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	elder_n	2,599	5	9.6510	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A74979	Excommunicatio excommunicata, or, A censure of the Presbyterian censures and proceedings in the Classis at Manchester wherein is modestly examined what ecclesiastical or civil function [sic] they pretend for their new and usurped power : in a discourse betwixt the ministers of that Classis, and some dissenting Christians.	Allen, Isaac, 17th cent.; Allen, Isaac, 17th cent.; Heyrick, Richard, 1600-1667.	1658 (1658)	Wing A1026A; ESTC R42720	45,307	67

as is consonant to the will of God and universall practice of primitive Churches c. In that you do here joyn the will of God and the universal practise of primitive Churches together as you joyned the Word of God and the constant practise of the Catholique Church before you seem to us to make up the rule whereby we must judge what Government it is that you pray might be established of these two viz. the will of God and the universal practise of primitive Churches Or that it is the universal practise of primitive Churches That must be our sure guide and comment upon the Word of God to tell us what is his will revealed these touching Church Government and discipline If this be your sense as we apprehend it is we must needs profess that herein we greatly differ from you as not conceiving it to be sound and orthodoxe It being the Word of God alone and the approved practise of the Church recorded there whether it was the universall and constant practise of the Church or no that is to be the onely rule to judge by in this or any other controversies in matters of Religion But yet admitting for the present the rule you seem to make we should desire to know from you what that Church Government is which is so consonant to the will of God and universall practise of primitive Churches For our own parts we think it will be very hard for you or any others to demonstrate out of any Records of Antiquity what was the universall practise of primitive Churches for the whole space of the first 300. years after Christ or the greatest part thereof excepting so much as is left upon record in the Scriptures of the new Testament the Monuments of Antiquity that concerne those times for the greatest part of them being both imperfect and far from shewing us what was the universall practise of the Church then though the practises of some Churches may be mentioned and likewise very questionable At least it will not be easie to assure us that some of those that go under the names of the most approved Authors of those times are neither spurious nor corrupted And hereupon it will unavoidably follow that we shall be left very doubtfull what Government it is that is most consonant to the universall and constant practise of primitive Churches for that time But as touching the rule it self which you seem here to lay down we cannot close with it We do much honour and reverence the primitive Churches But yet we believe we owe more reverence to the Scriptures then to judge them either imperfect or not to have light enough in themselves for the resolving all doubts touching matters of faith or practise except it be first resolved what was either the concurrent interpretation of the Fathers or the universall and constant practise of the Churches of those times Besides that admitting this for a rule that the universall and constant practise of the primitive Churches must be that which must assure us what is the will of God revealed in Scripture concerning the Government which he hath appointed in the Church our faith is hereupon resolved into a most uncertain ground and so made fallible and turned into opinion For what monuments of Antiquity besides the Scripture can assure us touching the matters of fact therein contained that they were such indeed as they are there reported to be the Authors of them themselves being men that were not infallibly guided by the Spirit But yet supposing we could be infallibly assured which yet never can be what was the universall and constant practise of the primitive Churches how shall that be a rule to assure us what is most consonant to the will of God When as we see not especially in such matters as are not absolutely necessary to salvation Even as a Generall Councill it self is subject to errrour but that the universall practise of the Churches might in some things be dissonant to the will of God revealed in Scriptures And so the universall practise of primitive Churches can be no certain rule to judge by what Church Government is most consonant to the will of God revealed in his Word We know there are corruptions in the best of men There was such hot contention betwixt Paul and Barnabas Gal. 2. as caused them to part asunder Peter so failed in his practise as that though before some came from James he did eat with the Gentils yet when they were come he withdrew himself fearing them of the Circumcision And hereupon not only other Jews dissembled with him but Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation Whence it 's clear that the examples of the best men even in those things wherein they went contrary to the rule of Gods Word are of a spreading nature and the better the Persons that give the bad example are the greater the danger of the more universall leavening Nay we finde that not only some few Apostolicall men had their failings but even Apostolicall primitive Churches did in the very face of the Apostles they being yet alive make great defection both in regard of opinions and practises As from the examples of the Churches of Corinth Galatia and the Churches of Asia is manifest The Apostle also tels us that even in his time the mystery of iniquity began to work And in after times we know how the Doctrine was corrupted what gross superstition crept into the Church what domination was striven for amongst the Pastors and Bishops of the Churches Till at length Antichrist was got up into his seat unto which height yet he came not all at once but by steps and degrees Besides it is of fresh remembrance that notwithstanding the reformation happily brought about in our own Church in regard of Doctrine and worship after those dismall Marian times yet the corruption in regard of Government continued such during the time of the late Prelacy which yet was taken away in other reformed Churches that the Pastors were deprived of that power of rule that our Church acknowledgeth did belong to them of right and which did anciently belong to them however the exercise thereof did after grow into a long disuse as hath been shewed before And therefore when we consider on the one hand that the superiority which the Bishop obtained at the first above the Presbyter in the ancient Church and which was rather obtained consuetudine Ecclesiae then by Divine right did at the length grow to that height that the Pastors were spoiled of all power of rule so we cannot much wonder on the other hand that the ruling Elder was quite turned out of doors For the proof of the being and exercise of whose office in the purer times there are notwithstanding produced testimonies of the ancients by Divines both at home and abroad that have written about that subject and to which we do therein refer you As there do remain some footsteps and shadow of

in those very termes covenanted against that the liberty that is granted to some be not extended to Popery and Prelacy And therefore if any Diocesan Bishop should exercise his jurisdiction and excommunicate any person within this Land wherein by Authority as you may see afterward there is also an appointment of another Government we leave it to those that are learned in the Law to determine whether such Diocesan Bishops would not run themselves into a praemunire But if you do not restrain lawfull Pastors to these onely our doubt yet is Whether you mean not onely such Ministers as were ordained by Diocesan Bishops excluding those out of the number that since their being taken away have been ordained by Presbyters onely If this be your sense we shall onely at present minde you of what is published to be the Judgement of Dr Vsher late Primate of Ireland in a Book lately put forth by Dr Bernard Preacher to the Honourable Society of Grayes-Inne and whom though a stranger to us and one of a different judgement from us in the point of Episcopacy yet we reverence for his moderation and profession of his desires for peace wishing that such as do consent in substantials for matter of Doctrine would consider of some conjunction in point of Discipline That private interests and circumstantials might not keep them thus far asunder * See pag. 14● of his last Book In which wish as we do cordially joyn our selves so we heartily desire that all godly and moderate spirited men throughout the Land would also close But the book which the said Doctor hath lately published is intituled The Judgement of the late Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of Ireland c. In this Book this Doctor tells us that the late Primate in Answer to a letter of his sent to him as it should seem for that purpose declares his Judgement touching the ordination of the Ministry in the Reformed Churches in France and Holland There he saith that Episcopus Presbyter gradu tantum differunt non ordine And consequently that in places where Bishops cannot be had the ordination by Presbyters standeth valid And in the close of his Answer about this point he saith That for the testifiying of his Communion with the Churches of the Low-Countryes of whom he had spoken immediately before and which he there professeth He doth love and honour as true members of the Universall Church notwithstanding the difference that was betwixt him and them about the point of Episcopacy he doth profess That with like affection he should receive the blessed Sacrament at the hands of the Dutch Ministers if he were in Holland as he should do at the hands of the French Ministers if he were in Charenton See pag. 125. and 126. Hence you may perceive that the Judgement of Dr Usher was That the Ordination of Presbyters where Bishops cannot be had standeth valid And consequently if you be of his opinion and you must have stronger reasons then ever yet we have seen to bear you out therein if you judge otherwise they ought to be esteemed lawfull Pastors to whom you grant the power of Excommunication Bishops being now taken away and may not therefore ordain according to the present Laws of the Land The said Dr Bernard hath some animadvertisements upon that Letter in which Dr Usher doth deliver his judgement as above said and there shews that he was not in this Judgement of his singular He alledgeth Dr Davenant that pious and learned Bishop of Sarisbury as consenting with him in it in his determinations quaest 42. and produceth the principall of the Schooleman Gulielmus Parisiensis Gerson Durand c. and declares it to be the Generall opinion of the Schoolemen Episcopatum ut distinguitur à simplici sacerdotio non esse alium ordinem c. see pag. 130. of the aforenamed Book as also pag. 131.132 Where the concurrence of Dr Davenant with Dr Vsher in his judgement about this matter is declared more fully He addes also others as in speciall Dr Richard Field in his learned Book of the Church lib. 3. cap. 39. and lib. 5. cap. 27. And also that Book intituled A defence of the Ordination of the Ministers of the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas maintained by Archdeacon Mason against the Romanists And further he saith He hath been assured it was not onely the Judgement of Bishop Overall but that he had a principall hand in it He tell us that the fore-mentioned Author produceth many testimonies The Mr of the Sentences and most of the Schoolemen Bonaventure Thomas Aquinas Durand Dominicus Soto Richardus Armachanus Tostatus Alphonsus a Castro Gerson Petrus Canisius to have affirmed the same and at last quoteth Medina a principall Bishop of the Councill of Trent who affirmed That Jerome Ambrose Augustine Sedulius Primasius Chrysostome Theodoret Theophylact were of the same judgment also But you may see these things your selves in Dr Bernard pag. 132 133 134. Wee have been onely at the pains to transcribe them Wee could alledg many more Testimonies to prove this But wee count these sufficient and do alledg these the rather because brought by one that is of the same Judgment with you as wee suppose But having declared how farr you accord with us in Judgment touching the way of informing the ignorant and reforming the wicked persons and schismatical c. you tell us That you are not therein so wavering and unsettled in your apprehensions of the Case as to submit either it or them either wholly or in part to the contrary Judgment and determination of a general Council of the Eastern and Western Churches much lesse to a new termed Provincial Assembly at Preston wherein you professe no little to differ from us That which wee submitted wholly to the Judgment of the Provincial Assembly was not whether Catechizing was a way appointed by God in his Word for the information of the ignorant but in what way of Catechizing as is expressed in our Paper the ignorant in our Congregations who never offered themselves unto the Sacrament were most like to be brought to some measure of knowledg and which is not a matter of Doctrine but of Order onely Neither was it by us submitted to that Assembly whether the censures of the Church were the means appointed by Christ for the reforming of the scandalous But whether it might not be meet pro hic nunc and as the present case stood to apply the Censures and so put in practice at this time that which in the General wee were sufficiently assured from the word of Truth was the way for their reformation and with which wee were both by God and Man intrusted to dispense unto those that were openly scandalous in our Congregations However they contented themselves to live in the want of the Lords Supper nor ever presented themselves to the Eldership to be admitted to it And this because meerely circumstantiall as to the dispencing of the Censures at

grown to that height that it had quite taken away from the Pastors that rule that of right did belong unto them And for the Reduction of it to the ancient form of Synodicall Government And therefore in the Judgement of this learned and reverend Antiquary our Provincial Assembly at Preston where the Pastors of the Churches are members as he acknowledgeth of right they ought to be in such Assemblies would not have been accounted a new termed Provincial Assembly But you go on and tell us That other parts of our Paper are full of darkness to which you say you cannot so fully assent till further explicated and unfolded by us We cannot apprehend any such darkness in our Paper as you speak of But yet because in yours you question what authority we have from the civil Magistrate for what we do and likewise the extent of it and your mistakes of our meaning may perhaps some of them arise from your unacquaintedness with the rule we walk by Although we were not to be blamed for any mistakes that might arise ab ignorantia juris whether simple or affected that we determine not but leave you to examine Before we come to make Answer more particularly to what follows we are willing to be at some paines to give you some further account of the power we are awarranted by the civil Authority for to exercise To what persons within our bounds it extends it self and what some of those rules are that are prescribed unto us by civil Authority to walk by in the exercise of that power we are betrusted with It is a general and common mistake amongst many that the Presbyterian Government was established by the Parliament but for three yeers and that therefore it is now expired and out of date But if you peruse all that passed in Parliament touching it no such matter will appear The directions of the Lords and Commons Assembled in Parliament after advice had with the Assembly of Divines for the Electing and chusing Ruling Elders in all the Congregations and in the Classical Assemblies for the Cities of London and Westminster and the several Counties of the Kingdom For the speedy setling of the Presbyterian Government bearing date August 19. 1645. Their Ordinance together with Rules and Directions concerning suspension from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper in cases of Ignorance and scandall dated Octob. 20. 1645. The Votes also of the said Houses for the Choise of Elders throughout the Kingdom of England and Dominion of Wales in the respective Parish Churches and Chappels according to the directions before mentioned And touching the power granted to the Tryers of Elections of Elders Of the date of Feb. 20. 1645. and Feb. 26. 1645. Their Ordinance for keeping scandalous Persons from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper the inabling of Congregations for the choice of Elders and supplying of defects in former Ordinances and Directions of Parliament concerning Church Government bearing date March 14. 1645. The Remedies prescribed by them for removing some obstructions in Church Government dated Aprill 22d 1647. And their Ordinance for the speedy dividing and setling the severall Counties of this Kingdom into distinct Classicall Presbyteries and Congregationall Elderships dated Jan. 29. 1647. We say all these were passed absolutely without any proviso's at all limiting the time of their continuance that is expressed in any of them Indeed in the Ordinance of Parliament giving power to all the Classical Presbyteries within their respective bounds to examine approve and ordain Ministers for severall Congregations dated Nov. 10. 1645. It is provided in the Close of it That it shall stand in force for twelve moneths and no longer As it is provided in another Ordinance for the Ordination of Ministers by the Classicall Presbyters within their respective bounds for the severall Congregations in the Kingdom of England bearing date August 28. 1646. That it shall stand in force for three years and no longer Which latter might give to some that took but the matter upon report an occasion to conceive that the Presbyterian Government was settled but for three years Although that was but ill applied to all the severall Ordinances that had passed before which belonged onely to one But the Ordinance especially from which chiefely as we conceive the mistake arose about settling the Presbyterian Government for three years onely was the Ordinance that passed June 5. 1646. The title whereof is An Ordinance of the Lords and Commons Assembled in Parliament for the present settling without further delay of the Presbyteriall Government in the Church of England In the Close whereof it is ordained That this Ordinance shall continue for the space of three years and no longer unless both Houses think fit to continue it But if the matter of this Ordinance be consulted it is manifest it was but touching a Committee of Lords and Commons to adjudge and determine scandalous offences not formerly enumerated appointed by the Ordinance in stead and place of Commissioners mentioned in the Ordinance of March 14. 1645. And also shewing how the Elderships were to proceed in the examination of such scandalous offences And touching what power was granted to the said Committee and in what sort they were to proceed as is clear to any that shall but take the paines to peruse that Ordinance The ground whereof in the preface to it is made to be this The Lords and Commons in Parliament holding their former resolution that all notorious and scandalous offenders shall be kept from the Sacrament have thought fit to make a further addition to the scandalous offences formerly enumerated for which men shall be kept back from the Sacrament And least the stay of the enumeration and the not naming of Commissioners to judge of Cases not enumerated should hinder the putting in execution the Presbyterian Governement already established They have thought fit c. And do therefore ordain a Committee therein particularly nominated in stead and place of Commissioners The groundlesness of the mistake about settling the Presbyterial Government for three years onely that might arise from the proviso in this Ordinance is so clear to any common understanding that the bare recitall of the sum of the matter of this Ordinance and the ground of making it doth make it so fully to appear that it were but lost labour to use any more words about it But we have particularly mentioned all that ever passed the Parliament so far as we have either seen or heard of that hitherto concerned Church Government untill the year 1648. When the form of Church Government to be used in the Church of England and Ireland was agreed upon by the Lords and Commons Assembled in Parliament after Advice had with the Assembly of Divines and was ordered by them to be printed August 19. of the said year 1648. And this Ordinance wherein all that had passed the Parliament before in parts and at severall times and what ever was but temporary by vertue of

not finde that the Presbyterian Government hath lyen hid so long as that for the space of 1500 years it could never be found till this present You have heard what rule did anciently belong to Presbyters notwithstanding that through the corruptions that crept into the Church in after times the exercise of that power was long disused And the like may be said of Ruling Elders and as hath been shewed by others But it is what de jure ought to be and not what de facto is or hath been which is that which you and wee are chiefly to attend and concerning which the Scripture must be the onely Judg as wee have said before But you say now subjection to our present Government is required by us and then demand Whether all that observe not our rank and order and subject not themselves to our present Government must be taken for lawlesse persons for so say you doth this close connexion of ours seem to import viz. Many who do not subject but live c. But here you do reason fallaciously à bene conjunctis ad male divisa For in our Paper wee speak of such as did live in a sinfull and total neglect of the Lords Supper That were scandalous and offensive in their lives drunkards unclean persons and that will not subject themselves to the present Government but live as lawlesse persons And therefore the lawlesse persons wee meant and as might plainly have been gathered from our words were such who as they subjected not themselves to the present Government of the Church so they were also scandalous and offensive in their lives wee joyning these altogether whom you divide And whether such as will neither submit themselves to the Laws of God nor the Government that is settled in the Church by the Civil Power be not lawlesse persons we leave it to you to judg But yet we do here also minde you That however we do not judg all those to be lawlesse persons that do out of conscience not come up to the observation of all those Rules which are or shall be established by Authority for regulating the outward worship of God and Government of this Church being otherwise blamelesse yet both you and wee may well remember that such as should have refused to have subjected themselves to the late Prelatical Government would have been accounted in those times to have been lawlesse persons But you say When wee make it an Order that notice shall be taken of all persons that forsake the publick Assemblies of the Saints you would gladly know how farr wee extend this Saintship this Church and Assembly of Saints To which wee answer as farr as the Apostle did when writing to the Church of Corinth and the Churches of Galatia hee calls them Saints and Churches notwithstanding there were some in those Churches that were leavened with unsound doctrine and grosly erroneous In Corinth some that denied the Resurrection made rents and schisms and sundry grosly scandalous In the Churches of Galatia such as mixed works with Faith in the point of Justification and of which the Apostle Paul would have those Churches to take notice even to the censuring of them they being spots to those Assemblies and however Saints by profession and in regard of outward calling being in Covenant with God and having been baptized yet answered not their profession by suitable conversation And therefore however there be sundry of the like stamp in our Assemblies wee do not therefore unchurch them or make our Assemblies not the Assemblies of Saints because of the corruption of such members And seeing our principles and practices are manifestly known to be utterly against the opinions and practices of the Donatists of old and those that have of late rent themselves from our Churches because of the scandalousnesse of the corrupt members that are found in them though the sin of these in our Churches is aggravated by giving that occasion you might well have spared your pains in transcribing out of Augustine what hee justly said unto those schismaticks that hee had to deal with Nay you might rather have gathered from our Paper That seeing wee said that notice should be taken of all those that should forsake the publick Assemblies of the Saints our purpose was to have censured such as the Donatists were That wee purposed to observe and censure those that did maintain and hold up private meetings in opposition to the publick That crie down our Churches and publick Assemblies Ministery and Ordinances as you know several sorts do and who as they hold sundry grosse errors that subvert the faith so in regard of those and other their practices that in their own nature do manifestly subvert the order unity and peace that Christ hath established in his Church do justly fall under Church censure according to the rules of our Government above mentioned And that therefore wee were not altogether silent concerning either the sin or punishment of such as did err grosly in doctrinals or in discipline so as to make such dangerous rents from the Church as the fore-named Sectaries do Contrary to what you say of us in your Paper And further by such as forsake the publick Assemblies of the Saints of whom wee said notice should be taken you might have gathered our meaning was that such of which sort there are but too many amongst us who out of a principle of carelesnesse sloth worldlinesse or manifest prophanenesse do on the Lords day either idle out the time or else are worse imployed when they should resort to the publick Assemblies and who as they are no friends to any private meetings for the good of their souls in the use of any private means of conference or prayer for that end So they do also Atheistically turn their backs on all the publick Ordinances forsaking them and the Assemblies where these are dispensed should be taken notice of in order to censure if there was not reformation and to neither of which sort of persons any indulgence is granted by any Laws of the Land that wee know of And if you had gathered thus much from our Paper as your mistake had been far the less so your Charity had been the more then to have reckoned us in the number of such Persons as the Donatists were And yet we did not mean That we intended to take notice in order unto censure of such who being sound in the faith and godly in life though differing from us in point of Discipline and Government had their distinct Assemblies from ours they indeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace They not being censurable by the rules of our Government as is manifest by what we have declared before Although we remember how all that submitted not to the former Government were counted schismatical Neither did we reckon these in the number of the lawless Persons we speak of who subjected not themselves to our Government and whom we account to be