AN ANSWER TO Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Sherlocke Confuting an Universal Humane Church-Supremacy Aristocratical and Monarchical as Church-Tyranny and Popery And defending Dr. Isaac Barrow's Treatise against it By Richard Baxter Preparatory to a fuller Treatise against such an Universal Soveraignty as contrary to Reason Christianity the Protestant Profession and the Church of England though the Corrupters usurp that Title LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns at the lower end of Cheapside near Mercers Chappel 1682. READER THough the difference between Mr. Dodwell and Mr. Thorndike and such others and those condemned by them be very great I would not have it seem greater than it is The sum of it is as followeth 1. Mr. Dodwell thinketh that there is no true Ministry Church-Sacraments nor Covenant-right to pardon and salvation but where there is a Ministry delivering the Sacraments who were ordained by Bishops in his sense of Bishops who had their Ordination from other Bishops and they from others by an uninterrupted chain of succession from the Apostles We know that by this Doctrine he condemneth or unchurcheth not only the Reformed Churches the Greeks and other Easterns but the Church of Rome it self and leaveth no certainty of the very being of any one Church on earth And we maintain that the sacred Scripture is the universal Law of Christ in which he hath described and instituted the office and work of the sacred Ministry and appointed the way of their continuance in the world by necessary Qualification Election Consent and ordinarily regular Ordination That as Presbyters now lay on hands with the Bishop so senior Pastors are the Ordainers as the Colledg of Physicians license Physicians and the Convocation of Doctors make Doctors and man generateth man But to avoid contention and division the Churches have used to make one of these Presbyters or Pastors a President and partly a Ruler in each Colledg and Church and given him a Negative voice in Ordinations against which we strive not but maintain 1. That his consent is not so necessary as that no one can be a true Presbyter that hath it not As the Clergy at Rome in Cyprian's days long governed when they had no Bishop so if the Bishop be dead or refuse to ordain or would ordain none but Hereâ—icks or uncapable men or would tyrannize and impose men not consented to the Ordination is valid that is made without him And 2. That the true chief Pastor of every particular formed Church is a true Bishop though Diocesans should deny it 3. And that even Ordination it self is necessary but for Order where it may be had and not to the Being of the Ministry where it cannot be had on lawful terms no more than Coronation to the King or publick solemnization to Marriage 4. And we are assured that if Regular Ordination were interrupted by death heresie refusal neglect e. g. at Antioch Alexandria Constantinople Jerusalem c. Christs Charter or Scripture-Law would presently restore it to persons duly qualified chosen and ordained by the fittest there that can be had 5. If this were not so as multitudes of schismatical and unlawful Popes Ordinations at Rome would be invalid e. g. John 13. and 21. and 23. and Eugenius 4th deposed as a Heretick by a General Council c. so every usurping Bishop that pretendeth falsly that he was himself lawfully ordained would nullifie Churches Ministry and Sacraments of all ordained by him And many have falsly pretended to Orders 6. And that if men must refuse the Government and Sacraments of all Bishops and Presbyters that do not prove to them a Regular Ordination uninterrupted for 1600. years all the Ministry on earth may be refused and none for so doing should be called Schismaticks I never yet heard or saw a Bishop prove such a succession nor ever knew one that would take his Oath on it that he was a true Bishop on such terms II. Mr. Dodwell thinks that the Presbyters yea and Bishops were not given by God Pag. 60. saith he But where do they find that God ever gave Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Where note that it is of the Office in specie that we speake But we think that God hath made or instituted the Office and its work And if he did not 1. Who did If men was it Clerg-ymen or Lay-men If Lay-men was it Christians or Infidels And by what Authority Do the children beget the fathers and yet may not Presbyters propagate their species If Clergy-men who were they If not Apostles or Prophets or Evangelists they were none If these then it seems the Apostles did it not as Bishops for it is the making of the first Bishops that we question And what the Apostles did not as Bishops but as commissioned Apostles Christ did by his Spirit And they that will do the like must have the like Office Authority and Spirit If God gave not Bishops because the Apostles made them then God gave us not the Scripture because the Apostles and Evangelists wrote it And is not this the same or worse Doctrine than that which the Italian Iesuits would have had pass at Trent against Gods making Bishops or their Office And if God gave not Bishops or Presbyters they that reject them reject no gift or institution of God And if men made them how come they to be essential to the Church Did not Christ and his Spirit in the Apostles institute so much as the Church-essentials And if men made Bishops and Presbyters in specie may not man unmake them III. Mr. Dodwell maintaineth that the power of Presbyters is to be measured by the intention of the Ordainers who give it them and not by any Scripture-institution charter or description We maintain the contrary that God having instituted and described the Office of Bishops Pastors Presbyters Gods Law in Scripture is the Rule by which the office-office-power and obligation and work in the essentials must be known Otherwise 1. It would be supposed that God made not the office of Bishops or Presbyters which is false 2. That Ordainers may make new Churches Bishops or Presbyters in specie yea as many species of them as they shall intend 3. That they may abrogate or change the ancient species They may make one office only for preaching another only for praying another only for Baptism another only for the Lords Supper and others for new work of their own The Papists themselves abhor this Doctrine 4. Then no man can know the measure of his Authority not knowing the intentions of the Ordainers Perhaps three or ten ordainihg Bishops may have three or ten several intents 5. Then the Bishop may put down Gods Worship or Sacraments by limiting the Priests power 6. It 's contrary to all Ministerial Investitures The Investing Minister is not the Owner or the Donor but delivereth possession of what the Owner and Donor contracted for or gave If the Archbishop Crowning the King would infringe his Prerogative it 's a
understood II. But if it be a priority of Existence in order of execution that you mean it disproveth it self For 1. It is contrary to the nature of production that two or twenty or an hundred stated Congregations should be before on t as it is that I should write a page before a line and a line before a word and a word before a letter 2. It is contrary to the Scripture-History which telleth us that Christ called his Disciples by degrees a few first and more after and that the Apostles accordingly converted men from the number of 120 they rose to 3000 more and after to 5000 c. And that ordinarily the Churches in Scripture-times were such as could and often did meet in one place though that be nâ—t necessary as I said before hath so copious evidence as that I will not here trouble you with it 3. Either the Apostles Ordained Bishops before subject Presbyters or such Presbyters before Bishops or both at once If both at once as two Orders it 's strange that they called both Orders promiscuously by the same names sometimes Bishops sometimes Presbyters and sometimes Pastors and Teachers without any distinguishing Epithete or notice And it 's strange that we never find any mention of the two sorts of Congregations one the Bishops Cathedral and the other the Parish Presbyters Congregation If you say that they were the Bishops themselves and first Ordained only subject-Presbyters under them that cannot hold For doubtless there were more than twelve or thirteen Churches the number of Apostles in their times nor were they fixed Bishops but indefinite gatherers and edifiers of the Churches And either those Elders first Ordained by the Apostles were Bishops or else there were Churches without Bishops for they Ordained Elders in every City and in every Church And either the Elders first Ordained by the Apostles had the power of Ordaining others or not If they had then either they were Bishops or else subject-subject-Presbyters were Ordained to be Ordainers yea to Ordain Bishops if such were to be after ordained And so indeed it would be suitable to your conceiâ— that the inferiour order of Diocesans do by consent make superior Metropolitans Provincials Nationals and Patriarchs to rule them and with Hieromes report ad Evagr. that the Alexandrian Presbyters made the Bishops as the Army doth a General But this making of Children to beget Fathers is so commonly denied that I need not more dispute against it 3 But I think most of the Hierarchical way will say that the Apostles first Ordained Bishops that those Bishops might Ordain subject-Presbyters And if so the Churches could be but single Congregation at the first till the subject-Presbyters were Ordained Yea Dr. Hammond as aforesaid asserteth in Act. 11. and in Dissert c. that there is no proof there were any of the Order of subject-Presbyters in Scripture-times and he thinketh that most of his party were of his mind and that the name Bishop Elder and Pastor in Scripture signifie only those that we now call Bishops And in this he followeth Dion Petavius and Fr. a Sancta Clara de Episcop who saith that it came from Scotus And if this be so then in all Scripture-times there was no Church of more than one worshipping Congregation For we are agreed that Church-meetings were for the publick Worship of God and celebration of Sacraments and exercise of Discipline which no meer Lay-man might lawfully guide the people in and perform as such assemblies did require And one Bishop could be but in one place at once And if there were many Bishops there were many Churches So that according to Dr. Hammond and all of his mind there was no Church in Scripture-times of more than one stated ordinary Worshipping Congregation because there were no subject-Presbyters If you say that yet this was a Diocesan Church because it had a Diocesan Bishop I answer why is he called a Diocesan Bishop if he had not a Diocesan Church If you mean that he was designed to turn his single Congregation into many by increase 1. That must not be said only but proved 2. And that supposeth that his one congregation was first before the many And I hope you â—ake not Infidels for parts of the Church because they are to be converted hereafter Those that are no members of the Church make not the Church and so make it not to be Diocesan One Congregation is not an hundred or a thousand because so many will be hereafter If you mean that such a space of ground was assigned to the Bishops to gather and govern Churches in I answer 1. Gathering Churches is a work antecedent to Episcopacy 2. The Ground is no part of the Church It is a Church of men and not of soil and houses that we speak of 3. Nor indeed will you ever prove that the Apostles measured out or distinguished Churches by the space of ground So that the first Churches were not Diocesan III. As to your Third Opinion 1. Officers are denominated from the work which they are to do There are works to be done circa sacra about the holy Ministerial works as Accidental as to 〈◊〉 to Church buildings Utensils and Lands to Summon Synods and Register their Acts to moderate in disputations and to take votes c. These the Magistrate may appoint Officers to peâ—â—orm and if he do not the Churches by his permission may do it by consent And there are works proper to the Magistrate viz. to force men to their duty by mulcts or corporal penalties I deny none of these But the works of Ordination Pastoral Guidance Excommunication and Absolution by the power of the Keys are proper to the sacred Office which Christ hath instituted And I shall not believe till I see it proved that any men have power to make any new Order or Office of this sort which Christ never made by himseelf or his Spirit in his Apostles much less that Inferiors may make Superior Offices For 1. It belongeth to the same power to make one especially the Superior Church-Office which made the other of the same General nature If without Christs institution no man could be Episcopus gregis and have the power of the Keys over the people then by parity of Reason without his institution no man can be Episcopus Episcoporum and have the power of the Keys over the Bishops 2. Dr. Hammond's argument against Presbyters Ordination is Nemo dat quod non habet which though it serve not his turn on several accounts both because 1. They have the Order which they confer 2. Because Ordination is not giving but Ministerial delivery by Investiture yet in this case it will hold For 1. This is supposed to be a new institution of an Office 2. And that of an higher power than ever the Institutors had themselves The King giveth all his Officers their power but all of them cannot give the King his power The Patriarch cannot make a Pope nor the
a true Bishop by vertue of Gods Law and if he have better Qualification and Election and Ordination to be of surer Authority than the Diocesan it 's his Communion that we must prefer 4. But indeed Baptism and Salvation are ordinarily given before Episcopal Communion of any sort 5. They that thought the Pope Antichrist as most Protestant Bishops long did thought it a duty to reject the Communion of the Bishops of the places where they lived And Denmark and other Countries set up others against them that were ordained by Bugenhagius and other Prsbyters 6. Parochial and Diocesan bounds are humane mutable institutions 7. If the Bishop of the place be a Schismatick the Communion of a better near is better b. II. 1. All causleless separation from any Christians or causleless disobedience to any Pastor or neglect of any Christian duty needful to the Churches peace and concord and every opinion and practice that is against them doth make a man guilty of sinful Division or Schism in some degree And while every Christian hath many errors and sins which all tend to some sinful breach as the least sore is solutio continui I cannot see but every man living hath some guilt of Schism nor that there is any Church on earth that hath not some such guilt But every degree of guilt denominateth not the man or Church a Schismatick in a predominant or mortal sense And in Charity I hope that even some of those heinous Schismaticks may be saved that divide the Churches by their usurpation obtrusion sinful impositions and worldly domination yea some that in blind zeal put down Parish-Bishops and smite and silence the Pastors and scatter the Flocks And if I must have Communion with none that 's guilty of Schism with what Church or Bishop should I joyn And if their Sacraments be invalid what a case is Italy Spain France yea and England in Must all be baptized again that they baptized 2. But it 's no schism but a duty for the people as far to forsake a sinful Bishop much more an usurper as Cyprian and that Council advised them to do in the case of Martial and Basilides 3. And after all this deceitful confusion note Reader that he denieth not our disobedience to be lawful in case of sinful conditions imposed And if we fully prove not this to be our case let our accusers silence us and let our guilt be our shame 4. And if people that had Parish-Bishops on the place where they lived lawfully called shall forsake them to obey a Diocesan that is not on the place but perhaps Forty or Fifty or Sixty Miles off and never saw them and was obtruded contrary to the ancient Canons which nullifie such and sets himself to silence faithful Pastors and persecute them and other godly Christians for not sinning heinously upon deliberate choice and covenant doth not even this man conclude such to be Schismaticks that are out of the ordinary way and hope of salvation CHAP. III. The consequence of Mr. Dodwell's foresaid doctrine 1. THOSE that live under the Popish Bishops in Italy Spain France c. must live in their communion and under their command in all unsinful things 2. The Protestant Churches that have not Episcopal Ordination are no true Churches and have no true Ministers or Sacraments nor any Covenant-right to salvation 3. The Protestant Churches are in the same unchurched damnable case that have Bishops if they have not an uninterrupted succession of such from the Apostles canonically ordained 4. Therefore the Churches of Denmark Germany c. that have Superintendents ordained at the Reformation by Bugenhagius Pomeranus a Presbyter and all the rest whose succession was interrupted are in the same case 5. It is Schism and rejecting Sacraments and Covenant-right to salvation in all the people that continue in such Protestant Churches and communicate with them 6. It is better for the Protestants in France to joyn with the Papists than to live as they do without Sacraments or Church-communion 7. Yet by self contradiction it will follow that certainly the Church of Rome and all that derive their ordination from that Church have no true Bishops Ministers Sacraments Churches nor Covenant-right to salvation for it 's certain their true succession hath been oft interrupted 1. By such utterly uncapable persons as all History describeth and even Baronius calleth Apostaticos non Apostolicos and such as divers General Councils judged Hereticks Infidels Simoniaks c. e g. Eugenius 4. who yet kept in 2. By such whose false ordination the Canons expresly null 3. By many Schisms two or three Popes at once of whom none can tell who had the right or whether any 4 By the Popes taking on him to be Christs Universal Vicar an Office in specie usurpt which he maketh his Episcopacy and as such giveth his orders And all his Presbyters have turned the true Ministry into the false one of Mass-Priests and being no true Ministers can give no true Sacraments by his rule 8. Yea it is certain that few if any Churches on earth can prove such an uninterrupted succession as he and the Papists describe and most it s known have no such thing 9. Therefore if any have such a succession they cannot know it it being a thing that cannot be proved and so cannot be sure that they are true Churches c. 10. For the certainty of any true Ministry Church Sacraments and Salvation dependeth on such knowledg of History as is not in the world viz. To know that this Bishop and his Ordainer and his Ordainer and his Ordainer and so up to the Apostles were every one true Bishops and truly Ordained which no mortal man can know 11. Men that by a Prince against even the Nullifying Canons can but get possession of Patriarchal and Diocesan Churches without the Clergy or peoples choice have thereby the power of damning men that fear God at their pleasure For 1. they must pass for the Bishops of the place 2. They may command any unsinful thing and excommunicate him that doth not obey 3. He is a Schismatick that suffers himself so to be Excommunicate and so is in a damnable state 4. He cannot hinder it not knowing the thing to be unsinful 12. For by this whoever will escape damnable schism must be one that knoweth the unsinfulness as he speaks of all things in the world that are such which a Prelate may command or else he must do any thing which he judgeth sin if a Prelate command it But that is wicked Idolizing man 13. And therefore by this rule no man living can be saved that a Prelate hath a mind to damn or from his damning impositions For no man living knoweth the lawfulness of all lawful things and therefore may take a commanded thing for sin that is not and then if he wilfully do that which he judgeth sin he rebelleth against God if he do it not the Prelate may excommunicate him and unresistibly make
Chief Iustice Lord Admiral c. shall have such and such power and be thus and thus invested in the place if there were an intercision of an hundred yâ—ars the next person so chosen will from the Law immediately receive his power And the Investiture is but for publick Order and the Investers regular succession no nor the act it self never necessary ad esse where it cannot be had as I proved against Mr. D. in my Book of Concord The Archbishops succession that Crowneth him is not necessary to the power of the King § 20. And obligation to the Office-work is as essential to the Officer as is the power to do it And it is only the Governours that lay on another an obligation to duty except what by contract a man layeth on himself and none are the obliging Governours of the highest Powers Civil or Ecclesiastical but God therefore theirs must flow only from God Therefore the thing is not unusual And if Bishops were as much superior to Parish-Pastors as the Lord Chancellor is to a Constable yet they were but Governours of them in tantum quoad exercitum and not Donors of their power The Constables power is immediately from the Soveraigns Law and so is the Ministers from Christ for he is the only universal Soveraign § 21. Mr. Dodwell saith These are bare similies Ans. These are plain explications of the conveyance of power from the Soveraign of all He saith That the power is not properly given by the Ordainer is but begged by me Ans. A begging affirmer may easily write Books at that rate But saith â—e They connot give an instance from humane Charters where the acts of men not invested are valid in Law Ans. 1. Will you tell the King so to his saace that before his Coronation no act is valid that he doth 2. No doubt but as publick Matrimony after secret Marriage is necessary in foro civili ordinis gratiâ where it may be had and yet when it was done by a Justice without a Priest yea or by the persons publick contract only it was no nullity no nor coram Deo before so to regular order the most orderly Investiture is needful but not ad esse much less that all the Investers circumstances also and all his predecessors have been regular 3. Investing here is the act of a servant only solemnizing the entrance or delivery of possession But such a servant is not the Owner and Donâ—â— of thâ— power 4. The Papists and Protestants confess that the power of Invâ—sting is so humane and mutable that it cannot be necessary ad esse potestatis I told you how oft the power of choosing â—nd investing Popes hath beeen changed And the old Canons make the Act of three Bishops necessary to Invest or consecrate one But did God determinâ— of three Or can you prove onâ— Bishops Ordination a Nullity 5. In the Civil State some Officers are made without any Investiture as Constables Headboroughs Church Wardens and others and some the Charter imposeth Investiture on But whether if Recorders Stewards Town Clerks that by Charter are to Invest be dead or refuse their Act the Mayor Bayliff or other Officers be therefore none and the Government be dead let Lawyers tell you 6. Sure I am that Hen. 4. and the rest of the Germane Emperors who fought and strove so long against Hildebrand and his Adherents for the Investing-power were no Bishops and all the Councils of Bishops who stood for the Emperors never took them for Bâ—shops and therefore thought not that Ivesting was an Act proper to Episcopal-power 7. I have before proved that ancient Writers and Papists and many Protestants agree that Baptism is valid administred by Lay-men that I say not women 8. Mr. Dodwell self-condemningly saith that a presumptuous Ordination of the Priest serves to the validity of Sacraments though indeed he were not Ordained and that God is bound to make such Acts to the people good 9. Mr. D. must beg belief instead of proving it if he tell us that the stated teaching of Gods Word to a Church is not as truly the work of the Pastor as is the Admistring the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lords Supper It is one of the principal of the Jesuits jugglings to make the people think that till they can prove their Teachers the rightly Ordained Ministers of Christ they are not bound to hear them or believe them Our Parents mostly were never Ordained Bishops or Priests Must not Children therefore hear them and believe them fide humanâ And hath not that God who appointed Parents to teach his Law to their children lying down and rising up and to educate them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord thereby signified that Parents instruction is the first ordinary means appointed by God for the conveying of saving knowledg and faith And if the help of Parents though unordained be Gods ordinary means of the first saving faith shall We say with such men as Mr. Dodwell that we have no Covenant right to salvation till we have the Sacrament from the hand of a Minister that had a regular Ordination uninterruptedly down from the Apostles 10. Did the Three hundred Act. 2. and the Eunuch Act. 8. refuse Baptism till they were satisfied by proof that the Baptizers were rightly called Ministers Paul tells those that questioned his Apostolick power that he was an Apostle to them whatever he was to others and that they should know first whether Christ were in them and so whether he were not a true Minister and not begin at the trying of the Ministry 2 Cor. 13.4 5 6 7. Gal. 3.1 2 3 4. c. 11. The Acts of the Parliament called irregularly by General Monk were they that restored King Charles the 2 d and were confirmed by him as valid through the defect of a Regular Summons and by necessity 12. I have fully proved in my Treatise of Episcopacy that the Species of Bishops which Mr. Dodwell pleaded for is not the same which the Churches had for 200. or 300. years And then where is his regular succession from the Apostles § 22. He saith also p. 37. They cannot give an Instance of any power setled by Charter whereupon the Acts of any persons lawfully Invested though confessedly less qualified are not thought valid A plain sign that their Investiture doth properly confer such power Ans. Words fitted to deceive 1. He that is unqualified is not lawfully Invested and yet the Act of the Invester may be right had the Recipient been lawful 2. He saith Less qualified when he knew that our question is of the unqualified 3. Investiture giveth it as the Act of the Power and Donor by a servant delivering orderly possession but doth not make or prove the Investing Minister the Owner or Donor no more than he was that from the Emperor Henry delivered the Bishops the Staff and Ring or the Priest that Marrieth the persons 4. Burroughs and Cities choose and return Burgesses for
Parliament by Charter yet if they are unqualified when they come thither the choice is judged null If a City choose and Invest a proclaimed Rebel for Mayor I will believe it null or invalid though Mr. D. will not And if he write Forty Books with such streams of confident words to prove that the Election and Investiture of the dâ—â—lared Heretick Bishops at Alexandria Antioch Constantinople and most of the Empire in many Ages Arrians Eutichians c. were yet judged valid by the Councils of the Orthodox no man that ever read the Councils will believe him 5. Nor will I believe him that any Bishops Ordination can make a true Bishop or Priest of a Woman an Infant or a professed Heathen Infidel or proper Heretick or any uncapable person any more than he can make a Woman to be a Husband or a dumb man the University Orator § 23. He saith They cannot give an Instance of any Power setled by Charter whereupon a failure of all who are by the Charter empowred to dispose of Offices the power must devolve to those who are not by the Charter empowred to dispose of them and where such a Charter is not thought in Law to fail by becoming unpracticable till the supreme power interpose c. Ans. Still the same fraud If all empowred to dispose of Offices is an ambiguous word The Prince disposeth of them by giving the Power and the Electors by choosing the Receivers and the Minister by delivering the Insignia If Electors and all die indeed there are none to determine of the Receiver And yet if the Plague kill most of the Electors at Age and leave not a due number when the rest left come to Age and choose the Charter will renew the Office-power 2. But if it be only the Ministerial Invester that faileth the sense of the Lawgiver must be judged of by the words and by other notices and the light of common Reason e. g. Whether it be the meaning of the Charter which saith that the Recorder shall give the Oath or the former Mayor shall deliver the Insignia that if the Recorder or Mayor be dead or sick or mad or wilfully refuse the City shall have no Mayor or if no Priest will Marry folks all England must live unmarried or if the Archbishops and Bishops will Ordain none but Hereticks all the Churches must have no other Ministers And here Nature and Christ teach us that the Means is only for the End and Order for the thing ordered and God will have us understand his own Laws so as that Rituals give place to Morals I will have mercy and not sacrifice And sure if the King of Spains Charter for the making of Governours at the West Indies should not express or reasonably imply a Remedy in case of the failure of circumstances of meer Order his Countrey might be lost before they could send to Spain for a new Charter or new power And Mr. D. saith Which is the very case impugned by me of the Nonconformists And so judg whether he must not turn a Seeker and say that all Ministry Churches and Sacraments cease till a new Commission comes from Heaven upon the failure of every such circumstance yea when almost all the Churches charge each other with failures and intercisions and the very species of the Ordainers is so much altered If the King send his Army into the Indies or his Navies and mention no power but the Generals as chief or no way of choosing a new General but by the Field-Officers choice and giving him an Oath by the Secretary c. yet no man doubteth but it was his meaning that if the General die or turn Rebel yea and the major part of the Field-Officers or the Secretary the Army should choose another General rather than perish and the Kings service miscarry § 24. He addeth They cannot give an Instance of any humane Charter that ever allows any person empowered to extend his own power by a private exposition of the Charter against the sense of all the visible supreme powers of the society Ans. This opens the Core of the Aposthume 1. We deny as confidently as any French or Italians affirm that there is any such thing at a supreme visible power over the universal Church under Jesus Christ and therefore none such is disobeyed or contradicted 2. And we maintain That by Divine appointment there is no visible National supreme Church-power but that of the Civil Christian Soveraign and therefore none such disobeyed 3. And we hold that no man can extend his own power further than Christs own Law extendeth it False expositions give no power 4. And therefore we prove by your own Rule that Christ being the only supreme universal Ruler and having described and specified the Office of a Pastor and order of a Church no Bishops can by their private exposition turn a single Church into a Diocesan or a Presbyter of Christs description into an half Presbyter of their own making But if they make a man a Pastor his power and work shall be what Christ saith and not what the Ordaâ—ner will Investing-Ministers Acts are null if they contradict the Order of the Donor If the King give you a Parsonage of 300. l. a year and the Instituter say you shall have but 100. l. out of it it 's vain he instituteth you but as the Donors instrument in the same Benefice and power given by him § 25. He addeth p. 38. Where can they find such a Charter for the power of Presbyters in Scripture as they speak of Ans. Nay then we are far from agreeing if you think that the very Species of a Pastors Office is not found in Scripture as of Christs institution Thâ—n it seems the Bishops make the very Species The Italian Bishops at Trent scarce gave so much to the Pope Then why may not the Bishops put down Presbyters if they make the Species or make as many Species as they please Indeed Dr. Hammond thought that there was no evidence of the Order of Subject Presbyters in Scripture-times And if God instituted none let us have none But I have told you before and often where in Scripture the true Pastors Office is described § 26. He adds They may find some actual practices but will they call that a Charter Ans. This is indeed to strike at our foundation If we prove not Christ to be King and Lawgiver and that his Laws or Governing-precepts were partly given by himself and partly by his Spirit in his Commissioned Apostles and these Recorded Sealed and Delivered in Scripture If we prove not that these as the authorized Agents of Christ delivered his Will by words and practice in setling and describing the Pastors of his Churches then take the Ministry and spare not for mans invention I cited you before the Texts that are our proof But if the Office which you call Priestly be of mans making in specie I doubt the Diocesans will prove so much more
for many Papists doubt of the Divine right of Prelacy that doubt not of the Divine unalterable right of the Priestly or Presbyter-power and work And will this cure men of Schism to tell them that God hath not so much as made and specified the Parish-Pastors Office and it is but a humane invention which you forsake § 27. And I would crave of this confident man to consider whether he reach not high and horrid Sacriledg if he make the Invester to be first the Owner and then the Donor Did we devote our selves to Patrons in our Ministry or to Diocesans or immediately to God If we covenanted only to be Gods Ministers for the Churches good then let them take heed that claim propriety in us as Priests And if Tythes and Glebes were devoted to God and not to Princes or Patrons I doubt he that maketh Patrons the Proprietaries and proper Donors will prove Sacrilegious and be convinced at last that he should only have taken Princes and Pastors for such Trustees as determine of the Receiver but give not the things § 28. If it be otherwise Princes Patrons and Prelates are greater and richer than I ever thought them 1. Then all the Bishopricks in England are the King 's till he give them 2. Then all the Tythes Glebes and Temples in England are the Patrons till they give them or else the Bishops or Chancellors who investeth men in them by institution and induction And the Patron and Bishop may have a hard suit to determine which is the Proprietor 3. And then a Bishop that Ordaineth a thousand Priests was the Owner of all their Relations before and so as they that are for the pre-existence of souls dispute whether they pre-existed individually or only in animâ universali so these that are for the pre existence of Priesthoods in the Diocesans must dispute whether they were in the Prelate a thousand individual Priesthoods before or but one common Priesthood that fell into individuals by Ordination If they say that they were but virtually in the Prelate that kills their Cause for then they did not pre-exist for existere est esse extra causas And this only saith that the Prelate had an effective vertue that could make them But the species was made before and so was the obliging and Donative Law therefore the Prelate had not power to do what God had done before § 29. I take it for granted because I know him that all this is nothing to Mr. Dodwell but to me it is moreover something 1. That the highest esteemers of Diocesans Ordination make it but a Sacrament 2 And that the Investing Minister is not the Owner and Donor of the Relation and Gift in any of their Seven Sacraments 1. In Baptism God only giveth the Right and Relation which the Minister by Investiture solemnizeth but giveth it not as his own Else every Lay-man and woman by their judgment should have multitudes of Christendoms of their own to bestow 2. In Confirmation the Priest never pretendeth to be the giver of the Spirit but by his act to fit the person to receive it The Holy Ghost is said to fall on them that heard the word before Baptism Act. 10.44 45 and they were after baptized He fell on them Act. 11.15 And Peter and Iohn prayed for the Samaritans that they might receive the Holy Ghost Act. 8.15 and they laid hands on them and they received the Holy Ghost v. 17. but not that they gave the Holy Ghost though by the laying on of their hands and their prayers he was given as he was on them without Act. 2. 3. And in Matrimony it 's confessed that the Priest is not the Owner and Donor of the Husbands power but a Ministerial Invester 4. And in the Eucharist even they that think the bread is made God take not the Priest as the efficient cause but a disposing instrument nor that he giveth God to the Receiver as the Owner or Donor but delivereth him as a Minister 5. The same is true of Penance Extreme Unction and therefore must be so also in Ordination If the King send a thousand Commissions to Captains Judges Justices c. the Messenger is not the Owner or Donor of them all nor may make any alteration of them yea if he intrust the Chancellor to name all the Justices he doth thereby but determine of the person that shall receive the Commission but altereth nothing of the Office nor is the Donor of it All this is plain to us but not to Mr. Dodwell § 30. Saith he p. 39. Are not many actual practices grounded on circumstances Are not many of those circumstances obnoxious to great mutability Are not ordinary Governours the competent Iudges of their actual change Ans. 1. And did not Christ promise his Spirit to his Apostles for the performance of their Commissions And were not those Commissions to gather and settle his Churches and teach them all that he commanded them And did not Christ by that Spirit make Pastors and Teachers as is before proved And did not the Apostles faithfully perform their trust 2. And doth he not see that by this he also subverteth his foundation of Prelatical power also as having no better institution than the Priesthood And then who are those Governours of the Church that he talks of that must judg And how prove they their jugding-power 3. And it were a kindness if he would tell us what change it is that thâ— Diocesans may make in the Priestly Office and work and tell us the bounds of their power if it have any And whether they may put down the Preaching part the Praying part the Sacraments or which of them And whether this be the power that hath put out the Sacramental Cup and made all the changes that are made in the Church To tell us of these ordinary Governours changing-power is a hard word to us that took Christs Laws delivered by his Spirit to be perfect and unchangeable However some circumstances are changed which were noted to be but occasional § 31. To return his Consequence p. 40. Since it is certain that the power of Oâ—daining others was not given to nor for some hundred years exercised by that species of Diocesans who were neither the Bishops of single Churches associated for personal present Communion nor were the Overseers of such Bishops but the Bishops of Diocesses that have many score or hundred unbishoped stated worshipping Assemblies it will follow by his arguing that these never had their Office from the Apostles and much less a continued succession of it § 32. He next pleadeth the Nullity of the Presbyterians Ordination 1. Because if they had Ordaining power it is only in Assemblies where Bishops are Presidents and Edict them 2. And because they carry it not by Plurality of Voices But I am a weary with answering such trifling things and the later part is a known mistake I never heard of one contradicting Voice against the Ordination of any
that was Ordained in our Synods § 33. And he hath half disabled me to answer him from p. 50. forwards where he feigneth me to maintain that Authority must necessarily result from true qualifications For it is taken for uncivil to give his words their proper name But if the Reader will pardon the Repetition I may remind him how probable it is that Mr. Dodwell trusted that his Reader would believe his words without perusing what I wrote where he might have seen 1. That I say that the Authority resulteth not from the qualifications but from Christs Law Grant or Charter 2. That personal qualifications of gifts or grace are but part of the necessary Dispasitio Recipientis but that moreover there is needful 1. Opportunity 2. And need of his Office 3. And to a Bishop the flocks consent if not election And ordinis gratia where moral necessiâ—y dispenseth not with order the Ordainers approbation and consent 5. And to regular possession where it may be had a due Investiture so that there is a Relative part as well as a Qualitative of the Receptive disposition necessary And all the following leaves in which he disputeth against me as maintaining a power resulting from meer qualities are so unbeseeming a Divine and a Câ—ristian that I will not soul my paper with their due confutation But they are suitable to that man who thinks himself wise good and fit enough to Unchurch and condemn so much as he doth of the Christian world on pretence of pleading for obedience to the Diocesans § 34. And where he adds p. 50. Or that it so depends on them qualifications as that where the persons ordained may want any of them there the whol Ordination must be null because of the incapacity of the matter This also he denieth Ans. 1. I still distinguish between the Qualifications necessary ad esse and those only ad bene esse or integral If he would perswade the Reader that I null Ordination for want of the latter his weakness or designed ill intent is such as warneth his Readers to take heed of believing him If he mean it only of the former as I speak I have before confuted him that dare say that no qualification is necessary ad esse Then a Pope Ioan or woman-Priest or Prelate or a professed enemy of God or Christ may be a Priest And he may be a Pastor of a Church to feed them by the Word who never heard or know what was the Word or Church Cannot the best believer go to Heaven if all your Priests will but deny him the Sacrament and yet may a man be validly a Bishop and the Key keeper of Heaven that believeth not that there is a God a Christ or Heaven and so professeth This maketh me remember the old Roman Canons how no Bishop must be deposed for lying with his own Sister unless a great multitude of Witnesses testifie it and the Councils that decreed no Layman shall witness against a Clergy-man c. But Election consent the Ordainers approbation ordinarily are part of my Qualifications And if these be unnecessary what doth the man plead for And is a false approbation of a man that wanteth Essentials more necessary than having them How contrary is this to the Doctrine of the Council of Carthage in the Epistle in Cyprian of Martial and Basilides and to many honest Councils § 35. P. 90. At the end of this insinuated false accusation he asketh Where do we find that God ever gave Bishops Presbyters and Deacons though he gave Apostles Pastors and Teachers those extraordinary Offices indeed seem to have been made neither of man nor by man but by God immediately c. Ans. 1. Hath he said a word to prove that Pastors and Teachers are not ordinary Officers contrary to the common judgment of the Church in all ages 2. Whether he mean Bishops in the Dative Case or the Accusative I know not If the later let him speak out and say God gave not Bishops But how proveth he that Presbyters and Bishops are not Pastors or Teachers 3. The Text tells you Ephes. 4.14 15 16. that these offices were given for the continued stated use of the Church For the perfecting of the Saints the work of the Ministry for the edifying the body of Christ till we all come in the unity of the faith and the knowledg of the Son of God to a perfect man c. Was this temporary 4. It seems he disclaimeth Bishops being made in making Apostles 5. Christ by his Spirit in the Apostles ordered the Churches § 36. P. 65. he saith They never find any of those Officers to whom succession is at present pretended made immediately by God but by the intervention of men c. Ans. Still deceiving confusion 1. Intervention is a word of fraud and may signifie only that act which determineth of and qualifieth the receiver and it may signifie the Donation or making of the office It is this that we speak of 2. The Intervention of infallibly inspired men commissioned to deliver and record Christs own will hath an efficiency instrumental in making the office in that the Spirit in them doth it and they do make instrumentally the Charter or Law which giveth the power and Christ doth what they did by his Commission and Spirit If you can prove that our Diocesans have this Commission spirit and power if they write new Sacred Scriptures or make new Sacraments and Church-forms and offices we will obey them But prove it well 3. Did any man but Christ send forth the Seventy Yet most Prelatists hold that those were the predecessors of the Presbyters 4. By this it seems he again denieth that Christ himself instituted the Order of Bishops by making Apostles And if so he will sorely shake his standing for then they must prove all their power from the Apostles or following persons institutions and not make them successors of the Apostles own Office for they made not their own Office And Dr. Stillingfleet thinks there were no Bishops or few made in the Apostles times as Dr. Hammond thinks of subject-subject-Presbyters And if Christs Spirit in the Apostles made not these Offices who made the Scripture which is Gods Law I despair of seeing it proved that any since them were authorized to make them And if men only made the Episcopal and Presbyters Office men may unmake them § 37. A case put to me within this hour remindeth me how much these men prefer Ordination not only in it self but in this circumstance of Prelatical uninterrupted succession before Baptism which is our Christning There are some godly young men that have Communicated in the Lords Supper that were the children of Quakers and Anabaptists some were never baptized and some know not whether they were or not and being born near Two hundred Miles hence cannot learn or come to any certainty The question is Whether these that have Communicated should yet be baptized which is to make Christians of
if she have no more The Priests that the Pope sent from Italy into England â—hat could speak no English knew what you mention perhaps But it 's necessary also that the Pastor teach all this knowledg to all the flock which is not done with saying few words This man minds me of the saying of an Atheistical Phâ—sician What needs there all this Preaching and stir I can tell them all in three words it is but think well and say well and do well Dr. Saywell and Mr Dodwell that are so much for our silence seem to be too near to this mans mind But saith St. Paul Who is sufficient for these things 8. Yet this sort of men that can accept of so little of God in the Priests so be it they will but be ruled by the Prelate who I suppose need ad esse be no wiser or better himself in their opinion are the rigidest silencers and excommunicators of others the wisest and holiest Pastors and Christians as Schismaticks or Hereticks if they obey not the Diocesan in every indifferent thing or be not of their mind in what they decree such odds is in their demands for God and for the Prelates He that doth but understand the common dealings of the world is capable of saying over the Liturgy of the Sacrament and a little knowledg and no honesty or piety may serve ad esse But if the Councils of Prelates yea or his single Diocesan command him never so many things as indifferent which the poor Priest feareth are perjury lying false worship or other heinous sins he is to be Excommunicated from Christian society and cast out of the Ministry and as a Schismatick not only to be silenced but to be damned if such as Mr. Saywell and Mr. Dodwell and their Masters be to be believed § 40. But saith he P. 74. How can they prove that Preaching is at all any essential part of the Office c. Ans. 1. From Christs own practice and his command to those whom he called and sent and from their practice and the Holy Ghosts determination by them Mat. 4.17 10.7 11.1 Mar. 1.4 38. 3.14 Luk. 4.18 19 43. 9.2 60. Act. 5.42 10.42 Rom. 10.8 10 14 15. Mat. 28.19 Mar. 16.16 20. Act. 30.20 8 5 2â— 40 9.20 13.5 42. 20.7 20 to the end Phil. 1.17 18. 1 Tim. 3.16 2 Tim. 3.16 2 Tim. 4.1 2. 1 Cor 1.21 2 Tim. 2.2 24. Tit. 2.3 Where do you find that ever any one in the New Testament was ordained a Mass Priest or Sacrament Priest and not a Teacher 2. When did you prove that actual giving the Sacrament was essential to a Bishop or Presbyter not only Paul baptized few but many Parish Priests leave that work to their Curates and some Bishopâ— leave both the Sacraments to their Chaplains or Priests I suppose you know that in the ancient Churches one Assembly had usually a Bishop with many Presbyters and Deacons and usually the Bishop did both preach and celebrate the Eucharist Can you prove that the rest did any 〈◊〉 celebrate than preach 3. But if you are willing you may easily know that we take Preaching to â—ave more modes than making a set Sermon in the Pulpit The Presbyters of old were all Preachers Sometimes in the Pulpit when the Bishop or chief speaker was absent sick or required it Sometimes to smaller parties in Houses or Chappels or lesser meetings sometime by conference as Christ preached to the Woman Iob. 4. And if you think otherwise yet I am confident by experience that it is an easier thing and requireth less skill to make a Pulpit studied Sermon than to deal convincingly in conference with particular persons that need our teaching And a man may learn to say Mass or Liturgies that hath no tolerable fitness to teach 4. But if Preaching and Teaching be all one with you as they are with me is it not a strange question to ask How we prove that Preaching that is Teaching is at all essential to their Office As if you should ask How we prove that Teaching is essential to a Schoolmaster or Tutor or that to Rule is essential to a Ruler or to give Physick essential to a Physician What can you take the Office to be that includeth not Teaching Neither Christs Apostles nor the ancient Church ever ordained any to give Sacraments without Teaching however Papists make the essence of the Priesthood to be in the power of making the body and blood of God Nay how can they celebrate the Sacraments without Preaching or Teaching Can they justly baptize the adult and not teach them the great Articles of the Creed which they must profess and the great and many duties to be done and the great and many benefits to be received And doth he think it such a small and easie matter to teach men all the Articles of the Creed the sense of the Lords prayer the Ten Commandments and the nature of the Sacrament of Baptism and the Lords-supper It may be hâ— will say that it is some other Preaching that he meaneth But he speaketh to me who in the hearing of Dâ— Warmstrie and of Mr. Th. Baldwin who is yet living did offer Bishop Morley when he â—orbad me to preach in his Diocess to promise him to preach only the Catechism-Doctrine on Baptism the Creed the Lords prayer the Ten Câ—mmandments and the Lords supper Archbishop Vsher in his â—ermon before King Iames on Ephâ—s 4 3. boldly affiâ—â—â—th That lâ—t the learnedsâ— of them all try it when they will they shall find that it requireth greater skill to open to the â—gnoraâ—t intelligiâ—ly these Catâ—chism common truths than to handle points of controverted School-Divinity § 41. It may be objected 1 Cor. 12. Are all Teachers and Rom. 12. He that teacheth on teaching Ans. It 's evident that Teachers or Doctors are there put for some eminently gifted above others in opening and defending sound Doctrine and not for all Teachers in general For Exhortation is distinguished from it which yet is the greatest pâ—rt of most Sermons Paul was the chief Speaker yet Barnabas was a Teacher We are more than he is for many Ministers in each Church where the chief Speaker shall usually preach but the other as assistants in their time and place and not to be meer Sacramenters § 42. His next recollections run all upon such intimated or expressed untruths meerly forged by him contrary to my copious Explications and against the rules of common honesty that I will not lose my own and the Readers time in particular answers to them He would perswade the Readers that I affirm that power immediately results from gifts who never had such a thought but say it neither resulteth from them mediately nor immediately This dealing is so grosly false that it is neither credit to his cause nor him Would he make men think that I take him to have most authority or power that hath the best gifts As if
about the final Judgment If all these be little tollerable differences why may not we be tollerated If not judg Reader who they be that are intollerable when you hear them plead against tolleration § 3. I. For the first we judg that there is a God who is the Governour of the World by an universal Law which is above all humane Laws or will and that he is the fountain of all power and there is none but what he giveth and limiteth and that no man is above him nor hath true authority against his Laws But Mr. Dodwell saith That it is irreconcileable to Government in this life or to due subordination of subjects to superiours to practice differently and defend it by pretending Divine authority and appealing to writings Scriptures is our word by excellency so called And so God shall be God and be obeyed if the Clergy please § 4. II. As to the second we suppose that the Holy Scriptures are Gods Laws indited and recorded by the Holy Ghost to be the first obliging Rule of Faith and holy living which all men are to be obedient to before and against all contrary Laws of men But Mr. Dodwell as aforesaid alloweth no such prime obligation as will warrant an appeal to the Word of God from the visible Church-Governours that contradict it § 5. III. And for the third we suppose that all humane Powers are derived from God and have no authority but what he giveth them and are more under him and his Laws than the Justices are under the King and his Laws and can oblige no man against the Laws of God But how far Mr. Dodwell thinks otherwise you have heard He saith not indeed that we must break Gods Laws but we must not pretend them or appeal to them against our Governours In charity I hope he meaneth no worse but that we must take our Rulers word or exposition and judg nothing to be in the Scripture contrary to their commands And whether he give them the same dominion also over the Law of Nature let him tell you Paul disclaimed dominion over mens saith and the written Law of God § 6. IV. And for the fourth We take moral good to be a conformity to Gods Law and moral evil or sin to be a breach of it But Mr. Dodwell is for measuring them by the Clergies or Governours will though Gods Law be against theirs § 7. V. And for the fifth we take the Catholick Church to have no Supreme Government but God and our Glorified Redeemer God and man and that there is no such thing as a Catholick-Church of Gods making under any other Supreme Rulers But that as God is the invisible King of this visible world and Kings are subordinate Supremes in their Kingdom but neither one of them or many conjunct in an Aristocracy Supreme over all the earth so Christ is the partly visible and partly invisible supreme Ruler of the visible Church of Christians and each Pastor is under him over his proper flock bound to keep concord and peace but none under him Supreme over all whether Monarch as the Pope or Aristocracy as Councils Cardinals or ' others But Mr. Dodwell is for a visible Society with a visible humane Supreme But who the Supreme is I despair of getting him to acquaint us § 8. VI. And for the sixth we suppose that God sent forth Preachers to convert the world and turn them from darkness to light and the power of Satan to God and that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word preached and that whoever believeth shall be saved and the word of God is powerful to this end and sufficient to make us wise to salvation But Mr. Dodwell thinks that it is not Preaching but the delivering men the Sacraments that giveth them the first true saving grace and title to Salvation And that none in the world have this Sacrament or Covenant-title to life but those that receive it from a hand that had an Ordination by Bishops in his sense of uninterrupted succession from the Apostles by the like Ordination § 8. VII Accordingly we hold that Preaching is for the converting of souls and the means of saving faith and holiness But what he thinks it is good for I know not well nor whether he would send the Indians the Sacraments instead of Preachers § 10. VIII We take it to be our duty though men forbid us to confess Christ and assemble for Gods worship to read and hear the Scripture and to praise God But he thinks we must not practice differently from the ruling Clergies will if they forbid us nor alledg Divine authority for it § 11. IX We suppose that the office of a Prophetical Ministry bringing new Doctrines or Laws from God and the office of the Teachers and Rulers by these Laws are greatly different and must necessarily be distinguished Moses was a Prophetical Mediator in Legislation and he confirmâ—d his Mediation by uncontrouled Miracles The Prophets afterward came but on particular applicatory messages But the Priests and Levites as such were no Prophets nor had power to make any new additions or alterations of the Law but only to teach it the people and as guides apply it to their several cases so Christ and his Apostles commissioned to deliver and record all his Doctrines and Commands to the following ages did by the Holy Ghost Prophetically deliver to the world that body of Doctrine and Law which must rule them to the end and judg them and thus sealed and confirmed all by a multitude of uncontrouled Miracles but all following Bishops and Pastors are not to do the like nor add or alter nor are such Legislators being not Prophets nor workers of Miracles but only to teach and apply the Laws already recorded in Scripture and guide their Congregations in variable circumstances time place translations c. according to the general rules of Gods Law This is the truth But how much Mr. Dodwell equals the Bishops and Apostles and sets their words above the Scripture as to obligation you have seen before § 12. X. And as he giveth Bishops power to silence Presbyters and forbid the Preaching of the Gospel and Gods worship so how little knowledg or godliness or common sobriety or honesty he requireth to a saving Sacramenting Priest who must not be separated from you heard before contrary to Cyprian and many a Councils Canons But we know that Paul had no power to destruction but only to edification And they have no more § 13. XI We suppose that we must love honour and communicate with all such as true Ministers or Churches who have true faith and repentance and sincere obedience to Christs Laws and are able godly willing Pastors chosen or consented to by the flocks approved and ordained by senior Pastors especially in Synods where City-Pastors preside and especially if also authorized by the Christian Magistrate But he thinks if they have not also successivâ— Ordination from the Apostles by Bishops
Nullity because he is not the Giver of it nor is his intention but the Kingdoms constitution the measure of it If the Priest would make the man whom he marrieth to a woman no governour of her it 's a Nullity for it is not his intent that makes the power 7. If this were otherwise I call and call again but in vain to Mr. Dodwell and all his party to tell me how the Bishops and Priests of the Church of England in the days of Henry the 8th and Edward the 6th and Queen Elizabeth came to have power to put down the Mass to set up the Liturgie to take down Images and to reform as they did when it was certainly contrary to the intention of their Ordainers 8. And setting this point together with the other that Ordination of Presbyters is null I ask them and ask again but all in vain 1. Do not Bishops generate their Species and make Bishops their equals 2. Who then can give his Office to the Archhishop if he have no Superior in England unless his Inferiors give it or you fly to a Forreign Iurisdiction 3. Whose Intention is it that giveth power to the Pope if he be greatest Or to the General Council if it be greatest If there be none above them either God or Inferiours give them their power 4. And what if these Inferiours that make Popes Primates or Councils by Intention would take down half their power Is it then done What self-contradiction and confusion would some men rather run into than grant Christ to be Christ that is the only Vniversal Head and Legislator to the Church on Earth IV. Accordingly Mr. D. holdeth that there is a supreme Authority in man over the Universal Church from whose intention and sense it is not lawful for us to appeal so much as to the Sacred Scripture no nor to the Day of Iudgment for any practice different from them See his Reply p. 80 81 82 83 84 85. Though we hold that no unjust Appeal should suspend the authorised Acts of a Governour this Doctrine seems to me to be worse than Antichristian and to put down God If God indeed be the Vniversal Soveraign Lawgiver and the final Iudge if God be God and man be man and not above him to say that we must not obey him before man and disobey man that commands what he forbids or that we must not appeal from mans subordinate Law to his supreme Law nor from mans judgment to his final judgment and to say as he and Thorndike do that to do so and practise accordingly is inconsistent with all Government are things that I had hoped my ears or eyes should never have seen or heard delivered by a sober Christian. Papists most commoâ—ly abhor it save some few Flatterers of the Pope If â—his be so a man must not only worship Images swear to the Pope and do all that Councils command but also curse Christ if the Turkish Rulers bid him blaspheme God if Heathen Rulers bid him and condemn all the Martyrs as Rebels that did subvert all Government by practising contrary to it and appealing to God And then man must be every where of the Rulers Religion and do whatever wickedness he commandeth Dan. 1. and 3.6 and the Church for three hundred years and more tell us of other kind of Examples V. Mr. D. holdeth this Absolute Destructive Power to be essentially necessary to the Vnity of the Catholick Church which is the sum of Thorndike's Book I would not go further from them or the French in the point of Vnity than I needs must I shall therefore tell you what is our judgment of it 1. We grant them that Christ's Church on earth is one and its Vnity is part of its very essence as the Vnity of the parts of a House Ship c. 2. We hold that this essential Vnity consisteth in the Vnion of all Christians with Christ the only unifying Vniversal Head and that the Vnity described Ephes. 4.4 5 6. sufficeth to it viz. One Body of Christ one Spirit one Hope of Grace and Glory one Lord one Faith one Baptism one God and Father c. And that all this is prescribed in the Gospel and every true Christian hath all this 3. That all must endeavour to keep this Vnity in the bond of peace and to be in every lesser matter of one mind as far as they can And the Pastors of the Churches to beautifie and strengthen the Church by as much concord as they can well obtain 4. But that perfect concord being the fruit of personal perfection will never be had on earth And the differences of the infirm that cannot be cured must be tolerated in tender Brotherly Love And to persecute or destroy Christians who unite in Christ and the Essentials of Christianity because they are not of one size of knowledg and differ in lesser things is the work of Satan the Enemy of Love and the great Destroyer 5. We believe that Synods or Councils are so far good and useful as they are needful to the foresaid strength and concord of the Churches But that they are for Agreement and not for direct Regiment as Archbishop Usher was wont to say Councils are not for Government of the several Bishops by the Majority but for Consultation and Concord And they that cannot in all things consent to them in Accidentals or lesser matters are not therefore cut off from Christ's Vniversal Church But it is a fault peevishly and causelesly to dissent and be singular a breach of Christ's general Law of doing our work as much as we can in Love and Concord Plainly Reader do you know the difference between the Senate of Rome or Venice and the Assembly at Nimmegen Ratisbone or Frankford The said Senate is una persona Politica though plures naturales and hath the Supreme Government by Vote in Legislation and Iudgment and it is Rebellion there to disown their Power and a Crime not to obey it At Nimmegen Ratisbone c. many Princes or their Agents meet for Peace and Christian Concord It is a sin for any of them to be causelesly against any Vote that is useful to those ends But no one of them nor the major Vote is Governour of the rest nor is any one to be dispossest of his Dominion that seeth reason to dissent This is plain truth Though Dr. Sherlock find fault with the Learned and Iudicious Dr. Barrow for asserting it in his Treatise against the Papacy And it being not Regiment but Concord that is the end of Synods as over Bishops there is no more use than possibility of an Vniversal Council or one Vniversal Colledge But the necessity and aptitude of Councils for strengthning concord must measure their extent What Mr. D's opinion is of the degree of corporal punishment which he would have used to his ends I know not Mr. Thorndike is against Death and Banishment For my part the two greatest things that have alienated me
Congregational or Parochial Bishops or Pastors without such as our Diocesans It must be Pastoral or true Episcopal regular Communion 3. Many Individual Bishops separating from one another have been and may be in one City 4. If e. g. the Bishop of Lincoln have many Counties and one differing from him were chosen by the Clergy at Leicester Hartford c. as he was by the King which of them is the Bishop on the place If Gloucester Clergy and People had chose another when Goodman a Papist was Bishop which was the Bishop 1. 1. Salvation is pronounced by Conformists to be certain upon Baptism without any other Sacrament 2. Popes and Papists are as much as any for tying salvation to Sacraments and yet a Pope Victor and his Council at Benevent 1078. decree that rather than Communicate with a Simonist they should persist without visible Communion and in mind joined to Christ have his Communion 3. What shall they do ordinarily in Italy Spain France c. that have none but Papist Bishops 1. Wilful neglect of any known means sheweth wilful disobedience against God But many means may be ignorantly neglected without destroying assurance of salvation Turtullian thought children should stay from Baptism unless in danger of death and Nazianzen was for some years delay This ignorance damned not the practisers Apocryphal books divers Sacraments Ceremonies Church-Offices Doctrines have been controverted means among true Christians 2. Faith comes by hearing Rom. 10. Christ blesseth them that hear and do it Thousands are mentioned as believing by hearing and salvation is promised to Faith 2. 1. Whoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved Ask and ye shall have True faith and conversion wrought by hearing Gods word and working by true love and prayer hath many a promise of pardon and salvation 2. Is a baptized praying believer out of the Communion of Christs Church though he doubt of Diocesans or Patriarchs He is not 2. 1. Ordinarily faith comes by hearing and hearing by preaching and he that truly believeth shall be saved Iohn 13.16 2. I think many Score or Hundreds of Protestant Divines have proved that Baptism giveth not the first Right to life but only solemnly confirmeth sealeth and by Ministerial investiture publickly delivereth that which true Faith received before See Gataker's two Tracts on Dr. Ward 's and Dr. Davenant's Theses 3. What 's Baptism to Episcopacy till King Iames alter'd it Women might Baptize in England and Priests still may And are men Baptized into the Name or Belief of Diocesans as Bellarmine saith Baptism binds them to the Pope Prove this if you can 2. If Baptism undoubtedly save at what Age doth the effect cease 2. The Lords Supper is necessary for corroboration and for expressing true obedience and living by Faith on Christ where it can lawfully be had and the need and use of it is understood B. This is false If they be given by a Lay-man falsly pretending Orders or by one who hath no Authority through uncapacity or usurpation yet the receiver loseth not his Right he taketh it as from God and if his ignorance be not culpable there is not so much as disobedience in it 2. If I prove that Papists have no such Authority as you plead for are all their Baptisms and Ordinations null III. Episcopal Communion is the Cothurnus the Hose drawn over your ulcer and snare 1. We have mental Communion in Essentials with all true Bishops in the world 2. We have Subject Communion with true Parish-Bishops 3. And with their Ruling Bishops at least as Magistrates 4. Novatians Luciferians Donatists and others in time of Schisms had all Orders in Episcopal Communion and so have Papists Greeks Moscovites Armenians 5. Parish-Bishops have more proof of Authority from Christ than the Diocesans or many hundred Congregations that have no other Bishops 6. Authority may be given by God without any Ordination where it cannot be had or not without sinning 1. No doubt but all true Authority must be derived from God 2. Those to whom it was first given were the Twelve Apostles They are considered 1. As the Inspired Prophetical Declarers and Recorders of the Laws and Doctrine and Promises of Christ. 2. As chief Pastors of the Church to gather and rule it All Gods gifts and graces that come to us by the mediation of the Gospel come by the Apostles mediation in the first sense as declaring Christs Will how Ministers shall be made in all Ages And as chief Pastors gathering and setling the first Churches which by Christs Charter shall call their Pastors and so others to the end of the world they may be said to be Mediators herein 3. But they mediate not as the Donors of the Pastoral power as being Pastors themselves but only as Ministerial investers The Sacraments come not to us without the mediation of the Apostles but they made them not nor make them effectual nor make new Apostles to deliver them 3. This is deceitful confusion 1. Authority to Administer Sacraments and Authority to call others to administer them are different things 2. And so is succession of Apostolical power and succession of common Ministry 3. And so is giving power as the Donor and giving it as an investing servant 4. And proper giving it and improper which is but qualifying the persons to receive it 1. Apostolical Prophetical conveyance harh no such succession 2. The Flock that have no Authority to Administer Sacraments partake of the Authority to call others to do it 3. Inferiors may have Authority to call Superiors else the highest could not be made 4. None of these people give the power but their Election is part of the receivers qualifications to whom God giveth it by his Law or Charter And then as serâ—ants they solemnize the Investiture 5. The power of this Law or Charter is never interrupted But if all Pastors were dead an Hundred years it would renew Pastoral power in the Church without uninterrupted Donors or Investers 4. This conveying power is where-ever Gods Law and capable receivers are A capable receiver is 1. One personally qualified with sufficiency and willingness 2. And that hath the Churches and Ordainers necessary consent when ordinary for order sake the Ordainers then must invest him by declaring him authorized by God c. The regular Ordination like publick Matrimony after contract is to be by authorized Ordainers and most Bishops Diocesan Papists Greeks Moscovites Armenian c. are of more doubtful Authority than Congregational or Parish Bishops though the former usurp the name as appropriated to them b. 2. 1. Then men in Rome Italy Spain France c. must be of the Papists Prelates Churches and Communion 2. Paulinus and Flavian Donatists Novatians Arrians c. may have Bishops in the same place And the Orthodox two or more at once Grotius thought as many as there were Synagogues in a City 3. Then if I prove the chief Pastor of a Parish or City-Church to be
ready to be Confirmed by learning the Catechism and recognizing the Covenant c. 25. Doth he not make the chief Bishops and Reformers of the Church of England to be the promoters of the Doctrine which he accounteth so damnable when Dr. Stillingfleet in his Irenicon recites the words of Cranmer and others of them at a Consultation down-right against not only the necessity of his uninterrupted succâ—ssion but also even of Episcopal Ordination it self And I have elsewhere cited about Fourteen of them for the validity of Ordination without Bishops And Dr. Stillingfleet Bishop Edw. Reignnolds and many more held that no Form of Government was of Divine determination Did all these plead for damning Schism against all title to salvation 26. And what could more directly contradict the main tenor of the Gospel which tells us of the saving power of the Word Preached how it converteth souls and promiseth salvation to all that truly believe and repent Insomuch that Paul thanks God that he baptizâ—d few of the Corinthians because God sent him not to baptize but to Preach the Gospel 27. But his Doctrine feigneth that God will damn them that truly believe repent love God forsake sin for want of the Sacrament or else that the Word converteth none but only Sacraments convert men 28. And then it will follow that none but unbelievers impenitent wicked men should be first admitted to the Sacrament for if that only converteth then it is only the unconverted that must first be received to it 29 When all 's done he doth but contradict his end for it 's hard to find a National Episcopacy on earth which imposeth no unlawful thing on Ministers or people And with all such he speaketh not for our Communion 30. Either Ordination and Collation of church-Church-power must be given by Superiors or by Equals if by Equals why may not Presbyters make Presbyters If by Superiors then who shall give the Pope his Power Or if you think any other be the highest who makes them such Who giveth the Archbishop of Canterbury his Power 31. In short as far as I can understand these men deny all Covenant-right to salvation to all men living and all true Sacraments and Church-Communion or at least all knowledg of any such thing seeing as it is certain that in most Churches such Ordination as they describe hath not had an uninterrupted succession so no man is sure that any one Church or man hath had such And they that silence us for not subscribing declaring and swearing obedience to our Diocesans and other Ordinaries are bold men if they dare swear themselves that they are true Bishops and have any Authority to rule and command us by an uninterrupted succession of a Canonical Episcopal Ordination down from the Apostles But I have already in my Book of Concord Part 3. Chap. 9. opened so many palpable and pernicious absurdities and ill consequents of Mr. Dodwell's Doctrine which he dare not undertake to answer but sâ—ly passeth by that I must expect the Reader will there peruse them who will judg uprightly between him and me and therefore will hear what both have said And those that will judg falsly upon partial trust to save themselves the labour of tryal are out of the reach of ordinary means to be saved from deceivers CHAP. IV. My words of Gods Collation of Ministerial Authority Vindicated from the forgeries and fallacies of Mr. Dodwell § 1. CHRIST hath taught me to judg of Prophets or Teachers by their fruits more than by their cloathing Mat. 7. And the fruits which are of God are those which express the Divine Nature and Image viz. holy Light and Truth holy Love and holy Life and Practice and the promoting of these in the world And Christ hath taught me that the Devil is 1. Against holy Light and Truth the Prince of Darkness and a Lyar and the Father of Lyes 2. Against holy Love accusing slandring and rendring as odious the servants and ways of Christ. 3. Against holy righteous and sober living and an opposer of it and a persecutor and murderer of the Saints And those that are likest Satan in these three parts of his Image and whose works are more certainly the works of these three Diabolical Principles I am taught by Christ to judg of by their fruits So much as there is in Mr. Dodwell's labours of holy Truth holy Love and helps to holy living so much sure is of God But so much as there is in his or any of his Parties cause of deceit and falshood and defence of ignorance so much as there is of Malignity Calumny or making odious the servants of Christ so much as there is of cruelty and destruction and silencing faithful Ministers and promoting ungodliness by upholding its defences I am obliged to resist as being from him against whom in my baptismal Covenant I was engaged § 2. He giveth his Reader the sum of my doctrine in this point p. 29 c. a chain of forgeries or putid falshoods Either he knew that he wrote falsly or he did not if yea then it seems he thinks that God or his Church needed his lyes if not how unfit is he to write against what he understandeth not But what made him devise a frame of his own words of above six pages to express my words by if he meant not to deceive those that would believe his writing without reading mine § 3. And whether it be from the Lord of love or the enemy of love that he goeth so far to the unchurching and damning of so many of the Reformed Churches besides the Churches of the Southern and Eastern parts of the world if not of all Churches on earth let the sons of Love consider § 4. And whether his endeavours to persuade all the Nonconformists to give over preaching Christs Gospel and all publick Worship of God till they can conscionably conform and his reasonings for that frame that hath long excluded true discipline and sheltered ignorance and ungodliness be of God and all his copious discourses to that end are to save souls or to starve and murder them I leave to mens impartial trial § 5. I so often and fully repeated my judgment of the Calling of the Ministry as leaveth his Forgeries inexcusable The sum is this 1. There is no power but of God 2. Gods universal Laws are the prime Laws and the only universal Laws of the Church or world 3. In his Laws God hath established or instituted the work and the species of that Ecclesiastical Ministry which he will have to teach and guide his Church to the end of the world And therein signified his owning of them as sent by him and promised them his help and blessing 4. In that Law he hath told us what men they are that he will thus own and bless and described the Essentials and the Integrals of their Receptive disposition or qualifications 5. He hath in that Law told us who shall be the tryers and
denieth § 7. I. If he deny that God hath Instituted the Office of the sacred Ministry and Pastorship in his Law 1. The Scripture will shame him to all that believe and understand it 2. And if it be not divinely established men may alter it and what is all this stir about to keep up their Domination § 8. II. If he think that God hath only Instituted Teachers or Rectors in genere but not in Specie then I give him the same answer as before Scripture will shame him and men may make new Species of Church-Pastors and unmake or alter them and how many or how oft who knows And who be the men that have this Office-changing-power that we may know whether and how far and how long we are bound to obey them § 9. III. If he think that Gods Law hath not described the Essential Qualifications of the Recipient then Prelates may make Pastors of Infidels Mahometans Bedlams or Blasphemers if not of Horses or Dogs § 10. IV. If he think that Gods Law hath determined of no way of Election Approbation or judging who is capable then every man may make himself a Bishop or Priest and the Turk may make Bishops for Christians or a company of Lay-enemies and persecutors may do it and then the Bishops Judgment and Ordination will have no Divine Authority § 11. V. If when the Recipient is duly qualified and chosen and capable he does not think that Gods Law or Grant is a sufficient signification of his Donative will and a fundamentum juris and an obliging instrument 1. He must deny the very nature and force of Gods Law and Grant And 2. He maketh it less effective than the Laws Charters and Donations of men are For which he cannot have the least shew of true reason § 12. VI. Can he devise any other sort of power in the Ordainers than I have named What is it If he say that they give the Office-power I ask Is the controversie about the word Give or the Act If that which I have named be called giving let him use his liberty and call it how he will 1. But as to the Thing what is it more than I have described It is God and not man that made the Office in genere specie Did our Bishops make the universal Law which stablisheth the Office in the world 2. And the Bishop never had that power and therefore cannot give that which he had not It 's Dr. Hammond's reason against Presbyters ordaining Nâ—mo dat quod non habet The word Office or Power and Duty signifieth an Accident which cannot transire a subjecto in subjectum The Ordaâ—ners have their own power but they have not another mans 3. Do they give it as Masters and Owners or only as the Donors Ministers No doubt they will say as his Ministers And do I need to prove to Mr. Dodwell that servants are not the Donors and give not their own but deliver their Masters Stewards themselves are but entrusted with the performance of their Masters will in delivering his Goods as he requireth them § 13. And this is so evident a truth that the Papists themselves who would fain have all power flow from the Pope are yet forced to plead for it as you may see in W Iohnson's alias Terret's answer to my first because else they cannot defend the Papal Power For the Pope hath been sometimes chosen by the Roman people sometime by the Roman Presbyters sometimes by people and Presbyters sometime by the Italian Bishops sometimes by Emperors and now by Cardinals and none of all these were Popes nor had Papal power and if they were the givers must give what they never had Whereupon the Papists are foâ—c't to grant that the Electors do but determine who shall be the Recipient but that the power floweth to him â—mâ—ediâ—tely from Gods Law or Institution § 14. And the Prelatists must needs say the same or else grant that Inferiors that never had Superior power may yet give it others for how else shall the supreme Ecclesiastical power in every National Church be given If it be in a Primate or a Synod those that have not the supreme power must give it for there is none above them or equal to do it And so Archbishops are chosen and Councils called § 15. And thus almost all Societies by contract are formed e. g. The King giveth Commission to several men to List voluntary Souldiers and be their Captains and command them Every Souldier chooseth his own Captain and thereby subjecteth himself to him but it is not by giving him his power for that floweth immediately from the Kings Commission but by making himself a subject to it and so maâ—ing the Captain Relatively a Recipient of power from God and the King over this particular man for the Soldiers have no governing-power to give nor are superiors to their Captain § 16. And thus Servants impropeâ—ly only make men their Masters not by giving them a Domestick Ruling-power which they never had themselves but by making themselves the Correlate Subjects and so putting their Masters into the Relation to which Gods Lâ—w immediately giveth the Ruling-power All the power is from God and God doth not first give it the Servant Souldier c. to give the Master or Captain but the Servants or Souldiers consent is a Causa sine quae non disposâ—tiva Recipientis to make the Receiver capable of it from God § 17. And indeed all Kings and Soveraigns thus hold their Soveraignty from God Though God hath not made the form in Specie necessary all power is of God and the Soveraignty from him by no mediate Efficient below his Law It 's a falshood in politicks to say that the people as such efficiently give the Soveraign his power and that he is universis minor in Authority though he is not universis melior and therefore their common good is more than his the finis regiminis Nor is it true that Richard Hooker saith that in defect of Heirs it escheateth to the people but only that it belongeth to the people to choose a new Recipient to whom the power shall flow from Gods Law and not from them I do not think that the King of France Spain or England will believe that their power is given â—fficiently by and floweth from their People Parliaments or the Prelate that Crowneth them And the case is evidently the â—am as to the Ministry § 18. And the French Papists by some called Protestants who are for the Ecclesiastical Soveraignty of General Councils above the Pope do not believe that the Pope giveth them their power though he may call them But whoever calleth them or chooseth them they suppose that God only giveth them their power § 19. And in all these cases it is notorious that an interrâ—ption of due Election and Investiture hindereth not the restoration of interrupted power If the Law say whoever is thus and thus chosen to be Lord Chancellor Lord
work that God hath â—ade Officers to do already And then we need not say â—that Orders are Iure Divino if the Bishop may make more at his pleasure but quo jure and what shall set his bounds and end This seemeth more in kind than the Italians at Trent would have given to the Pope over Bishops Anâ— if they do not themselves also that same Essential part of their Office which they give to others they degrade themselves For the ceasing or alienation of an Essential part changeth the specieâ— But I suppose you will say 〈◊〉 is Preâ—byters to whom they may delegate this work And 〈◊〉 either it is a worâ— which God hath made part of the Presbyters Office or not If it be then that Presbyter doth his ow◠〈◊〉 appointed him by God and not another 〈…〉 not 〈◊〉 he maketh a new Officer who is â—either 〈…〉 But the 〈…〉 the Office 〈◊〉 that it may not be 〈◊〉 thoâ—gh Bishop may Ordain men to an Office of 〈…〉 the King or Church may make new Officers 〈…〉 Clock keepers Ostiaries c. 〈…〉 and obligation to personal duty to be done 〈◊〉 personâ—l abiâ—â—ty as is the Office of a Physician a Judg a School 〈…〉 a Pilot c where he that Authorâ—zeth and obligâ—th another statedly to do his work doth thereby make that other a Physician Judg School-Master Pilot c. This is but Ordinâ—tioâ— And if a Bishop be but one that may appoint others to do the Episcopal work then 1. Why is not every King a Bishop for he may appoint men to do a Bishops work And why is he not also a Physician Musician Pilot c. because he may do the like by them 2. And then the Bishop appointed by the King is no more a Bishop indeed than one appointed by a Bishop is But this delegation that I speak against is a smaller sin than such men choose To depute others to exercise Discipline whom God appointed not de specie thereto is but Sacriledg and Usurpation by alienating it from the true office and setting up a false one But yet the thing might some how be done if any were to do it But the almost total deposition and destruction of the Discipline it self and letting none do it by pretending the sole authority of doing it is another kind of sin Now to your answer from the similitude of Civil Monarchs I reply It is no wonder if we never agree about Church-offices if we no better agree of the general nature of them and their work Of which if you will please to read a sheet or two which I wrote the last year to Ludov. Molinaeus of the difference of Magistracy and Church-power and also read the Lord Bacons Considerations you will excuse me for here passing by what is there said I. The standing of the Magistrates Office is by the Law of Nature which therefore alloweth variety and mutations of inferior Orders as there is cause But the standing of the Clergy is by Supernatural Institution Our Book of Ordination saith there are three Orders c. Therefore man may not alter them or make more of that same kind II. Kingly power requireth not ad dispositionem materiae such Personal ability as the Pastoral-office doth A child may be a King and it may serve turn if he be but the head of power and give others commission to do all the rest of the Governing work But it is not so with a Judg a Physician an Orator or a Bishop who is not subjectum capax of the essence of the office without personal aptitude III. God hath described the Bishops office in Scripture as consisting of three parts viz. Teaching Priestly or about Worship and Sacraments and ruling as under Christs Prophetical Priestly and Kingly Office And he hath no where made one more proper to a Bishop than another nor said this is Essential and that is but Integral Therefore the Bishop may as well allow a Layman to administer the Sacraments c. as one not appointed to it by God to Rule by the Keys IV. The Bishops Pastoral Rule is only by Gods word upon the Conscience as Bishop Bilson of Obed. sheweth at large and all Protestants agree and not by any mulcts or corporal force If he use the sword or constraint it is not as a Bishop but as a Magistrate But the Kings is by the sword And will it follow that because the King may appoint another to apprehend men and carry them to prison c. that therefore a Bishop appointed by God to Preach Worship and Rule and therein to draw the Impenitent to Repentance by patient exhortations and reproofs c. may commit this to another never appointed to it of God V. Either it is the Bishops work as was said that is delegated by him or some other If properly his own than either he maketh more Bishops and that 's all we plead for or else a Presbyter or Layman may do a Bishops proper work And then what need of a Bishop to pass by the contradiction VI. But my chief answer to you is the King as Supreme Magistrate doth appoint and rule by others that are truly Magistrates They have every one a Judicial power in their several places under him even every Justice of Peace But you suppose the Bishop to set up no Bishops nor no Church-Governours under him at all A King can rule a Kingdom by Supremo Judgment when he hath hundreds of Judges under him who do it by his authority And if this had been all our dispute whether a Patriarch or Archbishop can rule a thousand Churches by a thousand Inferior Bishops or Church-rulers you had said something But doth it follow that your Church Monarch can over-see them all himself without any sub-oversees or rule them by Gods word on the Conscience without any sub-rulers You appropriate the Decretory Power to your Monarch and communicate only the executive Hold to that The whole Government is but Legislatio Iudicium Legislation now we meddle not with yet our Bishops allow it to the Presbyters in Convocation for they take Canons to be Church-Laws It is a lower power that is denied to them that they grant the higher to Bare execution is no Government A Hangman is no Governour A Governour may also be Executioner but a meer Executioner is no Governour The People are Executioners of Excommunications while they withdraw from the Excommunicate and with such do not eat c. as 1 Cor. 5. And the Parish-Priest is an Executioner while he as a Cryer proclaimeth or readeth the Chancellors Excommunication in the Church and when he denieth the Sacrament to those that he is bid deny it to I grant you that this is Communicated But it is the Judicial power it self which I have been proving the Bishop uncapable of Exploration is part of the Judicial work I know you include not that in execution which follows it If you did it would be a sad office for a Bishop to
which maketh nothing for the mutability of the Universal Laws 8. No Pastors since the Apostles are by office or power appointed to make any Universal Laws for the Church nor any of the same kind and reason with Gods own Laws whose reason or cause was existent in the Apostles times but only to explain the word of God and apply it to particular persons and cases as Ministers under Christ in his Teaching Priestly and Governing office nor have the Apostles any other kind of Successors 9. Christ made not Peter or any one of his Apostles Governour of the rest But when they strove who should be the chief rebuked that expectation and determined That among them Preeminence should consist in excelling in humility and service 10. When the Corinthians were sick of the like disease Paul rebuked them for saying I am of Cephas and determineth that Apostles are but particular members of the body of which Christ only is the Head and not the Lords but Ministers and helpers of their faith 11 No Pastors as such have forcing power either to touch mens bodies or estates or inflict by the sword corporal penalties or mulcts But only by the word by which the power of the Keys is exercised to instruct men and urge Gods precepts promises and threats upon their Consciences 12. The Apostles were Bishops eminenter in that they called gathered and while they stayed with them governed Churches But not formaliter as taking any one particular Church for their proper charge But setled such fixed Bishops over them And though they distributed their labours about the world prudently and as the Spirit of Christ guided them yet we find not any probability that ever they divided the world into twelve or thirteen Provinces or ever setled twelve or thirteen chief Metropolitical seats in the world which their proper Successors as such should govern in preeminence Nor doth any History intimate such a thing nor yet that any Apostle took any City for his proper Diocess where another Apostle might not come and exercise equal Power 13. It seemeth that Christs sending out his seventy Disciples by two and two and the Apostles staying together much at Ierusalem and Paul and Barnabas's going forth together and after Paul Silas and Barnabas and Mark Peter and Paul supposed to be together at Rome c. that the Spirit of God did purposely prevent the intentions of any afterward of being the Metropolitical Successors of single Apostles or Disciples of Christs immediate sending in this or that City as their proper seat 14. As Grotius thinks that the Churches were instituted after the likeness of the Synagogues of which one City had many so Dr. Hammond endeavours to evince not only that Peter and Paul were Bishops of two distinct Churches of Rome one of the Iews and the other of the Gentile Christians but also that it was so in other Cities Dissertat 15. The Patriarchs were not 12 or 13 but three first and five afterward and none of them pretended to any power as especial Successors of any one Apostle but Antioch and Rome of Peter and that was not their first claim or title but an honorary reason why men afterward advanced them Alexandria claimed Succession but from St. Mark and Ierusalem from Iames no Apostle if Dr. Hammond and others be not much mistaken and Constantinople from none 16. The 28 Canon of Calcedon tels us enough of the foundation title and reason of Patriarchal power and all Church-History that the Metropolitical Powers were granted by Emperours either immediately or empowering Councils thereto 17. These Emperours having no power out of the Empire neither by themselves nor by Councils gave not any power that extended further than the Empire or that could by that title continue to any City which fell under the Government of another Prince 18 Aâ— theâ—e never was a Council truly Universal so the name Vniversal or Oecâ—menical was not of old given them in respect to the whole Christian world but to the whole Empire as the power that called them and the names of the Bishops subscribed c. fully prove 19. Before Christian Princes did empower them Councils were but for Counsel concord and correspondency and particular Pastors were bound by their Decrees only 1. For the evidence of truth which they made known 2. And by the General Law of God to maintain unity and peace and help each other But afterward by vertuâ— of the Princes Law or Will they exercised a direct Government over the particular Bishops and those were oft banished that did not submit to them 20. While Councils met but for Counsel and Concord and also when afterwards they were but Provincial or National under Kings where none of the Patriarchal Spirit and Interest did corrupt them they made excellent Orders and were a great blessing to the Churches Of the first sort e. g. were divers African and of the latter divers Spanish and French when neither Emperor nor Popâ— did over-rule them but the Gothish and French Kings moderately govern them But though I deny not any good which the Councils called General did especially the firâ—â— Nicene yet I must profess that the History of the Patriarchal Seats and the History of the General Councils and the Church-Wars then and after them managed by Four of the Patriarchs especially and their Bishops the confusion caused in most of the Churches the Anathematizâ—ng of one another the blood that hath been shed in the open streets of Monks and common people yea the fighting and fury of Bishops at the Councils to the death of some of them their â—iring out the endeavours of such Emperors and their Officers that would have kept Peace and Concord among them do all put me out of hope that the Peace and Concord of the Christian world should ever be setled by Popes Patriarchs or such kind of Councils which all have so long filled the Christian world with most calamitous divisions contentions and blood-shed and made the snares which continue its divisions and distractions to this day II. I conceive that the means of Church-concord appointed by God is as follows But I premise 1. It must be pre-supposed That no perfect Concord will be had on earth yea that there will unavoidably be very many differences which must be born So great is the diversity of mens natural Capacity and Temper their Education Company Teachers Helps Interests Callings Temptations c. that it is not probable that any Two men in all the world are in every particular of the same mind And every man that groweth in knowledg will more and more differ from himself and not be of the same mind as he was when he knew less 2. Yet must our increase in knowledg and Concord be our continual endeavour and it is the use of teaching to bring these differences caused by ignorance to as small a number as we can 3. There is scarce a more effectual means of Division and Confusion and
Church-ruin to be devised than to suppose a more extensive Concord to be possible and necessary than indeed is and so to set up an impossible End and Means and to deny Concord and Peace to all that cannot have it on those terms If all should be denied to be the Kings Subjects who dare not profess Assent Consent and approbation of every law and part or word of the laws or that agree not of the meaning of every law or that differ in any matters of Religion what a Schism Confusion and Ruine would it unavoidably make in the Kingdom and how few Subjects would it leave the King Even as if none but men of the same stature visage or wit should be Subjects 4 The necessary Union and Concord of Christians is a matter of so great importance that it cannot be supposed that Christ is the sole Universal Lawgiver and yet hath not ordained or determined what shall be the terms of necessary Christian Unity and Concord And indeed he hath determined it Viz. I. He hath ordained Baptism himself to be our Christning or our visible Investiture in the Church Universal that is our Relation to Christ as the Head of his Universal Kingdom or Body And every rightfully baptized person till by violating that Covenant he forfeit his benefits is to be taken by us as a Member of Christ a Child of God and an Heir of Heaven and we are bound to love him as a brother and use him accordingly in all due Offices of Love And because the Church into which Baptism entereth us consists of Christian Pastors and People Apostles and Prophets having been as Foundations infallibly delivering us now recorded in Scripture the Word of Life and ordinary Pastors being appointed to teach and guide the people in holy Doctrine Worship and Conversation therefore it is implied that the baptized person at Age understandeth this and consenteth thereunto that is to receive as infallible the recorded sacred Doctrine of the infallible persons Apostles and Prophets and the ordinary Ministry of such ordinary Pastors and Teachers as he shall discern to be set over him by the Word and Spirit of Christ. Whether this consent to the Pastoral-Office be necessary to the Being of a Christian or only to the Well-being is a controversie with which I need not stop or lengthâ—n in this account But Baptism as such doth not enter us into any particular Church II. 1. Christ by himself and his â—pirit in the Apostles hath ordained that Christians shall be associated into particular Churches consisting of the aforesaid Ordinary Pastors and their Flocks for Personal Communion in holy Dâ—ctrine Worship and Conversation in all which these Pastors are their Guides according to the Laws or Word of Christ already delivered by the inâ—allible Ministry of the Apostles and Prophets against or beyond which Christ hath given them no power Their Office is of his own making and describing and their power to determine undetermined useful circumstances in Gods Worship and Church-discipline is but a power to obey Christs general commands to do all thingâ— in Love Peace Order Decency and to Edification which they may not violate 2. Every Christian that hath opportunity should be a Member of some such particular Church Statedly if it may be if not yet transiently But some may want such opportunity as single persons converted or cast among Infidels Travellers Embassadors Factors and other Merchants among Infidels or where Christianity is so corrupted by the Pâ—stors as that they will not allow men Communion without sinful Oaths Covenants Professions Words or Practices 3. No one at Age can be a Member of the Universal or of any particular Church and so the Subjâ—ct of that Pastor against his will or without his own consent however Antecedent Obligations may bind men to consent 4. Every such Church should have its proper Bishop and in Ignatius's time its Unity was describâ—d by One Altar and One Bishop with his fellow Presbyters and Deacons 5. Such Bâ—shops or Pastors were to be ordained by Senior Bishops or Pâ—stors and received by the Eâ—ection or Consent of the whole Church and for many hundred years no Churches received their Bishops on any other terms The Ordainers and the People or Church receiving him having each a necessary consent as a double Key for the security of the Church to which afterwards the Christian Magiâ—â—rates consent was added according to Gods word so far as protecting and countenancing of the Bishop did require The senior Bishops must consent to his Ordination the people must consent to him as formally related to themselves as their Pastor and the Magistrate as to one to be protected by him 6 As without mutual consent the relation of Pastor and flock is not founded so Gods Providence must direct every man to know what particular Church he should be of and whom by consent to take for the guide of his soul. In England men may freely chuse what Church and Pastor they will stand related to every man having liberty to dwell in what Parish or Diocess he please without asking leave of the Bishop to remove 7. The individuating or distinguâ—shing of particular Churches by peculiar Circuits or proper spaces of ground is no further of Gods institution than it is the performance of the general commands of doing all in order to edification c. And as in prosperous times under godly peaceable Princes it is greatly convenient and desirable so in several cases of Division Church-corruption by Heresie or Tyranny Persecution c. it is inconvenient and it becomes a necessary duty to gather Churches in the same space of ground where only some other Pastor had a Church before The cases in which this is lawful and the cases in which Separation is unlawful having written largely in another paper I shall offer it to you when you desire it 8. It is not of absolute necessity that all the members of a particular Church do always or usually meet in one place though it be very convenient and desirable where it may be done for Persecution may prohibit it or want of a large capacious place or the great dâ—stance of some of the Inhabitants or the age or weakness of others and therefore in the ancient Churches though at first they usually were all assembled in one place yet after when they encreased the Canons required all the people to assemble with the Bishop but at certain chief Festivals in the year having Chappels or Oratories in the Villages where they mâ—t on other days And with us many Parishes of great extent have many Chappels of ease 9. But that the end of the Association be not only for distanâ— communion by Delegates or Letters or meer relation to one common Ruler as all the Empire had to the Emperour but for PERSONAL COMMVNION of Pastor and Flock so that they may at least per vices meet together or live within the reach of each others personal notice and converse and Communion in