Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
power_n	authority_n	bishop_n	presbyter_n	4,112	5	10.2023	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A05555	The answer of John Bastvvick, Doctor of Phisicke, to the information of Sir Iohn Bancks Knight, Atturney universall In which there is a sufficient demonstration, that the prelats are invaders of the Kings prerogative royall, contemners and despisers of holy Scripture, advancers of poperie, superstition, idolatry and phophanesse: also that they abuse the Kings authoritie ...	Bastwick, John, 1593-1654.; England and Wales. Attorney-General.	1637 (1637)	STC 1568; ESTC R212826	58,859	30

the proceedings of the Prelats against himself and their dealings tovvards others of their brethren the theame of vvhich booke he the Defendent desireth the honorable Court● to take a briefe relation of at this time that they may the better be informed of the falsitie of the information And first for the principall theame and matter of the booke it is the State of the questions in his Flagello Pontificis for vvhich he suffered vvith the summe of the Arguments he produced for the confirmation of the trueth The questio●s arising betvveen the Babylonian and the defendent concerning the autoritie of the Pope were these The first whether Christ did constitute Peter sole Monarch of the Catholick Church The second vvhether the Pope of Rome if hee bee a Bishop as hee is a Bishop hath Autoritie jurisdiction over Kings Emperors Thirdlie vvhether Popish Bishops be true Bishops or no and of the discussing of these questios the defendent saith his adversarie vvas the sole cause In the handling of the which the Defenden● f●rther affirmeth that he used all the caution that vvas possible as he supposed for man to use prefacing in his booke that being to dispute about the Autority of the Bishop of Rome he desired candidly to be understood of all men● for while he disputed of Episcopall autoritie he medled nor contended not against such Bishops as ackovvledge their autoritie jurisdiction from Kings and Emperors into vvhose hands the government of States Kingdomes● and Commonvvealths is by God committed For if the Popes themselves vvould acknovvledge their immense and unlimited autoritie from Kings and Emperors he the defendent there said if they commanded nothing contrarie to the vvill and Word of God that he for his part out of the reverence duty ● loyaltie to his Prince vvould obey it The Words in the Original are these Verum de Episcoporum autoritate locutus à bonis bene intelligi cupio Non enim litis litem moveo quatenus ab Imperatoribus Regibus Principibus Terre quorum interest salutem civium tueri potestatem ●us Imperium in socios totumque Dei gregem adepti sunt Nam si Romani Episcopi imm●nsam illam nullis limitibus circumscriptam autoritatem indulgentia Principum acceptam ferrent voluntati Episcopali nihil voluntati divinae inimicum jubenti obtemperandum putem ob reverentiam Principi si volenti debitam c. So that the defendent having thus playnlie set downe his minde before knowing that all the jurisdiction that the Bishops in England now exercise over others is ●rom the King he thought himself not onely secure from danger but expected fav●ur at least from the Bishops their helping hand especially when the opposing the Popes Autority in England is a thing that the King and State have ever so well allowed of And that this honorable Court may yet be f●rther informed of the speciall cause for which the Prelats are so displeased with the defendent it was for the truely and narrowlie disputing and discussing of the second question to wit whether the Pope of Rome if he be a Bishop as he is a Bishop have Autoritie jurisdiction not onelie over his fellow breth●en but over Kings and Emperors which the Defendent there denyed for many warrantable Arguments The summe of which he desireth here to relate unto this honorable Court for his just and necessarie defence justification For by the ve●ie light of nature and unanswerable reason it is evident and manifest that where there is an equalitie and pari●ie amongst men there the one doth not exceed the other in power or Dominion Paris enim in Parem non esse imperium inter Naturae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est Novv Divine constitution hath made Bishops and Presbyters or Elders a like and equall vvhich that it might the better appeare the Defendent propounded there tvvo things to be proved The first vvas That Bishops and Presbyters vvere by the Word of God one and the same Secondlie That Presbyters had equall Autoritie of Government● Ordination Excommunication vvith Bishops vvherein onely consists their preeminency Autoritie above their brethren vvhich things being proved it vvill necessarilie follovv That the Pope of Rome as he is Bishop doth no vvay exceed other Bishops and Presbyters they being in all things a like and equall unto him much lesse hath any Autoritie and povver over Kings and Emperours And for the proofe of the first position the vvords Presbyter Bishop do sufficientlie evince i● vvhich in holy Scripture though diverse in sound signifie one and the same thing as not to cite the vvords themselves vvhich would be large The Apostle Paul to Titus in the first chapter doth sufficientlie shew vvhere the words Bishop Presbyter are confounded And likevvise in the first Epistle of Peter and the fift Chapter there Presbyter and Bishop signifie one and the same thing And the Epistl● to the Philippians the first Chapter and the ●irst verse do●h apparentlie demonstrate it● and diverse other places might be produced dilucidating the same thing But the 20● of the Acts puts all out of controversie where Presbyter and Bishop signifie one the same thing● for office● honour and function so that the identity of their office● is signifyed by those tvvo expressions Neither is there a confusion of their names with a difference still of their functions administrations as some vvould cavill for in these places vvhere Presbyters are called Bishops the disputation is not about the title but about the office signified and specified by the title For vvhen S. Paul exhorts the Presbyters to have an eye to their duty charge he useth this reason that the Holy Ghost had made them Bishops● And the trueth of ●his is so evident that the Rhemists themselves as learned men as any Bishops in England and as able to mayntayne an error are forced ingen●ouslie to confesse it saying in expresse vvords in their No●es upon the 28. vers of that Chapter That in the Apostles times there vvas no difference betvveen Presbyter and Bishop● so that for the first position it is not onely by the Word of God clearlie evident but by the very confession of the adversaries of the trueth granted as a thing without controversy Novv for proofe of the second position that Presbyters as vvell as the Bishop of Rome have the povver and right of Government Ordination and Excommunication by vvhich in these times Bishops onely exceed Presbyters the defendent vvill here brieflie demonstrat it referring those of this honorable Court that have a desire to search into the full trueth of it to his booke And for proofe that the Government vvas committed unto them and that they exercised the same it is most perspicuous out of the first of Timothie 5. vvhere the Apostle sayth The Presbyters that rule vvell are vvorthie of double honour especially those that labour in Word and Doctrine By this testimonie it is evident that they

had rule and government in their hands And that they had povver also of ordination and imposition of hands it is likevvise apparent out of the first Epistle of Paul to Timothy the first Chapter For the Apostle speaking to Timothy sayth Doe not neglect the gift that is in thee vvhich is given thee for prophesy by the imposition of the hands of the Presbyterie Here allso the Presbyters had the right of imposition of hands And that they had the povver of Excommunication and Absolution it is likevvise manifest from the 5. of the 1. of the Corinthians and the 2. Chapter of the 2. Epistle vvhere the Apostle gives them the povver of casting the incestrous person out and upon his repentance receiving of him in againe By all vvhich Autorities of sacred vvrit it is sufficiently cleare and evident That the Presbyters had the Autoritie and povver of government and rule in the Church vvith the facultie also and abilitie of ordination excommunication and all this by Divine institution and expresse vvords of holy Scripture hovvsoever this right and their due vvas through the fraud and deceit of the Bishop of Rome and Romish Bishops aftervvards taken avvay from the Presbyters Wherefore the Defendent concluded● That if there were any difference betweene Presbyters and the Bishop of Rome which hee denyed that then the Presbyters in dignitie and honour exceeded and that greatly the Bishop of Rome Romish Bishops for all these Privileges of governement ord●nation and excommunication are in formall vvords given unto the Presbyters and no vvhere granted unto the Bishops And for farther illustration and proofe of this the Defendent with many other Arguments proved That Presbyters were better men then the Bishop of Rome if there were any difference The summe of which hee desire●h this Honorable Court to take notice of ●hat they may more ponderously wa●gh the businesse in hand and see the vanitie of the information And for the Arguments in briefe they are these They who are most obedient to the Precepts● Commands and Prohibitions of Christ and doe most diligently obey the Apostles admonitions they are and so ought to bee esteemed more worthy and excellent then such as regard neither of both But the Presbyters are more obedient to the Commands of Christ and doe more diligently obey the Apostles admonitions then the Romish Bishops Therefore they are more worthy excellent For the major no man can deny that knovves loyall and obedient Subiects to their Prince and his Officiers just commands are to bee preferred before Rebels and them that regard neither of both Novv Christ and his Apostles have commanded That all Ministers should feed the Flock of Christ deligently in preaching of the vvord administration of the Sacraments and that they should not be Lords over his inheritance Both which precepts and prohibitions the Presbyters do more exactly observe then Romish Bishops for they neither preach themselves nor will let others and are Lords over Christs inheritance which the Lord Iesus and his Apostles have pe●emptorily forbid Ergo the Presbiters are more worthie then Romish Bishops Againe That name which is and hath ever bene a name and title of Dignitie and Honour is to bee preferred before that which is a name of paine labour and sollicitude But the name of Presbyter or Senior is hath beene ever a name of Honour and dignitie and a title of mightie Emperors and Princes and the name of Bishop is a name and title of labour and travell Ergo the title and name of Presbyter is to be preferred before that of the Romish Bishops For the major none that are truly noble and learned can deny And for the minor to omit many other places it vvil evidently appeare to any that vvill looke upon the ●irst Epistle to Tim. and the 5. There the Apostle sayth The Presbyters that rule well are vvorthy of double honour So that it is apparent enough That honour and dignity is contayned in that name vvhich deserveth both reward reverence● respect And in the same Epistle the Apostle sayth Rebuke not a Presbyter but honour him as a Father● and speaking of Bishops he sayth He that desireth the Office of a Bishop desireth a good worke Hee sayth indeed a good vvorke but a work notwithstandig full of care watchfullnes toyle and labour From all which it is ratifyed That the name and title of Presbyter is a name full of dignity honour and splendour and the title of Bishop a compellation or name full of labour anhelation solicitude and therefore to be preferred before the title of Bishop being farre more excellent Againe That name which whensoever it is ioyned with the name of Bishop hath alwayes the first place and precedencie that name is most excell●nt But the name of Presbyter when it is ioyned with the title of Bishop hath ever the precedencie Ergo it is to be preferred before it For the major the adversaries cannot deny it For they conclude and establish the precedency and preminency of Peter before the o●her Apostles because he is often first named And for the minor the vvord of God declares it illustriously as may be seene in the 20. of the Acts and the first of Titus and the fif●h chapter of the first of Peter In all vvhich places the names of Presby●er and Bishop being ioyned together Presbyter is ever first named To all this Peter calls himselfe a Presbiter The same doth Saint Iohn as if all Ecclesiasticall dignity vvere placed in that name But there are many arguments yet remayning to prove the dignitie of Presbyters to bee above that of Bishops if there be any difference betvveen them For They to whom in the most difficult controversies of the Church and greatest dissentions the Primitive Christians had ever recourse and who the spirit of God did in a special maner assist and who made Decrees by which the Church of God to this day is to be regulated and governed and who the Apostles themselves made their sociats and companions in both Generall and Provinciall Counsels and the which had the next place unto the Apostles in their Assemblies they are more worthy and to be had in greater honour and veneration then the other Ministers of the Church which are neither by name nor place knowne in those holy meetings But the Presbyters are such and Therefore the Presbyters are more worthy and excellent then Bishops As for the major the adversaries cannot doubt of that vvhich bestovv dignity and honour upon their Bishops according to the place and degree they had in the first Councels And for the minor none can doubt of it vvho hath read the 15 of the Acts● and the twentyeth chapter of the same book But they that desire to be satisfied concerning this argument at large the Defendent desireth vvould read any of his books● Lastly That the dignity of the Presbyters may yet appeare above ●he title of Bishops it is thus evident Those to whom the Keyes

of the Kingdome of Heaven by name are committed those are more vvorthy honorable then those tha● have not that Priviledge But for the Presbyters they have the Priviledge of the Keys granted unto them by name Ergo the Presbyters are more honorable then Bishops For the major no good Christian vvill or rationall man can deny it And for the minor he that readeth the last of Iames shall finde it manifestly enough confirmed and proved By all vvhich Arguments the Defendent did sufficiently beat dovvne the Bishop of Romes autority and by the very light of reason overthew it For if that every Presbyter be by the word of God as good a man as the Bishop of Rome if not better and vvithall if the Presbyters neither can nor may usurp autority over their fellovv brethren much lesse may they doe it over Kings and Emperors and by consequence and necessity of reson it follovve●h that the Bishop of Rome hath no cause to arrogate such autority to himselfe over the vvhole Church as he doth and therefore that his rule Government is a meere usurpation and an abominable tyranny over the vvhole Church of God and ought of all men to be defyed abominated and abhorred vvith all his complices as impious and blasphemous against God●●njuriou● to Kings Princes and nocent to all the faithfull members of Iesus Christ. The recapitulation of all the vvh●ch Arguments this Defendent thought fit to make knovvne to this honourable Court that their illustricityes might in every respect see his innocency vvho first exemted all Bishops that acknovvledge their autorityes from Kings and Emperors out of the number of those against vvhich he disputed and secondly never by name fought against any other but Romish Bishops and vvi●h their ovvne arguments vvounded them● And therefore he could not but take it unkindly that when in this combat they should have helped him against the common enimie they defending him fell upon the poore Defendent to his perdition saying that he meant ●hem and that he vvas erronious and factious in his opinions Novv if the Defendent hath erred in the discussing of these truthes the Scripture that Word of Life hath brought him to it vvhich vvere blasphemie to thinke and therefore vvhen they adjudged his booke to be burnt they might as vvell have burnt th● Scripture also yea all antiquitie and the gravest and learnedest of auncient Fathers vvhose testimonies also hee hath made publick for the greater vindication of the truth against error and cruelty But that the integritie of the defendent may yet more clearlie appeare he most humbly entreateth this Illustrious Tribunall to heare hovv the busines vvas carried against him at his Araignment before the Prelats Barre at Lambeth and hovv submissively he demeaned himself there and hovv superciliously they carried themselves towards the Defendent on the contrary side When it came to his part to speake for himselfe the Advocat having formerly denied to plead his case any farther then about the vvitnesses testimonie vvhich he also did very jejunely beeing an Advocate of such excellent parts of learning and eloquence as he vvas and also at the Bar ●enouncing i● saying That the Defendent should plead himselfe which vvhen it vvas put upon him he then first related vnto the Assemblie the Theame of the booke vvhich vvas the mayntenance of the Kings prerogative royall Then he told them the occasion of his vvriting of it that he vvas provoked thereunto by a Pontifician vvho often had dared him into the list of dispute● which a● last he could not deny as he vvas a Christian and as he vvas a Subiect for by the Word of God he told them and by the Law of the Land and his speciall oath he vvas bound unto it vvhich Oath he also read at large in open Court the vvhich also all the Bishops of England and all the Iudges of the Kingdome had taken and vvere equally bound vvith him to observe Then before he entred into the combat vvith the adversarie he shevved vvhat caution he used that being to vvrite against the Bishop of Rome Italian Bishops it vvas onely as they arrogate their au●oritie over their Brethren and the Church of God yea over Kings and Emperors jure divino against such Bishops onely hee affirmed he did dispute read the vvords of exception formerly cited at the Barre as for such Bishops as acknovvledge their jurisdiction povver and autority from Kings and Emperors he sayd he ha● no controversy against them as he there againe and againe declared himself in the number of vvhich he the Defendent sayd ours were for all the Bishops of England and in his Majst Dominions had and received or at leastvvise ought so to doe their autoritie jurisdiction over their brethren from him For proofe of vvhich he cited read publickly the Statuts and Acts of Parlament as follow First that of the first of Queene Elizabeth of famous memorie vvherein the Oath of Allegiance vvas ratifyed In the which Statute there are these words That all jurisdiction all Superiorities and all Privileges and Preminencies spirituall and temporall are annexed to the Imperiall Crovvne vvhich by Oath he being bound to mayntayn●● could doe no lesse being provoked by an adversary of regal dignity He read also the Statute vvhich was inacted in the 37. of Henrry the eight vvhich is that Archb and Bish. and all other Ecclesiasticall persons have no other Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction but that vvhich they received and had by the King from the King and under his Royall Majest He read also the Statute made in the first of King Edward the sixt in these vvords That all jurisdiction and Autori●ie Spirituall and Temporall is derived and doth come frō the Kings Majest as supreme Head in the Churches and Kingdomes of England and Ireland and that by the Clergy of both the Kingdomes it ought no otherwise to be held or esteemed of and that all Ecclesiasticall Courts vvithin the sayd Kingdomes ought to be held and kept by no other povver and autoritie eyther domesticall or forrain then that vvhich comes from his most excellent Majestie And that vvhosoever did not acknovvledge and venerate this autoritie that the same men are ipso facto in a praemunire under the Kings high displeasure and indignation as the vvords of the Statute run and the mouth of the lavv speaks and then vvith some reason● also vvhich the Defendent produced besides the Word of God hee shevved That no Romish Bishops had autoritie over their fellovv brethren nor could jure divino challenge it much lesse over Kings and Emperors and therefore so long as the defendent had the Word of God the Lavves of the Kingdome and reason it self on his side he told them he thought himself reasonably secure from all danger in that place And then applying his speech unto the right honorable and noble Lord the Earle of Dorset then present the Defendent tolde his honour that he could not but vvonder that hee should stand

there at the Barr as a Delinquent for mayntayning the Religion established by publick Autority the honour of the King and the glory of his Majestie and that one Chouny a Sussex man a laick as vvell as himselfe should vvrite a Booke and set it forth by publicke autoritie mayntayning the Church of Rome to be a true Church and never to have had so much in her as the suspition of error in fundamentall poynts and that this booke should be dedicated to the Prelate of Canterbury patrionized by him vvhich Book● the Def●ndent both read and exhibited in Court by vvhich notwithstandig the King himselfe and all his Subiects were made Schismaticks and hereticks to the infinit dishonour of God our Gratio●s King and King Iames of blessed memorie and our most holie profession and religion This as the defendent told the Lord of Dorset struck an amazement in him especially vvhen the author of it must be favoured and co●ntenanced by Canterburie and for the defending of the honour and dignitie of our Church and the honour of the King the Defendent should stand as an evill doer Novv vvhen the defendent vvas come thus farre and vvas then approaching more closely unto them all intending more fullie in the pleading of his cause to have set forth their unjust dealing they tolde him that he rayled and imperiouslie commanded him to hold his peace vvhich vvas the reason of his Apologeticus ad Praesules Anglicanos vvhere he tooke libertie to vvrite that and publish it to the vievv of all the vvorld vvhich he vvould have then spoke But after that they had silenced him they then fell a thundering against him everie one as he pleased all of them joyning in this one onely excepted that they censured him onely for his Booke and in their censure they unanimously agreed that the Defendent should pay the costs of suite a thousand pounds unto the King for a fine be debarred of his practice that his booke should be burnt and that the Defendent should lye in prison till recantation and in the meane time be delivered unto Satan And thus did the Sublime Court deale with the Defendent for doing his duty But here the Defendent craveth favour againe of the honorable Court that he may briefly letting the puny Iudges and their nonsen●e dye in silence say something of the Prelats haranges because they onely were the men that found themselves aggreeved a● his writing to say the trueth all the other are Officiers under them and are the Prelats hangbyes he meanes the Doctors to doe what they would have thē as hourely experience teache●h all men And so much the more earnestly he desireth this liberty because it will make much for the demōstration of the justice of his accusation against the Prelats both in respect of the dishonor they have don unto God by it the dishonour of the King their Master King Iames of precious memory and the wrong done to himself in particular Now the first that entred this combat was Francis White Bishop of Ely who in the first place most blasphemously and with many contumelyes reproached the holy Scriptures making nothing of their divine Autority as all the standers by can witnes for he reviling the Defendent sayd That he had nothing in his booke but Scripture which was as he tearmed it the refuge of all Hereticks and Schismaticks openly averring withall That the Scrip●ures could not be knowne to be the Word of God but by the Fathers and Saint Augustin would not have beleeved the Scriptures to be the Word of God had not the Church told him so Further he sayd That the Scripture could not be knowne distinguished from ●he Apocrypha but by the Fa●hers nor the meaning of the Scripture found out but by the Fathers that all the Fa●hers from all Antiquity which is most false as the defendent in a speciall booke hath sufficiently shewed made and proved a vast difference between Bishops and Presbyters and that there was ever a greater excellency and Autority in the Bishop then in Presbyters And this with an unan●mous cōsent they all agreed in till a base fellow Calvin for so he tearmed that ever to be honoured Divine rose up in an obscure corner of the World vi●lated and overtrew all order Autority in the Church and would allso have demolished the Autority of the Magistrates And then turning his speech to the Defendent unhumanly he called him Base fellow Brasen faced Fellow Base Dunce and sayd in the face of the Court That if he could not mayntayne his Episcopall Autority to be Iure Divino he would fling away his Rotchet And so concluding with those that had gone before him in his censure he sat downe in a very great fu●y and passion Af●er him came forth the Bishop of Yorke and in that numerous Assembly proclaymes That Iesus Christ made him a Bishop and the holy Ghost consecrated him and that he had not his Autority from the King for Bishops were before Kings and that Bishops held the Crownes of Kings upon their heads and so peremptorily averring that the Defendent ought to be knockt downe with club-Law for his ignorance assenting with the rest in their Censure he fell a sleep In the third place the Bishop of London advanced forwards speaking very loud and temerarious words against the Holy Scriptures saying That he had thought to have found some great Matters in the Defendents booke seeing him so confident and so peremptory but diligently reading of it he met with nothing in it but Scripture which as he sayd was the refuge of all Schismeticks Hereticks so according with his predecessors in their opinion and censure he concluded his part of speech But last of all came forth the Prelat of Canterbury who with a frontlesse boldnes avouched his Episcopall Autority preeminency over his bre●hren to be onely from God very much blaming Calvin for his fa●tious Spirit saying That their Ecclesiasticall Autority the power they exercised was from Christ Iesus and produced Timothy and Titus to prove● the same assertion and that Bishops were before Christian Kings and they held the Crownes of Kings upon their heads For no Bishop no King those that would have no Bishops sought to overthrow all Government in his censure he jumped in all things with the rest saving in the Fine which as he sayd hee thought too little and therefore ought of meere conscience as he told the other Iudges hee fined the Defendent a Thousand pounds more But he had one thing more to speake as he sayd concerning the Ch●rch of Rome and about that he resolved publickly there to declare himself in regard the Defendent had cast Chounyes book unto him in open Court and of the Synagogue of Rome he spake verie honorably affirming That shee was a true Church and that shee did not erre in fundamentall poynts and all this hee spake in that publick Sessions All which the Defendent hath