Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	church_n	communicate_v	communion_n	2,762	5	9.2903	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91392	The true grounds of ecclesiasticall regiment set forth in a briefe dissertation. Maintaining the Kings spirituall supremacie against the pretended independencie of the prelates, &c. Together, vvith some passages touching the ecclesiasticall power of parliaments, the use of synods, and the power of excommunication.	Parker, Henry, 1604-1652.	1641 (1641)	Wing P428; Thomason E176_18; ESTC R212682	61,943	101

ought to be a great deal lesse and we doe the rather suspect all popish traditions and additions in Religion because wee see they make use of them for the augmenting of the power and regiment of Prelates And yet if knowledge did not abound if our Religion were more cloudie and if the Scriptures Councils Fathers and all learning were now more imperfect to us then they are I cānot imagin how an uncōfined absolute dominion of Churchmen shold be more necessary thē of Princes For if absolutenes of power be of necessary use in intricate perplexed mysteries cōtroversies yet why must that absolute power be more effectuall in Priests then Princes is not the counsel of Prelats the same and of the same vigor to solve doubts and determine controversies whether their power be subordinate or not doth meer power ad to the knowledg of Priests or is the power of Priests more virtuous for the promoting of truth then the power of Magistrates how comes this vast irreconcilable difference betwixt the government of the Church and State In matters of Law in matters of policy in matters of war unlimited power in such as are most knowing and expert does not conduce to the safety of the Common-wealth subordinate Counsells are held as available for the discerning of truth and far more available for the conserving of peace and order And who can then assigne any particular sufficient reason why matters of religion should not as well be determined in the consistory by dependent Prelates as matters of Law are by the Judges and Justices in their tribunals where they sit as meere servants to the King His third exception is That God having armed the Jewish Religion with a temporall sword and the Christian with that of spirituall punishment only the one with power to imprison scourge put to death the other with bare authoritie to censure and excommunicate there is no reason why our Church which hath no visible sword should in regiment be subject unto any other power then only to that which bindeth and looseth This reason taketh it for granted that amongst the Jewes the Church and State was the same had the same body the same head the same sword and that head was temporall and that sword was materiall This we freely accept of but in the next place without any reason at all given it as freely assumes that Christians now have only a spirituall sword in the Church as that Jews had only a temporall one A diametricall opposition is here put betwizt Jews and Christians in Church Regiment and yet no cause shewed or account given of that opposition We have very good colour to argue that without some strong reason shewed of opposition Christians ought not to bee so contrary to that excellent discipline of the Jewes which God himself ordered and to introduce I know not what spirituall rule in prejudice of temporall rule but how will Stapleton prove that amongst Christians the Church and State are two divided bodies so as they may admit of two severall heads and severall swords the one temporall the other spirituall the one yielding precedence as temporall the other predominating as spirituall This wee desire to see fortified with better proofs Hooker in his eighth booke not yet publisht has a learned cleere discourse to shew the fallacie and injustice of this blind presumption Hee allows that a Church is one way and a Commonwealth another way defined and that they are both in nature distinguisht but not in substance perpetually severed Since there is no man sayes hee of the Church of England but the same is a member of the Common-wealth nor any of the Common-wealth but the same is of the Church therefore as in a figure triangle the base differs from the sides and yet one and the self-same line is both a base and a side a side simply a base if it chance to be the bottome and to underlie the rest So though properties and actions of one doe cause the name of a Common-wealth qualities and functions of another sort give the name of a Church to a multitude yet one and the same multiude may be both Thus in England there 's none of one Corporation but hee is of the other also and so it was amongst the Jews Two things cause this errour First because professours of the true Religion somtimes live in subjection under the false so the Jews did in Babylon so the Christians in Rome under Nero in such cases true professors doe civilly only communicate with the State but in matters of their Religion they have a communion amongst themselves This now is not our case and therefore these instances are not proper amongst us Secondly In all States there is a distinction between spirituall and temporall affaires and persons but this proveth no perpetuall necessity of personall separation for the Heathens always had their spiritual Laws and persons and causes severed from their temporall yet this did not make two independent States among them much lesse doth God by revealing true Religion to any Nation distract it thereby into severall independent communities his end is only to institute severall functions of one and the same community Thus farre Hooker most judiciously and profoundly Wee must not here expect any satisfaction from our Adversaries why there should be lesse division betweene Church and State amongst the Jews and lesse use of two severall swords then is amongst us 't is sufficient that they have said it There 's no crime so scandalous amongst our Church-men or wherein they claime so much spirituall interest of jurisdiction as adultery yet amongst the Iews that crime was carnall not spirituall and its punishment was death inflicted by the Civill Judge not damnation denounced by the Priest Now if adultery in these days were better purged away and lesse countenanced in our Christian Courts then it was amongst the Jews there might something be alleaged to preferre our moderne inventions before Gods owne Statutes but when Ecclesiastiall persons shall therefore incroach upon Civill that by I know not what pecuniary corruptions and commutations vice and scandall may abound we doe strangly dote to suffer it For his last reason he says That albeit whilst the Church was restrained into one people it seemed not incommodious to grant their Kings generall chiefty of power yet now the Church having spread it self over all Nations great inconvenience must thereby grow if every Christian King in his severall Territorie should have the like power By this reason it s presumed that all the Universe ought to have but one head on earth and that Rome must be its Court and that it must be indued with Oraculous infallibilitie and so to remayne till the Worlds end and this must bee admitted out of some obscure generall Metaphors in Scripture or else God has not sufficiently provided for the wise government of his Catholike Church Man can scarce imagine any thing more mischievous or impossible then that which these goodly

men to refraine the outward act but reformeth not the secrets of the heart This is Bilson's sense and I thinke the sense of almost all our Divines by this is Nazianzen fully seconded and abetted for first the true and proper rule of priests is not only asserted but also explained for it gives grace and life by the Word and Sacraments it reproves and threatens it shuts the gate of Heaven against Non-repentants Secondly the rule of princes is lesned and that by this instance for that the preacher winneth soules to a willing service but the prince by externall terrour restraineth only from the outward act of sin And thirdly his comparison is indefinite betweene Prince and preacher that which is implyed of Priest in generall hee seemeth to apply to every priest in particular I must frame my answer to every particular Power and Dominion of it selfe is divine and adde but infinite or absolute to it it is Divinitie it selfe Nothing is more desirable to man or more adequate to the aymes of intelligent creatures then power the Angels in Heaven are known to us by the Names of Thrones and Principalities Heaven it self is knowne to us by the name of a Kingdome and our best devotion to God consists in ascribing to him honour worship subjection c. and the first and greatest sin of men and Angels was an aspiring to undue Power and excellence Absolute perfection and blessednesse is the Unitie of the Godhead and that Unitie must needs subsist in absolute power absolute wisdome and absolute goodnesse Absolute power also in order of Nature according to mans understanding as a Father gives being to absolute wisdome as both give being to absolute Goodnesse Whatsoever is in God must needs be God and of the same substance indivisible and so infinite wisdome and infinite Goodnesse must needs be coeternall and consubstantiall with infinite power yet this excludes not all order of distinction and according to order of distinction it is more proportionable to our capacitie that infinite Wisdome should derive its divine generation from infinite power then infinite power from infinite Wisdome Unitie of perfect blessednesse cannot comprehend any thing more then this Trinity neither can it comprehend any thing lesse and therfore though this word Trinity cannot have any relation to the essence of God or to his works ad extra which flow from the essence yet to his persons it may and to his internall operations wherein one person is more generative then another And according to these internal operations of the Deitie we ought to speak after the manner of men to ascribe prioritie of Order to infinite power the first person of the Godhead in as much as wee cannot conceive but that God is rather wise as he is powerfull and Good as hee is both powerfull and wise then that hee is powerfull as hee is wise or wise and powerfull as he is good Having premised these things in generall concerning power and dominion and the excellence thereof I am come now to see what that power and Dominion is which Churchmen clayme to themselves Our Hierarchists use the words Power and regiment to describe all their actions and employments the Power of Order the Power of Jurisdiction the Power of the Word and Sacraments and the Power of the Keys all their spirituall Offices and Faculties are expressed in commanding and high terms that they may seem to owe no subordination or dependence to any above themselves And this art they further use when they would prove the excellence of their spirituall rule they derive it from preaching and the subordinate Offices of the Ministery but when they would exercise their rule then they alleage that to rule over Preachers is more greater then to preach because the spirits of men are properly subject to no rule and because preaching though it be one of Gods most effectuall Ordinances yet is no proper rule but a service rather therefore they lay hold of Ecclesiasticall juridiction for proofe of their holy spirituall rule And yet because Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is of it selfe no such divine sublime thing as the ministration of the Word and Sacraments nor so incompetent for Princes as to the use of it therefore their proofs are chiefly grounded upon the ordinances of the Word and Sacraments but this slight imposture cannot so delude us for either Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction is more sacred and spirituall then the ministration of the Word and Sacraments or not if it be then these arguments drawne from the Word and Sacraments are impertinent The question is whether Princes be capable of such jurisdiction or not and this proves not the incapacity of Princes this only proves the honour of such capacitie but on the other side if it be not yet there is the same impertinence for if priests challenge to themselves power in things more excellent and holy this excludes not Princes from things lesse excellent and holy but wee shall not need to stick here The papists themselves doe acknowledge that to preach c. is lesse then to rule and to prescribe Laws to preachers c. and Bilson makes a plaine confession that the Sacerdotall Office is rather Ministeriall then Imperiall and that such reverence and subjection as is due in spirituall affaires from Princes is not due to the persons of priests but to the Ordinances of God and to the graces of the Church For says hee the word is to be submitted to in the mouths of Prophets and the Ordinances are to be honoured in the administration of Priests but the persons of Prophets and Priests must not be objects to terminate this submission and honour God is to be honoured in the service of his Ministers not the Ministers in Gods stead for in these services there is the same honour due to GOD from Ministers themselves as from Lay-men And therefore wee see if the greater Priest heare the word c. from the lesse this does not sanctifie the lesse above the greater as it would if sanctitie did rest in the person and not in the Ordinance or if it did not passe from the actor or instrument to the Author and Ordainer himselfe I thinke wee may therefore proceed now from this that power and Government is a thing in it selfe most awfull and honourable to this that the truest owners thereof next under God whom the Church ever look't upon as Gods immediate Vicegerents and Deputies thereof are Princes Saint Peter 1. 2. writing to the Church in the time of a Heathen and impious Emperour commands every soul to be subject to the higher powers He acknowledges power in a very Nero and that to be the higher power and to that higher power of that Nero he subjects every soule Christian and Heathen Priest and Laymen For the same cause also the primitives in Tertullians mouth make this humble profession Colimus imperatorem ut hominem à Deo secundum solo Deo minorem this profession was made under the

three things necessary 1. Invenire 2. Disceptare 3. Ferre The invention of all necessary Lawes is almost perfect alreadie to our hands Those Lawes which God ordained for the Iewes and those which our Ancestors found out for us are daily before our eyes and little can now be added of moment except only for illustration of what was ambiguous before In the Church also is lesse want of perpetuall alterations and additions of Canons than in the State our misery is that we succeed Ancestors which were opprest with too vast a Church discipline Our reformation hath rid us of some part of this burthen but yet no sensible man can chuse but see that our Ecclesiasticall Courts are yet of larger jurisdiction and fuller of trouble than ever the Iewish were or those of the Primitive Christians The reason of this is because wee still rely too much upon Divines herein and they for their own profit and power are still as willing to uphold their own Tribunals as ever they were Did they thinke it a greater honour to serve at the Altar than in the Consistory and did they take more delight in Preaching than attending suites they would not study New Canons but discharge themselves of many old ones and so ease themselves and us too and restore backe againe to the Civill Magistrate that which Popery first usurped and their ambition hath since continued Howsoever if Ministers can adde any Articles to the Doctrine of our Church for the better preventing of Schismes or frame any orders for the more decent performance of Gods worship in the Church I would not exclude them from proposing it I only desire that since they are men and may have private interests and respects to the prejudice of other men they may not ingrosse all power of proposing what they list and to exclude all others from the like power And in the second place if Clergie men only shall propose all Ecclesiasticall Lawes yet it is most unjust that Princes and Lay-men should be held utterly uncapable of ventilating and debating the same Id quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debet Nature hath printed this in us if the Priest propose any thing tending to the disservice of God that disservice will draw the same guilt upon me and all others as upon him and it shall not excuse me or others that he pretended his judgment to be unquestionable and shal it then here be unlawfull for me and others to use any endeavour for the prevention of this guilt If Angels from Heaven should seduce me I were inexcusable and when Ministers whom I know to bee subject to the same naturall blindnesse and partiality as I am and to whom I see generall error may be a private advantage in matters of this private advantage shal I be allowed no liberty to search and trye and to use my best art of discussion If this were so God had made my condition desperate and remedilesse and I might safely attribute my error and destruction to the hand of God alone but this no man can imagine of God without great impiety God hath declared himselfe contrary herein for he hath exempted none from error though never so learned nor leaves none excusable in error though never so unlearned if we will blindly trust others t is at our own perill He will require it at our hands but if we will seeke industriously we shall finde if wee will knock at his dore He hath promised to open to us And if private men stand accountable for their owne soules whatsoever the Priests doctrine or commands be how much more shall Princes and Courts of Parliament answer for their wilfull blindnesse if they will depart from their owne right and duty in sifting and examining al such religious constitutions as concerne them and all others under their charge Shall they sit to treate of Lether and Wooll and neglect doctrine and discipline Shall they consult of the beauty and glory of the kingdom and transfer Religion to others which is the foundation of all happines Shall they be sollicitous for transitory things and yet trust their soules into other mens hands who may make a profit of the same Let us not so infatuate our selves let us honour Divines and reverence their counsels but let us not superstitiously adore them or dotingly in-slave our selves to their edicts THe 3d. thing in making of laws is that which we term ferre Legem and till this act of carrying passing or enacting give the binding force of Law to it how good and wholsome soever it be after all debate yet it is but as the counsell of a Lawyer or the prescription of a Physition And here we maintaine that if Divines are the most fit to invent and discusse Ecclesiasticall Constitutions yet they have not in themselves that right and power which is to imprint the obliging vertue of Lawes upon them The forme or essence of Law is that coercive or penall vertue by which it bindes all to its obedience and all cannot be bound to such obedience but by common consent or else some externall compulsion take away this binding vertue and it is no Law it is but a Counsell wherein the inferior hath as much power towards his superior as the superior hath towards his inferior If then Divines will vindicate to themselves a Legislative power in the Church they must deduce the same either from the common consent of the Church or from some other authority to which all the Church is subject and to which the whole Church can make no actuall opposition If they clayme from common consent they must produce some act of State and formall record to abet their clayme and common consent must also still strengthen the same or else by the same that it was constituted it may still be dissolved and if they clayme from some higher externall authority stronger than common consent they must induce that authority to give vigor to their Lawes and to use means of constraint against all such as shall not voluntarily yeeld obedience to the same And it is not sufficient for them to alledge God for their authority without some speciall expresse words from Gods owne mouth for God gave no man a right but he allowes him some remedy agreeable thereunto and God is so great a favourer also of common consent that though hee hath an uncontroleable power above it yet as Hooker observes He would not impose his owne profitable Lawes upon his people by the hands of Moses without their free and open consent And if God which cannot doe unjustice nor will impose lawes but such as are profitable to us and yet hath an undisputable Empire over us will so favour common consent shall man which may erre and doe injurie and is of lesse value then communities and wants might to inforce and put in execution his owne commands usurpe that which God relinquishes Take it for granted that Priests cannot erre out of ignorance or be

humane are and lyable to examination and being made without common consent they binde not at all and being made by common consent they binde all either to obedience or to sufferance It is Gods owne Law that such as shall except against the validity or obliging vertue of common consent shall die the death for no peace can ever be in that State where any inconsiderable partie shall not acquiesce in the common Statutes of the land Those Lawes which Heathen Emperors made by common consent against Christianity were not wise Lawes But they were Lawes there was no pietie but there was vigor in them and doubtlesse the very Apostles which might not lawfully obey them yet might not lawfully contemne them Two things are objected against the Ecclesiasticall power of Parliaments 1. That it is more due to Princes 2. To Councells or Synods T is true anciently Princes were the only Legislatives the old rule was Quicquid placuerit Principii Legis habet vigorem But we must know that Princes had this power by common consent and doubtlesse till policy was now perfect and exquisite t was safer for Nations to depend upon the arbitrary unconfined power of Princes then to have their Princes hands too far bound up and restrained but since Lawes have bin invented by common consent as well to secure Subjects from the tyranny of their owne Lords as from private injuries amongst themselves and those Common wealths which have left most scope to Princes in doing of good offices and the least in doing acts of oppression are the wisest but ever this golden axiome is to bee of all received That that is the most politicke prerogative which is the best but not the most limited But this objection makes for Parliaments for whatsoever power was vested before in Princes and their Councells the same now remaining in Princes and the best and highest of all Counsells viz. Parliaments Counsells also and Synods are as improperly urged against Parliaments for Counsells and Synods did not at first clayme any right or in dependent power they were only called by the secular Magistrate as Ecclesiasticall Courtes for the composing of cissention in the Church and they were as meere assistants called ad consilium not ad consensum In 480 yeares after the establishment of Christians Religion from the first to the seventh Constantine there were but fixe generall Counsells called and those in disputes of a high nature all other Lawes were establisht without Oecumeniall Counsells by the private instruction of such Clergie-men as Emperors best liked The truth is no universall Counsell ever was at all because there never yet was any universall Monarch or Pope whose power was large enough to call the whole world but Princes to the utmost of their bounds did in that space of time congregate Bishops out of all their dominions in those sixe cases and yet we do not finde that those sixe Counsels though they have more reverence yet claymed more power than any other Nationall Synod Without question no lesse power than the Emperors could have bin sufficient to cite and draw together so great a body or to order them being met or to continue their mee●ing and no lesse power could animate their decrees with universall binding vertue then the same that so convened them But it is sufficient that Counsels have erred and that appeales have been brought against them and that redresse hath beene made by Emperors in other Counsels called for that purpose for this takes away from them that they are either supreme or sole or infallible judges of Religion and this being taken away they cannot be pretended to have any over-ruling superiority or priviledge above Parliaments The assistance of Counsels and Synods scarce any opposes so that they be not indeed with an obliging Legislative force above Parliaments or preferred in power above common consent which is the soule of all policy and power and that which preserves all Churches and States from utter ruine and confusion and this no wise man can agree too So much of the first act of power in passing and promulgating of Law I now come to the second In giving judgment according to those Lawes But little need here be said for if we did yeeld Clergie-men to be the most skilfull and knowing Iudges in all matter of doctrine and discipline this is no argument at all for their supremacy or independency neither can any difference be shewed why subordinate power in Ecclesiasticall judgments should not be as effectual and justifiable as in temporall and it is sufficiently cleered that poly coirany is not to bee received in any Church or Kingdome and therefore I haste to the third act of power which consists in using compulsory meanes for procuring obedience If Priests had any such spirituall sword as they pretend vertuous and efficacious enough to inflict ghostly paines upon such as disobey them doubtlesse it would reform as well as confound and procure obedience as well as chastise disobedience and then it would as much advance thei● Empire as the temporall sword doth the Princes Doubtlesse it would have some sensible efficacy and worke to good ends and men would not nor could not chuse but bow and submit themselves under it but now a spirituall sword is pretended whilst the gaining of a temporall sword is intended and nothing is more plaine to be seene It s not to be wondered at therefore if the people feare not any binding power where they see no loosing nor regard the shutting of those keyes which cannot open nor tremble at that thunder and lightning which is accompanied with no perceiveable vertue of warmth and moysture to open and refresh as well as to breake and burne But I have touched upon this already and so I now leave it THe next Argument is taken from the Iewish policy for they suppose that the Iewish Priest-Hood was independent in Spiritualibus and they suppose that the spirituall knowledge and ability of the Priests and Levites was the ground of this independency Here we say first that there are diverse reasons why more power and preeminence was requisite amongst the Iewish Priests than is now Bilson gives foure differences and I shall add two more for first the Priests and Levites were then a great body they were a twelfth part of Israel and had many Cities and their territories wherein they lived a part from other Tribes and in those Cities and precincts a civill rule was as necessary as els where and that rule could not be administred without inequality and power and in this they much differed from our Ministers Secondly Priests and Levites were then the onely studied Booke-men and Schollers of that Nation learning was at a low ebbe the judiciall as well as the Ceremoniall Lawes were scarce knowne or reade by any but that tribe and in this the State of our times is farre different Thirdly The Priests and Levites had then a naturall command and signiory in their owne families over their owne