to â— cramental Obligation already and no Man hath Aâ—thority to impose another Obligation in tâ— same Complex sacramental Action These are some of the Reasons that it's hopâ— will justifie our not Complying with the Sign the Cross in Baptism and may satisfie those of â—nother Perswasion that we do not indulge peeviâ— Scruples against it but are over-awed with tâ— Word of GOD not daring to add to it or off any Worship which He hath not commanded Our 5th Exception is your peremptory requiâ—ing the Re-Ordination of our Ministers otherwiâ— by your Laws they shall be no Ministers amoâ— you nor to any others so far as your Power câ— reach And this we judge a rejecting of us altogâ—ther and a manifest Injury to the Church of GOâ— for first our Ministers of the Presbyterian Perswâ—sion are Elected and Ordained according to tâ— Rules of Scripture the People Electing a Presbâ—try Ordaining It were good if you were able â— say as much for your selves 2. As our Ministers Ordination is Scripturaâ— it is the same Ordination approved and practisâ— by the Reformed Churches Abroad allowing â— Bishops Superior to Presbyters as appears â—ainly by their Confessions of Faith of which â—u may now take a taste The French Confession Art 30. We Believe that the True Church ought to be Goverâ—d by that Regiment or Discipline which Our Lord â—sus Christ hath Established viz. That there be in it â—astors Elders aend Deacons We Believe that all true â—astors in whatsoever Place they be placed have the â—me and equal Authority among themselves given unâ— them under Jesus Christ the only Head The Confession of Belgia Art 31. In whatsoever Place of the World the Ministers of â—e Word of GOD do keep they have all of them the â—me and equal Power and Authority being all of â—em equally the Ministers of Christ the only univerâ—l Head and Bishop of the Church The latter Confession of Helvetia The Power that is given to the Ministers of the â—hurch is the same and alike in all in the beginning â—e Bishops or Elders did with a common Consent and â—abour Govern the Church no Man lifted up himâ—lf above another These and the like Confessions of other Reformed Churches are the publick Standard aâ— Authentique Testimony of their Judgement Aâ— therefore the privat Sentiments of a few late Fâ—reign Divines writing in Favour of another Gâ—vernment of the Church whether by Mis-infâ—mation or declining from their own professâ— Principles are not to be valued Though soâ— are now at great Pains to scrape together if not procure Epistles from Forreigners approving Episcopal Government and so to impose on tâ— credulous a belief that the Churches Abroad aâ— of the same Mind But the publick Records these Churches are a permanent Testimony agaiâ— them so that it 's evident the Government of the Churches being by Ministers in parity of powâ— there can be no Episcopal ordination among theâ— 3. If Ordination performed by Ministers in pâ—rity of Power be not valide but Null and Voiâ— for the want of Prelacy then their Ministeriâ— Administrations are also null void as perforâ—ed by non habentibus Potestatem and if so then thâ— great Body of Protestants have neither lawfâ— Pastors to Feed them nor due Administration Sacraments nor are so much as professed Chrisâ—ans wanting Baptism the publick Badge of Châ—stianity For if Ministers be not lawfully Authâ—rized and Ordained they cannot warrantably Baâ—tize in the Name of the Father Son and Hoâ— Ghost it being a Profanation of that Ordinanâ— fâ—r any others to Administer it Let us then make Supposition that a baptized Member of the Reâ—rmed Churches Abroad should seriously enâ—uire at any of you whether he were Lawfully â—aptized or not for you give him Occasion to â—oubt whether such a Minister had Authority to â—aptize him what would be your Answer if you â—y he was not lawfully baptized because the Miâ—ister wanted Episcopal-Ordination then you â—ake your selves Schismaticks of the highest â—orm Unchurching so many True Churches of â—hrist And if you say he was lawfully Baptized â—en the Minister who baptized him was lawfully â—rdained and if he was lawfully Ordained by Miâ—isters in parity of Power Abroad why then are â—ot Ministers lawfully Ordained at Home being Ordained in the same manner without Episcopal Ordination And if lawfully Ordained why is Reâ—rdination required If you will please patiently to â—eflect on your own Way as to the Point of Reâ—rdination it will be hard to make one part of it â—onsist with another for if ye own the Gospel-Adâ—inistrations of Ministers Ordained without a Bishop you are thereby engaged to own their Orâ—ination as valide And that you do acquiesce in â—heir Gospel Administrations as valid is manifest for instance if one baptized by a Presbyter who â—ever had Episcopal-Ordination shall come to â—e a Member of your Communion you require no Re-baptising and if ye have other Pre-requiâ— for Confirmation ye will confirm and admit â— to the Lords Supper and if afterward he sâ—ripen farther and be qualified for Church-â—ders you will make a Minister of him this aâ— many other Instances are sufficient to Prove yâ— convinced and satisfied that the Gospel-Admiâ—strations of such Ministers are Valide before GOâ— and Man Let the Reader then Judge how congruous it is for you to require their Re-orâ—nation after upon the matter you have acknoâ—ledged the validity of their Ordination already 4. We humbly offer it to Consideration tâ— a Bishop over Presbyters not being by Divine stitution hath no greater Power in Ordinatiâ— than any other gospel-Gospel-Minister because all tâ— Power he hath by Commission is as a Presbyter Scriptural Bishop and as such all such have qual Ministerial Power granted by the Gospâ— Charter as hath been abundantly evinced alrâ—dy and therefore Ordination is as valide withâ— a Bishop as with him if a Presbytry Ordaiâ— Which is the Scripture Patern And many Instâ—ces might be given of the Ordination of Miâ—sters without a Bishop Gelas in act Concil Nicâ— Asserteth that Presbyters Ordain though the Bishoâ— not present and Ambrose on the Ephes saith the saâ— and your own Bishop Stilling fleet in his Iren. pâ— 380. 381. affordeth you plenty of such Instanâ— where Ordination of Ministers was performed â—ithout a Bishop And though the Kingdom of â—otland did early receive the Christian Faith yet â—e find by Johanes Major de gestis Scot. lib. 2. â—p 2. That there was no Episcopal Ordination in that â—urch before An. 430. and that they were instructed â—e Episcopis So Fordon Scot. Chron. lib. 3. cap. 8. â—nte Palladij adventum habebant Scoti fidei Doctores Sacramentorum Ministratores Presbyteros solumâ—odo vel Monachos ritum sequentes Eclesiae primitivae â—eir Teachers and such as administred the Sacraâ—ents were only Presbyters or Monks following â—e Custom of the primitive Church Having now discovered some of the strongest â—ross-bars that are laid in our Way obstructing â—r Communion in Worship with the established â—hurch We shal come
all People we knoâ— Dissenters in this Diocess do most need sucâ— help the weakest of them being often accoâ—ed with Questions more proper for studied Dâ—vines than poor Countrey-People and if thâ— Answers of these poor People do not relish â—â— shall have it published that the Dissenters here are a most ignorant People insulted over and exposed to Contempt Therefore we thought it necessary in our Circumstances because of our Love to the Truth and to the Weakest â—â— these who adhere to it to afford what Heâ—â— we could Acknowledging that this presâ—â— Undertaking might have been performed â—â— greater Advantage by some abler Pen which iâ— hoped will yet be done but whatever weaknes appear in this little Tractat shall not be imputable to many but to some of those to whom the Authors Admonition was Directed and therebâ— concerned to exoner their Conscience by making it appear that neither trifling Scruplâ— Peevishness nor perverse Obstinacy but meer â—y that our Consciences cannot be stretched to â—he Latitude that others take in the VVorship of GOD hath procured the following Resoâ—ution to the Authors Query If it be displeasing to him it 's that which we could not prevent but himself might have prevented it by permitting us to Live in Peace without such Queries For he could not but foresee our Answer would be conformed to our own Principles and Practice though we have no Pleasure in provocking him or any other being desirous to live Quiet and Peaceable in the Land giving thanks to GOD the Author of all Good and to his Majesties Clemency under whose happy Government we enjoy Protection and to whom we owe most entire Acknowledgements of Gratitude which we are desirous to testifie on all Occasions and at this present are confident that when many are found Guilty of these execrable Conspiracies to take away his Precious Life there shall not one of our Principles be stained with Disloyalty but all in a cheerfull readiness for his Majesties Preservation and Service There is one thing more that the Reader is desired to Notice that notwithstanding the Exceptions hereafter mentioned stand in the Way of our Communion with the Establisht Church yet we doubt not but many of that Communioâ— are Godly Persons and are known to be of suâ— a Christian-Conversation that we could free partake with them in Gospel-Ordinances pâ—viding we could obtain it without danger of Siâ—ning nor do we take it on us to Judge theâ— for following their own Judgement only â— cannot see with their Eyes nor they with ouâ— but must wait untill GOD reveal it to them wâ— are otherwise minded Perswading our Selâ— that the Sober and Judicious of another Persâ—sion whom we Love and Honour in the LORâ— will not Condemn but rather approve of oâ— Ingenuity in allowing Men to know the weigâ— of these Reasons that binds Us up from tâ— Communion which otherwise we would Coâ— for the Churches Peace This ingenuous Apology is neither for Ostentation nor Irritation but a necessary Vindication of our Practice unto which we are pressed IN laying open Our Exceptions we shall begin with that which is the Root of all these Eclesiastick-Impositious whereby our Consciences are Burdened and our Selves â—hrust out from Communion with You in the â—ublick Worship of GOD Our Ministers and â—heir Ministry is Rejected if they Subscribe not â—o this Article Cannon 36. viz. That the Book of Common Prayer and of Ordering of Bishops Priests â—nd Deacons containeth nothing in it contrary to the â—ord of GOD and that it may Lawfully so be used â—nd that he Himself will use the Form in the said Book â—rescribed in publick Prayer and Administration â—f the Sacraments and none other Here is a plain and full Extrusion of all Miniâ—ers who are not for Bishops over Presbyters for â—he Canon mentioneth only such Bishops or will â—se any other Form in Prayer than the Service â—ook to this Form of Service the People must â—lso subject for no other Church-Communion is allowed them but where these are Consented uâ— to But this our Consciences being Directed bâ— the Word of GOD cannot Comply with coâ—plaining of it as a most heavy Imposition And this Jurisdiction of Bishops over Presbyters is the Ground of our first Exception and thâ— because the Office of a Bishop having Authoriâ— over other Ministers of the Gospel is not founâ— in the Scriptures and therefore wanteth Diviâ— Institution And if such a Bishops Commission â— not found there then We are not obliged to suâ—ject to him as an Officer in the House of GOD Such therefore as will stand on no lower Grounâ— for Prelacy in the Church than Scriptural-Authâ—rity are obliged to make it appear And We dâ—sire no more but direct us to any Scriptures whâ— this Commission is granted if this could be doâ— ye would not only save us a Labour of proving Negative but should also find us as comformabâ— in Point of Subjection as any of your own Coâ—munion but after frequent and according â— our Measure serious reading the Book of GOD We could never yet observe a Bishop set ovâ— Presbyters but We frequently find that a Bishoâ— Presbyter are one office as hereafter shal appeaâ— Reason 1. If Christ had instituted the Offiâ— of a Prelate or Bishop over Presbyters then tâ— said Office would be mentioned in some of theâ— Scriptures which designedly giveth an accountâ— all Church-Officers in the Gospel-Church But in none of these Scriptures is there any mention of a Prelate or Bishop over Presbyters Therefore Christ hath not instituted the said Office For the first Proposition that if there were Institution for such an Officer he would be mentioned in these Scriptures is evident because the Apostle setteth himself to shew what Offices Christ had set in his Church both Extraordinary and Ordinary And who dare say that the Apostle failed in the Enumeration being inspired by the Holy Ghost and how can it be imagined that so eminent a Church-Officer making so great a Figure in the Church could be omitted was it not of great Importance for the Church of GOD in all succeeding Generations to know if there was One appointed to have Authority over many other Ministers without whose placet they should â—either have Power to Ordain other Ministers â—or Govern their Flocks If Christ had instituted such an Officer would he not have given some â—ntimation of Him That other Ministers might â—ave known it was their Duty conscientiously to Obey Him But we have no where any such Intiâ—ation from Christ or any of his Apostles but the contrary as shall appear And that a Bishop over Presbyters is invisible â—y any of these Scriptures where Church-Officers are purposely enumerated the Reader shall havâ— them in ready and full view 1 Cor. 12. 28. And GOD hath set some in thâ— Church first Apostles secondary Prophets thirdly Teachers after that Miracles then Gifts of Healinâ— Helps Governments Diversities of Tongues Rom. 12. 6. Having then Gifts differing accordinâ— to the Grace
â—eing he was to Ordain Elders in the plural numâ—er in every City and by the Scripture these Elâ—ers are Bishops then mo Bishops then one was â— be in every City which is contrare to the Episâ—opal Constitution 4. If it be said that Titus â—as Archbishop or Metropolitan Answ This â—cketh nothing but Proof which no where can â—e had For the primitive Gospel-Church knew â—o such thing as either a Diocesan Bishop Archâ—ishop or Metropolitan long after the Death of â—imothy and Titus there being no certain Rule â—or modeling of Diocesses until the Reign of Conâ—antine the Great at which time the Church did â—ollow the Civil Government as to Diocesses this â—ishop Stilling-fleet maketh out in his Irenic page â—76 377. 5. There is nothing to be found in â—e Scriptures to countenance this Assertion that â—itus was Archbishop of Crete all that can be said is â—at he was sent to Crete upon a piece of special serâ—ice for the Church which made him no more Biâ—op there then when he staid some time in other â—laces Aquinas run into the same Mistake as â—o Dalmatia for because Titus went to Dalmatia â—herefore he calls him the Bishop of Dalmatia 6. â—f it be said that the least that Bishops can Gain from Titus being left to Ordain Elders is that â—shops have sole Power of Ordination seing Tâ— alone ordained Answ This is but to begâ— Question for we deny that Titus was a Bishâ— let that first be proved And 2. That he ordaâ—ed as a Bishop And 3. That he ordained aloâ— For his ordaining of Elders makes him no Bishoâ— no more then the Apostle Pauls ordaining maâ— him a Bishop they ordained as Extraordinaâ— Officers in the Church making way for Bishoâ— or Pastors and though Titus was invested wiâ— extraordinary Power above any Bishop or Pastoâ— yet that it self will not prove that he ordained sâ— paratim without Presbyters Because he was Ordain Elders in the same manner that was the â—stablished Way of the Church in conjunction wiâ— Presbyters as the Apostle Paul did lay his hanâ— on Timothy conjunctim with the Presbytry thâ— is joyntly with a Presbytry Object 2. The Epistles to the seven Church of Asia are directed to the Bishops of these Chuâ—ches because each of them is directed to one siâ—gle Person called the Angel of the Church Answ That these Epistles are directed to tâ— Bishops of these Churches in the Scripture seâ— we easily acknowledge but then no advantaâ— to the Episcopal Cause is gained For if these Aâ—gels be Bishops and Bishops the same with Prâ—byters then ye are just where you were not liâ— â—d one step higher than a preaching Presbyter or â—ospel-Pastor 2. Whereas the Angel is spoken unto in the sinâ—lar number you have no advantage by this either â—r you shall find one and the same Angel spoken â— in the plural number As to the Angel of the â—hurch of Smyrna Rev. 2. 10 The Devil shal cast â—me of you into Prison the Speech is directed unâ— the Angel yet the plural number is used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to â—ew that it 's not one single Person only that is deâ—ted by the Name of Angel so also to the Angel â—f the Church of Thyatira but unto you I say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—ere the Angel is expresly spoken unto in the pluâ—l number So that any Argument from the â—ame Angel utterly faileth you For though an â—gel be named in the singular number yet that by â—e Name Angel is understood a collective Body â— Ministers is evident otherwise let any Man â—nder a Reason why the Angel is spoken to in the â—ural number as mo than one And hereby we â—ve solid ground to think that the Angel is spoâ—n to in the plural number purposly to obviat or â—rrect the Misapprehensions of any who would â—ink that a Bishop over Presbyters is understood â— the Word Angel Object 3 But the Government of the Church â— Bishops having Authority Jurisdiction over â—esbyters is so Antient that we cannot judge it â— any lower Derivation then from the Apostles albeit we have it not by express Scripture Answ 1. If you have such a Government the Church by due consequence from any Scriptuâ— of the New Testament We are ready to yeâ— Subjection albeit ye cannot Prove it by exprâ— Scriptures ye shall not be so hard put to it â— for you only to Affirm and Assert it Apostoliâ— without any Proof cannot convince Mens Judgâ—ments and satisfie their Conscience in a matter so great Importance Your selves being Judge if you have Proof for it make it appear Bishâ— Laud and some other Bishops with him said oâ— publickly if Prelacy were not the Apostolick Gâ—vernment they would forth with throw away thâ— Rotchets But they kept them as long as thâ— could and the Proof went no further upon whiâ— Mr. Pryne did challenge them for breach of Pâ—mise VVhy do ye not stop all our Mouths â—proving your Assertion and so satisfie a great Bâ—dy of Protestants at Home and Abroad Who giâ— Reasons from Scripture contrare to your Asserâ—on And to say it must be Apostolick because its Antiquity is little less then to say we will haâ— it from them whither they will or not their Dâ—ctrine and Practice refuse and yet it must be â—torted from them 2. We have made it appear already that the â—postles did prescribe another Form of Governmenâ— be managed by the Ministers of the Gospel in â— â—ty of Ministerial Power and how to impose uâ—on our own Reason and Belief that by some inâ—isible Prescription they have contradicted all â—is were hard measure should we or can we â—ject what they have Recorded by Inspiration of â—e Holy Ghost and betake our selves to some fanâ—ed Tradition Could this be a safe Way for our â—onsciences Or could we Answer to GOD for â— Your selves being Judges 3. If the Antiquity of Prelacy be at last its only â—ea and strongest Defence Cyprian will soon Anâ—er for us that Antiquity without Verity is but mouldy â—rror and as Sir Francis Bacon termed it a Cypher â—ithout a Figure 2. If this Plea should hold Good then there â— a Door opened for the most Antient Errors â—herewith the Church was infested even in the Aâ—ostles times and such as soon after endangered â—e renting of her Bowels 3. And however Antient Prelacy be found yet may and doth suffice us that it hath no Institution â— the Gospel-Church by Christ or his Apostles â—nd therefore can claim no better than Humane Appointment for which Appointment no Commisâ—n was granted to the Church Object All that is Alledged by you against Eâ—iscopacy is but your own late Sentiments For â—e Antient Fathers who understood the State of â—e Primitive Church better than you do generally bear Testimony that Bishops have been in all Agâ— of the Gospel-Church Answ We are of the same mind with Augâ—stin who being urged with the Authority of â—prian answered That what he spoke according to â— Scriptures he would
obtaining peace to her self 2. Tho' this be the strongest Effort and most â—lausible Argument that the Episcopal Cause can â—aim Yet when pondered in the Ballance of the â—anctuary it 's found light because first Christ did â—re know all the Trials Temptations and Events â—at should befall his Church yet he saw it not fit â— prescribe any such Remedy who is faithfull in â—l his House the Government is upon his Shoulâ—rs and the House is his own if any Man acâ—se him for omitting so necessary a Mean as is â—retended for the good of his Church let him â—onsider how he will give an account when he is â—dged by the same Lord of his House for his â—re and faithfulness hath fully appeared already â— setting so many Officers in his House as he â—ought necessary And therefore if an Oecumeâ—k Council were assembled more full than ever yet appeared in the Christian World they couâ— not jure set another Officer in the House of Goâ— to Command and bear Rule over these Officeâ— whom Christ hath entrusted to Feed his Flocâ— though Dr. Stilling fleet now Bishop once sceptiâ— as to any particular Form of Church-Goverâ—ment hath taken much pains in his Irenic to peâ—swade the World that it 's left to Humane Prâ—dence whither the Church be Governed by Bâ—shops over Presbyters or by Ministers in pariâ— of Power And strenuously opposeth the Diviâ— Right of Prelacy yet since he ascended and fiâ—ed in that Orb himself tempora mutantur nos mâ—tamur in illis Presbyters are now so contemptibâ— in his Eye that if his new Labours and Argumenâ— can prevail they shall not so much as be tolleraâ—ed to Labour in their Masters Vineyard Aureus heu fragilem confregit malleus urnaâ— That his Book is so answered that many douâ— his Confidence to give it a Reply but leaving hiâ— from whom better things were expected 3. Consider that if Bishops be set over Presbâ—ters for Preservation of Unity in the Church thâ— some new Order must be set over these Bishops fâ— they may fall out by the Way as well as other Bâ—thren as they often do and these who are set â—ver them may likeways fall into Divisions for iâ— rare to see Promotion make Men more Lowly aâ— Meek Archbishops and Metropolitans haâ— been scandalously divided by their own Pride to â—e height of Excommunicating one another â—nd when all these fail so that Unity is not obtainâ—d whether shall Men go next if not to a principiâ—m unitatis caput Eclesiae to whom all must subâ—ect And thus it was indeed that the Pope ascenâ—ed his Throne and as many have observed and â—e Groaning Church under that Tyrranny yet â—ndeth the Remedy proved worse than the Disâ—ase this manner of Cure to elevate some Miniâ—ers above the Station that Christ had placed â—em in and Robbing other Ministers of their â—e Right Could never have good Fruit nor â—d ever Men ground to expect GODS blessing â—on such an unwarrantable and audacious Preâ—mption Object Presbyters do voluntarly Elect and set â— Bishops to have Authority and Jurisdiction oâ—er themselves and therefore though they be now â—eprived of Jurisdiction they have no Cause to â—omplain for violenti non fit injuria blame themsves Ans 1. If Presbyters chused and made Bishops â—er themselves as we grant is said to be done at â—exandria then Presbyters had all that Power â— Jurisdiction at first intrinsecally in themselves â—r they could not give that to others which was â—t their own and this of it self is yeelding the â—use when it is acknowledged that Presbyters had the Original Ministerial-Power by CHRISâ— Commission 2. It was not in the Power of Presbyters to â—lienate that Power which Christ had conferred â—pon them for id possumus quod Jure possumâ— Christ having bestowed upon them full Pastoâ— Authority by what Warrant could they give tâ— away to another or any part of it For it was gâ—en to be exerted by themselves in their Person Service according to their Masters Directions their Master had thought fit to lodge that Poâ— in the Hands of others he would have bestow it himself but never left it to their Option to Sâ— or Give away his Gifts and so disable themselâ— for the Trust and Service he committed to thâ— besides that it is inaccountable Ungratitude â— Contempt of their Master to throw away â— Commission and let others Dispose of it as tâ— please And whoever have done so we are thereby obliged to the like Practice 3. If this be the deed of Conveyance whereby â—shops over Presbyters have obtain'd a Right â— Title to sole Jurisdiction in the Church then tâ— cannot say they have this Right and Title fâ— Christ It 's a Gift of the Presbyters but not a â— of Christ And a very dishonest Gift Dishonoâ—ble both to the Giver and Receiver Yet there are many Reasons to perswade the inadvertent succumbing of some Presbyâ— â—ve great Occasion for the rising of Prelacy pauâ—tim by Degrees For first Some Ministers being seated in Places of Emiâ—ncy in the World specially Great Cities in conâ—rmity to the Civil Government and Jurisdiction â— these Places the Ministers of these Places had â—o early some Titles of Honour not common to â— other Ministers 2. And if they were eminent â—r Abilities and Prudence or of long standing in â—e Ministry When other Ministers and they â—d meet together for the Affairs of the Church â—mmonly such Men were Chosen to preside for â—e orderly Management of their Judicatories as â—olocutors or Moderators Which cannot be â—nting without Confusion yet he who did Preâ—e had no power of Jurisdiction over the rest it reâ—aining in their Power to choose another for that â—rvice as they should see it expedient But 3. his sometimes falling into the hands of ambitiâ—s Men made interest not only for their conuance but for their farther Promotion usurpâ— upon other Ministers who were more meanly â—ated untill they had wrested Power out of their â—ands and did appropriate all Jurisdiction to â—emselves the other Ministers sinfully succumâ—ng under this Usurpation untill there was no â—trieving of what they had Lost Our 2d Exception is your Liturgy which after â—rious Perusal we cannot approve not that we are against a general Directory for decent Order Gospel-Administrations that each part of Wâ—ship have its due place This we acknowledge be necessary And therefore all the Reformâ— Churches have provided themselves with suâ— Directories But that which we cannot compâ— with is such a Form of Divine Service or Worshâ— as is Composed by a few and peremptorily iâ—posed on others so as that Form of Worship sâ— be used and no other Our Reasons are First no Liturgy or stinted Form of Worshâ— was either Composed Used or Imposed by tâ— Apostles or any Gospel-Ministers in the first â—ges of the Church If any Affirm there were suâ— Forms it 's their part to make them appear whiâ— hath never yet been done but by a manifest Fâ—gery of the Apostle James
was the Will of GOD that such an Officer as a â—shop over Presbyters should be in the House â— GOD that they might obey him in the LORâ— 3. The Apostle in the following Words giveâ— Warning that after his Departure grievous Wolvâ— shall enter in among them not sparing the Flock aâ— verse 30. of their own selves shall Men arise speaâ—ing perverse things to draw away Disciples after theâ— Yet for all this Danger he giveth no Direction set up a Bishop over other Ministers for presâ—ving the Flock nor any Intimation that it wâ— the Will of GOD to provide such a Remedy aâ—terwards But requireth the Pastors to Watch aâ— commendeth them to GOD and the Word of hâ— Grace which was able to Build them up wheâ— by we may see they are remitted to the word for Dâ—rection in what concerneth his Church and nâ— to invent without the Word a Remedy of theâ— own devising 4. From the same Scripture â— are also instructed that the instituted Pastors â— the Church are to feed and take heed unto all â— Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath maâ— them Overseers And therefore Gospel-Ministeâ— are to have no greater Charge than such as thâ— may perform all the Duties belonging to a Pastoâ— to all the Flock And if any Minister assumâ— greater Charge than he can perform these Duâ— unto then it is not that Charge that the Holy Ghâ— hath committed to him If it be said that the Bishop feedeth the Flock â— his Substituts such as he is pleased to appoint Answ But quo jure by what Right or Authoâ—ty can he substitute another to do that which he â—th assumed for his own Work and personal Perâ—rmance it was a doubt that the learned Sir Franâ— Bacon said he could never be resolved of how a Man that had a Trust committed to him for his perâ—nal Faithfulness could delegate that Trust to another â—d if a Bishop say he never engaged to Feed so â—any then it may be justly replyed he was never â—astor to so many Why then should he presume â—e Title and Name of their Pastor When he â—â—weth it simply impossible for him to Teach â—d Feed them or the twentieth part of them acâ—rding to the Duty of a Pastor It 's also to be observed that as by this and maâ— other Texts the Ministers of the Gospel have â—ual Pastoral Authority de jure so we find in the â—riptures that de facto they are placed in Possessiâ— of this Ministerial-Power and exercise it with â—vine Approbation For Presbyters ordain Miâ—sters as 1 Tim. 4. 14. and are therein approved â— the Apostle Timothy being charged not to neâ—ct the Gift he had thereby received 2. A Comâ—nity of Presbyters exert their Power in Church â—scipline and are required by the Apostle so to â— 1 Cor. 5. 4. and 5. verses This Sentence was â—icted by many not by one assuming the sole Power of Jurisdiction to himself which is câ—sonant to our Saviours Doctrine Matth. 18. 1â— who requireth the offended Brother to tell â— Church not a single Person if Christ had coâ—mitted the Power of Discipline to One than â— Complaint of the offended Brother should hâ— been to that One for to whom should he Coâ—plain but to such as had Power to do him Justiâ— and remove the Offence But we see Christ's â—pointment is not to make Application to One â— to the Church Therefore it 's no Institution Christ that authoritative church-Church-Power be loâ—ed in one Person So also we find that Presbyters are Constituâ— Members of that famous Juridical Synod at Jeâ—salem Acts 15. the Apostles and Elders came to â—ther to consider the Matter in which Assemâ— there is not one found to Over-rule the Rest â— assuming a negative Voice Though some presâ— had more just Authority in the Church than â— now on Earth can pretend to yet all had fâ— liberty to speak their Judgement and all carâ— by Suffrages and that which was concluded plâ—ed the Apostles and Elders and is published in â— Name of the Apostles and Elders whereby it's parent that in the Apostles time Presbyters â— in the actual exercise of Church-Government â—therwise the Decrees of the Synod had never â— published in their Name We shall not at prâ— multiply Arguments but let these three be duely â—nsidered 1. That the Office of a Prelate canâ—t be found in the Roll of Church-Officers 2. â—rists Discharging his Ministers to be one of â—em Greater than another And 3. The Diâ—e Institution of parity among Ministers Object Timothy and Titus are called Bishops in â— Bibles therefore Bishops are by Divine Instiâ—tion Answ All Gospel Pastors are Bishops accorâ—g to the Word of GOD and therefore tho' â—ey were Bishops which cannot be granted â—t the Episcopal Cause gaineth nothing because â—shops above Presbyters are never found in our â—bles 2. These Postscripts to the 2d Epistle to Tiâ—thy and the Epistle to Titus are not Canonick â—ripture but added several Ages after the Canon Scripture was closed and after the Church beâ—n to degenerat which is irrefragably evinced Mr Pryn in his Unbishoping of Timothy and â—us and is acknowledged both by Papists and â—ers that the most antient Copies have no such â—stscripts and therefore our Bibles have these â—stscripts still at some distance from the rest of â—se Epistles But the Difference is not altogeâ—er so observable now as formerly when these â—stscripts were purposely Printed in very smal â—aracters to make the Difference discernable by all who read them 3 Timothy is expresly â—led an Evangelist 2 Tim. 4. 5. and therefore coâ— not be a Bishop neither in Scripture sence aâ— Pastor to a particular Flock whom he might pâ—sonally oversee nor in the Prelatical sence as a â—ocesan Bishop because an Evangelist was noâ—â—mited to any particular bounds as hath been cleâ—ed already And to say that Timothy was Bishâ— of Ephesus is against reason for Timothy was pâ—sent with the Apostle Paul when he commitâ— the Charge of the Flock to the Presbyters in coâ—mon but no mention of Timothy as their Bishopâ— whom the Charge had chiefly belonged if he hâ— been the only Bishop of Ephesus As for Titus he was employed in the like Gâ—pel-Service from one place to another as Timâ— was But it 's said Tit. 15. That he was left in Cretâ— ordain Elders in every City therefore he had Episâ—pal Jurisdiction Answ 1. Timothy and Titus were both exâ—ordinary Officers in the Church as appears â— their constant Travels from place to place thâ— Work being to erect Churches and plant Bishâ— or Presbyters in these Churches but not to Bishops of them themselves their Power beâ— greater than ordinary Bishops or Pastors as is â— served by Chrysostom on Eph. 4 that their Work â— to plant Churches and Bishops or Elders to be theiâ—â—dinary Pastors 2. Seing Titus was to ordain Elâ—ers in every City of Crete then where was his own â—iocess For it cannot be supposed that he did â—rdain himself Bishop of one of these Cities 3.