Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A65399
|
A reply by T.W. citizen of Chester, to a Vindication of Mr. M.H's Brief enquiry into the true nature of schism, from the exceptions of T.W. &c. By a person who conceals his name
|
T.W. citizen of Chester.
|
1692
(1692)
|
Wing W128; ESTC R219277
|
46,420
|
51
|
bottom of his 35 p. he says Ignatius charges the Bishop to take Coâ—â—nizance of every Member of his Church not excepting the very Servants and that it was the Custom then in every Congregation to receive the Sacrament every Lords day and that they never received it but from the Hand of the Bishop Hence he concludes that such Bishops must be the Pastors of single Congrezations and adds that this Argument has been copiously mannaged by Blundel Baxter Owen Clarkson and others This Gent. as in all other Quotations leaves me to find this I have met with the passage in St. Ignatius's Ep. to Polycarp Bishop of the Smyrmans where he saith Converse with all man by man as God shall enaâ—â—e thee he saith further Let nothing be done without thy Sentence c. A little farther he saith Let Congregations be gather'd more frequently and take the names of all Persons Let neither Men nor Maid Servants be despised by thee And in the same Ep. he saith Be mindful of the Bishop that God may be mindful of you I could give my Life for those persons who are Subject to the Bishop Presbyters and Deacons Let the Reader consider all the parts together and then Judge how reasonably Congregational Bishops can be hence inferr'd 1. It is evident that Polycarp was not Bishop of one Single Congregation only by these words call the Congregations together c. in the Plural Number 2. His Jurisdiction and Authority over the Congregations is manifest in these words Let nothing be done without thy Sentence 3. The Subjection 〈◊〉 to the Bishop from these Congragations contain'd in this Exhortation to them Be mindful of the Bishop that God may be mindful of you 4. The Distinction of the three Sacred Orders in the Church about which these men have made such a bussle in the world are plainly set down and overthrows all their pretentions to Congregational Bishops for saith he J could give my life for these persons who are Subject to the Bishop Pres yters and Deacons Here is a plurality of Congregations and a plurality of Presbyters and Deacons and but one Bishop From his not reading or concealing the most material parts in this Ep. wherein lye the true Sentiments of St. Ignatius how Triumphantly does he conclude for Congregational Bishops whereas the whole is altogether against it Then he glories in the copious management of this Argument by Blundel Baxter Owen Clarkson and others Alass all these have been judiciously Answered by Bramhal Hammond Morris Stillingfleet Dodwell c. In his 36. p. saith he It is observable in the passage cited out of Irenaeus the Presbyters are said to have their Succession from the Apostles and infers from thence that the Presbyters are the Apostles Successors as well as Bishops and must conseq ently have the same power How frequently in the writings of the Fathers and in Scripture are Bishops called Presbyters as that word signifies Seniority or Dignity and are not they sometimes called Deacons too but as it would be very absur'd to infer from hence an Equality of Bishops and Deacons so would it be unreasonable to conclude concerning Bishop and Presbyter That our Author is mistaken in St. Irenaeus's sense of the word Presbyter appears by the words immediately subjoyned which are these Qui cum Episcopatus Successione Charisma veritatis certum Secundum placitum Patris acceserâ—nt L. 4. C. 43. Who that is the Presbyters above mentioned with the Succession of Episcopacy have received the Infallible Gift of Truth according to the Will of the Father It is plain that no other can be here ment but those of the highest Order in the Church Bishops My Author p. 37. accuseth me that I designed not fair dealing with Mr. H-ry it was a great omission in me I therefore take his thô very sharp Rebuke very kindly Mr. H-ry in his 19 p. Parag. 6. very Orthodoxly saith Separation from Communion with those that we have joyned our selves to without a Cause give me leave to call it Separation for Separation sake without any regard had to any think amiss in the Church we Separate from or any thing better in that we joyn our selves to is Schism Then he proves the truth of this Proposition from his own description of Schism and then concludes When we quite cast off Communion with our Brethren out of Ambition Animosity to their persons affectation of Novelty and Singularity and the like Now our Author lest this truth so plainly set down by Mr. H-ry should carry too sharp an edge upon 'em in p. 37. brings in his Insinuation as he in vain supposeth to guard them from the stroke they must naturally receive from the applying of it to them For says he We all grant that for persons wilfully to with-draw themselves from such particular Churches as are framed according to Scripture Rules and impose no new and needless Terms is to act Schismatically because such wilfull Separation cannot be without the breach of Charity The difficulties which my Author which indeed are none at all would put lyes in Churches framed according to Scripture Rules c. It is Schism in Mr. H-ry's Judgment to Separate from a Church without any regard had to any thing amiss Let it be Examined if in our Church there be any thing amiss Are not all the Arcicles of saving Faith truly taught No just cause of Separation the Holy Sacraments duly Administred the Moral precepts and all the Rules of the Christian Religion plainly and constantly recommended unto us and prest upon us for our Excercise in the whole Course of our lives in the Sermons of our Clergy in all our Churches are not all things pertaining to a Godly Life and Salvation by our Church fully exhibited to us so as that no man can miscarry but by his own fault Here then sure can be nothing amâ—ss Can these men maintain and justifie then the truth of their Doctrine and separate themselves from us without pronounceing themselves Schismatics either their Doctrin is not true or these men are Schismatics in practice by their own shewing All the false and shiftless pretence they have is that the Church of England is not framed according to Scripture Rules and imposeth new and needless terms and therefore Separation from such a Church is no Schism That our Church is truly Apostolical and as truly framed as Jerusalem Antioch Alexandria and all other Primitive Churches according to Scripture Rules according to Christ Jesus's own Institution is fully proved in these papers So that that Objection is clearly Answered and is indeed vain and frivolous Now let his other as vain and frivolous Objection be considered viz. the Imposing new and needless Terms by which is I suppose meant Geremonies I must here crave leave to mention what I have before viz. the Love-â—cast the Holy kiss had no intrinsic vertue in them were no Essentials of Religion see his p. 2. mere Ceremonies and as this Gent. calls our
our Learning In the end of p. 17. and in 18. he lays to my charge that I distinguished not betwixt the extraordinary power which was properly Apostolical and that ordinary Pastoral Power which was eminently comprehended in the other The Authority and Government of the Church must have expired with the Apostles had not this Power been conveyed by their Delegation to their Successors by virtue whereof the ordinary Pastoral power viz. Power to Preach the Gospel Administer Sacraments Absolve Penitents c. was and is confer'd upon the Presbyters the extraordinary and Apostolic Power of Ordaining and Governing of Binding and Loosing being intirely reserved in the Bishop the Apostles Successors and this too of the ordinary Pasteral power is to use his own words eâ—inently comprehended in the Diocesan Bishops as it was in the Apostles Other distinction than this cannot be truly made as I suppose Then he maliciously mentions the Arch-bishop of Canterâ—ury what Christian temper or good manners he shews therein let the Reader judge For it is written Thou shalt not speak evil of the Ruler of thy People The Nature and Extent of the Episcopal Office being fuily stated answers what he saith in the bottom of his 18 p. He says Dr. Hammond tells us that all the Elders we read of in the Scripture were Bishops and that every particular Church had one of these This Gent. has this quality he never mentions the place where the thing may be sound in any Author he quotes which is not fair Dr. Hammond says indeed That the Bishops in every City were the Successors of the Apostles Dissert 3 c. 3. In his Anot. on Acts c. 11. b. and in his Tracts of the Power of the Keys Asian Bishops called Angels and Bishop and Elder terms equivalent which were written in Vindication of his Dissertations from the exceptions of the Assembly of Divines as they were called wherein he has by Scripture the Primitive Fathers and undeniable Arguments evinced to the silenceing of the Assemblers that the word Bishop in Scripture did always signifie a Prelate or a Diocesan Bishop and that the word Elder had the same signification so that if this Gent. will be concluded by the Author he has cited his pretentions to Parochial and Congregational Bishops are at an end P. 19. he says t is pritty to hear him say these two that is Timothy and Titus were ordained Bishops by the Apostles was there any Apostle concerned besides Paul in it Here lies the trick c. Whether they were Ordained by St. Paul alone or with others conjunct it was all one being I was only to prove that their being Ordained Bishops was by Apostolic power which being done thô by St. Paul alone is sufficient Nothing but prejudice and ill nature could see any thing of a Trick in this Then he puts the Question and how pray could Timothy and Titus succeed the Apostles in the See of Ephesus and Crete whilst the Apostles were living And then he is pleased in his 20 p. to Droll and scoff at 'em and then says to be the Apostles Successors the Apostles yet alive and in plenitude of Power is a very great Mystery so is all the Gospel then he closes making himself merry with the ignorance of a Vicar of Newport who by the way is said to have been a Nonconformist which in a matter so momentous carries too much levity for a Minister of the Gospel I said in my p. 3. this Apostolical Succession was begun in Timothy and Titus c. They could not have been said to be Successors of Apostolical power if the Apostle moved by the Holy Ghost had not whilst living confer'd it on them could the Apostle have Ordained them after he was dead The Apostle by Ordaining them in his life time secured the Succession to them and the Government too in the Apostles absence even whilest he was living so that it was not improperly said that this Apostolic power was begun in Timothy and Titus they being the first mentioned in Scripture who were invested with Episcopal power of Jurisdiction by Apostolical Ordination that this Succession of Bishops is as he scossingly calls it a very great Mystery is very true the Bishops being by virtue of this Succession as truly the Representatives of Christ Jesus as Ambassadors are of Kings In p. 20. he says I affirmed that no Presbyters had power to Ordain He desires me to try how I will reconcile this with Dr. Hammond who says these Presbyters were all Bishops 1 Tim. 4.14 or with Scripture it self that says even Timothy received the Gift by the laying on the Hands of the Presbitery I have try'd and find it easily reconciled with Dr. Hammond for his Judgment is that those Presbyters who joyn'd in that Ordination were Apostles which you may see in his Paraphrase on the above-mentioned Scripture and he refers to Note on Acts chap. 11. f. for his reasons Mere Presbyters a â—umea power to Ordain first found in the Church of Rome The first clear Instance of mere Presbyters assuming the power to Ordain is to be found in the Church of Rome as the learned Primate Bramhal tells us p. 164. and in p. 431. he saith We may justly ascribe the reviveing of the Aerian Heresy to the Dispensations of the Court of Rome who Licensed Ordinary Priests to Ordain and Confirm c. In p. 20. he further saith for propagation of Apostolical Succession c. I inform 'em that Linus by Apostolical Consecration Succeeded the Apostles in the See of Rome here is a double blunder again Linus succeeded whilst the Apostles were alive How else could he have Apostolical Consecration c. The best way to determin this is to observe the Rule which in great Wisdom our Law hath appointed for Jurors to bring in their Verdict according to their best Evidence The best Evidence in this Case are the writings of the Fathers who lived in the next Age among whom Irenaeus is accounted the most exact Notary of the Succession of Bishops to the Apostolic Sees L. 3. C. 3. he affirms that Linus was made Bishop by the Apostles and that he Succeeded St. Peter in the See of Rome and that next after him Cletus by some called Anen Cletus Succeeded in that See and with him ‖ Lib. 1. adv Her Sect. 6. Epiphanius agrees and with these diverse others now this is so far from being a blunder that it is a clear Manifestation of the great care the Apostles had of providing for the Succession in their life time which no man can object against much less profanely Ridicule as my Adversary does who will consider that otherwise the Succession must have failed and been extinct if neglected whil'st the Apostles lived In the 21 p. at the bottom he saith That my affirming that this line of Apostolic Succession of Bishops hath continued in all Ages to this present time Succession of Bishops from the Apostles without