Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	apostle_n	authority_n	church_n	1,814	5	4.2729	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A44094	Some thoughts on a convocation and the notion of its divine right with some occasional reflections on the defence of the vindication of the deprived bishops.	Hody, Humphrey, 1659-1707.	1699 (1699)	Wing H2346; ESTC R37493	30,786	42

in this kind they should not be able when need is to do as Vertuous Kings have done As Iosia and Hezekiah in the Old Testament did when they Assembled the Priests and Levites to renew the House of the Lord and to Celebrate the Passover The like before them did David and Solomon for removing the Ark and Dedicating the Temple Such Authority as the Iewish Kings Exercised over Ecclesiastical Affairs and Persons the like we claim to belong to our Kings and those that deny them the same Authority are to be Excommunicated according to the Doctrine of the Church of England But since there is an Argument now again insisted upon from the New Testament to prove the Right which belongs to the Clergy to Assemble and make Ecclesiastical Laws without the leave of the Supream Authority which in Mr. Hooker's Time was brought for an Objection against such a Supremacy in the King I shall take the freedom to set it down in his Words with his Answer to it It will be says that Excellent Author perhaps alledged That a part of the Unity of Christian Religion is to hold the Power of making Ecclesiastical Laws a thing appropriated unto the Clergy in their Synods and whatsoever is by their only Voices agreed upon it needeth no farther Appropriation to give unto it the strength of a Law as may plainly appear by the Canons of that first most venerable Assembly Where those things the Apostles and Iames had concluded were afterwards published and imposed upon the Churches of the Gentiles abroad as Laws the Records threof remaining still in the Book of God for a Testimony that the Power of making Ecclesiastical Laws belongeth to the Successors of the Apostles the Bishops and Prelates of the Church of God To this we Answer That the Council of Ierusalem is no Argument for the Power of the Clergy to make Laws For first There has not been since any Council of like Authority to that in Ierusalem Secondly The Cause why that was of such Authority came by a special Accident Thirdly The Reason why other Councils being not like unto that in Nature the Clergy in them should have no Power to make Laws by themselves alone is in Truth so forcible that except some Commandment of God to the contrary can be shewed it ought notwithstanding the aforesaid Example to prevail The Decrees of the Council of Ierusalem were not as the Canons of other Ecclesiastical-Assemblies Humane but very Divine Ordinances For which Cause the Churches were far and wide commanded every where to see them kept no otherwise than if Christ himself had personally on Earth been the Author of them The Cause why that Council was of so great Authority and Credit above all others which have been since is expressed in those Words of principal Observation Vnto the Holy Ghost and to us it hath seemed good Which form of Speech though other Councils have likewise used yet neither could they themselves-mean nor may we so understand them as if both were in equal sort assisted with the Power of the Holy Ghost Wherefore in as much as the Council of Ierusalem did consist of Men so enlightned it had Authority greater than were meet for any other Council besides to challenge wherein such kind of Persons are as now the State of the Church doth stand Kings being not then that which now they are and the Clergy not now that which then they were Till it be proved that some special Law of Christ hath for ever annexed unto the Clergy alone the Power to make Ecclesiastical Laws we are to hold it a thing most Consonant with Equity and Reason that no Ecclesiastical Laws be made in a Christian Common-wealth without consent as well of the Laity as of the Clergy but least of all without consent of the highest Power The Opinion of the Learned Grotius being more short and decisive in our present Case upon that forementioned place of the Acts I shall also give an account of it The Original of Synods says he is usually taken from that History in the 15th Chap. of the Acts. But whether that Assembly may be properly termed a Synod as we now understand that Word may very well be questioned There arose a Controversie between Paul and Barnabas and certain Iews of Antioch concerning the Obligations of the Mosaick Law Paul and Barnabas are sent with some of Antioch to know the Opinion of the Pastors but were they those of all Asia Syria Cilicia and Judea Assembled together in one place that were to give their Iudgment No certainly but of the Apostles and Elders of Jerusalem the Company of the Apostles was a College not a Synod and the Elders of one City could not certainly be called a Synod One Church therefore alone is consulted or more truly and properly speaking the Apostles only are consulted and they alone give Iudgment to whose Authority the Elders and Brethren of Jerusalem yield their Consent and Approbation Thus I think there can't be the least shadow of an Argument brought from Scripture for a Divine Institution of Synods But to return once more to Mr. Hooker Were it so adds that judicious Author that the Clergy alone might give Laws unto all the rest is it not easie to see how injurious this might prove to Men of other Conditions Peace and Justice are maintained by preserving unto every Order their Right and by keeping all Estates as it were in even ballance which thing is no way better done than if the King their Common Parent whose Care is presumed to extend most indifferently over all do bear the chiefest sway in making Laws which all must be ordered by wherefore of them which attribute most to the Clergy I would demand what Evidence there is whereby it may clearly be shewed that in ancient Kingdoms Christian any Canon devised alone by the Clergy in their Synods whether Provincial National or General hath by meer force of their agreement taken place as a Law making all Men constrainable to be Obedient thereunto without any other approbation from the King before or afterwards required in that behalf This was the Sense of that Great-Man and the very same Opinion and Notions they are and no other as far I can judge which are maintained by them who at present defend the King's Authority in calling Convocations and in other Ecclesiastical Affairs And I can't yet apprehend how those who so warmly and furiously oppose them can reconcile their Notions with the Doctrines which have been always received in the Church of England But it may probably be urged That though the Clergy's Right to Assemble themselves and make Laws for the Government of the Church by their own Power could not be proved by Revelation yet in Reason it ought to be allowed to them because the security of Religion depends upon it For if the Clergy alone may not make any new Orders which may seem wanting nor pass a general Censure upon any false

SOME THOUGHTS ON A Convocation And the Notion of its DIVINE RIGHT WITH SOME Occasional Reflections ON The Defence of the Vindication of the Deprived Bishops LONDON Printed for Tim. Childe at the White-Hart the West-end of St. Paul's-Charch-yard 1699. THE PREFACE I Shall only thus far endeavour to prepossess the Reader in Favour of the following Papers as to assure him That the Author is not Conscious to himself of having advanced any Notion that is repugnant to the Sense of Scripture or Antiquity To the Articles of our own Church or the Opinions of its greatest Divines who have treated this Subject The Authority of the King over our Convocations has indeed been of late disputed by some and a Learned Treatise that was writ in Defence of it has had the Misfortune of meeting with a great many Enemies that are very free in thier Censures upon it what their Reasons are themselves best know For they are so kind as not to let them appear in Publick But these Papers are only designed to give as true a State and Notion of the Controversie as the Authors Enquiries could lead him into and not for a Vindication of others Opinions And if they should chance to fall in with any of those delivered in that forementioned Treatise it was no other than a sober and impartial View of the Subject that occasioned it And I can't but think that they who assent to the Articles of our Church can hardly deny joyning in the same Notions It is very common with the Managers of Disputes of late to fix Characters of Ignominy upon those who dissent from them And some who have engaged in this Controversie for want of other Arguments have thought I suppose to carry the Cause by insulting over their Adversaries as Latitudinarians and Erastians And therefore least they should fix the same Titles upon the Author of these Thoughts he desires they would first answer these two Queries Whether he who advances no other Doctrin than what has always been maintained by the Church of England and is intirely agreeable to its 39 Articles can justly be charged by any Member of that Church as a Latitudinarian in point of Doctrin And whether he who subscribes to the Government of the same Church as by Law Established and maintains no other Notions but what our Convocations have agreed to and are at this Day the standing Rules delivered to us in her Ecclesiastical Canons and Constitutions can by any Member of the Church of England be reasonably charged as an Erastian in point of Church-government And if he that guides himself by these Methods is in the wrong the Church must answer for his Errors and not he for being obliged to defend her And therefore the Church must be taxt with our false Principles if they are such or it ought to be shewn wherein we have differed from her It may probably be one Objection against these Papers that a Book of Grotius's is sometimes cited in them which lies under the Censure of Erastian Principles It is foreign to my present Business to engage in its Defence Ger. Vossius gives it the Character of a most Excellent Book and offers to defend it against all Opposers But it is enough to my purpose that there is nothing cited from him that is disagreeable to the Doctrines of our Church And it was not his Authority but the strength of his Argument that occasion'd his being introduced in the Debate But I hope the other Authorities that are here made use of can have no such Objections against them Tho' if these Papers are condemned they can hardly escape notwithstanding the Characters they have always bore in the World ought to secure them from such Treatment since if this Author is an Error 't is they who have led him into it SOME THOUGHTS ON A Convocation c. THE stating the Rights and Authority of the Clergy must be confest to be a very nice and tender Point and in Attempts of this Nature it is almost impossible not to offend Let a Man deliver his Opinions with never so much Sincerity and Caution yet after all he must expect to find that some Party or other will be displeased The asserting the Privileges of the Clergy but even as far as those Bounds which Religion and the Laws of the Land have set them and the Nature of their Function requires is almost a downright Affront to a sort of Men who think the whole Order useless and their Office only an Imposition upon the Rights and Liberties of the rest of Mankind And the not carrying their Authority to a higher pitch than the Constitution of the State does or can admit of or than the Law of God has allowed or even to such Immunities as some Mens mistaken Zeal would challenge to belong to them is represented as an Indignity to Religion and an open Violation of the Rights and Honours of that Profession I shall not concern my self in determining whose Censure 't is most safe to fall under But this seems very apparent That the pretending to too unlimited a Power is as great a Prejudice and of as dangerous Consequence to the Clergy as the parting with some of their just Rights and Privileges Either of these Extreams may be fatal and therefore the more Caution is required to avoid them It is certainly a great Weakness in any Clergy to raise themselves Enemies in the State by laying Claim to an Authority which is none of theirs The intolerable Usurpation of the See of Rome on the Rights of Princes and the Revolutions occasioned by it in a great many parts of Europe afford us Instances enough of this Nature Let us in God's Name maintain the Honours and Privileges of the Holy Function as far as of right we may but let us not extend them to such a Power and Superiority as neither the Laws of God will justifie nor those of the Land admit of and which the first Ages of the Church after the State was Christian never exercised The whole Controversie about a Convocation may be I think reduced to this Either that the time and manner of its sitting acting or debating is to be determined by the Laws of the Land and the Prudence of the supream Authority or that the Clergy have a Power by Divine Right independent on the State to assemble themselves decree and enact Ecclesiastical Laws without the Consent of the secular Authority If the latter of these Notions be true 't is plain That all human Laws to the contrary can be of no force A Divine Institution being unalterable by any other Power And if any other Power has decreed any thing in Opposition to it 't is a Sin to submit to its Commands But in Cases of this Nature where such a Right is pretended it ought to be made very clear and indisputable from the express Declaration of Scripture or at least from the Practice of the first Christians where any Parallel Instances can