Selected quad for the lemma: king_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
king_n	abbot_n	bishop_n	kingdom_n	1,005	4	4.8926	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46639	Nazianzeni querela et votum justum, The fundamentals of the hierarchy examin'd and disprov'd wherein the choicest arguments and defences of ... A.M. ... the author of An enquiry into the new opinions (chiefly) propagated by the Presbyterians in Scotland, the author of The fundamental charter of presbytry, examin'd & disprov'd, and ... the plea they bring from Ignatius's epistles more narrowly discuss'd.../ by William Jameson.	Jameson, William, fl. 1689-1720.	1697 (1697)	Wing J443; ESTC R11355	225,830	269

All Men agree that this Nation viz. Scotland had Palladius their first Bishop from Pope Coelestine And again thus you are instructed how to refuse these who alledge that Sedulius the Christian Poet whom Pope Gelasius so much extolls had for his Master Hildebert the Arch-bishop of the Scots for seeing even Sedulius himself lav'd in the time of Theodosius the Emperor how could he have had for his Master Hildebert the Arch-bishop of the Scots seeing there was no Arch-bishop yet ordain'd in Scotland and Palladius is without debate affirm'd to have been the first Bishop of that Nation This is yet more plainly express'd by the most learn'd Antiquaries of our Country all of them agree in this that before Palladius the Church was rul'd and guided without any Diocesan Bishops For as Fordun hath it before the coming of Palladius the Scots following the Custom of the primitive Church had Teachers of the Faith and Dispensers of the Sacraments who were only Presbyters or Monks And Iohannes Major saith the Scots were instructed in the Faith by Priests and Monks without Bishops And Hector Boethius Palladius was the first of all who exercis'd any Hierarchical Power among the Scots being ordain'd their Bishop by the Pope whereas before their Priests were by the suffrages of the People chosen out of the Monks and Culdees Add hereto the known Testimony of Buchanan and of Sir Thomas Craig To pass over saith he that most silly ' Fable of the three Archflamins and the twenty eight Flamins it 's plain that there was no Bishop in Britain before Palladius who is by the English themselves call'd the Bishop of the Scots or if either the Brittons or English have any let them name them and at what time they flourish'd § 3. Yea so clear is this Truth that the most learn'd of our Adversaries have found no better way to elude when they cannot clide it than as Torniellus in another case said of Bellarmine to endeavour the penetrating of a most firm wall and cast the History about fourty of our ancient Scotish Kings as a forg'd legend Among these is Loyd Bishop of St. Asaph but both he and Dr. Stillingfleet are nervously refuted by the learn'd Sir George M●kenzie Advocat and that their main purpose and undertaking was utterly desperat he makes soon appear And tho' saith he this Author could prove that we were not settl'd here before the year 503 yet that could not answer the Argument viz. that is brought against Episcopacy from the Scotish primitive Church-government for the Culdees might have been settl'd before that time And thus in a few syllables he demonstrats that the Bishop as to his ultimat design had only his labour for his cost But Sir George being too sagacious not to foresee that from the mutual strugglings between himself and the Bishop any man might easily conclude that Presbytry was the primitive Government of the Church of Scotland and having been one of the prime Instruments to put in execution the prelatical Fury judg'd himself concern'd in credit to say somewhat in favours of Episcopacy and attempt the stoping of such an Inference Wherefore to this purpose in a Letter to the Earl of Perth prefix'd to the defence of the Antiquity of the Royal Line of Scotland He makes several assayes The first whereof is That this is one of the meanest Arguments that ever were us'd by a Presbyt●rian And that it is a weak Argument saith he appears from this that I have met with very few Laicks in all our Countrey who had heard of it nor with one even of these few who had valu'd it But be it so that the Argument seem mean we gain notwithstanding a most sufficient Argumentum ad hominem seeing our ablest Adversaries value it so much yea Sir George himself clearly acknowledges this while he saith and what can the Presbyterians think of their other Arguments which they value much since this which they valu'd so little is thought of such force by a learn'd Bishop as to deserve a whole book the cutting off of 44 Kings and the offending a Nation of Friends But it 's nothing tho' the Laicks had neither valu'd nor heard it seeing as himself grants Blondel with whom join the rest of the Presbyterian Writers urg'd it Hence appears that this Argument is by both Parties judg'd to be of great force and consequence for the solution whereof the Advocat brings nothing save what is altogether unworthy of any ingenous man As for example since saith he it cannot be deni'd but that these who ordain'd our Presbyters were Bishops it necessarly follows that Episcopacy was settl'd in the Christian Church before we had Presbyters or Culdees Wherein as to the solution of our Argument which was the scope of his Letter he only begs the Question and gives us what is impertinent thereto and contradicts moreover these our Historians whose credit he so excellently vindicats seeing as we heard they plainly tell us that our ancient Anti-diocesan practice was the very custom of the primitive Church And when our Historians say that the Abbots of Icolm-kill had Jurisdiction over all the Bishops of the Province that is to be understood as Beda observes more inusitato after an unusual manner And yet he compares this practice of the Abbot to that of a King who makes one a Bishop and to the practice of a Mother who makes her Son a Church-man now if it be any strange or surprising thing for a King by his Congé d'eslire to make one a Bishop or for a Mother to educate her Son in order to be a Church-man and procure some place for him let any man judge And later Historians saith the Advocat meeting with these ambigous words in our Annals Designatus Electus Ordinatus were by a mistake induc'd to appropriat these words to the formal Ceremony of Ordination and Imposition of hands As if any man in his wit could take these words to mean any other thing than Ordination providing they be as they are in our Annals spoken of one Church-man in relation to another Moreover he knew sufficiently that the best Records of our Country expresly say that our Church was rul'd by Presbyters without Bishops and so leave not the least room for tergiversation Bede is one of these Authors who creat them so much vexation for speaking of Icolm-kill the Isle saith he still uses to have for its Rector an Abbot who is a Presbyter to whose Jurisdiction the whole Province and even the Bishops themselves after an unusual manner ought to be subject according to the example of their first Teacher who was no Bishop but a Presbyter Hence it 's clear that even in Bede's time Bishops were but of smal note here and their power much less than in other Churches They are therefore much pain'd with Bede's words and chiefly St. Asaph who amongst other odd things he excogitats tells us that the Superiority this Presbyter had

than the rest assert that it is founded on the Example and Institution of Christ or his Apostles § 3. This Discourse therefore shall weigh the Advantages alledged to flow from Episcopacy that it may appear if it have such Effects as they Promise As also inquire if the Hurt and Dammage does not preponderat all the Good they can pretend to be linked to their Hierarchy Neither shall we neglect to examine if what the most Learned of that Perswasion bring from Ecclesiastick Antiquity be subservient to their Cause Section II. The Aphorism No Bishop No King discuss'd A Chief Argument whereby they would prove the necessity of Prelacy they bring from the great Support which they say it affords to Monarchy Hence with them No Bishop No King is an axiomatick Aphorism which cannot be readily granted seeing to name no more the charges the Hierarchy stood the King and Kingdom made a dear Bargain Much was spent in their stated Revenues but more by their clandestine Exactions and other sinistrous means of draining the Country and places of their pretended Jurisdictions throw which there are Incorporations that even at this day groan under the Debts they then contracted And yet more by sustaining Standing-forces to be Janizaries to the Prelates and their Complices and persecute the sincerer part of Protestants for else there was then no use of such numbers Yet their Maxime may be thus far granted that Prelacy may much contribute to the introduction of a Despotick and Arbitrary Government And indeed the great Power they usurped and manifold Influences they had over both Cities and Country either to wheedle or menace them to elect such Members of Parliament as pleased them and to Cajole or awe these Parliament-men to speak in their own Dialect And the being of a good number of them prime Lords of the Articles whereby they had either the mediat or immediat Flection of the rest made them well nigh able to effect no less Which kind of Government no Wise and Paternal Prince will desire § 2. Moreover that Princes have no great reason to be fond of them is apparent from their great unfitness to manage Politick and State-Affairs There are two Ways whereby one may be fitted for being a Statesman either when Natural induements are extraordinary which I doubt if many of our Prelats could affirm of themselves Or else that of Education and continued Industry whereby to be fitted for State-imployments but so far were they from any thing of this that during their greener years they had quite other Studies and Imployments being designed for the Ministry and so were obliged to prosecute hard the Study of Divinity which I am sure will give any Man his handsfull of Work who makes earnest of it From this they are taken to feed some Flock which at least will give them no less exercise Now how these Men can be fit for managing State-affairs or how they can be well kept from falling into Solecisms therein whose skill is so small is not very discernable But though they were never so well fore-armed for such high State-imployments how find they leisure to exercise them Is not the Ruling and Governing so many Ministers and Churches which they alledge themselves to be entrusted with a Work heavy enough to exercise if not to bruise any one Man Or where have they found Warrant to relinquish the Ministry and turn themselves to Offices of State when offered or to undertake both together Do they not believe that either of them is heavy enough Know they not that not only the Apostle but also the ancient Canons and to name no others these which though not truly are called the Canons of the Apostles most clearly condemn this their Practice Let neither say they a Bishop Presbyter or Deacon taken upon him any secular Business otherways let him be cast out off his Office Hence we may learn if it be out of Conscience that these Men plead for Antiquity when they palpable contemn and trample what themselves count the most venerable Precepts thereof Moreover it 's observable how they so far as their Interest led them still studied the ruine of those to whom they owed their Being as Bishops Thus the Roman Prelats studied the Ruine of both the Eastern and Western Emperours Thus the Bishops of Scotland brought no small Vexation to both King and Nobility in the Reign of Alexander the III. And so Becket of Canter●ury and his Faction handled Henry the II of England But worse did their Successours treat Richard the II whom in his Absence they deprived of his Kingdom It 's vain to repone that these were Papists seeing the ambition of Prelats is well enough known of whatever Name they be Yea such also have been the Practices of Prelats who acknowledged no Pope as divers of the Greek Patriarks who helped not a little to Dethrone their Emperour And the English Bishops as Sir Francis Knols complains in a Letter to Secretary Cicil encroached not a little upon the Priviledges of the Crown kept Courts in their own Name and still give out that the Complex of their Office i. e. the civil part of it as well as the other without any Distinction was not from the King but from Jesus Christ. Which Encroachments are really Imperium in Imperio On which account this their usurped Power as being dangerous and of a Romish Original was abolished in the first Parliament of Edward the VI. The Substance of what Dr. Sanderson either insinuats or more clearly expresseth in Answer hereto is that this was a Corruption in Edward 's Reformation And that some other Courts in England as well as these of the Bishops are not kept in the King's Name But sure it 's not very credible that this was a Corruption seeing nothing else since Edward's Days hath been done during the succeeding Reigns for that Church's further Reformation but 't is an odd Paradox if we consider the Author for it was Mary who Abolished this Act of Edward and restored their Power when she brought back the rest of Popery And though other Courts as he says be not kept in the King's Name yet reason teacheth and former experience proves how dangerous it was to give Ecclesiasticks ought that looks like an Absolute power and worldly Grandure whereby like the Pope they may by his Artifices arrive at length to a real Independency And indeed B. Laud made large steps towards it who as Roger Coke relates copt with the King himself and maugre both his Will and Authority must visit Colledges not as his Commissioner but by his own Metropolitan right and plumed thus saith the Author in his own Feathers all black and white without one borrowed from Caesar whereby the more he assumes to himself the less he leaves to the King he now soars higher And notable here is Dr. Sanderson's disingenuity who always gives out that the Marian Act which he still compares with yea prefers to that of Edward was

he superintended and let him use it as he pleased yet neither can the Imparity be counted considerable not the harm he could do very hurtfull for within half a year at most for there was a General Assembly twice at least every year they had a prospect of a General Assembly to right their wrong wherein every Pastor was to have no less Power than any Superintendent and no less capable to sit judge and censure the Superintendent than the Superintendent was on the other hand to exerce the like Power over him yea any Minister in the Assembly such sometimes as were none was as fair to be chosen Moderator as any Superintendent By the frequency of these Assemblies it came to pass that few or no matters of importance were determin'd in the inferiour Synods but came thither for their final Decision Wherefore if we narrowly look on these times we shall find that the Superintendents were rather appointed as Observers and Delators of Matters to the Assembly than any proper Judges thereof save when a special command was giv'n him to cognosce on such and such particular Matters He was frequently also charged with execution of the Assemblies Determinations all which was common to him with other Commissioners to whom the Assembly gave the like Charge and sent them not rarely to these very Provinces where there were Superintendents with equal Power and Authority to that of the Superintendent Sometimes they ordain'd Causes to be handled by the Superintendent with the assistance of these Commissioners sometimes by the Commissioner with the assistance of the Superintendents which Commissioners were sometimes Ministers of another Province and sometimes of that Province wherein was the Superintendent with whom they were join'd with equal Power Authority From all which 't is evident how much they are taken with the humor of cavilling who dare to ascribe to the Superintendents any real Superiority or Power over other Pastors or any thing repugnant to a compleat Parity But there is yet more even in his own Synod he could do nothing contrary to the Majority for he was to act nothing without the Synods Consent neither could he impede ought done by the Majority for he had no negative vote Yea he was made subject to the Tryal and Censures of the Synod of the very province where he superintended And here our Author is compell'd to acknowledge that there was a considerable difference between Superintendents and Bishops and indeed 't was considerable with a witness and so considerable that it really sets them on even ground with each Pastor of the word He adds that this was a great wrong and error in the Constitution and on this ocasion has a long invective against our Reformers in speciall Knox counting them Children Idiots Ungovernable and of bad Principles and spares not to flegg at all Scots men or Scotch mettal as he speaks But this is but a kicking against the pricks He knows all this helps him nothing nor is to the present Question which is not de jure but de facto what our Reformers freely and joyntly did Not on what grounds they did so He next retorts that according to the book of Discipline the Elders are allow'd to admonish correct and with the consent of the Church and Superintendent depose their Minister But First tho our Reformers had spoken just alike of the Elders and Ministers as they did of the Synod and Superintendent their words will not bear the like inference the power they give to the Elders could certainly be a spurr to the Ministers and yet they might be sure the few Elders of one parish would never make so bold with their Minister as the whole Synod might with their Superintendent Secondly There is no such allowance giv'n to the Elders concerning their Minister as to the Synod over their Superintendent the former much act only with the consent of the Kirk and Superintendent but nothing of this injoyn'd to the latter Yea our Author himself will have the power of Deposition to be a prerogative of the Superintendent and no doubt he or the Commissioner did in the Churches name execute her sentence To Depose therefore here and that with allowance of the whole context of that 8 head of Discipline which he cites is nothing else than to delate to the Church and Superintendent the crimes of the Minister and in their own sphere assist them in that action He adds he hath no where found that de facto the Superintendent was judged by his own Synod And it may be so for litle do we find of any thing was then done by provincial synods every thing of moment being left to the General Assemblies which were then most frequent Such a Constitution adds he inferrs no such thing as Parity among Church-Offices Those who maintain that the King is inferior to his Subjects in their Collection are not yet so extravagant as to say he is not Superior to every one of them in their Distribution But where Superiors or Equalls can be gotten the Men of this Principle will freely yeeld that none who are Inferiours in the Distribution ought to judge the Actions of their Superiours providing other Judges can be had who in this Case cann't there being but one King only in a Kingdom Hence they believing that none may live lawless think the King's Actions are cognoscible by these who are his Inferiours but altering their capacity in the Collection But is it so in the Case of the Superintendent whereof there were severals not one only as there is one commonly King in a Kingdom Seeing then he was to be judged by the Synod notwithstanding that there were other Superintendents in the Church 't is evident they counted every Brother in the Ministry his equal § 19. But the Superintendents saith our Author had a stock of prerogatives above other Pastors But be it so yet notwithstanding hereof if we suppose which I trust at the narrowest search shall appear the truth of what we have now adduc'd and the self consistency of the actings of our Reformers whom he would fain set at variance with themselves whatsoever Prerogatives he has really brought can never prove that the Superintendent had any Dominion over other Pastors or that they acted not in a true and real Parity so that from what is now said these his pretended Disparities are prevented and remov'd For example he tells us that Superintendents had a larger district were nominated by the Council elected by the Nobility and Gentry 't was not so with the Paroch Ministers But the Commissioners had no less districts and were appointed by the General Assembly which I 'm sure is of no less weight in the case than the Councils Nomination even tho' the Gentlemens Election be added thereto and yet who in his Wit will take him for any other Officer than is every Parish-minister or fall into the rovery of our Author who calls these Commissioners