Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	church_n	power_n	synod_n	3,603	5	9.6685	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26279	Aaron's rod blossoming, or, The orthodox government of the Church of England by bishops, presbiters, and deacons, asserted from the practice of the apostles, the testimony of councils, synods, fathers and doctors, from the apostles time to this day ...		1680 (1680)	Wing A43; ESTC R22486	17,618	40

institute he made Timothy and Titus Episcopos Cleri gregis quoad regimen in ecclesia Bishops of the Clergy and their Flocks and to have Ecclesiastical Government over them whereas before they were but Presbyters or Disciples brought up under him by this Institution were other Presbyters made subordinate to them in governing and teaching the Church which to prove I thus argue He that is ordained and so ordained that he hath power constituere presbiteros per civitates to ordain Presby ters in every City is greater than those who have no such power in their Cities and Churches and they who may correct what is defective are superior to those for whom matters defective are corrected but Timothy and Titus had such power given them and did so correct things defective and none of the Presbyters had the same from the Apostles no not Timothy nor Titus whilst onely Presbyters therefore I conclude undeniably that Timothy and Titus were Superiors as Bishops over the Presbyters in their several Charges and Divisions Timothy in Ephesus and Titus in Creet That they had this Power given them by Paul appears Tim. 1.5.22 Lay hands suddainly on no man Tit. 1.5 For this cause I left thee in Creet that thou should'st set in order things which were wanting and ordain Elders in every City as I had appointed thee If any other in those Churches could have ordained Presbyters why was Timothy sent to Ephesus and Titus left at Creet for this very purpose And if the Cretians could have set in order things defective what need was there that Titus alone should have this Commission St. Jerom no great Friend to Episcopacy gives us in his Epistle to Evagrius pag. 329 this as a Distinction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remarkable betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter saying quid facit excepta ordinatione Episcopus quod non facit Presbiter What does a Bishop except the Ordaining of Others which a Presbyter does not And it is worth the observation what the Antient Father and Champion for the Blessed Trinity Athanasius hath in his Second Apologie viz. That Colithus a Presbiter of Alexandria had constituted Presbyters But what became of them Recissa est haec ejus ordinatio omnes ab eo constituti in Laicorum ordinem redacti fuere The ordaining of others by him was made invalid and they who were ordained by him were degraded and made Laicks So then you see that Bishops are Eminenter superiores presbiteris Eminently superiour to Presbyters having power affirmative and negative by the Opinion and Practice of the Antient Fathers This confirmes what the Apostles had taught and practised and appointed others in place above the ordinary Presbyters to do Now I come to shew the Second Difference betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter And wherein a Bishop hath eminentem superioritatem a clear Superiority above a Presbyter that is in Excommunication which was called Mucro Episcopalis the Episcopal Weapon and was a Power given to Bishops Successors of the Apostles and was ever practised by them This appears in that an Account of it was and is expected at their hands as it is manifested by the quarrel which our blessed Saviour had against the Angel of the Church of Pergamus namely that he suffered some of his Church who held the Doctrine of the Nicholaitans and against the Angel of the Church of Thiatira that he suffered the woman Jesabel to teach and seduce the people By this it is apparent that Christ expected they should do what they had by their places power to do namely that they being Angels of their Churches whom I affirm to be also Bishops thereof and Successors to the Apostles as is sufficiently proved by the most reverend and learned Archbishop of Armagh and Beza himself calling them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men in place above others should Hereticos coercere ex Ecclesia ejicere keep under Hereticks and cast them out of the Church If here it be objected that we must not argue from dark and mystical places of Scripture such as is the Apocalypse I answer that I argue from a plain place and from the plain words and direct Scope of the place and not from the mystical Sence or Interpretation neither can we here admit of that distinction that Angelus is in this place to be taken Collectively pro tota Ecclesia for the whole Church For I conceive there is not a word in Scripture but hath its weight and was it not as easy to have said Ecclesiae as Angelo Ecelesiae if Angelo had not something more in it then Ecclesiae and why not Angelus Ecclesia the Angel the Church but Angelus Ecclesiae the Angel of the Church if it had been to be taken Collectively but the terms are different and of a distinct force like those panis Domin● the bread of the Lord and panis Dominus bread representing the Lord. Besides to come to Timothy and Titus they are enjoyned to command others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to teach other Doctrine and obturaro ora deceptorum hereticos rejicere to stop the mouths of deceivers and to reject Hereticks these things were commanded them and an Account accordingly expected of the performance thereof which manifestly proves that every Church had its Angelum who had Episcopal Authority and Jurisdiction eminent above other inferiour Clergy-men and not many Angels in each of these Churches all of equal Authority and place or at least the Angel in each of the seven Churches was so absolute in his power that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chief Governour the Presbyters only Assistants to him he a Spiritual Justice and of the Quorum they of the Council The difference also of Episcopal Authority from that of Bresbyters appears in the Cause of Excommunication where there was an Appeal to the Synods which either confirmed or disolved them but none to the People none to the Presbyters this is confirmed by the antient Council at Nice Can. 5. and at Antioch Can. 6. and Jerom himself writing to Riparius concerning Vigilantius an heretical Presbyter is angry that the Bishop under whom he was did acquiescere ejus furori non virga Apostolica virgaque ferrea vas inutile confringere tradere ad interitum Carnis ut spiritus salvus fiat did quietly give way to his fury and not rather break in pieces that unprofitable vessel with his Apostolick Staff and rod of Iron and deliver him up to the destruction of the Flesh that his Soul might be saved And it seems strange to me that any should think that our Blessed Saviour his Executioners Administrators and Assigns knew not the meaning of his Will and Testament as well as we in these days Christ who ascending to Heaven gave Gifts to many would not deny this Gift so necessary He I say giving supereminent Gifts to the Apostles ad fundandam ecclesiam for the founding of his Church would not deny to their Successors those which were necessary

ecclesiae fundatae to the Church being founded and so necessary that nothing more concerns the Church Would he not or could he not inform his Trustees how he pleased to have his Church his Houshold governed in his absence To say he would not is derogatory to his Wisdom and Goodness to say he could not to his Almighty Sovereign Power I therefore conclude these Points First That Ordination of Presbyters was left to Timothy and Titus as to men of higher place and Authority and not to the Presbyters who were of inferior Degree Secondly The Power given to the Angels of Ephesus and the other Churches puts a difference of Superiority betwixt a Bishop and an ordinary Presbyter and other the Teachers of the Churches and gives them commission prae ceteris tam Clericis quam Laicis above others both Clergy and Laity yea a coercive and castigative Power Object Further they object That Episcopacy is not jure divino because Christ did not command it in the Gospel Answ To this I answer That jus divinum aliter in se habet in credendis aliter in agendis There is a difference of divine Right in matters to be believed and matters to be done In matters of Faith there must be textus manifestus aut convincens deductio a clear Text or a sound Consequence As for example In the beginning God made all things that is textus manifestus but there is onely convincens deductio concerning the Mystery of the blessed Trinity which is only proved thus There came down at Christs Baptism the Holy Spirit in the form of a Dove and a voice was heard saying This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased Here we find the Spirit in the form of a Dove there is heard a voice and Christ is seen in the water we know by the light of Scripture and the light of Nature that there is but one God and that from one all things are and that in one they terminate And that there is aliud medium copulans primum ultimum one between both coupling the first and the last Seeing also we read that there is a Father a Son and a Spirit and that there is but one God We hence infer by necessary deduction that there are three persons and but one God Besides this deduction is further confirmed by that Text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These three are one which in some sort is textus manifestus a clear Text. Now a Matter of Fact may be inferred to be jure divino as I suppose if I prove 1. First That the same Fact was the Practice of the Apostles 2. Secondly that it is Analogical to the Institution of the Church of the Jews which was settled according to Gods Appointment by the Mediation of Angels by the Ministry of Moses and Aaron 3. Thirdly That it is pointed at and insinuated in the New-Testament 4. Fourthly That it hath successively continued since the Apostles time as elsewhere so particularly in Brittain If these points can be proved concerning the Fact in question viz. Government by Bishops I hope none will deny it to be jure divino Now for Proof and Confirmation that Episcopacy is jure divino I will prove these Points and then say something concerning the Practice of other Churches And first St. Paul the Apostle and Dr. of the Gentiles gave Power and Authority to Timothy and Titus ordinare dignos to ordain men worthy and to examine such as were faulty to reprove and discharge such as were guilty and did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 teach other Doctrine and were offensive to the honour of their Callings and to cherish such as did well Those things are evident in the Epistles of Paul to Timothy and of that to Titus From Pauls Practice of Superiority over these two and from the Institution of Timothy and Titus to be Bishops I prove Episcopacy to be practised by the Apostles to make which good I thus argue If St. Paul himself practised eminent superiority and in the Epistles alledged gave all that power which of right Bishops challenge or doth belong to the definition of a Bishop to Timothy and Titus then Paul himself did not only practice Episcopacy but did also Constitute them Bishops but verum prius ergo posterius That he had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Bishoprick as the other Apostles had see Acts 1.20 and did diligently run his course therein no man will deny and that he gave Power to Timothy and Titus the same which he himself had To Ordain to Punish to Convent to Reward duplici honore with double honour the Epistles alledged do sufficiently prove Therefore Paul himself practised superiority and constituted Timothy and Titus Bishops in place superiour to Presbyters whom they had Authority to Ordain Convent and Punish Object If they object That Presbyters with a President may do the same even all things which are commanded Timothy and Titus and therefore these things were spoken to Timothy and Titus and to their Presbyters Collectively in the Persons of Timothy and Titus Answ I answer Their Old Friend Collectively will do them as little good here as elsewhere for this is but petere principium an Evasion which I have formerly taken away And now further I argue Such as the Charge is such is the Power but the Charge is personal that is given to Timothy and Titus particularly and therefore the Power and Authority given is personal to them for their time and to their Successours in place after them and not to them and the Presbytery Collectively nothing in place where such Charge is given doth intimate the Presbyters or Deacons interposing themselves in these Episcopal Actions with Timothy and Titus If they will have these Priviledges and Performances to belong to their President they must plead them due to him as he is Successor to Timothy and Titus and so he is in effect if you give him Continuance in his place a Bishop indeed The bare Name of a President cannot make him of a different Calling from a Bishop whenas he acteth the part of a Bishop in all those points by St. Paul prescribed The Practice of all times especially the first Century warrants not a Monthly or Yearly President doing nothing for Ordination Convention Punishment and Reward without the Advise and Consent of a company of Presbyters But it allows Bishops Superiority to Presbyters and Presbyters to Deacons yea it placed Bishops Successours to the Apostles as were Timothy and Titus and Presbyters and Deacons subordinate to Bishops as to the Apostles whilst the lived St. Ignatius the next Bishop to Evodius he received Episcopal Charge from the Apostles and writing to them at Antioch when he was carried Prisoner to Rome he uses these words to the Laity Obsequium prebete presbyteris Diaconis be ye obedient to your Presbyters and Deacons and addeth to the Presbyters pascite gregem apud vos donec Deus ostendit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 feed the

prebere because they would not submit to Austin's Will For this was indeed the quarrel as our Writers say This their refusal to yield to Austin the Monk I produce as a Proof that the Christians which he found here held in many things with the Eastern Churches as having their Doctrine from Jerusalem and Sion whence the Gospel was to be sent Isaiah 2.3 Malachi 4.2 to the Nations and whence as Salvation went Psal 14.7 so likewise the Doctrine of Salvation for Christ who gave the Apostles Commission to go to all Nations and preach the Gospel did bid them stay at Jerusalem not at Rome till the Holy Ghost had furnisht them with Gifts for the work commanded This further appears by that resolute Answer which the Abbot of Bangor gave to Austin the Monk Anno 601. viz. that he and his acknowledged no Superiority in the Bishop of Rome over them nor any Superiour but their own Arch-Bishop Caer Leonis or as some will have it Senovensis qui sub Deo solus possitus fuit super illos ad super videndum ad faciendum illos servare viam spiritualem who alone was under God made an Overseer or Bishop to them that he might make them observe the Spiritual way Seing this stout Champion thus answered it is propable that they were of the Primitive Institution And this I rather give credit to because if the Bishop of Rome had then held the present Tenent of that Church viz. that their City is the Spiritual Metropolis and that their Bishop is Caput Ecclesiae our Predecessours would have acknowledged the Pope and his See as they had been taught But Baronius saith that our English Bishops are as Antient as those of Rome and it is probable they were For this we have good proof that at a Council held at Arles Anno 314 we had three Bishops viz. Eborius de Civitate Eboraci Episcopus Restitutus de Civitate Londini Episcopus Eldelphius de Civitate Coloniae Londinensium exinde Sacerdos Presbyter Arminius Diaconus Eborius Bishop of York Restitutus Bishop of London Eldelphius Bishop of Colchester and after them Sacerdos a Presbyter Arminius a Deacon These subscribed in this Council here therefore I observe that in the year 314 we had Bishops Presbyters and Deacons the very Government now in question and Romish they were not as I conceive because they then acknowledged not a Subordination to Rome and because Urban the Second called Learned Anselme Patriarcha Brittanniae the Patriarch of Brittain Therefore methinks it should not now be questioned whether Episcopacy be a Romish Relique but rather that it should be confirmed as an Evangelical Ordinance and as Antient as the first Institution of Churches and as a Calling appointed by the Apostles What more have we for Baptism of Infants What more for our Lords Day or Sunday but convincing Deductions from the Scriptures or the Practice of the Apostles and the Observation of the same in the Churches of God successively to this very day And yet we hold both these to be Sacred Ordinances and of Divine Institution though they be both questioned by some men of the Reformed Churches as Episcopacy is among some of Ours The Case is alike and as clear if not clearer for Episcopacy that it had a Divine Institution If what is formerly said satisfie not I will only use this Argument more to prove that Episcopacy is jure divino If the Charge given Tim. 1.6 14. be to Timothy personally and be perpetual then it is to One person namely to Timothy and to the Successours in his place for Timothy was Mortal so that the perpetuity of the Charge must reach to all his Successours until the Appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ But the Charge is personal to Timothy and perpetual even to the Appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ therefore it is to one person viz. to Timothy and to his Successours for ever Object If it be here objected that the Charge was given to Timothy as elsewhere the Keys to Peter and according to that which is said quod dixit Petro dixit ceterisque Apostolis what was spoke to Peter was spoke to the other Apostles also Answ I answer It is true for what was said to Timothy was said ceterisque Episcopis Successoribus corum both to other Bishops and their Successours as Christ's giving the Keys to Peter was to him and the other Apostles but not to all Disciples Deacons and Widdows To sum up all Since it appears that Episcopacy Presbytery and Diaconatus are according to the practice of the Apostles Analogical to the Institution of the Jewish Church appointed by God and establisht by Moses pointed at and in some sort deciphered in the New-Testament and strongly insinuated by the Successours of the Apostles to have been received and practised by them as commended to them by Divine Authority Since these three Orders in our Church are derived so high have continued so long even from the Primitive times to this day we may well conclude that as Presbyters and Deacons so Bishops are jure divino especially seeing Episcopacy is so generally confirmed and hath been so constantly continued by the Aphstles Apostolick men Councils Fathers and Doctors And much the rather I am induced thus as I have said to judge of Episcopacy because the contrary part have not the like Proofs Warrant and Approbation for their Presbytery and can bring no sufficient and convincing Authority for a Quarterly or Yearly President joynt Presbyters and Lay-Elders usurping Pastoral and Episcopal Jurisdiction And here in confidence of my Cause I add That if they have any lawful General Council or any Synod except their own which established Church-Government by such a President Presbyters and Lay-Elders as aforesaid I will renounce my Opinion and yield the Cause Now it concernes us very much to be well advised and truly to judge of these Matters because it appears in a Seditious Pamphlet entituled the Prelates Pride that the Author thereof and such as he is care not what Government be established so that Popery which we wish more rightly than they may be abolisht Episcopacy and the present Government which how inconvenient it may be they know not may be abolisht and they have Liberty and Toleration which what settled State will permit to profess what Religion they please to make choice of and what shall best suit their own Interest the Card they commonly sail by So may we have as many Religions as there be at Amsterdam and unpeople all our Plantations by calling home many Phanatical Scismaticks who under colour of dislike of the Church-Government here have fallen out with our Religion and framed to themselves divers Opinions if not Religions contrary to ours not only in Form but Reality Seeing then there is but one Lord one Faith one Baptism one God and Father of All let us endeavour to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace That there may be one Body and one Spirit even as we are Called in one Hope of our Calling Eph. 4. Let us stick fast to that one Truth which we are taught and be stedfast in one Faith and agree jointly with one accord like Children of the same Father and Mother Let us not loose the Honour of our Church-Government but reform the personal Errours if any such be and sinde Reformation signifies nothing else but the reduceing and setting Matters into the Form in which they were most perfect let us constantly bold our selves to the Form kept and practised in the primitiver and purest Times and in the First and Second Centuries in which we shall find the Order Episcopal Presbyterial and Diaconal observed and ever since confirmed by National Synods and Councils of our own near 1400 years ago or 1000 at least and practised in many Successions before and since Nothing now remains but Prayers and Endeavours for the Continuance of the Establishment of the present Government of the Church of England which is so agreeable to the Antient Constitution Only now here I wish that we may save the Honour of our dear and aged Mother and punish her Sons if any have dishonoured her by pride tyranny covetousness or any other way and that the Church and Common-wealth may hold such Correspondency as they did in the days of David and as Kings were nursing Fathers and Queens nursing Mothers to the Church in her Infancy so in her Age she may find Kings to support her if weak And if any of her Children be like Eli's their Father may correct them so that their Mother may not be dishonoured and ruined I conclude with that of St. Augustine si quid tota ecclesia hodie frequent at per orbem hoc quin ita sit faciendum disputare insolentissimae est insaniae if any thing at this day be of frequent use in the whole Church to question and dispute whether it ought so to be is a most insolent Madness Epist. 118 and that it is Arianism to say That Presbyters in Common Acception are equal to Bishops such as were Successours of the Apostles and such as St. Augustin himself was This Epiphanius reckons it among the Antient Heresies and time hath not bettered it And whether it resembles and comes near the Antilogie of Korah or not my self not being rigid and prone to censure I leave to be determined by Others FINIS