to confess tho' De Synedr l. 1. Cap. 14.560 being an Erastian in his Judgment he was loth to allow the Word in this Text to signifie a College of Presbyters lest he should be forc'd to allow them the Power of Excommunication 4. To put this Sense upon the Word Presbyter in this Text and to make it to signify the Office is such an Inversion and Disturbance of the natural Order of the Word as is never to be allow'd but in case of plain Necessity lest we make the Sacred Scriptures a Nose of Wax of which Mr. Thorndike was too wise to be Guilty 5. And yet if you will needs take Presbytery here for the Office of a Presbyter which Calvin doth not do but rather for the Solemn Act by which the Office is conferr'd see how little it will be to your Advantage Doth it not then clearly follow that 't is by vertue of the Office it self and not by any Degree that some have obtain'd in it above others that Men are to be Ordain'd into the Ministry So that in whomsoever the Office of a Presbyter is found there is this Power of Ordaining others Have you not then ingenuously or inadvertently granted to our Ministers all that they demand in this Matter and prov'd it for 'em too from Calvin whom you pretend to alledge against ' em To what a pass now have you brought your Episcopal Ordination Are these the only Men that have Power to Ordain a Presbyter Or have they any Power or Authority at all to do it but as they are themselves Presbyters What is a Bishop but a Presbyter set in a higher Degree for Clerical Order and Government sake but as to Office the same with the Presbyter And therefore it is that the Titles are so promiscuously and indifferently us'd in the Holy Scriptures Nor did the Apostles themselves Ordain as Apostles but as Presbyters which is the Title they own in their Epistles and claim as their Honour And that it is the Presbyter not the Bishop i. e. consider'd only as such that must Ordain is put beyond Controversy by a rul'd Case that a Bishop or Prelate Ordain'd per saltum i. e. who never had the Ordination of a Presbyter himself but only of a Bishop can neither Consecrate nor administer the Sacrament of the Lord's Body nor Ordain a Presbyter Tho' for the necessary Ends of Clerical Order and Government the Bishop be set in a superiour Degree of Superintendency and consequently his Presence and authoritative Concurrence be necessary with a select Number of his best qualify'd Presbyters to confer Orders and to see the Laws of Christ duly executed in his Church yet where this Power is abus'd than which nothing in the World is apter nor hath been more abus'd where the Churches are impos'd upon and Presbyters tyrannically ravish'd of their just Rights and Priviledges and causelesly cast out of Episcopal Communion the Presbyter is nevertheless a Presbyter as to all the Parts and Purposes of his Office He may be robb'd of his Pulpit but not of his Office robb'd of his Maintenance but not of his Right to it robb'd of his Liberty but not of his Relation to Christ nor to his Church In the Holy Scriptures we find that Presbyters as such are vested with the Power of Rule and Government in the House of God 1 Tim. 5.17 Act. 20.17 28. But of the Investiture of Prelates or their Ordination by Imposition of Hands as of an Office distinct and different from that of the Presbyter we read not one Word in all the New Testament By what Law of Christ then doth he claim a despotical Power over his Presbyters any other than as the Head and Moderator of their common Council and in whose Name and with whose Concurrence for Order and Government sake all the necessary Canons and By Laws that conduce to the Peace Profit and Edification of the Churches committed to their Care ought to be issued and established Will you tell us they are the Apostle's Successors in Power and Authority So are Our Presbyters too 1 Pet. 5.1 2 3. both in Faith and Doctrin and all Things that are Common and Essential to the Office Prelacy is not of the Office per se but only per Accidens and which when duly exercis'd honourably conduces to the bene Esse of the Church but is not constitutive of its Esse We have hear'd indeed of no Bishop no King and ever thought it extravagant enough but never heard of no Bishop no Church till now Again you would have us to believe that Presbytery being a Name of Dignity is sometimes attributed to Ecclesiastical Officers of the highest Rank as St. Peter and St. John call themselves Presbyters and therefore it must needs here signify a Company of Bishops To this we Reply 1. That the Word Presbytery was never so taken for a Company of Bishops only of which there was but one in one Church which is the limited Sense either in the Times of the Apostles or of the first Centuries of the Church perhaps not till Chrysostome's Time but alway for the Collegium Presbyterorum and before we can believe that it is to be otherwise taken in this Text you must prove it 2. If the Word must be taken in your Sense for a Company of Bishops then either there is no particular Church tho' Diocesan that hath any Presbytery of its own or there must be more Bishops than One in every such Church or else you must say that your one Bishop is a Company of Bishops 3. What can you infer in this Case from Peter's and John's assuming the Title of Presbyter but that in all the common Acts of Ecclesiastical Government and Discipline they acted as Presbyters and not as Apostles And what then have you gotten by this Argument But you urge again That Timothy was a Bishop and had Jurisdiction over Presbyters therefore Presbyters could not Ordain him to his Office for they could not communicate a Power which they never receiv'd To this we Answer 1. That Timothy was an Evangelist 2 Tim. 4.5 which if it signify'd any more than a Preacher of the Gospel which was the Work of every Presbyter then it must signify something more than an Ordinary Bishop to which he had no particular Ordination but the Apostles Election of him as his Companion and his Mission to some particular Services in the Churches of Paul's planting So that the Presbytery Ordain'd him only as a Presbyter not as an Evangelist nor as a Bishop about which we have no Form Rule or Precedent in the Scripture 2. Whereas you say They could not communicate a Power which they never receiv'd We Answer That in this Case there was no need of it they Ordain'd him as a Presbyter and what other Titles he afterward arriv'd to were but Accidental But this Reason of yours seems to be bottom'd on a great Mistake viz. That the Ordainers communicate the ministerial Power to the Persons
Ordained whereas it is Christ that communicates the Pastoral Power and Authority by his Charter of the Gospel the Power is deriv'd from Christ not from the Ordainers As the Major of a City has his Authority from the Charter granted by the King and not from the Recorder who invests him in his Office And yet neither is this true that an inferiour Officer may not invest one of a superiour Order in his Office else what have the Bishops to do at the Coronation of Kings unless you will make the Regal to be an Inferior Office to that of the Bishop which if you do you may next pretend to an absolving and deposing Power too But you tell us again That we do not find in Scripture That to mere Presbyters any such Authority was ever committed nor are there any Footsteps of it in Antiquity And we tell you That we find not in Scripture nor in Antiquity that this Authority was ever committed to any other than Presbyters But if you insist That they must not be mere Presbyters we Reply 1. How do you prove that either Simeon that was called Niger or Lucius of Cyrene or Manaen who were commanded from Heaven Act. 13.1 2. to ordain Paul and Barnabas were any of them at that time more than mere Presbyters as to Matter of Office 2. Where do you find in all the Books of the New Testament not only that a mere Bishop but that any one single Person whether Bishop or Evangelist or Apostle or any other besides our Lord Jesus Christ himself did ever celebrate this Ordinance of Ordination without the assistance of some others more or less of the Presbytery If you instance in Paul's ordaining Timothy with his own Hands will that prove that it was with his own Hands alone especially while he tells us so expresly in words at length and not in figures That it was done by the Hands of the Presbytery 3. We will propose you a Case which is possible tho' we hope will never be real Suppose the Churches of Christ should be reduc'd to a very few and the Bishops of these few should all turn Hereticks or Persecutors of the Orthodox and cast them out of their Communion the Presbyters retaining their Integrity These Presbyters by your Doctrin cannot ordain so much as a Presbyter to continue a Succession much less can they create a Bishop to do it Must the whole Church then be extinct for lack of a Bishop to Head them Or would you expect to have one rais'd from the Dead or sent back out of Heaven to do it 4. As for Antiquity There is nothing more clear than that in the Primitive Churches the Bishops and their Presbyters alway acted in Conjunction in all Acts of Church Discipline both of Excommunication Restauration Confirmation and Ordination And in the Banishment or Absence of their Bishops the Presbyters alone without the presence of any other Bishop did by his order and allowance which he could not have done had it not been a thing in it self lawful execute all that the Bishop was to have done in Person among them Nay St. Jerom will tell you that the Presbyters have Power to Ordain a Bishop over them and invest him with his Episcopal Authority as they did at Alexandria Sir There was a Time within the Memory of Man that Our Bishops were banished from their Clergy in England and what was the Whole Church of England then extinct and cut off from the Head Christ Doth eternal Salvation go and come with Lawn-Sleeves Yet once more you tell us That the Office which Timothy had was given him by Prophecy 1 Tim. 4.14 Or according to the Prophesies which went before of him 1 Tim. 1.18 His Ordination therefore must have been an extraordinary Thing and not to be drawn into Precedent except in parallel Cases But our Pastors you suppose do not pretend that they are mark'd out by Prophecy 1. We answer These Prophesies whatever they were concerning Timothy respected his Person and not the manner of his Ordination 2. It is very probable that the Apostles had a more than ordinary Direction relating to the choice of Ministers or Church-Officers many times in their Days Acts 20.28 It is there said That the Elders of the Church of Ephesus were made Overseers of their Flocks by the Holy Ghost i. e. as some think their Choice and Nomination was by Direction of the Holy Spirit of God And Clemens Romanus says That the Apostles in those Days ordained Bishops or Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Discerning by the Spirit and having a perfect Knowledge whom they should Ordain But what is all this to the way of Ordaining by Presbyters is an extraordinary Thing and not to be drawn into Precedent It 's probable that it had been foretold by some one or other that Timothy would be a faithful and eminent Minister of Christ who but you would have concluded from thence That his Ordination by Presbyters was an extraordinary Case 3. May you not as pertinently argue That none of the Ordinations done by the Imposition of the Hands of the Apostles are to be drawn into Precedent because these were extraordinary Cases the Apostles being extraordinary Persons who had an extraordinary and immediate Mission from Christ himself nor do we know of any Bishops that now pretend to be marked out by an immediate Call from Christ or any Prophecy of their extraordinary Vsefulness that have gone before of ' em But Sir Before you had given your self and us all this Trouble to so little purpose you had done much better to have sate down and considered how you could have answered Mr. John Owen's ten Arguments from Scripture and Antiquity Owen's Plea for Scripture Ordination proving Ordination by Presbyters without Bishops to be valid to which to save Labour of Transcribing we refer those that are willing to see much more on this Subject III. The Declamation which you make against popular Ordination we are not at all concern'd in but join with you in our hearty Wishes that they that are would deeply consider it Now to conclude this your third Section Having read out our Indictment in all the Articles of it and examin'd it after your manner you come to sum up the Evidence or what you call Evident and bring in the Bill against us that we have in all these Respects exceeded the Novatians Donatists and Meletians But before you proceed to your Damnatory Sentence we hope your Charity will take into Consideration what we have already so briefly offer'd in our own Defence and what we have yet further to plead for our selves as your following Discourse shall give us Occasion Your fourth Section in which you pretend to blow us wholly up Sect. 4. and to beat us out of all our Fasinesses and not to leave us a Rag to cover our Nakedness with is a Collection of just half a dozen of some little Things which you have pickt up some-where behind
Service of your Hypothesis and on the Judgment and Practice of the Faithful in the purest Ages alias the most Popish Ages so that you presume your Inference is clear That all those who have separated without just Cause from the outward Communion of that Church with which they ought or with which you will say they ought to hold Communion and so persisting in that Separation tho' otherwise never so Orthodox or Holy have hereby so cut themselves off from the Body of the Vniversal Church that they can do nothing that can qualify themselves or others for Communion with it So that by this your Rule of Catholick Vnity in outward Communion all those Persons and Churches that herein agree not with you are not of the Body nor united to the Head and then must necessarily be in a state of Damnation Woe be then to all those poor Churches that are to your Constitution and way of Government and Worship Strangers But by the way give us leave to ask you How it comes to pass that Baptism and Ordination received in the Church of Rome are accounted valid in your Church of England and yet Ordination in any Protestant Church that 's not of your Constitution accounted Null Or for what politick Reason is their Baptism allowed and their Ordination only Condemn'd Is it because the Church of Rome never separated from you nor you from it as all the other Protestant Churches have done Who must therefore be all abandon'd by you as Harlots that deserve to be ston'd while Rome is own'd for your Sister or your Mother and of the same Catholick Body with you Either own the Relation or renounce the Title of Protestant Will you say that these Churches were never in Communion with you and therefore did not go out from you Suppose this were true of the main Body of them that they were never in particular outward Communion with the Church of England tho' before the Reformation they were in the same Church with you and many of those and of their Children who were once actually in particular Communion with you went out from you on the same Account as we do yet supposing it otherwise How little will this help Them more than Vs as to the Oneness of the outward Communion of the universal Church in the Sense that you take it and urge it on Vs And now that we are upon Enquiries with you Pray be not offended if we ask you once more What think you of our first Protestant Reformers Before they actually separated from the Church of Rome were they not Members of that Church and in outward Communion with it If not how could they be said to separate from it But if they were let us ask you again was that Church of which they were then Members a true Church of Christ or not If not then that Church and all the Members of it was not united to the Head and consequently was no Church nor by your Rule of Catholick Vnity could do any thing to qualify themselves or others for Communion with any part of the Catholick Church and from whom then did your Church of England or any of the Reformed derive their Succession and Authority from the Apostles But if it was a true Church how could they according to your Notion of Catholick Vnity separate from it without involving themselves in the guilt of Schism with which you now charge us May we not hence conclude that to separate from a true Church of Christ that retains the Essentials of a Church is not always Schismatical nor a Solution of Catholick Vnity Will you tell us that these had a Warrant by a Call from Heaven to justify their Separation Rev. 18.4 2 Cor. 6.17 But on what Reason was this Call grounded Come out of her my People that ye be not Partakers of her Sins And doth not the same Call reach Vs as far as the Reason is the same Tho' the Sins of the Church of Rome were greater than those of the present Church of England yet what is Sin is Sin still and will by your own Concessions so far justify our Separation and on no other Account do we desire or pretend to justify it The Separatists condemn'd in Scripture and with whom you would sort Vs and so represent us to the World were Men of very ill Character as to their Morals Persons given up to Sensuality walking after their own ungodly Lusts tho' veild under a Form of Religion yet by their corrupt Lives they were visibly to be discern'd Now let the impartial part of the World judge whether this be so much our Character as the Character of those by whom we are thus Censur'd That the Fathers and Bishops of the first Ages were very jealous of the Union of their Churches and an intire Obedience to their Ecclesiastical Rulers very Passionately and sometimes Hyperbolically declaiming against Separation or setting up Pastors without the Approbation of their own Bishops is not to be denyed and for which they had some prudential Reasons The Christian Church was then in its Infancy and therefore requir'd a stricter Hand of Government over it for the preservation of its Unity in Communion the Faithful were not so well settl'd and experienced in their Way their Dangers were many ways extraordinary not only from the Heathen Persecutors but from the Jewish Bigots which were in so many Places dispers'd among them and had so troublesome and ensnaring an Influence on the young Gentile Converts Besides the many false and seditious Teachers which the Devil had Sown as his Tares almost every where among them the Orthodox Presbyters too few and generally too weak to deal with so many so potent and so subtil Enemies or to be entrusted with the Conduct of the Church without the Counsel and Direction of its prime Guides and Governours Besides the Honour and Satisfaction of Sovereign Rule and Dictatorship is what was ever very pleasing to Nature So that all these things consider'd we have no reason to wonder at the Heat of their Spirits in this Case And indeed the Church had then very great Reason to bless God for this their Zeal and most religiously to observe them in it especially while they had no cause to dissent or divide themselves on the account of any Heresies they Taught them or any disputable unscriptural Impositions that were required as the Conditions of their Communion with them There were no such Things exacted of Them as have been of Vs and our Teachers which made their Obedience easy and indisputable And you may observe that the great Reason of their Care to preserve the Unity of the Churches outward Communion was not to uphold a few unnecessary Ceremonies but to preserve the Purity of its spiritual Worship and Doctrin which was infinitely more valuable and consequential a circumstantial variety of the external Forms of Church-Administrations would have done the Church no more harm than the variety which we see in every Species
say in behalf of our Ministers must be referr'd to your Third and most consequential Article of our Indictment as its more proper Place and which we are now next to enter on and it runs thus III. That the Pastors we have chosen have no lawful Call to the Ministry This indeed if it could be prov'd were enough to convict both Vs and Them for Schismaticks Those Dissenters that think themselves unconcern'd in this Matter we are not now to answer for nor are we concern'd in what you say of them And as for the Philadelphians we know not what they are expecting but might we once see the Church of England reform'd according to the Scriptures we would expect a better Clergy than most of them now are I. The Ministers whom we profess to own and to follow you confess to have had some of them Episcopal Ordinations and others only Presbyterial Of the former you are willing to allow for the Honour of your own Church not only the validity of their Ordination but an eminency of Personal Abilities but in the exercise of their Abilities you fancy that they are some of those of whom Ignatius says they serve the Devil and your great Reason is not that they are Men of debauched and scandalous Conversation or of false and corrupt Doctrin but because they refuse to obey their Ordinary as you say they solemnly promis'd to do that is you think they have broken their Oath of Canonical Obedience To this we answer for them that if any of 'em have inconsiderately enslav'd themselves and betray'd the Liberties of the Church by an Oath or Promise to any Man Ordinary or Extraordinary to obey them any further than the Apostle requir'd to be obey'd by the Churches 1 Cor. 11.1 viz. as far as he himself obey'd or followed Christ we think 't is time for them to repent of such an Oath And whereas you tell us They can't expect a blessing on their Work while they continue in the Breach of such an Engagement We have as great Reason to think they can't expect a Blessing in keeping it at least being now perswaded of the Evil of it But yet our Charity obliges us to believe that they took that Oath in no larger Sense than is consistent with the Rules of the Gospel and are sure that it is no otherwise binding to ' em And this we hope you will not call a new or strange Doctrin in the Christian Churches Neither is this to degrade all Bishops or to abrogate their Office or overthrow their Chairs as you with so ill Design suggest but to reduce them to that Scripture-Foundation on which alone they may be more gloriously and firmly Established We cannot but remark with how light a Touch you pass by the Foreign Protestant Churches as one that is afraid of burning his Fingers pretending to have nothing to do with them on a Supposition which you are willing to allow that you may so rid your Hands of 'em that their Call to the Pastoral Office was extraordinary for which you quote something out of Calvin and Beza tho' little to your Purpose In what Sense these Churches understand the extraordinariness of their Call they themselves are best able to inform you Did they ever any of them pretend to be rapt up into the third Heavens where Paul once was there to receive a new Call and Commission differing from what Christ and his first Apostles delivered to and left with the Churches By what Angel or Bathkol or Vision do they say this Extraordinary Call was given them When and on whom was it that the Holy Spirit came down in the Form of Cloven Tongues to Seal them a Commission to go out and Preach another Gospel and to lay a new Foundation of the Gospel Ministry Can you bring us any Tidings of any thing like this out of their Writings or if you could would you not easily answer it by Gal 1.8 But how far are they from such vain Dreams as these Mons Turretin will tell you in what Sense they take their Call to have been Extraordinary Turretin de Necessâ—ria Secessione 〈◊〉 Eccles Rom. p. 228. Si Ordinarium dicitur quod Ordini primitus divinitus instituto est Consentaneum potest dici nostra Vocatio Ordinaria sed si equivoce pro eo sumiâ—ur quod inveterata consuetudine qualiscunque illa sit publice est acceptum extraordinaria dicenda erit quia plurimum abfuit ab ea Consuetudine More qui in Ecclesia Romana inoleverat If Ordinary be taken for that which is agreeable to the Order of Primitive and Divine Institution then our Call is Ordinary but if it be taken equivocally for that which is by long Custom of any kind commonly receiv'd then may it be call'd Extraordinary because so very different from that use and manner which had so long obtain'd in the Church of Rome You see now in what Sense they take their Call to be Extraordinary The Deliverance of the Church out of Mystical Egypt and Babylon was indeed an Extraordinary Deliverance but their Call to the Ministry was the Ordinary Call of the Gospel that Spirit of Wisdom Faith Patience Zeal Self denyal by which they were divinely influenced in their Reformation was Extraordinary and it had been better for the Church of England if her's had not been in this respect too Ordinary In the same Sense as the Reformation of Johosaphat Hezekiah and Josiah was Extraordinary in comparison of that of some other Good Kings who are noted for sparing the High Places so may the Call of these Foreign Churches be said to be Extraordinary M. Claud History of the Reformation Part 4. p. 86. 89. but that they acted by the ordinary Rule of the Holy Scriptures and the Practice of the Primitive Church they constantly affirm O Sir How poor an Escape have you endeavour'd to make this way that you may seem to be a little more Courteous to Foreigners than to your own Country-Men how pitiful a Go by is this and as foreign to Calvin's Sense as these Churches are to Your's What a strain will it cost you now to deliver your self from the Hornes of this Dilemma either to acquit Vs of what you have charg'd us with or condemn all the Protestant Churches in the World that are not of your Constitution and Communion And Excommunicate us all as Heathens and Hereticks that have no Gospel-Ministry nor Ordinances among them as the Church of Rome doth whom you hereby justify in all their Persecutions and barbarous Severities against them which looks very ill in a Protestant especially at such a Time as this But that our Ministers have not taken upon them the sacred Function in a new Way that was never approv'd in ancient Times shall be prov'd as you demand by a sight of their Patent and Commission if you have Eyes to read it in its proper Place II. Next you prepare to bring on your Tryal against a
second sort of Teachers who claim a Title to the Ministry as being Ordain'd by Presbyters And indeed when you shall have prov'd this way of Ordination to be Schismatical you will have done something in the Service of your Cause wherein if Saying were Proving and Confidence were good Evidence doubtless you would not fail But this being the main Hinge on which the whole Controversy turns it will be necessary to spend a little more Time with you here And first you make your Trip at our Ministers Heels by striking at the Stone on which they stand but you will find it is a Rock against which you may dash your own Feet but which will not move for all the Kicks you can make at it The main Scripture which with all your might you heave at is that of 1 Tim. 4.14 Neglect not the Gift that is in thee which is given unto thee by Prophecy with the laying on of the Hands of the Presbytery Against the generally approved Sense of this Scripture you are pleas'd to Quote us Calvin himself whom you mistakingly call the Father of our Discipline and would have us to believe that he could find no such Matter in this Text and that he thought Presbytery here signifies but the Office of a Presbyter and so read to us the Sense of the Text thus That Timothy should not neglect but be careful to exercise that Presbyterial Office or Power which was committed to him by laying on of Hands Now by the way lest you should hereafter forget pray take notice that you have now granted that it was to the Office of a Presbyter that Timothy was now ordain'd not to that of a Bishop or an Evangelist But as for what you refer us to out of Calvin's Institutions We find that he was there offering some Observations which he had gather'd out of the Scriptures of the New Testament concerning the Ordination of such as are to serve in the Office of the Ministry and tells us that it is certain the whole Multitude of the People were not to impose Hands on their Ministers in their Ordination but only such as were themselves Pastors in Office to whom alone the ordaining Power belongs tho' he leaves it uncertain whether the Hands of many were always laid on in every solemn Act of Ordination but produces Scripture Instances that it was so done in the Ordination of Deacons Act. 6.6 and in the Ordination of Paul and Barnabas Act. 13.3 But that Paul here minds Timothy that he had ordain'd him with his own Hands tho' not exclusively of all others or with his own Hand only but rather that he was the principal Person and the only Apostle concerned in that Ordination and therefore Admonishes him to stir up the Gift that was in him by the Imposition of his Hands And afterward gives us his private Opinion that when the Apostle mentions to Timothy in his other Epistle the Hands of the Presbytery that he is not there minding him so much of the manner of his Ordination by the College of Presbyters of whom Paul was one and the chief in that Action but rather that he should mind lpsam Ordinationem his Ordination it self and the great and glorious Ends of it q. d. Fac ut Gratia quam per manuum impositionem recepisti quum te Presbyterum Crearem non sit irrita That so the Grace which he had receiv'd when he ordain'd him a Minister of the Gospel or a Presbyter might not prove in vain And now how far Calvin is like to serve your Purpose or to disserve ours we leave to any competent impartial Judge And yet if you think your Notion of Calvin's Sense be the right we must tell you you are a Dissenter from the generality of the most Learned of your own Church Mr. Herbert Thorndike will tell you If we take not our Marks amiss we shall sind Argument enough at least at the beginning for the concurrence of Presbyters with the Bishop in making of Presbyters and other inferior Orders In the first Place those general Passages of the Fathers Wherein is witnessed that the Presbytery was a Bench assistent to the Bishop without Advice whereof nothing of Moment was done must needs be drawn into Consequence to argue that it had effect in a particular of this weight Then the Ordination of Timothy by Imposition of Hands of the Presbytery will prove no less Indeed says he 't is well known that the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Ecclesiastical Writers signifies divers times the Office and Rank of Presbyters which Signification divers here embrace expounding Imposition of Hands of the Presbytery to mean that by which the Rank of Presbyter was conferr'd But the Apostles Words running as they do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 oblige a Man to ask when he is come as far as the Imposition of Hands of whom or whose Hands they were he speaketh of which the next Words satisfy Had it been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Sense might better have been diverted but running as it doth with the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with Imposition of the Hands it remaineth that it be specified in the next Words whose Hands were imposed Thus this Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Gospel Luk. 22.66 and in Ignatius's Epistles signifieth the College of Presbyters which hath the Nature and Respect of a Person in Law and therefore is read in the singular for the whole Bench which being assembled and set is call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in both Places and in Cornelius of Rome his Epistle to St. Cyprian where he saith Placuit contrahere Presbyterium Now Sir here 's your Mr. Thorndike against what you would impose on our Calvins But besides this we Answer 1. If the Word Presbytery is here to be understood of the Office then will it follow as we have before noted that Timothy's Office was the Office of a Presbyter What then is become of Timothy's Episcopacy which you so learnedly plead for in your Discourse of Church-Government Or When and by Whom was it that he was created Bishop 2. Camerarius tells us that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which imports the Office of a Presbyter So that here 's a foul mistake of the Presbytery for the Presbyterate the Persons for the Office 3. Ignatius who liv'd very near the Times of the Apostles and therefore may well be presum'd to have understood the Meaning and Use of this Word tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ignat. Epist ad Trall What is the Presbytery other than the Sacred Company who are the Bishops Counsellors and Assessours This Sense Clemens Alexandrinus and some others of the Primitive Fathers give of it nor was it ever taken in any other Sense by the Fathers till Origen nor in any Place of the New Testament doth it signify any other than the Company of Presbyters as Luk. 22.66 Act. 22.5 And this Mr. Selden himself is fore'd
to Preach Christ here so near to your Noses wherein you make your self a Judge of evil Thoughts 4. By your implicit complaint how much they exercise your Patience and Self-denial as those of old did Paul's Yet would you but lay aside your own Envy and Prejudices you might on much more comfortable Grounds conclude as the Apostle there doth that this their Preaching would be to your Advantage and Beneficial both to the Church and to your selves too V. The next Argument that you can afford us is this That we are only returned to those whom we had forsaken before and that we might do this since we had the Indulgence or the Liberty granted to us by the Law Before we meddle with this Argument let us turn it into Form after its Fellows and see how it will look then and who they are that will own it But in Syllogism it makes this Figure For a People to return to those Ministers whom they had forsaken before when they have Liberty granted them by the Law so to do is no Schism But we have now Liberty granted us to return to those Ministers whom we had forsaken before Erg. Sir It would look very ingeniously if you would now at last please to tell us from what Author of Ours you took this Topping Argugument which perhaps you think and would have others to think is one of the best we have to defend our selves with The truth is were it not for the Law that protects Us we should be badly able to defend our selves against Church-violence and doubtless there are Summer-flies enough among Us whose Devotion depends on this Liberty which the Law hath given us But had we not better Reasons to justifie our Cause against your Argumentations we should think our selves in an ill Case 'T is hardly worth our labour to follow you in all that you harrangue on this Head You say If our Separation was Sinful before we Conform'd our return to it must be Sinful And we think so too For the Law hath not alter'd the Case as to the Nature of the thing Wherefore your first Enquiry upon it is very pertinent viz. Whether our Separation before we Conformed were Sinful But instead of Enquiring you take it for granted that it was so and say 't is clear from what went before i. e. from your notion of Catholick Unity which we have examin'd and think that by this time you have little Reason to Glory in it But if this prove to be no clear evidence against us then it is not yet clear that our Separation from you is Causeless and therefore Sinful and Schismatical And we hope we have already said enough to destroy that Infant-notion of Catholick Unity in your Sense if we may but obtain an unbyassed Judgment upon it Neither do we need that Objection you here make for us That many of us were never Members of the Church of England and therefore no Deserters of it We commend you that you will be careful to raise no Objections but what you think you can Answer But you must first better prove that our Separation is Causeless and then we shall think our selves concerned to take notice of what you say Sir We are ashamed to hear a Protestant pleading so like a Papist for a Priestly Succession concluding that the Office of the Gospel-Ministry is utterly extinct without your Episcopal Ordination Had not this Antiscriptural Uncharitable Church destroying Pretension been so long ago baffled and therefore deserted by the Wisest and most Learned of your own Communion as well as by the Judgment of all Foreign Protestant Divines we should not have wondered so much at you Wherefore we shall not now Rem toties actam agere but leave you first to answer what hath been by so many and with so convincing Evidence written on this subject whose Names we need not mention to one that is so well acquainted with Books as you are In the mâ—an time we cannot but make a very particular Observation on the Ebullition of your Gall against the Liberty we now enjoy by the Benefit of the Law 't is well for us that this was not granted us as once by a Dispencing Power to which the late Reigns pretended but by a Better-design'd and Well advised Act of King and Parliament For to give us here a Taste of the Volatility of your Spirit of Charity you are bold to suggest that We are not the Persons that come within the intent of that Act and therefore can justly expect no savour from it because you say that Act was only design'd to give ease to Tender Consciences but ours are not of that number because not of the same Latitude with yours Oh how do your Fingers itch to be at your old Work with us again What a grief of Heart is the Indulgence which our Governours have so Graciously and so Necessarily granted us How fain would you cut us off from the Protection of the Laws under which we live as Loyally and Obediently as any of your selves And all because we have forsaken your Ceremonies and desire to Worship God in a way more agreeable to the Scripture Simplicity of the Gospel and more experimentally conducive to the Spiritual Good and Eternal Happiness of our own Souls We see by this that Paul was never in greater danger at Jerusalem on the account of his Nonconformity than We should be of You should the Government but once more let you loose upon Us. But that We are none of the Tender Consciences that come within the intent of the Act you pretend to prove by our former Conforming to you and Communion with you wherein you presume that we were then satisfied and thought it lawful Ay Sir we once thought it lawful i. e. not absolutely or in it self Sinful when we either knew no better or could get no better and we are of the same Mind still as we have once already told you and to which to avoid repetition we would referr you having for illustration of the Case first given you this Familiar Similitude 2 Kings 6.25 There was a time in Samaria when an Asse's Head was sold for Fourscore Pieces of Silver and the fourth part of a Cab of Dove's Dung for Five Pieces of Silver There was nothing so Ceremonially or Naturally unclean but was Hungrily fed upon and not one questioned the Lawfulness of it so that there were no Murder in the Case To the Hungry Soul every bitter thing was sweet But when the Siege was broken up and the Gates were opened and a Plenty of all Good Food was come should the Princes have Monopoliz'd it and by a severe Edict interdicted the free use of it and confin'd the People to the use of such things for kind and measure as they had found in their extremity would pass down with them and was just enough to keep Soul and Body together and condemn all such to Fines or Prisons or Banishment that should dare
do referr you assuring you that we are not carry'd by a Sense of Liberty but by a Sense of Duty as many of us as have any Religious Principles to act by either in our or in your Communions not because allowed by Men but because commanded of God to do what you so uncharitably condemn us for II. For our Ministers we say 1. That it was never desir'd nor design'd by those that influenc'd the Revolution of Church Affairs on the Restauration of King Charles the Second that any of those of the Presbyterian Way should be comprehended in that Act that was then made for Uniformity And tho' they pretended to treat with them about it the Design was but to know what they would stick at that so they might be sure to shut them out as appears not only by the Measures they took but by what is credibly reported of Archbishop Sheldon that he should say Now we know their Minds we 'll make them all Knaves if they conform Defence of Mr. M. H. of Schism Append. p. 143. And of another Reverend Dean that reply'd to a sober Gentleman complaining that they had made the Door of Admission too strait If we had thought so many of 'em would have conform'd we would have made it straiter So then they must Sacrilegiously have renounc'd their Ministry to have put their Necks under the Yoke of your Tyranny for into the Ministry you were resolv'd not to admit them if by any Means you could keep them out as you did the far greater part of them to the number of about Two Thousand 2. It is most certain that they neither could then nor can now obtain their Ministerial Communion with you without sinning directly against their own Consciences For 1. How can they without the most horrid Perjury declare upon Oath their full Assent and Consent to such things as they are perswaded in their Judgments to be unsound in Doctrine and superstitious in Worship can this be done without lying to the Holy Ghost And yet having thus shut them out of your Communion and hitherto kept the Door so strongly barr'd against them will your Charity accuse them for their Separation from you How unsincere is this You should have spoken out the very Truth that when you first threw them out of your Communion you repent you had not thrown them out of the World could you have found any Pretence for it That when you stopt their Mouths you had not stopt their Breath too Pray Sir upbraid them no more with their Nonconformity nor charge them with Schism on that Account till you can assure them which way they can conform to you in their Ministerial Capacity without Perjury or in a Lay capacity without Sacriledge 2. How can they submit to your Reordination without condemning and renouncing their first Ordination as null and consequently not only condemn Themselves and all their former Ministerial Acts but all those Protestant Churches in the World that have no other than Presbyterial Ordinations which while they are as they have Reason to be otherwise minded they can't possibly do without sinning point blank against their own Consciences against the Truth and against the greater part of the Church of Christ in the World So that they must either do this which is tremendous to think or must abandon their Office which they can't do without a Sacrilegious Desertion and sinning against Christ who hath put them in Commission and to whom they have sworn Fidelity and against so many Thousand Souls too that are perishing for want of more and better Ministerial Help almost every where throughout the Kingdom This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this little we think is enough to justifie their Practice in preaching the Gospel of Christ to us and to as many as will hear them And for you to brand Them or Us as Schismaticks for so doing is openly to fight against God Sir We wonder what you could propose to your self as the Merit of such an Undertaking what is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you please your self with the rare Discovery you have made after the most inquisitive Researches that have been made for these 38 Years by the most learned and sharpest Wits on both sides What have you to add to what hath been by the greatest Names in your Church already urg'd and which hath been over and over answer'd If your Design had not been to impose a Wheedle on such as never read much nor are capable of making a Judgment in controversial Cases and under a Pretence of Charity and Zeal for their Souls to affright them with the black Name of Schism and so to lick them into your Communion you would have taken other Measures If you would have pleaded the Case like a Man of Sense and Integrity you would have taken up the Arguments on our side in their Strength as they have been offered on every part of the Controversie by Mr. Baxter Mr. Clarkson Mr. Owen the Defender of Mr. M.H. Mr. Corbet Mr. Rule and many others more than it is needful for us here to mention and too tedious to make Collections from while the Authors themselves may so easily be consulted To conclude In what you have herein done it appears to Us that you have shewn your Charity and your Discretion much alike who are Reverend Sir Your Brethren in the Catholick Unity of the Christian Faith tho' those Dissenters who some of us conform'd before the Toleration and have since withdrawn our selves from the Communion of the Church of ENGLAND April 12th 1700. FINIS