Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	according_a	bishop_n	law_n	2,981	5	4.4057	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30324	An answer to the Animadversions on the History of the rights of princes, &c. by Gilbert Burnet.	Burnet, Gilbert, 1643-1715.	1682 (1682)	Wing B5761; ESTC R7324	19,703	25

with the History of that time they can admit of no other sense especially if we compare them with the citations from Nazianzen page 32. And for the Sixth Canon that common suffrage of all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was to take place notwithstanding the opposition of two or three can only be understood of the Election by the People For that suffrage which the Bishops gave when they approved of it and proceeded to ordain the elected person was not determined by the Majority For the Metropolitan had a Negative So that the Election where the Majority prevailed must be only understood of the decree that was made by the people I did never deny that the Bishops had a power to confirm or reject this Election but do expresly assert that they were Judges of the fitness of the person chosen Page 18. He accuses me for citing Cyprians words Epist. 66. wrong and to make this pass the better he puts those words which I had set down as my own in Italica to make it appear that I had set them down as a part of Cyprians words and had rendred quae nunc ratio forma tenetur instead thereof If the scope of Cyprians Epistle is considered it will appear to how little purpose these words are cited St. Cyprian is arguing against Churchmens medling in Secular affairs and he brings the instance of the Priests and Levites among the Iews who were well provided for by Tythes that they might have no tentation lying on them to entangle themselves with the cares of this World Which reason and form says he is observed in the Clergy The reason was that they being well provided for might be freed from these distractions and the form was their receiving their share out of the Basket as a Tythe of the fruits of the Earth In the end of this Paragraph he accuses me for saying that Origen affirmed that First-fruits were only to be payed under the Gospel and says that he mentions Tythes as due under the Gospel By this it appears that either these Animadversions were writ in hast or that the writers thoughts went too quick for all I said was that Origen concluded that First-fruits only were to be brought to the Priest And it is certain that he does not speak one word of paying Tythes to the Priest but all along repeats that of the first-fruits So that it does not appear that he thought it necessary to bring Tythes to the Priest But I never said that he affirmed that first-fruits were only due under the Gospel There is a great difference between what was to be paid to the Priest and what Christians ought to set off for Charitable and Pious uses Page 52. He accuses me for saying that Charles the Great subjected the Church Lands to the common services such as building of Bridges c. And I do not deny that the Capitular there cited does not clearly prove it but it proves this that those that were obliged to those services were to be required by such as the Bishop and the Count should name and who these were appears by an ancienter Capitular of Pepins the younger An. 793. cap. 20. by which all persons were required according to ancient custom to repair Churches to make Bridges and mend High-ways and none were to pretend immunity Which is clearly a carrying on of Honorius and Theodosius his Law cited from Iustinians Codex Here I confess at the first view he seems to have some advantage but what it amounts to I leave it to him self to judge Page 71. He quarrels with me for citing some formularies concerning the endowments of Churches and tells me those are the endowments of Monasteries and not of Parish Churches But I did not name Parish Churches this was put in by him otherwise he had lost his Objection I hope he does not deny that Cathedrals are Churches though possest by Monks I cite but four of these and of the first it does not appear what sort of Church it was of the second it is clear it was the Cathedral where St. Martins body lay and it mentions Rectors as well as the Abbot The third and fourth that I cite are general forms of endowment for Churches that had either Abbots or Rectors in them and were to be filled up according to the constitution of the Church to which the endowment was made Page 116. What I had set down concerning Abraham with a perhaps and an it seems he cites as if I had positively asserted it with this kind Animadversion that I wrest the Scripture to undermine the Clergy's maintenance If to commend the Princes that provided so I berally for the Clergy and to condemn as a great wickedness the taking away or detaining that which is so dedicated to holy uses be an undermining of the maintenance of the Clergy I acknowledge my self guilty of it but if this imports the quite contrary then he was too inconsiderate in his censure Nor will it serve his turn to say that some Eastern Kings did take Tythes that being begun when the Kings and Priests were one person For Samuel that is the ancientest Author cited for it lived some ages after those two Offices were divided And St. Paul Heb. 7. ver 2. after that he had said that Abraham gave a tenth part of all to Melchizedeck adds He being first by interpretation King of Righteousness and after that also King of Salem and ver 4. he says consider also how great this man was unto whom even the Patriarch Abraham gave a tenth of the spoil I leave it to any impartial man to consider if this will not justifie my exposition guarded with a perhaps and an it seems It is true St. Paul argues afterwards upon the supposition of Tythes being due to Priests but this was to the Iews to whom he wrote But if he had intended to bring the Christian Church under the like obligation it is not very accountable why he did not say one word about it this being so proper a place for it Page 143. He challenges me for saying that the 14. Canon of the Council of Chalons obliged the Bishops in their visitations to confirm and not to prey upon their people and tells me that the Canon did only oblige that when they did visit to confirm they should not oppress their people But the Canon in general speaks cum Episcopi Parochias suas peragrant si quando peragrandae parochiae necessitas incumbit and charges them that they should confirm enquire what was to be amended Preach the word of God and that they should use their industry rather in the gaining of souls than in the robbing and spoiling of their Subjects and scandalizing of their brethren Now I am not quick sighted enough to divine what can be made out of this Page 192. He challenges me for citing Zonaras saying that there were no Stewards in the East in his time and alledges that he says that many Bishops and some Abbots

did not regard the Canon that enjoyned the use of them But he says that the greatest part did not observe it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which it is true I enlarged the expression too generally and put no for few yet he contracts it as if it only signified many But the whole matter is of no consequence And now if the rest of the forty places be to be judged of by these as the sample I shall not much apprehend the censures of Learned and impartial men but if a man has before hand resolved to find fault it will be no hard task to write severe strictures on much better books than I can pretend mine to be But now I come to the third head of this accusation of my omissions of many passages which the Animadverter thinks were as obvious to me as those I have cited and he judges that they were past over by me lest they should look too favouorably on the Clergies power or their right to the Tythes But he does not know if these were as obvious to me as it seems they were to himself and he must know me better than he does yet before he can judge what my intentions are Page 40. He quarrels with me for not citing a part of the 23. Canon of Antioch and the 13. Canon of the African Code which speak of the Election of Bishops By the Metropolitan and the other Bishops of the Province But this was not at all necessary to be mentioned for I had laid it down as a thing undisputed over and over again that the Bishops had a power of judging after the people had pitcht on the person nor was it ever imagined by any that I know of that the Bishops met meerly as tools for ordaining those that were nominated by the People though violence was sometimes used for which see what I have said page 7 8 9 12 13. therefore having laid that down as an unquestionable truth there was no need of accumulating more proofs So there was no cause to charge this on me as a designed omission Page 72. He charges me for leaving out the clearest and firmest proofs for Tythes of the Fathers of that age and yet as there are none more eminent than Chrysostom Ierom and Austin whom I cite so I do not remember to have fallen on any thing more express for them in Doctor Combers History of Tythes It is very strange that he does not observe a difference between the advising People to set off more than a tenth for Charities and a rule obliging them to pay in a tenth as a Rent due to the Priest And that this was never set up in the Greek Church nor authorized by the Roman Law seems some inducement at least to a man of no extraordinary sagacity to believe that the Divine right of Tythes payable to Priests antecedently to humane Laws was not the Doctrine of that age Page 119 He challenges me for not citing all the Laws made by Charles the Great for the payment of Parochial Tythes and is not satisfied that I cite two But my purpose was to shew it was setled by him and I do not see the great need of telling how oft this was repeated by him And after that I had said that Alfred had setled the payment of Tythes in England I do not see why he should object to me the not mentioning the latter Laws that came afterwards For either those were only confirmations of the former and so they signifie nothing or all that could have been drawn from them was to represent the unwillingness of the People to submit to them and who knows but he would have made this criminal in me Page 127. His next exception is that I say before Caroloman and Pepin there had been no Synods in France for 80 years that is from 662. till 742. and this still holds good notwithstanding the four he mentions for by Synods it is plain my meaning was Assemblies for regulating the affairs of the Church Some meetings indeed there were in that interval which seem rather to have been Assemblies of the Estates or Parliaments than Ecclesiastical meetings For in some of them the Priviledges of Monasteries were confirmed and in other Bishops were condemned to be beheaded But that which he cites from Binnius at Chalons is not in my Edition nor will I enter into dispute with him whether Vtrecht belongs to France or Germany But for justifying what I said Boniface his letter to Pope Zachary is a sufficient authority for cap. 2. he writes to him that the Franrks as ancient men then said had had no Synod for above eighty years This serves to acquit me and hereafter he may deal with Boniface as he pleases Page 129. He accuses me for passing over some words in a Canon at Akin which shew that Charles the Great believed that Tythes were due by a Divine right But he cannot think I intended to disguise this matter for page 113. where I first enter upon it I do largely set out the Churches pretending to a Divine right for them and it was needless to repeat this at every time though I do expresly speak of it again page 140. and 141. Page 180. He accuses me for leaving out that provision made for the Emperours power of annulling Elections by the Clergy and People in the Popes concession of the investiture to the Emperour But if this is not plainly enough insinuated in these words that when a Bishop was canonically elected by the Clergy and People he should not be consecrated till the Ring and Staff were given him by the Emperour I am to seek as to the true use and sense of words For this clearly expresses that the Emperour had a Negative and by consequence the power of annulling Elections and they are the very words of the Popes concession The fourth Head is of the contradictions he finds me guilty of of these he reckons up three but with what success I now come to examine Page 52. and 169. I had affirmed that Church Lands in England before the Conquest were subjected to the service called Trinoda Necessitas for Fortifying Castles building Bridges and a rate for an expedition and yet from Matthew Paris I assert that they held their Lands in Frank Almoin and so were free from all secular service He acknowledges I have cited Right from Matthew Paris so all his quarrel must be for what I say of the Trinoda Necessitas I my self have seen it in some Original Charters in the Saxon time which I am ready to shew him as soon as I certainly know his name If there is a contradiction between these two things I am not to be blamed for it having good authority for all I affirm And if there should fall to be a contradiction betwixt Original Charters and Matthew Paris who was a Monk and so ready to speak in favour of their priviledges one would think it were not very difficult to determine the controversie But