Orders in the Church of Rome which are not truly such but only additions of human Invention according as their Church fancyed would conduce to the Decorum of Gods Service I adde this Term of Divine Institution which must be understood of divine Apostolical constitution and then it may again be put in these Prases that Ordination is an Act by which a Man is Constituted a Minister as at the beginning of this Treatise the Minister is defined for the Man ordained and the Minister before will be all one And so now the nature of Ordination being explained I shall encounter with Hooker in his first Question Whether Ordination is in nature before Election SECT IV. Ordination is not before Election IN answering this Question we shall agree to say No it is not before Election nor surely can it possibly be for a Man must be elected and chosen as fit to be ordained before he is ordained But because Mr. Rutherford as he expresseth it page 39 doth conceive this Election belongs to the People and that Ordination is like the making of a King the Election of the people like the giving and appropriating this ring to the finger by choosing this man to this place which Hooker opposeth I shall quit my self from Rutherford and then apply my self to Hooker I say therefore that first a man must be chosen before he is ordained a Presâ—yter but it is not necessary he should be Chosen by the people there is no semblance of any such Thing in the Scripture nor indeed do Rutherford or Hooker exact it but out of his mistake That they suppose no man should be made a Presbyter which should not at that instant or before be Elected to some benefice of the which the people should be Electors SECT V. Men may be Ordained without the Election of the People NOW the Contrary is most apparent in some Case As suppose Mr. Hooker and Mr. Cotton were adjudged fit men for the Conversion of the Indians they had need be sent with Presbyterial Aâ—thority for else they could not have right Authority to admit Converted men into Christs Church but the people to whom they were sent could not choose them these men must be ordained Presbyters before they are sent and elected before Ordained but not by the people to whom they are sent or the people that is the Commonalty from whom they are sent who are not Capable to discern the fitnesse for such a Work but their Drift is the people over whom they are to Pastorize Thus then it is evident that in some Cases Election of the Congregation or Church over which a Presbyter is put cannot alwayes precede his Ordination But suppose again a Company of Christians whose Presbyter is dead in many Cases they may elect one to be ordained before he is ordained and in many cases they may elect one to this Charge after he is ordained supposing that the power of Election were in them as thus in the first Case they find an able and fit man they desire to have him ordained in the second they find an able man already ordained sine Curâ I put the Casâ— without Exception As suppose his or Mr. Cottons Congregation destroyed by Enemies cannot he be elected to another Church or if Elected must he have another Ordination I believe he will not say so Well then in this Question the Answer must be the Election must precede Ordination but Election to Ordination not Election to a Cure in the second sense Election to a Cure may and may not precede Ordination SECT VI. St. Cyprian explained IN all Hookers Discourse upon this businesse I find nâ—thing remarkable produced to Confirm this Conclusion but some flashes against the Papists and then against the Prelates but page 42. he brings certain Quotations of Authors to which he assents amoâ—g which there is only one worth the insisting on and that is St. Cyprian out of whom Lib. 1. Epist. 4. which is a true Quotation according to the old and Erasmus his Edition but according to Pamelius in 68 Epist. Lib. 4. The words are Videmus de Divina Authoritate descendere ut Sacerdos plebâ— praesente sub omnium oculis delegatur dignus idoneus publico Judicio Testimonio comprobatur This place he cites rightly but what is here but that the people must be present as they are at our Consecrations to this purpose to know whether they have any thing to object against the Man or his life but here is no word of his Election and I must Commend the Ingenuity of the man for it is evident out of the following part of the Epistle that he meant no more because his Arguments inforce no more but the presence of the people yet indeed the words immediately preceding do seem upon the first view to carry another meaning they are these speaking of the people Quando saith he ipsa maximrâ— habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi which words if they be understood of more than a Custom of the Church which is confirmed by many Canons That there should be no clandestine Consecration as well as Marriage but that the Consecration of Priests and Bishops should be in the publick Church where any man may except against them if they have any thing to that purpose I say if this potestas eligendi recusandi be more than this which St. Cyprians Arguments do not enforce yet if there be more meant it is nothing but that the people did Elect their Sacerdos which is understoâ—d of a Bishop as I have intimated heretofore and is clear in this place because the Case disputed of in which St. Cyprian is consulted is concerning a Bishop now it is apparent in Story that many times it was indulged to the People to choose their Bishop especially abouâ— that Age wherein there was a kind of Impossibility of doing otherwise when the World was divided into so many great Schismes and the Emperors peremptorily abetting none nor destroying any so that you might know three Bishops together in a City one Orthodox the other Arian another Novatian now in these casâ—s thâ— people chose their Bishop when the old was dead and adhered to whom they would when he was alive unlesse the Emperor interposed as oft he did or some Council Provincial which likewise was used but for Divine right St. Cyprian speaketh of nothing but plebe praesente they were chosen in the presence of the people but to the Benefice whether Bishoprick or Parsonage the Electors have been various in all Ages and may be so there being nothing determined by Apostolical Constitution or practise yet there is nothing in all this that shews that Election to a Benefice must be before Ordination not the least word but rather after for if it lies in the people to elect a worthy Priest I so translate Sacerdos to his Benefice then he must be a worthy Priest before for else it should be they
from him At primum ex concessis Ergo I set down his words and all his words where hath he shewed that Presbyters elected their Bishop which yet may be true and the consequence most weak for after their Ordination by Bishops they may elect their Bishop but not ordain him Elections may be and are various according to humane Constitutions assigning this or that Pastor to this or that particular Congregation sometimes the Parish sometimes the Patron sometimes a Bishop but the Ordination and giving him power to Officiate must be only by the Bishops the Bishop ordains and makes a man a Presbyter a Bishop of the Catholick Church he may by humane Laws and his own consent be tyed to Officiate and execute that Pastoral duty in this particular place nor can any man shew me Authority from Scripture or the times near to the Scripture-Writers where any man was instituted and ordained to do these spirituall duties by any other Authority than Episcopal Nay I think since the Apostles Age no considerable Church or body of Men did conceive Election to be of validity to do these duties till now Well then all the premisses considered which have a full consent of Scripture and the practice of all Ages to confirm them conceive with me that it must be a bold and impudent thing of such men who dare Officiate in these divine duties without Authority granted from Christ which he only gave to the Apostles and they to their Successors Bishops and it is a foolish rashness in those men who adventure to receive the Covenants of their eternall Salvation from such men who have no Atturnment from Christ to Seal them If the Case were dubious which to me seems as clear as such a practick matter can be I should speak more but it being clear I need write no more in this Theam I intended to have spoken to Mr. Hobs but lately there came to my hands a Book of learned Dr. Hammond entituled A Letter of Resolution to six Queries in the fifth of which which is about Imposition of hands you may find him most justly censured for that vain and un-scholastick Opinion pag. 384. But the business is handled sufficiently in the beginning of that Treatise pag. 318. wherefore my pains were vain in this Cause An APPENDIX c. CHAP. I. In which is an Introduction to the Discourse and the Question stated SInce I came back to my Study I found one conclusion delivered in this Treatise opposed by a learned Scotchman one Doctor Forbes in a Treatise intituled Ironicam and in it he hath divers Arguments not inserted in my former Papers against this proposition That it is a proper and peculiar act of Episcopacy to ordain Priests and Bishops which he denyes in his second Book Chap. 11. Proposition 13. in his Exposition and proofe of that proposition page 159. And I observing it whilest my Papers are with the Printer thought it â—it to interpose that which satisfied my self in his Arguments In the top of the page before named he begins thus Gradus quidem Episcopalis est juris divini here we agree Ita tamen ut Ecclesia esse non desinit Sed esse possit sit quandoque vera Ecclesia Christiana in qua non reperitur hic gradus Here we begin to differ I say there neither is nor ever was a Christian Church without a Bishop and I will now begin to distinguish there is the universal Church and there are particular Churches The particular Churches we may yea must conceive to be sometimes without Bishops yea without Presbiters as by the death of their Bishops or Presbiters or by such persecutions as may so scatter them that they dare not shew themselves in their Churches In such cases these places must needes be without these Magistrates And yet those Christians who are by such means defrauded of this divine and blessed government keeping their first faith continue members of the Catholick Church and of that universal Church which have and ever shall have Bishops as long as the World stands so that if that proposition be meant of particular Congregations It is true they may be without a Bishop But if the universal they shall never be by the promise of our Saviour I will be with you to the end of the World without a Bishop And those particular Churches which may by such means be without Bishops may be without Presbiters likewise upon the same occasions This I think is clear I shall now examine his Arguments which oppose this which I have delivered His first Argument drawn from Scripture answered HE saith he will prove it before the Institution of Bishops and after First before I am perswaded he can shew me no Church before the Institution for their Episcopal authority was given in its fulness to the Apostles in that language of our Saviour As my father send me so send I you as I have explained All the Commission was given to them and they imparted all or part of it as they pleased they were the first and only Bishops untill they setled Provincial Bishops they were of the whole world as those latter of particular Diocesses he proves that there were Churches before Bishops out of Scripture but it is ciphered Scripture first Acts 8. 12. There Philip the Deacon so he terms him converted Souls to Christ where was no Bishop And by his leave if Philip were but a Deacon there was no Presbiter neither and by the By the Independant Thomas Hooker of New England and his fellows may take notice that a Deacon may preach and baptize for so did Philip in Samaria in that verse But Reader take notice that although men may be converted by Presbiters yea Lay-men any and when they are converted and baptized are members of the Catholick Church and parts of the mystical body of Christ and have no Bishop resident in that place yet without a Bishop it cannot be for the providence of God over the Church is such as that there shall always be such an authority resident in the Church universal whither men may in convenient time such as will be accepted of God repair for Church-discipline The next place be vergeth is Acts 11. 20 21. But there is nothing observable to any such purpose but only that they who were scattered upon the persecution of Stephen converted many Souls to the true faith His third place is Acts 14. 20 21 22. He should have added the 23 without the which all the former were imperfect to his purpose and in that verse are the words which he argues out of that is they ordained Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now there was a Church he inâ—erâ—s and no Bishop I will tell him there was a Church and no Presbyter untill the Apostles ordained them and the Apostles Barnabas and Paul ordained these Presbiters not a Presbitery and they themselves â—ineranâ—â— throughout the World visited their Churches with letters and directions sometimes when they could not personally
that nothing is essential but giving the proper blessing with imposition of Hands for the addition of one Presbyter to the two Bishops is served only to fill a gap and to comply with an unnecessary received Ceremony it added no virtue of its self noâ— impeded the virtue of the Consecration CHAP. XIV His Discourse examined and an Argument from some Father answered SECT I. The Preface to his Argument examined NOw we will enter upon another Argument being Page 164. towards the bottom a discourse unnecessary for me to write down at large but I will set down what is material in it and so pass to his Argument thus saith he Habent Presbyteri Presbyters have by a Divine right the power of Ordaining Sicut like as they have the power of Preaching and Baptizeing he expounds this that where there is a Bishop there this should be done sub regimine inspectione Episcopi under the government and eye of the Bishop but in other places where the Church is governed by the common Councel of Presbyters that Ordination is valid and good which is made by the imposition of the Hands of the Presbytery Thus he but I desire and so do many more to know where that Church was ever in the Christian world that gave simple Presbyters power to Ordain others before these latter times the practice whereof I think nothing can excuse in some Reformed Churches but a meer necessity in which Case the vote supplies the Act but I will proceed no further with this all to the midst of the next Page is only Discourse his conclusion there is that Presbyters may Ordain I come with him and will consider his following Arguments SECT II. His Argument from St. Ambrose and St. Augustine answered HE begins with St. Ambrose upon the Epistle to the Ephesians Cap. 4. the words are truly cited by him which are apud Aegyptum Presbyteri consignant si praesens non sit Episcopus I will not disturb this before I observe his second Quotation and make one answer serve both which is Augustinus sive quicunque sit author in quaestionibus ex utroque testamento mixtum Quest. 10. In Alexandria inquit Presbyter Consecrat the force of this Argument is this that in Alexandria and throughout Egypt in the absence of a Bishop a Presbyter or Presbyters do Consecrate by these Fathers in the Citation of St. Augustine he ingeniously saith sive quicunque author est illius operis whether he or whosoever is Author of that work indeed it is evident that it is not his and he might have said as much of St. Ambrose as is appâ—renâ— because these Comments are much suspected upon strong grounds but indeed are thought to be some Author of that age and then though an Heretique or Schismatique in a matter of Story which concerns not that business for which he is branded I see no reason why that matter of fact may not be credited I therefore must allow that authority neither will I quarrel at that word in him which is not Consecrat as in the counterseit Augustine but Consignat which is of a largersence but ye because that word is often used for Consecration I will allow that likewise yea I will add that which some Schoolmen who incline to Doctor Forbes his opinion have observed which is that the word Consecrat cannot here be taken for Consecrating the holy Eucharist of the Consecrating the Lords Supper for that was allowed lawful in any place now this seems to intimate a peculiar custom in Alexandria and Egypt for that therefore know that other things are in Ecclesiastical Story said to be Consecrated besides these of Bishops or the Elements of the Communion to wit Holy houses Churches Virgins and Utensils but some may object that this Consâ—â—ration may be understood of Bishops I answer no out of a famous Story recorded by Athanasius which is in his second Apologue and a letter writ by the Marcotici Praesbyteri Diaconi as they stile themselves to Curiasus and Evagrius It is there Registred that one Colluthus counterfeiting himself to be a Bishop when he was none but only a Presbyter Ordained divers persons amongst others one Ischyras for which he was condemned by Hosius and other Bishops in a general Councel that he should leave off Episcopising and be reduced into his former Order and therefore saith the letter Ischyras could be no Priest who was Ordained only by him who was no Bishop give me leave now to shew the truth of this Story it hath so great authority for it as Athanasius who was Bishop of Alexandria in his Apology for himself writ to his adversaries both Lay and Ecclesiastical if he had been a man of less Sanctity yet out of policy he durst not tell such an errant Lie granting this I say that if the other authorities were authentique which they are not that word Consecration must be understood of other Consecrations not of Bishops or Priests because in Alexandria this act was condemned And so I think that there is enough said to that Argument drawn from the pretended Ambrose and Augustine CHAP. XV. SECT I. His Argument drawn from the Councel of Antioch answered ANd now I proceed to another Argument drawn from the Councel of Antioch Canon 10. in which it is Ordained that Chori Episcopi which saith he were only Presbyters might Ordain Readers Sub-deacons and Exorcists but neither Priests nor Deacons as Dionisius Eriquus translates it pâ—aeter Civitatis Episcopum we may render it besides the Bishop of the City Gentianus Hervetus renders it absque Vrbis Episcopo without the Bishop of the City but he saith Hidorus Hispalensis hath a third Reading which he favours above all that is praeter â—anscientiam Episcopi as I may say without the Conscience of the Bishop here he puts down three various Translations or Readings I can add a fourth which is of another Isidore Isidori Mercator who put out the Councels by the advice of Fourscore Bishops as he himself writes in his Epistle before them but indeed hath no remarkable difference from the rest although it varyes from them Now saith Doctor Forbes Pope Damasus in his first Epistle to Purisper Bishop of the Prime Seat of Numidia and other Orthodox Bishops he condemns the Chori-Episcopi as an irregular Order being in themselves but Praesbyteri and taking upon them Episcopal power To go methodically in the examination of this Argument I propose to my self three things 1. The Consideration of the authority of the Canons made in this Councel next the examination of Pope Damasus his decree and last the Nature of those Chori-Episcopi or Country Bishops who are therein mentioned And first I apply my self to the Councel which I am content to admit because the Canons thereof were antiently received into the Code of the Universal Church and mentioned both in the Councel of Chalcedon and the Councel in Trullo though Estius in Quartum Distinct. 25. Sect. 2. is bold to reject the
although perhaps some who had not and I think there is little of moment to be found in antiquity concerning them which is not observed by me there is an Epistle of John the third Pope of that name but it is rejected by Binius and so slighted by me And yet me thinks some may ask my opinion of those Churches where are no Bishops first I dare censure no man much less such large Congregations amongst which I know there are many learned men and no doubt but full of Piety I may be deceived and so may they humanum est errare but certainly in that acquaintance that I have with antiquity there seems to me no ground for them there nor in the Scripture these few pieces which this learned Gentleman had Collected are but old totered Rags which cannot abide to be stitched to this new Garment they have nothing to excuse themselves but necessities which whether they have sufficient or no to excuse them let their own Souls Judge God will I dare not FINIS THE TABLE A Apostles their Election and to what 7. Their Number whence their Name their Office 8. To whom sent 9. What to Preach 10. The Apostles power whence 22. The Apostles truly had the Power of Preaching to all the world 23. 24. The Apostles only commissioned to Baptize 25. The Apostles only to Administer the Communion 27. B Baptism instituted by our Saviour 12. The Baptism of our Saviour and St. John not the same 13. Whether our Sacramental Baptism be the same with that before Christs death 14. 15. Not the same the Objections answered 16. 17. The Baptism instituted by Christ not in force till after his death 18. Whether Baptism administred by Laymen be valid 29. Of Bishops their distinction from Presbyters 94 First Argument from Scripture for their Points 96. The Argument examined 97. And answered 99. The Exception that Titus was an Evangilist but not a Bishop answered 99. Objection for their points from Acts 20. 28. answered 101. C An outward Call necessary to a Minister 129. This Call hath a Moral not a Physâ—cal influence 130. The Character left after Ordination 132. The Communion instituted by our Saviour 18. The Apostles Ministers of it 19. 20. Instituted before our Saviours death 20. 21. Mutual covenanting of the Saints gives not the Being to a Visible Church 157. What this Covenant is Explicit or Implicit 159. The Reasons for it answered 159 c. Other Arguments answered 165. 167 c D The Election of the Seventy Disciples 11. The Differences betwixt them and the Apostles 96. Deacons as afterwards used in the Church not instituted Acts 6. 37 38. Arguments proving this 39. 40. The opposing Arguments answered 43. Some of the first Deacons Preachers 40. What the Office of a Deacon 45. E Of Lay-Elders 59. What a Lay-Elder is in the Disciplinarian sense 60. No such Elders in Scripture 61. Places of Scripture urged for them answered ibid. Third Argument of Mr. Thomas Hooker for Lay-Elders answered 62 c 69. 74. 75. St. â—auls Elder signifies but one Office 66. St. Ambrose's words urged for Lay-Elders expounded 86. c. The design of making Lay-Elders 88. What the word Especially imports 1 Tim. 5. 17. 68. What an Evangelist is 106. G Gifted men may Preach if licenced by the Bishop otherwise not 84 85. H What Double Honour signifies 1 Tim. 5. 17. 68. Mr. Thomas Hookers opinion concerning Deacons examined 45 46. Rom. 12. 8. expounded against him 47 48. c. His Deacon enforced from this place of Scripture Confuted 53. The first Confutation of Mr. Thomas Hooker out of this Text. 54 55. His Second Argument refuted 56. His Third Argument refuted 57. His First Argument from Reason refuted 57. His Second and Third Argument from Reason answered 58. Another Argument answered 59. Mr. Thomas Hookers distinction of Pastors and Teachers refuted 90 c. I Episcopal Jurisdiction proved 115 L What Labouring in the Word imports 1 Tim. 5. 17. 67. 86. M What the word Minister signifies 1. The Definition of a Minister 2. The Definition explained 3. c. The Power to be a Minister must come from God 3. 6. Motion is to Relation 208 209. O Touching Ordination 121. Mr. Thomas Hookers definition of Ordination confuted 122. What Ordination is 123. Ordination not before Election 224. Men may be Ordained without the Election of the People 125. Whether Ordination gives all the Essentials to an Officer 128. Of Pastoral Ordination 140. P St. Peter had no greater power given him by Christ than the other Apostles 28. The chief Arguments for his superiority answered ibid. A vindication of our Common Prayer-Book in the number of the Sacraments 131. A Digression concerning Preaching 76. What Preaching is 78. To what Preaching every Presbyter is bound 80. The peculiar Interest a Presbyter hath in Preaching 82. Who is authorized to Preach 83. What a true Presbyter is 89. A Power is left by Christ to some men whereby they communicate Power to others 156. R Relation may be the principle of Action 211. One Relation may be the Foundation of another 242. What Ruling well imports 1 Tim. 5. 17. 67. A The Apostles only intrusted with the power of the Keys 29 30. Other Apostles besides the Twelve 31 32 33. The reason of it 33. The Apostolical power extended to all the world 34. How the Apostolical power was Communicated 35. How the Apostolical power was communicated to particulars 36. B Second Argument for Parity answered 102. Third Argument for it answered 104. Fourth Argument concerning Jurisdiction answered 106. An Argument from Ordination by Presbyters answered 107. An Argument out of St. Hierome answered 108. Bishops succeeded the Apostles in all that is Apostolical though not in their extraordinary endeavours 142. Baptism not the Form which constitutes a Church-Member but no Visible Act by which he is made a Member 171. Mr. Thomas Hookers Arguments against this Opinion answered 171 172 c. Baptism hath all things necessary to a real Relation 219. E Episcopacy setled by the Apostles in the Church 111. First Argument from Scripture to prove Episcopacy 113. A Second Argument to prove it 114. The Revelation of St. John assorts Episcopacy 117. St. Cyprian urged as favouring The People having the power of Electing their Ministers explained the Objection answered 126. Arguments from the Election of the Deacon Acts 6. examined 127. Other Arguments answered 133 c. 149 c. An Excommunicate man is a Member of the Church 175. Bellarmines Arguments against this Opinion answered 176 c. C Scriptures written of the Catholique Church grossely misapplyed by Mr. Thomas Hooker to particular Churches 162 c. What is meant by the Church and our Saviours saying Tell the Church 166. What makes a Church Visible 169. Such as renounce the fellowship of the Church are yet Members of the Church 180. The Arguments against this Opinion answered 181 c. 190 c. Some difficulties of this Opinion cleared 187. What
necessary for the gathering which are not necessary for the perfecting the body of Christ we see Prophets were necessary for the Gathering and the Extraordinary part of Apostles which are not necessary for the perfecting Now here is a Conjunction Gathering and Perfecting His second Consequence is as bad If the Church can be perfected without these there is no need of these this doth not follow things may be necessary ad esse ad perfectum esse and yet other things may be necessary to the easie obtaining this Esse I do but give you the non-consequence of his manner of Argument observe his Minor But there is no Minister necessary for the Gathering and Perfecting of the Church besides that of the Presbyters He proves this Because the Apostle setting down the several Ministries which Christ had purchased and by Ascention bestowed upon his Church when he gave Gifts to men for that end they are only comprehended in these two Pastors and Teachers Ephes. 4. 12 13. and they who are given for this end can and shall undoubtedly attain it Consider here the Inconsequence of this Argument Because saith he the Apostle in that place sets down none other therefore there is no other We have examined that Text sufficiently I thought already but this Starts another Negative note The Apostle doth not say there that there are no other but what he sets down nor doth he put any Exclusive Term as these and these only are they I am sure in the 12. to the Romans he hath another reckoning of things like Offices and so in the 1 Cor. 12. 28. I know he may say that with a Trick of Wit these may be brought about by subordination to amount to the same thing and number and so I can reduce them to two only Extraordinary and Ordinary or ruling and teaching a principal and subservient but unlesse he can shew a Negative or exclusive Term in the Text he cannot draw a Negative inference So that although the means that our Saviour appoints shall attain its end yet the means he appoints must be totally taken not one piece without another and this Text doth not say that is the Total means this is known in Logick posita Causa ponitur effectus but it must be totalis Causa not partialis But now suppose his Consequence were good in Logick will the Text bear him out in the matter Doth the Text name none but these Pastors and Teachers Yes sure and although these two as I have shewed are but one yet Apostles are different and these seem without distinction to be necessary to the perfecting of the body of Christ and Bishops by all Consent succeed the Apostles in tâ—is Duty I will not desâ—ant upon Prophet to shew the sense and meaning of it as not pertinent this is enough to shew the weaknesse of his Argument if the Text were granted to allow his deduction out of it But he proceeds as unluckily as if all this were granted Where saith he the Issue is if Pastors and Doctors be sufficieâ—t Teaching Ministryes to perfect the Church then there needs no more but these I will not lose my self in his long period Suppose these were sufficient Teaching Ministries is there no more requisite but teaching Yes to look to them that they do teach and teach right Doctrine But saith he if these be enough all others be superfluous I answer these are enough for their own Work if they would be good and all industrious workmen but there is necessity for some Custodire Custodes I am weary with this SECT XII His Fourth Argument concerning Jurisdiction answered HIs Fourth Argument is thus framed Distinct Offices must have distinct Operations Operari sequitur esse But they that is Bishops have no distinct Operations from Presbyters if there be any they must be Ordination and Jurisdiction but both these belong to Presbyters Jurisdiction John 20. 23. Whosesoever sins ye remit c. Binding and loosing imply a power of Censuring as well as preaching and both are given in the Apostles to their Successors the rulers and Elders of the Churches who succeed them in their Commission Let him prove that these who are here Elders of the Inferiour rank Succeed the Apostles in that part of their Commission and his Conclusion is granted but that he can never do and therefore labours not for it otherwise I have shewed that there were parts of the Apostles fulnesse of power imparted to one and part to another as the Divine Wisdom directed them to divide it for the good of the Church this they must grant who make Pastors Rulers Teachers distinct Offices SECT XIII Ordination not given by Presbyters FOR the Second Ordination he brings Scripture 1 Tim. 4. 14. He only Ciphers the Text I will put down the words Neglect not the Gift that is in thee which was given thee by Prophesy with the laying on of the hands of the Presbyters His Collection hence is That this Gift was his Presbyterial or Episcopal Office and that this power was Conveyed to him by the laying on of the hands of the Presbyters and therefore Presbyters have power of Ordination I will not here dispute what is meant by Prophesie as not pertinent to this Cause nor will I trouble my discourse with what is meant by this Gift which hath received another Interpretation by some of best Authority but will pitch upon the word Presbytery and it may be of Imposition of hands For this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is used only three times in the New Testament Luke 22. 66. where we render it the Elders of the people but it is in the Original in the Abstract not the men but the Presbytery of the people The second place is Acts 22. 5. where we read all the Estate of the Elders the word is the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the whole Presbytery now the Third place is this in my Text. In the two first places Presbytery is taken for the Magistrates or Senate of the people of the Jewes no Christian Order then from the use of the word in other places it cannot be Collected that this should particularize this lower Order which he fancieth sith there is no place to parallel it But because Presbytery doth signifie an Ecclesiastical Order in the Ministery therefore this Presbytery should do so likewise but in as large a sense as Presbyter not more restrained Now Presbyter takes in its latitude the whole Order of Priestood both Bishop and Presbyter it were in vain to insist upon particular places So then must this be would be know which I am Confident all Antiquity understand it of that rank of Presbyters which we term Bishops St. Chrysostome Theophylact Theodoret no man contradicting but these late Expositors Then let us adde one word more Were that Gift understood for the Ecclesiastical Authority which he had or secondly were Presbytery understood for a Synod of Presbyters as they call them which none but themselves affirm
yet it would not follow that they received it from their Imposition of hands but with it saith the Text with the Imposition of hands of the Presbytery when in 2 Tim. 1. 6. he speaking I think of the same Gift he saith which thou hast received by the Imposition of my hands here by as there with and so is the phrase varied in the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Pauls imposition had some signal force but theirs was only a Circumstance by the by not operative But I enforce not this although I am perswaded the Text would make it good but answer peremptorily That Presbytery there meant was not a Presbytery of the Inferiour Order and I speak no more than St. Chrysostome in expresse words This is not understood of Presbyters but Bishops and all the Ancients if he shall require me to prove it out of Scripture That Presbytery ever signifies a Company of Bishops which kind of Disputing is used amongst some I answer in this place I am not to prove but answer and I reply that neither they nor any I think can shew me this word Presbytery used in any other place than these I have named and then I am sure it cannot be proved that it should signifie that inferiour Order Thus have I done with this reason of his I could collect even hence a Strong Argument against them but I will referr it SECT XIV Mr. Hookers Argument out of St. Hierome answered AT the last Hooker comes to that Canvased place of St. Hierome and here he begins to boast of Antiquity If saith he we look to ancient Times that prime place of Hierome ad Evagrium shews the Charter whence all the Authority is derived Unum ex se electum in altiori Gradu collocarunt quem Episcopum nominaverunt This piece of St. Hierome somewhat amazed me upon the first view of it not but he was a man and might by passion be somewhat transported but although I have read it in him before and often urged in the School yet me thought not in such significant words To understand him therefore Conceive that he writ this Epistle to Evagrius against a Custom that had crept into the Church of Rome as it seems that some men did prefâ—rre Deacons before Presbyters this I can guesse to happen upon the rise of Cardinal Deacons which began to flourish in those days upon this St. Hierome magnifies the Presbyterian Order shews how Presbyters and Bishops were one and were called by the same name in Scripture which elsewhere he affirmeth likewise and there he seems to make the difference betwixt a Bishop in respect of Jurisdiction not to be as two Orders but Gradus in ordine and therefore he saith that in Alexandria which was founded by St. Mark in the time of Heraclius and Dionysius Presbyteri semper unum ex se electum in excelsiori Gradâ— collocatum Episcopum nominabant But presenâ—ly he makes a Bishop in the same Epistle like a General in an Army and yet comes off Quid enim facit Episcopuâ— exceptâ Ordinatione quod non facit Presbyter and at the Conclusion of that Epistle compares Bishops Presbyters and Deacons to Aaron the Inferiour Priests and Levites Whence it abundantly appears that not only St. Hierome otherwhere but even here opposeth these men expresly in the Case of Ordination and surely evidently enough in the business of Jurisdiction Comparing the Bishops to Generals and Aaron But then mark these mistakes in his Quotation where he puts Collocaverunt for Collocatum as if the Presbyters had given him his place or Dignity when it is no more but this that from St. Marks time down-ward the Presbyters of Alexandria had one chosen out of their Presbytery which was elected above the rest and called Bishop which was that their Bishop was chosen among them whether by them or no I dispute not now So that this Epistle of Hierom being read and this place Considered I know no reason why it should be urged against their power of Ordination or Jurisdiction First because this was the Practice only of a particular Church and as he disputes concerning Rome in the same Epistle may much easier be objected to Alexandria Si Authoritas quaeritur Orbis major est urbe And again in the same Epistle Quid mihi praeter unius urbis Câ—nsuâ—tudinem This might be but I yield not that there is any force to this purpose out of St. Hieromes phrase but only that they had one elected out of their number which was placed in an higher degree and called a Bishop not naming who ordained him or who elected him but suppose they should Elect him would it follow that they had power of Ordination Certainly no the people or Patron may elect their Parson but not ordain him or if they should elect and ordain him which will never be granted yet would it follow that he had Jurisdiction and sole power of ordaining others a Master of a Colledge is elected to his Office by the Fellows and ordained according to the Lawes yet unlesse by Authority delegated from him no Fellow can choose much lesse make the least Fellow or Scholar in the House Take St. Hieroms Instance The Emperor or General of an Army dies in his place the Army chooseth and Constitutes another Emperor as often happened in Rome when they had made their Election then he had power both of Jurisdiction in Governing them who chose him and of Ordaining inferiout Officers which were under him but over the rest of the Army So that although it be true in Nature that which can do the greater can do the lesse yet it is not true in Politick Affairs as thus In an Elective Kingdom or the Empire they who have power to choose the Emperour himself yet when they have chosen him have not power to choose the least Constable or Inferiour Officer but the Emperor only so that here are wonderfull Inconsequences in this Discourse if much more were granted than indeed is any way true and yet as if all were true he deduceth strange Conclusions Whence it followes saith he first that Bishops were first Presbyters I grant it secondly that they had their first Constitution and Election from them I deny that proposition First St. Paul and the Apostles Constituted many Bishops in their several precincts Timothy Titus many more Then I deny the Consequence or Dependance it hath upon the premisses â—or although all that were true in Alexandria yet that is no rule to the whole World besides that the same Method was used any where â—lse which is apparently grosse his next Deduction is as bad Ergo saith he Presbyters had their rise and Ordination before Bishops If they had what would follow It is possible the Apostles might make Presbyters first and chuse and make Bishops out of them if not the Apostles we have and shall prove were Bishops who were before Presbyters He saith If they can give Ordination
he drawes from his Imagination of no such power left to men which lest I should vex the Reader I omit and direct him to page 70 71 72. for the foundation being destroyed the Invective and Scorning of his â—nemies as many have done with an imagination only or rumor of Victory when there was no such thing will fall of its self There is a power left by Christ to men by which they communicate powers to others FIrst then I shall shew that there is such an Office power amongst men whereby they can Convey an Office power Authoritativâ— to others This may appear out of our Saviours Commission As my Father sent me c. John 20. and the like Now then if our Saviour was sent to appoint Officers then so were they I will be with you to the end of the World that cannot be understood of their persons it must be of their Succession and that Succession they communicated by the former Authority So Acts 13. they sent Baâ—nabas and Saul so 14. 21. They ordained Elders in every Church so Titus was by St. Paul left in Crete Timothy received from Imposition of his hands his power so in succession Timothy and Titus are directed to lay on hands themselves upon others which is by all understood of Ordination So then there is evident a delegate power given by men of Authority by which others are Authorized to operate in this Divine Administration I need say no more to this but enter his Second Conclusion which he is briefer in but is indeed the foundation of this other This you may find page 72. thus Secondly There is a Communicating power by voluntary Subjection when though there be no Office power formaliter in the people yet they willingly yielding themselves to be ruled by another desiring and calling him to take that rule he accepting of what they yield possessing that right which they put upon him by free Consent I put down his very words which are not sence making no Compleat Proposition but it may be the fault of the Printer and therefore read it possesseth that right c. for possessing The reason saith he is those in whose Choice it is whether any shall rule over them or no from their voluntary subjection it is That the party Chosen hath right and stands possessed of rule and Authority over them This Argument is mighty Lame for the Minor which is not set down if produced would be that the Case stands thus with Christians That it is in their Choice whether any shall rule over them or no which is absolutely false taking Christians for such men who have given themselves and their names to Christ in baptism and supposing that they intend to be saved by persevering according to that Covenant for without doubt such must submit to this Government and indeed I wondered how any man had Confidence to obtrude such a Conclusion concerning so high and material points without pretence of reason or Scripture as he doth in this place but I remember how heretofore I had read something to this purpose in his First Part and it seems he supposeth this granted out of his former Grounds although he might have done well to have eased the Reader with a reference to it but I have hunted it out and God willing will pursue the Chase wheresoever CHAP. IX SECT I. Mutual Covenanting of the Saints gives not being to a Visible Church IN his first part therefore of this Book page 46. he discourseth of the formal Cause of a visible Church and he puts this Conclusion Mutual Covenanting and Confederating of the Saints in the fellowship of the faith according to the Order of the Gospel is that which gives Constitution and being to a Visible Church This Term Consederating of the Saints is indefinite and seems therefore that he should mean all the Saints should Confederate which is impossible in any of their Congregations if he had meant of any limited Company of Saints he should have said of a Company of Saints or a number of them which he did not but puts it indefinite of the Saints Secondly observe that whereas he interposeth in his Conclusion according to the Order of the Gospel neither doth he nor can any man living shew any likenesse or resemblance of any such Order in the Gospel nor doth he in his whole discourse endeavour to shew any such Thing Upon my perusal of this Discourse I find that I have treated of it already in some papers which passed betwixt me and another who is since as I hear dead and I think I sent them you therefore I shall speak only briefly to it first setting down his Conceit then answering his Arguments then Consuting his Conclusion SECT II. His Opinion explained HIS Conceit is as I apprehend it That a Company of Saints as he calls them enter into a Covenant one with another and with one which they call Pastor to submit to him in Pastoral duties and he to perform Pastoral Offices among them as likewise in respect of themselves to submit to and exercise Churchly Censures one towards another some such Covenant if I can reach his sence is that which gives to the receivers an Obligation and bond and it is in Conscience one towards another which bond is the formal Essence and being of a Church I conceive this but for lack of some Copy of one of their Covenants I can only guesse at it by the main drift of his Discourse he denyes Baptism or Profession to give the being to a Member and only makes a Covenant to be it a superadded Covenant beyond Baptism Page 47. he delivers that this Covenant is either Explicite or Implicite Explicite when there is an open expression and profession of this Engagement in the face of the Assembly Implicite when in their practice they do that whereby they make themselves engaged to walk in such a Society according to such rules of Government which are executed amongst them and so submit themselves thereto but do not make any verbal profession thereof And thus he saith the people in the Parishes of England where there is a Minister put upon them by the Patron or Bishop they constantly hold them to the Fellowship of the people in such a place c. This being warned that upon their grounds there could be no Church in the Christian World but in New England he could not choose but allow this Implicite Covenant to be sufficient which is the common opinion among them although I doubt in some other Things he will reject an Argument drawn from an universal practice SECT III. His Conclusions concerning this Covenant PAge 48. he addes some Conclusions First an Implicite Covenant preserves the true nature of the Visible Church Secondly which is much the same an Implicite Covenant in some Cases may be fully sufficient Thirdly it is much agreeing to the Compleatnesse of the rule what rule I would know and for the better being of the Church that there be
his Major now let us examine his Minor In nostrâ tamen Ecclesia reformata Scotanica id haberi nondum potuit propter Ecclesiasticam paâ—pertatem bonis Ecclesiasticis laicorum hominum sacrilegio dirâ—ptis The force of this Argument runs thus Although Deacons be a divine ordinance yet the Scots by reason of their poverty are not able to maintaine such an Officer and there is the like reason for Bishops in such places where the supream authority will not allow them so that necessity may excuse men even where the divine Laws requires any thing I must confess that invincible necessity excuseth many Acts but it will lie upon the Souls of these Churches who live without Bishops to answer at the last day to Allmighty God and make it good before him that their Omission is such but the difference betwixt Bishops and Deacons is exceeding great I do not find any one place so much as directing that Deacons should be in every particular Church in many there is no need of them where a small congregation of twenty or a hundred may well be osâ—iciated in the meanest duty by a Presbiter onely but in Cathedral Churches where are many little offices for which perhaps we cannot find Presbiters so fit or that it is not fit that we should take them from their greater imployments to bestow their time upon those lesser duties in such cases there is a necessity for those lesser offices to be used but if they shall think their Deacons to be ordained for that imployment mentioned in the sixth of the Acts to minister to the poor I may say that such an imployment can hardly complain of necessity by sacriledge since that out of the collection for the poor he may be allowed a stipend competent for such an office but then to consider that which he would have to paralel a Bishop where is any such a small congregation as I have before specified all things may well be regulated by a Presbiter and he alone supply all the duties belonging to the Salvation of Souls But if there should be many such congregations or that Presbiter who did govern there die in that Government it is necessary for him or them to seek out some Bishop to authorize him or them for this duty The upshot of all this is that Deacons are not instituted as necessary for all lesser Congregations that Bishops are authorized to give Orders to dispose of such affairs as are usefull or necessary to the Government of little or great Congregations but especially in the latter where are usually more and more dangerous exorbitancies That which follows in that page is onely a Discourse but no Proof and so I passe to 161. page where he labours to prove that the Presbitery as he calls it or Company of Presbiters gathered together may give Orders thus CHAP 8. An Argument drawn from Scripture answered APostolus Paulus manuum impositionem per quam ordinatus est Timotheus modo vocat impositionem manuum sâ—arum 2. Tim. 1. 6. Modo impositionem manuum Presbiterii 1. Tim. 4. 14. Idest concessus Presbiterorum sic enim in Novo testamento passim et apud antiquissimos Scriptores Ecclesiasticos The effect of which is that St. Paul in those two places termes the giving Orders to Timothy in one place the laying on of his hands and in another the Laying on the hands of the Presbitery which saith he was the Company or Colledge of Presbiters as that word is often used in the New Testament and amongst the most antient Ecclesiastical Writers I have expounded these two places already and though he say Presbitery is often used for a Colledge or Concessus of Presbiters I have shewed it is no where so used in Scripture and for the most ancient Ecclesiastical Writers I would have been glad to have Read where I should seek them for remember them I do not I will trouble the Reader no further with this Argument it would be but a Repetition CHAP. 9. An Argument drawn from Saint Hierome answered HE comes next to the formerly examined place of St. Hierome and Evagrinus but he puts it down more truly than Thomas Hooker doth and after adds one phrase which the New-England-man left out which is Sicut exercitus imperatorem faciaet quibus verbis non abscurè indicat Presbiteros Alexandrinos initio ordinasse sibi Episcopum by which words as an Army makes an Emperour he doth not obscurely intimate that they did ordain their Bishops Thus Forbes if instead of Ordain he had said Elect I should not have been offended but to take upon them the power to ordain was too much unless they had the Armies to maintain their Act by force as they did The Souldiers upon the death of the Emperour proclaim and cry up commonly their General to be the Emperour and make it good with their sword but would Doctor Forbes or Hierom think that they did ordain or make him Emperour or rather according to their power elect it was often seen even in the age about St. Hierom that two or three Armies in their several places chose so many Emperours And it is not impossible that the Presbiters in Alexandria might have the Election of their Bishop as in most places but the Consecration of him was by others and mark this place of St. Hierom the phrase he useth is Presbiteri not Presbiterium which he calls the antient Language howsoever there is nothing in these words which can instance a Consecration from Presbiters no not in the Simile of an Army unless a Rebellious Election might pass for a Consecration I think I need not speak no more to that at this time but if there be any further need I foresee that the answering other Arguments will further illustrate this business CHAP. X. An Answer to the Argument drawn from the Consecration of Pelagius the first Pope of that name in which is discussed the Story of his Consecration as likewise that no Argument can be drawn from that Act That Popes Consecrations and Elections have been erronious HE proceeds page 162. Pellagium hujus nominis primum Romanum Episcopum ordinarunt duo Episcopi unus Presbiter Ostiensis nomine Andreas qui tanquam Episcopus munus illud ordinationis obivit dum non invenientur tres Episcopi qui secundum Canones Pelagium ordinarent The summe is that this Pope when there could not be three Bishopâ— got which according to Canons should joyn together in the ordination of a Bishop there being no more to be found they took in a Presbiter to officiate with them and therefore he thinks Presbiters may ordain for answer let no man think that I will undertake to defend the Consecrations of Rome it is a task too hard for me to manage or I think any other and materially no doubt but this was irregular yet it may be excused and perhaps justified by what I shall say take therefore the Story of these times SECT I. Where is the Story of
the Character left in Baptism is and the Definition of it 205. In what Predicament this Charaâ—â—er is 207. The Foundation of this Character is the Will of God 213. 218. Durandus holds this Character to be Ens Rationis 215. Is opposed by all the Schoolmen but their Arguments do not confute him ibid. The Subject of this Character is the whole man 221. THE TABLE OF THE Appendix A The Apostles were Bishops prov'd 233. The first of the Apostolical Canons examined 249. The anointing the Bishops hand no necessary essential to his Constituion 258. Sect. 6. Athanasius's testimony that meer Presbyteers could not Ordain even in Alexandria 27â— The Council of Antioch Schismatical and Illegal 274. B Bishops have ever been in the Church 231. Whether three Bishops be necessary to the Consecration of a Bishop 246. Sect. 1. Ans. Reg. The Consecration of St. James Bishop of Jerusalem objected and answered 248. What is essential to Constitute a Bishop 263. 264. Baptism not void by different circumstances in the Celebration of it P. 256. Balsamon Patriarch of Antioch's interpretation of the Canon of that Council approved 274 277. Bellarmine too hardly dealt withall by Dr. Forbes 278. Not confuted by him 279 280. St. Basil's Opinion of the Chori-Episcopi 286. C The Church Universal never was nor can be without a Bishop 231. The Church of Ephesus not governed by meer Elders but Bishops 233. The Church was without Elders till the Apostles Ordained them 232. Christianity may be continued but Church-communion and Ordinances cannot without Bishops 235. The Consecration of St. James Bishop of Jerusalem discussed 247. Three Bishops are not by Divine Right necessary to a Bishops Consecration 246. The Canon called the Apostles Canon about the Consecration of Bishops examined 249. The Canon of the Council of Nice examined 250 251. And proved to concern the Election not the Consecration of Bishops ibid. The second Canon of the Council of Carthage concerning the Consecration of Bishops 259. The Catholike Church does concentre in this conclusion that when words importing the Blessing are delivered by a Consecrating Bishop and those words are sealed by an imposition of Hands then those Holy Orders are effectually given 265. in the begin No Church in the Christian world ever gave simple Presbyters power to Ordain 270. The Chori-Episcopi have not power to Ordain proved 274. Unless they be Suffragans 279. 282. Cresperius's reading of the Canon of Antioch alledged for the Chori-Episcopi viz. not praeter but propter Conscientiam Episcopi 278. Chori-Episcopi were but Presbyters because Ordained by one Bishop alone 282. S. 7. ☞ Two sorts of Chori-Episcopi P. 283. What they were 284. D Dr. Forbes's arguments answered from P. 232 to 284. Deacons not necessary in every Parochial Church 240. Difference in the Form or words does not disanull a Sacrament 256. The distinction of Orders is known by the manner of the laying on of Hands and the form of words as in our Church used in the pronunciation of the Blessing 265. Sect. 2. Damasus his reading upon the Canon of Antioch 276. vid. 279. Which doth sufficiently answer Dr. Forbes his Arguments against all Chori-Episcopi having power of Ordination answered 281. His second Argument answered 282. Decrees of divers Councils examined 284 285. E The Church of Ephesus not Governed by meer Elders but Bishops 233. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated Eligi to be Elected or chosen 251. lin 13 Elders were not in the Church till the Apostles Ordained them 232 What is essential to the Constitution of a Bishop 254. Explicatory additions do not destroy the notion of that which they explain 257. in the end The only essential ceremony if any be in the Consecration of Bishops is the laying on of Hands 264. The essence of Ordination cheifly consists in the pronouncing the Blessing with the notes of distinction of the Orders then conferred 265. vid. 268. S. 4. The Errors committed in the Inauguration of Popes no President for reformed Churches in the Consecration â—f Bishops 269. The Church of England's Rites of Consecration defended Sect. 4. 268. F Dr. Forbes's first Argument from Scripture answered 232. His first Argument to prove their Ordination after Bishops were instituted answered 235. His Argument taken out of Johannes Major answered from 235. to 238. His Argument from the Church of Rome answered 239. His Argument from Deacons answered 240. His Argument from Scripture answered ibid. His Argument out of St. Hierome answered 242. His Argument from Pelagius's Ordination answered 244. 245. His Argument from St. Ambrose and St. Augustine answered 271. His Argument from the council of Antioch 274. to 284. G Gasper Hurtado's opinion about the Consecration of Bishops examined 261. ☞ The Gospel laid upon the Bishops Neck not essential to his Consecration because there were Bishops befoâ—e the Gospel was written 260. vid. 266. to 268. Gentianus Hervetus his reading of the Canon of Antioch 277. the begin H Henricus Henriques opinion that some papers wherein the Gospel was written might be given to the primitive Bishops in their Consecrations is found invalid 261. I Imposition of Hands the only necessary and essential ceremony if any be to the Consecration of Bishops 264. Inauguration of Popes no President for the Consecration of reformed Bishops P. 243. vid. 269. Imposition of the Hands of Presbyters alone is not sufficient for â—rdination 270. Ischyras was no Priest because Ordained by no Bishop 272. the begin Isidore Hispalensis his reading of the Canon of Antioch makes nothing for Dr. Forbes 277. L The laying on of Hands only essentially necessary to the constitution of a Bishop 264. Linus and Clemens were Chori-Episcopi to St. Peter 284 about the midst Laodicean Canon forbids the Chori-Episcopi to act any thing without the leave of their Diocesan 285. M The manner of the imposition of Hands distinguisheth what Orders are conferr'd 265. S. a. Moderation to be used towards every opponent though never so much mistaken 278. S. 4. N Necessity only can justify the Ordination of Presbyters 270. No Church ever gave meer Presbyters power to Ordain ib. The Canon of Nice examined 250 251. The Eighth Canon of the Council of Nice 285. O Objections against the Authors opinion concerning the Consecration of Bishops answered 265. The first Objection answered ib. Objection from the Council of Carthage answered from 266. to 268. Objection against the Church of Englands Rites of Consecration answered 268. objection taken from the Council of Antioch answered From 272 to 274. P Panormitan's Argument answered 234 Presbyters may Elect not Ordain a Bishop 242. Pelagiu ' s Ordination related Sect. 1. P. 243. The Patriarch of Antioch his interpretation of the Canon of the Council of Nice 250. c. The Pope cannot dispence with Divine Laws 253. Petrus Arcadius's discourse illustrated and applied Sect. 2. 255 c. The Pontifical differs in many things from the Canon of the Carthaginian Council in the rites of Consecration 267. Presbyters alone could
taking Care of the poor thus ye may find it Acts 6. 1. In those dayes there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews because their widowes were neglected in the daily Ministration there is the same word again and upon that ground the Apostles insâ—ituted the Office of a Deacon as you may see afterwards and for that reason because of their Ministration they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as we use to call them Deacons but indeed is Ministers Again from hence it comes that this Office being the lowest and the foundation of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy because all that serve God for the good of mens Souls are at the least Deacons or Ministers That this word is sometimes in its general Notion applied to the very Apostleship Acts 1. 17. speaking of Judas who was one of the 12. Apostles He obtained part of this Ministry and verse the 25. speaking of him whom God should choose that he may take part of this Ministry and Apostleship from which c. where you see the Apostleship called Ministry so likewise 2 Cor. 11. 23. Are they Ministers of Christ I speak as a fool I am more speaking of the Apostles I am more more Ministerial more industrious Thus as we may say a man is a vegetable Creature which is the remote Genus so are these said to be Ministers but I can never observe that in any particular Application this word Minister is used for that second Order of Presbyter either in Scripture or Antiquity as in this corrupt Age by usurpation it is abused But I think in this question you understand by it the whole body of the Clergy by what Titles soever and in that sense I mean to speak of it and so addresse my self to the consideration of what a Minister is and I conceive that I may thus define him CHAP. II. What a Minister is in his Definition A Minister is an Officer ordained by God to do something conducing to the salvation of mens Souls In the first place his Genus is an Officer which nature he hath in Common with multitudes of others who are such either Magistratical or Servile I need not discourse now of that it is so apparent Secondly in his Difference the first phrase is ordained by God that is by the Command or Institution of God There are many Officers that are instituted and ordained by men who have power from God to do this Act of Instituting Officers but a Minister is an Officer instituted by God from him he hath power in Divine things these no man can have power over but he who hath this Authority granted him from God and that is it which St. Paâ—l affirms Heb. 5. 4. No man taketh this honor to himself but he who is called of God as was Aaron Nay presently after he affirmeth of Christ that he assumed the Priesthood not of himself but from the Father so then this Ministerial Function requireth Gods Ordination but by the word Ordination I not only conceive an Institution of God but likewise some Duty commanded which God orders thereunto So that by giving this Order so the School and we in English call these holy Functions God exacts a Duty in these men who exercise it For the graces given these men being such as the School calls gratis datae not sanctifying the person who hath them but such as are for the sanctification of others God who gives nothing in vain will require an Account of these graces and abilities And to this purpose St. Paul 1 Cor. 4. 1. Let a man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ and Dispensators or Stewards of the mysteries of God Vers. 2. Moreover it is required in Stewards that they should be faithfull that is to lay out the moneys according to their Lords appointment and direction according to the Lords Ordinance but there is more intimated in this word Ordinance to wit an enabling the person who is ordained to do some supernatural Work but the enabling must be understood in Actu primo not secundo that is he is enabled with Authority to do that is required A man gives his keyes to his Steward bids him search such Rooms such Boxes for such occasions as he hath need here he hath Clavem the Authority and right power to do this Duty to open the doors in Actu primo but perhaps his hands are weak he cannot turn the key or he is ignorant he knows not how to do it yet what he doth is regular he hath Power and Authority to do it and should another who hath more ability do it in the second Act and not in the first he doth it like a Thief not like a Steward This first right is certainly Conveyed by the Ordinance of God with holy Orders but not the second and they who do these duties without this Authority given them from Christ are therefore called by Christ Thieves and Robbers John 10. 1. He that entreth not by the door into the Sheepfold but climbeth up another way he is a Thief and a Robber they are Thieves but they who come by the door by Authority from Christ are the right Shepherds and have Authority to go into the â—old and do their Duty there so that though a Minister have Authority given him to do holy Things yet he may not have the Science or Integrity to do accordingly but what he hath so far is ratifyed by God but others who have not this Authority though they do the same things yet they are responsible for a presumption as may appear out of Acts 19. v. 13. where certain Exorcists took upon them the power Divine of Casting out Devils which was Apostolical but they stole the keyes of this power had them not given them and the Devils rent and tare them from all which it appears that the enabling with this power such as may be justifyed comes from a Divine Ordination and not else The next Term is To do something conducing to the Salvation of mens Souls I put this phrase to do something more largely than the Schools and the great Consent of the Church of Rome use to do who restrain it only to the holy Communion as if holy Orders were only referred to that Mysterie and so with wresting bring in those little Ecclesiastical Officers into the Number but we may observe that for ought I find a Deacon by his Institution or Practice at the first in the New Testament had nothing to do with the Communion nor indeed hath more now than to assist with the Cup And the great Power of the Keyes toucheth not the Act of Communion immediately but by reason of admission or prohibiting such as shall or shall not Communicate I choose therefore this phrase to do something which comprehends all even that and Preaching and whatsoever else conduceth to mans Salvation but yet we must apply this to what went before likewise and take all together there are many Acts done by
men who are not Ministers which conduce to others Salvation and are very usefull and commendable in them nay are done out of Duty as the Example of a good life discreet admonishing men of their faults incouraging others to virtue and the like which are all Acts of Duty from one Christian man to another but not Acts of Office Acts of Charity as they are Christians not as they are this or that sort of men We must therefore recall the first Term that they must do something Conducing to the salvation of men This phrase must be a little farther cleared likewise There are things which Conduce accidentally to the Salvation of others as persecution affliction so it was with St. Paul sometimes assisting in villany which starts up some Divine Speech or Action so those wicked persons who assisted in the Crucifying of our Saviour their Wicked Act made them Spectators and Auditors of those supernatural words which then declared him to be God and made them receive that Faith in him and confesse that he was the Son of God But these persons are in themselves the Devils Ministers though Gods almighty power and providence Conjured them about as he will the very Devils themselves and draw his honour out of their Wickednesse his light out of their Darknesse These Acts in themselves Conduce to Hell but God wrought them miraculously about to Heaven and therefore not understood here but such as in themselves are disposed to it and because Heaven is not a result or an Effect naturally arising out of our Works but a blessing bestowed upon the Workers according to their Works for Christs sake therefore those things which Conduce to Heaven in themselves must be such as God is pleased to Covenant with us that upon them and the doing of them he will give this Salvation for no man can obtain that by Fraud or Violence and therefore it must be on such Terms as he Covenants for And these things are those of the Word and Sacraments as the whole Christian World hath named them though they have no such name given them in the New Testament to wit this God hath provided Salvation in Heaven for his Servants the Means for them to get this Heaven is by these Covenants Sealing these Deeds obeying these Ordinances of his â—or which he hath appointed Officers and given them Power and Authority to administer these Covenants Letters of Atturney for it is a Legal Juridical businesse and a legal phrase befits it to act these things betwixt him and men and teach them his Lawes and will by which they shall be Sharers of this blessing and they who have an Office and from that Office Authority to do All or Some of these things are the Ministers we speak of And I think this may suffice to speak what a Minister is How he is ordained and who they are will follow SECT II. These Powers must be given by God TO understand these heads we must first conceive that a man can receive or assume no such power that is effectual to himself unlesse it be given him from Heaven as St. John speaks John 3. 27. Heaven being Gods gift the powers the Covenants which bring men thither must be by his Appointment and the Officers who work and effect these powers must be by him authorized likewise I write these Conclusions briefly being of great Evidence in themselves and for ought I know denyed by none SECT III. The way to understand who these are AND now in my Conceit the readiest way to clear this truth will be to shew what Officers Christ hath appointed to this purpose and this must be done two wayes First to shew Historically what was done and Secondly to shew how that History shall agree with the Design it had to bring men to Heaven and how unfit other pretentions are to it The History I shall divide into two parts First to lay the Foundation of this glorious Building to shew what our Saviour acted himself in it what the Church Discipline was in Embrione in Ovo in the Foundation then to shew what Superstructures the Apostles built upon it what it was in the birth when it was a Chick The first must be sought out of the Gospells or the beginning of the Acts where the Story of our Saviours immediate Commerce with this World both in his life and after his Death is set down for us The second part must be cleared from the later part of the Acts and the Epistles and thus my design is layd CHAP. III. The Election of the Apostles and what to do THE first remarkable business in the Gospel is the Election of the Apostles which we may find recorded in the 3d. of St. Mark v. 13. and the 6th of St. Luke v. 13. In St. Mark we may observe that he ordained Twelve that they should be with him and that he might send them forth to preach and in St. Luke we may note that he gave these Twelve the Name of Apostles out of this we may Consider that our Saviour having many Disciples such as had leaned and listned to his Doctrine he chose out of them Twelve which he gave particular Favours to and gave them that name of Office to be Apostles That there was some Mystery in that Number of Twelve I am perswaded because that after the Apostacy of Judas in the 1. of the Acts v. 22. St. Peter saith That according to the Prophet David Psal. 109. 7. another should take his Office It was necessary another should succeed him in that Ministry and they chose one and no more to Compleat the Number What that Mystery is is not so apparent That which fits my Apprehension is this That our Saviour did in very many things lay the platform of his Ecclesiastical Government according to the pattern of the Jewish Polity and in this particular he resembled the Twelve Patriarchs but this he laid as Pillars only or a foundation intending it only to support the rest not to figure out the Number of these Officers which were afterwards to be a Number I know by none pretended to but yet they then were so many pillars to support this building and whatsoever Structure should be raised must be erected upon these But besides their Number we may mark their Office which was two-fold about our Saviour and about the Church or other men about our Saviour that they should be with him hearing and learning his Doctrine spectators of his Miracles and most exemplar manner of Life that so they being to bear Witnesse of him and his Actions afterwards might the more Constantly and Confidently do it when they had in such a manner been Conversant with him That which concerned other men was That he might send them forth to preach Here was an Office Instituted as St. Mark records it and to have power to heal sicknesse c. This Gift of Miracles was not the Office it self but a sign and token by which men might know that they
Service without Compulsion and since he was to leave the World himself he took Order with his Servants to Act as if he were present and Negotiate the great Work of Salvation of Souls by a Delegate power from him Therefore in the 16th of St. Mark v. 14. you may observe that he appeared to the Eleven that is to the Eleven Apostles for one of them Judas had apostatized and had hanged himself and in the 15th verse he gave them Commission Go ye into all the World and preach the Gospel to every Creà ture that is to every Creature that is Capable of it c. there was their Commission The same Story is thought by many to be a little more fully described by St. John Chap. 20. 21. after he had appeared to them as before he said Peace be unto you as my Father sent me so send I you and then he breathed on them the Holy Ghost Mark this phrase As my Father sent me It is a particular phrase not used elsewhere and therefore intimates some extraordinary matter God had sent many men before but never any besides Christ with the fulnesse of Authority as it is described Mat. 28. 18. All power is given me in Heaven and Earth All power was never given to any before I send you therefore with all power as my Father sent me So the power then of Giving powers to others which was never given before but to my self and therefore in that place of St. Matthew before cited in the last verse too I am with you to the end of the World with you teaching baptizing giving Orders to others for that is mightily enforced out of the word Sicut as my Father sent me and indeed else he could not be with them in their persons to the end of the World but in their Succession by which means he might well be said to be with them to the Worlds end Having now touched upon these places I will Collect this here was in the 28 of Matthew vers 19. Baptism Instituted Matter and Form In the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost which we read not prescribed before we see the Officers appointed these Eleven in their personal bodies or succession wee see their Diocesse enlarged preach to all Nations and as preaching so baptizing as large they go together we see the Subjects of their Sermons enlarged before Christs Death When they had to do with the Jews only it was the Kingdom of God is at hand Now it is to observe all things that I have commanded you So that then we see first before our Saviours Death two sorts of Officers Apostles Disples their Office at the first limited to preaching and that to the Israelites that they did baptize we are assured but not in what Form nor by what Commission untill after our Saviours Death then we have seen the Holy Communion Instituted just before his Death in Matter and Form and Commissioners appointed to Celebrate it to wit the Apostles we see after his Death a full and Absolute Commission granted to these persons to whom the Communion was committed to do all things Baptise preach celebrate forgive Sins to choose and send forth others and for ought I can collect in this Story the whole Ministerial power invested in them But because something may be objected against this which hath been delivered which I take to be the foundation of what shall follow I will clear those objections which seem most troublesom to me and so proceed to shew how the Apostles managed this Stewardship committed to them SECT II. Whether the power of preaching was given only to the Apostles FIrst It may be questioned whether the power of preaching was given to the Apostles and them only To understand this we must look back and remember that the Seventy likewise were sent but that was to the Israelites only their Commission extended no farther before our Saviours Death and after his Death we find no Commission given but to the Apostles and what Authority they or any else could have to preach the Gospel it must be from them let no man trouble this or any other part of my discourse with that frivolous Objection which is often intruded into these Controversies We read not that these or these men that these Presbyters received new Commissions from the Apostles and yet find them preaching for Answer once for many other times in which it may be needfull it was impossible that the Acts or Epistles could keep a Register of all that were ordained by the Apostles or Bishops in their Age it is enough for us to know that all power for these things was given to the Apostles and we may reasonably think that of these 70. which were chosen by our Saviour such as proved worthy should be Commissioned by the Apostles and such as were unworthy as some were should be suspended ab Officio but for these particular Registers and how and when each man was is not apparent nor to be expected Well then now it seems the Apostles had all the power of preaching none others being sent in this Embassy to the World but themselves But could none else preach not gifted men Consider these men never any so Extraordinarily gifted as these were yet see as I observed they preached not without an outward Calling by Christ nor then untill he sent them Again it is observable that by his outward Word he directed their Doctrine to the Jews that they should preach the Kingdom of God was at hand and to the Gentiles Mat. 28. 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have Commanded you So then Christ had given them Command before what they should preach I do not find no not in these yet any inspired Sermon but upon Direction and although these men had no doubt the most immediate Call that ever any had and the most extraordinary Gifts in the most extraordinary way yet for to enable them for their preaching they had Conversation with Christ which doth the most resemble the most Industrious life of Studious Scholars which in Books Converse with God as possibly a thing can do so that in that time in the time of our Saviours Life and untill his Ascention we can find no place for inward Calling without an outward nor an outward execution without means to enable them for this great Ministry of preaching but throughout a most Methodical Course SECT III. Whether these and these only were Commissioned for Baptism THE next thing to be looked upon is Whether these and these onely had the power of baptizing No doubt we may say of this that they had the Duty only none other obliged to either but they and when I have named the Duty I think I may justly adde the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The right and Authority will go along for it seems to be a branch and a main one of that Great Commission Mat. 28. and without doubt a great piece of the Power of
his malice against the Christians relieve not their own poor only but ours with a Counterfeit holinesse There he acknowledgeth the Christians abundant Charity in those dayes when he made all Christians poor and because he would not be out-acted in a Work of so much piety he gave that Priest the Collection of vast sums towards the relief of necessitous people This was necessary in Time of persecution but what further use is there of it in particular Churches than those Collectors for the poor which we have and Charity and Sweetnesse preached to men whereby they may be spurred on to enlarge their hearts beyond the Exactions of Statute-Duties to the overflowing of Charity Now then because it was an Occasional Office necessary then and there at such times in such places we cannot conceive why it should enforce such an Office perpetual in the Church and universally in all places or Churches SECT V. Another Argument to prove the former Conclusion SEcondly Consider the businesse they were designed to we shall not find that ascending to these Ministerial Duties it being only to relieve the body not the Soul to take Care of the Tables to look that the Grecian widows and poor be not despised in Consideration of the Native Jews I know it is objected by Catherive that these Tables there spoken of was the Lords Table and the Ministration they were imployed about was the Communion but these phrases of Daily Ministration and the murmure of the Grecians do inforce the other for if they had a daily Communion it is not to be imagined the Apostles would be standers by at so heavenly a Duty and if they were actors it cannot be thought that any should be neglected in it I therefore with a mighty Consent of Writers Conclude that it was an Administration of Temporal Things but the Administration of such maketh not to that Ministry we speak of which concerns things so Spiritual as affect the Soul immediately with some Divine blessing when these immediately only concern the body and Temporal Things and therefore could not belong to our Ministry SECT VI. A third Reason for the former Conclusion A Third Reason may be drawn from the persons which were elected into the Office which were as Epiphanius reports in the end of his 20. Chapter of his first Book Contra Haereses of the Seventy two Disciples of which Number there he reckons many more of equal rank if not an higher esteem than these Now then if they were of those Seventy two it is not reason to think that they should be Ordained into an Inferiour Order of Clergy and the lowest of all for all hold that they were Presbyters at the least either by their first Ordination from our Saviour when he sent them to preach and baptize the lost Sheep of the house of Israel or else by a Confirmation from the Apostles after they were invested with the whole Ecclesiastical power in themselves by that Grand Charter As my Father sent me c. Now then this had been a disparagement to Presbytery But lest any man should doubt whether these were Presbyters or no let him Consider that extraordinary work of St. Stephen who went up and down as you may read in the latter part of the 6th Chapter of the Acts doing Miracles and disputing and preaching I dare call it so say Mr. Thomas Hooker what he can with such a Spirit as they could not resist But Mr. Thomas Hooker in his Survey of Church Discipline Part 2. Chap. 2. pag. 36. denyes St. Stephen to be a Preacher and that most Sermon-like discourse I am sure of his Acts 7. he calls an Apology not a Sermon truly I see little of Apology in it and I know some have drawn a little Body of Divinity out of it and I know that vers 51. he drawâ— a most powerfull invective against their manners which cost him his present life in this World If Mr. Hooker will not allow this to be a Sermon he can find few in the whole New Testament SECT VII Some of these were Preachers BUT he shall not escape me so Though this propagation of the Gospel will not be allowed to be a Sermon because I cannot find an express Term so pâ—rasing his discourse I will shew him another of these Deacons in the next Chapter Acts 8. whose discourses to this purpose are called preaching that is of Philip Acts 8. 5. Then Philip went down to the City of Samaria and preached Christ to them The very word used for preaching in English as well as the Original is there placed Hooker himself where before alledged although he omits this verse yet cites the 38th verse of that 8th Chap. where Philip is said to baptize the â—unuch therefore more than a Deacon by his Doctrine but in vain that as I shall shew hereafter But now I will examine his Answer SECT VIII Whether Philip were an Evangelist and what an Evangelist PHilip saith he was an Evangelist and so appointed by God as afterwards appears and by virtue of that and not of his Deaconship he did baptize Indeed he is called an Evangelist Acts 21. 8. And lest we might think them two Philips the Text saith he was one of the Seven that is one of those Seven was chosen Acts 6. to take Care of the Poor but by the way consider that neither then or elsewhere in Scripture are these Seven called Deacons Well first Consider here was a great space of time betwixt the 8. and the 21. Chapt. he might be an Evangelist long after and not one then Degrees and dignities came by steps not the highest at first but suppose he were and suppose he was one before he was made Treasurer or Overseer of the Poor and suppose I conceive an Evangelist did preach the Gospel might baptize then I Conclude that such a man was at the least a Presbyter and that he was as it were degraded in being made such a Deacon by his Consent a Deacon hath nothing to do with Spiritual things but only the Treasure of the Church And therefore it is strange that both he and my Lord Say and Nathaniel Fiennes in their Speeches at the beginning of this Parliament affirmed That because the Apostles would not have Ecclesiastical men meddle with Temporal things they instituted a new Office out of their rank for the performing even these Duties of Charity which in nothing agrees with the Text for it seems at the first the Church layd all the burthen upon the Apostles when they put it off then they chose Ecclesiastical men again and such as were next them either of the Septuagint or else Evangelists certain we may be famous Churchmen St. Stephen Philip and the rest who have honourable mention in Ecclesiastical Story SECT IX An Objection answered BUT before I Conclude this Argument I will frame one great Objection Acts 6. 2. The Apostles said it is not reason we should leave the word of God and serve Tables was it not
seated in the Apostles and none else from those words As my Father sent me so send I you and therefore they had power to settle Offices for the Church as they pleased and there is no Office which had not its foundation from them so that although this question be often handled under these Terms whether Bishops be a distinct Order Jure Divino yet they that hold it Affirmatively must defend it with this phrase Apostolico Divino Apostolical by such a Divine Right not as if Christ immediately instituted it for he instituted none but the Apostles as we read of for the whole World but by such a Divine Right as Christ gave his Apostles power to Institute and they did institute Thirdly Let us Conceive that although perhaps there can be found no Law or Decree by either one or more Apostles which shall in expresse Terms say that by the Authority given us we do erect and institute such an Office for such Registers as I have said we have not yet when it shall appear to be the Apostles practice to ordain such Officers so qualified we may be Confident it was not without Authority for men of such Exemplar obedience and humility even to death would not in their practice act without Law and Authority Fourthly That where any place of Scripture that directs our Practice shall abide a double Interpretation because Quisque abundat sensu suo there the doctrine and practice of such men who were Apostolical conversed and lived with those Apostles themselves must needs be the best Glosse upon such a Text because as it is reasonable to think that they should best understand the Apostles meaning for when Laws are newly made their sense likewise how they should be understood is fresh in mens apprehension but Laws antiquated or grown old must be intrusted to the letter so likewise it is most reasonable to think that they could not write or do amisse in these publike Acts or Writings without Controll and therefore certainly it must needs be the best Comment when the Text abides a doubtful Interpretation to shew that the Apostles disciples which Conversed with them did so understand them Fifthly That the preheminence that I place in a Bishop over a Presbyter consists in these two things The power of giving these Orders which a bare Presbyter hath not and secondly The power of Jurisdiction over such as are only Presbyters of the lower rank These Truths being granted as they must without impudence I addresse my self to the Question wherein I can Complain for lack of mine Adversaries books for such as write for the Opinion I professe I care for none the Scriptures and Antient Fathers which I have by me serve my turn but I have their Hooker and I shall I think in reâ—utation of his Arguments discusse most of that matter which is necessary to this Question if I find any thing unhandled which is necessary to this Question I shall treat of it afterwards SECT V. Mr. Hooker undertaken in this Controversie FOR their Hooker he undertakes this Controversie Part 2. Chap. 1. pag. 22. in which he wastes that Page and the 23d upon a bitter invective distinction of a three-fold Bishop Divine Humane and Sathanical and his description of them which I let alone as impertinent â—roth and Fury of a man that is angry not charitable and as one inquisitive after truth disputing but Page 24. he comes to some sober dispute and to bring reasons against this Vsurped Order as he calls it which I undertake at this present His â—irst reason is as he saith the expresse Testimony of Scripture than which nothing can be more pregnant Titus 1. 5. 7. he only Ciphers out the place I will put down the words For this cause left I thee in Creet that thou shouldest set in order the things which are wanting and Ordain Elders in every City as I had appointed thee then verse 7. For a Bishop c. Now saith he the Apostle having enjoyned his Scholar to Appoint Elders in every City and how they must be qualified he adds â—he reason of his Advice For a Bishop c. Where the Dispute of the Apostle shews not only the Community of the Name but likewise the Identity of the Thing signified thereby otherwise his Argument had not only been a false reason but false in form having four Terms but in truth had not reasoned at all for it had been ready to reply here is a Gap as if the Copy had been imperfect but may easily be made up thus a Bishop is another thing from Presbyter SECT VI. His expressions very unhandsome I Will examine this Discourse and see how partial his expressions are to trouble the Truth First he disparageth Titus with although a true yet a diminishing Term He calls him St. Pauls Scholar only St. Paul in the 4th verse calls him his Son yea his own Son after the Common Faith and the Postscript or Direction is to Titus ordained the first Bishop of the Cretians Secondly He diminisheth likewise that phrase which is of great force to this purpose that is the phrase to ordain Elders he saith to appoint Elders Thus when they Cipher Scripture for the most part Scripture is abused and the heedlesse Reader swallowes in a Misconstruction before he is aware thus having examined his misrepeating the Story in things of importance we will sift his Arguments SECT VII His Argument examined THE force of it is this that there a Bishop and Elder are one thing as well as name I grant it for this dispute but let us see what will result out of it no more but this that in the Apostolical Age this name of Bishop and Presbyter was used for one Office the name Apostle was that which was used for the Superiour Dignity which as I shewed before out of Theodoret when I treated of the Name Apostle that in their Time many were called Apostles which were none of the Twelve but afterwards to avoid Confusion and an Indistinction betwixt the Original Apostles and the Derivative for such as were made by men the Church used this name of Bishops and reserved the Name of Apostle to those men who were so Constituted by our Saviour and that one who was made by Election of Lott into Judas his place So we find diverse phrases not used to such purpose in the New Testament yet prevailed with the Succeeders of the Apostles in such a manner as they gained a Constant use among Ecclesiastical Writers such is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst the Grecians and Sacerdos amongst the Latines words not used for any Order in the Church of Christ any where in the New Testament and yet amongst the Ancients are used for the whole Order of Priesthood as it includes Bishops and sometimes for Bishops alone but as they are the superiour Order in that sort of men and in the latter Age are solely appropriated by the use of Writers to that Order which the Scriptures and the
Presbyters under that general name of Presbyters as Writs are sent out â—o summon the Barons of the Kingdom to Parliaments by which word was understood both Earls and Dukes although by the Name and Notion called the house of Lords So Bishops were called along being Presbyters under that name they are all called both from Ephesus and the Adjacent Parts though that be put down only and then St. Paul gave them all their Charge to look to their Several Duties and execute their several Commissions which they had before received which is all that these words can enforce although this is reasonable yet methinks this is more probable that they were all or for the most part but bare Presbyters for in the first Age of the Church when the Conversion of men to Christ was new and there were but few Christians few Presbyters were necessary and then much sewer Bishops especially the Apostles living and Episcopizing one of them enough for Twenty of us and therefore one Bishop for a great Nation as Titus for Creet where were an hundred Cities was sufficient but Religion increasing in the hearts of men more Presbyters are necessary and they increasing there must be a greater necessity likewise of Bishops but that any of these should be such as we call Bishops to have power over other Presbyters and to give them orders is no way apparent This therefore proves nothing for their parity But he addes that the word Bishop is never used in the New Testament but the Actions therein required belong to any Presbyter He excepts the Case of Judas Acts 1. 20. For my part it is not material how the word is used but what I labour for is that there is such a Thing as the word Bishop now used doth signifie and that the more he or any other Trouble themselves against it it will appear the more clearly as hitherto it doth I will proceed therefore with him page 25. He frameth his Second reason thus SECT X. His Second Argument answered IF they be distinct the Bishop is Superiour but he cannot be superiour every Superiour Order hath superiour Acts and honours belonging thereunto above the Inferiour but Bishops have neither above those that are Presbyters for if labouring in the Word and Doctrine be an Act above ruling and is most worthy of Double honour then the Act and honour of a Presbyter is above the Act and honour of a Bishop for they only assume the Acts of rule but give the Presbyters leave to labour in the Word and Doctrine I have at large discoursed what labouring in the Word and Doctrine is I will not repeat now but begin with his last For they only assume c. which is the foundation upon which this whole discourse is built and I answer that the Bishops do not only assume the Acts of rule but esteem it their duty to labour in the Word And if Mr. Hooker would without prejudice Consider even of that kind of labouring which he and his Sort understand it Pulpit-preaching the World never yielded more fruitfull Industries than those of our Bishops whose Works live to bear witnesse for them being dead and therefore I conceive this to be an Argument of spleen rather than reason and for the second Clause of this foundation that they give the Presbyter leave to labour in the Word they do much more for they Episcopize over them and look to them and by Authority over them make them do it encourage them who do and punish those who do not If men have misdemeaned themselves in their Office no doubt but Twenty Presbyters have done so for one Bishop but yet neither the one nor the other are lesse Jure Divino for that Judas his Office was good he was an ill Officer Nicholas his Office was good he an ill Officer this chose by the Apostles that by Christ himself thus Offices are not disparaged by the Officers But Consider further that although labouring in the Word with the people may be a more Excellent Work than governing or ruling the people as it is more excellent to perswade than to compell men to vertuous Actions They are but half vertues that are forced yet governing Presbyters which is a proper act of Bishops is more excellent than labouring in the Word to the people by how much the Extent of the benefit is more General It produceth the Good of a Diocesse as that of a â—arish But once again although I had thought enough had been said to that Text 1 Tim. 5. 17. Let the Elders that rule well be accounted worthy of Double honour but especially they who labour in the Word and Doctrine yet I will adde somewhat for illustration Suppose this speech were turned from the Church to the Army and a man should say thus Let the Elders the Officers of the Army who govern or rule well their Regiments or the Army be worthy of double honour but especially they who labour and toyl in the heat of the battel could any man Collect from hence that it were a better Act to labour in the Act of fighting than to steer and direct the fighting No sure it is an Act becomming a private Officer and concerns a few but the other who rules well hath the whole fortune of the day the fate of a whole Kingdom sometimes depending on him yet if he can and do upon desperate occasions thrust himself into great hazard he hath an especialty of this Double honour due to him and yet it would not befit him to hazard the day which depends on his providence by neglecting direction to thrust himself into perpetual dangers These Bishops are the Generals of this Spiritual Militia they are to direct and oversee their Diocesse to encourage to command Inferiour Officers to their Duties when they do this well they are worthy of double honour but if when great occasions shall require they act themselves what at other Times they command and take care that others shall do it likewise they have an Especialty of Double honour due to them which is the full Sense of that Text Elders which rule well have a double honour because they have a double excellency both do their own and make others do their duty but if they who have abilities do rule well and labour too then especially much more is that honour due SECT XI His Third Argument answered I Come now to examine his Third Argument which I am sorry to read for it is so full of illogical deductions as methinks it should not be possible for any man to think he could perswade by them It is thus framed If they differ from Presbyters Jure Divino then there are some Ministers by Divine Authority necessary for the gathering of the Church and perfecting the body of Christ besides that of the Presbyter for if the Church can be perfected without these there is no need of these I will stay here a while This Consequence is not good for Ministers may be
is no where given Upon these reasons I cannot see a possible Colour to avoid this Text but that Titus had such a Commission Episcopal as Episcopacy is taken with us SECT XVII A Second Argument to prove Episcopacy MY next place shall be out of 1 Tim. in which we may discern the same Commission as fully delivered as before concerning Ordination Chap. 5. 22. Lay hands suddenly on no man The Qualities of the persons upon whom he should lay on hands described Chap. 3. from vers 1 to 14. for this all may be said as was before in the Case of Titus Here is a Command and Direction to Ordain the Clergy Officers given to one man and therefore by the way of Episcopizing It was a strange unlucky violence to the Text which the Glosse of Beza gives Do not lay hands saith he upon any suddenly Quantum in te est as much as in thee lies for saith he This power was not in Timothy alone but an Election being made by the Consent of the whole Church The Priest a chief man in the name of the Presbytery by Imposition of hands did Consecrate him who was chosen to the Lord Is not this a strange abusing of the Word of God and forcing it to serve mens carnal designes St. Paul bids him not do it suddenly that supposes he could and should do it Beza saith he cannot do it not at all but is only the Mouth of the rest he hath no power to do any thing more than another but never shews any reason for what he saith but referres the Reader to Chapter 4th ver 14th where Timothy is said to receive the power by the Imposition of hands of the Presbytery of which I have spoken somewhat already and God willing shall more hereafter but what is all this to the purpose Timothy is Commanded therefore he could do it yea he is commanded not to do it suddenly therefore he could do it both wayes leasurely and suddenly and he himself in his Short Notes upon the same Text saith that the Command is Neminem Antistes leviter Ordinato Do thou Bishop for so Antistes is often used Do thou ordain none lightly but this Exposition hath no Colour for it nor could St. Paul properly speak more distinctly for it had not been according to the usual Language of men to say Do thou alone do this when a man is authorized to do any thing or Do it by thy sole power they are not Languages used nor do we use to bid a man do any thing which he cannot Act alone but bid him joyn with others in doing such others who are necessarily Co-operators with him in the Work he is to do SECT XVIII Episcopal Jurisdiction proved FOR his Jurisdiction I need not speak much all that Epistle is full of it only â— will touch upon one place which being me thinks of great Brightnesse in it self will serve likewise to give light to the rest and that shall be 1 Tim. 5. 19 20. Against an Elder receive not an Accusation but before or as the Margin under two or three Witnesses Vers. 20. Them that sâ—n rebuke before all that others also may fear From whence thus I discourse Timothy was capable of receiving Accusations against Presbyters or not receiving which is a great piece of Judicial Authority he was likewise Authoritatively to rebuke or correct Presbyters in such sort as if they were Sinners and Guilty of the Accusation laid to their Charge that others by their punishment might learn to avoyd their faults Do these things sound like fellow Presbyters without a Superiority of Jurisdiction Can one fellow Presbyter Censure another or he who is barely a Temporal Speaker or Mouth of the rest This seems to me as full as could be how his Authority was not like Presbyters only over their flock but like a Superiour Shepherd over Inferiours But here with some more Colour in the Case of Timothy they plead he was an Evangelist because 2 Tim. 4. 5. he is bid do the Work of an Evangelist and therefore by the prerogatives belonging to that Office he might do these works of Jurisdiction surely although he was bid do the work of an Evangelist yet that may â—e without being one ex officio An Evangelist is nothing but either a Writer or a Preacher of the Gospel so that do the work of an Evangelist is no more but preach the Gospel and I cannot â—â—nd one man among the Ancients that makes Timothy an Evangelist by Office but I do find St. Chrysostome upon Ephes. 4. peremptorily saying That both Timothy and â—itus were not Evangelists and I find no one man among the Ancients nay I may adde Beza himself or Calvin no one man making it a part of an Evangelists Office either to give Orders or the power of Jurisdiction But these later make them a Subservient Office to the Apostles and if we should allow that what more proper Service than that their name implies to preach the Gospel about with them as they travelled So that it seems to me that these Writers when they utter such Things being learned men some of them and reasonable cannot deceive themselves with those Shadowes but think to drive on their Design with the people who â—earing the name of an Evangelist and not knowing what it is imagine any thing of it what they please to insinuate which in this particular is that an Evangelist had some transcendent power over Presbyters both to ordain and govern them which was not Communicable to others but they never shew that any such Authority is assigned them or any such Duty exacted from them Well it appears that Timothy had Episcopal Jurisdiction as well as Titus and this name Evangelist given by them for this Occasion only is but a meer Illusion I shall here therefore for a while leave St. Pauls Epistles and go to St. John in the Revelation Chap. 1. vers 20. The seven Stars are the Angels of the Seven Churches SECT XIX The Revelation asserâ—ing Episcopacy HEre these Angels were such men as had Episcopal Jurisdiction appears most reasonably to any Indifferent Reader upon these Grounds First because this word Angâ—l as I have shewed hath in its own signiâ—ication genuinely the same sense with Apostle and therefore may well be fitted to the same Office and as that was never applyed to any under a Bishop so neither this as any man can shew me in the whole New Testament That it is a name likewise appropriated to Spirits sent about Apostolical Employments and endowed by God who sends them with Apostolical Authority So that then whether Angel be applyed to Spirits or men it will in both or either receive this Common sense to be understood That these persons whether Spirits or bodies have divine Authority to act those things they are employed about Now then thus the word being of such a sense and no where otherwise understood we may from hence think it most reasonable that this
name should be affixed to such men nor do I find any man adventuring to shew any place where this word doth lesse than signifie a Bishop Then let us Consider that they are called after in the second Chapter The Angel of the Church of Ephesus the Angel of the Church of Smyrna c. which being great and populous regions could not reasonably but have many Presbyters in them and then to write to one Angel if the name Angel did stoop so low as Presbyter were to write to no man knew whom because there were so many there but if Angel as it is be understood of one in an higher and more exalted State than the rest who might be known by this name Angel as peculiarly due to him then and then only we may understand who it is that is meant by it but if any man should allow nothing but Scripture to prove so clear truth and say there was but one Presbyter in each of these Churches he may find that Acts 20. ver 17 18. St. Paul sent for the Presbyters in the plural number of the Church of Ephesus and when they were come to him he said to them still they and them in the plural number That Text will require a further Examination perhaps hereafter In the mean time take this because it is urged for a Unity of Office betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter from the 28th verse where St. Paul saith Take heed to your selves and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers that is Bishâ—ps then those that were called Presbyters before were called Bishops afterwards I have often said before that the name Bishop and Presbyter I conceive to be taken promiscuously in the New Testament for the same Office That the word Apostle was solely that name which was used by the way of propriety to that Office both to themselves who were originally such and to those who by their Appointment succeeded them But this is it I contend for That amongst them which they made their Successors they gave to some of them a greater and fuller power than to others both to govern and to ordain which since the Church hath called Bishops Now then from hence whether there were many Bishops in the Province of Ephesus or many Presbyters only yet many there were and these many were so inferiour to one that he is called the Angel which name was so appropriated to him as he might know to whom the Letter was directed or else as if a Man should write a Letter and superscribe it to the Alderman of London where are many no man could know whither to send it or who should receive it but if a man superscribe it to the Mayor every man knows who that is Thus must it be with these he to whom this Letter is superscribed must have this Angelical Condition so fitted to him that he must be known by that name that name solely agreeing to him But some here offer at an Answer That he might be like a Mayor have a superiour Dignity above the rest such as is notified by that name Angel which yet may not make a Bishop such as we require He may be a Temporary Governour such as the Presbyterian allows a President of a Synod who this year governs but the next resigâ—s his place and when he is there he hath no more to do but regulate the Synod no greater Authority than the rest To both these in their Order No Temporary Bishop or Superiour I am Confident that I never read of any such Thing and therefore am perswaded that no man can shew me out of Ecclesiastical Story that any man was outed of his Bishoprick but for Heresie Schism or Gross Impiety of Life when men have grown through old Age or Infirmities otherwise incapable of â—xecuting their Office they have had Coadjutors and helpers in their Office but not been deposed but by Death or some such occasion as before described and those that by Ecclesiastical Story were reckoned Bishops of these places at this time are recorded to dye Bishops And it seems a mighty Selfishnesse to me that any man should oppose his reasonlesse Conjectures against all Story when indeed these Epistles cannot be expounded but by Story as in particular the 13th verse of the 2d Chapter where speaking to the Angel or Bishop I may call him most Conâ—idently of the Church of Pergamus He commends him because thou hast not denyed my Faith even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithfull Martyr If a man would ask what Commendation of his Faith was this What was the Excellency of it Can any man answer me but out of Ecclesiastical Story where it is recorded that after a long and pious life full of all virtue led in Pergamus he was in the dayes of Domitian for the Testimony of his Religion put into a brazen Bull and in that Bull burnt now then this Bishops faith was Eminent that in such a cruel and fiery Tryal he kept his Integrity even in such a Time when thaâ— horrid President of the death of Antipas was set before him Thus I say Ecclesiastical Story is necessary for the Exposition of these Epistles as you may find prophane Story necessary for the Exposition of the Prophets in the Old Testament for a man then to talk of such an Officer concerning which there is no mention in the Word nor any in Story but a Poem a fictioâ— of their own Imagination is not like men that guided themselves by Scripture to undertake I close therefore with the 2d Exception which is that their Government was not such as is Episcopal but only such as is the president of a Synod to direct the businesse not Command more than others and this certainly the frame of these Letters doth Confute mightily for they make the Angâ—ls responsible for the faults and heresies which were under the Government which they could not be if they had only the Authority of Presidents but not of Bishops for a President of a Synod hath no Coercive power in himself but as conjoyned with the rest of the Synod and involved Nor hath he any particular Interest in the ruling or swaying the Affairs of the Church but is the mouth of the Synod therefore although if he neglect his duty in the Synod he may well be censured for it yet he cannot have the faults of the Inferiour Clergy or people layd to his Charge in particular take one Instance in the 15th verse of the 2d Chapter the Angel of the Church of Pergamus is censured because he had them which held the Doctrine of the Nicholaitans which Christ hates Should any one ask why the President should be Censured for these things He could answer I am but one man perhaps they can master me in the Synod I have nothing to do alone but a Bishop who hath Coercive power and can both examine and censure any who are in his Diocesse he may be punished because he did
as should be their Judges in Spiritual Things and have Authority over them and guide them and assist their Souls to Eternal Salvation But here he inserts an Objection against himself which he saith is ordinarily in the mouth of the Prelates and indeed deserves to be likewise in their heart Tit. 1. 4. for this Cause have I left thee in Creet that thou shouldest Ordain Elders in every City as I have appointed there the power of Ordaiâ—ing Elders in Cities is left to one man not to the people He answers the Apostle did appoynt him to do this work but to do it according to his mind and in the Order which Christ had instituted and of which he had given him a precedent pattern To skip unnecessary Discourse Acts 14. 23. When they had Created them Elders in every Church or as the Geneva reads it when they had ordained Elders in every Church by election and prayed and fasted they commended them to God â— First this Text I have sufficiently examined before but now must make Application again in this businesse it is urged for Titus was bid do it that is apparent and no doubt if our Saviour had instituted any particular way of doing it that would have been implyed in St. Pauls Command it should be done that way and none other but neither he nor any man living can shew me any way prescribed by our Saviour therefore that was in vain 2dly For St. Pauls own practice it might be various upon diversities of occasions and therefore if he had urged that he would have said as thou hast had me for an Example at such a Time but this is not shewed for this particular Take the Geneva reading that the â—lders were ordained by Election yet let us Consider what election can be meant there certainly that Election of which I have formerly dâ—scoursed which must precede Ordination an â—lection of Paul and Barâ—abas for if we will mark the Story at the beginning of this Chapter they were both frighted by the persecution from Iconium then they fled to â—ystra in the 19th verse you may observe St. Paul stoned at Lystra and Iconium where they ordained Elders in every Church by Election saith the Geneva supposâ— it But can it be imagined that such Concourses of people which according to these men should be the Electors of their Elders durst assemble together in places where the persecutors were powerfull without an uproar this could not be imagined and therefore no other Election can be understood but that of the Apostles that they chose whom they thought hittest and dismissed them to their Parishes and yet I am confident that Geneva reading cannot be enforced out of the Original as I shall more largely discourse elsewhere God willing and if that reading were true yet you see what Election must be understood for although if these Apostles Barnabas and Paul had been in quiet places and Ordained these men for those quiet places they were in there might be some Colour yet since they were in places of hot persecution and this phrase every Church implies all those Adjacent Church it necessarâ—ly follows in a Moral necessity that this Election was made by the Apostles and not by those Churches who could not there be then assembled in such full Companies as would become such a Duty and herein observe a strange license of expounding Scripture to abuse a cleâ—r and evident Text by wresting it with a Glosse according as he had done before to a Dubious Text yea such an one as cannot be expounded to their Sense without violent partiality But he urgeth at the latter end of this Argument That this was the Apostles mind and meaning in this Charge to Titus the words of the Text shew for it is added that he should redresse Things that are amisse and saith he must not this be done by the Officers and the Church also according to the rule of Christ I reply there is no rule of Christ given which saith so he should have shewed the rule for that which perhaps may be aimed at our Saviours rule tell the Church must be understood of the Church Officers it can have no other Sense for the Church totally for every person cannot ordinarily be assembled and totally can never but the Church quoad hoc for this purpose in its Officers and no other way and therefore the rule was given to him and him only to redresse such Things as were amisse SECT XII His Second Argument answered HIS Second Argument in the bottom of Page 52. is thus framed It is not the scope of Ordination by God appointed to give the Essentials of an Officers call therefore from thence it is not to be expected in an Orderly way He supposeth the Consequence undeniable and therefore undertakes only the proof of the antecedent for which he Cyphers out that place 1 Tim. 4. 14. Neglect not the Gift which is in thee which was given thee by prophesy with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery out of this he would prove his Conclusion he therefore in the fear of God as he speaks addresseth himself to the Consideration of three things What the gift is here said to be in Timothy 2ly How it was given by Prophesy 3ly What the laying on of the hands of the Elders was and why used In the search of which he spends many pages page 54. he begins and ends page 59. I will draw the summe of what he saith For the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rendered Gift he after Discourse of diverse acceptations conceives page 55. That those spiritual Graces and abilities with which Timothy was enabled to do his great work of his supposed Evangelizing are meant but before I go further here he Contradicts himself in the beginning of page 26. where he produceth this and this only place to prove that Ordination is the work of the whole Presbytery but here he distinguisheth the Abilities from the Office as Contradistinct Expositions For the 2d Term what was meant by given by Prophesy he first discourseth impertinently of the Office of an Evangelist to shew it was extraordinary yet sometimes given by means neither of which hath any foundation in Scripture That he saith Philip was made an Evangelist immediately without the mediation of man hath no one word of Scripture for it but only Acts 8. where he is called an Evangelist but not described which way Authorized either immediately or mediately For the 2d That one should be made an Evangelist by the Ordination of men he produceth this Text where there is no word of Scripture nor Exposition of any Antiquity which saith That he was by this Ordination made an Evangelist but Antiquity Theophylact and abundance say Bishop Again he confesseth it against his own Exposition of this word Gift which before was only Ability but now must be both Ability and Office so hard a thing is it for Error to be constant and to raise a strong building upon a
Argument is If Ordiâ—ation give the Essentials to an Officer before Election there may be a Pastor without people an Officer sine Titulo as they use to speak and a Pastor should be made a Pastor at large the rest is nothing but an Application to Mr. Rutherford's Simile of a Ring which concerns not us But this Argument of his invites me to speak of a pastoral Ordination which will perhaps give farther Illustration to the whole body of this Discourse A Pastor and a â—lock are relatives and do mutually se ponere tollere where one is the other must be where one is not the other cannot be Now then to be made a Pastor will require to have a flock this shall be presupposed and again every Pastor hath not all Pastoral Offices I can well suppose a mighty great flock which requires many Shepherds but one Chief above the rest he hath all Pastoral offices folds feeds drives to field prescribes pâ—stures medicines and doth all this by the Supream Pastoral power that is granted him either by his own hands or by the ministry of those Inferiours which are under him but they have partial Authorities only to feed or â—old or catch or drive as their several shares are dâ—signed the second part of the Division of the Pastoral Charge these men must grant who divide their Governours into several Offices Pastors Teachers Rulers which have their several Duties assigned them and it is most unreasonable for them to deny the first That one should have Superiority over the rest since as reason would direct without some body to over-look and attend them they would easily entrench upon one anothers duties or neglecting their own invite those others to put their hands to their work and what this reason directs that I think I have shewed the Scripture likewise Crowns with its approbation Now the first sort of Pastors are those we term Bishops the second Presbyters the flock they are to feed is the Church of Christ when they are admitted Pastors and so ordained according to their several Duties That which Hooker page 61. brings out of one Mr. Best as if St. Austin or some General Councel had dâ—creed it is absolutely to be denyed namely that an Apostle differeth from a Pastor that the Apostle is a Pastor throughout the whole Christian World but the Pastor is tyed to a certain Congregation out of which he is not to exercise Pastoral Acts. This I deny if he affirm it by Divine Right but if by Ecclesiastical Authority only which hath designed particular Bishops and Presbyters to particular places I shall yield much of it For the first part concerning the Apostles know that their Commission was universal as it is set down Mat. 28. 19. Go teach all Nations c. and John 20 As my Father sent me c. and we must conceive this to be divisim not conjunctim only every one had all this power not all only nor as Bellarmine would have Lib. 2. De Romano Pontifice Cap. 12. St. Peter only and the rest from him for we see the Commission granted to all but yet we must know that their Authority was habitu or potentia only in every one it was not actâ— in any they might Episcopize Apostolize in any place of the World They did Episcopize Apostolize only where they were râ—sident Just as I have Conceived if Adam had lived in his Integrity every man had had an habituâ—l and potential royalty over all the Creatures in the world yet he would have exercised that Royalty only where he lived yet he might have Travelled any where and have justly enjoyed any part of the World although actually he could possesse but his Share Now this was the Jurisdiction of every Apostle in all the whole Catholick Church habitually not actually as the Church of Rome would have their Apostolical Man as they call him the Pope and all this was necessary for them as Apostles which is men sent for the propagation of the Gospel to the planting and confirming of Churches other powers they had of Languages of Miracles which were necessary to the first plantation but no longer and therefore they were not peculiar to them but others had them besides as likewise that mighty power of being Inspired to write Scripture which did not appear in all of them and some others besides them had that power as St. Luke and Marke and some think St. James to be the Bishop of Jerusalem who writ that Epistle But now of those which were the Apostles it is evident that these Gifts were not Apostolical as belonging so to them as Apostles and it will appear in the other Cause That the Bishops succeeded them in every thing that was Apostolical although not in these extraordinary Endowments for the Apostolical power of planting setling Churches of propagating the Gospel throughout the whole World and enlarging the Kingdom of Christ must remain for ever and therefore though the manner of doing it by such Signs and Wonders be not communicated yet the Office must and therefore he who is a Bishop or Presbyter by divine right is such throughout the whole Word to this purpose you may observe in that famous place of Acts 20. 28. so much and so often canvased by them who handle these Controversies in other points but not thought on in this you may observe that St. Paul speaking to divers Presbyters or Bishops which you will he saith Take heed therefore to your selves and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers or Bishops to feed the Church of God which he purchased with his own blood Observe here that he spake to many and diverse Bishops or Presbyters I stand not upon thâ—t now he spâ—ke to them in the plural Number but when he speaks of the flock they were to pastorize over he puts it in the singular Number now if the Holy Ghoâ— had made them Bishops of particular Congregations only it must have been the flock every one his several but being all made Pastors of the Catholick Church he names it one flock and so likewise to feed or Sheperdizâ— over not the Churches but the Church of Christ which indeed were no way congruous if the Holy Ghost had made them Officers of particular Churches and confined them there but making them Officers of the Vniversal Church which Christ had purchased with his blood and all Officers of that it is rightly put in the singular number flock and Church This likewise the Holy Ghost intimates every where describing the Church to us by the name of a â—ield a Vineyard a City and multitudes of such Expressions which as much as this of a flock intimate the unity of that Body which is his Church his â—lock over which these are Pastors in their several wayes not only their little Congregations Now the wisdom of the Church finding that although the potential and habitual power is universal yet the actual cannot be exercised further
Canons of this Councel because there was an ill use made thereof against two eminent Fathers of the Church St. Athanasius and St. John Chrysostome who suffered much trouble and persecution upon the pretence of the IV. and XII Canons thereof from their Adversaries and were sentenced by them before they well heard But in particular concerning the Canon of this Councel about the power of the Chori-Episcopi it is well observed by Estius ubi supra that the words thereof are very intricate and perplexed as we shall now declare in the Chapter following CHAP. XV. The Argument to prove these Chori-Episcopi and their power to Ordain Presbyters examined I Think the likelyest man in the world to expound this Canon is Balsamon who was Patriarch of that Church and although he lived a good while after this Councel yet the sence and meaning of the decrees of his own Church is likelyer to be preserved by him and them in that Church than in any other places and men which lived further remote Therefore in his Comment upon the Canon and those particular words upon which the whole foâ—ce of this Argumentis built Illud autem sine Episcopo qui est in Urbe non accipitur pro eo quod est sine ejus mandato sed pro eo quod est sine ejus Ordinatione seu Consecratione et si enim fuerit Chori-Episcopo mandatum ut Praesbyterum ordinet hoc fecerit irrita erit Ordinatio quia non sit data Praesbyteris ordinandi potestas than which words nothing can be more clear to shew that these Chori-Episcopi here spoken of could not Ordain so now in answer to this Argument of Doctor Forbes drawn from the tenth Canon of the Antiochian Councel it is not of any force because the Councel is of none being made by Heretiques in a wicked Schism conspiring against that ever to be honour'd person Athanasius and urged to the destruction of that incomparable person John Chrysostome Secondly granting it to be of force yet by the best expositor in the world for that Councel Balsamon expounds the dubious language of that Canon against Doctor Forbes now then the business of Pope Damasus his decree falls of it self which introduceth a new work for me SECT II. Pope Damasus his decree examined THis Epistle in Crabbs Edition of the Councels is the fourth but in Binius the fifth Epistle of Damasus and it is sufficiently Pontifical it destroys all Chori-Episcopi and saith that they were prohibited as well by that Seat of Rome as by all the Bishops in the world this he saith there and we must take his word for it only for I find no such thing upon record before or after as will appear when I treat of the nature of them but he inveighs justly agaisnt the Laziness of Bishops which saith he brought them into like Nurces to suckle their children for them whilest they the Bishops might enjoy their ease and pleasure To conclude the whole drift of that Epistle is to prove that these Country Bishops are but Presbyters and therefore have no power to Ordain Priests and Doctor Forbes saith clean contrary that although they were but Presbyters yet by that accursed Councel of Antioch they might Ordain Priests The words of that Canon Damasus mentions although he do not name the Councels and truly these words seemed to me to be of great force quamquam impositionem Episcoporum perceperint where he observes the Plural number imposition of Hands of Bishops many in the Plural number of which more hereafter now if they did I know not what can hinder them by any Canon from a remote power to Ordain which may be acted by only leave from the Bishop himself but this is enough for the business of the decree of Damasus it seems he was angry with them and disputes against them and condemns them but as Doctor Forbes well observes this decree of his was but little or not at all obey'd either because this was no true but a counterfeit Epistle or whether these decrees of Popes extra Cathedram were not valid I know not but do know this that it was not observed so here we see a wicked Councel condemned by a Pope and that Pope neglected by all men afterwards what he urgeth out of Isidore Hispalensis is of no consideration but only to mark that the Popes decree was not observed in his time for Isidore there which is Lib. 2. de Ecclesiasticis officiis Cap. 6. sets down only the bare words of the two Councels of Neocaesarea and this of Antioch that of Neocaesarea only compares the Chori-Episcopi to the Disciples this of Antioch will prove a most perplexed decree in its self and such which may probably be objected against Doctor Forbes as well as expounded for him for that out of Neocaesarea which compares the Chori-Episcopi to the seventy Disciples Damasus shews that they Ordained but only the Apostles and Isidore hath not one word of discourse concerning this office as he uses to have concerning all others but only sets down the words of the Canons so that it remains for all him just as it was which is most intricate Damasus seems to conceive that the Records of this Canon did allow them with leave of the Bishop to Ordain Deacons and Priests and that the Laziness of Bishops connived at it for which reason he condemns them not the fault only but for the faults sake the very office this office we find continued in Isidores time after him in the Church and in late times as I shall shew so that as the Pope thought the Canon of that Councel not obliging so the Christian world thought his decrees invalid wherefore I might well lay them both aside SECT III. This Canon Reviewed BUt I will examine the Canon to see if it have any necessary construction that way There are two principal things which are disputeable in this Canon first whether these Chori-Episcopi might give Orders to Presbyters with leave of the Bishop of the City whereto they appertain secondly whether any of them were Bishops by Episcopal Ordination in both which we may find the Canon so perplexed as it will be hard to collect a clear conclusion of it For the first it is urged by Doctor Forbes that the words of the Canon in all Editions of which he quotes three make for him the first is of Dionysius Exigâ—us a grave Author and he urgeth his words truly Nec Praesbyterum nec Diaconum audeant Ordinare praeter Civitatis Episcopum speaking of Chori-Episcopi they should not Ordain a Priest or Deacon praeter besides the Bishop of the City to whom he with his possession is subject Is not this rightly termed by Estius a perplexed Canon then next take the Edition of Gentianus Hervetus which reads it absque Vrbis Episcopo he must not Ordain these without the Bishop of the City this I take to be in his Edition of Balsamon for so it is there and then why Balsaman
should not Ordain Priests Vasques in answer to this saith that the imposition of the Hands of Bishops is not to be understood of many Bishops laying on their Hands at the same time upon the same man but that several Bishops at several times laid their Hands upon several Chori-Episcopi but to this may be urged that word quamvis as one or etiamsi as another Edition why should the Canon say although he be Ordained by the imposition of Hands of Bishops and Consecrated as a Bishop this although would there signifie nothing for he should not be by it distinguished from a Presbyter but because some were and some were not Ordained by Bishops it reacheth even those who were so Ordained Doctor Forbes is not content with this answer of Vasques but adds another of his own at the bottom of Page 171. and throughout 172 where before cited the sence of which is that the imposition of Hands here mentioned is not to be understood passively for the imposition of Hands which they receive themselves but actively for that imposition of Hands which they had power of to give I think I have set it down as clearly as his words can be rendered for indeed his Language is as obscure as the Canon it self but this is most forced nor indeed can a man conceive Canonically how a Chori-Episcopus could receive that active which he mentions unless he had received it passively first by the imposition of Hands of divers Bishops nor can a man well imagine in that Language ut Episcopi Ordinantur what that ut should mean if it did not come to explain the former Phrase of imposition of Hands of divers Bishops so that then for ought I see Bellarmines exposition against both these adversaries is the most clear and congruous to the Canon let us now examine Pope Damasus's Arguments as they are scholastically urged by Vasques and that is the marrow of all that is in this Epistle SECT V. Damasus his first Argument against the Chori-Episcopi answered Damasus seems to me eitheir with Bellarmine to think there were two sorts of Chori-Episcopi in the time of making the Canon which may be perswaded because although he begins with this Argument from the Plural number before urged yet he never endeavours an answer to it or else believing them all but Presbyters he thinks that his other Argument may invalid this and notwithstanding this being deficient in other things they are not Bishops by it His first Argument is drawn from the word Chori which signifies Countrey they were but country Bishops when as all Bishops should be of a City To this I answer that although such Canons may be made for the establishment of the government of Churches in a setled Kingdom where are such Cities for the Decorum and honour of the Episcopal Sea yet it cannot be in unsetled States as suppose the Gospel should be preached in the barbarous places of the West-Indies where are no such places to give Episcopacy that honour yet the Church may and ought to be planted and governours put into them to regulate their discipline oâ— else things will go backward faster than forward in the matters of Religion Again we may conceive if such Canons be insisted upon that they should be understood of prime and chief Bishops not such as are Vicarii Episcoporum that is vicars of the chief Bishops Now it may happen that there be a necessity of such vicars and they may be of great use to the Bishop of the City whose Diocess is large as will appear shortly and these Chori-Episcopi although they may be impeded in the execution of their office by the superior authority of the Bishop of the City yet with his consent are impowred to Ordain in these cases which is most agreeing to the letter of the Canon according to any Edition either sine or praeter or whatsoever it is This is enough I think for the first Argument of Pope Damasus SECT VI. His next Argument answered ANother is thus framed there are but two Orders of Priesthood Bishops and Presbyters this he enlargeth and proves from the Church under the Law where were Aaron and his Sons only in the Priesthood as likewise from our Saviour himself who had only Apostles and Disciples so saith he it should be in the present Church now it seems these Chori-Episcopi are neither they esteem themselves greater than Presbyters and yet are not Bishops wherefore nothing in answer what they esteem themselves I know not but we have good reason to think some were Bishops and some only Presbyters and they who were Bishops might act these great offices of Ordaining Priests and Deacons with leave of the Bishop of the Diocess those who were only Priests could not Thus Damasus his Arguments are are of no force against that Canon of Antioch and therefore Vasques himself acknowledgeth in that 238. Disp. Cap. 7. That Damasus did conceive that in the time of the Council of Antioch some Chori-Episcopi were Bishops and he affirms that if they had Episcopal Consecration although they were but titular Bishops and so had no place assigned at their Consecration where they should officiate yet they had that power granted them at their Consecration which might be reduced into act whensoever a place was assigned them and yet Damasus condemns them for the future which was never obeyed SECT VII One word in the Canon more explained THere is one word more in the Canon which may abide a misinterpretation and is somewhat insisted upon by Doctor Forbes that is in the latter end of the Canon it is said that he the Chori-Episcopus must be Ordained by the Bishop to whom he and his possession are subject Now if he be Ordained by one Bishop only certainly he is but a Presbyter for although as I have said in a case of necessity one Bishop hath been allowed to Consecrate and the power Apostolical was to them Separative to every one to Ordain yet when Laws were substituted by Ecclesiastique authority for the well government of the Church and severe punishments inflicted upon the violation of them as are in this case it is not reasonable to think that men living in obedience to that Church should dare â—o break them in publique and that constantly as it seems this is for answer to this I say that this makes it evident that this Canon is delivered concerning a double sort of Chori-Episcopi some that were made by the imposition of Hands of divers Bishops and others that were ordained by one only which is all is required and so I will pass to my last proposal to shew what these Chori-Episcopi were CHAP. XVI What the Chori-Episcopi were IT is a hard task which I do not find clearly delivered by any what I find shall be set down and leave the determination to others In general my conceipt of them is this that as it happens in other Parisnes where Presbyters have the charge that where they are large and