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	ordination_n	presbyter_n	10,148	5	10.8332	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A66932	A little stone, pretended to be out of the mountain, tried, and found to be a counterfeit, or, An examination & refutation of Mr. Lockyers lecture, preached at Edinburgh, anno 1651, concerning the mater of the visible church and afterwards printed with an appendix for popular government of single congregations : together with an examination, in two appendices, of what is said on these same purposes in a letter of some in Aberdene, who lately have departed from the communion and government of this church / by James Wood ...	Wood, James, 1608-1664.	1654 (1654)	Wing W3399; ESTC R206983	330,782	402

Office Nor do we deny but the people might be present at the handling of matters of faith in Assemblies be hearers and witnesses of the whole proceedings thereanent give their counsell and advice in consultation also testifie their assent and approbation to the determinations We grant also that Excommunication and loosing from Excommunication of persons was not performed without at least the tacit agreement and consent of the people ●hey are to concur activè and executivè to both And therefore when any person was to be Excommunicat the grounds and causes thereof were made known to the people And when persons Excommunicat were to be received again into the Church they were brought before the people to make their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 publick confession before them as we do in our Churches now but none of these nor all of them amounts to an authoritative and juridicall power of Government But as for such acts as belong directly to authoritative and juridicall Government as Ordination of Ministers judiciall sentencing persons to be Excommunicat or absolution from Excommunication giving of definitive sentence in publick determinations of controversies of faith or of matters pertaining to order and rites to be observed in the Church let our Authors produce any testimony or allowed practice of the peoples formall influence and concurrence in these if they would say any thing from that antiquity for an Ecclesiastick Government properly Democraticall either in whole or in part section 15 Hierome who was near these ages and better acquaint with their way then these Authors tells us in the generall in whose hands the power of Government was then in that remarkable and famous saying of his on the Epistle to Tit. c. 1. Antequam Diaboli instinctu studia in Religione fierent diceretur in populo ego sum Pauli ego Apollo ego vero Cephae Communi Presbyterorum consilio Ecclesiae gubernabantur c. See what learned Chamier sayeth on this of Hierome lib. 10. de Oecumen Pontifc 5. § 22. Answering to Bellarmin his Arg. Respondeo ad primum etiamsi Aristocratia non sit totidem syllabis nominata tamen certò significatam his verbis Communi Presbyterorum consilio Ecclesiae gubernabantur c. And he adds bonam autem fuisse id regiminis formam inde sequitur quod ab initio fuisse dicat Hieronymus cum in Ecclesiâ id sit optimum quod verissimum id autem verissimum quod primum Dicit etiam Hieron fuisse ex institutionis Dominicae veritate And mark in this same Learned Author whose words I am now citing that the very thing he undertakes to demonstrate in that c. 5. and some following both from Scripture and antiquity is that the government as well of particular as of consociat Churches was pure Aristocracy c. 5. § 1. section 16 More particularly 1. That ordination and imposition of hands which only is the authoritative act in the Calling of a Minister and that which conferreth Ministerially under Christ a Mininisteriall power was in these primitive times the proper and peculiar act of the Ministers of the Church or the Presbytery is so evident and clear to all that has read any thing of these times that it were waste of time and paper to produce testimonies for it Indeed we find in antiquity that after that once there began a constant praesident to be set up in the Presbytery with the name of Bishop which in Scripture is common to all Presbyters appropriat to him alone somewhat of the Act of Ordination began also to be peculiar to him and as he advanced in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preheminency above Presbyters so was the power of ordination more and more deferred to him or usurped by him alone and hence came that point of difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter of which Jerome in his time Quid facit exceptâ ordinatione Episcopus quod non facit Presbyter But that ever the people had any formall concurrence in ordination of Ministers is a thing unknown to antiquity section 17 2. That the power and exercise of the Keyes of Discipline of binding and loosing sentencing unto censure and absolution from censure also was only in the hands of the Colledge of Presbyters in those times of the Church is as evident to such as are any ways acquainted in them Origen Hom. 7. in Iosuam tertio admonitum resipiscere nolentem jubet ab Ecclesiae corpore desecari per Ecclesiae praesides The Centuriators Cent. 3. c. 7. tels us that then Jus tractandi de Excommunicandis aut recipiendis lapsis publice penes Ecclesiae Seniores erat qui ad eam rem convenire solebant and they cite for this Tertullians Apologetick The order then observed in receiving penitents that had offended by grievous scandalous sins is most clear for this they were first to compear before the Bishop and his Clergy i. e. the Presbytery wherein the Bishop then differed from other Presbyters ordine tantum non gradu by them the penitents cause was judicially cognosced the manner of satisfaction prescribed and enjoyned to them And having performed that and made their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before the people they were actually absolved by the imposition of the hands of the Bishop and Clergy or the Presbytery Cyprians Epistles are full of testimonies to this purpose It were needlesse labour to insist in citation of them Only I think it worth the pains to produce one Passage whereby it may evidently appear that the way of absolving and receiving penitents was just as it is now in the Presbyterian Government as to the matter and substance It is in lib. 3. Epist 11. in Pamel Ord. Epist 46. from Cornelius Bishop of Rome to Cyprian concerning the return of some Confessours from the Novatian schism to the unity of the Church there Cornelius after he has related how these Confessours had expressed their desire of reconciliation to the Presbyters and taken with the faults laid to their charge in a privat and extrajudiciall way he proceedeth thus Omni igitur actu ad me perlato placuit contrahi Presbyterium Adfuerunt etiam Episcopi quinque qui hodie praesentes fuerunt ut firmato consilio quid circa personam eorum observari deberet consensu omnium statueretur Et ut motum omnium consilium singulorum dignosceres etiam sententias nostras placuit in notitiam vestri perferri quas subjectas leges His ita gestis in Presbyterium venerunt Vrbanus c. Et plerique fratres qui se iis adjunxerant summis precibus desiderantes ut ea quae ante fuerunt gesta in oblivionem cederent nullaque eorum mentio haberetur quod erat consequens omnis hic actus populo erat insinuandus ut ipsos viderent in Ecclesiâ constitutos Having related the peoples expression of their joy he sets down the confession which the penitents made Nos errorem nostrum confitemur c. And then addeth istâ

Prelaticall or Papall tyranny ●et all indifferent men judge When as we put the authoritative and judicall Power of censures in the hands of the Eldership or Rulers of the Church onely we make not people meer spectators or witnesses of what is done But give unto them a rational obediential consent so that they are not oblidged to give their obedientiall consent and concurrence to the Elderships acts if they find the●… not agreeable to the Word of God And your own most judicious and best advised make the dogmaticall determination of censure which they ascribe to the sole Eldership as obligatory upon the people for their obedience as we do the Presbyteries sentence and as their Preaching of the Word of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. whereas in the Presbyterian way inferior Elderships are countable for their proceedings to Superior more ample and larger Elderships and incase of grievance by the sentence of an inferior appeal and recourse may be had to a Superior more ample which is far from the Prelaticall or Papall way wherein the procedure is from moe to fewer till you come to one A Lord Metrapolitan or an universall Pope but in your way three Elders giving a dogmatical determination with four or five private brethren concurring with them as they are obliged to obey their determination as much as their Preaching of the Gospell may Excommunicate a man and are accountable to none on earth in a Church way to recognosce or ●edresse if they do amisse and if they should deliver souls enough to Satan unjustly there is none on earth that can autho●itatively call them to an account in a Church way to say to them What do you Now let the World judge whether of these two be nearest a * See a sad instance of this related by M. Caudrey vindic vind Epistle to the diss Papall power three Elders with some few private brethren having supreame Power on earth to Excommunicate persons unaccountable uncorrigible by any Superiour on earth Or some Presbyters acting in subordination to a larger Presbytery to whom recourse may be had for recognoscing their proceedings and sentence and rectifying it if amisse and if these haply fail then recourse may be had yet to a Synode may be consisting of a hundred Ministers and as many or more choise Elders of all the Churches of a whole Province Yea and if haply th● 〈◊〉 a failing there recourse may be had to a Synode of severa●●undreds of the choice Ministers and Elders of all the Churches of a whole Nation I say again ●et all indifferent men judge whether of these wayes be nearest to the Papall Power 2. It s a foul misrepr●sentation that our Interpretation of the place 1 Cor. 5. 4. is the very Doctrine of Iesuits of Rhe●s We confesse we say as they because therein they say with the truth that authority of giving sentence was not in the whole multitude of the Church and that the Power of binding and loosing was not given to the who●e Church at the subject but for their good as the end and in this they say righter then they that say the contrare which they falsly ascribe to all Protestant Divines But the Rhemists Jesuites puts that power in the hands of the sole Prelates Office● that were never of Gods appointing excluding all other Ministers of Christ we with the Word of God disclaiming all Prelates maintain it to be in all the Ministers and Elders of the Church to ●e exercised by them conjunctim Rhemists with other Papists make their Prelaticall power and authority lordly soveraigne dictatorian tyrannicall oblidging the people to absolute blind obedience We give no power to Elders but Ministeriall the actings and determinations whereof ought not to be received by people in a way of blind obedience but may and ought by them be tryed and proven in the judgement of private discretion whether they ●e agreeable to their rule the Word of God or not 3. When as Mr. Lockier sayeth that Gods people are deprived of their best liberties when they have not joint authoritative concurrence and vote in the Acts of Government but these are only in the hands of the Eldership and that is a bondage to them and that 't is little oddes under whom they have this bondage one Prelate or many Presbyters 1. I think upon more serious advice and deliberation he will take up that word againe where hee calls liberty of judiciall authoritative voteing in Acts of Government the best liberties of the people of God I think he will find they have liberties much better then that But 2. does Mr. Lock●…r indeed account it a depriving of people of their Liberties and a bondage to be under the Government of Rulers with whom they may not all and every one of them joyn 〈◊〉 ●…tively in the Acts of Government Certainly this princip●…●s under his words here and beleeve tho it may please Levellers well for it is just their language yet it will not ●ellish very well to such as have the present Government in their hand ● When he sayeth that Presbyters take power to themselves without the word viz. in acting in Government without joynt authoritative concurrence of the people and therefore may justly have the same title with other usurpers c. we say the Author bu● begs the Question that they take that power without the 〈◊〉 which he has not yet proven nor ever will The Word of God being clear for it that they are Rulers set over the Church to govern them and people commanded to give obedience unto them in that relation ●nd therefore to call them as 〈◊〉 whom Jesus Christ never appointed to be Rulers over his Church usurpers is nothing else but to call good evill and light darknesse section 11 The Authors second instance to make out his generall Assertion undertaken SECT 6. is taken from the proceedings of the Synod of Jerusalem Acts 15. Where the Apostles themselves were present and diverse Elders with them the matters being of great consequence as well for faith as practice Yet nothing was done in the beginning carrying on or ending of the same but with interessing the Congregation and the Brethren their names being to the Letters they speaking in the Assembly they having satisfaction by Argument and not overborn by Authority and these joining their assent in sending back chosen Messengers from amongst them as Judas and Silas to other Churches they were the Apostles Elders with the whole Church that joyned in it Acts 15. 22 23. If at any time the Church might been left out it might have been at such a time a● this when the inspired Apostles were present and in matters of this nature yet would they not leave such an example to future Churches of such a way Ans Were Mr. Lockiers cause he pleadeth for never so good yet I must crave leave to say it is ill managed in this instance If I have not ground to say so I ●ave to impartiall men to

We conclude then and affirm that this Eldership was no other but an Assembly of Elders as were these Acts 20. 17. ordinary Elders of the Church And to expound it of an Assembly of extraordinary Officers is but a fiction without ground in Scripture devised by men to shut out clear light And Mr. Lockier may remember that as able judicious men as are of his way the Dissenting Brethren in the Assembly at Westminster in their Reasons against the Proposition of Ordination take it to be an ordinary Eldership and so reason from it to the regulating of ordinary Ordination of Elders in the Church That a sufficient Presbytery say they meaning as is evident an ordinary Presbytery may assume all and sole power of ordination is proved 1 Tim. 4. 14. by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery section 4 Mr. Lockiers Reason to prove the contrary is of no force Timothy was an extraordinary Officer an Evangelist and it is beyond the power of ordinary Officers to give being to an extraordinary That same worthy Author we mentioned sufficiently discovereth the weaknesse of it in the place cited pag. 103. For 1. If it should be said that Timothy was twice ordained first to be a Presbyter then to be an Evangelist as some Episcopall Writers say to be a Bishop but a Bishop distinct from a Presbyter is a humane creaature not in Scripture and the first to be that mentioned 1 Tim. 4. 14. done by the ordinary Eldership The second mentioned 2 Tim. 1. 6. done by Paul an Apostle an extraordinary Officer above an Evangelist I know not what Mr. Lockier will bring to infringe this 2. Supposing that he was but once ordained an Evangelist and Elder both as who ever was an Evangelist was also an Elder yet an ordinary Eldership might concur with Paul in his Ordination and the act of these ordinary Elders extend no further but to that which was common to him with other Elders the Office of Eldership that which was extraordinary flowing from the Apostle Pauls concurrence in the businesse In this mixt action we may very well distinguish what was ordinary and what extraordinary ascribing that to the Presbytery viz. together with Paul this to the Apostle 3. Yet further I say with the worthy Author I bring these things from that I can see no inconsistency or absurdity if it be said that the Presbytery sent forth and ordained Timothy as an Evangelist that it is alledged an Evangelist is an extraordinary Officer and therefore the Elders being ordinary Officers could not give him a being i. e. ordain him I deny the necessity of the consequence any reason that can be brought to prove that consequence must be as I conceive one of those two viz. Either 1. That which is brought by some from Hebrews 7. 7. The lesse is blessed by the greater to which as to this particular in hand that worthy Author has sufficiently Answered by two things First that altho Timothy as an Evanelist was greater then a single Presbyter yet that proves not that he was greater then the whole Presbytery as one of the house of Lords is sure was greater then one of the house of Commons Yet not then the whole house of Commons 2ly That he that blesseth is not greater then he that is blessed every way But quatalis in so far as he blesseth and so why might not the Presbytery be greater then an Evangelist not simply and absolutely but so far as they blessed and ordained him That Author gives two instances of the like Act. 9. 17. and Act. 13. 1 3. Or 2. the reason of that consequence must be this Because ordinary Officers not having in themselves that extraordinar office can not give that which they have not And if this be it I would then aske Mr. Lockier how can people give the Office of a Minister which they have not in themselves nay the Office of an Apostle as he alledgeth that the people ordained Mathias an Apostle whatsover he can answer for that will serve our turn for the Presbytery ordaining Timothy to that Office which they had not in themselves The truth is mens ordaining a person to an Ecclesiastick Office not being by way of proper efficiency nor yet the Ordainers acting therein as principal agents or conferrers of the office that is Gods part by his institution but as morall instruments under God It is not ex natura rei requisite that the ordainers have in themselves formally the Office whereunto they Ordain the person But it is sufficient that they have a warrand from God to interveen as instruments to apply the person to the Office instituted by God And I see nothing in the Office of an Evangelist that can prove that ordinary Officers could have no warrand from God to act in this kind of causality to the applying of a person to it Read that which the often mentioned worthy Author hath judiciously spoken upon the nature of the Office of an Evangelist Miscell c. 7. p. 93 94. and it will shew I say not this without reason section 5 I trust by these things it appears that this instance of ordination by a Presbytery is not so far from this disputation as Mr. Lockier would have his Reader beleeve but that it is a patern of ordination in ordinary which some of the most judicious of his own side acknowledge with us shewing us also the right hands into which Christ has committed this power to wit the Eldership The example which he referreth us to Act. 13. 2 3. we thank him for it as making very much against himself For albeit Barnabas and Paul the persons on whom the act mentioned there passed did not then receive any new ordination to an Office extraordinary as Mr. Lockier in a mistake or inanimadvertency has imagined when he wrot this they were Apostles before yet did they receive a new call unto a more particular application or as it were appropriation of the exercise of their Office unto a certain definit charge the Gentiles to wit as Paul himself declareth it Gal. 2. 7. and yet we see evidently that as this calling was not performed by the body of the Church so it was performed by some ordinary Elders I say not that it was by ordinary Elders only for there were Prophets that had hand in it But I say that ordinary Elders did also concurre in it as appears v. 1. There were at Antioch certain Prophets and Teachers I hope it will not be denyed that Teachers are ordinary Elders section 6 2. Object Is from 1 Tim. 5. 22. and Tit. 1. 5. We read saith he that Titus and Timothie did ordain and are exhorted in an ordinary way to go to work by an ordinary spirit to wit not to lay hands suddenly on any man nor to be partiall but to weigh fit qualifications in every one that they were blamelesse the Husband of one Wife not accused of riot not self-willed not soon angry not given to

to these Answers of the Assembly for full satisfaction and for the present say onely in brief 1. If all that is said in this Argument were granted yet would it not conclude simply against an Eldership Ruling more Congregations then one but only against an Eldership made up of Elders fixed in their Teaching to severall particular Congregations But nothing against an Eldership consisting of Officers no● fixed to severall particular Congregations but Teaching and Governing in common the severall Congregations associated under their one Government And likely it is that so it was in the Church of Jerusalem and others these first Churches Certainly the contrair cannot be proven And we think so it may be at thi● day as it is indeed in some Reformed Churches without repugnancy to any positive Divine institution But 2. granting that the Scriptures doe testifie that the ordinary Ruling power of Elders is not extendended beyond their ordinary power of Teaching for that which Mr. Lockier addeth that the Scripture holdeth forth that rather the Teaching power exceeds in extent his Ruling power we desire proof of it for he brings none we say that it is a mistake which is alledged that the Presbytery we speak for Ruling over more Congregations extends the ordinary Ruling power of Pastours beyond the extent of their ordinary Teaching power It does only extend the ordinary exercise or actus secundos of the one beyond the ordinary exercise or actus secundos of the other having herein a call to the one and not to the other which is no incongruity nor doth oppose any part of the Word of God As for the Scriptures alledged by the Dissenting Brethren in th●t forecited Reasons and from them here by Mr. Lockier we still affirm with the Reverend Assembly in their Answers none of the● proves the contrary they only shew that all these things belong to their Office and that this is the usuall practice and work of Elders where their work lyes But none of them prove it prohibited of God or unlawfull for an Elder upon a call to do or exercise one of these where they have not occasion and a call to do the rest Any thing that Mr. Lockier sayeth to the contrary of this is but his meer assertion but no proof from the words of the Texts for which I appeal to the judgement of any understanding man reading and considering the Texts themselves Let any man shew me out of these Scriptures any thing bearing this much Elders rule these particular Congregations only which you do ordinarily teach So we shall not need to insist upon them particularly only a note upon somewhat said by him upon some of them section 2 When as upon that Act. 20. 28. That there were many Officers belonging to this Church of Ephesus herein we join with him and that it is manifest here was but one flock on this wee join also as to the word one flock But that it was one single flock or Congregation only as he meaneth we utterly deny and affirme it was an associate flock or Church made up of severall single particular Congregations For proof and satisfaction herein we refer the Reader to th●●ssemblies Answers to the Dissenting Brethrens reasons against the instance of the Church of Ephesus And here again I must crave leave to say Mr. Lockier exceedingly contemneth his Readers when as such considerable Answers being given and extant against all that could bee alledged by these ablest men of his side to prove that there was not many but one single Congregation in Ephesus he without any assay to infringe these Answers obtrudes 〈◊〉 bare naked Assertion that it was but one What Must 〈…〉 to him a● Pythagoras Disciples to captivate their judgement and acquiesce with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 section 3 Against his reasoning upon this Medium he propounds an Objection as one of our Arguments Sect. 36. and Answers it Sect. 37. Obj. Elders may Preach in this Church and that and many particular Churches Therefore they may according to this you have said rule over many particular Churches To which he Answers 't is not occasionall Preaching which one Church by consent and desire may admit to another that the Scriptures forementioned make th● bound of rule But where mens fixed call and work he must mean the work of Preaching properly lyeth To where I am called to Preach he must mean ordinarily this bounds commensurates and proportions my power as an Officer to Rule so that to go beyond this is to go beyond the Word to oppose the Word Ans 1. Albeit from what you have said viz. that the power of Preaching and the power of Ruling are commensurat and of equall extent it should not follow that if Presbyters may Preach to more Congregations then one occasionally Therefore may Rule over more Congregations then one ordinarily Yet it will follow they may rule over more Congregations then one in such a way as they may Preach to them For say yee their Preaching and Ruling are commensurate by Scripture Yea further if Elders may Preach to more Congregations then one not only occasionally but ordinarily which they may as suppose in a City where are many Congregations the Ministers be not fixed to them severally but teach them in common as they may do without violation of any Divine institution and that de facto it was not so in the first Churches nothing can be brought to demonstrat it will follow such Elders may Rule over mo●e 〈…〉 out 2. We do not make the occasion● 〈…〉 more Congregations then one 〈◊〉 r●aso● 〈…〉 ●hey may rule over more then one ordin●rily 〈…〉 a Minister by Christs institution and 〈…〉 Office ●s a Minister and hath that office habit 〈…〉 to the Universall Visible Church of Jesus Christ 〈…〉 singl● Congregation see ●his abundan●ly 〈…〉 the Learned Mr. Hudson Vin●ic of the ●ss●… 〈…〉 c. 6. pag. 138. seq ●nd so may and 〈…〉 O●fice and ●ny part thereof in relation to 〈…〉 Church i particular Congregation o● 〈…〉 according as 〈◊〉 promoving of the good of the whol● 〈…〉 and h● 〈…〉 particular call there 〈◊〉 and 〈…〉 of Preaching be bounded 〈…〉 yet his 〈…〉 Ru●…ng may be ordinar●…y 〈…〉 Congregatio●… hav●… a call thereunto by 〈…〉 that Congre●…tion ●nd 〈◊〉 the●… together ●or 〈…〉 and 〈…〉 association 〈…〉 obliged to ●…ter 〈…〉 section 4 In th●●…st of hi● 〈…〉 it 〈◊〉 are brought to 〈◊〉 that a Mini●…e● 〈…〉 wor● 〈◊〉 Preaching bounds hi● ord●nary power of 〈…〉 that wh●… he does not that h●●…nnot do this 〈…〉 Thess ● ●… 〈…〉 that labour among you 〈…〉 compared with 〈…〉 that ●…uring to be in the Wor● and 〈…〉 These 〈◊〉 sayeth he ●eacheth that fixed 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 Ruling go togeth●r Answ These plac●… 〈◊〉 teach 〈…〉 here 〈◊〉 Preach ordinarily over these 〈◊〉 also 〈…〉 not that ove● 〈◊〉 only they rule Mr. Loc●ier 〈…〉 but proveth not no●●an prove from the words The Author hath it 1. 17. I will not say but it may be an