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	ordain_v	2,236	5	8.5002	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A41074	Lex talionis, or, The author of Naked truth stript naked	Fell, Philip, 1632 or 3-1682.; Gunning, Peter, 1614-1684.; Lloyd, William, 1627-1717.	1676 (1676)	Wing F644; ESTC R20137	30,835	44

were from Heaven and stand upon that Scripture Basis of As my Father sent me so send I you by vertue whereof the Bishops during the first ten Persecutions governed their Flocks in despight of all Secular opposition and retaining part of their administration to themselves disposed of some to Priests and Deacons which is as notorious in fact as any thing in the world The Bishops may do tolerably well with this new word Commission instead of the old of Order Especially since in the close it is confest by our Author that in this order the Apostles left the Church at their death and in this order their Successors continued it as in duty sure they ought from time to time near 1500 years without any interruption wherefore for any to alter this way of Government or to take upon them to ordain not being chosen this way to it they would be guilty of great rashness and high presumption Nor will it be in my Authors power to kick all this down again as he endeavours in the following period by making the orders given by Priests though irregular yet firm and valid for if this power be from Heaven and separate from all Secular Authority as to its Nature and Original though limited by it in its Exercise and Application no man upon any pretence can take this honour to himself or confer it on others but they who were called of God as was Aaron But let us see how well our Author confutes the distinction of Order between Bishops and Priests T is ridiculous says he that the Priesthood which is capable to do the greatest things to Consecrate the Souls of men by Baptism and the Lords Supper yet forsooth cannot Consecrate Oil and Cups I desire to know whether a Deacon cannot Consecrate the Souls of men by Baptism and the Preaching of the Gospel or if they can whether they are of the same Order with Priests Or whether a Judg who has power of Awarding Life or Death which is the greatest thing may also make a Knight which is a less and if therefore a Judg and a King be of the same Order This word ridiculous is very unlucky and commonly returns on him who is most busie with it But since we are faln upon the instance of a King for farther illustration of this matter let us consider the Monarchs of the East who permitted the whole Administration of their Affairs to their Favorites as we read of Pharaoh that he pulled his Ring off his hand and said to Ioseph without thee no man shall lift up his hand or foot in all the Land of Egypt and according to thy word shall all my People be Ruled but for all this Pharaoh and this his Minister of State were not of the same Order for in the Throne he was greater then he Though the King had stript himself of the whole Execution of his Power and put it into the hand of his Favorite yet so long as the Origination of it continued with him he was as absolute and the other as subject as ever T is true the Bishops power is in itself Subordinate and Ministerial he must not Lord it over the Inheritance of God but as to the dispensing of it to the inferior Orders the Parallel will hold they all Act in Subordination and dependence upon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saies Ignatius No Priest or Deacon for several Centuries ever did it without particular leave given by the Bishop nay the Lector or Reader did not so much as Read the Gospel till first he had brought the Book to the Bishop and had his permission to go to the Ambo or Reading Pu● with it and though the Licence with us be not no● every day renewed yet the dependence is still owned in th● very Form of our Ordination where the Bishop says to the person Ordained take thou Authority to Read the Gospel in the Church of God and Preach the same when thou art thereunto Licenced by the Bishop himsel● But a farther Argument is taken from the promiscuous use of the name of Bishop and Presbyter to prove they are of the same Order which sure is one of seeblest ways of proving any thing the whole force of it amounts to this St. Peter and St. Iohn call themselves Presbyters but were also Bishops therefore Presbyters and Bishops are all one which is as much as to say that his Maj●sty is King of Great Britain and Knight of the Garter therefore to be King of Great Britain and Knight of the Garter is all one Nay St. Paul stiles himself a Deacon as well as an Apostle therefore to be a Deacon and an Apostle is all one but if our Author be not satisfied with this let him Read the Thirteenth Chapter of the most Learned Bishop of Chester's Vindiciae Ignati● and he will see how accurate the first Christian Writers were in distinguishing the three Orders of Bishop Deacon and Priest We will go on and attend him in his Talent of Book Learning wherein he has been hitherto so unfortunate and see how in his following expedition he mends the matter And here he tells us that Aerius whom by the way he constantly calls Arius was not a Heretick upon the account of his introducing a parity between Bishops and Priests but only for being an Arian That is Epiphanius made a List not of several Heresies but a Catalogue of several Arians and the 69. Heresie being assigned to Arius it passes the Muster again in the 75. Heresie under the auspice of A●rius It is agreed on all hands that discontent made Aerius a Heretick for that Eustathius whom he thought a worse man then himself was preferred before him and being in power though formerly his particular Friend considered him no farther then to make him Master of an Alms-house We are then to believe that out of discontent Aerius turned Arian but as ill luck would have it Eustathius was of that Sect and if he had a mind to quarrel with him nothing could have been so proper as to have turned Orthodox in spight It is manifest he was originally an Arian and the prime part of his Heresie was what his malice naturally dictated and all Writers agree it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. He entertained a mad opinion beyond what a man would receive saying What is a Bishop better than a Priest There is no difference between th●m there is but one order the same honour and dignity Since our Authors Greek reading fares no better let us go on to consider his Latine and there is no missing St. Ieroms Epistle to Evagrius which is so clear in the point that without more ado it converted our Author who it seems was once an Episcopal man into that errant Presbyterian that now he is Withal it makes him wonder and if the Reader understand Latine he will wonder to see men have the confidence to quote any thing out of it for the distinction between Episcopacy and

Presbytery Well I have read over the Epistle and as our Author says wonder but it is at his great confidence to say that there is nothing to be met with in it to found a distinction between Episcopacy and Presbytery when as he expresly reserves the power of Ordination peculiarly to the Bishops which is the point chiefly contested between the Assertors of Episcopacy and Patrons of Presbyterian parity As to the second desire that the Reader should observe the various fate of St. Jerom and Aerius that the one is reviled as an Heretick the other passes for a Saint I will satisfie my Author in that particular and shew him a plain reason for it Aerius set himself against the Apostolical Government by Bishops dogmatized and separated himself from the Church St. Ierom always obeyed his Governours and remained in Communion with them upon other occasions exprest his opinion in behalf of their Authority And here only in a private Epistle to a Friend and that a very short one being scandalized at an unseasonable opinion which pretended Deacons to be equal in dignity to Priests as it is usual in such cases he depresses what he can the Order of Deacons and exalts to his utmost that of Priests in the mean time does not so much as attempt to prove any thing more than barely saying Quid aliud facit Episcopus excepta Ordinatione quod non facit Presbyter What does a Bishop more than a Presbyter besides Ordaining And then reckoning up several actions common to both Our kind-hearted Author hereupon tells us that this presently converted him nay as if this good nature of his were as meritorious as grace he thereupon assures himself that great is his reward in heaven Our man of learning with his accustomed dexterity and confidence runs down the business of Colluthus his Ordination of Priests and pities poor Bishop Hall for going about to prove from thence that Presbyters were not capable to Ordain How slightly soever our Author thinks of the matter Socrates in the first Book of his History puts it under the blackest Character 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He privately adventured on an action worthy of many deaths who having never been ordained a Priest did those things which belonged to the Function of a Priest This you are to know was said of Ischryas who had as good Orders as Colluthus a Priest could give him but yet antecedently to the Decree of the Council of Alexandria is declared never to have been ordained a Priest Let up now see why the old man was so much to be pitied because he had quite forgot that the famous Council of Nice consisting of above three hundred Bishops had made a Canon wherein they declare that if any Bishop should Ordain any of the Clergy belonging to another Bishops Diocess without consent and leave had of that Bishop to whose Diocess they did belong their Ordination should be null You see the irregular Ordination of a Bishop is as null as the irregular Ordination of a Presbyter Therefore the irregular Bishop and the irregular Presbyter are of the same Order of the same Authority neither able to Ordain Our Author according to his usual Sagacity knows no difference betwixt an Act that is null and void in it self and an Act voided by Law There is no question but Bishops and Priests and Deacons for their Crimes may be degraded and deposed but that is not the same thing with the never having been Bishops Priests or Deacons The Council of Alexandria declared the Ordinations of Colluthus to have been void ab initio that of Nice voids those that are irregular Surely these are very different matters That the invalidity of the Ordination in the later case was of this kind that is made invalid by way of Penalty and Sentence we may learn from the thirty fifth Apostolick Canon by which both Zonaras and Balsamon interpret this of Nice who decree that in case of ordaining in anothers Diocess the Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Both he be deposed and they who were ordained by him And truly if they were to be deposed it is plain the Orders were in themselves valid and it is unquestionable that the Ordaining Bishops were so which is not to be said and can never be proved of a mere Presbyters And therefore the Triumph which is added here of dashing out the indelible Character or that the Line of a Diocess is a Conjurers Circle might very fairly have been laid aside And I appeal to the Reader and more than hope he will see how no proofs are brought for this Identity and parity of Order no Scripture no Primitive Council no general consent of Primitive Doctors and Fathers that he is perfectly out in every thing he avers and therefore for his poor judgment he may do well to keep it to himself and probably his Judgment is so poor because he himself is rich He in likelihood has imployed his time in Secular Concerns which had it been spent in Study would have rescued him from such gross misadventures as he at every turn incurrs But though the matter stand thus plain bef●re us yet ●ince our Author has had the confidence to cite the Council of Nice in proof of the nullity of irregular Orders to shew with greater evidence his perpetual ignorance and mistake I will throw in for vantage the proceeding of this very Council in the Case of Meletius who had usurpt upon the rights of Peter Patriarch of Alexandria in the point here contested of Ordaining within his Diocess the words of Theodoret are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He invaded the Ordinations belonging to the other Now the Council decreed herein that Meletius should be suspended from the future exercise of his function and retain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the bare name of a Bishop but do no Act of his Function either in the City or Villages but the Orders conferred by him were as to their intrinsick validity ratified and acknowledged 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those already Ordained should Communicate and Officiate but come after the Clergy of each Church and Parish 'T is to be wondered at how this man who seems to have always lived in a hollow Tree came to have heard by chance that there was once such a thing in the World as the Council of Nice To the Chapter of Deacons OUr Author is resolved on all occasions to shew that he thinks himself wiser then both the Church and State and therefore in defiance unto both he attempts to prove that Deaconship is not Holy Orders and to bring about so g●n●rous a d●sign he makes nothing of st●●ining a point with the Scripture since t is so unkind as to stand in his way It so happen'd that Petavius discoursing of Deacons had said what the Contents of our English Bibles and Commentators generally agre● in that P●ilip the Deacon Preacht did Miracles and Baptiz'd and Converted the City of Samari● and that the History describ'd Act. 8. belongs to

a few Complements sprinkled upon Discipline and Order labours to disparage the present Constitution and levels those who are concerned for their duty and obedience with the wild Rabble of Sectaries and Fanaticks I shall without more words dismiss the Inquest and go on to what follows To the Chapter of Preaching THe Chapter concerning Preaching is a most unreasonable reproach of the Church of England After that the Uniform Vote of all our Neighbours has given us the preference in this particular the Ministers of the Reformed Churches Germans Hollanders Danes Swedes French and Switzers learning our Language generally to take benefit of our Sermons and many travelling hither for that end our Author led to it by his excellent good nature labours to shew his Talent in depreciating what strangers so must esteem There was a time when Nicity of Division and the flowers of a Polyanthea were somewhat in fashion but those days are long since done a practical sober way of pressing Christian duty is generally taken up which has as little of the Quid or the Quale or the Quantum as our Author seems to have in his head or has discovered in his Writings His project for Preachers is as extravagant as his Character of our Sermons They must be grave elderly men not raw Novices from the Vniversity with all their Sciences and Languages but rather ●ober persons of Age and Experience having a good natural capacity c. that never saw the Vniversity and knew no other Language than their Mother Tongue That is they must be experienced Farmers illuminated Coblers or gifted Weavers and these no doubt as they did twenty years since would bring about a thorough Reformation These would redeem the Church from that great contempt the Aristotelists Scotists Aquinatists with their knacks of quiddities and qualities Syllogisms and Enthymems Distinctions and Subsumtions and the handsome School-boy exercise of the very good Preachers of the Age have brought upon it He goes on to tell us That his heart bleeds to think how many thousand poor souls there are in this Land that have no more knowledge of God than Heathens c. It is truly a lamentable thing that where the Gospel has been so long and so h●ppily planted any should be ignorant of it Would to God all the Lords People were Prophets but in the mean time let us not be so ungrateful as not to own with all due acceptation and thankfulness that our People generally speaking are better instructed in all the parts of Saving Knowledge than any Nation in the World And we may say it with perfect truth and therefore without vanity that they have also the most learned and sufficient Clergy Men that understand the Athanasian Creed much better than our Author who in his first Chapter has done what his little knowledge and violent passion could effect toward the undermining of it The truth is I cannot but wonder how it is possible for a man that did not design to put scorn upon Religion to offer such mad and unaccountable Proposals and the while talk demurely and in Scripture Phrase as if he would be thought to be in earnest To the Chapter concerning Bishops and Priests THe long Chapter of Bishops and Priests is of the same strein with the former it cries Hail Master to Episcopacy acknowledges the Apostolical Antiquity and Dignity thereof and then fairly goes about to betray it Whether Presbytery or Erastianism or Atheism be at the botton of the design it is not easie to divine That which is obviously apparent is that one thred of ignorance runs through the whole discourse neither what Petavius means nor what the Character of Priesthood is nor what the practice of th● Ch●rch w●s i● at ●ll understood b●t a long blunder is ●ade about A. B. C as if there we●e no other Character● in the world besides those of the Alphabet or as if the matter were as unin●elligible as the great mystery he talks of Which is to be known only in a Metaphysic●l w●y of abstraction that the superiour Species contains th● inferiour Genus Indeed the nature of a Genus or a Species which is no more than every School-boy understands who has learnt so much of his Grammar as to know what a Noun Appellative is requires not much niceness of Metaphysicks but the superiour Species and inferiour Genus are terms of Art that the dull Logicians of the University stand amazed at Aristo●le said of a man that he was Arbor inversa but our Author has here turned upside-down Porphyr●es Tree and by it turned a Man into a Horse for so he goes on in his learned Metaphysick Lecture A man a ration●l Cre●t●re contains the Anim●l●ty of an Ho●se the inferiour Crea●ure But doth not contain a real Hors● in his belly nor can a man b●get hors●s or men when he pleases Nor can you truly say a man is a horse I believe my School me● would take it in snuff should I affirm ●ny of them to be horse● Here having mended the matter and reformed a horse from being an inferiour Genus to a man and made him an inferiou● Creature he says that he contains the Animality of a Horse Upon which Hypothesis whether he will be as ill natured as the Schoolmen and take it in snuff I know not but I am sure that I can irrefragably prove him to be a Horse And the thin Sophism which every Fresh-man learns to solve within a Week after he comes to the University will be against him an unanswerable demonstration Which to try his patience I propose to ●im in common form thus He that says my Author is a living Creature says true h● that says he is a Hor●● says that he is a living Cr●a●●re therefore he who says he is a Horse says true There is no denying the Syllogism and saying it has four terms That though indeterminate animality be enunciated of the Species yet that which is determined by the contrary diffe●ence may no● Tha●● is the Ani●ality of a B●ute c●● belong only to an irrational animal as that of a man to a rational for our Author has precluded himself from that answer by saying expresly that a man a rational Creature contains the animality of a Horse the inferiour or irrational Creature And now if my Author be not a mere animal let the World judge and this comes of despising Logick Let us now see whether his Divinity be better than his Philosophy After this hog-shearing where we have had so loud a cry and no wool we will if we can pick out a little sense The thing he aims at proving is that Bishops are not superiour in Order to Priests a thing by the way directly contrary to the Liturgy of the Church and thereby the Law of the Land but yet they are superiour in Commission and by vertue of that can govern exercise the power of the Keys and ordain Priests and Deacons which Priests ordinarily speaking may not Well if this Commission