Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	king_n	time_n	year_n	19,963	5	5.0438	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A53660	A plea for Scripture ordination, or, Ten arguments from Scripture and antiquity proving ordination by presbyters without bishops to be valid by J.O. ... ; to which is prefixt an epistle by the Reverend Mr. Daniel Williams.	Owen, James, 1654-1706.; Williams, Daniel, 1643?-1716.	1694 (1694)	Wing O708; ESTC R32194	71,514	212

Notion of the Ius Divinum of Episcopacy as a superiour Order was first promoted in the Church of England by Arch-Bishop Laud. Dr. Holland the King's Professor of Divinity in Oxon was much offended with Dr. Laud for asserting it in a Disputation for his Degrees he checked him publickly and told him He was a Schismatick and went about to make a division between the English and other Reformed Churches This Prelate had inured his Tongue to say Ecclesia Romana and Turba Genevensis Cressy who apostatized to the Romish Church conceives that the reason why Episcopacy took no firm rooting in the Consciences of English Subjects before Archbishop Lauds time was because the Succession and Authority of Bishops and other Ecclesiastical Orders received from the Roman Church was never confidently and generally taught in England to be of Divine Right His Disciples since have rectified that Errour by obliging all the Conforming Ministers to subscribe That Episcopacy is a distinct Order and that it is manifest in God's Word that it is so This goes beyond the determination of the Council of Trent And to make the Fabrick lasting which was built upon this new Foundation all Ministers must be sworn to support it and that they will not remove one Stone out of the Building by any endeavours to alter the Government as established in Church and State The Substance of this Oath as it relates to Ecclesiastical Government is the same with the c. Oath which was imposed in the year 1640. only it includes also the Civil Government and requires Passive Obedience and Non-resistance in all Cases whatever which rendred it acceptable to the Powers then in being and gave them incouragement to trample upon Fundamental Laws and Constitutions as presuming upon the security of an Oath that neither they nor any commissioned by them must be resisted upon any pretence whatsoever The Proofs brought for this distinction and superiority of Order are so very weak that scarce two of the Asserters of Episcopacy agree in any one of them No Scripture no primitive General Council no general Consent of primitive Doctors and Fathers no not one Father of note in the first Ages speak particularly and home to this purpose The Point of Re-ordination began to be urged here in Arch-Bishop Laud's time his Influence was such and the Cause then in hand did work so powerfully upon good Bishop Hall himself that he adventured as Mr. Prin tells us to Re-ordain Mr. Iohn Dury though he had been before Ordained in some Reformed Church But from the beginning it was not so The old Church of England did not require Re-ordination as is now done In King Edward the Sixth his time Peter Martyr Martin Bucer and P. Fagius had Ecclesiastical Preferments in the Church of England but Cranmer whose Judgment of Episcopacy we have seen before never required Re-ordination of them He was most familiar with Martyr nether did he censure M. Bucer for writing that Presbyters might Ordain Iohn à Lasco with his Congregation of Germans was settled in England by Edward the Sixth's Patent he to be Super-intendent and four other Ministers with him and though he wrote against some Orders of our Church was with others called to Reform our Ecclesiastical Laws In Queen Elizabeth's time Ordination by Presbyters was allowed as appears by the Statute of Reformation c. 13 Eliz. cap. 12. It cannot refer to Popish Ordinations only if at all For 1. the words are general Be it enacted that every person which doth or shall pretend to be a Priest or Minister of God's holy Word The Title of Minister of God's holy Word is rarely used among the Papists and in common use among the Reformed Churches The Ministry with the Papists is a real Priesthood and therefore they call their Presbyters Priests And it 's an old Maxim Non est distinguendum ubi Lex non distinguit 2. The Subscription seems to intend those that scrupled Traditions and Ceremonies which the Papists do not For the assent and subscription required is to all the Articles of Religion which only concern the Confession of the true Christian Faith and the Doctrine of the Sacraments By this they gave Indulgence to those that were not satisfied to Subscribe all the Articles absolutely because the Approbation of the Homilies and Book of Consecration were included in them which are no Articles of the Catholick Church but private Articles of the Church of England as Mr. T. Rogers observes Therefore the Statute requires Subscription only to the Doctrine of Faith and of the Sacraments By the way I cannot but take notice of the following Clause in that Statute If any Person Ecclesiastical shall advisedly maintain or affirm any Doctrine directly contrary or repugnant to any of the said Articles and being convented before the Bishop of the Diocess or the Ordinary or before the Queen's Commissioners in Causes Ecclesiastical shall persist therein and not revoke his Errour or after such Revocation eftsoons affirm such untrue Doctrine such maintaining or affirming or persisting shall be just cause to deprive such Person of his Ecclesiastical Promotions And it shall be lawful to the Bishop of the Diocess or the said Commissioners to deprive such a Person so persisting and upon such Sentence of Deprivation pronounced he shall be indeed deprived Quaere Whether the Profession of Arminianism be not directly contrary to the Seventeenth Article of Predestination and Election to the Tenth Article of Free-will and to the Thirteenth of Works preparatory to Grace and if so Whether the Guilty do not deserve Deprivation by this Statute The best of it is they are like to meet with favourable Judges who will not be over-strict to mark the Errours of those who do but write after the Copy they have set before them Surely the Case is altered from what it was formerly It was Baro's unhappiness that he lived in a peevish Age for when he delivered himself unwarily in favour of those Opinions the Heads of the University of Cambridge sent up Dr. Whittaker and Dr. Tindal to Arch-Bishop Whitguift that by the interposition of his Authority those Errours might be crushed in the Egg. Hereupon Baro being obnoxious to this Statute was expelled the University and the Lambeth-Articles were made which come nothing short of the Determinations of Dort But tempora mutantur nos mutamur in illis But to return from this short digression some that were Ordained by Presbyters were admitted to the Publick Exercise of their Ministry and had Preferment in the Church of England without Re-ordination in Queen Elizabeth's time Mr. William Whittingham was made Dean of Durham about 1563. though Ordained by Presbyters only Mr. Travers Ordained by a Presbytery beyond Sea was Seven years Lecturer in the Temple and had the Bishop of London's Letter for it In his Supplication to the Council printed at the end of Mr. Hooker's Eccl. Polit. he saith One reason why he was Suspended by Arch-Bishop

Whitgift was because not lawfully called in Whitgift's Opinion to the Ministry nor allowed to preach according to the Laws of this Church But Mr. Hooker in his Answer wholly waves that and Replies only to the Contests between them The French Church in Thred-needle-street was allowed by the Queen as also the Dutch Church In the Year 1684. a Quo Warranto was brought against them In King Iames the First his time the like allowance was made unto Ministers Ordained by Presbyters The famous Mr. Iohn Camero who was Ordained in France came hither in the Year 1621. and set up a Divinity-Lecture in a private House in London ●● the Permission of King Iames the 〈◊〉 and a License from the then 〈◊〉 of London Before the Consecration of the three Scottish Bishops at London Andrews Bishop of Ely said They must be first Ordained as having received no Ordination by a Bishop Bancroft Arch-Bishop of Canterbury maintain'd That thereof there was no necessity seeing where Bishops could not be had the Ordination● given by Presbyters must be esteemed lawful otherwise it might be doubted if there was any lawful Vocation in most of the Reformed Churches This applauded to by the other Bishops Ely acquiesced and the three Bishops were consecrated Thus we see the Judgment and Practise of the Old Church of England in King Edward the Sixth's time in Queen Elizabeth's and in King Iames the First his time they required not Re-ordination as the New Conformity doth since the Year 1660. They acted from Catholick Principles that comprehended the Forreign Ordinations asserting the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters Object Aerius is branded for an Heretick by Austin and Epiphanius for affirming Bishops and Presbyters to be the same So Bishop Hall in his Divine Right of Episcopacy Part I. pag. 64. Answ. The great mannagers of this Objection are the Papists as we observed before from whom some Defenders of Episcopacy have borrowed it That Aerius was a Heretick is past doubt but he is so called by the Fathers because he was an Arian Epiphanius saith he did Arium ipsum dogmatum novitate superare Austin saith in Arianorum haeresin lapsus which is more then a favouring of it as some interpret their words Several of our Learned Writers against Popery have justified him against the Charge of Heresie for holding the equality of Bishops and Presbyters Chemnit exam Conc. Trid. part 4. CHAP. X. Instances of Ordination by Presbyters in the Primitive Church 1. At Alexandria 2. At Scetis by Paphnutius 3. By the Presbyters mentioned by Leo the Great 4. By the Captive Presbyters beyond Isther 5. By the Boiarii 6. By the Presbyters Ordained by Meletius 7. By the Presbyters mentioned by Hilary the Deacon 8. By Andreas Presbyter de Hostia 9. By the Chorepiscopi 10. By the Presbyters at Hy. Objections answered 11. By the Ancient Waldenses 12. By Wickliff's Followers in England 13. By the Presbyter of Taprobane THAT Ordination which was valid in the Primitive Church is valid now But Ordination by meer Presbyters was valid in the Primitive Church Therefore it is valid now The Major will be granted The Minor I prove 1. The Presbyters of Alexandria made their Bishops for almost two hundred years together Ierom having shewed at large from the Epistles of Peter Paul and Iohn That Bishops and Presbyters were the same at first he adds Quod autem postea unus electus est qui caeteris praeponeretur in Schismatis remedium factum est ne unusquisque ad se trahens Christi Ecclesiam rumperet Nam Alexandria à Marco Evangelistâ usque ad Heraclam Dionysium Episcopos Presbyteri semper unum ex se electum in excelsiori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant quomodo si exercitus Imperatorem faciat aut Diaconi eligunt ex se quem industrium noverint Archidiaconum vocant Note here 1. That Ierom undertaking to shew the Original way of making Bishops of Alexandria would leave nothing out that was material in the Constituting of them 2. He mentions no other way of Constituting them but this by the Presbyters 3. He brings this as an Argument of the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters that Presbyters at first made Bishops A Bishop in Ierom's Opinion is that to the Presbyters that an Arch-deacon is to the Deacons As an Arch-deacon chosen out of the Deacons is but a Deacon still though the chief Deacon so a Bishop set over Presbyters is but a Presbyter still though the chief Presbyter Is Episcopus qui inter Presbyteros primus The other Comparison of an Army making their General is not between the power of a General and that of a Bishop but it respects only the manner of their Creation As a General is made by the consent and choice of an Army so Bishops had their first being from the Presbyters consent 4. He ascribeth to the Presbyters the election the placing him in a higher degree and the naming of him a Bishop Neither do we read of any other Consecration Polydor Virgil confesseth that anciently in the making of a Bishop there were no Ceremonies used but the People met together to give their Testimony and Suffrage in their Election both Ministers and People did pray and Presbyters gave Imposition of Hands 5. He saith the Custom was changed from the time of Heraclas and Dionysius What Custom not the Election of a Bishop by Presbyters and People for that continued long after Therefore it must be the Constitution which afterwards was done by neighbouring Bishops in the way of Consecration This Testimony of Ierom is seconded by a more full one of Eutychius Patriarch of Alexandria who out of the Records and Traditions of that Church in his Arabick Originals thereof saith according to Selden's Translation in his Comment p. 29 30. Constituit item Marcus Evangelista duodecim Presbyteros cum Hananiâ qui semper manerent cum Patriarchâ adeò ut cùm vacaret Patriarchatus eligerent unum è duodecim Presbyteris cujus capiti reliqui undecim 〈…〉 eumque benedicerent Patriarcham eum crearent dein virum aliquem insignem eligerent eumque Presbyterum secum constituerent loco ejus qui sic factus est Patriarcha ita ut semper extarent duodecim Neque desiit Alexandriae ins●●●utum hoc de Presbyteris ut scilicet Patriarchae crearentur è Prsebyteris duodecim usque ad tempora Alexandri Patriarchae Alexandrini qui fuit ex numero illo 318. Is autem vetuit nè deinceps Patriarcham Presbyteri crearent decrevit ut mortuo Patriarchâ convenirent Episcopi qui Patriarcham Ordinarent Decrevit item ut vacante Patriarchatu eligerent sive ex quacunque regione sive ex duodecim illis Presbyteris sive aliis ut res ferebat virum aliquem eximium eumque Patriarcham vocarent atque ita evanuit institutum illud antiquius quo creari solitus à Presbyteris Patriarcha successit in locum