that but Popish but to a Doctrinal succession for that is Protestant And here what need I say much to prove that the Right Reverend Bishops Doctors and Pastors of our Church have owned Presbyterian ordination as valid sith that incomparable Mr. Baxter hath cited Bishop Jewel Bancroft Vher Downame Disput with Everard 240. Trys 541. Davenant Alley Morton Pilkinton Prideaux Overall Bramhall Bridges Bilson and Andrews all Bishops and D. Field Saravia Powell Chillingworth Bernard Ferne Steward Mason with the Lord Digby Grotius and Chisenhall to whom may be added the Revered D. Sanderson D. Featley Dr. â—â—wnes and D. Forbess and especially leâ—â—â— the Archbishops Bishops Archdeacons and Clergy of England be forgotten Irenicum who in their Book entituled The institution of a Christian man subscribed with all their names and dedicated to K. H. 8. an 1537. c. of Orders Nor K. H. 8. himself who in his book stiled A necessary erudition for a Christian man set out by authority of the Stat. of 32. H. 8. c. 26. approved by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal M. Pâ—yns â—ubâ—sh Tim. Tit. p. 71 72. with the Neather House of Parliament published an 1543. in both which Tracts they resolve that Bishops and Priests by Gods Laws are one and the same and that the power of ordination and excommunication belongs equally to them both Now judge who are nearest the Church of England the rigid Prelatist or the moderate Presbyterian And that our honoured Fathers were against the reordination of the presbyterially ordained appears partly from their owning such ordinations as valid and more fully in their constant admitting such to preferment without any reordination To instance in that famous story of the three Bishops whereof B. Andrews was one that were to consecrate Bishops for Scotland and the Qu. being mov'd whether those Scotch Ministers should not be reordained Presbyters before they were consecrated Bishops and it wâ—â—arried in the Negative and so they proceeded Iremember not long since a Reverend Minister and Prebendary told my self that he having received Presbyterian ordination beyond sea who when he came over into England went to a Bishop about his ordination who refused tâ— reordain him the judgement of Wickliff Hooker Armachanus and Mason shall be given by and by But if any one would perswade me that the antient Bishops were for such a reordination I shall only entreat him to produce a Catalogue of their names with a citation of their words for seeing is believing But I confess I have arrived at such a degree of assurance that few if any at all of the late Bishops excepting A. Laud with two or three of his Proselites that ever avowed a reordination of those that were ordained by Presbyters were those old dead Bishops but alive again they would quickly I believe remove reordinations and such like altitudes Nay more yet I do not believe that A. Laud B. Mountague or Bishop Hall though the highest in England that I have read of did ever maintain that those might lawfully be reordained which were validly ordained before so then the person in the Question must be satisfied that his former ordination is void or else he departs from those three lofty Bishops but if therein he be satisfied then he departs from others in this at least much more humble Judge now by this how we can accept a second ordination and yet be faithful to the Church of England 15. Will not this submission to a re-ordination prove a confirmation of some in certain false principles an enervation of others in certain true principles and so prove a lamentable scandal to them both See the danger of scandalizing your brethren Jer. 23.14 Mat. 18.6 7. Rom. 14.14 ult 1 Cor. 10.28 29 30 31 32. 1 Cor. 8.9 10 11 12. Now consider whether these be not false principles That there is an absolute necessity of a regular succession of Bishops and Priests that Bishops are a distinct order from the Presbyters jure divino that the sole power of ordination as well as the exercise of it lies jure divino wholly in the Diocesan or that a Diocesan Bishop is ential to ordination And so where there are no Diocesans there are no Ministers no Ordinances no Churches Organical no Christians See now how naturally such a re-ordination tends to the lengthening the cords and strengthening the stakes of these principles and likewise how craftily it weakens the hands and emasculates the hearts of those in England and other Reformed Churches which maintain the contrary Little do some think how their re-ordination hath drawn tears from many an eye and sobâ— from many a spirit whom they would not have made sad and encouraged many young ones to imbibe those principles which otherwise they durst not have tasted and how it hath been a sport unto some mocking and scorning at mens fluid vertiginous humors whilst others have stood trembling to see their dangerous stumbles and how it hath filled some men with hopes that all would do so and therefore they need to abate us just nothing and others with fears that too many would do so and therefore they dare trust us with nothing and just as the unnecessary Imposers so the Weathercock-Turners do sadly promote the Brownistical separation 16. How can the person in the Question pray in faith for a blessing on the second ordination either before in or after the solemnity for what ground have we to believe that Christ will bless such an odd use or I fear abuse of his ordinance or if you will a humane injunction varnished over with specious pretences of Christs institution Whether there be any more then a pretence of Christs institution try and see 1. In Christs ordination there is a segregation of person from the world which supposes hiâ— in the world in a sense before but thaâ— supposition cannot be admitted and consequently there is no segregation in reordination 2. Is there not in Christs ordination special dedication of a person to God which supposes that he was not so dedicateâ— before now this cannot be supposed iâ— reordination 3. In Christs ordination iâ— there not an investiture with Ecclesiastical power which supposes a defect of that power before but not so in reordination Where then is the essence of the instituted ordination or the natural consequentâ— thereof to be found in this new devised transaction which must be called a legal establishment a Canonical confirmation c. Upon what foundation therefore shall we build either our faith or hope that God will own us or blesse us in such a business 17. Is it not worth while to consider whether the Reordainers themselves be canonical or not not that I intend to slander in the least any of our Right Reverend Bishops only as I may without just offence discover in thesi that Bishops have as little regular authority to ordain as the Presbyters themselves 1. What hath been thought of these Bishops which were never elected
minus 10. What is that office not in name but in deed that the person in the Question must be ordained unto before he be reordained a Presbyter either it is the office of a Deacon or not if you say it is then 1. Where hath the Scripture made a Deaconry a step to Presbyterie 2. Where hath Christ given the power of baptizing unto Deacons See the book of Consecrat of Bishops c. 3. Where hath Christ separated the power of preaching and the power of baptizing 4. If our Deacons have a power to preach as some say then who hath power to suspend them constantly from the exercise 5. Or who can acquit them from the guilt of the constant neglect of their work 6. But where hath Christ conveyed the power of preaching unto Deacons 7. Where shall we place the boundaries betwixt our Deaconries and Presbyteries especially where shall we find such boundaries in the Scripture 8. How shall the re-ordained Presbyter execute the real office of a Deacon one part of whose work is certainly to serve tables Acts 6. beg for is not that work incompatible with the work of a Presbyter especially in great places and was it not judged so by the Apostles 9. How shall the Presbyter promise to continue in the office of a Deacon only as a probationer for the Presbyterie 10 How can he believe that a Deaconry is a step to Presbyterie when yet he is forced himself to step from Presbyterie to Deaconry if the motions of our speculations ascend from a Deaconry to Presbyterie how then shall the motions of our practicals descend from a Presbyterie to a Deacontie what cross-graind creatures would this make us and what contradictory motions would this produce in us would not such a procedure fit the person in the Question for this Motto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But if you say this is not the real office of a Deacon then 1. What office is it 2. By what authority instituted 3. Why is it called the office of a Deacon 4. Why are men ordained into it as the Deacons office 5. Why are men engaged to execute it as the Deacons office c. Let these things be considered for consideration is the end of their offer not a positive present determination by the Author 11. How many ordinations to the same office may a man submit unto Take a person that is now re-ordained he was 1. Ordained by the Presbyterie to be a Presbyter 2. He was ordained by the Bishop to be a Deacon 3. To be a Presbyter So then there is two if not three ordinations to the same office passed already And if a man may submit to two ordinations then why not to twenty and if to twenty why not to two hundred if any supposed necessity shall require it as once in a discourse a Gentleman of the passive conformable way being asked what if the Magistrate should impose as many ceremonies in the worship of God as ever the Jews had though not the very same must we submit to them all Yes said be Suppose he should add as many more as ever the Heathens had must we submit to them all yes also And therefore what think you will it not be worth while to consider a little where we shall stop or stay if once we leave Christs institutions Christs boundaries 12. Whether by a reordination we shall not create innumerable scruples in the hearts of the people about the validity of our former consecrations of Sacraments and therefore if for the satisfaction of a scrupulous Clergy we accept an hypothetical reordination how shall we avoid the giving an hypothetical rebaptization for the satisfaction of a scrupulous Laity 13. Will not this reordination prove the greatest scandal to the Reformed Churches will they not sook upon it as disowning their Ordinations their Ministry their Sacraments their Churches their all for 1. Were not their Ministers ordained by the Presbyterie as well as ours 2. Had not many of them as much liberty if not more of attaining Episcopal ordination then ours 3. Did not some of them cast off their Bishops which is the worst that can be said by the Prelatists against ours and against but a very few of them neither 4. Have not several of them declared in their Harmony of Confessions their dislike of Diocesan Bishops and Lord-Bishops which is more then many of ours ever did 5. Have not several of their Chieftains written so voluminously and learnedly against Diocesans as few of ours were ever guilty of how can it therefore be denied but this reordination will sadly wound them through our sides and shall we make a small matter of so sad a business as 1. To cast such a reflexion upon such famous and numerous Ministers and Churches 2. To make such a wide breach betwixt our selves and them sometimes the Dearest friends 3. And to make it by backsliding from our former prefessions of liking and loving them 4. And hereby weaken the Protestant Interest 5. And play the devils and the Jesuits â—ame whilst they stand laughing on 6. And provoke Protestant Princes and Pastors to set themselves against us and it may be to fight us by carnal and spiritual weapons if this be a laughing matter what is lamentable notooùs is that story how Doctor Holland when Doctor of the chair at Oxford schooled D. Laud afterward Archbishop of Canterbury yea and turned him out of the Schools in the face of the University for denying Bishops and Priests to be one order and that upon this very account because it would set us at variance with the Reformed Churches which have alwayes hitherto continued in amity 14. How shall we be faithful sons of the Church of England if we should disown that ordination which our Reverend Clergy have formerly owned or own a reordination which they have alwayes disowned How ambitious soever some of our brethren are to be admired as the constant sons of the Church of England yet let me tell them if they have nothing more to argue their constancy then their disowning an ordination which was alwayes owned and owning a re-ordination which was alwayes disowned they may be long enough ere they atrain that honour except they attain it before they deserve it likewise had they no more to prove the unfaithfulness of the Presbyterians to the Church of England then because they will not desert the Church of England in these two material points they might twist sand long enough before they make ropes And here let no man buz into my ear such a Question as this how can the Church of England be unfaithful to the Church of England for I hope none will confine the Church of England to a few of her present Doctors be they never so eminent neither will they understand by their faithfulness to the Church of England Bishop Jewel Defence of the Apol. part 2. c. 5. di 1. p. 120. a faithfulness to a personal succession of Bishops for what is
Reordination accumulative and a Reordination destructive i. e. of the former ordination 19. Some distinguish betwixt Apostolical and Apostatical Bishops 20. We must distinguish betwixt a Re-ordination wherein nothing is doubtful but the reiteration it self and a Reordination wherein the annexed concomitants may be as doubtful as the repetition of the act or betwixt Reordination in thesi in hypothesi or in actu signato actu exercito CHAP. II. Containing certain Propositions whereof many are presupposed in the Question and granted though not by all men yet mostly by the persons that are chiefly concerned in the Question Prop. 1. IT is presupposed that Jesus Christ being Lord over all hath instituted and ordained the office of a Presbyter determined his work described his qualifications impowered certain persons to set some apart to this office c. for the converting of sinners and the edifying of his body Mystical Prop. 2. It s to be understood that the Presbyter is not a meer political Minister but an Evangelical Presbyter for so you must give me leave to call him nor a meer Ruling but a Preaching Presbyter yet not one that rules over Presbyters neither is it to our purpose to enquire whether there be any such Ruling Elders or Diocesans by divine institution or not Prop. 3. It is to be presupposed that Jesus Christ by his Spirit doth qualifie certain persons and encline to undertake and enable to discharge this Ministry and that the person in the Question is such a one and that his former ordination was not vacated through the want of any necessary qualifications Prop. 4. It is presupposed that no man takes this honour to himself but that persons qualified are to be solemnly set apart or ordained to this office and that the person in the Question doth ipso facto acknowledge as much or else to what purpose doth he trouble himself about Reordination Prop. 5. It is to be understood that this Ministerial ordination is the solemn investing of a person qualified with Ministerial power after and with examination approbation benediction and imposition of hands and that the person in the Question hath received so much from the Presbyterie and that the fault lies not in the defect of any of these acts Here I confesse is something more doubtful as whether the Presbyters ordination be an ordination but this I leave to others who have spent more paper upon this Question then upon the other of Reordination as also it seems doubtful to some whether ordination be an investiture with Ministerial power This more directly lying in my way I shall endeavour to remove before I step one foot further I find some that would make Ordination but a confirmation or testification of our Ministerial Call Thus that learned Casuist Baldwin C. C. p. 1032.1033 Ordinatio nihil est aliud quam publica solennis legitimae vocation is confirmatio ut constet omnibus personam hanc non sibi ipsi rapuisse munus Ecclesiasticum c. melius est vocare ordinationem solennem ritum quo testificatur de legitima vocatione ordinandi donisque necessari is c. it s well known that Ames Hooker and several of the Congregational brethren place the essence of the Ministerial Call in election and make ordination but adjunctum consequens Now I acknowledge if ordination should suppose a man to be a Minister already and to be it self but a meer solemnity as the coronation of an hereditary Prince then there is not so much intrinsecal to that ordinance which may hinder its repetition but let us not so slight ordination before we hear what others say Sum. in supplem ad 3. part p. 41. in Sentent Comment 1.4 p. 14. De Effect sacr l. 2. c 19 De Min. Eccl. p. 182. De Min. Evan. p. 166.186 Miscel Quest p. 34. Ordo signaculum quoddam Ecclesiae est quo spiritual is potest as traditur ordinato saith P. Lombard justified herein by Aquin as So saith that other learned Schoolman Estius Ordo Sacramentum est novae legis à Christo instâ—tutum quo potest as spiritual is traditur c. So Bellarmine In sacramento ordinis adscribitur in numerum Ducum Praepositorum hujus militiae accipit potestatem distribuendi aliis bona Domini c. Gerard saith Effectus ordinationis proprius est collatio potestatis docendi sacramenta administrandi ad illum ordinatio per se dirigitur eundemque perpetno infallibiliter consequitur M. Antonius de dom l. 2. de Repub. Eccles 6.3 Sect. 24. c. cals ordination Missio potestativa which the London Ministers and Gelaspy do well approve The Confession of Wirtembergh seems to hold forth the same doctrine we cannot see say they what use there is of those kind of men in the Church which are ordained for this purpose that they may have authority to sacrifice for the quick and dead Therefore it is evident Harm of Confes p. 266. that except a Priest be ordained in the Church to the Ministery of Preaching he cannot rightly take unto him neither the name of a Priest nor the name of a Bishop Mr. Firmin citing Gerards description of ordination before mentioned adds thus much more with whom agree the stream of Divines and the practice of the Churches in New England Which story of New England I confesse I should hardly believe Schisme p. 83. did not a New England man tell it Lo here you see are two sorts of Divines and what shall we do with them We will resolve to reverence them both but pin our faith on the sleeves of neither I proceed therefore to enquire into the nature of ordination And here I grant what indeed cannot be denyed 1. That Jesus is the principal Constituent of the Ministerial power or office and he is most properly the Ordainer and his Act is most properly ordination 2. That the Gospel-Charter is the Instrument to convey this power 3. That a person qualified with essential qualifications at least is the only Recipient of this power 4. And may I not add That ordination is such an ingredient call it by what name you will that where it is rightly put there is Ministerial power conveyed and where it is not put there is not there cannot be regularly any conveyance So that you may call ordination either a solemn-publick Approbation Confirmation Testification or allowance with some or a potestative Mission solemn Investiture Collation the essence of the external Call which external and internal Call I understand much like to their external and internal Covenant with others or what else you think fit and I shall not quarrel with you about words provided it be acknowledged that it hath the force of a condition or causa sine qua non And though I might with some challenge more as due to ordination yet I choose rather to content my self with thus much least catching at a shadow with the Animal in the Fable I
by the Presbyterie and Layity Honorius â—he Emperor as saith Bishop Jewel writing to Boniface saith Reply p. 171. if two Bishops through ambition and contention happen to be chosen we will that neither of them be allowed as Bishop but that he only continue in the Apostolical See whom out of the number of the Clergy godly discretion and the consent of the whole brotherhood shall chuse by a new election The same Jewel tels us that Greg. Presb. saith for that the election and instalment of Greg. Nazian was past before the Bishops of Egypt and Macedonia came and so made without their consent that therefore they utterly refused to allow him or admit him as Bishop there not from any dislike of the party but for that they thought themselves defrauded of their voices The Council at Paris thus decrees Con. Par. 〈◊〉 c. 8. Geâ— Bucer de guber Eccl. p. 332. quia aliquibus in rebus consuetudo prisca negligitur decreta Canonum violantur placuit ut juxta antiquam consuetudinâ—m Canonum decreta serventur nullus Civibus invitis ordinetur Episcopus nisi quem populi Clericorum electio plenissima quaesier it voluntate non Principis imperio ueque per quamlibet conditionem contra Metropolis voluntatem Episcoporumque Comprovincialium ingeratur quod si per ordinationem regiam honoris istius culâ—â— pervadere nimia temeritate aliquis praesumpsâ—rit à Comprovincialibus loci ipsius Episcopâ— recipi nullatenus mereatur quem indebiâ— assumptum agnoscunt Siquis de Comprovinciâ— libus recipere eum contra indicta praesumpserâ— sit à fratribus omnibus segregatus ipsoruâ— omnium charitate remotus The Centuriator speak forth antiquity abundantly foâ— elections to instance briefly in Cent. 3. p. 94 Vsitatum in Ecclesiis Orientalibus fuit ut aâ— electionem aut ordinationem alicujus Episcopi venirent ex vicinia plures Presbyteri 〈◊〉 Episcopi eique quem dignum eo honore coguâ—â— vissent Euseb l. 6. c. 8. manus imponerent quemadmodum 〈◊〉 Origenis ordinatione apud Cesaream factum Eundem in ordinandis Presbyteris Episcopi morem etiam Africanae Ecclesiae observarunt primum enim si alicui Ecclesiae praeficiendus ordinandus Episcopus esset Cypr. l. 2. Epist ad Com. per literas Provinciis finitimis omnibus significabatur posted ejusdem provinciae Episcopi proximi quiquâ— veniebant aut quique venire minus possent judicium suum per literas significabant deligebatur Episcopus ea plebe cujuâ— Episcopus futurus erat praesente accessâ—â— manuum impositio hunc morem Cyprianuâ— in sua Ecclesia per universas feri provincias observatum tistatur Ordinationem Episcoporum aut Ministrorum in Ecclesiis Asiaticis pracedebant suffragia ut videtur populi Magistrautus Cent. 4. C. 6. de ritibus circa ordinat p. 243. aliorum Episcoporum Presbyterorum exemplo probat Basilius Epist 58. ad Meler sine justis suffragiis ordinationem in seditionem interdum exiisse Et Constant in Epist ad Nicomedenses hortatur eos ut sub pulso Eusehio alium ordinent Episcopum eleganter inquit medicina non sera fuerit si nunc salteâ— delecto Episcopo fideli integro respexeritis in Deum quod impraesentia est potestatis vestrae jampridem debuerat judicio vestro esse perfectum in Europaeis Ecclesiis ad electionem Episcopi consensus multitudinis accedebat The Fourth Council of Carthage requires to the admission of every Clergy man civium assensum testimonium convenientiam Can. 22. Lo. Com. Tom. 6. Sect. 95 96. Gerard citeth for the peoples right of Election Ambr. Chrysâ—s Orig. Isidore twelve Popes and many antient examples This I suppose may suffice to shew that non-elected Bishops are non-canonical but if any would see more let them read D. Blondels Apol. p. 379 c. Gelaspies Miscel Qu. 8. c. 2. What if the Ordainers should at any time prove quod absit Deus lazy incontinent intemperate worldly or Symonaicâ— persons by what charter doth Christ conveâ— Episcopal power to those that are notoriously such or allow them whilst such to exercisâ— such authority and what hath the Church decreed and the learned determined concerning such The seventh Canon of thâ— Apostles as they are called determines thus Episcopus aut Presbyter aut Diaconus nâ—quaquam saeculares curas assumit sin autem dejiâ—iatur Et Can. 25. Episcopus auâ— Presbyter aut Diaconus qui in fornicationâ— aut perjurio aut furto captus est deponatur Can. 42. Episc Presb. aut Diac. aleae auâ— ebrietati deserviens aut desinat aut ceriâ— damnetur Can. 44. Epise Presb. auâ— Diac. issuras à debitoribus exigent Conoll Nicâ—n can 20. aut desinaâ— aut certe damnetur Likewise in thâ— great Counc at Nice it was determined Quicunque ex lapsis per ignorantiam suâ—â— ordinati vel contemptum corum qui eos ordinaverunt hoc non praejudicat Regulae Ecclesiasticae cum enim compertum fuerit deponantur And Can. 18. deposes those that are guilty of usury and oppression Con. Anc. Can. 210. The Counc aâ— Ancyra decreed Siquis adulterium commiserit septem annis in poenitentia completi perfectionâ— reddatur secundum pristinos gradus The fifteenth Can. of the Counc of Nice and the 21. Can. of the Counc at Antioch disables a Bishop to remove from one City to another The Centuriators say Testatur etiam August quosdam Episcopos rebus saecularibus occupari Cent. Magd. Cent. 5. c. 7. p. 409. minus studiose operam sacris literis navare eoque erroribus indulgere Idem queritur multos favore vulgi ad sacerdotia venire illum qui pecuniâ Episcopatus honorem acquirat non venire à Deo indicat Bishop Jewel that mall of the Papists saith As for the Bishop of Rome except he minister the Sacraments instruct the people warn them and teach them we say that he ought not of right once to be called a Bishop or so much as an Elder for a Bishop as saith Saint August is a name of labour and not of honour that the man that seeketh to have preheminence and not to profit may understand himself to be no Bishop S. Chrysost saith Multi sacerdotes pauci sacerdotes multi nomine pauci opâ—re Saint Ambr. saith Nisi bonum opus amplectaris Episcopus esse non potes And Wickliff Papa vel Praelatus malus praescitus est aequivoce Pastor vere fur latro Saint Chrysos Qui ab hominibus ordinatus and not by God quantum ad Deum attinet non est Sacerdos aut Diaconus Thus far that pâ—arless Jewel 3. What power have heretical schismatical or notoriously erroneons Bishops where doth Christ give authority to those that are plainly bent to destroy Christianity to seduce his people The Centuriators tell us two or three very pretty stories so much to our purpose that I shall repeat them
Cent. 4. p. 244. Oportebat autem ut hic obiter moneamus Episcopum manuum imponentem non suspecta esse religionis sed orthodoxum sie enim Moses Saracenus raptus ad vicinum Episcopum Lucium Alexandrinum ut ordinaretur adductus manum ejus quod Arianus esses religionis hostis persecutor ferre noluit sed deduci se jussit ad exulantes in montanis orthodoxos à quibus manuum impositionem accepit Simile exemplum Theod. etiam de Antiochio recitat is enim Eusebio magnâ— illi Samosatensium Episcopo successor delectus cum inter manuum impositionem conversus vidisset Jovianum Pergensem qui brevi teâ—â—pore cum Arrianistis conjunctus fuerat manum capiti suo imponere repulit illam petiitquâ—ne interesset numero consecrantium se quod sufferre manum administram blasphemiae sacrâ—rum se posse negaret And that Reverend Doctor Field writes that which may make some mens ears tingle to read Cyprian saith he Cecilius Posic and other Bishops writing to the Clergy and people of the Churches of Spain whereof Basilides and Martialis were Bishops who fell in time of persecution denied the faith and defiled themselves with idolatry perswade them to separate themselves from those Bishops assuring them that the people being holy religious fearing God and obeying his Laws may and ought to separate themselves from impious wicked Bishops and not to communicate with them in matters of Gods service Quando ipsa plebs maxime habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi The same Doctor cites Ocham thus Si Papa maxims celebres Episcopi incidanâ— in haeresin ad Catholicos devoluta est omnis potestas judicandi So then when God shall punish a people with such Bishops how Candidates can desire ordination from them judge you Though their acts when done may be valid if the substance of the Ordinance were not neglected yet that will not justifie their sinful bestowances nor other sinful receptions 18. Could you admit reordination in actu signato yet how can you admit it in actu exercito Here it is supposed that reordination in actu exercito is cloathed with many accidents which quoad nos are inseparable the particulars whereof may be seen in the book of Consecration of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons a scantling wherefrom I shall propound for consideration and leave the judicious and conscientious to make the conclusion 1. How can you perswade your selves that this second ordination is no proper ordination no new investiture with office-office-power When yet 1. They begin with an exhortation declaring the duty and office of such as come to be admitted Ministers 2. It is said the Archdeacon or his Deputy shall present such as shall come to the Bishop to be admitted Deacons 3. If the Archdeacon tell truth then he presents these persons present to be admitted Deacons 4. If the Bishop tell truth then the persons presented are to be ordered Deacons and to be admitted to the same 5. The Directory in that book saith And if any great crime be objected the Bishop shall surrease from ordering that person 6. It is said the Bishop commending such as are found meet to be ordered c. 7. It is afterward prayed Mercifully behold these thy servants now called to the like office and administration 8. It is further said that the Oath of the Kings Supremacy is to be administred to every of them that are to be ordered 9. It is again in the direction said every one of them that are to be ordered 10. The Bishop calls the work you come about a taking upon you this office and administration 11. Accordingly he tels you what appertaineth to the office of a Deacon 12. Afterwards the Bishop expresly saith Take thou authority to execute the office of a Deacon 13. It is Also all that are ordered shall tarry and receive the holy Communion the same day with the Bishop 14. Then the Bishop blesseth God for the taking of those servants into the office of Deacons in the Church of God 15. The Archdeacon shall present unto the Bishop all that shall receive the order of Priesthood that day 16. The Archdeacon saith Reverend Father in God I present unto you these persons present to be admitted to the order of Priesthood 17. The Bishop saith Good people these be they whom we purpose God willing to receive this day to the holy office of Priesthood 18. If there be any of you which knoweth any impediment or notable crime of any of them for the which he ought not to be received into this holy Ministery 19. The Bishop prayes Mercifully behold these persons now called to the office of Priesthood 20. The Bishop calls it three times The office to which ye are called or to the same purpose in his exhortation 21. In the Bishops first Question in the name of the Congregation there are these expressions called To the ministry of Priesthood 22. The Bishop blesseth God for calling those persons to the office and ministry 23. Receive the holy Ghost and take thou authority c. 24. In the Rubrick following it is said If the orders of Deacons and Priests be given both upon one day 25. Afterwards the ordering of Priests 26. The ordering of Priests again 27. The Deacons shall be ordered Besides the title of the book the form of making and consecrating c. so that above thirty times in this book is the exercise called the ordering of Priests and Deacons though not in the same words yet in others that are tantamount many whereof seem by no means applicable to a meer legal establishment or any thing lesse then a proper investiture with ministerial power and several of them being in prayers and promises wherein an equivocation and wresting of words is dangerous therefore though we should grant which yet we deny that ordination may be used to some other end then to invest with power from Christ yet we can by no means grant that it should be administred by this form which so plainly expresseth what is not intended and is wholly silent in that which is only intended But to proceed to other considerations 2. Can you chearfully sing the Letany with the Congregation when you are reordained according as it is appointed 3. Can you joyn in praying the Letany which hath in it so many stated repetitions as also stated alterations the people being one while the publick mouth another while the Minister and their parts in prayer being so disjoyned that neither the Ministers words nor the peoples words carry any full sence in themselves but depend upon supplyes from each other Yea is there not such an alteration of the speakers in the saying that most compendious concatenated form of our blessed Lords own prescribing 4. Can you pray in the Letanies general expressions for all that travel by land and by sea 5. Do you well understand the Oath of the Kings Soveraignty appointed to be administred to you
distinction of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will utterly subvert the other interpretation Yet there are three several answers each of which will take off the pretence of Timothies re-ordination 1. It is well known that several learned Divines do take that act in 1 Tim. 4.14 and that in 2 Tim. 1.6 to be one and the same ordination some say with the laying on the hands of the Presbyterie may be meant Pauls hands so Bishop Bilson Mr. Mason Calvin Gelaspy De gubern Eccâ—â— 252. and others others think that Pauls hands were not the hands of the Presbyteric yet that both Pauls hands and the Presbyters were laid on together De Min. Angâ— p 44 45. in 1 Tim. 4. Misc Qu. p. 101. and so both concur in one ordination so then if either of these were true as I confess I dare make a point of faith of neither then there is no ordination to be found here 2. It s more probable that if these Texts must be understood of two ordinations that they were to two offices the first to an inferiour the second to a superiour office and perchance first to the office of a Presbyter and afterwards to the office of an Evangelist Gelaspy seems to lean this way Misc Qu. p. 90 103. It s observable indeed that in the first Epistle Paul never gives Timothy any higher Title then Bishop or Presbyter which now at last are acknowledged to be used by the Holy Ghost promiscuously but in the second Epistle wherein Paul mentions the laying on of his own hands he stiles him an Evangelist 2 Tim. 4.5 and either here must be a twofold ordination or else Timothy was ordained per saltum or else his second ordination is not recorded 3. Some think and I think it is most probable that 2 Tim. 2.1.6 is not to be understood of ordination at all but of some special gift conferred by the laying on of Pauls hands 1. As Mr. Baxter saith It may be imposition of hands in confirination 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 the following effects of the spirit of power and love and of a sound mind which are the fruits of confirming grace admonishing him that he be not ashamed of the testimony of our Lord which is also the fruit of confirmation 2. That very expression stir up the gift doth seem to imply that gift to be gratia gratum faciens for it seems too improper to say stir up thy office 3. The Apostle doth somewhat critically use a divers particle in these two Texts in the former 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the latter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 now the Question is why should Paul use different words if these were not different acts I am not ignorant that some say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used to set forth Pauls act in ordination because he was the Ordainer and only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to set forth the Presbyters act because they are only assistants in ordination But 1. This crotchet though ingenious yet it seems to be new 2. Altogether without proof 3. And it seems to contradict most of our Protestant Divines even Episcopal as well as others that acknowledge a power of ordination in Presbyters and that their ordination without a Diocesan is valid which they would not do had the Presbyterie no power of ordination at all 4. It supposes ordination in this Text which supposition is contrary to the two first probabilities that this gift was gratia gratum faciens and not gratia gratis data 5. In Acts 13. there is the same word used to signifie the act of the Doctors as was used to signifie the Act of the Prophets 6. This would overthrow their new interpretation of 1 Tim. 4.14 which is to put Presbyterium for the office with a Parenthesis in the Text to help the same and so make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie Pauls act 7. It will overthrow that testimony of the Antients so much magnified for understanding by a Colledge of Presbyters a Colledge of Dâ—ocesans for then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signifie their act 8. If this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie the Presbyters consent only then why should the Presbyters lay on hands any more then the people for the people were antiently to consent and to assist by their concurrence in prayer 9. If Presbyters are Ordainers with the Bishops as some confess then is it not against the nature of ordination for have not all ordainers the same causality 10. But further to speak the truth whether it make for me or against me these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are often used promiscuously instances are not rare of using 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for per and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for cum And it is evident that the whole Church till of late for ought I yet see hath so understood the same in these Texts But to leave it now to the impartial Reader to judge whether if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 difference any things it be not more probable that they difference the interpretation of the holy Ghost from an ordination then an ordination from an ordination But let it go how it will with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet sure I am that it is more probable either that Paul ordained â—ot Timothy at all or that he joyned with the Presbyters in their ordination or that the Presbyters ordained Timothy to one office and Paul afterwards to another a higher then that Paul ordained him to the same office to which he was ordained before All that I observe further in Mr. H. tract is the authority of Chemnitius and Baldwin Resol 1. Methinks it is a Question whether reordination be more credited by these two authorities or more discredited in that they are but two and two not of the Antients neither And though it is to be acknowledged that these two were learned and reverend Lutheran Divines yet no doubt there may be two score easily rallied against them and it may be as learned as they I believe no Reordained will ever adventure to pole authorities and if they will not number but weigh they will get but little But if they will needs urge me with their bare authority I must needs return to such an Ipse dixit as we were wont to return to the authority of Arist at Oxford Rationem Arist expecto non authoritatem Or our reverend Brother may be answered in his own words or rather St. Hieromes Quod de Scripturis authoritatem non habet eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur But more particularly it is certain that Baldwin was against reordination as appears by his seventh Argument produced against it
true it cannot signifie to him either the bestowance of an extraordinary gift or the working of a miraculous cure or the conferring Ecclesiastical authority or the confirmation of baptism or popular election yet it may be used either to signifie the Bishops benediction or his approbation and allowance or his confirmation of our orders or as a separating us to this or that particular work Thus they that cannot admit the Bishops hands for one end may do it for another 7. It is lawful for the person in the Question upon his undertaking a new charge to admit a solemn separation by the Bishops and Presbyters with fasting prayer and imposition of hands unto that particular work This I take to be irrefragably argued from Paul and Barnabas Acts 13. 8. It seems lawful to admit all that is aforesaid though a man should not remove to a new place If a Minister upon this change gave up his place for lost and his people gave up him upon the dissolution of his legal title if he shall afterwards gain a legal establishment and have his liberty to proceed in his labours in that part of the Lords harvest he may for ought I know accept the solemn Good speed with the approbative 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the honest Bishop By this you may see how strongly bent my soul is to peace insomuch that there is nothing that I can devise about â—eordination in the si that the right reverend Bishops can demand but it shall be yielded except only the formal investiture with ministerial power CHAP. VI. Containing certain Considerations humbly offered to those that are for the imposing of reordination to promote an accommodation 1. CAn it be imagined that Presbyterian ordination is such a groundless novelty as to be destitute of all authority I confess I wondred when I read the challenge of the late right reverend Bishop Hall and heard the like from a reverend Dean to give any solid Instance in all antiquity of a Presbyterian ordination What did they think of Pauls ordination as some call it Acts 9. by Ananias a Disciple It is well known that some would make the Bishops the successors of the Apostles of the seventy two Disciples and if so you know what follows Or what do they think of Saul and Barnabas their ordination as some call it in Acts 13. by the Teachers at Antioch Or what of Timothy's ordination by the hands of the Presbytery In Epist ad â—vag 1 Tim. 4.14 Or what of the Alexandrian Bishops consecrated by the Presbyters as St. Jerome tels us for the space of about two hundred years next after the Apostles Or what of the like history of ordinations by the Presbyters throughout Aegypt by St. Ambrose and St. Augustine Amb. In Eph. 4. August q. ex utroque Test Q. 101. Inter Ep Cyprian epist 75. or whoever they were yet to you it suffices in that they are cited by your selves for Ambrose and St. Augustine or what of Firmilians assertion that in the Church wherein all power and grace is seated there preside certain Elders which have both the power of baptizing imposing hands and ordaining But to come nearer home Bish Usher de prieccle Brit. 798 799 800. What did they think of that so famous story reported by so many great ones that the Scots from their first embracing of the Christian Faith Anno 179. till the year 430. were constantly instructed and governed only by Presbyters and Monks without Bishops Dr. Blond Apol. 314.315 Bâ—xters disp Ch. Gâ—v 97. Beda Ecc. hist l. 3. c. 35.17 21 24 25 26. l. 4 c. 4. Dr. Blond Apol. 367 368 369. Or what did they think of those so famous converters of a great part of our English Nation Segerius Aidanus Finanus Colmannus Tuda Diuna Ceollach Trumhere Cedda and others who received their ordination successively from Columbanus the Abbot Presbyter of Hy Abby who came out of Scotland at the invitation of Oswald King of Northumberland in the time of the Heptarchy About that time or somewhat after was Augustine the Monk sent from Gregory the great into the South part of England Chyâ—â—aeus in Chron. Sâ—xon l. 15 p. 456. Pryn ibid. 94. Or what did they think of M. Luther Doctor Medler and other Presbyters that ordained Amsdorfius Bishop of Newburgh Whosoever would see more Instances of Presbyterian ordination let him read Doctor Blondels Apol. Gersom Bucer de gubern Eccl. and Mr. Pryn's Vnbish Tim. Tit. 2. Can it be valid or candid to argue from the condemnation of Novatus Aerius Coluthus or Maximus to the condemnation of all Presbyters ordained by the Presbytery Certain I am that Bishop Downam and Bishop Bilson that argued from these against the regularity yet would not argue from these against the validity of Presbyterian ordination But let us consider these condemned persons severally 1. Novatus Eusâ—b hist l. 6. c. 42. who was censured in the third Century according to Eusebius He was 1. A Priest of Rome puffed up with pride against those that fell in time of persecuâ—ion through infirmity of the flesh as though there were no hope of salvation for them yea though they performed all that appertained to true conversion and right confession of faith 2. He became the Author and Ring-leader of his own hereticall Sect. 3. He was excommunicate and banished the Church by a Synod of sixty Bishops gathered at Rome with many Presbyters and Deacons 4. He wà s ordained a Priest by the favour of the Bishop though all the Clergy and many of the Laity withstood it who requested that he might be permitted to allow only this one 5 When he had presumptuously endeavoured to challenge to himself the title of a Bishop not granted him from above he chose two men of desperate condition to be partakers of his heresie whom he might send to a certain corner of Italy and there to seduce three Bishops plain simple and country men by some crafty means avouching that they must in all haste come to Rome feigning that they together with other Bishops meeting to the same purpose should appease and remove a certain Schism raised in that City these being simple men as we said before not knowing their crafty and mischievous fetches after their coming were included by such lewd persons as were suborned for that purpose and about ten of the clock in the night when they were somewhat tipsie and well cram'd with victuals were constrained to create him Bishop c. of which one of these Bishops repented and all deposed 6. He had formerly been possessed of the Devill 7. It was doubted of his baptism which at the best was on his bed in sickness 8. In persecution he denyed himself to be a Priest and forsook the Church of God 9. He caused the people at the Lords Table to swear by the body and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ they would never forsake him and fly to Cornelius ere he would delver them