Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
power_n	ordain_v	ordination_n	presbyter_n	4,289	5	10.5064	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A56213	The substance of a speech made in the House of Commons by Wil. Prynn of Lincolns-Inn, Esquire, on Munday the fourth of December, 1648 touching the Kings answer to the propositions of both Houses upon the whole treaty, whether they were satisfactory, or not satisfactory : wherein the satisfactorinesse of the Kings answers to the propositions for settlement of a firm lasting peace, and future security of the subjects against all feared regall invasions and encroachments whatsoever is clearly demonstrated ... and that the armies remonstrance, Nov. 20, is a way to speedy and certain ruine ... / put into writing, and published by him at the importunate request of divers members, for the satisfaction of the whole kingdome, touching the Houses vote upon his debate.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1649 (1649)	Wing P4093; ESTC R38011	126,097	147

being thereby abolished and extirpated his power of Ordination must be destroyed with his Function as well as suspended All which considered I cannot but conclude the Kings finall Answer as to the Office of and Ordination by Bishops to be compleatly satisfactory to our demands And so much the rather because the King in this particular of Ordination pleads only dissatisfaction in polnt of Conscience for closing with us in this seeming punctilio and if it were not meerly Conscience though some have over rashly censured it for a meer pretence to keep up Bishops still he that hath granted and yeelded us the greater would never contest with us for the lesser nor go so far in the abolition of Episcopacy as he hath done And truly I doubt not but His Majesty by conference may soon be satisfied in this point Nay had his own Divines dealt faithfully with him in the Isle of Wight He might have beene easily satisfied in this particular in which I doubt not by Gods blessing to undertake to satisfie him both in point of Episcopacy that it is in all things the same with Presbytery and that the ordination of Presbyters and Ministers by divine Right belongs only to Presbyters as such and not to Bishops as Bishops who for above a thousand years after Christ claimed the chief but not the sole interest in it not by divine Right and Authority but meerly by Canons and Custom long after the Apostles time which I have proved at large long since in my Vnbishoping of Timothy and Titus which none of the Bishops or their Patrons ever yet attempted to answer though I particularly challenged them to do it Only this I shall now say in brief for some satisfaction in the point to other Members 1. That there is no one Text of Scripture to prove that Bishops Iure divine are distinct from Presbyters in any thing much less in this particular of having a negative Voice or sole or principall interest as Bishops so distinguished in the power of Ordination● but a direct Text to the contrary 1 Tim. 4. 14 to omit others 2 That the pretence of impropriating Ordination to Bishops distinct from Presbyters by divine Right is grounded upon these two gross mistakes that Timothy and Titus were Bishops properly so called the one of Ephesus the other of Crete and that this power of ordaining Elders was vested in them quatenus Bishops only and not otherwise by divine institution for proof of the first the Postscript● of Pauls Epistles to them and no one Text of Scripture are cited and the 1 Tim. 5. 22. Tit. 1. 5. relating only to Ordination for the latter But it is clear as the noon-day Sun by Scripture that Timothy was never a Bishop properly so called much lesse the first or sole Bishop of Ephesus as is evident by sundry texts especially by Act. 20. 4 5 6 15 17 18 21 29 30 31. compared together nor Titus a Bishop properly so termed distinct from a Presbyter much lesse the first or sole Bishop of Crete nor do either of those texts prove that they had the power of Ordination by divine Right vested in them two meerly as Bishops distinct from or superiour to Presbyters as I have undenyably manifested in my Vnbishoping of Timothy and Titus And as for the Postscripts to these Epistles terming Timothy ordained first Bishop of Ephesus and Titus of Crete they are no part of the text first extant in and invented by Occumenius none of the authentickst Authors above 1050 years after Christ and annexed only to the end of his Commentary on those Epistles not adjoyned to the Text and they are not only omitted in most Manuscripts and printed Editions and Translations of these Epistles but apparently false in themselves as I have at large demonstrated in some printed Books Therefore this point of conscience may soone be satisfied 3 That no Bishops for 1200 years after Christ did ever claim the chief power in Ordination by any Divine Right as Bishops but meerly by Canons or Custom long after the Apostles and that in the Primitive times before any re●●riction by Councels Presbyters in many places did not only ordain Ministers and Deacous without Bishops and Bishops never but jointly with Presbyters but likewise ordaine Bishops themselves as Ierome Epiphanius Augustine and others assure us and sometimes joined in the consecration and enstallment of Popes themselves and Archbishops for defect of Bishops 4. That it is the constant tenent of all the eminentest Protestant Divines and some learned Papists too and the practice of all the reformed Churches that the Divine right of Ordination belongs originally to the whole Church but ministerially to Presbyters as such not to Bishops as Bishops and that which undeniably clears it up to mee is this That in the New Testament wee find both Apostles some of the 70 Disciples Evangelists and Presbyters equally ordaining Elders or Presbyters but not any one who is once in Scripture stiled a Bishop either conferring orders upon any much lesse eonomine jure as a Bishop And since the Apostles time wee find in point of use and practice Popes Patriarchs Archbishops Metropolitans Cardinalls Abbots in some places who are not Iure Divino nor Bishops properly so called but distinguished from them in degree ordaining Presbyters and Ministers as well as Bishops quatenus Bishops and that never by themselves but all by the Presbyters joint concurrence then present who by the fourth Councell of Carthage the Canon law the very Canons of Trent also and our owne book of Ordination and our Canons ought also to join with them in the Ordination Now all these distinct Orders and Degrees claiming and exercising this power by a Divine Right and many of their Functions being confessed not to be of Divine Right as Popes Patriarchs Archbishops Metropolitans Abbots and Chorall Bishops who yet ordain and these alwaies necessarily calling Presbyters who are clearly of Divine Right to join with them in their Ordination and not doing it alone is an unanswerable proof to me that they all concur in this action in no other right or notion at all but meerly as they are Presbyters in which they all accord and have one and the same authority not in their own capacities wherein they are all discriminated and are not all of Divine but only of humane institution Presbyters quà Presbyters being the properest persons to ordain others of their owne degree and function as Doctors of Divinity law and Physick in the Universities create Doctors of their severall Professions and Bishops consecrate Bishops and Archbishops even as a man begets a man of his own quality and degree and all other creatures generate those of their own kind without the concurrence of any her distinct species paramount them As for the Angel of the Church of Ephesus much insisted on in the Isle of Wight to prove an Episcopacy Iure Divino distinct from Presbytery I never read that this Angell ordained

growth and danger of Prophanenesse His Majesty hath condescended to an Act of Parliament as large as can be drawne against all Prophanations whatsoever of the Lords day with severe punishment for the prophaners of it in any kinde and against all such who shall write or preach against its morality and due observation And likewise to an Act to be framed and agreed upon by both Houses of Parliament for the reforming and regulating both Vniversities and of the Colledges of Westminster Winchester and Eaton the seminaries of Learning and Education of youth to serve and rule in our Church and State By which two Grants if duly executed all impiety and prophanenesse which can endanger our Church and Religion will easily be suppressed for the present and prevented for the future Thirdly Against the danger and revivall of Episcopacy and the appendances thereunto belonging the King hath clearly condescended to these particulars in terminis First to an Act for the abolition of all Archbishops Chancellors Commissaries Deanes and Sub-Deans Deans ard Chapters Arch-deacons Canons Prebendaries c. and all other Episcopall Cathedrall or Collegiate Officers both in England Wales and Ireland and to the disposall of all their Lands and Possessions for such uses as the Houses shall thinke meet So as there is no feare at all of their resurrection to disturb our Church All the question and difference now between the King and Houses is onely concerning the Office and power of Bishops and their Lands and Possessions in which two I finde most Members declare themselves to be unsatisfied especially those who have purchased Bishops Lands who are very zealous in that point for their own Interests For the clearing of these two scruples I shall examine and debate these two particulars First how far the K. hath consented to the Houses Propositions for the abolishing of the office jurisdiction of Bishops in the Church Secondly how far He hath condescended to the sale and disposal of their Lands and Possessions And whether his Concessions in both these be not sufficiently satisfactory in the sense I have stated the question in the beginning of my debate of it For the first of these It is clear that the King in his two last Papers hath abolished and extirpated that Episcopacy and Prelacy which we intended and have so earnestly contested against and contends now for no other but an Apostolicall Bishop which is but the same in all things with an ordinary Minister or Presbyter which Bishop being Apostolicall and of divine Institution we neither may nor can nor ever intended to abolish by our Covenant To make this evident to all mens consciences 1 The King hath yeelded to take away all the power and jurisdiction whatsoever exercised by our Bishops in point of censure or discipline in his former answer and contends for nothing now but their power of Ordination only and that not solely vested in the Bishop but in him and other Presbyters jointly yet so as the Bishop should have a negative Voice in Ordinations But the Houses voting this unsatisfactory because that the Bishops for three years during the continuance of the Presbyterian government should have the chief power of Ordination after those three years the sole power there being no others vested or intrusted with that power after the three years expired so as Bishops might by this means creep in and get up againe by degrees as high as ever Thereupon the King in his finall Answer hereunto though not fully satisfied in point of conscience but that the power of Ordination is principally vested onely in Bishops by Divine Authority hath yet for our satisfaction thus far condescended to us First that for three years next ensuing during the Presbyteriall Government no Bishops shall at all exercise this power of Ordination in the Church Secondly That if he can be satisfied in point of Conscience within that time upon conference with Divines That this power of Ordination so far as to have a Negative voice in it belongs not only unto Apostolical Bishops by a divine Right then he wil fully consent to the utter abolition even of this power of Ordination in the Bishops Thirdly That after the three yeares are expired if the King can neither satisfie his Houses in point of conscience nor they him upon debate That this power of Ordination belongs Iure Divino to Bishops that yet the exercise of that power shall be totally suspended in them till He and both Houses shall agree upon a Government and by Act of Parliament settle a Form of Ordination So as if both Houses never consent that Bishops shall hereafter have a hand or negative voice in Ordination this power of Bishops is perpetuaily suspended and as to the exercise of it perpetually abolished even by this Concession so as it can never be revived again without both Houses concurring assents And by this means Episcopacy is totally extirpated root and branch according to the Covenant which hath been so much pressed in this debate though the words of it have been somewhat mistaken that we therein absolutely covenant to extirpate Episcopacy when as the words are only That we shall endeavour the extirpation of Prelacy that is of Archbishops and Bishops c. And that certainly we have done and in a great measure accomplished so far as to satisfie both the words and intention of the Covenant though a concurrent power of Ordination be left in Bishops which yet is now totally suspended For as we covenant in the same clause to endeavour to root out Popery Superstition Heresie Schisme Prophanenesse and whatsoever shall be found to be contrary to sound Doctrine and the power of Godlinesse in the extirpation of which I am certain we have not proceeded by an hundred degrees so farre as we have actually done in the extirpation of Episcopacy there being no Proposition at all in the Treaty for the extirpation of Heresie Schisme and Errors as there is of Episcopacy and yet the Gentlemen who are so zealous for the Covenant perswade themselves they and we have not violated it in these particulars therefore much less in the point of Prelacy and Bishops since we have left them nothing at all but a meer power of Ordination actually suspended from any future execution but by both Houses assents Fourthly the King by abolishing Archbishops and Deans and Chapters hath also therein actually abolished all Bishops too for the future except those who are already made For by the Laws and custome of the Realm No Bishop can be consecrated but by an Archbishop or some deputation from him in case of sicknesse nor any Bishop made or consecrated unlesse he be first elected by the Dean and Chapter upon a Conge deslier issued out to them to choose one Now there being no Deanes and Chapters left to elect nor Archbishop to consecrate any Bishop for the future there can be no Bishop at all hereafter made in England or Ireland and so the Bishop

any Presbyters eit●er quatenus Angel or Bishop nor find I the name of a Bishop in any of St. Iohn's Writings but the title of a Presbyter or Elder very frequent by which himself is stiled And I wonder much the King or his Bishops should now so much insist upon this Angel and assert him to bee a Lord Bishop not an ordinary Minister For first King Iames himself and all the Bishops of Engl. with those learned men imployed by them in the last Translation of the Bible in the very contents prefixed to this Chap. Rev. 2. resolve the Angells of those Churches to be Ministers in these very words What is commanded to be written to the Angels THAT IS THE MINISTERS not Bishop of the Churches of Ephesus Smyrna c. If then the Angels by their joint confessions when these Contents were first composed and prefixed were only the Ministers not Bishops of these Churches and have ever since been constantly admitted confessed and this published to be so even in our authorized Bibles used in all Churches Chappels Families and printed cum privilegio five or six times a yeer without any alteration or disallowance of this Exposition I marvel much how the Bishops now dare inform the King That these Angels certainly were only Bishops but not Ministers diametrally contrary to these authorized Contents of their own or Predecessors affixing with learned King Iames his approbation or how his Majesty when Hee knowes it can beleeve them though they should averr it against His own Fathers and the whole Church of Englands resolution which hath so long received and approved this Translation excluding all others in publick and these Contents thereto prefixed Secondly Admit this Angell of Ephesus to be a Diocesan Bishop distinct from an ordinary Presbyter yet he was but an Apostate who had lost his first love ver 4. And if Timothy as they affirm was sole Bishop of Ephesus he must be the Apostate being at that time living unlesse he resigned his office to some other which is improbable And for our Bishops to father that divine Right of their Prelacy upon an Apostate Angell is no good Divinity and lesse Policy at this instant And this their rotten foundation upon an Apostate may probably be the ground why so many Prelates in this and former ages have turned Apostates after they were created Bishops Thirdly if those Angells in the Revelation were really Lord Bishops then certainly the Elders therein mentioned can bee no other then Presbyters not Bishops as the Prelates themselves will grant And if so then verily the Presbyter is the supream of the two both in point of Dignity Ministry and precedency which is very observable For first I find the 24 Elders there mentioned sitting upon twenty four seats round about Christs Throne and nearest to it Rev. 4. 4. c. 11. 16. but the Angells standing not sitting round about it and them without any seats at all provided for them as inferiour attendants Rev. 5. 11. c. 7. 11. Secondly I find these Elders not onely sitting on seats next Christs throne but likewise cloathed with white rayment and having on their heads Crownes of Gold the embleme of supream Authority power and honor Rev. 4. 4. 10. whereas the Angells had neither white rayment nor Crowns so it seems Bishops had no lawn sleeves nor Rochets nor Miters then though they have since usurped and robd the Presbyters of them Thirdly These Elders not the Angells are there alwayes introduced worshipping and falling downe before Christs Throne holding harps and golden viols in their hands full of odors representing the prayers of the Saints and singing the new song to him as the principal Officers and Ministers of Christ when as the Angells standing by act or speak little in these kinds like our late dumb unpreaching and rare-praying Prelates Fourthly the 24 Elders not the Angells sing this new Song of praise to Christ 1 Rev. 5. 9. 10. Worthy art thou to take the booke c. And hast made us Kings and Priests not Angells or Bishops to God the Father and we not the Angels that REIGN on the Earth therefore in all these respects if the Angells in the Apocalypse bee Bishops as our Prelates dreame the Elders must of necessity jure divino bee their Superiors and Lords paramount in point of dignity honour Soveraignty Ministry and they inferiour in jurisdiction and power unto Presbyters not superior as they would really make themselves When his Majesty shall be informed of these and many other particulars of this kinde I doubt not but his conscience will be so much satisfied as wholly to forgoe and lay aside his pretended Apostolicall Bishops both in point of function and ordination too as being the same with Presbyters And since in his last paper but one he hath professed to retain no other Bishops but such as are Apostolicall he must presently quit all those about him and their possessions too since neither of them are Apostolicall the Apostolicall Bishops being many alwaies over one Church and Congregation not one over many Churches or an whole Diocesse as ours are and having no Palaces Mannors Lands and Possessions as I shall prove in the next particular which comes to be now debated having fully cleared this to be satisfactory For the second question concerning the sale of Bishops lands how far the King hath condescended to it And whether the Kings answers to the first branch of that Proposition bee satisfactory in the premised sense I confesse I find this the grand and most swaying Argument of all others used by those who differ from me in the Treaty as not satisfactory because the King absolutely refuseth to agree to the sale of Bishops Lands for the satisfaction of those publike debts for which they are engaged by both Houses whereby purchasers and lenders upon that assurance will be not only defrauded but cheated of their debts and purchases many of them quite undone and ruined and the honor and publick faith of both Houses for ever forfeited and laid in the dust And indeed this is a very sensible argument especially to such Members who have either purchased Bishops lands or advanced moneys upon their security very fit to bee fully answered which I shall endeavour to doe I hope to their full satisfaction and content I confesse it to be most just and equall that all who have purchased Bishops Lands or advanced moneys to the State upon them should receive ful satisfaction and be no losers by it but rather gainers And I could have as heartily desired as any Member in this House that the King in this particular of Bishops lands had given us plenary satisfaction the rather because I was imployed by the Houses as one of the Contractors though without my seeking and to my prejudice by neglecting my calling and receiving as yet not one farthing salary for it though I have spent and lost some hundred of pounds in and by that imployment and had he