Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
church_n bishop_n clergy_n presbyter_n 2,916 5 9.9221 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A61665 A letter to Mr. Robert Burscough, in answer to his Discourse of schism, in which ... Stoddon, Samuel. 1700 (1700) Wing S5713; ESTC R10151 63,414 120

There are 7 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Ordained whereas it is Christ that communicates the Pastoral Power and Authority by his Charter of the Gospel the Power is deriv'd from Christ not from the Ordainers As the Major of a City has his Authority from the Charter granted by the King and not from the Recorder who invests him in his Office And yet neither is this true that an inferiour Officer may not invest one of a superiour Order in his Office else what have the Bishops to do at the Coronation of Kings unless you will make the Regal to be an Inferior Office to that of the Bishop which if you do you may next pretend to an absolving and deposing Power too But you tell us again That we do not find in Scripture That to mere Presbyters any such Authority was ever committed nor are there any Footsteps of it in Antiquity And we tell you That we find not in Scripture nor in Antiquity that this Authority was ever committed to any other than Presbyters But if you insist That they must not be mere Presbyters we Reply 1. How do you prove that either Simeon that was called Niger or Lucius of Cyrene or Manaen who were commanded from Heaven Act. 13.1 2. to ordain Paul and Barnabas were any of them at that time more than mere Presbyters as to Matter of Office 2. Where do you find in all the Books of the New Testament not only that a mere Bishop but that any one single Person whether Bishop or Evangelist or Apostle or any other besides our Lord Jesus Christ himself did ever celebrate this Ordinance of Ordination without the assistance of some others more or less of the Presbytery If you instance in Paul's ordaining Timothy with his own Hands will that prove that it was with his own Hands alone especially while he tells us so expresly in words at length and not in figures That it was done by the Hands of the Presbytery 3. We will propose you a Case which is possible tho' we hope will never be real Suppose the Churches of Christ should be reduc'd to a very few and the Bishops of these few should all turn Hereticks or Persecutors of the Orthodox and cast them out of their Communion the Presbyters retaining their Integrity These Presbyters by your Doctrin cannot ordain so much as a Presbyter to continue a Succession much less can they create a Bishop to do it Must the whole Church then be extinct for lack of a Bishop to Head them Or would you expect to have one rais'd from the Dead or sent back out of Heaven to do it 4. As for Antiquity There is nothing more clear than that in the Primitive Churches the Bishops and their Presbyters alway acted in Conjunction in all Acts of Church Discipline both of Excommunication Restauration Confirmation and Ordination And in the Banishment or Absence of their Bishops the Presbyters alone without the presence of any other Bishop did by his order and allowance which he could not have done had it not been a thing in it self lawful execute all that the Bishop was to have done in Person among them Nay St. Jerom will tell you that the Presbyters have Power to Ordain a Bishop over them and invest him with his Episcopal Authority as they did at Alexandria Sir There was a Time within the Memory of Man that Our Bishops were banished from their Clergy in England and what was the Whole Church of England then extinct and cut off from the Head Christ Doth eternal Salvation go and come with Lawn-Sleeves Yet once more you tell us That the Office which Timothy had was given him by Prophecy 1 Tim. 4.14 Or according to the Prophesies which went before of him 1 Tim. 1.18 His Ordination therefore must have been an extraordinary Thing and not to be drawn into Precedent except in parallel Cases But our Pastors you suppose do not pretend that they are mark'd out by Prophecy 1. We answer These Prophesies whatever they were concerning Timothy respected his Person and not the manner of his Ordination 2. It is very probable that the Apostles had a more than ordinary Direction relating to the choice of Ministers or Church-Officers many times in their Days Acts 20.28 It is there said That the Elders of the Church of Ephesus were made Overseers of their Flocks by the Holy Ghost i. e. as some think their Choice and Nomination was by Direction of the Holy Spirit of God And Clemens Romanus says That the Apostles in those Days ordained Bishops or Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Discerning by the Spirit and having a perfect Knowledge whom they should Ordain But what is all this to the way of Ordaining by Presbyters is an extraordinary Thing and not to be drawn into Precedent It 's probable that it had been foretold by some one or other that Timothy would be a faithful and eminent Minister of Christ who but you would have concluded from thence That his Ordination by Presbyters was an extraordinary Case 3. May you not as pertinently argue That none of the Ordinations done by the Imposition of the Hands of the Apostles are to be drawn into Precedent because these were extraordinary Cases the Apostles being extraordinary Persons who had an extraordinary and immediate Mission from Christ himself nor do we know of any Bishops that now pretend to be marked out by an immediate Call from Christ or any Prophecy of their extraordinary Vsefulness that have gone before of ' em But Sir Before you had given your self and us all this Trouble to so little purpose you had done much better to have sate down and considered how you could have answered Mr. John Owen's ten Arguments from Scripture and Antiquity Owen's Plea for Scripture Ordination proving Ordination by Presbyters without Bishops to be valid to which to save Labour of Transcribing we refer those that are willing to see much more on this Subject III. The Declamation which you make against popular Ordination we are not at all concern'd in but join with you in our hearty Wishes that they that are would deeply consider it Now to conclude this your third Section Having read out our Indictment in all the Articles of it and examin'd it after your manner you come to sum up the Evidence or what you call Evident and bring in the Bill against us that we have in all these Respects exceeded the Novatians Donatists and Meletians But before you proceed to your Damnatory Sentence we hope your Charity will take into Consideration what we have already so briefly offer'd in our own Defence and what we have yet further to plead for our selves as your following Discourse shall give us Occasion Your fourth Section in which you pretend to blow us wholly up Sect. 4. and to beat us out of all our Fasinesses and not to leave us a Rag to cover our Nakedness with is a Collection of just half a dozen of some little Things which you have pickt up some-where behind
to confess tho' De Synedr l. 1. Cap. 14.560 being an Erastian in his Judgment he was loth to allow the Word in this Text to signifie a College of Presbyters lest he should be forc'd to allow them the Power of Excommunication 4. To put this Sense upon the Word Presbyter in this Text and to make it to signify the Office is such an Inversion and Disturbance of the natural Order of the Word as is never to be allow'd but in case of plain Necessity lest we make the Sacred Scriptures a Nose of Wax of which Mr. Thorndike was too wise to be Guilty 5. And yet if you will needs take Presbytery here for the Office of a Presbyter which Calvin doth not do but rather for the Solemn Act by which the Office is conferr'd see how little it will be to your Advantage Doth it not then clearly follow that 't is by vertue of the Office it self and not by any Degree that some have obtain'd in it above others that Men are to be Ordain'd into the Ministry So that in whomsoever the Office of a Presbyter is found there is this Power of Ordaining others Have you not then ingenuously or inadvertently granted to our Ministers all that they demand in this Matter and prov'd it for 'em too from Calvin whom you pretend to alledge against ' em To what a pass now have you brought your Episcopal Ordination Are these the only Men that have Power to Ordain a Presbyter Or have they any Power or Authority at all to do it but as they are themselves Presbyters What is a Bishop but a Presbyter set in a higher Degree for Clerical Order and Government sake but as to Office the same with the Presbyter And therefore it is that the Titles are so promiscuously and indifferently us'd in the Holy Scriptures Nor did the Apostles themselves Ordain as Apostles but as Presbyters which is the Title they own in their Epistles and claim as their Honour And that it is the Presbyter not the Bishop i. e. consider'd only as such that must Ordain is put beyond Controversy by a rul'd Case that a Bishop or Prelate Ordain'd per saltum i. e. who never had the Ordination of a Presbyter himself but only of a Bishop can neither Consecrate nor administer the Sacrament of the Lord's Body nor Ordain a Presbyter Tho' for the necessary Ends of Clerical Order and Government the Bishop be set in a superiour Degree of Superintendency and consequently his Presence and authoritative Concurrence be necessary with a select Number of his best qualify'd Presbyters to confer Orders and to see the Laws of Christ duly executed in his Church yet where this Power is abus'd than which nothing in the World is apter nor hath been more abus'd where the Churches are impos'd upon and Presbyters tyrannically ravish'd of their just Rights and Priviledges and causelesly cast out of Episcopal Communion the Presbyter is nevertheless a Presbyter as to all the Parts and Purposes of his Office He may be robb'd of his Pulpit but not of his Office robb'd of his Maintenance but not of his Right to it robb'd of his Liberty but not of his Relation to Christ nor to his Church In the Holy Scriptures we find that Presbyters as such are vested with the Power of Rule and Government in the House of God 1 Tim. 5.17 Act. 20.17 28. But of the Investiture of Prelates or their Ordination by Imposition of Hands as of an Office distinct and different from that of the Presbyter we read not one Word in all the New Testament By what Law of Christ then doth he claim a despotical Power over his Presbyters any other than as the Head and Moderator of their common Council and in whose Name and with whose Concurrence for Order and Government sake all the necessary Canons and By Laws that conduce to the Peace Profit and Edification of the Churches committed to their Care ought to be issued and established Will you tell us they are the Apostle's Successors in Power and Authority So are Our Presbyters too 1 Pet. 5.1 2 3. both in Faith and Doctrin and all Things that are Common and Essential to the Office Prelacy is not of the Office per se but only per Accidens and which when duly exercis'd honourably conduces to the bene Esse of the Church but is not constitutive of its Esse We have hear'd indeed of no Bishop no King and ever thought it extravagant enough but never heard of no Bishop no Church till now Again you would have us to believe that Presbytery being a Name of Dignity is sometimes attributed to Ecclesiastical Officers of the highest Rank as St. Peter and St. John call themselves Presbyters and therefore it must needs here signify a Company of Bishops To this we Reply 1. That the Word Presbytery was never so taken for a Company of Bishops only of which there was but one in one Church which is the limited Sense either in the Times of the Apostles or of the first Centuries of the Church perhaps not till Chrysostome's Time but alway for the Collegium Presbyterorum and before we can believe that it is to be otherwise taken in this Text you must prove it 2. If the Word must be taken in your Sense for a Company of Bishops then either there is no particular Church tho' Diocesan that hath any Presbytery of its own or there must be more Bishops than One in every such Church or else you must say that your one Bishop is a Company of Bishops 3. What can you infer in this Case from Peter's and John's assuming the Title of Presbyter but that in all the common Acts of Ecclesiastical Government and Discipline they acted as Presbyters and not as Apostles And what then have you gotten by this Argument But you urge again That Timothy was a Bishop and had Jurisdiction over Presbyters therefore Presbyters could not Ordain him to his Office for they could not communicate a Power which they never receiv'd To this we Answer 1. That Timothy was an Evangelist 2 Tim. 4.5 which if it signify'd any more than a Preacher of the Gospel which was the Work of every Presbyter then it must signify something more than an Ordinary Bishop to which he had no particular Ordination but the Apostles Election of him as his Companion and his Mission to some particular Services in the Churches of Paul's planting So that the Presbytery Ordain'd him only as a Presbyter not as an Evangelist nor as a Bishop about which we have no Form Rule or Precedent in the Scripture 2. Whereas you say They could not communicate a Power which they never receiv'd We Answer That in this Case there was no need of it they Ordain'd him as a Presbyter and what other Titles he afterward arriv'd to were but Accidental But this Reason of yours seems to be bottom'd on a great Mistake viz. That the Ordainers communicate the ministerial Power to the Persons
have all the same External Form or manner of Operation in the Service of the Body Order is to be preserv'd in the Church but how shall we agree what and whose Order it shall be Let us ask you soberly Is there no true Church in the World but yours If there be may not every one of these Churches which differ from you and from one another as much as we magnify their own Order as a Law to all the Rest as you now do And then tell us whether it be Order or Confusion that these Positions lead to or whether this be not the way to set all the Christian World by the Ears Here you complain that Men are generally averse from enduring any thing of Subjection to which we may add and altogether as prone to Domineering and Imposing Now the Obedience which is prescrib'd in the Texts of Scripture which you have cited you say is to be paid by the Faithful to those that are over them in the Lord But by the whole tenour of your Discourse you plainly insinuate that the Wisdom which is in effect the same with the Will of those that have obtain'd the Government of the Church must be the Rule to all their Inferiours And by their being over them in the Lord you give us to understand nothing else but their Power de facto in the Church where they sit in Moses's Chair as the Representatives of Christ in Government so that they must be obey'd without asking any Question for Conscience sake But for our parts we understand not how we can be secur'd against the danger of Church-Tyranny and Superstition if those Words of the Apostle 1 Thes 5.12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Lord do not import the Bounds of our Obedience as well as the general Matter of it and Motive to it Church-Rulers may be forward to Labour and to Admonish too but if it be not in the Lord and according to the Lord woe be to them that are guided and influenc'd by ' em But let the Apostle's Exhortation be taken in the true intent and meaning of it and we will be as forward to obey as you There 's nothing in the World that we covet more than to see such Bishops and Pastors in the Church of England as the Apostle exhorts us to obey in the Lord that is without any personal Reflection such as require nothing of us but what the Lord requires that the World might see how much we would disdain to be out-done by any but Flatterers and Sycophants in our Love and Obedience to ' em What you say of the Oneness of Church-Government and of the People that are under it we agree to if you will but stand to your own Distinctions That what you say of both is to be understood of them so far as they agree to Christ's Institution And if Christ be not divided neither are they They are not divided I mean so far as they act according to his Will and the Rules of their Order If by these Rules you mean the Sacred Rules which Christ hath given them and not the Arbritary Rules which they give us We mean so too That the faithful People under their lawful Pastors we hope you mean Lawful by the Law of Christ and not only by the Law of Man make up one Body This you say is evident from their Duty and from their Rights From their Duty you plead 1. They are oblig'd to Honour and Obey their Spiritual Rulers Ay Sir In the Lord and according to the Lord. 2. It is their Duty to joyn together in publick Acts of Worship with that Company of Christians which they sind Established and in some Cases tho' only tollerated yea tho' Persecuted under a lawful Pastor where they reside This we acknowledge is their Duty where they may do it without Sin From their Rights which are the same every where you Argue That this Vnion is founded on a Divine Institution and the Baptismal Covenant in which they are all alike engag'd and not on a formal positive League amongst themselves No Sir nor on any thing that is merely Humane or of an Indifferent much less a doubtful Nature wherein the Substance or Essentials of Christianity do not consist What you object against the Independent Congregational way or any others of the same Practice and Persuasion in this Point we take not our selves to be concern'd in unless you mistake us all for such who have not that Dependance on and Communion with you which you are Quarrelling with us for Having been at great Labour to prove what none of Us nor perhaps any one else that is call'd Christian ever deny'd viz. That the universal Church is One Body you make your Application of this profound Doctrin by way of Encouragement to your selves and draw a most delightful Contemplation from it That it is now the same Body that it was from the beginning The same indeed is every true Church of Christ as it was from the beginning that is in all things that are absolutely necessary to Salvation but we would gladly understand where that pure Church is now to be found which hath not at all deviated or degenerated from what the Church of Christ was in the beginning 'T is true every true Church of Christ now in the World is deriv'd by Succession from Christ and his Apostles but dares the Church of England say that it is now the very same in all it's Circumstantials and external Modes and Forms of Worship Discipline and Ceremonies with those of the Apostles own Planting Where do you read your apostolical Rules or Precedents for any of those Things which you so zealously Practise and so arbitrarily impose on us as the Terms of our Communion with you and which are the only Matters in debate between us Yet you would have the World believe that without our full Conformity to these Things and our Communion with you in 'em we cannot be one Body with the Vniversal Church nor in Communion with the Apostles Nor is this all but that consequently we are out of Communion with the Father and the Son and so are in a state of Infidelity and Damnation Have we not herein a special Instance and Evidence of your Catholick Charity just like theirs of the Church of Rome who call those only Christians that are of their own Communion Let us be ever so Orthodox in all the Articles of the Christian Faith ever so right as to the Object of our Religious Worship or Reverent and Devout in the Acts of it ever so Sober Just and Righteous in our Conversation or ever so wiling to walk in Communion with you as far as we may do it without Sinning against God and our own Souls Yet for want of Conformity to you in all those unnecessary Things which you would impose on us we must be cut off from Christ and left to Perish with the Heathen World But if we will tamely put our Necks under your
Service of your Hypothesis and on the Judgment and Practice of the Faithful in the purest Ages alias the most Popish Ages so that you presume your Inference is clear That all those who have separated without just Cause from the outward Communion of that Church with which they ought or with which you will say they ought to hold Communion and so persisting in that Separation tho' otherwise never so Orthodox or Holy have hereby so cut themselves off from the Body of the Vniversal Church that they can do nothing that can qualify themselves or others for Communion with it So that by this your Rule of Catholick Vnity in outward Communion all those Persons and Churches that herein agree not with you are not of the Body nor united to the Head and then must necessarily be in a state of Damnation Woe be then to all those poor Churches that are to your Constitution and way of Government and Worship Strangers But by the way give us leave to ask you How it comes to pass that Baptism and Ordination received in the Church of Rome are accounted valid in your Church of England and yet Ordination in any Protestant Church that 's not of your Constitution accounted Null Or for what politick Reason is their Baptism allowed and their Ordination only Condemn'd Is it because the Church of Rome never separated from you nor you from it as all the other Protestant Churches have done Who must therefore be all abandon'd by you as Harlots that deserve to be ston'd while Rome is own'd for your Sister or your Mother and of the same Catholick Body with you Either own the Relation or renounce the Title of Protestant Will you say that these Churches were never in Communion with you and therefore did not go out from you Suppose this were true of the main Body of them that they were never in particular outward Communion with the Church of England tho' before the Reformation they were in the same Church with you and many of those and of their Children who were once actually in particular Communion with you went out from you on the same Account as we do yet supposing it otherwise How little will this help Them more than Vs as to the Oneness of the outward Communion of the universal Church in the Sense that you take it and urge it on Vs And now that we are upon Enquiries with you Pray be not offended if we ask you once more What think you of our first Protestant Reformers Before they actually separated from the Church of Rome were they not Members of that Church and in outward Communion with it If not how could they be said to separate from it But if they were let us ask you again was that Church of which they were then Members a true Church of Christ or not If not then that Church and all the Members of it was not united to the Head and consequently was no Church nor by your Rule of Catholick Vnity could do any thing to qualify themselves or others for Communion with any part of the Catholick Church and from whom then did your Church of England or any of the Reformed derive their Succession and Authority from the Apostles But if it was a true Church how could they according to your Notion of Catholick Vnity separate from it without involving themselves in the guilt of Schism with which you now charge us May we not hence conclude that to separate from a true Church of Christ that retains the Essentials of a Church is not always Schismatical nor a Solution of Catholick Vnity Will you tell us that these had a Warrant by a Call from Heaven to justify their Separation Rev. 18.4 2 Cor. 6.17 But on what Reason was this Call grounded Come out of her my People that ye be not Partakers of her Sins And doth not the same Call reach Vs as far as the Reason is the same Tho' the Sins of the Church of Rome were greater than those of the present Church of England yet what is Sin is Sin still and will by your own Concessions so far justify our Separation and on no other Account do we desire or pretend to justify it The Separatists condemn'd in Scripture and with whom you would sort Vs and so represent us to the World were Men of very ill Character as to their Morals Persons given up to Sensuality walking after their own ungodly Lusts tho' veild under a Form of Religion yet by their corrupt Lives they were visibly to be discern'd Now let the impartial part of the World judge whether this be so much our Character as the Character of those by whom we are thus Censur'd That the Fathers and Bishops of the first Ages were very jealous of the Union of their Churches and an intire Obedience to their Ecclesiastical Rulers very Passionately and sometimes Hyperbolically declaiming against Separation or setting up Pastors without the Approbation of their own Bishops is not to be denyed and for which they had some prudential Reasons The Christian Church was then in its Infancy and therefore requir'd a stricter Hand of Government over it for the preservation of its Unity in Communion the Faithful were not so well settl'd and experienced in their Way their Dangers were many ways extraordinary not only from the Heathen Persecutors but from the Jewish Bigots which were in so many Places dispers'd among them and had so troublesome and ensnaring an Influence on the young Gentile Converts Besides the many false and seditious Teachers which the Devil had Sown as his Tares almost every where among them the Orthodox Presbyters too few and generally too weak to deal with so many so potent and so subtil Enemies or to be entrusted with the Conduct of the Church without the Counsel and Direction of its prime Guides and Governours Besides the Honour and Satisfaction of Sovereign Rule and Dictatorship is what was ever very pleasing to Nature So that all these things consider'd we have no reason to wonder at the Heat of their Spirits in this Case And indeed the Church had then very great Reason to bless God for this their Zeal and most religiously to observe them in it especially while they had no cause to dissent or divide themselves on the account of any Heresies they Taught them or any disputable unscriptural Impositions that were required as the Conditions of their Communion with them There were no such Things exacted of Them as have been of Vs and our Teachers which made their Obedience easy and indisputable And you may observe that the great Reason of their Care to preserve the Unity of the Churches outward Communion was not to uphold a few unnecessary Ceremonies but to preserve the Purity of its spiritual Worship and Doctrin which was infinitely more valuable and consequential a circumstantial variety of the external Forms of Church-Administrations would have done the Church no more harm than the variety which we see in every Species
say in behalf of our Ministers must be referr'd to your Third and most consequential Article of our Indictment as its more proper Place and which we are now next to enter on and it runs thus III. That the Pastors we have chosen have no lawful Call to the Ministry This indeed if it could be prov'd were enough to convict both Vs and Them for Schismaticks Those Dissenters that think themselves unconcern'd in this Matter we are not now to answer for nor are we concern'd in what you say of them And as for the Philadelphians we know not what they are expecting but might we once see the Church of England reform'd according to the Scriptures we would expect a better Clergy than most of them now are I. The Ministers whom we profess to own and to follow you confess to have had some of them Episcopal Ordinations and others only Presbyterial Of the former you are willing to allow for the Honour of your own Church not only the validity of their Ordination but an eminency of Personal Abilities but in the exercise of their Abilities you fancy that they are some of those of whom Ignatius says they serve the Devil and your great Reason is not that they are Men of debauched and scandalous Conversation or of false and corrupt Doctrin but because they refuse to obey their Ordinary as you say they solemnly promis'd to do that is you think they have broken their Oath of Canonical Obedience To this we answer for them that if any of 'em have inconsiderately enslav'd themselves and betray'd the Liberties of the Church by an Oath or Promise to any Man Ordinary or Extraordinary to obey them any further than the Apostle requir'd to be obey'd by the Churches 1 Cor. 11.1 viz. as far as he himself obey'd or followed Christ we think 't is time for them to repent of such an Oath And whereas you tell us They can't expect a blessing on their Work while they continue in the Breach of such an Engagement We have as great Reason to think they can't expect a Blessing in keeping it at least being now perswaded of the Evil of it But yet our Charity obliges us to believe that they took that Oath in no larger Sense than is consistent with the Rules of the Gospel and are sure that it is no otherwise binding to ' em And this we hope you will not call a new or strange Doctrin in the Christian Churches Neither is this to degrade all Bishops or to abrogate their Office or overthrow their Chairs as you with so ill Design suggest but to reduce them to that Scripture-Foundation on which alone they may be more gloriously and firmly Established We cannot but remark with how light a Touch you pass by the Foreign Protestant Churches as one that is afraid of burning his Fingers pretending to have nothing to do with them on a Supposition which you are willing to allow that you may so rid your Hands of 'em that their Call to the Pastoral Office was extraordinary for which you quote something out of Calvin and Beza tho' little to your Purpose In what Sense these Churches understand the extraordinariness of their Call they themselves are best able to inform you Did they ever any of them pretend to be rapt up into the third Heavens where Paul once was there to receive a new Call and Commission differing from what Christ and his first Apostles delivered to and left with the Churches By what Angel or Bathkol or Vision do they say this Extraordinary Call was given them When and on whom was it that the Holy Spirit came down in the Form of Cloven Tongues to Seal them a Commission to go out and Preach another Gospel and to lay a new Foundation of the Gospel Ministry Can you bring us any Tidings of any thing like this out of their Writings or if you could would you not easily answer it by Gal 1.8 But how far are they from such vain Dreams as these Mons Turretin will tell you in what Sense they take their Call to have been Extraordinary Turretin de Necess●ria Secessione 〈◊〉 Eccles Rom. p. 228. Si Ordinarium dicitur quod Ordini primitus divinitus instituto est Consentaneum potest dici nostra Vocatio Ordinaria sed si equivoce pro eo sumi●ur quod inveterata consuetudine qualiscunque illa sit publice est acceptum extraordinaria dicenda erit quia plurimum abfuit ab ea Consuetudine More qui in Ecclesia Romana inoleverat If Ordinary be taken for that which is agreeable to the Order of Primitive and Divine Institution then our Call is Ordinary but if it be taken equivocally for that which is by long Custom of any kind commonly receiv'd then may it be call'd Extraordinary because so very different from that use and manner which had so long obtain'd in the Church of Rome You see now in what Sense they take their Call to be Extraordinary The Deliverance of the Church out of Mystical Egypt and Babylon was indeed an Extraordinary Deliverance but their Call to the Ministry was the Ordinary Call of the Gospel that Spirit of Wisdom Faith Patience Zeal Self denyal by which they were divinely influenced in their Reformation was Extraordinary and it had been better for the Church of England if her's had not been in this respect too Ordinary In the same Sense as the Reformation of Johosaphat Hezekiah and Josiah was Extraordinary in comparison of that of some other Good Kings who are noted for sparing the High Places so may the Call of these Foreign Churches be said to be Extraordinary M. Claud History of the Reformation Part 4. p. 86. 89. but that they acted by the ordinary Rule of the Holy Scriptures and the Practice of the Primitive Church they constantly affirm O Sir How poor an Escape have you endeavour'd to make this way that you may seem to be a little more Courteous to Foreigners than to your own Country-Men how pitiful a Go by is this and as foreign to Calvin's Sense as these Churches are to Your's What a strain will it cost you now to deliver your self from the Hornes of this Dilemma either to acquit Vs of what you have charg'd us with or condemn all the Protestant Churches in the World that are not of your Constitution and Communion And Excommunicate us all as Heathens and Hereticks that have no Gospel-Ministry nor Ordinances among them as the Church of Rome doth whom you hereby justify in all their Persecutions and barbarous Severities against them which looks very ill in a Protestant especially at such a Time as this But that our Ministers have not taken upon them the sacred Function in a new Way that was never approv'd in ancient Times shall be prov'd as you demand by a sight of their Patent and Commission if you have Eyes to read it in its proper Place II. Next you prepare to bring on your Tryal against a
second sort of Teachers who claim a Title to the Ministry as being Ordain'd by Presbyters And indeed when you shall have prov'd this way of Ordination to be Schismatical you will have done something in the Service of your Cause wherein if Saying were Proving and Confidence were good Evidence doubtless you would not fail But this being the main Hinge on which the whole Controversy turns it will be necessary to spend a little more Time with you here And first you make your Trip at our Ministers Heels by striking at the Stone on which they stand but you will find it is a Rock against which you may dash your own Feet but which will not move for all the Kicks you can make at it The main Scripture which with all your might you heave at is that of 1 Tim. 4.14 Neglect not the Gift that is in thee which is given unto thee by Prophecy with the laying on of the Hands of the Presbytery Against the generally approved Sense of this Scripture you are pleas'd to Quote us Calvin himself whom you mistakingly call the Father of our Discipline and would have us to believe that he could find no such Matter in this Text and that he thought Presbytery here signifies but the Office of a Presbyter and so read to us the Sense of the Text thus That Timothy should not neglect but be careful to exercise that Presbyterial Office or Power which was committed to him by laying on of Hands Now by the way lest you should hereafter forget pray take notice that you have now granted that it was to the Office of a Presbyter that Timothy was now ordain'd not to that of a Bishop or an Evangelist But as for what you refer us to out of Calvin's Institutions We find that he was there offering some Observations which he had gather'd out of the Scriptures of the New Testament concerning the Ordination of such as are to serve in the Office of the Ministry and tells us that it is certain the whole Multitude of the People were not to impose Hands on their Ministers in their Ordination but only such as were themselves Pastors in Office to whom alone the ordaining Power belongs tho' he leaves it uncertain whether the Hands of many were always laid on in every solemn Act of Ordination but produces Scripture Instances that it was so done in the Ordination of Deacons Act. 6.6 and in the Ordination of Paul and Barnabas Act. 13.3 But that Paul here minds Timothy that he had ordain'd him with his own Hands tho' not exclusively of all others or with his own Hand only but rather that he was the principal Person and the only Apostle concerned in that Ordination and therefore Admonishes him to stir up the Gift that was in him by the Imposition of his Hands And afterward gives us his private Opinion that when the Apostle mentions to Timothy in his other Epistle the Hands of the Presbytery that he is not there minding him so much of the manner of his Ordination by the College of Presbyters of whom Paul was one and the chief in that Action but rather that he should mind lpsam Ordinationem his Ordination it self and the great and glorious Ends of it q. d. Fac ut Gratia quam per manuum impositionem recepisti quum te Presbyterum Crearem non sit irrita That so the Grace which he had receiv'd when he ordain'd him a Minister of the Gospel or a Presbyter might not prove in vain And now how far Calvin is like to serve your Purpose or to disserve ours we leave to any competent impartial Judge And yet if you think your Notion of Calvin's Sense be the right we must tell you you are a Dissenter from the generality of the most Learned of your own Church Mr. Herbert Thorndike will tell you If we take not our Marks amiss we shall sind Argument enough at least at the beginning for the concurrence of Presbyters with the Bishop in making of Presbyters and other inferior Orders In the first Place those general Passages of the Fathers Wherein is witnessed that the Presbytery was a Bench assistent to the Bishop without Advice whereof nothing of Moment was done must needs be drawn into Consequence to argue that it had effect in a particular of this weight Then the Ordination of Timothy by Imposition of Hands of the Presbytery will prove no less Indeed says he 't is well known that the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Ecclesiastical Writers signifies divers times the Office and Rank of Presbyters which Signification divers here embrace expounding Imposition of Hands of the Presbytery to mean that by which the Rank of Presbyter was conferr'd But the Apostles Words running as they do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 oblige a Man to ask when he is come as far as the Imposition of Hands of whom or whose Hands they were he speaketh of which the next Words satisfy Had it been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Sense might better have been diverted but running as it doth with the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with Imposition of the Hands it remaineth that it be specified in the next Words whose Hands were imposed Thus this Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Gospel Luk. 22.66 and in Ignatius's Epistles signifieth the College of Presbyters which hath the Nature and Respect of a Person in Law and therefore is read in the singular for the whole Bench which being assembled and set is call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in both Places and in Cornelius of Rome his Epistle to St. Cyprian where he saith Placuit contrahere Presbyterium Now Sir here 's your Mr. Thorndike against what you would impose on our Calvins But besides this we Answer 1. If the Word Presbytery is here to be understood of the Office then will it follow as we have before noted that Timothy's Office was the Office of a Presbyter What then is become of Timothy's Episcopacy which you so learnedly plead for in your Discourse of Church-Government Or When and by Whom was it that he was created Bishop 2. Camerarius tells us that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which imports the Office of a Presbyter So that here 's a foul mistake of the Presbytery for the Presbyterate the Persons for the Office 3. Ignatius who liv'd very near the Times of the Apostles and therefore may well be presum'd to have understood the Meaning and Use of this Word tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ignat. Epist ad Trall What is the Presbytery other than the Sacred Company who are the Bishops Counsellors and Assessours This Sense Clemens Alexandrinus and some others of the Primitive Fathers give of it nor was it ever taken in any other Sense by the Fathers till Origen nor in any Place of the New Testament doth it signify any other than the Company of Presbyters as Luk. 22.66 Act. 22.5 And this Mr. Selden himself is fore'd
one's Liberty for any thing we have yet heard of and this being a Matter of natural Decency as he there argues at Ver. 14.15 we take it for our Duty to observe as one of our Ministers in an Essay on that Subject hath not long ago taught us But the Inference you drew from this had need of a little better proof Viz. That if the Church hath Power to lay aside such Rites for you confess they are Alterable tho' yours be like the Laws of the Medes and Persians so it hath Power also to appoint others of the like Nature and is oblig'd to do so upon Emergent Occcasions as the Prudence i. e. as the good Pleasure of your Bishops may direct But for our parts we cannot think that your Consequence is good Viz. That because the Church hath Power to Purge it self of some unnecessary and offensive Vanities therefore it hath Power to Introduce others much less that it is oblig'd so to do For we cannot believe that because Hezekiah had Power to take down the Brazen Serpent and to cast it away as a Nehushtan which had been a Symbol of God's own Appointment and of so long standing that therefore he had Power or was under any Obligation to erect another Gambol of his own Invention to stand in the Room of it 1. Then we will say with you It is certain that the publick Worship of God ought to be Celebrated with such Ceremonies as are suitable to the Dignity and Solemnity of the Work and agreeable to the general Directions of the Holy Scripture and you might have added to the Purity and Simplicity of the Gospel and which are Necessary to the right Performance of the Work 2. That Ceremonies us'd in Divine Worship ought to be Significant of some Spiritual Grace or Expressive of some Christian Duty is certain because else they are but Herb John Useless and Impertinent which would but Affront the Deity we pretend to Worship And so indeed we find that all the Ceremonies of Christ's Institutions were Symbolical and Expressive but to argue that because Christ did institute symbolical Ceremonies in his Church therefore you may do so too is what you may not expect our Assent to till you have prov'd your Power in and over the Church to be equal to that of Christ or shew us the Patent he hath given you to justifie your so doing The little Instances which you produce of Smiting the Breast Lifting up the Hands in Prayer Kneeling on the same Occasion and the putting on some new Garment at the time of Baptism have been indeed things taken up into common Use as naturally Expressive of some inward Devotion or Affection of the Heart or of outward Decency and almost common to all Mankind and when you shall have discover'd and prov'd any Divine Institution of them we will acknowledge our Sin if at any time we disuse them on such Occasions but to Argue from the Antiquity of their Use to the Churches imposing Power is as Orthodox and Valid in England as it is in Rome or Spain or any other Church true or false in the whole World 3. That the H. Scripture directs us in general to do all things Decently and in Order we do as zealously own as you But then why should not that of the H. Scripture from which we take our Rules of Gospel worship determine to us what is Decent and Orderly Or if by the Old Testament you would justifie your Ephod and Organs and Festivals and Ceremonious Consecrations or any thing else that the Christian hath borrowed from the Jewish Church why do you pick and chuse and follow your Rule at halves Are not the Harp and the Trumpet and the Viol and Cymbol the Holy Oil and all the rest of the Priestly Robes and Utensils of the Divine Service which you have left out altogether as Decent and as Significant as what you have taken from thence or have been borrowed from any others and which have as much to shew of a Divine Institution 4. Your next Paragraph looks more like Banter than Argument for you tell us in Effect that we ought to satisfie our selves with an implicit Faith of the Lawfulness of the Ceremonies impos'd on us and of their Consormity to the End for which they are appointed because it is not Necessary that every one that uses them should know the Reasonableness of their Institution so that we ought to make no Question of the Lawfulness of what you require of us even in the High and Important Concern of God's Worship and our own Salvation how Unreasonable soever it appears to us and are we not like to be edefi'd much by what we don't understand Is this one Article of your Faith too That Ignorance is the Mother of Devotion Must we put out our own Eyes and make no Question for Conscience sake either of the Lawfulness or Reasonableness of what you require of us but follow the Conduct of your Customs believing as the Church believes Is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Reasonable Service that God now requires of the Gospel-worshipper And is this some of your Protestant Doctrine But to satisfie our Consciences herein you Instance in the customary Way of taking an Oath by kissing the Book which you say may safely be done by such as know nothing of the Original of that Ceremony nor are satisfi'd of the Fitness of it what nor of the Lawfulness of it nor whether the Common-Prayer be in the Book or no If Custom will serve for a Rule in Civil Matters must it be so in the highest and most sacred Acts of our Religion too 5. And this now brings you home to your main Topick Custom from which you profess to take the Significancy of your Ceremonies and the Measures of Decency as that which gives Rules both for Words and Actions and Habits and Gestures 'T is true Custom hath a great stroak to conciliate a Decency and Significancy to these things and may serve very much to excuse the Use of them in Civil Conversation and to offer any thing to the holy God in Worship which Civil Custom hath made Undecent or Ridiculous is horribly Prophane But will you hence argue that what Custom hath made Decent in Civil Conversation is therefore so in Religious Worship and fit to be impos'd as a Condition of Christian Communion Or that what Religious Custom hath made Decent and Significant in the Opinion of the Superstitious and Idolaters is therefore lawful to be us'd and impos'd by you Tho' the Apostle pleaded from the Custome of the Churches for what he call'd on the Corinthians for 1 Cor. 11.16 yet this was but one of his Arguments and which if you observe he urges only negatively he doth not plead for it because it was a Custom but pleads against their contrary Practice because they had no such Custom And pray which of those Ceremonies which you contend for and make the indispensible Condition of Communion