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	pope_n	prince_n	1,609	5	5.8946	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46641	An apology for, or vindication of the oppressed persecuted ministers & professors of the Presbyterian Reformed Religion, in the Church of Scotland emitted in the defence of them, and the cause for which they suffer: & that for the information of ignorant, the satisfaction and establishment of the doubtful, the conviction (if possible) of the malicious, the warning of our rulers, the strengthening & comforting of the said sufferers under their present pressurs & trials. Being their testimony to the covenanted work of reformation in this church, and against the present prevailing corruptions and course of defection therefrom. Prestat sero, quàm nunquam sapere.	Smith, Hugh.; Jamieson, Alexander.	1677 (1677)	Wing J446; ESTC R31541	114,594	210

sake although differing from us in some other things 5 It is thought sufficient ground for this charge that some yea many of the persons that come to and haunt our meetings are found not to be conscientious and Christian in their walk but flagitious or in many of their practises scandalous We cannot think our adversaries are serious in this do beleeve as they speak seing 1 This does fall as heavy and will to onlookers reflect as much and more on the objectors themselves as on us whose meetings for worship are found to be the sinck of all debauched and profaine persons thorow the Land can they refuse this It is like the foresight of this forced them to say in their lybel of greivances against us that the abominations mentioned in one Article were commited at our meetings and not by persons present at them otherwise their assemblies for worship should have been as chargeab●● therewith as ours but in this our Antagonists 〈◊〉 like to the persecutours of the Christians in the pr●●mitive times who charged them for having these 〈◊〉 the like abominations commited at their assemblies as is to be seen in Church Histories The Lord deliver us from and rebuke the lying Spirit that is entered into and possesseth many 2. But if the presence of wicked and scandalous persons at the assemblies of Christians for hearing of the word and performing of other acts of worship be sufficient ground for chargeing the wickednesse and impieties of such on them as the cause inductive to scandals will not the assemblies that Christ his Apostles Ministers and Christians keeped in all ages be as lyable to this charge as we who excluded none but admited all to the hearing of the word and some other acts of worship as is manifest from Scripture and History whatever our adversaries will say for clearing of Christ Iesus his Apostles c. will acquit us 3. Do not men know that in preaching of the Gospel to sinners we should designe and labour their conversion as much as the edification of the converted Is not the Gospel with which Ministers are intrusted the mean and power of God to the one as well as to the other And seing this is our designe as it hath been our practice so it is our resolution not to exclude any from our assemblies how wicked soever they have been or are Truth is to charge us and our meetings with the sinnes and scandals of those that frequent the same is to reproach the Gospel of Christ and to Father all the wickednesse of its hearers on it contrare to its grand designe which is to save sinners from sin and all the miseries that follow upon it SECT V. Some Reasons why the Indulgence was not accepted IN the next place we come to the head of the Indulgence the not allowing of which hath been represented as a full evidence of our pivish wilful and stiff disposition to unpeacableness and distoyalty but we hope when our carriage in this mater is seriously thought upon and the reasons that determined us to this refusal are weighted in the ballances of the sanctuarie this charge will be found light and we are confident that upon trial it will appear we are not against but with all expressions of thankfulnes shall be ready to intertaine and receive any libertie for the Gospel its true interest and our selves that is consistent with our known principles that the Magistrat shall be pleased to grant us We look upon it as an unjust state of the question in this mater which hath been offered by some whether the Magistrat jure may or have it within the compass of his Magistratical power to give liberty to Ministers and people for serving and worshiping of God in his Son Christ Iesus according to his word this we do not deny but chearfully grant that although the exercise of Church power that is properly such be independent on the Magistrat yet the peacable exercise of it is truely from him it belongs to him no doubt to encourage countenance and protect the Church against all enemies and to relieve her of oppression when under it to this he is impowered and oblidged both as a Magistrat and as a Christian Neither is it with us a question whether the Magistrat may command Ministers to the duties of then function nor whether he may exeem them from the hazard of suffering to which they are obnoxious by law for their non-conformity nor yet whether he may confine Ministers simply and abstractedly considered from our present case which is only proper to the Magistrat and not all to the Church All these and much more we yeeld to the Magistrat about persones and maters Ecclesiastical according to the Word But the true state of the question to us is whether the Magistrat Jure Magistratico may of himself and immediatly without the Church the previous election of the people assigne and send Ministers to particular Churches to take the fixed and pastoral over sight of them prescribe rules and directions to them for the exercise of their Ministery and confine them to the said congregations The question thus stated being complex and consisting of several branches conform to the acts of Councel anent the indulgence we must of necessity for giving a just accompt of the grounds of our dissatisfaction therewith speak to them severally in some assertions with the reasons subjoyned Assertion First The Magistrat by vertue of his Magistratical power cannot of himself and immediatly assigne or send Ministers to particular congregations to take the pastoral charge and oversight of them For 1. We finde not in all the Word of God any such power given to or exercised by the Magistrat in the Church none hath yet given any instances of this If there be let them be produced and we shall acquiesce All acknowledge the Church not to be founded on the law of nature but on positive institution and supernatural revelation and therfore not to be governed in wayes and methods of Mens invention but in these that are revealed by the Holy Scriptures without which there cannot be a Church so that she owning her being constitution and all to them there must be some evident proof produced from these before we can yeeld to any such power in the Magistrat how long shall we exspect this 2. Also we finde the Church in the possession and exercise of this power from the times of the Apostles to the breaking up of the reformation by Luther and others in Germany as is manifest from Scripture and History We grant there was for some time a considerable debate betwixt the Pope and the Emperour of Germany about the investiture of Bishops which gave the rise to other Princes claming of the same seasing upon it but what says this to the mission of Ministers application of their Ministery to particular congregations For as Prelacy was the invention of men and the cause of horrid contentions in Churches and States so

〈◊〉 fulness of prelacy to the well but not to the being of the political Ministerial Church which they grant ●ay be such without it as most of the former opinion ●●●ld 3. Others that lean not to Scripture for the 〈◊〉 of prelacy in the Church found it upon Ecclesia●●● 〈◊〉 ●●●stitutio●s canons customes which they take to be the Interpreters of Scripture in this debate as Dounhame and others with him that make most use of antiquity 4. Others more moderat pious and more learned then the rest do so clip its wings that they bring it to a meer constant presidency in the meetings of presbyters for government making it a pure non-entity as to what is established by law amongst us and for which they bring no Scripture of which judgment was that godly and learned Bishop Usher who for knowledge in all the controversies of the Church especially in Antiquity was Nemini secundus 5. Some others argue for it as a mat●er of indifferency that may be received or rejected as Churches and states see it fits their interests asserting that all its authority and goodness depends upon and flowes from the power that brings it in thus Stillingfleet 6. Some of that party have fallen on a new method for justifying its divine right being straitened as it seems with our arguments and the weakness of their owne alleadging that Presbyters were not institute in Scriptur●-times by the Apostles that all Ministers mentioned in the Scriptures were Bishops in the sense controverted as Doctor Hammond but his evidence from Scripture and antiquity is so dimme that for any thing we know he hath gained few or none to follow him in this 7 These of the court party place all its goodness in the authority lawes establishing it granting it signifies nothing antecedently to these 8. If we shall consider prelacy and view it in its several parts as it is by law constitute and setled amongst us and bring them to the test and rule of the word of God that we may give judgment of them according to it how lite●● of prelacy will be found to be of divine right 〈…〉 the confession of our adversaries of all that have appeared on the feild for its defence there is none that ever pleaded scriptural institutions precepts and instances for the Lordly titles eminencies and wordly dignities of the Prelats that are now annexed to their office nor yet for their civil places and power in the State nor for their several orders and degrees as Primats Metropolitans Archbishops c Or for the like among their dependents in their numerous and various distinctions of degrees of superiorities and subordinations as Vicars Chancelors Deans Arch deacons Subdeans Deacons Parsons c. whoever hitatherto did put pen to paper and contended for the divine right of prelacy never opened a mouth to plead either Scripture or antiquity for thes● except Doctor Hammond who argues for Archbishops and what is prelacy in its constitution amongst us without them The only thing debated betwixt us and our Antagonists anent it is the superiority of one Pastor over other Pastors and their respective congregations to the probation of which from scripture and pure Antiquity there are two things that must of necessity be made out from these first the sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction and secondly Diocesan Churches made up of several ●esse● Churches and their respective Pastores and Officers in these does the essential difference lye in their owne confession betwixt Bishops Presbyters or ordinare Pastores none of which two hath been proven from scripture and antiquity And if that which differences prelats from other Pastores of the Church be ●or made to appear from scripture how will their office 〈◊〉 of divine right and how can it be expected from 〈◊〉 ●ho are under such strait divine engadgments against it that we should comply therewith and submit to the lawes injoining conformity thereto We complaine of the subdolous and uning enuous way of our opposites in this debate who always keep in generals and never condescend on the particular differences betwixt Prelates and Ordinate Pastores nor undertake to prove these and the truth is they cannot for they are forced to confesse that it is clear from antiquity that Presbyters have ordained sometimes in conjunction with Bishops and sometimes without them And for diocesan Churches with one fixed pastor over-feeing other Pastores and their flocks we cannot meet with the least probable evidence from scripture and pure antiquity we find no argument from our adversaries concluding this It is empty arguing to say there were Apostles there were Priests and Highpriests in the Old Testament there were seven Angels in the seven Churches of Asia therefore there must be Bishops now If they will from scripture make out the difference now assigned betwixt Prelats Presbveers in these instances of the Apostles Priests and Angels we shall yeeld the cause Let none therefore blame us in holding to this as a necessare consequence of our Antagonists succumbing in the probation of these things that a parity among the Ministers of the Gospel in point of power or office is of divine right for if in the institution of the Ministery there be alike power given to all called thereto there can be no superiority of one above another by divine right 9. It is a question much debated among the Popish school men and in which they are not agreed to this day wh●●ther their Prelacy be an order or office distinct from that of Presbyters or only a different degree of the same 〈◊〉 with Presbyters including no power formally distinct from theirs which last opinion asserts that all power acclaimed by the prelats is formally in Presbyters so that by office they are empowered to and may doe all that the prelats pretend to How hotly and stifly was this question tossed the Councel of Trent betwixt the Italian Gallican and Spanish divines which for this cause received no decision in this Councel but was left undetermined as before As is to be seen from the History of the said Councel 10. If any will consider our adversaries arguments for prelacy and compare them with the arguments of Papists especially Bellarmins for the Papacy they shall finde that they plead as strongly for the Pope or an Universal Bishop to the Catholick Church as for the Prelat or Bishop now controverted betwixt us as wil be made appear by a particular condescension if our intended brevity would suffer it We referre such as question this to the arguments of both and upon an impartial collation of the same we nothing doubt but it will be manifest Doth not the much courted and endeavoured reconciliation with Rome by the prelatical party in former and later times with their concessions to them for making way to this agreement speak this with full evidence As their denying the Pope to be the Antichrist their granting a primacy to him over the Catholick Church their purgeing

neither it nor the practices occasioned thereby can be any regulating precedent for us besides in all these contests about investiturs betwixt the Pope and Princes the mission of Ministers was never questioned but alwayes acknowledged as proper to the Church and not to the Magistrat which will be clear to any that will be at paines to read Church History 3. The sending of Ministers to particular congregations is an act of government purly and formally Ecclesiastical and not Civil and therefore incompetent to the Magistrat Let any consider it in its causes mater object and ends and they shall finde it so for the persons sent are Ministers the work they are sent on is to preach the Gospel and dispense its ordinances these they are sent to are the Churches of Christ the end for which they are sent to such is to gather in and perfect the body of Christ this is finis operis We know of nothing that can besaid against this But that it is not purely Ecclesiastick in the efficient cause Ans To this we reply First That all use in morals to sustaine the validity of the Arguments taken from the nature of the act to the undueness of it to such and such causes for it is by the respect of such acts in morals to their mater objects and ends that the bounds are determined and set to them in their efficient causes for instance if the mater object ends of an act be properly civil it is granted by all to be undue or incompetent to a Minister of the Gospel so of other acts in their moral specifical distinction by which in the law of God they are assigned made due to such and such efficients But Next Upon this reason it shall be as lawful for the Magistrat to ordaine and send persons without ordination to preach the Gospel which is every way absurd 4. The sending of Ministers to preach the Gospel and to oversee Churches is an act of the potestative mission one part of the keyes of the kingdom of God granted by Christ to his Church and never to the Magistrat from no part of the word can it be made appear that Christ hath given this power to the Magistrat we finde it given to the Ministers of the Gospel Matth. 16 19. with several other places of Scripture But as to the Magistrat there is altum silentium But that this sending of Ministers is an act of potestative mission we hope will not readily be denied of any do we ask whether Ministers go to such congregations on a special delegation from Christ more then to others If they do then it must flow from this power of mist on in the Church If they go not on this special delegation then they run unsent and are not the Pastours of these flocks more then of others and consequently they have no obligations upon them to feed these more then any other congregation which is absurd For beside the power of preaching and dispensing of ordinances there is alwayes a special delegation of the person to such and such a people by which he becometh the Ambassadour messenger of Christ Jesus whom they are bound to hear and submit to as such 5. This act of sending Ministers to congregations suppons several things that are beyond the line and cognition of the Magistrat as such as the trial of Ministers gifts the knowledge of the spiritual State of the congregation the sutablness or unsurablness of Ministers gifts to such and such a people ability to judge and cognosce in these as the mater and ends of this work require with many other things which not being granted to the Magistrat as such the work to which these are necessarily requisite cannot belong to him for every work to which God calls any hath its proper furniture of gifts and abilities without which none is to look upon themselves as called thereto 6. Some of the great Patrons and zealous Promoters of the Magistrats power in this and other things belonging to the Church yeeld that this power is in and returns to the Church when the Magistrat is either heathenish or heretical as Vedelius yea all are constrained to grant it How rational this is and how consistent with their arguments the force of which is thereby utterly broken let any judge we ask when this power is granted to be in the Church whether it comes from Christ Iesus or the Magistrat For a derive power it must be It cannot be from the Magistrat who does not willingly part with any of his power neither does religion robe the Magistrat of his power nor depose him from his regality and the prerogative thereof as Protestants maintaine against the Papists if it be derived and come from Christ as it does we desire to know what way it is conveyed to her in this case and not in the other when the Magistrat is Christian As we finde no difference of cases anent this mater given in the word so we finde the same institutions precepts and examples therein by which the Church is impowered and oblidged to exercise this government without the Magistrat to continue not only without any restrictions to times cases but without any repail We hear nothing from our adversaries to answer this but ineptia foolish rovings The truth is their Arguments conclude with as great force against all power of government in the Church under persecuting Magistrats as Christian for is there not in this case the erecting of an Empire in an Empire which our enemies accoundt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 anddo not Ministers and Christians owe as much subjection to the Magistrat in the one case as in the other Assertion 2. That the right and power of Election and calling of Ministers to particular congregations is in the congregations themselves to whom they are sent by divine right and not in the Magistrat and therefore should not have been assumed by the Magistrat and taken thus from them That this power of election of Ministers is not in the Magistrat either by divine humane or Ecclesiastical laws needs not to be much insisted on seing Scripture and antiquity for a thousand years after Christ gives not the least ground for it We desire to know from our Antagonists Prelats and Erastians from whence came this power or who were the givers of it to the Magistrat When they have condescended on the orginal derivation of this power and made it out to be just then we shall consider it which by none of these parties hath been yet done except by Vedelius but on such grounds as give every particular member of the Church as good clame thereto as he as will be evident to any that considers his Arguments for Scripture and antiquity they have none The first part of the proposition is that which is most stuck at The peoples right and power of election which is denyed by our adversaries but we thus make it out as our Divines have done