Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	bishop_n	power_n	presbyter_n	2,561	5	10.5876	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A27068	Whether parish congregations be true Christian churches and the capable consenting incumbents, be truly their pastors, or bishops over their flocks ... : written by Richard Baxter as an explication of some passages in his former writings, especially his Treatise of episcopacy, misunderstood and misapplied by some, and answering the strongest objections of some of them, especially a book called, Mr. Baxters judgment and reasons against communicating with the parish assemblies, as by law required, and another called, A theological dialogue, or, Catholick communion once more defended, upon mens necessitating importunity / by Richard Baxter.	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1684 (1684)	Wing B1452; ESTC R16512	73,103	142

I confess one man may possibly live under so intollerable a Minister as is not to be owned And even some of the high adversaries of Nonconformists seem of this mind and break the Canon and having Pastors who they think do not heartily conf●rm ●ut plead for Peace and Moderation they revile them as Trimmers and will not Communicate wi●h them but go out of their own Parishes and thousands seldom any where Other circumstances also may vary mens cases ●ut some Objectors at last t●ll us that the great difference which they mean is differe●t light T●e ●ld Martyrs Reformers and Nonconformists had not so much light as we and so it w●s not th●●r sin but greater light being now m●r● common it will be a common sin to j●yn in the Liturgy Ans 1. It is ordinary and easie for men to magnifie their own understandings but Gods Law was then the same as now and they were bound to know it Their ignorance might make sin less and stripes fewer but could not make it none 2. I have many Reasons to think that it is your light that is l●ss and the old Nonconformists and Conformists in this that was greater 1. That is the greater light that most agreeth with Gods Word and th● universal churches practice accordingly 2. The writings of the old Nonconformists yet extant give better reas●ns than the seperatists did and therefore had clearer light What vast difference is there in the writings of Ball Hildersham Am●sius Manuductions Gifford Paget Bradshaw c. on that part and Johnsons Cans Penrys c. on the other 3. The Theological writings and labours of the Nonconformists in all other points shewed that they were men of incomparable more light than the Separatists and is it like that God would give men such rare light only in church communion that had so little comparatively in the rest of Divinity except Ainsworth's skill in Hebrew in other things by Paget laid too naked how few old Separatists have left any considerable fruits of great light unto the church Read the writings of Cartwright Dudley Fenner Hildersham John Reignolds Dod Perkins Bai● Parker Ames Bradshaw c. Besides Scots and all Foreigners such as Calvin Beza Zanchy Sadeel and hundreds more and compare these with the Writings of the Separatists and judg who had greater light 4. Since 1660. all the London Ministers and others with them t●at offered the King to set up in the parish churches the old Liturgy with some alterations were men except my self who shewed in their Writings and preaching as much light as the Separatists have shewed even Brown or John Goodwin himself that wrote Prelatical Preachers are no Teachers of Christ Where do they now shew greater light than others this boast to me deserveth pity more than confutation Anabaptists and others say the same but I find much less light in them both when I read and hear them tho I truly love and honour all that is good in them If you have so much more light than we and all the Reformed churches shew it us in other excellencies XLI But I must more particularly consider of this Authors Allegation of my own words against me especially my Treatise of Episcopacy And I do heartily thank him for calling me to review it For 1. I profess to write nothing which may not be amended And 2. If mens misunderstanding turn my writings to a snare and scandal it greatly concerneth me to remove it by explication or by retractation of any thing that needeth it And 1. I do find that I have incautelously given some occasion to the mistake for thol entituled my Book not against Diocesan episcopacy but against that sort of Diocesan churches Prelacy and Government which casteth out the Primitive church sp●cies of ●piscopacy Ministry and Discipline and tho to avoi● mistake I said in the Preface I ●ere give notice to the Reader that whenever 〈…〉 me speak as against the English Diocesan Prelacy I mean it as described by Cosins and Dr. Zouch and as relating to the Et c●tera Oaths and 〈◊〉 and not in opposition to the laws of the Land Yet all this was not enough to avoid misunderstanding Indeed I took the church Government to be described and judged of by the churches own sentence more than by the ●●w and I had read the said Et cetera oath and canons with the words that so it ●ught to stand which I think could mean nothing less than that so by Gods Law it ought to stand and I had read the old canons 6 th 7 th and 8 th Which ex●ommunicate ipso facto all men with●ut excepting L●rds or Parliament M●n who affirm that any thing in the church Government by arch-Arch-Bishops Bishops Deans Arch-Deacons and THE REST that bear office therein is repugnant to the Word of God And I read the canons that forbid Ordained Ministers to preach till they are further licensed by Bishops yea and in the church or elsewhere so much as to expound any Doctrine or Matter but only to r●ad Scripture and Homilies c. with much more like this 3. And then I took the stated restraint of the Ministry with Lay-chancellors and officials decre●ive power of Excommunication and absolution and the foresaid Civilians denying all G●venment to Presbyters to have been quoad exercitium quantum 〈◊〉 at least an overthrow of parish churches Rectors and discipline 4. And I thought that the Bishops and Chancellors could never have so long done all this and ruled by these canons if the Law had not been on their side 5. And I thought that the Authors of the canons of 1640 being a c●nvo●a●i●n it was to be called the Church of England and specially when I found the most highly honoured Doctors pleading there was no Bishop but D●●cesan and no church without its proper Bishop By all these inducements with long sad experience I oft speak so incautelously calling this the English d●●●●san frame that the Reader might easily think that I meant it was that frame that was setled by law whereas having read ●ryn H●ntley Leigh●●● and others that deny the law to be for it and being my self a stranger to that case of Law I should have more fully separated the Law case from the new convocation case and much more from the destructive Innovators case who nullified the foreign churches with whom it was that I disputed and specially considering that the canons and oath of 1640. were a●ter cashier'd by Parliament and never since restor'd no not by the Parliament of 1662. Upon all this 1. I retract all words that seem to determine the case in Law if any such be there or that by darkness tend so to the Readers error 2. And all words that make the writings of superconformists and subver●ers or chang●rs of the church government or the canons of the convocation 1640 to be the sense of the Church of England when it is said that before its sence was otherwise and alteration is now abjured

choice And our present Canons since 1604 tho they null not the Parochial Pastorship do so far restrain it as I hope my Conscience shall never approve But yet for that I will not forsake what is of God nor make mans failings a pretence against my duty to God and Man to the Violation of Love Unity and Peace Yet I will try by distinct speaking to make both the Case and my meaining plainer if I can And thereby to shew that our case differeth but gradually from the old Nonconformists as to Lay-mens Parochial Communion where there are honest Ministers And that the old Nonconformists had better Evidence Scripture and Reason on their side than either those Innovators who make Parish-Pastors to be but de specie of humane Institution made by Bishops and changeable by them having just so much power as they please to give them or the Brownists that are so much of the same Principles as to think that mens Laws or Canons can change the form of the Office or that judg it nullified by tollerable Imperfections and Communion made unlawful by such faults as are found in almost all the Churches on Earth Qu. Whether according to the description of the Scripture and the exposition of Dr. Hammond himself all qualified Parish Ministers be not true Pastors and Bishops of the Flocks and with their consenting Christian Communicants true particular Churches and de facto all be not in the power given them by God which is essential hereto and in the power generally acknowledged by the legal Church Ans I have spoken to this so largely in my Treatise of Episcopacy and there added the testimonies of Writers old and new Protestants and Papists that I will give but a breviate of it here The essence of the Church Ministry consisteth in POWER and OBLIGATION FROM CHRIST to teach to guide in Worship and to oversee and guide the Conversation and Communion of the Flocks If it were not of Christ they were but officers of men de specie even of an office of mans making Dr. Hammond saith that Christ gave the Keys only to the Apostles and they only to their Successors That there is no evidence that there were any of a second order of Presbyters in Scripture time that this order was after made by Man Mr. Dodwell sheweth how and why and more fully than Dr. Hammond asserteth that such Presbyters have no more power than the ordaining Bishops intended to give them Or saith Dr. H. If they have a first power it is such as may not be exercised without a second so that it is indeed no true power to act And the Dr. plainly tells the London Ministers p. 80 81. There is no manner of incongruity in assigning of one Bishop to one Church and so one Bishop in the Church of Jerusalem because it is A. CHURCH not Churches being forced to acknowledg that where there were more Churches there were more Bishops And he denied our Presbyters that were not Diocesans to be Bishops both City and Country Presbyters And consequently that our Parishes were no Churches And on these grounds he and Bishop Gunning and such others judged Presbyters Ordination null because they were no Bishops And the said Dr. tho I thought he had been next Petavius one of the first that had expounded the new Testament Elders to be all Bishops of several Diocesses yet tells us that he thought most of his brethren were of his mind herein And when we in Worcestershire formed a Pacificatory Association of the Epicopal Presbyterians Indep●ndents and Peace-makers agreeing lovingly to practice so much in Doctrine Worship and Discipline as we were for according to our several principles forbearing each other in the rest and Dr. Warmst●●● and Dr. Tho. Good being for Bishops subscribed to it Dr. Peter Gunn●●g wro●e largely against so doing to Dr. Warmstrie and took him off upon these aforesaid principles and they then called their Judgment the Judgment of the Church of England and wrote as if the Church had been of their mind and gone their way I wrote ●large Answer to Dr Gunning's Paper not printed and proved that the old Protestant Bishops and Doctors were of another mind largely citing their testimonies in my Christian C●nc●rd and plainly warned English Protest●nts to take heed of these Innovators and that the name of the Church and Episcopacy deceive them not against the Church and Protestant Cau●e many ●ose against me for this with great indign●tion especially Arch-Bishop Bramhall and two or three learned Writers and would make the world believe that it was the Church of England which I sought to defame and bring under suspition and which owned Gr●tius and his way of Reconciliation with Rome when as it was for departing from the professed principles of the reformed Bishops and Doctors and from the book of Ordination and other writings of the Church that I blamed them Yet would they needs claim the name of the Church of England And it is not here seasonable for me to tell how many and how great men in 1661 and 1662 seemed by their w●rds and doings to be full at least as high as they nor how they expressed it nor how many strongly conceited by the Act th●● requireth reordination of men ordained by Presbyters and by the number rejected who refused it That the Parliament had been of th●ir mind and much more the ●●nv●cation called the church-repr●sentative especi●lly when they heard men call the old Bishops and Arch-Bishops such as ●sher Downame 〈◊〉 c. in I●eland and G. Abbot Rob. A●b●t Grindal and many such in England Puritans and Presbyterians And when P●● H●l●● maketh Arch bishop Abbot and the Bishops and Clergy in his days to ●e of one mind vilified by him and Arch-bishop Laud and his Clergy after of another In this case I gave the name of the present Diocesans to those that thus claimed it and pretended so confidently to the present possession of it but I thought not their claim just And when I sometimes used the name of English Di●cesans for this sort who nullifie the Parish Churches and Pastorship it was but to notifie them that so claimed it supposing I had oft sufficiently opened my sense and usually added that they nullifie them not effectively but quantum in se and by their consequences But I again now tell the Reader that I think the Judgment of the church of England considered as humanely constituted by publick professions and by Law much less as divinely constituted is not to be measured or named from any innovators or any that most confidently claim it or think they are uppermost at the present and thereby have that right but as Divine by Gods word whose sufficiency we all profess and as humane by the published Church professions that is the Liturgy the book of Ordination the 39 Articles of Religion the Apology of the Church of England the Defence of that Apology set in all Churches the book of H●milies Nowels

WHET●ER Parish C●●gregations BE TRUE Christian Churches ●●d the Capable Consenting Incumbents be truly their Pastors or Bishops over their Flocks 〈◊〉 Whether the old Protestants Conformists and Noncon●●rmists or the Brownists were in the right herein And how 〈…〉 our present Case is the same 〈◊〉 by Richard Baxter as an Explication of some Passages in his For●●● Writings especially his Treatise of Episcopacy misunderstood and misapplied by some and answering the strongest Objections of some of them especially a Book called R. Baxters Judgment and Reasons against Communicating with the Parish Assemblies as by Law required And another called A Theological Dialogue CATHOLICK COMMUNION once more Defended upon ●●ns necessitating importunity By RICHARD BAXTER LONDON 〈◊〉 in Parkhurst at the Bible and Three 〈◊〉 near Mercers Chappel 1684. Communion with Parish Churches vindicated In Answer to a Book entituled The Judgment of Mr. Baxter against Communicating c. Mistaking my writings A Church is not formally quid Physi●um but quid morale politicum Relativum a political Relative being II. The same name signifieth both the Genus and Species that are divers by use III. The same is true of the name Pastor IV. Diocesan Churches are of three sorts 1. Such as have at present but one fixed Assembly but design to gather more hereafter Such Dr. Hammond thought they were in Scripture times 2. Such as have one Diocesan Governour or Superintendent over many inferior Churches and their Pastors 3. Such as have one only Bishop or Pastor having no other true Pastor Elder Church-Ruler or Presbyter of Christs Institution under him but Chappels which have no such Ruler or Pastor V. The first sort of Diocesans we have now nothing to do with The second sort is controverible some holding it sinful some lawful and some and very many to be of Divine Institution as Successors of the Apostles not in the extraordinaries but in the ordinary parts of their Office Christ having made an imparity or a superiority of some over others they think that to say without proof that he changed that order in one Age is 1. to charge him with mutability and levity 2. And to diminish from his Law which hath a Curse The third sort of Diocesans is either 1. of a Diocess like a great Parish with Chappels so small that one Pastor may possibly oversee it This is tollerable when more cannot be had and when they can it hurts only ●he well-being of the Church Or 2. it is of a Diocess so great as that one man cannot do what is essential to a Pastor and so it is undone This nullifieth that Species of Churches which is of Christs Institution VI. A particular Church of Christs Institution of the lowest political order is A competent number of Neighbour-Christians who by Christs appointment and their own exprest consent are associated with one or more Past●● for the right worshipping of God in publick and the Edification of the Members by the exercise of the said Pastoral Office and their mutual Duties to God to their Pastors and each others for the welfare of the Society and the pleasing and glorifying of God VII The Pastoral Office as over this first or lowest Church and as it is in unfixed Ministers related yet to no one Church more than another differeth but as the subject matter or object of their charge doth differ and not in the fundamental Power or Order VIII This Pastoral Office is essentially Ministerial to Christ as the Prophet Priest and King of his Church 1. A Power to Teach 2. To Lead in Worship 3. To Guide by the Keys of Reception Admonition Exclusion and Restoration IX It is not Inconsistent with this Pastoral Office to be Governed by Superiors whether Magistrates or Ecclesiasticks as others were by Apostles and by Timothy Titus c. Therefore every limitation restraint rebuke or punishment for Mal-administration nullifieth not the Office nor yet allowing an appeal to Superiors X. To hinder a Pastor from forcible excluding men from Church or Sacrament and allow him only to do it by Application of Gods word is agreeable to his Office XI It is Power and Obligation to exercise and not the present actual Exercise that is essential to the Office in the fundamental Relation But should the Non-exercise be total and stated it would not make up a Church in act No more than a mere Power to Teach will make a School in act XII He that hath the entire Power and statedly exerciseth but one part of it statedly omitting an essential part may be in Order an empowred Minister but his Society is but a half Church But if it be only an Integral part that he omits it may be a true Church tho faulty or if it be an essential part and not statedly but only by some present impedition XIII The name of Church Pastor and Diocesan being formally Relative in signification are really divers things as the Fundamentum Relate Correlate and Terminus are divers They are therefore considerable I. As instituted and described by Christ II. As understood described and consented to by sound Orthodox Pastors and People III. As described by laws and Canons IV. As esteemed and described by many mistaking Bishops Clergy and People some Super-Conformists and some Misjudging that the Law saith as they The word as to these senses is equivocal XIV Christs Institution went before mens Corruption and is to be held to by all Christians who own him to be the Maker and Ruler of his own Church And no man hath Power to null his Institution nor to warrant 〈◊〉 to make his Church another thing XV. By Christs Institution every Ministerial Elder and Pastor hath Power 1. To Teach the People 2. To Lead them in Worship 3. To Receive by Baptism and to Communion or to refuse on just cause tho under Government as aforesaid The whole Office I have copiously described in my Universal Concord 24. years ago XVI The Parishes that have capable Christians and Ministers consented to by their sumbmission are such true Churches their Neighbourhood and Christianity making them capable matter Not that a man is of the Church because he is in the Parish Atheists Infidels Sadduces Hereticks and Refusers may dwell there Its thought that of 60000. that dwell in one London Parish 10000 Communicate not and so 40000 or 50000 are not of that Church but those that are capable Consenters and Communicants XVII This sort of Churches we were in Possession of 166● and till August 24. 1662. And of 9000 Ministers then 2000 only were put out the other 7000 continuing in And of those that were put out some few gathered part of their old Flock into private Churches renouncing and disswading them from the publick Most gathered no such Churches but help their old People as they could not drawing them from the Parish Churches till the time of the Kings Licences for more open Ministry Many led them to the Parish Churches and took themselves for fellow