A26860:156
An answer to Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Sherlock, confuting an universal humane church-supremacy aristocratical…An answer to Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Sherlocke, confuting an universal humane church-supremacy aristocratical…
An answer to Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Sherlock, confuting an universal humane church-supremacy aristocratical and monarchical, as church-tyranny and popery : and defending Dr. Isaac Barrow's treatise against it by Richard Baxter ; preparatory to a fuller treatise against such an universal sovereignty as contrary to reason, Christianity, the Protestant profession, and the Church of England, though the corrupters usurp that title.An answer to Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Sherlocke, confuting an universal humane church-supremacy aristocratical and monarchical, as church-tyranny and popery : and defending Dr. Isaac Barrow's treatise against it by Richard Baxter ; preparatory to a fuller treatise against such an universal soveraignty as contrary to reason, Christianity, the Protestant profession, and the Church of England, though the corrupters usurp that title.
London: printed for Thomas Parkhurst, 1682
Chapter 4: My words of Gods Collation of Ministerial Authority, Vindicated from the forgeries and…
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
§. 11. V. If when the Recipient is duly qualified, and chosen, and capable, he does not think that Gods Law, or Grant, is a sufficient signification of his Donative will, and a fundamentum juris, and an obliging instrument, 1. He must deny the very nature and force of Gods Law, and Grant. And 2. He maketh it less effective than the Laws, Charters, and Donations of men are; For which he cannot have the least show of true reason.
§. 11. V. If when the Recipient is duly qualified, and chosen, and capable, he does not think that Gods Law, or Grant, is a sufficient signification of his Donative will, and a fundamentum juris, and an obliging instrument, 1. He must deny the very nature and force of Gods Law, and Grant. And 2. He maketh it less effective than the Laws, Charters, and Donations of men are; For which he cannot have the least shew of true reason.
§. 12. VI. Can he devise any other sort of power in the Ordainers, than I have named? What is it? If he say, that they give the Office-power; I ask, Is the controversy about the word [Give] or the Act? If that which I have named be called giving, let him use his liberty, and call it how he will. 1. But as to the Thing, what is it more than I have described? It is God, and not man that made the Office in genere & specie. Did our Bishops make the universal Law, which stablisheth the Office in the world? 2. And the Bishop never had that power, and therefore cannot give that which he had not: It's Dr. Hammond's reason against Presbyters ordaining, N•mo dat quod non habet. The word Office or Power and Duty, signifieth an Accident, which cannot transire a subjecto in subjectum. The Orda•ners have their own power, but they have not another mans. 3. Do they give it as Masters and Owners, or only as the Donors Ministers? No doubt they will say as his Ministers And do I need to prove to Mr. Dodwell, that servants are not the Donors, and give not their own, but deliver their Masters? Stewards themselves are but entrusted with the performance of their Masters will, in delivering his Goods as he requireth them.