Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n bishop_n church_n whole_a 1,876 5 5.4126 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A27068 Whether parish congregations be true Christian churches and the capable consenting incumbents, be truly their pastors, or bishops over their flocks ... : written by Richard Baxter as an explication of some passages in his former writings, especially his Treatise of episcopacy, misunderstood and misapplied by some, and answering the strongest objections of some of them, especially a book called, Mr. Baxters judgment and reasons against communicating with the parish assemblies, as by law required, and another called, A theological dialogue, or, Catholick communion once more defended, upon mens necessitating importunity / by Richard Baxter. Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691. 1684 (1684) Wing B1452; ESTC R16512 73,103 142

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

WHET●ER Parish C●●gregations BE TRUE Christian Churches ●●d the Capable Consenting Incumbents be truly their Pastors or Bishops over their Flocks 〈◊〉 Whether the old Protestants Conformists and Noncon●●rmists or the Brownists were in the right herein And how 〈…〉 our present Case is the same 〈◊〉 by Richard Baxter as an Explication of some Passages in his For●●● Writings especially his Treatise of Episcopacy misunderstood and misapplied by some and answering the strongest Objections of some of them especially a Book called R. Baxters Judgment and Reasons against Communicating with the Parish Assemblies as by Law required And another called A Theological Dialogue CATHOLICK COMMUNION once more Defended upon ●●ns necessitating importunity By RICHARD BAXTER LONDON 〈◊〉 in Parkhurst at the Bible and Three 〈◊〉 near Mercers Chappel 1684. Communion with Parish Churches vindicated In Answer to a Book entituled The Judgment of Mr. Baxter against Communicating c. Mistaking my writings A Church is not formally quid Physi●um but quid morale politicum Relativum a political Relative being II. The same name signifieth both the Genus and Species that are divers by use III. The same is true of the name Pastor IV. Diocesan Churches are of three sorts 1. Such as have at present but one fixed Assembly but design to gather more hereafter Such Dr. Hammond thought they were in Scripture times 2. Such as have one Diocesan Governour or Superintendent over many inferior Churches and their Pastors 3. Such as have one only Bishop or Pastor having no other true Pastor Elder Church-Ruler or Presbyter of Christs Institution under him but Chappels which have no such Ruler or Pastor V. The first sort of Diocesans we have now nothing to do with The second sort is controverible some holding it sinful some lawful and some and very many to be of Divine Institution as Successors of the Apostles not in the extraordinaries but in the ordinary parts of their Office Christ having made an imparity or a superiority of some over others they think that to say without proof that he changed that order in one Age is 1. to charge him with mutability and levity 2. And to diminish from his Law which hath a Curse The third sort of Diocesans is either 1. of a Diocess like a great Parish with Chappels so small that one Pastor may possibly oversee it This is tollerable when more cannot be had and when they can it hurts only ●he well-being of the Church Or 2. it is of a Diocess so great as that one man cannot do what is essential to a Pastor and so it is undone This nullifieth that Species of Churches which is of Christs Institution VI. A particular Church of Christs Institution of the lowest political order is A competent number of Neighbour-Christians who by Christs appointment and their own exprest consent are associated with one or more Past●● for the right worshipping of God in publick and the Edification of the Members by the exercise of the said Pastoral Office and their mutual Duties to God to their Pastors and each others for the welfare of the Society and the pleasing and glorifying of God VII The Pastoral Office as over this first or lowest Church and as it is in unfixed Ministers related yet to no one Church more than another differeth but as the subject matter or object of their charge doth differ and not in the fundamental Power or Order VIII This Pastoral Office is essentially Ministerial to Christ as the Prophet Priest and King of his Church 1. A Power to Teach 2. To Lead in Worship 3. To Guide by the Keys of Reception Admonition Exclusion and Restoration IX It is not Inconsistent with this Pastoral Office to be Governed by Superiors whether Magistrates or Ecclesiasticks as others were by Apostles and by Timothy Titus c. Therefore every limitation restraint rebuke or punishment for Mal-administration nullifieth not the Office nor yet allowing an appeal to Superiors X. To hinder a Pastor from forcible excluding men from Church or Sacrament and allow him only to do it by Application of Gods word is agreeable to his Office XI It is Power and Obligation to exercise and not the present actual Exercise that is essential to the Office in the fundamental Relation But should the Non-exercise be total and stated it would not make up a Church in act No more than a mere Power to Teach will make a School in act XII He that hath the entire Power and statedly exerciseth but one part of it statedly omitting an essential part may be in Order an empowred Minister but his Society is but a half Church But if it be only an Integral part that he omits it may be a true Church tho faulty or if it be an essential part and not statedly but only by some present impedition XIII The name of Church Pastor and Diocesan being formally Relative in signification are really divers things as the Fundamentum Relate Correlate and Terminus are divers They are therefore considerable I. As instituted and described by Christ II. As understood described and consented to by sound Orthodox Pastors and People III. As described by laws and Canons IV. As esteemed and described by many mistaking Bishops Clergy and People some Super-Conformists and some Misjudging that the Law saith as they The word as to these senses is equivocal XIV Christs Institution went before mens Corruption and is to be held to by all Christians who own him to be the Maker and Ruler of his own Church And no man hath Power to null his Institution nor to warrant 〈◊〉 to make his Church another thing XV. By Christs Institution every Ministerial Elder and Pastor hath Power 1. To Teach the People 2. To Lead them in Worship 3. To Receive by Baptism and to Communion or to refuse on just cause tho under Government as aforesaid The whole Office I have copiously described in my Universal Concord 24. years ago XVI The Parishes that have capable Christians and Ministers consented to by their sumbmission are such true Churches their Neighbourhood and Christianity making them capable matter Not that a man is of the Church because he is in the Parish Atheists Infidels Sadduces Hereticks and Refusers may dwell there Its thought that of 60000. that dwell in one London Parish 10000 Communicate not and so 40000 or 50000 are not of that Church but those that are capable Consenters and Communicants XVII This sort of Churches we were in Possession of 166● and till August 24. 1662. And of 9000 Ministers then 2000 only were put out the other 7000 continuing in And of those that were put out some few gathered part of their old Flock into private Churches renouncing and disswading them from the publick Most gathered no such Churches but help their old People as they could not drawing them from the Parish Churches till the time of the Kings Licences for more open Ministry Many led them to the Parish Churches and took themselves for fellow
Pastors with the publick Ministers and lived in Love and Communion with them The People were not by the new Law cast out with the Ministers Most of the people in the 2000 Parishes of the ejected and almost all in the other 7000 who before communicated or were ca●able of it continuing the Parish Communion And so are Churches if they were so before XVIII The generality of the former Protestant Bishops and Clergy took the Parish Rectors to be true Pastors of the Parish Churche● as Bishop Usher proved them The Church of England is confessed to be of this mind before the Wars It is not certain that Arch-Bishop Laud thought otherwise If he did Hey●n names but five that joyned with him in his main cause of whom Mountague if not more were for the contrary cause in this point XIX They then took a Curate to be a Pastor and to have all that is essential to the Presbyters Office And to be a Presbyter and no Pastor is a Contradi●tion in the sense of Protestants and Papists except what is said for Lay-E●ders In France they call all their Parish-Pastors Curates the word sig●ifieth the Curam animarum XX. No Law since 166● hath changed any essentials of the Parish-Pastors O●●nce and so none hath nulled it from what it was in 1640. They that affirm the contrary must prove it The Law before subjected Parish-Pastors to Diocesans It imposed the Oath of Canonical Obedience and a promise of the same in Ordination It was the same to the Ecclesiastical Courts as now If any pretend to such singular skill in Law as to say that there was no Law for the Book of Ordination which made the ordained to Covenant to obey their Ordinaries nor any Law for the Canons I hope he will have more reason than to lay the controversie about Separation on his odd conceit when all the People in England have in the days of the four last Soveraigns been forced to submit to these as Legal and no such pretender could at any time deliver them Books have been written and Pleas used against submitting to the Courts that declared not that they held their Authority from the King but the Judges still over-ruled it against them And they that profest to hold it from the King did many if not most mean but the Liberty of publick exercising it as the Ministry is held under him or the adjunct Cogent Power or the Circa sacra XXI The Law enableth the Parish-Minister to receive into the Church by Baptism tho under canonical Prescripts which Dissenters much dislike and to Catechize Youth and certifie their fi●ness for Confirmation before they Communicate It bindeth them to reject all from Communion who are not confirmed or at least are not ready and desirous of it it tells us who is to be taken for ready Those that have learnt the Catechism and solemnly own their Baptismal Covenant The Pastor hereby hath Power to try all the unconfirmed whether they are thus ready or not The Canon requireth him to deny Communion to all that live in any scandalous Sin The Law and Canon bid him to instruct the Congregation to lead them in publick Worship and in the Name of Christ to Reprove Admonish Comfort Administer the Lord Supper Visit the Sick with Instruction and Prayers All which with the aforesaid Power of judging who shall be Communicants is full as much as is Essential to a Parish-Pastor Solemnly to pronounce them Excommunicate beside refusing Communion is not Essential If it were they have Power to do it after the Bishops Sentence If it were Essential to do it as ungoverned or finally or without appeal then Apostolick yea and Magistrates Government would null the Pastors Office XXII The altering some words in Ordination and putting out the name Pastors from most places in the Litturgy where they were applied to Parish-Ministers is no change at all of the Office much less of its essence It takes no Power from them which they had But it was done by the interest of some men who thought that Presbyters who swore the three Kingdoms against Bishops had taken too much upon them and in opposition they endeavoured to keep them under and so would diminish their pretences for Parity But this changeth not the Species of the Office And it s known who these men were And tho some of them are of Opinion that Diocesan Bishops only may regularly confer Ordination and exercise Jurisdiction over the Clergy and that meer Presbyter Ordination with us is null 1. These same men had a chief hand in debating and wording the Kings Declarations October 1661. Concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs and therein the King after debates with Lords and Bishops distinguisheth the meer Pastoral preswasive Power from the Episcopal which is Cogent and alloweth the Rural Deans with the Presbyters of his Deanry to exercise the said Pastoral perswasive Power and the other Pastors also to joyn with the Bishops And the Law still calls them Rectors The Liturgy yet calls them Past●rs the word Pastors being a Metaphor they take to be general Bish●ps and Priests being with them two Orders of Pastors Therefore because it doth not distinguish them they usually leave it out and put sometime Bishops and Curates and sometime Bishops Priests and Deacons The common description of a Bishop by them is that he hath the sole Power of presiding and determining in Ordination and Jurisdiction s●ne quo non oft alledging Jeroms Quid facit Episcopus quod non facit Presbyter excepta Ordinatione And yet the Law still binds them not to ordain without Presbyters Imposition of hands with them And Arch-Deacons and Presbyters Surrogates c. Excommunicate And in the Ember-week they are every day to pray by the Liturgy So guide and govern the minds of thy Servants the Bishops and Pastors of thy Fl●ck that they may lay hands suddenly on no man Where Bishops and Pastors cannot be taken for Synonyma whilst they speak of all that lay on hands And they distinguish not Pastors and Curates where they change the words but Bishops and Curates But nothing more proveth what I say than that the Law yet bindeth all Priests to all that is essential to an Episcopus Gregis a Pastor of a particular Church see the Exhort in Ord. of Priests We exhort you in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that you have in remembrance into how high a dignity and to how weighty an office and charge ye are called that is to say to be Messengers Watchmen and Stewards of the L●rd to teach and to premonish to feed and provide for the Lords Family to seek for Christs Sheep that are dispersed abroad and for his Children who are in the midst of this naughty world that they may be saved by Christ for ever have always therefore printed in your remembrance how great a treasure is committed to your charge for they are the sheep of Christ which he bought c. The Church and Congregation whom you
what Law maketh them whatever we think Ans Are not Churches formally relative societies what maketh them such but thoughts and wills of men expressed Gods mind exprest in his Institutions is his premised consent our consequent obedient consent maketh Christians Pastors and Churches If a Law cannot make the Parish consent to null Christs Officers and Churches it doth not null them to them If a Law say All marriages shall be void unless the Bishop remarry them This maketh them not void to any that consent not but say we stand to the valid marriage we had What doth another mans consent do to constitute me a Christian or Church-member except Parents for Infants And if my thoughts and consent put nothng in esse then the thoughts and consents of the conforming Clergy alters not their Churches and what then is that constituting cause you talk of Is it only the law for shame say not so Gods own Law as commanding us to be Christians Pastors or Churches maketh us not such without consent And can mans Law both null Gods Law and make us of what species it doth but bid us be without our consent XXX But here our Disputants think they expose me to derision What Do I intimate that one and the same Congregation may be two Churches of different species Ans I think to be such by open profession is disorderly and unusual But I think he that denieth this is unfit to deride the ignorance of another 1. If the people in one Kingdom may be in specie two Kingdoms the people of one Assembly may be two Churches but Bishop Bedle in his printed Letter said that Ireland was then two Kingdoms the King being Sovereign to some and the Pope to other And I think Hungary is so now between the Emperor and Turks 2. When Paul ordinarily held his assemblies in the Jewish Synagogues where half were Infidels and half Christians before he separated his Christians from them I think they were two Churches 3. If Independents had leave to meet in the Parish churches where the Parish Minister and their own Minister should preach by turns and the Parish only heard theirs as a lay preacher or none of their Pastor and so they heard the Parish Preachers I doubt not but they would be distinct church If one Parish church have two Pastors and one of them be professedly for an essential subjection to the Pope and the other against it and half the people of one mind and half of the other I think they are two Churches in one place If those Anabaptists who take none but the re-baptized for Church-members should with their Pastors join with Independents in worship tho esteeming them no churches I suppose you think they would be distinct churches in one place But I think none of this is the case of the churches that I join with for I suppose they null not Christs species of Ministers to themselves or me But if they did it to themselves that would not do it to me XXXI Obj. But one and the same Minister cannot be of two species and therefore relation to him cannot constitute distinct Churches Ans 1. One and the same man cannot be a Minister of Christ and no Minister of Christ so much is true nor of any two inconsistent species But if you will call any circumstantial difference a distinct species that will no● hinder the consistence The same man may be Christs Minister and the Kings Chaplain or a Dean or Pre●endary or a Diocesan Bishop or Subject to a Diocesan such Bishops as Chrysostom Augustine Ambrose 〈◊〉 Parke● Grindal Ush●r Davenant c and their Chaplains did not cease to be Christs Ministers 2 Relation to one of these men may make two sorts of consistent churche● if the same man have a Parish and a Diocess as the German superintendents have and many other Bishops the warrantableness we are not now disputing 3. Yea one and the same Parish Minister may be Pastor of two Churches in one Assembly If he openly profess himself Orthodox the people that so own him are a church and if he secretly to a party of them profess himself an Anabaptist or a Papist and they unite with him as such they are another church such as it is Vespae habent favos marcionitae ecclesias Tertul. XXXII Obj. But the grand Objection is No man can be a Pastor of Christ against his will The Parish Ministers have all by conforming renounced the essence of the Christian Ministry and subscribed and sworn this renunciat●● by subjecting themselves to Diocesans and swearing never to endeavour any alteration of the Diocesan Government and the Vestries who represent the churches have sworn the same and you have of●en said that the Diocesan form of Government 1. Deposeth the Parish Bishops and maimeth the Ministry 2. Dep●seth the Parish Churches 3. And maketh Parish Discipline impossible Ans It is impossible to write that which no man can misunderstand and make an ill use of I have oft told you 1. That I am in doubt whether Arch-Bishops as Successors of the Apostles only in the ordinary continued part of their Office be jure divino or not 2. That Congrational Bishops over Presbyters being ejusdem ordinis are an old venerable and lawful humane Institution 3. That Congregational Bishops only over the Laity are all Presbyters as such and of Christs Institution 4. Hereupon I have oft distinguished Diocesans into two sorts 1. Those that are but the Governors of true particular Churches that depose them not but Rule them by the word perswasively These are called Bishops being really Arch-Bishops These I never charged of the Consequents forenamed And if the King make them Cogent Magistrates also I will obey them I take the judgment of the Church of England manifest in Ordination Liturgy Articles c. to be for such Diocesans only tho I vastly dissent from many things in the Canons by which and the Mode in which some exercise their Government 2. The other sort is the Innovators form of Diocesan Government which hold that there is no Church without a Bishop and no Bishop but Diocesans either Bishop of Laity or Presbyters and so that the Parish Churches are no Churches but part of the lowest sort of true Political Churches These I take to be Super-conformists yea Nonconformists and Dissenters from the Church of England tho they may strive to get the name of the Church to themselves Now what I say of these Innovating Nonconformists and their designs and attempts our mistaking Separatists say I speak of the Laegal Church frame and so of all the Bishops and Parish-Churches And I see no hope of delivering the Church of God from the trouble of incogitant confident erroneous Dissenters that are not able to distinguish XXXIII I further answer this great Objection being concerned in Consc●ence to do it when men father their mistakes and Separation on me 1. The Parish-Ministers that I joyn with and I think the most that
Nation into his Church as a Hen gathereth her Chickens under her Wings And Rom. 11. Only their own unbelief broke them off from being a National Church including Infants And it is part of the Saints triumph that the Kingdoms of the World are become the Kingdoms of the Lord and of his Christ If you will read Mr. Beverlys Book called The whole duty of Nations it will give you full proof of this Where hath the Gospel extensively much prospered where Princes and Rulers were not Christians The Turks give liberty of Religion And yet the sometime famous Greek Churches Corinth Philippi Coloss Ephesus Laodicea Philadelphia and more than all the West are Apostatized or withered to a few ignorant vicious scandalous Christians Obj. IV. 8. If such a confederation in lawful Circumstantials as well as Integrals will make a Church I know not why we may not have a Catholick Visible Church organized if this be a due acception of a Church Ans This is as much as to say If the name Church may be used equivocally as all words must of several sorts then all those sorts may be the same I deny it If you dislike the use of the name you have your liberty as a Grammarian to forbear it But sure the Name and the Thing are not all one nor the Controversies about them 2. But we have a Catholick Visible Church Organized as I have oft proved against the Papists viz. under one Christ the Head and his Ministers as his subordinate Officers Obj. V. Page 3. If you touch a mans finger you touch the man we have communion with an integrum perpartes and with a Genus by the Species and with both by individuals Nay as every part of the Scripture one verse or sentence of it makes up sence so every part of the Liturgy as in form and manner therein contrived is Liturgy and worship thereafter is according to the Liturgy tho it be but part of the w●rship Page 20. As for the falseness in Integrals it gives the denomination to the whole for an Integral part is an essential part of the whole Much more there is to the same purpose making him guilty of all that useth a part Ans 1. You have the freedom of using words at your pleasure but not imposing them on mankind when necessity hath taught the World to distinguish essential and integral parts you have no authority to confound their Language by the quibble of calling Integrals essential causes of the whole A totum per aggregationem as a heap of Sand or a field of Grass is not constituted of a proper essentiating form and so homogeneous matter aggregate is all the being it hath And if you make contiguity an essential cause or how else you will you have liberty of speech But we will not be cheated by it to believe that it causeth any more than Totality or Integrality and the absence of it is a privation of no more And all mens Graces Obedience and Worship are defective in point of Integrality and degree and I hope you will not say that they need no favour or pardon or amendment 2. All human actions have their faults must we therefore do nothing or converse with no men England is one Kingdom If there be one or many faults in its Laws or officers may we therefore obey none that are faultless The Laws are the Rule of National Justice may a Judg Justice Officer or subject use none of them because some are faulty Doth that make him guilty of all Bonum est ex causis integris The fault of a part may indeed denominate the whole faulty so far But the whole Law or Liturgy may be called faulty for a part and yet he that useth either not be guilty of any of the bad part for using the good The Law and Liturgy are one thing and the use is another Its faults are no further his than he owneth them your Bread or Meat may be called bad if part only be bad and yet if you eat none but the good part it will not hurt you 2. But if it must be otherwise no man may hear you or joyn with your Churches And do you think as aforesaid that Mr. Faldo and all his Church at Barnet lived not in a sinful communion very many years that omitted at least an integral part of publick worship the singing of Gods praise Christ with his Disciples sung a Hymn after the Sacrament The Jews Church made it the chief part of their Worship James prescribeth it us in all our Holy Mirth such as the Lords Day is appointed for 1 Cor. 14.26 Every one had a Psalm and with them no one had a Psalm tho his Judgment was for it the question was Whether he should forsake them for refusing it I thought not because it was better that they had something that was good than nothing But your argument would not only unchurch them but make all sinners that communicated with them for omissions of great duties are faults and greater faults than tolerable failings in performance He that prayeth not at all doth worse than he that prayeth by a Book and he that preacheth or teacheth not at all doth worse than he that readeth a Sermon so that their total stated omission and opposition to singing by your false rule denominated them no worshippers of God if the whole must be denominated from a part How many private Meetings in London never sing a Psalm for fear of being discovered Yea how many seldom read a Chapter but only preach and pray and sometime administer the Sacrament Must we needs say therefore that they omit all Worship VI. On such occasions I argued That if we must not communicate with any Parish Church because of the faults of the Liturgy it will follow that we must not communicate with any Church on Earth that hath as great faults and that by this we must renounce Communion with all Christs Body on Earth All the Armenians Nestorians Eutychians Copties Abassines Georgians Greeks Russians Papists yea Lutherans have a more faulty Liturgie or manner of worship than the English Yea the Churches called Calvinists have their Liturgies and faults And I instanced in Switzerland because as God hath of late most preserved their peace so they are taken to be the honestest sort of Protestants that in poverty serve God with soundest doctrine and least scandal of Life but yet have no proper discipline but the Magistrates Is it a sin to have confederacy or Communion with their Churches To this he plainly saith Page 11. It is That is all that confederate with them as Churches are guilty of their error called Erastian For subjection t● such discipline is the condition of their Communion Ans Subjection is an equivocal word If it were by profession or subscription of consent it were indeed to be guilty of that error tho not by a fau●t of the Part denominating the whole to make their worship unlawful or their Churches none but