Selected quad for the lemma: enemy_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
enemy_n	aaron_n	church_n	way_n	14	3	3.7036	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86484	A rejoynder to Master Samuel Eaton and Master Timothy Taylor's reply. Or, an answer to their late book called A defence of sundry positions and scriptures, &c. With some occasionall animadversions on the book called the Congregational way justified. For the satisfaction of all that seek the truth in love, especially for his dearly beloved and longed for, the inhabitants in and neer to Manchester in Lancashire. / Made and published by Richard Hollinworth. Mancuniens.	Hollingworth, Richard, 1607-1656.	1647 (1647)	Wing H2496; Thomason E391_1; ESTC R201545	213,867	259

abhominable sinne and grant that the dream may be to our common enemies and the interptetation to them that hate us CHAP. XXVIII Whether the Church appear to be a particular Congregation MAT. 18. Sect. 1. IN Cong way justified you professe your selves to hold that the exercise of Church-power by the Congregational church is founded upon this text as the observation of the Christian sabbath is upon the 4. Commandement I joyn issue with you and observe that you grant 1. As the 4. Commandement did at the first promulgation of it and afterward command the keeping of the seventh-day Sabbath so this Text did first send the offended party of the Jewish church to the Jewish church while that Church remained in power as you acknowledge 2. As the 4. Commandement doth equally command any day in the week which God by other Texts doth require to be kept after the expiration of the Jewish sabbath so this Text sends the people of God to any Church which after the dissolution of the Jewish church should be in strength by vertue of a charter from heaven 3. That he that shall affirm that the first day of the week is to be kept holy rather then the 7. or 6. is enjoyned by the fourth Commandement other Texts set aside doth abuse and wrest the 4. Commandement so he that asserts that this Text doth so prove that the Church must be only Congregationall not Nationall and Oecumenicall doth wrong this Text. 4. Hence also may be inferred That if a day or time of the same extent was there commanded to the Jewes and after the expiration of the Jewish sabbath to Christians then a Church of the same extent as was amongst the Jews which was a Church consisting of subordinate Judicatories and was Nationall assoon as it was capable of being such and in a sense Occumenicall is here prescribed to the Christians after the expiration of the Jewish church And this is as much or more then I intended for it my professed work was only to vindicate the Text from the Congregationall way not to urge it for the Presbyterian as you would make the Reader to believe If I at this time do solidly vindicate the said text I do as much as I desired the chief of your other texts on which your opinions are pretended to be built have been and shall be examined Though I might spare my labour in this point your selves confessing that Mat. 18. doth not prove that the Church must be congregationall which I would have persons concerned to take notice of yet I will give the Reader a taste of your Reply Sect. 2. Reply p. 86. The sinew and strength of your reason is this It is necessary that the judging Church in the times of the Gospel should answer in the manner of its judicature to the judging church in the time of the Law therefore the Gospel-Church ought to have gradual judicatories and appeals as the Jewish church had The main hypothesis whereof is unsound for it is necessary that the Judging church in the time of the Gospel should be conformed to spirituall precepts and patterns left us by Christ and his Apostles and Christ hath not appointed the Jewish church to be a pattern to Gospel churches so then Churches of Presbyterian complexion are not here understood for there is a vast difference between them and the Jewish church Rejoynd 1. The sinew and strength of my reasoning is not that which you pretend it is plain in the words to be this If Kahal and Ecclesia with the 70 signifie the company of Elders as well as the body of the People and a Church with graduate Judicatories and Appeals then this Text doth not prove whatsoever others do or do not that the Church must be a particular Congregation as opposed to Classical Provincial National c. But the first is true therefore the second And this argument is good and strong your selves being judges 2. It is enough for me to shew that it doth not conclude for the Congregationall way though I should not shew that it makes against it or for the Presbyterians The argument you propound is your own not mine nor would I put the matter of it into fuch forme did I use the argument 2. You shew a vast difference between our Churches and the Jewish but doth this prove that the subordination of Ecclesiastical judicatories amongst the Jews was ceremoniall or that we may not reason for it from the analogie of the Jewish church Anabaptists may and do render many differences between Judaisme and Christianity Baptisme and Circumcision and yet notwithstanding from them all we may conclude from analogie the lawfulnesse of Paedobaptisme and Christian Magistracie There is a vast difference between the Priests of the Law and Ministers of the Gospel yet the Apostle by analogie reasons from the one to the other in point of maintenance In things most like it is easie to find some difference none of your differences do cleer that subordination of Ecclesiastical judicatories was ceremoniall amongst the Jewes or unlawfull amongst Christians and therefore they are not pertinent But what are those differences Sect. 3. Reply p. 87. 1. The Sanhedrim did not consist of chosen men sent out by the Synagogues but of Priests and Levites R. If it did not consist of chosen men which you say but do not prove yet God hath appointed us to chuse men for the Synod Act. 15.2 The Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 determined or ordered to send Paul and Barnabas and certain others with them This is as truly an ordinance of God as that was then 2. That the Sanhedrim did consist of none but Priests and Levites you too barely and boldly affirm It is said that Jehosaphat did set of the Levites and Priests and of the chief of the fathers of Israel 2 Chron. 19.8 for the judgement of the Lord and for controversies You reply further p. 87. that there was one chief by office 2 Chron. 19.11 but in the Classicall way all are equall in point of office R. The High-Priesthood was ceremoniall and therefore it must be abrogated but that the Sanhedrim quà a superior Judicatory was ceremonial is the thing you should prove 2. If in the Classicall way all be equall in point of office how comes it to passe that you charge that way to be Prelatical 3. So far as the high Priest Amariah or any other was but a President of the Sanhedrim so far reason and light of nature if not of Scripture shewes us that we may follow the pattern Reply p. 87. Thirdly you reply The Sanhedrim dealt with civil matters Deut. 21.5 Synods with ecclesiasticall Rejoynd 1. Their civil lawes were divine not drawn up by Princes or Parliaments but by God himself and so as being Gods lawes the Priests were the Lawyers and did interpret them and tell de jure what of right ought to be done yet de facto the Ecclesiastical Sanhedrim did put no man to death

them in the Lord for taking too much upon them be not the gainsaying of Corah You in the Cong-way justified p. 38. say Your reasons to prove our way is the gainsaying of Corah are weak For first this schismatical company would utterly have taken away the Power of Moses and Priesthood of Aaron and so when they had officers would have destroyed their officers We only in the extraordinary case of an utter want of an Eldership hold it fit to ordain by persons deputed by Preachers such as have been Ministers as deputed or by Elders elected Rejoynd I could wish for your sakes the reasons were weaker then they are 2. That Schismatical company did not oppose Moses as a Magistrate but as a Minister and therefore they said All the people of God are holy Not all the people of God are wise valiant true-hearted which are the vertues of the Magistrate Sympsons Sermon before Parl. July 26. 1643. And they did not claim to rule the State but to offer incense Num. 16.3.5.10 Hence Aarons rod budded not Moses his rod. 3. That they would have destroyed their officers is more then I know or you prove only they did usurp upon the office of the Priests yet here you grant that if you should endeavour to take away the power of the Magistrate or to destroy their officers then you were like to Corah indeed 4. Your extraordinary case is now too ordinary viz. at the erection of each of the Churches of Independents Brownists Anabaptists Familists 5. The case of Vzzah in staying the Arke 2 Sam. 6.6.8 and of Sauls sacrificing 1 Sam. 13.9 10 11. might seem to be extraordinary yet the Lord was very angry 6. If any Preachers do ordain that have been Ministers they do renounce their Ministery before they do ordain And as for the elect Elders they are when they do ordain but persons elected to be Elders for election of the people doth not make the officer as hath been shewed 7. That the Church hath any commission to depute a man to ordain I read not and Non credimus quia non begimus If Corah Dathan and Abiram had had a deputation from the Church of Israel to have offered incense as it may be they might have had this would have made the sinne of the Church greater not theirs the lesse 8. But if you may here be excused à tanto or à toto yet the Anabaptists with whom you close too much which ordinarily do place the power of administring the Sacraments in disciples that are no officers cannot be excused Sect 2. Cong way just If placing Church-power in the body of the Congregation were the gainsaying of Corah then because election of Officers Act. 6. is a branch of Church-power and was placed in and acted by the body of the Church then that Church was guilty of the gainsaying of Corah Rejoynd 1. You do not answer my argument but make a counter argument 2. Placing of Church power in the Body is undoubtedly the gainsaying of Corah Num. 16.3 All the Church is holy viz. hath power to do the Priests office Wherefore lift ye up your selves above the Church of the Lord 3. That election Act. 6. was but a nomination of some officers and a setting them before the Apostles who appointed them over the businesse and made them officers and that this was an act of Church-power placed in the body of the people the text saith not But of this more in its proper place Sect. 3. Cong way justified It is not true that our cause allowes or enjoyns complaining of the regular exercise of the power of the Elders that rule over us we honour and obey the Elders of our severall Churches and also the Elders and Members deputed of severall Churches meeting occasionally to rectifie disorders c. But for stated Classicall Elderships and your severall graduall Judicatories swallowing the Votes of the Elders of particular congregations Ordaining Depriving c. these are not Powers ordained of God Rejoynd Corah Dathan and Abiram did not nor I believe would confesse that they did oppose any Ordinance of God but only the pride and usurpation of the Priests 2. If Classicall Elderships and graduall Judicatories be powers ordained of God as hath been shewed they are then you are guilty as you implicitely confesse of the sinne of Corah and do resist lawfull authority as they did 3. That which makes me to suspect your Way of this sin is 1. This is a sinne of the New-Testament as well as of the Old Jude v. 11. 2. It was not so much a sedition against Moses the Magistrate as a schisme against Moses the Minister and Aaron the Priest 3. They did gather a Gnedah out of a Gnedah a Congregation out of a Congregation Num. 16.1 the Chaldee understands it of taking that is of withdrawing of himself saying And Corah separated himself and Salomon Jarchi also expounds it He took himself aside to be apart from the congregation and Dathan and Abiram also took men and separated themselves or Corah took them all into a distinct Gnedah or congregation v. 5.16 Psal 106.17 Now who they are that plead for withdrawing separating gathering themselves from a true Church into a distinct Congregation you very well know 4. As also to whose opinion the gainsaying of Corah is most sutable in the very expressions of it All the church or congregation is holy you Elders take too much upon you wherefore lift ye up your selves above the church of the Lord The church hath the power of the Keyes the church may depose and excommunicate if she see just occasion all her Elders 5. The authors of that Schisme were no blasphemers hereticks or fundamentally erroneous no adulterers nor grossely vitious any way that we know of but in likelihood they were men of good report and repute the Text saith they were famous in the church and though they be called wicked men v. 26. that was but in relation to their Schisme which is a work of the flesh Gal. 5.20 and shewes men to be carnall 1 Cor. 3.1 2 3. and the originall word signifies restlesse turbulent men the Greek hath it hard men 6. That schisme pretending power and liberty and questionlesse profit too for if the Priests work might be taken of them why not their tythes and wages took mightily for 1. 250 Senators called to the Assembly the Greek translates it Councel of the Governours Statesmen famous and renowned joyned themselves to these Schismatiques 2. The Congregation yea many doubtlesse religiously affected in the simplicity of their hearts favoured them v. 19.22 And though God appeared in an unheard of way against them yet all the congregation judged that Moses Aaron did oppose the people of the Lord appropriating that title to Corah and his company as though Moses and Aaron were not Gods people but enemies for which murmuring God sent a plague v. 41. 45 46 47. The Lord preserve the Parliament and people of the land from this