practise but having none but great words and commendations of their own to that purpose it will easily perswade men that they made first their Form and then hunted for something to insinuate a belief that they were induced by Scriptures and thinking with my self upon what design they should introduce this kind of Ministry I could imagine no reason but as when cunning people would change a Monarchy into an Aristocracy or Oligarchy they have no way to divert the people from their old obedience and introduce it to themselves but by making them believe they should have some share in that Government which was ingrossed by one So these men breaking from Episcopacy would perswade the people from the old to the new yoak which they would impose that they had a Share in Ecclesiastical Government and that they should send out of them into the Consistory their Lay Elders which would wonderfully provide for their Security and good much better than before with other Things of the like Nature of which I may speak hereafter but indeed their hopes are frustrate in all this design for they could never set up any thing more Tyrannical or Arbitrary than this CHAP. VII SECT I. What a true Presbyter is The Name first Expounded I Have done now with their Presbyter of which I see no footing in the Word of God or Antiquity I now come next to treat of our own Presbyter what he is and first that we may avoyd all Equivocations and doubtfull Interpretations of Scripture we will discourse of the Quid nominis what is meant by this and other Phrases which are used in Scripture to intimate this Office First he is called a Presbyter which as it naturally signifies an Elder in Age so from that analogy it signifies a grave and reverend Man another word is Bishop which we alwayes render for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and signifies alwayes a Superintender and it is applyed to Presbyters who have a Particular Charge to overlook and see to I stay little upon this because it hath received very little Controversie but yet say somewhat of it because it will illustrate some future passages They are likewise called Pastors or Shepherds because when they are in a Charge they look over it as a Shepherd over his flock to govern or â—ule to feed them and do such Duties They are called Doctors and Teachers because they instruct the people in the Mysteries of Godlinesse although perhaps this word may be extended farther than to them but these were the Chief names by which that superiour Order which succeeded the Apostles were called in the Primitive Church in the writings of the Apostles and after and this is the Sense implyed by these names SECT II. Certain Concessa by all who have engaged in this Controversie BUT now to sever Granted Truths from Questioned and not to wast my time in unnecessary discourses It is granted by all that I have seen that these all were ordained by the Apostles to do these Duties to administer the Sacraments of Baptism and the Communion to preach the Gospel although I think no man can shew me any place of Scripture expressing such a Canon which shall enable such men bearing such names under such Titles to be authorized to such Duties but only a Constant practice of it but it being supposed that they were authorized to do this Duty we may find rules directing how these should be performed by them I let that passe therefore and shall now enter the lists against two Opinions which I oppose one which makes Pastors and Teachers two Offices a second which makes no distinction amongst these SECT III. Mr. Hookers distinction of Pastors and Teachers handled FOR the first Mr. Hooker disputes in his Book before cited Part. 2. Chap. 1. pag. 19 20. And first to understand his Opinion Consider that he makes two sorts of Teaching Elders one he calls Pastors and the other Teachers the scope of the Pastors he describes with a great deal of handsom Circumlocution exceeding fine expressions of the Rhetorical perswasive part of a Preacher the result of all which is to perswade by such Arguments as have power over the Will and the Affections as it is pag. 19. The Teachers Office is to lay the Fundamental points of Christian Faith the Principles of Religion as he expresseth it in the bottom of Page 21 and the top of 22. These two parts he makes distinct Offices in the Church both of them being ruling Elders as well as teaching and both of them having power to administer the Sacraments but in their preaching the one is to bend his force his endeavour to the Teaching and informing the Understanding the other to the perswading and moving the Affection the first he calls Teachers the second Pastors Look for a reason for this distinction unheard-of till of late I find none but in a reply to Mr. Rutterford pag. 7. where it seems Mr. Rutterford urged that these formal Objects of these two Offices Information of the Judgement and Exhorting are not so different as that they should be incompetible pag. 7. Chap. 1. To this he replyes that in themselves and full breadth that is his phrase these are not so incompetible but look at the specialty of the Gift that fits for one and which furnisheth for the other to attend mainly and chiefly upon each according to the Gift they will prove inconsistent These are his words and these imply that where there are distinctions of Gifts and they diversly to be endeavoured there should be diverse Offices or else I see no force in this Discourse but this hath no probability of colour for it Consider Civil Offices a Justice of Peace one Justice hath a great Cunning in the Statutes in rendring them to a legal sense he applyes himself and endeavours to that most another hath a great ability in reconciling and taking up Quarrels and perswading men to friendship he endeavours that most and perhaps did either of these by framing himself to endeavour what he were least fit for lesse attend what he were more dexterous in he might attend his Office in general but the lesse profitable way and these are both one Office though in it diverse Gifts or Abilities which cannot both be attended with any mans utmost endeavour Passe from Civil to Ecclesiastical Offices and this very businesse Among Presbyters Preachers one hath great Excellency in giving the Grammatical sense of the Text another in expounding it Scholastically a Third in the Historical part of Divinity and these are several Gifts or Abilities and men according to them apply their utmost endeavours but these make not distinct Offices but several Gifts and Abilities in the same Office which is just the same with these and as there is no foot-step in the Historical part of Divinity to shew any one president so is there no colour of reason for it But he quotes Scripture The first is that place so largely discoursed of before Rom. 12.
most ancient term Presbyter inferiour to the Supreaâ— called by the Scripture Apostles and to their Successors called Bishops among the Ancients therefore in the reading of Authors not the Institutions only but the usus loquendi is to be Considered in words Cambden in his Remains hath a long Discourse like a Lexicon where we may see to how various Senses in our English Language the same words have arrived by Tract of Time losing their old and gaining a new Sense especially in Offices so hath it happened with the words Bishop and Presbyter they were most frequently in Scripture taken for one and the same thing but the word Apostle or Angel I can never find given to the Inferiour Sort of Presbyters But now this word Apostle is appropriated in the Language of Divines to the Twelve and St. Paul only the word Bishop to the Superiour Sort the word Priest or Presbyter to the Inferiour Sort of Presbyters I shall leave therefore to discourse of the Names and come to examine the Text concerning the Thing whether there be in this Text a Parity of Ministers prescribed SECT VIII The First Argument for a Parity answered FOR this Parity he urgeth nothing but the Attributing these two names which we use in a distinct Sense to one and the same thing which proves no parity of Office but only the use of these words in those dayes But I will go further and prove this Office we call Bishop distinct from the Presbyter out of that very Text St. Paul saith I have left thee in Creet to do these two things that thou shouldest set in order the Things that are wanting and ordain Elders in every City Mark here St. Paul had been in Creet himself he had layd the foundation of the Gospel he being to go further into the World leaves Titus to build upon his Foundation and he leaves him to do two things that he should set in Order or Correct or supercorrect those things which were not perfected by himself here is Episcopacy in one piece he had Authority to correct to set in order things that were out of Order to Correct what was amisse then secondly to Ordain Elders in every City not to appoint only but to ordain authoritatively to sâ—ttle them I do not know how a Bishop could more exactly be described in so few words and I wonder much why these men should produce this Text which without a mind much prejudicated with another Opinion cannot be wrested to any other sense Hooker takes no notice of this but some others say That Titus was an Evangelist Their Exception that Titus was an Evangelist answered THey say so but do they produce one word out of Scripture or Antiquity for it they might say he was an Apostle as well and with much more semblance and I think he was of the Inferiour rank but then can they tell me what an Evangelist was This is a shrewd Question Those four that writ the Gospels are only known by that name amongst Ecclesiastical Writers so that if a man should say the â—vangelist saith so we would Conclude one of them Philip is indeed called an Evangelist Acts 21. but no man else in the New Testament it may be because he was an excellent and powerfull Preacher Beza with those who affect new Opinions makes an Evangelist to be one who was an Associate and Companion to the Apostles in their travell but there is nothing in Scripture or Antiquity to give light to that Conclusion I am sure St. Chrysostome Theophylact c. are against it in expresse Terms upon the 4th to the Ephes. St. Ambrose makes him a Deacon to the Apostles which hath some shew of reason for it because Philip was an Evangelist This word Evangelist is but three Times used in Scripture Acts 21. 8. where Philip is called an Evangelist Ephes. 4. 11. where an Evangelist is reckoned amongst the Ecclesiastical Officers 2 Tâ—m 4. 5. where he is bid do the work of an Evangelist which could be nothing but industrious preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ or as some of the Ancients suffering for Christ because he is bid in the same verse immediately before these words to endure Affliction and in the words followâ—ng to make full proof of his Ministry but is there the least Colour that this Office should enable him to ordain Presbyters or Correct Misdemeanors or to regulate things that are amisse which Titus was Commissioned to do Again it is generally agreed amongst them that this Office of an Evangelist was a Temporary Office but these Duties of Correcting of Ordaining Elders must needs be perpetual in the Church and therefore could not Constitute the nature of that temporal Office Well then to dispell that cloud that would darken the light of this Text for Episcopacy by saying that Titus was an Evangelist there is no word in Scripture nor any Author in Antiquity of any reputation in the World which offers any thing towards that Opinion 2dly If they did yet they would be at as great a losse to shew me that the Office of an Evangelist was to do such things as Titus is here commanded to do 3dly If they could shew Evangelizing to Consist in the performance of such Duties yet we might justly then Conceive them to he Bishops such as we require and a Standing Office in the Church because these Duties are so and it is evident that Titus had Authority in both these kinds Therefore there were some men which had such Authority above others But let us go on with Hooker as he doth Confirm his Mistaken Opinion SECT IX Hookers Illustration from Acts 20. answered PAul saith he Acts 20. sends for the Elders of Ephesus and professeth in the 28th verse that Christ had made them Overseers or Bishops where not only the Name is Common but the Thing signified by that Name is enjoyned as their Duty He means to take heed to all the flock over which the holy Ghost had made them Bishops or Overseers here as before are left Gaps or Interruptions I will fill them as well as I can to make up his Sense thus What he implyes or requires in a Bishop that they that is these Presbyters were to do If he shall require to lay on hands to exercise Jurisdiction in foro externo that they must do and should they have been reproved for so doing they might have shewed their Commission thus farr he But I wonder where that Commission was given or read I can find no such Thing in that place but that they should take heed or have a care of their flock which they might execute according to that Authority was dispensed before by labouring in the Word diligent baptizing administring the Communion but to Convent or Summon their Flock or Censure them or give Orders and a like Authority to others of this there is no one word in particular To expresse my self Although many men reasonably have thought that St. Paul Convented both Bishops and
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
Ordination of Christ and in this I should place the Difference betwixt these Apostles and others That they are made such by an Immediate Ordination of Christ for it is not enough that some saâ— to be an Apostle was to be such a Minister as conversed with Christ in his humanity or saw him in the Flesh for this did all the Seventy which yet were not called Apostles nor is it sufficient which others say they were such whose Office extended to the whole world for so we shall find in the Acts almost none Confined to any place but that others as well as St. Paul had a Care of all Churches But upon this a man may justly enquire why St. Paul should in such distinct Terms not of men nor by man describe himself since it seems every Apostle was such To clear this and give further Illustration to this Truth Observe that others besides these were called Apostles so you may find first Barnabas as well as St. Paul Acts 14. 14. which when the Apostles Barnabas and Paul heard c. Apostles in the plural Number some have thought that this Barnabas was the same with Barsabas who Acts 1. 23. wâ—s Competitor with Mathias for the Apostleship but methinks missing the place then it were strange he should be called an Apostle afterwards and indeed their Names differ their Original Names and their Additional Names for Acts 1 his Name was Joseph called Barsabas sirnamed Justus but in Acts 4. 36. instead of Joseph is Joses and instead of Barsabas is Barnabas but besides him we read Rom. 16. 7. of Andâ—onicus and Junia of whom St. Paul saith that they were his kinsmen his fellow prisoner and of Note among the Apâ—stles which words although they have received a double sense either that they were Eminent persons among the Apostles or else esteemed and noted by them to be such persons of Esteem yet there are many both ancient and Modern Writers both such as are for and against Bishops that agree they were Apostles as the words very naturally bear it and to take away the Scruple both the Centuries and Baronius agree upon it which if there were scruple they would not have done then turn to Phil. 2. 25. there you shall find St. Paul calling Epaphroditus my brother and Companion in labour and fellow souldier but your Messenger Here I cannot but wonder at our Translators who render it Messenger such a mean phrase intimating any common or trivial man who is sent on an errand Beza did much better who called him Legatum an Embassador a nobler phrase but indeed the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your Apostle and so those Epithetes before express him my brother c. This may likewise be shewed â—ut of the 1 Cor. 4. 9. God hath set forth us the Apostles last the Translation here likewise is not good for it is not he hath set forth us last but us last Apostles us that were the last Apostles who are they in particular vers 6. he names Apollo these things I have in a figure transcribed to my self and to Apollo that ye might learn of us not to think of men above that which is written Now then although he may mean others beside himself and Apollo yet it is sit to conceive that he should be in the number of those are called Apostles because he is one of those from whom they must learn not to think of men above what is written and among other Arguments this is a main one That we the last Apostles Apollo and my self and perhaps more are unhappy wretched people marked out for misers to be made a spectacle of contemptible people to the World to Angels and men I could here likewise treat of Gal. 1. 19 where James the brother of the Lord is called an Apostle who by many is thought and from good reason to be none of the two James's which were of the Twelve but a third who was made Bishop of Jerusalem but I desist it is evident out of Scripture that the holy Writ mentioneth more Apostles besides the Twelve and St. Paul and if besides the Scripture any mans Language may be heard consider that of Ignatius who was Contemporary as he speaks with the Apostles Paul John and Timothy in his Epistle to the Ephesians who there speaks in the language of the times and by that language calls Timothy an Apostle SECT IX A Reason of this NOW then to draw this Discourse to some period there were other Apostles besides the first Twelve and St. Paul the Thirteenth but why so because as Theodoret speaks upon Phil. 2. 25. in the case of Epaphroditus before handled that he was called their Apostle to whom the Care of them was Committed And again upon the 1 Tim. 3. 1. Heretofore they called Presbyters Bishops and those which we call Bishops they called Apostles but saith he in processe of time they left the name of Apostles to them who were truly Apostles and they gave the name of Bishops to those which were formerly called Apostles So likewise St. Hierome on Gal. 1. 9. Procedente Tempore alii ab his quos Dominus elegerat ordinati sunt Apostoli In progresse of time other Apostles were ordained by those which the Lord had Choseâ— and this is the reason why St. Paul where before Gal. 1. 1. saith he was an Apostle not of men nor by man but by Jesus Christ to distinguish him from those others who were Apostles by Constitution of Apostles not immediately by God and to the same purpose may that be understood of St. Paul 2 Cor. 11. 5. I suppose I was not a whit behind or lesse or inferiour to the Chiefest Apostles Amongst the Apostles the Twelve there were not some Chief and some Inferiour but the Twelve were the Chief and the rest Inferiour Now he having his calling and enabling from Christ immediately was not inferiour to them And though I read I know not where the Authority of Theodoret slighted yet I do not remember what Satisfaction is given to his Reason Nor can well Conceive how these Scriptures can in any other sense be reasonably expounded CHAP. V. The Extent of the Apostolical Power AND now me-thinks I see the Apostles in the Church as Divines say Adam if he had lived innocent and his posterity would have been in the World they had been Emperors of the whole World and all the World would have been every mans yet being in their Integrity would have so enjoy'd all that it should have been to the good of all and hurt of none So these holy men were Bishops Apostles of all the World all the Churches throughout the World had absolute not order only as the School speaks to give holy Sacraments to any any where but Jurisdiction to Govern and rule all That which Eusebius saith hath some truth That they divided themselves into several parts of the World but not appropriating to themselves any piece nor excluding any other from that Share or
a Presbyter and see what peculiar Interest he hath in it distinct from other men First then without Question such a preaching as is Occasional by private Conference or in publike Assemblies when in publick Opportunity is offered to manifest the Glory of God or Convert or Confirm by Conference any soul to or in the Christian Religion or Godlinesse of living which indeed is a great part of Christianity when upon occasions of Discourse or otherwise Opportunities shall be granted to any man he may if he have abilities so Conferre as to perswade men to a newnesse of life and this is preaching in its latitude it is preaching the Gospel of Christ and each man that hath abilities ought to do it but each man is not bound to have abilities a private mans strength is chiefly discerned in holding fast the Word of Truth that so he be not carryed away with the wind of Doctrine he hath other Offices which are his Duties and in which he ought to expend his Studies and Endeavours but to have abilities or to endeavour to have some Abilities for this purpose is the Duty and Office of a Presbyter It is the Duty of the Shepherd to take care of his Masters sheep but it is a comely Charity in every Servant though he be not the Shepherd when he finds his Masters sheep run astray or ready to starve to throw them a lock of Hay or call them back to the fold Nay it is his Duty out of Charity though not out of Office but to take upon him the Office when he is not Authorized to it would be Intrusion and it would bring a great Confusion into the Church as it would into a great Family where every man or every man that would might take upon him the Manage of any Office he would St. Paul therefore saith of such How shall he preach unlesse he be sent that is how shall he take upon him the Office of doing it unlesse he be authorized for it let us then Consider who is authorized SECT XVIII Who is authorized to Preach THat this Authority must be joyned to every Presbyter that hath power to administer the Sacraments preaching must be taken in a large sense for reading Homilies for reading the Scriptures in known languages for it is not possible to find men of Abilities to do the other in such a Nation as ours is and yet it is necessary that they should have these Sacraments because by them men receive the Covenants of God concerning their Souls which to teach and incourage us to is the chief Duty of preaching and this is done I am perswaded more securely by the other way projected before but then if we will have men preach nothing but what they make themselves there had need be a mighty ability for a Weekly Preacher to do that and such indeed as cannot be expected from every Presbyter that may be fit for the other and therefore that way of penning their own Sermons is not nor can be exacted from every Presbyter And to preach Sermons not penned although upon urgency there hath been or may be such a Thing yet it is nothing but laziness and supine negligence and undervaluing of that great Work by those to do it Constantly and not worthy the thought of Christians But whether Presbyters alone may do this is a Question started in this Age but was disputed long since by learned men and how determined I will set down with mine observations upon it The Story is thus Origen a man most eminent for learning of any man in that Age both for humanity and Divinity and indeed such as may not only be accounted so for that Age in which he lived but deserved to be placed in the first rank of Scholars both of his own or any other Age when he lived at Cesarea by Authority given him from the Bishops of Palestine interpreted the Scriptures publikely in the Church when he was not a Presbyter nor that we know of had received any degree in Ecclesiastick Office Demetrius the Bishop of Alexandria who envyed the deserved glory of Origen and that honour which rather as a debt was paid to than given him for his Excellency in Preaching inveighs bitterly against him and having little else to be offended with him for saith it was an unheardâ—of thing that a Layman should preach and writes to the Bishops of Palestine about it They patronage that excellent Work of their own and gave him Instance in three or four that they knew of and no doubt say they there were more which had been licensed by Bishops to do so and did preach even before them I could have wished that the dispute had been larger set down that so the Arguments from Scripture or reason might have been set down for our Instruction but for defence of him who it is pity did not write his own Apology If any man object St. Pauls How can he preach unlesse he be sent I shall answer he was sent and by that power that had Authority to send that was the Bishops in that Province in which he lived who had authority to delegate as Apostles of which I shall treat hereafter by our Saviours Charter As my Father sent me so send I you to send others not with a plenipotency but as they saw expedient with divided powers to baptize and no more to administer the Sacraments and no more and why not preach and no more this way of preaching penning and contriving Orations to the people requires great abilities inherent acquired by mighty industry and pains and when men are found so Gifted and enabled although they think themselves not worthy to take a Pastoral Charge upon them or to administer the Sacraments yet when they find abilities for this and their Bishop think fit why should they not preach but not without the Bishop he is the Supream Pastor he may if he find an Inferiour fit for that place give him Authority to feed or fold or drive his Flock and no more and he that is authorized by the Supream Pastor may do it and others who without his leave undertake to do it are Intruders but he being so authorized doth it orderly lawfully thus did Origen who had he lived in our Age could have discoursed much more powerfully to this Theam and I can guesse that this may satisfie most of that which many in our Age object concerning their Gifts If they are Gifted let their Gifts be examined and if he the Bishop find them to be such as can enable them for such a Work let them be licensed otherwise not CHAP. XIX His Argument answered I Have been over tedious in this Discourse Here you may discern the vanity of his Argument from that Text if preaching be taken in that late sense as I have expounded it I deny that there are any Presbyters which are not Teachers If Preachers be taken in this strict sense for such as preach Studied Orations I say that there are many
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
reason that they should and why should others do it Yes much differenâ—â— one Sermon of the Apostles and prayer of theirs is of greater power and force with God than twenty others they out of Duty must travell through the whole world they cannot attend the Care of the poor in a particular City the others though being Evangelists may upon particular Occasions be called off from their place yet they shall return again and overview their Charge the people therefore when they could not have their particular eyes over that blessed work took those that were next them in that dubious time to take Care of the poor and these men could not therefore be chosen to an Inferiour Constant Office such as they feign their Deacons to be because â—hey were men of higher Employment and greater Concernment in the Church but were chosen for that Occasion how long I know not to attend that Duty SECT X. Another Argument for the former Conclusion A Fourth reason may be drawn from the Design which Mr. Hooker takes for this Office which is such as would make any Nation tremble to think upon an Erection of the greatest Tyranny which ever was exercised in any Commonwealth you shall find it described in the 36 37 pages where before For first he is Treasurer this may be without exception Secondly he must addresse himself to receive what is brought into the Treasury but mark not what is but what ought to be brought into the Treasury to be committed to his Trust for this briefly I will set down his sense purpose he must inform himself by advice and counsel from the body what every mans Free-will Offerings should be this upshot results out of his Discourses that only Free-will Offerings should be accepted yet because the maintenance of Church and poor must not be arbitrary they must understand mens Estates as well as they can if they be negligent admonish them then if they stirr not go to Christs Discipline tell the Church and so upon contempt of that to Eccleliastical Censure To this purpose he cites two places Deut. 16. 10. and Levit. 22. 18 19. In both which places if he had transcribed the words without further trouble there could have no more appeared but that men should bring their Free-will Offerings and then do this or this but the Sin lay upon him who was to bring it in he was not to be compelled to it nor do they perhaps they will say but I will reply Ecclesiastical Censure of putting out of the Church making a man an Heathen is the greatest Compulsion in the World and as they order it upon the Consultation and Advice of the Deacon it will arise to be upon the Imagination of the Deacon and instead of his Judgement perhaps oftentimes unlesse they be better than those the Apostles used before this election the partial Affection of the Deacon which would betray Souls to a most unhappy and arbitrary Government for Religion for Estates SECT XI The opposing Arguments answered UPon these reasons I am perswaded that the Office of a Deacon was not established in that of Acts 6. to be as a rule for all Churches but only these 〈…〉 of and Authorized in this great 〈…〉 that diâ—y in the Church at that time and thus I have disproved those Answers which Mr. Hooker seems to frame to my reasons his Arguments for confirmation of his Cause I shall undertake in a more proper place presently yet least men may think I introduce a new Opinion into the world know that this was the Opinion of St. Chrysostom and Oecumenius Estius in 4 Sent. dist 24. Sect. 18. observes as much and for Oecumenius throws him out with Cujus Authoritas non ita magni est momenti For St. Chrysostom it is in his 14 Homily upon the Acts about the middle he saith it is so obscure that it may be suspected of Corruption I answer it is very clear and no man will corrupt a Father without a design which cannot appear in this what it should be but rather than yield he will charge the rest of his Doctrine because saith he he affirms non fuisse Episcopos tunc in Ecclesia when Acts 1. it is said let another take his Bishoprick To this I reply that he saith not there were no Bishops but Apostolos solos only the Apostles and this is true nor Presbyter neither yet as will appear hereafter But now it may be enquired Was there no such Office as that of a Deacon proper to the Church SECT XII Whether there be such an Office as a Deacon proper to the Church YEs without question in the 1 of Tim. 3. 8. St. Panl describes at large the Qualifications of such a man who must be chosen to that Office I shall need no proof of it because all consent to this Conclusion but if a man should enquire when and where he was Ordained I must answer I know not nor do I find any Register of it in the New Testament nor amongst any learned men any Consent the greatest is upon that place in the 6. of the Acts which seems to me to be built upon weak grounds the Church of Rome in general makes all their seven Ordeâ— to be erected at the Institution of the Communion by our Saviour but I leave that imagination as of no moment since there is no word in Scripture which seems to countenance it and I will passe from this Question to the other What his Office was to do CHAP. VI. What is the Office of a Deacon THE Office what it was receives the greatest Illustration from his Name which signifies a Minister a Servant to the Ecclesiastical Officers Bishops or Presbyters so that as when a man is known to be a Minister or Servant to another he is by that made apparent to do such things as Conduce to the assistance of him who is his Superiour or Prelate in his Office so do these in respect of their Superiours Bishops and Presbyters I do not find one word in Scripture setting down what their Office was we can therefore have no knowledge of it but from the History of the Church from which we receive that their Office was to Baptize to assist at the Communion with delivering the Cup and sometimes the Body but not to Consecrate so likewise to assist in the Divine Service some other things we find various according to the Customs of Churches but all these are subordinate and ministerial Offices likewise they had power to preach upon particular occasions and licenses given to wit by that Order they had a qualification to receive a License these things I can particularly give an Account to be the sense of the Ancient Church if any man require it but am loath also to lose Time about it only I will now undertake Mr. Hooker SECT II. Mr. Hookers opinion concerning a Deacon examined HE therefore Part 2. Chap. 1. falsly printed for Chap. 2. page 33. in his third Acception of his
Pauls saying 1 Cor. 9. Woe is me if I preach not the Gospel and then Glosse upon it that St. Paul meant none of these preachings I have named it is true he did not but yet Consider that St. Pauls preaching was infallibly inspired and there he might have full assurance of what he delivered with Ease without Pre-thought what he should deliver which we have not without mighty pains and study therefore his preaching was by the power of his utterance and yet he St. Paul did not only use vocal preaching but writing and those Sermons he wrote have been I dare say more beneficial to the Church than those he preached and then we read those very Sermons which he wrote His Epistles are very Sermons we have the same and there is reason if we be not self-conceited that they should do as much good amongst us as the Roâ—ans Corinthians Galathians c. If they be hard to us in many places I doubt not but they were hard to them and we have besides these Expositions of the Fathers in the Ancient Church by which Souls were directed to heaven and all that have been saved these 12. or 1300 years have been saved by them unlesse some few of late who have found a new Road to Heaven Well then to end This is a low degree of preaching but is preâ—ching and preaching the Gospel These are Sermons which St. Paul and the Church thought fit to be divulged for the Salvation of men SECT XVI To what Preaching every Presbyter is bound I Have expounded what preaching is now let us see to what preaching every Presbyter is bound First without Question every Presbyter should be a ruler so St. Paul in the 3d. Chapter of this Epistle verse 5. For if a man know not how to rule his own house how shall he take care to rule the Church of God there he supposeth That he must be a Ruler otherwise his Conclusion were nothing drawn from the Governing his own house There ruling is necessâ—ry in a Bishop or Presbyter for you will see hereafter that these Offices had one name and in many things agreed Now there you see ruling is required in a Presbyter and he himself will not say that this was a Lay Presbyter But then Consider that in this whole Character of a Presbyter there is no one word of preaching although there is of ruling and can you think if a Presbyter were chosen such as St. Paul here nominates it were amisse But it is objected Tit. 1. 9. there it is required that he should be holding fast the faithfull word as he hath been taught that he may be able by sound Doctrine to exhort and convince the Gainsayers I may well think this to be a Caution of Advice not necessity But if Timothy had chosen and ordained such as were prescribed him they might have been men sufficiently qualified yet ex abundanti if this might be had in another Condition although that were well yet this would be better there is a latitude in Good though not in Truth but then let let us scan the Text suppose it be a requisite â—irst let us observe that he must hold fast the faithfull word that is the word I conceive of the Gospel hold fast that is apprehend it strongly adhere close to it as he hath learned so we in our Translation or in learning as the Margent or secundùm Doctrinam Sermonis as Beza the businesse will not be much It must either be holding fast that Doctrine which he hath learned heretofore and then there will be little left for new Invention or else it must be he must hold the faithfull word in his teaching and then I answer this will be made good in the reading the Scriptures in the reading or repeating Homilies The next Clause is That he may be able to exhort and convince Gainsayers This likewise will be acted in the other But Consider first Can any man think that this ability must be understood in such a vast Capacity as that every Presbyter must be able to Convince all ill Opinions of Gentilism Judaism Surely I believe not If so I dare say nor he nor any Fellow he hath is a Presbyter I remember once in a Conference with a Gentleman of his mind a Presbyter I proposed to him an Old Heresie which I had newly lighted on and those Arguments were made for it he was forced to Confesse an inability for that time and yet a man of as great a Name as any in England of that Side Well then what must it be that there must be some Capability to this purpose upon occasions not pulpit work but by discourse when any such thing shall be objected and that such men should endeavour to improve themselves in their Abilities to this purpose so that here is a great Latitude and Mens abilities in all Elections and Ordinations should be considered how far they extend to this purpose but I perceive not here that kind of preaching which is now so magnified at all exacted So the Heresie be convinced so the men be exhorted to piety whether by an Homily out of some Ancient Father or such which the wisdom of the Church prescribes or a Declamation of a mans own penning it is not material for although those who have least Abilities commonly do most magnifie the latter and practise it yet without question the former is much safer both for the Strong Convincing of ancient Heresies and likewise for sure Grounds of Exhortation Put the Case that it were as it was in Queen Elizabeths dayes that there was such a Reformation as abundance of learned men would not yield to but rather leave their Benefices than subscribe it is necessary that those Churches should have each a Presbyter in them you will have men gifted with abilities to preach and make Sermons of their own invention I presume there were not then an hundred such in all England St. Paul had then provided ill for this Church who should require as necessary such Conditions as could not be found Put the Case as it is that there be four or five hundred yea a thousand two or three thousand that have abilities fit to be licensed to preach Sermons of their own making it is a mighty matter yet what are they amongst those multitudes of Churches and Parishes certainly but an handfull the Parishes are 9284. It cannot be then that there is a necessity of more abilities to a Presbyter than to do these Duties in that general way which I have discoursed and so to endeavour in and by such means to instruct others and upon Study and Industry either from himself or more learned men upon the starting any new Doubt by Study convince the Gainsayers it is not required he should do it ex tempore SECT XVII What peculiar Interest a Presbyter hath in this kind of Preaching HAving thus Considered Preaching in its latitude it will now be worth our Thoughts to reflect upon this Officer called
7 8. He that teacheth on reaching he that exhorteth on exhortation This place I have at large shewed in the Case of their Deacon not to signifie distinct Offices but diversities of Gifts and it imports no more than that he who finds in himself Abilities of Teaching or Exhorting should use his Talent as a member of the same body to the good of his brother But I wonder why they should not rather distinguish thâ—se Offices by the Names of Teacher and Exhorter because these Names in this place signifie distinct Abilities and Endeavours in those two wayes which they intend them to but there is nothing in either word which intimates the nature of a Pastor which is to goveâ— as well as feed But these words are found Eph. 4. 1. where the words Pastor and Teacher are used and are urged for this distinction in his Treatise of the Preachers Office Part 2. Chap. 1. pag. 20. but how unluckily let any man Consider The words are these And he gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers let any man Consider this place and think whether the Apostle should put these as distinct Those which are distinct he distinguishes with this phrase some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors now mark he doth not say some Teachers but some Pastors and Teachers Coupling these together as one not distinguishing them as the other and therefore let him not dare to sever them whom God hath joyned But he â—ites Beza upon this place to answer mine Argument which he toucheth let us examine therefore what he saith I assent saith he to Ambrose who makes these Offices distinct for ratio parum firma est for saith he the reason is not firm which moved Hierom and Austin to Confound them that is because the Copula is put without the Article he saith it is not firm but he offers no reason why it is not firm the Apostlâ— distinguisheth the rest with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and joyns these with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is put to joyn these together can any man imagine these to be severed he names Hierome and Austin but he might have cited St. Crysostome Theophylact Theodoret all the Greek Fathers whom any man would credit in the Greek Tongue before Beza when he hath no reason for what he saith But the Trick of these men when they have no reason they speak great words in Commendation or Disparagement of what is for or against them It is parum firma ratio saith Beza but gives no reason when besides the propriety of Speech he hath all learned men against him I but Beza hath Ambrose it is true Ambrose doth in his Comments upon this place distinguish these but Beza will not stand to Ambrose for first he begins with Apostles they saith he are Bishops Prophets Expounders of Scripture Evangelists Deacons Pastors Lectors that is Readers Magistri Masters which we translate Teachers were Exorcists this last Beza mentioneth to be not agreeing with his Opinion I may say nor any one of the rest But take this note of Ambrose he took the words as they lay and so expounded them but not observing that Criticism which perhaps he looked not on he gave an Exposition such as was agreeing to the present face of the Church in which he lived which it is possible easily for any man to do but did ever any man who observed and marked the language of St. Paul think it fit to be cast off with a parum firma est ratio amongst these I have named who marked it amongst the Latinet as Beza Hierom Austin I can adde to them Anselm most punctually and our Bede likewise upon the place so that sense is invincible with an uninterrupted Exposition and a strong literal sense of the Text for St. Ambrose although Beza agree with him in the division yet his Authority prevails not with him for the Office what it should be nor Beza's opinion with Hooker so they serve one anothers Turn so far as their own design leads them but no further for Beza makes this Teachers place to be such as should read a Divinity Lecture Scholam regere Ecclesiasticam but Hooker denyes this There is saith he Doctor in Schola Doctor in Ecclesia and saith he the second is here meant but I would fain know the difference betwixt a Teacher in the Schools and in the Church for I conceive these men not putting difference in the places and if they take the Church for the Congregation of men I know no difference betwixt one and the other nor can there be this Exposition of Mr. Hookers which as it is most singular so it is farre from the language of St. Paul I will adde this only note That he nor any other can shew me that place of Scripture directing any Duty to either of these Offices in their distinct Notions as they expresse them which will not agree to both and therefore they have no ground upon which to build this phansie SECT IV. Whether there be a distinction of Offices I Come now to the other dispute Whether there be any distinction amongst these Offices by Apostolical right This is a Question which hath been mightily debated and therefore a man can scarce handle any thing which hath not been often discoursed on before yet if by varying the Method of Handling it or by other manner of expressions or applying other mens expressions in another way than they have done that which I shall write shall fit some mens understandings better than other mens words before me have done I shall think it an happy work and not repent me of my pains and although I think that other men have abundantly spoken of this question and so fully that they have satisfied my self yet because I find others are not satisfied I conceive our blessed Saviours Command to St. Peter to be a Precept to all of us when thou art confirmed strengthen thy brethren Luke 22. 32. and although it be but little I can speak yet put in that little For the understanding therefore of this Question First Know that although this Question about that Order we now term Bishops whether they have distinction and a right of preheminence beyond Presbyters that are barely such yet it is not de nomine barely of the Name whether this word Bishop be such as must alwayes be applied to that Office but of the Thing whether there be such a Thing as a Degree Instituted by the Apostles which hath a preheminence above other Presbyters and then because the word Bishop or Superior or Superintendent or Superinspector being a word applyed to this Office will by Consent of a perpetual Language in the Church be well fitted to the Expression of that Office we may use it often in this Discourse without prejudice as we shall see occasion Secondly Let us Conceive as was before taught that all Ecclesiastical power was
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
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
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
not oversee the flock of Christ over which the Holy Ghost had made him a Ruler And now here again discern the necessity of Ecclesiastical Story to expound this Scripture What can any man tell is the Doctrine of the Nicholaitans which God hates and so we ought to hate but by Ecclesiastical Story which sets it down to be as well in the Error of Opinion the Doctrine concerning the Creation that it was not by God as likewise that of practise that it was lawfull to have Wives in Common now by Ecclesiastical Story we are taught that these things were the Nicholaitans Opinions and these are they which God abhorrs And now Consider what fault would it be in the Angel that these things were heâ—d in his Church but that he had Coâ—rcive Authority to Command and hinder the proceedings of these Opinions A Third Exception is That these Epistles were written to the Angels the Presidents but by Name but to the whole Synod by Intention so that although he direct his Epistle but to one yet it is intended unto all as when a man should send a Letter to the Speaker which is to be read in Parliament But this is Confuted in the Text most evidently because all these things that are Commended or censured in any of these Epistles are in the singular number so Chap. 2. vers 2. I know thy works and thy labour c. thy in the singular number and so in the rest now if he had meant it to the whole Synod although directed to the President it would have been your works nor could the Speech be proper to say thy works when the whole body was intended nay it is not imaginable that those eminent virtues with which he and the other Bishops are honoured should appertain to the whole Assembly or Synod of them so likewise the fault he condemns that Angel of vers 4. that he should forsake his first love is not likely to be affirmed of the Synod so it is most remarkable in the Epistle to the Bishop of Smyrna vers 10. when he speaks of the rest he changeth his phrase The Devil shall cast some of you into prison and the like So likewise to the Angel of the Church of Thyatira vers 24. To you I say and unto the rest in Thyatira as many as have not this Doctrine c. Here it is evident that when the Things concern others he advertiseth the Bishop to acquaint them with it and he changeth his manner of Speech that notice may be taken what was personal to him and what to others Thus you see with how much wit and with what shuffling the Intention of these Scriptures hath been diverted but to little purpose among such as Consider and weigh them CHAP. VIII SECT I. Concerning Ordination I Come now at the last to handle Ordination because I find many things discussed about that the Clearing of which will Conduce much to the opening my businesse in hand and then that being finished I shall review my Work and if there appear any thing unsatisfied I shall insert such Discourses as shall be usefull to remove those Scruples Mr. Hooker undertakes this where before Part 2. Chap. 2. pag. 38. and in the handling of it pag. 39. he proposeth these Questions Whether 1. Ordination be before Election 2. Ordination gives all the Essentials to an Officer 3. What this Ordination is and wherein lies the full breadth and bounds of the being thereof 4. In whom the right of dispensing it lyes and by whom it may be dispensed I have put down his very words and do intend God willing to handle all these Questions but because he seems to me to follow an unjust method I shall begin with his Third Question To shew what that Ordination is of which we dispute for till that be Cleared we dispute de non Concessis as he doth in this Discourse I will first examine his Definition because I will not multiply unnecessary Contentions He defines it thus SECT II. His Definition of Ordination confuted ORdination is an Approbation of the Officer and Solemn setling and Confirmation of him in his Office by Prayer and laying on of hands In this Definition that which I can blame is first that which he makes the Genus to wit an Approbation of the Officer This is a prevenient Circumstance not an Essential part Constituting Ordination First men are Approved then Ordained and although he calls it a Description not a Definition which phrase abides a larger sense than Definition doth yet even there this Term is faulty for it must be a Description of Ordination of which this is no part no more than many other Circumstances belonging to it Again where he saith it is a Setling and Confirming him in his Office If by Office he Conceive a particular Congregation as by his whole discourse he seems to do then that is not large enough to contain that Act which it is directed to for men may yea must be Ordained before they are setled in particular Congregations So that as his Genus Approbation on precedes Ordination so setling thus in his Office is Consequent to it last of all the whole Description is too wide for the Thing described He takes setling in his Office in that sense I have shewed for it agrees to the Mission of Barnabas and Saul Acts 13. 2 3. who were ordained before as will appear after and is yielded elsewhere by him This Description of his is page 75. where before SECT III. My Definition set down and explained HIS Definition being thus briefly perused now take mine Ordination is an Act by which some Man is Constituted in some Ecclesiastick Order of Divine Institution This I conceive to be a Logical Definition for Definitions should be as short as may be so they be full and explain the nature of the Thing defined The Genus is an Act in General which agrees to it and diverse others The Object of this Act is a Man the Immediate Effect and End it Aims at is the Constitution of an Ecclesiastical Order the Explication of which will be the Chief businesse to understand the whole Definition Order is the disposition of things either accorâ—ing to their place or time For time as yesterday to day Order disposeth when it should be done or in place before behind at the right hand or the left above below Now because there are many degrees in Church Affairs where one is above or below another therefore when any man is put into any degree of these this is called a Church Order that which hath no degrees but is where it was is the lay sort of men These are as we speak in Logick of Individuums they are not in serie praedicamentali Now therefore it is said Ecclesiastical Order because there are Orders which are not Ecclesiacal as Kings Judges c. where there is a sub supra in the Common-wealth but belong not to our businesse Again because there are many Ecclesiastick
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
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
Jerusalem and an innumerable company of Angels then vers 23. to the General Assembly and Church of the first-born which are written in heaven and to God the Judge of all and to the Spirits of just men made perfect I cannot imagine with what colour of reason this can be applyed to a particular Church for although it may be affirmed That such men who are religiously united to such Churches are come to this glorious Society yet that that peculiar Church should be this City this mount Sion this heavenly Jerusalem cannot be admitted for first it is called City not Cities now if one Church be this City another cannot be it it is the heavenly Jerusalem an Innumerable Company of Angels the General Assembly the Church of the first-born which can be spoken of none but the universal Catholike Church of no particular in the world That it is this and such a Company let us look then upon his second place where he saith his particular Church is called an house 1 Tim. 3. 15 That thou mayst know how to behave thy self in the house of God which is the Church of the living God Hence he collects or no where that a Particular Church is a Corporation because an house A poor Consequence but see is this spoken of a Particular Church Mark the words following the pillar and ground of all Truth Can this be spoke of any particuliar of a little handfull of men in New England or in one Corner there I am sure the Church of Rome hath much more semblance for Rome than they can have for any of their Congregations which have been and are most unstable themselves much lesse supports for Christs Truth His 3d. place to prove this that particular Churches are Corporations is because they are termed the body of Christ for this he produceth Eph. 4. 13 16. The 13th verse hath not that phrase body but only saith in general that Christians must grow up in the unity of â—aith to the perfect Stature of Christ but in the 16th verse there is the name body from whom the whole body fitly joyned together and compacted by that which every joynt supplyes according to the Effectual working c. To understand this read the preceding verse where Christ is called the head and then think with your self whether this little Congregation can be his body spoke of or the whole Church or whether Christ be the head to so many bodies or whether all Christians are not Members of the same body His last place is 1 Cor. 12. 12. for as the body is one and hath many Members c. I am weary of transcribing Consider the body is one therefore not every Church a distinct body but there is one body the Catholick Church Then he urgeth ver 27 28. of the same Chapter verse 27. Now ye are the body of Christ and Members in particular Can a man choose but wonder to think that any man should offer to apply this to a particular Church to say it is the body of Christ The 28th verse reckons up the diverse Officers which God gave to govern these Churches which can be affirmed of none but the universal I am sure not of their particulars they have no Apostles neither literally nor successively Bishops no way This doth weary me but now you see all that is brought to prove this mighty Conclusion out of Scripture In brief to illustrate this Truth a little farther Conceive that the universal Church of Christ is like a City of which he is the King or Supream All men in baptism submit themselves to his Government He institutes Officers over the whole as I have before expressed these cannot actually be present every where and therefore by consent appoint these and these in their particular Wards or Precincts and as any man when he comes to plant in this or that City implicitely submits to the Government as of the City so of that particular part of the City where he lives so is it with Christians where they go any where in the Christian world having in general by Baptism submitted themselves to Christ and his Discipline take it in all places wheresoever it is So likewise the Church is an house Christ the Master in which every person in what room soever he rests can receive nothing but from his Officers The Church universal is a body he the head from which flow all those Spirits and Graces by which the body is enlivened Now as nothing can induce me to believe that each house in this City should be the City each Chamber in the house should be the house each member should be the body so a man cannot be perswaded that these particular Congregations which are parts of the whole should be that whole which is called by these Names CHAP. X. Another Argument answered I Now come to his second Argument which is thus framed Those who have mutual power each over other both to Command and Constrain in Conscience who were of themselves free each from other they must by mutual Agreement and Engagement be made partakers of that power But the Church of Believers have mutual power each over other to Command and Constrain in Conscience who were before free Therefore they must by mutual Agreement and Engagement be made partakers of that power I can guesse what he means by his Discourse but make no sense of this syllogism for in his Minor there is a Nown of the Singular number put to a Verb of the plural against Grammar the Church have when indeed if he would have expressed his meaning it should have been men in the Churches of believers or all men in all Churches of believers were such but I take it so SECT II. The Text If thy Brother offend thee Tell the Church vindicated HE offers to pâ—ove his Minor by Mat. 18. 15. If thy brother offend thee tell the Church In which saith he we have a legal and orderly way laid forth by our Saviour in which brethren only of the same Church ought to deal one with another which they cannot exercise with Infidels nor yet with other Christians as our own experience if we will take a taste will give undeniable evidence I deny his Minor being understood as I expressed for that ambiguous way of his delivering it in Nonsence poseth a Reader what to speak or think I say then that every particular man in a Church hath not power to command or constrain anorher let us examine his reason therefore out of Mat. 18. 15. If thy brother that is one of the same Church not an Inâ—idel nor yet other Christians This is his Collection but extreamly amisse for I dare confidently affirm that every Christian is our spiritual brother of what Congregation soever he is and it is an high kind of Impiety to deny it nay he is nearer than a brother a member of the same mystical body of which Christ is the head and therefore this Argument falls in the very first
answer them if there were need but the Argument from them is of no force at all and that the very quotations are of no force were the persons See his collection from them page 77. which perhaps he means a third Proposition because he saith Thirdly In case the face and form of all the Churches are generally corrupted c. I need adde no more Posito quolibet sequitur quidlibet suppose impossibilities and you may collect untruth enough Christ hath promised not to leave his Church destitute it is true there is no promise to their particular Congregations but to his Church in generall and therefore to dispute upon an impossible ground yeelds little or no strength to that Argument and so I desist from it His second Argument begins in the end of that page and proceeds in the next It is thus urged If the Church can do the greater then she may do the less the acts appertaining to the same thing and being of the same kind But the Church can do the greater namely give the essentials to a Pastor ut supra Ergo I put his words down verbatim but now he should have named the less which must be or he speaks nothing dispence this Ordinance of Ordination and then I would know what that is if not giving the essentials to this Officer So here is idem per idem the Conclusion proved by it self and therefore must be denyed upon the same grounds which I spake of before and this is all he puts down for his second Argument His third Argument page 78. is thus framed That which is not an act of power but of order the Church can do he proves this Proposition for saith he the reason why it is conceived and concluded that it is beyond the power of the people is because it is an act of supream jurisdiction But this is an act of order not of power Suppose I should deny his Major have the people power to do any thing that is an act of order Indeed I know no Ecclesiastick power they have or any spirituall power of acting any thing that concerns more than their particular demeanour and all the rest is obedience But then to his Minor To dispence Ordination is an act of power for although the thing dispensed as I have shewed is called an order yet it is an act of power that gives it as in a Civil State the precedency of place is meerly an order but yet it is an act of power in the supream Magistrate that gives it Now such is this although we should conceive it meerly an order yet it must be given by an act of power but this besides that notion of order hath in it self great powers which are conveyed by it of which I have treated somewhat in their distinct notions and this Argument is absolutely unvalid He hath another Argument which follows but it concerns only the Presbyterians yet from thence he takes occasion to asperse Bishops thus It is as certain saith he that it cannot firstly belong to a Bishop which by humane invention and consent is preferred before a Presbyter in dignity only if they will hold themselves either to the precedent he writes but I think he means president or pattern whence they raise their pedigree and it is from Hierom ad Evagrium Vnum ex se electum in altiori gradu collocarunt How many to speak modestly weaknesses may be observed in this Discourse First That it is imputed and obtruded upon the defenders of Episcopacy that they should consent that it is an humane invention than which nothing is more against their Discourses Secondly That they found their opinion only upon this place of St. Hierome which is as flat against apparent reason as the other since this place is commonly objected against them and although St. Hierome hath spoken enough otherwhere yet in this Epistle being pressed somewhat with the pâ—ide of Deâ—cons who were lifted up above Presbyters by the sloath and vanity of many he somewhat passionately defended the cause of Presbyters and here of all other places speaks the least for Bishops making the name be used reciprocally in Scripture But then lastly he quotes the place false and by the change of a letter makes him speak what he meant not to whom it may be answered in this as Bishop Andrews did to Bellarmine in the like case Verbum caret litera Cardinalis fide he saith Vnum ex se electum in altiori gradu collocâ—runt when it is Câ—llocatum Episcopum nominaverunt in which sence there is a mighty difference in the first as if they had placed and given their Bishop his authority which he had in the other only that they called him Bishop who was set over the other Presbyters so that it intimates that the name grew distinct not from the first instant of the Office I am sure I have spoke of this place before and let us consider it in its fullest and most averse sence that it can abide consider that just there in the heat and height of his Disputation against Deacons and upon that ground his extolling of Presbyters to which only Order he was exalted he proves that the difference betwixt Bishops and Presbyters and the exaltation of them was Apostolical and from the Apostles derived to his age from the Church of Alexandria which was founded by St. Mark where to his time from St. Mark was a succession of Bishops above Presbyters and it is a derogation from the reverence due to the Apostles to call their institutions meerly humane inventions in such things which concern Ecclesiasticall Government concerning which they had that great Commission As my Father sent me c. and in this case it is most weak of all other since concerning Ordination St. Hierome in this very Epistle immediately after these words saith Quid facit Episcopus excepta Ordinatione quod non faciat Presbyter thus in English What doth a Bishop except Ordination which a Presbyter cannot do Here then a Presbyter cannot ordain and yet to shew the full sence of the words understand that a Presbyter may do any thing I upon a sudden can except nothing not it may be he when he wrote that Sentence I say he can do any thing that a Bishop doth except ordain but the affairs of ruling other Elders or judging them he cannot do by an original or to use Hookers language by an Authority firstly â—eated in him or given to him but by a delegated but no delegation can serve the turn in Ordination because it was given to the Apostles by Christ in those words As my Father sent me so send I you to give Authority to ordain and they and they only who were so authorized by the Apostles can do it Thus you see that place out of St. Hierome expounded his Arguments deduced from thence falls of its self If Presbyters elected and gave first being to a Bishop then were they before him and could not receive Ordination
be present untill they setled Bishops amongst them His next place urged is Acts the 20. he leaves me to looke the verse but affirmes that the Church of Ephesus was governed first by Presbiters only from that Chap. afterward they had a Bishop who was called The Angel of the Church of Ephesus Apocalyps 2. That which hath any colour for this in this Chap. must be deduced out of the 17 th verse where it is said That from Miletum Paul sent to Ephesus for the Elders of the Church Therefore it seems the Church was governed by Elders at that time but let the Reader consider whether St. Paul did not Episcopize over them conventing the Elders before him and giving them that most heavenly charge And then consider that these men in the 28. verse are called Bishops Take heed to the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath madâ— you Overseers we read it but it is Bishop in the Original indeed as I have shewed in this Treatise The words were not distinguished at the first but they were promiscuously used untill the great increase of Christianity when the name of Apostles began to weare away and they had more generally setled Churches and planted Bishops over the other Presbiters in the chief Cities and then these were called Bishops and indeed every Presbiter who hath a charge of Souls is a little Bishop in the Superintendency of his parish though noâ— in the nature of the office he must look to his little flâ—ck as Bishop over them so that nominally every Presbiter with charge of Soals is a little Bishop superintendâ—ing them for their Souls good But a Bishop is higher over them and their flocks to take care that he doth his duty in these places of Scripture I see no manner of Argument to shew that a Church may exist without a Bishop for they had Apostles and then Bishops in their places CHAP. III. His Argument drawn from Panormitan answered HE then urgeth a Sentence out of Panormitan Olim Presbyteri in communi regebant Ecclesiam ordinabant sacerdotes consecrabant omnia Sacramenta Sed postmodum ad schismata sedanda fecerunt seâ— ordinaverunt Apostoli crearentur Episcopi Let me examine this bold assertion of Panormitan and of St. Hierom who hath much the same word Olim that was in the first plantation of the Churches I know no record of any authentick authority in the case but the Acts of the Apostles or their Epistles in which I can never find that any man or Company of men who were barely Presbiters did ordain Priests or did perform any Act of Jurisdiction in communi as he speakes which would intimate a Sentorian Government of which as they urge none so I cannot imagine what words in these Acts or Epistles should tend thereunto but then his last Clause I in part yeeld to that the Apostles did ordain Bishops and am confident they did it by divine Right which was given them by our Saviour saying As my Father sent me so send I you but whether only as they say ad sedanda schismata to appease schisme upon the occasion of some that said they were Pauls or else for the absolute better government of the Church which I rather adhere to I leave to the Readers Judgement but in general think it too great a boldness for men to limit Gods designes to their weake measures when God hath not determined or exprest them therefore such a passage in Panormitan is of no vallidity CHAP. IV. His first Argument to prove their ordination after Bishops were instituted answered HE proceeds with the second Number of his distinction to shew that not onely this was done before Bishops were instituted but after likewise the same was done and he gives this reason for saith the Doctor Non enim ad esse sed ad melius esse Ecclesiae necessaria est haec oeconomia This discipline is not necessary to the being but well-being of the Church suppose I grant it 't is true no discipline is necessary to the being of a Christian but Baptisme by which we are made members of that mystical body of Christ of which he is the head political Lawes Civil or Ecclesiastical are not necessary to our being Men or Englishmen of this Country but to our happy being in it we may be Christians and members of Christs Church where is no Presbiter as well as no Bishop As suppose a Diocess and Kingdom conquered by a Pagan as alass too many have been not a Bishop or a Priest left remaining Those noble Christians who remain without them have the being of Christians but not the well-being of Church-communion enjoying the blessed Sacrament which requires sacerdotal administration and likewise Church-discipline which conduce to the well-being of a Church but here we see the same necessity of one as the other for Bishops as Presbiters CHAP. V. An Argument out of Johannes Major answered BUt he proceeds and produceth a place out of Johannes Major de gestis Scotorum that he should write that the Scots were governed by Priests and Monks until Anno Domini 429. from whence he collects that they were two hundred and thirty yens without Bishops he might have urged other late Writers likewise in it But I answer to this that the Registers of that illiterate age were very ill preserved throughout Christendom but worse in those parts amongst the Picts and Scots then almost any where by reason that they were miserably oppressed with the almost perpetual Warrs they had with their Neighbours Brittaines and Romanes the Saxons and scarce any eminent man for learning who recorded any thing was acted amongst them and in that Gap of time in which they place this lack of Bishops their troubles were at the height for as there was all that space Warrs for dominion so there was persecution for destruction of Christianity and the Scots in general were banished that Country The Christians fled every where for safety to the adjacent Isles to Ireland from whence they came to Normandy to Denmarke any where for safety which it may be although unhappy to their wordly content yet advanced the propagation of the Gospel as it was in the Apostles time upon the persecution of St. Stephen Well then I think in this unhappy season they can find good Record for neither Bishops nor presbiters but every Chriâ—â—ian shifting for himself and especially those who were in authority and in Christian office because they of all others were sought after and therefore were concerned to hide their heads besides this it being the custome of Bishops to place themselves in some eminent Cities whereby they might be the more eminent and the better oversee their Diocesses There were few such in Scotland then but these Bishops which were then in the Kingdom were forced to inhabit many obscure places All which considered it is not possible for any man to expect a pedigree of their Bishops as it hath been preserved in more eminent Churches
by Divine Apostolical institution so it is reasonable to conceive it may add something Ecclesiastical to that which is Divine so it be not destructive to the foundation of which nature I shall show there is somewhat in this Canon For the Book which was imposed on the head and shoulders of the Bishop to be Consecrated is the Book of the Gospel or four Evangelists Now it is impossible that that Ceremony should be necessary because what is necessary to any thing must agree to all of that kind which this cannot because there were Bishops when this Book was not written yea when not one of the â—ospels were written this therefore cannot be essential to the Consecration of a Bishop which must needs follow his Consecration this Argumenr is taken notice of by divers although not in this â—ase but in that which concerns a Deacon where the Book of the Gospels is delivered at his Ordination to the Deacon and by most of the Church of Rome is made the matter essential to that Ordination as they call it or as we the outward sign of it you see this Argument which they are pinched with Let us consider how they shift from it Vasques in his 238 Disp. Cap. 4. Number 43. and Ochogamia in his Book of Sacraments in his title of Orders Cap. 4. out of him affirmed that this Order of Deacons as well as is evident of Bishops was before the Gospels were written and they were then ordained without that Ceremony but by a Dispensation of Christ that is Ochogamia's Phrase but Vasques by a Commission of his the Phrase doth not materially differ with these kind of shifts any thing may be affirmed can they shew any the least word in the New Testament intimating any such probability a dispensation must be upon a former Law there could be no Law made to ordain with giving Gospels before either all or any of them were written and it is most evident that none of them were writ when the first Bishops were made Gasper Hurtado goes therefore another way to work and although he grants that at first they were ordained only by the imposition of Hands yet he saith that it is probable that afterwards Christ instituted that when the Gospels were writ they should be delivered to the ordained it is an easy thing to say it is probable but he should give a reason why we should think it reasonable I have reason to think that when the Gospels do abundantly deliver to us such things which are necessary for us to know concerning the will of Christ and there is no such thing in the Gospels and they would be of great ease to the satisfaction of such men as expect to receive Divine blessings from some men in holy Orders It is necessary that they should have some means chalked out to them by which they might be assured that these are such hands by which they expected those blessings are promised to be given them but above all others I wonder at Henricus Henriques who is so bold in his sum of moral Divinity Lib. 1â— Cap. 8. Tit. 1. in his Comment to affirm that probabilius videtur quod in primitiva Ecclesia dabatur Diacono charta in qua continebantur Mysteria fidâ—i quae habentur in Evangâ—lio which is that it seems probable that in the primitive Church there was given to the Deâ—con somâ— paper in which were contrived written the Mysteries of Faith which are in the Gospel He saith it seems so I would ask to whom it seems so certainly to no man living fifteen hundred years after and upwards nor did ever any man say he saw any such Scripture nor heard of it before It cannot therefore seem probable to any man for sure such a Scripture would have given a Glorious light to many other Doctrines which now lye in darkness I therefore love occandus for a clear and ingenious conâ—ession in this point who in quartum sententiarum â—ist 24. Proposition 1. Page 83. saith thus Contra hoc est unum Argumentum cujus solutionem fateor me nescire gaudenter libentur ignorabo Against this Conclusion which is that the delivery of the Book should be essential to the Order of a Deacon against this there is one Argument whose answer I know not and am chearfully and willingly ignorant of And then he urgeth this Argument of mine and shews that even St. Mathews Gospel who was his tutelar Saint was not writ when Deacons were instituted he calls him Pater meus Spiritualis this â—s it was honest so it was ingenious and then he quotes Durandus rightly in Quartum Dist. 24. Quest 3. who agrees with me much in my opinion conceâ—ning this matter and saith that in the Arician Diocess where he was Bishop this Ceremony of the Book was never used so that there is neither Scripture for it nor any universal Traâ—ition and therfore hath no strong â—oundâ—tion the chiefest argument that â—ives me any consideration is that Canon of the fourtâ— Councel of Carthage of which I spake before where in express terms the use of the Book of the Evangelists is enjoyned in the ordination of a Bishop but doth that follow it is therefore necessâ—ry essentially I think I have writ before that it is reasonable to think that Eminent Councell consiâ—â—ing of 200. and odd Bishops many of them as eminent for learning and piety as the world hâ—d we may justly think that such a Councel would omit no essentially materâ—all circumstance but that it should add nothing to the Apostolical Canons is not reasonable and this might now be because now that Book was extant which â—t the first in the Apostles time was not so that I am confident that such who lived in obedience to that Church ought to observe it there being no opposition to the essential part but indeeed rather an explication of it and yet I may say that the Church of Rome did not doth not observe the manner of using the â—ook there enjoyned for as Huâ—tado difficultate decima de ordine olim saith he heretofore the Book was not imposed by Bishops as that Canon requires but by Deacons and now by the Bishops â—haplâ—ines for the use of the Book was impossible to be Apostolical as it is before proved it may be used and ought to be when ordained in a well governed and setled Church but it is not essential to the Ordination or Consecration CHAP. XIII In which what is essential to this Consecration is set down THus having removed the principal Rubbige which might impede my structure I come now to lay my foundation concerning the Building first then let us conceive that what is essential must be Apostolical and what is so may probably be thought to be essential for although it is a most assented Conclusion that the Sacraments which conveigh Grace must be of Divine Institution of which Nature they make Orders I contend not about words and the Apostles were instituted with full authority
to act since after his departure to the end of the world It is necessary therefore for us to think that such things as are delivered by them are Divine for although Canons of Councels general or particular are excellent Guides for the establishing Peace and Unity in the Church and so may require obedience from their Subjects yet because they are but men without an annexed infallibility without doubt they may vary in their practice and Discipline and their Dictates being introduced upon occasions may be altered and therefore cannot add essentials to any thing for the essences of things are always certain and necessary This is my Major Now to search what is Apostolical in this business we must examine the Scriptures where first we find our Saviour authorizing his Apostles As my Father sent me so send I you to give power to others We find him using no Ceremony but breâ—thing upon them gave them the Holy Ghost and truly that Breathing was most significative of that blessing he bestowed upon them but from thence we find not the Apostles using that Ceremony for they being enabled with this plenarty of power to give others that blessing they only gave it and for a sign that they did establish it laid their hands upon them so that as we conceive these two places 1 Tim. 1. 6. by the laying on of my hands or the 1 Tim. 4. 14. with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery to be Ordination so likewise we shall find this Ceremony taken for the whole 〈◊〉 or Ordâ—nation Tim. 5. 22. Lay hands suddenly on no man Now then without doubt if any outward Act must be essential to this Heavenly work this only being Apostolical must be esteemed most essential and there I think it most proper for men to conceive that this is the only Ceremony essentially necessary if any be to the performance of that duty for the power originally being given to the Apostles nakedly and absolutely without any qualification or mode in what manner they should use it to others we are to receive the manner at their acting it for our best Rule and guidance which is only in Scripture delivered to be imposition of Hands Thus much for that which the Doctors of the Church of Rome called the material part in the essence of Consecration and we may truly term the outward sign Let us now examine that which they call the form and we may term the words which express it the words which our Saviour used John 20. 22. are Receive ye the Holy Ghost these words expresly are used in the Roman Consecration and Ordination but in the Graecian the words are varied but the sence reserved not giving this blessing in the Imperative-mood which is much stood upon by many Schoolmen and Casuists but in a more humble stile The Grace of God Creates or Promotes thee to this Dignity of a Bishop or Priest or Deacon where we find the truth more largly expounded though materially the same for certainly the Grace of God is that which impowers men with these authorities are given and men are only Instrumental but that they are and therefore there is added how this is given by the suffrage of the Bishops which denotes them instrumental for the African Church you may discern in the Canon of Carthage before cited that the Consecration is expressed in a Language of such extent as may be applied to them both which is uno fundente benedictionem one of them pouring out the benediction or blessing but implying strongly the sence such as is proper for this work to Confirm which all the present Bishops lay on their hands and this universally so consented unto as agreeing to the Holy Scripture that although in the heat of disputation I find men sometimes over peremptorily asserting their own opinions yet I do not find that either Church did refuse such as were Consecrated in either although in wayes and modes differing from their own so that I may justly say that the whole Catholick Church Concenters in this Conclusion that when words importing the blessing are Delivered by a Consecrating Bishop and those words are sealed by imposition of Hands then these holy Orders are effectually given I shall then need to do little more in this Point than to answer such objections which are commonly made against it or I can apprehend proper to be opposed to it SECT II. The first Objection against the Truth answered THe first is common in the School made against the pontiâ—ical in this point because that in all that part of the Pontiâ—ical it is said only Receive ye the Holy Ghost and that Language is the same in the Ordination of Priests as likewise the Imposition of Hands so that by this no man can know what Order is given in the Church of Rome it is answered that the design which they are about will shew it whether to one or to the other Order and again the manner of the Imposition of Hands in the Consecration of a Bishop divers Bishops Impose Hands in the Ordination of a Priest one Bishop only with some Presbyters in the Ordination of a Deacon the Bishop alone but in our Church that scruple is clearly taken away by a great Prudence where at the Ordination of a Priest the Consecrating words are Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Priest and at the Consecration of a Bishop the words are Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Bishop in the Church of God where wee see that universal cause of all Spiritual blessings I mean the Holy Ghost applied to that particular duty in which at that time he works and therefore the Consecration is free from that Exception SECT III. Another Objection drawn from the Councel of Carthage answered ANother Ojection may be that the Councel of Carthage before cited mentions the laying on the Book by two Bishops upon the head and shoulders of the Bishop to be Consecrated and therefore that is necessary I answer that I much reverence that Councel in which was St. Augustine and divers other Bâ—shops famous for learning and piety in their Generations but yet as I have said before this was never practiced any remarkable time as sundry Doctors in the Church of Rome observe and again it is impossible to be essential because not Apostolical and that because the Holy Bible and that highest part of it the New Testament was not writ when Bishops and Priests were Ordained it is therefore worth our marking that there is a difference in the decrees of Councels concerning Doctrine and Discipline or Ceremonies of the Church in a point of Doctrine they shew in what sence they understand such and such a Conclusion but in the other they set down what is to be practiced to preserve Orders and decency in those Churches where they have to do and indeed there can be no more required of obedience than in quiet and setled times in which
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
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