Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
law_n aaron_n add_v moses_n 101 3 6.9328 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
A26858 Against the revolt to a foreign jurisdiction, which would be to England its perjury, church-ruine, and slavery in two parts ... / by Richard Baxter ... Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691. 1691 (1691) Wing B1182; ESTC R22132 311,021 600

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

of Foreign Jurisdiction is Hostility against Kings and States III. That Foreign Councils of Bishops and Dyets of Soveraign Princes are Authorized for Communion for mutual Counsel and Concord by Contract and Agreement and have no just Jurisdiction or Political Regiment over particular Soveraigns or their subject Congregations Though in Councils they retain their proper Power at home IV. The Foreign Councils agreeing on things profitable to the common benefit of all Gods own Law of Love Unity Concord Edification and publick Regard and Peace forbiddeth the particular Bishops and Churches causlesly to dissent and affect singularity But if they agree on things hurtful and dangerous to any of the particulars they are not to be obeyed nor yet if they claim Jurisdiction instead of Communion and Contract But every Prince and Pastor must Rule their own As Kings will not own a Foreign King or Council of Kings who shall Usurp a Soveraignty over them much more if over all V. That all Forcing Power that the Clergy can claim by Canons or Mandates in Christian Kingdoms is only from the Prince or State as they are authorized by him as his Officers who only hath the power of the Sword and not at all any part of their Pastoral Office And therefore as Grotius in that excellent Book de Imperio sum Potest circa Sacra hath shewed Clergy-Canons are no Laws but directing Agreements VI. The Canons of the Greatest Councils called General were Laws to none without the Empire unless Foreign Princes or Pastors made them so Nor to any within the Empire but by the Soveraigns Act as they are forcing and the particular Pastors as Directing VII Before the Division and Ruine of the Empire the Name of a General Council signified but an Imperial or National Council They being called by the Emperors who had no further power and only out of the Imperial Provinces unless any odd Person came voluntarily in for help and advantage which was rare This I have at large proved in my two Books against W. Johnson alias Terret And Ecclesia Vniversalis usually signified no more than Vniversal National or Imperial Leo meant no more when he called himself Caput Ecclesiae Universalis nor Phocas when he gave Boniface the Title of Universal Bishop And when the Empire was divided it was the Treasonable Erection of Popery to feign that Orbis Romanus was Orbis Universalis and that Concilia Generalia and Ecclesia Vniversalis meant extra Imperial and Vniversal Over-foreigners and all the World And this is still as the Foundation of Popery so the common Cheat that pleadeth for Foreign Jurisdiction VIII Though Rome was a meet Seat for Imperial Church Primacy while Emperors would have it so as it hath no just pretence to the Government of Foreigners so it is of all others most unfit for a Primacy or Presidentship in the Councils of Foreign Confederate Princes and Churches because it claimeth so much more even Foreign and Universal Regiment Nor are Councils of such Bishops or Princes to be trusted with General Contracts who claim such Jurisdiction A Primacy in Lawful Councils of Confederates would strengthen their claim of an Universal Jurisdiction till they openly renounce it And so would the use of a Senate or Council that pretendeth to the like power IX Patriarchs and Metropolitans and Provincials or Diocesans in one Empire or Kingdom can for Number Seat or Precedency justly claim no power of Governing Foreigners nor subject Bishops of that Nation but from the Soveraign X. Legislation is the first Essential power of Regiment Therefore none can be an Universal Legislator that is not an Universal Rector XI As an Universal Monarch Ecclesiastical or Civil is the absurd claim of an Impossible thing and open Hostility to all Christian Kings and Churches so an Universal Aristocracy in Councils or Patriarchs and Bishops is yet more absurd as claiming a more notorious Impossibility than the Pope doth XII An Universal power of Expounding or Judging of Christs Laws by Regent Authority or of being such Keepers of unwritten Laws seemeth the most Eminent part of Legislation it being more to be Judge what is Law and to make or determine of the sence than to make the bare words And so the Bishops should have a higher Regency than Christ Official Judges Expound the Laws only in their limited Provinces and for the deciding of particular Cases but not to be the Universal Determiners of the sence to all others None but the Law-makers can make an Universally obliging Exposition XIII The instance of the Apostles power will not prove an Institution of a stated Universal Legislative Aristocracy or Monarchy For 1. It is evident that Christ first chose and instituted them as his National Ministers by the number of Twelve related to the Twelve Tribes and by the keeping up just that number after the coming down of the Holy Ghost And by his special Mission of Paul Barnabas and others to the Gentiles distinguishing their Apostleship from Peter's and the rest to the Jews 2. When Persecution and the fall of the Jewish state made the Apostles Office more Extensive it was rather Indefinite than Universal They were to go as far as they were sent and were able 3. The Church was then in so narrow Bounds as made that Extent easie when now an Universal Humane Regiment is of Natural Impossibility and so past rational Controversie 4. Their power was not any further Legislative than as they were Promulgators of Christs Laws and Determiners of mutable undetermined Circumstances or Accidents 5. They have no Successors in those extraordinary parts of their Office which looketh like any part of Legislative power Which parts are 1. Being Eye and Ear-witnesses of what Christ did and said committed to their Testifying and Predicating Trust. 2. Having a special Commission to teach all Nations his Laws or what he commanded as the prime Promulgators 3. As having the promise of the Spirit to Teach them all things and bring all to their remembrance 4. And having the Miraculous Gifts of the Holy Ghost to attest their Witness As Moses had Successors in Executive Regency but not as a Mediatorial Deliverer of Gods Law which Aaron Samuel David and Solomon must obey and rule by but had no power to alter words or sence nor add any thing but undetermined Circumstances Yet as the Laws of Christ promulgate by the Apostles bind all Nations to whom they are revealed so we grant that the same Laws of Christ declared by Councils or Preached by any single Minister bind all to whom they come And that every Minister and Christian being a Member of the Church Universal his Doctrine tendeth to Universal Benefit which yet giveth him no Universal Regent Jurisdiction As I remember I have said all this before in my Letters to Bishop Guning when you were his Second or Witness of our Conference But the Invitation of your Discourse which I shall now give you my thoughts of maketh me think that this
them And he thinks it probable that it was in imitation of the Philosophers Successions that these Ecclesiastical Successions were framed And when the Philosophers failed to nominate their own Successors then the Election was in the Schools Ans. What could be said more gently by such a man 1. Then the first Churches were like Philosophers Schools very good not many score or hundred Schools as the first and least Order 2. The Government of Churches was much like that of Philosophers in their Schools 3. Bishops and much more Presbyters might be made then without Bishops by the Election and Consecration of Presbyters 4. This was the old way in time of Persecution 5. This alteration was not for want of Power in the Particular Churches c. 6. But it was made to secure Observance in the Colleagues 7. And Church Successions framed in imitation of Philosophers We shall in due time enquire whether we are all bound to stand to these changes on pain of all the scorn and sufferings that the followers of them will lay upon us Will you know more of this Self-confutation In his Preface he saith P. 4. I suppose all Churches Originally equal and that they have since submitted to prudential Compacts But are not all we poor nothings then obliged on pain of damnation to stand to all that our Fore-fathers did And must we not take the Imperial Subjects of Asia Africa and Europe we know not who for our Fore-fathers in Brittain and be of that Heathens mind that drew back from Baptism when he heard his Fore-fathers were in Hell and said that he would be where they were No this moderate man tells you Though they may oblige them as long as the reason of these Compacts lasts and as far as the equity of those Compacts may hold as to the true design of those that made them and as far as those Compacts have meddled with the alienable Rights of Particular Churches yet where any of these Conditions fail there the Particular Churches are at liberty to resume their Antient Rights Obj. Yea but who shall judge when any of of these Conditions fail He answers next And I suppose the power of judging when these Conditions fail to be an unalienable Right of Particular Churches and not only to judge with the Judgment of private discretion but such a Judgment as may be an authentick measure of her own practice We thank you Sir that you give us so fair quarter But if you had not had we known where we should have commenced a Suit for our Native and Christian Birth-right and put you to prove quo jure John Thomas Peter c. meeting a thousand years ago we know not why nor when nor by what Authority did give away the Birth-right and the Souls of an hundred millions not then in being that never consented or heard of their names nor were bound to know that there was such a City as Rome Nice c. or such men as Leo Tharasius c. in the World And if you had answered us according to the Roman genius with Gaols or Fire and Faggot we would have appealed to God whether you and all such will or not and when God judgeth do your wor●t But would you think what a stress this Humane Catholick layeth on innovating Prelates Compacts He adds after all this P. 6. Whoever they were that nominated the persons whether the People the Clergy or the Prince or the Pope yet still they were the Bishops that performed the Office of Consecration which was that which was then thought immediately to confer the Power Ans. You were not then in being and therefore did not then think it And you know mens thoughts so long before you were born no better than others Oportet fuisse memorem Had you not memory enough to make your Preface meet with your Book where you say that Presbyters did Consecrate Bishops and yet did not give them the Power and say that as to the Supreme President we know his name it must still be otherwise Yet this fundamental Humanist concludeth p. 11. They must be guilty of disobedience to the Divine Government Guilty of giving or abetting a Divine Authority in Men to whom God has never given such Authority nay in opposition to all the Authority he has really established among men They must be guilty of forging Covenants in Gods Name and counterfeiting the great Seals of Heaven in ratification of them And what can be more Treasonable by all the Principles of Government What is more provoking and more difficultly pardonable They must be guilty of sinning against the Holy Ghost and unto Death and of the sins described in the passages of the Epistle to the Hebrews with which none do terrifie the Consciences of ignorant unskilful persons more than they do They must be guilty of such sins which as they need pardon more than others so do they in the nature of the things themselves more effectually cut off the offender from all hopes of pardon in an ordinary way By being disunited from the Church he loses his Union with Christ and all the Mystical benefits consequent to that Vnion He has therefore no Title to the Sufferings or Merits or Intercession of Christ or any of those other blessings which were purchased by those Merits or which may be expected from those Intercessions He has no Title to pardon of sin to the gifts and assistants of the blessed Spirit or to any Promises of future Rewards though he should perform ALL OTHER PARTS OF HIS DVTY besides this of uniting himself again to Christ's Mystical Body in a VISIBLE COMMVNION Till then there are no promises of acceptance of any Prayers which either he may offer for himself or others may offer for him And how disconsolate must the condition of such a person be And pag. 20. Suppose I were mistaken why should they take it ill to be warned of a danger Ans. 10. What harm was it for those Act. 15. to say Except ye be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses ye cannot be saved And yet did Paul rail when he said Beware of evil-workers beware of Dogs beware of the Concision What Sect cannot easily without a Doctors degree thus dispute You are all damned that be not of our mind or Sect. But the Devil hurts those most whom he least affrighteth Ans. 2. What if we put this to wise men to tell us 1. How he can prove that all the Christian World agreed to the Compacts that bring us under these hellish consequences I provoke him again to answer my proof against Terret that they were the Compacts but of one Empire 2. How proveth he that we Brittains are under such Compacts when our Ancestors and the Scots renounced Communion with the Romanists 3. If our Ancestors after turned to Popery or Church-Tyranny how proveth he that we are any more bound to sin as they did than if they had turned to Arianism or Turcism when Ezek. 18. 33.
into Laws and make that seem needful to Unity which is against it and hurtful to the Churches no Christians should encourage their Usurpation by Obedience it being contrary to Christs general Laws 14. Whatever maketh true Christians maketh Men Members of Christ and his Church And only the Essentials of Christians go to make true Christians and the Integrals to make compleat Christians 15. The Canons of Bishops are not Essential to Christianity nor the understanding the many Controversies about Diocesans Patriarchs Councils Ordinations Successions nor to know which is the true Bishop 16. Baptism is our Christening and he that is truely Baptized is a Christian and a Member of Christ and hath the pardon of Sin and right to Heaven before he be a Member of a particular Church or Pastor as the Eunuch Acts 8. and many converted without Bishops As the Indians by Edesius and Frumentius and the Iberians by a Maid c. 17. Whosoever truely repenteth and believeth and loveth God as God and is of a Heavenly Mind and Life is pardoned before God before Baptism and Baptism doth but Invest him in it and make him a Christian more fully by Covenant and before the Church and the want of it without contempt will not keep him from Salvation 18. No one shall be saved by being joyned to a right Bishop or receiving the Eucharist who hath not true Repentance Faith Love and the Spirit of Holiness No Sacrament saveth the unqualified 19. Thousands live in ignorance and wickedness in Atheism Sadduceism Carnality Adultery Drunkenness c. that conform to Bishops and receive the Eucharist And to tell such they are in a state of Salvation is opposition to Christ and Damnable deceit of Souls 20. The Levites and Inferior Priests received not their Office from the High-priest but by Gods Law had it by Inheritance to which God chose the Tribe of Levi Nor had the High Priests power to add to or alter the Laws and Office of the Inferior Priests or their own 21. Nor was there a necessity of an uninterrupted regular Succession much was of man's making Christ owned them that were in possession though Usurpers not of Aarons Line but such as bought the place of the Romans 22. Seeing the High Priest was a Type of Christ and the Scripture saith so much of the change of the Law and Priesthood and Christ hath made sufficient Laws for Church Offices it is presumption to Judaize and pretend to any other imitation of the High Priests than Christ hath ordained 23. No one of the Apostles was an High Priest over the rest but had equal Apostolical Power 24. Christ rebuked them for seeking who should be greatest and expresly forbad that which they sought 25. Every Pastor or Church-Presbyter hath an Office subordinate to the Teaching Priestly and Ruling Office of Christ. 26. Every ones Pastoral Office is instituted and described by Christ by his Spirit in the Apostles and this specification is Divine which none may alter nor make any other such 27. Therefore as Papists confess of the Pope all that men have to do is not to be makers or donors of the Office but to determine of the persons that shall receive it from Christ's donative Instrument his Law and ministerially to invest them as men Christen Marry Crown Kings c. 28. No Minister or Priest representeth Christ simpliciter but secundum quid as Embassadors or Justices do the King 29. Christ's Laws are above mans and no man's to be obeyed against them To obey man against God is Idolatry 30. The Priests or Bishops are under Christ's Laws as well as others and by them all their true Power is given and limited And therefore if they go against Christ's Laws they represent him not therein nor are to be obeyed as usurping an unjust Power 31. Therefore every Christian hath a Judgment of discerning whether Bishops Laws agree with Christ's and must be governed as reasonable creatures and not as Infants Idiots or Brutes 32. They that deny this and require absolute obedience in all things set man above God and make it the duty of Subjects to be Atheists Infidels Idolaters Mahometans Murderers Adulterers Hereticks where Kings or Popes or Prelates will command it 33. Multitudes of Church-Canons have been contrary to Christ's Laws as I have with grief proved in my History of Councils 34. Bishops that deposed Emperors and Kings were not to be obeyed therein 35. Almost all the Christian World since the use of General Councils are disagreed who are the true Bishops one Party setting up one whom others reject and condemn so that if it were necessary to Salvation to know who is the true Bishop of the several Churches few Christians could be saved 36. Many Canons nullifie the Office and Power of these Bishops who come in by the Magistrate without the choice or consent of the Clergy and People And I think Mr. Dodwell professeth Communion with few but such and so is by Canons condemned 37. There is no Law of Christ or unchangeable Law of man for appropriating a certain space of ground to one Bishops Jurisdiction Grotius and Dr. Hammond thought that at first most great Cities had two Bishops and Churches one of Jews and one of Gentiles And the Apostles never so appropriated any places to themselves but oft divers in one City were their Teachers 38. Occupation of a space of ground for Priestly Power is no just Title and may be altered And if it were the Primitive Occupation was contrary to Mr. Dodwells Model 39. If each City was to have a Bishop each of our Corporations should have one being all Cities in that antient sense 40. It is not necessary to all to be of any fixed particular Church as I have proved elsewhere of Travellers some Embassadors Merchants Vagrants c. while they are of the Universal Church and own Christ and obey his Law 41. The Electors do more to the making of Bishops than the Ordainers Oft-times Bishops have ordained contrary Competitors some one and some another and are oft forc't to ordain whom Princes and Patrons chuse 42. Cyprian and his Carthage Council prove in the Case of Martial and Basilides that it is the Peoples Duty to forsake those Bishops who are not qualified according to Christ's Law though Canonically ordained and approved And Martin separated from such and Gildas saith he is not eximius Christianus that owned the Brittish Bishops 43. Christ hath left sufficient Directions for the continuation or restoration of the Priestly Office without Canonical successive Ordination uninterrupted As well as God hath done for Kings 44. Seeing Mr. D. saith A Presumptive title may serve he thereby confesseth that it is not real Canonical Succession but the Opinion of it that he makes necessary 45. The Question is Who must be the Presenters When they so greatly differ Grotius presumed that the Chief Minister of a City or a Church was really a Bishop though not so called 46. The Reformed can