Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
power_n	bishop_n	church_n	diocese_n	3,544	5	10.9542	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34539	The nonconformist's plea for lay-communion with the Church of England together with a modest defence of ministerial nonconformity, and the exercise of their ministry / by Mr. John Corbet ...	Corbet, John, 1620-1680.	1683 (1683)	Wing C6259; ESTC R2132	20,263	32

heavy on one mans shoulders as he thought it did formerly on the Bishops here But I do not as yet discern the divine Right of Episcopacy in the state and priviledges thereof here following wherein I desire information and would gladly receive satisfaction if there be such divine Rights indeed None can be justly offended with me for examining in my own defence that Right which I am accused to have invaded do not discern that a Bishop infimi gradus I mean one that hath none under him but Parish-Ministers who are pretended to have no Episcopal governing-governing-power I say I discern not that such a Bishop can by divine Right challenge to himself alone the Episcopal Authority over hundreds of particular Churches For every particular Church should have its proper Pastor or Bishop And particular Churches with their proper Pastors are so evidently of Divine Right that some eminently learned men in the Church of England have declared their judgment That no Form of Church-government besides the meer Pastoral Office and Church-assemblies is prescribed in the Word of God but may be various according to the various condition and occasion of several Churches Neither do I discern how it is possible for one man to do the work of a bishop towards hundreds of Churches I mean the work of a bishop infimi gradus under whom there are no subordinate Bishops or Pastors For the work of such a bishop is to oversee all the Flock to preach to them all to baptize and confirm all that are to be baptized and confirmed to administer the Lords Supper to all to bless the Congregation publickly and privataly to admonish all as their need requires to excommunicate the impenitent to absolve the penitent and that upon knowledg of their particular estate If such a Diocesan bishop saith it sufficeth that he perform all this to the Flock by others namely by the Parish-Ministers as his Curates and by other Officers his Substitutes it is answered 1. That the Pastoral Authority is a personal trust 2. It is desired that he shew his Commission from Christ the Prince of Pastors to do his work by others for I am now inquiring what is of divine and not of humane Right 3. None but a bishop can do the proper work of a bishop But if it be said That the Parochial Congregations are not Churches but only parts of the Diocess which is the lowest particular Church I desire proof from Scripture That such Congregations as our Parishes having their proper Presbyter or Presbyters invested with the power of the keys are not particular Churches properly so called The reason of my desire of this proof is because the Scripture is a perfect Rule for the Essential constitution of Churches tho accidents there unto belonging may be regulated by humane prudence 2. It is most evident in Scripture that a particular Congregation of Christians having their proper Pastor or Pastors Presbyter or Presbyters are Churches properly so called And a Parochial Minister I conceive to be a Pastor or Elder according to the Scripture Moreover if a Diocess containing a hundred two hundred five hundred or a thousand Parishes as somewhere it doth do constitute but one particular Church and those particular Parishes be not properly to be accounted Churches but only so many parts of that one Diocesan Church why may not ten thousand yea ten times ten thousand Parishes be likewise accounted but one particular Church and brought under one man as sole Bishop or Pastor thereof In all this I have not argued against the right of an Arch-Bishop or Overseer of other Bishops such as Titus must needs be if he were Bishop of Cr●te where Bishops or Elders were to be ordained in every City If either Scripture or Prudence guided by Scripture be for such an office I oppose it not and nothing here spoken makes against it If our Diocesan Bishops be in very deed Arch-Bishops or OOverseers of inferior Bishops to wit Parish-Ministers I do not here argue against it but only say that in their Archiepiscopal Diocess or Province they cannot exercise their authority any otherwise than according to the rules of Gods word for the edification and peace of the Church and that they cannot discharge the inferior Bishops from their obligation to Christ whose immediate Ministers and Stewards they are and to whom they are immediately accountable Moreover I do not discern that any Bishop can by divine right so challenge or claim such a circuit of ground for his Diocess as for example the County of Sussex as that thereupon he can by the said right prohibit all other Pastors whatsoever to do the work of the Ministry in any case without his licence within such a circuit of ground or that such a measure of ground is related to his Episcopal office as a propriety for government Ecclesiastical like as certain territories and dominions are as a propriety in reference to Civil government related to the temporal Soveraingty of a Prince The partition of one Church from another by local bounds is not of divine institution but of humane prudence from the convenience of the thing I say convenience not absolute necessity And the state of things may be such as to compel to vary from it in some particulars It is supposed by learned men that in the Apostles times there were several Churches at Rome under their several Bishops or Pastors in the same local bounds as one of the Circumcision and another of the Uncircumcision And if it were not so de facto I think few will deny but that it lawfully might have been so If upon the aforesaid diversity of condition in the persons namely as being of different nations and languages there may be several Churches under several Bishops or Pastors within the same local bounds why not also upon other diversity of condition which may render them as uncapable of being of the same particular Church as if they were of divers nations One instance may be an unmovable diversity of persuasions about points of Religion As for example Why may not Lutherans and Calvinists of the same nation town or village have their several Churches under their several Pastors and live in peace Nothing could hinder the said peace but want of Christian Humility and Charity And consequently why among us may not Christians that have invincible diversity of persuasions in matters of Church Government live peaceably within the same precincts in their several Churches Besides all this if the local bounds assigned for one mans immediate Pastoral charge be so vast and the multitude of Souls therein be so great as to render it impossible for any one man to fulfil that charge towards them can it be judged an usurpation against dwine right if another Pastor without license from him should perform ministerial service within those bounds Likewise let it be 〈…〉 ered what may or may not be done in any circuit of gro 〈…〉 ●here the inhabitants are destitute of competent provision

the Right of the Bishop upon the account of exercising the Ministry where he is the Pastor 4. That I make a Schism in the Church 5. That I violate the Authority of the Civil Magistrate To these particulars the several Heads of my Defence following are a direct Answer 1. That I have received from Christ the Office of a Pastor mentioned Eph. 4. 11. and that I am bound in my present state to fulfil it 2. That I am not obliged either by the nature of my Office or by any oath or promise or by being under the regulation of Authority to exercise my Ministry no otherwise than as in subordination to and as authorised and regulated by the Bishop of the Diocess 3. That I invade not the Right of the Diocesan Bishop in exercising the Ministry where he claims the right of being the Pastor 4. That I do not violate any true bonds of Church-Unity nor in any respect cause divisions and offences 5. That I do not violate the Authority of the Civil Magistrate § 1. That I have received from Christ the Office of a Pastor mentioned Eph. 4. 11. And that I am bound in my present state to fulfil it THE Ministry that I have received is the sacred office of Presbyterate to which I am ordained according to the form of Ordination that was established in the Church of England That this office is of divine right I take for granted and that according to the Scripture it is the office of a Pastor mentioned Eph. 4. 11. I thus prove 1. Wheresoever this office is set forth in the Scripture it is set forth as the office of a spiritual Pastor or Bishop which is to feed the Flock of God by teaching and ruling it And a Presbyter who is a sacred Officer of the Christian Church but not a Bishop or Pastor is no where mentioned in Scripture If it be said that this Office is otherwise set forth in Scripture or that a Presbyter who is a sacred Officer of the Christian Church yet no Bishop is there mentioned let the Assertor shew the place or places If it be said that this Order of Presbyterate may be of divine inst●tution yet not defined or expressed in Scripture I desire satisfactory proof from some other Authority both of its being of divine institution and what its nature is 2. To have the Power of the keys of binding and loosing of remitting and retaining sins in Christs name as his commissioned officer is to have Episcopal or Pastoral Power and this Power belongs to the said Office of Presbyterate Forasmuch as some distinguish the Power of the keys into that which is in in foro interiore or the Court of Conscience within and that which is in foro exteriore in the exterior Court to wit that of the Church the former of which is said to belong to the Bishop and the Presbyter and the latter to the Bishop only I further inforce my argument 1. The Scripture makes no such distinction and where the Law distinguisheth not we may not distinguish 2. The distinction in this case is vain for all power that belongs to the Pastors of the Church purely respects the Conscience and it respects the Conscience as having the conduct of the outward man and that in reference to Church communion as well as other matters 3. If Presbyters may in the name of Christ bind the impenitent and loose the penitent as to the conscience which is the greater and primary binding and loosing then by parity of reason and that with advantage they may bind and loose as to Church-communion which is the lesser secondary and subsequent binding and loosing 3. That Officer is a Pastor or Bishop that hath a power of Authoritative declaring or judging in Christs name that this or that wicked person in particular is unworthy of fellowship with Christ and his Church and of charging the congregation in Christs name not to keep company with him as being no fit member of a Christian society also a Power of authoritative declaring or judging in Christs Name that the same person repenting of his wickednes and giving evidence thereof is meet for fellowship with Christ and his Church and of requiring the congregation in Christs Name again to receive him into their Christian fellowship for these powers are no other than the powers of Excommunication and Ecclesiastical absolution Now the Presbyter hath apparently the said Powers as he can undoubtedly declare and judg and charge as aforesaid touching this or that person or particular all particulars being included in the general he hath undoubtedly a Power of applying the Word in Christs Name as well personally as generally 4. For the further clearing of what is already argued let it be considered that an Authoritative Teacher in the Church commissioned by Christ is also a Pastor for the government of a Pastor is only by the Spiritual Sword which is the Word of God and the discipline which he exercises is no more than the personal application of the same word to judg the impenitent and to absolve the penitent in Christs Name and he that Authoritatively teaches in Christs Name as the Presbyter doth can do so much in the personal Application of the Word 5. The Pastoral Authority of Presbyterate is further cleared by many passages in the publick forms of the Church of England touching that order In the very form of my ordination according to the ancient use of this Church I received the office of a Pastor and Successor of the Apostles I mean not in their Apostolick but Pastoral office The form was this Receive the holy Ghost whose sins thou remittest they are remitted and whose sins thou retainest they are retained and be thou a faithful dispenser of the Word of God and his Holy Sacraments in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Amen Now the former part hereof is intirely and compleatly the form of Words used by our Saviour Joh. 20. 22 23. towards the Apostles expressing their Pastoral Authority and the latter part Be tbou a faithful dispenser c. is no derogation or diminution from the Power granted in the former part If the Presbyters are not the Apostles successors in the Pastoral Authority how could they have right to that form of ordination In the form of ordering Priests or Presbyters in one of the prayers after the mentioning of Christs sending abroad into the world his Apostles Prophets Evangelists Doctors Pastors there follows thanksgiving to God for calling those that were then to be ordered Priests to the same Office and Ministry of salvation of mankind Whence it appears that this Office is the same with some of the forementioned kinds And what can it be but that of Doctors and Pastors This Church did before the last alteration made Anno 1662. in solemn form of words require the Presbyters when they were ordained to exercise the discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded