Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	aaron_n	atonement_n	incense_n	257	3	11.6752	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90932	The preacher sent: or, A vindication of the liberty of publick preaching, by some men not ordained. In answer to two books: 1. Jus divinum ministerii euengelici. By the Provincial Assembly of London. 2. Vindiciæ ministerii euangelici. By Mr. John Collings of Norwich. / Published by Iohn Martin, minister of the Gospel at Edgfield in Norfolk. Sam. Petto, minister of the Gospel at Sand-croft in Suffolk. Frederick Woodal, minister of the Gospel at Woodbridge in Suffolk.	Martin, John, 1595 or 6-1659.; Petto, Samuel, 1624?-1711.	1658 (1658)	Wing P3197; Thomason E1592_2; ESTC R208851	240,824	381

they grant Jus Div. Minist pag. 80. that in cases of necessity men out of Office may preach and instance in Aedesius and Frumentius two private men by whose means the Indians were converted to the Christian faith c. Now the case of Saul was extraordinary the Philistims were ready to assault him he had not made his peace with God Samuel delayed his coming the people began to scatter from him whereupon he constrained himself and offered a sacrifice all these things our Brethren reckon up Jus Divin Minist pag. 81. and then call it a necessitated act So in the case of Uzza what greater necessity could there be then this when the Ark was in danger 2 Sam. 6. 6. The oxen shook it 1 Chron. 13. 9 10. The oxen stumbled If the Ark had fallen or had been broken how exceedingly Israel had suffered by it the use of it will evidence and that dolefull complaint 1 Sam. 4. 17. The Ark of the Lord is taken and ver 22. The glory is departed from Israel for the Ark of God is taken Either our Brethren must say That none may preach in a case of necessity without Ordination or being designed to Office and so cross themselves and that none must preach as probationers for that is designation to Office but they must ordain men before they hear them preach and so before they know their fitness to preach or else they must grant that these examples of Saul and Uzza are impertinent and no proofs of the Argument Let them prove that these acts might be performed so much as once by any before they were actually in such Offices as the works did belong to upon any account whatever 2. These acts were expresly forbidden and some of them threatned with death to any person that did them besides the Officers designed for the doing of them as Numb 4. ver 15. The Sons of Kohath shall come to bear it bu● they shall n●t touch any holy thing lest they dy They are forbidden so much as touching of any of the holy things upon pain of death Uzzah breaking such a command he suffered the penalty was punished with death So Numb 16. ver 40. That no stranger which is not of the seed of Aaron come neer to offer incense before the Lord that he be not as Korah and his company c. All Israelites or Levites save Aarons sons only are counted strangets in this case of Priest-hood None might Offer incense Ainsw but they lest they be as Korah in sin and punishment Numb 1. 51. Numb 18. 22 23. Neither must the Children of Israel henceforth come nigh the Taberbernacle of the Congregation lest they bear sin and dy Let any shew where the preaching of gifted Brethren is thus forbidden else these examples are nothing to their purpose And besides the matter of these works as well as the manner of performing them was not allowed to any but those Officers whereas the matter of this work of preaching is allowed undenyably to such as are no Officers they may exhort and reprove privately by our Brethrens own grant but might not privately burn incense or offer sacrifice which sheweth a further difference between those acts Object 3. This practise doth make voyd or at best unnecessary and insufficient those Officers which God hath appointed What needs a peculiar Officer to be set apart to a common work Answ 1. It is common but to such as are gifted not to all Christians as they suggest 2. It is not performed in the same manner by gifted men or under such a relation as in case of Office it is Officers preach to their Churches as to those that they are over in the Lord that are committed to their charge for such ends but gifted men stand not under any such relation to those they preach unto Some Churches have no Officers and those that have yet need the gifts of other Members In some places there are no Churches to be Officers to the people having never had the Gospel preached to them It will hardly be proved that Officers must leave their Churches to preach to these and if not they must either finde some Officers who have no Churches which is to finde a shepherd without a flock a relate without a correlate or else they must say that none must preach for the conversion of such or else that men not in Office may preach and this doth not make Officers either voyd unnecessary or insufficient Officers are necessary and sufficient to the end that Christ hath appointed them unto to be over and take charge of his Churches under him but they are not sufficient to undertake the whole worke of preaching in all places and to all persons 3. This Objection lyeth as strongly against Officers being designed to admonish exhort or reprove at least in private for what need a peculiar Officer to be set apart say they to a common work other Christians may exhort and reprove and will our Brethren say therefore there is no need that Officers should be designed to this work Obj. 4. This practise doth confound disturb that order which God hath set in his Church therefore it must needs be sinful God is the God of order and not of confusion 1 Cor. 14. and hath commanded that every one should do his own work 1 Thes 4. Rom. 12. And abide in his own calling 1 Cor. 7. he hath condemned those that walk disorderly 2 Thes 3. and are busie-bodies he hath placed in his Church different orders some shepherds some sheep some Teachers of the word some to be taught as their places so their works are distinct This takes away the distinction between shepherds and flock Pastor and people c. Ans 1. We have proved that the preaching of gifted Brethren is a part of that order which Christ hath appointed therefore doth neither confound nor disturb that order which God hath set in his Church If Christ hath allowed their preaching then it is their work and in doing of it they walk orderly We have shewn before that it doth belong to their place and calling to preach and thither we refer the Reader 2. The preaching of persons not designed to Office doth not take away the distinction between shepherds and flock Teachers and some Taught because they do not act under such a relation towards them as Officers do A Father may reach and instruct his children as a Father another man may instruct and teach the same children as a School-master yet these relations are not destroyed or confounded hereby though both doe the same work Here are Fatherly teachings and yet the distinction between the Master and Scolar is not taken away and the same may be said if a friend Teacheth them who stands in no such relation to them It is a common practice in Schools for some youths of ripe wits and wel learned by the appointment of the School-master to be often set to teach fellow-scholars and yet the

That is sufficient to our purpose for so some of the chief men in a Church some of the most eminent believers may lay hands on Officers in the name of the rest we do not say that every member in a Church must lay on hands Obj. 4. The Levites were taken by God in stead of the first-born as appears Numb 8. 16 17. and hence it was that the children of Israel that is the first born of Israel were to lay on hands upon them for the Levites gave an atonement for them and were offered up to the Lord in their stead and as the Rabbins say every first born laid on hands on the Levite that was for him which if it be so will afford us two other answers to this Text. 1. The children of Israel had not onely a special command but a special reason also for what they did And wherefore this example cannot be made a pattern for New Testament practice 2. That this laying on of hands upon the Levites was not for them to set them apart for the service of the Lord but rather a setting them apart for a sacrifice unto the Lord. It was the command of God that the children of Israel must put their hands upon the sacrifices they did offer unto the Lord c. Answ 1. That the first-born onely did lay hands on the Levites is not proved It is true they were taken instead of the first-born but it was the Lords command that warranted the persons to lay hands on the Levites Numb 8. 10. and that runs in general to the children of Israel and therefore did not authorize the first-born more then any other persons to do it Hence 2. If the first-born did lay hands on the Levites it was not by vertue of any office but in the name and by the appointment of the children of Israel for the command did run to them in general 3. If the children of Israel had laid their hands upon the Levites upon the account of that command of God which required their putting hands upon the sacrifices they did offer then every man of them must have laid hands on them for so that command injoyneth Levit. 1. v. 2. When any man of you shall offer c. V. 4. He shall lay his hand upon the head of the burnt-offering c. Not a substitute not another for him but he every one to whom the offering belonged ought to impose hands upon it himself and this would overthrow their third objection which saith It is not imaginable that all the Israelites did put on hands c. and also this denyeth that it was onely the first-born that did impose hands and so destroyeth a great part of this fourth objection 4. It is not proved that this laying on of hands upon the Levites was a setting them apart for a sacrifice unto the Lord and therefore the objection is altogether groundless we do not read that hands were to be imposed on all sacrifices or offerings no not on the first-born in whose stead the L●vites were taken neither do we remember that the people were to impose hands on any but the burnt-offering Levit. 1. v. 4. He shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him other Sacrifices Aaron and his Sonnes or the Elders c. imposed hands on when that ceremony was used about them at all And that the Levites were not such a sacrifice the very name burnt offering will truly evidence Nay it is plain that the end of their offering before the Lord was that they might execute their office Numb 8. v. 11. And Aaron shall offer the Levites before the Lord for an offering not of the first-born onely as our brethren would have it but of the children of Israel not as their propitiation and atonement or as a sacrifice but that they may execute the service of the Lord so v. 15 16. They were indeed to make atonement for the children of Israel but not by offering sacrifices for the peoples sins for that was done by the Priests onely nor by being a sacrifice to make atonement for them because no such end of Aarons offering them up is proved and another end is mentioned v. 13 14 15 16 21. but by their other service in the Text and this the words following do confirm That there be no plague among the children of Israel when the children of Israel come nigh unto the Sanctuary Their making atonement was after they were offered not by being offered for an offering unto the Lord And by many verses it is plain that their setting apart was for the service of the Lord v. 11 15 19 21 22. and therefore the objection vanisheth Our brethren observe That notwithstanding this imposition of hands the Levites were not thereupon invested into their office it was Aarons waving of the Levites and separating them from among the children of Israel that did constitute and make them Church-officers If this be fully granted nothing is gained against us for we are far from thinking that Ordination doth constitute or make Church officers much less do we imagine that imposition of hands doth it But from hence we gather thus much That it was not the intendment of imposition of hands in Old Testament dayes to confer an office and therefore seeing the ceremony was borrowed thence it is very unlikely that in New Testament dayes it should be intended for such an end And thus we have proved the first part of the Minor of our sixth Argument viz. That believers may undoubtedly perform all the acts which Ordination so far as any man acteth in it doth confist in or is made up of The second part of the Minor viz. That these acts are not limited in their use upon the occasion of Ordination to Officers onely we prove thus because none of the Texts which speak of Ordination do limit it to Officers onely let our brethren prove any such limitation and unlesse they can do that which we suppose they never can it will necessarily follow That in a Church which hath no Officers some believers may lawfully or warrantably ordain without Officers If they may perform the same acts upon other occasions and they be not limited and confined to Officers upon this occasion then they may perform them here also And for the clearing of this that there is no such limitation we shall examine briefly our brethrens Arguments against Ordination by the people without Ministers They tell us That they might argue from what is recorded by Jewish Jus Divin Min. p. 184. Writers concerning the custom of creating men members of their great Council or Sanhedrin and they tell us That when a Successor was to be provided for Moses God commands him to take Joshua and lay his hands upon him c. and accordingly it was done Numb 27. 18. And so for those seventy Elders it is certain from the Jewish Writers that the succession

case justly deserveth such proceedings if it be asserted that gifted men are empowred to preach And thus we have answered their Arguments to prove their first Position CHAP. IX Answering such Arguments as are brought to prove that none may do the work of the Ministry without Ordination THere are several distinctions which our Brethren premise before they come to their arguments and these we have spoken to before They say Jus Div. Min. p. 78. It is Authoritative teaching only which we deny If by authoritative they mean the preaching Office-wise or such preaching wherein Office-power is put forth we might grant all their Arguments and yet nothing is gained against the preaching of gifted men But because their position and some of their Arguments seem to reach further and to deny all ordinary preaching without Ordination therefore we shall give a reply to such arguments as seem to have the greatest strength in them their position is this Position That none may do the work of the Ministry without Ordination Jus Divin Minist pag. 78. That none may undertake the work of the Ministry but he that is solemnly set apart thereunto Jus Divin Min. pag. 80. Their Arguments to prove this are eight in number Argum. 1. That work for the doing of which God hath designed special Officers of his own neither ought nor may be performed by any that are not designed unto that Office But God hath designed special Officers of his own for the preaching of his word Therefore none ought or may preach the word but such as are designed unto this Office Answ Their Minor we grant if they intend no more in it then they intimate in the explication of it We acknowledge that preaching of the word is one work assigned unto Officers It is not their only work yet it is one special work which they are appointed to perform But their Major we deny and we say That a work for the doing of which God hath designed special Officers of his own may be performed by some that are not designed unto that Office As for example Act. 6. 4. But we will give our selves continually to prayer and to the Ministery of the word Here prayer is declared to be a special work of Officers as well as the Ministery of the word the Apostles would have Deacons appointed that they might be freed from worldly incumbrances and might give themselves continually not only to preaching but also to prayer and therefore prayer is a work for the doing of which God hath designed special Officers of his own So Act. 20. 36. Yet prayer may be performed by such as are not designed unto Office It is the duty of every Christian to be exercised in the work of prayer 1 Thes 5. 17. Pray without ceasing and this is injoyned the Saints in general ver 14. We exhort you brethren Jam. 5. 13. Is any among you afflicted let him pray Also to distribute worldly goods is one work for the doing of which God hath designed special Officers of own viz. Deacons Act. 4. 34 35. compared with Act. 6. ver 1 2. c. and yet it is the duty of such as are not designed unto that Office to distribute to the necessities of others Rom. 12. 13. Distributing to the necessity of the Saints and this is put in the midst of Christian duties ver 12. Such as are to rejoyce in hope and be patient in tribulation and continue instant in prayer are also to distribute and therefore it cannot be restrained to Officers 2 Cor. 9. 1 2 13. Also exhorting and reproving or rebuking are works for the doing of which God hath designed special Officers of his own The Apostle layeth down the qualifications of a Bishop or Elder Tit. 1. ver 5 6 7 8 9. and one work of his is to exhort and convince gainsayers ver 9. and Tit. 2. 15. These things speak and exhort and-rebuke with all authority Yet these works may warrantably be performed by some that are not designed unto that Office Heb. 3. 13. Exhort one another dayly and 10. 25. Matth. 18. 15. Object 1. But though private Christians may doe those works in the matter of them which God hath designed Officers to as privately pray distribute exhort rebuke yet they may not do these in the sameway and manner that Officers are to perform them in not publickly or with all authority The fuller answer to this objection is given before yet we will add thus much Answ If an Officer exhorteth or rebuketh such as he is over in the Lord in private will not this be deemed another manner of act then if a brother doth it who is no Officer If so then the publickness of an act is not necessary to make it an act of Office 2. If it be the different way and manner of acting that maketh any act to be an act of Office then our Brethrens argument halteth for that is drawn from the work it self not from the manner of working Let them put their argument into that form and then it must run thus That work for the doing of which God hath designed special Officers of his own neither ought nor may be performed in that same way and manner which Officers act in by any that are not designed to that Office But God hath designed special Officers of his own for the preaching of the word Therefore none ought or may preach the word in the same way and manner that Officers doe but such as are designed unto this Office And if they will put the argument into this form we may grant the whole and yet gifted men may preach the word without crossing of it for they do it in another way and manner not under such a relation to those they preach to as Officers are And although this Answer might be sufficient to the Argument yet we shall take away their grounds for their Major Object 2. God hath severely punished such as have done the work appointed by him to special Officers though they had no intent to invade the Office unto which that work was by God designed Saul 1 Sam. 13. 8 9 c. he lost his Kingdom for offering sacrifice though but once and that in a great straight Uzzah 1 Chron. 13. 9 10. who put his hand to the Ark and that out of a good intention to keep it from falling when the oxen shook it and yet the anger of the Lord was kindled against him he smote him that he died Uzziah 2 Chron. 16. 16 17 18. went into the Temple of the Lord to burn incense upon the Altar of Incense and though he was a King yet the Lord smote him immediately with the plague of Leprosie of which he was not healed till his death Answ 1. This Objection concludeth as much or is equally strong against the preaching of any who are not Officers be the necessity never so great and the case never so extraordinary and so is against themselves as much as against us for