Selected quad for the lemma: city_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
city_n	bishop_n	church_n	ordain_v	4,727	4	9.0001	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26279	Aaron's rod blossoming, or, The orthodox government of the Church of England by bishops, presbiters, and deacons, asserted from the practice of the apostles, the testimony of councils, synods, fathers and doctors, from the apostles time to this day ...		1680 (1680)	Wing A43; ESTC R22486	17,618	40

institute he made Timothy and Titus Episcopos Cleri gregis quoad regimen in ecclesia Bishops of the Clergy and their Flocks and to have Ecclesiastical Government over them whereas before they were but Presbyters or Disciples brought up under him by this Institution were other Presbyters made subordinate to them in governing and teaching the Church which to prove I thus argue He that is ordained and so ordained that he hath power constituere presbiteros per civitates to ordain Presby ters in every City is greater than those who have no such power in their Cities and Churches and they who may correct what is defective are superior to those for whom matters defective are corrected but Timothy and Titus had such power given them and did so correct things defective and none of the Presbyters had the same from the Apostles no not Timothy nor Titus whilst onely Presbyters therefore I conclude undeniably that Timothy and Titus were Superiors as Bishops over the Presbyters in their several Charges and Divisions Timothy in Ephesus and Titus in Creet That they had this Power given them by Paul appears Tim. 1.5.22 Lay hands suddainly on no man Tit. 1.5 For this cause I left thee in Creet that thou should'st set in order things which were wanting and ordain Elders in every City as I had appointed thee If any other in those Churches could have ordained Presbyters why was Timothy sent to Ephesus and Titus left at Creet for this very purpose And if the Cretians could have set in order things defective what need was there that Titus alone should have this Commission St. Jerom no great Friend to Episcopacy gives us in his Epistle to Evagrius pag. 329 this as a Distinction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remarkable betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter saying quid facit excepta ordinatione Episcopus quod non facit Presbiter What does a Bishop except the Ordaining of Others which a Presbyter does not And it is worth the observation what the Antient Father and Champion for the Blessed Trinity Athanasius hath in his Second Apologie viz. That Colithus a Presbiter of Alexandria had constituted Presbyters But what became of them Recissa est haec ejus ordinatio omnes ab eo constituti in Laicorum ordinem redacti fuere The ordaining of others by him was made invalid and they who were ordained by him were degraded and made Laicks So then you see that Bishops are Eminenter superiores presbiteris Eminently superiour to Presbyters having power affirmative and negative by the Opinion and Practice of the Antient Fathers This confirmes what the Apostles had taught and practised and appointed others in place above the ordinary Presbyters to do Now I come to shew the Second Difference betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter And wherein a Bishop hath eminentem superioritatem a clear Superiority above a Presbyter that is in Excommunication which was called Mucro Episcopalis the Episcopal Weapon and was a Power given to Bishops Successors of the Apostles and was ever practised by them This appears in that an Account of it was and is expected at their hands as it is manifested by the quarrel which our blessed Saviour had against the Angel of the Church of Pergamus namely that he suffered some of his Church who held the Doctrine of the Nicholaitans and against the Angel of the Church of Thiatira that he suffered the woman Jesabel to teach and seduce the people By this it is apparent that Christ expected they should do what they had by their places power to do namely that they being Angels of their Churches whom I affirm to be also Bishops thereof and Successors to the Apostles as is sufficiently proved by the most reverend and learned Archbishop of Armagh and Beza himself calling them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men in place above others should Hereticos coercere ex Ecclesia ejicere keep under Hereticks and cast them out of the Church If here it be objected that we must not argue from dark and mystical places of Scripture such as is the Apocalypse I answer that I argue from a plain place and from the plain words and direct Scope of the place and not from the mystical Sence or Interpretation neither can we here admit of that distinction that Angelus is in this place to be taken Collectively pro tota Ecclesia for the whole Church For I conceive there is not a word in Scripture but hath its weight and was it not as easy to have said Ecclesiae as Angelo Ecelesiae if Angelo had not something more in it then Ecclesiae and why not Angelus Ecclesia the Angel the Church but Angelus Ecclesiae the Angel of the Church if it had been to be taken Collectively but the terms are different and of a distinct force like those panis Domin● the bread of the Lord and panis Dominus bread representing the Lord. Besides to come to Timothy and Titus they are enjoyned to command others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to teach other Doctrine and obturaro ora deceptorum hereticos rejicere to stop the mouths of deceivers and to reject Hereticks these things were commanded them and an Account accordingly expected of the performance thereof which manifestly proves that every Church had its Angelum who had Episcopal Authority and Jurisdiction eminent above other inferiour Clergy-men and not many Angels in each of these Churches all of equal Authority and place or at least the Angel in each of the seven Churches was so absolute in his power that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chief Governour the Presbyters only Assistants to him he a Spiritual Justice and of the Quorum they of the Council The difference also of Episcopal Authority from that of Bresbyters appears in the Cause of Excommunication where there was an Appeal to the Synods which either confirmed or disolved them but none to the People none to the Presbyters this is confirmed by the antient Council at Nice Can. 5. and at Antioch Can. 6. and Jerom himself writing to Riparius concerning Vigilantius an heretical Presbyter is angry that the Bishop under whom he was did acquiescere ejus furori non virga Apostolica virgaque ferrea vas inutile confringere tradere ad interitum Carnis ut spiritus salvus fiat did quietly give way to his fury and not rather break in pieces that unprofitable vessel with his Apostolick Staff and rod of Iron and deliver him up to the destruction of the Flesh that his Soul might be saved And it seems strange to me that any should think that our Blessed Saviour his Executioners Administrators and Assigns knew not the meaning of his Will and Testament as well as we in these days Christ who ascending to Heaven gave Gifts to many would not deny this Gift so necessary He I say giving supereminent Gifts to the Apostles ad fundandam ecclesiam for the founding of his Church would not deny to their Successors those which were necessary

Matter is true And Cognitio est rerum conceptarum per experientiam scientia Knowledge is a sure Apprehension of the Matters we conceive by experience of their Causes and undoubted Grounds of Truth And Resolutio is dubii depositio the abandoning of all Doubting I am past Opinion and acknowledge my self satisfied and well resolved that Episcopacy is Jure Divino and endeavour to give an Account thereof in this Treatise I will not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 withstand or resist or seek Evasions or subtil Answers to evade or elude Gods Truth Nor do I love 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be in Suspence Having well weighed the Truth here asserted I find cause to say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Great is the force of Truth and hath prevailed And to satisfie the World what Reason I have for this my Confidence I leave a Testimony thereof in this Discourse I therefore define Episcopum to be Presbiterum cum additamento superioritatis quoad regimen in Ecclesia A Bishop to be a Presbiter having an Addition of Superiority for the Governing of Gods Church His Charge is to Oversee the Clergy and their Flocks the Word I confess in a large signification may be taken for a Major of a City in Homer Ajax is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Bishop or Orderer of his Army But our Episcopus est cleri gregis in sua diocesi is Overseer of his Clergy and Flock bounded within his own Diocess He is also Presbiter an Antient and therefore Experienced and Able to inform and direct As for the Inferiour Presbiter or Ancient and Diaconus Minister or Servant they are distinct and subordinate to the Bishop or Superiour Presbiter both in the New Testament and in the Practice of the first Century and in all Ages even to this Day Let it not trouble any man that the Apostles sometimes term themselves and Bishops by the Title of Presbiters they call themselves also Diaconos Deacons in a general Notion our Presbiteri●●s would have Bishops to be pastores jure divi●o praesides jure ecclesiastice principes jure hum●no diabolico Pastors by Gods Law Presidents by Ecclesiastical Law Lords by Humane and Diabolical Law How little ground they have for this let my ensuing Discourse testifie Our Bishop is a Presbiter or Ancient Pastor set in eminent superiority over the Clergy and their Flocks with relation to the Government of them in Matters Ecclesiastical and such I say the Apostles instituted and to them gave a Charge how to demean themselves 〈◊〉 perpetual Succession whereof by practice hath continued from Christs Time to this Day Now for jus divinum I take that to be of Divine Right which is warranted in Sacred Scripture de credendis agendis in matters to be believed and done Let this serve for the present it will be more enlarged occasionally in some part of this Treatise Only here I add that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Practice of the Apostles which never was questioned and excepted against and is recorded in the Canonical Scripture hath in it a jus divinum and shews what is of Divine Right de facto These things premised I proceed to Objections against my Assertion and answer them particularly Object Eminent Superiority and Lordly Authority over the People is that which the Lords of the Gentiles may and do challenge and practice as their due jure humano by Humane Right and therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Law of things opposite Eminent Superiority and Lordly Authority over the Clergy and People of God is that which Bishops ought not to challenge or practice jure divino For Proof they bring Matth. 20.25 26. The Princes of the Gentiles dominantur Lord it and Rule over them but you non sic Or it shall not be so with you And the 1 of Pet. 5.2 3. Feed the Flock of the Lord taking the Oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly not churlishly or covetously for filthy Lucre but of a ready Mind neither as being Lords over Gods Heritage Ans To this I Answer That the Measure of Domination not the Matter lies in the word sic and so is expounded by the other words not by constraint but willingly not churlishly or covetously not as though ye were Lords dominering over them but that ye may be Ensamples to the Flock Non herile aut regale imperium exercentes sed pastorali superioritate paterna gubernatione utentes Not exercising a Master-like or Kingly Command but using a Pastoral Superiority and Fatherly Government And so this rather as I conceive confirms Superiority and Episcopacy than destroys it For the word sic so takes not away the Legality but qualifies the Power given by saying nay commanding let it be used sic so which I prove to be the meaning of the Apostle by this Argument The Practice of the Apostles is not contrary to Christs and their own Doctrine and the Sence thereof but the Apostles did practice Eminent Superiority and such lawful Authority as Christ forbids not over the Clergy and Flock and instituted Successors therefore their Doctrine allowed the same And so that cannot be meant by the words above which is pretended viz. That there should be a Parity in the Clergy and that Episcopacy is Dominium in Clerum a Lordly Rule over the Clergy and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an usurped Authority The Successors which they instituted are warranted by Christ when he said I am with you to the end of the World that is I am with you while you live and with Successors in your stead governing and teaching the Church to the Worlds end Hence it was that the Apostles ordained Bishops to succeed them So did the ancient Fathers in the purer times and this Course hath continued ever since The Practice of the Apostles was in superiority over others of the Clergy and to the Bishops whom they constituted to succeed themselves in place over the Clergy they gave a superior authority Neither did they either practice or ever mention that parity in power which the Presbyterians so much endeavour to introduce And therefore the Apostles never understood the words as these men do viz. that they should disallow of Bishops in superior authority above other of the Clergy To make the Practice of the Apostles evident I appeal to Paul who gave to Timothy and Titus Episcopal Power to the one in Ephesus to the other in Creet Now to clear this let us first oleanse the Spring-Head and then the Streams will run clear down to after-times I have above to this end defined Episcopum if we observe what he is then shall we evidently see whether St. Paul did institute such a Calling or no. Of Civil Bishops I speak not but of Spiritual and a Bishop of this kind I defined to be presbiterum cum additamento superioritatis quoad regimen in ecclesia He governs the Clergy and their Flocks in Spiritual matters Bishops of this kind St. Paul did

prebere because they would not submit to Austin's Will For this was indeed the quarrel as our Writers say This their refusal to yield to Austin the Monk I produce as a Proof that the Christians which he found here held in many things with the Eastern Churches as having their Doctrine from Jerusalem and Sion whence the Gospel was to be sent Isaiah 2.3 Malachi 4.2 to the Nations and whence as Salvation went Psal 14.7 so likewise the Doctrine of Salvation for Christ who gave the Apostles Commission to go to all Nations and preach the Gospel did bid them stay at Jerusalem not at Rome till the Holy Ghost had furnisht them with Gifts for the work commanded This further appears by that resolute Answer which the Abbot of Bangor gave to Austin the Monk Anno 601. viz. that he and his acknowledged no Superiority in the Bishop of Rome over them nor any Superiour but their own Arch-Bishop Caer Leonis or as some will have it Senovensis qui sub Deo solus possitus fuit super illos ad super videndum ad faciendum illos servare viam spiritualem who alone was under God made an Overseer or Bishop to them that he might make them observe the Spiritual way Seing this stout Champion thus answered it is propable that they were of the Primitive Institution And this I rather give credit to because if the Bishop of Rome had then held the present Tenent of that Church viz. that their City is the Spiritual Metropolis and that their Bishop is Caput Ecclesiae our Predecessours would have acknowledged the Pope and his See as they had been taught But Baronius saith that our English Bishops are as Antient as those of Rome and it is probable they were For this we have good proof that at a Council held at Arles Anno 314 we had three Bishops viz. Eborius de Civitate Eboraci Episcopus Restitutus de Civitate Londini Episcopus Eldelphius de Civitate Coloniae Londinensium exinde Sacerdos Presbyter Arminius Diaconus Eborius Bishop of York Restitutus Bishop of London Eldelphius Bishop of Colchester and after them Sacerdos a Presbyter Arminius a Deacon These subscribed in this Council here therefore I observe that in the year 314 we had Bishops Presbyters and Deacons the very Government now in question and Romish they were not as I conceive because they then acknowledged not a Subordination to Rome and because Urban the Second called Learned Anselme Patriarcha Brittanniae the Patriarch of Brittain Therefore methinks it should not now be questioned whether Episcopacy be a Romish Relique but rather that it should be confirmed as an Evangelical Ordinance and as Antient as the first Institution of Churches and as a Calling appointed by the Apostles What more have we for Baptism of Infants What more for our Lords Day or Sunday but convincing Deductions from the Scriptures or the Practice of the Apostles and the Observation of the same in the Churches of God successively to this very day And yet we hold both these to be Sacred Ordinances and of Divine Institution though they be both questioned by some men of the Reformed Churches as Episcopacy is among some of Ours The Case is alike and as clear if not clearer for Episcopacy that it had a Divine Institution If what is formerly said satisfie not I will only use this Argument more to prove that Episcopacy is jure divino If the Charge given Tim. 1.6 14. be to Timothy personally and be perpetual then it is to One person namely to Timothy and to the Successours in his place for Timothy was Mortal so that the perpetuity of the Charge must reach to all his Successours until the Appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ But the Charge is personal to Timothy and perpetual even to the Appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ therefore it is to one person viz. to Timothy and to his Successours for ever Object If it be here objected that the Charge was given to Timothy as elsewhere the Keys to Peter and according to that which is said quod dixit Petro dixit ceterisque Apostolis what was spoke to Peter was spoke to the other Apostles also Answ I answer It is true for what was said to Timothy was said ceterisque Episcopis Successoribus corum both to other Bishops and their Successours as Christ's giving the Keys to Peter was to him and the other Apostles but not to all Disciples Deacons and Widdows To sum up all Since it appears that Episcopacy Presbytery and Diaconatus are according to the practice of the Apostles Analogical to the Institution of the Jewish Church appointed by God and establisht by Moses pointed at and in some sort deciphered in the New-Testament and strongly insinuated by the Successours of the Apostles to have been received and practised by them as commended to them by Divine Authority Since these three Orders in our Church are derived so high have continued so long even from the Primitive times to this day we may well conclude that as Presbyters and Deacons so Bishops are jure divino especially seeing Episcopacy is so generally confirmed and hath been so constantly continued by the Aphstles Apostolick men Councils Fathers and Doctors And much the rather I am induced thus as I have said to judge of Episcopacy because the contrary part have not the like Proofs Warrant and Approbation for their Presbytery and can bring no sufficient and convincing Authority for a Quarterly or Yearly President joynt Presbyters and Lay-Elders usurping Pastoral and Episcopal Jurisdiction And here in confidence of my Cause I add That if they have any lawful General Council or any Synod except their own which established Church-Government by such a President Presbyters and Lay-Elders as aforesaid I will renounce my Opinion and yield the Cause Now it concernes us very much to be well advised and truly to judge of these Matters because it appears in a Seditious Pamphlet entituled the Prelates Pride that the Author thereof and such as he is care not what Government be established so that Popery which we wish more rightly than they may be abolisht Episcopacy and the present Government which how inconvenient it may be they know not may be abolisht and they have Liberty and Toleration which what settled State will permit to profess what Religion they please to make choice of and what shall best suit their own Interest the Card they commonly sail by So may we have as many Religions as there be at Amsterdam and unpeople all our Plantations by calling home many Phanatical Scismaticks who under colour of dislike of the Church-Government here have fallen out with our Religion and framed to themselves divers Opinions if not Religions contrary to ours not only in Form but Reality Seeing then there is but one Lord one Faith one Baptism one God and Father of All let us endeavour to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace That there may be one Body and one Spirit even as we are Called in one Hope of our Calling Eph. 4. Let us stick fast to that one Truth which we are taught and be stedfast in one Faith and agree jointly with one accord like Children of the same Father and Mother Let us not loose the Honour of our Church-Government but reform the personal Errours if any such be and sinde Reformation signifies nothing else but the reduceing and setting Matters into the Form in which they were most perfect let us constantly bold our selves to the Form kept and practised in the primitiver and purest Times and in the First and Second Centuries in which we shall find the Order Episcopal Presbyterial and Diaconal observed and ever since confirmed by National Synods and Councils of our own near 1400 years ago or 1000 at least and practised in many Successions before and since Nothing now remains but Prayers and Endeavours for the Continuance of the Establishment of the present Government of the Church of England which is so agreeable to the Antient Constitution Only now here I wish that we may save the Honour of our dear and aged Mother and punish her Sons if any have dishonoured her by pride tyranny covetousness or any other way and that the Church and Common-wealth may hold such Correspondency as they did in the days of David and as Kings were nursing Fathers and Queens nursing Mothers to the Church in her Infancy so in her Age she may find Kings to support her if weak And if any of her Children be like Eli's their Father may correct them so that their Mother may not be dishonoured and ruined I conclude with that of St. Augustine si quid tota ecclesia hodie frequent at per orbem hoc quin ita sit faciendum disputare insolentissimae est insaniae if any thing at this day be of frequent use in the whole Church to question and dispute whether it ought so to be is a most insolent Madness Epist. 118 and that it is Arianism to say That Presbyters in Common Acception are equal to Bishops such as were Successours of the Apostles and such as St. Augustin himself was This Epiphanius reckons it among the Antient Heresies and time hath not bettered it And whether it resembles and comes near the Antilogie of Korah or not my self not being rigid and prone to censure I leave to be determined by Others FINIS