of the Son and of the Holy Ghost And for a Bishop Take the Holy Ghost and remember that thou stir up the Grace of God which is in thee by imposition of hands For God hath not given thee the Spirit of Fear but of Power and Love and Soberness And they so continued till the review of our Liturgy Anno 1662. and then to obviate the above-mentioned cavil of the Presbyterians those explanatory words were inserted whereby the distinction between a Bishop and a Priest is more clearly and unexceptionably expressed So that now the words of Ordination for a Priest are Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Priest in the Church of God now committed to thee by imposition of our hands Whose sins thou dost forgive c. And for a Bishop Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a Bishop now committed to thee by the imposition of our hands in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost and remember that thou c. But 4. Having thus stated the Case and laid before you the differences between the new Ordinal and the Old Now to come to the main of the objection I assert that had the old Ordinal been continued without any such Addition although it might not so clearly have obviated the cavils of Adversaries yet the Orders conferred by it would have been altogether as valid And as to the Objection made by the Gentlemen of the Church of Rome that the words of our old Ordinal do not sufficiently express the Office conferred thereby this must be understood either in reference to the Priestly Ordination or the Episcopal or both And 1. As to the Priestly Ordination there seems not to be the least ground for it because the Form in the old Ordinal doth as fully expresse the Office Power and Authority of a Priest as need be required in these words Whose sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose sins thou dost retain they are retained And be thou a faithful dispenser of the Word of God and of his Sacraments Wherein the whole of the Priestly Office is expressed But 2. As to the Episcopal Ordination the whole pinch of the Argument seems to lye there because in the old Form of the words spoken at the imposition of hands the Office and Authority of a Bishop they say is not so particularly specifyed To this I answer first That I think this sufficiently done in the words of the Form Remember that thou stir up the Grace of God which is in thee by imposition of hands for God hath not given us the Spirit of Fear but of Power and Love and Soberness For they are the very words of St. Paul to Timothy Bishop of Ephesus Epist 2. c. 1. ver 6 7. Whereby he exhorts and stirs him up to the Execution of his Episcopal office and they have alvvays been understood to refer thereto and therefore I think they may be also allovved sufficient to express the same Episcopal office when spoken to any other and fully determine to what Office the Holy Ghost is given by imposition of hands in the Form mentioned and properer for this purpose than any other because of the greater Authority which they must have in that they are taken out of the Holy Scripture But if men vvill cavil on and still object that the Name of Bishop is not expressed in the Form or the duties and povver of that Office vvith sufficient clearness specified in the vvords mentioned the objection lies much more against the Roman Ordinal than ours as being much more defective herein For the vvhole Form used therein at the Consecration of a Bishop is no more than this Receive the Holy Ghost that being all that is said at the imposition of hands and asserted by them to be the vvhole Form of Episcopal Ordination And therefore Vasques a Learned Jesuit and most Eminent School-man makes the same objection against the Roman Ordinal that the Romanists do against ours For in Tertiam Thomae Disp 240. c. 5. N. 57. His words are Illa verba accipe Spiritum Sanctum quae a tribus Episcopis simul cum impositione manuum dicuntur super Ordinandum usque adeo generalia videntur ut proprium munus aut gradum Episcopi non exprimant quod tamen necessarium videbatur pro formâ i. e. These words Receive the Holy Ghost which are spoken by three Bishops together with imposition of hands over the person to be Ordained seem to be so general that they do not express the proper office and degree of a Bishop which yet did seem necessary for the Form of his Ordination But to this he himself gives a solution N. 60. of the same chapter in these following words Neque obstat id quod supra dicebamus verba illa accipe Spiritum Sanctum admodum generalia esse nam quamvis in illis secundum se consideratis non denotetur munus aut gradus peculiaris Episcopi pro quocunque alio ordine dici possent tamen prout proferuntur adhibitâ a tribus Episcopis in unum Congregatis manuum impositione pro materia recte quidem denotant gradum Episcopi ad quem electus ordinatur Sic enim simul imponentes per verba illa denotant se eum in suum consortium admittere ad hoc Spiritum sanctum tribuere ac proinde in eodem ordine Episcopali secum ipsum constituere Cum tamen manuum impositio ab uno tantum Episcopo adhibita eadem verba accipe Spiritum Sanctum paucis aliis additis ab eodem in ordinatione Diaconi prolata neque secundum se neque prout ab ipso Episcopo dicta huic materiae applicata peculiare munus aut gradum Diaconi denotent neque enim prout dicta a uno Episcopo cum tali materia denotare possunt ordinatum admitti ad consortium Episcopi in hoc potius ordine quam in alio cum unus Episcopus tam sit minister ordinis Sacerdotii Subdiaconatus quam Diaconatus e contrario vero tres Episcopi solius ordinis Episcopalis ministri sint ideo autem existimo Christum voluisse ut Ecclesia illius tantum verbis quae secundum se Generalia sunt in hac ordinatione uteretur ut denotaret abundantiam gratiae Spiritus Sancti quae Episcopis in Ordinatione confertur Plus enim videtur esse dari Spiritum Sanctum absolutè quam dari ad hunc vel illum effectum peculiarem i. e. Neither doth that hinder which I have said before that these words Receive the Holy Ghost were too general For although by these words considered in themselves the Office or peculiar degree of a Bishop cannot be denoted and they may be also said for any other Order but as they are pronounced the imposition of hands of three Bishops joyned together being also had therewith for the matter of Ordination they do truly denote the degree of a Bishop to
of Sacriledge to be reiterated on any or else that the last saying of those words as well as the first did both equally concur to the conferring of that Office upon them and consequently that they were not made perfect Priests till the Ordination was compleated by the last saying of them after the Cup was Administred which clearly overthrows their whole Hypothesis 2. Our Saviour was so far from making his Apostles Priests of the New Covenant at his last Supper that nothing can be a greater mistake than to suppose that he should at all Ordain any such before he had actually by his Death and Passion purchased and Establish'd that Church wherein they were to Minister Our Saviour indeed at his first choosing of them to be always with him designed them for this Office and all along the time of his Ministry here on Earth taught them and instructed them in order thereunto And so also an Heir expectant of a Crown may design some of his Followers to be his Officers and Ministers of State in his Kingdom but cannot actually constitute them as such till he himself be actually possest of the Soveraign power to enable him thereto Neither can our Saviour be said actually to have invested his Apostles with the Offices he designed them for till he had actually possest himself of that Kingdom his Church in which they were to Minister before him and thereby receiv'd that power which he was to delegate to them which cannot be said till after his Death and Passion For till then the Christian Church it self could not have any Being that being the act of Redemption whereby our Saviour first purchased it to himself and laid the foundation of its Establishment and all the whole oeconomy thereof bears reference thereto and totally commenceth from it Till then the former oeconomy of the Jewish Church remained in its full force For the Sacrifices and Ceremonies of it in which it did consist being all Types of that great and truly propitiatory Sacrifice of our Saviour whereby the work of our Redemption was wrought and appointed to prefigure and foreshow it till that Sacrifice it self should be actually offer'd once for all Till that was done it was necessarily to continue in its full Obligation to all those Observances And therefore our Saviour himself even to the time of his Death paid full Obedience to them But when that Sacrifice was actually offer'd and our Saviour gave himself up unto death upon the Cross to be a propitiation for us and thereby compleated that great work of our salvation for which he came among us then all the Types ceased at the fulfilling of the thing Typified all those shadows of good things to come totally vanished at the appearance of the things themselves which they foreshowed and the whole Law became fulfilled thereby and all the intents and meanings thereof totally accomplished And therefore by this great work of our Salvation the whole Jewish oeconomy receiving its completion and all the Legal Institutions thereof absolutely ceasing by being fulfill'd Matth. 5. v. 17. thenceforth the Christian succeeded in its stead that Church that Kingdom of our Saviour which by this his bloud-shedding he purchased to himself and therefore from that time being fully invested with the whole Soveraignty over the Church of God he tells his Holy Apostles that All power was given unto him in Heaven and in Earth In the Explication of which words Maldonat the Jesuit tells us Loquitur hic non de qualibet potestate sed de eà quam Apostolis dabat i. e. de potestate Regni sui spiritualis acquirendi colligendique quam ad rem Apostolos mittebat ita loquitur quasi eam potestatem ante resurrectionem non habuerit nam tanquam de re nova dicit data est mihi omnis potestas i. e. He speaketh not of every power but only of that which he gave his Apostles that is the power of acquiring and gathering his spiritual Kingdom for which purpose he sent his Apostles and he speaks so as if he had not that power before his Resurrection for he saith as of a thing newly done all power is given unto me c. and a little after De eâ denique loquitur potestate de quâ apud Johannem dicit Confidite ego vici mundum hanc sibi potestatem per mortem resurrectionem suam datam esse dicit quia eam meruit propter quod inquit exaltavit eum dedit illi nomen quod esset super omne nomen ut in nomine Jesu omne genu flectatur Coelestium Terrestrium infernorum hoc est data est mihi omnis potestas in Caelo in Terrâ quâ potestate ad propagandos Regni sui fines Apostolos mittit ut rectissime mihi videtur Vigilius interpretari i. e. And finally he speaks of that power concerning which he saith in the Gospel of St. John Be of good cheer I have overcome the world this power he saith was given him by his Death and Resurrection because he deserved it Wherefore he saith God hath highly exalted him and given him a name which is above every name that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow of things in Heaven things on Earth and things under the Earth that is there is given me all power in Heaven and in Earth by which power he sent his Apostles to propagate his Kingdom as Vigilius seems to me most rightly to Interpret So far the Learned Jesuit and if you will acquiesce in his Interpretation it plainly follows from hence that Christ did not receive the power of his spiritual Kingdom till after his Resurrection and that by vertue of that power it was that he sent his Apostles on their Mission as his Ministers to propagate this his Kingdom and therefore that they could not receive this Mission or be Ordain'd thereto till after his Resurrection And if we examine all the Gospels to find by what words of his he gave them this Mission after his Resurrection and invested them with the power and Authority of it it must be acknowledged that they could be none other but those of St. John Whose soever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whose soever sins ye retain they are retained for every thing else which was then done or said at the speaking of them manifestly infers it Our Saviour first sayes unto them As my Father hath sent me even so send I you which plainly declares his then giving them their Mission after that he breathed on them for his putting of his Spirit upon them and said Receive the Holy Ghost that is for the spiritual Office on which they were sent for as to those extraordinary Gifts which so wonderfully enabled them for the Execution of it he was not given till afterwards in the day of Pentecost and what can be more plain and clear than all this is that our Saviour was then giving his Commission to
is of the Church of England and was an Auditor at the said Conference but neither side advised with in the drawing up this Account The Question was About the validity of the Church of Englands Orders THe two former Gentlemen took upon them to prove them to be good and laid down this Rule That for making of Orders valid there were necessarily required these four things Authority Form Matter and Capacity The other Gentlemen did agree all of them to be necessary but because they would shorten the dispute would except against only that of our Form for that it was altered from the ancient and although they confessed their own had been altered yet never was in the essentials Then Mr. Earbury laid down this Proposition or Argument that if our Saviours Form were good by which he made Priests then was ours good but our Saviours was good therefore ours was Mr. Acton distinguisht upon his Major and said that though with us nothing could be a true Form that did not express the power given yet with our Saviour it was sufficient though it did not who being God could do that which none other could and therefore with him any thing which he should please to make use of that did not express the power given was a good and sufficient Form though the same would not be so with us The distinction was allowed and so Mr. Earbury proceeded to prove that our Form did express the power and accordingly produced his Common-Prayer-Book to show how it was therein expressed in the Form. Mr. Acton did allow it so to be in that Book but alledged that in all our Prayer-Books from Edward the 6th until 1662. the word Priest was not expressed in the Form of those This Mr. Earbury granted and said that though it did not yet it was sufficient because it was intended and then used several other Arguments to prove that it was intended Mr. Acton then would know of him whether he would maintain that the intention was sufficient who did assert it was but Mr. Kipping would not agree to it Then upon Mr. Actons asking Mr. Earbury that though it were expressed in the Prayers and not in the Form if all were cut off but the Form and Matter whether that were sufficient to make a good Priest upon which Mr. Earbury would not then abide by his assertion that the intention is sufficient The two former Gentlemen proceeded then to another Argument to prove our Orders good because they were allowed to be good by the Romish Church by Cardinal Pool who allowed of the Orders given in Edward the 6th days in the time of Queen Mary Mr. Acton replyed that now they come to offer another medium which was not to be allowed of unless they would agree first that they had no more to say as to the Form or were content to give that over But they said it was nothing but what was still depending upon the former Mr. Acton said That though it was against the Rules of the Schools yet he should go on and proceed to give his answer unto their new medium and so denyed that they were ever owned to be good by Cardinal Pool upon which the other Gentlemen told him they had not the Books present to prove it but should do it in writing to him the next day with citations of the Authors that they would send to his Lodgings Mr. Acton said he was sure they never could do it and though it belonged not to him to prove the contrary yet he produced to them a Protestant Book setting forth the manner of the burning of Bishop Ridley I think it was that Bishop who being made Priest by the Popish Form they first degraded him of his Priesthood but not of his Episcopal Orders telling him they would not degrade him of these for that they never lookt upon him for a Bishop who was such by the Form of Edward the 6th which did clearly prove they never allowed of the Orders to be good in Edward the 6th days The two former Gentlemen said they could stay no longer and so took their leaves If any other can say more then hath been in defence of our Orders the Author hereof will be very thankful to receive it from them in Writing which may come to him by the same hand by which he sends this and desires this may be sent him back again The Messenger that brought me the letter telling me that he had it from Mr. Anthony Norris though his name was not to it I supposed it to be his and therefore sending to Mr Earbury concerning it he brought me that account of the Conference which begins this Book and that with this follovving ansvver from my self vvas sent him the next day after LAst Night a nameless Paper vvas brought me containing a relation of a certain discourse that hapned betvveen one Mr. Acton a Gentleman of the Romish Communion and tvvo Divines of our Church concerning the validity of our Orders and as far as I find by that paper the grand objection brought against them was from the alteration made in our Ordinal Anno 1662. as if that were a tacit consent on our side that before this alteration was made our Ordinal was not sufficient and therefore no Orders could be conferred thereby and consequently that neither they which were ordained by it or we that have derived our Orders from them have received any legal and sufficient Ordination thereby To which I answer 1. That the putting in of Explanatory words to make things clearer and render them more free from cavil and objection cannot be well termed an alteration 2. That supposing really there had been any such alteration made as to the whole substance of the Form yet this is no more then what the Church of Rome hath often done there being scarce an age in which she hath not considerably varyed from her self herein as may be seen by comparing those many different Forms of Ordination used in the Church of Rome which are collected together by Morinus a Learned Priest of that Church in his book de Ordinationibus 3. The alterations or rather explanatory Additions made in our Ordinal in the Year 1662. were not inserted out of any respect to the controversie we have with the Church of Rome but only to silence a cavil of the Presbyterians who from the old Ordinal drew an Argument to prove that there was no difference between a Bishop and a Priest because as they say their Offices were not at all distinguished in the words whereby they were conferred on them when ordained or any new power given a Bishop which he had not afore as a Priest For the words of Ordination in King Edward's Ordinal are for a Priest as followeth Receive the Holy Ghost whose sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose sins thou dost retain they are retained and be thou a faithful dispencer of the Word of God and of his Sacraments in the Name of the Father and