Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	according_a	church_n	word_n	2,678	5	4.0797	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46641	An apology for, or vindication of the oppressed persecuted ministers & professors of the Presbyterian Reformed Religion, in the Church of Scotland emitted in the defence of them, and the cause for which they suffer: & that for the information of ignorant, the satisfaction and establishment of the doubtful, the conviction (if possible) of the malicious, the warning of our rulers, the strengthening & comforting of the said sufferers under their present pressurs & trials. Being their testimony to the covenanted work of reformation in this church, and against the present prevailing corruptions and course of defection therefrom. Prestat sero, quàm nunquam sapere.	Smith, Hugh.; Jamieson, Alexander.	1677 (1677)	Wing J446; ESTC R31541	114,594	210

it be one with the same why may not Presbyters consecrat and if they may ordaine as we undertake to make out from Scripture and Antiquitie what necessitie was there for going to England for it seing it might have been done by the Presbyters of this Church If consecration differ from ordination sure it is a humane custome and invention for which we have nothing in the Scriptures and pure Antiquity that only speaks of ordination the only way in which all Pastors entered into the pastoral office 3. The truth is as a Church Ministerial and politick constitute according to the Word of God with all officers of divine appointment hath the full power of the keys of the kingdome of God so there is no sort of officer necessare by divine institution to her edification but she is enabled to furnish her self with such without a necessitie of seeking to other Churches for them and if it be so the Presbyters of this Chruch being her representatives their consent should have been had Although we had no just exception against the office of the Prolates as it is constitute and declared by law as we have but their violent intrusion in this Church it puts a sufficient bar on our subjection to them so that we may not yea cannot owne them as the lawful pastors of this Church Obj. 3. The Magistrat consented to and procured their consecration Ans If any will make it appear that the Magistrat is the Church as Erastus does insolently assert without all probation yea a member of it as such or hath the power of mission we shall yeeld the cause and quietly submit but when we search into the Scripture we find the Magistrat as a Professor of Christianity a member of the Church without all Church power ●et be to be the fountaine of it and subjected as such to the care and oversight of Church Officers in the exercise of their ministerial authority and power We grant it is his part to put the Ministers of the Church when negligent in furnishing of her with officers to their duty anent it but not to thrust in officers upon her of himself without her consent Obj. 4. But the Curats have entered by the Church Ans 1. This we deny the contrare is clear from constant practice for the Curats come in upon congregations only by the Bishop and Patron who are not the Church nor have any power from her for what they do in this all their right and power is founded upon and derived from the supremacy and acts of Parliament and not from the Church in which the Bishop acts as the Kings delegat and substitute only impowered thereto by his law so that the Curats having and deriving all their power from the Prelates cannot have the same from the Church none gives what he hath not But. 2. The prelates not being the lawful governing Church any that enter congregations by them cannot be said to enter by the Church no more then if a Minister should enter into a congregation of this Church by a Minister or Ministers of the Church of France or Holland without the Ministers of this Church can be said to enter by the Church here for the Ministers of other Churches are not the governing Church of this Church The antecedent is to us clear for as the Prelates have entered without the Church so the lawful Ministerial ruling Church although scattered and persecuted is yet existent and in being who by the unjust and violent intrusion of others have not lost their right of ruleing this Church but in point of right and obligation do continue to be her lawful pastours for violence persecution and intrusion do not dissolve the relation betwixt the Church and her Pastours either general or particular there being nothing in our case that can justly do it other wayes it should be in the power of the Magistrat to undo and destroy the political Ministerial Church both formally and effectively which is ab●ord We ask at any who think persecution and intrusion do in our case annul the pastoral relation betwixt Ministers and Churches whether the Magistrats violent ejecting of Ministers and puting of Mahum●tan or Popish Priests in their roomes will discharge Ministers and Congregations of their obligations to one another if they think not then how can these untye their obligations in our case We ask a reason If they judge persecution and intrusion by the Magistrat in ●his case to have this effect then it will inevitably follow that the Magistrat can destroy divine commands flowing there from contrare to the practice of divine relations obligations to the obedience of the Church in the primitive times who notwithstanding of the Magistrats Edicts threatnings much actual violence performed the mutual duties of pastours and flocks Arg. 2. All power of the Prelates and their creaturs in the Church is by law fountained in and derived from the Magistrat and in its exercise subordinated to him as is evident from the act of restitution Parl. Carol. 2. 1. Ses 2. Act. 1. which derivation and subordination they owne and homologat by their compliance with what the law does require in order to it therefore such we cannot we may no● owne receive and subject to as our ministers under seing they acknowledge subject themselves in their ministery to another head then Christ Jesus which by law is set in and over this Church That the force of this Argument may be more perspicuous and clear we shall put it into forme thus Those that receive and derive their Church power from and are subordinat in its exercise to another head then Christ Jesus should not be received and subjected to as the ministers of Christ in his Church But the Prelats and their Curats do receive and derive their Church power from and are subordinat in its exercise to another head then Christ Jesus therefore they ought not to be received and subjected to as the ministers of Christ in his Church We suppose the first proposition will not be denyed all the debate will be in the Second Which we prove thus These officers in the Church professing themselves such that derive their Church power from and are subordinat in its exercise to a power truely Architectonick and supream in the Church beside Christ doe derive their power from and are subornat in its exercise to another head then Christ Jesus But so it is that the Prelates and their creaturs do derive their Church power from and are subordinat in its exercise to a power truely Architectonick and supream in the Church beside Christ therefore the Prelates and their Curates do derive their power from and are subordinat in its exercise to another head then Christ The major proposition is evident for whoever hath a supream Architectonick power in and over the Church must be an head to the same and the fountaine of all Church power it is a repugnancy to be supream have an Architectonick power