their Ministers Ordained by Presbyters without Bishops They maintain all Ministers to be in a state of parity and their Presbyters imposed Hands for Ordination These were the Fathers and famous Predecessors of the Protestants who bore the heat of the day They had the honour to be first Witnesses against Antichrist and are to this day as the Bishop of Salisbury calls them The purest Remains of primitive Christianity From them the Fratres Bohemi had their Succession of Ministers for they sent Michael Zambergius and two more for Ordination to the poor Waldenses who never had a Bishop among them but in Title only In compliance with their desires two of their Titular Bishops with some Presbyters that had not so much as the Titles of Bishops made Zambergius and his two Collegues Bishops giving them power of Ordination We dislike not that for Orders sake the Exercise of this Power should be ordinarily restrained to the graver Ministers provided they assume it not as proper to themselves by a Divine Right nor clog it with unscriptural Impositions XII Wickliffs followers here in England held and practised Ordination by meer Presbyters and least any should think they did so of necessity for want of Bishops it 's to be noted that they did it upon this Principle that all Ministers of Christ have equal power as the Popish Historian saith who complains how all parts of England were full of those People and that the Prelates knew of these things but none were forward to prosecute the Guilty except the Bishop of Norwich XIII In the Island of Taprobane or Zeilan as 't is now call'd there was a Church of Christians govern'd by a Presbyter and his Deacon without any Superiour Bishop to which he or his Flock was subject This Island is above two thousand Miles in compass a Province big enough for a Bishop yet had none in Iustin the Emperour's time which was about the Year 520 but was under the Jurisdiction of a Presbyter Ordain'd in Persia who in all likelyhood Ordain'd his Successor and would not be at the trouble of sending for one to very remote Countries By this Passage it appears that Bishops were not thought Essential to Churches no not in the sixth Age and that meer Presbyters have power of Jurisdiction and consequently of Ordination The Fathers in the second Council of Carthage A. D. 428. did observe that until that time some Dioceses never had any Bishops at all and thereupon Ordained they should have none for the future They would never have made such a Canon had they concluded the Government by Bishops to be Iure Divino CHAP. XI Objections against Ordinations by Presbyters answered 1. That it is against the Canons So is Episcopal Ordination 2. It destroys the Line of Succession answered in Seven Particulars 3. The Case of Ischyras consider'd A Passage in Jerom explained I Will briefly reflect upon the most material Objections that are made against the Ordination I plead for Object 1. Ordination by Presbyters without Bishops is condemned by the Old Canons Answ. 1. Many things are reserv'd to the Bishops by the Old Canons meerly to support their Grandeur For this reason the Consecration of Churches the Erecting of Altars the making of Chrysm the Reconciling of Penitents the Vailing of Nuns c. were appropriated to the Bishops All this is ingeniously acknowledged by the Council of Hispalis Let the Presbyters know that the power of Ordaining Presbyters and Deacons is forbidden them by the Apostolical See by virtue of novel Ecclesiastical Constitutions They add that this was done to bear up the dignity of the Bishops For the same reason the Chorepiscopi or Country Bishops were restrained from Ordaining in the Council of Antioch For the same reason 't was decreed in the Council of Sardis A. D. 347. That no Village or lesser Town must have a Bishop nè vilescat nomen Episcopi 2. Episcopal Ordinations also as they are now managed will prove Nullities by the Old Canons The Ancient Canons call'd the Apostles which are confirmed by the sixth General Council at Constantinople do depose all Bishops that are chosen by the Civil Magistrate Can. 29. If any Bishop obtains a Church by means of the Secular Powers let him be deposed and separated from Communion with all his Adherents This Canon is revived by the second Council of Nice which the Greeks call the Seventh General Council All our English Bishops are chosen by the Magistrate and not by other Bishops or the Presbyters and People of their Diocess The King 's Writ of Conge d'Eslier to the Dean and Chapter to choose their Bishop is only matter of form for the King chooseth properly and the Dean and Chapter cannot reject the Person whom he recommends nor are they the just Representatives of the Clergy and People of the Diocess whose Suffrages were required of old in the designation of a Bishop Can. 6. Forbids Bishops to intermeddle with Secular Affairs upon pain of Deprivatiion Let not a Bishop Presbyter or Deacon assume worldly Cares and if he doth let him be deposed Bishops at this time were not Judges in Civil Matters nor Ministers of State as being a thing inconsistent with their Office 2 Tim. 2.4 Can. 80. adds A Bishop must not engage in Publick Administrations that he may give himself to the Work of the Ministry Let him resolvedly decline these or be Deposed for no Man can serve two Masters The Church of England doth not observe the Canons of the first General Councils which some would have us believe are the measures of her Reformation next the Scripture The fourth Canon of the Council of Nice requires the Ordination of a Bishop to be by all the Bishops of the Province at least by three with the Consent of the absent Bishops expressed in writing I never knew the Consent of all the Bishops of the Province required much less expressed in Writing before the Consecration of English Bishops Can. 5. Requires Provincial Councils twice a year This is not observed Can. 6. and 7th establish the Rights and Priviledges of Metropolitans Quaere Whether Austin the Monk whom the Pope made Arch-Bishop of Canterbury did not wrongfully invade the Rights of the Brittish Bishops over whom Pope Gregory could give him no just Power notwithstanding his pretended Grant mentioned by Bede which are not restored to this day and if so whether this doth not make a Canonical Nullity in the whole Succession of English Bishops who derive their Line from that usurping Prelate Can. 15 and 16th forbids Ministers to remove from the Church in which they were Ordained I might mention several other Canons in this Council which are not observed as the third the eleventh the fourteenth which in the Greek is the eighteenth the nineteenth and twentieth which forbids kneeling upon the Lord's days No more are the Canons of the Great
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
dedicated The whole Church dedicates him to God by Prayer and yet don't lay on Hands so that meer dedication to God in the Learned Bishop's sense as distinct from Ordination cannot be the meaning of this Ceremony But I pray what is Ordination it self but a dedication of the Person to God for the Ministry what more doth the Bishop do in conferring the Ministry He cannot confer it by a meer Physical Contact if so every touch of his Hand on the Head of a Man Woman or Child would make them Ministers It must be therefore by a Moral Act that he doth it i. e. by laying on Hands on a fit Person according to the appointment of God to dedicate him to God for the Ministry The power is immediately from Christ and not from the Bishop Men do but open the door or determine the Person that from Christ shall receive the power and then put him solemnly into possession Acts 20.28 The moderate asserters of Episcopacy do acknowledge that the Presbyters lay on Hands as Ordainers Imponunt manus Presbyteri ... tanquam Ordinantes seu ordinem Conferentes ex potestate ordinandi divinitus accepta gratiam ordinato hoc adhibito ritu apprecantes With whom agrees the Arch-bishop of Spalato Dr. Fulk speaks to the same purpose in his Anti-Rhemish Annotations Object Where do you read that Presbyters did ordain without a Bishop Answ. This Objection grants my Argument that Presbyters have power of Ordination but not to be put forth without the Bishop Admit they have an inherent Power and it 's all I plead for I am sure no Law of God restrains the Exercise of it while it is managed regularly for the Edification of the Church We oppose not any Rules of Order while the main End is promoted The old Canons restrain the Bishop that he must not Ordain without his Presbyters we may say as well then that Bishops have no power to Ordain because they were not ordinarily to do it without their Presbyters All the Ordinations of Presbyters in the Apostles time and in the three first Centuries were done by Presbyters without Bishops of the present Species i. e. the sole Governours of 100 or 200 Churches for there were no such Bishops in the Primitive Church as hath been proved by several hands The very Office is humane and new The primitive Bishop was but the chief Presbyter who was President for orders sake but pretended not to be of a superior Order Bishop Vsher answered this Objection from the Example of the Church of Alexandria as Mr. B. affirms which shall be consider'd anon when we come to Instances of Ordaining Presbyters in Antiquity CHAP. VII Among the Iews any one that was Ordained himself might Ordain another prov'd from Dr. Lightfoot Mr. Selden P. Cuneus IF among the Jews any one that was Ordain'd himself might Ordain another then may Presbyters Ordain Presbyters But the former is true Therefore c. The Consequence of the Major is founded upon that which is acknowledg'd by most Learned Men that the Government of the Christian Church was formed after the Jewish Pattern The Minor I prove from Dr. Lightfoot Thus he Before they had restrained themselves of their own Liberties then the general Rule for Ordinations among them was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every one regularly Ordained himself had the power of Ordaining his Disciples as Ben Maimon affirms Mr. Selden gives many Instances to this purpose out of Gemar Babylon de Synedr lib. 2. c. 7. § 1. But in the time of Hiâ—lel they were restâ—ain'd from 〈◊〉 former Liberty whether out of Vâ—â—â—â—ration to his House or whether from the inconveniency of such common Ordinations is not certain and so it was resolved that none might Ordain without the presence of the Prince of the Sanhedrin or a License from him Per insigne est saith P. Cunoeus quod R. Maimonides tradidit in Salach Sanhed c. 4. Cum enim olim solennem hunc actum pro arbitrio suo omnes celebrarent quibus imposita semel manus fuerat coarctatum esse id jus à sapientibus constitutúmque ut deinceps nemo illud usurparet nisi cui id concessisset divinus senex R. Hillel Selden saith that St. Paul's creating of Presbyters was according to the Custom of creating Elders Paul being brought up at the feet of Gamaliel as his Disciple This Gamaliel was Nephew or Grandchild of Hillel and Prince of the Sanhedrin at that time and therefore no doubt but he had created his Scholar Paul a Jewish Elder before he was a Christian by virtue of which Ordination in all likelyhood the Jews admitted him to preach in their Synagogues Acts 9. 20. Now when Paul became an Apostle he knew himself and other Apostles to be free from the new Law of not makeing Elders without the licence of the Prince of the Sanhedrin which was not to be expected in their Case for this R. Gamaliel though otherwise a fair Man had an inveterate prejudice against the Christians and authorized a Prayer against them under the notion of Hereticks commanding its constant use in the Synagogues as Lightfoot observes out of Maimonides which Prayer is used among the Jews to this day containing bitter Curses and Execrations against the Christians as Buxtorf notes Dr. Hammond himself granteth that the Government of the Church was formed after the Jewish manner though he reckoneth up many Inconveniencies which would follow promiscuous Ordinations The Analogy between the Government of the Jewish Synagogues and the Christian Church seems very evident in the Case of Deacons who succeed the Jewish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Parnasâ—n of which there were two or three in every Synagogue to take care of the Poor Vide Lightf Harm on Act. 6. 7. To sum up this Argument the Case of Presbyters in point of Ordination is the same with that of Jewish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Elders Every one that was Ordained himself had originally the Power of Ordaining others the Exercise of which Power was afterwards restrained by a Canon of that Church So in the Christian Church at first in Scripture times Presbyters had a common power of Ordination but afterwards ut schismatum semina evellerentur the power was by degrees devolved upon a few chief Presbyters whom we call Bishops and the ordinary Presbyters were restrained by common consent as Ierom observes in Tit. 1. and Panormitan after him How well the new Order of superiour Bishops hath cured the World of Schism the Distractions and Confusions of the Church occasioned by the Pride and Grandeur of that Order for above a thousand years together are Instances to palpable to be deny'd CHAP. VIII Ordination an Act of the Exercise of the Power of the Keys acknowledged by Cornelius à Lapide Chamier Camero c. The Keys of Iurisdiction and Order given to Presbyters and consequently Power of Ordination THAT Ordination which is performed
by Persons who have the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven committed to them is valid but Ordination by Presbyters is performed by Persons who have the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven committed to them Therefore it is valid The Major I prove Either Ordination is an Act of the Exercise of the Power of the Keys or of some other Power but of no other If any other it 's either of a Secular Power or of an Ecclesiastical but neither of these Not an Ecclesiastical for there is no Ecclesiastical Power at least which Ordination can be pretended to belong to but the Power of the Keys not of a Secular Power for that belongs not to Ministers That the Keys do contain in them the Power of Ordination is acknowledged by Papists and Protestants particularly by Cornelius à Lapide Chemnitius Bucer Chamier Nomine clavium significatur omnis potestas Ecclesiastica Suppl Cham. lib. 4. c. 4. Traditio Clavium saith Camero Symbolum est potestatis atque auctoritatis collatoe Isa. 22.22 Rev. 3.7 Clavium traditione Doctorum apud Iudoeos inauguratio veteri instituto peragebatur The Keys delivered to the Jewish Teachers included the power of Ordination for as we observed before Every one regularly Ordained himself had the power of Ordaining his Disciples Maimon The Minor is in part granted by all to wit That Presbyters have the Key of Doctrine that they have the Key of Jurisdiction and Order also as some distinguish them I thus prove They that have the Key of Doctrine have also the Key of Jurisdiction and Order but Presbyters have the former therefore they have the latter The Major I thus prove Christ gave the Keys together and did not divide them therefore they that have the Key of Doctrine have the Key of Jurisdiction and Order To thee I give the Keys saith our Lord Matth. 16. 19. Io. 20.23 He did not give one Key to one and both to another he gives no single Key to any Person but Keys and so whatever these Keys serve for We know no distribution of the Keys but what is grounded upon Scripture He that hath the Keys of a House or Castle delivered to him hath power to admit or exclude Persons as he seeth cause Except there be a Limitation in his Order or Commission his power extends to all Persons without exception Christ here doth not limit the power of the Keys therefore if Presbyters may admit Church-Members into the House of God by Baptism they may admit Church-Officers by Ordination CHAP. IX All that have the Power of Order may confer it acknowledged by Arch-Bishop Usher and Dr. Fern. Bishops and Presbyter's have the Power of Order equally Proved 1. By the Ancient Fathers 2. By Schoolmen Lombard Bonaventure c. 3. By the Canonists Gratian Joh. Semeca c. 4. By Councils as that of Aquisgranum Hispalis Constance Basil. Bishops not expresly determined a superiour Order in the Council of Trent 5. This is acknowledged by the Old Church of England in the Canons of Elfrick and by J. Wicklef Lambert the Martyr the Provincial Synod of 1537. Cranmer Juel Morton Bilson c. This Truth is owned by the now Bishop of Salisbury and by the Bishop of Worcester Ordination by Presbyters allowed in the Old Church of England Instances of it ORders conferred by such as are in Orders and have the power of Order equal with the highest Bishop are valid but Orders conferred by Presbyters are conferred by such as are in Orders and have the power of Order equally with the highest Bishop Therefore Orders conferred by Presbyters are valid As to the Major it 's founded on that Maxim frequently used by Arch-Bishop Vsher Ordinis est conferre Ordines a Man that is in Orders quoad Presbyteratum may coeteris paribus confer Orders it being like Generation or Univocal Causation This Maxim is acknowledged by Dr. H. Fern in his Compendious Discourse p. 115 116 117. If among the Papists Men of an inferiour Order do make the Pope and among our selves Bishops do make Arch-Bishops how much more may Men of the same Order give what they have that is Ordinem Sacerdotii as the School-men call it Why may not Presbyters make Presbyters as Physicians make Physicians All Ranks or Orders of Beings generate their own kind but the impotent Order of Presbyters must prove extinct if the favourable Influences of a superiour Order do not propagate it by a sort of equivocal Generation Must Presbyters be reckoned amongst those Monsters in Nature that cannot perpetuate themselves by Propagation The Minor That Bishops and Presbyters have the power of Order equally will be acknowledged by most Protestants and Papists The Scripture no where mentions any distinction of Order among ordinary Ministers Neither do we read there but of one kind of Ordination then certainly there can be but one Order of Presbyters or Gospel-Ministers properly so called for two distinct Orders cannot be conferred in the same Instant by the same words and by the same actions Let a Man shew me from Scripture that Timothy or Titus or any other were Ordained twice made first Presbyters then Bishops which is absolutely necessary if they be distinct Characters This Point of the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters hath the Consent of the Fathers School-men Canonists Councils and of the Old Church of England 1. As to the Fathers Blondel in his Apology for Ierom's Opinion quotes most that are considerable who unanimously affirm the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters The Testimonies of Clemens Romanus Polycarp Irenoeus Clemens Alexandrin Ierom Austin Hilarius Isidore c. may be seen at large in the said Learned Author To which I could add several more if it were needful 2. The Judgment of the Schoolmen is the same in this Point The Master of the Sentences saith Apud veteres iidem Episcopi Presbyteri fuerunt He adds Excellenter Canones duos tantum sacros Ordines appellari censent Diaconatus sc. Presbyteratus quia hos solos primitiva Ecclesia legitur habuisse de his solis proeceptum Apostoli habemus Bonaventure in 4 sent dist 24. q. 1. A. 1. Episcopatus deficit ab Ordine c. includit necessariò Ordinem perfectissimum sc. Sacerdotium With whom agree Durand Dominic Soto Aureolus c. who all Comment upon Lombard's Text. See Aquinas's Supplem quaest 37. Art 2. Mr. Fran. Mason in his Defence of the Ordinations of Ministers beyond the Seas hath more Quotations of Schoolmen 3. To this Opinion some Canonists subscribe Gratian Sacros Ordines dicimus Diaconatuâ— Presbyteratum hos quidem solos Ecclesia primitiva habuisse dicitur Iohannes Seâ—eca in his Gloss on the Caâ—on Laâ— â—â—â—unt quidem quod in Ecclesia primâ primitivâ Commune erat Officium Episcoporum Sacerdotum nomina erant Communia Dist. 95. c. olim Et Officium erat Commune sed in secunda primitivâ caeperunt distingui Nomina Officia c. Gloss. in Dist.
ejus decretum de Patriarcha ab Episcopis creando Here is a full proof of Presbyters choosing and creating their Bishop whom Eutychius speaking in the language of his Age calls Patriarch and that by Imposition of Hands and Benediction or Prayer without any other Consecration which Custom continued several Ages until at last the neighbouring Bishops usurped the power of Consecration and left the Presbyters neither the Choice nor the Creation of their Bishop Here we have also an Instance of Presbyters making Presbyters for Eutychius tells us That the same Presbyters that made their Bishop chose and ordained another person Presbyter in his room and so constituted both Presbyters and Bishops for several Ages together II. The Bishop of Worcester tells us out of Iohannes Cassianus that about the Year 390. one Abbot Daniel inferiour to none in the Desert of Scetis was made a Deacon à B. Paphnutio solitudinis ejusdem Presbytero in tantum enim virtutibus ejus adgaudebat ut quem vitae merits sibi grâ—tiâ parem noverat coaequare sibi etiam Sacerdotii honore festinaret Siquidem nequaquam ferens in inferiore eum Ministerio diutiùs immorari optánsque sibimet successionem dignissimam providere superstes eum Presbyterij honore provexit Here is a Presbyter Ordained by a Presbyter which we no where read was pronounced null by Theophilus then Bishop of Alexandria or any other of that time Had it been either irregular or unusual doubtless it had been censured Possibly the Concession in the Canon Law is grounded upon this Example Abbas si est Presbyter conferre potest ordinem Clericalem Decret Greg. lib. 1. Tit. 14. c. 11. Innocent 3. III. Leo Mag. being consulted by Rusticus Narbonensis about some Presbyters that took upon them to Ordain as Bishops resolves the Case thus Nulla ratio sinit nt inter Episcopos habeantur qui nec in Clericis sunt electi nec à plebibus expetiti nec à provincialibus Episcopis cum Metropolitani judicio consecrati Vnde cùm saepe quaestio de malè accepto honore nascatur quis ambigat NEQUAQUAM ISTIS TRIBVENDVM quod non docetur fuisse collatum si qui autem Clerici ab istis Pseudo-episcopis in eis Ecclesiis ordinati sunt quae ad proprios Episcopos pertinebant Ordinatio ecrum cum consensu judicio praesidentium facta est potest rata haberi ita ut in ipsis Ecclesiis perseverent Two things are remarkable in this Decision of Leo the Great 1. They that want the Election of the Clergy and are not desired by the People nor Consecrated by the Bishops of the Province c. are Pseudo-episcopi false Bishops in Leo's Opinion which is agreeable to the old Canons as we observed before Our English Bishops want the Election of the Clergy and People and therefore their Ordinations have a Canonical nullity in them They would have been reckon'd but Pseudoepiscopi in Leo's time 2. The Consent ex post facto of the true Bishops made the Ordinations of meer Presbyters lawful which could not be unless they had an intrinsick power of Ordination which was only restrained by the Laws of the Church for if they have no power of Ordination it is impossible they should confer any by their Ordination The bare consent of the true Bishops could not have made them Ministers if they had not been such before IV. The power of Ordination and Government was in the Hands of the Captive Presbyters under the Seythians beyond 1ster for about Seventy years from the Year 260 to the Year 327 the former being the Year of their Captivity under Galienus the latter of the Change of the Government under Constantine when Vrphilas was created Bishop by Eusebius and others V. The Presbyters of Bavaria Ordained Ministers time out of mind until at last Pope Zachary sent one Vivilo to them for their Bishop It is certain that when Bonifacius Mogunt alià s Winifrid visited them he found no Bishops in the whole Province but this Vivilo of the Pope's sending not long before though the Province be so large that one third part of it now viz. the district of Saltsburg hath an Archâ—bishop who is the most powerful Prelate for Revenue and Iurisdiction of any in Germany The Boiarians who were the ancient Inhabitants of this Province were govern'd by their Presbyters without Bishops and in all probability had been so from their first Conversion which was about 200 years before For they were converted to the Christian Faith about the Year 540 and Vivilo was imposed upon them about the Year 740 by Pope Zachary who thus writes to Winifrid or Wilfred as some write his Name Quia indicasti perrexisse te ad gentem Boiariorum invenisse eos extra Ordinem Ecclesiasticum viventes dum Episcopos non habebant in Provincia nisi unum nomine Vivilo quem nos ante tempus Ordinavimus Presbyteros verò quos ibidem reperisti si incogniti fuerint Viri illi à quibus sunt Ordinati dubium est eos Episcopos fuisse an non qui eos ordinaverunt ab Episcopo suo benedictiones Presbyteratus suscipiant consecrentur sic Ministerio suo fungantur It is no wonder that this Pope requires Re-ordination for now Rome had usurped the Universal Headship and assumed a power of Deposing and Setting up of Princes as this Man did in the Case of Childerik and Pipin They that brought Kings and Princes under them would much more make Presbyters to depend upon them VI. The Council of Nice decreed thus concerning the Presbyters Ordained by Meletius at Alexandria c. Hi autem qui Dei gratiâ nostris precibus adjuti ad nullum Schisma deflexisse comperti sint sed se intra Catholicae Apostolicae Ecclesiae fines ab erroris labe vacuos continuerint authoritatem habeant TVM MINISTROS ORDINANDI tum eos qui Clero digni fuerint nominandi tum denique omnia ex lege instituto Ecclesiastico liberè exequendi If any say that the meaning is that these Presbyters shall Ordain and Govern with the Bishops but not without them it is granted for the Decree refers to instituta Ecclesiastica But this sheweth that Ordination belongeth to the Presbyters Office and consequently it is no nullity though an irregularity as to the Canons when it 's done by them alone If it be said this Condemns Schismatical Ordinations I answer Schism as such cannot make Ordination null though it implies an irregularity else the Ordinations of the Schismatical Church of Rome were null which are counted valid in England VII Hilary or whoever was the Author in Q ex utroque Test. mixtim affirms That in Alexandriâ per totum Aegyptum si desit Episcopus consecrat Presbyter It cannot be said that Consecrare here signifies the Consecration of the Eucharist for this might be done by the Presbyter proesente Episcopo If it be taken for Confirmation it
doth not prejudice our Cause for the Canon limits the power of Confirmation as well as Ordination to the Bishop as was also the power of Consecrating Churches if any should take the word in that sense We may understand the meaning by a parallel place of Hilary in Ambrose who thus speaks Ideo non per omnia conveniunt scripta Apostoli Ordinationi quae nunc in Ecclesiâ est quia haec inter ipsa primordia sunt scripta nam Timotheum 1 Tim. 4. 14. 2 Tim. 1. 6. Presbyterum à se creatum Episcopum vocat quia primum Presbyteri Episcopi appellabantur ut recedente uno sequens ei succederet Denique apud Aegyptum Presbyteri consignant si praesens non sit Episcopus Sed quia caeperunt sequentes Presbyteri indigni inveniri ad primatus tenendos immutata est ratio prospiciente Concilio ut non Ordo sed meritum crearet Episcopum multorum Sacerdotum judicio constitutum nè indignus temerè usurparet esset multis scandalum The same Author saith also in Tim. 3. post Episcopum Diaconi Ordinem subjicit Quare nisi quia Episcopi Presbyteri una Ordinatio est Vterque enim Sacerdos est sed Episcopus primus est Here note 1. That the Ordination in Hilary's time did not in all things agree with the Writings of the Apostle That he speaks of the Ordination of Ministers is evident by the following words Presbyterum à se creatum c. 2. At first Presbyters and Bishops were of the same Order and Office and had but one Odination Episcopi Presbyteri una Ordinatio est which shews the meaning of Ordinatio in the former Paragraph The Bishop in Hilary's time which was about the Year 380 under Damasus was but primus Sacerdos and not of a superiour Order Peter is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 primus Apostolus Matth. 10. 2. and yet Protestants hold all the Apostles to be equal 3. Spalatensis infers from this quotation That at the beginning when a Bishop died there was not so much as an Election of him that was to succeed much less any new Ordination but the eldest Presbyter came into the room of the deceased Bishop See the Preface to Blondel's Apology p. 11. 31. 4. There was a Change in the way of choosing their Bishop ut non ordo sed meritum crearet Episcopum and this was prospiciente Concilio whether that Council was the Council of Nice Can. 4. as Blondel thinks for it should seem that before that time neither the Consent of the Bishops of the Province nor the Concurrence of three Bishops in Ordination were accounted necessary for the making of a Bishop though it might be the Custom for the keeping up of Unity in some places Or whether it signifies no more then that which Ierom calls Concilium Presbyterorum the Bench of Presbyters who might make this Change by general Consent Multorum Sacerdotum judicio as Hilarius speaks Or whether it were some Council of which we have no further account in Antiquity most of the Records of the three first Centuries being lost is not very material It might be some Provincial Synod of which there were several before that of Nice It is presumption in us that live at this distance to say there was no such Council when an Ancient Writer so positively affirmeth it Such a Change there was and that by the advice of some Council they that say there was no such Council must disprove it by some positive Authentick Testimony 5. After this Change the Presbyters chose and made their Bishop For so Hilarius affirms him to be multorum Sacerdotum judicio constitutum 6. He adds that in Egypt Presbyteri consignant si praesens non sit Episcopus He speaks in the foregoing words of the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters and he brings this as a Confirmation of it that in the absence of the Bishop they might do those things which Custom had appropriated to the Bishops Consignare is some Act of Prerogative that the Bishops challenged to themselves which yet in their absence the Presbyters might perform Whether we understand it of Ordination or Confirmation in which they did Chrysmate consignare it 's not material for both were reserved to the Bishop by the Canons Though by comparing this with the scope of Hilary's Discoarse and with the quotation out of the Questions under Austin's Name Si desit Episcopus consecrat Presbyter it should seem evidently meant of Ordination especially when we find consignare to be taken for consecrare in several Authors Arnob. lib. 3. Cypr. Ep. 2. Tu tantum quem jà m Spiritalibus castris coelestis militia signavit VIII Pelagius the first Bishop of Rome was Ordained by Iohn Bishop of Perusia Bonus Bishop of Florence and Andreas Presbyter de Hostia whereas by the Canons three Bishops are absolutely necessary for the Ordination of a Bishop Either then Pelagius was no Canonical Bishop and the Succession was interrupted in the Church of Rome and consequently the English Bishops have no Canonical Succession or else a Presbyter hath the same intrinsecal power of Ordination with a Bishop but it 's only restrained by Ecclesiastical Laws This Instance is quoted in Dr. Stillingfl Iren. IX The Chorepiscopi or Country-Bishops Ordained Presbyters until they were restrained by a Canon in the Council of Antioch A. D. 344. Now these Chorepiscopi were either of the Order of Bishops or not If they were then it appears that Bishops were made not only in Cities but in Country Villages which were but thinly peopled with Christians when the Majority were Heathens or at least were great numbers By which we may guess at the bigness of primitive Diocesses which were scarce as large as our lesser Parishes Such Bishops in the Exercise of that power which Christ gave them without Canonical Restraints we plead for and earnestly desire Nay the Chorepiscopi are an Instance of Bishops without subject Presbyters they were but Parish-Bishops under the City-Bishop Sine authoritate literarum ejus in unaquaque Parochia Chorepiscopis non licet aliquid agere But if they were not Bishops then it 's undeniable that Presbyters did Ordain then without Bishops and their Ordination was valid until they were limited by the Canons The second Council of Hispalis makes the Chorepiscopi and Presbyters to be the same As to Bellarmine's conceit of two sorts of Choral Bishops some meer Presbyters others veri nominis Episcopi he is answered at large by Forbes in his Irenic c. 11. X. The Histories of Scotland do tell us that their Churches were governed by Presbyters without Bishops for above two hundred years and therefore had no Ordination but by Presbyters Hector Boetius saith Ante Palladium populi Suffragiis ex Monachis Culdaeis pontifices assumerentur Hist. Scot. lib. 7. fol. 28. Iohn Major is more express Prioribus illis temporibus per Sacerdotes
Hierarchy in the Churches of that Empire had its Pattern from the Heathen The Heathen had their Sacerdotes and over them their Pontifices maximos In every Province one chief Priest had the Supream Power to whom all the other Priests were subject And these were chosen ex hominibus qui in negotiis Civilibus rebus publicis erant illustrissimi See the Epistle of Iulian to Arsacius Chief-Priest of Galatia in Sozom. V. 16. Here is a President for Bishops intermedling in State Affairs The Office of these Chief-Priests was to Ordain and Govern the inferiour Priests The Master of the Sentences ingenuously confesseth that the distinction of Bishops Metropolitans Arch-Bishops was borrowed of the Gentiles Thus he Ordo Episcoporum quadripartitus est scil in Patriarchis Archiepiscopis Metropolitanis Episcopis horum autem discretio à Gentilibus introducta videtur qui suos Flamines alios simpliciter flamines alios Archi-flamines alios Protoflamines appellabant That the Ecclesiastical Government of Britain was built upon the Ruins of the Pagan Hierarchy is expresly affirmed by Ponticus Virunnius He tells us That there were in Britain before Christianity 28 Flamens and three Arch-Flamens In the room of the Flamens were set up Bishops and in the room of the Arch-Flamens Arch-Bishops The Seat of the Arch-Flamens were London York and Caerleon upon Vsk. To these three Metropolitans were subject 28 Bishops Fuerunt in Britanniâ octo viginti Flamines nec non tres Archi flamines quorum potestati coeteri judices morum atque phanatici submittebantur .... ubi erant Flamines Eiscopos ubi autem Archi-flamines Archi-episcopos posuerunt mirâ sanctitate incredibili devotione Sedes autem Archi-flaminum quae fuit antiquissima religio in tribus nobilioribus Civitatibus fuerant Lundoniis viz. atque Eboraci in Vrbe Legionum super Oscam fluvium His igitur tribus Metropolitanis evacuata superstitione 28. Episcopi subduntur The description that Caesar gives of the Government of the ancient Druids something agrees with this of Ponticus Virunnius Câ—â—â—r saith concerning the Druids of France That they managed all the Pagan Devotions under the Conduct of one Chief President whose Authority was Supream when he died another was chosen to succeed him Illi rebus divinis intersunt Sacrificia publica ac privata procurant religiones interpretantur His autem omnibus Druidibus praeest unus qui summam inter eos habet auctoritatem Hoc mortuo si quis ex reliquis excellit dignitate succedit at si sunt plures pares suffragio Druidum adlegitur He adds That this Discipline was found in Britain Disciplina in Britannia reperta atque in Galliam translata esse existimatur nunc qui diligentiùs eam rem cognoscere volunt plerumque illo discendi causâ proficiscuntur Having prov'd that Christianity was in the North part of Britain before Palladius's time and vindicated Boethius and Fordon I proceed to give an Instance of Presbyters Ordaining in Scotland Segenius a Presbyter and Abbot of Hy together with the other Presbyters of the Monastery Ordained Bishop Aidan The Presbyters of Hy also Ordain'd Finan as Successor to Aidan To this Quotation 't is said by some that Aidan was ordain'd by Bishops which they would ' thus prove There was always one Bishop in Hy Monastery as Bishop Usher tells us out of the Ulster Annals and another person Ordained perhaps only by the Bishop of Hy who was returned back from Northumbria Then at least there were present two Bishops for Aidan's Ordination Answ. 1. We have no Author near that time that saith there was a Bishop constantly resident at Hy which our Adversaries think a good Argument against the Scottish Historians As to the Annals of Vlster we leave them for Apocryphal as not being attested by any Author of that Age. 2. But suppose there were a Bishop resident at Hy he was subject to the Abbot who was the only Church-Governour of the Island and the Provinces about The Monastery was not only exempted from the Government of the Bishops which is usual but the Bishops of the Province were subject to the Abbot and therefore the parallel Instance of Oxford being under the Jurisdiction of the Chancellor and not of the Bishop of the place which is urged by some is not to the point for the Bishop is not subject to the Vice-Chancellor as the Bishops were to the Abbot of Hy. The Bishop of Oxford hath a Jurisdiction over all that have a Parochial Cure in the University versity who swear Canonical Obedience to him which cannot be said of the Bishops under the Jurisdiction at Hy 3. The second Bishop said to be at Hy when Aidan was Ordained cannot be produced out of Bede It doth not appear that he was Ordained Bishop Bede calls him only Sacerdotem a Priest Or if he was how will it appear that he was Ordain'd by the Bishop of Hy Ordain'd perhaps only by the Bishop of Hy saith the Learned Historian Here is a plain begging of the Question It is taken for granted that this Man was Ordained by the Bishop of Hy which we deny and which Bede no where affirms Finan's Ordination was by the Seniores and their Abbot as Bede saith and therefore his Predecessor had no other 'T is objected further That Finan must needs be Ordain'd by Bishops because there were three Bishops at the Ordination of Cedd This deserves to be taken notice of by our Aversaries and consider'd in other places where Bede speaks of Scottish Ordinations I answer we have taken notice of it and find it doth not at all concern the thing in question For Cedd's Ordination was at Lindis-farn in England out of the Liberties of the Abbots of Hy. Let one Example be produced of Ordination by Bishops within the district of Hy and 't will be something to the purpose which I have not yet met with Bede speaking of the British Bishops calls them Presbyters or Teachers so that 't is uncertain what sort of Bishops the old Brittains had 'T was many years after Cedd's time before the British Churches would submit to the Roman Yoke of Discipline when they had throughly imbib'd the Romish Modes and Customs then at a Synod held at Celichyth A. D. 816. 't was decreed That none of the Scottish Nation should be permitted to use the sacred Ministry among us It 's argued further against the Scotch Ordinations that they must needs be Episcopal because the Romans did not dislike the Orders that they found in the British Church If by the British Church be meant the Church of South Britain 't is not to the purpose as we observed before but if the Orders conferred in the Monastery of Hy be intended the Romans were not so ignorant of the Priviledges of Abbots as to dislike their Ordinations which to this day are allow'd by the Canons of that Church XI The ancient Waldenses had
Council of Chalcedon observed Can. 3. forbids Ministers to take Farms or Stewardships and to intermeddle with Secular Affairs Can. 7. is against the Clergies medling with Military Affairs or receiving Secular Honours upon pain of Excommunication Booted Prelates and Spiritual Lords would have look'd strange in this Age. One of the Methods which Iulian the Apostate used to corrupt the Clergy was to make Senators and Ministers of State of them That Politick Enemy of Christianity knew well enough how inconsistent worldly Greatness and Dominion would be with that humble Mortification and vigorous Application which the Gospel requires He that had been a READER in the Church before he came to the Empire could not be ignorant of that Precept of our Saviour to his Apostles Matth. 20. 25 26. The Princes of the Gentiles exercise Dominion over them but it shall not be so among you Can. 10. Deposeth all obstinate Pluralists This Canon if executed would bear hard upon our Gigantick Pluralists that heap Pelion upon Ossa Steeple upon Steeple as if they would mount to Heaven from the Pinnacle of Ecclesiastical Promotions I only produce these Canons ad hominem to shew how unreasonable 't is to urge old Canons against Ordinations by Presbyters when they may be equally urged against Episcopal Ordinations We judge it more ingenuous to disown their Authority over us as being made by such as had no power to give Universal Laws to the Church then pretend Submission to them as they do who act in open Contradiction to them If then it be a Crime not to observe the Canons let them that are without Canonical Guilt cast the first Stone Object 2. Your Ordinations are not by such Diocesans as have uninterrupted Succession down from the Apostles Answ. 1. This is the triumphing Argument of the Papists against the first Reformers They peremptorily deny the validity of their Ordinations because they wanted this Succession It is urged by Bellarmine De Sacram. Ordinis cap. 2. and by Gretzer against Luther Ep. Dedic praefix Operibus ejus The same Argument is used by Parsons the supposed Author of the Three Conversions of England part 2. cap. 10. and by Stapleton Rel. cap. 1. q. 4. art 2. as also by Arnoux the Jesuit in Moulin's Buckler p. 274 275. Turrian the Jesuite writ a great Book de Ordinationibus Ministrorum Ecclesiae against the Ordinations in Protestant Churches The Sum of all his Arguments is this of the Succession which we find gathered up in this Syllogism by M. Sadeel All lawful Ordinations depend upon an Ordinary Succession of Bishops under the Roman Pontiff the visible Head of the whole Church but no Protestant Ordinations are such therefore no Protestant Ordinations are lawful but they are void null and meerly Laic This Argument is exactly the same that is used against our Ordinations but with this Addition That the Pope is put at the top of the Line of Succession which adds no great Reputation to it 2. This Argument of the Succession is at large refuted by our Prosestant Writers Sadeel calls it praecipuum adversariorum Argumentum he challenges them to produce some Scripture to confirm it by Several Testimonies of the Ancients are cited by him that the Succession they plead for is a Succession of Doctrine and not of Persons which Succession of Doctrine failing in the Romish Church the other Succession of Persons is a meer useless Carcass These offensive Carcasses of Popish Bishops are animated by some to propagate a Generation of immortal Successors He further proves that the Ordinary Succession of Ministers may be interrupted by Scripture-Examples as when the Priesthood was taken away from the House of Ely to whom a Promise of perpetual Succession was made 1 Sam. 2. 30. And under the Kings of Israel God raised up Elijah to preach Repentance to them though he was not ex Sacerdotum Ordine Nay Christ himself coming to reform his Church chose unto himself Apostles not from the Priests but from other Families He did not observe the Ordinary Succession in the Reformation of the Church To which I may add That the Roman Governours set up and deposed what High Priests they pleased in the Jewish Church without regard to Lineal Succession Iosephus gives many Instances of this kind Vide lib. 15. c. 2. If ever an uninterrupted Succession were necessary to the being of a Church it must be in the Jewish Priesthood which was entailed upon one Family but the Church remained a true Church though the regular Succession was destroyed To the same effect speaks holy Mr. Bradford the Martyr to Dr. Harpsfield You shall not find saith he in all the Scripture this your essential part of Succession of Bishops In Christ's Church Antichrist will sit Dr. Fulk saith If the Truth of Doctrine be necessary to prove a true Church the Scriptures are sufficient to prove a true Church with lawful Succession also Dr. Field is of the same Judgment in this Point Field of the Church II. 6. III. 39. Mr. Perkins distinguisheth of a threefold Succession The first of Persons and Doctrines in the primitive Church The second of Persons alone among Infidels and Hereticks The third of Doctrine alone And thus our Ministers saith he succeed the Apostles and this is sufficient For this Rule must be remembred that the power of the Keys that of Order and Iurisdiction is tied by God and annext in the New Testament to Doctrine Dr. White largely confutes this pretended Succession in his defence of the way to the true Church So doth his Brother Mr. Francis White Thus we see the vanity of this pretended Succession who they be that maintain it and who are the Opposers of it It 's one of the Pillars of the Popish Church which supports that tottering Fabrick The Arguments against our Ordination must needs be very defective when no other can be found but those which the Jesuits urge against all Protestant Ordinations It 's an ill Cause that must be defended by Weapons borrowed out of their Tents Is there no Sword in Israel that you go to the Philistines to sharpen your Goads 3. The violent Assertors and Defendants of this Opinion little consider that by this Hypothesis there can be no true Ministers in the Church of England for it 's certain the Chain of Succession pleaded for hath been broken again and again One Nullity makes a breach in the whole Chain All our Bishops as such derive their Succession from Rome Now if we can find any Interruption in the Succession of Bishops there it Nullifies all the Administrations of those that depend upon them If the Pope succeeds Peter as Darkness doth Light if he who calls himself Christ's Vicar proves to be the Antichrist if many Popes were Hereticks Sodomites Idolaters Conjurers Whoremongers Murderers c. as some of their own Authors affirm if there were two or three Popes at a time and if they were