to â cramental Obligation already and no Man hath Aâthority to impose another Obligation in tâ same Complex sacramental Action These are some of the Reasons that it's hopâ will justifie our not Complying with the Sign the Cross in Baptism and may satisfie those of ânother Perswasion that we do not indulge peeviâ Scruples against it but are over-awed with tâ Word of GOD not daring to add to it or off any Worship which He hath not commanded Our 5th Exception is your peremptory requiâing the Re-Ordination of our Ministers otherwiâ by your Laws they shall be no Ministers amoâ you nor to any others so far as your Power câ reach And this we judge a rejecting of us altogâther and a manifest Injury to the Church of GOâ for first our Ministers of the Presbyterian Perswâsion are Elected and Ordained according to tâ Rules of Scripture the People Electing a Presbâtry Ordaining It were good if you were able â say as much for your selves 2. As our Ministers Ordination is Scripturaâ it is the same Ordination approved and practisâ by the Reformed Churches Abroad allowing â Bishops Superior to Presbyters as appears âainly by their Confessions of Faith of which âu may now take a taste The French Confession Art 30. We Believe that the True Church ought to be Goverâd by that Regiment or Discipline which Our Lord âsus Christ hath Established viz. That there be in it âastors Elders aend Deacons We Believe that all true âastors in whatsoever Place they be placed have the âme and equal Authority among themselves given unâ them under Jesus Christ the only Head The Confession of Belgia Art 31. In whatsoever Place of the World the Ministers of âe Word of GOD do keep they have all of them the âme and equal Power and Authority being all of âem equally the Ministers of Christ the only univerâl Head and Bishop of the Church The latter Confession of Helvetia The Power that is given to the Ministers of the âhurch is the same and alike in all in the beginning âe Bishops or Elders did with a common Consent and âabour Govern the Church no Man lifted up himâlf above another These and the like Confessions of other Reformed Churches are the publick Standard aâ Authentique Testimony of their Judgement Aâ therefore the privat Sentiments of a few late Fâreign Divines writing in Favour of another Gâvernment of the Church whether by Mis-infâmation or declining from their own professâ Principles are not to be valued Though soâ are now at great Pains to scrape together if not procure Epistles from Forreigners approving Episcopal Government and so to impose on tâ credulous a belief that the Churches Abroad aâ of the same Mind But the publick Records these Churches are a permanent Testimony agaiâ them so that it 's evident the Government of the Churches being by Ministers in parity of powâ there can be no Episcopal ordination among theâ 3. If Ordination performed by Ministers in pârity of Power be not valide but Null and Voiâ for the want of Prelacy then their Ministeriâ Administrations are also null void as perforâed by non habentibus Potestatem and if so then thâ great Body of Protestants have neither lawfâ Pastors to Feed them nor due Administration Sacraments nor are so much as professed Chrisâans wanting Baptism the publick Badge of Châstianity For if Ministers be not lawfully Authârized and Ordained they cannot warrantably Baâtize in the Name of the Father Son and Hoâ Ghost it being a Profanation of that Ordinanâ fâr any others to Administer it Let us then make Supposition that a baptized Member of the Reârmed Churches Abroad should seriously enâuire at any of you whether he were Lawfully âaptized or not for you give him Occasion to âoubt whether such a Minister had Authority to âaptize him what would be your Answer if you ây he was not lawfully baptized because the Miâister wanted Episcopal-Ordination then you âake your selves Schismaticks of the highest âorm Unchurching so many True Churches of âhrist And if you say he was lawfully Baptized âen the Minister who baptized him was lawfully ârdained and if he was lawfully Ordained by Miâisters in parity of Power Abroad why then are âot Ministers lawfully Ordained at Home being Ordained in the same manner without Episcopal Ordination And if lawfully Ordained why is Reârdination required If you will please patiently to âeflect on your own Way as to the Point of Reârdination it will be hard to make one part of it âonsist with another for if ye own the Gospel-Adâinistrations of Ministers Ordained without a Bishop you are thereby engaged to own their Orâination as valide And that you do acquiesce in âheir Gospel Administrations as valid is manifest for instance if one baptized by a Presbyter who âever had Episcopal-Ordination shall come to âe a Member of your Communion you require no Re-baptising and if ye have other Pre-requiâ for Confirmation ye will confirm and admit â to the Lords Supper and if afterward he sâripen farther and be qualified for Church-âders you will make a Minister of him this aâ many other Instances are sufficient to Prove yâ convinced and satisfied that the Gospel-Admiâstrations of such Ministers are Valide before GOâ and Man Let the Reader then Judge how congruous it is for you to require their Re-orânation after upon the matter you have acknoâledged the validity of their Ordination already 4. We humbly offer it to Consideration tâ a Bishop over Presbyters not being by Divine stitution hath no greater Power in Ordinatiâ than any other Gospel-Minister because all tâ Power he hath by Commission is as a Presbyter Scriptural Bishop and as such all such have qual Ministerial Power granted by the Gospâ Charter as hath been abundantly evinced alrâdy and therefore Ordination is as valide withâ a Bishop as with him if a Presbytry Ordaiâ Which is the Scripture Patern And many Instâces might be given of the Ordination of Miâsters without a Bishop Gelas in act Concil Nicâ Asserteth that Presbyters Ordain though the Bishoâ not present and Ambrose on the Ephes saith the saâ and your own Bishop Stilling fleet in his Iren. pâ 380. 381. affordeth you plenty of such Instanâ where Ordination of Ministers was performed âithout a Bishop And though the Kingdom of âotland did early receive the Christian Faith yet âe find by Johanes Major de gestis Scot. lib. 2. âp 2. That there was no Episcopal Ordination in that âurch before An. 430. and that they were instructed âe Episcopis So Fordon Scot. Chron. lib. 3. cap. 8. ânte Palladij adventum habebant Scoti fidei Doctores Sacramentorum Ministratores Presbyteros solumâodo vel Monachos ritum sequentes Eclesiae primitivae âeir Teachers and such as administred the Sacraâents were only Presbyters or Monks following âe Custom of the primitive Church Having now discovered some of the strongest âross-bars that are laid in our Way obstructing âr Communion in Worship with the established âhurch We shal come
was the Will of GOD that such an Officer as a âshop over Presbyters should be in the House â GOD that they might obey him in the LORâ 3. The Apostle in the following Words giveâ Warning that after his Departure grievous Wolvâ shall enter in among them not sparing the Flock aâ verse 30. of their own selves shall Men arise speaâing perverse things to draw away Disciples after theâ Yet for all this Danger he giveth no Direction set up a Bishop over other Ministers for presâving the Flock nor any Intimation that it wâ the Will of GOD to provide such a Remedy aâterwards But requireth the Pastors to Watch aâ commendeth them to GOD and the Word of hâ Grace which was able to Build them up wheâ by we may see they are remitted to the word for Dârection in what concerneth his Church and nâ to invent without the Word a Remedy of theâ own devising 4. From the same Scripture â are also instructed that the instituted Pastors â the Church are to feed and take heed unto all â Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath maâ them Overseers And therefore Gospel-Ministeâ are to have no greater Charge than such as thâ may perform all the Duties belonging to a Pastoâ to all the Flock And if any Minister assumâ greater Charge than he can perform these Duâ unto then it is not that Charge that the Holy Ghâ hath committed to him If it be said that the Bishop feedeth the Flock â his Substituts such as he is pleased to appoint Answ But quo jure by what Right or Authoâty can he substitute another to do that which he âth assumed for his own Work and personal Perârmance it was a doubt that the learned Sir Franâ Bacon said he could never be resolved of how a Man that had a Trust committed to him for his perânal Faithfulness could delegate that Trust to another âd if a Bishop say he never engaged to Feed so âany then it may be justly replyed he was never âastor to so many Why then should he presume âe Title and Name of their Pastor When he ââweth it simply impossible for him to Teach âd Feed them or the twentieth part of them acârding to the Duty of a Pastor It 's also to be observed that as by this and maâ other Texts the Ministers of the Gospel have âual Pastoral Authority de jure so we find in the âriptures that de facto they are placed in Possessiâ of this ministerial-Ministerial-Power and exercise it with âvine Approbation For Presbyters ordain Miâsters as 1 Tim. 4. 14. and are therein approved â the Apostle Timothy being charged not to neâct the Gift he had thereby received 2. A Comânity of Presbyters exert their Power in Church âscipline and are required by the Apostle so to â 1 Cor. 5. 4. and 5. verses This Sentence was âicted by many not by one assuming the sole Power of Jurisdiction to himself which is câsonant to our Saviours Doctrine Matth. 18. 1â who requireth the offended Brother to tell â Church not a single Person if Christ had coâmitted the Power of Discipline to One than â Complaint of the offended Brother should hâ been to that One for to whom should he Coâplain but to such as had Power to do him Justiâ and remove the Offence But we see Christ's âpointment is not to make Application to One â to the Church Therefore it 's no Institution Christ that authoritative church-Church-Power be loâed in one Person So also we find that Presbyters are Constituâ Members of that famous Juridical Synod at Jeâsalem Acts 15. the Apostles and Elders came to âther to consider the Matter in which Assemâ there is not one found to Over-rule the Rest â assuming a negative Voice Though some presâ had more just Authority in the Church than â now on Earth can pretend to yet all had fâ liberty to speak their Judgement and all carâ by Suffrages and that which was concluded plâed the Apostles and Elders and is published in â Name of the Apostles and Elders whereby it's parent that in the Apostles time Presbyters â in the actual exercise of Church-Government âtherwise the Decrees of the Synod had never â published in their Name We shall not at prâ multiply Arguments but let these three be duely ânsidered 1. That the Office of a Prelate canât be found in the Roll of Church-Officers 2. ârists Discharging his Ministers to be one of âem Greater than another And 3. The Diâe Institution of parity among Ministers Object Timothy and Titus are called Bishops in â Bibles therefore Bishops are by Divine Instiâtion Answ All Gospel Pastors are Bishops accorâg to the Word of GOD and therefore tho' âey were Bishops which cannot be granted ât the Episcopal Cause gaineth nothing because âshops above Presbyters are never found in our âbles 2. These Postscripts to the 2d Epistle to Tiâthy and the Epistle to Titus are not Canonick âripture but added several Ages after the Canon Scripture was closed and after the Church beân to degenerat which is irrefragably evinced Mr Pryn in his Unbishoping of Timothy and âus and is acknowledged both by Papists and âers that the most antient Copies have no such âstscripts and therefore our Bibles have these âstscripts still at some distance from the rest of âse Epistles But the Difference is not altogeâer so observable now as formerly when these âstscripts were purposely Printed in very smal âaracters to make the Difference discernable by all who read them 3 Timothy is expresly âled an Evangelist 2 Tim. 4. 5. and therefore coâ not be a Bishop neither in Scripture sence aâ Pastor to a particular Flock whom he might pâsonally oversee nor in the Prelatical sence as a âocesan Bishop because an Evangelist was noââmited to any particular bounds as hath been cleâed already And to say that Timothy was Bishâ of Ephesus is against reason for Timothy was pâsent with the Apostle Paul when he commitâ the Charge of the Flock to the Presbyters in coâmon but no mention of Timothy as their Bishopâ whom the Charge had chiefly belonged if he hâ been the only Bishop of Ephesus As for Titus he was employed in the like Gâpel-Service from one place to another as Timâ was But it 's said Tit. 15. That he was left in Cretâ ordain Elders in every City therefore he had Episâpal Jurisdiction Answ 1. Timothy and Titus were both exâordinary Officers in the Church as appears â their constant Travels from place to place thâ Work being to erect Churches and plant Bishâ or Presbyters in these Churches but not to Bishops of them themselves their Power beâ greater than ordinary Bishops or Pastors as is â served by Chrysostom on Eph. 4 that their Work â to plant Churches and Bishops or Elders to be theiââdinary Pastors 2. Seing Titus was to ordain Elâers in every City of Crete then where was his own âiocess For it cannot be supposed that he did ârdain himself Bishop of one of these Cities 3.
âeing he was to Ordain Elders in the plural numâer in every City and by the Scripture these Elâers are Bishops then mo Bishops then one was â be in every City which is contrare to the Episâopal Constitution 4. If it be said that Titus âas Archbishop or Metropolitan Answ This âcketh nothing but Proof which no where can âe had For the primitive Gospel-Church knew âo such thing as either a Diocesan Bishop Archâishop or Metropolitan long after the Death of âimothy and Titus there being no certain Rule âor modeling of Diocesses until the Reign of Conâantine the Great at which time the Church did âollow the Civil Government as to Diocesses this âishop Stilling-fleet maketh out in his Irenic page â76 377. 5. There is nothing to be found in âe Scriptures to countenance this Assertion that âitus was Archbishop of Crete all that can be said is âat he was sent to Crete upon a piece of special serâice for the Church which made him no more Biâop there then when he staid some time in other âlaces Aquinas run into the same Mistake as âo Dalmatia for because Titus went to Dalmatia âherefore he calls him the Bishop of Dalmatia 6. âf it be said that the least that Bishops can Gain from Titus being left to Ordain Elders is that âshops have sole Power of Ordination seing Tâ alone ordained Answ This is but to begâ Question for we deny that Titus was a Bishâ let that first be proved And 2. That he ordaâed as a Bishop And 3. That he ordained aloâ For his ordaining of Elders makes him no Bishoâ no more then the Apostle Pauls ordaining maâ him a Bishop they ordained as Extraordinaâ Officers in the Church making way for Bishoâ or Pastors and though Titus was invested wiâ extraordinary Power above any Bishop or Pastoâ yet that it self will not prove that he ordained sâ paratim without Presbyters Because he was Ordain Elders in the same manner that was the âstablished Way of the Church in conjunction wiâ Presbyters as the Apostle Paul did lay his hanâ on Timothy conjunctim with the Presbytry thâ is joyntly with a Presbytry Object 2. The Epistles to the seven Church of Asia are directed to the Bishops of these Chuâches because each of them is directed to one siâgle Person called the Angel of the Church Answ That these Epistles are directed to tâ Bishops of these Churches in the Scripture seâ we easily acknowledge but then no advantaâ to the Episcopal Cause is gained For if these Aâgels be Bishops and Bishops the same with Prâbyters then ye are just where you were not liâ âd one step higher than a preaching Presbyter or âospel-Pastor 2. Whereas the Angel is spoken unto in the sinâlar number you have no advantage by this either âr you shall find one and the same Angel spoken â in the plural number As to the Angel of the âhurch of Smyrna Rev. 2. 10 The Devil shal cast âme of you into Prison the Speech is directed unâ the Angel yet the plural number is used ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to âew that it 's not one single Person only that is deâted by the Name of Angel so also to the Angel âf the Church of Thyatira but unto you I say ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã âere the Angel is expresly spoken unto in the pluâl number So that any Argument from the âame Angel utterly faileth you For though an âgel be named in the singular number yet that by âe Name Angel is understood a collective Body â Ministers is evident otherwise let any Man ânder a Reason why the Angel is spoken to in the âural number as mo than one And hereby we âve solid ground to think that the Angel is spoân to in the plural number purposly to obviat or ârrect the Misapprehensions of any who would âink that a Bishop over Presbyters is understood â the Word Angel Object 3 But the Government of the Church â Bishops having Authority Jurisdiction over âesbyters is so Antient that we cannot judge it â any lower Derivation then from the Apostles albeit we have it not by express Scripture Answ 1. If you have such a Government the Church by due consequence from any Scriptuâ of the New Testament We are ready to yeâ Subjection albeit ye cannot Prove it by exprâ Scriptures ye shall not be so hard put to it â for you only to Affirm and Assert it Apostoliâ without any Proof cannot convince Mens Judgâments and satisfie their Conscience in a matter so great Importance Your selves being Judge if you have Proof for it make it appear Bishâ Laud and some other Bishops with him said oâ publickly if Prelacy were not the Apostolick Gâvernment they would forth with throw away thâ Rotchets But they kept them as long as thâ could and the Proof went no further upon whiâ Mr. Pryne did challenge them for breach of Pâmise VVhy do ye not stop all our Mouths âproving your Assertion and so satisfie a great Bâdy of Protestants at Home and Abroad Who giâ Reasons from Scripture contrare to your Asserâon And to say it must be Apostolick because its Antiquity is little less then to say we will haâ it from them whither they will or not their Dâctrine and Practice refuse and yet it must be âtorted from them 2. We have made it appear already that the âpostles did prescribe another Form of Governmenâ be managed by the Ministers of the Gospel in â âty of Ministerial Power and how to impose uâon our own Reason and Belief that by some inâisible Prescription they have contradicted all âis were hard measure should we or can we âject what they have Recorded by Inspiration of âe Holy Ghost and betake our selves to some fanâed Tradition Could this be a safe Way for our âonsciences Or could we Answer to GOD for â Your selves being Judges 3. If the Antiquity of Prelacy be at last its only âea and strongest Defence Cyprian will soon Anâer for us that Antiquity without Verity is but mouldy ârror and as Sir Francis Bacon termed it a Cypher âithout a Figure 2. If this Plea should hold Good then there â a Door opened for the most Antient Errors âherewith the Church was infested even in the Aâostles times and such as soon after endangered âe renting of her Bowels 3. And however Antient Prelacy be found yet may and doth suffice us that it hath no Institution â the Gospel-Church by Christ or his Apostles ând therefore can claim no better than Humane Appointment for which Appointment no Commisân was granted to the Church Object All that is Alledged by you against Eâiscopacy is but your own late Sentiments For âe Antient Fathers who understood the State of âe Primitive Church better than you do generally bear Testimony that Bishops have been in all Agâ of the Gospel-Church Answ We are of the same mind with Augâstin who being urged with the Authority of âprian answered That what he spoke according to â Scriptures he would
unwarrantable âpectations of Christs Disciples hoping he wâ erect a Temporal Kingdom and thereby Plâ of Trust and Honour might fall to their shaâ âis Attendants Yet their Master gave them no round to expect such Worldly Honour shewing âhem that His Kingdom was not of this World and âhat they might expect to be Hated Despised and âersecuted for his Names Sake And therefore âhe Instructions given them by these Scriptures âoncerning Superiority relateth to the lowly âtate they were in and might expect for the future âs his Servants And not to a State of Worldly Granâur which He did not promise them nor did they âfterwards Possess but as it was grasped without âis Commission And this is manifestly confirmâd by our Saviours following Words verse 27. but â am among you as he that serveth in which Words ây his own Example as one that serveth among âhem he rebuketh Dominion and Superiority over âne another This Example immediatly followâg the Prohibition of one of them to be Greater âan another is most remarkable that tho' himâelf had absolute Dominion over them as their âORD yet to have this engraven upon the hearts âf all his Servants in his Gospel-Kingdom that âone of them should usurp Authority over anoâer he condescendeth upon this over coming Exâmple of serving as a perswasive against their Deâate who should be Greatest 6. This Superiority being prohibited among âe Apostles who were all of one Order The same âuperiority is thereby forbidden all Ministers of the Gospel who are by Divine Institution of oâ and the same Order And therefore Scriptural-Bâshops Presbyters being of one the same Oâder and under equal Commission by Divine Insâtution are under the same Prohibition of Superâority over one another For it were ignorant Iâpudence to say that the Apostles might not usuâ Authority over one another but Bishops or Pâstors may do it By these Scriptures then we have our greâ Law-Givers Determination and Verdict passed â that unhappy Plea of Greatness among Churcâ Men which should end the Dispute being a moâ solide Argument against Prelacy in the Gospeâ Church and no reason to pass from it on that uâ just Pretence as if nothing were forbidden bâ love of Greatness the which Opinion contradicâeth the very words of the Text. A third Reason why we cannot approve of a Bâshops Jurisdiction and Superiority over othâ Gospel-Pastors is because by the Gospel-Chartâ all Gospel-Ministers have parity of Ministeriaâ Power committed to them and therefore none them have a Right to Jurisdiction over anothâ besides many other Scriptures this our Assertiâ shall be proved by Acts 20. 17 28. by this Scâpture these things are clear First That these who are called Presbyters Elders verse 17. are called Overseers or Bishoâ verse 28. Take heed therefore unto your selves and to all the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made âou Overseers to feed the Church of GOD which He hath purchased with his own Blood It hath pleased GOD to make this Truth so plain that Bishops and Presbyters are one that it hath stopt the mouths of the greatest Gain-sayers Papists and all who are not Antiscripturists being convinced by its undenyable Evidence it must âhen be Presumption to excogitate a Difference âetween those whom the Holy Ghost hath âade one and so great a Difference that some of them shall be subordinate to the Jurisdiction of ânother this is to be Wise above what is written ând who should be obliged in the Matters of God âo subject to that Wisdom that cometh not from âbove 2. By this Scripture it 's evident that the Comâission given is to feed the Flock that is to Lead Guide and Govern the Flock with Pastoral Powâr for without this Pastoral Authority they could âot Discharge the Trust committed to them the âastors part being not only to take care that the âlock have good wholsom Food But to keep âem in Order to preserve them from Straying â bring again that which was driven away and to âeek that which was Lost For if the Flock be not âttended defended from Injuries and so ordered â to be kept from Straying they are as if they had no Shepherd which we may see at length âzek 34. from verse 2 d. to verse 7th the People thâ are as if they had no Pastor if their Pastor have â Power to Govern them or neglect his Officeâ GOD will require his Flock at the Pastor's hanâ and yet he is not capable of giving an account if â be deprived of Power to Govern them We maâ see this farther confirmed By that which is wriâten to the Hebrews Cap. 13. and verse 17. the Mânisters who Watch for the Souls of the People aâ allowed Ministerial Ruling over them and thâ People obliged to submit because these who watâ for their Souls must give an Account If it be said that none Watch for the Souls â the People but a Bishop over a vast number â Parishes then these People are forced into Misâry it being impossible for one Man to Watch âver all their Souls Again if it be said that other Ministers undeâ him Watch for the Souls of the People then thesâ Ministers who Watch have by the Scripture Power to Rule as these who must give an Account anâ to deprive them of that Power which Christ haâ committed to them can be no less then Sacrâledge Will a Bishop assuming the sole Power â Government to himself say in earnest that he wiâ stand up for all the Ministers that are under hiâ and take their Accounts off their Hands and Aâswer to GOD for them all will he indeed taâ such a Burden upon him Or if he would what Minister dares trust him with it For if the Men âe Ministers of the Gospel themselves they shall âever be clear before GOD by anothers underâking for them because themselves were Personâlly entrusted with the feeding and therefore the âoverning of the Flock For Thirdly By the above-mentioned Scripture we ând all Gospel-Pastors equally interressed in the Commission no imparity of Ministerial Power âor any colour for it in the Text Bishops and âres byters being not only under one Name but ânder one and the same Commission Who then âath Authority to make some of them subordinat â another Who are made equal by Divine Instiâtion if Men would be concluded by plain Scriâture this should put an End to the whole Disâute Fourthly We are the more obliged to take this âext as the Revelation of GOD's Will for the paâty of Gospel-Ministers that none of them âould have Superiority over another because the âne when these words were spoken was an opârtune Season to have discovered imparity if the âoly Ghost had allowed it Because first the Aâstle did call these Ministers together to give âem Directions as Ministers of the Gospel 2. âe was now to take Leave of them so as to see their âces no more And it was of great Importance for the Church of GOD in future Ages to know if
obtaining peace to her self 2. Tho' this be the strongest Effort and most âlausible Argument that the Episcopal Cause can âaim Yet when pondered in the Ballance of the âanctuary it 's found light because first Christ did âre know all the Trials Temptations and Events âat should befall his Church yet he saw it not fit â prescribe any such Remedy who is faithfull in âl his House the Government is upon his Shoulârs and the House is his own if any Man acâse him for omitting so necessary a Mean as is âretended for the good of his Church let him âonsider how he will give an account when he is âdged by the same Lord of his House for his âre and faithfulness hath fully appeared already â setting so many Officers in his House as he âought necessary And therefore if an Oecumeâk Council were assembled more full than ever yet appeared in the Christian World they couâ not jure set another Officer in the House of Goâ to Command and bear Rule over these Officeâ whom Christ hath entrusted to Feed his Flocâ though Dr. Stilling fleet now Bishop once sceptiâ as to any particular Form of Church-Goverâment hath taken much pains in his Irenic to peâswade the World that it 's left to Humane Prâdence whither the Church be Governed by Bâshops over Presbyters or by Ministers in pariâ of Power And strenuously opposeth the Diviâ Right of Prelacy yet since he ascended and fiâed in that Orb himself tempora mutantur nos mâtamur in illis Presbyters are now so contemptibâ in his Eye that if his new Labours and Argumenâ can prevail they shall not so much as be tolleraâed to Labour in their Masters Vineyard Aureus heu fragilem confregit malleus urnaâ That his Book is so answered that many douâ his Confidence to give it a Reply but leaving hiâ from whom better things were expected 3. Consider that if Bishops be set over Presbâters for Preservation of Unity in the Church thâ some new Order must be set over these Bishops fâ they may fall out by the Way as well as other Bâthren as they often do and these who are set âver them may likeways fall into Divisions for iâ rare to see Promotion make Men more Lowly aâ Meek Archbishops and Metropolitans haâ been scandalously divided by their own Pride to âe height of Excommunicating one another ând when all these fail so that Unity is not obtainâd whether shall Men go next if not to a principiâm unitatis caput Eclesiae to whom all must subâect And thus it was indeed that the Pope ascenâed his Throne and as many have observed and âe Groaning Church under that Tyrranny yet ândeth the Remedy proved worse than the Disâase this manner of Cure to elevate some Miniâers above the Station that Christ had placed âem in and Robbing other Ministers of their âe Right Could never have good Fruit nor âd ever Men ground to expect GODS blessing âon such an unwarrantable and audacious Preâmption Object Presbyters do voluntarly Elect and set â Bishops to have Authority and Jurisdiction oâer themselves and therefore though they be now âeprived of Jurisdiction they have no Cause to âomplain for violenti non fit injuria blame themsves Ans 1. If Presbyters chused and made Bishops âer themselves as we grant is said to be done at âexandria then Presbyters had all that Power â Jurisdiction at first intrinsecally in themselves âr they could not give that to others which was ât their own and this of it self is yeelding the âuse when it is acknowledged that Presbyters had the Original ministerial-Ministerial-Power by CHRISâ Commission 2. It was not in the Power of Presbyters to âlienate that Power which Christ had conferred âpon them for id possumus quod Jure possumâ Christ having bestowed upon them full Pastoâ Authority by what Warrant could they give tâ away to another or any part of it For it was gâen to be exerted by themselves in their Person Service according to their Masters Directions their Master had thought fit to lodge that Poâ in the Hands of others he would have bestow it himself but never left it to their Option to Sâ or Give away his Gifts and so disable themselâ for the Trust and Service he committed to thâ besides that it is inaccountable Ungratitude â Contempt of their Master to throw away â Commission and let others Dispose of it as tâ please And whoever have done so we are thereby obliged to the like Practice 3. If this be the deed of Conveyance whereby âshops over Presbyters have obtain'd a Right â Title to sole Jurisdiction in the Church then tâ cannot say they have this Right and Title fâ Christ It 's a Gift of the Presbyters but not a â of Christ And a very dishonest Gift Dishonoâble both to the Giver and Receiver Yet there are many Reasons to perswade the inadvertent succumbing of some Presbyâ âve great Occasion for the rising of Prelacy pauâtim by Degrees For first Some Ministers being seated in Places of Emiâncy in the World specially Great Cities in conârmity to the Civil Government and Jurisdiction â these Places the Ministers of these Places had âo early some Titles of Honour not common to â other Ministers 2. And if they were eminent âr Abilities and Prudence or of long standing in âe Ministry When other Ministers and they âd meet together for the Affairs of the Church âmmonly such Men were Chosen to preside for âe orderly Management of their Judicatories as âolocutors or Moderators Which cannot be ânting without Confusion yet he who did Preâe had no power of Jurisdiction over the rest it reâaining in their Power to choose another for that ârvice as they should see it expedient But 3. his sometimes falling into the hands of ambitiâs Men made interest not only for their conuance but for their farther Promotion usurpâ upon other Ministers who were more meanly âated untill they had wrested Power out of their âands and did appropriate all Jurisdiction to âemselves the other Ministers sinfully succumâng under this Usurpation untill there was no âtrieving of what they had Lost Our 2d Exception is your Liturgy which after ârious Perusal we cannot approve not that we are against a general Directory for decent Order Gospel-Administrations that each part of Wâship have its due place This we acknowledge be necessary And therefore all the Reformâ Churches have provided themselves with suâ Directories But that which we cannot compâ with is such a Form of Divine Service or Worshâ as is Composed by a few and peremptorily iâposed on others so as that Form of Worship sâ be used and no other Our Reasons are First no Liturgy or stinted Form of Worshâ was either Composed Used or Imposed by tâ Apostles or any Gospel-Ministers in the first âges of the Church If any Affirm there were suâ Forms it 's their part to make them appear whiâ hath never yet been done but by a manifest Fâgery of the Apostle James