an explicite Covenant He gives reasons of this Conclusion For thereby the judgement of the Members comes to be informed and convinced of their Duty more fully His Reasons of his Third Conclusion answered I Would ask whether a new Duty added by this Covenant or an old Duty which arose out of Baptism If a new I cannot judge of the fitnesse without I knew the particulars but am assured that whatsoever is added to the Covenant in baptism although it may have possible Allowance in Acts of Religion to some particular men upon some particular Occasions yet in general to presse such a Thing upon all Christians is not tollerable If it be no addition to that Covenant the only refreshing of that Covenant to the memory of a Christian is abundantly enough This likewise answers his 2d Argument page 49. They are saith he thereby kept from Cavilling and Starting aside from the Tenure and Terms of the Covenant which they have professed and acknowledged before the Lord and so many Witnesses I answer as before If the Terms be additions to what was in Baptism he ought not in general to prescribe them to all Christians If they are not Additions then that Covenant is the strongest he can make which was made in Baptism The same answer may be applied to his third reason For saith he thereby their hearts stand under a Stronger Tye. I answer no stronger than Baptism SECT IV. This Covenant of his cannot agree to Travellers THen he enters into a Second Question how far this Covenant requires Cohabitation His handling of which is very weak in my Judgement for since he allows Merchants and others upon diverse Occasions to be absent sometimes divers years he gives no satisfaction at all to shew how these men in their absence can partake of Church-blessings But me-thinks they must live without Preaching without Sacrament or any blessing of any Covenant of Gods because their Pastors and Officers reside at their constant place but contrarywise our Doctrine which makes each Presbyter an Officer of the Catholick Church and each Christian a Member of it it follows that any Ship may carry a Pastor and every man receive the Comforts and blessings of Gods Covenants from him which is like our Saviours providence for all and every particular But I omit this at this time as not necessary for our businesse and apply my self to his Reasons for his Conclusion That this Covenant gives the Essentials to a Church which he begins page the 50th SECT V. His Reasons answered HIS first Argument is thus framed in these words Every Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Corporation receives its being from a Spiritual Combination But the visible Churches of Christ are Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Therefore I can justly complain here that the Terms are altered which In a Logical Discourse should be the same I will reduce them therefore and so discourse upon it Combination must here be taken for Covenant or a Combination by Covenant so that the sence of that Proposition is Every Ecclesiastical Corporation receives its being from a Combination by Covenant In the Examination of this Proposition I will follow his own Expressions because I will dispute ex concessis He instâ—nces in the Corporations of Towns and Cities There saith he they have their Charter granted them from the King or State which gives them warrant to unite themselves to carry on such works for such Ends with such Advantage So saith he their mutual Engagements each to other to attend such Terms to walk in such Orders which shall be sutable to such a Condition gives being to such a body Thus he Coâ—sider now that the form of every thing is that which last comes to give every thing its being and make it Compleat Secondly it is that which enables every thing to do its proper work Now Consider a Corporation hath first a Charter by which they are enabled to unite by Authority of which they assemble and come together and perhaps enter into some Engagement required by that Charter by this Engagement they are made the Matter of this Corporation but the form is the Influence of the Charter by which these men so engaged by Covenant are authorized to do this So in every question when it is moved concerning any Action we have recourse to the form Ask why this did heat or burn It is answered because it was fire had the form the burning form of fire Why did that grow because it had a vegetable form Now ask why did a Corporation do this or that let this Lease make that man free The answer is not made because they were Combined by a Covenant but because they have a Charter to do it so that the influence which that Charter hath upon the Corporation is the thing which gives that Corporation its being not their Union by Covenant which makes them but the Matter when the other gives the life and being force and operation solely to the Corporation To apply this to our purpose Suppose every little particular Church were a Corporation first they must have a Charter to unite in a Covenant which nor he nor any man living can shew me and although these men vaunt mightily of Scripture and Contemn all Doctrine which is not delivered there yet this which seems to me their Corner Stone and main foundation they have no not the least shew of any words of Scripture which can authorize much lesse exact any such Covenant but then suppose they had some such Commission yet not their union upon the Commission but the other Authorities expressed in the Charter must be it which enables them to do whatsoever they do not their union by that Covenant for ask why any man preacheth administreth the Sacraments or the like the answer is not made from any union but from the Charter which granted it Now I come to his Minor but the visible Churches of Christ are Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Corporations I deny this Proposition absolutely that every particular Church is a distinct Corporation and else he saith nothing to his purpose but are Members or branches of that great Corporation the whole Catholick Church SECT VI. Scripture Phrases abused by him HE offers at Scripture to prove this page 51. Every particular Church saith he is a City Heb. 12. 22. an house 1 Tim. 3. 15. The body of Christ Ephes. 4. 13 16. 1 Cor. 12. 12 27 28. Here is Cyphered Scripture All these places saith he there are spoken of particular visible Churches When I viewed the places I was amazed to read the holy Scripture so injured and that mighty Article of our Creed I believe the holy Catholick Church to be made such a Nothing as by his Application of these Texts it is Let us Consider the particulars the first place is Heb. 12. 22. But ye are come unto Mount Sion and unto the â—ity of the living God this is the phrase he must pitch upon to prove it a City but mark what follows The heavenly
Jerusalem and an innumerable company of Angels then vers 23. to the General Assembly and Church of the first-born which are written in heaven and to God the Judge of all and to the Spirits of just men made perfect I cannot imagine with what colour of reason this can be applyed to a particular Church for although it may be affirmed That such men who are religiously united to such Churches are come to this glorious Society yet that that peculiar Church should be this City this mount Sion this heavenly Jerusalem cannot be admitted for first it is called City not Cities now if one Church be this City another cannot be it it is the heavenly Jerusalem an Innumerable Company of Angels the General Assembly the Church of the first-born which can be spoken of none but the universal Catholike Church of no particular in the world That it is this and such a Company let us look then upon his second place where he saith his particular Church is called an house 1 Tim. 3. 15 That thou mayst know how to behave thy self in the house of God which is the Church of the living God Hence he collects or no where that a Particular Church is a Corporation because an house A poor Consequence but see is this spoken of a Particular Church Mark the words following the pillar and ground of all Truth Can this be spoke of any particuliar of a little handfull of men in New England or in one Corner there I am sure the Church of Rome hath much more semblance for Rome than they can have for any of their Congregations which have been and are most unstable themselves much lesse supports for Christs Truth His 3d. place to prove this that particular Churches are Corporations is because they are termed the body of Christ for this he produceth Eph. 4. 13 16. The 13th verse hath not that phrase body but only saith in general that Christians must grow up in the unity of â—aith to the perfect Stature of Christ but in the 16th verse there is the name body from whom the whole body fitly joyned together and compacted by that which every joynt supplyes according to the Effectual working c. To understand this read the preceding verse where Christ is called the head and then think with your self whether this little Congregation can be his body spoke of or the whole Church or whether Christ be the head to so many bodies or whether all Christians are not Members of the same body His last place is 1 Cor. 12. 12. for as the body is one and hath many Members c. I am weary of transcribing Consider the body is one therefore not every Church a distinct body but there is one body the Catholick Church Then he urgeth ver 27 28. of the same Chapter verse 27. Now ye are the body of Christ and Members in particular Can a man choose but wonder to think that any man should offer to apply this to a particular Church to say it is the body of Christ The 28th verse reckons up the diverse Officers which God gave to govern these Churches which can be affirmed of none but the universal I am sure not of their particulars they have no Apostles neither literally nor successively Bishops no way This doth weary me but now you see all that is brought to prove this mighty Conclusion out of Scripture In brief to illustrate this Truth a little farther Conceive that the universal Church of Christ is like a City of which he is the King or Supream All men in baptism submit themselves to his Government He institutes Officers over the whole as I have before expressed these cannot actually be present every where and therefore by consent appoint these and these in their particular Wards or Precincts and as any man when he comes to plant in this or that City implicitely submits to the Government as of the City so of that particular part of the City where he lives so is it with Christians where they go any where in the Christian world having in general by Baptism submitted themselves to Christ and his Discipline take it in all places wheresoever it is So likewise the Church is an house Christ the Master in which every person in what room soever he rests can receive nothing but from his Officers The Church universal is a body he the head from which flow all those Spirits and Graces by which the body is enlivened Now as nothing can induce me to believe that each house in this City should be the City each Chamber in the house should be the house each member should be the body so a man cannot be perswaded that these particular Congregations which are parts of the whole should be that whole which is called by these Names CHAP. X. Another Argument answered I Now come to his second Argument which is thus framed Those who have mutual power each over other both to Command and Constrain in Conscience who were of themselves free each from other they must by mutual Agreement and Engagement be made partakers of that power But the Church of Believers have mutual power each over other to Command and Constrain in Conscience who were before free Therefore they must by mutual Agreement and Engagement be made partakers of that power I can guesse what he means by his Discourse but make no sense of this syllogism for in his Minor there is a Nown of the Singular number put to a Verb of the plural against Grammar the Church have when indeed if he would have expressed his meaning it should have been men in the Churches of believers or all men in all Churches of believers were such but I take it so SECT II. The Text If thy Brother offend thee Tell the Church vindicated HE offers to pâ—ove his Minor by Mat. 18. 15. If thy brother offend thee tell the Church In which saith he we have a legal and orderly way laid forth by our Saviour in which brethren only of the same Church ought to deal one with another which they cannot exercise with Infidels nor yet with other Christians as our own experience if we will take a taste will give undeniable evidence I deny his Minor being understood as I expressed for that ambiguous way of his delivering it in Nonsence poseth a Reader what to speak or think I say then that every particular man in a Church hath not power to command or constrain anorher let us examine his reason therefore out of Mat. 18. 15. If thy brother that is one of the same Church not an Inâ—idel nor yet other Christians This is his Collection but extreamly amisse for I dare confidently affirm that every Christian is our spiritual brother of what Congregation soever he is and it is an high kind of Impiety to deny it nay he is nearer than a brother a member of the same mystical body of which Christ is the head and therefore this Argument falls in the very first
Argument is If Ordiâ—ation give the Essentials to an Officer before Election there may be a Pastor without people an Officer sine Titulo as they use to speak and a Pastor should be made a Pastor at large the rest is nothing but an Application to Mr. Rutherford's Simile of a Ring which concerns not us But this Argument of his invites me to speak of a pastoral Ordination which will perhaps give farther Illustration to the whole body of this Discourse A Pastor and a â—lock are relatives and do mutually se ponere tollere where one is the other must be where one is not the other cannot be Now then to be made a Pastor will require to have a flock this shall be presupposed and again every Pastor hath not all Pastoral Offices I can well suppose a mighty great flock which requires many Shepherds but one Chief above the rest he hath all Pastoral offices folds feeds drives to field prescribes pâ—stures medicines and doth all this by the Supream Pastoral power that is granted him either by his own hands or by the ministry of those Inferiours which are under him but they have partial Authorities only to feed or â—old or catch or drive as their several shares are dâ—signed the second part of the Division of the Pastoral Charge these men must grant who divide their Governours into several Offices Pastors Teachers Rulers which have their several Duties assigned them and it is most unreasonable for them to deny the first That one should have Superiority over the rest since as reason would direct without some body to over-look and attend them they would easily entrench upon one anothers duties or neglecting their own invite those others to put their hands to their work and what this reason directs that I think I have shewed the Scripture likewise Crowns with its approbation Now the first sort of Pastors are those we term Bishops the second Presbyters the flock they are to feed is the Church of Christ when they are admitted Pastors and so ordained according to their several Duties That which Hooker page 61. brings out of one Mr. Best as if St. Austin or some General Councel had dâ—creed it is absolutely to be denyed namely that an Apostle differeth from a Pastor that the Apostle is a Pastor throughout the whole Christian World but the Pastor is tyed to a certain Congregation out of which he is not to exercise Pastoral Acts. This I deny if he affirm it by Divine Right but if by Ecclesiastical Authority only which hath designed particular Bishops and Presbyters to particular places I shall yield much of it For the first part concerning the Apostles know that their Commission was universal as it is set down Mat. 28. 19. Go teach all Nations c. and John 20 As my Father sent me c. and we must conceive this to be divisim not conjunctim only every one had all this power not all only nor as Bellarmine would have Lib. 2. De Romano Pontifice Cap. 12. St. Peter only and the rest from him for we see the Commission granted to all but yet we must know that their Authority was habitu or potentia only in every one it was not actâ— in any they might Episcopize Apostolize in any place of the World They did Episcopize Apostolize only where they were râ—sident Just as I have Conceived if Adam had lived in his Integrity every man had had an habituâ—l and potential royalty over all the Creatures in the world yet he would have exercised that Royalty only where he lived yet he might have Travelled any where and have justly enjoyed any part of the World although actually he could possesse but his Share Now this was the Jurisdiction of every Apostle in all the whole Catholick Church habitually not actually as the Church of Rome would have their Apostolical Man as they call him the Pope and all this was necessary for them as Apostles which is men sent for the propagation of the Gospel to the planting and confirming of Churches other powers they had of Languages of Miracles which were necessary to the first plantation but no longer and therefore they were not peculiar to them but others had them besides as likewise that mighty power of being Inspired to write Scripture which did not appear in all of them and some others besides them had that power as St. Luke and Marke and some think St. James to be the Bishop of Jerusalem who writ that Epistle But now of those which were the Apostles it is evident that these Gifts were not Apostolical as belonging so to them as Apostles and it will appear in the other Cause That the Bishops succeeded them in every thing that was Apostolical although not in these extraordinary Endowments for the Apostolical power of planting setling Churches of propagating the Gospel throughout the whole World and enlarging the Kingdom of Christ must remain for ever and therefore though the manner of doing it by such Signs and Wonders be not communicated yet the Office must and therefore he who is a Bishop or Presbyter by divine right is such throughout the whole Word to this purpose you may observe in that famous place of Acts 20. 28. so much and so often canvased by them who handle these Controversies in other points but not thought on in this you may observe that St. Paul speaking to divers Presbyters or Bishops which you will he saith Take heed therefore to your selves and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers or Bishops to feed the Church of God which he purchased with his own blood Observe here that he spake to many and diverse Bishops or Presbyters I stand not upon thâ—t now he spâ—ke to them in the plural Number but when he speaks of the flock they were to pastorize over he puts it in the singular Number now if the Holy Ghoâ— had made them Bishops of particular Congregations only it must have been the flock every one his several but being all made Pastors of the Catholick Church he names it one flock and so likewise to feed or Sheperdizâ— over not the Churches but the Church of Christ which indeed were no way congruous if the Holy Ghost had made them Officers of particular Churches and confined them there but making them Officers of the Vniversal Church which Christ had purchased with his blood and all Officers of that it is rightly put in the singular number flock and Church This likewise the Holy Ghost intimates every where describing the Church to us by the name of a â—ield a Vineyard a City and multitudes of such Expressions which as much as this of a flock intimate the unity of that Body which is his Church his â—lock over which these are Pastors in their several wayes not only their little Congregations Now the wisdom of the Church finding that although the potential and habitual power is universal yet the actual cannot be exercised further
setting out and can proceed no further but to understand the Text and so more abundantly the weaknesse of this Argument SECT III. What is meant by Church FIrst know that by the Church we must understand the visible Catholick Church which hath this power and indeed almost all the promises of Christ which is his City his house his spouse his body but then it is understood of her according to that part which hath that faculty of receiving Complaints he who bids you tell a man any Story bids you not speak it to its â—eet or hands but his Ears which are fit parts to receive the Story or if he be deaf you must do it by writing that his Eyes which are organized for that purpose may entertain that relation Again when a man commands he doth it not with his Eyes or Ears but his Tongue which is the part fitted for that purpose The Church is Christs body it hath many parts when you are bid tell the Church you are not bid tell the feet or hands but the Ear those who are proper for that work when the Church speaks it is not with hands or eyes but with the Churches Tongue which are the Officers for that purpose these men would make the body of Christ all Ear all Tongue every member of the Church fit to receive Complaints and fit to Judge and Censure which is ridiculous Take his own Simile Suppose the Church universal a Corporation there was never any such where every man was a Judge It cannot be therefore so here Tell the Church that is tell those Officers in the Church who are designed and organized authorized for such a purpose and then if he refuse to hear them let him be c. and this that very word brother which he introduceth for the prop of his cause evinceth for all Christians throughout the Catholique Church are brethren and the Duty belongs to them this I think doth satisfie and what he adds is of no moment for he being full with his conceit that by Church is meant a particular Congregation and each man in it labours to build upon that foundation which being overthrown his building perisheth He urgeth a place out of Whitaker to prove that Lay-men have Authority of Censuring pag. 52. but because he confesseth That Whitakers meaning is of a General Council that it hath power over any particular Pastor in the Conclusion of that page and the top of the 53. he forms this Syllogism SECT IV. Another Argument of his answered EVery Member of a General Council hath power in the Censuring of a Delinquent Brethren or Lay men as they are termed are Members of a General Council I deny this Minor he brings no proof although if he had studied this question he could not choose but know it is generally denyed by such Writers as Treat of it Although he is extraordinarily Confuted I am unwilling to let any thing slip which may disturb a Reader He saith the Proposition is proved by Instance and Experience but I know not where He addes immediately If others had not Church power over this or that party if he would have refused to have come into their fellowship and joyned with them then it was his voluntary Subjection and Engagement that gave them all the power and Interest they have To understand this there is voluntary engagement in Baptism and besides this there is no more needfull for it is true he who lives in Scotland cannot be governed by the Bishops of England because they cannot have cognizance of his State and because that the Church hath confined the Exercise of that habitual power which they have every where that it shall not break out into Act in such places and upon such causes which they cannot have a full knowledge of but if he who now lives in Scotland will come and live in England and receive the blessings of Gods mercies in his Covenants from the Church of England if he offend he must be admonished and convented before the â—hurch quoad hoc that is the Church Officers and if he obey them not be as an Heathen If he refuse to Communicate with us in these Spiritual blessings he makes himself as an Heathen So that in some Sence there is a Covenant required that which he calls implicite even in a baptized man for else he makes himself an Heathen towards us in regard of us but this implicite is not like their Covenant which seems to be perpetual This is only pro tempore for the time of his abode and no â—onger That which he yet urgeth that men travell into farre Counâ—ries where are Churches planted certainly that man if they be Protestant Churches he will claim a right in the Church Seals if he be a Protestant if a Papist and they Papists he will do so likewise or else he will be as an Heathen To conclude this he brings some places of Scripture to shew that some would not joyn with the Apostles as Acts 5. 13. where Heathens refused to joyn with the Apostles Luke 7. 30. The Pharisees and Lawyers rejected the Council c. But can he shew me that any who were Christians refused Communion with them of what Church soever It is not imaginable His Third Argument is only against Presbyterians I meddle not with it His Fourth Argument is thus framed SECT V. Another Argument of his answered THat Society of Men who may enjoy such priviledges Spiritual and Ecclesiastical unto which none can be admitted but by Approbaâ—ion of the whole that Society must be in an Especial Combination But a particular Combination is such a Society who enjoy such Spiritual priviledges c. Ergo. I deny this Minor Laymen in a particular Congregation have no such power to admit allow and approve of every man who comes into that Congregation they may inform but they cannot judge His last Argument from an Induction avails nothing where he saith If the Inventory of all other respects being brought in none can constitute a Church visible then this only must he reckons up mutual Affection and Cohabitation only which are insufficient to make his Induâ—ion I shall therefore set down what makes a Church visible CHAP. XI SECT I. What makes a Church Visible COnsider what makes a Church that if it be visible constitutes a Church visible and certainly for the first if we consider the Church to be the body of Christ the City of God the Heavenly Jerusalem then as we must conceive it consisting of many men we must conceive it likewise having these men united in some form of Government under Christ and like a City an house a body ruled by their King and head Christ who by his Inferiour Ministers and Officers rules and governs this body this City he is of this City who is ruled and governed by the Lawes of this City of this House who is governed by the Oeconomical discipline of this house of this body who is guided and governed by the
from him At primum ex concessis Ergo I set down his words and all his words where hath he shewed that Presbyters elected their Bishop which yet may be true and the consequence most weak for after their Ordination by Bishops they may elect their Bishop but not ordain him Elections may be and are various according to humane Constitutions assigning this or that Pastor to this or that particular Congregation sometimes the Parish sometimes the Patron sometimes a Bishop but the Ordination and giving him power to Officiate must be only by the Bishops the Bishop ordains and makes a man a Presbyter a Bishop of the Catholick Church he may by humane Laws and his own consent be tyed to Officiate and execute that Pastoral duty in this particular place nor can any man shew me Authority from Scripture or the times near to the Scripture-Writers where any man was instituted and ordained to do these spirituall duties by any other Authority than Episcopal Nay I think since the Apostles Age no considerable Church or body of Men did conceive Election to be of validity to do these duties till now Well then all the premisses considered which have a full consent of Scripture and the practice of all Ages to confirm them conceive with me that it must be a bold and impudent thing of such men who dare Officiate in these divine duties without Authority granted from Christ which he only gave to the Apostles and they to their Successors Bishops and it is a foolish rashness in those men who adventure to receive the Covenants of their eternall Salvation from such men who have no Atturnment from Christ to Seal them If the Case were dubious which to me seems as clear as such a practick matter can be I should speak more but it being clear I need write no more in this Theam I intended to have spoken to Mr. Hobs but lately there came to my hands a Book of learned Dr. Hammond entituled A Letter of Resolution to six Queries in the fifth of which which is about Imposition of hands you may find him most justly censured for that vain and un-scholastick Opinion pag. 384. But the business is handled sufficiently in the beginning of that Treatise pag. 318. wherefore my pains were vain in this Cause An APPENDIX c. CHAP. I. In which is an Introduction to the Discourse and the Question stated SInce I came back to my Study I found one conclusion delivered in this Treatise opposed by a learned Scotchman one Doctor Forbes in a Treatise intituled Ironicam and in it he hath divers Arguments not inserted in my former Papers against this proposition That it is a proper and peculiar act of Episcopacy to ordain Priests and Bishops which he denyes in his second Book Chap. 11. Proposition 13. in his Exposition and proofe of that proposition page 159. And I observing it whilest my Papers are with the Printer thought it â—it to interpose that which satisfied my self in his Arguments In the top of the page before named he begins thus Gradus quidem Episcopalis est juris divini here we agree Ita tamen ut Ecclesia esse non desinit Sed esse possit sit quandoque vera Ecclesia Christiana in qua non reperitur hic gradus Here we begin to differ I say there neither is nor ever was a Christian Church without a Bishop and I will now begin to distinguish there is the universal Church and there are particular Churches The particular Churches we may yea must conceive to be sometimes without Bishops yea without Presbiters as by the death of their Bishops or Presbiters or by such persecutions as may so scatter them that they dare not shew themselves in their Churches In such cases these places must needes be without these Magistrates And yet those Christians who are by such means defrauded of this divine and blessed government keeping their first faith continue members of the Catholick Church and of that universal Church which have and ever shall have Bishops as long as the World stands so that if that proposition be meant of particular Congregations It is true they may be without a Bishop But if the universal they shall never be by the promise of our Saviour I will be with you to the end of the World without a Bishop And those particular Churches which may by such means be without Bishops may be without Presbiters likewise upon the same occasions This I think is clear I shall now examine his Arguments which oppose this which I have delivered His first Argument drawn from Scripture answered HE saith he will prove it before the Institution of Bishops and after First before I am perswaded he can shew me no Church before the Institution for their Episcopal authority was given in its fulness to the Apostles in that language of our Saviour As my father send me so send I you as I have explained All the Commission was given to them and they imparted all or part of it as they pleased they were the first and only Bishops untill they setled Provincial Bishops they were of the whole world as those latter of particular Diocesses he proves that there were Churches before Bishops out of Scripture but it is ciphered Scripture first Acts 8. 12. There Philip the Deacon so he terms him converted Souls to Christ where was no Bishop And by his leave if Philip were but a Deacon there was no Presbiter neither and by the By the Independant Thomas Hooker of New England and his fellows may take notice that a Deacon may preach and baptize for so did Philip in Samaria in that verse But Reader take notice that although men may be converted by Presbiters yea Lay-men any and when they are converted and baptized are members of the Catholick Church and parts of the mystical body of Christ and have no Bishop resident in that place yet without a Bishop it cannot be for the providence of God over the Church is such as that there shall always be such an authority resident in the Church universal whither men may in convenient time such as will be accepted of God repair for Church-discipline The next place be vergeth is Acts 11. 20 21. But there is nothing observable to any such purpose but only that they who were scattered upon the persecution of Stephen converted many Souls to the true faith His third place is Acts 14. 20 21 22. He should have added the 23 without the which all the former were imperfect to his purpose and in that verse are the words which he argues out of that is they ordained Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now there was a Church he inâ—erâ—s and no Bishop I will tell him there was a Church and no Presbyter untill the Apostles ordained them and the Apostles Barnabas and Paul ordained these Presbiters not a Presbitery and they themselves â—ineranâ—â— throughout the World visited their Churches with letters and directions sometimes when they could not personally
to Bishops they may to Presbyters Both the Proposition and the Deduction have been Confuted already Last of all he deduceth They who have the same Commission have the same power from Christ. But they all have the same Commission John 20. 21. Prout misâ—â— me Pater ego mitto vos I put the words as he doth in Latine it was said to all the Apostles Equally and to all their Successors indifferently I deny that the plenipotence spoken there was spoken to all that succeeded the Apostles in any part of their Oâ—fice there are diverse Things communicated to one which were not to another according to their very Doctrine only Bishops succeeded them in their fulnesse of power in Ruling and Giving Orders and therefore these are bold Conclusions which are only spoken not proved by him SECT XV. The Truth explained I Have done with his Arguments and now apply my self to seâ— down what I Conceive â—it to prove my Conclusion which is That there was such a Thing as Episcopacy setled by the Apostles in the Church If I had no other reason â—t might perswade men easily to credit it because that the Church in the old Law seems to be governed by such a Discipline where as I said out of St. Hierome there was Aaron the Priests and the Levites for although this Argument be not necessary yet because the Wisdom of God is not to be parallel'd in Polity so well as Nature it should be reasonable for men to think that where is no Ground for a Difference in this second Church under the New Testament from that former under the Old there God should not vary in the Discipline and I think no man can shew me a reason for such a Difference either that men are more united or that the Church doth require a lesse Union now than then which two as they are the heads from which we enforce Episcopacy in that matter of Government so they must be the heads from which any strong Argument of force must be deduced to shew the difference This being so it is fit for us to Conceive without strong reason against it that there is such a Conformity especially if to this be added the great uniformity and convenience that the Ancient Levitical Law had to our Ecclesiastical which might abundantly be shewed in other things without some Language expressing a difference in a dubious Case it were â—it we should adhere to Gods former practice But then again our Saviour in his life-time hatching a Church in Embrione He as I have shewed made two distinct Orders Apostles and the Seventy and these both Preaching Orders without there were some main reason to the Contrary we cannot easily subscribe to another Discipline nor surely would have quarrell'd at that but by reason of pride in themselves that they would be all Bishops like the Conspirators against Moses Numbers 16. who being men of Quality in Israel were not Content to be Princes in their Condition but would be Equal to the Supream So these men are not Content with their rank which is high and great in the Church of God unlesse they shall pluck down the highest of all and not be subordinate but supream in their Prelatical Principalities or else which is a spice of the same vice there is amongst them an Abhorring of Obedience which indeed is the Mother and Ground of all Virtue and although they would have all their Subjects obey them in an Insolent manner yet they would obey none other themselves and for a Countenance to this pridâ— and stubbornenesse study Scripture and wrest it to their purpose which how weak it is for them hath been shewed how strong against them I shall now urge SECT XVI My First Argument from Scripture to prove Episcopacy MY First Argument from Scripture shall be thus framed That Government which the Apostles did settle in their Government of Churches that is Apostolical But the Apostles did settle such an Episcopacy as I require Ergo such an Episcopacy is Apostolical My Major â— conceive not to be denyed for as I have shewed we ought not to seek for expresse Terms to shew that they made a Law in such peremptory Words That this or this we enact perpetually for the Government of all Churches this or the like is not to be found any where nor doth any Government pretend to it There is no Book unquestionable of their Canons extant but only Registers of their Acts and certain Epistles which set down what they did do and from that Assure us what we should do The first place I shall insist on will be that I formerly touched Tit. 1. 5. For this Cause left I thee in Creet that thou shouldest set in Order the Things that are wanting and Ordain Elders in evâ—ry City as I have appointed thee This Text I have handled before and have shewed that in more expâ—esse Terms St. Paul could not Authorize one man to that Office which we pretend to than he did here I have spoken likewisâ— of that Shift they have for it to say he was an Evangelist and by that Authority did Act these things to which I think may be irresistably objected that it can no where be shewed that he was an Evangelist and 2dly it can no wherâ— be shewed that an Evangelist had such an Autâ—ority belonging to his Offâ—ce and therefore that must needs be but a weak refuge to fly unto A Second Shift of some is That this Commission was giâ—â— to Titus but in Common with others as one of the Presbyters conjunctim not divisim joyned with them not severed 〈◊〉 them but by such Tricks men may cast off all Scripture but 〈◊〉 I would have them shew me where ever there was such a Commission given to a Presbytery which they can never do Secondly Let them Consider it would be as safe nay much safer for me to say that power given to the Presbytery must be by the Sole virtue of Association with the Supreame as they can when I shew a Commission given to one Man say it is meant of him in the Company of others and the more agreeing to sense because when this Commission is granted it implyes at the least that he must be of the Quorum which to none others could be enforced And again when we read such a Precept given to any man it must be understood that he must have power to execute that Authority which certainly if he could only Act in Commission with others he could not because suppose St. Paul Chargeth him to Ordain Elders in every City such and so qualified he might answer in many Cases the others will not joyn Suppose he should stop the mouths of Deceivers It is likely the great deceivers would be amongst the Presbytery themselves he can do nothing without their Consent which is nothing of himself not he but they therefore must have the Charge given them for he is not by these men capable of performing it and as for their Charge it
than where they have some manner of residence hath therefore restrained the execution of it in other places than where they have that residence both to avoid Confusion which otherwise must necessarily arise out of the Intermedling in other mens precincts and likewise because the main scope of their endeavours may be applyed to that place in a near Obligation every one being for the most part worthy of the Incumbents utmost labour And this they did by the Apostles own example who appointed Timothy Titus Epaphroditus their several Diocesse yet we must further Conceiâ—e that this Alotment of the Church is not such as doth lay any restraint upon the power given by the Spiris but directs it only for although a Particular man may offend by intruding into another mans Pastoral precincts and Officiating there yet factum valet so that if a Bishop give Orders in another mans Diocesse as was the famous Case of Epiphanius Bishop of Cyprus in St. Chrysostoms Diccesse at Constantinople or a Presbyter Administer the Communion in anothers Parish which is the common practice these things although done without leave from the peculiar Pastor are valid to the receivers although punishable in the Actors Yea yet once again although a man be placed in a Pastoral Charge and shall either find upon his own certain experience or the Judgement of his Superiours that he can advance the Glory of God or improve his own Commission by removing to another place either for a time as Timothy and Titus and the rest beneficed in particular places were yet upon urgencies of the publick good called aside from the more particular Charge to the more publick where they were employed or else if their whole residence may more advance the general Good of the whole Flock over which they are made Overseers they ought to remove totally to that great Occasion So when a man of great Abilities shall be beneficed in a private Corner where perhaps lesse Abilities would as well if not better agree it becomes him to be removed to a place better befitting his Qualifications or a man indowed with the strength of rational Divinity such a man to be sent to the propagating the Gospel in the Indies among the Heathen and he ought to endeavour to put himself into such an employment because he is a Pastor of the whole flock for which Christ dyed So that now I think it appears manifestly that an Apostle and another Pastor differ not in this that one was an Universal Pastor and the other a Particular but contrarywise they are both habitually or Potentià Pastors of the whole Word actually pastorizing in some particular only This caused all those admonitions from one Bishop to another of which the Fathers are full This made sometimes Contentions because it was the Duty of every man that was a Pastor to take care of the whole flock he is Pastor over and therefore to endeavour their good So that here you see his Argument fully answered by a flat denial of his Minor he is not a Pastor without a Flock nor an Officer sine Titulo he hath Title to the whole Catholick Church he is Pastor at large He hath a long Dispute with Mr. Rutherford about Preaching and Administring the Communion out of his own Congregation and the Communication of Sister Churches which touch me not yet I will give the Reader a Note that whereas before he made Preaching almost the whole Act of a Presbyter he now seemes to make it no proper duty of a Pastor pag. 63 64. But I let these things passe as not pertinent and apply my self to his fifth and last Argument pag. 67. which is SECT XV. His Fifth Argument answered IF Ordination gives Essentials to a Pastor before Election then by that alone he hath Pastoral power Against which he disputes thus He that hath Compleat power of an Office and stands an Officer without Exception he cannot be hindred Justly from doing all Acts of that Office but this is the Condition of a Pastor Ordained without the Election of the people he may according to rule be justly hindred from Executing any Act of a Pastor I could quarrel were I pinched with this Argument with almost every word as first the changing of the Terms of that Proposition he was to prove In the Proposition he was to prove the Terms were give the Essentials of a Pastor now they are a Compleat power and an Officer without Exception Many things are essentially right which lack Completion and are not without Exception Then again where it was in his first Proposition A Pastor before Election here is added in his second Election of the people But I insist upon this upon which the Ground of his Argument is founded That an Ordained Officer may according to rule be hindred from executing any part of his Office as he enforceth Suppose all Congregations full To which I answer Ordination doth not give the Act but the Jus or right to execute and a man may have the Essentials when these do not work Mark Mr. Hooker was a Pastor when asleep and had the Essentials of it but not the Operation Essentials do work their proper work omnibus positis ad agendum requisitis The fire it self although it have the Essentials of sire cannot burn things too remote or such Things which are not combustible the reason is that those things which are requisite to burning as fit distance disposure of the matter are not rightly disposed I may say the same of the Eye Place the Object too near too far in the dark it cannot see the requisites to sight are not sittingly disposed although the Eye have all the Essentials belonging to sight So I may â—ay of a man Ordained If there be not a place not any piece of the flock of Christ which hath need of him or having need he knoweth not of their need or knowing their need cannot by distance or some such moral Impediment come to supply then need the Circumstances required to his Operations are so taken away that he cannot do the Duties in Act which he hath power to do St. Paul himself could not officiate any where where others of Authority were labouring yet he had Authority and was ordained by God but saith he if all places are full he may according to rule be hindred from executing any part of Pastoral Office I would fain know by what rule the Apostles were Authorized by Christ to preach to all Nations and so are all Pastors by Ordination they have Authority over the world but are restrained by Ecclesiastical Law founded upon the Law of Nature which forbids any thing to go into a full place which with another Law saith Deus Natura nihil faciunt frustra And again non sunt multiplicandae Entia sine necessitate so that when one looks to this part then the other should not intermeddle without the first give way to him yet he hath the power and can do the work of
such yet men are as partial to their Opinions as their Children and will expound every Thing that comes in their way to the Advantage of them yea it will seem so to them and therefore even these Propositions are not to be swallowed without Examination But yet suppose this were granted that one Relate as he phrases it did give the Essentials to another would this prove That the Election of the people by the rule of Christ did it Certainly no for the Pastor and people are the two relates not the Pastor and Election of the people People and the Election of the people are two Things This latter an Act of the former He sayes Mr Rutherford seems to be much moved with this Argument I have not seen his books but by that I have heard of him it would be strange he should but I leave them together and see what he urgeth for Confirmation of this Argument which may concern my businesse Pag. 68. He saith the Proposition is supported by the Fundamental Principles of Reason so that he must raze out the received rules of Logick that must reject it High language But why so I ask He answers immediately Relata sunt quorum unum constat mutua alterius Affectione This is non-sense for should I ask if Vnum which of the two he could not answer the reason is because as relates there is the same reason of one as of the other But I think he means utrumque but Consider then what is this to his purpose Suppose they did Consist in a mutual Affection one of another could one properly be said to give the Essentials to the other The Father indeed gives the Essentials to his Son and Father and Son do mutually as Father and Son depend upon a reciprocal Affection as he calls it one upon the other but the Son cannot be said properly to give the Essentials to the Father no not as Father because all he hath he hath from his Father as Suppose again a Master and Servant are relates neither of these give the Essentials one to another But properly that Covenant which engaged them in their mutual Duties that Covenant gave them the Essentials of that relation not one another and therefore this Discourse though he think it very Evident yet begets no Acceptance in me although declared with the name of a fundamental principle That which he deduceth that relata are simul natura is most true but not deduced yea it is against that principle he deduceth it from for that which Constitutes anothers being is prius natura to that which is Constituted but these are simul and therefore cannot give Essentials one to another His Assumption that Pastor and Flock are relates no man saith he that hath sip'd in Logick can deny I grant it Then saith he the Conclusion follows but he sets not down what I am sure his doth not That this Election gives the Essentials to an Officer In the Conclusion he saith Hence again it follows that Ordination which comes after he means Election is not for the Constitution of the Officer but the Approbation of him so Constituted in his Office for relata are unum uni saith the rule there is no Connexion in this neither and for unum uni that must be understood in that particular relation a Father may have many sonnes and so One to Many but there are distinct paternities and the Logicians say that although absolute Accidents Numero tantùm distincta cannot exist in the same Subject at the same Time yet relative may So one flock may have many pastors the Catholick Church a Thousand visible ones invisible only Christ. The Church of Rome would desire no more but that you grant one â—lock must have but one Pastor they will quickly prove the Catholick Church one Flock and then will follow the Pope to be the Universal Pastor for none else pretends to it but indeed they themselves grant many Pastors to the same slock for their Teachers are Pastors and their Lay-Elders have Pastoral Authority of Governing But now punctually after a long Discourse A Paster and Flock are relates there may be many Pastors to one Flock where the Flock is great there must be the Flock of Christ is the Vniversal Church in which he hath placed many Pastors and there is no Christian man who is a Member of Christs Flock wheresoever he is in the World and finds any Pastor but he may receive and require the Duty of a Pastor from him and he ought to give it him Again there is no Pastor wheresoever he is in the world if he find any of his Masters Flock in any place who have need of him but he ought out of duty if he can to supply his lack And thus are the mutual bondâ— and relations betwixt Christs Pastors and his Flock supplyed as soon as he is made a Pastor the Church of Christ is his Flock and which way he can advance the good of it he ought and iâ— bound in Duty to do it His Second Argument answered AND so I passe to his Second Argument which is this It is lawfull for a people to reject a Pastor upon Just Causes if he prove pertinaciously scandalous in his Life or haeretical in his doctrine and put him out of his Office Ergo it is in their power to call him outwardly and to put him into his Office The Consequence is plain from the Staple rule Ejusdem est Instituere he would say I think destruere The Antecedent is as certain by Gods word Beware of Wolves Mat. 7. 15. Beware of false Prophets Phil. â— 2. Now because he begins with his Consequence I will so likewise and that which he so highly commends for a Staple Rule I will examinâ— and from henceforth receive this rule That great words with him are forced to be the Cloaks of least performances I do not believe he read that Staple rule in any Logick Author and am very Confident it is absolutely false in all Sciences In nature it is most evident that water which destroyes fire cannot make it If he answer that in general the power of Nature which by Water doth destroy fire by another hand of power doth make I will apply this to our particular and say that in general men destroy it therefore men give it by the same way as Nature by water destroyes fire and by fire makes it If we look into Policy we shall find that sometimes when Kings have setled power the people have pluckt them down Those whom the people have Instituted Kings have destroyed but perchance he may say that lawfully out of right the same power can destroy that did institute perhaps there may be Legality in some of these Instances but see a Clearer A Tithing man is elected by his parish like as he would have Pastors afterwards he is sworn by the Steward of the Court like his Ordination or perhaps by some Justice of Peace The Parish for his misdemeanours
which no man can deny if understood Actually because no man can have actual faith at all Times nor is it necessary that faith should be habitual in every member for Infants cannot be proved to have it but only Sacramentum fidei which is the first hand which gives an Interest in Christ and thus much these have of whom we dispute The Sentences which he alledgeth out of the Fathers may be answered out of what hath been already delivered His only reason is That because the Church is a multitude united and this union chiefly consists in the profession of the Faith and in the observation of the same lawes and rights no reason will permit that we should have any of the body of the Church which have no Conjunction with that body he means in these things but he handles this Controversie negligently I answer The perfection of the union consists in these things he names such are in the highest and nearest and dearest way in the Church but the absolute union consists in Baptism I have perused many later Jesuites but they are almost all Excerpta out of him scarce changing his words but because in his Answer to one Argument which is objected against him he confesseth in my Judgement what I require I will put down that and so passe on It is Objected 3dly saith he That Hereticks are in the Church because they are Judged by the Church So saith St. Paul 1 Cor. 5. 12. What have I to do to Judge them which are without therefore they are in the Church He answers That although Hereticks are not of the Church yet they ought to be This is poor hitherto for then they ought not to be Judged untill they are of the Church and yet he addes Et proinde ad eam pertinent How do they pertain to it if they are not of it Yes saith he as a stray Sheep belongs to the fold as we use to say this Sheep belongs to this fold This speech pleaseth me That fold hath an Interest in that Sheep and that Sheep in that fold though it have now no Communion with it yet it hath an union and interest in Communion whensoever he shall legally lay Claim to it to be sed with the rest and every way provided for as they are Thus I think all stray Sheep which are mark'd by Christ for his belong to his fold his Church and by his mark in Baptism may claim it and the Church exact a Christian observance from it neither of which can be in another man Thus I apprehend Bellarmines Confession hath assisted me in giving him satisfaction hut because this Question hath been little pryed into by such Writers as have come into my hands I will for far farther Illustrations adde some Propositions which may clear it from some Oppositions which arise out of mine own understanding rather than in the perusing any Adversaries Writing SECT V Some difficulties cleared THe mighty difficulty which troubled my mind all this while I have been discoursing of this union was how it may be said that the same person shall be a member of Christ and yet in the state of Damnation as without doubt many a baptized person is Somewhat like this I read in Cardinal Cajetan who in his Treatise of the Pope and a Council Chap. 22. having been pinched with an Argument against the Popes Supremacy and being the visible head of the visible Church that the Pope may be an Heretick yea an Apostate and so no member much lesse the head of the visible Church He flyes to my Conclusion for refuge I will not meddle with the force of it against the Conclusion he Treats of but only as he handles it in its self That the Pope must be a baptized person and that union of Baptism will retain him in his Membership Then saith he if we will cast the eyes of our minds a little higher we shall see that he who hath only the Character of faith which is a baptized man is at the same instant bâ—â—h faithfull and unfaithfull a Member of Christ and his Church and extra membra Christi without the Members of Christ and his Church in diverse respects and therefore diverse and contrary things are affirmed of such a man by the Doctors In a word he saith That such a Man as much as is in his own power is out of the Church but Christ by his power keeps him in This is his Sence and he goes further That he who hath this Character is a Member though in Hell But his Expressions and Explications of this Conclusion are not so full as I could have desired he saith he is aliqualiter membrum after a sort a Member but sets not down clearly after what sort Bannes in his large Notes upon 2. 2dae Quest. 1. Art 10. saith that in the Constitution of the visible Church there are two Things Considerable one visible and the other invisible one Internal and the other External In respect of what is visible a baptized man is a member of the Church but if he be an Apostate or an Heretick he is not a Member internally This is somewhat he saith but it is not eâ—ough for if there be no internall adhesion it will be rather a shew and outward appearance of a thing than a reality of it Other expressions made by Jacohus Granado or such later Writers as I have seen scarce come up so far Secundum quid saith he they are Members and such phrases which make a man to know no more than if they had said nothing I shall therefore express my self in this manner First If you take the proportion of this body called the Church from that communion it hath with a naturall body as St. Paul seems to do we shall then find a baptized man grafted into the stock and whilest he clings to it by faith and brings forth fruit by charity he is a lively member of this body as those branches in all bodies are which bring forth their fruit in due season the best branch bringeth not forth fruit in all seasons not in winter and yet is a lively branch if it bring forth its fruit in its proper time and so more or less excellent in its severall kinds as it enlargeth its self in bringing forth fruit but if it bring not forth fruit when the season for fruit requires it then it is not a lively branch but yet living which we may know because many such a branch hath afterwards brought forth fruit again by the discipline of pruning and husbandry The same may be said of the parts of a mans body and yet to express this fuller it is likely that this branch is then in the state of mortality and would perish were it not repaired by husbandry Here you perceive a baptized man ingrafted into Christs body you see him bringing forth fruit and lively you see him not lively but living and whilest he yet lives in the state of death and destruction unless he
Jesus seeing their faith said to the sick of the palsie Sâ—n thy sins be forgiven thee Observe they were divers persons whose fâ—ith he saw and but one to whom he spake and because some avoid it and say that within this word their is involved his who was sick his faith as well as theirs who carried him although this will appear a forced explication to them who consider the Text yet let it be granted I hope they will noâ— say his faith alone then theirs co-operated with him in the work then they could operate themselves for no second causes do cooperate one with another but when each hath the power then they had force of themselves towards the procuring of this blessing Consider then the blessing Son thy sins are forgiven thee what this was appears by the Dispute which followed the Scribes said He spake blasphemy none can forgive sins but God and our Saviour proved immediately that he was God in the 21. verse by saying to the sick of the palsie arise take up thy bed and walk and did the miracle so that it appears evidently first that faith precedes to induce Baptism before men can come to God that the coming of Infants is by others feet that the faith pre-required in Children is other mens faith for as it is with all supernatuâ—all works there is a passive faith in the object necessary to make it capable of that miracle without which miracles in the course of Gods ordinary doing them are not wrought and with which all things are possible both for our selves or those which belong to us and this faith in a Father is powerfull for his Son in a Master for his Servant So is it in Bâ—ptism faith is necessary to this great work of Adoption but faith of others in Children is only necessary and this is excellently exprest in the practice of the Civil Law which whether it received its rise from this or Circumcision or that the same principles which direct one are evident in the other I dispute not but it is some comfort even in Religion to see it illustrated by the wayes of prudent nature and the universall Axiomes of it This then is so illustrated although Adoption requrie the consent of both parties yet personally that is only done in such as are sui juris grown to such years as they are masters of themselvs and their own actions but such as are of such weak years as they are governed and under parents they can be and are adopted by their parents to another an adopting Father and their Covenants for the behalf and in the name of the Child both oblige the Child to filiall duties towards his new Father and likewise the Father to a fatherly care of the Son both in life by protecting him and in death by estating him in his Inheritance Thus did God with the Children of the Jewes at Circumcision that act by the Parents made the Child a debtor to that law and God to his Covenant of mercy to him So here is the hand of God accepting this act of Parents for their Children in Nature in the Law and in all footsteps of Gods Government the same discipline is observed I will conclude somewhat like that passage in Petrus Claniacensis a man famous for learning and piety as any of that Age in the Treatise of his against the Petro-brusians whose Opinions agreed in the point with our Anabaptists You see multitudes of men in Scripture had a faith prevalent for others and those but single persons or a few men that carried the Paralytick shall not the faith of the world of the whole Church be effectuall to these Infants A Father begs for his Son a Master for his Servant shall not Christian Parents yea the Christian Church be heard in prayer for these Infants God hath Covenanted Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name he will give it you John 16. 22. Ask say Divines constantly faithfully for good things according to Gods will non ponenti Obicem either for himself or others who do not stop by self-wickedness the power of prayers can then the constant prayers of the Church with that unshaken faith of hers be denyed its efficacy in a thing so pleasing to God to such persons who actually can put no hinderance to the power and efficacy of that prayer These things in Christian men canot be denyed and therefore in brief to the Argument Faith in all introduceth this Covenant in Baptism and moves the receiver to be adopted to God and therefore observe that the Apostle as he verse 26. Ye are all the Children of God by faith so in the 27th verse he brings a reason For as many as are baptized into Christ have put on Christ. The reason why they are the Children of God by faith is because that such as have this faith are moved to be baptized and they put on Christ. The faith of him who is master of his own actions makes him be baptized the faith of him who is master of his Childs actions causeth him to bring his Child to this Adoption and yet methinks it hath not only power concerning this blessing before the act of Adoption to bring men to it but even in it to accept it for although there were all the affection in the world to it before yet if faith fail in the Act that man would hold from accepting such a Covenant whereby he had no confidence to be blessed but this faith doth only make him Covenant but it self is not the Covenant Thus I suppose I have spoken abundantly to Mr. Hookers second Argument and to such Objections which I have thought upon as most opposing this Doctrine I have delivered and although I could frame many more of this nature yet what is said to these will serve the turn for them likewise and therefore I let them pass SECT X. Mr. Hookers third Argument answered THomas Hookers third Argument page 54. is thus framed This Tenent doth necessarily evidence the Church of Rome to be a true Church which is thus gathered Where all the members are true members there the Church is a true Church But all the members in all the Congregations of Rome are true members Ergo. This Minor he proves because they are baptized I would first know what is the harm if we allow the Church of Rome to be a true Church true in the essentials of a Church though sick and full of corrupt Doctrines I have shewed and it is most true that many men be in a Church yea in the Catholick Church and not be saved and perhaps there may be an whole Church such as Mr. Hooker would have and scarce a man of them saved without the same means as many in the Church of Rome are saved by And therefore by the way I adde that the Church of Rome is not only a Church but a saving Church such as I doubt not but multitudes are saved in for they have not only a Doctrine
beings as Seals transient it may be further doubted how Seals can be forms This I urge though not a Book-Objection as indeed I do not find the Question disputed in the School under this Notion but only which started it self in my thoughts whilest I was writing and indeed may do so with others for I am unwilling to let any thing pass which may disturb a Readers assenting and therefore in Answer to this Objection do say that although the Seal be gone yet its image its likeness when it is gone remains in the Wax which is as valid to all its intentions as it self and is the Seal effective in its morall existence to all those morall effects which it produceth so it is in Baptism there is that the School calls the Character which remains after the act of Baptism is gone and is powerfull to all its effects I did avoid to speak of this intricate business hoping I might have escaped it but since I cannot do thus undertake it now and define it thus CHAP. XIII What the Character left in Baptism is and this Character defined THe Character or Relict of Baptism by which a Christian is constituted a member of the Catholick Church is a spiritual power by which the baptized man is interessed with right both to receive and do what belongs to a member of Christs Church First It is a power Powers are either active or passive active to do as fire to burn passive to suffer or receive as wood hath a passive power to receive the ignifying nature of fire which gold hath not This relict of Baptism doth both these both enable a man to demand and receive Confirmation to joyn with the Christian Congregation in devoâ—ions and prayers to demand and receive absolution the Communion with all other things which a Christian man doth in his severall duties and occasions But we must here distinguish betwixt natural powers and moral the first are faculties in man by which he is enabled by that internall principle to act what the power directs him to and no man obtains any such but by a reall change and alteration in himself to some absolute quality as a power to walk to speak or the like that he had not before But in moral powers as the right to an Estate or to an Office these may come to a man without any such alteration As the father dyes the son is immediately invested with the power of his fathers Estate and yet the son is the same in all absolute things hath no such change in himself Again a man is chose a Generall a King he hâ—â—h in himself no such change no such alteration but is the same he was before in all absolute things In moral powers we are not to expect an alteration in the party who receives them to any absolute reality so that although in a baptized person who receives these mighty powers we can discover no alteration yet these powers are in him by the force of this moral form which enables him to act or receive such or such things Next let us consider that it is a spiritual power that Attribute is given it in regard of its object and end because the power aims at spirituall blessings and is conversant about spirituall means to obtain this end for as it is called morall because it considers not naturall actions but such as concern a mans manners his doing well or ill in relation to God and that Christian Community in which he lives so it is spirituall in respect of the spirituall conversation it hath with God and those men of whose society it is And now we seeing the genus in this definition let us examine the difference a power by which he is interessed with right here is apparent that which was implyed before that it is not a naturall but a morall power naturall powers enable a man to do as the power to move to speak but the morall power gives him not ability but authority and right to move or speak thus or now he hath interest and right to do it to receive and do this power is both active and passive as before what belongs to a member of Christs Church This gives him interest in no civill right nor Office in the Church but only a right as a member that is such a right as by Christs Laws appertain to him If a sinner in such a degree he is shut out of the Communion if a penitent he may require absolution and by his being baptized he is made capable of these which otherwise before and without Baptism he was not SECT II In what Predicament this Character is THus this Definition being explained there is a great Question what manner of thing in what Predicament this relict power is For my part without disparagement of my great Master in Philosophy Aristotle I think that these spiritual theological powers need not be tugged into any of his Predicaments nor was he to be blamed as insufficient in his number because he being acquainted only with naturall things found out names for them in his Ten but being ignorant of spirituall must of necessity leave them â—nd such as studied them to shift for their room elsewhere and we might therefore with more ease invent another for them than be forced with unjust violence to hale them to these which were only provided for naturall things But yet because those old names would better please a Reader I will keep my self to them And first I opine that this relict is of a relative nature in its proper being for it is that interest which a man hath as before in Christ as his head and the rest of the Church as his fellow-members which is a relation for pars totum part and the whole are relates so are head and member in such bodies as have heads and in this consists the nature of this relict and therein are seated all the interests and powers which a baptized man hath Aquinas with that great Army of learned men who follow his colours sight against this Conclusion vehemently with many Arguments seemingly powerfull the nature of which consisting of such matter as is not usuall in English Authors it may chance not be unpleasing to him who reads this to study a little that Christian Philosophy which will be opened in this discourse and I am confident it will by drawing aside such curtains as are interposed give admittance to such light as will illustrate the business in hand to any easie sight and therefore I undertake them The first Argument urged by Cabrera for I will take them where I find them strongest maintained Cabrera in 3. Quest. 63. Art 2. Disp. 1. Sect. 3. Conclus 3. thus argues There is no motion to a bare relation ad relationem per se is his phrase for this he produceth Aristotle 5. Phys. Text. 10. for saith he all change is to an absolute form but there is a motion to this Character as he and the
to act since after his departure to the end of the world It is necessary therefore for us to think that such things as are delivered by them are Divine for although Canons of Councels general or particular are excellent Guides for the establishing Peace and Unity in the Church and so may require obedience from their Subjects yet because they are but men without an annexed infallibility without doubt they may vary in their practice and Discipline and their Dictates being introduced upon occasions may be altered and therefore cannot add essentials to any thing for the essences of things are always certain and necessary This is my Major Now to search what is Apostolical in this business we must examine the Scriptures where first we find our Saviour authorizing his Apostles As my Father sent me so send I you to give power to others We find him using no Ceremony but breâ—thing upon them gave them the Holy Ghost and truly that Breathing was most significative of that blessing he bestowed upon them but from thence we find not the Apostles using that Ceremony for they being enabled with this plenarty of power to give others that blessing they only gave it and for a sign that they did establish it laid their hands upon them so that as we conceive these two places 1 Tim. 1. 6. by the laying on of my hands or the 1 Tim. 4. 14. with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery to be Ordination so likewise we shall find this Ceremony taken for the whole 〈◊〉 or Ordâ—nation Tim. 5. 22. Lay hands suddenly on no man Now then without doubt if any outward Act must be essential to this Heavenly work this only being Apostolical must be esteemed most essential and there I think it most proper for men to conceive that this is the only Ceremony essentially necessary if any be to the performance of that duty for the power originally being given to the Apostles nakedly and absolutely without any qualification or mode in what manner they should use it to others we are to receive the manner at their acting it for our best Rule and guidance which is only in Scripture delivered to be imposition of Hands Thus much for that which the Doctors of the Church of Rome called the material part in the essence of Consecration and we may truly term the outward sign Let us now examine that which they call the form and we may term the words which express it the words which our Saviour used John 20. 22. are Receive ye the Holy Ghost these words expresly are used in the Roman Consecration and Ordination but in the Graecian the words are varied but the sence reserved not giving this blessing in the Imperative-mood which is much stood upon by many Schoolmen and Casuists but in a more humble stile The Grace of God Creates or Promotes thee to this Dignity of a Bishop or Priest or Deacon where we find the truth more largly expounded though materially the same for certainly the Grace of God is that which impowers men with these authorities are given and men are only Instrumental but that they are and therefore there is added how this is given by the suffrage of the Bishops which denotes them instrumental for the African Church you may discern in the Canon of Carthage before cited that the Consecration is expressed in a Language of such extent as may be applied to them both which is uno fundente benedictionem one of them pouring out the benediction or blessing but implying strongly the sence such as is proper for this work to Confirm which all the present Bishops lay on their hands and this universally so consented unto as agreeing to the Holy Scripture that although in the heat of disputation I find men sometimes over peremptorily asserting their own opinions yet I do not find that either Church did refuse such as were Consecrated in either although in wayes and modes differing from their own so that I may justly say that the whole Catholick Church Concenters in this Conclusion that when words importing the blessing are Delivered by a Consecrating Bishop and those words are sealed by imposition of Hands then these holy Orders are effectually given I shall then need to do little more in this Point than to answer such objections which are commonly made against it or I can apprehend proper to be opposed to it SECT II. The first Objection against the Truth answered THe first is common in the School made against the pontiâ—ical in this point because that in all that part of the Pontiâ—ical it is said only Receive ye the Holy Ghost and that Language is the same in the Ordination of Priests as likewise the Imposition of Hands so that by this no man can know what Order is given in the Church of Rome it is answered that the design which they are about will shew it whether to one or to the other Order and again the manner of the Imposition of Hands in the Consecration of a Bishop divers Bishops Impose Hands in the Ordination of a Priest one Bishop only with some Presbyters in the Ordination of a Deacon the Bishop alone but in our Church that scruple is clearly taken away by a great Prudence where at the Ordination of a Priest the Consecrating words are Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Priest and at the Consecration of a Bishop the words are Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Bishop in the Church of God where wee see that universal cause of all Spiritual blessings I mean the Holy Ghost applied to that particular duty in which at that time he works and therefore the Consecration is free from that Exception SECT III. Another Objection drawn from the Councel of Carthage answered ANother Ojection may be that the Councel of Carthage before cited mentions the laying on the Book by two Bishops upon the head and shoulders of the Bishop to be Consecrated and therefore that is necessary I answer that I much reverence that Councel in which was St. Augustine and divers other Bâ—shops famous for learning and piety in their Generations but yet as I have said before this was never practiced any remarkable time as sundry Doctors in the Church of Rome observe and again it is impossible to be essential because not Apostolical and that because the Holy Bible and that highest part of it the New Testament was not writ when Bishops and Priests were Ordained it is therefore worth our marking that there is a difference in the decrees of Councels concerning Doctrine and Discipline or Ceremonies of the Church in a point of Doctrine they shew in what sence they understand such and such a Conclusion but in the other they set down what is to be practiced to preserve Orders and decency in those Churches where they have to do and indeed there can be no more required of obedience than in quiet and setled times in which