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
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A30391 A modest survey of the most considerable things in a discourse lately published, entituled Naked truth written in a letter to a friend.; Selections. 1685 Burnet, Gilbert, 1643-1715. 1676 (1676) Wing B5835; ESTC R16335 27,965 32

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

their courses in making such breaches in Christ's Vineyard and Sheepfold that lets in the Foxes and Wolves and to be disposing our own minds into such a gentle temper that notwithstanding all past provocations and all the advantages we have from the Laws and Law-givers yet we may be willing to yield even to the peevish weakness and unaccountable scruples of these that separate from us as far as can be without giving just occasions of scandal on the other hand But to give them such advantages as this Discourse does is that which I cannot reconcile to the common Rules of Prudence and Edification I wish this Writer had also considered how unjust a way of reasoning it was to argue from the indecencies and abuses any may be guilty of in the use of some of the Ceremonies that they ought to be taken away Alas at that rate the most sacred and solemn things shall not escape since all things when they fall into the hands of mortal men are subject to such abuses He did also very much forget himself when he reckoned the Bowing to the Altar one of the Ceremonies of the Church which has never enjoyned it neither by Canon nor Rubrick for in it all are left to their freedom So that this can furnish none with so much as a pretence to excuse their separation For his long Discourse about Church-men and their Qualifications and labours chiefly about Preaching i● certainly deserves great consideration and in it we cannot steer by a better Rule than those most excellent constitutions Antiquity has left us which are indeed so divine and pure that if this Age could bear such a Reformation I know no greater blessing could befal us But it is more to be wished than hoped for to see Plato's Commonwealth built upon the ruines and dregs of Romulus We ought to converse much with the writings the Ancients have left us concerning the Qualifications and Employments of the Clergy such as Nazianzen's Apollogetick Chrysostome's Books of the Priesthood and Gregory the Great 's Books of the Pastoral care But whatever defects we may charge our selves with this is so far from contributing to our Schism that it is rather the effect and consequence of it for where there is bitter zeal and strife there is confusion and every evil work and so it was not needful to put this in a Book concerning Union Nor have these that divide from us any reason of insulting over us whatever we may have to humble our selves for those things and least of all for Preaching which perhaps is at this day come to such perfection that if all our other defects were as much mended as these of Preaching are we might on all accounts be esteemed the best and most excellent Church that ever was since the Ages of Miracles In a word to end all that needs be said on these Heads the grounds of our communicating with any Church being chiefly the purity of their Doctrine and Worship and that their order and Rules are such that they hinder the exercise of no Christian virtue but very much advance it no personal failings or defects how publick and gross soever ought to make any to separate from such a Society For till I be involved in some guilt which no other Man's faults can do by joyning in Communion with a Church I ought still to abide in it This must either be laid down for a Principle otherwise Schisms and Rents shall be endless for as long as men are men personal failings and corruptions are unavoidable And now having thus far examined the most considerable parts of that discourse except what relates to Bishops and Priests about which you desire chiefly to be satisfied and upon which the Authour has laid out his utmost strength I come at last to consider that which I shall do with that candour and calmness I have carried along with me hitherto His opinion is That the Bishops Precedency over the rest of the Clergy with Authority to ordain to exhort to rebuke to judge and censure as he found cause is of Apostolical institution and hath been continued in the whole Church of God ever since so that nothing but necessity if that can excuse those that set up another Form of Government therefore this Government ought to be still kept in the Church But after all this he thinks the Bishops and Priests are one and the same order so that by their Ordination they have no more power conferred on them than Presbyters have This he studies to prove 1. From the silence of the Scriptures that do not mention two such orders 2. Because he finds but one Ordination which he thinks cannot confer two Characters 3. Because the Apostles call themselves Presbyters and no where Bishops 4. Because St. Clement in his Epistle speaks only of Bishops and Deacons 5. Justin Martyr calls the Bishop only President 6. St. Cyprian calls himself Praepositus 7. Because the Form of ordaining Elders is the same with which Christ ordained the Apostles Receive ye the Holy Ghost whose Sins ye forgive they are forgiven them 8. The bad consequences of admitting this difference of Order are great for it will condemn all the other Reformed Churches Upon these reasons he rejects the Difference of Order and instead of that says the Apostles ordain'd all equally to be Bishops or Presbyters but some having more eminent gifts than others the Apostles did by Commission empower and constitute These to be Overseers and Bishops over the rest from which beginning this practice has been kept up in the Church ever since Therefore he thinks Priests ought not to ordain other Priests but yet having done it it is valid and may without a crime be done by a Priest that were by shipwrack or any such chance cast into a Countrey where no Person can be had that is thus commissionated to ordain This is a full and clear account of his opinion and of the reasons that led him to it I shall now examine both and First let us see what all this will amount to This must signifie little or nothing to the composing differences among us but will rather inflame them For a Presbyterian may upon this supposition very reasonably plead that since by his order he has the same Authority that a Bishop hath he ought not to be obliged or limited in the exercise of it That any such Commission the Apostles gave some extraordinary men must have been but temporary for their lives for if they had judged this a thing needful to be kept up in the Church they had given such lasting directions about it constituting it a distinct order as might have preserved it still in the Church but since they did not that we have no reason to acknowledge any such Power now And therefore if Priests see their Bishop doing what they think amiss they may assume that Power their Order has given them and judge and depose him too if need be I am confident that
Authour will not allow of this and yet it is visible that it arises naturally out of what he has set down But suppose he could avoid that what does all he has said contribute to the re-uniting our Dissenters and us again somewhat he may say as to the foreign Churches and yet I hope to shew that may be done another way A little may be also said to such as were ordained before by Priests in the time of the late Usurpation who are now but a small number and yet even these by his Principles did a very ill thing who out of no necessity but in a wanton sedition against their Bishops threw them off by the strength and force of a prevailing Army And if such Persons ought not to be marked by some censure or at least not admitted to any sacred Employments till they have been sensible of their fault and repent of it I leave it to every body to consider But for the rest of our Dividers as long as the Bishops have such an Authority over their Priests by what Title or conveyance soever they possess it it is all one to them And indeed the weaker their Title is they will think they have the stronger Plea So that this Notion were it ever so true cannot go a great way towards the settling matters among us but on the contrary will rather widen the breach I go next to examine his opinion in it self that there are many contradictions in his Discourse is apparent For if Bishops have Authority to ordain to exhort to rebuke to judge and censure as they find cause and if this Authority was given by the Apostles Is not here a distinct Order all Ecclesiastical Functions are but so many Commissions from God of which the conveyers were the Apostles for what is the order of Priesthood but a Commission from God which was first issued out by the Apostles giving such Persons authority to Preach and to administer Sacraments and can any think that the Apostles could have given any such Commissions but 1. They must have had the direction of the Holy Ghost that assisted them in all they went about 2. They must have conferred such a measure of the Holy Ghost as was necessary for the discharge of such a Commission for they that conferred the Holy Ghost on all they laid their hands on would have done it much more on those they did commissionate for so high a trust 3. This must have been done by imposition of hands so we find they laid hands on Paul and Barnabas when they were sent to the Gentiles though they were endued with extraordinary power before and were Apostles according to what St. Paul says of himself in the beginning of his Epistle to the Galatians God had also by name marked them out for that service yet hands were laid on them and so they were sent out by the Holy Ghost 4. If these Persons commissionated with such Authority were empowered by the Apostles then all the rest of the Priests were bound to submit to that Authority and whatever power they might have pretended before that then since latter deeds do vacate and invalidate former ones that power being conferred on another who is acknowledged vested with the Authority the former must be supposed divested of it and bound to subject themselves to it Nor could they except in cases of simple necessity re-assume it without rejecting the Authority of the Apostles themselves according to that maxime of our Saviour's He that rejecteth me rejecteth him that sent me 5. Either the Apostles did declare this was only temporary that for the present exigency such extraordinary persons were vested with such Authority or that this constitution should continue still in the Church He cannot chuse the former for then that order must have determined with these mens lives in whose hands it was entrusted which is against what that Authour pleads for So that he must say they declared that such Commissions must continue to the end of the World otherwise there were no obligation lying on the Church to continue them which yet he acknowledges 6. After the Apostles were dead either these Commissions were to be renewed on the account of what the Apostles had appointed or only by a voluntary delegation of the Priests and People if the former then our Bishops at this day act by vertue of a Commission from the Apostles If the latter be true then 1. This delegation may be given or not as they please and so the order may vanish 2. They may limit or enlarge it as they please and so may very much change it 3. Those who are ordained Bishops without such Commissions cannot be Bishops at all For if that Power be only a Commission then it cannot be seated in any person that has got no such Commission therefore there being no such thing asked as a delegation of such Authority from the Priests for the Election of the Dean and Chapter relates only to the Person but not to the Power and Office none are now truly Bishops since they have no such Commissions nor does the Metropolitan and the other consecrating Bishops give any such Commissions but only ordain a Bishop to the Work and Office so committed to him by the imposition of their hands in which it is clear as also from the whole Office of the Consecration of Bishops that they suppose there is a standing Power and Authority in the Office and therefore do believe it does not depend upon any Commission they can give all they do being to ordain him to the Office to which the Authority is necessarily annexed So that it is clear that either we have no Bishops at all or the Commission for this Authority is annexed to the Office and the Church does not constitute the Office but only admit or ordain a person duly elected and qualified unto an Office already constituted From all these particulars which necessarily follow upon that Authour's Hypothesis I may well assume that by his principles Bishops were empowered for ordination and jurisdiction by the Apostles they being directed in it by the Holy Ghost and laying their hands on them and conferring the Holy Ghost by such imposition of hands upon which all the rest both Clergy and Laity were bound to submit to them and that the Apostles intended this order should be still continued in the Church So that all succeeding Bishops act by that Power then conveyed by the Apostles to the first Bishops and continued with their successors to the end of the World And if this does not state the distinct Office of Bishops and Priests let every Reader judge There is a different power lodged with the Bishops another Commission ratified by an imposition of hands which is to continue in a succession for ever So that that Hypothesis destroys it self establishing so many different things that contradict one another But before I go to answer his arguments I shall premise somewhat of the Office of Bishop