Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sin_n	apostle_n	power_n	remit_v	3,967	5	10.6590	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45157	A second discourse about re-ordination being an answer to two or three books come out against this subject, in behalf of the many concern'd at this season, who for the sake of their ministry, and upon necessity, do yield to it, in defence of their submission / by John Humfrey, min. ; together, with his testimony, which from the good hand of the Lord, is laid upon himself, to bear, in this generation, against the evil, and to prevent, or repress (as much as by him may be possible) the danger, of the imposition.	Humfrey, John, 1621-1719.	1662 (1662)	Wing H3709; ESTC R9881	127,714	152

in Joh. hom c. Cyp. de simp Prael August De Civit. dei 64 Quaest ex●vet nov Test c. 9● He yet adds This is the more proper Ordination of the Ministers of the New Testament the full origin●l and semin●l tradition of the Ministerial Powers whereby all future Ordinations of the like kind are sanctified and for these causes our Saviour iterated their Ordination to the Pastoral extraordinary and ordinary Offices and the rather lest his death might be thought to have made void their first more secret and covert Ordination Mr. Lloid of Primitive Episcopacy and Ceremonies I must confess I am not taken with the attributing that to the Text in John which is excellently proper to the last of Matthew Mat. 20.18 19 20. Seeing the mission we find in the one Jo. 20.21 with the 19. and 24. appears not to me by what hath been before touched to be indeed numerically the same as to time place and persons with the other Nevertheless we are beholding to this man enough that upon search he hath found that the re-ordaining the Apostles is not strange to the Ancients when Reordination yet in thesi is apt to be so both to them as him also Let us see now what our Author answers to this which I must needs say beforehand may very much satisfie us herein because indeed he falls so short of saying any thing to weaken our belief of it There be some judge saies he the Apostles Commission Mat. 10. was temporary and did expire at their return But besides that this is a rate concei● in Divinity as if the Ministry were a Cloak to be put on and off again upon occasion and that it is nothing however to their second missi●n Jo. 20.21 when we find they have yet after a third Mat. 28. It appears expressely that the Disciples Baptized Jo. 4.2 and wrought Miracles Mat. 17.16 when they abode with Jesus The words of that Text then Mat. 3.14 are here worthy of consideration And he appointed twelve 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they might be with him and that he might send them to preach Here it seems there was some work belonging to the Office of their Apostleship which they were to pe●●ota● while they were with him as well as when they were abroad This is plain that when he sent them to Preach he gave them power to heal the Sick and do Miracles and seeing this ●ower did certainly continue with them after they were returned to him how shall we think any other power which was given with it and much less I hope the whole Office it self could cease And therefore this Opponent himself dare put no trust in this but frames another Answer that their first Commission was but partial not to all acts as to administer the Sacraments absolve Penitents and the like Unto which I shall not need to red what some say that when Christ said do this he gave his Disciples power to administer the Sacrament when he said whose sins ye remit c. Jo. 20. he gave them power of Absolution and yet after both we read of that chief Comission he finally leaves with them Mat. 28.19 Nor shall I stick in the found words of a grave Author They received with the Name of Apostles the power to Minister all the Doctrine and means to Salvation which Christ intended in due time to deliver unto them Acts 1.24.25 Act. 26.16 And therefore when the Sacrament of the Eucharist was instituted they needed not a new Ordination but only a signification of Christs pleasure that they should use the power before given them in the administration of this Ordinance which is but an extention of the power to a new object But I reply that which is most clear and obvious and what his Answer does not touch I am sure in the least whether the instance it self urged does the root of the Scruple or no● he may d●ffer in his apprehension with me if he will The Lord Christ had given them Commission for the P●e●ching of the Gospel and B●p●iz●ng that is certain before and yet does he renew here the same Authority again to them Go Preach and Baptize Mat. 28. What is it now for this Opposer to say here that their Commission granted at first was partial such as did not authorize them to all Ministerial acts as to administer the Sacrament confirm the Baptized which were not then in being when the Commission they have last or is again delivered to them is this Go preach and baptize That is Such as does authorize them to that part of their Office or those Ministerial acts they were authorized to before Is not here an Authority or Commission to the same Ministerial Acts or Work renewed or refresh●ds That is the point in hand This Gentleman then for ought I see might rather have borrowed an answer from me here that the Apostles were sent out at first only to the Jews and after to all Nations and therefore they had a new Commission To which I reply 1. The Lord Jesus if he pleased might at least if any will say he did not have given them their Commission so large at once as to reach Jew and Gentile and appointed the execution thereof to each according to the due season And if then he chose to do it at twice we may conceive even from thence that the renewal of a Commission hath not therefore any such appearance sure of evil in it as is fancied by my Opposer 2. Though C●rist did say to his Disciples Go not in the way of the Gentiles at his first sending of them he did not say Go not in the way of the Jews at his last but while he saves Go teach all Nations the Jewish Nation is one and the Chief of those Nations And while Peter was the Apostle of the Circumcision and James and others did abide among the Jews the Commission was the same in effect as to them So that here is an Authority to the same persors work and place repeated yet however Did Peter and James and J●hn that preached to the Jews preach by vertue of their last Commission or not If they did not their last was in vain if they di● then was their first and last to the same effect which is the point wonn 3. Though the renewal of the Apostles first Commission was by way of enlargement being confined to the execution at least before to the Jews only yet when Pauls Commission from Christ at first was ext●nded to the Gentiles at large the Holy Ghost Commissions him again with confinement as to such and such particular Countries Now then if a new Commission may be given to th● s●●●e wo●● ei●her when i● is narrower or ●arger the Wit of man may have something to object but the Conscience may I hop● have enough to be satisfied as to the main though the work be but of equal extent as it was For in the Enlargement there is the same though with

dedicate himself to this service before him as an Outward and solemn by Ordination which whether it be Presbyterial of Episcopal it is all alike as to what the word requires but is not accepted alike in our present Church which stands upon her proper form and mode of Government I will enlarge a little here There is a Fundamental right as Presbyterians say and I believe in every Minister to Ordain others according to that rule which is dignified by a great Pen Ordinis est conferre ordines Nevertheless when the Church came to see it good for the avoiding of faction and keeping peace to give a preheminence to the Bishop above the Presbyter there is no reason but the Presbyter upon consent might as to the actual exercise hereof de jure suo cedere so as to Ordain none without the Bishop which comming more and more into debate it is no wonder if you begin at the second Canon of the Apostles and goe over all the Councils and Fathers and find this still the allowed prerogative of the Bishop to have the power of Ordination according to that which is so well known of Cassander Convenit inter omnes on Apostolorum aetate inter Episcopos Presbyteros nullum discrimen fuisse sed postmodum Schismatis evitandi causâ Episcopum Presbyteris fuisse praepositum cut chirotonia id est ordinandi potestas concessa est Now forasmuch as the authority of Councils or Fathers is received or not received of particular Churches according to their proper concernments and complexion As Presbytery hath served her self of the Scripture to the neglect hereof It cannot be expected but Episcopacy should serve her turn likewise of Antiquity which being added to present power must needs discountenance other Orders and if they come once not to be received and owned the ground is laid for their refreshment or iteration I remember in the Council of N●ce we have this Canon Can. 17. Si quis ausus fuerit aliquem qui ad alterum pertinet ordinare in sua ecclesia cum non habeat consensum Episcopi ipsius à quo recessit Clericus irrita erit hujusmodiordinatio Let me ask here any Divine Presbyterian or Episcopal Suppose a man ordained by another Bishop than his own and without his leave is that man truly ordained or no There are none in our dayes will deny it and yet according to these Canons such a mans Ordination was null and consequently if he would enjoy the use of his Ministry under his Bishop he must be re-ordained Now let any learned man tell me how such Ministers in this case could submit to that Canon in those dayes which no doubt but most did submit to seeing that Council was so authentique in the word and then will our case be also opened and justified to my hands In short it is sufficient for the Church to receive a man as a Minister that is Ordained only by the Presbytery as of old by any Bishop as their own according to Scripture which knows no difference between Bishop and Bishop or Bishop and Presbyter in this case but it would and will not serve according to Ecclesiastical constitution Let us now see what my Opposer sayes here and it is the same only he hath every where If the Presbyterial ordination leave a man not capable of having any thing conferr'd on him but only the free use of his Ministry in the English Church why will he submit to such a form as was purposely instituted to conferr the very Ministry it self why are such prayers put up to God as suppose him to be no Minister This is answered already and we see the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same still There is no form to be conceived such as to confer the Ministry it self unto any or to put up Prayers that a man may be made a Minister as he conjectures and speaks p. 68. I doe therefore produce him the very words of this form to serve my turn Take thou authority to preach the Word and minister the Sacraments where thou shalt be appointed which are so apt as if they w●re studied to ordain a man not to the Office but to the Work only of his place Hereunto he candidly gainsays nothing only tells us there are more words used than these to wit Receive the Holy Ghost whose sins yee remit c. unto which words in particular and the form in general I have spoken at large at first What I must say over again to answer him as I go along is Our Ordainers must not be look'd upon according to this Author as Creators of the Ministerial power which is given alone by Jesus Christ but as the signifiers and approvers of his Will and Grant There is indeed one grand Warrant I must say Commission or Charter from Christ in general empowring them who are qualified as his word describes to be his Ministers The Ordainers now are to enquire whether a person have these qualifications that is as it were whether he be in the Commission and then if he be found there what they doe besides is but the declaring this by the solemnity The Commission then or Ministry it self is from our Lord and Orders doe but give the same its free passage in the Church where a man is Now this passage is hindred by the change of the times and therefore the Right Reverend as he speaks is troubled to remove this hindrance and so not to doe only what is already done He is troubl●d not to make a man again a Minister of Christ but a Canonical Minister if you will of our Church that is to make him passe for such according to their Lawes and Canons when else he cannot pass and therefore is this also done by that form so prescribed the words whereof which stick we are to conceive with all forms of Orders else must be interpreted only as I have said to be declarative not operative of our power by way of investiture possession or solemnization Even as it is in the inauguration of Princes which as I have but now instanced in David above and Solomon before may be valid at first and yet done over again to establish them more formally or legally amongst their people I will take a little liberty here of more words Ordination I count is the confirmation declaration and solemn allowance of a mans Ministry by our chief Pastors and Rulers that may give us the value and recep●ion as Ministers to all intents in the Church particularly for the execution of our charge where we are Now there being none according to the form of our English Church and Nation of authority to doe this but the Bishops though our former Orders have been sufficient hitherto and are yet good as to our Right yet growing insufficient through this change or enervate as to the effect the renewal of them according to the present Polity unless there be some mysterious danger in submitting at all hereto does become

remember a man of strong mind rests himself alone in that apprehension In this case I suppose there is none but will judge that Charity so highly concerned which is the end of Gods Commandements must over-rule any command of man so that we must suffer any thing in the Outward man rather than work the eternal loss of our Brothers Soul The worst the Magistrate can do will hardly amount to so much as to have a Milstone tied about the neck and be thrown into the Sea but this were certainly more eligible unless Christ's own words will not go than the other 3. When a man acts in indifferent things whereof he being instructed or having knowledge another by his exeample is induced to do the same having not that knowledge and so sinns And this may be either when the thing as to the account upon which he acts is sin indeed as in the 1 Cor. 8. where the Apostle sayes Some with Conscience of the Idol cat it as a thing offared to an Idoll we may understand it comparing it with 1 Cor. 10. that some of these Corinths being but new converted had hankering thoughts yet towards their Idol as the Jews towards their abolished Rites so that when they saw any others eating of those Meats in those Temples upon the account the Idol was nothing they upon the account of that fear and worship they were formerly wont to give them did eat after their pattern and so eating it was flat I●olatry Or when the thing is evil only or sin because they think it so to be To him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean to him it is unclean as in the ordinary case about Dayes and Meats and those Rites in question where a Weak Brother as we may conjecture the case to be seeing one eat what is lawful for him because his Conscience is instructed follows him and eats too though it be with a Doubting and resisting Conscience and so falls into sin And this is that Scandal Dr. Hammond saies in his tract of Scandal the Apostle intends Ro. 14. in the whole context v. 13. to the end So that we may do nothing saies he though to us never so lawful which we have reason to fear that another who thinks it unlawful may yet without sat is fying his Conscience be likely to do after us In this case upon my farthest thoughts that have been apt heretofore to take it up in a huddle that Scandal of Brethren weighs light to the command of Authority as some Doctors speak I am convinced now at the present of these two things hath that the Magistrate cannot command m● to use a thing which will scandalize my Brother in this sense which the Scripture does so stand upon as to lay down a negative Chapter about the same and that if he do I break not the fist Commandement to forbear doing the thing until I see how I may avoid the Scandal if I do it The reasons are 1. Because of the Superiour command the Scripture saies do it not Lay not a stumbling block in the way for thy Brother to fall and God is to be obeyed before Man 2. Because the Apostle tells us expressely that to sin against our weak Brother so as to wound his Conscience is to sin against Christ 1 Cor. 8.12 and no Law can command me to sin against the Lord. 3. Because Humane Laws can bind only the Outward man and not the Conscience to wit immediatè ratione consequentiae c. and therefore so long as I do it not out of contempt or neglect of him but in Conscience to Christ and tenderness to my Brother I am to conceive it is his pleasure if a good man I should forbear till it may be safe and it not I must suffer his will rather than do it And here we are cast upon that point which is so sore and nearly concerning all of us at this season in regard of our present impositions that are fallen or falling now upon us The worthy D. before mentioned had once given me some ease in a notion of his upon 1 Cor. 8. which since I have read this Tract mentioned I find serves me not but how light soever he may male of other Scandal which is but called so in comparison of publick Authority Yet as for Scandal in this sense which he makes the whole drift of one place as I have said there is none can lay more weight upon me in it than he so that I must confess my own Conscience not to be tender only but even as I may say raw in this case As for my Adversary I must embrace him for his kindness and worthiness who hath not brought here the rough hand of Mars but of a Physician where it is need and offers his relief and that is from two learned Authors he quots 1. That Scandals are not culpable where there is not some moral reason in them 2. That when a thing cannot be forborn sine maxima aliqua difficultate the Law of Scandal binds not This indeed is some Sugar to the wound but the Salve is behind where he add He may do well to weigh this whether he endeavoured first to sa isfy his Brethren about him for many things may be lawfully done after we have given a reason and laboured to prevent stumbling which could not else be done without sin These words of his though they be a rebuke to me I accept thankfully and that not only because I am a man that when I maintain my subject am yet ready to acknowledge my fai●ings and crave Gods mercy but also because I take this item to be that which does afford us the only true and substantial solu●ion unto this so deeply touchy and sore objection of scandal and that is it must be answered by practice to wit the argument from Scandal against indifferent things enjoyned let it be pressed as sharp as it can does not destroy the action and void the duty but infers circumspection My meaning is that it follows not that therefore the thing may not be done at all but that there is care and prudence to be used that the Scandal be avoided in the doing and the act forborn and that only in the mean season In the instance of the Apostle about meats although he will have a man carefully abstain when he knows or is told that some are by who are like to be stumbled at it yet when he knows it not or is not told so he bids him eat with a free spirit and without making any question for the earth is the Lords and the fulness thereof From whence I shall gather that when a man hath considered the action he is about suppose it required of his Superiours and that he is satisfied of the lawfulness of it an 〈◊〉 hath taken that care as to satisfie all he can think are like to be stumbled at it so that his Conscience does sincerely tell him the Coasts are now clear to his