Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
power_n	father_n	son_n	trinity_n	3,742	5	9.9958	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A53660	A plea for Scripture ordination, or, Ten arguments from Scripture and antiquity proving ordination by presbyters without bishops to be valid by J.O. ... ; to which is prefixt an epistle by the Reverend Mr. Daniel Williams.	Owen, James, 1654-1706.; Williams, Daniel, 1643?-1716.	1694 (1694)	Wing O708; ESTC R32194	71,514	212

Bishops so well that we could wish we had as many Bishops as there are Parishes in England as the Jewish Synagogues had to which St. Iohn alludes when he calls them Angels of the Churches In sum If Presbyters be Scripture Bishops as we have proved and Diocesan Bishops have no footing there as hath been evinced then our Ordinations are Iure Divino and therefore valid CHAP. III. Instances of Ordination by Presbyters in Scripture St. Paul and Barnabas Ordain'd by Presbyters Their Ordination a Pattern to the Gentile Churches Acts 13.1 2 3. vindicated Turrianus's Evasion confuted Timothy Ordained by Presbyters 1 Tim. 4.14 explained The Particles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used promiscuously THAT Ordination of which we have Scripture Examples is valid but of Ordination by Presbyters we have Scripture Examples therefore Ordination by Presbyters is valid The Major I hope will not be denied it carries its own Evidence with it to such as are willing to be guided by the practise of Apostolical Churches which is the first and best Antiquity The Minor I thus prove St. Paul and Barnabas were Ordained by Presbyters Acts 13.1 2 3. so was Timothy 1 Tim. 4.14 These two Instances deserve a more particular consideration Concerning the first in Acts 13. these two things are evident 1. That Luke speaks of Ordination he mentions the separating of Paul and Barnabas to a Ministerial Work by Fasting and Prayer with the Laying on of Hands and what more can be done in Ordination It 's true they had an extraordinary Call before Gal. 1.1 yet being now to plant the Gospel among the Gentiles they enter upon their Work at the ordinary Door of Ordination Dr. Lightfoot thinks it was for this reason That the Lord hereby might set down a Plat-form of Ordaining Ministers to the Church of the Gentiles to future times 2. The Ordainers were Prophets and Teachers Acts 13.1 2. Now Teachers are ordinary Presbyters who are distinguished from Prophets and other extraordinary Officers both in 1 Cor. 12.28 and in Eph. 4.12 Every Presbyter is a Teacher by Office Turrianus the Jesuit thinks to avoid the force of this quotation by affirming the Prophets mentioned in this Ordination to have been Bishops and the Teachers to have been meer Presbyters and that these Presbyters were Paul and Barnabas who were now created Bishops But this is a most ridiculous evasion Was St. Paul the chief of Apostles but a meer Presbyter was he inferior to Lucius Niger and Manaen Apostles were superior to Prophets much more to Teachers 1 Cor. 12. 28. The Prophets here could not be Bishops because they were extraordinary Officers and there were more then one in this Church and in the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 14.29 Neither is there any ground in the Text of this distribution that Teachers should refer to the Ordained and Prophets to the Ordainers This is a meer fiction of the Jesuit to support the Cause of Prelacy If any say This separation of Paul and Barnabas was not to the Office of the Ministry but to a special Exercise of it I answer it doth not alter the Case For here are all the outward Actions of an Ordination properly so called Fasting Prayer with Imposition of Hands to a Ministerial Work Now the Question is Who have power to perform these Actions here the Presbyters do it They to whom all the outward Actions of Ordination belong to them the Ordaining Power belongs as he that hath power to wash a Child with Water in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost hath power to Baptize for what else is baptizing but washing with Water in the Name of the Sacred Trinity for special Dedication to God He that hath power to set apart Bread and Wine for Sacramental use hath power to Administer the Lord's Supper So here they that have power to dedicate Persons to God for the Work of the Ministry by Fasting Prayer and Imposition of Hands have power of Ordination It 's true a Lay-Patron may give one power to exercise his Ministry that cannot give the Office but can he do this by repeating all the solemn Acts of Ordination Can he use the same form of Ordination with the Ordaining Bishop Can he lay hands upon the Person ordained and by Fasting and Prayer devote him to God in the Publick Congregation I think none will affirm it If he cannot invest a Person by repeating the whole form of Ordination because he is a Lay-man and hath not the Ordaining Power therefore they that can use the form of Ordination have power to Ordain The Bishops would not like it if all those that are Ordained by them in Scotland should be declared uncapable of Exercising their Office there until they were admitted by a Classis of Presbyters with solemn Imposition of Hands It would scarce satisfie them to say That the Presbyters imposed Hands only to impower the Person in the Exercise of his Office and not to give the Office it self when they performed all the outward Actions of Ordination which are the ordinary means of conveying the Office I proceed to the second Instance of Ordaining Presbyters mentioned in 1 Tim. 4.14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee which was given thee by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery Here Timothy is Ordained by the Presbytery nothing can be more express then this Testimony Two things are usually objected to this Scripture Object 1. By 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is meant the Office of Presbytery and not the Colledge of Presbyters saith Turrianus the Jesuit who is followed by some Protestants I answer The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is never taken in this sense in the New Testament it always signifies a Company of Presbyters see Luke 22.66 Acts 22.5 Presbyterium is used by Cyprian for a Consistory of Elders Lib. 2. Ep. 8. 10. Cornelius Bishop of Rome in an Epistle to Cyprian saith Omni actu ad me perlato placuit contrahi Presbyterium Adfuerunt etiam Episcopi quinque c. The Office of Presbytery is expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. What sence can be made of the Text according to this Interpretation Neglect not the gift given thee by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the office of Presbytery Hands belong to the Persons and not to the Office Nor can 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be the Genitive Case to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neglect not the gift of the office of Presbytery for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 come between Thus the Text M 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To refer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would invert the natural order of the words which is not to be done without evident necessity otherwise the Scriptures may be made a Nose of Wax and the clearest Expressions wrested to a contrary sense by such Transpositions and Dislocations 3. But suppose

a Bishop and the other a meer Usurper and all his Administrations must be null and void for want of this Ceremony Let the Spirit of God indue a Man with never such excellent Gifts for the Ministry it shall be in the power of a Prelate to exclude him that he shall be no Minister of Christ though he devote himself to the Work and be solemnly set apart for it nay more it will be in his power to make a Minister of another Person whom the Holy Ghost never designed for that Office by any real work of Sanctification upon his heart or conferring upon him any tolerable degree of Minist●rial Abilities They that can believe such Fancies may please themselves therewith Christ gave us another Rule to discern between false and true Pastors Matth. 7. 15 16 20. Ye shall know them by their fruits that is by their Doctrine and Conversation The Reformers vindicate their Ministry against the Papists by this Argument Christus hanc nobis regulam praef●●verit quâ possimus falsos à veris Doctoribus discernere nempe eos à suis fructibus esse dignoscendos cur eq non contenti alias praeterea temerè pro arbitrio confingamus Itaque judicetur tum de pontificiis tum etiam de nostris Pastoribus ex Doctrinâ quae verus est fructus atque etiam si placet utrorumque vita in disquisitionem vocetur Quod si fiat certò speramus Deo favente nos facilè in hâc causâ fore superiores We are very willing to put our Case to the same Issue to be judged according to this Rule of Christ by our Doctrine and Conversation CHAP. VI. Presbyters Power of Ordination prov'd from their Imposition of Hands in Ordination not as bare Approvers Turrianus Heylin J. Taylor c. confuted Two other Objections answered THose that have power to impose Hands in Ordination have power to Ordain but Presbyters have power to impose Hands in Ordination therefore to Ordain The Minor viz. that Presbyters may impose Hands will not be denied 'T is required by the Old Canons Omnes Presbyteri qui praesentes sunt manus suas juxta manum Episcopi super caput illius teneant Chrysostom was charged in a Libel put in by Isaacius how justly is not certain that he Ordained Ministers without the Concurrence of his Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phot. Biblioth v 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 27. Edit Aug. Vindelic 1601. However the Presbyters continued to lay Hands with the Bishops even in the darkest Ages of the Church as might be proved by several Instances if necessity required But this is so undeniable that to this day the Presbyters are admitted to joyn with the Bishop in imposition of Hands in the Church of England And in the present Church of Rome also all the Presbyters that are present are required to lay Hands with the Bishop The Major will be deny'd that though they impose Hands they have not the Ordaining Power I thus prove it That which is an Ordaining Act bespeaks an Ordaining Power but imposition of Hands in Ordination is an Ordaining Act therefore \h The Major is evident for Actus praesupponit potentiam As to the Minor If imposing of Hands in Ordination be not Actus ordinans what is it I should be glad to see one Instance given in the Apostles times of Persons laying on Hands in Ordination that had no Ordaining Power If imposition of Hands in Ordination be no evidence of an Ordaining Power how come the Bishops to urge that Scripture 1 Tim. 5.22 Lay hands suddenly on no man in favour of Timothy's Ordaining Power and thence to infer he was Bishop of Ephesus Timothy might lay Hands for Ordination and yet have no Ordaining Power and so be no Bishop of Ephesus Thus they unwarily undermine their own Foundations It 's a meer Subterfuge and indeed such as betrays the Cause to acknowledge that Presbyters may perform all the outward Acts of Ordination but not as Ordainers 'T is as if one should say a Presbyter hath Power to apply Water to a Child in Baptism in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost but he hath no power to Baptize He may set apart Bread and Wine and distribute it to the People according to Christ's Institution but he hath no power to Administer the Lord's Supper If Presbyters imposing of Hands signifie no Ordaining Power what doth it signifie Turrianus the Jesuit saith it signifies their Approbation of the Bishops act non Excludantur Presbyteri ab impositione manûs approbante sed ab ordinante He is followed herein by many of our own Dr. Heylin saith The Presbyters Hands confer nothing of the power of Order upon the Party ordained but only testifie their consent unto the business and approbation of the man To the same purpose speaks Dr. I. Taylor But that cannot be the meaning of it for they could signifie their approbation some other way without imposition of Hands their saying Amen to the Ordination Prayer would be a sufficient expression of their Consent The Peoples approbation was required in primitive Ordinations who never were admitted to lay Hands with the Bishop The Consent of the People was required in the Ordination of Deacons yet did they not lay Hands on them If no more be intended by it then a bare approbation how come the Bishops alone to lay Hands upon Deacons without their Presbyters Hi cum ordinantur solus Episcopus eis manum imponit But this signification is deserted by a Learned Bishop who saith I think rather they dedicate him to God for the Ministry which is conferred on him by the Bishop This specious Evasion is equally disserviceable to the present Point with the former Where in all the New Testament have we any ground for this distinction How can it be said that the Ministry is conferred by the Bishop first and afterwards the Presbyters dedicate the Person to God when both Bishops and Presbyters do lay Hands together Can he be ordained and dedicated to God as two distinct Acts the one inferiour to the other and that in the same moment of time by the same Ceremony of Imposition of Hands and by the same words How comes the Bishops Hand to confer the Ministry more then the Presbyters not by any inherent virtue in the one more then in the other not from any Institution of Christ or his Apostles appropriating an Ordaining or Minisher making Power to the Bishops Hand and a bare dedication to the Ministry actually conferred to the Presbyters Hands The Scriptures of the New Testament make no mention of such distinct significations of that Ceremony and therefore they cannot be ex instituto and it 's plain they are not ex naturâ rei Might not the Presbyters dedicate the Person to God without the laying on of Hands Can there be no dedication to God without laying Hands on the Persons so