Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	call_v	church_n	congregation_n	1,735	5	9.2238	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A53662	Tutamen evangelicum, or, A defence of Scripture-ordination, against the exceptions of T.G. in a book intituled, Tentamen novum proving, that ordination by presbyters is valid, Timothy and Titus were no diocesan rulers, the presbyters of Ephesus were the apostles successors in the government of that church, and not Timothy, the first epistle to Timothy was written before the meeting at Miletus, the ancient Waldenses had no diocesan bishops, &c./ by the author of the Plea for Scripture-ordination.	Owen, James, 1654-1706.	1697 (1697)	Wing O710; ESTC R9488	123,295	224

with Judas 'T is no more impossible saith he that Timothy should leave his first Love Rev. 2.2 than that Judas the Apostle should betray his Master P. 162. We must not think but that some of the Apostles Friends and Disciples made Ship-wrack of the Faith Alexander did so Acts 19.33 And why not Timothy so did Demas The Apostle saith of Timothy There was no Man like-minded Phil. 2.20 22. And that there were Prophecies concerning him that he should War a good Warfare 1 Tim. 1.18 Can any such thing be said of Judas We say Comparisons are odious was there ever a more odious one than to compare one of the most excellent New Testament Saints with the vilest of Hypocrites I will refer him to his own Words if it be not offensive to him to review them Criticks will be busie and advance Paradoxes and who can help it P. 163. Timothy shall be an Apostate-Bishop rather than no Bishop But he thinks to mend the Matter by supposing Timothy might be dead when the Revelation was written because he was an infirm Man 1 Tim. 5.23 and would scarce live to Seventy Years We have known infirm Men that were Temperate to live above Seventy J. O. observ'd that many Chronologers affirm'd that Timothy was alive then This he overlooks J. O. shew'd out of Dr. Lightfoot That the Angel of the Church was a Parish-Bishop in Conformity to the Jewish Synagogues each of which had its Angel or Bishop Our Author here enters the Lists with Dr. Lightfoot not with J. O. He hath not shew'd us saith he P. 164 165. that every Synagogue had a Presbytery Let him consult Dr. Lightf Vol. 1. p. 302. p. 611. Vol. II. p. 133. But the Rulers of the Synagogues adds he P. 165. were subject to the High-Priests and their Presbytery So are the Presbyters to Jesus Christ our great High-Priest and to all Rulers of his appointment He told us above That the High-Priest and Presbytery were the chief Court of Judicature among the Jews and had the highest Jurisdiction And so it had in things Civil and Sacred What is this to Episcopal Power over the Presbyters Let the Bishops produce as clear a Charter for their Order as the High Priests did for theirs and we 'll submit He remembers Mr. Bois scoffs at the Bishop of L. for Arguing with Dr. Lightfoot P. 166. but does not refer to the place lest we should see what great Reason Mr. B. might have to reject Rabbinical Traditions and what little reason our Author had to charge him with scoffing When Rabbinical Learning is of any advantage we are content to make use of it if against us P. 167 we deride it saith he When it is against the Truth we reject it when there is a Harmony between it and the New Testament we receive it not for Confirmation of Divine Truth but for Illustration Mr. G. cannot deny but the Minister of every Synagogue was call'd the Angel of the Church and Bishop of the Congregation as Dr. Lightfoot hath prov'd Therefore it looks highly rational that the Angels of the Asian Churches should be so called in Allusion to the Ministers of the Synagogue Christian Oratories are call'd Synagogues James 2.2 Our Author cannot deny the Agreement in many things between both But says he The Temple-Worship whereof a great deal was Moral was as much the Pattern of the Christian as was the Synagogue-Worship and if so the Jewish Priest-hood was the Pattern of the Christian Hierarchy p. 166. 1. The Jewish Priesthood was appropriated to the Ceremonial Worship of the Temple though they perform'd the Moral parts there also The Legal Priests and the Legal Altar were Relates Heb. 7.13 14. and both were Abolished together Heb. 7.12 For the Priesthood being changed there is made of necessity a change also of the Law What Law not that which concern'd the Moral Worship but the Law of Ceremonies to which the Levitical Priesthood was adapted 2. The Moral Worship in the Synagogues might be performed by such as were no Priests * Lightf Vol. II. p. 133 134 135. but none but Priests gave attendance at the Altar Heb. 7.13 Therefore the Ceremonial Worship Temple and Priesthood being Abolished and the Moral Worship which was the only Synagogue-Worship being Transplanted into the Christian Church it follows that the Jewish Priesthood was no Pattern of the Gospel-Ministry But this has been consider'd before J. O's First Instance of Ordination by Presbyters from Acts 13.1 2 3. hath been sufficiently vindicated above Cap. 2. He is in one of his hot Fits again P. 168. and Charges J. O. with insufferable Artifice Fallacy Sophistry c. for saying That if Barnabas was one of the Seventy Disciples as the Ancients affirm he was then was he of the Order of Presbyters according to that Hypothesis that makes Bishops to succeed the Twelve Apostles and Presbyters the Seventy Disciples J. O. did not call Barnabas a Presbyter but argued ad bominem He might as well have affirm'd saith he That Matthias another of the Seventy was but a Presbyter who succeeded Judas We read of Matthias his Solemn Call to the Apostleship and that he was Numbred with the Eleven Acts 1.26 but we have not the like account of Barnabas 'T is true he is call'd an Apostle Acts 14.4.14 so are Evangelists sometimes as we proved before Many conceive he was but an Evangelist Paul seems to own no Apostles in a strict Sense but the Twelve and himself 1 Cor. 15.5 7 8. It was the Prerogative of the Apostles to confer the Gifts of the Holy Ghost but we do not find that Barnabas ever confer'd that Gift Though I will not be positive but he might be a real Apostle J. O. Argued That those who have power to Dispense the Gospel to Baptize and Administer the Lord's Supper have also Power of Ordination because these are Ordinances not inferiour to Ordination Et parium par est ratio They are not inferiour to Ordination 1. Preaching the Gospel is not inferiour to Ordination The Publishers of it are Ambassadors for Christ 2 Cor. 5.20 represent the great Prophet of the Church Mat. 5.20 are Workers together with God 2 Cor. 6.1 And is an Ordainer morethan this Baptism is our Solemn Dedication to God Ordination is no more only the former is to Christianity as such the latter to a particular work 2. Baptism is a Sacramental Dedication which Ordination is not 3. In the Lord's Supper the Minister sets apart Bread and Wine as Symbolical Representations of Jesus Christ Jerom saith of Presbyters Ad quorum preces Corpus Sanguis Christi consicitur Now which is greater to Impose Hands or to make the Sacramental Body and Blood of Jesus Christ If they have Power to Consecrate Holy Things why not Holy Persons also Thus J. O. who prov'd also that the Ministerial Acts now mention'd are not inferiour to Ordination from 1 Cor. 1.17 Mat. 28.19 20.

Christianity had no Consecrated Temples nor Altars ‖ Arnob. adv Gent. lib. VI. For this Reason Caecilius in Minucius Foelix reproaches the Christians and asks Cur nullas Aras habent nulla Templa Why have they no Altars no Temples no visible Images † Min. Foel Octav. p. 29. Oxon. Minucius answers What Temple can I build unto Him whom the World which is Created by His Power cannot contain And since I a Man dwell more at large shall I include so great a Majesty within one little House Is He not better Consecrated in the bottom of our Hearts * Ibid. p. 94. To the same purpose speaks Clemens Alexandrinus He that is endued with Knowledge saith he Honours God that is gives Thanks for the knowledge of an upright Life neither in a definitive place nor in a select Temple nor on certain stated Festivals but through his whole Life and in every place And a little after Every place is truly Sacred in which we Converse with God ‖ Strom. 7. The Heathen built their Temples upon the Graves or Ashes of their Dead as Arnobius affirms † Lib. VI. For this reason Clemens Alexandrinus calls them Sepulchers You call them saith he by the specious Name of Temples but they were Sepulchers that is Sepulchers were call'd Temples * In 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These they dedicated by certain Ceremonies to the Memory of their deceas'd Friends whom they honoured as Gods and accounted their Temples Sacred as Caecilius speaks ‖ Vbi supr p. 18 19. He complains that the Christians despised them as polluted Graves † p. 25. The wiser sort of Heathens acknowledged that their Consecrated Temples had no real Holiness in them No Edifice saith Plato in Clemens Alexandrinus is of any great worth or truly Holy that is built by sordid Mechanicks * Strom. V. In imitation of them the Christians as they degenerated from the Apostolical Simplicity built Temples in honour of departed Saints and Martyrs They call'd their Temples after their Names Dedicated them to such and such Saints in Memory of which they kept Festivals which gave occasion to our Wakes We have some Instances of these Dedications and Festivals in the Fourth Century Euseb Vit. Constant IV. Nazian Orat. in Nov. Dominic No Instance can be given of any Dedication of Temples till about Constantine's time and the Dedications of that Age were no Ceremonious Consecrations they were only celebrated with Solemn Prayers Praises Preaching and Administring the Eucharist which are the stated Duties to be performed in such places The first performance of these Religious Duties can have no more Vertue for Consecration of the Place than the continued Series of them Eusebius mentions also some Orations in Commendation of the Benefactor and the Magnificency of the Structure which were delivered at those Solemnities * Vit. Const IV. 45. These had no Consecrating Vertue in them Ceremonious Consecrations appropriated unto Bishops were unknown in the three first Centuries I find but one Instance of it in the Fourth Century and that in the Roman Church in which Superstitions grew faster than in other Churches and this instance is very dubious The Roman Council under Sylvester is said to Decree That no Presbyter presume to Celebrate Mass but in Places Consecrated by the Bishop ‖ Epit. Syn. Rom. Sub. Sylvest The Acts of this Council are justly suspected to be Spurious for certain the Twentieth Canon which forbids Judging the first Seat is so Vid. Conc. Nicen. Can. 6. Above a hundred Years after A. D. 456. an Irish Council under St. Patrick determin'd That no Presbyter who had built a Church do offer the Eucharistic Sacrifice until he bring the Bishop to Consecrate it C. 23. About the Year 494. the Power of Consecrating Churches which the Bishops had before appropriated to themselves was restrained to Metropolitans by Pope Gelasius † Ep. IX c. 4. 25. In the Year 619. the Second Council of Sevil acknowledges That the Consecration of Churches is forbidden Presbyters Novellis Ecclesiasticis regulis by certain new Ecclesiastical Canons * Con. His 2 Can. 7. The Consecration of Altars is almost as ancient as the Consecration of Churches It is mention'd about the Year of Christ 506. in the Council of Agatha Can. 10. 29. and about the Year 563. in the Council of Braga ‖ Conc. Bracar Can. 37. For the same reason that we have laid aside the Consecration of Altars we may also that of Churches We conceive that all places are equally near to Heaven and that all Places where the Worship of God is Celebrated are equally Holy God looks more on the disposition of the Worshipper than he doth on the place of Worship † Aug. de Vnit Cap. 16. as Austin well speaks 1. Mr. G. will do well to shew us 1. some Warrant from the New Testament for Consecration and Holiness of Places which he seems so fond of 2. When he hath done that let him shew us what Authority from the New Testament the Bishops have to appropriate the Consecration of Churches to their Order Did Timothy or Titus whom he calls Bishops Consecrate Churches 3. If the Gospel give them no such Power can he shew any Canons made since the Reformation that do impower them to Consecrate Places of Worship We have Forms for the Ordering of Priests and Deacons and for the Consecrating of Bishops and Arch-Bishops we have a Form for Confirmation also but no Form nor Order nor Direction about the Consecration of Churches that ever I cou'd meet with Indeed the Roman Pontifical can supply us with one Dr. Heylin tells us that Arch-Bishop Laud had a design to draw up an English Pontifical to be approv'd by the Convocation in the Year 1640. This new Pontifical was to contain among other things a Form to be observed by all Arch-Bishops and Bishops for Consecrating Churches Church-Yards and Chapels * Laud's Life p. 441. But the Troubles of the Time obliged him to defer the prosecution of it till a fitter conjuncture When King Charles II. returned and the Bishops had all the advantage they could desire they did not prosecute the design not being so violent in that Point as Laud and his Party had been 4. Wherein doth a Consecration promote the acceptance of our Devotions with God Is the Worship of God more acceptable in a Consecrated than in an Vnconsecrated Place If it be not what are we the better for Consecration If it be let the Rector prove it Can he shew any Promise that is made to Consecrated Places as such under the Gospel He cannot produce either a Command of Precedent for Consecration of Places under the Gospel nor a Promise to such Places above others Jesus Christ Promises to meet his People in all places without distinction Mat. 18.20 John 4.21 23. 1 Tim. 2.8 He dwelleth not in material temple Acts 7.49 and 17.24 The Rector hath studied this Subject and