Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	church_n	elder_n	pastor_n	988	5	9.2585	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45153	The question of re-ordination, whether, and how a minister ordained by the Presbytery, may take ordination also by the Bishop? by John Humfrey ...	Humfrey, John, 1621-1719.	1661 (1661)	Wing H3704; ESTC R8105	33,209	104

pastoralis the other Sapientiae maturitatem as Henderson out of Bede This office is to rule and preach Ruling and preaching are the inseparable parts of the same 1 Thes 5.12 13. Heb. 13.7 I speak quoad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whatsoever it be sometimes quoad exercitium Now there are some more able for one part of their office and some more able for the other Those that are eminent in either the Apostle would have to be encouraged or rewarded accordingly Let them have double honor that is Not as some do fondly gloss it two things Reverence and Maintenance for the next verse to this tells us what honor he certainly means such as when otherwhere he says Honor widows that is Maintenance or provision for them and double honor is more maintenance then others The Emphasis then for the Interpretation does lye on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is not to be construed barely bené but pulchrè egregiè eminentèr that is the genuine signification of the word as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this being put in the beginning emphatically to the first branch will appear easily to him that ponders the Greek Text that it must be understood again in the latter to wit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 scilicet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also Here then plainly is the meaning Those Ministers that are more eminent then others are to have more encouragement honor or maintenance above others that is double honor whether they are eminent in one part of their Office or in the other in ruling or in preaching but especially if they are eminent in preaching The other note I must add in the behalf of Episcopacy for if I know any thing by my own heart it does love integrity which is the speaking as nothing but what I find in it so the whole I find there When I have said above that the identity of a Bishop and a Presbyter in Scripture does shake Episcopacy if it be held Jure divino strictly I must confess also if it be held so only at large there does some impressions ever since my deliberate reading of the Conference at the Isle of Wight remain upon me for it By a Jus divinum I understand vulgarly justum jussum in the Word of God It is true there is no superiority of the Bishop above the Presbyter in Scripture because they were all one then two words for the same thing but yet there is a superiority and inferiority in the Scripture among the Ministers in the Church The Bishops superiority is not jure divin● but I say Superiority is jure divino The twelve Apostles were above the Seventy God hath set some in his Church first secondarily thirdly c. 1 Cor. 10.28 Now while the Church had her extraordinary Officers it did suffice that this superiority and inferiority was terminated or lodged in those divers orders but when that which was extraordinary was done away and there remained only one Order the Pastor and Teacher of the four Ephes 4.11 there was in the Church before then must the superiority inferiority of the preaching Ministry or Priest quite fall or else the Authority of the Church must interpose and make a difference of degree in identity of order and so the names of Bishop and Presbyter being sit for the turn were prudently distinguished by pious antiquity and mad use of for it For man to create a new officer or another order in his Lords house which himself hath not set there 1 Cor. 12.28 cannot I doubt be taken well by him But to put a difference only of degree or to double the dignity as well as maintenance 1 Tim. 5.17 to some above others in the same office is not like to be at all against his will Now then if you ask me Is Episcopacy jure divino or no I answer If you take this largely it is because superiority and inferiority in the Preaching Ministry of the Church is of Christ and the Scripture If you take it strictly it is not because the distinction of a Bishop and Presbyter is not of Scripture but this disparity of degree in the same order is assumed by man as consonant to the will of God in general and necessary to government To be more short Inequality for orders sake in the Ministry is of divine the mode or fashion thereof in Episcopacy is of Ecclesiastical institution It appears in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus that Paul writes to them after such a rate that does signifie very plainly an authority in them over the Elders and Deacons in their Churches How does he tell Timothy of his abiding at Ephesus to charge some that they teach no other doctrine Why does he lay down qualifications of the Pastor and Deacon what they ought to be and do What are the duties of other men to him but upon this account Wherefore does he bid him Rebuke an Elder And how shall he receive an accusation against him by witness if he had not an inspection and power of Jurisdiction over them And these things I write says he that thou might'st know how thou oughtest to behave thy self in the Church of God Again Do nothing by partiality Who does not see here Episcopus pastorum as well as gregis Who will not confess a preheminence of Authority in Timothy at Ephesus and Titus in Crete over the Ministers there that is not compatible with every common Presbyter You may believe it the rather because our Divines at the Conference mentioned never denyed it That which is answered is this That Timothy and Titus were Evangelists But in the mean time the thing it self and matter contended for is found in Scripture and granted to be practised by these two men And what if they had lived and dyed where Paul left them in the exercise of this Authority Had the continuance thereof changed the nature and made it evil Was it lawful for them to exercise such a power and jurisdiction for a year and had it been unlawful if they had exercised it ten or for their lives If it had not there is the whole thing which is disputed for in a fixed Bishop Here then I take up and distinguish There is the matter it self of Episcopacy and the form or mode of it The matter appears to have its warrant in Gods Word The form which is the breaking a single order to wit the order of the Pastor into two degrees in that order and upon the ceasing of the Evangelist an higher order the placing his work so far as it is ordinary and continues necessary to the Churches welfare upon the superior degree of the Pastor so divided is indeed of mans authority and contrivance Let then the Bishop remember that as he is Pastor the Ministers also are Pastors by God whose office as to their own flock is to rule and to teach as well as his Let him beware for his life he does not un-pastor the lower degree but think

it must be meant does not only doe this for it necessarily does the first whether it does the last or not I will suppose then it does no lesse It makes a man a Minister I say I suppose this not grant it and also signifies him to be such before men It gives the office and also it makes a man to be received as such in the Church where he is sent which is a matter of great weight and open importance as I shall say more about it Now I am fixed here Though we that are Ministers already cannot be ordained to the one end which is supposed the most common our case being peculiar yet are we may we and for any thing I know if required ought we to be ordained again for the other The common and generall end of Baptism was for remission of sins yet was Jesus Christ baptized who was not capable of that end but some others The common end of Ordination is for the office as is supposed yet if the Bishop shall say here Why comest thou to be ordained Thou hast no need that art a Minister already I will answer him humbly in my Saviours words Suffer it so to be now for it becommeth us to fulfill all righteousness It becometh us to conform to the peace unity and government of the Church as well as State so far as we can in the Nation St Paul is made a Minister by Christ himself Mark the words well for they are beyond dispute I have appeared to thee for this purpose to make thee a Minister And now I send thee to the Gentiles to open their blind eys c. Act. 26.16 17 18. And yet is he ordained after by the hands of men Act. 13.3 Will any man say that the imposition of hands did make him a Minister or confer his office That were not only against that text but such a manifest wrong he will never put up who in expresse termes stands upon it that he was an Apostle not of men neither by man but by Christ Gal. 1.1 which is the truth 'T is plain then that a man who is a Minister already may be ordained or that it is not necessary to be ordained only to this end to have the office conferred on him And now then my Friend that art in my case doe thou tell the Bishop thou art a Minister already Be sure thou doest not renounce thy former ordination and consequently as much as in thee lyes all thy ministeriall acts past together with thy consent to the Reformed Churches for any thing If he shall thereupon ask thee wherefore then wilt thou be ordained Say To this end this very end St. Paul here was ordained let it be what it will it is that alone I come for which indeed in effect is nothing else but the canonicall stamp of allowance or Establishment of thy former vocation and as for the bare Ceremonies it self twice using which alone is left to be excepted at value it not Who does not know that imposition of hands with prayer is used for Confirmation as well as Ordination I will advance here on further The reason of a precept is to be look't on as the precept To perform a precept against the reason of it is to break it To do according to the reason though not according to the precept is to keep it We have no precept in Scripture for Re-ordination but we have here in this instance the reason of it Let any one tell me the reason of this imposition of hands upon Paul by Lucius and Niger who could not be made a Minister by man seeing Christ had appeared to him as is said for that purpose before I will presume to give the same or the like for our re-ordination by the Bishop If you say Here was a command of the Holy Ghost It is true but that takes not away the reason of the rite the thing must have it's due end and reason but the rather for that What then is the reason indeed hereof Is it for to give the ministerial office and nothing else Surely if it does that at all which one may think God alone does by the warrant of his word upon his enabling gift and the mans Consent Yet is not this the reason altogether for certain because here is an instance to the contrary let any man cavill at it what he can What is the reason then Why really I think it is this This solemn rite does give the currant repute or valuation to a man of a Minister so that he who was truly called of God before is now received as such by all as to the exercise of his function with freedome and acceptation And this is that authority alone I count the Bishop gives at least as to us in those words Take thou authority c. To wit an authority of esteem in regard of men who many will not and many perhaps out of conscience mislead cannot hold me for a true or legall Minister otherwise And hereupon you see upon what ground it is we go in Re-ordination and that is no other then the very reason it self of Ordination which believe it is not a little matter even no lesse then that of the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 namely the very course and glorifying of our Gospell which ought to be I think one of the greatest Concernments to us in the world To be short then for we are now at the bottome Forasmuch as our former ordination by the Presbytery though it be good according to God and consequently such as ought to give us this reputation or outward authority as Ministers which is the reason of ordaining yet does not do it and reach it's end in our Church by reason of the times and perhaps according to the ancient Laws as they are now changed and like to stand I argue where the reason of the precept is repeated who can deny nay who dare refuse the repetition of the duty And here the prime knot of the whole difficulty is also loosed which is this We on one hand dare not but own out former Ordination as valid for our ministeriall acts past On the other hand if we owne the first as valid what room can there be for a second There must be some sense therefore wherein it is to be conceived not valid null or rather as the case truly is nullified as to some considerable intents or else a second ordination does nothing but what is done which is absurd I answer therefore directly The validity of our former Ordination accipitur dupliciter This is what is cleer and so may seem easy to you found but cost mee many thoughts to frame and find This validity I say is to be taken either in regard of what it ought to do or in regard of what it does do as I have said It would be fuller if I could say In regard of what it ought to doe according to the Law of God and in regard of what