Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A92974
|
Flagellum flagelli: or Doctor Bastwicks quarters beaten up in two or three Pomeridian exercises, by way of animadversion upon his first booke, intituled, Independency not Gods ordinance. / By J.S. M.A. Published by authoritie.
|
Sadler, John, 1615-1674.
|
1645
(1645)
|
Wing S276; Thomason E298_25; ESTC R200240
|
16,323
|
26
|
while it was intricate and then reported it and had their assistance and concurrence and the Letters of resolution run in the name of the Brethren i. the Church as well as the Apostles and Elders ver. 23. And so in Ordination {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} i. Election by lifting up of the hand belongs to the Brethren though {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} i. Imposition of hands be proper to the Officers where there are Officers as in a Church constituted and compleat 3. That where the whole Church is written to and exhorted to a part of discipline that the Officers onely should be intended as in confirmation of your Assertion you afterwards affirme by the instance of the Church of Corinth we can no way admit Rather on the other hand Christ many times writes and directs his Commands to the Officers when they appertaine to the whole Church and are so to be understood onely written and sent to them as being principall parts of the Churches by and from whom they are ex Officio to be communicated to the whole And for your Simile of Kings directing their Mandats to a Citie or Corporations which are to be executed by the Majors Sheriffes c. I conceive it doth ire in contrarium it is contrariously framed to the manner which is rather to direct to the Sheriffe or Major what doth concerne the Corporation and is required of the whole and so we finde Christ to doe in the Epistles to the seven Churches For that anticipating assertion That the Apostles ruled this Church aggregate not by vertue of their Apostleship but by vertue of its union I shall referre it to the next head viz. That the Church of Jerusalem and the government of the same is to be a pattern for all Congregations and Assemblies in any city or vicinity to unite into one Church and for the Officers and Presbyters of those Congregations to govern that Church joyntly in a Colledge or Presbyterie which is your fourth and last branch of your first Question pag. 97. Answ. 1. They are not an example of uniting or aggregation except it be found that there were many churches aggregated which a very facile and swasible reader may well doubt of for any thing that hath yet been said to make it good 2. If this were granted that many Churches did aggregate and unite in the beginning yet would not this example be bindingly presidentiall For as many things were done out of that ordinary course that was after setled in the creation and in a singular way by themselves as the enlightening of the world without a Sun the watering of the earth with a mist before it rained the producing of fruits ex tempore which things afterwards ceased being digested into orderly rules and courses so might it be in the first plantation of churches Many things might pro tempore be taken up which might not afterwards be continued e. g. The Apostles did * serve Tables at first but afterwards an office was instituted for that on purpose So suppose there were in the Church of Jerusalem a greater multitude then could meet in one place and yet all one church and ruled joyntly by the Apostles and Elders thereof which yet wee do not admit yet could not this from hence be drawne into president because that howsoever the Acts of government which the Apostles exercised together with the Elders in and over this Church were common and ordinary and done after the ordinary manner as the Doctor contends yet I shall make bold to remember him again of that which it seemes hee remembers very well to have been answered in this case formerly though he make not so good an use of it viz. That the extent of their power in the exercising of these Acts there and elsewhere was extraordinary as was their persons and calling to Apostleship And we do not so {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} by this distinction that hee should not know where to have us for 't is easily apprehended what we say is imitable and what not imitable in these Apostles And now for that cavill That the Apostles did not this by vertue of their Apostleship but by vertue of the union of those assemblies I answer that in asserting it thus exclusively of their Apostleship you suppose the Apostles to have been the officers ordinary or at leastwise extraordinary of this Church of Jerusalem only and so that they could not elsewhere exercise the like power or not otherwise then by vertue of an union of churches which is no greater prerogative then you will grant to ordinary officers now and so the Apostles shall have no greater a Commission then we which is as to say their persons were no more extraordinary nor their office then common Presbyters now adayes But thirdly to abound in the answer of this same matter if that many churches in Jerusalem did unite and transact their affaires or some of them joyntly and that therefore we may do so yet it followes not that wee must whether we will or no for this is to urge us beyond the pattern The churches in Jerusalem admit voluntarily spontaneously through the opportunity and advantage of the Apostles help and through the strength of the spirit of love and confidence which they had one to and towards another and for other good causes and considerations did act many things that concern'd the churches in an associated way therefore all churches will they nill they have they the same grounds reasons and incouragements yea or no must do so Is this good Logick And that you may not think here is prevarication or jugling in this businesse I for mine owne part must ingenuously grant and confesse that I am not very solicitous concerning the answer of this matter for whether it were so or it were not so then that they did or did not associate I think it might be so now I mean some kinde of aggregation and union might be though wee might tread more confidently having the steps of the Primitive Churches before us that is to speak more plainly The Churches of Christ now though possessed of an entire independent Church-power in each body yet may when and where and with whom and in what cases or things God shall perswade them transact such affaires as they shall think fit joyntly and sociously provided that hereby they devest not themselves of nor prejudice themselves in any priviledge of an entire sole and and single administration or the like which Christ hath given them but retain that power of resuming and recollecting themselves to themselves when they shall see oâ—casion And if the churches in Jerusalem did so wee have cause to think this was all they did and if the Brethren of Antioch did appeale Acts 15. we have cause to judge it was a free and voluntary appeal and they were not call'd and compell'd thereto And that they and wee in imitation of them might do this
baptisme fight against the true Baptisme and baptizer the Lord Jesus so that I conceive this Argument were it granted that all the people received Johns Baptisme will stand in little stead to prove the Conclusion viz. That they were made Christians much lesse cast into a Church-mould according to the New Testament forme and least of all that they were all members of one Christian Church at Jerusalem But note an absurdity in the sequell of the discourse where the Doctor having got a multiplying glasse in his hand goes on to make strange discoveries of the increase of Christian Beleevers Pag. 36. he tells us That Christ made many more Disciples and beleevers then John and added daily to the Church that was then in Jerusalem such as should be saved Here 's two Paradoxes First That Christ made more Disciples then John Out of whom should he make them when as John had swept all along with him as you affirme before pag. 32. med. not taking it synecdochically whatever you determine of it here Secondly That Christ should adde daily to the Church that was then in Jerusalem is not this a marvailous anticipation and mistake to apply that which was done by the Disciples after Christs ascension Act. 2. last unto the Ministry of Christ himselfe and yet in the sequell you reckon this to the Apostles also expresly pag. 56. Judge if here be not false Musters And let me tell you you give us occasion shrewdly to suspect your ignorance to say no worse to talke of a Church in Jerusalem besides the Nationall Church of the Jewes in the life-time of our Saviour And thus farre I have taken notice of most of the Materiall Excipienda in your Booke I had thought to have bestowed as much time on the rest but that other Considerations forbad me therefore I shall onely briefly examine the maine Propositions that follow omitting the Amplifications and Collaterall Notions that fall in the handling thereof And so I shall leave this Proposition without taking any further Exceptions to it or any more passages in the asserting of it and the rather because there are and those so able already ingaged in the dispute thereof and come to the second Proposition viz. That all these Congregations and severall Assemblies made up but one Church Which Proposition except the former stand good is to little purpose as the Doctor foreseeing is therefore very briefe in the manifestation of it I shall not therefore be long in the Examination of it though in that little compasse of lines he gives cause of manifold Exceptions For first whereas you say The Brethren themselves acknowledge that all the Beleevers in Jerusalem were all members of that Church If you meane the Church spoken of Act. 15. 4. I deny and say it is a grosse presumption and begging of the Question to say that wee acknowledge all the Beleevers in Jerusalem to be Members of that one ministring Church especially if you reckon all Johns Disciples and Converts to these Beleevers For as there was a good space of time after there were multitudes of Beleevers ere there was such a Church so for any thing hath yet been brought to the contrary it is probable enough that the true Beleevers which were not so many after you have cut off Johns Converts I meane those that did stick in Johns Baptisme which were multitudes and temporary Beleevers which ceased to walke with Christ which were not a few and strangers which did afterwards disperse themselves into severall Countries those that did remaine at Jerusalem did gradually grow up unto Church-fellowship And it amounts to no lesse then the former begging and presumption that which followes viz. That this Proposition is manifest out of the Scripture viz. that they that were convented are said to be added to the Church For what if that be to be understood of the Church Catholick and not a particular Church It may not be denyed that the word Church is often so used in the New Testament and it is suspicious that the three thousand converted at once were not so soone instructed in Church-followship as converted As for that which followes that they continued in the Churches Communion and the Apostles doctrine The Doctor hath moulded the Text for his own advantage and indeed hath falsified it for 't was in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship not in the Churches fellowship except you are content it should be understood in the communion of the Church Catholicke which is no more then in Christian Communion in generall and for ought I know that is all that is meant there And tell me any act wherein the multitude of beleevers did communicate that can bespeake it necessarily to be any more then a Christian Communion in generall or what Christians may have together though not of the same Church and the Doctor himselfe says before The chiefe publique Ordinance they communicated in was preaching To the third Assertion or Branch Pag. 82. which is That the Apostles and Presbyters governed ordered and ruled this Church of Jerusalem consisting of many Congregations and Assemblies by a Common Councell and Presbytery I answer First I am not satisfied by any thing hath been alledged that that Church consisted of many Congregations and Assemblies and that upon the scruples before instanced Secondly In asserting that the Presbyters did rule that Church and ordinarily other Churches whom doe you hit Sure not the Independents as you call them We grant 't is their part to rule but we distinguish between Authority and jurisdiction on the one hand and power and interest on the other this latter belongs to the people the other is proper to the Officers which yet they exercise in the name of the Church So they i. the Officers ordaine they excommunicate i. pronounce Excommunication they lead and direct in all Government and disputes they have the executive power as you demand pag. 93. But the people have a power and interest too as those places alledged by your selfe shew expresly Act. 15. For tho ver. 2. Paul and Barnabas are said to be sent to the Apostles and Elders only yet ver. 4. they are said to be received of the Church and Apostles and Elders therefore they were sent to the Church also and that word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} with one accord ver. 25. imports a multitude met together and this to be the result of that multitude els it were no great commendation of the resolution that it was convened about and issued forth {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} And though onely the Apostles and Elders are mentioned as coming together to consider of the Question ver. 6. yet it is said ver. 22. that it pleased not onely the Apostles and Elders but the whole Church also therefore the Church also came together to consult or the Apostles and Elders as a Committee first prepared the dispute as not counting it so safe perhaps to admit the weake to the same