Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	apostle_n	church_n	holy_a	989	5	4.8664	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A92287	The reasons of the Dissenting Brethren against the third proposition, concerning presbyterial government· Humbly presented.	Westminster Assembly; Goodwin, Thomas, 1600-1680.; Westminster Assembly (1643-1652). Answer of the Assembly of Divines unto the reasons of the seven Dissenting Brethren, against the proposition of divers congregations being united under one Presbyteriall government.	1645 (1645)	Wing R573; Thomason E27_14; ESTC R209981	37,798	45

that both these might be consistent For that in forein States and Kingdomes and Societies there are Burgesses of particular Corporations and there are Burgesses in an Assembly of Parliament so called by way of distinction met in common for the ordinary government of all those Corporations in common and therefore the like may be here in this The reply were easie that what ever such distinction there is in other States yet the question is of such Burgesses as the Lawes of this State hold forth the question is of such Burgesses as this Kingdome hath set up where there is no distinction of Burgesses of Corporations and Burgesses in Parliament mentioned But on the contrary only one single uniforme stile and title in the lawes namely Burgesses of the Corporation and duties suited thereunto Now parallel to this case are our Arguments and the Answers given thereto Lastly if they be Elders only in sensu aggregato yet so farre as they are acknowledged thus Elders so farre will many of the incongruities in the minor follow them and fall upon them as that still they are but meerly ruling Elders and that there be Deacons in sensu aggregato Reasons against and exceptions to the first proofe of the first Assertion viz. That the Church of Jerusalem consisteth of more Congregations then one from the multitude of Believers FIrst Reasons to shew there were not more then could meet in one place The Holy Ghost hath from first to last as on purpose shewed this as if his scope had been aforehand to prevent and to preclude all reasonings to the contrary 1. In the beginnings of that Church their meetings are set out to us by two Adjuncts First that they met {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} with one accord in the same duty of prayer Acts Chap. 1. Verse 14. And secondly {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} together in one and the same company Verse 15. Which therefore is there and usually translated in one place And that here by these words the intent of the Holy Ghost is to shew their meeting in one and the same Assembly is evident For whereas in the 15 Verse 't is said Peter stood up in the middest of them as therefore being present together in one company he addes And the number of them that were {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} that is Present together in company were an hundred and twenty 2. Then Chap. 2. Verse 1. Another meeting of theirs for worship at Pentecost is continued to be expressed in the same phrases a second time They were all with one accord in one place 3. Then when about three thousand yet still some of their meetings then for some acts of worship are recorded to have been as before with one accord as joyning unanimously in the same duty and in stead of that former expression {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} used of the former meetings there is the mention of the place it selfe where they met set downe to supply it and so to interpret it and shewes it was still in one Assembly Verse 46. They continued daily with one accord in the Temple as mentioning the very place where they had their most frequent meetings which were for hearing as being there altogether in one Assembly and not as comming thither only for Jewish worship For it is said of these as of the former meetings mentioned which were proper to themselves That they continued with one accord And though they held these meetings in this place for preaching that the Jewes might be present to hear c. Yet that hindred not but it was a Church meeting to them wherein they continued with one accord which expression is stil used of al their Christian meetings throughout this Story Acts 1. 14. Acts 4. 24. Acts 5. 12. Acts 15. 25. 4. When there was a further addition to these Chap. 5. Verse 1. whether to five thousand or no is spoken to afterwards yet in that Chapter he making a description of their State in almost all the very same particulars by which he had done it before Chap. 2. from Verse 43. unto the end as by the paralell comparing of these two passages of the Story will appear he lastly speaking of a meeting of theirs which is the point in hand as carefully puts in as in the former Verse 14. And they were all with one accord in Solomons Porch the same words he had used Chap. 2. Verse 46. Their union and joyning together with one accord being carefully indigitated and the place named in stead of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} as was observed before And that the All that met were not the Apostles only appears not only by the forementioned paralell of this with Chap. 2. Verse 46. where their being with one accord in the Temple is spoken of all the multitude and so here But secondly that all the Apostles should be met with one accord in any duty and not the people who are said to continue in the Apostles Doctrine and Prayer and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} or with one accord still in the story of this Church referring to communion in some holy duty as Chap. 1. Verse 14. and Chap. 4. Verse 24. is most unlikely And Solomons Porch was a place large enough to hold them and fitted for preaching and to hear which in John 10. Verse 22. is called the Temple and so is the place intended in Acts 2. Verse 46. They met in the Temple that is in the Porch of Solomon It was the outer Court as Josephus lib. 20. cap. 8. It was the place where CHRIST used to walk and preach and the Apostles also Chap. 3. Verse 11. The multitude ran to Solomons Porch 5. When againe upon mention of this multiplication of Disciples the Deacons are to be chosen the Apostles called the multitude Chap. 6. Ver. 2. and not persons selected but all for Verse 5. they are called the whole multitude and they are spoken to as together For the saying pleased the whole and the whole chose seven men out from among them and set them before the Apostles Ver 6. as being in one place together and they prayed in which the multitude had an interest to joyne with them and laid on them hands And this meeting was certainly a Church meeting and yet still in some one place and therefore though it might follow that alwayes they should not have met together in one yet they both did and could 6. After that great dispersion mentioned Chap. 8. ver. 1. Then as they might more conveniently meet in one place and assembly so that they did so it is as carefully recorded that so the Holy Ghost might hold forth this from the first unto the last mention of this Church Acts 15. Acts 21. 22. The multitude must needs come together And to interpret {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} or with one accord which the Holy Ghost carries through all to

be intended of the joyning of the same persons in the same act of worship for which they still did meet is genuine for it imports that which is the spirit and life of publick worship which of all other actions done by a multitude is to have the nearest union of spirits as that wherein the Communion of Saints in worship consists And then naming the place where they met also it must needs import Onenesse of Assembly which also holds forth in this example this duty That as Saints when met in worship should joyne with one accord so living in a place together should as farre as possibly may joyne themselves to one Assembly and this carries with it such an appearance as is not in the other sense And that the Holy Ghost should in the same Story of the same Church set forth the unity of their first meetings as in one and the same individuall Assembly by this expression of being in one and with one accord Acts Chap. 1. Chap. 2. and in the next mention not farre off carry along one of the same expressions namely with one accord and together therewith shall name the place of their meeting and yet in the latter intend not One but meetings in severall companies in that place This we humbly submit to better judgements Secondly Exceptions 1. For the mention of five thousand Chap. 4. Verse 4. This cannot be evinced from that place that the five thousand were a new number added to the three thousand The words are these Howbeit many of them that heard the word believed and the number of the men was about five thousand But that this number of five thousand should refer to them that believed is not certaine seeing both the Greek will bear it and favour it as well to be meant of the number that heard as of the men that believed and of the two that former is the more probable that he should say of the men that heard they were five thousand and that of them that heard many believed this sounds well and is no way forced but five thousand men to be converted at once is that which was never afore nor since And the great conversion that our Divines have instanced in is the three thousand Acts Chap. 2. and not in this five thousand And if the scope of the Holy Ghost therein why the number of the men that heard should be here reckoned to be five thousand be asked after it was to shew what had occasioned the persecution which he had spoken of in the Verse before Namely this that such a multitude of the people should be taught and preached to this fretted the Pharisees that came upon Peter and John and with this agrees the second Verse that they were grieved they taught the people the effect whereof is that many of them that heard believed notwithstanding this persecution but how many of these is not certaine And Beza and Calvin and many others of our protestant Writers judge this number not to be of this new accession of Converts but the totall number including the former and the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} although translated men is when put alone as there all one with {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Females as well as Males which especially may be so taken because it is spoken of such a promiscuous auditory And if any should affirme it meant of Males only and them now converted it would make a greater Miracle then any other recorded especially when the people are said to be converted Verse 2. that did alike runne to see the Miracle 2 Exception is That it may be supposed that all that are mentioned to be converted remained not constant members of that Church abiding at Jerusalem untill the dispersion and so though the Holy Ghosts scope may be to shew the increase of Converts to the faith yet not of such as continued all that while at Jerusalem and our reasons for that are these First those three thousand who were converted Chap. 2. were not setled dwellers at Jerusalem but strangers Commorants of the ten Tribes which were dispersed in all those Countries mentioned in the 2 Chapter Verse 9. who came up to the feast of Pentecost as the manner of the Jewes was Acts 21. 20 27 28. Jewes that lived in Asia came to the feast of Pentecost as Paul also did compared with Acts 20. 16. And the word which is translated Dwellers at Jerusalem is interpreted by an eminent Critick Sojourners at Jerusalem during this Feast although the word signifies both and to that end quotes the Septuagint in 1. Kings 17. 20. where Elijah cries unto the Lord saying O Lord my God hast thou also brought evill upon the Widow {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} with whom I sojourne onely and that which confirmes it is that they are said to be dwellers or inhabitants of Mesopotamia and Judea and Capadocea Verse 9. They could not fixedly belong as dwellers to both they were therefore rather sojourners in Jerusalem now at the Feast though fixed dwellers in all those places For if they were fixed dwellers in Jerusalem to what end whilest they were at Jerusalem should the Evangelist tell us they were sojourners in Mesopotamia and they must needs rather be dwellers there because they are said to understand every one his own language And that which strengthens this is that in the Greek there is this difference in the words in Verses 5 and 9. in that they are said {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in Hierusalem As for the present there yea and as to come {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} from out of every Nation but in the 9 Verse he changeth it and saies {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} as inhabiters of Mesopotamia and those other Countries where their fixed possessions were And therefore Verse 14. he cals them Men Jewes and Dwellers at Jerusalem as two sorts and Verse 22. Men of Israel the stile given those of the ten Tribes scattered Men devout as Verse 5. who came up at those solemne times having wives and children and their families at home to whom they used after a time to returne Now although these were added and made members of that Church and are said to continue in the Apostles doctrine yet that will not necessarily imply that they continued all the time till the dispersion at Jerusalem but whilest they were there they were {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} that is they cleaved to the Apostles but to think that many of them comming as strangers should not go downe to their wives and children which Nature taught them to provide for and religion taught them to take care of their soules or fetch them up to them so as this might well be a fluid Church ebbing and flowing as touching the residence of its members yea some of these were of Judea Verse 9. and so of the Country about and of them might

Now if they bee Elders in common because a Presbytery as was said in answer to the first Argument then they are not to bee argued a Presbytery onely because they are Elders in Common For then the Argument runnes in Circulo And the chiefe and first reason of their being Elders for no other is mentioned is accordingly held forth in their being Elders to that Church in common whereas according to Presbyteriall Principles there is a primary relation of Elders quà Elders to their particular fixed Congregations Reasons against the third Proofe of the second Branch viz. That the Apostles did the ordinary Acts of Presbyters as Presbyters in the Church of Hierusalem doth prove a Presbyteriall Government in that Church before the dispersion The Proofe of the whole depends upon this Proposition for though before the dispersion there had been many Congregations yet not under Elders but Apostles Now it is granted that the substance of Ministeriall Acts were one and the same in Apostles and Evangelists who were extraordinary and in other ordinary Ministers But first though for the Act of Ministeriall power it was the same in the Apostles and them yet in the extent of power which is the point in question therein the Apostles Jurisdiction over many Congregations is not the patterne of Presbyteriall Elders over many for the Apostles power was universall over all Churches and upon that was founded their power over those Congregations supposed many And Episcopacie may as strongly argue and inferre that because in Crete by Apostolicall warrant One man Titus did ordaine Elders c. That therefore there may bee one man a Bishop that hath power to ordaine c. in and over severall Churches And this Argument will bee stronger from the instance of an Evangelist for Episcopall power then this of Apostolicall government for the Presbyteriall by how much it is the more inferior Office but that of the Apostles is more immediate and transcendent and so the power of an Evangelist is neerer to an ordinary succession and it will as well follow that any one Presbyter alone might governe many Congregations because one of these Apostles might as that because the Apostles did governe these joyntly that therefore many Presbyters over severall Congregations may Secondly each of these Apostles as hee had by vertue of his Apostolicall Commission the power of them all so hee had relation of Ministerie unto all these supposed Congregations unto every person thereof for the performance of all sorts of duties of preaching to them admonishing them c. But thus in the Presbyteriall government over many Congregations fixed and their Pastors and Elders fixed to them the severall Elders are denied to have the relation of Elders to each Congregation but make up onely an Eldership in common as united over all these But the Apostles here have the relation to both and therefore if this Apostolicall frame bee made a Patterne then it followes that all the Elders of these Congregations were directly and immediatly Elders to each Congregation and every member of them and not onely of a common Presbytery for so the Apostles were If it bee alledged that those acts of government performed by them in that Church were for the substance of them ordinary Acts such as Presbyters performe and that therefore answerably their persons themselves are in them to bee considered as Elders because that the Apostles were not onely Apostles but Elders also as John Epistle 2. Verse 1. And Peter Epist. 1. Chap. 5. Vers 1. and therefore might and did act as Elders in ordinary Acts of Church government and are therefore therein to bee look't at as a just patterne to us and to have ruled these Congregations of Jerusalem as a Colledge or body of Elders united conedscending so to act as common Presbyters taking the consent of the Church as Acts. 6. as likewise they did in every Church where they came joyning with the Eldership thereof as Elders and not as Apostles and therefore that they might give a patterne and Example of an ordinary Presbytery especially seeing that what they thus did they did as an united body to many Congregations considered as one Church It is answered to the first that although the Apostles are called Elders yet they are so called virtually not formally and but because Apostleship containes all Offices in it so as they are Elders but upon this ground that they are Apostles and therefore John in that very Epistle where hee stiles himselfe an Elder hee yet writes Canonicall Scripture as an Apostle and takes on him to threaten Diotrephes as an Apostle to remember him which as a formall Elder hee could not have done and surely those Offices which Christ distinguisheth Ephesians 4. Hee gave some Apostles some Pastors and Teachers the same person is not formally both though virtually he may bee All that they did in that Church of Hierusalem they are said to act as Apostles their preaching is called the Apostles doctrine their bringing their monies to them as to the Officers of that Church is to them not as Elders but as Apostles They laid it downe at the Apostles feet yea in that Act of ordaining the seven Deacons it is said They set them afore the Apostles Chap. 6. Vers 6. and they laid on their hands And it is very hard to distinguish and say that the men were Apostles but the power they acted by was as Elders when the name of an Apostle imports the Office Yea in that very Act of government about Deacons they must needs act as Apostles for they doe not simply ordaine the men but doe anew by vertue of Apostolicall authoritie institute the Office of Deacons by declaring Christs mind which none but Apostles could immediatly and at first have done so as the same persons in this same Act instanced in must act partly as Apostles and partly as Elders and by what infallible rule shall wee distinguish To the second viz. that they acted here as it were in a joynt body or in Collegio over these many Congregations It is answered that an Association of Elders in an Eldership over many is not argued from hence For first they had all singly the same power which they exercised joyntly and that they should exercise it joyntly here to that end to give a patterne for Eldership is not easy to prove they exercised it together because it fell out that they were together and it was fit none of them should bee excluded but it depended not upon this union of all in a body as Acts of Elders in a Presbytery do as Parliamentary power is not the result of Parliament men but as assembled in Parliament yea and the authoritie of Jurisdiction thence ariseth not so here Our Apostle might have done that which all here did yea may it not bee said that because two Apostles Paul and Barnabas ordained Elders in every Church Acts 14. as joyned in the same Act and so acting not as Apostles but joyntly