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
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
lowlinesse of mind which should be amongst fellow Members I answer therefore That the Gifts of Deacons are not such as qualifie a Bishop of which St. Paul spake there but I will tell you very like them and as that Clause is not inserted to a Deacon that he should be apt to teach so it is not required of him but when he is found fit to teach and it is required he may I think I have spoken enough to him If I knew any more of this kind I would not account it lost time to handle it although tyred with this CHAP. VIII SECT I. Of a Ruling Elder THE next particle or Branch of Ecclesiastical Authority which I will undertake to handle is that they call a ruling Elder or a Lay Elder he is called an Elder but I am confident that the Name is new and the Office not known in the Primitive Church nor hath any mention in Scripture but by phansy Now to understand this I shall first shew what manner of Office this man is imagined to have and then answer such Arguments as are brought for him and so Conclude with mine own reasons against him First the Examination of his Office what it is to do is set down by Mr. Hooker Part 2. Chap. 1. pag. 16. I will not transcribe all he saith but set down the heads SECT II. What those Lay Elders are according to Hooker BEfore the Assembly meet he is of the Common Council and his voyce is to be taken in with the rest in the Consultation and Consideration of the businesse by which I think he means the businesse should be agitated that day Here he ciphers out 3. places of Scripture I think to no such purpose read them he that will Heb. 13. 17. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Acts 20. 28. When Offences are to be brought to the Congregation it belongs to them to ripen and prepare the businesse by way of praeconsideration to state the Cause right c. Thirdly when the Church is met he may interpose his Judgment without asking leave These he hath in Common with other Elders what he hath peculiar to himself is First visiting the Sick and such as are any way under Spiritual wants these men should send for these Elders and they shall be the Physitians of their Souls for this he quotes James 5. 14. but no word there of a Lay Elder Secondly by the same reason he should seek out such and visit them Thirdly He is to make peace amongst Members Fourthly If there be a Fame of a Member that he misbehaves himself towards such as are without that is I think not of their Church by which the Church may be scandalized he is to enquire of the Truth and I think inform or else all is in vain Fifthly He is to Consider of the persons that are to be admitted into the Church and to pronounce Excommunications Thus in general we see what manner of Office this is let us now examine whether there be semblances of any such thing in Scripture which they pretend should be the Guide in these Affairs And â—irst I will begin where I left for that in the first place he cites Romans 12. 8. As he found a word for his Deacon He that distributes so he hath another for his Elder He that ruleth with diligence SECT III. Whether any such Elders truly in Scripture THis Question Mr. Hooker enters upon in the same 1st Chapter of the 2d Part pag. 8. Here he saith he hath nothing to doe but with the Hierarchical party whose main Arguments are a Pursuivant and a Prison armed with Authority of an High Commission This man I observe though civil in many places to others yet very passionately bitter when any thing crosses him to speak against that Cause which I conceive right and do not doubt but I shall prove it First he undertakes to prove this Office that there is such an Office from the former place but goes now somewhat higher Rom. 12. 7. He argues for it first thus The Gifts here mentioned and considered are not such as have reference to a Civil but to an Ecclesiastical Condition so the words vers 5. We are one body in Christ. This is no strong Argument we are one body in Christ therefore that which is spoken of that body or members must be Ecclesiastical not Civil In the same body consisting of the members of Christs Church his mystical body there are many Civil Duties even as they are Christians exacted from them and as members of that body Duties of Kings to Subjects of Subjects to Kings Husbands to Wives and theirs to their Husbands betwixt Masters and Servants and so they mutually a little of this Divinity will make all things Ecclesiastical and reduce all Obedience for Christs sake to a Pastor or Teacher an Elder or Deacon Secondly the Operations which issue from these Functions evidence as much Prophesying c. Exhorting c. I would he had put in shewing mercy too but we see they do not shewing mercy giving ruling may relate to any member of this body There is nothing therefore in these Arguments that enforce these should be Ecclesiastical duties of members in the mystical body of Christ. He hath another Figure of 2 I think he means by it another Argument for the Cause that is pag. 9. An Argument of his answered GIfts here are not such as are Common and belong to all Christians as Faith Hope Charity c. What if they are not are they Ecclesiastical Orders that will never follow but he proves it although to no purpose if it were proved First those Gifts are here meant by which the Members of the body are distinct one from another and have several Acts appropriate to them He proves that because verse 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. all members have not the same office this I have said is not parallel'd in the Simile and therefore not to be urged further But saith he Common Graces are not so distinct for in them they do agree I answer these are not Common nor yet Ecclesiastical only nor the duties required witnesse this one which is instanced in He that ruleth with Diligence To be a Ruler is not only in Ecclesiastical Affairs but Civil and he that ruleth in Civil affairs is to do it with diligence so Origen upon this very place so St. Ambrose St. Hierom Theophylact Anselm H. Rabanus Maurus out of them all of which use phrases to this purpose qui praest vel fratribus vel Ecclesiae So that by this although there is not a Common Grace that is universal to all Christians yet it is so Common as that it belongeth to all Governors whether Lay or Ecclesiastical nemine contradicente but these late men and the duty enjoyned is as Common as the Grace given to wit to govern or rule not barely but with diligence So that this Conclusion is Confuted out of this very Instance and may as easily out of any other but
retort this Argument If none may preach but Clergy Elders then it seems here that these must be Clergy not Lay Elders which rule well for the Text that sayes the one labours in the Word implyes with that that the other doth it but not industriously and therefore must be such Elders who may preach and would have more honour if they did it laboriously or rather that honour more due SECT XIV A Digression concerning Preaching BUT because tbese men seem to place the whole work of the Ministry in preaching I would learn from some of them what this preaching is which they magnifie so much which I could never know to be so defined as to make a peculiar Work of a Minister so that it should as they make it swallow up his Function and belong to none but such as they call Ecclesiastical Presbyters I hope it will not be unuseful to the Explication of the Text nor unprofitable nor unpleasant to the Reader if I beyond the bounds of an Answer digresse a little to discourse of this Theam Labouring in the Word is not only labouring with the Word in the pulpit but an Industrious and studious Endeavour and therefore in the 4th Chapter of this Epistle vers 13. he adviseth Timothy to give himself unto reading that is Studying Exhortation Doctrine and vers 15. Meditate on these things this is labouring in the Word and this labour is such as is expressed like an Oxe as he expresseth it vers 18th of this Chapter Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Oxe that treadeth out the Corn it must be as much or greater or else his Argument would not hold It is the labour of the mind by day and night reading meditating And such are worthy in an especial manner of double honour but because the Apostle adviseth to Exhortation and Doctrine and every Ecclesiastick Officer is not for himself but for the Church this reading and meditating must not be for his private Contemplation but for the publique to teach him to rule well upon Occasions to exhort to all piety to teach the Truth of Gods will both to believe and to do all these at their several Occasions not only in the pulpit but in Writings and in Conferences Every man who is fit to be a Presbyter is not cut out for a popular Auditory he may have Gifts of an higher strain and they ought to bestow their pains upon those greater dutyes As I have heard it was answered Erasmus when he scrupled to receive a Benefice in England because he had not that Language to teach the people You teach their Preachers which is more than to teach them so may we say of these that they may teach Preachers which is a greater Work Preach to them in Conference preach to them in their Writings I have known in mine experience a learned man who had not himself the Faculty of Pulpit-preaching yet did more good by directing and teaching others to preach and advanced the Cause of Christ more than Twenty peeachers could have done Did not this Man labour in the Word think you Others again who have not that Convenience of doing it by Conference have written learned books for Preachers to study and by them Preachers preach Did not these men labour in the Word It is reported of Salvianus that he wrote and penned Homilies which others preached and repeated which of these think you was the Preacher I think both and both took pains and did their utmost endeavour and laboured in the Word and Doctrine perhaps one could not pen exactly perhaps the other could not Orator-like deliver or perhaps and it is likely Salvianus could do both but his Sermon might serve both places and did good and was applauded in both his own Church and his that preached his Sermon he preached perhaps in two places at once and both thesâ— put their Talents out to use and I doubt not but they may hear Well done good and faithfull Servant thou hast been faithfull in a little I will make thee Lord over much But let us a little Consider what Preaching is SECT XV. What Preaching is I Can think it nothing but teaching the Gospel of Christ that is his Life for Example his Doctrine for Precepts and his Death and Resurrection for our Meditation now then this is done by words written or spoken either of these a man preacheth by He preacheth that writeth such Arguments as Convince or Perswade as well as he that speaks them yea perhaps doth more by that and makes an Everlasting Sermon like a persume when the body is gone yet there is a sweetnesse remaining behind which is gratefull to all such as Converse with it so the Preacher being dead the Sermons yet live the fruit remains when the Tree is felled That this is Preaching is most evident because these teach the truth of Doctrine and these perswade to Godlinesse Again it is preâ—ching and he preâ—cheth who using others words and matter in the Pulpit perswades the Auditory either to Christian faith or manners this is preaching and for my part I conceive the saying or reading a Godly Homily to be preaching and more usefull than those vain Sermons which Trivial Presbyters and proud men utter even in pulpits with you in London I call them proud bacause many take upon them to preach who scarce ever did read a Body of Divinity nor are able to ballance the Doctrine they deliver by the Analogy of Faith or if they could do it by leasure and study take not time to do it being alwayes preaching but never learning these men if they were humble would content themselves either with such Sermons as are penn'd by the Church to be read or got without book or with such excellent Sermons which St. Chrysostome Bazil Gregory or the like made as the whole Church of the Muscovites do for by that means both the people should be instructed in the fundamentals of Faith and Life and they secured from that fearfull presumption of undertaking to teach being not taught and that vanity of being unestablished in the Faith and being carryed about with winds of Doctrine and that other pride of seeking their own vain-glory truly these thoughts have often made me startle when I go about to study a Sermon and not daâ—e to adventure on any thing which I have not carefully Considered on To repeat anothers Homily or Sermon is preaching it is teaching the people the Gospel of Christ for it is not material who penn'd it so the Message of God be delivered and because Nihil dictum quod non fuit dictum prius I know not why men should be so squeamish of it But I will stoop one degree lower since Preaching is Evangelizing and that is teaching the Gospels who can say that reading the Scripture in a known Tongue is not preaching which teacheth the people out of Scripture all that they ought to know concerning their Souls Good Let no man trouble this Discourse with St.
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.
I put down lest he may start from it hereafter and so will passe it over and proceed with the same succinctnesse to his second Conclusion which is p. 48. and is this It is an Act of power as an Instrument or means under Christ to give an Officer the being of an outward Call in the Church Here an Instrument being taken as I expounded it before a moral Instrument This Conclusion hath Truth granted likewiâ—e and so I passe to his second head pag. 49. by what means the essential of this power may be Conveyed SECT IX Whether Ordination doth communicate the Essence to the Outward Call HIS first Conclusion is Ordination as it is Popishly dispensed under the Opinion of a Sacrament and as leaving the Impression of an indelible Character doth not Communicate the Essence of this outward Call In the handling this Conclusion there are two thingâ— he insists upon First to shew that the Prelatical party are Popishly affected in this Doctrine 2dly to dispute against the Indelible Character for the first he draws it from the Answer in the Catechism which is in the Book of Common Prayer where it is said that there are only two Sacraments as generally necessary to Salvation not as he puts it down two only Absolutely necessary to Salvation and then glosses on it q.d. there are more and those necessary but not absolutely necessary These are his words which you see is a false Quotation But because that ever-to-be-honoured Book the Common Prayer is named I will first vindicate that and then proceed Know then It is the first time that ever read the Prelatical party accused under that Notion that the Common-Prayer Book held the Doctrine of the Church of Rome because it was the most Authentique piece which expressed the Doctrine and Religion of the Church of England 2ly Let the Reader observe that this word Sacrament is a Term not found in the New Testament but an Ecclesiastical Term taken up by the â—athers and used by all Christians for that thing which is Ordinarily defined a visible sign of an invisible and spiritual Grace Now if that have the Notions which the Word Sacrament expresseth then Mr. Hooker cannot deny Orders to be a Sacrament because he grants an outward Call to be necessary which is an outward Sign and he grants the Effect of that Call to be the Order given by it which is an Invisible grace as Grace is taken largely for Gratia gratis data and yet the Common Prayer Book is most true which saith there are two only generally necessary that is to all men for Orders are not generally necessary to all men as Baptism and the Lords Supper are but only to such persons as undertake such Duties Let this suffice to have been spoken to that which he unnecessarily to his businesse or mine inserted SECT X. Of the Character left after Ordination AND such another passâ—ge I shall have with his 2d Discourse concerning the Indelible Character a Thing not material to his businesse but only to vaunt and shew his reading in the School â—or this understand that this Character that he and they speak of is the relict of that gift of Ordination by which the Ordained is enabled to do these Duties he is ordained to Now that there is some such Thing he must needs confesse who discourseth of the Causation of these Essentials which imports an Effect and certainly this Effect must be permanent remain in the Ordained or else he hath nothing in him which should Authorize and enable him for those duties Now then it is in vain for him to fustian the Reader with the various opinions of the School whether this Effect be a Quâ—lity or Relation and such unnecessary Discourse unlesse he could shew what it is if not one of these since he holds that it is somwhat I must needs say that the worst of those Writers hath done better than he because those Authors have expressed something with a guesse of reason to it but he without reason to the contrary laughs at them all and yet hath said so much as invincibly proves there is a Character but not said what If it were pertinent to his or my Discourse I would insist upon it but although he is Tedious in such impertinencies I will not follow him in them it is enough that there is a Character something left in the person of a man perhaps that is a righter phrase than to say in either Soul or Understanding or Will unlesse for subjectum quo But something there is left by that Act of Ordination by which that man in whom it is left is capable to do those Divine duties whether this be delible or not is not yet material to this Question we will come therefore to his second Conclusion where will be new dispute SECT XI His Second Conclusion discussed HIS Second Conclusion is Page 52. That Ordination administred according to the method and mind of Mr. Rutherford namely as preceding the Election of the people it doth not give Essentials to the outward Call of a Minister An uncouth kind of phrase doth not give Essentials to the outward Call no it doth not for it is the outward Call of a Minister what 's that a Deacon he should have spoken clearly as his meaning expressed afterwards is and have said to a Presbyter but his meaning is in clear Terms that without the Election of the people to a Cure of Souls by no Ordination preceding a Presbyter doth receive his being a Presbyter And this I oppose His first Argument to prove it is taken from Acts 6. where it is said to the multitude vers 3. Look ye out among you seven men c. Contrary saith heâ— to their present practice Ver. 5. And the saying pleased the people and they chose and they set them before the Apostles His Collection hence is If none but those who were first Elected by the people should be ordained and all such who were so chosen could not be reâ—used then to ordain before Choice iâ— neither to make Application of the Rule nor Communion of the right in an orderly manner I set down his very words lest it might be urged upon an Alterâ—tion I spoyled his Argument But the first is plain from the place alledged Then he answers that seeming Objection that this is only concerning Deacons When saith he the reason is the same in both and stronger in Presbyters because the people have a greater dependance upon the other and are engaged to greater subjection to them and to provide for their honour in a more especial manner This kind of Arguing forceth me to a repetition Conceive therefore that this Instance being singular and occasional cannot be fitly called a rule which must give others but only prudentially when the like Circumstances concurre 2ly Though the people may have a fitnesse to choose such an Officer for such an employment as that was the relief of the poor yet not â—it to choose such
head of this body So he is of Christs Church who is governed by the Lawes of his Church we are not born Citizens of the Heavenly Jerusalem but re-born by Baptism by which we submit to that Discipline and are Incorporated into his body Now then as a man of any City if he live in the East part so long as he lives there is governed according to the Laws of that City by the Constables and Officers whose Authority is there prevalent yet if he remove to the West part by the Lawes of the same City he is governed by other Officers yet by force of the same Law which ruled him before so a Christian submitting himself to Christs Discipline by Baptism if he live in any part of this City submits to those Governours which are there if in another to those which rule in that and all because a Citizen of that City and these are the powers of that City yea perhaps there are kinds of Governments in one part of the City diverse from another according to the condition of the plâ—ce one fittest for that one and another for that other and 〈◊〉 he submitting to the Law of that City varies in the manner of his Subjection according to the exigencies rules of every place by that general rule of submission to the Government of that â—ity This likewise is apparent in an house A Servant admitted into an house so a man by Baptism submits himself to the Oeconomical Discipline of that house and according to the diverse rules of that house in diverse rooms of it submits himself to divers men perhaps diverse Disciplines So in the Hall he meets with one Governour with another in the Kitchin another in the Larder another in the Pantry and in all these he hath diverse Officers to submit to and diverse wayes of Submission in diverse Things Consider it a Body and in a Body consider those parts which walk up and down and go to several parts of the body as blood and spirits each of these by that general rule and Law of being Ministerial parts of the body in their passages through diverse parts receive diverse disciplines and are obedient to several Lawes in the heart the hand the head yet all by that obedience they have to the Law of humane bodies not by a New Covenant in every particular place but by virtue of that first Covenant to be Servants to that head which governs all Now then thus you see by Baptism we are made Citizens of the Heavenly Jerusalem and that being a visible sign makes us visible Members of this visible Church SECT II. Baptism is not the Form which Constitutes aâ— Church-Member but the Visible Act by which men are made such I Would willingly leave this Truth so clearly expressed as it might be without Question therefore Consider a little further that I do not conceive that Baptism is the Form which Constitutes a Church Member but that Baptism is that visible Act by which a man is made a Member a visible Member of Christs Church and the Effect of that Act is that form which â—o Constitutes him The Indenture is not the form of an Apprentice but the Deed by which he is made an Apprentice and that relation or Quality which is got in the person bound is the Effect of that Indenture and is the formality of his Apprenticeship Now because Mr. Hooker seems to oppose this Doctrine I will examine his Arguments which he enters upon Part 1. Chap. 5. page 55. Proposing this Question Whether Baptism doth give formality to make a Member of a visible Church He answers negatively His First reason is SECT III. His First Argument and the Answer to it IF there be a Church and so Members before Baptism Then Baptism cannot give the formality But the Church as toâ—um Essentiale is before Baptism Ergo. He proves his Minor because Ministers are before Baptism this he proves because there must be a Church of believers to choose a Minister lawfully for none but a Church can give a Call One Absurdity granted a Thousand follow Consider which were first Ministers or Churches and whether the Churches did choose their â—â—rst Minister Did the Church or Christ choose their first Ministers the Apostles Did Crete choose or St. Paul ordain Titus their Minister In the second part he supposeth all true which he had discoursed in the first in the first part he supposeth all true which he means to discourse of in the second and indeed both grosly false Ministers were before Churches and did constitute Churches not they them but he gives an Instance page 56. Let it be supposed the coming of some Godly man I draw up his sence amongst Pagans and they are Converted by him may not these men choose him for their Pastor c. I answer Instances upon Extraordinary occasions cannot make general rules but in particular I deny that if he were not a Presbyter before they could make him their Pastor or that he hath power by any Call of theirs to administer the Seals and I can give Instances in particular passages of the same nature in Ecclesiastical Story but that which is an invincible reason against this and the whole force of this matter is that although people may have power to dispose of their own obedience to whom they will give it yet they cannot of Divine benedictions which God shall give them they must in that submit to Gods Ordinance and they who are not authorized by him cannot be chosen by them and therefore they cannot choose him a Pastor where God doth not make him his Officer for that purpose which unlesse he is a Presbyter he is not SECT IV. His Second Argument answered HIS second Argument is If Baptism gives the form to visible Membership then whiles that remains valid the party is a visible Member But there is true Baptism resting in the party who hath no visible Membership Ergo. He proves his Minor from short Instances in an Excommunicate man in him who renounceth the Fellowship of the Church or when the Church is absolutely destroyed then all Church Membership ceaseth To understand the force of this Argument I must deviate a little and discourse of what it is to be a Member of the Church of the force of Baptism in this work Know then that the Church is a body and an orgâ—nical body which hath many members which have diverse Offices an eye a foot c. and as St. Paul philosophyes 1 Cor. 12. and all this body is animated and informed by the same soul the holy Spirit the head of this body is Christ all this needs no proof I think but then that men are made Members of this body by Baptism that I shall apply my self to Consider therefore the 13. verse of that 12 Chap. of 1 Cor. By one Spirit we are baptized into one body whether we be Jewes or Gentiles c. Having in the preceding verse shewed that there are many members
them that they are severed from the Actual partaking of the Sacraments He addes 1 Cor. 5. 2. as he reads it with an Introduction why rather have you not sorrow that he who hath done this might be taken away from among you Then he sâ—ips to verse 6. A little leaven leaveneth the whole Lump and therefore in the last verse 13. Put away therefore from among your selves that wicked person In which words saith he the Apostle describes what Excommunication is I yield all this but this doth not prove that this man was out of the visible â—huâ—ch for although he be severed from actually participating many blessed Covenants oâ— God's yet not severed from his membeâ—â—â—â—p This is but physicking the sick part you shall â—ind versâ— 5. To deliver such an one to Sathan for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord like as a man who hath 〈…〉 member exposeth â—â—to the Chirurgion that he may be cured of his former malady so that I observe two ends of Excommunication in this Chapâ—er the separation of the person from the Conversation with 〈◊〉 members lest they should be corrupted by him lest the Lump should be leavâ—ned and a punishment and chastisemâ—nt of the person that he mâ—y amend Now if that Chirurgery doth at â—ny time produce 〈◊〉 Effect of Amendmenâ— he then 〈◊〉 where he was to the Actual enjoying and participating of all â—ods mercies and Church-blessings The obâ—truction is removed but 〈◊〉 man ought to be excommunicated for Destruction but for Amendment of his own person or the saving others from the conâ—agion of his 〈◊〉 so that it is a sign whilst he is â—xcommunicate that he is member a sick one only obstructed from the parâ—icipationâ— of mâ—ny â—cclesiâ—stical felicities but not taken away from the Esse and being of a Christiâ—n His 2d Argument is drâ—â—en from a Rule of the Canon Law That violators of Churches should be put out of the Communion of Christianity This is nothing but the participation of those Actual blessings that are communicated to such in wâ—om there is no obâ—truction as suppose a moâ—tified and numbed member it partakes not of that influence of spirits and blood which others which â—re livelyer members are indued with but yet it remains a member Thirdly He argues from the Fathers Hillary St. Chrysostome Theophylact who say to be made as an Heathen is to be cast out of the people of God cast out of the Church So likewisâ— St. Austin Every Christian qui à Sacâ—â—dotibus excommunicatur Sathanae trâ—ditur He who is exâ—ommunicated by the â—acerdotes the Priests of God I render it is delivered to Sathan Now because out of the Church the Devil is as in the Church Christ I grant all these phrases to have their Truth That the Excommunicated man is out of the Church as I said before that is out of the participation of all those heavenly Covenants and mercies which are appropriated to them who in a more constant Conversation and fellowship have Commerce with it yet he loseth not all union Suppose then the Church a Body Politick a City this Baptized person one of the Corporation for some fault by him committed he is by them expelled the City untill such time as either he humble himself for his fault or else give such satisfaction as is enjoyned This man so long as he is out of the City loseth all priviledges of a Citizen yet not all union when he satisfies he is re-admitted upon his first Title so that Excommunication is a kind of suspension from the participation and execution of those Divine benedictions which other members have it is not a degradation from his Christian being like a Tree which is dead in the Winter and brings forth neither fruit nor leaf yet revives in the Spring or else like a withered part which by Chirurgery is recovered to a lively being Consider St. Pauls expression Rom. 11. 17. and the following part we are said to be graffed into Christ now that Act which grafts us in is baptism Now as we may see some branch of a graft in the Fruit season bearing neither fruit nor leaf giving forth no expression of livelyhood yet when we find by any Experience that there is any hope in it or a possibility of restoring it to a vivacity with care of Husbandry we know that branch is not dead nor utterly hath lost union because his restitution is by physick not re-grafting so it is with Baptized persons which being Grafts not Sprouts when any decay whatsoever is restored or repaired by repentance and sorrow for Sins not by re-grafting by Baptism it is a certain and undoubted sign that it retains still an union by the former Graftiâ—g So that this Act of Excommunication is nothing but his suspension from his Acting many duties of a Christian and an obstruction of the influences of many Graces of God to him but yet not a total destruction of either for as he may pray repent in himself and upon that justly require Absolution and the Church is bound to give it so before these he may receive motions and incitements to them and upon the use of those Talents proceed from grace to grace until he obtain such a measure of humiliation and repentance as ought to be accepted of the Church and accepted upon humiliation not Baptism again which is a sign the branch was not cut off but sick only so that now having spent I hope not wasted so much time and paper in Explicating what Excommunication doth Conceive my Answers to these pieces of Fathers thus By Excommunication a man is put out from many Actual priviledges and blessings which those who are not excommunited enjoy that they are put out of the Lap the Bosom the near Caresses and Embraces of the Church not out of the absolute being in or with her And lest any man should think this a forced Explication take an Instance in Mat. 27. 46. Our Saviour complains My God my God why hast thou forsaken me How can this be understood Not that the Deity had taken away that supeâ—natural hypostatical union but that for that while there was a suspence of the influx of the fulnesse of those all-comforting graces which were other whiles constantly attending his humanity Lastly Bellarmine disputes out of reason First Because Excommunication deprives a man of all Spiritual Commerce and he urgeth a piece out of Tertullian for it Cap. 39. of his Apology But the sence of him and Bellarmines Supposition is to be understood as I before Explained he is deprived of the Actual Conversation of â—he Church in many things not the union and therefore Tertullian in that place saith summum futuri Judicii praejudicium the greatest prejudice in this World of the future Judgement the greatest Injury towards it that a man can have to be barred from the Communion from the association of prayers but it canot exclude his own praying or
and so pass on first then that our Saviour did institute many holy offices in themselves you may say even his Sacraments so as there may be divers Ceremonies according to the prudence of divers Churches is appâ—rent for let us consider Baptisme the matter as it is positively set down in the Institution is water this must not be altered and that which is called the form which is the words by which this Baptisme is administred are in part set down it must be In the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost but now whether it should be I Baptize thee as the Latine Church or let the Servant of God be Baptized or he is Baptized which are severally used in other Churches is not determined by our Saviour and the words of either do fully express the meaning of Baptisme so that neither doth the Latine Church re-baptize those who are Baptized by the Graeciâ—ns nor the Graecians such as are Baptized by the Latines although both are bitter enough one against another so that you may see there may be variation in the administration of these duties in their Circumstances where there is a Communion in the Substance and truly for my part I think in such a man who lives in either of these Churches it would be a Schismatical Act for any of them to vary from that usage which is in the Churches wherein he lives for although these things are indifferent in themâ—elves yet when they are determined in the Greeâ— Euthology and the Roman Rituals they are not indifferent to them which live amongst them in their several Churches but a varying from the Church wherein they live makes a breach of Charity and violates the Band of peace SECT III. Another Precognitum explained ANother Introduction may be that whatsoever is instituted by Scripture in any of these holy performances whether as form or matter must not be altered nor can lawfully by any man for since the blessing which is bestowed is onely Gods gift and Man is only ministerial in it he must act according to that Method whicâ— God hath prescribed and that only having his Covenant can bring the blessing SECT IV. Another Observation expounded ANother note may be that Additions explicatory so they are certainly such and are not intruded for essentials do not destroy the notion of that which they explain it is necessary for otherwise why should men expound the Scriptures in Sermons or otherwise yea our Saviour expounded his own Parables and after his exposition to his Disciples we write further Comments our selves but that there is in none of these an alteration but a dilatation of the conceit of them these things being premitted I shal return where I left at Tanner and the Roman pontiâ—ical SECT V. Many mistakes about Ceremonies in the Church of Rome IT is an apparent truth that the Church of Rome doth very ofâ— clog Divine duties with so many Ceremonies and its mischief is frequent in that mischance that even their learned writers do in a little time grow o such mistakes as to think that some of those which are Ecclesiastical Ceremonies only instituted by the authority of the Church to be the essentials and that which is essential to be but accidents this particular business I have in hand will demonstrate this conclusion SECT VI. It is an Error to think that the Anointing the Bishops Hand is a necessary Essential THe third Ceremony by Tanner out of the pontiâ—ical is the Anointing of the Bishops hand which is to be Consecrated in these words ungantur manus istae oleo Consecrato that is when he Anoints his hands he saith let these hands be anointed with holy oyl And Francis Silvius I must say truly a learned man and most perspicuous writer in his fortieth Quest. upon the supplement of Thomas Art 5. in resp ad 8 m. saith that the essential Consecration of a Bishop consists in this unction and the words pronounced with it for the Church of Rome calls the oâ—tward sign the matter and the words the form and this to be it he proves by a very strong Argument against the Romanist because in the whole frame of Ordination the Bishop Consecrated is calâ—ed in the pontiâ—ical untill then Bishop Elect only But then absolutely Bishop from that time and his Argument is as weakly answered by Tanner where before quoted that Neque obstat quod in pontisicali ordinandus Episcopus post unctionem primum vocatur Consecratus antea vero solum Electus id â—nim ad scriptorem Rubrici modum lâ—quendi pertinent plus non significat quam ante unctionem nondum esse plene Consecratum That is that the Language of the Pontiâ—ical ought to be attributed to the writer of the Rubrick and that there is no more imported in it but that before the Unction he is not fully Bishop Truly I think Silvius doth desire no more but if men can shift off such grave and weighty observations with saying it was a fault in the Writer or Printer there can no authority be produced but may be so answered But he is more to blâ—me who transcribed it false but why hath it not been amended and that fault corrected The truth is the Pontiâ—ical it self is to blame there is no such thing in that much more antient Pontiâ—icâ—i I mean the fourth Councel of Carthage Canon 2. I will put down tâ—e words because I am likely to make use of them hereafter the words are these Episcopus quum ordinatur duo Episcopi ponant teneant Evangeliorum codicem super caput cervicem ejus uno fundente benedictionem reliqui omnes Episcopi qui adsunt manibus suis caput ejus tangant That is a Bishop when he is ordained two Bishops shall put and hold the Book of the Gospel over his head and neck and one giving him the blessing the other Bishops shall put and hold the Book of the Gospel over his head and neck and one giving him the blessing the other â—ishops which are present shall touch his head with their hands here is not any word of anointing and therefore according to this Canon neither of these Unctions I mean head and hand are necessary for although the Canon may name somethings which are not necessary yet it is not to be imagined that it should leave out any thing which is necessary SECT VII Another Error concerning the Book confuted THere is therefore another opinion which has gained great Reputation with many Schoolmen and that is of some who place the essentials of a Bishops Ordination in the first â—eremony named in the Pontifical and that is the same with that of the Councel of Carthage to wit the putting the Book upon the Head of the Consecrated Bishop and the laying on of Hands and the Benediction this certainly is most conform to that Canon of Carthage but as I said before as it is not reasonable to think that these Canons should omit any essential thing