Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	king_n	law_n	sovereign_a	2,603	5	9.3026	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A56167	A fvll reply to Certaine briefe observations and anti-queries on Master Prynnes twelve questions about church-government wherein the frivolousnesse, falseness, and grosse mistakes of this anonymous answerer (ashamed of his name) and his weak grounds for independency, and separation, are modestly discovered, reselled : together with certaine briefe animadversions on Mr. Iohn Goodwins Theomachia, in justification of independency examined, and of the ecclesisticall jurisdiction and rights of Parliament, which he fights against / by William Prynne ...	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1644 (1644)	Wing P3967; ESTC R3868	34,873	26

concluded thence That the Altar was measured as well as the Temple Rev. 11. 1. referring only to the * Jewish not christian Church which hath no * Temple nor Altar Ergo we ought to have an Altar yea one divine set form of Altars in all christian Churches under the Gospel which I hope you dare not aver After these three Independent Arguments he pretends my third Quere contradicts the first because I suppose a church-government may be consonant to Gods Word in the generall which is not particularly prescribed in it A pretty fancy As if nothing could be consonant to Gods Word which is not particularized or verbally enjoyned in it Are not our materiall churches garments temporall Magistrates Majors Corporations Parliaments Courts of justice Laws of all sorts yea Festivals Covenants monthly Fasts c. agreeable to Gods Word because not literally prescribed in it Are your private church-covenants unmixt Communions as you phrase them erections of Independent congregations without the licence of temporall Magistrates not consonant to the Word in your owne opinions though no where extant in it If not then all your divine pretences for them vanish and you yeeld your cause If yea you must then recant this pretence of a contradiction till you are able to prove 〈◊〉 better then yet you have done Having played the Logicians and contradictors part so well he next betakes himself to his Anti-queries to prove a set church-modell which are three 1. If no prescript forme of church-government in the Word why not Episcopacy especially regulated and moderated as well as Presbytery I answere if you meane it of Lordly Episcopacy there are abundant pregnant Texts against it to prove it opposite to Gods Word If of moderated or regulated Episcopacy the same with Presbytery if the Parliament by the Synod●… advice unanimously establish it as most consonant to the Scriptures and most agreeable to the civill Government I shall readily submit unto it without opposition and why not you and all others 2. If church-government be suited to States whether Politicians are not more fit to consult about establishing it Why is an Assembly of Divines called to search the Word about it I answer that my position is That every church-government ought to be suitable to Gods Word as likewise to the civill State Therefore Politicians and States-men are fit to be consulted with to suit it best to the civill State and an Assembly of Divines to square it likewise by and to the Word the true reason why in this our Realme and all other Christian States as I can abundantly manifest if need be Ecclesiasticall Lawe●… and formes of government have ever been setled by Parliaments with the advice of Synods Councells wherein States-men and Church-men have jointly concurred in their deliberations and votes using both the Bible and the Law to settle it and not throwing either of them aside as incompatible as ignorant or lawlesse persons deeme them but joyning both together True civill or ecclesiasticall Policy skill in Government Arts wholsome Lawes boing † Gods gift as well as spirituall graces To his third Anti-quere I answer That it is more reasonable the * State should be subject to Christs rule then Christ to its direction But this Quere is quite besides the Question till you prove infallibly That Christ hath prescribed a set unalterable divine government to which all churches Nations States must necessarily conform and clearly manifest what this Government is in all its particulars Till this be done the sole question is Whether christian Princes Parliaments States Synods under the Gospel have not a lawfull power to prescribe Ecclesiasticall Lawes and forms of Government not repugnant to the Word not to Christ himself as you pretend who is † King of Kings and Lord of Lords above the reach or command of humane power but to all particular Christian churches congregations subjects under their respective jurisdictions and whether the whole representative Church and State of England in Parliament have not sufficient authority by Gods law to over-rule and bind all or any particular members or congregatious of it as well as the major part of an Independent congregation power to * over-vote and rule the lesser part and to order yea bind any of their particular members A truth so clear that no rationall man good Christian or Subject can deny it Your prime argument then wherewith you deceive poore silly people That Kings Parliaments cannot prescribe Lawes and Canons to Christ himselfe the Soveraigne Lord and King of his Church Ergo they cannot prescrib them to their Christian subjects and Churches who by Christs owne ordinance are subject to their lawfull soveraigne authority is pure Independent Non-sence much like this A Master Father cannot prescribe Laws Rules to the King or Parliament who are paramount him Ergo not to his servants children who are subject to him As for the latter part of this Querie That the Saints thinke CHRIST is King alone over his Churches and hath not left them to substitutes and the politicke considerations of men to bee governed by If hee meanes it onely of matters of Faith or of meere internall government over the soules of men it may passe as tolerable but if hee intends it of externall Ecclesiasticall Government Discipline or order in the Church or State as Christian hee must renounce his Oath of Allegeance his late Protestation Nationall Vow and Covenant and make Rom. 13. 1 to 6. 1. Pet. 2. 13 14. Tit. 3. 1. 1 Tim. 2. 1 2 3. to be Apocryphall the Confessions of all Protestant Churches heterodox and deny christian Kings Magistrates highest civill powers to be Christs substitutes Vicars in point of Government to whom Christ hath delegated his * Kingly power as truely as Ministers are his deputies in point of instruction admonition to whom he hath bequeathed his Propheticall office 2. In his answer to my second Quere he first wilfully misrecites it then infers † a blind obedience from it to all superiours commands be they never so unjust or contrary to Gods Word whereas my Question speaks onely of lawfull decrees c. consonant to Gods Word and to the civill Lawes Government and manners of the people to which every Christian in point of conscience is bound to submit without any danger of blinde obedience by the expresse resolution of Rom. 13. 1 to 6. 1 Pet. 2. 14 15. Tit. 3. 1. Ezra 7. 26. Josh. 1. 16 17 18. Heb. 13. 17. If any man deny this verity he must renounce not onely his Christianity but his Allegeance and Humanity too But suppose saith he the whole Parliament and Synode should erre in commanding a Government that is erronious or untrue must we then submit unto it I answer first such an oversight is not to be presumed before it be actually committed and it is neither * christian charitable nor any way of Christ thus to prejudge their resolutions Secondly if the Decrees or Government

multitude of the Land yea of a greater power then ever Iesus Christ himselfe had at least then ever he exercised For as dare R●…gem argues a greater power then esse R●…gem as hee that buildeth an house hath more honour then the house Hebr. 3. 3. so to nominate and appoint who shall have power to umpire in matters of conscience and of God * to determine what shall be preached and what not what shall be beleeved and what not is a branch of a greater root of power then the exercise of the power that is committed to others in this behalfe Now though Iesus Christ had a power and was authorized by God to be a Law-giver himselfe unto his Churches and Saints in their spirituall Republike yet it is hard to prove that he ever he invested any other with such a power His Apostles themselves were no Lords over the faith of the Saints nor had they anie power or authoritie to impose any thing upon men as † necessarie either to be beleeved or practised but what they had in expresse commission and charge from Jesus Christ himselfe to impose upon such termes c. The summe of this large passage is that there is not onelie an improbabilitie but absolute impossibilitie that the Parliament should have any power at all to enact Lawes and Statutes in matters of Religion church-government Gods worship or service because the people who elect them have no such power and so an impossibilitie of deriving any such authoritie to them and to affirme the contrarie is not onely to awake the eyes of jealousie upon them but exceedingly destructive to and undermining of not onely their power but honour peace and safetie also Whether this be not directly to undermine the authority of Parliaments and temporal Magistrates in all church-affairs and matters of Religion contrarie to your late Covenant and Protestation and that in the most transcendent maner that ever any have hitherto attempted in print let all wise men judg I am sory such ill passages should fall from so good a pen But to give a short Answer to this extravagant discourse First this objection might be made against the generall Assemblies Parliament Kings of the Israelites who a were chosen by the people yet they made Lawes and Statutes concerning Religion and Gods worship with his approbation without any such exception as I have elsewhere proved Secondly God himself as I formerly ●…uched used the ministry assistance of Cyrus Artaxerxes Durius with other heathen Princes and Magistrates for the building of his Temple and advancement of his worship for which they made Decrees Statutes notwithstanding this objected reason reflects more upon them and their electors then on such who are Christians by externall profession Thirdly most Christian Kings and Magistrates in the World even those who claime to be hereditary as the yet continued formes of their Coronations and instalments manifest come in by the peoples election as well as such members of Parliament who are eligible yet you cannot without disloialty and absurdity deny them authoritie in matters of Religion and Church-government Fourthly your selfe doe not onely grant but argue b That every private man hath yea ought to have power to elect and constitute his own Minister and no doubt you will grant that private men have power likewise to set up independent Congregations which have authority to prescribe such Covenants Lawes and Rules of Government Discipline Worship as themselves think most agreeable to the Word If then they may derive such an Ecclesiasticall authority to independent Ministers and Churches why not as well to Parliaments and Synods likewise by the self-same reason Fi●…hly it is cleare by sundry instances in Scripture and your owne Text that God doth oft times make use of unsanctified persons and the rude multitude whom you so much under-value to advance his glory propagate his Gospel promote his Worship vindicate his Truth and edifie his Church He can poure a spirit of prophesie upon c a Baalam a Saul a Gamaliel a persecuting High-Priest he can make a d Judas an Apostle yea send him to preach and build his Church as well as a Peter Wee read in the Evangelists that none were so forward as the vulgar e multitule to beleeve follow professe Christ and embrace the Gospel though many of them did it out of sinister ends Therefore they may well have power to chuse such persons who shall and may make Lawes to promote the Gospel and Government of the Church of Christ Sixthly those who have no skill at all in Law Physick or Architecture have yet judgment and reason enough to make choice of the best Lawyers Physitians Architects when they need their help Those who are unfit or unable to be members of Parliament themselves as most of the electors are have yet had wisdom enough in all ages and especially at this present to elect the most eminent ablest men for such a service Those who are unmeet to be Kings Magistrates Commanders or Ministers have yet skill enough to chuse able persons for such offices power to delegate to them such Parliamentary Royall Magisteriall Pastorall authority as is necessary for their severall offices which those who elected them never had actually but onely originally or virtually in them not to use but derive them unto others why then may not our free-holders who have voices in electing the members of our Parliaments and the Commonalty of the Land whom you scandalously terme the vilest and most unworthy of men though there be a degree of vulgar people viler and unworthier then they in all respects who have no votes in such elections have sufficient authority in them to elect and nominate such fitte persons who by virtue of such nomination or election shall have right and power to enact Lawes Statutes in matters of Religion Worship and Church-government not dissonant from Gods Word to which themselves and others by Gods owne ordinance must submit If the common people who neither are nor can be Parliaments * Emperors Kings Judges Magistrates Ministers have yet a lawful power to make others such by their bare election to give them such authority and power as themselves never actually were or can be possessors of then why by the self-same reason may they not likewise delegate a lawfull Ecclesiasticall legislative authority in church-affairs to their elected Parliamentary and Synodall Members which was never actually in themselves as well as Mr * Goodwin delegate the power of determining who should be fit persons to receive the Sacrament and to become members of his independent Congregation to eight select substitutes which was never actually vested in himselfe nor transferrible thus to others by any Law of God or man why may not a man bring an ecclesiastical or spiritual extraction out of a secular root contrary to your Paradox as * well as a R●…gall Magisteriall Parliamentall Ministeriall extraction out of a

20. c. 3. 1. 1 Pet. 2. 2. Heb. 5. 12 13 14. 1 Ioh. 2. 11. to 15. Ephes. 4. 15. 16 † 1 Tim. 3 6. † Ezek. 16. 13. * Rom. 13. 1 to 7. 1 Tim 2 1 2 3. Tit 3. 1 1 Pet. 1. 2. to 24 c. 3. 1. 1 Cor. 7. 1 to 18. Eph. 5. 22 23. c. 6. 1. to 10. Col. 3. 18 to 25. † See my Catalogue c. The unbishoping of Timothy and Titus A Breviate and Antipathy of the English Lordly Prelacy † See my humble Remonstrance against Ship-money * In his Sermon on Feb. 25 * Deut. 12. 8. Judges 〈◊〉 6. r. 21. 25. † Yea never more dangerous errours ref●…ted suppressed then in the 4. first general Councels and some Synods since as that of Dort and other Protestant Synods See the Harmony of confession●…s Where therefore they determine rightly you must submit unto them where they confirm apparent dangerous errours there you may vary from them when proved such * These are the true grounds of all s●…rations Esa 65. 5. Luk. 18. 10 to 16. lude 18. 19. witnesses the Novatians Dunatists of old The severall orders of Monks Nuns Erem●…s Anchorites in the Church of Rome and their new order of Jesuits each of them pre●…nding more sanctity and strictnesse then another and so severing in their different orders habits Mon●… rules covenants one from another † Mr Goodwins Theomachia p 24 25. The Reply of two of the Brethren pas●… * Epistle to the Reader p g. 11. 33. 44. to 52. b Page 18. 22. 52. and else Gamaliell Himselfe no Apostle nor Christian from whose words you yet take your text is Gospell was not altogether of this opinion 1. * Sec Epiphanius Basil Augustine and all the Bookes of or against any Hereticks and Sectaries * Matth. 4 6. * Mat. 24. 11. 23. to 27. c. 7. 15. 2 Cor. 11 13 14 15. Ephes. 4. 14. 2 Thes. 2. 9. 10 Rev. 13. 2. to ●…8 2 Ioh. 10. 〈◊〉 f Gal. 2. 4. to 18 * Rom. 19. 15 16 26. h See Iustinian Cod. l. 〈◊〉 Tit. 8. 1. Eliz. c. 2. 35. Eliz. c. 1. 2. 2 i Page 21. k See the London Ministers Petition against it 1 l See 1 Cor. 11. 16. c 10. 32. 33. m See p. 30. to 52. 2 n p. 3 4. 11. 12. p Ezra I. 1. to the end c. 4 17. to 24. c. 6. 2. to 17. c. 7. 12. to 28. Neh 2. 1. to 27. 2 Chron. 36. 22 23. Isay 44. 28. Dan. 3. 29. c. 6. 25 26 27. Ionah 3. 5 6 7. r Acts 24 5. 26 27 28. 2 Tim. 4. 10. 17. s 1 Tim. 2. 1 2. 3. Rom. 13. 1. to 7. Tit 3. 1 t Matt. 10. 17 18. 21. c. 26 27. Amos 13. 9. c. 15. Acts 4. 1. to 24. c. 5. 17. to 4. c. 6. 12 13. c. 9. 1 2. 3. c. 11. 2 3 4. c. 16. 10. to 40. c. 18. 12. q Tim. 2. 1 Ier. 29. 7. v Page 38. 10 40. x Pag. 30. 31 y Amos 3. 3. * Esa. 9. 6. See my twelve Questions p. 7 8. Pag. 48 49 50. This he more fully expressed in a Sermon in February last Note Gamaliell your Text never taught you any such Anti-Parliamentary Doctrine Note * The people having power to elect Princes Magistrates Ministers Parliaments Synods have likewise authority ●…o nominate such who by the rule of Gods Word may limit these particulars though not by their owne bare authority without or against the Word † Every Magistrate Parliament and Synod have power to declare and en jo●…n what is necessary to be beleeved practised by or according to Gods Word not without or contrary to it a See my Appendix to the soveraigne power of Parliaments and Kingdomes p. 122. to 131. Twelve considerable Queries p. 4 5. Independency examined p. 2 11 12. b Page 25 26. c Num. 22. 35 c. 23 24. 1 Sam. 10. Act. 5. 34. to 40. Joh. 11. 49 to 53. d Ioh. 6. 70 71 Mar. 6. 7. to 14. e Matth. 5. 1. c. 13. 1 2. c. 8. 18. c. 9. 36. c. 14 14 19 c. 11. 32 33. c. 21 8 9 10. Luk. 6. 17 19. c. 8. 44 45. Joh. 6. 2 5. Mar. 12. 12 37. Luk. 13 17. c. 18. 43. c. 21. 38. c. 22. 1. Joh. 7 40. 43. c. c. 8. 2. Act. 2. 47. * This he confessed and it appeared by a writing before the Committee of plundered Ministers * Or as well ashimselfe extracts many spirituall Doctrines out of Gamaliels secular speech in these very sermons * Therefore your principall Argument that the seven particular Churches in Asia had no Iurisdiction one over another being under different civil Dominions and not members of the selfe-same Christian Republike ●…rgo the whol Parliament and Church of England have no Iurisdiction over particular parish Churches or Independent Congregations in England is a meere Independency