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	order_n	ordination_n	3,909	5	10.6280	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A81304	The Quaker no Papist, in answer to The Quaker disarm'd. Or, A brief reply and censure of Mr. Thomas Smith's frivolous relation of a dispute held betwixt himself and certain Quakers at Cambridge. By Hen. Denne.	Denne, Henry, 1606 or 7-1660?	1659 (1659)	Wing D1024; Thomason E1000_13; ESTC R207840	18,534	22

make any other answer then what George Whitehead makes to T. S. that they had a Commission but could not shew it under hand and Seal so that indeed it was George Whiteheads memory that failed or perhaps his want of experience in the History of former times that he did not retort upon T. S. his own Argument which if he had done he had made T. S. stand as mute as by his own report he so often made the Quakers to stand 5. If he will give me leave I shall in a word or two try the issue with him here upon that point Suppose then that G. W. had aborded his adversary thus T. S. what Commission hast thou to teach me and this good company here concerning matters of our soul perhaps T. S. would reply I come not here as a Minister to preach but onely as a Christian friend to dispute and argue with you concerning your errours and to reduce if I be able both your self and those whom you pervert into the right way Well be it so But by what Commission then sayes G. W. doest thou T. S. preach to thy parish at Caucat who gave thee thy Commission for that T. S. replyes some of the late English Bishops for I suppose he is an ordained Minister as well as a Master of Arts G. W. demands further but who gave the Protestant Bishops their Commission who made them Bishops at first in Queen Elizabeths Reign some say that T. S. ought of right to stand mute here the first Protestants Bishops having no other Ordination but what they mutually gave to themselves I will not say at the Tavern in Cheapside but grant it might possibly be at some other more seemly place But if upon that account he will not be silent but pretend that the first Protestant Bishops to wit Matthew Parker and the rest were ordained by other Protestant Bishops before them viz. by Wil. Barlow Miles Coverdale John Scory c. Who were all Bishops in King Edward the sixths time G.W. will not yet give over the pursuit but demand of him who gave William Barlow Miles Coverdale and Scory their Commissions who gave them a Commission to make Matthew Parker Archbishop of Canterbury And here T. S. will be mute again For certainly whatsoever he may think and also allow in his private judgement he would not be so hardy as to profess openly in that Assembly where he was that they received their Commission from the Popish Bishops of King Harry the eighths time nor could he in truth affirm it For to the making of a lawful Bishop of a particular Diocess it s well known that according to Popish and Prelatical principles not to say Presbyterian also there is a double power ordinarily to be given viz. the power of Order and the power of Jurisdiction Bare Episcopal Ordination gives no more power of Jurisdiction that is to be Bishop of such a Diocess then bare Ministerial Ordination makes a man to be Pastour or Minister of such a Parish but that power viz. of Jurisdiction say both the Popish Prelatical and Presbyterian Doctours must be had from the lawful Ecclesiastical Superiour Now G. W. demands of T. S. what lawful Ecclesiastical Superiour gave William Barlow and Miles Coverdale Authority to make Bishops in the Diocess of London or in the Province of Canterbury Pool the Popish Archbishop and Cardinal was dead and Boner Bishop of London was coop't up in the Marshal-sea and consented to nothing that was done in that kinde Nay he plainly and positively forbad the same under pain of Excommunication If he answer they had Authority from the Queen then will G. W. reply again the Queen was a Lay-person and a woman the Queen was no part of the Ecclesiastical Ministery or Hierarchy and therefore could give no spiritual or Ecclesiastical power nor the Kings that succeeded her to any one properly to be Bishop of such a Diocess or Pastour of such a Parish no more then my people here can give me Commission to be their Preacher which thou T. S. I am sure wilt not allow them to do And if it be granted saith G. W. that Lay-men or Lay-persons as you call them may grant Commissions to others to be Bishops and Pastours of Souls what rule will you prescribe from Scripture or how will you determine to how many and to what sorts of Lay-persons and people you will extend that power If to the King in his Kingdom why not to a Prince a Duke an Earl c. in their respective Principalities Dukedoms Countyes c. why not to every Judge in his Circuite to every Sheriff in his Shire to every Justice of Peace in his District to every Lord in his Mannor lastly why not to every Master in his Family why may not I say every Master of a Family upon the like grounds either be himself or constitute some other to be Pastour and Preacher to his family And if thus why may not any Congregation or company of people either elect and constitute their own Preacher over them or such as have an inward Call to it take that office upon them by and with the consent of such as are willing to be instructed by them and when they do so who in reason shall quarrel with them for want of Commission 6. Now I cannot sufficiently wonder why those of the English Ministery glory so much in their Succession even from Popish Bishops seeing that beside the ridiculous absurdity of it they are in this perfectly singular and divided in sense and judgement from all other reformed Churches in the world So that if this Succession be the glory of the English Clergy as they pretend it must be the shame and confusion of all the rest of their brethren to want it and if it be not the shame but glory of others to want it yea to cry shame upon it and to reject it as a Superstitious relique of Popery and mark of Antichrist as others think no less wise and learned then themselves it must be the shame of our Clergy to have it and a greater ignomy to glory in their shame Let them rather look upon that Evangelical example which the Protestant Ministers of France their Brethren if they will acknowledge them for such have given them in their Assembly at Poysie not onely in renouncing and abjuring whatsoever any of them had received of Ordination from Rome but as much as in them lay blotting it quite out and washing away all such impurity from them and so ordering their whole Ministery that it might not seem to have any the least dependance of the Babylonish Ordination 7. But indeed that which deserves to be most reflected upon in this trifling dispute is that Major of his first Syllogisme viz. Whosoever refuses to take the Oath of Abjuration is a Papist a Proposition wherein there is as much spite as there is little wit What had the man to do with Papists when he disputed with a Quaker