〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But you say the custome was among the Graecians in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or lawfull meetings that the people joyned Votes with the Rulers and the Rulers with the people before any act was accounted legall Yea it may be rather referred to the people than to them for the people sometimes voted alone but the Ruler did never Answ For this I think you cite Budaeus and Henry Stephen but at large go and consult them once againe you wrong those learned men while you would have us to beleeve that they were as ignorant of the Greek story as your selfe or that this is to be found in them which is not For what you here assert were it true of some particular Common-wealth in Greece at somâ— time yet it is far from truth concerning all the Grecians generally The Rulers in Athens often met apart and voted apart nothing was or might bee brought into their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but what the Rulers had first consulted and concluded * Sam. Petitus in comment ad leges Atticas lâ—b 2. de legibus titulo 1. p. 116. A Law made by the Senate alone stood good for a yeere before the people were consulted with about it And this was one of Solons Lawes sine Senatus praejudicio populus nullâ de re rogator Let the people be consulted with in nothing which the Senate have not predetermined * There were a sort of Rulers among them who voted things amongst themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before the Senate and the Common Hall * idem p. 123. See more to the clearing of this in Henri Steph. Tom. 4. p. 429. G. But imagine all was as you say of the custome among the Graecians in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lawfull civill meetings what is that to binde Christians in their Churches Paul saith we have no such Custome nor the Churches of God T is not said nor the 1 Cor. 11. 16. Churches of Greece as meaning civill Assemblies You must first prove that the government of the Church is Democraticall and that every single Congregation among us is to have the same power which a Common-Hall had among them and that our manner of proceeding is to be regulated by theirs before you argue from the one to the other But to go on And in this sense say you it is to be taken by the Reverend Engl. Pop. cer p. 166. Divine of Scotland his words are But it is objected that Luke saith not of the whole Church but of Paul and Barnabas that they made them by voices Elders in every city Ans But how can we imagine that betwixt them two alone the matter went to suffrages Election by most voices or the lifting up of the hand in token of a suffrage had place only among a multitude assembled together Wherefore we say with Junius that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is both a common and particular action whereby a man chooseth by his own suffrage in particular and likewise with others in common one so that in one and the same action we cannot divide those things which are so joyned together Ans The sense you mean as I suppose is this Paul and Barnabas as Rulers together with the People who had interest of authority in this busines by joint suffrage or election made Elders not Paul and Barnabas alone This you call the sense of a reverend Divine of Scotland in other passages you cite the same book as speaking the sense of that Church 1. Though I reverence the Church and the Divine thereof yet I cannot but remember Amicus Plato c. though Junius be heretaken in yet all will not help to prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth necessarily refer in this place to any other than to Paul and Barnabas It sufficeth against the Papists that the people are not excluded by the Word but how it shall be proved that they are included by vertue of it I see not The note of Grotius upon the place is worth observing Solâ—â— quidâ—m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sumi de quavis electione et iâ—m quae ab â—â—â— vel pancis fit 2. And be it granted that Paul and Barnabas made Elders with the consent of the people as it is by Grotius himself and Protestants generally their consent is one thing and by their authority another that must be granted not from the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but from analogy of the act of making Ministers with that of choosing Matthias Act. 1. or Deacons Act. 6. or from some other ground 3. Neither need it seem strange that a thing should go to suffrage between two if we consider what we read of Barnabas and Paul in the case of John Mark Act. 15. 37 38. and what is the meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which refers to God alone Act. 10. 42. 4. When Junius saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is both a common and particular action his meaning cannot be that there must be many of divers sorts people as well as rulers or else there is no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And granting as he doth that it may signifie a particular action it cannot be from the word proved that more joyn in the action then are said to joyn Besides where two alone do joyn there is actus communis particularis simul And as to the Text in â—and only Paul and Barnabas are here expressed to be those who gave suffrage And when two are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it s not necessary to understand twenty or two hundred Two Consuls may be said truly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both by a common and a particular act when they joyn in any busines belonging to them as Consuls though the whole Senatus Populúsque Romanus do not Vote with them Those Divines among us Protestants as Calvin and Ames * Calvin instit l. 4. c. 3. §. 15. Nempe sic Romani historici non rarò loquntur consulem qui comitia habuerit creasse novos magistratus non aliam ob causam nisi quia suffragia receperit populum moderatus sit in eligendo * Amesius Bellarm. enerv 10. 2. l. 3. c. 2. §. 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is dicitur qui praeâ—st 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quo sensu tribuitur presbyteriâ— primariis vel episcopis aliquaÌ„do apud Euseb who answer the Papists that Paul and Barnabas are said to ordain because they gave direction and had precedence in this businesse do thereby acknowledge that the action is here expresly ascribed to them alone To that which follows But if the word they ordained be referred to Paul and Barnabas and signifie to create or make an Officer who was nons before yet the power whereby this creation is wrought is not their own only for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is creare per suffragia as H. Stephen renders it which is as much as to say they did it not only vertually in the power
his words I fram this argument That which is not only lawfull but so necessary about the calling of a Minister that it may not be omitted but only in case of necessity is more then a bare solemnization inauguration or publication and little lesse then essentiall but so it is with Ordination in the judgement of Crotius therfore Crocius makes against you not for you For Iunius he is so far from giving nothing but a bare rite about Ordination to the Presbyterie that he gives all unto it And though in severall respects and a divers kind he ascribes the power of Ordaining both to Christ as the head and Spouse of his Church and to the Church as the Body and Bride yet in a mediate Calling both of them in his judgement make over the power unto Ministers and Elders Sic totum in solidum Ordinatinnis potestatem Christus habet quam cum ecclesia sua communicat uterque verò pro suo jure sponsus inquam sponsa Presbyterio tradit Iure Divino So as al the power of Ordination in ful belongs to Christ which he communicates with his Church and both of them the Bridegroom and the Bride according to the right of each gives it by Divine right unto the Presbyterie * Junius anim in Bellar. con 5 l. 1. c. 3. ar 16. And whereas in the Presbyterie if it be compleat there be two sorts of Elders he distinguisheth after this manner that it may be known what belongs to each Actu presbyterium totum i. e. singuli in corprre presbyterii potestatem ordinandi habet ritu verò soli Presbyteri pascentes verbo i. e. Ministri verbi habent ordinandi potestatem * Art 21. The power of Ordaining in the act of it belongs to the whole Presbyterie consisting of Ministers and Elders as distinguished but in the rite of it it belongs to the Preachers only What can this Act be as thus considered apart from the Rite but something substantiall to the Calling the rather because in the same chapter * Art 3. profectò id legitimuÌ„ est ut quemadmodum in ministerio absolutè per episcopos it à in ministerio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bujus aut illius ecclesiae per ipsam ecclesiam ordinetur communi ecclesiae nomine he makes the act of the Ministers and Elders to be that whereby a fit person is made a Minister and the act of the Church to be that whereby he is made a Minister of this or that particular Church As for Voetius though of all other he seem most to favour your cause and to ascribe much to election and little to Ordination yet I desire that this may be seriously weighed out of him That he professedly and at large maintains against Iansenius that the first Reformers had an ordinary outward call not only to the work of reforming but also to the office of being Ministers Which cannot possibly be maintained on any other principle but this That as in some cases Election alone sufficeth for he speaks but of Cases as all that is essentiall to a Calling so in their case Ordination alone made them Ministers and that way of Calling conteined all that was essentiall thereunto See to this purpose Desp causa Papatus lib. â— sect 1. à cap. 2. ad ult sec 2. cap. 1. seq usque ad 12. And whereas he sayes Majorem differentiam c. None can imagine a greater difference between these two Election and Ordination then between the Constitution and Commission of a Prince considered nakedly and the same commission adorned with some arbitrary symbols as scepter crown c. It may be answered besides all the premises that Election is that act whereby one is chosen in futurum Presbyterum to be made a Minister and Ordination is that whereby he who is so chosen is actually made a Minister And the reason is cleer Because between Election and Ordination something may intervene to make the choise null in relation to the end and effect whereunto it is intended to wit the making of such a person to be a Minister The designing of a person to be made a King and the act of putting him into the Kingly office as the choise of a meet person to be a wife and that act of mariage whereby she is made a wife de praesenti do very much differ the last is the most formall and constitutive And so it is between Election and Ordination when they are rightly compared and specially when Ordination as in this debate is taken for the substantiall act of Ministers and Elders distinct from the rite of Imposing hands Hitherto of those Calvinists which you cited Now for the Lutherans though you speak big yet you name but two and the one was cited to your hand in the other as Hunnius in Turnovius For the judgement of Turnovius * Paulus Turnovius de S. ministerio l. 1. c. 6. he makes Election to be vocationis initium tantum only the beginning of a call and that it differs from Calling it self which he proves by the instance of those two Act. 1. 23. who were both chosen and yet but one of them was called and by experience because many are chosen and yet upon examination rejected And relating to the judgement of Danaeus that the first suffrage belongs to the Presbyterie though he grants in matter of fact it is sometime otherwise yet he says it would be rectissimum justissimum the most right and just way that no Patron Magistrate Nobleman or Ruler should make any promise to any that they should be taken into this Order of the Ministery before he was satis exploratus sufficiently tryed both for doctrine ability to teach and conversation by the Presbyterie Consistory or Superintendent and Company of Ministers Quòd quoties negligitur hic ordo legitimus non servatur toties juâ—a ecclesiae violantur atque utinam ipsa in periculum nunquam praecipitaretur For Hunnius I cannot yet meet with that Tract of his which you cite but you have his judgement out of other writings 4. The use of Ordination take it how you will in the sense of Protestant writers is more then to solemnize inaugurate or publish the calling of a Minister And therefore your but to solemnize is a glosse of your own to corrupt the text of those Authors and others of like kind whom you have quoted Why was not that englished Missio solennis in possessionem honoris The solemn mission into the possession of honour Shew us some reason why a right in the thing should not be essentiall as well as a right unto it or some other Scripture way whereby a Minister is actually made a Minister and put into the possession of Ministeriall power besides that of Ordination Tarnovius in the book and chap. which you have cited pag. 267. assigns a threefold use of it 1. The person chosen is by this ceremony separated from the remaining company of
Hearers and consecrated unto God as a sacrifice 2. He is hereby commended to the Church as the Governour thereof 3. Blessed unto the Ministery and to that end Prayer and Fasting use to be joyned From the first of these ariseth this argument When a man is separated from the common company and condition of hearers and consecrated unto God to do him service in the holy function of the Ministery then he is formally and essentially made a Minister But every man is so separated and consecrated in and by his Ordination therefore in and by Ordination he is formally and essentially made a Minister Chemnitius among other uses whereunto it serves sets down this for one ut esset quasi publica solennis ecclesiae coram deo protestatio in electione vocatione servatam esse formam regulam à spiritu sancto praescriptam That it might be as it were a publique and solemn protestation of the Church before God that the forme and rule prescribed by the holy Ghost hath been observed in election and calling But how can such a protestation be thereby made unlesse Ministers be taken into the Election and Calling not onely to direct and guide the Church in choosing but also to judge and determine of the validity of their choice seeing the forme and rule prescribed by the holy Ghost in Scripture examples gives no election or power of calling to the people but under an oversight and prostacie For as he well observes * ad Can. 6 7 8. out of the Apostles prâ—ctice Act. 1. about Mathias and Act. 6. about the Deacons Non prorsus se abdicant cura vocationis vulgi aut multitudinis caecae confusae libidini eam permittunt sed sunt quasi gubernatores moderatores electionis vocationis Proponunt enim doctrinam regulam quales quomodo eligere debeant electi sistuntur coram Apostolis ut illorum judicio electio probetur an rectè fiat illi verò orantes impositione mannuns electionem approbant The end of Ordination is therefore with him to approve and validate the Peoples choice which might otherwise be accounted null or insufficient And in this sense may all those particular expressions which you have cited be understood that Ordination is a solemne declaration a testification of the Ministers constitution A publique testimony of one called A consecration manifestation declaration signification and solemn testification before the Church All which declaration testification c. is to be performed by Ministers and Elders not only as Witnesses but as Judges in the room and stead of God and Christ and without this the sufficiency of all that is done by the people may be suspected and questioned And if it be well considered that the mediate as well as immediate Calling of a Minister doth properly belong to God alone and to Christ as their act it will plainly appeare that where such a declaration is wanting which should be performed by them who in their office act in the name of God and Christ that there that which is most proper to an externall and mediate calling from God is wanting And if it were granted that Ordination in this sense is but to solemnize c. yet it would not follow that it is not essentiall to the calling of a Minister but rather on the contrary that it is because though it may be admitted that God calls by the Church in choosing yet the Peoples proper part is to desire and accept or to designe the person but with submission to the Ministers and Elders who are to judge detetmine and declare yea to give and set over with the Churches consent and approbation in the room and stead of Christ so as when one is to be Ordained Commitur illi nomine ac loco Dei ab Ordinatore cura gregis dominici The care of the Lords flock is by him who Ordains committed * Nic. Hunnius quo supr p. 280. to him that is Ordained in the name and place of God Your third Reason Then a man is a Minister when he hath a calling to the work from God and man But both these he may have without Ordination Ans That a man is a Minister when he hath a calling to the work from God and man is granted if you understand this Call not of a providentiall permission on Gods part nor of any undue and irregular choise by the people alone but of Gods calling with approbation and mans orderly proceeding to make a Minister according to the rules of Scripture in that case provided And that both these God and man may concurre in a calling without Ordination in some extraordinary cases will not be denyed That which you should prove is that Ordination is essentiall neither in ecclesiâ constitutâ nor constituendâ But let us see what you prove A man is called by God when he is approved to he of eminent gifts and hath his heart stirred up by spirituall respects to use those gifts for publique good Ans It seems by this that Judas had no call of God to be an Apostle nor the sons of Ely to be Priests and that an unregenerate person cannot be a Minister called of God nor any regenerate person though he have sufficiencie unlesse he be of eminent gifts But who must have the judging of this eminencie and of the spirituall respects wherewith the heart is stirred up to use them for publique good Is no other judgement to be made use of but a mans own or have the People all power to be sole Judges in this case First prove that Ministers and Elders are no competent Judges in this kind and then you shall heare further But of Mans calling it followes He is called by Man when the People who are godly consulting with the Word of God and laying aside all carnall respects choose him and give up themselves unto him Ans Suppose ungodly people choose a godly man approved to be of eminent parts is the choice void because the choosers are not godly Who shall be Judge of the peoples godliness if themselves alone then who will be excluded from being of the number of the godly Every Minister lawfully called is ae gift of Christ * Eph. 4. 8. 11. therefore people should rather receive Ministers as from his hands by the Ordination of other Ministers and Elders then give Ministers unto Christ and unto themselves If Ministers be sent them and set over them in the Lord they may receive them by acceptance 2 Cor. 8. 5. â— and give up themselves unto the Lord and unto them as his Ministers although they do not first and formally choose them themselves Carnall respects may sometimes cause godly people to choose one rather then another and it may be the more unworthy True Apostles were often despised when False teachers and the messengers of Satan were welcomed as Angels of light And therefore the calling of a Minister should not be left entirely to peoples
your naked Argument would blush to see it self Therefore if this might suffice to the whole yet I shall say something to the particulars of amplification To Election there goes the tryall and approbation of a mans abilities Ans So there does to Ordination and whether Ministers and Elders be not as able at least for this as the People let the people judge In this respect therfore Ordination may be as essential as Election * Note As for your quotations here to the beginning of this 4. reason they are the same which you gave us before p. 7. for the 8. Reason and serve only in this place to swell the margin for a shew and therefore I passe them over and refer the Reader to the answer of them in that place where they were first alleadged In Election the Church giveth up it self to God to take whom he shall direct their hearts unto and in choosing one well Act. 1. 24. qualified they choose him whom God would have chosen Ans In Ordination Ministers and Elders give up themselves to God to ordain him whom he shall direct their hearts unto and in ordaining one well qualified they ordain him whom God would have ordained Where is the substantiall difference that Ordination may not be essentiall Yet I pray you remember that which we read Act. 1. 24. speaks of â—ods choosing not of the peoples And where all the eleven Apostles were choosers Ministers and Elders are virtually a part There were two nominated at that time both well qualified and both referred unto God and he chose one If the people had all power in making Ministers why did not they apart from the Apostles choose one alone when there was but one to be chosen but to teach us that to the regular Call of a Minister something is necessary besides a meer election by the people In their choice they h. e. the People eo ipso separate and set him apart to the Ministerâ— Ans Those two whom the hundred twenty presented Act. 1. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were neither of them eo ipso set apart to the Ministry but after the lot fell upon Mathias eo ipso he became an Apostle and was numbred with the eleven When the holy Ghost said Separate me Paul and Barnabas with fasting and prayer by Imposition of hands they were separated Act. 13. 1 2 3. So in Ordination when a person well qualified hath hands laid on him with fasting and prayer eo ipso he is separate and set apart to the Ministry * See the testimonies formerly cited pag. 17. But where is either precept example or grouund of reason for people to set any man apart by a sole act of their own and thereby to make him a Minister when they may have Ministers and Elders to joyn with them in choosing and after to Ordain Him h. e. the Minister they take as from Gods appointment and hand they offer themselves to God by him Ans This is true when one is Ordained for them whom they accept of as made their Minister by Ordination and who accepts of them as his cure and charge But when people choose one to be a Minister who neither is Ordained nor intends to be they give him to God so as they are the Priests and the Minister the Sacrifice and God must receive him as a Minister to him from their appointment and hand The truth is a Minister should be called in such a manner as he may come to the Church from God and as a gift of Christ yet so as it may appear that the Church receives him as such and therefore as some testimony of the Churches consent is necessary so much more an Ordination by Ministers and Elders for otherwise well may Ministers be looked upon as given by the Church unto God but it cannot be held out that they are given from God to the Church In accepting the choice the Party chosen undertakâ—th to be in Gods stead to them and in their stead and behalf to God for what else is it to be a Minister And all this is done with prayer and mutuall agreement 2 Cor. 5. 20. Ans All this is but a consequent of Election and Ordination both no substantiall act of either but an effect The duty of a Minister when he hath a call towards God and the people to whom he is assigned not the formall thing whereby he is made a Minister That a Minister is an ambassadour for Christ God beseeches by him and he in Christs stead we learn indeed from 2 Cor. 5. 20. But this makes nothing at all for a call by popular election because many were true Ministers as Prophets and Apostles in all these respects who were never chosen by the Church to that end but by God alone And what is more improper then for a People to choose an Ambassador and one to be in Gods stead unto them As he is to act for them there is some pretence for choice but no necessity for every High-Priest yea every Priest was taken from among men and Ordained for men in Heb. 5. 1. things pertaining to God and yet none of them was properly chosen by men but all by God And as he is to act for God so its necessary there should be some act whereby Gods sending of him in his stead may appeare The choice or calling of Ambassadors belongs not to them to whom they come as Ambassadors but unto him from whom and in whose name they are to act And because God doth not now adayes make any extraordinary designations either by voyce from heaven as at Christs a Mat. 3. 17. baptisme and transfiguration b ch 17. 5. or by prophecie as in the case of Timothy c 1 Tim. 4. 14. or by some extraordinary and expresse signation of his Spirit as in the case of Paul and Barnabas d Act. 13. 2. or by vision as in the case of Paul at first unto Ananias or by lot as in the case of Matthias e ch 9. 15. there remains the only way of Ordination whereby we come f ch 1. 26. to know who are sent of God and who are not Now as where the Church agrees in an act God will be present to confirme that act Mat. 18. 18 19. so Prayer is also a separation of one to the Ministery Act 13. 2 3. Ans The word Church is not used in either of those verses which you cite in Matthew and in the 17. verse where we find it it signifies a company endowed with power of binding and loosing and consequently the Presbyterie Ministers and Elders If they agree to Ordain a Minister their act is valid by vertue of this â—ext And if they ask of God the confirmation or blessing of their act it shall be granted them Agreement must here be understood not only with reference to the persons among themselves but with respect unto the right rule of acting That people have a
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intelligens ut opinor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prosiste sed ita sumpto ut quum dicitur sistere cursum Possit tamen aliquis magis etiam proprio verbo utens illud 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eustathii reddere Appelle * In the latter of those pages which you cite out of him viz. p. 1767. he sayes that Cicero's phrase constituere regem is in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in the former of them viz. p. 1732. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est quod Cicero constituere regem dicir But what of this till we know what Cicero means by his constituere Is there therefore no difference between the peoples appointing two and Gods choosing one or did the Multitude and the Apostles both or either constitute as Kings use to be constituted in the same sense Then why should the foregoing act of the people be counted essentiall in the Calling of Matthias and the Deacons rather then the latter act of God alone or the Twelve It might suffice you to say the act of tâ—e multitude in setting seven men before the Apostles was essentiall though the act of the Apostles in setting the same seven over the multitude was not But must you needs make the act of God in choosing one of two to be a meer accident Take heed To make the praeposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Diminutâ—ve is against all use and reason That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to place one and to place one with honour and is an authoritative word and as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be granted in some texts though not in these but that will not content you unlesse the compound signifie lesse then the simple In good earnest let us know some reason why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may not signifie prâ—ficâ—re as H. Stephan saith it doth in those texts of Matthew and Luke heretofore insisted on and consequently to place one in honour by way of authority and as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Why is the act of the people under authority a substance and the act of those who are over them in the Lord a shadow I feare it is not so much for the Truths sake or for the Peoples good as for some advantage that you make so light account of the Apostles and God himself I would willingly allow the people all right but I dare not say that alone which they do is essentiall authoritative and establishing but nothing else If 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be an authoritative word in that phrase We establish the law where the Apostle speaks but of a doctrinall establishment let us know why when he speaks of politicall acts and applies the compound to them that should not also be as authoritative or at least authorittaive When you say the Septuagint whom Luke is observed to follow use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 1 Chron. 9. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These did David and Solomon appoint in their set office I hope by this time you see the mistake The words are whom David and Samuel the Seer did appoint in their set office And if you mean that the peoples act in Act. 1. 23. and Act. 6. 6. was like unto that of David and Samuel about the porters you are mistaken David and Samuel might be said to set appoint or ordain either as the one was a King and the other a Judge or as they were both Prophets but neither of these acceptions belong unto the people Yet there is something in the close wherin perhaps you may speed better then you have done hitherto But especially consider that electing one is taking up an office for him Act. 1. 20. 22. and he that is elected is said to be numbred amongst officers Act. 1. 26. The lot fell upon Matthias and he was numbred amongst the Apostles Numbred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 communibus suffragiis seu calculis ad scriptus est by common consent or votes he was put into the number or inrolled amongst the Apostles Ans That electing one is taking up an office for him I understand not But that by Gods election Matthias was made an Apostle as all the rest by Christ is certain That there were two presented by the people at first and afterward Apostolos solus Deus eligit Ecclesia accipit Apostoli à Christo solo Ecclesiae capite ac non ab homâ—nibus ut Paulus ad Galat. 1. 11. eliguutur Jun. ecclesiast lib 3. cap. 1. one accepted of by common consent in way of obedience to Gods determination I verily believe There was no other suffrage nor second lot though the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sound that way for to refer the choice by lot to God and after to vote whether Gods decision should stand were to tempt God but an acquiescence on all parts in his as the last resolve Calvin speaking to this point A quibus eligendi sunt Ministri sayes Hujus rei certa regula ex Apostolorum institutione peti non potest quae nonnihil habuit à communi reliquorum vocatione dissimile * Calv. inst l. 4. c. 3. §. 13. And that the 120. acted here as a generall Church visible not as a single Congregation is the rather to be believed because he that was chosen was to be an Apostle and this will make little for the right of Congregations to have all power in electing of their Officers Yet this example may be of this use to teach us 1. That the Churches consent or assent is in some cases requisite unto the call of a Minister 2. That a Ministers call is not to be left wholly to the Peoples election for then what need either of a Lot as here or of Ordination as in the case of Deacons And for all that yet appeares in the discussion of this argument Ordination may be estentiall to the calling of a Minister Your fifth Argument pag. 11. 5. Vpon whomsoever Eleâ—tion falleth Ordination doth necessarily and therefore the Call to the Ministery lies principally in Election as he that iâ— chosen to be a King must be crowned therefore his Election gives him the right to rule That Ordination necessarily follows Election appears Act. 6. 3. where the Apostle bids them look out i. e. chuse as is explained ver 5. and he would appoint Ans This Argument falls short in the Conclusion That therefore Ordination is not essentiall And if Ordination do necessarily fall upon whomsoever Election falleth then is Ordination at least necessary after Election If it be necessary it may not be omitted when it may be had all that neglect or despise it are without excuse especially when the Magistrate injoyns it agreeably unto the Word And if it should alwayes follow upon Election yet you cannot thence conclude that the Call to the Ministery lies principally in Election Marriage is begun by the motion of the man to the woman that he may have her for his
so much as one witnesse to your Thesis of Ordination as it was stated in the beginning As for the English Popish Ceremonies whether one alone composed that Tract or many concurred together by their joint endeavours I know not I take it for no more then a single and in many things for a singular and solitary Testimony What think you of Protestant Estates Is not their Judgement considerable If they do not hold Ordination to be essentiall why have they ever been so strict in urging it You know our Worthies assembled in Parliament are under a Solemn Vow and Covenant to reform according to the Word of God and the Example of the best Reformed Churches and in pursuance thereof they have declared it as a thing manifest by the Word of GOD * Ordinance of Parliament for Ordination pro tempore That no man ought to take upon him the office of a Minister untill he be lawfully Called and Ordained thereunto And that the work of Ordination that is to say An outward solemn setting apart of persons for the Office of the Ministery in the Church by Preaching Presbyters is an Ordinance of Christ This they have since attested unto in the same words in other Ordinances of Theirs giving power to Ordain unto Classicall Presbyteries And that this sense of Theirs might be better taken notice of they have further Ordered as here followeth Die Sabbathi 26 April 1645. IT is this day Oâ—dered and Declared by the Lords and 〈◊〉 in Parliament â—â—sâ—â—abled That no â—erson be permitted to Preach who is not Oâ—dained a Minister either in this or some other Reâ—oâ—med Church except such as intending the Ministery shall be allowed for the â—â—yall of their 〈◊〉 by those who shall be appointed thereunto by boâ—h Houses of Parliament It is this day Ordered by the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled That this Ordinance be forthwith printed and published And that it be forthwith sent to Sir THOMAS FAIRFAX with an earnest desire and recommendation from both Houses That he take care that this Ordinance may be duly observed in the Army and that if any shall transgresse this Ordinance that he make speedy representation thereof to both Houses that the Offenders may receive condigne punishment for their contempts It is further Ordered by the Lords and Commons That this Ordinance be forthwith sent to the Lord Mayor and Committee of the Militia in London to the Governours Commanders and Magistrates of all Garrisons Forces Places of strength Cities Towns â—orts and Ports And to the severall and respective Committees of the severall and respective Counties with the like injunction unto them respectively and that they take care that this Ordinanâ—e be duly observed in the places aforesaid respectively and that they make speedy representation to both Houses of such as shall offend herein that they may receive condigne punishment Die Jovis 31. Decemb. 1646. A Declaration of the Commons assembled in Parliament Against all such Persons as shall take upon them to Preach or Expound the Scriptures in any Church or Chappel or any other publique place except they be Ordained either here or in some other Reformed Church THE Commons assembled in Parliament do Declare That they do dislike and will proceed against all such persons as shall take upon them to Preach or Expound the Scriptures in any Church or Chappel or any other publique place except they be Ordained either here or in some other Reformed Church as it is already prohibited in an Order of both Houses of 26. April 1645. And likewise against all such Ministers or others as shall publish or maintain by Preaching Writing Printing or any other way any thing against or in derogation of the Church-government which is now established by the authority of both Houses of Parliament And also against all and every person or persons who shall willingly and purposely interrupt or disturb a Preacher who is in the publique Exercise of his Function And all Justices of Peace Sheriffs Mayors Bailiffs and other Head-Officers of Corporations And all Officers of the Army are to take notice of this Declaration and by all lawfull wayes and means to prevent offences of this kind and to apprehend the offenders and give notice hereof unto this House that thereupon course may bee speedily taken for a due punishment to be inflicted on them For the Example of the best Reformed Churches if thereby you understand as some do those of New-England how ever their Elders speak â—â— part as you have done yet by their Practise they make it essentiall for why else is it that they put the power and aâ—t of Ordaining into the peoples hand or some of their deputing when they have no Officers and in their Doctrine they hold it Necessary by Divine Institution * Church Government and Church Covenant discussed pag. 67. For those of the separation these are the words of their Confession Art 23. that every Christian Congregation hath power and Commandment to elect and ordaine their own Ministerie according to the rules in Gods word prescribed And if there be a commandement for Ordination as well as for Election why should not the former be essentialâ— as well as in their account the latter is Whether every congregation have the power is no part of the present question and thereforâ— as they affirme it I deny it and passe it by Those who are wont to â—e called Non-conformists in that book of Common-prayer which they advised * Printâ—d at Lonâ—on by Ro. Wâ—â—de-graâ—e they speak of the Election and Ordination of Ministers to the Election they call in neighbour-Ministers After that say they he is to be ordained by the laying on of the hands of the Eldership with these words pronounced by the Miâ—ister thereunto appointed According to this lawfull calling agreeable to the word of God wherby thou art chosen pastor IN THE NAME OF GOD stand thou charged with the pastorall charge of this people over which the Holy-Ghost hath made thee Overseer to governe this flock of God which he hath purchased with his bloud Among thâ—m there are two of great eminency whose expressions I shall here adde One the Reverend Mr. Arthur Hildersam who in that letter which Johnson in his Treatise of the Ministry * Page 117. pretends to answer makes a right Ordination into the office a substantiall part of a true Calling to the Ministerie The other Mr. H. Jacob whose old books have furnished those who are known among us by the name of Independents with their new light and all subtilties wherby they would be thought to distinguish themselves from Brownists There are two essentiall parts of Calling to the Ministery these are his words * Attestation ch 8. pag. 299. Election and Ordination And though he make Imposition of hands but a ceremony yet he adds Howbeit I suppose Christs Church offendeth in omitting of it for though it be but a ceremony yet it is Apostolick And howsoever in this place
Lord giveth leave Harm Eng. pag. 253. 254. The Augustane Confession Art 14. Concerning Ecclesiasticall Orders they teach that no man De Ordine ecclesiastico docent quod nemo debeat in ecclesia publice docere auâ— Sacramenta administrare nisi rite vocatus Sicut Paulus praecipit Tito ut in civitatibus Presbyteros constituat Corp. Conf. par 1. p. 16. should publikely in the Church teach or minister the Sacraments except he be rightly Called according as St. Paul giveth commandement to Titus to Ordain Elders in every city Harm Eng. p. 258. The latter Conf. of Helvetia chap. 18. Furthermore no man ought to usurp the honour of the Nemo autem honorem Ministerii ecclesiastici usurpare sibi i. e. ad se largitionibus aut ullis artibus aut arbitrio proprio rapere debet Dâ—mnamus hic omnes qui fua spoâ—â—â— currunt cum non sint electi missi nec Ordinaâ—â— Corp. Conf. par 1. pag. 59. Ecclesiasticall Ministery that is to say greedily to pluck it to him by bribes or any evill shifts or of his own accord We do here therefore condemn all those which run of their own accord being neither chosen sent nor Ordained Harm Engl. p. 236. The Conf. of Wirtemberg Art 20. Neither is it unknown that Christ in his Church hath Nec est obscurum qd Christus instituerit in ecclesia sua Ministros qui adnâ—ncient Evangelium suum dispensent Sacramenta ejus Nec permittendum est cuivis quamvis spirituali sacerdoti ut sine legitima vocatione usurpet publicum Ministerium in Ecclesia Corp. Conf. par 2. pag. 164. instituted Ministers who should Preach his Gospel and Administer the Sacraments Neither is it to be permitted to every one although he be a spirituall Priest to usurp a publike Ministery in the Church without a lawfull Calling Harm Engl. p. 265. The ENGLISH Conf. Further we say that the Minister ought lawfully duly Credimus Ministrum legitime vocari oportere rectè atque ordine praefici ecclesiae Dei neminem autem ad sacrum Ministetium pro suo arbitrio libidine posse se intrudere Corp. Conf. par 1. pag. 116. See also the 23 Art among the 39. and Corp. Conf. p. 131. and orderly to be preferred to that office of the Church of God and that no man hath power ro wrest himself into the Holy Ministery at his own pleasure Harm Eng. p. 255. PROPOS III. In Calling to the Ministery besides Election Ordination is to be used where it may be had Act. 6. 2. ch 13. 2. ch 14. 23. Titus 1. 5. 1 Tim. 5. 22. And besides the usuall way of Ordaining by Prayer Fasting and Imposition of hands there is no other spoken of in any Confession of the Reformed Churches The Conf. of Helvetia quo supra And those which are chosen let them be Ordained of the Elders with publike prayer and laying on of hands We do here therefore condemn all those which run of their own accord as before Harm Engl. p. 236. See also the former Conf. of Helv. Har. Eng. p. 242. Corp. Conf. par 1. pag. 90. The SAXON Confession We do retain in our Churches also the publike rite of Retinemus igitur in nostris ecclesiis publicuÌ„ ritum Ordinationis quo comendatur MinisteriuÌ„ Evangelii verè electls quorum mores doctrinam prius exploramus Corp. Conf. par 2. pag. 99. Ordination whereby the Ministery of the Gospel is commended to those that are truly chosen whose manners and doctrine we do first throughly examine Harm Eng. pag. 225. The BELGICK Confess Art 31. We believe that the Ministers Seniors and Deacons Credimus Ministros Seniores Diaconos debere ad functiones illas suas vocari promoveri legitimâ Ecclesiae electione adhibitâ ad eam seril Dei invocatione atque co ordine ac modo qui nobiâ— Dei verbo praescribitur Corp. Conf. par 1. pag. 179. ought to be Called to their functions and by the lawfull Election of the Church to be advanced into those rooms earnest prayer being made unto God and after the Order and manner which is set down unto us in the Word of God Harm Eng. p. 258. Note here that besides Prayer they speak of an Order and manner set down unto us in the Word of God which for Ministers and Deacons relates to laying on of hands or Ordination if I understand them The Confession of BOHEMIA ch 9. But Ministers ought not of their own accord to presse Dâ—cent Ministros Ecclesiae quibus administratio verbi sacramentorum demandatur ritè institutos esse oportere ex Domini Apostolorum praescripto Atque hi probentur prius tum demum factâ precatione per manâ—um impositionem confirmentur à Senioribus forward in that Calling but ought according to the example or commanded rather for so ' its in the Latine ex praescripto of the Lord and the Apostles to be lawfully appointed and Ordained thereunto They teach also that above all things they be proved and tryed by examination and so afterward Prayer and Fasting being made they may be confirmed or approved or rather as it should be translated Let them be confirmed those words or approved have nothing to answer to them in the Latine by laying on of hands Harm Eng. p. 246. Let the Reader observe that he who published the Harmony of Confessions in English was no friend to Ordination and Imposition of hands as appeares not only by his Notes upon every passage where Imposition of hands is mentioned but by his Translation here But that the sense of the Bohemians may be the better understood I shall here adde the words of the Waldenses out of their most antient Confession the first that ever was extant against Popery Ad plenam Presbyteri gradationem tria esse necessaria Baâ— Lâ—d Wald. to 2. p. 14. approbamus Primum probatio vitae fidei donorum fidelitatis quoque in exilioribus negotiis creditis Alterum orationes cum jejuniâ— Postremum contributio potestatis aptis ad hoc verbis manuum impositio adcorroborationem For the Church of SCOTLAND In their Second book of Discipline ch 2 3. The Divines of that Church speak clearly fully and most accurately to all the former propositions To the first in the 2. chap. to the second and third in the 3. chap. Without lawfull Calling it was never leasome i. e. lawfull Doct. Disc of the Church of Scotl. p. 81. to any person to meddle with any function Ecclesiasticall There are two sorts of Calling one extraordinary by God immediately as was of the Prophets and Apostles which in Kirks established and well already reformed hath no place The other Calling is ordinary which besides the Calling of God and inward testimony of a good Conscience is the lawfull approbation and outward judgement of men according to Gods word and order established in the Kirk This ordinary and outward Calling hath
two parts Election and Ordination Election is the choosing out of a person or persons most able to the office that vakes by the judgement of the Eldership and consent of the Congregation to which shall be the person or persons appointed Ordination is the separation and sanctifying of the person appointed to God and his Kirk after he be well tryed and found qualified The Ceremonies of Ordination are Fasting earnest prayer and Imposition of hands of the Eldership Let it be observed here that Imposition of hands is no otherwise made a ceremony then Fasting and earnest prayer PROPOS IV. The practise of those in these dayes who commonly Preach and receive maintenance for so doing refusing or neglecting to be Ordained is not to be justified by the Scripture or by the doctrine of or approved example in any of the Reformed Churches but forbidden in their Books of Discipline and condemned by their Divines as the opinion and practise of Anabaptists Libertines Arminians and Socinians Towards the clearing of this examine these Quotations following Crocius de Eccl. Pont. praejud Dissert 6. num 9. pag. 139. Synops puri Theol. disp 42. num 6. seq Joshua Stegman Photinlanis disp 53. qu. 1. 2. p. 608. 613. Balthazar Mentzerus in Exegesi Augustane Conf. ad ar 14. pag 639. seq Fredericus Balduinus lib. 4. cap. 4. de casibus conscientiae Casu 1. pag. â—009 Idem in brevi Instit Minist cap. 6. pag. 40 41. cap. 9. pag. 79. Johannes Geâ—â—aâ—dus L. C. in fol. de Minist Eccles cap. 3. sec 1. num 54. à num 64. ad finem sectionis Among the Ecclesiasticall Canons ratified in the last Synod of Dort this is the Third Nemini fas esto quantumvis Doctori Seniori vel Diacono ministerium Verbi Sacramentorum exercere nisi legitime ad ea vocato Contra siquis fecerit aliquâ—ties admonitus non abstinuerit penes Classem judicium esto utrum Schismaticus sit declarandus an aliâ quadam poena coercendus A brief Answer to the Pretences of Edmond Chillenden for the lawfulnesse of Preaching without ORDINATION CHILLENDEN Pag. 5. ELdad and Medad prophecied in the camp Moses said would God that all the Lords people were Prophets Numb 11. from 26. to 30. Ans It is one thing to Prophecie another to Preach Prophets and Preachers are not convertible termes because there are Preachers who are no Prophets God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers 1 Cor. 12. 28. How shall they be distinguished if they be the same Yet those that can prove themselves to be Prophets shall have liberty for me to Preach without Ordination and that not only in the Camp but elswhere Pag. 8. Jehosaphat sent to his Princes to Teach in the Cities of Judah and they taught in Judah and had the book of the Law of the Lord with them and went about through all the cities of Judah 1 Chron. 17. 7 8 9. Ans Remember none went to any city of their own head but those whom Jehosaphat the supreme Magistrate sent What Jehosaphat sent you and such as you are Here 's no mention of Preaching If Teaching and Preaching be alwayes all one then do our Judges though not Ordained Preach at every Assize In this sense that of the Princes teaching v. 7. is most properly to be understood And that in the 9. verse They taught in Judah refers to the Priests and Levites spoken of in the 8. verse It remains on your part to prove that the Princes preached sermon-wise or in the same manner and kind as the Priests and Levites did However here were none joyned with them but the Princes 't was Jeroboam only that made Priests of the lowest of the people Whosoever would he consecrated him But mark what follows And this thing became sin unto the house of Jeroboam even to cut it off and to destroy it from off the face of the earth 1 King 13. 33 34. Out of the New Testament the instances of the Scribes Pharisees and Lawyers are brought and with them are joyned the examples of Christ Paul and Barnabas pag. 9. Ans The liberty given in the Jewish Synagogues is no more a president for Christian Churches then their exercise of power It would anger you if any should say They whipt and scourged in their synagogues such Teachers as they did not like and therefore so should we do now If none might preach among us unordained but upon such tearms and the standing Officers of our Congregations be the Judges perhaps you might have occasion to complain with St. Paul Of the Jewes five times received I forty stripes save one Thrice was I beaten with rods once was I stoned 2 Cor. 11. 24 25. A certain Jew named Apollos borne at Aleâ—â—â—dria an eloquent man and mighty in the Scriptures came to Ephesus c. Act. 18. from 24. to the end Ans This as the former is but an instance of the liberty given by the Jewes or taken where as yet there was no Church in being Take in all the commendations of the man and in a like juncture of time others of like abilities may do the like And yet this concession will nothing avail to prove the sense of your Position To that pag. 12. of the dispersed Disciples out of Act. 8. 1 4. compared with Act. 11. 9 20 24. I answ In such a condition of the Church as that was these cases being much alike no Order established and Order dissolved I should not oppose that able men should teach in love as they are able though out of Office But under this pretence to plead for like liberty to every one that will assume it in all places and in all conditions of the Church is as if one should argue thus When there was no King in Israel every one did that which was right in his own eyes Therefore it is the liberty of the Subject for every one to do what they please although they have a King Pag. 15. The next Scripture that offers it self to be looked upon in this particular of Preaching without Ordination is in 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. As every one hath received the gift even so minister the same one to another as good stewards of the manifold graces of God If any man speak let him speak as the oracles of God c. Ans Every one is to use his gift with respect to the gift it self and to his place and calling and no otherwise private persons in a private way and publike officers publikely And be a mans gift never so small yet he must use it For these words contain a precept Not that every man is bound to be a Preacher by this Text but he that is a Preacher by office is bound to preach with all his might Compare this Text with Rom. 12. from the beginning of the 3. verse to the end of the 8. it may help to understand it But you will never prove That
of others but they did it by others Ans The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies sometimes simply to choose with lifting up of hands or without so as there be some outward expression of the inward consent of the mind it sufficeth and sometimes by choosing to create But how will you prove that it signifies mixtly to create per suffragium proprium alienum or non per proprium sed per alienum as you here suppose or that the plurall suffragia hath any weight to imply a multitude in the Latine tongue They who gave their own suffrage and by giving it created and made or chosâ— Ministers they had the power Thus did Paul and Barnabas they made Presbyters by suffrage that must be understood of their own suffrage Not they by the people but they that is Paul and Barnabas for them that is for the people to their use and benefit That the people did it in Paul and Barnabas by acquiescing in their vote will not be denied but that the people did it by them as if the power were the peoples and not the Apostles unlesse by delegation from the people is not yet nor can be proved from the word as here used In the close of this Paragraph as your reasoning is weak so your expressions are confused if the answer fall short thank your self Your second argument to prove that Ordination is not essentiall to the calling of a Minister begins thus 2. The end and scope of Ordination is but to solemnize The second Argument inaugurate or publish the Calling of a Minister It is to a Minister as Coronation is to a King it makes him not a King but declares him and sets him forth with glory These are the very expressions and similitudes of Protestant writers both Lutherans and Calvinists in this matter Sicut non coronatio facit regem sed electio Aegyd Hun. ad artic Arturi contra assert 6. Ames Bellarmini enerv tom 2. p. 76. idem Cas cons l. 4. c. 25. sect 28. Boet. disp causa papatus l. 2. c. 20. p. 264. Majorem differentiam comminisci non potest inter duo illa elect ordinat quam inter constitutionem commissionem principis nudè spectatam inter eandem commissionem erbitrariis quibusdam symbolis sceptro coronâ c. insignitam id p. 267. Your margin Aegid Hun. ad artic Arturi contra assert 6. declaratio solennis Ames cas cons l. 4. c. 25. s 28. constitutionis testificatio Croci Antisoci disp 24. s 3. missio solennis in possessionem honoris Jun. testimonium vocati publicum Tâ—â—nob de minist l. 1. c. 25. Consecratio manifestatio declaratio promulgatio significatio coram ecclesia solennis testificatio Voet. desp causa Papat l. 2. s 2. c. 20. Ans 1. If there were no other use of Ordination then there is of Coronation to a King it might suffice in some sense to prove it essentiall to the calling of a Minister If coronation among Kings in our time be of like use to them as anointing was to Kings among the Jews or as imposition of hands was unto the Elders and unto Joshua in succession unto Moses Josh 27. 18. 2. Coronation is not of the like nature in all times and places nor in all mens judgements who write of Politicks And though for the most part it suppose some precedent act whereby a King receives title yet such weight is laid on this solemnity even among those who inherit by succession that he who is a King thinks himself not rightly setled till he hath been crowned and from the time of crowning the time of reigning uses to be accounted in the Empire * Althus polit c. 19. num 95. 3. It is not simply right that makes a man to be a King but the solemn declaration of that right in a forensick way which uses to be done by proclamation and some acknowledgement of the right demanded and that 's by coronation All these in the substance of the things must concurre and may be said to be essentiall because though the outward sign be juris positivi yet the thing signified is juris naturalis Apply this to the calling of a Minister and see what follows The consent of those who have power to make him a Minister who otherwise is none is substantially necessary Among those who have that power I hope the Ministers and Elders as such shall be allowed their share And that manner of declaring consent which is approveable by the fundamentall laws of the kingdom of Christ is also necessary the one antecedently the other consequently Let Ordination be in as much request among us for making Ministers as Coronation is for our Kings and it shall suffice for then as we have no Kings but such as are crowned so we shall have no Ministers but those who are ordained Remember that you are now speaking of Ordination as it is an act of Ministers and Elders wherein they are to consent for making of a Minister And if their consent as such h. e. as Ministers and Elders be essentiall though the manner of Declaring it were arbitrary yet that will suffice to prove Ordination in some sense essentiall 4. As for the Protestant writers when they compare Ordination to Coronation though it might suffice to say Comparisons prove nothing Theologica symbolica non est argumentativa yet I answer further They thereby understand for the most part the rite of Ordination or the act of Imposition of hands as distinguished from the foregoing consent of the Ministers and Elders and in that sense it may be admitted that Ordination is declaratio solennis aut constitutionis testificatio missio solennis in possessionem honoris and such like And this will be no advantage to you or prejudice to us You are now to speak of Ordination as distinguished from Imposition of hands for that follows afterward to be considered but how the Protestant writers understand it when they compare it to Coronation is another thing To the testimonies which are cited by you I shall speak more particularly in the close Whereas you say that these expressions and similitudes are agreeable to Scripture for Act. 13. Paul and Barnabas are said to be separated to the work by prayer and fasting and laying on of hands but both of them were Ministers before as appears Act. 12. ult Ans This text Act. 13. compared with Act. 12. makes nothing for proving the former expression and similitudes but it makes much against the scope of your argument because if Paul and Barnabas were Ministers before by a call from God without election and yet the Lord would have them to be ordained it makes much for the necessity of Ordination where it may be had The holy Ghost said Separaâ—â— me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereto I have called them I have called them why might not that suffice but that the Lord would teach us by this extraordinary act and
Tim. 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2. Tit. 1. 5. Comming afterwards to speak more particularly quid cuivis statui propriè tribuendum sit what is properly to be given to every severall state that no confusion may arise and one state may not take to it self that which is peculiar to another after other things premised he makes this distribution of their parts Presbyterio competit exameâ— ordinatio inauguratio To the Presbyterie belongs examination ordination inauguration Magistratui Christiano nominatio praesentatio confirmatio To the Christian Magistrate nomination presentation confirmation Populo consensus suffragium approbatio vel etiani pro ratione circumstantiarum postulatio To the People consent suffrage approving or as circumstances may require postulation Id. loco cap. citatis sec 3. num 85. p. 93. num 86. p. 95. * vid. ead apud cund Augustana confession is par 2. cap. 1. Now Sir I beseech you recollect your self and tell whether in the judgement of the Lutherans Ministers and Elders as such have not an interest in the calling of a Minister or why the Peoples act should be essentiall and not the Ministers by vertue of any ground which they build upon and where you find in them Ordination and Imposition of hands so distinguished as they are here by you 2. The Calvinists do for the most part agree with the Hanc viz. electionem seu designationem Ministri dicimus non ad solom supremum Magistratum pertinere us Gretius alii judicarunt nec etiam ad solam ecclesiam Excluso magistratu ut alii volunt imprimis Anabaptistae Papistae sed dicimus ad totam Ecclesiam hanc electionem certo respectu pertinere ordine tamen debito observato ut praecant Ecclesiae praefecti adsentiatur populus quisque suo ordine Ant. Wallaeus locis com parte 2. de functionibus ecclesiasticis edit priore in 4. p. 907. Pertinet autem electio designatio ipsa ad totam Ecclesiam in quâ sit sed diversâ— ratione Pessime quoque hallucinantur qui non distinguunt quae sunt Presbyterii quae autâ—m Plebis in electionibus istis partes sed quod est illius istitribuunt indicentes in ecclesiam Dei magnam omnino confusionem Praesbyterorum est personam quae idonea ad munus vacuum videri potest inquirere ex totepopulo camque designareoculis de ea inter sese agere conferreâ—raire enim toti Ecclesiae Presbyteri Cum autem hoc primum suffragiuÌ„ ad praesbyteros pertineat non ad universam ecclesiam populuÌ„ quemodmoduÌ„ tamen quidem sentiu ut consentiose disputant Ratio est 1. quòd presbyteri pastores dicuntur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ecclesia Heb. 13. 7. undo sua voce suâ— que consilio praeire populo debent 2. Quòd illi ipsi sunt ecclesiae senatus ad quem prima rerum ecclesiasticarum deliberatio ac cura pertinet atque etiam referenda est 3. Exemplum ipsius primitivae ecclesiae Apostoli enim ipsi primi de diaconis eligen dis deliberant 4. Ex ipsa loquendi ratione quâ utitur Scriptura Act. 15 v. 22. 16. v. 4. 1 Cor. 16. v. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex qua phrasi luce clarius intelligatur à populo universa ecclesia probari tantum vel improbari quae praesbyteri ipsi praepositi ecclesia ère ecclesia esse judicarant atque proposuerant 5. Exempla posterioris ecclesiae quae tum canonibus suis sanxit tum etiam usu ipso praxi demonstravit à plebe tantum essensum requiri ut quae à presbyterio gesta sunt justa aliqua ratione plebs vel rata haberet vel irrita faceret Sed fierit summus Magistratus fidelis in cujus territorio aliquis ad dignitatem ecclesiasticam est asciscendus debet certâ— specialis istius Magistratus consensus praeter eum qui à toto populo praestatur expectari accedere Lamb. Danaeus com in 1. ad Tim. ad cap. 5. v. 22. p. 348 349 352 353 354. Vide plura in hunc sensum apud Bucanum loc 42. de Ministerio in respons ad quaest 39. Marcsium in Enchiridio de Minist potest discip ecclesiae p. 117. thesi 39 inter Canones ecclesiasticas Synodi Dordrac can 4. Zanch in 4. praec loc 4. qu. 2. to 4. p. 780. sequ Harmo Synodorum Belgic cap. 1. art 4. Lutherans touching the interest of Magistrates Ministers and People about the calling of a Minister though in manner of expression there be some difference yet in the substance of the thing it self there is an harmony Some speak of Calling others of Election both mean the same thing and ascribe it not to the People alone as you do with the Libertines Anabaptists Brownists and the like nor to the Magistrate alone as Grotius and the Erastians but principally and primarily to the Ministers and Elders and respectively to the whole Church 3. None of those writers in particular which you cite either in the body or margin of that paragraph pag. 7. exclude Ministers and Elders from sharing in the power and act whereby a meet person is made a Minister but every one of them hath more or lesse expresly for their interest For the Calvinists to giue them the first place I shall speak of them in order as you rank them Ames against Bellarmine tom 2. p. 76. hath nothing at all one way or other unlesse the Edition which I follow deceive me In that of Oxford 1624. p. 96. I find this Populus in judicando dirigi potest ac ordinarie debet à judicio aliorum pastorum electionem vel praeeunte vel comitante The people may and ordinarily must be directed in judgement by the judgement of other Pastors either foregoing or accompanying Election And in his book of Cases of Conscience lib. 4. cap. 25. num 27. Actus varii ad vocationem pertinentes possunt aliis committi ex ordine debent à praecipuis ecclesiae membris vel praesbyteâ—is praestari Cura etiam ut omnia rectè fiant pertinet ad Magistratum Divers actions pertaining to the calling of a Minister may be committed to some and according to order must be performed by the principall Members or Presbyters of the Church the care also that all things be done rightly belongeth to the Magistrate Crocius tels us the conspiracio of the people must not be taken for a lawfull call Non conspiratio populi pro perfectè legitimâ vocatione haberi debet * Anti-Socin disp 24. Of the rite of Ordaining he says Haec est constitutionis illius testificatio quae exemplo Apostolorum docetur licita neque extra casum necessitatis in Ministerio constituto temerè negligenda This is a testification of that Election which is taught to be lawfull by the Apostles example and not to be rashly neglected in a setled Ministery when there is no case of necessity Out of
wife and yet mariage it selfe lies not principally in that nor in their mutuall consent but in their solemn taking one another and in the ratification thereof by such as are in authority to allow or disallow of such desires and purposes In generation nature begins with the preparation of the matter and after that the forme is educed or introduced and yet the essence or being arises from the union of the forme with the matter That he who is chosen to be a King must be crowned makes still more for the necessity of Ordination and if his Election gives him the right to rule yet his Coronation only doth solemnly declare to the binding of all his Subjects unto obedience that his right is acknowledged and he is actually put into the exercise of it Grant that a Minister may not have jus in re act as a Minister in things of Order and Jurisdiction till he be Ordained and our strife will cease Where you say that Ordination necessarily follows Election appears Act. 6. 3. I fear you mean it backwards that Election must necessarily go before Ordination but then Act. 6. 3. will not prove it because neither that one example nor any other hold out a full enumeration for all cases which belong unto the calling of a Minister * In hist N. Testamenti exempla habemus constitutionis miâ—iâ—â—erâ—i ejusdeâ— etiam conservationis sed noÌ„â—estaurationis ejus aut Reforâ—ationis post generalem apostasium Omnia igitur quae pertinent ad plebem fidelem in tali casu non representantur ibi certis exemplis Ames Bell. Enerv. â—â— 2. c. 2. n. 6. And if the Apostle reserves as you grant appointing to himself it thereby appears that some act of another nature distinct from Election belongs to the calling of a Deacon which is not in the peoples power for why should the Apostles reserve that unto themselves which did belong unto the people As to your Margin about this Argument if I should take no notice of it either you might think your self neglected or some Reader be so weak as to imagine there was strength in the Latine though the English prove weak and therefore I shall take that also into consideration Out of Ames you tell us * Omnes illi actus quâ— pertinent ad Electionem ut nominatio praesentatio examinatio vel ab Electione pendent ut O dinatio institutio vel immissio Ames cas consc quo supra All those acts which pertain to Calling either tend to Election as Nomination Presentation Examination or depend upon Election as Ordination Institution or Immission Ans Nomination Presentation and Examination tend equally to Ordination as to Election and some kind both of examination and election belongs properly to the Ordainers and not unto the People If Election be taken for the peoples act Ordination does not depend upon it absolutely in all cases as hath been proved already but suppose it did what hinders but that those things which depend upon Election may be as essentiall unto Calling as Election it self What think you of the act of a Minister in accepting of the work and charge unto which he hath been chosen If that be not essentiall a Minister may be compelled and made a Minister whether he will or no If you say it is essentiall you grant that something which depends upon Election is essentiall for he cannot properly accept untill he have been chosen first Sometimes there is Mission Institution Ordination or something of like nature thereunto without any Election on their part to whom Ministers are sent as in the case of particular Ordination as Junius distinguishes of it into universall and particular When Peter and John were sent unto Samaria they might preach baptize perform any act of Ministeriall order among the Samaritans respectively to their state and condition anâ— if they had any Election from the Believers there it must follow after their lawfull calling to the Ministeriall work in that place which they brought with them from Jerusalem and received not in Samaria and so was not essentiall to constitute but accumulative to corroborate their call When a Ministery is first set up in any place to convert those who are yet uncalled it comes in after this manner mediately or immediately To that of Voetius though it be more full in his own words then as you contract it * Relationes in subjecto dicuntur existere posiâ—o fundamento termâ—no Sed legitima electio est fundamentum Ministerii particularis Ecclesia ista vel illa terminus Voet. ubi sup p. 265. Consecratio est adjunctum Ministerii atque adjunctum est poâ—terius suo subjecto Id. 18 That relations are said to exist in their subject upon the position of their foundation and terme and that the lawfull election and vote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Church is the foundation of the Ministery and this or that particular Church the terme as also that Consecration is but the adjunct of Ministery and the adjunct is after his subject Yet you shall do well to prefer reason before testimony and to consider that the foundation of Calling is power and authority to set one over others in the Lord for the Ministery and the terme may be indefinite or particular or both as the good and state of the Church doth require Election of the people can be nothing else but a desire that such a one may be made a Minister and their Minister in particular and may either go before or follow Ordination according to the state of the person who is desired This desire of theirs is to be subject as in some respect to the person himself so more especially unto them who are to discern judge and determine in the room of Christ The sentence of such competent Judges is the true foundation of Calling and the assignation of a particular Company to be ministred unto which when they are Saints is to be done with their consent is the terme All this is done in Ordination and in that regard Ordination rightly stated is not an adjunct of Calling it might be an adjunct and yet inseparable but the forme it self That which followes concerns those of Scotland And to this agree our Brethren of the Church of Scotland speaking of Ordination in generall though they instance it as Eng. pop cer pt 3. c. 8. p. 167 to a particular flock Neither the Patrons presentation nor the Clergies nomination examination and recommendation nor the Bishops laying on of hands and giving of institution nor all these put together can make up to a man his Calling to be a Pastor without the free election of the flock Here it might be added Nor the free election of the People without Ordination Again A man hath from his Election power to be a Pastor so far as concerns jus ad rem and Ordination only applyeth him to the actuall exercising of his Pastorall office which Ordination ought to be given to
ecclesia constituti Aâ—d though after he shew the invalidity of their Call ex ipsis Canonibus quos jactant out of those Canons which they boast of yet he brings not one reason to prove that Imposition of hands is not to be included in the Originall word so much insisted on And if the word Elders used in that Text be to be taken synecdochically for Pastors Deacons and Ruling Elders as he there expounds it why may it not as well be said that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though it signifâ—â— choosing does also include Ordaining because it appears by Act. 6. that with choosing Ordination by Imposition of hands was also used This by the way to your Parenthesis To the Inconvenience it self I answer 1. The Ordination of Româ—sh Priests as Priests is a meer nullity because the Priesthood iâ— self is so but their Ordination adonus Presbyterii to Preach and administer the Sacraments is of another nature and therefore these must not be confounded together the rather because in their manner of Ordaining they are really distinguished * Vide Pontisicale Romanum 2. Though some of our Divines deny a lawfull Ministery and Calling thereunto to be in the Roman Hierarchy as * Beza and Sadeel not as making of it to be simply invalid and null but extreme sinfull yet they must not be interpreted too rigorously unlesse we mean to set Protestants at variance among themselves to our own prejudice And that 1. Because the Lutherans do maintain the ordinary Call which Luther had in the Church of Rome as sufficient And 2. not they only but divers also of the Calvinists as Voetius Forbes Festus Homius c. 3. They who say there was sometâ—ing extraordinary in Luthers Calling do place that extraordinarinesse rather in his spirit gifts successe and manner of ministery than in the Call it self and therefore make his Calling mixt 3. The most judicious and best approved amongst us do hold That as Baptisme so Ordination euen in Rome is so far forth valid that upon separation from them and joyning with us there needs neither new Baptisme nor a new Ordination 4. We all agree that a Call from Rome is not necessary at all against the Papists who make the Pope to be the fountain of Order and Jurisdiction 5. This inconvenience follows not at at all upon the opinion that Ordination is essentiall but upon that mistake only that the lawfull way of Calling is one onely in all cases and conditions of the Church wherein whesoever engages either for Election or Ordination apart and much more for both together will be sure to plunge himself into inextricable labyrinths I approve our men saith Reverend Forbes who sustain our ordinary Vocation in common but who plead so for it as a point absolutely requisite for approving our cause and in such a case of the Church do place all defence therein in my judgement they do wrongly limit the Holy One of Israel against both the priviledge of his power and his usuall manner of dealing in such cases Forbes Defence of the lawfull Calling sec 28. pag. 60. To your second inconvenience That then the Church of Rome is a true Church and Spouse of Christ I answer 1. It followes not because in a false Church there may be something true 2. Many Protestant Divines are not afraid to grant that in some sense it is a true Church So at the whole Church was not extinct in Rome neither did the Ministery altogether perish there * â—â—a ut sicut non penitus extiâ—cta ibi suit Ecclesia sic neque penitus interitrit ibi Miniâ—terium Zanch. iâ— 4 prâ—â— 3. This objection is so fully answered by all our Writers of this subject against the Papists that it is not worth the while to transcribe them Vide Voetium quo supra 4. Those who are commonly called Brownists are sufficiently zealous against Rome and yet even among them the more moderate part as Johnson and his followers do not only grant that the Society commonly called the Church of Rome is a true Church without all fear of inconvenience but labour at large to prove it * Christian Plea by Fran. Johnson Printed Anno 1617. hom pag. 119. â—â— 215. The more rigid of them who deny that which he grants as Robinson and Ainsworth yet acknowledge that in Rome there are some true Ordinances as Baptisme for instance And in granting the administration of Baptisme with those of Rome to be valid and yet denying the Church to be true they must needs reject your consequence As the Lord hath his people in Babylon saith Robinson his I mean both in respect of Election and of personall Sanctification so hath he for their sakes there preserved notwithstanding all the apostasie and confusion which is found in it sundry his holy Truths and Ordinances amongst which Baptisme is one Robins justificat of Separat ed. ult p. 232. If the question he whether Ordination or Imposition of hands be not another Ordinance reteined in Rome from the beginning the Reader shall do well to weigh what follows here out of Mr. Johnson one of no mean account among the Brethren of the Separation Whereas one that was Minister in the Church of England was after chosen Teacher to a Separate Congregation without any new Imposition of hands he labours for to justifie it after this manner in his Ans to the Letter of H. A. touching the division among themselves p. 50. seq The Anabaptists holding saith he that Antichrist hath utterly destroyed all Gods ordinances so as there was not so much as true Baptisme reteined and had among them h. e. in Rome or England thereupon they began to baptize themselves again Whose errors while we confuted and while some of them objected that we should no more retain the Baptisme then the Ministry there received we had just occasion thereupon to consider thereof and so weighing with our selves that one main and speciall reason against Rebaptization is because Baptisme is an ordinance of God which was had in the Church of Rome before she fell into apostasie and hath been there continued ever since the Apostles times however it be co-mingled among them with many corruptions and inventions of their own we began to consider Whether the like might not be observed and said concerning Imposition of hands that it was had from the Apostles in the Church of Rome before her apostasie and is there continued to this day though mixed with many pollutions and devises of their own And entring into a consideration thereof we observed 1. That Imposition of hands is of God and not an invention of man not a post or threshold first brought by Antichrist into the temple of God but had therein afore Antichrist sate there 2. That Baptisme and Imposition of hands are joyned together among the principles of the foundation spoken of Heb. 6. 2. which we thought therefore should in this behalf be well regarded 3. That Imposition of
calling of a Minister But as to the regular and ordinary lawfull Calling of a Minister if precept and examples out of Scripture the generall practise of the Church in all ages from the Primitive downward with that of the Reformed Churches ever since the foundations of the Second-Temple-mysticall have been laid among them or arguments drawn out of Scripture and from the judgement of Protestant Divines conforme thereunto will determine any Question I shall presume notwithstanding all you have insisted on unto the contrary That Ordination h. e. an act of Ministers and Elders as such whereby they IN THE NAME OF CHRIST separate and set apart a meet person to the Work and office of a Minister is necessary and more or lesse essentiall to his Calling For Imposition of hands though many things unavoydably as either You those Authors which you have cited or the nature of the thing gave occasion have been touched upon about it yet it followes now more particularly to be considered Yet stay a while Upon perusall of the papers after the Presse had made some progresse I take notice of a double oversight one in my self another in you besides some errata's of the Printer In the transcribing of your part a few things are unwittingly omitted which should be in the margin yet for the things themselves you shall find an answer Only one passage which is with you pag. 8. in the body of the Tract I forgot to set down at length and therefore though out of place I supply it here which should have been inserted pag. 29. before the fourth reason This meaning your third is the reason of Crocius in Anti Soc. diâ—p 24. see 3. defence of the Protestants against the Socinians Distinguimus inter necessitatem Vocationis Ordinationis sayes he We distinguish between the necessity of having a Call and of being Ordained * Illa est necessaria ratione mandati haec ratione ordinis consâ—itutionis Ecclesiasticae Illa est constitutio in officio quae si legitima est duo habet 1. Vt à Dco quis eligatur 2. Vt per antâ—cedentem poâ—uli consensum eligatur A Deo eligitur cum ipse donis exornaâ— c. A Calling is necessary by reason of Gods command Ordination is necessary in respect of order and Ecclesiasticall constitution The Calling is the Constitution of one in Office which if it be lawfull hath two things in it 1 That one be chosen of God 2 That he be chosen by the antecedent consent of the people One chosen of God when he is adorned with gifts c. To this besides what I have already said pag. 28. lin 22. seq I shall now adde further 1. That the Socinians insisting only upon this question Whether a Constitution by way of Ordination be altogether necessary to the making of a Minister are not as you think to be opposed neither are the Reformed Churches nor Protestant Divines of any other judgement then they and therefore what needs Crocius to defend the Protestants against them in this point or professe himself Anti-Socinian unlesse he will say more for Ordination then they have done which cannot well be but by holding it to be essentiall 2. It 's granted that there is lesse necessity of Ordination then of Calling yea that Ordination is not alwayes alike necessary but according to the state of the Church And it might be proved that there is a case wherein it is so far from being necessary that it is not lawfull But it will not thence follow that in no case it is essentiall 3. Those Scriptures which prove the lawfulnesse of it will prove more For we cannot argue from the bare example of the Apostles Thus they did therefore we may do the same Because it follows not in all things Therefore De Eccl. Pontis Praejud Disser 6. p. 149. Crocius in a later Work flies to 1 Tim. 5. 22. for his ground and proof and there we have a precept 4. That Order and Ecclesiasticall constitution which he speaks of can be understood of none other then Apostolicall and those things which the Apostles wrote about Order were commandements 1 Cor. 14. 37. 5. Whereas he sayes A Calling is necessary by Gods command and after seems to shew what he means by Calling namely that the person constituted be chosen by the antecedent consent of the People You know full well no command of God can be found for this way of Calling but as it is gathered out of examples by consequence from Act. 1. and the 6 chap. And if those examples imply a command for the Peoples Election one way I would hear some solid reasons why the like command is not to be concluded out of examples for Ordination 6. Whether the antecedent consent of the People be alwayes necessary is not the point at present under debate But this is his sense That the power of choosing is the right of the whole Church and belongâ—th not to the People alone as we commonly understand the word And the antecedent consent of Ministers and Elders is I 'le be bold to say it necessary unto a Call And that granted suffices to the matter of Ordination as it is here considered 7. To that That one is chosen of God when he is adorned with gifts I think you your self make some scruple of it When the Ministers of England have pleaded among other things to prove their Calling the gifts which God had given them Those of the Separation in their Writings are wont to tell them Qualification is no Calling Neither dare I say Every one that is sit to be a Minister is called to be one And in a mediate Calling the testimony of competent Judges concerning Abilities and the right to exercise them is most necessary and that useth to be in the orderly way of Gods prescribing in the Word by Ordination Now Sir give me leave to minde you of an oversight in yourself You told us in your Title-page of the Judgement of the Reformed Churches as a distinct part from that of Protestant Divines Why are none of their Confessions cited or Books of Discipline Make they for you or against you If they be on your side would you spare to tell us Suppose they were against you yet you might not conceale it while you pretend to hold it out As for particular men their Judgement is not tanti if it agree not with the Church in generall He that made the Observations on the Harmony of Confessions in English will help you out a little but the Confessions themselves are not as it seems for your turn As for the Divines which you have cited of the Lutherans there are but two Hunnius and Tarnovius and of the Calvinists but three Ames Voetius and Cortiuâ— Though each of them be Reverend yet they are but of yesterday either living or lately dead too few to make up a full verdict touching the Historicall part of the point in question Indeed you have not
That which follows of your own is Something extraordinary its likely was in the Apostles Laying on of hands For he says the gift was given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the laying on of my hands as it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by prophecie which was peculiar to extraordinary Officers but it was but with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 4. 14. They it seems had but a bare concurrence but the efficiencie was in Paul as our Brethren of Scotland expresse it To which I answer 1. All this is but its likely and it seems by which its likely to prove nothing and it seems you your self saw as much aforehand 2. To say there was something extraordinary in the Apostles laying on of hands is ambiguous because it may relate either to the ground or manner of doing or to the effect or accidentall consequent thereof There might be something extraordinary but that can be no prejudice to the ordinary use of this rite unlesse they â—ad only some extraordinary ground for their using of it 3. In comparing 2 Tim. 1. 6. 〈…〉 4. 14. there is indeed a difference between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 â—nd with and from thence the Papists and Prelates woâ—â—â—â—fer That the efficiency of Timothy's Presbyteratus was iâ— Paul as in a Bishop and in the Presbyterie by a bare concurrence and thence infer the necessity of a Bishop unto Ordination But this is eâ—ually vain as in them to one end so in you to another For that in 2 Tim. 1. 6. you may remember what was said in the beginning of this answer to your Third And as you tell us pag. 17. touching laying on of hands in 1 Tim. 5. 22. that its not necessary to be understood of Ordination because it was used in other cases So might it be put off here But be it granted that Ordination is intended in 2 Tim. 1. yet it will not follow that Paul ascribes any thing to himself as excluding the Presbyterie Junius speaking to this Text sayes In a common thing the arguing from position of one to the removing or denying of another is inconsequent As after this manner Paul laid hands on Timothy therefore the Presbyterie did not * Junius in Bel. Cont. 5. lib. 1. cap. 3 ar 5. 1 Tim. 1. 18. Ac. 16. 1 a. Those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by prophecie do shew the moving cause and what incouraged Paul with the Presbytery to lay hands on him viz. It was prophecied that Timothy should be an excellent Minister as Cartwright upon the place interprets it That phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do both of them equally imply an instrumentall efficiencie in Paul and in the rest of the Presbyterie That the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by with a genitive case doth usually signifie an instrumentall working yet not in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is amongst Cartwrights Annotations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with is sometimes put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by as Act. 13. 17. chap. 14. 27. 15. 4. In the 12. v. of that chap. Then all the multiâ—ude kept silence and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul declaring See Beza in loca what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them In the Greek 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this latter place but in all the rest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet the like thing viz. what God did by them as by instruments is intended in them all The reason why the Apostle useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 1 Tim. 4. 14. may be because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 goes immediately before in the same verse in that phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where it hath another sense than the next words will beare if it had been used there also How fit it would have been for the words to have run thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. by prophecy by laying on of hunds let the learned judge 5. If the efficiencie was in Paul singularly and in the Presbyterie by a bare concurrence as you say it seems there using of it then makes nothing at all for our using of it now unlesse we had such concurrence and then Laying on of hands in these times is not only non-essentiall but unlawfull We must wait with the Seekers for some New Apostles to revive this way of Ordaining and the practice of those who being themselves out of Office are deputed to lay on hands is most presumptuous because there is no instance so much as of their concurrence and much lesse of their acting alone in this kinde 6. Those words as our Brethren of Scotland expresse it seem to relate unto the former passages and then they are injurious because you go about to put a sense upon them which I think you know they will not owne That the Presbyterie Ordained only by a bare concurrence and not as Causa socia a joint cause in way of efficiencie I shall now consider their words as you alledge them Paul's hands were the mean the laying on of their hands the rite and signe of his Ordination And therefore they adde as you say It s not to be used with opinion of necessity Ordination may be done by word alone without ceremony And again If the use of Imposition of hands in Ordination be accounted and used as a sacred Rite and as having a sacred signification the use of it not being necessary it becomes unlawfull by reason of the by gone and present superstitious use of the same in Popery Ans 1. All this you heap together by substraction as you please And though it 's true the first words Pauls hands were the mean are to be found in the place intended yet your conscience will tell you that the Author used them to one end and you unto the contrary Take them fully and let a third be Judge between us Thus he Because Imposition of hands was used in Ordination not only by the Apostles who had power to give extraordinarily the gifts of the Holy Ghost but likewise by the Presbyterie or Company of Elders and Timothy did not only receive 2 Tim. 1. 6. 1 Tim 4 14. that gift which was in him by the laying on of Pauls hands as the mean but with the laying on of the hands of the Presbyterie as the rite and signe of his Ordination therefore the Church in after-ages hath still kept and used the same rite in Ordination which rite shall without leave be yet retained in the Church 2. For my part I see no ground at all either in the nature of the thing or in the Texts for that distinction of mean and signe The Professors of Leyden are not afraid to call Ordination a mean Ad legitimam Pastorum ordinariorum vocationem duo potissimùm media sunt adhibenda vocandorum Synop. pur Theol â—isâ— 42. n. 31. Electio electorum Ordinatio Two meanes are
as you understand Election and if you will needs have Election understood there it will follow that Paul and Barnabas did both elect and ordain and while you grasp in all for the People you will leave them nothing 4. If lifting up of hands by the people were as directly intended and as often expressed as laying on of hands by Apostles Elders is your zeale for the People would make you think it necessary To what purpose should laying of hands be so often mentioned if the Holy Ghost intended it should be meerly arbitrary whether it be used or no 5. Consider what Antonius Walaeus hath said propounding the question Whether Imposition of hands be necessary * Video in omnibus Confessionibus Nostrarum Ecclesiaâ—um praetâ—r unam aâ—t alte am eam requiri Sane cum Apostoli semper eam usurparint inâ—o Apostolus praeceptum dat Timotheo 1. Tim. 5 22 Ne â—ito â—â—iquam manus Imponito nos omittendam non judicamus quia in negativo illo mandato etiam affirmativuÌ„ continetur ubi cuÌ„ pro totâ electione Pastoris sumatur per Synecdochen certe pro ritu aut parte essentiati habenda est alioquin pro toto sumi non possit aut saltem proadjuncto proprio omnibus vocationibus communi Ant. Wal. l. de Funct Eccl. I perceive saith he that it is required in all the Confessions of our Churches except one or two And surely seeing the Apostles alwayes used it yea the Apostle gives Timothy a commandment 1 Tim. 5. 22. Lay hands suddenly on no man we judge it is not to be omitted because in that negative commandement an affirmative is also contained where being taken by a Synecdoche for the whole Election of a Pastor it must be taken either for a rite or for an essentiall part otherwise it could not be put for the whole or at least for a proper adjunct and that which is common to all Callings Now you begin to draw towards a conclusion and propound this question If therefore laying on of hands be not essentiall why should those be kept altogether from labouring in the Lords harvest who cannot or have not receivedit and in a way too that is as questionable as the thing it self If the Calling may be true without it why is it equally pressed with it Is there more need of an adjunct an accessory a solemnity then of Ministers peace salvation to peoples soules by Preaching Assoon as they had but an Altar they offered on it when they came out of Babylon and stayed not till all the Temple in all its furniture and utensils was ready Ezra 3. Before they were wholly carried away into Babylon they worshipped and served God with those vessels which were left in the Sanctuary though they had not all 2 Chron. 36. 7. 10. 18. What higher point of Separation is there than to make voyd or deny a whole Ordinance for want of a Circumstance Ans 1. Here are many rash insinuations As 1. That some are kept altogether from labouring in the Lords harvest who cannot or have not received Imposition of hands 2. That the way to receive Imposition of hands speaking of the present is as questionable as the thing it selfe 3. That Calling and Imposition of hands are equally pressed 4. That nothing should be prest about the Calling of a Minister but that which is essentiall I shall speak a little to these and then answer your main question For the first The fault of our times is and long hath been a boundlesse liberty usurped by some and connived at by others Perhaps some may be denied approbation for and admittance unto the publike Ministery by way of charge not because they had not but because they would not though tendered to them receive imposition of hands But who are kept back altogether Many both men and women are said to have laboured much in the Lord by their private endeavours who did not yet stretch themselves Phil. 4. 3. Rom. 16. 12. beyond their line to preach publikely un-ordained This liberty in a morall way is denied none For the second I suppose your Margin is intended where you tell us We have the word Presbyterie but once spoken of in all the Scripture as belonging to the Churches of the New-Testament Calvin understands by it the office of a Presbyter not a company of them Those who take it for a company differ among themselves Some say a company of Preachers as the Leyden-Professors Synops purior Theol. disp 43. n. 37. Some take it for a company of extraordinary Ministers as Apostles Evangelists Prophets Scoti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Paracles p. 228. Others for a company of Ruling Elders as well as others Eng. pop cer p. 171. Some understand it of a Congregationall Presbyterie as the Non-conformists against See the answ to Bp. Downham serm p. 93. Downham and the Scots against Tilenus Some of a Classical Provinciall Presbyterie as the LONDON-Ministers Ans 1. You should do well to let us know your own judgment whether we shall repute you Prelaticall Brownist Anabaptist Independent Erastian Seeker Sceptick Or whether you understand it of a Conclave of Cardinals Would you have it a cypher to signifie nothing or ad placitum What means this pretending of ambiguity where there is none You cannot but perceive that most of these opinions fall into one against those that place the power of Ordination in the People There might be a company of Preachers and of extraordinary Ministers and some Ruling Elders and yet all in one Presbyterie No man yet ever dreamed that it signified a company of Believers without Officers 2. What of that that it is but once spoken of in all the Scriptures You cannot find the word Excommunication so much as once nor Trinity will you therefore be Erastian or Arrian Shew us one place for Ordination by the people or calling to the office of a Minister without it Wheresoever there were divers Apostles Evangelists Prophets or Bishops and Elders orderly assembled for acts of power there was the substance of a Presbyterie we have neither fitter nor other name in Scripture to call such an Assembly by Such there were both at Jerusalem Act. 15. and at Antioch Act. 13. 1. and at Philippi Phil. 1. â— And therefore though we read of the name but once we have the thing often 3. For Calvin these are his own words upon that Text 1 Tim. 4. 14. Presbyterium qui hîc collectivum nomen esse putant pro Collegio Presbyterorum positum rectè sentiunt meo judicio They who think Presbyterie in this place to be a Noun collective put for a Colledge of Presbyters do think rightly in my judgement Therefore though he think another sense non malè quadrare may agree with the words yet you have no reason to set him at a distance from others and from himself 4. As touching the Leyden-Professors whereas your printed book hath disput 43. n. 3â— I suppose your Copy
had disp 42. for there only is shew of something for your purpose but nothing indeed Though the power of Ordaining or Confirming Pastors say they belong to the whole Presbytery yet of old the Presbytery did execute that in the rite of laying on of hands not so much by Ruling Elders as by Pastors who did especially attend on prophecy or explication of the Scripture and application of it to the use of the faithfull unde Prophetia cum Manuum impositione per quam olim fiebat Ordinatio Pastorum ab Apostolo conjungitur 1 Tim. 4. 14. By this it appears they have a singular opinion of the word Prophecy not of the word Presbytery for they plainly suppose the Presbyterie consisted of two sorts of Elders and yet that preaching Elders only laid on hands And well they might suppose that as doth your Author so often cited pag. 171. because much of Prayer and Teaching is to accompany the act of Imposition before and after 5. That which you cite out of the answer to Tilenus under the title of Scoti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Paraclesis is not to be found in it as applied to the word but this he sayes in generall There were many Presbyteries in the Apostles times in which no Bishop properly so called could preside Quia pars magna ex Apostolis Evangelistis ejusmodi viris constabat qui Episcopis longè erant superiores Because a great part not the whole did consist of Apostles Evangelists and such like men which were far superior unto Bishops 6. None affirms that the word Presbytery as it is used in 1 Tim. 4. 14. does necessarily imply a company of Ruling Elders as well as others But upon the supposition that there are two sorts of Elders proved by other places they may be included under that one word because its comprehensive of them both The Presbyterie may be in the essentiall consideration but cannot be whole in the integrall without them He that says The number of preaching Elders in one city together with those Elders Eng pop cer which in the same city laboured for Discipline only made up that company which the Apostle 1 Tim. 4. 14. calleth a presbyterie must be understood to speak of that company in the generall notion of it rather than in the peculiar or individuall And this is plain by those words of his which follow a little after The Doctor himself speaking of Forbes in his Irenicum by the Presbyterie whereof the Apostle speaks understandeth as we do Consessus Presbyterorum 7. That some understand it of a Congregationall Presbytery is granted and some exclusively as if there were no other as you your self perhaps But whatever the Nonconformists against Downham do surely the Scots in generall do not nor those in particular who wrote against Tilenus And howsoever they use the word Parish or Congregation as distinct from Diocesse yet they use it in so large a sense as serves to take in the greatest City of England to make but one Congregation The words of him that wrote against Tilenus lib. citat cap. 28. pag. 218. are these Diversae sunt Londini paroeciae distinctae quarum tantus est numerus tam exiguus Note locus ut impossibile sit omnes simul semel convocari tamen pro una tantùm habentur congregatione seu paraeciâ 8. For the London Ministers it appears plainly pag. 191. that they bring the word Presbytery as used in 1 Tim. 4. 14. only for the proof of this Position That there is a pattern of a Presbytery in the Word of Christ And that not only because they find the thing as in other places but the name as here And if we find the nature of a Presbytery we shall more easily discern what use is to be made of it 9. All this while I heare nothing but a windy noise that the way to receive Imposition of hands is as questionable as the thing it self Sir to be plain with you before ou◠parting If you can say no more against the way of receiving then you have said against the lawfulnesse and expediencie of Laying on of hands which is worth the while in reference to practise than you have said yet You may begin when you please and bring both ends to nothing To your third insinuation that Calling and Imposition of hands are equally prest I answer 1. Were it so you need not wonder because there are few who zealously oppose the one but they oppose the other also if you mean it of a Church-Call the thing it self is struck at Most of those who care not for having Hands laid on them do as little value the Peoples choice were it not that the people are purs-bearers the beneficium is sure to come from them whosoever conveighs the officium Gifted men would plead only the right of their own gifts but that the Peoples gifts byas them towards the peoples Call 2. He that scruples to have Hands laid on him may well be suspected to question something else the rather because they make a new Sect beyond all in ordinary enumeration who pretend the unlawfulnesse of this Rite and therefore Church and State have need to watch against the creeping in of such To the last That nothing should be prest about the Calling of a Minister but what is essentiall I answer Consider of qualifications whether every one of them be essentiall or no if they be not yet whether they may not be prest Is there any Church in the world that urgeth only essentials Many things may be said for Imposition of hands that cannot be said for every rite if it be but a rite This is to me in stead of all That liberty whereby we pretend to lay aside this will imholden us to devise some other in stead of it and that 's at least dangerous Be it but an adjunct in one sense it will prove an inseparable one Ordination is likely to fall with it and this monster like to arise in the room of it the Church will be all body in visible administrations to it self to act her own part and Christs confusedly But it remains to answer your Questions a little more particularly If the Calling may be true without it why is it equally pressed with it Ans It is as well pressed but not equally and therefore pressed though it were not essentiall because so to do is conforme to the Apostles practise not only in the particular thing but in other cases as Act. 15. Order in the particulars of it is not essentiall and yet particulars may be pressed for Orders sake and that by way of commandement 1. Cor. 14. 37. Is there more need of an adjunct an accessory a solemnity than of Ministers peace and salvation to peoples soules by Preaching Ans The necessity of Ministers peace and salvation are strong obligations to binde those who desire the office of a Minister not to refuse a lawfull adjunct accessory and solemnity Woe