grace That inferiour Bishops cannot be the Apostles Successors first by Scripture and next by demonstrative Reasons Beside many other places of Scripture read but Acts 15.2.4.6.22.23 where yee shall finde Apostles and Elders cleerly distinguished I intreat you to see the places and I doubt not but ye shall receive satisfaction and farther I remember not that ever I heard any Divine affirme Elders and inferiour Bishops to be in rank and degree with the Apostles but that all Divines ancient and moderne accounted Elders to bee inferiour in degree to the Apostles but I will prove by three unanswerable Reasons That Presbyters did not succeed the Apostles My first Reason I will form thus They that were inferiour in degree to the apostles were not the apostles successors in that same order and degree But Presbyters were inferiour in degree to the apostles And therefore Presbyters were not the apostles successors in that same order and degree The Proposition I take for granted for I hope no man will deny it I prove the assumption first by the cōsent of all the divines that ever were in this World next by the cleer evidence of Scripture throughout all the book of God where the Apostles who were chiefe Bishops and Over-seers both of the Pastors and the people are cleerly distinguished from inferiour Bishops who only have the oversight of the people as is evident by the Apostle Paul his directions to the Elders of Ephesus Acts 20. My second Reason I will form thus If Elders be the Apostles Successors then that same power and authoritie necessary for the government of the Church is committed to them by the Apostles as amply as they themselves had it But that same power and authoritie necessary for the government of the Church is not committed unto Elders as amply as the Apostles themselves had it And therefore Elders are not the Successors of the Apostles If any man deny the Proposition I will aske him how it can be possible that Elders can be the Apostles Successors unlesse they succeed them in that same Power and Authoritie Truly it is beyond my capacitie to conceive and understand it I know they cannot succeed them in those things that are extraordinary but in their ordinary power and authoritie and that which is perpetually necessary for the Government of the Church of Christ under the Gospel they must succeed them and they be their successors I prove the Assumption Any one of the Apostles might ordaine Elders so Paul ordained twelve Elders at one time at Ephesus Acts 19. any one might ordain Bishops so Paul ordained Timothy and Titus Bishops of Ephesus and Creet for Timothy it is cleer 2 Tim. 1.6 any one of the Apostles might command Elders and Deacons to preach the Gospel any where as is evident throughout all Pauls Epistles and in the Acts of the Apostles and which I think no Divine will deny any one of them might prescribe Rules and Laws to inferiour Elders so did the Apostle Paul to the Elders of Ephesus Acts 20. to Archippus Col. 4.17 who by the declaration of all the Ancients was Bishop and so superiour to an Elder any one of Apostles might Command Rebuke Censure and correct Elders at their own pleasure as is most evident in Scriptures and in particular in Saint Paul his Epistles now those things no Elder can do by himself and therefore That some ordinary and necessary power which the Apostles had is not committed to inferiour Bishops but to Superiour Here it may be objected That by this Reason Bishops Superiour cannot be the Apostles Successors because they doe not exercise their power and authoritie without the concurrence of the inferiour Bishops they joyne with them in the Ordination of Ministers so they should also in the exercise of Jurisdiction Answer There is no warrant for this in the Scripture it is true wee read the Apostles tooke the concurrence of Ministers in decision of doubts and controversies and also in Ordination so Paul saith that Timothy was ordained by the Presbyterie but there was no direction from Christ for so doing it pleased the Apostles to take their concurrence which they needed not to have done and therefore they did sometimes exercise their Episcopall power by themselves alone as wee may see in the Acts of the Apostles and 2 Tim. 1.6 and many other places of Scripture and did very seldome crave the concurrence of Presbyters so that Bishops do not exercise their power without the concurrence of Presbyters it is not because they are commanded so to doe by Christ and his Apostles but their own voluntary yielding of their right and submitting of themselves to their own Ecclesiastick Laws and Canons of ancient Councels it is as cleer as the Sun That an Elder hath no power of Ordination or Jurisdiction granted to him in the Scriptures what he hath it is but by humane Ordination and hee hath not in any ways Supreame Power granted him by any ancient Councell This is most certaine That a Bishops Ordination is valid and good without a Presbyter and hath warrant from the example of the Apostles but a Presbyter to ordain without the command of a Bishop is not warranted by any example in Scripture nor the Canon of any ancient Councell and so my conclusion stands good That inferiour Bishops are not the Successors of the Apostles My third Reason is this They who were inferiour to those in dignitie and degree who were inferiour to the apostles in place and estimation were not the apostles Successors in all the parts of the Ministeriall Function But Presbyters were inferiour in dignitie and degree to those who were inferiour to the apostles in place and estimation And therefore Presbyters were not Successors to the Apostles in all the parts of the Ministeriall Function The Proposition I know will be granted I prove the assumption That Presbyters were inferiour in dignitie and degree to those who were inferiour to the Apostles in place and estimation Timothy and Titus were inferiour to the Apostles in place and estimation so were all the Evangelists as all Divines acknowledge and yet those were Superiour in dignitie and degree even in the judgment of those who oppose the doctrine delivered in this Treatise That Timothy and Titus were superiour to Presbyters I shall prove it by and by but I will use one Argument yet for the ordinary callings of Apostles and Evangelists and this it is briefly Either the callings of the Apostles and Evangelists were ordinary callings or else we have no ordinary Ministers of the Gospel by Christs institution But this were absurde to say that we had not ordinary Ministers of the Gospel by Christs institution And therefore it is as absurd to say that the callings of Apostles and Evangelists are not ordinary callings I desire all those who oppose this doctrine to loose this knot Now it remayneth to prove that the Bishops succeeded in place of the Apostles and in place of Evangelists inferiour Presbyters
power of ordination Timothy and Titus are commanded to Ordaine Elders And therefore Tim. and Tit. had the power of Ordination The Proposition cannot in reason be denied for Paul would never have commanded them to do that which they had not power to doe yea the same power of ordination is a part of that Commandement which he is bidden commit to faithfull men to be kept and propagated untill the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ The Assumption is manifest 1. Tim. 5.22 and Tit. 1.5 That they had the power of jurisdiction is proved thus They who are commanded to rebuke censure and correct with all authority and not suffer themselves to be despised to stay foolish questions and vain bablings to excommunicate the obstinate to try and prove those who desire the office of a Bishop and either to admit or reject them according to their weakenesse or ability have the power of jurisdiction spirituall But Timothy and Titus are commanded to do all these things 1 Timothy 4.11 12. 1 Tim. 3.9.17.19.20 1 Tim. 6.17 Tit. 1.11.13 and Tit. 3.10 And therefore Timothy and Titus have the power of jurisdiction spirituall The strength of this Argument I refer to the consideration of the learned for I hope no wise man will say that these priviledges can bee divided from the power of jurisdiction Now I will use one Argument yet to prove that Timothy and Titus had the power of ordination and jurisdiction jointly If those Bishops of whom the Apostle Paul speaks in his Epistles to Timothy and Titus received the power of ordination and jurisdiction by those instructions and precepts which the Apostle Paul sets downe in those Epistles then Timothy and Titus much more received the power of ordination and jurisdiction by those instructions of the Apostle Paul set downe in those Epistles But the first is true and therefore the second is true also The connexion of the proposition is valid enough for if inferiour Bishops whom the Apostle calleth also Elders in that place received the power of ordination and jurisdiction as is asserted by all the opposers of Episcopacie by the Apostles injunctions in those Epistles much more have superiour Bishops as Timothy and Titus were this twofold power by those injunctions this is an argument strong enough ad hominem although I confesse That properly Timothy and Titus have not this twofold power here by the Apostle Paul but only are commanded to put that power in execution which the Apostle Paul before had conferr'd upon them at their ordination which also they are commanded to propagate and transmit unto others for the preservation of the calling and propagation of the Gospell of Christ vntill his second comming to judgement Now for the better cleering of this Doctrine I will prove That Presbyters or inferior Bishops have no ways the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction I desire any Opponent to shew mee the place where it is recorded in the Scripture in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus they find it not Tim. and Tit. are commanded to put all the parts of the Apostolicall power in execution but not those Elders and Deacons of whom the Apostle speakes there they get no Commandement to use that power for it is more then evident That all the injunctions set down in those Epistles are given to Timothy and Titus and all those who were to succeed them in that same order and degree yea to them as they are singular men and as Superiour in Order and Degree to all those towards whom they are to exercise that power and the reason is this because one man in that same Order and Degree cannot have power over an other in that same rank and order one Bishop cannot have power over an other one Presbyter cannot have power over another That man that hath power over an other must be superior unto him in degree or he can have no authority over him that is his own properly delegate he may have but that is not his it is his in whose name he exercises that power But it will be replied That this power is given to a company of Presbyters and not to one in particular Answer This power is given here to Timothy and Titus as singular persons and therefore I will make the matter manifest by a formall argument That power which is committed to certain particular and singular men in the Ministery is not committed to a representative body of Ministers But the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction is committed to certain particular and singular men in the Ministery And therefore it is not committed to a representative body of Ministers The proposition cannot be denied for that which is committed to one singular man in a calling cannot bee said to bee committed to the whole company and trade indefinitely for example that power which is committed to one Alderman in the Citie to wit the Master or Lord Major is not committed to the whole councell of Aldermen he hath a different and superiour power to all the rest As to the assumption That this power was committed to certain singular men as to Timothy and Titus and all those who were to succeed them in the same ranke and order it is more then evident Now to note this by the way since Presbyters doe not succeed to Timothy and Titus in that same order and degree the power of Ordination cannot be committed unto them Furthermore If the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction be committed to Presbyters as they are singular men then every Presbyter hath alike power and authoritie within his own Charge every one is Pope in his own Parish and may command rule and governe as hee thinks good for who can controll him none of his brethren have any more power over him then hee hath over them for every one hath equall power and authoritie transinitted unto them and this is downright Brownisme But it may be replyed That the Presbytery hath power over all particular Ministers Answ Who hath given them this power It is not given them by Christ nor his Apostles If you reply it is agreed upon by common consent I Answer Then at least Presbyteriall Government is not of divine Ordination But I would ask this question what if I should refuse to give my consent to such a government or to subject my self to it how can I be forced to obey their Canons and Laws by whose authoritie the representative Church such as the Presbytery is cannot compell me before I subject my selfe to her authoritie the civill Magistrate cannot do it neither by the doctrine of all my opposites and some would say if any should usurpe authoritie and compell by violence it should be the destroying of our Christian Libertie and tying us whom Christ hath made free and in a word the demolishing of that platforme of government which Christ himselfe did establish any defender of Parochiall government may reason in this kind But it will be againe replyed That this authoritie is given to a
Sinners and pronounce Remission of Sins to all Penitent souls The fourth Testimony is in Matth. 28.20 and Iohn 14.16 the Argument I frame thus They with whom Christ promised to be always untill the end of the World Their calling was ordinary and to continue untill the end of the World But Christ promised to be with his Apostles alwayes untill the end of the World And therefore their calling was ordinary and to continue untill the end of the World Of necessity then Christ his promise here is not only made to his Apostles because they were not to continue until the end of the world but to their Successors in all the Ages and Generations to come for Iohn saith 14.16 That the Comforter would abide with them for ever that is to the end of the world and so with their successors aswell as themselves The fift Testimonie is in Matth. 5.14 the Argument is this They whom Christ appointed only to be the light of the World their calling was ordinary and to continue untill the end of the World But Christ appointed his Apostles to be the light of the World And therefore their calling was ordinary and to continue untill the end of the World Although the Apostles themselves may in some respect be called the light of the World because by their Ministery chiefly the World was first enlightned with the light of the Gospel yet in respect that this light might be in danger to go out there behoved others to succeed the Apostles in the ages to come to keep in this light and still to hold it out as a Lanthorne in the Ministery of the Word and the exercise of the other parts of that Spirituall and Heavenly Function that all men might see how to walke in that narrow way that leads to life eternall The fire in the Temple of Jerusalem which the Priests were daily to attend that it went not out was a Type and figure of this spirituall and heavenly fire of Grace which must be preserved by the Ministery and continuall attendance of the Apostles and their Successors The sixt Testimonie is in Matth. 10.40 and Luke 10.16 The argument is this Whomsoever all men are bound to heare and receive in Christs stead their calling was ordinary and to be continued untill the end of the World But to heare and receive the Apostles in Christs stead all men are bound And therefore the calling of the Apostles was ordinary and to continue untill the end of the World By all men here we must not understand only all those men that lived in the Apostles times but all men in all Ages following and not genera singulorum neither but singula generum for as the Apostles were commanded to preach the Gospell to all and every man without exception so all and every man is bound to heare them and receive them now none could beare the Apostles but those that lived in their dayes and therefore necessarily our Saviour did understand the Apostles and their Successors in all Ages and Generations following for they that heare not the Successors of the Apostles heare not Christ and they that receive not them neither doe they receive Christ and they that heare them and receive them receive Christ The seventh testimonie is in Matth. 24.42 and Marke 13.35 The Argument is this They who are commanded by Watching and Prayer to attend the second comming of our Saviour their calling was ordinary and to continue untill the end of the World But the Apostles were commanded by Watching and Prayer to attend the second comming of our Saviour And therefore the Apostles calling was ordinarie and to continue untill the end of the World No man will say that our Saviour did mean here that the Apostles in their proper persons behoved to attend his second comming for Christ knew well enough that the Apostles were not to live untill that time but his meaning is that they and their Successors in all Ages and Generations to come and in generall all men in all Ages following should thus attend their Masters comming and therefore Christ saith Marke 13.37 What I say unto you I say unto all men watch so that our Saviour speaketh principally to the chiefe Governours of the Church who should still be going about their Masters businesse that when hee comes hee may finde them well employed so that I may unanswerably conclude by the cleer evidence of all these former Texts and many more then these registred in the Book of God That the calling of the Apostles was ordinary and to be continued untill the end of the world Now for further strengthening of this Doctrine I will use two Arguments which naturally flow from the former Doctrine By the first I prove That these Commandements set down in these texts of Scripture are not only given to the apostles By the second I prove affirmatively That these directions are given to the apostles and their Successors in all the following Generations The first Argument is this That which the Apostles were not able to do by themselves alone Christ would not command them to do it by themselves alone But the apostles were not able to keep these Cōmandements by themselves alone And therefore Christ would not command them to keep them by themselves alone I prove the Assumption because the Apostles could not live unto the end of the World and so it was impossible to them to keep these Commandements by themselves They might keep them during their own life but no longer all that they were able to doe was to commit them to other faithfull men to be propagated unto the end of the World and so my conclusion is good That these Commandements were not only given to the Apostles The second Argument is affirmative and proves That these Commandements were given to the apostles and their Successors in all ages and Generations to come That which Christ knew was only possible to the Apostles and their Successors Christ gave it in Commandement to the Apostles and their Successors But Christ knew that it was only possible to the Apostles and their Successors to keep these Commandements And therefore Christ gave these Commandements to the Apostles and their successors This argument is a plain demonstration à causa ad effectum the strength whereof none that will oppose me shall ever be able to evade for the cause why these Commandements are not only given to the Apostles but to them and their Successors is because Christ knew that onely they and their Successors were able to keep them Now to end this point I will here affirme That I am so confident of the strength of these Reasons that no Divine is able to answer or rebate the force of them their only Refugium must be this That inferiour Bishops or Presbyters are the Apostles Successours by which wee obtain at first That the calling of the Apostles is an ordinary calling not extraordinary which they before maintained but I shall prove by Gods