Selected quad for the lemma: order_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
order_n	bishop_n	ordain_v	presbyter_n	5,751	5	10.9253	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A27068	Whether parish congregations be true Christian churches and the capable consenting incumbents, be truly their pastors, or bishops over their flocks ... : written by Richard Baxter as an explication of some passages in his former writings, especially his Treatise of episcopacy, misunderstood and misapplied by some, and answering the strongest objections of some of them, especially a book called, Mr. Baxters judgment and reasons against communicating with the parish assemblies, as by law required, and another called, A theological dialogue, or, Catholick communion once more defended, upon mens necessitating importunity / by Richard Baxter.	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1684 (1684)	Wing B1452; ESTC R16512	73,103	142

Pastors with the publick Ministers and lived in Love and Communion with them The People were not by the new Law cast out with the Ministers Most of the people in the 2000 Parishes of the ejected and almost all in the other 7000 who before communicated or were ca●able of it continuing the Parish Communion And so are Churches if they were so before XVIII The generality of the former Protestant Bishops and Clergy took the Parish Rectors to be true Pastors of the Parish Churche● as Bishop Usher proved them The Church of England is confessed to be of this mind before the Wars It is not certain that Arch-Bishop Laud thought otherwise If he did Hey●n names but five that joyned with him in his main cause of whom Mountague if not more were for the contrary cause in this point XIX They then took a Curate to be a Pastor and to have all that is essential to the Presbyters Office And to be a Presbyter and no Pastor is a Contradi●tion in the sense of Protestants and Papists except what is said for Lay-E●ders In France they call all their Parish-Pastors Curates the word sig●ifieth the Curam animarum XX. No Law since 166● hath changed any essentials of the Parish-Pastors O●●nce and so none hath nulled it from what it was in 1640. They that affirm the contrary must prove it The Law before subjected Parish-Pastors to Diocesans It imposed the Oath of Canonical Obedience and a promise of the same in Ordination It was the same to the Ecclesiastical Courts as now If any pretend to such singular skill in Law as to say that there was no Law for the Book of Ordination which made the ordained to Covenant to obey their Ordinaries nor any Law for the Canons I hope he will have more reason than to lay the controversie about Separation on his odd conceit when all the People in England have in the days of the four last Soveraigns been forced to submit to these as Legal and no such pretender could at any time deliver them Books have been written and Pleas used against submitting to the Courts that declared not that they held their Authority from the King but the Judges still over-ruled it against them And they that profest to hold it from the King did many if not most mean but the Liberty of publick exercising it as the Ministry is held under him or the adjunct Cogent Power or the Circa sacra XXI The Law enableth the Parish-Minister to receive into the Church by Baptism tho under canonical Prescripts which Dissenters much dislike and to Catechize Youth and certifie their fi●ness for Confirmation before they Communicate It bindeth them to reject all from Communion who are not confirmed or at least are not ready and desirous of it it tells us who is to be taken for ready Those that have learnt the Catechism and solemnly own their Baptismal Covenant The Pastor hereby hath Power to try all the unconfirmed whether they are thus ready or not The Canon requireth him to deny Communion to all that live in any scandalous Sin The Law and Canon bid him to instruct the Congregation to lead them in publick Worship and in the Name of Christ to Reprove Admonish Comfort Administer the Lord Supper Visit the Sick with Instruction and Prayers All which with the aforesaid Power of judging who shall be Communicants is full as much as is Essential to a Parish-Pastor Solemnly to pronounce them Excommunicate beside refusing Communion is not Essential If it were they have Power to do it after the Bishops Sentence If it were Essential to do it as ungoverned or finally or without appeal then Apostolick yea and Magistrates Government would null the Pastors Office XXII The altering some words in Ordination and putting out the name Pastors from most places in the Litturgy where they were applied to Parish-Ministers is no change at all of the Office much less of its essence It takes no Power from them which they had But it was done by the interest of some men who thought that Presbyters who swore the three Kingdoms against Bishops had taken too much upon them and in opposition they endeavoured to keep them under and so would diminish their pretences for Parity But this changeth not the Species of the Office And it s known who these men were And tho some of them are of Opinion that Diocesan Bishops only may regularly confer Ordination and exercise Jurisdiction over the Clergy and that meer Presbyter Ordination with us is null 1. These same men had a chief hand in debating and wording the Kings Declarations October 1661. Concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs and therein the King after debates with Lords and Bishops distinguisheth the meer Pastoral preswasive Power from the Episcopal which is Cogent and alloweth the Rural Deans with the Presbyters of his Deanry to exercise the said Pastoral perswasive Power and the other Pastors also to joyn with the Bishops And the Law still calls them Rectors The Liturgy yet calls them Past●rs the word Pastors being a Metaphor they take to be general Bish●ps and Priests being with them two Orders of Pastors Therefore because it doth not distinguish them they usually leave it out and put sometime Bishops and Curates and sometime Bishops Priests and Deacons The common description of a Bishop by them is that he hath the sole Power of presiding and determining in Ordination and Jurisdiction s●ne quo non oft alledging Jeroms Quid facit Episcopus quod non facit Presbyter excepta Ordinatione And yet the Law still binds them not to ordain without Presbyters Imposition of hands with them And Arch-Deacons and Presbyters Surrogates c. Excommunicate And in the Ember-week they are every day to pray by the Liturgy So guide and govern the minds of thy Servants the Bishops and Pastors of thy Fl●ck that they may lay hands suddenly on no man Where Bishops and Pastors cannot be taken for Synonyma whilst they speak of all that lay on hands And they distinguish not Pastors and Curates where they change the words but Bishops and Curates But nothing more proveth what I say than that the Law yet bindeth all Priests to all that is essential to an Episcopus Gregis a Pastor of a particular Church see the Exhort in Ord. of Priests We exhort you in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that you have in remembrance into how high a dignity and to how weighty an office and charge ye are called that is to say to be Messengers Watchmen and Stewards of the L●rd to teach and to premonish to feed and provide for the Lords Family to seek for Christs Sheep that are dispersed abroad and for his Children who are in the midst of this naughty world that they may be saved by Christ for ever have always therefore printed in your remembrance how great a treasure is committed to your charge for they are the sheep of Christ which he bought c. The Church and Congregation whom you

choice And our present Canons since 1604 tho they null not the Parochial Pastorship do so far restrain it as I hope my Conscience shall never approve But yet for that I will not forsake what is of God nor make mans failings a pretence against my duty to God and Man to the Violation of Love Unity and Peace Yet I will try by distinct speaking to make both the Case and my meaining plainer if I can And thereby to shew that our case differeth but gradually from the old Nonconformists as to Lay-mens Parochial Communion where there are honest Ministers And that the old Nonconformists had better Evidence Scripture and Reason on their side than either those Innovators who make Parish-Pastors to be but de specie of humane Institution made by Bishops and changeable by them having just so much power as they please to give them or the Brownists that are so much of the same Principles as to think that mens Laws or Canons can change the form of the Office or that judg it nullified by tollerable Imperfections and Communion made unlawful by such faults as are found in almost all the Churches on Earth Qu. Whether according to the description of the Scripture and the exposition of Dr. Hammond himself all qualified Parish Ministers be not true Pastors and Bishops of the Flocks and with their consenting Christian Communicants true particular Churches and de facto all be not in the power given them by God which is essential hereto and in the power generally acknowledged by the legal Church Ans I have spoken to this so largely in my Treatise of Episcopacy and there added the testimonies of Writers old and new Protestants and Papists that I will give but a breviate of it here The essence of the Church Ministry consisteth in POWER and OBLIGATION FROM CHRIST to teach to guide in Worship and to oversee and guide the Conversation and Communion of the Flocks If it were not of Christ they were but officers of men de specie even of an office of mans making Dr. Hammond saith that Christ gave the Keys only to the Apostles and they only to their Successors That there is no evidence that there were any of a second order of Presbyters in Scripture time that this order was after made by Man Mr. Dodwell sheweth how and why and more fully than Dr. Hammond asserteth that such Presbyters have no more power than the ordaining Bishops intended to give them Or saith Dr. H. If they have a first power it is such as may not be exercised without a second so that it is indeed no true power to act And the Dr. plainly tells the London Ministers p. 80 81. There is no manner of incongruity in assigning of one Bishop to one Church and so one Bishop in the Church of Jerusalem because it is A. CHURCH not Churches being forced to acknowledg that where there were more Churches there were more Bishops And he denied our Presbyters that were not Diocesans to be Bishops both City and Country Presbyters And consequently that our Parishes were no Churches And on these grounds he and Bishop Gunning and such others judged Presbyters Ordination null because they were no Bishops And the said Dr. tho I thought he had been next Petavius one of the first that had expounded the new Testament Elders to be all Bishops of several Diocesses yet tells us that he thought most of his brethren were of his mind herein And when we in Worcestershire formed a Pacificatory Association of the Epicopal Presbyterians Indep●ndents and Peace-makers agreeing lovingly to practice so much in Doctrine Worship and Discipline as we were for according to our several principles forbearing each other in the rest and Dr. Warmst●●● and Dr. Tho. Good being for Bishops subscribed to it Dr. Peter Gunn●●g wro●e largely against so doing to Dr. Warmstrie and took him off upon these aforesaid principles and they then called their Judgment the Judgment of the Church of England and wrote as if the Church had been of their mind and gone their way I wrote ●large Answer to Dr Gunning's Paper not printed and proved that the old Protestant Bishops and Doctors were of another mind largely citing their testimonies in my Christian C●nc●rd and plainly warned English Protest●nts to take heed of these Innovators and that the name of the Church and Episcopacy deceive them not against the Church and Protestant Cau●e many ●ose against me for this with great indign●tion especially Arch-Bishop Bramhall and two or three learned Writers and would make the world believe that it was the Church of England which I sought to defame and bring under suspition and which owned Gr●tius and his way of Reconciliation with Rome when as it was for departing from the professed principles of the reformed Bishops and Doctors and from the book of Ordination and other writings of the Church that I blamed them Yet would they needs claim the name of the Church of England And it is not here seasonable for me to tell how many and how great men in 1661 and 1662 seemed by their w●rds and doings to be full at least as high as they nor how they expressed it nor how many strongly conceited by the Act th●● requireth reordination of men ordained by Presbyters and by the number rejected who refused it That the Parliament had been of th●ir mind and much more the ●●nv●cation called the church-repr●sentative especi●lly when they heard men call the old Bishops and Arch-Bishops such as ●sher Downame 〈◊〉 c. in I●eland and G. Abbot Rob. A●b●t Grindal and many such in England Puritans and Presbyterians And when P●● H●l●● maketh Arch bishop Abbot and the Bishops and Clergy in his days to ●e of one mind vilified by him and Arch-bishop Laud and his Clergy after of another In this case I gave the name of the present Diocesans to those that thus claimed it and pretended so confidently to the present possession of it but I thought not their claim just And when I sometimes used the name of English Di●cesans for this sort who nullifie the Parish Churches and Pastorship it was but to notifie them that so claimed it supposing I had oft sufficiently opened my sense and usually added that they nullifie them not effectively but quantum in se and by their consequences But I again now tell the Reader that I think the Judgment of the church of England considered as humanely constituted by publick professions and by Law much less as divinely constituted is not to be measured or named from any innovators or any that most confidently claim it or think they are uppermost at the present and thereby have that right but as Divine by Gods word whose sufficiency we all profess and as humane by the published Church professions that is the Liturgy the book of Ordination the 39 Articles of Religion the Apology of the Church of England the Defence of that Apology set in all Churches the book of H●milies Nowels

for another yet agreeing in the same ordinary external Communion one part may be called national as well as the other The question is de ●omine the name equivocal from diversity of relations I own 1. A Christian Kingdom 2. I own a national association of Parish Churches and Pastors 3. Tho these submit to Diocesan superiority and be parts of a Diocess but true single Churches I do not therefore separate from them 4 A national Church headed by one constitutive pastoral Head I disown call which you will the national Church But saith he of his approved parish Church P. 14. Such a Church a●●i●meth to it self all that past●ral p●wer that in pursuance of Canon and Statute Law is fixed in the Bishop Ans Incogitantly spoken Do all Independents assume the power of Ordination Jurisdiction over others Citations Licencing Subspendings Degradings silencings instituting inducting c. which are so fixed on the Bishop If none of this be pastoral power then the appropriating it is no depriving parish Ministers of pastoral power and to be under Magistrates power nulls not the pastors XLIX What he saith about unlawful terms of Communion p 21. c. in the instances of kneeling putting off the hat standing up c. I answer 1. The Author all along seemeth to forget that I am not accusing him not telling every man his duty but only giving the Reasons of my own and such others practice so they make a long ado to vindicate him whose Manuscript I answered and say His question was only whether it be lawful to communicate with the churches as setled by Law and not in other respects When I ever told them I meddle with none of their Questions but my own viz 1. Whether I and such other do well or ill in that communion we hold with the Parish Churches 2. Whether all Protestants in England are bound in conscience to renounce and avoid Communion in the Liturgy with all Parish Churches and Chappels and rather to give over all church worship I only gave my Reasons why that Manuscript divulged and boasted of as unanswerable changed not my Judgment and I answered that in his Arguments which went further than the question put by them and assaulted my own assertions having before in my Christian Directory and cure of Church divisions without naming him fully answered his printed Reasons to prove it unlawful to use an imposed form or Liturgy especially because Ministers must use their own gifts But if any man believe that it is a sin to communicate kneeling or standing or sitting unless he lye down as Christ did or at any time save at a feast or supper or any where save in an Inn or an upper room or with any women or more than twelve or if they think it sin to kneel at prayer or be uncovered or to sing Psalms in our Metre and Tunes whether these men should separate from all the Churches that will not receive them in their own way or how far they do well or ill that will not let every man do what he will is none of the case that I have before me It will not follow that I must separate from a Church that bids me kneel and be uncovered c. because you take it to be sin put not your measures on all others And here because same maketh Mr. Faldo the Author of the Vindication which I answered that I may so far vindicate him as to shew that it 's ●earce likely I ask whether if Mr. Faldo did well as a pastor to keep up a church at Barn●● many years which would not endure the singing of a psalm of praise to God but constantly forbore it tho his Judgment was against them besides that many of them were not only against Infant Baptism but f●rther differ'd in other things was this communion more lawful or laudable than with honest parish Ministers in the Liturgy Did he the whole office of a pastor What if the Bishop had forbid him to sing ●salms Is not the Church State more concerned in the whole congregation than in an absent Bishop what greater omission or defect is there in many Parish-Churches I again say that I am so far of the Judgment of Hildersham John Ball c. that I had rather joyn caeteris paribus in a Church that useth the Psalms Chapters and all the Lords-day Prayers in the Liturgy before Sermon than one that only giveth us one Psalm or none and a Pulpit-prayer and a Sermon without all the rest of Church Worship L. I will conclude all with repeating a little of the Explication of my misused writings I. The pastoral Oversight of the Laity by the Elders or Bishops of the several Flocks is of Christs Institution and belongs to all true Presbyters And tho in necessity it may be done by divers transient Ministers pro tempore most regularly every Church should have it s stated Pastors II. Where such Churches are large the work requireth many Ministers where each one hath but part of the Charge III. Reason and Church-consent among these made one a President over the rest and called him the Bishop pecularly if it were in Marks days as Hierom saith it was in John's And tho this be not essential to a Church it is lawful and fit and at last it grew to so great a Reputation and Opinion of necessity that all Churches had such Bishops and gave them a Negative voice and ordained not without them and defined Churches as essentiated by Relation to them Ecclesia est plebs Episcopo adunata If now such men as J.O. Mr. Nye Dr. Goodwin c. should have in one Church six or seven young men of their own training up to be their Assistant-presbyters I do not think an Independent Church would take it for any crime that he should have a Negative voice in acts of Order and Discipline or that they should ordain Ministers therein without his Consent IV. By degrees single Congregations increased to as many as our great Parishes that have Chappels and tho still they communicated in the chief Church at some special times of the year they ordinarily met in divers places and the Presbyters officiated some in one meeting and some in another at first whosoever the Bishop daily sent but after their particular Tyths or Chappels were assigned to each yet all together were esteemed but one Church governed by one Bishop and his Colledg of Presbyters V. When they increased yet more and more fixed Chappels were assigned to fixed Presbyters but not as distinct Churches but parts of the Diocesan Church tho at last they were larger than one Bishop and Colledg could guide according to the first Institution VI. Yet long every Christian City had a Bishop and Church and every incorporate big Town like our Corporations or Market-Towns was called a City not because it had a Market as a reverend Slanderer seigneth me to lay but because Custom the master of Language called all Corporations and great

Towns by that name● But at last the Bishops being loath to diminish their Jurisdiction decreed that very small Cities should have no Bishops ne vi●c●eat nomen Episc●pi And in process of time in some Countries the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or City was appropriated at the Princes pleasure to some very few Corporations peculiarly priviledged above the rest So that a King that would have had but one Bishop in his Kingdom as it 's said that all the Aba●●ian Empire hath had but one might have done it by calling but one Town a City VII Yet the People and Bishops being sensible that there was more work For a Bishop in a City-Diocess than one could do in many Countries they had Rural Bishops set over P●pul●ns country Churches And tho these were subject to the Diocesans yet hereby the Churches were multiplied But the Bishops soon grew jealous and weary of these Rural-Bishops and most places put them down and set up instead of them a kind of Itinerant visiting Presbyters empowring all Arch-Bishops and Ach Deacons till at last to save themselves the labour and yet not diminish their Dominion they set up the Courts of Lay-Chancellors Officials and many such Offices besides the Arch-Deacons Surrogates c. VIII In England as is agreed by most Historians at first one Bishop had but one Church or Temple And at Luindisfarne saith Bede It was so po●● a thing that it was a house thatcht with reeds The Pastor of this one Church was to convert as many as he could in all the Countrey about him The Heathen Country might be his Diocess but not his Church The converted Christians got into several Monasteries and not into Parish-Churches These Monasteries were partly for Society in Religious Exercise and partly for Studies like Schools to Educate Youth for the Ministry So that long a Diocess was only the Bishops Church with divers Monasteries At last Gentlemen for their convenience built and endowed Parish-Churches the Bishops old single Churches being called the Cathedrals And finally by the help of Princes all the Land was divided into Parishes subject to the Cathedral-Bishops to whom Deans and Chapters were added in imitation of the old Bishops Colledg of Presbyters in every single Church IX When the Rural-Bishops were put down the Presbyters power in their several Parishes was somewhat enlarged And the Diocesses at last became so great that the Bishops were sain to commit more of the oversight to the Presbyters Tho they kept them under by severe Canons Lay-Deputies and the Cogent Sword X. It grew then a controversie among the Papists themselves whether the Parish Incumbents were proper Pastors and had any Power of Government and how much And my Objectors confess that they were reputed Pastors among the Papists and that Linwood calleth them Pastors and the Laity Oves I have cited in Treat of Epis ●ilesa●us and many more that prove it Ant. de Dom. Spalatensis is large and full in it Sp●lman in R. A●l●ricks Law shews that the Bishop and Presbyter made but one of their seven Orders A great sort of the Schoolmen say the same Most Drs. say That the Presbyters essentially as Sacredetes have the power of the Keys inf●ro interi●re by which they mean not a power that must be kept secret but that which consisteth in the perswas●v● use of Gods word on C●nfer●n●e privately or publickly as distinct from Magisterial and C●gent Power And if they ●e of one Order then if one be a Past●r the other is so also That they are taken but in partem curae is nothing against it but for it For equal Presbyters in one Church have each but partem curae The Reformation finding th●ngs in this case determined none of the disputes de nomine Whether Parish Rectors shall be called ●pis●op●s Gregis or Pastors or Rectors or I●cumb●nts but use these names promiscuously Nor did they dispute whether the Parishes are Political Churches But the Definition and not the Name is the thing now before us in debate God hath given every such Minister the essence of a Pastoral oversight of his Flock Men may hinder the Exercise but can no more alter the Christian Office Power than they can deprive a Husband of the power over his Wife And the Diocesans at last have been necessitated to permit the essential Pastoral power by the word to the Incumbents having none else to use it by But Lawyers have taught many to call nothing Government that is not Cogent on the unwilling and so to say that Government is not in the Presbyters but the Bishops and that all is derived from the King which is all true of Cogent Government by the Sword in f●ro exteriore but not as to Pastoral Government of the Flock by Gods w●rd As Bishop Bilson of Obedience hath distinguished and applied well at large XI Now to come nearer our Case Diocesan Bishops have put down the ranks of Bishops which of old was setled as Presidents over the Presbyters in every Church in Cities and of the lowest Order described by Ignatius and Cyprian and others Every lowest Church hath not now a Bishop over the Presbyters as it had for divers hundred years And by this they have unchurched all the old sort of Churches in the sense of them that say There is no Church where there is no Bishop over Pre●byters And they have set up a Diocesan Church and Bishop only w●●re should be many Churches and Bishops and thus 〈◊〉 hom●●●m I argued with them c. But indeed this Parochial Episcopacy or Pr●sid●ncy being wrongfully said to be Essential to the Church being at most b●t useful to peace ad melius esse and the Epicopacy or Pastoral care of the Laity without any power over the Clergy being it that is essential to single Church Pastors In truth no man can alter this In Consent and ●●putati●n it is altered by those that think Parish Curates no Pastors and deny any Essential power over their Flocks But it is not in Consent and Reputation destroyed by them that acknowledg their Essential power and subject only themselves as Pastors to the oversight of Diocesans and Magistrates They do but destroy the 〈…〉 of Episcopacy of humane Institution which was over Presbyters in 〈◊〉 Ch●rch●● but not the Episcopacy over the Flock which is of Christs Ins●i●utio● XII 〈◊〉 whether most in England are of this Opinion or of that for 〈◊〉 or for meer g●verning Episcopacy and which way the Laws go and 〈◊〉 may be called the sense of the Church when Convocations and Bishops seem to differ and men change their Opinions with the Age and Interest it is impossible for me to be sure But I know how they govern by what Canons and by what Courts and as all their Cogent power is from the King it is no wonder if they be chosen by him But the old sort of Bishops that had no forcing power was so constantly otherwise chosen that their Canons nulled the Magistrates

ever I knew have not that I know of renounced any thing essential to a Parish-Pastor I before said Ordination and Jurisdiction over Presbyters or other Churches is no part of its essence To be obedient to a Diocesan is no such Renunciation Therefore it is no such Renunciation to promise to obey them in lawful things subordinate to obeying Christ If it prove a mistake in them and that they owe no such Obedience every such mistake doth not degrade them He that said that he that will be greatest shall be servant of all thought not that to obey an equal did null the Ministry Nor he that said Be su●ject one to another Christ and Peter paid tribute to avoid offence tho the Children be free But what if a man be in doubt whether such Obedience be not his Duty Is it not the safer side much more if he verily think it his Duty 2. To take Diocesans to be Jure Divino is said by some to be destructive of the Pastoral Office and Churches and a change of the English Church-Government But it 's error For 1. It is not the Destructive Diocesan Government which acknowledg no Church and Pastor under them that those in question consent to but the Governing Diocesan who ruleth subject Pastors and Churches 2. This Question of Divine right is threefold 1. Of that which by D●●ire right is necessary ad esse 2. Of that which is by Divine right best and m●st elegible or needful ad melius esse 3. That which is by right of Divine Concession lawful but not necessary The Church of England never determined which of these was the Diocesans Case All Conformists judged it Lawful multitudes judged it Better than other forms Many judged it necessary when it might be had But no Law determined for any of these alone Unless you will say the Preface to the Book of Ordination doth it by saying It is evident to all men diligently reading holy Scripture and Ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christs Church Bishops Priests and Deacons Which Offices were evermore had in such Reverend Estimation c. Here some say That the Church of England took not these for three distinct Orders before 1640 but now Therefore by the word these Orders is meant only two Ans At this rate he must have the bette● whom the hearer best trusteth whatever he say If these Orders of Ministers Bishops Priests and Deacons speak not three Orders I cannot understand them Here note partiality the same that refuse to subscribe them because they speak three Orders yet say they speak but two when they argue that Church-Government is changed 1662 from what it was 1640. Indeed Aelfricks Laws in Spelman make Bishops and Priests the same Order and so do a great part of Schoolmen and other Papists but the English Bishops and Clergy were some of one mind and some of another about it and determined it not Unless this Preface be a Determination the Name Order and Office being both used And to instance in no other Saravia tho no English man yet of the Church of England wrote more strongly almost than any that I ever read for Diocesan Episcopacy against Beza c. and that upon this ground of Divine right that they succeeded the Apostles and such as Timothy Titus c. in the Government of many Churches And the Kings Divines at the Isle of White went all on that Ground To say then that to plead a Divine right for them is new is to contradict large Historical Evidences And were it true that this had been never before Imposed or Subscribed surely it is not an Opinion of the Divine right of governing of many Churches that renounceth the being of those Churches it asserteth them to be by Divine right For that which is not is not governable Non entis non sunt accidentia But where and how hath the Law or Church altered the case since 1640. These words were in the Book of Ordination before and I know of none plainer that way since It s destructive Diocesan Government which renounceth the Government of any subject Churches but of one only and of any Pastors that I argue against and not Governours of such Churches XXXIV But it 's objected That they swear not to endeavour any alteration of Church-Government therefore they renounce the Pastoral Office because the present Government excludeth it Ans 1. This is to dictate and not to prove The Diocesan Government hampered and fettered it by the Canons in the time of Whitgift and Bancroft but null'd it not He that reads the Canons or knows the Church and thinks that it's Government hath no need of Amendment is far from my mind But governing is not nullifying 2. It is not true that ever I heard that they swear what this Objection saith The Ministers do not swear but subscribe it and swear Obedience in licitis honestis And I could never learn what Law commands that Oath And if it should extend to obey all the Canons it 's that which I would be full loath to swear but I know no Canon that utterly nulleth the Parish-Churches and Ministers And a Justice that sweareth to execute the Laws is not supposed thereby to justifie every Law nor to execute any if it should be against Gods Law that exception being still supposed 3. Their Subscription never to endeavour alteration engageth them never to endeavour to destroy the Parish Churches and Ministry and so is for them For that would be a great alteration indeed 4. If you should think otherwise yet if the Subscriber or Swearer think himself that it is not destructive but governing Diocesans that he subscribeth to it is not your Opinion or Exposition that bindeth him against his own No tho you were in the right as to the Imposers sense For Ignorantis non est consensus It 's unjust to face them down that they mean what they profess they do not Ask forty Conformists whether they think the Government which they promise not to alter be that Diocesan form which ruleth Parish Churches and Pastors or that which denieth their being and I think few will profess the latter sense 5. And suppose the worst that any Parish-Priest were of that mind yea and were really no true Pastor as to his own acceptance with God he may yet be a Pastor so far true as is necessary to the Essence of the Church if the People know it not For the Innocent suffer not for the guilties sin If a man be a secret Atheist or Heretick or do counter●eit Ordination and Election and really had none and the People be deceived by him and know it not while he possesseth the place and doth the work his Baptisms and Administrations are valid to the Church as a Church tho not to himself and his Ministry The Jews Church was not null when the high Priests had no lawful call but bought the Office of R●man

destroy it but their sin may consist with the true office that is hindred If we cannot pray without penalty we are yet bound to pray And if any such penalties should prevail with any Ministers to cast off so much of Discipline as is indeed their duty their office is so far destroyed as to its exercise But it is not every ill Council Canon Bishop or Priest of old when they began to be corrupted that changed and nullified the Pastoral Power and Office as from Christ I have repeated things over and over here because I would not be misunderstood nor leave a snare behind me to mislead men The sum again is 1. The Pastoral Office in specie is instituted by Christ and his Spirit therefore the essence of it is unchangeably fixed by him and no Bishops or Churches may change it by pretending they may give Presbyters as their servants what degree or kind of power they please or make the office another thing II. The said office in mutable accidents or circumstances may be altered by Princes Laws or the several Churches Agreements and thus far it is humane Of the Divine sort was the Apostolick and other extraordinary Prophetick offices And the ordinary Presbytery commonly called Priesthood and Elders setled over particular Churches were Episc●pi Gregis Bishops over the flock And of the humane sort is the Presidency of one in every single Church over the rest of the Presbyters who was the Episcopus Presbyterorum a Bishop over the Presbyters of one single Church as well as over the people This was the old Episcopacy of the first three Centuries this is it which I say our Diocesans have put down and we that would have them restored and would have such a Bishop and Assistant Elders in every Church are by the heighth of impudency said to be against Bishops because we would have them restored to each Church tho not as essential to it as hath been thought of old yet as a way of peace to comply with Ant●quity and avoid singularity and they that put down many score or hundred Bishops and instead of them would have but one call themselves Episcopal III. Whether Arch-bps Diocesans as successors of the Apostles in the ministerial care of many Churches by the word and not the sword be of Divine or Human Institution I am in doubt IV. The cogent Power by the Sword is only the Magistrates and if Diocesans appropriate this only they are Magistrates and thereby take none of our office from us V. The ●ssence of the Parish ministerial oversight being of God de specie and the accidents that are mutable from man the existence of the office in individual persons is not without consent of the Pastors so that no man can be a Pastor against or without his will nor yet without a capacity in qualifi●ati●n so that if you prove any person to be uncapabl● or else to have truly disclaimed and renounced the essentials of his office I am not about to perswade you that such a man is a true Pastor VI. But then we must know that indeed it is such an incapacity or renunciation and not a tollerable defect nor subscriptions and Oaths which by unseen consequences may seem to renounce it when the man took them in a sense which renounced it not For tho such a man may greatly sin by taking Oaths or subscriptions in a forced sense which plainly taken would infer worse yet his sin is not a renunciation of the office if he declare that he meant it in a better sence and took it on such mistake for we must not for bare words against mens meaning quibble or dispute our selves into unwarrantable separations out of Christian Communion especially when it is specially necessary VII And if any lay-men or men unauthorized will usurp the Keys or any Councils will make hurtful Canons and hinder men in the work appointed by God we must be faithful and patient and God in due time will judg and decide all causes justly VIII The office-power is essentially related to the work so far as Parochial Incumbents are allowed the work as of Christ they are acknowledged to be Pastors and Bishops of the flocks tho the name were denied them and so far as the Bishops office may be delegated to Lay-men or to Clergy-men of another Order so far it is Humane and not proper to them by Gods Institution They therefore that say All Diocesans Jurisdiction may be so delegated to them that are no Bishops but that the Pastoral Rectorship by Word Sacraments and Keys cannot be delegated to any men that are not of the same office do thereby say as much as that the Diocesan government is of men and may be changed by men but the Pastoral Incumbency is of Christ and cannot be changed The Lord that instituted it protect it and save it from Satans most dangerous assault which is by getting his own servants into it by error and malignity and strife and cruelty to do his work as the Ministers of Righteousness and as by Christs Authority and in his name London Aug. 13. 1684. POSTSCRIPT Aug. 25. 1684. HE that gave me notice of this Book which I answer did withall send me a Manuscript to be privately answered containing the very same things but somewhat enlarged His displeasure against my former mention of his private Writings to me and the Contents made me confident that he would not have any thing Published which I should answer to his last By which I found my self in a notable strait For if he at once privately sent me his reasons and also in another Book Printed them if I should answer his private papers which reason forbad me doing in my condition for his use alone I should judg my self forestalled from answering the Printed Book because the matter being the very same and 't is likely by the same man I should be supposed to have broken the Laws of Civility to have answered his private papers But having no Amanuensis or Scribe to take any Copy of his papers or my own I thought it the best way to return his unanswered they being Written for my use which Reading will as fully serve as answering them but supposing the Printed papers must be answered I inserted also an answer to the strength of all his additionals in the Manuscript And at last he giveth me some notice of his thoughts of publishing the Manuscript or a vindication of it Which falls well for the Readers use that I have answered that Manuscript before it is Published without taking notice of it and s● avoiding wordy altercations The Author professeth himself my great acquaintance Who he is I know not but he seemeth to be a very rational sober man God forbid that I should ever contribute unless duty do it accidentally to the grievance of such men I doubt not but he speaketh as he thinketh And I doubt I have given him occasions by some uncautelous words in my writings I