Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
authority_n apostle_n church_n minister_n 2,916 5 6.7721 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A20683 A defence of church gouernment Dedicated to the high Court of Parliament. Wherein, the church gouernment established in England, is directly proued to be consonant to the word of God, and that subiects ought of dutie to conforme themselues to the state ecclesiasticall. Together with, a defence of the crosse in baptisme; as it is vsed in our Church, being not repugnant to the word: and by a consequent, the brethren which are silenced, ought to subscribe vnto it, rather then to burie their talents in the ground. By Iohn Doue, Doctour of Diuinity. Dove, John, 1560 or 61-1618. 1606 (1606) STC 7081; ESTC S110107 58,733 80

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

the Apostles in other places and so continued by succession from them vntill these daies vnlesse when their succession was interrupted by warres or schisme or persecution But to come to a Diocesan Lord Bishop ruling by his sole power which is indeed the chiefe matter now in question Such a Bishop saith hee seemeth not to haue beene established in Ambrose Ierom and Augustines time It may be it seemeth not so to Maister Iacob but it seemed so to Zozomene that Saint Ambrose himselfe did rule like a Lord Bishoppe Sozom. l. 7. ca. 24. by his sole authority when meeting the Emperour Theodosius as hee went to Church without any consent or consultation had with other Priests on a suddaine took him by the gowne in the sight of the people interdicted him both from the holy communion the Church for the offence he had committed and the Emperour obeyed his authority His wordes are these Imperator quum Mediolanum venisset ad Ecclesiam processit vt oraret Sed quùm ad ostium iam pernenisset occurrit et Ambrosius eius ciuitatis Episcopus apprehensâ illius purpû-â in prae●entiâ populi siste gradum inquit homini enim ob peccata prophano manus innoxio sanguine comaculatas habēti fa● non est antequā poenitentiā egerit vel sacrum ingredi solium vel ad diuinorū mysteriorum communionem admitti Imperator libertatem sacerdotis admiratu● cogitationibus conscientiam accusantibus regressus est poenitentia compunctus The Emperour when he came to Millanie went towards the church to pray whē he was but at the doore Ambrose the Bishop of that citie ran to him caught him by his purple robe in the presence of the people cōmanded him to stay there shewing that it was not permitted him hauing defiled his hands with innocent blood to goe into the Church nor to be partaker of the Sacrament before he had shewed himselfe penitent The Emperour meruailed at the great spirit of the Bishop his conscience pricked him vpon his remorse hee went backe and repented And afterward more plainly he saith Ambrosius Imperatorem insimulans vt consentaneum est ab Ecclesiâ arcuit à communione seclusit Ambrose laying to the Emperour his charge his crime which he committed as it did behooue him thrust him out of the Church secluded him from the communion In this Story that action is ascribed solely vnto the Bishop no mention is made of any other whose consent was required Though soone after we doubt not saith Maister Iacob it tooke place in the Church Therefore by his owne confession the office of Lord Bishop ruling by his sole authoritie is of great antiquitie and therefore to be preferred before the Eldership which is but a nouelty and neuer preuailed vntill our age and that but in some few Churches And that I may speake something for the iustification of Bishoppes ruling by their sole authority Timothy and Titus were such Bishops Maister Iacob replieth two manner of waies First he saith the Apostles did not ordeine Ministers nor censure offenders by their sole authority much lesse then Timothy and Titus which were inferiour to the Apostles For answer to his reply which consisteth of nothing but manifest vntruthes I do instance in S. Peter which by his sole authority censured Ananias Suphira when they lied to the holy Ghost smiting them with present death St. Paul which alone censured Elymas the sorcerer whē he smote him Acts. 5. Act. 13. 11 with blindnes for seeking to peruert the deputy frō the faith And both these censures were then in the place of excommunicatiō Vide Bucerum dè clauibus 1. Cor. 16. 22. anathema marannatha Politiae Iudaicae c. 2. which is now the ordinarie censure of the church And besides that Saint Paule by his sole authoritie excommunicated in general all that loued not the Lord Iesus euen vnder the time of nature Henoch as Cornelius Ber●ram writeth in his booke Printed at Geneua and allowed of by that church did alone anathema illud solenne suoe aetatis hominibus proponere quod extat Iudae ver 14 15. pronounce that solemne sentence of excommunication against the men of his time of which mention is made in S. Iude ver 14. 15. Behold the Lord commeth with thousands of his Saints to giue iudgement c. And so did Saint Ambrose by their examples And as for making Ministers our Bishops doe not conferre orders alone but assisted with other ministers which ioyne with them in prayer imposition of hands Yet still the chiefest authoritie resteth in Bishops as S. Paule writeth to Titus For this cause I left thee in Creete that thou shouldest ordaine Elders in euery citie And to Timothy Tit 1 5. lay hands sodainly on no man by which words it appeareth that ordination imposition of hands belong to the Bishops 1. Tit 5. 22. principally and to the inferiour Ministers but as assistants to the Bishop But that it belonged to the same men to censure offenders rule by their sole authoritie the places of Scripture doe make it so plaine that ir may not be denied Rebuke 1. Tim ● v. 1. 9. 11. 17. 19. 21. not an Elder but exhort him as a Father Let not a widdow be taken into the number vnder 60 yeares old Refuse the yonger widdowes The elders that rule wel let thē be had in doble honor Obserue these things without preferring one before another doe nothing partially Receiue no accusatiō against an elder but vnder 2. or 3 witnesses Secondly he saith that if these things were granted that Timothy Titus ruled by their sole anthoritie it would not follow that therefore our Bishops might do the like his reason is this For saith he they are not to be reckoned in the catalogue of Bishops neither were they properly called Bishops because they were not affixed to certaine places but often remoued to other churches as the Apostles did Which reason I refute by manifest text for as much as Timothy was affixed to Ephesus as his proper charge and so Titus to Creete as to his peculiar place witnesseth the Apostle I besougbt thee to abide still in Ephesus For this cause haue I left 1. Tim. 1. 3. Tit. 1. 5. thee in Creete that thou shouldest continue there to redresse the things that remaine But what then though they afterward remoued and were called to other places so are our Bishops also and priuate pastours oftentimes called from one congregation to another I cannot deny but the cannon Lawe hath determined that Bishops shal not remoue from one Bishopricke to another without some vrgent cause as when they are required by another Church their gifts beeing thought fitter for a greater charge and the lawe is grounded vpon the decrees of the first generall councell of Nice which so concludeth Episcopus Presbyter aut diaconus non aebet transferri ab vnâ ciuitate ad a●iam quia id est contrà regulas
And no ciuil magistrate in Councels assemblies for Church causes can be chief moderatour Iudge or gouernour And no ciuil magistrate hath such authoritie as that without his consent it should not be lawful for Ecclesiasticall persons to make any Church orders or ceremonies For as much therfore as God hath established kingdomes but a presbytery and a kingdome cannot both stand together because one standing the other falleth They are enemies not onely to Gods ordinance but also to the state of Kings which goe about to establish this Eldership in a kingdome Of Diocesan Bishops MAister Iacob in his Booke of reformation obiecteth against the state of Bishops and Cathedrall Churches that of right there are no Diocesan but onely parochiall Bishops that the authoritie iurisdiction and rites of a Bishop are no other then belongeth to all parsons of parish Churches and consequently that euery parson is a Bishop That there is no visible Church ministeriall besides the parish Churches and that they as depending vpon no other nor subiect to any other nor parts or members of any other haue absolute authoritie and power as wel of gouernment as of teaching within themselues and so consequently there are no cathederal Churches And as one absurditie being granted a thousand will followe so vpon these proemises which without proofe he taketh for granted he inferreth these fiue conclusions to the slander of our state as absord as the proemises were That the case standing thus 1. Our Bishops be no Christians for saith he euery Christian is a pastour or one of the people of the people they denye themselues to be and pastours they are not 2. Being not lawfull Diocesan Bishops much lesse may they be Lord Bishops 3. Hauing no lawfull authoritie nor calling their selues they cannot conferre Ecclesiasticall orders and lay handes vpon others and so consequently our ministers by them ordered haue no lawefull ministerie 4. That by their meanes wee are defrauded of a mayne point of our ordinarie meanes of saluation which is the true Ecclesiesticall discipline 5. That in our state Christ is robbed and spoiled of some parts of his kingly and propheticall office his kingly office being to appoint vs and his prophetical office being to teach vs solely of himselfe the true Ecclesiasticall gouernmēt which our Bishops take from him and ascribe vnto men altering that discipline and gouernment which he alone as king hath appointed and as a Prophet hath taught in his holy word which cōclusions because they are inferred vpō false groūds the grounds being shaken the conclusions will fall of themselues Therefore let vs come to the examination of these grounds to shewe how weake and vnsufficient a foundation they be to build vpon He impugneth the Church state of Bishops first by shew of argument secondly by his own idle conceits vaine coniectures and imaginations He maketh shew of two arguments the first is this that the state of Bishops is a breach of the 2. commandement and by a consequent idolatrie For in this cōmandement Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any grauen image thou shalt not bow down to it nor worship it saith he are forbidden all meanes being humane inuentiōs wherby men would giue honour to the true God But one of these meanes of diuine worship being an humane inuention he saith to be the state of Bishops our Diocesan prouincial Churches vsing gouernment with the ministeries offices proper to them For answer to which argument I denie the MINOR proposition which consisteth of 2. parts meanes of diuine worship humane inuention And because he bringeth no proofe of his MINOR being the subiect of his disputation which all opponents ought to doe I will disproue it and each part of it And first Diocesan prouinciall Churches vsing gouernment and their ministeries which are of Archbishops Bishops were neuer intended by the founders of them nor vsed by the officers ministers of them nor held by the defendours maintainers of them nor conceiued by men of vnderstanding to be any meanes of diuine worship but of gouernment God can be and is worshipped without these and was worshipped as sincerely as now hee is when they were not but the Ecclesissticall state vnder a kingdome cannot be peaceably gouerned without these God is worshipped alike in Geneua and in England though this gouernment and these offices are not in Geneua which are in England And God is worshipped as sincerely and as fully and amplely in our parish Churches as in our cathederal churches and by ordinarie pastors as by Bishops so that their ministeries and high callings doe not afforde them any greater or other meanes to worship God then they had when they were first admitted to be priuate ministers But their places and high callings do strengthen and arme them with authoritie for the better gouerning of the churches which are committed to them wheras being but priuate ministers they had no such charge of gouernment These things therefore are not morall or doctrinall therefore belong not vnto worship but politicall and therefore belong vnto gouernment And according to the course of the holy Bible that which is politicall that which is morall being of sundrie natures are to be distinguished the one from the other God in his word established 3. lawes among his people one politicall which did bind the Iewes to the obseruation of it but it was not imposed vpon other nations that they should be bound to receiue it further then that it might stand with the peace and good of the state The other ceremoniall which was to abide in force till the cōming of our Sauiour and by his death to be abolished so that now ceremonies vnder the Gospell doe cease excepting those only which serue not for worship but decensie comlinesse and good order and so the primitiue Church did in the dayes of the Apostles and the Church of Geneua now doth deuise ceremonies witnes their owne Booke of Lawes and that all 1. Cor. 11. Churches may doe the like witnes Caluin Beza Vrsinus their owne Doctors The third morall which containeth rules of Gods worship which was from the beginning and must continue as a patterne of holines to the ende and bindeth all to the obseruation of it But this is no part of that lawe and all these three Lawes differ in nature one from the other Secondly that such Churches and Church offices are not humane inuentions I proue by euident demonstration For the first Church ministeriall that euer was had ordination from God which was the Church of the Iewes vnder Aaron and his successours and that Church was both Diocesan and prouinciall and also nationall hauing all rites and iurisdiction which a Diocesan or prouinciall or nationall church euer had or coulde haue Also vnder the Gospell Saint Paul by warrant from the holy Ghost appointed Timothy a prouinciall Bishop of Ephesus hauing many Bishops vnder him and Titus a nationall Bishop ouer all the kingdome of
force tooke from them all power of life death not onely from the Priests but also from the whole nation 40. yeares before that time as Maister Beza hath well obserued it was not lawfull for them to put any man to death Thirdly if the Iewes had had all their authoritie in their Beza in annot maiorib in Ioh 18. hands without controlment yet it appeareth by the 28. verse of that chapter that the Priests at that time would not be present at that iudgement where sētence of death was to be pronounced because the feast of Easter was at hand and so doing they should haue made themselues vncleane and by a consequent disinabled themselues from executing their office at that solemnitie Thus you haue heard proued out of the holy Scriptures that among Gods people in that kingdome which was gouerned according to Gods own lawes euen then when it was reformed by godly kings there was no bench of Iustice for hearing and ending of ciuill causes vpon which Priests and Leuites did not sit as Iudges and Iustices Therefore I demand other sound reasons or places of Sctipture to proue why it should not so continue among vs which are also Gods people especially our Ecclesiasticall persons being more honourable vnder the Gospel then they were vnder the law I confesse that the Popes lawes haue decreed the contrarie but Lancelelot iustitut iuris can l 1. Tit 4. Concil Lat 31. partis 1. can 12. it is not fit that wee which are a reformed Church and haue long since abandoned the Popes authoritie should nowe forsake God and the examples of the holy Bible to followe the Pope and his Canons The Popes lawe saith Laici sunt quibus licet temporalia prssidere vxere●● ducere causes agere intèr virum virum iudicare Clerici qui diuinis officijs mancipati sunt quos ab omni strepitu cessare conueuit Lay men are they to whom it is lawful to haue temporal possessions to marie wiues handle causes and controuersies in Law to iudge betweene man and man but as for Clergy men their state and condition is otherwise they are so deuoted and mancipated to the seruice of God that they must not intermeddle with such worldly troubles Some of our brethren giue this answerles answer that arguments drawen from the state of the Ministerie in the olde Testament to that which is vnder the Gospell doe not holde that we must not followe examples of the olde Testament in Church gouernment and that therefore the argument doth not followe that because Bishoppes in the olde Testament were Lords and of the Kings Counsell in the highest place and inferiour Ministers were ciuill Magistrates therefore vnder the Gospell it may be so although what should hinder they cannot shewe But that I may followe them in that course of disputation They say wee must not followe the examples of the olde Testament in Church gouernment and that therefore the argument doth not followe Bishops in the olde Testament were Lords and Kings Counsellers and inferiour Ministers were ciuill Magistrates therefore vnder the Gospel they must be so To whō I alledge that by the like reason these arguments which Bishop Iuell and the learned men of the reformed churches haue vrged against the Popes authoritie and for the vpholding of Princes cannot follow when they conclude in this manner Solomon deposed Abiathar the Priest for committing high Treason and placed Sadoc in his roome therefore vnder the Gospell Christian Kings may punish their Ministers for high Treason Ezechias reformed the Church Iosias reade the Lawe before the Priestes in the house of the Lord and commanded Helchias the high Priest and the Priests of the second order to bring forth of the Temple all the vessells made for Baall put downe Idolls 1. Reg 2. 2. Reg 18. slewe the idolatrous Priestes therefore Christian Kings may put downe idolatrie and reforme the Church You see thereforefore the weakenes and great vnsufficiency of this answere Againe why doe the Lawes of Geneua punish adulterie with death after the example of the olde Testament and why doe our brethren which stand for the reformation labour that the same punishment may bee inflicted vpon adulterers with vs vrging vs with the authoritie of that Law if so be that they will holde that the Lawes of the old Testament may not preuaile vnder the Gospell In their simplicitie and want of iudgement they shape this answere as if it were the Trumpet to blowe downe Iericho Dauids sling to kill Golias Sampsons iawe-bone to slay a thousand Philistines that the ceremoniall Lawe is abolished whereas before I haue shewed thal this is not ceremoniall but politicall and that the Priesthood is abolished whereas onely that which is ceremonicall concerning the Priests office is abolished but that which is moral indureth to the end And againe a Minister of the Gospell may with more conueniencie be a ciuill Magistrate then the Priests vnder the Lawe because now the daily sacrifices the great number of feasts and solemnities the infinite number of ceremonies do cease which then procured vnto them a whole world of businesses in their Ministery by which they had lesse vacant time to heare ciuill causes then our Ministers haue vnder the Gospell The answer to the common obiection Luk 22 25. they that beare rule ouer them are called gracious Lords but ye shall not be so FOr the opening of this text these things are to be examined First whether our Sauiour spake these wordes to his Apostles onely or in the name of the Apostles to al Christians For albeit the Apostles onely were personally present and his apostrophe was vnto thē yet many circumstances do proue that these words doe cōcerne al Christians For first we find else where another speech parallel vnto this The Scribes and Pharisies loue the chiefe places at feasts and to Mat 2. 3. haue the chiefe seates in the assemblies and greeting in the markets and to be called of men Rabbi Rabbi that is Lord Lord but be not yee called Rabbi for one is your Rabbi to wit Christ and all ye are brethren c. but he that is greatest among you let him be your seruant No man can iustly say this was spoken vnto Ecclesiasticall persons onely but also to lay men for so the text saith Then Iesus spake to the multitude and to his Disciples 2. In the same chapter it appeareth that our Sauiour did celebrate his last Supper immediately before he spake these wordes but that storie being set downe more plaine by the other Enangelist hee saide drinke you of this all Mat 26. which wordes were spoken onely to his Apostles and yet none but they of the Church of Rome will so conster them as if they were ment onely of Ecclesiasticall persons For euen as the Cuppe in the holy Communion did not appertaine onely vnto the Ministerie but also vnto the laitie so humilitie which is the Subiect of this speech is not
had his calling from his Father Moses from God Aaron from Moses the Apostles from our Sauiour Timothy Titus from S. Paul so we must consider in whom this authority resteth to call men to the ministery for none of these of whom I haue spoken had any consent of the people This custome of popular election is borrowed out of the Turkes Alcaron and not of the Bible It is saide to the congregation concerning the election of Deacons Looke ye out 7. men of honest conuersation c by which it is iustified which our law doth require that they vpon whom the Bishoppe Act. 6. shall lay hands must bring with them sufficient testimony of their worthinesse but in the words following it is said whom we may appoint to this businesse And afterward verse 6. when they were found out they set them before the Apostles and the Apostles prayed and laide hands vpon them but not the people as our Bishops assisted with other ministers without the helpe of the people ordeine ministers with vs. Therefore in their obiection out of the Acts where they alleage these English words When they had ordeined Elders by Act. 14. election in euery Church c they doe but deceiue themselues For the Greeke word is cheirotoneo of cheir an hand and teino porrigo extendo noteleno to reach or stretch forth or lay on not to eleuate or lift vp so cheirotoneia is not eleuation but imposition of hands in Eccesiasticall writers These words then cheirotonesantes eautois presbuterous is manuum impositione consecrantes sibi ipsi● presbyteros when by imposition of hands they had consecrated Elders or Ministers as Moses by imposition of hands conferred the holy Ghost vpon Iosua and sanctified him to be a Magistrate and our Deut. 24. Matt. 19. Sauiour in the Gospel by laying hands on the children blessed them And th●● cheirotoneia is expressed more plainely by another Greeke word in the Acts of the Apostles concerning Act. 6. the consecration of Deacons to be epithesis ion cheiron imposition of hands where the text saith proseuxamenoi op●thecan autois tas cheiras when they had prayed they layed hands vpon them And Gual●er in his Commentary vpon that place of the Acts which before was alleaged when they had ordeined Elders by election in euery Citie after he hath iustified these popular elections vsed in the Church of Tigurie and dispraised our manner of ordination reuoketh himselfe and confesseth by the word cheirotonesantes magis verisimiliter hîc incelligi manuum impositionem non incerto populo rem tam seriam committendam that in that place imposition of hands is rather to be vnderstoode then any popular election and that a matter of so great importance as the ordination of Ministers is not to be committed to the rude and inconstant common people He commeth now to his ob Sol and obiecteth in our behalfe as we doe our selues commonly alleage that it cannot stand with the state of a Kingdome that there should be a popular gouernment of the Church And he answereth himselfe that it is not requisite that the gouernment of the Church should bee answerable to the gouernement of the Realme To which his answer I reply that if the gouernment of the Church be not answerable to the gouernment of the Realme then our assertion is true that this popular gouernment cannot stand with the state of a Kingdome because the King is by the people excluded out of the Church gouernment With vs Bishops are the Kings Lieutenants in Ecclesiasticall causes and all Ecclesiasticall Courts are the Kings Courts they be held immediately vnder the King his authority in causes Ecclesiasticall being subalternate and immediately subordinate vnto our Sauiour Christ Now for as much as they which hold with the lay Eldership and popular gouernment doe claime their authority immediately from God without the King they derogate from the Kings authority in Ecclesiasticall causes and in Church matters they hold him for no King Lastly whereas we obiect that popular gouernment with vs cannot be but tumultuous and hee answereth that no tumults can arise by their gouernment considering foure circumstances First that it is Gods ordinance Secondly that it is to be executed by no greater multitude then a parish Thirdly that the Church guides being seperated from the people determine the matter and prepare it onely the people consent with them Fourthly if any few be violent and vnruly the next Iustices are to keepe the peace among them It is but an answerlesse answer For first that popular gouernment is not Gods but mans ordinance as I haue shewed Secondly it is apparant that diuers parishes with vs be so populous that they consist of many thousands and are as large in compasse as some Diocesse in other places Thirdly for the guides of the Church priuately to agree vpon the matter and to vrge the people and constraine them by the authority of Iustices of peace to yeelde vnto that which they haue decreed is as much as to make it no popular election at all because then free consents are denied them and all authority resteth in the guides of the Church For if there be no tumult it is wholly in the power of the Church Magistrates to conclude and establish what they list and the people must agree to it if there be a tumult the Magistrates of the Church are to command the Iustices to execute what their selues would haue done so that the people are vsed but as ciphers and haue no liberty in themselues So this is as good as no election Of Lord Bishops and Ecclesiasticall persons exercising ciuill authoritie THe common obiection is that our Sauiour being the chiefe Bishop was not held for a Lord neither had hee any outward pompe or glory in this world To which I answer if so be they inferre this conclusion vpon that example therefore Bishops must not be Lords the weakenesse of that argument will appeare by the like for they may as well conclude against Kings that because our Sauiour being a King yet was no Lord had no pompe nor glorie-therefore Kings must not be Lords c. I could answer further Tit. 2. that he was a Lord and so the Apostle doth call him a great Lord and the head of the Church and the Prince of Eph. 4. 15. Apoc. 1. the kings of the earth and because he is head of the Church all Kings doe holde their Crownes vnder him That the world did not acknowledge him for a Lorde it was their blindnesse Hee came to be crucified and had the world knowne him non Dominum gloriae crucifixissent they had not crucified the Lord of glory And yet in his state of humility hee had an honourable retinew to attend vpon him to the number of eighty two his twelue Apostles and seuenty Disciples Matth. 1● Luk. 10. Iudas was his treasurer or pursbearer he sent Philip to the market to buy bread he imployed his Disciples in such seruices
commended onely to the Apostles but to all men So that if the title of Lord belong not to the Apostles neither doth it belong vnto ony other because these wordes doe indifferently concerne all The second question is whether in these wordes of our Sauiour any mention is made concerning the title of Lord or no Surely whosoeuer shall say that the title of Lord is here forbidden hee hath as litle iudgement in the Greeke tongue as the man in the Gospell which was not able to discerne men from trees For the Greeke which is authenticall because it was written by the holy Ghost hath no such words as gracious Lords but euergetai bountifull or benefactors or doers of good they which bare rule ouer them are called well doers but yee shall not be so There cannot be one place of Scripture alledged betweene the first of Genesis and the last of The Apocalips to proue that Gods Ministers may not be called Lords but some places may bee alledged to proue that they are Lords Our Sauiour his selfe doth accept of that titile Ioh 3 2. of Lord giuen him by Nicod●mus when hee called him Rabbi that is my Lord. For Rabbi as Pagnin sheweth in his Lexicon signifieth Magistrum honorabilem inclytum ob multiplices quibus po●let dignitates a Maister an honourable Ioh. 13. 13. person a man that is eminent by reason of his manifold dignities and places of honour which he holdeth And in another place he saith the name Kurios Lord doth of right belong vnto him Vmeis phoneite me o didascales caio Kurios cai calos legete eimigar You call me Doctor and Lord and ye say wel for so I am Furthermore Saint Paule and Silas accepted of the same ●itle of Curios Lord when it was giuen them by the keeper of the prison when hee fell downe before them and saide Kur●oi Lords what must I doe to be saued to whom they Act. 16. 30 answered beleeue in the Lord Iesus and thou shalt be saued And a greater title then Lord is giuen to Gods Ministers in his owne word they are called Gods For that of the Prophet Psal 82. 6. Ioh 10. 33. God standeth in the assemblie of Gods and I haue saide ye are Gods meaning of Princes and Iudges our Sauiour his selfe expoundeth of Ministers For when the Iewes saide to him For thy good worke wee stone thee not but for blasphemie and that thou being a man makest thy selfe God Iesus answered them Is it not written in your Lawe I saide yee are Gods if hee call them Gods vnto whom the word of God is giuen and the Scripture cannot be broken say yee of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world thou blasphemest because I sayd I am the Sonne of God You see how in the whole course of the Scripture the Minister and the Magistrate goe together both of them are Gods annointed both called Gods because they represent the person of God vpon earth both Lords because they be the deputies and Leiftenants of him that is the Lord of Lords to the ciuill Magistrate is especially committed the temporall sword to the Minister the dispensation of the word And you see here the reason plainly expressed why our Sauiour calleth Ministers Gods because vnto them the word of God was giuen and the same word which was committed to the ministers vnder the law is cōmitted more abundantly to the ministers of the Gospel and must continue with them to the worldes end The king is called Poimen shepheard so is the minister in the originall tongues pascere Psal 2. regere to feede and to gouerne is all one And that the English translation is corrupt where it hath ye shall not be called gratious Lords it appeareth not onely by the originall but also by the analogy of faith because according to faith Bishops may be Lords as I haue shewed and then much more gratious Lords for else they were gracelesse Lords For this word grace according to the Scriptures is taken actiuely for the loue and fauour of the superiour which hee vouchsafeth the inferiour So the Apostle saith By the grace of God I am 1. Cor. 15. Luk. 1. Luk 2. Luk. 4. Rom. 3. Tit. 3. Eph. 4. 1. Tim. 4. that I am or else passiuely for any good parts gifts in the inferiour by which he is respected of his superiour So the Virgin Mary was ful of grace the child Iesus grew in grace they all meruailed at the wordes of grace which proceeded out of his mouth wee are freely iustified through his grace if of grace then not of works we are saued by grace through faith To euery one of vs is giuen grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ Do not neglect the grace which is conferred on thee by imposition of hands Let euery man 1. Pet 4. Eph. 2. as hee hath receiued grace minister the same one to another Thirdly that wee may come to the true exposition of these wordes There arose a controuersie among them who should seeme to be the greatest c. In which story are two things to be obserued their example of ambition which did striue for superiority and our Sauiour his doctrine of humility teaching that such ambition is found among the Gentiles and ought not to bee among Christians The Kings of the Nations saith hee reigne ouer them that is ouer the Nations which are vnder them and that by oppression as Saint Chrysostome and Musculus haue ezpounded it not according to iustice as Gods word willeth them to doe but after their own sensuall lusts and fleshly desires and they are called euergetai doers of good as the Ptolomes King of Aegypt two of them did sername their own selues albeit they were not doers of good but of euill and oppressors of their subiect Cōcerning the applicatiō of this to christiās he saith you shal not be called so that is you shall not reign as kings but gouerne as subiects not tyrannically but iustly you shall not be called doers of good but cacoergoi euill doers and malefactours although ye doe good as the Apostle speaketh Wee are reuiled and yet we blesse wee are persecuted and wee suffer 1. Cor. 4. 12. 13. Act. 10. 38 we are euill spoken of and we pray It is your dutie to doe good as it is said of our Sauiour dielthen euergeton he went about doing good yet you shall not haue the due praise of your well doing as our Sauiour himselfe was called Belzebub a glutton a drunkard Iohn the Baptist an hypocrit all the Apostles seditious men c notwithstanding they were all doers of good So then in this place is not forbidden honour and authority but ambitious seeking of it as when they stroue and vniust vsing of it as the Kings of the Nations did as when he saith The Scribes and Pharisies loue the chiefest places c and to be called Rabb c Maister Beza vpon that