or chiefly Mr. Cartw. thus By Imposition of hands the Apostle meaneth no Sacrament Rhem. Test much lesse confirmation after Baptism but by Trope or borrowed speech the Ministry of the Church upon the which hands were laid which appeareth in that whosoever believeth not there ought to be a Ministry by order to teach and govern the Church overthroweth Christianity this is to the point indeed Mr. Sur. Ch. Dis p. 1. p. 7. Hooker proves that Church Discipline is a fundamental point of Religion from hence thus Laying on of hands being by a Metonymy of the Adjunct put for Ordination and Ordination one particular put for the whole of Discipline Having then these men and these no babes on my side I will see what reason there is why Ordination here must not be meant For confirmation which so many expound it of I searched amongst those Protestant Divines which I had to find a definition of it in our Protestant sense and why they call it so but I could not find one who gave me satisfaction but Chemnitius Exam. Concil Trid. de confirmat The Papists definition I knew and a pretty one it is That which Chemnitius speaks gave me great content but I could wish some body would prove this is the meaning of Imposition in this Text for then we should have one more strong ground for Infant-Baptism as we may gather by Chemnitius opening of confirmation Casting my eye on Diodati I see he thus expounds it and hence gathers Infant-Bpatism But this is not sufficient we call for proof now I know Imposition of hands was after Baptism in Scripture except Act. 9.17 and so far as we can learn from Scripture we find 1. Extraordinary gifts were ever the effect of it So Acts 8. Acts 9. Acts 19. nor do we find any other end of it these gifts being conveyed in a way above nature might very well tend to the confirming them in their faith received and so well called confirmation But in the confirmation we talk of there is no such thing nor do I see why we should call it confirmation 2. The persons who did Impose hands were either Apostles or persons extraordinarily raised We read but of one Ananias Acts 9. I do not find the Evangelists did Impose Hence the Bishops who call themselves the Apostles successors they claime this power and poore Presbyters must not do it at least without leave from them That then which truly deserves the name confirmation is ceased many hundred years since But for the thing it self which our Divines call confirmation as Chemnitius lays it down Instit l. 4. c. 19. s 4. I could heartily wish with Calvin that it were brought into practise only Imposition I think might be left out yet I would not contend with him who did use it rather so then not have the thing practised Musculus speaking of Imposition in confirmation saith The Imposition of the Apostles was of miraculous operation Loc. Com. p. 321. and ceased long since Exemplum illius retinuerunt Episcopi quo magis Apostolorum viderentur esse successores But he speaks nothing against Imposition in Ordination But to the Text let us see why Ordination must be shut out here 1. The key of Interpretation I take to be the word Foundation and principles c. as we Translate So Camerarius Sunt necessaria Dogmata Capita doctrinae Christianae quae enumerantur hoc loco So Chrysostom Now it seems strange to me that a foundation should be lost out of the Church above fifteen hundred years I thought foundations should hold so long as the building lasts take away a foundation the house must be in danger But if this be meant of Ordination then it holds for the Ministry shall hold so long as the Church holds till the body be perfected Eph. 4. But if confirmation and extraordinary gifts which were the only effect so far as we find in Scripture as before I touched then this foundation is gone long since 2. Faith Repentance and Baptism are to last to the end of the world Some of our Divines do from this Text prove against the Socinians that Water-Baptism is an ordinance still to continue because it is put amongst the foundations Chatechetical heads why then the Ministry which is Christ's great ordinance to convert to beget faith which comes by hearing c. and authorized to baptize to the end of the world should not be meant by Imposition Matth. 28.20 but a temporary thing which was to vanish presently I can see no reason 3. That Imposition alone is put for Ordination we have other Scriptures to shew 1 Tim. 5 4. as before but shew us another Text where Imposition alone is put for confirmation 4. Extraordinary gifts were conveyed without Imposition of hands as Act. 2.10 Act. 44.4 why then Imposition should only signifie the Holy Ghost which yet was given without it I am not satisfied 5. Then these Divines must prove that all who were baptized had hands Imposed and extraordinary gifts conferred else the placing after Baptism proves nothing if onely to some baptized persons and pro tempore what is this to prove it meant of confirmation for I hope all baptized ones are to be confirmed in their sense But this will be hard to prove One thing more I shall add when I come to Mr. Noyes why it should be meant of extraordinary gifts Camero gives the strongest reason But yet I hope to an indifferent Reader it doth appear by what I have said that there is no forcing reason why Ordination should be shut out but may at least be fairly implied So much for my second argument Arg. 3. That Act which the Church ever used and that regularly in ordaining of Officers ought to be used in Ordination But Imposition of hands is an Act which the Church ever used and that regularly in ordaining c. Ergo The Major seems so fair that I think no rational man will deny it The Minor is clear the Church under the Old Testament used this act Numb 8.10 Upon which verse Mr. Ainsworth thus speaketh This rite was kept at the Ordination of Officers both in the Old Testament and in the New Acts 6.6 13.3 By this sign they did put the charge and service of the Church upon them c. Then why it ought not still to be used I know not Mr. Ains was a man learned holy and far from Popery or idle Ceremonies Arg. 4. Let us suppose Prayer and Fasting to be of the essence of Ordination as say our Brethren If Prayer and Fasting without Imposition do not difference Ordination from another Ordinance then Imposition of hands ought to be used in Ordination But the Antecedent is true ergo the Consequent is true The reason of the Consequence is because every Ordinance hath something in it whereby it is distinguished from others so must this have something Here I lie open to two Objections Some will say Why do
officers known but by their actions To say That though the brethren doe the same things yet they doe them not as their Officers is to say nothing How shall we know that If any man may make a warrant and that warrant is as valid as the Justices how shall a man know who is Justice the name may differ but not the power Ergo not the office 2. We finde divers promises made to the Church of Gods giving Officers Jer. 3.15 23.4 Ezek. 34.25 Isa 30.20 But if every body may do the officers acts then God seems to make promises of good to his Church which are needlesse a great shew of mercy but no mercy indeed There is no need no use of the things promised what would this impute to God 3. Our Divines have maintained against the Papists that Matth. 28.19 was spoken to the Apostles and the Ministers of the word their successors and the context will force it I think if he spoke to the eleven Apostles v. 16. And though the Lords Supper is not there mentioned yet surely it was there included there is par ratio Let any man bring a proof from Scripture or antiquity that ever any but an officer did administer the Lords Supper Docete baptizate Matth. 28.19 Haec dicuntur solis Apostolis Ministris verbi certum est haec non fuisse dicta hominibus privatis Bell. ener co 3. p. 342 In Actis Apostolorum nihil omnino legitur de privatis Christianis absque speciali revelatione baptizantibus saith Learned Ames 4. The Church-officers under the Old Testament had such acts peculiar to them as none but they could doe It were strange that Christ should institute Officers under the New Testament and they should have nothing proper to them 5. If this be true then all the body is an Eye The foot may say to the eye though you are placed above and I below yet I doe the same acts you doe and it is not the place but the organ and the action which makes an eye It is not the place but the actions shew the Officer that member which seeth is the eye place it where you will if all see then all are eyes But the Apostle denieth the whole body to be an eye 1 Cor. 12. 6. Church-officers are called Stewards â—verseers Preachers Ambassadors Rulers We would think it strange men would not bear it in civil acts to have every body doe the acts which belong to these Relations as much order I hope in Gods house as in other houses or States He is every where a God of order but this was spoken in reference to his House especially I intend to add no more arguments to prove the necessity of Ordinantion I have onely two objections to answer which two eminent Divines made against me maintaining the necessity of Ordination Obj. 1. We read of no Ordination but it was performed either by extraordinary persons or at least some such were present when they died who know where they left the power The Bishop Presbyter Fraternity each of these challenge the power but who knows to whom it belongs Answ The first part of the objection cutts off Ordination wholly and that is chiefly aimed at The second part doth seem to yield it could we but finde who should Administer it To the first part I answer 1. It 's no wonder though we finde extraordinary persons in the administration of this Ordinance when they were in Being In the first beginnings these must ordain or none we have but the histories of planting of Churches in the New Testament where none were before and this was done by persons extraordinary 2. All that extraordinary persons did I hope did not die with them What is there more extraordinary in Ordination then in Preaching why must not Preaching die as well as ordination to Preaching The action is no more then may be performed by ordinary Ministers If it be said as I know it is they conveyed gifts in Ordination I shall answer this when I come to Mr. Noyes 3. How shall we prove that there were Ministers elected without the presence acting guidance and consent of extraordinary officers I think no man can prove there were any so chosen by the examples we have of the peoples choise for extraordinary persons were ever present and we finde they acted By the same reason throw away Election which this Divine would hardly doe Walaeus To. 2. p. 51. Nullum etiam occurret exemplum in toto Novo Testamento nec in primitiva Ecclesia quae Apostolorum aetatem excepit ullam ullius ordinarii Doctor is Electionem in ulla Ecclesia peractam fuisse sine consensu consilio aliquorum saltem Doctroum This pincheth 4. Were the Churches so blinde that they could not see this to be an extraordinary thing and that to die with these officers Would the extraordinary officers admit ordinary Presbyters to joyn with them in that work which was proper to them as extraordinary officers But that they did so the Epist to Timo. doth plainly carry it and was no doubt the ground of that Canon 3. in Concil Carth. 4. where Presbyters were to impose hands with the Bishop 5. Were the Epistles to Timothy and Titus writ to them as extraordinary officers I know when Timothy is called upon to do the work of an Evangelist this was proper to him as such an officer but I think laying aside that which was proper to them as Evangelists which did not consist in the administration of any Ordinance those Epistles were written to Ministers They must preach the Word be instant in season and out of season c. as well as Timothy and why not I pray commit the things 2 Tim. 2.2 c. 2 Tim. 2.2 lay hands on none suddenly as well as Timothy What extraordinary matter is in this above the other 6. Shall persons come into the Ministry untried whether they be fit or unfit sound or heretical No by no meanes this is judged a dangerous thing Men must be tried and that by those who are able to judge as now we have Commissioners But what Scripture-rule have you for this If you leave out the Epistles to Timothy and Titus 1 Tim. 3.10 I doubt you will hardly finde any in Scripture but Timothy and Titus were extraordinary persons and what have we to doe with their Epistles but if you will make use of those Epistles to mainain your trial of men it was a Commissioner that made this objection against me give us leave to make use of the same Epistles to prove our Ordination of Ministers those who are able to do the one I hope are as able to do the other For the second part of the Objection I little regard that As for the Fraternty let the people bring forth their Charter and shew us where the great Lord gave them this power Against this I have argued a little I intended but a little in my book against the Separatists p.
confess 4. But put case it were so yet this hinders not his Associating with our Brethren who desire him but to Associate where they do separate the precious from the vile by Discipline Since then this separation was Doctrinal as all Divines upon the Text acknowledge then whether the Prebyterial Brethren very many of them at least do not separate as well as himself I desire my Brother to consider For the last words which he also used Let them return to thee but return not thou unto them Doth my Brother indeed parallel our Associated Brethren with those who are meant by them Let the Presbyterial Brethren return to the Congregational not they to them I should not have dared to have made such a parallel I shall only put this Brother in mind what he then said against those who dare depart from standing Commandments and desire him to consider whether he never read of a standing to use his own words Commandment repeated again and again that we should follow the things which make for peace and whether he with our Brethren who stand off have answered that Commandment sober Congregational men shall judge Let me leave with our Brethren a few lines which I received a few weaks since from that learned and godly Divine Mr. Norton Teacher of the Church in Boston in N. England in a Letter to me The Association you mention amongst the Ministers we much rejoyce in I never thought it better then human but oftentimes worse that the Presbyterian and Congregational men cannot close together in Brotherly Communion The power of godliness interest us in the affections of the godly above the notions of either of them considered apart therefrom I believe the Congregational way to be the truth yet I think better of many Presbyterians then of many Congregational men 'T is no wonder if Independents are unruly for I distinguish between Independents and Congregational men or rather such call themselves as they please that will not acknowledge the rule of the Presbytery and the order of Councils Thus far this reverend and great Divine I am sure our Association reaches no higher then a Council As for our Brethren who will not Associate till they see the Civil Magistrate set his stamp of Authority upon this way of Association whatever the late Instrument made by the Parliament allows us though they see Anabaptists and Congregational Churches and other Associated Counties to exercise Discipline without any scruple though they would quarrel with an Erastian Magistrate that should deny any such power to belong to Churches yea though some of these can suspend from the Lord's Supper whom they please we must leave these to their own wisedom and desire them to convince the Magistrate so that he may be able to see clearly that the government of the Church is either Episcopal Classical or Congregational and so stablish one or if the Magistrate be not so clear in either but yet willing to favour any of these the persons being godly and peaceable as he doth then let these Brethren consider whether the want of Church-Discipline be a fault to be charged most upon the Magistrate or upon themselves To return to you then Fathers and Brethren in a few words Hitherto God hath brought us the worke we have engaged in is to most if not all of us new and such a work as many of those who have been exercised in it have so often miscarried in that the Ordinance of Discipline hath suffered much dishonour and that which adds to the difficulty we set to it in such times wherein the Ministry is so much reviled by Sectaries and as to this work much contemned by the Gentry and our Episcopal Divines one of which and whom I honour said to me That we were no more fit to manage the government of the Church of England then David Saul 's Armour We boast not of our fitness but for the government of the Church by such Bishops though I highly reverence some of them they have no such cause to boast as witness the Churches they have left us miserably overgrown with ignorance and profanness had we so many hundreds or thousands of pounds per annum such honour and regal power to stick to us as had they I hope the Churches might be governed as well as they were before and be purged a little from that ignorance and profaneness which now we find them in But we must go to our work without Saul's Armour I am sensible how much wisedom and prudence this work calls for all my comfort is Christ of God is made to us wisedom c. 1 Cor. 1. I take care for nothing but for Faith Humility and Prayer to fetch this wisedom from our King and Head and leave the success to him who did institute this Ordinance Your fellow labourer in the worke of the Gospel GILES FIRMIN Shalford 2. of the 2. Month 1658. An Advertisement of two Books lately published by this Author Mr. Giles Firmin Viz. 1. Stablishing against Shaking being a discovery of the Quakers 2. The Power of the Civil Magistrate in matters of Religion vindicated and the extent of it determined By Mr. Stephen Marshall published by his own Copy since his death with notes upon it CHAP. I. A brief and friendly examination of Dr. Owen 's discovery of the Nature of Schism SEveral definitions of Schism both ancient and modern the Doctor recites none of which give him content Austin he saith suited his definition directly to the cause he had in hand against the Donatists for the rest they do not satisfie him then offers his definition being the definition which agrees with Scripture to which he appeals and esteems this appeal to be necessary and reasonable I am of the Doctor 's mind and wish we had kept there all this time for while some men made Providence their Bible others make Antiquity theirs they have made us by woful experience know the evil effects of walking by such Canons Providences antiquity are excellent things to confirm us when they have clear Scriptures stand before them as Figures before Cyphers and if men would reduâ—e their actions and disputes to this Head by which one day we shal be judged Rom. 2. and not by Providences or Antiquity as we might have spared many of our troubles so we might sooner come to the closing up of our breaches which I perceive is one part of the Doctors aim but I can hardly believe will ever effect the Cure For suppose he can convince men that this separation from Churches is not Schism in the precise notion as he often mentions of Scripture yet if they apprehend it to be something else as bad and it may be worse his book will prove ineffectual to the healing of our wounds Thus then he defines Schisin p. 51 52. It is a causelesse difference or division amongst the members of any particular Church that meet together or ought so to do for the worship of God and
Doctor hath delivered concerning Schism though with a great part of it I am abundantly men of more learning then I am may give more only this I I may and do add it is a trouble to me that I have cause in any point to appear cross to the Doctor with whom I have had so much inward familiarity whom I have so entirely loved and honoured and do still both honour and love CHAP. II. Concerning the Parochial Congregations in England I took it for granted that our Congregational brethren did look on the Parochial Congregations where they came and have gathered Churches as true Churches before they came there and so did not lay new foundations or gather Churches where there were none before only the Congregations being over-grown with persons grosly ignorant and scandalous for want of Catechizing and Discipline they did segregate such persons from Church-Communion till they got so much as might declare them to be visible Saints But one of these Ministers tell me I am mistaken if I be then I understand not our brethren all this while nor do I know when I shall for my part I have ever professed I looked on the Parochial Congregations as a true Church before I came to it though over-grown as before I said Those who were here and elected me to be their officer I look on my self as having sufficient authority over them by their election those who have come into Town since I do require their owning of me for their officer knowing that government here is founded upon consent and subjection to all ordinances if they demand the ordinances of me so far I go along with our brethren That many Parochial Congregations are true Churches I doubt not though the Presbyterial brethren have not proceeded so far as others have done and therefore the Congregational Brethren may safely have communion with them Some things let me premise and then I will give one argument or two 1. The want of some ordinances in a Church destroys not the truth of the Church Then there can be no homogeneal Church our brethren I hope will not allow the Fraternity being destitute of officers to baptize c. but yet a homogeneal Church they maintain much might be spoken here but I forbear Ecclesiastical Discipline which some alledge as being wanting in these Parochial Churches do not therefore deny them to be true Churches which yet in part they had for suspension it is well known The Rod is not of the essence of the family though the children may do ill where it is wanting Feast of Tabernacles Neh. 8.17 was long wanting 2. An officer usurping power in a Church doth not destroy the truth of the Church Diotrephes took more then was due The Bishops were but Ministers and did ministerial work if they took more power then the Lord gave them yet that doth not hinder the truth of the Churches What shall be said then to the Bishops in the primitve Churches I wish I had as much zeal and love to Christ as they had 3. Though many members be corrupt in doctrine and manners yet they do not take away the truth of a Church Corinth had too many of these and the officers might be faulty in tolerating of them but yet a true Church and I hardly think that Paul would have refused communion with the Church I doubt not but other Churches also had bad members The Churches which lived under Heathenish persecution were true Churches yet there are foul scandalous sins reported of some of the members 4. Reality of grace though desireable O very desireable yet is not absolutely requisite to the making of a visible Church though I think it is hard to find such a Church yet I know not but according to the rules we must go by in admitting of Church-members there may be a true visible Church where there is not one real true Saint Dare any Congregational Minister avouch the true grace of all the members of his Church will any Church excommunicate a person for want of true grace Did the Apostles when they admitted members search narrowly for the truth of grace 5. I had almost said It is as great a fault to keep out visible repenting believers willing to subject to all ordinances as it is to tolerate wicked persons in a Church If the Presbyterial brethren are guilty of the latter the Congregational are guilty of the former I think it as great a faultto sin against the lenity of Christ as against the severity of Christ It is true these wicked ones are a dishonour to Christ leaven to the lump but yet suspended from the Lord's Supper and they have not that means applied which might help to their souls salvation but it is that which these Ministers would gladly reach if they could they alledge the words of the Apostle their authority is for edification not destruction On the other side to keep out those who visibly appear like Christians when men have power to take in is to hinder these from being levened with true grace a great offence to the godly discouragement of souls and Magisterially to set up Rules which the Lord never appointed Who blame Bishops for setting up their posts by God's posts I know the word visible Believer is a contentious word but I understand one plainly thus Here is one that hath a competent knowledg of those grounds which are essential to salvation and believes them His estate by nature he understandeth and professeth he believeth in the Lord Jesus for life and salvation his conversation doth not confute his profession worships God in his family and subjects to all Christ's Ordinances for the private conferences of Christians and private fastings which sometimes they have though this were desireable to have them frequent them yet these in such a manner being free-will offerings I dare not tie up men to these or else debar them if he hath been scandalous he declareth his repentance cordially so far as charity can judge and proves it by some time would the Apostles have debarred such a person from the Church but I speak what I know persons who go thus far and further cannot yet be admitted to Church-fellowship Some would have us go to Rev. 21.15 and Rev. 11.2 to see the rules for Churches What they have drawn from hence I know not I have bestowed so much pains in reading of men upon the Revelation and find so little content in all that I read great Hooker of N.E. would say he would never forfeit his credit in undertaking those Scriptures where he could not make Demonstration that now I regard nothing which is said upon it One Text which I observed as I was reading through it in my course gave me more settlement then all I had read But alas good men do they carry us to their Symbolical Divinity to prove what they would have this will not prevail with judicious men I think the Apostolical practices must be our Reed to measure by
say if you will mould your Churches according to those in the Scripture and have divers Elders to carry on the Affaires of the Church why then may we not have one Elder among these who may be a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 suppose a standing Moderator For in those Churches we find mention made of an Angel in Ephesus and the other Churches which seem to imply as much I answer If you doe not make this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 primus Presbyter standing Moderator or what other name you will give him a distinct Scriptural Officer from other Presbyters giving to him a power distinct from and superiour to the power of other Preaching Presbyters whence he shall perform some Church-Acts which other preaching Presbyters shall not or cannot perform so that it be no distinct or superiour power but onely order which is contended for I am well content to yield it being ready to goe with others for peace and unities sake till they come to constitute Officers which Christ never did then I say Hold. But for a standing Moderator one that Durante vitâ modo bene se gesserit shall keep that place let him per me licet For 1. In the meetings of Councils there must be one who must rule and order the affairs at those times a President a Moderator must be reason leads us to it to avoid confusion and this is seen in the synodical meetings of Congregational Elders 2. He who is chosen President or Moderator this Session may be the next and the next we may choose him for one year or two years what Scripture text forbids it why may we not twenty 3. I am so far from thinking it is contrary to Scripture that I think it comes neerest to Scripture I may declare my opinion with submission to better judgements for as for the word Angel mentioned in the Epistles to the seven Churches though I cannot agree to that which that ever honoured and learned Davenant doth gather from it namely Determ 42. the superiority of the Bishop above other Presbyters because here was one in the Church of Ephesus c. which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For what Isidore saith of created Angels Angelus est nomen officii non naturae semper sunt spiritus sed cum mittuntur vocantur Angeli I may apply to this if all true preaching Ministers are sent as they are Rom. 10. then they also are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I think our Divines have spoken sufficiently to take off this yet with favour I conceive that Christ mentioning an Angel in the singular number and reason telling us what must be in all orderly Meetings Councils to avoid confusion there being divers Elders in one Church who had the care inspection and government of it I conceive those Elders had one who for order sake was a President Moderator though he had not power above them as may be proved by other Scriptures that ordered the transactions when they met nor can I conceive it was so for one Session or two but for his life for ought I can learn he that can let him prove the contrary in that he is taken notice of so in a special manner it should seem he was one that was so more then one or two Sessions 4. I verily conceive that error be not offended I pray if I call it so for I humbly conceive it to be so which so soon crept in of one assuming power above other Presbyters took its first rise upon occasion of this Order God's providence so ordering it to leave his own Servants to their wisedom and wills who freely acting made way at last for his Decrees for if the President or Moderator had shifted and changed every Session I cannot tell which way it was possible a Pope should have risen Obj. Therefore away with your standing Moderator you have spoken enough against it Ans Stay not too fast must I throw away every thing that may be or is abused occasio and causa differ much Diotrephes and so other Ministers may abuse their power shall then a Minister have no power over his people Tollatur abusus maneat usus Obj. But for Ministers power we have Scripture for it plainly so we have not for a constant standing Moderator Ans By Scripture Authority we make Officers who have power from Christ immediately I am not discoursing of the making of a Church-Officer and what power such an Officer should have I disclaim this power and order are two things 2. That Text which before I produced I know not what fairer Interpretation can be given of it I can exclude superiority of power by other Scriptures but why an Interpretation of Scripture which crosses no other Scripture nor sound reason and hath such fair probability from the practise of the most ancient should not be admitted especially when a fairer Interpretation cannot be given for my part I know none I know no reason The most that can be objected against me is matter of Prudence But I conceive 1. that which comes neerest to make peace in the Church and doth not cross the Scripture that is prudence 2. That which comes neerest to Scripture Interpretation having the practice of so many ancient holy Men and Martyrs though I know they went higher to give light to it this I call prudence 3. Time will discover which will have most prudence in it whether a Moderator or President changed every Session or a standing Moderator I think now we are out of danger of making a Pope if his time of ruine be so neer as some think Thus I have delivered my thoughts humbly conceiving that a Church so moulded as there may be divers elders in it and amongst these one chosen for a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 president or what you will call him for order sake to abide so constantly come neerest to the plat-form of the Churches in the Scripture and in this there is something of the Congregational something of the Classical and something like the Episcopal way such a Church for the exercise of its power being independent as was the Church in Ephesus But to have one Pastor and it may be twelve men to stand alone and to exercise all Church-power when they may associate I desire to see such a Church in Scripture PART II. CHAP. I. A Plea for Ordination To. 4. Disp 9. q. 1. p. 1. I own no Church Officer which is not ordained Nemo ad ordinariam in ecclesiâ functionem sive ad Diaconatum sive ad Presbyteratum c. admitti debet nisi legitimè electus ordinatus Zanch. 4. praec p. â—77 ALthough I am far from Valentia's judgment making Ordination a Sacrament strictly so called yet in this I think he saith true when he would have the word Ordination to be taken from the effect of that Ordinance Quia per Ordinationem aliquis in gradu quodam atque Ordine certo ecclesiasticae dignitatis
extraordinary Presbyters A. Say what Presbyters and prove the extraordinary Presbyters are enumerated 1. The Synod of N.E. Mr. Hooker nor a thousand more ever thought of any such thing the Synod conceive it was the Presbytery of Ephesus which Imposed hands on Timothy Junius conceives it was the Presbytery of Derbe and Lystra where Paul took him Eccles p. 1960. Acts 16.2 Chrysostom indeed thinks they were Bishops for Presbyters could not ordain Bishops saith he Mr. N. doth not believe Chrysostom I know nor do I believe they were extraordinary Presbyters 2. I wonder the Bishops of old and our latter Bishops did not hit of this notion but that both according to the Canons of old and so of our Bishops Presbyters were admitted to joyn in Ordination with the Bishop I question not but the Canons were grounde◠upon this Presbytery which Imposed with Paul upon Timothy but if Mr. N. notion be true it might have been easily said those were extraordinary Presbyters so these ordinary Presbyters have no power in Ordination For Acts 13. he saith these seem to be extraordinary Elders 1. Partly by their Ambulatory course ordinary Elders are no where described by the title of Doctors only 2. Partly because it is evident some of them were extraordinary Prophets yet they are all put together as equal A. 1. How will Mr. N. prove that all the Prophets and Teachers which were in the Church of Antioch used that ambulatory course had not this Church a setled Presbytery that were strange how was it in Corinth 2. Teachers when taken distinct from other Officers as here I think use to signifie ordinary and setled Officers Why doth Mr. N. say that ordinary Elders are nowhere described by the title of Doctors only What difference between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. 4.11 there as here distinct from Prophets So I think 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 12.28 else we must find no ordinary preaching Elders there 3. Though there were some extraordinary Officers there yet that hinders not but the whole teaching Presbytery of Antioch might joyn in the separation of Paul and so in imposing of hands how will Mr. N. prove the Teachers were excluded neither doth it follow because they are numbred together therefore they were equal Prophets here as in other Texts are named before and as distinct from Teachers But ordinary Presbyters might not impose upon extraordinary Presbyters this I think he would have but have you a Scripture-rule which forbids it what if God will have it so If Paul were now made the Apostle of the Gentiles as all that I see but Mr. N. do acknowledge then though only the Prophets had Imposed yet here inferiour officers imposed on superiour for Apostles were superiour to Prophets 1 Cor. 12.28 Eph. 4.11 and I hope by the same reason a Presbytery might impose on Timotby an Evangelist Thus Mr. Hooker and the Synod of N.E. say Presbyters not extraordinary imposed hands on Timothy an Evangelist To say inferiour may not impose when the Text saith these did Impose and it lieth upon Mr. N. to prove which were excluded is flatly to deny the Text. But Mr. N. saith He was no Apostle yet and his proof is because the Apostles long after this time gave him the right hand of fellowship A. 1. If there were no Apostles at Antioch now as doubtless there were none for then they would have been mentioned as well as inferiour Officers then Apostles could not now give him the right hand of fellowship 2. Why should their right hand of fellowship make him an Apostle that I suppose he doth not mean he was one before they gave him the right hand it is so in inferiour Officers Paul saith he was called to be an Apostle Rom. 1.1 What when they gave him the right hand of fellowship or here where God saith so I have called him Mr. N. in this is singular and his proofs not sufficient He further proveth that they as extraordinary persons did Impose because there was an extraordinary and sensible gift conferred on Timothy and thus much he insinuateth in his fourth Argument The extraordinary gift ceaseth in respect of Ordination ergo it must be removed as from prayers for the sick and converts c. A. This is somewhat like and this I have heard urged I know nothing to take off Imposition but this if it can be proved If Mr. N. can carry this he shall carry me But how proves he this Thus it had this effect upon Timothy ergo What it had the same upon all and this was the end of Imposition But this Mr. N. must prove If I can prove the contrary then I must tell Mr. N. to argue a particulari ad universale is none of the best Logick But of Timothy more anon 1. The Apostles Acts 6. when they Imposed hands did it not to confer such gifts For 1. They say plainly it was to appoint them v. 3. to such a work i. e. they were made Deacons I think Mr. N. will not deny 2. They were to seek out men full of the Holy Ghost and wisedom they were then gifted before Imposition 2. In Acts 13.3 when the Prophets and Teachers were commanded to Impose hands on Paul and Barnabas the end was not to confer extraordinary gifts Paul was filled with the Holy Ghost Acts 9. when Ananias Imposed hands The end here was to separate them c. the Old Testament-word 3. Timothy had command to Impose hands in Ordination I doubt not 1 Tim. 5.22 But that Timothy conferred extraordinary gifts is a task for Mr. N. to undertake to prove Philip was an Evangelist but it seems he could not do it Acts 8.15 17. Peter and John the Apostles did this besides that all the ordinary Presbyters for I hope some were ordinary had extraordinary gifts seems strange 4. Timothy is charged to commit the things c. to ahle men 2 Tim. 2.2 So Titus hath order sent him to Ordain men qualified gifted such as must be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gain-sayers So in 1 Tim. 3.2 the Bishop must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what need this caution For if they by Imposition of hands could confer extraordinary gifts they could make them able be they never so weak before As we finde in Acts 8. and Acts 19. when the Apostles after Baptism Imposed hands they did not look at their ability or inability they made them able presently 5. Imposition was in practice before this time under the Old Testament from whence as say our Divines it was translated into the New Testament Numb 8.10 But I hope the Israelites did not thereby confer extraordinary gifts it was one Act in their separation of the Levites Now for Timothy who is the only proof of Mr. N. his Argument I wish Mr. N. had opened the Text more fully What was this Prophesie One thus He will have Ordination be in facie
70 c. For the Bishop and the Presbyter it must first be proved that these are distinct officers jure divino or else the contest is vain this is not a question for me to handle in this place but I can safely say this there must be more brought from Divine writ then I see is yet brought to prove it or else I can acknowledge no such thing I suppose Bishop Davenant in his Determination upon the question hath summed up what can be brought from Scripture but that will not doe yet he there in some cases will allow Presbyters to ordain and I think our case is as weighty as any Anselm the Popish Canterburian Arch-Bishop in his Comment upon Titus 1. Though I see much of it is taken out of Jerom gave me enough to quiet my thoughts about this question such lines from his pen took much with me considering the Scriptures he brought I am sure he that made the objection did not own any such distinction I think no sober Bishop did ever yet deny the Ordinations in the French Dutch and Scottish Churches to be valid The second Objection was made by another reverend Divine when I passed the Commissioners He put this question to me Whether I judged Ordination necessary to the Constitution of a Minister I answered Yes if it could be had He asked me to which command I would refer Ordination I answered to the second To which he assenting added Cultus naturalis could not nor must be laid aside but Cultus Institutus might rather then Cultus naturalis should God will have mercy not sacrifice in such a case but if I would say Ordination was necessary and might now be had then I must own it by succession and consequently maintain the Church of Rome to be a true Church Some words then passed but time cut us off To this reverend Divine I shall now give a further answer A. The first part of the speech saith no more then we allow onely when Ordination cannot be had I think it is not then properly laid aside 2. Preaching take the word strictly as it is the act 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to be referred to the first Commandment I conceive but to the second nor do I see our Divines make it a part of Cultus naturalis 3. This notion will cut off popular election as well as Ordination if preaching belongs to Cultus naturalis for that must not be laid aside saith this Divine I hope popular election doth not belong to the first Commandment then election is as unnecessary and if men may preach without Election and Ordination we shall have brave work Preaching here is put for all other Ordinances where then is the essence of a Minister according to his owne notion But the last part of his speech was that where he put the most strength which yet hath been often answered that I might well spare my pains something I answered then and now will add more 1. Divers of our Congregational Divines of which this reverend Divine is one conceive and practise accordingly the Fraternity to have power of Ordination and if so then if election may be had Ordination may be had so shall it not need be laid aside nor shall we need trouble our selves about Rome that dispute rather may be laid aside I desired an Answer of him what he thought of it but he would give me none 2. But suppose his judgement be contrary According to this argument Ordination which we are sure was once an Ordinance of God and I have before proved it must be utterly lost unless with the Seekers we gape for some Apostles again For this argument of Succession may ever be urged and will be as strong to the worlds end as now But why must the Church lose an Ordinance If the argument be so strong against Ordination is it not as strong against any thing else that came through Rome Rome is no true Church ergo nothing that comes through Rome is valid What will be next Mr. Ainsw and other Separatists zealous enough against Rome would not say so of Baptism therefore admitted of no re-baptizing Nor would Mr. Johnson upon the same ground admit of re-ordination one was as valid as the other 3. If God hath so far owned the Ministry of England as to work with it to the conversion of many soundly and others visibly whence there are numbers to elect Ministers I doubt not but he will as well own the Ordination of Ministers by them though they had some accidental corruptions adhering to their own Ordination for the substance true If he hath not owned the Ministry how came our Brethren to gather Churches here some few years since those who elected them to office I believe very few of them if any in some places were converted by Ministers who were not ordained because they must have their Ordination by succession c. I pray where is there a Ministry in the world which God hath more owned 4. Let it be as this Divine saith because Cultus institutus may be laid aside Ordination may be also c. Let us see whither this will go then official preaching pardon the expression for I think all preaching properly so called is official Baptism the Lord's Supper Discipline may be all laid aside upon the same account for these belong to Cultus Institutus so the whole second Commandment lost which way shall we come to these for fear of Rome will he say that the Churches and those without Ordinances it seems may choose their Pastors suppose Wickliff Luther Zuinglius men gifted and raised extraordinarily and election giving the essence to a Ministers call these may now preach baptize c. so the second Commandment is saved else I know not which way he can save it though they be not ordained may not the same Ministers as well Ordain other Ministers Ordination belonging to the same Commandment surely no rational man can oppose it this he must yield to or else the whole instituted worship of God must be lost out of the Church as well as Ordination But if election will help then I hope most of the godly Ministry in England may ordain for they have been elected by the people men qualified and whom God hath blessed in their work more or less though they have more then election in their own esteem that hinders not they have that which you think can authorize them to preach baptize c. then to ordain as well and those who are ordained by such no doubt but may Ordain again so Rome and Succession trouble us not Ames grants that Wickliff Med. The. l. 1. c. 33. s 39. Luther Zuinglius may not unfitly be called extraordinary Ministers joyning some of our famous Martyrs with them and gives three reasons for the assertion the last is Quia ordine tum temporis perturbato collapso necesse habuerunt non nulla tentare praeter ordinem commune So Syn. Pur. The. D.