Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	epistle_n	paul_n	timothy_n	2,910	5	10.4803	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85313	Presbyterial ordination vindicated. In a brief and sober discourse concerning episcopacy, as claiming greater power, and more eminent offices by divine right, then presbyterie. The arguments of the Reverend Bishop Dr Davenant in his determination for such episcopacy are modestly examined. And arguments for the validity of presbyterial ordination added. With a brief discourse concerning imposed forms of prayer, and ceremonies. Written by G.F. minister of the gospel in defence of his own ordination, being questioned, because it was performed by Presbyters.	Firmin, Giles, 1614-1697.	1660 (1660)	Wing F961; Thomason E1045_17; ESTC R208016	42,577	55

Acts 14.23 that now a single Bishop can ordain alone The Dr. forgat himself much but this power of Ordination and Jurisdiction he had need to prove to reside as he saith in illis solis else he hath lost his cause But see how much authority he opposeth what woful mischief might this soon produce to the Church 5. It may as strongly be gathered that to preach in season and out of season as do all Bishops to meditate to read to oppose hereticks c do only belong to Bishops because these Commands are given the first I am sure only to Timothy as to gather because Timothy is directed in Ordination how to act that therefore Presbyters must not impose hands Why this proper to him above all the rest 6. Consider I pray that which is added 1 Tim. 5.22 Neither be partakers of other mens sins whether it may not infer the contrary thus Timothy though other Ministers may be rash and not consider what they do in Ordination but would ordain unfit unworthy persons yet do not thou lay on hanas suddenly do not thou partake of their sins in rash Ordinations joyning with them A man may partake of the sins of Ordainers as well as of the Ordained I know nothing contrary to the Analogy of Faith nor to the Context if that sense be given Why saith the Dr. Could not the Ministers of Ephesus ordain before Timothy arrived or of Crete before Titus came thither I cannot learn but Titus went along with Paul to Crete the first time of his preaching there Answ and having laid the Foundations of Churches as Jerom saith left Titus there ut rudimenta nascentis Ecclesiae confirmaret ipse pergens ad alias Nationes c. But however 1. There is a difference between the arrival of Evangelists and the Bishops in question 2. There being abundance of enemies and errours spread about as we see it was the very reason why Paul besought Timothy to stay at Ephesus 1 Tim. 1.3 These men being so able and qualified above others might very well there be lest for a time as to oppose the heresies and errours so to look to the Ministry that none but sound and able men came into it but because these being Evangelists were far more able does it conclude the Presbyters had not the Right to ordain with them 3. Remember that Cajetan confesseth even in these Epistles Presbyter and Bishop signifie the same degree and the same office Had not the Churches been in danger Timothy had not need been there so this denies not their power The Dr. goes on to prove this sole power of Ordination from humane Authority 1. From that Saying of Jerome Excepta Ordinatione quid facit Episcopus quod Presbyter non faciat Answ Jerom speaks de facto the Bishops had engrossed this power but he does not say de jure it ought to be so for he had strongly proved the Bishop and Presbyter from several Scriptures to be the same 2. It should seem it was not a universal Custom For it was one great complaint against Chrysostom saith Bish Downam that he made Ordinations without the Presbytery And in the year 398 about which time Chrysostom flourished that fourth Council of Carthage which opposeth Bishops sole power of Ordination was held However this is but humane 2. He brings in the example of one Colythus a Presbyter of Alexandria who ordained Presbyters but their Ordination was made void and the Ordained returned into the Order of Laicks Still this is but a humane Act grounded on no Scripture Answ and yet there is somthing more to be said about this For 1. I find this Colythus is reckoned among the Hereticks by Augustine and others One of his Opinions Augustin mentions but what more he held I know not 2. He was a man infamis ambitione say the Historians and would make himself a Bishop as the Epistle of the Presbyters of Mareotis in the same Apol. of Athanas intimates whence they call him non verum sed imaginarium episcopum whence the general Council commanded ut se pro Presbytero haberat qualis antea fuisset 3. It appears in both places of Athanasins that this Colythus ordained alone there are none mentioned that joyned with him 4. That Ischyras who was ordained by Colythus and about whom there was so much trouble was not chosen of a Church for so the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 570. Now for a Heretick alone ambitiously making himself a Bishop to ordain a person not elected by a Church is not the same with five Orthodox Presbyters ordaining a Presbyter elected by a true Church The Dr. before he hath done does allow this which is so proper to Bishops to be common to Presbyters in some cases then it seems the power may be ours and whether our case be not as weighty I will consider anon The Third and last is The power of Jurisdiction over both Laick● and Presbyters and instanceth in Excommunication He will allow indeed Presbyters to be consulted with from Cyprians example he might have added the 23 Canon Concil Carthag 4. which make else Sententia Episcopi irrita but for the censure this proceeds only from Episcopal Authority Hence then Presbyters have not the power of Excommunication nor are Judges in it so he saith 2. A Bishop alone may excommunicate Presbyters For the first Presbyters have the power of Excommunication 1. Why else are they called Pastors and Rulers Heb. 13.17 and the people commanded to obey them they must feed the flock and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 5.1 So 1 Thes 5.12 They are over them in the Lord. 2. There was no Bishop in Corinth when Paul wrote to have the incestuous person cast out yet they had the power of Excommunication 1 Cor. 5.7 12 13. purge judge put away Had they done it before Paul would not have written so sharply 3. Those who have the power of the Keyes have the power of Jurisdiction but Presbyters have the power of the Keyes not denied by the Papists Sent. l. 4. dis 18. S. 14. but affirmed insomuch that Estius moves this Question Vtrum Sacerdotes soli habent potestatem excommunicandi and tels us some were of that opinion Now by soli● Estius does not mean whether they alone without a Bishop For the question he is about is this Penes quos sit excommunicandi potestas and his scope is to prove that others besides Priests have the power but for the Priests that is taken for granted that they had the power and quotes 1 Cor. 5.5 13. And Augustine l. 3. contra Epist Parmen c. 2. Aquinas he also tels us Supplem q. 22. ● 1. that some were of that opinion that the Parochial Priests might excommunicate but thinks his own opinion to be more rational that the Bishop should do it had his distinction a foundation in Scripture 4. Those that have power to take into the Church have power to cast out of the

I know God hath his hand in this and we do pray the conditions of others though we know it not while we pray our own But yet way we not then use these Forms also which are common to the whole Congregation as it were to make amends Burdened souls when indeed tentations ly heard cannot but minde themselves though none should be the mouth of the Congregation 5. The thing being in it self good and doubtlesse a man may pray graciously though he doth use a form Why may we not yield in such a point to take off prejudices from our Ministry and if they would join with us more willingly in Prayer why should this be wholly denied If you look on it as being such a thing as you will rather lay down your Ministry than use any form at all I desire we might see those grounds which may warrant you and us thereunto and we shall thank you CHAP. IV. Of Ceremonies and in particular of the Surplice I Intend but a few words We are told the Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies and this is swallowed down so readily as if there were no bones in it What they mean by the ambiguous word Ceremony and what by the Church we must learn from their practice And I pray see through all Pauls Epistles where the Church is often mentioned whether you can find such a Church as decreed our Ceremonies God having appointed his Day for Worship what time of the day is fittest for it we doubt not the Church may determine so for place and other things which of necessity must be as if there must be Wine and Bread at the Supper c. then Vessels must be whether Woodden as when they had their golden Priests or Pewter or Silver there is no determination by God the Church may here appoint but these deserve not the names of Ceremonies Were we in our purest estate in Adam had God appointed such Ordimnces these things must of necessity follow these things must be place and vessels c. but it would not then have necessarily followed we must have garments Considering sin indeed which hath brought this shame upon us we must now from sin have garments but it doth not follow properly from the Ordinance it self we must have Garments as if Wine and Bread we must have vessels to put the Wine into if sin then garments is true not properly if ordinances then garments though now it is true The only Text brought for these Ceremonies is 1 Cor. 14. ult Let all things be done decently and in Order whence thus the Argument runs If all the Worship of God for that I think the Apostle by All things properly aimes at must be performed decently in the Church then the Church may decree Ceremonies But the Consequence is denied For 1. The Worship of God may be decently performed without humane Ceremonies deny it if you can I will prove it afterwards 2. The Worship of God may be very undecently performed though humane Ceremonies be annexed we need not to prove what eyes have seen among your white Worshippers in your Cathedrals and Colledges how rudely have divers carried themselves very much unbecoming the Worship of God I am sure 3. Had Ceremonies been so necessary surely the Lord would have appointed them himself and not leave his Worship to be dressed by a vain wretched head of man opposite to him in all things He whose name is Jealous Exod. 34.14 and that in his instituted Worship would not let man have this refuge to run to while he was sinning against his Second Commandment to say I do it for decency 4. God would not suffer his Church of old to add one Ceremony Moses did as he was commanded repeated seven times over in Exod. 40. Did God take care of the pins of the Tabernacle then and will he not now of the Curtains Since Gods wisdom seeth meet to appoint none mans wisdome seeth meet to appoint what he please yea thus it must be else he is not Man-fallen i.e. Cross to God in every thing It seems God sends his worship into the Church under the New Testament naked and we must make Garments to hide the shame of it and with other Ribbands of our Inventions dress it up fine Will the great God thank you for this you potsheard man who will mend his work 5. What the Apostle meaneth by decency and Order you may see in the eleventh Chapter and this fourteenth Chapter in which Chapters you shall find Undecency and Disorder but not for want of Ceremonies 6. If from hence we may appoint Ceremonies where shall we stand Determ 20. may we not go in infinitum What hinders B. Davenant saith of these Ceremonies Si nimis excreverint in hoc graviter peccant and quotes Austin in his 119. Epist Complaining of the burden of Ceremonies preferring the Jews Ceremonies being Gods own Institutions before theirs But what saith the Ceremony-maker all these make the worship to be performed decently So this month he invents these the next month he invents others for so we are taught if we will believe the Church may alter and change the Ceremonies if she see cause yea and cast them out also if she be so true to her husband as she should be As for Apparel I think people commonly come decently enough some else will not come at all And I see not but if a Ministers civil Garments with his gown be cleanly as commonly they are in these his Civil Garments he is decent enough as to apparel Such Decency and Order as whose contrary is undecency and disorder I think is there meant and nothing more but I hope that is not want of a Surplice which I thus prove I. If different Garments appropriated to the worship of God Arg. 1 as a Surplice be requisite to the decent performance of it then neither the Apostles nor the Primitive Churches did worship God decently But they did deny it if you dare Ergo Such Garments are not requisite c. For the Apostles and those Churches will any say they had Surplices no man will I am sure About the year 261. I finde indeed Pope Stephen decreed The Garments for Divine Worship should be consecrated and used only in the Church But his Decree is not early enough by many years to reach the Primitive Churches Bishop Jewel quoting Valafredus Abbas Des Apol. 326. tells us out of him that the old Fathers ministred the Holy Communion having on their own common apparel very undecently certainly It is a wonder that holy Paul could not see his exhortation to decency did force in a Surplice which he and others should have used but older and wiser I pray let the Rule of Irenaeus before mentioned here take place II. Arg. 2 If a Surplice be requisite to the decent performing of the worship of God Then all the Congregation ought to wear Surplices The Reason is Because they are all worshippers at least pretend

Bishop to which he answered No then said this Learned Doctor to him Your Ordination and Institution is not worth a Fart Sweetly spoken Sir According to the Talent the Lord hath lent me I wrote a little in defence of Episcopal Ordination so far as to prove it not to be Antichristian But now the Controversie is come home to my own door for though in the presence of the people who elected me with their hands lifted up to manifest their Election in a day of Fasting and Prayer I was by five Ancient Godly and Grave Divines the greater part eminent in their Generation set apart to the work of the Ministry by Imposition of hands Prayer and words sutable to the Ordinance yet my Ordination is questioned by such in whose defence I wrote before thank you Brethren the ground being this they judge Ordination to be a work proper to a Bishop whom they make an Officer distinct from Presbyters having more eminent Offices and greater power belonging to them than Presbyters have How they come by this power is the question that Reverend and Learned Bishop Dr. Davenant in his 42 Determination undertakes to prove that this eminency of the Bishop is in verbo divino adumbrata delineata abipsis Apostolis constabilita and that it is an easie thing to demonstrate it The reasons why I pitch upon this man rather than another are these 1. Because he undertakes to prove this eminency of power by the holy Scriptures I wish all would hold here 2. He sums up all the Arguments that ever I heard for it 3. He performes his work gravely soberly like a Christian a Divine not filling his Papers with such scorns jeers and bitter Invectives as the Episcopal men have done who have wrote of late that a sober man hath scarce patience to read them For my part I have bestowed but very little time in this controversie neither have I so much as seen those who have written most largely and elaborately about it as Blondel Salmatius nor others Mr. Baxter came to my hand when I had almost done so that I have not read him through but cast my eye here and there upon him I wish some body would answer him as soberly as he writes but I think he will never be answered Leaving the Reader to such able men for fuller satisfaction I shall communicate my meditations so far I hope as to prove our Ordination by Pretbyters to be valid holding weight in Gods Balance For those Episcopal men who have written of late with such scorn bitterness and confidence the strongest Arguments I find are these 1. Thus it hath been for fifteen hundred years before Calvin rose the Churches had ever Bishops name the Church that had not Thus these Brethren think à facto ad jus valet consequentia undeniably 2. The Fathers who lived in the Primitive times tell us the Apostles did constitute Bishops in several Cities as Timothy and Titus c. This is all their strength But in sober words I beseech you What kind of Bishops were fifteen hundred years ago if you begin to reckon from the Apostles times Bishops distinct from Presbyters in Power and Offices and that by Divine right Verily you fall short in proving it Or were they such Bishops that extended their power for forty miles space or more over many hundred Presbyters and over many hundred thousand of persons whom they never saw I beseech you name us such Bishops in the three or four first Centuries else you know what Bishops do not answer I have read in a Learned Author that in Augustines time there were in one Province under Carthage of the Catholicks and Donatists above nine hundred Bishops the Author sums up how many of each surely these Bishops did not extend their power much further than some great Parishes in some Countreys * Suppose Lancashire or some such Towns as Ipswich Bristol Colchester c. If you will have such Bishops and give them no more power than Christ hath given them for Order sake I will yield to them and give them the Honour and if more maintenance be conferred upon them by the King than other Presbyters who joyn with them I shall be very willing and glad of it So that I am not against an Imparity in honour nor maintenance neither would I be in power and office if Christ had given more to them than others As to the Second I do honour the Fathers in their places 1. Scripture 2. Sound Reason 3. Fathers or Antiquity But yet I cannot yield that St. Paul and Ignatius St. Peter and Chrysostome should be of equal authority I am sure you make them but very little different if any thing less as will appear after I am not a man versed in the Fathers as others are yet some of them the most ancient I have read and in them I find so many strange humane mixtures in the Worship of God that I cannot yield to this consequence The Fathers say it or did it ergo It is lawful Much less in this controversie finding what the holy Ghost hath foretold of an Antichrist that should arise whom out Godly Bishops before and Learned Whitaker with others have thought and proved to be the Bishop of Rome though Dr. Hammond and our latter Episcopal Divines will not have it so We fear we fear c. What a pitiful interpretation hath D. Hum. made of 2 Thes 2. and so of several places of the Revelation to the end the Bishop of Rome might be spared But following worthy Bishops and the Learned and holy Divines in their judgment of that Bishop of Rome I am not so much carried with the sayings not practises of these ancient Bishops in this point for there must be some preparation made to his rising into that usurped Chair he came not there persaltum To these Divines let me propound these questions 1. Quest. Whether are not the Holy Scriptures the perfect and only Rule for our Faith and Manners Are they not able to Make a man of God a Minister perfect 2 Tim. 3 17. If they be I beseech you let us give more honour to them in these Controversies 2. Were those Fathers and Churches you so much mention so guided that they could not or did not erre Were not the holy Scriptures a Rule to them as well as to us Erre they did in some points I am sure 3. Will the Lord judge us at that great day by these Fathers Will it be a sufficient answer to give the Lord if we sin in setting up Humane Inventions in his Worship to say Lord thus the Fathers said thus they did Dare you say it is sufficient to excuse us I beseech you then Reverend Brethren Why do you press us so much with these men and with Antiquities and not stick to pure Antiquity the holy Scriptures Blessed Augustine whom I so much honour and love of all the Fathers knew how to value Cyprian enough Aug. tom 7.

Church Are the Keyes given to Pastors to turn them but one way Ridiculous 5. How does this agree with Jerom before quoted excepta Ordinatione c. It seems Jurisdiction was not excepted when they had engrossed Ordination Presbyters had that power and at first the Churches were governed by the common advice of the Presbyters thus he Tit. 1. 6. The Priests had that power not only to discern between Lepers and Lepers but as they could judge they could separate them from the Camp of Israel which did shadow out our excommunication 7. It seems very strange that when a Pastor who hath taught it may be baptized a person and now fallen into sin the Church and he have dealt with that person according to rule that now the Church must go to a Bishop to excommunicate this person to whom yet he never bare relation How came this Bishop to have power over this Church which he never saw it may be But let Dr. Fulks speak It is manifest that the Authority of binding and loosing committing and retaining pertaineth generally to all the Apostles alike and to every Pastor in his Cure Answ to Rhem. 2 Cor. 2. Bishop Jewel Reply p. 178. quotes Basil speaking thus Christ appointed Peter to be the Pastor of the Church after him and so consequently gave the same power unto all Pastots and Doctors A Token whereof is this that all Pastors do equally both bind and loose as well as he So Basil 8. In such Cities as Ephesus c. where the Church was one and divers Elders in common governed that Church let the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pronounce the sentence of excommunication I deny it not For his Proofs because Timothy must charge some that they teach no other Doctrine 1 Tim. 1.3 So Tit. 1.11 Mouths must be stopped But I beseech you what is there in this more than Presbyters might do who govern the Church in common that stopping may be meant partly if not chiefly there by Argument convince gainsayers v. 9. I must confess I cannot see the Logick of this Argument though it doth prove Jurisdiction does it prove Presbyters have not the power I thought he would have quoted 1 Tim. 5.19 But because he doth not I let it alone His next is the Angel of Pergamus and Thiatira blamed Rev. 2. for suffering of Jezebel c. 1. Answ Does this exclude the other Presbyters What mean those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 24. But to you I say If the King writes to the Speaker and reproves somthing amiss or complains somthing is not done does it lay the blame on him only and not on the Members of the House as well 2. Suppose these Angels had been guilty of sins for which themselves had deserved excommunication who should have cast them out Are they Lords Paramount above all Christs Laws in his Church I know not but the other Presbyters with the consent of the Churches obeying their Presbyters might have cast these Angels out or no way that I know of The Scriptures know no Archbishops though the Papists and Dr. Hammond do But to have one Bishop alone excommunicate Presbyters this would make as brave work as we have known before the wars begun Let the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Presbyters excommunicate a Presbyter the Church consenting Thus far the Dr. goeth and then undertakes to answer our Arguments but because I see nothing is there said which I have not spoken to before and I am loath to exceed in this discourse I shall only take notice of what he saith in his Answer to the third Objection where he tels us the necessity of Bishops in these respects 1. To ordain Ministers lest the Evangelical Ministry should fail Cannot this evil be prevented by Presbyters as well Answ Are not divers thousands of Presbyters in England more likely to keep up a succession of Ministers in England than 24 Bishops of whom how few now were left Had the succession of Ministers depended upon them in what a sad case had the Church been 2. For the Governing of Presbyters lest by their impure manners heresies and schismes they should destroy the Church And are not Bishops equally liable to these Answ How shall the Church now be saved May we not read with our eyes in Histories and hear with our ears what Bishops have been Have we not seen the excellency of this Government in England as to the impure manners of Ministers being corrected Is it not a Cordolium to the godly in England to have so many who were justly cast out for scandal by the Parliament though some were wronged I know and do as much detest their ejectment to return again not one whit purged that we can fee 2. For Heresie and schism 1. We know what Bellarmine saith Certe Heresiarchae ferè omnes aut Episcopi aut Presbyteri fuerunt and from these Heresies rise Factions among the people saith he so that Bishops are as deep in the mire for heresie and causing schism as the Presbyters Hence he will have a Pope but that Monarchical Government hath not cured Schism we know much less Heresie 2. As for Heresie and Schism both name any National Church under Heaven more free from them than the Church of Scotland before these troubles began and yet there Bishops are not approved of 3. For Schism read but the life of Constantine and there see whether Bishops were not guilty of Schism and the Concil Tolata 1. was called upon some Schism among the Bishops 4. We say that Rome is guilty of the Schism between us and them because Rome gave the cause I leave the Reader to enquire who gave the first cause of the Schisms now in England 5. Why then did not Paul appoint a Bishop in Corinth when Schism was there both in his time and Clemens his time but Clemens mentions none Jerom saith indeed that upon these Schisms Bishops were set up afterwards I write not his known word posted But it is much that these ends of a Bishop which are so great for the good of the Church and it seems can be performed by none but him should not be foreseen by Christ at first and so this Bishop at first appointed but the ordinary main Stud of Christs House should be forgot to be set up till many years after the House was up Sure this means was none of his and so it proves 6. How can the Bishop be a fit means to cure Schism or prevent it I know no way but this that Presbyters must resign all their judgments up to his Chair and he infallibly determine which is right or wrong and so all must yield to his sentence This were brave indeed 7. Let our King withdraw his tender and healing hand and his power from assisting Bishops let us now see how the Bishops will shew forth that wonderful vertue of Episcopacy in healing our Schisms I doubt our King who is as Constantine said of himself the Bishop extra