acres of Land and not by the number of souls whereas they should have done as the Bee-hives do when they are ready to swarm so that the old hive cannot contain them all the swarm removes and seeks them another habitation and makes them a New hive of their own So when a Church grows big enough for two Churches one part should remove to another meeting place and they should become two Churches and the later be of the same sort as the former and as free and not become subject to the former as if men had right to be Rulers of others because they were Converted before them or because they dwell in a walled City and others in the Villages This Error therefore was no contrived or suddain thing but crept on by degrees as Countries were Converted and Churches enlarged we are agreed therefore de facto that it was otherwise in the Apostles daies and that soon after in some places it came to that pass as the Prelates would have it in some degree But whether the Apostles were willing of the change is the Question between us we deny it and expect their better proof And till they prove it we must needs take it for our duty to imitate that Government which themselves confess was only practised in Scripture times supposing this the safest way BUt yet though the proof lye on their part who affirm the Apostles to have had such Intentions that Pastors of single Congregations should afterward become the Pastors of many I shall ex super abundanti give them some Reasons for the Negative 1. And first we are most certain that the holyest Pastors of the Church had so much Pride and Ambition that might possibly make them guilty of such a mistake as tended to the â—ncrease of their own power and rule We find even the twelve Apostles contending in Christs own presence for the Primacy till he is put sharpâ—ly to rebuke them and tell them the Necessity of humility and teach them better the state of his Kingdom Paul met with many that contended against him for a preheminence and put him upon all those defences of the dignity of his Apostleshipâ— which we find him using Peter found it necessary to warn the Pastors that they should not Lord it over Gods Heritage And Iohn did meet with a Lording Diotrephes that loved to have the preheminence While they lay under the Cross the Bishops were aspiring and usurping authority over one another or else Victor of Rome had not presumed to Excommunicate the Asian Bishops for not conforming to his opinion What abundance of unworthy contentions did the Bishops of the first ages fill the Churches with and much about superiority who should be greatest what should be the priviledges of their several Seas c. Their pride no doubt was a great cause of their contention and those contentions necessitated the interposition of Emperors to reconcile them that could not agree of themselves If the Emperors called a Council to that end even the Council it self would fall to pieces and make all worse if the Magistrate did not moderate them Had not Constantine burnt the Nicene Schedules and done much to maintain an Union among them the success of that Council might have been such as would have been no great encouragement to succeeding ages to seek for more What bitter quarrels are there between the most eminent of all the Fathers and Bishops of the Church between Chrysostom and Epiphanius Chrysostom and Theophilus Alexandrinus Hierom and Iohn of Ierusalem Ierome and Ruffinus besides his quarrels with Chrysostom and Augustine I open not the concealed nakedness of the Saints but mention those publike doleful tragedies which made the Church an amazement to it self and a scorn to the Heathens that lived about them witness the well known censure of Ammianus Marcellinus when so many people shall be murdered at once in contention for a Bishoprick as were at the choice of Damasus ambition was too predominant The mentioning of the contentions of those most excellent Bishops and the first four general Councils makes Luther break out into so many admiring exclamations in his Treatise de Conciliis that ever such men should so ambitiously quarrel about toyes and trifles and childish things and that even to the disturbing of all the Churches and setting the Christian world on a flame Of the two Churches of Rome and Constantinople he saith Ita hae â—uae Ecclesiae ambitiose râ—â—atae sunt de re nihili vanissimis nugacissimis naeniis doneâ—â—â—ndem utraque horribiliter vastata deleta est pag. 175. This caused Nazianzen who complaineth so much himself of the â—dium or displeasure of his fellow Bishops to profess himself to be so affected that he would avoid all Assemblies of Bishops because he had never seen a good end of any Synod and which did not rather increase the evils than remove them and his reason is not as Bâ—llarmine feigneth only because they were all Arrians but because The desire of contending and of preheminency or principality and their emulation did overcome reason which Luther mentioning ib. pag. 225. wondereth that for these words he was not excommunicated as an arrant heretick Who knoweth not that knoweth any thing of Church history how the Church hath been torn in pieces in all ages except the first by the dissention of the Bishops till the Pope drew part of them to unite in him And who knoweth not that knoweth any thing of the present state of the Christian world into how many fractions it is broken at this day and almost all through the Division of these Guides If therefore we shall imagine that the Pastors of the Church could not be tainted with so much ambition as to inlarge their own Diocesses and gather the new Chuches under themselves when they should have formed them into the same order and freedom as were the first we shall shut our eyes against the most full experience of the Christian world especially when the change was made by degrees 2. The second Reason that perswadeth me to stick to the sole practised Government in Scripture times and not to alter it upon pretended Intentions of the Apostles is this Nothing that intimateth temerity or mutability is to be charged upon the Holy Ghost but to institute one frame or species of Church-government for Scripture times and to change it presently into another species to all succeeding ages doth intimate temerity or mutability or at least is so like it that therefore without good proof it is not to be charged on the Holy Ghost That they are two distinct species of Government is plain one is the Government of a Particular Congregation without any other Congregations or Elders under that Government the other is the Governing of many Elders and Churches by one supereminent Prelate and if these be not two differing sorts of Government then let the Prelates confess that the Government which we would continue is of the same
in Afrâ—ca and call the rest Cecilians and let the Papists reduce it to the subscribers to their Trent confession or to them only that believe in the Popes universal Headship and Government and call all others Hereticks yet will all true Catholicks imitate Augustine and the Councils that were called against the Donatists who still described the Catholike Church to be that which was dispersed over the world having begun at Ierusalem and though to Gods praise we dare rejoycingly affirm that the most illustrious and the soundest part of it is in Europe among the Reformed yet dare we not say that it is all or the greatest part here Nay we confess that we are but a small part of Christs Church And therefore common sobriety may tell us that the Peace of so great a part of Christs Church as is in all the rest of the world is highly to be valued and sought with all our might in righteousness Moreover even among the reformed Churches there are many for some Episcopacy or Superintendency As the Church of England and Ireland was lately for Diocesan Episcopacy so the Churches in Denmark Sweden Saxionie and other parts of Germany Transilvania c. are for a lower sort of Episcopacy called Superintendency among them 3. And the quality of many of the Divines of that way is such as bespeaks our greatest reverence to them and should move us to thirst after Unity and Reconciliation with them Many of them are men of eminent Learning and Godliness and sound in the faith I know that it is commonly objected that they are generally ungodly men that are that way and though some of them are Learned men yet they are all or almost all of careless and carnal lives or meerly formal and superstitious and therefore their Communion is not much to be desired To which I answer 1. The plain undenyable truth is that it was so here with the most of them in the Bishops dayes where ever I was acquainted There were more Ministers in many places that would have scorned threatned or troubled a man for a godly diligent life then that would lead him that way by a good example We must speak that truth that cannot be hid whoever be displeased To this day too many of that way are careless and scandalous But then Consider withall 2. That it is but too common for the common sort even of Ministers as well as people to be careless and bad what ever opinions they are of Especially if the times do discountenance practical Religiousness the greater part are likely to follow the times being that way also so strongly enclined by nature 3. Consider also that we have had and have men of that Judgement that have been excellent Instruments of the Churches good and so eminent for Gods graces and gifts that their names will be pretious whilest Christ hath in England a Reformed Church were there in all England but one such man dissenting from us as Hooper Farrar Latimer Cranmer Ridley Iewel Abbot Davenant Vsher Hall c. what sober Godly man would not be exceeding solicitous for a reconciliation I am sure besides the godliness of their lives and painful preaching One Iewel One Vsher One Davenant hath done so much against the Roman Usurpers as they will never well claw it off them to the last Moreover who knoweth not that most of the Godly able Ministers of England since the Reformation did judge Episcopacy some of them Lawful and some of them most fit for the Non-conformists were but few and that even before this late trouble and war the most even almost all of those that were of the late Assembly at Westminster and most through the land did subscribe and conform to Episcopal Government as a thing not contrary to the word of God so that it is evident that it is very consistent with a Godly life to judge Episcopacy lawful and fit or else we should not have had so many hundred learned and godly men of that mind And I am not altogether unapt to believe that many of them yet are so far reconcileable to it moderated that if it were again established they would submit to it as they did For I hear but of few that have made any recantation of their former conformity but contrarily have known divers of them profess a reconcilableness as aforesaid as Mr. Gataker doth in one of his books express his own Judgement If I have proved this preparatory proposition which I think needeth but litle proof then have I also proved 1. That they have sinned much who have hitherto forborn the use of any means for Peace which was in their power 2. And that we are bound our selves to desire and seek after a peace with such men and that we cannot discharge a good conscience while we neglect such means as is within our reach and fit for us to use The second Proposition is that A Certain Episcopacy may be yielded to for the peace if not also for the right order of the Church In the declaration of my judgement concerning this I make no doubt but I shall displease both sides the one for yielding so much the other for yielding no more But jacta est alea I live not upon mens favour nor the air of their applause That truth which displeaseth at present may tend to peace and produce it at the last when the angry humour is allayed or at least when the angry age is gone For the clearer determination of this and the main Question following it is necessary that I here stay 1. To open the nature of Church-Government in general 2. To open the sence of the word Episcopacy and the several sorts of Bishops And then 3. I shall tell you what sort of Episcopacy it is that I could yield to for the Churches peace 1. I must confess I think that the greatest part of the controversie by far is in this first question of the nature of Ecclesiastical Government strictly so called which is only in the hands of Christs Ministers Bishops or whomsoever commonly called Clergy men Aâ—d concerning this having written my thoughts more largely elâ—ewhere I shall now lay down these few Propositions Prop. 1. All this power Ecclesiastical is Jure divino given from God himself and that either immediately or by the mediation only of the Apâ—stles I mean as to the determination in specie what it shall be and the constitution of that order and power in the Church though perhaps some other causes at least sine quibus non may intervene for the reception of this power by an individual person These therefore that plead only the Laws of the Land or only Canons of former Bishops for their standing or authority do say nothing that as to our controversie is regardable Whâ—t men do they may undo if there be reason for it and if it depend on their authority we must submit to their reason Prop. 2. This Divine Constitution of the Species of Church-Power
by another that could not have any power to Rule him without that consent of his own and voluntary Condescension 5. As for the fifth sort that is The standing President of a Classis having no Negative voice I should easily consent to them for order and Peace for they are no distinct Office nor assâ—me any Government over the Presbyters And the Presbyterian Churches do commonly use a President or Moderator pro tempore And doubtless if it be lawful for a Month it may be lawful for a year or twenty years or quam diu se bene gâ—sserit and how many years had we one Moderator of our Assemblies of Divines at Westminster and might have had him so many years more if death had not cut him off And usually God doth not so change his gifts but that the same man who is the fittest this month or year is most likely also to be the fittest the next 6. And for the sixth sort viz. A President of a Classes having a Negative voice I confess I had rather be without him and his power is not agreeable to my Judgement as a thing instituted by God or fittest in it self But yet I should give way to it for the Peace of the Church and if it might heal that great breach that is between us and the Epâ—scopal Brethren and the many Churches that hold of that way but with these Cautions and Limitations 1. That they shall have no Negative in any thing that is already a duty or a sin for an Angel from heaven cannot dispense with Gods Law This I doubt not will be yielded 2. That none be forced to acknowledge this Negative vote in them but that they take it from those of the Presbyters that will freely give or acknowledge it For its a known thing that all Church-power doth work only on the Conscience and therefore only prevail by procuring Consent and cannot compell 3. Nor would I ever yield that any part of the Presbyters dissenting should be taken as Schismaticks and cast out of Communion or that it should be made the matter of such a breach This is it that hath broken the Church that Bishops have thrust their Rule on men whether they would or not and have taken their Negative voice at least if not their sole Jurisdiction to be so necessary as if there could be no Church without it or no man were to be endured that did not acknowledge it but he that denyeth their disputable Power must be excommunicated with them that blaspheme God himself And as the Pope will have the acknowledgement of his Power to be inseparable from a member of the Catholike Church and cast out all that deny it so such Bishops take the acknowledgement of their Jurisdiction to be as inseparable from a member of a particular Church and consequently as they suppose of the universal and so to deny them shall cut men off as if they denyed Christ. This savoureth not of the humility that Christ taught his followers 4. Nor would I have any forced to declare whether they only submit for Peace or consent in approbation nor whether they take the Bishops Negative vote to be by Divine Institution and so Necessary or by the Presbyters voluntary consent contract as having power in several cases to suspend the exercise of their own just authority when the suspension of it tendeth to a publike Good No duty is at all times a duty If a man be to be ordained by a Presbytery it is not a flat duty to do it at that time when the President is absent except in case of flat necessity why may not the rest of the Presbyters then if they see it conducible to the good of the Church resolve never to ordain except in case of such Necessity but when the President is there and is one therein which is indeed to permit his exercise of a Negative vote without professing it to be his right by any Institution It is lawful to ordain when the President is present it is lawful out of cases of Necessity to forbear when he is absent according therefore to the Presbyterian principles we may resolve to give him de facto a Negative voice that is not to ordain without him but in Necessity and according to the Episcopal principles we must thus do for this point of Ordination is the chief thing they stand on Now if this be all the difference why should not our May be yield to their Must be if the Peace of the Church be found to lye upon it But 5. I would have this Caution too that the Magistrate should not annex his sword to the Bishops censure without very clear reason but let him make the best of his pure spiritual Authority that he can we should have kept peace with Bishops better if they had not come armed and if the Magistrates had not become their Executioners 7. As to the seventh sort viz. A President of a Province fixed without any Negative voice I should easily admit of him not only for Peace but as orderly and convenient that there might be some one to give notice of all Assemblies and the Decrees to each member and for many other mattters of order this is practised in the Province of London pro tempore and in the other Presbyterian Churches And as I said before in the like case I see not why it may not be lawful to have a President quam diu se bene gesserit as well for a moneth or a year or seven years as in our late Assembly two successively were more as I remember so that this kind of Diocesan or Provincial Bishop I think may well be yielded to for the Churches Order and Peace 8. As to the eighth sort of Bishops viz. The Diocesan who assumeth the sole Government of many Parish Churches both Presbyters and People as ten or twelve or twenty or more as they used to do even a whole Diocess I take them to be intolerable and destructive to the Peace and happiness of the Church and therefore not to be admitted under pretence of Order or Peace if we can hinder them But of these we must speak more when we come to the main Question 9. As for the ninth sort of Bishops viz. A Diocesan Ruling all the Presbyâ—ers but leaving the Presbyters to Rule the People and consequently taking to himself the sole or chief Power of Ordination but leaving Censures and Absolution to them except in case of Appeal to himself I must needs say that this sort of Episcopacy is very ancient and hath been for many ages of very common reception through a great part of the Church but I must also say that I can see as yet no Divine institution of such a Bishop taken for a fixed limited officer and not the same that we shall mention in the eleventh place But how far mens voluntary submission to such and consent to be ruled by them may authorize them I have no mind to dispute
altogether neglect it So that some through a Carnal indulging of their own ease and quiet and to avoid mens ill will and some through the great oppositions of the people or for one such cause or other do let all alone In so much as even here in this County where we have associated and engaged our selves to some execution of Discipline this work goes on so heavily as we see and need not mention further when yet there is not a daies omission of Sermons and other Ordinances so that its apparent that its it which all lazie carnal man-pleasing Ministers may well comply with as that which suites their Carnal Interests to be free from the toil and care of Discipline If you say why then do the Bishops desire it if flesh and blood be against it I answer Experience and the impossibility of performance tells us that it is not the work but the empty name and honour that they took up and that indeed the flesh doth much more desire Had they desired or been willing of the work as they were of Lordships and Riches they would have done it Argum. 9. NO Episcopacy at least which hath so many evils as aforesaid attending it which is not of Gods Institution should be admitted into the Church The late English Prelacy as to the disapproved properties before mentioned is not of Gods Institution therefore it is not to be admitted into the Church The Major is confessed by all that plead for the Ius Divinum of Episcopacy or most and with the qualification from the ill consequents will be yielded by all The Minor I prove by parts 1. That the exclusion of Presbyters from Rule and the putting the Government from them into a Lay-mans hand with the rest before mentioned are not of Divine Institution is proved already as much as needs 2. If at the present we yield a superintendency or preheminence of one Pastor before others yet the Controversie remaineth whether a Prelate should be only Parochial that is only the President of the Elders of one particular Church or at the utmost of that with two or three or a few neighbour small Parishes which he may well oversee without the neglect of the Discipline Now I know not how any man of that way can prove out of Scripture that a Bishop must have more then one Parish much less more then three or four or a few For it is confest by them for ought I know that Scripture doth not determine how many Presbyters or Churches a Bishop must have under him only we say he must have but one for the main thing that they labour to prove is that a Bishop is above Presbyters as to Ordination and Jurisdiction and so he may be if he be a parish-Parish-Bishop for a parish-Parish-Church may have a Curate and 2 or 3 Chappels with Curates at them besides Deacons and according to the old course perhaps many Presbyters more that did not publikely preach though they wanted not authority but oversee the flock Now one man may have all that most of their Arguments require if he be but the chief over this Parish Presbytery But perhaps they will say that according to Scripture every City only must have a Bishop and therefore all the Country about must be his Diocess though the number of Churches and Presbyters under him be not determined To which I answer that the word Only is not in Scripture no Text saith that it was Only in Cities that Churches or Bishops were to be seated There is no prohibition of setling them in Villages It will be said that There is no example of any Bishop but in a City To which I answer 1. Themselves ordinarily tell us in case of Sacrament gesture and many other things that examples do not alway bind affirmatively much less can they prove that they bind negatively I mean not to do that which was not done Can you prove in Scripture that there were any particular Churches or Assemblies for Sacraments and other worship in Villages If not then is it lawful now to have any If not then all our Parish Churches in the Country are unlawful If yea then why may we not have Bishops in the Countreys without Scripture example as well as Churches for we shall prove that the reasons why there were none or few Bishops in the Country was for want of Churches for them to oversee The Gospel was not then preached nor any Bishops placed in many Nations of the world it doth not follow therefore that there must be none since 2. The reason is evident why Churches and Bishops were first planted in Cities because there was the greatest Concourse of people not that God loves a Citizen better then a Countrey-man or that he will have his Churches so limited to soil or place or scituation it is the number of persons where-ever they live that must be regarded that the Church be not too great nor too small but if there be the same number of people Cohabiting in the Countrey as one of the Apostolical Churches did consist of then there is the same reason to have a Church and Bishop in that Country Village as was then for having one in a City 3. Elders should be ordained in every Church and therefore Bishops for some of them say that these were Bishops But Churches may be in Country Villages therefore Elders and Bishops may be in Country-Villages 4. I prove from Scripture that there were Bishops in Villages or out of Cities thus Where there was a Church there was a Bishop But in a Village there was a Church therefore The Major I prove from Act. 14.23 compared with 1 Tim. 3. They ordained them Elders in every Church or Church by Church but these Elders are called Bishops in 1 Tim. 3. and by some of that way maintained to be such For the Minor I prove it from Rom. 16.1 where there is mention of the Church at Cenchrea but Cenchrea was no City but as Grotius speaks Portus Corinthiorum ut Piraeus Atheniensium viz. ad sinum Saronicum apparet ibi Ecclesiam fuisse Christianorum Grot. in Act. 18.18 in Rom. 16.1 vide et Downam Defensâ— pag. 105. who out of Strabâ— saith it was the Port that served most properly for Asia But Bishop Downam saith ibid. that Cenchrea was a Parish subordinate to the Church of Corinth having not a Bishop or Presbytery but a Presbyter assigned to it so before he saith by a Church he means a Company of Chrâ—stiâ—ns haâ—ing a Bishop and Presbytery But if he will so define a Church as that the Prelate shall enter the Definition then he may well prove that every Church had a Prelate And so a Patriarch may be proved to be Necessary to every Church if you will say you mean only such congregations as have a Patriarch But it was denominated a Church Act. 14.23 before they had Presbyters ordained to them and so before fixed Bishops when the Apostles had converted and congregated them they
spoke of such Bishops only as we have in question or that he did not plainly speak of Presbyters as such For he speaks of the plenitude of Power and Grace in the Church and therefore intended more then what was proper to a Prelate 2. He mentioneth Elders Majores natu in general without distinction And 3. His praesident is plainly related to the Church as the ubi shews it being the People and not the Elders over whom these Elders are said to preside And 4. Baptizing is first instanced which was known to be commonly the work of Presbyters and never appropriated to the Prelate So that the same persons that did Baptize even the Elders of the Church according to Firmilian did then possess the power of laying on hands and of ordaining But these things are more fully discussed in what followeth And if any either adversary or friend would see the Reformed Churches Ministry and Ordination more fully vindicated I refer them to Voetius against Jasenius Desperata causa Papatus which if I had read before I had written this Disputation I think I should have spared my labour Reader if others are too busie to misled thee I may suppose thee unwilling to be misled especially in a matter of so great concernment For saith Blessed Agustine Multos invenimus qui mentiri velint qui autem falli â—eminem de Doctrin Christ. l. 1. cap. 36. And therefore as thou lovest Christ his Church and Gospel and the souls of others and thine own take heed how thou venturest in following a sect of angry men to unchurch so great and excellent a part of the Catholich Church and to vilifie and depose so great a number of able faithfull Ministers of Christ as those that had not Prelatical Ordination And if you are Gentlemen or unlearned men that for want of long and diligent studying of these matters are uncapable of judging of them and therefore take all on the Authority of those whose Learning and parts you most esteem I beseech you before you venture your souls on it any further procure a satisfactory answer to these Questions 1. Whether the Reformed Churches that have no Prelates have not abounded with as learned men as any one of those that you admire of a contrary judgement 2. If you are tempted to suspect men of partiality whether they that plead for Lorship honour and preferment or they that plead against it and put it from them are more to be suspected caâ—teris paribus 3. If you will needs suspect the Protestant Ministers of partiality what ground of suspicion have you of them that were no Ministers such as the two Scaligers whose learning made them the admiration of the Christian world even to Papists as well as Protestants and yet were cordial friends to those Reformed Churches which these men deny and draw men to disown Such also as Salmasius that hath purposely wrote about the subject with abundance more 4. If these are not to be trusted why should not Bishops themselves be trusted were not Bishop Usher Andrews Davenant Hall and others of their mind as learned pious men as any whose Authority you can urge against them 5. If all this be nothing I beseech you get a modest resolution of this doubt at least whether the concurrent judgement of all the Protestant Churches in Christendom even of the English Bishops with the rest should not be of more authority with any sober Protestant then the Contrary judgement of those few that are of late risen up for the cause that you are by them solicited to own It is a known Truth that the generality of the Bishops themselves and all the Protestant Churches in the world have owned them as true Ministers that were ordained by Presbyteries without Prelates and have owned them as true Churches that were guided by these Ministers and have taken them for valid administrations that were performed by them And are your few Recusants that would draw you to separation of greater Learning authorty and regard then all the Protestants in the world besides I beseech you if you will needs take things upon trust consider this and trust accordingly Though I must say it is pitty that any truely Catholick Christian should not have better grounds than these and be able himself in so palpable a case to perceive his duty For my own part my conscience witnesseth that I have not written the following Disputation out of a desire to quarrel with any man but am drawn to it to my great displeasure by the present danger and necessity of the Churches and by compassion to the souls that are turned from the publick Ordinances and engaged in the separation and also of the Churches that are divided and troubled by these means The sad complaints of many of my Brethren from several parts have moved my heart to this undertaking Through Gods Mercy I have peace at home but I may not therefore be insensible of the divisions and calamities abroad I shall adjoin here one of the Letters that invited me and no more because in that one you may see the scope and tenour of the rest and that I rush not on this displeasing work without a Call nor before there is a cause The passages that intimate an ever-valuing of my self you may charitably impute to the Authors juniority and humility with some mistake through distance and disacquaintance One of the Letters that invited me to this task Reverend Sir UNderstanding by the Preface to the Reader before your Gildaâ— Salvianus that you intend a second part wherein you promise to speak of the way how to discern the true Church and Ministry I make bold to present you with the desire of some Godly Ministers viz. that if you see it convenient you would do some thing towards the vindication of the present Churches and Ministers from the aspersions of the new Prelatical party in England It is a principle much made of by many of the Gentry and others that we are but Schismatical branches broken off from the true body and this by faithfull tradition is spread amongst them the learning of some rigid Prelatical Schollars is very prevalent with them to make them thus account of us With these men we must be all unchurched for casting off Diocesan Episcopacy though we be found in the faith and would spend our selves to save souls and the main substance of our Ordination at least cannot be found fault with yet because we had not a Bishop to lay his hands on us we are not sent from God Of what consequence this opinion may prove if it spread without being checked an ordinary apprehension may perceive I can guess something from what I observe from those of this leaven already that our most serious pains will be little regarded if our people take this infection when we would awaken them we cannot because they take it that we have no power to teach them It must not be men of mean parts that must
in other passages of Scripture had the power of Ordination and that it belonged not only to the Apostles and Evangelists and such as they call Archbishops but that the fixed Bishops of particular Churches had it Sect. 3. The Minor I prove thus that our Ordination is by Scripture Bishops The Scripture Bishops were the Pastors of Particular Churches having no Presbyters subject to them Most of our Ordainers are such Pastors therefore most of our Ordainers are Scripture Bishops Sect 4. The Major is asserted at large by the foresaid 〈◊〉 Dr. H. H. Annot. in Art 11. b. p. 407. Where he shews 〈◊〉 though this title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders have been also 〈◊〉 second Order in the Church is now only in use for them under 〈◊〉 name of Presbyters yet in the Scripture times it belonged princâ—pally if not only to Bishops there being no evidence that any of 〈◊〉 second order were then instituted So that the Scripture Bishops were the Pastors of single Churches having no Presbyters under them for there were no inferiour Presbyters that had not the Power of Ordination instituted in those times This therefore may be taken as a granted truth Sect. 5. And that our Ordainers are such is commonly known 1. They are Pastors it is but few of the Prelates that denyed this They are Rectors of the People and have the Pastoral charge of souls 2. They are Pastors of Particular Churches 3. They have for the most part at least no subject or inferiour Presbyters under them therefore they are Scripture Bishops Sect. 6. Object The difference lyeth in another point The Scripture Bishops had the Power of Ordination Your Pastors have not the Power of Ordination thereefore they are not the same Answ. That is the thing in Question I am proving that they have the power of Ordination thus In Scripture times all single Pastors of single Churches had the Power of Ordination there being no other instituted But our Ordainers are the single Pastors of single Churches and of Christs institution therefore they have the Power of Ordination If the Pastors now are denyed to be such as were instituted in Scripture times 1. Let them shew who did institute them and by what authority 2. The sole Pastors of particular Churches were instituâ—ed in Scripture times But such are ours in question therefore c. Sect. 7. There is no sort of Pastors lawfull in the Church but what were instituted in Scripture times But the sort of Pastors now in question are lawfull in the Church therefore they were instituted in Scripture times The Minor will be granted us of all those that were Ordained by Prelates They would not Ordain men to an office which they thought unlawful The Major is proved thus No sort of Pastors are lawful in the Church but such of whom we may have sufficient evidence that they were instituted by Christ or his Apostles But we can have sufficient evidence of none but such as were instituted in Scripture times that they were instituted by Christ or his Apostles therefore no other sort is lawfull The Major is proved in that none but Christ and such as he committed it to have power to institute new Holy Offices for Worship in the Church But Christ hath committed this to none but Apostles if to them therefore c. Whether Apostles themselves did make any such new Office I will not now dispute but if they did 1. It was by that special Authority which no man since the planting of the Churches by them can lay claim to or prove that they have 2. And it was by that extraordinary guidance and inspiration of the Holy Ghost which none can manifest to have been since that time communicated Sect. 8. Moreover if there were a Power of instituting new Offices in the Church since Scripture times it was either in a Pope in Councils or in single Pastors But it was in none of these not in a Pope for there was no such Creature of long time after much less with this authority Not in a Council For 1. None such was used 2. None such is proved 3. Else they should have it still Not in every Bishop as will be easily granted Sect. 9. If such a Power of instituting New Church-Offices were after Scripture times in the Church then it is ceased since or continueth still Not ceased since For 1. The Powers or officers then lâ—â—t continue still therefore their authority continueth still 2. There is no proof that any such temporary power was given to any since Scripture times Nor doth any such continue still Otherwise men might still make us more New Offices and so we should not know when we have done nor should we need to look into Scripture for Christs will but to the will of men Sect. 10. Argument 2. No men since Scripture times had power to change the Institutions of Christ and the Apostles by taking down the sort of Pastors by them established and setting up another sort in their stead But if there be lawful Pastors of particular Churches that have not power of Ordination then men had power to make such a change For the sort of Pastors then instituted were such as had but one Church and were themselves personally to guide that Church in actual Worship and had the power of Ordination and there was no subject Presbyters nor no single Pastors that had not the Power of Ordination All single Pastors of particular Churches had that Poâ—er then But all or almost all such single Pastors of particular Churches are by the Dissenters supposed to be without that Power now Therefore it is by them supposed that Christs form of Church Government and sort of Officers are changed and consequently that men had power to change them for they suppose it lawfully done Sect. 11. Argument 3. The Pastors of City Churches may ordain especially the sole or chief Pastors Many of our present Ordainers are the Pastors of City Churches and the sole or chief Pastors in some Places therefore they may Ordain The Major is proved from the doctrine of the Dissenters which is that every City Church should have a Bâ—shop and that every Bishop is the chief and sometimes only Pastor of a City Church If they say that yet every Pastor though the sole Pastor of a City Church is not a Bishop I answer that then they will infer the same power of changing Scripture Institutions which I mentioned and disproved before Let them prove such a Power if they can Sect. 12. The Minor is undenyable and seen de facto that many of our Ordainers are such Pastors of City Churches and that of two sorts some of such Cities as have both the Name and Nature of Cities And some of such Cities as have truly the nature but in our English custom of speech have not the name such as are all Corporations in the several Market Towns of England Sect. 13. Argument 4. Those Pastors that have Presbyters
and Government is to be found wholly in the written word of God called the holy Scriptures This we are agreed on against the Papists who would supply the supposed defects of Scripture by their unwritten Traditions which they call the other part of Gods word Church Canons and Laws of men may determine of some modes and circumstances for the better execution of the Laws of God by the People whom they are over but they cannot make new Church Ordinances or Governments nor convey a Power which God the fountain of Power did not ordain and convey nor can they give what they themselves had not The Church-office and Authority therefore that is not proved from the Holy Scripture is to be taken as the fruit of humane arrogancy and presumption Yet I deny not but that we may find much in Antiquity in Fathers and Councils about matters of fact to help us to understand some Scriptures and so to discern the matter of right Prop. 3. The Scripture doth not Contradict but suppose and confirm the light of Nature nor doth it impose upon any man Natural impossibilities nor constitute offices which cannot be executed or which would destroy that end to which they are supposed to be Constituted Prop. 4. Ecclesiastical Authority comprehendeth not the power of the sword nor any power of using violence to mens bodies or laying mulcts or confiscations on their estates The Ecclesiastical Power which Christ ordained was exercised for the first three hundred years without any touching of mens bodies or purses before there were any Christian Princes Prop. 5. Magistrates are not eo nomine obliged to punish men because they are Excommunicated whether upon every just Excommunication they should punish I will not now dispute but they are bound to know that their penalties be deserved before they inflict them and therefore must themselves take Cognisance of the Cause and as rational agents understand before they act and not blindly follow the Judgements of the Bishops as if they were but as Executioners where the Bishops are Judges Prop. 6. The Power of the highest Church-governours is but an Authority of Directing in the way to salvation It is but Directive but then there is no room for the common Objection that then it is no greater then any other man may perform for it is one thing to Direct Occasionally from Charity and another thing to Direct by Authority in a standing office as purposely appointed hereunto The Power of Church-Governors is but of the same nature as is the Power of a Physitian over his Patients or of a School-master over his Schollers supposing he had not the power of the rod or actual force but such a power as the Professors of Philosophy or other sciences had in their several schools upon the adult nor all so great neither because the Laws by which we must rule are made to our hands as to the substantials Hence therefore it is plain that as we can bind or force no man to believe us or to understand the truth and to be Christians but by the power of demonstrated Evidence and by the light which we let in through Gods grace into their Consciences so neither can we cause any to execute our sentences against offenders further than by light we convince them that it is their duty so that if all the Bishops or Presbyteries in the land should judge such or such an opinion to be heresie and should Excommunicate those that own it as hereticks in this case if the Church do believe as the Pastors believe they will consent and avoid the Excommunicate person but if they take it to be Gods truth which the Pastors call heresie they will not take themselves bound by that sentence to avoid him nor will the Offender himself any further be sensible of a penalty in the sentence then he shall be convinced that he hath erred and if the Church avoid him he will justifie himself and judge that they do it wrongfully and will glory in his suffering so that it is on the Conscience that Church-Governors can work and no otherwise on the outward man but mediante Conscientiâ Prop. 7. The ground of this is partly because no Church Governors can bind any man contrary to Gods word Clave errante ita apparente if the people know that he erreth they are not to obey him against God Yet in the bare inconvenient determination of some Circumstantials by which the duty is not destroyed but less conveniently performed the people are bound to obey their Governors because it is not against Gods determination and because he erreth but in an undetermined point of which God appointed him to be the orderly determiner But if God have once determined no mans contrary determination can oblige nor yet if they go beyond the sphere of their own work and determine of an aliene subject which God did never commit to their determination else a Minister or Bishop might oblige every Taylor how to cut his garment and every Shoâ—-maker how to cut his shoe so that they should sin if they did disobey which is ridiculous to imagine and if they go about to introduce new stated Ordinances or Symbols in the Church which they have nothing to do with or in any other work shall assume to themselves a power which God never gave them it doth no more oblige then in the former case Prop. 8. Another reason of the sixth Proposition is because The People have a Iudgement of discerning whether the Governors do go according to Gods word or not else they should be led blindfold and be obliged by God to go against Gods word whensoever their Governors shall go against it It is not bruits or Infants but rational men that we must rule Prop. 9. The three things which Church power doth consist in are in conformity to the three parts of Christs own office 1. About matter of Faith 2. About matter of Worship 3. About matter of Practice in other cases 1. Church-Governors about Doctrine or Matters of Faith are the Peoples Teachers but cannot oblige them to Err or to believe any thing against God nor make that to be truth or error that is not so beâ—ore 2. In matter of Worship Church-guides are as Gods Priests and are to go before the people and stand between God and them and present their prayers and prayses to God and administer his holy mysteries and bless them in his name 3. The Commanding Power of Pastors is in two things 1. In Commanding them in the name of Christ to obey the Laws which he hath made them already And this is the principal 2. To give them new Directions of our own which as is said 1. Must not be against Gods Directions 2. Nor about any matter which is not the object of our own office but is without the verge of it 3. But it is only in the making of under laws for the better execution of the laws of Christ and those
doubt Prop. 2. It is as certain that common prudence required them to make a convenient distribution of the work and not go all one way and leave other places that while without the Gospel But some to go one way and some another as most conduced to the conversion of all the world Prop. 3. It is certain that the Apostles were not armed with the sword nor had a compulsive coercive power by secular force but that their Government was only forcible on the Conscience and therefore only on the Conscientious so far as they were such unless as we may call mens actual exclusion by the Church and their desertion and misery the effect of Government Prop. 4. It is most certain that they who had the extraordinary priviledge of being eye-witnesses of Christs Miracles and Life and ear-witnesses of his Doctrine and had the extraordinary power of working Miracles for a Confirmation of their Doctrine must needs have greater Authority in mens Consciences then other men upon that very account if there were no other So that even their Gifts and Priviledges may be and doubtless were one ground at least of that higher degree of Authority which they had above others For in such a Rational perswasive Authority which worketh only on the Conscience the case is much different from the secular power of Magistrates For in the former even Gifts may be a ground of a greater measure of Power in binding mens minds And here is the greatest part of the difficulty that riseth in our way to hinder us from improving the example of the Apostles in that it is so hard to discern how much of their power over other Presbyters or Bishops was from their supereminency of Office and Imperial Authority and how much was meerly from the excellency of their Gifts and Priviledges Prop. 5. It s certain that the Magistrates did not then second the Apostles in the Government of the Church but rather hinder them by persecution The excommunicate were not punished therefore by the secular power but rather men were enticed to forsake the Church for the saving of their lives so that worldly prosperity attended those without and adversity those within which further shewes that the force of Apostolical Government was on the Conscience and it was not corrupted by an aliene kind of force Prop. 6. Yet had the Apostles a power of Miraculous Castigation of the very bodies of the Offenders at least sometimes which Peter exercised upon Ananiaâ— and Sapphyra and Paul upon Eâ—â—mas and some think upon Hymenaeus and Philetas and those other that were said to be delivered up to Satan certainly Paul had in readiness to revenge all disobedience 2 Cor. 10.6 which its like extendeth somewhat farther than to meer censures But it s most certain that the Apostle used noâ— this power oâ— hurting mens bodies ordinarily but sparingly as they did other Miracles perhaps not according to their own wills but the Holy Ghosts So that this did not corrupt their Government neither and destroy the Spirituality of it Yet this makes it somewhat more difficult to us to improve the Apostles example because we know not how much of their power upon mens Consciences might be from such penal Miracles Prop. 7. The Apostles had power to Ordain and send others to the work of the Ministry But this only by the consent of the ordained and of the people before they could be compleat fixed Pâ—stors for they forced not any to go or any people to entertain them And it seemeth they did not Ordain singly but many together Acts 14.23 Timothy had his Gift by the laying on of Pauls hands and of the hands of the Presbyterie 1 Tim. 4.14 and 2 Tim. 1.6 Prop. 8. It seems that each Apostle did exercise a Government over the Churches which were once planted but this was principally in order to well setling and confirming them Prop. 9. No one Apostle did appropriate a Diocess to himself and say Here I am sole Governor or am chief Governor nor did they or could they forbid any others to Govern in their Diocess though as is said they did agree to distribute their work to the publike advantage and not to be all in one place at once but yet successively they might Prop. 10. Nay it s certain that they were so far from being the sole Bishops of such or such a Diocess that they had usually some more unfixed general Officers with them Paul and Barnabas went together at first and after the Division Barnabas and Mark Paul and Silas and sometimes Timothy and sometime Epaphroditus and sometime others went together afterward And others as well as Iames were usually at Ierusalem and all these had a general power where they came And it cannot be proved that Iames was Ruler of Peter Paul and the rest when they were at Ierusalem nor that he had any higher power then they Prop. 11. Yet it seems that the several Apostles did most look after those same Churches which themselves had been the instruments of gathering and that some addition of respect was due to those that had been spiritual Fathers to them above the rest 1 Cor. 4.15 Prop. 12. It was therefore by the General Commission of Apostleship that they Governed particular Churches pro tempore while they were among or neer them and not by any special Commission or Office of being the Diocesan or Metropolitane of this or that place 1. It was below them and a diminution of their honor to be so affixed and take the charge of any particular Churches 2. We find not that ever they did it 3. If they had then all the disorders and ungovernedness of those Churches would be imputable to them and therefore they must be still with them as fixed Bishops are seeing they cannot govern them at such a distance as makeâ— them uncapable 4. When Peter drew Barnabas and many more to dissimulation and almost to betray the liberties of the Gentiles Paul doth not say This is my Diocess and I must be the Ruler here nor doth Peter plead this against him when Paul and Barnabas fell out whether Mark should be taken with them or not neither of them did plead a Ruling Authority nor say This is my Diocess or I am the superior Ruler but they produced their reasons and when they could not agree concerning the validity of each others reasons they separated and took their several companions and waies Prop 13. It was not only the Apostles but multitudes more that were such general unfixed Ministers as the seventy Barnabas Silas Epaphroditus Timothy and many others And all these also had a Power of Preaching and Ruling where they came Prop. 14. None of these General Officers did take away the Government from the fixed Presbyters of particular Churches nor kept a Negative vote in their own hands in matters of Government for if no fixed Bishop or Presbyter could excommunicate any member of his Church without an Apostle then almost all
Institution not by inspired Apostles but by Ordinary Bishops then 1. They make all Presbyters to be jure Episcopali and Bishops only and their Superiours to be jure Divino as the Italians in the Council of Trent would have had all Bishops to depend upon the Pope But in this they go far beyond them for the Italian Papists themselves thought Presbyterie jure Divino 2. Either they may be changed by Bishops who set them up or not If they may be taken down again by man then the Church may be ruined by man and so the Bishops will imitate the Pope Either they will Reign or Christ shall not Reign if they can hinder it Either they will lead the Church in their way or Christ shall have no Church If man cannot take them down then 1. It seems man did not Institute them for why may they not alter their own institutions 2. And then it seems the Church hath universal standing unchangeable Institutions Offices and binding Laws of the Bishops making And if so are not the Bishops equal to the Apostles in Law making and Church Ordering and are not their Laws to us as the word of God and that word insufficient and every Bishop would be to his Diocess and all to the whole Church what the Pope would be to the whole 3. Moreover how do they prove that ever the Apostles gave power to the Bishops to institute the order of Presbyterie I know of no text of Scripture by which they can prove it And for Tradition we will not take every mans word that saith he hath tradition for his conceits but we require the proof The Papists that are the pretended keepers of Tradition do bring forth none as meerly unwritten but for their ordines inferiores and many of them for Bishops as distinct from the Presbyters but not for Presbyters themselves And Scripture they can plead none For if they mention such texts where Paul bids Titus ordain Elders in every City c. they deny this to be meant of Elders as now but of Prelates whom Titus as the Primate or Metropolitane was to ordain And if it be meant of Elders then they are found in Scripture and of Divine Apostolical Institution 4. If they were Instituted by Bishops after the Scripture was written was it by one Bishop or by many If by one then how came that one to have Authority to impose a new Institution on the universal Church If by many either out of Council or in if out of Council it was by an accidental falling into one mind and way and then they are but as single men to the Church and therefore still we ask how do they bind us If by many in Council 1. Then let them tell us what Council it was that Instituted Presbyterie when and where gathered and where we may find their Canons that we may know our order and what Auâ—hors mention that Council 2. And what authority had that Council to bind all the Christian world to all ages If they say it bound but their own Churches and that age then it seems the Bishops of England might for all that have nulled the Order of Presbyters there But O miserable England and miserable world if Presbyters had done no more for it then Prelates have done I conclude therefore that the English Prelacy either degraded the Presbyters or else suspended to ally an essential part of their office for themselves called them Rectors and in ordaining them said Receive the Holy Ghâ—st Whose sins thou dost remit they are remitted whose sins thou dost retain they are retained And therefore they delivered to them the Power of the Keyes of opening and shutting the Kingdom of Heaven which themselves make to be the opening and shutting of the Church and the Governing of the Church by Excommunication and Absolution And therefore they are not fit men to ask the Presbyters By what authority they Rule the Church by binding and loosing when themselves did expresly as much as in them lay confer the Power on them And we do no more then what they bid us do in our Ordination Yea they thereby make it the very work of our office For the same mouth at the same time that bid us tâ—ke authority to preach the word of God did also tell us that whose sins we remit or retain they are remitted or retained and therefore if one be an Essential or true integral part at least of our office the other is so too From all which it is evident that if there were nothing against the English Prelacy but only this that they thus suspend or degrade all the Presbyters in England as to one half of their offâ—ce it is enough to prove that they should not be restored under any pretence whatsoever of Order or Unity Argum. 5. THat Episcopacy which giveth the Government of the Chuâ—ch and management of the Keys of Excommunication and Absolution into the hands of a few Layâ—men while they take them from the Presbyters is nâ—t to be restored under any pretence of Vnity or Peace But such was the English Prelacy therefore c. The Major is plain because it is not Lay-men that are to be Church Governours as to Ecclesiastical Government This is beyond Question with all save the Congregational and they would not have two or three Lay men chosen but the whole Congregation to manage this business The Minor is known by common experience that it was the Chancelor in hâ—s Court with his assiâ—â—ants and the Register and such other meer Lay-men that managed this work If it be said that they did it as the Bishops Agents and Substitutes and therefore it was he that did it by them I answer 1. The Law put it in the Chancellors and the Bishopâ— could not hinder it 2. If the Bishops may delegate others to do their work then it seems Preaching and Ruling Excommunicaâ—ing and Abâ—olving may as well be done by Lay-men as Clergy men Then they may commission them also to administer the Sacraments And so the Ministry is not necessary for any of these works but only a Bishop to depute Lay-men to do them which is false and confusive Argum. 6. THat Episcopacy whâ—ch necessarily overwhelmeth the souls of the Bishops with the most hainous guilt of neglecting the many thousand souls whose charge they undertake is not to be restored for Order or Peace For men are not to be oveâ—whelmed with such hainous sin on such pretences But such is the English Prelacy and that not accidentally through the badness of the men only but unavoidably through the greatness of their charge and the Natural Impossibility of their undertaken work How grievous a thing it is to have the blood of so many thousands charged on â—hem may soon appear And that man that undertakes himself the Government of two or three or five hundred thousand souls that he never seeth or knoweth nor can possibly so Govern but must needs leave it undone except the shadow
a Power to be a servant to all and to do the work And therefore that the first Question is Whether the great burden and labour of Ministerial service may be laid on any man without Ordination by such as our English Prelates Or whether all men are discharged from this labour and service on whom such Prelates do not Impose it If Magistrates Presbyters and People conspire to call an able man to the work and service of the Lord whether he be justified for refusing it what ever the Church suffer by it meerly because the Prelates called him not Sect. 24. Though the forementioned works do all belong to the Office of the Ministry yet there must be Opportunity and a particular Call to the exercise of them before a man is actually obliged to perform the several acts And therefore it was not without sence and reason that in Ordination the Bishop said to the Ordained Take thou authority to Read or to preach the word of God when thou shalt be threunto lawfully called Not that another call of Authority is necessary to state them in the office or to oblige them to the Duty in General But we must in the invitation of people or their consent to hear us or other such advantagious accidents prudently discern when and where we have a Call to speak and exercise any act of our Ministry Even as a Licensed Physitian must have a particular Call by his Patients before he exercise his skill This call to a particular act is nothing else but an intimation or signification of the will of God that hic nunc we should perform such a work which is done by Providence causing a concurrence of such inviting Circumstances that may perswade a prudent man that it is seasonable Sect. 25. A man that is in general thus obliged by his office to do all the formentioned works of the Ministry that is when he hath a particular call to each may yet in particular never be obliged to some of these works but may be called to spend his life in some other part of the Ministry and yet be a compleat Minister and have the obligation and Power to all upon supposition of a particular Call and not be guilty of negligence in omitting those other parts One man man may live only among Infidels and uncalled ones and so be obliged only to Preach the Gospell to them in order to Conversion and may die before he sees any ready to be baptized Anoâ—her may be taken up in Preaching and Baptizing and Congregating the Converted and never be called to Pastoral Rule of a particular Church Another may live in a Congregated Church where there is no use for the Discipling-Converting-Preaching of the Gospel and so may have nothing to do but to Oversee that particular Church and Guide them in holy Worship And in the same Church if one Ministers parts are more for Publick preaching and anothers more for Private instruction and acts of Guidance and Worship if one be best in expounding and another in lively application tâ—ey may lawfully and â—itly divide the work between them and it shall not be imputed to them for unfaithfulnss and negligence that one forbeareâ—h what the other doth For we have our guifts to the Churches edification Thus Paul saith he was not sent to Baptize but to Preach the Goâ—pel Not that it was not in his Commission and a work of his office but quoad exercitium he had seldome a second particular Call to exercise it being taken up with that Preaching of the Gospel and settling and confirming Churches which to him was a greater work Sect. 26. This Ministry before desâ—râ—bed whether you call it Episcopatum Sacerdotium Presbyteratum or what else is fit is but one and the same Order for Deacons are not the Ministers defined by us It is not distinguished into various Species Even the Patrons of Prelacy yea the Schoolmen and other Papists themselves do ordinarily confess that a Prelate and Presbyter differ not Ordine but only Gradu So that it is not another office that they ascribe to Prelates but only a more eminent Degree in the same Office And therefore they themselves affirm that in Officio the Power of Ordination is in both alike the office being the same But that for the honour of the Degree of Prelacy for the unity of the Church Presbyters are hindered from the Exercise of that Ordination which yet is in their Power and Office Sect. 27. As far as Ordination is a part of the Ministerial Work it is comprised in the forementioned acts of Congregating Teaching Ruling c. and therefore is not left out of the Definition as it is a duty of the office though it be not expâ—essed among the Efficient causes for the reason above mentioned and because I am now more distinctly to treat of it by it self and to give you fuâ—ther reasons hereof in the explication of the Nature and Ends of this Ordination CHAP. II. Of the Nature and Ends of Ordination Sect 1. THat we may know how far the Ordination in question is necessary to the Ministry and whether the want of it prove a Nullity we must first enquire what goes to the laying of the Foundation of this Relation and how many things concur in the efficiency and among the rest what it is that the Ordainers have to do as their proper part and what are the reasons of their Power and Work Sect. 2. As all that deserve the name of men are agreed that there is no Power in the world but from God the Absolute Soveraign and first Cause of Power so all that deserve the name of Christians are agreed that there is no Church Power but what is from Christ the head and Soveraign King of the Church Sect. 3. As the will of God is the Cause of all things And no thing but the Signification of it is necessary to the conveying of meer Rights So in the making a man a Minister of the Gopel there needeth no other principal efficient cause then the Will of Jesus Christ nor any other Instrumental Efficient but what is of use to the signifying of his Will So that it is but in the nature of signs that they are Necessary No more therefore is of Absolute Necessity but what is so necessary to signifie his will If Christs will may be signified without Ordination a man may be a Minister without it Though in other respects he may be culpable in his entrance by crossing the will of Christ concerning his duty in the manner of his proceedings Sect. 4. There is considerable in the Ministry 1. Beneficium 2. Officium 1. The Gospel pardon salvation-Ordinances are those great Benefits to the sons of men which the Ministery is to be a means of conveying to them And is it self a Benefit as it is the means of these Benefits In this respect the Ministry is a Gift of Christ to the Church and his Donation is the necessary act for their
prevail with Papists Italians or French to give us such a proof 2. It is a thing impossible for any man now alive to prove the Regular Ordination of all his Predecessors to the Apostles daies yea or any Ordination at all How can you tell that he that ordained you did not counterfeit himself to be Ordained Or at least that he was not ordained by an unordained man or that his Predecessors were not so It is a meer impossibility for us to know any such thing we have no Evidence to prove it Sect. 8. Object But it is probable though not certain for the Church proceedeth by such Rules and taketh the matter to be of so great weight that there is no probability that they would suffer any to go for Pastors or Bishops that are unordained in so great a case Answ. 1. All this is no certainty and therefore no proof and no satisfaction to the mind of a Minister in the forementioned doubts 2. Yea we have so great reason to be suspicious in the case that we cannot conclude that we have so much as a probabâ—ly Sect. 9. For 1. We know that there is so much selfishness and corruption in man as is like enough to draw them to deceit Ordainers may be bribed to consecrate or ordain the uncapable and the Ordained or Consecrated may be tempted to seek it in their incapacity and many may be drawn to pretend that they were Ordained or Consecrated when it was no such matter And so there is not so much a a Probability Sect. 10. 2. And we know that there were so many heresies abroad and still have been and so much faction and Schism in the Church that we cannot be sure that these might not interrupt the succession or that they drew not our predecessors to counterfeit a Consecration or Ordination when they had none or none that was regular Sect. 11. 3. And we know our selves that the thing hath been too usual When I was young I lived in a village that had but about twenty houses And among these there were five that went out into the Ministry One was an Old Reader whose Original we could not reach Another was his son whose selfâ—Ordination was much suspected The other three had Letters of Orders two of them suspected to be drawn up and forged by him and one that was suspected to Ordain himself One of them or two at last were proved to have counterfeit Orders when they had continued many years in the Ministry So that this is no rare thing Sect. 12. Among so many temptations that in so many ages since the Apostles dayes have befallen so many men as our predecessors in the Ministry or the Bishops predecessors have been it were a wonder if all of them should scape the snare So that we have reason to take it for a thing improbable that the succession hath not been interrupted Sect. 13. And we know that in several ages of the Church the Prelates and Priests have been so vile that in reason we could expect no better from men so vicious then forgery and abuse he that reads what Gildas and others say of the Brittish and what even Baronius much more Espencaeus Cornelius Mus. and others say of the Romanists yea he that knows but what state the Bishops and Priests have been in and yet continue in in our own dayes will never think it an improbable thing that some of our predecessors should be guilty either of Simony or other vice that made them uncapable or should be meer usurpers under the name of Bishops and Ministers of Christ. Sect. 14. Argument 2. If uninterrupted Regular Ordination of all our Predecessors be Necessary to the Being of the Ministry then can no Bishop or Pastors whatsoever comfortably Ordain For who dare lay his hand on the head of another and pretend to deliver him authority in the name of Christ that hath no assurance nor probability neither that he hath any Commission from Christ to do it But the Consequent will be disowned by those that dispute against us therefore so should the Antecedent be also Sect. 15. Argument 3. If there be a Necessity of an uninterrupted succession of true Regular Ordination then no man can know of the Church that he is a member of or of any other Church on earth that it is a true Church By a Church I mean not a Community but a Society not a company of private Christians living together as Christians neighbours but a Politick Church consisting of Pastor and people associated for the use of publick Ordinances and Communion therein But the consequent is false c. Sect. 16. The Major or consequence is certain For no man can know that the Church is a true Political Organized Church that knows not that the Pastor of it is a true Minister of Christ. Because the Pastor is an Essential constitutive part of the Church in this acceptation And I have proved already that the truth of the Ministry cannot be known upon the Opponents terms And for the Minor I think almost all Church members will grant it me For though they are ready enough to accuse others yet they all take their own Churches for true and will be offended with any that question or deny it Sect. 17. Argument 4. If there be a Necessity of an uninâ—errupted succession of true Ordination then cannot the Church or any Christian in it know whether they have any true Ministerial administrations whether in Sacraments or other Ordinances For he that cannot know that he hath a Minister cannot know that he hath the administration of a Minister But the consequent is untrue and against the comfort of all Christians and the honour of Christ and is indeed the very doctrine of the Infidels and Papists that call themselves Seekers among us Sect. 18. Argument 5. If the Churches and each member of them are bound to submit to the Ministry of their Pastors without knowing that they are regularly ordained or that they have an uninterrupted succession of such Ordination then are they quo ad Ecclesiam true Pastors to them and their administrations valid though without Ordination or such a succession But the Antecedent is true and granted by all that now we have to deal with Though they will not grant a known unordained man is to be taken for a Minister or one whose succession had a known intercision Yet they will grant that if the Nullity be unknown it freeth not the people from the obligation to their Pastors Sect. 19. Bellarmine lib 3. de Eccles. c. 10. was so stalled with these difficulties that he leaves it as a thing that we cannot bâ— resolved of that our Pastors have indeed Potestatem Ordinis Iurisdictionis that is that they are true Pastors And he saith that Non habemus certitudinem nisi Moralem quod illi sint vere Episcopi But when he should prove it to us that there is a Moral Certainty he leaves us to seek and gives us
for Holland he questioned if there was a Church among them or not or words fully to that Purpose Against which abuse of the Dr. the Bishop was fain to vindicate himself See page 124 125. Of his Posthumous Judgement Sect. 15. Moreover 5. We know not of almost any Bishops in England by whom men may be Ordained Four or five Reverend Learned men of that degree are commonly said to survive among us whom we much honour and value for their worth But as these are so distant and their residence to the most unknown so the rest if there be any are known to very few at all that I can hear of It s famed that many Bishops there are but we know it not to be true nor know not who they be and therefore it cannot well be expected that their Ordination should be sought If they reveal not themselves and their Authority and do not so much as once command or claim obedience from the generality of Ministers how can they expect to be obeyed If they plead the danger of persecution I answer 1. What Persecution do they suffer that are known above others of their way 2. If that will excuse them when we never heard of any that suffered the loss of a penny for being known to be a Bishop since the Wars were ended then it seems they take the Being of the Ministry and Churches to be but of small moment that are not worthy their hazzard in a manifestation of their power And if this excuse them from appearing it must needs in reason excuse others from knowing them obeying them and submitting to them Sect. 16. And when they shall declare themselves to be our Bishops they must in all reason expect that the proof of it as well as the naked affirmation be desired by us For we must not take every man for a Bishop that saith he is so They must shew us according to the Canons that the Clergy of the Diocess lawfully Elected them and Bishops Consecrated them which are transactions that we are strangers to If they take the secret Election of six or seven or very few in a Diocess to be currant because the rest are supposed to be uncapable by Schism 1. Then they shew themselves so exceedingly unjust as to be unmeet for Government if they will upon their secret presumptions and unproved suppositions cut off or censure so many parts of the Clergy without ever accusing them or calling them to speak for themselves or heâ—ring their Defence 2. And if upon such presumptuous Censures you make your selves Bishops besides the Canons you cannot expect obedience from those that you thus separate from and censure unheard Sect. 17. It s known that the English Bishops as Grotius himself affirmeth were chosen by the King according to the custom here the Chapter being shadows in the business And if the King may make Bishops he may make Presbyters and then Ordination is unnecessary But if you say that the Consecrators make them Bishops and not the Kings Election then Rome had many Bishops at once when ever three or four Popes were consecrated at once which marrs all succession thence dirived and then if some Bishops consecrate one and some another both are true Bishops of one Diocess and many Pastors may be thus Ordained to one Church Sect. 18. And it concerneth us before we become their subjects to have some credible Evidence that they are so Orthodox as to be capable of the place And the rather because that some that are suspected to be Bishops how truly I know not have given cause of some suspicion Either by writing against Original sin or by owning Grotius's Religion which what it was I have shewed elsewhere or by unchurching the Protestant Churches and Nullifying their Ministry that have not their kind of Ordination while they take the Roman Ordination to be Valid and their Church and Ministry to be true with other such like Sect. 19. And 6. If we should now when better may be had subject our selves to the Ordination and Government of the abolished Prelacy we should choose a more corrupt way of administration and prefer it to a more warrantable way That this way is corrupt is proved in the former Disputation That a way more warrantable may be had I shall prove anon Though submission to a faulty way in some cases of Necessity is excusable yet when we have our choice the case is altered Sect. 20. And a tender Conscience hath very great reason to fear lest by such voluntrary subjection they should incur moreover this double guilt 1. Of all the hurt that this corrupt sort of Episcopacy did before the abolition 2. And of all the hurt that it might do again if it were introduced which is neither small nor uncertain He that hath seen the fruits that it brought forth but for a few years before the abolition and weighs the arguments brought against it methinks should fear to be the restorer of it Sect. 21. If any man as Mr. Thorndike and others do shall write for a more regular sort of Episcopacy it s one thing to find a tolerable Bishop in his Book and another thing to find him existent in England For we know not of any New sort of Regulated Episcopacy planted and therefore must suppose that it is the Old sort that is in being Let them bring their Moderate forms into existence and then its like that many may be more inclined to submit to their Ordination but their moderate principles having not yet made us any Moderate Episcopacy I see not how we should be ever the more obliged for them to submit to the Old but rather are the more justified in disowning it when their own reformed modell is against it CHAP. VII The Ordination used now in England and in other Protestant Churches is Valid and agreeable to Scripture and the Practice of the Ancient Church Sect. 1. HAving already proved that the late English Bishops Ordination is not of necessity it is satisfactory without any more ado to them that would nullifie our Ministry and Churches that have not their Ordination But because we may meet with other adversaries and because in a case of so much weight we should walk in the clearest light that we can attain for the satisfaction of our own Consciences I shall further prove the Validity of our Ordination and the truth of our Call and Minstry and Churches Sect. 2. Argument 1. The Ordination is Valid which is performed by such Bishops as were instituted and existent in Scriture times But our Ordination used in England and other refoâ—med Churches is performed by such Bishops as were institutâ—d and existent in Scâ—â—pture times the refore such Ordination is Valid Thâ— Major will not be denyed being â—â—derstood with a supposition of other requisites that are not now in controversie For those that we have to deal with do grant that such Bishops as are mentioned Acts 20. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. Phil. 1.1 and
is commanded or commended by the Magistrate to the care of many Churches above his brethren yet some men are as diligent and faithfull in doing good to all within their reach as if they had been chosen and nominated to the work Many able painfull Ministers of Christ that thirst for mens salvation do go up and down among the ignorant or weak and preach in season and out of season notwithstanding the burden of their particular flocks which they faithfully bear § 33. And the parts and graces of these men do win them audience and respect where they come without any Humane Authority to awe men In almost all parts of our Countrey we have either settled or movable Lectures and when do we see a thin Congregation before a lively rowsing Minister or any man of great ability in the work No but we see the Temples crowded and find that the people reverence and hearken to such men as these in whom the Spirit of God appears § 34. Yea and the Ministers themselves will consult with the Wise and Love the good and learn of those that are ablest to teach them and imitate the ablest preachers as neer as they can So that I may truly say that there is a certain kind of Natural or rather spiritual Episcopacy everywhere exercised in the Church A great light that burneth and shineth above others will draw the eyes of many to it and if it be set on a hill it will hardly be hid Calvin was no Prelate and yet his Gifts procured him that Interest by which he prevailed more then Prelates for the conformity of the minds of many to his own There is scarce a Country but hath some able judicious Minister who hath the Interest of a Bishop with the rest though he have no higher an office then themselves Gods Graces deserve and will procure respect Even in Civil Councils Courts Committees we see that some one of leading parts is the Head of the rest though their authority be equal § 35. And indeed the conveniences and inconveniences are such on both sides that it is not an easie matter to determine Whether appointed Visitors or Superintendents be more desirable then these Arbitrary Visitors that have the Natural Episcopacy of Interest procured by their meer abilities On the one side if Magistrates appoint such Visitors the people yea and many Ministers will the more easily submit and hear and obey and more unanimously concur then if we offer our assistance without any such appointment That 's the convenience But then here 's the inconvenience The Magistrate may choose an unworthy man and then he may be feared but not honoured nor loved but greater lights will be greater still let the Magistrate set the lesser on never so high a Candlestick And then the Ministers and people will measure their esteem of the man according to his worth and that will irritate his displeasure For when he is lifted up he either looks to be valued by his Height and not his Light or Worth or else that his Light should be judged of by his Height And as this will turn to heart-burnings and divisions so the esteem that is procured by humane Constitution will be more humane and ordinarily less Divine then the calling and work of a Divine requireth On the other side if none be appointed by the Magistrate but every man go forth in the strength of his zeal and Abilities we are like to be cast on many disadvantages with carnal temporizing men and to have less unity among our selves But then that unity and peace and respect and success that we have will be more voluntary and pure § 36. The best way then if we could hit it seems to be the joining of both these together To have such Magistrates as will appoint only the most judicious able faithfull Ministers to be Visitors of the Churches that shall go forth both in the strength of the Spirit of Christ with eminency of gifts and also in the strength of the Magistrates Commission But if this cannot be attained I shall not long for constituted Visitors or Superintendents but shall be content with the Holy Ghosts appointment § 37. It is therefore the most Christian course to lay no greater stress on these modes and forms of Ministration then they will bear and therefore to live obediently and peaceably under either of them obeying such Visitors as are appointed by the Magistrate and honouring the graces of the Spirit where there is no such appointment and not to think the Church undone when our conceits about such things are crost CHAP. III. It is Lawfull for the several Associations of Pastors to choose one man to be their President durante vita if he continue fit § 1. I Come next to speak of a third sort of Ministry which hath a greater resemblance to the ancient Episcopacy then any of the rest Yea indeed is the same that was exercised about the second or third Century after Christ. And that is the fixed Presidents of the Presbyters of many Churches associated In the first settlement of Churches there was either a single Pastor to a single Church or many Pastors in equality at least of Office And whether from the beginning or afterward only one of them became the stated President is very uncertain of which anon But when the Churches encreased in magnitude and many Congregations were gathered under one Presbyterie then that Presbyterie also had a stated President as the Congregational Presbyteries perhaps had before And thus he was an Archbishop under the name of a Bishop that awhile before was either unknown or else must needs be esâ—eemed an Archbishop § 2. That these men should take the Pastoral charge of many Churches or that they should suspend the Governing Power of the Presbyters upon pretence of a Presidency or superiority is I think a matter not warrantable by the word of God § 3. But that such Associations of the Pastors of many Churches should ordinarily be for the sake of Union and Communion as also that it is lawfull for these Associatied Ministers to choose one among them to be their President is granted by all § 4. But all the question is Whether these Presidents should be only pro tempore or durante vita supposing that they forfeit not the trust I shall not say much of the point of convenience but I affirm that of it self it is lawful to choose a President that shall be fixed durante vita si tam diu bene se gesserit Yea it is lawfull now in England as things stand § 5. And 1. It may suffice for the proof of this that it is nowhere forbidden in Nature or in Scripture directly or by consequence and therefore it is lawfull Where there is no law there is no transgression They that say that it is a thing forbidden must prove it from some word of God which I think they cannot do § 6. 2. If it be lawfull to choose a fixed President
word 2. Or 〈◊〉 the Churches are all called One that are under one Christian Magistrate I will confess the thing to be true that is pretended to be the reason of the name All the Churches do owe obedience to the Magistrate But he is no Essential part or Ecclesiastical Head of the Church and therefore it is very improperly denominated from him or called One on that account No more then all the Schools are one because he is their Soveraign It is the Common-wealth that is specified and individuated by the Magistrate as the Soveraign Power and not the Churches But yet it is but an improper word to call all the Churches one Church on that account which we contend not about § 7. But it is the Thing that we stick more at then the name A General Head doth properly specifie and individuate the Body Prove either 1. That the Archbishop of Canterbury or any other 2. Or an Assembly of Bishops or Presbyters is properly an Ecclesiastical Head having Authority from Jesus Christ to be the chief Ruler of all the Churches in the Land and then I will confess that we have properly and strictly a National Church But no such thing can be proved § 8 As for an Assembly I have already shewed which Bishop Vsher asserted to me that they are not superior Governors nor instituted graâ—ia Regiminis but gratia unitatis having no more Rule over particular Bishops then a Convention of Schoolmasters over a particular Schoolmaster If they say that Kings and Parliaments give Power to Convocations I answer that can be but such as they have themselves which we shall speak of anon and is nothing to this place § 9. And as for a Primate or Archbishop of Canterbury e. g. 1. It will be a hard task to prove Archbishops as such to be of Divine Institution 2. And it will be harder even Impossible to prove Archbishops of the English species as such to be of Divine institution 3. And certainly Christ hath nowhere told us that every Nation shall have such a Head nor every Province nor every County nor told us whether there shall be one over ten Nations or ten over one Their limits are not to be found in Scripture supposing there were such an office there known 4. Nor is it anywhere determined that such a City shall have the preheminence and Canterbury v. g. be Ruler of all the rest All these are of meer humane institution And therefore that which the imposers of Ceremonies call the Church of England is a meer humane thing which therefore can bind us no further then the Magistrate can authorize them to do § 10. But the stronger pretence will be that the particular Bishops of England were severally officers of Christ authorized to Govern their several flocks and therefore a Convâ—cation of these Bishops binds us in conscience gratia unitatis The People they oblige as their Rulers and the several Presbyters also as their Rulers and the several Bishops gratia unitatis for avoiding of schism § 11. Answ. This also is an insufficient evidence to prove our Consciences obliged to their Ceremonies eo nomine because of their Canons or commands For though we acknowledge a sort of Episcopacy to be warrantable yet that this sort that made the Canons in question is not warrantable I have proved at large in the former Disputation on that question Such Pastors of a Diocess as our Bishops were have no word of God to shew for their office further then as they are Presbyters but we have shewed already that their office is unlawfull And therefore though their actions as Presbyters may be valid yet their actions are Null which were done by pretence of this unlawfull sort of office they being no other way enabled thereto On this ground therefore we are not bound § 12. If it could be pretended that at least as Presbyters the Convocation represented the Presbyters of England and therefore thus their Canons binds us to the use of ceremonies Common prayer c. I should answer that 1. Even Synods of Presbyters or the Lawfullest sort of Bishops oblige but gratia unitatis 2. That the late Synod at Westminster was as truly a Representative of the Presbyters of England as the Convcaotion where such consent if any were given was retracted 3. By actuall dislike signified by disuse the Presbyters of England for the most part have retracted their Consent 4. Yea most that are now Ministers never gave such Consent 5. Even â—ll particular Pastors and Churches are free and may on just reason deny consent to such impositions § 13. There remains nothing then that with any shew of strength can be pretended as continuing our obligation to Ceremonies from Authority but that of the Civil Power that commanded them But to that I say 1. So much as was lawfull we confess that we were bound to use while we had the command of the Civil power But nothing unlawfull could be made our duty by them 2. the Civil Power hath repealed those laws that bound us to these ceremonies The Parliament repealed them the late King consented at least for the ease of tender Consciences as he spoke that men should have liberty to forbear them And the present Rulers are against them whom we see even the ceremoniouâ— obey in other matters § 14. Let those then that would subjugate our Consciences to their ceremonies make good their foundation even the Authority by which they suppose us to be obliged or they do nothing If all their impositions were proved things indifferent and lawfull that 's nothing to prove that we must use them till they prove that lawfull authority commandeth them The Civil Powers do not command them And the Ecclesiasticks that command them prove not their authority over us In the matters of God we will yield to any man that bids us do that which God hath bidden us do already But if they will exercise their power by commanding us more then God commands us and that unnecessarily we must crave a sight of their commission § 15. And if men that have no Authority over us shall pretend Authority from God and go about to exercise it by Ceremonious impositions we have the more reason to scruple obeying them even in things indifferent lest we be guilty of establishing their usurpation and pretended office in the Church and so draw on more evils then we foresee or can remove CHAP. XI Prop. 11. The Commands of Lawfull Governors about Lawfull Ceremonies must be understood and obeyed with such exceptions as do secure the End and not to the subverting of it § 1. THE proof of this is obvious These humane Ceremonies are appointed but as means to a further end But that which would cross and overthrow the end doth cease to be a Means and cannot be used sub ratione medii § 2. Order and Decency are the pretended ends of the Imposed Ceremonies and the right worshiping of God and the good of mens