Selected quad for the lemma: church_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A50212
|
The judgment of several eminent divines of the congregational vvay concerning a pastors power occasionally to exert ministerial acts in another church besides that which is his own particular flock.
|
Mather, Increase, 1639-1723.
|
1692
(1692)
|
Wing M1223; ESTC R41439
|
6,067
|
16
|
Ministerial Acts in other Congregations besides those where they are fixed See Mr. Foxes Martyrol Vol. 1. p. 57. 4. Eminent Men amongst those of the Congregational way have been for the Affirmative in the Question before us Indeed Rigid Separatists Mr. Canne and such like Brownists have stiffly maintained that a Pastor may not Exert an Official Act except among his own peculiar Flock But they that are truly Congregational have declared themselves to be otherwise perswaded That the First Elders in New-England were of this Judgment I conclude from their Platform of Discipline chap. 15. Sect. 4. Their words are these The Members of one Church occasionally coming unto another we willingly admit them to partake of the Lords Table it being the Seal of our Communion not only with Christ nor only with Members of our own Church but also with all the Churches of the Saints in which regard we refuse not to Baptize their Children presented to us if either their own Minister be Absent or such a fruit of Holy Fellowship be desired with us In like case such Churches as are furnished with more Ministers than one do willingly afford one of their own Ministers to supply the place of an absent or sick Minister of another Church for a needful Season That Platform of Church Discipline was in a peculiar manner the Composure of the Reverend Mr. Richard Mather the Famous Teacher of the Church at Dorchester in New England That he was for the Affirmative in the Question before us is manifest from what yet remains and is to be seen written with his own Hand The Renowned Mr. Thomas Hooker of Hartford in New-England desired that some of the Ministers in the Massachusetts-Bay and particularly Mr. Mather would communicate to him their Apprehensions concerning this Position viz. The Entreaty of one Congregation does not give an Officer of another Congregation Power of Office to Administer Seals to their Assembly Mr. Mathers Answer in a Letter Dated Nov. 6. 1645. was in the following words 1. It seems an Officer of a Church may lawfully Dispense Seals in another Church at their Entreaty and Request The Reason is because there is a Communion between Churches as Sisters by vertue of which they are to take care and do for one another as each ones occasion and necessity may require Cant. 8.8 We have a Little Sister and she has no Breasts what shall we do for her Now if Churches must do Offices of Love and Helpfulness to one another as each ones Occasions shall need they must also afford their Help in this particular of Lending their Officers to Minister the Seals in their Assemblies This particular will follow from the General aforementioned unless there be some particular Command from God prohibiting the same 2. By this Communion of Churches it is lawful for a Pastor upon the Request of a Member of another Church to Administer the Seals to that Member being present when the Pastor is Administring to his own Church And if this be lawful why not the other also If Christians may hold Communion one with another in the Works and Duties of each others Members Receiving the Sacraments why not also in the Works and Duties of each others Ministers Dispensing the same For as the Minister stands in special Relation to his own Church as a Minister so a Member stands in special Relation to his own Church as a Member If therefore the Member may be received into Communion in another Church for a time or for one Act as a Member and yet his Memberly Relation to his own Church not be violated thereby it seems as rational also that a Minister of one Church may in like sort be received into Communion in another Church for a time or for one Act as a Minister and yet his Ministerial or Pastoral Relation to his own Church not be violated thereby for it is hard to conceive how such an act of the Minister should be prejudicial to his Relation to his own Church as a Minister any more than the Act of the Member be prejudicial to his Relation as a Member Besides in the one case a Minister doth what he doth only at the Request of one Member but in other there is the Request of the whole Church And if the one may be done by the Request of one which is the less why not the other at the Request of the whole Church and which is greater If it be say'd in the one Case a Ministers own Church is present but not in the other The Answer is 1. That the Members Church had as much need to be present when the Member doth the Duty of a Member in Receiving the Seals as the Ministers Church be present when he does the Ministers Duty in Dispensing the same If therefore a Member may do an Act and Work of a Member in the absence of the Church whereto he belongs why may not the Minister also do an Act and Work of his Office as a Minister in the absence of that Church whereto he most peculiarly is a Minister I do not yet perceive how the presence of the Ministers Church is requisite in the one case any more than the presence of the Church in the other 2. I want a good Reason for this that this Act of the Minister to Members of another Church should be lawful in his own Churches presence and unlawful in their absence If consent be requisite that may be had though they be not corporally present at all But if the thing be unlawful in his Churches absence it is not for ought I know his Churches presence that will warrant or excuse him therein no though his Church were all present and though the Act he now doth to others be to no more but only to one Member of another Church Thus Mr. Mather in his Letter to Mr. Hooker Mr. Norton who was many Years an Eminent Teacher of the Church in Ipswich and after that at Boston his Answer to Apollonius is by Hornbeck and Others Esteemed the most Learned Book that has been Published in defence of Congregational Principles Now in that Book Pag. 80. 81 82. he affirms that tho' a Pastor cannot Authoritatively perform the Ministerial Acts of his Office in another Church as he may in his own nevertheless that Charitatively he may do it Provided that the Exercise thereof be duely qualified that is to say that the Church where he does Minister shall request him to perform Ministerial Acts among them and that the Church be necessitated to that request which is the case saith he of an Inorganick Church with respect to the Administring of Sacraments The exercise of Ministerial Power thus qualifyed is no way repugnant to the Liberty or Summity of a particular Church Mr. Thomas Shepard the first Pastor of the Church at Cambridge in New England and Mr. John Allyn Pastor of the Church at Dedham in their defence of the Nine Positions Printed in the Year 1648 in answer to Mr. Ball
THE Judgment Of Several Eminent Divines OF THE Congregational VVay Concerning A PASTORS POWER Occasionally to Exert Ministerial ACTS in another CHURCH besides that which is His Own Particular FLOCK Boston Printed by Benjamin Hurris and are to be Sold by Richard Wilkins 1692. WE have carefully perused the following Discourse and Judg it to be not only agreeable to true Congregational Principles but also needful for the Information and sufficient for the Conviction of such Churches as have been or may be for any considerable time without the advantage of a Setled Minister among them that they may not be unnecessarily deprived of the Enjoyment of those Ordinances the Dispensation whereof is so much to be desired we do therefore Recommend it to the serious Consideration of such as Love Zions Prosperity James Allen. Samuel Willard Michael Wigglesworth Cotton Mather Nehemiah Walter QUESTION WHether the Pastor of a particular Congregation may at the Desire of another Church Exercise Ministerial Acts and in special Dispense the Seals to them that are not his peculiar Charge ANSWER I Incline to the Affirmative for 1. The Ministerial Power which a Pastor has received from the Lord Christ is not so confined to his particular Flock as that He shall cease to be a Minister when he does Act in the Name of the Lord elsewhere I cannot in this concur with the Opinion of the Refuter of Dr. Downham's Sermon and some others that a Pastor of a Church Preaching in another Congregation Acts only as a Gifted Brother and not as a Minister of the Lord. I am as to this particular fully of the same Judgment with the Learned Doctor John Owen in his Judicious Treatise concerning a Gospel Church p. 100 101. where he has these words Altho' we have no concernment in the Figment of an indelible Character accompanying Sacred Orders yet we do not think the Pastoral Office is such a thing as a man must leave behind him every time he goeth from Home For my own part if I did not think my self bound to Preach as a Minister Authorized in all places and on all occasions when I am called thereunto I think I should never Preach more in this World Thus speaks our Famous Owen A Pastor does Preach as a Minister and Bless in the Name of the Lord as a Minister of His wherever he may be occasionally called thereto And if he may by vertue of his Office Exert these Ministerial Acts of Preaching and Blessing in other Congregations why may He not Dispense the Seals sure he may unless he performs the other Acts not as an Officer but as a Brother only It is true A Pastor has not that Rule Authority in another Church which the Lord Jesus has given to him over that Flock to which he is specially related Nevertheless when another Church does desire him he has Potestas precaria Power conferred on him for that Time and that Act. Whatever the Rule requires as necessary in order to Dispensing the Seals is here to be seen E. G. The Dispenser must be set apart to act in the Name of the Lord in Holy Administrations and he must by a Church of Christ be Chosen to Administer to them all which is true concerning the Pastor of whom the Question is 2. If the Pastor of a Church may Administer the Sacrament to the Members of another Congregation and so to the whole Church in case they shall come to the Church whereof he is Pastor and desire such occasional Communion He may upon as good Grounds go to the Town where the other Church dwelleth and at their Request Minister to them For neither the Place nor the Presence of his own Flock can make that which is in it self contrary to the Rule of the Word become a regular Act. This Argument seems not easy to be answered and therefore acute Mr. Hooker instead of solving it does plainly cut it in pieces For in his Survey of Church Discipline which is an elaborate and accurate Piece Part 2d pag. 65. in answer to that Allegation That Members of one Congregation may partake of the Sacrament in another and then they Receive it from one who is not their Pastor He replies thus It has been a course which I have ever questioned and against it many years have alledged many Arguments and therefore could readily ease my self of the Argument by professing the Course unwarrantable c. But now there are few or none amongst us who scruple the Lawfulness of admitting Members of other Churches to their Communion It uses to be said they are Transient Members of the Church where they Partake And why may it not with as good reason be affirmed that the Minister who Dispenseth the Seals in another Congregation is a Transient Pastor for ought that I can discern to the contrary there is as much Ground in the Scripture for Transient Officers as there is for Transient Members Whereas it is objected that the Pastor of another Church has no Authority by his Office to require them of another Church to Receive the Sacrament as he may those of his own Flock It may be replyed he has as much Power to do that as he has to Enjoyn one of another Congregation occasionally to receive where he is not a Member The Request of the Persons concerned doth sufficiently Empower him pro hac vice to Exert a Ministerial Act towards them 3. In the primitive and pure Times of the Christian Church not only the Apostles but ordinary Pastors of Churches did occasionally Dispense the Seals in other Churches besides those wherein they were fixed It is the Opinion of very Learned Men that Polycarp was the Angel of the Church in Smyrna unto whom the Lord Jesus directed that Epistle in Revolations chap. 2. So Paraeus Estius Tirinus Menâ—chius c. He was the Apostle Johns Scholar And as Hierom Eusebius and other Ecclesiastick Writers Testify was by the Apostles themselves Ordained the Pastor of that Church This Holy Minister is not as most Officers in the Seven Asiatick Churches were blamed or reproved for any Fault Yet did the Pastor of that Church if Polycarp was he occasionally Administer the Lords Supper to the Christians in Rome where there was in those Days a pure and a true Church There was some Difference in Opinion between Anicetas the Pastor of the Church in Rome and Polycarp Pastor of the Church at Smyrna who undertook a long Journey from Smyrna to Rome to Assist in composing the Differences about small matters which in those early days threatned the Churches Anicetas only to Testify his Love and Honour to Polycarp requested him to Administer the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to that Church where not Polycarp but Anicetas was the Pastor Jrenaeus Lib. 3. cap. 1. says that Polycarp always taught the Churches to observe those things which he Learned from the Apostles and nothing else If that be so were the Apostles here they would allow Pastors occasionally to Exercise