already answered We add 9thly The Popish Priests wait not the Churches call to the Ministry but make suit to some Prelate to be ordained Priest and giving money for their Letters of Ordination so the Priests of England Mr. T. replies To offer a person's self for ordination is in some case a duty 1 Tim. 3. 1. Isa 6. 8. Answ 1. The Scriptures produced prove not his assertion Isa 6. 8. is sufficiently remote from any such thing there 's not the least mention of Ordination therein it s only a testimony of Isaiah's readiness to obey the voice of the Lord in going forth to bear a testimony for him against an untoward rebellious people 1 Tim. 3. 1. only tels us that he that desires the office of a Bishop desires a good work i. e. as say our Annotators is inwardly moved by the Spirit of the Lord thereunto which he may do and yet I hope wait the Churches call thereunto Besides 2ly Should this be granted it signifies little till he prove that it 's the duty of any with the neglect of the Churches call to this Office to seek ordination thereunto from an unscriptural Prelate which is that we charge upon them which Mr. T. knows they do He tells us 2dly Giving money for their Letters of Ordination is only Wages to the Register for writing Answ 1. Be it so that they give money for their Letters of Ordination is all that is asserted by us which Mr. T. grants they do 2. 'T is well if there be no Simony as it 's call'd found amongst them 3. If provision be made against the Registers exacting over-much by the Canons of the Church of England he informs us that the same provision is made by the Popish Trent-Council The Parallel in this particular holds good We say 10thly The Popish Priests are ordained to their Office though they have no Flock to attend upon So the Priests of England Mr. T. replies The Priests of England are not to be ordained without some title according to Can. 33. even the Trent-Council hath made some provision thereabout Answ 1. Mr. T. doth well to consociate the Canons of the Church of England and the Church of Rome in the Trent-Council together they are in not a few things near of kin 2. However I cannot but stand astonished at his confidence in telling us that the Priests of England are not to be ordained without some title according to Can. 33. when that Canon saith expresly That they may if a Fellow or in right as a Fellow or to be a Chaplain in some Colledge in Oxford or Cambridg if a Master of Arts of five years standing that liveth of his own charge in either of the Universities if to be shortly admitted either to some Benefice or Curatship then void or if the Bishop do after his admission into the said office keep and maintain him with all things necessary till he prefer him to some Ecclesiastical Living 3. But it may be the Animadverter by title means some one of those things mentioned To which I shall only say that if so he doth openly prevaricate pretends to answer to what he speaks not one word such Titles are supposed to be without a Flock to attend upon What he adds of Ministers being necessary for Armies c. is nothing to the purpose This proves not that they may be ordained Ministers without a Flock to attend upon which they may have and by them be sent forth for the works mentioned for a season We know it hath been the practice of the Churches so to do 2. Privâ—te Brethren may act for the supply of the services mentioned and frequently have done so nor indeed do I conceive how any can act therein in any other capacity Which is not incongruous to Acts 23. 2. as this Animadverter suggests which speaks not a tittle of their ordination to the Office of Ministry which they had before but only a solemn commending of them by Fasting and Prayer to the Blessing of the Lord by the Church in the Service they were now setting upon in which they testified their consent by the laying on their hands as say our Annotators To the 11th Parallel viz. That the Priests of England must swear Canonical Obedience to their Ordinary as the Priests of Rome Mr. T. only saith That 't is true at their institution into Benefices they do so but it is so bounded that it is not intolerable 't is nothing like that which is required of the Papists Answ 1. The Parallel herein betwixt the English and the Popish Priests is acknowledged which is all we affirm 2. That the Oath is tolerable that 't is nothing like the Oath of Canonical Obedience tendred to the Popish Priests is only affirmed by Mr. T. without proof that was the copy and pattern of this as he cannot be ignorant The 12th Parallel touching their leaving their Benefices for advantage-sake without consent of the People The 13th touching their special Licence to preach without which they must not from â—he Prelates though thereunto before ordained The 14th touching their subjection to be silenced by the Prelates betwixt the Ministers of England and Rome he grants to be true nor saith he any thing by way of reply that deserves the taking notice of To the 15th viz. the Popish Priests are not of like and equal power degree and authority amongst themselves but are some of them inferiour to others herein as Pastors to Archdeacons Archdeacons to Lord-Bishops Lord-Bishops to Arch-Bishops so the Priests of England Our Animadverter replies 1. Inequality is judged to be in the Elders of the Primitive Churches by the inscription of the seven Epistles to the Angels of the seven Churches of Asia Answ But this rather proves there equality to each is a several Epistle directed whereas had there been one Arch-Bishp or Superintendent over them one Epistle had been sufficient and had been no doubt directed to him He adds 2dly It hath been in some sort in all well-ordered Churches and is necessary to setled order Answ These are his dictates which he is not at leasure to prove The Church of Rome in the Apostles dayes of Corinth Ephesus were as I remember well-ordered Churches yet cannot be manifest any inequality amongst their Elders No Superintendent lord-Lord-Bishop or Arch-Bishop as I read of 2dly What thinks he of the Church of the Waldenses were they well-ordered Churches They were from the beginning without this Superiority of Elders one above the other The like may be said of most or all the Reformed-Churches The Churches of Helvetia reckoning up the degrees of Arch-Bishops Suffragans Metropolitans Deans Subdeans tell us plainly they are not sollicitous about them That the Apostles Doctrine touching Ministers is sufficient for them cap. Confes. Helvet poster c. 18. And afterward there is one and the same equal Power and Function in all the Ministers of the Church and though in process of time one was chosen from amongst the rest to preside in
which yet they do but rarely if at all is not the Succession pleaded for by our Prelates They care not for Preaching hinder oppose it many of them dreading it as the Engine in the hand of the Spirit that would shake their Kingdom and utterly overturn and demolish it so they may have their Lordships Pleasures and Pallaces 'T is not indeed Antichristian for me to confess the Apostles Creed because it is conveyed to our hands through the Papacy for however it cannot be so called because the Apostles were the Formers of it which they were not yet the matter thereof being except in one Article bottom'd upon the Scriptures I ought to confess it But this is remote from what he is pleading for viz. A personal succession of Bishops through the Papacy receiving their Power and Authority from the man of Sin which I say still whilst the Bishops pretend to they do therein proclaim their shame and yeeld the matter in controversie though their Advocate shamefully prevaricates that he may with a multitude of words cover their nakedness omitting the consideration of what was incumbent upon him especially to have removed out of the way viz. The Arguments produced to evince That the Apostles as Apostles had no successor in that their Office Which if it remain good the present Bishops most assuredly cannot be their Successorâ— as Apostles He adds 5thly That Bishops as a Superior order or degree above Presbyters were not dreamt of in the world for several hundreds of years after Christ he thinks can hardly be made good but he wisely reâ—reats with a Protestation that he will not enter the lists with respect to that point The truth is he knows it hath been proved and that with that strength of evidence that he cannot bear up against That Clemens his not takeing notice of them as distinct from Presbyters is ballanced by the passages in Ignatius his Epistles which I am perswaded he rejects as spurious and counterfeit I am sure it were easie to manifest them to be so it is already done by others is such a pitiful covert that a man would never fly to but in case of extreme necessity when he knows not what to say Lombards words import he grants that the order of Bishops above Presbyters was not known till after the Apostles dayes and if so they are no order of divine institution in which he once more perfectly yeelds the cause they are not of the institution of Christ in the Scripture Though he cannot prove that by the primitive Church Lombard means the Churches in the dayes of the Apostles his words seem to import somewhat more And Bellarmins himself acknowledgeth that the name of Elders was given in common to Bishops and Elders And Eusebius lib. 5. c. 24. calls Victor Anicetus Pius Telesphorus Xistus who was almost three hundred years after Christ Bishops of Rome Elders And the learned Whitaker ingenuously confesseth That betwixt an Elder and a Bishop there was of old no difference That such Bishops as are now in the Roman Church in the English Church we may as truly say were from the beginning is most false and can never be proved There were then more Bishops i. e. Pastors of one Church Act. 20. 17. contr 2. q. 5. c. 6. p. 284. But Mr. T. tells us 'T is enough for his purpose if the office be found in Scripture though not their Superiority Answ And is this your pleading for your Clients Seriously Sir you would discourage any person in the world from entertaining you as his Advocate when you are exposing your Client thus to ruin by your own pleadings at every turn The question is whether the office of Lord-Bishops which as such consists in there Superiority jurisdiction over the Priests and Ministers of England be of the institution of Christ Saith Mr. T. their Superiority is not Very good what needed so many words to no purpose 't is well however he will be so ingenuous as to confess at last that the juridicial office of Lord-Bishop is not of Christs institution The words of Dr. Hammond he grants to be as we recite them but thinks we misapply them But certainly if as the Dr. saith a Primary Metropolitical seat was constituted over Episcopal Seats and Churches viz. such as are Diocesan that their state and frame may be accommodated to the state and condition of the Government of the Nations in the Empire he that hath but half an eye will see that hence it follows that the Primacy and Supremacy of the Bishops over these Churches was the result of the designs of men to accommodate the state and frame of the Church to the state and condition of the Government of the Nations But the truth of this Assertion depends not upon the Doctors concession it s notoriously known and acknowledged by several others The distribution of Churches ordinarily followed the destribution of the Common-wealth so that when some Regions were subjected to the Civil jurisdiction in any City the same were ordinarily subjected also to the Ecclesiastical and as they were reckoned to be of the same Province in respect of the Civil so were they of the same Church or Diocess in respect of the Spiritual Government saith Rainoldes Confer with Hart. And the Council of Constantinople decreed That if any new City by the Authority of the Emperor was erected that the order of Ecclesiastical things should follow the Civil and Publick form Hence by the same Council Constantinople receives the Primacy because it was New Rome Can. 5. which before Old Rome enjoyed for that very reason But that you may understand how the Pope incroached on Bishops by degrees untill of an Equal he became a Soveraign first over a few next over many at last over all I must fetch the matter of Bishops Metropolitans and Arch-Bishops somewhat higher and shew how Christian Cities Provinces and Diocesses were alotted to them First therefore when Elders were ordained by the Apostles in every Church Act. 14. 23. through every City Tit. 1. 5. to feed the flock of Christ whereof the Holy Ghost had made them overseers Act. 20. 28. They to the intent they might the better do it by common councel and consent did use to assemble themselves and meet together In which meetings for the more orderly handling and concluding of things pertaining to their charge they chose one amongst them to be the President of their Company and Moderator of their actions And this is he whom afterward in the Primitive Church the â—athers called Bishop i. e. the President of the Presbyters who was thâ— Bishop of the chiefest City whom they called the Metropolitane For a Province as they termed it was the same with them that a Shire is with us And the Shire-town as you would say of the Province was called Metropolis i. e. the Mother-City In which as the Judges and Justices with us do hear at certain times the causes of the whole Shire So the Ruler of the
Witnesses of Christ the Waldenses state the Defection of the Church Catal. Test 1509. From which time at least whatever Offices or Rites were introduced being introduced by the Antichrist that was now gradually revealing himself are justly to be accounted Antichristian 3dly Would Mr. T. had told us what Officers they are that are only continued in the Church of Rome that are of divine appointment that we might have considered the truth of his suggestion Lord-Bishops we prove are not such He further tells us 2dly That it is not true that the office of Lord-Bishops is derived from and is only to be found in the Papacy 1. It is manifest in the first Nicene Council can 6. that then and before were Patriarchs Metropolitan Bishops and Lord-Bishops with their Office Answ 1. That they were before is not so easily proved Hither as to their source and spring are they usually referred The learned Hooper tells us A Bishop ought to be a Bishop only of one City it is to be lamented that the Episcopal Office is so greatly degenerated Iâ— was not so from the beginning when Paul commanded Titus to constitute Bishops through every City And certainly if the ancient love toward the people did flourish in us we should confess that there is more to be done in one City than can easily be performed by the best 'T is sufficiently known that the Primitive-Church had no such Bishops as were over more Cities or Congregations than one before the time of Sylvester the first In whose time was the first Nicene Council 2dly That because the first Nicene Council acknowledged Metropolitane and Lord-Bishops therefore they are not derived from the Papacy is not so easily demonstrated This Council was in oâ— about the year 315. Long before the Spirit by which the body Antichristian is animated visibly manifested it self not once nor twice aâ— is known What other spirit shewed it self in Victor who excommunicated the Eastern Bishops for not keeping Easter with him at the same time which brawl continued till the first Council of Nice which sides with Victor an Argument that they were acted by the same spirit 3dly What assurance will our Animadverter give us that this Canon as well as some others which confessedly are is not foisted into the Acts of that Council by persons of after-ages He is not ignorant that Protestants plead this against the Papists who for the establishment of the Tyranny of the Roman Primacy produce a fictitious Canon of the Nicene Council 4thly 'T is incumbent upon him to prove that such Metropolitane Bishops and lord-Lord-Bishops as are now in England were in and before the first Nicene Council which he knows to be false and untrue 1. The English Episcopacy is an order above the order of Presbyters then Episcopacy and Presbytery was accounted one and the same order 2. Ruledom and Jurisdiction is the peculiar flower of the Garland of our English Episcopacy of that it was not so As the Presâ—yters were to do nothing without the Bishop so neither was the Bishop to do any thing without the Presbyters He adds 2. That in the Greek Eastern Russian Churches the same Office is continued Answ 1. Nor do we affirm the contrary that we should do so is not necessary The Greek-Churches were at the first involved in the same Apostasie with the Roman at least with respect to the matter in debate betwixt us 2. We only say that 't is only found in the Papacy with respect to the Reformed-Churches none of them have continued it He therefore adds 3. That it is also pleaded that the Lutheran Churches Reformed that have separated from the Papacy in Germany Denmark Swethland have retained the same Office under the name of Superintendents Answ 'T is indeed thus pleaded by Downham c. who 't is like took up the story of Hadrianus Saravia a known Patron of the Popish Hierarchy who asserts it in a way of reproach to the Lutheran Reformation whether it be truly pleaded or otherwise Mr. T. tells us not though he cannot be ignorant of the contrary The Superintendency of the Lutheran Churches is exceeding different from the Office of our Bishops 1. Their Superintendent is only as a President or Chairman for the preservation of order in an Assembly 2. He is only so during the Session out of it he exerciseth no authority at all more than the rest of his Co-Presbyters as do the Bishops of England 3. He is subject to the Presbytery our Bishops Lords over them 4. He differs not in order and degree from the rest of the Ministeâ—â— as do the Bishops of England 5. He is but a Pastor of one particular Church our Bishops are of scores hundreds He proceeds after the same rate of confidence and verity 4. That it is false that the true Spouse and Witnesses of Christ have in all ages utterly rejected the Office of Lord-Bishops and that it hath its entertainment only by the false Antichristian Church Answ 1. 'T is much he doth not produce one instance of this Assertion and yet so confidently avers it which could he have done he would as well have proved it false as said it was so 2dly For the confirmation of the truth of what he saith is false we have produced several Testimonies his Answer thereunto such as it is we have already taken notice of it and manifested its lightness and vanity He adds This is manifest by the many Epistles written to the English Prelates by their reception at the Synod of Dort Answ 1. What the Epistles are he intends what the Reception mentioned is not of such import as to spend our time in enquiring thereabout 2dly That they have rejected the Office of Lord-Bishops is known they have published their dislike and detestation of it in their Confession to the world What respect any of them give them either in point of civility or as Messengers or persons sent from the King or perhaps not being truly informed what the Jurisdiction and Office is they exercise in their private Letters or otherwise is not considerable in the matter in hand The Office of lord-Lord-Bishops or a superiority of Order above Presbyters or Elders they absolutely condemn as we have proved We add in S. T. One Stone of Offence must be removed out of our way It is said that though Lord-Bishops are Antichristian yet it doth not follow that the Office and Ministry derived from them is so for they are also Presbyters and ordained as Presbyters To which Mr. T. subjoyns 1. There is nothing replied to the allegation that Bishops ordain with Presbyters Answ 1. Nor is there any such allegation in the objection proposed 2ly If there were it s not so considerable as to deserve to be taken notice of They are only assistants to the Bishop 't is he not they that sets them apart admits them into Sacred Orders as they heathenishly call them He adds 2dly Nor to this that some of the Bishops have acknowledged Episcopacy
and they also which pierced him and all kindreds of the Earth shall wail because of him And Mat. 24. 30. Then shall appear the Sign of the Son of Man either per Synechdochen the great signs of Glory and Majesty which then shall compass him round about or the Son of Man himself as the sign of Circumcision is nothing else but Circumcision it self in Heaven And then shall all the Tribes of the Earth mourn and they shall see the Son of Man coming in the Clouds of Heaven viz. in Majesty and great glory The sight whereof shall be the meaâ—s of their miraculous Conversion Accordingly you have here in Isa 66. vers 5. The appearing of the Lord. The issue whereof is 1 The ruine of his enemies vers 6 14 15 16 where you have Christs appearance largely discoursed of Rev. 19. 2 The Conversion and Restauration of the Jews vers 7 8 9. 3 The concomitant Glory in the new Heaven and new Earth state or the time of the restitution of all things vers 10 11 12 13 14 22 23. All which considered I humbly conceive I had ground enough to assert That Isa 66. 8. is a Prophesie expresly relating to the Jews and their miraculous Conversion That because t is said Rom. 11. 25 26. When the fullness of the Gentiles is come in all Israel shall be saved Therefore I may find something of a National Church consisting of several Parish Churches bounded by old Customs Laws Constitutions c. in subordination to Diocesan Metropolitan Churches with their several Officers of Priests Arch-Deacons Bishops Arch-Bishops on the head of them which is the National Church we are enquiring after in Isa 66. 8. is a Consequence I shall never see Mr. T. make good That he should do so is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst the number of those things that are impossible And once for all I desire him when he writes next not to think so highly of himself as to conceit that his dictates must pass without controle but to remember he is as well as other men obliged to give us a reason of them else we shall not think our selves bound to take any further notice of them then to reject them as sayings of no weight or value Sect. 15. Of National Ministers Peter Paul Titus no National Ministers Ephes 4. 11 12 13 explained The Body of Christ there not the Church-Catholick visible but a particular Church of Christ proved Pastors and Teachers are only belonging to one particular Congregation If a man be a Minister by the appointment of Christ of a Church-Catholick visible he cannot be a Minister of Christ of a National Church The Ministers of Christ are either Extraordinary or Ordinary Of Saints Interest in each 1 Cor. 3. 22 23 expounded THE second Querie in the S. T. is Whether National Ministers are the Ministers of Christ Or Whether there can be a true Ministry in a false Church as a National Church must be if not of Divine Institution To this Mr. T. pretends to answer Sect. 16. And after conjectures of what I mean by National Ministers he gives us such a description of them as he could not sure think any man besides himself would subscribe to but it served his design he thought By National Ministers I mean such as are members of a National Church related to it as the Ministers thereof as such Ordained and set apart by National Officers bound up by its Canons and Laws in their Ministrations who when Mr. T. shall prove to be Ministers of Christ he will be supposed to say something in answer to the Querie which as yet he hath not done His ensuing Arguments speak not a word for such National Ministers himself being Judge 1st Peter though he had the Apostleship of Circumcision and Paul of the Gentiles were not National Ministers 2dly Nor Titus though left in Crete to set in order things that were wanting and to ordain Elders in every City Tit. 1. 5. Fâ—r they were First No members of a National Church Secondly Not related to it as the Ministers thereof Thirdly Not Ordained or set apart to their Office by Natinnal Officers Fourthly Not bounded and circumscribed in their Mâ—nistrations by any devised Institutions or Canons thereof None of which were then in being as is known He goes on and tells us 3dly They that may be Ministers of Christ though they be Ministers for the Body of Christ and all the Members thereof maâ— be Ministers of Christ though National But Pastors and Teachers are given for the edifying of the Body of Christ Therefore c. Answ 1. If by the Body of Christ Mr. T. means the Church-Catholick visible The Apostle Eph. 4. 11 12 13. speaks not a word of it not the Body of Professors or multitude of persons professing Faith in Christ is there intended but some particular Instituted Church of Christ Which we prove 1. The Body of Christ Eph. 4. 11 12 13. is the same with the Body and Church of Christ 1 Cor. 12. 27 28. as by the serious perusal of both places comparing the one with the other will to the sober and judicious be evident That there it signifies a particular Church of Christ we have demonstrated Sect. 13. therefore here it also so signifies 2. Here Pastors and Teachers are said to be given for the edifying of the Body of Christ i. e. particular instituted Churches of Christ and accordingly we find them ordained in every Church Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5. and the whole of their charge limited to particular Churches Acts 20. 17 28. 1 Pet. 5. 2. 1 Tim. 3. 15. Col. 4. 17. who are commanded to obey them in the Lord 1 Thess 5. 12. Heb. 13. 17. from whom they might not upon every occasion nor without â—he consent of the Congregation upon any pretext whatsoever remove See Calv. Institut l. 4. c. 3. s 7. of which Mr. Paul Bains speaks in his Exposition on the Ephesians chap. 2. 3. p. 350 351. As the Lord doth give a Calling and Grace so a People towards whom it is especially blessed It is true the Apostle had a more large Flock the care of all Churches was upon him but wheresoever God giveth a Calling there he giveth a People of whom the Minister may say Toward you Grace is given me of God Acts 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 2. God hath assigned every ordinary Minister a portion of his People for this is the difference between extraordinary as the Apostles Evangelists the seventy Disciples and our ordinary Pastors The Apostles had an Universal Commission and the Evangelists were Delegates of the Apostles The Seventy if not Evangelists which some of the Ancients encline to yet they were illimited helpers and fellow-labourers in the work of the Lord. But ordinary Ministers the Lord commanded to fasten them to certain places Tit. 1. 5. Ordain Elders City by City And in the Council of Chalcedon chap. 6. Let none be ordained at large lest he prove a wandring
that a conformity to any thing that God had revealed and determined as our duty had upon that account been our bondage 'T is the liberty joy and delight of the Saints to do his will Psal 119. 45. 1 Joh. 5. 3. Psal 19. 8. 119. 111. Such kind of weak impertinent arguings asserted with state and confidence as is the manner of the man must he be content to deal with who undertakes the consideration of what is proposed by this Animadverter But to recite these Arguments had been Answer sufficient to the judicious and intelligent Reader We attend his further motion Sect. 20. God had designed his own Officers for the management of the affairs of his House Who they are may be collected from Ephes 4. 11. The Animadverter proves not that Arch-Bishops c. do the work of the Ministers of the Gospel are commissionated by Christ His apprehension when he took the solemn League and Covenant not the same as now The extensiveness of the Priviledges of the Saints under the Gospel-Oeconomie What things were wanting to the Jews under the second Temple which they had under the first The Election of Ministers the peculiar Priviledge of the Church That it was practised by the Saints in the first Ages granted by the Animadverter Many things charged upon the Saints then living that are false Neither former disorders nor present distempers amongst the Saints any sufficient Warrant for the changing an Institution of Christ. The Priviledge of Women asserted from Scripture and learned Writers Of the Decree of the Council of Carthage 1 Cor. 14. 34 35. 1 Tim. 2. 12. explained What is to be done in case of difference in the Congregation touching the election of Officers MR. T. in his 21. Sect. proposes the 5th Query in S. T. to consideration viz. Whether God hath not now as then under the time of the Law designed the several Officers and Offices his wisdom thought sufficient for the management of the affairs of his House so that the Invention of new ones by the Sons of Men is not only needless but a daring advance against the soveraignty care and wisdom of God over his Churches To which after a large harangue touching Moses the 70 Elders Joshua the Judges David and other Kings the Prophets Aaron and his Sons with the Levites whom the Lord appointed for the management of the affairs of his House having also learnedly told us that God hath not in the Christian Church designed such Officers and Offices as these the twelve Disciples and amongst the rest Peter to whom he seems to assert a Primacy by way of promise to appertain He resolves the Question in the affirmative Tells us that who the Officers of Christ's designing are may best be gathered from Eph. 4. 11. of which we have formerly spoke in Chap. 3. of S. T. As for what follows when Mr. T. shall prove 1st That the arch-Arch-Bishops Bishops c. of the Church of England do the works enjoyned by Christ and his Apostles to the Ministers of the Gospel 2dly That every one that doth those works though not Commissionated by Christ thereunto nor performing them after the order appointed by him is a Minister of Christ 3dly That its lawful for the Sons of men to make more degrees of Ministry one above the other under new Names Titles with maintenance forreign to the maintenance of Christ employed in works he no where charges upon them to do than Christ ever instituted appointed shall look upon our selves as concerned in what he offers in this Section But till then we shall neither trouble our selves or Reader with his Lordly dictates which being tendred without proof may righteously be rejected by us Only thus much I would tell him in his ear That if he had when he took the solemn League and Covenant the same apprehension of this generation of men he now seems to have he did very wickedly to swear to endeavour the extirpation of Prelacy i. e. as in the Covenant is explained Church-Government by Arch-Bishops Bishops their Chancellours and Commissaries Deans Deans and Chapters Archdeacons and all other Ecclesiastical Officers depending on that Hierarchie What Durst he sware to extirpate the Ministers and Ministry of Christ as he now supposeth them to be But Tempora mutantur nos mutamur in illis In Sect. 22. Mr. T. takes notice of the 6th enquiry in S. T. touching the extensiveness of the Priviledges of the Saints under the Gospel whether not commensurate with theirs under the Law which if understood of Saints in appearance or the visible Church he tells us The visible Church of the Jews had in some things greater Priviledges as those mentioned Rom. 9. 4 5. 3. 1 2. and are they not as much committed to the Church and People of God now so that these Texts are little to his advantage together with Gods revealing his mind to them by Urim and Thumim extraordinary Prophets and many more which he not being pleased to particularize to us we shall not turn aside to make enquiry after But to those instanced in we Answer First That the Church and People of God are destitute of some of the Priviledges mentioned is granted and so was the Church of the Jews after their return from the Babylonish Captivity The Rabbies tell us That in the second Temple there were five things wanting which had been in the first 1. The Ark with the Mercy-Seat and Cherubims 2. The fire from Heaven 3. The Urim and Thummim Ezra 2. 63. Neh. 7. 65. whereby the Lord never answered them more 4. The Majesty or divine presence whereby they seem to mean the Oracle in the most holy place where God hath dwelt between the Cherubims Psal 80. 2. Numb 7. 89. 5. The Holy Ghost or the Spirit of Prophesie which was not in the Prophets after the second year of Darius after Haggai Zechariah and Malachie had finished their Prophesies Secondly The Inference of the Animadverter is weak Believers or visible Saints under the Gospel have not some things with which the Church of the Jews was priviledged therefore their Priviledges are not as extensive which notwithstanding they might be yea abundantly more extensive The first Temple upon many accounts was more glorious than the second which wanted as was but now remarked many things wherein its glory lay Yet Hag. 2. 9. the Prophet tells them that the glory of the latter house should be greater than of the former which it was though it had not the same things for its ornament and glory upon other accounts viz. it s being honoured with the bodily presence of Christ there c. Of the Priviledges of the Gospel-Churches and their super-eminency with respect to the Old-Testament-Church we shall not now treat They are delivered from the Yoke of Ceremonial Observances have the Gospel unvailed preached amongst them 2 Cor. 3. 18 c. Nor need we the intendment of our present enquiry being only this Whether the solemn deputation of
of wisdom nor faithfulness in Christ he did foresee what parts of Worship were and should be requisite and what parts were essential and necessary to be observed were determined in Scripture as for accidental things they were left to the prudence and authority chiefly of Rulers Who told him so This canting he surely learned of the Romish Cabal Christ was faithful in that he revealed what was his Fathers will in Spirituals but for Externals appointed but a few things and left the rest to be ordered under general Rules as it should be found convenient in after times Answ 1. These are Mr. T. his dictates of which you must expect his proofs when he hath greater leisure but in the mean while no man can reasonably be blamed if he refuse to subscribe to them 2dly If Christ hath determined what parts of worship are essential and necessary to be observed as he grants this part of the Controversie is at an end and must be by him acknowledged to be so till he have proved First That there are accidental parts of Instituted Worship Secondly That unnecessary trifles may be added to the essential and necessary parts of Worship as parts thereof Thirdly That what Christ thought not necessary to be observed is necessary to be observed because men think so But 3dly Would Mr. T. would direct us to the place where Christ hath granted that power to the Rulers or any else to add what they shall judge convenient to his Worship he being Head of his Body the Church and King of Saints we suppose he will not have the confidence to assert they may do this without his leave the doing so being a plain usurpation of his Throne and Kingly Authority I have read over the New Testament more than once and must profess I find not the least intimation of any such thing therein but the contrary 4thly We do not understand how Christ could be faithful if he revealed only what was his Fathers will in Spirituals and neglected to do so with respect to Externals as Mr. T. intimates when he was to reveal the whole will of his Father to his Church and for that end came into the world John 1. 18. Heb. 1. 2. Nor 5thly Can we conceive how it consists with the wisdom of Christ to leave it to men the greatest and wisest of them to determine what is fit and convenient to be added to his Worship because nothing is more evident than that they are incompetent Judges hereof Their folly herein being frequently remarked in the Scripture Jeroboam thinks it convenient that the People worship at Dan and Bethel and that they have golden Calves as visible representations of that God whom they worshipped Ahaz thinks it decent and convenient that a stately Altar the pattern whereof he had seen at Damascus be set up by the Altar of the Lord that was at Jerusalem which things were the provocation of the eyes of his glory The truth is the wretched additaments of the Sons of men to the Worship of Christ owe their original to this one abominable figment of Mr. T. That what is by men thought convenient in the Worship of Christ is left to be ordered by them In the Papacy Holy Water is by Pope Alexander thought to be convenient to be reserved in Temples to sanctifie the People and drive away Devils So is the Dedication of Temples by Pope Higinus That all of ripe years do every Easter receive the Sacrament by Pope Zephirinus That Priests Stand when the Gospel is read by Pope Anastatius The Letany by Pope Gregory Confirmation of the Baptized by Clemens as 't is said though many of these things are antedated and ascribed as to their Original to persons that would have abhorred them Scultetus Med. Patr. p. 1. l. 11. c. 10. saith Of all the Epistles of the first Popes no man that reads them attentively but acknowledgeth them to be forged The Epistles Decretal which pass under the Names of Clement c. are all forged and that for six Reasons saith Perkins The like saith Dr. Prideaux in his 9th Orat. de Pseudoepigraphis Sect. 3. The Celebration of the Mass upon the Altar by Xistus or Sixtus The Distinction of Parishes by Dionysius with a command to Preachers to keep within their Bounds The singing the Creed by Pope Marcus The Glory to the Father to be said after the Psalms And the Order of Queristers or Singing-Men by Pope Damasus The Dedication of Churches by Bishops by Foelix Pope Stephen the 7th thinks it convenient to Degrade all that had taken Orders from P. Formosus he himself gives them new ones John Sicco the Successor of Silvester an 1003 makes a Decree that the election of the Roman Popes should belong only to the Roman Clergy without the consent of the People because the People are to be led and not followed he establisheth the Feast of All Souls P. Urban An. 1096 ordained That no Clergy or Layman should eat Flesh from Shrovetide to Easter Innocent the third ordained Transubstantiatioâ— yea the Fathers of the Council of Constance publish a Decree in these words Although Christ after Supper hath instituted and administred to his Disciples this venerable Sacrament under both kinds of Bread and Wine yet notwithstanding the Authority of the sacred Canons the laudable and approved custom of the Church hath observed and doth observe that this Sacrament ought not to be finished after Supper nor administred under both kinds and seeing this custom hath been according to reason brought in and a long time observed by the Church and holy Fathers it is to be held for a Law Concil Const. Sess 3. And if the case be so with us as is suggested by this Animadverter 't is not to be thought that our condition is in the least better'd by the removing the carnal ordinances of the Jews 't is by many degrees worse than theirs They had a stinted number of Ceremonies of the institution of the Lord We have an innumerable company of the devising of man nor any security but we may have a thousand more for if â—â—e Rulers shall judge them convenient they may ordain them and we are bound to submit unto them if Mr. T. his Doctrine be true But blessed be the Lord things are far otherwise Christ hatâ— not broken the yoke of the Jewish observances off the necks of his Disciples to have them become such servants of men as to stoop to every Theatrical and Ludicrous Ceremony that under the notion of Conveniency shall be by them thought fit to be imposed on them If he hath let Mr. T. produce one Scripture in which he hath so done if not we expect he manifest so much Christian modesty as to retract his over-confident Assertion that Christ hath under general rules left what relating to the externals of Worship was to be added to be ordered as it should be found convenient in after-times We further add in S. T. That 't is not lawful
afterwards and here and in his Roman discussed asserts that 't is not tyrannical Dominion but the Dominion of one Apostle over another that is interdicted So that the same thing is doubtful and not doubtful with Mr. T. in the writing a few lines And this he proves by no fewer than ten reasons in his Rom. discussed 2dly Here he tels us that 't is an affectation of the Rule which a person may have and lawfully exercise that is forbidden there that the Dominion or Rule it self is interdicted which he would do well to reconcile and answer his Arguments he there produceth for its confirmation The sum whereof is Christ would have none amongst them superiour but all equal he forbids not only tyrannical Dominion but also any Dominion at all over one another which is saith he apparent 1. From the occasion of the words Christ forbids what they sought for but they sought for chief Dignity Seniority and priority of Order as do the Bishops of England 2dly From the Subjects whose Dominion is forbidden viz. Kings that had lawfull Authority and therefore such Rule is forbidden as the best Rulers used amongst the Nations 3dly The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although sometimes meant of meer lordly forcible Rule against the will and good of the person ruled yet here it cannot be so meant sith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to use Dominion at all and to have power at all over one another is forbidden Luke 22. 25. 4thly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the simple 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is used still of Rule without abuse is forbidden 5thly It is forbidden to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. to affect that title which implies one to be under another and to be beholden one to another as persons that could gratifie one another which doth imply superiority in some sort 6thly The additional speech of Christ commanding in the stead of Dominion Mat. 20. 26 27. rather Ministry and Service shews he would have none among them superiour but all equal 7ly Christ's propounding himself as their example only in service 8â—y He requires such a mutual debasement as takes away the taking to themselves priority of order or place or rule over one anotheâ— Mat. 20. 26 27. Mark 10. 43 44. Luke 22. 26. 9ly This is confirmed by other places upon a like occasion Mat. 18. 1 2 3 4. Mark 9. 33. Luke 9. 46. In which Christ resolves them that they should be as a little child that assumes not Empire but is humble and accounts others as equal to him 10ly From Luke 22. 28. that Christ having forbidden superiority in any of them among themselves promises them a Kingdom afterward in recompence of their abiding with him in his temptations All which manifest 1. a Superiority interdicted 2. That the Superiority interdicted is not interdicted to all Christians as he would in his Theodulia bear us in hand for then Christians should be forbidden to exercise Civil Dominion and Power as Mr. T. his ten Arguments manifest But 3. a Superiority of order over one another as the Bishops of England exercise over their fellow-Ministers That the Apostles exercised any such Superiority over the Church of God or Ministers of a lower order as the Bishops of England exeâ—cise over them this Animadverter will never prove And if he were able so to do this would not justifie the Bishops in their exercise of such Superiority who are invested with no Apostolical Power that I know of 'T is true a rule over the Faith of Saints is disclaimed by the Apostle 2 Cor. 1. 24. but that this is not the whole of what is interdicted in the places before-cited he hath himself proved by ten Arguments but now repeated by us As for 1 Pet. 5. 3. he tells us what the Assembly in their Annotations say on the place viz. that is not imperiously commanding your own inventions in the stead of the Doctrine of the Gospel not carrying hemselves insolently and magisteriously towards Gods People 3 Joh. 9. Answ 1. All this is known to be practised by the present Bishops They command imperiously their own inventions to which the preaching of the Gospel must give place when there is not time for both as in the case of Liturgy-worship is known to be true How insolently and magisterially they carry it towards the people of the Lord the whole Nation is witness 2. The Elders being interdicted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to exercise Lordly Rule over the Heritage of God is certainly an interdiction of the introduction of any such Officer into the Churcâ— of God as against the will of the Lord's People should by vertue of an Office-power exercise a Lordly jurisdiction over them and their Ministers as a superiour order of Priesthood and certainly more forbidden than the office of an Elder Jurisdiction is not an abuse of our Prelates Office as is known though they too often abuse it by exercising it exorbitantly even contrary to their own Canons but a great a chief part of it wherein they do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exercise dominion over the People of God and that against their will by fore and violence to their utter undoing and that in execution of that office they have received and exercise according to their Canon Laws in their Courts Ecclesiastical We further prove in S. T. That the office of Lord-Bishops is Antichristian because derived from and only to be found in the Papacy none of the Reformed Churches have retained it the Woman in her flight into the Wilderness carried it not along with her it 's rejected by the true Spouse and Witnesses of Christ in all ages We instance in several as Hierom the Churches of Helvetia c. To this Mr. T. replies 1. Though the latter Popes viz. from the time of Boniface the third about the year 606. be the head of Antichrist yet it doth not follow that the office that is derived from and is only to be found in the Papacy is surely Antichristian there having been bad Officers perhaps derived from good Popes and continued only in the Church of Rome Answ 1. That the Popes of Rome were not the head of Antichrist till the time of Boniface the third this Animadverter will never prove 2dly Should it be granted him what good Popes he will find from the time of Sylvester about the year 320 I know not nor what Officers were derived from them Lord-Bishops there were none till afterwards When Constantine coming to the Throne the Man of Sin began by little and little according to the prophesie of Paul touching him 2 Thess 2. 7. to shew himself in the following Popes The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Letter viz. the Roman Pagan Emperours being removed out of the way about which time many report a Voice was heard Hodie Venenum c. This day Poyson is poured forth into the Church of Christ And from this time the noble and renowned
not to be an order above Presbytery Answ 1. Who they are that have thus acknowledged I know not 2. Mr. T. saith not that any of the present Bishops do so 3. If they did in words their practice contradicts it exercising jurisdictions over the Presbyters or Elders 3dly Nor to this saith he that though the Bishop imposing hands do act as of superior order yet being a Presbyter his act is valid as he that convey's a thing as conceiving himself as Heir and Executor if he be not Heir yet if he be only Executor by that hath power to convey iâ— the Grant is good Answ 1. But this is Mr. T. his mistake I say expresly though it should be granted that they act as Presbyters yet their act is not valid because they act not as Presbyters of the institution of Christâ— of which he afterwards takes notice Though 2dly Mr. T. will never be able to prove that the Bishop imposing hands as a Bishop and acting under that capacity yet being a Presbyter his act is valid For. 1. when a Bishop he is no longer a Presbyter but one of an higher order and degree as a Presbyter is no longer a Deacon when once made a Presbyter 2. As a Bishop he hath no authority from Christ at all to act in the business of imposition of hands therefore acting as such his act is invalid which his once being a Presbyter cannot make otherwise because he is not now so nor acts as such but avowedly the contrary 3. His instance of a persons conveying a thing as conceiving himself as Heir and Executor is not pertinent For. 1. He hath originally and legally the same right if he be one as if both and pretends to a right to both in his conveyance 2ly Should he refuse his Executorship and make a Conveyance as Heir and he prove not to be so his Conveyance is naught Nay 3. if he make a Conveyance of what neither as Heir or Executor he hath any right to the Grant is undoubtedly not good This is evidently the case of our Lord-Bishops To the objection as proposed by us we answer 1. That they act in the capacity of Presbyters in the matter of ordination is false 2. Contrary to their avowed principles Mr. T. replies This is uncertain Answ And he may as well say it is uncertain that the Sun shines at noon-day The least smatterer in the usages of the Church of England and principles of these Doctors thereof see and know it to be certainly true 2. Contrary to the known Law of the Land by which they receive power to act therein in which they are known and owned only in the capacity of Lord-Bishop Mr. T. replies This is not true for the ordination of Suffragan-Bishops who are not Lords is valid by Law Answ A weak proof of such a crimination A Suffragan-Bishop is a Titular-Bishop when he acts in the matter of ordination he represents the Lord-Bishop whose Suffragan he is And the Law accounts his act not his own but the act of the Lord-Bishop whose Representee hee is And this Mr. T. could not be ignorant of We say 3dly 'T is contrary to their late practice whereby they have sufficiently declared the nullity of a Ministerial Office received from the hands of a Presbytery in thrusting out of doors several hundreds of Ministers so ordained Strange that it should be pleaded they act as Presbyters in the matter of ordination and yet they themselves judge a Presbyterian ordination invalid What saith Mr. T. Why 1. They do not nullify ordination by a Presbytery in forrain Churches Answ But this is not at all to the purpose have they not done so at home To attempt to do so in forraign Churches where they have no power were but to expose themselves to greater contempt as busy Bishops indeed 2dly In England they do it because the Laws saith he require Episcopal Ordination Answ But Sir the question is not upon what accounts they have so done in England but whether their so doing be not a manifestation that they act not in the capacity of Presbyters in the business of Ordination for if they did they fore-condemn their own act in condemning Presbyterian ordination their ordination being upon this supposition onely such 2dly He grants The Law requires Episcopal ordination if so it doth sure tie them that act in it to think themselves Bishops to act with such an intention and under that notion which not many lines before he denyed We further answer in S. T. What if this should be granted it would avail nothing except it can be proved that they are and act as Presbyters of the institution of Christ which these being only in a particular instituted Church of Christ will never be to the worlds end To which our Animadverter replies If this be held then all the Presbyters of the French Dutch and other Churches under Presbyterial goverment are not of Christs institution and so a separation avowed from all Protestant Churches except their own Answ 1. But this is no proof that the Bishops of England act in the matter of ordination as Presbyters of the institution of Christ which is the one and onely thing he should have heeded in his reply but of that he is wholly silent 2dly No doubt he thinks he hath sufficiently bespatter'd uâ— but if he account it a discredit to speak palpable untruths it will be his own 1. 'T is false that we avow separation from all Churches but those of our own way that our Assertion tends to such an end I challenge our Dictator to make good 2. The Presbyterians own particular Churches of the institution of Christ have their Presbyters fixed officers in and amongst them and that both in England and beyond the Seas What satisfaction he will think meet to make us for so foul an aspersion whereby he labours to render us odious to the Godly at home abroad we shall know by the next In the mean while we are ready to attend his motions in the next Chapter CHAP. V. Sect. 1. The fourth Argument in S. T. against hearing the present Ministers vindicated A twofold denial of the Offices of Christ Whether the Papists are guilty of a verbal professional denial of Christs Offices 'T is not lawful to hear such as are guilty of a verbal or real denial of Christs Offices The present Ministers oppose the Kingly and Prophetical Offices of Christ They do so who hearken not to that revelation Christ hath made touching the Orders of his House Deut. 18. 18 19. Act. 3. 23. Mat. 3. 17. Isa 9. 6. explained The vanity of Mr. T. his dictates to the contrary evinced IN Chap. 4th of S. T. we advance a fourth Argument against hearing the present Ministers which is this Those that deny any of the Offices of Christ are not to be heard but separated from But the present Ministers deny some of the Offices of Christ Therefore Before we come to clear the several
not What he adds is most frivolous 't were wicked and abominable in our addresses to God to call him Molech Milcom Malcham Jove but that therefore if the names of Idols be to be abolished we may not call him King Lord Jehovah because some of the fore-mentioned Titles so signifie and others as 't is thought were derived from these names of God is most absurd Christ is called Priest he is truly really so and upon the account of his once offering up himself for the sins of the people before any Mass-Priest was thought of in the world that therefore the name of Priests may lawfully be applied to a company of persons accounted Ministers of the Gospel which was a title assumed by the most idolatrous generation of men professing themselves to be of the same order when such as these pretend to be are no where in the Scripture so called will not in haste be proved We manifest in S. T. 1. a further agreement betwixt the Priests of England and Rome 2. They are both Deacons before they are Priests 3. Ordained to their Office by a lord-Lord-Bishop or his Suffragan 4. Both presented by an Archdeacon or his Deputy with these words Reverend Father I present these men unto thee to be admitted to the Order of Priesthood Our Animadverter replies These are granted and avouched as not Popish but justifiable and agreeable to Orthodox Antiquity Answ 1. That these things are not Popish are avouched without proof They are exactly extracted out of the Pope's Portuis not retained in any one of the Reformed Churches but ejected as the sowr leaven of Popery 2dly That they are justifiable is said not proved Mr. T. should not talk thus confidently of Orthodox Antiquity when he knows 't is of all things the most difficult to determine what things are agreeable to Orthodox Antiquity 3dly Nothing will justifie what we do in matters Divine but the Scriptures Orthodox Antiquity is not sufficient Hear what Basil saith If whatever is not of Faith is sin as saith the Apostle but Faith is by hearing and hearing by the Word of God without doubt whatever is without Divine Scripture since it is not of Faith is sin So Hilarie ad Constant Augustine Tertullian de praescript cap. 15. 8. Hierom in Mat. 23. and Lactantius Humane Precepts have no weight which want Divine Authority lib. 3. c. 27. Theophylact saith 'T is Diabolical to account any thing Divine without the authority of Divine-Scriptures that is Divine which is Apostolical nor is it â—o be sought any where without the Scripture lib. 2. Paschal The saying of Ignatius is worthy to be written in letters of Gold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ is our Antiquity Yet 4thly the Animadverter cannot justifie these things from Orthodox Antiquity any better than the Papists can justifie their Oyl Spittle Salt in Baptism their orders Eccâ—â—siastical of Exorcists Acolytes And indeed his arguing and Baronius's for these seems to be much a like although there is mention made in Scripture only of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons yet saith he Ignatius in those counterfeit Epistles you must understand that pass under his name mentions more so that it is necessary that either they were in the Apostles time or at least were approved of by them By such Orthodox Antiquity Mr. T. may soon justifie not only the forementioned practices of our Clergy but all the inventions of the Romish Bawd 'T is a trick of the Devil saith Augustine under the pretext of Antiquity to commend fallacies to us de quaest Vet. Nov. Testa q. 14. some things seem'd to be new that were indeed ancient as Christ's Doctrine to the Pharisees Christian Religion to Celsus and his Pagans some things seem to be ancient that are but the impostures cheats and fallacies of the later dayes We add in S. T. 5thly The Priests of Rome must be ordained to their Office according to their Pontifical the Priests of England according to their Book of ordering Priests and Deacons which is taken out of the Popes Pontifical To this Mr. T. returns the same answer that Arch-Bishop Whitgift gave the summe whereof is 1. That what is good in the Popes Pontifical if in our Pontifical our Pontifical is never the worse for having it Answ That nothing but Divine Institution in the Scripture of the Lord renders any thing good consider'd as it relates to the Worship of God as such we have already proved In such cases to talk of things as good for which no precept instituting them can be produced is to talk without book 'T is diabolical saith Theophylact. He proceeds 2dly 'T is most false that the book of ordering Ministers is word for word drawn out of the Popes Pontifical Ignorance and rashness drives you into many Errours Answ 1. Why the Book of ordering Ministers should be called a Pontifical if not from the chief Pontifice of Rome I understand not 2. We say not that the English Pontifical is taken word for word out of the Popes but that it is so i. e. for the substance thereâ—f 3. I have often observed that persons most guilty of ignorance and rashness have been most free in charging their Antagonists therewith Thus fares it with our Animadverter as is evident to the eye of an ordinary Reader from the view of the ensuing parallel Romish Pontifical 1. Tempora ordinationum sunt c. The times of ordination are the Sabbaths in omnibus quatuor temporibus Rom. Pontif. de ordinibus conferendis 2. Ordinationes Sacrorum Ordinum The ordination of holy Orders shall be in the times appointed and in the Cathedral Church the Canons of the said Church being present thereat shall be publickly celebrated in the time of Divine Service ibid. 3. They are taken to the order of Presbytery who have continued in the Office of a Deacon at least a whole year except for the profit and necessity of the Church it shall otherwise seem good unto the Bishop ibid. 4. Episcopus autem Sacerdotibus but the Bishop Priests being adjoyned to him and other prudent men skilful in the Divine Law and exercised in Ecclesiastical functions shall diligently examine the persons age of him that is to be ordained 5. Nullus ad ordinem None shall be admitted to the order of a Deacon before he be twenty three years old nor to the order of Presbytery before the twenty fifth year of his age 6. Archidiaconus offerens The Arch Deacon presenting those who are to be promoted to the order of Deacons each of them being decently habited unto the Bishop sitting in his seat before the Altar saith Reverend Father 7. Pontifex c. The Bishop shall ask Do you know them to be worthy the Arch-Deacon shall answer As much as humane frailty suffers me to know I know and testifie that they are worthy 8. Pontifex The Bishop shall speak to the Clergy and People If any one hath ought against thâ—se persons let him come forth and with confidence speak for
God and before God 9. Postremo Lastly the Bishop takes and delivers to them all the Book of the Gospel saying Receive power of reading the Gospel in the Church of God 10. Pontifex The Bishop shall say the Ministers and Chaplains answering Lord have mercy upon us O God the Father of Heaven have mercy on us O God the Son Redeemer of the world have mercy on us That it may please thee to blesse sanctifie and consecrate these elect ☞ We beseech thee hear us 11. They sing one and the same Hymn only the one is in Latine the other in English Veni Creator Spiritus Mentes tuorum visita c. 12. Pontifex The Bishop shall lay his hands upon the heads of each of them kneeling upon their knees before him saying to every one Receive the Holy Ghost whose Sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose Sins thou dost retain they are retained 13. Pax The Peace of God be alwayes with you the blessing of God Almighty the Father Son and Holy Ghost descend upon you English Pontifical 1. We decree that no Deacons or Ministers be ordained but only upon the Sundays more heathenishly spoken then the Pope in his Pontifical immediatly following jejunia quatuor Temporum commonly cald Ember-weeks Constit Can. Eccl. can 31. 2. And this be done in the Cathedral or Parish Church where the Bishop resideth and in the time of Divine Service in the presence not only of the Archdeacon but of the Dean ibid. 3. And here it must be declared unto the Deacon that he must continue in that office the space of a whole year except for reasonable causes it shall otherwise seem good unto the Bishop The Book of ordering Priests and Deacons 4. The Bishop before he admit any person to holy Orders shall diligently examine him in the presence of those Ministers that shall assist him at the imposition of hands Can. 35. 5. None shall be admitted a Deacon except he be twenty three years of age and every man which is to be admitted a Priesâ— shal be full twenty four years old The Preface to the Form and Manner of making Priests and Deacons c. 6. The Archdeacon or his Deputy shall present unto the Bishop sitting in his Chair near to the holy Table such as desire to be ordained Deacons each of them being decently habited saying these words Reverend Father 7. The Bishop Take heed that the persons whom you present unto us be apt and meet for their learning The Arch Deacon shall answer I have enquired of them and also examined them and think them so to be 8. Then the Bishop shall say to the people Brethren if there be any of you who knoweth any impediment or notable crime in any of these persons let him come forth in the name of God and shew what it is 9. Then the Bishop shall deliver to every one of them the New Testament saying Take thee authority to read the Gospel in the Church of God 10. The Bishop with the Clergy and People shall sing or say the Litany O God the Father of Heaven have mercy upon us miserable sinners O God the Son Redeemer of the world have mercy on us That it may please thee to bless these they Servants ☞ We beseech thee to hear us good Lord. Come Holy Ghost our souls imspire And lighten with Celestial Fire c. 12. The Bishop shall lay their hands severally upon the heads of every one that receive the order of Priesthood the Receivers humbly kneeling upon their knees and the Bishop saying Receive the Holy Ghost whose Sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose Sins thou doest retain they are retained 13. The Peace of God and the Blessing of God Almighty the Father Son and holy Ghost be amongst you and remain with you always Amen To which it were easie to adde other parallel particulars but these upon a slight view of the Roman Pontifical offering themselves being sufficient to confute that assertion of Whitgift and Mr. T. that the Book of ordering Ministers and Deacons is almost in no point correspondent to the Roman Pontifical we content our selves with them From whence the ingenuous Reader will soon determine to whom ignorance and rashness may justly be imputed We add 6thly The Popish Priests must kneel down upon their knees at the feet of the Lord Bishop that ordains them and he must say to them blasphemously enough Receive the Holy Ghost whose Sins ye forgive they are forgiven whose Sins ye retain they are retained which exactly accords with the fashion of ordaining the Priests of England To which Mr. T. replies in a long harangue not at all to the purpose giving us an account what Whitgift and Hooker say to this prâ—ctice confesses at last they offer some force to the Scripture to which they allude tells us those words may be used prayer-wise Answ 1. The Question is Whether in the particular instanc'd in there be an exact symmetry betwixt the Ordination of the present Ministers of England and the Priests of Rome This Mr. T. denies not but leads the Reader to the consideration of somewhat else 2. The use of the words John 20. 22 23. he grants to be an offering force to the Scripture and if so it is wicked and abominable to wrest the Scripture to our private interpretation is undoubtedly so 3. That they should be used prayer-wise is a most ridiculous evasion the manner of expression evinceth the contrary 4. Mr. Richard Hooker Eccles Polit. lib. 5. sect 77. as câ—ted by our Animadverter interprets it of the collation of the gifts of the holy Ghost which if we should interpret of the Office of Ministry it belongs as we have said to the Church not to such a thing as a Lord-Bishop to collate We proceed in the Parallel 7thly The Popish Priests are not ordained in and before the Congregation to whom they are to be Priests but in some Metropolitan Cathedâ—al City So the Priests of England To which Mr. T. replies 1. This is not alwayes so Answ I challenge him to give one instance of the contrary for these six or seven years last past 2dly It may be before the Congregation to whom the person is to be Priest Answ What may be is one thing what is another We say not only that it may be but that it ought to be yet we know it is not 'T is added in S. T. 8thly The Popish Priests take the care of Souls though nâ—t elected by them from the presentation of a Patron by the Institution and Induction of a Lord Bishop so the Ministers of England To which our Animadverter This is not always so nor when so Popish Answ 1. The first is most notoriously false and we challenge Mr. T. to make it good if he can 2. the latter remains to be proved by him to assert it is not Popish is a piece of beggary this Animadverter is much used to What he hath before said is
ever he met with hath judged them Antichristian must be imputed to the shortness of his memory He haâ—h I suppose met with Zuinglius Keckerman who say little less The former Art 34. p. 254 255 tells us That for any to claim any Rule Power or Superiority over any Church of Christ which we know out Bishops do is Devilish Proud and Popish Arrogancy And Aretius in his Problems producing Christ's prohibition of Superiour power to his Apostles Mar. 10. 5. Luke 22. 25. saith None but Antichrist dare be so fancy as to usurp it Marlorat on Rev. 17. 3. saith That Arch-Bishops are in Office under Antichrist And on Chap. 19. The tailes of Antichrist Bale on Rev. 17 saith That Canterbury and York are the Beastly Antichrists Metropolitans And on Chap. 13. That Arch-Bishop Diocesan are very Names of Blasphemy Of these we spake pag. 28. S. T. who I dare say were sober Writers and considerate men Mr. T. his answer to their Testimony viz. That they writ thus against the Romish Hierarchy is ridiculous they writ against the Offices of Arch-Bishops as such which are not a whit the better because they constitute the English Hierarchy We mention Cartwright the seekers of Reformation in Queen Elizabeths dayes proclaiming them to come out of the bottomless Pit of Hell to be Antichristian Devilish These also must pass in the Roll of inconsiderate fellows yet others as wise as Mr. T. think otherwise of them For the proof of the Antichristianism of the Office of Lord-Bishops I propose a few things briefly in the S. T. as 1st That Office that is not to be found in the Scripture of the Institution of Christ but is contrary to express Precepts of his is Antichristian But the Office of Lord-Bishops is not to be found in the Scriptures is contrary to express Precepts Therefore The Major Mr. T. is nibling at but he doth but think he tells us if Universal it is not true The Office of the Religious Votaries he talks of is Antichristian If there be any Antichristian Office in the World that must needs be so that is introduced into the Church of Christ though not of his Institution directly contrary to express Precepts That this Assertion should necessitate any one to affirm every sin to be Antichristian though in a large sence as Antichristian signifies that which is against Christ every sin every errour is so is absurd to imagine The Minor I say consists of two parts 1. That the Office of Lord Bishops is not to be found in Scripture of the Institution of Christ This I manifest by considering the most remarkable places where the Officers and Offices that are of Christs appointment are enumerated in which we have a total silence of them Ephes 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7 8. 1 Tim. 3. 12. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5 7. Acts 20. 28. I add also that they were never dreamt of in the world for some hundreds of years after Christ We introduce the Testimony of Clemens Lombard Dr. Hamonds acknowledgment of their Rise To which Mr. T. answers The whole Discourse is impertinent the thing to be proved was that the Office of lord-Lord-Bishops was not to be found in the Scriptures and the whole Discourse is about the Superiority of Order above Presbyters Primacy or Supremacy of Degrees among Bishops Answ 1. We have examined the particular places wherein mention is made of the Officers of Christs Institution and find no Lord-Bishops instituted in any of them which manifests that they are not If this be not taken for proof I know not what will If this be not to the purpose I am in dispair of producing any thing that he will account so 2dly The Office of Lord-Bishops as such consists in the Primacy Superiority and Supremacy mentioned as is known If Mr. T. grants this not to be found of the Institution of Christ in the Scripture he gives away the Cause 3dly They themselves do own and avow a great part of their Office to consist in the foresaid Primacy Jurisdiction And if this be not it I am sure some of them are seldom or never minding their Office these things are what is most attended by them Of whom we may complain as Bernard of old Vides omnem Ecclesiasticum Zelum forvere prâ— sola dignitate tuenda honori tantum datur sanctitati nihil aut parum Si causâ requirente paulo submissius agere aut socialius to habere tentaveris absit inquiunt non decet tempori non congruit majestati non convenit quam geras personam attendito De placito Dei ultima mentio est pro jactura salutis nulla cunctatio quod sublime est hoc salutare putamus quod gloriam redolet id justum De Considerat Lib. 4. His following Exceptions are not worth the heeding I mention Diotrephes in S. T. and say That some appearances of a Spirit striving to ascend into this Chair of wickedness was seen in him and others in the Apostles dayes To this Mr. T. But this was not the usurping the Superiority of Order of a Bishop above a Presbyter Answ Nor do I say it was I expresly affirm the contrary whâ—n I say that such a Superiority was not in the world for some hundred of years after Christ we only say that some appearances of that Spirit was seen in him which the Apostle affirms John Epist 3. Vers 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He loveth the preheminence among them attempts the Primacy so Beza Which if it be not an appearance of the Spirit mentioned I know not what is he endeavoured to rule all himself carried it proudly pragmatically arrogantly over the Church the Brethren John himself who was an Elder saith Mr. T. He that cannot see somewhat of our Episcopal Spirit in this is I fear willfully blind I am fure he must wink hard He takes notice that in reciting Ephes 4. 11. I twice leave out Evangelists which he knows not the reason of Answ Nor do I my self possibly it was an oversight it may be an omission of the Amanuensis However it was it was not I assure him any fear I had that he or any one could justly plead that our Prelates were Evangelists 1. I know that Title is declined by Pleaders for Episcopal Jurisdiction 2. Our Bishops do not the works of Evangelists They had no setled residence but travelled up and down with or after the Apostles to help forward the work of Christ that was set on foot in the world by them We find Titus who was an Evangelist somtimes at Crete Gal. 2. 3. At Dalmatia 2 Tim. 4. 10. appointed to meet Paul at Nicopolis Tit. 3. 12. Sent to Corinth 2 Cor. 12. 18. At Macedonia 2 Cor. 7. 5 6. Such an itinerant laborious life that our Bishops are unacquainted with 3. Evangelists were such extraordinary Officers as ceased with that Age for we find no directions given touching their future Election in in the Churches Mr. T. tells us Our Prelates
chalenge the term of Pastors and Teachers this I had said was too great a debasement of their Lordships he tells us This is a Satyrical Sarcasm no proof Ans 1. However it is evidently true Pastors and Teachers we have already proved are Officers appertaining to one particular Church 'T is certainly a debasement of their Lordships who preside as petty Princes over hundreds of Pastors and Churches so called to be reduced to a laborious over-sight over one 2dly I had said in S. T. That their Parochial Priests over whom they preside are supposed to be Officers in that degree The Argument is this which Mr. T. may take time to answer If the Parochial Priests over whom the Bishops of England preside be such Pastors and Teachers as the Scripture mentions then the Bishops of England are not cannot be such for they are an Order and Degree above them to them as their Superiours they promise and swear fealty But tho former according to the judgment of the Church of England is true Therefore The Story he after tells us of a Presbyters having in case of infirmity Assistants who notwithstanding may be called a Teacher is so remote from the business in hand that though some would cry out Quis temperâ—t a risu For my part I heartily pitty him 1st This is known not to be the reason of the Bishops having Parochial Priests under them were they never so strong it were impossible they should perform the Office of Pastors to the several Congregations in England 2dly The Presbyter is not an Order above his Co-adjutor as is the case of the Bishops he is a Co-Presbyter one of the same degree with himself So that of this we shall I suppose hear no mere We add in S. T. That they pretend to be and are so accounted by some the Apostles Successors but if they derive their sâ—ccession through the Papacy 't is an evident Argument they are Antichristian if the Pope be the Antichristian head over many Countries as Protestants affirm In respect of their Office we prove they are not their Successors Because 1. The Apostles were immediately sent by Christ 2. Extraordinary Officers sent forth to preach the Gospel throughont the Nations of the world 3. We find no Apostles after them 4. None appointed by them to succeed them 5. None are qualified with gifts for the discharge of such an Office and Christ sends not forth servants in any imployment but he furnisheth them with gifts suitable thereunto This the summe To which our Animadverter pretends to answer Sect. 5. Chap. 3. 1. Apostles he grants they may not be reckoned yet 2. They may be their Successors 1st Dr. Owen of Schism Cap. 6. Sect. 55. grants That persons adhering to ordination by succession from Popish Bishops may be right worthy Ministers of the Gospel but not upon the account of that their Successional Ordination but the eminent gifts God hath vouchsafed them and the Lords people submitting themselves to them in the administration of Ordinances And the Author of S. T. denies not they succeed them as Christians and if so they may be heard as gifted brethren which was denied by him Chap. 2. Answ 1. How all this proves the Bishops of England to be the Successors of the Apostles in respect of their Office which was what he pretends to attempt the proof of I know not 2. I deny indeed that they may be heard as gifted Brethren Chap. 2. and give my reasons of my so doing which I have vindicated from this Dictators exceptions That we are to have communion with all that we cannot deny to be Christians in that wherein they act not as such but by virtue of an Office-power we know they have not received from Christ Mr. T. will not in hast attempt the proof of He asks Why may they not succeed them in Office Answ I wonder he should ask such a Question En Tabulas The reasons thereof are given in the place he undertakes the confutation of They were it seems too weighty for him he wisely lets them alone without burthening himself so far with them as to attempt their removal The Apostles Office was indeed no other than that mentioned Mat. 28. 19 20. Mar. 16. 15. but that was 1st An Office of Preaching not of Lording and Loytering 2dly Into it they were immediately invested by Christ 3dly They were to preach the Gospel through the Nations of the World not to stretch themselves upon Beds of Ivory in a Lordly Pallace which was as much their Office as Preaching the Gospel upon the account whereof Paul saith He was a debtor both to the Greeks and to the Barbarians Rom. 1. 14. Christ its true promiseth his presence with them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But 1. I am not satisfied that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Consummation of this world is any more than the winding up or perioding of that Age. I am sure the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the space of 70 or 100 years and sometimes not near so many as Mark 13. 30. which came to pass within 50 years And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no more than the perioding of the Jewish Paedagogie or Church state Heb. 9. 26. 2. I hope Christ is with them now so that there needs not a succession of persons in the same Office which we have proved there never was to whom Christ may make good his promise 3. The Lord promised Joshua never to leave him nor forsake him Josh 1. 5. This Promise he will not say doth necessarily suppose a succession of Officers in the place of Joshua which upon all accounts there was not The Apostle applies it to the Saints Heb 13. 5. And I am of the mind Christ doth as really fulfill that Promise Mat. 28 20. made originally to the Apostles when he vouchsafes his presence to the Saints to comfort quicken uphold defend them according as their exigencies do require as ever he did to the Apostles themselves So little reason is there of asserting the necessity of Officers as successors of the Apostles in their Office of Apostleship to vindicate the faithfulness of Christ in that Promise of his The succession we speak of which the present Ministers pretend to is a personal succession through Papacy i. e. that the Apostles ordained Bishops these ordained others downwards to this day a Catalogue of whom from time to time some pretend to That when Antichristianism overspread the world and the Pope as the Head thereof ordained and sent forth Ministers from whom they received their Office-power these should be notwithstanding not Antichristian is a fond conceit He could not communicate that he had not that he had any true power any other than a false Antichristian Office-power Mr. T. will not have the consideâ—ce to aver So that the whole fardle of words that ensue are not at all to the purpose A succession in doing the same work after them and preaching the same Gospel
Miracles by the Apostle there had been no need to have assembled the Church but it was necessary that to the doing of this act the Church be assembled vers 4 5. 5thly He is to be delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved which is not likely to be effected by Satans Ministry 6thly 'T is more than probable the Church did what the Apostle commanded them to do Now this is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the publick rebuke inflicted by many which many cannot signifie the Apostle but the Church of Corinth all which evince that it was a Church-act and no more than what is practised by the Churches of Christ at this day Though 't is true it is more than the ordinary Excommunication of the Church of England by a Chancellour or Proctor several miles from the Parish-Church to which the person is related and it may be unknown to them an argument they own not this Institution of Christ We add in S. T. as another Institution of Christ 4. That the Officers of his appointment are only such as these Pastors Teachers Elders Deacons Widows or Helpers who as they are in one particular Congregation so they have not any Lordly authority over each other Ephes 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7. and 16. 1. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Phil. 1. 1. 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3. Acts 6. 5. and 15. 2. and 20. 17. and 28. 21 28. 1 Tim. 3. chapt and 5. 9 10 17. This Law of Christ they subject not we say unto set up other Officers and Offices To which Mr. T. 1st There were other Officers given by Chrst besides these mentioned viz. Apostles therefore these are not the only Officers of his appointment Answ 1. Had he said therefore These were not the only Officers of his appointment he had spoken more properly Apostles were of his appointment are not now as we have proved 2. We are speaking of ordinary fixed Officers in the particular Churches of Christ which the Apostles were not so that his instancing these and inference thereupon is frivoâ—ous and impertinent If these had Superiority over others it will not advantage the Animadverter except he can prove the Bishops in respect of Office to be their Successors which he will never be able to do That because the Elders mentioned 1 Tim. 5. 17. must be accounted worthy of double honour therefore they were of a Superiour order of Ministry to lord it over the rest is one of Mr. T. his Consequences that a youth of half a years stâ—nding in the University would be ashamed of Besides Sir the double honour is due to the working Presbyter not the lording loytering Bishop as is the custom of England The person mentioned 2 Cor. 8. 19. was chosen by the Churches for the present expedition was no standing fixed Officer amongst them therefore appertains not to our present disquisition He adds Whether all the Officers and Offices be rightly ordered in the Church of England is not our present inquiry Answ But this is no small part of our present enquiry for if they are not rightly ordered they are not Officers of Christ if they are not such 't is evident they reject this Institution of his set up other Officers and Offices What he tells us is notoriously false viz. That the present Ministers of England have neither Name nor thing required by Christ in this Law is manifestly true Their Parish Ministers are called Priests not Pastors or Teachers 'T is true they have those are called Doctors which signifies Teachers but that is a School not a Church-Title they are call'd so with respect to an Academick degree not with relation to any particular Church or Churches in whom they are placed They have those thaâ— are called Deacons but they are not such Officers as Christ calls so those that come nearest to these are those they call Church-wardens oâ— Overseers of the Poor But they have the thing the Office of preachâ—ng the Gospel continues with them Answ 1. 'T were well if it could be said of many of them that they preached the Gospel Alas they understand it not 2dly However they have not the Office as we prove whilest he suggests the contrary he doth but beg the Question Whether the Assertion That they set up other Officers and Offices as if in open contempt and defiance of Christs Authority be very unrighteously said others will judge I am sure as was said in S. T. They are such of which it may righteously be said he did at no time command them neither did it ever enter into his heart so to do And I challenge Mr. T. to give an instance of the contrary We remark a 5th Institution of Christ in S. T. viz. That these Officers be chosen by the common Suffrage of the Church of Christ according to Acts 1. 15 23 26. and 6. 1 2 3 5. and 14. 23. and 9. 26. which we find the Church in the practise of for some Centuries of Years As the Epistle of Clemens to the Church of Corinth Martin Luther Cyprian Lambard Peter Martyr Bullinger Gualter Zanchy Calvin Beza the united Brethren of Bohemia manifest Of which at large we there treat This Institution of Christ we say the present Ministers conform not to Mr. T. replies 1. He finds not this to be an Appointment of Christ in the Scriptures mentioned Answ Whether it be or not let the Reader judge the impertinency of his Answer to the three first we have already shewed Acts 9. 26 27. proves thus much That 't is in the Churches power to reject any one or refuse to receive him as a Preacher amongst them till they have received satisfaction touching him which doth not a little demonstrate the power of Election of their own Officers to be seated in them For he assayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to joyn himself to the Disciples as a Brother in the fellowship of the Gospel as the word signifies Acts 5. 13. 1 Cor. 6. 16 17. but they would not suffer him so to do till better informed of him and then he comes in and goes out at Jerusalem ver 28. i. e. is owned received by them What follows is a repetition of what he had before said Sect. 22. in answer to the Preface to which we have there spoken Clemens speaks fully to our purpose Ministers must be appointed by famous and discreet men with the good liking and consent of ALL the Church without which it seems they could not be constituted In that which follows in Clemens his Epistle touching a readiness in the Elder or Pastor to depart or return according as the multitude of Believers should determine We have sure a proof that the choice or rejection of a Pastor is seated in them That Luther Bullinger meant no more than the not obtruding unable Ministers on the Churches of Christ is Mr. T. his mistake They both assert the Churches priviledge in the choice of their own Pastors Their voice saith
must either justifie their Canons or manifest that they themselves do not Secondly 'T is notoriously known that that the present Ministers justifie the aforesaid Canons Ecclesiastical and dare not but do so He adds 2dly 'T is not said Caâ— 7. That the Orders and Offices of arch-Arch-Bishops Bishops c. are Orders needful and necessary in the Church of Christ nor is it required therein that Ministers promise subjection and obedience to them Answ 1. But the former of these is fairly implied in the foresaid Canon which saith T is a wicked Error to assert them to be Antichristian or repugnant to the Word of God for which persons are ipso facto to be excommunicated 2. The latter they actually do when they are Ordained Ministers And in Artic. 36. They are to subscribe to this That the Book of Common-Prayer and of Ordering Bishops Priests and Deacons contains nothing contrary to the Word of God and that it may lawfully be used and that they themselves will use the Form in the said Book prescribed in publick Prayers and administration of the Sacraments and none other Whence it follows that they own submit to whatever is contained in the Canons Ecclesiastical though in every particular Canon it is not said they do and the Common-Prayer-Book-Service the Orders and Rites thereof with the Orders and Rites of the Book of Ordering Bishops Priests and Deacons So that when we prove this or that to be contained it this or that Canon we prove their submission thereunto Canonical Obedience or Obedience to these Canons being what at the time of their Ordination as was said they promise to the Bishop which is a sufficient answer to all that Mr. T. asserts in this Sect. In Can. 4. The Liturgy-Worship is asserted to be the Worship of God whoever affirms It is a corrupt superstitious and unlawfull Worship of God is to be excommunicated They promise at the time of their Ordination as was said To use the Form in the Common-Prayer-Book prescribed in Publick Prayers and none other which if it be not a sufficient proof that they own and submit to it I must profess I shall for ever despair of ability to prove any thing His exceptions to the Third Particular touching their engaging to conform to the Rites of the Common-Prayer Book are not worth the mentioning They own Fourthly The Office of a Deacon to be the first step to the Order of Priesthood inasmuch as this is asserted so to be in the Book of Ordering Priests and Deacons to which they are to subscribe by Can. 36. and Can. 32. It 's fairly intimated also Fifthly That no person be admitteâ— to expound the Scriptures though judged worthy of the Cure of Souls withâ—ut License from the Bishop thereunto is plainly asserted Can. 49. Though the words judged worthy of the cure of Souls be not expressed they are evidently implied the Cure they there speak of can be no other thâ—n that they so call Sixthly That there be some lawful Ministers which are no Preachers And Seventhly That these unpreaching Ministers may lawfully administer the Ordinances of Baptism and the Lords Supper is fully asserted Can. 49 57. So is the Eighth particular touching the sentence of Excommunication to be passed upon such as refuse to have their Children Baptized or to receive the Sacrament from such dumb Ministers Ninthly Though it be not said in so many words That Confirmation by Diocesan Bishops is an Ordinance of God Can. 6. yet it is fairely implied and in the Common-Prayer-Book they bottom it upon the Apostles practice which fully evinceth they esteem it as such That it Tenthly appertains to the Office of Ministers to Marry the regulation of the Ministers therein by Can. 62. clearly manifests Eleven That the Bishop of the Diocesse may lawfully suspend a Minister from his Ministry for refusing to bury the Dead Mr. T. grants is presupposed Can. 68. So is 12thly The unlawfulness of Ministers Preaching and administring the Communion in private Houses except in time of necessity And 13thly The unlawfulness of appointing Fasts holding Meetings for Sermons Can. 71 72. I wonder he dare aver the contrary Whether 14thly It be not said Can. 74. That Ministers ought to be distinguished by their Vestments and Apparrel as Gowns Hoods c. Let the Reader satisfie himself by the perusal of the said Canon to which their practice is known to be correspondent Having instanced in these 14 particulars we add in S. T. Are any of these Ordinances of the appointment of Christ when and where were they instituted by him To which this Animadverter replies 1. That he might answer by cross interrogations Are the Church Covenant-gathering-Churches in the Congregational way election of Ministers by the Church c. Ordinances of Christ when and where were they instituted Answ 1. He may so indeed but he must not imagine that any one besides himself will take this for an Answer to what is proposed and argued in this matter by us 2. Of the particulars instanced by him we have hinted somewhat in S. T. and more largely in this Treatise proving them to be Ordinances of Christ Cotton Ainsworth Bartlet Robbinson Canne c. have distinctly proved these matters at large When Mr. T. or any one else is able to say half so much for the particulars instanced in we will openly acknowledge our errour and mistake But 2dly He grants They are not Ordinances and Institutions of Christ. Answ Ingeniously said Church-Government by Arch-Bishops Bishops and the rest of that Hierarchy is no Ordinance of Christ then are they not Ministers of Christ for none are such but by his Institution The Lyturgie-Worship Rites enjoyned in the Common-Prayer-Book the Office of a Deacon as the first step to the Priesthood denial to expound the Scripture without the Bishops License unpreaching Ministers or bare Readers administration of Sacraments by such Confirmation by Diocesan Bishops the Marrying of persons burying the dead by the Priest are no Ordinances of Jesus Christ is acknowledged by Mr. T. Yet all these and much more as a National Church are owned and submâ—tted to by the present Ministers Therefore they do own and submit to Ordinances that are not of the appointment of Christ their own Advocate being judge We add in S. T. That these are Posts set by the Lords Posts of which he complains Ezek. 43. 8. who sees not To which Mr. T. replies I see not I think him in a dream or phrensie that saith he sees it no Interpreters that I have met with so expâ—und the place Answ 1. 'T is no disparagement to Mr. T. that he sees not every thing though some think he sees further than he is pleased to own in his Theodulia or at least hath done so and are sorry to find him at that toilsom work of building again the things he once destroyed Nor am I 2dly concerned with his thoughts touching this matter If I am in a phrensie 't is through grace an holy one