Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	canon_n	council_n	nice_a	2,852	5	10.4936	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A39994	The differences of the time, in three dialogues the first, anent episcopacy, the second, anent the obligation of the covenants against episcopacy, the third, anent separation : intended for the quieting the minds of people, and settling them in more peace and unity.	Forrester, David, fl. 1679.	1679 (1679)	Wing F1589; ESTC R10780	86,473	238

but in himself 2. The Apostle in that Chapter is clearly pressing the Corinthians to Unity from the consideration that Christians are all one body and therefore the meanest Gifts must no more be despised than the meanest members of our body and Schism must be avoided vers 25. 3. Suppone coveting the best Gifts were spoken to Christians in your sense yet it must be understood with due Limitations such as that we covet them in an orderly way and with respect to the Churches peace and such like And so many general directions in the Word are to be understood with necessary cautions as your self can not deney Edification indeed is much to be set by yet let none imagine that it is warrantable for them to seek it in a way that marrs the Churches peace breeds in people a neglect and despising of their own Ministers who are set over them in the Lord and whom they are commanded to honour and reverence that takes away the distinction of Parochs and of one mans labours from another as we would shun confusion And that is contrary to laudable Canons and Acts of the Church You know we must not do evil that good may come of it Rom. 3.8 D. What Canons or Acts of the Church are against my leaving my own Paroch Minister and going to another by whom I think I get more good I. I might produce sundry ancient Canons commanding Ministers not to excise their Pastoral Office within another's charge without leave and that they receive not any man of another Paroch to Divine Service who neglects his own Pastor The First Council of Nice Can. 16. The second Council of Carthage Can. 11. and Council 3. Can. 20. Concilium Nannetense cap. 1. In which Council Presbyters or Ministers are commanded that at their entry to Divine Service they ask the people if there be any present of anothers Congregation who despising his own Minister desires to joyn with them and if any such be found that forthwith he be thrust out of the Church And again in that same Council that no minister reset one that belongs to anothers charge unless he be on a journey or upon some other such relevant ground that keeps him from attending in his own congregation for the time But passing these there is an act of the General Assembly of this same Church of Scotland Anno 1647. To be found among the printed Acts of it Intituled Act against such as withdraw themselves from the publick Worship in their own Congregation And it is express in discharging all Members of this Kirk from withdrawing from their own Congregation usuallys except in urgent cases made known unto and approven by the Presbytrie And if any contraveen it 's recommended first to the Minister to whom such persons resort to deal with them to stay at home in their own Paroch And then to the Minister and Session of the Paroch they belong to and if need be to cite them to the Presbytrie c. Now I suppose you will not decline the Authority of that Assembly nor think the General Assembly of this Church were such enemies to edification as to have deprived Christians of this way of attaining it if they might have allowed it to them without manifest hazard of Schism You may think they were competent enough to judge in such a case yea that Act was purposely conceived to curb the beginnings of Separation and Schism which at that time began to appear in this Church D. If Ministers had all alike abilities and gifts for edification I could say the less against that Act but it is not so for some Ministers excell others very far in an edifying gift I. Yet you see what the Assemblies mind was in this matter Now to what you say of an edifying Gift I wish many of you mistake it not if a man have a stentorian voice or a ton can speak loud and boldly and can rail upon the Civil Powers and cry down Bishops and Curats O that is an edifying man It feareth me many of you who are pretenders high enough to knowledge and piety can little judge of mens Gifts when all is done and I make no doubt oft times leaves better at home then what ye go to But passing this I offer to your serious consideration these few things anent the diverse measures of Ministerial Gifts and Edification by them 1. The Lord hath not given to all Ministers alike measure of Gifts but the Spirit distributes in what measure he pleaseth 1 Cor. 12. and therefore to undervalue men of low Gifts is to quarrel with the Almighty 2. Though all have not received alike measure we must not therefore think the meanest Gifts are useless 1 Cor. 12. vers 21.25 3. The best Gifts can not of themselves work on hearts and consciences it 's only the Spirit can do this by what means pleaseteh him weak or strong 1 Cor. 3. vers 6 7. And therefore peoples too much magnifying of Cifts is but an idolizing of men and giving Gods due to the Creature this seems to have been the fault of the Corinthians 1 Cor. chap. 1. and chap. 3. The learned Hieronimus Zauchius in the Epistle Dedicatory to the seventh Tom. of his Works tells that when first he left Italy he came to Geneve and there observing a French man who used always to hear Calvin and none else he asked him his reason why he did not hear Viretus as occasion served he answered that if Paul were to come and preach at Geneve Ego relicto Paulo audirem Calvinum i. e. he would leave Paul and go hear Calvin which answer amazed Zauchius and saith that he heard him cum summa animi offensione i. e. Zauchius was much troubled and offended at his answer and observeth from it how dangerous it is for people to admire any Minister too much and make gods of them as he saith and to despise others 4. The Lord useth oft-times to do more good by men of weak Gifts than by greater Christ was very far beyond Peter in Gifts for he received not the Spirit in measure and his enemies did bear him witness that never man spake like him And in another place They wondered at the gracious words that proceeded out of his mouth And yet Act. 2. Peter a poor sinful man and very weakly gifted in comparison of Christ at one Sermon converteth three thousand We read no where of the like success of Christs Ministry but we hear him oft complaining of smal success as was before prophesied Isai 49. vers 4. and Chap 53. vers 1 2 3. c. And in the Gospel frequently upbraiding these to whom he had preached because of their unbelief Math. 11. vers 20 21 22 23. c. Chap. 13. vers 14 15. c. Chap. 23. vers 37. John 5. vers 40. and in other places And in that famous Sermon he had on the Mount Mat. 5.6 7. It 's said Chap. vers 28. that when he had ended his

must confess that ordinary and inferior Officers might ordain a Supe●ior cxtraordinary Officer which is absurd D. Have you any proof more for bishops out of the New Testament I. The Angels of the seven Churches Rev. chap. 2. and 3. were Bishops for it is undenyable there were many Ministers for example at Ephesus Act. 20.27 28. Yet Revel 2. When that Church is written to which was long after Pauls exhortation Act. 20. and the Church was on the growing hand yet I say we find but one Angel among all these Ministers and he alone spoken to and commended for what was praise-worthy in that Church and blam'd for what was faulty as he who had the chief hand in that Churches affairs So may be said of the rest the Epistle always directed to the Angel and he commended for what was right and discommended for what was wrong seing by his place and authority he ought to have seen to the preventing or reforming of those things D. The word Angel Rev. 2. and 3. denoteth not one single person but is taken collectively for all the Ministers that were in each of these Churches I. I know that is the answer usually given but have oft wondered at it No doubt this Scripture pincheth sore when ye flee to such a shift Scultetus a learned Protestant in his observations upon Titus hath these words doctissimi quique interpretes per septem ecclesiarum angelos intenpretantur septem ecclesiarum Episcopos neque enim aliter possunt vim nisi textui facere velint that is the most learned Interpreters all expound the Angels of the seven Churches to be the Bishops of those Churches neither can they expound the words otherwise unless they offer violence to the text D. But Rev. 2.24 Christ by John speaks to moe then one for it is in the plural number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vobis Hence it is clear to me that by the Angel of that Church he meant all the ministers I. Will you be content to stand to Beza's exposition of the place he says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to you the President and to the company of ministers and to the rest of the people You see the word Angel in his opinion is still to be taken for a single person and that in this place moe then the Angel are spoken unto This is as some think an Apostrophe which is an ordinary Figure in speech when the speaker turns his discourse to some other than he had at first been speaking to but that which I think should put it out of question is the Light we have from antiquity declaring to us that these Angels were single persons and condescending upon some of their Names for I suppose the practise opinions and assertions of such as followed hard after these Angels should by any rational man be acquiesced in as a sufficient commentary on this and the like Scriptures that speak of Church Governours D. Well What say they I. I told you before that Polycrates who was Bishop of Ephesus and born near to the Apostles times speaks of seven of his predecessors who had been Bishops there before him and Leontius Bishop of Magnesia in the council of Chalcedon speaks of twenty seven Bishops of Ephesus successively from Timothy We find the Bishops of those seven Churches of Asia present at the first Council of Nice and designed by their several Churches Ephesus Smyrna c. and subscribing the Acts of the Council with the rest of the Bishops Jerome de Scriptoribus Ecclesias tells us that Polycarp who had been John's disciple was by him made Bishop of Smyrna so Eusebius lib. 3. cap. 32. So Tertullian praescrip cap. 23. And Iraeneus lib. 3. cap. 3. contra Valentin sayes Polycarp was by John ordained Bishop of Smyrna and that he saw Polycarp when he himself was a child for says he Polycarp lived long Now should not these testimonies think you have weight with any man that 's free of prejudice And further among Ignatius his Epistles who was contemporary with the Apostle John we find one written to this Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna who is thought to be the very same Angel to whom John writeth Rev. 2. D. I think indeed much of these testimonies especially of that of Irenaeus who says he saw Polycarp and so knew the better that he was a Bishop And I have heard that Irenaeus himself was a Bishop too but for Ignatius his testimony I am not much moved with it because I hear say that these Epistles of his are forged and counterfit I. Of these Epistles we may have occasion to speak afterward but if you will be at the pains to see what the most part by far and with all the most learned of Protestant Writers and Interpreters think of these Angels you shall find Beza Diodat Marlorat Bullinger Gualter Piscator Sibelius Pareus Aretius Fulk Our own Countreyman Napier of Marchistoun Cartwright the learned Reynolds in his conference with Hart yea and Blondel in the preface to his Apologia pro sententia Hieronymi all expounding the Angel in each of these Churches to be a single person So true is it what I told you Scultetus observes doctissimi quique interpretes per septem Ecclesiarum Angelos interpretantur septem Ecclesiarum Episcopos D. Beza and may be others of these Divines though they interpret the Angel to be a single person yet they never thought that person to be a Bishop but meerly a Moderator and President among the rest of his brethren I. He could be no less than bishop because the Epistle is still directed to him though it 's true the whole Church be concerned in what is written yet I say the Angel is chiefly commended or discommended according as matters were right or wrong which clearly imports that he had the chief hand in business and so he chiefly capable of what Christ by John says to him And the power we saw before in Timothy and Titus above inferiour Ministers may oblige us to think no less can be allowed to the Angels And further most of the Divines I have named do say that these Angels were Episcopi Bishops And Beza himself de Minist Grad doth in effect cap. 13. give to the Angels an Episcopal power for he saith Horum authoritas in Ecclesiae regimine fuit eminentior that is their authority in governing the Church was more eminent than the rest's I might also shew you how Mr. Mede is misunderstood as if in his Key of the Revelation he did teach that the word Angel is commonly through the Revelation taken collectively that is not to signifie one person you may see the contrary in his Key Apocal. 9.14 and 14.6 7. And he sayeth the twenty four Elders about the Throne do represent the Bishops and Prelats of the Churches You may also see Brightman on cap. 7 8. and ordinarily through the Revelation he expounds the word Angel of some single person I shall produce one place more from the New Testament

make Bishops of later date than the Apostles Yet doth he not with all say that there was a necessity of bringing Bishops into the Church that thereby Schism might be put out and kept out And that this was done by a Decree through the whole Christian World And 3. Did he not approve of Episcopacy from it's first Institution down to his own time as still necessary for preserving Unity and Peace in the Church and submitteth to it Now would ye all thus far go along with Jerome our contests about Bishops and their first rise might soon cease Mr. Durham on Revel pag. 227. answering the objection that all antiquity did condemn Aerius because he took away all distinction betwixt Bishop and Presbyter answers that Aerius was condemned not simply as maintaining any thing contrary to truth in this but as imprudently brangling the order than established in the Church to the hazard of their Union Now setting aside the dispute anent the antiquity of Bishops Have not we in this Land been and are not you and many others as chargeable with this imprudence as ever Aerius was for ye would take away the difference betwixt Bishop and Presbyter to the hazarding of Peace and Union and so brangles that order which under Episcopacy hath been maintained in the Church for many Centuries of years D. You say Episcopacy is necessary for preserving the Church in unity and keeping out of Schism but I think not so or that ever God did appoint it for this end for the Holy Ghost would never ordain that for a remedy which could not reach the end but became a Stirup for the Pope to get into his Sadle for if there be a necessity of setting up one Bishop over many Presbyters for preventing Schism there is the same necessity of setting one Arch-bishop over many Bishops and one Patriarch over many Arch-bishops and one Pope over all unless you imagine there is hazard of Schism only among Presbyters and not among Bishops and Arch-bishops I. When you say you think not Episcopacy necessary to keep out Schism in this you forsake Jerome who makes the taking away and preventing of schism the reason of bringing Episcopacy into the Church Also you forsake Calvine who Institut lib. 4. cap. 4. num 2. Sayeth Bishops were set over Presbyters ne ex aequalitate dissidia ut fieri solet orerentur that is lest discords should arise from equality as is usual to be As for the setting up of Arch-bishops and Patriarchs it is a thing anciently practised in the Church as antiquity sheweth and something of this I hinted to you before from Titus and his Successors supposed to be Arch-bishops in Crete And from Ignatius who calleth himself Bishop of Syria c. And the first Council of Nice speaking of Patriarchs call their Precedency Mos antiquus Can. 6. This was found to contribute to the Churches Unity and Calvine expresly approves of it Institut lib. 4. Cap. 4. Sect. 4. Quod autem singulae provinciae unum habebant inter Episcopos Archiepiscopum quod item in Nicaena Synodo constituti sunt Patriarchae qui essent ordine dignitate Archiepiscopis superiores id ad disciplinae conservationem pertinebat i. e. That every Province had an Arch-bishop over Bishops and that the Council of Nice did approve of Patriarchs over Arch-bishops was a thing that belonged to the preservation of Discipline And in that same place Calvin saith that although he liketh not the word Hierarchy yet if we look upon the thing it self saith he that is Church-government by Bishops Arch-bishops and Patriarchs Reperiemus veteres Episcopos non aliam regendi Ecclesiae formam voluisse fingere ab ea quam dominus verbo suo praescripsi● i. e. We shall find those ancient Bishops had no thought of seigning any other form of Government from that which the Lord prescribed in his Word And further that for order's sake there was one Patriarch above the rest of the Patriarchs with a certain kind of Priority who was called Episcopus Primae Sedis Concil Carthag 3. can 26. and is a thing granted by Protestant Writers Among others see Mysterium Iniquitatis Philippi Mornaei pag. 203. 204. c. and Bucer inter Scripta Anglicana pag. 583. and all this was done to maintain order You say there is no less hazard of Schism among Bishops and Arch-bishops c. than among meer Presbyters I deny not but there may be and have been Schisms and clashings among Bishops yet I say it 's a Government not so liable to this inconvenience as a meer parity is No Government is so exempted but it may be abused by corrupt men yet one form may be better in it self than another and more conducing to the ends of Government Aristocratie may be abused yet it hath in it more of the nature of Government than a meer confused Democratie So Episcopacy is the best Government although the Pope hath abused it Certainly the best and most useful things in the World may be abused through the corruptions of men are not the Scriptures of God perverted by Hereticks and must the Scriptures be therefore cryed down Monarchy is oft through the default of men turned into tyrrany must all Monarchy therefore be cryed down Bucer de vi usu mnisterij cap. de disciplina Cleric inter scripta Anglicana pag. 583. speaking of the Bishop of Rome abusing his primacy saith Episcopacy must not therefore be abolished quia saith he omnino necesse est ut singuli clerici suos habeant custodes procuratores instauranda est Episcoporum authoritas D. But let us return to the Fathers Mr. Durham on Revel pag. 225. saith not only Jerom was of Aerius his mind about the equality of Presbyter and Bishop but also some other Fathers as Augustine Ambrose Chrysostome c. I. Mr. Durham brings this as Medina's assertion as he is cited by Bellarmine to which I say 1. Suppose these Fathers to be of Jerom's opinion no great prejudice will hereby ensue to Bishops as have already shewed 2. It 's strang●… Mr. Durham should upon any's testimony cite Augustine as being of Aerius his judgement anent Episcopacy since he knew very well that Augustine directly makes Aerius herein to be erroneous and inrolleth him in his Catalogue of Hereticks even for his judgement in this Haeresi 53. Dicebat etiam Presbyterum ab Episcopo nulla differentia debere discerni i. e. Aerius also said there ought to be no difference betwixt Presbyter and Bishop 3. Ambrose and Chrysostome whose words are cited by Mr. Durham are mistaken for their Testimonies will not come up the length intended Ambrose or one Hilary as it's thought saith Presbyteri Episcopi una est ordinatio uterque enim sacerdos est sed Episcopus primus est ut omnis Episcopus Presbyter sit non tamen omnis Presbyter Episcopus ille enim Episcopus est qui inter Presbyteros primus est i. e. both a Presbyter and