Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	authority_n	church_n	pillar_n	1,970	5	10.4442	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A80158	Responsoria ad erratica pastoris, sive, vindiciæ vindiciarum. Id est, the Shepherds wandrings discovered, in a revindication of the great ordinance of god: Gospel-preachers, and preaching. By way of reply and answer to a late booke, called, The peoples priviledges, and duty guarded against the pulpit and preachers encroachment. And their sober justification and defence of their free and open exposition of scriptures. Published by William Sheppard, Esq. Wherein Mr Sheppards pretended guard, consisting of ten propositions and ten arguments, is examined, and found to wear nothing by wooden swords. And all his replyes to Mr Tho. Halls arguments, and Mr Collinges arguments in his Vindiciæ ministerii, brought against not ordained persons ordinary preaching, are found but cavils and too light. And the truth still maintained, ... in that, preaching and expounding scripture publiquely, are proper acts to gospel officers; not common to all. Wherein also the great question, how far the spirit of God ... dothïnable them to understand scripture is opened, ... / By John Collings, M.A. and preacher of the Gospel in Norwich.	Collinges, John, 1623-1690.	1652 (1652)	Wing C5331; Thomason E672_1; ESTC R207127	122,201	185

the word lieth not so much in enabling them to the act which they might have done before c. 1. To your first cavill V. Novar ad loc that the word may be translated Goe make Disciples I answer and it may be read Goe preach it may be translated Go be Disciples V. Scapulam ad loc But because a word hath many significations doth it follow that any of them may be the sense of that place where it is used 2. But suppose it should be translated so how is one made a Disciple but by conversion and when is a man converted but when he is brought to believe and faith comes by hearing then from hence will follow that the same thing is meant yea and something more That those that the Lord intends ordinarily to honour with the conversion of soules to himselfe must be commission-officers in the businesse of the Gospell To your second cavill that the Commission is not literally exclusive If it excludes them from baptizing it excludes them for preaching but you grant the former To your third that in common reason they are not excluded What you meane Sir by common Reason I cannot tell Socinian and Erastian reason wil not exclude them but sanctified reason that teacheth the soule to take heed of thrusting its name into a commission and doing any thing for which is not plain ground in Scripture this will exclude them But you tell us Though a Commission be given to some to be Justices of the peace yet doth not this exclude others from keeping the peace 1. Your similitude is no proofe 2. It halts shamefully Preaching is a piece of instituted worship where the rules of institution must be kept but keeping the peace is not 3. It is false and the fallacy lies in keeping the peace Every one is bound to keep the peace as to his own private practice not to be riotous but every one is not to command others to keep the peace 4. Constables Sir are officers and so bound by office to keep the peace and see it kept and may doe something more then Justices But your guifted brethren are no officers at all Christ you say gave his Apostles commission to heale the sicke Mat. 10 8. might not others therefore that had this guift heale them 1. It is not proper to say healing the sick was an office and the Apostles had a commission it was a rare guift to which they had a power 2. Supponis quod non supponendum est No other had that guift 3. If any other should have gone to a sick person and pretended to heale miraculously saying as Peter Act. 3.6 In the name of the Lord Iesus Christ arise and walk he should have sinn'd against God I am sick of your similitudes to goe on therefore to your third Cavill viz. That the people have a commission to teach c. What then Sir The commission 1 Tim. 22. to teach others Matth. 28.20 to teach all Nations Shew us where they have such a Commission They may teach by private exhortations by an holy life not by publique expositions and doctrines shew us where their commission to this lies To your fourth cavill Suppose it were but an enlargement of the Apostles Commission yet it was the first commission that authorized them to preach the Gospell to all Nations or to any but Jews and the originall copy of the Gospell preachers commission Thus much your selfe confesse we ask no more To your fifth cavill I answer That the force of that word lies in enabling them to preach the Gospell to any sort and condition of people in establishing a perpetuall standing office of Gospel-Preachers with whom Christ promiseth to be to the end of the world not as you would seem to hint onely in laying it upon them as a duty which yet was the liberty of all besides them Your places 1 Cor. 9.16 17. Ezek. 3.17 18. serve to prove what none denies you that we must preach but they will not prove that all may preach nor that the force of that word Mat. 28.20 is no more then you would have it for they have no reference at all to that place warranted by Scripture But you tell us That Ministers must attend to preaching and make it their work which guifted brethren are not bound to doe They are beholding to you for justifying their lazy preaching but God and his word are not much beholding to you for this patronage of lazy idle unwarranted extempore preachers Thus Sir you may see how slight an answer you think to stop the mouth of our first Argument with Our second objection as you say is That men that have not skill in the originall Tongues cannot understand much lesse interpret the Scriptures much lesse can they divide the word of God aright To this you answer 1. That we grant that although they be not skilled in School-learning if called they may preach 2. That many of the Preachers in office this day doe not understand the Tongues 3. That something in the Scripture may be understood without the knowledge of the Tongues 4. That many great Schollers see little of Gods mind in them 5. That the knowledge of heavenly truths is attainable only by the Spirit of God not by any humane power or strength 1 Cor. 2.14 Upon which you enlarge 6. That many that have little of this learning yet have much divine Learning and a large understanding of the Word of God 7. That to divide the word of God aright is to divide to every one their portion from the word and to fit it to the severall estates and conditions of people that heare it and this may be done without much humane learning To all this I answer 1. Generally 2. Particularly Nunquam quis rectius assiquitur alterius mentem germanam sententiam quam qui ips●● loquent● voces proprium sermonem audit intelligitque Hyperius in rat studii theol l. 1. c. 9. 1. Generally This is none of my Argument My brother Hall doth hint it p. 19. but Sir if you mean him you wrong him for his proposition is this Those that want learning both humane and divine cannot be sound interpreters nor solid disputants You have set up a man of straw and then fall to pushing of him I know none that say that it is simply unlawfull for those that understand not the originall Tongues to interpret Scriptures 2. But secondly this we say That the extraordinary and miraculous Revelation of the Spirit now ceasing no man can so soundly and well interpret Scriptures as he that knows the Languages without doubt it is no despicable means The Papists partly to justifie their ignorant Priests and the authority of their vulgar translation and to justifie the Churches authority V. Calv. in 1. ep ad Corinth c. 14. as the pillar and ground of truth are much of your mind that the knowledge of the Tongues is not necessary and therefore have blotted

therefore we must not say the people have it committed to them The Scripture warrants no such speech it is not the language of Canaan And so Sir in point of publique trust they are excluded as much as a Commission to his Excellency to be Lord Deputy of Ireland excludes others from being so though it be not said so in the letter in the Commission In point of use indeed the people are every where included but they are no where called Stewards c. And Sir for your distinction between committed and so committed it is Apocryphall The Scripture no where sayes they are at all committed to them You must remember Sir your own marginall note which you give as p. 29. Vbi lex non distinguit non est distinguendum But to justifie what you say you tell us that it is committed to the people for In 1 Tim. 3.15 the Apostle saies That the whole Church not the Preachers onely is the pillar and ground of truth Any one may see a Non sequitur without spectacles in the Argument And the Gentlemans proofes will none of them prove this nor any thing like unto it In the next place he comes to cleare his point from two Objections He frames one from Revel 2. Where the Epistles are directed to the Angels To this he answers 1. The Angels are taken collectively for the whole Churches as Exod. 4.2 Israel my sonne 2. He sayes It is clearly expressed Revel 2.7 He that hath an eare to beare let him beare what the Spirit sayes to the Churches To which I answer Though I should never have made this objection but think there is very little strength in it and the Gentleman onely brought it forth to try his skill about it yet I conceive his answer is too short in it and seeing the argument is weake it is charity for disputation sake to take its part 1. It will hardly be proved that Angel is taken any where collectively that Israel is is plain enough from more places then one The term Angel I take it is scarce found but to signifie an Angel by nature or by office Now it is absurd to say that all the people in a Church are sent and in office which is the appellative signification of the term To his second answer 2. The Spirit spake to the Churches Although the Epistles were not directed immediately to all the members doubtlesse they were directed to their Officers for their use And thus the holy Ghost speaks to us in speaking to the Jews of old and to the Jews and Christians in the new Testament Else neither the Scriptures of the Old nor the New Testament belong to us He frames a second Objection p. 5. Ob. The Scriptures are committed to the trust and care of Preachers in Office 1 Tim. 1.11 6 20. 2 Tim. 2.14.3.14 Tit. 1.3 The bringing of this objection makes me think he understood by as well that the Scriptures did equally belong to people as Preachers and are alike committed to them For if this objection opposeth the doctrine he must mean by belonging a belonging to them as the Lords Trustees and Commissioners in the Gospel And then his position is false and these Scriptures which he here quotes unanswerably prove it so Yet he pretends to answer Sir As to that text 1 Tim. 3.15 it is a very disputable text who the Apostle calls there the pillar and ground of truth is not so well agreed as you presume Some refer it to Timothy Mr. Calvin saith V. Deodate ad loc V. Leigh ad loc Calv. ad loc V. Leigh ib. Engl. Annot. Elogium hoc ad ministerium verbi pertinet That it is to be applied to the ministry of the Word Others understand it of the living God who is indeed the pillar and ground of truth So Cameron and others To bar either of these interpretations you have nothing but the poor credit of a comma or two and those that knew any thing know that the Originall copies generally are both without stops and distinction of verses For my own part I should understand it of the living God and supply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who is and then your proofe failes But admit it be the Church it is gratis dictum and not proved that by Church he mean all the individuall members The Papists generally contend that the Church is there called the pillar and ground of truth and thence Bellarmine and Estius V. Estium ad loc V. Calv ad loc Beza ad loc and others conclude it cannot erre It is also disputed whether it be meant of the Church Vniversall or particular Protestants maintain it of the Church Vniversall And doubtlesse if it be to be understood of the Church at all it must be of the Church Vniversall and not of every individuall member of that And then it is to be considered in what sence the Church is the pillar and ground of truth and it is concluded that the Church is the pillar of truth because in that truth is to be found As Proclamations hang upon pillars so the Church is the Pillar of truth but Sir you prove nothing if you doe not prove that the Individuall members of the Church are speaking pillars which will be an hard task for you Indeed they should be pillars of truth to beare the Law of the Lord upon their hearts and conversations And they are as you say from Iude 3. to contend for the faith But the question is whether God hath committed the doctrine of faith to them to preach No such thing is proved from that text in Timothy nor that in Iude neither And in earnest Sir if every gifted brother be to be a pillar of truth truth hath lost its uniformity Many of them have been pillars upon which the divell hath hung all the errors and blasphemies of former times not one of many a pillar of truth In short I shall dispatch your first proposition granting you that the Scriptures belong to all to be exercised in them to search and examine them and their own hearts by them to read in them and meditate in them day and night But they doe not belong to all to preach them publikely CHAP. V. Wherein the sixth and seventh pages are examined and the Authours third proposition is scanned and his proofe of it enquired into c. FOr your second proposition viz. That the people as well as the preachers are to read and study the Scriptures I grant it you to be a t●uth and wish it may be practised But it concludes nothing to the businesse in hand unlesse you will conclude thus They that are to read and study the Scriptures are also to expound and preach them That is denied Your third proposition is p. 6. That the exposition of Scripture lying in the opening of the true sense of the words and sayings thereof and the applying of them in that sense to them that heare it and read it as to the right use

assemblies by faithfull men who shall be able to teach others and to whom such things shall be committed by Timothies and Pauls those things private persons to whom such things are so committed according to Scripture-warrant Vindiciae ministerii p. 38. ought not in publique so to communicate But the truths of the Gospell are such as according to Scripture-warrant are onely to be communicated to others by such as being faithfull and able to teach others and have those things committed to them by Timothies and private persons are not such to whom these things are so committed Ergo. To prove the Major I instanced in 2 Tim. 2.2 and shewed the force of it p. 40. I alluded to that place Mal. 2.7 but not as a proofe on which I much insisted My brother Hall hath not instanced this Argument in his first Edition of his Pulpit-guard The other Editions I have not Now let us see if you have sufficiently answered this Argument which is chiefly founded on 1 Tim. 2.2 though 1 Tim. 1.11.18.6.20 Titus 1.3 prove a part of it 1. You answer by way of concession telling us that you grant such an officer as a preaching Minister and tell us that they are more eminent preachers And something is undoubtedly committed to and required of them as to the preservation and promulgation of the Word of God over and above what is required of and committed to men out of office 1. They are bound to it ex officio by their office others not 2. They are bound to doe it more lively and vigorously then others Ro. 10.14 Es 40.9 Es 48.1 Ro. 9.27 Mat. 3.3 Jo. 7.37 38. 3. They may preach with authority Titus 2.15 2 Thes 3.6 1 Tim. 5.2 4. They may doe it with continuance they may make it their calling and whole worke 2 Tim. 4.2 1 Tim. 5.17 1 Thes 5.12 1 Tim. 3 4. 5. They are to assume the whole office to administer the seales also But you say secondly that the Texts are not exclusive but private men may doe it too Thirdly you spend a great deale of time and paper to vindicate that text Mal. 2.7 p. 54 55. and those places Mat. 28.19 Mar. 16.15 Having thus analysed your answer in the next place let me come to examine the strength of it 1. From what you have granted us I gather 1. That there are to be some Preachers in office and to these onely it belongs to administer the Sacraments and these are onely to preach authoritatively vigorously ex officio constantly making it their work This is all a great truth then it seems 2. That for guifted brethren they may doe it or they may let it alone it is but an act of liberty in them yet you told us before it was their duty 3. They may doe it coldly and poorly and lazily for the preacher is onely bound to doe it vigorously and lively p. 52. and earnestly 4. They can onely preach precariously for they have no authority and cannot do it authoritatively Titus 2.15 5. They must not make it their whole work 1. Surely our guifted brethren will give you little thanks for your concessions 2. Surely all people that are in their right wits will take heed of hearing these guifted brethren that at the most can but preach coldly and lazily without authority or any vigour without due meditation and study Surely the countenance and blessing of God is most likely to follow those that come in the name of God and with his authority and can command in the Lords name But you say that the Texts are not exclusive though they doe plainly hint that those that preach the Gospell should have it committed to them yet you think that some may preach that have it not committed and so you would make my argument a fallacy à dicto secundum quid ad dictum fimpliciter But sir I reply upon you 1. Neither are any Scriptures exclusive in so many words that you bring to prove that they may not administer the Sacraments and that they may not preach with authority nor make it their work yet this you grant us and upon good grounds 2. What the Scriptures doe not say that none may doe in the worship of God for we must not adde to Scriptures But the Scriptures although they say preachers in office may and ought to preach to others yet no where say that the guifted brethren may doe it Ergo. The Scripture plainely sayes that those that teach others must not onely be able and faithfull but must have the Scriptures committed to them See your own rule p. 45. Generaliter dictum generaliter intelligendum this Sir is exclusive except you can bring another Scripture that proves they may teach others though they have not those things committed to them And besides the Apostle plainely speakes de re of the thing not de modo of the manner of performance the Apostle sayes teach others you put in authoritatively vigorously c. Bring us a Scripture that sayes that gifted brethren may teach others publikely for that is plainly meant there if you cannot this Text is proofe enough against you Your similitudes prove nothing By your answer I would infer that all the Acts of Church officers may be done by private persons because the Scriptures that say they ought to doe them doe not say others ought not The third part of your answer lies in a vindication of that Text Mal. 2.7 The Priests lips should preserve knowledge and the people should require the Law at his mouth To this you answer 1. Critically telling us the words are better read the Priests lips did preserve knowledge c. and so some read them 2. That it is not exclusive 3. That the case of people under the Law and Gospell differ For my own part I was aware of your last answer and therefore did not insist upon that place yet now you have brought it upon the stage let me take its part a little and see if you have done it no wrong Whereas you say that those words Mal. 2.7 which we translate The Priests lips shall preserve knowledge are read by some The Priests lips did preserve knowledge and this reading best agrees with the coherence of the words antecedent and subsequent I answer 1. It is true Piscator doth so translate it and make the sense what you say but he is the onely man I finde doing it Tremellius and Calvin and Gualter and Ribera and Oecolampadius the Septuagint St. Hierom. Our late Annotations c. Translate it shall or should and this is agreeable to Haggai 2.12 which St. Hierome quotes as paralell Thus saith the Lord of hosts aske the Priests concerning the Law c. So that you see for one authority for you we have found seven against you But let us enquire the Hebrew 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The word is there in the future tence and properly to be translated shall or will or should and although it be

a truth that the Hebrewes doe sometimes confound tenses and we often translate their future tense by the preterperfect yet with submission to those more learned and criticall in that language I conceive it should not be so translated except the sense inforceth it the primary and proper signification being otherwise 3. Neither doe I see such a necessity for the coherence sake so to translate it there V. Our Annot. for might not the Prophet as well set out their impiety by their declination from their duty as well as from the piety of the Priests formerly 4. Nay under favour Sir the coherence is both against you and Piscator too the very next words are for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts now let any judicious man judge whether the sense be better as you would have it thus For the Priests lips did keep knowledge and they did seeke the Law at his mouth for he is the Angell of the Lord of hosts or as we read it For the Priests lips should preserve knowledge and they should seeke the Law at his mouth For he is the Angell of the Lord of hosts or the messenger of the Lord of hosts for the same word signifies both this is the reason given why the people should enquire the interpretation of the Law at his mouth because he is the Messenger he is one authorized and sent and appointed by God to open the Law 5. But Fifthly suppose we admit your reading it alters not the case at all for you grant that the Priests lips did keep knowledge and the people did require the Law at his mouth and this in the purer state of the Jewish Church and this was a piece of their sinne that they were deviated from this practise this is as much as we desire surely the Jewish Church order was not altered but by their corruption in Malachies time if we take your sense it amounts to this In the old time The Priests lips did preserve knowledge and they did require the law at his mouth who was the messenger of the Lord of hosts But now the Priests are ignorant and the people profane they care for no Priests but thinke themselves best able to interpret the Law of the Lord for they were deviated as well as the Priests v. 11.12 13 14 15 16. Have not you warded this Text well think you Sir It is as if we should say of England In the Prelates times the Ministers of the Lord Jesus preached plainely and powerfully and constantly they preached Law and Gospell reproofes and exhortations and the people heard the word of God diligently and reverently and were content to teach their families and to repeat Sermons and then the power of godlinesse encreased and Christians kept in the Vnity of the spirit and the bond of peace and walkt humbly with God and hated Arminian and Socinian and familisticall Errors and Blasphemies and were kept under an aw of Ordinances But now many Ministers are come to preach notions and allegories and whimzies to read Sermons instead of preaching to lay aside preaching duty and reproofe and to preach nothing but priviledges and mysteries and nonsensicall notions and to preach once a fortnight And the people they are come to neglect and despise Ordinances to thinke themselves as much preachers as the Ministers and to know as much as they can tell them and hence they are puft up with pride and are taken in the snare of the Devill and are continually rending and dividing one from another and running into error and blasphemies and the whole Nation of professors almost is turn'd Arminian Socinian or Familisticall You have put the interpretation Sir upon the Prophets words I have to strengthen our argument helpt you with a parallell Quam bene conveniunt To your second answer in which you point us to Deodate for a note but you have abused him for he hath never a note upon the words you quote I grant you the words onely held to us Analogically but where is the Analogy if not here as the Priests were the onely ordinary persons that had the knowledge of the Law betrusted to them to communicate it to others and the people were not to go to seeke it at an ordinary Jewes mouth but at the publike officers mouth so the Ministers of the Gospell are the only ordinary persons under the Gospell that have the Gospell committed to them to teach others out of it and Gospell Christians are not to require the opening of those Mysteries at one anothers mouthes but at theirs But you tell us thirdly the Case is otherwise under the Law and Gospell I grant you all you say there onely I do not finde that Is 61.8 the people of God are called Priests nor doe I believe that all people generally come under those promises you mention onely Saints and I turne your argument upon your selfe thus If under the Gospell people be generally more full of knowledge then under the Law then they had need have more eminent able teachers that should give them strong meat And these Sir had need be such as are able to search the deeps of Scripture to dive into the hidden mysteries Besides as knowledge encreaseth so in some wantonnesse will encrease and the Gospell preachers had need be such as shall be able to oppose those that gainesay their doctrine in opposing those that contradict a truth Those that maintaine a dispute either for a truth or for an errour had need have some more abilities then unlearned gifted brethren A late experience of this I could tell you in the gathered company at Bury where were many thought themselves able enough to Preach but being challenged by the Reverend pastor of the Presbyterian Church to dispute a point which they might have beene well versed in for I believe the persons have been studying it and practising it these seven years whether the Ministers of England be true Ministers they were glad to send for some of their Norfolk Brethren for helpe and some of the gifted brethren went and when they returned being miserably bafled by their owne confession they said they wanted a Scholler yet I suppose they thought they had the spirit of God but God will convince men learning is his Ordinance to enable men both to expound Scripture and defend his truth In the last place you come to the Commission Math. 28.19 Mar. 16.15 From which both my Brother Hall and my selfe urged you to say 1. That the word may be read go make disciples Jo. 4.1 2. There is no negative Clause in it 3. In common reason it doth not exclude others and to the last purpose you serve us with our usuall fare Similitudes instead of proofes it is for want of better Arguments sure Sir 4. You tell us the people have a commission to teach 5. That the native sense of the place seems only an enlargement of the former commission Mat. 10.1 2. Lu 10.1 2. 6. That the force of