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
A92287	The reasons of the Dissenting Brethren against the third proposition, concerning presbyterial government· Humbly presented.	Westminster Assembly; Goodwin, Thomas, 1600-1680.; Westminster Assembly (1643-1652). Answer of the Assembly of Divines unto the reasons of the seven Dissenting Brethren, against the proposition of divers congregations being united under one Presbyteriall government.	1645 (1645)	Wing R573; Thomason E27_14; ESTC R209981	37,798	45

of Jerusalem to have sent chosen men to carry the Letters and withall to shew the grounds of those their judgements by word of mouth ver. 23. 27. 31. This needed not if their own Elders had been present and so had been to have returned and if they were sent as Messengers from the Synod then to all the Churches as well as to Antioch and why doe they then goe no further then unto Antioch ver. 33. Yea and although Paul and Barnabas delivered those results to all the Cities yet as it should seem accidentally and not principally intended they goe not on purpose chiefely to deliver those decrees but ver. 36. of chap. 15. it was Pauls motion upon other grounds to go visit the Churches in every City where they had Preached and so but occasionally delivered these Decrees Chap. 16. 4. So as they came to them not as sent in a mandatory way as to Churches subject to that Synod by a Synodical Law as such Canons are used to bee sent but as the judgement onely of this Church and the Apostles delivered them for their edification And in the third place If there were any further authority or jurisdiction in their Decrees it was from the Apostles who were present and concurred in it and who had power over all the Churches and accordingly though the Elders in the whole Church were present and joyned with the Apostles Quantum in se to consent and approve their Decrees with that severall respective kinde of judgment proper unto them yet all the authority put forth over these Churches was that transcendent authority of the Apostles which is not now left in all the Elders of the world joyned together and that therefore these Decrees made and the decision of these questions here were by infallible Apostolicall authority and to that end they subjoyned that Apostolicall Seale It seemed good to us and the Holy Ghost And although the ordinary Elders yea and the whole Church joyned in this yet but according to their Measure Analogy and Proportion of their faith even as in writing some Epistles Timothy and Silvanus joyned with Paul but yet Paul onely wrote Apostolically and the authority in them is looked at as his or else because perhaps they having the Holy Ghost falne on them through the Apostles Doctrine then delivered which was then usuall perswading their hearts unanimously though afore dissenting as ver. 25. to accord in that respect they might speak this in such a sense that no assembly of men wanting Apostolicall presence and instruction may now speak And although it may bee objected That then this Letter and these Decrees should bee formall Scripture and so binde us still it is answered That they are Scripture and written for our learning and if the case were the same upon which they obliged them then viz. matter of offence that then they would binde us now but the things being enjoyned but as {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} things of a superadded casuall necessity and not absolute in case of offence onely and not simply for the things themselves therefore now the necessity being ceased the obligation ceaseth yet so as the equity of the rule and ground these were commanded upon to abstain from things that will offend our brethren doth hold in like cases to the end of the world And last of all there is no act of such authority and government put forth in it which the Proposition intendeth which will appeare if wee either consider the occasion and rise of it or the issue and result of it It was not a set or stated meeting by common agreement of the Churches but Antioch sends to Jerusalem unknowne to them there are no summons sent to send up Delinquents nor can wee finde these disturbers are sent to Jerusalem to bee censured by those Ecclesiasticall pupunishments in which Government doth properly lye and consist The subject matter sent to them for their decision was meerely matter of Doctrine about this question verse 2. and about this word verse 5. Namely whether the Ceremoniall Law was to bee observed Concerning which they wrote their judgements dogmatically which they were called to doe being thus sent unto Neither doth it argue that it was more then to determine this question doctrinally they came up for because that Paul and Barnabas could have decided that before being themselves Apostles and that therefore their comming up was for discipline against Delinquents for as the case stood they listened not to Paul and Barnabas as Apostles but pretended the judgment of the other Apostles For indeed Paul and Barnabas did declare their judgements the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} or contention ver. 3. being attributed unto them as contending against the false Teachers for the Truth and so as even the Church of Antioch rested not in their decision Otherwise Paul and Barnabas might have as Apostles censured those Delinquents without comming to Jerusalem as wel as by Apostolique authority have decided the question For Apostolicall power extended to Discipline as well as Doctrine If it bee said That even doctrinally to deliver the truth when it is done by a company of Elders hath authority or power in it as when Christ said Goe and teach all power is given unto mee It is granted an Authoritie exercised in doctrine and so to bee in Synods but yet not Jurisdiction which the Proposition intends which is when doctrines are delivered sub paena under the penaltie of that Ecclesiasticall punishment of Excommunication if not received One Minister alone hath a dogmaticall authoritie as a Minister to rebuke exhort and yet acts of Jurisdiction are not his alone but of others conjoyned with him Neither secondly doth the titles given to these results of theirs argue a Jurisdiction in that they are called {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Act. 16. 4. For although the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is used for an Imperiall decree Luke 2. 1. yet but rarely and more commonly as Stephanus and Budaeus observe for doctrine opinion in matters morall or speculative as Platonis Dogma c. and thence is translated to import the Judgements of Divines given in matters Theologicall although delivered with certaintie And so the using of this word implyeth the subject to have beene doctrinall onely and so delivered And further the subject matter of this decision being about rules and ceremonies and the not observation of them the Dogma is elegantly and perhaps on purpose given to these Apostolicall Canons by way of opposition and contradiction to those that taught and observed such rules who are said {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in so doing Colossians 2. 20. being led away by the false Dogmata or Heterodox theses of false Teachers that enjoyned them And for that other word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} translated ordained it plainely notes out but this that these

12. speaking of respect to their Officers Know them that labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you These two labour and are over you are commensurable that is who make it their calling to have the care of you which the many Pastors and Elders in a common Presbyterie cannot And labour in what Tim. Epist. 1. chap. 1. ver. 17. expounds it That labour in the word and Doctrine The Elders that rule well are worthy of double honour especially those that labour in the word and Doctrine And expound this latter known place whether of Teaching Elders only or ruling and teaching both as the Reformed Churches doe however it affords this to us that the extent of ruling in either the one or the other is but as large as teaching And if it be meant of Teaching Elders only that both rule and labour in the word and Doctrine yet if they be limited in labouring in the word as they are being fixed Pastors to their own Congregations then in ruling And if it be meant of ruling Elders as distinct from them yet their ruling is but of the same extent that the others labouring in the word is and that is extended but to one Congregation And secondly Reason is for this For in a Pastors Office in which Preaching and Ruling are joyned yet his power of ruling flowes in him from and is the adjunct of his power to preach and to be sure it is not extendible further and however yet there is the same proportion of either and then by just reason the extent of the Church which is the subject of his ordinary ruling cannot be extended larger then what is the ordinary subject of his preaching and so these relations are of equall limits If a father hath the power of governing as a father then it is extendible only to those he is a father to And that a Pastor hath his ordinary ruling power annexed to his ordinary power of preaching is proved by these reasons First If not upon this ground then upon some other not by any speciall faculty or Office over and above this of preaching for then he should be ordained a ruling Elder over and above his being first a Preaching Elder as a new faculty given him or by being made a Ruler first and then this of preaching superadded as the Bishops first made Deacons then Presbyters But Secondly All the keyes are given him at once the keyes of ruling with the keyes of knowledge the power of the staffe intrinsecally followes his being a Pastor or Shepheard and though the one is a power of meere order namely that of Preaching and that of his Ruling be a power of jurisdiction to be exercised with others and not alone yet still his receiving power to joyne with others in those acts of Rule of jurisdiction is from this his power of Order and the ordinary extent of his authority therein is extendible no farther then his ordinary call to preach Yea Thirdly The extent of the power of the Apostles themselvs in ruling in all the Churches was founded upon and extendible with their commission to preach in all Churches and their very call and obligation being not to preach in a set fixed relation as ordinary Pastors calling is but to all Churches in all Nations Hence their power of ruling was answerable It was their very call to be universall Pastors and therefore universall Rulers yea and in reference to those that are without their authority of ruling was narrower in the extent of it then of their preaching The Apostles might preach to Heathens and their call was so to doe to convert them but they had not power to rule all men what have I to doe to judge them that are without But in this way of Presbyteriall governement though they also may occasionally preach where they may not rule yet the proportion of their ordinary ruling is extended beyond the proportion of their ordinary preaching which it was not in the Apostles themselves Secondly It breeds an incongruous disproportion between the Offices of Ruling and Preaching Elders compared among themselves for this Governement makes the Extent of the Ruling Elders Office and relation to be larger then that of their Teachers or Pastors For the Pastor quâ Pastor is limited to his particular Congregation he is fixed to for the ordinary performance of his Office as the Deacons also are but the Ruling Elders Office quâ Ruling Elder is extended over all these Congregations in this Presbyterie The Ruling Elder performes his Office in the highest perfection of it as to admonish excommunicate in all these Churches but the Pastors are limited in the highest work of their Callings Preaching being more excellent then Ruling yea then baptizing unto one Congregation That in the first Epistle to Tim. Chap. 5. Ver. 17. interpret it as you will justifies this Thirdly It perverts the order and distinction of Teaching Elders and meere Ruling Elders as the reformed Churches call them or Church Governours as the Assembly That whereas Christ hath made some Teaching Elders and some Ruling Elders and these distinct in this that the Preaching Elders Office is to preach and rule the Ruling Elders Office only to rule this frame of Presbyteriall government makes one person not only to doe both these works which in a particular Congregation every Pastor doth but formally to be both those Offices in respect of a double relation he doth susteine namely a Pastor to be a Preaching Elder to the Congregation where he is fixed and a meere ruling Elder to the rest of the Congregations of a Classicall Church for it is demanded when a Pastor in a particular Congregation is in this common Presbyterie what sort of Officer he is to that Presbyteriall Church An Elder he is because he doth the work of an Elder A Teaching Elder to that Church he is not for to that whole Church he labours not in the word and Doctrine Timothy Epist. 1. Chap. 5. ver. 17. Therefore a meere ruling Elder he must be and so the same man beares two sorts of Offices and by this meanes there are two sorts of meere ruling Elders whereas in a particular Congregation a Pastor though he rules yet he ruleth as a Pastor to that Congregation And this disorder and confusion is further set out in that by this meanes the same Officer hath a full relation to one Church and but halfe a relation to another and causeth him to performe the whole of his Office to one Church the particular Church he hath relation to and but the halfe thereof to the other Fourthly It makes an incongruous disproportion between the Extent of the relation of those two Offices of Elders and Deacons unto a Church If the Scriptures had intended many Churches making one Church and the Elders of those many Churchers to have been Elders in common to those Churches as one Church then in like manner the Deacons of all those Churches should make up a common

bee for Synods they are or ought to bee extraordinary and occasionall Presbyteries are standing and ordinary Synods are made up of Commissioners sent from Presbyteries and Presbyteries are made up of the Elders of particular Congregations The Members of Synods are Elders of such Churches which are according to the principles of Presbyteriall Government compleat Churches having full power of jurisdiction for all Acts of Government within themselves but the members of Presbyteries are Elders of such Congregations which are neither compleat Churches nor have within themselves full and compleat power And these cannot bee one The Elders of the Presbytery of Jerusalem when this once became a Synod by the addition of the Elders of other Churches ceased to bee any longer a Presbytery to that Church and must become with them a new body to all the Churches these other Elders did come from And then to argue these Acts done by these because the Elders of Jerusalem were present and Members of this Synod were Presbyteriall Acts of the Elders of Jerusalem is all one as to go about to argue from the Acts of Government put forth by a Parliament at Westminster to the power of the Burgesses and Common Councell of the City of Westminster because there the Parliament sits and the Burgesses of that City are parts and members of that Parliament Or as if the Kingdome were governed by County Courts and out of those County Courts Knights and Burgesses should bee chosen to make up a Parliament when the Parliament is met there can be no Argument drawn from the power of a Parliament to prove the power of a County Court Or from the power of a County Court to prove the power of a Parliament Thus Synods are made out of Presbyteries therefore wee cannot argue from the power of Synods to the power of Presbyteries or from the power of Presbyteries to the power of Synods But secondly wee deny it to have been such an ordinary formall Synod The jurisdiction of Synods is founded upon this necessary requisite thereunto That there bee Commissioners from all those Churches representing them present or called to bee so And the power of the jurisdiction cannot reach nor extend further then to such Churches as have sent Commissioners thereunto The weight then of this Synodicall power depends on the proofe of this That all those Churches sent Commissioners to this Assembly which if either it bee not proved or the contrary thereunto found true the authority of those decrees as from those Elders here will prove not to have been Acts of Government further then the Apostles authority who joyned in it was stamped on it to affirme that Commissioners from them all were present because the decrees did binde them is to begge what is denyed when another just reason may bee given of their binding if any such authority were in them and our reasons to the contrary are these First Wee finde a deepe silence about it For wee read but onely of two Churches between whom it was transacted they of Antioch sending to Jerusalem and their Elders there Chap. 14. 27 28. compared with chap. 15. 2 3. and the Messengers which were sent from this Assembly going onely to Antioch ver. 30. 31. as those who were chiefely troubled onely the benefit redounded to all they wrote to yea although Paul came through Phenice and Samaria ver. 3. yet wee read not a word of any of the Churches of those parts their sending of any Commissioners unto this Synod as had it been intended such certainly they would and there was this speciall reason why those of this Church were thus electively sent unto because they were the Mother Church from whom the Word of God came and from whom those men that troubled them had gone forth and had pretended to teach what they had received from them and besides they were in an especiall manner versed in this question it being about the observation of their law and there also some of the Apostles were present how many wee know not for dispersed they had been long before and if any number of others out of those other parts of Judea had come up hither it would have been said as Act. 11. ult. The Elders of Judea not onely of Jerusalem yea it is not so much as said that they that were sent from Antioch were of the Elders of that Church but that they sent Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them And secondly the contrary seemes cleere namely that those Letters and Decrees were written and sent onely from the Elders of Jerusalem and not from all those Churches For first the Decrees are every where attributed to the Elders in Jerusalem So Chap. 16. 4. The Decrees of the Apostles and Elders in Jerusalem {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Now the usuall stile of the New Testament is by way of distinction of Churches to say the Church in such a place the Elders in such a place as the Church of Antioch Act. 13. 1. and the Church at Corinth 1 Cor. 1. 1. and by the like reason the Elders in such a place doe signifie the proper Elders of the Church in that place or City whilest but one and therefore if by the Elders in Jerusalem had been meant in this place onely the Elders met from all Quarters at Jerusalem as the place of that Assembly there had been a great ambiguity seeing the more usuall and proper import of that expression is to note out the fixed standing Elders of a place and the Church in a place Again secondly in the fourth verse Paul and Barnabas are said to bee received of the Church and Apostles and Elders namely of Jerusalem as in particular relation to it Yea thirdly the standing Elders of that place assumed to themselves to have written the Decrees Chap. 21. 25. As touching the Gentiles wee have written and concluded Fourthly and accordingly the conclusion of their Letter is made the speciall Act of that Church and the Elders thereof ver. 22. It pleased the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church that is of Jerusalem as verse 4. to send chosen men and the Letters run thus The Apostles Elders and Brethren Fifthly the matter of the Letter argues it ver. 24. Forasmuch as certain that went out from us have troubled you with words to whom wee gave no such Commandement How could this bee said by a Synod of the Elders of those Churches which were themselves troubled by them It is manifest therefore they came out from this Church of Jerusalem who wrote this and they pretended the Apostles Doctrine which is called a Commandement because the Apostles taught no other then what Christ commanded as Matth. 28. ult. And to say the Denomination was from the more eminent part namely the Elders of that Church had been derogatory to the Synod if it had been such a meeting And sixthly if the Elders of all those Churches had been present there had been lesse need for the Apostles and Elders