Hands It lyes upon you to shew where that Precept or President is I know no such Texts you acted did you act in Faith that you acted according to God and were well-pleasing to God in your ordaining without Imposition of Hands Then shew us that Divine Testimony upon which your Faith for so acting is grounded You never gave me one as yet and if you cannot do it your Faith in this Act is but vain If there be any thing I do in the House of God for which I cannot give either Precept President necessary Consequence from Scripture or light of Nature I will lay by that Act I will not trouble the Peace of the Church nor hinder Union with my Brethren by keeping up such Practices Thirdly The Apostles did not constitute Churches as you do with one single Pastor c. In Nine Churches we find several Teachers but not one with a single Teacher In a Young Church at Antioch Act. 13.2 3. There were three Teachers to separate Paul and Barnabas There is an Errour then in your Constitution and that does not justifie your Error in Ordination Fourthly Give me a President where the Pastor of one Church did so much as preach or pray in another Church if you cannot then we must not so much as preach or pray in another Church But you have called me and others to preach in your Church To this you answered me You could well do that from Matth. 28.19 go teach all Nations if so then in other Churches Answ First Set by Presidents then it seems you can find none Secondly I may deny your Coâ—seqâ—ence at â—â—ast according to some Independent Principles unless I preach as a gifted Brother To preach to the Nations who were Heathens and to preach in an Independâ—nt Church differ I may preach to Heathen as a Minister of Christ but in an Independent Church as a giâ—ted Brother I wish we knew the first Author of this Distinction that we might scratch his Cranium for so witty an Invention What your judgment is as to this distinction Lib. 2. p. 101. I cannot tell But I am of Dr. Owens mind If I did not think my self boâ—nd saith he to Preach as a Minister and as a Minister Authorized in all places and on all occasions wheâ— I am called thereunto I think I should never preach much more in this world Fisthly If that Text will warrant me to preach in another Church it will warrant me to Baptize in another Church if there be need and I am called to it They are joined together and if I may put forth two Acts of Authority I may also put forth a third If there wants a Pastor and I am called to join with others to separate him to his Office we will do it according to the Word with Fasting Prayer and Imposition of Hands without which 't is not Ordination We do not give him the Deficition Sixthly Since then we are come to consequence from Scripture I gave you a Scripture 1 Cor. 12.12 The Body is one and hath many Members c. He does not mean that particular Church of Corinth is that one Body he adds so is Christ v. 13. Jews and Gentiles make up that one Body v. 25. The Members of this one Body must have the same care one of another Does the Apostle tye up his Discourse to the Church of Corinth that the Members of that Church should have care one of another and if one of their Members did â—â—â—â—er v. 26. all the rest of the Members of Corinth suffer with them but for other Churches take no care of them If they suffer you need not suffer with them Certainly this was not the Apostles meaning I look upon all particular Churches to be Members of that one Body It is such a Church in which Christ hath set Apostles Prophets c. v. 28. It is such a Church where some are as Eyes others as Ears some as Feet some as Hands verses 15 16. Therefore he speaks of the Visible Church If every particular Church were the Body of Christ how many Bodies should Christ have But he hath but one Body as the 12th verse and Ephes 4.4 12. tell us Since thâ—n all particular Churches are but Members of that one Body and the Lord hath commanded the Members to have care one of another Surely the Lord hath not confined the Ministerial Power of a Pastor to his own particular Church so that if a Neighbour-Church have no Pastor that the Pastors near to this Church may not help that Church to a Pastor and in that way which his Word hath declared Your Practice testifieth it for you would make the Person to be ordained and others believe you ordain in another Church and this is an Act of Authority but not as you perform it nor according to God's Word and so it is no Ordination There is a difference between a Ministers helping another Church destitute of an Officer in seeding them with the Word and Sacraments a joyning with others in the Ordination of a Pastor to them and exercising Discipline in that Church in case of Scandal The Church hath some Power to help it self in this Case tho no Pastor For instance a Pastor of a Church not far from us in the time of Persecution leaves England goes beyond-Sea many miles this Church had none to seed them they desired help of their Neighbour Ministers who accordingly did afford them help some preached some baptized their Infants and others Administred the Lord's Supper to them One of the Church fell very foully being seduced by another Professor the Scandal very great so that the Hearts of good People very sad but our Enemies rejoyced it made such a noise in the Country many miles about us that the like I believe have not been known in these Parts I was desired to preach there when I had done my Sermon a Writing was delivered to me wherein the Church desired me to declare to the Congregation which was then very great being no Sermon in the publick place their abâ—orrency of such Acts and withal desired me to inform them what was their Duty what they ought to do in such a Case as this I gave them my thoughts thus You are but a Homogeneal Body and so have no power to Excommunicate that being an Act of Authority nor have I any power to call the person to an account and excommunicate But yet this you may do since the person was admitted into Church-Fellowship and Communion with your consent she having fallen so foully dishonoured God so greatly and opened the mouths of Men against Godliness you should first meet together and humble your Souls before God that there should be such Dishonour brought to his Name by one of your Church Then First You have the Lord's Supper Administred sometimes amongst you there you may deny Communion with her Secondly You have times when your Church only meet together for Prayer mutual Conference c. You
there be an Uniform Order touching Ordination of Ministers throughout the whole Realm and that with Imposition of Hands and thus it holds to this day Mr. An. 1598. pag. 424. Bruce having preached many Years would admit of Imposition of bands for Confirmation but not for Ordination Several denyed him to be their lawful Pastor for want of Imposition but others own'd him Mr. Bruce accepts of Imposition for Confirmation and Mr. Pont imposes hands upon him First As for Imposition of Hands for Confirmation as it is used in England after Baptism I find not one word of it in all the History nor did the Church of Scotland own it that I find there Secondly All this while there is not one Scripture brought by those who opposed Imposition Yet they had taken the Word of God for their only Rule which is so express for Imposition c. which makes me wonder at Mr. Bruce so holy a Man But if they had no Scripture had they no Reasons Yes they had one and but one and that a pityful one too Thus It being laid as a ground pag. 425. that none can receive Ordination to the Ministry without Imposition of Hands and that the Ceremony is proper to Bishops it behoved to follow that none could enter into the Ministry without the Imposition of the Hands of Bishops This is all very strange that Mr. Bruce should admit of Imposition of Hands for Confirmation when the Bishops do appropriate that to themselves as well as in Ordination How many things may be said to this to shew the weakness of this ground Any understanding man may easily see but I forbear The Representation of Presbyterian Government and put out the Year 1690. when Bishops are turn'd out tell us in the sixteenth Section That Men come into the Ministry by Election and Ordination by laying on of the Hands of the Bresbytery which is a mean of Communicating Authority to him Then it seems the Church of Scotland where this stir was can impose Hands in Ordination without Bishops By reading this History I find the Government of the Church of Scotland from the first beginning of Reformation was Presbyterian wherefore it was no small injury to impose upon them Prelatical Bishops unless they had been of Christs Institution which we are sure they are not And that our first Reformers in King Henry the Eights and in King Edward the Sixth's did declare That Episcopacy was no distinct Order from Bresbytery by Divine Right but only a prudent Constitution of the Civil Magistrate for the better Government of the Church SECT II. The Definition of Ordination AS to the word Ordination I think Greg de Valen. speaks right Tom. 4. Dis 9. Q. 1. p. 1. the word is taken from the Effect of that Ordinance Quia per Ordinationem aliquis in gradu quodam atque Ordine certo Ecclestasticae Dignitatis Constituitâ—r Some are Pastors some are Teachers some aâ—e Ruling Elders some are Deacons they are set or placed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 1.28 in such an Order in the House of God by Ordination Thus it hath passed for Currant many hundred Years in the Church till yesterday Election gave the Essence and Ordination was but an Adjunct I desire my Brethren but to give me that Adjunct according to the Word of God and we shall unite tho' we differ in our Logical Notions What should he done where Ordination cannot be had Something I had to say to it but being none of our Question I let it alone It is more material to know what Ordination is and being it is Essential to our Discourse I will give the Definition of it This being a sure Truth That they who do not give the Definition they do but mock the Person to be ordained and abuse the Ordinance for he is not ordained Cui convenit Definitio eidem quoque Convenit Definitum è Contra c. Ordination then is the Separation of a Person rightly qualified to the work of the Ministry by teaching Elders with Fasting Prayer and Imposition of Hands Something I had thought to have spoken about the Qualification wherein I see these mens Practices with no content their way being to debase the Ministry but the stress lying most in the Ordiners and Impositions of Hands I shall speak to these two Heads That it belongs to Teaching Elders Act. 13.3 Tim. 1.4.14 I prove it Here the People rise up and claim a Right by Virtue of their being the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Power of the Keys And I have seen it practised Two Private Persons imposed their Hands upon an Ancient grave Divine who was ordained I believe near 40 Years before in England c. They gave him the Essence in giving him a Call and so they gave him the Adjunct And this being the Opinion of these men here I preser their Ordination with Imposition of Hands and would own him for a Gospel Minister before them whom you ordain as you suppose without Imposition And if Ordination be no more than Prayer and Fasting what need of you according to the Principles of Independency in another Church It is not Prayer Preaching and Fasting Tho' I grant Preaching is very comely at such an Ordinance yet Preaching is not Ingredient into the Ordination The People can Fast and Pray as well as you I observed while the hands of these private Persons were upon the Head of their Pastor one of them made such a Prayer as might become any Minister it was so apposite to the business in hand that I could but wonder at it and I believe it was his own Composing Whether the Fraternity be the first Subject of the Power of the Keys Mr. Nath. Ward use to say They were the first Subject of the Key-Clog not the Keys So they have proved in many Churches I am sure I have spoken to it several Years since in another Tract I add but a few word now In the Common Wealth the People are before the Magistrate In the Church the Ministry is before the People Thus it began with the Apostles they were first and after them by a continual Succession of the Ministry the Church is continued The Ministry is the Instrument in God's Hand which he useth commonly or chiefly for the bringing in and building up of his Church 2 Cor. 6.1 Ephes 4.11 12. The principal Cause and the Instrument work together to the producing of the Effect that then the effect of a Power should be the first Subject of that Power of which 't is an Effect is new Logick to me Dr. Owen saith The Church is before Ordinary Ministers Answ First But is it before the Ministry Else 't is nothing Secondly The Proposition is not true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that faithful and laborious Servant of Christ Mr. Eliot whom I know and honour Mr. Mahew Mr. Leverick with great Labour and Industry get the Indian Language and preach'd to the Indians they were
but ordinary Ministers God blesseth their Preaching The Indians some of them are converted gathered into a Church Were they a Church before these Ministers And were they the first Subjects of the Power of the Keys before these Ministers preached to them Let the Scriptures in the Languages that the Spirit of God inspired his Pen-men to write them be sent to a People who never saw them nor heard of them Let this People understand them believe them embrace them give themselves up to them without any Ministry to translate to interpret and to help them to understand and believe I will allow this People to be the Subjectum Primum Secundum Tertium of all the Power of the Keys but rot else Secondly There are others who lay claim to this and impropriate it to themselves as belonging to them only i. e. Bishops as being of a Superior Order above Teaching Elders Thus Bishop Gawden told me it was out of Courtesie that the Bishop admitted Presbyters to impose Hands with them in Ordination Thanks to this Courteous Bishop I thought they had followed the fourth Council of Cartbage But if Presbyters do impose Hands with the Bishop then the Superiority of the Bishop above the Presbyter in Ordination is gone For Imposition of Hands is the Principal thing in Ordination as I will prove anon because one prays at the Imposition that argues no Superiority of Power in him All Bishops were not of this Bishop Gawden's mind not that Bishop of Peterborough who when he ordained many at one time but then take notice That he did ordain them as Presbyter He spoke not without Reason for no Ministerial Acts in the Church are valid but such Acts as are performed by Ministers of Christ's Institution They who are Officers in the Church by Civil or Ecclesiastical Constitution all their Acts as such signifie nothing But his being a Bishop and so superior to a Presbyter was by no Institution of Christ had only jus Humanum to Warrant his Authority and therefore he did not ordain as such a Bishop but as Presbyter Two I know Mr. Statham as I heard and Mr. Samuel Smith who were then Ordained Mr. Smith spake of it often what the Bishop said to them and â—â—d them take notice of it Had Mr. Smith lived till now he had been about 78 years of Age suppose him to be Ordained about 25 years of Age some by this may guess what the Name of that Bishop was about 58 years past I have often thought of this the meanest Officers in the Common-Wealth be they Rum-bailiffs Ale-Founders yet they must have Law for their Office to Warrant their Actings But that in the House of God there should be such as look upon themselves as the Chiefest Officers in the Church and yet can shew no Law from the Lord of the House to Warrant their Office this is strange what hath jus Humanum to do in the House of God Is not the Wisdom of the Great God Sufficient to know what Officers to appoint in his House but sinful Man must set up Officers and supream Officers too without him Thus Bishop Gawden told me The Bishop is the Supream Officer He should have said the Arch-Bishop in the Church you Presbyters are but the Pipe-staves the Bishop is the Hoop that holds you together An excellent similitude I desired him to tell me who should be the Cooper to knock on this Hoop I doubt I told him the Pope would swear by his Keys that he must and will be the Cooper And Bellarmin will maintain it by his Argument a Simili c. De Romano Pontif. mibi 204. He told me moreover you Presbyters are no more able to manage the Government of the Church of England than David was able to wield ' Saul's Armour The Government of the Church of England is a hard word there needs an Interpreter We poor Presbyters look only to the Government of our particular Flocks whom we feed with the Word and Sacraments over whom God hath made us Bishops Acts 20.17 28. If all the particular Congregations in England supposing them to be visible Saints were so govern'd then by an Induction of particulars it might be so call'd We do not indeed in our Government use Writs de Excommunicato Capiendo Prisons Fines Cutting off Ears these are Saul's Armour but none of Paul's spiritual Weapons 2 Cor. 10.4 with which we are content If it be well examined it will be found that the Zeal of his Government hath been carried out against Consciencious Men who for Doctrin Worship Discipline stick close to the Word of God without admitting any Humane Inventions to justle with him I say the Zeal has been carried out against those far more than against Whore-mongers Drunkards prophane Swearers Dam'mees c. I can but take notice of Dr. Lightfoot 1 Vol. p. 787 788. that learned Man and Son of the Church of England living in the times of our Persecution who denys Bishops to be Successors to the Apostles And that it is an improbable and unconstant Inference that because there was Subordination between the Apostles and Philip. in Acts 8. that therefore the like is to be reputed betwixt Bishops and other Ministers I have done with this I only aimed at this Teaching Elders may Ordain and we have Divine Authority for it in the Texts before mentioned These we are sure are Officers in the Church by Christs Institution The Lutherans have Bishops yet they deny any inequality jure Divino between Bishops and Presbyters quoad Potestatem Jurisdictionis Therefore Gerrard answering Bellarmin appropriating Ordination to Bishops saith De Minist Eccles p. 261. there is not one tittle in all God's Book that Ordination by Bishops should be valid but by Presbyters should be Null The next thing is it must be performed with Imposition of Hands I named five Scriptures for this before What Dr. Owen saith Ordination of Ministers is one thing Imposition of hands is another differing as the whole and the part I yield it by this whole he must mean totum integrale it cannot be totum universale but we say in Logick suolata qualibet parte tollitur perfectio Integri sed sublata parte principali tollitur integrum Then I say where there is not Imposition of hands there is no Ordination for this Imposition is the principal part and so tollitur Integrum That it is the principal part I prove and this shall be my first Argument 1st The Spirit in the Apostles sets forth the whole Ordinance of Ordination only by Imposition of Hands but never by Fasting and Prayer 1 Tim. 4.14 the laying on of the Hands of the Presbytery 1 Tim. 5.22 Lay Hands on no Man suddenly That in those Texts Ordination is meant and not Confirmation nor reception of Penitents nor the Sick I have proved in another Tract so that I insist not upon them Heb. 6.2 This my Brother with whom I now deal denyes to be Ordination but it is meant
may there deny her Communion also but when you meet publickly with others there you should not deny but she may be present at Prayer being it is natural Worship tho she were actually excommunicated and rendred as a Heathen I have seen the Indians present with us at Prayer and Preaching tho' as yet they had not embraced Christianity Thirdly As for the Civil Familiarity you had with her before you ought to suspend that too 2 Thess 3.14 and verse 6. yet having a care of her being in a poor condition that she do not perish Fourthly You may choose three or sour of your chief Members and send them to her to make her know the Determination of the Church and that the Church doth this in the Name of the Lord Jesus The Church did so the effects of it was the clamours of the People ceased the Mouths of them who before were opened against us were silent and now they rather sound sault with me that I was too sharp upon the Person offending the effect was a relenting and humbling of her self before God in the publick Congregation to the satisfaction of the Church she is now dead but the Church having then their Pastor absolved her before she died and it was a comfort to her her Absolntion was without money By this I see were this Ordinance of Church Discipline carried on according to the word of God which hath been so fearfully abused we should need no Writ de Excommunicato capiendo I did but add a sew words what the case of such a person was under this Sentence and it struck an awe in the hearts of Carnal People To return to my Brother To what I have said from the one body in the Corinth 12. That the Pastors of Churches may help other Churches where there are none and they call to help them you answer me This is all you have to say and there is little in it Answ No not all Brother I gave you your own Text whereby you proved that Pastors of other Churches may joyn with you in days of Fasting and Prayer and preaching and if so then in Ordaining 2dly I gave you the Texts of Scripture whereby the Synod of N. England proved they might ordain in another Church with Imposition of hands You tell me you deny a Political-visible Catholick Church Answ So do I. If I said but little I am sure you say too much How doth it follow Because we may help neighbour Churches when they call us to help them with Pastors in a Gospel way Therefore I must own a Political visible Catholick Church I gave you instance before how Churches may help to purge themselves from seandalous persons tho they have no Officers If there be a Family by us where are several Children Parents both dead and there is none that takes care of them to help them to food It is one thing for me to go to the House and help them with food another thing to cast one of the Children out of the House if it be cross refractory and will not be reclaimed by counsel Thecase is the same here twenty or forty Elders may meet to give Counsel in a Case leaving the Execution to the Church whence the Case depends You tell me Ministers are not set over the whole Church their Power may be refused in other Congregations Answ But they do not refuse their Power when they Call for it and desire to help them in their want I limit the Power of Elders to other Churches to the Call of those Churches being in want They are not therefore set over the whole Church When you with the two other Ministers they go for such did separate that illiterate Person to the Work of the Ministry did you Act as Officers or as private Brethren If you acted as private Brethren then I am sure he is no Minister the Brethren of the same Society had more right than you If you acted as Officers then it seems you could not put forth Official Power in another Church To separate to an Office is an Act of Authority Whom we may appaint not the People Act. 6.3 You tell me the 13 Acts 3. is no Platform for us unless we have an immediate Command from God to Ordain Men. Answ The immediate Command was in the separating Paul and Barnabas to the Work of their Apostleship The Command was not to Teach them how they should separate the Lord saith only Separate c. they knew how they should separate before The Synod of New-England and Dr. Owen were much mistaken who quote this Text for Ordination by Impostion of Hands But to this Text I have spoken before As to what you say That Gifts were then Conserred with the Imposition of Hands Answ The end when the Lord first Commanded it was not to Conferr Giâ—ts but to separate Numb 8.10 14. so Acts 13.3 Separate we Paul c. 2. The Savoy Consession is against you if there be Elders in the same Church it calls for Imposition of Hands 3. Paul and Barnabas were Gifted before as I named the Texts 4. The Deacons were Gifted before their Ordination Acts 6.3 5. Paul then needed not to have given that Caution to Timothy 2 Tim. 2.2 that they be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to whom he Committed the Gospel-Doctrine for Timothy by the Imposing Hands might Conferr Gifts and make them able or fit Men for the Work 6. As to what you gather from 1 Tim. 4.14 for your Proof that Text you know admits of Controversie As whether Timothy was not first Ordained a Presbyter and asterwards an Evangelist Whether Paul's Imposition and the Presbyters were both at the same time c. but this is certain laying the 1 Tim. 1.18 and 2 Tim. 1.6 together with this Text there was something extraordinary as to Timothy's Gifts in which the Presâ—â—teries Imposition had no share the Propositions differ it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the putting on of my Hands See Didoclavius Altare Damos p. 161. Thus Gillospy Misc p. 101. but 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the laâ—ine oâ— of the Hands of toâ— Presbitery after Prophecy So that when Paul and the Presbytery did both impose Hands the Gift was conveyed as Paul saith by my Hands But as to â—â—s Office to a Potestative Authoritative Mission the Imposition of the Hands of the Presbytery did concâ—rr with Paâ—â—'s You tell me I must own Succission and those polluted Hands c. Answ Your Argument speaks thus If you will have no Ordination without Imposition of Hands according to Scripture then you must own Succession So I will Was Imposition of Hands in Ordination an Invention of Rome or an Institution of God the Papists can prove their Act in this Point by Scripture so cannot you 2. Mr. Robinson Mr. Johnson tho' rigid old Separates yet worthy Men made light of this Argument because it was God's own Appoinement 3. You had best throw away Baptism because their polluted Hands do
not to a Deacon Whom We may appoint over this Bâ—sitess Acts 6.3 say the Apostles It was not their Election that did Constitute them Deacons but the Apostles Authoritatively kppointing them over this Businâ—â—s We appoint not Yâ—â— appoint As Pharaoh appointed Joseph Governour over Egypt Acts 7.10 the same Word the Act of Authority 3. A Man whom God hath qualified may be Ordained to the Work of the Ministry tho' there he no People to Elect him As if one having gotten the Language of some Heathens he may go and Preach among them and if God bless his Ministry he may Baptize them if there be lent one or two at one time as Philip did the Eunuch and as the Aposles Paul and Bounabas who were Ordained before they were sent sorth to the Gentiles of which we see no need as I said before they carrying their Credentials with them the Power of Miracles but that Man cannot Baptize unless he be Ordained he is not in Authority before he be Ordained So that true Qualisication and Fitness for the Ministry and Authoritative Separation to the Ministry makes A Minister Election of the People makes him their Minister 4. Tho' I deny Election to give the Essence yet suppose Election to be an Ingredient into it where two things meet together to the Constitution of an Officer Subjection and Authority certainly Authority gives the Essence more than Sabmission thus Dr. Owen the People Electing Sabmit themselves and Dr. Ames * Bellar. enera to 2. p. 87. before him answering Bellarmin who made it strange that Sheep should choose their Shepherd Yes saith Dr. Ames rational Sheep may choose their Shepherd not by Jurisdiction but by Sabjection 5. The Scriptures which are for Ordination by Imposition of Hands are more in number and far more clear than those for Election the first Text which they bring for Election Acts 1.15 this differs much from curs for our Election is with Subjection to him whom the People Elect But this was not so Did Peter the Pope will be angry if you tell him so and the other Apostles sabject themselves to him whom they Chose 2ly It was choosing one of their own Order not one above them so does not Popular Election 3ly Tho' Peter did speak to all present yet it does not appear that all present did choose but the Apostles for they could tell best who had accompanied them all the time the Lord Jesus went in and out among them V. 21 22. Surely all that were present could not tell who those were as the Apostles 4ly They gave forth their Lotts V. 26. 5ly They Prayed to the Lord to shew whether of these two Thou hast chosen 24. Is this Text clear for Popular Election The 6 Acts 3. is the clearest for Election but not of a Pastor The 14 Acts 23. is much Controverted and these are all I meet with for Popular Election But for the other we have First God's own Institution Secondly We have five Scriptures more in the New Testament which are plain for it which makes me wonder how it came about that any Men of Learning should put so much upon Election that it should give the Essence to a Minister 6. The Peoples Election gives the Essence to a Minister What without his Acâ—â—ptation No sure If ten Churches choose a Man he may resuse them every one he may have Reasons for it Where then is the Essence their Election gives my Acceptation is every whit as essential to my being a Minister as their Election why then is the Causality given to their Election To be a Minister to them that they may demand of me and I be bound to administer all Ordinances to them by way of Office I grant here their Election and my Acceptation are essential But to be A Minister hath other Causes where Popular Election hath no Cansality That a People must subject themselves to a Minister and persorm all the Duties the Word of Go I require to a Minister and yet not choose him is Tyranny fit for Rome not for the Church of Christ This Notion of Popular Election giving the Essence to a Minister is the ground of that Witty Distinction of a Minister's Preaching if he Preach to his People that Chose him then he Preaches as a Minisler but if in another Church then as a Cisted Brother And hence they must not Administer the Sacraments in another Church tho' there be need and the Church desire he must not Act as a Minister beyond them who gave him the Essence of a Minister And this they would prove or illustrate from a Mayor of a Corporation who out of his Corporation hath no Power Ans 1. In a Kingdom or Corporation 't is sufficient there be a People first of whom neither the King nor the Mayor are Causes in the least in the Church 't is not sufficient there be a People but such a People viz. Visible Saints of whom God hath Ordained the Ministry to be in his Hand the Instrument to make them such So that the Ministry is first and an Instrumental Cause to make them a People as such 2. The Work of a Mayor is to Govern only A Minister hath other Work to feed with Word and Sacraments which they may do when called to it where they cannot Govern as I shew'd before 3. The Catholick visible Church made up of particular visible Churches is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephes 4.4 1 Cor. 12.12 and we are all Members of that one Body and the Members are bound to help one another else 't is contrary to the Light of Nature 1 Cor. 12.25 But where do you read that all Corporations and Kingdoms make one Body of Christ 4. I think Pastors and Teachers are Ministers the Apostle calls himself and others so Ministers 1 Cor. 3.5 The Apostles were Catholick Pastors to the Catholick Church * 2 Cor. 11.28 The Care of all the Churches Actu primo secundo depended upon the Call of no Church to Act in that Church al. Acts of Power yet Ministers Hence we say the Ministry †1 Tim. 1.12 2 Tim. 4.5 Col. 4.17 not â—he Pastorship I then a Man be a Pastor of such a Church both Actu primo secundo yet he is a Minister and doth habitually actu primo bear a respect to the Catholick Church and may perform the Acts of a Minister to another Church that is in want and cannot at present help themselves and call upon him to help for as he is a Minister that Church which Called him was no Cause of that What disserence is there between the Acts of a Pastor and a Minister because I read one saying He may Preath as a Minister which is better than a Gisted Brother but not as a Pastor This giving the Keye to the Fraternity as the first Subject of them hath brought in that Sin which Mr. Whan that Emitrent Servant of Christ and my former Pastor calls Koraism * See
Weighty Questions DISCUSSED I. Whether Imposition of Hands in Separating a Person to the Work of the Ministry be Necessary II. Whether it be Essential to the right Constitution of a particular Church that the Teaching Elders and the Members meet alwayes in One Place Whereunto is added A Prediction of Mr. Daniel Rogers Minister in Essex long before the Beheading King Charles I. and Arch-Bishop Laud foretelling that they should not dye a Natural Death By GILES FIRMIN Author of the Real Christian What thing soever I Command you observe to do it thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it Deut. 13.32 LONDON Printed for the Author 1692. To the READER THat Unity among Christian Brethren is a thing not only beautifull in it self but also a Duty greatly incumbent upon them who profess that blessed Name of Christ none that read the Holy Scripture can be ignorant of it yea a Duty so greatly incumbent that they who do not all they can to promote it provided the Authority of the Scriptures be preserved taking care that they neither profess nor practise any thing in the House of God but what is according to the Holy Scriptures lest that Vnity should be hindered they neither shew that respect to the Command of Christ to us nor to the Prayer he made to his Father for this End as become Christians I thought I might have said At that Holy Table where we being many are one bread 1 Cor. 10.17 I do admit Independents Presbyterians Anabaptists Members of the Church of England that are and walk as Christians tho' we differ in Opinion and here Ecclesiastical Vnion is chiefly seen that both in former times and in these dayes I had been as desirous of this Vnity as some other Men. Glad I was when I heard some Brethren of the Independant and Presbyterial Perswasion in London did attempt it their Names were very dear unto me when I heard who they were that laboured in it tho' I knew none of them more glad I was when about four Years since a Copy of the Agreement was sent me to which my Brethren in the Countrey and my self readily consented We expected the same should have been Published but we find another much different from it In particular in the former Ordination was to be performed with Imposition of Hands but in this the Words are left out and these words put in The Person that is Chosen shall be Duely Ordained not expressing what that Due Ordination is However as it is worded I Consent to this and whatever be the different Sentiments I have from others in several things mentioned and more than are mentioned in the Agreement yet I have willingly Subscribed to it and Profess my self a Vnited Brother with all that are Duely Ordained In a small Treatise which some few Years since I published I took Notice of the Apostolical Churches how they were Constituted I named Nine Churches all that I could find in which were several Elders I find not one Church in the Gospel where was but One Pastor Since that Dr. Owen hath taken Notice of it and hath proved by several Scriptures and Reasons that there ought to be many Elders in every particular Church There were three Teaching Elders besides other Officers in his Church this was like a Gospel Church To have but one Pastor to govern is a Novel Opinion he saith and what he adds is true It is difficult if not impossible on supposition of one Elder only in a Church to preserve the Rule of the Church from being Prelatical or Popular As there ought to be many Elders in one Church so I doubt not but the true Primitive Church-Government was by a President with the Presbytery Not a President over more Churches but only one particular Church Not a President superiour in Power over the Presbytery but only Ordinis gratiâ Revel 2.18 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (a) The President 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (b) The President with the Presbytery So Beza and Raynoldus Anglorum Eruditissimus c. saith Didocla Alta. Damas p. 131. the light of Nature directs to this I would willingly have but one Instance given where this Government was ever prejudicial to the Church More I could say I only mention this that tho' in these Points I may differ from my Brethren besides what are mentioned in the Agreement yet it hinders not my Vnion with them What this Due Ordination is our Brethren as I said have not told us Hence the Discussing of this Question falls not under that Prohibition p. 3. that we must not Dispute those different Sentiments For our Sentiments do all agree it must be Due Ordination which if it be not declared what it is we agree and Subscribe to we know not what Before I Subscribed I asked the Brethren whether the Subscribing to this Agreement did debar us from an amicable discussing the Questions wherein we differ they All Answered No. We were not hindered by it We know the different Sentiments before we Subscribe the Agreement and tho' we Dispute them yet our Vnion holds as well as if we did not dispute them The Apostle exhorts 1 Cor. 1.10 and Phil. 2.2 that we be all of one Mind of one Judgment If we must not labour after it to what purpose is the Exhortation Is not the discussing Controverted Questions in a Christian amicable way seeking Light from God and setting up his Ends not our own one way to come to be of one mind which the Apostle exhorts to I am sure it is and could give good proof of it from experience in the Question now disputed If we may not do this then it is as much as to say There are different Sentiments amongst us and shall be so for still I say the End of the Agreement which is Union is preserved As to the Question of Ruling Elders which have continued in the Virgin Churches of the Vaudois from the Apostles dayes and in the Churches of Bohemia The Apostle mentioning only Bishops and Deacons 1 Tim. 3. troubles me where their Work is laid open with much more satisfaction to me than in any Book I have yet seen in England I shall be thankfull to any Brother who will dispute the Question Pro or Con it shall not hinder Vnion As to this Question about Ordination it is to my Knowledge a great hinderance of our Vnion The thing is so clear in several Texts of Scripture how it should be performed and the Practice of the best if not all the Churches since the Apostles times have been accordingly with Imposition of Hands that I have wondered any Man should scruple it I heard of an Ordination in our County of an illiterate Person and that without Imposition of Hands after it was past hearing of another who is a Scholar to be Ordained by the same Persons I wrote to him to desire the Elders that were to Ordain him to give me the Scriptures which did Warrant
them to Ordain without Imposition of Hands One of them undertook it a Person whose Gifts and Graces I honour For Scriptures he gave me none Whether his Reasons be Cogent the sequel shall declare That Diminishing from the Word is as great a Sin as Addition to the Word none can deny the Text is expresly against them both Deut. 12.32 and ch 4.2 both offer an Affront to the Wisdom of the â—aw-giver Addition charges him with Defect Diminishing charges him with superfluity appointing things needless and vain Grant it that Imposition of Hands in Ordination be but a Ceremony yet it is God's Ceremony appointed first by his express Command Numb 8.10 14. Not to conferr Gifts as some would have it but to Separate to Office If you then could deny Communion with the Church of England because of their Addition of Humane Doctrinal Ceremonies to the Worship of God I doubt not but this was one Cause among others may we not then question our Communion with you in your Administring of the Holy things for throwing out God's Ceremony It is one thing to hold Communion with a Person as a Christian which I can do with all my Soul another thing to hold Communion with the same Person as a Minister dispensing the Holy things of God For when as in Separation to Office God's Ceremony expressed in five or six Scriptures is left out have you not given us just Cause setting by the Authority of God in those Scriptures to question the lawfulness of your Ministry O why do our Brethren lay such Blocks in our way to hinder that which the Lord hath so Commanded and we so earnestly desire and seek after Unity I have spoken with some Ordained thus and they told me they would have been Ordained with Imposition of Hands and expected it but they who did it refused it the more trouble have they made in the Church They who come into the Gospel-Ministry must come in according to Gospel-Order God stands upon his Order 1 Chron. 15.13 God made a Breach upon us for that we sought him not after Due Order How severe was the Holy Law-giver then but there was not Due Order nor is here Due Ordination God is the same God still the God of Order as well as then The Scriptures are plain in this Point why are not we as plain what need have we of other words them what we find in the Scriptures If Imposition of Hands were but an indifferent thing or but a circumstance of the Action I could Answer my self But it will appear to be that in which Separation to Office is principally made and in which only it is seen That godly and learned Men may err as well by Diminishing from the Word as such have done in Adding to the Word I know nothing against it they are but Men But these Men who as I judge diminish from the Word would not therefore Vnite and hold Communion with them in Worship where these Additions were because they were godly and learned Men. We have our Rule to look to not Men further than they walk according to that Rule If the Reader meet with the Word Independent I desire him not to be offended for this Discourse between my Brother and my self was before the Agreement of the Vnited Brethren came forth yet the word may be used sano sensu well enough For I doubt not a particular Church duely â—â—ganized walking regularly may Execute all the Power of the Keys within it self without dependency upon any other Churches As to the End of my publishing this Treatise my Conscience bears me Witness before the Lord I aim but at these two things 1. To remove that Block if I could which hinders our hearty Union I know it offends many of our Brethren besides it gives advantage to them who observe our Practices to speak against us and that justly 2. To keep up the Authority of the Scriptures which are so plain in this Case that if we will own Ordination without Imposition of Hands to be Due Ordination then the Authority of five or six Scriptures is set by I know no other ground of our Sufferings but our maintaining of the Authority of the Scriptures while Men would be Imposing upon us such things in the House and Worship of God which if the Questions were truly stated which they never did have no footing or ground in the Holy Scriptures but were their Addition to them as if the Wisdom of God in the Scriptures were defective If we suffered then for the Authority of the Scriptures while Men added to them we will not give away their Authority now while men diminish from them Where shall we End if this be the Practice As to the Second Question I seek Light 1. To have but one Pastor or Teaching Elder in a Church agrees neither with the Holy Scripture nor sound Reason Good Mr. Faldo was troubled about it I understand by his Letter to me 2. The Poverty of the Churches generally is such that very few can maintain One then not more 3. Complaints have been made by some Members of Churches that their Pastors have not proceeded rightly against them and they had no help 4. If then the Holy Scriptures have not declared that the Officers and Members of a Church must meet alwayes in One Place then all Church-work may be carried on which as now we stand cannot be I begg of the Father of Lights to Guide Vs The Unworthiest of the United Brethren GILES FIRMIN The Prediction of Mr. Daniel Rogers Minister in Wethersfield in Essex concerning King Charles the first and Arch-Bishop Laud. IF you ask me who this Mr. Daniel Rogers was he was the Son of Mr. Richard Rogers a Man eminent in Holiness whom God honoured to make him his Instrument in bringing home many Souls to Christ If you ask what he was for Grace himself His Brother Mr. Nathanael Ward use to say of him My Brother Rogers hath Grace enough for two men but not half enough for himself His Natural Constitution was no Advantage to Grace If you ask what he was for a Divine his Works Answer for him If you ask what he was for a Scholar two things declared him to be a Scholar one was this When Arch-Bishop Land Visited Mr. Rogers was Summoned to appear and did so whether Mr. Rogers did grapple with the Arch-Bishop I cannot tell but one that lived in the Town where I now do being then present at the Court heard the Arch-Bishop say to him Mr. Rogers I acknowledge you to be a better Scholar than my self but I will make you know your place And silenced him A second thing was this which I had from a Kinsman of mine who was of Clare-Hall at the same time if not the same Year with Mr. Rogers the Man was a very moderate Episcopal Man he told me this The Arch-Bishop sends down a Coryphaus this was the Word he used to the University of Cambridge to Challenge the
Rule in the House of God contrary to that Confession Why Imposition of Hands by Elders of other Churches should be Irregular he names no Scripture to prove it But if it be omitted that Ordination saith he is irregular this we are sure of from Scripture that 's enough for me If it be irregular then 't is not Due Ordination for the Rule hath not it's Due given to it If such Ordination can be valid to what purpose is the Rule We shall have strange things follow if this be admitted that in Religion and in the House of God Acts may be valid which are not conformable to the Word of God The Word saith thus but these Acts answer it not Pious and Learned Mr. Faldo before his Death wrote me word That one of the Brethren against Imposition of Hands was with him and debated the Question with him and this especially he stuck at He would not allow the Elders of one particular Church to perform Office-Acts to those that were not of that Church Mr. Faldo tells me He gave him a formal Argument to prove that it might be and in many cases it must be admitted This he desired to write down and did so and I believe it will be seen by others in this Town of his Opinion Aud if they will take occasion to ventilate that Difference Brotherly it will not be declined by some of your and my mind Thus Mr. Faldo What that Argument was Mr. Faldo did not write I wrote to that Brother desiring him to let me know it but I cannot obtain it he searched for it but could not find it But now for Imposition of Hands in separating a Person to Office in the House of God this came in by an express Command of God Numb 8.10 14. Who are meant by the Sons of Israel in the 10th verse is the Question Mr Pool saith the First-Born or chief of the Tribes The same Persons I presume might be both and most probable it was so First Charkâ—ni as Mr. Ainsworth Quotes him and agrees with him in it saith They were the First-Born In this case he may be credited as soon as any Christian Writer Secondly We read in the three next verses 16 17 18 the Lord tells Moses three times that he had taken the Levites instead of the First-born Hence 't is most probable the First-born were they who imposed Hands on the Levites Thirdly By this Act saith Mr. Pool they signified their transserring that Right of Ministring to God from the First-born in whose hands it formerly was Very good But who should or who could give away the First-Borns-Right but themselves We read Exod 24.5 Moses sent the Young Men of the Sons of Israel and they offered burnt Offerings Who were these Young Men The Chaldee saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Primogeniti the First born These were the Priests or Sacrificers until the Levites had the Priesthood in their Tribe So Numb 3.12 'T is certain the First-born had many Priviledges tho' Esau despise his Eirth-right Then the First-born must impose hands and give away their Priviledges but shall they who have no right give away another Man 's Right Fourthly The First-born were separated Exod. 13.2 Sanctifie unto me every First-born in their Sanctification there was a Separation Now it is most probable that they who were separated did separate the Levites and not others I insist upon this for a Reason I shall give hereafter let our Opposites give better Reasons to prove they were not the First born As this Practice came into the Church by God's Command so it continued in the Jewish Church Dr. Lightfoot tells us that some Men who gave themselves to the study of the Law became very Learned Men which they might the Law being in their own Tongue and did teach beside the Priests and the Levites but none without being first ordained and that with imposition of hands Dr. Owen affirms the same when the Gospel-Church was to be erected the Apostles with whom Christ had spoken of things pertaining to the Kingdom of God Acts 1.3 when a Deacon was to be set apart to his Office they did it with Imposition of hands Acts 6.6 And so the Churches practised ever afterwards Acts 13.3 1 Tim. 4.14 1 Tim. 5.22 Heb. 6.2 Of which Text more anon This was the Practice of the Churches next the Apostles and ever since amongst the Fathers Papists and Protestants both Lutherans Calvinists Episcopal Presbyterian Independents I never saw in my time Platfor Ch. Dise Cap. 9. Thes 4.5 while I was there nor ever heard since I came from New England tho I have enquired that any one was ordained to any Office in the Church without Imposition of hands Thus the Synod held there * And approved by the Synod held at Boston 1680. 1649. tells us upon these Hypotheses that the Fraternity is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Power of the Keys and that Election gives the Essence If there be no Elders Imposition of hands may be performed by some of the Brethren Numb 8.10 But there is a Difference between the First-born there and our private Brethren and good reason why they should impose Hands and not our private Men. It was not so in the Gospel-Church It is Irregular saith Dr. Owen But by this we see how Imposition of Hands must be and was in Practice In the next Thesis The Fifth they tell us In such Churches where there are no Elders and the Church desire it we see not why Imposition of hands may not be performed by the Elders of other Churches 1 Tim. 4.14 Act. 13.3 Ordinary Officers laid hands upon Officers of many Churches The Presbytery at Ephesus laid hands upon Timothy an Evangelist The Presbytery at Antioch laid hands upon Paul and Barnabas These Men do not tell us this is their Judgment but they give us the Holy Scriptures for what they say Whereas the Savoy Confession gives us not one word of Scripture but only tells us where the Essence of a Pastor lyes without imposition of hands which is denyed I must say with Tertullian Non recipio quod extra Scripturam de tuo insers Si Apostolicus cum Apostolis senti I find in the beginning of the Reformation of the Church of Scotland when they came newly out of Popery Imposition of Hands was not judged necessary An. 1560. pag. 26. as I read in the History put out by Mr. Calderwood That Man of God Mr. Robert Bruce whose Name I honour was not ordained thus nor any other way that I can learn as if there were something in him extraordinary though I honour the Man yet we must stick to our Rule and not Mr. Bruce An. 1581. pag. 105. But afterwards they tell us how Ordination is to be performed viz. by Fasting Prayer and Imposition of the Hands of the Eldership After this pag. 383. they make it Indifferent But at a general Assembly An. 1597. pag. 408. it was ordered That
Mâ— Quick's Sermo aâ— Mr. Faldo 's Funâ—ral p. 22. What Mr. Qâ—ick writes I am both an Eye and Ear-witness to About fitty sour Years since he Preached on Mar. 2.5 in Boston in New-England and did think-the Pâ—â—â—â—-man had Faith because Christ tells him his Sins were forgiven but no Forgiveness without Faith up rose one first forsooth he was not satisfied then another after him then Mr. Cotton our Teacher he took up our Pastor's Case and defended it and ten one after another fell upon him Tho' the Text does not say when Jesus saw his but their Faith it doth not follow but the Palsie-man might be included in the word their and his Faith put them on both the Bearers and Palsie-man had Faith This was too common in that Church though the most publick where Seamen and all Strangers came Sir Henry Vane was the Man that did embolden them when Ministers had done Preaching he would find Questions to put to them though they were Strangers Second Question AReverend Author out of a Book composed as he tells us by several Bishops and great Doctors and approved by Authority in King Henry the Eighth's dayes hath Collected these Propositions First That a Parochial or Congregational-Church Government is accordint to the Church of England jure Divino Secondly That the Diocesan or National Government is jure Hamano Thirdly That Protestants except some obscure Writer assert Particular Churches to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Church-Government Among whom saith he there are these differences 1. The Episcopal and Presbyterian differ from the Congregational about the Extent of particular Churches i. e. the Congregational concludes there must be no more than are capable of Personal Communion The former make a greater extent and give too great advantage to Papacy 2. They differ concerning the Nature of Discipline the Congregational being esteemed an Espouser of a Democracy the Presbyterian of an Aristocracy the Episcopal of Monarchy But Maccovius a Theol. Polem p. 161. Keckerman b Syst Theol. p. 3. mention another Aristo Democratical and Dr. Ames c Medul Theol. p. 1. c. 33. thes 20. seems to be of the same judgment Fourthly All Protestants agree in afferting the Independency of particular Churches Thus far my Author That we may understand one another clearly Suppose we then that all the Christians in England that dwell in their several Parishes were such as deserved the Name of Visible Saints these meet every Lords-Day in their parish-Parish-Church as they call it to Worship God where there is but one Pastor Lecturers and Readers are but in few Parishes in the Countrey nor have they any Power in Church-Government 1. Are these the particular Churches you mean by the words Parochial and Congregational I suppose my Brother means so 2. Is every such particular Church the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Power of the Keys 3. Are all these Independert my Brother hath said it First I desire my Brother would Name one such Church which the Apostles did Constitute but with one Teaching Elder or Paster Secondly How you may perswade the Pastor to admit the People to be Rulers with them I cannot tell but I doubt we should have a Monarclical-Government set up in every Parish in England which you say the Bishops espouse Mr. Norton as acute and Learned Divine as New-England had being at a Meeting of about forty Elders one that was newly come into the Countrey was reading to the Elders what his Judgment was about Church-Government He would have it to be Democratical quoting Morellus several times What have we to do with Morâ—llus said Mr. Norton to me if I cannot prove the Government of the Church to be Presbyterial I will give up our Cause Thirdly If all these particular Churches be Independent I fear we should have wild doings Experience have proved it already At this day we see woful effects of it If there be one or two Gentlemen of Purse Piety and Parts that stick close to the Minister and awe the People things may go on quietly else if there be but two Self-conceited pragmatical Fellows as I have known you should soon see what will become of your Parochial-government Fourthly Suppose the Pastor be foully scandalized by some of his Church one or more how shall the Government be carryed on shall he be Plaintiff and Judge in his own Case I have known a Case where a Pastor had great Offence given I propounded the Case to Dr. Owen * And Mr. Faldo whether that Pastor should proceed according to Matth. 18.15 16 he told me by no means when he heard my Reason We shall meet with hard Cases if we come to set to Government indeed Fifthly Suppose the Pastor himself grow scandalous how shall Government be carried on now Sixthly Good Men and Ministers are subject to Passions and Infirmities whence it is not fit the Government of the Church should be Committed to One alone Seventhly To Govern will is a Gist by it self a Man may be a good Preacher but no good Governoâ—r Eighthly When our Lord sent out the Apostles and the Seventy only to Preâ—â—â— he sent them out by two and two Mar. 6.7 Lâ—k 10.1 Now a single Paster undertakes all Ninthly The Jewish Synagogues bad several Elders to carry on the Government in one of their Synagogues and we but one 〈◊〉 vident Oâ—â—li quam Oâ—ulâ—s It is true our Pastor with his People may truely be called a Church as that Woman who had no Arms but held bee Pen between her Toes and so wrote 〈◊〉 have seen of her Writing 〈◊〉 may well be said to be Animal rationale a râ—â—ioâ—â—â— Creature but had God made the Wâ—â—an so at first the Woman had not been a 〈…〉 to Man So here is a Company of Vâ—â—ible Stints one Paâ—â—or here is Preaching Prayer Administration of Sacraments and in some Cases Excresse of Discipline so that it is a true Church but not such a Church as the Aposlles sent by Christ did Conâ—â—itute 〈◊〉 to answer all ends of a Church 't is imperfect defective and our Duty is to write after that Copy the Apostles of Christ have set us Dr. Owen hath proved there ought to be many Elders in every Church 2d Part of the Church p. 138. by Scriptures and Reasons I think sufficiently Soon after the Apostles in the Primitive Churches Mr. Clarkson in his Discourse against Diocesan Churches his first Book p. 5.21 hath shown there were more Presbyters in every Church than were necessary In those Virgin Churches in the Valleys of Piedmont which were never desiled with Popery but kept pure from the Apostles dayes where I find Ordination was with Imposition of Hands contrary to our Men I read in their low Condition seven Elders made a Classis they carryed on their Government by joint Councils they had their Consistories and 140 Pastors heretofore in a Synod Whence this one Teaching Elder or a single Pastor in a Church is a