nothing will more encourage him to persevere in it and to expect a blessing from it than the evidence that he is deputed by God to this Office That he is feeding the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made him oversâ—er This was Gods encouragement to Ieremy and Isaiah There is required in Ministers a singular confidence in Gods assistance and a singular expectation of direction protection provision supportation and benediction which they cannot have unlesse they be fully assured that their function and Ministry is from heaven heavenly Hence it is that Paul laboureth to make out the authority of his calling to the Corinthians and Iohn unto the Pharisees and Christ unto the Iewes Thirdly For our enemies sake that cry down the prâ—â—ent Ministers as â—â—als Priests as Popish and Antichristian That Goliah-like defie the Armies of the living God That tread under their feet not onely the Ministers but their Ministry And say to us Bow down that we may go over That make our bodies as the ground and â—s the street for them to go in That say of us just as the Jewes did of Christ Crucifie them crucifiâ— thâ—â— Now that such as these may know That when they fight against our Ministry they fight against God whose Ministry it 〈◊〉 And that when they persecuâ—e us they persecute Christ whose servants we are And that it is in vain to kick against pricks That we are 〈◊〉 in Christ's right hand and that they shall feel the power of his right hand that would pluck us out of his right hand That even Ieroboam's hand though a King shall wither if he stretch it out against a true Prophet of the Lord That we are a plant of Gods planting and therefore shall not be rooted up Therefore it is that we have undertaken this work The Thesis we shall lay down is this That the Ministers of the Church of England that now are and have been since the reformation of Religion are lawfully called to their Office so as they need not renounce their Ordination nor have their people any just ground of separation from them in that respect The present Ministers of the Church of England are of two sorts either such as have been made Ministers since the abolishing of Prelacy by the imposition of the hands of preaching Presbyters or such as were ordained heretofore by the laying on of the hands of the Bishop together with other Ministers And there are two sorts of Dissenters amongst us There are some that dislike our present way of Ordination and say it is invalid because performed by Ministers without a Bishop There are others dislike our former way of Ordination and say it is null and of no validity because we were made by Antichristian Bishops One side deny our Ministry to be of God because we want Bshops to Ordain us The other side deny our Ministry to be of God because we had once Bishops to Ordain us And thus is the present Ministry like Jesus Christ himself crucified between two opposite parties But as Christ though crucified yet rose again and is ascended up into heaven So we doubt not but the Ministers of Christ though they prophesie in sackcloth for the present and may perhaps â—e slain and lye in the streets for three dayes and an half yet they shall rise in spight of all their enemies and be called up into heaven in the sight of them In opposition to these two sorts of Dissenters we shall lay down these two Propositions That the Calâ— to the Office of the Ministers which some of our present Ministers did receive during the prevalency of Episcopacy was lawful and valid That the Call to the Office of Ministry which our present Ministers do now receive since the abolishing of Episcopacy is lawful and valid CHAP. I. Containing the first Prâ—position and proving it by Arguments drawn from the Principles of our Adversaries THat the Call to the Office of the Ministâ—ry which some of our present Ministers did receive during the prevalency of Episcopacy was lawful and valid THere are some amongst us that refuse to hear our Ministers because they were Ordained as they say by Antichristian Bishops and think they are bound in conscience to renounce our Ministery till we have renounced our Ordination And as the Antipaedâ—-baptist would rebaptize all that are baptized amongst us So the Brownist would re-ordain all that are ordained amongst us For our parts we are confident that there is neither warrant out of the Word of God for rebaptization nor re-ordination That the latter which is our present work may the better appear we must premise a distinction which we have formerly made use of in our Vindication where we have also spoken something about this subject We must distinguish between a defective Ministery and a false Ministery as we do between a man that is lame or blind and a man that is but the picture of a man We do not deny but that the way of Ministers entring into the Ministery by Prelates â—ad many deâ—ects in it for which they ought to be truly and greatly humbled but yet we adde Thâ—t notwithstanding all accidâ—ntâ—l corrâ—ptions it is not substantially and essentially corrupted so as there should be need of re-ordination The Scribes and Pharisees were not onely wicked in their conversation but mingled the leaven of false doctrine with their teachings and had many defects in their entrance yet our Saviour saith Matth. 23.2 3. The Scribes and Pâ—â—risees siâ— in Mosâ—s his seat All therefore c. If they that sate in Moses his Chair were to be heard in all things that they taught according to the Word though they did not live as they taught and had many failings in their entrance much more they that sâ—t in Câ—thâ—drá Christi in the châ—iâ— of Christ and teach 〈◊〉 quae sunt Christi those things which Christ would have them teach and live according to what they â—each although there were many defects in their entrance into the Ministry Aâ— every defect in a Christian doth not make him no Christian and every defect in the administration of the Gospel-Ordinances doth not make them no Gospel-Ordinances So â—very defect in the way of entrance into the Ministry doth not make that Ministry a false Ministry or no Ministry Now that our Ministry during the prevalency of Episcopacy was lawfull and valid for the substance of it though mingled with many circumstantiall dâ—fectâ— appears two manner of wayes 1. We will arâ—ue â—ccordiâ—â— to the judgement of those who hold that the whole essence of the Ministeriall call consisteth in the election of the people and that Ordination is nothing else but a solemne installing of a Minister into that Office which he had before conveyed unto him by his election Our Brethrâ—n of New â—ngland though they hold Ordination by imposition of handâ— to be of divine institution yet not so necessary as if a Ministers call were a nullity
these very gro unds and Principles Now then if the denying of our Ministry during the raign of Episcopacy to be a lawfulâ— Ministry be the parental cause of such horrid and desperate consequences we doubt not but it will be abhorred and abominated by all sober and godly Christians And that our people that read these lines will be rooted and established in this great Truth That the call to the Office of the Ministry which some of our Ministers did receive during the prevalency of Episcopacy was lawful and valid for the substance of it though mingled with many circumstantial defects CHAP. III. Wherein the great Objection against our Ministry as being derived from Rome is answered But the great objection of which we even now spake against this proposition is IF we justifie the lawfulnesse of Episcopal Ordination then it will also follow that we must justifie the Ordination that is in the Church of Rome For if Ordination by our Bishops be lawful then these Bishops themselves must be be lawful Ministers and then their Ordination must also be lawful and so by consequence it will follow That those in the Church of Rome from whom the Protestant Ministers in the beginning of the Reformation had their Ordination were true Ministers of Christ. For if they were not then were not our Ministers made by them the Ministers of Christ. And if they were then may a Minister of Antichrist be a Minister of Christ and Ordination received from the Pope of Rome be a Scripture Ordination Before we answer to this great Objection we shall premise this one distinction It is one thing to receive a Ministry from the Apostate Church of Rome as the author of it another thing to receive a Ministry from Jesus Christ through the Apostate Church of Rome Our Antiministerial adversaries if they would argue aright their objection must be thus framed The Ministry which hath the Pope of Rome or which is all one That hath Antichrist for the author of it is Popish and Antichristian But such is the Ministry of the Church of England Ergo. We deny the Minor For we say That our ministry is derived to us from Jesus Christ. We are his Ministers and his Ambassadors It is he that gave Pastors and Teachers to his Church as well as Apostles and Evangelists We say That Ordination of Ministers by Ministers is no Romish institution but instituted by the Lord Jesus himself long before Antichrist was That our Ministry is descended to us from Christ through the Apostate Church of Rome but not from the Apostate Church of Rome And that this great objection which some say is unanswerable must of necessity be summed up into this argument Those Ministers which stand by an institution of Christ descending to them from the Apostles through the antichristian Church of Rome are ministers of Antichrist and not of Christ. But such are our Ministers Ergo. But here we deny the Major as utterly false we say That the Ministry which is an institution ofChrist passing to us through Rome is not made null and void no more then the Scriptures Sacraments or any other Gospel-Ordinance which we now enjoy and which do also descend to us from the Apostles through the Romish Church Now that this great Truth so necessary to be known in these dayes may be fully made out to our respective Congregations we shall crave leave a litle to enlarge our selves in the proof of it and shall for this end offer these ensuing considerations to be seriously weighed by all that fear God amongst us That the Lord Jesus hath given the Ministery to the Church to continue till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man unto the measure of the stature of the fulnesse of Christ which will never be till the day of judgement And he hath promised to be with the Apostles teaching and baptizing alway even unto the end of the World which must needs be understood of them and their successors He hath promised that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church which Mr. Hooker Mr. Cotton and others expound of the universall visible Church existing in its particulars The Apostle Paul also saith That the Sacrament of the Lords supper is to be observed and to continue till the comming of Christ. And that glory is to be given to God by Christ Jesus in the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 throughout all generations and ages It is also prophesied concerning the Kingdom and Government of Jesus Christ both invisible and visible that it shall abide to the end of the world Luc. 1.33 Isaiah 9.6.7 By all these teâ—ts it is evident That there was iâ— and shall be a true Church and a true Ministery preserved by Jesus Christ even unto the end of the World How can glory be given to God in the Church throughout all ages if there should be an age in which the Church should be utterly lost How can the Sacrament be continued in the Church till Christ come if there were so many hundred years in which there was no true Ministery How can it be said That Christ is with his Ministers alway even unto the end of the World and that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church and that there is no end of Christs Government if during all the raign of Antichrist there was no true Church-state in the world no true Ordinance as some say no true Ministery And therefore though we should not be able to tell how the Church and Ministry was preserved in the midst of that great and general Apostasie that hath been in the Christian World yet notwithstanding we ought to believe that it is so because Christ hath said it shall be so and heaven and earth shall â—asse away but not one title of Gods word shall passe away Mr. Bartlet in his Model of the Congregational way spends the most part of a Chapter to prove That the essentials of a Church-state together with the Officers Ordinances and administrations thereunto appertaining hath and shall abide for ever in the World This he proveth both by Prophesies promises and precepts of Scripture and also by divers reasons The same task is also undertaken by Mr. Philips of Watertown in New-England but for brevity we forebear transcribing them We read Revel 12. of a great wonder in heaven a woman cloathed with the Sun c. This woman represents the Christian Church she is persecuted by the heathen Emperours and overthrows them by the blood of the Lambe and by the word of her testimonie and by not loving her life unto the death Afterward she is persecuted by Antichrist and then she flies into the wildernesse where she hath a place prepared her of God that they should feed her a thousand two hundred and threescore dayes Vers. 6. and she iâ— said to be
captivity from off her â—nd then take her to wife So doth the Protestant Reformed Religion It distinguisheth between the Ordinances of God and the corruptions cleaving unto the Ordinances It washeth away all the defilements and pollutionâ— contracted in the Church of Rome both from Baptisme and Ordination but it doth not renounce either the one or the other 1. Because they are none of Antichrist's posts or Antichrist's inventions but are the institutions of Jesus Christ and were in the Church of Rome long before Antichrist sat there 2. Because they have been preserved sound for the substantials and essentials of them And the truth is he that renounceth the one must needs renounce the other which were well if some of our dissenting Brethren would seriously consider Now that this Position may not seem strange we will a a little compare the Apostacy of the 10. Tribes with the Apostacy of the church of Rome The 10. Tribes did not onely worship God after a false manner by setting up their golden Calves in Dan and Bethel but afterwards in the raign of Ahab they directly worshipped false Gods and set up Baal and Ashtaroth and fell away wholy from the true God and yet notwithstanding all this when the Prophet came to â—noint Jehu he saith unto him Thus saith the Lord God of Israel I have anointed thee King over the people of the Lord â—veâ—over Israel Here note That they are called the people of God notwithstanding their Apostacy And the Ordinance of Circumcision which was retained amongst them in this their Apostacy was Gods Ordinance and they that were circumcised under that Apostacy not onely did not renounce their circumcision but had sinned against God if they had done it and were accordingly admitted to the passeover by Hâ—â—â—kiah as truly circumcised For Gods Ordinanceâ— are not to be renounced for mans Corruptions cleaving to them but the corruptions are to be removed and the Ordinances embraced And afterwards in Christâ— time it is evident that the Office of the Priest and the High-Priest was excâ—edingly corrupted They came ordinarily into thâ—ir office by bribery faction And as many learned men think there were Two high Priestâ— together Anâ—as and Caiaphas when Christ was crucified The Priests and High-Priests had their chief stroak in the Crucifying of Christ. And yet we read Iohn 11.15 Caiaphas is owned by the Holy Ghost as high Priest c. Act. 23. when Paul said to the High-Priest God will sâ—itâ— thee thou whited wall c. and they that stood by said Râ—vilest thou the High-Priest Paul answered I wist not Brethren that he was the High-Priest For it is written Thou shalt not speak evil of the Rulâ—r of thy People Here also Paul as many think acknowledged him as an High-Priest though the Priesthood at that time was tyrannical heretical and they came by most unjust wayes into their places and offices From all this it appears That corruptionâ— cleaving to Gods Ordinances do not null Gods Ordinances That we are not to renounce divine Ordinances because of circumstantial defilements annexed to them That Baptisme and Ordination were found for the substance in the Church of Rome and therefore to be reformed but not renounced 5. The fift thing we desire may be considered is That it is no disparagement to the present Ministry of the Church of England to say That we receive our Ministry from Christ and his Apostles and from the Prâ—mitive Churches through the impure and corrupt Channel of the Church of Rome For 1. It was no disparagement to Jesus Christ that he received his humane nature from Adam through many unclean channels as Thamar Rahab Bethshebah c. 2. It is no disparagement to the holy Scriptures of the old Testament that the Christians received them from the Church of the Iewes even after they had crucified that Christ who was the center of the whole Old Testament Nor is it any disparagement to the Old and New Testament that we receive them as delivered to us by sucession from the Apostles through the Church of Rome although that Church by their corrupt Glosses and Interpretations had much depraved and corrupted them 3. It was no disparagement to circumcision that it came from God through the hands of Idolaters unto Christ and his Apostles Nor to Baptisme that it comes to us from Christ through the Antichristian Church of Rome insomuch as many of those that renounce Ordination do yet retain their Baptisme though it may be easily made to appear that it was as much corrupted as Ordination 4. It is no disparagement to the Ordinance of Marriage that many have been married in the Church of Rome and married with all the Popish Ceremonies yet we never heard of any that have renounced their marriage as unlawful because solemnized in the Church of Rome which yet notwithstanding doth hold Marriage to be a Sacrament in a proper sense and have many corruptions in their way of marriage and yet it is by the Law of God and man valid for the sustance of it 5. It was no disparagement to the Vessels of the Temple that they had been 70. years in Babylon and abused and prophaned by Belshazzar who in contempt of the God of Heaven drank Wine in those holy and consecrated Vessels for afterwards the Israelites made no scruple of receiving them and restoring them to the Temple This is the fift consideration 6. The sixt consideration is That the receiving of our Ordination from Christ and his Apostles and the Primitive Churches and so all along through the Apostate Church of Rome is so far from nullifying our Ministry or disparaging of it that it is a great strengthening of it when it shall appear to all the World That our Ministry is derived to us from Christ and his Apostles by succession of a Ministry continued in the Church for 1600. years And that we have 1. a lineal succession from Christ and his Apostles 2. Not onely a lineal succession but that which is more and without which the lineal is of no benefit we have a Doctrinal succession also We succeed them in Preaching the same Doctrine that they did deliver to the Churches The Papists boast much of a lineal succession but they want the Doctrinal They succeed the Apostles as darknesse succeeds light and as Manasseh succeded Hezekiah But this is the happinesse of the present Ministry That we have both a lineal and doctrinal succession from Christ and his Apostles But doth not this discourse of ours when we say That the essentials of a 〈…〉 true Ministry and that Baptisme and Ordination for the Substantials of them were preserved in the Church of Rome during the prevalency of Antichrist make Rome to be a true Church of Christ. There are indeed some learned Orthodox Divines That say That the Church of Rome is Vâ—rè Ecclesia though not Vera Ecclesia is Truly a Church though far from being a true Orthodox Church There
are others that say That till the last Councel of Trent the Church of Rome remained a true Church for the essentials and substantials of it and then it ceased to be a true Church The Scripture saith That Antichrist sits in the Temple of God though he be no part of it as we have formerly said no more then Satan who had his seat in Pergamus was part of the Church of Pergamus But for our parts we conceive we are not at all forced by any thing that we have said to entermeddle with this Controversie For it doth not follow That because Ordination which is an Ordinance of Christ for the substance of it was preserved in the Church of Rome that therefore the Church of Rome is a true Church no more then it followeth That a Theefe having the goods of an honest man in his house which he hath stolen should thereupon be accounted a True man Surely The Theefe is still a theefe And so is Rome still the Mother of Harlots notwithstanding her possessing the Essentials of Ordination and Baptisme Even as Babylon of old A type of Rome was Babylon still and far from being the Church of God although it had the Vessels of the Temple with her So is the Church of Rome still an Antichristian Church The Mother of Harlots and abominations of the earth although it hath had the Essentials of a true Ministry by Gods overruling providence continued in her 7. The Seventh and last consideration doth more immediately concern the Ministry of England and it consisteth of three branches 1. That the first conversion of the English Nation from Heathenisme unto Christiaâ—ity did not proceed from Româ— but from Hierusalem Mr. Fox and Dr. Iohn White have learnedly demonstrated out of Gildas and sundry other Authors who affirm that Britaine received the Gospel in the time of Tiberius the Emperour under whom Christ was crucified from some of the Apostles or some Apostolical men It is mostly received that Ioseph of Arimathea was sent by Philip from France to Britaine about the year 63. and laid the first foundation of the Christian faith amongst us To this Tertullian attesteth in his Book against the Iewes And therefore it is a falsity for Rome to challenge the conversion of the English Nation and no lesse absurdity for us to derive our succession from them 2. That the Churches of England in their first Plantation were rightly gathered and constituted as being planted by the Apostles or men Apostolical And that true Christianity after it's first settlement in Britaine was never wholy exâ—â—nguished but hath continued from the very first Plantation of it to this very day This Dr. VVhite proveth â—gainst the Papists in his way to the Church § 49. Where he sheweth That the Faith continued here from King Lucius to the coming of Austin the Monk whom Gregory sent hither 600. years after Christ who when he came found divers Britaine Bishops and learned men with a Monastery at Bangor who did oppose Arrianisme and Pâ—lagianisme and the pride of Austin the Popes Ambassador 3. That during the raign of Antichrist here in England God reserved unto himself many Thousands that never bowed their knees to Baal as appears in the Book of Martyrs And amongst otherâ— he raised up Mr. VVickliffe and made him a great and famous instrument of Church-reformation Our London Divines in their Appendix to the jus divinum of Church government prove out of good Authors that in this Church of England the corruptions which the Church of Rome would have introduced about Ordinations of Ministers and other Ecclesiastical affairs were withstood and opposed by the Kings of England c. So that if the whole be well considered it will puzzle our Antiministerial adversaries to prove that the Church of England was beholding to the Church of Rome for either the first plantation after reformation or continuation of the Gospel Church and Ministry therein from the begining to this day We will conclude this consideration with the remarkable speeches of two new-New-England Ministers The first is Mr. Philips of Watertown who having proved That England was not beholden to Rome for its first conversion nor after reformation at last hath these words When it pleased God more fully to clear up the light of his Gospell in this Nation so as many thousands were redeemed from amongst men Antichristian and were made the first fruits unto God and the Lambe The Church-state was not essentially altered all this time nor were these first fruits unto God New constituted Churches but members of some Churches clearing themselves from corruption and by reformation recovering themselves out of a desperate diseased condition into a more healthful and sound estate In which course the Lord went on mightily in many places especially after Luthers time yea even in England something by Henry the 8 th more by Edward the 6 th and Queen Elizabeth who did not constitute new Churches but reformed the Churches deeply degenerated from the first constitution and the pure state thereof as they did the like in the state of Iudah often sometimes better and more fully and sometimes not so fully in the dayes of the Judges David Asa Iehoshaphat Hezekiah Iosiah Ezra and Nehemiah The other is Mr. Cotton in his way of the Churches of Christ in new-New-England Chap. 7. Pag. III. where he saith Four things we observe in the State of the Churches in England which make way for Reformation amongst them First the Efficient instruments of their first plantation which were either Apostles or Apostolicall men whether Philip or Ioseph of Arimathea or Simon Zelotes as any of our Countrymen may read in Mr. Foxe's Book of Acts and Monuments in the beginning of it next after the story of the ten persecutions out of Gildas Tertullian Origen Beda Nicephorus which being so we cannot but conceive the Churches in England were rightly gathered and planted according to the Rule of the Gospel and all the corruptions found in them since have sprung from Popish Apostacy in succeeding ages and from want of through and perfect purging out of that leaven in the late times of reformation in the dayes of our Fâ—therâ— So that all the work now iâ— not to make them Churcheâ— which were nonâ— before but to reduce and restore them to thâ—ir primitive institution c. And thus we have â—t lâ—st finished our several considerâ—tions in answer to thiâ— great Objection and shâ—ll here put an â—nd to our first Proposition to wit That the Call to the O ffice of the Ministry which some of our Ministerâ— did receive during the prevalency of Episcopacy was lâ—wfull and valid for the substance of it though mingled with many circumstantiall dâ—fects We have proved it by arguments drawn from the principles of our adversaries and also from our owne principlâ—â— We have indeavoured to give full satisfaction to all the Objectionâ— that are brought against it We had thought to have given our people a summary recapitulation
had no sooner done but the Wolves presently devoured the Sheep Even so when once not only the Persons of Ministers are disgraced and their Maintenance taken away but when the very Calling and Office of the Ministry is denied and libertie given to every man that will to preach then will the Wolves devour the Sheep of Christ then will Errors Heresies Blasphemie Atheism and Poperie come in like a mighty floud then will ruine and desolation come like an armed man upon that Nation where this is practized without remedie And thâ—refore to testifie our Love unto the Truth that the Sun of Righteousness may not go down in our daies that the Truth of the Gospel may live when we are dead and the Word of Christ may run and be glorified And to prevent the growth of Atheism which every where abounds and threatneth the overthrow and ruine of the way that God hath called holy and to reduce poor misled souls which ignorantly conceive they sinne not in traducing the Ministers of the Gospel as if they were men onely seeking their own things and not t he things of the Lord Iesus and contemning the Ministry as if it were not Gods Institution but an humane in vention introduced to uphold some carnal interest We the Members of the Provincial Assembly convened by Authority of Parliament conceive it our Duty to clear unto our respective Congregations the Ministry and Ministers such as serve the Lord in uprightness from these unkinde and ungrounded aspersions Beseeching the Lord the Father of Spirits to convince and settle the Iudgments of them that through misguidance may doubt and to give Repentance unto such as carnally oppose themselves that they may come to the acknowledgement of the Truth and so recover themselves out of the snare of Satan wherein they suffer themselves to be taken captive at his pleasure The Summe of all we shall say about the Gospel-Ministry we shall comprehend in this following Scheme The Divine Right of the Gospel-Ministry containing 1. The Justification of the Ministry wherein are handled these particulars 1. That the Office of the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments is necessary in the Church of God by Divine Institution 2. That this Office is perpetually necessary in the Church of God 3. That no man ought to take upon him the Office or do the work of the Ministry except he be lawfully called and ordained thereunto 4. The several waies of calling men to the Ministry where is spoken of 1. An immediate call and therein laid down 1. The characters of an immediate call 2. A resolution whether we are now to expect an immediate call 3. Whether the call of the first Reformers of Religion from Popery was an immediate call 2. A mediate call consisting in Election concerning which are handled two things 1. That the Election of a Minister doth not by Divine Right belong wholly and solely to the major part of every Congregation 2. That the whole Essence of the Ministerial call doth not consist in Election without Ordination Ordination concering which are made good these four Assertions 1. That Ordination of Ministers is an Ordinance of Christ. 2. That the Essence of the Ministerial call consisteth in Ordination 3. That Ordination ought to be with praier fasting and Imposition of hands 4. That Ordination ought to be by the Presbytery 2. The Justification c. B B. 2. The Justification of our Ministry which is comprised under two Propositions 1. That the Call to the Office of the Ministry which some of our present Ministers did receive during the prevalency of Episcopacy was lawful valid which is proved 1. By Arguments drawn from the principles of our Adversaries wherein by the way is proved 1. That the Chuâ—ches of England are true Churches 2. And the two great Objections against them taken from their Parochiall and Nationall constitution are sufficiently answered 2. By Arguments taken from our own Principles and the nature of the thing And here our Ministry is largely vindicated from the foul aspersion of Antichristianism which is cast upon it because conveyed unto us as is said by Popish and Antichristian Bishops 2. That the Call to the Office of the Ministry which our present Ministers do receive since the abolition of Episcopacy is lawfull and valid in which is shewed 1. That a Bishop and Presbyter are all one in Scripture 2. That the instances of Timothy and Titus and the Asian Angels do not prove the contrary And because Ordination by Presbyters without Bishops is highly accused of Novelty as having not the least shadow of Antiquity and thereby many Candidates of the Ministry are discouraged from this way of entring into the Ministry and Ordination so received is accounted null We have therefore added an Appendix wherein is briefly held forth the Judgement and Practise of Antiquity both in reference to Ordination and the whole matter of Episcopacy Ius Divinum Ministerij Evangelici OR THE DIVINE RIGHT OF THE Gospel-Ministry The First Part. CONTAINING A Justification of The Gospel-Ministry in generall The necessity of Ordination thereunto by Imposition of Hands The Unlawfulnesse of private mens assuming to themselves either the Office or Work of the Ministry without a lawful Call and Ordination LONDON Printed by Abraham Miller 1654. Ius Divinum Ministerij Evangelici OR THE DIVINE RIGHT OF THE Gospel-Ministry CHAPTER I. Containing the first Proposition PROP. I. That the Office of the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments is necessary in the Church by Divine Institution FOr the understanding of this Proposition we shall briefly shew 1. What is meant by Ministry 2. What by Office 1. What is meant by Ministry The word Ministry is a term of large comprehension Sometimes it is taken for a Civil Service in the Common-wealth Sometimes for a spirituall worship of Jesus Christ Sometimes for the Office of a Deacon But in this Proposition it is taken for an Ecclesiasticall Function appointed by Christ in his Church for the Preaching of the Word and Administration of the Sacraments This is called a Ministry in opposition to Lordly Domination and Principality For Ministers are not appointed to be Lords over Gods Heritage but to be examples to the flock The Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them and they that are great exercise authority upon them But it shall not be so among you but whosoever will be great among you let him be your Minister and whosoever will be chief among you let him be your Servant The Office of the Ministry is not a Dominion but a Service and a labourious Service and therefore called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word taken from those that labour at the oar and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word taken from those that do in pulvere desudare But yet it is a most glorious and honourable Service because a Service to God his Church and the Souls of People and therefore called The Ministry of Christ The Stewardship of the Mysteries
besides This is contrary to their own practice in New-England where it is frequent to have a man Elected and preach half a year a whole year nay as Mr Gi. Firmin once a Preacher there saith he knew one elected and preached two years to his people and they maintained him all that while and yet all that time he never administred a Sacrament but he and they when they would partake the Lords Supper went ten miles to the Church out of which they issued to receive the Sacrament which practice without doubt was very unnecessary if Election gives the whole essence of the Ministeriall Call and Ordination be only an adjunct We say in Logick Forma dat operari Effects depend upon the Form not upon extrinsecall circumstances This is Argumentum ad hominem Arg. 6. If the whole essence of the Ministeriall Call consisteth in Election then it will follow That a Minister is only a Minister to that particular charge to which he is called and that he cannot act as a Minister in any other place This consequence is confessed by Reverend Mr Hooker who saith That a Minister preaching to another Congregation though he ceaseth not to be a Pastor yet he doth not preach as a Pastor nor can he do any Pastorall acts but in that place and to that people to whom he is a Pastor Thus also it is said in the answer of the Elders of severall Churches in new-New-England unto nine Positions Pos. 8. If you mean by Ministerial act such an act of authority and power in dispensing of Gods Ordinances as a Minister doth perform to the Church whereunto he is called to be a Minister then we deny that he can perform any Ministeriall act to any other Church but his own because his Office extends no further then his Call This is also confessed in the new-New-England Platform of Church-Discipline And therefore we need not say more for the proof of the consequence But as for the minor That a Minister can perform no Pastorall act out of his own Congregation is an assertion 1. Unheard of in the Church of Christ before these late years 2. Contrary to the practice of the Brethren themselves with whom we dispute It is acknowledged by all of them that the administration of the Sacrament is a Ministeriall act and cannot be done but by a Pastor or Teacher and yet it is ordinary both in Old England and in New England for members of one Congregation to receive in another Congregation M. Firmin tels us That M. Phillips Pastor of the Church in Water-town while M. Wilson Pastor of the Church of Boston was here in England went to Boston and administred the Lords Supper to that Church This surely was a Pastorall act and M. Phillips acted herein as a Pastor to those that were out of his own Congregation And if we may argue from our Brethrens practice we may safely conclude That a Minister may act as a Minister out of his own Congregation Thirdly Contrary to Scripture For the Scripture tels us 1. That there is a Church generall visible as well as a particular Church visible Act. 8.1 Gal. 1.13 1 Cor. 10.32 Gal. 4.26 Eph. 3.10 1 Cor. 12.28 1 Tim. 3 15. 2. That Ministers are primarily seated in the Church generall visible and but secondarily in this or that particular Church 1 Cor. 12.28 Teachers are set by God in the same Church with the Apostles Eph. 4.11 12. Pastors and Teachers are given by Christ for the perfecting of the Saints and for the building of the body of Christ in general 3. That every Minister hath a double relation one to his particular Church another to the Church general visible And though he be actually to exercise his Ministry especially over that charge where he is fixed yet he hath a virtual and habitual power to preach as a Minister in any place where he shall be lawfully called Therefore Ministers are spoken of in Scripture under a general notion to shew the indefinitenesse of their Office They are called Ministers of God 2 Cor. 6.4 Ministers of Christ 1 Cor. 4.1 Ministers of the New Testament 2 Cor. 3.6 Ministers of the Gospel 1 Thess. 3.2 and Ministers in the Lord Ephes. 6.21 Embassadours for Christ 2 Cor. 5.20 But never Ministers of the people Indeed they are for the people but not of the people That a Minister is a Minister of the Church Catholick visible appears thus He that can ministerially admit or eject a Member into or out of the Church-Catholick visible is a Minister and Officer of the Church-Catholick visible But every Minister by Baptism or Excommunication admitteth or ejecteth Members into or out of the Church-Catholick visible Therefore c. This Argument is urged by Apolloâ—iâ—s and also by that godly learned Minister Mr Hudson who hath largely handled this point and to whom we must necessarily referre the Reader that would be further satisfied about it We shall onely relate a passage out of Mr Ball in his Trial of the new Church-way p. 33. collected by Mr Hudson A Minister chosen and set over one Society is to look unto that people committed to his charge c. But he is a Minister in the Church universal For as the Church is one so is the Ministry one of which every Minister sound orthodox doth hold his part And though he is a Minister over that flock which he is to attend yet he is a Minister in the Church universal The function or power of exercising that function in the abstract must be distinguished from the power of exercising it concretely according to the divers circumstances of places The first belongeth to a Minister every where in the Church the later is proper to the place and people where he doth minister The lawful use of the power is limited to that Congregation ordinarily the power it self is not so bounded In Ordination Presbyters are not restrained to one or other certain place as if they were to be deemed Ministers there onely though they be set over a certain people And as the faithfull in respect of their community between them must and ought to perform the offices of love one to another though of different Societies so the Ministers in respect of their communion must and ought upon occasion to perform ministerial Offices toward the faithfull of distinct societies And one more passage out of Mr Rutherford in his peaceable plea pag. 263. Ordination saith he maketh a man a Pastor under Christ formally and essentially the peoples consent and choice do not make him a Minister but their Minister the Minister of such a Church he is indefinitely made a Pastor for the Church Fourthly This Assertion That a Minister can perform no Pastoral act out of his own Congregation as it is contrary to the universal Church to the practice of our Brethren themselves to the holy Scriptures so also it is contrary to sound reason For hence it will follow 1. That when a
any out of his own Congregation he doth it not as a Minister but as a gifted brother That the great work of conversion which is the chief work of a Minister doth properly belong to gifted Brethren All this ariseth from that groundlesse conceit That a Minister is no Minister out of his own Congregation which we have abundantly disproved Secondly It will also follow That there must be Churches before there be Ministers which is against Scripture and sound reason We do not deny but that there must be a Church before their Minister but not before a Minister The Church-Entitative is before the Church Ministerial but yet a Minister must needs be before a Church For every Church must consist of persons baptized Unbaptized persons cannot make a Church And therefore there must be a Minister to baptize them before they can be made capable to enter into Church-fellowship Our Saviour Christ chose his Apostles for the gathering of Churches There were first Apostles before Churches and afterward◠the Apostles ordained Elders in these gathered Churches And one great work of these Elders was to convert the neighbouring Heathen and when converted to baptize them and gather them into Churches And therefore Elders as well as Apostles were before Churches And whosoever with us holds as our Brethren do that none but a Minister in Office can baptize must needs hold that there must be ordinary Ministers before Churches and that therefore the whole essence of the Ministeriall Call doth not consist in the Election of the Church So much for the proof of the second Proposition It will be expected that we should answer to the Arguments that are brought by these Reverend men that hold the contrary to this Proposition As for Texts of Scripture there are none brought nor as we said before can be brought The great argument used by D. Ames and improved by M. Hooker is this Arg. 1. One Relate gives being and the essentiall constituting causes to the other But Pastor and People Shepherd and Flock are relates Ergo. He addes further That they are simul natura and that the one cannot be without th◠other There cannot be a Pastor before there be a people which choose him c. Answ. We shall answer to this Argument according to the grounds formerly laid That every Minister hath a double relation one to the particular Church of which he is a Minister the other to the Church universall As to his relation to his particular Church it is very true That Pastor and People are relates and simul naturâ He cannot be their Pastor but by their submission to his Ministry and when he leaves them he ceaseth to be their Minister But now besides this particular relation he hath a relation also to the Church universall and by his Ordination is invested as we have said with habituall power to act as a Minister beyond his particular Church when he is lawfully called thereunto and as long as this correlative the Church universall lasteth so long his ministeriall office lasteth though his particular relation should cease In a word The people give being to a Minister as to be their Minister but not as to be a Minister Another Argument brought by M. Hooker is Arg. 2. It is lawfull for a people to reject a Pastor upon just cause if he prove pertinaciously scandalous in his life or hereticall in his doctrine and put him out of his Office Ergo It is in their power also to call him outwardly and put him into his Office The consequence is proved from the staple rule Ejusdem est instituere destituere He that hath power to invest hath power to devest The Antecedent is as certain by warrant from the Word Mat. 7.15 Mat. 7.15 Beware of Wolves Phil. 3.2 Beware of false Prophets Answ. If by putting him out of his office be meant only a putting him from being their Officer then the argument must be thus framed They that have power to put out a Minister from being their Minister have power to choose him to be their Minister and this we deny not But if by putting him out of office be meant a putting him absolutely from being an Officer we deny that the people in this sense have power destituere to put him out of office or instituere to put him into office And we retort the Argument They that have not power instituere have not power destituere They that have not power to put a Minister into office have not power to put him out of office But people not being Officers have not power to make an Officer as hath been shewed Ergo. But it seems that Mr Hooker by the peoples rejecting their Pastor and putting him out of office doth mean their excommunicating of him for he saith afterwards That this rejection cuts him off from being a member in that Congregation where he was c. For answer to this we refer the Reader to what is said by a Minister that is come out of New-England who saith That if Reverend Mr Hooker had been alive and had seen what work Church-members make here in England in very many Churches it would have caused him to bethink himself again of the Peoples power Something we hear of saith he is done in a Church not farre from the place where he lived it cannot be kept close the light of that fire shines into England Afterwards he brings Mr Cotton to confute Mr Hooker Mr Cotton saith That Excommunication is one of the highest acts of rule in the Church and therefore cannot be performed but by some Rulers Then he cites Mr Burroughs If the Church be without Officers they cannot do that which belongs to Officers to do they have no Sacraments amongst them neither can they have any spiritual Iurisdiction exercised amongst them only brotherly admonition and withdrawing from such as walk disorderly for their own preservation Much more to this purpose is brought by this Author to whom we refer the Reader As for those two Texts of Scripture Matth. 7.15 Phil. 3.2 by which Mr Hooker proves his Antecedent they do not at all come up to the point in hand Though people are to beware of wolves and of false prophets it doth not therefore follow that a people may excommunicate their Minister Indeed this will follow That people are to be careful to preserve themselves from heretical Ministers and to withdraw from them and this withdrawing if it be upon just grounds makes him cease to be their Minister but not from being a Minister as we have often said We will not trouble the Reader with answering any more Arguments because they seem to us to have no weight in them these two already answered being the chief that are brought Only we shal speak a little to a similitude that is often brought by our Brethren of the contrary judgment For it is ordinarily said That there is the same relation between a Minister and his particularCongregation as
in the Text fore-named was onely for those times and not to continue to the end of the world Answ. 1. This is not true For if the Ministry he to continue to the end of the world then the way of entring into the Ministry enjoyned by the Apostles is also to continue And there can no reason be brought why the one should be abolished and not the other 2. Timothy is enjoyned to keep this commandment without spot unrebukable untill the appearing of our Lord Iesus Christ. Beza translates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 haec mandatâ— Keep these commandments that is saith he all the commandments commanded him in the whole Epistle Thus Deodate That thou keep this commandment that is Not only that which is contained vers 11. 12. but generally all other commandments which are contained in this Epistle Now this commandment of laying hands suddenly on no man is one of those commandments which he was to keep without spot untill the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ which evidently proves That Ordination is an Ordinance of Christ and is to last to the end of the world It is worth observing which is also hinted by a Reverend Minister that there are 4. descents of men sent and ordained 1. Christ himself was sent and had his Commission from his Father Ioh. 20.22 23. Iesus Christ did not glorifie himself to be made an High-Priest but was anointed thereunto by God his Father Act. 10.38 2. Christ Jesus as he was sent of his Father so he sent forth his Apostles Ioh. 20.23 It is said Mat. 10.1 That Christ called unto him his twelve Apostles and sent them forth and gave them their commission Nay it is said Mar. 3.14 And he ordained twelve The Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he made twelve that they should be with him and that he might send them forth to preach This making was an authoritative appointing them to their Office The Apostles would not have dared to have preached the Gospel had they not been commissionated by Christ thereunto 3. The Apostles went about ordaining Elders in every Church Paul ordained Timothy 2 Tim. 1.6 4. Timothy and Titus did ordain others as they themselves had been ordained and that by the Apostles own appointment Tit. 1.5 1 Tim. 5.22 Nay we reade of a Presbytery ordaining 1 Tim. 4.14 And as Timothy was intrusted with the Word of Christ so he is commanded to commit the same trust to faithfull men able to teach others also that so there may be a succession of Teachers Thus we have four descents recorded in Scripture 1. God anoints Jesus Christ and ordains him to his Ministerial office 2. Christ ordains his Apostles 3. The Apostles ordain extraordinary and ordinary Officers 4. And these ordain others And this commandment is given to be observed till the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. And thus as the Authour fore-mentioned saith The Apostles admitted men in their own practice into the Ministry and thus they appointed for succeeding times and can any think that Ordination ended with that age Is there not the same cause necessity use and reason for it in after ages as in the first times of the Church when there were as yet extraordinary gifts stirring in the Church which are now ceased and therefore the more need of a standing Ministry Sure we are of two things 1. That there are more and more clear Texts for Ordination then for popular Election Our Brethren in new-New-England and many in Old England are very much for Election by the people And so are we if it be rightly ordered and managed But we desire them to shew us as clear Scriptures for Election as we have done for Ordination 2. That there is as much if not more in Scripture for the Justification of Ordination as for any other part of Church-Government as for the divine right of Synods of Excommunication of Ruling Elders or any other part of Discipline in which we agree together How then it should come to passe that many in our daies should cry up the divine right of Election by the people of Excommunication and other parts of Church-government and cry down the divine right of Ordination we know not Indeed we confesse That the Papists do too much extoll it calling it a Sacrament and not only a Sacrament in a generall sense as Calvin seemeth to do but a Sacrament in a proper sense as Baptism and the Lords Supper are called Sacraments And also in appropriating it to Bishops as distinct from Presbyters Hence it may be it is That some in our age running into the other extream as the nature of man alwaies is apt to do do too much vilifie and undervalue it and because they like it not brand it with the black mark as they do other of the Ordinances of Christ of Antichristian Ordination But we hope better things of our people and beseech them to take heed of those that call good evil and evil good and that call the Institutions of Christ the doctrines of Antichrist So much for the first Assertion CHAP. XI Proving the Second Assertion about Ordination to wit That the essence of the Ministeriall Call doth properly consist in Ordination THe Second Assertion is That the essence of the Ministeriall Call doth properly consist in Ordination The contrary to this Assertion is maintained by many Reverend Divines who set up Election in the room of Ordination and make Ordination â—o be but an adjunct unto and a consequent of this Ministeriall Call and a confirmation of a man into that office which he hath bestowed upon him by his election The essence and substance of the outward calling of an ordinary Officer in the Church say the Ministers of new-New-England in their Platform of Church-Government doth not consist in his Ordination but in his voluntary and free Election by the Church and in his accepting of that Election In opposition to this we have already endeavoured at large to prove That the essence of the Ministeriall Call doth not consist in popular Election And therefore we intend to be very brief in proving the contrary That it doth consist in Ordination This we make out by these ensuing arguments 1. If Election doth not give the essentials of the Ministeriall Office then Ordination doth For the outward Call of a Minister as it is agreed on all sides doth consist only in his Election or Ordination But Election doth not c. as we have formerly shewed by divers arguments Ergo. Ordination doth 2. If Ordination makes a man a Minister that was not one before then it gives the essence of the Ministeriall Office But Ordination makes a man a Minister that was not one before Ergo c. That this is so appears 1. From the Ordination of Deacons Act. 6.3 Look ye out seven men c. whom we may appoint over this businesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to put a man into an Office which he had not before Thus it
in the New Testament we meet with no such command laid upon the people We reade that Timothy and Titus and the Presbytery are to lay on hands but not a word of command for the people but rather against it as we have shewed 3. When it is said That the children of Israel laid on hands it is not imaginable that all the Israelites did put on hands but it was done by some chief of them in the name of the rest And as Ainsworth observes It was done by the first-born For the first-born was sanctified and consecrated unto the Lord Exo. 13.1 Because the Lord when he destroyed the first-born in Egypt spared the first-born of the Israelites therefore he challengeth a right in all their first-born and they were to be given to him And now the Levites were taken by God in stead of the first-born as appears Numb 8.16 17. And hence it was that the children of Israel that is the first-born of Israel were to lay on hands upon them for the Levites gave an atonement for them and were offered up unto the Lord in their stead and as the Rabbins say Every first-born laid on hands on the Levite that was for him Which if it be so will afford us two other answers to this text 4. That the children of Israel had not onely a special command but a special reason also for what they did And therefore this example cannot be made a patern for New Testament practice 5. That this laying on of hands upon the Levites was not for them to set them apart for the service of the Lord but rather a setting them apart for a Sacrifice unto the Lord. It was the command of God that the children of Israel must put their hands upon the Sacrifices they did offer unto the Lord. The Levites were now to be waved or offered before the Lord for an offering of the children of Israel and to be offered in stead of the first-born And therefore the first-born did put their hands upon them as their propitiation and atonement It is very observable That notwithstanding this Imposition of hands the Levites were not thereupon invested into their office and made able immediatly to execute it But Aaron the Priest was to wave them before the Lord for a wave-offering that they might execute the service of the Lord. It was Aarons waving of the Levites and separating them from among the children of Israel that did constitute and make them Church-officers And thus at last we have put an end to our first part concerning the Divine Right of the Gospel-Ministry and have as we hope sufficiently cleared to the consciences of our people That there is such an Office as the Office of the Ministry perpetually to be continued in the Church of Christ. That no man ought to take upon him either the Office or the Work of the Ministry unlesse he be lawfully ordained thereunto That Ordination of Ministers is an Ordinance of Christ and ought to be by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery c. We cannot but expect to meet with many Adversaries that will oppose what we have here written Some will deny the very Office of the Ministry Others will grant that there was such an Office in the Apostles dayes but will say that it is now quite lost Some will grant that the Office of the Ministry is perpetually necessary but will adde That it is lawfull for all men gifted to enter upon the publick work of the Ministry though they be not called and ordained thereunto Some are for an immediate and extraordinary Call to the Ministry Some will deny all Ordination of Ministers Others will grant Ordination but deny Imposition of hands Others will grant Imposition of hands but say That it ought to be done by private Church-members and not by the Presbytery By this it appears that our Adversaries differ as much one from another as they do from us And therefore we need not be much afraid of their opposition for in writing against us they will be necessitated also to write one against another It is we confesse a great lamentation and shall be for a lamentation that there should be such differences and divisions amongst Christians and especially amongst those that professe the Protestant Reformed Religion and have made a necessary and just separation from the Idolatry and superstition of the Church of Rome Hereby God is greatly dishonoured True Religion hindered and disgraced The wicked are hardâ—ed in their wickednesse The Popish party is encouraged The godly party weakned and great stumbling blocks are laid before weak Christians to deter them from true conversion But we hope that this which we have written will contribute something towards the healing of these differences and uniting of all godly and unprejudiced people in peace and truth This is our design this is the success we pray for We have been necessitated to make frequent mention of A Platform of Church-Discipline agreed upon by the Elders and Messengers of the Churches in new-New-England and have expressed our dissent from some things therein contained But we desire the Reader to take notice 1. That in the Preface to this Platform they assure us of their hearty consent to the whole Confession of Faith for substance of Doctrine which the Reverend Assembly presented to the Parliament and tell us of an unanimous vote of a Synod at Cambridge 1648. which passed in these words This Synod having perused and considered with much gladnesse of heart and thankefulness to God the Confession of Faith published of late by the Reverend Assembly in England do judge iâ— to be very holy orthodox and judicious in all matters of Faith and do therefore freely and fully consent thereunto for the substance thereof c. And do therefore think it meet that this Confession of Faith should be commended to the Churches of Christ amongst us and to the honoured Court as worthy of their due consideration and acceptance 2. That as we agree wholly in the same Confession of Faith so also we agree in many things of greatest concernment in the matter of Church-Discipline 3. That those things wherein we differ are not of such consequence as to cause a schism between us either in worship or in love and affection Our debates with them are as it was said of the disputes of the ancient Fathers one with another about lesser differences not contentiones but collationes We can truly say as our Brethren do in the fore-named Preface That it is far from us so to attest the Discipline of Christ as to detest the Disciples of Christ so to contend for the seamless coat of Christ as to crucifie the living members of Christ So to divide our selves about Church-communion as through breaches to open a wide gap for a deluge of Antichristian and prophane malignity to swallow up both Church and Civil State The main intendment and chief drift of this our undertaking hath been to oppose those that say
That there is no such Office as the Office of the Ministry or That this Office is quite lost or That every man that thinks himself gifted may intrude into the Ministerial Office These opinions we judge destructive to Christian Religion and an in-let to Popery and all errour to all disorder and confusion and at last to all profaneness and Atheism There are four things that justly deserve to be abhorred by all good Christians 1. An Vniversal Toleration of all Religions 2. An Vniversal Admittance of all men to the Lords Supper 3. Vniversal Grace that is that Christ died equally for all and that all men have free-will to be saved 4. Vniversal Allowance of all that suppose themselves gifted to preach without Ordination This last is that which we have abundantly confuted and which we conceive to be unsufferable in a well-ordered Christian Commonwealth And our prayer to God is That our respective Congregations may be established in the truth against this and all other errours And that they may take heed least being led away with the errour of the wicked they should fall from their own stedfastness And for the preventing of this mischief That they may grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ to him be glory both now and for ever Amen The End of the first Part. The Second Part CONTAINING A Iustification of the present Ministers of England Both such who were ordained during the prevalency of Episcopacy from the foul aspersion of Antichristianisme and those who have been ordained since its abolition from the unjust imputation of Novelty That a Bishop and Presbyter are all one in Scripture and that Ordination by Presbyters is most agreeable to the Scripture pattern TOGETHER With an Appendix wherein the Judgment and Practice of Antiquity about the whole matter of Episcopacy and especially about the Ordination of Ministers is briefly discussed 1 Cor. 4.1 Let a man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ and Stewards of the Mysteries of God 1 Thess. 5.12 13. And we beseech you Brethren to know them that labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you 13. And to esteem them very highly in love for their work sake 1 Cor 9.2 If I be not an Apostle unto others yet doubtlesse I am to you for the seal of mine Apostleship are ye in the Lord. Revel 11.3 And I will give power unto my two Witnesses and they shall prophesie a thousand two hundred and threescore dayes clothed in sackcloth Acts 20.28 Take heed therefore unto your selves and to all the flock over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers or Bishops LONDON Printed by I. L. 1654. The Justification of our Ministry is comprised undertwo Propositions 1. That The Call to the Office of the Ministry which some of our present Ministers did receive during the prevalency of Episcopacy was lawfull and valid which is proved 1. By Arguments drawn from the principles of our Adversaries wherein by the way Is proved 1. That the Churches of England are true Churches 2. The two great Objections against them taken from their Parochial and National constitution are sufficiently answered 2. By Arguments taken from our own Principles and the nature of the thing And here our Ministry is largely vindicated from that foul aspersion of Antichristianisme which is cast upon it because conveyed unto us as is said by Popish and Antichristian Bishops 2. That The Call to the Office of the Ministry which our present Ministers do receive since the abolition of Episcopacy is lawful and valid In which is shewed 1. That a Bishop and Presbyter are all one in Scripture 2. That the instances of Timothy and Titus and the Asian Angels do not prove the contrary And because Ordination by Presbyters without Bishops is highly accused of Novelty as having not the least shadow of Antiquity and thereby many Candidates of the Ministry are discouraged from this way of entring into the Ministry and Ordination so received is accounted null We have therefore added an Appendix wherein is briefly held forth the Judgment and Practice of Antiquity both in reference to Ordination and the whole matter of Episcopacy The Preface HAving sufficiently proved That there is such an Office as the Office of a Minister and that this Office is perpetual And that no man ought to assume this Office unless he be lawfully called thereunto And that this Call is by Ordination with the imposition of the hands of the Presbytery It remains now that we should speak something concerning the Justification of our own Ministry For what are we the better that there is a Ministery by Divine institution if our Ministry be of man and not of God What are we the better that there is a Ministry from Christ if our Ministry be from Antichrist It will be said to us as it was to Christ Physitian cure thy self Trouble not the world with a general assertion of the necessity of a Ministry unlesse you will bring it down to particulars and make out unto us the divine right of your Ministry This then is the work that is now before us which we shall the rather undertake First for our peoples sake that they may with all chearfulnesse and conscienciousnesse submit unto our Ministry when it shall appear plainly unto them that we are Ministers sent by God Thaâ— we are over them in the Lord That we are the Lords Stewards and the Lords Ambassadors And that they may with confidence expect a blessing from God upon our Ministry as not doubting but that God will make use of his own Instruments and that a Minister sent by God will be blessed by God whâ—reas they that hear men not lawfully called have no promise of a blessing but rather a threatning that they shall not profit by such Preachers as we have formerly proved Hence it is that such hearers run from one errour to 〈…〉 as a just punishment of God upon them 〈◊〉 to the saying of the Apostle 2 Tim. 4.3 〈…〉 will come when they will not endure sound 〈…〉 after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves 〈…〉 having itching ears They shall make 〈◊〉 upon Teacher they shall heap up teachers And these teachers shall be sent by themselves and not by God and after their own lusts not after the Divine rule For so saith the Text They shall after their own lusts heap to themselves c. And the reason why they do this is not because they have more judicious eares then other people or because they are more holy but because they have â—â—ching eares But mark the curse that attends all such vers 4. They shall turn away their eares from the truth and shall be turned unto fables Secondly for our Brethren's sake in the Ministery For there is nothing that will more inable a Minister to dischargâ— his Office with courage faithfulnesse and chearfulnesse maugre all opposition of unreasonable men
without it for they say in the same place that the outward Call of a Minister consisteth properly and essentially in election by the people and that this election is so necessary as that the Ministerâ— Câ—ll withouâ— it is â— nullity but not so without ordination The Brownistâ— and Anabaptists doe speake fâ—rre more slightingly and undervaluiâ—gly of Ordination and therefore we â—rave leave to use â—rgumentum ad hâ—minem Thus They that are lawfully elected by the people are lawfull Ministers But sucâ— are the Ministerâ— of Englâ—â—â— c. Ergo. Or thus If a Minister rightly chosen by the people be a true Minister though not at all ordained then a Minister rightly chosen by the people is a true Minister though â—orruptly ordained But according to these men a Miâ—ister rightly chosen by the people is a true Minister though not at all ordained Ergâ— But many Ministers during the prevalency of Episcopacy wâ—re not at all elâ—cted by the pâ—ople But mâ—ny were â—nd thiâ— argument serves to justifie their Ministry 2. Though there are some that were at first obtruded unjustly and unduely upon the people yet the pâ—opleâ— aftâ—r â—cceptance â—nd â—pprobâ—tio◠〈◊〉 supply thâ— want of elâ—ction â—t first 〈…〉 afâ—er â—onsent â—nd â—â—ceptance of Leah made her to be his wife though he chose her not at first And by thiâ— sâ—y oâ—r Brethren in New-England we hold the calling of many Ministers in England may be excused who at first came into their places without the consent of the people But the people that â—hose them were wicked and ungodly and therefore they were not rightly chosen This is not true of many placeâ— where Ministers were chosen by Congregations wherein there were many godly people 2. Visible Saints and unblameable livers are sufficient to to make up the matter of a true Church and who can deny but that there are such in many if not in most of the Congregations in England But what though we judge that the whole essence of the Ministeriall Call consisteth in popular election yet the Ministers whom we plead against look upon their Ordination as that which giveâ— them the essence of their Call and think they stand Ministers by that What is that to you what they â—hink their 〈◊〉 â—hinâ—ing in your opinion is their personal errour but it câ—nnot nullifie their Ministry for he that hath the essentials of a true Minister is a true Minister but he that is rightly elected hath the essentiâ—ls of â— true Minister â—ccordâ—ng â—o you and therefore whatsoever his judgement is about ordination he must stand a true Minister to you unlesse you will crosse your own position Suppose as one saith a Deacon thinks his Ordination gives him the essentials of his office the people think their election doth what then â— will you separate froâ— him and not go to him for reliefe in case of want he hath election and ordination so that to be sure a Deacon he is The case is the same with the present Ministry This instance is urged by Mr. Burroughs of which we shall have occasion afterwards to make further use We shall add another Argument of the same nature to prove that the Ministry of England is a true Ministrie If there were true Churches in England during the prevalency of Episcopacy then there was a true Ministry For according to those men it is the true being of a Church that giveth being to the truth of Ministry and Ordinances and not the Ministry and Ordinances that give being to a Church But there were true Churches in England during the prevalency of Episcopacy Ergo c. That there were true Churches appears From what the new-New-England Ministers say in their Answer to the 32. Questions pag. 24.25.26.27 And in their Apologie for the Church-Covenant pag. 36 37 38 39 40. where they shew 1. That the Gospel was brought into England in the Apostles dayes or a little after and that Churches were by them constituted in England according to the Evangelicall pattern 2. That though Popish Apostacy did afterwards for many ages overspread all the Churches of England as in other Countries yet still God reserved a remnant according to the election of Grace amongst them for whose sake he preserved the holy Scriptures amongst them and baptisme in the name of the Trinity onely 3. That when God of his rich Grace was pleased to stir up the Spirit of King Edward the â—ixt and Queen Elizabeth to cast off the Pope and all fundamentall errors in doctrine worship and a great part of the tyranny of PopishChurch-government c. the people of the Nation generally reâ—â—ived the Articles of religion c. wherein is contained the marrow and summe of the Oracles of God c. 4. That wheresoever the people do with common and mutuall consent gather into settled Congregations ordinarily every Lords day as in England they do to teach and hear this Doctrine and do professe their subjection thereunto and do binde themselves and their Children as in baptisme they do to continue therein that such Congregations are true Churches notwithstanding sundry defects and corruptions found in them wherein say they we follow the judgement of Calvin Whitakers and many other Divines of chief note nor can we judge or speak harshly of the wombes that bare us nor of the paps that gave us suck This also appears 2. From that Mr. Phillips of Watertown in New-England saith in a Book of his written for the Justification of Infant-Baptisme and also concerning the form of a Church therein he proveth that there is a true Ministry in England because there are true Churches and that there are true Churches in England and in other Reformed Churches of the like consideration he Proveth 1. Because the true visible state of Christs Church is by Gods promise to continue unto the end of the World Luk. 1.33 Matth. 16.16 and 18.18.20 Mat. 28.19 20. 1 Cor. 11 26. Then he argueth If the visible Church-state be to continue then either it continued in England and other places of like consideration or in some other places of the World But not in other places of the world c. Ergo. Again If there be no other Churches in the World nor have bin for many hundred years but Popish or Reformed Then if the visible state of Christs Church must abide for ever either the Popish or the Reformed Churches must be the true Churches of Christ. But not the Popish Ergo the Reformed 2. He argueth If Antichrist must sit in the Temple of God and the Courts of the Temple be given unto the Antichristian Gentiles for a certain time to tread under foot then there was a true Church-state where he sate and whilest he sate there and it was the true measured Temple whose Courts he treads under foot nor can there be Antichrist unlesse there be the Temple and Courts thereof where he is And if Antichrist â—ver sate in England then
there was the Temple of God there before he sate in it and whilest he sate in it as also in other Reformed Churches The Temple or Church is the subject wherein he must sit The Antichristian seat is not the subject nor Constitutes it but is an accident vitiating the subject the removing therefore of Antichristianity doth not destroy the subject or make it to â—ease to be but changeth it into a better estate He adds 3. If ever there were true Churches Constituted in England they remain so still or else God hath by some manifest act unchurched them But there were true Churches in England in the Apostles dayes or a little after and God hath by no manifest act UnChurched them Ergo. Thus farr this Reverend Author That there are true Churches in England and so by consequence true Ministers appears further 3. Where there are a company of visible Saints meeting constantly together in publike to worship God according to his own way prescribed in his Word for the substance of it there are according to these mens opinion a true Church and a true Church-state and a true Ministry But during the prevalency of Episcopacy there were in our Congregations companies of visible Saints meeting together to worship God according to his own way prescribed in the Word for the substance of it Ergo. The Congregations in England are not combined together by a Church-Covenant which is the essential form of a particular Church and therefore are not true Churches and so by consequence have no true Ministry We acknowledge no such Church Covenant as commanded in Scripture distinct from the Covenant of grace Supposing but not granting that a Church-Covenant is necessary to the being of a Church yet we desire that our Brethren in new-New-England may be heard pleading for us Mr. Hooker saith that this Church Covenant is dispensed after a double manner either explicitely or implicitely An implicite Covevant is when in their practise they do that whereby they make themselves ingaged to walk in such a Society according to such Rules of Government which are exercised amongst them and so submit themselves thereunto but do not make any verbal profession thereof Thus the people in the Parishes in England when there is a Minister put upon them by the Patron or Bishop they constantly hold them to the fellowship of the people in such a place attend all the Ordinances there used and the Dispensations of the Minister so imposed upon them submit thereunto c. By such actions and a fixed attendance upon all such services and duties they declare that by their practise which others do hold forth by their profession And therefore it is a great Scandal for any to say that for want of a Church-Covenant we Nullify all Churches but our own and that upon our grounds received there must be no Church in the World but in new-New-England c. So likewise in their Apology for a Church-Covenant they say Though we deny not but the Covenant in many Congregations of England is more implicite and not so plain as were to be desired yet we hope we may say of them with Mr Parker Polit. Eccl. l. 3. c. 16. pag. 167. Non abest realis substantialis quanquam magis quam par erat implicita Coitio in faedus eaque voluntaria professio fidâ—i substantialis qua Deo gratia essentiam Ecclesiae idque visibilis hucusque sartam tectam in Anglia conservavit That is there wants not that real and substantial coming together or agreeing in Covenant though more implicite then were meet and that substantial profession of Faith which thanks be to God hath preserved the Essence of visible Churches in England unto this day But the Congregations of England are Parochiall Churches and therefore no true Churches of Christ and so by consequence have no true Ministry There is much opposition in our dayes against distinguishing of Congregations by local bounds and much endeavour to break this bond asunder and to leave people at liberty to joyn notwithstanding their dwellings with what Church they please with no Churches if they please and most People speak of Parochial Churches in a most contemptible way as of so many cages of unclean Birds and of Parochiall Ministers as of so many Parish Priests But we hope this ariseth not so much out of Malice and from a spirit of opposition as from a misunderstanding of our judgement concerning Parochial Congregations We will therefore briefly declare what we do not hold and what we do hold 1. We do not say That the bare dwelling in a Parish is sufficient to make a man a member of the Church of Christ within that Parish A Turk or Pagan or Idolater may be within the bounds of a Parish and yet we do not hold him a member of the Church in that Parish 2. We do not say That all that dwell in a Parish and that joyn constantly in hearing of the word of God therein Preached should upon that account be admitted to the Lords Table We heartily desire and sincerely endeavour to keep all Ignorant and Scandalous People from the Sacrament although they dwell within the same bounds with those that are admitted 3. We do not allow but much dislike the unequal division of Parishes and we heartily desire a redresse herein But we say 1. That it is most expedient for edification and most agreeable to the Evangelical pattern that Congregations should be distinguished by the respective bounds of their dwellings Thus all the Christians in Corinth did belong to the Church of Corinth and all the Believers in Ephâ—sus to the Church of Ephesus The Churches in the New Testament are distinguished one from another by the places where the believers dwelâ— As the Church at Corinth from the Church at Ephesus And we do not read of any of one Town member of a Church in another Town distinct from it The Reverend Assembly gave 3. reasons for the proof of this Assertion 1. Because they who dwell together being bound to all kind of Moral duties one to another have the better oportunity thereby to discharge them which Moral tie is perpetual for Christ came not to destroy the Law but to sulful it 2. The Communion of Saints must be so ordered as may stand with the most convenient use of the Ordinances and discharge of Morall duties without respect of persons 1 Cor. 14.26 Let all things be done unto edifying Heb. 10.24 25. Iam 2.1.2 3. The Pastor and people must so nearly cohabit together as that they may mutually perform their duties each to other with most conveniency 2. We say That all that live within the same Parish being Baptized persons and making profession of Christianity may claime admission into the society of Christians within those bounds enjoy the priviledges and Ordinances there dispensed if by their Scandalous lives they make not themselves unworthy For we believe that all Baptized Persons
are members of the Church general visible and have right unto all the Ordinances of Christ as the circumcised Iew had and wheresoever they come to fix their dwellings may require an orderly admission unto the Ordinances there dispensed unlesse by their sins they have disinherited themselves 3. We say That it is agreeable to the will of Christ and much tending to the edification of his Church That all those that live within the same bounds should be under the care of the same Minister or Ministers to be taught by them and Governed by them and to have the other Ordinanceâ— dispensed unto them sutable to their condition as they shall manifest their worthinesse to partâ—ke of them And â—hat to remove altogeher those Parochial bounds would open a gap to Thousands of people to live like sheep without a shepheard and insteed of joyning with purer Churâ—heâ— to joyn with no Churcheâ— and in a little time as we conceive it would bring in all manner of prophanenesse and Athiesme Suppose a godly man living under a wicked Minister or â—n Hereticall Minister or a Minister that admits all men promiscuously to the Sacrament without any examination would you have this man bound to hear him and to receive the Sacrament from him If the Government of the Church were once setled and countenanced by the Civil Magistrate care would be taken that there should be no place for such kind of objections 2. Such a person in such a case ought rather to remove his Habitation if it may be done without any great prejudice to his outward estate then that for his sake that good and old way of bounding of Parishes rightly understood should be laid aside Suppose he cannot remove without very great prejudice to his outward estate In sucâ— a case It is much better as we conceive till the Church Government be further setled and hath further countenance from Civil Authority to relieve such a one by admitting him into another Congregation for a while than wholly to break and dissolve that Laudable and Church edifying way of distinguishing Congregations by local bounds But would you then have every man bound to keep constantly to the Minister under whom he lives We are not so rigid as to tie people from hearing other Ministers occasionlly even upon the Lords day But yâ—t we beliâ—ve that it is most a greeable to Gospel order upon the grounds forâ—mentioned that he that fixetâ— his hâ—bitâ—tion wherâ— there is â— godly able Orthodox Minister should ordinarily waite upon his Ministry joyn to that Congregation where he dwells rather then to another In Scripture To appoint Elders in every Church and in every City is all one They that were converted in a City who were at first but few in number joyned in Church-fellowship with the Elders and Congregation of that City and not with any other But the Church of England is a National Church and therefore cannot be a true Church because the Church of the Iewes was the only National Church and there are no National Churches now under the New Testament This objection lies as a great stumbling block to hinder many Christians from joyning with our Churches and therefore we shall take some pains to remove it For the better answering of this objection we shall premise this distinction of a national Church A Church may be called National in a two fold respect Either because it hath one national Officer worship and place of worship Thus it was among the Iewes they had one high Priest over all the Nation they had one place to which all the Males were bound thrice in a year to assemble and one special part of worship to wit Sacrifice which was confined to that publick place unlesse in case of extraordinary Dispensation Such a National Church we are far from asserting or endeavouring to establish Or a Church may be called National when all the particular Congregations of one Nation living under one civil Government agreeing in doctrine and worship are governed by their lesser and greater Assemblies and in this sense we assert a national Church But there is no example of any national Church in the New Testament The reason is because we have no example there of any Nation converted to the faith 2. There are Prophesies and promises of National Churches Psal. 72 10 11 17. Isai. 2.2 Isai. 19.18 In that day shall five Citiâ—s spâ—ak thâ— Languagâ— of Caâ—aan â—nd swear to the Lord of Hostâ— â— and v. 19. then shall be an Altar 〈◊〉 the midst of the Land of Egypt and a pillaâ— at thâ— border tâ—â—reof to the Lord. And so on to vers 24 25. In that day shall Isrâ—â—l be the third with Egypt and with Assyâ—ia â—ven a blessing iâ— the midst of the Land Whom the Lord of Hosts shall blessâ— saying Blessed be Egypt my people and Assyria the work of mine hands and Israâ—l mine inheritance From this full place we gather 1. That in the times of the New Testament there shall be National Churches 2. That these Churches shall combine in one way of worship by Oath and Covenant 3. That the Lord own 's those Churches thus combined as hiâ— own and promiseth to blesse them 3. Even the Iewes themselves when their Nation shall be turned to the Lord and return to their own Land shall become a National Church not as having one High Priest one place of worship and one special publick worship in that one place for these things were Typical and Ceremonial and so were to vanish but as agreeing together in the same way of doctrine worship and covenant as other Christian Nations doâ—â— This is evident from Ezek. 37.21 to the end of the Chapter But we do not find in the New Testament that the particular Churches of any Nation are called a Church in the singular number But Churchâ—â— And therefore we look upon it as an unscriptural Expression to call the Congregations of this Nation The Church of England We find that several Congregations in the same City are called a Church as in Ierusalem Act. 8.1 That there were many Congregations in Ierusalem is evidently proved both in the Reasons of the Assemblie of Divines against the dissenting Brethren where they prove it both from the variety of Languages and from the multitude of professours and Ministers as also in our Vindication of the Presbyterial Government And so Act. 12 1 5. And Act. 15.4 22. Thus it was with the Ephesians called â— Church Act. 20.17 and Revel 2.1 and yet had many Congregations as appears from the Bookeâ— fore-quoted And if five Congregations may be called one Church why not five hundred 2. We might instance that the Churches in divers Cities are called A Church compare Gal. 1.13.22 23. with Act. 26.11 where the Churches of divers Cities are called expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. Yet further it appears that all the visible Churches in the World
are called A Church 1 Cor. 12.28 Ephes. 3.21 1 Cor. 10.32 And if all the Churches in the World are called one Church let no man be offended if all the Congregations in England be called the Church of England But how doth it appear that it is the will of Christ that the Churches of one Nation should be governed by lesser and greater Assemblies and so become a Nationall Church For this we desire the Reader seriously and impartially to peruse the Vindication of the Presbyterial Government wherein this very thing is largely proved both by the light of Nature and by the Scripture See Vindicat. p. 20. 26. And thus we have endevoured by two Arguments to convince those that oppose our Ministry from their own principles and to give them to understand that according to their own Tenents they are bound in conscience to acknowledge many of our Ministers at least to be true Ministers although it should be granted them that our Ordination is unwarrantable and Antichristian For most of these men are amongst the number of them that vilify and disregard Ordination The best of them make it but a meer circumstance or adjunct to the call of the Ministry And who knowes not but circumstances may be wanting or corrupted and yet the substance remain intire If we be true Churches then according to their own positions we are true Ministers If rightly Elected then we have that which they say is essential to the Ministerial call Suppose Ordination by Bishops should be an humane addition not agreeable to the Rule yet notwithstanding humâ—nâ— additioâ—â— do not nullify divine institution Mr. Burroughs in his Heart-divisions hath this saying I confesse for my part I never yet doubted of the lawfulnesse of the call of many of the Ministers of the Parishional Congregations in England though they had something superadded which was sinfull yet it did not nullify that call they had by the Church that communion of Saints amongst whom they exercised their Ministery If a man be Baptized in the name of the Father Son and holy Ghost though there should be many Ceremonial additions of Sâ—le Spiâ—â—l◠〈◊〉 the sign of the Crosse c. Yet these additions would not nullify the Ordinance of Baptismâ— Now more can the superaddition of Ordination unto our election though it be supposed by them to be sinful nullify our Ministry which in their judgements is for the 〈◊〉 of it conferâ—ed by Election CHAP. II. Wherein the same Proposition is proved by Arguments taken from our own Principles BUt omitting this way of Argumentation we shall now God assisting undertake to prove according to our own Principles who hold That Ordination is that which gives the Essâ—rice to the Ministerial call That the call to the Office of the Ministry which some of our Ministers did receive during the prevalency of Episcopacy was lawful and valid for the substance of it though mingled with many circumstantial defects This appears by these ensuing Arguments They that for the substance of their call were called to the Ministry according to the mind of Christ are lawful Ministers of Christ. But the Ministers that were Ordained during the prevalency of Episcopacy were for the substance of their call called according to the mind of Christ Ergo. Here we desire the Reader to take notice that in this Argument we shall not at all speak of the peoples election of their Minister Not because we are enemies to popular Election rightly managed and ordered or because we think that the Ministerial call doth not consist in Election as well as Ordination for we have formerly declared the contrary But because the great stumbling stone and Rock of offence against the present Ministry is in reference to to their Ordination therefore it is that we insist upon that onely The Minor is proved by surveying the Book of Ordination established by Act of Parliament according to which Ministers were to be Ordained during the prevalency of Episcopacy Out of which we thus Argue They who were sufficiently gifted and qualified for the Ministry and were inwardly called by God and outwardly called by prayer and fasting with the imposition of the hands of Preaching Presbyters were called to the Office of the Ministry for the substance of it according to the mind of Christ. But such were they who were Ordained during the prevalency of Episcopacy Ergo. That they were such that is ought to have been such according the Rule established and that many were such de facto and if any were not such it was viâ—ium personae ordinantis not vitium regulae the fault of the person ordaining not of the Rule for Ordination appears by viewing the Book it self in which we shall find 1. That the party to be Ordained is to be one that is apt to teach willing to take pains in the Ministry found in the faith of honest life and conversation And sure we are many were such and if any were not it was a personal not a Church error 2. The party to be Ordained is to be examined touching his perswasion of an inward calling by the Spirit whether he be inwardly moved by God to the work of the Ministry and touching his faith of the sufficiency of the Scriptures his purpose to execute his Ministry according to the word of God to oppose all erroneous and strange doctrines to fashion his conversation according to what may become a Minister of the Gospel c. 3. The party thus qualified after a Sermon Preached and prayer made to God for a blessing is to be Ordained and set apart to the work of the Ministry by the laying on of the hands of the Bishop together with other Preaching Presbyters This is the substance of the Book as touching the Ordination of Ministers from which it appears That Ministers made during the prevalency of Episcopacy were for the substance of their call called according to the mind of Christ and therefore lawful Ministers But it will be objected That the Ministers we plead for were made by Bishops distinct from Presbyters who had no power nor authority to Ordain them and not onely so but by Bishops who held themselves to be a superiour Order of Ministry by divine right above Presbyters who were not onely Bishops but Lord Bishops who were wicked and Antichristian and whom we have renounced and sworn to endeavour to extirpate in our late solemn League and Covenant What our opinio n is concerning the divine right of Episcopacy and what difference there is between a Presbyter Bishop and a Bishop over Presbyters between a Scripture Bishop and the Bishop that obtained in the Primitivâ— times and the Bishop of our times we shall have occasion to declare hereafter For the present before we return an answer to this great objection consisting of many particulars we must crave leave to premise these few conclusions many of which we shall in the next proposition prove at large That according
fully proved Therefore a Bishop and a Presbyter are one and the same Officer 5. This is further manifested from Phil. 1.1 To all thâ— Saints in Christ Iâ—sus who are at Philippi with the Bishops and Dâ—acons Here again note 1. That a Bishop and a Presbyter are all one For by Bishops cannot be meant Bishops over Presbyters for of such there never was as our Episcopal men say but one in a City 2. That there are but two Orders of Ministry in the Church of Christ of divine institution Bishops and Deacons And that therefore a Bishop over Presbyters is not a plant of Gods planting nor an Officer appointed by Christ in his Church 6. We argue From these very texts in which the holy Ghost doth on purpose set down all the several sorts of Ministry which Christ hath Ordained in his Church As 1 Cor. 12.28 Ephes. 4.11 12. Rom. 12.6.7 8. When Christ went up to Heaven he left extraordinary and ordinary Officers for the perfecting of the Saints and for the work of the Ministry c. But here is no mention made of a Bishop distinct from a Presbyter much lesse of a Bishop superiour to a Presbyter in the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction Here are Apostles Prophets and Evangelists who were extraordinary Officers and temporary and had no successors properly in â—undem gradum And here is mention of Pastors and Teachers who are the onely ordinary standing and perpetual Ministers But no mention of the Pope by which argument our learned Protestant Divines prove him to be none of Christ's Ministers nor of Patriarches nor of Archbishops or Bishops distinct from Pastors and Teachers 7. All distinct Officers must have distinct works and operations nam operari sequitur esse and they must have distinct Commissions But Presbyters have the same commission with Bishops and the same work and operation Ergâ— they are the same with Bishops That they have the same Commission appears from Ioh. 20.21 As my Father sent me so send I you This was said to all the Apostles equally and to all their successors indifferently And whose sins you forgive are forgiven c. This is common with Bishops to all Presbyters So Matth. 28.20 Go Teach all Nations Baptising them c. and lo I am with you alway unto the end of the world This is common to all Presbyters And as for their work and operation The Presbyters are called Rulers Governours and Overseers in Scripture 1 Tim. 3.5 1 Tim 5.17 1 Thess. 5.12 Heb. 13.7.17 24. And the keyes of the Kingdom of heaven are committed to them Matth. 16.19 The Scripture puts no distinction between the Bishop and the Presbyter nor gives us any the least hint to make us believe That the key of doctrine should belong to the Presbyter and the key of Discipline to the Bishop Ordination is performed by the Presbytery 1 Tim. 4.14 Jurisdiction likewise is given to the Presbyters For they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And when the Apostle saith to the Church of Corinth Do not ye Iudge them that are within and put ye away from among your selves that wicked person And when Christ saith Tell the Church These texts cannot be understood of a Biship distinct from a Presbyter For one man cannot be called a Church which signifieth a company And the Apostle speaks to the Corinthians not in the singular but in the plural number Nor can they be understood of the whole Congregation promiscuously For the Apostle saith expresly That the punishment executed upon the incestuous person was inflicted by many not by all And by the Church of which Christ speaks and to which scandals are to be brought must of necessity be meant a Ruling and Governing Church And it is most clear in Scripture That private members are not Church-rulers For the Apostle puts a distinction between Saints and Rulers Heb. 13.24 Salute all them that have the rule over you and all the Saints If all were the eye where were the hands and feet And therefore these texts must be understood of the Presbytery From hence then it followes If jurdifiction and Ordination Oâ—dination belong to the Presbyter as well as the Bishop then a Bishop and a Presbyter are one and the same office 8. We might add That the Scripture acknowledgeth no superiority or inferiority between officers of the same kind For thâ—â—gh we read that one order of Ministery is said to be above another yet we never read that in the same Order of Officers there was any one superior to others of the same order We believe That the Apostles were above the Evangelistâ— And the Evangelists above Pastors and Teachers and Pastors and Teachers above Deacons But we likewise believe That there was no Apostle above â—n Apostle but that they were all equal in power and jurisdiction no Evangelist above an Evangelist no Deacon above another and so by consequence no Presbyter by divine right over other Presbyters 6. Lasâ—ly If there be any distinction between a Bishop and a Presbyter in Scripture the greater honour and preâ—â—inence must of necessity be given to the Presbyter above the Bishop which we believe will never be granted For according to our Prelatical Divines the office of a Bishop as distinct from Presbyters is to rule and govern and the office of a Presbyter is to preach and administer the Sacraments Now sure we are That preaching and administring the Sacraments are far more excellent works then ruling and governing And the Apostle saith expressely That they that labour in word and doctrine deserve more honour then they that Rule well 1. Tim. 5.17 Hence we argue If there be a Bishop distinct from a Presbyter either he is equal or inferior or superior Our Adversaries will answer That he is superior But this cannot be For superiour Orders must have superior acts and honour belonging unto them above their equalls or inferiours But Bishops have not For preaching is an act above Ruling and most worthy of double honour and so is administring of the Holy Sacraments And therefore the act and honour of a Presbyter is above the act and honour of a Bishop and â—rgo a Bishop is not superior and ergo there is no Bishop at all in Scripture distinct from a Presbyter This is all we have to say out of Scripture for the Identity of a Bishop and a Preâ—byter and that this may not seem to be our own private judgment or that we do herein hold any thing that is contrary to the doctrine of the Catholique Church or our own Church of England we shall crave leave to set down what hath been the opinion of the Church of Christ and also of our own Church concerning the divine right of Episcopal government First we will begin with St. Ierome who upon the first of Titus hath these words A Presbyter and a Bishop is the same and before there were through the Diveâ—â— instinct divisions in Religion and
the defence of his Apoology part 2. cap 9. diviâ— 1. proveth against Harding that Aerius could not be counted an heretick for holding that Bishops and Presbyters are all one Iure divino and citing for it Hierom Austin Cyhrsostome closeth up for answer with these words All these and many more holy Fathers together with the Apostle St. Paul for thus saying must by Hardings advice be held for heretiques 9. Bishop Morton in his Cathol Apology part 1. cap. 33. affirmeth that divers other Divines besides Hierom were of the same opinion with Aerius That there was no difference by divine right between a Bishop a Presbyter For which he also citeth Medina Anselme Sedulius Erasmus and Alphonsus a Castro who saith that Hierome was of this opinion that a Bishop and a Presbyter are ejusdem ordinis et authoritatis of the same Order and the same Authority 10. Bishop Bilson whatsoever he saith to the contrary in his book called the perpetual government of Christs Church in his book against Seminaries lib. 1. pag. 318. affirmeth out of Hierome that the Church at first was governed by the common Councel of Prâ—byters and therefore Bishops must understand that they be greater then Ministers rather by custome then the Lords appointment and the Bishops came in after the Apostles times 11. Dr. Whitakers respon ad Campiani rationes ratio affirmeth That Iure divino a Presbyter and a Bishop are all one And whereas Durans affirmeth with many words that Bishops and Presbyters were Iure Divino divers he telleth him that if he will retain the estimation of a modest Divine he must not so confidently affirm that which all men see to be so evidently false For what is so well known saith he as this which you acknowledge not Hierom plainly writeth that Elders and Bishops are the same and confirmeth it by many places of Scripture 12. Dr. Holland the Kings Professor in Oxford at an Act Iuly 9. 1608. Concluded against Mr Lanes question An Episcopatus sit ordo distinctus a Presbyteratu â—oque superior jure divino and said That the Affirmative was most false against the Scriptures Fathers the Doctrine of the Church of England yea the very School-men themselves Lombard Thomas Bonaventure c. We might cite divers others as Arch-Bishop Whitguife against Carâ—hright and Dr. Fulk upon Titus the 1. ver 5. and Deane Nowell c. But we forbeare and the rather because we shall have occasion hereafter to touch upon the same Argument Now by all this it appears That by Scripture the judgment of the antient Church and our own Church of England a Bishop and a Presbyter are all one and that therefore they that are made Ministers by Presbyters are made Ministers by Bishops and are lawfully ordained because ordained in a way most agreeable to Scripture pattern CHAP. V. Answering Objections taken from the pretended Episcopacy of Timothy and Titus BEfore we leave our Scripture-proofs it will be expected that we should answer to what is brought out of Scripture for for the Ius Divinum of Prelacy and also to what is brought in answer unto our Arguments out of Scripture against it For the first there are two chiefe and principall arguments the one from Timothy and Titus the other from the 7. Asian Angels As for Timothy and Titus It is said that they were constituted Bishops of Ephesus and Creeâ— by the Apostle Paul and did exercise Episcopall power in these places both in Ordination and Jurisdiction and this power was derived by them unto their successors as being necessary to continue in the Church as well as the power of preaching and administring the Sacraments To this we Answer That Timothy and Titus were not Bishops in a Prelatical sense We deny not but that they did exercise Episcopal power both in Ordination and Jurisdiction and that this power is necessary to be continued in the Church But we say that they did this not as Bishops in a formall sense but as extraordinary Officers or Evangelists which were Officers in the Church distinct from Pastors and Teachers To make this out we will briefly do two things 1. We will prove that Timothy and Titus were not Prelaticall Bishops 2. That they were Evangelists 1. That they were not Prelaticall Bishops This we make out 1. Because the Scripture no where cals them Bishopâ— But in the Postscripts they are called Bishops These Postscripts are no part of Canonicall Scripture The Papists themselves Baronius Serarius and the Rhemists confesse that there is much falsity in them Smectimnuâ—s hath everlastingly blasted the Authority of them The first Epistle is said to be writ from Laodicea whereas Bâ—za in his Annotations proves apparently that it was written from Macedonia to which opinion Baronius and Serarius and Athanasius and Theodoret in his Epistle before his Commentary upon Timothy subscribe It is also called the first Epistle But how was Paul sure that he should live to write a second And it is also said to be written from Laodicea which is the chiefest City of Phrygia Paâ—atiana But as Bâ—za well observes there is no mention of Phrygia Pacatiana in the writers of those ages sed apud recentiores illos qui Romani â—mperii jam inclinantis provincias descripserunt The second Epistle iâ— thus subscribed The second Epistle unto Timothy ordained the first Bishop of the Church of the Ephesians was written from Rome when Paul was brought c. Now these words Ordained the first Bishop are wanting saith Bâ—za in quibusdam vâ—tâ—stis codicibus in veteri vulgatâ editione apud Syrum interpretem The Syriack Interpreter reads it Here ends the Second Epistle to Timothy written from Rome If St. Paul had written this Postscript he would not have said to Timothy the first Bishop c. whereas it was not yet certain whether ever there should be a second Neither would it be said when Paul was brought c. But when I was the second time brought before Nero. The Epistle to Titus is said to be written from Nicopolis whereas it is cleare that Paul was not at Nicopolis when he wrote it Titus 3.12 Be diligent to come to me to Nicopolis for I have determined there to winter he doth not say here to winter but there where note for the present he was not there and besides it is said that Titus was ordained the first Bishop c. And who was the second or was there ever a second But we forbear transcribing any more c. This is abundantly sufficient to invalidate the authority of the Postscript written ab hominibus vâ—l indoctis vel certe non sâ—tis attentis as Beza saith But some of the Fathers call them Bishops They that call them Bishops borrow their testimonies from Eusebius of whom Scaliger saith and Dr. Râ—ynâ—lds approves of it That he read ancient Histories paruâ— attente which they prove by many instances And all that Eusebius saith is only Sic scribitur It is so
of God of Ordination by Presbyters without Prelats HAving now finished our Vindication of the present Ministers of the Church of England both such as were made by Bishops and such as are now made without Bishops before we come to our Appendix we shall crave leave to shew in few words unto our respective Congregations not onely the lawfulnesse of the present Ministry But the absolute necessity of adhering to it and the destructive dangers and ineffable mischiefs that will follow upon receiving of it And this will appear upon a fourfold account 1. Because a true Ministery is essential to an Organical Church that is a Church administring Ordinances A true Church saith Cyprian is Plebs Episcopo adunata Ecclesia non est saith Jerom quae non habet sacerdotem Sure we are That there cannot be a true Church Ministerial without true Ministers 2. Because the Scripture way and the onely Ordinary way by which men are set apart to the work of the Ministry is by Ordination as we have abundantly shewed He that comes any other way is a Thief and a Robber not a true Shepherd 3. Because That this Ordination must be performed either by Ministers or by the people And if all Ordination by Ministers be to be accounted Antichristian because these Ministers were made by other Ministers and those by others and those by such as before the reformation were belonging to the Church of Rome Then it will follow That there is no way of Ordination left but by the people 4. Because there is neither precept nor president in all the Book of God for Ordination of Ministers by the people without Ministers We read of Ordination by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery but never by the laying on of the hands of the people We find the Apostles Ordaining and Timothy and Titus Ordaining as we have formerly said and the Presbytery ordaining But no where of the peoples Ordaining We find the people contra-distinguished from Rulers and Governours but no where called Rulers or Governours And if there be a power by Scripture in the people to Ordain Ministers why was Titus sent to Creete to Ordain Elders why did the Apostles visit the Churches they had planted to Ordain Elders in every Church And why is Timothy commanded To lay hands suddenly on no man c. Some thing possibly may be said out of Scripture For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is ne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quidem in totâ Scripturâ Surely this way of Ordination by the people is a devise that hath neither ground for it in the Scripture nor in all Antiquity And for private Christians to assume not onely a power to elect their own Ministers that is to nominate Persons to be made their Ministers which we no wayes dislike or deny so it be done in an orderly way by the guidance of the Presbytery but also to undertake without Ordination to become Publick Preachers themselves and not onely so but to send forth Ministers authoritatively to Preach the Gospel and administer the Sacraments This is a sin like unto the sin of Vzziah and of Corah and his company This is to make themselves Political Popes and Antichristian Christians And therefore for the conclusion of all we shall make bold to speak two things to all those that renounce their former Ordination by Ministers and take up a new way of Ordination by the people 1. We would intreat them that before they find fault with our way of Ordination by Ministers they would first of all justifie by the Canon of the Scripture their new way of Ordination by the people 2. We would desire them in the fear of God to consider That whosoever renounceth Ordination by Ministers must of nece ssity not onely renounce our Ministry but all the Ministers and Churches Reformed in the Christian world and as Constantine said to Acesius the Novaâ—ian He must erect a Ladder by himself to go to heaven in a new way He must turn Seeker and forsake all Church-Communion as some do in these our unhappy dayes upon this very ground that we are speaking of For sure we are If Ordination by Ministers be Antichristian Ordination by the people is much more Antichristian But we hope better things of you though we thus speak And our prayer to God is and shall be That the Lord would send down the spirit of Truth into the hearts of his people to guide them in the truth in these erring dayes The Spirit of holinesse to sanctifie them by his truth in these prophane dayes And the Spirit of charity and meeknesse and sobriety to cause them to speak the truth in love Ephes. 4.15 and to love one another in the truth 2 Joh. 1. in these sinful and miserable dayes of uncharitablenesse and division The Appendix HAving sufficiently proved out of the word of God that a Bishop and Presbyter are all one and that Ordination by Presbyters is most agreeable thereunto We shall now subjoyn a brief Discourse about the grand Objection from the Antiquity of Prelacy and about the Judgement and Practise of the Ancient Church concerning the Ordination of Ministers And this we shall do the rather because our Prelatical Divines do herein most triumph and boast For Bishops distinct from Presbyters have been say they in the Church of Christ for 1600. years and upâ—ward And there never was any Ordination without them And when Coluthus was Ordained by a Presbyter without a Bishop his Ordination was pronounced null and void And Aerius by Austin and Epiphanius was accounted an Heretique for holding an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an equality and Identity between a Bishop and a Presbyter Nay Ierom himself saith That a Bishop over Presbyters is an Apostolical Tradition and that it began when some said I am of Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas which was say they in the Apostles dayes And from hence it is peremptorily asserted that Episcopal government is of Apostolical institution For answer to this great and plausible objection and for the further declaration of our judgements concerning the Antiquity of Prelaâ—y we crave leave to lay down these following Propositâ—ons Proposition 1. THat whatsoever may be said for Prelacy out of antiquity yet sure we are as we hope hath been sufficiently proved That it hath no foundation in the Scriptures And as Christ in matter of divorce brought the Iewes to the first institution of marriage so ought we in the point of Prelacy to reduce men back to the first Institution of Episâ—opacy and to say as Christ From the beginning it was not so It is a good saying of Tertullian Id adulterum quod posterius id verum quod primum And it was well observed by Cyprian That Christ said Ego sum via veritas vita not Ego sum consuetudo and that consuetudo sine veritate est vetâ—stas erroris Christ is
Anacletus Clemens and another called Cletus as some affirm are inextricable Some say That Titus was Bishop of Crâ—te some say Archbishop and some Bishop of Dalmatia Some say That Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus and some say That Iohn was Bishop of Ephesus at the same time Some say Polycaâ—ps was first Bishop of Smyrna another saith that he succeeded one Buâ—olus and another That Aristâ— was first Some say That Alexandria had but one Bishop and other Cities two and others that there was but one Bishop of one City at the same time And how can these Catalogues be unquestionable that must be made up out of Testimonies that fight one against another Learned Iunius speaking of that great controversie about the succession of the first Bishops or Presbyters of Rome whether Linus was the first or Clemens or Anacletus hath this remarkable passage That these or some of these were Presbyters or Bishops of Rome at the same time ruling the Church in common But the following Writers fancying to themselves such Bishops as then had obtained in the Church fell into these snares of tradition because they supposed according to the custome of their own timeâ— that theâ—e could be but one Bishop in one Church at the same time which iâ— quite crosse to the Apostolic all times Thirdly This is also to be considered That they that made the Catalogues spake according to the language of the times in which they lived in which there was a distinction between Bishops and Presbyâ—ers and therefore call them who went before them Bishops whereas indeed they were not so in a proper sence Nor can the Bishops of after-times be said to succeed them any otherwise if so much then Caesar is said to succeed the Roman Consuls Fourthly These Catalogues do resolve themselves into an Apostle or an Evangelist as at Rome into 〈◊〉 at Alexandria into Mark at Ephesus into Timothy aâ— â—retâ— into Titus Now it is certain That the Apostles and Evangelists cannot be said to be Bishops in a formal sence For they had an universal Commission and their Offices were extraordinary and they had no successors properly in idem Officium Indeed Bishops or Presbyteâ—s did succeed them in some part of their work but not in their Office Ordinary Offices succeed Extraordinary not in the same line and degree as one Brother succeeds another in his inheritance but as men of another Order and in a different line They are we confesse called Bishops by Ecclesiastical Writers but that was onely by way of allusion and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as we have formerly shewed We will conclude this Proposition with part of a passage out of the conference of the Reverend Presbyters at the Isle of Wight where they say And left your Majesty might reply That however the Catalogues and Testimonies may varie or be mistaken in the order or times or names of those Persons that succeeded the Apostles yet all agree that there was a Succession of some Persons and so though the credit of the Catalogues be infirmed yet the thing intended is confirmed thereby We grant that a Succession of men to feed and govern these Churches while they continued Churches cannot be denyed and that the Apostles and Evangelists that planted and watered those Churches though extraordinary and temporary Officers were by Ecclesiastical Writers in compliance with the language and usage of thir own times called Bishops and so were eminent men of chief note presiding in Presbyteries of the Cities or Churches called by such Writers as wrote after the division and distinction of the names of Presbyters and Bishops But that those first and ancientest Presbyters were Bishops in proper sence according to your Majesties description invested with power over Presbyters and people to whom as distinct from Presbyters did belong the power of Ordination giving Rules and Censures we humbly conceive can never be proved by authentick or competent Testimonies And granting that your Majesty should prove the Succession of Bishops from the Primitive times seriatim yet if these from whom you draw and through whom you derive it be found either more then Bishops as Apostles and extraordinary persons or lesse then Bishops aâ— meerly first Presbyters having not one of the three essentials to Episcopal Government mentioned by your Majestie in their own hand it will follow that all your Majestie hath proved by this Succession is the Homonymy and equivocal acceptation of the word Episcopus Proposition 8. THat whatsoever may be said of Episcopacy out of Antiquity yet notwithstanding it is an opinion generally received by the Learned in all ages That there are but Two Orders of Ministers in the Church of Christ Bishops and Deacons according to the saying of Paul to the Philippians where he salutes the Bishops and Deaconâ— that is the Presbyters and Deacons Of this opinion iâ— Clement in his Epistle to the Corinthians and Polycarpâ— in his Epistle to the Philâ—delphians as we have shewed Thiâ— also iâ— the opinion of most of the School-men Lombard saith Whereas all the seven Orders are spiritual and sacred yet the Canons think that two onely are called Sacred Orders by an excellency to wit the order of Deaconship and Priesthood because the Primitive Church so far as we can read had onely these two and of these only we have the Apostles precept Bonaventâ—râ— saith That Episcopacy iâ— no order but an eminency and dignity The like saith Aâ—reâ—lus upon the 4. Sent. distinct 24. Navâ—rrus saith That it is the common opinion of the Divines That Episcopacy is not an Order but an Office See more of this in Forbesii Iâ—â—nicuâ— lib. 2. cap. 11. And in the Addition of M. Mason to his defence of the Ministry of the Church of England where there are very many authors cited to prove That Presbytery is the highest Order of Ministry is not a different order but a different degree of the same Order See also D. Bloâ—deâ— Sect. 3.135 where he sheweth out of divers Councells that under the name of Priests and Levites the whole Gospel-Ministry were comprehended In our own Nation that blessed man Mr. Wickloffe did judge that there ought onely to be two Orders of Ministers in the Church to wit Presbyters and Deacons And Iohn Lamberâ— a Martyr in his answer to Articles objected against him saith As touching Priesthood in the Primitive Church when vertue bore as Ancient Doctors do deem and Scripture in mine opinion recordeth the same most room there were no more Officers in the Church of God then Bishops and Deacons that is Ministers as witnesseth besides Scripture Hierome in his Commentariesupon the Epistles of Paul But we shall give one instance instead of many that might be added In the year 1537. there came out a Book called The Institution of a Christian man made by the whole Clergy in their Provincial Synod set forth by the authority of the Kings Majestie and approved by the whole Parliament and commanded to be preached to the
magis consuâ—â—â—dine quam dispositionis Dominicae veritate Presbyteris esse majoâ—â—s in communi debere Ecclesiam regere imitantes Moysen quis cum haheret in potestate solus piae esse populo Israel septuainta elegit cum quibus populum judicaret Hiâ—ronymus Evagrio Tom. 3. Quamvis secundum honorum vocabula quae Ecclesiae usus obtinuit Episcopatus Pre sbyterio major est in multis tamen Augustinus Hieroâ—â—mo minor est An Epâ—scopatus inter Ordines Ecclesiasticos ponâ—ndus sit inter Theologos et Canonâ—stas non convenit convenit autem inter omnes in Apostolorum aetate intâ—r Episcopos et Prâ—sbyteros nullum discrimen â—uisse sed post-modum Schismatis â—vitandi causa Episcâ—pum Presbyterii suisse praepositum cui 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est Ordinandi potâ—stas concessa est sine quà ordinandi distiâ—ctione pax vel politica vel Ecclesiastica retineri vix possit Object Answ. Object 1. Answ. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quae a majoribus acceperunt posteri ea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 securi examinis suis iter posteris tradiderunt â—ib 5. 〈◊〉 Capel Sâ—â—ectymnuus 1. Tim. 1.3 Hâ—b 13.23 Phil. 1 1. Philem. 1. Col. 1.1 Heb. 13.23 2. Tâ—m 4.6.10.11.12.16 Titus 13.12 2. Cor. 1.12 2 Cor. 5.6 2. Cor. 8.6 2 Tim. 4.10 Conclus 1. Conclus 2. Conclus 3. Object Answ. 1. In tacta Iuce adhuc caecutire aliquos inter pessima inâ—auspicatissimi seculi prodigia numerandum est Smectimnuus The vindicati of Smeâ—tym The humble answer of the Divines at the Isle of Wight * L ords day †The Word Hoc enim non multum distat ab iusania dicere Petrum fuisse propciè Episcopum ut reliquos Apostolos Answ. Object Answ. Object Ribera tyra Pererius b) Tertul. Ignatius Eusebius Answ. Sed hinc stutui Episcopalis ille gradus postea humanitus in Ecclâ—siam Dei invectus certe nec potest nec debet imo ne perpetuum quidem istud 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 munus esse necessaria â—portucsse sicut â—xorta inde Tyrannis oligarchia cuus apex â—st Antichrâ—stianâ— bestia cetissima cum totius non Ecclesiae modo sed etiam orbis pernicie nunc andem declarâ—t Object Answ. Act. 2 40. 4 4. 5.14 Aâ—t 14.23 Reply Hierom in praefatione Epist. ad Ephesios Reply Reply Reply Reply (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. Conâ—ra Crescon 2. cap. 32. Austin lib. 1. de peccat merit remiss Basil de Spiritu Sancto cap. 27â— Object 1. Answ. Object 2. Answ. Answ. Object 3. Answ. Quest. Answ. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clemens ad Corinth p. 54. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Perpetual government of Christs Church Distinct. 93. cap. Legimus Objeâ—t Answ. †Ex quibus constat quaedam esse resecta quaedam assuta quaedam mutata ac proinde epistolas illas fidem facere non posse nisi in iis in quibus cum Apostolorum Scriptis conveniunt Riveti critica sacra Reason 1. Reason 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â— Reason 3. Coci censura 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Walo Messalinus cap. 4. Nos sane genuinis scriptis parati sumus deferre quantum jure bono poscere ab Herone potuit Custodâ— inquit depositum meum quod ego Christus concredimus ubi Christus in verbo suo depositum sacrum concredidit cui quâ— apud Ignatium concinnat amplectiâ—ur Caeâ—â—ra vero quae nec cum â—hristo nec cum vero Ignatio conveniut ut adulterinâ— non â—erenda 〈◊〉 Irenai lib. 3. cap. 3. Lib. 4. cap. 63. Lib. 5. cap. 20. Episcopi Presbyteri una est Ordinatio uterque enim Sacerdos est sed Episcopus primus * In Conference with Hart in the end of the third and beginning of the fifth Division Mr. Iohn Gerce his Sisters Sieve broken cap. 4. Iun. conâ—rv lib. 2. cap. 5. not 18. 4. Sent. distinct 24. Non est ordo praecise loquendo Sed ordinis eminentia vel dignitas Ponav in 4. Sent. distâ—â—ct 24. Catalogus â—â—stium tom 2. Tantum Duos ordines Ministrorum esse debâ—re judicavit Presbâ—tâ—ros viz. Diâ—conos Cypr. Ep. 33. Apud Cyprian epist. 75. Lib. 2. cap. 11. Cap. 11 Cap. 11. The Addition of Francis Mason unto his defence of the Ministry of the Church of England wherein the Ord nation of the Ministers of the Reformed Churches is maintained Lib. 4 d. 24. artic 2. Forbesâ—i Irenicum cap. 11. 〈◊〉 tertiam partem Thomae disp 238. cap. 7. De potestate Imperatoris Papae part 4. cap. 16. Lib. 2. de Concil cap. 18. Lib. de Matrim cap. 11. Lib. 3. cap. 39. Mr. Baxter in his Christian Concord and agreemâ—nt Epist. 6.28.18 Epist. 68. * Lib. 2. cap. 39. Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 22 23. Lord Digby Isa. 8.20