Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
lord_n day_n great_a people_n 16,100 5 4.4671 3 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A35632 The case of pluralities & non-residence rightly stated in a letter to the author of a book called, A defence of pluralities, &c. shewing the false reasonings and evil doctrines therein contained / by an impartial hand, and a hearty well-wisher to the Church of England. Impartial hand and a hearty well-wisher to the Church of England. 1694 (1694) Wing C966; ESTC R16560 28,436 93

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

with them there is no reason to think that any other men should be punished in another World for the Non-performance of any other obligation whatsoever And yet that you are guilty of doing this appears from what you say in reference to the Spanish Bishops in the Council of Trent who would have had Residence of Bishops to be declared necessary Jure Divino Upon which if the Spanish Bishops ●ag 24 25. say you had been asked whether the Residence which they asserted to be of Divine Right included the whole year or only part of it they could not have agreed in it If Residence of the whole Year were required by the Law of God by what Authority did they appear in that place out of their Dioceses c. If only partial Residence were required who should define how much God would accept or how much might lawfully be spent out of their Dioceses It might have been alleged against them that since God himself had revealed nothing as to this matter it was an evident Argument that he intended no such obligation So that according to your wise way of arguing to reside even any the least part of a year in ones Bishoprick is not necessary Jure Divino And you do yet more openly assert this Doctrine when you bring the Incumbent before the great Tribunal at the last day and like a trusty Advocate for the Non-resident Pluralist you plead thus for him Pag. 33 34. And then as to a Proxy if the Priest allegeth that the same Authority of the Bishop which committed the Care of the Parish to him did disburden him of that Care and imposed it in whole or in part upon a Substitute there is no reason to believe that God will not accept this plea. Here you speak out indeed and all at once For if a Cure may be wholly served by a Substitute and if God at the day of Judgment will accept of such a Plea then 't is plain that all personal care and labour is unnecessary But Sir 't is to be hoped before that great and terrible day of the Lord's comes you will learn more Seriousness and Modesty than to think of preferring so thin and false an excuse to so great a Judge A false Excuse I say For what Statute or Canon of the Realm or Church of England doth authorize a Bishop to disburden an Incumbent of the Care of his Parish and impose it in whole upon a Substitute I know that Dispensations may be had for Local Non-residence But I challenge you or any Man else to produce any Authority that the Bishop hath either by our Canon or Statute-Law to transferr the Cure of Souls wholly from the Incumbent to another Though when I consider you as an Antiquary I have a good mind to revoke my challenge For you may have Rods in Brine and Canons perdue which a Countrey Gentleman never heard of before And we need not despair of having any thing made out by Men vers'd in such Studies since we have had such Doctrines published as the genuine Product of the Church of England represented in Convocation which the hundredth part of the Clergy themselves knew nothing of till they had layn in the dark about 80 years and were at last published either to prove some new Doctrine or else for nothing at all But let me as a Friend once more remind you of that wretched Plea which it seems you intend to make for your self and Brethren at the last day consider of it again and tell me whether you think it can pass in that great Court nay whether your own Conscience if you would let it speak out can vouch it or rely upon it I am so far from thinking that it will be accepted by him who is greater than our Consciences and knoweth all things That a Civil or Ecclesiastick Judge would or at least ought to reject it For 't is certain if any Bishop should pretend to a power beyond Law and Canon and the Nature of things all such pretensions would be vain both as to this World and another And I believe 't is as certain and true that no Bishop of the Church of England as now established did ever assume such a sort of Authority If any Prelate had a faculty of loosing Men from the obligations to their People I doubt not but he might have as much Custom amongst some of your Friends as 't is usually said that Priest might have who could procure a Commission for unmarrying People And for ought I could ever yet learn any Priest may as well and legally do the latter as a Bishop the former The Notion of transferring the Charge from the Incumbent to the Curate is new and I hope your own I do believe that 't was never heard of in General Council Parliament or Convocation And if you have no better thoughts to communicate to that Reverend Body last mentioned I hope you will never have the Vote of an honest Clergyman to sit in it But when you write again pray let us know by what Instruments Letters or Faculties a Bishop doth or can release an Incumbent wholly from his charge or in what Court such Letters Dispensatory can be procured For I believe I know some who would give money for them tho' I do not imagine any good Man would For I do not think that any Humane Power can take off that obligation which every Minister hath upon him of personal Labour amongst his People I shall reduce what I have to say on this subject to these following Propositions I. Tho' Plurality of Benefices be not in it self contrary to the Law of God yet for any one to take on himself such Charges as he cannot or will not perform is II. Tho' Curates may be used for the more full and perfect discharge of Duty yet the whole Care of the people is not intrusted with them III. Tho' perpetual Local Residence be not injoined by God yet to live so near the Cure and to be actually resident so far forth as effectually to answer all the ends of the Ministry is IV. Vicars by reason of their Oaths are obliged to Local Residence unless they be dispensed with by the Bishop I. Tho' Plurality of Benefices be not in it self contrary to the Law of God yet for any one to take on himself such Charges as he cannot or will not perform is It cannot indeed with any appearance of Truth be asserted that 't is unlawful to serve or have more Benefices than one The Scriptures do neither in express Terms nor by any Consequence fairly to be drawn from them prohibit it And thus far we are agreed I say as to the Conclusion tho' not as to the Premises For one of the arguments by which you would prove this is a meer Cavill I mean that pag. 37 c. where you undertake to conclude the Lawfulness of Pluralities from the Authority and Example of the primitive Church and that 't is lawful to
Ministry of Priesthood And I need only set them down to shew that they do not at all concern the present Controversie And 't is the only instance of modesty which you have given us in your whole Book that you have not so much as mentioned this Argument as some miscall it But Further another plea whereby you endeavour to wash off the Clergy-mans obligation to labour among his People and which seems to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the fundamental Error of your whole Book is that Ministers are not ordained to one Diocese or Parish but to the Catholick Church Pag. 43. passim Tho' you acknowledge so much of the truth viz. That good order and discipline do require that the exercise of their Office be confined to some certain limits and place as will determine every good man against the Conclusion you would draw from it For if he who sits not down on his Cures and will not confine the exercise of his Office to the Church or Churches intrusted with him do break discipline and good order 't is plain that he is guilty of a great crime But I shall further shew that this Notion of a Minister's being ordained not to this or that Parish or Diocese but to the Universal Church is false Not but that upon occasion he may exercise his Function in any part of the Church and upon whatever shore he is cast he ought not to be re-ordained but that when he enters into Orders he is design'd for the service of some particular Church or Diocese more than of the whole As for the Church of England she ordains none except in one or two special Cases which cannot break a rule fine certo Titulo And in the Office for ordering of Priests Can. 33. among other questions asked by the Bishop this is one Will you maintain and set forward Quietness Peace and Love amongst all Christian people and especially among them that are or shall be committed to your charge And your self I presume have made answer to it in the words of the Office I will do so the Lord being my Helper Now in this question other Christian People are contradistinguished to those of your Cure and in the answer you oblige your self to prosecute your duty more especially amongst the latter But you that would be called the true Sons of the Church of England write and act as if you were so much her fondlings as that you had a particular priviledge of contradicting her You can be very severe upon your Brethren of the Clergy who mutilate or disuse her Ceremonies but think it no fault in your selves almost or altogether to lay aside the exercise of your Functions at least in such places as the Canons and Constitutions of the Church do peculiarly require your labours I know no labouring Clergy of our Church who do mutilate or disuse her Ceremonies but if I did I should think them more excusable who do something of their duty than they who wholly neglect it And Sir 'T is such as these that betray her Cause that open the mouths of her Adversaries and give just occasion of scandal And let me tell you That you are partaker of these mens sins by pretending to justify them And take my word for it the Church is very little beholden to you for your doing so especially since you have made bold with her for a little arguments sake so far as to contradict her Offices and Canons But alas Canons and Rubricks and such like things were not made for Authors and Grand Pluralists They are so far from being obliged to obey them that one would think they never read or at least remembred them Otherwise how could any one who did not think himself above Canons confidently assert That Priests are not ordained to this or that Parish but to serve the Church of God in general when the Church has solemnly decreed That they are or ought to be ordained to some particular Cure and obliges them there more especially to prosecute their Office And even in the Primitive and Apostolical Churches Men were not ordained so much for the service of the whole as of one particular Diocese The Apostles themselves were indeed Catholick Bishops in the largest sence and had a Commission to teach all Nations and had every one of them the care of all the Churches But tho' they did not themselves sit down and take up their Residence in any particular Diocese yet they constituted distinct and setled Governours for every Church as soon as it was raised Thus St. Timothy was created Bishop of Ephesus Titus of Crete Linus or Cletus or both of Rome even during the Apostles lives And as Bishops were then design'd for every particular Diocese so as the Number of the Christians grew 't was absolutely necessary that they should have Presbyters subservient to them And 't is evident that those Presbyters did not only live in subjection to the Bishops of those distinct Dioceses to which they were ordained so long as themselves thought fit but were obliged not to leave them without the consent of the Diocesan And when the Levity of some prompted them to break this standing Custome of the Church there were Canons made to confine all Bishops and Presbyters to the Service of that Diocese to which they were first ordained And there is only this difference between the Primitive Platform and our own viz. That in the former Presbyters were ordained not for the Service of one particular Congregation but of the whole Diocese to serve the Bishop in the more full and perfect discharge of his Office to be sent to such parts of the Diocese and for such a time as the Bishop thought fit whereas by our Constitution every Presbyter has his particular Allotment and his distinct Dividend in the endowments and labours of the Church But they were no more designed for the Service of the Church at large in those days than they are now If we enquire why every particular Presbyter had not his distinct Cure allotted him in the primitive Church we must needs allow it to be its infant and unsetled State So that when the Empire came into the Church and Christianity began to be the Religion of Rome and Greece all Churches soon fell into a Parochial Division And that so early that at the Council of Chalcedon it seems to have been a general Establishment for there it is provided that No one shall be ordained a Priest or Deacon at large 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be at his own Liberty but should be assigned particularly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to some Church either in the City or in a Village Can. 6. or Martyrdome or Monastery I know you are not willing to allow Parish-Priests or Churches to have been generally constituted at this time but I think this is a better Authority for it than you can produce against it It could not indeed be so early in our Church which was