this Case the Line would be right enough and all that can be said is That there was One Vsurper in the Line of Jurisdiction who never was within the Line of Order and consequently could make no intercision in it And perhaps to prevent any Irregularity in the Succession of that Order the Apostles gave the Example and the Church enjoyn'd That a Bishop should be ordain'd by Three at least Apâ—…st c. 1. Con. Nican c. 4. Con. Areâ—… c. 21. Con. Laodic c. 12. Con. Paris 1. c. 6 c. and likewise that he should be Constituted with the Approbation of his Metropolitan and Com-Provincials which practices were certainly a very great security to the Right Succession it being not very likely That all the Bishops of a Province should be so extreamly careless to suffer an irregular Ordination and the Persons concern'd to Consecrate all void of that Character which they pretended to bestow After all That ever any Abbot that was no Bishop did ordain Bishops I do utterly deny Adamnanuâ—… in his Life of Columba Adamn Vit. Col. Vsh Primorâ—… makes mention of a Bishop in the Abby of Hy and that there was always one residing there is confirmed by Bishop Vsher out of the Vlsleâ—… Annals And perhaps the Bishop of Dâ—…nkeld as the Learned Bishop of St. Asaph conjectures joyn'd in the Consecration of Bishop Aldan Finan Bp. of St. Asaph of â—…h Gov. p. 102. and Colman had the like Ordination But Tuda the next in Succession was ordain'd a Bishop among the South Scots in Ireland So that should we allow his Instance true viz. That Aâ—…dan Finan and Colman were ordained by the Abbot yet that Succession at Lindisfarn in all likelihood fail'd in Colman and the Line of Order was right in Tuda and consequently his Marginal Instance is nothing to the purpose an Instance that has been frequently urg'd by the Nonconformists against Episcopacy and as often confuted from the most Authentick History of those Times by divers Learned Men Vind. C. E. cap. 9. Vind. Ignat. par 1. c. 10. Orig. Brit. Ch. Gov. c. 5. Barbos Past p. 2. All. 3. Num. 3.4 c. Maur. de Alz. de Prac. Episc Dig. p. 2. c. 5. Num. 6 7 8 9. Aquin. Sup. q. 38. ar 1. Res ad ter Vid. Victor in Sum. Num. 216. Sect. de Sac. Ord. Non facile credeâ—…em Victor in sum Num. 237. quem seq Vivald in Candel aureo p. 1. tit de Sacram. Ordin Num. 17. In fine asserenti se vidisse quandam Bullam Papae concedentem facultatem sacerdoti conferendi Diac. Sub. Diac. Barbos Past p. 2. Al. 3. N. 4. Ap. c. 67. Nicaen c. 19. Con. C. P. c. 4 Bishop Bramhâ—…ll Bishop Pearson the present Bishop of Worcester and St. Asaph and Mr. Dodwell have so fully Answer'd this business of Hy that a Man would wonder at the Confidence of this Gent. that he should still hope to impose the same Mistake upon the World Nor does the Church of Rome allow that an Abbot who is no Bishop should Consecrate a Bishop They are so far from allowing it that their Canonists generally declare that the Pope himself cannot impower any Presbyter to Ordain so much as a Deacon An Abbot who has Jus Mitrae Bacuâ—… a Cardinal or an Ordinary Presbyter by Commission from the Pope may confer the lesser Orders but not the greater or those which are called Sacred viz. those of Bishop Priest and Deacon nay even as to the lesser Thomas Aquinas Joh. Major and Paludanus Affirm that it is safer to receive the Order of Sub-Deacon from another than from such a priviledged Presbyter And altho Anguianus and some few more are of opinion that the Pope might Impower a Presbyter to confer the Higer Orders yet it never was the allowed practice of that Church And I challenge him to produce so much as one instance of any Abb t that was no Bishop who ever Consecrated a Bishop As for Sub-Deacons and such people who are sometimes Ordainâ—…d by Abbots the Gentileman knows well enough we have no occasion for 'em in England and therefore the Succession of our Bishops may be just and regular notwithstanding this first Case As to the Second viz. Whether this line of Ordina ion may be continued in a Schismatical Church We Answer 1st That such was the care of the Primitive Church so great a regard they had to a right Succâ—…ssion that they who thought the Ordination of certain Hereticks void such as the Paâ—…lianists and Montanists 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. decreed 'em to be Ordained by a Catholick Bishop And it is likewise determin'd by the first Council of Constantinople concerning the Ordinations made by Maximus Cymicus that they are all null they neither allowing him to be a Bishop not those Ordained by him to enjoy any Function among the Clergy And in the Roman Church Bâ—â—n Tâ—m 9. p. 2â—4 Pâ—â—tin dâ— Vâ— Pont. p. 22.4 Contra â—â—ephanum III. alâ—s IV. Mabill in Ordiâ— Rom. Com. p. cxix particularly those ordain'd by Constantine the Lay-Invader of the Papal Chair were by a Council under Stephen the Third or Fourth to return to their former Orders unless they were in great Esteem with the People and in that Case they were to be re-ordain'd by the Church and for fear of laying the Foundations of a future Schism it was further decreed That none of 'em should be promoted to any higher degrees By these and many other Instances it is plain what Care the Church has taken to re-ordain or utterly silence those whose Orders they thought void And lest any such persons should creep into strange places and there invade that Office to which they had no Right No Man either of the Clergy or Laity Ap. 〈◊〉 12. con 〈◊〉 30 con 〈◊〉 c. 33. 〈…〉 C. 〈◊〉 c. 7. con 〈◊〉 c. 12. con Elizbeâ—â— c. 51. was to hold Communion with 'em under pain of incurring the Ecclesiastical Censures No Clergy Man was to go abroad without Commendatory Letters no bishop to be ordain'd without the Knowledge and Consent of his Metropolitan and the Neighbouring Bishops No Heretick to be admitted into Orders and if ordain'd to be depos'd No Man to ordain in another's Province By which and seveâ—â—l other Canons it became extreamly difficult for any such Hereticks or Schismaticks whose Orders they thought void to make any considerable intercision in the Line of Succession But I can see no Reason why the Line of Ordination may not pass through a Schismatical Church For although by Schism People are out of the Church and while they continue so cannot enjoy the benefit either of Ordination or Sacraments yet to say That â—â—â—h are absolutely destroy'd and nullify'd so that a â—â—â—â—…matick lâ—â—â— the Characters and can neither be a Christian 〈…〉 i. e. not the Subject of Apostolical Power 'till he be 〈◊〉 â—â—â— baptiz'd and ordain'd is an Assertion beyond all that I câ—â—â—…d ever yet meet with The
Apostle saying there is one God one Christ one Faith one Baptism And St. Austin confirms the same thing 1st of all distinguishing aliud est non habere aliud pernitiose habere aliud salubriter habere Aug. l. 2. Cont. Ep. Parmen and then telling us concerning those that are separated from the Unity of the Church that there is now no question but that they both have and may confer both Orders and Baptism Sed pernitiose habent pernicioseque dant quia extra Vinculum pacis sunt and the same Father asserts the same Doctrine a little before in two cases First If any of the Schismatical Clergy be reconciled to the Church tho it seems expedient to allow them the exercise of their former Function yet are they not to be Reordained c. and Secondly If on the contrary the Church judges it not convenient to allow them any Ministration Vid. Tim. Proâ—… C. P. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ap Coteler Ec. Gr. Mon. T. 3. p. 420. E. Niceph. C.P. Epist Canonic Ibid. p. 459 c. Mason Brâ—…mhal Burnets Vind. p. 60. yet their Ordination is not hereby made void but continues with them still c. To this I might add the practice of the Greek Church in former Ages and the opinion of the Romanists at this day who altho they are as little friends to those they call Schismaticks as any People in the World yet the most Learned of them declare that no Man indeed ought to receive Orders from either Hereticks or Schismaticks and that both he that gives and he that receives them sin greivously yet where Hereticks or Schismaticks that Ordain were truely Ordained themselves and the Ordinations made by them according to the Forms of the Church such Ordinations are valid and Hereticks or Schismaticks so Ordained need no new Ordination but only to be reconciled And this we find alledged by Protestants against those Popish Enemies who sometime have urged the very same Argument against our first Bishops which this Vindicator makes use of now I wish this were the only instance wherein the Papists and Dissenters are agreed against us And now let the Gentleman take his Answer to this difficult question Whether Schismaticks can Ordain It being generally given in the Affirmitive if we may be allowed to believe as most People do the deriving of our Orders through a Schismatical Church can be no prejudice to the line of Succession And yet all those Persons who have thus determined concerning the validity of Schismatical Ordinations think Schismaticks out of the Church as much as T. W. Perhaps our Author expected to Triumph in this Concession and that made him call so earnestly for an Answer to this Question Supposing that if Ordinations made by Schismaticks are granted to be valid our present Non-conformists may find a place among the Clergy when ever Mr. Baxter and can obtain a Comprehension without a new Ordination but this we deny For although Schism do's not invalidate any mans Orders when they are really given yet this will be no plea for those who never were Ordained which must needs be the case of many of you who deny the Order of Bishops For we believe with St. Jerome that the Power of Ordaining belongs only to the Bishop and your Ordinations made by Presbyters are all Void and Null and till you can prove the contrary we take you for no more but a parcel of Lay-intruders into those Holy Functions to which you have no right those of you only excepted who have been Episcopally Ordain'd And those who have enquir'd more nicely into your Mission are apt to suspect that many of your first Apostles from whom several of you in all probability do derive your Orders never were Ordain'd and how to distinguish those from others at this day we cannot tell And this is an Observation which I suppose the Vindicator had never met with or else he would scarce have been so confidâ—…nt as to tell us p. 26. that they are in the Line still And yet it is hard to say whether he was not aware of some such thing or else what should make him so earnest as to lose so many Pages aga nst this Line of Succession which if it would do him no good would certainly do him no harm Methinks it is at least a Matter of Reputation to succeed the Apostles and therefore I can see no Reason why this Vindicator should take such pains to oppose it unless being conscious to himself that his Party has no pretence to it he would if it lay in his power make it void or needless to prevent others insisting upon it who he knows can make out a better Claim It has been the common practice of many others besides this Gent. to lay aside those Notions which their Circumstances would not bear and to find out New Devices with which they would more easily quadrate And therefore we cannot wonder that he looks upon Ordination to be no more but a Publick Approbation of Ministerial Abilities by competent Judges p. 26. Most of this Man's Party have no other Ordination and perhaps many of 'em not that Otherwise we know the Saints are as tenacious of Priviledges as other Men. And therefore if they could make any tolerable pretence to the Line of Succession they would magnifie it to the full as much as we do But why only a Publick Approbation of Miniseterial Abilities Does the Publick Approbation of a Man's Abilities invest him in his Office Will a Testimonial from the Inns of Court make a Man a Judge or from the Vniversities a Minister without any Commission from the King or Ordination from the Bishop or any body else But this is such a way of making Clergy-men as never was heard of before And indeed our Author himself puts in Two other Circumstances in the next page viz. That he be chosen by the rest and set apart by the most competent Judges which amounts to a great deal more than only a Publick Approbation And these Judges he supposes may be Lay-men in certain Cases of Necessity As in case that a Company of Lay-men be cast upon an Island or remain in same Countrey when their Pastors are all kill'd or turn'd Hereticks But in the first place I must put him in mind That as no Man is to meddle with the Sacred Offices except he he called of God no Man to preach except he be sent so no Man is to call or send as from God but he that is Authorized by him for that purpose Our blessed Saviour himself when he gave Commission to his Apostles recites his own All power is given unto me in Heaven and in Earth Go therefore c. Mat. 28.18 19. As my Father sent me so send I you John 20.21 And We hope our Dissenting Brethren when they go about to Ordain will not disdain to follow his Example In all Ages of the Church the calling or sending of persons to the Work of the Ministry
of that Nation and when he refus'd to be Ordain'd by Lucius of Alexandria the Bloody Arian the Roman Magistrates we find carried him to the banished Bishops for Orders which they needed not have done if they had been of the Mind of our Author For if Ordination be nothing more but a publick Approbation of Ministerial Abilities by the most competent Judges Moses was really Ordain'd before ever he came at those Bishops his Ministerial Abilities being publickly Approv'd by the Roman Magistrates and the Queen before he left his own Country Ang. sac p. 423. Tho. Chesterf de Episc Cov. Lich. Ibid. p. 425. So when Peada King of the Mid-Angles was Converted and Baptiz'd in Northumbria he brought Home with him four Presbyters viz. Cedda and Adda and Betti and Duma that he might Propagate the Christian Religion among his own Subjects and Diuma was afterward Consecrated the first Bishop of the Mercians and Mid Angles by Finan Bishop of Northumbria and yet I doubt not but his fellow Presbyters were competent Judges and might have made him a Bishop as well as Finan if our Author's way of Ordaining had been then found out But as the Church never dream'd of any such rare Inventions so it is plain they thought Episcopal Ordination necessary that the only way of deriving that Authority from our Saviour was by Succession and that no Man might Administer in Sacred things unless he were thus Admitted And for this Reason the Councel of Celichyth under Wulfred Archbishop of Canterbury were so wary that they would not admit an Stranger of the Scotch Nation to perform any Sacred Office quia incertum est nobis unde an ab aliquo Ordinentur Spelm. Concâ—… Ang. Tom. 1. 329. because it was uncertain to them by whom and whether they were ordain'd by any body at all Now as it is plain from all these Instances that the Christians of several Countries and Ages were of a quite contrary Opinion to that of our Author so I might add several more were I not to deal with Persons who rather than lay aside that Scheme of Government which they have lately espous'd will despise all Antiquity insomuch that the practice of the very Apostles themselves cannot escape their Censure Vind. p. 27. witness that unseemly Jest wherewith the Vindicator endeavours to Ridicule that Sacred Ceremony viz. Imposition of Hands which being used by St. Paul in the Ordination of Timothy what is here said against it in General Terms is no less a Libel upon him than it is upon us I wonder who taught him the Notion of an uninterrupted Succession of our English Monarchs from the Eldest Son of Noah Ibid. If he can produce it from any Author I shall then believe that he can speak truth for once In the mean time I cannot but admire that a Man who disputes with so much Pertness as if every thing that he says were all Oracle should want either the Sence to understand or Integrity to report so plain a Notion If our Loyalty to English Monarchs is so great a Trouble to these Gentlemen that they cannot hear it asserted without torturing their Ears we cannot help it I confess it is no more than what I always thought and since the Gent. so freely owns it I hope it will be taken notice of For the Government which Gâ—…d be thanked is not yet quite a Commonwealth must needs be concern'd in that Grievance And he that can libel the Grandfather with so much Impudence Vind. p. 57 c. and triumph in the Subversion of those Principles which lately supported the Monarchy cannot be thought to wish very auspiciously to the present Reign And yet notwithstanding their Natural Aversation and Spight against Monarchy so easie and flexible are those Gentlemen to any thing of their own Interest that when King James the Second afforded 'em a Tolerat on No Complements were too high for him Subversion of Religion and cutting of Throats the dangerous Consequences of a Popish Successor were absolutely forgotten The Monarch was no Bugbear nor the Papists neither Prerogative and Dispensing Power were harmless innocent things His Leige-People the Dissenters Leads Address June 25. 87. were vying who should most feelingly express a Thankful Heart They magnified him as the Generous Leading Pattern to the Princes of other People and a Father to his own The Assertor and Restorer of God's immediate Dominion over Conscience the covering Cherub under whose refreshing Shadow they promis'd themselves Rest The First and Happy Instrument Independ and Bipt in the County of Glou. May 87. Dissent of Maldon Great Coghall c. July 9. 87. Dissenters in Leathward in Cumberl Aug. 87. Presbyter of Colchester Aug. â—… 87. under God of the present and future Peace and Prosperity of his Dominions One designed for great Services the blossoming whereof was then made visible in his Celebrated Wisdom in happening upon the most melodous Harp to charm all evil Spirits that many other Princes had no Skill to use though according to others Concarring herein with many Noble Princes before him But as others thought fit to express themselves Of all that ever sate upon the English Throne It shall only be said of Your Maiesties Reign That from the Western Ocean even to the Frozen Thule then had the Churches Rest and were multiplied no one forbidding them Your Royal Indulgence like the Sound of the Jubilee Trumpet has so exhilarated the Hearts of your Dissenting Subjects that they want Words to express their Gratitude and Tongues to Celebrate your Clemency c. So dear was that Unhappy Prince to these People upon the Account of the Indulgence though at the same time they knew well enough that he inte ded hereby the Ruine of the Establish'd Church that they follow'd him with Acclamations and Shouts beyond all others wherever he came The Flattery of their Addresses had no other Bounds but want of Wit You have hereby ecchoed to the angelical song which brought him into the World who at his ingress into it brought peace and at his egress out of it bought peace and thereby immolated that Resignation of a narrow interest for the Divinity of a more general Preservation and so tuned the strings of your auspicious Government as to make melody over your whole Empire Presbyt of Hull Octob. 87. And a little after they call him plainly their Redeemer and that Defect was oftentimes supply'd with Fustian and Blasphemy He that reads 'em wou'd think many parts of 'em to have been taken out of their Prayers insomuch that God Almighty and King James the Second had in many instances the very same Complements Nay if the Prophets did any where magnifie the Divine Clemency by a most extraordinary flight of Expression it was presently got into the Addresses and apply'd most ingenuously to King James to enhaunce the Dissenters Gratitude for that Illegal Act. So that methinks there is little Room for this Gentleman to
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. Vid. Dodw. in Irenae Dis 1. Sect. XVII and that there were no Subordinate Presbyters to do the same thing by the Bishops Order in other Congregations within his Diocess And that there were more Congregations than one under the Bishop of Smyrna is evident from that Passâ—…ge of Ignatius in his Epistle to them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ig. ad Smyrn Let no man perform any of those things which belong to Publick Assemblies without the Bishop That Eucharist is to be thought valid which is either under him or at least which he allowed What had he to do to allow the Eucharist in Congregations Independent upon him and to talk of giving allowance to himself in his own is to great a Blunder for Ignatius to be charged with So that all the distinction here made is betwixt a Congregation under the Bishop viz. that where he was Personally present and another Congregation Assembled by his permission and allowance and must consequently imply that in the Church of Smyrna there were several Congregations under one Bishop what relates to Servants is nothing to this purpose in Ignatius whatever it was in our Authors Head Nor is the Second Alligation more regular or just than the former Antistitis manu in Tertullian for thence it came Originally by way of Mr. Baxter to our Author referring not to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Aquam adituri ibidem sed aliquanto prius in Ecclesia sub Antistitâ—… manu contestamur nos Renunciare Diaibolo c. Eucharistiae Sacramentum in Tempore victus Omnibus mandatum a Domino etiam antelucanis Caetizbus nec de Aliorum manu quam praesidentium sumimus Tert. De Cor. Milit. c. 3. but to the Form of Renouncing the Devil c. which was preparatory to Baptism and the persons to be Baptized did it sub Antistitis manu for ex as this Man quotes it would have made it Non-sence Tertullian does indeed speak of the Lords Supper not to be Received nisi de Praesidentium manu But this will do our Author no Service The word Praesidentium including the Bench of Presbyters as well as the Bishop in Cathedra Vid. Pears Vind. Ignat. p. 2. c. 13. Assert 2. Dod. in Iren. Dis 1. Sect. VII Nor will the Passage out of Irenaeus which he so hastily misapplies if fully cited and understood afford any advantage to his cause Presbyters in that Father oftentimes denoting the Age rather than the Office of those Persons meant by it as divers Learned Men have already observed And in that Sence not only Presbyters but likewise Bishops Deacons and Laymen might be comprehended under that Title And accordingly Irenaeus distinguishes by divers Characters telling them what sort of Elders they were to hearken to Qua propter eis qui in Eccles sunt Pres obaudire oportet hiis qui Successionem habent ab Apostolis sicut ostendimus qui cum Episc Successione charisma veritatis Certum secundum placitum Patris acceperunt Iren. l. 4. c. 4 3. Iren. l. 4. c. 43 viz. First Eis qui in Ecclesia sunt those who are within the Pale of the Church Secondly Hiis qui Successionem habent ab Apostolis c. those who had the Succession from the Apostles and who together with the Succession in their Episcopal Charge did receive the sure Gift of Truth according to the Will of the Father Whence it is plain that Irenaeus in this place means Bishops only when he talks of the Apostles Successors And therefore our Authors Inference in behalf of Presbyters having their Succession from the Apostles as well as Bishops is out of Doors Irenaeus reckons up the Bishops of Rome in order as they Succeeded to Eleutherius then Bishop who was the Twelfth from the Apostles concluding Hac Ordinaâ—…ione Successione c. by this Ordination and Succession that Tradition which is in the Church from the Apostlâ—…s and the Preaching of the Truth is handed down to us From which it is plain that Succession in their days was more than bare Conformity to the Apostles Model in Government and Worship For they Succeedded the Apostles First In Power and Authority So Irenaeus quibus etiam ipsas Ecclesias Committebant quos Successores relinquebant suum ipsorum Locum Magisterii tradentes Secondly In Place So Linus was constituted the Successor of St. Peter and St. Paul at Rome and Irenaeus tells us further that they made him Bishop And therefore if his Successors afterwards mentioned kept up to the Apostles Model they must likewise derive their Office as he did from Persons invested wâ—…th the same Character and Consequently as Linus was Ordained by the Apostles who had that Episcopal Authority in themselves which they conferred upon him So the rest down to Eleutherius must be Ordained by Bishops And if so let our Author consider with himself whether his Notion or ours is nearer in all Points to the sense of those Times When I consider how nice and strict this Gentleman was in the Notion of Succession P. 19. 20 that he could not allow Two Bishops to Succeed One Apostle nor One to Succeed Two I cannot but wonder that in the Writing of 16 Pages his Head should grow so loose as to make it no more than Conformity to the Apostles Model in Government and Worship Surely if this be the truest Sence as the Gentleman affirms One Bishop may Succeed Two Apostles or One Apostle be Succeeded by Twenty Bishops without any such absurdity or Blunder as our Author cries out against in the fore-quoted Pages We all grant that for Persons wilfully to withdraw themselves from such particular Churches as are framed according to Scripture Rules and impose no new or needless Terms is to Act Schismatically because such willfull Separation when nâ—… cause is giuen cannot be without breach of Charity with our fellow Christians Page 37. Yes it may through the prejudices of Education or for want of understanding People may take that to be New which is very Old and that which is very Decent and Fit to be Imposed to be altogether Needless and withdraw themselves from particular Churches fram'd according to Scripture Rules when purely out of mistake they think them otherwise They may be led by Interest or won over by perswasion to a new Communion and yet have no hard thoughts of that Church or its Members which they left I cannot believe that every Dissenter at his first going off from the Church of England does immediately hate us I find several of 'em very Kind aâ—…d Affable Persons And yet if our Author has granted Right all their Charity though a very good and commendable thing cannot excuse 'em from the Guilt of acting schismatically And because our Author has granted this I shall grant likewise That Schism is frequently the Effect of Uncharitableness which perhaps was all that honest Mr. H. meant when he call d it formalis ratio People
the dignity of a Doctor And altho' some of those ancient Heretics could dispense with Fornication yet they dissuaded People from Marriage teaching them that it was of the Devil That we ought to own our Saviour in times of the greatest persecution is a great Gospel-Truth Luke 12.9 and yet the Corinthian Schismatics taught and practis'd otherwise which Doctrin and Practice St. Paul is likewise thought to oppose chap. 3. ver 11 c. and went so far as to partake of the Idol Sacrifices according to their worldly wisdom that they might escape persecution which made the Apostle argue that point cap. 8. and to determin so peremptorily and severely cap. 10.21 Ye cannot drink the Cup of the Lord and the Cup of Devils Ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's Table and the Table of Devils I might give you several other instances of the Gnostick heresy too rife at that time in the Corinthian Church but these surely are sufficient to prove against Mr. H. that they were not all agreed in the great Gospel-Truths Now Heresy includes Schism as it breaks the unity of the Faith one of the indispensible requisites to the unity of the Church And therefore the Corinthian Hereticks being Schismatics likewise i.e. disjointed and loose from the body of the Church the Apostle bids 'em be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 well-jointed and compacted in the Church Again in the same mind and in the same judgment i. e by uniting themselves to it both in affection and principles a work surely to be done while men are in this world and if it be not Mr. H. will find it too late when he enters into another I have only two things further to note under this particular First That the Apostle charging the Corinthians to be perfectly join'd together in the same mind and in the same judgment or opinion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is strange how Mr. H. could observe that they were not obliged to think the same thing And secondly That this Text relating so plainly to difference in apprehension even according to his own exposition it is no less unaccountable to me why it might not as well have been reduced under that head as any one of those which he alledged to that purpose Secondly We must enquire into the Corinthians miscarriage which occasioned this caution which he tells us we have v. 11 12. There were contentions among them v. 11. Now the contention was about their Ministers as Mr. H. assures us p. 11. But I would ask him first of all was there no miscarriage antecedent to that contnetion Yes surely their heretical and wicked opinions which occasioned the antecedent caution viz. That ye all speak the same things In these the Schism was founded and they were probably the occasion of their ascribing themselves to Paul and Apollos and Cephas and Christ For where difference in opinion occasions debates among people not only the merits of the cause but likewise the original of each party and the means of knowing what they pretend to teach others are very frequently enquired into Thus it was in our Saviour's case when he taught something new and extraordinary beyond the common rate of their ordinary Scribes Whence hath this man this wisdom and these mighty works Is not this the Carpenters son Is not his Mother called Mary c And are not his Sisters all with us Whence then hath this man all these things Mat. 13.54 55 56. And there seems to be abundantly more occasion for the like enquiry in the case of the Corinthians as will appear if we consider the circumstances of those early times when this Epistle was written especially what means of knowledge the Corinthians then had and what proofs they might make use of to evince the truth or falshood of any Doctrine in debate They could not have the writings of the New Testament this Epistle being one of the first And it may reasonably be conjectured perhaps proved that of that little which was then written they had seen nothing For neither in their Epistle to St. Paul so far as St. Paul alludes to it neither in his to them is there the least intimation of any such thing And yet in the Epistles to the Thessalonians and the Gospel of St. Matthew which were of a prior date had they been in their hands they might have found the resolution of some of those cases which they put to the Apostle and therefore saved themselves the labour of that part of their appeal And as for the writings of the Old Testament there were two sorts of errors not to mention any more which were not easily confuted by their authority One was touching the Doctrine of the Resurrection which altho it might be proved from the Old Testament yet the Gnostics who denyed it may reasonably be supposed to have learnt from the Sadduces some of their first Masters how to evade those proofs and as for the other Judaizing Doctrines the Old Testament did so far seem to countenance them that it was not likely that every 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be able to prove it otherwise And therefore it might become the skill and authority of the great Apostle himself to shew the contrary And as the Corinthians had not the assistance of the written rule either for information or proof in these cases so both must be derived from their Teachers either in word or writing For instruction besides what they had learned from our Saviour and his Apostles they had their Prophets and Evangelists continually among them who being endued with the Spirit were thereby qualified to instruct and educate the younger converts in the Doctrines of the Gospel and from these the Corinthians received their common Instructions But as the Orthodox Prophets had their true inspirations so the Heretical Teachers pretended to the same and as the former had their true miracles for the confirmation of their Doctrines so the latter had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their lying wonders for the confirmation of theirs to deceive if it were possible the very elect And that which made it still more difficult for the ordinary Corinthians to judge betwixt them was because both parties continued in the same communion the Heretics not daring to go out i. e. to separate from the Church till a considerable time after this when many of the Apostles were dead Now where both sides were equal in order pretended to the same inspirations the same miracles and lived in the same communion the proof of each Doctrine must depend upon the credit and authority of those persons from whom it was derived If from Christ it was the greatest if from the Apostles it was next if from one of the first Converts well learned in the Christian doctrines highly approved and dignified by the Apostles as Apollos was it was of the last great authority Thus St. Paul recommends the authority of the houshold of Stephanas as being the most early Converts in that Region
Apostle's authority and order 1 Cor. 5.3 4 5. to be delivered unto Satan by being excommunicated out of the Church for the destruction of the flesh that Satan having him in his power might torment his body with diseases and pains For such a power as this the Apostles had whereby they were more especially enabled to convict Heretics of Imposture who pretending to Miracles as well as the Apostles it was not easy for the common People to see which were in the right unless something extraordinary appeared on the one side more than the other And in this case nothing could be so proper as that power of inflicting punishments upon the very persons of the Wonder-workers They might equal the Apostles themselves in their pretences to Inspirations to Mystery and Knowledge Their Tricks and Conjurations might perhaps seem as strange to the common People as any true Miracles But when the Apostles inflicted miraculous punishments and yet they could neither save nor avenge themselves by all their power it would be plain enough to every one who it was that acted by the power of God and consequently which side were in the right and which Cheats and Impostors Thus St. Paul threatens the elated Gnostics to know their power 1 Cor. 4.19 For the kingdom of God is not in word but in power i. e. it will not be so easy for you to judge by disputations c. who are the orthodox members of God's Church as by these more evident demonstrations of power which make the case plain to every man And yet the Apostle was always tender how he used those rigorous methods this power being given for edification and not for destruction 2 Cor. 13.10 it was only to be exerted upon the most notorious and incorrigible Offenders And this is the reason why we meet with so few instances of it and why the Apostle leaves it to their choice how he should deal with them What will ye shall I come unto you with a rod or in love and in the spirit of meekness 1 Cor. 4.21 And this power seems to be appropriate to the Apostles and their Successors the Bishops of that early Age For why else does the Apostle in the case of the incestuous Corinthian affirm himself to be present in spirit at the meeting of the inferior Ministers of the Church When ye are gathered together 1 Cor. 5.3 4 5. What matter whether the Apostle were present any way or not if his presence were no way necessary why should his spirit with the power of Christ be so emphatically mentioned ver 4. if the Assembly had that power of Christ so as to do it without him perhaps one reason might be because the Corinthian was a Doctor And we find the same authority over persons of that degree appropriated to the succeeding Bishops So Timothy might bestow the marks of Honour and likewise receive Accusations against an Elder and rebuke them that sinned before all so as to terrify others 1 Tim. 5.17 19 20. Titus was to rebuke sharply the Gnostic Prophets those who bore the like character in the Christian Church to that of Epimenides among the Heathen i. e. were Priests and Diviners to stop their mouths which was surely to silence them Tit. 1.11 12 13. So that the Apostles and Bishops who succeeded them in Authority had power to silence the schismatical Teachers which is all we contend for But neither they nor we are for silencing those Ministers that being duly ordain'd are sound and orthodox according to Mr. H's Supposition and whether he and his Vindicator belong to the former or the latter sort we are willing at any time to stand a fair Tryal As for his instance of Apollos it will do him but little service if Antiquity is to be credited which makes this very Apollos the first Bishop of Corinth and it is to be noted that there were Teachers and Ministers before and therefore if Apollos was the first Bishop he was of another Order And their boasted Father St. Jerome expresly tells us that upon this very Schism of the Corinthians * Hiâ—…ron in Comment ad Tiâ—…um In toto orbe decretum est ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur caeteris ad quem omnis ecclesiae cura pertineret Schismatum semina tollerentur Not that there was no Episcopal Authority before this time it was lodged in the Apostles till now and this was the first time they communicated it to any other person With the like ingenuity Mr. H. expounds the second place in this Epistle where he finds the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 telling us First That it could not be meant of breach of Communion because they all came together into one place v. 20. Secondly That the Schisms were Quarrels and Contentions about some little things relating to the circumstances of public worship Thirdly That the quarrel seems to be obout the time of beginning their worship in every of which conjectures Mr. H. is grosly mistaken and seems not to have understood St. Paul's meaning as will appear if we consider First That altho it is true as I noted before that Schismatics did not as yet hold any separate Conventicles yet there was a most notorious breach of communion even at the Communion-Table and their miscarriages were so great and of such a kind as were scarcely reconcileable with the nature of a Sacramental Feast Insomuch that the Apostle tells 'em v. 20. When ye come together into one place This is not to eat the Lord's Supper and the reason was because they did not communicate one with another For in eating every one taketh before other his own Supper and one is hungry and another is drunken i. e. The rich who contributed more plentifully to the common feast did not suffer the poor to be sharers with them but snatcht up their own oblation and eat and drank it themselves So that those who by reason of their poverty brought little or nothing went away hungry and ashamed v. 21 22. Now this was so much a breach of communion that according to this practice there was really no communion at all The rich lookt upon what they brought as their own Supper to which no man else had any right and for this reason were so hasty to eat it up themselves that the poor had nothing So that while one party had nothing to eat and the rest ate every man his own without communicating one with another there was so great a violation of the designed communion that really they made it no communion at all And yet I can find no quarrels or contentions among them The rich who fed so plentifully had no reason to quarrel for they had their full share even to excess And altho the poor had really a just cause of complaint yet perhaps because they brought nothing they thought it not seemly to mutiny All the Apostle mentions concerning their behaviour is that they were hungry v. 21. and as
Meletiâ—ns were Schismaticks and 〈◊〉 thâ—se 〈◊〉 by Meletius were receiv'd into places where othâ—â—… 〈…〉 though the Paulianists and 〈◊〉 were to be re-baptiz'd 〈◊〉 ordain'd by the 19th Canon of the Council of Nice 〈…〉 those ordain'd by the Novaâ—â—â—…ns * 〈…〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid c. 8. when reconcil'd to the Church were to continue in the same Station which they enjoy'd before except Catholick were in pâ—ssession by the 8th Caâ—â—… of the very same Council From which Instances it is plain Tâ—â—â—… according 〈◊〉 the Sence of those Fathers though Schismatical 〈…〉 â—â—â—…ieties were out of the Church yet it did not whâ—â—…Y dâ—vâ—st 'em 〈◊〉 their Character so as to make 'em no longer the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cal Power as this Vindicator would insinuate Nay the severest Enemies to Heretical Ordinationâ— never went so far as our Aâ—â—â—or as appears from what they declare in a â—â—â—â—â—…lel Case viz. that of Baptism St. Cyprian himself owns the practice in his days to admit reconciled Hereticks Vid. Cypr. ad Quinteâ—… Steph. ap Cyp. ad Pomp. cp 74. Crescent ap Conc. Carthag 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ap Eus H. E. l. 7. c. 7. Ec. His l. 1. c. 9. Apos c. 67. Con. Nic. Can. 19. c. Ap. Cypr. Ed. Ox. Ep. LXXV Novatus à Thâ—…umagade ap Con. Carth. as Penitents only with Imposition of Hands if at first they were Baptiz'd by the Orthodox Clergy And so Heraclas of Alexandria took care that such persons should renounce their Heresies not at all requiring 'em to be Rebaptiz'd And in like manner Miletius retain'd his Character tho debarr'd the exercise of his Function by the Decree of the Nicene Council as appears by their Synodical Epistle in Socrates So that here the case of Baptism and Ordination run parallel neither being made void by meer Heresie or Schism and accordingly we find them put together in several Ancient Canons and in Firmilianus's Epistle to St. Cyprian c. 'T is true the case was otherwise with those Baptized or Ordained by Hereticks or Schismaticks they were to be Reordain'd and Rebaptiz'd according to the Sentiments of those African Fathers How consistently with their own practice let others judge for if Hereticks or Schismaticks did retain their Character while they were out of the Church as those Fathers seem to allow I can see no reason why it should be totally out of their Power to confer the like upon other Persons for if it be said that they lost their Character by departing from the Church how they could obtain it again without a new Ordination is past my understanding And therefore why Miletius himself should retain his Character Socr. ubi sup and yet those Ordain'd by him be confirmed or setled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if by those words is really meant a Second Ordination I must learn from others Vid. Iren. adv Haer. l. 1. c. 18. As for the grosser Hereticks that lived before the time of St. Cyprian and whose several manners of Baptizing were so Monstrous and Wicked I cannot wonder if the Ancients thought fit to Baptize them over again Their former Baptism wanting the necessary words and being Consequently void in the very performance and therefore when Tertullian and other Fathers reject their Baptism I am of opinion it makes little for St. Cyprians Cause So that notwithstanding the Testimonies produced by a Learned Author â—…aun Ep. 15. Agrippinus might be the first introducer of that Practice as Vincentius Lirinensis testifies Vincen. Lirin Com. c. 9. p. 21. Edit Cantab. 1687. Ap. Cyp. ut Supra Vid. Cyp. ipsum in Ep. ad Juâ—…aian And this I am the rather induc'd to believe be cause Pope Stephen then condemn'd it as a Novel Custom and Firmilianus and other Africans seem to own at least could not deny that it was so as appears by the Answer they made to that Objection So that by the most constant usage of the Church in those first Ages the Baptism of Hereticks was not to be admitted in gross neither was it Universally to be rejected upon St. Cyprians Principles there being a difference to be made betwixt those Hereticks who did not really Baptize at all and those that did And so you find both the first and second Councils of Arles admit such as were Baptiz'd in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost 1. Con. Arcl. c. 8. 2. Con. Arcl. c. 16. 17. Optat. 1. 4. and Rebaptising only those that did not believe in the Trinity nor Consequently use the Essential Form and so Optatus declares Quodcunque in Trinitate factum est bene factum est The like distinction I reckon is to be made concerning Ordinations viz. Those who derived their Orders only from Hereticks and Consequently never had any Succession from the Church were justly to be reputed as Unordain'd but those Ordain'd by Hereticks who had their Ordination originally from the Church and did not omit any thing necessary to the conferring of Orders had no occasion for Reordination And to let pass the distinction betwixt the Novatians and Cataphrygae made by the Nicene Fathers Optatus and St. Austin have both of 'em settled the point in their Controversy with the Donatists (a) Vinc. Lirin c. 11. p. 26. Ed. Cant. 1687 who pretended the Authority of the African Council for Rebaptizing the Catholicks Thus (b) In hoc Sacramento Baptismatis Celebrando tres esse Species Constat c. Optat. l. 5. p. 143. Edit Com. 1599. Optatus in Celebrating the Sacrament of Baptism there are three kinds of things which you can neither increase nor diminish nor pretermit The 1st is the Trinity The 2d in him that Believes The 3d. in him that does the Office but they are not all to be esteem'd of equal moment For I look upon two of 'em to be necessary and one as if it were necessary The Trinity obtains the principal place the Faith of him that Believes comes next after this and the Person of him that Ministers is nigh but cannot be of the same Authority The two former remain always unalterable and fixt for the Trinity is always the same and the Faith in several Persons is but one both always retain their proper Efficacy but the Person of him that Ministers is known that it cannot be equal to the two former sorts for this reason because it alone appears to be alterable c. And (c) Ibid. p. 141 142. a little before he acquaints us with the practice of the Church at that time As oft as any one Baptized by you i. e. the Donatists desires to come over to us we receive him according to the Example of our Master with all simplicity for far be it from us that we should call him back again to the Font who is already washed far be it from us that we should repeat that which is to be done but once or double that which is but one for so it is written by the
has still been the business of a select Order of Men Neither is it to be alter'd now except our Author can shew us a Text of Scripture whereby Laymen are impower'd to Ordain the Clergy or some Scripture Instance to justifie that Practice And if this cannot be done I should be loth to be one of those Laymen though never so discreet and knowing that shouâ—…d presume to appoint Embassadors for Almighty God without his Order Neither can I see any Reason why a Man may not as well be a Minister of Jesus Christ without any Mission at all as by the Mission of those persons who never were sent themselves As to the Three Cases wherein ou Author supposes that such Lay-Ordinations became Necessary we have no Instances before us in Ecclesiastical History of that kind nor any particular direction in Scripture to do as he thinks we may And therefore we cannot tell what Method God Almighty would take in such Cases whether he would revive the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and call persons to the Ministry after an extraordinary manner that hereby the Authority might again appear to be derived from himself rather than accept of such unauthorized Ministers as are only propounded by the People Nor is it so easie to guide our selves by Arguments drawn from seeming Necessity in cases where there is no such Necessity at all For instance Suppose that a Company of Christian Women were cast upon an Island whether would one of them of the best Qualifications chosen by the rest and approv'd and set apart by the most competent Judges among 'em to administer in Holy Ordinances to them be a true Minister of Jesus Christ and a Lay Person no longer Here is the same Necessity which our Author supposes And if the Case holds as to the Men I can see no Reason why the Women whose Salvation is as Necessary should be rejected But if a well-qualified Sister should happen to win the Hearts of the most competent Judges in Mr. H's Congregation she must according to our Author's Argument be a truâ—… Clergywoman at their next Election Suppose that the Sacred Scriptures should be totally destroy'd or so corrupted by Hereticks that it were impossible to learn out of 'em the great Christian Trutâ—…s would not Papists upon this Supposal cry up the Use of Vnwritten Tradition and the great Necessity of an Infallible Judge Would not the Socinian argue stiffly for Natural Religion which might be practis'd well enough after all that loss And why should not the Quaker put in for a share and prefer the Conduct of Inward Light which may easily survive the Written Word And yet what Orthodox Believer would abate his Reverence for Scripture upon the Inferences of such People No more will it become us to admit Lay-Ordinations up n that of our Author from this Supposal of Necessity As wise Men as he would have concluded another way Not that Laymen are to Ordain Ministers but that where Ministers aâ—…e wanting People may either minister to themselves or communicate without Symbols or forbear till such times as Ministers can be had Why may not Almighty God as well dispense with some One of these things as with a Lay-Ordination And therefore when so many other Courses may be taken I would know by what Logick this Vindicator can prove That Lay Ordinations become Necessary And if not Necessary all his Argument is at an end whereby he would make 'em lawful I believe there never was any Case of Absolute Necessity for Lay-Ordinations but if possibly such should happen as the Gentleman mentions I am apt to believe that Bishops and Ministers duly ordain'd might be had from other Countries And if not methinks it would be reasonable and fit that we should first see what God would do in such Cases before we presume to do any thing of our selves for which we have no Scripture Warrant In the nighest Cases to his those of the Abyssines c. 't is plain the Persons concern'd were of a quite contrary Opinion to that of our Author The Abyssines did not think their want of Ordinances did impower 'em to Ordain Clergymen but were contented to be without those which are to be dispens'd by Priests till such times as Frumentius return'd from Alexandria who was there made a Bishop by Athanasius and his Colleagues in Council And yet they serv'd God in the best manner that Laymen could do They had their Conventicula Meeting-houses as Ruffinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Oratories or places for Prayer as Socrates Buffin H.B. l. 1. c. 1â—… Soc. H. E. l. 1. c. 19. Sunt enim Conventicula loca privata inquibus collectae fiunt ab illis distinguuntur Ecclesiae quae sunt publici juris c. Vales Annot. in Sec. l. 1. c. 19. but not to be call'd Churches as Valesius distinguishes They Catechiz'd but did not Preach They pray'd but had no Sacraments that we read of And when Frumentius came back like an Apostle of the Country he was Endowed with the Power of Working Miracles as the most Authentick Evidence both of his Doctrin and Mission Nâ—…w if those Christians had been of this Author's Opinion it might have sav'd Frumentius the Fatigue of so long a Journy for the Christian Merchants at Auxumae might have Chosen and Approv'd and set him apart and without ever troubling Athanasius he had been a true Minister of Jesus Christ sufficiently Authoriz'd to the Work Vindic. p. 27. and a Lay Person no longer And if Oswald King of Northumbria had but understood the Nature of Ordination like this learned Gentleman he needed not have sent to the Abbot of Hy for Bishops he and his Privy Council or others of his Christian Subjects might have ordain'd enough For probably there were not only Christians but Presbyters in Northumbria at that time Twelve Thousand being baptiz'd according to Nennius and Paulinus their Archbishop Nen. H. Prit c. 65. Vid. chronic sanct cru Edin ad an 627. Angl Sac. Tom. 1. Hist de Success Ep. Dunelm ib. p. 691. with the Assistaâ—…ce of Edwin their King having spent six years in planting and setling Christianity there and but two years betwixt his going off and Bishop Aidan's coming thither And unless the Gent. can shew the contrary viz. That none of the former Converts were then remaining or if they were that none of 'em were better qualified none more competent Judges than the rest but all alike It is plain by their practice that they were not of his Opinion When ever a new People were Converted to the Faith great care was always taken to have a Lawful Ministry among 'em both Bishops and Presbyters duly Ordain'd Ruffin H. E. l. 1. c. 10. For this Reason the Iberians dispatch'd an Embassy to Constantine desiring that Priâ—…sts might be sent ' em Soz. H. E. l. 6. c. 38. And when the Saracens were Converted Mavia their Queen desires that Moses a Saracen might be the Bishop
for it But in some Greek Copies the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are left out So that upon the whole matter the Eastern Churches have no quarrel against either of those * Combefis ad Man Calec not 59. Creeds All their contention with the Western in this case is about the true Reading of them †Symbolum fidei quod ipsi profitentur idem est atque illud quod Latini in Missa recitant Differunt in eo à Latinis quod ipsi de Spir. Sancto dicunt qui ex Patre procedit Latini qui ex Patre filioque procedit id cum Graeci non negent idem cum Latinis dicere existimandi sunt Leo All. de Cons l. 3. c. 10. Sect. 1. And therefore unless he had been more particular about that this first Branch of T. W's description may stand and yet neither the Greek or any Eastern Church be excluded Secondly To partake of the same Table 't is true T. W. did not mean the same individual Table as the Gentleman rightly supposes and yet he meant somthing more than barely the same Eucharist in Specie Hereticks and Schismaticks may deliver the same Eucharist in Specie and yet he that Communicates with either is not thereby in the Communion of the Saints Thirdly To joyn all in the same Holy Prayers and Supplications and giving of Thanks T. W. does not hereby Excommunicate all the rest of the World For although the Forms of Holy Prayer c. are different in several Countreys yet people joyning with the Church where they live in its Holy Devotions do answer this Branch of the Description and those Christians who refuse and separate from them are certainly Schismaticks Fourthly To be Subject and Obedient to our Spiritual Rulers and Governors who have derived their Authority from the Apostles by a due Succession in all things pertaining to godly Life Decency and Order He cannot except against this They are desirous to give due Honour and Obedience to their Spiritual Governors who derive their Authority from Christ but still he endeavours to justifie their Separation upon two accounts Vind. p. 32. First Because he thinks the Bishop ought not to Govern so many Congregations nor by such Rules and Officers as they do Neither Secondly By the nomination of the Civil Magistrate without the consent of the People or the Ministers within the Diocess and while he does so he is a Creature not to be found either in Scripture or in the Primitive Times and therefore can be no Spiritual Governor of theirs by Divine Right As to the Government of so many Congregations we think it not Essential to the Office of a Bishop It being not the greatness of the City he lives in or the extent of his Diocess or the Number of Congregations but the Ordination that makes him a Bishop We acknowledg with St. Ep. ad Evagr. Jerome that the poor Bishop of Eugubium had the same Order and Authority with him of Rome and that he of Tanis was equal in that respect to him of Alexandria Soz. l. 2. c. 14. and that Milles the Martyr in Sozomen who had never a Christian within his Diocess Ibid. l. 7. c. 19. was as truly a Bishop as he who had all Scythia under his care On the other hand to persuade us that the great Extent of a Bishops Diocess does make void his Office will be a task I am afraid too difficult for our Author to manage We have no such Doctrine in Sc ipture And this conceit as it is beyond the malice so it is below the Sence of all Hereticks and Schismaticks in former Times And if it were true the Apostles themselves must have been the greatest Usurpers They having a larger extent of Jurisdiction even according to this Author than any of their Successors But this Argument has been so Copiously and so lately managed by Doctor Maurice in his Learned Defence of Diocesan Episcopacy that I shall only need to refer the Reader thither Secondly As for the Officers used by our English Prelacy we think them such as are extreamly useful in order to the more regular and easy management of the Episcopal Charge The Chancellor is a Person well learned in the Canon and Civil Laws and consequently able to judg or assist the Bishop in his Judicial Proceedings Nor is it any great exception against him in my Opinion that he is a Layman while there is no Necessity for him Personally to perform any of those things which belong only to the Clergy Lyndew de Constit q. incontin Dec. Rural vid plura de judiciis c. 1. Dec. Rural The Dean Rural is a Temporary Officer under the Archbishop or Bishop ad aliquod ministerium exeâ—…cendum Constitutus Cujus Officium est in Causis ecclesiasticis citationes ei transmissas exequi cujus sigillum in talibus erit auctenticum The Rules they go by are the Canon and Civil Laws where the Laws and Canons of our own Kingdom have not expresly directed The Authority they have is from the Bishop and the Law So that he who disobeys them in the just and legal Exercise of their Authority disobeys both How Sacred and Certain that Authority is I wish these Gentlemen may consider And if it were purely a matter of Choice yet methinks Church-Affairs are more likely to be well manag'd under our English Prelacy by such Officers and Rulers than after the Independent Fashion by the Sudden and Arbitrary Determination of every Mean and Ordinary Pastâ—…r perhaps in a Consistory of Clowns who must Pole for that Truth and Equity which they do not understand And if either the Pastor or any body else happens to be wiser than the rest so as to judge right have Power to over-rule his Sence and Arguments either by Votes or Tumult Neither Thirdly Do we think the Consent of the People or of the Ministers of the Diocess Essential to thâ—… Office of a Bishop Our Saviour Constituted his Apostles without it We have no Command in Scripture for any such Consent The Practice of the Primitive Times was various and therefore we think it a Matter left wholly to the Discretion of the Church Matthias and Justus seem to be appointed by the People as well as the Apostles Acts 1.15 c. But the Apostleship was not determined by that Election but by the Lot which fell upon Matthias For Justus who was equally Sharer with him in that Act of the People was thereby no more an Apostle than he was before And perhaps the same way of Chusing by Lots might be us'd by St. John as Mr. Dodwell conjectures but was never Diss Cyp. p. 12. probably in Use after the Apostles Days though if it had been Necessary we cannot believe it would have been omitted in the following Ages The Seven Deacons we read were Elected by the People but receiv'd their Authorities and Office from the Apostles by imposition of Hands And these are I believe all
the Instances of Popular Elections that can be found in Scripture but from none of 'em is it evident that the Election of the People did contribute any thing that was Essential to Holy Orders The Reason why it was admitted was that they might confer the Power and Character upon the Best and most Unexceptionable Persons such as were of Honest Report which could not so easily be known without consulting the Multitude Cyp. Ep. LXVIII Ed. Oxon. And this is all the Use that St Cyprian makes of the aforementioned Instances who tells us That it was so order'd in the Case of Eleazar the Son of Aaron and ought to be so that the Crimes of ill Men may be Detected and the Deserts of Good Men Extoll'd And that the Apostles proceeded so diligently and warily in the Choice of Matthias and the Seven Deacons lest any Unworthy Person should creep into the Service of the Altar or obtain the Degree of Priesthood And he adds further That in his Time it was the Custom for the Neighbouring Bishops of the same Province to Meet and Chuse a Bishop in the presence of the People who fully understood each Man's Life And after this manner they advanced Sabinus into the Place of Basilide All this seems to be plainly allow'd by the Council of Laodicea which will have none to be made Bishops but such as are of Known and Approved Conversation Con. Laod. Can. 12. and provides that they should be constituted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Discretion of the Metropolitans and Neighbouring Bishops In which Poâ—…nts it agrees exactly with St. Cyprian s Model Can. 13. anâ—… yet the Canon immediat ly following will not allow the People to chuse those that are to be advanced to the Priesthood and therefore surely their Consent was not then thought Essentially Necessary to the making of a Bishop Nay so far was the Church from the Opin on of this Author that upon the Death of Auxentius Theod. H. E. l. 4 c. 7. the Arian Bish p of Milan the Synod petition'd the Emperour That he would chuse one to suc eed him in that See which certainly they would not have done if they had thought that his Nomination would have made him such a Monster as our Author speaks of viz. A Creature not to be found in Scripture or the Primitive Times I might add several other Instances of Bishops Metropolitans and Patriarchs chosen to their respective Charges by the Discretion of the Emperour and other Princes but I suppose it is not necessary As to the Nomination of our English Prelacy suppose it had been of right Originally in the Clergy and People yet they by their Representatives in Parliament 25 H. 8. c. 20. have confirm'd it to the Prince So that it is his by Law And for my part I know no Reason why it should not so continue Episcopacy is the same chuse who Names it being not the Nomination but the Ordination that makes the Bishop And if that be the same now which it was in the Primitive Times our Episcopacy must needs be the same with theirs Page 33 and 34. The Gentleman is willing to be try'd by the Pattern of those Churches which are truly Primitive but I find he dares not venture far among 'em for fear of losing his Cause He complains That a Century or Two made a considerable Change in the Features of their Government and Worship but in which Century that Change was wrought he durst not inform us However if he pleases to venture his Cause upon it let him take any of the first Fifteen to prove Congregational Episcopacy and provided he will allow the Writers of that or the next Age to be credited before those that liv'd later I shall freely joyn issue with him We have a Specimen of his Abilities already page 34 and 35. where he tells us That Ignatius charges the Bishop to take a personal cognizance of every Member of his Church not excepting the very Servants And Secondly That it was the Custom then in every Congregation to receive the Sacrament every Lord's Day and that they never receiv'd it nisi ex antistitis manu but from the Hand of the Bishop What could such Bishops be more than Pastors of single Congregations To which I Answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ignat. Ep. ad Polyc. First That Ignatius does indeed require of the Bishop to discourse people singly as God should enable him But how does this prove That he was to take a Personal Cognizance of every particular Member of his Church Had he no body to assist him in the Remoter parts of his Charge Why could no Man else acquaint him with the Frailties and Misdemeanors of particular persons but all must depend wholly upon his own Cognizance and Observation Or because he was not to content himself barely with Publick Preaching but was to discourse 'em particularly as he found occasion Does it therefore follow that he must needs be acquainted with every Member o his Church How if they were too numerous or liv d too remote to be all Personally discours'd with All that Ignatius requires is so far as God shall enable him Which kind of Expression methinks implies some difficulty Let Assemblies be held often 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. Enquire after all by their Names do not despise or behave thy self insolently towards the Men-Servants or Maid-Servants This I suppose is the Passage to which our Author principally refers Though if he had been able to have quoted it we might have been abundantly more certain However from this it is not to be concluded that he must take a personal Cognizance of every Member of his Church or that he was the Pastor only of One single Congregation For how does he prove That those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were to be only at One Place Why might not the several Assemblies in his Diocess be as well comprehended under that Title Again how does our Author prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies no more but the Ordinary Congregations Why not the more Extraordinary Assemblies when the Bishop Visited Perhaps the Bishop had a Scroll wherein the Names of Christians were enroll'd and in calling them over at his Visitations might enquire into the Faith and Manners of particular Persons and call for the Men themselves and as he found Occasion discourse 'em 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of Doct ine Admonition or Reproof Or peradventure he might call over the Nâ—…mes of the Congregation where he himself was present that he might hereby discover who were heretically inclin'd For even then such Persons began to withdraw from the Communion of the Church and to hold Conventicles though very privately And if we take it in the latter Sence it will contribute little to his Cause unless he could first prove That the Bishop's Congregation would not be a Pattern to the rest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Id. ad Smyr