secondarily Christ is the Chief Corner Stone the Spiritual Rock 1 Cor. 10. 4. and then there was no more sâ—id to him that St. Paul expounds of them all Ephes. 2. 20. and are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the Chief Corner Stone to them all the Apostles were secondary foundations and Rocks as well as he were that place to be understood to call him a Rock Nor can there be any stronger foundation affirmed of him either in person or Succession than of the rest Mat. 28. I will be with you to the end of the World that is assisting them in executing their Duty For the second place Mat. 16. 19. I will give thee the Keyes of Heaven it is but a promise and he performed it to him and the rest John 20. 22. For the Third Feed my Sheep it is a poor Argument drawn from a meer Simile of pastorizing but let it be what it can there can be no more in it but preach baptize give the Communion give Orders govern the Church all which are involved in those two places insisted upon before and therefore I desist from further discourse of them and supposing that the Apostles had equal Authority to minister Divine Mysteries to the whole World with St. Peter we will now come and enquire whether any other men had any such Commission given them by Christ or not SECT VI. How it is to be understood that the Power of the Keyes is given to the Church THe Chief place if not the only which I have observed in the Gospel pretended to be wrested to any such Intent is Mat. 18. 17. If he shall neglect to hear them tell it to the Church Thence it is by some enforced that the Church is made the Judge in Ecclesiastiâ—al Discipline and by the Church they will understand others besides the Apostles To apprehend which conceive with me First that this was one of those things which our Saviour delivered for a Rule to govern the Church and Christian men by not at that present but afterwards when Church Discipline was setled for as yet there was no such Thing as any Discipline setled but like a Commonwealth in the â—raming by degrees Laws projected yeâ— Contrived and enacted which might take their rise and force afterwards when established It is a poor Conceit methinks of Beza on this place who would have it understood of the Jewish Synagogue since he himself Confesseth that the word Church is no where else used for the Synagogue nor indeed can it be and why it should be forced to that meaning here I see no reason and therefore the true understanding of it must be taken from those setled Laws which our Saviour made after his Death of which I have discoursed Now that this Law could not extend to any other men but these Apostles who had all the powers given them as I have explained will appear first First because it seems to be a Juridical way of proceedings and it is impossible that the multitude should have Juridical Discretion to make a man as an Heathen or a Publican being many of them illiterate men and we should conâ—ine the limits of Christian men and Religion in much too narrow bounds to say it belong only to the learned or men enabled for such or so high a work But there must be Officers in a Church to hear and judge of such a Cause which Officers we understood by the Church and although this Censure ought to be done in publick in the face of the Church or the Court where such Matters are discussed yet it is not necessary nor can have a face of reason with it that every one of the Church should be there present or they who are present should have the Nature of Judges only such Men as are Officers enabled to act in this power then if Officers these men who hâ—d the power given them in the 20th of St. John are these which are here in the 18th verse said to bind and loose So that then I can see nothing that can hinder us from agreeing that after our Saviours Death all Ecclesiastical power was seated in the Apostles how they understand it we shall Consider in the future Discourse by their Actions set down to us which must be our next undertaking SECT VII The Apostles Authority and Management of it NOW we see the Eleven inthroned in the Chair of Ecclesiastical power They and they only having Interest in it but yet they had only power the right and Authority they received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the vertue and qualities enabling them to execute this power according to the Extent throughout the world afterwards when the power of Tongues was given them Acts 2. 4. and you may find this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used for this virtue Acts the 1. v. 8. where it is promised so that they had all Power and Authority before but this Faculty of Tongues they had not untill then and this will be of little use in our Discourse being a Gift of no constant Succession in the Church but only those Authorities of Administring the Sacraments of Preaching of Giving Orders of Governing these will always be necessary in the Church and therefore must be insisted upon For this therefore the first thing we find them Acting in this kind was to settle their own Society and Compleat the Number of Twelve and this you may find recorded in the 1. of the Acts v. 13. where we may observe first that they referred the Election of this Apostle to God by â—asting Lotts they Chose two Barsabas and Mathias and referred it to Divine Election the reasons of which guessed at by Divines rather than demonstrated I omit But now there are Twelve Apostles Bishops for if Judas was a Bishop by being an Apostle as he is termed vers 20. the rest likewise were or Twelve Deacons or Ministers for that phrase is affirmed of Judas in regard of his Apostleship vers 25. SECT VIII What Additions were made to the Apostles BUT yet we must not leave them but examine Whether there were any Addition made to these Apostles and what that was To understand this We may find St. Paul in abundance of places called an Apostle instead of many take this one Instance Galat. 1 1. Paul an Apostle not of men neither by man but by Jesus Christ An Apostle not of men not by man that is who received my Apostleship not from the Authority given to men as before when Christ sent his Apostles as his Father sent him with power to give these powers John 20. As my Father sent me so send I you not then of men that is from this Authority given to them nor by man that is by any Ministerial Act of mans He received his Baptism by the Ministery of man as you may find Acts 9. 18. But his Apostleship he received of God and by God as the other Apostles did by the immediate
were sent from God for they taking upon them a new Office and pretending that they received it of God executing it for him it was necessary that they should bring with them some evidence that they had it from him and this evidence or sign of it was this power of Miracles which accompanyed them Thus St. Mark hath described the Office and because men should not be mistaken in these Officers St. Mark and St. Luke have set down the particular Names and Characters of many of them upon which I insist not as not material to my work But then it must be marked farther that St. Luke sets down the Name of the Office as well as the Officers and saith the Name was imposed by Christ which he called Apostles which Name is derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is mitto to send and an Apostle is missus one sent thus the general nature of the word signifies and so the word is used John 13. 16. Neither is he that is sent greater than he that sent him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that is sent but in this place it is perpetually put for the Name of this Office and to the same sense is that word Angel which with Apostle Amen and divers other words all languages observe and derive from the Original Angel is derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is Nuntius a Messenger to relate some Affairs to others now the Apostles received this Name as men sent about the most excellent Errand that ever was the Messengers the men sent In a word we see there were a certain Number of men chosen they are set down what they are what their Names were and the Number of the Committee and we see the names of their Office as likewise what their Authority hitherto was that is to preach No doubt but Beza's word which he interposeth to preach the Gospel is a good glosse though I think it not the right Text. But although they have Election into an Office provided for them and a power and Authority to execute this Office when they are sent yet they must not go before tâ—ey are sent we will consider therefore their Mission in the next place SECT II. How and to whom the Apostles were sent AND for that we must come to St. Matthew 10. 1. and to St. Luke 9. 1. there we may observe in either place that as before they had the power given them so in these places they were Commanded to execute this power In St. Mark it is said that he ordained Twelve that they might be with him that he might send them forth to preach ready they were for the bunesse they lacked nothing but Mission and that they had in the former places In St. Matthew 10. 5. we may observe these Twelve sent forth we shall see there the place where they were to execute the Commissions described First negatively verse the 5. Go not into the way of the Gentiles and into any City of the Samaritans enter ye not then positively but rather go ye to the lost Sheep of the house of Israel vers 6. Not that our Saviour would forbid Salvation to any Soul in the World for others besides Jews were Converted but accidentally the Office of the Apostles in our Saviours time was while he lived restrained to them And therefore we may observe that St. Peter himself in the 10th of the Acts until he was admonished by a Vision of his Errors was of Opinion that it was not lawfull for a Jew to have any Communication or keep Company with a Gentile as he expresseth it to Cornelius vers 28. So then you see their Commission restrained in place and Secondly you may observe their Commission explained what they were to preach SECT III. What they were to preach BEfore they had Commission to preach now a Command what to preach St. Luke the 9th ver 2. to preach the kingdom of God St. Matth. 10. 7. The Kingdom of heaven is at hand the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven are the same called from God as the King as we may say Caesars Kingdom or Empire called from Heaven as the place the Empire of Rome the Kingdom of Jerusalem Now this Kingdom is from the Eminency of it called the Kingdom of Heaven because there is as it were the Court where Gods Glory is most manifestly apparent that is called his Kingdom as Rome but though his Court be there his Kingdom is on Earth though Heaven be the Court yet Earth is the Country of this Kingdom though Heaven be his Throne yet Earth is his Foot-stool So then by his Kingdom or the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand is meant that Christs Kingdom was comming near That now the time was Comming in which he should conquer the Devil and lead Captivity captive now the time was Comming in which he should Settle his Dominions in the World And this was much the same with the Subject of St. John Baptist his Sermons Mat. 3. 2. Repent ye for the Kingdom of God is at hand nor indeed could other Doctrine be preached for Christ had not yet Conquered the Devil nor setled his Government and therefore as their Commission was setled and restrained to a place so it was in the Doctrine much unlike what it afterwards came to Thus you see that the Apostles had now at the last a Commission to preach you see their Diocesse to the Lost Sheep of the house of Israel you see likewise what they were to preach The next thing to be Considered will be what other Officers our Saviour Instituted and what Enlargement he gave to this Commission whether any or no. SECT IV. What other Commission our Saviour gave to other men TO understand this let us consider Luke 10. 1. where we shall find that our Saviour called and sent Seventy or Seventy and two other Disciples besides these Twelve before named the diverse Lection of the Number is not material to any thing in hand but we may observe first that there was the same businesse in which they were employed as the very Apostles were out of the 9th verse where they were commanded to preach the same Doctrine The Kingdom of God is come nigh unto you That they had the same Assistance for their preaching the power of Miracles That they had the same way of Congratulating Cities or houses whither they came That there was the same Curse upon them that received them not that they were so to demean themselves both to the receivers and them who did not receive them But herein we see some difference the Apostles were first ordained and then sent these ordained and sent together Secondly the Apostles were taken into a Near attendance about Christ and from that had a more Intimate Acquaintance with both his Life and Doctrine and from thence although these were sent equally with them in all respects yet they only had the Name of Apostles given them by a prerogative Eminence which throughout
Service without Compulsion and since he was to leave the World himself he took Order with his Servants to Act as if he were present and Negotiate the great Work of Salvation of Souls by a Delegate power from him Therefore in the 16th of St. Mark v. 14. you may observe that he appeared to the Eleven that is to the Eleven Apostles for one of them Judas had apostatized and had hanged himself and in the 15th verse he gave them Commission Go ye into all the World and preach the Gospel to every Creà ture that is to every Creature that is Capable of it c. there was their Commission The same Story is thought by many to be a little more fully described by St. John Chap. 20. 21. after he had appeared to them as before he said Peace be unto you as my Father sent me so send I you and then he breathed on them the Holy Ghost Mark this phrase As my Father sent me It is a particular phrase not used elsewhere and therefore intimates some extraordinary matter God had sent many men before but never any besides Christ with the fulnesse of Authority as it is described Mat. 28. 18. All power is given me in Heaven and Earth All power was never given to any before I send you therefore with all power as my Father sent me So the power then of Giving powers to others which was never given before but to my self and therefore in that place of St. Matthew before cited in the last verse too I am with you to the end of the World with you teaching baptizing giving Orders to others for that is mightily enforced out of the word Sicut as my Father sent me and indeed else he could not be with them in their persons to the end of the World but in their Succession by which means he might well be said to be with them to the Worlds end Having now touched upon these places I will Collect this here was in the 28 of Matthew vers 19. Baptism Instituted Matter and Form In the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost which we read not prescribed before we see the Officers appointed these Eleven in their personal bodies or succession wee see their Diocesse enlarged preach to all Nations and as preaching so baptizing as large they go together we see the Subjects of their Sermons enlarged before Christs Death When they had to do with the Jews only it was the Kingdom of God is at hand Now it is to observe all things that I have commanded you So that then we see first before our Saviours Death two sorts of Officers Apostles Disples their Office at the first limited to preaching and that to the Israelites that they did baptize we are assured but not in what Form nor by what Commission untill after our Saviours Death then we have seen the Holy Communion Instituted just before his Death in Matter and Form and Commissioners appointed to Celebrate it to wit the Apostles we see after his Death a full and Absolute Commission granted to these persons to whom the Communion was committed to do all things Baptise preach celebrate forgive Sins to choose and send forth others and for ought I can collect in this Story the whole Ministerial power invested in them But because something may be objected against this which hath been delivered which I take to be the foundation of what shall follow I will clear those objections which seem most troublesom to me and so proceed to shew how the Apostles managed this Stewardship committed to them SECT II. Whether the power of preaching was given only to the Apostles FIrst It may be questioned whether the power of preaching was given to the Apostles and them only To understand this we must look back and remember that the Seventy likewise were sent but that was to the Israelites only their Commission extended no farther before our Saviours Death and after his Death we find no Commission given but to the Apostles and what Authority they or any else could have to preach the Gospel it must be from them let no man trouble this or any other part of my discourse with that frivolous Objection which is often intruded into these Controversies We read not that these or these men that these Presbyters received new Commissions from the Apostles and yet find them preaching for Answer once for many other times in which it may be needfull it was impossible that the Acts or Epistles could keep a Register of all that were ordained by the Apostles or Bishops in their Age it is enough for us to know that all power for these things was given to the Apostles and we may reasonably think that of these 70. which were chosen by our Saviour such as proved worthy should be Commissioned by the Apostles and such as were unworthy as some were should be suspended ab Officio but for these particular Registers and how and when each man was is not apparent nor to be expected Well then now it seems the Apostles had all the power of preaching none others being sent in this Embassy to the World but themselves But could none else preach not gifted men Consider these men never any so Extraordinarily gifted as these were yet see as I observed they preached not without an outward Calling by Christ nor then untill he sent them Again it is observable that by his outward Word he directed their Doctrine to the Jews that they should preach the Kingdom of God was at hand and to the Gentiles Mat. 28. 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have Commanded you So then Christ had given them Command before what they should preach I do not find no not in these yet any inspired Sermon but upon Direction and although these men had no doubt the most immediate Call that ever any had and the most extraordinary Gifts in the most extraordinary way yet for to enable them for their preaching they had Conversation with Christ which doth the most resemble the most Industrious life of Studious Scholars which in Books Converse with God as possibly a thing can do so that in that time in the time of our Saviours Life and untill his Ascention we can find no place for inward Calling without an outward nor an outward execution without means to enable them for this great Ministry of preaching but throughout a most Methodical Course SECT III. Whether these and these only were Commissioned for Baptism THE next thing to be looked upon is Whether these and these onely had the power of baptizing No doubt we may say of this that they had the Duty only none other obliged to either but they and when I have named the Duty I think I may justly adde the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The right and Authority will go along for it seems to be a branch and a main one of that Great Commission Mat. 28. and without doubt a great piece of the Power of
portion which they superintended but rebounding back often where they had been before and diverting as Occasions offered themselves into other Precincts this they did and might do by that vast Authority was given them Go preach to all Nations and by that power Equalling their Authority which was Conferred at the Pentecost but it was not with other men that universal Authority would not besit the meaner powers of those who were to succeed and to follow them and therefore we will in the next place Consider in what proportions they Communicated these Authorities to others SECT II. How the Apostolical Power was Communicated THE virtue of which Communication we enjoy at this day some for place some for Authority some in part some in the Lump For the first we shall for place Consider that their Successors were confined in place Titus in Creet Timothy in Ephesus Epaphroditus in Philippi not that they were Confined or pegg'd here immovably So is no Bishop in his Diocesse no not quoad Officium as if his holy Duties which he performed out of his Diocesse were invalid or of no force for without doubt if a Bishop baptize preach celebrate the Communion give Holy Orders secundùm materiam formam Canonically according to Matter and Form out of his Diocesse they are firm and good to the receivers although perhaps without leave or extreme necessity they are not Commendable Nay without doubt if either Bishop or Presbyter remove to other Diocesse or Parish he takes not a new Ordination but an acceptation or just Election to that place sufficeth Now his Confining to that place is to restrain the Ministring of his Office out of Duty there so that he is out of Duty to have a Care of that place and to look to that flock which is Committed to his Charge which is part not the whole as it was Committed to the Apostles and no doubt that which Dr. Field hath learnedly discoursed upon this subject in Ancient Times Bishops were the Pastors of their Diocesse solely Presbyters their Assistants and Associates as the Apostles with that almost immense power were made Bishops of the World yet being men with Confined bodyes were forced to use Deputyes and the help of other men in their Charge even whilst they lived and certainly the Church was better Governed by that Subordination than if every one who hath not Apostolical Integrity should assume Apostolical Authority so it was by these they had great Diocesses committed by the Apostles and as I shall shew anon they had many Inferiors Assisting them but these were their places over which they were made Overseers and they had not Authority of Jurisdiction over others Thus I could set down how almost all the World was divided in the Apostolical Age but I let this alone SECT III. How the Apostolical Power was divided to Particulars and concerning the Office of Deacons NExt we will Consider how the very Office of the Apostleship was divided And the first thing that comes into our Consideration to begin at the foot and climb upward will be the Office of Deacon in handling which I find some matter of Dispute First about the Institution of him when this Function was first erected There is a general Claim to Acts 6. the Story may thus be observed In the Infancy of the Church when it pleased God by the preaching of the Word to encrease the Church beyond the expectation of men or lesse power than Apostolical there were many poor among the Disciples but the piety of the Christians was such as you may read Acts 4. 5. in ver 34. of the 4th Chapter there was no lack for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them and brought the price and cast it at the Apostles feet and Barnabas is presently particularly instanced in but in the 5th Chapter we read the fearfull Story of Ananias and Sapphira who would seem righteous to do as the fashion of Godly men was but being hypocrites were punished for their hypocrisies Now these Sales bringing in great sums for the relief of the poor the Apostles as it seems were troubled with it and the Care to relieve the poor took them off from attendance upon that mighty work of planting the Gospel this was the rather awakened by a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrâ—ws that is either such Grecians as were made Proselytes or else such Hebrews as lived and perhaps were born amongst the Greeks for as yet the Apostles had no Communication with the Gentiles now these Grecian Jews murmured because it seems the Apostles as I can guess had left the administration of this Charity to some who had dealt partially for I am confident they themselves would not wherefore they Convented the Disciples together and bid them with all Care who must needs know the Integrity of mens conversations better than the Apostles who could not search hearts select some men fit for such a purpose and appointed the Number of Seven the Disciples did accordingly and they chose Stephen and Philip c. as you may read in the 5. vers of the 6. Chap. and set them before the Apostles when the Apostles had prayed they laid their hands upon them no doubt rectifying their Choice and Authorizing them to the work Thus we see these men receiving Title to execute this Office SECT IV. Reasons why the Office of a Deacon was not Instituted Acts 6. BUT for my part salvo semper meliori judicio I cannot conceive how this should prove that Ministerial Office of a Deacon which was afterwards used in the Church from this place for these reasons First because this was an Occasional Office necessary for that Time in which there being many poor which lived under the correction and rod and persecution of the politick Magistrate no legal Course could be taken for the relief of them but such as came by Charity out of the bowels of their own Fraternity to wit from Christians who might be perswaded not compelled to that Duty and by reason of this there was a necessity to have some Officers chosen Overseers of the Poor which by a Religious Tie where could be no legal should be bound to the Execution of this Duty for which they instituted this Office but why these should be called Deacons that Ministerial Office used in the Church I see neither Authority nor Ground in the Scripture for it That they should not be annual Officers as our Overseers of the poor I can see no reason or why in a setled Commonwealth where the politick Lawes provide for the poor and Law makes such Charity a Duty to the Commonwealth there is no Ground It is true in the Times of persecution these things are necessary as there is often mention both in St. Pauls Epistles and the Ecclesiastical Story and Julian the Apostate himself in an Epistle to Arsalius the Heathen Pontifex or Chief Priest of Galatia The wicked Galileans saith he under which name he vented
than where they have some manner of residence hath therefore restrained the execution of it in other places than where they have that residence both to avoid Confusion which otherwise must necessarily arise out of the Intermedling in other mens precincts and likewise because the main scope of their endeavours may be applyed to that place in a near Obligation every one being for the most part worthy of the Incumbents utmost labour And this they did by the Apostles own example who appointed Timothy Titus Epaphroditus their several Diocesse yet we must further Conceiâ—e that this Alotment of the Church is not such as doth lay any restraint upon the power given by the Spiris but directs it only for although a Particular man may offend by intruding into another mans Pastoral precincts and Officiating there yet factum valet so that if a Bishop give Orders in another mans Diocesse as was the famous Case of Epiphanius Bishop of Cyprus in St. Chrysostoms Diccesse at Constantinople or a Presbyter Administer the Communion in anothers Parish which is the common practice these things although done without leave from the peculiar Pastor are valid to the receivers although punishable in the Actors Yea yet once again although a man be placed in a Pastoral Charge and shall either find upon his own certain experience or the Judgement of his Superiours that he can advance the Glory of God or improve his own Commission by removing to another place either for a time as Timothy and Titus and the rest beneficed in particular places were yet upon urgencies of the publick good called aside from the more particular Charge to the more publick where they were employed or else if their whole residence may more advance the general Good of the whole Flock over which they are made Overseers they ought to remove totally to that great Occasion So when a man of great Abilities shall be beneficed in a private Corner where perhaps lesse Abilities would as well if not better agree it becomes him to be removed to a place better befitting his Qualifications or a man indowed with the strength of rational Divinity such a man to be sent to the propagating the Gospel in the Indies among the Heathen and he ought to endeavour to put himself into such an employment because he is a Pastor of the whole flock for which Christ dyed So that now I think it appears manifestly that an Apostle and another Pastor differ not in this that one was an Universal Pastor and the other a Particular but contrarywise they are both habitually or Potentià Pastors of the whole Word actually pastorizing in some particular only This caused all those admonitions from one Bishop to another of which the Fathers are full This made sometimes Contentions because it was the Duty of every man that was a Pastor to take care of the whole flock he is Pastor over and therefore to endeavour their good So that here you see his Argument fully answered by a flat denial of his Minor he is not a Pastor without a Flock nor an Officer sine Titulo he hath Title to the whole Catholick Church he is Pastor at large He hath a long Dispute with Mr. Rutherford about Preaching and Administring the Communion out of his own Congregation and the Communication of Sister Churches which touch me not yet I will give the Reader a Note that whereas before he made Preaching almost the whole Act of a Presbyter he now seemes to make it no proper duty of a Pastor pag. 63 64. But I let these things passe as not pertinent and apply my self to his fifth and last Argument pag. 67. which is SECT XV. His Fifth Argument answered IF Ordination gives Essentials to a Pastor before Election then by that alone he hath Pastoral power Against which he disputes thus He that hath Compleat power of an Office and stands an Officer without Exception he cannot be hindred Justly from doing all Acts of that Office but this is the Condition of a Pastor Ordained without the Election of the people he may according to rule be justly hindred from Executing any Act of a Pastor I could quarrel were I pinched with this Argument with almost every word as first the changing of the Terms of that Proposition he was to prove In the Proposition he was to prove the Terms were give the Essentials of a Pastor now they are a Compleat power and an Officer without Exception Many things are essentially right which lack Completion and are not without Exception Then again where it was in his first Proposition A Pastor before Election here is added in his second Election of the people But I insist upon this upon which the Ground of his Argument is founded That an Ordained Officer may according to rule be hindred from executing any part of his Office as he enforceth Suppose all Congregations full To which I answer Ordination doth not give the Act but the Jus or right to execute and a man may have the Essentials when these do not work Mark Mr. Hooker was a Pastor when asleep and had the Essentials of it but not the Operation Essentials do work their proper work omnibus positis ad agendum requisitis The fire it self although it have the Essentials of sire cannot burn things too remote or such Things which are not combustible the reason is that those things which are requisite to burning as fit distance disposure of the matter are not rightly disposed I may say the same of the Eye Place the Object too near too far in the dark it cannot see the requisites to sight are not sittingly disposed although the Eye have all the Essentials belonging to sight So I may â—ay of a man Ordained If there be not a place not any piece of the flock of Christ which hath need of him or having need he knoweth not of their need or knowing their need cannot by distance or some such moral Impediment come to supply then need the Circumstances required to his Operations are so taken away that he cannot do the Duties in Act which he hath power to do St. Paul himself could not officiate any where where others of Authority were labouring yet he had Authority and was ordained by God but saith he if all places are full he may according to rule be hindred from executing any part of Pastoral Office I would fain know by what rule the Apostles were Authorized by Christ to preach to all Nations and so are all Pastors by Ordination they have Authority over the world but are restrained by Ecclesiastical Law founded upon the Law of Nature which forbids any thing to go into a full place which with another Law saith Deus Natura nihil faciunt frustra And again non sunt multiplicandae Entia sine necessitate so that when one looks to this part then the other should not intermeddle without the first give way to him yet he hath the power and can do the work of
the Gospel is not attributed to these later Disciples Besides these I read not of any persons which had any Mission from Christ to do these great Works concerning mans Salvation But hitherto we find onely the Authority of preaching given We will therefore in the next place Consider who were made Ministers of these Covenants of Heaven called Baptism and the Lords Supper whether these all these or other besides them SECT V. Who were made Ministers of the Sacraments TO begin with Baptism that Baptism was instituted in our Saviours life time is very evident out of the 3d. of St. John v. 22. where it is said That our Saviour camo into Judea and there tarried with them and baptized that 's expounded Chapter 4. v. 2. that he did not baptize but his disciples out of which it is evident besides the Conference he had with Nicodemus in the beginning of the 3d. Chapter That there was a Baptism used and instituted by our Saviour and they who were the Ministers of it were his Disciples But now when it was instituted and what it was that was Instituted are mighty difficulties not fully cleared For the first part I leave all those parties which fix it to any times which are these two either when St. John baptized our Saviour of which we may read Mat. 3. 13. or else in his Conference with Nicodemus John 3. 5. where he uttered these words Except a man be born again of Water and the holy Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of Heaven I can consent to neither of these Not to the first for we find nothing like an Ordination but indeed by the descending of the Holy Ghost and the voice from Heaven a foundation for an Ordinance but not an Ordinance it self Not the second for it was a private Conference between our Saviour and that man wherein he might well declare that there had been some such Thing or that there should be such a power given but this did not settle any such power nor any form or Minister of it I conclude therefore that as many things were done without doubt which are not written as St. John speaks in the last Chapter of his Gospel and the last verse so amongst many things this is one which yet was done we may safely Conclude because it would be a mighty presumption for the Disciples to usurp a power of baptizing without a Commission and that they did baptize is apparent I therefore Conclude that it was done but when is not apparent and now let us examine what was done SECT VI. Concerning Baptisme THis Question seems to me to be very unsatisfactorily handled by those who have treated of it To understand what can be comprehended in it conceive with me that there comes a three-fold Baptism in Consideration in this Question the Baptism which we are baptized with which in expresse terms was ordained by our Saviour after his resurrection the Baptism of John Baptist and the Baptism of the Disciples of our Saviour in the time of his residence upon Earth the Baptism of John and the Baptism of our Saviour have been disputed with a great deal of vehemency betwixt Calvin and the Church of Rome whether it were the same with our Saviours or no and I am in this Conclusion against Calvin and do think that he causlesly rejects the Fathers with a sleight in his Institutes when certainly in it self the Question is of no great use to any Design of faith or piety I will not trouble the Controversie now but shall be ready to give an Account of it to any man that shall require it but hint out to the Reader that one place Acts 19. 2. Where St. Paul finding Disciples at Ephesus asked them whether they had received the Holy Ghost They answered that they had not so much as heard that there was an Holy Ghost and he replying to what were ye then baptized they answered unto Johns Baptism Then in the 4th verse St. Paul tells them that John indeed baptized with the baptism of repentance saying unto the people that they should believe on him who should come after him that is on Jesus Christ. When they heard this they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus Observe that it could not be the same which was instituted by our Saviour because they had not heard of the Holy Ghost which is an expresse phrase appointed by our Saviour and then that they were baptized by St. Paul which was a sign the first was not perfect This particular is miserably shifted off by Beza and that shift wonderfully extolled by Chamier when the Text is evident that they were rebaptized SECT VII Whether the. Baptism of the Disciples before Christs death was the same with Johns THere is a second Controversie whether the baptism of the Disciples before Christs Death differed from Johns sure it seems to differ because Johns Disciples came to him in the 3d. of John v. 26. and told him how Christ baptized and seemed enviously to clamour that he and his baptism was followed more than St. Johns which if it had been the same they would never have done because by that their own Church was encreased but wherein this Difference was placed we can hardly discern by the Gospel for as I have shewed their Doctrine was the same that the Kingdom of God was at hand and they could not go further but as Prophets for yet it was not Come but Comming Now there could be no baptism into any other Faith than that was taught Thus briefly of that second Question SECT VIII Whether our Sacramental Baptism be the same with that before Christs death NOW the third may be betwixt that Sacramental Baptism which we have and that which they administred before our Saviours death whether they are the same For my part I am against it and not I alone but many more both Ancient and later Writers First because that preaching the Word was only out of Office to be done to the Jews and they retained Circumcision still the legality of the Ceremonial Law being not yet abolished untill our Saviour put a period to it with his Consummatum est It is finished at his Death for although there might be an use of both together yet both could not be used Sacramentally and although Baptism might have an Institution and have Laws made and Directions for it before as must needs almost be in the Making of any Laws yet these Laws had not their legal force till the execution was ordained which could not be untill the Abolishing of the old which was not as I say untill our Saviours Death So Heb. 9. 16. For where a Testament is there must be the Death of the Testator for a Testament is of force after men are dead otherwise it is of no force while men are living Now although Christ might make these Covenants and this Will and Testament in his Life yet it is of no force untill after his Death Again the
the Keyes John 20. Now then they and they only that we read of had from Christ this Commission those Questions come not to be handled whether Bishops Priests or Deacons have this power there was yet no such distinction of them as I find but whether the Apostles only or no I do not find any other the Seventy had a Commission to baptize among the Hebrews as well as they their Commission of preaching and baptizing equal but what that was I know not but here all the power is granted to the Apostles In whom and whom alone I can discern all the Ministerial power belonging to mens Souls so that they or men sent by them have this power or none I know there is a great dispute whether Laymen can baptize and the Church of Rome is mightily offended with Calvin for saying they cannot but I do not find the least Argument out of Scripture to confute him and certainly this place of Mat. 28. seems exceeding strong for his Cause and they themselves grant that the ordinary Minister of Baptism is Sacerdos by which word they understand Bishop and Priest that in their Absence a Deacon may and so go on to the little Orders but in extremity a Layman For my part I grant for certain that the Apostles were the only men Ordained for it I conclude that baptism is necessary and that it is a great Mercy of God to the Children of believing parents that they are capable of it that baptism is necessary is evident out of the Dialogue betwixt our Saviour and Nicodemus John 3. 3. Except a man be born agaiâ— he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God vers 5. Except a man be born of Water and the Spirit he cannot c. vers 6. A reason is given That which is born of the Flesh is Flesh as if he should sâ—y nothing can work ultra sphaeram Flesh there ore cannot inherit more than Flesh nor be in a better than â—â—eshly estate and that is not the State of Heaven therefore there must be some way by which that which is flesh and blood may become Spiritual which alone is by baptism That which Calvin most â—â—gâ—niously urgeth That Children which dye uncircumâ—ised are not to be judged damned may thus be Answered That their bond of Circumcision was dated the eighth dâ—y and therefore nor due before the date but ours of baptism being without daâ—e is due presently So that then ours is like the State of those who were not Circumcised the eighth day when Circumcision was due not of those before the eighth day when it was not due Now upon this reason the Care of the Church layd a mighty Charge upon all preachers to be diligent to preach all dangers which might surprise Children before they come to do their Duty Now although I place such a necessity as that we see no ordinate means without it of Assurance of Heaven yet I will not despair of Gods mercy to such who adde not evil of their own Acting which should hinder the Effect of Christs Death and the daily prayers of the Church for all men And therefore with Calvin I think it a rash adventure of any man to open the Gate of Heaven who hath not the key committed to him which was not given to him yet I question if he hath turned the key in the Lock whether it do not open the door although he hath not the legal power which Calvin cannot deny but that it hath been an universal Opinion of the Church and for all â— see in his 18th Section of his 4th Book of his Institutes he doth not deny but it is valid and I believe he would not allow to reâ—bâ—ptize such a Child which he knew had true bâ—ptism according to matter and form but I am confident no man ever had â—his power given him from God but the Apostles and therefore it must needs be a mighty presumption in that Man who without Authority â—ven him should dare â—o put Gods Seal to any Article or Covenant by which he might be obliged to any Duty SECT IV. Whether administring the Communion was appropriated to the Apostles in our Saviours life THE next thing to be examined would be Whether in his Life-time our Saviour did appropriate the Administration of the Communion to the Apostles only and because we see that Commission only given to them nor ever semblance of any thing to the Contrary because it is a Work of so great height in its self because as the other so this Sacrament Conveys with it a Covenant on Gods part and because from Christs time downward the right of Consecrating was never pretended to by any Man untill now I cannot but think it a monstrous pride in such men who having no Authority from the Apostles should dare to undertake it and although I have heard of such an Opinion yet I never heard or read any reason for it SECT V. Whether the Power of the Keyes was given to them only AND then next I will examine Whether the power of the Keyes was given to them and them only by which power I understand the power of binding and loosing the power of Government and ruling in the Church and Church Affairs Here are two pretenders the onâ— that it was given to St. Peter only the other that it was given to the whole Church I will examine both First for St. Peter this Controversie betwixt the Church of Rome and Us hath been so vastly handled in such large Volumes as it would be a little impudence to offer at it in these few sheets and to stop my intended Course with tedious disputes which have so often been repeated and Canvased by others only I will point my singer at that which I think may Occasion a Reader in Studying this Controversie to fix himself upon what is pertinent and to take notice of such Things as may easily induce him to the Truth for though I am perswaded I could adde something at least â—llustrations to some Arguments which are Discussed in this Controversie yet that would drive me from satisfying your doubt and make my few lines swell to a Volume I only say thus much That in all those places Mat. 18 19. John 21. 15 16 17. which are the main pillars upon which St. Peters prerogative is setled no man living can shew me other power which a man can Conceive reasonably to be Conferred on him than on the whole body of the Apostles In those two places 28 Mat. 19. c. and 20. John 21. if we should understand him a Rock in the 16. of St. Matthew which yet without Partiality a man cannot do But rather think that St. Peters Confession was that Rock upon which the Church was built or that our Saviour who by his Confession was acknowledged the Son of God was that Rock hath with some a great Consent of Antiquity yet should we grant him there to be termed a Rock yet it must be no otherwise than derivativè
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
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
should elect a Worthy man to be Priest not elect a Worthy Priest to a Benefice of which St. Cyprian seems to speak and which is his Aym for his other Quotations they are of such men as are of little use with me or with any their Adversaries and therefore I trouble not my self to examine them SECT VII His Argument from the Election of Deacons Acts 6. examined AT the last he urgeth Page 41 Acts 6. About the Election of the Deacons that were chosen first by the people and after Ordained by the Apostles I set down mine opinion of that Act before never dreaming then of this Design which it is aymed at here but what I said then will serve my Turn now First that Election was Occasional and therefore cannot be drawn to a President but when there is the like Occasion 2dly It was to such an Office which might easily fall under the Cognizance of the people to wit the Caring for the poor and they might better discern the sufficiency of men for such a purpose than the Apostles themselves First then we see here falls to the Ground that if the people had this liberty in an under Officer there was much greater reason they should have it in an Officer of higher degree in whom they had greater Interest and by whose administration they were to receive greater good This follows not for this Office was of such a Thing as they might best know the Integrity of those men with whom they Conversed but the other of an higher nature they could not be Judges of so well and therefore there is a diverse Case the people may be fit to choose a Collector for the Poor a Tithing-man but can they be fit to choose a Judge And indeed it favours of an high presumption which his delight in this Conceit transports him with when he saith as he doth in that page That the liberty of the Apostles in ordaining was not so great as the peoples in choosing when the Apostles had all Divine Authority from Christ solely delegated to them and the Apostles did not only ordain these men but their very Office it self I may adde to this that the people in this inferiour office did not authoritativè of themselves choose these but by particular direction and command from the Apostles I have answered as I conceive all that he speaks concerning his first Question Whether Ordination or Election be first He Conceives it not much material and therefore concludes the proof of this will appear in the Explication of the other particulars which he undertakes and I will follow him SECT VIII Whether Ordination gives all the Essentials to an Officer HIS Second Question is Whether Ordination gives all the Essentials to an Officer In handling of which he examines two things First how farr the Essentials of the Ministry or Minister may be given by Man If they may be given and Conveyed by man by what means men may be said to do this whether by Ordination or any other Appointment of Christs How their Ministerial Offices may be given by men COncerning the first of these he makes his first Conclusion thus There is a Causal virtue put forth in a Subordinate way by some under Christ to bring the formality or specifical being of an Ecclesiastical Office to a person or party that is Called thereunto or stands possessed thereof Alas what mighty words are these and how easily might the businesse of this Proposition have been expressed to the Capacity of any Reader if he had said there is some power under Christ to Constitute Ecclesiastical Officers there is no need of such high and difficult Terms of Causal virtue Formality or Ecclesiastical being which do amuse a weak Capacity and no way satisfie an Intelligent The Drift of his Conclusion is to prove that there is an outward Call necessary to a Minister which he saith is by none denyed but by Anabaptists and Familists which folly and madnesse labours as he saith with the loathsomnesse of it self so he contemns them but truly they are now grown a Considerable Enemy but I let them passe to answer for themselves which I am considenâ— they cannot justly and indeed I grant this whole Conclusion and let alone his proofs of it But yet because he placeth a necessity upon it as surely is Truâ—h I would ask whether the necessity be not required out of the part of such as are to receive the Pastor or Elder and I am sure he must yield it for there is no reason Men should receive such a Pâ—stor who is not lawfully called to use his own phrase but then why doth he despise the Bishops Seal and Parchment in a Box as he speaks page 40. when there can be none other Evidence to the people of his Call but this And again because this is a◠〈…〉 a Causal virtue which he useth I shall adde something 〈◊〉 Explication of it which he hath omitted there is a physical Cause and a Moral Cause This word Cause at the first reading sounds like a Physical Operation and although in his second Conclusion he addes this Term Instrument or means yet that is not to be allowed in a physical notion for these powers in men have no physical influx into these Effects no not as Instruments for as the Philosophers speak an Instrument hath its particular work in the Effect so a knife or axe which be both Instruments have their several wayes of Operation though used by the same hand and do their work according to their particular and proper dispositions but now these Agents have no Influence on the Subject but only as moral Instruments as a hand and feal have no physical Nature to pay a Debt but only a moral force which is granted it by the Law of the Realm and from thence it hath this moral force not a physical Of this nature I conceive this power granted to men to give Orders and it is founded upon that great Commission As my Father sent me so send I you with that Authority to grant powers to other men so that the powers the Authority granted by them are Confirmed by God they having a moral Causality to do such Things which God will Confirm but they working not so much as Instrumentally any physical Effect Thus the Conclusion being explained I grant it but in his handling of it many things deserve Censure for although he bragg at the Top of the 44th Page that he will lend such help to the weakest Reader that he may lay his finger upon the several Things yet indeed he is mightily perplexed and intricate which I passe and granting his Conclusion will not disturb his manner of handling it only repeate what he saith at the bottom of the 45 page whoever in a Compleat way hath received this outward Call he is then a Compleat and true Officer and may act any part of his Office though not inwardly graced or fitted worthy of such a place or Work by God this
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
an explicite Covenant He gives reasons of this Conclusion For thereby the judgement of the Members comes to be informed and convinced of their Duty more fully His Reasons of his Third Conclusion answered I Would ask whether a new Duty added by this Covenant or an old Duty which arose out of Baptism If a new I cannot judge of the fitnesse without I knew the particulars but am assured that whatsoever is added to the Covenant in baptism although it may have possible Allowance in Acts of Religion to some particular men upon some particular Occasions yet in general to presse such a Thing upon all Christians is not tollerable If it be no addition to that Covenant the only refreshing of that Covenant to the memory of a Christian is abundantly enough This likewise answers his 2d Argument page 49. They are saith he thereby kept from Cavilling and Starting aside from the Tenure and Terms of the Covenant which they have professed and acknowledged before the Lord and so many Witnesses I answer as before If the Terms be additions to what was in Baptism he ought not in general to prescribe them to all Christians If they are not Additions then that Covenant is the strongest he can make which was made in Baptism The same answer may be applied to his third reason For saith he thereby their hearts stand under a Stronger Tye. I answer no stronger than Baptism SECT IV. This Covenant of his cannot agree to Travellers THen he enters into a Second Question how far this Covenant requires Cohabitation His handling of which is very weak in my Judgement for since he allows Merchants and others upon diverse Occasions to be absent sometimes divers years he gives no satisfaction at all to shew how these men in their absence can partake of Church-blessings But me-thinks they must live without Preaching without Sacrament or any blessing of any Covenant of Gods because their Pastors and Officers reside at their constant place but contrarywise our Doctrine which makes each Presbyter an Officer of the Catholick Church and each Christian a Member of it it follows that any Ship may carry a Pastor and every man receive the Comforts and blessings of Gods Covenants from him which is like our Saviours providence for all and every particular But I omit this at this time as not necessary for our businesse and apply my self to his Reasons for his Conclusion That this Covenant gives the Essentials to a Church which he begins page the 50th SECT V. His Reasons answered HIS first Argument is thus framed in these words Every Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Corporation receives its being from a Spiritual Combination But the visible Churches of Christ are Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Therefore I can justly complain here that the Terms are altered which In a Logical Discourse should be the same I will reduce them therefore and so discourse upon it Combination must here be taken for Covenant or a Combination by Covenant so that the sence of that Proposition is Every Ecclesiastical Corporation receives its being from a Combination by Covenant In the Examination of this Proposition I will follow his own Expressions because I will dispute ex concessis He instâ—nces in the Corporations of Towns and Cities There saith he they have their Charter granted them from the King or State which gives them warrant to unite themselves to carry on such works for such Ends with such Advantage So saith he their mutual Engagements each to other to attend such Terms to walk in such Orders which shall be sutable to such a Condition gives being to such a body Thus he Coâ—sider now that the form of every thing is that which last comes to give every thing its being and make it Compleat Secondly it is that which enables every thing to do its proper work Now Consider a Corporation hath first a Charter by which they are enabled to unite by Authority of which they assemble and come together and perhaps enter into some Engagement required by that Charter by this Engagement they are made the Matter of this Corporation but the form is the Influence of the Charter by which these men so engaged by Covenant are authorized to do this So in every question when it is moved concerning any Action we have recourse to the form Ask why this did heat or burn It is answered because it was fire had the form the burning form of fire Why did that grow because it had a vegetable form Now ask why did a Corporation do this or that let this Lease make that man free The answer is not made because they were Combined by a Covenant but because they have a Charter to do it so that the influence which that Charter hath upon the Corporation is the thing which gives that Corporation its being not their Union by Covenant which makes them but the Matter when the other gives the life and being force and operation solely to the Corporation To apply this to our purpose Suppose every little particular Church were a Corporation first they must have a Charter to unite in a Covenant which nor he nor any man living can shew me and although these men vaunt mightily of Scripture and Contemn all Doctrine which is not delivered there yet this which seems to me their Corner Stone and main foundation they have no not the least shew of any words of Scripture which can authorize much lesse exact any such Covenant but then suppose they had some such Commission yet not their union upon the Commission but the other Authorities expressed in the Charter must be it which enables them to do whatsoever they do not their union by that Covenant for ask why any man preacheth administreth the Sacraments or the like the answer is not made from any union but from the Charter which granted it Now I come to his Minor but the visible Churches of Christ are Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Corporations I deny this Proposition absolutely that every particular Church is a distinct Corporation and else he saith nothing to his purpose but are Members or branches of that great Corporation the whole Catholick Church SECT VI. Scripture Phrases abused by him HE offers at Scripture to prove this page 51. Every particular Church saith he is a City Heb. 12. 22. an house 1 Tim. 3. 15. The body of Christ Ephes. 4. 13 16. 1 Cor. 12. 12 27 28. Here is Cyphered Scripture All these places saith he there are spoken of particular visible Churches When I viewed the places I was amazed to read the holy Scripture so injured and that mighty Article of our Creed I believe the holy Catholick Church to be made such a Nothing as by his Application of these Texts it is Let us Consider the particulars the first place is Heb. 12. 22. But ye are come unto Mount Sion and unto the â—ity of the living God this is the phrase he must pitch upon to prove it a City but mark what follows The heavenly
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
termed Divine from their authority the same reason will be for the next to them and so to the last and so even the Prescriptions of the now living Bishops should be Divine than which nothing can be more abhorring to reason Well then what I have said before will serve likewise here that is that what Divine Laws were established by the Apostles we may find in the Acts and Epistles now there is no such Decree observable any where in them The Commission given to the Apostles by which they and their Successors were and are authorized to send others was not given to them conjunctim as if they should act onely altogether much less was there specified that three of them should joyne in it but without doubt separately every one had this power given to punish to forgive Sins to Baptize give the Communion Ordain and we find upon this foundation it is that St. Paul gave Commission to particular persons to Titus to Timothy and the like But I need not trouble the Scriptures about it I do not find the Patrons of that opinion producing any And therefore I wonder that Vasques did term it a Divine Right when he attempts no where to prove it nor his Predecessors or Followers in this Conclusion The Consecration of St. James to be Bishop of Jerusalem discussed BUt they urge the Decretall Epistles of Anacletus and out of him Amcetus that St. Peter James and John I mean James the Great as the other is called James the Less that these three Apostles did Consecrate the other James Bishop of Jerusalem and St. Peter by whom he saith himself Anacletus was made Priest told him that it should always be a Law hereafter that there should be three Bishops to Consecrate one I do wonder if this were so how St. Peters pretended Successors should be bold to dispence with this Law of St. Peters of which we shall see more hereafter but it is well known by learned men how unlike these Epistles are to be these mens writings upon whom they are fathered But I acknowledge the story so far as it affirms the Consecration of St. James for by better authority then theirs it is justified which is by Eusebius lib. 1 cap. 1. But Eusebius sayth not that St. Peter gave it for a Rule for the future which this Anacletus seems to inforce Nay Eusebius doth not name this Anacletus in his Relation which if there had been any such Epistle extant in his time no doubt but he would have done as well as Clemens but I grant the story and as Adam Tanner a learned Jesuit speaks Tom. 4. Scholasticae theologiae disputatione prima Quest. 3. Dubio 2. Numero 3. It might be done ad quandem solemnitatem ordinis Episcopalis I may say Episcopatus ejus than whom never man deserved more honour in his Consecration for he is esteemed the father of that Epistle which goes under his name then he was the Brother that is the nearest kinsman of our blessed Saviour then a man so honoured for vertue that he was called James the just and so esteemed by Josephus a Jew who attributes the great Judgement of God upon the Jews in the destruction of Jerusalem to their iniquity of stoning that just man so that if ever there was a man to be honoured with so glorious a Consecration it was he But give me leave by the By to say that from this I can add one strong Scholastick reason to the excellent industry of Doctor Hammond who in his Preface to St. James the Apostle proves from antiquity that this Bishop of Jerusalem was none of the Twelve either the son of Zebedee or Alpheus I can add this for if he had been any of them it is not reasonable to think that he had need of a new Consecration to a Bishoprick whom Christ himself had ordained an Apostle or our Saviour made him onely Bishop of Jerusalem as many affirm let no man think that he could be Consecrated again by these three for Orders must not be given twice and no man can think that either our Saviours Ordination to make him an Apostle or Bishop was insufficient but let it be which you will it is not needfull to trouble the Reader with discussing the truth of it nor indeed in Actions so far remote where are such great Authorities of both sides Is it possible to conclude any thing peremptorily I therefore let it pass and for the present grant he was Consecrated by these three But what can follow but this that so great a Person of such an extraordinary merit was so honoured by these Apostles who as Clemens saith did not contend for the honour themselves but pitched upon him to be the first Bishop of that Sea which without doubt was then the most glorious Episcopal seat in the World but is there any rule given that every Bishop should have that honour done him which was given to St. James SECT II. The first of these are called Apostolicall Canons examined THe next thing in order to this dispute to be examined will be the first of those which are called Apostolicall Canons the words of which Canon are Let a Bishop be ordained by two or three Bishops this Canon comes next to be examined and by them who require three Bishops to the Consecration necessarily it is answered that these two Bishops are required but with an addition of an Archbishop two Bishops an Archbishop So Cardinall Bellarmine in his fourth Book de Ecclesia militante which is de notis Ecclesiae cap. 8. and from him the latter schoolmen with one consent But let a man consider whether this be not a violence to the Text when the name of Archbishop is not mentioned in these Canons nor in the Scripture for if these Canons were of the Apostles Constitution then they must be penned in the language of Scripture-phrase bearing the same date with them and so not to vary from their sence for although Archbishops are of great necessity and antiquity where there are many Bishops to keep them in peace and unity with Ecclesiastical discipline so a Patriarch over them yet neither he nor a Patriarch have any thing but jurisdiction by Ecclesiastical authority nothing of Order by divine right more than a Bishop and therefore no more necessity of him than another Bishop in the Consecrating of a Bishop but onely by the Canons of the Church and therefore it is a violence offered to that Canon by them who have a veneration of it SECT II. Some Canons of Councels examined THe next thing to be considered will be the fourth Canon of the first Councel of Nice Episcopum apparet maxime quidem ab omnibus qui sint provincia constituit si autem hoc sit difficile vel propter urgentem necessitatem vel viae longitudinem tres omnino in eundem locum congregatos absentibus quoque suffragium ferentibus scriptisque assentientibus tunc electionem fieri eorum autem quae
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
the matter of fact in his Consecration THe first Bishops of Rome who succeeded St. Peter were chosen by the Clergy the Nobles and â—eople who were Christians and durst assemble together for such purpose and indeed were men of such excellency that they accepted that Bishoprick with a design to be Martyrs which they were many one after another afterwards when it pleased God to bless the Church with Christian Emperours they proved Nursing-fathers to their Bishops and under them the Bishop grew great which being discerned the Emperours considering what a great stroak the Bishop of Rome had in the management of all affairs of the Empire they put in for an Interest in their Election and there was no Pope elected but by their approbation untill the Emperour granted his Conge de liere as I may term it Now at this time Italy was full of Souldiers Narses that gallant General of Justinians lay then about Rome whose favourite Pelagius was and Doctor Forbes must forgive me if I think he is somewhat mistaken in the Story when in the next page he writes that Pelagius was but a Deacon when Binius calls him Arch-deacon and again where he saith there that he was chosen by the Command of the Emperour Justinian when it is recorded by Platina that after the Election he sent to Justinian at Constantinople to excuse the Consecration without his Approbation which could not be had in those busles but Narses was as good as Justinian and 〈◊〉 doubt but by him the will of Justinian might be intimated well Rebus sic stantibus Pelagius must be the man he lay under the scandall of being accessary to his Predecessors death upon this the generality of the Bishops refuse to be present at his Consecration onely two and these took a Presbiter to them and ordained Pelagius in that Act rather complying with the Canon so much as in them lay than violating it in Contempt It is a sure Rule Silent Leges inter Arma so they are not Gods Laws Now it is evident that there was the terrour of that Army upon them for the story related both by Platina and by Binius and others affirm that a multitude of the Nobles as well as the People and Clergy fled because their Consciences would not allow them to be assistant And the terrour of the Army would not permit them to oppose that this ordination was not questioned was because the Pope purged himself of that Scandal afterwards and so that which made them desert him at his Consecration being removed made them wink at small faults when he was Pope Thus the Story being cleared for matter of fact I will examine this Argument logically it must run thus SECT II. The Argument discussed and his Major disproved HIs argument termed must be thus That which was acted in the Consecration of a Pope that is lawfull for us to do but a Presbiter did Consecrate Pope Pelagius therefore he may Consecrate a Bishop or a Presbiter with us for the Major it must run so for there can be no difference of Pope Pelagius from other Popes of Rome I deny the Major then and I will disprove it by the Predecessors of Pelagius Vigillius his Consecration cannot be lawfull for he was intruded into the Papacy by Justinian the Emperour and Belisarius his other Generall his Predecessors Silverius being by violence forced from Rome cast into banishment and so died in misery starved as Baronius This Vigillius was put into his Chair and yet for all that Silverius being of a mighty invincible Courage got a few Bishops together and excommunicated Vigillius from which he never released Vigillius Silverius dies Vigillius then renounced his former Election and by the interest of Bellisarius Vigillius was again Elected being an Excommunicated Person and abominated for that and many other Crimes as even Baronius confesseth who was his Friend in his story as much as he could Now then Doctor Forbes his Major failes the instances in the Church of Rome must not be â—residents nor are they Arguments for us to build upon I but he will and doth say this If so Pelagius would have been punished by his successor if it had beeen nought I answer that doth not follow there is not that Law of God or Man which hath not been violated unquestioned I remember Binius writes of it that it had never been so before Baronius onely tells the story but passeth not his Judgement upon it They mention the Scandal he lay under it being that he was accessary to Vigillius his death They mention his purgation which he made as doth Platina and in that it is evident that they who were scandalized at his imagined offence were satisfied with his purgation and so we see that block of offence being removed which made him unfit to be Chosen and Consecrated Pope they never questioned his Consecration its self but this is sufficient for satisfaction to his Major Now let us come to his Minor And here we must examine whether this Presbiter did consecrate the Pope or no And first we will undertake that Question whether it be essentially necessary to the being of a Bishop that he should be Consecrated by three Bishops CHAP. XI SECT I. That Question entred upon Whether three Bishops are necessary to the Consecration of a Bishop GAbriel Vasques a very learne Jesuit and one that Doctor Forbes acknowledgeth much to countenance his opinion in his 243. disp upon the third of Thomas Cap. 6. Page 706. justly complaines that Pauci ex nostra Schola few of our Schoolmen have handled this Question exactly or delivered it defined in their writings I shall undertake him and endeavour now to shew a more clear truth than I have observed delivered by others for indeed because some Canons of Councels seem to make for it and they have been swallowed without chewing and have not been ex mined it hath passed undoubtedly by a generall practise in all quietly setled Churches But I much mistrust that there is not an absolute necessity in persecuted and unsetled Churches after Vasques had produced Arguments against this necessity he puts his own determination fully Mihi tamen probabilior visa est sententia that opinion seems to me to be more probable of them who say first that to the right ordination of a â—ishop three Bishops at the least are necessary by Divine Law as the ordinary Ministers but by commission he means from the Pope two may do it or one thus far he I will take it peicemeale And first I say this Canon that three Bishops should Consecrate a Bishop hath no Collour to challengâ— a Divine Right for that can have a lawful claim to a Divine right must either draw it from God himself prescribing it or else from such men who were immediately authorized by God as the Apostles for if we will go further we must make all Humane Laws Divine for if the next to the Apostles should have their Dictator