Selected quad for the lemma: rest_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
rest_n	bishop_n	church_n	presbyter_n	2,348	5	10.4986	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A27046	A third defence of the cause of peace proving 1. the need of our concord, 2. the impossibility of it, on the terms of the present impositions against the accusations and storms of, viz., Mr. John Hinckley, a nameless impleader, a nameless reflector, or Speculum, &c., Mr. John Cheny's second accusation, Mr. Roger L'Strange, justice, &c., the Dialogue between the Pope and a fanatic, J. Varney's phanatic Prophesie / by Richard Baxter.	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1681 (1681)	Wing B1419; ESTC R647	161,764	297

you I named And now O the power of Innocency and worth all those for their Gravity Sobriety Learning and Peaceableness you have as much esteem for as I can have And really I hope as bad as they and their adversaries judge each other were they all better acquainted with each other the rest would constrain their afflicters themselves to such a praise and approbation an inconsiderable number only excepted But who else should I name in the County where you live and near you Mr. Joseph Baker Mr. Benjamin Baxster Mr. George Hopkins Mr. Waldern c. are dead Those living are Mr. Ambrose Sparrey your predecessour at Hampton Mr. Andrew Tristram Mr. Kimberley Mr. Osland Mr. Badland of Worcester Mr. Sergeant Dr. Richard Morton Mr. Stephen Baxter Mr. Richard Dowley Mr. Cowper Mr. Paston Mr. Read I cannot remember all Tell me how many and which of those you mean The Elder about you dead were on our side Mr. Arthur Salway Mr. John Hall Mr. Thomas Hall your next Neighbour Mr. Smith at Dudley Mr. Smith at Stoke a younger Man and not far of Mr. Anthony Burgess Mr. Blake c. which of these mean you And what if you can Name one unlearned Man in Forty or Fifty If he be but a meer Nonconformist and not of some such Sect with whom we have not much more affinity than with the Papists who conform not and yet say they are nearer to you than to us I doubt that odd unlearned Man should he but conform would be a great ornament to your present Church But what course can one better take to silence such Calumnies and to convince Posterity of such mens incredibility than to Name the persons round about How many hundred worthy men in London and a few Counties of my acquaintance could I Name you And you say it is a usual Stratagem with us to possess particular persons with an opinion that you detract from them It is bad arguing Syllogizare ex particulari Excellent Logick He that condemneth the Non-conformists and the ejected Ministers as meer illiterate doth not condemn the Individuals though it came in with an How many I never said that you condemn them all but I askt you as you did me How many And is this like syllogizing ex particulari Do you intimate an Accusation against Many of them and when I name almost all of that County neer you will you absolve them all 2. Next you say Those I intended have your suffrage Because I said I had rather have a meer English Divine than an Hebrew or a Syriac Sot It seems you are of another mind A Sot will serve to preach Divinity and seek mens salvation We feel the judgment of more than you and this was enough to set you upon blew Aprons c. How forgot you Tub-Preachers 3. And you would fain steal some honour to your self from the Universities as a Defender of them O happy advantage But who accused them I said I am grown of late years to take it for no very great honour to our young Preachers that they are acquainted with the Universities And you put It is for I take it and so I take it still But late years signifieth not always nor our young Preachers all Preachers Doth he that dishonoureth the University deserve honour for being at the University What young ones you have I know not but our young ones that I speak of do not yet go about to change my mind Do you think all those named though he did not well by the Glocester Cobler Ralph Wallis are an honour to the University or it to them I still take it for no very great honour I said not none for any ignorant idle Lad to have been at the University But sure I obtruded not this judgment on you or any other Yet here is place for Corah's holy Congregation eclipsing the two Luminaries Agamemnon the Sodomites and more such stuff And shall it be the Controversie whether you or I have written more for Learning and Universities and which of us did more to save them from the Anabaptists and other Fanaticks when they were endangered The visible Evidences shall decide the Case You may be more beholden to the Universities than I but I have done more than wish their prosperity as well as you But Quidvis ex quovis is your way There went about Eleven or twelve out of Kederminster Parish and School to the University and Ministry in my time and many since If you please enquire of the difference 3. And when you tell me that I deal no better with the Primitive Fathers I first ask you how could you make shift to be ignorant how ill you use the ancient Presbyters yea and Bishops of the Church your self were they not mostly blew Aprons with you and such as you disdain for want of Hebrew c. Know you not that the Paucity of Learned Presbyters was the true Cause that the few that were such got the place and honour and power of Bishops above the rest And how few Philosophers turned Christians then And how long it was before the Christians had many considerable Schools much less Universities And what men the common Presbyters were yea and the Bishops for the most part Alexandria by Pantaenus Clemens and Origen kept up some competent Learning Basil Nazianzen Nissen Chrysostom were fain to go to such as Libanius and to Athens except those forenamed and Justin Martyr and Tertullian before them and Hierom after how few either Linguists or Philosophers had we And yet do not you account those holy and worthy men blew Aprons such as Ignatius Polycarpus Irenaeus yea and Cyprian almost all the Bishops of Rome Graeg Neocaesar Antonius Ab. Pachomius Macarius yea Epiphanius himself Ephrem Syrus Isidore Pelesiota Ambrose Philastrius Theoph. Alexand Ruffinus Gaudentius Maximus c. Besides Simeon Stillita and all the holy Famous Monks yea Augustinus himself the best rational Divine had little enough of the Tongues Their Writings easily prove all this with the Historical Descriptions of others concerning them I said I think it so short a Work to read the few brief Writers of the three first Centuries as maketh it more a dishonour to be ignorant of them than any great honour to be acquainted with them Instead of this you feign me to say It is no great honour to be acquainted with them But is this true Is a Positive and a Comparative Assertion all one But it seems you are not of my mind But take it for a greater honour for a Minister to know them than a dishonour to be ignorant of them And who vilified them more then you or I If I say that it is a greater dishonour to be ignorant of the Alphabet of the Grammar of the Gospel than honour to be acquainted with them so as to know what is in them and you denied this who vilified them most Have you no greater matters than these to exercise your censorious faculty on You know

the King hath not the said Power of the Spiritual Keys and Sacraments 5. And specially the most learned and zealous Defenders of Monarchy and Prelacy Bilson of Chest Obed. and Perp. Gov. and Andrews in Tortura Torti have most plainly and vehemently renounced it and shewed their malice or ignorance that impute such an Arrogation to our Kings So also Carlton of Jurisdic Jewel Whitaker and who not 6. What a King may do virtually by another I think unless Inconveniencies hinder the exercise he hath power to do himself But I think the King may not Administer Sacraments or Spiritual Discipline himself Which of our Kings did it Or who since Uzziah offered Sacrifice among the Jews 7. Our Kings never yet pretended so much as to Ordain that is to Invest another in that Power Ministerially in the Name of Christ But as to the Supremacy it 's true that the King is the Supream over Physicians Philosophers c. but not the Supream Physician or Philosopher He exerciseth Coercive Government by the Sword over Bishops who use Spiritual Government by the Keys and Word but hath not Authority to use this same sort of oversight himself unless a Clergy-man were King as some are Magistrates As to the Proxies of the Lords Spiritual in Parliament when you have as well proved that Christ hath allowed them to Preach Administer Sacraments and exercise the Keys by Proxies I will yield all that Cause But they will be loath to go to Heaven by Proxy Page 21. As to Jebosaphats Mission and his Nobles Teaching I answer 1. Teaching is not so proper to a Pastor or Clergy-man as the Keys and Sacraments Parents have their Office or Power of teaching and School-masters and Lay Catechists have theirs and Magistrates have theirs Judges on the Bench do usually teach the People even religious Duties so did Constantine and so may any King But there is a different teaching whith is proper to the Clergy which is by teaching to gather Churches and guide them and edifie them as Pastors devoted or separated to this as their proper Office As there is a difference between the Office of a Physician and a Womans healing a cut finger or giving a Cordial to one that fainteth But this proper Teaching which God did not leave in common to others no Prince can use no Bishop can do by Proxy Nor can he delegate to a Lay-man the power of the Keys and Sacraments 2. And the King may no doubt command Pastors to do their Duty as well as Physicians to do theirs I take none of this to be quarrelling but plain truth Your telling us that Chancellors may direct and advise the Surrogates may signifie something in another Land but not with us If we had never seen their Courts nor read Travers Of the difference between Christs Discipline and theirs yet Cousin's Tables are in our Libraries You add We are all but the Bishops Curates in the exercise of it Answ 1. I ventured to deny that to Bag shaw who made it the Reason of Separation And I will yet deny it of some others though not of you If we are all but the Bishops Curates the Italian Bishops of Trent were not so absurd as they were made in making the Bishops the Popes Curates How easie should I be were I a Curate could I believe that I have no more to answer for than the Bishop imposed on me and that he must answer for all the rest I suppose that the Office of the Presbyters or Ministers of Christ is immediately Instituted and described in the Scriptures and that the Bishop doth but Invest them in it and that their work is their own as properly as the Bishop's is his own and that his Precminence maketh not him the Communicator of the Power to them as from himself nor them to be his Curates 2. And while I think that I can prove this very easily censure us not too deeply for not swearing to the Bishops if the sence of it be to make us his Curates Not that I think my self too good to be a Servant to the Bishop's Coach man but that I dare not subvert Christ's established Church Orders As for your Engine and Wonders and Babel and Lucifer and trembling I have not learning enough to answer them As to your talk of Absolute Autocratical c. they are but Oratorical Flowers that speak against none of our particular Doctrines but are the rant of your Magisterial style And your talk of Excommunicating Kings may pass as part of your equal ways to one that hath written so oft against Excommunicating Kings when yet Bishop Andrews and other Prelates maintain the Refusing them the Communion and you know in what Case Chrysostom rather offered to lose Hand and Life even then to give the Sacrament to the Greatest that was unworthy Prove that ever any of the present Non-conformists who were called to present the judgment or desires of the rest did ever say more than Andrews and Bilson or so much But the Lord Digby is your Author Answ 1. Were we and our present Controversie for the most of us in being and at age when the Lord Digby spake that Is not Conformity now another thing Do all or half the Non-conformists profess themselves Presbyterians Are Presbyterians all for Excommunicating Kings And do not some that are for it confine it only to such Pastors as Kings themselves shall commit their Souls to and give leave to exercise that Power Are we I say we now living and silenced answerable for all that any Presbyterian holdeth any more than you are for what Hooker holdeth Some Scots-men refuse the Oath of Supremacy Are we guilty of that Mistake who Take it and Write for it Or did we spring out of their Loins and must be silenced for such Original sin derived from them that were no kin to us 2. But where did the Lord Digby say it You cite no Book or Speech of his but cite Rushworth p. 218. Where is no syllable of any such matter nor any where else that I can yet find 3. Suppose he had Did he not say in his Letter to Sir Ken. Digby Printed That the Primitive Church Government will be found pecking towards Presbytery He was then Episcopal he is now a Papist Is not his Authority then ad hominem while he was one of your own more valued against you than against them that were not of his Party or way and is this good arguing Whatever the Lord Digby Bancroft Heylin and if you will Bellarmine charge the Presbyterians with 1640 or I know not when or where all that are the Non-conformists Episcopal Presbyterians Independents and Catholick Moderators are guilty of in 1671. But the Lord Digby sometimes said that the Presbyterians would Excommunicate Kings Ergo the present Nonconformists even Episcopal and all are guilty of that Opinion even they that write against it But all your ways are just and equal But I pray you why was no Article about

Excommunicating Kings offered us as a Test or why was there never any such difference between us and the Prelatists pretended Try us whether we will not subscribe in this to as much as the Prelatists ever did agree on or ordinarily hold and lay our Liberty upon it and spare not But I remember you nibled before at my words in Differ of Magist and Pastors power Thes 60. p. 38. as if I had said That unless perhaps in some rare Case Kings may not be Excommunicated A Calumny when I annexed those words of exception only to the Excommunicating of Parents But your ways are still equal And I gave even Moral Reasons against Excommunicating Kings and Parents But when you in swearing will put who knows how many Exceptions to express Universals must I after all this be at your mercy unless I will say that In no rare case a Pastor may Excommunicate his own Parents What if the rare Case were 1. That he were but one in a Presbytery subject to a Bishop and his Parents were as open Apostates as Julian and the Bishop and the rest of the Presbytery required him to concur in their Excommunication 2. What if the King command a Bishop to Excommunicate a Magistrate or Parent for Treason Must he needs be disobeyed 3. What if God should send an Angel or Prophet with a particular Message so to do I am sure that Case is rare enough and I durst not disobey But it s hard pleasing some men § 45. Semper idem 1. But will you give it under your hand as a Lesson to your Flock That a Minister may not gainsay another for slandering Christians who in any thing differ from him that doth gainsay him nor may defend the Innocency of a Presbyterian unless he be one himself And that all men are bound to stand to the Opinions of all Christians in all other points whom they seek to vindicate against publick slanders What a pack of Doctrines do the Reasonings of these your Writings imply if they were but set together If I write almost twenty years ago and still against Lay Elders a Conformist may equally charge that upon me which I write against if I do but plead against slandering those that hold what I dissent from Yea he knoweth not where to have us so little do our Writings signifie our minds in these mens account The first Epist to Kederm in the first Book that ever I wrote disclaims them But that 's nothing to you And I must be taken for the Achilles of the Party and accountable for their Opinions if I do but say to a Printing Conformist Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy Neighbour May I not say so to you for a Heathen or a Papist Dr. Heylin tells us in the Life of Archbishop Laud That the Kings Printers were censured sorely for Printing the Seventh Commandment Thou shalt commit Adultery But I never yet met with the Ninth Commandment so transmuted to give you any excuse If you think it lawful to say any thing how unjust soever against a man that is not for your Discipline which you as much wish amended your self I am of another mind When Lamprid tells us that Alex Severus borrowed his Motto of the Christians Quod tibi fieri non vis c. He never said that therefore he was a Christian I had got no Lawyer to plead for me at the Bar if they had known that they were accountable for all my Opinions I am sure the Lord Chief Justice when he acquit me thought fit to declare his different judgment from mine in point of Preaching privately Yet here your terms of Logick are Into how many shapes and Hecatetriformis Fish flesh Mermaid Episcopal Presbyterian Independent yet none of these when you please an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes in the water sometimes out I wish you were hot or cold All this set together would make a Syllogism of a new Mood and Figure But 1. For ought I know most of the Nonconformists are such are your bungling description intimateth And whatever men hold take it as it is and feign them not to hold what they do not Do not you in Print proclaim men to be flesh or fish hot or cold that are not so But lay our Error where it lieth even as I must not take your Chancellors for Clergy-men or Lay-men 2. And did not all my tedious writings convince you before now that I therefore take that for an honour which you take for my disgrace because I take that for plain and certain truth which you reproach You could not except a Catholick Christian have trulier called me than an Episcopal Presbyterian-Independent I have oft enough told the World that I am very confident that each of the three Parties have some Truths and some Errors appropriate to themselves or which the rest have not I never found in Scripture any Obligation that I must needs be of a Faction in a time when Faction hath bred Wars troubled Kingdoms silenced Preachers by the hundreds c. and when I have seen and felt the Effects and not been always innocent of the Cause Nor yet that I must either refuse all the good or receive all the bad and feed on the excrements of any Faction whatsoever I am for no such heats or cold I am no such fish or flesh I will neither persecute as Paul did nor separate as Peter did Gal. 2. nor comply as Barnabas did nor reject the Brethren as Diotrephes did nor condemn others as the Weak did nor despise them as the strong did Rom. 14. 1 2 c. But be such an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he that became a Jew a Greek all things to all men that he might win some When I offended the Bishops in Conference I openly told them I had ever taken kneeling at the Sacrament to be lawful but I never took it to be lawful to cast honest Christians out of the Communion of the Church of Christ that dare not do it Did this prove me to be neither fish nor flesh Is no man of your Religion that is not for Excommunication or Prisons Swords or Flames for every Child of God that cryeth or wrangleth with the Breast Again I will say were they Priscillianists I am more for Martin's Spirit than the Ithacian Bishops And Sir that factious fury and uncharitableness keepeth up but a present violent kind of honour the Instance now once again named may tell you that when all the Bishops thereabouts in their Synods did but seek to the Magistrate to use the Sword against such gross Hereticks as the Priscillianists who as Severus saith that knew them were Gnosticks and but one poor ragged unlearned godly Bishop Martin with one other only in all France did dissent from them reprove them and separate for it from their Synods and Communion Godly people accidentally falling under the Vulgars reproach for the Hereticks sake as lately by the word Puritans here yet this one

their own principle in baptizing the Infants of Non-Confederates p. 129. I do utterly withstand it as Wickedness and Abomination in Gods Church I am to die and burn at a stake before I yield to any such thing This is Mr. Baxters way He offers it to Bishop Morley and Bishop Gunning in his Preface to his last Book of Concord that posterity may see what it is that he would have had and laboured to set up in all the Churches And accordingly let both the present and future Ages see and know p. 130. Your way is not so innocent as that of re-baptizing For the very matter and terms of your Church-Covenant are unsafe and plainly Schismatical As if Constables and people of each Town must Confederate to be a Corporation an Independent body having all jurisdiction within themselves and such as will not enter into this Confederacy must be counted none of the Kings Subjects To say there are no Churches in the world but a few Independent Churches were to go beyond Brownism It were rather to teach Infidelity such an opinion would be abhorred by all Now Mr. Baxter and the Independents Doctrine saith it Their errour should they hold it habitually predominantly and practically would be certainly their damnation p. 141 I see not but Pagans gross Hereticks Apostates Thieves and Robbers might combine together and say I take thee for my Pastor and I take you for my people Doth not your Doctrine infer it p. 143. If I yield to their assertion I must subvert the office of Christ and his Apostles and all his faithful Ministers and all the Churches to this day which I will not do for fear of the censure of any man living no nor of a whole Council of men p. 57. The way that Mr. Baxter offers seems to be a worse way It is the way of rigid Independencie Indeed Mr. B. in all his Writings seems to be against the Office of Lay-Elders But that he is not for them under another notion as Heads and delegates of the people mutually chosen by the Pastor and people for assistance in Discipline may be doubted He seems to hint at it c. § 2. How little truth is in all this and abundance such 1. either it is truth that I am for rigid Independency or not If not if yea I am glad that the Independent way is no worse I am not much acquainted with them But if this man say true 1. They are for no Covenanting but consent to the relation signifyed 2. They are not for binding any to continue in that relation 3. They are not for binding any from a regular use of any other Minister or Churches Communion 4. In places where Parishes are divided by Law and the ordinary attendance on the Pastors Ministration goeth for a sign of consent they are true Churches and Members that thus signifie it and ad esse it is usually enough though ad bene esse in doubtful cases the more express as more intelligible caeteris paribus is best 5. They are against an Office of Lay-Elders distinct from Ministers of the Word and Sacraments as of Gods institution for Church-government 6. They are against Democracie or the Church-governing power of the People 7. They take reformed Parish-Churches for the best Order not taking all for Members that are in the Parish but all the capable 8. They are against gathering Churches out of such Parish-Churches without great necessity 9. They are greatly against requiring any qualification as necessary to Communion in point of holiness but express consent to the Baptismal Covenant or profession of Christianity not disproved 10. They make not the peoples Election of their Pastors necessary ad esse but meer consent though the Patron or others Elect them 11. They suppose that the peoples Election or consent is not necessary to make a man a Minister in the Universal Church but only to make him their Pastor As to make a Physician and to make him my Physician differ 12. They suppose that a true Minister officiateth as such where ever he doth it 13. They suppose that associations or correspondencies of Churches for concord and help and Synods to that end and dependencie on such Synods is usually a duty where it can well be had and needless discord a fault 14. They refuse not to submit in practice to the instructions or admonitions of any general Visiter or Overseer of many Churches called by some Archbishops 15. They refuse not the precedency of one Pastor in every particular Church over the rest of the Presbyters 16. They refuse him not the name of the Bishop nor yet to submit to his negative voice as of the Quorum or the Archbishops either in Ordinations and all great publick matters 17. They are for separating from no Christians further than they separate from Christ or would force them to sin but are for universal Love and Concord 18. They are for obeying the Magistrate in all lawful things belonging to his function 19. They take the most extensive Love Peace and Concord for the most desirable and best 20. It is next their obedience to Christ and his sufficient Laws the great reason why they are against the terms imposed in most places of the Christian world where things unnecessary and suspected are made necessary to Communion Reader Mr. Ch. is so honest a man that it were unjust to take him for a deliberate studied Lyar. Therefore seeing he saith that my way is rigid Independency and oft maketh me a downright Independent I that know my own Judgement and knew not theirs so well as he seems to do am glad to hear that they are no worse and that they are wronged by such as accuse them of denying any of those Twenty points § 3. And supposing that he saith true and that they hold but my way as he calls it I will now try the force and honesty of his charge against them And first it savours of a spirit worse than his own that when he had before used the word Oath as owned by me and then said he repented of it that he still useth the word Covenant here as mine instead of Consent which is the word which I use and over and over say that I own no Covenant but any signification of Consent to the relation onely because I said that not ad esse but ad bene esse plain or express Consent in doubtful cases is best This smells of an ill intention and now I will try his arguments against this Consent § 4. P. 101. he saith Mr. B. acts contrary to his own Principles in baptizing the Children of No● confederates The Universal and Particular Church make but one Church of God He that refuseth one Essential of Church-communion is no Christian and is to be debarred the Priviledges of Christians But according to you Non-confederates refuse one essential of Church-communion I may not baptize you you are to me a Pagan Ans Putares sed calumniaris Here is