taking Care of the poor thus ye may find it Acts 6. 1. In those dayes there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews because their widowes were neglected in the daily Ministration there is the same word again and upon that ground the Apostles insâ—ituted the Office of a Deacon as you may see afterwards and for that reason because of their Ministration they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as we use to call them Deacons but indeed is Ministers Again from hence it comes that this Office being the lowest and the foundation of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy because all that serve God for the good of mens Souls are at the least Deacons or Ministers That this word is sometimes in its general Notion applied to the very Apostleship Acts 1. 17. speaking of Judas who was one of the 12. Apostles He obtained part of this Ministry and verse the 25. speaking of him whom God should choose that he may take part of this Ministry and Apostleship from which c. where you see the Apostleship called Ministry so likewise 2 Cor. 11. 23. Are they Ministers of Christ I speak as a fool I am more speaking of the Apostles I am more more Ministerial more industrious Thus as we may say a man is a vegetable Creature which is the remote Genus so are these said to be Ministers but I can never observe that in any particular Application this word Minister is used for that second Order of Presbyter either in Scripture or Antiquity as in this corrupt Age by usurpation it is abused But I think in this question you understand by it the whole body of the Clergy by what Titles soever and in that sense I mean to speak of it and so addresse my self to the consideration of what a Minister is and I conceive that I may thus define him CHAP. II. What a Minister is in his Definition A Minister is an Officer ordained by God to do something conducing to the salvation of mens Souls In the first place his Genus is an Officer which nature he hath in Common with multitudes of others who are such either Magistratical or Servile I need not discourse now of that it is so apparent Secondly in his Difference the first phrase is ordained by God that is by the Command or Institution of God There are many Officers that are instituted and ordained by men who have power from God to do this Act of Instituting Officers but a Minister is an Officer instituted by God from him he hath power in Divine things these no man can have power over but he who hath this Authority granted him from God and that is it which St. Paâ—l affirms Heb. 5. 4. No man taketh this honor to himself but he who is called of God as was Aaron Nay presently after he affirmeth of Christ that he assumed the Priesthood not of himself but from the Father so then this Ministerial Function requireth Gods Ordination but by the word Ordination I not only conceive an Institution of God but likewise some Duty commanded which God orders thereunto So that by giving this Order so the School and we in English call these holy Functions God exacts a Duty in these men who exercise it For the graces given these men being such as the School calls gratis datae not sanctifying the person who hath them but such as are for the sanctification of others God who gives nothing in vain will require an Account of these graces and abilities And to this purpose St. Paul 1 Cor. 4. 1. Let a man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ and Dispensators or Stewards of the mysteries of God Vers. 2. Moreover it is required in Stewards that they should be faithfull that is to lay out the moneys according to their Lords appointment and direction according to the Lords Ordinance but there is more intimated in this word Ordinance to wit an enabling the person who is ordained to do some supernatural Work but the enabling must be understood in Actu primo not secundo that is he is enabled with Authority to do that is required A man gives his keyes to his Steward bids him search such Rooms such Boxes for such occasions as he hath need here he hath Clavem the Authority and right power to do this Duty to open the doors in Actu primo but perhaps his hands are weak he cannot turn the key or he is ignorant he knows not how to do it yet what he doth is regular he hath Power and Authority to do it and should another who hath more ability do it in the second Act and not in the first he doth it like a Thief not like a Steward This first right is certainly Conveyed by the Ordinance of God with holy Orders but not the second and they who do these duties without this Authority given them from Christ are therefore called by Christ Thieves and Robbers John 10. 1. He that entreth not by the door into the Sheepfold but climbeth up another way he is a Thief and a Robber they are Thieves but they who come by the door by Authority from Christ are the right Shepherds and have Authority to go into the â—old and do their Duty there so that though a Minister have Authority given him to do holy Things yet he may not have the Science or Integrity to do accordingly but what he hath so far is ratifyed by God but others who have not this Authority though they do the same things yet they are responsible for a presumption as may appear out of Acts 19. v. 13. where certain Exorcists took upon them the power Divine of Casting out Devils which was Apostolical but they stole the keyes of this power had them not given them and the Devils rent and tare them from all which it appears that the enabling with this power such as may be justifyed comes from a Divine Ordination and not else The next Term is To do something conducing to the Salvation of mens Souls I put this phrase to do something more largely than the Schools and the great Consent of the Church of Rome use to do who restrain it only to the holy Communion as if holy Orders were only referred to that Mysterie and so with wresting bring in those little Ecclesiastical Officers into the Number but we may observe that for ought I find a Deacon by his Institution or Practice at the first in the New Testament had nothing to do with the Communion nor indeed hath more now than to assist with the Cup And the great Power of the Keyes toucheth not the Act of Communion immediately but by reason of admission or prohibiting such as shall or shall not Communicate I choose therefore this phrase to do something which comprehends all even that and Preaching and whatsoever else conduceth to mans Salvation but yet we must apply this to what went before likewise and take all together there are many Acts done by
than where they have some manner of residence hath therefore restrained the execution of it in other places than where they have that residence both to avoid Confusion which otherwise must necessarily arise out of the Intermedling in other mens precincts and likewise because the main scope of their endeavours may be applyed to that place in a near Obligation every one being for the most part worthy of the Incumbents utmost labour And this they did by the Apostles own example who appointed Timothy Titus Epaphroditus their several Diocesse yet we must further Conceiâ—e that this Alotment of the Church is not such as doth lay any restraint upon the power given by the Spiris but directs it only for although a Particular man may offend by intruding into another mans Pastoral precincts and Officiating there yet factum valet so that if a Bishop give Orders in another mans Diocesse as was the famous Case of Epiphanius Bishop of Cyprus in St. Chrysostoms Diccesse at Constantinople or a Presbyter Administer the Communion in anothers Parish which is the common practice these things although done without leave from the peculiar Pastor are valid to the receivers although punishable in the Actors Yea yet once again although a man be placed in a Pastoral Charge and shall either find upon his own certain experience or the Judgement of his Superiours that he can advance the Glory of God or improve his own Commission by removing to another place either for a time as Timothy and Titus and the rest beneficed in particular places were yet upon urgencies of the publick good called aside from the more particular Charge to the more publick where they were employed or else if their whole residence may more advance the general Good of the whole Flock over which they are made Overseers they ought to remove totally to that great Occasion So when a man of great Abilities shall be beneficed in a private Corner where perhaps lesse Abilities would as well if not better agree it becomes him to be removed to a place better befitting his Qualifications or a man indowed with the strength of rational Divinity such a man to be sent to the propagating the Gospel in the Indies among the Heathen and he ought to endeavour to put himself into such an employment because he is a Pastor of the whole flock for which Christ dyed So that now I think it appears manifestly that an Apostle and another Pastor differ not in this that one was an Universal Pastor and the other a Particular but contrarywise they are both habitually or Potentià Pastors of the whole Word actually pastorizing in some particular only This caused all those admonitions from one Bishop to another of which the Fathers are full This made sometimes Contentions because it was the Duty of every man that was a Pastor to take care of the whole flock he is Pastor over and therefore to endeavour their good So that here you see his Argument fully answered by a flat denial of his Minor he is not a Pastor without a Flock nor an Officer sine Titulo he hath Title to the whole Catholick Church he is Pastor at large He hath a long Dispute with Mr. Rutherford about Preaching and Administring the Communion out of his own Congregation and the Communication of Sister Churches which touch me not yet I will give the Reader a Note that whereas before he made Preaching almost the whole Act of a Presbyter he now seemes to make it no proper duty of a Pastor pag. 63 64. But I let these things passe as not pertinent and apply my self to his fifth and last Argument pag. 67. which is SECT XV. His Fifth Argument answered IF Ordination gives Essentials to a Pastor before Election then by that alone he hath Pastoral power Against which he disputes thus He that hath Compleat power of an Office and stands an Officer without Exception he cannot be hindred Justly from doing all Acts of that Office but this is the Condition of a Pastor Ordained without the Election of the people he may according to rule be justly hindred from Executing any Act of a Pastor I could quarrel were I pinched with this Argument with almost every word as first the changing of the Terms of that Proposition he was to prove In the Proposition he was to prove the Terms were give the Essentials of a Pastor now they are a Compleat power and an Officer without Exception Many things are essentially right which lack Completion and are not without Exception Then again where it was in his first Proposition A Pastor before Election here is added in his second Election of the people But I insist upon this upon which the Ground of his Argument is founded That an Ordained Officer may according to rule be hindred from executing any part of his Office as he enforceth Suppose all Congregations full To which I answer Ordination doth not give the Act but the Jus or right to execute and a man may have the Essentials when these do not work Mark Mr. Hooker was a Pastor when asleep and had the Essentials of it but not the Operation Essentials do work their proper work omnibus positis ad agendum requisitis The fire it self although it have the Essentials of sire cannot burn things too remote or such Things which are not combustible the reason is that those things which are requisite to burning as fit distance disposure of the matter are not rightly disposed I may say the same of the Eye Place the Object too near too far in the dark it cannot see the requisites to sight are not sittingly disposed although the Eye have all the Essentials belonging to sight So I may â—ay of a man Ordained If there be not a place not any piece of the flock of Christ which hath need of him or having need he knoweth not of their need or knowing their need cannot by distance or some such moral Impediment come to supply then need the Circumstances required to his Operations are so taken away that he cannot do the Duties in Act which he hath power to do St. Paul himself could not officiate any where where others of Authority were labouring yet he had Authority and was ordained by God but saith he if all places are full he may according to rule be hindred from executing any part of Pastoral Office I would fain know by what rule the Apostles were Authorized by Christ to preach to all Nations and so are all Pastors by Ordination they have Authority over the world but are restrained by Ecclesiastical Law founded upon the Law of Nature which forbids any thing to go into a full place which with another Law saith Deus Natura nihil faciunt frustra And again non sunt multiplicandae Entia sine necessitate so that when one looks to this part then the other should not intermeddle without the first give way to him yet he hath the power and can do the work of
be present untill they setled Bishops amongst them His next place urged is Acts the 20. he leaves me to looke the verse but affirmes that the Church of Ephesus was governed first by Presbiters only from that Chap. afterward they had a Bishop who was called The Angel of the Church of Ephesus Apocalyps 2. That which hath any colour for this in this Chap. must be deduced out of the 17 th verse where it is said That from Miletum Paul sent to Ephesus for the Elders of the Church Therefore it seems the Church was governed by Elders at that time but let the Reader consider whether St. Paul did not Episcopize over them conventing the Elders before him and giving them that most heavenly charge And then consider that these men in the 28. verse are called Bishops Take heed to the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath madâ— you Overseers we read it but it is Bishop in the Original indeed as I have shewed in this Treatise The words were not distinguished at the first but they were promiscuously used untill the great increase of Christianity when the name of Apostles began to weare away and they had more generally setled Churches and planted Bishops over the other Presbiters in the chief Cities and then these were called Bishops and indeed every Presbiter who hath a charge of Souls is a little Bishop in the Superintendency of his parish though noâ— in the nature of the office he must look to his little flâ—ck as Bishop over them so that nominally every Presbiter with charge of Soals is a little Bishop superintendâ—ing them for their Souls good But a Bishop is higher over them and their flocks to take care that he doth his duty in these places of Scripture I see no manner of Argument to shew that a Church may exist without a Bishop for they had Apostles and then Bishops in their places CHAP. III. His Argument drawn from Panormitan answered HE then urgeth a Sentence out of Panormitan Olim Presbyteri in communi regebant Ecclesiam ordinabant sacerdotes consecrabant omnia Sacramenta Sed postmodum ad schismata sedanda fecerunt seâ— ordinaverunt Apostoli crearentur Episcopi Let me examine this bold assertion of Panormitan and of St. Hierom who hath much the same word Olim that was in the first plantation of the Churches I know no record of any authentick authority in the case but the Acts of the Apostles or their Epistles in which I can never find that any man or Company of men who were barely Presbiters did ordain Priests or did perform any Act of Jurisdiction in communi as he speakes which would intimate a Sentorian Government of which as they urge none so I cannot imagine what words in these Acts or Epistles should tend thereunto but then his last Clause I in part yeeld to that the Apostles did ordain Bishops and am confident they did it by divine Right which was given them by our Saviour saying As my Father sent me so send I you but whether only as they say ad sedanda schismata to appease schisme upon the occasion of some that said they were Pauls or else for the absolute better government of the Church which I rather adhere to I leave to the Readers Judgement but in general think it too great a boldness for men to limit Gods designes to their weake measures when God hath not determined or exprest them therefore such a passage in Panormitan is of no vallidity CHAP. IV. His first Argument to prove their ordination after Bishops were instituted answered HE proceeds with the second Number of his distinction to shew that not onely this was done before Bishops were instituted but after likewise the same was done and he gives this reason for saith the Doctor Non enim ad esse sed ad melius esse Ecclesiae necessaria est haec oeconomia This discipline is not necessary to the being but well-being of the Church suppose I grant it 't is true no discipline is necessary to the being of a Christian but Baptisme by which we are made members of that mystical body of Christ of which he is the head political Lawes Civil or Ecclesiastical are not necessary to our being Men or Englishmen of this Country but to our happy being in it we may be Christians and members of Christs Church where is no Presbiter as well as no Bishop As suppose a Diocess and Kingdom conquered by a Pagan as alass too many have been not a Bishop or a Priest left remaining Those noble Christians who remain without them have the being of Christians but not the well-being of Church-communion enjoying the blessed Sacrament which requires sacerdotal administration and likewise Church-discipline which conduce to the well-being of a Church but here we see the same necessity of one as the other for Bishops as Presbiters CHAP. V. An Argument out of Johannes Major answered BUt he proceeds and produceth a place out of Johannes Major de gestis Scotorum that he should write that the Scots were governed by Priests and Monks until Anno Domini 429. from whence he collects that they were two hundred and thirty yens without Bishops he might have urged other late Writers likewise in it But I answer to this that the Registers of that illiterate age were very ill preserved throughout Christendom but worse in those parts amongst the Picts and Scots then almost any where by reason that they were miserably oppressed with the almost perpetual Warrs they had with their Neighbours Brittaines and Romanes the Saxons and scarce any eminent man for learning who recorded any thing was acted amongst them and in that Gap of time in which they place this lack of Bishops their troubles were at the height for as there was all that space Warrs for dominion so there was persecution for destruction of Christianity and the Scots in general were banished that Country The Christians fled every where for safety to the adjacent Isles to Ireland from whence they came to Normandy to Denmarke any where for safety which it may be although unhappy to their wordly content yet advanced the propagation of the Gospel as it was in the Apostles time upon the persecution of St. Stephen Well then I think in this unhappy season they can find good Record for neither Bishops nor presbiters but every Chriâ—â—ian shifting for himself and especially those who were in authority and in Christian office because they of all others were sought after and therefore were concerned to hide their heads besides this it being the custome of Bishops to place themselves in some eminent Cities whereby they might be the more eminent and the better oversee their Diocesses There were few such in Scotland then but these Bishops which were then in the Kingdom were forced to inhabit many obscure places All which considered it is not possible for any man to expect a pedigree of their Bishops as it hath been preserved in more eminent Churches
and yet in the best of them there are mighty difficulties to make them certain but yet they may know that they might have Bishops in that time and Presbiters ordained by them although the Register's not apparent for it is evident out of such stories as we have that King Lucius the first Christian King we read of in our Nation when he setled Christianity here he was to extirpate the former Pagan Religion used by the Druids in these Countreys Now they had here three Arch-flamins besides divers other Flamins inferior according to their Method so he setled Christianity he made three Arch-bishops Yorke London Caerlyon this last governed Wales and divers adjâ—cent Countreys London the Mediterranean part of this Island of Brittaine but York had the Northern part of England and Scotland for his government and this lasted untill Anno 1470 or thereabouts at which time there was erected one Arch-bishop at St. Andrews so that there was a place to which in case of necessity men might repair for Orders when they would as we know by our late sad experience in these last sad times and no doubt but many did where they knew were Bishops as since the first plantation of Christianity there was in Wales But to come nearer to this Crathling King of Scots in Dioclesians time which was in this Interim he mentions entertained all Christians who fled out of these parts of Brittaine and gâ—ve them the Isle of Man to plant in and setled Amphibolus their Bishop there and built a Church and endowed it nobly who governed all the adjacent Isles and had a succession of Bishops after him so that they could never lack Bishops either to give orders to Priests or to order any thing that were amisse Beside this in this time I read of Ninias who was Bishop of Candida Casa and of Regulas amongst the Picts and I think it would be hard if not impossible for John Major or any of his followers to shew me so many Presbiters men of Note as I have shewed Bishops It is true for a while after Maximus had extirpated the Scots upon the cruel mercyless malicious and indeed foolish instigâ—tion of the Picts against the disposition and manners of a Roman Conquerour there was about forty years in which there was not seen in that territory so much as a Scotchman or Woman but all forced to â—ly their Countrey and therefore Hollandsilde might well say that their Bishops and Priests were forced to fly away but that is a signe there they had Bishops then yet as soon as Fergusus that gallant person came with his conquering Army thither no doubt he brought all such persons with him as were â—it for the plantation fo the Church as well as his Kingdome and therefore I may affirm that there were Bishops within this time prefixed by Major before the extirpation of the Scots in the time and after by the Bishop of Man and his successors As likewise those which that gallant heroique King Fergusius did bring with him and certainly throughout the world where were Presbiters there were Bishops either in particular Diocesses or hard by from whom men might receive orders or somewhere in Christendom where they might hunt them out if there were any number of Christians which might provoke that industry if particular persons as heretofore have been and may be cast away or cast in a Pagan or impeopled Land they may be without a Presbiter although that may be more easily purchased yet they may be without him or having one he may die and they still continue in a Christian condition Man or Men and all the defects of these Officers may be supplied with soliloquies and a holy conversation with godly Prayers but the same though a greater misfortune is theirs who cannot have so much as a Priest with them who may be sufficient for a â—ew Christians but if many the other is necessâ—ry both to ordain their Priests and to govern Priests and them likewise so that in answer to John Major Hector Boethius Bacanan and all others of that Crew I answer there was never any time I mean any considerable time in which the Scots lacked Bishops after there was a considerable conversion of them to Christ. But they had Bishops to repair to at York or at Man Candida Casa or other where and then because Major saith that they were governed by Priests only and not Bishops I think it will be a mighty hard thing for him to shew any judicial Act of Government performed by Presbiters unless they were commissioned by some Bishop and therefore all he said is only said and cannot be proved I have done with this CHAP. VI. Another Argument drawn from the Church of Rome answered HIs next Argument begins page 165 where he says Ecclesiae etiam Romanae sede vacante Presbiteri per undecem menses quindecem dies post caedem secundi Romani pontificis immanissima persecutione comitia pontificalia Romae prohibente Anno Domini 259. I will yeeld all this and perhaps that Sea may be vacant a longer space at another time or any other Sea but what then the Colledge of Presbiters may govern but what can he shew from Onuphrius or Platina Binius or any other who write those stories that they gave orders which they set down constantly at the end of every Popes life what orders they gave or can they shew that they did confirm which are proper to Episcopal duties or only order the pontifical affairs which they might do but not as Bishops they never say they did his next Reason followes CHAP. VII His Argument answered drawn from Deacons DE Iure divino est ut in Ecclesiis Diaconi sint Clerici Canonici per manuum impositionem ordinati per totam vitam adstricti here he ciphers two places of Scripture Acts 6. Tim. 1. 3. Now consider that he saith that these are Jure divino then I have shewed Bishops to be by Apostolical constitution I could trouble this speech but I let it alone only this must be questioned what he meanes by this ut in Ecclesiis Diaconi sint Clerici there is no question but every Church throughout the world acknowledgeth that Deacons are an inferior sort of Clergy which is all that these words imports but I think his meaning is ut sint in Ecclesiis Diaconi Clerici that there should be in every Church such inferior Clergy as Deacons and this the following words with the force of his Argument will make good and then I can reply to him that there is no such divine Law that there should be Deacons in every Parochial Church that he speakes of in the Acts was an occasional office set up for that purpose and that cannot be a Law no not a president but upon the like occasion That in Tim. hath no one word of the ceremonies of ordaining in particular Churches but onely what manner of persons they should be who are to be ordained this is
and so pass on first then that our Saviour did institute many holy offices in themselves you may say even his Sacraments so as there may be divers Ceremonies according to the prudence of divers Churches is appâ—rent for let us consider Baptisme the matter as it is positively set down in the Institution is water this must not be altered and that which is called the form which is the words by which this Baptisme is administred are in part set down it must be In the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost but now whether it should be I Baptize thee as the Latine Church or let the Servant of God be Baptized or he is Baptized which are severally used in other Churches is not determined by our Saviour and the words of either do fully express the meaning of Baptisme so that neither doth the Latine Church re-baptize those who are Baptized by the Graeciâ—ns nor the Graecians such as are Baptized by the Latines although both are bitter enough one against another so that you may see there may be variation in the administration of these duties in their Circumstances where there is a Communion in the Substance and truly for my part I think in such a man who lives in either of these Churches it would be a Schismatical Act for any of them to vary from that usage which is in the Churches wherein he lives for although these things are indifferent in themâ—elves yet when they are determined in the Greeâ— Euthology and the Roman Rituals they are not indifferent to them which live amongst them in their several Churches but a varying from the Church wherein they live makes a breach of Charity and violates the Band of peace SECT III. Another Precognitum explained ANother Introduction may be that whatsoever is instituted by Scripture in any of these holy performances whether as form or matter must not be altered nor can lawfully by any man for since the blessing which is bestowed is onely Gods gift and Man is only ministerial in it he must act according to that Method whicâ— God hath prescribed and that only having his Covenant can bring the blessing SECT IV. Another Observation expounded ANother note may be that Additions explicatory so they are certainly such and are not intruded for essentials do not destroy the notion of that which they explain it is necessary for otherwise why should men expound the Scriptures in Sermons or otherwise yea our Saviour expounded his own Parables and after his exposition to his Disciples we write further Comments our selves but that there is in none of these an alteration but a dilatation of the conceit of them these things being premitted I shal return where I left at Tanner and the Roman pontiâ—ical SECT V. Many mistakes about Ceremonies in the Church of Rome IT is an apparent truth that the Church of Rome doth very ofâ— clog Divine duties with so many Ceremonies and its mischief is frequent in that mischance that even their learned writers do in a little time grow o such mistakes as to think that some of those which are Ecclesiastical Ceremonies only instituted by the authority of the Church to be the essentials and that which is essential to be but accidents this particular business I have in hand will demonstrate this conclusion SECT VI. It is an Error to think that the Anointing the Bishops Hand is a necessary Essential THe third Ceremony by Tanner out of the pontiâ—ical is the Anointing of the Bishops hand which is to be Consecrated in these words ungantur manus istae oleo Consecrato that is when he Anoints his hands he saith let these hands be anointed with holy oyl And Francis Silvius I must say truly a learned man and most perspicuous writer in his fortieth Quest. upon the supplement of Thomas Art 5. in resp ad 8 m. saith that the essential Consecration of a Bishop consists in this unction and the words pronounced with it for the Church of Rome calls the oâ—tward sign the matter and the words the form and this to be it he proves by a very strong Argument against the Romanist because in the whole frame of Ordination the Bishop Consecrated is calâ—ed in the pontiâ—ical untill then Bishop Elect only But then absolutely Bishop from that time and his Argument is as weakly answered by Tanner where before quoted that Neque obstat quod in pontisicali ordinandus Episcopus post unctionem primum vocatur Consecratus antea vero solum Electus id â—nim ad scriptorem Rubrici modum lâ—quendi pertinent plus non significat quam ante unctionem nondum esse plene Consecratum That is that the Language of the Pontiâ—ical ought to be attributed to the writer of the Rubrick and that there is no more imported in it but that before the Unction he is not fully Bishop Truly I think Silvius doth desire no more but if men can shift off such grave and weighty observations with saying it was a fault in the Writer or Printer there can no authority be produced but may be so answered But he is more to blâ—me who transcribed it false but why hath it not been amended and that fault corrected The truth is the Pontiâ—ical it self is to blame there is no such thing in that much more antient Pontiâ—icâ—i I mean the fourth Councel of Carthage Canon 2. I will put down tâ—e words because I am likely to make use of them hereafter the words are these Episcopus quum ordinatur duo Episcopi ponant teneant Evangeliorum codicem super caput cervicem ejus uno fundente benedictionem reliqui omnes Episcopi qui adsunt manibus suis caput ejus tangant That is a Bishop when he is ordained two Bishops shall put and hold the Book of the Gospel over his head and neck and one giving him the blessing the other Bishops shall put and hold the Book of the Gospel over his head and neck and one giving him the blessing the other â—ishops which are present shall touch his head with their hands here is not any word of anointing and therefore according to this Canon neither of these Unctions I mean head and hand are necessary for although the Canon may name somethings which are not necessary yet it is not to be imagined that it should leave out any thing which is necessary SECT VII Another Error concerning the Book confuted THere is therefore another opinion which has gained great Reputation with many Schoolmen and that is of some who place the essentials of a Bishops Ordination in the first â—eremony named in the Pontifical and that is the same with that of the Councel of Carthage to wit the putting the Book upon the Head of the Consecrated Bishop and the laying on of Hands and the Benediction this certainly is most conform to that Canon of Carthage but as I said before as it is not reasonable to think that these Canons should omit any essential thing
men who are not Ministers which conduce to others Salvation and are very usefull and commendable in them nay are done out of Duty as the Example of a good life discreet admonishing men of their faults incouraging others to virtue and the like which are all Acts of Duty from one Christian man to another but not Acts of Office Acts of Charity as they are Christians not as they are this or that sort of men We must therefore recall the first Term that they must do something Conducing to the salvation of men This phrase must be a little farther cleared likewise There are things which Conduce accidentally to the Salvation of others as persecution affliction so it was with St. Paul sometimes assisting in villany which starts up some Divine Speech or Action so those wicked persons who assisted in the Crucifying of our Saviour their Wicked Act made them Spectators and Auditors of those supernatural words which then declared him to be God and made them receive that Faith in him and confesse that he was the Son of God But these persons are in themselves the Devils Ministers though Gods almighty power and providence Conjured them about as he will the very Devils themselves and draw his honour out of their Wickednesse his light out of their Darknesse These Acts in themselves Conduce to Hell but God wrought them miraculously about to Heaven and therefore not understood here but such as in themselves are disposed to it and because Heaven is not a result or an Effect naturally arising out of our Works but a blessing bestowed upon the Workers according to their Works for Christs sake therefore those things which Conduce to Heaven in themselves must be such as God is pleased to Covenant with us that upon them and the doing of them he will give this Salvation for no man can obtain that by Fraud or Violence and therefore it must be on such Terms as he Covenants for And these things are those of the Word and Sacraments as the whole Christian World hath named them though they have no such name given them in the New Testament to wit this God hath provided Salvation in Heaven for his Servants the Means for them to get this Heaven is by these Covenants Sealing these Deeds obeying these Ordinances of his â—or which he hath appointed Officers and given them Power and Authority to administer these Covenants Letters of Atturney for it is a Legal Juridical businesse and a legal phrase befits it to act these things betwixt him and men and teach them his Lawes and will by which they shall be Sharers of this blessing and they who have an Office and from that Office Authority to do All or Some of these things are the Ministers we speak of And I think this may suffice to speak what a Minister is How he is ordained and who they are will follow SECT II. These Powers must be given by God TO understand these heads we must first conceive that a man can receive or assume no such power that is effectual to himself unlesse it be given him from Heaven as St. John speaks John 3. 27. Heaven being Gods gift the powers the Covenants which bring men thither must be by his Appointment and the Officers who work and effect these powers must be by him authorized likewise I write these Conclusions briefly being of great Evidence in themselves and for ought I know denyed by none SECT III. The way to understand who these are AND now in my Conceit the readiest way to clear this truth will be to shew what Officers Christ hath appointed to this purpose and this must be done two wayes First to shew Historically what was done and Secondly to shew how that History shall agree with the Design it had to bring men to Heaven and how unfit other pretentions are to it The History I shall divide into two parts First to lay the Foundation of this glorious Building to shew what our Saviour acted himself in it what the Church Discipline was in Embrione in Ovo in the Foundation then to shew what Superstructures the Apostles built upon it what it was in the birth when it was a Chick The first must be sought out of the Gospells or the beginning of the Acts where the Story of our Saviours immediate Commerce with this World both in his life and after his Death is set down for us The second part must be cleared from the later part of the Acts and the Epistles and thus my design is layd CHAP. III. The Election of the Apostles and what to do THE first remarkable business in the Gospel is the Election of the Apostles which we may find recorded in the 3d. of St. Mark v. 13. and the 6th of St. Luke v. 13. In St. Mark we may observe that he ordained Twelve that they should be with him and that he might send them forth to preach and in St. Luke we may note that he gave these Twelve the Name of Apostles out of this we may Consider that our Saviour having many Disciples such as had leaned and listned to his Doctrine he chose out of them Twelve which he gave particular Favours to and gave them that name of Office to be Apostles That there was some Mystery in that Number of Twelve I am perswaded because that after the Apostacy of Judas in the 1. of the Acts v. 22. St. Peter saith That according to the Prophet David Psal. 109. 7. another should take his Office It was necessary another should succeed him in that Ministry and they chose one and no more to Compleat the Number What that Mystery is is not so apparent That which fits my Apprehension is this That our Saviour did in very many things lay the platform of his Ecclesiastical Government according to the pattern of the Jewish Polity and in this particular he resembled the Twelve Patriarchs but this he laid as Pillars only or a foundation intending it only to support the rest not to figure out the Number of these Officers which were afterwards to be a Number I know by none pretended to but yet they then were so many pillars to support this building and whatsoever Structure should be raised must be erected upon these But besides their Number we may mark their Office which was two-fold about our Saviour and about the Church or other men about our Saviour that they should be with him hearing and learning his Doctrine spectators of his Miracles and most exemplar manner of Life that so they being to bear Witnesse of him and his Actions afterwards might the more Constantly and Confidently do it when they had in such a manner been Conversant with him That which concerned other men was That he might send them forth to preach Here was an Office Instituted as St. Mark records it and to have power to heal sicknesse c. This Gift of Miracles was not the Office it self but a sign and token by which men might know that they
secondarily Christ is the Chief Corner Stone the Spiritual Rock 1 Cor. 10. 4. and then there was no more sâ—id to him that St. Paul expounds of them all Ephes. 2. 20. and are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the Chief Corner Stone to them all the Apostles were secondary foundations and Rocks as well as he were that place to be understood to call him a Rock Nor can there be any stronger foundation affirmed of him either in person or Succession than of the rest Mat. 28. I will be with you to the end of the World that is assisting them in executing their Duty For the second place Mat. 16. 19. I will give thee the Keyes of Heaven it is but a promise and he performed it to him and the rest John 20. 22. For the Third Feed my Sheep it is a poor Argument drawn from a meer Simile of pastorizing but let it be what it can there can be no more in it but preach baptize give the Communion give Orders govern the Church all which are involved in those two places insisted upon before and therefore I desist from further discourse of them and supposing that the Apostles had equal Authority to minister Divine Mysteries to the whole World with St. Peter we will now come and enquire whether any other men had any such Commission given them by Christ or not SECT VI. How it is to be understood that the Power of the Keyes is given to the Church THe Chief place if not the only which I have observed in the Gospel pretended to be wrested to any such Intent is Mat. 18. 17. If he shall neglect to hear them tell it to the Church Thence it is by some enforced that the Church is made the Judge in Ecclesiastiâ—al Discipline and by the Church they will understand others besides the Apostles To apprehend which conceive with me First that this was one of those things which our Saviour delivered for a Rule to govern the Church and Christian men by not at that present but afterwards when Church Discipline was setled for as yet there was no such Thing as any Discipline setled but like a Commonwealth in the â—raming by degrees Laws projected yeâ— Contrived and enacted which might take their rise and force afterwards when established It is a poor Conceit methinks of Beza on this place who would have it understood of the Jewish Synagogue since he himself Confesseth that the word Church is no where else used for the Synagogue nor indeed can it be and why it should be forced to that meaning here I see no reason and therefore the true understanding of it must be taken from those setled Laws which our Saviour made after his Death of which I have discoursed Now that this Law could not extend to any other men but these Apostles who had all the powers given them as I have explained will appear first First because it seems to be a Juridical way of proceedings and it is impossible that the multitude should have Juridical Discretion to make a man as an Heathen or a Publican being many of them illiterate men and we should conâ—ine the limits of Christian men and Religion in much too narrow bounds to say it belong only to the learned or men enabled for such or so high a work But there must be Officers in a Church to hear and judge of such a Cause which Officers we understood by the Church and although this Censure ought to be done in publick in the face of the Church or the Court where such Matters are discussed yet it is not necessary nor can have a face of reason with it that every one of the Church should be there present or they who are present should have the Nature of Judges only such Men as are Officers enabled to act in this power then if Officers these men who hâ—d the power given them in the 20th of St. John are these which are here in the 18th verse said to bind and loose So that then I can see nothing that can hinder us from agreeing that after our Saviours Death all Ecclesiastical power was seated in the Apostles how they understand it we shall Consider in the future Discourse by their Actions set down to us which must be our next undertaking SECT VII The Apostles Authority and Management of it NOW we see the Eleven inthroned in the Chair of Ecclesiastical power They and they only having Interest in it but yet they had only power the right and Authority they received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the vertue and qualities enabling them to execute this power according to the Extent throughout the world afterwards when the power of Tongues was given them Acts 2. 4. and you may find this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used for this virtue Acts the 1. v. 8. where it is promised so that they had all Power and Authority before but this Faculty of Tongues they had not untill then and this will be of little use in our Discourse being a Gift of no constant Succession in the Church but only those Authorities of Administring the Sacraments of Preaching of Giving Orders of Governing these will always be necessary in the Church and therefore must be insisted upon For this therefore the first thing we find them Acting in this kind was to settle their own Society and Compleat the Number of Twelve and this you may find recorded in the 1. of the Acts v. 13. where we may observe first that they referred the Election of this Apostle to God by â—asting Lotts they Chose two Barsabas and Mathias and referred it to Divine Election the reasons of which guessed at by Divines rather than demonstrated I omit But now there are Twelve Apostles Bishops for if Judas was a Bishop by being an Apostle as he is termed vers 20. the rest likewise were or Twelve Deacons or Ministers for that phrase is affirmed of Judas in regard of his Apostleship vers 25. SECT VIII What Additions were made to the Apostles BUT yet we must not leave them but examine Whether there were any Addition made to these Apostles and what that was To understand this We may find St. Paul in abundance of places called an Apostle instead of many take this one Instance Galat. 1 1. Paul an Apostle not of men neither by man but by Jesus Christ An Apostle not of men not by man that is who received my Apostleship not from the Authority given to men as before when Christ sent his Apostles as his Father sent him with power to give these powers John 20. As my Father sent me so send I you not then of men that is from this Authority given to them nor by man that is by any Ministerial Act of mans He received his Baptism by the Ministery of man as you may find Acts 9. 18. But his Apostleship he received of God and by God as the other Apostles did by the immediate
portion which they superintended but rebounding back often where they had been before and diverting as Occasions offered themselves into other Precincts this they did and might do by that vast Authority was given them Go preach to all Nations and by that power Equalling their Authority which was Conferred at the Pentecost but it was not with other men that universal Authority would not besit the meaner powers of those who were to succeed and to follow them and therefore we will in the next place Consider in what proportions they Communicated these Authorities to others SECT II. How the Apostolical Power was Communicated THE virtue of which Communication we enjoy at this day some for place some for Authority some in part some in the Lump For the first we shall for place Consider that their Successors were confined in place Titus in Creet Timothy in Ephesus Epaphroditus in Philippi not that they were Confined or pegg'd here immovably So is no Bishop in his Diocesse no not quoad Officium as if his holy Duties which he performed out of his Diocesse were invalid or of no force for without doubt if a Bishop baptize preach celebrate the Communion give Holy Orders secundùm materiam formam Canonically according to Matter and Form out of his Diocesse they are firm and good to the receivers although perhaps without leave or extreme necessity they are not Commendable Nay without doubt if either Bishop or Presbyter remove to other Diocesse or Parish he takes not a new Ordination but an acceptation or just Election to that place sufficeth Now his Confining to that place is to restrain the Ministring of his Office out of Duty there so that he is out of Duty to have a Care of that place and to look to that flock which is Committed to his Charge which is part not the whole as it was Committed to the Apostles and no doubt that which Dr. Field hath learnedly discoursed upon this subject in Ancient Times Bishops were the Pastors of their Diocesse solely Presbyters their Assistants and Associates as the Apostles with that almost immense power were made Bishops of the World yet being men with Confined bodyes were forced to use Deputyes and the help of other men in their Charge even whilst they lived and certainly the Church was better Governed by that Subordination than if every one who hath not Apostolical Integrity should assume Apostolical Authority so it was by these they had great Diocesses committed by the Apostles and as I shall shew anon they had many Inferiors Assisting them but these were their places over which they were made Overseers and they had not Authority of Jurisdiction over others Thus I could set down how almost all the World was divided in the Apostolical Age but I let this alone SECT III. How the Apostolical Power was divided to Particulars and concerning the Office of Deacons NExt we will Consider how the very Office of the Apostleship was divided And the first thing that comes into our Consideration to begin at the foot and climb upward will be the Office of Deacon in handling which I find some matter of Dispute First about the Institution of him when this Function was first erected There is a general Claim to Acts 6. the Story may thus be observed In the Infancy of the Church when it pleased God by the preaching of the Word to encrease the Church beyond the expectation of men or lesse power than Apostolical there were many poor among the Disciples but the piety of the Christians was such as you may read Acts 4. 5. in ver 34. of the 4th Chapter there was no lack for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them and brought the price and cast it at the Apostles feet and Barnabas is presently particularly instanced in but in the 5th Chapter we read the fearfull Story of Ananias and Sapphira who would seem righteous to do as the fashion of Godly men was but being hypocrites were punished for their hypocrisies Now these Sales bringing in great sums for the relief of the poor the Apostles as it seems were troubled with it and the Care to relieve the poor took them off from attendance upon that mighty work of planting the Gospel this was the rather awakened by a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrâ—ws that is either such Grecians as were made Proselytes or else such Hebrews as lived and perhaps were born amongst the Greeks for as yet the Apostles had no Communication with the Gentiles now these Grecian Jews murmured because it seems the Apostles as I can guess had left the administration of this Charity to some who had dealt partially for I am confident they themselves would not wherefore they Convented the Disciples together and bid them with all Care who must needs know the Integrity of mens conversations better than the Apostles who could not search hearts select some men fit for such a purpose and appointed the Number of Seven the Disciples did accordingly and they chose Stephen and Philip c. as you may read in the 5. vers of the 6. Chap. and set them before the Apostles when the Apostles had prayed they laid their hands upon them no doubt rectifying their Choice and Authorizing them to the work Thus we see these men receiving Title to execute this Office SECT IV. Reasons why the Office of a Deacon was not Instituted Acts 6. BUT for my part salvo semper meliori judicio I cannot conceive how this should prove that Ministerial Office of a Deacon which was afterwards used in the Church from this place for these reasons First because this was an Occasional Office necessary for that Time in which there being many poor which lived under the correction and rod and persecution of the politick Magistrate no legal Course could be taken for the relief of them but such as came by Charity out of the bowels of their own Fraternity to wit from Christians who might be perswaded not compelled to that Duty and by reason of this there was a necessity to have some Officers chosen Overseers of the Poor which by a Religious Tie where could be no legal should be bound to the Execution of this Duty for which they instituted this Office but why these should be called Deacons that Ministerial Office used in the Church I see neither Authority nor Ground in the Scripture for it That they should not be annual Officers as our Overseers of the poor I can see no reason or why in a setled Commonwealth where the politick Lawes provide for the poor and Law makes such Charity a Duty to the Commonwealth there is no Ground It is true in the Times of persecution these things are necessary as there is often mention both in St. Pauls Epistles and the Ecclesiastical Story and Julian the Apostate himself in an Epistle to Arsalius the Heathen Pontifex or Chief Priest of Galatia The wicked Galileans saith he under which name he vented
his malice against the Christians relieve not their own poor only but ours with a Counterfeit holinesse There he acknowledgeth the Christians abundant Charity in those dayes when he made all Christians poor and because he would not be out-acted in a Work of so much piety he gave that Priest the Collection of vast sums towards the relief of necessitous people This was necessary in Time of persecution but what further use is there of it in particular Churches than those Collectors for the poor which we have and Charity and Sweetnesse preached to men whereby they may be spurred on to enlarge their hearts beyond the Exactions of Statute-Duties to the overflowing of Charity Now then because it was an Occasional Office necessary then and there at such times in such places we cannot conceive why it should enforce such an Office perpetual in the Church and universally in all places or Churches SECT V. Another Argument to prove the former Conclusion SEcondly Consider the businesse they were designed to we shall not find that ascending to these Ministerial Duties it being only to relieve the body not the Soul to take Care of the Tables to look that the Grecian widows and poor be not despised in Consideration of the Native Jews I know it is objected by Catherive that these Tables there spoken of was the Lords Table and the Ministration they were imployed about was the Communion but these phrases of Daily Ministration and the murmure of the Grecians do inforce the other for if they had a daily Communion it is not to be imagined the Apostles would be standers by at so heavenly a Duty and if they were actors it cannot be thought that any should be neglected in it I therefore with a mighty Consent of Writers Conclude that it was an Administration of Temporal Things but the Administration of such maketh not to that Ministry we speak of which concerns things so Spiritual as affect the Soul immediately with some Divine blessing when these immediately only concern the body and Temporal Things and therefore could not belong to our Ministry SECT VI. A third Reason for the former Conclusion A Third Reason may be drawn from the persons which were elected into the Office which were as Epiphanius reports in the end of his 20. Chapter of his first Book Contra Haereses of the Seventy two Disciples of which Number there he reckons many more of equal rank if not an higher esteem than these Now then if they were of those Seventy two it is not reason to think that they should be Ordained into an Inferiour Order of Clergy and the lowest of all for all hold that they were Presbyters at the least either by their first Ordination from our Saviour when he sent them to preach and baptize the lost Sheep of the house of Israel or else by a Confirmation from the Apostles after they were invested with the whole Ecclesiastical power in themselves by that Grand Charter As my Father sent me c. Now then this had been a disparagement to Presbytery But lest any man should doubt whether these were Presbyters or no let him Consider that extraordinary work of St. Stephen who went up and down as you may read in the latter part of the 6th Chapter of the Acts doing Miracles and disputing and preaching I dare call it so say Mr. Thomas Hooker what he can with such a Spirit as they could not resist But Mr. Thomas Hooker in his Survey of Church Discipline Part 2. Chap. 2. pag. 36. denyes St. Stephen to be a Preacher and that most Sermon-like discourse I am sure of his Acts 7. he calls an Apology not a Sermon truly I see little of Apology in it and I know some have drawn a little Body of Divinity out of it and I know that vers 51. he drawâ— a most powerfull invective against their manners which cost him his present life in this World If Mr. Hooker will not allow this to be a Sermon he can find few in the whole New Testament SECT VII Some of these were Preachers BUT he shall not escape me so Though this propagation of the Gospel will not be allowed to be a Sermon because I cannot find an express Term so pâ—rasing his discourse I will shew him another of these Deacons in the next Chapter Acts 8. whose discourses to this purpose are called preaching that is of Philip Acts 8. 5. Then Philip went down to the City of Samaria and preached Christ to them The very word used for preaching in English as well as the Original is there placed Hooker himself where before alledged although he omits this verse yet cites the 38th verse of that 8th Chap. where Philip is said to baptize the â—unuch therefore more than a Deacon by his Doctrine but in vain that as I shall shew hereafter But now I will examine his Answer SECT VIII Whether Philip were an Evangelist and what an Evangelist PHilip saith he was an Evangelist and so appointed by God as afterwards appears and by virtue of that and not of his Deaconship he did baptize Indeed he is called an Evangelist Acts 21. 8. And lest we might think them two Philips the Text saith he was one of the Seven that is one of those Seven was chosen Acts 6. to take Care of the Poor but by the way consider that neither then or elsewhere in Scripture are these Seven called Deacons Well first Consider here was a great space of time betwixt the 8. and the 21. Chapt. he might be an Evangelist long after and not one then Degrees and dignities came by steps not the highest at first but suppose he were and suppose he was one before he was made Treasurer or Overseer of the Poor and suppose I conceive an Evangelist did preach the Gospel might baptize then I Conclude that such a man was at the least a Presbyter and that he was as it were degraded in being made such a Deacon by his Consent a Deacon hath nothing to do with Spiritual things but only the Treasure of the Church And therefore it is strange that both he and my Lord Say and Nathaniel Fiennes in their Speeches at the beginning of this Parliament affirmed That because the Apostles would not have Ecclesiastical men meddle with Temporal things they instituted a new Office out of their rank for the performing even these Duties of Charity which in nothing agrees with the Text for it seems at the first the Church layd all the burthen upon the Apostles when they put it off then they chose Ecclesiastical men again and such as were next them either of the Septuagint or else Evangelists certain we may be famous Churchmen St. Stephen Philip and the rest who have honourable mention in Ecclesiastical Story SECT IX An Objection answered BUT before I Conclude this Argument I will frame one great Objection Acts 6. 2. The Apostles said it is not reason we should leave the word of God and serve Tables was it not
most ancient term Presbyter inferiour to the Supreaâ— called by the Scripture Apostles and to their Successors called Bishops among the Ancients therefore in the reading of Authors not the Institutions only but the usus loquendi is to be Considered in words Cambden in his Remains hath a long Discourse like a Lexicon where we may see to how various Senses in our English Language the same words have arrived by Tract of Time losing their old and gaining a new Sense especially in Offices so hath it happened with the words Bishop and Presbyter they were most frequently in Scripture taken for one and the same thing but the word Apostle or Angel I can never find given to the Inferiour Sort of Presbyters But now this word Apostle is appropriated in the Language of Divines to the Twelve and St. Paul only the word Bishop to the Superiour Sort the word Priest or Presbyter to the Inferiour Sort of Presbyters I shall leave therefore to discourse of the Names and come to examine the Text concerning the Thing whether there be in this Text a Parity of Ministers prescribed SECT VIII The First Argument for a Parity answered FOR this Parity he urgeth nothing but the Attributing these two names which we use in a distinct Sense to one and the same thing which proves no parity of Office but only the use of these words in those dayes But I will go further and prove this Office we call Bishop distinct from the Presbyter out of that very Text St. Paul saith I have left thee in Creet to do these two things that thou shouldest set in order the Things that are wanting and ordain Elders in every City Mark here St. Paul had been in Creet himself he had layd the foundation of the Gospel he being to go further into the World leaves Titus to build upon his Foundation and he leaves him to do two things that he should set in Order or Correct or supercorrect those things which were not perfected by himself here is Episcopacy in one piece he had Authority to correct to set in order things that were out of Order to Correct what was amisse then secondly to Ordain Elders in every City not to appoint only but to ordain authoritatively to sâ—ttle them I do not know how a Bishop could more exactly be described in so few words and I wonder much why these men should produce this Text which without a mind much prejudicated with another Opinion cannot be wrested to any other sense Hooker takes no notice of this but some others say That Titus was an Evangelist Their Exception that Titus was an Evangelist answered THey say so but do they produce one word out of Scripture or Antiquity for it they might say he was an Apostle as well and with much more semblance and I think he was of the Inferiour rank but then can they tell me what an Evangelist was This is a shrewd Question Those four that writ the Gospels are only known by that name amongst Ecclesiastical Writers so that if a man should say the â—vangelist saith so we would Conclude one of them Philip is indeed called an Evangelist Acts 21. but no man else in the New Testament it may be because he was an excellent and powerfull Preacher Beza with those who affect new Opinions makes an Evangelist to be one who was an Associate and Companion to the Apostles in their travell but there is nothing in Scripture or Antiquity to give light to that Conclusion I am sure St. Chrysostome Theophylact c. are against it in expresse Terms upon the 4th to the Ephes. St. Ambrose makes him a Deacon to the Apostles which hath some shew of reason for it because Philip was an Evangelist This word Evangelist is but three Times used in Scripture Acts 21. 8. where Philip is called an Evangelist Ephes. 4. 11. where an Evangelist is reckoned amongst the Ecclesiastical Officers 2 Tâ—m 4. 5. where he is bid do the work of an Evangelist which could be nothing but industrious preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ or as some of the Ancients suffering for Christ because he is bid in the same verse immediately before these words to endure Affliction and in the words followâ—ng to make full proof of his Ministry but is there the least Colour that this Office should enable him to ordain Presbyters or Correct Misdemeanors or to regulate things that are amisse which Titus was Commissioned to do Again it is generally agreed amongst them that this Office of an Evangelist was a Temporary Office but these Duties of Correcting of Ordaining Elders must needs be perpetual in the Church and therefore could not Constitute the nature of that temporal Office Well then to dispell that cloud that would darken the light of this Text for Episcopacy by saying that Titus was an Evangelist there is no word in Scripture nor any Author in Antiquity of any reputation in the World which offers any thing towards that Opinion 2dly If they did yet they would be at as great a losse to shew me that the Office of an Evangelist was to do such things as Titus is here commanded to do 3dly If they could shew Evangelizing to Consist in the performance of such Duties yet we might justly then Conceive them to he Bishops such as we require and a Standing Office in the Church because these Duties are so and it is evident that Titus had Authority in both these kinds Therefore there were some men which had such Authority above others But let us go on with Hooker as he doth Confirm his Mistaken Opinion SECT IX Hookers Illustration from Acts 20. answered PAul saith he Acts 20. sends for the Elders of Ephesus and professeth in the 28th verse that Christ had made them Overseers or Bishops where not only the Name is Common but the Thing signified by that Name is enjoyned as their Duty He means to take heed to all the flock over which the holy Ghost had made them Bishops or Overseers here as before are left Gaps or Interruptions I will fill them as well as I can to make up his Sense thus What he implyes or requires in a Bishop that they that is these Presbyters were to do If he shall require to lay on hands to exercise Jurisdiction in foro externo that they must do and should they have been reproved for so doing they might have shewed their Commission thus farr he But I wonder where that Commission was given or read I can find no such Thing in that place but that they should take heed or have a care of their flock which they might execute according to that Authority was dispensed before by labouring in the Word diligent baptizing administring the Communion but to Convent or Summon their Flock or Censure them or give Orders and a like Authority to others of this there is no one word in particular To expresse my self Although many men reasonably have thought that St. Paul Convented both Bishops and
to Bishops they may to Presbyters Both the Proposition and the Deduction have been Confuted already Last of all he deduceth They who have the same Commission have the same power from Christ. But they all have the same Commission John 20. 21. Prout misâ—â— me Pater ego mitto vos I put the words as he doth in Latine it was said to all the Apostles Equally and to all their Successors indifferently I deny that the plenipotence spoken there was spoken to all that succeeded the Apostles in any part of their Oâ—fice there are diverse Things communicated to one which were not to another according to their very Doctrine only Bishops succeeded them in their fulnesse of power in Ruling and Giving Orders and therefore these are bold Conclusions which are only spoken not proved by him SECT XV. The Truth explained I Have done with his Arguments and now apply my self to seâ— down what I Conceive â—it to prove my Conclusion which is That there was such a Thing as Episcopacy setled by the Apostles in the Church If I had no other reason â—t might perswade men easily to credit it because that the Church in the old Law seems to be governed by such a Discipline where as I said out of St. Hierome there was Aaron the Priests and the Levites for although this Argument be not necessary yet because the Wisdom of God is not to be parallel'd in Polity so well as Nature it should be reasonable for men to think that where is no Ground for a Difference in this second Church under the New Testament from that former under the Old there God should not vary in the Discipline and I think no man can shew me a reason for such a Difference either that men are more united or that the Church doth require a lesse Union now than then which two as they are the heads from which we enforce Episcopacy in that matter of Government so they must be the heads from which any strong Argument of force must be deduced to shew the difference This being so it is fit for us to Conceive without strong reason against it that there is such a Conformity especially if to this be added the great uniformity and convenience that the Ancient Levitical Law had to our Ecclesiastical which might abundantly be shewed in other things without some Language expressing a difference in a dubious Case it were â—it we should adhere to Gods former practice But then again our Saviour in his life-time hatching a Church in Embrione He as I have shewed made two distinct Orders Apostles and the Seventy and these both Preaching Orders without there were some main reason to the Contrary we cannot easily subscribe to another Discipline nor surely would have quarrell'd at that but by reason of pride in themselves that they would be all Bishops like the Conspirators against Moses Numbers 16. who being men of Quality in Israel were not Content to be Princes in their Condition but would be Equal to the Supream So these men are not Content with their rank which is high and great in the Church of God unlesse they shall pluck down the highest of all and not be subordinate but supream in their Prelatical Principalities or else which is a spice of the same vice there is amongst them an Abhorring of Obedience which indeed is the Mother and Ground of all Virtue and although they would have all their Subjects obey them in an Insolent manner yet they would obey none other themselves and for a Countenance to this pridâ— and stubbornenesse study Scripture and wrest it to their purpose which how weak it is for them hath been shewed how strong against them I shall now urge SECT XVI My First Argument from Scripture to prove Episcopacy MY First Argument from Scripture shall be thus framed That Government which the Apostles did settle in their Government of Churches that is Apostolical But the Apostles did settle such an Episcopacy as I require Ergo such an Episcopacy is Apostolical My Major â— conceive not to be denyed for as I have shewed we ought not to seek for expresse Terms to shew that they made a Law in such peremptory Words That this or this we enact perpetually for the Government of all Churches this or the like is not to be found any where nor doth any Government pretend to it There is no Book unquestionable of their Canons extant but only Registers of their Acts and certain Epistles which set down what they did do and from that Assure us what we should do The first place I shall insist on will be that I formerly touched Tit. 1. 5. For this Cause left I thee in Creet that thou shouldest set in Order the Things that are wanting and Ordain Elders in evâ—ry City as I have appointed thee This Text I have handled before and have shewed that in more expâ—esse Terms St. Paul could not Authorize one man to that Office which we pretend to than he did here I have spoken likewisâ— of that Shift they have for it to say he was an Evangelist and by that Authority did Act these things to which I think may be irresistably objected that it can no where be shewed that he was an Evangelist and 2dly it can no wherâ— be shewed that an Evangelist had such an Autâ—ority belonging to his Offâ—ce and therefore that must needs be but a weak refuge to fly unto A Second Shift of some is That this Commission was giâ—â— to Titus but in Common with others as one of the Presbyters conjunctim not divisim joyned with them not severed 〈◊〉 them but by such Tricks men may cast off all Scripture but 〈◊〉 I would have them shew me where ever there was such a Commission given to a Presbytery which they can never do Secondly Let them Consider it would be as safe nay much safer for me to say that power given to the Presbytery must be by the Sole virtue of Association with the Supreame as they can when I shew a Commission given to one Man say it is meant of him in the Company of others and the more agreeing to sense because when this Commission is granted it implyes at the least that he must be of the Quorum which to none others could be enforced And again when we read such a Precept given to any man it must be understood that he must have power to execute that Authority which certainly if he could only Act in Commission with others he could not because suppose St. Paul Chargeth him to Ordain Elders in every City such and so qualified he might answer in many Cases the others will not joyn Suppose he should stop the mouths of Deceivers It is likely the great deceivers would be amongst the Presbytery themselves he can do nothing without their Consent which is nothing of himself not he but they therefore must have the Charge given them for he is not by these men capable of performing it and as for their Charge it
name should be affixed to such men nor do I find any man adventuring to shew any place where this word doth lesse than signifie a Bishop Then let us Consider that they are called after in the second Chapter The Angel of the Church of Ephesus the Angel of the Church of Smyrna c. which being great and populous regions could not reasonably but have many Presbyters in them and then to write to one Angel if the name Angel did stoop so low as Presbyter were to write to no man knew whom because there were so many there but if Angel as it is be understood of one in an higher and more exalted State than the rest who might be known by this name Angel as peculiarly due to him then and then only we may understand who it is that is meant by it but if any man should allow nothing but Scripture to prove so clear truth and say there was but one Presbyter in each of these Churches he may find that Acts 20. ver 17 18. St. Paul sent for the Presbyters in the plural number of the Church of Ephesus and when they were come to him he said to them still they and them in the plural number That Text will require a further Examination perhaps hereafter In the mean time take this because it is urged for a Unity of Office betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter from the 28th verse where St. Paul saith Take heed to your selves and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers that is Bishâ—ps then those that were called Presbyters before were called Bishops afterwards I have often said before that the name Bishop and Presbyter I conceive to be taken promiscuously in the New Testament for the same Office That the word Apostle was solely that name which was used by the way of propriety to that Office both to themselves who were originally such and to those who by their Appointment succeeded them But this is it I contend for That amongst them which they made their Successors they gave to some of them a greater and fuller power than to others both to govern and to ordain which since the Church hath called Bishops Now then from hence whether there were many Bishops in the Province of Ephesus or many Presbyters only yet many there were and these many were so inferiour to one that he is called the Angel which name was so appropriated to him as he might know to whom the Letter was directed or else as if a Man should write a Letter and superscribe it to the Alderman of London where are many no man could know whither to send it or who should receive it but if a man superscribe it to the Mayor every man knows who that is Thus must it be with these he to whom this Letter is superscribed must have this Angelical Condition so fitted to him that he must be known by that name that name solely agreeing to him But some here offer at an Answer That he might be like a Mayor have a superiour Dignity above the rest such as is notified by that name Angel which yet may not make a Bishop such as we require He may be a Temporary Governour such as the Presbyterian allows a President of a Synod who this year governs but the next resigâ—s his place and when he is there he hath no more to do but regulate the Synod no greater Authority than the rest To both these in their Order No Temporary Bishop or Superiour I am Confident that I never read of any such Thing and therefore am perswaded that no man can shew me out of Ecclesiastical Story that any man was outed of his Bishoprick but for Heresie Schism or Gross Impiety of Life when men have grown through old Age or Infirmities otherwise incapable of â—xecuting their Office they have had Coadjutors and helpers in their Office but not been deposed but by Death or some such occasion as before described and those that by Ecclesiastical Story were reckoned Bishops of these places at this time are recorded to dye Bishops And it seems a mighty Selfishnesse to me that any man should oppose his reasonlesse Conjectures against all Story when indeed these Epistles cannot be expounded but by Story as in particular the 13th verse of the 2d Chapter where speaking to the Angel or Bishop I may call him most Conâ—idently of the Church of Pergamus He commends him because thou hast not denyed my Faith even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithfull Martyr If a man would ask what Commendation of his Faith was this What was the Excellency of it Can any man answer me but out of Ecclesiastical Story where it is recorded that after a long and pious life full of all virtue led in Pergamus he was in the dayes of Domitian for the Testimony of his Religion put into a brazen Bull and in that Bull burnt now then this Bishops faith was Eminent that in such a cruel and fiery Tryal he kept his Integrity even in such a Time when thaâ— horrid President of the death of Antipas was set before him Thus I say Ecclesiastical Story is necessary for the Exposition of these Epistles as you may find prophane Story necessary for the Exposition of the Prophets in the Old Testament for a man then to talk of such an Officer concerning which there is no mention in the Word nor any in Story but a Poem a fictioâ— of their own Imagination is not like men that guided themselves by Scripture to undertake I close therefore with the 2d Exception which is that their Government was not such as is Episcopal but only such as is the president of a Synod to direct the businesse not Command more than others and this certainly the frame of these Letters doth Confute mightily for they make the Angâ—ls responsible for the faults and heresies which were under the Government which they could not be if they had only the Authority of Presidents but not of Bishops for a President of a Synod hath no Coercive power in himself but as conjoyned with the rest of the Synod and involved Nor hath he any particular Interest in the ruling or swaying the Affairs of the Church but is the mouth of the Synod therefore although if he neglect his duty in the Synod he may well be censured for it yet he cannot have the faults of the Inferiour Clergy or people layd to his Charge in particular take one Instance in the 15th verse of the 2d Chapter the Angel of the Church of Pergamus is censured because he had them which held the Doctrine of the Nicholaitans which Christ hates Should any one ask why the President should be Censured for these things He could answer I am but one man perhaps they can master me in the Synod I have nothing to do alone but a Bishop who hath Coercive power and can both examine and censure any who are in his Diocesse he may be punished because he did
Orders in the Church of Rome which are not truly such but only additions of human Invention according as their Church fancyed would conduce to the Decorum of Gods Service I adde this Term of Divine Institution which must be understood of divine Apostolical constitution and then it may again be put in these Prases that Ordination is an Act by which a Man is Constituted a Minister as at the beginning of this Treatise the Minister is defined for the Man ordained and the Minister before will be all one And so now the nature of Ordination being explained I shall encounter with Hooker in his first Question Whether Ordination is in nature before Election SECT IV. Ordination is not before Election IN answering this Question we shall agree to say No it is not before Election nor surely can it possibly be for a Man must be elected and chosen as fit to be ordained before he is ordained But because Mr. Rutherford as he expresseth it page 39 doth conceive this Election belongs to the People and that Ordination is like the making of a King the Election of the people like the giving and appropriating this ring to the finger by choosing this man to this place which Hooker opposeth I shall quit my self from Rutherford and then apply my self to Hooker I say therefore that first a man must be chosen before he is ordained a Presâ—yter but it is not necessary he should be Chosen by the people there is no semblance of any such Thing in the Scripture nor indeed do Rutherford or Hooker exact it but out of his mistake That they suppose no man should be made a Presbyter which should not at that instant or before be Elected to some benefice of the which the people should be Electors SECT V. Men may be Ordained without the Election of the People NOW the Contrary is most apparent in some Case As suppose Mr. Hooker and Mr. Cotton were adjudged fit men for the Conversion of the Indians they had need be sent with Presbyterial Aâ—thority for else they could not have right Authority to admit Converted men into Christs Church but the people to whom they were sent could not choose them these men must be ordained Presbyters before they are sent and elected before Ordained but not by the people to whom they are sent or the people that is the Commonalty from whom they are sent who are not Capable to discern the fitnesse for such a Work but their Drift is the people over whom they are to Pastorize Thus then it is evident that in some Cases Election of the Congregation or Church over which a Presbyter is put cannot alwayes precede his Ordination But suppose again a Company of Christians whose Presbyter is dead in many Cases they may elect one to be ordained before he is ordained and in many cases they may elect one to this Charge after he is ordained supposing that the power of Election were in them as thus in the first Case they find an able and fit man they desire to have him ordained in the second they find an able man already ordained sine Curâ I put the Casâ— without Exception As suppose his or Mr. Cottons Congregation destroyed by Enemies cannot he be elected to another Church or if Elected must he have another Ordination I believe he will not say so Well then in this Question the Answer must be the Election must precede Ordination but Election to Ordination not Election to a Cure in the second sense Election to a Cure may and may not precede Ordination SECT VI. St. Cyprian explained IN all Hookers Discourse upon this businesse I find nâ—thing remarkable produced to Confirm this Conclusion but some flashes against the Papists and then against the Prelates but page 42. he brings certain Quotations of Authors to which he assents amoâ—g which there is only one worth the insisting on and that is St. Cyprian out of whom Lib. 1. Epist. 4. which is a true Quotation according to the old and Erasmus his Edition but according to Pamelius in 68 Epist. Lib. 4. The words are Videmus de Divina Authoritate descendere ut Sacerdos plebâ— praesente sub omnium oculis delegatur dignus idoneus publico Judicio Testimonio comprobatur This place he cites rightly but what is here but that the people must be present as they are at our Consecrations to this purpose to know whether they have any thing to object against the Man or his life but here is no word of his Election and I must Commend the Ingenuity of the man for it is evident out of the following part of the Epistle that he meant no more because his Arguments inforce no more but the presence of the people yet indeed the words immediately preceding do seem upon the first view to carry another meaning they are these speaking of the people Quando saith he ipsa maximrâ— habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi which words if they be understood of more than a Custom of the Church which is confirmed by many Canons That there should be no clandestine Consecration as well as Marriage but that the Consecration of Priests and Bishops should be in the publick Church where any man may except against them if they have any thing to that purpose I say if this potestas eligendi recusandi be more than this which St. Cyprians Arguments do not enforce yet if there be more meant it is nothing but that the people did Elect their Sacerdos which is understoâ—d of a Bishop as I have intimated heretofore and is clear in this place because the Case disputed of in which St. Cyprian is consulted is concerning a Bishop now it is apparent in Story that many times it was indulged to the People to choose their Bishop especially abouâ— that Age wherein there was a kind of Impossibility of doing otherwise when the World was divided into so many great Schismes and the Emperors peremptorily abetting none nor destroying any so that you might know three Bishops together in a City one Orthodox the other Arian another Novatian now in these casâ—s thâ— people chose their Bishop when the old was dead and adhered to whom they would when he was alive unlesse the Emperor interposed as oft he did or some Council Provincial which likewise was used but for Divine right St. Cyprian speaketh of nothing but plebe praesente they were chosen in the presence of the people but to the Benefice whether Bishoprick or Parsonage the Electors have been various in all Ages and may be so there being nothing determined by Apostolical Constitution or practise yet there is nothing in all this that shews that Election to a Benefice must be before Ordination not the least word but rather after for if it lies in the people to elect a worthy Priest I so translate Sacerdos to his Benefice then he must be a worthy Priest before for else it should be they
setting out and can proceed no further but to understand the Text and so more abundantly the weaknesse of this Argument SECT III. What is meant by Church FIrst know that by the Church we must understand the visible Catholick Church which hath this power and indeed almost all the promises of Christ which is his City his house his spouse his body but then it is understood of her according to that part which hath that faculty of receiving Complaints he who bids you tell a man any Story bids you not speak it to its â—eet or hands but his Ears which are fit parts to receive the Story or if he be deaf you must do it by writing that his Eyes which are organized for that purpose may entertain that relation Again when a man commands he doth it not with his Eyes or Ears but his Tongue which is the part fitted for that purpose The Church is Christs body it hath many parts when you are bid tell the Church you are not bid tell the feet or hands but the Ear those who are proper for that work when the Church speaks it is not with hands or eyes but with the Churches Tongue which are the Officers for that purpose these men would make the body of Christ all Ear all Tongue every member of the Church fit to receive Complaints and fit to Judge and Censure which is ridiculous Take his own Simile Suppose the Church universal a Corporation there was never any such where every man was a Judge It cannot be therefore so here Tell the Church that is tell those Officers in the Church who are designed and organized authorized for such a purpose and then if he refuse to hear them let him be c. and this that very word brother which he introduceth for the prop of his cause evinceth for all Christians throughout the Catholique Church are brethren and the Duty belongs to them this I think doth satisfie and what he adds is of no moment for he being full with his conceit that by Church is meant a particular Congregation and each man in it labours to build upon that foundation which being overthrown his building perisheth He urgeth a place out of Whitaker to prove that Lay-men have Authority of Censuring pag. 52. but because he confesseth That Whitakers meaning is of a General Council that it hath power over any particular Pastor in the Conclusion of that page and the top of the 53. he forms this Syllogism SECT IV. Another Argument of his answered EVery Member of a General Council hath power in the Censuring of a Delinquent Brethren or Lay men as they are termed are Members of a General Council I deny this Minor he brings no proof although if he had studied this question he could not choose but know it is generally denyed by such Writers as Treat of it Although he is extraordinarily Confuted I am unwilling to let any thing slip which may disturb a Reader He saith the Proposition is proved by Instance and Experience but I know not where He addes immediately If others had not Church power over this or that party if he would have refused to have come into their fellowship and joyned with them then it was his voluntary Subjection and Engagement that gave them all the power and Interest they have To understand this there is voluntary engagement in Baptism and besides this there is no more needfull for it is true he who lives in Scotland cannot be governed by the Bishops of England because they cannot have cognizance of his State and because that the Church hath confined the Exercise of that habitual power which they have every where that it shall not break out into Act in such places and upon such causes which they cannot have a full knowledge of but if he who now lives in Scotland will come and live in England and receive the blessings of Gods mercies in his Covenants from the Church of England if he offend he must be admonished and convented before the â—hurch quoad hoc that is the Church Officers and if he obey them not be as an Heathen If he refuse to Communicate with us in these Spiritual blessings he makes himself as an Heathen So that in some Sence there is a Covenant required that which he calls implicite even in a baptized man for else he makes himself an Heathen towards us in regard of us but this implicite is not like their Covenant which seems to be perpetual This is only pro tempore for the time of his abode and no â—onger That which he yet urgeth that men travell into farre Counâ—ries where are Churches planted certainly that man if they be Protestant Churches he will claim a right in the Church Seals if he be a Protestant if a Papist and they Papists he will do so likewise or else he will be as an Heathen To conclude this he brings some places of Scripture to shew that some would not joyn with the Apostles as Acts 5. 13. where Heathens refused to joyn with the Apostles Luke 7. 30. The Pharisees and Lawyers rejected the Council c. But can he shew me that any who were Christians refused Communion with them of what Church soever It is not imaginable His Third Argument is only against Presbyterians I meddle not with it His Fourth Argument is thus framed SECT V. Another Argument of his answered THat Society of Men who may enjoy such priviledges Spiritual and Ecclesiastical unto which none can be admitted but by Approbaâ—ion of the whole that Society must be in an Especial Combination But a particular Combination is such a Society who enjoy such Spiritual priviledges c. Ergo. I deny this Minor Laymen in a particular Congregation have no such power to admit allow and approve of every man who comes into that Congregation they may inform but they cannot judge His last Argument from an Induction avails nothing where he saith If the Inventory of all other respects being brought in none can constitute a Church visible then this only must he reckons up mutual Affection and Cohabitation only which are insufficient to make his Induâ—ion I shall therefore set down what makes a Church visible CHAP. XI SECT I. What makes a Church Visible COnsider what makes a Church that if it be visible constitutes a Church visible and certainly for the first if we consider the Church to be the body of Christ the City of God the Heavenly Jerusalem then as we must conceive it consisting of many men we must conceive it likewise having these men united in some form of Government under Christ and like a City an house a body ruled by their King and head Christ who by his Inferiour Ministers and Officers rules and governs this body this City he is of this City who is ruled and governed by the Lawes of this City of this House who is governed by the Oeconomical discipline of this house of this body who is guided and governed by the
head of this body So he is of Christs Church who is governed by the Lawes of his Church we are not born Citizens of the Heavenly Jerusalem but re-born by Baptism by which we submit to that Discipline and are Incorporated into his body Now then as a man of any City if he live in the East part so long as he lives there is governed according to the Laws of that City by the Constables and Officers whose Authority is there prevalent yet if he remove to the West part by the Lawes of the same City he is governed by other Officers yet by force of the same Law which ruled him before so a Christian submitting himself to Christs Discipline by Baptism if he live in any part of this City submits to those Governours which are there if in another to those which rule in that and all because a Citizen of that City and these are the powers of that City yea perhaps there are kinds of Governments in one part of the City diverse from another according to the condition of the plâ—ce one fittest for that one and another for that other and 〈◊〉 he submitting to the Law of that City varies in the manner of his Subjection according to the exigencies rules of every place by that general rule of submission to the Government of that â—ity This likewise is apparent in an house A Servant admitted into an house so a man by Baptism submits himself to the Oeconomical Discipline of that house and according to the diverse rules of that house in diverse rooms of it submits himself to divers men perhaps diverse Disciplines So in the Hall he meets with one Governour with another in the Kitchin another in the Larder another in the Pantry and in all these he hath diverse Officers to submit to and diverse wayes of Submission in diverse Things Consider it a Body and in a Body consider those parts which walk up and down and go to several parts of the body as blood and spirits each of these by that general rule and Law of being Ministerial parts of the body in their passages through diverse parts receive diverse disciplines and are obedient to several Lawes in the heart the hand the head yet all by that obedience they have to the Law of humane bodies not by a New Covenant in every particular place but by virtue of that first Covenant to be Servants to that head which governs all Now then thus you see by Baptism we are made Citizens of the Heavenly Jerusalem and that being a visible sign makes us visible Members of this visible Church SECT II. Baptism is not the Form which Constitutes aâ— Church-Member but the Visible Act by which men are made such I Would willingly leave this Truth so clearly expressed as it might be without Question therefore Consider a little further that I do not conceive that Baptism is the Form which Constitutes a Church Member but that Baptism is that visible Act by which a man is made a Member a visible Member of Christs Church and the Effect of that Act is that form which â—o Constitutes him The Indenture is not the form of an Apprentice but the Deed by which he is made an Apprentice and that relation or Quality which is got in the person bound is the Effect of that Indenture and is the formality of his Apprenticeship Now because Mr. Hooker seems to oppose this Doctrine I will examine his Arguments which he enters upon Part 1. Chap. 5. page 55. Proposing this Question Whether Baptism doth give formality to make a Member of a visible Church He answers negatively His First reason is SECT III. His First Argument and the Answer to it IF there be a Church and so Members before Baptism Then Baptism cannot give the formality But the Church as toâ—um Essentiale is before Baptism Ergo. He proves his Minor because Ministers are before Baptism this he proves because there must be a Church of believers to choose a Minister lawfully for none but a Church can give a Call One Absurdity granted a Thousand follow Consider which were first Ministers or Churches and whether the Churches did choose their â—â—rst Minister Did the Church or Christ choose their first Ministers the Apostles Did Crete choose or St. Paul ordain Titus their Minister In the second part he supposeth all true which he had discoursed in the first in the first part he supposeth all true which he means to discourse of in the second and indeed both grosly false Ministers were before Churches and did constitute Churches not they them but he gives an Instance page 56. Let it be supposed the coming of some Godly man I draw up his sence amongst Pagans and they are Converted by him may not these men choose him for their Pastor c. I answer Instances upon Extraordinary occasions cannot make general rules but in particular I deny that if he were not a Presbyter before they could make him their Pastor or that he hath power by any Call of theirs to administer the Seals and I can give Instances in particular passages of the same nature in Ecclesiastical Story but that which is an invincible reason against this and the whole force of this matter is that although people may have power to dispose of their own obedience to whom they will give it yet they cannot of Divine benedictions which God shall give them they must in that submit to Gods Ordinance and they who are not authorized by him cannot be chosen by them and therefore they cannot choose him a Pastor where God doth not make him his Officer for that purpose which unlesse he is a Presbyter he is not SECT IV. His Second Argument answered HIS second Argument is If Baptism gives the form to visible Membership then whiles that remains valid the party is a visible Member But there is true Baptism resting in the party who hath no visible Membership Ergo. He proves his Minor from short Instances in an Excommunicate man in him who renounceth the Fellowship of the Church or when the Church is absolutely destroyed then all Church Membership ceaseth To understand the force of this Argument I must deviate a little and discourse of what it is to be a Member of the Church of the force of Baptism in this work Know then that the Church is a body and an orgâ—nical body which hath many members which have diverse Offices an eye a foot c. and as St. Paul philosophyes 1 Cor. 12. and all this body is animated and informed by the same soul the holy Spirit the head of this body is Christ all this needs no proof I think but then that men are made Members of this body by Baptism that I shall apply my self to Consider therefore the 13. verse of that 12 Chap. of 1 Cor. By one Spirit we are baptized into one body whether we be Jewes or Gentiles c. Having in the preceding verse shewed that there are many members
he shews here which way we are made members of it that is Christs body to wit being baptized by the same Spirit into Christ the Spirit which enlivens us makes Baptism effectual to the incorporating a man into the body of Christ For what else can that phrase be into the body as a work of Baptism but into the body of Christ his Church Well then Baptism is the Act the relict of Baptism as before is the Thing which makes us members and parts of this body Consider then next Gal. 3. 26 27. Ye are all the Children of God by faith in Christ Jesus for as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. Here you see phrases wonderfully expressing the same thing As God is considered in Oeconomicks so he is a father so by Baptism we are adopted the children of God as Christ is the head of the body so we are baptized into him and engrassed as the Spirit speaks elsewhere into the body Suppose Christ to be an holy Garment with which the Crimes and Sins of his Servants are hid by Baptism you cloath your selves with his righteousnesse and you put on Christ under whom your unrighteousnesse shall be hid and your sins covered or else as others expresse it Matters put on a form c. But then if you will adde the last verse If ye be Christ ye are Abrahams seed heirs of the promise you may see these 3. things Children Members Heirs most heavenly united in the second Answer of our Catechism In my Baptism wherein I was made a Member of Christ a Child of God and an Inheritor of the kingdom of Heaven which three in expresse Terms are put down â—y St. Paul and what necessary Thing and Essential as he calls it of another Covenant can adde to a further union than this matters not much Well then it is proved that Baptism doth constitute a Member Now I will examine how this may be justified against his Objection which consists only of Instances against this and no proof of them An Excommunicate man saith he hath no Membership He that renounceth the fellowship of the Church or when a Church is utterly dissolved there is no Church-Membership CHAP. XII His Instances Examined and Confuted The Dissolution of a Church doth not destroy Membership I Will take all these apart and discourse the Evidence of them and begin with the last of which I may justly say posito quolibet sequitur quidlibet Let it be granted that the Church should be dissolved and torn to pieces that being the entire body of Christ Christ could have no body and then there would be no Members but it is impossible the Gates and powers of Hell shall never have power to dissolve it the winds shall bluster and the rain fall but not have force to beat down the City of the living God It shall be in persecution and suffer many miseries but the darknesse shall not be able to comprehend or suppresse the light of it it is true one of their poor particular Congregations may be and hath been shaken and scâ—ttered and their Union dissolved because it is wrought by man and mans hand guards it but it shall never be so with Christs body it shall be a pillar a strong support of all truth yea the ground and foundation in which Truth is inherent and by which Truths are supported that instance therefore falls of its self the foundation is cast down and then the Castle hangs only in the Air. SECT II. How Excommunication doth extirpate Baptisme I Apply my self then to the first Instance of an Excommunicated man in which case I would have wished he had brought some reasons to have proved they were not of the Church but he not doing it I will undertake the question against such Opposition as I can find elsewhere The Question is whether an Excommunicate man be a visible member of Christs visible Church I put the Terms as strict as I can because I will avoid all future Cavilling and I answer affirmatively he is he brings no proof to the contrary So we are upon even Terms if I should say no more only the difference will be in the Authority of the Speaker in which I think he will prevail and therefore I will examine it by reason and as well as I can satisfie the Objections made by some Jesuites against it To understand this Consider that any part continues so long a member of its body as it is united to it and so long it is united to it as it can receive influence from the head and be active and operative in its proper works by the fountains and originals of those motions assisted any way by any outward applications or inward medicines the members of a mans body as it haps out in some Palsies may be utterly unactive so that they cannot stirre or move no not feel or be sensible of any hurt and yet these parts remain members of the body still and it may be by Physicians directions be restored to former vivacity and be quickened by spirits as before coming from the same fountain and this is a Sign it is a member still of this body That which is a member of another body canot by any Act be made a member of this nor that which is an entire body of it self so that when physick can restore a member though it appear to our Senses never so dead yet it is still a member Again Consider for the other Term of distinction That if a baptized man though excommunicate be a member by his Baptism he is likewise a visible member by the same Baptism for Baptism is a visible sign of the Effect it produceth and is as visible in the Excommunicated man as in him that Communicates Thirdly Consider that many parts of the body are by obstructions hindred from that influence of blood and spirits which would enable them to do their duties which yet that obstruction removed hold the same Commerce and Society with giving and receiving mutual correspondence in their several offices again with both head and members These things premised as I think apparent Truth I now addresse my self to the businesse SECT III. Bellarmines Arguments answered THere is a great Dispute betwixt Cardinal Bellarmine and others Whether an Excommunicated person be a member of the Church I must oppose Bellarmine for although the Conclusion seems the same in Thomas Hooker and him yet Hooker offers at no reason for it Bellarmine doth lib. 3. de Ecclesia militante Cap. 6. And he saith Excommunicated persons are not in the Church his first Argument is drawn from Mat. 18. 17. If he will not hear the Church let him be as an heathen c. This saith he is understood of Excommunication I yield But saith he Heathens are not of the Church I grant that likewise but do adde neither doth the Text say they are Heathens no more than Publicans but resembling as Sicut being in that like
be pruned and disciplined by repentance Now it is an invincible sign that that branch is yet knit to the body because its livelihood is repaired by pruning not grafting again and this according to the Analogy betwixt a natural body and its members and the Church and her members Secondly Draw the proportion from a Politick body a Corporation Suppose a Corporation with this fundamentall clause in its Statutes that whosoever is once admitted though he may be thrust out of it for such and such offences though he thrust himself out yet if he return again making satisfaction although not of equality yet such acknowledgement as being ordained by Law shall be accepted this man shall be admitted into his former community of the priviledges of that Corporation This man by being once admitted loseth not this union untill he come unto that condition of never laying hold of the priviledges of that Charter he keeps his union though he enjoys not the communion of that Corporation This is the state of this apostatizing man and by the Laws of God granted by all he is upon these terms admitted again whether he thrust himself out of the communion or be thrust out Thus this man in Answer to the former Argument is at the same time in the state of a man that is damned having put himself out of Noahs Ark the Church in which alone is salvation and without repentance and untill repentance which is commonly called Secunda post naufragium tabula he is in that state of damnation and yet if he lay hold on that planck after his shipwrack he shall be saved and hath title to a room in that Ship a place in that Corporation and this is the union I labour for and that which sufficeth to answer mine own Argument and Hookers the same member is at the same time a member of Christs mysticall body and in the state of damnation a member though not lively but only living and in the state of dead men and without repentance must be in that state for ever yet by his Baptism hath a foundation for that to work upon thus to my self then to Mr. Hooker This man who is baptized is still by that Covenant in the Church Tanquam pars in toto though not tanquam locatum in loco he is a member in the first act though he by his sins and opposition neither may nor can use any priviledge of a member in the second act to receive blessings from or with them like a dead branch dead to the second act though alive in the union he hath not lost his membership by these acts but only communion in the second SECT VI. Another Argument answered ANother Argument I can frame somewhat like this former out of Scripture First from Rom. 8. 1. as it is urged after by such who draw Conclusions from curtalled Scripture There is no condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus These Apostates who are baptized by your Doctrine should be in Christ therefore there should be no condemnation to them which is impossible to be for if there be none to them then there is none to any This Argument may be blown away by the very air and breath of the following words rather than need any Answer for the following words are who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit But to such who are in Christ by Baptism and in their lives are far from him their condemnation is more abundantly just and their very Baptism by which they Covenanted to serve God will arise in judgement against them Again it may be Objected John 10. That Christs sheep hear his voice and follow him these run away from him therefore not his sheep It may be Answered His sheep who are in his fold do hear his voice so long as they keep in that blessed communion but when they leave that and go into the wilderness with the stray sheep then they listen not to it nor follow him but go from him as is in the parable of the lost sheep Luke 11. But yet it is evident that sheep belonged to his flock by the shepherds search after him and that it was called his sheep though a stray one and gone cleâ—n from the fold and communion with the rest of the flock so that it owed obedience to his voice and to his steps to follow him though it ran from him and this is all I require a bond of duty the obligation of a Covenant not the force of any violent Tye. SECT VII Rom. 8. 17. Answered IT may be Objected once again that the baptized are by that made the Sons of God and if Sons then Heirs as St. Paul disputes the Case Rom. 8. 17. But these Apostates cannot be accounted Heirs of Heaven therefore they lose their filiation and their Sonship by such wickedness and so may all those other consequences of the Adoption of that Covenant This Question is fully handled by our Saviour Luke 15. in the Story of the prodigall Son there is no Apostate can do more than that dissolute young man did but only perseverance and yet when he returned was not begot anew that cannot be but admitted into his former estate of a Son Take it therefore logically by way of Answer He that is a Son quatenus as a Son he is by that title an Heir but yet he may so dispose of himself like the Prodigall like Esau that he may aliene and sell his Birthright and in that state he is not Heir though a Son So that a Son non ponenti obicem if he alien not his Birthright in himself is an Heir but if he do he hath no Inheritance though an Heir he loseth his Birthright But how then may one say is St. Pauls saying true If a Son then an Heir Thus because by being a Son he hath a title to the reversion of his Fathers estate but he may aliene it which he could not do unless he had title to it And yet we may say that although he is by his Adoption the right Heir yet he is by his lewdness disinherited So that as the prodigall Son so long as he lived in that dissolute and prodigall estate received no favour from his Father nor any relief from his estate yet when he returned he was restored to all again So it is with a Christian a baptized Christian once adopted the Son of God hath Heaven so entayled that he cannot aliene it without a power of revocation which power it then acted when with true repentance and humiliation he shall prostrate himself before the Throne of grace for mercy when he shall with the prodigall Son have a sence of his misery by living in that dissolute condition and longing after the blessings of his Fathers house shall creep to him confessing his sins and begging his favour with a Father I have sinned against Heaven and before thee c. This is the state of every baptized man who by that is adopted a Son of
whole School call it I term it the relict for the Sacramentall motion is terminated in this Character as is evident in him who should feignedly take this Sacrament he receives nothing but the meer Character no grace nor any other supernaturall quality but only this Character I may urge it further because as I have shewed this relict may remain in a man who is void of all grace and full of all impiety and therefore is something in it self which is the terminus the bound the effect of that motion SECT III. Motion is to Relation I Answer to this that motion is to relation and that relations may be the effects of motions that language which Scotus and his followers use in the explication of this Conclusion is not amiss that it is true such relations which arise ab intrinseco from some inward principle cannot be produced without a change in the subject or fundamentum or the object to which it is referred but such relations which arise ab extrinsâ—co from abroad are terms and proper effects of motions His followers Franciscus de Pitigianis Ruiz Faber Faventinus in Q. 4. Dist. 6. Quest. 10. amongst the later as likewise the more ancient touching upon it explain this distinction thus These relations arise from within out of the very nature of both the relates which putting both the relates in actuall being that respect must needs arise out of them and this indeed must shew such relation to arise from an inward principle because it results from their being like heat from â—ire as soon as it is For instance a son and a father are no sooner in the world both at the same time but there ariseth out of them that mutuall relation of fatherhood and filiation so likewise no sooner is one paper dyed black but there ariseth that mutuall similitude and likeness it hath with another paper which was black before that relation comes from abroad which doth not naturally arise out of the being of the relates but requires something else to give it a proper being They illustrate it thus an agent and patient have relation one to the other but the agent as fire and the patient as wood may both he in being yet not have their relation one to another they may be at such a distance as the fire cannot work upon the wood yea in a sit distance and all things else disposed there may be some medium interposed and the fire not be agent nor the wood patient and without any new change in either of them but the removing the interposed body they shall have instantly the relation of agent and patient and the motion only of the interposed body without any new absolute quality introduced into either the fire or the wood shall cause that relation thus they but see it clearer in those morall relations which have a nearer affinity with this of my business in hand a man is chosen Mayor of a Town Judge in a Circuit he is the same in all absolute things he was before can do no physicall or naturall act which he could not before he was as wise before could before give sentence as well as after but his sentence was not definitive before this only that relation which the power of the Magistrate gave him of being a Judge or Mayor enabled him with and this was extrinsecall from abroad for he was before the Town or parties to be judged were before but only this outward investiture in his Office outward in respect of both the relates gave him this being So it is with the business in hand the baptized man had all the absolute qualities before that he hath afterwards he could receive the Communion he could pray with the Congregation he could be absolved the same things he could do or suffer but he had right to none he could not do or receive these blessings effectively before he was baptized he was before Christ was before the Church was before but his relations to neither were before but this act of Baptism introduced them And thus relation we see may be the term and effect of such motion for mutation or change is whatsoever hath novum else a new thing is something which it was not before now that which hath a new relation is something that it was not before the Mayor is the Governor of his Town the Judge of his Circuit so a baptized man a Christian which he was not before I think there needs no more be spoken to the first Argument for the place in Aristotle the Scotists say it is only to be understood of those relations which have their being from an inward principle not such as are from abroad that it is true of those which are in the predicament of relation not of all respects which are transcendent or of which the six last predicaments are constituted for Suarez makes Angelicall motion to be to the predicament of ubi which is one of those respects which constitute a Predicament of themselves but are not in the predicament of relation And we may observe that our transposition of our body in our place to a new situs is a motion to a relation which is another Predicament of the same nature But Cabrera where before saith that Dominicus Soto despiseth this Answer in 4. Dist. 1. Quest. 4. Art 2. You may read it towards the later end of that Article His Answer is That there is no such thing as a relation arising out of any outward cause for every relation ariseth immediately out of its foundation The instances of Scotus he seems to overthrow First That of fire saith he the foundation of the relation to the patient the wood is the action of warming not the heat but let that warming act to the wood have its being presently the relation results and for the action to Vbi he denies Vbi to be a relation but the esse in loco to be in a place which is a reall thing I will not dispute these instances although they are the only instances given by the Scotists and they do not observe this reply in this place but my instances of a Mayor or Judge can in no manner be excepted against for there is the Mayor absolutely the same way endowed with all qualities and defects as before who is the foundation of this relation and he living in the same Town conversing with the same men and yet hath this new relation of being Mayor arising from the constitution of an outward power and that motion from an outward cause works no change in him to any reall and absolute quality But perhaps he will say that this Mayoralty is the foundation of that relation and so the relation immediately results out of it Let him tell me then what that Mayoralty is but that relation he hath to that Society of which he is Mayor for certainly he can make it nothing else but that very Mayoralty must be that relation SECT IV. Relation may be the principle of
now with Mr. Hooker his third Argument from page 69. to 75. of the second Part as also that which for confirmation of it was in many Arguments produced Part 1. Chap. 5. Pag. 55. to overthrow my Conclusion That Baptism doth make a member of a visible Church CHAP. XV. How there may be Pastors of Pastors I Come therefore now to the satisfaction of his fourth and last Argument in this cause which is thus framed pag. 75. of the second Part. Chap. 2. If the essentials of a Pastor be communicated by the Eldership or Bishop meerly then there will be Pastor of Pastors and that in propriety of speech He no way illustrates this or proves it but only thus for saith he the Pastor that is made by them hath reference to them and dependance upon them as Pastors only for it is that which is contended for in the Question in hand that it should be appropriate to their places to make Officers For Answer first to this last If this were it which is contended for he should have proved what he contended for See his proof how weak by a retortion if this consequence were true That if the essentials of a Pastor were communicated by the Elders c. then there will be Pastors of Pastors c. Then the truth of this ariseth out of this that because Elders give Pastors their Office therefore they should be their Pastors then it holds by the same Logick that if the people give the Pastor his essentials then the people should be Pastors of their Pastors then the flock should be Shepherds of their Shepherds which would have served well in the Play of the Antipodes and compleat the Jest of that witty man who said that heretofore God led the people like sheep by the hands of Moses and Aaron but now they lead Moses and Aaron like sheep by the hands of the people And indeed thus it happens with them in this Controversie they give the people power of ordination and correction of their Pastors so that the Corporation judges their Mayor the Scholars whip their Masters the Sheep have power to expell their Shepherd the Children to punish their spiritual Parents than which nothing can be conceived more abhorring to reason But then leaving the examination of this rerortion let us consider the Argument it self If Pastors should be made by Elders or Bishops then Pastors should be Pastors of Pastors Doth he mean that these inferiour Pastors should be sheep to the superiour that follows not see an invincible instance Suppose a superiour Pastor-Shepherd should have power given him to constitute all the inferiour Shepherds or Officers which is the Polity agreeing in the analogy to all States and all great families which resemble little States in this case it would not follow that the inferiour Pastors were sheep but under-Shepherds which he governs not as sheep but as Officers somewhat inferiour to himself Secondly Let it be taken that the inferiour Pastors are governed like inferiours which are accountable to the superiour this is so far from bringing any inconvenience with it that it is most consenting to all the Ecclesiastick and Politick Governments which are setled by God in Church or State and all those prudent Authorities which our wise men imitating God have established in any Commonwealth So that then this Argument falls to the ground and this being all that he hath urged in this case he hath said nothing to prove that the election of the people gives the essentials to an Officer So I have now ended his third Question viz. What Ordination is Secondly His first Question Whether Ordination precede Election Thirdly His second Question Whether Ordination gives all the essentials to an Officer Now I come to his fourth and last Part. 2. pag. 74. To whom the right of dispensing this Ordinance doth appertain CHAP. XVI To whom the right of dispensing this Ordinance doth appertain IN the handling of this Question he seemeth to me to discourse most wildly yet he proposeth this method 1. To state the Question then to confirm his Conclusion In that which he calleth stating the Question he discourseth upon some Propositions The first is page 76. When the Churches are compleated with all the Officers of Christ the right or rite of Ordination the margent cannot tell whether it be right or rite belongs to the teaching Elders the act appertains to the Presbyters of ruling and teaching Elders when an Officer is invested in his place for of these it is expresly spoken 1 Tim. 4. 14. This is all his proof of which place I have spoken I think abundantly in the handdling the case of Episcopacy but consider the Conclusion 1. He supposeth a Church compleated with all its Officers then there is none lacking then there can be none elected or ordained by him because in his Divinity Election is Ordination 2. He sayes that the right of Ordination belongs to the teaching Elders Mark here a man would think were a learned distinction and an heedless Reader would be beguiled by such a distinction of right and act but consider that the right of Ordination is nothing but the Jus the Authority to do it for Ordination is an act how can one have the right to act and yet the acting belong to others That which follows is nothing but great words against Bishops which like froth vanisheth of it self His second Proposition is Though the act of Ordination belongs to the Presbyters yet the Jus Potestas Ordinandi is conferred firstly upon the Church by Christ and resides in her it is in them instrumentally in her originally The right of Ordination just now was in the teaching Elders but the Jus Potestas is now in the Church the Church hath the Latin names and they the English I but the right is firstly in the Church mark the Jus the right to ordain that is to act and then the â—lders do not ordain but the Church the Elders saith he instrumentally she originally this is not well said The Elders cannot be the Churches instruments but Christs they cannot be guided or directed by the Church but are the guides and directors of the Church Nay I will go further than these men and say the Elders are not physicall instruments of this Ordination but only morall it 's Christ that works all in all and these only come in like morall instruments appointed by Christ to do this great work which Christ blesseth but to say they are instruments of the Church is a strange phrase they are the Churches Ministers objectivè busied about the Church but they are Gods Ministers as I may so speak subjectivè subject only to his commands and directions I should have wished that he had endeavoured to confirm these Propositions either out of Scripture reason or antiquity but I see neither neither do I think that the matter will afford either he indeed names three or four late Writers which never trouble me to examine but yet I could
answer them if there were need but the Argument from them is of no force at all and that the very quotations are of no force were the persons See his collection from them page 77. which perhaps he means a third Proposition because he saith Thirdly In case the face and form of all the Churches are generally corrupted c. I need adde no more Posito quolibet sequitur quidlibet suppose impossibilities and you may collect untruth enough Christ hath promised not to leave his Church destitute it is true there is no promise to their particular Congregations but to his Church in generall and therefore to dispute upon an impossible ground yeelds little or no strength to that Argument and so I desist from it His second Argument begins in the end of that page and proceeds in the next It is thus urged If the Church can do the greater then she may do the less the acts appertaining to the same thing and being of the same kind But the Church can do the greater namely give the essentials to a Pastor ut supra Ergo I put his words down verbatim but now he should have named the less which must be or he speaks nothing dispence this Ordinance of Ordination and then I would know what that is if not giving the essentials to this Officer So here is idem per idem the Conclusion proved by it self and therefore must be denyed upon the same grounds which I spake of before and this is all he puts down for his second Argument His third Argument page 78. is thus framed That which is not an act of power but of order the Church can do he proves this Proposition for saith he the reason why it is conceived and concluded that it is beyond the power of the people is because it is an act of supream jurisdiction But this is an act of order not of power Suppose I should deny his Major have the people power to do any thing that is an act of order Indeed I know no Ecclesiastick power they have or any spirituall power of acting any thing that concerns more than their particular demeanour and all the rest is obedience But then to his Minor To dispence Ordination is an act of power for although the thing dispensed as I have shewed is called an order yet it is an act of power that gives it as in a Civil State the precedency of place is meerly an order but yet it is an act of power in the supream Magistrate that gives it Now such is this although we should conceive it meerly an order yet it must be given by an act of power but this besides that notion of order hath in it self great powers which are conveyed by it of which I have treated somewhat in their distinct notions and this Argument is absolutely unvalid He hath another Argument which follows but it concerns only the Presbyterians yet from thence he takes occasion to asperse Bishops thus It is as certain saith he that it cannot firstly belong to a Bishop which by humane invention and consent is preferred before a Presbyter in dignity only if they will hold themselves either to the precedent he writes but I think he means president or pattern whence they raise their pedigree and it is from Hierom ad Evagrium Vnum ex se electum in altiori gradu collocarunt How many to speak modestly weaknesses may be observed in this Discourse First That it is imputed and obtruded upon the defenders of Episcopacy that they should consent that it is an humane invention than which nothing is more against their Discourses Secondly That they found their opinion only upon this place of St. Hierome which is as flat against apparent reason as the other since this place is commonly objected against them and although St. Hierome hath spoken enough otherwhere yet in this Epistle being pressed somewhat with the pâ—ide of Deâ—cons who were lifted up above Presbyters by the sloath and vanity of many he somewhat passionately defended the cause of Presbyters and here of all other places speaks the least for Bishops making the name be used reciprocally in Scripture But then lastly he quotes the place false and by the change of a letter makes him speak what he meant not to whom it may be answered in this as Bishop Andrews did to Bellarmine in the like case Verbum caret litera Cardinalis fide he saith Vnum ex se electum in altiori gradu collocâ—runt when it is Câ—llocatum Episcopum nominaverunt in which sence there is a mighty difference in the first as if they had placed and given their Bishop his authority which he had in the other only that they called him Bishop who was set over the other Presbyters so that it intimates that the name grew distinct not from the first instant of the Office I am sure I have spoke of this place before and let us consider it in its fullest and most averse sence that it can abide consider that just there in the heat and height of his Disputation against Deacons and upon that ground his extolling of Presbyters to which only Order he was exalted he proves that the difference betwixt Bishops and Presbyters and the exaltation of them was Apostolical and from the Apostles derived to his age from the Church of Alexandria which was founded by St. Mark where to his time from St. Mark was a succession of Bishops above Presbyters and it is a derogation from the reverence due to the Apostles to call their institutions meerly humane inventions in such things which concern Ecclesiasticall Government concerning which they had that great Commission As my Father sent me c. and in this case it is most weak of all other since concerning Ordination St. Hierome in this very Epistle immediately after these words saith Quid facit Episcopus excepta Ordinatione quod non faciat Presbyter thus in English What doth a Bishop except Ordination which a Presbyter cannot do Here then a Presbyter cannot ordain and yet to shew the full sence of the words understand that a Presbyter may do any thing I upon a sudden can except nothing not it may be he when he wrote that Sentence I say he can do any thing that a Bishop doth except ordain but the affairs of ruling other Elders or judging them he cannot do by an original or to use Hookers language by an Authority firstly â—eated in him or given to him but by a delegated but no delegation can serve the turn in Ordination because it was given to the Apostles by Christ in those words As my Father sent me so send I you to give Authority to ordain and they and they only who were so authorized by the Apostles can do it Thus you see that place out of St. Hierome expounded his Arguments deduced from thence falls of its self If Presbyters elected and gave first being to a Bishop then were they before him and could not receive Ordination
from him At primum ex concessis Ergo I set down his words and all his words where hath he shewed that Presbyters elected their Bishop which yet may be true and the consequence most weak for after their Ordination by Bishops they may elect their Bishop but not ordain him Elections may be and are various according to humane Constitutions assigning this or that Pastor to this or that particular Congregation sometimes the Parish sometimes the Patron sometimes a Bishop but the Ordination and giving him power to Officiate must be only by the Bishops the Bishop ordains and makes a man a Presbyter a Bishop of the Catholick Church he may by humane Laws and his own consent be tyed to Officiate and execute that Pastoral duty in this particular place nor can any man shew me Authority from Scripture or the times near to the Scripture-Writers where any man was instituted and ordained to do these spirituall duties by any other Authority than Episcopal Nay I think since the Apostles Age no considerable Church or body of Men did conceive Election to be of validity to do these duties till now Well then all the premisses considered which have a full consent of Scripture and the practice of all Ages to confirm them conceive with me that it must be a bold and impudent thing of such men who dare Officiate in these divine duties without Authority granted from Christ which he only gave to the Apostles and they to their Successors Bishops and it is a foolish rashness in those men who adventure to receive the Covenants of their eternall Salvation from such men who have no Atturnment from Christ to Seal them If the Case were dubious which to me seems as clear as such a practick matter can be I should speak more but it being clear I need write no more in this Theam I intended to have spoken to Mr. Hobs but lately there came to my hands a Book of learned Dr. Hammond entituled A Letter of Resolution to six Queries in the fifth of which which is about Imposition of hands you may find him most justly censured for that vain and un-scholastick Opinion pag. 384. But the business is handled sufficiently in the beginning of that Treatise pag. 318. wherefore my pains were vain in this Cause An APPENDIX c. CHAP. I. In which is an Introduction to the Discourse and the Question stated SInce I came back to my Study I found one conclusion delivered in this Treatise opposed by a learned Scotchman one Doctor Forbes in a Treatise intituled Ironicam and in it he hath divers Arguments not inserted in my former Papers against this proposition That it is a proper and peculiar act of Episcopacy to ordain Priests and Bishops which he denyes in his second Book Chap. 11. Proposition 13. in his Exposition and proofe of that proposition page 159. And I observing it whilest my Papers are with the Printer thought it â—it to interpose that which satisfied my self in his Arguments In the top of the page before named he begins thus Gradus quidem Episcopalis est juris divini here we agree Ita tamen ut Ecclesia esse non desinit Sed esse possit sit quandoque vera Ecclesia Christiana in qua non reperitur hic gradus Here we begin to differ I say there neither is nor ever was a Christian Church without a Bishop and I will now begin to distinguish there is the universal Church and there are particular Churches The particular Churches we may yea must conceive to be sometimes without Bishops yea without Presbiters as by the death of their Bishops or Presbiters or by such persecutions as may so scatter them that they dare not shew themselves in their Churches In such cases these places must needes be without these Magistrates And yet those Christians who are by such means defrauded of this divine and blessed government keeping their first faith continue members of the Catholick Church and of that universal Church which have and ever shall have Bishops as long as the World stands so that if that proposition be meant of particular Congregations It is true they may be without a Bishop But if the universal they shall never be by the promise of our Saviour I will be with you to the end of the World without a Bishop And those particular Churches which may by such means be without Bishops may be without Presbiters likewise upon the same occasions This I think is clear I shall now examine his Arguments which oppose this which I have delivered His first Argument drawn from Scripture answered HE saith he will prove it before the Institution of Bishops and after First before I am perswaded he can shew me no Church before the Institution for their Episcopal authority was given in its fulness to the Apostles in that language of our Saviour As my father send me so send I you as I have explained All the Commission was given to them and they imparted all or part of it as they pleased they were the first and only Bishops untill they setled Provincial Bishops they were of the whole world as those latter of particular Diocesses he proves that there were Churches before Bishops out of Scripture but it is ciphered Scripture first Acts 8. 12. There Philip the Deacon so he terms him converted Souls to Christ where was no Bishop And by his leave if Philip were but a Deacon there was no Presbiter neither and by the By the Independant Thomas Hooker of New England and his fellows may take notice that a Deacon may preach and baptize for so did Philip in Samaria in that verse But Reader take notice that although men may be converted by Presbiters yea Lay-men any and when they are converted and baptized are members of the Catholick Church and parts of the mystical body of Christ and have no Bishop resident in that place yet without a Bishop it cannot be for the providence of God over the Church is such as that there shall always be such an authority resident in the Church universal whither men may in convenient time such as will be accepted of God repair for Church-discipline The next place be vergeth is Acts 11. 20 21. But there is nothing observable to any such purpose but only that they who were scattered upon the persecution of Stephen converted many Souls to the true faith His third place is Acts 14. 20 21 22. He should have added the 23 without the which all the former were imperfect to his purpose and in that verse are the words which he argues out of that is they ordained Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now there was a Church he inâ—erâ—s and no Bishop I will tell him there was a Church and no Presbyter untill the Apostles ordained them and the Apostles Barnabas and Paul ordained these Presbiters not a Presbitery and they themselves â—ineranâ—â— throughout the World visited their Churches with letters and directions sometimes when they could not personally
that nothing is essential but giving the proper blessing with imposition of Hands for the addition of one Presbyter to the two Bishops is served only to fill a gap and to comply with an unnecessary received Ceremony it added no virtue of its self noâ— impeded the virtue of the Consecration CHAP. XIV His Discourse examined and an Argument from some Father answered SECT I. The Preface to his Argument examined NOw we will enter upon another Argument being Page 164. towards the bottom a discourse unnecessary for me to write down at large but I will set down what is material in it and so pass to his Argument thus saith he Habent Presbyteri Presbyters have by a Divine right the power of Ordaining Sicut like as they have the power of Preaching and Baptizeing he expounds this that where there is a Bishop there this should be done sub regimine inspectione Episcopi under the government and eye of the Bishop but in other places where the Church is governed by the common Councel of Presbyters that Ordination is valid and good which is made by the imposition of the Hands of the Presbytery Thus he but I desire and so do many more to know where that Church was ever in the Christian world that gave simple Presbyters power to Ordain others before these latter times the practice whereof I think nothing can excuse in some Reformed Churches but a meer necessity in which Case the vote supplies the Act but I will proceed no further with this all to the midst of the next Page is only Discourse his conclusion there is that Presbyters may Ordain I come with him and will consider his following Arguments SECT II. His Argument from St. Ambrose and St. Augustine answered HE begins with St. Ambrose upon the Epistle to the Ephesians Cap. 4. the words are truly cited by him which are apud Aegyptum Presbyteri consignant si praesens non sit Episcopus I will not disturb this before I observe his second Quotation and make one answer serve both which is Augustinus sive quicunque sit author in quaestionibus ex utroque testamento mixtum Quest. 10. In Alexandria inquit Presbyter Consecrat the force of this Argument is this that in Alexandria and throughout Egypt in the absence of a Bishop a Presbyter or Presbyters do Consecrate by these Fathers in the Citation of St. Augustine he ingeniously saith sive quicunque author est illius operis whether he or whosoever is Author of that work indeed it is evident that it is not his and he might have said as much of St. Ambrose as is appâ—renâ— because these Comments are much suspected upon strong grounds but indeed are thought to be some Author of that age and then though an Heretique or Schismatique in a matter of Story which concerns not that business for which he is branded I see no reason why that matter of fact may not be credited I therefore must allow that authority neither will I quarrel at that word in him which is not Consecrat as in the counterseit Augustine but Consignat which is of a largersence but ye because that word is often used for Consecration I will allow that likewise yea I will add that which some Schoolmen who incline to Doctor Forbes his opinion have observed which is that the word Consecrat cannot here be taken for Consecrating the holy Eucharist of the Consecrating the Lords Supper for that was allowed lawful in any place now this seems to intimate a peculiar custom in Alexandria and Egypt for that therefore know that other things are in Ecclesiastical Story said to be Consecrated besides these of Bishops or the Elements of the Communion to wit Holy houses Churches Virgins and Utensils but some may object that this Consâ—â—ration may be understood of Bishops I answer no out of a famous Story recorded by Athanasius which is in his second Apologue and a letter writ by the Marcotici Praesbyteri Diaconi as they stile themselves to Curiasus and Evagrius It is there Registred that one Colluthus counterfeiting himself to be a Bishop when he was none but only a Presbyter Ordained divers persons amongst others one Ischyras for which he was condemned by Hosius and other Bishops in a general Councel that he should leave off Episcopising and be reduced into his former Order and therefore saith the letter Ischyras could be no Priest who was Ordained only by him who was no Bishop give me leave now to shew the truth of this Story it hath so great authority for it as Athanasius who was Bishop of Alexandria in his Apology for himself writ to his adversaries both Lay and Ecclesiastical if he had been a man of less Sanctity yet out of policy he durst not tell such an errant Lie granting this I say that if the other authorities were authentique which they are not that word Consecration must be understood of other Consecrations not of Bishops or Priests because in Alexandria this act was condemned And so I think that there is enough said to that Argument drawn from the pretended Ambrose and Augustine CHAP. XV. SECT I. His Argument drawn from the Councel of Antioch answered ANd now I proceed to another Argument drawn from the Councel of Antioch Canon 10. in which it is Ordained that Chori Episcopi which saith he were only Presbyters might Ordain Readers Sub-deacons and Exorcists but neither Priests nor Deacons as Dionisius Eriquus translates it pâ—aeter Civitatis Episcopum we may render it besides the Bishop of the City Gentianus Hervetus renders it absque Vrbis Episcopo without the Bishop of the City but he saith Hidorus Hispalensis hath a third Reading which he favours above all that is praeter â—anscientiam Episcopi as I may say without the Conscience of the Bishop here he puts down three various Translations or Readings I can add a fourth which is of another Isidore Isidori Mercator who put out the Councels by the advice of Fourscore Bishops as he himself writes in his Epistle before them but indeed hath no remarkable difference from the rest although it varyes from them Now saith Doctor Forbes Pope Damasus in his first Epistle to Purisper Bishop of the Prime Seat of Numidia and other Orthodox Bishops he condemns the Chori-Episcopi as an irregular Order being in themselves but Praesbyteri and taking upon them Episcopal power To go methodically in the examination of this Argument I propose to my self three things 1. The Consideration of the authority of the Canons made in this Councel next the examination of Pope Damasus his decree and last the Nature of those Chori-Episcopi or Country Bishops who are therein mentioned And first I apply my self to the Councel which I am content to admit because the Canons thereof were antiently received into the Code of the Universal Church and mentioned both in the Councel of Chalcedon and the Councel in Trullo though Estius in Quartum Distinct. 25. Sect. 2. is bold to reject the
although perhaps some who had not and I think there is little of moment to be found in antiquity concerning them which is not observed by me there is an Epistle of John the third Pope of that name but it is rejected by Binius and so slighted by me And yet me thinks some may ask my opinion of those Churches where are no Bishops first I dare censure no man much less such large Congregations amongst which I know there are many learned men and no doubt but full of Piety I may be deceived and so may they humanum est errare but certainly in that acquaintance that I have with antiquity there seems to me no ground for them there nor in the Scripture these few pieces which this learned Gentleman had Collected are but old totered Rags which cannot abide to be stitched to this new Garment they have nothing to excuse themselves but necessities which whether they have sufficient or no to excuse them let their own Souls Judge God will I dare not FINIS THE TABLE A Apostles their Election and to what 7. Their Number whence their Name their Office 8. To whom sent 9. What to Preach 10. The Apostles power whence 22. The Apostles truly had the Power of Preaching to all the world 23. 24. The Apostles only commissioned to Baptize 25. The Apostles only to Administer the Communion 27. B Baptism instituted by our Saviour 12. The Baptism of our Saviour and St. John not the same 13. Whether our Sacramental Baptism be the same with that before Christs death 14. 15. Not the same the Objections answered 16. 17. The Baptism instituted by Christ not in force till after his death 18. Whether Baptism administred by Laymen be valid 29. Of Bishops their distinction from Presbyters 94 First Argument from Scripture for their Points 96. The Argument examined 97. And answered 99. The Exception that Titus was an Evangilist but not a Bishop answered 99. Objection for their points from Acts 20. 28. answered 101. C An outward Call necessary to a Minister 129. This Call hath a Moral not a Physâ—cal influence 130. The Character left after Ordination 132. The Communion instituted by our Saviour 18. The Apostles Ministers of it 19. 20. Instituted before our Saviours death 20. 21. Mutual covenanting of the Saints gives not the Being to a Visible Church 157. What this Covenant is Explicit or Implicit 159. The Reasons for it answered 159 c. Other Arguments answered 165. 167 c D The Election of the Seventy Disciples 11. The Differences betwixt them and the Apostles 96. Deacons as afterwards used in the Church not instituted Acts 6. 37 38. Arguments proving this 39. 40. The opposing Arguments answered 43. Some of the first Deacons Preachers 40. What the Office of a Deacon 45. E Of Lay-Elders 59. What a Lay-Elder is in the Disciplinarian sense 60. No such Elders in Scripture 61. Places of Scripture urged for them answered ibid. Third Argument of Mr. Thomas Hooker for Lay-Elders answered 62 c 69. 74. 75. St. â—auls Elder signifies but one Office 66. St. Ambrose's words urged for Lay-Elders expounded 86. c. The design of making Lay-Elders 88. What the word Especially imports 1 Tim. 5. 17. 68. What an Evangelist is 106. G Gifted men may Preach if licenced by the Bishop otherwise not 84 85. H What Double Honour signifies 1 Tim. 5. 17. 68. Mr. Thomas Hookers opinion concerning Deacons examined 45 46. Rom. 12. 8. expounded against him 47 48. c. His Deacon enforced from this place of Scripture Confuted 53. The first Confutation of Mr. Thomas Hooker out of this Text. 54 55. His Second Argument refuted 56. His Third Argument refuted 57. His First Argument from Reason refuted 57. His Second and Third Argument from Reason answered 58. Another Argument answered 59. Mr. Thomas Hookers distinction of Pastors and Teachers refuted 90 c. I Episcopal Jurisdiction proved 115 L What Labouring in the Word imports 1 Tim. 5. 17. 67. 86. M What the word Minister signifies 1. The Definition of a Minister 2. The Definition explained 3. c. The Power to be a Minister must come from God 3. 6. Motion is to Relation 208 209. O Touching Ordination 121. Mr. Thomas Hookers definition of Ordination confuted 122. What Ordination is 123. Ordination not before Election 224. Men may be Ordained without the Election of the People 125. Whether Ordination gives all the Essentials to an Officer 128. Of Pastoral Ordination 140. P St. Peter had no greater power given him by Christ than the other Apostles 28. The chief Arguments for his superiority answered ibid. A vindication of our Common Prayer-Book in the number of the Sacraments 131. A Digression concerning Preaching 76. What Preaching is 78. To what Preaching every Presbyter is bound 80. The peculiar Interest a Presbyter hath in Preaching 82. Who is authorized to Preach 83. What a true Presbyter is 89. A Power is left by Christ to some men whereby they communicate Power to others 156. R Relation may be the principle of Action 211. One Relation may be the Foundation of another 242. What Ruling well imports 1 Tim. 5. 17. 67. A The Apostles only intrusted with the power of the Keys 29 30. Other Apostles besides the Twelve 31 32 33. The reason of it 33. The Apostolical power extended to all the world 34. How the Apostolical power was Communicated 35. How the Apostolical power was communicated to particulars 36. B Second Argument for Parity answered 102. Third Argument for it answered 104. Fourth Argument concerning Jurisdiction answered 106. An Argument from Ordination by Presbyters answered 107. An Argument out of St. Hierome answered 108. Bishops succeeded the Apostles in all that is Apostolical though not in their extraordinary endeavours 142. Baptism not the Form which constitutes a Church-Member but no Visible Act by which he is made a Member 171. Mr. Thomas Hookers Arguments against this Opinion answered 171 172 c. Baptism hath all things necessary to a real Relation 219. E Episcopacy setled by the Apostles in the Church 111. First Argument from Scripture to prove Episcopacy 113. A Second Argument to prove it 114. The Revelation of St. John assorts Episcopacy 117. St. Cyprian urged as favouring The People having the power of Electing their Ministers explained the Objection answered 126. Arguments from the Election of the Deacon Acts 6. examined 127. Other Arguments answered 133 c. 149 c. An Excommunicate man is a Member of the Church 175. Bellarmines Arguments against this Opinion answered 176 c. C Scriptures written of the Catholique Church grossely misapplyed by Mr. Thomas Hooker to particular Churches 162 c. What is meant by the Church and our Saviours saying Tell the Church 166. What makes a Church Visible 169. Such as renounce the fellowship of the Church are yet Members of the Church 180. The Arguments against this Opinion answered 181 c. 190 c. Some difficulties of this Opinion cleared 187. What