Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	bishop_n	church_n	presbyter_n	1,708	5	10.0860	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A52063	A vindication of the answer to the humble remonstrance from the unjust imputation of frivolousnesse and falshood Wherein, the cause of liturgy and episcopacy is further debated. By the same Smectymnuus.	Smectymnuus.; Marshall, Stephen, 1594?-1655. aut; Calamy, Edmund, 1600-1666. aut; Young, Thomas, 1587-1655. aut; Newcomen, Matthew, 1610?-1669. aut; Spurstowe, William, 1605?-1666. aut	1654 (1654)	Wing M799; ESTC R217369	134,306	232

a Canon provides that they should not be in little Villages Ne vilesceret honos Episcopatus but these himselfe acknowledgeth are but the accessaries of Episcopacy by the donations of Magnificent Princes But what is the meaning of this where it may be had what doth he meane where it may be had with the favour of the Prince then the Primitive Church had never had any Or where it may be had with the willing subjection of the people then Episcopacy shall be an ordinance if the people will have it so Where it may be had what with quiet and conveniency then you make that which you call an ordinance of God subject to mans convenience Or what with possibility requiring that where Episcopacy may be had possibly it should what 's this lesse than a command yet saith the Remonstrant here is no expresse law of God requiring it Now we pray you review your worke and see how well you have stated the question To prove that Episcopacy was not a divine but a humane institution we produced out of antiquity some places that mention the occasion and authors of Episcopall imparity which are not as the Remonstrant absurdly the onely countenance of our cause Our first was that knowne text of Hiereme in the 1. Titus out of which we collected five things which the Remonstrant summes up thus First that a Bishop and a Presbyter are originally one Secondly that the imparity was grounded upon Ecclesiasticall custome That before this priority the Church was governed by the common Councell of Presbyters and that Bishops ought still so to governe And lastly that the occasion of this imparity was the division which through the divels instinct fell among Christians this the Remonstrant cals the summe of our collection But if his Arithmeticke be no honester then thus he shall summe no summes for us for he leaves out one Collection which is indeed principally considerable That this was not Hieromes owne opinion but the opinion of the scriptures This would have stopt the mouth of his satis imperitè Wel what saies the Remonstrant You look now that I should tell you the booke is of uncertaine credit No indeed sir we looked for no such matter because we know that booke is approved by men both of as great learning and of as little affection to Hieromes opinion as the Remonstrant is though his lesser commentaries on the epistles be questioned Or else you look that I should tell you Hierome was a Presbyter and not without some touch of envy to that higher dignity which he missed Truely sir this we looked for and the rather because Doct. Hall in his Episcopacy by Divine right part 2. page 122. saith that as he was naturally a waspish a hot good man so being now vexed with some crosse proceedings as he thought with Iohn of Ierusalem he flew out c. but what a slender answer is this Hierome was a Presbyter what then Hierome saith nothing here but what he saith from Scripture and is Scripture the lesse Scripture because produced by a Presbyter Hierome was a Presbyter and pleads for his owne order doth that make his argument the lesse creditable the author of Episcopacy by Divine right was a Bishop is it sufficient confutation of that booke to say hee was a Bishop that made it he must plead for his own honour and order Or you looke say you that I should tell you that wiser men then your selves have censured him in this point of Arrianisme No indeed for feare you should thereby comfort us against the same censure past so often upon our selves If Hierome suffer under the name of Aerian no wonder we doe but if wisermen than we have condemned him for Aerianisme wiser men then the Remonstant have quitted him of that crime But the Remonstrant thinkes to decline these common waies and set Hierome to answer Hierome which yet is no more then Bellarmine did before him and and puts us in mind that the same father passes a satis imperitè upon the same opinion in the Bishop of Hierusalem but a satis imperitè doth not condemne the opinion but the man for it may be truth which a man speakes though he speakes it imperitè yet to make sure worke the Remonstrant will set Hierome to answer himselfe what saith Hierome at first saith he Bishops and Presbyters had but one title No Hierome said not so nor did we Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus How doth the Remonstrant construe this Is this in English a Bishop and a Presbyter is the same or is it at first Bishops and Presbyters had but one title with what face can the Remonstrant charge us with infidelity in quotation and mis-englishing who useth no more fidelity himselfe that which Hierome speakes of the office he would restraine to the title that which Hierome speakes in the present tense as true in all the moments and fluxes of time he would remit to the time past They had but one title This the Remonstrant passeth from and slips from their Identity to their imparity inquiring the time and occasion of that and will needs force Hierome here to confesse Bishops in the Apostles daies because then they began to say I am of Paul c. but will take no notice at all of what our answer spake for the removing of this inference unlesse it be to slight it as a poore shift nor will take notice of that which Hierome himselfe speakes Haec propterea ut oftenderemus apud veteres eosdem fuisse Presbyteros quos Episcopos paulatim verò ut dissentionum plantaria evellerentur ad unum omnem solicitudinem esse delatam intimating that Episcopacy was not presently invented as a cure of schisme but paulatim so that should it be granted that the schismes spoken of here were those in the Apostles daies yet it doth not follow that Episcopacy should be coaetaneous to these schismes because Hierome saith Paulatim ad unum omnem solicitudinem esse delatam Let the Remonstrant now aske Hierome not us why the remedy should be so late after the disease and here we desire the reader to observe that the Remonstrant doth meerely abuse him in telling him that Clemens in his Epistle to the Corinthians taxeth the continuance of the distractions raised in the Apostles daies when it is apparent that Clement speakes of a new schisme different from that Paul speakes of raised against ther Presbyters and the former schisme mentioned in the Scripture was onely among the people As for those Bishops whom Hierome names as made by the Apostles at present we say no more but this Hierome as a Divine saith Bishops and Presbyters are the same and to prove this produceth Scripture but Hierome speaking as an Historian mentions Bishops made by the Apostles and brings no Scripture for the proofe of that but onely the testimony of Eusebius his history who alone had writ before him of that subject Now let the

Sermon once a yeere or a quarter or a month that will bee sufficient to merit and maintain that name Some indeed have taken some paines heretofore But there are so few of them now that sure the Remonstrant intended this booke for posterity The present Age will never beleeve that England is so full of preaching Bishops that there is not an unpreaching Bishop to bee found But what if we should challenge the Remonstrant to shew any preaching Bishop in England such a preaching Bishop as Chrysostome Augustine and the rest of those ancient worthies were 〈◊〉 who if they had preached no oftner then our Bishops Chrysostome had never mentioned his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so often nor his Nudi●tertius Nor his cras and perendie Nor Austin his Nudius tertiani hes●erni Sermones Nor Cyprian his Quotidiani Tractatus Indeed of old one saith Bishops gloried of their chaire and teaching as the flowre of their garland preferring it far before government but when they were faln from spirituall felicity and inf●cted with Secular smoake then they commended the labour of teaching to Presbyters then the Iurisdiction and Consistory did carry all the credit Every Office in the Church being counted a dignity as it had more or lesse jurisdiction annexed to it this dignity hath almost crowded out the duty The scandall of inferiour Ministers hee professeth to bleed for but saith we blazon No Sir as we told you before and tell you again they have beene the trumpets of their own shame that like Hophne and Phineas made the sacrifices of the Lord to be abhorred But wee beseech you what is the English of your desires to have had the faults made lesse publike Doe you mean you would not have had them medled withall in open Parliament or that you would have had the Parliament doe by all Petitions brought in against such seandalous persons as Constantine did by those Papers that the proud contentious Bishops gave one against another commit them to the fire if so then as you are Christian tels us whether you doe not think this had been the onely way to involve the whole Parliament and Nation in the guilt of those sins and expose them to that wrath and vengeance that would from heaven pursue them Bethink your self how you will answer this at that great Tribunall to which you make so many rash and bold appeals as also your prophaning the glorious title of the God of peace that you might under the sweet name of peace perswade an impunity for sin Sir we nothing feare but wee shall answer our opposing the unerring rule of the Word of God which texts you never went about to answer against that example of Constantine who as a man though good was subject to errour ten thousand times better then you will doe either of these In our next Section saith our Remonstrant we spit in the face of our Mother Good Reader please to review our Answer Section 17. and judge The Remonstrant will deny presently that hee and the Bishops are the Church of England and yet here that which is spoken against them and their Perseus-like practices is spoken against our Mother the Church Well be what you please Fathers and Mothers and Sonnes and all Onely we desire the Remonstrant if hee can to tell us what the Church of England is For it doth not please him here that we should call the Convocation the Church of England much lesse the Bishops or Archbishops Yet if we be not mistaken you your self call the Convocation the Church of England pag. 122. And the Canons and Constitutions made in the Convocation are called the Canons and Constitutions of the Church of England which the Convocation alone excluding the Parliament cannot be so much as a representative of unlesse you will count the whole Laity of the Nation represented in Parliament none of the Church of England Yet this is the Church so cryed up These Canons are the commands of the Church so rigorously urged Who ever breaks a Canon especially in point of Ceremony is no dutifull sonne of the Church Indeed in point of Morality Drinking Swearing Gaming there is more indulgence Nay how many Bishops in England are there that have urged their owne private paper-injunctions as the commands of the Church and proceeded against such as would not observe them as disobedient or refractory against their Mother the Church That Sir upon the point there will appeare to be more Churches in England then one For tell us we beseech you when the Church of England at Norwich forbade all prayer before and after Sermon but onely in the words of the 55 Canon forbad all preaching in the afternoons all expounding of Catechisme or Scriptures the Church of England in London forbad none of these things when the Church of England in London enjoyned rayling in Communion Tables and all communicants to make their approaches thither the Church of another Diocesse went further and enjoyned setting of them Altarwise And all these were the commands of the church of England The transgression of any one of these the omission of any other thing enjoyned was condemned as disobedience to the church Now how many churches of England were there at this time But you will play off all this as merriment with a Ridiculum caput To deal with you therefore seriously Because you make so strange a thing of hearing of more churches of England then one and distinguish so deeply between Churches of England and Churches in England wee beseech you consider whither the Scripture doe not speak as properly when it speaks of the Churches of Iudea and of Galatia as if it had said the churches in Iudea and in Galatia And what difference between Saint Iohn when hoe writes to the Church of Ephesus of Laodicea and the church in Sardis in Thyatira Yet we are not ridiculous enough therefore the Remonstrant will help the matter and to make his jeere will corrupt our words For whereas we had said if the bounds of a Kingdome must needs be the limits of a Churth Why are not England Scotland and Ireland all one church to make it non-sence hee adds of England are not England Scotland and Ireland all one Church of England Hee that made it let him take it This discourse of Churches of England cannot end without a descent into the Prelaticall and Anti-prelaticall Church We said We acknowledge no Anti-prelaticall Church The Remonstrant tels us if wee make and condemne the Prelaticall Church what shall be the other part of the contradistinction Our reply must be that not we but themselves make the Prelaticall Church wee doe but shew it and we shew also the other part of the contradistinction which the Remonstrant pleaseth to call the Antiprelaticall Church The Remonstrant had upbrayded the Divisions of that part wee made our just defence and therein declared that the Prelaticall party were the chiefe Authours and Fomentors of those divisions