Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A10838
|
A manumission to a manuduction, or Answer to a letter inferring publique communion in the parrish assemblies upon private with godly persons there. By Iohn Robinson; Unreasonablenesse of the separation
|
Robinson, John, 1575?-1625.
|
1615
(1615)
|
STC 21111; ESTC S106681
|
22,876
|
24
|
deriving spirituall authority from them And because Popeish kings have given theyr power to the beast shall Christian kings therefore take the beasts power vnto them which they should surely do in makeing themselves the spring-heades from whence floweth the power of makeing ministers excommunicateing offenders which the Prelates vse in theyr Provinces Diocesses And albeit for want of the bookes I cannot exactly set down the judgment of the lawes in this case yet may I safely affirm that they no where derive from the kings civile authority the power of these spirituall administrations but do onely make the king the establisher vphoulder civily of this power The same ecclesiasticall jurisdiction which had been in vse in popery a great part of the popish Hierarchy was confirmed Eliz pri so continueth at this day in vayn men apply theyr industry arâ— in the washing of this blackmore Neyther yet doth it follow though the lawes of the land did esteem this Iurisdiction civile that therefore it were such indeed They may and do misesteem many things especially of this kynde They esteem the Crosse Surplice c. indifferent yea comely â—dificative ceremonyes are they therefore such or so esteemed by this authour So for those corrupt vsurpations abuses which he affirmeth to be mingled with the Byshops so seeming vnto him civile power do not the lawes of the land esteem even them also lawfull laudable ordinances orders The Arguments therefore from the lawes esteem to the nature of the thing is of no force Now that the prelates Iurisdiction in theyr Prov Dioc is not civile but ecclesiasticall a spiritual externall power appeareth playnly by these Reasons First where he makes it civile because it is coactive or bodily enforceing I conclude on the contrary that because it is not so coactive therefore it is not civile The furthest the Byshops can go as Byshops is to excommunicate a man or to pronounce him an heretique which done they may deliver him to the secular power or procure a civile coactive processe agaynst him from the L Chauncelour in certayn cases 2 dly Where he affirmeth that the king might perform the works of theyr jurisdiction by other civile officers there neyther can be stronger nor need be other Arguments to prove the contrary then the very consideration of the nature of those theyr workes which are for substance the makeing of ministers excommunicateing of offenders with theyr contraryes appâ—rtenances which to call civile workes what is it but to make a civile religion 3 dly Let theyr consecration to theyr byshopricks be looked into and there wil be found in them no word or sillable insinuateing any civile authority but onely that which is spirituall for the feeding of the flock doeing the work wherevnto the H Ghost hath called them such scriptures also being therevnto applyed as conteyn in them onely the callings offices workes of the ministers of the Church 4 ly Theyr civile authority whether that which is peculiar to some of them as to be of the pryvy councell or high commission or that which is more ordinary coÌ„mon to all as to be Iusticers of peace in the countryes where they live is but one the same conveyed by one and the same ioynt calling commission with that of other counsaylers commissioners Iusticers therefore is nothing at all to that iurisdiction by which they ordeyn ministers and excommunicate offenders which the foresayd civile magistrates neyther have nor can have power to practise though by theyr civile power they do and may civilely restreyn men vnder peyn of bodily punishmeÌ„t Ad vnto this also that the Byshops may do excercise all every part of theyr episcopall authority where they have not the least civile authority viz in the cittyes and corporations within theyr Provinces and Diocesses as for example the Bishop of Norwich in the city of Norwich where his civile authority is no more then myne Lastly whereas all civile proceedings are made in the name of the king they on the contrary side proceed In the name of God though too oft verifying the old saying In nomine Dei incipit omne malum And by these reasons that which I did not suspect that any would have denyed is confirmed to wit that the Prelates power in theyr Provinces and Diocesses is not civile but a kynde of externall spirituall power which I have also in my former book proved Antichristian as vsurpeing vppon Christes royal prerogatives subverting the order of true Christian government su allowing vp as with full mouth both the peoples liberty and Elders government wherewtih Christ the Lord hath invested the true Church He proceedeth But if this be so then sayth Mr Rob those ministers are vnder no spirituall government and so be lawlesse persons and inordinate walkers c. His answers are 1. that they so govern themselves as that no honest man hath cause to abhor from theyr communion 2 that they are subiect to civile government even in spirituall actions in the larger acception of the word to externall regiment merely spirituall 3. that they are no more lawles persons then I my self was when I had no elder ioyned with me or am now with myne one Elder since I exclude the people from all government In these answers he neyther dealeth with me nor the cause of the Lord as is meet For first I do not in my book inter this exception vppon the former ground as he sets it down for his advantage as will appear in the examination of the 3. answer 2. I do not alledg it to prove communion vnlawfull with them as he insinuates but to reprove that vppon theyr own plea theyr Church-state standing as such as wherein they neyther do nor can enioy the spirituall externall government of Christ in his Church so neyther have that conscience which is meet of the commaundements of Christ by his Apostles to give due honour to them who rule well to submit themselves to those who are over them in the Lord nor of theyr own frayltyes in what need they stand of the Lords ordinances of this in speciall for theyr guidance conservation in his wayes And though he passe by this reproof not myne but the H Ghostes turning it off another way yet let the godly Reader with good conscience remember that the disciples of Christ are to observ whatsoever he hath commaunded his Apostles withall that it was the Prophets comfort that he should not be confounded when he had respect to all Gods cammaundemeÌ„ts 3. In his 1. 2. answer he speakes not at all to the purpose in hand our question not being about the personall government which a man hath over himself nor about civile government though in spirituall actions nor about government at all in the larger acceptation of the word ut onely as it is taken
him not to hinder him For to obteyn licence of the Bishop is to obteyn publique authority of the publique officer and according to the publique lawes of the church to excercise a publique ministery 2. The great Turk is a lawfull civill Magistrate in his Dominions with whose civill authority it is lawfull to partake but so is not the Byshop a lawfull Ecclesiasticall officer in his Province or Diocesse with whose spirituall jurisdiction Gods servants may communicate And is this to lead men by the hand to take for graunted the mayn question in controversy to wit that the Bishops jurisdiction in their Provinces Diocesses is lawfull which I have also by sundry arguments proved vnlawfull antichristian Surely they who suffer themselves thus to be led must be as destitute of spirituall sight as was Saul of bodily when men led him by the hand to Damascut Theyr authority then being proved so confessed by this myne opposite els where antichristian so consequently one of the sinns of Babylon whether excercised by themselves or by others eyther Officials in the CoÌ„sistories or ministers in the Parochiall churches may not by Gods people be partaken with no not in actions though otherwise lawfull under the peyn of Babylons plagues And this answer also serveth to the 4 th demaund or Supposition of this persons takeing besydes his licence the form of admission called orders of the Diocesan And so that which I bring pag 15. Arg 2. of my book is here misapplyed I there speak of lawfull actions performed merely by the personall grace of fayth the Spirit in a godly man though of infirmity remayning in an estate standing otherwise culpable but here of actioÌ„s though in themselves lawfull yet performed immediately by vertue or vice rather of that very vnlawfull state standing Suppose after this that being desyred so chosen by some assembly wherein there are many fearing God apparently he taketh a Pastorall charge of them haveing the Bishops Patrons admission but cheifly professedly grounding his calling vpon the peoples choyse that he do nothing but the same he did before besydes the administration of the Sacraments to such as are in charity discretion to be esteemed worthy what hindreth from communion here Indeed if men may take liberty in disputeing first to suppose what themselves have a mynde vnto and after to suppose that others are also of the same mynde with them and yet have litle reason eyther for the one or other they may then easily conclude theyr purposes But .1 I deny that an assembly gathered consisting of many fearing God many which must also be supplied without the fear of God is a lawfull Church-assembly haveing a right in communion or common right to call enjoy a pastour his pastorall administrations 2. I deny that any doth or can truely take a pastorall charge in the parrish assemblyes It belongs to the pastours charge not onely to teach minister the sacraments but also that as a mayn parte or duety thereof to govern and rule the flock which no parochiall minister doth oâ— can take vpon him 3. The Church of England doth acknowledge no such calling as is cheifly grounded vpon the peoples choyce but onely that which is grounded vppon the Bishops ordination at the first and to the ministery at large and determinately eyther uppon the Bishops license or vppon the patrons presentation Bishops institution and Arch-deacons induction confirmed by the publique lawes of the same Church both ecclesiasticall civill According to which publique lawes and orders especially submission vnto them being publiquely professed and given as is by the minister here deciphered we are to judge of the publique ministery of the Church not according to the private intendiments and vnderhand professions of particular persons And let God all reasonable men judge between me myne opposite whether a man goeing to the publique governers of a Church desyreing of them a publique office or publique orders so receaving them according to the publique lawes of the same Church therewith authority to preach the word so preaching publiquely in the same Church whether I say such a man be not to be esteemed as called to that work by these governers so by coÌ„sequence whither al men pertakeing with him in that work of preaching for which he was so sent do nor partake therin withall what in them lyeth in the authority of the sender And for such a man except he have publiquely renounced his former calling to pretend in secret vnto his freinds whom he dare trust who he thinks will agayn trust beleeve him eyther that he preacheth not by that calling or by an other principally is but to put on a cloak of shame to walk in craftines more like in truth to a disguized familist then a minister of Iesus Christ. And if any ministery grounded as this man supposeth be to be found in any of the assemblyes I deny the â—ame to be the ministery of the Church of EnglaÌ„d about which our question is And howsoever men do build much vppon the peoples acceptance of and submission vnto theyr ministery yet is this a very sandy foundation wherevpon to build such a weight If they be not the lawfull ministers of those Churches before it is theyr syn to accept of them submit vnto them as such The peoples acceptance and submission are not causes but consequences of the ministers calling duetyes which they ow vnto them all theyr life long 4. The supposition is but an imagination that any parochiall minister doth administer the sacrameÌ„ts onely to such as are in charity discretion to be esteemed worthy He is by his parochiall cure shew me the man whose practise is not answerable to administer the sacrament of Baptism to all the infants born in the parrish though neyther parent can no not in the most enlarged if â—ot over-stretched charity be judged to be of the fayth so in the covenant of Abraham according to which covenant Baptism is to be administred Lastly I would know of this man so of others who would bring the presbiteriall government vpon the parrish assemblyes without a separation what should be done with such men of years in the parrish as are to be esteemed vncapeable of the L Supper It should seem as the common opinion is that such should be suspended so consequently remayning obstinate incorrigible excommunicated But by what law of God or reason of man do the Censures of the Church apperteyn vnto such as had never right to be of the Church nor were within Gods covenaÌ„t made onely with theyr faythfull theyr seed And since the Church is onely to iudg them which are within the same faln from theyr former holines at least externall how should not excommunication be greatly prophaned vpon such as never came vnder that