Selected quad for the lemma: order_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
order_n	apostle_n	bishop_n	deacon_n	3,197	5	10.6688	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A57068	The tabernacle of God with men, or, The visible church reformed a discourse of the matter and discipline of the visible church, tending to reformation / by Richard Resbury ...	Resbury, Richard, 1607-1674.	1649 (1649)	Wing R1136A; ESTC R32282	56,135	82

distinct from and above Presbyters is manifest in this instance of the Church of Alexandria where till Heraclas and Dionysius a Bishop was no other but one of the Presbyters by the choice and consent of the rest set in an higher degree 2. Another pretence from antiquity is the Catalogues of Bishops succeeding each other in such and such Churches Answ How doth it appeare that these Bishops had peculiar Ordination and above Presbyters there is as formall a Catalogue given in of the Bishops of Alexandria as of any other Church succeeding Mark the Evangelist in this order 1. Anianus 2. Abilius 3. Cerdo 4. Primus 5. Justus 6. Eumenes 7. Marcus 8. Celadion 9. Agrippas or Agrippinus 10. Julianus 11. Demetrius 12. Heraclas 13. Dionysius Whereas yet we have it cleare from Ierome that Heraclas was the first who had distinct Ordination and Office above a Presbyter 3. Pretence from antiquity such testimonies as are given to the honour and power of Bishops by the Ancients and here above all Ignatius helps at every turne Answ 1. Forasmuch as five of his Epistles are granted by diverse advocates of Episcopacy to be such as do evidently betray no little forgery who shall assure us that those seven by them avouched in all things genuine are so indeed what more unlikely then that they should escape tampering by the same hands 2. Those seven most stood upon are by very learned men amongst others Salmasius judged in the very testimonies very spurious and that not from blasse but upon good grounds 1. The arrogance of some of them take that for one in his Epistle to the Trallians What is the Bishop but he that is strongly possest of all Principality and Authority beyond all as much as is possible for men to be possest being made an imitatour according to Power of Christ who is God He that can find here an Apostolicall spirit breathing surely hath little acquaintance with the Apostles writings saith Salmasius and indeed how unlike to that of the Apostle is it 1 Cor. 3.5 Who then is Paul and who is Apollo but ministers by whom you beleeved c. This was Pauls way to take up schisme how contrary to this Ignatius here for the Prevention of it 2 Of the falsenesse of some that in the same Epistle Reverence the Bishop as Christ as the blessed Apostles commanded you Where is this command That in his Epistle to the Smyrnians Let that be accounted a firme Eucharist which is by the Bishop administred or by him to whom he shall have committed it it is not lawfull without the Bishop either to baptize or to offer c. Hath not the Holy Ghost committed preaching and baptisme and administration of the Supper joyntly to every Presbyter this sounds ill in every care except of Papist or Prelate the Church of Alexandria had no true baptisme for about two hundred and sixty years if this be true doctrine as for the Reformed Churches they are in the same case 3. The idolatrous strayne of some take that in the same Epistle In the Church is nothing greater then the Bishop consecrate to God for the salvation of the whole world 4. The impertinencie of some take that in his Epistle to the Philadelphians Let the Princes obey the Emperour the Souldiers the Princes the Deacons the Presbyters those High-Priests the Presbyters and the Deacons and the rest of the Clergy and who are they I wonder and what part of the Clergy is the Deacon with all the People and the Souldiers and the Princes and the Emperour let them obey the Bishop Setting aside other flawes what impertinencie is here to enjoyne the Princes and the Emperour to obey the Bishop when there were not at this time nor many years after any Emperour or Princes Christian These are some few gleanings more of the like stamp there to be found that not without reason it is by the learned conjectured that about the beginning or middle of the second Century was this forged Author surreptitiously brought into the Church about which time this kinde of Episcopacy soaring above Presbytery began 3. How little our prelates and their party regard his writings only they plead them to serve their own turne is manifest that we hear so little from them of subjection to the Presbyters and Deacons which Ignatius urgeth so much in his Epistle to the Trallians It is necessary that ye do nothing without the Bishop but that ye be in subjection likewise to the Presbytery as to the Apostles of Jesus Christ And ye ought by all means to please the Deacons being of the mysteries of Jesus Christ The Presbyters are the great Councell of God and the Chain of the Apostles of Jesus Christ In his Epistle to those in Tarsus Let the Presbyter be subject to the Bishop the Deacons to the Presbyters the People to the Presbyters and the Deacons they that keep this good order my soul for theirs Much more to the same purpose up and down in him where Salmasius conjectures this spurious Author was about the midst or towards the beginning of the second century whilst the Presbytery yet retaind much of its authority Now what do our Prelates and their party here For Presbyters they allow them no rule by way of jurisdiction for Deacons they have first changed their office and then ordered it so as it is never long standing being only a degree to Presbytery And indeed here this Ignatius seemes to ascribe that office and power to Deacons which the scripture takes no notice of which hath appointed them to the service of tables not to preach and rule in the Church as Jerome argues and this furthers discovers that this is no true Ignatius 4. Conclude from Jerome that before schisme fell out in the Churches and that long after the Apostles times the Church was governed only by Presbyters that the Bishop above the Presbyters was brought into some Churches sooner into others later according as schisme gave the occasion that it was about 260 years ere this change was made in the Church of Alexandria that wheresoever it was made it stands not upon divine authority but upon Church Custome and this by Scripture strongly proved therefore these testimonies of Ignatius or whatsoever the like so farre as they plead for Episcopacy above Presbytery cannot stand either with the truth of the Scripture or the practice of the first and purest Churches We returne to Jerome his Epistle to Evagrius That which next follows concernes not the matter in hand but is against the superiority of the Bishop of Rome and against a perverse custome in Rome that a Presbyter was ordained upon the testimony of a Deacon that which concernes the present question followes in these words Presbyter and Bishop one is the name of age the other of dignity whence to Titus and Timothy the Apostle speaks of the Ordination of the Bishop and Deacon concerning the Presbyters he is altogether silent because in the Bishop the Presbyter

also is contained He that is ordained from the lesse to the greater he is advanced Therefore either let the Deacon be ordained from the Presbyter that is let him that is first a Presbyter be afterwards ordained a Deacon that the Presbyter may be proved lesse then the Deacon into whom he encreaseth from a little one or if the Presbyter be ordained from the Deacon let him know that he is lesse in gaines greater in ministery And that we may know that the Apostolicall traditions were taken out of the Old Testament what Aaron and his sonnes and the Levites were in the Temple that let the Bishops and Presbyters and Deacons challenge in the Church Here we have two things confirming the equality of Bishops and Presbyters in the third place an objection is to be answered seeming to favour their inequality The first thing confirming their equality That Presbyter and Bishop are different names of one and the same person in one and the same office as having one and the same ordination and where it is said the Presbyter is contained in the Bishop the meaning is not as the lesse in the greater but as one with him thus he exprest himselfe in the beginning of this Epistle this he hath strongly pleaded all the way thus againe in his Commentary upon 1 Titus as was formerly quoted in these words Some man may think that this is not the sentence of the Scripture but mine owne that a Bishop and Presbyter are one and that one is the name of age the other of office let him read the words of the Apostle Phil. 1.1 c. The second confirmation of their equality that Ordination is from the lesse to the greater and therefore if the Deacon be greater then the Presbyter he must from a Presbyter as a little one grow by Ordination into a Deacon as a great one this rule destroyes the foundation of Hierarchy that the Apostles were towards the end of their dayes and so the Evangelists ordained Bishops of certaine Cities every one having his proper See then from an Apostle or Evangelist as the lesse did he by Ordination increase into a Bishop as the greater but this is too absurd that a Bishop should be greater then an Evangelist nay then an Apostle The Objection to be removed follows in the last words And that we may know that the Apostolicall traditions c. where he cals the superiority of Bishops over Presbyters then obtaining in the Church an Apostolicall tradition Answ 1. There was great difference betwixt the Episcopacy that then was and the Prelacy as we have had it as nothing was done without the Bishop so nor without the rest of the Ministers and People 2. His scope was to prove and clearly he hath proved that according to the Scriptures in the writings of the Apostles there is no inequality at all betwixt Bishop and Presbyter but they are one and the same 3. The rise of their inequality he makes the custome of the Church contra-distinguished to the truth of the Lords order 4. Therefore that he cals it an Apostolicall tradition it can amount only to this that what the Church did here when by schismes occasioned thereto he conceives not contrary to Apostolicall Precept in generall though particularly the equality or identity rather of the Bishop and Presbyter be abundantly held forth in their writings but rather that the Churches Practice here fell under some generall rule as let all things be done to edifying or the like And here was the difference as is observed by the learned betwixt Jerome and Aerius they both agreed that according to divine institution there was no inequality Aerius would have this inviolably observed in the Church Jerome thought the Church had liberty to make a difference and that it was a great expedient against schisme Of the same mind with Ierome for equality by divine institution it is pleaded by some choicely learned amongst our Writers of sacred Controversies Ames and Salmasius confest by a learned Authour among the Papists Medina that Ambrose Austin Sedulius Primasius Chrysostome Theodoret Oecumenius and Theophylact were This instruction then stands good Bishops in office above Presbyters are no Church-Officers of divine institution according as it is pleaded by Jerome I shall conclude this instruction with one question Quest May the Church in any case set up as an expedient an office in the Church which is not of divine institution Answ No in no wise It was appointed that the man of fin should ascend into his chayre thence the Church discerned not the iniquity of those beautifull steps by which he was to ascend what the Church took for an expedient to prevent schisme proved an expedient to promote tyranny His time of falling hath been comming on in this last age is more and more hastening hence this truth making not a little for it passeth clear and current in the Reformed Churches that in the Church no office-Power is to be owned but what is of divine institution An Argument or two to confirme it 1. As among Jewes no order of Priests or Levites but what was expressely appointed of God was to be received so in the Gospel-Churches no other order of Ministeries All by Moses there as a faithfull servant All by Christ here as a faithfull Sonne 2. Christ is the onely Law-giver of his Church the appointing of office is a maine exercise of the Law-givers power as in the kingdomes of men so in the Kingdome of the Mediator 3. All proper and essentiall meanes of worship must be of divine institution 1. Because worship by other meanes is will-worship and will-worship is hatefull unto God 2. Because it is God alone who can sanctifie and blesse the meanes of worship man can put no instrumentall efficacy unto meanes therefore cannot he ordaine them But office or ministery in the Church is a proper and essentiall meanes of worship therefore it must be of no other then divine institution As for that worne Octjection of Timothy and Titus Answ They were Evangelists who as the Apostles are succeeded by Pastors and Teachers above whom there is no Bishop Object The Angel of the Church 2 and 3. of the Revelation is the Bishop of each Church a Pastor of peerlesse power in the Church Answ 1. Suppose by the Angel is meant a singular person and he an eminent Pastor how doth it appear that he had distinct power of Ordination and jurisdiction above the rest Why might it not be in those Churches as in the Church of Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist till Heraclas and Dionysius one in degree and order not in office and distinct power above the rest to whom the Epistle is inscribed 2. Angel in the singular number doth not of necessity infer a singular person it is used in Scripture collectively diverse times as Psal 34.7 The Angel of the Lord pitcheth his tents c. that is the Angels of the Lord pitch their tents round about c. so the Revelation