Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	authority_n	bishop_n	church_n	2,934	5	4.3576	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85313	Presbyterial ordination vindicated. In a brief and sober discourse concerning episcopacy, as claiming greater power, and more eminent offices by divine right, then presbyterie. The arguments of the Reverend Bishop Dr Davenant in his determination for such episcopacy are modestly examined. And arguments for the validity of presbyterial ordination added. With a brief discourse concerning imposed forms of prayer, and ceremonies. Written by G.F. minister of the gospel in defence of his own ordination, being questioned, because it was performed by Presbyters.	Firmin, Giles, 1614-1697.	1660 (1660)	Wing F961; Thomason E1045_17; ESTC R208016	42,577	55

Acts 14.23 that now a single Bishop can ordain alone The Dr. forgat himself much but this power of Ordination and Jurisdiction he had need to prove to reside as he saith in illis solis else he hath lost his cause But see how much authority he opposeth what woful mischief might this soon produce to the Church 5. It may as strongly be gathered that to preach in season and out of season as do all Bishops to meditate to read to oppose hereticks c do only belong to Bishops because these Commands are given the first I am sure only to Timothy as to gather because Timothy is directed in Ordination how to act that therefore Presbyters must not impose hands Why this proper to him above all the rest 6. Consider I pray that which is added 1 Tim. 5.22 Neither be partakers of other mens sins whether it may not infer the contrary thus Timothy though other Ministers may be rash and not consider what they do in Ordination but would ordain unfit unworthy persons yet do not thou lay on hanas suddenly do not thou partake of their sins in rash Ordinations joyning with them A man may partake of the sins of Ordainers as well as of the Ordained I know nothing contrary to the Analogy of Faith nor to the Context if that sense be given Why saith the Dr. Could not the Ministers of Ephesus ordain before Timothy arrived or of Crete before Titus came thither I cannot learn but Titus went along with Paul to Crete the first time of his preaching there Answ and having laid the Foundations of Churches as Jerom saith left Titus there ut rudimenta nascentis Ecclesiae confirmaret ipse pergens ad alias Nationes c. But however 1. There is a difference between the arrival of Evangelists and the Bishops in question 2. There being abundance of enemies and errours spread about as we see it was the very reason why Paul besought Timothy to stay at Ephesus 1 Tim. 1.3 These men being so able and qualified above others might very well there be lest for a time as to oppose the heresies and errours so to look to the Ministry that none but sound and able men came into it but because these being Evangelists were far more able does it conclude the Presbyters had not the Right to ordain with them 3. Remember that Cajetan confesseth even in these Epistles Presbyter and Bishop signifie the same degree and the same office Had not the Churches been in danger Timothy had not need been there so this denies not their power The Dr. goes on to prove this sole power of Ordination from humane Authority 1. From that Saying of Jerome Excepta Ordinatione quid facit Episcopus quod Presbyter non faciat Answ Jerom speaks de facto the Bishops had engrossed this power but he does not say de jure it ought to be so for he had strongly proved the Bishop and Presbyter from several Scriptures to be the same 2. It should seem it was not a universal Custom For it was one great complaint against Chrysostom saith Bish Downam that he made Ordinations without the Presbytery And in the year 398 about which time Chrysostom flourished that fourth Council of Carthage which opposeth Bishops sole power of Ordination was held However this is but humane 2. He brings in the example of one Colythus a Presbyter of Alexandria who ordained Presbyters but their Ordination was made void and the Ordained returned into the Order of Laicks Still this is but a humane Act grounded on no Scripture Answ and yet there is somthing more to be said about this For 1. I find this Colythus is reckoned among the Hereticks by Augustine and others One of his Opinions Augustin mentions but what more he held I know not 2. He was a man infamis ambitione say the Historians and would make himself a Bishop as the Epistle of the Presbyters of Mareotis in the same Apol. of Athanas intimates whence they call him non verum sed imaginarium episcopum whence the general Council commanded ut se pro Presbytero haberat qualis antea fuisset 3. It appears in both places of Athanasins that this Colythus ordained alone there are none mentioned that joyned with him 4. That Ischyras who was ordained by Colythus and about whom there was so much trouble was not chosen of a Church for so the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 570. Now for a Heretick alone ambitiously making himself a Bishop to ordain a person not elected by a Church is not the same with five Orthodox Presbyters ordaining a Presbyter elected by a true Church The Dr. before he hath done does allow this which is so proper to Bishops to be common to Presbyters in some cases then it seems the power may be ours and whether our case be not as weighty I will consider anon The Third and last is The power of Jurisdiction over both Laick● and Presbyters and instanceth in Excommunication He will allow indeed Presbyters to be consulted with from Cyprians example he might have added the 23 Canon Concil Carthag 4. which make else Sententia Episcopi irrita but for the censure this proceeds only from Episcopal Authority Hence then Presbyters have not the power of Excommunication nor are Judges in it so he saith 2. A Bishop alone may excommunicate Presbyters For the first Presbyters have the power of Excommunication 1. Why else are they called Pastors and Rulers Heb. 13.17 and the people commanded to obey them they must feed the flock and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 5.1 So 1 Thes 5.12 They are over them in the Lord. 2. There was no Bishop in Corinth when Paul wrote to have the incestuous person cast out yet they had the power of Excommunication 1 Cor. 5.7 12 13. purge judge put away Had they done it before Paul would not have written so sharply 3. Those who have the power of the Keyes have the power of Jurisdiction but Presbyters have the power of the Keyes not denied by the Papists Sent. l. 4. dis 18. S. 14. but affirmed insomuch that Estius moves this Question Vtrum Sacerdotes soli habent potestatem excommunicandi and tels us some were of that opinion Now by soli● Estius does not mean whether they alone without a Bishop For the question he is about is this Penes quos sit excommunicandi potestas and his scope is to prove that others besides Priests have the power but for the Priests that is taken for granted that they had the power and quotes 1 Cor. 5.5 13. And Augustine l. 3. contra Epist Parmen c. 2. Aquinas he also tels us Supplem q. 22. ● 1. that some were of that opinion that the Parochial Priests might excommunicate but thinks his own opinion to be more rational that the Bishop should do it had his distinction a foundation in Scripture 4. Those that have power to take into the Church have power to cast out of the

by you with those Forms which the Penmen of the Scriptures were directed by the Spirit to compose 2. Impose no other Prayers upon us but Scripture-forms and we shall not refuse to use them though not them only The Lords Prayer is the most compleat of all the Forms yet we are not bound to that form only I hope we may use other prayers keeping that substance 3. The 102 Psal which was made for the afflicted Church a little before the time of their return out of Captivity as the 13 14 15 16 Verses declare did not hinder Daniel Chap. 9. to pray by his own gift upon the same occasion where there is great difference in the Petitions and matter of prayer Object But other Churches have their Formes Answ Not all Churches where men are as orthodox and holy as ours are 2. Irenaeus bids us have recourse to those Churches in which the Apostles were conversant and in them we finde no such thing 3. Those who have Forms do yet condemn ours as witness Apollonius in the name of the Walacrian Classis p. 172. who rejecting Forms of Prayer and Administrations of Sacraments where the matter is vicious or any Superstition cleaves to them c. He adds For this cause we reject the Ceremonies and Forms of Publick Worship in the Church of England in these last corrupt times brought in by the Hierarehical Bishops as those which being Superstitious and Idolatrous have deformed the Church and the worship of God obscurarunt gloriosa Reformationis facem faciem c. In the next Section the same Divines do reject those Forms of Prayer though in respect of the matter of them good whenas they are imposed tyrannically and with violent command upon the consciences of men as being absolutely necessary and essential parts of Gods Worship c. They speak more and that notably what cruelty they have been made the instruments of and Hath not ENGLAND felt it See more in that Learned Author page 173. though he maintains the lawfulnesse of a Form So do the Leyden Professors Synop pu the. p. 499. and yet say it is necessary that Pastors of Churche should stirr up themselves to pray without forms p. 499. And once more for our Common-Prayer Book lately used Bishop Davenant hath commended it to us upon this ground What is there in it that is not approved of the Papists themselves Determ 27. and he confirms the truth of it thus That some of the Bishops of Rome have offered to approve our forme of Prayers provided that we would accept it by their authority A notable Argument to bring Orthodox and holy Christians to hear it though his scope is to prove Ergo the Papists ought to be present at our worship and the Magistrate neglects his Office if he doth not compell them Object But the totall use of Ministers gifts is not taken away Answ I think it was in some places and every where it was in Baptisme and the Lords Supper only before Sermon and after men had the use of their gifts scarce that Object But all Ministers are not able Answ Whose fault is that shew us such Ministers ordained by the Presbyterians that are not in some good measure able to pray without their book though there is difference of Gifts There are a Generation coming in again that I think indeed are not all of them and but very few I deny not but there was wrong offered to some who were turned out and let them come in withall my heart But I speak of Superstititous men pot-companions swearers c. men who have not the Gift of Prayer and despise it in others 2. But what is this to those who are able why must they be forced to read as other insufficient men must wanting Gifts Question But what if a Form of prayer be imposed so as not to take away the total use of Ministers Gifts in any Ordinance they may have their liberty of their own gifts but sometimes use that Forme Answ I should a little desire to know the Authority that enjoins it if a Synod of such Divines as ought to be I mean not superstitious Arminians Orthodox and holy men did order such a thing in a sober way not tyrannically as absolutely necessary as said Apollonius before then I confesse it would trouble me to refuse it though I finde and have heard some of my Brethren say Let the Forms of Prayer be what they will they will submit to none it is an offence they conceive and a wrong to that good spirit who hath pleased to bestow on them the Gift of Prayer to have that hindered by submitting to mens injunctions But I am not satisfied in this 1. Because you have the use of your gift in all Ordinances only sometimes you are required to use a Form 2. A Form of Prayer in it self the matter of it being agreeable to the Word is not unlawfull thus godly and wise men judge 3. I finde that the old holy Non-Conformists were not offended at a bare form of Prayer but some particular things in the Common prayer-Book and truly those are many Yea I finde the Congregationall Divines in New-England though they use no forms they are able indeed yet they dare not condemn all Forms of prayer in the Church Defense of the 9 Positions p. 34. divers of them at least would not do it so Master Shephard Though all of us could not concurr to condemn all set Forms as unlawfull yet for the English Liturgy c. And so after in the same Page Thus also Mr Norton in his Answer to Apollonius alloweth of a form of prayer for Ministers but if they be gifted then to impose is unlawfull But whether he means it is so though they use their own gift and the Forms sometimes I finde not p. 138 139. But do any we now speak of condemn all use thereof c. So again page 38. only there they say That though the thing it self be lawfull yet if not duly circumstantiated it may be evil and scandalous in the use as Meats 1 Cor. 8.13 This to me if we have liberty as in the Question is the greatest trouble how to answer the offence it will give to other Christians in case we cannot satisfie there being we have no command in the Word to use these Forms how will you help us here Will men give the Answer which Bishop Land when he silenced my Father in law gave to him My Father pleaded that Text of Paul He would not offend his weak Brother Why then should the Bishop offend him by imposing the Surplice To that speech of Paul Bishop Laud answered Yea Paul said so when he was alone but do you think Paul would have said so if he had been in a Convocation A rare Answer worthy of a Bishop 4. What think you of this Do we not many times when we are beaten with tentations pray our own conditions more than the Congregations though