was an Angel-Minister and this his office must make him the guide and superiour to the Rest even all the whole Church since he was charged with all 3. By the Angel is meant a singular person for the reprehensions and the commendations respectively imply personal delinquency or suppose personal excellencies Add to this that the compellation is singular and of determinate number so that we may as well multiply Churches as persons for the seven Churches had but seven stars and these seven stars were the Angels of the seven Churches And if by seven stars they may mean 70 times seven stars for so they may if they begin to multiply then by one star they must mean many stars and so they may multiply Churches too for there were as many Churches as stars and no more Angels than Churches and it is as reasonable to multiply these seven Churches into 7000 as every star into a Constellation or every Angel into a Legion But besides the exigency of the thing it self these seven Angels are by Antiquity called the seven Governours or Bishops of the seven Churches and their names are commemorated Unto these seven Churches S. Iohn saith Arethas reckoneth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an equal number of Angel-Governours and Oecumenius in his Scholia upon this place saith the very same words Septem igitur Angelos Rectores septem Ecclesiarum debemus intelligere eò quòd Angelus nuntius interpretatur saith S. Ambrose and again Angelos Episcopos dicit sicut docetur in Apocalypsi Iohannis Let the woman have a covering on her head because of the Angels that is in reverence and in subjection to the Bishop of the Church for Bishops are the Angels as is taught in the Revelation of S. Iohn Divinâ voce sub Angeli Nomine laudatur praepositus Ecclesiae so S. Austin By the voice of God the Bishop of the Church is commended under the title of an Angel Eusebius names some of these Angels who were then Presidents and actually Bishops of these Churches S. Polycarpe was one to be sure apud Smyrnam Episcopus Martyr saith Eusebius He was the Angel of the Church of Smyrna And he had good authority for it for he reports it out of Polycrates who a little after was himself an Angel of the Church of Ephesus and he also quotes S. Irenaeus for it and out of the Encyclical Epistle of the Church of Smyrna it self and besides these authorities it is attested by S. Ignatius and Tertullian S. Timothy was another Angel to wit of the Church of Ephesus to be sure had been and most likely was still surviving Antipas is reckoned by Name in the Revelation and he had been the Angel of Pergamus but before this book was written he was turned from an Angel to a Saint Melito in all probability was then the Angel of the Church of Sardis Melito quoque Sardensis Ecclesiae Antistes Apollinaris apud Hierapolim Ecclesiam regens celeberrimi inter caeteros habebantur saith Eusebius These men were actually living when S. Iohn writ his Revelation for Melito writ his book de Paschate when Sergius Paulus was Proconsul of Asia and writ after the Revelation for he writ a Treatise of it as saith Eusebius However at least some of these were then and all of these about that time were Bishops of these Churches and the Angels S. John speaks of were such who had jurisdiction over their whole Diocess therefore these or such as these were the Angels to whom the Spirit of God writ hortatory and commendatory letters such whom Christ held in his Right hand and fixed them in the Churches like lights set on a candlestick that they might give shine to the whole house The Summe of all is this that Christ did institute Apostles and Presbyters or 72 Disciples To the Apostles he gave a plenitude of power for the whole commission was given to them in as great and comprehensive clauses as were imaginable for by vertue of it they received a power of giving the Holy Ghost in confirmation and of giving his grace in the collation of holy Orders a power of jurisdiction and authority to govern the Church and this power was not temporary but successive and perpetual and was intended as any ordinary office in the Church so that the successors of the Apostles had the same right and institution that the Apostles themselves had and though the personal mission was not immediate as of the Apostles it was yet the commission and institution of the function was all one But to the 72 Christ gave no commission but of preaching which was a very limited commission There was all the immediate Divine institution of Presbyterate as a distinct order that can be fairly pretended But yet farther these 72 the Apostles did admit in partem solicitudinis and by new ordination or delegation Apostolical did give them power of administring Sacraments of Absolving sinners of governing the Church in conjunction and subordination to the Apostles of which they had a capacity by Christs calling them at first in sortem ministerii but the exercise and the actuating of this capacity they had from the Apostles So that not by Divine ordination or immediate commission from Christ but by derivation from the Apostles and therefore in minority and subordination to them the Presbyters did exercise acts of order and jurisdiction in the absence of the Apostles or Bishops or in conjunction consiliary and by way of advice or before the consecration of a Bishop to a particular Church And all this I doubt not but was done by the direction of the Holy Ghost as were all other acts of Apostolical ministration and particularly the institution of the other order viz. of Deacons This is all that can be proved out of Scripture concerning the commission given in the institution of Presbyters and this I shall afterwards confirm by the practice of the Catholick Church and so vindicate the practises of the present Church from the common prejudices that disturb us for by this account Episcopacy is not only a Divine institution but the only order that derives immediately from Christ. For the present only I summe up this with that saying of Theodoret speaking of the 72 Disciples Palmae sunt isti qui nutriuntur ac erudiuntur ab Apostolis Nam quanquam Christus hos etiam elegit erant tamen duodecim illis inferiores postea illorum Discipuli sectatores The Apostles are the twelve fountains and the LXXII are the palms that are nourished by the waters of those fountains For though Christ also ordained the LXXII yet they were inferior to the Apostles and afterwards were their followers and Disciples I know no objection to hinder a conclusion only two or three words out of Ignatius are pretended against the main question viz. to prove that he although a Bishop yet had no Apostolical authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I do not
Saint Polycarpe at Smyrna many years before Saint John writ his Revelation 6. Lastly That no jurisdiction was in the Ephesine Presbyters except a delegate and subordinate appears beyond all exception by Saint Paul's first Epistle to Timothy establishing in the person of Timothy power of coercitive jurisdiction over Presbyters and ordination in him alone without the conjunction of any in commission with him for ought appears either there or elsewhere * 4. The same also in the case of the Cretan Presbyters is clear For what power had they of Jurisdiction For that is it we now speak of If they had none before Saint Titus came we are well enough at Crete If they had why did Saint Paul take it from them to invest Titus with it Or if he did not to what purpose did he send Titus with all those powers before mentioned For either the Presbyters of Crete had jurisdiction in causes criminal equal to Titus after his coming or they had not If they had not then either they had no jurisdiction at all or whatsoever it was in subordination to him they were his inferiours and he their ordinary Judge and Governour 5. One thing more before this be left must be considered concerning the Church of Corinth for there was power of excommunication in the Presbytery when they had no Bishop for they had none of diverse years after the founding of the Church and yet Saint Paul reproves them for not ejecting the incestuous person out of the Church * This is it that I said before that the Apostles kept the jurisdiction in their hands where they had founded a Church and placed no Bishop for in this case of the Corinthian incest the Apostle did make himself the sole Judge For I verily as absent in body but present in spirit have judged already and then secondly Saint Paul gives the Church of Corinth commission and substitution to proceed in this cause in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ when ye are gathered together and my Spirit that is My power My authority for so he explains himself my Spirit with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ to deliver him over to Satan And 3. As all this power is delegate so it is but declarative in the Corinthians for Saint Paul had given sentence before and they of Corinth were to publish it 4. This was a Commission given to the whole Assembly and no more concerns the Presbyters than the people and so some have contended but so it is but will serve neither of their turns neither for an independent Presbytery nor a conjunctive popularity As for Saint Paul's reproving them for not inflicting censures on the peccant I have often heard it confidently averred but never could see ground for it The suspicion of it is ver 2. And ye are puffed up and have not rather mourned that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you Taken away But by whom That 's the Question Not by them to be sure For taken away from you implies that it is by the power of another not by their act for no man can take away any thing from himself He may put it away not take it the expression had been very imperfect if this had been his meaning * Well then In all these instances viz. of Jerusalem Antioch Ephesus Crete and Corinth and these are all I can find in Scripture of any consideration in the present Question all the jurisdiction was originally in the Apostles while there was no Bishop or in the Bishop when there was any And yet that the Presbyters were joyned in the ordering Church affairs I will not deny to wit by voluntary assuming them in partem sollicitudinis and by delegation of power Apostolical or Episcopal and by way of assistance in acts deliberative and consiliary though I find this no where specified but in the Church of Jerusalem where I proved that the Elders were men of more power than meer Presbyters men of Apostolical authority But here lies the issue and strain of the Question Presbyters had no jurisdiction in causes criminal and pertaining to the publick Regiment of the Church by vertue of their order or without particular substitution and delegation For there is not in all Scripture any Commission given by Christ to meer Presbyters no Divine institution of any power of Regiment in the Presbytery no constitution Apostolical that meer Presbyters should either alone or in conjunction with the Bishop govern the Church no example in all Scripture of any censure inflicted by any mere Presbyters either upon Clergy or Laity no specification of any power that they had so to do but to Churches where Colledges of Presbyters were resident Bishops were sent by Apostolical ordination not only with power of imposition of hands but of excommunication of taking cognisance even of causes and actions of Presbyters themselves as to Titus and Timothy the Angel of the Church of Ephesus and there is also example of delegation of power of censures from the Apostle to a Church where many Presbyters were fixt as in the case of the Corinthian Delinquent before specified which delegation was needless if coercitive jurisdiction by censures had been by divine right in a Presbyter or a whole Colledge of them Now then return we to the consideration of S. Hierom's saying The Church was governed saith he communi Presbyterorum consilio by the common Councel of Presbyters But 1. Quo jure was this That the Bishops are Superiour to those which were then called Presbyters by custom rather than Divine disposition Saint Hierome affirms but that Presbyters were joyned with the Apostles and Bishops at first by what right was that Was not that also by custom and condescension rather than by Divine disposition Saint Hierom does not say but it was For he speaks only of matter of fact not of right It might have been otherwise though de facto it was so in some places * 2. Communi Presbyterorum consilio is true in the Church of Jerusalem where the Elders were Apostolical men and had Episcopal authority and something superadded as Barnabas and Judas and Silas for they had the authority and power of Bishops and an unlimited Diocess besides though afterwards Silas was fixt upon the See of Corinth But yet even at Jerusalem they actually had a Bishop who was in that place superiour to them in Jurisdiction and therefore does clearly evince that the common Councel of Presbyters is no argument against the superiority of a Bishop over them * 3. Communi Presbyterorum consilio is also true because the Apostles call'd themselves Presbyters as Saint Paul and Saint John in their Epistles Now at the first many Prophets many Elders for the words are sometimes used in common were for a while resident in particular Churches and did govern in common As at Antioch were Barnabas and Simeon and Lucius and Manaen and Paul Communi horum Presbyterorum consilio the Church of
himself hath not can he give what himself hath not received * I end this point with the saying of Epiphanius Vox est Aerii haeretici Vnus est ordo Episcoporum Presbyterorum una dignitas To say that Bishops are not a distinct order from Presbyters was a heresy first broached by Aerius and hath lately been at least in the manner of speaking countenanced by many of the Church of Rome SECT XXXII For Bishops had a power distinct and Superiour to that of Presbyters As of Ordination FOR to clear the distinction of order it is evident in Antiquity that Bishops had a power of imposing hands for collating of orders which Presbyters have not * What was done in this affair in the times of the Apostles I have already explicated but now the inquiry is what the Church did in pursuance of the practice and tradition Apostolical The first and second Canons of Apostles command that two or three Bishops should ordain a Bishop and one Bishop should ordain a Priest and a Deacon A Presbyter is not authorized to ordain a Bishop is S. Dionysius affirms Sacerdotem non posse initiari nisi per invocationes Episcopales and acknowledges no ordainer but a Bishop No more did the Church ever Insomuch that when Novatus the Father of the old Puritans did ambire Episcopatum he was fain to go to the utmost parts of Italy and seduce or intreat some Bishops to impose hands on him as Cornelius witnesses in his Epistle to Fabianus in Eusebius To this we may add as so many witnesses all those ordinations made by the Bishops of Rome mentioned in the Pontifical book of Damasus Platina and others Habitis de more sacris ordinibus Decembris mense Presbyteros decem Diaconos duos c. creat S. Clemens Anacletus Presbyteros quinque Diaconos tres Episcopos diversis in locis sex numero creavit and so in descent for all the Bishops of that succession for many ages together But let us see how this power of ordination went in the Bishops hand alone by Law and Constitution for particular examples are infinite In the Council of Ancyra it is determined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Rural Bishops shall not ordain Presbyters or Deacons in anothers Diocess without letters of license from the Bishop Neither shall the Priests of the City attempt it * First not Rural Bishops that is Bishops that are taken in adjutorium Episcopi Principalis Vicars to the Bishop of the Diocess they must not ordain Priests and Deacons For it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is anothers Diocess and to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is prohibited by the Canon of Scripture But then they may with license Yes for they had Episcopal Ordination at first but not Episcopal Jurisdiction and so were not to invade the territories of their neighbour The tenth Canon of the Council of Antioch clears this part The words are these as they are rendred by Dionysius Exiguus Qui in villis vicis constituti sunt Chorepiscopi tametsi manus impositionem ab Episcopis susceperunt ut Episcopi sunt consecrati tamen oportet eos modum proprium retinere c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the next clause ut Episcopi consecrati sunt although it be in very ancient Latine copies yet is not found in the Greek but is an assumentum for exposition of the Greek but is most certainly implyed in it for else what description could this be of Chorepiscopi above Presbyteri rurales to say that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for so had countrey Priests they had received imposition of the Bishops hands Either then the Chorepiscopi had received ordination from three Bishops and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be taken collectively not distributively to wit that each Countrey Bishop had received ordination from Bishops many Bishops in conjunction and so they were very Bishops or else they had no more than village Priests and then this caution had been impertinent * But the City Priests were also included in this prohibition True it is but it is in a Parenthesis with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the midst of the Canon and there was some particular reason for the involving them not that they ever did actually ordain any but that since it was prohibited to the Chorepiscopi to ordain to them I say who though for want of jurisdiction they might not ordain without license it being in alienâ Parochiâ yet they had capacity by their order to do it if these should do it the City Presbyters who were often dispatched into the Villages upon the same imployment by a temporary mission that the Chorepiscopi were by an ordinary and fixt residence might perhaps think that their commission might extend farther than it did or that they might go beyond it as well as the Chorepiscopi and therefore their way was obstructed by this clause of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * Add to this The Presbyters of the City were of great honour and peculiar priviledge as appears in the thirteenth Canon of the Council of Neo-Caesarea and therefore might easily exceed if the Canon had not been their bridle The sum of the Canon is this With the Bishops license the Chorepiscopi might ordain for themselves had Episcopal ordination but without license they might not for they had but delegate and subordinate jurisdiction And therefore in the fourteenth Canon of Neo-Caesarea are said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 like the 70 Disciples that is inferior to Bishops and the 70 were to the twelve Apostles viz. in hoc particulari not in order but like them in subordination and inferiority of jurisdiction but the City Presbyters might not ordain neither with nor without license for they are in the Canon only by way of parenthesis and the sequence of procuring a faculty from the Bishops to collate orders is to be referred to Chorepiscopi not to Presbyteri Civitatis unless we should strain this Canon into a sence contrary to the practice of the Catholick Church Res enim ordinis non possunt delegari is a most certain rule in Divinity and admitted by men of all sides and most different interests * However we see here that they were prohibited and we never find before this time that any of them actually did give orders neither by ordinary power nor extraordinary dispensation and the constant tradition of the Church and practice Apostolical is that they never could give orders therefore this exposition of the Canon is liable to no exception but is clear for the illegality of a Presbyter giving holy orders either to a Presbyter or a Deacon and is concluding for the necessity of concurrence both of Episcopal order and jurisdiction for ordinations for reddendo singula singulis and expounding this Canon according to the sence of the Church and exigence of Catholick custome the Chorepiscopi are excluded from giving orders for want of jurisdiction and the Priests of
the City for want of order the first may be supplied by a delegate power in literis Episcopalibus the second cannot but by a new ordination that is by making the Priest a Bishop For if a Priest of the City have not so much power as a Chorepiscopus as I have proved he hath not by shewing that the Chorepiscopus then had Episcopal ordination and yet the Chorepiscopus might not collate orders without a faculty from the Bishop the City Priests might not do it unless more be added to them for their want was more They not only want jurisdiction but something besides and that must needs be order * But although these Chorepiscopi at the first had Episcopal Ordination yet it was quickly taken from them for their incroachment upon the Bishops Diocess and as they were but Vicarii or visitatores Episcoporum in villis so their ordination was but to a meer Presbyterate And this we find as soon as ever we hear that they had had Episcopal Ordination For those who in the beginning of the 10 Canon of Antioch we find had been consecrated as Bishops in the end of the same Canon we find it decreed de novo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Chorepiscopus or countrey Bishop must be ordained by the Bishop of the City in whose jurisdiction he is which was clearly ordination to the order of a Presbyter and no more And ever after this all the ordinations they made were only to the inferiour Ministeries with the Bishops License too but they never ordained any to be Deacons or Priests for these were Orders of the Holy Ghosts appointing and therefore were gratia Spiritus Sancti and issues of order but the inferiour Ministeries as of a Reader an Ostiary c. were humane constitutions and required not the capacity of Episcopal Order to collate them for they were not Graces of the Holy Ghost as all Orders properly so called are but might by humane dispensation be bestowed as well as by humane ordinance they had their first constitution * * The Chorepiscopi lasted in this consistence till they were quite taken away by the Council of Hispalis save only that such men also were called Chorepiscopi who had been Bishops of Cities but had fallen from their honour by communicating in Gentile Sacrifices and by being Traditors but in case they repented and were reconciled they had not indeed restitution to their See but because they had the indeleble character of a Bishop they were allowed the Name and honour and sometime the execution of offices Chorepiscopal Now of this sort of Chorepiscopi no objection can be pretended if they had made ordinations and of the other nothing pertinent for they also had the ordination and order of Bishops The former was the case of Meletius in the Nicene Council as is to be seen in the Epistle of the Fathers to the Church of Alexandria But however all this while the power of ordination is so fast held in the Bishops hand that it was communicated to none though of the greatest priviledge * I find the like care taken in the Council of Sardis for when Musaeus and Eutychianus had ordained some Clerks themselves not being Bishops Gaudentius one of the moderate men it is likely for quietness sake and to comply with the times would fain have had those Clerks received into Clerical communion but the Council would by no means admit that any should be received into the Clergy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Balsamon expresses upon that Canon but such as were ordained by them who were Bishops verily and indeed But with those who were ordained by Musaeus and Eutychianus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we will communicate as with Laymen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For they were no Bishops that imposed hands on them and therefore the Clerks were not ordained truly but were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dissemblers of ordination Quae autem de Musaeo Eutychiano dicta sunt trahe etiam ad alios qui non ordinati fuerunt c. saith Balsamon intimating that it is a ruled case and of publick interest * The same was the issue of those two famous cases the one of Ischiras ordained of Colluthus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that dreamed only he was a Bishop Ischiras being ordained by him could be no Priest nor any else of his ordaining 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Ischyras himself was reduced into lay communion being deposed by the Synod of Alexandria 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 falling from the imagination of his Presbyterate say the Priests and Deacons of Mareotis And of the rest that were ordained with Ischiras 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith S. Athanasius and this so known a business 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No man made scruple of the Nullity ** The parallel case is of the Presbyters ordained by Maximus who was another Bishop in the air too all his ordinations were pronounced null by the Fathers of the Council in Constantinople A third is of the blind Bishop of Agabra imposing hands while his Presbyters read the words of ordination the ordination was pronounced invalid by the first Council of Sevil. These cases are so known I need not insist on them This only In diverse cases of Transgression of the Canons Clergy men were reduced to lay communion either being suspended or deposed that is from their place of honour and execution of their function with or without hope of restitution respectively but then still they had their order and the Sacramens conferred by them were valid though they indeed were prohibited to minister but in the cases of the present instance the ordinations were pronounced as null to have bestowed nothing and to be merely imaginary * But so also it was in case that Bishops ordained without a title or in the Diocess of another Bishop as in the Council of Chalcedon of Antioch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And may be it was so in case of ordination by a Presbyter it was by positive constitution pronounced void and no more and therefore may be rescinded by the Countermand of an equal power A Council at most may do it and therefore without a Council a probable necessity will let us loose But to this the answer is evident 1. The expressions in the several cases are several and of diverse issue for in case of those nullities which are meerly Canonical they are expressed as then first made but in the case of ordination by a Non-Bishop they are only declared void ipso facto And therefore in that decree of Chalcedon against Sinetitular ordinations the Canon saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Irritam Existimari manus impositionem to be esteemed as null that is not to have Canonical approbation but is not declared null in natura rei as it is in the foregoing instances 2. In the cases of Antioch and Chalcedon the degree is pro futuro which makes it evident that those nullities are such as are made
by Canon but in the cases of Colluthus and Maximus there was declaration of a past nullity and that before any Canon was made and though Synodal declarations pronounced such ordinations invalid yet none decreed so for the future which is a clear evidence that this nullity viz. in case of ordination by a Non-Presbyter is not made by Canon but by Canon declared to be invalid in the nature of the thing 3. If to this be added that in antiquity it was dogmatically resolved that by nature and institution of the order of Bishops ordination was appropriate to them then it will also from hence be evident that the nullity of ordination without a Bishop is not dependent upon positive constitution but on the exigence of the institution ** Now that the power of ordination was only in the Bishop even they who to advance the Presbyters were willing enough to speak less for Episcopacy give testimony making this the proper distinctive cognizance of a Bishop from a Presbyter that the Bishop hath power of ordination the Presbyter hath not So S. Jerome Quid facit Episcopus excepta ordinatione quod Presbyter non faciat All things saith he to wit all things of precise order are common to Bishops with Priests except ordination for that is proper to the Bishop And S. Chrysostome Sola quippe ordinatione superiores illis sunt Episcopi atque hoc tantum plusquam Presbyteri habere videntur Ordination is the proper and peculiar function of a Bishop and therefore not given him by positive constitution of the Canon 4. No man was called an heretick for breach of Canon but for denying the power of ordination to be proper to a Bishop Aerius was by Epiphanius Philastrius and S. Austin condemned and branded for heresie and by the Catholick Church saith Epiphanius This power therefore came from a higher spring than positive and Canonical Sanction But now proceed The Council held in Trullo complaining of the incursion of the barbarous people upon the Churches inheritance saith that it forced some Bishops from their residence and made that they could not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the guise of the Church give Orders and do such things as did belong to the Bishop and in the sequel of the Canon they are permitted in such cases ut diversorum Clericorum ordinationes canonicè faciant to make Canonical ordinations of Clergy men Giving of Orders is proper it belongs to a Bishop So the Council And therefore Theodoret expounding that place of S. Paul by laying on the hands of the Presbytery interprets it of Bishops for this reason because Presbyters did not impose hands There is an imperfect Canon in the Arausican Council that hath an expression very pertinent to this purpose Ea quae non nisi per Episcopos geruntur those things that are not done but by Bishops they were decreed still to be done by Bishops though he that was to do them regularly did fall into any infirmity whatsoever yet non sub praesentia sua Presbyteros agere permittat sed evocet Episcopum Here are clearly by this Canon some things supposed to be proper to the Bishops to the action of which Presbyters must in no case be admitted The particulars what they are are not specified in the Canon but are named before viz. Orders and Confirmation for almost the whole Council was concerning them and nothing else is properly the agendum Episcopi and the Canon else is not to be understood * To the same issue is that circum-locutory description or name of a Bishop used by S. Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The man that is to ordain Clerks * And all this is but the doctrine of the Catholick Church which S. Epiphanius opposed to the doctrine of Aerius denying Episcopacy to be a distinct order 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 speaking of Episcopacy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 speaking of Presbytery The order of Bishops begets Fathers to the Church of God but the order of Presbyters begets sonnes in baptism but no fathers or Doctors by ordination * It is a very remarkable passage related by Eusebius in the ordination of Novatus to be Presbyter the Bishop did it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all the whole Clergy was against it yet the Bishop did ordain him and then certainly scarce any conjunction of the other Clergy can be imagined I am sure none is either expressed or intimated For it was a ruled case and attested by the Uniform practise of the Church which was set down in the third Council of Carthage Episcopus Vnus esse potest per quem dignatione Divina Presbyteri multi constitui possunt This case I instance the more particularly because it is an exact determination of a Bishops sole power of ordination Aurelius made a motion that if a Church wanted a Presbyter to become her Bishop they might demand one from any Bishop It was granted But Posthumianus the Bishop put this case Deinde qui Vnum habuerit numquid debet illi ipse unus Presbyter auferri How if the Bishop have but one Priest must his Bishop part with him to supply the necessity of the Neighbour widow Church Yea that he must But how then shall he keep ordinations when he hath never a Presbyter to assist him That indeed would have been the objection now but it was none then For Aurelius told them plainly there was no inconvenience in it for though a Bishop have never a Presbyter no great matter he can himself ordain many and then I am sure there is a sole ordination but if a Bishop be wanting to a Church he is not so easily found ** Thus it went ordinarily in the stile of the Church ordinations were made by the Bishop and the ordainer spoken of as a single person So it is in the Nicene Council the Council of Antioch the Council of Chalcedon and S. Jerome who writing to Pammachius against the errors of John of Jerusalem If thou speak saith he of Paulinianus he comes now and then to visit us not as any of your Clergy but ejus à quo ordinatus est that Bishop's who ordained him * So that the issue of this argument is this The Canons of the Apostles and the rules of the Ancient Councils appropriate the ordination of Bishops to Bishops of Presbyters to one Bishop for I never find a Presbyter ordained by two Bishops together but only Origen by the Bishops of Jerusalem and Caesarea Presbyters are never mentioned in conjunction with Bishops at their ordinations and if alone they did it their ordination was pronounced invalid and void ab initio * To these particulars add this that Bishops alone were punished if ordinations were Vncanonical which were most unreasonable if Presbyters did joyn in them and were causes in conjunction But unless they did it alone we never read that they were punishable indeed Bishops were pro toto integro as is reported by
Sozomen in the case of Elpidius Eustathius Basilius of Ancyra and Eleusius Thus also it was decreed in the second and sixth Chapters of the Council of Chalcedon and in the Imperial constitutions Since therefore we never find Presbyters joyned with Bishops in commission or practice or penalty all this while I may infer from the premisses the same thing which the Council of Hispalis expresses in direct and full sentence Episcopus Sacerdotibus ac Ministris solus honorem dare potest solus auferre non potest The Bishop alone may give the Priestly honour he alone is not suffered to take it away This Council was held in the year 657 and I set it down here for this purpose to show that the decree of the fourth Council of Carthage which was the first that licensed Priests to assist Bishops in ordinations yet was not obligatory in the West but for almost 300 years after ordinations were made by Bishops alone But till this Council no pretence of any such conjunction and after this Council sole ordination did not expire in the West for above 200 years together but for ought I know ever since then it hath obtained that although Presbyters joyn not in the consecration of a Bishop yet of a Presbyter they do but this is only by a positive subintroduced constitution first made in a Provincial of Africa and in other places received by insinuation and conformity of practice * I know not what can be said against it I only find a piece of an objection out of S. Cyprian who was a Man so complying with the Subjects of his Diocess that if any man he was like to furnish us with an Antinomy Hunc igitur Fratres Dilectissimi à me à Collegis qui praesentes aderant ordinatum sciatis Here either by his Colleagues he means Bishops or Presbyters If Bishops then many Bishops will be found in the ordination of one to an inferiour order which because it was as I observed before against the practice of Christendom will not easily be admitted to be the sence of S. Cyprian But if he means Presbyters by Collegae then sole ordination is invalidated by this example for Presbyters joyned with him in the ordination of Aurelius I answer that it matters not whether by his Colleagues he means one or the other for Aurelius the Confessor who was the man ordained was ordained but to be a Reader and that was no Order of Divine institution no gift of the Holy Ghost and therefore might be dispensed by one or more by Bishops or Presbyters and no way enters into the consideration of this question concerning the power of collating those orders which are gifts of the Holy Ghost and of Divine ordinance and therefore this although I have seen it once pretended yet hath no validity to impugne the constant practice of Primitive Antiquity But then are all ordinations invalid which are done by meer Presbyters without a Bishop What think we of the reformed Churches 1. For my part I know not what to think The question hath been so often asked with so much violence and prejudice and we are so bound by publick interest to approve all that they do that we have disabled our selves to justifie our own For we were glad at first of abettors against the Errors of the Roman Church we found these men zealous in it we thanked God for it as we had cause and we were willing to make them recompence by endeavouring to justifie their ordinations not thinking what would follow upon our selves But now it is come to that issue that our own Episcopacy is thought not necessary because we did not condemn the ordinations of their Presbytery 2. Why is not the question rather what we think of the Primitive Church than what we think of the reformed Churches Did the Primitive Councils and Fathers do well in condemning the ordinations made by meer Presbyters If they did well what was a vertue in them is no sin in us If they did ill from what principle shall we judge of the right of ordinations since there is no example in Scripture of any ordination made but by Apostles and Bishops and the Presbytery that imposed hands on Timothy is by all Antiquity expounded either of the office or of a Colledge of Presbyters and S. Paul expounds it to be an ordination made by his own hands as appears by comparing the two Epistles to S. Timothy together and may be so meant by the principles of all sides for if the names be confounded then Presbyter may signifie a Bishop and that they of this Presbytery were not Bishops they can never prove from Scripture where all men grant that the Names are confounded * So that whence will men take their estimate for the rites of ordinations From Scripture That gives it always to Apostles and Bishops as I have proved and that a Priest did ever impose hands for ordination can never be shown from thence From whence then From Antiquity That was so far from licensing ordinations made by Presbyters alone that Presbyters in the Primitive Church did never joyn with Bishops in Collating holy Orders of Presbyter and Deacon till the fouth Council of Carthage much less do it alone rightly and with effect So that as in Scripture there is nothing for Presbyters ordaining so in Antiquity there is much against it And either in this particular we must have strange thoughts of Scripture and Antiquity and not so fair interpretation of the ordinations of reformed Presbyteries But for my part I had rather speak a truth in sincerity than erre with a glorious correspondence But will not necessity excuse them who could not have orders from Orthodox Bishops shall we either sin against our consciences by subscribing to heretical and false resolutions in materiâ fidei or else lose the being of a Church for want of Episcopal ordinations * Indeed if the case were just thus it was very hard with good people of the transmarine Churches but I have here two things to consider 1. I am very willing to believe that they would not have done any thing either of error or suspicion but in cases of necessity But then I consider that M. Du Plessis a man of honour and great learning does attest that at the first reformation there were many Arch-Bishops and Cardinals in Germany England France and Italy that joyned in the reformation whom they might but did not imploy in their ordinations And what necessity then can be pretended in this case I would fain learn that I might make their defence But which is of more and deeper consideration for this might have been done by inconsideration and irresolution as often happens in the beginning of great changes but it is their constant and resolved practice at least in France that if any returns to them they will reordain him by their Presbytery though he had before Episcopal ordination as both their friends and their enemies bear
but yet of no objection in case of Confirmation * And indeed Consignari is us'd in Antiquity for any signing with the Cross and anealing Thus it is used in the first Arausican Council for extreme Vnction which is there in case of extreme necessity permitted to Presbyters Haereticos in mortis discrimine positos Si Catholici esse desiderent si desit Episcopus à Presbyteris cum Chrismate benedictione Consignari placet Consign'd is the word and it was clearly in extreme Unction for that rite was not then ceased and it was in anealing a dying body and a part of reconciliation and so limited by the sequent Canon and not to be fancied of any other consignation But I return *** The first Council of Toledo prohibites any from making Chrisme but Bishops only and takes order Vt de singulis Ecclesiis ad Episcopum ante diem Paschae Diaconi destinentur ut confectum Chrisma ab Episcopo destinatum ad diem Paschae possit occurrere that the Chrisme be fetcht by the Deacons from the Bishop to be used in all Churches But for what use why it was destinatum ad diem Paschae says the Canon against the Holy time of Easter and then at Easter was the solemnity of publick baptisms so that it was to be used in baptism And this sence being premised the Canon permits to Presbyters to sign with Chrisme the same thing that S. Gregory did to the Priests of Sardinia Statutum verò est Diaconum non Chrismare sed Presbyterum absente Episcopo praesente verò si ab ipso fuerit praeceptum Now although this be evident enough yet it is something clearer in the first Arausican Council Nullus ministrorum qui Baptizandi recipit officium sine Chrismate usquam debet progredi quia inter nos placuit semel in baptismate Chrismari The case is evident that Chrismation or Consigning with ointment was used in baptism and it is as evident that this Chrismation was it which S. Gregory permitted to the Presbyters not the other for he expresly forbad the other and the exigence of the Canons and practice of the Church expound it so and it is the same which S. Innocent the first decreed in more express and distinctive terms Presbyteris Chrismate baptizatos ungere licet sed quod ab Episcopo fuerit Consecratum there is a clear permission of consigning with Chrisme in baptism but he subjoyns a prohibition to Priests for doing it in Confirmation Non tamen frontem eodem oleo signare quod solis debetur Episcopis cùm tradunt Spiritum Sanctum Paracletum By the way some that they might the more clearly determine S. Gregorie's dispensation to be only in baptismal Chrisme read it Vt baptizandos ungant not baptizatos so Gratian so S. Thomas but it is needless to be troubled with that for Innocentius in the decretal now quoted useth the word Baptizatos and yet clearly distinguishes this power from the giving the Chrisme in Confirmation I know no other objection and these we see hinder not but that having such evidence of fact in Scripture of Confirmations done only by Apostles and this evidence urged by the Fathers for the practice of the Church and the power of Confirmation by many Councils and Fathers appropriated to Bishops and denied to Presbyters and in this they are not only Doctors teaching their own opinion but witnesses of a Catholick practice and do actually attest it as done by a Catholick consent and no one example in all antiquity ever produced of any Priest that did no law that a Priest might impose hands for Confirmation we may conclude it to be a power Apostolical in the Original Episcopal in the Succession and that in this power the order of a Bishop is higher than that of a Presbyter and so declared by this instance of Catholick practice SECT XXXIV And Jurisdiction Which they expressed in Attributes of Authority and great Power THUS far I hope we are right But I call to mind that in the Nosotrophium of the old Philosopher that undertook to cure all Calentures by Bathing his Patients in water some were up to the Chin some to the Middle some to the Knees So it is amongst the enemies of the Sacred Order of Episcopacy some endure not the Name and they indeed deserve to be over head and ears some will have them all one in office with Presbyters as at first they were in Name and they had need bath up to the Chin but some stand shallower and grant a little distinction a precedency perhaps for order-sake but no preheminence in reiglement no superiority of Jurisdiction Others by all means would be thought to be quite through in behalf of Bishops order and power such as it is but call for a reduction to the Primitive state and would have all Bishops like the Primitive but because by this means they think to impair their power they may well endure to be up to the ankles their error indeed is less and their pretence fairer but the use they make of it of very ill consequence But curing the mistake will quickly cure this distemper That then shall be the present issue that in the Primitive Church Bishops had more power and greater exercise of absolute jurisdiction than now Men will endure to be granted or than themselves are very forward to challenge 1. Then The Primitive Church expressing the calling and offices of a Bishop did it in terms of presidency and authority Episcopus typum Dei Patris omnium gerit saith S. Ignatius The Bishop carries the representment of God the Father that is in power and authority to be sure for how else so as to be the supreme in suo ordine in offices Ecclesiastical And again Quid enim aliud est Episcopus quà m is qui omni Principatu potestate superior est Here his superiority and advantage is expressed to be in his power A Bishop is greater and higher than all other in power viz. in materiâ or gradu religionis And in his Epistle to the Magnesians Hortor ut hoc sit omnibus studium in Dei concordiâ omnia agere Episcopo praesidente loco Dei Do all things in Vnity the Bishop being President in the place of God President in all things And with a fuller tide yet in his Epistle to the Church of Smyrna Honora Episcopum ut Principem Sacerdotum imaginem Dei referentem Dei quidem propter Principatum Christi verò propter Sacerdotium It is full of fine expression both for Eminency of order and Jurisdiction The Bishop is the Prince of the Priests bearing the Image of God for his Principality that 's his jurisdiction and power but of Christ himself for his Priesthood that 's his Order S. Ignatius hath spoken fairly and if we consider that he was so primitive a man that himself saw Christ in the flesh and liv'd a man of exemplary sanctity and died a Martyr and hath
circa gerenda ea quae administratio religiosa deposcit Be my substitutes in the administration of Church affairs He intreats them pro dilectione because they loved him he Commands them pro religione by their religion for it was a piece of their religion to obey him and in him was the government of his Church else how could he have put the Presbyters and Deacons in substitution * Add to this It was the custome of the Church that although the Bishop did only impose hands in the ordination of Clerks yet the Clergy did approve and examine the persons to be ordained and it being a thing of publick interest it was then not thought fit to be a personal action both in preparation and ministration too and for this S. Chrysostome was accused in Concilio nefario as the title of the edition of it expresses it that he made ordinations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet when S. Cyprian saw occasion for it he did ordain without the consent of the Clergy of his Church for so he ordained Celerinus so he ordained Optatus and Saturnus when himself was from his Church and in great want of Clergy-men to assist in the ministration of the daily offices *** He did as much in jurisdiction too and censures for himself did excommunicate Felicissimus and Augendus and Repostus and Irene and Paula as appears in his 38 and 39 Epistles and tells Rogatianus that he might have done as much to the petulant Deacon that abused him by vertue of his Episcopal authority And the same power singly and solely he exercised in his acts of favour and absolution Vnus atque alius obnitente Plebe contradicente mea tamen facilitate suscepti sunt Indeed here is no contradiction of the Clergy expressed but yet the absolution said to be his own act against the people and without the Clergy For he alone was the Judge insomuch that he declared that it was the cause of Schism and heresie that the Bishop was not obeyed Nec unus in Ecclesiâ ad tempus Sacerdos ad tempus judex vice Christi cogitatur and that one high Priest in a Church and Judge instead of Christ is not admitted So that the Bishop must be one and that one must be Judge and to acknowledge more in S. Cyprians Lexicon is called schism and heresie Farther yet this Judicatory of the Bishop is independant and responsive to none but Christ. Actum suum disponit dirigit Vnusquisque Episcopus rationem propositi sui Domino redditurus and again habet in Ecclesiae administratione voluntatis suae arbitrium liberum unusquisque Praepositus rationem actûs sui Domino redditurus The Bishop is Lord of his own actions and may do what seems good in his own eyes and for his actions he is to account to Christ. This general account is sufficient to satisfie the allegations out of the 6th and 8th Epistles and indeed the whole Question But for the 18th Epistle there is something of peculiar answer For first it was a case of publick concernment and therefore he would so comply with the publick interest as to do it by publick council 2dly It was a necessity of times that made this case peculiar Necessitas temporum facit ut non temerè pacem demus they are the first words of the next epistle which is of the same matter for if the lapsi had been easily and without a publick and solemn trial reconcil'd it would have made Gentile Sacrifices frequent and Martyrdom but seldom 3dly The common-council which S. Cyprian here said he would expect was the council of the Confessors to whom for a peculiar honour it was indulged that they should be interested in the publick assoyling of such penitents who were overcome with those fears which the Confessors had overcome So that this is evidently an act of positive and temporary discipline and as it is no disadvantage to the power of the Bishop so to be sure no advantage to the Presbyter * But the clause of objection from the 19th epistle is yet unanswered and that runs something higher tamen ad consultum vestrum eos dimisi ne videar aliquid temerè praesumere It is called presumption to reconcile the penitents without the advice of those to whom he writ But from this we are fairly delivered by the title Cypriano Compresbyteris Carthagini consistentibus Caldonius salutem It was not the epistle of Cyprian to his Presbyters but of Caldonius one of the suffragan Bishops of Numidia to his Metropolitan and now what wonder if he call it presumption to do an act of so publick consequence without the advice of his Metropolitan He was bound to consult him by the Canons Apostolical and so he did and no harm done to the present Question of the Bishops sole and independent power and unmixt with the conjunct interest of the Presbytery who had nothing to do beyond ministery counsel and assistance 3. In all Churches where a Bishops seat was there were not always a Colledge of Presbyters but only in the greatest Churches for sometime in the lesser Cities there were but two Esse oportet aliquantos Presbyteros ut bini sint per Ecclesias unus in civitate Episcopus so S. Ambrose sometimes there was but one in a Church Post-humianus in the third Council of Carthage put the case Deinde qui unum Presbyterum habuerit numquid debet illi ipse unus Presbyter auferri The Church of Hippo had but one Valerius was the Bishop and Austin was the Priest and after him Austin was the Bishop and Eradius the Priest Sometimes not one as in the case Aurelius put in the same Council now cited of a Church that hath never a Presbyter to be consecrated Bishop in the place of him that died and once at Hippo they had none even then when the people snatch'd S. Austin and carried him to Valerius to be ordain'd In these cases I hope it will not be denied but the Bishop was Judge alone I am sure he had but little company sometimes none at all 4. But suppose it had been always done that Presbyters were consulted in matters of great difficulty and possibility of Scandal for so S. Ambrose intimates Ecclesia seniores habuit sine quorum Concilio nihil gerebatur in Ecclesiâ understand in these Churches where Presbyters were fixt yet this might be necessary and was so indeed in some degree at first which in succession as it prov'd troublesome to the Presbyters so unnecessary and impertinent to the Bishops At first I say it might be necessary For they were times of persecutions and temptation and if both the Clergy and people too were not complied withal in such exigence of time and agonies of spirit it was the way to make them relapse to Gentilism for a discontented spirit will hide it self and take sanctuary in the reeds and mud of Nilus rather than not take complacence in an imaginary
security and revenge 2dly As yet there had been scarce any Synods to determine cases of publick difficulty and what they could not receive from publick decision it was fitting they should supply by the maturity of a Conciliary assistance and deliberation For although by the Canons of the Apostles Bishops were bound twice a year to celebrate Synods yet persecution intervening they were rather twice a year a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a dispersion than a Synod 3. Although Synods had been as frequently conven'd as was intended by the Apostles yet it must be length of time and a successive experience that must give opportunity and ability to give general rules for the emergency of all particulars and therefore till the Church grew of some considerable age a fixt standing Colledge of Presbyters was more requisite than since it hath been when the frequency of general Councils and provincial Synods and the peace of the Church and the innumerable volumes of the Fathers and Decretals of Bishops and a digest of Ecclesiastical Constitutions hath made the personal assistance of Presbyters unnecessary 4. When necessity required not their presence and counsel their own necessity required that they should attend their several cures For let it be considered they that would now have a Colledge of Presbyters assist the Bishop whether they think of what follows For either they must have Presbyters ordained without a title which I am sure they have complained of these threescore years or else they must be forced to Non-residence For how else can they assist the Bishop in the ordinary and daily occurrencies of the Church unless either they have no cure of their own or else neglect it And as for the extraordinary either the Bishop is to consult his Metropolitan or he may be assisted by a Synod if the Canons already constituted do not aid him but in all these cases the Presbyter is impertinent 5. As this assistance of Presbyters was at first for necessity and after by custome it grew a Law so now retrò first the necessity failed and then the desuetude abrogated the Law which before custome had established quod quâ negligentiâ obsoleverit nescio saith S. Ambrose he knew not how it came to be obsolete but so it was it had expired before his time Not but that Presbyters were still in Mother-Churches I mean in Great ones In Ecclesiâ enim habemus Senatum nostrum actum Presbyterorum we have still saith S. Hierome in the Church our Senate a Colledge or Chapter of Presbyters he was then at Rome or Jerusalem but they were not consulted in Church affairs and matter of jurisdiction that was it that S. Ambrose wondred how it came to pass And thus it is to this day In our Mother-Churches we have a Chapter too but the Bishop consults them not in matters of ordinary jurisdiction just so it was in S. Ambrose his time and therefore our Bishops have altered no custome in this particular the alteration was pregnant even before the end of the four general Councils and therefore is no violation of a divine right for then most certainly a contrary provision would have been made in those conventions wherein so much sanctity and authority and Catholicism and severe discipline were conjunct and then besides it is no innovation in practice which pretends so fair antiquity but however it was never otherwise than voluntary in the Bishops and positive discipline in the Church and conveniency in the thing for that present and counsel in the Presbyters and a trouble to the Presbyters persons and a disturbance of their duties when they came to be fixt upon a particular charge * One thing more before I leave I find a Canon of the Council of Hispalis objected Episcopus Presbyteris solus honorem dare potest solus autem auferre non potest A Bishop may alone ordain a Priest a Bishop may not alone depose a Priest Therefore in censures there was in the Primitive Church a necessity of conjunction of Presbyters with the Bishop in imposition of censures * To this I answer first it is evident that he that can give an honour can also take it away if any body can for there is in the nature of the thing no greater difficulty in pulling down than in raising up It was wont always to be accounted easier therefore this Canon requiring a conjunct power in deposing Presbyters is a positive constitution of the Church founded indeed upon good institution but built upon no deeper foundation neither of nature or higher institution than its own present authority But that 's enough for we are not now in question of divine right but of Catholick and Primitive practice To it therefore I answer that the conjunct hand required to pull down a Presbyter was not the Chapter or Colledge of Presbyters but a company of Bishops a Synodal sentence and determination for so the Canon runs qui profecto nec ab uno damnari nec uno judicante poterunt honoris sui privilegiis exui sed praesentati Synodali Judicio quod canon de illis praeceperit definiri And the same thing was determined in the Greeks Council of Carthage If a Presbyter or a Deacon be accused their own Bishop shall judge them not alone but with the assistance of six Bishops more in the case of a Presbyter three of a Deacon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the causes of the other Clergy the Bishop of the place must Alone hear and determine them So that by this Canon in some things the Bishop might not be alone but then his assistants were Bishops not Presbyters in other things he alone was judge without either and yet his sentences must not be clancular but in open Court in the full Chapter for his Presbyters must be present and so it is determined for Africa in the fourth Council of Carthage Vt Episcopus nullius causam audiat absque praesentiâ Clericorum suorum alioquin irrita erit sententia Episcopi nisi praesentiâ Clericorum confirmetur Here is indeed a necessity of the presence of the Clergy of his Church where his Consistory was kept lest the sentence should be clandestine and so illegal but it is nothing but praesentia Clericorum for it is sententia Episcopi The Bishops sentence and the Clerks presence only for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Bishops Alone might give sentence in the causes of the inferiour Clergy even by this Canon it self which is used for objection against the Bishops sole jurisdiction *** I know nothing now to hinder our process for the Bishops jurisdiction is clearly left in his own hand and the Presbyters had no share in it but by delegation and voluntary assumption Now I proceed in the main question SECT XLV So that the government of the Church by Bishops was believed necessary WE have seen what Episcopacy is in it self now from the same principles let us see what it is to
desire to do natural or moral good things but even spiritual 784 4o. he may leave many sins which he is commanded to forsake 785 5o. he may leave some sins not only for temporal interest but out of fear of God and regard to his Law ibid. 6o. he may besides abstinence from evil do many good things 786 7 o he may have received the Spirit of God and yet be in a state of distance from God ibid. 6. The character of the unregenerate state or person n. 42.787 7. What are properly and truly sins of infirmity and how far they can consist with the regenerate estate 789 8. Practical advices to be added to the foregoing considerations 795. n. 65. Chap. IX Of the effect of Repentance viz. remission of Sins 800 Sect. 1. There is no sin but with Repentance may be pardoned ibid. 2. Of pardon of sins committed after baptism 802 3. Of the difficulty of obtaining pardon The doctrine and practice of the Primitive Church in this Article 803 4. Of the sin against the H. Ghost and in what sence it may be unpardonable 808 5. What sin is spoken of by our Lord Matth. 12.32 and that final impenitence is not it 810 6. The former doctrines reduced to practice 815 Chap. X. Of Ecclesiastical Penance or the fruits of Repentance 820 Sect. 1. What the fruits of Repentance are in general ibid. 2. Of Contrition or godly sorrow the reasons measures and constitution of it 821 3. Of the nature and differences of Attrition and Contrition 828 4. Of Confession 830 1o. Confession is necessary to Repentance ibid. 2o. It is due only to God 831 3o. In the Primitive Church there was no judicial absolution used in their Liturgies n. 54.838 4o. The judicial absolution of a Priest does effect no material change in the Penitent as to giving of pardon 841. n. 60 5. Attrition or imperfect Repentance though with absolution is not sufficient 842 6. Of Penance or satisfactions 844. 1o. sorrow and mourning 2o. Corporal austerities 3o. Prayers 847. 4o. Alms 848. 5o. forgiving injuries 6 o restitution 849 7. The former doctrine reduced to practice 850 8. The practice of Confession 854 9. The practice of Penances and corporal austerities 858 A Discourse in Vindication of Gods Attributes of Goodness and Justice in the matter of Original Sin against the Calvinists way of understanding it 1o. THe truth of the Article with the errors and mistakes about it 869 2o. Arguments to prove the truth 872 3o. Objections answered 881 4o. An Explication of Rom. 5.12 ad 19. 887 An Answer to the Bishop of Rochesters First Letter written concerning the Sixth Chapter of Original Sin in the Discourse of Repentance 895 The Bishop of Rochesters Second Letter upon the same subject 907 An Answer to the Second Letter from the Bishop of Rochester 909 The Liberty of Prophesying EPist Dedicatory Introduction Sect. 1. Of the nature of Faith and that the duty of it is compleated in believing the Articles of the Apostles Creed 941 2. Of Heresie its nature and measures That it is to be accounted according to the stricter capacity of the Christian Faith and not in opinions speculative nor ever to pious persons 947 3. Of the difficulty and uncertainty of arguments from Scripture in Questions not simply necessary nor literally determined 965 4. Of the difficulty of expounding Scripture 971 5. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Tradition to expound Scripture or determine questions 976 6. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Councils Ecclesiastical to expound Scripture or determine questions 984 7. Of the fallibility of the Pope and the uncertainty of his expounding Scripture and resolving Questions 995 8. How unable the Fathers or Writers Ecclesiastical are to determine our questions with certainty and truth 1007 9. How incompetent the Church in its diffusive capacity is to be Judge of controversies and how impertinent that pretence of the Spirit is 1011 10. Of the authority of reason and that it proceeding on the best grounds is the best Judge 1013 11. Of some causes of error in the exercise of reason which are in themselves inculpable 1016 12. How innocent error of mere opinion is in a pious person 1022 13. Of the deportment to be used toward persons disagreeing and reasons why they are not to be punished with death 1025 14. Of the practice of Christian Churches toward persons disagreeing and when persecution first came in use 1031 15. How far the Church or Governours may act to the restraining false or differing opinions 1034 16. Whether it be lawful for a Prince to give toleration to several Religions 1036 17. Of complying with disagreeing persons or weak Consciences in general 1038 18. A particular instance in the opinion of the Anabaptists to shew that there is so much reason on both sides of the Question that a pious person mistaking may be innocent in his error 1040 1o. The arguments usually alledged for baptizing Infants n. 3. ad 12.1041 1042 2o. How much the Anabaptists have to say in opposition to those arguments and to justifie their own tenent n. 12. ad 34.1043 ad 1051 3o. A reply to the arguments of the Anabaptists by the Author since the first Edition wherein the lawfulness of the Churches practice is established n. 34. ad fin Sect. 1051. ad 1068 19. That there ought not to be any toleration of doctrines inconsistent with piety or the publick good 1069 20. How far the Religion of the Church of Rome may be tolerated 1070 21. Of the duty of particular Churches in allowing Communion 1076 22. That particular men may communicate with Churches of different perswasions and how far they may do it 1077 The Discourse of Confirmation INtroduction Sect. 1. Of the Divine Original Warranty and Institution of the Rite of Confirmation 3 2. The Rite of Confirmation is a perpetual and never-ceasing Ministery 12 3. That Confirmation which by laying on of Hands gives the H. Spirit was actually continued and practised by all succeeding Ages of the Primitive Church 15 4. The Bishops were always and are still the only Ministers of Confirmation 18 5. The whole procedure of Confirmation is by prayer and laying on of Hands 22 6. Many great Graces and Blessings are consequent to the worthy reception and due ministery of Confirmation 24 7. Of preparation to Confirmation and the circumstances of receiving it 28 A Discourse of Friendship 1. HOw far a perfect Friendship is authorized by the principles of Christianity 35 2. What are the requisites of Friendship 38 3. What are the lawful expressions and acts of Friendship 42 4. Whether a Friend may be dearer than a Husband or Wife 47 5. What are the duties of Friendship 49 6. Ten Rules to be observed in the conduct of Friendship 50 Five Letters about change of Religion 53 THE AUTHORS PREFACE TO THE APOLOGY FOR AUTHORIZED and SET FORMS OF LITURGY WHEN Judges were instead of Kings and Hophni and Phinehas were among the Priests every
great remedy for the great necessity And it was ever much valued in the Church insomuch that Nectarius would by no means take investiture of his Patriarchal Sea until he had obtained the benediction of Diodorus the Bishop of Cilicia Eudoxia the Empress brought her son Theodosius to S. Chrysostome for his blessing and S. Austin and all his company received it of Innocentius Bishop of Carthage It was so solemn in all marriages that the marrying of persons was called Benediction So it was in the fourth Council of Carthage Sponsus sponsa cum benedicendi sunt à Sacerdote c. benedicendi for married And in all Church Offices it was so solemn that by a Decree of the Council of Agatho A. D. 380. it was decreed ante benedictionem Sacerdotis populus egredi non praesumat By the way only here is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for two parts of the English Liturgy For the benediction in the Office of marriage by the authority of the Council of Carthage and for concluding the Office of Communion with the Priests or Bishops benediction by warrant of the Council of Agatho which Decrees having been derived into the practice of the universal Church for very many ages is in no hand to be undervalued lest we become like Esau and we miss it when we most need it For my own particular I shall still press on to receive the benediction of holy Church till at last I shall hear a Venite benedicti and that I be reckoned amongst those blessed Souls who come to God by the ministeries of his own appointment and will not venture upon that neglect against which the piety and wisdom of all Religions in the world infinitely do prescribe 44. Now the advantages of confidence which I have upon the forms of benedicton in the Common-Prayer-Book are therefore considerable because God himself prescribed a set form of blessing the people appointing it to be done not in the Priests extempore but in an established form of words and because as the authority of a prescript form is from God so that this form may be also highly warranted the solemn blessing at the end of the Communion is in the very words of S. Paul 45. For the forms of Absolution in the Liturgy though I shall not enter into consideration of the Question concerning the quality of the Priests power which is certainly a very great ministery yet I shall observe the rare temper and proportion which the Church of England uses in commensurating the forms of Absolution to the degrees of preparation and necessity At the beginning of the Morning and Evening Prayer after a general Confession usually recited before the devotion is high and pregnant whose parts like fire enkindle one another there is a form of Absolution in general declarative and by way of proposition In the Office of the Communion because there are more acts of piety and repentance previous and presupposed there the Churches form of Absolution is optative and by way of intercession But in the Visitation of the sick when it is supposed and enjoyned that the penitent shall disburthen himself of all the clamorous loads upon his conscience the Church prescribes a medicinal form by way of delegate authority that the parts of justification may answer to the parts of good life For as the penitent proceeds so does the Church pardon and repentance being terms of relation they grow up together till they be complete this the Church with greatest wisdom supposes to be at the end of our life grace by that time having all its growth that it will have here and therefore then also the pardon of sins is of another nature than it ever was before it being now more actual and complete whereas before it was in fieri in the beginnings and smaller increases and upon more accidents apt to be made imperfect and revocable So that the Church of England in these manners of dispensing the power of the Keys does cut off all disputings and impertinent wranglings whether the Priests power were Judicial or declarative for possibly it is both and it is optative too and something else yet for it is an emanation from all the parts of his Ministery and he never absolves but he preaches or prays or administers a Sacrament for this power of remission is a transcendent passing through all the parts of the Priestly Offices For the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are the promises and the threatnings of the Scripture and the prayers of the Church and the Word and the Sacraments and all these are to be dispensed by the Priest and these keys are committed to his Ministery and by the operation of them all he opens and shuts Heaven gates ministerially and therefore S. Paul calls it verbum reconciliationis and says it is dispensed by Ministers as by Embassadors or Delegates and therefore it is an excellent temper of the Church so to prescribe her forms of Absolution as to shew them to be results of the whole Priestly Office of Preaching of dispensing Sacraments of spiritual Cure and authoritative Deprecation And the benefit which pious and well disposed persons receive by these publick Ministeries as it lies ready formed in our blessed Saviours promise erit solutum in coelis so men will then truly understand when they are taught to value every instrument of grace or comfort by the exigence of a present need as in a sadness of spirit in an unquiet conscience in the arrest of death 46. I shall not need to procure advantages to the reputation of the Common-Prayer by considering the imperfections of whatsoever hath been offered in its stead but yet a 1 form of worship composed to the dishonour of the Reformation accusing it of darkness and intolerable inconvenience 2 a direction without a rule 3 a rule without restraint 4 a prescription leaving an indifferency to a possibility of licentiousness 5 an office without any injunction of external acts of worship not prescribing so much as kneeling 6 an office that only once names reverence but forbids it in the ordinary instance and enjoyns it in no particular 7 an office that leaves the form of ministration of Sacraments so indifferently that if there be any form of words essential the Sacrament is in much danger to become invalid for want of provision of due forms of Ministration 8 an office that complies with no precedent of Scripture nor of any ancient Church 9 that must of necessity either want authority or it must prefer novelty before antiquity 10 that accuses all the Primitive Church of indiscretion at the least 11 that may be abused by the indiscretion or ignorance or malice of any man that uses it 12 into which Heresie or blasphemy may creep without possibility of prevention 13 that hath no external forms to entertain the fancy of the more common spirits 14 nor any allurement to perswade and entice its adversaries 15 nor any means of adunation and uniformity amongst its
If the second as it is most certain so then the main Question is evicted viz. that something perpetually necessary was in the power of the Apostles which was not in the power of the inferiour Ministers nor of any but themselves and their Colleagues to wit Ministerium S. Spiritus or the ordinary office of giving the holy Ghost by imposition of hands For this promise was performed to the Apostles in Pentecost to the rest of the faithful after Baptisme Quod n. nunc in confirmandis Neophytis manûs impositio tribuit singulis hoc tunc spiritûs sancti descensio in credentium populo donavit Vniversis saith Eusebius Emissenus Now we find no other way of performing it nor any ordinary conveyance of the Spirit to all people but this and we find that the Holy Ghost actually was given this way Therefore the effect to wit the Holy Ghost being to continue for ever and the promise of universal concernment this way also of its communication to wit by Apostolical imposition of hands is also perpetuum ministerium to be succeeded to and to abide for ever Secondly This Ministery of imposition of hands for confirmation of baptized people is so far from being a temporary Grace and to determine with the persons of the Apostles that it is a fundamental point of Christianity an essential ingredient to its composition Saint Paul is my Author Therefore leaving the principles of the Doctrine of Christ let us go on unto perfection not laying again the foundation of Repentance from dead works faith towards God the doctrines of Baptism and of laying on of hands c. Here is imposition of hands reckoned as part of the foundation and a principle of Christianity in Saint Paul's Catechism Now imposition of hands is used by Name in Scripture but for two Ministrations First For Ordination and secondly for this whatsoever it is Imposition of hands for Ordination does indeed give the Holy Ghost but not as he is that promise which is called the promise of the Father For the Holy Ghost for Ordination was given before the Ascension John 20. But the promises of the Holy Ghost the Comforter the Paraclete I say not the Ordainer or Fountain of Priestly order that was not given till the day of Pentecost and besides it was promised to all Christian people and the other was given only to the Clergy * Add to this that Saint Paul having laid this in the foundation makes his progress from this to perfection as he calls it that is to higher mysteries and then his discourse is immediately of the Priesthood Evangelical which is Originally in Christ ministerially in the Clergy so that unless we will either confound the terms of his progress or imagine him to make the Ministery of the Clergy the foundation of Christ's Priesthood and not rather contrary it is clear that by imposition of hands Saint Paul means not ordination and therefore confirmation there being no other ordinary ministry of imposition of hands but these two specified in holy Scripture For as for benediction in which Christ used the ceremony and as for healing in which Ananias and the Apostles used it the first is clearly no Principle or fundamental point of Christianity and the second is confessedly extraordinary therefore the argument is still firm upon its first principles 3. Lastly The Primitive Church did de facto and believed themselves to be tyed de jure to use this Rite of Confirmation and giving of the Holy Ghost after Baptism Saint Clemens Alexandrinus in Eusebius tells a story of a young man whom S. John had converted and committed to a Bishop to be brought up in the Faith of Christendom Qui saith S. Clement eum baptismi Sacramento illuminavit posteà verò sigillo Domini tanquam perfectâ tutâ ejus animi custodiâ obsignavit The Bishop first baptized him then consigned him Justin Martyr sayes speaking pro more Ecclesiae according to the Custom of the Church that when the mysteries of Baptism were done then the faithful are consigned or confirmed Saint Cyprian relates to this story of Saint Philip and the Apostles and gives this account of the whole affair Et idcircò quia legitimum Ecclesiasticum baptismum consequnti fuerant baptizari eos ultrà non oportebat Sed tantummodo id quod deerat id à Petro Iohanne factum erat ut oratione pro eis habitâ manu impositâ invocaretur infunderetur super eos Spiritus S. Quod nunc quoque apud nos geritur ut qui in Ecclesiâ baptizantur Praepositis Ecclesiae offerantur ut per nostram orationem ac manûs impositionem Spiritum S. consequantur signaculo Dominico confirmentur Saint Peter and Saint Iohn by imposing their hands on the Converts of Samaria praying over them and giving them the Holy Ghost made supply to them of what was wanting after Baptism and this is to this day done in the Church for new baptized people are brought to the Bishops and by imposition of their hands obtain the Holy Ghost But for this who pleases to be farther satisfied in the Primitive faith of Christendom may see it in the decretal Epistles of Cornelius the Martyr to Fabianus recorded by Eusebius in the Epistle written to Iulius and Iulianus Bishops under the name of Saint Clement in the Epistle of Vrban P. and Martyr in Tertullian in Saint Austin and in Saint Cyril of Ierusalem whose whole third Mistagogique Catechism is concerning Confirmation This only The Catholicks whose Christian prudence it was in all true respects to disadvantage Hereticks lest their poyson should infect like a Pest laid it in Novatus's dish as a crime He was baptized in his bed and was not confirmed Vnde nec Spiritum sanctum unquam potuerit promereri therefore he could never receive the gift of the Holy Ghost So Cornelius in the forequoted Epistle Whence it is evident that then it was the belief of Christendom that the Holy Ghost was by no ordinary Ministery given to faithful people after Baptism but only by Apostolical or Episcopal consignation and imposition of hands What also the faith of Christendom was concerning the Minister of confirmation and that Bishops only could do it I shall make evident in the descent of this discourse Here the scene lies in Scripture where it is clear that Saint Philip one of the 72. Disciples as antiquity reports him and an Evangelist and a Disciple as Scripture also expresses him could not impose hands for application of the promise of the Father and ministerial giving of the Holy Ghost but the Apostles must go to do it and also there is no example in Scripture of any that ever did it but an Apostle and yet this is an ordinary Ministery which de jure ought and de facto alwayes was continued in the Church Therefore there must alwayes be an ordinary office of Apostleship in the Church to do it that is an
concurrence of Jurisdiction this must be considered distinctly 1. Then In the first founding of Churches the Apostles did appoint Presbyters and inferiour Ministers with a power of baptizing preaching consecrating and reconciling in privato foro but did not in every Church at the first founding it constitute a Bishop This is evident in Crete in Ephesus in Corinth at Rome at Antioch 2. Where no Bishops were constituted there the Apostles kept the jurisdiction in their own hands There comes upon me saith S. Paul daily the care or supravision of all the Churches Not all absolutely for not all of the Circumcision but all of his charge with which he was once charged and of which he had not exonerated himself by constituting Bishops there for of these there is the same reason And again If any man obey not our word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie him to me by an Epistle so he charges the Thessalonians and therefore of this Church S. Paul as yet clearly kept the power in his own hands So that the Church was ever in all the parts of it governed by Episcopal or Apostolical authority 3. For ought appears in Scripture the Apostles never gave any external or coercitive jurisdiction in publick and criminal causes nor yet power to ordain Rites or Ceremonies or to inflict censures to a Colledge of meer Presbyters * The contrary may be greedily swallowed and I know not with how great confidence and prescribing prejudice but there is not in all Scripture any commission from Christ any ordinance or warrant from the Apostles to any Presbyter or Colledge of Presbyters without a Bishop or express delegation of Apostolical authority tanquam vicario suo as to his substitute in absence of the Bishop or Apostle to inflict any censures or take cognizance of persons and causes criminal Presbyters might be surrogati in locum Episcopi absentis but never had any ordinary jurisdiction given them by vertue of their ordination or any commission from Christ or his Apostles This we may best consider by induction of particulars 1. There was a Presbytery at Jerusalem but they had a Bishop always and the Colledge of the Apostles sometimes therefore whatsoever act they did it was in conjunction with and subordination to the Bishop and Apostles Now it cannot be denied both that the Apostles were superiour to all the Presbyters in Jerusalem and also had power alone to govern the Church I say they had power to govern alone for they had the government of the Church alone before they ordain'd the first Presbyters that is before there were any of capacity to joyn with them they must do it themselves and then also they must retain the same power for they could not lose it by giving Orders Now if they had a power of sole jurisdiction then the Presbyters being in some publick acts in conjunction with the Apostles cannot challenge a right of governing as affixed to their Order they only assisting in subordination and by dependency This only by the way In Jerusalem the Presbyters were something more than ordinary and were not meer Presbyters in the present and limited sence of the word For Barnabas and Judas and Silas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Luke calls them were of that Presbytery 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They were Rulers and Prophets Chief men amongst the Brethren and yet called Elders or Presbyters though of Apostolical power and authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Oecumenius For truth is that divers of them were ordained Apostles with an Vnlimited jurisdiction not fixed upon any See that they also might together with the twelve exire in totum mundum * So that in this Presbytery either they were more than meer Presbyters as Barnabas and Judas and Silas men of Apostolical power and they might well be in conjunction with the twelve and with the Bishop they were of equal power not by vertue of their Presbyterate but by their Apostolate or if they were but meer Presbyters yet because it is certain and proved and confessed that the Apostles had power to govern the Church alone this their taking meer Presbyteros in partem regiminis was a voluntary act and from this example was derived to other Churches and then it is most true that Presbyteros in communi Ecclesiam regere was rather consuetudine Ecclesiae dominicae dispositionis veritate to use S. Hierom's own expression for this is more evident than that Bishops do eminere caeteris by custom rather than Divine institution For if the Apostles might rule the Church alone then that the Presbyters were taken into the Number was a voluntary act of the Apostles and although fitting to be retained where the same reasons do remain and circumstances concur yet not necessary because not affixed to their Order not Dominicae dispositionis veritate and not laudable when those reasons cease and there is an emergency of contrary causes 2. The next Presbytery we read of is at Antioch but there we find no acts either of concurrent or single jurisdiction but of ordination indeed we do and that performed by such men as S. Paul was and Barnabas for they were two of the Prophets reckoned in the Church of Antioch but I do not remember them to be called Presbyters in that place to be sure they were not meer Presbyters as we now Understand the word as I proved formerly 3. But in the Church of Ephesus there was a Colledge of Presbyters and they were by the Spirit of God called Bishops and were appointed by him to be Pastors of the Church of God This must do it or nothing In quo spiritus S. posuit vos Episcopos In whom the holy Ghost hath made you Bishops There must lye the exigence of the argument and if we can find who is meant by vos we shall I hope gain the truth * S. Paul sent for the Presbyters or Elders to come from Ephesus to Miletus and to them he spoke ** It 's true but that 's not all the vos For there were present at that Sermon Sopater and Aristarchus and Secundus and Gaius and Timothy and Tychicus and Trophimus And although he sent to Ephesus as to the Metropolis and there many Elders were either accidentally or by ordinary residence yet those were not all Elders of that Church but of all Asia in the Scripture sence the lesser Asia For so in the Preface of his Sermon S. Paul intimates Ye know that from the first day I came into Asia after what manner I have been with you at all seasons His whole conversation in Asia was not confined to Ephesus and yet those Elders who were present were witnesses of it all and therefore were of dispersed habitation and so it is more clearly inferred from verse 25. And now behold I know that ye all among whom I have gone preaching the Kingdom of God c. It was a travel to preach to all that were present and therefore
Episcopus B. Jacobus à Petro Jacobo Johanne Apostolis est ordinatus Three Apostles went to the ordaining of S. James to be a Bishop and the self same thing is in words affirmed by Anicetus ut in ore duorum vel trium stet omnis veritas And S. Cyprian observes that when Cornelius was made Bishop of Rome there happened to be many of his fellow Bishops there factus est Episcopus à plurimis collegis nostris qui tunc in urbe Româ aderant These Collegae could not be meer Priests for then the ordination of Novatus had been more Canonical than that of Cornelius and all Christendome had been deceived for not Novatus who was ordained by three Bishops but Cornelius had been the schismatick as being ordained by Priests against the Canon But here I observe it for the word plurimis there were many of them at that ordination In pursuance of this Apostolical ordinance the Nicene Fathers decreed that a Bishop should be ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by all the Bishops in the Province unless it be in case of necessity and then it must be done by three being gathered together and the rest consenting so the ordination to be performed The same is ratified in the council of Antioch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Bishop is not to be ordained without a Synod of Bishops and the presence of the Metropolitan of the province But if this cannot be done conveniently yet however it is required 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ordinations must be performed by many The same was decreed in the Council of Laodicea can 12. in the 13 Canon of the African Code in the 22 Canon of the first Council of Arles and the fifth Canon of the second Council of Arles and was ever the practice of the Church and so we may see it descend through the bowels of the fourth Council of Carthage to the inferiour ages Episcopus quum ordinatur duo Episcopi ponant teneant Evangeliorum codicem super caput cervicem ejus uno super eum fundente benedictionem reliqui omnes Episcopi qui adsunt manibus suis caput ejus tangant The thing was Catholick and Canonical It was prima immutabilis constitutio so the first Canon of the Council of Epaunum calls it And therefore after the death of Meletius Bishop of Antioch a schism was made about his successor and Evagrius his ordination condemned because praeter Ecclesiasticam regulam fuerit ordinatus it was against the rule of Holy Church Why so Solus enim Paulinus eum instituerat plurimas regulas praevaricatus Ecclesiasticas Non enim praecipiunt ut per se quilibet ordinare possit sed convocare Vniversos provinciae Sacerdotes praeter per tres Pontifices ordinationem penitus fieri interdicunt Which because it was not observed in the ordination of Evagrius who was not ordained by three Bishops the ordination was cassated in the Council of Rhegium And we read that when Novatus would fain be made a Bishop in the schism against Cornelius he did it tribus adhibitis Episcopis saith Eusebius he obtained three Bishops for performance of the action Now besides these Apostolical and Catholick Canons and precedents this thing according to the constant and United interpretation of the Greek Fathers was actually done in the ordination of S. Timothy to the Bishoprick of Ephesus Neglect not the grace that is in thee by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery The Latin Fathers expound it abstractly viz. to signifie the office of Priest-hood that is neglect not the grace of Priest-hood that is in thee by the imposition of hands and this Erasmus helps by making Presbyterii to pertain to Gratiam by a new inter-punction of thâ— words but however Presbyterii with the Latin Fathers signifies Presbyteratus not Presbyterorum and this Presbyteratus is in their sence used for Episcopatus too But the Greek Fathers understand it collectively and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not simply such but Bishops too all agree in that that Episcopacy is either meant in office or in person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Oecumenius and S. Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Theophylact. So Theodoret The probation of this lies upon right reason and Catholick tradition For SECT XXXI To which Presbyters never did assist by imposing hands 3. THE Bishops ordination was peculiar in this respect above the Presbyters for a Presbyter did never impose hands on a Bishop On a Presbyter they did ever since the fourth Council of Carthage but never on a Bishop And that was the reason of the former exposition By the Presbytery S. Paul means Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Presbyters did not impose hands on a Bishop and therefore Presbyterium is not a Colledge of meer Presbyters for such could never ordain S. Timothy to be a Bishop The same reason is given by the Latin Fathers why they expound Presbyterium to signifie Episcopacy For saith S. Ambrose S. Paul had ordained Timothy to be a Bishop Vnde quemadmodum Episcopum ordinet ostendit Neque enim â—as erat aut licebat ut inferior ordinaret Majorem So he and subjoyns this reason Nemon tribuit quod non accepit The same is affirmed by S. Chrysostome and generally by the authors of the former expositions that is the Fathers both of the East and West For it was so General and Catholick a truth that Priests could not might not lay hands on a Bishop that there was never any example of it in Christendome till almost 600. years after Christ and that but once and that irregular and that without imitation of his Successors or example in his Antecessors It was the case of Pope Pelagius the first dum non essent Episcopi qui eum ordinarent inventi sunt duo Episcopi Johannes de Perusio Bonus de Ferentino Andraeas Presbyter de Ostiâ ordinaverunt eum pontificem Tunc enim non erant in Clero qui eum possent promovere Saith Damasus It was in case of necessity because there were not three Bishops therefore he procured two and a priest of Ostia to supply the place of the third that three according to the direction Apostolical and Canons of Nice Antioch and Carthage make Episcopal ordination * The Church of Rome is concerned in the business to make fair this ordination and to reconcile it to the Council of Rhegium and the others before mentioned who if ask'd would declare it to be invalid * But certainly as the Canons did command three to impose hands on a Bishop so also they commanded that those three should be three Bishops and Pelagius might as well not have had three as not three Bishops and better because so they were Bishops the first Canon of the Apostles approves the ordination if done by two 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the Nicene Canon is as
witness 2. I consider that necessity may excuse a personal delinquency but I never heard that necessity did build a Church Indeed no man is forced for his own particular to commit a sin for if it be absolutely a case of necessity the action ceaseth to be a sin but indeed if God means to build a Church in any place he will do it by means proportionable to that end that is by putting them into a possibility of doing and acquiring those things which himself hath required of necessity to the constitution of a Church * So that supposing that ordination by a Bishop is necessary for the vocation of Priests and Deacons as I have proved it is and therefore for the founding or perpetuating of a Church either God hath given to all Churches opportunity and possibility of such Ordinations and then necessity of the contrary is but pretence and mockery or if he hath not given such possibility then there is no Church there to be either built or continued but the Candlestick is presently removed There are divers stories in Ruffinus to this purpose When Aedesius and Frumenâ—ius were surprized by the Barbarous Indians they preached Christianity and baptized many but themselves being but Lay-men could make no Ordinations and so not fix a Church What then was to be done in the case Frumentius Alexandriam pergit rem omnem ut gesta est narrat Episcopo ac monet ut provideat virum aliquem dignum quem congregatis jam plurimis Christianis in Barbarico solo Episcopum mittat Frumentius comes to Alexandria to get a Bishop Athanasius being then Patriarch ordained Frumentius their Bishop Et tradito ei Sacerdotio redire eum cum Domini Gratiâ unde venerat jubet ex quo saith Ruffinus in Indiae partibus populi Christianorum Ecclesiae factae sunt Sacerdotium coepit The same happened in the case of the Iberians converted by a Captive woman Posteà verò quà m Ecclesia magnificè constructa est populi fidem Dei majore ardore sâ—â—â—ebant captivae monitis ad Imperatorem Constantinum totius Gentis legatio mittitur Res gesta exponitur Sacerdotes mittere oratur qui coeptum erga se Dei munus implerent The work of Christianity could not be compleated nor a Church founded without the Ministery of Bishops * Thus the case is evident that the want of a Bishop will not excuse us from our endeavours of acquiring one and where God means to found a Church there he will supply them with those means and Ministeries which himself hath made of ordinary and absolute necessity And therefore if it happens that those Bishops which are of ordinary Ministration amongst us prove heretical still Gods Church is Catholick and though with trouble yet Orthodox Bishops may be acquir'd For just so it happened when Mauvia Queen of the Saracens was so earnest to have Moses the Hermite made the Bishop of her Nation and offered peace to the Catholicks upon that condition Lucius an Arian troubled the affair by his interposing and offering to ordain Moses The Hermite discovered his vileness Et ita majore dedecore deformatus compulsus est acquiescere Moses refus'd to be ordain'd by him that was an Arian So did the reform'd Churches refuse ordinations by the Bishops of the Roman Communion But what then might they have done Even the same that Moses did in that necessity Compulsus est ab Episcopis quos in exilium truserat Lucius sacerdotium sumere Those good people might have had order from the Bishops of England or the Lutheran Churches if at least they thought our Churches Catholick and Christian. If an ordinary necessity will not excuse this will not an extraordinary calling justifie it Yea most certainly could we but see an ordinary proof for an extraordinary calling viz. an evident prophesie demonstration of Miracles certainty of reason clarity of sence or any thing that might make faith of an extraordinary mission But shall we then condemn those few of the Reformed Churches whose ordinations always have been without Bishops No indeed That must not be They stand or fall to their own Master And though I cannot justifie their ordinations yet what degree their necessity is of what their desire of Episcopal ordinations may do for their personal excuse and how far a good life and a Catholick belief may lead a man in the way to Heaven although the forms of external communion be not observed I cannot determine * For ought I know their condition is the same with that of the Church of Pergamus I know thy works and where thou dwellest even where Sathans seat is and thou heldest fast my faith and hast not denied my Name Nihilominus habeo adversus te pauca Some few things I have against thee and yet of them the want of Canonical ordinations is a defect which I trust themselves desire to be remedied but if it cannot be done their sin indeed is the less but their misery the Greater * I am sure I have said sooth but whether or no it will be thought so I cannot tell and yet why it may not I cannot guess unless they only be impeccable which I suppose will not so easily be thought of them who themselves think that all the Church possibly may fail But this I would not have declared so freely had not the necessity of our own Churches required it and that the first pretence of the legality and validity of their ordinations been buoyed up to the height of an absolute necessity for else why shall it be called Tyranny in us to call on them to conform to us and to the practice of the Catholick Church and yet in them be called a good and a holy zeal to exact our conformity to them But I hope it will so happen to us that it will be verified here what was once said of the Catholicks under the fury of Justina Sed tantafuit perseverantia fidelium populorum ut animas prius amittere quà m Episcopum mallent If it were put to our choice rather to dye to wit the death of Martyrs not rebels than lose the sacred order and offices of Episcopacy without which no Priest no ordination no consecration of the Sacrament no absolution no rite or Sacrament legitimately can be performed in order to eternity The summe is this If the Canons and Sanctions Apostolical if the decrees of eight famous Councils in Christendom of Ancyra of Antioch of Sardis of Alexandria two of Constantinople the Arausican Council and that of Hispalis if the constant successive Acts of the famous martyr-Martyr-Bishops of Rome making ordinations if the testimony of the whole Pontifical book if the dogmatical resolution of so many Fathers S. Denis S. Cornelius S. Athanasius S. Hierom S. Chrysostom S. Epiphanius S. Austin and divers others all appropriating ordinations to the Bishops hand if the constant voice of Christendom declaring ordinations made by Presbyters to be null and void in
great antiquity were not the prime constitutions in those several Churches respectively but meer derivations from tradition Apostolical for not only the thing but the words so often mentioned are in the 40 Canon of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same is repeated in the twenty fourth Canon of the Council of Antioch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Presbyters and Deacons must do nothing without leave of the Bishop for to him the Lords people is committed and he must give an account for their souls * And if a Presbyter shall contemn his own Bishop making conventions apart and erecting another altar he is to be deposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the 32 Canon as a lover of Principality intimating that he arrogates Episcopal dignity and so is ambitious of a Principality The issue then is this * The Presbyters and Clergy and Laity must obey therefore the Bishop must govern and give them laws It was particularly instanced in the case of Saint Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Theodoret He adorned and instructed Pontus with these laws so he reckoning up the extent of his jurisdiction * But now descend we to a specification of the power and jurisdiction of Bishops SECT XXXVI Appointing them to be Judges of the Clergie and Spiritual causes of the Laity THE Bishops were Ecclesiastical Judges over the Presbyters the inferiour Clergy and the Laity What they were in Scripture who were constituted in presidency over causes spiritual I have already twice explicated and from hence it descended by a close succession that they who watched for souls they had the rule over them and because no regiment can be without coercion therefore there was inherent in them a power of cognition of causes and coercion of persons * The Canons of the Apostles appointing censures to be inflicted on delinquent persons makes the Bishops hand to do it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If any Presbyter or Deacon be excommunicated by the Bishop he must not be received by any else but by him that did so censure him unless the Bishop that censured him be dead The same is repeated in the Nicene Council only it is permitted that any one may appeal to a Synod of Bishops Si fortè aliquâ indignatione aut contentione aut qualibet commotione Episcopi sui excommunicati sint if he thinks himself wronged by prejudice or passion and when the Synod is met hujusmodi examinent Quaestiones But by the way it must be Synodus Episcoporum so the Canon Vt ita demum hi qui ob culpas suas Episcoporum suorum offensas meritò contraxerunt dignè etiam à caeteris excommunicati habeantur quousque in communi vel ipsi Episcopo suo visum fuerit humaniorem circà eos ferre sententiam The Synod of Bishops must ratifie the excommunication of all those who for their delinquencies have justly incurred the displeasure of their Bishop and this censure to stick upon them till either the Synod or their own Bishop shall give a more gentle sentence ** This Canon we see relates to the Canon of the Apostles and affixes the judicature of Priests and Deacons to the Bishops commanding their censures to be held as firm and valid only as the Apostles Canon names Presbyters and Deacons particularly so the Nicene Canon speaks indefinitely and so comprehends all of the Diocess and jurisdiction The fourth Council of Carthage gives in express terms the cognizance of Clergy-causes to the Bishop calling aid from a Synod in case a Clergy-man prove refractory and disobedient Discordantes Clericos Episcopus vel ratione vel potestate ad concordiam trahat inobedientes Synodus per audientiam damnet If the Bishops reason will not end the controversies of Clergie-men his power must but if any man list to be contentious intimating as I suppose out of the Nicene Council with frivolous appeals and impertinent protraction the Synod of Bishops must condemn him viz. for his disobeying his Bishops sentence * The Council of Antioch is yet more particular in its Sanction for this affair intimating a clear distinction of proceeding in the cause of a Bishop and the other of the Priests and Deacons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. If a Bishop shall be deposed by a Synod viz. of Bishops according to the exigence of the Nicene Canon or a Priest or Deacon by his own Bishop if he meddles with any Sacred offices he shall be hopeless of absolution But here we see that the ordinary Judge of a Bishop is a Synod of Bishops but of Priests and Deacons the Bishop alone And the sentence of the Bishop is made firm omni modo in the next Canon Si quis Presbyter vel Diaconus proprio contempto Episcopo privatim congregationem effecerit altare erexerit Episcopo accersente non obedierit nec velit ei parere nec morem gerere primò secundò vocanti hic damnetur omni modo Quòd si Ecclesiam conturbare solicitare persistat tanquam seditiosus per potestates exteras opprimatur What Presbyter soever refuses to obey his Bishop and will not appear at his first or second Summons let him be deposed and if he shall persist to disturb the Church let him be given over to the secular powers * Add to this the first Canon of the same Council 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. If any one be excommunicate by his own Bishop c. as it is in the foregoing Canons of Nice and the Apostles The Result of these Sanctions is this The Bishop is the Judge the Bishop is to inflict censures the Presbyters and Deacons are either to obey or to be deposed No greater evidence in the world of a Superiour jurisdiction and this established by all the power they had and this did extend not only to the Clergy but to the Laity for that 's the close of the Canon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This constitution is concerning the Laity and the Presbyters and the Deacons and all that are within the rule viz. that if their Bishop have sequestred them from the holy Communion they must not be suffered to communicate elsewhere But the Audientia Episcopalis The Bishops Audience-Court is of larger power in the Council of Chalcedon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If any Clergy-man have any cause against a Clergy-man let him by no means leave his own Bishop and run to Secular Courts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But first let the cause be examined before their own Bishop or by the Bishops leave before such persons as the contesting parties shall desire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whosoever does otherwise let him suffer under the censures of the Church Here is not only a subordination of the Clergie in matters criminal but also the civil causes of the Clergie must be submitted to the Bishop under pain of the Canon * I end this with the attestation of the Council of Sardis exactly of the same Spirit the same injunction and almost the
Patriarchat These are enough to shew that in the Primitive Church there were Metropolitan Bishops Now then either Bishops were Parochial or no If no then they were Diocesan if yea then at least many of them were Diocesan for they had according to this rate many Parochial Bishops under them * But I have stood too long upon this impertinent trifle but as now adays it is made the consideration of it is material to the main Question Only this I add That if any man should trouble the world with any other fancy of his own and say that our Bishops are nothing like the Primitive because all the Bishops of the Primitive Church had only two towns in their charge and no more and each of these towns had in them 170 families and were bound to have no more how should this man be confuted It was just such a device as this in them that first meant to disturb this Question by pretending that the Bishops were only Parochial not Diocesan and that there was no other Bishop but the Parish-Priest Most certainly themselves could not believe the allegation only they knew it would raise a dust But by Gods providence there is water enough in the Primitive fountains to allay it SECT XLIV And was aided by Presbyters but not impaired ANOTHER consideration must here be interposed concerning the intervening of Presbyters in the regiment of the several Churches For though I have twice already shown that they could not challenge it of right either by Divine institution or Apostolical ordinance yet here also it must be considered how it was in the practice of the Primitive Church for those men that call the Bishop a Pope are themselves desirous to make a Conclave of Cardinals too and to make every Diocess a Roman Consistory 1. Then the first thing we hear of Presbyters after Scripture I mean for of it I have already given account is from the testimony of S. Hierome Antequam studiain religione fierent diceretur in populis Ego sum Pauli c. communi Presbyterorum consilio Ecclesiae gubernabantur Before factions arose in the Church the Church was governed by the common Counsel of Presbyters Here S. Hierome either means it of the time before Bishops were constituted in particular Churches or after Bishops were appointed If before Bishops were appointed no hurt done the Presbyters might well rule in common before themselves had a ruler appointed to govern both them and all the Diocess beside For so S. Ignatius writing to the Church of Antioch exhorts the Presbyters to feed the flock until God should declare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom he would make their ruler And S. Cyprian speaking of Etecusa and some other women that had made defailance in time of persecution and so were put to penance praeceperunt eas Praepositi tantisper sic esse donec Episcopus constituatur The Presbyters whom sede vacante he praeter morem suum calls Praepositos they gave order that they should so remain till the Consecration of a Bishop * But if S. Hierome means this saying of his after Bishops were fixt then his expression answers the allegation for it was but communi Consilio Presbyterorum the Judicium might be solely in the Bishop he was the Judge though the Presbyters were the counsellors For so himself adds that upon occasion of those first Schisms in Corinth it was decreed in all the World ut omnis Ecclesiae cura ad unum pertineret all the care of the Diocess was in the Bishop and therefore all the power for it was unimaginable that the burden should be laid on the Bishop and the strength put into the hands of the Presbyters * And so S. Ignatius stiles them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Assessors and Counsellors to the Bishop But yet if we take our estimate from Ignatius The Bishop is the Ruler without him though all concurr'd yet nothing could be done nothing attempted The Bishop was Superiour in all power and authority He was to be obeyed in all things and contradicted in nothing The Bishops judgment was to sway and nothing must seem pleasing to the Presbyters that was cross to the Bishops sentence this and a great deal more which I have formerly made use of is in Ignatius And now let their assistance and counsel extend as far as it will the Bishops authority is invulnerable But I have already enough discussed this instance of S. Hierom's Sect. thither I refer the Reader 2. But S. Cyprian must do this business for us if any man for of all the Bishops he did acts of the greatest condescention and seeming declination of Episcopal authority But let us see the worst Ad id verò quod scripserunt mihi compresbyteri nostri solus rescribere nihil potui quando à primordio Episcopatûs mei statuerim nihil sine consilio vestro sine consensu plebis meae privatâ sententiâ gerere And again quamvis mihi videantur debere pacem accipere tamen ad consultum vestrum eos dimisi ne videar aliquid temerè praesumere And a third time Quae res cùm omnium nostrum consilium sententiam spectat praejudicare ego soli mihi rem communem vindicare non audeo These are the greatest steps of Episcopal humility that I find in Materiâ juridicâ The sum whereof is this that S. Cyprian did consult his Presbyters and Clergy in matters of consequence and resolved to do nothing without their advice But then consider also it was statui apud me I have resolved with my self to do nothing without your Counsel It was no necessity ab extrà no duty no Sanction of holy Church that bound him to such a modesty it was his own voluntary act 2. It was as well Diaconorum as Presbyterorum consilium that he would have in conjunction as appears by the titles of the sixth and eighteenth Epistles Cyprianus Presbyteris ac Diaconis fratribus salutem So that here the Presbyters can no more challenge a power of regiment in common than the Deacons by any Divine Law or Catholick practice 3. S. Cyprian also would actually have the consent of the people too and that will as well disturb the Jus Divinum of an independant Presbytery as of an independant Episcopacy But indeed neither of them both need to be much troubled for all this was voluntary in S. Cyprian like Moses qui cùm in potestate suâ habuit ut solus possit praeesse populo seniores elegit to use S. Hierome's expression who when it was in his power alone to rule the people yet chose seventy Elders for assistants For as for S. Cyprian this very Epistle clears it that no part of his Episcopal authority was impaired For he shews what himself alone could do Fretus igitur dilectione vestrâ religione quam satis novi his literis hortor mando c. I intreat and Command you vice meâ sungamini
Synodum quòd quidam qui in Clero sunt allecti Propter Lucra Turpia conductores alienarum possessionum fiant saecularia negotia sub curâ suâ suscipiant Dei quidem Ministerium parvipendentes Saecularium verò discurrentes domos Propter Avaritiam patrimoniorum sollicitudinem sumentes Clergy-men were farmers of lands and did take upon them secular imployment for covetous designs and with neglect of the Church These are the things the Councel complain'd of and therefore according to this exigence the following Sanction is to be understood Decrevit itaque hoc Sanctum magnumque Concilium nullum deinceps non Episcopum non Clericum vel Monachum aut possessiones conducere aut negotiis secularibus se immiscere No Bishop no Clergy-man no Monk must farm grounds nor ingage himself in secular business What in none No none Praeter pupillorum si forte leges imponant inexcusabilem curam aut civitatis Episcopus Ecclesiasticarum rerum sollicitudinem habere praecipiat aut Orphanorum viduarum carum quae sine ullâ defensione sunt ac personarum quae maximè Ecclesiastico indigent adjutorio propter timorem Domini causa deposcat This Canon will do right to the Question All secular affairs and bargains either for covetousness or with considerable disturbance of Church-Offices are to be avoided For a Clergy man must not be covetous much less for covetise must he neglect his cure To this purpose is that of the second Councel of Arles Clericus turpis lucri gratiâ aliquod genus negotiationis non exerceat But not here nor at Chalcedon is the prohibition absolute nor declaratory of an inconsistence and incapacity for for all this the Bishop or Clerk may do any office that is in piâ curiâ He may undertake the supra-vision of Widows and Orphans And although he be forbid by the Canon of the Apostles to be a Guardian of Pupils yet it is expounded here by this Canon of Chalcedon for a voluntary seeking it is forbidden by the Apostles but here it is permitted only with si fortè leges imponant if the Law or Authority commands him then he may undertake it That is if either the Emperor commands him or if the Bishop permits him then it is lawful But without such command or licence it was against the Canon of the Apostles And therefore Saint Cyprian did himself severely punish Geminius Faustinus one of the Priests of Carthage for undertaking the executorship of the Testament of Geminius Victor he had no leave of his Bishop so to do and for him of his own head to undertake that which would be an avocation of him from his Office did in Saint Cyprian's Consistory deserve a censure 3. By this Canon of Chalcedon any Clerk may be the Oeconomus or Steward of a Church and dispence her Revenue if the Bishop command him 4. He may undertake the patronage or assistance of any distressed person that needs the Churches aid * From hence it is evident that all secular imployment did not hoc ipso avocate a Clergy-man from his necessary office and duty for some secular imployments are permitted him All causes of piety of charity all occurrences concerning the Revenues of the Church and nothing for covetousness but any thing in obedience any thing I mean of the forenamed instances Nay the affairs of Church Revenues and dispensation of Ecclesiastical Patrimony was imposed on the Bishop by the Canons Apostolical and then considering how many possessions were deposited first at the Apostles feet and afterwards in the Bishops hands we may quickly perceive that a case may occur in which something else may be done by the Bishop and his Clergy besides prayer and preaching 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Ignatius to Saint Polycarpe of Smyrna Let not the Widows be neglected after God do thou take care of them Qui locupletes sunt volunt pro arbitrio quisque suo quod libitum est contribuit quod collectum est apud Praesidem deponitur atque is inde opitulatur Orphanis viduis iisque qui vel morbo vel aliâ de causà egent tum iis qui vincti sunt peregrè advenientibus hospitibus ut uno verbo dicam omnium indigentium Curator est All the Collects and Offerings of faithful people are deposited with the Bishop and thence he dispenses for the relief of the Widows and Orphans thence he provides for travellers and in one word he takes care of all indigent and necessitous people So it was in Justin Martyr's time and all this a man would think requir'd a considerable portion of his time besides his studies and prayer and preaching This was also done even in the Apostles times for first they had the provision of all the goods and persons of the coenobium of the Church at Jerusalem This they themselves administred till a complaint arose which might have prov'd a scandal then they chose seven men men full of the Holy Ghost men that were Priests for they were of the seventy Disciples saith Epiphanius and such men as Preached and Baptized so Saint Stephen and Saint Philip therefore to be sure they were Clergy-men and yet they left their preaching for a time at least abated of the height of the imployment for therefore the Apostles appointed them that themselves might not leave the Word of God and serve Tables plainly implying that such men who were to serve these Tables must leave the Ministery of the Word in some sence or degree and yet they chose Presbyters and no harm neither and for a while themselves had the imployment I say there was no harm done by this temporary Office to their Priestly function and imployment For to me it is considerable If the calling of a Presbyter does not take up the whole man then what inconvenience though his imployment be mixt with secular allay But if it does take up the whole man then it is not safe for any Presbyter ever to become a Bishop which is a dignity of a far greater burden and requires more than a Man 's all if all was requir'd to the function of a Presbyter But I proceed 4. The Church prohibiting secular imployment to Bishops and Clerks do prohibit it only in gradu impedimenti officii Clericalis and therefore when the Offices are supplyed by any of the Order it is never prohibited but that the personal abilities of any man may be imployed for the fairest advantages either of Church or Commonwealth And therefore it is observable that the Canons provide that the Church be not destitute not that such a particular Clerk should there officiate Thus the Councel of Arles decreed Vt Presbyteri sicut hactenus factum est indiscretè per diversa non mittantur loca ne fortè propter eorum absentiam animarum pericula Ecclesiarum in quibus constituti sunt negligantur officia So that here we see 1. That it had been usual to send Priests
Bishop and were his Emissaries for the gaining souls in City or Suburbs But when the Bishops divided Parishes and fixt the Presbyters upon a cure so many Parishes as they distinguished so many delegations they made And these we all believe to be good both in Law and Conscience For the Bishop per omnes divinos ordines propriae hierarchiae exercet mysteria saith Saint Denis he does not do the offices of his Order by himself only but by others also for all the inferiour Orders do so operate as by them he does his proper offices * But besides this grand act of the Bishops first and then of all Christendom in consent we have fair precedent in Saint Paul for he made delegation of a power to the Church of Corinth to excommunicate the incestuous person It was a plain delegation for he commanded them to do it and gave them his own spirit that is his own authority and indeed without it I scarce find how the Delinquent should have been delivered over to Satan in the sence of the Apostolick Church that is to be buffetted for that was a miraculous appendix of power Apostolick * When Saint Paul sent for Timothy from Ephesus he sent Tychicus to be his Vicar Do thy diligence to come unto me shortly for Demas hath forsaken me c. And Tychicus have I sent to Ephesus Here was an express delegation of the power of jurisdiction to Tychicus who for the time was Curate to Saint Timothy Epaphroditus for a while attended on Saint Paul although he was then Bishop of Philippi and either Saint Paul or Epaphroditus appointed one in substitution or the Church was relinquished for he was most certainly non-resident * Thus also we find that Saint Ignatius did delegate his power to the Presbyters in his voyage to his Martyrdom Presbyteri pascite gregem qui inter vos est donec Deus designaverit eum qui principatum in vobis habiturus est Ye Presbyters do you feed the Flock till God shall design you a Bishop Till then Therefore it was but a delegate power it could not else have expired in the presence of a Superiour To this purpose is that of the Laodicean Council Non oportet Presbyteros ante ingressum Episcopi ingredi sedere in tribunalibus nisi fortè aut aegrotet Episcopus aut in peregrinis eum esse constiterit Presbyters must not sit in Consistory without the Bishop unless the Bishop be sick or absent So that it seems what the Bishop does when he is in his Church that may be committed to others in his absence And to this purpose Saint Cyprian sent a plain Commission to his Presbyters Fretus ergo dilectione religione vostrâ his literis hortor mando ut vos Vice mea fungamini circa gerenda ea quae adiministratio religiosa deposcit I intreat and command you that you do my office in the administration of the affairs of the Church and another time he put Herculanus and Caldonius two of his Suffragans together with Rogatianus and Numidicus two Priests in substitution for the excommunicating Foelicissimus and four more Cùm ego vos pro me Vicarios miserim So it was just in the case of Hierocles Bishop of Alexandria and Melitius his Surrogate in Epiphanius Videbatur autem Melitius praemenire c. ut qui secundum locum habebat post Petrum in Archiepiscopatu velut adjuvandi ejus gratiâ sub ipso existens sub ipso Ecclesiastica curans He did Church offices under and for Hierocles And I could never find any Canon or personal declamatory clause in any Council or Primitive Father against a Bishops giving more or less of his jurisdiction by way of delegation * Hitherto also may be referr'd that when the goods of all the Church which then were of a perplex and busie dispensation were all in the Bishops hand as part of the Episcopal function yet that part of the Bishops office the Bishop by order of the Council of Chalcedon might delegate to a Steward provided he were a Clergy-man and upon this intimation and decree of Chalcedon the Fathers in the Council of Sevill forbad any Lay-men to be Stewards for the Church Elegimus ut unusquisque nostrûm secundùm Chalcedonensium Patrum decreta ex proprio Clero Oeconomum sibi constituat But the reason extends the Canon further Indecorum est enim laicum Vicarium esse Episcopi Saeculares in Ecclesiâ judicare Vicars of Bishops the Canon allows only forbids Lay-men to be Vicars In uno enim eodemque officio non decet dispar professio quod etiam in divinâ lege prohibetur c. In one and the same office the Law of God forbids to joyn men of disparate capacities Then this would be considered For the Canon pretends Scripture Precepts of Fathers and Tradition of Antiquity for its Sanction SECT LI. But they were ever Clergy-men for there never was any Lay-Elders in any Church-office heard of in the Church FOR although Antiquity approves of Episcopal delegations of their power to their Vicars yet these Vicars and Delegates must be Priests at least Melitius was a Biship and yet the Chancellor of Hierocles Patriarch of Alexandria so were Herculanus and Caldonius to Saint Cyprian But they never delegated to any Lay-man any part of their Episcopal power precisely Of their lay-power or the cognisance of secular causes of the people I find one delegation made to some Gentlemen of the Laity by Sylvanus Bishop of Troas when his Clerks grew covetous he cur'd their itch of Gold by trusting men of another profession so to shame them into justice and contempt of money Si quis autem Episcopus posthâc Ecclesiasticam rem aut Laicali procuratione administrandam elegerit non solùm à Christo de rebus Pauperum judicatur reus sed etiam Concilio manebit obnoxius If any Bishop shall hereafter concredit any Church affairs to Lay-Administration he shall be responsive to Christ and in danger of the Council But the Thing was of more ancient constitution For in that Epistle which goes under the Name of Saint Clement which is most certainly very ancient whoever was the Author of it it is decreed Si qui ex Fratribus negotia habent inter se apud cognitores saeculi non judicentur sed apud Presbyteros Ecclesiae quicquid illud est dirimatur If Christian people have causes of difference and judicial contestation let it be ended before the Priests For so Saint Clement expounds Presbyteros in the same Epistle reckoning it as a part of the sacred Hierarchy To this or some parallel constitution Saint Hierom relates saying that Priests from the beginning were appointed Judges of causes He expounds his meaning to be of such Priests as were also Bishops and they were Judges ab initio from the beginning saith S. Hierom So that the saying of the Father may no way prejudge
or the Judicial whether it were better to say God of his mercy pardon thee or by his authority committed to me I absolve thee and in Peter Lombards days when it was esteemed an innocent doctrine to say that the Priests power was only declarative it is likely the form of absolution would be according to the power believed which not being then universally believed to be Judicial the Judicial form could not be of universal use and in the Pontifical there is no Judicial form at all but only Optative or by way of prayer But in this affair besides what is already mentioned I have two great things to say which are a sufficient determination of this whole Article 54. I. The first is that in the Primitive Church there was no such thing as a judicial absolution of sins used in any Liturgy or Church so far as can appear but all the absolution of penitents which is recorded was the mere admitting them to the mysteries and society of the faithful in religious offices the summ and perfection of which was the holy Sacrament of the Lords Supper So the fourth Council of Carthage Can. 76. makes provision for a penitent that is near death reconcilietur per manus impositionem infundatur ori ejus Eucharistia Let him be reconciled by the imposition of hands and let the Eucharist be poured into his mouth that was all the solemnity even when there was the greatest need of the Churches ministery that is before their penances and satisfactions were completed The Priest or Bishop laid his hands upon him and prayed and gave him the Communion For that this was the whole purpose of imposition of hands we are taught expresly by S. Austin who being to prove that imposition of hands viz. in repentance might be repeated though baptism might not uses this for an argument Quid enim est aliud nisi oratio super hominem It is nothing else but a Prayer said over the man And indeed this is evident and notorious in matter of fact for in the beginning and in the progression in the several periods of publick repentance and in the consummation of it the Bishop or the Priest did very often impose hands that is pray over the penitent as appears in Is. Ling. from the authority of the Gallican Councils Omni tempore jejuniis manus poenitentibus à Sacerdotibus imponantur And again Criminalia peccata multis jejuniis crebris manus sacerdotum impositionibus eorúmque supplicationibus juxta Canonum statuta placuit purgari Criminal that is great sins must according to the Canons be purged with much fasting and frequent impositions of the Priests hands and their supplications In every time or period of their fast let the Priests hands be laid upon the penitents that is let the Priests frequently pray with him and for him or over him The same with that which he also observes out of the Nicene Council Vultu capite humiliato humilitèr ex corde veniam postulent pro se orare exposcant that 's the intent of imposition of hands let the penitent humbly ask pardon that is desire that the holy man and all the Church would pray for him This in every stage or period of repentance was a degree of reconciliation for as God pardons a sinner when he gives him time to repent he pardons him in one degree that is he hath taken off that anger which might justly and instantly crush him all in pieces and God pardons him yet more when he exhorts him to repentance and yet more when he inclines him and as he proceeds so does God but the pardon is not full and final till the repentance is so too So does the Minister of repentance and pardon Those only are in the unpardoned state who are cut off from all entercourse in holy things with holy persons in holy offices when they are admitted to do repentance they are admitted to the state of pardon and every time the Bishop or Minister prays for him he still sets him forwarder towards the final pardon but then the penitent is fully reconciled on Earth when having done his repentance towards men that is by the commands of the Church he is admitted to the holy Communion and if that be sincerely done on the penitents part and this be maturely and prudently done on the Priests part as the repentance towards men was a repentance also towards God so the absolution before men is a certain indication of absolution before God But as to the main question Then the Church only did reconcile penitents when she admitted them to the Communion and therefore in the second Council of Carthage absolution is called reconciliari Divinis altaribus a being reconciled to the Altar of God and in the Council of Eliberis Communione reconciliari a being reconciled by receiving the Communion opposite to which in the same Canon is Communionem non accipiat he may not receive the Communion that is he shall not be absolved The same is to be seen in the eighth Canon of the Council of Ancyra in the second Canon of the Council of Laodicea in the 85 Epistle of P. Leo and the first Epistle of P. Vigilius and in the third Council of Toledo we find the whole process of binding and loosing described in these words Because we find that in certain Churches of Spain men do not according to the Canons but unworthily repent them of their sins that so often as they please to sin so often they desire of the Priest to be reconciled therefore for the restraining so execrable a presumption it is commanded by the holy Council that repentance should be given according to the form of the ancient Canons that is that he who repents him of his doings being first suspended from the Communion he should amongst the other penitents often run to the imposition of hands that is to the Prayers of the Bishop and the Church but when the time of his satisfaction is completed according as the Priests prudence shall approve let him restore him to the Communion That 's the absolution as the rejecting him from it was the binding him It was an excommunication from which when he was restored to the Communion he was loosed And this was so known so universal a practice and process of Ecclesiastical repentance that without any alteration as to the main inquiry it continued so in the Church to very many ages succeeding and it was for a long while together the custom of penitent people in the beginning of Lent to come voluntarily to receive injunctions of discipline and penitential offices from the Priest and to abstain from the holy Communion till they had done their penances and then by ceremonies and prayers to be restored to the Communion at Easter without any other form of Judicial absolution as is to be seen in Albinus and in the Roman Pontifical To which this consideration may be added That the
and cellars and retirements think that they being upon the defensive those Princes and those Laws that drive them to it are their enemies and therefore they cannot be secure unless the power of the one and the obligation of the other be lessened and rescinded and then the being restrained and made miserable endears the discontented persons mutually and makes more hearty and dangerous Confederations King James of blessed memory in his Letters to the States of the Vnited Provinces dated 6. March 1613. thus wrote Magis autem è re fore si sopiantur authoritate publicâ ità ut prohibeatis Ministros vestros nè eas disputationes in suggestum aut ad plebem ferant ac districtè imperetis ut pacem colant se invicem tolerando in ista opinionum ac sententiarum discrepantia Eóque justiùs videmur vobis hoc ipsum suadere debere quòd neutram comperimus adeò deviam ut non possint cum fidei Christianae veritate cum animarum salute consistere c. The like counsel in the divisions of Germany at the first Reformation was thought reasonable by the Emperour Ferdinand and his excellent Son Maximilian For they had observed that violence did exasperate was unblessed unsuccessfull and unreasonable and therefore they made Decrees of Toleration and appointed tempers and expedients to be drawn up by discreet persons and George Cassander was design'd to this great work and did something towards it And Emanuel Philibert Duke of Savoy repenting of his war undertaken for Religion against the Pedemontans promised them Toleration and was as good as his word As much is done by the Nobility of Polonia So that the best Princes and the best Bishops gave Toleration and Impunities but it is known that the first Persecutions of disagreeing persons were by the Arians by the Circumcellians and Donatists and from them they of the Church took examples who in small numbers did sometime perswade it sometime practise it And among the Greeks it became a publick and authorized practice till the Question of Images grew hot and high for then the Worshippers of Images having taken their example from the Empress Irene who put her son's eyes out for making an Edict against Images began to be as cruel as they were deceived especially being encouraged by the Popes of Rome who then blew the coals to some purpose And that I may upon this occasion give account of this affair in the Church of Rome it is remarkable that till the time of Justinian the Emperour A.D. 525. the Catholicks and Novatians had Churches indifferently permitted even in Rome itself but the Bishops of Rome whose interest was much concerned in it spoke much against it and laboured the eradication of the Novatians and at last when they got power into their hands they served them accordingly but it is observed by Socrates that when the first Persecution was made against them at Rome by Pope Innocent I. at the same instant the Goths invaded Italy and became Lords of all it being just in God to bring a Persecution upon them for true belief who with an incompetent Authority and insufficient grounds do persecute an errour less material in persons agreeing with them in the profession of the same common Faith And I have heard it observed as a blessing upon S. Austin who was so mercifull to erring persons as the greatest part of his life in all senses even when he had twice changed his minde yet to tolerate them and never to endure they should be given over to the Secular power to be killed that the very night the Vandals set down before his City of Hippo to besiege it he died and went to God being as a reward of his mercifull Doctrine taken from the miseries to come And yet that very thing was also a particular issue of the Divine Providence upon that City who not long before had altered their profession into truth by force and now were falling into their power who afterward by a greater force turned them to be Arians But in the Church of Rome the Popes were the first Preachers of force and violence in matters of Opinion and that so zealously that Pope Vigilius suffered himself to be imprisoned and handled roughly by the Emperour Justinian rather then he would consent to the restitution and peace of certain disagreeing persons But as yet it came not so far as Death The first that preached that Doctrine was Dominick the Founder of the Begging Orders of Friers the Friers Preachers in memory of which the Inquisition is intrusted onely to the Friers of his Order And if there be any force in Dreams or truth in Legends as there is not much in either this very thing might be signified by his Mother's dream who the night before Dominick was born dreamed she was brought to bed of a huge Dog with a fire-brand in his mouth Sure enough however his Disciples expound the dream it was a better sign that he should prove a rabid furious Incendiary then any thing else whatever he might be in the other parts of his life in his Doctrine he was not much better as appears in his deportment toward the Albigenses against whom he so preached adeo quidem ut centum haereticorum millia ab octo millibus Catholicorum fusa interfecta fuisse perhibeantur saith one of him and of those who were taken 180 were burnt to death because they would not abjure their Doctrine This was the first example of putting erring persons to death that I find in the Roman Church For about 170 years before Berengarius fell into opinion concerning the blessed Sacrament which they called Heresie and recanted and relapsed and recanted again and fell again two or three times saith Gerson writing against Romant of the Rose and yet he died sicca morte his own natural death and with hope of Heaven and yet Hildebrand was once his Judge which shews that at that time Rome was not come to so great heights of bloudshed In England although the Pope had as great power here as any-where yet there were no executions for matter of Opinion known till the time of Henry the fourth who because he usurped the Crown was willing by all means to endear the Clergy by destroying their enemies that so he might be sure of them to all his purposes And indeed it may become them well enough who are wiser in their generations then the children of light it may possibly serve the policies of evil persons but never the pure and chast dâ—signs of Christianity which admits no bloud but Christ's and the imitating bloud of Martyrs but knows nothing how to serve her ends by persecuting any of her erring Children By this time I hope it will not be thought reasonable to say he that teaches mercy to erring persons teaches indifferency in Religion unless so many Fathers and so many Churches and the best of Emperours and all the world till they were abused by Tyranny
said of Theodosius Certaminum Magister orationum Judex constitutus You are appointed the great Master of our arguings and are most fit to be the Judge of our Discourses especially when they do relate and pretend to publick Influence and Advantages to the Church We all are witnesses of Your Zeal to promote true Religion and every day find You to be a great Patron to this very poor Church which groans under the Calamities and permanent Effects of a War acted by Intervals for above Four Hundred years such which the intermedial Sun-shines of Peace could but very weakly repair Our Churches are still demolished much of the Revenues irrecoverably swallowed by Sacriledge and digested by an unavoidable impunity Religion infinitely divided and parted into formidable Sects the People extremely Ignorant and Wilful by inheritance superstitiously Irreligious and uncapable of Reproof And amidst these and very many more inconveniences it was greatly necessary that God should send us such a KING and he send us such a Vice-Roy who weds the Interests of Religion and joyns them to his heart For we do not look upon Your Grace only as a Favourer of the Churche's Temporal Interest though even for that the Souls of the relieved Clergie do daily bless You neither are You our Patron only as the Cretans were to Homer or the Alenadae to Simonides Philip to Theopompus or Severus to Oppianus but as Constantine and Theodosius were to Christians that is desirous that true Religion should be promoted that the Interest of Souls should be advanced that Truth should flourish and wise Principles should be entertain'd as the best Cure against those Evils which this Nation hath too often brought upon themselves In order to which excellent purposes it is hoped that the reduction of the Holy Rite of Confirmation into use and Holy practice may contribute some very great moments For besides that the great Vsefulness of this Ministery will greatly endear the Episcopal Order to which that I may use S. Hierom's words if there be not attributed a more than common Power and Authority there will be as many Schisms as Priests it will also be a means of endearing the Persons of the Prelates to their Flocks when the People shall be convinced that there is or may be if they please a perpetual entercourse of Blessings and Love between them when God by their Holy hands refuses not to give to the People the earnest of an eternal inheritance when by them he blesses and that the grace of our Lord Jesus and the Love of God and the Communication of his Spirit is conveyed to all persons capable of the Grace by the Conduct and on the hands and Prayers of their Bishops And indeed not only very many single Persons but even the whole Church of Ireland hath need of Confirmation We have most of us contended for false Religions and un-Christian Propositions and now that by God's Mercy and the Prosperity and Piety of his Sacred Majesty the Church is broken from her Cloud and many are reduc'd to the true Religion and righteous worship of God we cannot but call to mind how the Holy Fathers of the Primitive Church often have declar'd themselves in Councils and by a perpetual Discipline that such persons who are return'd from Sects and Heresies into the Bosom of the Church should not be re-baptiz'd but that the Bishops should Impose hands on them in Confirmation It is true that this was design'd to supply the defect of those Schismatical Conventicles who did not use this Holy Rite For this Rite of Confirmation hath had the fate to be oppos'd only by the Schismatical and Puritan Parties of old the Novatians or Cathari and the Donatists and of late by the Jesuits and new Cathari the Puritans and Presbyterians the same evil Spirit of Contradiction keeping its course in the same chanel and descending regularly amongst men of the same Principles But therefore in the restitution of a man or company of men or a Church the Holy Primitives in the Council of C P. Laodicea and Orange thought that to Confirm such persons was the most agreeable Discipline not only because such persons did not in their little and dark Assemblies use this Rite but because they always greatly wanted it For it is a sure Rule in our Religion and is of an eternal truth that they who keep not the Unity of the Church have not the Spirit of God and therefore it is most fit should receive the ministery of the Spirit when they return to the bosom of the Church that so indeed they may keep the Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace And therefore Asterius Bishop of Amasia compares Confirmation to the Ring with which the Father of the Prodigal adorn'd his returning Son Datur nempe prodigo post stolam annulus nempe Symbolum intelligibilis signaculi Spiritûs And as the Spirit of God the Holy Dove extended his mighty wings over the Creation and hatch'd the new-born World from its seminal powers to Light and Operation and Life and Motion so in the Regeneration of the Souls of Men he gives a new Being and Heat and Life Procedure and Perfection Wisdom and Strength and because that this was ministred by the Bishops hands in Confirmation was so firmly believ'd by all the Primitive Church therefore it became a Law and an Vniversal practice in all those Ages in which men desir'd to be sav'd by all means The Latin Church and the Greek always did use it and the Blessings of it which they believ'd consequent to it they expressed in a holy Prayer which in the Greek Euchologion they have very anciently and constantly used Thou O Lord the most compassionate and great King of all graciously impart to this person the seal of the gift of thy Holy Almighty and adorable Spirit For as an ancient Greek said truly and wisely The Father is reconcil'd and the Son is the Reconciler but to them who are by Baptism and Repentance made friends of God the Holy Spirit is collated as a gift They well knew what they received in this Ministration and therefore wisely laid hold of it and would not let it go This was anciently ministred by Apostles and ever after by the Bishops and religiously receiv'd by Kings and greatest Princes and I have read that S. Sylvester confirm'd Constantine the Emperor and when they made their children servants of the Holy Jesus and Souldiers under his banner and Bonds-men of his Institution then they sent them to the Bishop to be Confirm'd who did it sometimes by such Ceremonies that the solemnity of the Ministery might with greatest Religion addict them to the service of their Great Lord. We read in Adrovaldus that Charles Martel entring into a League with Bishop Luitprandus sent his Son Pepin to him ut more Christianorum fidelium capillum ejus primus attonderet ac Pater illi Spiritualis existeret that he might after the manner of Christians
first cut his hair in token of service to Christ and in confirming him he should be his Spiritual Father And something like this we find concerning William Earl of Warren and Surrey who when he had Dedicated the Church of S. Pancratius and the Priory of Lewes receiv'd Confirmation and gave seizure per capillos capitis mei says he in the Charter fratris mei Radulphi de Warrena quos abscidit cum cultello de capitibus nostris Henricus Episcopus Wintoniensis by the hairs of my head and of my Brother's which Henry Bishop of Winchester cut off before the Altar meaning according to the ancient Custom in Confirmation when they by that Solemnity addicted themselves to the free Servitude of the Lord Jesus The Ceremony is obsolete and chang'd but the Mystery can never And indeed that is one of the advantages in which we can rejoyce concerning the ministration of this Rite in the Church of England and Ireland That whereas it was sometimes clouded sometimes hindred and sometimes hurt by the appendage of needless and useless Ceremonies it is now reduc'd to the Primitive and first Simplicity amongst us and the excrescencies us'd in the Church of Rome are wholly par'd away and by holy Prayers and the Apostolical Ceremony of Imposition of the Bishops hands it is worthily and zealously administred The Latins us'd to send Chrism to the Greeks when they had usurped some jurisdiction over them and the Pope's Chaplains went with a quantity of it to CP where the Russians usually met them for it for that was then the Ceremony of this Ministration But when the Latins demanded fourscore pounds of Gold besides other gifts they went away and chang'd their Custom rather than pay an unlawful and ungodly Tribute Non quaerimus vestra sed vos We require nothing but leave to impart God's blessings with pure Intentions and a Spiritual Ministery And as the Bishops of our Churches receive nothing from the People for the Ministration of this Rite so they desire nothing but Love and just Obedience in Spiritual and Ecclesiastical duties and we offer our Flocks Spiritual things without mixture of Temporal advantages from them we minister the Rituals of the Gospel without the Inventions of Men Religion without Superstition and only desire to be believ'd in such things which we prove from Scripture expounded by the Catholick Practice of the Church of God Concerning the Subject of this Discourse the Rite of Confirmation it were easie to recount many great and glorious expressions which we find in the Sermons of the Holy Fathers of the Primitive Ages so certain it is that in this thing we ought to be zealous as being desirous to perswade our People to give us leave to do them great good But the following Pages will do it I hope competently only we shall remark that when they had gotten a custom anciently that in cases of necessity they did permit Deacons and Lay-men sometimes to Baptize yet they never did confide in it much but with much caution and curiosity commanded that such persons should when that Necessity was over be carried to the Bishop to be Confirm'd so to supply all precedent defects relating to the past imperfect ministery and future necessity and danger as appears in the Council of Eliberis And the Ancients had so great estimate and veneration to this Holy Rite that as in Heraldry they distinguish the same thing by several names when they relate to Persons of greater Eminency and they blazon the Arms of the Gentry by Metals of the Nobility by precious Stones but of Kings and Princes by Planets so when they would signifie the Vnction which was us'd in Confirmation they gave it a special word and of more distinction and remark and therefore the Oil us'd in Baptism they call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that of Confirmation was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and they who spake properly kept this difference of words until by incaution and ignorant carelesness the names fell into confusion and the thing into disuse and dis-respect But it is no small addition to the Honour of this Ministration that some wise and good men have piously believed that when Baptiz'd Christians are Confirm'd and solemnly bless'd by the Bishop that then it is that a special Angel-Guardian is appointed to keep their Souls from the assaults of the Spirits of darkness Concerning which though I shall not interpose mine own opinion yet this I say that the Piety of that supposition is not disagreeable to the intention of this Rite for since by this the Holy Spirit of God the Father of Spirits is given it is not unreasonably thought by them that the other good Spirits of God the Angels who are ministring Spirits sent forth to minister to the good of them that shall be Heirs of Salvation should pay their kind offices in subordination to their Prince and Fountain that the first in every kind might be the measure of all the rest But there are greater and stranger things than this that God does for the Souls of his Servants and for the honour of the Ministeries which himself hath appointed We shall only add that this was ancient and long before Popery entred into the World and that this Rite hath been more abus'd by Popery than by any thing and to this day the Bigots of the Roman Church are the greatest Enemies to it and from them the Presbyterians But besides that the Church of England and Ireland does religiously retain it and hath appointed a solemn Officer for the Ministery the Lutheran and Bohemian Churches do observe it carefully and it is recommended and establish'd in the Harmony of the Protestant Confessions And now may it please Your Grace to give me leave to implore Your Aid and Countenance for the propagating this so religious and useful a Ministery which as it is a peculiar of the Bishop's Office is also a great enlarger of God's Gifts to the People It is a great instrument of Vnion of hearts and will prove an effective Deletery to Schism and an endearment to the other parts of Religion it is the consummation of Baptism and a preparation to the Lord's Supper it is the Vertue from on high and the solemnity of our Spiritual Adoption But there will be no need to use many arguments to enflame your Zeal in this affair when Your Grace shall find that to promote it will be a great Service to God for this alone will conclude Your Grace who are so ready by Laws and Executions by word and by Example to promote the Religion of Christ as it is taught in these Churches I am not confident enough to desire Your Grace for the reading this Discourse to lay aside any one hour of Your greater Employments which consume so much of Your Days and Nights But I say that the Subject is greatly worthy of consideration Nihil enim inter manus habui cui majorem sollicitudinem praestare deberem And for the Book
it self I can only say what Secundus did to the wise Lupercus Quoties ad fastidium legentium deliciásque respicio intelligo nobis commendationem ex ipsa mediocritate libri petendam I can commend it because it is little and so not very troublesome And if it could have been written according to the worthiness of the Thing treated in it it would deserve so great a Patronage but because it is not it will therefore greatly need it but it can hope for it on no other account but because it is laid at the feet of a Princely Person who is Great and Good and one who not only is bound by Duty but by Choice hath obliged Himself to do advantages to any worthy Instrument of Religion But I have detain'd Your Grace so long in my Address that Your Pardon will be all the Favour which ought to be hop'd for by Your Grace's most Humble and Obliged Servant Jer. Dunensis A DISCOURSE OF CONFIRMATION THE INTRODVCTION NEXT to the Incarnation of the Son of God and the whole Oeconomy of our Redemption wrought by him in an admirable order and Conjugation of glorious Mercies the greatest thing that ever God did to the World is the giving to us the Holy Ghost and possibly this is the Consummation and Perfection of the other For in the work of Redemption Christ indeed made a new World we are wholly a new Creation and we must be so and therefore when S. John began the Narrative of the Gospel he began in a manner and style very like to Moses in his History of the first Creation In the beginning was the Word c. All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made But as in the Creation the Matter was first there were indeed Heavens and Earth and Waters but all this was rude and without form till the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters So it is in the new Creation We are a new Mass redeem'd with the bloud of Christ rescued from an evil portion and made Candidates of Heaven and Immortality but we are but an Embryo in the regeneration until the Spirit of God enlivens us and moves again upon the waters and then every subsequent motion and operation is from the Spirit of God We cannot say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost By him we live in him we walk by his aids we pray by his emotions we desire we breath and sigh and groan by him he helps us in all our infirmities and he gives us all our strengths he reveals mysteries to us and teaches us all our duties he stirs us up to holy desires and he actuates those desires he makes us to will and to do of his good pleasure For the Spirit of God is that in our Spiritual life that a Man's Soul is in his Natural without it we are but a dead and liveless trunk But then as a Man's Soul in proportion to the several Operations of Life obtains several appellatives it is Vegetative and Nutritive Sensitive and Intellective according as it operates So is the Spirit of God He is the Spirit of Regeneration in Baptism of Renovation in Repentance the Spirit of Love and the Spirit of holy Fear the Searcher of the hearts and the Spirit of Discerning the Spirit of Wisdom and the Spirit of Prayer In one mystery he illuminates and in another he feeds us he begins in one and finishes and perfects in another It is the same Spirit working divers Operations For he is all this now reckoned and he is every thing else that is the Principle of Good unto us he is the Beginning and the Progression the Consummation and Perfection of us all and yet every work of his is perfect in its kind and in order to his own designation and from the beginning to the end is Perfection all the way Justifying and Sanctifying Grace is the proper entitative Product in all but it hath divers appellatives and connotations in the several rites and yet even then also because of the identity of the Principle the similitude and general consonancy in the Effect the same appellative is given and the same effect imputed to more than one and yet none of them can be omitted when the great Master of the Family hath blessed it and given it institution Thus S. Dionys calls Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the perfection of the Divine birth and yet the baptized person must receive other mysteries which are more signally perfective 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Confirmation is yet more perfective and is properly the perfection of Baptism By Baptism we are Heirs and are adopted to the inheritance of Sons admitted to the Covenant of Repentance and engag'd to live a good Life yet this is but the solemnity of the Covenant which must pass into after-acts by other influences of the same Divine principle Until we receive the spirit of Obsignation or Confirmation we are but babes in Christ in the meanest sence Infants that can do nothing that cannot speak that cannot resist any violence expos'd to every rudeness and perishing by every Temptation But therefore as God at first appointed us a ministery of a new birth so also hath he given to his Church the consequent Ministery of a new strength The Spirit mov'd a little upon the waters of Baptism and gave us the Principles of Life but in Confirmation he makes us able to move our selves In the first he is the Spirit of Life but in this he is the Spirit of Strength and Motion Baptisma est nativitas Vnguentum verò est nobis actionis instar motûs said Cabasilas In Baptism we are intitled to the inheritance but because we are in our Infancy and minority the Father gives unto his Sons a Tutor a Guardian and a Teacher in Confirmation said Rupertus that as we are baptized into the Death and Resurrection of Christ so in Confirmation we may be renewed in the Inner man and strengthned in all our Holy vows and purposes by the Holy Ghost ministred according to God's Ordinance The Holy Rite of Confirmation is a Divine Ordinance and it produces Divine Effects and is ministred by Divine Persons that is by those whom God hath sanctified and separated to this ministration At first all that were baptiz'd were also confirm'd and ever since all good people that have understood it have been very zealous for it and time was in England even since the first beginnings of the Reformation when Confirmation had been less carefully ministred for about six years when the people had their first opportunities of it restor'd they ran to it in so great numbers that Churches and Church-yards would not hold them insomuch that I have read that the Bishop of Chester was forc'd to impose hands on the people in the Fields and was so oppressed with multitudes that he had almost been trode to death by the people and had died with the throng
if he had not been rescued by the Civil Power But men have too much neglected all the ministeries of Grace and this most especially and have not given themselves to a right understanding of it and so neglected it yet more But because the prejudice which these parts of the Christian Church have suffered for want of it is very great as will appear by enumeration of the many and great Blessings consequent to it I am not without hope that it may be a service acceptable to God and an useful ministery to the Souls of my Charges if by instructing them that know not and exhorting them that know I set forward the practice of this Holy Rite and give reasons why the people ought to love it and to desire it and how they are to understand and practise it and consequently with what dutious affections they are to relate to those persons whom God hath in so special and signal manner made to be for their good and eternal benefit the Ministers of the Spirit and Salvation S. Bernard in the Life of S. Malachias my Predecessor in the See of Down and Connor reports that it was the care of that good Prelate to renew the rite of Confirmation in his Diocese where it had been long neglected and gone into desuetude It being too much our case in Ireland I find the same necessity and am oblig'd to the same procedure for the same reason and in pursuance of so excellent an example Hoc enim est Evangelizare Christum said S. Austin non tantùm docere quae sunt dicenda de Christo sed etiam quae observanda ei qui accedit ad compagem corporis Christi For this is to preach the Gospel not only to teach those things which are to be said of Christ but those also which are to be observed by every one who desires to be confederated into the Society of the Body of Christ which is his Church that is not only the doctrines of good Life but the Mysteries of Godliness and the Rituals of Religion which issue from a Divine fountain are to be declar'd by him who would fully preach the Gospel In order to which performance I shall declare 1. The Divine Original Warranty and Institution of the Holy Rite of Confirmation 2. That this Rite was to be a perpetual and never-ceasing Ministration 3. That it was actually continued and practised by all the succeeding Ages of the purest and Primitive Churches 4. That this Rite was appropriate to the Ministery of Bishops 5. That Prayer and Imposition of the Bishop's hands did make the whole Ritual and though other things were added yet they were not necessary or any thing of the Institution 6. That many great Graces and Blessings were consequent to the worthy reception and due ministration of it 7. I shall add something of the manner of Preparation to it and Reception of it SECT I. Of the Divine Original Warranty and Institution of the Holy Rite of Confirmation IN the Church of Rome they have determin'd Confirmation to be a Sacrament proprii nominis properly and really and yet their Doctors have some of them at least been paulò iniquiores a little unequal and unjust to their proposition insomuch that from themselves we have had the greatest opposition in this Article Bonacina and Henriquez allow the proposition but make the Sacrament to be so unnecessary that a little excuse may justifie the omission and almost neglect of it And Loemelius and Daniel à Jesu and generally the English Jesuits have to serve some ends of their own Family and Order disputed it almost into contempt that by representing it as unnecessary they might do all the ministeries Ecclesiastical in England without the assistance of Bishops their Superiors whom they therefore love not because they are so But the Theological Faculty of Paris have condemn'd their Doctrine as temerarious and savouring of Heresie and in the later Schools have approv'd rather the Doctrine of Gamachaeus Estius Kellison and Bellarmine who indeed do follow the Doctrine of the most Eminent persons in the Ancient School Richard of Armagh Scotus Hugo Cavalli and Gerson the Learned Chancellor of Paris who following the Old Roman order Amalarius and Albinus do all teach Confirmation to be of great and pious Use of Divine Original and to many purposes necessary according to the Doctrine of the Scriptures and the Primitive Church Whether Confirmation be a Sacrament of no is of no use to dispute and if it be disputed it can never be prov'd to be so as Baptism and the Lord's Supper that is as generally necessary to Salvation but though it be no Sacrament it cannot follow that it is not of very great Use and holiness and as a Man is never the less tied to Repentance though it be no Sacrament so neither is he ever the less oblig'd to receive Confirmation though it be as it ought acknowledg'd to be of an Use and Nature inferior to the two Sacraments of Divine direct and immediate institution It is certain that the Fathers in a large Symbolical and general sence call it a Sacrament but mean not the same thing by that word when they apply it to Confirmation as they do when they apply it to Baptism and the Lord's Supper That it is an excellent and Divine Ordinance to purposes Spiritual that it comes from God and ministers in our way to God that is all we are concern'd to inquire after and this I shall endeavour to prove not only against the Jesuits but against all Opponents of what side soever My First Argument from Scripture is what I learn from Optatus and S. Cyril Optatus writing against the Donatists hath these words Christ descended into the water not that in him who is God was any thing that could be made cleaner but that the water was to precede the future Vnction for the initiating and ordaining and fulfilling the mysteries of Baptism He was wash'd when he was in the hands of John then followed the order of the mystery and the Father finish'd what the Son did ask and what the Holy Ghost declar'd The Heavens were open'd God the Father anointed him the Spiritual Vnction presently descended in the likeness of a Dove and sate upon his head and was spred all over him and he was called the Christ when he was the anointed of the Father To whom also lest Imposition of hands should seem to be wanting the voice of God was heard from the cloud saying This is my Son in whom I am well pleased hear ye him That which Optatus says is this that upon and in Christ's person Baptism Confirmation and Ordination were consecrated and first appointed He was Baptized by S. John he was Confirm'd by the Holy Spirit and anointed with Spiritual Unction in order to that great work of obedience to his Father's will and he was Consecrated by the voice of God from Heaven In all things Christ is the Head and the
spiritual Unction this Confirmation of baptized persons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We are therefore called Christians because we are anointed with the Vnction of God These words will be best understood by the subsequent testimonies by which it will appear that Confirmation for reasons hereafter mention'd was for many Ages called Chrism or Unction But he adds the Usefulness of it For who is there that enters into the World or that enters into contention or Athletick combats but is anointed with oil By which words he intimates the Unction anciently us'd in Baptism and in Confirmation both for in the first we have our new Birth in the second we are prepar'd for spiritual Combate Tertullian having spoken of the Rites of Baptism proceeds Dehinc saith he manus imponitur per Benedictionem advocans invitans Spiritum Sanctum Tunc ille Sanctissimus Spiritus super emundata benedicta corpora libens à Patre descendit After Baptism the hand is impos'd by Blessing calling and inviting the Holy Spirit Then that most Holy Spirit willingly descends from the Father upon the Bodies that are cleans'd and blessed that is first baptiz'd then confirm'd And again Caro signatur ut anima muniatur Caro manûs impositione adumbratur ut anima Spiritu illuminetur The Flâ—sh is consign'd or seal'd that also is one of the known primitive words for Confirmation that the Soul may be guarded or defended and the Body is overshadowed by the Imposition of hands that the Soul may be enlightned by the Holy Ghost Nay further yet if any man objects that Baptism is sufficient he answers It is true it is sufficient to them that are to die presently but it is not enough for them that are still to live and to fight against their spiritual Enemies For in Baptism we do not receive the Holy Ghost for although the Apostles had been baptiz'd yet the Holy Ghost was come upon none of them until Jesus was glorified sed in aqua emundati sub Angelo Spiritui Sancto praeparamur but being cleans'd by Baptismal water we are dispos'd for the Holy Spirit under the hand of the Angel of the Church under the Bishop's hand And a little after he expostulates the Article Non licebit Deo in suo Organo per manus sanctas sublimitatem modulari spiritalem Is it not lawful for God by an instrument of his own under Holy hands to accord the heights and sublimity of the Spirit For indeed this is the Divine Order and therefore Tertullian reckoning the happiness and excellency of the Church of Rome at that time says She believes in God she signs with Water she clothes with the Spirit viz. in Confirmation she feeds with the Eucharist she exhorts to Martyrdom and against this order or Institution she receives no man S. Cyprian in his Epistle to Jubaianus having urg'd that of the Apostles going to Samaria to impose hands on those whom S. Philip had baptized adds Quod nunc quoque apud nos geritur ut qui in Ecclesia baptizantur per praepositos Ecclesiae offerantur per nostram orationem ac manûs impositionem Spiritum Sanctum consequantur signaculo Dominico consummentur Which custom is also descended to us that they who are baptiz'd might be brought by the Rulers of the Church and by our Prayer and the Imposition of hands said the Martyr-Bishop may obtain the Holy Ghost and be consummated with the Lord's signature And again Vngi necesse est eum qui baptizatus est c. Et super eos qui in Ecclesia baptizati erant Ecclesiasticum legitimum Baptismum consecuti fuerant oratione pro iis habitâ manu impositâ invocaretur infunderetur Spiritus Sanctus It is necessary that every one who is baptiz'd should receive the Unction that he may be Christ's anointed one and may have in him the grace of Christ. They who have receiv'd lawful and Ecclesiastical Baptism it is not necessary they should be baptiz'd again but that which is wanting must be supplied viz. that Prayer being made for them and Hands impos'd the Holy Ghost be invocated and pour'd upon them S. Clement of Alexandria a man of venerable Antiquity and Admirable Learning tells that a certain young man was by S. John delivered to the care of a Bishop who having baptiz'd him Postea verò sigillo Domini tanquam perfectâ tutâque ejus custodiâ eum obsignavit Afterward he sealed him with the Lord's signature the Church-word for Confirmation as with a safe and perfect guard Origen in his seventh Homily upon Ezekiel expounding certain mystical words of the Prophet saith Oleum est quo vir sanctus Vngitur oleum Christi oleum Sanctae Doctrinae Cùm ergò aliquis accepit hoc oleum quo Vngitur Sanctus id est Scripturam sanctam instituentem quomodo oporteat Baptizari in nomine Patris Filii Spiritûs Sancti pauca commutans unxerit quempiam quodammodo dixerit Jam non es Catechumenus consecutus es lavacrum secundae generationis talis homo accipit oleum Dei c. The Vnction of Christ of holy Doctrine is the Oil by which the Holy Man is anointed having been instructed in the Scriptures and taught how to be Baptized then changing a few things he says to him Now you are no longer a Catechumen now you are regenerated in Baptism such a man receives the Vnction of God viz. He then is to be Confirmed S. Dionys commonly called the Areopagite in his excellent Book of Ecclesiastical Hierarchy speaks most fully of the Holy Rite of Confirmation or Chrism Having describ'd at large the office and manner of Baptizing the Catechumens the trine Immersion the vesting them in white Garments he adds Then they bring them again to the Bishop and he consigns him who had been so baptiz'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the most Divinely-operating Vnction and then gives him the most Holy Eucharist And afterwards he says But even to him who is consecrated in the most holy mystery of Regeneration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the perfective Vnction of Chrism gives to him the advent of the Holy Spirit And this Rite of Confirmation then called Chrism from the Spiritual Unction then effected and consign'd also and signified by the Ceremony of Anointing externally which was then the Ceremony of the Church he calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the holy consummation of our Baptismal Regeneration meaning that without this there is something wanting to the Baptized persons And this appears fully in that famous censure of Novatus by Cornelius Bishop of Rome reported by Eusebius Novatus had been Baptized in his bed being very sick and like to die but when he recover'd he did not receive those other things which by the rule of the Church he ought to have receive'd neque Domini sigillo ab Episcopo consignatus est he was not consign'd with the Lord's signature by
the hands of the Bishop he was not Confirmed Quo non impetrato quomodo Spiritum Sanctum obtinuisse putandus est Which having not obtain'd how can he be suppos'd to have receiv'd the Holy Spirit The same also something more fully related by Nicephorus but wholly to the same purpose Melchiades in his Epistle to the Bishops of Spain argues excellently about the necessity and usefulness of the Holy Rite of Confirmation What does the mystery of Confirmation profit me after the mystery of Baptism Certainly we did not receive all in our Baptism if after that Lavatory we want something of another kind Let your charity attend As the Military order requires that when the General enters a Souldier into his list he does not only mark him but furnishes him with Arms for the Battel so in him that is Baptiz'd this Blessing is his Ammunition You have given Christ a Souldier give him also Weapons And what will it profit him if a Father gives a great Estate to his Son if he does not take care to provide a Tutor for him Therefore the Holy Spirit is the Guardian of our Regeneration in Christ he is the Comforter and he is the Defender I have already alledged the plain Testimonies of Optatus and S. Cyril in the first Section I add to them the words of S. Gregory Nazianzen speaking of Confirmation or the Christian signature Hoc viventi tibi maximum est tutamentum Ovis enim quae sigillo insignita est non facilè patet insidiis quae verò signata non est facilè à furibus capitur This Signature is your greatest guard while you live For a Sheep when it is mark'd with the Master's sign is not so soon stollen by Thieves but easily if she be not The same manner of speaking is also us'd by S. Basil who was himself together with Eubulus confirm'd by Bishop Maximinus Quomodo curam geret tanquam ad se pertinentis Angelus quomodo eripiat ex hostibus si non agnoverit signaculum How shall the Angel know what sheep belong unto his charge how shall he snatch them from the Enemy if he does not see their mark and signature Theodoret also and Theophylact speak the like words and so far as I can perceive these and the like sayings are most made use of by the School-men to be their warranty for an indeleble Character imprinted in Confirmation I do not interest my self in the question but only recite the Doctrine of these Fathers in behalf of the Practice and Usefulness of Confirmation I shall not need to transcribe hither those clear testimonies which are cited from the Epistles of S. Clement Vrban the First Fabianus and Cornelius the summ of them is in those plainest words of Vrban the First Omnes fideles per manûs impositionem Episcoporum Spiritum Sanctum post Baptismum accipere debent All faithful people ought to receive the Holy Spirit by Imposition of the Bishops hands after Baptism Much more to the same purpose is to be read collected by Gratian de Consecrat dist 4. Presbyt de Consecrat dist 5. Omnes fideles ibid. Spiritus Sanctus S. Hierom brings in a Luciferian asking Why he that is Baptiz'd in the Church does not receive the Holy Ghost but by Imposition of the Bishop's hands The answer is Hanc observâ—tionem ex Scripturae authoritate ad Sacerdotii honorem descendere This observation for the honour of the Priesthood did descend from the authority of the Scriptures adding withall it was for the prevention of Schisms and that the Safety of the Church did depend upon it Exigis ubi scriptum est If you ask where it is written it is answered in Actibus Apostolorum It is written in the Acts of the Apostles But if there were no authority of Scripture for it totius orbis in hanc partem consensus instar praecepti obtineret the Consent of the whole Christian World in this Article ought to prevail as a Commandment But here is a twofold Chord Scripture and Universal Tradition or rather Scripture expounded by an Universal traditive interpretation The same observation is made from Scripture by S. Chrysostom The words are very like those now recited from S. Hierom's Dialogue and therefore need not be repeated S. Ambrose calls Confirmation Spiritale signaculum quod post fontem superest ut perfectio fiat A spiritual Seal remaining after Baptism that Perfection be had Oecumenius calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Perfection Lavacro peccata purgantur Chrismate Spiritus Sanctus superfunditur utraque verò ista manu ore Antistitis impetramus said Pacianus Bishop of Barcinona In Baptism our sins are cleans'd in Confirmation the Holy Spirit is pour'd upon us and both these we obtain by the hands and mouth of the Bishop And again vestrae plebi unde Spiritus quam non consignat unctus Sacerdos The same with that of Cornelius in the case of Novatus before cited I shall add no more lest I overset the Article and make it suspicious by too laborious a defence only after these numerous testimonies of the Fathers I think it may be useful to represent that this Holy Rite of Confirmation hath been decreed by many Councils The Council of Eliberis celebrated in the time of P. Sylvester the First decreed that whosoever is Baptiz'd in his sickness if he recover ad Episcopum eum perducat ut per manûs impositionem perfici possit Let him be brought to the Bishop that he may be perfected by the Imposition of hands To the same purpose is the 77. Can. Episcopus eos per benedictionem perficere debebit The Bishop must perfect those whom the Minister Baptiz'd by his Benediction The Council of Laodicea decreed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All that are Baptized must be anointed with the celestial Unction and so be partakers of the Kingdom of Christ. All that are so that is are Confirm'd for this celestial Unction is done by holy Prayers and the invocation of the Holy Spirit so Zonaras upon this Canon All such who have this Unction shall reign with Christ unless by their wickedness they preclude their own possessions This Canon was put into the Code of the Catholick Church and makes the 152. Canon The Council of Orleans affirms expresly that he who is Baptiz'd cannot be a Christian meaning according to the usual style of the Church a full and perfect Christan nisi confirmatione Episcopali suerit Chrismatus unless he have the Unction of Episcopal Confirmation But when the Church had long disputed concerning the re-baptizing of Hereticks and made Canons for and against it according as the Heresies were and all agreed that if the first Baptism had been once good it could never be repeated yet they thought it fit that such persons should be Confirm'd by the Bishop all supposing Confirmation to be the perfection and consummation of the less-perfect Baptism Thus the
first Council of Arles decreed concerning the Arrians that if they had been Baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost they should not be re-baptized Manus tantùm eis imponatur ut accipiant Spiritum Sanctum that is Let them be Confirm'd let there be Imposition of hands that they may receive the Holy Ghost The same is decreed by the second Council of Arles in the case of the Bonasiact But I also find it in a greater record in the General Council of Constantinople where Hereticks are commanded upon their Conversion to be received secundùm constitutum Officium there was an Office appointed for it and it is in the Greeks Euchologion sigillatos primò scil Vnctos Vnguento Chrismatis c. signantes eos dicimus Sigillum doni Spiritûs Sancti It is the form of Confirmation used to this day in the Greek Church So many Fathers testifying the practice of the Church and teaching this Doctrine and so many more Fathers as were assembled in six Councils all giving witness to this holy Rite and that in pursuance also of Scripture are too great a Cloud of Witnesses to be despised by any man that calls himself a Christian. SECT IV. The BISHOPS were always and the only Ministers of Confirmation SAint Chrysostom asking the reason why the Samaritans who were Baptized by Philip could not from him and by his Ministery receive the Holy Ghost answers Perhaps this was done for the honour of the Apostles to distinguish the supereminent dignity which they bore in the Church from all inferior Ministrations but this answer not satisfying he adds Hoc donum non habebat erat enim ex Septem illis id quod magìs videtur dicendum Vnde meâ sententiâ hic Philippus unus ex septem erat secundus à Stephano ideo Baptizans Spiritum Sanctum non dabat neque enim facultatem habebat hoc enim donum solorum Apostolorum erat This Gift they had not who Baptized the Samaritans which thing is rather to be said than the other for Philip was one of the Seven and in my opinion next to S. Stephen therefore though he Baptized yet he gave not the Holy Ghost for he had no power so to do for this Gift was proper only to the Apostles Nam virtutem quidem acceperant Diaconi faciendi Signa non autem dandi aliis Spiritum Sanctum igitur hoc erat in Apostolis singulare unde praecipuos non alios videmus hoc facere The Ministers that Baptized had a power of doing Signs and working Miracles but not of giving the Holy Spirit therefore this Gift was peculiar to the Apostles whence it comes to pass that we see the chiefs in the Church and no other to do this S. Dionys says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is need of a Bishop to Confirm the Baptized 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this was the ancient custom of the Church And this was wont to be done by the Bishops for conservation of Unity in the Church of Christ said S. Ambrose A solis Episcopis By Bishops only said S. Austin For the Bishops succeeded in the place and ordinary Office of the Apostles said S. Hierom. And therefore in his Dialogue against the Luciferians it is said That this observation for the honour of the Priesthood did descend that the Bishops only might by Imposition of Hands confer the Holy Ghost that it comes from Scripture that it is written in the Acts of the Apostles that it is done for the prevention of Schisms that the safety of the Church depends upon it But the words of P. Innocentius I. in his first Epistle and third Chapter and published in the first Tome of the Councils are very full to this particular De consignandis Infantibus manifestum est non ab alio quà m ab Episcopo fieri licere nam Presbyteri licèt sâ—nt Sacerdotes Pontificatûs tamen apicem non habent haec autem Pontificibus solis deberi ut vel consignent vel paracletum Spiritum tradant non solùm consuetudo Ecclesiastica demonstrat verùm illa lectio Actuum Apostolorum quae asserit Petrum Joannem esse directos qui jam Baptizatis traderent Spiritum Sanctum Concerning Confirmation of Infants it is manifest it is not Lawful to be done by any other than by the Bishop for although the Presbyters be Priests yet they have not the Summity of Episcopacy But that these things are only due to Bishops is â—ot only demonstrated by the custom of the Church but by that of the Acts of the Apostles where Peter and John were sent to minister the Holy Ghost to them that were Baptized Optatus proves Macarius to be no Bishop because he was not conversant in the Episcopal Office and Imposed hands on none that were Baptized Hoc unum à majoribus fit id est à summis Pontificibus quod à minoribus perfici non potest said P. Melchiades This of Confirmation is only done by the greater Ministers that is by the Bishops and cannot be done by the lesser This was the constant Practice and Doctrine of the Primitive Church and derived from the practice and tradition of the Apostles and recorded in their Acts written by S. Luke For this is our great Rule in this case what they did in Rituals and consigned to Posterity is our Example and our warranty we see it done thus and by these men and by no others and no otherwise and we have no other authority and we have no reason to go another way The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in S. Luke the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in S. Chrysostom the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Philo and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the chief Governour in Ecclesiasticals his Office is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to teach such things as are not set down in Books their Practice is a Sermon their Example in these things must be our Rule or else we must walk irregularly and have no Rule but Chance and Humour Empire and Usurpation and therefore much rather when it is recorded in Holy Writ must this Observation be esteemed Sacred and inviolable But how if a Bishop be not to be had or not ready S. Ambrose is pretended to have answered Apud Aegyptum Presbyteri consignant si praesens non sit Episcopus A Presbyter may consign if the Bishop be not present and Amalarius affirms Sylvestrum Papam praevidentem quantum periculosum iter arriperet qui sine Confirmatione maneret quantum potuit subvenisse propter absentiam Episcoporum necessitate addidisse ut à Presbytero Vngerentur That Pope Sylvester fore-seeing how dangerous a Journey he takes who abides without Confirmation brought remedy as far as he could and commanded that in the absence of Bishops they should be anointed by the Priest and therefore it is by some supposed that factum valet sieri non debuit The thing ought
not to be done but in the proper and appointed way but when it is done it is valid just as in the case of Baptism by a Lay-man or Woman Nay though some Canons say it is actio irrita the act is null yet for this there is a salvo pretended for sometimes an action is said to be irrita in Law which yet nevertheless is of secret and permanent value and ought not to be done again Thus if a Priest be promoted by Simony it is said Sacerdos non est sed inaniter tantùm dicitur He is but vainly called a Priest for he is no Priest So Sixtus II. said That if a Bishop ordain in another's Diocese the Ordination is void and in the Law it is said That if a Bishop be consecrated without his Clergy and the Congregation the Consecration is null and yet these later and fiercer Constitutions do not determine concerning the natural event of things but of the legal and Canonical approbation To these things I answer That S. Ambrose his saying that in Egypt the Presbyters consign in the Bishop's absence does not prove that they ever did Confirm or Impose hands on the Baptized for the ministery of the Holy Spirit because that very passage being related by S. Austin the more general word of consign is rendred by the plainer and more particular consecrant they consecrate meaning the blessed Eucharist which was not permitted primitively to a simple Priest to do in the Bishops absence without leave only in Egypt it seems they had a general leave and the Bishop's absence was an interpretative consent But besides this consignant is best interpreted by the practice of the Church of which I shall presently give an account they might in the abscence of the Bishop consign with Oil upon the top of the Head but not in the Fore-head much less Impose hands or Confirm or minister the Holy Spirit for the case was this It was very early in the Church that to represent the Grace which was ministred in Confirmation the Unction from above they us'd Oil and Balsam and so constantly us'd this in their Confirmations that from the Ceremony it had the appellation Sacramentum Chrismatis S. Austin calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so Dionysius Now because at the Baptism of the adult Christians and by imitation of that of Infants Confirmation and Baptism were usually ministred at the same time the Unction was not only us'd to persons newly baptizâ—d but another Unction was added as a ceremony in Baptism it self and was us'd immediately before Baptism and the oil was put on the top of the head and three times was the party sign'd So it was then as we find in the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy But besides this Unction with oil in Baptismal preparations and pouring oil into the Baptismal water we find another Unction after the Baptism was finished For they bring the Baptized person again to the Bishop saith S. Dionys who signing the man with hallowed Chrism gives him the Holy Eucharist This they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the perfective or consummating Vnction this was that which was us'd when the Bishop Confirmed the Baptized person For to him who is initiated by the most holy initiation of the Divine generation that is to him who hath been Baptiz'd saith Pachimeres the Paraphrast of Dionysius the perfective Vnction of Chrism gives the gift of the Holy Ghost This is that which the Laodicean Council calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be anointed after Baptism Both these Unctions were intimated by Theophilus Antiochenus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Every man that is born into the World and every man that is a Champion is anointed with oil That to Baptism this alluding to Confirmation Now this Chrism was frequently ministred immediately after Baptism in the Cities where the Bishop was present but in Villages and little Towns where the Bishop was not present it could not be but Bishops were forc'd at their opportunities to go abroad and perfect what was wanting as it was in the example of Peter and John to the Samaritans Non quidem abnuo hanc esse Ecclesiarum consuetudinem ut ad eos qui longè in minoribus Vrbibus per Presbyteros Diaconos baptizati sunt Episcopus ad invocationem Sancti Spiritûs manum impositurus excurrat It is the custom of the Church that when persons are in lesser Cities baptiz'd by Priests and Deacons the Bishop uses to travel far that he may lay hands on them for the invocation of the Holy Spirit But because this could not always be done and because many Baptized persons died before such an opportunity could be had the Church took up a custom that the Bishop should consecrate the Chrism and send it to the Villages and little Cities distant from the Metropolis and that the Priests should anoint the Baptized with it But still they kept this part of it sacred and peculiar to the Bishop 1. That no Chrism should be us'd but what the Bishop consecrated 2. That the Priests should anoint the Head of the Baptized but at no hand the Fore-head for that was still reserved for the Bishop to do when he Confirmed them And this is evident in the Epistle of P. Innocent the First above quoted Nam Presbyteris seu extra Episcopum seu praesenta Episcopo Baptizant Chrismate baptizatos ungere licet sed quod ab Episcopo suerit consecratum non tamen frontem ex eodem oleo signare quod solis debetur Episcopis cùm tradunt Spiritum Paracletum Now this the Bishops did not only to satisfie the desire of the Baptized but by this Ceremony to excite the votum Confirmationis that they who could not actually be Confirmed might at least have it in voto in desire and in Ecclesiastical representation This as some think was first introduc'd by Pope Sylvester and this is the Consignation which the Priests of Egypt us'd in the absence of the Bishop and this became afterward the practice in other Churches But this was no part of the Holy Rite of Confirmation but a Ceremony annexed to it ordinarily from thence transmitted to Baptism first by imitation afterwards by way of supply and in defect of the opportunities of Confirmation Episcopal And therefore we find in the first Arausican Council in the time of Leo the First and Theodosius junior it was decreed That in Baptism every one should receive Chrism De eo autem qui in Baptismate quâcunque necessitate faciente Chrismatus non fuerit in Confirmatione Sacerdos commonebitur If the Baptized by any intervening accident or necessity was not anointed the Bishop should be advertis'd of it in Confirmation meaning that then it must be done For the Chrism was but a Ceremony annexed no part of either Rite essential to it but yet they thought it necessary by reason of some opinions then prevailing in the Church But here the Rites themselves are clearly distinguish'd and
Lunatick child and at the same time cured him but such things as these are extra-regular and contingent This which we speak of is a regular Ministery and must have a regular effect S. Austin said that the holy Spirit in Confirmation was given ad dilatanda Ecclesiae primordia for the propagating Christianity in the beginnings of the Church S. Hierom says it was propter honorem sacerdotii for the honour of the Priesthood S. Ambrose says it was ad Confirmationem Vnitatis in Ecclesia Christi for the confirmation of Unity in the Church of Christ. And they all say true But the first was by the miraculous Consignations which did accompany this Ministery and the other two were by reason that the Mysteries were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were appropriated to the ministery of the Bishop who is caput unitatis the Head the last resort the Firmament of Unity in the Church These effects were regular indeed but they were incident and accidental There are effects yet more proper and of greater excellency Now if we will understand in general what excellent fruits are consequent to this Dispensation we may best receive the notice of them from the Fountain it self our Blessed Saviour He that believes out of his belly as the Scripture saith shall flow Rivers of Living waters But this he spake of the Spirit which they that believe on him should receive This is evidently spoken of the Spirit which came down in Pentecost which was promised to all that should believe in Christ and which the Apostles ministred by Imposition of hands the Holy Ghost himself being the expositor and it can signifie no less but that a Spring of life should be put into the heart of the Confirmed to water the Plants of God that they should become Trees not only planted by the waterside for so it was in David's time and in all the Ministery of the Old TeTestament but having a River of living water within them to make them fruitful of goods works and bringing their fruit in due season fruits worthy of amendment of life 1. But the principal thing is this Confirmation is the consummation and perfection the corroboration and strength of Baptism and Baptismal Grace for in Baptism we undertake to do our duty but in Confirmation we receive strength to do it in Baptism others promise for us in Confirmation we undertake for our selves we ease our God-fathers and God-mothers of their burthen and take it upon our own shoulders together with the advantage of the Prayers of the Bishop and all the Church made then on our behalf in Baptism we give up our names to Christ but in Confirmation we put our Seal to the Profession and God puts his Seal to the Promise It is very remarkable what S. Paul says of the beginnings of our being Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word of the beginning of Christ Christ begins with us he gives us his word and admits us and we by others hands are brought in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is the form of Doctrine unto which ye were delivered Cajetan observes right That this is a new and emphatical way of speaking we are wholly immerged in our Fundamentals other things are delivered to us but we are delivered up unto these This is done in Baptism and Catechism and what was the event of it Being then made free from sin ye became the Servants of Righteousness Your Baptism was for the Remission of sins there and then ye were made free from that bondage and what then why then in the next place when ye came to consummate this procedure when the Baptized was Confirmed then he became a servant of righteousness that is then the Holy Ghost descended upon you and enabled you to walk in the Spirit then the seed of God was first thrown into your hearts by a celestial influence Spiritus Sanctus in Baptisterio plenitudinem tribuit ad innocentiam sed in Confirmatione augmentum praestat ad gratiam said Eusebius Emissenus In Baptism we are made innocent in Confirmation we receive the increase of the Spirit of Grace in that we are regenerated unto life in this we are strengthned unto battel Dono sapientiae illuminamur aedificamur erudimur instruimur confirmamur ut illam Sancti Spiritûs vocem audire possimus Intellectum tibi dabo instruam te in hac vitâ quâ gradieris said P. Melchiades We are inlightned by the gift of wisdom we are built up taught instructed and confirmed so that we may hear that voice of the Holy Spirit I will give unto thee an understanding heart and teach thee in the way wherein thou shalt walk For so Signari populos effuso pignore sancto Mirandae virtutis opus It is a work of great and wonderful power when the holy Pledge of God is poured forth upon the people This is that Power from on high which first descended in Pentecost and afterward was ministred by Prayer and Imposition of the Apostolical and Episcopal hands and comes after the other gift of Remission of sins Vides quòd non simpliciter hoc fit sed multâ opus est virtute ut detur Spiritus Sanctus Non enim idem est assequi remissionem peccatorum accipere virtutem illam said S. Chrysostom You see that this is not easily done but there is need of much power from on high to give the Holy Spirit for it is not all one to obtain Remission of sins and to have received this vertue or power from above Quamvis enim continuò transituris sufficiant Regenerationis beneficia victuris tamen necessaria sunt Confirmationis auxilia said Melchiades Although to them that die presently the benefits of Regeneration Baptismal are sufficient yet to them that live the Auxiliaries of Confirmation are necessary For according to the saying of S. Leo in his Epistle to Nicetas the Bishop of Aquileia commanding that Hereticks returning to the Church should be Confirmed with invocation of the Holy Spirit and Imposition of hands they have only received the form of Baptism sine sanctificationis virtute without the vertue of Sanctification meaning that this is the proper effect of Confirmation For in short Although the newly-lifted Souldiers in humane warfare are inrolled in the number of them that are to fight yet they are not brought to battel till they be more trained and exercised So although by Baptism every one is ascribed into the catalogue of Believers yet he receives more strength and grace for the sustaining and overcoming the temptations of the Flesh the World and the Devil only by Imposition of the Bishops hands They are words which I borrowed from a late Synod at Rhemes That 's the first remark of blessing In Confirmation we receive strength to do all that which was for us undertaken in Baptism For the Apostles themselves as the H. Fathers observe were timorous in the Faith until they were Confirmed in Pentecost but after
give very great assistances to Episcopal Government and yet be no warranty for Tyrannical and although even the Sayings of the Fathers is greater warranty for Episcopacy and weighs more than all that can be said against it Yet from thence nothing can be drawn to warrant to any man an Empire over Consciences and therefore as the probability of it can be used to one effect so the fallibility of it is also of use to another but yet even of this no man is to make any use in general but when he hath a necessity and a greater reason in the particular and I therefore have joyn'd these two Books in one Volume because they differ not at all in the design nor in the real purposes to which by their variety they minister I will not pretend to any special reason of the inserting any of the other Books into this Volume it is the design of my Bookseller to bring all that he can into a like Volume excepting only some Books of devotion which in a lesser Volume are more fit for use As for the Doctrine and Practice of Repentance which because I suppose it may so much contribute to the interest of a good life and is of so great and so necessary consideration to every person that desires to be instructed in the way of godliness and would assure his salvation by all means I was willing to publish it first in the lesser Volume that men might not by the encreasing price of a larger be hindred from doing themselves the greatest good to which I can minister which I humbly suppose to be done I am sure I intended to have done in that Book And now my Lord I humbly desire that although the presenting this Volume to your Lordship can neither promote that honour which is and ought to be the greatest and is by the advantages of your worthiness already made publick nor obtain to it self any security or defence from any injury to which without remedy it must be exposed yet if you please to expound it as a testimony of that great value I have for you though this signification is too little for it yet I shall be at ease a while till I can converse with your Lordship by something more proportionable to those greatest regards which you have merited of mankind but more especially of My Lord Your Lordships most affectionate Servant JER TAYLOR THE CONTENTS and ORDER of the whole Volume The Apologie for Liturgie THE Authors PREFACE to the Apology for Authorized and Set Forms of Liturgy Quest. 1. Whether all Set Forms are unlawful Page 2 2. Whether are better in publick Set Forms injoyned by Authority or Set Forms composed by private Preachers Sect. 51. pag. 13 Episcopacy Asserted Sect. 1. CHrist did institute a government in his Church pag. 45 2. This Government was first committed to the Apostles by Christ. 46 3. With a power of joyning others and appointing Successors 47 4. This Succession is made by Bishops 48 § For the Apostle and Bishop are all one in Name and Person ibid. 5. and Office 49 6. Which Christ himself hath made distinct from Presbyters 50 7. Giving to Apostles a power to do some offices perpetually necessary which to others he gave not 51 § as of Ordination ibid. 8. and Confirmation 52 9. and Superiority of Jurisdiction 55 10. So that Bishops are Successors in the office of Apostleship according to Antiquity 11. and particularly of S. Peter 61 12. And the institution of Episcopacy expressed to be jure divino by Primitive Authority 63 13. In pursuance of the Divine Institution the Apostles did ordain Bishops in several Churches as S. James and S. Simeon at Jerusalem 65 14. S. Timothy at Ephesus 67 15. S. Titus at Crete 70 16. S. Mark at Alexandria 73 17. S. Linus and S. Clement at Rome 74 18. S. Polycarp at Smyrna and divers others 75 19. So that Episcopacy is at least an Apostolical ordinance of the same authority with many other points generally believed 76 20. And was an office of Power and great Authority 77 21. Not lessened by the counsel and assistance of Presbyters ibid. 22. And all this hath been the Faith and practice of Christendom 84 23. Who first distinguished names used before in common 85 24. Appropriating the word Episcopus to the supreme Church-officer 89 25. Calling the Bishop and him only the Pastor of the Church 91 26. and Doctor 92 27. and Pontifex ibid. 28. And these were a distinct order from the rest 94 29. To which the Presbyterate was but a degree 96 30. There being a peculiar manner of Ordination to a Bishoprick 31. To which Presbyters never did assist by imposing hands 97 32. For a Bishop had a power distinct and superior to that of Presbyters As of Ordination 101 33. and Confirmation 108 34. and Jurisdiction Which they expressed in attributes of authority and great power 111 35. Requiring universal obedience to be given to Bishops by Clergie and Laity 113 36. Appointing them to be Judges of the Clergie and Laity in spiritual causes 115 37. Forbidding Presbyters to officiate without Episcopal license 125 38. Reserving Church Goods to Episcopal dispensation 129 39. Forbidding Presbyters to leave their own Dioecese or to travel without leave of the Bishop 129 40. And the Bishop had power to prefer which of his Clerks he pleased 130 41. Bishops only did vote in Council and neither Presbyters nor People 133 42. The Bishops had a propriety in the persons of their Clerks 138 43. Their Jurisdiction was over many Congregations or Parishes 139 44. And was aided by Presbyters but not impaired 144 45. So that the Government of the Church by Bishops was believed necessary 148 46. For they are Schismaticks that separate from their Bishop 149 47. And Hereticks 150 48. And Bishops were always in the Church men of great honour 152 49. And trusted with affairs of Secular interest 157 50. And therefore were forced to delegate their power and put others in substitution 163 51. But they were ever Clergie-men for there never was any Lay-Elders in any Church-office heard of in the Church 164 A Discourse of the Real Presence Sect. 1. THE state of the Question 181 2. Transubstantiation not warrantable by Scripture 186 3. Of the Sixth Chapter of S. John's Gospel 188 4. Of the words of Institution 198 5. Of the Particle Hoc in the words of Institution 201 6. Of these words Hoc est corpus meum 208 7. Considerations of the manner circumstances and annexes of the Institution 213 8. Of the Arguments of the Romanists from Scripture 217 9. Arguments from other Texts of Scripture proving Christ's Real Presence in the Sacrament to be only Spiritual not Natural 219 10. The doctrine of Transubstantiation is against Sense 223 11. The doctrine of Transubstantiation is wholly without and against reason 230 12. Transubstantiation was not the doctrine of the Primitive Church 249 13. Of Adoration of the Sacrament 267 The
provision at all is made in the Directorie and the very administration of the Sacraments left so loosely that if there be any thing essential in the Forms of Sacraments the Sacrament may become ineffectual for want of due Words and due Administration I say he that considers all these things and many more he may consider will find that particular men are not fit to be intrusted to offer in Publick with their private Spirit to God for the people in such Solemnities in matters of so great concernment where the Honour of God the benefit of the People the interest of Kingdoms the being of a Church the unity of Minds the conformity of Practice the truth of Perswasion and the salvation of Souls are so much concerned as they are in the publick Prayers of a whole National Church An unlearned man is not to be trusted and a Wise man dare not trust himself he that is ignorant cannot he that is knowing will not THE END OF THE SACRED ORDER AND OFFICES OF EPISCOPACY BY Divine Institution Apostolical Tradition and Catholick Practice TOGETHER WITH Their Titles of Honour Secular Imployment Manner of Election Delegation of their Power and other Appendant Questions Asserted against the Aërians and Acephali New and Old By JER TAYLOR D. D. and Chaplain in Ordinary to King CHARLES the First Published by His MAJESTIES Command ROM 13.1 There is no Power but of God The Powers that be are ordained of God CONCIL CHALCED 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 LONDON Printed for R. Royston Bookseller to the King 's most Excellent MAJESTY M DC LXXIII TO THE Truly Worthy and Most Accomplisht Sir CHRISTOPHER HATTON Knight of the Honourable Order of the BATH SIR I AM ingag'd in the defence of a Great Truth and I would willingly find a shroud to cover my self from danger and calumny and although the cause both is and ought to be defended by Kings yet my person must not go thither to Sanctuary unless it be to pay my devotion and I have now no other left for my defence I am robb'd of that which once did bless me and indeed still does but in another manner and I hope will do more but those distillations of celestial dews are conveyed in Channels not pervious to an eye of sense and now adays we seldom look with other be the object never so beauteous or alluring You may then think Sir I am forc'd upon You may that beg my pardon and excuse but I should do an injury to Your Nobleness if I should only make You a refuge for my need pardon this truth you are also of the fairest choice not only for Your love of Learning for although that be eminent in You yet it is not your eminence but for your duty to H. Church for Your loyalty to his sacred Majesty These did prompt me with the greatest confidence to hope for Your fair incouragement and assistance in my pleadings for Episcopacy in which cause Religion and Majesty the King and the Church are interested as parties of mutual concernment There was an odde observation made long ago and registred in the Law to make it authentick Laici sunt infensi Clericis Now the Clergie pray but fight not and therefore if not specially protected by the King contra Ecclesiam Malignantium they are made obnoxious to all the contumelies and injuries which an envious multitude will inflict upon them It was observ'd enough in King Edgars time Quamvis decreta Pontificum verba Sacerdotum inconvulsis ligaminibus velut fundamenta montiurn fixa sunt tamen plerumque tempestatibus turbinibus saecularium rerum Religio S. Matris Ecclesiae maculis reproborum dissipatur ac rumpitur Idcirco Decrevimus Nos c. There was a sad example of it in K. John's time For when he threw the Clergie from his Protection it is incredible what injuries what affronts what robberies yea what murders were committed upon the Bishops and Priests of H. Church whom neither the Sacredness of their persons nor the Laws of God nor the terrors of Conscience nor fears of Hell nor Church-censures nor the laws of Hospitality could protect from Scorn from blows from slaughter Now there being so near a tye as the necessity of their own preservation in the midst of so apparent danger it will tye the Bishops hearts and hands to the King faster than all the tyes of Lay-Allegiance all the Political tyes I mean all that are not precisely religious and obligations in the Court of Conscience 2. But the interest of the Bishops is conjunct with the prosperity of the King besides the interest of their own security by the obligation of secular advantages For they who have their livelihood from the King and are in expectance of their fortune from him are more likely to pay a tribute of exacter duty than others whose fortunes are not in such immediate dependency on his Majesty Aeneas Sylvius once gave a merry reason why Clerks advanced the Pope above a Council viz. because the Pope gave spiritual promotions but the Councils gave none It is but the common expectation of gratitude that a Patron Paramount shall be more assisted by his Beneficiaries in cases of necessity than by those who receive nothing from him but the common influences of Government 3. But the Bishops duty to the King derives it self from a higher fountain For it is one of the main excellencies in Christianity that it advances the State and well-being of Monarchies and bodies Politick Now then the Fathers of Religion are the Reverend Bishops whose peculiar office it is to promote the interests of Christianity are by the nature and essential requisites of their office bound to promote the Honour and Dignity of Kings whom Christianity would have so much honour'd as to establish the just subordination of people to their Prince upon better principles than ever no less than their precise duty to God and the hopes of a blissful immortality Here then is utile honestum and necessarium to tye Bishops in duty to Kings and a threefold Cord is not easily broken In pursuance of these obligations Episcopacy pays three returns of tribute to Monarchy 1. The first is the Duty of their people For they being by God himself set over souls judges of the most secret recesses of our Consciences and the venerable Priests under them have more power to keep men in their dutious subordination to the Prince than there is in any secular power by how much more forcible the impressions of the Conscience are than all the external violence in the world And this power they have fairly put into act for there was never any Protestant Bishop yet in Rebellion unless he turned recreant to his Order and it is the honour of the Church of England that all her Children and obedient people are full of indignation against Rebels be they of any interest or party whatsoever For here and for it we thank God and good Princes Episcopacy hath been preserved
in fair priviledges and honour and God hath blest and honour'd Episcopacy with the conjunction of a loyal people As if because in the law of Nature the Kingdom and Priesthood were joyned in one person it were natural and consonant to the first justice that Kings should defend the rites of the Church and the Church advance the honour of Kings And when I consider that the first Bishop that was exauctorated was a Prince too Prince and Bishop of Geneva methinks it was an ill Omen that the cause of the Prince and the Bishop should be in Conjunction ever after 2. A second return that Episcopacy makes to Royalty is that which is the Duty of all Christians the paying tributes and impositions And though all the Kings Liege people do it yet the issues of their duty and liberality are mightily disproportionate if we consider their unequal Number and Revenues And if Clergie-subsidies be estimated according to the smallness of their revenue and paucity of persons it will not be half so short of the number and weight of Crowns from Lay Dispensation as it does far exceed in the proportion of the Donative 3. But the assistance that the Kings of England had in their Councils and affairs of greatest difficulty from the great ability of Bishops and other the Ministers of the Church I desire to represent in the words of K. Alvred to Walfsigeus the Bishop in an Epistle where he deplores the misery of his own age by comparing it with the former times when the Bishops were learned and exercised in publick Councils Foelicia tum tempora fuerunt inter omnes Angliae populos Reges Deo scriptae ejus voluntati obsecundârunt in suâ pace bellicis expeditionibus atque regimine domestico domi se semper tutati fuerint atque etiam foris nobilitatem suam dilataverint The reason was as he insinuates before Sapientes extiterunt in Anglica gente de spirituali gradu c. The Bishops were able by their great learning and wisdom to give assistance to the Kings affairs And they have prosper'd in it for the most glorious issues of Divine Benison upon this Kingdom were conveyed to us by Bishops hands I mean the Vnion of the houses of York and Lancaster by the Counsels of Bishop Morton and of England and Scotland by the treaty of Bishop Fox to which if we add two other in Materia religionis I mean the conversion of the Kingdom from Paganism by St. Augustin Arch-bishop of Canterbury and the reformation begun and promoted by Bishops I think we cannot call to mind four blessings equal to these in any Age or Kingdom in all which God was pleased by the mediation of Bishops as he useth to do to bless the people And this may not only be expected in reason but in good Divinity for amongst the gifts of the spirit which God hath given to his Church are reckoned Doctors Teachers and helps in government To which may be added this advantage that the services of Church-men are rewardable upon the Churches stock no need to disimprove the Royal Banks to pay thanks to Bishops But Sir I grow troublesome Let this discourse have what ends it can the use I make of it is but to pretend reason for my boldness and to entitle You to my Book For I am confident you will own any thing that is but a friends friend to a cause of Loyalty I have nothing else to plead for your acceptance but the confidence of your Goodness and that I am a person capable of your pardon and of a fair interpretation of my address to you by being SIR Your most affectionate Servant JER TAYLOR The goodly CEDAR of Apostolick Catholick EPISCOPACY 〈…〉 d with the moderne Shoots Slips of divided NOVELTIES in the Church 16â—â— Place this Figure at Page 43. OF THE SACRED ORDER and OFFICES OF EPISCOPACY BY Divine Institution Apostolical Tradition and Catholick practice c. IN all those accursed machinations which the device and artifice of Hell hath invented for the supplanting of the Church Inimicus homo that old superseminator of heresies and crude mischiefs hath endeavoured to be curiously compendious and with Tarquins device putare summa papaverum And therefore in the three ages of Martyrs it was a rul'd case in that Burgundian forge Qui prior erat dignitate prior trahebatur ad Martyrium The Priests but to be sure the Bishops must pay for all Tolle impios Polycarpus requiratur Away with these pedling persecutions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lay the axe at the root of the tree Insomuch that in Rome from Saint Peter and Saint Paul to Saint Sylvester thirty three Bishops of Rome in immediate succession suffered an Honourable and glorious Martyrdom unless Meltiades be perhaps excepted whom Eusebius and Optatus report to have lived all the time of the third Consulship of Constantine and Lucinius Conteret caput ejus was the glorious promise Christ should break the Devils head and though the Devils active part of the Duel was far less yet he would venture at that too even to strike at the heads of the Church capita vicaria for the head of all was past his striking now And this I say he offered to do by Martyrdom but that in stead of breaking crowned them His next onset was by Julian and occidere Presbyterium that was his Province To shut up publick Schools to force Christians to ignorance to impoverish and disgrace the Clergie to make them vile and dishonourable these are his arts and he did the Devil more service in this fineness of undermining than all the open battery of the ten great Rams of persecution But this would not take For that which is without cannot defile a man So it is in the Church too Cedunt in bonum all violences ab extrá But therefore besides these he attempted by heresies to rent the Churches bowels all in pieces but the good Bishops gathered up the scattered pieces and reunited them at Nice at Constantinople at Ephesus at Chalcedon at Carthage at Rome and in every famous place of Christendom and by Gods goodness and the Bishops industry Catholick religion was conserved in Unity and integrity Well however it is Antichrist must come at last and the great Apostasie foretold must be and this not without means proportionable to the production of so great declensions of Christianity When ye hear of wars and rumors of wars be not afraid said our Blessed Saviour the end is not yet It is not War that will do this great work of destruction for then it might have been done long ere now What then will do it We shall know when we see it In the mean time when we shall find a new device of which indeed the platform was laid in Aerius and the Acephali brought to a good possibility of compleating a thing that whosoever shall hear his ears shall tingle an abomination of desolation standing where it
Ministers for they were Doctors or Teachers and that 's not all for they were Prophets too This even at first sight is more than the ordinary office of the Presbytery We shall see this clear enough in Saint Paul where the ordinary office of Prophets is reckoned before Pastors before Evangelists next to Apostles that is next to such Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Saint Paul there expresses it next to those Apostles to whom Christ hath given immediate mission And these are therefore Apostles too Apostles secundi ordinis none of the twelve but such as Saint James and Epaphroditus and Barnabas and Saint Paul himself To be sure they were such Prophets as Saint Paul and Barnabas for they are reckoned in the number by Saint Luke for here it was that Saint Paul although he had immediate vocation by Christ yet he had particular ordination to his Apostolate or Ministery of the Gentiles It is evident then what Prophets these were they were at the least more than ordinary Presbyters and therefore they imposed hands and they only And yet to make the business up compleat Saint Mark was amongst them but he imposed no hands he was there as the Deacon and Minister vers 5. but he medled not Saint Luke fixes the whole action upon the Prophets such as Saint Paul himself was and so did the Holy Ghost too but neither did Saint Mark who was an Evangelist and one of the 72. Disciples as he is reckoned in the Primitive Catalogues by Eusebius and Dorotheus nor any of the Colledge of the Antiochian Presbyters that were less than Prophets that is who were not more than meer Presbyters The sum is this Imposition of hands is a duty and office necessary for the perpetuating of a Church ne gens sit Vnius aetatis lest it expire in one age this power of imposition of hands for Ordination was fixt upon the Apostles and Apostolick men and not communicated to the 72. Disciples or Presbyters for the Apostles and Apostolick men did so de facto and were commanded to do so and the 72. never did so therefore this Office and Ministery of the Apostolate is distinct and superiour to that of Presbyters and this distinction must be so continued to all ages of the Church for the thing was not temporary but productive of issue and succession and therefore as perpetual as the Clergy as the Church it self SECT VIII And Confirmation SECONDLY The Apostles did impose hands for confirmation of Baptized people and this was a perpetual act of a power to be succeeded to and yet not communicated nor executed by the 72. or any other mere Presbyter That the Apostles did confirm Baptized people and others of the inferiour Clergy could not is beyond all exception clear in the case of the Samaritan Christians Acts 8. For when Saint Philip had converted and Baptized the Men of Samaria the Apostles sent Peter and John to lay their hands on them that they might receive the Holy Ghost Saint Philip he was an Evangelist he was one of the 72. Disciples a Presbyter and appointed to the same ministration that Saint Stephen was about the poor Widdows yet he could not do this the Apostles must and did This giving of the Holy Ghost by imposition of the Apostles hands was not for a miraculous gift but an ordinary Grace For Saint Philip could and did do miracles enough but this Grace he could not give the Grace of consigning or confirmation The like case is in Acts 12. where some people having been Baptized at Ephesus Saint Paul confirmed them giving them the Holy Ghost by imposition of hands The Apostles did it not the twelve only but Apostolick men the other Apostles Saint Paul did it Saint Philip could not nor any of the 72. or any other mere Presbyters ever did it that we find in Holy Scripture Yea but this imposition of hands was for a Miraculous issue for the Ephesine Christians received the Holy Ghost and spake with tongues and prophesied which effect because it is ceased certainly the thing was temporary and long ago expired First Not for this reason to be sure For extraordinary effects may be temporary when the function which they attest may be eternal and therefore are no signs of an extraordinary Ministery The Apostles preaching was attended by Miracles and extraordinary conversions of people ut in exordio Apostolos divinorum signorum comitabantur effectus Spiritûs Sancti gratia ità ut videres unâ alloquutione integros simul populos ad cultum divinae religionis adduci praedicantium verbis non esse tardiorem audientium fidem as Eusebius tells of the success of the preaching of some Evangelists yet I hope preaching must not now cease because no Miracles are done or that to convert one man now would be the greatest Miracle The Apostles when they cursed and anathematized a delinquent he dyed suddenly as in the case of Ananias and Saphira whom Saint Peter slew with the word of his Ministery and yet now although these extraordinary issues cease it is not safe venturing upon the curses of the Church When the Apostles did excommunicate a sinner he was presently delivered over to Satan to be buffeted that is to be afflicted with corporal punishments and now although no such exterminating Angels beat the bodies of persons excommunicate yet the power of excommunication I hope still remains in the Church and the power of the Keys is not also gone So also in the power of confirmation which however attended by a visible miraculous descent of the Holy Ghost in gifts of languages and healing yet like other miracles in respect of the whole integrity of Christian faith these miracles at first did confirm the function and the faith for ever Now then that this right of imposing hands for confirming of baptized people was not to expire with the persons of the Apostles appears from these considerations First Because Christ made a promise of sending Vicarium suum Spiritum the Holy Ghost in his stead and this by way of appropriation is called the promise of the Father This was pertinent to all Christendom Effundam de spiritu meo super omnem carnem so it was in the Prophecy For the promise is to you and to your Children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to all them that are afar off even to as many as the Lord shall call So it was in the first accomplishing To all And this for ever for I will send the Holy Ghost unto you and he shall abide with you for ever for it was in subsidium to supply the comforts of his desired presence and must therefore ex vi intentionis be remanent till Christ's coming again Now then this promise being to be communicated to all and that for ever must either come to us by 1. Extraordinary and miraculous mission or by 2. an ordinary Ministery Not the first for we might as well expect the gift of Miracles
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Peter and S. John although they were honoured of our Lord yet they would not themselves be but made James sirnamed the Just Bishop of Jerusalem and the reason is that which is given by Hegesippus in Eusebius for his successor Simeon Cleophae for when S. James was crowned with Martyrdom and immediately the City destroyed Traditur Apostolos qui supererant in commune consilium habuisse quem oportere dignum successione Jacobi judicari It was concluded for Simeon because he was the Kinsman of our Lord as S. James also his Predecessor The same concerning S. James is also repeated by Eusebius Judaei ergo cùm Paulus provocâsset ad Caesarem in Jacobum fratrem Domini cui ab Apostolis sedes Hierosolymitana delata fuit omnem suam malevolentiam convertunt In the Apostolical constitutions under the name of S. Clement the Apostles are brought in speaking thus De ordinatis autem à nobis Episcopis in vitâ nostrâ significamus vobis quòd hi sunt Hierosolymis ordinatus est Jacobus Frater Domini S. James the Brother of our Lord was ordained Bishop of Jerusalem by us Apostles The same is witnessed by Anacletus Porrò Hierosolymitarum primus Episcopus B. Jacobus qui Justus dicebatur secundum carnem Domini nuncupatus est frater à Petro Jacobo Johanne Apostolis est ordinatus And the same thing in terms is repeated by Anicetus with a Scimus enim Beatissimum Jacobum c. Just as Anacletus before S. James was Bishop of Jerusalem and Peter James and Iohn were his Ordainers But let us see the testimony of one of S. Iames his Successors in the same Chair who certainly was the best witness of his own Church Records S. Cyrill of Jerusalem is the man Nam de his non mihi solum sed etiam Apostolis Jacobo hujus Ecclesiae olim Episcopo curae fuit speaking of the question of circumcision and things sacrificed to Idols and again he calls S. Iames primum hujus parochiae Episcopum the first Bishop of this Diocess S. Austin also attests this story Cathedra tibi quid fecit Ecclesiae in quâ Petrus sedit in quâ hodiè Anastasius sedet Vel Ecclesiae Hierosolymitanae In qua Jacobus Sedit in quâ hodiè Iohannes sedet I must not omit the testimony of S. Ierome for it will be of great use in the sequel Iacobus saith he post passionem Domini statim ab Apostolis Hierosolymorum Episcopus ordinatus and the same also he repeats out of Hegesippus There are many more testimonies to this purpose as of S. Chrysostome Epiphanius S. Ambrose the Council of Constantinople in Trullo But Gregorius Turonensis rises a little higher Iacobus Frater Domini vocitatus ab ipso Domino nostro Iesu Christo Episcopus dicitur ordinatus S. James the Brother of our Lord is said to have been ordained Bishop by our Lord Iesus Christ himself If by Ordinatus he means designatus he agrees with S. Chrysostome But either of them both will serve the turn for the present But either in one sence or the other it is true and attested also by Epiphanius Et primus hic accepit Cathedram Episcopatûs cui concredidit Dominus thronum suum in terra primó S. James had first the Episcopal chair for our Lord first intrusted his earthly throne to him And thus we are incircled with a cloud of witnesses to all which if we add what I before observed that S. Iames is in Scripture called an Apostle and yet he was none of the twelve and that in the sence of Scripture and the Catholick Church a Bishop and an Apostle is all one it follows from the premisses and of them already there is faith enough made that S. Iames was by Christs own designation and ordination Apostolical made Bishop of the Church of Ierusalem that is had power Apostolical concredited to him which Presbyters had not and this Apostolate was limited and fixed as his Successors since have been But that this also was not a temporary business and to expire with the persons of S. Iames and the first Apostles but a regiment of ordinary and successive duty in the Church it appears by the ordination of S. Simeon the son of Cleophas to be his Successor It is witnessed by Eusebius Post martyrium Iacobi traditur Apostolos c. habuisse in commune Concilium quem oporteret dignum successione Iacobi judicari omnesque uno consilio atque uno consensu Simeonem Cleophae filium decrevisse ut Episcopatûs sedem susciperet The same also he transcribes out of Hegesippus posteaquam Iacobus Martyr effectus est electione divina Simeon Cleophae filius Episcopus ordinatur electus ab omnibus pro eo quòd esset consobrinus Domini S. Simeon was ordained Bishop by a divine election And Epiphanius in the Catalogue of the Bishops of Ierusalem reckons first Iames and next Simeon Qui sub Trajano crucifixus est SECT XIV S. Timothy at Ephesus THE next Bishop we find ordained by the Apostles was Timothy at Ephesus That he was ordain'd by an Apostle appears in Scripture For S. Paul imposed hands on him that 's certain Excita Gratiam quae in te est per impositionem manuum mearum By the laying on of my hands That he was there a Bishop is also apparent from the power and offices concredited to him First He was to be resident at Ephesus And although for the publick necessities of the Church and for assistance to S. Paul he might be called sometimes from his Charge yet there he lived and died as the Church story writes there was his ordinary residence and his avocations were but temporary and occasional And when it was his cure was supplied by Tychicus whom S. Paul sent to Ephesus as his Vicar as I shall shew hereafter 2. S. Paul in his Epistles to him gave directions to him for Episcopal deportment as is plain A Bishop must be blameless the husband of one wife c. Thirdly S. Paul concredits jurisdiction to S. Timothy Over the people 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is of as great extent in S. Timothies commission as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Commanding as teaching Over Presbyters but yet so as to make difference between them and the Neotericks in Christianity the one as Fathers the other as Brethren 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is denied to be used towards either of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Suidas a dishonourable upbraiding or objurgation Nay it is more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is castigo plagam infero saith Budaeus so that that kind of Rebuking the Bishop is forbidden to use either toward Priest or Deacon Clergy or Laity Old or Young For a Bishop must be no striker But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that 's given him in commission both to old and young Presbyters and Catechumens that is Require them postula
faith of the Primitive Church And yet the ordination of S. Mark was within the term of S. Lukes story for his successor Anianus was made Bishop of Alexandria in the eighth year of Nero's reign five or six years before the death of S. Paul Igitur Neronis primo Imperii anno post Marcum Evangelistam Ecclesiae apud Alexandriam Anianus Sacerdotium suscepit So the Latin of Ruffinus reads it in stead of octavo Sacerdotium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Bishoprick for else there were many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Priests in Alexandria besides him and how then he should be S. Marks successor more than the other Presbyters is not so soon to be contrived But so the Collecta of the Chapter runs Quod post Marcum primus Episcopus Alexandrinae Ecclesiae ordinatus sit Anianus Anianus was consecrated the first Bishop of Alexandria after S. Mark * And Philo the Jew telling the story of the Christians in Alexandria called by the inhabitants Cultores and Cultrices The worshippers Addit autem adhuc his saith Eusebius quomodò sacerdotes vel Ministri exhibeant officia sua vel quae sit supra omnia Episcopalis apicis sedes intimating that beside the offices of Priests and Ministers there was an Episcopal dignity which was apex super omnia a height above all imployments established at Alexandria and how soon that was is soon computed for Philo lived in our blessed Saviour's time and was Embassador to the Emperor Caius and survived S. Mark a little But S. Jerome will strike up this business A Marco Evangelistâ ad Heraclam usque Dionysium Episcopos Presbyteri Aegypti semper unum ex se electum in celsiori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant And again Marcus interpres Apostoli Petri Alexandrinae Ecclesiae primus Episcopus The same is witnessed by S. Gregory Nicephorus and divers others Now although the ordination of S. Mark is not specified in the Acts as innumerable multitudes of things more and scarce any thing at all of any of the twelve but S. Peter nothing of S. James the son of Thaddaeus nor of Alpheus but the Martyrdom of one of them nothing of S. Bartholomew of S. Thomas of Simon zelotes of S. Jude the Apostle scarce any of their names recorded yet no wise man can distrust the faith of such records which all Christendom hitherto so far as we know hath acknowledged as authentick and these ordinations cannot possibly go less than Apostolical being done in the Apostles times to whom the care of all the Churches was concredited they seeing and beholding several successions in several Churches before their death as here at Alexandria first S. Mark then Anianus made Bishop five or six years before the death of S. Peter and S. Paul But yet who it was that ordained S. Mark Bishop of Alexandria for Bishop he was most certainly is not obscurely intimated by the most excellent man S. Gelasius in the Roman Council Marcus à Petro Apostolo in Aegyptum directus verbum veritatis praedicavit gloriosè consummavit Martyrium S. Peter sent him into Aegypt to found a Church and therefore would furnish him with all things requisite for so great imployment and that could be no less than the ordinary power Apostolical SECT XVII S. Linus and S. Clement at Rome BUT in the Church of Rome the ordination of Bishops by the Apostles and their successions during the times of the Apostles is very manifest by a concurrent testimony of old writers Fundantes igitur instruentes beati Apostoli Ecclesiam Lino Episcopatum administrandae Ecclesiae tradiderunt Hujus Lini Paulus in his quae sunt ad Timotheum Epistolis meminit Succedit autem ei Anacletus post eum tertio loco ab Apostolis Episcopatum sortitur Clemens qui vidit ipsos Apostolos contulit cum eis cum adhuc insonantem praedicationem Apostolorum traditionem ante oculos haberet So S. Irenaeus Memoratur autem ex comitibus Pauli Crescens quidam ad Gallias esse praefectus Linus vero Clemens in urbe Româ Ecclesiae praefuisse Many more testimonies there are of these mens being ordained Bishops of Rome by the Apostles as of Tertullian Optatus S. Augustin and S. Hierom. But I will not cloy my Reader with variety of one dish and be tedious in a thing so evident and known SECT XVIII S. Polycarp at Smyrna and divers others S. JOHN ordained S. Polycarp Bishop at Smyrna Sicut Smyrnaeorum Ecclesia habens Polycarpum ab Johanne collocatum refert sicut Romanorum Clementem à Petro ordinatum edit proinde utique caeterae exhibent quos ab Apostolis in Episcopatum constitutos Apostolici seminis traduces habeant So Tertullian The Church of Smyrna saith that Polycarp was placed there by Saint John as the Church of Rome saith that Clement was ordained there by S. Peter and other Churches have those whom the Apostles made to be their Bishops Polycarpus autem non solum ab Apostolis edoctus sed etiam ab Apostolis in Asiâ in eâ quae est Smyrnis Ecclesia constitutus Episcopus testimonium his perhibent quae sunt in Asia Ecclesiae omnes qui usque adhuc successerunt Polycarpo c. The same also is witnessed by S. Jerome and Eusebius Quoniam autem valde longum est in tali volumine omnium Ecclesiarum successiones enumerare to use S. Irenaeus his expression It were an infinite labour to reckon up all those whom the Apostles made Bishops with their own hands as Dionysius the Areopagite at Athens Caius at Thessalonica Archippus at Colosse Onesimus at Ephesus Anâ—ipas at Pergamus Epaphroditus at Philippi Crescens among the Gaules Evodias at Antioch Sosipater at Iconium Erastus in Macedonia Trophimus at Arles Jason at Tarsus Silas at Corinth Onesiphorus at Colophon Quartus at Berytus Paul the Proconsul at Narbona besides many more whose names are not recorded in Scripture as these fore-cited are so many as Eusebius counts impossible to enumerate it shall therefore suffice to summe up this digest of their Acts and Ordinations in those general foldings used by the Fathers saying that the Apostles did ordain Bishops in all Churches that the succession of Bishops down from the Apostles first Ordination of them was the only argument to prove their Churches Catholick and their adversaries who could not do so to be Heretical This also is very evident and of great consideration in the first Ages while their tradition was clear and evident and not so be-pudled as it since hath been with the mixture of Hereticks striving to spoil that which did so much mischief to their causes Edant origines Ecclesiarum suarum evolvant ordinem Episcoporum suorum ita per successiones ab initio decurrentem ut primus ille Episcopus aliquem ex Apostolis aut Apostolicis viris habuerit
much exact in requiring the capacity of the person as the Number of the Ordainers But let them answer it For my part I believe that the imposition of hands by Andreas was no more in that case than if a lay-man had done it it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and though the ordination was absolutely Uncanonical yet it being in the exigence of Necessity and being done by two Bishops according to the Apostolical Canon it was valid in naturâ rei though not in forma Canonis and the addition of the Priest was but to cheat the Canon and cozen himself into an impertinent belief of a Canonical ordination 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Council of Sardis Bishops must ordain Bishops It was never heard that Priests did or de jure might These premises do most certainly infer a real difference between Episcopacy and the Presbyterate But whether or no they infer a difference of order or only of degree or whether degree and order be all one or no is of great consideration in the present and in relation to many other Questions 1. Then it is evident that in Antiquity Ordo and Gradus were used promiscuously 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was the Greek word and for it the Latins used Ordo as is evident in the instances above mentioned to which add that Anacletus says that Christ did instituere duos Ordines Episcoporum Sacerdotum And S. Leo affirâ—â— Primum ordinem esse Episcopalem secundum Presbyteralem tertium Leviticum And these among the Greeks are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 three degrees So the order of Deaconship in S. Paul is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a good degree and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. is a censure used alike in the censures of Bishops Priests and Deacons They are all of the same Name and the same consideration for order distance and degree amongst the Fathers Gradus and Ordo are equally affirmed of them all and the word Gradus is used sometimes for that which is called Ordo most frequently So Felix writing to S. Austin Non tantum ego possum contra tuam virtutem quia mira virtus est Gradus Episcopalis and S. Cyprian of Cornelius Ad Sacerdotii sublime fastigium cunctis religionis Gradibus ascendit Degree and Order are used in common for he that speaks most properly will call that an Order in persons which corresponds to a degree in qualities and neither of the words are wronged by a mutual substitution 2. The promotion of a Bishop ad Munus Episcopale was at first called ordinatio Episcopi Stir up the Grace that is in thee juxta ordinationem tuam in Episcopatum saith Sedulius And S. Hierom prophetiae gratiam habebat cum Ordinatione Episcopatus Neque enim fas erat aut licebat ut inferior Ordinaret majorem saith S. Ambrose proving that Presbyters might not impose hands on a Bishop * Romanorum Ecclesia Clementem à Petro Ordinatum edit saith Tertulliâ—n and S. Hierome affirms that S. James was Ordained Bishop of Jerusalem immediately after the Passion of our Lord. Ordinatus was the the word at first and afterwards Consecratus came in conjunction with it when Moses the Monk was to be ordained to wit a Bishop for that 's the title of the story in Theodoret and spyed that Lucius was there ready to impose hands on him absit says he ut manus tua me Consecret 3. In all orders there is the impress of a distinct Character that is the person is qualified with a new capacity to do certain offices which before his ordination he had no power to do A Deacon hath an order or power Quo pocula vitae Misceat latices cum Sanguine porrigat agni as Arator himself a Deacon expresses it A Presbyter hath an higher order or degree in the office or ministery of the Church whereby he is enabled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Council of Ancyra does intimate But a Bishop hath a higher yet for besides all the offices communicated to Priests and Deacons he can give orders which very one thing makes Episcopacy to be a distinct order For Ordo is designed by the Schools to be traditio potestatis spiritualis Collatio gratiae ad obeunda Ministeria Ecclesiastica a giving a spiritual power and a conferring grace for the performance of Ecclesiastical Ministrations Since then Episcopacy hath a new ordination and a distinct power as I shall shew in the descent it must needs be a distinct order both according to the Name given it by antiquity and according to the nature of the thing in the definitions of the School There is nothing said against this but a fancy of some of the Church of Rome obtruded indeed upon no grounds for they would define order to be a special power in relation to the Holy Sacrament which they call corpus Christi naturale and Episcopacy indeed to be a distinct power in relation ad corpus Christi Mysticum or the regiment of the Church and ordaining labourers for the harvest and therefore not to be a distinct order But this to them that consider things sadly is true or false according as any man list For if these men are resolved they will call nothing an order but what is a power in order to the consecration of the Eucharist who can help it Then indeed in that sence Episcopacy is not a distinct order that is a Bishop hath no new power in the consecration of the Venerable Eucharist more than a Presbyter hath But then why these men should only call this power an order no man can give a reason For 1. in Antiquity the distinct power of a Bishop was ever called an Order and I think before Hugo de S. Victore and the Master of the Sentences no man ever denied it to be an order 2. According to this rate I would fain know the office of a Sub-deacon and of an Ostiary and of an Acolouthite and of a Reader come to be distinct Orders for surely the Bishop hath as much power in order to consecration de Novo as they have de integro And if I mistake not that the Bishop hath a new power to ordain Presbyters who shall have a power of consecrating the Eucharist is more a new power in order to consecration than all those inferior officers put together have in all and yet they call them Orders and therefore why not Episcopacy also I cannot imagine unless because they will not *** But however in the mean time the denying the office and degree of Episcopacy to be a new and a distinct order is an innovation of the production of some in the Church of Rome without all reason and against all Antiquity This only by the way The enemies of Episcopacy call in aid from all places for support of their ruinous cause and therefore take their main hopes from the Church of Rome by advantage of the former discourse
the nature of the thing and never any act of ordination by a Non-Bishop approved by any Council decretal or single suffrage of any famous man in Christendom if that ordinations of Bishops were always made and they ever done by Bishops and no pretence of Priests joyning with them in their consecrations and after all this it was declared heresie to communicate the power of giving orders to Presbyters either alone or in conjunction with Bishops as it was in the case of Aerius if all this that is if whatsoever can be imagined be sufficient to make faith in this particular then it is evident that the power and order of Bishops is greater than the power and order of Presbyters to wit in this Great particular of ordination and that by this loud voice and united vote of Christendom SECT XXXIII And Confirmation * BUT this was but the first part of the power which Catholick antiquity affixed to the order of Episcopacy The next is of Confirmation of baptized people And here the rule was this which was thus expressed by Damascen Apostolorum Successorum eorum est per manus impositionem donum Spiritûs sancti tradere It belongs to the Apostles and their successors to give the Holy Ghost by imposition of hands But see this in particular instance The Council of Eliberis giving permission to faithful people of the Laity to baptize Catechumens in the cases of necessity and exigence of journey Ita tamen ut si supervixerit baptizatus ad Episcopum eum perducat ut per manûs impositionem proficere possit Let him be carried to the Bishop to be improved by imposition of the Bishops hands This was Law It was also a custom saith S. Cyprian Quod nunc quoque apud nos geritur ut qui in Ecclesiâ baptizantur per Praepositos Ecclesiae offerantur per nostram orationem manûs impositionem Spiritum sanctum consequantur signaculo Dominico consummentur And this custom was Catholick too and the Law was of Vniversal concernment Omnes Fideles per manuum impositionem Episcoporum Spiritum Sanctum post baptismum accipere debent ut pleni Christiani accipere debent So S. Vrbane in his decretal Epistle And Omnibus festinandum est sine mora renasci demùm Consignari ab Episcopo septiformem Spiritûs sancti gratiam recipere so saith the old Author of the fourth Epistle under the name of S. Clement All faithful baptized people must go to the Bishop to be consigned and so by imposition of the Bishops hands to obtain the sevenfold gifts of the Holy Ghost Meltiades in his Epistle to the Bishops of Spain affirms Confirmation in this to have a special excellency besides baptism Quòd solùm à summis Sacerdotibus confertur because Bishops only can give Confirmation And the same is said and proved by S. Eusebius in his third Epistle enjoyning great veneration to this holy mystery Quòd ab aliis perfici non potest nisi à summis Sacerdotibus It cannot it may not be performed by any but by the Bishops Thus S. Chrysostom speaking of S. Philip converting the Samaritans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philip baptizing the men of Samaria gave not the Holy Ghost to them whom he had baptized For he had not power For this gift was only of the twelve Apostles And a little after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This was peculiar to the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence it comes to pass that the principal and chief of the Church do it and none else And George Pachymeres the Paraphrast of S. Dionysius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is required that a Bishop should consign faithful people baptized For this was the Ancient practice I shall not need to instance in too many particulars for that the Ministry of Confirmation was by Catholick custom appropriate to Bishops in all ages of the Primitive Church is to be seen by the concurrent testimony of Councils and Fathers particularly of S. Clemens Alexandrinus in Eusebius Tertullian S. Innocentius the first Damasus S. Leo in John the third in S. Gregory Amphilochius in the life of S. Basil telling the story of Bishop Maximinus confirming Basilius and Eubulus the Council of Orleans and of Melda and lastly of Sevill which affirms Non licere Presbyteris per impositionem manûs fidelibus baptizandis paracletum spiritum tradere It is not lawful for Presbyters to give confirmation for it is properly an act of Episcopal power Chrismate spiritus S. super infunditur Vtraque verò ista manu ore Antistitis impetramus These are enough for authority and dogmatical resolution from antiquity For truth is the first that ever did communicate the power of confirming to Presbyters was Photius the first Author of that unhappy and long lasting schism between the Latin and Greek Churches and it was upon this occasion too For when the Bulgarians were first converted the Greeks sent Presbyters to baptize and to confirm them But the Latins sent again to have them re-confirmed both because as they pretended the Greeks had no jurisdiction in Bulgaria nor the Presbyters a capacity of order to give confirmation The matters of fact and acts Episcopal of Confirmation are innumerable but most famous are those Confirmations made by S. Rembert Bishop of Brema and of S. Malchus attested by S. Bernard because they were ratified by miracle saith the Ancient story I end this with the saying of S. Hierome Exigis ubi scriptum sit In actibus Apostolorum Sed etiamsi Scripturae authoritas non subesset totius orbis in hanc partem consensus instar praecepti obtineret If you ask where it is written viz. that Bishops alone should Confirm It is written in the Acts of the Apostles meaning by precedent though not express precept but if there were no authority of Scripture for it yet the consent of all the world upon this particular is instead of a command *** It was fortunate that S. Hierome hath expressed himself so confidently in this affair for by this we are armed against an objection from his own words for in the same dialogue speaking of some acts of Episcopal priviledge and peculiar ministration particularly of Confirmation he says it was ad honorem potius Sacerdotii quà m ad legis necessitatem For the honour of the Priesthood rather than for the necessity of a law To this the answer is evident from his own words That Bishops should give the Holy Ghost in Confirmation is written in the Acts of the Apostles and now that this is reserved rather for the honour of Episcopacy than a simple necessity in the nature of the thing makes no matter For the question here that is only of concernment is not to what end this power is reserved to the Bishop but by whom it was reserved Now S. Hierome says it was done apud
were Presbyters before this choice And lastly It was only a nomination of seven Men the determination of the business and the authority of rejection was still in the Apostles and indeed the whole power Whom we may appoint over this business and after all this there can be no hurt done by the objection especially since clearly and indubiously the election of Bishops and Presbyters was in the Apostles own persons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith S. Ignatius of Evodias Evodias was first appointed to be your Governour or Bishop by the Apostles and themselves did commit it to others that were Bishops as in the instances before reckoned Thus the case stood in Scripture 2. In the practice of the Church it went according to the same law and practice Apostolical The People did not might not chuse the Ministers of holy Church So the Council of Laodicea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The people must not chuse those that are to be promoted to the Priesthood The prohibition extends to their Non-election of all the Superiour Clergy Bishops and Presbyters But who then must elect them The Council of Nice determines that for in 16 and 17 Canons the Council forbids any promotion of Clerks to be made but by the Bishop of that Church where they are first ordained which clearly reserves to the Bishop the power of retaining or promoting all his Clergy * 3. All Ordinations were made by Bishops alone as I have already proved Now let this be confronted with the practice of Primitive Christendom that no Presbyter might be ordained sine titulo without a particular charge which was always custom and at last grew to be a law in the Council of Chalcedon and we shall perceive that the ordainer was the only chuser for then to ordain a Presbyter was also to give him a charge and the Patronage of a Church was not a lay inheritance but part of the Bishops cure for he had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The care of the Churches in all the Diocess as I have already shown And therefore when S. Jerome according to the custom of Christendom had specified some particular ordinations or election of Presbyters by Bishops as how himself was made Priest by Paulinus and Paulinus by Epiphanius of Cyprus Gaudeat Episcopus judicio suo cum tales Christo elegerit Sacerdotes Let the Bishop rejoyce in his own act having chosen such worthy Priests for the service of Christ. Thus S. Ambrose gives intimation that the dispensing all the offices in the Clergy was solely in the Bishop Haec spectet Sacerdos quod cuique congruat id officii deputet Let the Bishop observe these rules and appoint every one his office as is best answerable to his condition and capacity And Theodoret report of Leontius the Bishop of Antioch how being an Arian Adversarios recti dogmatis suscipiens licet turpem habentes vitam ad Presbyteratus tamen ordinem Diaconatus evexit Eos autem qui Vniversis virtutibus ornabantur Apostolica dogmata defendebant absque honore deseruit He advanced his own faction but would not promote any man that was catholick and pious So he did The power therefore of Clerical promotion was in his own hands This thing is evident and notorious and there is scarce any example in Antiquity of either Presbyters or people chusing any Priest but only in the case of S. Austin whom the Peoples haste snatch'd and carried him to their Bishop Valerius intreating him to ordain him Priest This indeed is true that the testimony of the people for the life of them that were to be ordained was by S. Cyprian ordinarily required In ordinandis Clericis Fratres Charissimi solemus vos ante consulere mores ac merita singulorum communi consilio ponderare It was his custom to advise with his people concerning the publick fame of Clerks to be ordained It was usual I say with him but not perpetual for it was otherwise in the case of Celerinus and divers others as I shewed elsewhere 4. In election of Bishops though not of Priests the Clergy and the people had a greater actual interest and did often intervene with their silent consenting suffrages or publick acclamations But first This was not necessary It was otherwise among the Apostles and in the case of Timothy of Titus of S. James of S. Mark and all the Successors whom they did constitute in the several charges 2. This was not by law or right but in fact only It was against the Canon of the Laodicean Council and the 31 Canon of the Apostles which under pain of deposition commands that a Bishop be not promoted to his Church by the intervening of any lay power Against this discourse S. Cyprian is strongly pretended Quando ipsa plebs maxime habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi Quod ipsum videmus de divina authoritate descendere c. Thus he is usually cited the people have power to chuse or to refuse their Bishops and this comes to them from Divine authority No such matter The following words expound him better Quod ipsum videmus de divinâ authoritate descendere ut Sacerdos plebe Praesente sub omnium oculis deligatur dignus atque idoneus publico judicio ac testimonio comprobetur That the Bishop is chosen publickly in the presence of the people and he only be thought fit who is approved by publick judgment and testimony or as S. Pauls phrase is he must have a good report of all men that is indeed a divine institution and that to this purpose and for the publick attestation of the act of election and ordination the peoples presence was required appears clearly by S. Cyprians discourse in this Epistle For what is the Divine authority that he mentions It is only the example of Moses whom God commanded to take the Son of Eleazar and cloath him with his Fathers robes coram omni Synagoga before all the congregation The people chose not God chose Eleazar and Moses consecrated him and the people stood and looked on that 's all that this argument can supply * Just thus Bishops are and ever were ordained Non nisi sub populi assistentis conscientiâ In the sight of the people standing by but to what end Vt plebe praesente detegantur malorum crimina vel bonorum merita praedicentur All this while the election is not in the people nothing but the publick testimony and examination for so it follows Et sit ordinatio justa legitima quae omnium suffragio judicio fuerit examinata ** But S. Cyprian hath two more proofs whence we may learn either the sence or the truth of his assertion The one is of the Apostles ordaining the seven Deacons but this we have already examined the other of S. Peter chusing S. Matthias into the Apostolate it was indeed done in the presence of the people * But
them but Diocesan and therefore the lesser but conventus Capitularis or however not enough to give evidence of a subscription of Presbyters to so much as a Provincial Council For the guise of Christendom was always otherwise and therefore it was the best argument that the Bishops in the Arian hurry used to acquit themselves from the suspicion of heresie Neque nos sumus Arii sectatores Quî namque fieri potest ut cum simus Episcopi Ario Presbytero auscultemus Bishops never receive determination of any article from Priests but Priests do from Bishops Nam vestrum est eos instruere saith S. Clement speaking of the Bishops office and power over Priests and all the Clergy and all the Diocess eorum est vobis obedire ut Deo cujus legatione fungimini And a little after Audire ergo eum attentius oportet ab ipso suscipere doctrinam fidei monita autem vitae à Presbyteris inquirere Of the Priests we must inquire for rules of good life but of the Bishop receive positions and determinations of faith Against this if it be objected Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debet That which is of general concernment must also be of general Scrutiny I answer it is true unless where God himself hath intrusted the care of others in a body as he hath in the Bishops and will require the souls of his Diocess at his hand and commanded us to require the Law at their mouths and to follow their faith whom he hath set over us And therefore the determination of Councils pertains to all and is handled by all not in diffusion but in representation For Ecclesia est in Episcopo Episcopus in Ecclesiâ saith S. Cyprian the Church is in the Bishop viz. by representment and the Bishop is in the Church viz. as a Pilot in a ship or a Master in a family or rather as a steward and Guardian to rule in his Masters absence and for this reason the Synod of the Nicene Bishops is called in Eusebius conventus orbis terrarum and by S. Austin consensus totius Ecclesiae not that the whole Church was there present in their several persons but was there represented by the Catholick Bishops and if this representment be not sufficient for obligation to all I see no reason but the Ladies too may vote in Councils for I doubt not but they have souls too But however if this argument were concluding in it self yet it loses its force in England where the Clergy are bound by Laws of Parliament and yet in the capacity of Clergy-men are allowed to chuse neither Procurators to represent us as Clergy nor Knights of the Shire to represent us as Commons In conclusion of this I say to the Presbyters as S. Ambrose said of the Lay-Judges whom the Arians would have brought to judge in Council it was an old heretical trick Veniant planè si qui sunt ad Ecclesiam audiant cum populo non ut quisquam Judex resideat sed unusquisque de suo affectu habeat examen eligat quem sequatur So may Presbyters be present so they may judge not for others but for themselves And so may the people be present and anciently were so and therefore Councils were always kept in open Churches ubi populus judicat not for others but for themselves not by external sentence but internal conviction so S. Ambrose expounds himself in the forecited allegation There is no considerable objection against this discourse but that of the first Council of Jerusalem where the Apostles and Elders did meet together to determine of the question of circumcision For although in the story of celebration of it we find no man giving sentence but Peter and James yet in Acts 16. they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decrees judged by the Apostles and Elders But first in this the difficulty is the less because Presbyter was a general word for all that were not of the number of the twelve Prophets Evangelists Pastors and Doctors And then secondly it is none at all because Paul and Barnabas are signally and by name reckoned as present in the Synod and one of them Prolocutor or else both So that such Presbyters may well define in such conventual assemblies 3. If yet there were any difficulty latent in the story yet the Catholick practice of Gods Church is certainly the best expositor of such places where there either is any difficulty or where any is pretended And of this I have already given account * I remember also that this place is pretended for the peoples power of voicing in Councils It is a pretty pageant only that it is against the Catholick practice of the Church against the exigence of Scripture which bids us require the law at the mouth of our spiritual Rulers against the gravity of such assemblies for it would force them to be tumultuous and at the best are the worst of Sanctions as being issues of popularity and to summe up all it is no way authorized by this first copy of Christian Councils The pretence is in the Synodal letter written in the name of the Apostles and Elders and Brethren that is says Geta The Apostles and Presbyters and People But why not Brethren that is all the Deacons and Evangelists and Helpers in Government and Ministers of the Churches There is nothing either in words or circumstances to contradict this If it be asked who then are meant by Elders if by Brethren S. Luke understands these Church-officers I answer that here is such variety that although I am not certain which officers he precisely comprehends under the distinct titles of Elders and Brethren yet here are enough to furnish both with variety and yet neither to admit meer Presbyters in the present acceptation of the word nor yet the Laity to a decision of the question nor authorising the decretal For besides the twelve Apostles there were Apostolical men which were Presbyters and something more as Paul and Barnabas and Silas and Evangelists and Pastors besides which might furnish out the last appellative sufficiently But however without any further trouble it is evident that this word Brethren does not distinguish the Laity from the Clergy Now when they heard this they were pricked in their hearts and said unto Peter and to the rest of the Apostles Men and brethren what shall we do Judas and Silas who were Apostolical men are called in Scripture chief men among the brethren But this is too known to need a contestation I only insert the saying of Basilius the Emperor in the Eighth Synod De vobis autem Laicis tam qui in dignitatibus quà m qui absolutè versamini quid amplius dicam non habeo quà m quòd nullo modo vobis licet de Ecclesiasticis causis sermonem movere neque penitùs resistere integritati Ecclesiae universali Synodo adversari Lay-men says the Emperor must by no means
and yet a Godly Bishop and Saint Austin his Presbyter preached for him The same case might occur in the Apostles times For then was a concurse of all Nations to the Christian Synaxes especially in all great Imperial Cities and Metropolitans as Rome Antioch Jerusalem Caesarea and the like Now all could not speak with tongues neither could all Prophesie they were particular gifts given severally to several men appointed to minister in Church-offices Some prophesied some interpreted and therefore it is an ignorant fancy to think that he must needs be a Laick whosoever in the ages Apostolical was not a Preacher 2. None of the Fathers ever expounded this place of Lay-Elders so that we have a traditive interpretation of it in prejudice to the pretence of our new Office 3. The word Presbyter is never used in the New-Testament for a Lay-man if a Church-officer be intended If it be said it is used so here that is the Question and must not be brought to prove it self 4. The Presbyter that is here spoken of must be maintained by Ecclesiastical Revenue for so Saint Paul expounds honour in the next verse Presbyters that rule well must be honoured c. For it is written thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Oxe that treadeth out the corn But now the Patrons of this new devise are not so greedy of their lay-Lay-Bishops as to be at charges with them they will rather let them stand alone on their own rotten legs and so perish than fix him upon this place with their hands in their purses But it had been most fitting for them to have kept him being he is of their own begetting 5. This place speaks not of divers persons but divers parts of the Pastoral office 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To rule and to labour in the Word Just as if the expression had been in materiâ politicâ All good Councellors of State are worthy of double honour especially them that disregarding their own private aim at the publick good This implies not two sorts of Counsellors but two parts of a Counsellors worth and quality Judges that do righteousness are worthy of double honour especially if they right the cause of Orphans and Widows and yet there are no righteous Judges that refuse to do both 6. All Ministers of H. Church did not preach at least not frequently The seven that were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 set over the Widows were Presbyters but yet they were forced to leave the constant ministration of the Word to attend that imployment as I shewed formerly and thus it was in descent too for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Socrates A Presbyter does not Preach in Alexandria the Bishop only did it And then the allegation is easily understood For labouring in the word does not signifie only making Homilies or Exhortations to the people but whether it be by word or writing or travelling from place to place still the greater the sedulity of the person is and difficulty of the labour the greater increment of honour is to be given him So that here is no Lay-Elders for all the Presbyters S. Paul speaks of are to be honoured but especially those who take extraordinary pains in propagating the Gospel For though all preach suppose that yet all do not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 take such great pains in it as is intimated in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to take bodily labour and travel usque ad lassitudinem so Budaeus renders it And so it is likely S. Paul here means Honour the good Presbyters but especially them that travel for disseminating the Gospel And the word is often so used in Scripture S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have travelled in the word more than they all Not that S. Paul preached more than all the Apostles for most certainly they made it their business as well as he But he travelled further and more than they all for the spreading it And thus it is said of the good Women that travelled with the Apostles for supply of the necessities of their diet and houshold offices they laboured much in the Lord. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the word for them too So it is said of Persis of Mary of Tryphaena of Tryphosa And since those Women were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that travelled with the Apostolical men and Evangelists the men also travelled too and preached and therefore were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is travellers in the word We ought therefore to receive such saith S. John intimating a particular reception of them as being towards us of a peculiar merit So that the sence of S. Paul may be this also All the Rulers of the Church that is all Bishops Apostles and Apostolick men are to be honoured but especially them who besides the former ruling are also travellers in the word or Evangelists 7. We are furnished with answer enough to infatuate this pretence for Lay-Elders from the common draught of the new discipline For they have some that Preach only and some that Rule and Preach too and yet neither of them the Lay-Elder viz. their Pastors and Doctors 8. Since it is pretended by themselves in the Question of Episcopacy that Presbyter and Episcopus is all one and this very thing confidently obtruded in defiance of Episcopacy why may not Presbyteri in this place signifie Bishops And then either this must be Lay-Bishops as well as Lay-Presbyters or else this place is to none of their purposes 9. If both these Offices of Ruling and Preaching may be conjunct in one person then there is no necessity of distinguishing the Officers by the several imployments since one man may do both But if these Offices cannot be conjunct then no Bishops must preach nor no Preachers be of the Consistory take which government you list for if they be then the Officer being united in one person the inference of the dististinct Officer the Lay-Elder is impertinent For the meaning of Saint Paul would be nothing but this All Church-Rulers must be honoured especially for their preaching For if the Offices may be united in one person as it is evident they may then this may be comprehended within the other and only be a vital part and of peculiar excellency And indeed so it is according to the Exposition of Saint Chrysostom and Primasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They rule well that spare nothing for the care of the Flock So that this is the general charge and preaching is the particular For the work in general they are to receive double honour but this of preaching as then preaching was had a particular excellency and a plastick power to form men into Christianity especially it being then attested with miracles But the new Office of a Lay-Elder I confess I cannot comprehend in any reasonable proportion his person his quality his office his authority his subordination his commission hath made so many divisions and
the gayeties of this sinful age For although Christs blood can expiate all sins and his Spirit can sanctifie all sinners and his Church can restore all that are capable yet if we consider that the particulars of every naughty mans case are infinitely uncertain that there are no minute-measures of repentance set down after Baptism that there are some states of sinners which God does reject that the arrival to this state is by parts and undetermin'd steps of progression that no man can tell when any sin begins to be unpardonable to such a person and that if we be careless of our selves and easie in our judgments and comply with the false measures of any age we may be in before we are aware and cannot come out so soon as we expect and lastly if we consider that the Primitive and Apostolical Churches who best knew how to estimate the mercies of the Gospel and the requisites of repentance and the malignity and dangers of sin did not promise pardon so easily so readily so quickly as we do we may think it fit to be more afraid and more contrite more watchful and more severe 31. I end this with the words of S. Hierome Cùm beatus Daniel praescius futurorum de sententiâ Dei dubitet rem temerariam faciunt qui audacter peccatoribus indulgentiam pollicentur Though Daniel could foretel future things yet he durst not pronounce concerning the King whether God would pardon him or no it is therefore a great rashness boldly to promise pardon to them that have sinned That is it is not to be done suddenly according to the caution which S. Paul gave to the Bishop of Ephesus Lay hands suddenly on no man that is absolve him not without great trial and just dispositions 32. For though this be not at all to be wrested to a suspicion that the sins in their kind are not pardonable yet thus far I shall make use of it That God who only hath the power he only can make the judgment whether the sinner be a worthy penitent or not For there being no express stipulation made concerning the degrees of repentance no taxa poenitentiaria penitential Tables and Canons consign'd by God it cannot be told by man when after great sins and a long iniquity the unhappy man shall be restor'd because it wholly depends upon the Divine acceptance 33. In smaller offences and the seldom returns of sin intervening in a good or a probable life the Curates of souls may make safe and prudent judgments But when the case is high and the sin is clamorous or scandalous or habitual they ought not to be too easie in speaking peace to such persons to whom God hath so fiercely threatned death eternal But to hold their hands may possibly increase the sorrow and contrition and fear of the penitent and returning man and by that means make him the surer of it But it is too great a confidence and presumption to dispense Gods pardon or the Kings upon easie terms and without their Commission 34. For since all the rule and measures of dispensing it is by analogies and proportions by some reason and much conjecture it were better by being restrain'd in the Ministeries of favour to produce fears and watchfulness carefulness and godly sorrow than by an open hand to make sinners bold and many confident and easie Those holy and wise men who were our Fathers in Christ did well weigh the dangers into which a sinning man had entred and did dreadfully fear the issues of the Divine anger and therefore although they openly taught that God hath set open the gates of mercy to all worthy penitents yet concerning repentance they had other thoughts than we have and that in the pardon of sinners there are many more things to be considered besides the possibility of having the sin pardoned SECT IV. Of the Sin against the Holy Ghost and in what sence it is or may be Vnpardonable 35. UPON what account the Primitive Church did refuse to admit certain Criminals to repentance I have already discoursed but because there are some places of Scripture which seem to have incouraged such severity by denying repentance also to some sinners it is necessary that they be considered also lest by being misunderstood some persons in the days of their sorrow be tempted to despair 36. The Novatians denying repentance to lapsed Christians pretended for their warrant those words of S. Paul It is impossible for those who were once inlightened and have tasted of the Heavenly gift and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come if they shall fall away to renew them again unto repentance seeing they crucifie to themselves the son of God afresh and put him to an open shame and parallel to this are those other words For if we sin wilfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation which shall consume the adversaries The sence of which words will be clear upon the explicating what is meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and what by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 37. If they shall fall away viz. from that state of excellent things in which they had received all the present endearments of the Gospel a full conviction pardon of sins the earnest of the Spirit the comfort of the promises an antepast of Heaven it self if these men shall fall away from all this it cannot be by infirmity by ignorance by surprise this is that which S. Paul calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sin wilfully after they have received the knowledge of the truth Malicious sinners these are who sin against the Holy Spirit whose influences they throw away whose counsels they despise whose comforts they refuse whose doctrine they scorn and from thence fall not only into one single wasting sin but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they fall away into a contrary state into Heathenism or the heresie of the Gnosticks or to any state of despising and hating Christ expressed here by Crucifying the Son of God afresh and putting him to an open shame these are they here meant such who after they had worshipped Jesus and given up their names to him and had been blessed by him and felt it and acknowledged it and rejoyc'd in it these men afterwards without cause or excuse without error or infirmity chusingly willingly knowingly call'd Christ an Impostor and would have crucified him again if he had been alive that is they consented to his death by believing that he suffer'd justly This is the case here described and cannot be drawn to any thing else but its parallel that is a malicious renouncing charity or holy life as these men did the faith to both which they had made their solemn vows in Baptism but this can no way be
reconciling of penitents in the Primitive Church was not done by the Bishop or Priest only but sometimes by Deacons as appears in Saint Cyprian and sometimes by the people as it was allowed by S. Paul in the case of the incestuous Corinthian and was frequently permitted to the Confessori in the times of persecution and may be done by an unbaptized Catechumen as S. Austin affirms The result of which is that this absolution of penitents in the Court Christian was not an act of Priestly power incommunicably it was not a dispensation of the proper power of the Keys but to give or not to give the Communion that was an effect of the power of the Keys that was really properly and in effect the Ecclesiastical absolution for that which the Deacons or Confessors the Laicks or Catechumens did was all that and only that which was of rite or ceremony before the giving the Communion therefore that which was besides this giving the Communion was no proper absolution it was not a Priestly act indispensably it might be done by them that were no Priests but the giving of the Communion that was a sacerdotal act I mean the consecration of it though the tradition of it was sometimes by Deacons sometimes by themselves at home This therefore was the dispensation of the Keys this was the effect of the powers of binding and loosing of remitting or retaining sins according as the sence and practice of the Church expounded her own power The prayers of the Priest going before his ministration of the Communion were called absolution that is the beginning and one of the first portions of it absolutio Sacerdotalium precum so it was called in ancient Councils the Priest imposed hands and prayed and then gave the Communion This was the ordinary way But there was an extraordinary 55. For in some cases the imposition of hands was omitted that is when the Bishop or Priest was absent and the Deacon prayed or the Confessor but this was first by the leave of the Bishop or Priest for to them it belong'd in ordinary And 2. this was nothing else but a taking them from the station of the penitents and a placing them amongst the faithful communicants either by declaring that their penances were performed or not to be exacted 56. For by this we shall be clear of an objection which might arise from the case of dying penitents to whom the Communion was given and they restored to the peace of the Church that is as they supposed to Gods mercy and the pardon of sins for they would not chuse to give the Communion to such persons whom they did not believe God had pardoned but these persons though communicated non tamen se credant absolutos sine manus impositione si supervixerint were not to suppose themselves absolved if they recovered that sickness without imposition of hands said the Fathers of the Fourth Council of Carthage by which it should seem absolution was a thing distinct from giving the Communion 57. To this I answer that the dying penitent was fully absolved in case he had receiv'd the first imposition of hands for repentance that is if in his health he submitted himself to penance and publick amends and was prevented from finishing the impositions they supposed that desire and endeavour of the penitent man was a worthy disposition to the receiving the holy Communion and both together sufficient for pardon but because this was only to be in the case of such intervening necessity and God will not accept of the will for the deed but in such cases where the deed cannot be accomplished therefore they bound such penitents to return to their first obligation in case they should recover since God had taken off their necessity and restored them to their first capacity And by this we understand the meaning of the third Canon of the first Arausican Council They who having received penance depart from the body it pleases that they shall be communicated sine reconciliatoriâ manus impositione without the reconciling imposition of hands that is because the penitential imposition of hands was imposed upon them and they did what they could though the last imposition was not though the last hand was not put upon them declaring that they had done their penances and completed their satisfactions yet they might be communicated that is absolved Quod morientis sufficit consolationi This is enough to the comfort of the dying man according to the definition of the Fathers who conveniently enough called such a Communion their Viaticum their Passe-port or provision for their way For there were two solemn impositions of hands in repentance The first and greatest was in the first admission of them and in the imposition of the Discipline or manner of performing penances and this was the Bishops office and of great consideration amongst the holy Primitives and was never done but by the superior Clergy as is evident in Ecclesiastical story The second solemn imposition of hands was immediately before their absolution or Communion and it was a holy prayer and publication that he was accepted and had finished that processe This was the less solemn and was ordinarily done by the superior Clergy but sometimes by others as I have remonstrated other intermedial impositions there were as appears by the Creber recursus mentioned in the third Council of Toledo above cited the penitents were often to beg the Bishops pardon or the Priests prayers and the advocations and intercessions of the faithful but the peace of the Church that is that pardon which she could minister and which she had a promise that God would confirm in Heaven was the Ministery of pardon in the dispensation of the Sacrament of that body that was broken and that blood that was poured forth for the remission of our sins 58. The result is That the absolution of sins which in the later forms and usages of the Church is introduced can be nothing but declarative the office of the preacher and the guide of souls of great use to timorous persons and to the greatest penitents full of comfort full of usefulness and institution and therefore although this very declaration of pardon may truly and according to the style of Scripture be called pardon and the power and office of pronouncing the penitents pardon is in the sence of the Scripture and the Church a good sence and signification of power as the Pharisees are said â—o justifie God when they declare his justice and as the preacher that converts a sinner is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to save a soul from death yet if we would speak properly and as things are in their own nature and institution this declarative absolution is only an act of preaching or opening and reading the Commission an effect of the Spirit of prudence and government entring upon the Church but the power of the Keys is another thing it is the dispensing all those rites and ministeries by
my life confuting him and though I will not contend with him yet I will die with him in behalf of the Church if God shall call me but for other little things and trifling arrests and little murmurs I value none of it Quid verum atque decent curo rogo omnis in hoc sum Condo compono quod mox depromere possim Nullius addictus jurare in verba Magistri Quo me cunque rapit tempestas deferor I could translate these also into bad English verse as I do the others but that now I am earnest for my liberty I will not so much as confine my self to the measures of feet But in plain English I mean by rehearsing these Latin Verses that although I love every man and value worthy persons in proportion to their labours and abilities whereby they can and do serve God and Gods Church yet I inquire for what is fitting not what is pleasing I search after ways to advantage souls not to comply with humors and Sects and interests and I am tied to no mans private opinion any more than he is to mine if he will bring Scripture and right reason from any topick he may govern me and perswade me else I am free as he is but I hope I am before-hand with him in this question But one thing more I am willing to add By the confession of all the Schools of learning it is taught that Baptism hath infallibly all that effect upon Infants which God design'd and the Church intends to them in the ministery of that Sacrament because Infants cannot ponere obicem they cannot impede the gift of God and they hinder not the effect of Gods Spirit Now all hinderances of the operation of the Sacrament is sin and if sin before the ministration be not morally rescinded it remains and remaining is a disposition contrary to the effect of the Sacrament Every inherent sin is the obex bars the gates that the grace of the Sacrament shall not enter Since therefore Infants do not bar the gates do not hinder the effect of the Sacrament it follows they have no sin inherent in them but imputed only If it be replied that Original sin though it be properly a sin and really inherent yet it does not hinder the effect of the Sacrament I answer then it follows that Original sin is of less malignity than the least actual sin in the world and if so then either by it no man is hated by God to eternal damnation no man is by it an enemy of God a son of wrath an heir of perdition or if he be then at the same time he may be actually hated by God and yet worthily disposed for receiving the grace and Sacrament of Baptism and that sin which of all the sins of the world is supposed to be the greatest and of most universal and parmanent mischief shall do the least harm and is less opposed to Gods grace and indisposes a man less than a single wanton thought or the first consent to a forbidden action which he that can believe is very much in love with his own proposition and is content to believe it upon any terms I end with the words of Lucretius Desine quapropter novitate exterritus ipsâ Expuere ex animo rationem sed magis acri Judicio perpende si tibi vera videtur Dede manus aut si falsa est accingere contrá Fear not to own what 's said because 't is new Weigh well and wisely if the thing be true Truth and not conquest is the best reward 'Gainst falshood only stand upon thy guard Madam I Humbly beg you will be pleased to entertain these Papers not only as a Testimony of my Zeal for Truth and Peace below and for the Honour of God above but also of my readiness to seize upon every occasion whereby I may express my self to be Your most obliged and most Humble Servant in the Religion of the H. Jesus JER TAYLOR An ANSWER to a LETTER Written by the R. R. The Lord Bishop of ROCHESTER Concerning the Chapter of ORIGINAL SIN IN THE VNVM NECESSARIVM R. R. Father and my good Lord YOUR Lordships Letter Dated July 28. I received not till Septemb. 11. it seems R. Royston detained it in his hands supposing it could not come safely to me while I remain a prisoner now in Chepstow-Castle But I now have that liberty that I can receive any Letters and send any for the Gentlemen under whose custody I am as they are careful of their charges so they are civil to my person It was necessary I should tell this to your Lordship that I may not be under a suspicion of neglecting to give accounts in those particulars which with so much prudence and charity you were pleased to represent in your Letter concerning my discourse of Original Sin My Lord In all your Exceptions I cannot but observe your candor and your paternal care concerning me For when there was nothing in the Doctrine but your greater reason did easily see the justice and the truth of it and I am perswaded could have taught me to have said many more material things in confirmation of what I have taught yet so careful is your charity of me that you would not omit to represent to my consideration what might be said by captious and weaker persons or by the more wise and pious who are of a different judgment But my Lord First you are pleased to note that this discourse runs not in the ordinary channel True for if it did it must nurse the popular error but when the disease is Epidemical as it is so much the worse so the extraordinary remedy must be acknowledg'd to be the better And if there be in it some things hard to be understood as it was the fate of S. Paul's Epistles as your Lordship notes out of S. Peter yet this difficulty of understanding proceeds not from the thing it self nor from the manner of handling it but from the indisposition and prepossession of mens minds to the contrary who are angry when they are told that they have been deceived for it is usual with men to be more displeased when they are told they were in error than to be pleased with them who offer to lead them out of it But your Lordship doth with great advantages represent an objection of some captious persons which relates not to the material part of the Question but to the rules of art If there be no such thing as Original Sin transmitted from Adam to his posterity then all that Sixth Chapter is a strife about a shadow a Non ens Ans. It is true my Lord the Question as it is usually handled is so For when the Franciscan and Dominican do eternally dispute about the conception of the Blessed Virgin whether it was with or without Original Sin meaning by way of grace and special exemption this is de non ente for there was no need of any such
eats the Lamb not within this House is prophane he that is not in the Ark of Noah perishes in the inundation of waters He that gathers not with this Bishop he scatters and he that belongeth not to Christ must needs belong to Antichrist And that 's his final sentence But if you would have all this proved by an infallible Argument Optatus of Milevis in Africa supplies it to us from the very name of Peter For therefore Christ gave him the cognomination of Cephas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to shew that S. Peter was the visible Head of the Catholick Church Dignum patellâ operculum This long harangue must needs be full of tragedy to all them that take liberty to themselves to follow Scripture and their best Guides if it happens in that liberty that they depart from the perswasions of the Communion of Rome But indeed if with the peace of the Bishops of Rome I may say it this Scene is the most unhandsomly laid and the worst carried of any of those pretences that have lately abused Christendome 3. First Against the Allegations of Scripture I shall lay no greater prejudice then this that if a person dis-interested should see them and consider what the products of them might possibly be the last thing that he would think of would be how that any of these places should serve the ends or pretences of the Church of Rome For to instance in one of the particulars that man had need have a strong fancy who imagines that because Christ prayed for S. Peter that being he had design'd him to be one of those upon whose preaching and Doctrine he did mean to constitute a Church his faith might not fail for it was necessary that no bitterness or stopping should be in one of the first springs lest the current be either spoil'd or obstructed that therefore the faith of Pope Alexander VI. or Gregory or Clement 1500 years after should be preserved by virtue of that prayer which the form of words the time the occasion the manner of the address the effect it self and all the circumstances of the action and person did determine to be personal And when it was more then personal S. Peter did not represent his Successors at Rome but the whole Catholick Church say Aquinas and the Divines of the University of Paris Volunt enim pro sola Ecclesia esse oratum says Bellarmine of them and the gloss upon the Canon Law plainly denies the effect of this prayer at all to appertain to the Pope Quaere de qua Ecclesia intelligas quod hîc dicitur quòd non possit errare an de ipso Papa qui Ecclesia dicitur sed certum est quòd Papa errare potest Respondeo ipsa Congregatio fidelium hîc dicitur Ecclesia talis Ecclesia non potest non esse nam ipse Dominus orat pro Ecclesia voluntate labiorum suorum non fraudabitur But there is a little danger in this Argument when we well consider it but it is likely to redound on the head of them whose turns it should serve For it may be remembred that for all this prayer of Christ for S. Peter the good man fell foully and denied his Master shamefully And shall Christ's prayer be of greater efficacy for his Successors for whom it was made but indirectly and by consequence then for himself for whom it was directly and in the first intention And if not then for all this Argument the Popes may deny Christ as well as their chief predecessor Peter But it would not be forgotten how the Roman Doctors will by no means allow that S. Peter was then the chief Bishop or Pope when he denied his Master But then much less was he chosen chief Bishop when the prayer was made for him because the prayer was made before his fall that is before that time in which it is confessed he was not as yet made Pope And how then the whole Succession of the Papacy should be entitled to it passes the length of my hand to span But then also if it be supposed and allowed that these words shall intail infallibility upon the Chair of Rome why shall not also all the Apostolical Sees be infallible as well as Rome why shall not Constantinople or Byzantium where S. Andrew sate why shall not Ephesus where S. John sate or Jerusalem where S. James sate for Christ prayed for them all ut Pater sanctificaret eos suâ veritate Joh. 17. 4. Secondly For tibi dabo claves was it personal or not If it were then the Bishops of Rome have nothing to do with it If it were not then by what Argument will it be made evident that S. Peter in the promise represented onely his Successors and not the whole Colledge of Apostles and the whole Hierarchy For if S. Peter was chief of the Apostles and Head of the Church he might fair enough be the representative of the whole Colledge and receive it in their right as well as his own which also is certain that it was so for the same promise of binding and loosing which certainly was all that the Keys were given for was made afterward to all the Apostles Matt. 18. and the power of remitting and retaining which in reason and according to the style of the Church is the same thing in other words was actually given to all the Apostles and unless that was the performing the first and second promise we find it not recorded in Scripture how or when or whether yet or no the promise be performed That promise I say which did not pertain to Peter principally and by origination and to the rest by Communication society and adherence but that promise which was made to Peter first but not for himself but for all the Colledge and for all their Successors and then made the second time to them all without representation but in diffusion and perform'd to all alike in presence except S. Thomas And if he went to S. Peter to derive it from him I know not I find no record for that but that Christ conveyed the promise to him by the same Commission the Church yet never doubted nor had she any reason But this matter is too notorious I say no more to it but repeat the words and Argument of S. Austin Si hoc Petro tantùm dictum est non facit hoc Ecclesia if the Keys were onely given and so promised to S. Peter that the Church hath not the Keys then the Church can neither bind nor loose remit nor retain which God forbid If any man should endeavour to answer this Argument I leave him and S. Austin to contest it 5. Thirdly For Pasce oves there is little in that Allegation besides the boldness of the Objectors for were not all the Apostles bound to feed Christ's sheep had they not all the Commission from Christ and Christ's Spirit immediately S. Paul had certainly Did not S. Peter himself say to all
First-fruits and in these things was the Fountain of the Sacraments and Spiritual Grace and the great Exemplar of the Oeconomy of the Church For Christ was nullius poenitentiae debitor Baptism of Repentance was not necessary to him who never sinn'd but so it became him to fulfil all righteousness and to be a pattern to us all But we have need of these things though he had not and in the same way in which Salvation was wrought by him for himself and for us all in the same way he intended we should walk He was Baptized because his Father appointed it so we must be baptized because Christ hath appointed it and we have need of it too He was Consecrated to be the great Prophet and the great Priest because no man takes on him this honour but he that was called of God as was Aaron and all they who are to minister in his Prophetical office under him must be consecrated and solemnly set apart for that ministration and after his glorious example He was Anointed with a Spiritual Unction from above after his Baptism for after Jesus was baptized he ascended up from the waters and then the Holy Ghost descended upon him It is true he receiv'd the Fulness of the Spirit but we receive him by measure but of his fulness we all receive grace for grace that is all that he receiv'd in order to his great work all that in kind one for another Grace for Grace we are to receive according to our measures and our necessities And as all these he receiv'd by external ministrations so must we God the Father appointed his way and he by his Example first hath appointed the same to us that we also may follow him in the regeneration and work out our Salvation by the same Graces in the like solemnities For if he needed them for himself then we need them much more If he did not need them for himself he needed them for us and for our Example that we might follow his steps who by receiving these exterior solemnities and inward Graces became the Author and finisher of our Salvation and the great Example of his Church I shall not need to make use of the fancy of the Murcosians and Colabarsians who turning all Mysteries into Numbers reckoned the numeral letters of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and made them coincident to the α and ω· but they intended to say that Christ receiving the Holy Dove after his Baptism became all in all to us the beginning and the perfection of our Salvation here he was confirm'd and receiv'd the ω to his α the Consummation to his Initiation the completion of his Baptism and of his Headship in the Gospel But that which I shall rather add is what S. Cyril from hence argues When he truly was baptized in the River of Jordan he ascended out of the waters and the Holy Ghost substantially descended upon him like resting upon like And to you also in like manner after ye have ascended from the waters of Baptism the Vnction is given which bears the image or similitude of him by whom Christ was anointed that as Christ after Baptism and the coming of the Holy Spirit upon him went forth to battel in the Wilderness and overcame the adversary so ye also after Holy Baptism and the mystical Vnction or Confirmation being vested with the Armour of the Holy Spirit are enabled to stand against the opposite Powers Here then is the first great ground of our solemn receiving the Holy Spirit or the Unction from above after Baptism which we understand and represent by the word Confirmation denoting the principal effect of this Unction Spiritual Strength Christ who is the Head of the Church entred this way upon his duty and work and he who was the first of all the Church the Head and great Example is the measure of all the rest for we can go to Heaven no way but in that way in which he went before us There are some who from this Story would infer the descent of the Holy Ghost after Christ's Baptism not to signifie that Confirmation was to be a distinct Rite from Baptism but a part of it yet such a part as gives fulness and Consummation to it S. Hierom Chrysostom Euthymius and Theophylact go not so far but would have us by this to understand that the Holy Ghost is given to them that are baptized But Reason and the Context are both against it 1. Because the Holy Ghost was not given by John's Baptism that was reserv'd to be one of Christ's glories who also when by his Disciples he baptiz'd many did not give them the Holy Ghost and when he commanded his Apostles to baptize all Nations did not at that time so much as promise the Holy Ghost he was promis'd distinctly and given by another Ministration 2. The descent of the Holy Spirit was a distinct ministery from the Baptism it was not only after Jesus ascended from the waters of Baptism but there was something intervening and by a new office or ministration For there was Prayer joyn'd in the ministery So S. Luke observes while Jesus was praying the Heavens were open'd and the Holy Spirit descended for so Jesus was pleas'd to consign the whole Office and Ritual of Confirmation Prayer for invocating the Holy Spirit and giving him by personal application which as the Father did immediately so the Bishops do by Imposition of hands 3. S. Austin observes that the apparition of the Holy Spirit like a Dove was the visible or ritual part and the voice of God was the word to make it to be Sacramental accedit verbum ad elementum â—it Sacramentum for so the ministration was not only perform'd on Christ but consignâ—d to the Church by similitude and exemplar institution I shall only add that the force of this Argument is established to us by more of the Fathers S. Hilary upon this place hath these words The Fathers voice was heard that from those things which were consummated in Christ we might know that after the Baptism of water the Holy Spirit from the gates of Heaven flies unto us and that we are to be anointed with the Vnction of a celestial glory and be made the Sons of God by the adoption of the voice of God the Truth by the very effects of things prefigur'd unto us the similitude of a Sacrament So S. Chrysostom In the beginnings always appears the sensible visions of Spiritual things for their sakes who cannot receive the understanding of an incorporeal nature that if afterwards they be not so done that is after the same visible manner they may be believ'd by those things which were already done But more plain is that of Theophylact The Lord had not need of the descent of the Holy Spirit but he did all things for our sakes and himself is become the First-fruits of all things which we afterwards were to receive that he might become the
and not Man first by Baptism and then by Confirmation first by Water and then by the Spirit The Primitive Church had this Notion so fully amongst them that the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions attributed to S. Clement who was S. Paul's Scholar affirms That a man is made a perfect Christian meaning Ritually and Sacramentally and by all exterior solemnity by the Water of Baptism and Confirmation of the Bishop and from these words of Christ now alledged derives the use and institution of the Rite of Confirmation The same sence of these words is given to us by S. Cyprian who intending to prove the insufficiency of one without the other says Tunc enim plenè Sanctificari esse Dei filii possunt si Sacramento utroque nascantur cùm scriptum sit Nisi quis natus fuerit ex aqua Spiritu non potest intrare in regnum Dei Then they may be fully Sanctified and become the Sons of God if they be born with both the Sacraments or Rites for it is written Vnless a man be born of Water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God The same also is the Commentary of Eusebius Emissenus and S. Austin tells That although some understand these words only of Baptism and others of the Spirit only viz. in Confirmation yet others and certainly much better understand utrumque Sacramentum both the Mysteries of Confirmation as well as Baptism Amalarius Fortunatus brings this very Text to reprove them that neglect the Episcopal Imposition of Hands Concerning them who by negligence lose the Bishop's presence and receive not the Imposition of his Hands it is to be considered lest in justice they be condemned in which they exercise Justice negligently because they ought to make haste to the Imposition of Hands because Christ said Vnless a man be born again of Water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God And as he said this so also he said Vnless your Righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven To this I foresee two Objections may be made First That Christ did not institute Confirmation in this place because Confirmation being for the gift of the Holy Ghost who was to come upon none of the Apostles till Jesus was glorified these words seem too early for the consigning an Effect that was to be so long after and a Rite that could not be practised till many intermedial events should happen So said the Evangelist The Holy Ghost was come upon none of them because Jesus was not yet glorified intimating that this great Effect was to be in after-time and it is not likely that the Ceremony should be ordained before the Effect it self was ordered and provided for that the Solemnity should be appointed before provisions were made for the Mystery and that the outward which was wholly for the inward should be instituted before the inward and principal had its abode amongst us To this I answer First That it is no unusual thing for Christ gave the Sacrament of his Body before his Body was given the Memorial of his Death was instituted before his Death 2. Confirmation might here as well be instituted as Baptism and by the same reason that the Church from these words concludes the necessity of one she may also infer the designation of the other for the effect of Baptism was at that time no more produced than that of Confirmation Christ had not yet purchased to himself a Church he had not wrought remission of sins to all that believe on him the Death of Christ was not yet passed into which Death the Christian Church was to be Baptized 3. These words are so an institution of Confirmation as the sixth Chapter of S. John is of the blessed Eucharist It was designativa not ordinativa it was in design not in present command here it was preached but not reducible to practice till its proper season 4. It was like the words of Christ to S. Peter When thou art converted confirm thy Brethren Here the command was given but that Confirmation of his Brethren was to be performed in a time relative to a succeeding accident 5. It is certain that long before the event and Grace was given Christ did speak of the Spirit of Confirmation that Spirit which was to descend in Pentecost which all they were to receive who should believe on him which whosoever did receive out of his Belly should flow Rivers of Living Waters as is to be read in that place of S. John now quoted 6. This predesignation of the Holy Spirit of Confirmation was presently followed by some little antepast and donariola or little givings of the Spirit for our Blessed Saviour gave the Holy Ghost three several times First 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obscurely and by intimation and secret vertue then when he sent them to heal the sick and anoint them with Oil in the Name of the Lord. Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more expresly and signally after the Resurrection when he took his leave of them and said Receive ye the Holy Ghost And this was to give them a power of ministring Remission of sins and therefore related to Baptism and the ministeries of Repentance But Thirdly he gave it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more perfectly and this was the Spirit of Confirmation for he was not at all until now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says the Text The Holy Ghost was not yet So almost all the Greek Copies Printed and Manuscript and so S. Chrysostom Athanasius Cyril Ammonius in the Catena of the Greeks Leontius Theophylact Euthymius and all the Greek Fathers read it so S. Hierom and S. Austin among the Latines and some Latin Translations read it Our Translations read it The Holy Ghost was not yet given was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in them as some few Greek Copies read it but the meaning is alike Confirmation was not yet actual the Holy Spirit viz. of Confirmation was not yet come upon the Church but it follows not but he was long before promised designed and appointed spoken of and declared * The first of these Collations had the Ceremony of Chrism or Anointing joyned with it which the Church in process of time transferred into her use and ministery yet it is the last only that Christ passed into an Ordinance for ever it is this only which is the Sacramental consummation of our Regeneration in Christ for in this the Holy Spirit is not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 present by his power but present 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as S. Gregory Nazianzen expresses it to dwell with us to converse with us and to abide for ever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so S. Paul describes this Spirit of Confirmation the Spirit which he hath poured forth upon us richly or plentifully that is in great measures and to the full consummation of the
they minister shadows instead of substances SECT V. The whole Procedure or Ritual of Confirmation is by Prayer and Imposition of Hands THE Heart and the Eye are lift up to God to bring Blessings from him and so is the Hand too but this also falls upon the People and rests there to apply the descending Blessing to the proper and prepared suscipient God governed the People of Israel by the hand of Moses and Aaron calidae fecêre silentia turbae Majestate manûs And both under Moses and under Christ when-ever the President of Religion did bless the People he lifted up his Hand over the Congregation and when he blessed a single Person he laid his Hand upon him This was the Rite used by Jacob and the Patriarchs by Kings and Prophets by all the eminently Religious in the Synagogue and by Christ himself when he blessed the Children which were brought to him and by the Apostles when they blessed and confirmed the baptized Converts and whom else can the Church follow The Apostles did so to the Christians of Samaria to them of Ephesus and S. Paul describes this whole mystery by the Ritual part of it calling it the Foundation of the Imposition of hands It is the solemnity of Blessing and the solemnity and application of Paternal prayer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said Clement of Alexandria Upon whom shall he lay his hands whom shall he bless Quidenim aliud est Impositio manuum nisi Oratio super hominem said S. Austin The Bishop's laying his hands on the People what is it but the solemnity of Prayer for them that is a prayer made by those Sacred persons who by Christ are appointed to pray for them and to bless in his Name and so indeed are all the Ministeries of the Church Baptism Consecration of the B. Eucharist Absolution Ordination Visitation of the Sick they are all in genere Orationis they are nothing but solemn and appointed Prayer by an intrusted and a gracious Person specificated by a proper order to the end of the blessing then designed And therefore when S. James commanded that the sick Persons should send for the Elders of the Church he adds and let them pray over them that is lay their hands on the sick and pray for them that is praying over them It is adumbratio dextrae as Tertullian calls it the right hand of him that ministers over-shadows the person for whom the solemn Prayer is to be made This is the Office of the Rulers of the Church for they in the Divine Eutaxy are made your Superiors they are indeed your servants for Jesus sake but they are over you in the Lord and therefore are from the Lord appointed to bless the People for without contradiction saith the Apostle the less is blessed of the greater that is God hath appointed the Superiors in Religion to be the great Ministers of Prayer he hath made them the gracious Persons them he will hear those he hath commanded to convey your needs to God and God's blessings to you and to ask a blessing is to desire them to pray for you them I say whom God most respecteth for their piety and zeal that way or else regardeth for that their place and calling bindeth them above others to do this duty such as are Natural and Spiritual Fathers It is easie for prophane persons to deride these things as they do all Religion which is not conveyed to them by sense or natural demonstrations but the Oeconomy of the Spirit and the things of God are spiritually discerned The Spirit bloweth where it listeth and no man knows whence it comes and whither it goes and the Operations are discerned by Faith and received by Love and by Obedience Date mihi Christianum intelligit quod dico None but true Christians understand and feel these things But of this we are sure that in all the times of Mose's Law while the Synagogue was standing and in all the days of Christianity so long as men loved Religion and walked in the Spirit and minded the affairs of their Souls to have the Prayers and the Blessing of the Fathers of the Synagogue and the Fathers of the Church was esteemed no small part of their Religion and so they went to Heaven But that which I intend to say is this That Prayer and Imposition of Hands was the whole procedure in the Christian Rites and because this Ministery was most signally performed by this Ceremony and was also by S. Paul called and noted by the name of the Ceremony Imposition of hands this name was retained in the Christian Church and this manner of ministring Confirmation was all that was in the commandment or institution But because in Confirmation we receive the Unction from above that is then we are most signally made Kings and Priests unto God to offer up spiritual sacrifices and to enable us to seek the Kingdom of God and the Righteousness of it and that the giving of the Holy Spirit is in Scripture called the Vnction from above the Church of God in early Ages made use of this Allegory and passed it into an External Ceremony and Representation of the Mystery to signifie the Inward Grace Post inscripta oleo frontis signacula per quae Vnguentum Regale datum est Chrisma perenne We are consigned on the Fore-head with Oil and a Royal Unction and an Eternal Chrism is given to us so Prudentius gives testimony of the ministery of Confirmation in his time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said S. Cyril Preserve this Unction pure and spotless for it teaches you all things as you have heard the blessed S. John speaking and philosophizing many things of this holy Chrism Upon this account the H. Fathers used to bless and consecrate Oil and Balsam that by an External Signature they might signifie the Inward Unction effected in Confirmation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Chrism is not simple or common when it is blessed but the gift of Christ and the presence of his H. Spirit as it were effecting the Divinity it self the body is indeed anointed with visible Ointment but is also sanctified by the holy and quickning Spirit so S. Cyril I find in him and in some late Synods other pretty significations and allusions made by this Ceremony of Chrisms Nos autem pro igne visibili qui die Pentecostes super Apostolos apparuit oleum sanctum materiam nempe ignis ex Apostolorum traditione ad confirmandum adhibemus This using of Oil was instead of the Baptism with Fire which Christ baptized his Apostles with in Pentecost and Oil being the most proper matter of Fire is therefore used in Confirmation That this was the ancient Ceremony is without doubt and that the Church had power to do so hath no question and I add it was not unreasonable for if ever the Scripture expresses the mysteriousness of a Grace conferred by an Exterior ministery as this is by
the reception of the Holy Ghost they waxed valiant in the Faith and in all their spiritual combats 2. In Confirmation we receive the Holy Ghost as the earnest of our inheritance as the seal of our Salvation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Gregory Nazianzen we therefore call it a Seal or Signature as being a guard and custody to us and a sign of the Lord's dominion over us The Confirmed person is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sheep that is mark'd which Thieves do not so easily steal and carry away To the same purpose are those words of Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Remember that holy mystagogâ—e in which they who were initiated after the renouncing that Tyrant the Devil and all his works and the confession of the true King Jesus Christ have received the Chrism of spiritual Vnction like a Royal signature by that Vnction as in a shadow perceiving the invisible grace of the most Holy Spirit That is Confirmation we are sealed for the service of God and unto the day of Redemption then it is that the seal of God is had by us The Lord knoweth who are his Quomodo verò dices Dei sum si notas â—on produxeris said S. Basil How can any may say I am God's sheep unless he produce the marks Signati estis Spiritu promissionis per Sanctâ—ssimum Divinum Spiritum Domini grex effecti sumus said Theophylact. When we are thus seal'd by the most Holy and Divine Spirit of promise then we are truly of the Lord's Flock and mark'd with his seal that is When we are rightly Confirm'd then he descâ—nds into our Souls and though he does not operate it may be presently but as the Reasonable Soul works in its due time and by the order of Nature by opportunities and new fermentations and actualities so does the Spirit of God when he is brought into use when he is prayed for with love assiduity when he is caressed tenderly when he is us'd lovingly when we obey his motions readily when we delight in his words greatly then we find it true that the Soul had a new life put into her a principle of perpetual actions but the tree planted by the waters side does not presently bear fruit but in its due season By this Spirit we are then seal'd that whereas God hath laid up an inheritance for us in the Kingdom of Heaven and in the faith of that we must live and labour to confirm this Faith God hath given us this Pledge the Spirit of God is a witness to us and tells us by his holy comforts by the peace of God and the quietness and refrâ—shments of a good Conscience that God is our Father that we are his Sons and Daughters and shall be co-heirs with Jesus in his eternal Kingdom In Baptism we are made the Sons of God but we receive the witness and testimony of it in Confirmation This is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Holy Ghost the Comforter this is he whom Christ promis'd and did send in Pentecost and was afterwards ministred and conveyed by Prayer and Imposition of hands and by this Spirit he makes the Confessors bold and the Martyrs valiant and the Tempted strong and the Virgins to persevere and Widows to sing his praises and his glories And this is that excellency which the Church of God called the Lord's seal and teaches to be imprinted in Confirmation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a perfect Phylactery or Guard even the Lord's seal so Eusebius calls it I will not be so curious as to enter into a discourse of the Philosophy of this But I shall say that they who are curious in the secrets of Nature and observe external signatures in Stones Plants Fruits and Shells of which Naturalists make many observations and observe strange effects and the more internal signatures in Minerals and Living bodies of which Chymists discourse strange secrets may easily if they please consider that it is infinitely credible that in higher essences even in Spirits there may be signatures proportionable wrought more immediately and to greater purposes by a Divine hand I only point at this and so pass it over as it may be not fit for every mans consideration And now if any man shall say we see no such things as you talk of and find the Confirm'd people the same after as before no better and no wiser not richer in Gifts not more adorned with Graces nothing more zealous for Christ's Kingdom not more comforted with Hope or established by Faith or built up with Charity they neither speak better nor live better What then Does it therefore follow that the Holy Ghost is not given in Confirmation Nothing less For is not Christ given us in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Do not we receive his Body and his Blood Are we not made all one with Christ and he with us And yet it is too true that when we arise from that holy Feast thousands there are that find no change But there are in this two things to be considered One is that the changes which are wrought upon our souls are not after the manner of Nature visible and sensible and with observation The Kingdom of God cometh not with Observation for it is within you and is only discerned spiritually and produces its effects by the method of Heaven and is first apprehended by Faith and is endear'd by Charity and at last is understood by holy and kind Experiences And in this there is no more objection against Confirmation than against Baptism or the Lord's Supper or any other Ministery Evangelical The other thing is this If we do not find the effects of the Spirit in Confirmation it is our faults For he is receiv'd by Moral instruments and is intended only as a Help to our endeavours to our labours and our prayers to our contentions and our mortifications to our Faith and to our Hope to our Patience and to our Charity Non adjuvari dicitur qui nihil facit He that does nothing cannot be said to be help'd Unless we in these instances do our part of the work it will be no wonder if we lose his part of the co-operation and supervening blessing He that comes under the Bishops hands to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost will come with holy desires and a longing Soul with an open hand and a prepared heart he will purifie the House of the Spirit for the entertainment of so Divine a guest he will receive him with humility and follow him with obedience and delight him with purities and he that does thus let him make the objection if he can and tell me Does he say that Jesus is the Lord He cannot say this but by the Holy Ghost Does he love his Brother If he does then the Spirit of God abides in him Is Jesus Christ formed in him Does he live by the laws of the Spirit Does he obey his commands Does he attend his motions Hath he no
earnest desires to serve God If he have not then in vain hath he received either Baptism or Confirmation But if he have it is certain that of himself he cannot do these things he cannot of himself think a good thought Does he therefore think well That is from the Holy Spirit of God To conclude this inquiry The Holy Ghost is promised to all men to profit withall that 's plain in Scripture Confirmation or Prayer and Imposition of the Bishops hand is the Solemnity and Rite us'd in Scripture for the conveying of that promise and the effect is felt in all the Sanctifications and changes of the Soul and he that denies these things hath not Faith nor the true notices of Religion or the spirit of Christianity Hear what the Scriptures yet further say in this Mystery Now he which confirmeth or stablisheth us with you in Christ and hath anointed us is God Who hath also sealed us and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts Here is a description of the whole mysterious part of this Rite God is the Author of the Grace The Apostles and all Christians are the suscipients and receive this Grace by this Grace we are adopted and incorporated into Christ God hath anointed us that is he hath given us this Unction from above he hath sealed us by his Spirit made us his own bored our ears through made us free by his perpetual service and hath done all these things in token of a greater he hath given us his Spirit to testifie to us that he will give us of his glory These words of S. Paul besides that they evidently contain in them the spiritual part of this Ritual are also expounded of the Rite and Sacramental if self by S. Chrysostom Theodoret and Theophylact that I may name no more For in this Mystery Christos nos efficit misericordiam Dei nobis annunciat per Spiritum Sanctum said S. John Damascen he makes us his anointed ones and by the Holy Spirit he declares his eternal mercy towards us Nolite tangere Christos meos Touch not mine anointed ones For when we have this Signature of the Lord upon us the Devils cannot come near to hurt us unless we consent to their temptations and drive the Holy Spirit of the Lord from us SECT VII Of Preparation to Confirmation and the Circumstances of Receiving it IF Confirmation have such gracious effects why do we Confirm little Children whom in all reason we cannot suppose to be capable and receptive of such Graces It will be no answer to this if we say That this very question is asked concerning the Baptism of Infants to which as great effects are consequent even Pardon of all our sins and the New birth and Regeneration of the Soul unto Christ For in these things the Soul is wholly passive and nothing is required of the suscipient but that he put in no bar against the Grace which because Infants cannot do they are capable of Baptism but it follows not that therefore they are capable of Confirmation because this does suppose them such as to need new assistances and is a new profession and a personal undertaking and therefore requires personal abilities and cannot be done by others as in the case of Baptism The Aids given in Confirmation are in order to our contention and our danger our temptation and spiritual warfare and therefore it will not seem equally reasonable to Confirm Children as to Baptize them To this I answer That in the Primitive Church Confirmation was usually administred at the same time with Baptism for we find many Records that when the Office of Baptism was finished and the baptized person devested of the white Robe the person was carried again to the Bishop to be Confirmed as I have already shewn out of Dionysius and divers others The reasons why anciently they were ministred immediately after one another is not only because the most of them that were Baptized were of years to chuse their Religion and did so and therefore were capable of all that could be consequent to Baptism or annexed to it or ministred with it and therefore were also at the same time Communicated as well as Confirmed but also because the solemn Baptisms were at solemn times of the year at Faster only and Whitsuntide and only in the Cathedral or Bishop's Church in the chief City whither when the Catechumens came and had the opportunity of the Bishop's presence they took the advantage ut Sacramento utroque renascantur as S. Cyprian's expression is that they might be regenerated by both the Mysteries and they also had the third added viz. the Holy Eucharist This simultaneous ministration hath occasioned some few of late to mistake Confirmation for a part of Baptism but no distinct Rite or of distinct effect save only that it gave ornament and complement or perfection to the other But this is infinitely confuted by the very first ministery of Confirmation in the world For there was a great interval between S. Philip's Baptizing and the Apostles Confirming the Samaritans where also the difference is made wider by the distinction of the Minister a Deacon did one none but an Apostle and his Successor a Bishop could do the other and this being of so universal a Practice and Doctrine in the Primitive Church it is a great wonder that any Learned men could suffer an error in so apparent a case It is also clear in two other great remarks of the practice of the Primitive Church The one is of them who were Baptized in their sickness the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when they recovered they were commanded to address themselves to the Bishop to be Confirmed which appears in the XXXVIII Canon of the Council of Eliberis and the XLVI Canon of the Council of Laodicea which I have before cited upon other occasions The other is that of Hereticks returning to the Church who were Confirmed not only long after Baptism but after their Apostasie and their Conversion For although Episcopal Confirmation was the inlargement of Baptismal grace and commonly administred the same day yet it was done by interposition of distinct Ceremonies and not immediately in time Honorius Augustodunensis tells That when the Baptized on the eighth day had laid aside their Mitres or proper habit used in Baptism then they were usually Confirmed or consigned with Chrism in the Forehead by the Bishop And when children were Baptized irregularly or besides the ordinary way in Villages and places distant from the Bishop Confirmation was deferr'd said Durandus And it is certain that this affair did not last long without variety Sometimes they ministred both together sometimes at greater sometimes at lesser distances and it was left indifferent in the Church to do the one or the other or the third according to the opportunity and the discretion of the Bishop But afterward in the middle and descending Ages it grew to be a question not whether it were
invalidity of their first pretended Baptism or their not using at all Confirmation in their Heretical Conventicles But the repetition of Confirmation is expresly forbidden by the Council of Tarracon cap. 6. and by P. Gregory the Second and sanctum Chrisma collatum altaris honor propter consecrationem quae per Episcopos tantùm exercenda conferenda sunt evelli non queunt said the Fathers in a Council at Toledo Confirmation and Holy Orders which are to be given by Bishops alone can never be annulled and therefore they can never be repeated And this relies upon those severe words of S. Paul having spoken of the foundation of the Doctrine of Baptisms and Laying on of hands he says if they fall away they can never be renewed that is the ministery of Baptism and Confirmation can never be repeated To Christians that sin after these ministrations there is only left a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expergiscimini that they arise from slumber and stir up the Graces of the Holy Ghost Every man ought to be careful that he do not grieve the Holy Spirit but if he does yet let him not quench him for that is a desperate case 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Holy Spirit is the great conservative of the new Life only keep the Keeper take caâ—e that the Spirit of God do not depart from you for the great Ministery of the Spirit is but once for as Baptism is so is Confirmation I end this Discourse with a plain exhortation out of S. Ambrose upon those words of S. Paul He that confirmeth us with you in Christ is God Repete quia accepisti signaculum spirituale spiritum sapientiae intellectûs spiritum consilii atque virtutis spiritum cognitionis atque pietatis spiritum sancti timoris serva quod accepisti Signavit te Deus Pater confirmavit te Christus Dominus Remember that thou who hast been Confirmed hast receiv'd the Spiritual Signature the spirit of wisdom and understanding the spirit of counsel and strength the spirit of knowledge and godliness the spirit of holy fear keep what thou hast receiv'd The Father hath sealâ—d thee and Christ thy Lord hath confirmed thee by his Divine Spirit and he will never depart from thee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unless by evil works we estrange him from us The same advice is given by Prudentius Cultor Dei memento Te fontis lavacri Rorem subiisse Sanctum Et Chrismate innotatum Remember how great things ye have received and what God hath done for you ye are of his Flock and his Militia ye are now to sight his battels and therefore to put on his armor and to implore his auxiliaries and to make use of his strengths and always to be on his side against all his and all our Enemies But he that desires Grace must not despise to make use of all the instruments of Grace For though God communicates his invisible Spirit to you yet that he is pleas'd to do it by visible instruments is more than he needs but not more than we do need And therefore since God descends to our infirmities let us carefully and lovingly address our selves to his Ordinances that as we receive Remission of sins by the washing of Water and the Body and Blood of Christ by the ministery of consecrated Symbols so we may receive the Holy Ghost sub Ducibus Christianae militiae by the Prayer and Imposition of the Bishops hands whom our Lord Jesus hath separated to this Ministery For if you corroborate your self by Baptism they are the words of S. Gregory Nazianzen and then take heed for the future by the most excellent and firmest aids consigning your mind and body with the Vnction from above viz. in the Holy Rite of Confirmation with the Holy Ghost as the Children of Israel did with the aspersion on the door-posts in the night of the death of the first-born of Egypt what evil shall happen to you meaning that no evil can invade you and what aid shall you get If you sit down you shall be without fear and if you rest your sleep shall be sweet unto you But if when ye have received the Holy Spirit you live not according to his Divine principles you will lose him again that is you will lose all the blessing though the impression does still remain till ye turn quite Apostates in pessimis hominibus manebit licèt ad judicium saith S. Austin the Holy Ghost will remain either as a testimony of your Vnthankfulness unto condemnation or else as a seal of Grace and an earnest or your inheritance of eternal Glory THE END A DISCOURSE OF The NATVRE OFFICES and MEASVRES OF FRIENDSHIP WITH Rules of conducting it In a Letter to the most Ingenious and Excellent M rs KATHARINE PHILIPS Madam THE wise Ben-Sirach advised that we should not consult with a Woman concerning her of whom she is jealous neither with a coward in matters of War nor with a Merchant concerning Exchange and some other instances he gives of interested persons to whom he would not have us hearken in any matter of Counsel For where-ever the interest is secular or vicious there the â—iass is not on the side of Truth or Reason because these are seldom serv'd by profit and low regards But to consult with a Friend in the matters of Friendship is like consulting with a Spiritual person in Religion they who understand the secrets of Religion or the Interior beauties of Friendship are the fittest to give answers in all inquiries concerning the respective subjects because Reason and Experience are on the side of interest and that which in Friendship is most pleasing and most useful is also most reasonable and most true and a Friends fairest interest is the best Measure of the Conducting Friendships and therefore you who are so eminent in Friendships could also have given the best answer to your own inquiries and you could have trusted your own Reason because it is not only greatly instructed by the direct notices of things but also by great experience in the matter of which you now inquire But because I will not use any thing that shall look like an excuse I will rather give you such an account which you can easily reprove than by declining your commands seem more safe in my prudence than open and communicative in my Friendship to you You first inquire How far a Dear and a perfect Friendship is authoriz'd by the principles of Christianity To this I answer That the word Friendship in the sence we commonly mean by it is not so much as named in the New Testament and our Religion takes no notice of it You think it strange but read on before you spend so much as the beginning of a passion or a wonder upon it There is mention of Friendship with the world and it is said to be enmity with God but the word is no where else named or to any other purpose in