Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	answer_n	answer_v	objection_n	2,644	5	9.4165	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A87226	Confidence encountred: or, A vindication of the lawfulness of preaching without ordination. In answer to a book published by N.E. a friend of Mr. Tho Willes, intituled, The confident questionist questioned. Together with an answer to a letter of Mr. Tho. Willes, published in the said book. By which the lawfulness of preaching without ordination is cleared, and the ordination of the national ministers proved to be a nullity. By Jer. Ives.	Ives, Jeremiah, fl. 1653-1674.	1658 (1658)	Wing I1094; Thomason E936_1; ESTC R207711	43,652	64

Fulk and Whittingam and divers others when they have had to do with Papists have inveighed against Ordination from them as a stinking filthy thing as I have already observed So that the great loss they are at among themselves touching the Derivation of their Authority is one Reason why it may be questioned Whether they have any or no The second Reason is their unwillingness to answer those Objections that their Adversaries the Papists objected against their Ordination which is a shrewd sign they feared it would not abide the trial As 1. they objected That the English Reformers in Queen Elizabeth 's time went to a Popish Irish Bishop that was then Prisoner in the Tower and promised him his liberty and a sum of money if he would ordain them Bishops but he refused 2. It is objected by their Adversaries the Papists That they sought to be ordained by the Bishop of Landaff but he refused it 3. It is further objected That Parker and others of the Queens new Bishops were ordained by one Scory a Priest at a meeting which they had for this purpose at the Nags-head-Tavern in Cheap-side To these Objections no Answer was given till Bishop Masons time which was nigh fifty yeers after when most of the men were dead that were the chief Witnesses to these things though the Answer at that time much concerned them these Objections being then the common talk of their Adversaries A third Reason why they are to be questioned appears in the Case of the new-made Bishop of Winchester who indicted Bishop Bonner to which Bonner pleaded That Winchester was no Bishop according to any Law and the Judges in Queen Elizabeth's time did resolve That Bonner's Plea should be received See the Abridgement of Diers Reports 7 Eliz. 234. And that they were at this time no Bishops neither by Statute-Law or Canon-Law appears by the great industry and care that the new Bishops took to get themselves confirmed by Act of Parliament the words of the Act are these All Acts and things heretofore made and done about the consecration of Archbishops Bishops Priests c. by vertue of the Queens Letters Patents since the begining of her Reign be and shall be by Authority of this Parliament declared and judged good and perfect c. And a little after in the same Act it followeth That all Archbishops Bishops Priests c. be declared in very deed by the Authority aforesaid and enacted to be Archbishops Bishops Priests c. and rightly made ordered and consecrated any Statute-Law Canon-Law or other thing to the contrary notwithstanding 8 Eliz. 1. So that you may see that the Clergy of England were no lawful ordained Ministers neither by Statute nor Canon-Law till the 8 of Eliz. in the Opinion of the Judges in the Case of Bonner and Horn before mentioned which I desire may be considered by all judicious Christians and then I question not but they will see that the Clergy of England have little reason to glory in their Apostolical succession and to cry down others that stand upon a more religious foot of account then themselves POSTSCRIPT Reader WHereas Mr. Willes in the forementioned-Letter tells a story of a man that was in company with me at his house as though he should say He had rather hear the Devil then an ordained Minister Give me leave to tell thee That this scandal carries enough in the mouth of it to discover the untruth thereof to all sober and intelligent men for I think no man in his wits but had rather hear the worst of men then the Devil himself And if the Gentleman be points at be Mr. Vancourt as I know not who else he should mean I must tell thee That his dayly hearing such as are ordained in the sense that Mr. Willes calls Ordination is to all that know him a sufficient justification And though Mr. Willes would have put such a sense upon some words that sell from this Gentleman yet Mr. Willes cannot but remember that the Gentleman was offended at him for that he misrepresented him to the company then present and thereupon Mr. Willes was desired not to misconstrue these words and he promised that he would not though since he hath done it contrary to the Gentlemans then-declared meaning and his own promise Vale. Thou art desired to take notice of these two errors viz. in the Epist read organical for original pag 20. lin 20. for Mat road Mal. There is an excellent piece lately published entituled Gospel-worship no work for infants cleerly proving the folly vanity and deceit of infants Baptism and that the true Worshippers of God are believing men women converted by the preaching of the word not infants By H. Haggar Sound Doctrine or the Doctrine of the Gospel about the extent of Christs death with a brief compendium of Doctrine of the holy Scriptures clearing up the riches of God's love to all mankinde and his desires to save them that yet wilfully perish By William Pedelsden Both to be sold by Dan. White at the seven Stars in Pauls Church-yard FINIS

Confidence Encountred OR A VINDICATION OF THE Lawfulness of PREACHING without Ordination In Answer to a Book published by N. E. a friend of Mr. Tho Willes INTITULED The confident Questionist Questioned Together with An Answer to a Letter of Mr. Tho. Willes published in the said Book BY WHICH The Lawfulness of Preaching without Ordination is cleared and the Ordination of the National Ministers proved to be a Nullity By JER IVES How forcible are right words but what do your arguings re●rove Job 6.25 As every one hath received the gift even so m●nister the same one to another as good stewards of the manifold grace of God If ANY MAN speak let him speak as the oracl●s of God 1 Pet. 4. ●0 ●● Printed at London and are to be sold by Dan. White at the seven Stars in Paul's Church-yard or may be had at the Authors house in Red-Cross-street 1658. To the READER Reader I Have for thy further information in the things of Christ published an Answer to some counter Queries which were made by an unknown Author in the behalf of Mr. Tho. Willes his Doctrine concerning the sinfulness of Preaching without Ordination in which counter-Queries thou maist be acquainted with the Author's Spirit though by his concealing his Name thou canst not be acquainted with his Person and by a strict Observation of what he hath writ thou maist see that he hath made good his own words viz. That he had writ enough to puzzle * See his book page 4. rather then convince his Adversary and that appears by his many contradictions one while he saith The Clergy is routed and by and by tells Mr. Willes The Enemy is routed * See his Epist to the Reader and compare it with his Epistle Dedicatory one while he demands whether Apollos was not ordained Minister when he preached publickly Act. 18. and by and by he demands if Apollos knew of any such thing as Ordination from the Apostles when he preached Act. 18. one while he demands if there was a constituted original Church with Officers in it at this time when Apollos preached See his book page 22 23. Act. 18. and by and by he saith That it is certain Apollos was at this time an Officer and bids me prove that he was ever made an Officer after his preaching Act. 18. Again he saith If the Church of Rome was a true Church then her Ministers were true Ministers when our Reformers were ordained by her And demands why I did not disprove her to be a Church pag. 41. and yet a little before he saith That she was as bad when the Ministers did receive Ordination from her as she was when they left her and yet he saith They left her not as she was the Spouse of Christ but as she was a Harlot page 39. so that he supposeth Rome to be a Harlot and Christ's Spouse at one and the same time Again he saith page 37. That the corruptions of the corrupt Dispensers of Ordinances cannot make them null and yet he saith pag. 48. If it be true as Mr. Brookes saith That the Ministers of England are Antichristian then all that they have baptized must be baptized again Is not this plain contradiction As he abounds with Contradictions so he doth with Impertinencies medling with the Trade that I follow and my being a Souldier and such-like things that concern not the Question before him Another while he blames me for that he doth himself viz. of meddling with this Controversie and taking it out of Mr. Brookes his hand when he undertook to answer a particular Paper which was proper for none else to answer but Mr. Willes Another while he blames me for that I did charge a thing upon Mr. Willes that I had but one witness for and yet himself believes the Accused's bare Negation without any witness for at that time when Mr. VVilles desired a Gentleman to apprehend me for a Jesuite there was none present to witness besides the Gentleman aforesaid though at our first meeting there was divers Again one while he saith Rome had power to ordain Ministers as Christ's Church and by and by compares them to Thieves and to Korah at the time they ordained the first Reformers Again his Book is full of unman-like arguings as appears by his frequent begging the chief things in question otherwhile when I demand a proof of those things that are so frequently affirmed by Mr. VVilles he demands how I prove they are not and so turns the proof of the affirmation from himself and puts his Respondent to prove Negations Surely this is not to give a Reason of our Hope to every one that asketh with Meekness and Fear Again he tells his Reader That the Anabaptists are bloody pag. 31. and pag. 50. he saith he ghesses that they are the men whose hands were most embrued in the blood of the late VVars When indeed the Anabaptists were in no capacity at the beginning of these Wars to blow those sparks of contention into a burning Flame if they had had a minde to so bad a work Thus I have given thee a taste of that Spirit that inspired him in the writing of his Book to which I have given an Answer and though I have not answered to every word yet I have answered every thing that hath any shew or colour of Reason in it which I desire thee faithfully and impartially to consider trying all things and holding fast that which is the best and that thou maist so do is the prayer and desire of Thy Friend Jer. Ives Confidence encountred c. Mr. N. E. ACcording to your desire I have answered your Counter Queries you sent to me with a Letter and though you have medled with a matter that concerns you not yet know that it concerns me to answer you lest you should be confirmed in your folly and though you contemn my Queries as slight and call me an unworthy Enemy yet I have learned to say Contemptum stulti contemnere maxima laus est Contemni à stulto dedecus esse nego To scorn a Fool 's contempt is praise and I His scorn to be disgrace do quite deny And though you thought you had so routed me that I would never appear again yet know that this was nothing but the violent beatings of the Waves and Billows of your ambition which I thought necessary to put a check to by this ensuing Answer lest you should be exalted above measure for the prevention whereof I have published this Reply And therein I Shall first begin with your Title wherein you call me a Confident Questionist but if you had read my Epistle you would have found that I did question for Conscience sake some things that Mr. Willes had delivered and withal did propound to the Reader that if the Answers thereunto did satisfie I should bless the Father of Lights that had not suffered me to labour in vain This was the greatest altitude of my Confidence and

any discharge or acquittance for any debt that you owe me at his hand In like manner is it sinful to receive Ordination from Rome if they have turned Thieves and Robbers as you say they are then the Receiver is as bad as the Thief So that I shall need no other weapon to fight with you then your own But to proceed I come now Quest 33 To the thirty third Question wherein I demand If the Church of Rome had power as a Church and you did separate because of her corruptions why then was Mr. Brooks to be blamed in separating from the corruption of the Church of England c. In your many-headed Counter-Query you say nothing that concerns me to answer but this viz That because I say If Rome was a true Church c. Hence you glory and say I yield up my weapons by saying IF Rome was a true Church You demand then To what end was all my other Questions c. I answer That you had need go to School to learn to distinguish between an Hypothetical and a Categorical Proposition for is it not one thing to say The Church of Rome IS a true Church and another thing to say IF she be a true Church Might you not as well have told your Reader That David said He COULD take the Wings of the Morning and flie because he said IF I take the wings of the morning c. This is the ground of your triumph because I say If Rome was a true Church you conclude I said She was a ture Church O brave Logician I see now there was a reason why you concealed your Name And for those other questions that you ask me concerning Mr. Brooks his separation in p. 41 42. I shall refer you to him who very likely can give you a better Answer then you have given to my Queries Quest 34 I demand in the next place Why the Protestant Shepherds shear the Papists since they judge them no Sheep of their fold This is the sum of the Question In your Reply you say little that concerns me to answer onely That the Church hath debarred Papists from communion And thereupon you demand Whether it be not reason then that they should pay their tythes c. To this I answer That there is little reason why any body should pay but there is less reason why one that is put out of the Fold should pay then any nay there is no colour of reason why any that are cast out of the Church should be forced to maintain the Minister Should not you have done well to have proved this before you went further viz. That Christ would have men pay tythes to a Minister when they are thrust out of their stock and are put out of communion The rest of this Question which you ask relates to Mr. Brooks his practice of which I have not so particular an information as an answer to it requires and therefore I shall refer you to him for an Answer Quest 35 I demand in the next place Whether that the reason why you do exclude Papists which is because they do not reform be not the reason why Mr. Brooks excludes scandalous persons viz. because they do not reform c. Your Answer hereunto as far as it doth concern me is That Mr. Brooks keeps people out of his Church because they do not own his Church and disown their own To this I answer That this is the reason why you reject Papists for many of them are such whose lives are without reproof so that you keep them out because they will not own your Church and disown their own Quest 36 Your query upon my thirty sixth Question is nothing but what hath been queried by you before and is already answered both in my Answer to M. Willes his Letter in the beginning of this Book and also in my Reply to the twenty sixth Counter-Query Quest 37 I query since Ordination from Rome was thrown off upon a politick account what ground the Ministers of the Nation have to plead a necessity to preach without Ordination The substance of your Counter-Query to this as it relates to your Succession is answered already in the thirty sixth Query and for that part of your question that relates to necessity I answer First That there was no need of our first Reformers pleading necessity for they were as idolatrous when they first rent from Rome as they were when they were in communion with her Secondly If they had separated from the Church of Rome because of her uncleanness then there was no need for them to plead necessity for their preaching without Ordination since they might have been ordained by the reformed Churches in other Countries which had forsaken Rome before them And thirdly if Necessity may be a Warrant to them at that time it was as good a Warrant to other Sects that revolted from Rome as well as it was for those you call our first Reformers So that then if any Arrians or Socinians c. should have Rent from Rome and gathered into a Congregation they might have pleaded that they had a lawful Ministery either by Succession in that some of them had been Priests before they revolted or else by vertue of a Necessity since a positive Law gives place to necessity Would not you answer these men that they are Ministers by neither of these ways and so do I answer you as I have already done once and again And therefore when Mr. Willes hath proved himself a lawful Minister then I shall say He came in by one of these ways but till then let me tell him and you too That any Sect that will take it for granted that they have Ministers among them may as well justifie their Ministers Authority as Mr. Willes can do his by taking it for granted he is a Minister of Christ which he is never able to prove Quest 38 I demanded When the Line of Succession was broke whether then every one might not preach that were able although it might not have been lawful before c. This was the sum of this Question To which you say nothing but what hath been already answered over and over onely you ask me Whether a case of necessity makes any Ministers but those that are fittest and undertake the charge To which I answer That if the Men that preach shall be their own Judges who will not think that he is fit and able And was it not so with those you call our first Reformers were they not Judges of their own abilities and so made themselves Ministers of their own heads and by the same Rule others may depart from them as they departed from Rome and take upon them to be Heads or Guides of a Congregation of people especially if they can object considerable errors both in their Lives and Doctrines Quest 39 My next Question demands how it can be a sin for any to preach that are able seeing there is no Ordination on foot now

the Reader may see That former times did not esteem both Ordinations lawful viz That that was done by Bishops and that that was done by Presbyters but looked upon the one as a meer nullity so that whatever you say there hath been a manifest contradiction and that the difference was not circumstantial as you vainly tell your Reader but essential for not onely the Fathers but Councels judged Ordination by Presbyters a meer nullity and that Episcopal Ordination was essential to the being of the Ministers Office So that the thing you so much talk of viz. That both these Ordinations are of God is a meer fiction But more of this anon Quest 23 In my twenty third Query I demand If that the Independent-Ordination be of God wherein is Mr. Brookes to be condemned if he preach according to the Independent-Ordination You hereupon tell your old tale viz That you cannot believe by what I have urged any Ordination to be according to Rule but what is done by Ministers To which I answer That this was no part of my business in the Questions proposed from first to last for all my business was to shew by the light of those Queries That it was not sinful to preach without Ordination and that Mr. Willes his Ordination was a meer nullity that he so much glories in and that it is not that which Christ approves of and for your slanders in saying That I appear for Independency as a cloak for Anabaptism c. Did you not blush when you writ this horrid untruth Have I not your own confession appeared as publickly for that which you call Anabaptism Do you not tell your Reader That I did publickly appear at the Disputation held at Clements without Temple-Bar which was against Infant-Baptism And have I not published my Opinion in print touching this Controversie and yet you are so impudent as to tell your Reader I appeared for Independency as a cloak that my design might be the more plausible It 's no wonder that you conceal your Name since you can write at this rate Quest 24 I ask in my twenty fourth Question If that Ordination by Presbyters were the onely Ordination where was an Ordination to be had in England thirty yeers ago Your Query thereupon is nothing but to enquire Whether Presbyterian and Episcopal-Ordination might not both be lawful and bid me prove by the next That Bishops COULD NOT ordain then and that Presbyters CANNOT ordain mow Oh shameless Disputant I told you you could talk of Logick but how little you use let the Reader judge My main design in proposing my Questions was to put some one or other upon the proof of that which was so frequently asserted viz. That the Ordination by Bishops or by Presbyters is of God meaning that which is practiced by the National Ministers And you come forth and bid me prove That the Bishops could not and that the Presbyters cannot If you can dispute no better you shall never commence Master of Arts. Sir is it not a sad thing for you to tell your Reader in your Epistle to him That this Doctrine of Ordination that is now contended for is a foundation-Doctrine And when you are demanded a proof of it you shamefully shuffle and bid me prove in my next That it is not and that they had not power to ordain or if the Bishops and Presbyters did not ordain true Ministers Therefore take an Answer I say They did not and charge you in your next to reason like a man and prove they did Quest 25 In my twenty fifth Query I demand Why Mr. Willes did not tell his Hearers which of those divers kindes of Ordination it is that God approves of This was the sum of this Query To which you reply and the sum of all you say is That if I have heard Mr. Willes in all his Sermons upon this Subject I might had understood that he was not rigid for Episcopacy Presbytery nor Independency but for a Moderation c. and that Ordination any of these ways was good seeing the difference was but in circumstance c. I have answered to this already over and over that these by your own confession must all of them be proved to be Christ's Ministers before their Ordination must be valued and also you must prove That Christ ever did allow of Ordinations so palpably contradictious as these are which will further appear in my following Answers before there be any weight in what you or M. Willes hath said to this Question However if Mr. Willes doth well in being indifferent in this matter how evilly hath the generality of our Presbyterians spent their time about such trifling circumstances while the more weighty matters have been neglected for how furiously have they opposed the Episcopal and Independent Government and Governours though they have been such which you say are Christ's Ministers and that the differences are but circumstantial For the proof of this I shall refer the Reader to Mr. Edwards his Gangraena wherein he as much condemns ordained Ministers in the Independent way as any other Sect whatever and this was generally approved of by most of the Presbyterian Race as appears by the several Letters sent to encourage Mr. Edwards which he hath printed in his Book which he saith he received from godly Presbyterian-Ministers Nay is not the noise of this hot difference fresh in the ears of all intelligent Men which you must needs say was to little purpose if what you say of all these sorts of Ordinations be true Quest 26 I further demand Whether Mr. Willes his Ordination be from the Line of Succession or whether it was from any necessity c. And you ask me Whether I do not grant that a true succession makes true Ministers and whether there is not a case of necessity when the succession in broke off and whether such a necessity doth not make true Ministers This is that you call unanswerable This you challenge me to answer and therefore I shall soon dismount your confidence by telling you That by this Argument I am a true Minister for either I am one by succession or necessity if the Line of Succession was broke then I am a Minister by necessity Would not this Argument justifie all Sects that schismed from Rome as well as you And did not all the Sects that departed from Rome into other novel and strange Opinions worse then those they left reason thus That they either had some men which were in religious Orders that separated with them and so they pretended that they had a successive Authority or else they will tell you That they were the first Reformers and therefore positive Laws must give place to necessity and therefore all that succeed from them are a true Ministery I challenge you to answer Why this is not as good an Argument to prove any company of men that shall depart from Rome to be a true Ministery as well as any that you plead for