Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	act_n	bishop_n	presbyter_n	3,131	5	10.0517	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A29237	The XXIV cases concerning things indifferent in religious worship considered, or, The resolver better resolved by his own principles, and non-conformists more confirmed also, the grand case touching ministers conformity, with the double supplement thereunto annexed, briefly discussed.	Bagshaw, Edward, 1629-1671.; Bagshaw, Edward, 1629-1671. Great question concerning things indifferent in religious worship briefly stated.	1663 (1663)	Wing B427; ESTC R12512	53,178	68

Nor against the Lawes of the Land 3. Nor against the Priviledges of Parliament 4. Nor against the liberties of the subjects 5. Nor against any former obligations God hath the first Obligation upon us by our Baptism and Christian Profession I say still each in his Place and Calling To contend earnestly for the Faith once delivered to the Saints Jude v. 3. And consequently to endeavour to remove and root out all Doctrine Worship Discipline or Government contrary thereunto I shall not so much distrust the Understanding of any Reader much less the Judgment of the Learned Casuist as that they will deny the former Consequences upon my borrowed or begged Supposition or that they are not easily able if but willing to make Application thereof to all the Particulars named Much more might have been said to many things but I am warned by anothers Harm Not to fly too near the Candle lest I be scorched by the Flame 5. The Conclusion Concerning the Lawfulness of Re-Ordination c. There is one thing and but one thing he saies more in the Condition of Law required of Ministers by the Act and that is Re-Ordination of such as were Ordained by Presbyters only and Ordination of others by Bishops And both these are much scrupled by some men of hopeful and very useful parts The latter sort because they believing Bishops as such and as a distinct Order from Presbyters to be unlawful dare not come under unauthorized hands The former because they judge their Ordination valid by Presbyters and dare no more be re-ordained then re-baptized And indeed if their Ordination by Presbyters be invalid all their Ministerial Acts by vertue of that Ordination are null as some Prelates have told them and if not they themselves yet those baptized by them must be re-baptized or else they are scarce Christians which seems very harsh Doctrine from them who as thy cry out of Anabaptists for Re-baptization so in some Cases allow a Woman to baptize Let them consider it and I attend him He uses many Reasons to perswade the first sort though nothing to the second not to stick at Re-ordination As 1. Considering that Liberty is not denied them to keep their own sense whether Ordination by Presbyters is valid or not This is as if the Children of Anabaptists being forced by Law to be baptized should perswade their Parents to suffer it considering that Liberty is not denied them to keep their own sense whether this Baptism is valid or not and they may rebaptize them when at Age. Does an Ordinance of God depend upon mens sense thereof Or may men dally with it in this manner and not take his Name in vain However some Bishops tell them their first Ordination with all the Acts thereof are null and bid them repent of all Now if their Ordination be judged by them to be valid they in repeating of it offend against the Word the Ordainers and those Churches that have no Bishops as making theirs no Ministers no Churches If they judge it not valid they offend if but ignorantly against the Institution of Christ who hath placed Ordination in a Presbytery Bishops themselves being first Ordained by such even B. Timothy if a B. he was as Hierome with the Scripture hath proved and others follow him therein 2. The Act he saies makes it self no judge of the Ordination by Presbyters in forreign Churches In words and directly it does not but implicitly and consequentially it does Else why doth it so strictly so rigorously require Ordination by a Bishop But as making the former null and invalid to any Ministerial Acts Yea some Prelatical men stick not to affirm those Churches to be none that want Bishops 3. There is no other way saies he to exercise their Ministry in this Church by Law or to entitle them to a Charge or the Profits thereof How true this is appeares in that many Priests ordained by Popish Bishops are admitted to all those without Re-ordination It is a sad thing that a Presbytery of pious Learned Orthodox men should not find the same favour with Protestants But if Ordination by Presbyters be Evangelical it should seem reasonable it should be made Legal No Law of man ought to countermand the Institutions of Jesus Christ And what is this but a kind of Independant Principle on the one side who allow and require Re-ordination of their Ministers such as it is as oft as they remove from one congregation to another And on the other side a kind of Anabaptistical Fancy practise who allow require rebaptization of those baptized by our episcopa Ministers And lastly it seems a too near Complyance with Rome where they re-ordain those of ours that convert or apostate to them though ordained by our Bishops as our Bishops re-ordain those ordained by Presbyters This Retaliation may seem just and reasonable at least from God 4. To save himself a further Labour he refers us to Mr. Humphries Justification of his own and others Re-ordination Alas poor Soul A worse Perswasive could scarce have been brought whose Tracts are judged by some very weak and by others sufficiently confuted and which is more strongly really contradicted by a most vehement Abjuration of his 2d Ordination by a Bishop Concerning his own solemn Profession and Subscription ex animo That he hath not used one Argument but what he judges convincing c. I for my part am in Charity bound and willing to believe him For upon his Supposition I should easily be convinced my self that is if the Government Liturgy Ceremonies of this Church be in all and every thing true and lawful which are indeed all concerned and supposed in the Declarations but not by him at all proved but confessedly here taken for granted I should be ready to profess Conformity to them notwithstanding many Inconveniences in them But when his Opposites take many things to be unlawful and he presumes to take them all for lawful he may perhaps perswade some that are of his mind which few are but cannot in reason hope to make them his Proselytes who judge any thing in them unlawful There are some other things here repeated which have been spoken to elsewhere and I pass them by I have one humble request to make to the Rev. Casuist and I have done That at his next leisure he will be pleased to give some few new Arguments for the old we think are insufficient and sufficiently answered to prove I say not all and every thing in the Declarations to be necessary that would be too hard a Task but to prove the things controverted the Government Liturgie Ceremonies to be Lawful according to the Word of God and I shall engage my self and what little Credit I have either to give him a fair and full Answer with Meekness and Modesty or if I cannot to yield my self his Proselyte FINIS

are not able to bear as some of their Forefathers complained And to omit or shorten Preaching to enlarge the Church-Service they are ready to profess to be against their Consciences as a making voyd the Commandment of God by observing the Traditions of men 2. It is highly sinful to Assent and Consent unfeignedly to things Inexpedient purely Indifferent that is Idle or Useless Superstitious Doubtful or Significant Humane Ceremonies as against the Second and Third Commandments and because such things are sinful in Worship But to some such things yea many do they assent and consent who declare their assent and consent to all and every thing Contained in and Prescribed by that Book as hath clearly been proved ergo c. 3. It is highly Presumptuous Sacrilegious if not Blasphemous to make that Book equal to the Sacred Bible and the Powers Imposing it as infallible as those were that wrote the holy Scriptures as the Pope does the Apocrypha and the Traditions of the Church But this is done by all that in that manner make that Declaration For what can more be declared and asserted of the Holy Canonical Spirit inspired Scriptures then an unfeigned assent to the Truth and consent to the Goodness of all and every thing contained in those Books 4. To assent and consent to the Imposition of things unlawful in Worship is to make themselves twice guilty of sin once as they assent and consent to things unlawful and a second time as they confirm the Imposers in that sinful Imposition For when will they repent of or repeal these sinful Impositions when they are confirmed to be true and lawful by so many complying Ministers in so high a Declaration 5. To declare and profess so publickly before God and their People their unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing in that Book believing that some things are Inconvenient and Inexpedient which they wish were removed is gross Dissimulation and desperate hypocrisie But many of the Complyers do believe and confess some such things to be contained in that Book either not true or not lawful and yet assent and consent to all and every thing contained in it Or suppose them so corrupted in their understanding and Judgments as to be perswaded of the Goodness and Truth of all and every thing therein it may easily be proved and hath been already that some things in it are not true as to matter of Doctrine and some things not lawful as to matter of Worship or Discipline if I might safely dispute against that Book having a Law to render it liable to a Premunire But Truth is Truth and to be acknowledged when we are called to give testimony to it This hath been done by many and not yet answered The Book containes the whole of English Religion in Doctrine Worship and Discipline and in every one of those Defects Imperfections and Corruptions manifested and yet without Reformation of many things imposed and pressed on us with more rigour then formerly See some Particulars 1. In Doctrine As 1. In the Articles of Religion Art 20. The Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies which words being ambiguous taken either for meer Circumstances of Worship for Order Decency c. or for Sacred Rites and religious Ceremonies In the first sense they are true but doubtful To which no unfeigned assent can be given till the distinction be given In the last sense in which they are usually taken they are proved to be false above in this Discourse And some other principal points of Doctrine there are so doubtfully worded that as Papists and Arminians have glossed them to their Opinions so no tender Conscience can safely give so full assent to them as true till they be explained which was formerly denied and prohibited to be made by those that subscribed them 2. In the Liturgy some Doctrinals are delivered and prescribed to be assented to as first a false Translation of the Psalmes according to the errours of the Vulgar Latine still retained to be read not to speak of their leaving out of the Titles of many Psalmes which in Hebrew are Canonical Scripture And it is as unlawful to take from the word of God as to add to it unless they intend to make amends for their Substraction of some by Addition of other things and that is sufficiently done by addition of some Apocryphal Psalmes Te Deum Benedicite and a great many Chapters of the Bookes called Apocrypha to be read a most for two moneths together some whereof are false and as very lying Legends as those used in the Romish Churches and some newly added not in before as the History of Susanna Bell and the Dragon And what is this but as they at Rome a Canonizing in part of the Apocrypha making it equal to the Scripture in Divine Service as part of their Doctrine I might add that Assertion That all Children Baptized are really regenerated and want nothing necessary to their Salvation which drawes after it all or most of the Arminian and Popish Tenents 3. The Homilies are part of the Doctrine of the Church ratified by the 35 Canon and prescribed to be read by every Minister and now with the Articles enjoyned to be assented to unfeignedly as true In these have been observed some false Doctrines as to justifie plurality of Wives by the old Fathers Hom. Of the time and place of Prayer pag. 147. That Almes purgeth away all sins delivereth from death Hom. 2. Of Almes pag. 16. For proof whereof is cited as good Scripture Tobit 4.10 the Son of Syrach Dare any Orthodox Minister declare his unfeigned assent to the Truth of these Doctrines yet this is done by too many 2. In Worship There are some things not good that is unlawful to which yet an unfeigned consent is to be given For the Ceremonies they are largely discovered to be sinful and unlawful above To which may be added the Apocryphal Psalmes and Books made not only equal with the Divine Scriptures but also parts of Divine Service as fully as any part of the Word of God Add to these the Responds of the Clerk and People Women Boyes and Wenches clearly against the Apostles Rules of Decency Order Edification as may be easily manifested And more might be said concerning the Ministers change of places postures ridiculous gesticulations as if Divine Service were some Play or Comedy to be acted which causes the Name of God to be taken in vain against the third Commandment Can any pious devout Minister give his unfaigned consent to these as good 3. In Discipline The Book of Ordination is the Epitome thereof now joyned and established with the Articles and Liturgy But there are some things in them proved to be false As 1. That there are three kinds or Orders of Church Officers Bishops Priests and Deacons when Scripture knowes but two It being proved and confessed by Episcopal men that in Scripture a Bishop and a Presbyter are one and

the less to the greater But can any external necessity be greater than that of Obedience unto Gods Command by a Moral or Natural Law His Application therefore of that Rule of Indulgence proceeds upon his too common Supposition Is Mercy to our Beast so highly prized how much more is Mercy to our selves to our Nation to the Church to the soules of our people c. This Inference were good were the things in question proved to be only Inconvenient penally in Worship but if any of them be proved unlawful and sinful I should argue to the contrary Is Mercy to our Beasts so highly prized how much more Mercy to our own souls Yea Mercy to our Nation Church People in avoyding sin against God whom by sinning we provoke against all these This is the way to destroy both Altar Sacrifice and Priests also for Ministers to comply together to offend God Mercy does well with Piety but without it is meer Cruelty But much stress is laid upon the practise of the Apostles in their condescending to Conform in some things to the Ceremonial Law and in that Decree Acts 15. To make some things necessary after they were abolished by Christ his Death This was alledged in the former Case and here again For Pauls circumcising Timothy and his own Observation of some Jewish Rites when he had preached against them and that Decree making some Ceremonials not only lawful and expedient but necessary many things may be said 1. Though those Ceremonies were dead with Christ yet at that time they were not deadly till they were decently buried and therefore were then a while Indifferent to be used or not according to occasion Paul that circumcised Tim. would not circumcise Titus in another case 2. The reason of both was one and the same viz. to avoid offence to the Jewes one while to further their Conversion to the Gentiles another while to prevent their Apostacy Now not to lay a stumbling-Block or to remove it if it be laid is a Moral Law to which Positive and Ceremonial Lawes must give place Even Ceremonials of Divine Institution much more of mens Invention 3. For that Decree making some things abolished necessary though enough hath been said already yet I shall consider further what he saith Things that are expedient are therefore good it seemed good to us and therefore necessary these necessary things whence those very things which we are afraid to do because Inexpedient may possibly be our Duty to do because expedient By a contrary Inference things that are not-expedient in Worship are not good but evil and therefore unlawful hence those things that we do when expedient we must be afraid to do when and where they are Inexpedient that is in his own Gloss sinful in Worship He addes p. 147. The Apostles knew that refusing to eat things strangled and bloud at that time especially by a Law to enjoyn it was in one Consideration no small Inconvenience yea a burden as they call it yet to prevent greater Inconveniences the Apostacy of the Jews the Interruption of the Gospel c. it seemed good yea necessary to them to do so Let the Reader observe here his old Diversion to say no worse in substituting the Word Inconvenient for Inexpedient a penal for a sinful evil and confounding the terms For true it is those Ceremonial Observations dead before this time were a burden if Imposed on Christians at that time but not sinful but the causing or occasioning of the Apostacy of the Converted Jews or the Interruption of their Conversion by the Non-observation of them for a time were not only Inconveniencies though such also but sinful Inexpediencies and therefore enjoyned for a time to prevent very great sins But I pray is the Imposition of our Ceremonies and the submission to them for any such ends Hear himself speak The ends moving thereunto were most weighty viz. The Unity of Brethren winning Soules the Propagation of the Gospel the prevention of Scandals and the danger of the Ministry by persecution Now as for our Ceremonies Imposed or the Imposition of things Inexpedient such as they are which might equally be justified upon the same grounds which yet is by the R. Cas peremptorily denied not one of these ends can justly be pretended 1. Not the Unity of Brethren for they are the greatest Causes of our former and present Divisions 2. Not winning of Soules for whom should they win Papists We see the contrary as some are hardned by our coming so near them so some upon our Complyance with them are turned Roman Catholikes 3. Not the Propagation of the Gospel they hinder it nothing more by casting out some Thousands of able Ministers as is reported 4. Not Prevention of Scandal for none that judge them M●tters of Indifferency and unnecessary as most do or they are very ill taught have any just cause to be offended at our non-observation of them while we are perswaded of their unlawfulness yea they occasion much Scandal to many truly tender Consciences 5. Not the danger of the Ministry through Persecution For as that was no End of the Apostles making that Decree they being persecuted for not observing them and preaching against them so it was the end of the False Teachers Gal. 6.12 who preached up Circumcision to avoid Persecution and indeed the rigorous pressing of them hath proved the greatest danger I must not say persecution of the Ministry since Q Mary's daies Upon all these Reasons in my poor Judgment the Rev. Casuist and his Prelates might have done far more and better Service to this Church and Nation if they had endeavoured to procure an Act for Repealing of them than for their Imposition with so much rigour But whist Lastly To this Instance of the Apostles Decree and Practise I will not plead the great Distance of the two Authorities then and now in imposing things Indifferent or Inconvenient on the Churches For I foresee what may be Answered But I shall only tell him that very Learned men are of Opinion that that Decree or Law to abstain from things offered to Idols strangled and Bloud is still obliging to Christians and then this Instance is impertinent For 1. More may be said to assert their Obligation than for any of ours or for all the Ceremonies of the Roman Church for this was one of the Lawes given to Noah before the Law revived again by Moses under the Law and now the third time ratified under the Gospel I know nothing so attested except one day in seven for a Sabbath 2. The things decreed by the Apostles seem all either equally necessary and perpetual or all equally mutable These necessary things and if mutable and arbitrary then Fornication may seem now to be a venial sin as Papists or an Indifferent thing as many Protestants repute it if we may judge by their Practise And why things unequally lawful or unlawful should be included in one Decree I should be glad to see a