Selected quad for the lemma: saint_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
saint_n	bishop_n	church_n	deacon_n	1,417	5	10.6336	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86484	A rejoynder to Master Samuel Eaton and Master Timothy Taylor's reply. Or, an answer to their late book called A defence of sundry positions and scriptures, &c. With some occasionall animadversions on the book called the Congregational way justified. For the satisfaction of all that seek the truth in love, especially for his dearly beloved and longed for, the inhabitants in and neer to Manchester in Lancashire. / Made and published by Richard Hollinworth. Mancuniens.	Hollingworth, Richard, 1607-1656.	1647 (1647)	Wing H2496; Thomason E391_1; ESTC R201545	213,867	259

the words in sensu distributive is no more figurative then yours If it be I pray you what figure is it wil you make a new Rhetorick too 2. What the holy Ghost saith we must beleeve but you should not beg the question and say the holy Ghost saith what he doth not mean all the Hebrews did assemble themselves together in the sense he means viz. in several companies and so may this be understood and beleeved 3. You for your advantage translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when the whole Church comes together but you should translate if the whole Church come together and I told you in my answer that suppositions put nothing in being and you know they do not Gal. 1.8 Though you take no notice of it yet you are willing to lay aside the conditional expression which is both in the original and sundry translations and take up a more absolute one this dealing is not candid should the Apostle have said which you know may without any impropriety be said now in London if two or three whole Churches shal meet together in one place would you have collected thence that two or three whole Churches may orderly convene and that there ought to be no more in two or three Churches then may so convene when we say if the whole County of Lancaster or York respectively come together into the Castleyard of Lancaster or York doth this prove that the whole County doth ordinarily meet in one place though upon some special occasion as choosing of a Knight c. They may meet together or at least a great part of them in the name and power of the rest And so when he faith if the whole Church come together in one place it cannot be thence rationally concluded that every member of the Church was at any time much le●s ordinarily in one place some were infants some no doubt were sick and weak 1 Cor. 11.30 Some abroad about necessary negotiation some women in travel some in childbed so we read Ioshua 22.12 And Ezra 2.64 That the whole Church or all the Church was gathered together and yet you know there were many thousands of men in the Church of the Jews besides women and children and sick persons which were not in that assembly so far are such texts as these from proving that the Church must consist of no more then may meet in one place 4. That same thing which now you alledg to me was alledged by a Protestant revolted to Popery concerning hoc est corpus meum viz. The holy Ghost saith it and Protestants have bin convinced with the evidence of that text to grant a corporal presence in the Sacrament Sect. 7. When I urge that the Apostles writes to the Saints in all Achala and that there were other Churches in that Region at least two Corinth and Cenchrea which was oppidū Corinthiorū c. You Reply p. 20. That he doth not write to them as making one Church with the Corinthians for he mentions them with a note of distinction from the Corinthians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rejoynder 1 You fight with your own shaddow I said not that he writes to them all as one Church but plainly asserted with Beza Piscator and others that he writes to the Churches in that region 2. Your criticism is worth nothing if one should say Paul writes not to the Bishops and Deacons as Saints at Philippi for he mentions them with a note of distinction to the Saints at Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons yourselves would laugh at it 3. He might have a scope that the other Churches in Achaia from the Epistle he sent to Corinth which they were to peruse as the Laodicean Church was to read the Epistle written to the Colossians should be stirred up to the same duty of contribution c. Thus you But the Apostle had not a scope to stir up all other Churches at least not all alike to that duty of contribution to the poor Saints at Ierusalem and therefore you now in effect acknowledg what before you did deny viz. That the Apostle writes more properly to the Achaians then to the whole world Besides you know your paralel is not suitable for 2 Cor. inscribed to the Achaians and so is not that Epistle to Colo●s inscribed to the Church of Laodicea 4. You demand why then doth not the Apostle say to the Churches of Judea Macedonia Asia Why is the Church of Corinth mentioned and the Church at Cenchrea wholy silenced in the first Epistle and not mentioned directly and by name in the second You are as good at asking questions as any I pray you answer me one question and then if need be I wil answer yours Why doth not Paul cal the Romans Ephesians Philippians by the name of Saints and the Corinthians and Thessalonians by the name Church Why doth not Paul James and Jude inscribe their Epistles to the Churches of Iudea or the Hebrew Churches though all of them write to Churches and famous ones too far more famous then Cenchrea probably was yet they make no mention of them directly or by name The answer is 1. We must not teach the Apostle in what phrase to speak Nor 2. can we render a reason why he inscribes his Epistle to the. Saints at Ephesus whom elsewhere he calleth the Church of Ephesus no more then we shew a reason why the Church of Cenchrea may be included under the name of Saints in Achaia 3. The Church of Corinth may be mentioned and not any other Church by name because the Church of Corinth was the most famous best-gifted Church Or to use the words of Mr Banes Diac. tryal p. 16. because it was the most illustrious and conspicuous Church 5. Where Iurge that the women he writes too did resort to Churches else how could they keep silence in the Churches 1 Cor. 14.34 You reply p. 21. That these Epistles were written for universal direction of the women of all Churches 2. That women were wort to go from ove Church to another as Phebe and were to keep silence in all Churches 3. That though he saith your wome he saith not your Churches Rejoyn It was indeed for universal direction of the women of all Churches in a secundary and mediate way but primarily and immediately it was for direction of those he writes to and hence he saith not set women or all women but your women 2. Phaebe's going from Cenchrea to Rome doth not prove that women had such a wont to go from one Church to another and that they were so forward speakers that the Apostle had need to silence them not only in their own Church but in strange Churches 3. If it had been said your Churches which phrase being not found in any place of Scripture is not here to be expected it had been somewhat more plain but as it is it is plain enough viz. that the women he writes to did resort to Churches and therefore I conclude they were

taken it includes both 2. The word Church in Acts 20. is but distinguished only from Elders not from all the officers and from feeding not ruling Elders for that the ruling Elders are said to be made Bishops by the holy Ghost is not probable 3. Phil. 1.1 wil prove that there were Saints in Philippi distinct from Bishops and Deacons but not that they were a Church without them much less that they were a Church properly so called Lastly If you can shew by Scripture that any company of people without officers did or ought to exercise Church-power or that they might receive in or cast out members our of the Church it shal suffice we wil not contend about names nor wil the name of the Church avail if this power cannot be proved by Scripture CHAP. XVI Of Election of Ministers and other officers Sect. 1. Reply p. 47. THe Position saith not that a particular Congregation hath full and free power without seeking the help of advise and direction of a Synod Classis or Presbytery but without the authoritative help thereof Rejoyn 1. Then you allow both that there should be Synods Classes and Presbyteries and that they should be advised with about election prove you that any Congregation did ask or seek the direction or advice of any Synod Classis or Presbytery in election of officers which you press as a duty and holy ordinance and I will shew you that they used authoritative help of a Synod Classis c. 2. I approve your approbation of Mr Cottons modesty in not taking on him hastily to censure the many notable presidents of ancient and latter Synods which have put forth the acts of power in ordination c. Which Author though he speak not expresly of election yet if acts of power may be put forth in another Congregation in one thing they may be put out in another 3. When I say we hold it a priviledg of the people especially if they proceed wisely and piously to elect their officers 1. You vainly ask Reply p. 47. What people Is it a people-priviledg or a Church-previledg to choose Ecclesiastical officers R. You are too willing to contend Scripture warrants me to cal un-officed men Church-members or others by the name of people Heb. 7.5 and your selves p. 59. yea in the last line of this very page use the same word in the same sense which you quarrel at that a Church viz. a company of people knit together by express publick covenant or agreement hath the only power of choosing officers I put you to prove 4. You ask What if they do not proceed wisely and piously is their priviledg lost Would it then be no injury to intrude any officer on them Is the priviledge of a Church-officer or Master of a family lost if he use it not wisely and piously Must they not be directed and exhorted to use it rightly and the priviledg remaine still with him we have Junius of our mand Rejoyn Then I conceive the Presbyters ought to keep the charge of the Lord and not to ordain hastily though the people should elect suddenly 1 Tim. 5.22 Least they should be partakers of other mens sins viz. of that unwise and ungodly Election 2. A master of a family may rule his house so unwisely and impiously that his priviledge of Governing it yea his liberty and his life may by the Magistrate be taken away from him A Church officer your selves assert may be censured yea deposed for unwise and ungodly managing his trust 3. Your selves hold not I suppose that it is the priviledge of the people to have an unwise and ungodly election confirmed but rather an injury to them 4. The Church of Boston in New England did chuse or would have chosen a notorious familist to have been co-teacher with Mr C. would you have the Elders to have ordeined him or the Synod to have approved him 5. If you grant that whensoever a people do chuse unwisely and ungodlity the Presbytery or Synod should oppose and refuse to ordain them and that without such ordination they may not lawfully officiate it is enough as to my present purpose and this at least if not more you seem to grant by equalling the case of a Church mis-electing to the case of a Mr of a family or a Church-officer mis-governing both which may loose their priviledg and power by a. busing it especially for a time til they be more wise Sect 2. I ingenuously confess I have always and stil do in my opinion and practise propend that people should elect their Minister they being thereby engaged the more to love and obey him and his cal to them made more unquestionable yet the Scriptures you bring though as I conceive as perument as any other and your defence of them upon the matter as strong as the cause wil suffer are unsatisfactory to me To your first text I answered that it is likely that Assembly was not a body politick but occasional only no part of Church-government being as yet on foot here were not all but some of the sounder members of the Jewish Church and they had no commission to separate from the Jews before Act. 2.44 The company was not without Elders The Apostles if not the 70 were present all the Churches and Elders that were at that time in the world were present in respect whereof it may be called an acumenical councel The Apostles being Elders of all Churches rather then a particular Congregation If there had been any more Elders and Churches they must have convened upon that occasion to choose an Apostle who is a Pastor of all Churches The choise was limied by the Apostle Peter 1. To the persons present 2. To those that had accompanied the Apostles all the time that the Lord Jesus went and out amongst them and by God the director of the lot to whom properly the election of an Apostle doth belong to Matthias You reply p. 48.1 There is a contradiction if they were but the sounder parts of the Jewsh Church then they were not a Christian Church and if no Christian Church how were the Apostles Elders of it how was it an ●cumenical Councel the Churches and Elders in all the world being present Rejoyn I do not at all contradict my self for 1. To he Christian and to be the sounder members of the Jewish Church was then all one 2. The Apostles being members of the then Iewish Church hinders not but that they might be Elders of all the Churches in the world as Christ was a member of the Jewish Church yet head of the whole Church Christian or Jewish in several respects 3. If you wil have it to be a Christian Church as you affirm it was liker to a general Councel then a particular Congregation You further reply 1. Is there not some mistake in point of truth There were added to them 3000 souls to them to whom To those who were yet members of the Iewish Church then these

sufficient pertinent and full of power to prove it And in this I praise your modesty 2. Your applying of the commendation of Jugurtha to your selves in your last That he did pl●rimum facere minimum de se loqui is no act of your modesty The Independent Answerer of Mr. Prynnes Quaere's saith Independents are the meekest men upon earth and you by your own report are men that do much and say little Surely few think so but your selves You say p. 62.1 We considered how Christ and the Apostles were maintained in the work of the Ministery and we find that they had a Stock of monies which came partly at least by Contribution Luke 8.2 3. and out of this stock was taken for the Poor also as from Joh. 13.29 appears See Junius Ecclesiast p. 1954. Rejoynd The one Text saith The women ministred to Christ of their substance The other faith that Judas had the bag But that the womens contribution was given every Lords day or that it was put into the publike treasury Or that Judas bag out of which Christ gave somewhat to the poor had not Christs proper goods in it but the Churches stock that Judas was a kind of Deacon or Church-officer it saith not 2. That Christs maintenance was wholly out of a stock that was raised by contribution your selves do not assert nor were the Apostles maintained in the work of the Ministery out of that bag save only when they were at home as being of Christs own family Sect. 2. Reply p. 62. We consider what was done in the Apostles times Act. 2.45 4.35 there was a Stock then but raised after an extraordinary way and yet by free contribution they brought their whole estates and put them into a common stock which was but a temporary businesse and not astrictive unto all times Now out of this common stock the Apostles and all others that had need were maintained and the Apostles had at first the oversight of this stock Rejoynd 1. They could not have any other way of Church-maintenance at that time 2. Your selves acknowledge First that a setled maintenance may come from the State And must it come from the State and the Church-stock too Secondly that that was but a temporary businesse and not astrictive to all times else it would hold that there must be a community of all things in the Church 3. What is this to Lords-day contributions for the Ministers maintenance of which the Position speaks Sect. 3. Reply p. 62. You say There were Deacons chosen which had the oversight of the treasure of this Church for the Apostles gave themselves to the ministery of the Word to Prayer Act. 6.4 and neither medled with receiving nor with disposing of what was contributed The Deacons took that burden from off them so that now they received all and disposed of all if any brought their estate they laid it down at the Deacons feet and if any distribution was made the Deacons made it the Apostles medled with nothing So then the work was the same which the Deacons managed with that which the Apostles had before managed only it was in other hands the Deacons came into the Apostles place hence it follows that if the distribution was made as every one had need when the Apostles had the oversight and if themselves had a share as their need required and other Labourers with them then it was so afterwards when the Deacons were intrusted in it so then the Deacons office was to dispose as the Labourers had need and their office was not to oversee the Poor alone Rejoynd 1. That the Deacons came so into the Ap●stles place that the Apostles medled with nothing but received their maintenance from the Deacons or that men laid their money at the Deacons feet it appears not in Scripture 2. The contrary rather appears for not only Paul took great care of the poor divers times and in divers places and James Cephas and John not the Deacons did desire him to remember the poor Gal. 2.10 but the Antiochians Act. 11.30 sent the relief for the poor brethren which dwelt in Judaea to the Elders not to the Deacons Now Agabus and other Prophets came lately thither from Hierusalem v. 27 28. and Barnabas and Paul that went with it knew to whom to deliver it yet they lay it down at the feet of the Elders not of the Deacons which imports that Agabus the Prophets Barnabas and Saul did know that the Apostles and Elders had somewhat to do with it at least to take for their own necessity as they did before and not to be at the disposall of the Deacons and if Barnabas and Saul had conceived it to be Gods ordinance that the Apostles and Elders should not meddle with reception they would have brought it to the Deacons whose office they knew well enough nor would the Elders have received it at their ●hands but have sent them to the Deacons 3. That the charge of the poor belongs to Pastors is the judgement of Pareus and others which do hold that the greater and higher office doth include in it the lesse and lower 4. By this doctrine Pastors if they have meanes of their own ought not to receive maintenance out of the Churches stock except they have need in the judgement of the Deacons or of the Church as other poor Saints have Sect. 4. P. 63. You tell us That the office of the Deacons is not temporary but perpetuall But what is this to prove Ministers maintenance by Lords-day contributions or out of the Church-stock Yes say you In the Commandment which respects the necessity of the Ministers Gal. 6.6 the word is the same in the Greek which is in the commandment to distribute to the necessity of the Saints Rom. 12.13 Heb. 13.16 and signifies to communicate But what then 1. The word communicating is a generall word and compriseth all duties whereby men do mutually help one another Calv. on Heb. 13.16 Can there be no communicating except the Deacons do receive it and pay it over to the Minister except there be Lords-day contributions and a Church-stock You know the contrary 2. That place in Gal. 6. which only speaks expresly of Ministers maintenance is understood of private as well yea rather then of publike contribution 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all his goods by which is meant not only money which may be fitly brought to the Congregation but other good things according as there is opportunity ability and necessity some of which cannot be fitly brought into the Congregation 3. Your own Texts do declare that the Scripture distinguisheth communicating to the necessity of the Saints and communicating to their Ministers and that these two are not both one f●r then Paul might have said Give unto the Church-treasury for publike uses for the maintenance of the Ministery and of the poor to both which if there were a Church-stock they might contribute in one act but he speaks of severall acts