not a word this word Gift would import otherwise SECT IX Another Argument NOW to this last in page the 9th I frame this Syllogism Those Gifts which have been and are many times in the same are not so Contradistinct as they cannot subsist in the same Subject But many of these Gifts in the Text have been and often are in the same Subject Ergo. My Major is clear from the Act that which hath been and is is possible and crosseth not the nature of any thing My Minor may be proved in the Lump First I doubt not to say that the Apostles had all these for they were Prophets they were Minsters they were Doctors Teachers Exhorters did give to the poor did rule had bowels of mercy with all the requisites Take Prophesy for Preaching many a man now hath all these in the same Lump Secondly Teacher and Exhorter cannot be severed This Gentleman stiles himself Pastor of the Church of Hertford upon Connecticutt in N. England Mr. Cotton Teacher of Boston in N. England both of them have written concerning these businesses If a Pastor be an inconsistent Office with a Teacher why doth Mr. Hooker teach and so Logically endeavour to prove his Doctrine and Mr. Cotton the Teacher use Rhetorick to perswade These things seem to me inconsistent a Teacher and not an Exhorter or an Exhorter and not a Teacher so farre they are from being inconsistent one with the other that they cannot exist well one without the other and for this particular phrase Distributer or Giver neither one nor other be good men unlesse they be both the Clergy must not be altogether upon the receiving hand there is time and place for them to give as well yea rather than others and take Care of the poor and have bowels of Compassion towards them and by their good Example exhort others to do as they do I have been something too tedious here but this will save future labour SECT X. His Second Argument refuted HIS Second Argument to prove his kind of Office is drawn from theâ— 1 Tim. 3. 8. where the Description how he must be qualified is set down I grant it but is it set down that he is an Officer to dispose Church Treasure and nothing else which he disputes for For he offers at such a thing and therefore that place in his own Judgement can speak nothing for it proves only that there is such an Office as a Deacon and how he should be qualified but no one word what the duty of that Office is and therefore he draws no Argument from it but only sets it down with a figure of 2. for his second Argument although he argue nothing from it His Third Argument refuted HIs Third Argument is drawn from the place before hand led Acts 6. to which I have I doubt not spoken enough but that it may appear wherein he and I agree and wherein differ in this point Consider with me that he saith that this was a publike Office I grant it Secondly that this service was about Tables I grant it Thirdly page 35 that the full and carefull attendance upon this work could not stand with carefull constant and consciencious Attendance upon the Ministry of the Word as the Office of a Minister so employed did require This I deny because I have proved they were Ministers of the Word and have before answered his Arguments drawn from the Apostles It is not meet c. vers 3. and do now adde It is one thing to say It is not meet another to say It is inconsistent it cannot stand with it Again many things might be and were sit for Inferior Ministers which were not fit for the Apostles It is not meet was truly said by the Apostles But now I doubt whether this Office was for this occasion only or for their lives I 2dly affirm as before that these men were Ministers And 3dly I deny that this was of that Deacon St. Paul speaks of and was after used in the Church His continued Discourse is but a repetition only a passionate expression or two that we make a Deacon half a Priest or a Preparation to it and he saith that this was the first In-let into the Usurpation of Bishops I let these things passe and come to his Dispute against us His First Argument from Reason Answered THat which is made by Christ a distinct Office from Pastor and Teacher that cannot be any part of either or a preparation to either But so the Office of a Deacon is I answer That First I deny that ever the Office of a Deacon was instituted by Christ but by the Apostles Secondly although I grant that the Apostles instituted this Oâ—â—â—ce distinct from them yet it may be a preparation or part of either for that which is a preparation is distinct from that it is prepared for and although all the parts united together do not differ really from the whole yet any one part doth And Thirdly I say that although it were neither part nor preparative yet it may be subservient to them in which Consists the Office of a Deacon His Second Argument from Reason answered HIs Second Argument That Office which is to attend Tables hath nothing to do with Pastors or Doctors c. But this Office is to attend Tables To the Major That Office may do both those in the Acts did To the Minor I deny that the Office of a Deacon is solely to attend Tables but if he leave out that word solely his whole Argument is lame that which he urgeth out of Acts 6. is not to the purpose for as I may deny them to be Deacons because never so called in the Scripture so I do deny them to be those Deacons St. Paul directs 1. Tim. 3. His Third Argument answered HIs Third Argument If the Apostles who were extraordinary persons could not shall men of ordinary Abilities be sufficient I have answered this before It is no where said that they could not they could without doubt have done much more but as they were men of extraordinary abilities so they were men of extraordinary employments and it was not meet that that employment should be impeded by any of these lesse affairs Again we deny that the Office of a Deacon exacts the duty of a Pastor from him but only that he should minister to the Pastor which he may do well with such a Charge upon him Page 36. Number 3. I understand not those Figures He saith somewhat that would be answered Another Argument from 1 Tim. 3. 8. answered THE Gifts of Deacons which are required by the Apostle are such as will not furnish a man to be a Minister he means a Presbyter I think for such should be Apt to teach to be a teacher and not apt to teach is to be a Bell without a Clapper I could answer this in his own Coyn but I love not scurrility and sharpnesse in these Grave and Serious things they taste not of that
retort this Argument If none may preach but Clergy Elders then it seems here that these must be Clergy not Lay Elders which rule well for the Text that sayes the one labours in the Word implyes with that that the other doth it but not industriously and therefore must be such Elders who may preach and would have more honour if they did it laboriously or rather that honour more due SECT XIV A Digression concerning Preaching BUT because tbese men seem to place the whole work of the Ministry in preaching I would learn from some of them what this preaching is which they magnifie so much which I could never know to be so defined as to make a peculiar Work of a Minister so that it should as they make it swallow up his Function and belong to none but such as they call Ecclesiastical Presbyters I hope it will not be unuseful to the Explication of the Text nor unprofitable nor unpleasant to the Reader if I beyond the bounds of an Answer digresse a little to discourse of this Theam Labouring in the Word is not only labouring with the Word in the pulpit but an Industrious and studious Endeavour and therefore in the 4th Chapter of this Epistle vers 13. he adviseth Timothy to give himself unto reading that is Studying Exhortation Doctrine and vers 15. Meditate on these things this is labouring in the Word and this labour is such as is expressed like an Oxe as he expresseth it vers 18th of this Chapter Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Oxe that treadeth out the Corn it must be as much or greater or else his Argument would not hold It is the labour of the mind by day and night reading meditating And such are worthy in an especial manner of double honour but because the Apostle adviseth to Exhortation and Doctrine and every Ecclesiastick Officer is not for himself but for the Church this reading and meditating must not be for his private Contemplation but for the publique to teach him to rule well upon Occasions to exhort to all piety to teach the Truth of Gods will both to believe and to do all these at their several Occasions not only in the pulpit but in Writings and in Conferences Every man who is fit to be a Presbyter is not cut out for a popular Auditory he may have Gifts of an higher strain and they ought to bestow their pains upon those greater dutyes As I have heard it was answered Erasmus when he scrupled to receive a Benefice in England because he had not that Language to teach the people You teach their Preachers which is more than to teach them so may we say of these that they may teach Preachers which is a greater Work Preach to them in Conference preach to them in their Writings I have known in mine experience a learned man who had not himself the Faculty of Pulpit-preaching yet did more good by directing and teaching others to preach and advanced the Cause of Christ more than Twenty peeachers could have done Did not this Man labour in the Word think you Others again who have not that Convenience of doing it by Conference have written learned books for Preachers to study and by them Preachers preach Did not these men labour in the Word It is reported of Salvianus that he wrote and penned Homilies which others preached and repeated which of these think you was the Preacher I think both and both took pains and did their utmost endeavour and laboured in the Word and Doctrine perhaps one could not pen exactly perhaps the other could not Orator-like deliver or perhaps and it is likely Salvianus could do both but his Sermon might serve both places and did good and was applauded in both his own Church and his that preached his Sermon he preached perhaps in two places at once and both thesâ— put their Talents out to use and I doubt not but they may hear Well done good and faithfull Servant thou hast been faithfull in a little I will make thee Lord over much But let us a little Consider what Preaching is SECT XV. What Preaching is I Can think it nothing but teaching the Gospel of Christ that is his Life for Example his Doctrine for Precepts and his Death and Resurrection for our Meditation now then this is done by words written or spoken either of these a man preacheth by He preacheth that writeth such Arguments as Convince or Perswade as well as he that speaks them yea perhaps doth more by that and makes an Everlasting Sermon like a persume when the body is gone yet there is a sweetnesse remaining behind which is gratefull to all such as Converse with it so the Preacher being dead the Sermons yet live the fruit remains when the Tree is felled That this is Preaching is most evident because these teach the truth of Doctrine and these perswade to Godlinesse Again it is preâ—ching and he preâ—cheth who using others words and matter in the Pulpit perswades the Auditory either to Christian faith or manners this is preaching and for my part I conceive the saying or reading a Godly Homily to be preaching and more usefull than those vain Sermons which Trivial Presbyters and proud men utter even in pulpits with you in London I call them proud bacause many take upon them to preach who scarce ever did read a Body of Divinity nor are able to ballance the Doctrine they deliver by the Analogy of Faith or if they could do it by leasure and study take not time to do it being alwayes preaching but never learning these men if they were humble would content themselves either with such Sermons as are penn'd by the Church to be read or got without book or with such excellent Sermons which St. Chrysostome Bazil Gregory or the like made as the whole Church of the Muscovites do for by that means both the people should be instructed in the fundamentals of Faith and Life and they secured from that fearfull presumption of undertaking to teach being not taught and that vanity of being unestablished in the Faith and being carryed about with winds of Doctrine and that other pride of seeking their own vain-glory truly these thoughts have often made me startle when I go about to study a Sermon and not daâ—e to adventure on any thing which I have not carefully Considered on To repeat anothers Homily or Sermon is preaching it is teaching the people the Gospel of Christ for it is not material who penn'd it so the Message of God be delivered and because Nihil dictum quod non fuit dictum prius I know not why men should be so squeamish of it But I will stoop one degree lower since Preaching is Evangelizing and that is teaching the Gospels who can say that reading the Scripture in a known Tongue is not preaching which teacheth the people out of Scripture all that they ought to know concerning their Souls Good Let no man trouble this Discourse with St.
necessary for the gathering which are not necessary for the perfecting the body of Christ we see Prophets were necessary for the Gathering and the Extraordinary part of Apostles which are not necessary for the perfecting Now here is a Conjunction Gathering and Perfecting His second Consequence is as bad If the Church can be perfected without these there is no need of these this doth not follow things may be necessary ad esse ad perfectum esse and yet other things may be necessary to the easie obtaining this Esse I do but give you the non-consequence of his manner of Argument observe his Minor But there is no Minister necessary for the Gathering and Perfecting of the Church besides that of the Presbyters He proves this Because the Apostle setting down the several Ministries which Christ had purchased and by Ascention bestowed upon his Church when he gave Gifts to men for that end they are only comprehended in these two Pastors and Teachers Ephes. 4. 12 13. and they who are given for this end can and shall undoubtedly attain it Consider here the Inconsequence of this Argument Because saith he the Apostle in that place sets down none other therefore there is no other We have examined that Text sufficiently I thought already but this Starts another Negative note The Apostle doth not say there that there are no other but what he sets down nor doth he put any Exclusive Term as these and these only are they I am sure in the 12. to the Romans he hath another reckoning of things like Offices and so in the 1 Cor. 12. 28. I know he may say that with a Trick of Wit these may be brought about by subordination to amount to the same thing and number and so I can reduce them to two only Extraordinary and Ordinary or ruling and teaching a principal and subservient but unlesse he can shew a Negative or exclusive Term in the Text he cannot draw a Negative inference So that although the means that our Saviour appoints shall attain its end yet the means he appoints must be totally taken not one piece without another and this Text doth not say that is the Total means this is known in Logick posita Causa ponitur effectus but it must be totalis Causa not partialis But now suppose his Consequence were good in Logick will the Text bear him out in the matter Doth the Text name none but these Pastors and Teachers Yes sure and although these two as I have shewed are but one yet Apostles are different and these seem without distinction to be necessary to the perfecting of the body of Christ and Bishops by all Consent succeed the Apostles in tâ—is Duty I will not desâ—ant upon Prophet to shew the sense and meaning of it as not pertinent this is enough to shew the weaknesse of his Argument if the Text were granted to allow his deduction out of it But he proceeds as unluckily as if all this were granted Where saith he the Issue is if Pastors and Doctors be sufficieâ—t Teaching Ministryes to perfect the Church then there needs no more but these I will not lose my self in his long period Suppose these were sufficient Teaching Ministries is there no more requisite but teaching Yes to look to them that they do teach and teach right Doctrine But saith he if these be enough all others be superfluous I answer these are enough for their own Work if they would be good and all industrious workmen but there is necessity for some Custodire Custodes I am weary with this SECT XII His Fourth Argument concerning Jurisdiction answered HIs Fourth Argument is thus framed Distinct Offices must have distinct Operations Operari sequitur esse But they that is Bishops have no distinct Operations from Presbyters if there be any they must be Ordination and Jurisdiction but both these belong to Presbyters Jurisdiction John 20. 23. Whosesoever sins ye remit c. Binding and loosing imply a power of Censuring as well as preaching and both are given in the Apostles to their Successors the rulers and Elders of the Churches who succeed them in their Commission Let him prove that these who are here Elders of the Inferiour rank Succeed the Apostles in that part of their Commission and his Conclusion is granted but that he can never do and therefore labours not for it otherwise I have shewed that there were parts of the Apostles fulnesse of power imparted to one and part to another as the Divine Wisdom directed them to divide it for the good of the Church this they must grant who make Pastors Rulers Teachers distinct Offices SECT XIII Ordination not given by Presbyters FOR the Second Ordination he brings Scripture 1 Tim. 4. 14. He only Ciphers the Text I will put down the words Neglect not the Gift that is in thee which was given thee by Prophesy with the laying on of the hands of the Presbyters His Collection hence is That this Gift was his Presbyterial or Episcopal Office and that this power was Conveyed to him by the laying on of the hands of the Presbyters and therefore Presbyters have power of Ordination I will not here dispute what is meant by Prophesie as not pertinent to this Cause nor will I trouble my discourse with what is meant by this Gift which hath received another Interpretation by some of best Authority but will pitch upon the word Presbytery and it may be of Imposition of hands For this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is used only three times in the New Testament Luke 22. 66. where we render it the Elders of the people but it is in the Original in the Abstract not the men but the Presbytery of the people The second place is Acts 22. 5. where we read all the Estate of the Elders the word is the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the whole Presbytery now the Third place is this in my Text. In the two first places Presbytery is taken for the Magistrates or Senate of the people of the Jewes no Christian Order then from the use of the word in other places it cannot be Collected that this should particularize this lower Order which he fancieth sith there is no place to parallel it But because Presbytery doth signifie an Ecclesiastical Order in the Ministery therefore this Presbytery should do so likewise but in as large a sense as Presbyter not more restrained Now Presbyter takes in its latitude the whole Order of Priestood both Bishop and Presbyter it were in vain to insist upon particular places So then must this be would be know which I am Confident all Antiquity understand it of that rank of Presbyters which we term Bishops St. Chrysostome Theophylact Theodoret no man contradicting but these late Expositors Then let us adde one word more Were that Gift understood for the Ecclesiastical Authority which he had or secondly were Presbytery understood for a Synod of Presbyters as they call them which none but themselves affirm
of essentially true Baptism to admit men into the Church but they have a Doctrine essentially true of repentance to let men out of it and I am confident that those men which so die with their repentance and contrition for sins and a desire of a new life and a trust in Christ that he hath satisfied for their sins and have no wilfull errors but their other errors are such as are invincible and upon that ground beg with David the Lord to forgive them their secret sins I say such a soul shall be saved notwithstanding multitudes of errors both in belief and practice And this Doctrine is taught in the Church of Rome although mixed with many errors for which yet they have many such seeming reasons as to such who are not allowed to converse with men or read Books of another belief may be sufficient to excuse them at the last day So that although the errors taught in the Church of Rome are not safe yet the fundamentals taught among them annexed to that Doctrine of repentance may be accepted by Almighty God according to his Covenant in Jesus Christ to their salvation This Controversie hath been most learnedly handled by Chillingworth and others I let it pass therefore and will examine his Major which is extreamly far from truth Where all the members are true members there the Church is a true Church This Proposition is false all the members of a dog are true members all the members of a man are true members but there is no true Church where that Turk is or where that dog is Thus as he sets it down it is grosly false nor can I adde any one term to mend it the likeliest I can may be this That Church where every member is a true member that Church is a true Church But yet this is false according to themselves for a Church as we dispute of it is totum Integrale under that notion we conceive it to have members but many times there may be many hands and many feet which stick together and yet do not make a true totum Integrale which consists of a perfect body with all its severall parts and yet these are true parts of their severall bodies these hands of Richard those of William so there may be divers Lay-men Congregated or divers Pastors which are severally each of them true members perhaps of other Congregations yet in that body make not up a true Church which consists of all parts Pastors Teachers c. Let me adde one term more In that Church where all the members are true members of it there that Church is a true Church This is false likewise for in a representative Officer each member is a true member of him of a false or counterfeit King each member is a true member of him but he is not a true Officer or true King and for him to urge that he who is a false Officer is no Officer and that Congregation which is not a true Church is no Church then he by making these members of the Church of Rome and calling it a Church of Rome makes it a true Church himself So that either this Proposition means nothing or it is absolutely false This I speak to shew that although the Conclusion which he conceives of an undeniable evidence were true as I have proved it false yet it would in no means be deduced from that Major no not with the addition of two or three the most assisting terms I could adde to it and so I come to his fourth Argument which is thus framed SECT XI His fourth Argument answered THat which is a Seal of the Covenant and our Incorporation into the Church visible that cannot be the form of it At primum verum Ergo. I put down his very words which forceth me to adde his Minor But Baptism is the Seal c. Ergo Baptism is not the form This Proposition he proves thus Because the Seal comes after the thing sealed but the form goes before These things are so grosly delivered and so without all illustration that it is hard to speak to it for this is all he speaks in that place to this business what he addes against Mr. Rutherford I am nothing concerned in nor do I know what Mr. Rutherford replyes to this nor can conceive it by him In a word I deny his Major That say I which is the Seal may be the form of the Covenant in such cases where the Seal is made an essentiall part of it as in such deeds where Sealing is necessary as in Law where signing sealing and delivering altogether make the form of that Covenant where they are so required and Baptism is all these so that if he had said that which is a Seal alone cannot make the form I would have denyed his Minor and have said that Baptism is not a bare Sign as he will and doth confess but signing and delivering on both sides Now to illustrate this Proposition in such cases such Seals as I have described are the form of those Covenants Consider that the form of every thing is that which gives it ability to work that which is its proper work this doth signing sealing and delivering do every Deed is like a dead body before but when sealed it receives a soul and is able to work which it could not do before Again the form of every thing is the last addition to it that which he speaks in his proof that a form goes before the thing sealed or rather informed or constituted and a Seal comes after is very vain and weak for it is true as it being a constituting principle and a cause of that it produceth it is therefore as the Logicians speak prius naturâ non effectu before it in nature not in time The Sun is in nature before its light because its light proceeds out of it fire before heat yet they are simul tempore children of the same birth and one cannot be without both are The soul of man is before a man in nature because it is a constituting cause yet by them that hold it created Creando infunditur infundendo creatur and they that hold it ex Traduce give it no prae-existence in time to the man and what he sayes of a Seal it comes after in such cases where Seals are essentiall they are before the Seal comes and like a soul put into a body it gives it ability to work and in that state is precedent in nature So that you see Seals in such Deeds as well as forms are before the vivacity of a Covenant in nature though both are simul in time and therefore such Seals may be forms and indeed are forms as is before exprest being that which gives the Covenant sealed its form and power to work and likewise the last thing which comes to actuate that thing in which it is but because that when the Seal is gone yet the form of the Covenant remains and forms having permanent
men who are not Ministers which conduce to others Salvation and are very usefull and commendable in them nay are done out of Duty as the Example of a good life discreet admonishing men of their faults incouraging others to virtue and the like which are all Acts of Duty from one Christian man to another but not Acts of Office Acts of Charity as they are Christians not as they are this or that sort of men We must therefore recall the first Term that they must do something Conducing to the salvation of men This phrase must be a little farther cleared likewise There are things which Conduce accidentally to the Salvation of others as persecution affliction so it was with St. Paul sometimes assisting in villany which starts up some Divine Speech or Action so those wicked persons who assisted in the Crucifying of our Saviour their Wicked Act made them Spectators and Auditors of those supernatural words which then declared him to be God and made them receive that Faith in him and confesse that he was the Son of God But these persons are in themselves the Devils Ministers though Gods almighty power and providence Conjured them about as he will the very Devils themselves and draw his honour out of their Wickednesse his light out of their Darknesse These Acts in themselves Conduce to Hell but God wrought them miraculously about to Heaven and therefore not understood here but such as in themselves are disposed to it and because Heaven is not a result or an Effect naturally arising out of our Works but a blessing bestowed upon the Workers according to their Works for Christs sake therefore those things which Conduce to Heaven in themselves must be such as God is pleased to Covenant with us that upon them and the doing of them he will give this Salvation for no man can obtain that by Fraud or Violence and therefore it must be on such Terms as he Covenants for And these things are those of the Word and Sacraments as the whole Christian World hath named them though they have no such name given them in the New Testament to wit this God hath provided Salvation in Heaven for his Servants the Means for them to get this Heaven is by these Covenants Sealing these Deeds obeying these Ordinances of his â—or which he hath appointed Officers and given them Power and Authority to administer these Covenants Letters of Atturney for it is a Legal Juridical businesse and a legal phrase befits it to act these things betwixt him and men and teach them his Lawes and will by which they shall be Sharers of this blessing and they who have an Office and from that Office Authority to do All or Some of these things are the Ministers we speak of And I think this may suffice to speak what a Minister is How he is ordained and who they are will follow SECT II. These Powers must be given by God TO understand these heads we must first conceive that a man can receive or assume no such power that is effectual to himself unlesse it be given him from Heaven as St. John speaks John 3. 27. Heaven being Gods gift the powers the Covenants which bring men thither must be by his Appointment and the Officers who work and effect these powers must be by him authorized likewise I write these Conclusions briefly being of great Evidence in themselves and for ought I know denyed by none SECT III. The way to understand who these are AND now in my Conceit the readiest way to clear this truth will be to shew what Officers Christ hath appointed to this purpose and this must be done two wayes First to shew Historically what was done and Secondly to shew how that History shall agree with the Design it had to bring men to Heaven and how unfit other pretentions are to it The History I shall divide into two parts First to lay the Foundation of this glorious Building to shew what our Saviour acted himself in it what the Church Discipline was in Embrione in Ovo in the Foundation then to shew what Superstructures the Apostles built upon it what it was in the birth when it was a Chick The first must be sought out of the Gospells or the beginning of the Acts where the Story of our Saviours immediate Commerce with this World both in his life and after his Death is set down for us The second part must be cleared from the later part of the Acts and the Epistles and thus my design is layd CHAP. III. The Election of the Apostles and what to do THE first remarkable business in the Gospel is the Election of the Apostles which we may find recorded in the 3d. of St. Mark v. 13. and the 6th of St. Luke v. 13. In St. Mark we may observe that he ordained Twelve that they should be with him and that he might send them forth to preach and in St. Luke we may note that he gave these Twelve the Name of Apostles out of this we may Consider that our Saviour having many Disciples such as had leaned and listned to his Doctrine he chose out of them Twelve which he gave particular Favours to and gave them that name of Office to be Apostles That there was some Mystery in that Number of Twelve I am perswaded because that after the Apostacy of Judas in the 1. of the Acts v. 22. St. Peter saith That according to the Prophet David Psal. 109. 7. another should take his Office It was necessary another should succeed him in that Ministry and they chose one and no more to Compleat the Number What that Mystery is is not so apparent That which fits my Apprehension is this That our Saviour did in very many things lay the platform of his Ecclesiastical Government according to the pattern of the Jewish Polity and in this particular he resembled the Twelve Patriarchs but this he laid as Pillars only or a foundation intending it only to support the rest not to figure out the Number of these Officers which were afterwards to be a Number I know by none pretended to but yet they then were so many pillars to support this building and whatsoever Structure should be raised must be erected upon these But besides their Number we may mark their Office which was two-fold about our Saviour and about the Church or other men about our Saviour that they should be with him hearing and learning his Doctrine spectators of his Miracles and most exemplar manner of Life that so they being to bear Witnesse of him and his Actions afterwards might the more Constantly and Confidently do it when they had in such a manner been Conversant with him That which concerned other men was That he might send them forth to preach Here was an Office Instituted as St. Mark records it and to have power to heal sicknesse c. This Gift of Miracles was not the Office it self but a sign and token by which men might know that they
the Gospel is not attributed to these later Disciples Besides these I read not of any persons which had any Mission from Christ to do these great Works concerning mans Salvation But hitherto we find onely the Authority of preaching given We will therefore in the next place Consider who were made Ministers of these Covenants of Heaven called Baptism and the Lords Supper whether these all these or other besides them SECT V. Who were made Ministers of the Sacraments TO begin with Baptism that Baptism was instituted in our Saviours life time is very evident out of the 3d. of St. John v. 22. where it is said That our Saviour camo into Judea and there tarried with them and baptized that 's expounded Chapter 4. v. 2. that he did not baptize but his disciples out of which it is evident besides the Conference he had with Nicodemus in the beginning of the 3d. Chapter That there was a Baptism used and instituted by our Saviour and they who were the Ministers of it were his Disciples But now when it was instituted and what it was that was Instituted are mighty difficulties not fully cleared For the first part I leave all those parties which fix it to any times which are these two either when St. John baptized our Saviour of which we may read Mat. 3. 13. or else in his Conference with Nicodemus John 3. 5. where he uttered these words Except a man be born again of Water and the holy Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of Heaven I can consent to neither of these Not to the first for we find nothing like an Ordination but indeed by the descending of the Holy Ghost and the voice from Heaven a foundation for an Ordinance but not an Ordinance it self Not the second for it was a private Conference between our Saviour and that man wherein he might well declare that there had been some such Thing or that there should be such a power given but this did not settle any such power nor any form or Minister of it I conclude therefore that as many things were done without doubt which are not written as St. John speaks in the last Chapter of his Gospel and the last verse so amongst many things this is one which yet was done we may safely Conclude because it would be a mighty presumption for the Disciples to usurp a power of baptizing without a Commission and that they did baptize is apparent I therefore Conclude that it was done but when is not apparent and now let us examine what was done SECT VI. Concerning Baptisme THis Question seems to me to be very unsatisfactorily handled by those who have treated of it To understand what can be comprehended in it conceive with me that there comes a three-fold Baptism in Consideration in this Question the Baptism which we are baptized with which in expresse terms was ordained by our Saviour after his resurrection the Baptism of John Baptist and the Baptism of the Disciples of our Saviour in the time of his residence upon Earth the Baptism of John and the Baptism of our Saviour have been disputed with a great deal of vehemency betwixt Calvin and the Church of Rome whether it were the same with our Saviours or no and I am in this Conclusion against Calvin and do think that he causlesly rejects the Fathers with a sleight in his Institutes when certainly in it self the Question is of no great use to any Design of faith or piety I will not trouble the Controversie now but shall be ready to give an Account of it to any man that shall require it but hint out to the Reader that one place Acts 19. 2. Where St. Paul finding Disciples at Ephesus asked them whether they had received the Holy Ghost They answered that they had not so much as heard that there was an Holy Ghost and he replying to what were ye then baptized they answered unto Johns Baptism Then in the 4th verse St. Paul tells them that John indeed baptized with the baptism of repentance saying unto the people that they should believe on him who should come after him that is on Jesus Christ. When they heard this they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus Observe that it could not be the same which was instituted by our Saviour because they had not heard of the Holy Ghost which is an expresse phrase appointed by our Saviour and then that they were baptized by St. Paul which was a sign the first was not perfect This particular is miserably shifted off by Beza and that shift wonderfully extolled by Chamier when the Text is evident that they were rebaptized SECT VII Whether the. Baptism of the Disciples before Christs death was the same with Johns THere is a second Controversie whether the baptism of the Disciples before Christs Death differed from Johns sure it seems to differ because Johns Disciples came to him in the 3d. of John v. 26. and told him how Christ baptized and seemed enviously to clamour that he and his baptism was followed more than St. Johns which if it had been the same they would never have done because by that their own Church was encreased but wherein this Difference was placed we can hardly discern by the Gospel for as I have shewed their Doctrine was the same that the Kingdom of God was at hand and they could not go further but as Prophets for yet it was not Come but Comming Now there could be no baptism into any other Faith than that was taught Thus briefly of that second Question SECT VIII Whether our Sacramental Baptism be the same with that before Christs death NOW the third may be betwixt that Sacramental Baptism which we have and that which they administred before our Saviours death whether they are the same For my part I am against it and not I alone but many more both Ancient and later Writers First because that preaching the Word was only out of Office to be done to the Jews and they retained Circumcision still the legality of the Ceremonial Law being not yet abolished untill our Saviour put a period to it with his Consummatum est It is finished at his Death for although there might be an use of both together yet both could not be used Sacramentally and although Baptism might have an Institution and have Laws made and Directions for it before as must needs almost be in the Making of any Laws yet these Laws had not their legal force till the execution was ordained which could not be untill the Abolishing of the old which was not as I say untill our Saviours Death So Heb. 9. 16. For where a Testament is there must be the Death of the Testator for a Testament is of force after men are dead otherwise it is of no force while men are living Now although Christ might make these Covenants and this Will and Testament in his Life yet it is of no force untill after his Death Again the
thence draw Arguments in Questions of Religion but from the rest which he expounds not the Arguments will be but probable so here I may say Mr. Hookers Argument is weak because members have diverse offices in the natural body and St. Paul saith we are a body and one anothers members like the other so far but leaving out the rest and diverse Offices distinct might I not say that this doth not enforce it But let us go on I will not say so for although I think this Text doth not enforce it yet I think it true Doctrine That there are diverse Offices in the body of the Church like diverse members in the body Anselm H. Rabanus Maurus with others have paralelled them in their Comments on this Text. Let us now go on Although it be true Doctrine that as in the body many members have distinct offices and abilities to perform their dutyes which are not competible to other so it is in the Church there are diverse Memberâ— which have distinct Offices and those Offices assisted with diverse Graces peculiar to them and not to others yet this Text goes not to discourse of the distinction of Officers but of the Manage of them It never parallels that and all Members have not the same Office but only that we are one body and one anothers Members SECT V. Diverse Gifts and Offices HAving then c. I will stand upon no Criticism here to talk of an Hebraism without necessity methinks the Text is full having then diverse Gifts mark diverse Gifts there are many Organical members which have besides their Offices Abilities and Gifts as beauty strength and the like which are powerfull Assistants ad benè operandum to do their Office more dexterously and commendably Now then as we find amongst us there are diverse Officers and diverse Gifts amongst these Officers Abilities of utterance of knowledge and the like so may in these men here spoken of but indeed the very Authority is a Gift of God to do these things of God and these Authorities or Gifts whatsoever are distinguished by the Grace of God that is given us not our own Merits but his Favour and Grace both gives the Gift and the Difference but since it is a Gift of a Member therefore it must be used to the good of the Members and not for our own private ends and here the Apostle doth not make that division of Gifts so contradistinct that they cannot come together but saith that whatsoever Gift any man â—ath of doing good as he must acknowledge it the Gift of God so he must use it to the good of his Neighbour whether Prophesy or Ministry that this is the sense appears out of that clause in the Similitude not parallel'd So we see it doth by this Instance made by the Apostle where is no opposition in the persons but only a difference in Gifts which may well be in the same Office without any inconsistency or reluctancy If any man will see this Discourse more fully let him read the same Apostle 1 Cor. 12. 4. There are diversities of Gifts but the same Spirit then go to verse 9 10. To one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom c. Let any man peruse them all and see whether they were Offices or Gifts and the same word is used for those Gifts there as here which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the 12. verse to make these places meet he deduceth the same Simile out of these premisses of these Gifts as in this Text he deduceth the Condition or Scope of the Gifts from that Simile so that then I conclude some of these Gifts being the same are used there the word the same that is used there and it is impossible to force those to Offices therefore it should be a violence to force these let us come to the particulars whether Prophesy c. Whether this be an Office or no is hard to determine I am sure it is mentioned amongst those were no Offices 1 Cor. 12. 10. But let us conceive what it is It is possible that it was the Gift of Prophesy to foretell the will of God concerning things to come of which there were diverse in the first Age of the Church or else by Prophesy may be meant preaching which expounds the will of God revealed in Scripture of both which I may justly affirm that of St. Paul 1 Cor. 14. 3. He that prophesyeth speaketh unto men to Edification and to Exhortation and Comfort SECT VI. A Conceit of some Commentators refuted NOw see here the Conceit of Beza Tolet the Jesuit I know not which had iâ— from the other Cornelius à Lapide with other late Writers upon this place of my Text in hand see how vain their Conceits are who make Prophesy here a Genus of Teaching and Exhortation because they would make them two sorts of Officers and Prophesy only a general name predicated of them when St. Paul makes Edification which is the same with Teaching and Exhortation to be Gifts or qualities of a Propher both belonging to the same Offices Concerning Prophesy Prophesy if you will is a Gift sometimes as well as an Office every Office is a Gift but not every Gift an Office but whether Prophesy be taken for a Gift or an Office it is not a Genus to the other two but the other are rather Integral parts or qualifications belonging to it and therefore I wonder at these men that they expound this Text to such an impossible Sense Hooker gives this reason because saith he if these Prophesie he means Ministry were several functions then there should be seven what if there were seventeen If there be so many what is that to the purpose this he speaks Chap. 1. of his second Book p. 10. Well but what saith the Apostle He saith not this is a distinct Office as the Eye in the body but drives at the main that we are one anothers members that this man must not think too highly but follow his businesse let him prophesy according to the proportion of Faith what that is I will not examine it is something for the good of others who are his fellow Members Concerning Ministry The second is Or Ministry let us wait on our Ministry Hath a man received the Gift of Ministry Here a man might have looked for a Deacon for the very word is put but because the word is not to his sense he lets that slip and takes his sense without his word And it is worth any mans marking that in his treating of the Office of a Deacon which begins Chap. 1. page 32. he first sets down the Acceptation of the Word and page 33. he explains the word strictly as it concerns our purpose but shews not one place where this word is used to his Sense and indeed he cannot he had shewed Phrases in the Scripture for the other but not for this but in this very place the Word is used according to his
name should be affixed to such men nor do I find any man adventuring to shew any place where this word doth lesse than signifie a Bishop Then let us Consider that they are called after in the second Chapter The Angel of the Church of Ephesus the Angel of the Church of Smyrna c. which being great and populous regions could not reasonably but have many Presbyters in them and then to write to one Angel if the name Angel did stoop so low as Presbyter were to write to no man knew whom because there were so many there but if Angel as it is be understood of one in an higher and more exalted State than the rest who might be known by this name Angel as peculiarly due to him then and then only we may understand who it is that is meant by it but if any man should allow nothing but Scripture to prove so clear truth and say there was but one Presbyter in each of these Churches he may find that Acts 20. ver 17 18. St. Paul sent for the Presbyters in the plural number of the Church of Ephesus and when they were come to him he said to them still they and them in the plural number That Text will require a further Examination perhaps hereafter In the mean time take this because it is urged for a Unity of Office betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter from the 28th verse where St. Paul saith Take heed to your selves and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers that is Bishâ—ps then those that were called Presbyters before were called Bishops afterwards I have often said before that the name Bishop and Presbyter I conceive to be taken promiscuously in the New Testament for the same Office That the word Apostle was solely that name which was used by the way of propriety to that Office both to themselves who were originally such and to those who by their Appointment succeeded them But this is it I contend for That amongst them which they made their Successors they gave to some of them a greater and fuller power than to others both to govern and to ordain which since the Church hath called Bishops Now then from hence whether there were many Bishops in the Province of Ephesus or many Presbyters only yet many there were and these many were so inferiour to one that he is called the Angel which name was so appropriated to him as he might know to whom the Letter was directed or else as if a Man should write a Letter and superscribe it to the Alderman of London where are many no man could know whither to send it or who should receive it but if a man superscribe it to the Mayor every man knows who that is Thus must it be with these he to whom this Letter is superscribed must have this Angelical Condition so fitted to him that he must be known by that name that name solely agreeing to him But some here offer at an Answer That he might be like a Mayor have a superiour Dignity above the rest such as is notified by that name Angel which yet may not make a Bishop such as we require He may be a Temporary Governour such as the Presbyterian allows a President of a Synod who this year governs but the next resigâ—s his place and when he is there he hath no more to do but regulate the Synod no greater Authority than the rest To both these in their Order No Temporary Bishop or Superiour I am Confident that I never read of any such Thing and therefore am perswaded that no man can shew me out of Ecclesiastical Story that any man was outed of his Bishoprick but for Heresie Schism or Gross Impiety of Life when men have grown through old Age or Infirmities otherwise incapable of â—xecuting their Office they have had Coadjutors and helpers in their Office but not been deposed but by Death or some such occasion as before described and those that by Ecclesiastical Story were reckoned Bishops of these places at this time are recorded to dye Bishops And it seems a mighty Selfishnesse to me that any man should oppose his reasonlesse Conjectures against all Story when indeed these Epistles cannot be expounded but by Story as in particular the 13th verse of the 2d Chapter where speaking to the Angel or Bishop I may call him most Conâ—idently of the Church of Pergamus He commends him because thou hast not denyed my Faith even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithfull Martyr If a man would ask what Commendation of his Faith was this What was the Excellency of it Can any man answer me but out of Ecclesiastical Story where it is recorded that after a long and pious life full of all virtue led in Pergamus he was in the dayes of Domitian for the Testimony of his Religion put into a brazen Bull and in that Bull burnt now then this Bishops faith was Eminent that in such a cruel and fiery Tryal he kept his Integrity even in such a Time when thaâ— horrid President of the death of Antipas was set before him Thus I say Ecclesiastical Story is necessary for the Exposition of these Epistles as you may find prophane Story necessary for the Exposition of the Prophets in the Old Testament for a man then to talk of such an Officer concerning which there is no mention in the Word nor any in Story but a Poem a fictioâ— of their own Imagination is not like men that guided themselves by Scripture to undertake I close therefore with the 2d Exception which is that their Government was not such as is Episcopal but only such as is the president of a Synod to direct the businesse not Command more than others and this certainly the frame of these Letters doth Confute mightily for they make the Angâ—ls responsible for the faults and heresies which were under the Government which they could not be if they had only the Authority of Presidents but not of Bishops for a President of a Synod hath no Coercive power in himself but as conjoyned with the rest of the Synod and involved Nor hath he any particular Interest in the ruling or swaying the Affairs of the Church but is the mouth of the Synod therefore although if he neglect his duty in the Synod he may well be censured for it yet he cannot have the faults of the Inferiour Clergy or people layd to his Charge in particular take one Instance in the 15th verse of the 2d Chapter the Angel of the Church of Pergamus is censured because he had them which held the Doctrine of the Nicholaitans which Christ hates Should any one ask why the President should be Censured for these things He could answer I am but one man perhaps they can master me in the Synod I have nothing to do alone but a Bishop who hath Coercive power and can both examine and censure any who are in his Diocesse he may be punished because he did
not oversee the flock of Christ over which the Holy Ghost had made him a Ruler And now here again discern the necessity of Ecclesiastical Story to expound this Scripture What can any man tell is the Doctrine of the Nicholaitans which God hates and so we ought to hate but by Ecclesiastical Story which sets it down to be as well in the Error of Opinion the Doctrine concerning the Creation that it was not by God as likewise that of practise that it was lawfull to have Wives in Common now by Ecclesiastical Story we are taught that these things were the Nicholaitans Opinions and these are they which God abhorrs And now Consider what fault would it be in the Angel that these things were heâ—d in his Church but that he had Coâ—rcive Authority to Command and hinder the proceedings of these Opinions A Third Exception is That these Epistles were written to the Angels the Presidents but by Name but to the whole Synod by Intention so that although he direct his Epistle but to one yet it is intended unto all as when a man should send a Letter to the Speaker which is to be read in Parliament But this is Confuted in the Text most evidently because all these things that are Commended or censured in any of these Epistles are in the singular number so Chap. 2. vers 2. I know thy works and thy labour c. thy in the singular number and so in the rest now if he had meant it to the whole Synod although directed to the President it would have been your works nor could the Speech be proper to say thy works when the whole body was intended nay it is not imaginable that those eminent virtues with which he and the other Bishops are honoured should appertain to the whole Assembly or Synod of them so likewise the fault he condemns that Angel of vers 4. that he should forsake his first love is not likely to be affirmed of the Synod so it is most remarkable in the Epistle to the Bishop of Smyrna vers 10. when he speaks of the rest he changeth his phrase The Devil shall cast some of you into prison and the like So likewise to the Angel of the Church of Thyatira vers 24. To you I say and unto the rest in Thyatira as many as have not this Doctrine c. Here it is evident that when the Things concern others he advertiseth the Bishop to acquaint them with it and he changeth his manner of Speech that notice may be taken what was personal to him and what to others Thus you see with how much wit and with what shuffling the Intention of these Scriptures hath been diverted but to little purpose among such as Consider and weigh them CHAP. VIII SECT I. Concerning Ordination I Come now at the last to handle Ordination because I find many things discussed about that the Clearing of which will Conduce much to the opening my businesse in hand and then that being finished I shall review my Work and if there appear any thing unsatisfied I shall insert such Discourses as shall be usefull to remove those Scruples Mr. Hooker undertakes this where before Part 2. Chap. 2. pag. 38. and in the handling of it pag. 39. he proposeth these Questions Whether 1. Ordination be before Election 2. Ordination gives all the Essentials to an Officer 3. What this Ordination is and wherein lies the full breadth and bounds of the being thereof 4. In whom the right of dispensing it lyes and by whom it may be dispensed I have put down his very words and do intend God willing to handle all these Questions but because he seems to me to follow an unjust method I shall begin with his Third Question To shew what that Ordination is of which we dispute for till that be Cleared we dispute de non Concessis as he doth in this Discourse I will first examine his Definition because I will not multiply unnecessary Contentions He defines it thus SECT II. His Definition of Ordination confuted ORdination is an Approbation of the Officer and Solemn setling and Confirmation of him in his Office by Prayer and laying on of hands In this Definition that which I can blame is first that which he makes the Genus to wit an Approbation of the Officer This is a prevenient Circumstance not an Essential part Constituting Ordination First men are Approved then Ordained and although he calls it a Description not a Definition which phrase abides a larger sense than Definition doth yet even there this Term is faulty for it must be a Description of Ordination of which this is no part no more than many other Circumstances belonging to it Again where he saith it is a Setling and Confirming him in his Office If by Office he Conceive a particular Congregation as by his whole discourse he seems to do then that is not large enough to contain that Act which it is directed to for men may yea must be Ordained before they are setled in particular Congregations So that as his Genus Approbation on precedes Ordination so setling thus in his Office is Consequent to it last of all the whole Description is too wide for the Thing described He takes setling in his Office in that sense I have shewed for it agrees to the Mission of Barnabas and Saul Acts 13. 2 3. who were ordained before as will appear after and is yielded elsewhere by him This Description of his is page 75. where before SECT III. My Definition set down and explained HIS Definition being thus briefly perused now take mine Ordination is an Act by which some Man is Constituted in some Ecclesiastick Order of Divine Institution This I conceive to be a Logical Definition for Definitions should be as short as may be so they be full and explain the nature of the Thing defined The Genus is an Act in General which agrees to it and diverse others The Object of this Act is a Man the Immediate Effect and End it Aims at is the Constitution of an Ecclesiastical Order the Explication of which will be the Chief businesse to understand the whole Definition Order is the disposition of things either accorâ—ing to their place or time For time as yesterday to day Order disposeth when it should be done or in place before behind at the right hand or the left above below Now because there are many degrees in Church Affairs where one is above or below another therefore when any man is put into any degree of these this is called a Church Order that which hath no degrees but is where it was is the lay sort of men These are as we speak in Logick of Individuums they are not in serie praedicamentali Now therefore it is said Ecclesiastical Order because there are Orders which are not Ecclesiacal as Kings Judges c. where there is a sub supra in the Common-wealth but belong not to our businesse Again because there are many Ecclesiastick
I put down lest he may start from it hereafter and so will passe it over and proceed with the same succinctnesse to his second Conclusion which is p. 48. and is this It is an Act of power as an Instrument or means under Christ to give an Officer the being of an outward Call in the Church Here an Instrument being taken as I expounded it before a moral Instrument This Conclusion hath Truth granted likewiâ—e and so I passe to his second head pag. 49. by what means the essential of this power may be Conveyed SECT IX Whether Ordination doth communicate the Essence to the Outward Call HIS first Conclusion is Ordination as it is Popishly dispensed under the Opinion of a Sacrament and as leaving the Impression of an indelible Character doth not Communicate the Essence of this outward Call In the handling this Conclusion there are two thingâ— he insists upon First to shew that the Prelatical party are Popishly affected in this Doctrine 2dly to dispute against the Indelible Character for the first he draws it from the Answer in the Catechism which is in the Book of Common Prayer where it is said that there are only two Sacraments as generally necessary to Salvation not as he puts it down two only Absolutely necessary to Salvation and then glosses on it q.d. there are more and those necessary but not absolutely necessary These are his words which you see is a false Quotation But because that ever-to-be-honoured Book the Common Prayer is named I will first vindicate that and then proceed Know then It is the first time that ever read the Prelatical party accused under that Notion that the Common-Prayer Book held the Doctrine of the Church of Rome because it was the most Authentique piece which expressed the Doctrine and Religion of the Church of England 2ly Let the Reader observe that this word Sacrament is a Term not found in the New Testament but an Ecclesiastical Term taken up by the â—athers and used by all Christians for that thing which is Ordinarily defined a visible sign of an invisible and spiritual Grace Now if that have the Notions which the Word Sacrament expresseth then Mr. Hooker cannot deny Orders to be a Sacrament because he grants an outward Call to be necessary which is an outward Sign and he grants the Effect of that Call to be the Order given by it which is an Invisible grace as Grace is taken largely for Gratia gratis data and yet the Common Prayer Book is most true which saith there are two only generally necessary that is to all men for Orders are not generally necessary to all men as Baptism and the Lords Supper are but only to such persons as undertake such Duties Let this suffice to have been spoken to that which he unnecessarily to his businesse or mine inserted SECT X. Of the Character left after Ordination AND such another passâ—ge I shall have with his 2d Discourse concerning the Indelible Character a Thing not material to his businesse but only to vaunt and shew his reading in the School â—or this understand that this Character that he and they speak of is the relict of that gift of Ordination by which the Ordained is enabled to do these Duties he is ordained to Now that there is some such Thing he must needs confesse who discourseth of the Causation of these Essentials which imports an Effect and certainly this Effect must be permanent remain in the Ordained or else he hath nothing in him which should Authorize and enable him for those duties Now then it is in vain for him to fustian the Reader with the various opinions of the School whether this Effect be a Quâ—lity or Relation and such unnecessary Discourse unlesse he could shew what it is if not one of these since he holds that it is somwhat I must needs say that the worst of those Writers hath done better than he because those Authors have expressed something with a guesse of reason to it but he without reason to the contrary laughs at them all and yet hath said so much as invincibly proves there is a Character but not said what If it were pertinent to his or my Discourse I would insist upon it but although he is Tedious in such impertinencies I will not follow him in them it is enough that there is a Character something left in the person of a man perhaps that is a righter phrase than to say in either Soul or Understanding or Will unlesse for subjectum quo But something there is left by that Act of Ordination by which that man in whom it is left is capable to do those Divine duties whether this be delible or not is not yet material to this Question we will come therefore to his second Conclusion where will be new dispute SECT XI His Second Conclusion discussed HIS Second Conclusion is Page 52. That Ordination administred according to the method and mind of Mr. Rutherford namely as preceding the Election of the people it doth not give Essentials to the outward Call of a Minister An uncouth kind of phrase doth not give Essentials to the outward Call no it doth not for it is the outward Call of a Minister what 's that a Deacon he should have spoken clearly as his meaning expressed afterwards is and have said to a Presbyter but his meaning is in clear Terms that without the Election of the people to a Cure of Souls by no Ordination preceding a Presbyter doth receive his being a Presbyter And this I oppose His first Argument to prove it is taken from Acts 6. where it is said to the multitude vers 3. Look ye out among you seven men c. Contrary saith heâ— to their present practice Ver. 5. And the saying pleased the people and they chose and they set them before the Apostles His Collection hence is If none but those who were first Elected by the people should be ordained and all such who were so chosen could not be reâ—used then to ordain before Choice iâ— neither to make Application of the Rule nor Communion of the right in an orderly manner I set down his very words lest it might be urged upon an Alterâ—tion I spoyled his Argument But the first is plain from the place alledged Then he answers that seeming Objection that this is only concerning Deacons When saith he the reason is the same in both and stronger in Presbyters because the people have a greater dependance upon the other and are engaged to greater subjection to them and to provide for their honour in a more especial manner This kind of Arguing forceth me to a repetition Conceive therefore that this Instance being singular and occasional cannot be fitly called a rule which must give others but only prudentially when the like Circumstances concurre 2ly Though the people may have a fitnesse to choose such an Officer for such an employment as that was the relief of the poor yet not â—it to choose such
an explicite Covenant He gives reasons of this Conclusion For thereby the judgement of the Members comes to be informed and convinced of their Duty more fully His Reasons of his Third Conclusion answered I Would ask whether a new Duty added by this Covenant or an old Duty which arose out of Baptism If a new I cannot judge of the fitnesse without I knew the particulars but am assured that whatsoever is added to the Covenant in baptism although it may have possible Allowance in Acts of Religion to some particular men upon some particular Occasions yet in general to presse such a Thing upon all Christians is not tollerable If it be no addition to that Covenant the only refreshing of that Covenant to the memory of a Christian is abundantly enough This likewise answers his 2d Argument page 49. They are saith he thereby kept from Cavilling and Starting aside from the Tenure and Terms of the Covenant which they have professed and acknowledged before the Lord and so many Witnesses I answer as before If the Terms be additions to what was in Baptism he ought not in general to prescribe them to all Christians If they are not Additions then that Covenant is the strongest he can make which was made in Baptism The same answer may be applied to his third reason For saith he thereby their hearts stand under a Stronger Tye. I answer no stronger than Baptism SECT IV. This Covenant of his cannot agree to Travellers THen he enters into a Second Question how far this Covenant requires Cohabitation His handling of which is very weak in my Judgement for since he allows Merchants and others upon diverse Occasions to be absent sometimes divers years he gives no satisfaction at all to shew how these men in their absence can partake of Church-blessings But me-thinks they must live without Preaching without Sacrament or any blessing of any Covenant of Gods because their Pastors and Officers reside at their constant place but contrarywise our Doctrine which makes each Presbyter an Officer of the Catholick Church and each Christian a Member of it it follows that any Ship may carry a Pastor and every man receive the Comforts and blessings of Gods Covenants from him which is like our Saviours providence for all and every particular But I omit this at this time as not necessary for our businesse and apply my self to his Reasons for his Conclusion That this Covenant gives the Essentials to a Church which he begins page the 50th SECT V. His Reasons answered HIS first Argument is thus framed in these words Every Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Corporation receives its being from a Spiritual Combination But the visible Churches of Christ are Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Therefore I can justly complain here that the Terms are altered which In a Logical Discourse should be the same I will reduce them therefore and so discourse upon it Combination must here be taken for Covenant or a Combination by Covenant so that the sence of that Proposition is Every Ecclesiastical Corporation receives its being from a Combination by Covenant In the Examination of this Proposition I will follow his own Expressions because I will dispute ex concessis He instâ—nces in the Corporations of Towns and Cities There saith he they have their Charter granted them from the King or State which gives them warrant to unite themselves to carry on such works for such Ends with such Advantage So saith he their mutual Engagements each to other to attend such Terms to walk in such Orders which shall be sutable to such a Condition gives being to such a body Thus he Coâ—sider now that the form of every thing is that which last comes to give every thing its being and make it Compleat Secondly it is that which enables every thing to do its proper work Now Consider a Corporation hath first a Charter by which they are enabled to unite by Authority of which they assemble and come together and perhaps enter into some Engagement required by that Charter by this Engagement they are made the Matter of this Corporation but the form is the Influence of the Charter by which these men so engaged by Covenant are authorized to do this So in every question when it is moved concerning any Action we have recourse to the form Ask why this did heat or burn It is answered because it was fire had the form the burning form of fire Why did that grow because it had a vegetable form Now ask why did a Corporation do this or that let this Lease make that man free The answer is not made because they were Combined by a Covenant but because they have a Charter to do it so that the influence which that Charter hath upon the Corporation is the thing which gives that Corporation its being not their Union by Covenant which makes them but the Matter when the other gives the life and being force and operation solely to the Corporation To apply this to our purpose Suppose every little particular Church were a Corporation first they must have a Charter to unite in a Covenant which nor he nor any man living can shew me and although these men vaunt mightily of Scripture and Contemn all Doctrine which is not delivered there yet this which seems to me their Corner Stone and main foundation they have no not the least shew of any words of Scripture which can authorize much lesse exact any such Covenant but then suppose they had some such Commission yet not their union upon the Commission but the other Authorities expressed in the Charter must be it which enables them to do whatsoever they do not their union by that Covenant for ask why any man preacheth administreth the Sacraments or the like the answer is not made from any union but from the Charter which granted it Now I come to his Minor but the visible Churches of Christ are Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Corporations I deny this Proposition absolutely that every particular Church is a distinct Corporation and else he saith nothing to his purpose but are Members or branches of that great Corporation the whole Catholick Church SECT VI. Scripture Phrases abused by him HE offers at Scripture to prove this page 51. Every particular Church saith he is a City Heb. 12. 22. an house 1 Tim. 3. 15. The body of Christ Ephes. 4. 13 16. 1 Cor. 12. 12 27 28. Here is Cyphered Scripture All these places saith he there are spoken of particular visible Churches When I viewed the places I was amazed to read the holy Scripture so injured and that mighty Article of our Creed I believe the holy Catholick Church to be made such a Nothing as by his Application of these Texts it is Let us Consider the particulars the first place is Heb. 12. 22. But ye are come unto Mount Sion and unto the â—ity of the living God this is the phrase he must pitch upon to prove it a City but mark what follows The heavenly
unites us to Christ either in a perfect union or in a remisse or in the lowest degree In a perfect union that is by it which St. James phraseth a lively faith a faith quickned and inflâ—enced with Charity that dare with Abraham forsake all Lands Wife Children yea offer his Son himself a sacrifice to the good pleasure of God this the Church of Rome calls an informed saith actuated and informed with Charity this is the highest union and communion Then there is an union lower than this which is the faith which believes aright and makes a profession of it but will not bide the Test of a Confession when it comes to the Touch and these are by all held so long to be in the Church as they have this union with Christ and so long retains its Community untill some Temptation of fear or hope or perhaps some Carnal Argument perswade otherwise and then they fall into Heresie or Apostacy to have or gâ—in something and these I think to be those of whom the Apostle spake men who lived in a formal shew of a right faith by conversing in a seeming manner with the Godly and the Church but then went from them I will not dispute the falling from Grace here But thus when men had this faith before spoken of and professed it or professed it and had it not they had an union with the Church at the least outward if but by profession but inward likewise if they had that second sort of faith yet they were not of us the number of those who had justifying faith then when these left us but now there is another union and that is per Sacramentum fidei by the Sacrament of Faith as Baptism is called the which no man leaves and this is an union by which a wicked man after his repentance hath a Title to claim mercy and absolution as likewise the Church owes it him So that I dare say Bellarmine nor any Jesuite I have read against this Doctrine can deny that there is such a Title or that that Title is not by this union So then they went from us that is the Communion with us that shewed they were not then of us of that dear union of a lively faith for then they would not have left us you see this cannot be understood of lack of Election The Elect may go out and come in again It cannot be understood that they left union but Communion for the Antichrist himself hath a union with the Church though he keeps a Communion against it I think this is enough to shew that although this departure which St. John speaks of be by Heresie or Apostacy as Bellarmine insinuates yet it is not a leaving all union of and with Christ but only Communion as I have before expressed Reader be not hasty to Judge of this Conclusion and then I hope thou shalt find it most agreeing to all principles of Religion Secondly Bellarmine quotes the Council of Nice Can. 8. 19. Where saith he Hereticks are said to be received into the Church if they will return upon certain Conditions For Answer It is worth our marking that those two Canons are made for two sorts of Hereticks the 8th Canon for the Cathari or Puri as the Canon calls them or the Novatians as Balsamon expounds it for they were the same these the Canon receives into the Church upon repentance with Imposition of hands only but they must expresse their profession in writing The other in the 19th Canon were the Pauliani or Paulianites who were re-baptized upon their re-admission the first was a reception of such who had gone out of the Communion of the Church by denying re-admission of Penitents who forsook their Religion by sacrificing to Idols and communication with the Digami such as had been twice marryed whom they held unclean These things were their Heresies and therefore were called Cathari because they must by these Things proâ—esse themselves holyer than other men but these being not things which nulliâ—ed Baptism although pertinaciously held they could not be rebaptized But for the Paulinians because they they denyed the Trinity they could not baptize according to Christs Institution and therefore such as came from them to the Church were re-baptized You see now how upon examination of these Canons of that most sacred Council the Case is stared for me because it seems the Cathari had but left the Communion as is before expressed and therefore the removing the Obstruction with proper physick 〈◊〉 but the Paulinians had no union and therefore to be grafted into the body I have insisted the longer upon this because the Story of these several Heresies is not perhaps apparent to every one and that difference of Condition upon the diversity of the Heresie perhaps by a negligent Reader would not have been observed What he produceth out of the Council of Lateran That the Church is Congregatio fidelium I need not examine I yield it but he saith That Hereticks are not fideles is denyed by many of his own Religion for although that they have not a fulnesse of faith which he cannot exact in a member yet they may have faith in many Articles which may preserve them in the unity of members though sick members but this serves not my turn comes not home to my businesse I therefore say that as homo is Animal rationale which is one of the compleatest Definitions given to any thing and the most exemplar yet every part of man is not rationale the hand cannot discourse nor the feet so the Church is Congregatio fidelium but it doth not follow that every part of the Church is faithfull Infants are members of the Church and such members as are in a saving Condition yet they have but Sacramentum Fidei and Faith in Potentiâ they are not actually sideles nay perhaps not habitually I am certain as we know of they have no habit of it But it may be objected that these non ponunt Obicem as the School speaks as they reach not out their hands of faith to lay hold on Christ so they do not hinder or oppose it but these men do with violence thrust Christ from them I answer that violence returns to their own Soul in thrusting themselves out of the state of grace and favour with God protempore for that time they do so and it hinders Grace in its operari in its great and noble Effects which it drives at but doth not extinguish it in its first Act which is to make a man a member yea therefore they are more sinfull than if done by an Heathen or any who had not knowledge of Gods Law nor been admitted into his membership Therefore the Apostle urgeth this Argument Shall I take the members of God and make them the members of an Harlot In a word therefore the Church is the Congregation of the faithfull the Essential and Constituting parts of it are such yet many parts of it are not such
Jesus seeing their faith said to the sick of the palsie Sâ—n thy sins be forgiven thee Observe they were divers persons whose fâ—ith he saw and but one to whom he spake and because some avoid it and say that within this word their is involved his who was sick his faith as well as theirs who carried him although this will appear a forced explication to them who consider the Text yet let it be granted I hope they will noâ— say his faith alone then theirs co-operated with him in the work then they could operate themselves for no second causes do cooperate one with another but when each hath the power then they had force of themselves towards the procuring of this blessing Consider then the blessing Son thy sins are forgiven thee what this was appears by the Dispute which followed the Scribes said He spake blasphemy none can forgive sins but God and our Saviour proved immediately that he was God in the 21. verse by saying to the sick of the palsie arise take up thy bed and walk and did the miracle so that it appears evidently first that faith precedes to induce Baptism before men can come to God that the coming of Infants is by others feet that the faith pre-required in Children is other mens faith for as it is with all supernatuâ—all works there is a passive faith in the object necessary to make it capable of that miracle without which miracles in the course of Gods ordinary doing them are not wrought and with which all things are possible both for our selves or those which belong to us and this faith in a Father is powerfull for his Son in a Master for his Servant So is it in Bâ—ptism faith is necessary to this great work of Adoption but faith of others in Children is only necessary and this is excellently exprest in the practice of the Civil Law which whether it received its rise from this or Circumcision or that the same principles which direct one are evident in the other I dispute not but it is some comfort even in Religion to see it illustrated by the wayes of prudent nature and the universall Axiomes of it This then is so illustrated although Adoption requrie the consent of both parties yet personally that is only done in such as are sui juris grown to such years as they are masters of themselvs and their own actions but such as are of such weak years as they are governed and under parents they can be and are adopted by their parents to another an adopting Father and their Covenants for the behalf and in the name of the Child both oblige the Child to filiall duties towards his new Father and likewise the Father to a fatherly care of the Son both in life by protecting him and in death by estating him in his Inheritance Thus did God with the Children of the Jewes at Circumcision that act by the Parents made the Child a debtor to that law and God to his Covenant of mercy to him So here is the hand of God accepting this act of Parents for their Children in Nature in the Law and in all footsteps of Gods Government the same discipline is observed I will conclude somewhat like that passage in Petrus Claniacensis a man famous for learning and piety as any of that Age in the Treatise of his against the Petro-brusians whose Opinions agreed in the point with our Anabaptists You see multitudes of men in Scripture had a faith prevalent for others and those but single persons or a few men that carried the Paralytick shall not the faith of the world of the whole Church be effectuall to these Infants A Father begs for his Son a Master for his Servant shall not Christian Parents yea the Christian Church be heard in prayer for these Infants God hath Covenanted Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name he will give it you John 16. 22. Ask say Divines constantly faithfully for good things according to Gods will non ponenti Obicem either for himself or others who do not stop by self-wickedness the power of prayers can then the constant prayers of the Church with that unshaken faith of hers be denyed its efficacy in a thing so pleasing to God to such persons who actually can put no hinderance to the power and efficacy of that prayer These things in Christian men canot be denyed and therefore in brief to the Argument Faith in all introduceth this Covenant in Baptism and moves the receiver to be adopted to God and therefore observe that the Apostle as he verse 26. Ye are all the Children of God by faith so in the 27th verse he brings a reason For as many as are baptized into Christ have put on Christ. The reason why they are the Children of God by faith is because that such as have this faith are moved to be baptized and they put on Christ. The faith of him who is master of his own actions makes him be baptized the faith of him who is master of his Childs actions causeth him to bring his Child to this Adoption and yet methinks it hath not only power concerning this blessing before the act of Adoption to bring men to it but even in it to accept it for although there were all the affection in the world to it before yet if faith fail in the Act that man would hold from accepting such a Covenant whereby he had no confidence to be blessed but this faith doth only make him Covenant but it self is not the Covenant Thus I suppose I have spoken abundantly to Mr. Hookers second Argument and to such Objections which I have thought upon as most opposing this Doctrine I have delivered and although I could frame many more of this nature yet what is said to these will serve the turn for them likewise and therefore I let them pass SECT X. Mr. Hookers third Argument answered THomas Hookers third Argument page 54. is thus framed This Tenent doth necessarily evidence the Church of Rome to be a true Church which is thus gathered Where all the members are true members there the Church is a true Church But all the members in all the Congregations of Rome are true members Ergo. This Minor he proves because they are baptized I would first know what is the harm if we allow the Church of Rome to be a true Church true in the essentials of a Church though sick and full of corrupt Doctrines I have shewed and it is most true that many men be in a Church yea in the Catholick Church and not be saved and perhaps there may be an whole Church such as Mr. Hooker would have and scarce a man of them saved without the same means as many in the Church of Rome are saved by And therefore by the way I adde that the Church of Rome is not only a Church but a saving Church such as I doubt not but multitudes are saved in for they have not only a Doctrine
his Councels come to be Decrees in this Epistle there is not one word like a Decree but onely an Advice to him nothing like a Commission as Vasques and divers others phrase it for then it should be mandamus or concedimus potestatem we Command or grant you power nor of dispensation as Cardinall Bellarmine and others for then it should be in that language we dispence with you or non obstante notwithstanding any Law to the contrary but here is no such thing but sometimes he saith fraternibus vestra your brotherhood knows this or that and the like and here shews him the reason why he should come by more Bishops to assist him although I think he was deceived in his supposals for there were Bishops in Brittain at that time howsoever that reason was good to authorize Austin at that time and the like may be good for any man in the like Condition for this triplicity of Bishops to Consecrate cannot be necessary to Consecration according to any Divine Constitution but onely Ecclesiastical which cannot be understood to exact impossibilities or else to make a particular Church to lose all the benefit of Episcopall Government But then consider the language of all these men and see how inconsistent it is with their first principles that there must be three Bishops by Divine right to the Consecration of a Bishop can the Pope dispence with what is due by Divine authority or can he grant a Commission to act against Divine Laws I hope they will not say so unless they will set themselves against all that is called God and make an earthly god above our Father which is in â—eaven then let us consider how it was possible that Christian Religion could have been planted unless the power essentially had been in one Bishop to Consecrate when Timothy Titus and St. John who you will that went about with the power of Tongues into unknown Countreys to plant Religion and God blessing their industry the Churches increased learned Men were Converted fit to make Bishops of Can you think that these Itinerants would suffer them like Austin here in England to send to Rome for advice in such a matter or much less for a Commission or dispensation to use their Language it is not imaginable nay when a Church is in persecution I know a little what belongs to that can they send to many Bishops in the same Province to send their votes in writing or without that there can be no Consecration It cannot be I conclude thus although in a setled Church there is a great decency in practiseing according to that Rule of having three Bishops at a Consecration yet in these Cases it is not necessary and it may be validly acted by one alone and no Commission or dispensation is necessary And now Reader having walked through this intricacy I cannot think my self nor the Reader satisfied untill I have applied another Question which is what is it which so enables a Consecration that we may say when that is done this man is a Bishop CHAP. XII In which is discoursed what is essentially to the constitution of a Bishop THe Question introduced To understand which that I may write distinctly take this for a Praecognitum that since the power was given to the Apostles in these words As my Father sent me so send I you Therefore when this power is given by Apostles and Apostolicall men then this dignity is conferr'd upon Men But again because that it is necessary for the Church of Christians not onely that they have the power but that this power should be so administred as that other men who are to receive blessings from it should be able to take notice for else how is it possible to repair to the wells head unless they can know where it is that there is such a blessing bestowed upon them therefore this power must be given by some such means as are visible and that men may discern when it is granted for if it should be given by the Apostles without any outward sign onely with a vehitie a kind of secret grant it must be most uncertain to other men because each man may pretend to it and there is no confuting but by some outward sign which being proper to this Action may be an infallible assurance that then and not till then it is given and here will be required a diligent and curious inquest there are divers things pretended to which are not right and they being severed we may then safely pitch upon what is the truth to do which let us first consider that Adâ—m Tanner in his fourth Tome of Scholasticall Divinity upon the third of Thomas and the supplement Disp. 7. Quest. 2. Dubio 4. handling the doubt what is the matter and form of a Priest and Bishop at the last page 1900. he names as a Concessum and things to be supposed eight Actions at the consecration of a Bishop he quotes the Romane Pontificall for it I will not set them down the writing them is too much paines but what hath grown in reputation amongst Scholars I shall examine But yet I must make another pause SECT II. A discourse of Petrus Arcadius illustrated and applied THere is a learned man one Petrus Arcadius who hath writ a Book with a most pious title which is of the concord betwixt the occidentall Church or the Latine and orientall under which headâ— he reduceth the African and sometimes the Rutherian in the administration of the Sacraments which controvercy he hath very industriously and happily handled in very many things in particular in this business having handled before the form used in both Churches at the ordination title 6. de Sacramento ordinis cap. 4. he comes to reconcile them and doth it upon this foundâ—tion I am now handling that is that they agree in the essentialls that is the Doctrine of all the three Churches and the difference is onely in Accidentalls this saith he may be done first by saying our Saviour did so institute this Sacrament that the Consecration of Ministers should be by certain words and outward signs by which it should sufficiently appear to what part of Ministry they were ordained but he left it to the arbitrement of the Church what these signs and words must be this he illustrates by the Councell of Trent wherein Sâ—ssion 23. Canon 3. the Councell decrees the thing that holy ordination should be made with signs and words but determines not what so that it excludes not the Graecian or African Ordination Again he illustrates this by Marriage most rightly for they make Matrimony a Sacrament as well as ordination there the word of God establisheth for men how they should live in holy wedlock but never determines what shall be the manner with what words or signs they shall be married but leaves that to the determination of every Church yea Common-wealth thus you may perceive his Conclusion how strengthned I will set down my Judgements and reasons
to act since after his departure to the end of the world It is necessary therefore for us to think that such things as are delivered by them are Divine for although Canons of Councels general or particular are excellent Guides for the establishing Peace and Unity in the Church and so may require obedience from their Subjects yet because they are but men without an annexed infallibility without doubt they may vary in their practice and Discipline and their Dictates being introduced upon occasions may be altered and therefore cannot add essentials to any thing for the essences of things are always certain and necessary This is my Major Now to search what is Apostolical in this business we must examine the Scriptures where first we find our Saviour authorizing his Apostles As my Father sent me so send I you to give power to others We find him using no Ceremony but breâ—thing upon them gave them the Holy Ghost and truly that Breathing was most significative of that blessing he bestowed upon them but from thence we find not the Apostles using that Ceremony for they being enabled with this plenarty of power to give others that blessing they only gave it and for a sign that they did establish it laid their hands upon them so that as we conceive these two places 1 Tim. 1. 6. by the laying on of my hands or the 1 Tim. 4. 14. with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery to be Ordination so likewise we shall find this Ceremony taken for the whole 〈◊〉 or Ordâ—nation Tim. 5. 22. Lay hands suddenly on no man Now then without doubt if any outward Act must be essential to this Heavenly work this only being Apostolical must be esteemed most essential and there I think it most proper for men to conceive that this is the only Ceremony essentially necessary if any be to the performance of that duty for the power originally being given to the Apostles nakedly and absolutely without any qualification or mode in what manner they should use it to others we are to receive the manner at their acting it for our best Rule and guidance which is only in Scripture delivered to be imposition of Hands Thus much for that which the Doctors of the Church of Rome called the material part in the essence of Consecration and we may truly term the outward sign Let us now examine that which they call the form and we may term the words which express it the words which our Saviour used John 20. 22. are Receive ye the Holy Ghost these words expresly are used in the Roman Consecration and Ordination but in the Graecian the words are varied but the sence reserved not giving this blessing in the Imperative-mood which is much stood upon by many Schoolmen and Casuists but in a more humble stile The Grace of God Creates or Promotes thee to this Dignity of a Bishop or Priest or Deacon where we find the truth more largly expounded though materially the same for certainly the Grace of God is that which impowers men with these authorities are given and men are only Instrumental but that they are and therefore there is added how this is given by the suffrage of the Bishops which denotes them instrumental for the African Church you may discern in the Canon of Carthage before cited that the Consecration is expressed in a Language of such extent as may be applied to them both which is uno fundente benedictionem one of them pouring out the benediction or blessing but implying strongly the sence such as is proper for this work to Confirm which all the present Bishops lay on their hands and this universally so consented unto as agreeing to the Holy Scripture that although in the heat of disputation I find men sometimes over peremptorily asserting their own opinions yet I do not find that either Church did refuse such as were Consecrated in either although in wayes and modes differing from their own so that I may justly say that the whole Catholick Church Concenters in this Conclusion that when words importing the blessing are Delivered by a Consecrating Bishop and those words are sealed by imposition of Hands then these holy Orders are effectually given I shall then need to do little more in this Point than to answer such objections which are commonly made against it or I can apprehend proper to be opposed to it SECT II. The first Objection against the Truth answered THe first is common in the School made against the pontiâ—ical in this point because that in all that part of the Pontiâ—ical it is said only Receive ye the Holy Ghost and that Language is the same in the Ordination of Priests as likewise the Imposition of Hands so that by this no man can know what Order is given in the Church of Rome it is answered that the design which they are about will shew it whether to one or to the other Order and again the manner of the Imposition of Hands in the Consecration of a Bishop divers Bishops Impose Hands in the Ordination of a Priest one Bishop only with some Presbyters in the Ordination of a Deacon the Bishop alone but in our Church that scruple is clearly taken away by a great Prudence where at the Ordination of a Priest the Consecrating words are Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Priest and at the Consecration of a Bishop the words are Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Bishop in the Church of God where wee see that universal cause of all Spiritual blessings I mean the Holy Ghost applied to that particular duty in which at that time he works and therefore the Consecration is free from that Exception SECT III. Another Objection drawn from the Councel of Carthage answered ANother Ojection may be that the Councel of Carthage before cited mentions the laying on the Book by two Bishops upon the head and shoulders of the Bishop to be Consecrated and therefore that is necessary I answer that I much reverence that Councel in which was St. Augustine and divers other Bâ—shops famous for learning and piety in their Generations but yet as I have said before this was never practiced any remarkable time as sundry Doctors in the Church of Rome observe and again it is impossible to be essential because not Apostolical and that because the Holy Bible and that highest part of it the New Testament was not writ when Bishops and Priests were Ordained it is therefore worth our marking that there is a difference in the decrees of Councels concerning Doctrine and Discipline or Ceremonies of the Church in a point of Doctrine they shew in what sence they understand such and such a Conclusion but in the other they set down what is to be practiced to preserve Orders and decency in those Churches where they have to do and indeed there can be no more required of obedience than in quiet and setled times in which