Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
power_n	believer_n	church_n	key_n	3,113	5	10.5671	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61546	A discourse concerning the power of excommunication in a Christian church, by way of appendix to the Irenicum by Edward Stillingfleet ...	Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699.; Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699. Irenicum.	1662 (1662)	Wing S5583; ESTC R38297	24,655	38

arise from meer consent is that Deed of Gift whereby our Blessed Saviour did confer the Power of the Keyes on the Apostle Peter as the representative in that action of the whole Colledge of the Apostles and Governours of the Church of which power all the Apostles were actually infeoffed John 20.23 By which Power of the Keyes is certainly meant some administration in the Church which doth respect it as a visible society in which sense the Church is so frequently called as in that place the Kingdom of Heaven and in all probability the administration intended here by the Power of the Keyes is that we are now discoursing of viz. the Power of Admission into the Church of Christ in order to the pardon of the sins of all penitent believers and the shutting out of such who were manifestly unworthy of so holy a communion So that the Power of the Keyes doth not primarily respect exclusion out of the Church and receiving into it again upon absolution but it chiefly respects the Power of Admission into the Church though by way of connotation and Analogy of reason it will carry the other along with it For if the Apostles as Governours of the Church were invested with a power of judging of mens fitness for admission into the Church as members of it it stands to the highest reason that they should have thereby likewise a power conveyed to them of excluding such as are unworthy after their admission to maintain communion with the Church So that this interpretation of the power of the Keyes is far from invalidating the power of the Church as to its censuring offendors all that it pretends to is only giving a more natural and genuine sense of the power of the Keyes which will appear so to be if we consider these things 1. That this power was given to Saint Peter before any Christian Church was actually formed which as I have elsewhere made manifest was not done till after Christs resurrection when Christ had given the Apostles their commission to go preach and baptize c. Matth. 28.19 Is it not therefore far more rational that the power of the Keyes here given should respect the founding of a Church and admission into it then ejection out of it before it was in being and receiving into it again And this we find likewise remarkably fulfilled in the person of the Apostle Peter who opened the door of admission into the Christian Church both to Jews and Gentiles So the Jews by his Sermon at Pentecost when about 3000. souls were brought into the Church of Christ. So the Gentiles as is most evident in the story of Cornelius Acts 10.28 who was the first fruits of the Gentiles So that if we should yield so far to the great inhancers of Saint Peters power that something was intended peculiar to his person in the Keyes given him by our Saviour we hereby see how rationally it may be understood without the least advantage to the extravagant pretensions of Saint Peters pretended successors 2. The pardon of sin in Scripture is most annexed to Baptism and Admission into the Church and thence it seems evident that the loosing of sin should be by admitting into the Church by Baptism in the same sense by which Baptism is said to save us and it is called the washing of regeneration respecting the spiritual advantages which come by admission into the Church of Christ and so they are said to have their sins bound upon them who continue refractory in their sins as Simon Magus is said to be in the bonds of iniquity 3. The Metaphor of the Keyes referrs most to admission into the house and excluding out of it rather then ejecting any out of it and re-admitting them Thus when Eliakim is said to have the Keyes of the house of David it was in regard of his power to open and shut upon whom he pleased And thus Cyprian as our learned Mr. Thorndike observes understands the power of binding and loosing in this sense in his Epistle to John where speaking of the remission of sins in Baptism he brings these very words of our Saviour to Peter as the evidence of it That what he should loose on earth should be loosed in heaven and concludes with this sentence Vnde intelligimus non nisi in Ecclesiâ praepositis in Evangelicâ lege ac Dominicâ ordinati●ne fundatis licere baptizare remissam peccatorum dare foris autem nec ligari aliquid posse nec solvi ubi non sit qui ligare possit aut solvere That which I now inferr from this discourse is that the power of the Church doth not arise from meer consent and confederation both because this power doth respect those who have not actually consented to it and because it is settled upon the Governours of the Church by divine institution Thus it appears that the right of inflicting censures doth not result meerly ex confederatâ disciplinâ which was the thing to be proved The like evidence may be given for the duty of submitting to penalties or Church-censures in the members of the Church which that it ariseth not from meer consent of parties will appear on these accounts 1. Every person who enters this Society is bound to consent before he doth it because of the obligation lying upon conscience to an open profession of Christianity presently upon conviction of the understanding of the truth and certainty of Christian Religion For when once the mind of any rational man is so far wrought upon by the influence of the Divine Spirit as to discover the most rational and undoubted evidences which there are of the truth of Christianity he is presently obliged to profess Christ openly to worship him solemnly to assemble with others for instruction and participation of Gospel-Ordinances and thence it follows that there is an antecedent obligation upon conscience to associate with others and consequently to consent to be governed by the rulers of the Society which he enters into So that this submission to the power of Church-officers in the exercise of Discipline upon offendors is implyed in the very conditions of Christianity and the solemn professing and undertaking of it 2. It were impossible any Society should be upheld if it be not laid by the founder of the Society as the necessary duty of all members to undergo the penalties which shall be inflicted by those who have the care of governing that Society so they be not contrary to the Laws nature and constitution of it Else there would be no provision made for preventing divisions and confusions which will happen upon any breach made upon the Laws of the Society Now this obligation to submission to censures doth speak something antecedently to the confederation although the expression of it lies in the confederation its self By this I hope we have made it evident that it is nothing else but a mistake in those otherwise learned persons who

2. I prove the divine original of this power from the special appointment and designation of particular officers by Jesus Christ for the ruling this society Now I say that Law which provides there shall bee officers to govern doth give them power to govern suitable to the nature of their society Either then you must deny that Christ hath by an unalterable institution appointed a Gospel Ministry or that this Ministry hath no Power in the Church or that their Power extends not to excommunication The first I have already proved the second follows from their appointment for by all the titles given to Church Officers in Scripture it appears they had a Power over the Church as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all which as you well know do import a right to govern the Society over which they are set And that this power should not extend to a Power to exclude convict offenders seems very strange when no other punishment can bee more suitable to the nature of the Society than this is which is a debarring him from the priviledges of that Society which the offender hath so much dishonoured Can there bee any punishment less imagined towards contumacious offenders then this is or that carries in it less of outward and coactive force it implying nothing but what the offender himself freely yeilded to at his entrance into this Society All that I can find replyed by any of the Adversaryes of the opinion I here assert to the argument drawn from the institution and titles of the Officers of the Church is that all those titles which are given to the Ministers of the Gospel in the New Testament that do import rule and government are all to bee taken in a spirituall sense as they are Christs Ministers and Ambassadors to preach his Word and declare his will to his Church So that all power such persons conceive to lye in those titles is onely Doctrinal and declarative but how true that is let any one judge that considers these things 1. That there was certainly a power of discipline then in the Churches constituted by the Apostles which is most evident not only from the passages relating to offendors in Saint Pauls Epistles especially to the Corinthians and Thessalonians but from the continued practice of succeeding ages manifested by Tertullian Cyprian and many others There being then a power of discipline in Apostolical Churches there was a necessity it should be administred by some persons who had the care of those Churches and who were they but the several Pastors of them It being then evident that there was such a power doth it not stand to common sense it should be implyed in such titles which in their natural importance do signifie a right to govern as the names of Pastors and Rulers do 2. There is a diversity in Scripture made between Pastors and Teachers Ephes. 4.11 Though this may not as it doth not imply a necessity of two distinct offices in the Church yet it doth a different respect and connotation in the same person and so imports that ruling carries in it somewhat more then meer teaching and so the power implyed in Pastors to be more then meerly doctrinal which is all I contend for viz. A right to govern the flock committed to their charge 3. What possible difference can be assigned between the Elders that rule well and those which labour in Word and Doctrine 1 Tim. 5.17 if all their ruling were meerly labouring in the Word and Doctrine and all their governing nothing but teaching I intend not to prove an office of rulers distinct from teachers from hence which I know neither this place nor any other will do but that the formal conception of ruling is different from that of teaching 4. I argue from the Analogy between the primitive Churches and the Synagogues that as many of the names were taken from thence where they carried a power of Discipline with them so they must do in some proportion in the Church or it were not easie understanding them It is most certain the Presbyters of the Synagogue had a power of ruling and can you conceive the Bishops and Presbyters of the Church had none when the Societies were much of the same constitution and the Government of the one was transcribed from the other as hath been already largely proved 5. The acts attributed to Pastors in Scripture imply a power of Governing distinct from meer Teaching such are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used for a right to govern Matth. 2.6 Revel 12.5 19.15 which word is attributed to Pastors of Churches in reference to their flocks Acts 20.28 1 Pet. 5.2 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is applyed to Ministers when they are so frequently called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which notes praesidentiam eum potestate for Hesychius renders is by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at Athens had certainly a power of Government in them 6. The very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is attributed to those who have over-sight of Churches 1 Cor. 12.8 by which it is certainly evident that a power more then doctrinal is understood as that it could not then be understood of a power meerly civil And this I suppose may suffice to vindicate this argument from the titles of Church-officers in the New Testament that they are not insignificant things but the persons who enjoyed them had a right to govern the Society over which the Holy-Ghost hath made them Over-seers 3. I argue that Church power ariseth not meerly from consent because the Church may exercise her power on such who have not actually confederated with her which is in admitting members into the Church For if the Church-officers have power to judge whether persons are fit to be admitted they have power to exclude from admission such whom they judge unfit and so their power is exercised on those who are not confederated To this it may be answered That the consent to be judged gives the Church power over the person suing for admission I grant it doth as to that particular person but the right in general of judging concerning admission doth argue an antecedent power to an actual confederation For I will suppose that Christ should now appoint some Officers to found a Church and gather a Society of Christians together where there hath been none before I now ask Whether these Officers have power to admit any into the Church or no This I suppose cannot be denyed for to what end else were they appointed If it be granted they have power to admit persons and thereby make a Church then they had power antecedently to any confederation for the confederation was subsequent to their admission and therefore they who had power to admit could not derive their power from confederation This argument to me puts the case out of dispute that all church-Church-power cannot arise from meer confederation And that which further evidenceth that the power of the Church doth not