Selected quad for the lemma: act_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
act_n	power_n	spiritual_a	temporal_a	2,523	5	9.3508	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A08327	The guide of faith, or, A third part of the antidote against the pestiferous writings of all English sectaries and in particuler, agaynst D. Bilson, D. Fulke, D. Reynoldes, D. Whitaker, D. Field, D. Sparkes, D. White, and M. Mason, the chiefe vpholders, some of Protestancy, and some of Puritanisme : wherein the truth, and perpetuall visible succession of the Catholique Roman Church, is cleerly demonstrated / by S.N. ...	S. N. (Sylvester Norris), 1572-1630.	1621 (1621)	STC 18659; ESTC S1596	198,144	242

Christ who was to come in flesh Thou art a priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech Of Saint Ambrose Christ is declared to offer in vs whose speach sanctifyeth the sacrifice which is offered Of Epiphanius The Priesthood of Melchisedech now florisheth in the Church Theophilact Christ is called a Priest for euer because there is dayly offered there is perpetually offered an oblation by the mynisters of God hauing Christ our Lord both the Priest and sacrifyce Of Saint Leo Eucherius Primasius and the rest whose testimonyes togeather with the Priestly function of Melchisedech which they mayntayne M. Fulke and his felow-protestants vtterly contemne Insomuch as Fulke sayeth this bringing forth of bread and wine was no part of Melchisedeches Priesthood therfore those Fathers were deceaued that iudged that act to pertayne to his Priesthood Marke the arrogancy of this yesterday-vpstart in censuring the Fathers for allowing a Priesthood which he with his adherentes flatly detest Well then seing they renounce both these orders I know not in what ranke to place them vnlesse it Tully in Philip. be in the order of Asinius the voluntary Senatour as Tully iesteth at him himselfe being made by himselfe Or of the order of Don-Quixote knighted in an Inne by the good fellow his host For so they are eyther voluntary Priestes arrogating that dignity without commission or created at the Nags-head in Cheape by them that had as much authority to make them as the Inkeeper to dub a knight Or at the most they can be no other then Parlamentall Priests ordayned by the new deuised forme of that temporall Court authorized by the letters patents first of a Child then of a woman which although it may giue more shew and countenance to the vsurpation of their titles yet it giueth no more right then the former to the dignity of their functions 13. Moreouer no secular Princes or temporall Magistrates No secularprinces haue power to cōferre ecclesiastical orders haue authority to confer Ecclesiasticall orders But the order of Mynistery which our ghospellers challenge was both in Kinge Edward and Queene Elizabeths dayes wholy deuised and primarily conferred by the is secular and temporall authority It was therefore no true Episcopall Priestly or Ecclesiasticall order The Maior or first Proposition is apparant in nature For no man can imparte vnto others that which he hath not himselfe Secular persons neyther a part nor assembled togeather in publike Parlament haue any ecclesiasticall order or iurisdiction much lesse can they communicat it vnto others Then Ciuill Magistrates haue only Ciuill power in Ciuill affayres ordeyned to Ciuill and naturall endes The Episcopall or Priestly order is a spirituall dignity touching spirituall functions directed to a spirituall and supernaturall end which can no more be deriued from a Ciuill Magistrate then white from blacke day from night The Minor or second Proposition I proue by the Parlament lawes other testimonyes vnanswerable In the first of King Edward a Statute was made That Archbishops Bishops should not send out their sommons citations other processes in their own names but in the name and stile of the Kinge Seeing as the law it selfe speaketh that all authority of iurisdiction spirituall Edward 1. chap. 2. and temporall is deriued and deducted from the Kinges Maiesty as supreme head of these Churches and Realmes of England and Ireland and so iustly acknowledged by the Clergy of the sayd Realmes Then you heard before how by the Kinges letters Patentes Archbishoprickes and Bishopprickes were conferred And Fox testifyeth that King Henry 8. imparted to the Fox in his Monu pag 522. 1. Eliz. 1. c. 1. Lord Cromwell the exercise of his supreme spirituall regimēt making him in the Church of England vicegerent for concerning all his iurisdiction ecclesiasticall In the first likewise of Queen● Elizabeths raygne a Statute was enacted whereby all spirituall or ecclesiasticall power or authority is vnited and annexed to the Imperiall crowne of her Realme c. all sorrayne vsurped power iurisdiction preheminence cleerly extinguished c. and by solemne oath renounced forsaken in so much as Doctour Whitgift placed in the Queene the fulnes of VVhitg tract 8. c. 3. d. 33. all ecclesiasticall gouernement from whome all ecclesiasticall power and authority is deriued to Bishops and mynisters she hauing in her as he writeth the supreme gouernment in al causes ouer all persons as she doth exercise the one apportayning to matters Ciuile and temporall by the Lord Chauncelour So doth she the other concerning the Church religion by the Archbishops 14. As this power was straunge and neuer heard of before in any Christian heathen or Turkish commonwealth So the maner of consecrating the mynisters of those dayes was new and before vnasuall For another Act was made in the third of King Edwards raign 3. Edward c. 12. fol. 15. wherein it is sayd Be it therefore enacted by the Kinges Highnes with the assent of the Lords spirituall and temporall and the Com●ons of this present Parlament assembled and by the authority of the same That such forme and manner of making and consecrating of Archbishops Bishops Priests Deacons and other Mynisters of the Church as by sixe Prelats and sixe other men of this Realme learned in Gods law by the Kinges Maiesty to be appointed and assigned or by the most number of them shal be deuised for that purpose and set forth vnder the great seale of England before the first day of Aprill next comming shall by vertue of this present Act be lawfully exercised and vsed and none other any Statute law or vsage to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding Further when this new deuised forme of consecrating Bishops Priests c. bred many doubtes of the inualidity of their consecration and ordering Queene Elizabeth in publique Parlament decreed that all persons that haue been or shal be made ordered or consecrated Archbishops Bishops Priestes after the forme and order prescribed by Kinge Edward in the same forme and order be in very deed 8. Elizab. 1. and also by authority hereof declared and enacted to be and shal be Archbishops Bishops Priests c. and rightly made ordered and consecrated Any Statute law canon or other thing to the contrary notwithstanding 15. What meaneth this Statute Were your Bishops lawfully ordeyned and consecrated before Why then are they not only declared as M. Mason would excuse the manner of speach but enacted to be and shal be Archbishops c In vayne was this Act if they needed it not and Mason lib. 3. c. 4. p. 122. if they needed it it auayled them nothing as I haue already proued Or to speake more clearely Eyther the Lordes of the Parlament with their Queene had authority to install their Bishops in Episcopall dignity and make their inauguration lawfull in case it had beene inualid or they had no power to doe it Which of these M. Mason will you graunt For

nor yet did they vse the true matter and forme prescribed by him Therefore notwithstanding their character their ordination was nothing els but a prophanation of that Sacrament For to instance in the order of Priesthoode so intrinsecally presupposed in Episcopall dignity as the Catholique Athanasius Apolo 2. in Episc Cōcil Sa●d Councell of Sardis wondred at the Arians impudency because they gaue sayth the Councell to him the title of Bishop who was not so much as a Priest The Priesthood instituted by Christ was a Priesthood ordeyned to sacrifice A Priesthood to which a iudiciall power was giuen by the holy Ghost to pardon and remit sinne● in 〈…〉 Pennance The forme of the Priesthood was partly that Receaue the holy Ghost whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen them and whose you shall retayne they are reteywed partly this other 10. 20. vers 23. mentioned in the Councell of Florence Receaue power to offer sacrifice in the Church for the liuing and dead in the name Cōcil Flor. in litter is Eugen. Luc. 22. of the Father and of the sonne and of the holy Ghost Which words although they be not set downe in holy writ in playne tearmes yet the substance of them is gathered out of S. Luke and that kinde of forme as likewise the forme of Baptisme is deliuered by tradition as proceeding from Christ The matter necessarily accompayning this later forme is the reaching of the chalice with wine the paten with the hoast to the party consecrated specifyed also in the aforesayd Councell of Florence So that two actes or functions are included in our Priesthood or a The power of Priesthood cōtayneth two functions the one about the true the other about the mysticall body of Christ power twofold The one apperteyning to the true and reall body of Christ to consecrate and offer it to God which is the chiefest act or faculty of Priesthoode and first also imparted The other ouer Christes misticall body the members of his Church to remit their sins which necessarily presupposeth the former This order of Priesthood these two functions all Protestant superintendēts disclay me and deny this the consecratours intende not to giue nor do the consecrated Mynisters purpose to receaue they haue not then that sacred ordination which was prescribed by Christ 10 Yet sayth M. Mason that holy Priesthood which Christ ordeyned we haue pared from the corruptions of sacrificing and shrift which you haue added to the institution Mason lib. 1. c. 2. p. 11. and libr. 2. c. 11. p. 94. In the first part of the Antidote in the 4 ad 5. contro of Christ Well then the whole question is brought to this issue whether our Sauiour instituted a sacrificing Priesthood to which authority is also giuen to remit sinnes in the Sacrament of Pennance or no But both these pointes I haue sufficiently conuinced in the first part of my Antidote The one in the controuersy of the Sacrifice of the Masse the other in the controuersy of Auricular Confession and the former I shall touch agayne in the Chapter ensewing Therfore if Protestant haue pared away these Priestly functions they haue reiected the whole substance and pared of the very pith of Christes heauenly Priesthood 11. Or if they will needs vsurpe the name of Priests let them tell me I beseech them in what order doe they ranke them selues In the order of Aaron or of Melchisedech The order of Aaron was to offer bloudy sacrifices bulles calues rammes and heyfers which neyther they Primas ad Heb. 5. callenge for any thinge I see nor yet doe they practise that abrogated function much lesse the function of Melchisedech whose office was to offer bread and wine and Euseb l. 5. de demon Euang. c. 3. Oecum ad Heb. 5. Geneb l. 1. Chronog Gal. l. 10. c. 5. Iero. in ep ad Marcal Cyp. ep 63. Aug. in ps 33. Primas in cap. 5. ad Heb. Arn. in ps 109. Pulke in c. 7. ad heb sect 8. in cap. 10. ad Corinth sect 8. not any of the former victimes Melchisedech sayth Primasius was not a Priest according to the legall precepts but accorning to the dignity of a certayne singular Priesthood offering bread to God not the bloud of bruit beastes Melchisedech sayth Eusebius neuer seemeth to haue vsed corporall sacrifices but wine only bread Melchisedech sayth Oecumenius was the first who offered an hoast without bloud to wit bread and wine Which Genebrard and Galatinus also proue out of the ancient Rabbines And therein Melchisedech was a perfect type and figure of Christ Witnesse Saint Ierome Melchisedech euen then in token of Christ offered bread and wine Saint Cyprian VVe see in the Priest Melchisedech the Sacrament prefigured of our Lordes sacrifice Saint Augustine Christ instituted a sacrifice of his body and bloud according to the order of Melchisedech Primasius In the order of Melchisedechs Priesthood Christ is made not a temporall but an eternall Priest not offering legall victimes but like vnto him bread and wine to wit his flesh and bloud Arnobius Christ by the mystery of bread wine is made a Priest for euer But you say quoth Fulke that Christ offered not bread and wine therefore not that which Melchisedech offered Did euer man reason so foolishly For must the signe and thinge signed the figure and the truth be al one Was not the Pascall lambe infinitly more base and inferiour in condition to our blessed Redeemer the Lambe of God Yet was it not a perfect type and figure of him In like manner the bread and wine offered by Melchisedech although meaner in quality and different nature from Christs body and bloud which ●●mselfe sacrificed is the true tipe notwithstāding re●●●blance hereof because this is made of the substance and offered vnder the accidents of bread and wine and so the same in quality the same in appearance the truth and full accomplishment of that typicall sacrifice which Melchisedech offered 12. This kind of oblation and office of Priesthood Luc. 22. v. 19. Doe this for a commemoration of me Aug. libro 1. cont ad leg prophe ca. 20. l. 16. de ciuit cap. 22. Amb. in psal 38. Epiphan haer 59. Theo. in c. 5. ad heb Leo 2. de āniuers suae assump Euche l. 2. c. 18 in Gen. Prim. in c. 5. ad heb Fulke in c. 7. ad heb sect 8. by the expresse warrant example and commaundement of Christ his Church the Church of Rome now practiseth vnder him And by this he being chiefe Priest and principal sacrificer the eternity of his priesthood is most properly continued according to the doctrine of the an●ient Fathers Of Saint Augustine They know that reade what Melchisedech hath offered such a sacrifice they now see offered to God throughout the world Also There first appeared the sacrifice which now is offered to God by Christians and that is fullfilled which longe after this is spoken by the Prophet to

one you must needes Had they authority Then no other ordination at that time to the validity of their orders was essentially required in their opinions but the royall assent of the Queene approbation of her Nobility Had they no authority or power to do it It was an vniust act thē of vsurpation in that honourable assembly a great want of Wisdome to make a law not appertayning to their office and nothing Mason pa. 132. 8. Eliz. c. 1. profitable to their cause 16. The like absurdityes ensew of the dispensation her Maiesty vsed to make good the consecrations of D. Paprker and other intruders ordeyned in the second or third of her raigne For if their consecrations were sound as Mayster Mason obiecteth to himselfe why did the Queene in her letters patentes directed for the consecrating of them vse diuers generall wordes and sentences whereby she dispensed with all causes or doubtes of any imperfection or disability that could or might be obiected in any wise agaynst the same as may appeare by ●● Act of Parlament referring vs to the sayd letters Patents remayning vpon record Whereupon I conclude that seeing no man can dispense in the disabilityes of holy orders but such as haue authority to giue and conferre them eyther M. Maiesty who graciously dispensed to vse Mayster Masons wordes with Mason l. ● c. 5. p. 132. all causes or doubtes in their orders was the chiefe collatour and giuer of them or she iniuriously challenged to her selfe that which no law neyther of God nor man could possibly affoard her All the dawbinges which M. Mason applyeth to couer these faultes are pithily and iudiciously cast of by Mayster D. Champney For wheras he one while sayth that the Queene dispensed with the trespasses Doctour Champney in his answ to Mayster Mason c. 13. agaynst her owne lawes It is answered that there were no lawes of hers transgressed in consecrating of any before that tyme she hauing repealed in her first Parlament the lawes of Queene Mary which disanulled that new inauguration deuised by the twelue deputed by King Edward and hauing enacted no new lawes her selfe any way violable in that kinde before she practised that supreme power of her spirituall soueraygnty in graunting dispensations which was about the second yeare of her raygne Then when Mason dallyeth that she dispensed not in essentiall pointes of ordination but only in accidentall Mason l. 3. c. 5. p. 133. 8. Eliz. c. ● not in substance but in circumstance the wordes of the Queenes letters patents giue testimony agaynst him that she dispensed with all causes or doubtes of any imperfection or disability that can or may be obiected in any wise agaynst the same Now the doubtes were not about any accidentall ceremony or other not essentiall circumstance but as appeareth No man cā dispēse in the disabilityes of holy orders but he that hath power to cōferre thē by the Statute made in the Eight of Queene Elizabeth and by other most learned lawyers of the Realme as I shall declare by by they were about the very substance it selfe of their ordination whether they were true Bishops or no Likewise it belongeth only to them to dispense euen in accidental disabilities of holy orders to whome it belongeth to conferre the orders Therfore if Queene Elizabeth had power in M. Masons iudgemēt to doe the one she had authority to confer the other and that collation thogh voyde in it selfe was iudged sufficient amongst the Protestants Besides whereas M. Mason sayth That the wisdome of their Church discreetly and religiously pared away all superfluous and superstitions ceremonyes in ordination Mason l. 2. c. 11. p. ●4 What ceremony vnbeseeming What circumstance vnfitting remayned amongst them which needed dispēsation Especially seeing as M. Doctour Champney wel vrgeth agaynst him It is not to be thought that the Queene would dispense with those which the wisdome of their Church retayneth as good lawfull 17. In fine the ordination ministred in Queene Elizabeths raygne was no other then such as was deuised in the dayes of Kinge Edward ratifyed and confirmed by her But that inauguration was no validity as 8. Eliz. 1. appeareth by an Article of Queene Maryes made by the consent of the Lords spirituall and temporall and thus Fox in his Acts and Monum p. 1295. related by Mayster Fox Touching such persons as were heretofore promoted to any orders after the new sort and fashion of orders considering they were not ordered in very deed the Bishop c. The same Fox reporteth that Doctour Brook Bishop of Glocester proceeding to the degradation of Ridley consecrated Bishop after that new forme yet made Priest after the ancient tolde him That they were to degrade him only Fox pag. 1604. of Priesthood for they did not take him to be a Bishop Agaynst which Ridley neuer excepted Howbeit Cranmer being truly consecrated was degraded as Archbishop Then the opinion of the Iudges and censure of the common law disallowed that new ordination In the great Abridgement of the common law it is sayd Que Euesques c. That the Bishops in King Edward the sixt dayes were not consecrated Brookes Nouell cases placito 463. fol. 101. printed 1604. and therefore were not Bishops For which cause a lease for yeares made by them and confirmed by the Deane and Chapter shall not binde the Successour for such were not Bishops Contrarywise of a Bishop depriued which was Bishop in fact at the tyme of the letting confirmation made by the Deane and Chapter These were the Iudges words which are yet further strengthned by the case of Bishop Bonner who was certified into the Kings Bench by Doctour Horne supposed Bishop of Winchester for refusing the new oath appointed to ecclesiasticall persons by the statute of the first of Queene Elizabeth 1. Elizab. c. 1. vnto him offered in Southwarke in the Bishops howse there and his addition was Legum doctor in sacris or diuibus constitutus non clericus nec Episcopus And therefore the certificate was challenged sed non alocatur Also the sayd certificate was challenged for that the oath was sayd to be tendred vnto him by Robert Horne Bishop of Winchester who was no Bishop And Bonner was endited vpon this certificate in the County of Midlesex according to the Statute he pleaded thereunto not guilty And it was holden that the triall should not be made by a iury of Midlesex but by a Iurry of Surry and the venew of Southwarke c. It was also much debated amongst 6. 7 Eliz. Diar folio 234. al the Iustices in the Lord Catlins chamber if Bonner might giue in euidence vpon this issue not guilty that the said Bishop of VVinchester non fuit Episcopus tēpore oblationu Sacramenti and resolued by all that the verity and matter being so indeed he should be well receaued vpon this issue and that the Iury should trye it The triall was