Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
christian_n christian_a church_n jewish_a 1,506 5 9.5679 5 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
A41330 The questions between the conformist and nonconformist, truly stated, and briefly discussed Dr. Falkner, The friendly debate &c., examined and answered : together with a discourse about separation, and some animadversions upon Dr. Stillingfleet's book entituled, The unreasonableness of separation : observations upon Dr. Templers sermon preached at a visitation in Cambridge : a brief vindication of Mr. Stephen Marshal. Firmin, Giles, 1614-1697. 1681 (1681) Wing F962; ESTC R16085 105,802 120

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Form then I hope they will not blame us though we refuse to subject unto it as we would refuse subjection to one in the Commonwealth who is not an Officer according to Law Professing withal for my self and I dare say for all the Nonconformists in England that if it can be made good that Christ hath appointed such a Government in his Church we will most willingly subject unto it being glad we are eased of such a burden Pride shall never hinder us though that be so much charged upon us For the first the Doctor meets with several arguments that some have produced to prove there must be a Form appointed and he answers them but his answers do not satisfie I had prepared a reply to his answers but lay it by To their Arguments I would add one or two more First if Christ hath determined no form of Government in his Church then the Form may be Monarchical and Bellarmine's argument to prove it for the prevention of Schism will carry it a simili saith he c. de Rom. Pontif. l. 1. c. 9. Dr. Stillingfleet might have spared the seventh Chapter of his Rational Account wherein he labours to disprove the Jesuit arguing for the Monarchical Form Kings are supream in all cases Ecclesiastical says the Church of England the supream Magistrate may determine the Form says Doctor Stillingfleet then the Ten Kings may give their power to the Beast without any error A Pastor and a Deacon may serve at first while believers are few but when the Church is enlarged to a whole Nation there must be another Form of Government saith the Doctor p. 180. Irenic Go on Sir when the Church is enlarged to many Nations there may be another Form and why not then Monarchical Christ having determined none as the Doctor saith Above one thousand Presbyters in a Diocess may devolve the exercise of that power which Christ hath committed to them actu primo to one person according to Dr. Stillingfleet so may ten thousand as well for ought I know to one Bishop and he may exercise it by his Arch-deacon Chancellor Commissaries as well as now 2ly If God determine a Form of Government in the Jewish Church then Christ in the Christian Church Christs Kingly-Government in the heart is secret none can see that his visible Government by which he is made known to the world is known by his Ordinances Government of his House as our Courts at Westminster Sessions and Assizes shew our Kings Government with the Profession of the Christian Faith and conversation of Christians accordingly He is faithful in his house Heb. 3.6 that House is his Church which he builds not the Commonwealth qua sic 3ly To determine a Form of Government argues more Soveraignty more Perfection more Wisdom in the supream Governour than to appoint only an unformed Government as it were a meer materiae prima If a Prince give a Charter to a Corporation a Patent to a Colony he appoints the form of their Government He that gives the form in other things gives the perfection of the thing Christs Form in the Church carries authority and hath an awe upon the hearts of Believers this notion brings Christ in his wisdom and Soveraignty below an earthly Prince 4ly Dr. Stillingfleet hath affirmed Christ hath appointed a form of Government in his Church for whereas the Jesuit is pleading for the Monarchical form of the Church-Government because wise men have thought that to be best the Doctor answers What is this to the proving what Government Christ hath appointed in his Church for that is the best Government of the Church not which Philosophers and Politicians have thought best but which our Saviour hath appointed in his word Ration Account p. 464. then Christ hath appointed a form in his word and I hope that is Jure Divino else the Jesuit is not answered We need no more proof 2. For the second Quest What then is that form A. I shall lay several Propositions and clear them by Scripture First Prop. In all Churches in the New Testament where we read of Elders we read of several Elders in one Church we never read but of one Elder in a Church that I call to mind 1. In the Church of Jerusalem one Church but divers Elders Act. 15.6 23 v. 16. ch 4. 2ly In the Church of the Romans one Church but several Elders as Rom. 12.6 c. 3ly In the Church at Antioch one Church but more Elders Act. 13.1 4ly In the Church of Corinth there were divers Elders witness the Schism 5ly In the Church of Ephesus divers Elders Act. 20.17 6ly In the Church of Philippi were several Elders Phil. 1.1 So Polycarpus's Epistle to the Church declares 7ly In the Church of the Colossians several Elders Col. 1.7 4.17 Epaphras and Archippus we are sure of the Dutch say Onesimus also from Ch. 4.9 8ly In the Church of the Thessalonians were several Elders 1 Thes 5.12 Let any man that opposes me produce one Church where there was but one single Pastor though if it were so it will not save us for the Churches then had the Apostles living among them and could help that single Pastor if the Church were but new planted 9ly In Act 14.24 The Apostles ordained them Elders not an Elder in every Church Mr. Thorndike one of your own joining this Text with Tit. 1.5 crosses Dr. Stillingfleet's gloss on the Text i. e. saith the Doctor no Church wanted an Elder not that every Church had more Elders but Mr. Thorndike thus not meaning one Elder in a place but Presbyteries Colledg of Presbyters with common advice to order the Churches planted in those cities This agrees with the plain Gramar of the Text 2. with eight examples I gave before 3ly The Syriack is full for our sense The Doctor while he labours to darken this Text forgets himself strangely for p. 239. He lays this for a foundation to clear the Apostolical practise viz. that the Apostles in framing Churches did observe the customs of the Jewish Synagogues And p. 248. Having cleared that there was a peculiar form of Government in the Synagogues and that the Apostles copied out the Government of the Christian Churches by them Now p. 429. he tells us there were divers Rulers in a Synagogue is evident from Act. 13.15 he supposes Ten wise men did jointly concur for ruling the affairs of the Synagogue p. 250. so many Elders to make a Bench. Strange the Doctor should forget his foundation For Act. 20.17 Dr. Stillingfleet Dr. Hammond with Irenaeus darken that Text. I might have shown how cross Dr. Hammond and Irenaeus are one to another Forsooth the Bishops of Asia not only the Elders of Ephesus were sent for according to Hammond Grotius is clear against Hammond de Imper. p. 343 393. But I should answer thus 1. Consider how many miles Philippi was distant from Jerusalem the way Paul sailed c. according to Bunting who gives an account of
member and yet both he and that particular Church too may be guilty of Schism So that his definition is too strait I will give him more advantage and let him take it I shall then give a description of Schism and open it Then I will lay down several Propositions tending to the clearing of the Question who are the true Schismaticks Schism is a renting or dissolving that Vnion which Christ our Head requireth in his visible body To open it I shall be short 1st That Christ hath a Body Natural and Mystical or a body in a mystery which is to him as his natural body is known to all Christians Ephes 1.22 speaking of Christ He is the head over all to the Church v. 23. which is his body This Head and this Body make up one Christ mystical 1 Cor. 12.12 so is Christ 2ly This Body of Christ is but one two Bodies joined to one Head much more thousands were monstrous All the believers in all the particular Churches of the world make up but this one Body of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ehes 4 4. one body So Rom. 12.4 5. 1 Cor. 12.12 so Revel 19. ch 21. one Bride one Wife 3ly This body hath its bands or ligaments whereby the body is tyed to the Head and the members one to another For those to the Head I omit the other concern me in this place how the members are tyed one to another Now these ligaments are first Internal secondly are External 1. Internal and they 1. The blessed Spirit of Christ Ephes 4.4 One body and one spirit so 1 Cor. 12.13 The second is love Col. 3.14 Eph. 5.16 2. The External bands are the Sacraments or Seals of the New Covenant whether Government be any thing I shall touch afterwards But for the Sacraments they are the bands of this visible body they belong only to the members of this body one Baptism Ephes 4.5 belong only to that one body v. 4. 1 Cor. 11.17 We being many are one bread and one body for we are all partakers of that one bread Hence Excommunication in which men are cut off the Body and rendered durante hoc statu as Heathens and Publicans not visible members of Christ is by casting them out of Communion with their Body in these Ordinances In these Ordinances the visible members of the body declare that unity and internal band of love one to another Panis igitur fractio est unitatis dilectionis symbolum Virtute hujus Sacramenti con a lescimus in unum corpus invicem cum Christo Par. in loc Paraeus in loc who quotes Chrysostom and the practise of the old Christian Churches how Christians in this Ordinance did manifest their unity and love A Christians love I speak to the business in hand is twofold 1. There is a Christian love common to all 2. There is a Christian Ecclesiastical love proper to some as for Christian love I am bound to manifest that to the bodies and souls of all though Heathens I will pray with Heathens a silly thing to turn Excommunicated persons from Prayer which is Natural Worship I will Preach to Heathens I will exhort reprove encourage Heathens privately to comfort a Heathen as a Christian I cannot else I call not to mind what effects of love I manifest to a Christian but I will to a Heathen But for Christian Ecclesiastical love manifested by Communion in these Symbols or signs I will not manifest that to one Heathen only to the members of this visible body being one with them As for Episcopal Government which Dr. Goodman and this late Commencer adds First I would thank either of them if they would give us a stout piece against Erastus and his followers 2ly If by Episcopal Government they mean such as now is among us let them first prove it is of Divine Institution which all the Commencers in Cambridg or Oxford shall never be able to do so long as there is a Bible and if they cannot do that then where is the schism It 's rather our duty to separate from what is not of Christs planting in his house 3ly But let the Government be of Christs Institution yet wherein doth that Government shew it self among other things in letting in or casting out of this body by admitting or casting out from these Ordinances of the Sacraments but that refusing or separation from such Episcopal-Government meerly as Episcopal should be Mortale schisma this is but the figment of the delirant-brain of a Prelatical Zealot 2ly This Schism is in the visible body of Christ I hear there are schisms among you 1 Cor. 11.8 the house of Cloe 1 Cor. 1.11 saw them who informed Paul Schism it seems comes under the senses then it must be in the visible body when this body visibly met together By the visible body of Christ I understand all that make profession of their Faith in the Lord Jesus and the Doctrine of the Gospel soundly and do in their conversation visibly walk according to his Rules in his Gospel so that their conversation do not openly be●ly and deny their profession Tit. 1.16 That the one body of Christ mentioned 1 Cor. 12.12 in which there ought to be no schism v. 25. is meant the visible body of Christ I think none will deny So Rom. 12. Ephes 4. 1. It is such a body in which the Lord had set Apostles Evangelists 1 Cor. 12.18 Ephes 4.11 such a body to which extraordinary gifts were given But these were Apostles not to one particular Church but the Catholick Church visible 2. One member is to suffer or rejoice with another 1 Cor. 12.26 Ay if it be a member and real member of our particular Church of Corinth but for other Churches and unless we are sure they are invisible members let them go Is this the meaning 3. Are we baptized into a particular or the Catholick Church 1 Cor. 12.13 and Baptism belongs to the visible Church Other things I might mention but I think it will not be denied 3ly When then that union our Lord and Head requireth in this his visible body is rent dissolved when Communion is denied among the members of it contrary to his appointment Now Schism appears when the internal band Love is broken there is something of the nature the root of the sin is in it but that is hid Men can hypocritically and vilely meet together and hold communion in that Ordinance which holds forth unity and love and have their hearts wretchedly divided one from another this may be hid as I said But Schism properly so called is when the external band is broken when communion in those symbols or signs is denied on one side or refused on the other side without warrant from Christ so that the members do not meet and hold their communion as they ought but split into several pieces opposite one to another as if they were not members of that one body Now Schism is apparent
thus he said but would Paul have said so if he had been in a Consistory with the rest of the Apostles my friend made no reply but held down his head supposing thereby he might make the Prelate recall his words this answer was becoming an Archbishop and worthy of Laud To be sure he silenced my friend Only this Sir let me say they used the argument upon your Hypothesis that the things are indifferent but though we grant the things considered absolutely or abstractedly in their own nature are indifferent yet consider them in their use we look on them as sinful To examine all that learned Mr. Falkner hath written would be tedious and needless for I should yield to him in many things had not the state of the question been mistaken Briefly therefore I will consider the case the Apostle had before him and apply our case to it The Lord having in the old Law forbidden divers meats and commanded the observation of divers days when Christ the substance the body was come these shadows vanished Some Believers in Christ understood this they knew though once they were under a Law yet at this time they were indifferent and so they knew their liberty Others because the Law was so express the observation had been many hundred years the words for ever added to those Laws they could not yet understand what the stronger Christians did The Apostle guided by the Spirit of Christ chargeth these stronger Christians not to judg despise refuse or offend these weaker Christians but to receive them into their hearts into Church-fellowship and all Church communion and not perplex their minds with those doubtful disputations or reasonings but wait and bear tenderly with them till the Lord shall reveal that truth also unto them For our case the things in question are no necessary circumstances of Divine Worship as time place c. which are necessary attendants of Worship and Antecedaneous to any act of mans will but such as have their dependance upon mans pleasure only Hence you tell us you may change them when you please Those things fell under the command of God and so not these unless as forbidden by the general Law of God as those meats were by particular Laws For a man a creature to institute a Doctrinal Religious Ceremony to teach men their duty they owe to God ordain it as a mean to help stir up their minds to their duty and annex this to the worship of God yea so as there must be no Divine Worship unless this Ceremony be used it is such high boldness it doth so touch the Lords Prerogative and tacitely so charge him with defect of wisdom as if he had not appointed means sufficient to teach his Creature but we must supply his defect by adding to his word that let superstition speak never so smoothly as it always comes with some pious end in the mouth it is no other but wretched impiety not will we by the help of his Grace conform unto it You who tell us these things are indifferent are yet so far from answering the Duty that Christ commands by the Apostle in these Chapters i. e. to receive us not to judg us not to offend us that in opposition to the command you thrust us out of the Lords work you shut us out from the Sacraments you excommunicate us imprison us and do what in you lye to destroy us both soul and body As to what you say p. 410. quoting Mr. Thorndike with whom you agree It is not meant a bare displeasing of our Brother but doing such actions which tend to occasion some to fall from Christianity disgust Christian Religion for which you quote the 15. v. Destroy not him c. The first part in some sense I should yield but for the latter part which carries this sense that the destruction in the 15. v. was by making them to fall from Christianity as if there were no other way to destroy them but that I conceive humbly that your self with Mr. Thorndike are both mistaken For that weak Christian might be strongly convinced that Christian Religion was true though he could not as yet see the repealing of those Laws upon the reasons I gave before yet through the unkindness pride cruelty of the stronger Christians who would judg despise him and not receive him unless he would eat the forbidden meats as they did and through their example whom he saw to eat he might be put upon a temptation to eat such meats too not in faith but with a doubtful conscience and so doing he was condemned according to the last verse So their pride unkindness and example did help to destroy their brother as much as in them lay Hence in the first verse of the Chapter the Apostle charges them not to trouble such a one with doubtful disputations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. * Non cumeo disputis de usu libertatis quam nondum potest intelligere quod plus anxietatis kaesitationis rudibus animis parit quàm utilitatis Vatabl. In the last verse he ends with He that doubteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is damned so that he begins and ends with doubtfulness Now had the weak Christian fallen off from the Faith the weak Christian would not have eaten such meats doubtfully and so bring himself under the danger of condemnation for so doing for to be sure he would eat none of those meats which made him fall off from Christianity because he saw Christians eat them there was no danger of his damning for eating with a doubting conscience so that this implys that he who eats with doubting did yet hold his Christianity Thus have some by reason of that unkindness and severity in imposing these Laws upon us been put upon Subscriptions with a doubtful Conscience in their temptations and afterwards have met with that which hath stung them This is the charity of your Church towards your brethren Nor doth that you say p. 435. help it viz. That these different practises had a peculiar respect to those times only of the first dawning of Christianity for the Church afterwards in their Canons condemned all those who observed those Mosaical Laws For we are under the same condition with those Christians who dare not eat the meat then because they had been forbidden in the Law so nor dare we submit to your Humane Inventions in the Worship of God because they are forbidden in the general Law Thou shalt not add Deut. 12.32 They are not according to Christ Col. 2.8 Christ put no such things into the Apostles Commission to Preach Mat. 28. ult So that with a doubtful conscience at least we must practise them and what is next we know Nor doth your obedience to authority help here which so many are glad they have that starting hole to run into and your self so much urge Had these strong brethren in this Rom. 14. been Princes or Archbishops and they should have commanded the weak brethren
all the miles from Port to Port that Paul sailed it was two thousand one hundred and fifty six miles if he mistake not 2ly Consider how many days between the Feast of Unleavened bread and Pentecost for Paul to sail these miles 3ly What time Paul set sail from Philippi 4ly How many days he stayed in several places all which I had cast up 5ly When he came at Miletum thirty days at least were spent he had but twenty days of these he stays eight days by the way besides two days journey going and coming between Miletum and Ephesus as they reckon it from Miletum to Jerusalem 844 miles according to Bunting he stays at Philips house Act. 21.8 10. At Miletum Act. 20.16 He hasted if possible c. yet now he sends for the Bishops of Asia this is the fancy of that learned man Besides if he can prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the 17 vers and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 28. be words of the Plural Number then his great learning may perswade us to something For his other notion on Phil. 1.1 the Jewish and Christian Bishop Dr. Stillingfleet hath answered him I add 1. In matter of fact one would think Chrysostom and Ambrose should know a little better than Dr. Hammond of yesterday and they could have given other answers than they have done upon the Text. 2ly When Paul Phil. 4.15 saith O ye Philippians he means the same persons in Ch. 1.4 but if one in France should write to the French Church in London would they write O ye Londoners they are but strangers as the Jews in Philippi 3. In the Church of Thessalonica there were Elders 1 Thes 5.12 but none Jewish Christian Bishops 1 Thes 1.9 These turned from Idols c. not so the Jews So in Ephesus several Elders but no Jewish distinct Elders Ephes 2.11 12. make that clear I could give more answers Prop. 2. The Elders in the Gospel-churches had all of them Ministerial power committed to them alike I mean the ordinary teaching Elders So Bishop Jewel If it be a heresie to say that by the Scriptures of God a Bishop and Priest are all one then many of the Fathers whom he mentions yea Paul himself must be a Heretick Dr. Stillingfleet hath yielded this and we desire no more the truth is the same if he be changed this question Learned Pens have discussed I let it alone Prop. 3. This equality of power which the Elders received from Christ did continue all the time the Apostles lived This I think Dr. Stillingfleet yields p. 275. the Epistle of Clemens to the Corinthians after the Apostles time and of Polycarpus to the Philippians declare the same The Teachers Act. 13.1 2 3. did Ordain so several of the ancient and modern Divines Lutherans and Calvinists so understand it there is a full definition of Ordination If this were Peter's see where is that Bishop had there been an Apostle he had been mentioned The Church of Corinth ought to have Excommunicated the Incestuous person though Paul had not sent to them or here joined with them Chrysostom on the Text speaks fully to the point Prop. 4. The number of the Elders increasing in the Church by reason of the increase of the Believers One of these Elders and most probably that Elder which was first Ordained by the Apostles in the Church had a Primacy as to order and honour but not as to power and jurisdiction over his fellow Elders The Text commands it 1 Cor. 14. ult Order must be and where there is a Plurality to avoid confusion there must be one If there be Twenty Justices of the Peace in a County and the King add Ten more it doth not alter the form of Government At the Sessions one must be for order sake the Judg of the Sessions and the other Justices do not devolve the exercise of their power upon him nor hath he more power than the rest every one exerts his own power So in the Parliament a Speaker must be but no superiority of power nor devolving the exercise of the power of the other Members upon him so it is in the Church That Eminent Servant of Christ Mr. Thomas Hooker alloweth of an Episcopus Humanus in the Consociation of Churches to moderate the actions of the Assembly to propound things to be agitated to gather voices to pronounce the Sentence which passed by common approbation Reason and order saith he forceth such a kind of proceeding Survey Chu Disc p. 1. Cap. 2. p. 22 23. only the constancy of it he denies from experience There is the pinch Prop. 5. This Primacy I humbly conceive did continue in that Elder during his life unless for some default he were cast out by his fellow Elders I shall wrangle with none of my brethren nor differ from them in affection about it but I shall ground my notion on the Angel of the Church Apoc. 2. c. 1st The word doth not connote any superiority of power over the rest no more than when the King wrote from Breda or at any other time to the Speaker of the House of Lords or Commons or to the Judg of the Sessions did or do argue any superiority of power but only order what Isidore saith of the word Angelus Angelorum vox est nomen Officii ne naturae cum mittuntur vocantur Angeli So here all Elders are sent Rom. 10.15 if sent then they are Angels Superiority of power among the ordinary teaching Elders was the first step Antichrist took to get into his Chair 2ly The word is to be taken individually not collectively So famous Reynolds against Hart p. 314. So Beza Piscator Paraeus and many others The instances our brethren give to prove collectively some do not prove it others as the Ram the Goat in Daniel the Antichristian Beast c. in the Revel I humbly conceive give away the Cause for there was ever one superiour in power which I will not yield 3ly That this person was during life c. The Argument brought against it is no Scripture but humane Prudence from experience so Mr. Hooker To which I say keep out but superiority of power and the danger is avoided and no doubt while the Churches kept that out this form of government carried on things very well You cannot then charge me with being cross to Scripture in my opinion 2ly Since you cannot prove me so then I prove my sense from the practice of the primitive Churches of which we have the Histories which to me is of great force in proving the sense of a Text that seems very fair and have no other Scripture to contradict that sense how much the Histories of them speak of a single person who is ignorant and that during life Ambrose or whoever it was as ancient as he in his Comment on the 4 Ephes speaks home to the point see Thes Salmar p. 3. p. 299. 3ly By the Seven Epistles to