who was Patriarch of Antioch although a good while after should not be thought â—itter to understand the practice of that Church than those who lived after him in other Churches I apprehend not His Comment upon the Text is this Sine Vrbis Episcopo without the Bishop of the City is not to be understood without his Command as we term it his Fiat but saith he his Ordination or Consecration for saith he if the Bishop Command the Chori-Episcopus to Ordain and he should do it that Ordination were void so that by this learned Author this perplexed Canon must be understood against Doctor Forbes but he hath a third Edition of Isidore Hispalensis which reads it praeter conscientiam Episcopi without the conscience of the Bishop and here he magnifies this Edition and calls it probatissima Versio the most approved version but he doth not set down by whom this is approved besides himself neither do I think he can nor doth shew any reason why it should be so approved but his own Authority and let us see what he hath got by it for certainly it seems not to me to inforce his interpretation which is that he may Ordain these offices with the leave of the Bishop for it is not praeter consensum but conscientiam now conscience is not the same with consent consent is most proper to another mans action Conscience to his own the great actions of Conscience being to accuse or excuse a mans self or to judg of a mans own act or whether they have been done according to right science but it meddles not with what concerns other men either to judge accuse or excuse them unless we are authorized in foro publico or privato in confession and then it is an act of the Confessors Conscience only out of this regard that he is bound in duty to apply his knowledg to others and therefore to understand this Phrase better let us conceive that Praeter or beside the Conscience of the Bishop is non-sence but if he or any others are delighted with this word Conscience in this Canon I will shew them a fourth reading where he may find it used most properly and significantly which is Cresperius his sum word Chori-Episcopus where he quotes this Canon and therein saith that a Chori-Episcopus must not Ordain Priests or Deacons propter Conscientiam Episcopi for the conscience he hath of the Bishop of his City that is because his Conscience tells him that the Bishop is only to Ordain such thus I think that it is no way evident from the Canon that these men did Ordain Priests or Deacons we come next to the second whether any of these Chori-Episcopi had Episcopal Ordination and so might in a case of necessity Ordain SECT IV. Doctor Forbes to blame for Censuring Bellarmine too sharply in this point IN this Question Doctor Forbes falls soul upon Cardinal Bellarmine which I was sorry to read gives him ill language calls his opinion ridiculous and childish and again Page 170. detestanda est Bellarmini impudentia Bellarmines impudence is to be abhorr'd or else miseranda imperitia his Ignorance is to be pityed for although the Cardinal may seem to deserve such language himself after giving learned men who differ from himself in judgment as bad or worse yet these Pen-Combates should in that resemble those with swords where the first engagers in the quarrel being high with animosities against each other will give no Quarter but after the experience of a continued warr hath taught that what happens to one this day may be the fortune of the other to morrow they manage the warr more civilly in the future so it should be with us now when the warrs have continued a long time and experience hath taught us that the most learned writer is a man and subject to error may be mistaken in his judgment may sometimes in Quotations miss the right conceit of them we should spare such reproachful languages and deal with one another even our enemies more courteously but let us see why he is so severe against Bellarmine because saith he Bellarmine doth oppose Damasus and all antiquity in saying that there are some Chori-Episcopi which had Episcopal Consecration and some which had only Presbyterial to this I say Bellarmine may be mistaken and so may Vasques the Jesuit who opposeth him in that conclusion but I doubt it doth not clearly appear out of antiquity Which is mistaken Bellarmine de Clericis in his seventeenth Cap. conceives that these Chori-Episcopi which he and all writers make to be vicarii Episcoporum may be of two sorts either such as are meer Presbyters or else such as are suffragans or titular Bishops the first sort are they which Pope Damasus condemns and will not suffer to encroach upon the Episcopal office the other he saith which were suffragan Bishops or titular might do it with leave from the Bishop of the City the fault of this saying appears not to me for they being vicarii may be of either sort or both and I spoke it knowingly as will appear presently in the next Cap. if they were such as are called suffragans as is reasonable to think then they were Ordained Episcopally and might Ordain Priests yea Bishops and did do it nor doth any thing in Vasques or Doctor Forbes necessarily confute it first for Cardinal Bellarmine he seems to be of opinion that this Canon doth approve of the Consecration of these Chori-Episcopi and that they might give the Order of Priesthood with leave from the chief Bishop to avoid that that they who were presbyters might then do it he puts down this distinction that some had but Presbyterian Ordination and some Episcopal and this he thinks this Canon implyes when it saith speaking of the Chori-Episcopi etiamsi manus impositionem Episcoporum acceperint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mark it is in the Plural number they had the imposition of Hands of Bishops not of one only as Presbyters and then again it is said ut Episcopi consecrati fuerunt and are Consecrated as Bishops which words saith Doctor Forbes were by the translator added and are not in the original Greek it is probable Pope Damasus who lived near that time a thousand years and more nearer than he and is reported to be learned in the Greek as well as Latin should know the words of the Councel as well as he or any other yet he puts down these words and they are in both the Lections of Peter Crabb I will not trouble my self to look further but Pope Damasus writing against them and condemning them would not have put down this Argument against himself if it had not been the Language used in that Canon what force his Arguments have I shall examine speedily but now let us consider the Argument which is only touched by Bellarmine if they were a sort of Chori-Episcopi which had the imposition of Hands from divers Bishops what reason can be imagined why such
Pauls saying 1 Cor. 9. Woe is me if I preach not the Gospel and then Glosse upon it that St. Paul meant none of these preachings I have named it is true he did not but yet Consider that St. Pauls preaching was infallibly inspired and there he might have full assurance of what he delivered with Ease without Pre-thought what he should deliver which we have not without mighty pains and study therefore his preaching was by the power of his utterance and yet he St. Paul did not only use vocal preaching but writing and those Sermons he wrote have been I dare say more beneficial to the Church than those he preached and then we read those very Sermons which he wrote His Epistles are very Sermons we have the same and there is reason if we be not self-conceited that they should do as much good amongst us as the Roâ—ans Corinthians Galathians c. If they be hard to us in many places I doubt not but they were hard to them and we have besides these Expositions of the Fathers in the Ancient Church by which Souls were directed to heaven and all that have been saved these 12. or 1300 years have been saved by them unlesse some few of late who have found a new Road to Heaven Well then to end This is a low degree of preaching but is preâ—ching and preaching the Gospel These are Sermons which St. Paul and the Church thought fit to be divulged for the Salvation of men SECT XVI To what Preaching every Presbyter is bound I Have expounded what preaching is now let us see to what preaching every Presbyter is bound First without Question every Presbyter should be a ruler so St. Paul in the 3d. Chapter of this Epistle verse 5. For if a man know not how to rule his own house how shall he take care to rule the Church of God there he supposeth That he must be a Ruler otherwise his Conclusion were nothing drawn from the Governing his own house There ruling is necessâ—ry in a Bishop or Presbyter for you will see hereafter that these Offices had one name and in many things agreed Now there you see ruling is required in a Presbyter and he himself will not say that this was a Lay Presbyter But then Consider that in this whole Character of a Presbyter there is no one word of preaching although there is of ruling and can you think if a Presbyter were chosen such as St. Paul here nominates it were amisse But it is objected Tit. 1. 9. there it is required that he should be holding fast the faithfull word as he hath been taught that he may be able by sound Doctrine to exhort and convince the Gainsayers I may well think this to be a Caution of Advice not necessity But if Timothy had chosen and ordained such as were prescribed him they might have been men sufficiently qualified yet ex abundanti if this might be had in another Condition although that were well yet this would be better there is a latitude in Good though not in Truth but then let let us scan the Text suppose it be a requisite â—irst let us observe that he must hold fast the faithfull word that is the word I conceive of the Gospel hold fast that is apprehend it strongly adhere close to it as he hath learned so we in our Translation or in learning as the Margent or secundùm Doctrinam Sermonis as Beza the businesse will not be much It must either be holding fast that Doctrine which he hath learned heretofore and then there will be little left for new Invention or else it must be he must hold the faithfull word in his teaching and then I answer this will be made good in the reading the Scriptures in the reading or repeating Homilies The next Clause is That he may be able to exhort and convince Gainsayers This likewise will be acted in the other But Consider first Can any man think that this ability must be understood in such a vast Capacity as that every Presbyter must be able to Convince all ill Opinions of Gentilism Judaism Surely I believe not If so I dare say nor he nor any Fellow he hath is a Presbyter I remember once in a Conference with a Gentleman of his mind a Presbyter I proposed to him an Old Heresie which I had newly lighted on and those Arguments were made for it he was forced to Confesse an inability for that time and yet a man of as great a Name as any in England of that Side Well then what must it be that there must be some Capability to this purpose upon occasions not pulpit work but by discourse when any such thing shall be objected and that such men should endeavour to improve themselves in their Abilities to this purpose so that here is a great Latitude and Mens abilities in all Elections and Ordinations should be considered how far they extend to this purpose but I perceive not here that kind of preaching which is now so magnified at all exacted So the Heresie be convinced so the men be exhorted to piety whether by an Homily out of some Ancient Father or such which the wisdom of the Church prescribes or a Declamation of a mans own penning it is not material for although those who have least Abilities commonly do most magnifie the latter and practise it yet without question the former is much safer both for the Strong Convincing of ancient Heresies and likewise for sure Grounds of Exhortation Put the Case that it were as it was in Queen Elizabeths dayes that there was such a Reformation as abundance of learned men would not yield to but rather leave their Benefices than subscribe it is necessary that those Churches should have each a Presbyter in them you will have men gifted with abilities to preach and make Sermons of their own invention I presume there were not then an hundred such in all England St. Paul had then provided ill for this Church who should require as necessary such Conditions as could not be found Put the Case as it is that there be four or five hundred yea a thousand two or three thousand that have abilities fit to be licensed to preach Sermons of their own making it is a mighty matter yet what are they amongst those multitudes of Churches and Parishes certainly but an handfull the Parishes are 9284. It cannot be then that there is a necessity of more abilities to a Presbyter than to do these Duties in that general way which I have discoursed and so to endeavour in and by such means to instruct others and upon Study and Industry either from himself or more learned men upon the starting any new Doubt by Study convince the Gainsayers it is not required he should do it ex tempore SECT XVII What peculiar Interest a Presbyter hath in this kind of Preaching HAving thus Considered Preaching in its latitude it will now be worth our Thoughts to reflect upon this Officer called
Presbyters which are not Preachers and do not labour in the Word in that sense and yet there are no Presbyters which have not the power of Administring the Sacraments It is very weak that he saith there must be Preachers which are no Preachers for Presbytery doth not depend upon preaching in this kind nor doth the name or office signifie a Preacher but if he will there may be preachers who do not labour make it their Chief pains to preach there may be differences in the Industries of men and industrious men may be industrious in one piece of their Office and not in another 1 Cor. 15. 10. St. Paul saith he laboured more than they all that was without doubt in preaching aud yet 1 Cor. 1. 14. he baptized but a few industriously attending one and not so much the other but the sense of the Text is apparent I think and do you forgive my tedious digression But he urgeth that the Bishops Factors provide ill for them for by the Apostles determination the meanest Minister that is conscientious and laborious in preaching should have more respect than his Diocesan who sits c. but labours not to feed them with the Word of Life The Text doth not say the meanest conscientious Minister c. but saith that those who rule well and labour in the Word likewise are more deserving that honour than they that rule well only It may be it is spoken only of Bishops howsoever it is only an Addition of the obligation to him who labours and truly I think that Bishop who doth not labour in the Word is worthy of little but I confine not labouring in the Word to preaching only studyed Sermons but to instruct Preachers to write to overthrow ill opinions and the like and this is labouring in the Word and Doctrine SECT XX. St. Ambrose Expounded LAstly he hath found a piece of an Antient and truly to be honoured Father of the Church St. Ambrose which he rejoyceth in like one that had met with some unexpected blessing see how he commends it It carries saith he an Amazing Evidence and again after the place quoted The brightnesse and patenesse of the Witnesse is such as though it had been writ with a beam of the Sun and dazles the Eyes of almost Envy it self But observe this one thing as he and that sort of Writers when they will urge Scriptures which they cannot find to make any thing for them they put not down the words but Ciphers So here the words seem to serve his turn but the place where they are put overthrows it but it is not set down by him I have hunted it out and it is upon the first verse of the 1 Tim. 5. the words are these Apud omnes ubique Gentes honorabilis est Senectus unde Synagoga postea Ecclesia Seniores habuit sine quorum Consilio nihil agebatur in Ecclesiâ quod quâ negligentiâ obsoleverit nescio nisi forte Doctorum desidiâ aut potius superbiâ dum soli volunt aliquid videri Now consider this is Writ upon the first verse before The Words he comments on are these Rebuke not an Elder but entreat him as a Father and the younger men as brethren St. Ambrose with all Commentators even Beza doth acknowledge this word Elder to signifie an Elder in Age St. Ambrose his words before these written down are Propter honorificentiam aetatis majorem natu cum mansâ—ctudine ad bonum opus provocandum And upon that he brings the words cited Amongst all Nations old Age is honourable and this word is as it were put of purpose to overthrow those men he useth Senectus not Presbyter which word Senectus was never used for an Officer so then what doth St. Ambrose mean but that in the Jewish Synagogue and in the Church they used grave men to assist and counsell without whose Advice nothing was done in the Church I grant it but these men were not your Elders but grave and learned men to advise with I will put in it is fit to be so still and for that reason Chancellors men learned used to sit in the Consistory But he gives two cautions pag. 15. Wherefore let him know that is the Reader that the Elders mentioned by Ambrose were such that their places and offices were almost worn out I agree but such were not the preaching Elders I agree to that likewise but say withall that these men were not such Elders who had Office in the Church but were Counsellors as he saith His second Observation upon St. Ambrose is That the defacing of the power and Rule of these Elders came as he conjectures by the sloath especially by the Pride of the Teachers because they alone might be lifted up The word in St. Ambrose was Doctorum of Doctors which was a phrase applyed to Bishops who in his time were the only Preachers as appears in the famous Story of St. Austin who when he was a Presbyter was fain to have a license to preach now then why he should say the sloath of the Bishops I cannot tell for sloathfull men are willing to have others joyned in Commission with them that so others may act what through lazinesse they are unwilling to meddle with but what he saith of pride may have some colour that they would Act all alone and so have all the Curchy and Application made to them therefore they would admit none of these Lay Counsellors with them Here is the drift of his Speech and what word in all this tends to the Addition of any Ecclesiastical Officer much lesse by a Divine right which is pretended to but only some Chancellor as I have said to advise with and now suppose I say clean contrary to him that the sloath and pride of Bishops put all business upon these Lay men so that indeed in our Times they are more Bishops than the Bishops and all through their sloath because they would not act in businesse and pride because they disdained to stoop to petty occasions I doubt I should say true and yet neither his Saying nor mine make one word for their Elders Jure Divino the rest that he saith vanisheth of its self thus they would make themsâ—lves eminent by the disannulling the honor of others places they could not be such as were of their own rank or did possess any of their places I grant it neither were they such Elders as we speak of nor you Thus now is apparent I hope how weak his Arguments are and what he said of that place of St. Ambrose that it had an amazing kind of discovery with it I may say of this whole discourse that it hath an amazing kind of discovery but what it discovers is the strangenesse of these men who opposing a known truth and the universal practise of the Christian world from Christs time downward dare urge these places for their Conceits which had very little semblance for them although they had been expounded by
7 8. He that teacheth on reaching he that exhorteth on exhortation This place I have at large shewed in the Case of their Deacon not to signifie distinct Offices but diversities of Gifts and it imports no more than that he who finds in himself Abilities of Teaching or Exhorting should use his Talent as a member of the same body to the good of his brother But I wonder why they should not rather distinguish thâ—se Offices by the Names of Teacher and Exhorter because these Names in this place signifie distinct Abilities and Endeavours in those two wayes which they intend them to but there is nothing in either word which intimates the nature of a Pastor which is to goveâ— as well as feed But these words are found Eph. 4. 1. where the words Pastor and Teacher are used and are urged for this distinction in his Treatise of the Preachers Office Part 2. Chap. 1. pag. 20. but how unluckily let any man Consider The words are these And he gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers let any man Consider this place and think whether the Apostle should put these as distinct Those which are distinct he distinguishes with this phrase some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors now mark he doth not say some Teachers but some Pastors and Teachers Coupling these together as one not distinguishing them as the other and therefore let him not dare to sever them whom God hath joyned But he â—ites Beza upon this place to answer mine Argument which he toucheth let us examine therefore what he saith I assent saith he to Ambrose who makes these Offices distinct for ratio parum firma est for saith he the reason is not firm which moved Hierom and Austin to Confound them that is because the Copula is put without the Article he saith it is not firm but he offers no reason why it is not firm the Apostlâ— distinguisheth the rest with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and joyns these with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is put to joyn these together can any man imagine these to be severed he names Hierome and Austin but he might have cited St. Crysostome Theophylact Theodoret all the Greek Fathers whom any man would credit in the Greek Tongue before Beza when he hath no reason for what he saith But the Trick of these men when they have no reason they speak great words in Commendation or Disparagement of what is for or against them It is parum firma ratio saith Beza but gives no reason when besides the propriety of Speech he hath all learned men against him I but Beza hath Ambrose it is true Ambrose doth in his Comments upon this place distinguish these but Beza will not stand to Ambrose for first he begins with Apostles they saith he are Bishops Prophets Expounders of Scripture Evangelists Deacons Pastors Lectors that is Readers Magistri Masters which we translate Teachers were Exorcists this last Beza mentioneth to be not agreeing with his Opinion I may say nor any one of the rest But take this note of Ambrose he took the words as they lay and so expounded them but not observing that Criticism which perhaps he looked not on he gave an Exposition such as was agreeing to the present face of the Church in which he lived which it is possible easily for any man to do but did ever any man who observed and marked the language of St. Paul think it fit to be cast off with a parum firma est ratio amongst these I have named who marked it amongst the Latinet as Beza Hierom Austin I can adde to them Anselm most punctually and our Bede likewise upon the place so that sense is invincible with an uninterrupted Exposition and a strong literal sense of the Text for St. Ambrose although Beza agree with him in the division yet his Authority prevails not with him for the Office what it should be nor Beza's opinion with Hooker so they serve one anothers Turn so far as their own design leads them but no further for Beza makes this Teachers place to be such as should read a Divinity Lecture Scholam regere Ecclesiasticam but Hooker denyes this There is saith he Doctor in Schola Doctor in Ecclesia and saith he the second is here meant but I would fain know the difference betwixt a Teacher in the Schools and in the Church for I conceive these men not putting difference in the places and if they take the Church for the Congregation of men I know no difference betwixt one and the other nor can there be this Exposition of Mr. Hookers which as it is most singular so it is farre from the language of St. Paul I will adde this only note That he nor any other can shew me that place of Scripture directing any Duty to either of these Offices in their distinct Notions as they expresse them which will not agree to both and therefore they have no ground upon which to build this phansie SECT IV. Whether there be a distinction of Offices I Come now to the other dispute Whether there be any distinction amongst these Offices by Apostolical right This is a Question which hath been mightily debated and therefore a man can scarce handle any thing which hath not been often discoursed on before yet if by varying the Method of Handling it or by other manner of expressions or applying other mens expressions in another way than they have done that which I shall write shall fit some mens understandings better than other mens words before me have done I shall think it an happy work and not repent me of my pains and although I think that other men have abundantly spoken of this question and so fully that they have satisfied my self yet because I find others are not satisfied I conceive our blessed Saviours Command to St. Peter to be a Precept to all of us when thou art confirmed strengthen thy brethren Luke 22. 32. and although it be but little I can speak yet put in that little For the understanding therefore of this Question First Know that although this Question about that Order we now term Bishops whether they have distinction and a right of preheminence beyond Presbyters that are barely such yet it is not de nomine barely of the Name whether this word Bishop be such as must alwayes be applied to that Office but of the Thing whether there be such a Thing as a Degree Instituted by the Apostles which hath a preheminence above other Presbyters and then because the word Bishop or Superior or Superintendent or Superinspector being a word applyed to this Office will by Consent of a perpetual Language in the Church be well fitted to the Expression of that Office we may use it often in this Discourse without prejudice as we shall see occasion Secondly Let us Conceive as was before taught that all Ecclesiastical power was
most ancient term Presbyter inferiour to the Supreaâ— called by the Scripture Apostles and to their Successors called Bishops among the Ancients therefore in the reading of Authors not the Institutions only but the usus loquendi is to be Considered in words Cambden in his Remains hath a long Discourse like a Lexicon where we may see to how various Senses in our English Language the same words have arrived by Tract of Time losing their old and gaining a new Sense especially in Offices so hath it happened with the words Bishop and Presbyter they were most frequently in Scripture taken for one and the same thing but the word Apostle or Angel I can never find given to the Inferiour Sort of Presbyters But now this word Apostle is appropriated in the Language of Divines to the Twelve and St. Paul only the word Bishop to the Superiour Sort the word Priest or Presbyter to the Inferiour Sort of Presbyters I shall leave therefore to discourse of the Names and come to examine the Text concerning the Thing whether there be in this Text a Parity of Ministers prescribed SECT VIII The First Argument for a Parity answered FOR this Parity he urgeth nothing but the Attributing these two names which we use in a distinct Sense to one and the same thing which proves no parity of Office but only the use of these words in those dayes But I will go further and prove this Office we call Bishop distinct from the Presbyter out of that very Text St. Paul saith I have left thee in Creet to do these two things that thou shouldest set in order the Things that are wanting and ordain Elders in every City Mark here St. Paul had been in Creet himself he had layd the foundation of the Gospel he being to go further into the World leaves Titus to build upon his Foundation and he leaves him to do two things that he should set in Order or Correct or supercorrect those things which were not perfected by himself here is Episcopacy in one piece he had Authority to correct to set in order things that were out of Order to Correct what was amisse then secondly to Ordain Elders in every City not to appoint only but to ordain authoritatively to sâ—ttle them I do not know how a Bishop could more exactly be described in so few words and I wonder much why these men should produce this Text which without a mind much prejudicated with another Opinion cannot be wrested to any other sense Hooker takes no notice of this but some others say That Titus was an Evangelist Their Exception that Titus was an Evangelist answered THey say so but do they produce one word out of Scripture or Antiquity for it they might say he was an Apostle as well and with much more semblance and I think he was of the Inferiour rank but then can they tell me what an Evangelist was This is a shrewd Question Those four that writ the Gospels are only known by that name amongst Ecclesiastical Writers so that if a man should say the â—vangelist saith so we would Conclude one of them Philip is indeed called an Evangelist Acts 21. but no man else in the New Testament it may be because he was an excellent and powerfull Preacher Beza with those who affect new Opinions makes an Evangelist to be one who was an Associate and Companion to the Apostles in their travell but there is nothing in Scripture or Antiquity to give light to that Conclusion I am sure St. Chrysostome Theophylact c. are against it in expresse Terms upon the 4th to the Ephes. St. Ambrose makes him a Deacon to the Apostles which hath some shew of reason for it because Philip was an Evangelist This word Evangelist is but three Times used in Scripture Acts 21. 8. where Philip is called an Evangelist Ephes. 4. 11. where an Evangelist is reckoned amongst the Ecclesiastical Officers 2 Tâ—m 4. 5. where he is bid do the work of an Evangelist which could be nothing but industrious preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ or as some of the Ancients suffering for Christ because he is bid in the same verse immediately before these words to endure Affliction and in the words followâ—ng to make full proof of his Ministry but is there the least Colour that this Office should enable him to ordain Presbyters or Correct Misdemeanors or to regulate things that are amisse which Titus was Commissioned to do Again it is generally agreed amongst them that this Office of an Evangelist was a Temporary Office but these Duties of Correcting of Ordaining Elders must needs be perpetual in the Church and therefore could not Constitute the nature of that temporal Office Well then to dispell that cloud that would darken the light of this Text for Episcopacy by saying that Titus was an Evangelist there is no word in Scripture nor any Author in Antiquity of any reputation in the World which offers any thing towards that Opinion 2dly If they did yet they would be at as great a losse to shew me that the Office of an Evangelist was to do such things as Titus is here commanded to do 3dly If they could shew Evangelizing to Consist in the performance of such Duties yet we might justly then Conceive them to he Bishops such as we require and a Standing Office in the Church because these Duties are so and it is evident that Titus had Authority in both these kinds Therefore there were some men which had such Authority above others But let us go on with Hooker as he doth Confirm his Mistaken Opinion SECT IX Hookers Illustration from Acts 20. answered PAul saith he Acts 20. sends for the Elders of Ephesus and professeth in the 28th verse that Christ had made them Overseers or Bishops where not only the Name is Common but the Thing signified by that Name is enjoyned as their Duty He means to take heed to all the flock over which the holy Ghost had made them Bishops or Overseers here as before are left Gaps or Interruptions I will fill them as well as I can to make up his Sense thus What he implyes or requires in a Bishop that they that is these Presbyters were to do If he shall require to lay on hands to exercise Jurisdiction in foro externo that they must do and should they have been reproved for so doing they might have shewed their Commission thus farr he But I wonder where that Commission was given or read I can find no such Thing in that place but that they should take heed or have a care of their flock which they might execute according to that Authority was dispensed before by labouring in the Word diligent baptizing administring the Communion but to Convent or Summon their Flock or Censure them or give Orders and a like Authority to others of this there is no one word in particular To expresse my self Although many men reasonably have thought that St. Paul Convented both Bishops and
Devil together the seed of God brings forth good fruit the seed of the Devil that which is ill as he works from the seed of God he cannot sin and A Lapide expresseth in another phrase much conducing to the same purpose in sensu composito concerning a man working by that principle he cannot sin or working by the Devil he shall sin but taking a man in sensu diviso as not knit to that principle nor working by the divine seed he may sin Let us see then this Text applied to this business He who is born of God by Baptism sinneth not not quatenus not so long as he works according to the design and intent of Baptism which is to forsake the Devil and follow Christ and this seed of this Covenant remaineth in him to produce sanctity and holiness of life which so long as it is watered and cherished it will do and be sure when you do evil you work from another principle but this no whit derogates from the constant union which such a person keeps as a member or a filiation SECT IX Another Argument against the Filiation wrought in Baptism answered I Would willingly clear this from all seeming opposition and therefore will discuss whatsoever appears to me of any difficulty I seem to place the Adoption the Filiation of a Son of God in the Covenant of Baptism and because that remains firm therefore this Filiation doth so likewise and is not extirpate by these greater sins But now if it appear that this work is done by other things and not by it then the foundation of this discourse perisheth and what is built upon it must fall to the ground but the Antecedent is true Gal. 3. 26. Ye are all the Sons of God by faith in Christ Jesus there faith not Baptism is set down as the mean of our Filiation I do not find faith put there as a constituting cause of our Regeneration but may well be a motive to it and have a proper influence in it but not the constitution of it To understand which consider that this Filiation is an Adoption and so there is two things requird the consent of the parties and the obligatory Covenant which they both enter into This is in this Adoption Christ would have all men to be saved to repent and come to him they do covenant with him by Baptism to serve him as the children of Israel covenanted in Circumcision to serve God according to their Judaicall Laws so do they with him in Baptism according to his Evangelicall Laws Now as no man will submit himself to any Father by being adopted to him unless he believe that he will bless him that his Covenants upon Adoption shall be made good to him so no man cometh unto God as St. Paul Heb. 11. 6. He that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of them who seek him This act of faith must precede every access to God no man would take this Covenant no man be baptized and adopted without it and therefore although faith do not constitute the child of God yet it is the means of his constitution but without which no man would be constituted and indeed not only sine quà non as the Logicians speak but likewise a means moving and inclining men to it There is commonly objected the case of Infants that they can have no faith preceding their Baptism I must not entangle my self in all controversies of these times and here handle this Question otherwise than this Objection exposeth it self against this Conclusion and therefore Answer that as Infants have not actuall faith of their own that any man can know of so they do not come with their own feet to Christ neither doth Christ exact it of them or any other more than they can do and therefore we may observe in that famous story recorded in our Baptism Mat. 19. 13. Mark 10. 13. Luke 18. 15. That when they brought little Children or Infants as St. Luke calls them and the Disciples rebuked them who brought them our Saviour rebuked the Disciples and said to them Suffer little Children to come unto me First mark this here That these three Evangelists recording this fact although they varied in other phrases yet all agree in these two that these little ones were brought by other men and that our Saviour said Suffer little Children to come unto me whereas in things not substantiall to a story the Evangelists most oft vary in the relation and we may observe so great difference both in the phrases by which they are exprest and likewise in the very matter that mens wits are much troubled to reconcile them So in materiall points the matter is constantly the same but when the phrase is the same likewise it is a most assured Argument that things were so disposed in that very manner and words and some excellent thing of high note is delivered which I conceive thus If the Disciples had here replyed we do not hinder them from coming we forbid only others to bring them oru Saviours reply was couched in the very words Children Infants come with others feet when they bring them now no men come to God but believers they come then with others feet why not believe with others faith as well Nay there seems to be great reason for it because faith is necessary to coming that is personall in them that can have personall faith as their own feet in them that have feet but other mens feet serve the turn for them who have none of their own so other mens faith and for my part I wonder why we should be so shy to allow this faith since there is nothing more frequent in Scripture than as the Bishop spake of St. Austin though a man of a loose life and carried away with those wicked and horrid Opinions of the Manichees Filius tantarum lachrymarum non potest perire He who had a Mother so zealous for him with such showers of tears would not perish her piety was powerfull with God for his good That other mens faith and prayers are prevalent with God for their Childrens or Friends good I need not repeat the story of the Centurion Mat. 8. whose faith was powerfull to the curing of his Servant verse 13. So likewise Mark 9. where Christ cured a mans Son by the prayer of the â—ather and did it upon the Fathers faith as is evident by verse 23. If thou canst believe all things are possible to him that believeth all things then for other men as well as for themselves There are many such stories but men throw them off with this shift that those things are concerning their bodies not their souls Alas what more reason is there for one than the other But see it more closely read Mark 2. 3. There many men bring one sick of the pulsie who was carried of four and let down from the top of the house verse 5. It is said That
the matter of fact in his Consecration THe first Bishops of Rome who succeeded St. Peter were chosen by the Clergy the Nobles and â—eople who were Christians and durst assemble together for such purpose and indeed were men of such excellency that they accepted that Bishoprick with a design to be Martyrs which they were many one after another afterwards when it pleased God to bless the Church with Christian Emperours they proved Nursing-fathers to their Bishops and under them the Bishop grew great which being discerned the Emperours considering what a great stroak the Bishop of Rome had in the management of all affairs of the Empire they put in for an Interest in their Election and there was no Pope elected but by their approbation untill the Emperour granted his Conge de liere as I may term it Now at this time Italy was full of Souldiers Narses that gallant General of Justinians lay then about Rome whose favourite Pelagius was and Doctor Forbes must forgive me if I think he is somewhat mistaken in the Story when in the next page he writes that Pelagius was but a Deacon when Binius calls him Arch-deacon and again where he saith there that he was chosen by the Command of the Emperour Justinian when it is recorded by Platina that after the Election he sent to Justinian at Constantinople to excuse the Consecration without his Approbation which could not be had in those busles but Narses was as good as Justinian and 〈◊〉 doubt but by him the will of Justinian might be intimated well Rebus sic stantibus Pelagius must be the man he lay under the scandall of being accessary to his Predecessors death upon this the generality of the Bishops refuse to be present at his Consecration onely two and these took a Presbiter to them and ordained Pelagius in that Act rather complying with the Canon so much as in them lay than violating it in Contempt It is a sure Rule Silent Leges inter Arma so they are not Gods Laws Now it is evident that there was the terrour of that Army upon them for the story related both by Platina and by Binius and others affirm that a multitude of the Nobles as well as the People and Clergy fled because their Consciences would not allow them to be assistant And the terrour of the Army would not permit them to oppose that this ordination was not questioned was because the Pope purged himself of that Scandal afterwards and so that which made them desert him at his Consecration being removed made them wink at small faults when he was Pope Thus the Story being cleared for matter of fact I will examine this Argument logically it must run thus SECT II. The Argument discussed and his Major disproved HIs argument termed must be thus That which was acted in the Consecration of a Pope that is lawfull for us to do but a Presbiter did Consecrate Pope Pelagius therefore he may Consecrate a Bishop or a Presbiter with us for the Major it must run so for there can be no difference of Pope Pelagius from other Popes of Rome I deny the Major then and I will disprove it by the Predecessors of Pelagius Vigillius his Consecration cannot be lawfull for he was intruded into the Papacy by Justinian the Emperour and Belisarius his other Generall his Predecessors Silverius being by violence forced from Rome cast into banishment and so died in misery starved as Baronius This Vigillius was put into his Chair and yet for all that Silverius being of a mighty invincible Courage got a few Bishops together and excommunicated Vigillius from which he never released Vigillius Silverius dies Vigillius then renounced his former Election and by the interest of Bellisarius Vigillius was again Elected being an Excommunicated Person and abominated for that and many other Crimes as even Baronius confesseth who was his Friend in his story as much as he could Now then Doctor Forbes his Major failes the instances in the Church of Rome must not be â—residents nor are they Arguments for us to build upon I but he will and doth say this If so Pelagius would have been punished by his successor if it had beeen nought I answer that doth not follow there is not that Law of God or Man which hath not been violated unquestioned I remember Binius writes of it that it had never been so before Baronius onely tells the story but passeth not his Judgement upon it They mention the Scandal he lay under it being that he was accessary to Vigillius his death They mention his purgation which he made as doth Platina and in that it is evident that they who were scandalized at his imagined offence were satisfied with his purgation and so we see that block of offence being removed which made him unfit to be Chosen and Consecrated Pope they never questioned his Consecration its self but this is sufficient for satisfaction to his Major Now let us come to his Minor And here we must examine whether this Presbiter did consecrate the Pope or no And first we will undertake that Question whether it be essentially necessary to the being of a Bishop that he should be Consecrated by three Bishops CHAP. XI SECT I. That Question entred upon Whether three Bishops are necessary to the Consecration of a Bishop GAbriel Vasques a very learne Jesuit and one that Doctor Forbes acknowledgeth much to countenance his opinion in his 243. disp upon the third of Thomas Cap. 6. Page 706. justly complaines that Pauci ex nostra Schola few of our Schoolmen have handled this Question exactly or delivered it defined in their writings I shall undertake him and endeavour now to shew a more clear truth than I have observed delivered by others for indeed because some Canons of Councels seem to make for it and they have been swallowed without chewing and have not been ex mined it hath passed undoubtedly by a generall practise in all quietly setled Churches But I much mistrust that there is not an absolute necessity in persecuted and unsetled Churches after Vasques had produced Arguments against this necessity he puts his own determination fully Mihi tamen probabilior visa est sententia that opinion seems to me to be more probable of them who say first that to the right ordination of a â—ishop three Bishops at the least are necessary by Divine Law as the ordinary Ministers but by commission he means from the Pope two may do it or one thus far he I will take it peicemeale And first I say this Canon that three Bishops should Consecrate a Bishop hath no Collour to challengâ— a Divine Right for that can have a lawful claim to a Divine right must either draw it from God himself prescribing it or else from such men who were immediately authorized by God as the Apostles for if we will go further we must make all Humane Laws Divine for if the next to the Apostles should have their Dictator
to act since after his departure to the end of the world It is necessary therefore for us to think that such things as are delivered by them are Divine for although Canons of Councels general or particular are excellent Guides for the establishing Peace and Unity in the Church and so may require obedience from their Subjects yet because they are but men without an annexed infallibility without doubt they may vary in their practice and Discipline and their Dictates being introduced upon occasions may be altered and therefore cannot add essentials to any thing for the essences of things are always certain and necessary This is my Major Now to search what is Apostolical in this business we must examine the Scriptures where first we find our Saviour authorizing his Apostles As my Father sent me so send I you to give power to others We find him using no Ceremony but breâ—thing upon them gave them the Holy Ghost and truly that Breathing was most significative of that blessing he bestowed upon them but from thence we find not the Apostles using that Ceremony for they being enabled with this plenarty of power to give others that blessing they only gave it and for a sign that they did establish it laid their hands upon them so that as we conceive these two places 1 Tim. 1. 6. by the laying on of my hands or the 1 Tim. 4. 14. with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery to be Ordination so likewise we shall find this Ceremony taken for the whole 〈◊〉 or Ordâ—nation Tim. 5. 22. Lay hands suddenly on no man Now then without doubt if any outward Act must be essential to this Heavenly work this only being Apostolical must be esteemed most essential and there I think it most proper for men to conceive that this is the only Ceremony essentially necessary if any be to the performance of that duty for the power originally being given to the Apostles nakedly and absolutely without any qualification or mode in what manner they should use it to others we are to receive the manner at their acting it for our best Rule and guidance which is only in Scripture delivered to be imposition of Hands Thus much for that which the Doctors of the Church of Rome called the material part in the essence of Consecration and we may truly term the outward sign Let us now examine that which they call the form and we may term the words which express it the words which our Saviour used John 20. 22. are Receive ye the Holy Ghost these words expresly are used in the Roman Consecration and Ordination but in the Graecian the words are varied but the sence reserved not giving this blessing in the Imperative-mood which is much stood upon by many Schoolmen and Casuists but in a more humble stile The Grace of God Creates or Promotes thee to this Dignity of a Bishop or Priest or Deacon where we find the truth more largly expounded though materially the same for certainly the Grace of God is that which impowers men with these authorities are given and men are only Instrumental but that they are and therefore there is added how this is given by the suffrage of the Bishops which denotes them instrumental for the African Church you may discern in the Canon of Carthage before cited that the Consecration is expressed in a Language of such extent as may be applied to them both which is uno fundente benedictionem one of them pouring out the benediction or blessing but implying strongly the sence such as is proper for this work to Confirm which all the present Bishops lay on their hands and this universally so consented unto as agreeing to the Holy Scripture that although in the heat of disputation I find men sometimes over peremptorily asserting their own opinions yet I do not find that either Church did refuse such as were Consecrated in either although in wayes and modes differing from their own so that I may justly say that the whole Catholick Church Concenters in this Conclusion that when words importing the blessing are Delivered by a Consecrating Bishop and those words are sealed by imposition of Hands then these holy Orders are effectually given I shall then need to do little more in this Point than to answer such objections which are commonly made against it or I can apprehend proper to be opposed to it SECT II. The first Objection against the Truth answered THe first is common in the School made against the pontiâ—ical in this point because that in all that part of the Pontiâ—ical it is said only Receive ye the Holy Ghost and that Language is the same in the Ordination of Priests as likewise the Imposition of Hands so that by this no man can know what Order is given in the Church of Rome it is answered that the design which they are about will shew it whether to one or to the other Order and again the manner of the Imposition of Hands in the Consecration of a Bishop divers Bishops Impose Hands in the Ordination of a Priest one Bishop only with some Presbyters in the Ordination of a Deacon the Bishop alone but in our Church that scruple is clearly taken away by a great Prudence where at the Ordination of a Priest the Consecrating words are Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Priest and at the Consecration of a Bishop the words are Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Bishop in the Church of God where wee see that universal cause of all Spiritual blessings I mean the Holy Ghost applied to that particular duty in which at that time he works and therefore the Consecration is free from that Exception SECT III. Another Objection drawn from the Councel of Carthage answered ANother Ojection may be that the Councel of Carthage before cited mentions the laying on the Book by two Bishops upon the head and shoulders of the Bishop to be Consecrated and therefore that is necessary I answer that I much reverence that Councel in which was St. Augustine and divers other Bâ—shops famous for learning and piety in their Generations but yet as I have said before this was never practiced any remarkable time as sundry Doctors in the Church of Rome observe and again it is impossible to be essential because not Apostolical and that because the Holy Bible and that highest part of it the New Testament was not writ when Bishops and Priests were Ordained it is therefore worth our marking that there is a difference in the decrees of Councels concerning Doctrine and Discipline or Ceremonies of the Church in a point of Doctrine they shew in what sence they understand such and such a Conclusion but in the other they set down what is to be practiced to preserve Orders and decency in those Churches where they have to do and indeed there can be no more required of obedience than in quiet and setled times in which
although perhaps some who had not and I think there is little of moment to be found in antiquity concerning them which is not observed by me there is an Epistle of John the third Pope of that name but it is rejected by Binius and so slighted by me And yet me thinks some may ask my opinion of those Churches where are no Bishops first I dare censure no man much less such large Congregations amongst which I know there are many learned men and no doubt but full of Piety I may be deceived and so may they humanum est errare but certainly in that acquaintance that I have with antiquity there seems to me no ground for them there nor in the Scripture these few pieces which this learned Gentleman had Collected are but old totered Rags which cannot abide to be stitched to this new Garment they have nothing to excuse themselves but necessities which whether they have sufficient or no to excuse them let their own Souls Judge God will I dare not FINIS THE TABLE A Apostles their Election and to what 7. Their Number whence their Name their Office 8. To whom sent 9. What to Preach 10. The Apostles power whence 22. The Apostles truly had the Power of Preaching to all the world 23. 24. The Apostles only commissioned to Baptize 25. The Apostles only to Administer the Communion 27. B Baptism instituted by our Saviour 12. The Baptism of our Saviour and St. John not the same 13. Whether our Sacramental Baptism be the same with that before Christs death 14. 15. Not the same the Objections answered 16. 17. The Baptism instituted by Christ not in force till after his death 18. Whether Baptism administred by Laymen be valid 29. Of Bishops their distinction from Presbyters 94 First Argument from Scripture for their Points 96. The Argument examined 97. And answered 99. The Exception that Titus was an Evangilist but not a Bishop answered 99. Objection for their points from Acts 20. 28. answered 101. C An outward Call necessary to a Minister 129. This Call hath a Moral not a Physâ—cal influence 130. The Character left after Ordination 132. The Communion instituted by our Saviour 18. The Apostles Ministers of it 19. 20. Instituted before our Saviours death 20. 21. Mutual covenanting of the Saints gives not the Being to a Visible Church 157. What this Covenant is Explicit or Implicit 159. The Reasons for it answered 159 c. Other Arguments answered 165. 167 c D The Election of the Seventy Disciples 11. The Differences betwixt them and the Apostles 96. Deacons as afterwards used in the Church not instituted Acts 6. 37 38. Arguments proving this 39. 40. The opposing Arguments answered 43. Some of the first Deacons Preachers 40. What the Office of a Deacon 45. E Of Lay-Elders 59. What a Lay-Elder is in the Disciplinarian sense 60. No such Elders in Scripture 61. Places of Scripture urged for them answered ibid. Third Argument of Mr. Thomas Hooker for Lay-Elders answered 62 c 69. 74. 75. St. â—auls Elder signifies but one Office 66. St. Ambrose's words urged for Lay-Elders expounded 86. c. The design of making Lay-Elders 88. What the word Especially imports 1 Tim. 5. 17. 68. What an Evangelist is 106. G Gifted men may Preach if licenced by the Bishop otherwise not 84 85. H What Double Honour signifies 1 Tim. 5. 17. 68. Mr. Thomas Hookers opinion concerning Deacons examined 45 46. Rom. 12. 8. expounded against him 47 48. c. His Deacon enforced from this place of Scripture Confuted 53. The first Confutation of Mr. Thomas Hooker out of this Text. 54 55. His Second Argument refuted 56. His Third Argument refuted 57. His First Argument from Reason refuted 57. His Second and Third Argument from Reason answered 58. Another Argument answered 59. Mr. Thomas Hookers distinction of Pastors and Teachers refuted 90 c. I Episcopal Jurisdiction proved 115 L What Labouring in the Word imports 1 Tim. 5. 17. 67. 86. M What the word Minister signifies 1. The Definition of a Minister 2. The Definition explained 3. c. The Power to be a Minister must come from God 3. 6. Motion is to Relation 208 209. O Touching Ordination 121. Mr. Thomas Hookers definition of Ordination confuted 122. What Ordination is 123. Ordination not before Election 224. Men may be Ordained without the Election of the People 125. Whether Ordination gives all the Essentials to an Officer 128. Of Pastoral Ordination 140. P St. Peter had no greater power given him by Christ than the other Apostles 28. The chief Arguments for his superiority answered ibid. A vindication of our Common Prayer-Book in the number of the Sacraments 131. A Digression concerning Preaching 76. What Preaching is 78. To what Preaching every Presbyter is bound 80. The peculiar Interest a Presbyter hath in Preaching 82. Who is authorized to Preach 83. What a true Presbyter is 89. A Power is left by Christ to some men whereby they communicate Power to others 156. R Relation may be the principle of Action 211. One Relation may be the Foundation of another 242. What Ruling well imports 1 Tim. 5. 17. 67. A The Apostles only intrusted with the power of the Keys 29 30. Other Apostles besides the Twelve 31 32 33. The reason of it 33. The Apostolical power extended to all the world 34. How the Apostolical power was Communicated 35. How the Apostolical power was communicated to particulars 36. B Second Argument for Parity answered 102. Third Argument for it answered 104. Fourth Argument concerning Jurisdiction answered 106. An Argument from Ordination by Presbyters answered 107. An Argument out of St. Hierome answered 108. Bishops succeeded the Apostles in all that is Apostolical though not in their extraordinary endeavours 142. Baptism not the Form which constitutes a Church-Member but no Visible Act by which he is made a Member 171. Mr. Thomas Hookers Arguments against this Opinion answered 171 172 c. Baptism hath all things necessary to a real Relation 219. E Episcopacy setled by the Apostles in the Church 111. First Argument from Scripture to prove Episcopacy 113. A Second Argument to prove it 114. The Revelation of St. John assorts Episcopacy 117. St. Cyprian urged as favouring The People having the power of Electing their Ministers explained the Objection answered 126. Arguments from the Election of the Deacon Acts 6. examined 127. Other Arguments answered 133 c. 149 c. An Excommunicate man is a Member of the Church 175. Bellarmines Arguments against this Opinion answered 176 c. C Scriptures written of the Catholique Church grossely misapplyed by Mr. Thomas Hooker to particular Churches 162 c. What is meant by the Church and our Saviours saying Tell the Church 166. What makes a Church Visible 169. Such as renounce the fellowship of the Church are yet Members of the Church 180. The Arguments against this Opinion answered 181 c. 190 c. Some difficulties of this Opinion cleared 187. What
the Character left in Baptism is and the Definition of it 205. In what Predicament this Charaâ—â—er is 207. The Foundation of this Character is the Will of God 213. 218. Durandus holds this Character to be Ens Rationis 215. Is opposed by all the Schoolmen but their Arguments do not confute him ibid. The Subject of this Character is the whole man 221. THE TABLE OF THE Appendix A The Apostles were Bishops prov'd 233. The first of the Apostolical Canons examined 249. The anointing the Bishops hand no necessary essential to his Constituion 258. Sect. 6. Athanasius's testimony that meer Presbyteers could not Ordain even in Alexandria 27â— The Council of Antioch Schismatical and Illegal 274. B Bishops have ever been in the Church 231. Whether three Bishops be necessary to the Consecration of a Bishop 246. Sect. 1. Ans. Reg. The Consecration of St. James Bishop of Jerusalem objected and answered 248. What is essential to Constitute a Bishop 263. 264. Baptism not void by different circumstances in the Celebration of it P. 256. Balsamon Patriarch of Antioch's interpretation of the Canon of that Council approved 274 277. Bellarmine too hardly dealt withall by Dr. Forbes 278. Not confuted by him 279 280. St. Basil's Opinion of the Chori-Episcopi 286. C The Church Universal never was nor can be without a Bishop 231. The Church of Ephesus not governed by meer Elders but Bishops 233. The Church was without Elders till the Apostles Ordained them 232. Christianity may be continued but Church-communion and Ordinances cannot without Bishops 235. The Consecration of St. James Bishop of Jerusalem discussed 247. Three Bishops are not by Divine Right necessary to a Bishops Consecration 246. The Canon called the Apostles Canon about the Consecration of Bishops examined 249. The Canon of the Council of Nice examined 250 251. And proved to concern the Election not the Consecration of Bishops ibid. The second Canon of the Council of Carthage concerning the Consecration of Bishops 259. The Catholike Church does concentre in this conclusion that when words importing the Blessing are delivered by a Consecrating Bishop and those words are sealed by an imposition of Hands then those Holy Orders are effectually given 265. in the begin No Church in the Christian world ever gave simple Presbyters power to Ordain 270. The Chori-Episcopi have not power to Ordain proved 274. Unless they be Suffragans 279. 282. Cresperius's reading of the Canon of Antioch alledged for the Chori-Episcopi viz. not praeter but propter Conscientiam Episcopi 278. Chori-Episcopi were but Presbyters because Ordained by one Bishop alone 282. S. 7. ☞ Two sorts of Chori-Episcopi P. 283. What they were 284. D Dr. Forbes's arguments answered from P. 232 to 284. Deacons not necessary in every Parochial Church 240. Difference in the Form or words does not disanull a Sacrament 256. The distinction of Orders is known by the manner of the laying on of Hands and the form of words as in our Church used in the pronunciation of the Blessing 265. Sect. 2. Damasus his reading upon the Canon of Antioch 276. vid. 279. Which doth sufficiently answer Dr. Forbes his Arguments against all Chori-Episcopi having power of Ordination answered 281. His second Argument answered 282. Decrees of divers Councils examined 284 285. E The Church of Ephesus not Governed by meer Elders but Bishops 233. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated Eligi to be Elected or chosen 251. lin 13 Elders were not in the Church till the Apostles Ordained them 232 What is essential to the Constitution of a Bishop 254. Explicatory additions do not destroy the notion of that which they explain 257. in the end The only essential ceremony if any be in the Consecration of Bishops is the laying on of Hands 264. The essence of Ordination cheifly consists in the pronouncing the Blessing with the notes of distinction of the Orders then conferred 265. vid. 268. S. 4. The Errors committed in the Inauguration of Popes no President for reformed Churches in the Consecration â—f Bishops 269. The Church of England's Rites of Consecration defended Sect. 4. 268. F Dr. Forbes's first Argument from Scripture answered 232. His first Argument to prove their Ordination after Bishops were instituted answered 235. His Argument taken out of Johannes Major answered from 235. to 238. His Argument from the Church of Rome answered 239. His Argument from Deacons answered 240. His Argument from Scripture answered ibid. His Argument out of St. Hierome answered 242. His Argument from Pelagius's Ordination answered 244. 245. His Argument from St. Ambrose and St. Augustine answered 271. His Argument from the council of Antioch 274. to 284. G Gasper Hurtado's opinion about the Consecration of Bishops examined 261. ☞ The Gospel laid upon the Bishops Neck not essential to his Consecration because there were Bishops befoâ—e the Gospel was written 260. vid. 266. to 268. Gentianus Hervetus his reading of the Canon of Antioch 277. the begin H Henricus Henriques opinion that some papers wherein the Gospel was written might be given to the primitive Bishops in their Consecrations is found invalid 261. I Imposition of Hands the only necessary and essential ceremony if any be to the Consecration of Bishops 264. Inauguration of Popes no President for the Consecration of reformed Bishops P. 243. vid. 269. Imposition of the Hands of Presbyters alone is not sufficient for â—rdination 270. Ischyras was no Priest because Ordained by no Bishop 272. the begin Isidore Hispalensis his reading of the Canon of Antioch makes nothing for Dr. Forbes 277. L The laying on of Hands only essentially necessary to the constitution of a Bishop 264. Linus and Clemens were Chori-Episcopi to St. Peter 284 about the midst Laodicean Canon forbids the Chori-Episcopi to act any thing without the leave of their Diocesan 285. M The manner of the imposition of Hands distinguisheth what Orders are conferr'd 265. S. a. Moderation to be used towards every opponent though never so much mistaken 278. S. 4. N Necessity only can justify the Ordination of Presbyters 270. No Church ever gave meer Presbyters power to Ordain ib. The Canon of Nice examined 250 251. The Eighth Canon of the Council of Nice 285. O Objections against the Authors opinion concerning the Consecration of Bishops answered 265. The first Objection answered ib. Objection from the Council of Carthage answered from 266. to 268. Objection against the Church of Englands Rites of Consecration answered 268. objection taken from the Council of Antioch answered From 272 to 274. P Panormitan's Argument answered 234 Presbyters may Elect not Ordain a Bishop 242. Pelagiu ' s Ordination related Sect. 1. P. 243. The Patriarch of Antioch his interpretation of the Canon of the Council of Nice 250. c. The Pope cannot dispence with Divine Laws 253. Petrus Arcadius's discourse illustrated and applied Sect. 2. 255 c. The Pontifical differs in many things from the Canon of the Carthaginian Council in the rites of Consecration 267. Presbyters alone could