Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	aaron_n	abel_n	peter_n	30	3	5.3646	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A10620	An animadversion to Mr Richard Clyftons advertisement Who under pretense of answering Chr. Lawnes book, hath published an other mans private letter, with Mr Francis Iohnsons answer therto. Which letter is here justified; the answer therto refuted: and the true causes of the lamentable breach that hath lately fallen out in the English exiled Church at Amsterdam, manifested, by Henry Ainsworth.	Ainsworth, Henry, 1571-1622?	1613 (1613)	STC 209; ESTC S118900	140,504	148

children that dwel with their adulterous mother that is to abhorr her syn with speech and signe to cal her back from evil absteyn themselves from it and in al things cleav to their father betake thēselves into his closet c. I answer thus it appeareth that these our opposites are returned to acknowledge the whore of Rome to be their mother whom they feign to be as woman which lyeth in a deadly sort swollen with waters of the dropsie or with poison which had long agoe given up the ghost if God by the imposition of his grace c. had not nourished and kept her warm Now to leav their mother thus on her sick bed as they have doon disclayming al Christian dutie unto her which is due to a true Church in corruption is but the part of unnatural children Whiles God dooth nourish keep her warm wil they quite abandon her let them return and cherish her also and al her members and see if ther be any baulm to heal her wounds and to comfort her As for us we have been taught of God that in respect of him she is dead long agoe in her syns Rev. 20.5 with Ephes. 2.1 having been the marked whore worshiper of the Beast from which death she is not risen to live reign with Christ. Although to this world she liveth and reigneth in pleasure til at one day death otherwise also come upon her she be burnt with fire Rev. 18.7.8 And then shal we be so far from mourning at her funeral as we shal rejoyce with the heavenly multitude and sing Hallelujah when God hath given Sodoms judgment on her and we see her smoke rise up for evermore Rev. 19 1.2.3 Finally to back M. Iunius judgment they cite Amandus Polanus Bart. Keckerman who sayd that Antichrist shal sit in the temple of God not Jewish but Christian c. and as a rotten apple is an apple but corrupt so that Church is corrupt c. I answer they may I confess cite diverse men that were mistaken in judging of that rotten church which wil help these our opposites nothing who have seen and acknowledged better now goe back Bernard was a learned man in his time and is counted a Sainct and he playnly reproved many Romish abominations and sayd the beast in the Revelation which hath a mouth speaking blasphemies occupieth Peters chaire yet himself doted overmuch upō the bewty of that harlot when he wrote thus at an other time to her Leman the Pope Thou art the great sacrificer the cheif Preist thou art Prince of Bishops heyr of th'Apostles thou art in primacie Abel in government Noah in patriarchship Abraham in order Melchisedek in dignity Aaron in authoritie Moses in judgship Samuel in power Peter in anoynting Christ. It is not therfore to be marveiled at though wise godly men be mistaken for in many things we syn all Jam. 3 2. But I have shewed how the scriptures doo judge of this sorceress and could also allege many learned mens judgements but I wil goe no further then our own country Mr Cartwright speaking of the baptising of children sayth Jf both parents be Papists or condemned heretiks c. their children cannot be received to baptisme because they are not in the covenant c. And agayn Jf the corruption be such as destroyeth the foundations as in the Arians which overthrow the person of Christ as in the Papists which overthrow the office of Christ they being no Church ought to have no priviledge of the church Mr Perkins writeth thus As for th'Assemblies of Papists understanding companies of men holding the Pope for their head and beleeving the doctrine of the council of Trent in name they ar caled Churches but in deed they are no true or sound members of the catholik church for both in their doctrine in their worship of God they rase the very foūdatiō of religiō And agayn Jt is no more a church in deed then the carkes● of a dead man that weareth a living mans garment is a living man though he look never so like him And agayn he hath a treatise and Assertion that A reprobate may in truth be made partaker of all that is conteyned in the religion of the church of Rome and a Papist by his religion cannot goe beyond a reprobate and bringeth 4. arguments for proof hereof and endeth with this Corolarie that A man being indued with no more grace then that which he may obteyn by the religion of the Church of Rome is stil in the state of damnation D. Fulk answering the counterfeit Catholik saith Jt is evident that the true Church decayed immediatly after the Apostles times and telleth the Papist yow cry the Catholik Church the Catholik Church when yow have nothing in deed but the Synagogue of Sathan Agayn The Church of Antichrist is founded upon 7 hills Rev. 17. upon the traditions dreames fantasies and devises of men c. Therfore sayth he in no wise may she be called the city of God but Babylon the mother of fornication Sodom Aegypt where our Lord is dayly crucified in his members D. Willet answering Bellarmin sayth We deny utterly that they are a true visible Church of Christ but an Antichristian Church and an assembly of Heretiks enemies to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Agayn he sayth 2. Thes. 2. he shal sit in the temple of God that is the visible Church that which sometime was the true visible Church as the Church of Rome and after should be so tak●n reputed and chalenged as it is at this day by the Papists c. He shal sit in the Temple of God that is take upon him the name title of the Church and yet an adversary unto it And agayn The Turk is out of the Church and so in truth is the Pope but yet he challengeth to him and his the name of the Church M. Bale compareth the Pope and Turk togither thus So glorious are the pretenses of Romish Pope Mahomet that they seem unto them which regard not these warnings the very Angels of light and their Churches most holy congregations being very divels with the very dregs of darknes The Pope in his Church hath ceremonies without number none end is there of their babling prayers their portases bedes temples altars songs howrs bells images organs ornaments Iewels lights oilings shavings c. that a man would think they were proctours of paradise On the other side Mahomet in his Church is plenteous also in holy observations they wash themselves oft frequent their temples pray 5. tymes in the day they reverently incline they lye prostrate on the ground they fervently cal to God they absteyn from wine they abhor idols c. But unto what end this holynes leadeth the sequel declareth Daniel maketh these two but one because they are both of one

deceyt The whole Church is a kingdom of Preists that is of ministers who are to be guided and governed by their Officers caled also ministers in more special manner for the holy and orderly practise of the power And thus the Prophets foretold the state of the Christian Church saying strangers shal stand and feed your sheep and the sonns of strangers shal be your plowmen and dressers of your vines but ye shal be named the Preists of the Lord men shal say unto you The Ministers of our God Where the Officers of the Church are cōpared to pastours husbandmen as the new testament also cōfirmeth vvhich should be of the converted Gentiles and the Church it self is the Lords preisthood and his Ministers Sixtly they ask whither we in the Churches goverment as the Anabaptists in the sacraments would not make them aliens from the cōmon wealth of Jsrael c. I answer this was in their fourth observation before and there is by me answered I trust without absurdity or ungodlynes errors or evils all which they here insinuate against us for to fyll up their mesure But here agayn the reason deceiveth the reader for in sted of cōmon-wealth or politie they bring in one body one Lord one faith of theirs and ours c. Ephe. 2. c. Al this we grant but the outward politie goverment we deny to be the same it being changed by Christ both for Citie Sanctuarie Dan. 9.26 There was alwayes one Lord faith of the Church but not alwayes one politie The kingdom and preisthood were first executed by one person as in Melchisedek afterward these functions were divided Kings might not doo the Preists work Also the civil government in Israel was changeable somtime without a King sometime with one yea sometime by hethen Kings as Nebuchadnezar Cyrus c to whom the Israelites were bound to be subject but not so in their sacraments that ther is no just consequence to be drawn frō the one of these to the other We rather may ask of our opposites whether they as the Papists would not draw us frō the testament of Christ vvho was faithful as Moses in al his house to the Ievvish politie novv abolished And let them tell us vvhether ther may be novv Archbishops over other Bishops and Ministers as in Israel there were Archpreists over other Preists and Levites or a superior court to hear the appeals from particular synagogues cities now as was then and whether the ministers of the Church now may be captayns of politik armies as Benajah son of Iehojada the cheif Preist was general of the feild in Ioabs room Such orders have been heretofore in Israel Seventhly they ask why we speak not of our selves what we pleaded to be the church spoken of Mat. 18 17. c. I answer because our plea is already set forth in sundry books as the Discovery the Re●itation of M. Gifford the Apologie the Treatise of the Ministerie against M. Hildersh the Answer to White c. And I ask of them agayn why they answer not the things already published in so many treatises but fish for more matter by subtile questions as if men had nothing ells to doo but answer al things that they write and demand and to let them range at wil without orderly answering as is meet They say some of us taught it to be the whole church alleging to that end Num. 15.33 27.2 and 35.12 I answer first we taught then no otherweise then as them selves taught heretofore with us Secondly we alleged many other scriptures and reasons both from the Prophets and Apostles though it please them to omitt those and cull out these against which they think they have more colour to contend For hereupon they thus argue 1 Jf this rule be found in the book of Numbers c. then it is not a new rule first given in Mat. 18.17 I answer they wrong us and would deceiv the reader we alleged not those scriptures to prove the rule to be the same then and now but to give light unto the question by shewing what was the peoples right then under the law and under the Magistrate which may be more but can not be less now under the gospel where the church ministery hath not the power of Magistracie over Gods heritage The Apostle applieth many things from Aarons preisthood to Christ yet he maketh Christs preisthood not to be after Aarons order but Melchisedeks should men now thus carp at his allegations Then they say those scriptures speak of civil goverment which we except about the Elders but they suppose we wil not give to the people civil authoritie I answer first them selves grant that the people have as much right and power now as they had in Israel but we deny they can never prove that the ministers now have as much authority over the people as had the Princes of Israel so our reasoning is good though theirs be naught Secondly for civil authoritie as we never chalenged it so neyther should it be objected to them but that they wil have it to be no new rule Then say we it must be left to the Magistrate and ministers may not intrude into their place And seing they thus urge it let them if they please clear them selves whither they think not that the Elders of the church may have civil authoritie also as had the Elders in Israel Thirdly they say that by these and the like scriptures it is certayn sinners in Jsrael were brought before the congregation of Elders I answer if they mean Elders onely as they must if they reason to the matter in hand I deny it and ther is no weight in their proof For it is also certayn that Paul imposed hands on Timothee 2. Tim. 1.6 but elswhere it appeareth others also imposed hands as wel as he 1. Tim. 4.14 So the Apostles and Elders came togither about a controversie Act. 15.6 but the whole Church came togither also verse 22.23 Titus was left to ordeyn Elders Tit. 1.5 but was he to doo it himself alone The keyes were promised to Peter Mat. 16.19 but were they meant to him onely In Rev. 2.1 Iohn wrote to the Angel or Messenger of the church but by Rev. 1.11 2.7 it is plain the whole church was intended So in Israel the law sayth in a case of mariage let her goe up to the gate to the Elders Deut. 25.7.8.9 but the practise of this sheweth that the people were also interested with the Elders Ruth 4.2.7.9.11 Jn Exod. 5.1 Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh but by Exod. 3.18 we may gather that the Elders of Israel went with them also So in the place cited Num. 15.33 they brought him to Moses and to Aaron and to al the Congregation the people are here meant with the Magistrates for God then

the Elders of Jsrael often meant I answer 1. First this being granted it disprooveth not our argument for it may be often so used elswhere and yet not here When we reason from Heb. 1.8 O God thy throne is for ever to prove Christs Godhead the Arians object that Princes and Magistrates are often caled Gods Psal. 82. Exod. 21.6 but is that a sufficient answer 2. Secondly that which these say is here true but not the whole truth 〈◊〉 Elders are meant as principals but not they to be al the congregation which I thus manifest The Levites now to be ordeyned Ministers were taken in stead of al the firstborn of Israel and not in stead of the first-born of the Elders onely Num. 3.40.41 The Levits were now to be offred before the Lord as a shake offring of the children of Israel Num. 8.11 being freely given as a gift of theirs unto the Lord to doo the service of the Tabernacle of the congregation Num. 18.6 8.16 Al offrings were by those that offred them to be presented at the dore of the Tabernacle with imposition of hands Levit. 1. verse 2.3.4 c. For as much therfore as these Levites were offred by al the Congregation and not the Elders or officers onely in sted of their own firstborn it is evident that not the Officers onely but the other people also are here meant Num. 8.10 the rather also for that before verse 9. and after verse 11. others besides Elders are intended 2. Secondly they object how should so many hundred thowsand of Jsrael eyther at once hear or doo the things there spoken of I answer as wel as they heard and did other publik affayrs in the Tabernacle unless they think that al the people never heard or did any thing there When the whole Congregation of Israel synned al the Congregation was to bring a sacrifice Num. 15.24 25 26. wil they ask how so many 100000. could doo it By this reason nothing at al should ever be doon in Israel by the multitude eyther for word prayers sacrifices c. And so by their proportion of the Church now let the people be exempted from word prayers sacraments as wel as from ordination of officers and censuring of synners and let the Eldership be al in al. 3. Thirdly they except if it be sayd some did it for the rest first who were those some but the Elders secondly under whom did they it but under the Lord who set them over the people to minister and govern in his sted I answer first the multitude not the Elders onely were assembled Secondly the multitude and not the Elders onely gave these Levits to the Lord both these are before proved Thirdly for the order and manner of giving Moses governed the action to him it was sayd thou shalt sprinkle water thou shalt bring them before the Lord c. and then the children of Jsrael imposed ●ands this I understand not of every particular man but of some of the cheif for the rest as the Elders heads of tribes cheif fathers of families c. as when a● the multitude brought an oblation for their syn the Elders put their hands on the head of the sacrifice Lev. 4.14.15 Accordingly have wee practised in our ordination of officers as these our opposites wel know some of the cheif of the Church the ancientest and fathers of families imposed hands in name of the rest Now to their secōd questiō I answer they did it under the Lord and for the other people But this wil not satisfy them for they say they were over the people to minister and govern in Gods sted Exod 20.12 Num. 11.16 30. Deut. 1.9 18. 16.18 17.12 19.12 17. c I answer admit that al they which imposed hands were governours though that cannot be proved neyther dooth honour thy father mother Exod. 20 12. I am sure shew any such thing yet they did not this thing as a work peculiar to their office of goverment neyther do any of the scriptures alledged shew so much but the contrary may be manifested For if they did it as governours then was it eyther as governours ecclesiastical and ministers in the sanctuarie but so were not they for Aaron and his sonns had peculiarly that charge Levit. 8. Or they did it as governours civil Magistrates of the cōmon wealth Which if it be affirmed then first Christian Magistrates now which have civil authoritie equal with the Magistrates of Israel may ordeyn and impose hands on church ministers and so men need not run to Rome to borow a Ministery from Antichrist as many now doo fansie Secondly if civil Magistrates may impose hands on Ministers it wil folow that the Church wanting Magistrates may also by the Fathers of families or other fittest members impose hands For it is not properly a work tyed to the magistrates office 1. because then the churches in the Apostles times wanting Magistrates could not have had Ministers but they had and yet never intruded into the Magistrates office 2. Because the Magistrates sword and office is not subordinate to Christ as he is mediatour and head of the Church for so ther should be no lawful magistrates but Christians mēbers of the church but Magistrates have their office next under God to be heads of the Common weales whether they be mēbers of the church or not as Christ hath his office under God to be head of the Church and these two goverments are so distinct as they neyther may be confounded neyther doo one take in hand the work peculiarly belonging to another Christ professed his kingdom not to be of this world neyther medled 〈◊〉 with the outward sword nor civil controversies neyther on the other side might the Kings of Israel medle with the Preists work to burn incense or the like 3. Because the works of the civil Magistrates office in Israel might be performed by hethēs when they ruled over that nation as appointing of officers judging of controversies punishment of malefactors c. So Nebuchadnezar the Babylonian lawfully as concerning God reigned over the Iewes and did set over them a governour and put some of them to death for adulterie other evils And the Iewes were bound to obey him and his substitutes and to pray for his cōmon wealth But to the Babylonian Preists they might not be subject Neyther doo I think that our opposites wil say Nebuchadnezar and his Princes might give office of Ministerie or impose hands on the Levites in the sanctuarie Wherfore I conclude that the cheif fathers of Israel imposed hands on the Levites not because of their office of magistracie if they had such an office as if it could not ells have been performed but because they were the principallest members of the Church therfore by order to doo it before al other and in the name of al other which for the