Selected quad for the lemma: ground_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
ground_n	apostle_n	church_n	time_n	1,642	5	3.9468	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85313	Presbyterial ordination vindicated. In a brief and sober discourse concerning episcopacy, as claiming greater power, and more eminent offices by divine right, then presbyterie. The arguments of the Reverend Bishop Dr Davenant in his determination for such episcopacy are modestly examined. And arguments for the validity of presbyterial ordination added. With a brief discourse concerning imposed forms of prayer, and ceremonies. Written by G.F. minister of the gospel in defence of his own ordination, being questioned, because it was performed by Presbyters.	Firmin, Giles, 1614-1697.	1660 (1660)	Wing F961; Thomason E1045_17; ESTC R208016	42,577	55

reason to hazard our selves for them 5. We could not tell where to have them 6. And how many were corruption Doctrine 7. And what divers had been in persecution we know so that we had no reason to feek to such 8. Besides the State set up Presbyterial Ordination 9. Succession of Ministers must be continued VIII Arg. 8 That Ordination which by the most learned and godly Episcopall men is judged valid cannot be denied by others to be invalid without great defect of modesty and humility Unless they have good Scripture against it which be sure they have not But thus have a Presbyterial Ordination been judged by the most Learned c. as by that flower of all Episcopal men Bishop Usher so all our Bishops and Episcopal men who have asserted the Ministry of other Churches where no Bishops are to be lawful and valid And to go yet a little higher to Antiquity those places in Augustine a Tom. 4. p. 780 Fro. and Ambrose b Ephes 4. are well known both of them speak to the same purpose Nam in Alexandria per totam Aegyptum si desit Episcopus consecrat Presbyter so saith Augustine Consignant Presbyteri si praesens non sit Episcopus saith Ambrose Yea it seems that this Ordination by Presbyters did trouble Durandus Sent. l. 4. Dist 24. q. 5. for speaking to this question Utrum in Ecclesia sit aliqua potest as major Sacerdotali In point of Jurisdiction he will allow the Bishop to be superiour but De potestate Consecrationis vel Ordinis est magnum dubium By Jeroms Authority from the Scripture and by a reason he brings himself he could conclude Bishop and Priest in this point to be Pares but that the Authority of the Church had determined it otherwise Thus the Church is above Scripture and Reison eise Durandus will own our Ordination I will conclude with the saying of that learned Lutheran Gerhard who alloweth some Bishops Loc com de minist Eccles p. 261. Ex toto codice biblico ne apex quidom proferri potest quo demonstretur immutabili quadam necessitate a●●ipsius Dei Institutione potestatem ordinandi en modo competere Episcopo ●t si Minister ab Episcopo ordinetur ejus vocatio ordinatio oenseatur rata sin à Presbytero quod tunc irrita coram Deo frustranea sit habenda My Prayer is Lord lead me not into temptation But if it comes to this that I must renounce my Presbyterial Ordination and be ordained by a Bishop or I must be silenced I shall desire grace from the Lord and resolve to lay down my Ministry before I will my Ordination for in being re-ordained by Bishops 1. I must plainly condemn all Ministers of other Churches who are ordained only by Presbyters how abominable is this To null all other Ministers that have not Episcopal Ordination 2. I must establish an officer in the Church which Christ never did not his Apostles yea and this the chief Officer 3. Episcopal Ordinations have other Appendices of subscriptions which the Lord deliver us from I omit the slightiness of Bishops in their Ordinations above that I have seen among Presbyters 4. And with this I conclude If they can prove us to be Hereticks let them else I give them the 67 Canon Apostol Si quis Episcopus aut Presbyter aut Diaconus secundam ab aliquo ordinationem susceperit deponitor tam ipse quàm qui ipsum Ordinavit CHAP. III. Concerning Imposed Forms of Prayer HOw different mens opinions are concerning Forms of Prayer their Tongues Pens and Practises declare Some are carried vehemently against them and will own none but conceived Prayers made by the Spirit others are as high for Forms of Prayer against conceived Prayer us his Scriptures he could have conveyed all his minde to us by Tradition who doubts it But I may go so farr and desire you to shew us in the very next Churches to the Apostles that such things were in use in the worship of God and that those Churches affirme they had them from the Apostles by Tradition What neither Apostolical Writings nor Apostolical Traditions Whence came these then not that I will build my Faith upon a Tradition When I read these words in Just. martyr Apol. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I thought possibly some body might lay hold upon them for our Common-Prayers and not long after I found them used for that purpose by a Learned Doctor But how do these words prove an Imposed form of Prayer or that they read them out of a Book why he calls them common the next words will give us a Reason but they prove not the imposed forme Besides had he turned over the leaf in the next Page he might have found that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did pray 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which if Langus had any skill to translate is quantum pro virili sua potest Tertullians words are commonly known That they prayed sine Monitore Apol. c. 30. Then no Forms of Prayer were imposed Arg. Arg. 2 If the grounds for imposing Forms of Prayer now were of as much or more force in the Apostles time and yet they did not impose Forms of Prayer then those grounds are insufficient now and so the Act unwarrantable But the Grounds that now are alledged had as much yea and some of them more force then then now Ergo. For the Antecedent name your Grounds the main one that I hear is Uniformity but this was of much more force in the Apostles time for they travelling into Europe Asia Africa and planting of Churches in all these parts of the world had they made such a Liturgie and Forms of Prayer for the whole Catholique Church there had been a Uniformity in all the Churches of the world there should not have been so many Liturgies as there is now every Nation following their own what abundance have been and are Yea but Paul wanted wisdome had he lived longer he might have learned from other men Thus I wil carry all those Arguments which the Scorners of conceived Prayer bring and shew they had as much force then as now But had there been such form of Prayer in all the Churches they would not all have been lost sure enough some would have been reserved til now One thing it may be will be alledged Inability of men But this speaks ill it seems neither the Apostles nor Evangelists would ordain those to the Ministry who had not a gift of Prayer it being as requisite as a gift of preaching 2. However that troubles not my Question for I speak of imposing upon men gifted and able To say The Churches were then newly planted Therefore say I the more need of Formes of Prayer if needfull at all and yet the Apostles lived many years after the Churches were planted and did not impose or appoint Forms of Prayers III. Arg. 3 That Act which in great part doth frustrate one fruit of Christs Ascention

est Timotheum Titum Jacobum multosquè alios propriè dictos Episcopos fuisse viventibus Apostolis c. yet adds in the conclusion quasi affixos Well then certum est but how I pray certitudine fidei divinae else 't is not certain to us in this controversie I regard not mens words without Scripture but what mean these words quasi affixos this quasi spoils the certainty for if but quasi affixi they were but quasi Episcopi as I could soon prove from the Scriptures and the Canons of Councils I wonder the Dr. should say that James was the Bishop of Jerusalem and that propriè dictus I see Lapide and Lorinus giving that the reason why James spake next to Peter because James was Bishop of Jerusalem where the Council was held But 1. He was an Apostle one of the Pillars Gal. 2.9 whose sentence in this question swayed the Synod but to have an Apostle a Bishop in our sense is strange Had the Dr. forgot that on this ground our Divines against the Papists prove that Peter could not be Bishop of Rome because he was an Apostle and so not fixed 2. If James were a Bishop why had he not his Title given him in Acts 15 For in v. 4 6 23. we have mention made of Apostles and Presbyters but not a word of a Bishop this is very far from this certainty 'T is certain indeed he was no Bishop As for Timothy and Titus there hath been a huge stir about these I have heard that Mr. Prin hath written a Treatise which he cals the unbishopping of Timothy and Titus and that so strongly that as none yet ever went about to answer him so none can I could never see the Book but refer the Reader to him I shall be the briefer I see some Divines prove that Paul did constitute Timothy Bishop of Ephesus because he said 1 Tim. 1.3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus Strange that a Bishop of a place should be besought to stay in his Bishopprick And Titus because he said Chap. 1.5 For this cause I left thee in Crete I pray cast these two Texts into Syllogisms and let us see how invincibly Timothy and Titus come out Bishops of those places in the Conclusions Could not Timothy stay at Ephesus to oppose heresies and ordain with others or if not with others Ministers and Titus left at Crete to do the same but it must follow necessarily Ergo they were constitued fixed Bishops of those places But the Fathers say they were Bishops that 's a proof not sufficient to make jus divinum The Papists and Dr. Hammond say they were Archbishops both alike for truth Do the Fathers speak properly when they say so It was the saying of a great Bishop that Histories are not curious in calling men by their Ti●les Sure I am that Paul gives him another title of which presently If the Fathers did so might they not be deceived with the subscriptions of the Epistles which this Learned Dr. meddles not with knowing they were not Canonical Name I pray the most ancient Fathers and tell us if they call these so in your sense Sure I am that Ignatius cals Timothy a Deacon and joynes Linus with him Epist ad Tral p. 71. But what if the Fathers call them so if I find strong grounds in Holy Scripture to make me believe they were of a higher order than ordinary Officers if a hundred Fathers say they were ordinary Bishops I regard them not Searching the Scriptures we find for Timothy that 1. He is often joyned with Paul in the Inscription of his Epistles as Phil. 1.1 Col. 1.1 1. Thes 1. 2 Thes 1. Philem. 1. 2. We find him journeying with Paul and sent up and down by Paul 3. He is bidden to do the work of an Evangelist 2 Tim. 4.5 Now though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken largely yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is used but thrice in the New Testament is never taken but for a peculiar Officer He was one of those Paul mentions Eph. 4.11 To confine the word Evangelists to those who wrote the Gospels is absurd Matthew and John I hope were Apostles and Philip was an Evangelist Acts 21.8 yet wrote no Gospel If he were no Evangelist but bidden to do the work of one this is strange an inferiour order do the work of a superiour However I hope by this Presbyters may ordain as well though they be of an inferiour Order But if Timothy must do the work of an Evangelist he must not fixe at Ephesus No more fixed at Crete was Titus though for a time left at Crete In 2. Cor. 8.23 Paul cals him his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 words sutable to an Evangelist sent up and down by Paul as we may observe in the Epistles and journeying with Paul After he was at Crete Paul sends to him to Nicopolis Tit. 3.12 which was six hundred miles distant from Crete as Bunting saith p. 566. How long he stayed with him or whither he went next I find not But towards the end of Pauls life 2 Tim. 4.10 11. he was at Rome with Paul and by Paul sent to preach in Dalmatia saith Lapide How these things sute with a Bishop in our sense I know not Hence Junius Zanchy Polanus Beza Calvin Diodati and the Lutherans conclude him to be an Evangelist As for Evangelists Ensebius will give us some light to understand them Eccles Hist lib. 3. cap. 37. He speaks of divers then who obtained the first step of Apostolical succession and being as divine Disciples of the chief and principal men builded the Churches every where planted by the Apostles c. Taking their journey fulfilled the work and office of Evangelists that is they preached Christ unto them which as yet heard not of the Doctrine of Faith These men having planted the Faith in sundry new and strange places ordained there other Pastors committing unto them the tillage of the new ground passing themselves unto other people and Countries being holpen thereunto by the Grace of God which wrought with them for as yet by the power of the Holy Ghost they wrought miraculously so that innumerable multitude of men embraced the Religion of the Almighty c. Thus Eusebius If this description of Evangelists sute any doth it not Timothy and Titus who were indeed divine Disciples of Paul a principal man sent up and down by him and if these wrought miraculously must it be denied of Timothy and Titus as for the gift of Tongues that was also needful for men travelling and preaching in so many several Countreys I find some forced to yield they were Evangelists at first but afterwards were made Bishops of these places 1. Was the being made a Bishop a degree above an Evangelist Answ was an ordinary Officer above an extraordinary Officer then some truth may be in this I find Concil Sard. Can. 13. that the Bishop must ascend