Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n court_n justice_n law_n 3,065 5 4.7299 4 true
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
B11734 The vnreasonablenesse of the separation Made apparant, by an examination of Mr. Iohnsons pretended reasons, published an. 1608. Wherby hee laboureth to iustifie his schisme from the church assemblies of England. Bradshaw, William, 1571-1618.; Ames, William, 1576-1633. Manudicition for Mr. Robinson. 1614 (1614) STC 3532; ESTC S113892 55,662 116

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

offices of such Prelats Priests and Deacons as are Ministers of our Church Assemblies For most of those which haue such offices are and are bound to be members of true visible Churches And cannot in their Estate they being in all points answerable to the lawes be members of a falce Church They are all such excepted as haue speciall dispensations bound to one particuler Congregation and may not by law haue more Cures then one but admitting of a seconde the first is voyd Yea the Prelats thēselues though in regard of their Prelaticall office they are Gouernors of whole Prouinces diocesses yet it is possible for them not withstanding to be members in their Estate of a true visible Church and bee bound as are the Prelats of Scotland to one particuler congregation for the speciall Ministery and Gouerment therof And though the other Ministers may haue in that estate pluralitie of benefices and Cures yet it doth not follow that therfore they are such as in their estate cannot be members of a true visible Church excepte they haue thē indeede yea though they should be pluralists indeede yet for ought hee hath proued to the contrary they may bee membres of true visible Churches and may each bee bound to one particuler Congregation for the Ministery and Gouerment therof But what man except hee were halfe frantick wold reason thus Our Ministers may bee Pluralists therfore they neither are nor can be true Pastors and Teachers Is not this rather one of the honors then blemishes of our Ministers That they may be pluralists and yet are not If by our lawes their owne Assemblies were established If by the same lawes their Pastors and Teachers might bee non residents or pluralists or worse would they think hemselus euer the worse for this would they not rather thinke themselus the better that they are not soe bad as by mans lawe they might bee Fr. Iohn The Offices Condition and Gouerment of Pastors and Teachers The 7. Arg. are such as noe way impaire the Authority and Supremacy of the Syvill Magistrate But the offices Condition and Gouerment of Prelates Priests Deacons are such as doe many waies impaire the Authoritie Supremacie and dignity of Kings and all other Magistrats both in Civill and Ecclesiasticall Causes For the Prelates will haue their presence voice and Authority to be at Parlaments for enacting of lawes and Statuts for the Common wealth They are Rulers of whol Prouinces and diocesses in the Ecclesiasticall causes therof In Civill State and dignity some of them are aboue all and all of them aboue some of the Nobles Iustices and other Magistrats of the Lande Themselues their Courts and officers handle and determine sundry Civill Causes and affaires appertaining to the Magistracie They inflict Civill Mults and punishments In their forbidden times they giue licence to Mary The beneficed Priests sweare Canonicall obeidience to the Prelats All the Priests and Deacons are exempt from the Magistrats Iurisdiction in diuers things appertaining vnto them and answerable onely or cheifly to the Prelats and their officers Therfore they are not the onely Pastors and Teachers spoken of Eph. 4.11 Answere The Assumption is falce nether doe the instances proue the same 1. The Prelats claime their voices in Parlament not as diuine ordinaunces appartaining to their Prelateship but as an honor annexed to the same by the Civill Magistrate 2. Their Authority in Causes Ecclesiasticall ouer Prouinces c. is either such as the Civill Magistrate himselfe may execute and administer in his owne person if hee please or such as is not for them as they are Magistrats to execute The first sort they administer only by vertue of the Magistrats owne Commission and therin they cannot impair either his dignity or Supremacie much lesse in the other part of their Authoritie which belongeth not to the Magistrats themselues to execute especially when they vse it not nether without their consent lycence and approbation 3. That all are aboue some and some aboue all of the Nobles and Iustices c. is a free and voluntary honour graunted vnto them by the Civill Magistrate and held in tenure from him and not claimed as I thinke as belonging to their Episcopall function by diuine right 4. Their Courts determine noe other Civill causes then the Civill Magistrate and his lawes do permit or if they doe the falt is in the Parsons and not in the Prelatship further they inflict Civill punishments giue lycences exacte Oathes c. by Authority from the Magistrat whose subsistutes therin they are And therfore the Prelates neither in theis nor in any of the former instances can bee saide to impaire the dignity Authoritie or Supremacie of the Civill Magistrate when herein they doe all things in and by the protection of his Authoritie much lesse can other inferior Ministers who haue noe dealing in the aforesaid matters Lastly if all our Ministers be exempt from the Magistrats Iurisdiction in some things appertaining vnto them but wherin I knowe not this very exemptiō it selfe is an act of the Magistrats Iurisdiction depends onely vpon his pleasure how can it thē any waies impair the same hytherto hee hath dealt by Syllogismes such as they are now for a conclusion of this first Argument hee shoots at rouers as followeth Fr. Iohn To this end diuers other reasons might be aledged for example If they say that Arch Bishops haue the Pastors then they haue but two If Lord Bishops then but 26. and what office then haue the Arch Bishops amongst them If the other Priestes then what office haue the Arch Bishops and Bishops seing God hath or dayned noe higher ordinary Ecclesiasticall office as some of them-selus acknowledg If they say the deacons haue the Pastors office the same absurdity followeth as in the former besids that the works of the deacons office are opposed to the worke of the Ministery Act. 6.2 with Eph. 4.11 Rom. 12.8 If they should say they haue the Teachers office it would be known which of their officiers haue it amongst them and to whom they are adioyned for the worke of Ministery as Teachers are to Pastors and what office the rest haue whom the accompt not to haue the Teachers office whether the Teacher spoken of Eph. 4.11 must first bee deacons and then Priestes and permit obeydeince to the Prelates and that also is to their ordinaires and be sylenced and deposed at thtir pleasure Answere Here hee thinkes hee hath knitt such Gardian knotts as cannot be vntide without a sword or a bill but the Simplicitie of the man here in is to bee laughed at for 1. though some should say that either our Arch Bishops or Bishops haue the Pastors office yet ther in they doe not exclude the other Ministers from that which is the substance and effect of that office though they should from the name No nor frō the name neither but should therin onely make degres of pastours viz. of Arch
Therfore they are not true Pastors and Teachers Answere Ther are 4. Termes in this Syllogisme The grosse Sophisterye wherof may appeare by the Explanation therof in others wordes True Pastors Teachers may not viz. by Gods lawe take vpon them Cyvill offices The Ministers of England may viz. by Mans lawe take vpon them Cyvill offices Therfore they are not true Pastors and Teachers This is the effect of his Argument who is so blind but hee may see the fallacie therof And it is as though we should reason in the like manner against their owne Ministery thus True Pastors Teachers may not bee Drunckards Anabaptists Familists The Ministers of the Seperation at Amsterdam may be Drunckards Anabaptists Familists Therfore they are not true Pastors and Teachers This Assumption is as true as the former for the same kinde of Authoritie that permits our Ministers to bee Cyvill Magistrats doth permit them to bee Drunckards c. The goverment vnder which they liue permitteth the one to more then our state doeth the other But I answer more particulerly 1. That by the same lawe that our Ministers may take vpon them Cyvill Magistracie Any true Pastors and Teachers may take vpon them the same Authority and by the same lawe that true Pastors and Teachers may not take Cyvill Authoritye vpon them our Ministers may not take the same vpon them 2. All our Ministers may not noe by the lawes of our State take vpon them Cyvill Authority But such only as are called specially therto by the fauours grace of the Cyvill Magistrate not as they are Prelats Priests or Deacons or by vertue of those functions but in respect of other qualifications Nether are the forced by any law to adjoyne any such Authoritie to their Ministery but permitted only But what if by the lawes of men Ministers might be Murtherers Adulterers Theeus c. should theis lawes chaunge the nature of their Ministery what of their Ministery that denye vnto themselues that lycence would it not rather the more justify their Ministery when in Conscience of Gods law they shall for beare that which flesh and blood and humaine laws would permit vnto them 3. Suppose not onely that it is vnlawfull for any true Pastors and Teachers to bee Cyvill Magistrats but that also by our lawes all our Ministers were forced therunto and that by vertue of their Ministery will it thence follow that for this cause they are not true Pastors and Teachers May not true Pastors and Teachers in their weacknesse ignorance and infirmities the laws of the State requiring the same admitt of some kind of office or Authoritie for bidden them but they must needs ther vpon cease to bee true Pastors Teachers doth the admitting of every vnlawfull thing chaunge the nature of the Ministery and make it either noe Ministery or a Ministery of an other kinde Fr. Iohn The Ministery of Christian Pastors and Teachers The. 5. Arg. standeth by the word and ordinance of Christ so as all Churches vnder Heaven are bound to receaue and submit thervnto But the Prelacie Preesthood and Deaconry of the Ghurch of England staundeth only by the Authoritie and Law of man soe as other Churches els wher nether are nor neede to bee subjecte thervnto which euen themselues of all sorts haue acknowledged for which see Whitgifts defence in the Preface The Answer to the Abstraucte pag. 58. The Admonition to the Parlement The defence of the Godly Ministers the demonstration Therfore it is not the Ministery of Christian Pastors and Teachers Answere I deny the Assumption The Ministery of our Church Assemblies of England whether of Prelates Priests or Deacons or by what other names soeuer they be called for the substance therof standeth by the word and ordinance of Christ and not onely by the Authority and law of man And all other true Churches are and ought to be subject to the same kinde of Ministery and to noe other that shall in any Essentiall point of Ministery differ from ours If any Perticuler Parsons amongst vs haue bene soe vnaduised to graunt the Assumption let them answer for themselues Hee hath noe more reason to binde vs to their opinions then wee to binde him vnto whatsoeuer his predecessours Browne Barrowe and Greenwood haue held before him Concerning some of the particulers Doctor Whitgifts words are theis The substance and nature of Gouerment must indeed by taken out of the word of God and consisteth in theis parts That the word be truely taught the Sacraments rightly administred virtue furthered vice repressed and the Church kept in quietnesse and order The offices of the Church wherby this Gouerment is wrought bee not namely and particulerly expressed in the Scripture but in some points left to the discretion and libertie of the Church to be disposed according to the State of times Places and persons The Author of the Answer to the Abstract in the place aledged saith That it cannot be proued that any set and exacte particuler forme of discipline is recomended vnto vs in the word of God Now are either of theis to affirme That the Ministery of our Church Assemblies staundeth only by the lawes and Authoritie of Man Hath M. Iohnson any shame left in his face that thus shamefully abuseth the names of learned and reuerent men soe directly contrary to their words and meaning Is ther not cause to suspect that the other Authors are in like manner abused and that for the better hideing of his fraude hee forbeareth to quote any particuler places Being therfore convinced of depravation in the places particularly quoted wee may presume that if the other places had bene more pertinent hee would haue giuen vs some particuler directions also for the finding of them And the rather for that hee cannot be ignorant that those whom specially hee fighteth against in theis Argumēts doe rely vpon the judgement of the Authours following more then of the former Fr. Iohn The offices of Pastors The 6. Arg. and Teachers which Christ hath appointed are such as they which haue them must bee members of a true visible Church and bound to one perticuler Congregation for the Ministery and Gouerment therof But the Offices of the Prelats Priests and Deacons of the Church of Englande are such as they which haue them need not bee neither in their State can bee members of a true visible Church but of a fals neither are bound to one perticuler Congregation for the Ministery and Gouerment therof but the Prelates are our whoele Prouinces and Diocesses other inferior Priests may haue in that State pluralitie of benefices and Ecclesiall Cures c. which none can deny Therfore they are not the Pastors Teachers that Christ hath appointed Answere Though some parts of the Proposition bee disputable Yet because other besids the Seperation doe hould the whol for truth I will leaue it in medio The Assumption is falce especially if it bee vnderstoode as it ought to bee of the