Selected quad for the lemma: son_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
son_n	aaron_n	act_n	consecration_n	42	3	10.5225	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

yet cannot passe without confession and crave the Readers ingenuity I have observed what a little escape sometime as another would think Augustine takes notice of himself in his Retractations For passing my judgement on Re-ordination I laid down as first two distinctions There are some things I said that are indifferent in their nature so as in some case they may be done and yet are by Divines indefinitely counted evil And there is evil which is notional only or moral evil That which my Opponent sayes to this is only that he quotes Dr. Saunderson ingenuously intimating from whence I took my first distinction and not disallowing my second differs only in his verdict that he accounts not this thing in the number of such indifferents to wit indifferentia ad unum but a thing unlawfull and not an imaginary but morall evil He does not give us any reason here pro or con only passes to the next but I desire my Reader to note I do not leave the businesse so but when I have given in my opinion otherwise I proceed in my discourse to lay down the nature of Orders which I humbly offer as the free and open account for that my judgement I have been therefore so large upon this before as I must continue and seeing this Author opposes nothing but runs upon the common by as to the contrary to wit that Orders do give the Ministerial Authority and Office which is not I take it well understood of those themselves that receive it I shall seasonably take here into remembrance those Arguments which the London Divines do offer for this assertion and if they be answered my Brethren I suppose will not be seeking to find out any more likely or solid from others Their first Argument is this If Election does not give the essentials of the Ministerial Office then Ordination doth I answer As for those many eminent and learned Divines besides the Ministers of New England that do hold Election gives the Ministerial Office and these worthy judicious Divines of London that hold Ordination doth it may I think both fairly part stakes When the former do say and prove that Ordination is but the confirmation of a man in his Office not the giving the Office I like well the liberty of their judgements but when they have will taken from Orders this which is too high for man to assume and give it to Election and the people I understand not with them It is Mr. Perkins I Judge clearly in the right here who hath told us Our calling is of God and the Churches Authority is a Ministry to approve and confirm that call This I do assent to in opposition to both of these Learned parties to wit that Ordination does not give the power or Office but is only the confirmation of our call against the one and that that call is of our inward call by God and not so low as the outward only of Election by the people Ordinationis ritus est talis publica testification quâ vocatis in conspectu Dei ipsius nomine doclaretur esse legitima divine sayes Chemnetius Unto which I will adde one signal testimony and that is out of the Confession of the famous Churches of Helvetia speaking that the Ministerial charge it to be committed to such only as are found skillfull in the Law of God of a blamelesse life and to bear a singular affection to the Name of Christ the three things our Perkins before acurately hath it follows which seeing it is the true Election of God is tightly allowed by the consem of the Church and by the laying on of the hands of the Priest Harm Confess printed Anglicae Cambridge 1586. Their second Argument is from Tit. 1.5 Ordination does 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they presse the word Act. 6.3 I answer this Text Tit. 1.5 is paralell with Act. 14.23 see Fulk in locum and in both the word ordained though the Greek differ is taken comprehensively as it includes election and so in those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom we may appoint the plurall we includes I think those whom the Apostles speak to as well as themselves and makes for us for is follows then Ordination does 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 constituere or make a Minister as election does and election as ordination that is they do both go to the designation of the person as in the making Magistrates in Corporate Towns but the power does flow immediately from the Charter from Christs institution The third Argument is from Ro. 10 15. this sending say they is missio potestativa a sending with authority I answer it is true compare Jer. 23.21 with it but this Authoritive mission is not Ordination This appears irrefragably by the climax in the Text themselves have noted Without calling upon the name of the Lord no salvation without faith no calling upon him without hearing no faith without preaching no hearing and without being sent no preaching consequently if by being sent is meant Ordination it must follow without Ordination no Salvation which God forbid seeing Histories are not wanting to tell us not only of some persons but people as I remember have been converted by private Christians and scattered Disciples which have not been in orders see Theodorat lib. c. 14. et c. 23 24. Peter Martyr disproving the opinion of those that hold Ordination so necessary Vt citra eam non posset esse Ministerium in ecclesia does quote John the Baptist who preacht and baptized and no doubt converted many and Paul before the 13. of the Acts and Moses who consecrated Aaron and his sons and offered varia sacraficiorum genera saies he and had no consecration Loc Com. De Ec. p. 849. The fourth Argument is from 1 Tim. 4.14 This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they say here is Docendi officium for which they quote those two Texts Eph. 4.8 Rom. 12.6 Answ I must confesse I my self have been bended to this same conceit upon the score of the last Text but when I have more narrowly consulted the same I find that I and they have been quite out The question is whether the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be in●er reted Office And if the Apostle does use it in that sense otherwhere we shall be apt to believe it so here if he does not this belief will sink of its own accord Now then if we look the first of these quoted Texts we shall find the word there to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so is a plain mistake that concerns not our search For the other Text then let us look into it and we find the Apostle does distinguish de industria between the two words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gifts and Grace and the one of them according to the sense there must signifie authority and office and the other endowments or abilities for the same Now which of the two words is it that signifies the former

about it it appears to me that both what this author sayes may be fully answered and what I have is for the main not touched or in the weight not impaired I can but be sorry my ability hath been no more to serve those I have desired and be content such as I have to lay out yet once more in their behalf and my own though I must needs say with such a heavie and weakned spirit in good earnest that I have more need to crave their prayers unto God and be supported my self then to offer fresh support and furthersatisfaction to others He giveth power to the saint and to them that have no might he encreaseth strength A hard task it is upon me unto him I look up and I cannot well tell from whence to derive my discourse which is sure to meet with so much prejudicate interest and opinion It is Custom I know and the common apprehension that rules the many and while their heads run shallow it is not enough for a man to embark in a sound bottom unlesse we have something of the tide also and stream with us I remember what a strange thing the Antipodes seem to Lactantius as others of the Fathers and to beleeve any habitable land beyond the Ocean was to the antient Clemens another world 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is enough certainly to make truth it self seem a crime if it appears but singular and if Paul himself but offers to bring some new thing they will determin it before-hand to be babbling though it was the spread doctrine of the Christian Religion And yet is not this all but there are the several engagements of mens spirits and concernments to bee met with also wherein one must look to run the fate of such who are engaged in arbitrations who when they have most carefully discharged their trust doe reap but ill will on both sides and only have left them the testimony of their own conscience that though both parties that are extream be displeased yet both have cause to be content Hee persued and possed safely even by the way that he had not gone with his feet There is a School adage well applyed to the Intellect Intus existens prohibet alienum and I perceive indeed here that the common notion which lies upprrmost hath so filled the minds of most that Orders makes us Ministers which should bee rightly understood and that we are Ministers already that they have no thoughts hardly left them free born for the discussion of this matter It is besides the Original humour of man to be apt to think of himself more high then he ought to think as the Apostle speaks and not soberly according to the measure God hath dealt him and hereupon is the Ordainer ready to beleeve that in Orders he conferrs no lesse then the holy Ghost it self his grace or gifts or the spiritual power at least of the Ministry which all are indeed the prerogative I take it alone of Jesus Christ and does argue both the pride of some mens understandings that dare assume so much without Gods word and the lownesse of others to take it up upon trust as if our Protestants all as well as the Papists were of that opinion A large presumption that lying at the bottom of this dispute does require some of our first and most serious thoughts about it as introductory to our businesse I said I will answer also my part I also will shew my opinion To fetch this matter from the beginning Let us look unto the Priests under the Law and observe what God almighty hath said in the first place Exod. 29.9 The priests office shall be Aarons and his sonnes for a perpetual statute I gather from hence that the Right power dignity office of Priesthood did flow immediately upon the priests under the law from this statute which is undoubtedly Gods will appointing of it If the spiritual power or authority of the priest as our Book of Orders calls us came only by such a delegation that conveighes the same through mans hands then was the priests under the law no priests or had no power for they were not ordained priests but born priests and this right and power of priesthood was theirs we see expresly by this statute for ever We read indeed of the priests sanctifying themselves often to some particular work as to carry the Ark to cleanse the Sanctuary and the like but we read not that they were to be consecrate to their office as I yet finde We read indeed that the high Priest as he succeeded was to be consecrate and annointed and so Aarons garments were kept on purpose but forasmuch as this dignity it self of the high priesthood came also by birth it is apparent that their annointing and consecration did not give them their right and office but only solemnize and confirm it as princes who are so by birth cannot have the regal office conveighed but declared and ratified by their inauguration As for the rest of the priests we read of one consecration only by Moses at once for all of them Lev. 8. Exod. 29. And certainly we may conceive if God did intend that the Ministerial power should be conveighed ordinarily through the hands of man any otherwise then as the signifiers of his will then should not one consecration it is like have sufficed for all but he would have commanded every one of them to be particularly consecrate or set apart for the receiving that power by man in their generations Besides when Aarons sonnes are consecrate at once by Moses this is all you shall find in it An Investiture by several ceremonies you may see Lev. 8. which all are manifestly without the least word or form of conferring power by the way onely of external solemnization and an Attonement made by sacrafice for them because else they might not approach the holy God in their fins and therefore is is said This shalt thou do to hallow them to minister in their office Exod. 29.1 It is not said This thou shalt do to give them their office Their office was conferred by Gods appointment and the hallowing them is only to the work that they might stand before the Lord to execute their service in the holy place And now let us come to look also under the Gospel All power sayes Christ is given me in heaven and earth Go preach and baptize Here we see from whence the authority of the Ministry is derived and that is from him only who is the Master of discipline and fountain of power And does he say this to his Apostles only No it followes And lo I am with you alway even to the end of the world Again when he ascended and gave gifts to men as he gave some to be apostles so he gave some to be pastors and teachers Eph. 4 It is he then gives the office putting us in the Ministry as Paul speaks 1 Tim. 1.12 In Mat. 9.38 It is the father

nothing left him hardly to stand upon in the controversie Before I passe let me here humbly lay down a caution I would not have any offer to think that I and the forementioned author do go about to make light of Orders as if when a man hath parts he may streight goe and be a Preacher of his own head There are none I know that hold Qualification a call coram ecclesia I am not a man of that complexion I am so much for a solemn allowance of the Church that I contend it should be twice done rather then not bee done to purpose God is a God of Order and hath provided against confusion and intrusion into his Church I am ready then with that eminent person to account not only that it is a great sin to neglect Ordination where it may be had and that the Church is to disown such and that it is required by Christ and so necessary necessitate praecepti medii too ad ordinem bene esse but I am willing to go so far that he requires it in his Charter to every Church which is constituted as a part of the condition which untill it be put the Authority coram hominibus is suspended And yet so long as being put it operates only to the power as a condition doing but its own part this hinders not but the same may be put and put again so long as it is not omni modo to the same effect and the nature thereof or part it does will bear it What is that you will say and In what regard possible can the effect be any other and not altogether the same An Answer to these two Questions will unloose the knot here of Re-ordination For the former There are three things goes to a Minister 1. The testimony of their Conscience of their sincere desire not of lucre or honour but to edifie the Church 2. A faculty to do that to which they have a desire and will 3. The Ordination of the Church which approves and gives testimony of their will and ability So Mr. Perkins in whose judgement methinks I rejoyce to see how fully he agrees with me in his Notion of Orders which yet I must confesse I took not from him or any other Book but from its own light in my first sheets Now whether this testification or approbation of the Church is such a thing or no I leave to this fair Adversary himself to judge and I hope he will see as those abilities and desires the chief part of the condition Christs Charter requires may and are to be renewed still or encreased so may the approbation of the same ad bene esse be renewed also and our Ministry be the better not as all the worse for it For the latter When I allow thus much to Orders to be a condition that is causa sine qua non of our Office-power I understand it you must note it well to be so truly and only in the Court of the Church A condition is such a thing you may say as cannot be repeated for it being put the effect follows and when the effect is obtained the thing can have no longer the nature of a condition I answer then The Court of the Church wherein alone I affirm that Orders is this condition is varied and doubled and hence it is that the condition it self also is doubled and the effect flowing from the same varied likewise While the court of the Church was Presbyterian any Orders if Scriptural onely was the condition but n●w it is Episcopal no Orders but Canonical also is the condition In both courts then or either of them unlesse a person be ordained he is no Minister and so the condition requisite to our authority coram Ecclesia is the same in both to wit Orders but as these Orders which are the condition are diversified and Episcopal Ordination distinguished from Presbyterian so the condition I hope is not the same In like manner the effect which flowes from the condition being put in either or both these courts is this Church-authority as I speak or the receiving us as Ministers in the court of the Church and so is the same but as these courts wherein we are so received and are the termini relationis are varied and not the same in that regard the effect also must be diversified or multiplyed and so not the same though the same which ends the difficulty Having laid this caution there followes an Objection which as to the main hath sometimes been a stop upon my mind I doe conceive that the Ordainers do act from God to the people and the approving or declaring a mans Ministry more then once drawes happily the ampler reception and no absurdity in it but I may be mistaken perhaps and the Ordainers act from the Church or people to God in presenting him a servant from amongst them to his house Even as when the Levites were separate to God Num. 8. it is said Aaron shall offer them before the Lord for an offering of the children of Israel v. 11. And hence are the children of Israel themselves to lay their hands upon them v. 10. whereby there might be signified happily their parting with their right in them which to do again were a kind of owning their right still and look like sacraledge in it But this conceit I guesse is some of that close superstition which is still apt to exercise my thoughts in this matter It is manifest that when God saved the first-born of the Israelites in Egypt he challenged them to himself the first-born of the cattel were to be offer'd in sacrafice to him and for the first-born of their Sons he accepts the Levites and hence it is they were the offering of the people and that they laid their hands on them in offering them because I say it was in lieu of their first-born which is all plain in the Text vers 16 17 18. Now as for us under the Gospel when Jesus Christ the only true first-both is offered there is up such propriety and discrimination and consequently no offering of the Ministry in lieu thereof Besides though the Levites whose office was but a service only to help Aaron and his Sons vers 19. were an offering of the Children of Israel the Priests which was not a bare Service but a Dignity were no offering of the people but taken by God into that honour and office of himself The Subjects of a Prince may present him with slaves to do his work but they present him not with Embassadors as we are to be entrusted with the affairs of his Kingdom It may be yet said it is true he that hath this honour must have Gods calling and consequently the Ordainers act from God in ordaining him but there may be a middle way to wit that they act not from God to the Church or people nor from the Church to God but from God to God and so their whole act be terminated