95. c. Legimus in verb. postea Arch-Bishop Vsher appeals to this first primitive Church in Matters of Doctrine and why may not we appeal to it in point of Discipline as well as Doctrine See many more Canonists quoted in Mr. Mason ubi supra 4. Some Councils also attest to this Truth The Council of Aix le Chapelle owns the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters Sed solum propter authoritatem summo Sacerdoti Clericorum Ordinatio reservata est To the same purpose speaks the Council of Hispalis or Sevil. Concil Hispal 2. Can 7. In the Councils of Constance and Basil after long debate it was concluded that Presbyters should have decisive Suffrages in Councils as well as Bishops because by the Law of God Bishops were no more then Presbyters and it 's expresly given them Acts 15. 23. In the Council of Trent all the Spaniards with some others moved that the superiority of Bishops de jure Divino might be defined next morning came into the Legats Chamber three Patriarchs six Arch-Bishops and eleven Bishops with a Request that it might not be put into the Canon that the Superiority is de jure Divino because it savoured of Ambition and it was not seemly themselves should give Sentence in their own Cause and besides the greater part would not have it put in At length the Opinion of the Spaniards prevailed and was inserted into the Canon though in such ambiguous words as might not offend the other Party The words of the Canon are these Si quis dixerit Episcopos non esse Presbyteris superiores vel non habere potestatem confirmandi ordinandi vel eam quam habent illis esse cum Presbyteris Communem anathema sit This Decision was made 1. In opposition to the Lutherans This Reason was given by the Arch Bishops of Granata in the Congregation held Octob. 13. 1562. and of Zarah as also by the Bishop of Segovia 2. In favour of the Pope for they were afraid that if the Divine Institution and Superiority of Bishops were denied the Popes triple Crown would soon fall off his Head So the Bishop of Segovia If the power of the Bishops be weaken'd that of the Pope is weaken'd also To the same purpose said the Arch-Bishop of Granata being assured that if the Bishops Authority were diminished the Obedience to the Holy See would decrease also The very Council of Trent doth not expresly determine Bishops to be a Superiour Order to Presbyters and the general definition which they make of their Superiority above Presbyters and of their sole power of Ordination and Confirmation is in opposition to the Protestants and in favour of the Pope Which puts me in mind of a passage in the Council of Constance where that blessed Man of God Mr. Iohn Wickleff was condemned for a Heretick and his Bones ordered to be taken up and burnt One of the Articles for which he was condemned was this Confirmatio juvenum Clericorum Ordinatio locorum consecratio reservantur Papae Episcopis propter cupiditatem lucri temporalis honoris 5. This Doctrine hath been maintain'd also by the Church of England both Popish and Protestant The Judgment of the Church of England in the tims of Popery we have in the Canons of Elfrick ad Wolfin Episc where the Bishop is declared to be of the same Order with the Presbyter Haud pluris interest inter Missalem Presbyterum Episcopum quam quod Episcopus constitutus sit ad Ordinationes conferendas ad visitandum seu inspiciendum curandúmque ea quae ad Deum pertinent quod nimiae crederetur multitudini si omnis Presbyter hoc idem faceret Ambo siquidem unum tenent eundem Ordinem quamvis dignior sit illa pars Episcopi The ancient Confessors and Martyrs here were of the same mind It is said of that eminent Confessor Iohn Wickleff that tantum duos Ordines Ministrorum esse debere judicavit viz. Presbyteros Diaconos Iohn Lambert a holy Martyr saith In the primitive Church when Vertue bare as ancient Doctors do deem and Scripture in mine Opinion recordeth the same most room there were no more Officers in the Church of God then Bishops and Deacons The same was the Judgment of Tindal and Bannes The Protestant Church of England was of the same mind The Institution of a Christian Man made by the whole Clergy in their Provincial Synod Anno 1537. set forth by King and Parliament and commanded to be preached to the whole Kingdom mentions but two Orders Bishops or Presbyters and Deacons In Novo Testamento nulla mentio facta est aliorum graduum aut distinctionum in Ordinibus sed Diaconorum vel Ministrorum Presbyterorum sive Episcorum To which agrees the MS. mention'd â—y the now Bishop of Worcester setting forth the Judgment of Arch-Bishop Cranmer That Bishops and Priests were â—ne Office in the beginning of Christs Reâ—igion The Bishop of St. Asaph Thirlby Redman Cox all imployed in that Conâ—ention were of the same Opinion â—hat at first Bishops and Presbyters were â—he same Redman and Cox expresly â—ite the Judgment of Ierom with approâ—ation The Learned Bishop concludes his Discourse of Arch Bishop Cranmer thus We see by the Testimony of him who was instrumental in our Reformation that he owned not Episcopacy as a distinct Order from Presbytery of Divine Right but only as a prudent Constitution of the CIVIL MAGISTRATE for the better governing of the Church The same Arch-Bishop Cranmer was the first of six and forty who in the time of King H. 8. affirmed in a Book called The Bishops Book to be seen in Fox's Martyrology that the difference of Bishops and Presbyters was a Device of the ancient Fathers and not mentioned in Scripture Our Learned Writers against the Papists are of the same mind Bishop Iewel in the Defence of his Apology proves against Harding that Aerius could not be accounted a Heretick for holding that Bishops and Presbyters are all one Iure Divino and â—ting Ieróm c. concludes in thesâ— words All these with many more holy Fathers together with the Apostle St Paul for thus saying must by Harding advice be held for Hereticks The same is affirmed by Bishop Morton in his Cath. Appeal by Bishop Bilson against Seminaries Dr. Whittaker Resp. ad Camp Rationes Dr. Fulk upon Tit. 1. 5. Dean Nowel Dr. Stillingfleet Bishop of Worcester in his Irenic Dr. Burnet Bishop of Salisbury in his Vindication of the Church of Scotland his words are these I acknowledge Bishop and Presbyter to be one and the same Office and so plead for no new Office-bearer in the Church The first branch of their power is their Authority to publish the Gospel to manage the Worship and to dispense the Sacraments and this is all that is of Divine Right in the Ministry in which Bishops and Presbyters are equal sharers p. 331. The truth is this
Quia Concilii Nicaeni Operâ quod celebrandum curaverat Ecclesiae pacem restituerat Arrianorum impias controversias compescuerat Constantius added one more and there were but five Temples in that great City that was little inferior to Rome in the days of Iustinian See Gentiletus his Exam. Concil Trid. lib. 5. sect 48. Some of our greater Parishes have as many Chappels or Places of Publick Worship as there were Temples in Constantinople which are but a small part of an English Diocess But the Learned Mr. Baxter and Mr. Clarkson have so fully proved the English Species of Episcopacy to be destructive of the Scripture and Primitive Form that until they be solidly answered we will take it for granted that it is a Humane Creature which grew up as the Man of Sin did and owes it's being to the meer favour of Secular Powers who can as easily reduce it to it 's primitive Nothing Some have pretended to make Bishops of the seven Asian Angels when they have proved their power of Jurisdiction and the extent of their Diocesses to be the same with ours they shall be heard The state of Ephesus one of the seven Asian Churches we have seen already by which we may guess at the rest The Church of Smyrna another of the seven Churches of Asia consisted of a single Congregation that ordinarily worshipped and communicated in one place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let all follow the Bishop as Iesus Christ doth the Father and the Presbytery as the Apostles and reverence the Deacons as God's Commandment Let none mannage any Church matters without the Bishop And a little after he adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where the Bishop is there let the Multitude be even as where Christ is there the Catholick Church is it is not lawful without the Bishop either to baptize or to make Love-feasts Here it is evident 1. That the Multitude which were the Bishops Flock ordinarily worshipped God together 2. That they did this under the conduct of their respective Bishop who was ordinarily present with every Church Assembly 3. That he was the ordinary Administrator of Baptism to his Flock which he could not do had it been as large as our present Dioceses 4. That the same Assemblies had a Bishop Presbyters and Deacons For the same Multitude is to follow the same Bishop Presbyters and Deacons and how could one Parish follow all the Presbyters of all other Parish Churches of a Diocess whom they never knew Ignatius's Epistle to Polycarp who was then Bishop of Smyrna makes it more evident that he was Bishop of a single Congregation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Keep frequent Congregations inquire after all by name despise not Men-servants and Maid servants I leave it to such as are willing to understand the Truth to consider how great Polycarp's Church then was when the Bishop himself was to look after every one by name even the Men-servants and the Maids We find by Ignatius's Epistle to the Philadelphians another of these Churches that the Angel of the Church of Philadelphia had no larger a Diocess then those of Ephesus and Smyrna 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Study therefore to use one Eucharist or Eucharistical Communion for there is one Flesh or Body of our Lord Iesus Christ which is represented in the Sacramental Bread and one Cup which is Sacramentally given into the union of his Blood one Altar one Bishop with the Presbytery and the Deacons my fellow Servants Nothing can be more full than this Testimony They are all to joyn in one Assembly for the Eucharist and there must be but one Altar for this Communion and one Bishop and one Presbytery with the Deacons with him and such a Bishop is a Parish Minister or Rector assisted by his Curates and Deacons the latter of which were originally instituted to serve Tables Acts 6. II. Tyconius's old Exposition mentioned by Austin hath not been yet disproved which is this That by the Angels are meant the whole Churches and not any single Persons Aug. lib. 3. 30. de Doctr. Christian. The whole style of the Text countenances this Exposition for as every Message begins with To the Angel so it endeth with To the Churches III. In the Contents of our authorized Bibles they are expounded Ministers By which we may understand the sense of the Old Church of England agreeable to many of the Ancients such as Aretas Primasius Ambrose Gregory the Great Bede Haymo and many more Scripture is it 's own best Interpreter we find there that the Church of Ephesus over which one of these Angels presided had several Bishops in it and all the other Churches had several Ministers in them as will be acknowledg'd by our Antagonists Now these other Ministers are included either under the name of Candlesticks and so reckoned among the People which is absurd or under the name of Stars and Angels Many may be intended by one Angel as afterward by one Beast cap. 13. and one Head cap. 17. It 's remarkable that it is spoken of the Candlesticks the seven Candlesticks are the seven Churches but of the Stars it 's said indefinitely the seven Stars are the Angels not seven Angels of the seven Churches IV. Angel is a name of Office and not of Order as is agreed by the Learned it is a strange Consequence To the Angel of the Church of Ephesus therefore the Angel was a Bishop and had Authority over other Ministers St. Iohn placeth the Presbyters next the Throne of Christ himself and the Angels further off at a greater distance shall we therefore say that the Presbyters are more honourable then the Bishops the Inference is much more natural then the other if Angels be Bishops as our Adversaries affirm St. Paul prefers the preaching before the ruling Presbyter V. It 's observed by many Chronologers that Timothy was alive when the Epistle to the Angel of the Church of Ephesus was written and shall we think that he had left his first love whom Paul so often commends for his Zeal and Diligence in the Work of God VI. To put this matter out of doubt St. Iohn a Jew calls the Ministers of Particular or Parochial Churches the Angels of the Churches in the style of the Jewish Church who call'd the Publick Minister of every Synagogue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Angel of the Church They call'd him also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Bishop of the Congregation Every Synagogue or Congregation had its Bishop or Angel of the Church Now the Service and Worship of the Temple being abolished as being Ceremonial God transplanted the Worship and Publick Adoration used in the Synagogues which was Moral into the Christian Church to wit the Publick Ministry Publick Prayers reading God's Word and Preaching c. Hence the names of the Ministers of the Gospel were the very same the Angel of the Church and the Bishop which belong'd to the Ministers in the Synagogues We love
whether Peter Euodius or Ignatius succeeded Peter or Paul or the one and the other Paul At Alexandria where the Succession seems to run clearest the Original of the Power is imputed to the Choice of Presbyters and to no Divine Institution as we observed already 7. If there were any certainty in this Succession the Fathers ascribe it to Presbyters as much as to Bishops Ignatius saith concerning them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Presbyters succeeded in the place of the Bench of the Apostles Irenaeus affirms the same Cum autem ad eam iterum Traditionem quae est ab Apostolis quae per Successionem Presbyteriorum in Ecclesiis custoditur provocamus eos qui adversantur Traditioni dicent se non solum Presbyteris sed etiam Apostolis existentes sapientiores c. Though the truth is when the Fathers insist upon the Succession of Bishops or Presbyters they are not to be understood of the Succession of Persons but principally of the Succession of Doctrine which the first Bishops or Pastors of Churches kept inviolable as received from the Apostles Otherwise the Succession of Persons without the Orthodox Doctrine is no note of a true Church as among the Arians where they had a Succession of Bishops and yet no true Church Pietatis successio proprie successio aestimanda est namque qui eandem fidei Doctrinam ejusdem quoque Throni particeps est qui autem Contrariam fidem amplectitur adversarius in Throno etiam Censeri debet Atque haec quidem nomen illa vero rem ipsam veritatem habet successionis Now the Succession of true Doctrine being wanting in the Popish Church the other of Persons is an empty Name to circumvent the Simple Object 3. Ischyras was Deposed because he was Ordained by Colluthus a Presbyter of Alexandria Thus Bishop Hall in his Divine Right of Episcopacy p. 91 92. and Bilson's Perpetual Government cap. 13. Answ. Colluthus Ordained as a pretended Bishop constituted by Meletius Arch Bishop of Thebais and therefore was commanded by the Alexandrian Council to be a Presbyter as he had been formerly Ischyras's Ordination was declared void as being not acknowledged by them that were reported to be the Authors himself also is reckon'd by Austin amongst the Hereticks and his Ordination was a notorious breach of the Canons it was sine titulo extra fines and nulli vicinorum nota all which Circumstances make it uncanonical Dr. Field saith That when Presbyters Ordinations were accounted void it 's to be understood acoording to the rigour of Canons in use in their Age which appears saith he by this that Ordinations sine Titulo were null Conc. Chalc. Can. 6. The Reverend Author of the Naked Truth thus Answers Bishop Hall's Objection about Colluthus and Ischyras I am sorry saith he so good a Man had no better proof for his intended purpose It seems he quite forgot how that the famous Council of Niâ—e made a Canon wherein they declare that if any Bishop should Ordain any of the Clergy belonging to another Bishops Diocess without his consent their Ordination should be null You see then the irregular Ordination of a Bishop is as null as the irregular Ordination of a Presbyter therefore the irregular Bishop and the irregular Presbyter are of the same Order of the same Authority neither able to Ordain Object 4. It is objected out of Ierom Quid facit Episcopus quod non facit Presbyter exceptâ Ordinatione Answ. Ierom speaks of Canonical Restraints and not of Scriptural for the design of his Discourse is to prove the identity of Bishops and Presbyters and having brought many Arguments from Scripture to prove it he confirms it by asking this Question What doth a Bishop more then a Presbyter except Ordination plainly intimating that this could not advance him to a superiour Order the Bishop and Presbyter being originally the same As if he would say The Presbyters perform the most transcendent Acts of Religion they are Ambassadors for Christ to preach the Gospel they administer Baptism and the Lord's Supper and what doth a Bishop more then these except Ordination which being no Sacrament is inferiour in dignity to the other mentioned Acts and therefore cannot elevate them to a higher degree A Canonical Restraint cannot prejudice their inherent Power FINIS Books Printed for John Salusbury at the Rising Sun in Cornhil PRactical Reflections on the late Earthquakes in Iamaica England Sicily Malta Anno 1692. with a particular Historical Account of those and divers other Earthquakes by Iohn Shower Earthquakes explained and Practically improved occasioned by the late Earthquakes on Sept. 18. 1692. in London and many other Parts in England and beyond Sea by Tho. Doolittle M.A. The Duty and Blessing of a Tender Conscience plainly stated and earnestly recommended to all that regard Acceptance with God and the Prosperity of their Souls by T. Cruso The Christian Laver or a Discourse opening the Nature of Participation with and demonstrating the Necessity of Purification by Christ by T. Cruso Four Sermons on several Occasions by T. Cruso Barbarian Cruelty being a true History of the distressed Condition of the Christian Captives under the Tyrany of Mully Ishmael Emperor of Morocco c. by Francis Brooks The Mirrour of Divine Love unvail'd in a Paraphrase on the Song of Solomon by Robert Flemming V. D. M. * Perrin's Hist. p. 53 62. Hist. of the Vaudois c. 3 * Contra Waldens cap. 4. Walsing Hist. p. 339. * Dr. Stillingfl Iren. p. 393. †Hier. in Ep. ad Tit. * CommuniÌ„ Concitio Presbyterorum gubernabatur Ecclesia Hieron ubi supra ad Evagr. ‖ See La Rocque's Conform of Dâ—scipline cap. 1. art 3. Isa. 53. 12. Rom. 8. 36 37. Eph. 4. 11 14. Arg. 1. * 1 Pet. 5. 1 2. †Rev. 2. 27 ‖ 1 Tim. 5. 17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * 1 Tim 3. Phil. 1. 1. †Acts 20. 17 28. ‖ Acts 14. 21 22 23. * Walt. Praef. de Edit Bib. Polygl p. 30 40. ‖ 1 Tim. 5. 17. †1 Pet. 5. 1. Object * Spens contra Bucer Answ. †Acts 20. 28. ‖ 1 Pet. 5. 1. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * Eph. 4. 11. * Acts 20. 17 28. 1 Pet. 5. 1 2. †1 Cor. 12. 28. Eph. 4. 11. Object Answ. 1. ‖ Vid. Turr. Sophis inter Sadeel Op. p. 598. * Eph. 4. 11 ‖ Euseb. Hist. 111. 34. * In Eph 4. †1 Tim. 5. 22. ‖ 2 Tim. 4. 1. 2. * 1 Tim. 4. 14. †Acts 14. 23. ‖ 1 Tim. 1. 3. 4. 13 14. * 1 Tim. 3. 14 15. †Whitt contr 5. q. 1. c. 2. s. 16. ‖ Cypr. Ep. 64 68. ‖ Acts 20. 17 28. * 1 Tim. 3. 14. 15. 4. 13. †1 Tim. 5. 13. ‖ 1 Pet. 4. 15. * 2 Tim 4. 9 10 11. †Heb. 13. 23. ‖ Acts 20. 17 28. * Acts 20. 4 5 6 7 13 14. * Ib. v. 25. †1 Tim. 4 14. 1 Tim. 1.
this sense were admitted and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be taken for the Office of Presbytery it will not prejudice our Argument for it will follow that Timothy was but a meer Presbyter by Office and that it belongs to the Office of a Presbyter to impose Hands for Ordination because Timothy a Presbyter did so 1 Tim. 5. 22. So that whether we understand the place of a Bench of Presbyters Ordaining Timothy or of the Office of a Presbyter into which Timothy was Ordained and by virtue of which he had power to Ordain others it equally proves our assertion that meer Presbyters did Ordain Object 2. Timothy was Ordained by Paul with the concurrence of the Presbyters Non excluduntur Presbyteri ab impositione manus approbante sed ab impositione manus ordinante saith the Jesuit who is followed by some of our own they say The efficacy of Timothy's Presbyteratus was in Paul as in a Bishop and therefore he saith in 2 Tim. 1.6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the Presbyters by a bare concurrence and therefore it 's said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 denotes Authority and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a meer Instrumentality Answ. It cannot be denied but Paul laid hands upon Timothy 2 Tim. 1.6 but how doth it appear that it was for Ordination it might be for any thing appears to the contrary for the conferring of the Holy Ghost which was given by the Laying on of the Apostles Hands Acts 8. â—17 18. But if he laid Hands for Ordination it 's certain he joyned the Presbyters with him which he had not done if there had not been an inherent Power of Ordination in Presbyters as such The Apostles did not assume to themselves the sole Power of Ordination but took the Presbyters for their Associates in this Action Paul joyns Barnabas with him Acts 14.23 who if he were one of the Seventy Disciples as Dorotheus affirms with whom agrees Eusebius then was he of the Order of Presbyters according to that Hypothesis that makes Bishops to succeed the twelve Apostles and Presbyters the Seventy Disciples and so we have another Example of a Presbyter ordaining The like must be said of Timothy who laid on Hands in Ephesus not without the Presbyters joyning with him who were made Bishops there by the Holy Ghost Acts 20.17 28. He would not assume a greater Power to himself then Paul did but Paul joyned the Presbyters with him in the Act of Ordination therefore Timothy did the like Nothing can be gathered from the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 applied to Paul's Act and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as applied to the Presbyters Act for they are used promiscuously in the New Testament and the signification of them must be determined by the subject matter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 1 Tim. 4.14 respects the moving Cause that encouraged Paul with the Presbyters to lay Hands on Timothy see 1 Tim. 1.18 But usually 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a Genitive Case signifies an instrumental working or efficiency See Matth. 8.17 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Esaias the Prophet We are said to be justified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 3.30 It signifies also a way or medium that respects a certain end See Matth. 2.12 7.13 12.43 I find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used promiscuously in Acts 15.4 12. 14.27 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by them is rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in v. 12. and yet the same thing is intended viz. what God did by them as Instruments Paul's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do equally imply an instrumental efficiency For all Ordainers are Ministerial Deliverers of Possession and none of them principal efficient Donors Christ is the Authoritative Giver of the Ministerial Power by his Law which is the Fundamentum Iuris As the King's Charter to a Corporation determines who shall be capable of being Mayor how he shall be chosen and how invested here the Mayor's Power is immediately from the King's Charter as the efficient constitutive Instrument and all that others do is but to determine of the Recipient and Invest him so the Lord Jesus Christ hath hath in his Law determined the Office of the Ministry the qualifications of the Persons and how they are to be separated for the Work all that belongs to the Ordainers is but ministerialty to Invest a capable Recipient They are no Efficients of the Power that is immediately from Christ's Law which is the Fountain and Measure of their Power Thus the Presbyters in the purest and first Age of the Church had the Ordaining Power which they kept for a considerable time as we shall see â—â—non though as the Church degenerated from the first Purity and the number of Presbyters increased one was chosen as President of the rest who â—hould Impose Hands in the Name of â—is Collegues Hence the Superior Dignity of Bishops who at length â—ubjected not only to their Hands but â—o their Feet also not Presbyters alone â—ut Sovereign Princes and Emperours that we may not forget the Bishop â—f Rome so that at length the poor â—resbyters were no more then the Bishops Curates as our Liturgy distinguisheth them in the Prayer for Bishops and Curates The easiest and more honourable Parts of the Ministerial Work as they were reckon'd they reserved in their own hands and committed the rest to their Presbyters CHAP. IV. Presbyters have power of Ordination because they have power to Preach Baptize and Administer the Lord's Supper These are not inferior to Ordination proved from the Nature of these Acts from Christ's Commission from the Sense of the Ancients Object The Apostles reserved Ordination to themselves and Successors Answ. 1. They joyned the Presbyters with them 2. The Apostles as such had no Successors prov'd from the Peculiars of their Office from the the Testimonies of Sadeel Barrow Lightfoot Another Objection answered THey who have power to Preach the Gospel to Baptize and Administer the Lord's Supper have power of Ordination but meer Presbyters have power to Preach Baptize and Administer the Lord's Supper therefore they have power of Ordination The Major only requires proof which I thus prove Preaching Baptizing and Administring the Lord's Supper are Ministerial Acts not of an inferiour Nature to Ordination parium par est ratio That they are not inferiour to Ordination appears both from the nature of the thing and from Scripture It appears 1. From the nature of the thing it self Let us consider each apart As to Preaching the Gospel Authoritatively in the Name of Christ it 's a most glorious Ordinance the Publishers of it are called Ambassadors for Christ 2 Cor. 5.20 And is an Ordainer any thing more In the Act of Preaching they represent the Lord Jesus Christ the great Prophet of the Church Matth. 10. 40. and can any thing be more honourable They are said to be
perform that Ministerial Act in a regular manner for it 's included in their Commission Popish Ordainers did not intentionally give the Reforming Power to the first Reformers yet no Protestant will question but it was annext to their Office as Ministers Now the Office of the Ministry being from Christ and not from Man we must not go to the words of the Ordainer but to the instituting Law of Christ to know what the Office is As if the City and Recorder should chuse and invest a Lord Mayor and tell him you shall not have all the Power given by the King's Charter it 's a Nullity he shall have all the Power that the Charter giveth him by virtue of his Office CHAP. V. The Ordinations of the greater part of the Reformed Churches are by Presbyters Their not having superiour Bishops cannot unchurch them nor is it a Case of Necessity as is pretended by some For 1. They might have Bishops if they would 2. Some of them refused them when offered 3. Their Learned Writers assert an inherent Power in Presbyters to Ordain and never use this Plea of Necessity 4. Their Confessions make all Ministers equal THAT Ordination which is the same with the Ordinations in the Reformed Churches beyond Sea is valid but such is Ordination by meer Presbyters Therefore If theirs be null and the Roman or Popish Ordinations valid then it 's better be of the Roman Popish Church then of the Reformed but the Consequence is absurd I know but two things can be replied to this Argument 1. That the Reformed Churches have no true Ministers for want of Episcopal Ordination Thus Mr. Dodwel and others who would have us believe the Romish Church to be a true Church and receive the Pope as the Patriarch of the West These Gentlemen have cast off their Vizard and give us to know what they would be at They condemn the forreign Reformed Churches as no Churches their Sacraments as no Sacraments and consequently no Salvation to be had in their Communion Like the Donatists of old they confine Salvation to their own Party and Way It 's unaccountable that any who call themselves Protestants should unchurch the greatest and purest part of Reform'd Christians in favour of a Despotick Prelacy which hath no foundation in Scripture or the best Antiquity The being of Ministry and Churches must depend upon a few Men who look more like State-Ministers then Ministers of Christ and are generally more busie in managing Intrigues of Government then in preaching the word in season and out of season Can any imagine that such Pastors as rarely preach the Gospel as not above once in three years visit their Flock that have many thousands of Souls under their charge whose Faces they never saw that assume to themselves a Grandeur more agreeable to the Princes of the World then to the Simplicity and Humility required in the Ministers of the Gospel that entangle themselves with the Affairs of this Life contrary to the Scriptures and the Old Canons I say can any imagine such Pastors to be so necessary to the Church that there must be neither Ministry nor Sacraments nor Worship of God nor Salvation without them O happy Rome O miserable Reformed Churches if the Case be thus 2. Others that are more moderate say The Case of the Reformed Churches is a Case of Necessity they have no Bishops nor can have them Ordinations by meer Presbyters may be lawful where Bishops cannot be had I answer 1 The Case of the forreign Churches is no Case of Necessity for if they have a mind of Bishops what hinders their having of them Is it the Magistrates It cannot be said of Holland Switzerland Geneva c. where they have Magistrates of their own Suppose France and some other places would not have admitted of it that should have been no bar to the Order if they had been desirous of it The primitive Christians were under Heathen Magistrates for three hundred years who were generally professed Enemies to the Ministry and Churches yet they wanted no Ministerial Order of Christ's appointment Christ never appointed an Order of Ministers in his Church which may not be had in the most difficult times It 's true if the Civil Magistrate be against Bishops it may eclipse their Lordly greatness but it need not prejudice their Ius Divinum if they have any Why cannot the Apostles Successors subsist with as little dependance upon Authority as the Apostles themselves did Do Spiritual Men need Carnal Weapons to defend their Order yet it cannot be denied but that even in France the Protestants had their Immunities and a Polity of their own by virtue of the Edict of Nants which enabled them had they pleas'd to get Diocesan Bishops They had their Synods for Church Government and Moderators to preside in them and why not Bishops also had they judged them necessary Nor is it to be supposed that their French Masters would have liked them the worse for conforming to their own Ecclesiastical Government Thuanus a moderate Papist thinks it was an Errour in their Constitution that they neglected the superiour Order of Bishops in their first Reformation for the supporting of their interest The want of them did not prejudice their Constancy to the Truth as appears by their late Sufferings 2. Time hath been when the French Churches were earnestly sollicited particularly by Bishop Morton to receive a Clergy by the Ordination of the English Bishops which they refused Peter Moulin in his Letter to the Bp. of Winchester excusing himself for not making the difference betwixt Bishops and Presbyters to be of Divine appointment he pleads That if he had laid the difference on that foundation the French Churches would have silenced him 3. How come the Learned Wriâ—te of the forreign Churches that vindicate their Ordinations against the Papists to forget this Plea of Necessity They never say They would have Bishops but cannot have them but they justifie their Ordinations as according to Scripture and assert an inherent Power in Presbyters as such to Ordain This is undeniable to any body that reads their Dicourses upon this Subject See Daillé Moulin Bucer Voetius Sadeel c. that professedly write of Ordination against the Papists besides the vast numbers that treat occasionly of this Subject in their Common Places and other Writings such as Melancthon Musculus Zanchy Ravanel the Leyden Professors c. who all insist upon the Right of Presbyters to Ordain It 's true of late years some Arts have been used to proâ—ure Letters from some eminent forâ—eign Divines to condemn the Nonconâ—ormists here without an impartial hearâ—ng of our Case That we have been misrepresented to them is evident by Dr. Morley's Letter to the famous Bochart who vindicates us from the Doctor 's Calumny Some also have oâ— late submitted to Re-ordination who are more to be pitied then censured foâ— they wanted Bread and could have noâ— Relief without Conforming to
rather Apostatical then Apostolical for fifty years together as their own Baronius confesseth what becomes of the pretended Line of Succession If none of these things can infringe it what can We may as rationally affirm that a Dog may generate a Man as that the Man of God may be the Off-spring of the Man of Sin I doubt not but Christ had his Ministers in the darkest Ages of the Church but not by virtue of this Succession in debate 4. Nay this Principle destroys all Churches in the World For there 's no Church this day can produce such a Testimonial of Succession as hath met with no Canonical Interruption They that bid fairest for it are the Greek Churches the Latine and the African Churches and all of them derive the Succession from the same Source making Peter the Head of it The Greeks produce a large Catalogue of Patriarchs proceeding from Peter until the time of Neophytus who not many years ago held the See at Constantinople The Christians of Affrica especially the Habassines who are the most considerable among them derive their Succession from the Patriarch of Alexandria and he from Mark and Peter The Western Churches also derive the Succession from the same Spring Thus we have the most considerable Sects of Christians in the World deriving their Claim from one and the same Apostle All would be reputed the Off-spring of the Chief Apostle and glory in their Relation to him It seems Paul the Great Apostle of the Gentiles who laboured more abundantly then all the rest either left no Successour behind him or no Body knows what is become of him Sic vos non vobis c. Peter the Apostle of the Circumcision must be the Universal Head of all the Gentile-Churches and Paul with the rest of the Apostles must be written Childless or be the Progenitors of such an Off-spring that is long ago extinct or so very obscure that their Names are written in the Dust. But how comes Peter to Canton his Bishoprick into three Parts and to leave three Successors behind him By the same Rule every Bishop must have more Successors then one three at least and each of them as many and so forward until Bishopricks be crumbled into Parochial Churches and the Patrimony of Peter by an Apostolical Gavel kind be equally divided between his Parochial Successors But the unhappiness of it is the three Patriarchal Successors cannot agree about the divided Inheritance The eldest Brother for so the Pope of Rome reckons himself Condemns the two others as spurious and Claims to himself the Universal Inheritance His Advocate Bellarmine expresly affirms Non posse ostendi in Ecclesiâ Graecâ Successionem He adds We see that the other Apostolick Sees are decay'd and fail'd viz. those of Antioch Alexandria and Jerusalem wherein after that those places were taken away from the Romans by the Persians and Saracens since which time there are nine hundred years past there hath been no Succession and if there were any the same was very obscure Stapleton also saith of the Greek Church That she hath no Legitimate Succession The Greek Churches on the other hand condemn the Roman Succession Primi qui seriò primatum Romanum Pontificis oppugnarunt videntur fuisse Graeci saith Bellarmine Barlaam the Monk thus attacks the Roman Succession What Law saith he obligeth us to reckon the Bishop of Rome Peter's only Successor that must rule all the rest and why may not the Bishop of Alexandria be accouted Peter's Successor and so challenge the Supremacy for as Clemens was made Bishop of Rome so was Mark the Evangelist Bishop of Alexandria He strikes at the Head of the Succession and denies Peter to have been Bishop of Rome as many of our Protestant Writers have done If therefore a Man would know the true Church by Personal Succession 't is difficult to know what part to take especially considering that of all the pretended Successions the Roman from which the English Prelacy derives it self is most suspicious as being often interrupted by Simony Heresie and Schism Pope Eugenius the Fourth was deposed by the General Council of Basil and pronounced Heretick and Schismatick with all his Adherents yet he retains the Papal Authority against the Judgment of that Council Cardinals and Bishops were Instituted by him 5. By this Principle no Man can know himself to be a Minister of Christ. Can any Man know that all the Predecessors of that Bishop that Ordained him were Canonical Bishops that none of them came in by Simony or err'd in the Fundamentals so as to be guilty of Heresie that none of them lost their Authority by involving themselves in Secular and Publick Administrations or by neglecting to instruct their Flocks or by being Ordained by a Bishop without the reach of his own Jurisdiction These things make Canonical Nullities Can any Man know who was the Bishop that was the Root of his Succession A great part of the Christian World is uncertain what Apostles did first Convert their particular Countries which were it known would not yet resolve the Point Conscience will not be satisfied with saying Let others disprove my Succession It must have positive Grounds of Satisfaction that I am a true Minister of Christ. So that this Notion serves only to perplex Ministers and People with insuperable difficulties about their acceptance with God and to leave Christianity it self upon such precarious Foundations as will be in the power of every Critick in Church-History to shake if not to overturn How is it possible That plain illiterate People should know this Succession which is learnt only by reading of the Greek and Latine Fathers the length and obscurity of which wearieth the wisest Men and which oftentimes contradict themselves Ought not the Consciences of the meanest to be satisfied in the Call of their Ministers Must they act in a Matter of so great importance by an Implicit Faith What Rule shall they judge by not by the Line of Succession that will but lead them into an inextricable Labyrinth Our Saviour hath left us a better Rule By their Fruits ye shall know them 6. Let it be further considered That the Catalogues that are brought by some of the Ancients of the Successors of the Apostles were made by Conjecture Nor is this Succession so evident and convincing in all places as it ought to be to demonstrate the thing intended A List would be expected of Apostolical Successors not only in the Great Patriarchal Churches but in all others planted by the Apostles as Philippi Corinth Caesarea and in all the Seven Churches of Asia and not only at Ephesus which has not been yet produced Though in the Patriarchal Churches the beginning of the Line is as obscure as the Head of Nilus At Rome 't is not certain whether Linus Cletus Anacletus or Clemens are to be reckon'd first And as for Antioch 't is far from being agreed