Selected quad for the lemma: state_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
state_n	church_n	member_n	visible_a	2,963	5	9.4470	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85043	The churches and ministery of England, true churches and true ministery. Cleared, and proved, in a sermon / preach'd the 4th of May at Wiviliscombe; before a numerous congregation assembled together to hear the opposition, which had been long threatned to be made that day, by Mr Collier and others of his party, who, with the greatest strength the West would afford them, were present at the sermon. Wherein were these five things undeniably proved: 1. That a mixture of prophane and scandalous persons with reall saints, is not inconsistent with the Church of God or a true church. ... 5. And then, they also must needs be guilty, who forsake true churches and a lawfull ministry, to follow and hear unsent preachers. By Francis Fullwood minister of the Gospel at Staple Fitzpane in the county of Somerset. Before it there is an epistle and preface, shewing the manner, and a narrative subjoyned shewing the substance of the dispute after the sermon, (both which lasted nine hours.) Set forth by the ministers that were at the dispute, and attested under their hands.	Fullwood, Francis, d. 1693.; Darby, Charls.; Collier, Thomas, fl. 1691.	1652 (1652)	Wing F2498; Thomason E671_2; ESTC R202166	72,915	100

that one is more Christian then another and then there is granted some Christianism and not all Antichristianism in the Church of Rome and she was at least before that wretched Councel of Trent a Church of Christ Now my conclusion hence is this That if it be granted that Conclusion Rome was a true though wicked Church before the Councel of Trent sate then our first Reformers had a lawfull outward call a lawfull Ordination unto the Ministery for were not they ordained Ministers of the Church of Rome and consequently of a true Church were not they ordained Ministers Reformatio Ecclesiarum per Angliam An. Dom. 1547. See more Sleid. de statu Relig. pag. 599. l. 19. by the Church of Rome before the Councell of Trent none can deny it and then we have a known visible succession of persons in the Office of the Ministery from the Apostles times to this day None may object That this is nothing to the Ministery of England for certain it is that the Ministery of England as may be remarkably observed had their Ordination if from Rome before the Councel of Trent sate for they with the Church of England broke off from Rome even while that councell sate Consider therefore these things Seven Considerables to clear the Ordination of our first Reformers in England You may reade those decrees in Sleidan they were made An. 1539. as pag. 346. and abolisht An. 1547. as pag. 399. 1. That Rome her self was a true Church and her Ministers true Ministers before the Councell of Trent sate and therefore much more the Churches in England were true Churches and the Ministery thereof true Ministers before that time 2. The Churches and Ministery of England in the time of that councell broke off from Rome abolisht her fatall decrees touching Religion demolish't the images and statues in the Temples and thus began the blessed Reformation in England even then while Rome was declining towards Antichristianism 3. Who then can choose but see and know that our first Reformers had I mean the Ministers their Ordination in a true Church from true Ministers and we from them unto this very day have had a succession of lawfull Ministers in our Churches and upwards from them ever since we bore the name of a Church which may I suppose be computed to be upwards of 1500. years 4. Moreover might Rome be said and acknowledged to be a true Church still though extreamly corrupted yet could not this blame but commend our leaving of her for we separate not from her as a Church much lesse as true but as a corrupt and Apostate Church that is we separate from her corruptions and from her only as we cannot joyn with her but we must partake of her sins and plagues Just as the Non-conformists who did not joyn in some acts of worship heretofore because they could not safely do it without having communion with corruption in it yet did not all the while disown our Churches or separate from them but in them only as Rutherford distinguisheth 5. But to cleer the matter a little further consider the Church as one universall visible Church of Christ and Rome to be but a member of it and so far as the state of Rome is Antichrist but sitting in the Temple or universall Church of God for though she would usurp her self to be the whole visible Church yet God accounts not so we see for she is but in the Temple of God though she would be as God there Now is it a sin for one particular Church to deny communion with a sister Church in those things wherein she offends both God and other Churches no doubtlesse but a vertue rather if one particular Church should deny communion with the whole visible Church b●sides her self in such a case Now Rome of right and in Gods account is but a sister no mother Church to the Church of England what authority she had over it was usurp'd on her part and utterly unlawfull if yeelded to on ours Now had the sister in the word denied to commit that folly with her brother and escaped his hands by flying from him she had done virtuously then also if England broke out of the hands of her sister Rome and would not commit that Adultery with her she hath praise of God for obeying his will and command If a sinner entice consent thou not One particular Church bears some Analogy to another like that of a member of a particular Church to another member of the same two particular Churches are members of one universall as two particular members are of one particular Church Now therefore if a member of a particular Church must not partake of the sin of another member no more must one particular Church of the sinne of another Again so a particular Church may not joyn with the sinnes and corruptions of the universall no more then one member may joyn with the Church of which he is in any sinne or errour whatsoever In We leave Rome in two things two things the Church of Rome is forsaken by us 1. In her corruptions and superiority of us in neither of which without sinne and losse could we joyn with her or yeeld unto her Now what hath been said upon this particular as it serves to pleade for o●r lawfull distance to the Church of Rome though she should be found to be a true Church still so also to maintain the practice of Luther c. who left the Romane Church before that wretched Councel sate we so much speak and complain of 6. Nor can there be any thing of moment urg'd from any interruption of Popery since against our Ministery or Churches in England could it be granted that the Councel of Trent did wholly and fully make Rome Antichrist for the Protestant Religion flourish'd from Henry the eighth's through Edward the sixth's to Queen Maries Reign indeed she made havock of the Churches however she reign'd but four years and four moneths and what of Popery she brought among us was by force so that by Q. Elizabeths gentle commands we easily reduced our selves to our former profession of the Protestant truth however what could this short sword effect as to the cutting the line of succession of true Ministers none can think that all were butchered but that many of our Ministers and people too did temporize throughout her Reign not daring to suffer for the truth secretly beleeved though not openly professed by them as by others * And as to this worst of the cases Johnson the Separatist himself helps us observing that in case of Idolatry in the time of the Law the Levites and Priests that had revolted upon Repentance kept their first functions without any new anointing or imposition of hands and for this h● quotes many Texts Again many other Ministers might be blinded and fall away in time of persecution for advantage sake who yet being ordained before Queen Mary lawfull Ministers might out-live both

Church But as to their outward Call receiv'd in Rome there may be Rome not Antichrist before the Councel of Trent though Antichristian not wholly so more said than you can Answer and that is this That Rome was not so far Antichristian then but that she had some of the Ordinances of the true though not pure and that though she had plaid the Harlot before yet she had not an expresse and absolute divorce till the Councel of Trent When she by a publick deliberate Councel dis-own'd and razed the fundamentals of Religion which she had not done before that that makes me of this mind is Rome we say was not built in a day Reas 1 The Mysterie of iniquity that disease of Rome had its rise and increase Because Rome was not at her height of sin till that Councel before its state and so far its certain that she was not at her height before this deadly and desperate fit of the Councel of Trent as appears 1. Because those grosse fundamentall errours that are now so firmly laid in the Church of Rome by the Councell of Trent and which carrieth so great a stroak in the seating of Which appears because there was never so many and dangerous Heresies decreed before the Councel of Trent Antichrist there were not only complained of declaimed against by private single Ministers both in their Preaching and Printing but disowned by Decrees made against the most dangerous of them by publick Counsels and we do hardly read of any former Counsel that did not onely not establish all the Errors or the grossest of the Errors of the Counsel of Trent but that on the contrary did expressely declare against some one or more of the very worst of them There are six chief or Cardinal Errors of the Church of Rome The Popes supremacie the dividing of the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament allowing the people no Wine the Worshipping of Images the denyall of the Bible to the common people Justification by works and beleeving of Traditions Now these six were never established together by any Councel but the Councel of Trent Ye● 1. The Popes Supremacie was decree'd against by the Councels of Calcedon Affrick Milevi Constantinople and Basil 2. Communicating in both kinds was decreed by the Councel of Basil 3. The Divine Worshipping of Images was forbidden in the second Nicen Councel 4. The Councel of Nice decreed that no Christian should be without a Bible 5. And Thomas an acknowledged writer of the Roman faith in his time denieth Justification by works Ceremoniall or Morall 6. And we were never bound or commanded to beleeve tradition untill the Councel of Trent decreed it Now while Rome declared against or had not by councel decreed any one of these errours sure she was not at such a pitch of heresie or so deeply died with Antichristianism as now she is made by the councell of Trent where they are all and many more ratified as firm as hell can make them yea very much of Antichristianism was brought to Rome with the last of these errours touching tradition which she had not before the councell of Trent for the Church is built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets the Scriptures and what doth weaken the Scripture more and consequently the foundation of the Church more then making tradition contrary to it a compartner with it in the Churches faith especially if we adde the abuse of originals the Greek and Hebrew Text preferring the latin corruption above them which was with such strictnesse and weight imposed by the Councel of Trent and never before The conclusion of the first Argument with the deniall of the vulgar to reade it Now Physicians do not count a disease in its state untill it have reigned to its full height and therefore how to condemn the Church of Rome as wholly Antichristian before Trent councel I cannot see the disease was daily encreasing upon her she seemed not however to be at the height or mortally sick before for from what hath been said the councell of Trent did desperately wound the Church of Rome in three respects 1. In that it did heighten and multiply her damnable errours 2. In that it did draw all the poyson into one entire monster and body of errour and presented it all to the world as the doctrine of the Church 3. In that these were more solemnly seriously deliberately publikely by the pretended representative of the whole Church as the work of years delivered ratified as the perpetuall doctrine of the Church which made the errors rather the errors of Rome Note though many particular persons were against then if all the members of the Church of Rome had held the same apart that is without a councell My second Argument to prove that Rome was not at the Because there were strange mottions towards Reformation in Rome before and somewhat effectuall state or height of this her disease till the Councell of Trent is taken from her strange motions all along after Reformation every age almost complained of abuses in doctrine and discipline and were so urgent and impetuous that they prevail'd to have a councell cal'd for to advise about a Reformation and every councell before this last for ought I can finde did some good and this very wicked councell the councell of Trent it self was occasioned by universall and potent complaints of corruption and errour and such was the power of the better people that the malignant party were forc'd to yeeld to call a counsell on which there lay great hopes being called indeed upon fairest pretences this I would inferre from hence that God had not wholly cast Rome off who doth not leave The conclusion while and where there is any the least appearance of hope of which it seems there was not a little in the Church of Rome till the Councel of Trent A second Argument to prove that there might be something A second Argument that Rome was a true Church till the Councel of Trent at least of Christ in Rome that she was not wholly Antichristian and no true Church till the Councel of Trent is taken from the concessions of most of our Adversaries in this thing the Brownists most of them acknowledge that the Church of Rome had true Baptism and some of them as Johnson c. held they had true Ordination too and such as broke off from Rome had not any need of the Repetition of either Now let us consider could there be true and valid Ordinances in a Church that was true in no respect could there do we think be Ordinances of Christ in a Church that was wholly Antichrist Suppose the Church of Turks should baptize In the Name of the Father Son and holy Ghost were that true Baptism if not then a difference must be made betwixt the Baptism of Rome and that and if so where lies the difference but in the Church and what is the difference but

if they had said by what authority do or may we preach why do not doubt saies Christ My Father sent me and in his sending me he gave me Authority to send others As he sent me so I say or by that I had power to send you and give you power to send others He sent me to preach and ordain I send you to preach and ordain and do you send others to preach and ordain c. therefore we finde the Apostles executing their Commission accordingly along as occasion requires Paul sends Timothy Titus c. bidding them ordain and so successively to the end of the world which thing is most plain in the Text we are upon with regard to the persons ordaining and ordained Persons ordaining are Prophets and Teachers and persons ordained in this ordinary sending what power receive they they are sent 't is most apparent by an ordinary sending and what to do I pray you why to preach ver 5. and to ordain Elders in every Church c. 13. 23. clearly intimating that Ministers by their very Ordination have power to ordain as well as to preach 4. If a Presbytery have power to ordain then ordinary Ministers have power to ordain for a Presbytery is nothing but a Colledge-combination or company of Presbyters or ordinary Ministers But a Presbytery hath power to ordain for Timothy was ordained by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery Object But there were Apostles in these Presbyteries Answ What if this strengthens the Argument if rightly considered for if it was counted an act of the Presbytery when Apostles were there it appears that the Apostles joyning with ordinary Elders acted as Elders and not as Apostles or extraordinary Officers there being Apostles in the Presbytery that doeth ordain and yet Ordination is said to be done by the Presbytery cleerly shews that Ordination is a proper act of an ordinary Presbytery and not of Apostles as so and to make it out of doubt Ordination is defin'd in that text to be the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery But this hands me to another Argument 5. If ordinary Officers had a hand in Ordination in Apostles times much more and safer may they ordain now there are no extraordinary Officers among us The minor implied is already proved and for the consequence I say much more but how so why because à pari the people where there are no Ministers to do their work have power to Ordain by the warrant of necessity then much more ordinary Ministers may now there are none extraordinary left if they as so had a hand in Ordination by the like warrant and law of necessity And now that that confirms me about all doubting touching the Ordination of ordinary Officers is the practice of the primitive Churches next the Apostles and so down along through all ages and Churches to this day without interruption or contradiction unless by a few inconsiderable men as the Seekers are Thus we have shew'd what Gospel Ordination is and in Conclusion whose hands the power of ordaining lies it is a setting men apart with fasting and prayer and laying on of hands by preaching Elders which is indeed in every jot and title of it the very same with the Ordination allow'd and practic'd in the Church of England time out of mind The additional Ceremonies and harsh Oaths are taken away and we now have nothing left but pure Ordination according to the word so that the word doth allow us lawfull Ministers because we have what the word requires to make us so Obj. To say we were ordained by Bishops is not worth the while for still there were ordinary Presbyters joyned with them and they themselves were no more but ordinary Presbyters though they thought themselves more their thought could not add one cubit to their stature whom neither Church nor State did ever declare to be a superior Order to other Presbyters But for this I refer you to Mr Seaman who hath given five Answers to this very Objection every one of which are so sound and solid that they are single and apart from each other abundantly satisfying See 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 85. Object But the great Objection yet remains viz. That we must needs be Antichristian because by a line of succession we descended from Antichrist this indeed is all they have to say against our Ministery Answ There are two knots in the line of succession of the Gospel-Ministery to our times The first is as it passeth the bounds of the Apostles daies and this the Seekers tie but we have already dissolved it The other is in the passage of it from the Church of Rome to the reformed Churches as it lies in this objection Four Arguments to cleer the succession of Ordination made by Brownists Anabaptists c. which I shall now untie I shall touch but four Arguments for I am in hast every of which experience hath proved very effectuall 1. I judge it a truth not to be question'd that there hath been certain Ministers of Christ in the world ever since there were any and more certain it is that there were true Ministers in the Church of Rome when our first Reformers began to think of breaking off from her for there was conversion there else God would not have had a people there and conversion is the work of sent Ministers Rom. 10. 14 15. now can any man in reason think that those that forsook both Rome and her harlotry and obey'd that known command of God and come out from Rome were not the best of the Ministers there and so by consequence the Ministers of Christ if there were any which may not be doubted Yea therefore remarkeable providence did seal to their Ministery immediately upon their leaving Rome being used by God to preach that doctrine and presse that command Come out of her my people and to prevail with a great number to follow their steps and leave the whore And when God by them had drawn his people into the wildernesse he did feed them there by the same Pastors Rev. 12. 6 and 14. which helps me to conclude that as the best of the members leaving Rome were owned by God for the true Church so the first of the Ministers leaving Rome were acknowledged by God for the true Ministery every man abiding in that calling wherein he was called whether members or Ministers 2. Again It is not so much as question'd but that our first reformers had an inward Call and if their outward call be question'd it is no great matter since both we and our adversaries agree in this that in such a strait and a case so extraordinary as that was the people are bound to chuse and call a Minister and theirs is valid no man doubts in such a case and therefore the Call of our first Reformers may not be questioned by our opponents any more untill they leave their Principles since it was confirmed by God and the

throughout and nothing warrantable with God or man Two things I should undertake here viz. to shew you the ground of this distinction of publick Preaching and private teaching and to clear and confirm my conclusion thereupon Rutherford Hall Collings Ferriby c. viz. That though private teaching be the duty of all yet publick Preaching is the sin of any but men in Office which having been done so fully by others to whom I refer you I shall dispatch in a word For the ground and reason of this clear distinction one instance of many shall serve the turn and it is of women whom we find in Scripture commended for private teaching yet also forbidden there in publick Preaching see Act. 18. 26. There Aquilla and Priscilla took Apollos unto them it is said and expounded the word Mark they took him to them aside into private and there the woman as well as the man expounded the way of God unto Apollos Well then here is an example of a womans teaching in a private way but doth this allow a womans publick Preaching no alas that 's clearly forbidden in another text which tels us we must not suffer a woman to speak in the Church neither to the end she may teach or learn And as women are forbidden to speak at all so are men forbidden to preach in the Church without a call For no man taketh this honour to himself unlesse he be called of God as Aaron was As if it had been said in the times of the Gospel Heb. 5. 4. a call is as necessary to licence a Preacher as it was in the time of the law For how shall they Preach except they be sent Rom. 10. 15. That is none can perform the Office of a Preacher as just before How shall they hear without a Preacher unless he be sent that is as we largely explained before ordained according to the order of the Gospel by the power of the Church Now we never read of any in Scripture that were sent to preach but they were thereby put into Office yea this Preaching in the Text is expounded there to be an exercise of one that is sent and none other and this being sent doth expound it selfe to make a Preacher as in the last words of the fourteenth verse and this word Preacher is never given to any in Scripture but to men in Office Then those that to presume to preach must needs pretend to be sent some way or other and I know no other sending but extraordinary or ordinary now I wish our Adversaries to take which they please Are they sent extraordinarily That though some of them have pleaded heretofore they are all ashamed of and do not now so much as pretend unto it for indeed it is great blasphemy Neither doe they pretend to be sent in an ordinary way according to the nature of the word sending or the Rule of the Gospel as we have this day declared to you How and yet dare to preach upon what account I beseech you Object There is a sending of Duty as well as Office saith one of them Answ How many absurdities are couch't together in these few words 1. It would devide betwixt the Duty and Office of preaching which differ no more than Ghost and Spirit the same thing in two words 2. It would devide betwixt a mans being sent by God and put into Office by him still one and the same thing 3. It is but the old distinction put into worse and harder words which is That private Christians may exercise their gifts in a way of love in a private way but there is a preaching in Office that onely is lawfull for men that are sent 4. To speak all in a word this sending in the very nature of the word and sence of Scripture doth plainly exclude what ever such men pretend unto to authorize their sinful disorderly practice of publick preaching even all the four things we nam'd before 1. It excludes the secret impulse of their own spirit for no man that goes of his own accord can be said to be sent the one is Active the other Passive and this is confirm'd by that known Text No man taketh this honour to himself but he that is called of God as was Aaron clearly expressing that going and calling are two things 2. Sending excludes the call of gifts also for we not imagine that every man that is fit eo ipso a Justice of Peace ability is one thing commission another as most evidently appears by that clear Text Mat. 10. 1 5. In the first verse they have their qualification and in the fift they receive their Commission and are bid goe and therefore examination or proving of gifts is but the way to Ordination as in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus doth plainly appear 3. Sending excludes Electing from the whole work and therefore we finde sending and electing two things and even perform'd in a different way and by different persons in Acts 6. 5 6. The people chose and set the men before the Apostles but they are not sent yet and therefore the Apostles lay hands upon them 4. Sending is more than desiring lastly for this is but an act of an equal but sending is ever an act of Superiors Desiring doth leave the power in the partee desir'd but sending implyes the power to be in the partee sending Desiring doth not while sending doth still put a man into Office and a Minister in special giving him authority to deliver his Message intrusted to him for how shall he preach except he be sent That is perform the Office of a Preacher except he hath receiv'd a Commission so to do except he be sent Which I conclude with this argument as the sum of this matter None may preach except he be sent But Self-will Gifts Election Desire or Invitations of the people are not sending Therefore those that have no other Commission then these four may not preach Object But though we have not the Doctrine of Scripture we have many examples of Scripture that favour our preaching Answ 1. Suppose it yet you must know these two things 1. That Example will never warrant the practice of any unlesse all circumstances of time place person c. that are materiall meet together if thou beest not in all respects in the same condition with that man thou lookst at in Scripture his action is no pattern to thee 2. That Examples in Scripture are not further to be imitated by us then they are agreeing with the Word of Scripture But secondly as you have not one Word so neither one Example in the holy Scripture that will stand you in stead in the least Object Did not Apollos preach Answ So may you in non-constituted Churches especially if you were known to be Ministers as he is called 1 Corinth 3. 5. Object But did not Philip preach Answ So may you in the same state of the Church especially being ordained as Philip was Acts 6.