Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	place_n	scripture_n	word_n	9,705	5	4.5641	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46641	An apology for, or vindication of the oppressed persecuted ministers & professors of the Presbyterian Reformed Religion, in the Church of Scotland emitted in the defence of them, and the cause for which they suffer: & that for the information of ignorant, the satisfaction and establishment of the doubtful, the conviction (if possible) of the malicious, the warning of our rulers, the strengthening & comforting of the said sufferers under their present pressurs & trials. Being their testimony to the covenanted work of reformation in this church, and against the present prevailing corruptions and course of defection therefrom. Prestat sero, quàm nunquam sapere.	Smith, Hugh.; Jamieson, Alexander.	1677 (1677)	Wing J446; ESTC R31541	114,594	210

Church but as a Professor of Christianity which intitles others to this priviledge as much as him Therefore he cannot be the fountaine of Church power as such for whoever is the fountaine of power to any society is a member yea the noblest member of it Obj. But as a christian Magistrat he is a member of the Church Ans 1. What then will this prove him to be the fountaine of Church power so might Christian Husbands Parents c. argue as justly for this clame the truth is he being only a member of the Church as a Christian and not as a Magistrat Magistracy gives him no more priviledge then any other power civil or natural when the person tuines Christian for the benefite of membership goes on grounds and reasons common to all Christians and containes no speciality to one more then to another If any think Magistracy does they shall do well to prove it which none hath yet offered to do 2. If men understood well what it is to be a Christian a disciple and member of Christ's Church they would quickly see its inconsistency with the said profession does not persons turning Christians profese subjection to Christ his Lawes Ordinances and Servants which is repugnant to the fountaine of the Church power 2. He may not exercise Church power Therefore is not the fountaine of it all yeeld that these who are the fountaine of power to others may exercise it themselves it being in them and others acting as their delegates in its exercise that the Magistrat may not exercise Church power is clear for Church power being by positive institution from Christ they that exercise it must have a commission from him which none hath prodduced for the Magistrat Erastus asserteth it but without all proofe of which it is so destitute that the most of his followers have left him in this assertion Arg. 2. All Church power is lodged in and immediatly descended from Christ Jesus as the Supream Head and Ruler of the Church and Superiour to the Magistrat Therefore it is not subordinat to the Magistrat The reason of the consequence is clear for it is a repugnancy in a power to be immediatly subordinat to two Supream powers in one and the same respects especially where the one is superiour to the other The antecedent is manifest for Christ is only head of the Church all power in her is institute by him exerced in his name astricted to and regulated by his word and accomptable to him All notes of power immediatly descended from him Obj. But the Christian Magistrat as Christs substitute and vicegerent is under him the nearest and immediat fountaine of Church power for subordinata non pugnant Ans Long hath the Pope of Rome conrended for this and on grounds more plausible then these on which the Magistrat goes But Protestant Divines answer to the Papists on this head furnish us with irrefragable answers to the Magistrats clame which we desire our adversaries would consider answer at their own leasure we finde not the Magistrat inrolled among the officers of the Church far lesse substitute for Christs vicegerent if there be any Scripture for this bring it forth We know of none as yet alledged by our adversaries but what will plead as strongly for the heathenish Magistrat as for the Christian And if they do what traitours were the Apostles Ministers and Christians of the primitive times that did not acknowledge the heathenish Magistrates for their head in the Church but resisted and disobeyed their lawes and edicts against them for crying up of another K●ng in the maters of their Christian Profession Arg. 3. All Church power was institute by Christ in an immediat subordination to himself without any acknowledgment of or dependance on the Magistrat Therefore it is not dependant upon nor subordinat to him The antecedent is clear from the History of the New Testament where we find that Christ moulded and constituted the Church by his Apostles and furnished her with a Government and officers to be exercised in his name and all this he did without consulring or advising with the Magistrat or suspending of her upon him the Magistrat all this time resisting letting himself for crushing of this Church Kingdome of Christ which he erected in the midst of their Kingdomes making use of their rage and violence to establish and propagat it for some Hundreds of years All this is so evident that our adversaries are not able to refuse it what is there then to hinder the consequence that we draw from this deed of Christ If our opposites in this mater could shew us that the Church had no government institute by Christ nor exercised any all the time that the Magistrat thus opposed himself to her or that Christ had declared his will that she should be subjected to the Magistrat in her Government when he should become Christian they would soon end this strife but nothing can we learne from them to this purpose Arg. 4. As this Government was institute by Christ and his Apostles so it was exerced in his name in the Church without dependance on the Magistrat till Constantine the great 's time and from thence downe ward till the Reformation of Religion brack up in Germanie till which time it was never questioned by any until Erastus the Physician arose who laboured not only to subject the Church to the Magistrat in all her concearnes as such but denied all Government to her by divine institution that is distinct from the Government of the Magistrat contrare to full and clear Scripture which he most insolently and wickedly endeavours to wrest pervert So then if the Government of the Church was in Scripture times and downwards till within these hundered years exercised without dependance on the Magistrat both heathenish and Christian then it must yet be independant on and not directly subordinat to him Here our Antagonists are put to strange shifts The first three hundred years they must grant and may we not take this for a yeelding of the cause Scripture and antiquity hath been held for a sufficient plea for maters of doctrine and practise debates in Polemical divinity hath run on these two heads and whoever made out their assertions from these have been esteemed to carry the cause all that our adversaries have to say to this are these two 1. That the Government exercised in the Church was not by divine institution and precepts but by confederation of Churches and officers To this we reply 1. If the Epistles to Timothy to the seven Churches in Asia Revel 2 and 3. Chapters with other places of Scripture used by our Divines in this mater prove not the contrary they have no sense We beg of our adversaries they will for saving us a labour answer Mr. Gillespies Arguments from Scripture in the second part of his Aarons Rod blossoming 2 Besids they are not able to make out what they assert to wit that the Church did

out of envy and malice for 1. the Church is the executer of her own acts and sentences and not the Magistrat who only puts to execution his owne lawes that he is pleased to enact on her behalf 2. It is known to all that we grant to the Magistrat and to all in the Church a discretive judgment to cognosce on the Churches acts and sentences and if he finde them not to be just he hath a definitive judgment anent the execution of his own Lawes made about them for the obligation that arises from Churches acts and sentences on all in the Church to the obeying and furthering of them is only conditional and not absolute that is none is bound to obey and advance the Churches sentences except their mater be just and righteous which must be first known before they finde themselves obliged to this But here the immediat object of the Magistrats power and its exercise about Church acts and sentences is properly civil and not Ecclesiastical to wit whether he will execute his owne law or not These things are easy and plaine and if ambition and worldly interests had not determined many to the contrare there would be little controversie about them Obj 8. The Magistrats power and its exercise about Church maters and meetings being independant on the Church what he does in relation to Church concerns determinations and sentences he may doe it antecedent to these without the Church Ans We deny the consequence to be universally true for some of the Magistrats sentences about Church maters and meetings doe necessarly suppone the Churches sentences and acts for their object as these of ordination excommunication acts of regulation c. must necessarly pass before the Magistrat can reach the persons and things to which they are applyed for instance before the Magistrat can doe justice to a Minister in his maintenance he must first be ordained by it have right thereto on the Churches act of ordination which must first be known to the Magistrat and by him given as the ground or reason of his sentence for the Ministers legal right to enjoy and use the provided and allowed maintenance and so of many others We grant in some cases and things a power to the Magistrat about Church maters and meetings which he may exercise antecedent to the exercise of Church power he may yea no doubt he ought to command Ministers when negligent to their work or duty without a Church sentence yea contrare to it but to say that the exercise of his power in many things and cases is not necessarly subsequent to the acts and exercise of Church power is most absurd abhorrent to all right reason seing there are many things that the Magistrat ought to doe to and for the Church that necessarly suppone not only the being but the exercise of Church power without which the Magistrat cannot doe how shall he punish contumacious heretical and excommunicat persones till they be first dealt with by the Church conforme to the rules of the word and declared to be such c. The reason of the consequence is weak for all created power suppones its object and in its exercise must be subsequent and posteriour to it which is not inconsistent with the independency of any power on another as is to be seen in the instance of the marital power and others the power of the Magistrat about it presupponeth the conjugal relation its acts before it can put the laws in execution anent it in application to the persones under that relation The designe of this objection is obvious which is to evert all Church Government the necessity and use of it but before it have its full intended force it must first be proven that Church power and its acts are competent to the Magistrat and may be done by him as that he may ordaine depose receive into and cast out of the Church preach the word dispense all ordinances c. which no Erastian hath yet done for if these be incompetent to the Magistrat and are to be done by others the former conclusion will hold Conclus Haveing thus with all Christian ingenuity and plainness in the words of truth sobernes discovered our hearts anent the foregoeing particulars we expect that much charity and justice from all even our Antagonists that before they give out their censors they will seriously consider what is said and in the ballances of Scripture and true reason impartially ponderat the reasons and grounds of our judgment and practice least in stead of fighting against us they happily be found to fight against God for seing the grounds on which we build are of common obligation on all Christians and on which our Christian profession leans none can refuse our conclusions but they must either contradict and shake the foundations of the said profession or els shew their inconsequence and inconsistancy with these we have not insisted on nor much made use of particular places of Scripture nor wrangled as many in their debaits doe about the sense and application of these nor laid the stress of our arguments from antiquity on citations from particular fathers and historians but on the series and threed of these ancient records to which we appeal anent the maters debated in the preceeding discourse as any that deals candidly and impartially will on trial find The issue of our adversaries arguments in the defence of the Antitheses resolving in these three the imperfection of the Scriptures the manifest and violent perverting and wresting of them the professed and open contradicting of their authority by Hobs Leviathan and others more gross if grosser can be do sufficiently declare what the tendency of the contrare opinion is and what we may expect will be the result of the same if things continue for sometime in their present channel All Protestants before these debats entered on the field esteemed the perfection of the Scriptures the chief and principal foundation of the reformed protestant Religion and builded thereon their doctrins in opposition to popery which the patrones of prelacy doe now strick at and labour to shake in denying their sufficiency or perfection in maters of obedience or practice whereby they break the force of all the arguments that the Protestants used against the Papists for the fulness and perfection of the holy Scriptures and the truth is prelacy cannot be maintained without this assertion as is to be seen in the most eminent assertors of it for if we hold the Scriptures to be a perfect and full rule of faith and manners and not to be receded from in maters of doctrine worship and Government the prelacy controverted having so little evidence from them it cannot stand and if this sufficient regulation of the Scripturs be refused what a wide door is opened to humane inventions and what may not men bring in at it to the corrupting and polluting of all the Churches concerns We grant the admitting of the

and not to be the head of that Society to which any is such Now to the Minor that the Prelats and their Curats have their power from and in its exercise are subjected to a supream Architectonick power is beyond disput clear from the act of restitution formerly mentioned and other acts to be mentioned afterwards and will be so to any that consideratly peruse the same of which we are to speak at more large under the last head but for the time we propose these three from these acts for making out of this argument 1. They are expresly made to have a dependance upon and subordination to the King as supream to them in their Church judicatories and administrations 2 The government of the Church in its ordering and disposeing is annexed to the crowne as one royal prerogative thereof which not only suppons the government to be in him as the fountaine thereof but to be exercised with that dominion that is suteable to his regality 3 The giving of Church power to Church officers is supponed to be the effect and deed of his lawes and acts without which all power in the Church is declared to be null and void Objec Although the Kings Majesty be supream governour in all causes and over all persons Ecclesiastical yet he is not head to and of the Church Ans If he be supream governour in such causes and over such persons in Linea directa no question he is the head political to the Church for GOVERNOUR HEAD are equipollent terms whosoever is supream Governour to any society in this sense is a proper political head to it it is needless to quarrel about words if the thing be granted And that this subordination or supremacy is direct or in Linea directa is we judge clear from the fore mentioned acts seing they not only make the King the fountaine of Church power but moreover in the act anent the the National Synod he is made the All of the same and without him it is nothing The like of these the sun never shined on except these made by King Henry the 8. of England which being scrupuled at by all sorts of persons at home abroad they were in Queen Elizabeths time forced to alleviat the mater by removeing the title head and some mitigating explications allowed and ordered to be given to the subjects at the taking of the oath of supremacy but no such explications allowed here Arg. 3. If the Ministers and Churches required by law to receive and submit to the Prelats and their Curats thus thrust in upon them were constitut and setled in Christs way as Pastors and flocks in the just possession and actual use of all ordinances conforme to the rules of the word then it is no sinful separation for Churches in adhering to their Ministers not to receive nor submit to the Prelates and their Curats But so it is that the Ministers and Churches required by law to receive and submit to the Prelats and their Curats thus thrust in upon them were constitut and setled in Christs way as Pastors and flocks in the just possession and actual exercise of all ordin●●ces conforme to the rules of the word Therefore it is ●●●o sinful separation on their part not to receive and submit to the Prelats and their Curats in hearing and receiving of ordinances from them We suppose the consequence of the major proposition is evident and will not readily be denyed by any and if it shall happen to be we prove it thus If there be divine obligations on Ministers and their Churches to the performance of the mutual duties of Pastors and flocks then it can be no sinful separation for Churches in adhering to their Ministers not to receive nor submit to the Prelats and their Curats But so it is that the Ministers and Churches required by law to receive and submit to the Prelats and their Curats were under divine obligations to the performance of the mutual duties of Pastors and flocks Therefore it is no sinful separation for Churches not to receive nor submit to the Prelats and their Curats The consequence of the major proposition leaneth upon these two and is infallibly made out by them first that th●●e is a divine relation of Pastor and flock betwixt Ministers and the Churches over whom they are set and secondly that they are bound by divine commands to do the mutual duties of such contained and prescribed in the word of God none that acknowledge the Ministery to be an ordinance of divine instution and the Scriptures to be the rule of religion and righteousness will be able to refuse these We conceive none even of our Antagonists will deny the Minor if they do will it not follow that the Church of Scotland before and at the Prelats introduction was no Ministerial political Church which is false as we undertake to prove when ever our opposites give their reasons to the contrare But we know the greatest debate will be about the Minor proposition of the first argument to wit that Ministers and Churches required by law to receive and submit to the. Prelats and their Curates were setled in Christs 〈◊〉 as Pastors and flocks in the just possession actual exercise of all ordinances of divine appointment This for mater of fact is beyond all denial for the Churches of Christ in Scotland before and at the Prelates late entry among us in the Year 1662. were for the generality of the furnished with Pastors and in the possession of all ordinances The debate then will run upon the jus of that constitution that was existent and in being at the Prelats introduction against which there is nothing that can with any colour of reason be objected but one of these three Obj. 1. Prelacy was wanting in that constitution which it should have had Ans 1. To the validity of this objection it must first be made out that Prelacy as it is established by law and in use and exercise among us at this day is of divine right or an office institute in the word of God which is not yet done and for any thing we have yet seen never will Let our adversaries in this great debait consider the reasons and exceptions we have given in against i● and answer them yea we undertake to prove that it is not only without but against the word of God 2 We ask at the Patrons of Prelacy whether they judge it essential to the constitution of the Ministerial political Church If they judge it essential doth it not necessarily follow that all the Reformed Churches of France Holland c. are no ministerial Political Churches and that all ordinances dispensed in them are Nullities yea that the Churches of the vallyes of Piemont called the Albigenses which by all historians have their original deduced from the Apostles were not such seing 〈◊〉 the confession of all they never had Prelacy from their begining of Christianity to this day which is contrare to