Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A04417
|
Christ on his throne. Or, Christs church-government briefly laid downe and how it ought to bee set up in all Christian congregations. Resolved in sundry cases of conscience.
|
Burton, Henry, 1578-1648, attributed name.
|
1640
(1640)
|
STC 14541; ESTC S107732
|
25,100
|
92
|
upon the Priest And even many Protestants are of opinion that Ordination cannot be performed but by a Prelate or at least by Ministers onely as without whose imposition of hands it were no Ordination or as if it did confer such an order Whereas the prime and proper conferring of this Order is by Christ himselfe inwardly calling and gifting a man for the work of the Ministry Secondly then what is that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} ordaining and appointing of Ministers and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the Imposition of hands which the Scripture speakes of I answer {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} signifying properly a stretching out of the hand it was used either in lifting up of the hands in token of sufferage in election of officers or in stretching out of the hand upon the head of the man chosen for confirmation Also when it was used by the Apostles it pleased God to bestow therwith the gifts of the holy Ghost and on some recovery of health This was very frequent in the Apostles times But afterwards in successive ages there was no such gift annexed to the laying on of hands Secondly Therefore it was of use according to its antient and ordinary custome in sufferages in elections of officers to declare assent and approbation of those for such and such places when after prayer hands were layd on them But by whom was this Imposition of hands used at the choice of Ministers I answer By those who gave their sufferages or votes to the election and those were sometimes the congregation it selfe and sometime others at their request joyning with them as we reade Act. cap. 6. 5 6. And all Ecclesiasticall stories tell us that antiently the election of Ministers was by every congregation respectively So as to them also of right belonged the laying of their hands as a token of their approbation and confirmation of him that was so chosen to that office And though we reade in one place That the Apostle layd his hands upon Timothy as 2 Tim. 1. 6. yet in another we reade as 1 Tim. 4. 14. that the Presbyterie layd their hands upon him Which Presbyterie comprehends as well the Elders of the people as those of the Ministry Accordingly wee exclude not the Elders or Ministers of other neighboring congregations from joyning in that worke for assistance especially in prayer for a blessing upon the new chosen Minister For so farre must we be from excluding any in this kinde that wee highly commend consociation and communication of gifts for assistance where it may be conveniently had Onely reserving to each congregation that peculiar interest and right which every true Church of Christ hath in chusing their owne Ministers and other Church officers And this stands with good reason for not onely antiquity both in and from the Apostles times pleadeth for this but even naturall reason and equity For reason willeth that such as chuse should ratifie Secondly Those who give the maintenance should chuse the Officer Thirdly Who have commonly better Ministers than those Congregations that upon good advice and counsell chuse them themselves Fourthly Where is greater love betweene Minister and people than where the liberty of such a choyce is enjoyed Fiftly What vertue at any time doth a Prelates imposition of hands adde to Ministers so ordained by him Or what bee those Ministers whom Prelates usually place over the people And I would aske any reasonable Christian whether hee would not rather have the approbation prayer and imposition of hands of the poorest godly man than of the most glorious Prelate Yea though hee were stiled even Grace it selfe For as James saith The effectuall fervent prayer of a righteous man prevaileth much It is not sayd The prayer of a great or learned man CASE XII How far may and ought true reformed Christian Congregations to hold communion among themselves and with other Reformed Churches FOr answer in generall First in generall it is agreeable to good and approved examples in Scripture to make firme leagues and faithfull Covenants for the maintenance of the true faith and religion of Christ See for this 2 Chron. 15. 12 13. and Chapter 34. 31 32 33. Ezra 10. 3 Nehem. cap. 9. 38. Severally in particular It stands both with Christian piety and prudence for all the members of a particular Church or congregation to enter into a firme covenant among themselves to maintain a holy communion together in the profession of the truth and practise of a holy life as becommeth the communion of Saints Thirdly It stands with the like Christian piety and prudence to hold a sweet and inviolable bond and communion with all other churches or congregations rightly constituted as we conceive according to Christs ordinance and walking according unto it Fourthly If there be any Christian Churches that doe in some small circumstances differ from us in that forme of government which wee conceive and beleeve Christ hath set up in his Word so as therein they may seem to come short of that exactnesse that is required nor yet are able to attaine unto it either in regard of some outward difficultie or human imperfection and frailty the judgement being as yet not fully enlightned and perswaded concerning which the Apostles rule is Let every man bee fully perswaded in his owne minde wee do notwithstanding not with-hold from them the right hand of fellowship but hold communion with them as the churches of Christ they holding the Orthodox Truth and the substance of the government which is suteable to the Church of Christ and joyning with us against the Common Adversaries of the Gospell concluding with that excellent saying of our Savior Christ They that are not against us are on our part The EPILOGVE or Conclusion HAving thus freely and faithfully though briefely as the present straits of time would permit declared what I have and doe conceive and beleeve concerning Christs kingdome and that forme and frame of the government thereof in his Church as I finde it recorded in the Scripture whereof I am in my conscience fully perswaded as my earnest prayer and trust is That Christ by his spirit and Word will leade his into all truth necessary to salvation so my hope is that however perhaps those things which I have here delivered according to the simplicity of my conscience will not so bee relished of all but that they wil seem bitter especially to the ignorant and carnall minded who savour not the things of Christ yet my confidence is that all the wise hearted and wel affected to Iesus Christ For If any man love not the Lord Iesus Christ that is love not to have Iesus Christ set up as Lord over their soules let him be Anathema Maranatha will embrace Christs yoke and to the uttermost of their power labour to advance his throne in all Churches or if that through Sathans malice cannot bee effected yet that they will set him up as sole Lord and King over their owne soules and so will joyne in communion with all those that doe or shall desire heere to serve Iesus Christ according to that purity of conscience which is required in every true Christian as the Apostle professed of himselfe and in that way wherein the name of Christ shall bee most magnified and his kingdome exalted heere on earth And this shall the better be done if a Law be made this present Parliament that as Antichrists kingdome in the Prelacy shall and must be cast out so Christs kingdom may bee freely set up in this kingdome while his people even as many as will are suffered freely to enjoy Christs Ordinances in their puritie and so may at length recover that Christian liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free and for which his precious bloud was poured forth and whereof this Land by the Hierarchy hath beene till now deprived it being our hearts desire rather to live under Christs governement in this our owne native Countrey than for want thereof bee forced to flye into forreigne parts where how can wee so sweetely enjoy Christ without the bitter remembrance of our Native Soile which wee shall never cease to wish worse unto than to our owne Soules FINIS Acts 15. 16. Ezra 5. 6. Nehem. 4. Cum reflavit affligimur Cic. So D. Hall in his Booke of Episcopacie 2 Thess. 2. 7. Mat. 19. 3. Mat. 7. 17. Mat. 15. 13. Mat. 12. 33. 2 Ti. 1. 13. 3. 16. Phil. 3. 15 16 Ier. 23. 32. Mat. 18. 17. 1 Cor. 5. Mat. 15. 9. Ecc. 29. 13. Col. 2. 8. 18. Vol. 2. p. 667. print ed. 1631 Gal. 4. 9 10. Col. 2. 16. Gal. 5. 1. 1 Thess. 5. 1 Cor. 14. 15 * Ier. Heb. 12. 1 Sam. 1 King 1 pet. 5. 4. 1 Pet. 2. 25. Rom. 8. Act. 26. a Act. 20. Tit. 1. 5. 7. b Eph. 4. 11. c Luke 1. 2. 2 Cor. 11. 23. d Luk. 10. 7. 1 Cor. 3. 9. Act. 6. 4. Mat. 28. 20. Act. 20. 7. Mat. 20. 25 26. Heb. 13. 17. Quest Answ. Act. 15. Act. 15. 28. Act. 15. 21. Rom. 13. 1 Pet. 2. 14. * D. Hall in his Episcopacy by Divine right Act. 8. 17. Mar. 16. 18. Iam. 5. 16. Mark 9. 40. 1 Cor. 16. 22. 2 Tim. 1. 3.
judgement zeale courage constancy unity unamity in the love of the Truth that such a perfect Reformation may be wrought as Christ at this time calleth for as his word appointeth as all Gods people every where thirst after and as the whole Antichristian faction is afraid of that so when Christ alone shall be set upon his Throne over our soules to rule us according to his word and to dwell among us by his Spirit the Kings throne may be for ever established in justice and judgement and Gods people in this Land may enjoy both inward and outward peace unto the day of Christ and so our posterity after us may blesse God and for ever call this Parliament The blessed Parliament Let the Reader correct as here he sees cause Errata PAge 4. line 1. reade 3. hundred l. 11. blot out 1. p. 6. l. 12. r. possibly be l. 20. r. as is usuall p. 7. l. 10. r. may be proved p. 11. l. 19. r. truly ancient p. 16. l. 8. r. order sake l. ult. r. of false p. 20. l. 10. r. of Prelates p. 16. l. 11. r. forme of Liturgie p. 24. r. in the Test. l. 26. r. Commandements of men p. 28. l. 23. r. grievances p. 31. l. 18. r. accommodate p. 34. l. 11. r. and is surest p. 38. l. 9. r. out of the way p. 50. l. 16. r. said Articles p. 66. l. 4. r. and lay p. 67. l. 14. r. 〈◊〉 CASES OF CONCIENCE CASE I. Whether Diocesan Bishops as they are commonly called be by Divine right THe answer is negative They are not The reasons are First Because the Scripture knoweth no such creatures as Diocesan Bishops for the Bishops mentioned in Scripture are none other than Presbyters whereof one or moe were set over their several congregations respectively as we clearly reade Tit. 1. 5 7. Act. 20. 17 â—8 So Act. 14. 23. compared with Philip 1. 1. So as Presbyters Bishops in Scripture are convertible termes every Presbyter a Bishop and every Bishop a Presbyter Secondly Because all such prelaticall jurisdiction and domination as our Diocesans usurpe and exercise is expresly forbidden by Christ himselfe as Mat. 20 25 26. Mark 10. 42 43. Luke 22. 25 26. Thirdly Because the Apostles condemned all such jurisdiction and domination as our Prelats use As 2 Cor. 1. 24. 2 Cor. 11. 20. 2 Thess. 2. 4. 1 Pet. 5. 3. 3 Joh. 9. 10. Fourthly Because Apostles themselves whose successors Prelats pretend to be never used any such jurisdiction as the Prelats doe neither in Ordination of Ministers nor in excommunication both which they doe most grosly abuse nor in making of Canons or setting up or imposing of Ceremonies both of meer humane invention which the Apostles utterly condemned Gal. 4. 9. 10. Col. 2. 8 c. Fiftly Because the Prelats are never able to prove by any demonstration from Scripture that their jurisdiction is of Divine authority their allegations are meere pervertings of scripture as they alledge first Christs ordaining twelve Apostles and seventy Disciples here was an inequality say they Ergo a superiority of jurisdiction But neither can hee prove here any such authority as they pretend or much lesse any subordination of the seventy unto the Twelve for the Twelve neither ordained nor sent forth the Seventy Secondly they alledge the post-scripts after the second Epistle to Timothy and after that to Titus which say That those two were Bishops But 't is cleare that those postscripts are no part of the Text as Beza well sheweth Nor are they to be found in the vulgar Latine translation which was at the least an hundred yeares after Christ Timothy and Titus were both Evangelists not resident anywhere but as the Apostles called them from Country to country as we read in Pauls Epistles and if they were to bee called Bishops according to the scripture they must have beene Bishops over one Congregation respectively Thirdly they aledge those seven Angels 1 Revel 2 3. These say they were seven Bishops This they can never prove And if Bishops yet Diocesans they were not seeing for some hundreds of yeares after there were no such Diocesse extant And our last Translation in the contents of the second Chapter of the Revelation calls those Angels the Ministers of those Churches And for the Angel to be meant of one single man doth imply many absurdities as that God should destroy a whole Church for one mans sake for God threatneth the Angell of Ephesus if hee repent not to remove his Candlesticke out of his place to wit that whole Church But God never doth so there is not in all the whole scripture any one example that God ever rooted out a whole State or Church generall or particular for one mans sinne be he Magistrate or Governor And if God for one pretended Prelates sin should remove or destroy a whole Church as that of Ephesus as there he threatens the Angell who alone is charged with one onely sinne which was a declination from his first love Then what security or safety can the whole Church or State of England long promise to it selfe so long as it harboreth in the bosome and bowels thereof such a crew and confederacy of most notorious and apostatised Prelates who have not now declined in some degrees from the faith formerly professed but have openly oppressed and persecuted the Preachers and preaching of the Gospel and that even unto bloud And againe to goe about to proove the lawfulnesse of Prelacy by the Word of God from a word of a darke and figurative signification against cleer and expresse testimonies of Scripture to the contrary is most absurd and too presumptuous For for Angell here to signifie a Prelate cannot possibly because the Scripture elsewhere as before damneth all Prelacy in the Church of Christ And there be many other reasons to confute them that these Angells were no such Bishops other than Scripture Bishops as aforesaid and that which was spoken to one was by a Senechdochae spoken to all as is usually in Scripture and cleare in all those seven Epistles Sixtly The wisest and learnedest of the Prelats at this day among us doe warily decline the Scripture in this point dare not stand to their authority as being point blanke against them but they fly to Custom and antiquity as the Papists doe for all their unwritten Traditions CASE II. Whether the next Age immediately succeeding the Apostles be not a sufficient warrant for Prelaticall jurisdiction seeing it may be mooved say they that there were then Bishops THe Answer is negative first because it is not a sufficient warrant to build the government of the Church upon any Humaine example which hath not expresse warrant from Gods Word Secondly Because those who were there called Bishops cannot be proved to have been Diocesan Bishops or to have had or exercised such a jurisdiction as our Prelates usurpe Thirdly could that be proved yet being not according unto but directly against the Scripture