commending a man to Gods grace or the invocation of his blessing upon him for his work which is the most signal end of this Rite Act. 14 then I and our Protestant Divines do account of it viz. Such a Person presents himself to the Ordainers they examine him and what is it they are to search and to find Why if they consider what it is it is this whether the man hath the gift whereupon they may conclude that he is commissioned according to Christs Institution and also hath sincere ends of being faithfull in his place if they find this here is the call of God and what is there remaining possible for them to do besides what is done but to confirm it before men that they may receive him So that this Rite in its essence to use those Divines word is but the solemn Approbation Declaration or Confirmation of our call by God and the immediate effect of it is the value repute outward Authority Account or Esteem with men as Ministers of his to all ends and purposes in the Church and place where a man shall be so appointed And this is that thing which orders does really and effectually give which is not a matter neither of small moment but of great consequence even so much as the free passage of the Gospel comes to in the Church where we are which must therefore and will keep up the head of Orders while the World lasts Now Sirs The immediate effect of an action must be the end of the Agent and forasmuch as in this Change of times and Government which God hath brought upon us this end and effect doth fail us in our first Orders we see how there arises upon a man even from Providence it self without any other arguing the necessity the duty supposing him at first and still fit and reason of his Re-ordination And this I take it is the marrow of what I have in my first sheets which is not yet so much as tasted or touched by my Opposer neither in his Book where he disputes upon this question nor in his Appendix which he hath against mee in the way of animadversion I shall take both now into consideration I will speak that I may be refreshed I will open my lips and answer SECTION II. THere are two things in generall any one may see upon which the stresse of what this Adversary hath doth lye The one is a supposition which hath prepossessed the thoughts of most concerning the nature or end of Ordination The other is the form the Bishop uses supposed agreeable hereunto and inconsistent to our case To begin with the first which hath cost me some words already and requires many more Ordination let us know may be taken more comprehensively as it comprizes election foregoing so it is Acts 14.23 Tit. 1.5 where those two words in the Greek text I count equivalent and well rendred in the old translation VVhen they had ordained them Elders by election Or else it is taken strictly and properly for the Rite it self distinguisht from Election So is it Act. 6.6 Act. 13 3. 1 Tim. 4.14 2 Tim. 1.6 which places I think are all we have expresse upon this matter In the last sense it concernes my discourse and it is the solemn invocation of Gods grace or blessing upon a person in the work of the Ministery by the way of Approbation Declaration or Confirmation of our Vocation as I have been discoursing before and in my first papers I know it stands the Church of Rome upon to speak higher then thus Ordo est sacrum quoddam quo spiritualis potestas traditur ordinato officium sayes the Master of their Schools Lib. 4. Dist 24. and 't is no wonder if his Scholars that follow turn this into Sacramentum quo character indelebilis in anima imprimitur I see also some of the eminent Sons of our own Church for her forme sake derived from thence cannot leave the like conceptions But I suppose if our forreign Protestant Divines be generally lookt over we shall find that definition Ordinatio est vocationis confirmatio most current which Dr. Baldwin hath taken up as common with them in his Cases When Calvin and our Divines that follow him speak of the Sacraments as Symbolls of grace they understand it not as signs conferring grace but as signs of grace conferred Rom 4.11 and define them the confirmations of our grace Now what they take from the Sacraments they are not like to give to Orders Ordo sayes Bullinger in his Decads est Symbolum delegati muneris The Symboll of Gods grace sayes Calvin in his Comments and Institutes There must be this grace or gift then this munus delegatum to wit a deo before or the Rite cannot according to their Doctrine be the Symboll of it and this is so for a man is tryed and the Ministerial grace found in him and then does the Church use this Rite as a sign token symboll by way of testimony or ratification of it Vocatio debet habere publicum ecclesiae testimonium ritus ordinationis nibil aliud est quam talis publica testificatio sayes Chemnitius De Eccles Electioni saepe addi solet publica quaedam per preces manuum impositionem inauguratio velut in ipsius muneris administrationem missio quae confirmatio dici solet Arminius Disp priv thes 59. Ordinandi potestas seu in ministerio confirmandi The Leyden Divines Praesentatio confirmatio Musculus Ministrorum approbatio Erasmus Sarcerius Consecratio in muneris possessionem immissio Wendiline Personae examinatae ad functionem obcundam introductio confirmatio Polanus Syntag. l. 7. c. 10. Wollebius There is one proof which I will note instead of many It is known that the common thoughts of the learned whether ancient or modern upon Acts 13. are that Paul and Barnabas were there ordained to their apostleship so Chrysostom so Dr. Hammond on the place Now Pauls apostleship was certainly given him immediately by Christ Ordination then if this be ordination according to the full stream is not must not cannot be this Collation of the power it self but this testification before the Church whereof we are speaking or a confirmation Melius est sayes that learned Professor of Wittenberg at first mentioned vocare ordinationem solennem ritum quo testificatur de legitima vocatione donisque necessariis In the Harmony of Confessions It is taught that such be chosen who have gifts and are of a Hameless life c. above all that they be proved whether they be such and so afterwards prayers and fastings being made they may be confirmed or approved of the Elders by the laying on of hands The Bohemian Confession So the Helvetian yet more full but I shall have occasion to cite that more to my need somewhere hereafter Manus impositiones verba sunt mystica quibus confirmatur ad opus Electus sayes St. Ambrose upon 1 Tim 4. and thus is it
called Oratio benedictio among the antients If I were near some good Library I might perhaps turn over a score of Common places and Compends of Protestant Divinity to prove this further but I doe see half a dozen more before my eyes and brought to my hands without labour Hunnius Amesius Crocius Junius Tarnovius Voetius Lutherans and Calvinists who express Ordination accordingly Declaratio solennis Constitutionis testificatio missio solennis in possessionem manifestatio promulgatio coram Ecclesiae as Dr. Seaman hath them in his book of Ordination and tells us They are to be understood of the rite of Ordination to wit as I intend it distinguisht from election and in that sense may be admitted and so is it rightly compared he acknowledges by our Protestants to Coronation p. 16. Now then as there may be reason of State sometimes for a double inauguration of the Magistrate So may there be if I may so speak reason of Church for re-ordination of the Minister and so long as both agree in their nature the one may be I suppose a good argument for the other There is a learned but too vehement adversary I see upon this subject that does mention Olivers double investiture before a Lord Mayor and before a parliament as Protector but he might have made mention of other examples that would have relished better Our English of old did feel of what advantage it was against them to the affairs of France that Charles the 7th was crowned more then once Yet will not I rest here for we have sacred instances in Scripture even of the most famous of all the Kings of the Jewes who were annointed from the Lord by the hand of Prophets and Priests and yet inaugurated again after before the face of all Israel And if what the forequoted judicious Doctor intimates to us pag. 15. bee good that annointing to Kings amongst the Jewes was in some sense essential to their calling this one comparison alone I judge must needs strike a great stroak to the determining this matter It is true that the Papists and Schoolmen and some Antients who make Orders to be a Sacrament and a means of conferring the Holy Ghost may look on it as injurious to the Rite it self as doth appear by a sentence of Austin and Cyprian this Author quotes to repeat the same but our Protestants and especially the more learned Rabbies of them who tell us that this imposition of Hands was doubtlesse taken up from the custome of the Jews some add in their Synagogues in ordaining their Elders and not from the sacred mouth and command of Christ as Baptisme was are not and need not be so strait laced in this matter It is true also that some of our own grave Divines are willing to put as high an honour as they can on this Ordinance Mr. Hocker who strives to do so Ec. Pol. p. 410 411 412 413. hath these words What Angel in Heaven could have said to man as our Lord did to Peter Feed my sheep Preach Baptize Do this whosoever sins you retain are retained O wretched blindnesse if we admire not so great power more if we consider it aright and notwithstanding imagine any but God can bestow it The learned Grotius De Imp. Sum. Pot. circa sac c. 10. will have these two things accurately distinguished Ipsa facultas or jus praedicandi Sacramenta et claves administrandi and applicatio hujus facultatis ad certam personam the one he attributes wholly to Christ the other onely he allowes to Ordination The eminent Voetius De desp caus Pap. lib. 2. sect 2. c. 20. is proving that solemnizatio seu consecratio seu ordinatio seu investitura 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocant patres groeci illa externa quam nos confirmationem dicimus does not tribuere ministerium or is not ejus fundamentum I note the words in the expression as well as the position of greater concernment to us Honest Mr. Perkins upon Gal. 1.1 does speak here as truly fully and well methinks to my mind as any mortall man can I gather from hence saies he that the right to call belongs to God the Father thrusts forth Labourers into his Vineyard the Son gives Pastors and Teachers the Holy Ghost makes Overseers It may be objected that the Church hath Authority to call and ordain Ministers I answer that the Churches Authority is no more but a Ministery or service whereby it doth testify declare and approve whom God hath called Whose doctrine that is that Orders do Imprint a Character those that read the Councill of Treat may know That some of the eminent Papists do understand by this ind lible Character nothing but spiâ—itualis potestas those that reade Bellarmine and Lombards definition before may know unto what parties then consequently these two opinions on one side that Ordination does give the Spiritual power and on the other that it is the Confirmation of our Call do appertain may be known without a Monitor also There is five Disputations about Church Government of Mr. Baxters the second whereof as soon as the Book came to my hand did put me methinks out of countenance to see when I had been beating long about something with what fullnesse and perspicuity hâ— hath gone before me Let me set down a few passages The Ordainers p. 146. do not give the power as from themselves to others nor doth it passe through their hands It is the standing act of Christ in his Law that giveth the power immediately The ordinary judgement I think of Divines is that the Ministerial Authority is from Christ but mediately But this acute and known Divine sayes immediâ—tely He explains it p. 147. As in the making of Bayliffs for our Corporations either the people or the Burgesses have the power of choosing and the Steward or Recorder of swearing him and performing the Ceremonies and yet none of these conferre the power which he receives from the Prince alone by the Charter of the Cities or Towns as his Instrument So is it in the Ordaining of Ministers The People may choose and the Pastors may invest but it is God only by the Gospell Charter that conferrs the power from himself You will say though we have a Charter a man is not a Magistrate till chosen nor compleated till sworn therefore it is mediately I answer true it is mediately or through the means of the people and Steward doing that which is their part which is only designing the person but not mediately through them as deriving the power which they have not themselves that is if you will it is through them putting the condition according to the Charter for the Charter requires this that a man be chosen and sworn but the condition being put the power flowes immediately from the charter itself Why so here The power is immediately sayes he p. 234. from Christ and men do but open the door or determine of the person that shall from Christ
the being of the Ministry but that Orders are not of absolute necessity necessitate medii ad esse ministerii it is proved by that author cap. 3. beyond answer as by Voâ—tius and others The truth is there is no Protestant Divine I know but grant in Ecclesiâ constituendâ or in a case of necessity a man may be a Minister without Orders and if there were but one instance in the world where a mans ministry is valid unordained the power is proved thereby to be immediately from Christ and the esse ministerii not to depend upon ordination I shall content my self with one instance and that is of Barnabas of whom we read in Acts 11.19 that he was sent forth by the Church of Jerusalem and then is ordained after with Paul at Antioch Acts 13 2. Now I demand was Barnabas ordained before or no If he was not then is not the Ministerial power given by nor the being of the Ministry depend upon Ordination If he was then have we here plain text and example for Re-ordination 7. To understand this clearly and more fully though before touched The Ministerial power must be considered as I have intimated Coram Deo or Coram Hominibus when a man hath Gods gifts and a heart to devote them to the use of the Church it is Christs will he should be his Minister and as his will makes it his duty it must give him right and power now when the man hath this it is his will moreover that these gifts be approved and power declared by the Church that he may be received as his Minister or Embassador by men and those particularly unto whom he is sent This is done by this Solemnity this is one end and proper nature of it and so the authority he had before Coram Deo is made current Coram Ecclesia and he reputed and passed streight by all amongst the Order as we call it of the Clergy Understand me I pray here The authority of the Ministry Coram Deo and Coram Hominibus I count not two authorities but the same one Spiritual authority which being derived to a man from the standing act of Christs will in his institution immediately upon his inward call in the Court of Heaven and his own Conscience does not yet passe in the Court of the Church till this call be approved and confirmed by her Pastors which she requires for Orders sake and calls Ordination And here now is a firm and true foundation laid against that Objection which is apt to rise upon us that if the Ministerial power flows immediately from Christs charter and call then may any man pretend hereunto and take upon him to be a Minister without Orders which were to open the door to Fanaticism and Confusion But God forbid we should not be able to put a bar upon such which we can clearly maintain It is this to wit that whatsoever a mans call is in the sight of God the Church is to take no cognizance of it untill by some of her chief appointed Pastors to that purpose it be approved testified and declared by this Solemnity If a man hath indeed abilities and a heart for Christs service then iâ— he bound to submit them to tryal and get them allowed if he does not he sins and the Church is to take no notice of him till then 1 Tim. 5.22 1 Tim. 3.10 so that you may see how the actual exercise of a mans Ministry does depend even altogether hereupon though the power does not and that Text made good How can they preach except they be sent in this sense of the words they are ordinary used whether truly or no I here say not Let a David be excommunicate for Adultery he shall be held Coram Ecclesia out of the Church as well as an Ahaz let a man be truly called while his calling is not approved by the Church which is by Orders we shall not account him a Minister any more then he that is not called and if a man be not called yet if he be ordained his Ministrations are not to be doubted of as valid to the Church while he is to repent of his bad Conscience before God To give more life to this As what hath been said may appear from its own light so will it appear more fully from the case of necessity wherein the validity of the Ministry without Orders is agreed to by all If the Ministerial power did not come to a man Coram Deo so that he is a Minister in Gods sight before Orders then could not necessity dispence with them because necessity falls not upon God There is no impossible with him But when the authority orders give is only this authority Coram Hominibus that is the reception or acceptation thereof with men the value or esteem of us as Ministers at the Churches bar in their sight or account what we are in Gods before let a man plead impossibility whether natural as suppose him among the Indies that he cannot be ordained or moral suppose him among the papists that he cannot without sâ—nne against his conscience this plea Nemo tenetur ad impossibile is good at mans barr for upon man necessity does come and he is to be dispensed with and his ministry therefore to passe which else in Ecclesia rectè constitutâ were to be quite refused for orders sake I cannot omit here one simile to the same point which is laid down strongly by Grotius De Imp. p. 270. Potestas maritalis est a Deo applicatio ejus potestatis ad certam personam ex consensu vonit quo tamen ipsum Jus non datur Nam si ex consensu daretur posset consensu etiam dissolvi matrimonium For my part I cannot but conceive thus A man and a woman consents in their hearts and privately give the same to one another This contract between themselves makes them husband and wife before God and his standing Law conveigheth to the man his power and obligeth both to their duties yet are they not to live together before marriage if it were only for the shame or sake of the world besides that it is their duty hereupon as matter of publick order to seek the matrimonial investiture which is valid according to the Land So is it here when a man having Gods gifts does consent seriously between him and his Soul to dedicate them to his service the same standing law or will of his in his word or institution about this matter does make it his duty and give him power yet is he not to have the exercise of it before this investiture of Orders not only because of the bastardy of the Ministry that will else follow when men shall be received without tryal and approbation Nor only because God commands this as his duty so that he sinnes if it may be had to neglect it but because the Church or People are not to receive or account such as Ministers as they will not a couple
dedicate himself to this service before him as an Outward and solemn by Ordination which whether it be Presbyterial of Episcopal it is all alike as to what the word requires but is not accepted alike in our present Church which stands upon her proper form and mode of Government I will enlarge a little here There is a Fundamental right as Presbyterians say and I believe in every Minister to Ordain others according to that rule which is dignified by a great Pen Ordinis est conferre ordines Nevertheless when the Church came to see it good for the avoiding of faction and keeping peace to give a preheminence to the Bishop above the Presbyter there is no reason but the Presbyter upon consent might as to the actual exercise hereof de jure suo cedere so as to Ordain none without the Bishop which comming more and more into debate it is no wonder if you begin at the second Canon of the Apostles and goe over all the Councils and Fathers and find this still the allowed prerogative of the Bishop to have the power of Ordination according to that which is so well known of Cassander Convenit inter omnes on Apostolorum aetate inter Episcopos Presbyteros nullum discrimen fuisse sed postmodum Schismatis evitandi causâ Episcopum Presbyteris fuisse praepositum cut chirotonia id est ordinandi potestas concessa est Now forasmuch as the authority of Councils or Fathers is received or not received of particular Churches according to their proper concernments and complexion As Presbytery hath served her self of the Scripture to the neglect hereof It cannot be expected but Episcopacy should serve her turn likewise of Antiquity which being added to present power must needs discountenance other Orders and if they come once not to be received and owned the ground is laid for their refreshment or iteration I remember in the Council of Nâ—ce we have this Canon Can. 17. Si quis ausus fuerit aliquem qui ad alterum pertinet ordinare in sua ecclesia cum non habeat consensum Episcopi ipsius à quo recessit Clericus irrita erit hujusmodiordinatio Let me ask here any Divine Presbyterian or Episcopal Suppose a man ordained by another Bishop than his own and without his leave is that man truly ordained or no There are none in our dayes will deny it and yet according to these Canons such a mans Ordination was null and consequently if he would enjoy the use of his Ministry under his Bishop he must be re-ordained Now let any learned man tell me how such Ministers in this case could submit to that Canon in those dayes which no doubt but most did submit to seeing that Council was so authentique in the word and then will our case be also opened and justified to my hands In short it is sufficient for the Church to receive a man as a Minister that is Ordained only by the Presbytery as of old by any Bishop as their own according to Scripture which knows no difference between Bishop and Bishop or Bishop and Presbyter in this case but it would and will not serve according to Ecclesiastical constitution Let us now see what my Opposer sayes here and it is the same only he hath every where If the Presbyterial ordination leave a man not capable of having any thing conferr'd on him but only the free use of his Ministry in the English Church why will he submit to such a form as was purposely instituted to conferr the very Ministry it self why are such prayers put up to God as suppose him to be no Minister This is answered already and we see the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same still There is no form to be conceived such as to confer the Ministry it self unto any or to put up Prayers that a man may be made a Minister as he conjectures and speaks p. 68. I doe therefore produce him the very words of this form to serve my turn Take thou authority to preach the Word and minister the Sacraments where thou shalt be appointed which are so apt as if they wâ—re studied to ordain a man not to the Office but to the Work only of his place Hereunto he candidly gainsays nothing only tells us there are more words used than these to wit Receive the Holy Ghost whose sins yee remit c. unto which words in particular and the form in general I have spoken at large at first What I must say over again to answer him as I go along is Our Ordainers must not be look'd upon according to this Author as Creators of the Ministerial power which is given alone by Jesus Christ but as the signifiers and approvers of his Will and Grant There is indeed one grand Warrant I must say Commission or Charter from Christ in general empowring them who are qualified as his word describes to be his Ministers The Ordainers now are to enquire whether a person have these qualifications that is as it were whether he be in the Commission and then if he be found there what they doe besides is but the declaring this by the solemnity The Commission then or Ministry it self is from our Lord and Orders doe but give the same its free passage in the Church where a man is Now this passage is hindred by the change of the times and therefore the Right Reverend as he speaks is troubled to remove this hindrance and so not to doe only what is already done He is troublâ—d not to make a man again a Minister of Christ but a Canonical Minister if you will of our Church that is to make him passe for such according to their Lawes and Canons when else he cannot pass and therefore is this also done by that form so prescribed the words whereof which stick we are to conceive with all forms of Orders else must be interpreted only as I have said to be declarative not operative of our power by way of investiture possession or solemnization Even as it is in the inauguration of Princes which as I have but now instanced in David above and Solomon before may be valid at first and yet done over again to establish them more formally or legally amongst their people I will take a little liberty here of more words Ordination I count is the confirmation declaration and solemn allowance of a mans Ministry by our chief Pastors and Rulers that may give us the value and recepâ—ion as Ministers to all intents in the Church particularly for the execution of our charge where we are Now there being none according to the form of our English Church and Nation of authority to doe this but the Bishops though our former Orders have been sufficient hitherto and are yet good as to our Right yet growing insufficient through this change or enervate as to the effect the renewal of them according to the present Polity unless there be some mysterious danger in submitting at all hereto does become
expedient to us and obliging and obliging without some other greater reason because expedient to us for the sake of the Gospel To advance this yet farther There be some learned men do give much here to the Magistrate Grotius saies Mr. Baxter commendeth the saying of Musculus that would have no Minister question his Call that being qualified hath the Christian Magistrates Commission I observe Grotius himself does allow Confirmation of a Minister distinctly to the Magistrate and Dr. Seaman hath quoted Gerrhard to the same purpose I might I think adde someâ—hing out of Peter Martyr Chemnitius and most others Now if these great men held that Ordination made a Minister the Mâ—gistrate could have no part assigned him at all about that business but if Ordination only declares a mans Ministry If it be Christ alone gives us our Office and man only procures us an outward Authority for repute and reception as Ministers in the Church where we are called which I take it is true then as I doe not doubt but that upon supposition there were no Ministers in a place to ordain the Magistrates allowance is good So do I propose it to be considered whether the Magistrates appointing who shall be Ordainers Presbyters or Bishops may not still determine the validity by either in the Church where he is Sâ—preme and consequently though our Orders before were of force now the pleasure of our Law-givers is otherwise whether we may not be re-ordained upon that accourt This lâ—oâ—er because there may be some consciences perhaâ—s that can act upon such a ground as this when they cannot otherwise though I intend to lay no furâ—her stress upon it I return then to my Opposer who p. 67 68. is hunting some of my exâ—ressions but should do well to take the substance with them I am in my last Proposition there proposing such Scriptures which concern the fift Commandment Our Superiours are to be obeyed in all things 1 Pet 2.13 Col. â— 22 This thing is what they require and impose uâ—on us and that I take therefore to be a plain ground for our submission There is a late book of some tender and learned Diâ—ines concerning the interest of words in prayer who when they have told us p. 72. that what we call the Church of England is nothing else than a company of men by a Civil Power made Bishops and called to advise the State in things concerning Religion do add p. 73. We again say far be it from us to oppose Civil Authority either exercised by Lay-persons or Ecclesiastical persons We further sâ—y we are bound to obey the Civil magistrate in all things in things lawful actually in things unlawful by suffering I do note this passage as that which may do good to many and tend to healing when the rest of that book may make them but very sore to wit that though they should have received such prejudicate and hard thoughts of the Government by Bishops as if they were anti-Câ—ristian against their Covenant or the like yet may they see here how or under what notion they may obey them for all that to wit as the King is Supreme both in causes Ecclesiastical and Civil the Bishops I perceive are taken with them for Magistrates appointed under him in the one as the Judges Justices are in the other so they allow obedience to them is to other Superiours so long as they require only things lawful and that our matter in hand is such it suffices I count that it is no where forbidden in the light of Nature or Scripture directly or consequentially and therefore it is lawful for which I have quoted that known Text Where there is no Law there is no transgression In his rebus sayes Austin de qu bus nihil certi statuit Scriptura instituta majorum pro lege tenenda sunt That which can be supposed to be replied to this is only that it is like the Law forbids the repetition of such an Ordinance and therefore I do clear this by other instances The first was of Marriage which hath been ordinarily by the Magistrate and the Minister both in these times I mâ— seâ—f have had a comple come to me after they were long married and had a child and I made no question to marry them again for the satisfaction of their consciences The like apprehensions therefore I have perceived in me about this matter I see indeed some others are ready to question perhaps whether such who have done thus have done lawfully but why not I pray as well as contract themselves and give their mutual consent fiâ—st and be married after Such a consent de proesenti no doubt does ponâ—re fundamentum relation it so that they are Man and Wife coram Deo thereby and what does the solemnity after but declare them so coram hominibus and give them that account legally in the world Now if this testification be not sufficient but men will account them as unmarried unless it be by a Minister nay suppose the Laws of any place would not allow it otherwise who would advise but they should do it again Nay this is not enough who would advise that they rather part quite leave one another and be no more Man and Wife rather than be married again Such is the case and question of ours in hand for ought I can see and no less in this matter of Re-ordination For the form he objects I answer the impropriety of some words in sâ—ch a case as to the one will not argue and infer the same I hope altogether in the other whereof it suffices that I have spoken before already A second instance I have is of the Oaths of Alleagiance and Supremacy These are taken at our Degrees at our Orders and upon particular occasions as the Law and Magistrate requires and yet cid I never hear any plead against this that it would be taking an Ordinance in vain Holy Bradford the Martyr tells his Judges that he had taken the same Oath against the Pope six times Unto this my Opponent sayes nothing and indeed noâ—hing can be said If that only argument of his varied in words be good that a man cannot be Ordained twice because the end of Ordination is attained as one Administration then a man may not have either of these Oaths twice administred to him because the end to wit the obliging a man to the contents is attained at once and so the Laws and Magistrate that require this on sundry occasions do require the taking Gods Name in vain Let my Author come off here if he can The swearing by Gods Name we know is a solemn Ordinance part of Gods Worshi Deut. 10.20 and if this may be repeated upon the forms of Courts be order of the Law command of our Superiours let this be satisfaction likewise to us that what is in vain as to one end is not so to another that what is in vain in regard of ones self is not in
Paulus licet immediate vocatus tamen aâ—â— Ananiam mittitur qui imponat manus ut Ecclesiae constet de vocatione Act. 9.17 Et Act. 13.3 cum inter gentes ablegandus erat rursus impositione manuum ordinarius Gertium Doctor constituitur hic ritus ideo fuit adoibitus ut publica esus vocatio decleretur legitima nec alii consimiliter de to gloriarentur Loc. Com. De Ec. This great Divine we see is express for Re-ordination For my part I see not how any can deny but Ananias laid his hands on Paul for the confirmation of his Ministry as well as for the receiving of his sight yet dare not I place any of my strength there but build on what is sure Paul is made a Minister that is certain by Christ himself I have appeared to thee for this purpose to make thee a Minister and now I send thee c. So 1 Tim. 12. I thank Jesus Christ putting me in the Ministry Again Gal. 1. He stands upon it expresly that he had not his Ministry of men nor by men but by Jesus Christ. From whence then it appears that a man may be a Minister already and yet be Ordained or what is all one a man may be Ordained and not to this end of his receiving his Office or Ministerial Authority thereby and yet the Ordinance not be taken in vain Here then is my answer made good the proof full and must stand against the world Let us lee what my Adversary sayes to it Here is something sayes he supposed which cannot be proved either that Paul was before a Minister when some learned men say he was but only a Probationer and Candidate to the Office or that Paul was now in the 13. Act. made a Minister when others do say that laying on of hands there was rather Optative than Ordinative As for which I must needs wonder more than once hat a judicious man should be so sleight here where indeed my strength lies I wonder first how he does account that what I have said can possible suppose the last of these to wit that Paul was made a Minister here when that which I say and proâ—â—e is the direct contrary that he was a Minister before And I wonder again what proof this Gentleman would haâ—e more that Paul was a Minister before than to have Christs own mouâ—h â—rerally to say it and Paul also to be his Witness What face can any learned man put upon this Was Christs immediate Massion Authoritative to all the rest of the Apostles and Paul be only a Probationer until his Orderâ— If this be their learning I had rather hear reason Vulgus aliquendo plus sapit sayes Lactanius quiatantum quantum satis est sapit The truth is this worthy Author and I do fully agree that this Ordination of Paul and Barnabas was not to their Office non co spectabat ut Epâ—scopalâ—m gratiam eis largiretur sayes Mason bu◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is express and consequently besides the setting a man apart to his Office there may be another Ordination if it be to the same ends as theirs was in this place Whereas therefore we are bid he goes on to tell the Bishop if he should ask whâ—refore wilt thou be Ordained that we come to be Ordained to that end that very end S. Paul was here Ordained to I say this as very good wholesome counsel and advise Lot here then we are again agreed and it remain only to enquire what were those ends these Apostâ—es here were ordained to and if we are capable of the same we may be re ordained As for what hâ— annexes hereunto it is either answered already in the form or belongs to the next Section There are there ore two ends I humbly suppose of this Ordination of these Apostles the one appears in the Text the other arises from the nature of the Ordinance it self For the first this is most manifest that the Holy Ghost calls forth these persons to a special work of the Ministry and so the words Separate to me ver 2. are interpreted Ver. 4 So they being sent forth by thâ— Holy Ghost Now those Elders that were there do here upon joyn in imposition of hands and prayer and that action iâ— described by the holy Penman of the Acts himself Act. 14.26 to be a recommendâ—ng them to the Grace of God for their work From whence I gather that if any of my tender and worthy Brethren be out of their places and have a Call to a new or intend to apply themselves thereunto as they ought there is the same reason for a fresh imposiâ—ion of hands upon them wiâ—h prayer as there was here for Paul and Barnabas to wit to commit them to the Grâ—câ— of God for that particular charge There is one thing only may be apt likely to come into their thoughts against this to wit that this looks at first sight like Independantism But I beseech them let not that stumble ary It is the End we say in Moral that spâ—cificates the Action and so long as this be done on an Episcopal or Presbâ—terian account it can be no Independent opinion There is none I hope will say my Creed is the Independent Creed and think that therefore I should leave it There are two things therefore I will offer here to remove this scruâ—le from my Brethren being needful to wit a Precedent and also Satisfaction For the Precedent I find one which is most apposite in the Archbishop of St. Andrews His Scot. p. 451. One Mr. Robert Bruce having Preached ordinarily in Edenburgh ten years upon the aâ—probation of the general Assembly maintaining it to be equivalent to any Ordination upon ten dayes debate they came to agree that the Commissioners did acknowledg his calling to be a Pastor in Edenburgh lawful and yet that he should be Ordained Here I note that a man who is acknowledged a Minister already may be Ordained by the judgement of Presbyterians even of the Scots themselves And that the account I offer is not Independent the story goes on and tells us further this was the form they agreed upon that the Imposition of hands was not used as a Ceremony of his Ordination to the Ministry but of his Ordination to a particular Flock This was acted Anno 1598. For satisfaction upon this whereas we have the distinction here between a general and particular Ordination I desire this particular Ordination be understood not to the Office but to the Work It is the Independent tenent I take it that all power Christ hath given to the Church is to be applyed to the diffusive body and so they account it is the people by their choice do constitute their own Pastor in that individual relation Consequently when that particular gathered company dissolves that man ceases to be a Pastor and while it lasts upon the same consequence he cannot ever separate from it Relata mutuò se ponunt tollunt
injury when he must not do iâ— Let me say then it is even the duty of these first Orders of ours to suffer wrong in this case so long as it is not from us who cannot help it The wrong is that we cannot enjoy that right we should have by them and while by taking new we do but pursue â—he same ends of setting off our Ministry or giving iâ— its free passage for which we took them aâ— first and cannot now have it upon their score they ought at I may so say to be content with us and put it up from the time We do not our selves think the worse of them for being vilified Besides let the Bishop think them to be null and we think them to be good our thinking is nothing to the thing it self if they be valid indeed and according to truth they will be so whether others think so or no and we go no more from any thing we have by them by taking new than we do go from the wealth we have when we get more What then is the matter here in good earnest Why the doing this you may say perhaps will at least make men think our former Orders to be null though they be not and this is something I answer no you cannot say so much as this or it may make them think only that they will not pass in these times and that a man is forced therefore to do but the same thing legally aâ—d canonically which was done otherwise before and this is that no doubt but most think indeed as the plain truth according to the vulgar reason although we may put it in the fairer words if we will of soâ—e moderate Bishops themselves that our lorâ—ner Orders are lawful before God and the Church but not legal according to the Order of the Nation And yet is not this â—he pâ—int indeed neither at the bottom what others may think while the objection is that we renounce or relâ—tâ—quish our former Ministry thereby but what they may thiâ—k we think our selves in the doing hereof or upon what account it is we do it I have therefore framed my answer in my former sheeâ—s to this Objection thus that I humbly judge So long as a man doth clearly and unfeignedly boâ—h before and after as he hath occasion declare himself to the contrary this will not I hope by the Lord and ought not by man to be laid to his charge because expression in this case does give construction to the action The Bishop you may say do shold our former Orders null and requires new If we yield Do not we in the fact grant the same I say again No If we declare otherwisâ— and yield not to the fact on that accounâ— for I muâ—t giâ—e St Ambrose's due memento here Si ratio reddeâ—d sitâ— ro omni otâ—oso verbo cave etiam aliquando ne dâ— vittoso bleâ—tio I have cleared this by the instance of the Reubenites Jâ—s 22. which methinks may satisfy the ingenuous though in the application for those words we have been content p. 57. I wish I had put we have forced our selves for that is more I find for my own art than I am even yet able to say Flectâ— mihi cor meum Domine mi Deus confiteor enim haec tibi indulgenâ—â—â—m peto That which is replied by this Author and by Mr. C. in effect both is this only Protestatio non valet contra factum I answer There may be Fact of a man which contradicts his Profession in the nature of the thing it self as I might perhaps take some of their instances but that I should fill too much Paper to speak to them and here it is true if it be so a mans Protestation cannot prevail against his Fact Or there is a Fact of a man that contradicts his Profession only in the conceit of some persons but does not do so in the thing it self nor in the estimation of others that judge aright of it And in this Case it should be apparent methinks that the Fact must receive interpretation by the mans declaration For while some may judge one thing of it and some another it is they only can judge charitably that take his own account of it Had the setting up of the Altar by the Rubenites been Idolatry in the thing it self or had they done it really to estrange themselves from the God of Israel their Protestation had been nothing to justifie their Fact but when it was indeed no such matter but only judged a renunciation by their mistaken Brethren their Profession we see alone did honestate the Act and gave all satisfaction Such is truly I deem our Case in this Objection And now I am methinks something engaged â—o take into farther cognizance the main Bâ—dy of that other Book I have mentioned the Tenour of whore Discourse does run thus Re ordination does accumulate nothing to the vâ—lidity liberty or dignity of our Ministry which he descants upon in several learned Pages and therefore we may not be re-oraained For which methinks I would write only this Re-ordination does super-induce the Câ—nonical Stamp of allowance in the present Church upon our Ministry and so propose it back to him whether therefore we must not be re-ordained To speak to this I must first in the way takâ—notice thaâ— when Divines do tell us of the validity of an Ordinace I perceive by some words of Austin about Baptism they account that whâ—n there is the essentials of an Ordinance then is â—he Ordinance valid In which sense it is not to be conceiâ—ed that we who have exercised our Ministry several years upon our first Orders should doubt in the least of the validity thereof which â—his very ready Author alone if there were not a world besides hath sufficienâ—ly proved But when we speak of the validity of Orders in this dispute I would have it understood as to the effect I answer then to this Authors whole discourse with that one distinction I have in my first Sheets which I believe himself by this time will yield to be too true And that is The validity of our former Ordination may be taken either in regard of what it ought to do or in regard of what it does do I say there that the Orders we have first ought to give the same outward authority liberty acceptation to our Ministry as Episcopal Orders but they do not They ought I count according to the Law of God but they do not do so according to the present constitution of our Church and Land and hence is it men are re-ordained I wiâ—l put this in other terms as more proper perhapâ— for these present Sheets Ordination I have said is that which gives us the Reception as Ministers in the Church where we are Now there is the Right of this Reception and the actual Fruition I am perswaded that when a man is ordained only by Presbyters it is the Will of God that the Church should
particular I answer To the first The case is the same as in the repetition of the Oath of Allegiance to the Magistrate Ante p. 57. The swearing is specifically the same to wit the matter of the same Precept and the repetition which makes it differ numerically only is the command of our Superiours Add to this that instance 2. Ch. 30.23 Say the same of it and apply it to Orders To the Second It is answered at large Aâ—te Sec. 4. p. 36. c. To his Third and Fifth I would ask whether Josephs being Christs reputed Father was a Relation If it were I should answer what is hinted before But to choose what I think Ordination I will say adds no new being nor begets any new Relation but declares or testifies that to the Church which is already As when a Couple have mutually given their consent the conjugal Relation arises from thence before God and if they be married after both by the Magistrate and Minister it is but the same thing new declared and that is all And thus I remember among the Arguments Voetius uses to prove that Ordinatio non est Fundamentum Ministerii he produces this for one Conjugii Fundamentum est mutuus consensus non vero externa solemnizatio which he confirms out of the Lawyers To his Fourth between See Ante p. 90. To his Sixth Christ I conceive exerts not any Act in Ordination as to collation of power whatever he do as to his Grace or Spirit but the Charter of his Gospel only or Institution is his standing Act and the Church declares a man in Office according to the same To his Seventh Re-ordination is an injury indeed on the part of those that require it to the nullifying our former Ministry but not I hope on the part of those that submit to it only for the use of that Ministry they cannot enjoy otherwise Necessity excuses by the verdict of this mans own twelfth Proposition To the Eight We must conceive no otherwise of this investiture with Ministerial power in Orders than of the investiture with Regal in the Inâ—uguration of Princes the repetition whereof instanced by me in Scripture does I hope answer this Interrogation To the Ninth and Tenth The Deaconship as well as the Priesthood in our Case is taken only we know by way of Form for the Canonical Stamp upon our former Ministry and let a man lock to it only that he avoid lying in his own Answers and I do judge supposing him at present disposed and under the need of it that it is to be born by him when he cannot help it as a Christian bears affronts and indignities for the sake of the Gospel To the Eleventh Necessity that knows no Law is not bounded by Number To the Twelfth Our people are to be taught by us to believe as we do that our former Orders are valid which prevents these scruples To the Thirteenth and Fourteenth The arguing is pertinent as to our Rulers if they will please to hearken to it but the Case of Imposition is not the same with the Submission To the Fifteenth This is prevented by the explication of our account of and sense about our re-ordaining To the Sixteenth what should hinder but a man may pray in Faith for Gods Grace or Blessing upon his Office or Work more than once To the Seventeenth I had thought to have found something against Prelacy in the Abstract as Anti Câ—ristian akinn to the Papal Hierarchy or the like and so dangerous to be medled with at all or to be come near in the least but when that which is objected is personal only I pray Quorsumhaec The validity of Orders I hope as of Baptism depends not on the goodness of the Priest Luther and others of our first Reformers never took any other than the Romish Orders To the Eighteenth If Re-ordination be but proved in thesi it is fair for me for I will confess that as it is cloathed with all its circumstances in hypothesi it is very hard to be digested and this good man methinks should not go to make it harder while he sits down so industriously as it were to prick thorns into his Brethrens hearts that are herein too tender and bleed already There are 27 Particulars raked up out of the words of the Bishop or Arch-deacon as incongruous in the Form which let them look to that speak them For my part I care not to have it said in regard of the change of the Churches Court from Preâ—bytery to Episcopacy that I am new Order'd or Admitted any more than for a Mâ— or Arts in one University to be admiâ—â—â—d Mr. also in the other There are 20 other Particulars therefore he adds which come more close whereof though some are much strained and some concern those that come to be Ordained at first as the Re-ordained which is piâ—ty Yet do I assent to him so far that whatever words or engagements a man utters for himself he hath need to be very tender of them insomuch that I my self find some kind of guilt reflected on me methinks I crave mercy in one passage I thought not on in the least before to wit the first Question in the Deaconship is Do you think you are moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon you this Office and Ministration I took this Cursoâ—ily as no more than Do you think you have Gods Call to the Ministry And the Answer being so gentle I think so it passed with me without more thought A man may I think say he is moved by the Holy Ghost to his duty and while he submits to this Form only for the confirming his Ministry I cannot deny but this may be said yet let the words be strictly taken as this man does urge them of that Work and Office of the Deaconship as distinct from the Priesthood if I were put upon it now I could hardly say it again without some explication It must be conceived therefore when the Bishop dispenses with the Canons as to the Ordaining a man Deacon and Presbyter in one day there is no expression necessary there to but he may dispense with likewise And consequently let every man be sure to crave his liberty accordingly as to the variation of any such expression which is against his Conscience and that is the proper clear and full remedy in this matter If possibly one Bishop should deny a man so poor a thing as this which I conceive none will let him go to another To the Nineteenth I consent with full conviction that it is wholsome and prudent advise for a man that goes about this business to consider first with himself well how far his Conscience will go and whether he can thereby attain his end by it to wit as the getting into so the keeping his Ministry got which if he can with a satisfied heart by a full conformity or His Majesties gracious indulgence either it is well I shall be glad however it
sends forth labourers into the harvest and though those Elders it is likely at Ephesus Acts 20. were ordained yet as for their power it is expresse the holy Ghost made them Overseers We receive our commission and authority from them whose embassadors we are but we are not the embassadors of men but the Stewards of God 1 Cor. 4.1 and embassadors of Jesus Christ 2 Cor. 5.20 VVho then is that faithfull Steward whom his Lord shall make ruler of his houshold Luke 12.42 It is the will I gather and appointment of the Lord which gives the formal being of a ruler to this steward and at for the servants they might indeed deliver him the keyes and so bee said if you will to make him steward which is to be known also by the way of investiture and external possession The London Divines who are to be much regarded in such works of theirs In Jus. Div. Min. Evan c. 11. after they have told us that the contrary is maintained by many Reverend Divines which by the way may dash some who think this Opinion of mine to be singular and are laying down arguments to prove that Orders do give the Ministerial Office which arguments I shaal answer in due place they check themselves in their course and tell us they mean it only as to the essence of the outward call and if that indeed be all let us take their meaning thus that it gives the Office before men so that a man is and is to be taken for a Minister thereupon which in the Court of the Church he was not before and that does hit the truth I think and bottom of this matter I do not doubt but we may say as we do ordinarily that Ordination makes us Ministers nay that it makes us so as we were not before but then we must understand this aright There is therefore this distinction which is clear in its own light to be received here unless we will remain still in the dark and that is this The Ministerial power which a man hath by vertue of that grand warrant Go and Teach all Nations must be considered as good In foro Dei or In foro Ecclesiae There are many worthy Persons who devoting themselves to this service have preached a good space as Origen of old before they have taken orders when perhaps they have forborn the Sacraments and we may not doubt but some of them have converted souls Now where there is conversion there is Faith and where there is that preaching as begets Faith the Preacher must be sent which is expresse Ro. 10.15 and consequently such a man then must have his Commission in the Court of God when he hath none yet in the court of man and is not a Minister yet indeed as to the Church before Orders Ordination then does make a man a Minister as Baptism makes a Christian when he hath saving grace before The Orders of the Church does give the Ministry as the absolution of the Church does forgive sinnes that is where a man hath true faith and repentance and so is forgiven in heaven It is the prerogative of God to forgive sinnes and yet doeth the Church forgive them in her court that is declares and pronounces to the penitent remission as our Liturgy hath it It is the prerogative royal of Jesus Christ to appoint his own officers in his Church and yet does the Church make a man a Minister in her court that is declares pronounces him to be such approves and confirms his call from the Lord by this solemnity There is no man taketh to himself this honour but he that is called of God Heb. 5. This calling then of God is that which gives the honour and office in his sight and the call of man whereof Orders is the consummation does give it him before men by solemnization If it must be first given of God before a man may take it to himself I gather à fortiori it must be first given of God before another can apply it to him by the ceremonie thereof And Abraham received circumcision a signe of the righteousnesse of faith which he had whiles he was uncircumcised As for the outward call those Divines speak of it must bee opposed to the inward The inward call is this call of God as distinguished from mans Herein I have conceived three things 1. The Institution which is Gods appointing such an office to bee and that those who have such gifts shall bee such officers 2. The Gift which is Gods endownents of a person adapting him for this office and that peculiarly above others which I put in because the abilities of a person are warily to bee considered according to mens severall capacities dispositions condition and those circumstances of providence and otherwise which render several men of the same parts serviceable to their generation under several employments 3. Consent which is the resigning a mans self hereunto and does lye in those holy and sincere desires and ends that the spirit of God alone can stirre up and a man ought to have that does devote his life to so sacred a function to wit that his great aim in the prevailing Interest of his heart be nothing else but the glory of his Redeemer and Salvation of mens souls When God now hath given the second of these to wit the gift the first alone does necessarily conveigh to him the Power and makes the third his duty Vnto every one of us is given Grace according to the measure of the Gifts of Christ Eph. 4.7 By grace is meant there I suppose Authority or Office as we shall see more somwhere and then it followes where there are Christs gifts this Authority to use them is given with them So 1 Cor. 12.7 The Manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withall The Gifts alone do infer a power to edifie the Church by them Hence in that place before Eph. 4. if we compare vers 8. with v. 11. while Christ is giving gifts in the one he gives the office in the other And the reason is good because the power does slow upon the gifts from the Institution A power let me say again but in Gods sight for it is not for every man to pretend gifts and straight be a Minister which I shall meet with well enough if you will attend a little till its due place When the Lord in the parable gave the man his talent that alone impower'd him and obliged him to traffique with it There was no need more in a Prophet then to be inspired with a Prophecy to be sent of the Lord. No more can there be likewise required in a Minister to give him his Office before God then this call of God And as for the farther call of man which is yet required to a Minister before men that was not to a prophet when there are already the three things mentioned what can there be more herein distinguished there from besides the
nothing left him hardly to stand upon in the controversie Before I passe let me here humbly lay down a caution I would not have any offer to think that I and the forementioned author do go about to make light of Orders as if when a man hath parts he may streight goe and be a Preacher of his own head There are none I know that hold Qualification a call coram ecclesia I am not a man of that complexion I am so much for a solemn allowance of the Church that I contend it should be twice done rather then not bee done to purpose God is a God of Order and hath provided against confusion and intrusion into his Church I am ready then with that eminent person to account not only that it is a great sin to neglect Ordination where it may be had and that the Church is to disown such and that it is required by Christ and so necessary necessitate praecepti medii too ad ordinem bene esse but I am willing to go so far that he requires it in his Charter to every Church which is constituted as a part of the condition which untill it be put the Authority coram hominibus is suspended And yet so long as being put it operates only to the power as a condition doing but its own part this hinders not but the same may be put and put again so long as it is not omni modo to the same effect and the nature thereof or part it does will bear it What is that you will say and In what regard possible can the effect be any other and not altogether the same An Answer to these two Questions will unloose the knot here of Re-ordination For the former There are three things goes to a Minister 1. The testimony of their Conscience of their sincere desire not of lucre or honour but to edifie the Church 2. A faculty to do that to which they have a desire and will 3. The Ordination of the Church which approves and gives testimony of their will and ability So Mr. Perkins in whose judgement methinks I rejoyce to see how fully he agrees with me in his Notion of Orders which yet I must confesse I took not from him or any other Book but from its own light in my first sheets Now whether this testification or approbation of the Church is such a thing or no I leave to this fair Adversary himself to judge and I hope he will see as those abilities and desires the chief part of the condition Christs Charter requires may and are to be renewed still or encreased so may the approbation of the same ad bene esse be renewed also and our Ministry be the better not as all the worse for it For the latter When I allow thus much to Orders to be a condition that is causa sine qua non of our Office-power I understand it you must note it well to be so truly and only in the Court of the Church A condition is such a thing you may say as cannot be repeated for it being put the effect follows and when the effect is obtained the thing can have no longer the nature of a condition I answer then The Court of the Church wherein alone I affirm that Orders is this condition is varied and doubled and hence it is that the condition it self also is doubled and the effect flowing from the same varied likewise While the court of the Church was Presbyterian any Orders if Scriptural onely was the condition but nâ—w it is Episcopal no Orders but Canonical also is the condition In both courts then or either of them unlesse a person be ordained he is no Minister and so the condition requisite to our authority coram Ecclesia is the same in both to wit Orders but as these Orders which are the condition are diversified and Episcopal Ordination distinguished from Presbyterian so the condition I hope is not the same In like manner the effect which flowes from the condition being put in either or both these courts is this Church-authority as I speak or the receiving us as Ministers in the court of the Church and so is the same but as these courts wherein we are so received and are the termini relationis are varied and not the same in that regard the effect also must be diversified or multiplyed and so not the same though the same which ends the difficulty Having laid this caution there followes an Objection which as to the main hath sometimes been a stop upon my mind I doe conceive that the Ordainers do act from God to the people and the approving or declaring a mans Ministry more then once drawes happily the ampler reception and no absurdity in it but I may be mistaken perhaps and the Ordainers act from the Church or people to God in presenting him a servant from amongst them to his house Even as when the Levites were separate to God Num. 8. it is said Aaron shall offer them before the Lord for an offering of the children of Israel v. 11. And hence are the children of Israel themselves to lay their hands upon them v. 10. whereby there might be signified happily their parting with their right in them which to do again were a kind of owning their right still and look like sacraledge in it But this conceit I guesse is some of that close superstition which is still apt to exercise my thoughts in this matter It is manifest that when God saved the first-born of the Israelites in Egypt he challenged them to himself the first-born of the cattel were to be offer'd in sacrafice to him and for the first-born of their Sons he accepts the Levites and hence it is they were the offering of the people and that they laid their hands on them in offering them because I say it was in lieu of their first-born which is all plain in the Text vers 16 17 18. Now as for us under the Gospel when Jesus Christ the only true first-both is offered there is up such propriety and discrimination and consequently no offering of the Ministry in lieu thereof Besides though the Levites whose office was but a service only to help Aaron and his Sons vers 19. were an offering of the Children of Israel the Priests which was not a bare Service but a Dignity were no offering of the people but taken by God into that honour and office of himself The Subjects of a Prince may present him with slaves to do his work but they present him not with Embassadors as we are to be entrusted with the affairs of his Kingdom It may be yet said it is true he that hath this honour must have Gods calling and consequently the Ordainers act from God in ordaining him but there may be a middle way to wit that they act not from God to the Church or people nor from the Church to God but from God to God and so their whole act be terminated
in the sanctifying or separating a person to him without reference at all otherwise to the Church or people As for this though the thing be conspicuous in its own nature and solemnity let us suppose untill it appears farther it were so and then must we take into consideration what this separating or sanctifying a man unto God is Under the Law it is plain there were sacrafices appointed and by these the Priests and Levites were clensed that they might draw nigh to God Under the Gospel there is no Sacrafice but only there are Prayers and consequently the commending a man to the grace of God for his work by Prayer is all that sanctification there can be in this matter and as for the imposition of Hands it self it is nothing but the expresse designation of the person upon whose head we crave the discention of his blessing To which purpose Calvin in his institutions tell us that this rite was taken from Jacobs blessing his Grand-children which was by Prayer Gen. 48.15 16. And Grotius is quoted by Mr. Stilling fleet speaking about the Jews ordaining their Elders Epi. ad Gal. Tunc orabant ut sic Dei efficacia esset super illum sicut manus efficaciae Symbolum ei imponebatur By this Dei efficacia we must not understand the authority or power of the Ministry as if in our taking Orders we did pray to God to give us that as my Antagonist thinks strangely often for Grotius himself in his Book de Imp. before quoted acurately tells us that comes not by Orders Christ 〈◊〉 procul dubio is est à quo jus illud praedicandi sacrament a exhibendi clavibus utendi oritur vim suam accipit but we must understand thereby the solemn invocation of the divine presence and assistance to be upon or with the person upon whom the hands are laid to use the words of that Learned Author which may be repeated I hope if need be without question To proceed here while we are upon it In a form of Church policy presented in a Convention at Edenbourgh anno 1560. I read in Spotswood p. 156. Other ceremonies then the publick approbation of the people and the declaration of the chief Minister that the person there presented is appointed to serve that Church we cannot approve for albeit the Apostles used imposition of hands yet seeing the miracle is ceased the using the ceremony we judge not to be necessary In another anno 1578. presented to the Parliament Ordination is the separation and sanctifying of the person appointed by God and the Church after he is well tryed and found qualified The ceremonies are Fasting Prayer and Imposition of hands of the Eldership p. 292. This notion of Ordination is that I suppose is like to passe with the Presbyterian and perhaps one may think though a double approbation or declaration draws in it no absurdity yet a Consecration of a thing or person to the Lord more then once may seem hainous Let us know therefore that there is really no more in the thing under this conception then under the other This Learned man my Adversary himself does well quote Mason and another who holding with him that the Office of a Bishop and Presbyter is the same differing only gradu not ordine answer their new investiture with this that our Church calls it not an Ordering but Consecration so that a double Consecration in the same Office is not to be accounted belike any matter they themselves being judges The Temple under the Law we find new consecrated by Hezekiah The Priests at the same time do new consecrate themselves 2 Chron. 29.30 34. In the Gospel too we read again of Festum Encaeniorum Jo. 10.22 But there is one instance alone does satisfie me in this thing beyond exception and that is of Solomon whom we read not only to be annointed which is consecrated but it is said expresly to the Lord that makes it sacred a second time If there was any native evil or absurdity in the thing it self to have a double consecration or investiture unto the same Office or work how comes this to passe that holy David and his most wise Son with the Fathers and Elders of all Israel should make no scruple at all at it There is this one Text much wanting therefore in my former sheets which I now offer further to my case 1 Chron. 29.22 where I note three things 1. That Ordination makes a man a Minister I count as they are said in the words to make Solomon King We none deny but Orders make a Minister only let it be understood from hence Perfectivè Complementally by way of Declaration or Solemnization 2. That a double investiture or consecration to the same Office is expresly exemplified in Scripture for which I quote this place and why it should be more to be Re-ordained then Re-annointed no Protestant I believe can tell So that where I have compared Ordaining in my Book still to a double Marrying I wish I had rather put in Annointing to make the simile the more sure 3 That it is probable what Mr. Rosse Pans p. 8. tell us that this Zadock was High-priest at the end of Sauls reign but David favouring Abiathar preferred him and retained them both and consequently that he was annointed the second time Priest as Solomon the second time King So I close my first generall And they made Solomon King the second time and annointed him to the Lord to be chief Governour and Zadock to be Priest SECTION III. FOr the second generall The Form which the Bishop uses I will confesse it freely to be so compiled to the ordinary conception of Orders as is most proper for such as are made ex non Ministris Ministri as he speaks yet let not my tender Brethren be troubled at this seeing that hinders not but it may serve too for those that are only declared to be Ministri and confirmed or regularly legally canonically made what they were truly in the sighs of God before It is the offence of mens minds makes this so grievous There is no Ordination indeed is any more then a Declaration and Allowance before the Church of a mans call from God and let a man read the Forme quite over one may rather wonder at it as a happinesse there is no more incongruity to our case then complain there is so much as if it were compiled with some tender regard hereto that if any were ordained before as beyond Sea otherwise they might not scruple for all that if they thought good to submit to it The words Ordered and Admined is the worst this sober man himself can pick out which when I see in the instruments of our Orders as it were purposely interpreted for us secundum ritus Ecclesiae Anglicanae admissimus Legitimè Canonicè ordinavimus I cannot but conclude what I have said and say that it is well this form indeed is no worse I mean more improper seeing
may read Spotswood Hist. of Scot. p. 514. and also that the episcopally ordained were not constrained by the Gallican and Belgick Churches to be re-ordained after the mode of their Churches As to all which I account it were good for some of more skill in the history of latter times then I concerning things of this nature to give us a relation of what hath been done in this case There hath been examples no doubt of some that have some that have not been re-ordained That which I say to this argument meerly of practise herein is that it does truly seem very pressing on the part of our rulers and imposers but as for the part of the submitter I cannot for my part but freely believe that any or either of these mentioned might be ordained again if the exercise of their Ministry depends upon the same and so I give in my answer From a non solet to a non licet is a non sequitur And here I will not omit one pertinent relation A present grave Minister and of note in Northampton shire I have no commission to print his name being ordained in the Low Countries came to Bishop Davenant he told him that they held his ordination valid neverthelesse in regard of his setling in the Ministry here he thought it good before they parted to ordain him again himself giving him liberty in the point of Subscription and what Indulgence else he desired I hear not This instance is singularly full to my purpose and being in a Bishop who was so eminently a solid and pions Doctor cannot but at the very sight remove some prejudice as to my opinion and indeed as I hear hath prevailed it may be more then such an argument alone de exemple ought upon many Let our Church Rulers be pleased but to tread in these steps that is declare our former Ministry hitherto to be good require a new only ad praesentem statum by the way of confirmation vary a few of their expressions where they see fit accordingly and give a like indulgence as this above in such circumstances as they find doe afflict any that are tender in conscience and then I suppose both my brethren and I and they and we may soon come to composition in this controversie For the third Commandement his other Argument it is the same and no other then what I have laid down my self in my first sheets to wit the second Objection there which one would have thought might have saved my Opponent his labour as to the half of his work for it is this one thing upon the matter is the substance of his Book upon my question wherein as soon as a man hath turn'd over any lease that concerns me he may guesse what will be objected against me before hand The form namely and the Ordinance in vain that is more words perhaps but this Argument still for the main one light in a several change the old Moon and the new Moon but the same I must confesse when the objection at first came into my mind in those sheets where I fetch what I have only from my own spirit as I go along it did lye sore upon it a good while but I must needs say also that the answer there I give to it was as fully satisfactory to me as that was pressing before and I did think it would be so also to others or else those sheets might hardly have passed my hands It does therefore now stand me upon though I have spoke to this there so largely already and have some things also before which might be sufficient to gather up together all the forces that I have had or further have to fight as it were at once neither with small or great in comparison save with this his King or master-argument he relies upon in this matter He that is ordained sayes he with a valid ordination ought not to be reordained because by submitting thereto he doth take an ordinance of God in vain This he proves To take an ordinance for no end or for no such end as God hath appointed it unto is to take it in vain But to be reordained after preceding valid ordination is to do so because ordination is to set us apart to the office of the Ministry and we have the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 already This is his marrow without the exact writing out more of his words which I hope neither he nor I care to stand upon in this dispute Unto which I have therefore many things to say for when I have in effect but one thing to speak to there are many things I must needs speak to it 1. There is a passage in an Author whom he otherwhere names with honour as he is worthy which I will set down in the first place because I cannot chuse but receive it We have no ground to think that the Apostles had any peculiar command for laying on of hands upon persons in prayer over them or ordination of them but the thing it self being enjoyned the setting some apart for attendance on the Churches by them planted they took up and made use of a laudable rite and â—austom then in use upon such occasions Mr. Stillingfleet Iren p. 270. Now though Doctor Seaman Mr Lyford and the London Ministers to whom my Opposer turns us may have spent their pains well to prove that no man may ordinarily enter the Ministry without Orders while as Calvin hath it illa Apostolorum accurata observatâ—o ought to be Praecepti vice to us Yet is there doubtlesse some difference to be put between such Ordinances which Christ Jesus our Lord hath left from his own mouth to his Church as Baptisme is and such as the Apostles took up themselves from the present Custome of the Jewes and we follow for their example 2. I have distinguisht plainly in my Book between our Ministry and the use and exercise of it I deny that Ordination is in vain which is not to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Ministry it self and the reason is irrefragable because a man may be a Minister already and yet be ordained as the case was with Paul and Barnabas Act. 13. which our Author himself opens enlarges and grants p. 4. I will put this in other words Ordination is either to the office or to the work Now I deny our Author his definition Ordination is the setting a man apart to the work and Office of the Ministry in the sense he understands separating a man to his office for we have but one place only from which we gather this Genus definitionis that Orders is a separating or setting a man apart to wit that in the Acts. Separate me Paul and Barnabas and there it is manifestly to the Work only and not the Office which they had already as himself and I argue upon it and I lay as the sure foundation of our Case It is true that the Office or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if you call
humbly lay two charges upon them The first is that they do throughly ponder the Book of Orders and every thing besides that will be required of them before-hand and if they be not perswaded in their minds that it is lawful for them let them not do iâ— I charge them for the worlâ— I will not be guilty of wounding their Souls but tell them if they do it and doubt if they act not in faith it is sin unto them that is sure The second then is if they be satisfied themselves that yet if they do but imagine any of their Brethren like to follow them wiâ—h a Conscience unsatisfied they take special care to prevent it which else doth put in a barr to them whereas if they go to them and satisfie them with their reasons or else warn them to forbear so that they understand from them that they are not like to do it for their example till satisfied the passage is open And let them then be sure they have a sincere heart in the main I humbly hope as they act in faith so they may with coâ—fort anâ— success And the Priest said unto them go in peace befoâ—â— the Lord is your way wherein you go SECTION VIII IN my fourth Section I come to a second Objection Ordination is that which according to Divines does give the Ministerial Offices This is the end they account hereof Now when a man is a Minister already there is not this end and consequently the Ordinance taken in vain Thus have I laid it down and my Answer to it is this There is more ends than one in Ordination as in Baptism and other Institutions It is not necessary to the using an Ordinance that a man be capable of all its ends but of some right end of the same We have had the Objection in hand before as the main Argument of this Authors Book and there you have therefore my full and compleat Answer to it That which I have to do here is only the maintaining this present Solution Unto which then thus he replies We grant this but then a man must take it in such a form of words as is expressive only of that end whereof he is capable As in Aged Marriage the Prayer for Issue must not be used But let this Gentleman hold a little for he goes on upon a supposal that in our Orders there are Prayers put up for us to be made Ministers to use his own words p. 68. which if it vvere true it would indeed be just alike with us here as to pray for the blessing of Children upon a couâ—le that are pass'd it But he may soon know the Church hath no such odd Prayer inconsistent with the reason of the form it self He adds One that is ordained already and so a Minister may be ordained again in order to the free exercise of his Ministry but not ordained with that Ordination whose chief end it to give the Ministerial Commission and Authority Unto this as his whole strength I have spoken at first in my two generals about the form and supposition of the nature of Orders That I have now to take notice of and cannot pass without injury both to ingenuity and my self is the Candour and Integrity of my Aâ—versary He is pleased to grant me here the Question I dispute for My Question is Whether and how a Minister ordained by the Presbitery may take Ordination also by the Bishop and I determine it though he cannot be ordained again to his Ministry he may as to the free use of it in the English Church Now my Adversary does directly yield this I desire If my Brethren to see and own it Nevertheless in thâ— qâ—â—stion included how this may be done he is a â—iâ—tle more â—â—iff than I am He supposes the form that is used is improâ—er to our case I have therefore proposed my Desire p. 92 in my sheets for another Thus we agree still but then wâ— part here if this cannot be had he thinks the substance unlawful for the shadows sake and I am apt to think that for the substance sake being lawful the shadow may be born if indeed it cannot be help'd I proceed The common and general and of Baptism was for remission of sinns yet was Jesus Christ baptized who was not capable of that end He answers Let Mr. H. if he can prove that in the Baptism of Christ any words were used by John expressive of such an end as Christ was not capable of But what a poor come off is this when he hath spoken so like a Scholar and judicious man besides That Christ was baptized we know That Baptism was for remission of sinns whereof Christ was uncapable we know likewise and consequently that an Ordinance may be used by a man who is not capable of its grand end but some other is proved But with what form of words whether any or none John baptized Jesus with neither I nor he do know I argue then from what I know This Author answers in what he does not know and that is very neer he knows not what to answer And here I find next he hath made a great skip for when I have said there are more ends than one in Orders I open my self Ordination gives a man his Commission according to others and installs him in it it makes a man a Minister and also signifies him to be such before men it gives the Office and also makes him received at such in the Church where he is sent It is true a man who is ordained already is not capable of the one end but he is of the other He that was a Minister before cannot be made so now as to have the Office given him but he may have the same Office declared or signified I hope more then once as in the Inauguration of Princes when there is need for the better execution thereof and acceptation with the people This my Opponent should not have pasied as also that I am wary still of the first of these ends to say I do suppose it only and not grant it It may suffice that I have in my first work maintained my question notwithstanding that supposition without which many of my Brethren perhaps would scarce have received it into their thoughts to digest it But now the light I will conceive may have broken in at least something upon their minds through the cranies I have there I may follow the same here more oâ—enly and if this Supposition also belaid aside there is no remora lest in the business But to follow him where he please he produces after this my chief Instance which is such I must confess that I dare aâ—one venture all my whole Cause upon it Paul is made a Minister by Christ himself Act. 26.16 17 18. yet was he Ordained afâ—er by the hands of men Act. 13. These words of mine he quotes where I shall take in by the way a passage from Chemnitius upon the same
For my part who am apt to believe that Christ hath given Pastors and Teachers to his Church only as Catholick Eph. 4. I know not whether it be warrantable to be Ordained a particular Pastor in this sâ—nse supposing as most do that Election or Orders gives the Office Methinks however I should not choose to be so made for the reason mentioned as also because there is reason in the mouth of those men of Dan Is it not better to be a Priest to a Tribe in Israel than to the House of one man This I take it to be Independentism But when a man is already of Minister of the Catholick Church to have a particular laying on of hands only unto the work unto which he is called in a several place I am assured in my belief that we are most fully waranted by this only instance of these Apostolical persons who were no Independents I think at least in this point in hand being certainly Catholick Ministers and yet Ordained to that particular work not to the Pasâ—orship of some Countries whereunto they were at present called And here I cannot but observe farther the gracious providence of God which for the time hitherto as it were determined our case Our present Ecclesiastical Rulers would not let a man have Institution without Episcopal Orders and there hath been an Act of Confirmation of all Ministers already in any living though ordained only by Presbyters Now then if any of my tender Brethren scrupled this businesâ— as being without precedent if they were already in a living God provided against their scruple and confirmed them If they are out of a living then God hath provided for them in his Word this instance undeniable of Paul that a man who is a Minister already may be Ordained for all that unto the particular work of that new place whereunto he shall be called And why may not this be strengthned from the Priest under the Law who though he was dedicate to God and his Office at once did consecrate himself often to some particular service upon emergent occasions There is nothing more can be objected against it but the Form which is already answered The other end of their using this Rite here I will conceive to be that which I have mentioned from that great Divine before named Et hic ritus ideo fuit adhibitus ut publica ejus vocatio declaretur lâ—giâ—ma St. Paul was called immediately to the Gospel at first by Christ and here by the Holy Ghost to this work Oâ—hers might not know this or believe it This act then of these eminent Prophets and Teachers at Antioch is as it were he publick testimony of the Church thereof There was none could question the other Apostles Authority who was known to have been with Christ in his life but as for Paul unto whom he appeared miraculously afâ—erwards though he had the same Authority and by him alone then given yet as the Disciples of the Jews â—urst not trust this until they were confirmed by Ananias so was it convenienâ— no doubt also for the Gentiles that this Diâ—ine Call of his should be approved and attested by this Ordination which must â—rom hence therefore be irrefragably defined as I have said the Confirmation only of our Vocation Two sorts there are now of my Brethren in distress about being re-ordained some that have a call to a new place and some that cannot else keep their old Though the former of these I confess have their way here most plain yet may the rest I think be kept from stumbling also who though they cannot take a fresh Imposition of hands so clear to the first end as the former for the committing them to Gods blessing upon their new charge yet may they submit here to the latter end for Confirmation of their Ministry as well as any It is a serious question I propose therefore in my Book when we see in this place for certain by this instance of Paul and Barnabas that the reason of Ordination is not for to give the Ministerial Function and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Timothy is something else What is the reason of it theâ— Why really I say I think it is this This solemn Rite does give an Outward Authority before the Church that is the current repute or valuation to a man of a Minister So that he who was truly called of God before is now received as such by all as to the exercise of his Function with freedom and acceptation I cannot express my self more fully not argue more firmly than I do upon it The Reason of a precept is to be look'd on as the Precept but the reason why we should be ordained at all does now arise upon us to be re-ordained to wit because else we cannot have this reception or enjoy this End of Ordination thus exprest in our Church and consequently so far as we have Precept or Scripâ—ure example to warrant or command the one it is and must be of force for the other And here there is but one thing since I must profess hath ever been upon my mind to give any check unto this and that is if the End I speak oâ— could be proved in Scripture then there were nothing indeed more saâ—isfying but the Scripture does not express this End of Orders and if we know not that God hath appointed this for an End thereof then will it not be a safe ground for our acting upon it I answer There are two means whereby we may know thing to be of Divine warrant or conformable to God Wiâ—â— the Scripture and Right Reason That which is evident by and coâ—foraâ—t to the true light of Nature or natural Reason is to be accountâ—d jure Divino in matters of Religion sayes the Authors of Jus Dâ—vin Reg. Ee. c. 3. Now though it be the first end mentioned only that I date say is express in the Word yet must I needs affirm that this other I stand upon is so evident in the nature it self of the Solemnity and consonant to the dictates of Reason that I am perswaded there is none of my Brethren that shall receive it in the clearness of it but will be satisfied in their Consciences that they follow no other than the mind of God in it Nevertheless I shall not be wanting through his grace to strengthen their assurance herein with an instance or two from Scripture it self to put it if possible even beyond dubitation The one is in Acts 1. Where we have a kind of Divine Ordination of Matthias into the Apostleship by lots It is said v. ult They gave forth their lots and the lot fell upon Matthias and he was rumbred with the eleven Apostles Here it is apparent that the immediate effect of this external signification of Gods Will by lot whereby Matthias is constituted one of the Apostles is this same value repute account as an Apostle or as a Minister which I stand upon He was numbred that
more in the Confinement though less there iâ— only the same 4. Let this be so yet here is in generâ—l nevertheless a double Commission to the same work exemplified for they have Commission to preach to the Jews and then Commission to preach to all Nations So that Re ordination hereby is proved though not our Re-ordination You may say there is not the same reason for us as for them but this we gain hence however that there may be some reason why a Commission may be repeated and if there may be one we are put in heart there may be another and we are sure it is not unlawful altogether 5. When we see that a Commission may be renewed upon the change of the Persons to whom a man is sent why not upon the change of the Court which sends So is the Case here Ordination is the commissionating a man only in the Churches Court Now the Court of the Church is changed and that Commission will not pass upon the change that would before and therefore is renewed 6. I have made this more statedly serve our case p. 44. in my first Sheets I will conclude therfore the matter If the Lord himself whose sending his Disciples as the head of his Church could not be without the furnishing of them both with abilities and power does iterate their Commission at least as to the delivery more than once What should we stand upon Mans Ceremony which is we are sure but a formal delivery or investitive only at first when the Right and Faculty is never from him at all as Grotius speaks And as Dr. Ames in his Case Ordinatio est nihil alâ—ud quam solâ—mnis declarationt coronatio regis â—nauguratio magistratus And so it comes to no more to be iâ—crated upon need or good Cause than for me to repeat And they made Solomon King the second time that is what hath been once already signified before And Jesus said again unto him yet the third time Simon Son of Jonas lovest thou me Lord my Sheep SECTION IX IN the Fifth Section there is a Third Objection To be â—â—â—raâ—ined does seem virtually in the Act to renounce make void or offer injury to our first Oraers and that does looklike some great evil Unto which that I may speak hete something more fully I will acknowledge so far as I can judge that this conceit hath gotten into mens minds far and wide from the Ancients which makes some the Papists especially think so hainoufly of Re-ordination as if there were no less than Sacrilege in it Indeed this Author and our Brethren at this season have got a conceit that it is injurious to the Third Commandement which requires the reverend use of Gods Ordinances which may be done I hope when an Ordinance is repeated as when it is used but once But if they could then shew me in the scattered Sentence of the Fathers that this were their harmonious reason why they are against it it would do more with me for conviction than any thing else I yet know because it would make me suspect then some Moral evil perhaps to be in it when all I apprehend yet is Notional only as I said at first or but in mens imaginations The rise then or spring of this conceir I guess to flow from St. Cyprians time when Re-baptization was in the World That pious Bishop and Martyr does plead thus still in his Writings There is one Church one Faith one Baptism those that are out of the Church have not the â—rue Faith and so no Baptism And therefore they that are baptized of Here-ticks must be re-baptized Pro certo tenentes neminem for as baptizart extra ecclesiam posse cum sit baptismâ— unum intra sanctam ecclesiam constituâ—um Lab. 1. Ep. 12. Hereupon there was none we must conceive rebaptized but they supposed their former Baptism to be void this being the pleaded ground for their Re-baptization And though those Disciples Act. 19th who doubted not of the validity of the Baptism they had did not void Johns Baptism I hope in the least for their being baptized again into the Name of Jesus Yet while the Party himself here and the Church were both perswaded otherwise of theirs this act might be accounted coram ecclesia a kind of professed voidance thereof and their heresie with it And consequently when they came to think that Re-baptization did make pull their first Baptism the sâ—me thoughts from thence we may conjecture came to â—oâ—iess them about Orders But as the Fathers which succeeded Cyprian and Councils did lay aside his Rebaptization concluding the ground he went upon errâ—nions and consequently that the former Baptism of such as were re-baptized hoâ—vsoever they thought that re-baptived them was good and valid according to the Word of God So do I believe that after Ages will disprove the ground upon which Re-ordination is now by some required and our former Orders being valid or good before God or according to his Word it is not our being re-ordâ—ined can make them null or void but only they are so in the judgement of such as lye under thaâ— conception To look then more throughly if we can into this business Suppose a man a Minister already and in Orders does Re-ordination now make him no Minister or to have been none or evacuate his former Ministerial Acts the time before If that be true then should I never plead for Re-ordination sure then must I be ready to think it Sacrilege as soon as any but this certainly can nâ—ver be The Papists do hold that there is an indelible Character imprinted in Orders under iterari non posse and anathematize those that gainsay it To save their curse I deny not with our Hooker and Mason if by their Character they mean only spiritualis potestas as some of them do that there is such a thing and they quoad homines we may say impressed hereby which our Divines also do hold indelible So that the Office being once received cannot be taken away even by degradation it self though the Work may sometime be made to cease Now if it were Orders did indeed give this power as my Opposer with the most do think then must those Orders we take first stand good and valid against any other we take after if there were twenty which can neither make nor marr as to that end which is already attained thereby And here in the way may be one plain Conviction on this Gentleman that when he does plead that I make null my first Ordination and therefore my Profession will not prevail against my Fact he quite intersares with himself who still pleads all the way besides that my first Orders having given me my Ministry already it is that renders my second in vain There are two Books let me therefore here mention it come out against Re-ordination one before and this Author two Arguments it is they harp upon The former stands mainly upon this That a
second Ordination does in the fact make null the first The other insists upon this That our first Ordination if he be understood as he must does null the second to wit by rendring it in vain Now let uâ— set these two Arguments together by the ears and they must needs fall by the hands of one another for it a mans first Ordination be indeed made null then is not his second in vain and if his second be in vain then is not his first null The truth is were the supposition true which they go both upon it is the last Argument were of force and the former must be nothing Neither would it hence follow because the Character if one will call the Power or Office so is not repeated therefore the Rite which does solemnize it may not any more than because the Regal Office is but one and the same which must be still urged therefore the annointing or in estiture can be but once also If a man who is Consecrated shall desert his first Ordination and steal away himself from the Ministry into the Laity when he believes God originally called him and his labours like still to be serviceable to him not disabled not put to it by distress or force for the safety of his Conscience Sâ—uâ—s peace Gods greater glory and any will call that Sacrilege there may be I think some appositeness indeed in the tern but if the Papist will call Reordination barely so and make that the reason why a man may not be Re-ordained which he renders for the very account upon which he yields hereunto to wit because he thinks his Power or Office indeed indelible and that being entered in the Ministry he may not go back and to is constrained to it it is but giving an innocent thing ill words and as it seems to me rather in our case it is plain in the whole A cujus contrarium verum est I cannot therefore but take up a few word here if it be only to see the Genius at least of that other Opposer of Re-ordination Does not he really renounce his Ordination recede from his Office and dâ—vest hâ—mâ—â—lf of Authority who taketh up his Ministry â—â—â—d anew passâ—th under this constituting investing Ordinance Mâ— C. p. 33. wâ—ich is the chief battering Ramm of that Book But God forbid this indeed should hâ— so when Christs Disciples had their Commission Go Preach and Baptize renewed to them aâ— hath been said before was that second act indeed an actual and formal voidance of the first When the Holy Ghost does separate to him Paul for the work whereunto he calls him Act. 13. Does that mission or sending forth of the Holy Ghost make null his first Ministry and authorative mission by Jesus Christ Act. 26.16 18. When a Jew was baptized in Christ's time did that null his Cicumcision When those Disciples Act. 19. were re-baptized was that Baptism indeed a voiding of their first Or Christs Baptism really a renunciation of Johns How can any prove that Was the Ordination of Barnabat by those at Antioch a divesting him of any authority he had by being sent forth before by the Church of Jerusalem This cannot be Yet again when the men of Judah came and annonited David King in Hebron was the passing of David under this constituting investing Ceremony to speak with him really a renouncing his former annointing by Samuel and receding from that Kingly Power and Office which was given him at first by that mouth which said Arise annoint him for this is he And the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward Was Charles the seventh of France his Coronation at Rheimes after he was Crowned at Poitiers before and King by birth any thing else but a farther establishment of his title only for the satisfaction and better obedience of his people It is but so indeed here And for that the Dream was doubled unto Pharaoh twice it is because the thing is established by God and God will shortly bring it to pass The bottom then of my Adversaries mistake I have already opened and cannot omit one note more from Mr. Baxter of whom I have made herein so necessary use before who gathering an Argument as solidly as learnedly from the Magistrate 10 the Minister in thiâ— case does tell us that our Divines in abundance have proved the power of Princes howsoever men may have an hand in their Election and Investiture to be immediately from God for which he mentions particularly Spalatensis Saraâ—ia and Bilson that any who will may inform themselves whereupon he hath these words p. 146. And for my part I think I shall never consent to any that will give more to men in making a Minister than in making a King All power is of God the Powers that be are ordained of God I must therefore here humbly desire these worthy Authors and others that they consider well such expressions when they use them that Orders is the taking up the Ministry a constituting Ordinance which if they conceive so as if it gave the Ministry coram deo I must invert that of the Father mentâ—m â—ene linguam corrige and say if they will keep their words they must correct their apprehension I do like well indeed to see the meaning of this Author to be so full who thinks that to be re-ordained does offer injury to our Ministry it self as if we did thereby even recede from our Office the contrary whereof is true or vacate our Ministerial Acts which might well highly provoke his quickest worth and zeal against it but when perhaps he hath let his thoughts cool a little more on the matter he may come to conceive with us that the Ministry it self is not conferred by our Orders at the first and consequently that it cannot be endamaged by being re-ordained in the least but that these Orders first and last both do operate upon or to the same only by way of declaration before men for the reception of us in the Church where we are as hath been said no otherwise than we see the like of Princes as to their Kingdoms in the instances now mentioned and scarce yet out of sight And here I cannot say but we may divide perhaps between the Ministry it self and our Orders the Ministry which is from Christ and his institution alone and Orders which are of man Let us be allured in the first place that our Ministry or Office it self receives no damage by these second Orders which a man does not indeed recede from but cleave to thereby and the great fear is over and as for our former Orders barely whether they receive any injury hereby or no it may be perhaps another matter For my part I must acknowledge that there is injury offered to the same but I will not say hereby in what we do The doing injury is one thing and the suffering injury is another we are here but sufferers It is a Christians duâ—y to bear
be ere thou bid the people return from following of their Brethren And now methinks there lies before you O you Rulers many thousands at your feet crying quarter quarter for our Souls quarter for our Consciences we are not able to submit to some of these Impositions Though the things may be lawful yet so long as they are against their Consciences it is sin to them and they cannot do them but they wound their Souls He that doth them and doubteth is damn'd if he do them O for Gods â—ake take heed do not shove do not press them upon damnation If the Christian that only by his example gives occasion to another to do the same thing he does before his Conscience be satisfied shall judge himself that he hath sinned and dare not do the same again lest the wrath of God be kindled what shall we think of such if there be any such that are ready to provide all severity and rigor to force mens Consciences which for to do were the highest of scandal And if it be better to have a Millstone about ones neck and be hurled into the bottom of the Sea than to offend one of Gods little ones what is it to offend thousands and ten thousands I profess to God if I were a great person I should not think I ought to be more careful in the taking away a mans life in judgement than in passing such Impositions that may ensnare mens Consciences and if I should indulge my self otherwise and think to find a way to engage the Lord towards me in his tender mercies I should think this were like to be the best to be pitâ—iful to his Children in having regard to their grieved Consciences He shall have judgement without mercy that hath shewed no mercy If the tender Christian himself that by temptation from without does feel one scalding drop of Gods wrath to be so hot when he shall but yield to the most small thing against his Conscience what shall those Rivers of Brimstone be hereafter for those that drive men forward and make no Conscience though men do sin against their Consciences If innocent blood does cry so loud from Earth to Heaven for vengeance what shall the blood of mens Souls O Sirs You wâ—ll not you will not I hope seek the blood of mens Consciences It must be a very hard thing for an honest man and good subject to be put upon it to lose all that he hath for a Ceremony And yet as that Ancient said to the Child that ask'd him why he chod him for so little a matter Custome saies he is no little matter So say I Conscience is a great matter when the thing is little for which a man suffers Not that I would indulge my self in such scruples or that while Charity hopeth all things and believeth all things and on some you have compassion this should hinder the making difference between a Scruple of Reason and Affliction and the Refractoriness of Faction Will the Unicorn be willing to serve thee or abide by thy Crib I pray God to encline you all to those waies of Prudence Humility and Charity that if it be possible you may win the hearts of good men to you who like the Disciples that were amazed when they heard of Saul in the Synagogue Is this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem may begin as it were every where to wonder at themselves and at one another how they came to be filled with former prejudice and mis-apprehension as if with a change of the times and a tast of Affliction your Character was changed and Titus the Bishop turn'd Titus the Emperour Neminem a se tristem demittere Now the God of Peace that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus that great Shepheard of the Sheep through the blood of the everlasting Covenant make you perfect in every good work to do his Will working in you that which is well-pleasing in his sight through Jesus Christ to whom he Glory for ever FINIS ERRATA PAge 8 l. 8. for fit r. fitly disposed p. 26 l. 28. for on r. upon p. 32. l. 40. r. declared p. 55. l. 37. put in the space 20. p. 75. l. 19. make the full point a comma p. 82. l. 22. blot out we and transpâ—se they in its place p. 86 l. 40. insert vt vis p 98. l. 31. r. convinced ib. l. 34. insert pardon the words p. 99. l. 27. for must r. may ib. l. 32. for frequent r. fervent p. 103. l. 15. for too r. so p. 105. l. 35. r. praeproperè p. 106. l. 19. r. adverterant ib l. 22. r. verùm p. 107. l. 24. r. varios p. 109. l. 11. r. exploratum p. 111. l. 3. r. quibusdam p. 114. l. 21. for the second ab put ad p. 115. l. 3. r. down p. 126. l. 35. for the second and r. or p. 136. l. 40. r. dimittere Being upon review of these with some other litteral escapes I am informed by Letter concerning the Party whom I mention p. 35. to have been Re-ordained by Bishop Davenant that he had received only Litentiam in ordine incaeptorum in the Low Countries which the Bishop indeed taking for compleat Oâ—dination did yet ingenuously tell him for all that that he cared not to have him Oâ—dained more apud nos râ—câ—pto were it not others might except But when the Party certified him hereupon about the way of these Churches and that this went not with them for the Ordo perfâ—ctorum Pastorum he was better satisfied so that this Party avertes he was but Ordained not Re-ordained and desires to have it divulged lest more be led by his example It is the Reverend and Learned Mr. William Barlee