Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	authority_n	old_a	testament_n	2,803	5	7.9085	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A50332	A defence of diocesan episcopacy in answer to a book of Mr. David Clarkson, lately published, entituled, Primitive episcopacy / by Henry Maurice ...	Maurice, Henry, 1648-1691.	1691 (1691)	Wing M1360; ESTC R8458	258,586	496

near adjoyning made but one Church Now because Churches of so large extent required many Ministers of the word and sacraments and yet of one Church there must be but one Pastor the Apostles in setling the state of these Churches did so constitute in them many Presbyters Now according to Dr. Field every Episcopal Church as laid out by the Apostles having so large extent as to require many Ministers and yet but one Pastor or Bishop was plainly not a Congregational Church but Diocesan Bishop Bilson (t) Bils Perpet Gov. c. 14. p. 295 298 306 321. is yet plainer against the purpose for which he is alledg'd We have says that learned Prelate one Bishop in a Church ty'd to the Laws of God the Church and the Prince you would have 300 in a Diocese and some more all of equal power and set at liberty to consult and determine at their pleasure Neither had the Jews that kind of Government which you would establish in the Church neither did our Lord and Master ever prescribe to the Gentiles the judicial part of Moses Law And again As the people did increase so did the pains in each place and consequently the number of Presbyters one man being no more able to serve the necessities of a great City than to bear the burden of the Earth upon his back and yet in each Church and City one chief among them that as principal Pastor of the place c. And to conclude you dislike a Bishop should have any Diocese or Church besides that one wherein he teacheth which nice conceit of yours not only condemneth the Primitive Church of Christ that assigned Dioceses to Bishops but contradicteth the very ground of Government which the Apostles left behind them (u) Prim. Ep. p. 48. Now in what places the Jews had their Synagogues if it were not plain Matth. 9.35 that they were far from being alway great Cities will appear from the seats of their Consistories I never yet heard of any who denied that the Jews had Synagogues in Villages as well as Cities But that the Village-Synagogues were independent and free from any subjection to the Cities in Ecclesiastical causes is now the question and our Author is wise in saying nothing of it For those who have taken his side of the question though men of good reading have not been able to produce any thing about it but their own affirmations It is not to be doubted but every good Village of the Jews had a Synagogue as every Parish with us hath a Church and great Cities had many Synagogues as our great Towns have many Parishes and Jerusalem particularly is said to have had 480. But that every Village-Synagogue had supream authority in matters Ecclesiastical and no dependance upon any other Court or the chief officers of the City Synagogues is very unlikely For so many Independent and Co ordinate Officers could never without a miracle have preserved themselves one year under one National communion And in those great Cities where the Jews had many Congregations it cannot well be conceived that every one had supream authority but that there must be some Chief or Council to which all those Synagogues were subject This is most likely because common order and National agreement cannot well subsist without it I know there are some great men (x) Grot. de jure sum pot c. 11. Gotof. in l. 2. de Cod. Theod. have been very positive on the other side and have asserted the Independence of every Synagogue that every such Assembly had a chief Officer answering to our Bishops and all co-ordinate and of equal authority But for all this no evidence is produced and when learned men speak without book about distant matter of fact their authority is but small for then they do not speak from their knowledge and learning but their affection The Scriptures of the old Testament give no directions concerning Synagogues and do not so much as mention those Assemblies From whence some have concluded that in those times there were no such religious Assemblies among the Jews In the new Testament we have frequent mention of them and sometimes their Officers are named but how they were ordered in respect of one another and of general Communion the new Testament does not give the least hint Nay as to this matter the writings of the Jews are not plain and though they were yet they taste too much of the fable to be depended upon Great men may guess and affirm according as they stand affected but when all is done this matter is still in the same obscurity for want of sufficient evidence After the establishment of Christian Religion we find general Officers of the Jews endued with the power of Excommunication and Absolution but that every Village or City-consistory had that power then we do not find and for ought appears they might have no more power than our Church-wardens and Vestries Nay in the complaint the Jews make to Arcadius and Honorius (y) L. 8. de Jud. Coeli Sam. l. 15. de Jud. l. 29. Codesh that the civil Officers had restor'd to Communion several whom the Primates of their Law had cast out without the consent of those Primates the power seems to belong chiefly to these and they too derived their Jurisdiction not from the Synagogues but from the Patriarchs by whom they were appointed And this Invasion of the Imperial Officers is represented not as an injury to the Vestries of Village or City Synagogues but only to these Primates whose office was of greater compass than the inspection of a single Synagogue as appears from the last of those Laws cited in the margin where we are informed that upon extinction of the Patriarchs these Primates succeeded to all their power But while I was thinking of the learned men who treat of this matter I had almost forgot our Author who tells (z) Prim. ep p. 48. us That something will appear from the seats of their Consistories Let us therefore attend In Cities of less than sixscore Families they plac'd their Consistories of three In Cities of more than a hundred and twenty Families the Courts of twenty three Maimon in Sanedr c. 1. Sect. 5. Seld. de Synedr l. 2. c. 5. And it is well known that many of our Country Towns with their Precincts have more than 120 Families and our lesser Villages are as great as the Cities in the lower account They must be very sore distress'd who repair to Rabbins for propriety of expression or evidence of Antiquity In Maimonides his language it seems a place that had not 120 Families was a City And what if it had but three It was sufficient to furnish a Triumviral Consistory and therefore may pass for a Rabbinical City But Cunaeus (a) Cun. de R. P. Hebr. l. 1. c. 13. Ego vero Aristoteli assentior ne quidem eam esse civitatem Civitas nomen amittit modus si defit who lov'd to