Councils since Scripture times at least there have beeen no such things nor any thing like them unless the Roman Empire yea a piece of it be the whole world I know therfore no humane Vniversal Laws whether it be for forms of Government Liturgies Holy dayes or any thing else Sect. 14. But the principal matter that tends to end our dâ—fference is the right understanding of the Nature of that Government that is properly Ecclesiastical What is it that we must have Diocesans and Metropolitans to do besides what I have granted to Apostolical Bishops in the third Dispute Is it to Teach or Rule the people of the particular Churches They cannot do it at so great distance not knowing them nor conversing with them at least so well as they that are on the place as the ancient Bishops were Is it to Rule the Presbyters only Why then hath not every Church a Bishop to Rule the flock but a Presbyter that is forbidden to Rule them in all that which they call Iurisdiction themselves And how is it that Presbyters shall be Ruled by Diocesans and the Diocesans by Provincials not by force For the Pastors have no coercive power by violence or touching mens bodies or estates Is it by bare commanding Why what will that do on dissenters that disobey shall they depose the Bishops or Presbyters that disobey them But how Not by any force but command or exhortation or Excommunication They can do no more that I know of And what if they excommunicate a Pastor Let the case be supposed as now it is among us What if a Bishop with the few that adhere to him excommunicated all the Pastors in the County that are not satisfied of the Divine Right of Diocesans or of the lawfulness of all his imposed Ceremonies and Forms The people will take it to be their duty most generally where the Ministry hath been savingly effectual to own their Pastors notwithstanding such an Excommunication and the Pastors will take it to be their duty to go on with their work and the excommunication will do no good unless perhaps to make some Division and make both parties the scorn of the ungodly or procure the rabble to rail more bitterly at their Pastors and hate all their advice be a desireable good And as when the Pope excommunicated them some Bishops again excommunicated the Pope so some of these Pastors its like would excommunicate their Metropolitans And why a Bishop or at least a Synod of Bishops may not cast a wicked Metropolitan out of their communion is past my understanding to conceive Synods are for Communion of Churches and if we had a Monarchical National Church in conformity to the Common-wealth I know not how it would stand with the Law of God for the whole Nation to hold Communion with an Heretical Primate A Roman Synod deposed John the thirteenth and other Popes have been deposed by Councils I conclude therefore that what ever power men claim if the Magistate interpose not which is extrinsick to the Church-Government in question it will work but on mens Judgements call it Deposing Excommunicating or what you please and this power no man can take from you but by hindring you to speak You may now depose thus and excommunicate whom you please and when they have sleighted it or excommunicated you again you will have done Nay I think you do excommunicate us already For you withdraw from our Communion and draw many with you and so you exercise your power I mean it of that party that in the second Disputation I have to do with Sect 15. Much of my Opposition to the English Prelacy dependeth on the supposition that they took all the people and not only the Presbyters for the objects of their Government or for their charge And I find some of the younger sort that are sprung up since their fall do doubt of this But 1. all men in England that knew but twenty year ago what belonged to these matters are past doubt of it And I have no mind to dispute against them that contradict the common knowledge of the Nation as if they should doubt whether we had ever a King in England 2. Read over the Canons and the yearly Visitation Articles which the Church-wardens ordinarily sware to present by before they had ever read the Book or heard what was in it and then judge 3. Their arguing for the sole Iurisdiction of Bishops and that they only were properly Pastors and that Presbyters had not the Key of Discipline but of Doctrine is some evidence 4. It is known to the Nation that the Pastors of the Parish Churches had no power by their Laws or sufferance to cast out any the most enormous sinner or Heretick from the Church nor to bring them to open confession of their sin nor to Absolve the penitent but by Reading of their Sentence and publishing what they sent from their Courts and consequently could do nothing of all the means in order hereto For the means cannot be used where the end is known to be impossible All the obstinate scandalous persons and scorners at a holy life we must take as members of our Churches having no power to cast them out Indeed we had the same power as the Church-wardens to put our names to their presentments But a power of accusing to a Chancellors Court is not a Power of Governing especially when Piety under the name of Preciseness and Puritanism was so hated and persecuted that to have accused a man for meer prophaness would have been so far from obtaining the end as that it was like to have been the undoing of the accuser except he had been out of the suspicion of Preciseness as they called it himself But I need not dispute the with any but those that being bred iâ— better times though far from what we desire are unacquainted with the casâ— of their Predecessor Sect. 16. Object But do you not contradict your self in saying the Pastors were degraded or suspended as to the exercise of so great a part of their work and yet say here Pref. to the Reformed Pastor that the Power of Discipline was given them Answ. 1. In their Ordination the Bishops said to them Receive the Holy Ghost whose sins thou dost remit they are remitted whose sins thou dost retain they are detained And in the Book of Ordination it was asked of them Whether they would give their faithful diligence always to administer the Doctrine and Sacraments and the Discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded and as this Realm hath received the same according to the Commandements of God And the Rubrick of the Common Prayer Book enableth the Curate to admonish open and notorious evil livers by whom the Congregation is offended and those that have wronged their neighbors that they come not till they have openly declared that they have repented and amended But 1. This doth but serve to leave them unexcusable that acknowledged Discipline to
to one that is only the Overseer or Ruler of the People of one particular Church and not of any Church-rulers themselves That ruleth the flock but not any Shepherds 2. Those also may be called Bishops who only are Ioint-Rulers with others of a particular Church and Presidents among the Elders of that one Church for Vnity and order sake without assuming any Government over those Elders 3. A third sort there are that are Presidents in such an Eldership and withal do take a Negative voice in the Government so that nothing shall be done without them in such affairs 4 A fourth sort are the sole Pastors of such a particular Church that have many Ministers under them as their Curates who are properly to be Ruled by them alone so that the Pastor is the sole Ruler of that Church and the Curates do only teach and otherwise officiate in obedience to him Which is the case of divers Ministers of great Parishes that keep one Curate at their Parish Church and others at their Chappels Yet it s one thing to be the sole Ruler of the Parish and another to Rule the rest of the Elders 5. A fifth sort of Bishops are those that are the fixed Presidents of a Classis of the Pastors of many particular Churches who hold the title durante vitâ or quà m diu bene se gesserint though they are in use only while the Classis sitteth and have only a power of Moderating and ordering things as the foreman of a Jury or a double or casting voice as the Bayliff in Elections in most Corporations or as the President in some Colledges but no Negative voice which maketh a Power equal with all the rest 6. A sixth sort are the heads of such Classes having a Negative voice so that the rest can do nothing without them 7. A seventh sort are the Presidents of Provinces or Diocesses containing many Classes which have only a Moderating Power but no Negative voice 8. An eighth sort are the Bishops of particular Cities with all the Rural parts that are near it containing many Churches who assume the Power of Governing that Diocess to themselves alone without the Presbyters of the particular Churches either not using them at all in matter of Government or only consulting with them in Assemblies but giving them no determining votes 9. A ninth sort is a Diocesan Bishop of such a City who doth not take upon him the Rule of the people of the Diocess beyond his own Congregation but only of the Pastors supposing that the several Pastors or Presbyters have power to Rule the several Congregations but withall that they themselves are to be ruled by him 10. A tenth sort are such Bishops as assume the Government of these Diocesan Bishops which are commonâ—y called Archbishops to which also we adjoyn Metropolitans Primates and Patriarchs who assume the Power of Governing all below them as under the seventh rank I do also for brevity comprehend Metropolitans Primates and Patriarchs who assume no Governing Power over other Bishops but only the primam sedem and the moderating Power in Councils 11. The eleventh sort are unfixed general Pastors called Ambulatory or Itinerant that have a care of all the Churches and are no further tyed to any particulars then aâ— the necessary defect of their natural capacity seeing they cannot be in all places at once or else the dispatch of that work which they there meet with before they go further and some such occasion doth require and being excluded out of no part of the Church further then by consent for the common good they shall exclude themselves such I mean as the Apostles were 12. The twelfth and last sort is the Judas that goes under the name of St. Peters Successor and Christs Vicar General or the Vice-Christ who claimeth a power of Governing the whole universal Church as its Head having Infallible power of determiâ—ing Controversies and matters of Faith and whose Office must enter the definition of the Catholick Church and those that separate from him are no Catholikes or true Christians This is he that beareth the bag and maketh the twelfth sort 3. I Come now in the third place to tell you how many and which of these sorts of Episcopacy I think may be admitted for the Peace of the Church And 1. Of the first sort â—here is no Controversie among us few will deny the Ius Divinum of Presbyters as having the Rule of the people of a particular Church and the sole Rule supposing that there is no other Pastor over that Church but himself 2. Of the second sort of Parish Bishops who are meer Presidents over the whole Eldership of that particular Church and that continually or fixedly I think there is little question will be made by any but they also will easily be admitted 3. The third sort A Parochial Bishop having a Negative voice in a Parish Eldership I should be content to admit for the Peace of the Church but whether of it self it be desirable I do not dispute for if one Pastor even in a Parish may have a Negative voice among two or three Curates it will follow that the thing it self is not unlawful viz. for one Minister to have a Negative vote among many and so among an hundred if there be nothing else to forbid 4. The fourth sort for brevity Comprehendeth two sorts 1. Such Pastors of a single Congregation which having diverse Curates under them who are Presbyters do yet themselves take upon them the sole Government of the people and of their Curates I think this is intolerable and indeed a Contradiction or a Nulling of the Presbyters office for it is essential to the Presbyter of any Church to be a Guide or Ruler of that Church to put them out of all Rule therefore is to Null or suspend the exercise of their office which cannot statedly be done without destroying it But then 2. if we speak of the second sort that is such Pastors of particular Churches as have Curats who are Presbâ—ters and they govern their Curates but take the Curates as true Governors of the flock these as I dare not simply defend for if it be lawful for one Pastor to Rule two or three in a Parish then why not twenty or an hundred if nothing else forbid so I confess I should be ready to admit of them if it might attain the Churches peace for I see many godly Divines that are against Episcopacy yet practice this and will have no Curates in their Parish that will not be Ruled by them And there is a certain Obedience which Juniors and men of weaker parts do owe to their Seniors and men of far greater knowledge though the Office be the same And the Nature of the Government being not Compulsive and Coercive but only upon the voluntary whose judgements approve and their wills consent its considerable how far even a Ruler of others may voluntarily consent and so oblige himself to be Ruled
Churches must remain polluted and ungoverned through the unavoidable absence of those twelve or thirteen men The Apostles therefore did admonish Pastors to do their duties and when themselves were present had power to do the like and to censure Pastors or people that offended but they did not take on them the full Government of any Church nor keep a Negative vote in the Government Prop. 15. It seems utterly untrue that Christ did deliver the Keyes only to the twelve Apostles as such and so only to their Successors and not the seventy Disciples or any Presbyters For 1. The seventy also were General unfixed Officers and not like fixed Presbyters or Bishops and therefore having a larger Commission must have equal power 2. The Apostles were not single Bishops as now they are differenced from others but they were such as had more extensive Commissions then those now called Arch Bishops or Patriarchs If therefore the Keyes were given them as Apostles or General Officers then they were never given to Bishops For Bishops as fixed Bishops of this or that Diocess are not Successors of the Apostles who were Geneâ—al unfixed Officers 3. It is granted commonly by Papists and Protestants that Presbyters have the power of the Keyes though many of them think that they are limited to exercise them under the Bishops and by their Direction and Consent of which many School-men have wrote at large 4. The Key of Excommunication is but a Ministerial Authoritative Declaration that such or such a known Offendor is to be avoided and to charge the Church to avoid Communion with him and him to avoid or keep away from the Priviledges of the Church and this a meer Presbyter may do he may authoritatively Declare such a man to be one that is to be avoided and charge the Church and him to do accordingly The like I may say of Absolution if they belong to every authorized Pastor Preacher and Church guide as such then not to a Bishop only but to a Presbyter also And that these Keyes belong to more then the Apostles and their Successors is plain in that these are insufficient Naturally to use them to their Ends. An Apostle in Antioch cannot look to the censuring of all persons that are to be Censured at Athens Paris London c. so that the most of the work would be totally neglected if only they and their supposed Successors had the doing of it I conclude therefore that the Keyes belong not only to Apostles and their Successors in that General Office no nor only to Diocesan Bishops for then Presbyters could not so much as exercise them with the Bishops in Consistory which themselves of late allow Prop. 16. The Apostles were fallible in many matters of fact and consequently in the Decisions that depended thereupon as also in the Prudential determination of the time and season and other Cirumstances of known duties And thence it was that Paul and Barnabas so disagreed even to a parting where one of them was certainly in the wrong And hence Peter withdrew from the uncircumcision and misled Barnabas and others into the same dissimulation so far that he was to be blamed and withstood Gal. 2. Prop. 17. In such Cases of misleading an Apostle was not to be follownd no more is any Church-Governor now but it is lawful and needful to dissent and withstand them to the face and to blame them when they are to be blamed for the Churches safety as Paul did by Peter Galatians 2.1 Prop. 18. In this Case the Apostles that by Office were of equal Authority yet were unequal when the Reasons and Evidence of Gods mind which they produced was unequal so that a Presbyter or Bishop that produceth better Reasons is to be obeyed before another that produceth less Reason or that Erreth And the Bishop of another Church that produceth better Evidence of Gods mind is to be obeyed before the proper Bishop of that same Church that produceth weaker and worse Evidence Yea a private man that produceth Gods Word is to be obeyed before Bishops and Councils that go against it or without it in that case where the word bindeth us so that in all cases where Scripture is to determine he that bringeth the best Scripture proof is the chief Ruler that is ought chiefly to prevail Though in the determination of meer Circumstances of duty which Scripture determineth not but hath left to Church-Guides to determine pro re natâ it may be otherwise so that the Apostles power in determining matters of faith was not as Church-Governors but as men that could produce the surest Evidence Prop. 19. It is not easie to manifest whether every Presbyter in prima instantia be not an Officer to the Church Universal before he be affixed to a particular Church and whether he may not go up and down over the world to exercise that office where ever he hath admittance And if so what then could an Apostle have done by vertue of his meer office without the advantage of his extraordinary abilities and priviledges which the Presbyter may not do May an Apostle charge the people where he comes to avoid this or that seducer or heretick so may any Preacher that shall come among them and that by authority May an Apostle Excommunicate the very Pastor of the place and deprive him why what is that but to perswade the people and Authoritatively require them to avoid and withdraw from such a Pastor if the Cause be manifest And so may any Pastor or Preacher that comes among them For if as Cyprian saith it chiefly belong to the people even of themselves to reject and withdraw from such a Pastor then a Preacher may by Authority perswade and require them to do their own duty Yet I shall acknowledge that though both may do the same duty and both by Authority yet possibly not both by equal Authority but an Apostle Majore authoritate and so may lay a stronger obligation on men to the same duty but the rest I determine not but leave to enquiry Prop. 20. In making Laws or Canons to bind the Church which are now laid down in Scripture the Apostles acted as Apostles that is as men extraordinarily Commissioned illuminated and enabled infallibly to deliver Gods will to the world And therefore herein they have no Successors In Conclusion therefore seeing that matters of meer Order and Decency depending on Circumstances sometime rationally mutable sometime yearly daily hourly mutable are not to be determined Vniversally alike to all the Church nor to all a Nation nor by those that are at too great a distance but by the present Pastor who is to manage the work and being intrusted therewith is the fittest Judge of such variable Circumstances and seeing for standing Ordinances that equally belong to all ages and places Gods word is perfect and sufficient without the Bishops Canons and seeing that Scripture is a perfect Law of God and Rule of Christian faith and seeing that
seek to reclaim the wandring strengthen the weak comfort the distressed openly rebuke the open obstinate offendors and if they repent not to require the Church to avoid their Communion and to take cogniscance of their cause before they are cut off as also to Absolve the penitent yea to visit the sick who are to send for the Elders of the Church and to pray with and for them c. yea and to go before them in the worship of God These are the acts of Church Government that Christ hath appointed and which each faithful Shepherd must use and not Excommunication and other Censures and Absolution alone 2. But if they could prove that Church Government containeth only Censures and Absolution yet we shall easily prove it Impossible for the late English Episcopacy to do that For 3. It is known to our sorrow that in most Parishes there are many persons and in some greater Parishes very many that have lived common open swearers or drunkards and some whoremongers common scorners of a godly life and in many more of those offences for which Scripture and the ancient Canons of the Church do excommunicate men and we are commanded with such no not to eat And it s too well known what numbers of Hereticks and Seducers there are that would draw men from the faith whom the Church-Governours must after the first and second admonition reject 4. And then it s known what a deal of work is Necessary with any one of these in hearing accusations examining Witnesses hearing the defendants searching into the whole cause admonishing waiting re-admonishing c. 5. And then it s known of how great Necessity and moment all these are to the honour of the Gospel the souls of the offendors to the Church to the weak to them without c. So that if it be neglected or unfaithfully mannaged much mischief will ensue Thus in part we see what the Government is Next let us see what the English Episcopacy is And 1. For the extent of it a Diocess contained many score or hundred Parishes and so many thousands of such souls to be thus Governed Perhaps some Diocesses may have five hundred thousand souls and it may be London Diocess nearer a million And how many thousand of these may fall under some of the forementioned acts of Government by our sad experience we may conjecture 2. Moreover the Bishop resideth if not at London as many of them did yet in his own dwelling many miles perhaps twenty or thirty from a great part of his Diocess so that most certainly he doth not so much as know by face name or report the hundreth perhaps the thousandth or perhaps the second or third thousandth person in his Diocess Is it Possible then for him to watch over them or to understand the quality of the person and fact In Church Cases the quality of the person is of so much moment that without some knowledge of it the bare knowledge of the fact sometimes will not serve 3. And then it is known that the English Episcopacy denyeth to the Presbyters all power of Excommunication and Absolution uâ—less to pronounce it as from the Bishop when he hath past it And they deny him also all power so much as of calling a sinner to open Repentance which they called Imposing penance and also they denied all power of denying the Lords Supper to any without the Bishops censure except in a sâ—dden case and then they must prosecute it after at the Bishops Court and there render the Reason of that suspension So that the trouble danger labour time would be so great that would be spent in it that scarce one Minister of a hundred did venture on it once in seven and seven years except only to deny the Sacrament to a man that would not kneel and that they might do easily and safely 4. And then Consider further that if the Minister should be one of an hundred and so diligent as to accuse and prosecute all the open scandalous offendors of his Parish before the Bishops Court that so he might procure that act of Government from them which he may not perform himself it would take up all his time and perhaps all would not serve for half the work considering how far he must ride how frequently he must attend c. And then all the rest or most of the Pastoral work must be neglected to the danger of the whole Congregation 5. It is a great penalty to an innocent man to travail so far to the trial of his â—ause But the special thing that I note is this that it is Naturally Impossible for the Bishop to hear try and judge all these causes yea or the fifth or hundredth of them or in some places one of five hundred Can one man hear so many hundred as in a day must be before him if this discipline be faithfully executed By that time that he hath heard two or three Causes and examined Witnesses and fully debated all the rest can have no hearing and thus unavoidably the work must be undone It is as if you set a Schoolmaster to teach ten or twenty thousand Schollars Must they not be needs untaught Or as if you set one Shepherd to look to two or three hundred several flocks of Sheep that are every one of them three or four miles asunder and some of them fourty miles from some of the rest Is it any wonder thâ—n if many of them be lost 6. But what need we further witness then the sad experience of the Church of late Are we not sure that discipline lay unexercised and our Congregations defiled and Gods Laws and the old Canons were dead letters while the Bishops keep up the lame and empty name of Governours How many drunkards swearers whoremongers raylers Extortioners scorners at a godly life did swarm in almost every Town and Parish and they never heard of discipline except it were one Adulterer or fornicator once in seven years within twenty miles compass where I was acquainted that stood in a white sheet in the Church We know that there was no such Matter as Church Government exercised to any purpose but all left undone unless it were to undoe a poor Disciplinarian as they therefore scornfully called them that blamed them for neglect of Discipline For my part the Lord my Judge knows that I desire to make the matter rather better then it was then worse then it was and I solemnly profess that for the Peace of the Church I should submit to almost any body that would but do the work that is to be done Here is striving between the Episcopal Presbyterian and Independent who it is that shall Govern I would make no great stirr against any of them all that would but do it effectually Let it be done and it s not so much matter by whom it is done as it is to have it lie undone But I can never be for that party that neither did the work when
care not so we come near an agreement about the proportion of Members that the definition be not overthrown and the ends of it made impossible by the distance number and unacquaintedness of the members that cannot have any Church communion immediately one with another If there be no communion how is it a Church Nay or if there be no such communion as consists in mutual assistance and conjunction in Worship and holding familiarity also in our conversation which the excommunicated are excluded from And if a communion there be it is either Immediate by the members themselves Assembled or else but Mediately by their Officers or Delegates If it be only by the latter Mediately then it is not the Ecclesia prima but orta It is an association of several Political Churches For that is the difference between the communion of a single particular Church and many combined Churches that as the first is a combination of persons and not of Churches so the communion is held among the Members in common whereas the other being a combination of Churches the communion is maintained orderly by Officers and Delegates joyning in Synods and sent from the Congregations If therefore it be an Immediate ordinary communion of members in Ecclesiastical affairs viz. Worship and Discipline that is the Particular Church that I intend call it what you will else and whether there may be any private meetings in it besides the main body or not as possibly through some accidents there may be and yet at Sacrament and on the most solemne occasions the same persons that were at Chappels or less meetings may be with the chief Assembly But I shall proceed in the proof of this by the next Argument which will serve for this and the main together Argum. 11. THat sort of Church Government may most safely be now practised which was used in the Scripture times and that 's less safe which was not then used But the Government of many Elders and particular Churches by one Bishop fixed and taking that as his proper Diocess such as the English Bishops were was not used in Scripture times Therefore it is not so safe to use it or restore it now The Major is proved hence 1. In that the Primitive Church which was in Scripture times was of unquestionable Divine Institution and so most pure And it is certainly lawful to practice that Church-Government which alone was practised by all the Church in the Scripture times of the New Testament 2. Because we have no certain Law or Direction but Scripture for the frame of Government as jure Divino Scripture is Gods sufficient and perfect Law If therefore there be no mention of the Practice of any such Episcopacy in Scripture no nor any precept for the practice of it afterwards then cannot we receive it as of Divine Institution The Objections shall be answered when we have proved the Minor And for the Minor I shall at this time argue from the Concessions of the most Learned and Reverend man that at this time hath deeply engaged himself in defence of Episcopacy who doth grant us all these things following 1. That in Scripture times they were the same persons and of the same office that were called Bishops and Presbyters 2. That all the Presbyters mentioned in Scripture times or then instituted as far as we can know had a Power of Ordination 3. And also a Power of Ruling the Church Excommunicating and Absolving 4. That there was not then in being any Presbyter such as the Bishops would have in these times who was under the Bishop of a particular Church or Diocess His words are these And although this title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders have been also extended to a second Order in the Church and is now only in use for them under the Name of Presbyters yet in the Scripture times it belonged principally if not alone to Bishops there being no Evidence that any of that second order were then instituted though soon after before the writing of Ignatius Epistles there were such instituted in all Churches 5. It is yielded also by him that it is the office of these Presbyters or Bishops to Teach frequently and diligently to reduce Hereticks to reprove rebuke Censure and absolve to visit all the sick and pray with them c. And therefore it must needs follow that their Diocess must be no larger then that they may faithfully perform all this to the Members of it And if there be but one Bishop to do it I am most certain then by experience that his Diocess must be no bigger then this Parish nor perhaps half so big 6. And it must needs follow that in Scripture times a Particular Church consisted not of seveâ—al Churches associated nor of several Congregations ordinarily meeting in several places for Christian communion in the solemn Worship of God but only of the Christians of one such Congregation with a single Pastor though in that we dissent and suppose there weâ—e more Pastors then one usually or often That this must be granted with the rest is apparent 1. The Reverend Author saith as Bishop Downam before cited That when the Gospel was first preached by the Apostles and but few Converted they ordained in every City and region no more but a Bishop and one or more Deacons to attend him there being at the present so smal store out of which to take more and so small need of ordaining more that this Bishop is constituted more for the sake of those which should after believe then of those which did already 2. And it s proved thus If there were in Scripture times any more ordinary Worshiping Assemblies on the Lords dayes then one under one Bishop then either they did Preach Pray Praise God and administer the Lords Supper in those Assemblies or they did not If not then 1. They were no such Worshipping Assemblies as we speak of 2. And they should sin against Christ who required it 3. And differ from his Churches which ordinarily used it But if they did thus then either they had some Pastor Presbyter or Bishop to perform these holy actions between God and the people or not If not then they suppose that Lay-men might do all this Ministerial work in Word Sacraments Prayer and Praise in the name of the Assembly c. And if so what then is proper to the Ministry then farewell Bishops and Presbyters too If not theâ—â—â—her the Bishop must be in two Assemblies at once performing the Holy Worship of God in their communion but that 's impossible or else he must have some assisting Presbyters to do it But that 's denyed Therefore it must needs follow that the Church order constitution and practised Government which was in Scripture times was this that a single Worshipping Congregation was that particular Church which had a Presbyter or Bishop one or more which watched over and ruled that only Congregation as his Diocess or proper charge having no Government
no necessiâ—y and the Non-necessity is but preâ—ended First it is preâ—eâ—â—ed that there were so few fit men that there was a Necessity of forbâ—arance But this is not so For 1. The Church had larger gifts of the Spirit then then now and therefore proportionable to the flocks they might have had competent men then as well as now 2. They had men enough to make Deacons of even sâ—ven in a 〈◊〉 And who will believe then that they could find none to make such Elders of Was not Stephen or Philip sufficiently qualified to have been a subject Elder 3. They had many that prophesied and interpreted and spake with tongues in one Assembly as appears 1 Cor. 14. And therefore its manâ—fâ—st that there were enough to have made Ruled Elders At least sure the Church at Ierusalem where there were so many thousands would have afforded them one such if it had been requisite But secondly its pretended not to have been Necessary because of the fewness of the people But I answer 1. The same persons say that in Ignatius his time all Churches had such Presbyters And its manifest that many Churches in the Scripture times were more populous or large then many or most beside them were in Ignatius time 2. Did the numerous Church at Ierusalem ordinarily meet on the Lords dayes for holy communion or not If they did then it was but a Church of one Congregation which is by most denyed If not then the several Assemblies must have several Presbyters for several Bishops they will not hear of Doubtless they did not celebrate the holy communion of the Church and Ordinances of God by meer Lay-men alone 3. What man that knows the burden of Pastoral Oversight can say that such Churches of thousands as Ierusalem Rome Alexandria c. had need of no more than one man to Teach them and do all the Pastoral work and so that assisting Ruled Presbyters were then needless If they were needless to such numerous Churches then let us even take them for needless still and set up no new orders which were not seen in Scripture times Reas. 8. The Apostles left it not to the Beshops whom they established to make new Church-offices and orders quoad speciem but only to ordain men to succeed others in the offices and orders that themselves had by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost appointed or else Christ before them A Bishop might make a Bishop or a Deacon perhaps because these were quoad speciem made before and they were but to put others into the places before appointed But if there were no such creature in Scripture times as a subject Presbyter that had no power of Ordination and Jurisdiction then if the Bishops afterward should make such they must make a new office as well as a new officer So that either this new Presbyter is of the institution of Christ by his Apostles or of Episcopal humane institution If the former and yet not institututed in Scripture times then Scripture is not the sufficient rule and discoverer of Divine Institutions and Church Ordinances and if we once forsake that Rule we know not where to fix but must wander in that Romane uncertainty If the latter then we must expect some better proof then hitherto we have seen of the Episcopall or any humane power to make new Offices in the Church of Christ and that of universal and standing necessity Till then we shall think they ought to have made but such Presbyters as themselves Reason 9. If there be not so much as the name of a Ruled Presbyter without power of Ordination or Iurisdiction in all the Scripture much less then is there any description of his Office or any Directions for his ordination or the qualifications prerequisit in him and the performance of his office when he is in it And if there be no such Directory concerning Presbyters then was it not the Apostles intent that ever any such should be ordained The reason of the consequence is 1. Because the Scripture was written not only for that age then in being but for the Church of all ages to the end of the world And therefore it must be a sufficient directory for all The second Epistle to Timothy was written but a little before Pauls death Surely if the Churches in Ignatius daies were all in need of Presbyters under Bishops Paul might well have seen some need in his time or have foreseen the need that was so neer and so have given directions for that office 2. And the rather is this consequence firm because Paul in his Epistles to Timothy and Titus doth give such full and punctual Directions concerning the other Church-officers not only the Bishops but also the Deacons describing their prerequisite qualifications their office and directing for their Ordination and conversation Yea he condescendeth to give such large Directions concerning Widows themselves that were serviceable to the Church Now is it probable that a perfect Directory written for the Church to the worlds End largely describing the qualifications and office of Deacons which is the inferiour would not give one word of direction concerning subject Presbyters without power of Ordination or Rule if any such had been then intended for the â—hurch No nor once so much as name them I dare not accuse Pauls Epistles written to that very purpose and the whole Scripture so much of insufficiency as to think they wholly omit a necessary office and so exactly mention the inferiour and commonly less necessary as they do Reason 10. The new Episcopal Divines do yield that all the texts in Timothy Titus and the rest of the New Testament that mentitn Gospel Bishops or Presbyters do mean only such as have power of Ordination and Iurisdiction without the concurrence of any superiour Bishop The common Inerpretation of the Fathers and the old Episcopal Divines of all ages of most or many of those texts is that they speak of the office of such as now are called Presbyters Lay both together and if one of them be not mistaken they afford us this conclusion that the Presbyters that now are have by these texts of Scripture the power of Ordination and Iurisdiction without the concurrence of others And if so then was it never the Apostles intent to leave it to the Bishops to ordain a sort of Presbyters of another order that should have no such power of Ordination or Jurisdiction without the Bishops Negative Reason 11. We find in Church History that it was first in some few great Cities especially Rome and Alexandria that a Bishop ruled many settled worshipping Congregations with their Presbyters when no such thing at that time can be proved by other Churches therefore we may well conceive that it was no Ordinance of the Apostles but was occasioned afterwards by the multiplying of Christians in the same compass of ground where the old Church did inhabite and the adjacent parts together with the humane frailty of the
undertake more fully to wipe off this reproach for the learned adversaries are tall Cedars in knowledge in comparison of many of us and if men of parts do not grapple with them herein they will easily carry the vote in many mens judgements for they judge that the greater Schollars by far certainly have the better in the contest Sir We beseech you that you would improve your acquaintance in Antiquity for our help in this case Not that we would engage you in wrangling with particular men by name who will not want words but however you would evidence it that our Ordination by Presbyters is not void and of no effect I have this reason ready to give for this request for besides what I had formerly heard I was lately with some of those not of the meanest influence who urged Episcopacy as of absolute necessity affirming that this order the Church of God ever observed and that it was doubtless of Apostolical institution being a thing of Catholick tradition and that 's the best standard to intepret Scripture by What then are we arrived at that have forsaken the whole Church herein Though I am little versed in the Ancients yet I tell them we acknowledge that soon after the Apostles times the name Bishop came up as distinct fâ—om the Presbyters but then I call for their proof that the Primitive Bishops had the power of jurisdiction over Presbyters or that to him only ordination was appropriated I tell them also that we have certain evidence that in some Churches these Bishops were made by Presbyters so was the custom in Alexandria and when did ever the Church judge them to be no Bishops or Ministers And also of Tertullians Praesident probati quique Seniores and of Cyprians Salvo inter Collegas pacis concordiae vinculo and that doubtless if Cyprian be to be believed the Church was then ruled by the joint consent of its Pastors of whom one was indeed the President or Moderator who yet called himself compresbyter and the Presbyters sâ—atres not filios as it was of lâ—te This answer I have had from some of them that the Church in those times was much under the cloâ—d being persecuted and had not that liberty to settle Diocesan Episcopacy in that Glory which the Apostolical institution aimed at and that the Church was then what it could be and not what it would be Do you judge of its weight For my part I am most stumbled at the reading of Ignatius whom Dr. H. so strenuously dâ—fends and cannot tell how to evade that Testimony in the behalf of Episcopacy if it be indeed the testimony of the true Ignatius But methinks his phrase is much unlike either that of Clemens or of Cyprian in this case It s great pity that Dr. Bloudel wants his eyes and so we are hindred of enjoying of more of his labours in this point His Notion of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a very pretty on and it were well if we had fuller evidence added to that which he hath endeavoured after in his Preface to his Apology for Hierom. Or if your judgement about the power of every single Pastor were fully improved it would conduce much to the clearing of these controversies I could methinks be glad of the practice of those proposals which Bishop Usher hath made in a late printed sheet But these angry Brethren who now oppose us are of a higher strain But I run out too far and forget whom I am writing to Truly I am deeply sensible what mischief those seeds which are as yet but thin-sown as I may say may grow up to in time I know not how it is with yoâ— but with us I fear 〈◊〉 for one at least would be easiâ—y drawn to â—uch an opinion of us if the temptation were but somewhat stronger multitudes observing how câ—vil transactions have 〈◊〉 in a round begin also to think we shall also arive at our old Church-customs again now â—f thâ—se Episcopal 〈◊〉 judgement should but be dispersed moâ—e abroad how easily would it make these people think that we have dâ—luded them all this whiâ—â— and so will not regard us Alas that a sad thought is it if I should study and preach and pray for mens souls and yet be reâ—ected as one that had no chaâ—ge of them as a Mâ—nister laid on me for God We thank you for what you said in your Christian Concord and 〈◊〉 you would enlarge further on this Subject as you see convenient That the striplings in the Ministry may be furnished with arguments against our 〈…〉 such able hands as yours are I have doâ—e only I shall desire your pardon for my interrupting you in your other business and if I shall hereafter crave your assistance and direction iâ— some cases I pray you excuse me if uncivil and vouchsafe to let me hear from you for I am about to settle where the charge is great The Lord continue you 〈◊〉 us that you may be further an instrument of good I rest Ian. 8. 1657. Your Affectionate friend and weak Brother M. E. Assert Those who nullifie our present Ministry and Churches which have not the Prelatical Ordination and teach the people to do the like do incur the guilt of grievous sin CHAP. I. Sect. 1. FOR the making good this Assertion 1. I shall prove that they groundlesly deny our Ministry and Churches and 2. I shall shew thâ— greatness of their sin In preparation to the first I must 1. Take some notice of the true Nature of the Ministerial function and 2. Of the Nature and Reasons of Ordination Sect. 2. We are agreed ore tenus at least that the Power and Honour of the Ministry is for the Work and the Work for the Ends which are the revelation of the Gospel the application or conveyance of the benefits to men the right worshiping of God and right Governing of his Church to the saving of our selves and our people and the Glorifying and Pleasing God Sect. 3. So that A Minister of the Gospel is an Officer of Iesus Christ set apart or separated to preach the Gospel and thereby to convert men to Christianity and by Baptism to receive Disciples into his Church to congregate Disciples and to be the Teachers Overseers and Governours of the particular Churches and to go before them in publick worship and administer to them the special Ordinances of Christ according to the word of God that in the Communion of Saints the members may be edified preserved and be fruitful and obedient to Christ and the Societies well ordered beautified and strengthened and both Ministers and People saved and the Sanctifier Redeemer and the Father Glorified and Pleased in his People now and for ever Sect. 4. In this Definition of a Minister 1. It is supposed that he be competently qualified for these works For if the Matter be not so far Disposed as to be capable of the Form it will not be informed thereby There are some Qualifications necessary
in other passages of Scripture had the power of Ordination and that it belonged not only to the Apostles and Evangelists and such as they call Archbishops but that the fixed Bishops of particular Churches had it Sect. 3. The Minor I prove thus that our Ordination is by Scripture Bishops The Scripture Bishops were the Pastors of Particular Churches having no Presbyters subject to them Most of our Ordainers are such Pastors therefore most of our Ordainers are Scripture Bishops Sect 4. The Major is asserted at large by the foresaid 〈◊〉 Dr. H. H. Annot. in Art 11. b. p. 407. Where he shews 〈◊〉 though this title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders have been also 〈◊〉 second Order in the Church is now only in use for them under 〈◊〉 name of Presbyters yet in the Scripture times it belonged princâ—pally if not only to Bishops there being no evidence that any of 〈◊〉 second order were then instituted So that the Scripture Bishops were the Pastors of single Churches having no Presbyters under them for there were no inferiour Presbyters that had not the Power of Ordination instituted in those times This therefore may be taken as a granted truth Sect. 5. And that our Ordainers are such is commonly known 1. They are Pastors it is but few of the Prelates that denyed this They are Rectors of the People and have the Pastoral charge of souls 2. They are Pastors of Particular Churches 3. They have for the most part at least no subject or inferiour Presbyters under them therefore they are Scripture Bishops Sect. 6. Object The difference lyeth in another point The Scripture Bishops had the Power of Ordination Your Pastors have not the Power of Ordination thereefore they are not the same Answ. That is the thing in Question I am proving that they have the power of Ordination thus In Scripture times all single Pastors of single Churches had the Power of Ordination there being no other instituted But our Ordainers are the single Pastors of single Churches and of Christs institution therefore they have the Power of Ordination If the Pastors now are denyed to be such as were instituted in Scripture times 1. Let them shew who did institute them and by what authority 2. The sole Pastors of particular Churches were instituâ—ed in Scripture times But such are ours in question therefore c. Sect. 7. There is no sort of Pastors lawfull in the Church but what were instituted in Scripture times But the sort of Pastors now in question are lawfull in the Church therefore they were instituted in Scripture times The Minor will be granted us of all those that were Ordained by Prelates They would not Ordain men to an office which they thought unlawful The Major is proved thus No sort of Pastors are lawful in the Church but such of whom we may have sufficient evidence that they were instituted by Christ or his Apostles But we can have sufficient evidence of none but such as were instituted in Scripture times that they were instituted by Christ or his Apostles therefore no other sort is lawfull The Major is proved in that none but Christ and such as he committed it to have power to institute new Holy Offices for Worship in the Church But Christ hath committed this to none but Apostles if to them therefore c. Whether Apostles themselves did make any such new Office I will not now dispute but if they did 1. It was by that special Authority which no man since the planting of the Churches by them can lay claim to or prove that they have 2. And it was by that extraordinary guidance and inspiration of the Holy Ghost which none can manifest to have been since that time communicated Sect. 8. Moreover if there were a Power of instituting new Offices in the Church since Scripture times it was either in a Pope in Councils or in single Pastors But it was in none of these not in a Pope for there was no such Creature of long time after much less with this authority Not in a Council For 1. None such was used 2. None such is proved 3. Else they should have it still Not in every Bishop as will be easily granted Sect. 9. If such a Power of instituting New Church-Offices were after Scripture times in the Church then it is ceased since or continueth still Not ceased since For 1. The Powers or officers then lâ—â—t continue still therefore their authority continueth still 2. There is no proof that any such temporary power was given to any since Scripture times Nor doth any such continue still Otherwise men might still make us more New Offices and so we should not know when we have done nor should we need to look into Scripture for Christs will but to the will of men Sect. 10. Argument 2. No men since Scripture times had power to change the Institutions of Christ and the Apostles by taking down the sort of Pastors by them established and setting up another sort in their stead But if there be lawful Pastors of particular Churches that have not power of Ordination then men had power to make such a change For the sort of Pastors then instituted were such as had but one Church and were themselves personally to guide that Church in actual Worship and had the power of Ordination and there was no subject Presbyters nor no single Pastors that had not the Power of Ordination All single Pastors of particular Churches had that Poâ—er then But all or almost all such single Pastors of particular Churches are by the Dissenters supposed to be without that Power now Therefore it is by them supposed that Christs form of Church Government and sort of Officers are changed and consequently that men had power to change them for they suppose it lawfully done Sect. 11. Argument 3. The Pastors of City Churches may ordain especially the sole or chief Pastors Many of our present Ordainers are the Pastors of City Churches and the sole or chief Pastors in some Places therefore they may Ordain The Major is proved from the doctrine of the Dissenters which is that every City Church should have a Bâ—shop and that every Bishop is the chief and sometimes only Pastor of a City Church If they say that yet every Pastor though the sole Pastor of a City Church is not a Bishop I answer that then they will infer the same power of changing Scripture Institutions which I mentioned and disproved before Let them prove such a Power if they can Sect. 12. The Minor is undenyable and seen de facto that many of our Ordainers are such Pastors of City Churches and that of two sorts some of such Cities as have both the Name and Nature of Cities And some of such Cities as have truly the nature but in our English custom of speech have not the name such as are all Corporations in the several Market Towns of England Sect. 13. Argument 4. Those Pastors that have Presbyters
If the Ordination of Papist Bishops be valid much more is the Ordination of English Preâ—byters so but the Antecedent is true in the judgement of those against whom we dispute therefore the Consequent must be granted by them on that supposition Sect. 33. The reason of the Consequence is because the Popish Bishops are more unlike to the Scripture Bishops and more uâ—capable of ordaining then the Presbyters of the Reformed Churches are For 1. The Papist Prelates profess to receive their Power from a Vice-christ at least quoad exercitium media conserendi which Protestant Presbyters do not 2. The Papist Bishops profess themselves Pastors of a new Catholick Church which is headed by the Papacy as an essential part and which Christ will not own as such But so do not the Protestant Presbyters 3. The Papist Prelates Ordain men to the false Office of turning Bread into the Body of Christ by the way of Transubstantiation in their Consecration and offering it as a Sacrifice for the quick and dead and delivering this as the very Body of Christ and not Bread to the Communicants and perswading them that it is such and holding and carrying it to be Worshipped by them with Divine Worship and the like But the Protestant Presbyters are Ordained and do Ordain others to that true Office of a Presbyter or Pastor or Bishop which Christ hath instituted 4. The Papist Prelates have abundance of false doctrines and practices in Worship which the Protestant Presbyters have not 5. And they have no more to shew for a Power of Ordination then our Presbyters have so that these with many the like considerations will prove that if the Papists Ordination be Valid that of the Protestant Churches by Presbyters is so much more And doubtless they that plead for a succession from the Papist Prelates do hold their Ordination Valid Sect. 34. Argument 13. If the Protestant Churches that have no Prelates be true Churches in a Political sense and the Ordinances among them valid and to be owned and received then are the Pastors of those Churches true Pastors though they have no Ordination but by Presbyters But the Antecedent is true therefore so is the Consequent The reason of the Consequence is clear and granted by them that we have now to do with Because the Pastors are essential to the Church as Political and the said Ordinances of Publike worship as the Lords Supper and Government cannot be allowable without them nor such as the people should submit to or receive This therefore we may take as granted Sect. 35. And for the Minor that the Protestant Churches are true Churches that have no Prelates 1. There are so few of them that have Prelates that he that will unchurch all the rest I suppose when he playes his game above board would take it for an injury to be accounted a Protestant himself 2. If the Churches of the West called Papists and the Churches of Africa Asia and America be true Churches of Christ and have true administrations then much more confidently may we affirm that the Protestants are so too But the Antecedent is maintained by those that we now dispute against excepting the Papists who yet maintain it as of their own Church therefore c. Sect. 36. The reason of the Consequence is because the Papists Greeks Armenians Georgians Syrians Aegyptians Abasines c. have much more to be said against them then we have And if the lesser or supposed imperfection of the Protestant Churches do unchurch them for wanting Prelates then the many great and real defects of the other Churches will unchurch them much more Especially this holds as to the Church of Rome which yet is taken by the Dissenters to be a true Church and by some of them at least denyed to be the seat of Antichrist Their Vicechrist and usurping head and all the Ministry that hold by him afford us other kind of Arguments against their Church then want of Prelates can afford them or others against our Churches Sect 37. And if any will deny the Antecedent so far as to unchurch all the Churches in the world that are more defective then the Protestants he will blot out of his Creed the Article of the Catholick Church and being a Seeker or next one to day is like to be an Infidel ere long as I shall further shew when I speak of the sinfulness of such Sect. 38. Argument 14. If the Administrations of a Usurping Presbyter to an innocent people are Valid and not Nullities then the Ordination of an Usurping Ordainer to an Innocent expectant is Valid and consequently the Ordination of Presbyters is Valid if they were Usurpers as they are unjustly said to be But the administrations of usurping Presbyters to an Innocent people are Valid therefore c. Sect. 39. The Antecedent is granted by Bellarmine himself in the place before cited who saith that no more is required to oblige the people to obey him and submit then that he be reputed a Pastor And all must say so 1. That will not rob the Innocent of the Benefit of Gods Ordinances because of an usurpers fault 2. And that will not leave the people almost commonly in an utter uncertainty whom they should take for a Pastor and obey and when the Ordinances are Valid for their good Sect. 40. The Consequence is made good by the Parity of Reason that is in the two cases If usurpation cause not a Nullity invalidity or unprofitableness in one case to the innocent receiver no nor make it his sin to receive no more will it in the other For there is no Reason for any such difference Nay iâ— it be a duty to submit to an unknown usurper in several cases in receiving the Sacraments hearing praying c. so is it a duty in such cases to receive Ordination Sect. 41. Object But the usurping Presbyter doth nothing but what belongeth to the office of a Presbyter but the usurping Ordainer doth that which belongs not to the office of a Presbyter and therefore his action is a Nullity as being extra proprium forum Sect. 42. Answ. 1. It is proved before to belong to the office of a Presbyter to Ordain 2. But suppose it were not yet the objection is vain because it is the office of a Bishop that the Ordaining Presbyter doth pretend to and which you imagine that he doth usurp They say that subject Presbyters quoad ordinem vel Officium are no creatures of Gods appointment and therefore they renounce that Office and claim that office which you call Episcopacy and hath the Power of Ordination The quarrel between us is not about meer Bishops such as Dr. H. H. describeth as aforesaid These are not denyed but the Parish Ministers profess themselves such Bishops But it is about the other sort of Presbyters subject to Bishops that the quarrel is For they say that the Church should have none such and Dr. H. H. saith there is no Evidence that any such
were instituted in Scripture times Now as a pretended Presbyters administrations are Valid to the innocent receiver of the Sacrament so a pretended Bishops administration in Ordination is as Valid to the innocent caeteris paribus Sect. 43. Argument 15. They that have the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven have the power of Ordination But Parochiall Pastors called Presbyters have the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven therefore they have the power of Ordination Sect. 44. The Minor is granted commonly by Papists and Protestants as to some of the Keyes but it is by many denyed as to other They say that every Pastor hath the Key of doctrine and of Order but not the Key of Jurisdiction But 1. Christ gave the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven together and never divided them Therefore they are not to be divided He did not give one Key to one and another to another but all to the same men And what God hath joyned together let no man put asunder 2. The Apostles in delivering these Keyes to others are never found to have separated them For Subject Presbyters were not instituted in Scripture-times Therefore all that were then Ordained Presbyters had all the Keyes together and so that of Iurisdiction as it is called with the rest 3. That Presbyters had the Key of Order will prove that they may Ordain as is aforesaid 4. But that English Presbyters had the Key of Iurisdiction is proved 1. In that they were with the Bishops to Ordain by Imposition of hands 2. In that they were by the Book of Ordination charged to administer Discipline though this was disused and the Prelates frustrated their power Sect. 45. I shall recite the words of Reverend Vsher for the proof of this Reduction of Episcopacy c. By Order of the Church of England all Presbyters are charged in the Book of Ordination to administer the Doctrine of Sacraments and the Discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded and as this Realm hath received the same and that they might the better understand what the Lord hath commanded therein the exhortation of St. Paul to the Elders of the Church of Ephesus is appointed to to be read unto them at the time of their Ordination Take heed unto your selves and to all the flock among whom the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers to Rule the Congregation of God which he hath purchased with his blood Of the many Elders who thus in common ruled the Church of Ephesus there was one President whom our Saviour in his Epistle unto this Church in a peculiar manner stileth the Angel of the Church of Ephesus And Ignatius in another Epistle written about twelve years after unto the same Church calleth the Bishop thereof Betwixt the Bishop and the Presbyterie of that Church what an harmonious consent there was in thâ— ordering of the Church Government the same Ignaâ—iâ—â— doth fully there declare by the Presbyterie with St Paul understanding the Community of the rest of the Presbyters or Elders who then had a hand not only in the delivery of the Dâ—ctrine and Sacraments but also in the Administration of the Discipline of Christ For further proof of which we have that known Testimony of Tertullian in his General Apology for Christians â—n the Church are used exhortations chastisements and divine censure for judgement is given with great advice as among those who are certain they are in the sight of God and it is the chiefest foreshewing of the Iudgement which is to come if any man have so offended that he be banished from the Community of Prayer and of the Assembly and of all holy fellowship The Presidents that bear rule therein are certain approved Elders who have obtained this honour not by Reward but by good report who were no other as he himself intimates elsewhere but those from whose hands they used to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist For with the Bishop who was the chief President and therefore stiled by the same Tertullian in another place summus Sacerdos for distinction sake the rest of the dispensers of the Word and Sacraments joyned in the common Government of the Church and therefore where in matters of Ecclesiastical judicature Cornelius Bishop of Rome used the recieved form of gathering together the Presbyterie of what persons that did consist Cyprian sufficiently declareth when he wisheth him to read his Letters to the flourishing Clergy which there did preside or rule with him The presence of the Clergy being thought so requisite in matters of Episcopal audience that in the fourth Council of Carthage it was concluded That the Bishop might hear no mans cause without the presence of the Clergy and that otherwise the Bishops sentence should be void unless it were confirmed by the presence of the Clergy which we find also to be inserted into the Canons of Egbert who was Archbishop of York in the Saxon times and afterwards into the body of the Canon-Law it self True it is that in our Church this kind of Presbyterial Government hath been long disused yet seeing it still professeth that every Pastor hath a right to rule the Church from whence the name of Rector also was given at first unto him and to administer the Discipline of Christ as well as to dispence the Doctrine and Sacraments and the restraint of the exercise of that right proceedeth only from the custom now received in this Realm no man can doubt but by another Law of the Land this hinderance may be well removed Sect. 46. And indeed the stream of Antiquity and the Authors that are principally rested on for Episcopacy are full against them that deny the Government of the people to the Presbyters And it is the principal mischief of the English Prelacy thus to degrade or quoad exercitium to suspend at least all the Presbyters from their office Not as it is a denying them any part of their honour that 's not to be much regarded but as it is a discharging them of their work and burden and consequently leaving the Churches ungoverned And for the Government of Presbyters themselves in Cyprians dayes the Bishop did not could not Ordain or censure any Presbyter without his Clergy and Councils have decreed that so it should be Yea and the plebs universa also was consulted with by Cyprian Sect. 47. And now I come to the Major of my Arrgument which I prove thus Either Ordination is an act of the exercise of the power of the Keyes or of some other power But of no other power therefore of the Keyes If it be the exercise of any other power it is either of a secular power or an Ecclesiastick but neither of these therefore of no other Not of another Ecclesiastick power for there is no Ecclesiastical power at least which Ordination can be pretended to belong to but the power of the Keyes not of a secular power for that belongeth not to Ministers nor is it here pretended Sect. 48. And I think it
will appear that the power of Baptizing and judging who shall be taken for Christians and who not and the power of administring the Eucharist and Eucharistical actions in the Church is as great as this of Ordination especially supposing that a Presbyterie must concur in this and a single Pesbyter may do the other And therefore the one being granted them the other cannot be denyed Sect. 49. Argument 16. If the administrations of the Priests and Teachers in Christs dayes among the Jews was Valid to the people then the Ordination of our Presbyteries and the administrations of our Presbyters so ordained are Valid to the people and receivers now But the Antecedent is true therefore so is the Consequent This Argument is managed so frequently and copiously by our Ministers heretofore against the Separatists that I shall need to say but little of it Sect. 50. The Antecedent is proved easily from Scripture Acts 13.27 15.21 shew that Moses and the Prophets were read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day and Luke 16.29 shews that it was the peoples duty to hear them Mat. 23.1 2 3. Then spake Iesus to the Multitude and to his Disciples saying The Scribes and the Pharises sit in Moses seat all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe that observe and do but do not ye after their works for they say and do not Mat. 8.4 Mark 1.44 Luke 16.29 But go thy way shew thy self to the Priest and offer for thy cleansing those things which Moses commanded c. So that it was the peoples duty to hear and submit to the Teachers and the Priests Sect. 51. The reason of the Consequence is because these Priests and Teachers had not so good a Call as our Presbyters to their Office but were lyable to far more exceptions The Priests were not of the line that God had by his Law appointed to succeed in the Priesthood the succession had long failed as to the just title of the Successors The Priesthood was bought for money of the Civil Powers and instead of being the Priest for life he was oft changed every year chosen by a Pagan Prince and by him displaced and most think there were two at once The Scribes and Pharises had abominably corrupted the Law by their traditions and false expositions and their Calling was much more defective then ours so that if they must pass yet for Ministers of God and their administrations be valid then so must Presbyters and their administrations be esteemed much more I know we need not this odious comparison of our Ministry with the Priests or Pharises but to shew the adverâ—â—ries the odiousness of their accusations and grossness of their 〈…〉 〈…〉 Presbyters may make a Bishop 〈◊〉 they may make a 〈◊〉 But they may make a Bishop 〈◊〉 they may make 〈◊〉 ordain a Presbyter The 〈◊〉 of the Major is proved thus 1. They that may â—onfer 〈…〉 Dâ—gree may confer the lower the place of a Bishop is supposed the higher Degree and the place of a Presbyter the lower 2. â—he Bishops themselves require more power in or to the Consecration of a Bishop then to the Ordination of a Minister called a Presbyter The later may be done according to their Canons by one Bishop with assisting Presbyters but the former must have three Bishops at the least Sect. 53. To this it is commonly answered that Praecise the Ordination of a Presbyter is a greater work then the making of a Bishop and therefore the Major is denyed To which I reply 1. I speak not of a Greater work because the word greater is ambiguous and may signifie the greater change in regard of the Terminus a quo which is not it that I intend But the addition of an higher degree of power may require more power to the effecting it then the giving of the Lower degree though the lower be praecise the greater change for the higher is the greater change as to the terminus ad quem and as Episcopacy comprehendeth or supposeth Presbyterie so the power of making a Bishop comprehendeth or supposeth the power of Ordaining Presbyters It may be praecise or cum praecisione as the Schoolmen speak it may be a greater work to make a beggar to be the chief Prince next to the King in a Kingdom and yet sinâ— praecisione and in regard of the terminus ad quem it is a greater work to make him afterward a King and doubtless the addition of this Power requireth the Greater power to effect it Sect. 54. Otherwise if the Dissenters will stand to their answer we shall from their own grounds infallibly overthrow their cause thus It is a greater work to Baptize then to Ordain or Confirm therefore he that may Baptize may Ordain and Confirm Just as making a Presbyter is cum praecisione and in respect to the terminus a quo a greater work then Consecrating or making a Bishop so Baptizing is cum praecisione and in respect to the terminus a quo a far greater work then Ordination the one making a Christian and the other a Minister of a Christian See Aquil. in Scotel in 4. sent d. 7. q. 2. pag. 816. of Confirmation Sect. 55. It is only the Minor therefore that will hold dispute which I prove from the well known words of Hierom to Evagrius which Bishop Vsher told me he alleadged to King Charls at the Isle of Wight to this end when he was asked by him for an instance of Presbyters Ordaining Quod autem postea unus electus est qui caeteris praeponeâ—etur in schismatis remedium factum est ne unusquisque ad se trahens Christi Ecclesiam rumperet Nam Alexandriae à Marco Evangelista usque ad Heraclam Dionysium Episcopos Presbyteri semper unum ex se electum in excelsiori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant quomodo si exercitus Imperatorem faciat aut Diaconi eligant de se quem industrium noverint Archidiaconum vocent Presbyters then made the first Bishops at Alexandria Sect. 56. To this it is answered that it was only Election of Bishops that Hierom ascribeth to the Alexandrian Presbyters and not Ordination of them for that was done by some other Bishops and that it is Ordination that makes a man a Bishop Sect. 57. To this I reply 1. Hierom here undertakes to tell us how Bishops were made at Alexandria but maketh not the least mention of other Ordination or Consecration then these words express as done by the Presbyters And therefore till they prove it we must take the affirmation of another Ordination to be but the groundless presumption of the Assertors 2. Hierom doth purposely bring this as an argument to prove the identity first and the neerness afterward of Bishops and Presbyters that Presbyters made Bishops which would have been no argument if it was not Presbyters but Prelates that made them and if the Presbyters only chose them for 3. The people may choose a Bishop as well as the Presbyters and ordinarily did
5.1 2 3. The Elders which are among you I exhort who am also an Elder Feed the flock of God which is among you taking the oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly not for filthy lucre but of a ready mind neither as being Lords over Gods Heritage but as ensamples to the flock See Dr. Hammond expounding it as spoken to Bishops q. d. The Bishops of your several Churches I exhort take care of your several Churches and govern them not as secular Rulers by force NB but as Pastors do their sheep by calling and going before them that so they may follow of their own accord Heb. 13.7 Remember them that have the Rule over you who have spoken unto you the word of God Dr. Hammond Paraphr Set before your eyes the Bishops and Governors that have been in your Church and preached the Gospel to you O all you Inhabitants of Yorkshire Lincolnshire Norfolk Suffolk Essex Middlesex Kent Worcestershire c. how many of your Parishes did ever hear a Bishop preach the Gospel to them Vers. 17. Obey them that have the Rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your souls as they that must give account D. H. Obey those that are set to Rule you in your several Churches the Bishops whose whole care is spent among you as being to give account of your proficiency in the Gospel O dreadful account for him that must give it for so many thousands whose faces he never saw and whose names he never heard much less did ever speak a word to them 1 Tim. 5.17 Let the Elders that Rule well be counted worthy of double honour especially they who labour in the word and doctrine see Dr. H. expounding it of Bishops 1 Thes. 5.12 And we beseech you Brethren to know them which labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you and to esteem them very highly in love for their works sake Dr. H. Pay all due respects to the Bishops of your several Churches Tell us ye Parishes of England what labours have Bishops bestowed among you or how many of you have they admonished and which of them are you hence obliged to honour for their works sake and is it them or is it the Presbyters I mention none of this as blaming Bishops for negligence but as blaming them that will plead for and undertake an impossible task and after all with an hardened forehead will defend it with violence and separation from dissenters when so many ages have told the world to their faces that the undertaken task was never done 3. It is the work of Bishops to confirm the Baptized and is now made peculiar to them D. H. on Heb. 13. a. To teach exhort confirm and impose hands were all the Bishops office in that place And if so then the examining all the persons in a Diocess till they have just satisfaction that they are fit to be confirmed and the actuall Confirmation of them all will be a considerable task of it self 4. It is the Bishops work to exercise Discipline in the Church by admonishing the unruly and disorderly and hearing the case when the Church is told of those that have continued impenitent and openly to rebuke them and to cast them out by Excommunication if they remain impenitent and unreformed Dr. H. on Tit. 3.10 It is thy office and duty toward such an one first to admonish him once or twice and if that will not work upon him or reduce him then to set a mark upon him to inflict the censures on him and to appoint all men to break off familiar converse with him And O what abundance of work is this in the several parts even in one Parish much more in a Diocess see Dr. H. on Mat. 18.17 18. 5. It is the Bishops work to take the principal care of the poor and their stock or the contributions for them which contributions were made at every Assembly See Dr. H. on 1 Cor. 12.28 e. The supream trust and charge was reserved to the Apostles and Bishops of the Church So in the 41. Canon of the Apostles A Bishop must have the care of the monies so that by his Power all be dispensed to the poor by the Presbyters and Deacons and we command that he have in his Power the goods of the Church So Iustin Martyr Apol. 2. That which is gathered is deposited with the Prefect or Bishop and he helps relieves the Orphans and Widdows and becomes the Curator or Guardian to all absolutely NB that are in want So Ignatius to Polycarp After the Lord thou shalt be the Curator of the Widdows And Polycarp himself speaking of the Elders or Bishops They visit and take care of all that are sick not neglecting the Widdow the Orphan or the poor So Dr. H. read him further Remember this all you that are for our English Prelacy See that the Bishop be at once in every Parish in his Diocess to receive the contributions Or see that you put all into his hands and custody see that he take care of all the poor and widdows and orphans in all your Country and that all their monies be disbursed by him or his special appointment and be the common Overseer of the poor for his Diocess And when you and he have tryed this one seven years come then and tell us whether he will be any longer a Prelate or you will any longer be for Prelacy In the mean time judge in your Consciences by these passages of Antiquity cited by D. H. whether the antient Bishops had one Congregation or many score or hundred to be their Pastoral charge 6. Also it is a part of the Bishops work to visit the sick and pray with them and for them Iam. 5.14 Is any sick among you let him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray over him see Dr. H. that by Elders is meant the Bishops e. Because there is no Evidence whereby these inferiour Presbyters may appear to have been brought into the Churâ—h so early and because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the plural doth no way conclude that there were more of these Elders then one in each particular Church any more then that the sick man was bound to call for more then one and because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders of the Church was both in the Scripture stile and in the first writers the title of Bishops and lastly because the visiting of the sick is anciently mentioned as one branch of the Office of Bishops therefore it may very reasonably be resolved that the Bishops of the Church one in each particular Church but many in the Universal are here meant so far Dr. H. Remember all you that are all for Prelacy to send for the Bishop when you are sick every person in the Diocess according to this express command And if he would do his work by a Deputy remember that in all that Diocess which was the Bishops charge in the Scripture-times
was no Grotian or he was a Papist Again I profess that it is far from the desire of my soul to raise so much as the least suspicion on any that own not the Doctrine and Design of Grotius Disclaim it and we are satisfied Dr. Heylin was taken for as hot an antipuritan as most in England and yet in a moderate Letter to me he disclaimeth Grotianism which I mention partly lest any by my naming him on another occasion in that Book misconceive me to have accused him of this and principally to discourage the defenders of Grotius when such men as Dr. Heylin and Dr. Steward are against them The CONTENTS DISPUATION 1. WHether it be Necessary or Profitable to the right Order or the Peace of the Churches of England that we restore the extruded Episcopacy Neg. Peace with Episcopal Divines to be sought pag. 2 3. The Nature of Church-Government opened pag. 5. to 14. Twelve sorts of Bishops to be distinguished pag. 14 15. Which of these may be admitted for Peace pag. 16. Vnfixed General Ministers to do the Ordinary part of the Apostles work are to be continued proved pag. 21 22. What Power Apostles had over other Ministers p. 23 to 30. The Authors Concessions for Episcopacy pag. 30 31. Arguments against the English Prelacy 1. It destroyeth Government and its end pag. 32. 2. It gratifieth Satan and wicked men pag. 36. 3. It unavoidably causeth divisions pag. 37. 4. It suspendeth or degradeth all the Presbyters pag. 38. 5. It maketh Lay men Church-governors 6. And oppresseth the Bishops with guilt pag. 44. 7. It is the product of pride pag. 45. 8. It gratifieth lazy Ministers pag. 46. 9. It is not of Gods Institution pag. 48. 10. 〈◊〉 is contrary to Gods word pag 51. 11. It is unsafe as never used in Scripture times How fully the supposition is granted us pag. 58 59. Many Reasons proving that the Apostles who de facto are confessed by Dr. H. to have setled no subject Presbyters in Scripture times but one Bishop over one stated Congregation intended not the changing of this Order afterwards pag 63. to 74 c. More Arguments that Diocesan Bishops are no Scripture-Bishops pag 75. They are contrary to the Iewish and Apostolical Government pag. 76 77. Proved by two Arguments more pag. 83 84. The Confession of Episcopal writers pag. 85 86. Against Diocesan Bishops of many Churches the Testimony of Clemens Romanus p. 87. with Grotius's exposition pag 88. Of Polycarps and Ignatius who is full against them pag. 88. Of Iustin Martyr and Gregory Neocaesaâ—iensis pag. 92 93. Tertullian pag. 93 94. Of Clemens Alexandr and from the late division of Parishes pag. 96. Ninius testimony cited by Mr. Thorndike of 365. Bishopricks planted by Patrick in Ireland pag. 96 97. More cited by Usher pag. 97. The Testimonies of Councils pag. 98. to 103. Many weighty Consequents of the proved point pag. 103. DISPUTATION 2. THose who Nullifie our present Ministry and Churches which have not the Prelatical Ordination and teach the people to do the like do incur the guilt of grievous sin A Preface to the Dissenters pag. 109. One Letter of a Minister of another County that openeth the Necessity of this Disputation pag. 127. Chap. 1. A Minister of Christ defined pag. 130. Whether special Grace be Necessary to the being of a Minister pag. 130 131. What Qualifications are Necessary pag. 132. Ministers Christs Officers pag. 133. Must be separated to the work pag. 134. Who are the true objects of the Ministry pag. 134 c. Whether the Pastors or Church be first p. 136. Whether a particular Church or the Vniversal be first ibid. The Pastors work in a particular Church p. 137. How far Intention is Necessary to the Validity of an administration p. 138. A Call to exercise after a Call to Office p. 139. Chap. 2. Of the Nature and Ends of Ordination shewing what it is that is the Ordainers work and what not p. 141. Chap. 3. Humane Ordination not of Constant Necessity to the Being of the Ministry fully proved p. 150. Chap. 4. An uninterrupted Succession of Regular Ordination is not of Necessity p. 168. proved Chap. 5. Ordination by such as the English Prelates not Necessary to the Being of the Ministry proved p. 178. Objections Answered Chap 6. Ordination especially at this time by English Prelates is unnecessary p. 190. Chap. 7. The Ordination used now in England and in other â—rotestant Churches is valid and agreeable to Scripture and the practice of the antient Church p. 198. fully proved and so our Ministry vindicated by twenty Arguments Chap. 8. The greatness of their sin that are now labouring to perswade the people of the Nullity of our Ministry Churches and Administrations Manifested in forty aggravations p. 240. Chap. 9. The sinfulness of despising or neglecting Ordination p. 252. The distinct power of Pastors People and Magistrates to our Call p. 253. Approbation of Pastors must be sought p. 258. What Pastors should be sought to for Ordination p. 266. DISPUTATION 3. AN Episcopacy desirable for the Reformation Preservation and Peace of the Churches p. 274. Chap. 1. Of General unfixed Bishops or Ministers p. 275. Chap. 2. Of fixed Pastors that also participate in the work of the unfixed p. 286. Chap. 3. It is lawful for the several Associations of Pastors to choose one man to be their President durante vita if he continue fit p. 297. What power shall such have p. 301. Chap. 4. It is lawful for the Presbyters of a particular Church to have a fixed President for life p. 307. Chap. 5. Objections against the forementioned Presidency answered p. 316. Chap. 6. The summ of the foregoing Propositions and the Consistency of them with the principles of each party and so their aptitude to reconcile p. 335. Chap 7. Some Instances proving that moderate men will agree upon the forementioned terms p. 339. Bishop Hâ—lls full Consent p. 340 341. Dr. Hide of the new party stigmatizeth his book with the brand of irrational Separatism and Recusancy p. 342 343. Bishop Usheâ—s full Consent to us p. 344. with Dr. Holdâ—worths and Dr. Forbs The Presbyterians Consent to the same terms Mr. Gaâ—akers Mr. Gerees the London Province Beza's Calvins Mr. Rich. Vines in two Letters Bishops can have no other power over Pastors of other Churches then the Synods have p. 347 348. Presbyterians for a Church of one Congregation p. 348. The Polonian Protestants Government p. 353. DISPUTATION 4. WHether a stinted Liturgy or Form of worship be a desirable means for the peace of these Churches Proposition 1. A stinted Liturgy is in it self lawful p. 359. Prop. 2. A stinted Liturgy in some parts of publick holy service is ordinarily necessary p. 365. Prop. 3. In those parts of publick worship where a form is not of ordinary necessity but only Lawful yet may it not only be submitted to but desired when the peace of the Church doth accidentally require it p. 367. Prop.
them when written and the like after the printing for the collecting the Errata of the Press I find by this hasty review and by some observation of mens readiness to misunderstand me that it is necessary to speak a little more about the following particulars that I may be understood by such as are willing to understand me and the mistakes of others I shall easily bear Sect. 1. Pag. 89. There is somewhat that requireth correction of the pen and somewhat that requireth explication In translating that passage of Ignatius Unus panis qui pro omnibus fractus est must be written next effusus est before unus Calix And for the following objection though it was made by a discreet person yet I know no ground for it unless Is. Vossius his Edition leave out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which I have not now at hand but is likelyest I know not of any Greek copy that leaves it out Indeed Bishop Ushers Latine doth and the Vulgar Latine leaves out the translation of the next words before it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which saith Bishop Usher Ex interpretatione hac excidisse videantur And noting the corruption of the Vulgar Translation in this very place I there premised to my Answer that it might occasion a change in the Text that it hath done so in many places I think is easie to prove but that it hath done so here there is no probability if any Greek Copy be as is objected and the Reasons of my conjecture of the possibility are so little for a probability that as I express them not so I think them not worth the expressing but rather bid you take that as non dictum Though of the general I find Bishop Usher himself saying both of his Latine Version Ex eâ solâ integritati suae restitui posse Ignatium polliceri non ausim and of the first Greek Edition Hanc reliqui sequuti sunt editores non ex Graco aliquo codice alio sed partim ex ingenio partim ex vetere Vulgato Latino Interprete non paucis in locis eandem corrigentes Epist. ad Lect. ante Annot. pag. 26. Dissert Sect. 2. I must intreat the Reader to observe that my drift in this writing is not so much to oppose any form of Government meerly as contrary to the Institution or Apostolical Rule as to plead against that which I take to be destructive to the Ends of Government Not that I desire not a careful adhering to the sacred Rule but 1. Because I suppose that many circumstantials of Discipline undetermined in the Word are feigned by some to be substanstantial necessary things and that many matters are indifferent that some lay the Peace if not the being of the Church upon 2. Because I so far hate contention that if any Government contrary to my Iudgement were set up that did not apparently in the nature of it wrong the Church I would silently live under it in peace and quietness and accordingly would be now loth to enter a quarrel with any Writers that differ from us in tolerable things But if I know that their judgement reduced to practice is like to be the undoing of many souls and to cast Discipline almost wholly out of the Church I think it better to displease them then let them undo the Church without contradiction The best is the serious Christians of this age have experience to help them to understand the case and I suppose my Disputation to be unto them as if I Disputed before a man that is restored from want or banishment or sickness whether he should be reduced to the Condition from which he is restored Sect. 3. Some passages here will occasion the Question as p. 5. Whether and how far Church Government is jure Divino But of this in the main I am agreed with them that I dispute To speak further my own judgement is 1. That the Spirit of God hath established all the Officers and worship-Ordinances of his Church and that no new Church-office or Ordinance of worship as to the substance may be instituted by man 2. But that there are many Circumstantials about the Exercise of those Offices and Ordinances that are not determined particularly by a Law but are left to humane prudence to determine of by the General directions of the Law And so I suppose that Bishops and Presbyters are but one Office of Gods institution but in the exercise of this Office if one for order be made a Moderator or President of the rest or by agreement upon a disparity of parts or interest do unequally divide their work between them in the exercise it is a thing that may be done and is fit where the Edification of the Church requireth it but not a thing that always must be done nor is of it self a Duty but a thing indifferent The following Case therefore I hence resolve Sect. 4. Quest. Whether the Order of subject Presbyters might lawfully be created by Bishops or any humane Power and whether the Order of Bishops might lawfully be created for the avoiding of Schism by the consent of Presbyters or Metropolitans by Bishops Answ. If you understand by the word Order a distinct Office none may create any of these but God But if by Subject Presbyters be meant only men of the same Office with Bishops that do for the Churches benefit subject themselves to the direction or Presidency of another upon some disparity in their gifts or the like in the exercise of that Office I suppose that this is a thing that by Consent may be lawfully done And so I verily believe that betimes in the Church it was done of which anon So if by Bishops be meant no distinct Office but one of the Presbyters chosen from among the rest to exercise his Ministery in some eminency above the rest by reason of his greater Gifts or for Peace and Order I doubt not but it is a thing that consent may do And accordingly the Canon Law defines a Bishop that he is Unus è Presbyteris c. So if by a Metropolitan be not meant another Office but one in the same Office by reason of the advantage of his Seat chosen to some acts of Order for the common benefit I doubt not but it may be done but every such Indifferent thing is not to be made Necessary statedly and universally to the Church Sect. 5. When I do in these Papers plead that the Order of Subject Presbyters was not instituted in Scripture times and consequently that it is not of Divine Institution I mean as aforesaid that as a distinct Office or Species of Church ministers as to the Power from God it is not of Divine Institution nor a lawful Institution of man but that among men in the same Office some might Prudentially be chosen to an eminency of degree as to the exercise and that according to the difference of their advantages there might be a disparity in the use of their
authority and gifts I think was done in Scripture times and might have been after if it had not then And my judgement is that ordinarily every particular Church such as our Parish Churches are had more Elders then One but not such store of men of eminent gifts as that all these Elders could be such But as if half a dozen of the most judicious persons of this Parish were Ordained to be Elders of the same Office with my self but because they are not equally fit for publick preaching should most imploy themselves in the rest of the Oversight consenting that the publick preaching lie most upon me and that I be the Moderator of them for Order in Circumstantials This I think was the true Episcopacy and Presbytery of the first times From the mistake of which two contrary Errors have arisen The one of those that think this Moderator was of another Office in specie having certain work assigned him by God which is above the reach of the Office of Presbyters to perform and that he had many fixed Churches for his charge The other of them that think these Elders were such as are called now Lay-elders that is Vnordained men authorized to Govern without Authority to Preach Baptize or Administer the Lords Supper And so both the Prelatical on one side and the Presbyterians and Independents on the other side run out and mistake the ancient form and then contend against each other This was the substance of what I wrote to Mr. Vines which his subjoyned Letter refers to where he signifieth that his judgement was the same When Paul and Barnabas were together Paul was the chief speaker and yet Barnabas by the Idolaters called Jupiter Nature teacheth us that men in the same Office should yet have the preheminence that 's due to them by their Age and Parts and Interests c. and that Order should be kept among them as in Colledges and all Societies is usual The most excellent part of our work is publick preaching but the most of it for quantity is the rest of the Oversight of the Church in Instructing personally admonishing reproving enquiring into the truth of accusations comforting visiting the sick stablishing the weak looking to the poor absolving answering doubts excommunicating and much more And therefore as there is a necessity as the experienced know of many Elders in a particular Church of any great number so it is fit that most hands should be most imployed about the said works of Oversight yet so as that they may preach as need and occasion requireth and administer Sacraments and that the eminent Speakers be most employed in publick preaching yet so as to do their part of the rest as occasion requireth And so the former Elders that Rule well shall be worthy of double honour but especially these that labour in the Word and Doctrine by more ordinary publick preaching And such kind of seldom-preaching Ministers as the former were in the first times and should be in most Churches yet that are numerous Sect. 6. When I speak in these Papers therefore of other mens Concessions that there were de facto in Scripture times but One Bishop without any subject Presbyters to a particular Church remember that I speak not my own judgement but urge against them their own Concessions And when I profess my Agreement with them it is not in this much less in all things for then I needed not disspute against them but it is in this much that in Scripture times there was de facto 1. No meer Bishop of many particular Churches or stated worshipping Congregations 2. Nor any distinct Office or Order of Presbyters that radically had no Power to Ordain or Govern or Confirm c. which are the subject Presbyters I mean Sect. 7. Specially remember that by Bishops in that dispute I mean according to the Modern use one that is no Archbishop and yet no meer Presbyter but one supposed to be between both that is a Superior to meer Presbyters in Order or Office and not only in degree or modification of the exercise but below Archbishops whether in Order or Degree These are they that I dispute against excluding Metropolitans or Archbishops from the question and that for many Reasons Sect. 8. If it were proved or granted that there were Archbishops in those times of Divine Institution it would no whit weaken my Arguments For it is only the lowest sort of Bishops that I dispute about yea it confirmeth them For if every combination of many particular Churches had an Archbishop then the Governors of such Combinations were not meer Bishops and then the meer Bishops were Parish Bishops or Bishops of single Churches only and that is it that I plead for against Diocesan Bishops that have many of these Churches perhaps some hundreds under one Bishop of the lowest rank having only Presbyters under him of another Order Sect. 9. If any think that I should have answered all that is written for an Apostolical Institution of Metropolitans or of Archbishops or of the subject sort of Presbyters or other points here toucht I answer them 1. In the former my work was not much concerned nor can any man prove me engaged to do all that he fancieth me concerned to do 2. Few men love to be contradicted and confuted and I have no reason to provoke them further then necessity requireth it 3. I take not all that I read for an argument so considerable as to need Replyes If any value the Arguments that I took not to need an Answer let them make their best of them I have taken none of them out of their hands by robbing them of their Books if they think them valid let them be so to them Every Book that we write must not be in folio and if it were we should leave some body unanswered still I have not been a contemner or neglecter of the writings of the contrary-minded But voluminously to tell the world of that I think they abuse or are abused in is unpleasing and unprofitable Sect. 10. And as to the Jus Divinum of limited Diocesses to the Apostles as Bishops and of Archbishops Metropolitans c. I shall say but this 1. That I take not all for currant in matter of fact that two or three or twice so many say was done when I have either cross testimony or valid Reasons of the improbability I believe such Historians but with a humane faith and allow them such a degree of that as the probability of their report and credibility of the persons doth require 2. I take it for no proof that all that was done in all the Churches that I am told was done in some 3. I take the Law of Nature and Scripture to be the entire Divine Law for the Government of the Church and World 4. And therefore if any Father or Historian tell me that this was delivered by the Apostles as a Law to the Vniversal Church which is not contained in Scriptures
belong to the Office of a Presbyter when yet he might not exercise it The Bishops in the Ordination of Presbyters enabled them to preach the Gospel And yet they were after that forbidden to preach till they had a License and it was put into the Visitation Articles to present those Ministers that preached without License If they will deny us the exercise of the Power that they first confess belongeth to our Office we are not answerable for their self-contradictions 2. By Discipline I suppose they mean but our Instruction and our publishing their Orders for Penance Excommunication or Absolution 3. They were the Judges of the sense of the Laws as far as the executâ—on required And the Vniversal Practice of England with their writings shewed us to our cost their judgement What good would it do us if the Law had been on our side while the Concurrent Iudgement and Practice of the Governors denyed it and went against it 4. He that had kept a man from the Sacrament according to the plain words of the Rubrick was to have been accountable for it at their Courts and so likely if he had been a man of serious piety and not a persecutor of Puritans to have been undone by it and was like to make so little of it as to the Ends of Discipline all men being compelled by the Presentments to receive the Sacrament that I never knew one to my best remembrance in 25 years time that I lived under the Bishops that was kept from the Sacrament except a Puritan that scrupled to take it kneeling And what was this to true Church-Government Sect. 17. Object But either they did it according to the established Law or not If they did the fault was in the Law and not in them If they did transgress the Law then the fault was in mens abuse and the Law and Order cannot be blamed Answ. A sad case to poor ignorant miserable souls that they must be left in obstinacy and deprived of Gods means of Reformation without Remedy because either the Law or Iudges must be excused The Iudges are the mouth of the Law to us that is Law in the issue to us which they unanimously call Law If the fault were in the Law it was time it should be altered if it was in the Bishops universally it was time they should be altered Let us but have a Remedy and enjoy Gods Ordinances which he that is the Churches Head and King hath appointed for our benefit and we have done Sect. 18. Object But may not Bishops when they Ordain Delegate what measure of Ministerial Power they please and if you never received more why should you use it Answ. A poor relief to the forsaken Church Deprive her of Government and then tell us that we had no power Is the Power desirable to us if the Ordinance were not desirable to the Church 2. What Power have Bishops and whence did they receive it to change the Office of Christs institution or his Apostles If so they may turn the three Orders which the Papists themselves say the Pope cannot alter into as many more Then they may create an Office for Baptizing only and another for the Lords Supper only and another for praying only and so of the rest which is worse then making Lay-elders or then taking away the Cup in the Sacrament Hath Christ by his Spirit instituted Church-offices and are they now at the Bishops power to transform them 3. If they had power to distribute the work in the exercise part to one and part to another yet they have no power to deprive the particular Churches of the whole or any part but one or more must do it and the Office must be the same and the power exercised to the edification and not the confusion and corruption of the Church Sect. 19. Object But the Keys were given only to the Apostles and not to the seventy Disciples nor to Presbyters Answ. 1. If the seventy were only Disciples and not Church-officers the Ancients and the English Bishops have been much mistaken that have so much urged it that Presbyters succeed them as Bishops do the Apostles But if they be Officers then they have the Keys 2. The Episcopal Divines even the Papists commonly confess that part of the Keys are given to the Presbyters and Christ gave them together 3. Were they given only to Apostles for themselves or to convey to others If to themselves only then no one hath them now If to convey to others then either to Apostles only as their Successors but there 's none such or to Patriarchs or Primates or Metropolitans or Archbishops only but none of this will please the Bishops or to Bishops only which I grant taking Bishops in the Scripture sense And I desire to see it proved that it was not a presumptuous Innovation in them whosoever they were that after the days of the Apostles Ordained a new sort of Presbyters in the Church that should have no power of the Keys 4. They that must use the Keys must have Power to use them But Parish Bishops must use them as the nature and necessity of the work doth prove Therefore Parish Bishops must have the Power If only one man in a Diocess of an hundred or two hundred Churches shall have the power of the Keys we may know after all the talk of Discipline what Discipline to expect Sect. 20. Object Why blame you Lay-chancellors Registers Proctors c. when you set up Lay-elders we are as well able to call Chancellors Ecclesiastical as you can call Lay-elders so Answ. I never pleaded for Lay-elders If other men erre will it justifie your error But I must tell you an unordained man in a single Parish having power only to assist the Pastor in Government is far unlike a Lay-Court to Govern all the Churches of a Diocess Sect. 21. Object Do not your Arguments against Bishops for excluding Discipline make as much for the casting out of Ministers of whom you complain in your Reformed Pastor for neglect of Discipline Ans. 1. The Nature of Prelacy as set up in England â—here only one man had the Government of so many Churches unavoidably excludeth it if the best men were Bishops till it be otherwise formed But the nature of a Parochial Episcopacy is fitted to promote it 2. Those Presbyters that I blamed for neglecting the higher acts of Discipline do yet keep away more prophane persons from the Lords Supper in some one Church then ever I knew kept away in all places under the Prelates 3. If Ministers sinfully neglect Discipline yet as Preachers and Guides in publick worship c. they are of unspeakable need and value to the Church But few Bishops of England preached ordinarily And 4. We are desirous that Bishops shall continue as Preachers but not as Diocesan excluders of Parochial Church-Discipline Sect. 22. Object By pretending to agree with them that say there were no Presbyters in Scripture times you would put down
in Afrâ—ca and call the rest Cecilians and let the Papists reduce it to the subscribers to their Trent confession or to them only that believe in the Popes universal Headship and Government and call all others Hereticks yet will all true Catholicks imitate Augustine and the Councils that were called against the Donatists who still described the Catholike Church to be that which was dispersed over the world having begun at Ierusalem and though to Gods praise we dare rejoycingly affirm that the most illustrious and the soundest part of it is in Europe among the Reformed yet dare we not say that it is all or the greatest part here Nay we confess that we are but a small part of Christs Church And therefore common sobriety may tell us that the Peace of so great a part of Christs Church as is in all the rest of the world is highly to be valued and sought with all our might in righteousness Moreover even among the reformed Churches there are many for some Episcopacy or Superintendency As the Church of England and Ireland was lately for Diocesan Episcopacy so the Churches in Denmark Sweden Saxionie and other parts of Germany Transilvania c. are for a lower sort of Episcopacy called Superintendency among them 3. And the quality of many of the Divines of that way is such as bespeaks our greatest reverence to them and should move us to thirst after Unity and Reconciliation with them Many of them are men of eminent Learning and Godliness and sound in the faith I know that it is commonly objected that they are generally ungodly men that are that way and though some of them are Learned men yet they are all or almost all of careless and carnal lives or meerly formal and superstitious and therefore their Communion is not much to be desired To which I answer 1. The plain undenyable truth is that it was so here with the most of them in the Bishops dayes where ever I was acquainted There were more Ministers in many places that would have scorned threatned or troubled a man for a godly diligent life then that would lead him that way by a good example We must speak that truth that cannot be hid whoever be displeased To this day too many of that way are careless and scandalous But then Consider withall 2. That it is but too common for the common sort even of Ministers as well as people to be careless and bad what ever opinions they are of Especially if the times do discountenance practical Religiousness the greater part are likely to follow the times being that way also so strongly enclined by nature 3. Consider also that we have had and have men of that Judgement that have been excellent Instruments of the Churches good and so eminent for Gods graces and gifts that their names will be pretious whilest Christ hath in England a Reformed Church were there in all England but one such man dissenting from us as Hooper Farrar Latimer Cranmer Ridley Iewel Abbot Davenant Vsher Hall c. what sober Godly man would not be exceeding solicitous for a reconciliation I am sure besides the godliness of their lives and painful preaching One Iewel One Vsher One Davenant hath done so much against the Roman Usurpers as they will never well claw it off them to the last Moreover who knoweth not that most of the Godly able Ministers of England since the Reformation did judge Episcopacy some of them Lawful and some of them most fit for the Non-conformists were but few and that even before this late trouble and war the most even almost all of those that were of the late Assembly at Westminster and most through the land did subscribe and conform to Episcopal Government as a thing not contrary to the word of God so that it is evident that it is very consistent with a Godly life to judge Episcopacy lawful and fit or else we should not have had so many hundred learned and godly men of that mind And I am not altogether unapt to believe that many of them yet are so far reconcileable to it moderated that if it were again established they would submit to it as they did For I hear but of few that have made any recantation of their former conformity but contrarily have known divers of them profess a reconcilableness as aforesaid as Mr. Gataker doth in one of his books express his own Judgement If I have proved this preparatory proposition which I think needeth but litle proof then have I also proved 1. That they have sinned much who have hitherto forborn the use of any means for Peace which was in their power 2. And that we are bound our selves to desire and seek after a peace with such men and that we cannot discharge a good conscience while we neglect such means as is within our reach and fit for us to use The second Proposition is that A Certain Episcopacy may be yielded to for the peace if not also for the right order of the Church In the declaration of my judgement concerning this I make no doubt but I shall displease both sides the one for yielding so much the other for yielding no more But jacta est alea I live not upon mens favour nor the air of their applause That truth which displeaseth at present may tend to peace and produce it at the last when the angry humour is allayed or at least when the angry age is gone For the clearer determination of this and the main Question following it is necessary that I here stay 1. To open the nature of Church-Government in general 2. To open the sence of the word Episcopacy and the several sorts of Bishops And then 3. I shall tell you what sort of Episcopacy it is that I could yield to for the Churches peace 1. I must confess I think that the greatest part of the controversie by far is in this first question of the nature of Ecclesiastical Government strictly so called which is only in the hands of Christs Ministers Bishops or whomsoever commonly called Clergy men Aâ—d concerning this having written my thoughts more largely elâ—ewhere I shall now lay down these few Propositions Prop. 1. All this power Ecclesiastical is Jure divino given from God himself and that either immediately or by the mediation only of the Apâ—stles I mean as to the determination in specie what it shall be and the constitution of that order and power in the Church though perhaps some other causes at least sine quibus non may intervene for the reception of this power by an individual person These therefore that plead only the Laws of the Land or only Canons of former Bishops for their standing or authority do say nothing that as to our controversie is regardable Whâ—t men do they may undo if there be reason for it and if it depend on their authority we must submit to their reason Prop. 2. This Divine Constitution of the Species of Church-Power
by another that could not have any power to Rule him without that consent of his own and voluntary Condescension 5. As for the fifth sort that is The standing President of a Classis having no Negative voice I should easily consent to them for order and Peace for they are no distinct Office nor assâ—me any Government over the Presbyters And the Presbyterian Churches do commonly use a President or Moderator pro tempore And doubtless if it be lawful for a Month it may be lawful for a year or twenty years or quam diu se bene gâ—sserit and how many years had we one Moderator of our Assemblies of Divines at Westminster and might have had him so many years more if death had not cut him off And usually God doth not so change his gifts but that the same man who is the fittest this month or year is most likely also to be the fittest the next 6. And for the sixth sort viz. A President of a Classes having a Negative voice I confess I had rather be without him and his power is not agreeable to my Judgement as a thing instituted by God or fittest in it self But yet I should give way to it for the Peace of the Church and if it might heal that great breach that is between us and the Epâ—scopal Brethren and the many Churches that hold of that way but with these Cautions and Limitations 1. That they shall have no Negative in any thing that is already a duty or a sin for an Angel from heaven cannot dispense with Gods Law This I doubt not will be yielded 2. That none be forced to acknowledge this Negative vote in them but that they take it from those of the Presbyters that will freely give or acknowledge it For its a known thing that all church-Church-power doth work only on the Conscience and therefore only prevail by procuring Consent and cannot compell 3. Nor would I ever yield that any part of the Presbyters dissenting should be taken as Schismaticks and cast out of Communion or that it should be made the matter of such a breach This is it that hath broken the Church that Bishops have thrust their Rule on men whether they would or not and have taken their Negative voice at least if not their sole Jurisdiction to be so necessary as if there could be no Church without it or no man were to be endured that did not acknowledge it but he that denyeth their disputable Power must be excommunicated with them that blaspheme God himself And as the Pope will have the acknowledgement of his Power to be inseparable from a member of the Catholike Church and cast out all that deny it so such Bishops take the acknowledgement of their Jurisdiction to be as inseparable from a member of a particular Church and consequently as they suppose of the universal and so to deny them shall cut men off as if they denyed Christ. This savoureth not of the humility that Christ taught his followers 4. Nor would I have any forced to declare whether they only submit for Peace or consent in approbation nor whether they take the Bishops Negative vote to be by Divine Institution and so Necessary or by the Presbyters voluntary consent contract as having power in several cases to suspend the exercise of their own just authority when the suspension of it tendeth to a publike Good No duty is at all times a duty If a man be to be ordained by a Presbytery it is not a flat duty to do it at that time when the President is absent except in case of flat necessity why may not the rest of the Presbyters then if they see it conducible to the good of the Church resolve never to ordain except in case of such Necessity but when the President is there and is one therein which is indeed to permit his exercise of a Negative vote without professing it to be his right by any Institution It is lawful to ordain when the President is present it is lawful out of cases of Necessity to forbear when he is absent according therefore to the Presbyterian principles we may resolve to give him de facto a Negative voice that is not to ordain without him but in Necessity and according to the Episcopal principles we must thus do for this point of Ordination is the chief thing they stand on Now if this be all the difference why should not our May be yield to their Must be if the Peace of the Church be found to lye upon it But 5. I would have this Caution too that the Magistrate should not annex his sword to the Bishops censure without very clear reason but let him make the best of his pure spiritual Authority that he can we should have kept peace with Bishops better if they had not come armed and if the Magistrates had not become their Executioners 7. As to the seventh sort viz. A President of a Province fixed without any Negative voice I should easily admit of him not only for Peace but as orderly and convenient that there might be some one to give notice of all Assemblies and the Decrees to each member and for many other mattters of order this is practised in the Province of London pro tempore and in the other Presbyterian Churches And as I said before in the like case I see not why it may not be lawful to have a President quam diu se bene gesserit as well for a moneth or a year or seven years as in our late Assembly two successively were more as I remember so that this kind of Diocesan or Provincial Bishop I think may well be yielded to for the Churches Order and Peace 8. As to the eighth sort of Bishops viz. The Diocesan who assumeth the sole Government of many Parish Churches both Presbyters and People as ten or twelve or twenty or more as they used to do even a whole Diocess I take them to be intolerable and destructive to the Peace and happiness of the Church and therefore not to be admitted under pretence of Order or Peace if we can hinder them But of these we must speak more when we come to the main Question 9. As for the ninth sort of Bishops viz. A Diocesan Ruling all the Presbyâ—ers but leaving the Presbyters to Rule the People and consequently taking to himself the sole or chief Power of Ordination but leaving Censures and Absolution to them except in case of Appeal to himself I must needs say that this sort of Episcopacy is very ancient and hath been for many ages of very common reception through a great part of the Church but I must also say that I can see as yet no Divine institution of such a Bishop taken for a fixed limited officer and not the same that we shall mention in the eleventh place But how far mens voluntary submission to such and consent to be ruled by them may authorize them I have no mind to dispute
doubt Prop. 2. It is as certain that common prudence required them to make a convenient distribution of the work and not go all one way and leave other places that while without the Gospel But some to go one way and some another as most conduced to the conversion of all the world Prop. 3. It is certain that the Apostles were not armed with the sword nor had a compulsive coercive power by secular force but that their Government was only forcible on the Conscience and therefore only on the Conscientious so far as they were such unless as we may call mens actual exclusion by the Church and their desertion and misery the effect of Government Prop. 4. It is most certain that they who had the extraordinary priviledge of being eye-witnesses of Christs Miracles and Life and ear-witnesses of his Doctrine and had the extraordinary power of working Miracles for a Confirmation of their Doctrine must needs have greater Authority in mens Consciences then other men upon that very account if there were no other So that even their Gifts and Priviledges may be and doubtless were one ground at least of that higher degree of Authority which they had above others For in such a Rational perswasive Authority which worketh only on the Conscience the case is much different from the secular power of Magistrates For in the former even Gifts may be a ground of a greater measure of Power in binding mens minds And here is the greatest part of the difficulty that riseth in our way to hinder us from improving the example of the Apostles in that it is so hard to discern how much of their power over other Presbyters or Bishops was from their supereminency of Office and Imperial Authority and how much was meerly from the excellency of their Gifts and Priviledges Prop. 5. It s certain that the Magistrates did not then second the Apostles in the Government of the Church but rather hinder them by persecution The excommunicate were not punished therefore by the secular power but rather men were enticed to forsake the Church for the saving of their lives so that worldly prosperity attended those without and adversity those within which further shewes that the force of Apostolical Government was on the Conscience and it was not corrupted by an aliene kind of force Prop. 6. Yet had the Apostles a power of Miraculous Castigation of the very bodies of the Offenders at least sometimes which Peter exercised upon Ananiaâ— and Sapphyra and Paul upon Eâ—â—mas and some think upon Hymenaeus and Philetas and those other that were said to be delivered up to Satan certainly Paul had in readiness to revenge all disobedience 2 Cor. 10.6 which its like extendeth somewhat farther than to meer censures But it s most certain that the Apostle used noâ— this power oâ— hurting mens bodies ordinarily but sparingly as they did other Miracles perhaps not according to their own wills but the Holy Ghosts So that this did not corrupt their Government neither and destroy the Spirituality of it Yet this makes it somewhat more difficult to us to improve the Apostles example because we know not how much of their power upon mens Consciences might be from such penal Miracles Prop. 7. The Apostles had power to Ordain and send others to the work of the Ministry But this only by the consent of the ordained and of the people before they could be compleat fixed Pâ—stors for they forced not any to go or any people to entertain them And it seemeth they did not Ordain singly but many together Acts 14.23 Timothy had his Gift by the laying on of Pauls hands and of the hands of the Presbyterie 1 Tim. 4.14 and 2 Tim. 1.6 Prop. 8. It seems that each Apostle did exercise a Government over the Churches which were once planted but this was principally in order to well setling and confirming them Prop. 9. No one Apostle did appropriate a Diocess to himself and say Here I am sole Governor or am chief Governor nor did they or could they forbid any others to Govern in their Diocess though as is said they did agree to distribute their work to the publike advantage and not to be all in one place at once but yet successively they might Prop. 10. Nay it s certain that they were so far from being the sole Bishops of such or such a Diocess that they had usually some more unfixed general Officers with them Paul and Barnabas went together at first and after the Division Barnabas and Mark Paul and Silas and sometimes Timothy and sometime Epaphroditus and sometime others went together afterward And others as well as Iames were usually at Ierusalem and all these had a general power where they came And it cannot be proved that Iames was Ruler of Peter Paul and the rest when they were at Ierusalem nor that he had any higher power then they Prop. 11. Yet it seems that the several Apostles did most look after those same Churches which themselves had been the instruments of gathering and that some addition of respect was due to those that had been spiritual Fathers to them above the rest 1 Cor. 4.15 Prop. 12. It was therefore by the General Commission of Apostleship that they Governed particular Churches pro tempore while they were among or neer them and not by any special Commission or Office of being the Diocesan or Metropolitane of this or that place 1. It was below them and a diminution of their honor to be so affixed and take the charge of any particular Churches 2. We find not that ever they did it 3. If they had then all the disorders and ungovernedness of those Churches would be imputable to them and therefore they must be still with them as fixed Bishops are seeing they cannot govern them at such a distance as makeâ— them uncapable 4. When Peter drew Barnabas and many more to dissimulation and almost to betray the liberties of the Gentiles Paul doth not say This is my Diocess and I must be the Ruler here nor doth Peter plead this against him when Paul and Barnabas fell out whether Mark should be taken with them or not neither of them did plead a Ruling Authority nor say This is my Diocess or I am the superior Ruler but they produced their reasons and when they could not agree concerning the validity of each others reasons they separated and took their several companions and waies Prop 13. It was not only the Apostles but multitudes more that were such general unfixed Ministers as the seventy Barnabas Silas Epaphroditus Timothy and many others And all these also had a Power of Preaching and Ruling where they came Prop. 14. None of these General Officers did take away the Government from the fixed Presbyters of particular Churches nor kept a Negative vote in their own hands in matters of Government for if no fixed Bishop or Presbyter could excommunicate any member of his Church without an Apostle then almost all
Institution not by inspired Apostles but by Ordinary Bishops then 1. They make all Presbyters to be jure Episcopali and Bishops only and their Superiours to be jure Divino as the Italians in the Council of Trent would have had all Bishops to depend upon the Pope But in this they go far beyond them for the Italian Papists themselves thought Presbyterie jure Divino 2. Either they may be changed by Bishops who set them up or not If they may be taken down again by man then the Church may be ruined by man and so the Bishops will imitate the Pope Either they will Reign or Christ shall not Reign if they can hinder it Either they will lead the Church in their way or Christ shall have no Church If man cannot take them down then 1. It seems man did not Institute them for why may they not alter their own institutions 2. And then it seems the Church hath universal standing unchangeable Institutions Offices and binding Laws of the Bishops making And if so are not the Bishops equal to the Apostles in Law making and Church Ordering and are not their Laws to us as the word of God and that word insufficient and every Bishop would be to his Diocess and all to the whole Church what the Pope would be to the whole 3. Moreover how do they prove that ever the Apostles gave power to the Bishops to institute the order of Presbyterie I know of no text of Scripture by which they can prove it And for Tradition we will not take every mans word that saith he hath tradition for his conceits but we require the proof The Papists that are the pretended keepers of Tradition do bring forth none as meerly unwritten but for their ordines inferiores and many of them for Bishops as distinct from the Presbyters but not for Presbyters themselves And Scripture they can plead none For if they mention such texts where Paul bids Titus ordain Elders in every City c. they deny this to be meant of Elders as now but of Prelates whom Titus as the Primate or Metropolitane was to ordain And if it be meant of Elders then they are found in Scripture and of Divine Apostolical Institution 4. If they were Instituted by Bishops after the Scripture was written was it by one Bishop or by many If by one then how came that one to have Authority to impose a new Institution on the universal Church If by many either out of Council or in if out of Council it was by an accidental falling into one mind and way and then they are but as single men to the Church and therefore still we ask how do they bind us If by many in Council 1. Then let them tell us what Council it was that Instituted Presbyterie when and where gathered and where we may find their Canons that we may know our order and what Auâ—hors mention that Council 2. And what authority had that Council to bind all the Christian world to all ages If they say it bound but their own Churches and that age then it seems the Bishops of England might for all that have nulled the Order of Presbyters there But O miserable England and miserable world if Presbyters had done no more for it then Prelates have done I conclude therefore that the English Prelacy either degraded the Presbyters or else suspended to ally an essential part of their office for themselves called them Rectors and in ordaining them said Receive the Holy Ghâ—st Whose sins thou dost remit they are remitted whose sins thou dost retain they are retained And therefore they delivered to them the Power of the Keyes of opening and shutting the Kingdom of Heaven which themselves make to be the opening and shutting of the Church and the Governing of the Church by Excommunication and Absolution And therefore they are not fit men to ask the Presbyters By what authority they Rule the Church by binding and loosing when themselves did expresly as much as in them lay confer the Power on them And we do no more then what they bid us do in our Ordination Yea they thereby make it the very work of our office For the same mouth at the same time that bid us tâ—ke authority to preach the word of God did also tell us that whose sins we remit or retain they are remitted or retained and therefore if one be an Essential or true integral part at least of our office the other is so too From all which it is evident that if there were nothing against the English Prelacy but only this that they thus suspend or degrade all the Presbyters in England as to one half of their offâ—ce it is enough to prove that they should not be restored under any pretence whatsoever of Order or Unity Argum. 5. THat Episcopacy which giveth the Government of the Chuâ—ch and management of the Keys of Excommunication and Absolution into the hands of a few Layâ—men while they take them from the Presbyters is nâ—t to be restored under any pretence of Vnity or Peace But such was the English Prelacy therefore c. The Major is plain because it is not Lay-men that are to be Church Governours as to Ecclesiastical Government This is beyond Question with all save the Congregational and they would not have two or three Lay men chosen but the whole Congregation to manage this business The Minor is known by common experience that it was the Chancelor in hâ—s Court with his assiâ—â—ants and the Register and such other meer Lay-men that managed this work If it be said that they did it as the Bishops Agents and Substitutes and therefore it was he that did it by them I answer 1. The Law put it in the Chancellors and the Bishopâ— could not hinder it 2. If the Bishops may delegate others to do their work then it seems Preaching and Ruling Excommunicaâ—ing and Abâ—olving may as well be done by Lay-men as Clergy men Then they may commission them also to administer the Sacraments And so the Ministry is not necessary for any of these works but only a Bishop to depute Lay-men to do them which is false and confusive Argum. 6. THat Episcopacy whâ—ch necessarily overwhelmeth the souls of the Bishops with the most hainous guilt of neglecting the many thousand souls whose charge they undertake is not to be restored for Order or Peace For men are not to be oveâ—whelmed with such hainous sin on such pretences But such is the English Prelacy and that not accidentally through the badness of the men only but unavoidably through the greatness of their charge and the Natural Impossibility of their undertaken work How grievous a thing it is to have the blood of so many thousands charged on â—hem may soon appear And that man that undertakes himself the Government of two or three or five hundred thousand souls that he never seeth or knoweth nor can possibly so Govern but must needs leave it undone except the shadow
of any other Church Congregation or Elders De facto this is plainly yielded Well this much being yielded and we having come so far to an agreement about the actual Church Constitution and Government of the Scripture times we desire to know some sufficient reason why we in these times may not take up with thaâ— Government and Church order which was practised in the Scripture times And the Reason that is brought against it is this Because it was the Apostles intention that this single Bishop who in Scripture times had but one Congregation and Governed no Presbyters should after Scripture times have many settled Congregations and their Presbyters under them and should have the power of ordaining them c. To this I answer 1. The Intentions of mens hearts are secret till they are some way revealed No man of this age doth know the Apostles hearts but by some sign what then is the revelation that Proveth this Intention Either it must be some Word or Deed. For the first I cannot yet find any colour of proof which they bring from any word of the Apostles where either they give power to this Presbyter or Bishop to Rule over many Presbyters and Congregations for the future Nor yet where they do so much as foretell that so it shall be As for those of Paul to Timothy and Titus that theâ— rebuke not an Elder and receive not accusation against them but under two or three Witnesses the Reverend Author affirmeth that those Eâ—ders were not Presbyters under such Bishops as we now speak of but those Bishops themselves whom Timothy and Titus might rebuke And for meer facts without Scripture words theâ—e is none that can prove this pretended Intention of the Apostles First there is no fact of the Apostles themselves or the Churches or Pastors in Scripture time to prove it For Subordinate Presbyters are confessed not to be then â—nstituted and so not existent and other fact of theirs there can be none And no fact after them can prove it Yet this is the great Argument that most insist on that the practice of the Church after Scripture times doth prove that Intention of the â—pâ—stles which Scripture doth not for ought is yet proved by them that I can find at all express But we deny that and require pâ—ooâ— of it It is not bare saying so that will serve Is it not possible for the succeeding Bishops to err and mistake the Apostles Intentions If not then are they Infallible as well as the Apostles which is not true They might sin in going from the Institution And their sin will not prove that the Apostles intended it should be so de jure because their followers did so de facto If they say that it is not likely that all the Churches should so suddenly be ignorant of the Apostles Intention I answer 1. We must not build our faith and practice on Conjectures Such a saying as this is no proof of Apostolical intentions to warrant us to swerve from the sole practised Government in Scripture times 2. There is no great likelihood that I can discern that this first practised Government was altered by those that knew the Apostles and upon supposition that these which are pretended were their intents 3. If it were so yet is it not impossible nor very improbable that through humane frailty they might be drawn to conjecture that that was the Apostles intents which seemed right in thier eyes and suited their present judgements and interests 4. Sure we are that the Scripture is the perfect Law and Rule to the Church for the Establishing of all necessary Offices and Ordinances and therefore if there be no such intentions or Institutions of the Apostles mentioned in the Scripture we may not set up universally such Offices and Ordinances on any such supposed intents De facto we seem agreed that the Apostles settled One Pastor over one Congregation having no Presbyters under his Rule and that there were no other in Scripture time but shortly after when Christians were multiplied and the most of the Cities where the Churches were planted were converted to the faith together with the Country round about then there were many Congregations and many Pastors and the Pastor of the first Church in the City did take all the other Churches and Pastors to be under his Government calling them Presbyters only and himself eminently or only the Bishop Now the Question between us is Whether this was well done or not Whether these Pastors should not rather have gathered Churches as free as their own Whether the â—hristians that were afterward converted should not have combined for holy Communion themselves in particular distinct â—hurches and have had their own Pastors set over them as the first Churches by the Apostles had They that deny it and Justifie their fact have nothing that we can see for it but an ungrounded surmise that it was the Apostles meaning that the first Bishops should so do But we have the Apostles express Institution and the Churches practise during Scripture times for the other way We doubt not but Christians in the beginning were thin and that the Apostles therefore preached most and planted Churches in Cities because they were the most populous places where was most matter to work upon and most disciples were there and that the Country round about did afford them here and there a family which joyned to the City Church Much like as it is now among us with the Anabaptists and Separatists who are famed to be so Numerous and potent through the Land and yet I do not think that in all this County there is so many in Number of either of these sects as the tenth part of the people of this one Parish nor perhaps as the twentieth part Now if all the Anabaptists in Worcestershire or at least that lived so neer as to be capable of Church communion should be of Mr. T 's Congregation at Bewdley or of a Church that met in the chief City Worcester yet doth not this intimate that all the space of ground in this County is appointed or intended for the future as Mr. T 's Diocess but if the successive Pastor should claim the whole County as his charge if the whole were turned to that opinion no doubt but they would much cross their founders mind And if the comparison may be tolerated we see great reason to conceive that the Ancient Bishops did thus cross the Apostles minds When there were no more Christians in a City and the adjoyning parts then half some of our Parishes the Apostles planted fixed Governours called Bishops or Elders over these particlar Churches which had constant communion in the worship of God And when the Cities and Countreyes were converted to the faith the frailty of ambition co-working thereto these Bishops did claim all that space of ground for their Diocess where the members of their Church had lived before as if Churches were to be measured by the
Bishops who gathered as many as they could under their own Government when they should have erected new Churches as free as their own Reason 12. If the Description of the Bishops settled in the New Testament and the work affixed to them be such as cannot agree to our Diocesan Bishops but to the Pastors of a single Church then was it never the mind of the Holy Ghost that those Bishops should degenerate afterwards into Diocesan Bishops But the Antecedent is certain therefore so is the Consequent I here still suppose with Learned Dr. H Annot. in Act. 11. passim that the name Presbyter in Scripture signifieth a Bishop there being no Evidence that in Scripture time any of that Second Order viz. subject Presbyters were then instituted Though I am far from thinking that there was but one of these Bishops in a Church at least as to many Churches Now as we are agreed de facto that it was but a single Church that then was under a Bishop and not many such Churches for that follows undenyably upon the denying of the existence of subject Presbyters seeing no such Churches can be nor the worshipping Assemblies held without a Bishop or Presbyter so that it was the mind of the Apostles that it should so continue is proveed by the Desciption and work of those Scripture Bishops Argument 1. From Acts 20.28 29 31. The Bishops instituted and fixed by the Holy Ghost were and are to take heed to all the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made them overseeers to feed the Church of God and to watch against Wolves and to warn every one night and day But this cannot be done by Diocesan Bishops nor any that have more then one Church Therefore Diocesan Bishops are not the Bishops that the Holy Ghost hath so fixed and instituted such as Paul describeth were to continue and that 's such as can do that work Argument 2. The Bishops that the Holy-Ghost settled and would have continue and had the Power of Ordination given them were such as were to be Ordained in every City and every Church Acts 14.23 Tit. 1.3 4 5. See Dr. Hammonds Annotat. But it is not Diocesan Bishops that are such for they are over many Churches and Cities therefore it is not Diocesan Bishops that were settled by the Holy Ghost nor meant in those texts Ar. 3. The Bishops which were instituted by the Holy Ghost and are meant in Scripture were to watch for their peoples souls as those that must give account Ruling over them and to be obeyed by all and speaking to them the word of God Heb. 13.7 17 24. But this cannot be done by a Bishop to a whole Diocess nor will they be willing of such an account if they be wise therefore it is not Diocesan Bishops that are meant in Scripture Argument 4. The Bishops settled for continuance in Scripture were such as all the people were to know as labouring among them and over them in the Lord and admonishing them and to esteem them very highly in love for their work sake 1 Thes. 5.12 13. But this cannot be meant of our Diocesan Bishop whom the hundreth part of the flock shall never see hear nor be admonished by therefore it is not such that were settled for continuance in the Church Argument 5. The Bishops settled by the Holy Ghost must by any that are sick be sent for to pray over them But this a Diocesan Bishop cannot do to the hundreth or thousandth person in some places therefore it is not Diocesan Bishops but the Bishops of a single Church that are capable of these works that are meant by the Holy Ghost to continue in the Church and consequently to whom the power of Ordaining was committed If any question whether the Texts alleadged do speak of subject-subject-Presbyters or Bishops I refer them to the foresaid Reverend Doctor with whom I am agreed that there were no subject-Presbyters instituted in Scripture times Reason 13. It was not one or two or all Churches for a year or two or more in their meer fieri or infancy before they were well formed that consisted only of one settled worshipping Assembly and its guides but it was the formed and stablished state of the particular Churches To prove this I shall briefly do these three things 1. I shall shew it in respect to the Jewish Synagogues 2. As to the Churches in the Apostles dayes after many years growth even of every Church that 's mentioned in the New Testament as a particular Political Church 3. As to some of the Churches after the Apostles dayes mentioned by the ancients 1. It is apparent that the Jews Synagogues were particular Congregational Churches having each one their several Rulers and as many Learned men suppose they had an Ecclesiastical Judicature of Elders belonging to each of them where fit men could be found and this distinct from the Civil Judicature Or as others think they had a Sanhedrim which had power to judge in both Causes and one of these was in every City that is in Places of Cohabitation For in every City of Israel which had one hundred and twenty families or free persons say others they placed the Sanhedrim of twenty three And in every City which had not one hundred and twenty men in it they set the smallest Judicature of three Judges so be it there were but two wise men among them fit to teach the Law and resolve doubts See Aâ—nsworth on Numb 11.16 citing Talmud Bab. Maimonides more at large And doubtless many of our Country Villages and almost all our Parishes have more then 120. and every Country Village may come in in the lesser number below 120. which are to have three Elders and that say some was every place where were ten men And that these were under the great Sanhedrim at Ierusalem is nothing to the matter For so we confess that such particular Churches as we mention have some such General officers over them de jure as the Apostolical men were in the Primitive Church but not that any of these Synagogues were under other Synagogues though one were in a great City and the other but in a small Town And that these Synagogues were of Divine institution is plain in divers texts particularly in Lev. 23.1 2 3. where a convocation of holiness or a holy Convocation is commanded to be on every Sabboth in all their dwellings which most plainly could be neither the meeting at Ierusalem at the Temple nor yet in single families and therefore it is not to much purpose that many trouble themselves to conjecture when Synagogues began and some imagine it was about the Captivity For as their controversie can be but about the form of the meeting place or the name so its certain that some place there must be for such meetings and that the meetings themselves were in the Law commanded by God and that not to be tumultuary confused ungoverned Assemblies If the scourging in
spoke of such Bishops only as we have in question or that he did not plainly speak of Presbyters as such For he speaks of the plenitude of Power and Grace in the Church and therefore intended more then what was proper to a Prelate 2. He mentioneth Elders Majores natu in general without distinction And 3. His praesident is plainly related to the Church as the ubi shews it being the People and not the Elders over whom these Elders are said to preside And 4. Baptizing is first instanced which was known to be commonly the work of Presbyters and never appropriated to the Prelate So that the same persons that did Baptize even the Elders of the Church according to Firmilian did then possess the power of laying on hands and of ordaining But these things are more fully discussed in what followeth And if any either adversary or friend would see the Reformed Churches Ministry and Ordination more fully vindicated I refer them to Voetius against Jasenius Desperata causa Papatus which if I had read before I had written this Disputation I think I should have spared my labour Reader if others are too busie to misled thee I may suppose thee unwilling to be misled especially in a matter of so great concernment For saith Blessed Agustine Multos invenimus qui mentiri velint qui autem falli â—eminem de Doctrin Christ. l. 1. cap. 36. And therefore as thou lovest Christ his Church and Gospel and the souls of others and thine own take heed how thou venturest in following a sect of angry men to unchurch so great and excellent a part of the Catholich Church and to vilifie and depose so great a number of able faithfull Ministers of Christ as those that had not Prelatical Ordination And if you are Gentlemen or unlearned men that for want of long and diligent studying of these matters are uncapable of judging of them and therefore take all on the Authority of those whose Learning and parts you most esteem I beseech you before you venture your souls on it any further procure a satisfactory answer to these Questions 1. Whether the Reformed Churches that have no Prelates have not abounded with as learned men as any one of those that you admire of a contrary judgement 2. If you are tempted to suspect men of partiality whether they that plead for Lorship honour and preferment or they that plead against it and put it from them are more to be suspected caâ—teris paribus 3. If you will needs suspect the Protestant Ministers of partiality what ground of suspicion have you of them that were no Ministers such as the two Scaligers whose learning made them the admiration of the Christian world even to Papists as well as Protestants and yet were cordial friends to those Reformed Churches which these men deny and draw men to disown Such also as Salmasius that hath purposely wrote about the subject with abundance more 4. If these are not to be trusted why should not Bishops themselves be trusted were not Bishop Usher Andrews Davenant Hall and others of their mind as learned pious men as any whose Authority you can urge against them 5. If all this be nothing I beseech you get a modest resolution of this doubt at least whether the concurrent judgement of all the Protestant Churches in Christendom even of the English Bishops with the rest should not be of more authority with any sober Protestant then the Contrary judgement of those few that are of late risen up for the cause that you are by them solicited to own It is a known Truth that the generality of the Bishops themselves and all the Protestant Churches in the world have owned them as true Ministers that were ordained by Presbyteries without Prelates and have owned them as true Churches that were guided by these Ministers and have taken them for valid administrations that were performed by them And are your few Recusants that would draw you to separation of greater Learning authorty and regard then all the Protestants in the world besides I beseech you if you will needs take things upon trust consider this and trust accordingly Though I must say it is pitty that any truely Catholick Christian should not have better grounds than these and be able himself in so palpable a case to perceive his duty For my own part my conscience witnesseth that I have not written the following Disputation out of a desire to quarrel with any man but am drawn to it to my great displeasure by the present danger and necessity of the Churches and by compassion to the souls that are turned from the publick Ordinances and engaged in the separation and also of the Churches that are divided and troubled by these means The sad complaints of many of my Brethren from several parts have moved my heart to this undertaking Through Gods Mercy I have peace at home but I may not therefore be insensible of the divisions and calamities abroad I shall adjoin here one of the Letters that invited me and no more because in that one you may see the scope and tenour of the rest and that I rush not on this displeasing work without a Call nor before there is a cause The passages that intimate an ever-valuing of my self you may charitably impute to the Authors juniority and humility with some mistake through distance and disacquaintance One of the Letters that invited me to this task Reverend Sir UNderstanding by the Preface to the Reader before your Gildaâ— Salvianus that you intend a second part wherein you promise to speak of the way how to discern the true Church and Ministry I make bold to present you with the desire of some Godly Ministers viz. that if you see it convenient you would do some thing towards the vindication of the present Churches and Ministers from the aspersions of the new Prelatical party in England It is a principle much made of by many of the Gentry and others that we are but Schismatical branches broken off from the true body and this by faithfull tradition is spread amongst them the learning of some rigid Prelatical Schollars is very prevalent with them to make them thus account of us With these men we must be all unchurched for casting off Diocesan Episcopacy though we be found in the faith and would spend our selves to save souls and the main substance of our Ordination at least cannot be found fault with yet because we had not a Bishop to lay his hands on us we are not sent from God Of what consequence this opinion may prove if it spread without being checked an ordinary apprehension may perceive I can guess something from what I observe from those of this leaven already that our most serious pains will be little regarded if our people take this infection when we would awaken them we cannot because they take it that we have no power to teach them It must not be men of mean parts that must
no peculiar Diocess of Paul Sect. 14. And 3. We still find that there were more then one of these general itinerant Ministers in a Place or at least that no one excluded others from having equal power with him in his Province where ever he came Barnabas Silas Titus Timotheus Epaphroditus and many more were fellow-labourers with Paul in the same Diocess or Province and not as fixed Bishops or Presbyters under him but as General Ministers as well as he We never read that he said to any of the false Apostles that sought his contempt This is my Diocess what have â—ou to do to play the Bishop in another mans Diocess Much less did he ever plead suâ—h a Power against Peter Barnabas or any Apostolical Minister Nor that Iames pleaded any such prerogative at Ierusalem Sect. 15. And therefore though we reverence Eusebius and other Ancients that tell us of some Apostles Diocesses we take them not as infallible reporters and have reason in these points partly to deny them credit from the word of God The Churches that were planted by any Apostle or where an Apostle was longest resident were like enough to reckon the series of their Pastors from him For the founder of a Church is a Pastor of it though not a fixed Pastor taking it as his peculiar charge but delivering it into the hands of such And in this sence we have great reason to understand the Catalogues of the Antients and their affirmations that Apostles were Bishops of the Churches For Pastors they were but so that they had no peculiar Diocess but still went on in planting and gathering and confirming Churches Whereas the Bishops that were setled by them and are said to succeed them had their single Churches which were their peculiar charge They had but one such charge or Church when the Apostles that lead in the Catalogues had many yet none so as to be limited to them And why have we not the Diocess of Paul and Iohn and Mathew and Thomas and the rest of the twelve mentioned as well of Peter and Iames Or if Paul had any it seems he was compartner with Peter in the same City contrary to the Canons that requireth that there be but one Bishop in a City Sect. 16. It s clear then that the English Bishops were not such Apostolical unfixed Bishops as the Itinerants of the first age were And yet if they were I shall shew in the next Argument that it s nothing to their advantage because Archbishops are nothing to our question And that they were not such as the fixed Bishops of Scripture times I am next to prove Sect. 17. The fixed Bishops in the Scripture times had but a single Congregation or particular Church for their Pastoral Charge But our English Bishops had many if not many hundred such Churches for their charge therefore our English Bishope were not of the same sort with those in Scripture The Major I have proved in the former Disputation The Minor needs no proof as being known to all that know England Sect. 18. And 2. The fixed Bishops in the Scripture times had no Presbyters at least of other particular Churches under them They Governed not any Presbyters that had other associated Congregations for publick Worship But the English Bishops had the Presbyters of other Churches under them perhaps of hundreds therefore they are not such as the Scripture Bishops were There is much difference between a Governour of People and a Governour of Pastors Episcopus gregis Episcopus Episcoporum is not all one None of us saith Cyprian in Concil Carthagin calleth himself or takes himself to be Episcopum Episcoporum No fixed Bishops in Scripture times were the Pastors of Pastors as least of other Churches Sect. 19. This I suppose I may take as granted de facto from the Reverend Divine whom I have cited in the foregoing Disputation that saith Annotat. in Art 11. that Although this Title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders have been also extended to a second order in the Church and now iâ— only in use for them under the name of Presbyters yet in the Scripture-times it belonged principally if not alone to Bishops there being no Evidence that any of that second Order were then instituted though soon after before the writing 〈◊〉 â—gnatius Epistles there were such instituted in all Churches So that he granteth that de facto there were then no Presbyters but Bishops and that they were not instituted and therefore Bishops had no such Presbyters to Govern nor any Churches but a single Congregation For one Bishop could guide but one Congation at once in publick worship and there could be no Worshipping Congregations in the sence that now we speak of without some Presbyter to guide them in performance of the worship Sect. 20. So saith the same Learned man Dissertat 4. de Episcop page 208 209. in quibus plures absque dubio Episcopi â—uere nullique adhuc quos hodie dicimus Presbyteri And therefore he also concludeth that the Churches weâ—e then Governed by Bishops assisted by Deacons without Presbyters instancing in the case of the Church of Ierusalem Act. 6. and alledging the words of Clem. Roman 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. How Grotius was confident that Clemens was against their Episcopacy shewed before To the same purpose he citeth the words of Clemens Alexandrinus in Euseb. of Iohn the Apostle concluding Ex â—is ratio constat quare sine Presâ—yterorum mentione intervenientâ— Episcopis Diaconi immediate adjiciantur quia scilicet in singulis Macedoniae civitatibus quam vis Episcopus esset nondum Presbyteri constituti sunt Diaconis tantum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ubique Episcopis adjunctis Dissertat 4 cap. 10. Sect. 19 20 21. So also cap. 11. Sect. 2. alibi passim Sect. 21. Object But though de facto there were no Bishopâ—â—uling Presbyters then nor ruling any more then a single Worshâ—pâ—ing Church yet it was the Intention of the Apostles that they should afterwards enlarge their Diocess and take the care of many Churches and that they should ordain that soâ—t of subject Presbyters that were not instituted in Scripture-times Answ. Do you prove the secret Intention of the Apostles to be for such a Mutation and then we shall be satisfied in that But till then it is enough to us that we have the same Government that de facto was set up by the Apostles and exercised in Scripture times And that it s granted us that the office was not then instituted which we deny For it is the office of such subject Presbyters having no Power of Ordination that we deny Sect. 22. Object But though in Scripture times there were no Bishops over many Churches and Presbyters yet there were Archbishops that were over many Answ. Because this objection contains their strength I shall answer it the more fully And 1. If there were no subject Presbyters in those times then Archbishops could rule none But there were
under them have power of Ordination But very many English Pastors at this day have Presbyters under them therefore they have Power of Oâ—dination By Presbyters I mean not men of another office but gradually inferiour in the saâ—e office The Major is proved ad hominem from the Concessions of the Dissenters For though I rarely meet in their disputations for Bishops with any Definition of a Bishop yet This is it that they most commonly give us as the Essential difference of a Bishop that he is one that is over Presbyters Yea this agâ—eeth with their higher sort of Bishops that they say were in the Church in Ignatius daies when subject Presbyters were instituted and therefore those Pastors may ordain that are of that higher sort of Bishops Sect. 14. The Minor is notorious Many of our Pastors in Market Towns and other large Parishes have a curate with them in the same Congregation and one or two or more Curates at several Chappels of ease that are in the Parish And these are under them 1. De facto being chosen and brought in by them Ruled by them and paid by them and removed by them 2. De jure the Bishops and Laws of the Land allowed this Sect. 15. Argument 5. The stated or fixed President of a Presbyterie may Ordain with his fellow Presbyters But many of our Parish Pastors are the fixed Presidents of Presbyteries therefore they may ordain The Major I take for granted by all that stand to the Ordinary descriptions of a Bishop For the stated President of a Presbyterie is not only a Bishop in the judgement of Forbes Bishop Hall Bishop Vsher and such other but is indeed the Primitive Bishop in their judgement and such a Bishop in whom they would rest satisfied and do propose such for the Churches Peace Sect. 16. And the Minor is notorious For 1. In the most of our ordered Churches there is a Presbyterie of Ruling Ecclesiastick Elders 2. In many there are divers preaching Presbyters which may satisfie them that are against meer ruling Elders as I shewed before And if these be not inferiour to the chief Pastor in Ecclesiastical Degree yet they are his Compresbyters and he is in all Parishes that I know where Curates or Assistants are their stated President or Moderator so that we have in all such Congregations according to the doctrine of the Bishops themselves not only such Bishops as were in the Apostles days when there was no subject Presbyters but also such Bishops as were in Ignatius daies when the fixed President or Bishop had many Presbyters to whom he was the President or Moderator Sect. 17. Yea if you will make his Negative voice Essential to a Bishop which Moderate Episcopal men deny yet commonly this agreeth to such Parish Bishops as have Curates under them For in the Presbyterie they have ordinarily a Negative Voice Sect. 18. Yea where there are no such Presbyteries with a President it is yet enough to prove him a Bishop that he hath Deacons under him or but one Deacon saith Dr. H H. Annotat in Act. 11. b. When the Gospel was first preached by the Apostles and but few converted they ordained in every City and Region no more but a Bishop and one or more Deacons to attend him there being at the present so small store out of which to take more and so small need of Ordaining more Sect. 19. Argument 6. The Moderator or President of many Pastors of particular Churches assembled may Ordain and his Ordination is Valid But such a Moderator or President is ordinarily or frequently One in our Ordinations therefore they are Valid The Major is granted by many of the Dissenters and all their principles I think do infer it For such a one is a Bishop not only of the Apostolical institution Nor only such as was in Ignatius days but such an Archbishop as next afterward sprung up When it is not only one Church and its Presbyters that are under him but the Presbyters or Bishops of many Churches that he is Moderator or President of methinks those that are for the highest Prelacy should not deny the Validity of his Ordination Sect. 20. But two things will be here objected The one is that he was not consecrated to this Presidency or Moderatorship by Bishops To which I answer 1. That Consecration is not of Necessity to such a Bishop according to the principles of Episcopal Divines it being no new Office or Order that they are exalted to but a new Degree Ordination which was received when they were made Presbyters may suffice and is not to be iterated 2. The Election of the Presbyters served as Hiâ—rom testifyeth in the Church of Alexandria therefore it may serve now of which more anon 3. He is chosen by true Bishops as is shewed Sect. 21. The other Objection is that our Presidents are but pro tempore and therefore are not Bishops To which I answer 1. That in some Places they are for a long time and in some for an uncertain time Dr. Twiss was Moderator of the Synod at Westminster for many years together even durante vita and Mr. Hâ—rle after him was long Moderator The London Province hath a President for many moneths even from one Assembly to another 2. I never yet met with an Episcopal Divine that maintained that it was essential to a Bishop to be such duâ—rante vita I am sure it is not commonly asserted If a man be made the Bishop of such or such a Diocess for one and twenty years or for seven years it will be said to be irregular but I know none of them that have averred it to be so great an Error as nullifieth his Power and administrations And if it may stand with the Being of Episcopacy to be limited to seven years then also to be limited to seven moneths or seven weeks or days Especially when as usually with us they fix no time at the first Election but leave it to the liberty of the next Assembly to continue or to end his power Let them prove that affirm it that duration for life is essentiall to a Bishop Sect. 22. Argument 7. Where all these forementioned qualifications of the Ordainer do concur viz. 1. That he be the Pastor of a particular Church and the chief Pastor of it and the Pastor of a City Church and have Deacons and Presbyters under him and be the fixed President of a Presbyterie and the Moderator or President of a larger Presbyterie of the Pastors of many Churches there according to the principles even of the râ—gider sort of Dissenters the Ordination is valid But all these forementioned qualifications do frequently concur to some of our present Ordainers in England therefore even according to the more rigid Dissenters their Ordination is Valid The premises are so plain that they need no confirmation Sect. 23. Argument 8. Ordination by a Presbyterie is Valid But in England and other Reformed Churches we have Ordination by a Presbyterie therefore
our Ordination is Valid The Major is proved from 1. Tim. 4.14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee which was given theâ— by Prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the Pres-Presbyterie Also from Act. 13.1 2 3. They were the Prophets and Teachers of the Church of Antioch that imposed hands on Barnabas and Saul whether it were for their first Ordination to the Office or only for a particular Mission I now dispute not The Church of Antioch had not many Prelates if any but they had many Prophets and Teachers and these and none but these are mentioned as the Ordainers As for them that say these were the Bishops of many Churches of Syria when the Text saith they all belonged to this Church of Antioch they may by such presumptuous contradictions of Scripture say much but prove little Sect. 24. As for them that grant us that there were no subject Presbyters instituted in Scripture-times and so expound the Presbyterie here to be only Apostles and Bishops of the higher order I have shewed already that they yield us the Cause though I must add that we can own no new sorâ— of Presbyterie not instituted by Christ or his Apostles But for them that think that Prelates with subject Presbyters were existent in those times they commonly expound this Text of Ordination by such subject Presbyters with others of a Superior rank or degree together Now as to our use it is sufficient that hence we prove that a Presbyterie may ordain and that undeniably a Presbyterie consisted of Presbyters and so that Presbyters may ordain This is commonly granted us from this Text. That which is said against us by them that grant it is that Presbyters did Ordain but not alone but with the Bishops Sect. 25. But 1. if this were proved it s nothing against us for if Presbyters with Bishops have power to Oâ—dain then it is not a work that is without the reach of their Office but that which belongeth to them and therefore if they could prove it irregular for them to Ordain without a Bishop yet would they not prove it Null Otherwise they might prove it Null if a Bishop Ordain without a Presbyterie because according to this Objection they must concur 2. But indeed they prove not that any above Presbyters did concur in Timothies Ordination whatever probability they may shew for it And till they prove it we must hold so much as is proved and granted Sect. 26. As for 2 Tim. 1.6 it is no certain proof of it It may be Imposition of hands in Confirmation or for the first giving of the Holy Ghost after Baptism ordinarily used by the Apostles that is there spoken of which also seemeth probable by the Apostles annexing it to Timothies Faith in which he succeeded his Mother and Grandmother and to the following effects of the Spirit of Power and of Love and of a sound mind which are the fruits of Confirming Grace admonishing hâ—m that he be not ashamed of the Testimony of our Lord which is also the fruit of Confirmation However the pâ—obâ—bility go they can give us no certainty that Paul or any Apostle had an hand in the Ordination here spoken of when the Text saith that it was with the laying on of the hands of the Presbâ—terie we must judge of the office by the name and therefore 1. we are sure that there were Presbyters 2. And if there were also any of an higher rank the Phrase encourageth us to believe that it was as Presbyters that they imposed hands in Ordination Sect. 27. Argument 9. If Bishops and Presbyters as commonly distinguished do differ only Gradu non Ordine in Degree and not in Order that is as being not of a distinct office but of a more honourable Degree in the same office then is the Ordination of Presbyters valid though without a Bishop of that higher Degree But the Antecedent is true therefore so is the Consequent The Antecedent is maintained by abundance of the Papists themselves much more by Protestants The reason of the Consequence is because ad ordinem pertinet ordinarâ— Being of the same office they may do the same work This Aâ—gument Bishop Vsher gave me to prove that the Ordination of meer Presbyters without a Prelate is valid when I askt him his Judgement of it Sect. 28. Argument 10. If the Prelates and the Laws they went by did allow and require meer Presbyters to Ordain then must they grant us that they have the Power of Ordination But the Antecedent is true as is well known in the Laws and common Practice of the Prelates in Ordaining divers Presbyters laid on hands together with the Bishop and it was not the Bishop but his Chaplain commonly that examined and approved usually the Bishop came forth and laid his hands on men that he never saw before or spoke to but took them as he found them presented to him by his Chaplain so that Presbyters Ordained as well as he and therefore had power to Ordain Sect. 29. If it be Objected that they had no power to Ordain without a Bishop I answer 1. Nor a Bishop quoad exercitium without them according to our Laws and Customs at least â—â—â—ually 2. Ordaining with a Bishop proveth them to be Ordainers and that it is a work that belongeth to the order or office of a Presbyter or else he might not do it at all any more then Deacons or Chancellors c. may And if it be but the work of a Presbyters office it is not a Nullity if Presbyters do it without a Prelate if you could prove it an irregularity Sect. 30. Argument 11. If the Ordination of the English â—relates be valid then much more is the Ordination of Presbyters as in England and other Reformed Churches is in use But the Ordination of English Prelates is valid I am sure in the judgement of them that we dispute against therefore so is the Ordination of English Presbyters much more Sect. 31. The reason of the Consequence is because the English Prelates are more unlike the Bishops that were fixed by Apostolical Institution or Ordination then the English Presbyters are as I have shewed at large in the former Disputation the Scripture Bishops were the single Pastors of single Churches personally guiding them in the worship of God and governing them in presence and teaching them by their own mouths visiting their sick administring Sacraments c. And such are the English Presbyters But such are not the late English Prelates that were the Governors of an hundred Churches and did not personally teach them guide them in worship govern them in presence and deliver them the Sacraments but were absent from them all save one Congregation These were unliker to the Scripture fixed Bishops described by Dr. H. H. then our Presbyters are therefore if they may derive from them a Power of Ordination or from the â—aw that instituted them then Presbyters may do so much more Sect. 32. Argument 12.
it and yet this proveth not that the people were neer the Bishop in degree that which the people themselves may do and frequently did is not the only thing that Hierom here ascribeth to the Presbyters but such is the Election of a Bishop therefore c. 4. It is the Original or first making of Prelates at Alexandria that Hierom here speaks of which he shews was from the Presbyters consent This appeareth plainly in his words though some can make the plainest words to signifie what they would have them For 1. He begins with a Presbyteris id est Episcopâ—s and 2. proceedeth from many scripture passages to prove them in scripture times the same and that not only quoad nomen but officium for 3. When he had done with the Testimonies of Saint Iohn in his two Epistles he immediately addeth Quod autem postea unus electus est qui caeteris praeponeretur c. where note both that unus qui caeteris praeponeretur is more then the bare name and also that Postea referreth to the date of Iohns Epistles and therefore he plainly averreth that it was after Iohns Epistles that one was chosen to be before the rest 5. And to the Answer I further reply that here is all that was done and all that was needfull to be done ascribed to the Presbyters For 1. They elected one 2. They did in excelsiori gradu electum collocare place him in an higher degree and 3. Episcopum nominabant they named him the Bishop by way of excellency And if Election and placing him in the Degree and giving him peculiarly the name be not Ordination then Ordination is but some Ceremony for these contain the substance 6. And Hierom expresly resembleth this action of the Presbyters to an Armies making an Emperour or General as if he had said As the Army makes an Emperour Imperatorem faciat so Presbyters made the Bishop but the Army so made the Emperour that they left it not to another power to make him and to them only So that it is both Making a Bâ—shop that is here ascribed to the Presbyters and such a making as leaveth him not unmade to the making of another 7. And he resembleth it to the making of an Arch-deacon supposing that the Deacons do 1. Elect. 2. Judge of the person quem industrium noverint 3. And give him the name Archi-diaconum vocent 8. And he affirmeth this to be semper the constant custom of the Alexandrian Presbyters till the dayes of Heraclas and Dionysius intimating that then the custom changed but what custom was then changed Not the Election of a Bishop by the Presbyters with the people for that continued long after and therefore it must be the Constitution which afterward was done by Neighbour Bishops in Consecration but till then by the Election Collocation and nomination of the Presbyters of that City-Church 9. Having shewed thus that Bishops and Presbyters were the same and in the beginning called them by the same name he affirms that Omnes Apostolorum successores sunt that is All these Bishops 10. And he plainly affirms that the difference is made by Riches and Poverty He is the greater that is the richer and he is the inferiour that is the poorer Potentia divitiarum paupertatis humilitas vel sublimiorâ—m vel inferiorem Episcopum facit Let any impartial Reader peruse the Epistle it self and consideâ— of these ten passages and then believe if he can either that Hierom did imply that other Bishops made these Alexandrian Bishops and not the Presbyters or that these Presbyters altered but the name and gave not the Bishop his new degree or that this was not a thing that was now de novo in remedium schismatis contrived or performed by them There is evidence enough against these conceits Sect. 58. And further for them that think it was but the name that was now changed I would ask them these few Questions supposing them to be of their mind that tell us that Inferiour Presbyters were not instituted in Scripture-times and that it was only Prelates that are called Bishops and Presbyters in Scripture 1. Is it not strange that when after Scripture-times a New Office was made it should not have a new Name also but should have the same name with the old superiour office 2. And is it not strange that both names of the superior Office Bishop and Presbyter should be commonly given to the new inferior Office at the first 3. And strange that the Church must afterward be put to change the names and retrench or recall the name of a Bishop from the new sort of Presbyters and confine it to the old leaving as old the name of a Presbyter to the new inferior Office 4. And if in Scripture-times in the dayes when Iohn wrote his Epistles and Revelation the names of Bishop and Presbyter were both appropriated to Prelates there being no Inferiour Presbyters then instituted and yet from Mark the Evangelist the Alexandrian Presbyters brought back the name of a Bishop to the Prelates retaining the name Presbyter themselves Quaero How long time was there after the Institution of Inferiour Presbyters till the regulating of their names from the dayes of Mark About thirty four years backward Mark dyed in the eighth year of Nero and the Presbyters made Arianus Bishop after his death who continued twenty two years even from the eighth of Nero to the fourth of Domitian as Eusebius in Histor. Eccles. l. 2. cap 23. lib. 3. cap. 12. in Chronic. Hieronym in Catalog ex illis Usher Annal. Vol. 2. ad an Dom. 67. pag 677. And Helvicus and others are neer the same time And saith Helvicus Iohn wrote the Revelations about the fourteenth year of Domitian and wrote his Gospel about the first year of his Successor Nerva So that Mark dyed about thirty six years or thirâ—y four at least before Iohn wrote his Gospel so that here you have your choice whether you will believe that subject Presbyters did regulate the names of themselves and Bishops and did elect or make Bishops thirty six years before they were instituted themselves or whether you will believe that yet at the death of Mark there were no inferior Presbyters at Alexandria and so no superior Bishops for all this that Hierom doth report Sect. 59. As for the Episcopal Divines that dissent from the Principle of the forecited Learned Author who saith that there is no evidence that any of the second sort of Presbyters were instituted in Scripture times I need not deal with them in thâ—s Disputation for all of them that ever I yet met with do grant the validity of Presbyters Ordination and the truth of the Reformed Churches and their Ministry and Ordinances otherwise it were easie enough to vindicate all these from them also if they denyed them Sect. 60. Argument 18. Ad hominem If the late English Prelates had a lawful call to their Prelacy then much
Major is undenyable because there are all things enumerated that are Necessary to the determination of the person qualified that is to receive the power from Christ Sect. 68. And the Minor I prove by parts 1. That our Ministry have usually the peoples consent is a known case that needs no proof 2. So is it that they have the Magistrates allowance and his Authority appointing Approvers for their Introduction and allowing Ordination and commanding Ministerial Works Sect. 69. And doubtless the Magistrate himself hath so much Authority in Ecclesiastical affairs that if he command a qualified person to preach the Gospel and command the people to receive him I see not how either of them can be allowed to disobey him Though yet the party ought also to have recourse to Pastors for Ordination and people for consent where it may be done And Grotius commendeth the saying of Musculus that would have no Minister question his Call that being qualified hath the Christian Magistrates Commission And though this assertion need some limitations yet it is apparent that Magistrates power is great about the Offices of the Church For Solomon put out Abiathar from the Priesthood and put Zadeck in his place 1 Kings 2.27 35. David and the Captains of the host separated to Gods service those of the sons of Asaph and of Heman and of Ieduthun who should Prophesie with Harps c. 1 Chron 16.4 And so did Solomon 2 Chron. 8.14 15. They were for the service of the house of God according to the Kings Order 1 Chron. 25.1 6. And methinks those men should acknowledge this that were wont to stile the King In all causes and over all persons the supream Head and Governour Sect. 70. But 3. We have moreover in the Ordination of the Reformed Churches The approbation and solemn Investiture of the fittest Ecclesiastical Officers that are to be had And no more is requisite to an orderly Admission There being nothing for man to do but to determine of the qualified person and present him to God to receive the power and obligation from his Law it is easie to discern that where all these concur the Peoples Election or Consent the Magistrates Authority the determination of fit Ecclesiastical Officers and the qualification and consent of the person himself there needs no more to the designation of the man Nor hath God tyed the essence of the Church or Ministry to a certain formality or to the interest or will of Prelates nor can any more ad ordinem be required but that a qualified person do enter by the best and most Orderly way that is open to him in those times and places where he is And that we have the fittest Approvers and Ordainers I prove Sect. 71. If the most of the Protestant Churches have no other Ecclesiastical Officers to Ordain but Presbyters then is it the most fit and orderly way to enter into the Ministry in those Churches by their Ordination and those Presbyters are the fittest that are there to Ordain But the Antecedent is a known truth If any in denyal of the Consequence say that the Churches should rather be without Ministers then have Ordination by such they are confuted by what is said before Sect. 72. And if you say that they should have Bishops and it is their own fault that they have not I answer Suppose that were a granted truth it can reach but to some that have the Rule It is not the fault of every Congregation or expectant of the Ministry It is not in their power to alter Laws and forms of Government and therefore they are bound to enter by the fittest way that is open to them Sect. 73. Moreover even in England the Presbyteries are fitter for Ordination then the present Bishops as to the Nation in general therefore the Ordination by Presbyteries is done by the fittest Ecclesiastical officers and is the most regular and desireable Ordination Sect. 74. I prove the Antecedent by comparing the Ordination of the Presbyteries and the present Prelates 1. I have before shewed that the English Prelacy is more unlike the Primitive Episcopacy then our Parochial Presbytery or Episcopacy is and therefore hath less reason to appropriate to themselves the Power of Ordaining 2. The Ordaining Presbyters are Many and known persons and the Prelates few and to the most and except three or four to almost all that I am acquainted wiâ—h unknown 3. The Presbyters Ordain Openly where all may be satisfied of the impartiality and Order of their proceedings But the Prelates Ordain in Private where the same satisfaction is not given to the Church 4. Hereupon it is easie for any vagrant to counterfeit the Prelates secret Orders and say he was Ordained by them when it is no such matter and who can disprove him But the publick Ordination of Presbyters is not so easily pretended by such as have it not and the pretence is easily discovered 5. The Prelates for ought I hear are very few and therefore few can have access to them for Ordination But Presbyteries are in most countreyes 6. The Prelates as far as I can learn Ordain Ministers without the peoples consent over whom they are placed and without giving them any notice of it before hand that they may put in their exceptions if they dissent But the Presbyters ordinarily require the consent of the people or at least will hear the reasons of their dissent 7. The Presbyteries Ordain with the Magistrates allowance and the Prelates without and against them Those therefore that are Ordained by Prelates usually stand on that foundation alone and want the consent of People and Magistrates when those that are Ordained by Presbyteries have all 8. Ordination by Prelates is now pleaded for on Schismatical grounds and in submitting to it with many of them we must seem to consent to their Principles that all other Ordination is Null and the Churches are no true Churches that are without it But Presbyteries Ordain not on such dividing terms 9. We hear not of neer so much care in the Prelates Ordinations in these or former times as the Presbyteries I could give some instances even of late of the great difference which I will not offend them with expressing 10. Most of them that we hear of Ordain out of their own Diocesses which is against the ancient Canons of the Church 11. Some of them by their Doctrines and their Nullifying all the Reformed Churches and Ministry that have no Prelates do shew us that if they had their will they would yet make more lamentable destructive work in the Church then the hottest persecutors of their late predecessors did For it is plain that they would have all the Ministers disowned or cast out that are not for the Prelacy And what a case then would this land and others be in Of which more anon So that we have reason to fear that these are destroyers and not faithful Pastors I speak not of all but only of the guilty For
Neminâ—m rectâ— dare quod non habet eumque aut eâ—s qui hac potestate induâ—i nunquam fuerint sine viâ—latione aut sacrilegio quâ—dâ—m sibi arrogare aut assumere aut aliis aeque à Deo non vocatis aut missis communicare neutiquam posse Illud hic nobis unicum mâ—minisse sufficiet unumquemque in Anglicana Ecclesia ab Epiâ—copis ordinatum Presbyterum nulla ordinandi alios facultate aut per se aut quà quolibet comparium caetu munitum praeditum esse nec igitur â—am sibi rectius arrogare posse quam si Diaconorum immo Laicorum unus aut plures tali potestate nullatenus induti idem ausursint The summ is Presbyters have not this power therefore they cannot give it Sect. 98. Answ. If the Argument run thus No man can give that which he hath not Presbyters have not the Office of a Presbyter therefore they cannot give it I then deny the Minor They are not Presbyters if they have not the Office of a Presbyter that therefore which they have to speak in the Dissenters language they may give Sect. 99. But if the Argument be this No man can give that which he hath not Presbyters have not a power of Ordaining therefore they cannot give a power of Ordaining I answer as followeth 1. We receive not our Office by the Gift of man whether Presbyters or Prelates The Power is immediately from Christ and men do but open us the door or determine of the person that shall from Christ receive the power and then put him solemnly into possession It is the first Error of the adversaries to hold that this power is given by men as first having it themselves In the Popes case Bellarmine himself will grant us this Respons ad 7 Theolog. Venet. p. 246.232 Saepe inquit jam dictum est Electionem Cardinalium non conferre potestatem sed designare tantummodo personam cui Deus potestatem tribuit And yet that In summo Pontifice post electionem nulla alia requiritur confirmatio quia statim ut electus est suscipit administrationem ut declarat Nicol. Papa Can. in nomine diâ— 23. pag. 175. And of the Power of Princes the Dissenters will grant it for we have it in their writings that the Power is from God immediately though the people may elect the person You will thrust out all Princes of the world by this Argument and say No man giveth that which he hath not the people have not a Power of Government therefore they cannot give it I would answer you as here God hath the Power and he giveth it but the people that have it not may design the person that shall receive it from God as the Burgesses of a Corporation may choose a Major or Bayliff to receive that power from the Soveraign by the Instrumentality of a Law or Charter which they had not themselves to use or give And so a Presbyterie and sometime the people alone may design the person that shall receive the Office of the Ministrie from God though they had it not themselves to use or give Sect. 100. Resp. 2. By this Argument and its supposition none are true Ministers that are Ordained by Prelates for they have not the Power of the Ministrie to Give but only to Vse no Ordination is a Giving of the Power save only by way of â—nvestiture which supposeth a Title and Right before and is not of absolute necessity to the Possession for in several cases it may be without it Sect. 101. Respons 3. A man may Instrumentally give or deliver both Right and Investiture in that which he hath not himself nor ever had Your servant may by your appointment deliver a Lease a Deed of Gift a Key or twig and turf for Possession of house and lands though he never had house or lands or possession himself It is sufficient that the Donor have it that sends him Sect. 102. Resp. 4. Presbyters have the Power of Presbyters or the Ministerial Office and if they can give that which certainly they have then they can give a Power of Ordaining other Presbyters For to Ordain others is no more then they do themselves in giving the Power or Office which they have therefore if they may do it those that they give their Power to may do it that is may also give others that power which they have Sect. 103. But as to our case in hand it sufficeth that we prove that Presbyters may give others the Office of Presbyters whether this Office contain a Power of Ordaining is another Question but soon dispatcht if this be granted because as is said to Ordain is nothing else but to invest others with the Office or Power which we have our selves Sect. 104. Resp. 5. The Argument maketh more against the Prelates Ordination on another account because that as is proved already that Species of Prelacie that was exercised in England the sole Governours of an hundred or two hundred Churches is so far contrary to the Word of God that we may boldly conclude that as such they have no power to use or give their very Office is humane and destructive of the true Pastoral Office and therefore as such they have less pretence of Divine Authoritie then Presbyters whose Office is of God Yet do I not make their Ordination Null because they were Presbyters as well as Prelates and also were in Possession of the place of Ordainers and had the Magistrates authority Sect. 105. Resp. 6. Presbytrrs have a Power of Ordaining it is already proved And to your confirmation where you say that the Bishops gave them no such Power therefore they have it not I answer 1. I deny the Consequence God gave it them therefore they have it without the Bishops gift 2. If by Giving you mean but an accidental Causation or the action of a Causa sine qua non or a designation of the Person that shall receive it then I deny the Antecedent The Prelates and Electors designed the person and also invested him solemnly in the Office which containeth this Power of Ordination which you deny them Sect. 106. Obj. The Prelates expressed no such thing in their Ordination Ans. 1. It being not the Prelates but Christ that makes the Office we must not go to the words of the Prelates but of Christ to know what the Office is though we may go to the Prelates while the work was in their hands to know who the person is If a Prelate Consecrate a Prelate and yet mention not particularly the works that are pretended to belong to a Prelate you will not think him thereby restrained or disabled to those works He that Crowneth a King and they that choose him though they name not the works of his Office and Power do thereby choose him to all those works that belong to a King God hath set down in his Word that the Husband shall be the Head or Governor of his Wife if now the woman shall
choose a certain person to be her Husband and the Minister or Magistrate solemnize their Marriage without any mention of such Governing Power the Power doth nevertheless belong to the man because God hath specified by his Law the Power of that Relation and the man is Lawfully put in the Relation that by the Law of God hath such a Power so is it in the case in hand Sect. 107. But yet 2. I add that the Prelates and the Laws of England gave to Presbyters a Power of Ordination For in all their Ordinations the Presbyters were to lay on hands with the Prelate and did in all Ordinations that I have seen And if they actually imposed hands and so Ordained it was an actual profession to all that they were supposed to have the power of Ordination which they exercised Sect. 108. Obj. But they had no Power given them to do it without a Prelate Answ. 1. By Christ they had 2. You may as well say that Bishops have no Power to Ordain because they were not ordinarily at least to do it without the Presbyters Sect. 109. Obj. Saith the foresaid Learned Author Dissert Praemonit sect 10.11 Vnum illud lubens interrogarem an Hieronymus dum hic esset Presbyteratu secundario fungeretur partiariâ tantum indutus potestate praesente sed spreto insuper habito Episcopo Diaconum aut Presbyterum ordinare aut Presbytero uni aut alteri adjunctus recte potuerit si affirmetur dicatur sodes qua demum ratione ab eo dictum sit Episcopum sola ordinatione ergo ordinatione à Presbytero disterminatum esse sin negetur quomodo igitur Presbytero Anglicano cui nullam quae non Hieronymo potestatem c. Answ. 1. This is none of our case in England we Ordain not praesente sed spreto Episcopo but most Countreyes know of no Bishop that they have but Presbyters 2. Hierom might have Ordained with his fellow-presbyters according to the Laws of Christ but not according to the Ecclesiastical Canons that then obtained or bore sway 3. Hierom plainly tells you that it is by Ecclesiastical appointment for the prevention of schisme that Bishops were set up so far as to have this power more then Presbyters in the point of Ordination 4. The English Presbyters are Parochial Bishops and have an Office of Christs making and not of the Prelates and are not under those Ecclesiastical Canons that restrained Hierom from the exercise of this power And therefore whereas it is added by this Learned Author Quid huic dilemmati reponi aut opponi possit fateor equidem me non adeo Lynceum esse ut perspiciam he may see that he could scarce have set us an easier task then to answer his dilemma Sect. 110. The second and their principal objection is that We have no precept or example in the Church for Presbyters Ordaining without Prelates therefore it is not to be done Answ. 1. I told you before how Bishop Vsher told me he answered this Objection to King Charlâ— viz. from the example of the Church of Alexandria where Presbyters made Bishops which is more Sect. 111. But 2. I answer you haue no example in Scripture or long after that ever Prelates of the English sort did ordain nor any precept for it nor was such a Prelacy then known as is proved and therefore their Ordination hath less warrant then that by Pretbyters Sect. 112. And 3. I have told you before of Scripture warrant for Ordination by a Presbyterie and also by the Teachers and other Officers of a single Church as was the Church of Antioch Prove that there was any Bishop Sect. 113. Lastly it is confessed by the Dissenters that such Presbyters or Bishops as are mentioned Act. 20. Phil. 1.1 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1 c. had power of Ordination But according to the judgement of most of the Fathers that ever I saw or heard of that interpret those texts it is Presbyters that are meant in all or some of those texts It is granted us also by the Dissenters that the chief or sole Pastors of single Churches in Scripture-times did ordain and had the power of Ordination But the Presbyters of England and other Protestant Churches are the chief or sole Pastors of single Churches therefore c. Sect. 114. Object 3. But the English Presbyters have broak their Oaths of Canoical obedience and therefore at least are schismatical Answ. 1. Many never took any such oath to my knowledge For my part I did not 2. The particular persons that are guilty must be accused and neither must they be judged before they speak for themselves nor yet must others be condemned for their sakes In these parts there is not one Presbyter I think of ten who differs from the Prelates about Ordination that ever took that oath And therefore it is few that can be called Schismaticks on that account Yea 3. And those few that did take that Oath have few of them that I know of done any thing against the Prelates Sect. 115. Object 4. The English Presbyters have pull'd down the Prelates and rebelled against them and therefore at least are guilty of Schism Answ. 1. The guilty must be named and heard their case is nothing to the rest It is not one often I think perhaps of twenty that can be proved guilty 2. It was not the Scripture Bishops that they Covenanted against or opposed but only the irregular English Prelacy before described And the endeavour of reforming this corrupted Preâ—acy and reducing it to the Primitive frame is in it self no schism Sect. 116. Object 5. Ignatius commandeth them to obey the Bishops and do nothing without them Answ. 1. Ignatius also commandeth them to obey the Presbyters as the Apostles of Christ and to do nothing without them 2. The Bishops that Ignatius mentioneth were such as our Parish Bishops or Presbyters are that have a Presbyterie to assist them They were the chief Pastors of a single Church as is before proved out of Ignatius and not the Pastors of hundreds of Churches Sect. 117. I shall trouble the Reader with no more of their objections seeing by what is said already he may be furnished to answer them all but I shall now leave it to his impartial sober consideration whether I have not proved the truth of our Ministry and of the Reformed Churches and the Validity of our administrations and of our Ordination it self CHAP. VIII The greatness of their sin that are now labouring to perswade the People of the Nullity of our Ministry Churches and administrations Sect. 1. HAving laid so fair a ground for my application I think it my duty to take the freedom to tell those Reverend persons that oppose us in this point the Reasons why I dare not joyn with them and the guilt that I am perswaded they heap upon their own souls Wherein I protest it is not mine intent to make them odious or cast disgrace upon them for I do with
is commanded or commended by the Magistrate to the care of many Churches above his brethren yet some men are as diligent and faithfull in doing good to all within their reach as if they had been chosen and nominated to the work Many able painfull Ministers of Christ that thirst for mens salvation do go up and down among the ignorant or weak and preach in season and out of season notwithstanding the burden of their particular flocks which they faithfully bear § 33. And the parts and graces of these men do win them audience and respect where they come without any Humane Authority to awe men In almost all parts of our Countrey we have either settled or movable Lectures and when do we see a thin Congregation before a lively rowsing Minister or any man of great ability in the work No but we see the Temples crowded and find that the people reverence and hearken to such men as these in whom the Spirit of God appears § 34. Yea and the Ministers themselves will consult with the Wise and Love the good and learn of those that are ablest to teach them and imitate the ablest preachers as neer as they can So that I may truly say that there is a certain kind of Natural or rather spiritual Episcopacy everywhere exercised in the Church A great light that burneth and shineth above others will draw the eyes of many to it and if it be set on a hill it will hardly be hid Calvin was no Prelate and yet his Gifts procured him that Interest by which he prevailed more then Prelates for the conformity of the minds of many to his own There is scarce a Country but hath some able judicious Minister who hath the Interest of a Bishop with the rest though he have no higher an office then themselves Gods Graces deserve and will procure respect Even in Civil Councils Courts Committees we see that some one of leading parts is the Head of the rest though their authority be equal § 35. And indeed the conveniences and inconveniences are such on both sides that it is not an easie matter to determine Whether appointed Visitors or Superintendents be more desirable then these Arbitrary Visitors that have the Natural Episcopacy of Interest procured by their meer abilities On the one side if Magistrates appoint such Visitors the people yea and many Ministers will the more easily submit and hear and obey and more unanimously concur then if we offer our assistance without any such appointment That 's the convenience But then here 's the inconvenience The Magistrate may choose an unworthy man and then he may be feared but not honoured nor loved but greater lights will be greater still let the Magistrate set the lesser on never so high a Candlestick And then the Ministers and people will measure their esteem of the man according to his worth and that will irritate his displeasure For when he is lifted up he either looks to be valued by his Height and not his Light or Worth or else that his Light should be judged of by his Height And as this will turn to heart-burnings and divisions so the esteem that is procured by humane Constitution will be more humane and ordinarily less Divine then the calling and work of a Divine requireth On the other side if none be appointed by the Magistrate but every man go forth in the strength of his zeal and Abilities we are like to be cast on many disadvantages with carnal temporizing men and to have less unity among our selves But then that unity and peace and respect and success that we have will be more voluntary and pure § 36. The best way then if we could hit it seems to be the joining of both these together To have such Magistrates as will appoint only the most judicious able faithfull Ministers to be Visitors of the Churches that shall go forth both in the strength of the Spirit of Christ with eminency of gifts and also in the strength of the Magistrates Commission But if this cannot be attained I shall not long for constituted Visitors or Superintendents but shall be content with the Holy Ghosts appointment § 37. It is therefore the most Christian course to lay no greater stress on these modes and forms of Ministration then they will bear and therefore to live obediently and peaceably under either of them obeying such Visitors as are appointed by the Magistrate and honouring the graces of the Spirit where there is no such appointment and not to think the Church undone when our conceits about such things are crost CHAP. III. It is Lawfull for the several Associations of Pastors to choose one man to be their President durante vita if he continue fit § 1. I Come next to speak of a third sort of Ministry which hath a greater resemblance to the ancient Episcopacy then any of the rest Yea indeed is the same that was exercised about the second or third Century after Christ. And that is the fixed Presidents of the Presbyters of many Churches associated In the first settlement of Churches there was either a single Pastor to a single Church or many Pastors in equality at least of Office And whether from the beginning or afterward only one of them became the stated President is very uncertain of which anon But when the Churches encreased in magnitude and many Congregations were gathered under one Presbyterie then that Presbyterie also had a stated President as the Congregational Presbyteries perhaps had before And thus he was an Archbishop under the name of a Bishop that awhile before was either unknown or else must needs be esâ—eemed an Archbishop § 2. That these men should take the Pastoral charge of many Churches or that they should suspend the Governing Power of the Presbyters upon pretence of a Presidency or superiority is I think a matter not warrantable by the word of God § 3. But that such Associations of the Pastors of many Churches should ordinarily be for the sake of Union and Communion as also that it is lawfull for these Associatied Ministers to choose one among them to be their President is granted by all § 4. But all the question is Whether these Presidents should be only pro tempore or durante vita supposing that they forfeit not the trust I shall not say much of the point of convenience but I affirm that of it self it is lawful to choose a President that shall be fixed durante vita si tam diu bene se gesserit Yea it is lawfull now in England as things stand § 5. And 1. It may suffice for the proof of this that it is nowhere forbidden in Nature or in Scripture directly or by consequence and therefore it is lawfull Where there is no law there is no transgression They that say that it is a thing forbidden must prove it from some word of God which I think they cannot do § 6. 2. If it be lawfull to choose a fixed President
between you and your Brethren for so they are is too much known to friends and foes at home and abroad and too much daily manifested by each side Shall it still continue or would you have it healed If it must continue tell us how long and tell us why Would you have it go with us to Eternity and will you not be reconciled nor dwell with us in Heaven It is not in your Power to shut us out And will you not be there if we be there Or do you think there will be any Discord where Love is Perfected and we are One in God If you can be content to be saved with us and believe that all of both Opinions that truly love and fear the Lord shall live there in dearest Love for ever how can you chuse when you forethink of this but Love them now that you must for ever Love and long to be reconciled to them with whom you must there so harmoniously accord You know that Earth is our preparation for Heaven and such as men would be there they must begin to be here As they must be Holy here that ever will there see the Lord in Holiness so must they here be Loving and Peaceable that ever will live in that perfect heavenly Love and Peace And why is it that the distance must be so great Are we not all the Children of one Father Have we not all the same God the same Redeemer the same Spirit in us if we are Christians indeed Rom. 8.9 Are we not in the same Baptismal Covenant with God Have we not the same holy Scripture for our Rule and are we not in the same universal Church and of the same Religion some of you say No to the grief of your friends and the shame of your own understandings and uncharitableness I beseech you bear it if I touch the sore For my work is Healing and therefore though it Must be touch't it shall be as gently as the case will bear If I may judge by such as I have had any opportunity to know I must say that the distance on your part is continued in some by confused apprehensions of the case and not distinguishing things that differ In some by discontents of mind and too deep a sense of worldly losses and the things that you take as injuries from others In some by the advantage of a co-interest and consociation with those Divines that are of your way and so by a Willingness to think them in the right and those in the wrong that you take for adversaries In some by a stiffness and stoutâ—ess of disposition that cals it Constancy to hold your own and Manliness not to stoop to others and takes it as dishonourable to seek for Peace even in Religion with your supposed adversaries or to yield to it at least without much importunity With too many miserable souls it is meer ungodliness and enmity to that way of Piety that in many that you differ from appears And in the best of you it is a Remissness of Charity and want of Zeal for the Churches Peace and the Love and Vnity of Brethren To confute the reasonings of all these sorts would draw out this Preface to too great a length The first sort my experience hath caused me to observe Oft have I faln into company with men that pour forth bitter odious words against Presbyterie and I ask them what that Presbyterie is that they speak of with so much abomination Is it the Name or the Thing which they so abhor If the Name is it not a term of Scripture used by the Holy Ghost 1 Tim. 4.14 Are not the Pastors of the Church most frequently called the Presbyters or Elders Tit. 1.5 Act. 14.23 15.2 4 6 22 23. 1 Tim. 5.17 Act. 20.17 James 5.14 1 Pet. 5.1 c. It must needs then be the Thing and not the Name which they abominate And what is that Thing most of them cannot tell me Some presently talk of the disuse of the Common Prayer as if that were a part of Presbyterie and Government and the form of worship were all one Some presently run to Scotland and talk of forcing men to Confession of sin and of their secular enforcement of their Excommunications But 1. If this be odious why was it used by the Bishops Is it good in them and bad in others 2. And why plead you for Discipline and against Toleration if you so loath the things you plead for 3. But will you not when it s known so openly distinguish the Ministerial Power from the secular It s known by their Laws and constant Practice that all the Power that was exercised by Violence on Body or Estate by the Assemblies was derived from the Magistrate whose Commissioners also sate among them And the Bishops in England were seconded by the Sword as much as they It s known that the Presbyterians commonly maintain in their Writings that Pastors have no Coercive or Secular Power but only the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to exercise on the Conscience committed to them by Christ. 4. And the writings and practice of those in England openly manifest it and its them with whom you have most to do Some tell me that Presbyterie is the Government of the Church without Bishops And is it only the Negation of your Prelacy that is the odious thing Is there nothing Positive odious in Presbyterie Thus our Belief is condemned by the Papists even because we Believe not so much as they when in the Positives of our Faith there is nothing that they can blame Some make it the odious thing that they have Lay-Elders But 1. The Presbyterians account them not Lay but Ecclesiasticks 2. And what is the Odious harm that these men do among them They are present and Consent to the admonishing and censuring of offendors And what great harm doth that to the Church Is it because they do not Preach No sure in that your Readers are much like them What work can you Name that these Elders are appointed to that by your Confession is not to be done It is not the Work then that you blame but that these men do it 3. But what is this to all that are in this point of your mind and think that unordained Elders wanting Power to preach or administer the Sacraments are not Officers in the Church of Gods appointment As far as I can understand the greater part if not three for one of the English Ministers that you stand at a distance from are of this mind and so far against Lay-Elders as well as you of whom I confess my self to be One. and that M r Vines was One I have shewed you in the End Surely then all we are none of the odious Presbyterians in your eyes Why then is there such a distance And are Lay-Elders as bad as Lay-Chancellors So also when some have been hotly condemning us as being against Bishops I ask them what a Bishop is and what
valid 6. The Old Episcopal Divines thought it lawful to joyn in actual Communion with the Pastors and Churches that were not Prelatical But the New ones separate from their communion and teach the people to do so supposing Sacramental administrations to be there performed by men that are no Ministers and have no authority 7. The Old Episcopal Divines thought it meet to suspend silence imprison or undo those Godly Divines that did not bow towards the Altar or publish to their People Declarations or Instructions for Dancing on the Lords Day or that did preach twice a day But many of the New ones practically told us that this was their judgement Of these differences I have given you some proof hereafter and would do here in the express words of the Authors on both sides were it not that I should be needlesly tedious and that I should unnecessarily offend the particular Divines of the New party who are among us by reciting their words More of the differences I pass by I. And now I would know of those of you that follow the Ancient Episcopal Divines what hindereth you from a charitable peaceable Communion with those Orthodox Ministers now in England that some of you stand at a distance from Doctrinal differences at least requiring such a distance you cannot pretend B p Hall tels you in his Peace-maker after cited that there is none between you and the Forrein Presbyterian Churches And as for the matter of Episcopacy if you will insist upon the late English Frame as necessary viz. That there be but One Bishop over many hundred Churches and that he have the sole power of Excommunication and that he rule by a Layâ—Chancellor c. and be a Lord and seconded with a forcing power c. then you will forsake the Iudgement of your Leaders For they will tell you that some of these are but separable appurtenances some of them corruptions and blemishes and some not Necessary What need we any more ado You see in the published Iudgements of B p Hall B p Usher D r Holdsworth Forbes and others after cited that they would have all Presbyters to be Governors of the Churches one of them having a stated Presidency or Moderatorship and this will content them And are we not then agreed I am confident most of the Ministers in England would be content to yield you this But what if there be some that are not of your mind concerning the stated Presidency which you desire will you therefore uncharitably refuse communion with them so would not your Leaders In this therefore you will forsake them and forsake many holy Churches of Christ and forsake charity and Christ himself that teacheth you another lesson Will it not content you that you have freedom your selves to do that which seemeth best in your own eyes unless all others be of your opinion But perhaps you will say that you have not Liberty your selves to practise according to this your judgement To which I answer 1. Your Brethren of the Ministery have not the power of the Sword and therefore do neither deny you Liberty nor can give it you It is the Magistrates work And will you separate from us for other mens doings For that you have no rational pretence If you know of any that perswade Magistrates to restrain your Liberty that 's nothing to others Censure none but those that you know to be guilty 2. I never knew that you were deprived of the Liberty of exercising such an Episcopacy as the forementioned Bishops do desire I do not believe you could be hindered and we that are your neighbours never hear of it I know not of either Law or Execution against you If you think that the clause in the Covenant or the Ordinance against Prelacy or the late Advice that excepts Prelacy from Liberty are any restraint to you I think you are much mistaken It is only the late frame of Prelacy as it stood by Law exercised by Archbishops Bishops Deans Chancellors c. and that by force upon dissenters that is taken down You have not Liberty to force any by corporal punishment to your obedience But you have full Liberty for ought that ever I heard to exercise the meer Episcopacy desired by Hall Usher and such like on all that are of your judgement and will submit to it That we may hold constant Assemblies of Pastors we find by experience And in these Assemblies if you will choose one for your stated President who will hinder you No one I am confident Tell us whoever suffered for so doing or was prohibited or any way hindered from it by any force Nay more if you will give this President a Negative vote in Ordination and Iurisdiction who will hinder you yea who can If twenty Ministers shall resolve that they will never Ordain or Excommunicate any without the consent yea or Command if you must have it so of such a man whom they take for their President who can or will compell them to the contrary And all the People that are of your mind have Liberty to joyn themselves with such Pastors on such terms and submit themselves to you if they will But you will say that this is no setting up of Episcopacy while every one that is unwilling to obey us may refuse it I answer This is all that the Nature of Episcopacy requireth And this is all that the Church saw practised even Rome it self for above three hundred years after Christ. And is not that now tolerable for your Communion with us which served then for the Communion of all the Churches on earth Is the Primitive pattern of purity and simplicity become so vile in your eyes as to be inconsistent with Christian Communion Let not such principles be heard from your mouths or seen in your practises Whether the Magistrate ought to compell us all to be of your mind or way I will not now meddle with but if he will not will you therefore separate from your Brethren Or will you not exercise the Primitive Episcopacy on Consenters because you have not the sword to force Dissenters And are you denied your Liberty because you are not backed by the Sword This concerneth other mens Liberties and not yours You have the Liberty of Episcopal Government though not of smiting others with the Magistrates Sword and as much Liberty for ought I know as Presbyterians or Independents have though not so much countenance And how comes it to pass that the other modes of Government are commonly exercised upon meer Liberty and yours is not Is it because you have no confidence in any Arm but flesh If your Episcopal Power be of Divine appointment why may you not trust to a Divine assistance as well as others that you think are not of God If it can do nothing without the Sword let the Sword do all without it and retain its proper honour If it can do less on voluntary Subjects then other ways of Church-government can
nor to be proved by them I will not believe them no more then I would have believed Papius and all his Millenary followers that pretended Tradition from Saint John nor any more then I would have believed the Asians or Romans that pretended different times for Easter as a Tradition Apostolical binding the whole Church 5. If it were proved that de facto the Apostles did thus or thus dispose of a circumstance of Government or Worship which yet is undetermined in Scripture I take it not for a sufficient proof that they intended that Fact for an Universal Law or that they meant to bind all the Churches in all ages to do the like no more then Christ intended at the Institution of his Supper to tie all ages to do it after Supper in an upper room but with twelve and sitting c. 6. Yea if I had found a Direction or Command from the Apostles as Prudential determiners of a Circumstance pro tempore loco only as of the kiss of love hair covering eating things strangled and blood c. I take it not for a proof that this is an universal standing Law One or two of these exceptions wil shake off the proofs that some count strong for the universal obligation of the Church to Diocesans or Metropolitans Sect. 11. That the Apostles had Episcopal Power I mean such in each Church where they came as the fixed Bishops had I doubt not And because they founded Churches according to the success of their labors and setled them and if they could again visited them therefore I blame not the Ancients for calling them the Bishops of those Churches But that each man of them was really a fixed Metropolitan or Patriarch or had his proper Diocess in which he was Governor in chief and into which no other Apostle might come as an equal Governor without his leave this and such like is as well proved by silence as by all that I have read for it of Reason or History that is the Testimonies of the Ancients I find them sometime claiming a special interest in the Children that they have begotten by their Ministry But doubtless when Paul Barnabas or Silas went together some might be converted by one and some by another within the same Diocess or City If any man shall convince me that any great stress doth lie upon this questioÌ„ I shal be willing to give him more of my reasons for what I say Sect. 12. And as to them that confidently teach that the Apostles suited the Ecclesiastical Government to the Politick and that as by a Law for the Church universally to obey All the confutation at present that I will trouble them with shall be to tell them that I never saw any thing like a proof of it to my understanding among all the words that are brought to that purpose and to tell them 1. That if Paul chose Ephesus Corinth and other the most populous places to preach in it was but a prudential circumstantiating of his work according to that General Law of doing all to Edification and not an obligation on all the Pastors or Preachers of the Gospel to do the same where the case is not the same 2. And if Paul having converted many in these Cities do there plant Churches and no other can be proved in Scripture times it follows not that we may plant no Churches but in Cities 3. And if the greatest Cities had then the most numerous Churches and the most eminent Pastors fitted to them and therefore are named with some note of excellency above the rest it followeth not that the rest about them were under them by subjection 4. Yea if the Bishops of the chief Cities for order sake were to call Provincial Assemblies and the meetings to be in their Cities and they were to be the Presidents of the rest in Synods with such like circumstantial difference it followeth not that they were proper Governours of the rest and the rest to obey them in the Government of their proper charges Nor that they had power to place and displace them 5. Much less will it prove that these Metropolitans taking the name of Diocesans might put down all the Bishops of two hundred Churches under them and set up none but Presbyters in order distinct from Bishops over the flocks besides themselves and so the Archbishops having extinguished all the first Order of Bishops of single Churches to take the sole Government of so many Churches even people as well as Presbyters into their own hands 6. And I do not think that they can prove that the Apostles did institute as many sorts of Church-Government then as there were of civil â—olicy in the world All the world had not the Roman form of Government Nor had lesser Cities the same dependence upon greater in all other Countryes 7. Was it in one degree of subordination of Officers only or in all that the Apostles suited the Ecclesiasticall Government to the Civil If in One how is it proved that they intended it in that one and not in the rest If in all then we must have many degrees of Officers more then yet we have Inferiors very many and Superiors some of all conscience too high then we must have some to answer the Correctors the Consular Presidents and the Vicars and Lieutenants the Pro-consuls and Prefects and the Emperor himself Even one to be Vniversal in the Empire that 's yet some Limit to the Pope and will hazzard the removing of the Supremacy to Constantinople by the Rule that the Apostles are supposed to go by And great variety must there be in the several Diocesses of the Empire which Blondell hath punctually described de primatu in Eccles. pag. 511. to 519. shewing the causes of the inequality of Bishopricks and Churches 8. According to this Opinion the form of Church must alter as oft as Emperours will change their Policy or Wars shall change them And upon every change of the Priviledges of a City the Churches Preheminence must change and so we shall be in a mutable frame Which if Basil and Anthymius had understood might have quicklier decided their controversie Yea according to this opinion Princes may quite take down Metropolitans at pleasure by equalling the priviledges of their Cities The best is then that it is in the power of our Civil Governours to dissolve our obligation to Metropolitans yea and to all Bishops too if Cities must be their only residence as I have shewed Sect. 13. As for them that pretend humane Laws for their form of Government that is the decrees of General Councils I answer 1. I disown and deny all humane Laws as obligatory to the Church Vniversal It is the prerogative of God yea the greatest point of the exercise of his Soraignty to be the Law-giver to his Vniversal Church There can be no Vniversal Laws without an Vniversal Law-giver and there is no Vniversal Law-giver under Christ in the world 2. And for General
and Government is to be found wholly in the written word of God called the holy Scriptures This we are agreed on against the Papists who would supply the supposed defects of Scripture by their unwritten Traditions which they call the other part of Gods word Church Canons and Laws of men may determine of some modes and circumstances for the better execution of the Laws of God by the People whom they are over but they cannot make new Church Ordinances or Governments nor convey a Power which God the fountain of Power did not ordain and convey nor can they give what they themselves had not The Church-office and Authority therefore that is not proved from the Holy Scripture is to be taken as the fruit of humane arrogancy and presumption Yet I deny not but that we may find much in Antiquity in Fathers and Councils about matters of fact to help us to understand some Scriptures and so to discern the matter of right Prop. 3. The Scripture doth not Contradict but suppose and confirm the light of Nature nor doth it impose upon any man Natural impossibilities nor constitute offices which cannot be executed or which would destroy that end to which they are supposed to be Constituted Prop. 4. Ecclesiastical Authority comprehendeth not the power of the sword nor any power of using violence to mens bodies or laying mulcts or confiscations on their estates The Ecclesiastical Power which Christ ordained was exercised for the first three hundred years without any touching of mens bodies or purses before there were any Christian Princes Prop. 5. Magistrates are not eo nomine obliged to punish men because they are Excommunicated whether upon every just Excommunication they should punish I will not now dispute but they are bound to know that their penalties be deserved before they inflict them and therefore must themselves take Cognisance of the Cause and as rational agents understand before they act and not blindly follow the Judgements of the Bishops as if they were but as Executioners where the Bishops are Judges Prop. 6. The Power of the highest Church-governours is but an Authority of Directing in the way to salvation It is but Directive but then there is no room for the common Objection that then it is no greater then any other man may perform for it is one thing to Direct Occasionally from Charity and another thing to Direct by Authority in a standing office as purposely appointed hereunto The Power of Church-Governors is but of the same nature as is the Power of a Physitian over his Patients or of a School-master over his Schollers supposing he had not the power of the rod or actual force but such a power as the Professors of Philosophy or other sciences had in their several schools upon the adult nor all so great neither because the Laws by which we must rule are made to our hands as to the substantials Hence therefore it is plain that as we can bind or force no man to believe us or to understand the truth and to be Christians but by the power of demonstrated Evidence and by the light which we let in through Gods grace into their Consciences so neither can we cause any to execute our sentences against offenders further than by light we convince them that it is their duty so that if all the Bishops or Presbyteries in the land should judge such or such an opinion to be heresie and should Excommunicate those that own it as hereticks in this case if the Church do believe as the Pastors believe they will consent and avoid the Excommunicate person but if they take it to be Gods truth which the Pastors call heresie they will not take themselves bound by that sentence to avoid him nor will the Offender himself any further be sensible of a penalty in the sentence then he shall be convinced that he hath erred and if the Church avoid him he will justifie himself and judge that they do it wrongfully and will glory in his suffering so that it is on the Conscience that Church-Governors can work and no otherwise on the outward man but mediante Conscientiâ Prop. 7. The ground of this is partly because no Church Governors can bind any man contrary to Gods word Clave errante ita apparente if the people know that he erreth they are not to obey him against God Yet in the bare inconvenient determination of some Circumstantials by which the duty is not destroyed but less conveniently performed the people are bound to obey their Governors because it is not against Gods determination and because he erreth but in an undetermined point of which God appointed him to be the orderly determiner But if God have once determined no mans contrary determination can oblige nor yet if they go beyond the sphere of their own work and determine of an aliene subject which God did never commit to their determination else a Minister or Bishop might oblige every Taylor how to cut his garment and every Shoâ—-maker how to cut his shoe so that they should sin if they did disobey which is ridiculous to imagine and if they go about to introduce new stated Ordinances or Symbols in the Church which they have nothing to do with or in any other work shall assume to themselves a power which God never gave them it doth no more oblige then in the former case Prop. 8. Another reason of the sixth Proposition is because The People have a Iudgement of discerning whether the Governors do go according to Gods word or not else they should be led blindfold and be obliged by God to go against Gods word whensoever their Governors shall go against it It is not bruits or Infants but rational men that we must rule Prop. 9. The three things which Church power doth consist in are in conformity to the three parts of Christs own office 1. About matter of Faith 2. About matter of Worship 3. About matter of Practice in other cases 1. Church-Governors about Doctrine or Matters of Faith are the Peoples Teachers but cannot oblige them to Err or to believe any thing against God nor make that to be truth or error that is not so beâ—ore 2. In matter of Worship Church-guides are as Gods Priests and are to go before the people and stand between God and them and present their prayers and prayses to God and administer his holy mysteries and bless them in his name 3. The Commanding Power of Pastors is in two things 1. In Commanding them in the name of Christ to obey the Laws which he hath made them already And this is the principal 2. To give them new Directions of our own which as is said 1. Must not be against Gods Directions 2. Nor about any matter which is not the object of our own office but is without the verge of it 3. But it is only in the making of under laws for the better execution of the laws of Christ and those
Only this I will say that though I allow not in my judgement this sort of Episcopacy yet I think it incomparably more tolereable than the eighth sort which taketh the whole Government of the people from the Presbyters to themselves And if I lived in a place where this â—overnment were established and managed for God I would submit thereto and live peaceably under it and do nothing to the disturbance disgrace or discouragement of it My reasons I le not stay to produce 10. As for the tenâ—h sort of Bishops viz. Archbishops Metropolitans Primates and Patriarchs having not only the moderation of Synods but also either the sole Government of all the Clergy and cheif Government of all the people or a Negative voice in all I am much more in judgement against them then the former and so much the more against them by how much the larger their Jurisdiction is for reasons which I shall anon have occasion to produce 11. As for the eleventh sort of Bishops that is such as succeed the Apostles in the office of Preaching and Governing to wit as unlimited universal Officers it is a great doubt among many whether any such should be For though it be certain that such were yet we are in doubt whether they have any successors For my own part I confess my self satisfied in this that the Apostles have Successors though not in their extraordinary Immediate manner of Mission nor in their extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit yet in all that part of their office which is of standing Necessity to the Church And I am satisfied that their general Ministry or ambulatory pâ—eaching as unfixed officers and their Government of the Church by Office such as they did then use are of standing Necessity to the Church And therefore that as such unfixed general Officers the Apostles de jure have Successors And this I have formerly proved to you in my Theses de Polit. Ecclesiast briefly thus Argument 1. Christ promised when he instituted this General Office to be with them to the end of the world therefore it was his will that it should continue to the end of the world Mat. 28 20 21. It was to a Ministry that were sent to preach the Gospel to every Creature or to all the world and to Disciple Nations that this promise was expresly made therefore such a Ministry is to be continued Argum. 2. The same work and Necessity still continueth Foâ— 1. There are still most of the Nations on earth unconverted 2. The Converted and Congregated to be Confirmed and Governed therefore the Office continueth Argum. 3. We can fetch no Argument from the Apostles Example or from any Precept or Promise to them to prove the succession of fixed Pastors which is stronger then this by which we prove the succession of General unfixed Officers therefore either we must yield to this or by the same reasons as we deny it we must deny the Ministry too Which is not to be done Argum. 4. The Apostles had many Associates in this General Office in their own times Therefore it was not proper to them nor to ceâ—se with them Barnabas Sylas Timothy Titus Apollo with multitudes more in those times were unfixed General Officers that went up and down to convert the world and staid only to order and confirm the new gathered Churches and then went further sometimes returning to review preserve and strengthen their converts Argum. 5. If we can prove that such unfixed General officers were by Christ settled in his Church and that by such the Churches were in any sort then to be governed then our cause is good till the repeal or revocation of this office and order be proved Let them therefore that affirm such a revocation prove it for till then we have proved enough in proving that once it was instituted But they cannot prove that revocation I think nor yet any Cessation or that the institution was but pro tempore Argum. 6. It is not a tolerable thing to charge God with such a sudden Mutation of his Law or Order of Church Government without very certain proof If we find Christ setling one way of Church-Government in his own time and presently after for the first age it is a most improbable thing that he should take that down again and set up another kind of Government to continue ever after This seems to charge Christ with so great mutability that it is not to be done without very clear proof But such proof is not produced I know it is easily proved that the immediate Mission and extraordinary measure of the Spirit for Miracles â—nogues Infallible delivery of the doctrine of Christ are ceased But this is nothing to the general office of Preaching or Governing the Church which is of standing use So that I am satisfied of this that the Apostles as General Preachers and Governours have successors But then I must confess my self not fully satisfied what Governing Power it was that the Apostles had over the Pastors of the Church I find that when Saravia and after him the Disputants in the Isle of Wight do insist on this Argument from the way of Church Government by the Apostles that their Antagonists do presently grant the Minor that The Government of the Church at first was by men authorized to Rule the Presbyters and their Churches but they deny the Major that the Government which was then in the Church should continue till now because it was by Apostles whose Office they think ceaseth Whereas I must confess I am unavoidably forced to yield the Major that we must have the same kind of Government that was at first instituted unless we had better proof of a change For the stablishment of particular Churches and Presbyters was no change of the Apostles power seeing they gave not away their power to the Presbyters nor ceased to have the same Apostolical power which they had before Only the Apostles extraordinary Mission Gifts and Priviledges I confess are ceased But then I conceive that the Minor which is so easily granted viz. that the Apostles had the Government of the particular Presbyters will hold more dispute at least as to the nature and degree of their power and were I as fully satisfied about the Minor as I am of the Major I must by this one Argument be forced to be for the Ius Divinum of Epâ—scopacy What at present seems truth to me I shall lay down in these Propositions Prop. 1. It is certain that the Apostles were general unfixed Officers of Christ having the care of the whole world committed to them within the reach of their natural Capacity and that their business was to take that course in the particular management of their work as is most conducible to the propagation of the faâ—th through the whole world and that in all places where they came they had the same power over the Churches gathered as the fixed Pastors of those Churches have This much is past
in the expounding of the Scripture they that bring the best Evidence will beget the most Knowledge and they that produce the clearest Divine Testimony will beget most effectually a Divine belief and those that are known to be of far greatest abilities in learning experience and grace and consent with the most of the Church will procure more effectually an humane belief then a weak unlearned unexperienced Pastor of our own therefore the Jurisdiction of supereminent Bishops Metropolitans Primates and Patriarchs will appear to be reduced into so narrow a room and written in so small a character that he hath need of very quick sight that can read it and humble men may be easily drawn to think that the Unity Happiness and Safety of the Church lyeth not in it and that if it had been only for Christ and not their own Greatness there had not been such Contention and Division made about it in the Church as there hath been TO draw some of this which I have said into a narrower room I shall briefly tell you what I could heartily wish both Magistrates and Ministers would speedily accomplish for the order and Peace of the Church in these matters 1. I could wish that they would choose out the ablest Godly men and let them be appointed General Teachers and Guides to call the uncalled and to order confirm and so take care of the Churches that are gathered And if by the Magistrates consent and their own they divide their Provinces it will be but meet These I would have to go up and down to the several Parishes in their Provinces and to have no particular Parishes of their own nor to take the fixed Pastors power from them but to take care that it be by themselves well exercised And I would have the Magistrate keep his sword in his own hand and let these prevail with mens consciences as far as they can and in that way if they would exceed their bounds and arrogate any unjust power to themselves we shall dissent and deny it them and stand upon our ground and deal with them upon equal terms and so need not to fear them And I have cause to think that neither Presbyterians nor all the Independents will be against such General Officers Successors of the old ones as I here describe Not the Presbyterians for in Scotland they appointed and used such in the beginning of their Reformation when they made Visitors of the particular Churches and assigned to each their limited Provinces and so they were Commissioners to cast out Ministers put in others and plant Kirks and they had several Superintendents all which is to be seen in the Doctrine and Discipline of the Kirk of Scotland printed not long agoe again And the Itinerant Commâ—ssioners in Wales that were set there to go about preaching and Reforming doth shew that their Judgements were not against the Power 2. I could wish that every Parish Church may have one Eldership where they may be had or some Elders and Deacons with one Constant Fixed Perfect for Order and Unity 3. I could wsh that Ordination and Constitutions for Unity and Communion may be done only in Synods less or greater and that of many Presbyteries there may consist a Classis as commonly called and of many of those a Province And that the Classical meeting may be frequent and that some one the fittest man may be standing President of that Classis during life except he deserve removal 4. I could wish also that the Provincial Assembly to be held once a quarter or half year in each County may have the most able discreet godly Minister chosen to be the standing President also during life unless he deserve removal So that here are four several sorts of Bishops that for Peace and Order I could consent to to wit 1. A General unfixed Superintendent 2. A fixed Parochial Bishop President of that particular Presbytery 3. A Classical Bishop President of that Classis 4. A Provincial Bishop President of the Provincial Assembly But there is no necessity of these 5. Of the degree of their Power I said enough before It is intolerable they should have a Negative vote in Excommunications and Absolutions and such Government of the people except the Parochial Bishop save only in case of appeals and there I leave it to each mans consideration though I had rather they had none But whether they should be admitted a Negative in Ruling the Pastors I determine not Only in case of Ordination I would have all resolve to do nothing except in a case of Necessity but when the President is One and stop there which will permit him de facto the use of his Negative and yet trouble no mans conscience to acknowledge de jure that it Must so be for to that none should be forced This much I could willingly yield to for reconciliation and unity And I doubt not but I shall be sufficiently reproached by some for yielding so far and by others for yielding no further AND now at last after these not needless preparations I come to the main Question it self Whether it be Necessary or Profitable for the right Order or Peace of the Churches to restore the extruded Episcopacy And this I deny and having said so much already for explication shall presently give you the Reasons of my denyal in which the rest of the necessary explication will be contained Argument 1. That sort of Prelacy or other Government which destroyeth the End of Government and is certainly inconsistent with the Necessary Government and discipline to be exerciâ—ed in the Churches is not to be restored under pretence of the Churches Order or Peace nor can be consistent with its right Order and Peace But such is the Episcopacy which was of late exercised in England and is now laid by Therefore c. The Major needs no proof for few Christians I think will deny it If Episcopacy as lately here exercised be the certain excluder of Government it self and Christs discipline while it only retains the empty name then doubtless it is not to be restored The Minor I prove thus If there be a very Natural Impossibility that the late English Episcopacy though in the hands of the best men in the world should Govern the Churches as Christ hath appointed and as they should and may otherwise be Governed then the foresaid inconsistency and destructiveness is apparent But that there is such a Natural Impossibility for the late English Episcopacy to Govern the Church thus I shall prove 1. By shewing you what is undoubtedly necessary in Christs Government 2. And then what was the late English Episcopacy and then 3. The Impossibility will appear of it self when both these are opened and compared together without any more ado 1. And 1. It is past controversie among us that Church Governours should watch over each particular soul in their flock and instruct the ignorant admonish the faln convince gainsayers counterwork seducers among them
second inconvenience which followeth it which I think utterly intolerable where there is any possibility of a remedy The Major I suppose will be granted For though an Office may be unexercised for a time on some special reason yet if it be statedly suspended and that suspension established by Law or Custom during the life of the Minister this is plainly a destroying or nulling of the Office it self and not to be endured And that it is not to be endured appeareth thus 1. Because the Office of the Presbyter is of Divine Institution and therefore not to be nulled by man I never yet read or heard of any more but one Divine of any reputation who denyed that Presbyters as now called are appointed in the Scriptures and I think that one hath destroyed his cause by it of which more anon 2. Because the Church cannot with any safety spare the Office of the Presbyters because they are many perhaps many hundred to one Prelate and if so many of Christs Officers be laid by it is easie to see what loss the vineyard and harvest may sustain The Minor I prove thus That Episcopacy which taketh from the Presbyters the power of Church-Government and alloweth them only the power of preaching and administring Sacraments and those other parts of the work which they distinguish from Government do thereby destroy the very Office of the Presbyters and so degrade or suspend them But the late English Episcopacy taketh from the Presbyters the power of Church-Governing c. therefore The Antecedent is well known by those that know their Canons claim and constant practice in England till the time of their exclusion That the Consequence is currant appeareth thus Church-Government is as real and as essential a part of the Presbyters work and office as any other whatsoever Therefore they that take this from him do destroy his Office The Antecedent is proved thus if those Texts of Scripture which mention the Office of Presbyters Acts 20. and 14.23 and many other places do speak of Presbyters as now understood and not of Prelates then Ruling is as much essential to their office as Preaching This is proved 1. From the express woâ—ds of the several Texts which make them Overseers of the flock Acts 20.28 and to be over the people in the Lord to whom they are to submit 1 Thes. 5.12 13. and Rulers of them whom they must obey as well as Preachers to them Heb 13.7 17 24. 1 Tâ—m 3 4 5. 2. It s proved from common Consent For 1. Those that think these Texts speak of Presbyters as now understood do most commonly confess this sense of the Text vâ—z that it makes them Rulers only some of them add that themselves must be Ruled by the Bishops 2. He that denyeth these Texts to speak of such Presbyters doth confess that those of whom it doth speak are certainly Rulers of the Church And then I assume But the general vote of almost all Expositors old and new Episcopal and others from the Apostles daies till now as far as we can know by their writings did take these Texts at least many of them to speak of such Presbyters and I think the new exposition of one man is not to be taken against the Exposition of the whole stream of Expositors in all ages without better reason to evince them to have erred then any I have yet seen produced At least all the Episcopal Divines except that one man and those that now follow his new Exposition must yield to what I say upon the authority of these Texts But if this Divine were in the right and none of these Texts be spoken of Presbyters yet I make good my Antecedent thus For 1. If Presbyters be of humane Institution then neither Preaching or Ruling is any Essential part of their Office by Divine Institution because they have none such and therefore I may say one is as essential as the other that is neither is so But yet of their humanly instituted Office it is as essential a part still for if it be true that there were no Presbyters in the Church till about Ignatius his daies yet its certain that when they were instituted whether by God or man they were as truly made Rulers as Preachers And therefore we find their Ignatius still calling on the people to obey the Presbyters as well as the Bishops And Hierom tells us Epist. ad Evagr. how long the Presbyters governed the Churches Communi Consilio by Common Counsel or Consent and how themselves at Alexandria chose our one and made him their Bishop and Cyprian tells us enough of the Presbyters ruling in Council or Consistory with the Bishop in his time so that he would do nothing without the Presbyters Much more proof may easily be brought of this but that I find it now acknowledged and so it is needless I will not go far but only note a few Canons especially of the fourth Council of Carthage Can. 23. is Vt Episcopus nullius Causam audiâ—t absque praesentia Clericorum suorum alioquin irâ—ita erit sententia Episcopi nisi Clericorum praesentia confirmetur Can. 22. Episcopus sine Consilio Clericorum suorum Clericos 〈◊〉 ordinet ita ut Civium assensum conniventiam testimonium quaerat Can. 29. Episcopus si Clerico vel laico crimen imposuerit deducatur ad probationem in Synodum Can. 32. Irrita erit donatio Episcoporum vel venditio vel câ—mmutatiâ— râ—i Ecclesiasticae absque conniventia subscriptione clericorum Can. 34. Vt Episcopus in quelibet lâ—co sedens stare Presbyterum non patiatur Can. 35. Vt Episcopus in Ecclesia in consessu Prsebyterorum sublimior sâ—deat Intra domum verò collegam se Presbyterorum esse cognoscat Can. 36. Presbyter qui per dioeceses Ecclesias regunt non à quibuslibet c. Can. 37. Diaconusita se Presbyteri ut Episcopi Ministrum esse cognoscat Here you see that Bishops may not Ordain hear any cause accuse a Clergy man or Lay-man not give sell or Change any Church goods without the Presbyters and that he is their Collegue and must not let them stand if he sit and that they Rule the Churches through the Diocesses and that the Deacons are Servants as well to them as to the Bishop Aurelius and Augustine were in this Council If they that think it uncertain whether Presbyters be mentioned in the New Testament and that think they began about Ignatius his time do mean that yet they were of Divine Apostolical Institution then they strike in with the Papists in making the Scriptures to be out part of Gods word and insufficient to reveal all Divine institutions about his Church-Government and Worship and so we must look for the rest in uncertain Tradition Nay I know not of any Papist to my best remembrance that ever reckoned up the Office of Presbyters under their meer unwritten Traditions If they say that they are of Ecclesiastical Episcopal
Certainly if subject Presbyters were not till after Scripture times nor any settled Worshipping Church without a Presbyter unless the people preached and administred the Sacraments then there could be no Worshipping Church that had not their own proper Governour nor any such Governour fixed that had more Churches then one Reason 4. The contrary opinion feigneth the Apostles to have allotted to each Bishop a space of ground for his Diocess and to have measured Churches by such spaces and not by the number of souls But this is unproved absurd 1. Unproved For there is no place in Scripture that giveth the Bishop charge of all that space of ground or of all the Christians that shall be in that space during his time Indeed they placed a Bishop in each City when there was but a Church in each City But they never said there shall be but one Church in a City or but one Bishop in a City much less in all the Country region 2. And its absurd For it s the number of souls that a Church must be measured by and not a space of ground so they do but co-habite For if in the same space of Ground there should be twenty or an hundred times as many Christians it would make the number so great as would be uncapable of personal communion and of obtaining Church Ends. If a Schoolmaster have a School in the chief City or Town of this County and there come as many from many miles compass as one School can hold and there be no more there so long all that space may belong to his School not for the space sake but the number of Schollars For if there be afterward an hundred times as many in that space to be taught they must set up more Schools and it were no wise part in the old Schoolmaster to maintain that all that Country pertaineâ—h to his School because that it was so when there were fewer So that to measure our the matter of Churches by space of ground and not by number of souls is plainly against the Reason of the Relation Reason 5. The opposed opinion doth imply that God more regardeth Cities then Country Villages or that Churches are to be measured according to the number and greatness of Cities rather then according to the number of souls For they suppose that every City should have a Bishop if there be but twenty or fourty or an hundred Christians in it but if there be five hundâ—ed Country Parishes that have some of them many thousand souls in them these shall have no Bishops of their own but be all ruled by the Bishop of the City Now how unreasonable this is methinks should not be hard to discern For 1. What is a City to God any more then a Village that for it he should make so partial an institution Doth he regard Rome any more then Eugubium or Alexandria more then Tanis for their worldly splendor or priviledges No doubtless it is for the multitude of inhabitants And if so its manifest that an equal number of inhabitants elsewhere should have the same kind of Government 2. Is it probable that God would have twenty thousand or an hundred thousand people in a Diocess and in some a Million to have but one Church-Ruler and yet would have every small congregation in a City to have one though there be none else under him What proportion is there in this way of Government that an hundred or fifty men shall have as many Governours as a Million as if ten thousand or an hundred thousand Schollars ouâ— of a City shall have no more Rulers then an hundred in a 〈◊〉 and all because one part are in a City and the other not Or a Physitian shall have but an hundred Patients to look to in a City and if there be a Million in that City and Country he shall also upon pain of Gods everlasting wrath undertake the care of them all Let them that strive for such a charge look to it I profess I admire at them what they think 1. Of the needs of men souls 2. Of the terrours of Gods wrath 3. And of their own sufficiency for such a work Were it my case if I know my own heâ—rt at all I should fear that this were but to strive to damn thousands and to be damned with them by undertaking on that penalty to be their Physitian under Christ when I am sure I cannot look to the hundreth man of them and I had rather strive to be a gally-slave to the Turks or to be preferred to rid Chaâ—els or the basest office all my dayes Reason 6. According to the opposâ—d opinion it is in the power of a King to make Bishops to be either Congregational or Diocesan to make a Bishâ—p to haâ—e a Million of souls or a whole Nation in charge or to have but aâ— few For if a King will but dissolve the Priviledge and title and make that no City whâ—ch was a City though he diminish not the number of souls and if he will do thus by all the Cities save one in his dominion then must there be but one Bishop in his dominion And if he will but make every countrey Town that hath four or five hundred or a thousand inhabitants to be incorporate and honour it with the title and priviledges of a City thâ—n shall they have a Bishop Moreover thus every Prince may de jure banish Episcopacy out of his Dominions without diminishing the number of Christians if he do but defranchise the Cities and be of the mind as I have heard some men have been that Cities are against the Princes interest by strengthening the people and advantaging them to rebellions Also if there be any Indian Nations so barbarous as to have no Cities though they were converted yet must they have no Bishops Also it would be in the Princes power de jure to depose any of those Bishops that the Apâ—stles or their Successors are supposed to set up For the Râ—man Emperour might have proclaimed Antioch Alexandria or any of the rest to be no Cities and then they must have no longer have had any Bishops And what Bishâ—ps shall Antioch have at this day Now how absurd all this is I need not manifest that whole Contreâ—eâ— shâ—ll have no Government for want of 〈◊〉 that Kings shall so alter Church Officers at their pleâ—sure â—hen they intend it not meerly by altering the Civil Priviledgâ—s of their people that a King may make one Diocess to become an hundred and an hundred become one by such means And yet all this doth undenâ—ably follow if the Law be that every City and only every City shall be a Bishops Sea where there are Christians to be governed Reason 7. There is no sufficient Reason given why subject Pâ—â—sâ—byters should not have been set up in the Scripture times as well as after if it had been the Apostles intent that such should be instituted The Necessity pretended was
dayes and after He affirmeth also that the power of the Keyes belongeth to the Presbyters and that its convertible with the power of celebrating the Eucharist and that 's the Reason Why it belongs to them page 98. ibid. and that the Power of the Keys that is the whole power of the Church whereof that power is the root and sourse is common to Bâ—shops and Presbyters page 128 and that to this all sides agree page 106. and that by their Grant Deacons and others may preach but not Rule or administer the Lords Supper see page 118.123 And he is far from being of their mind that think in Scripture times there was but one single Bishop without other Presbyters in a Diocesan Church For he supposed many in a Congregation Page 126 he saith You see by St. Paul 1 Cor. 14. that one Assembly whereof he speaks there furnished with a great number of Prophets whether Presbyters or over and above them In the Records of the Church we find divers times a whole Bench of Presbyters presiding at one Assembly And before he had shewed how they sate about the Bishop and the congregation stood before them And page 127. he saith that Clemens the Disciple of the Apostles in his Epistle to the Corinthians to compose a difference among the Presbyters of that Church partly about the celebration of the Eucharist adviseth them to agree and take their turns in it I confess I knnw not whence he hath this doubtless not in the true approved Epistle of Clement but it shews in his judgement 1. That there were then many Presbyters in the Church of Corinth 2. And that that Church was but one Congregation or not very many Else what need the Presbyters take their turns when they might have done it at once 3. That the word Presbyter in Clemens signifieth not a Prelate 4. And it seems this intimateth there was then no Bishop in Corinth else no question but Clemens would have charged these disagreeing Presbyters to obey their Bishop and used some of Ignatius language 5. Nay if Bishops had been then known in the world is it not likely that he would have charged them to get a Bishop if they had not to Govern such a disagreeing Presbytery And page 129 130 131. he shews that the condemning of Marcion at Rome and of Noelus at Ephesus are expresty said by Epiphanius Haeres 42. num 1. 2. Haeres 57 num 1. to have been done and passed by the Act of the Presbyters of those Churches And which is of later date the Excommunication of Andronicus in Sâ—nesius 57. Epist. I find reported to have passed in the same sort and all this agreeable to the practice recorded in Scripture alledging 1. Tim. 5.19 Acts 21.18 citing Cyprian Ep. 46. and the Apost Constit. and saith Bloudell in this might have spared his exact diligence it being granted c. Mr. Thorndike also tells us pag. 62. of the words of Ninius that in Ireland alone Saint Patrick at the first plantation of Christianity founded three hundred and threescore and five Bishopricks And can any man believe that all these had Cities or more then one of our Parish Churches when all Ireland to this day hath not seven Cities and when all this was done at the first plantation of the Gospel I think we had this sort of Episcopacy Even since the Reformation there is reckoned in Ireland but four Arch-bishops nineteen Bishops What think you then were 365. Bishops at the first plantation of the Gospel To proceed to some further Evidence 1. It s manifest in Clemens Rom. Epist. to the Corinthians there is mention of no more but two Orders the one called sometime Bishops sometime Presters the other Deacons page 54.55.57 and this he saith the Apoâ—â—les did as knowing that contention would arise about the name of Episcopacy and that they so seâ—led the Ministerial Offices that others should succeed in them when some were deceased For my part I cannot see the least reason to be of their mind that think Clemens here doth speak only of Prelates or supereminent Bishops of which I refer the Reader to Mr. Burtons notes in his English Translatâ—on of Clemenâ— But suppose it were so If at that time the Churches had none but single Bishops it is plain then that they were but single Congregations For no other Congregations having communion in theâ—r-then-ordinary publike worship could be managed without a Bishop or Presbyter to do the work But for them that sleight Mr. Burtons other mens plain Reasons concerning the judgement of Clem. Romanus and force his words to speak what they mean not I desire them to observe the judgement of Grotius whom they profess so much to value who in his Epistol 162 ad Bignon gives this as one Reason to prove this Epistle of Clemens genuine Quod nusquam meminit exsortis illius Episcoporum autoritatis quae Ecclesiae consuetudine post Marci mortem Alexandriae atque eo exemplo alibi introduci cepit sed planè ut Paulus Apostolus ostendit Ecclesias communi Presbyterorum qui iidem omnes Episcopi ipsi Pauloque dicuntur consilio fuisse gubernatas Nam quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nominat omnia ista nomina non ad Ecclesiam sed ad Templum Hieros pertinent unde infert omnia recto ordine agenda si Iudaeis tanto magis Christianis You see that Grotius then and Clemens in his judgement were against Prelacy 2. The very same I say of Prelacie Epist. ad Philip. which mentioneth only two sorts Presbyters and Deacons 3. And though Ignatius oft mention three it seems to me that they were all but the Governours or Ministers of one Congregation or of no more people then one of our Parishes In the Epist. ad Smyrâ— he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Vbi Episcopus praesens fuerit illuc plebs Congregetur sicuti ubi Christus est omnis militia coelestis aâ—est as the common interpreter translateth it ut vid. est in Edit Perionii Vsherii c. Vbi comparuerit Episcopus ibi Multitudo sit quemadmodum ubi Christus ibi omnis astat exercitus coelestis as Hier. Vairlenius Videlius translate it Or Vbi utique apparet Episcopus illic multitudo sit quemadmodum utiq ubi est Christus Iesus illic Catholica Ecclesia as Vshers old Tranlation And by the Context it appeareth that this plâ—bs or multitudo is the Church which he ruleth and not only one Congregation among many that are under him For this doth without distinction bind all the people one as well as another to be where the Bishop is or appeareth viz. in the publick Assembly for Communion in Worship It is plain therefore there that were not then many such Assemblies under him otherwise all save one must have necessarily disobeyed this command And in the Epistle to the Philadelphians he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e.
eyes of God and men are on them and that it is no light matter to an honest heart that Christ and his cause should be dishonoured by our weaknesses and our labours should hereby be frustrated and sinners hardned in their impiety But yet I must say that many that are but low in Learning have greater abilities by grace and use to manage the great essentials of Christianity and set home a necessary truth upon the heart and deal with ignorant dead-hearted sinners then many very Learned men did ever attain to And I confess I could wish for the service of the Church that some such now private less-learned men in great Congregations were yoaked with some Learned men that are less fit for lively rouzing application that they might Lovingly go together the one confessing his defect in Learning and the other his defect in application and the unlearned depending for guidance from the more Learned in cases of difficulty where his abilities fall short that so they might be both as one able Minister communicating the honour of their several abilities to each other to supply and cover each others defects But if such a thing should be attempted though agreeably to the Churches practice for many hundred years after Christ what an out-cry should we have from the men now in hand against Mechanicks and unlearned men and how many would reproach their work that cannot mend it I have been long on this subject I will end it with this story Gregory Nysen tells us in his relation of the Life of Gregory Thaumaturgus that this holy man then Bishop of Neocaesarea was so famous by his miracles and successes that the Neighbour Countreys sent to him to preach and plant Churches among them Among others Comana a neighbour City sent to him to come and plant a Church and Bishops among them When he had stayed a while and preached and prepared them and the time was come that he was to design them a chief Pastor or Bishop the Magistrates and principal men of the City were very busie in enquiring anxiously and curiously who was of most eminent rank and splendour excelling the rest that he might be chosen to the office and dignity of being their Bishop For Gregory himâ—elf had all these Ornaments and therefore they thought their Pastor must have them too But when it came to choice they were all to pieces some for one and some for another so that Gregory looked to heaven for Directions what to do When they were thus taken up with proposing men of splendor and eminency Gregory remembring Samuels anointing David exhorted them to look also among the meanest for possibly there might be found among them some of better qualifications of mind Whereupon some of them signified that they took it as a contumelie and sâ—orn that all the chief mâ—n for eloquence dignity and splendor should be refused and that Mechanicks and tradesmen that labour for tehir living should be thought fitter for so great an office And saith one of them to him in derision If you will pass by all these that are chosen out of the best of the Citizens and go to the scum and basest of the people for a Pastor for us its best for you even to make Alexander the Collier a Priest and lets all agree to choose him The good man hearing these scornful words it struck into his mind to know who that Alexander the Collier was Whereupon they brought him presently with laughter and set him in the midst of them collowed and half-naked and ragged and sordid and thus stood Alexander among them But Gregory suspected somewhat better by him then they that laught at him and thereupon taking him out of the company and examining his life he found that he was a Philosophick man that being of a very comely person and loth it should be any occasion of incontinency and also renouncing the vanities of the world had addicted himself to the life of a Collier that his person and worth might be hid from men and his mind be kept in an humble frame Whereupon Gregory appointeth some to take away Alexander and wash him and cloath him with his Pastoral attire and bring him into the Assembly as soon as they had done In the mean time Gregory goes to the Assembly and fals a preaching to them of the nature of the Pastoral office and the holiness of life required thereto entertaining them with such speeches tâ—ll Alexander was brought and comely adorned in Gregories garmâ—nts was set before them Whereupon they all fell a gazing and wondering at Alexander and Gregory falls a preaching to them again of the deceitfulness of judging by outward appearances about the inward worth of the soul and that Satan had obscured Alexander lest he should subvert his kingdom To be short he ordaineth Alexander their Bishop a Pastor of a single Church And when they desired to bear him preach he shewed that Gregory was not deceived in him His sermon was sententious and full of understanding but because he had no flowers of Oratory or exactness and curosity of words one that was a curious hearer derided him who it is said was by a vision brought to repent of it And thus despised Alexander the Collier was made Bishop or Pastor of Comana when the great ones were rejected and afterward proved a Champion for Christ to whom he passed in Martyrdome through the flames I have recited this for their sakes that deride the gifts of God in men whom they account unlearned but not to encourage any to thrust themselves on so great a work without Ordination and due qualifications Object But it is Ordination it self that is wanting to the Pastors of the Reformed Churches and therefore they are no Pastors c. Answ. The contrary is manifested in this ensuing Disputation This separating Principle is it that I here purposely contend against For it is cast in to divide and to destroy And to quench such granado's and fire-works of the Devil is a necessary work for them that will preserve a Churches Peace I read in Thuanus of a Bishop in France that turning Protestant took his Popish consecration for insufficient and was again elect and ordained by the Protestant Minsters without a Prelate to be a Prelate But that Presbyters Ordained by a Presbytery of Protestants should be reordained by a Prelate and that as necessary to the being of their office is strange doctrine to all the Protestant Churches It was rejected commonly by the English Bishops even by A. B. Bancroft himself Saith Firmilian inter Epist. Cypriani Omnis potestas gratia in Ecclesia constituta est ubi praesident Majores natu qui baptizandi Manus imponendi ordinandi poffident potestatem i. e. All Power and Grace is placed in the Church where Elders do preside who possess the power of Baptizing Imposing hands and Ordaining I know it will be said that Firmilian speak of Bishops only But I believe not that he
Sect. 9. 2. A Minister is an officer of Christ and therefore receiveth his Authority from him and can have none but what he thus recieves And therefore 1. He hath no Soveraignty or Lordship over the Church for that is the perogative of Christ. 2. He hath no degree of underived Power and therefore must prove his Power and produce his Commission before he can expect the Church to acknowledge it 3. He hath no Power to work against Christ or to destroy the souls of men or to do evil Though he hath a Power by which occasionally he may be advantaged to evil yet hath he no Authority to do it For Christ giveth no man power to sin nor to do any thing against himself 4. He deriveth not his authority from man though by man as an instrument or occasion he may The People give him not his Power The Magistrate gives it not The Ordainers Bishops or Presbyters give it not any further then as I shall shew anon by signifying the will of Christ that indeed giveth it and by investing men in it by solemn delivery The Choosers may nominate the person that shall receive it and the Magistrate may encourage him to accept it and the Ordainers may Approve him and Invest him in it but it is Christ only that gives the Power as from himself As in Marriage the persons consent and the Magistrate alloweth it as Valid at his bar and the Minister blesseth them and declareth Gods consent But yet the Power that the Husband hath over the wife is only from God as the conferring cause and all that the rest do is but to prepare and dispose the person to Receive it save only that consequently the consent of God is declared by the Minister Of which more anon when we speak of Ordination Sect. 10. 3. A Minister is a man separated or set a part to the work of the Gospel For he is to make a calling of it and not to do it on the by Common men may do somewhat that Ministers do even in preaching the Gospel but they are not separated or set apart to it and so entrusted with it nor make a Calling or Course of employment of it Ministers therefore are Holy persons in an eminent sort because they have a two-fold Sanctification 1. They are as all other Christians sanctified to God by Christ through the spirit which so devoteth them to him and brings them so neer him and calls them to such holy honourable service that the whole Church is called a Royall Priesthood a Holy Nation c. to offer spiritual sacrifice to God And Christ hath made them Kings and Priests to God But 2. They are moreover devoted and sanctified to God not only by this separation from the world but by a separation from the rest of the Church to stand neerer to God and be employed in his most eminent service I mention not mans Ordination in the Definition because it is not essential to the Ministry nor of Absolute Necessity to its being of which anon But that they be set apart by the will of Christ and sanctified to him is of Necessity Sect 11. 4. These Ministers have a double subject to work upon or object about which their Ministry is Employed The first is The world as that matter out of which a Church is to be raised The second is Believers called out of the world These Believers are Either Only Converted and not invested in a Church state or such as are both Converted and Invested These later are either such as are not yet gathered into a particular Church or such as are For all these are the objects of our office Sect. 12. 5. Accordingly the first part of the Ministerial office is to Preach the Gospel to unbelievers and ungodly ones for their Conversion This therefore is not as some have imagined a common work any more then preaching to the Church Occasionally ex Charitate only another man may do it But ex Officio as a work that we are separated and set a part to and entrusted with so only Ministers may do it No man hath the Power of Office but he that hath the Duty or Obligation to make it the trade or business of his life to preach the Gospel though bodily matters may come in on the by Sect. 13. 6. Hence it appears that a man is in order of Nature a Preacher of the Gospel in General before he be the Pastor of a particular flock though in time they often go together that is when a man is ordained to such a particular flock Sect. 14. 7. And hence it follows that a man may be ordained sine Titulo or without a particular charge where the Converting preparatory work is first to be done Sect. 15. 8. And hence it appeareth that a Minister is first in order related to the unbelieving world as the object of his first work before he be related to the Church existent either Catholick or particular And that he is under Christ first a Spiritual Father to beget children unto God from the unbelieving world and then a Governour of them If others have already converted them to our hands and saved us that part of our work yet that overthroweth not the order of the parts and works of our office though it hinder the execution of the first part it being done to our hands by others in that office Sect. 16. 9. The second part of the Ministers work is about Believers meerly converted together with their Children whom they yet have power to Dedicate to God And that is to Invest them in the Rights of a Christian by Baptism in solemn Covenanting with God the Father Son and Holy Spirit And these are the next Material objects of our Office Many of the Ancients Tertullian by name and the Council of Eliberis thought that in case of Necessity a Lay-man though not a Woman may Baptize If that be granted yet must not men therefore pretend a Necessity where there is none But I am satisfied 1. That Baptism by a a private man is not eo nomine a Nullity nor to be done again 2. And yet that it is not only a part of the Ministers work to Baptize and approve them that are to be Baptized ex officio but that it is one of the greatest and highest actions of his office Even an eminent exercise of the Keyes of the Kingdom letting men into the Church of Christ it being a principal part of their Trust and power to judge who is meet to be admitted to the Priviledges and fellowship of the Saints Sect. 17. 10. The third part of the Ministers work is about the Baptized that are only entred into the universal Church for many such there are or else the unbaptized that are Discipled where the former work and this are done at once And that is to congregate the Disciples into particular Churches for Holy Communion in Gods Worship c. They must do part of this
a Power to be a servant to all and to do the work And therefore that the first Question is Whether the great burden and labour of Ministerial service may be laid on any man without Ordination by such as our English Prelates Or whether all men are discharged from this labour and service on whom such Prelates do not Impose it If Magistrates Presbyters and People conspire to call an able man to the work and service of the Lord whether he be justified for refusing it what ever the Church suffer by it meerly because the Prelates called him not Sect. 24. Though the forementioned works do all belong to the Office of the Ministry yet there must be Opportunity and a particular Call to the exercise of them before a man is actually obliged to perform the several acts And therefore it was not without sence and reason that in Ordination the Bishop said to the Ordained Take thou authority to Read or to preach the word of God when thou shalt be threunto lawfully called Not that another call of Authority is necessary to state them in the office or to oblige them to the Duty in General But we must in the invitation of people or their consent to hear us or other such advantagious accidents prudently discern when and where we have a Call to speak and exercise any act of our Ministry Even as a Licensed Physitian must have a particular Call by his Patients before he exercise his skill This call to a particular act is nothing else but an intimation or signification of the will of God that hic nunc we should perform such a work which is done by Providence causing a concurrence of such inviting Circumstances that may perswade a prudent man that it is seasonable Sect. 25. A man that is in general thus obliged by his office to do all the formentioned works of the Ministry that is when he hath a particular call to each may yet in particular never be obliged to some of these works but may be called to spend his life in some other part of the Ministry and yet be a compleat Minister and have the obligation and Power to all upon supposition of a particular Call and not be guilty of negligence in omitting those other parts One man man may live only among Infidels and uncalled ones and so be obliged only to Preach the Gospell to them in order to Conversion and may die before he sees any ready to be baptized Anoâ—her may be taken up in Preaching and Baptizing and Congregating the Converted and never be called to Pastoral Rule of a particular Church Another may live in a Congregated Church where there is no use for the Discipling-Converting-Preaching of the Gospel and so may have nothing to do but to Oversee that particular Church and Guide them in holy Worship And in the same Church if one Ministers parts are more for Publick preaching and anothers more for Private instruction and acts of Guidance and Worship if one be best in expounding and another in lively application tâ—ey may lawfully and â—itly divide the work between them and it shall not be imputed to them for unfaithfulnss and negligence that one forbeareâ—h what the other doth For we have our guifts to the Churches edification Thus Paul saith he was not sent to Baptize but to Preach the Goâ—pel Not that it was not in his Commission and a work of his office but quoad exercitium he had seldome a second particular Call to exercise it being taken up with that Preaching of the Gospel and settling and confirming Churches which to him was a greater work Sect. 26. This Ministry before desâ—râ—bed whether you call it Episcopatum Sacerdotium Presbyteratum or what else is fit is but one and the same Order for Deacons are not the Ministers defined by us It is not distinguished into various Species Even the Patrons of Prelacy yea the Schoolmen and other Papists themselves do ordinarily confess that a Prelate and Presbyter differ not Ordine but only Gradu So that it is not another office that they ascribe to Prelates but only a more eminent Degree in the same Office And therefore they themselves affirm that in Officio the Power of Ordination is in both alike the office being the same But that for the honour of the Degree of Prelacy for the unity of the Church Presbyters are hindered from the Exercise of that Ordination which yet is in their Power and Office Sect. 27. As far as Ordination is a part of the Ministerial Work it is comprised in the forementioned acts of Congregating Teaching Ruling c. and therefore is not left out of the Definition as it is a duty of the office though it be not expâ—essed among the Efficient causes for the reason above mentioned and because I am now more distinctly to treat of it by it self and to give you fuâ—ther reasons hereof in the explication of the Nature and Ends of this Ordination CHAP. II. Of the Nature and Ends of Ordination Sect 1. THat we may know how far the Ordination in question is necessary to the Ministry and whether the want of it prove a Nullity we must first enquire what goes to the laying of the Foundation of this Relation and how many things concur in the efficiency and among the rest what it is that the Ordainers have to do as their proper part and what are the reasons of their Power and Work Sect. 2. As all that deserve the name of men are agreed that there is no Power in the world but from God the Absolute Soveraign and first Cause of Power so all that deserve the name of Christians are agreed that there is no Church Power but what is from Christ the head and Soveraign King of the Church Sect. 3. As the will of God is the Cause of all things And no thing but the Signification of it is necessary to the conveying of meer Rights So in the making a man a Minister of the Gopel there needeth no other principal efficient cause then the Will of Jesus Christ nor any other Instrumental Efficient but what is of use to the signifying of his Will So that it is but in the nature of signs that they are Necessary No more therefore is of Absolute Necessity but what is so necessary to signifie his will If Christs will may be signified without Ordination a man may be a Minister without it Though in other respects he may be culpable in his entrance by crossing the will of Christ concerning his duty in the manner of his proceedings Sect. 4. There is considerable in the Ministry 1. Beneficium 2. Officium 1. The Gospel pardon salvation-Ordinances are those great Benefits to the sons of men which the Ministery is to be a means of conveying to them And is it self a Benefit as it is the means of these Benefits In this respect the Ministry is a Gift of Christ to the Church and his Donation is the necessary act for their
acts yet all that he doth quite out of the line of his Office are Nullities Sect. 14. We see then that all that the Law hath left to the Ordainer is but this In General to Discern and judge of the person that is Qualified according to the Description of the Law and particularly to call him out to the work if he need excitement and to Try and Approve him before he be admitted and to Invest him or solemnize his admittance at his entry So that the sum of all is but to find out the qualified person because he is not named by the Law Sect. 15. And even in this the Ordainers are not the only Discerners or Judges but the person himself the People and the Magistrates have all the forementioned parts in the work And God himself goes before them all and by providence frequently points them out the man whom they are bound to choose Ordain accept and submit unto and that by these particular acts Sect. 16. 1. As God doth plainly describe the persons in the word so he doth Qualifie them accordingly by his Guifts and that of three sorts Even his special Graces necessary so far as was before mentioned Ministerial Abilities of Knowledge and utterance and a desire after the work for its ends 2. God useth to qualifie so small a nuâ—ber thus compared with his Churches Mecessities that whether they should be Ministers in general or not is seldom matter of controversie to prudent men or at least a doubt that 's more easie to decide 3. God useth by Providence to give some one man by advantage of parts acquaintance opportunity interest c. a special fitness for one place and people above other men and so to facilitate the decision 4. God useth to stir up the hearts of the Church to choose or consent to the person thus qualified 5. And he useth to stir up desires or consent in the heart of the person to be the Pastor of that particular flock 6. And he useth oft times to procure him Liberty if not some call from the Magistrate 7. And also to remove impediments in his way 8. And to assist ordainers in discerning the qualifications of the person when the work comes to their hands All this God doth providentially Sect. 17. By this much it appeareth that the Ordainers do not give the power as from themselves to others nor doth it pass through their hands They are but the occasions and the Instruments of Inauguration or solemn possession when their interposition is due It is the standing Act of Christ in his Law that giveth the Power immediately I say immediately as without any mediate receiving and conveying cause that is directly efficient of the Power it self though not so Immediately as to exclude all Preparations and perfecting Instruments accidentall causes other means As in case of Marriage it is the womans consent that is of Necessity to the designation of the Person that shall be her husband But it is not her Consent that properly giveth him the power of an husband over her For that is done by God himself in that Law by which he constituteth the husband to be head of the wife and determineth in specie of his power which one determination immediately conferreth the power on all individual persons when once they are chosen and named so that the Elector of the person doth but prepare and dispose him to receive the power and not give it He doth but open the door and let men in to the Ministry not give it It s one thing to bring the person to the Pool that healeth that he may be the man that first shall enter and it s another thing to heal him It s one thing to Judge of the person that shall receive the Power immediately from God and another thing to give it him our selves Sect. 18. It s thus in the case of Magistrates Power in which mens interest hath ever been more discernable to the world and beyond controversie then in the power of Ministers Though here there be a certain specification that dependeth on the will of man yet the Power it self is immediately from God and men do but choose the person that shall receive it and present him to God and solemnly inaugurate him And for my part I think I shall never consent to any side that will needs give more to men whether Presbyters Prelates or people in making a Minister then in making a King All power is of God the powers that be are ordained of God Sect. 19. If any doubt of this as I perceive by many writings they do I shall to spare the labour of a Digression refer them to the copious unanswerable labours of abundance of Protestants that have written in England for the Royal Power But instead of more let them but read Spalatensis and Saravia and Bilson and rest satisfied or confute them before they expect any more from me Sect. 20. As in the making of Bayliffs for our Corporations either the people or the Burgesses have the power of choosing and the Steward or Recorder hath the power of swearing him and performing the Ceremonies and yet none of these confer the power but only design the person who receives the power from the Prince alone by the Charter of the Cities or Towns as his Instrument so is it in the ordaining of Ministers The People may choose and the Pastors may invest but its God only by the Gospel Charter that confers the power from himself Sect. 21. Hence it is plaâ—n that the Argument is vain that 's commonly used by the Prelates from Nemo dat quod non habet For it falsly supposeth that the Ordainers are the givers of Power the master-error in their frame Christ hath it and Christ giveth it Men give it not though some of them have it For they have it only to use and not to give When the People choose a King they give him not the Power but God giveth it to the man whom the people choose When our Corporations choose their Bayliff the choosers give him not the Power for they had it not themselves but they determine of the man that immediately from the Princes Charter shall receive it Nor doth the Recorder or Steward give it Primarily but only Instrumentaliter perfective by a Ceremonial inauguration So the People give not Pastors the Power Nor the Ordainers but only complementally Sect. 22. From what is aforesaid also it appeareth that the work of the Ministry is founded first in the Law of nature it self which upon supposition of mans misery and his recovery by Christ and the Promise and means appointed for application requireth every man that hath Ability and Opportunity to do his best in the Order appointed him by God to save mens souls by proclaiming the Gospel and using Gods appointed means for the great and blessed Ends that are before us Sect. 23. Hence it also appeareth that Gods first command partly in Nature and partly
Episcopal Brethren accommodated and propound somewhat for a Peace Sect. 2. I shall be much briefer on all these then evidence would invite me to be because I apprehend the most of them to be of no great necessity to our cause we having enough without them and lest men should think that we need such Mediums more then we do and because of my exceeding scarcity of time which forceth me to do all hastily And for the first that Humane Ordination is not of Absolute Necessity to the Being of the Ministry I argue as followeth Arg. 1. If the Necessity of Ordination may cease as to single persons and the Necessity of Ministration continue or if the obligations to each are thus separable then is not Ordination of Necessity to the Being of the Ministry But the Antedent is true which I shall prove by parts for the consequence is past all doubt nor will any I suppose deny it Sect. 3. That the obligation to be Ordained may cease to some persons I prove by instances in certain cases And 1. In case of a mans distance from any that should Ordain him As if one or many Christians were cast upon the Coasts of any Indian Heathen or Mahometan Nation as many have been There is no ordination Possible and therefore not necessary or due And to return for it to the Christian part of the world may be as impossible and if not yet unlawfull by reason of delay Sect. 4. And 2. In case of the great Necessity of the People that cannot bear the absence of such as are able to teach them so long as while he travaileth many hundred or thousand miles for Ordination As Basil in another case writes to the Bishops of the West that if one of them the Eastern Bishops should but leave their Churches for a very small time much more for a journey into the West they must give up their Churches to the Wolves to be undone before they return And this case is ordinary abroad Sect. 5. And 3. That in case by Civil wars or enmity among Princes men be unable to travail from one of their Countries into the other for an Ordination which else oftimes cannot be had so the Turks and Persians and the Indian Mogol and the Tartarians and many other Princes by such wars may make such passage an impossible thing Nor is it like they would suffer their subjects to go into the enemies country Sect. 6. And 4. in case that Princes Infidels or others should persecute Ordination to the Death I do not find that it were a Duty to be ordained if it would cost all men that seek it their lives and so made them uncapable of the Ends of Ordination For the dead preach not If we were all forbid to preach on pain of death I know we should not forbear unless our places were so supplied that mens souls were not apparently endangered by our omission But he that may preach without Ordination can scarce prove it a duty to seek Ordination when it would cost him his life Or if he will plead it in Paper he would soon be satisfied in tryal Sect. 7. And 5. In case that the Generality of Bishops within our reach turn Hereticks as in many parts of the East in the Arrian revolt when scarce seven Bishops remained Orthodox Or in case of a National Apostacie as in the Kingdomes of Nubia Tenduc and many more that by the conquest of Infidels have revolted Sect. 8. And 6 Ordination is no duty in case that Bishops confederate to impose any unlawfull oaths or other Conditions on all that they will ordain As the Oath of the Roman Prelates containing divers falshoods and unlawful passages doth make all Roman Ordination utterly impious and unlawfull to be received and therefore not necessary Sect. 9. And 7. In case that Bishops themselves whom those that we now speak to do suppose to have the whole Power of Ordination should either have a desâ—gn to corrupt the Church and ordain only the unworthy and keep out such as the Necessities of the Church requireth or set up a destructive faction or by negligence or any other cause should refuse to ordain such as should be ordained In all these cases Ordination is impossible to them Sect. 10. And 8. In case that death cut off all the Bishops within our reach or that the remnant be by sickness or banishment or imprisonment hindered or by danger affrighted to deny Ordination or by any such means become in accessible Ordination must here fail Sect. 11. And 9 In case that Bishops through contention are unknown as Bellarmine confesseth it hath been at Rome that the wisest could not tell which was Pope Especially if withall both parties seem to be such as are not to be submitted to Ordination fails Sect. 12. And 10. In case of Prophetical immediate calls from God which many had of old and God hath not bound himself from the like again though none have reason to expect it and none should rashly presume of it In all these ten cases Ordination faileth Sect 13. And that it doth so needs no proof the Instances prove it themselves Briefly 1. Nemo tenetur ad impossibile But in many of these cases Ordination is Impossible therefore c. Sect. 14. And 2. Nemo tenetur ad inhonestum No man is bound to sin For Turpe est impossibile in Law But in many of these cases or all is plainly sin therefore c. Sect. 20. And 3 Cessante fine cessat obligatio The means are for the end But in many if not all these cases Cessat finis ratio medii therefore cessat obligatio Sect. 21. And 4. Cessante materia cessat obligatio But here aliquando cessat materia As in case of the Apostacy death banishment concealment of Bishops therefore c. Sect. 22. And now I am next to prove that when the Obligation to Ordination ceaseth yet the Obligation to Ministerial Offices ceaseth not but such must be done And 1. I prove it hence because the obligations of the common Law of Nature cease not upon the cessation of a point of Order But if the Ministerial works should cease the Obligations of the Law of Nature must cease Here I have two points to prove 1. That the Law of Nature supposing the work of Redemption already wrought and the Gospel and Ordinances established obligeth men that are able and have Opportunity to do the work of Ministers 2. And that this Law is not ceased when Ordination ceaseth Sect 23. The Law of Nature prohibits cruelty and requireth Charity and to shew mercy to men in greatest Necessities according to our ability But to suspend the exercise of the Ministerial office were the greatest cruelty where there is Ability and opportunity to exercise it and to exercise it is the greatest work of Mercy in all the World Nature teacheth us to do good to all mâ—n while we have time and to save them with fear pulling them
among the Churches in Europe on their grounds hath any proof and therefore must not pretend to the Ministry Churches or Ordinances but we must all turn Seekers to day and Infidels to morrow by this device Sect. 30. Argument 8. The Ministry of the Priests and Levities before the incarnation of Christ and in his time was not Null though they wanted as much or more then such a succession of right Ordination therefore it is so still with the Gospel Ministery The Antecedent I shall more fully manifest neerer to the end Only now observe that when Abiathar was put out by Solomâ—n and when such as were not of the line or Genealogie of the Priests were put as polluted persons from the Priesthood Neh. 7.64 65. and 13 29 30. Ezra 2.62 yet were not any of their administrations taken to have been Null Sect. 31. Argument 9. If the Ministration or Governing acts of Vsurping Princes may be Valid and there need no proof of an uninterrupted succession to prove the validity then is it so also in the Ministry But the Antecedent is certain therefore c. The Validity of the consequence from the parity of Reason I shall manifest anon Sect. 32. Argument 10 If an uninterrupted Succession of Canonical or true Ordination be Necessary to the Being of the Church Ministry and Ordinances then Rome and England have lost their Ministry Churches and Ordinances But the Consequent will be denyed by the adversaries therefore so also must the Antecedent if they regard their standing Sect. 33. Though this be the Argument that I have the greatest advantage to press the adversary with yet because I have made it good already in two or three other writings in my Key for Catholicks and my Safe Religion and Christian Concord I shall say but little of it now But briefly this may suffice 1. For the Church of Rome if either Heresie Infidelity Sodomie Adultery Murder Simony violent intrusion ignorance impiety want of due election or of due consecration or plurality of Popes at once can prove an interruption of their succession I have shewed them already where it s proved But if none of these prove it we are safe our selves Sect. 34 But Grotius in Discus Apolog. Rivet pleads for them that if any intercision have been made at Rome it hath been made up from other Churches Answ. 1. That is not proved but nakedly affirmed 2. Nor will it serve the Papists turn that must have all Churches hold from Rome and her succession and Rome from none nor to be patcht up from their succession 3. De facto the contrary is certain For 1. Those other held their Ministry as from the universal Headship of the Pope and therefore had themselves their interruptions in the former interruptions of Rome as being but her members and therefore were not capable themselves of repairing of her breaches 2. The successors of the illegitimate Popes such as deposed Eugenius c. and men as bad as they have continued the succession And tâ—e Bishops that were consecrated by power received from the illegitimate Popes were the only persons that were the repairers of the breach And yet the Pope will hardly yield that he receiveth his power from any of these 3 There have been greater defects in the succession then this of Consecration even of due Election Capacity yea of an office it self which Christ will own The Vicechristship of the Pope is no office of Christs planting Sect. 35. And 2 For the English Prelates as they are unable to prove their uninterrupted succession so the interruption is proved in that they derived and held their Power from the Vicechrist of Rome and that qua talis for so many ages This was their own profession and all that they did was as his Ministers by his Authority which was none Sect. 36. Object But this nulled not the true Authority which they received from the Pope or Prelates as Prelates Answ. The Pope was uncapable of giving them Authority and whether the Prelates as such were so too we shall enquire anon And though I grant that where the person was fit there was yet a Ministry Valid to the Church and perhaps to themselves in the main yet that is because Canonical Ordination is not of Necessity to the Being of the Ministry but by other means they might be then Ministers though this corruption was conjunct that they received their Power imaginarily from Râ—me but that the said Canonical succession was interrupted by this Papal tenure and many a delinquency is nevertheless sure and sufficient to inforce the Argument as to them that now are our adversaries But so much shall suffice for the Non-necessity of this succession of a true and Regular Ordination CHAP. V. Ordination by such as the English Prelates not Necessary to the Being of the Ministry Sect. 1. I Have made this work unnecessary by the two former Chapters For if no Ordination be of Necessity to the Being of the Ministry nor an uninterrupted Succession Necessary then doubtless an Ordination by these Prelates in Specie is not Necessary at present or as to succession But yet ex abundati I add Sect. 2. Argument 1. Ad hominem I may well argue from the Concession of the English Prelates themselves and their most zealous adherents And their judgements were 1. That such a succession as aforesaid of right Ordination was not of Necessity And for this they that write against the Papists do commonly and confidently dispute Sect. 3. And 2. They maintained that the Protestant Churches that had no Bishops were true Churches and their Ministers true Ministers and so of their administrations This was so common with them that I do not think a dissenting vote can be found from the first Reformation till about the preparations for the Spanish match or little before Sect. 4. I have in my Christian Concord cited at large the words of many and the places of the writings of more as 1. Dr. Field 2. Bishop Downam 3. Bishop Iewel 4. Saravia 5. Bishop Alley 6. Bishop Pilkinton 7. Bishop Bridges 8. Bishop Bilson 9. Alexander Nowel 10. Grotius their friend then 11 Mr. Chysenhal 12. The Lord Digby 13. Bishop Davenant 14. Bishop Prideaux 15. Bishop Andrews 16. Chillingworth 17. To which I now add Bishop Bromâ—all of Schism 18. Dr. Fern 19. Dr. Steward in his answer to Fountains letter these of the later or present sort 20. And Bishop Vsher whose judgement of it is lately published by Dr. Bernard at his own desire 21. And Mr. Mason in a Book of of purpose for justification of the Reformed Churches hath largely pleaded this cause 22. And Dr. Bernard saith that Dr. Overall was judged not only to consent to that Book but to have a hand in it 23. And no wonder when even Bancroft himself the violentest of all the enemies of them called Puritans in those times is said by Spotswood there recited by Dr. Bernard to be of the same mind and to give it
for Holland he questioned if there was a Church among them or not or words fully to that Purpose Against which abuse of the Dr. the Bishop was fain to vindicate himself See page 124 125. Of his Posthumous Judgement Sect. 15. Moreover 5. We know not of almost any Bishops in England by whom men may be Ordained Four or five Reverend Learned men of that degree are commonly said to survive among us whom we much honour and value for their worth But as these are so distant and their residence to the most unknown so the rest if there be any are known to very few at all that I can hear of It s famed that many Bishops there are but we know it not to be true nor know not who they be and therefore it cannot well be expected that their Ordination should be sought If they reveal not themselves and their Authority and do not so much as once command or claim obedience from the generality of Ministers how can they expect to be obeyed If they plead the danger of persecution I answer 1. What Persecution do they suffer that are known above others of their way 2. If that will excuse them when we never heard of any that suffered the loss of a penny for being known to be a Bishop since the Wars were ended then it seems they take the Being of the Ministry and Churches to be but of small moment that are not worthy their hazzard in a manifestation of their power And if this excuse them from appearing it must needs in reason excuse others from knowing them obeying them and submitting to them Sect. 16. And when they shall declare themselves to be our Bishops they must in all reason expect that the proof of it as well as the naked affirmation be desired by us For we must not take every man for a Bishop that saith he is so They must shew us according to the Canons that the Clergy of the Diocess lawfully Elected them and Bishops Consecrated them which are transactions that we are strangers to If they take the secret Election of six or seven or very few in a Diocess to be currant because the rest are supposed to be uncapable by Schism 1. Then they shew themselves so exceedingly unjust as to be unmeet for Government if they will upon their secret presumptions and unproved suppositions cut off or censure so many parts of the Clergy without ever accusing them or calling them to speak for themselves or heâ—ring their Defence 2. And if upon such presumptuous Censures you make your selves Bishops besides the Canons you cannot expect obedience from those that you thus separate from and censure unheard Sect. 17. It s known that the English Bishops as Grotius himself affirmeth were chosen by the King according to the custom here the Chapter being shadows in the business And if the King may make Bishops he may make Presbyters and then Ordination is unnecessary But if you say that the Consecrators make them Bishops and not the Kings Election then Rome had many Bishops at once when ever three or four Popes were consecrated at once which marrs all succession thence dirived and then if some Bishops consecrate one and some another both are true Bishops of one Diocess and many Pastors may be thus Ordained to one Church Sect. 18. And it concerneth us before we become their subjects to have some credible Evidence that they are so Orthodox as to be capable of the place And the rather because that some that are suspected to be Bishops how truly I know not have given cause of some suspicion Either by writing against Original sin or by owning Grotius's Religion which what it was I have shewed elsewhere or by unchurching the Protestant Churches and Nullifying their Ministry that have not their kind of Ordination while they take the Roman Ordination to be Valid and their Church and Ministry to be true with other such like Sect. 19. And 6. If we should now when better may be had subject our selves to the Ordination and Government of the abolished Prelacy we should choose a more corrupt way of administration and prefer it to a more warrantable way That this way is corrupt is proved in the former Disputation That a way more warrantable may be had I shall prove anon Though submission to a faulty way in some cases of Necessity is excusable yet when we have our choice the case is altered Sect. 20. And a tender Conscience hath very great reason to fear lest by such voluntrary subjection they should incur moreover this double guilt 1. Of all the hurt that this corrupt sort of Episcopacy did before the abolition 2. And of all the hurt that it might do again if it were introduced which is neither small nor uncertain He that hath seen the fruits that it brought forth but for a few years before the abolition and weighs the arguments brought against it methinks should fear to be the restorer of it Sect. 21. If any man as Mr. Thorndike and others do shall write for a more regular sort of Episcopacy it s one thing to find a tolerable Bishop in his Book and another thing to find him existent in England For we know not of any New sort of Regulated Episcopacy planted and therefore must suppose that it is the Old sort that is in being Let them bring their Moderate forms into existence and then its like that many may be more inclined to submit to their Ordination but their moderate principles having not yet made us any Moderate Episcopacy I see not how we should be ever the more obliged for them to submit to the Old but rather are the more justified in disowning it when their own reformed modell is against it CHAP. VII The Ordination used now in England and in other Protestant Churches is Valid and agreeable to Scripture and the Practice of the Ancient Church Sect. 1. HAving already proved that the late English Bishops Ordination is not of necessity it is satisfactory without any more ado to them that would nullifie our Ministry and Churches that have not their Ordination But because we may meet with other adversaries and because in a case of so much weight we should walk in the clearest light that we can attain for the satisfaction of our own Consciences I shall further prove the Validity of our Ordination and the truth of our Call and Minstry and Churches Sect. 2. Argument 1. The Ordination is Valid which is performed by such Bishops as were instituted and existent in Scriture times But our Ordination used in England and other refoâ—med Churches is performed by such Bishops as were institutâ—d and existent in Scâ—â—pture times the refore such Ordination is Valid Thâ— Major will not be denyed being â—â—derstood with a supposition of other requisites that are not now in controversie For those that we have to deal with do grant that such Bishops as are mentioned Acts 20. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. Phil. 1.1 and
more have Ministers Ordained by Presbyters a lawfull call to their Ministry But the Prelates say that they had a lawfull Call to their Prelacy therefore c. The reason of the Consequence which only will be denyed is 1. Because the Presbyters are Ordained to an Office that is of Christs Institution but the Prelates are Consecrated to an Office that is not of Christs Institution but against it and against the light of Nature in taking on them the impossible Government of an hundred or many hundred Churches as was shewed in the former Disputation 2. Because the Prelates hold an uninterrupted Succession of Legitimate Ordination necessary to the Being of their Prelacie I mean such as now we dispute against hold this but so do not the Presbyters The said dissenting Prelates are still upon their Nâ—mo dat quod non habet which therefore we may urge upon them And 1. They cannot prove an uninterrupted Succession themselves on whom it is incumbent according to their principles if they will prove their Call 2. We can prove that they are the successors of such as claimed all their Power from the Roman Vicechrist and professed to receive it from him and hold it of him as the Catholick Head and so that their Ordination comes from a seat that hath had many interruptions and so had no power of Ordination by their Rule For when the succession was so oft and long interrupted Nemo dat quod non habet and therefore all that followed must be usurpers and no Popes and those that received their Offices from them must be no Officers But the Presbyters that Ordain will give a better proof of their Call then this Sect. 61. Argument 19. Where the Office is of Gods Institution and the persons are endued with Ministerial abilitities and are Orderly and duly designed and separated to the Office of the sacred Ministry there are true Ministers and Valid administrations But all these are found in the Reformed Churches that have Ordination without Prelates therefore c. The Major is undenyable as containing a sufficient enumeration of all things necessary to the Being of the Ministry Sect. 62. The Minor is proved by parts 1. That the Offiâ—e of a Presbyter is of divine institution is confessed by most And I suppose those that deny it to be of Scripture insâ—iâ—ution will yet have it to be Divine But if they deny that yet it sufficeth us that it is the same officer that they call a Bishop and we a Presbyter that is the chief Pastor of a particular Church Sect. 63. 2. And that the persons are duly or competenly qualified for the Ministry nothing but Ignorance Faction and Malicâ— that ever I heard of do deny Supposing the humane frailties that make us all insufficient gradually for these things The Ignorant that know not what the Ministerial qualifications are do judge as carnal interest leadeth them The Factious rail at all that be not of their mind Grotius thought the opinions of the Calvinists made them unfit materials for the Catholick Edifice that by his Pacification he was about to frame So do most other Sects reject those as unworthy that suit not with their minds And malice whether â—nâ—mated by Heresie Prophaness or Carnal interest will easily find faults and unweariedly slander and reproach But besides such I meet with none that dare deny the competent abilities of these Ministers Sect. 64. And 3. That the persons are Orderly and duly separated to the work of the Ministry is thus proved Where there is a separation to the Ministry by mutual Consent of the person and the flock and by the Magistrates authority and by the Approbation and Investiture of the fittest Ecclesiastical officers that are to be had there is an orderly and due separation to the Ministry But all this is to be found in the Ordination used in England and other Reformed Churches without Prelates therefore c. This proves not only the Validity of their Ordination but the full Regularity Sect. 65. God himself as hath been shewed doth by his Law appoint the Office of the Ministry imposing the duty upon the person that shall be called and giving him his power by that Law And then there is nothing to be done but to detertermine of the person that is to receive this power and solemnly to put him in Possession by Investiture Now the principal part of the former work is done also by God himself by his Qualifying the person with his eminent Gifts and giving him opportunities and advantages for the Work So that the people and Odainers have no more to do but to find out the man that God hath thus qualified and to elect approve and invest him and usually he is easily found out as a candle in the night So that the two great acts by which God maketh Ministers is his Instituting Law that makes the office and his Spiritual and Naturall Endowments given to the person which the Church is but to find out and call into use and exercise And therefore we may still truly say that the Holy Ghost maketh Pastors or Overseers of the Church as well as formerly he did Act. 20.28 because he giveth them their Gifts though not such Miraculous Gifts as some then had By his common Gifts of Knowledge and Utterance and his special Gifts of Grace it is the spirit that still makes Ministers and still Christ giveth Pastors to the Church Sect. 66. It is therefore to be noted that Eph. 4.6 7 8 11 the way of Christs giving officers to his Church is said to be by giving Gifts to men and the diversity of Offices is founded in the diversity of the Measure of Grace or these Gifts To every one of us is given Grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. Therefore he saith Ascending on high he led captivity 〈◊〉 and gave Gifts to men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he gave some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists and some Pastors and Tâ—â—chers So that giving Gifts and giving Apostles Prophets c. are here made the same work of God Not that 〈…〉 and Approbation of these gifts is hereby made unnecessary but 〈◊〉 this is Gods principal act by which â—e giveth Pastors and Teachers to the Church and by which the Officers aâ—e distinguished For the Church is to discern and submit to those that are thus gifted and to follow the Spirit and not either contraâ—ict or lead him When God hath thus gifted men the main wâ—rk is done for making them Ministers iâ— withall he give tâ—em opportunities and advantages for the work and it is the Churches Duty â—o Own and Approve these Gifts of God and to do their parts to introduce the person And if the Ordainers refuse this in case of Necessity the gifted person is bound to improve his Gifts without them I say in case of Necessity using the best Order that is left Sect. 67. This being premised I come to the Argument § 64. And the
Ministerium vel ad Sacerdotalem locum indignu obreperet Ordinari enim nonnunquam indignos non secundum Dei voluntatem sed secundum humanam praesumptionem haec Deo displicere quae non veniant ex legitima justa Ornatione Deus ipse manifestat per Osee Prophetam dicens sibi ipsi constituerunt Regem non perâ—me Propter quod diligenter de traditione Divina Apostolica observatione observandum est tenendum quod apud nos quoque fere Provincias universas tenetur ut ad Ordinationes rite celebrandas ad eam plebem cui praepositus ordinatur Episcopi ejusdem provinciae proximi quique conveniant Episcopus deligatur plebe praesente quae singulorum vitam plenissime nâ—vit uâ—iuscujusque actum de ejus conversatione perspexit Quod apud vos factum videmus in Sabini collegae nostri ordinatione ut de universae fraternitatis suffragio de Episcoporum qui in praesentia convenerant quique de eo ad vos literas fecerant judicio Episcopatus ei deferretur manus ei in locum Basilidis imponeretur And so he goes on to shew that even the Bishop of Romes restoring of Basilides was not valid to rescind the foresaid Ordination of Sabinus which was thus made by the Bishops on the peoples suffrages And yet our Diocesans have alas too commonly thrust on the people against their consent such unworthy persons as of whom we may say as Cyprian ibid. of these Cumque alia multa sint gravia delicta quibus Basilides Martialis implicati tenentur frusta tales Episcopatum sibi usurpare coâ—antur cum manifestum sit ejusmodi homines nec Ecclesiae Christi posse praeesse nec Deo sacrificia offerre debere I have cited these words at large because they are full and plain to shew us the practice of those times and are the words of an African Syrod and not of Cyprian alone and shew that then the People had the chiefest hand in the Election or designation of the person which is it that I have now to prove Sect. 86 Pamelius himself while he seeks to hide the shame of their Prelates Ordination from the light of these passages of Cyprian doth yet confess and say Non negamus veterem Electionis Episcoporum ritum quo plebe praesente immo suffragiis plebis eligi solent Nam in Africa illum observatum constat ex electione Eradii Successoris D. Augustini de quo extat Epistola ejus 120. In Gracia aetate Chrysost. ex lib. 3. de Sacer. In Hiâ—paâ—is ex hoc Cyprianâ— loco Isidor lib. de Officiis In Galliis ex Epistâ—l Celestin. Pap. 2. Romae ex iis quae supradiximus Epist ad Antâ—n Vbique etiam alibi ex Epist. Leonis 87 Et perdurasse eam consuetudinem ad Gregor 1. usq ex ejus Epistolis immo ad tempora usque Caroli Ludovici Imperatorum ex 1. lib. Capitulorum eorundem satis constat This full confession from the mouth of an adversary may save me the labour of many more allegations concerning the judgement and practice of the ancients Sect. 87. He that would see more may find enough in Voâ—tius de Desparata causa Papatus lib. 2. c. 12. Sect 2. passim And in Blondel de jure plebis Goulartius on the foresaid notes of Pamelius on Cyprian p. 205 Among others he there citeth those known Canons of the Carthage Councils three and four out of Gratian Nullus ordinetur clericus nisi probatus vel examine Episcoporum vel populi testimonio Et. Episcopus sine concilio clericorum suorum clericos non ordinet itâ— ut civium conn ventiam testimonium quaerat What and where is that Clergy without whose Council our Prelates Ordain not and that people whose suffâ—ages they require And saith Goula tius Observanda est Carâ—li ut Ludovici Constitutio Sacrerum Camnum non ignari ut Dei nimine sacrosancta Ecclâ—sia suo liberius patiatur honore assensum Ordini Ecclesiastico praebemus ut Episcopi per Electionem Cleri pâ—puli secundum statuâ—a Canonum eligantur It s certain then that the people were sometime the sole choosers and the Pastors the approvers and sometime the People and the Pastors joynt Electors and sometime the Pastors chose but forced none on the people against or without their Consent as Pamelius confesseth till Popular tumults divisions and other reasons occasioned the change of this ancient Custome And therefore it is most certain that an Election by the people may be a valid determination of the person Sect. 88. And the person being once sufficiently determined of the power and obligation doth fall upon him immediately from God so that were it not that the Pastors Approbation is part of the Determination there would be nothing left for Ordination but the solemnizing of their entrance by Investiture which is not essential to the Ministerial Office but ad bene â—ssâ— makes to a compleat and orderly possession where it may be had and where it cannot Election may suffice Sect. 89. Voetius de Desperata causa Papatus lib. 2. sect 2 cap. 20. doth by seven Arguments prove against Iansenius Electionem tribuere Ministerium esse proprie ejus fundamentum The first Argument is from the Definition of Election the second from the Canon Law which giveth a Bishop his power before Consecration and gives the Pope a power of governing the Church before he is inthroned or Consecrated The third is à similibus in Oeconomâ—e and Policie the foundation of marriage union is mutual Consent and not Solemnization Coronation saith he doth not make a King he means not fundamentally but compleatively but hereditary Succession or Election He may well be a King without Coronation as saith he the custom is in Castile Portugal c. The King of France dependeth not pro jure regni on the Archbishop of Rhemes but saith Barclay hath the right and honour of a King before his Coronation An elect Emperour governeth before his Coronation Quoad potestatem administrandi regni Galliâ—i unctio Coronatio nihil addunt inquit Commentator sanctionis pragmat fol. 4. His fourth Argument is from the nature of all Relations quae posito fundamento termino in subjecto dicuntur existere atqui Solemnizatio seu Consecratio seu Ordinatio seu Investitura 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vâ—cant patres Graeci illa externa quam nos confirmationem dicimus neque est fundamentum neque terminus Ministerii aut Ministri sed legitima electio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclesiae est fundamentum Ministerii ista vel illa particularis Ecclesia est terminus in quo est correlatum Oves seu discipuli ad quod refertur relatum Doctoris seu Pastoris Though some of this need explication and limitation yet its worthy consideration His fifth Argument is from the Confessions of the Adversaries citing Sylvest Prieras Immanuel Sa
and not till then we shall have perfect Holiness so when we come to Heaven and not till then we shall have perfect Vnity and Peace But till then I shall take that which you call Patching as my Duty and our great Benefit If you think one man have not a Negative voice we neither urge you to say that he hath nor so much as to seem to own his claim You shall have leave in the publike Register of the Association to put it under your hand that Not as owning the claim of the Presidents Negative voice but as yielding in a Lawful thing for Peace you do Consent to forbear Ordaining any without him except in Cases of Necessity This you may do without any shew of contradicting your Principles and this is all that is desired § 30. Quest. And may we not for peace sake grant them as much in point of Iurisdiction as of Ordination and Consent to do nothing without Necessity but when the President is one and doth Consent Answ. Either by Iurisdiction you mean Law making or Executive Government The first belongs to none but Christ in the substance of his Worship and the Circumstances no man may Vniversally and Vnchangeably determine of but pro re nata according to emergent occasions the Magistrate may make Laws for them and the Pastors may make Agreements for Concord about them but none should determine of them without need and therefore here is no work for Legislators the Usurpers that have grievously wronged the Church And for Executive Government either it is over the People or over the Pastors To give a Negative voice to the President of an Association of the Pastors of many Churches in Governing the People of a single Church is to set up a new Office a fixed Pastor of many Churches and to overthrow Government and introduce the noxious sort of Prelacy which for my part I intend not to be guilty of And for proper Government of the Pastors I know none but God and Magistrates that have that Power Every Bishop saith Cyprian and the Council of Carthage hath Power of his own will and is responsible for his Actions to God and none of us are Episcopi Episcoporum Bishops of Bishops But there is a Communion among Pastors and Churches to be exercised and so an avoiding or rejecting from Communion and this some call improperly a Government And in this for my part I should consent where peace doth require it that we will not agree upon the rejecting of any Pastor of our Association no more then to the Accepting or Ordaining of them without the President but in cases of Necessity and that just on the terms exprest about Ordination § 31. As for instance in a particular Church there is a Communion to be held among all the members though none of them but the Officers are Governors of the Church And in many cases where the Peoples Consent is needful its common to stand to a Major vote and so great a stress is laid on this that by many of the Congregational way the Government of the Church is said to be in the Major vote of the people and yet 1. This is indeed no Government that belongs to them but Consent to Communion or Exclusion and 2. No Scripture doth require a Minor part to stand in all cases to the decision of a Major vote nor give a Major vote any Rule over the Consciences of the Minor part shew us this voting power in Scripture And yet 3. All agree that upon natural Reasons and General Rules of Scripture the Churches are allowed yea obliged in lawful things for maintaining Vnity and Peace to stand to the judgement of a Major vote in Cases that belong to them to vote in though there be no particular word for it in the Scripture Even so Associate Pastors have not a proper Government of one another neither by Presidents or Major votes though over the people they have but are all under the Government of God and the Magistrate only And yet they may in acts of Consent about Communion or Non-communion with one another prudentially agree to take the Consent of the President or of the Major vote of Pastors or of both where Peace or Order or Edification requireth it except in cases of Necessity § 32. Quest. But what will you take for a Case of Necessity which you will except Answ. 1. If the President be dead 2. Or sick or absent and cannot come 3. Or if he be malignant and wilfully refuse to Consent that the Church be well provided for or Governed 4. And withall supposing that without the great hurt or hazzard of the Churches we cannot delay the business till he be one or do Consent 5. Especially if he be set in enmity against the welfare of the Church and by pretence of a suspending vote would destroy the Church and bring in unworthy hurtful persons or things In all such Cases of Necessity its time to lay by our humane Rules for peace and Order § 33. Object But who shall be judge of this Necessity Answ. The Magistrate only shall be the Compelling Iudge The people shall be the Discerning Iudges the Pastors shall at least have as much power as the People each of them shall Discern so far as they must obey and execute And God only shall be the final Iudge § 34. Object But this will but cause Divisions and Confusions while the President thinks one thing Necessary and the Pastors another and the People another Answ. I answered this before Reason must not be cast by and the Churches ruined and poyson and destruction taken in on pretence of such inconveniences If such a Case of difference fall out each man will execute as he discerneth or judgeth being to answer for his own actions and having none that can undertake to answer for him And when we all come to the Bar of God for final Judgement he that was in the right shall be justified and he that falsly pretended Necessity against duty shall bear the blame § 35. Object But in the mean time the Churches will be divided Answ. 1. I told you there is no more hope of â— perfect Vnity on earth then of perfect Holiness 2. When two evils are before us though neither must be chosen for Evil is not an Object of choice unless as seeming good yet the Greater Evil must be first and most studiously repelled And the deformity and destruction of the Churches and the casting out of the Gospel and Worship of God is a greater Evil then disorder about good actions and differences about some Circumstances of Necessary works § 36. All this that I have said about the Negative de facto though not de jure that I would have Consented to for peace I intend not to extend to those Cases and Countries where peace requireth it not but rather the contrary muchâ—less to encourage any to think such a Negative Necessary in it self Some things may be Lawfully
granted that are unlawfully and upon mistake desired § 37. Lastly understand also that when I speak of yielding to this Negative voice in Ordination to the President of such an Association I intend not to exclude the Presbyterie of a particular Church where it is sufficient from the said Power and exercise of Ordination of which I am to speak in the the following Chapter which is of the President of such a Presbyterie CHAP. IV. It is Lawful for the Presbyters of a particular Church to have a fixed President during life § 1. I Come now to the most Ancient fixed Bishop that the Church was acquainted with except the meer Episcopus Gregis the Overseer of the flock and that is A President of many Elders in one particular Church The Diocesan Bishop was long after this The first Bishops if you will call them so in the Church were the first mentioned Itinerant Bishops that were sent abroad to convert souls and gather Churches and afterward took care to water and confirm them The next sort of Bishops and the first so called were the fixed Pastors of particular Churches that cannot be proved to have any superiority over Presbyters The third sort of Bishops in time and the first fixed Bishops that were superiours to other Pastors were these Presidents of the Presbyteries of particular Churches And these are they that now we have to speak of And I shall prove that it is not unlawful to have such § 2. But first I must tell you what I mean and shew you that such may be had among us I have in one of the former Disputations defined a particular Câ—urch It should ordinarily consist of no more then may hold personal Communion together in Gods publick Worship But yet take notice 1. That it tendeth to the strength and honour of it that it be not too small but consisting of as many as are well capable of the Ends. 2 And it is lawfull for these to have some other meeting places for part of the Church besides the principal place which is for the whole Chappels of ease may lawfully be made use of for the benefit of the weak and lame and aged that cannot alwayes or often come to the common Assembly And where such Chappels are not it is lawfull to make use of convenient houses Yea if there were no Place to be had sufficiently capacious of a full Assembly or else if persecution forbad them to meet it might still be but one Church though the members met in several houses ordinarily as five hundred in one and three hundred in another or one hundred only in several places every one going to which house he pleased and having several Pastors that in Society and by Consent did guide them all But though somewhat disorderly may be born with in cases of Necessity yet 1. As it is Necessary to the Ends and so to the Being of a particular Church that they be a Society capable of personal Communion and the personal Teaching Guidance and Oversight of the same Pastors So 2. It is desirable as much tending to Order and Edification that all of them that are able do frequently meet in one Assembly for the Worshipping of God with one heart and mouth And this is the Church I speak of § 3. It is not of Necessity to the Being of such a particular Church that it have more Pastors then one And when one only is the Pastor or Governour that one alone may do all the works of a Pastor or Governour For what else is his Office but the state or Relation of a man obliged and authorized to do such works The Learned Dr. H. H. thinketh that the Apostles planted none in Scripture times but single Pastors or Bishops called also Presbyters in every Church with Deacons under them without any other Presbyters subject or assistant over that Church This I conceive cannot be proved nor so much as the probability of it nay I think at least a probability if not a certainty of the contrary may be proved of some Churches But yet it is most likely that it was so with many Churches And reason tells us that the thing being in it self indifferent was suted by the Apostles to the state of the particular Churches that they planted A small Church might well have a single Pastor when a large Church especially in times of persecution when they must assemble in several houses at once required more Some places might have many persons fit for the Office and some but one Which cases must needs have some Variety § 4. Where there are more Pastors in such a Church then one I know of no Necessity that one should have any superiority over another nor can I prove that it was so from the beginning Some Divines of the Prelatical Judgement think that this was an Ordinance of the Apostles at the first planting of such Churches Others of them think that it was of their appointment but not actually existent till after Scripture times Others of them think that as Hierom saith it began when factions rose in the Church not by Divine Ordination but Ecclesiastical agreement for the preventing or cure of schism § 5. The first Church that we find it in in History is that of Alexandria And Alexandria was a place exceedingly given to sedition tumults and divisions the contentions between Cyril and Orestes the murder of Hypatia by Peter and his company the assault made upon Orestes by Ammonius the other Nitrian Monks and many such feats in the dayes of Theophilus Dionysius and up to the beginning do shew what they were And Socrates saith of them expresly li. 7. cap. 13. that The people of Alexandria above all other men are given to Schism and contention for if any quarrel arise at any time among them presently hainous and horrible offences use to follow and the tumult is never appeased without great blood-shed such were the Alexandrians § 6. But yet it is certain that the Original of this custom of setting up one as President or chief Presbyter in a particular Churâ—h cannot be found out so as to say by whom and when it was first brought in But if it began upon the death of Mark at Alexandria it must needs be long before the death of Iohn the Apostle in that Church what ever other Churces did But it seems that there was then a difference and indifferency in this point and that other Churces did not presently imitate the Churches of Alexandria and Rome herein He that reads Clemens Epistle to the Corinthians without partiality I think will be of Grotius mind before cited Epist. ad Gal. ad Bignon that Clemens knew not any such Prelacy among the Corinthians when he wrote that Epistle And so we may say of some other Witnesses and Churches in those times and afterwards in many places § 7. It is not another Order of Ministers or Office that was in such Churches distinct from the Presbyters that assisted them
the point For 1. It seemeth a most improbable thing that all the Churches or so many should so suddenly take up this Presidency Prelacy or Disparity without scruple or resistance if it had been against the Apostles minds For it cannot be imagined that all these Churches that were planted by the Apostles or Apostolical men and had seen them and conversed with them should be either utterly ignorant of their minds in such a matter of publike practice or else should be all so careless of obeying their new received doctrine as presently and unanimously to consent to a change or endure it without resistance Would no Church or no persons in the world contend for the retention of the Apostolical institutions Would no Chuâ—ch hold their own and bear witness against the corruption and innovations of the rest would no persons say you go about to alter the frame of Government newly planted among us by the Holy Ghost It was not thus in the dayes of Peter or Paul or John and therefore we will have no change Thâ—s seeâ—s to me a thing incredible that the whole Church should all at once almost so suddenly and silently yield to such a change of Government And I do not think that any man can bring one testimony from all the volumes of Antiquity to prove that ever Church or person resisted or disclaimed such a change in the times when it must be made if ever it was made that is in the first or second ages § 17. Yea 2. It is plain by the testimony of Hierom before mentioned and other testimonies of antiquity that in Alexandria at least this practice was used in the dayes of the Apostles themselves For they testifie that from the dayes of Mark the Evangelist till the days of Heroclas and Dionysius the Presbyters chose one from among them and called him their Bishop Now it is supposed by the best Chronologers that Mark was slain about the sixty third year of our Lord and the tenth of Nero and that Peter and Paul were put to death about the sixty sixth of our Lord and thirteenth of Nero and that Iohn the Apostle died about the ninety eighth year of our Lord and the first of Trajan which was about thirty five years after the death of Mark. Now I would leave it to any mans impartial consideration whether it be credible that the holy Apostles and all the Evangelists or Assistants of them then alive would have suffered this innovation and corruption in the Church without a plain disowning it and reproving it Would they silently see their newly established Order violated in their own dayes and not so much as tell the Churches of the sin and danger Or if they had indeed done this would none regard it nor remember iâ— so much as to resist the sin These things are incredible § 18. And I am confident if the judicious godly people had their choice from the experience of what is for their good they would commonly choose a fixed President or chief Pastor in every Church Yea I see that they will not ordinarily endure that it should be otherwise For when they find that God doth usually qualifie one above the rest of their Teachers they will hardly consent that the rest have an equal power over them I have seen even a sober unanimous Godly people refuse so much as to give their hands to an assistant Presbyter whom yet they loved honoured and obeyed though they were urged hard by him that they preferred and all from a loathness that there should be a parity I know not one Congregation to my remembrance that hath many Ministers but would have one be chief § 19. Object But the Prelatical men will say our Pariâ—shes are not capable of this because they have commonly but one Pastor nor have maintainance for more Answ. 1. Though the greâ—ter number have but one yet it is an ordinary case to have two or three or more where there are Chappels in the Parish and the Congregations great as in Market Towns And if ever we have Peace and a setled faithfull Magistrate that will do his part for the house of God we shall certainly have many Ministers in great Congregations Or else they are like to be left desolate For Ministers will over-run them for fear of undertaking far more work then with their utmost pains they are able to perform § 20. And 2. There are few Congregations I hope of Godly people but have some private men in them that are fit to be Ordained Assistant Presbyters though not to govern a Church alone without necessity yet to assist a Learned judicious man such as understand the body of Divinity as to the great and necessary points and are able to pray and discourse as well as many or most Ministers and to exhort publickly in a case of need He that would imitate the example of the Primitive Church at least in the second Century should Ordain such as these to be some of them Assistant Elders and some of them Deacons in every Church that hath such and let them not teach publickly when a more learned able Pastor is at hand to do it but let them assist him in what they are fittest to perform Yet let them not be Lay Elders but authorized to all Pastoral administrations and of one and the same office with the Pastor though dividing the exercise and execution according to their abilities and opportunities and not comming in without Ordination nor yet taking up the Office only pro tempore And thus every Parish where are able Godly men may have a Presbyterie and President § 21. Till then 3. It is granted by the Learned Dr. H. H. that it is not necessary to the being of a Bishop that he have fellow Presbyters with him in that Church If he have but Deacons it may suffice And this is easie to be had § 22. And indeed 1. The parts of many very able Christians are too much buried and lost as to the Church for want of being drawn into more publick use 2. And it is it that tempteth them to run of themselves into the Ministry or to preach without Ordination 3. And yet few of these are fit to be trusted with the Preaching of the word or guiding of a Church alone no nor in equality with others for they would either corrupt the doctrine or divide the Church But under the inspection and direction of a more Learned judicious man as his assistants doing nothing against his mind they might be very serviceable to some Churches And such a Bishop with such a Presbyterie and Deacons neither Lay nor usually very Learned were the ancient fixed Governours of the Churches if I can understand antiquity CHAP. V. Objections against the Presidency forementioned answered § 1. BUT it is not likely but all these motions will have Dissenters on both sides It were strange if in a divided age and place and among a people engaged in so many several parties and that
so deeply as now men are there should any healing remedy be propounded that should not have abundance of opposers Most men are prejudiced and affected at their Education or opportunities or parties or several interest sway them And therefore I expect that most should reject all that I say and some of them with much reproach and scorn Our disease were not so great and dangerous if it could but endure the remedy But let us consider some of their Objections § 2. Object 1. The unpeaceable men of the Prelatical way will say This is but to turn a Bishop into a Parish-Priest and to make him the Ruler of a Parish and a Curate or two and in many places of no Ministers at all A fair Promotion It seems you would leave them but a name and shadow and make them to be contemptible § 3. Answ. 1. Remember that I grant you also the Presidency of Associations c. which you may call an Archbishoprick if you please 2. Is it honour that you contend for or labour and service to the Church If honour you must get it by being the servants of others and not by being Lords of the Clergy or heritage of God If you are seeking honour of men and founding officeâ— in the Church by such directors as ambition you are not the men that we can hope for Peace or Holiness from and therefore can have little treaty with you but to lay by your wickedness But if it be service that you contend for in order to the Churches good try first whether a Parish will not find you work enough I have tried it and find that if I were ten men I could find as much as I am able to do in this one Parish Though I do as much as I am well able night and day and have so many helpers yet it is so great a trouble to me that my work and charge is quite too great for me that I have been often tempted to desert it and go to a smaller place And nothing stayes me but this consideration that God requireth no more then I can do and that its better do what I can then nothing and that if I leave them the next is like to do no more Could I but speak with each man in my Parish by personal Instruction once a moneth or once a quarter or half year it would put me into high expectations of making a very great change among them by this means But when I am not able to speak to them past once a year or two years I must needs fear lest the force of former words will be lost before I come again And yet must you needs have more work and service and more souls to answer for To deal plainly and faithfully with you Brethren impartial standers by conceive that its time for you rather to be more diligent in a smaller charge and to lament your negligence in your Parishes and publickly to bewail that you have by your idleness betrayed so many souls letting them alone in their ignorance and ungodliness and commonly doing little in your charges but what you do at Church in publick Overseers think that most of you are fitter for smaller charges rather then for greater I doubt this will offend many But you were better use it to your Repentance and Reformation then your offence § 4. And 3. I pray you consider how your Passion and partiality maketh you contradict your selves Do you not use to 〈…〉 the Presbyters that they would all be Bishops and they would have a Bishop in every Parish and so are against Bishops that they may be Bishops themselves And what is a Parish Bishoprick so great a prize for our Ambition and yet is it so contemptible to yours Are we proud for seeking to be Parish Bishops and do you take it as an empty name or shadow At least then confess hereafter that your Pride is so much greater then ours that the Mark of our Ambition is taken by you to be a low dishonourable state § 5. And 4. I would intreat you impartially to try whether the Primitive Apostolick Episcopacy fixed in particular Churches were not a Parochial Episcopacy Try whether I have not proved it before And if it were will you pretend to antiquity and Apostolick institution and yet despise the primitive simplicity and that which you confess was settled by the Apostles Let the Eldest carry it without any more ado § 6. And 5. At least say no more that you are for Episcopacy and we against it when we are for Episcopacy as well as you It is only your transcendent or exorbitant sort of Episcopacy that we are against Say not still that we have no Power of Ordination because we are not Bishops but because we are only Bishops of one Church Put the controversie truly as it is Whether it be lawful for the Bishop of one Church with his Prebytery to Ordain Yea or whether many such Associated may Ordain Or rather whether it be tyed to the Bishop of many Churches as you would have it that is Whether Ordination belong to Archbishops only Is not this the controversie § 7. And then 6. Why do you in your Definitions of Episcopacy which you very seldom and sparingly give us require no more then a Parochial Episcopacy and yet now despise it as if it were no Episcopacy at all Tell us plainly what you mean by a Bishop I thought you meant a Primus Presbyterorum or at least a Ruler of People and Presbyters And is not this to be found in a Parish Bishop as well as in a Bishop of many Parishes or Churches Change your Definition from this day forward if you must have a change of the thing defined as it seems you must § 8. And I wouâ—d know whether you can prove that it is Essential to a Bishop to have more Churches or Parishes then one Prove it if you are able Was not great Gregory of Naocesarea a Bishop with his seventeen souls And was not Alexander the Colliar whom he Ordained at Comana a Bishop though but of a small Assembly Do not some of you confess that Bishops in Scripture-times had no subject Presbyters and consequently had but a single Congregation If then a Parish or Congregational Bishop were a true Bishop why may he not be so still § 9. Object 2. But the Church under Christian Princes should not be conformed to the model of the Church under persecution Shall Bishops have no more power and honour now then they had then We see in Constantines dayes a change was made Must they be tyed to a Parish now because they were Bishops only of a Parish in Scripture-times § 10. Answ. 1. We would not have them persecuted now as they were then nor yet to want any due encouragement or assistance that a Christian Magistrate can afford them But yet we would have Gods Word to be our Rule and Bishops to be the same things now as then and we would
and we have to dispute of It is Ecclesiastical Government by Ministers and not secular by Magistrates that is our controversie It is of the Power left by Christ to Pastors and not to Princes § 25. Object But at least those should be excommunicated that deny obedience to their Bishops that is a Power that is left in the Bishops themselves whether the Magistrate consent or not Answ. 1. Excommunication is a sentence that should fall on none but for such gross and hainous sin if not also obstinacy and impenitency in them as is mentioned in Scripture Using it in cases of controversie and tolerable differences is but a tearing and dividing the Church 2. We take it not for our duty to excommunicate you because you are for Diocesan Prelacy therefore you should not take it for yours to excommunicate others because they are against it For 3. If your species of Episcopacy be such as I have proved it you have more need to repent and amend and ask forgiveness of God and men then to excommunicate them that are not of your opinion and for your sin 4. But if you take this to be your duty who hath hindered you from it these twelve years You had liberty for ought I know to have discharged your consciences and to have excommunicated us all 5. But you might so easily see what was like to come of it that it is no wonder that you forbore If such a Ministry and such a people as are now your adherents whose description I forbear should execute your sentence and cast us and our adherents out of their communion what contempt would it bring upon you in England The Ale-houses would be shut up for the most part against uâ— But that and the rest would be easily born I think this is not your way § 26. Object 7. But what need you form us a new sort of Episcopacy were we not well enough before Why did you pull down that which was well planted and now pretend to commend a better to us We were well if you had let us alone § 27. Answ. 1. But We were not well because you would not let us alone The Ministers that were silenced and imprisoned and banished and the thousands of people that were fain to follow them and all those that were undone by your prosecutions in England were not well But this is a small matter The ignorant Congregations that had ignorant and drunken guides where Piety was scorned as Puritanism and impiety made a thing of nothing and where Satan was so commonly served the many hundred Congregations in England that never knew what true Discipline meant nor never saw in all their lives a drunkard oppressor railer blasphemer either cast out or penitently confess his sin before the Church all these were not well though you were well 2. Whether we were well before I have shewed in my first Disputation and thither I refer you 3. And whether we have brought in a new Episcopacy or only cast out a new one and desire to bring in the Old we are content to put it to an equal tryall We all concurr in offering you this motion Let the oldest stand and the newest be cast out § 28. Object 8. Iudge now by the effects The Episcopacy which you blame did keep up Order and Vnity in the Church It kept under those weeds of heresie and error that since sprung up We had then no Quakers nor Seekers nor such other Sects as now abound This swarm of Errors shews which Government is best § 29. Answ. This is a gross fallacy à non causa pro causa to which I return you my answer in these seven considerations 1. You tell us of the good that you think you did but you tell us not of the hurt I hope I love Divisions or Heresies as little as ever a Bishop in England and yet I must profess that I had rather an hundred times have things continue as they are with all our swarms of heresies then to be restored to their ancient pass Our loss iâ— as great as Iosephs in being removed from the Prison to Pharaohs ungodly family I mean in spirituals of seculars anon I know not of an Anabaptist Separatist Quaker or any other Sectary in the Town that I live in for all this noise unless you will take a few Infidels for Sectaries or a few ignorant Papists or those of your own way But on the other side I hope there are many hundreds that truly fear God that formerly were drowned in ignorance and ungodliness The families that were wont to curse and swear and rail at Godliness do now worship God and set up holy instructions and cast out sin and this is our change And in some measure I have reason to believe that it is so in other places also § 30. 2. The Errors of the times are many of them your own and therefore you exclaim against your selves It is of your own selves that men arise that write against Original sin and for Liberty of Prophecying which is more then Liberty of Believing and for a kind of Limbus Patrum and Infantum and for humane Satisfactions for sin to God and for the Primacy of the Pope and that all our Protestant Churches are no Churches or Ministers no Ministers that have not Prelatical Ordination yea and a Succession of it with many the like to say nothing of other Pelagian weeds It doth not therefore become you to reproach us with our swarms of Errors while you introduce them § 31. 3. There were Heresies and Sects even in the dayes of Prelacy Had you not then the Familists the Grundleâ—onians such as Hacket and Coppinger and Arthington and the Anabaptists and Separatists and Antinomians and Papists and such like besides the contentions between the Arminians and Antiarminians and the contentions raised by Episcopacy it self and the Ceremonies that it upheld Who were they that rose up against the Bishops and pulled them down if there were Unity under them as you pretend § 32. 4. The truth is it was the Magistrate and not Episcopacy that kept that Unity and Peace among us which we had and that kept under Heresies so much as they were kept under Take not therefore the Magistrates honour to your selves Who would have attended your Courts or submitted to your censures had it not been for fear of the Secular power I think but few You know the Hereticks themselves obeyed you not for Conscience sake Nor would they have regarded your Excommunication if the Magistrate would have let them alone If it was the spiritual sword in your hands that kept out Heresies why did you not keep them out since as well as then You have the same power from Christ now as ever you had And I hope the fears of persecution will not hinder you from your duty especially when you can name so few that have suffered for exercising Church-discipline by Episcopal power at least this was no hinderance a
exercised here in England how confidently soever some appropriate the title of the Church of England to the adherents of that frame yet would we not have the Church ungoverned nor worse governed nor will we refuse for peace such a kind of Episcpacy as is tolerable in the Church And there are four sorts of Exercise of the Ministry which if you please you may call Episcopacy which we shall not refuse when it may conduce to Peace § 2. I. We shall consent that the Ancient Parochial Episcopacy be restored that is that in every Parish that hath a particular Church there may be a Pastor or Bishop setled to govern it according to the word of God And that he may be the chief among the Presbyters of that Church if there be any And may assume fit men to be assisting Presbyters to him if there be such to be had If not he may be content with Deacons And these Parochial Bishops are most antient and have the Power of Ordination § 3. Yet do we not so tye a Church to a Parish but that in places where the ignorance infidelity or impiety of the people or the smalness of the Parishes is such as that there are not fit persons enough in a Parish to make a convenient particular Church it may be fit for two or three or four in necessity Neighbour Parishes to joyn together and to be formed into one particular Church The several Ministers keeping their stations for the teaching of the rest as Catechumens but joyning as one Presbyterie for Governing of that one particular Church that is Congregate among them And having one President without whom nothing should be done in matters left to humane determination Yet so that the Presbyters be not forced to this but do it freely § 4. II. We shall consent that these Parish Churches be Associate and that in every Market Town or such convenient places as shall be agreed on there may be frequent meetings of the Pastors for Communion and Correspondency and that one among them be their standing Moderator durante vita or their President for so I would call him rather then Bishop though we would leave men to use what name they please And to him should be committed the Communicating of times and places of meeting and other businesses and Correspondencies And the Moderating of the debates and disputations § 5. And for my part I would consent for peace that de facto no Ordination be made in either of the foresaid Presbyteries without the President but in cases of Necessity so be it 1. That none be compelled to own any other Principle of this Practice then a Love of Peace and none be compelled to profess that he holdeth the President to have de jure a Negative voice yea that all have liberty to write down on what other Principles they thus yeild that the Practice only may suffice for Peace § 6. III. We shall consent also that one in a Deanry or Hundred or other convenient space may by the Magistrate be chosen a Visitor of the Churches and Countrey about him having Power only to take notice of the state of things and gravely to admonish the Pastors where they are negligent and exhort the people and provoke them to Holiness Reformation and Unity only by perswasions from the Word of God Which is no more then any Minister may do that hath opportunity only we desire the Magistrate to design a particular person to do it requiring Ministers and people to give him the meeting because that which is every mans work is not so well done as that which is specially committed to some And we desire that he may acquaint the Magistrate how things are § 7. And to avoid the inconveniences of dividing these works we are desirous that these two last may meet in one man and so he that is chosen by the Pastors the President of their Association may be chosen his Visitor by the Magistrate and do both which may be done by one in every Market-town which is truly a City in the antient sense and the circumjacent Villages Yet this we cannot make a standing Rule that one man do both because the Pastors must choose their President and the Magistrate his Visitor and its possible they may not alwayes concur But if the Magistrate will not choose such a Visitor the Pastors may But then they can compel none to meet him or hear him § 8. IV. Besides these three or two whether you will before mentioned we shall consent that there be a general sort of Ministers such as the Apostles Evangelists and others in those times were that shall have no special charge but go up and down to preach the Gospel and gather Churches where there are none and contribute the best assistance of their Abilities Interest and Authority for the reforming confirming and right ordering of Churches And if by the Magistrates Command or Ministers consent there be one of these assigned to each County and so their Provinces prudentially distinguished and limited we shall not dissent Yet we would have such but where there is need § 9. V. Besides these four sorts of Bishops we are all agreed on two sorts more 1. The Episcopi gregis or Pastors of every Congregation whether they have any assistant Presbyters or no or being themselves but such assistant Presbyters 2. The Magistrate who is a secular Bishop or a Governor of the Church by force And we desire the Magistrate to be a nursing Father to the Church and do his duty and to keep the sword in his own hand and for forcible deposing Ministers or any punishment on body or estate we desire no Bishops nor other Ministers may be authorized thereto But if Pastors exclude an unworthy Pastor from their Communion let the Magistrate only deprive him forcibly of his place and maintenance if he see cause When the Council of Antioch had deposed Paulus Samosatenus he would not go out of the house And all the Bishops in the Council could not force him out but were fain to procure the Heathen Emperor Aurelian to do it It lyeth as a blot on Cyril of Alexandria that he was the first man that arrogated and exercised there a secular Coercive Power under the name of a Bishop of the Church § 10. There is enough in this much to satisfie any moderate honest men for Church-government and for the healing of our Divisions thereabout And there is nothing in this that is inconsistent with the Principles of the moderare of any Party § 11. 1. That a Church organized called by some Ecclesia prima should be no greater then I have mentioned is not contradictory to the Principles of the Episcopall Presbyterians Congregationall or Erastian Indeed the two first say that it may be bigger but none of them say It must be bigger The Presbyterians instances of the Church of Ierusalem which sâ—rued to the highest cannot be proved neer half so great
Accommodation § 10. A fourth witness is Dr. Forbs of Scotland who having written purposely a Book called his Irenicon for Accommodation on such terms I need to say no more of him but refer you to the Book I shall name no more of the Episcopal party These four are enow to my purpose § 11. That the Presbyterians of England specially are willing to close upon these terms of a fixed Moderator I prove 1. By the profest Consent of that Reverend Learned servant of Christ Mr. Thomas Gataker a Member of the late Assembly at Westminster who hath professed his judgement of this matter in a Book against Lilly I refer you to his own words for brevity sake § 12. My next witness and for brevity many in one shall be Mr. Geree and the Province of London citing him in their Ius Divinum Ministerii pag. Append. 122. the words are these That the Ancient Fathers in the point of Episcopacy differ more from the high Prelatist thâ—n from the Presbyterian for the Presbyterians alwayes have a President to guide their actions which they acknowledge may be perpetual durante vita modo se bene gesserit or temporary to avoid inconvenience which Bilson takes hold of as advantagious because so little discrepant as he saith from what he maintaineth See the rest there § 13. 3. Beza the Leader against Prelacy saith de grad Minist Evang. Instituti Divini est ut in omni coetu Presbyterorum unus sit qui ordine praeat praesit reliquis It is of Divine Institution that in every Assembly of Presbyters there be one that go before and be above the rest And dividing Bishops into Divine Humane and Diabolical he makes the Humane tolerable Prelacy to be the fixed President § 14. 4. Calvin who is accused for ejecting Episcopacy besides what he writes of it to Card Sadolet saith in his Institut lib. 4. cap. 4. § 1. Ea cautione totam suam Oeconomiam composuerunt Ecclesiae veteris Episcopi ad unicam illam Dei verbi normam ut facile videas nihil fere hac parte habuisse à verbo Dei alienum § 2. Quibus ergo docendi munus injuâ—ctum erat eos omnes nominabant Presbyteros Illi ex suo numero in singulis civitatibus unum eligebant cui specialiter dabant titulum Episcopi ne ex aequalitate ut fâ—â—ri solet dissidia nascerentur Neque tamen sic honore dignitate superior erat Episcopus ut Dominium in Collegas haberet sed quas partes habet Consul in Senatu ut referat de negotiis sententias roget consulendo monendo hortando aliis praeâ—at authoritate sua totam actionem regat quod decretum Communi Consilio fuerit exequatur id munus sustinebat Episcopus in Presbyterorum coetu § 4. fine Gubernationem sic constituti nonnulli Hierarchiam vocarunt nomine ut mihi videtur improprio certe scripturis inusitato Cavere enim voluit spiritus sanctus nequis principatum aut dominationem somniaret quum de Ecclesiae gubernatione agitur Verum si rem omisso vocabulâ— intueamur N. B. reperiemus veteres Episcopos non aliam regendae Ecclesiae formam voluisse fingere ab ea quam Deus verbo suo praescripsit This he writes after the mention of Archbishops and Patriarcks as well as of Bishops governing in Synods § 15. Where by the way let me give you this observation that Bishops Governing but in Synods can have no other power of Government then the Synods themselves have But Synods themselves as such are not directly for Government but for Concord and Communion of Churches and so consequently for well-governing the several flocks Nor hath a Synod any Governing Power over a particular Pastor as being his superiour appointed to that end but only a Power of Consent or Agreement to which for unity and communion sake he is consequentially obliged not by Virtue of Gods Command that requireth us to obey the Higher Power for three Pastors are not made so the Rulers of one but by virtue of Gods commands that require us to do all things in Unity and to maintain the Peace and Concoâ—d of the Churches and to avoid Divisions and discord § 16. If any think that this doth too much favour the Congregational way I must tell him that it is so true and clear that the Episcopal men that are moderate acknowledge it For instance the Reverend Bishop Vsher did without asking of himself profess to me that it was his judgement that certainly Councils or Synods are not for Government but for Vnity and that a Bishâ—p out of Council hath the same Governing Power as all the Council though their vote may bind him for Vnity to consent § 17. This being so it must needs follow that an Archbishop or the President of a National Provincial Diocesan or Classicall Assembly or of any Association of the Pastors of many Churches hath no superiour Governing power over the Parochial or Congregational Bishop of one Church but only in concurrence with the Synod a Power of Determining by way of Agreement such points as he shall be obliged for Unity and Communion to consent to and perform if they be not contrary to the word of God This evidently follows from this Reverend Archbishops doctrine and the truth § 18. And if any shall think that the Presbyterians will not yield that a particular Church do ordinarily consist but of one full Congregation I confute them by producing their own Concessions in the London Ministers Ius Divinum Ministerii Append pag. 123. they plainly say that The later Bishops were Diocesan the former that is the Bishops of the first or ancient times were Bishops only of one Congregation And pag. 82. they say These Angels were Congregational not Diocesan In the beginning of Christianity the number of Believers even in the greatest Cities were so few as that they might well meet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in one and the same place And thâ—se were called the Church of the City and therefore to ordain Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are all one in Scripture Thus far they yield to the Congregational men § 19. 5. One other witness of the Presbyterians readiness to accommodate on these terms I shall give and no more and that is Mr. Richard Vines a man that was most eminent for his management of the Presbyterian cause in the Assembly and at Vxbridge Treaty and in the Isle of Wight the Papers there presented to the King are to be seen in Print When we did set up our Association in this County I purposing to do nothing without advise and designing a hearty closure of all sober Godly men Episcopal Presbyterian Congregational and Erastian did consult first about it by Letters with Mr. Vines and in his answer to mine he approved of the design and thought our distance very small and yielded to a fixed Presidency though not to a Negative
voice which I would have none forced to Because they are too long to put into this section I will adjoyn that part of his Letter that concerns this subject prefixing one that went next before it against the selling of the Church lands that the Bishops may see how little such men as he consented to it or liked it and may take heed of charging them with Sacriledge § 20. Lastly the Erastians are known to be for Episcopacy it self so be it it come in by the power of the Magistrate And that nothing proposed crosseth the Principles of the Congregationall men I have shewed before But whether really we shall have their consent to a Peace upon these proposed terms I know not because their writings that I have seen do not meddle with the point save only one Congregational man Mr. Giles Firmin hath newly written for this very thing in his Treatise of Schism against Dr. Owen page 66 67 68. I desire you to read the words to save me the labour of transcribing them In which he giveth us to understand that some of the Moderate Congregational Party will joyn with us in a Reconciliation on these terms Whether many or all will do so I know not Let their practise shew whether they will be the first or the last in the Healing of our Divisions But if they refuse we will not for that refuse to Love them as Brethren and study to perform our duty towards them as knowing that we suffer much more when we come short of our duty and love to others then when they come short of their duty and love to us Mr. Richard Vines his Letters before mentioned as a Testimony that the Presbyterian Ministers are not against a fixed President or that Episcopacy which Bishop Hall c. would have been satisfied with Reverend Friend I Received your two last and as for a Schoolmaster I shall do the best I can to propound one to you c. As for your Question about Sacriledge I am very near you in present opinion The point was never stated nor debated in the Isle of Wight I did for my part decline the dispute for I could not maintain the cause as on the Parliaments side and because both I and others were unwilling it was never brought to any open debate The Commissioners did argue it with the King but they went upon grounds of Law and Policy and it was only about Bishops Lands for they then averred the continuance of D. and Chapiters Lands to the use of the Church Some deny that there is any sin of Sacriledge under the Gospel and if there be any they agree not in the definition Some hold an alienation of Church goods in case of Necessity and then make the Necessity what and as extensive as they please The most are of opinion that whiles the Church lies so unprovided for the donations are not alienable sine Sacrilegio If there were a surplusage above the competent maintenance it were another matter It s cleer enough that the Dâ—nors wills are frustrated and that their General intention and the General use viz. the maintenance of Gods worship and Ministers should stand though the particular use might be superstitious I cited in my last Sermon before the Parliament unprinted a place touching Sacriledge out of Mr. Hildersham on Psal. 51. It did not please You may find the words in his book by the Index If his description of it be true then you will still be of your own mind I dare encourage no purchasers but do desire to have some more of your thoughts about it and I shall return you mine as I do my thanks for your excellent and worthily esteemed Treatise which you vouchsafed to prefix my name before Sir I have no more time or paper but to subscribe my self Your truly loving Friend R. Vines London July 20. Sir THough I should have desired to have understood your thoughts about the point of Sacriledge that so I might have formed up my thoughts into some better order and cleerer issue then I did in my laâ—t yet to shew unto you how much I value this correspondence with you I am willing to make some return to your last And first touching the Schoolmaster intended c. The Accomodation you speak of is a great and a good work for the gaining into the work such useful parts and interests as might very much heal the discord and unite the strength of men to oppose destructive ways and in my opinion more feasible with those men then any other if they be moderate and godly for we differ with them rather about some pinacles of the Temple then the foundation er abbuttresses thereof I would not have much time spâ—ut in a formula of doctrine or worship for we are not much distaxt in them and happily no more then with one another But I would have the agreement attempted in that very thing which chiefly made the division and that is Government heal that breach and heal all there begin and therein labour all you can What influence this may have upon others I know not in this exulceration of mens minds but the work speaks it self gâ—od and your reasons for the attempting of it are very considerable For the Assembly you know they can meddle with just nothing but what is sent uâ—to them by Parliament or one house thereof as the order saith and for that reason never took upon them to intermedle therein What they do in such a thing must be done as private persons and not as in the capacity of Assembly men except it come to them recommended by the Parliament The great business is to find a temperament in ordination and government in both which the exclusion or admittance of Presbyters dicis causa for a shadow was not regular and no doubt the Presbyters ought and may both teach and govern as men that must give account of souls For that you say of every particular Church having many Presbyters it hath been considered in our Assembly and the Scripture speaks fair for it but then the Church and City was of one extent no Parishes or bounds assigned out to particular men as now but the Ministers preacht in circuitu or in common and stood in relation to the Churches as to one Church though meeting haplâ— in divers houses or places as is still the manner of some Cities in the Low Couâ—tries If you will follow this model you must lay the City all into one Church particular and the Villages half a dozen of them into a Church which is a business here in England of vast design and consequence And as for that you say of a Bishop over many Presbyters not over many Churches I believe no such Bishops will please our men but the notion as you conceive it hath been and is the opinion of learned men Grotius in his commentary on the Acts in divers places and particularly Cap. 17. saith that as in every particular Synagogue many
do more hurt by breaking the Churches peace then they do good by converting souls But who was it that laid these snares in their way Who laid the Churches peace upon your inventions Had not the Church a sure Rule and an happy order and unity and peace before your Common prayer Book or Ceremonies were born Why must the Church have no peace but upon such terms Who made this Necessity that all men must be taken for intolerable schismaticks that dare not stint themselves in the publick worship by your impositions Will you not be confounded before God when these Questions must be answered The Church might have kept both Peace and her Pastors if you had let all alone as the Apostles left it and had not turned the forms of your Devotions to be a snare for others 9. And it is great unmercifulness to the Souls of particular men when you will drive them into such snares and câ—mpell them to go against their consciences in indifferent things what ever is not of faith is sin And whether they believe it good or bad you will compell them to practise all that you impose Have you not Consciences your selves Do you not know what it is for a man to be driven against his Conscience If not you are no Christians and then no wonder if you want the Charity and compassion of Christians and so easily for nothing abuse and injure the Christian cause 10. And in thus doing you deal unjustly and do not as you would be done by You would have Liberty your selves now to use a Liturgy And why should not others have Liberty to disuse it Either you take it for a thing Necessary in it self or for Indifferent If as Necessary then you are so much the more arrogant and injurious to the Churches and your usurpation is the more intolerable and you do much to Justifie them that deprive you of your own liberty For I know no Liberty that you should have to make universal Laws for the Church or to make new duties by your own meer wills or turn Indifferent things into Necessary and so to multiply our work and burden and danger and to silence suspend or excommunicate all that dare not submit to your usurped Dominion But if you take it for a thing in it self Indifferent whether we pray in a Form of prescribed words or not then as we are content that you have your Liberty on one part you have as just cause to allow us our liberty on the other and to do as you would be done by 11. And by these Impositions you set up a New Office or Power in the Church Consisting of a New Legislation and a Government of the Church by such new humane Laws We know no Law-giver but 1. Christ as to universal Laws of standing necessity to the Churches in the matters of Salvation And 2. Magistrates to make by-laws under Christ for a just determination of those mutable circumstances that ought to be determined by humane Prudence and 3. The Ministers or Pastors of particular Churches to direct and guide the people as there is cause As for Bishops or Councils we know of no Legislative Power that they have over their Brethren though Agreements they may make which may be obligatory 1. by consent as other contracts 2. and in order to unity where the case requireth such Agreements But to set up a New sort of Jurisdiction in the Church by Legislation to make Forms and Ceremonies obligatory and by Executions to punish Pastors that will not practise them is a dangerous device 12. Lastly by this means you will harden the Papists that by their Inventions and Impositions have divided the Church and been guilty of so much usurpation and tyrannie For how can we condemn that in them that is practised by our selves And though in number of Inventions and Impositions they exceed yet it is not well to concur with them in the kind of unnecessary Impositions and so far to Justifie them in their injury to the Church If none of these or other Reasons will alloy the Imperious distemper of the Proud but they must needs by a usurped Legislation be making Indifferent things become necessary to others and domineer over mens Consciences and the Church of God we must leave them to him that being the Lord and Lawgiver of the Church is Jealous of his Prerogative and abhorreth Idols and will not give his glory to another and that delighteth to pull down the Proud and humble them that exalt themselves But yet how far an Agreement or voluntary Consent of the Churches is desirable as to a Liturgy I shall shew more anon Prop. 7. THE safest way of composing a stinted Liturgie is to take it all or as much as may be for words as well as matter out of the Holy Scriptures Reas. 1. This way is least lyable to scruple because all are satisfied of the infallible Truth of Scripture and the fitness of its expressions that are not like to be satisfied with mans And it is a laudable disposition in the Creature to prefer the words of God before all other and therefore not to be discouraged in any Reas. 2. This way tends most to the peace of the Church All will unite in the words of God that will not unite in the forms and words of men If they understand not a word of God yet knowing it to be true they will not quarrel with it but submit But if they understand not the words of men they will be ready to suspect them and so to quarrel with them and so the Churches peace will be broken Besides the judgements of men being fallible many will suspect that its possible there may be some error in their forms though we see them not and God should be worshiped in the surest way Reas. 3. There is no other words that may be preferred before the words of God or stand in Competition with them and therefore me thinks this should easily be decided Object But the Scripture hath not forms enough for all the Churches uses Answ. It hath matter and words for such Forms Without any additions save only terms of Connection the sentences of holy Scripture may suffice the Church for all its uses as to forms Object But men may speak untruths in Scripture words if they will and by misplacing and misapplying them may make them speak what was never meant in them Answ. But 1. When they use no expository terms of their own but meerly recite the words of Scripture the perverting them will not be so easie or common And 2. When they have placed them how they please the people are left at liberty 〈…〉 to the sence they have in the 〈…〉 to what mens misplacing 〈…〉 put upon them when we professedly make our forms out of Gods word we do as it were tell the people that they must give each sentence its proper interpretation as it s meant in Scripture because we pretend not to change it
word 2. Or 〈◊〉 the Churches are all called One that are under one Christian Magistrate I will confess the thing to be true that is pretended to be the reason of the name All the Churches do owe obedience to the Magistrate But he is no Essential part or Ecclesiastical Head of the Church and therefore it is very improperly denominated from him or called One on that account No more then all the Schools are one because he is their Soveraign It is the Common-wealth that is specified and individuated by the Magistrate as the Soveraign Power and not the Churches But yet it is but an improper word to call all the Churches one Church on that account which we contend not about § 7. But it is the Thing that we stick more at then the name A General Head doth properly specifie and individuate the Body Prove either 1. That the Archbishop of Canterbury or any other 2. Or an Assembly of Bishops or Presbyters is properly an Ecclesiastical Head having Authority from Jesus Christ to be the chief Ruler of all the Churches in the Land and then I will confess that we have properly and strictly a National Church But no such thing can be proved § 8 As for an Assembly I have already shewed which Bishop Vsher asserted to me that they are not superior Governors nor instituted graâ—ia Regiminis but gratia unitatis having no more Rule over particular Bishops then a Convention of Schoolmasters over a particular Schoolmaster If they say that Kings and Parliaments give Power to Convocations I answer that can be but such as they have themselves which we shall speak of anon and is nothing to this place § 9. And as for a Primate or Archbishop of Canterbury e. g. 1. It will be a hard task to prove Archbishops as such to be of Divine Institution 2. And it will be harder even Impossible to prove Archbishops of the English species as such to be of Divine institution 3. And certainly Christ hath nowhere told us that every Nation shall have such a Head nor every Province nor every County nor told us whether there shall be one over ten Nations or ten over one Their limits are not to be found in Scripture supposing there were such an office there known 4. Nor is it anywhere determined that such a City shall have the preheminence and Canterbury v. g. be Ruler of all the rest All these are of meer humane institution And therefore that which the imposers of Ceremonies call the Church of England is a meer humane thing which therefore can bind us no further then the Magistrate can authorize them to do § 10. But the stronger pretence will be that the particular Bishops of England were severally officers of Christ authorized to Govern their several flocks and therefore a Convâ—cation of these Bishops binds us in conscience gratia unitatis The People they oblige as their Rulers and the several Presbyters also as their Rulers and the several Bishops gratia unitatis for avoiding of schism § 11. Answ. This also is an insufficient evidence to prove our Consciences obliged to their Ceremonies eo nomine because of their Canons or commands For though we acknowledge a sort of Episcopacy to be warrantable yet that this sort that made the Canons in question is not warrantable I have proved at large in the former Disputation on that question Such Pastors of a Diocess as our Bishops were have no word of God to shew for their office further then as they are Presbyters but we have shewed already that their office is unlawfull And therefore though their actions as Presbyters may be valid yet their actions are Null which were done by pretence of this unlawfull sort of office they being no other way enabled thereto On this ground therefore we are not bound § 12. If it could be pretended that at least as Presbyters the Convocation represented the Presbyters of England and therefore thus their Canons binds us to the use of ceremonies Common prayer c. I should answer that 1. Even Synods of Presbyters or the Lawfullest sort of Bishops oblige but gratia unitatis 2. That the late Synod at Westminster was as truly a Representative of the Presbyters of England as the Convcaotion where such consent if any were given was retracted 3. By actuall dislike signified by disuse the Presbyters of England for the most part have retracted their Consent 4. Yea most that are now Ministers never gave such Consent 5. Even â—ll particular Pastors and Churches are free and may on just reason deny consent to such impositions § 13. There remains nothing then that with any shew of strength can be pretended as continuing our obligation to Ceremonies from Authority but that of the Civil Power that commanded them But to that I say 1. So much as was lawfull we confess that we were bound to use while we had the command of the Civil power But nothing unlawfull could be made our duty by them 2. the Civil Power hath repealed those laws that bound us to these ceremonies The Parliament repealed them the late King consented at least for the ease of tender Consciences as he spoke that men should have liberty to forbear them And the present Rulers are against them whom we see even the ceremoniouâ— obey in other matters § 14. Let those then that would subjugate our Consciences to their ceremonies make good their foundation even the Authority by which they suppose us to be obliged or they do nothing If all their impositions were proved things indifferent and lawfull that 's nothing to prove that we must use them till they prove that lawfull authority commandeth them The Civil Powers do not command them And the Ecclesiasticks that command them prove not their authority over us In the matters of God we will yield to any man that bids us do that which God hath bidden us do already But if they will exercise their power by commanding us more then God commands us and that unnecessarily we must crave a sight of their commission § 15. And if men that have no Authority over us shall pretend Authority from God and go about to exercise it by Ceremonious impositions we have the more reason to scruple obeying them even in things indifferent lest we be guilty of establishing their usurpation and pretended office in the Church and so draw on more evils then we foresee or can remove CHAP. XI Prop. 11. The Commands of Lawfull Governors about Lawfull Ceremonies must be understood and obeyed with such exceptions as do secure the End and not to the subverting of it § 1. THE proof of this is obvious These humane Ceremonies are appointed but as means to a further end But that which would cross and overthrow the end doth cease to be a Means and cannot be used sub ratione medii § 2. Order and Decency are the pretended ends of the Imposed Ceremonies and the right worshiping of God and the good of mens
no the fifth day of the week the Baptized were to say over their Belief to the Bishop or the Presbyters And it was not such Diocesses as ours that this work could be thâ—â— done for * As many of them d◠〈◊〉 when they hold it in terms of which see what I have said in the Preface to the Reformâ—â— Pastor And even in this while they confess that Pastors are Rulers and the People must obey according to the express words of the text Heb. 13.17 1 Tim. 5.17 1 Thes. 5.12 c. They grant us what we plead for Cons. 1. Cons. 2. Cons. 3. Cons. 4. Cons. 5. Cons. 6. Cons. 7. Cons. 8. Cons. 9. Cons. 10 * Dispute of Right to Sacraments Rom. 1.1 2. 1 Pet. 2.5.9 Rom. 1.6 Mat. 28.20 Heb. 2.3 4 2 Cor. 5.19 20. Jam 5.14 Acts 2.41 42. 4.35 1 Cor. 11.23 Acts 20.7 1 Cor. 10.16 Acts 20.28 2 Cor. 5.11 1 Tim. 5.17 20 22 24. 2 Cor. 2.10 Mat. 18.18 Of this Voctius hath written at large de desperata causa Papatus to which I refer the Reader Fit autem missio aut per Deum mediante c. aut per Deum mediante superiorum authoritate c. Fit rursus nonnunquam ipsa necessitatis lege quando non aliter posset fidei seu morum veritas inviolata servari Ubi verum est illud Pasce fame morientem si non Pavisti Occidisti Voetius Luke 2.34 1 Pet. 2. â— 7 8. Of this I desire the Reader to peruse what is written by Voctius de desperata Causa Papatus l. 2. Sect. 2. c. 21. passim Arg. 3. 〈…〉 c. Read their words * Mr. T. P. calls himself Rector of Brington Cyprian Ep. 28. p 64. ad Clerum de Gaio Desiderasâ—is ut de Philumeno Fortunato â—ypodiaconis Favorino acoluthore sâ—ribam cui rei non potui me solum judicem dire cum multi adhuc de clero absentes sint nec locum suum vel sero repetendum putaverint haec singulorum tractanda sit limanda plenius ratio non tantum cum collegis meis sed cum plebe ipsa universa How big was the Diocess then and how much the Bishop ruled alone may be hence conjectured and whether Presbyters had any hand in ruling Why doth Ignatius and Tertullian command them to be subject to the Presbyters as to the Apostles of Christ if they had not the Key of Government Alphonsus à Castro doth maintain that Hâ—eroms opinion was indeed the same that from his plain and frequent expressions we averr it to be and rebuketh them that pretend the contrary Hector Boethius before cited saith Scoâ— Histor. l. 7. fol. 128. b. that Ante Palladium Populi suffragâ—is ex Monachis Culdaâ—is pontifices assumerentur No Bishop then ordained them but Presbyters And Balaeus Centur. 14. c. 6. saith Habebant antea Scoti suos Episcopos ac Ministros ex verbi Divini Ministerio plebium suffragiis electos prouâ— Asianorum more fieri apud Britanaos videbant ☜ Cyrian Epist. 11. Plebi Contra Episcopatum meum immo contra suffragium vestrum Dei judicium c. * This is not the way of our Prelates Ordination And thâ—s shewâ—th that the Churches in 〈◊〉 â—ays were not Diocesan consisting oâ— many particular Churches else all the people could not have been present beholders and consenters at the Ordination of the Bishops †Still this shews that the Churches of Bishops were then no greater then that all might be personally present and fore-acquainted with his life Yea that it was the pâ—â—ples duty noâ— only to elect but to reject there 's more then Cyprian affirm Euseâ—â—us Hâ—st Eccl. l. 5. c. 18. out of Apolâ—onus telleth us that Alexander a Mâ—ntanâ—st being a thief the Congregation of which he was Pastor so that was his Diocess would not admit him 〈…〉 11. 〈◊〉 Secundum 〈…〉 〈◊〉 de 〈…〉 Constâ—ntinâ— in his 〈◊〉 to the 〈…〉 tells them that in the election of their Bishops all men should freely deliver their opinion and the general suffrage of all should be equally considered becausâ— Ecâ—lesiastical Honours should be obtained and conferred wâ—â—â—out 〈◊〉 and diâ—cord 〈…〉 3 〈◊〉 Even those Protestant Churches that have Superintendents are unchurched by them too for want of a true Ordination For their Superintendents were commonly ordained by meer Presbyters or settled only by the Princes power So in Denmark when their seven Bishops were deposed seven Presbyters were Ordained Superintendents by Iohan. Bugenhagius Pomeranus a Presbyter of Wittenberge in the Presence of the King and Senate at the chief Church in Haffnia See Vit. Bugenhagii in Melch. Adâ—m vit Germ. Theolog. page 315. * The Jesuits and Fryars do not take the Generals or Governors of their Orders to be men of another Order though they have a Power of Ruling and that Tyrannically ☜ It s more then Dr. H. H. speaks of the Primitive Bishops that had no Presbyters under them but one or more Deacons 1. Parochial Bishops 2. The stated Presidents of Associated Pastors 3. A Visitâ—r of the neighbour Churches and Countrâ—y These two to be in one man 4. General unfixed Ministers * So Constantiâ—e calls himself a Bishop Euseb. vit Coâ—st l. 4. c 24. And he made his Court a Church and assembling the people did use to take the holy Scriture and deliver Divine contemplations out of it or else he would read the Common-Prayers to the whole Congregation cap. 17. And it is plain that it was Constantine that kept the Churches in Unity and Peace when the Bishops else would have broken them to peices And the Emperours frequently took down and set up Bishops at their pleasure especially in the Patriarchial Seats as Rome Constantinople Antioch Alexandria ☞ * And Mr. Burroughs Irenicoâ— Dr. Holdsworth Dr. Forbs Gataker The London Pâ—â—â—ince Beza Calvin See also Dan. Colonius in his Disputat ex Iâ—stâ—tut Calv. l. 4. Dâ—sp 2. §. 18.24 ☞ Argum. 2. Argum. 3. Argum. 4. Argum. 5. Argum. 6. Argum. 7. Argum. 8. Prop. 2. Prop. 3. Prop. 4. ☜ Prop. 5. Prop. 6. Prop. 7. Prop. 8. prop. 9. Prop. 10 Object 1. Object 2. Object 1. â—â—ject 2. Object 3. Object 4. Object 5. Object 6. Object 7. Object 8. Object 9. Object 10. The summ Besides sâ—â—ms of Catechisms * In point of Lawfulness For Conveniency is according to several accidents * The Provincial Consil. Agath Can. 14. is the first that I remember mentioning them * The Pope 〈…〉 King 〈…〉 that 〈◊〉 cannot be done without tumult or 〈◊〉 Dâ—â—ila p. 1362. an 1595. So that when he feareth losing by it himself the good man makes conscience of murdering them that he will câ—ll hereticks but at another time 30000. to be murdered in France in a few daies Dâ—â—ila saith 40000. was a blessed work And therefore when I said before that in case of Necessity I would rather Kneel then not communicate yet I now add that I would for all that rather be imprisoned or otherwise persecuted then cast out of the Churches Communion all that dare not kneel or conform in such a circumstance And yet this were Ministers then commanded on great penalties to do ☜ Luke 4.18 Matth. 11.28 Matth. 12.20 Isa. 42.2 3. 40.11 Mat. 18.6 Luke 17 2. Rom. 14.1 15.1 2. 14.13 15 20 21 23. * See my writing of Grotius Râ—ligion
would not lay too great a stress upon any forms or modes which may be altered or diversified Let the Church have but such a Number of souls as may be consistent with the ends and so the essence of a particular Church that they may held personal holy communion and then I will not quarrel about the name of one or two Congregations nor whether they must needs all meet together for all ordinances nor the like Yea I think a full number so they be not so full or distant as to be uncapâ—ble of that communion are desireable for the strength and beauty of the Church and too smal Churches if it may be to be avoided So that all the premises being considered out difference appears to be but small in these matters between the Congregational and Presbyterian way among them that are moderate I shall not presume more particularly to enter into that debate which hath been so far proceeded in already by such Reverend men but shall return to the rest of the task before promised against the Diocesan Churches as the supposed subject of the Bishops Government As for Scripture times and the next succeeding together I shall before I look into other testimonies propound these two Arguments 1. From the Bishops office which was before mentioned If the office of a Bishop in those times was to do so much work as could not be done by him for a Church any greater than our Parishes then were the Churches of those times no greater then our Parishes But the Antecedent is true therefore so is the consequent The works are before mentioned Preaching Praying administring the Lords Supper visiting the sick reducing hereticks reproving censuring absolving to which they quickly added too much more of their own The impossibility of a faithful performance of this to more is so undenyable that I cannot suppose any other answer but this that they might ordain Presbyters to assist them in the work and so do much of it by others But 1. I before desired to see it proved by what authority they might do this 2. Their office and work are so inseparable that they cannot depute others to do their work their proper work without deputing them also to their office For what is an office but the state of one Obliged and Authorized to do such or such a work A Presbyter may not authorize another to preach as the Teacher of a Congregation and to administer the Sacraments without making him a Presbyter also Nor can a Bishop authorize any to do the work of a Bishop in whole or by halves without making him a Presbyter or half a Bishop And he is not authorized either to make new officers in the Church or to do his work by deputies or substitutes 2. I argue also from the Identity of that Church to whâ—ch the Bishops and Deacons were appointed for ministration It was not a Church of many stated Congregations or any larger than our Parishes for number of souls that the Deacons were made Ministers to therefore it was no other or bigger which the Bishops were set oveâ— The consequence is good because where ever Deacons are mentioned in Scripture or any Writer that I remember neer to Scripture times they are still mentioned with the Bishops or Presbyters as Ministers to the same Church with them as is apparent bâ—th in the seven chosen for the Church at Ierusalem and in Phil. 1.1 2. and in the Direction of Paul to Timothy for ordaining them And the Antecedent is proved from the nature of their work For they being to attend on the tables at the Love feasts and the Lords Supper and to look to the poor they could not do this for any greater number of people then we mention Whether they had those feasts in one house or many at once I determine not but for the number of people it was as much as a Deacon could do at the utmost to attend a thousand people I shall proceed a little further towards the times next following and first I shall take in my way the confession of one or two learned men that are for Prelacy Grotius in his Annotat. on 1 Tim. 5.17 saith Sed notandum est in una Vrbe magna sicut plures Synagogas ita plures fuisse Ecclesias id est conventus Christianorum Et cuique Ecclesiae fuisse suum praesidem qui populum alloqueretur Presbyteros ordinaret Alexandriae tantum eum fuisse morem ut unus esset in tota urbe praeses qui ad docendum Presbyteros per urbem distribueret docet nos Sozomenus 1.14 Epiphanius ubi de Ario agit dicitque Alexandriae nunquam duos fuisse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 voce â—a sumpta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ita ut significat jus illud quod habebat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that Grotius affirmeth that Bishops had not then so much as all the converted persons of a great City under their care but the Churches and Assemblies were the same and each Assembly had a Prelate and in the great Cities there were many of these Churches and Prelates and that only the City of Alexandria had the custom of having but one such Bishop in the whole City 2. Those learned men also must grant this cause who maintain that Peter and Paul were both of them Bishops of Rome at once there being two Churches one of the Circumcision under Peter the other of the uncircumcision under Paul and that one of them had Linus and the other Cletus for his Successor and that this Church was first united under Clemens and the like they say of two Churches also at Antioch and elswhere If this be so then there is no Law of God that Bishops should be numbred by Cities but more Bishops then one may be in one City and were even when Christians comparatively were a small part of them 3. Also Mr. Thorndike and others affirm that it was then the custome for the Bishops and Presbyters to sit in a semicircle and the Bishop highest in a Chair and the Deacons to stand behind them This he gathereth from the Apost Constitut. Ignatius Dionysius Arcop and the Jews Constitutions in his Apost form page 71. and Right of the Church c. p. 93.94 95. And if this were so it seems that Bishops Presbyters and Deacons were all the Officers of one such stated Congregation and had not many such Congregations under them For the Bishop could be but in one place at once and therefore this could be the custome but of one Church in his Diocess if he had many whereas it is made the form of the ordinary Christian Assemblies The same learned man Right of Church p. 65. saith that About Saint Cyprians time and not afâ—re he finds menâ—ion of setled Congregations in the Country By which it may be well conjectured what a small addition the Bishops had out of the Countreys to their City Chuâ—ches and how many Congregations they Governed in the Apostle
as his judgement that the Scotch Ministers then to be Consecrated Bishops were not to be reordained because the Ordination of Presbyters was valid Sect. 5. These Novel Prelatical persons then that so far dissent frrom the whole stream of the Ancient Bishops and their adherents have little reason to expect that we should regard their judgement above the judgement of the English Clergy and the judgement of all the Reformed Churches If they can give us such Reasons as should conquer our modestie and perswade us to condemn the judgement of the Plelates and Clergy of England all other Churches of the Protestants and adhere to a few new men of yesterday that dare scarcely open the face of their own opinions we shall bow to their Reasons when we discern them But they must not expect that their Authority shall so far prevail Sect. 6. And indeed I think the most of this cause is carried on in the dark What Books have they written to prove our Ordination Null and by what Scripture Reasons do they prove it The task lieth on them to prove this Nullity if they would be Regarded in their reproaches of the Churches of Christ. And they are not of such excessive Modesty and backwardness to divulge their accusations but sure we might by this time have expected more then one volume from them to have proved us No Ministers and Churchess if they could have done it And till they do it their whsperings are not to be credited Sect. 7. Argument 2. If that sort of Prelacy that was exercised in England was not necessary it self yea if it were sinfull and tended to the subversion or exceeding hurt of the Churches then is there no Necessity of Ordination by such a Prelacy But the Antecedent is true therefore so is the consequent The Antecedent hath been proved at large in the foregoing Disputation Such a Prelacy as consisteth in the undertaking of an impossible task even for one man tâ— be the only Governour of all the souls in many hundred Parishes exercising it also by Lay men and in the needful parts not exercising it all all a Prelacy not chosen by the Presbyters whom they Govern yea suspending or degrading â—he Presbyters of all those Churches as to the governing part of theâ—â— office and guilty of the rest of the evils before mentioned is not only it self unnecessary but sinful and a disease of the Church which all good men should do the best they can to cure And therefore the effects of this disease can be no more Necessary to our Ministry then the burâ—ing of a feaver or swelling of a Tympany is necessary to the body Sect. 8. No Bishops are Necessary but such as were in Scriture times But there were none such as the late English Bishops in Scripture times Therefore the English Bishopâ— are not necessary He that denyeth the Major must go further in denying the sufficiency of Scripture then I find the Papists ordinarily to do For they will be loth to affirm that any office is of Necessity to the Being of the Church or of Presbyters that is not to be found in Scripture or that was not then in Being Therefore so far we are secure Sect. 9. And for the Minor I prove it thus If the English Bishops were â—either such as the unfixed General Ministers nor such as the fixed Bishops of particular Churches then were they not such as were in Scripture times But they were neither such as the unfixed General Ministers nor such as the fixed Bishops of particular Churches therefore c. Sect. 10. Besâ—des these two sorts of Ministers there are no more in the New Testament And these aâ—e diversified but by the exercise of their office so far as they were ordinary Ministers to continue The unfixed Ministers whether Apostles Evangelâ—sts or Prophets were â—uch as had no special charge of any one Church as their Diocess but were to do their best for the Church in general and follow the direction and call of the Holy Ghost for the exercising of their Ministry But it s known to all that our Engsish Bishops were not such They were no ambulatory itinerant Preachers they went not about to plant Churches and confirm and direct such as they had planted but were fixed to a City and had every one their Diocess which was their proper charge but Oh how they discharged their undertaking Sect. 11. Object The Apostles might agree among them selves to divide their Provinces and did accordingly James being Bishop of Jerusalem Peter of Rome c. Answ. No doubt but common reason would teach them when they were sent to preach the Gospel to all the world to disperse themselves and not be preaching all in a place to the disadvantage of their work But 1. It s one thing to travail several ways and so divide themselves as itinerants and another thing to divide the Churches among them as their several Diocesses to whâ—ch they should be fixed Which they never did for ought is proved 2. And its one thiâ—g prudently to disperse themselves for their labour anâ— another thing to claim a special power over a Circuit or Diocess as their charge excluding a like charge and power of others So far as any man Apostle or other was the Father of souls by their conversion they owned him a special honour and love which the Apostles themselves did sometimes claim But this was nothing to a peculiar Diocess or Province For in the same City a Ierusalem some might be converted by one Apostle and some by another And if a Presbyter convert them I think the adversaries will not therefore make them his Dâ—ocess not give him there an Episcopal Power much less above Apostles in that place Nor was this the Rule that Diocesses could be bounded by as now they are taken Sect. 12. Nor do we find in Scripture the least intimation that the Apostles were fixed Diocesan Bishops but much to the contrary 1. In that it was not consistent with the General charge and work that Christ had laid upon them to go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature How would this stand with fixing in a peculiar Diocess Sect. 13. And 2. We find them answering their Commission in their practice going abroad and preaching and planting Churches and sometimes visiâ—ing them in their passage but not sâ—tling on them as their Diocesses but going further if they had opportunity to do the like for other places Yea they planted Bishops in the several Cities and Churches which they had gathered to Christ. Though Paul staid three years at Ephesus and other adjacent parts of Asia yet did not all that abode prove it his peculiar Diocess And yes its hard to find again so long an abode of Paul or any Apostle in one place Elders that were Bishops we find at Ephesus Acts 20. and some say Timothy was their Bishop and some say Iohn the Apostle was their Bishop but its clear that it was