they only were the choosers Produce if you can but one instance out of any Author wherein the word is used in such a sense as you contend for viz. for some to choose by other mens voices Our old English translation When they had ordained them Elders by election doth plainly hold out that two distinct acts ordaining and electing yet not two distinct agents are included under that one word Beza upon the place though he sayes enough to shew that Ordination from Popish Bishops is not necessary yet endeavours not to prove that Imposition of hands is not included under the Greek word To say that Imposition of hands is there meant vi vocis by the proper signification of the word is indeed absurd but to hold it is included ex natura rei from the nature of the thing the making of Church-officers and the example of the Apostles elswhere upon like occasions is no absurdity As for Cartwright though he is a little warmer in many expressions then needed yet in the close he is exceeding wary and sayes They speak untruly which accuse us Protestants as if we so commended the Churches election as we shut out the Bishops ordination which we do not only give unto them but make them also the chief and directors in the Election understanding by Bishops only such as are mentioned in Scripture and not humane creatures All that followes might be spared but that you have a great mind to let the world know you sometimes look into a Greek Dictionary and lest some Readers be beguiled by your shew of Learning I shall therefore omit nothing especially because you earnestly call for observation Yea let it further be observed that in Election and Ordination the same word is used In Election Act. 1. 23. Act. 6. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Ordination it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same word with the addition of a Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only Ans That Act. 1. 23. speaks not properly of Election in your sense is already proved Neither is Election to be understood by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Act. 6. 6. In the 5. verse it is said of the whole multitude they chose Steven c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sixth verse sayes they set them viz. those whom they had chosen before the Apostles not over themselves by way of authority but before them that they might Ordain them I wonder at your boldnesse with the Scripture and especially at your abuse of words in the Originall language The truth is though the Apostles referred the choice of fit persons to the people yet as they took unto themselves to prescribe the qualifications and the number of the persons wherein they make themselves Judges of the election so they reserved unto themselves the constitution and ordination of them and thereby plainly declare that Election without an Ordination suffices not no not in the case of Deacons and much lesse of Ministers of the Word And in this they seem plainly to have an eye as in all things that belong to the politie of the Church to the common-wealth of Israel and to Moses his manner of making officers among the Jews whereof we read in Deuteronomy Take or give ye wise men and understanding among your tribes and I will make them * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud Sept. rulers over you ch 1. 13. And ye answered me and said The thing which thou hast spoken is good for us to do v. 14. so I took the chief of your tribes wise men and known and made them * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 heads over you v. 15. This gives great light to that in the Acts if the phrases be compared But all this while we have nothing for Election alone without Ordination But something we have for Ordination by your own grant for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 refers to Ordination You must needs intend this of the phrase in Act. 6. 3. and if there it be so understood it is the more likely to have the same sense in Tit. 1. 5. which you denyed before Yet you seem loth to grant that truth which you dare not deny and therefore having said that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Act. 1. 23. and Act. 6. 6. is to be understood of Election and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that you mean out of Act. 6. 3. of Ordination yet you go about to prove that the simple and compound word have the same sense and signification that by this grammaticisme you may seem to gain something Thus men who are ready to sink use to catch at any thing or the shadow of a thing Hitherto we have not found an Election in any sense without an Ordination as Act. 6. or something more as an extraordinary decision by lots but it may be we shall anon And as the translators of the Bible render both words Appoint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They appointed Act. 1. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We will appoint Act. 6. 3. So the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not alter the sense specifically from the word when it is without it no not in the matter of making an Officer for it is all one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as H. Stephen observes In the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to place one and to place one with honour when the phrase is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He shall set the sheep on his right hand Mat. 25. 33. it is an authoritative word as Rom. 3. 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We establish the Law And the Septuagint whom Luke is observed to follow most use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Chron. 9. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These did David and Solomon appoint in their set office Ans This great shew of something comes to nothing For granting that the simple and compound word have sometimes for alwayes they have not the same signification yet it will not follow that they have the same sense in the Texts alleadged as appears by that which hath been said already The action of the hundred and twenty in appointing two out of which God was to choose one was not of the same nature with Gods appointing one because neither of the two were made Apostles by the former act but one alone by the latter And that of the Multitude in setting seven men before the Twelve was not of like nature with the Apostles in Ordaining them Whereas you say in the margin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud Eustath you abuse your self and the Reader because neither the simple nor the compound in his sense are to be understood as you understand them here And H. Stephan of whose words you pretend not to be ignorant and are therefore the more inexcusable hath it thus At Eustathius â—ult 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse pro simplici 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
Lord giveth leave Harm Eng. pag. 253. 254. The Augustane Confession Art 14. Concerning Ecclesiasticall Orders they teach that no man De Ordine ecclesiastico docent quod nemo debeat in ecclesia publice docere auâ— Sacramenta administrare nisi rite vocatus Sicut Paulus praecipit Tito ut in civitatibus Presbyteros constituat Corp. Conf. par 1. p. 16. should publikely in the Church teach or minister the Sacraments except he be rightly Called according as St. Paul giveth commandement to Titus to Ordain Elders in every city Harm Eng. p. 258. The latter Conf. of Helvetia chap. 18. Furthermore no man ought to usurp the honour of the Nemo autem honorem Ministerii ecclesiastici usurpare sibi i. e. ad se largitionibus aut ullis artibus aut arbitrio proprio rapere debet Dâ—mnamus hic omnes qui fua spoâ—â—â— currunt cum non sint electi missi nec Ordinaâ—â— Corp. Conf. par 1. pag. 59. Ecclesiasticall Ministery that is to say greedily to pluck it to him by bribes or any evill shifts or of his own accord We do here therefore condemn all those which run of their own accord being neither chosen sent nor Ordained Harm Engl. p. 236. The Conf. of Wirtemberg Art 20. Neither is it unknown that Christ in his Church hath Nec est obscurum qd Christus instituerit in ecclesia sua Ministros qui adnâ—ncient Evangelium suum dispensent Sacramenta ejus Nec permittendum est cuivis quamvis spirituali sacerdoti ut sine legitima vocatione usurpet publicum Ministerium in Ecclesia Corp. Conf. par 2. pag. 164. instituted Ministers who should Preach his Gospel and Administer the Sacraments Neither is it to be permitted to every one although he be a spirituall Priest to usurp a publike Ministery in the Church without a lawfull Calling Harm Engl. p. 265. The ENGLISH Conf. Further we say that the Minister ought lawfully duly Credimus Ministrum legitime vocari oportere rectè atque ordine praefici ecclesiae Dei neminem autem ad sacrum Ministetium pro suo arbitrio libidine posse se intrudere Corp. Conf. par 1. pag. 116. See also the 23 Art among the 39. and Corp. Conf. p. 131. and orderly to be preferred to that office of the Church of God and that no man hath power ro wrest himself into the Holy Ministery at his own pleasure Harm Eng. p. 255. PROPOS III. In Calling to the Ministery besides Election Ordination is to be used where it may be had Act. 6. 2. ch 13. 2. ch 14. 23. Titus 1. 5. 1 Tim. 5. 22. And besides the usuall way of Ordaining by Prayer Fasting and Imposition of hands there is no other spoken of in any Confession of the Reformed Churches The Conf. of Helvetia quo supra And those which are chosen let them be Ordained of the Elders with publike prayer and laying on of hands We do here therefore condemn all those which run of their own accord as before Harm Engl. p. 236. See also the former Conf. of Helv. Har. Eng. p. 242. Corp. Conf. par 1. pag. 90. The SAXON Confession We do retain in our Churches also the publike rite of Retinemus igitur in nostris ecclesiis publicuÌ„ ritum Ordinationis quo comendatur MinisteriuÌ„ Evangelii verè electls quorum mores doctrinam prius exploramus Corp. Conf. par 2. pag. 99. Ordination whereby the Ministery of the Gospel is commended to those that are truly chosen whose manners and doctrine we do first throughly examine Harm Eng. pag. 225. The BELGICK Confess Art 31. We believe that the Ministers Seniors and Deacons Credimus Ministros Seniores Diaconos debere ad functiones illas suas vocari promoveri legitimâ Ecclesiae electione adhibitâ ad eam seril Dei invocatione atque co ordine ac modo qui nobiâ— Dei verbo praescribitur Corp. Conf. par 1. pag. 179. ought to be Called to their functions and by the lawfull Election of the Church to be advanced into those rooms earnest prayer being made unto God and after the Order and manner which is set down unto us in the Word of God Harm Eng. p. 258. Note here that besides Prayer they speak of an Order and manner set down unto us in the Word of God which for Ministers and Deacons relates to laying on of hands or Ordination if I understand them The Confession of BOHEMIA ch 9. But Ministers ought not of their own accord to presse Dâ—cent Ministros Ecclesiae quibus administratio verbi sacramentorum demandatur ritè institutos esse oportere ex Domini Apostolorum praescripto Atque hi probentur prius tum demum factâ precatione per manâ—um impositionem confirmentur à Senioribus forward in that Calling but ought according to the example or commanded rather for so ' its in the Latine ex praescripto of the Lord and the Apostles to be lawfully appointed and Ordained thereunto They teach also that above all things they be proved and tryed by examination and so afterward Prayer and Fasting being made they may be confirmed or approved or rather as it should be translated Let them be confirmed those words or approved have nothing to answer to them in the Latine by laying on of hands Harm Eng. p. 246. Let the Reader observe that he who published the Harmony of Confessions in English was no friend to Ordination and Imposition of hands as appeares not only by his Notes upon every passage where Imposition of hands is mentioned but by his Translation here But that the sense of the Bohemians may be the better understood I shall here adde the words of the Waldenses out of their most antient Confession the first that ever was extant against Popery Ad plenam Presbyteri gradationem tria esse necessaria Baâ— Lâ—d Wald. to 2. p. 14. approbamus Primum probatio vitae fidei donorum fidelitatis quoque in exilioribus negotiis creditis Alterum orationes cum jejuniâ— Postremum contributio potestatis aptis ad hoc verbis manuum impositio adcorroborationem For the Church of SCOTLAND In their Second book of Discipline ch 2 3. The Divines of that Church speak clearly fully and most accurately to all the former propositions To the first in the 2. chap. to the second and third in the 3. chap. Without lawfull Calling it was never leasome i. e. lawfull Doct. Disc of the Church of Scotl. p. 81. to any person to meddle with any function Ecclesiasticall There are two sorts of Calling one extraordinary by God immediately as was of the Prophets and Apostles which in Kirks established and well already reformed hath no place The other Calling is ordinary which besides the Calling of God and inward testimony of a good Conscience is the lawfull approbation and outward judgement of men according to Gods word and order established in the Kirk This ordinary and outward Calling hath
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But you say the custome was among the Graecians in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or lawfull meetings that the people joyned Votes with the Rulers and the Rulers with the people before any act was accounted legall Yea it may be rather referred to the people than to them for the people sometimes voted alone but the Ruler did never Answ For this I think you cite Budaeus and Henry Stephen but at large go and consult them once againe you wrong those learned men while you would have us to beleeve that they were as ignorant of the Greek story as your selfe or that this is to be found in them which is not For what you here assert were it true of some particular Common-wealth in Greece at somâ— time yet it is far from truth concerning all the Grecians generally The Rulers in Athens often met apart and voted apart nothing was or might bee brought into their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but what the Rulers had first consulted and concluded * Sam. Petitus in comment ad leges Atticas lâ—b 2. de legibus titulo 1. p. 116. A Law made by the Senate alone stood good for a yeere before the people were consulted with about it And this was one of Solons Lawes sine Senatus praejudicio populus nullâ de re rogator Let the people be consulted with in nothing which the Senate have not predetermined * There were a sort of Rulers among them who voted things amongst themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before the Senate and the Common Hall * idem p. 123. See more to the clearing of this in Henri Steph. Tom. 4. p. 429. G. But imagine all was as you say of the custome among the Graecians in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lawfull civill meetings what is that to binde Christians in their Churches Paul saith we have no such Custome nor the Churches of God T is not said nor the 1 Cor. 11. 16. Churches of Greece as meaning civill Assemblies You must first prove that the government of the Church is Democraticall and that every single Congregation among us is to have the same power which a Common-Hall had among them and that our manner of proceeding is to be regulated by theirs before you argue from the one to the other But to go on And in this sense say you it is to be taken by the Reverend Engl. Pop. cer p. 166. Divine of Scotland his words are But it is objected that Luke saith not of the whole Church but of Paul and Barnabas that they made them by voices Elders in every city Ans But how can we imagine that betwixt them two alone the matter went to suffrages Election by most voices or the lifting up of the hand in token of a suffrage had place only among a multitude assembled together Wherefore we say with Junius that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is both a common and particular action whereby a man chooseth by his own suffrage in particular and likewise with others in common one so that in one and the same action we cannot divide those things which are so joyned together Ans The sense you mean as I suppose is this Paul and Barnabas as Rulers together with the People who had interest of authority in this busines by joint suffrage or election made Elders not Paul and Barnabas alone This you call the sense of a reverend Divine of Scotland in other passages you cite the same book as speaking the sense of that Church 1. Though I reverence the Church and the Divine thereof yet I cannot but remember Amicus Plato c. though Junius be heretaken in yet all will not help to prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth necessarily refer in this place to any other than to Paul and Barnabas It sufficeth against the Papists that the people are not excluded by the Word but how it shall be proved that they are included by vertue of it I see not The note of Grotius upon the place is worth observing Solâ—â— quidâ—m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sumi de quavis electione et iâ—m quae ab â—â—â— vel pancis fit 2. And be it granted that Paul and Barnabas made Elders with the consent of the people as it is by Grotius himself and Protestants generally their consent is one thing and by their authority another that must be granted not from the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but from analogy of the act of making Ministers with that of choosing Matthias Act. 1. or Deacons Act. 6. or from some other ground 3. Neither need it seem strange that a thing should go to suffrage between two if we consider what we read of Barnabas and Paul in the case of John Mark Act. 15. 37 38. and what is the meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which refers to God alone Act. 10. 42. 4. When Junius saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is both a common and particular action his meaning cannot be that there must be many of divers sorts people as well as rulers or else there is no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And granting as he doth that it may signifie a particular action it cannot be from the word proved that more joyn in the action then are said to joyn Besides where two alone do joyn there is actus communis particularis simul And as to the Text in â—and only Paul and Barnabas are here expressed to be those who gave suffrage And when two are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it s not necessary to understand twenty or two hundred Two Consuls may be said truly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both by a common and a particular act when they joyn in any busines belonging to them as Consuls though the whole Senatus Populúsque Romanus do not Vote with them Those Divines among us Protestants as Calvin and Ames * Calvin instit l. 4. c. 3. §. 15. Nempe sic Romani historici non rarò loquntur consulem qui comitia habuerit creasse novos magistratus non aliam ob causam nisi quia suffragia receperit populum moderatus sit in eligendo * Amesius Bellarm. enerv 10. 2. l. 3. c. 2. §. 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is dicitur qui praeâ—st 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quo sensu tribuitur presbyteriâ— primariis vel episcopis aliquaÌ„do apud Euseb who answer the Papists that Paul and Barnabas are said to ordain because they gave direction and had precedence in this businesse do thereby acknowledge that the action is here expresly ascribed to them alone To that which follows But if the word they ordained be referred to Paul and Barnabas and signifie to create or make an Officer who was nons before yet the power whereby this creation is wrought is not their own only for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is creare per suffragia as H. Stephen renders it which is as much as to say they did it not only vertually in the power
power to choose themselves a Minister and by that act of theirs to make him one without Ordination who otherwise is none even when there is a way open for his Ordination for that must here be supposed remains yet for you to prove That Prayer alone is a separation of one to the Ministery is but your bare assertion and to cite Act. 13. 2 3. for the proof of this is bold presumption and abuse of Scripture That Deacons were separated with prayer and imposition of hands without fasting for there is no mention of that we read in Act. 6. 6. And that Paul and Barnabas were separated by prayer fasting and imposition of hands we read also Act. 13. 2 3. But what 's this to prove separation by Prayer only and that also by the people alone without Ministers and Elders Adde further Our translators of the Bible take and render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to ordain which signifies properly to choose And where the Scripture speaks expresly of choosing they supply the text with the word Ordain Ans Our translators use the word Ordain for the English of severall words in the Greek as in the Old Testament for that one English word Idols there be many and divers words Elilim Gillu lim Teraâ—him Baalâ—m Tsirim c. in the Hebrew This liberty is necessary and almost unavoidable in many places and the more warrantable because the Holy Ghost speaking in divers places of the same thing does often vary in the manner of expressing And this is to be found not only by comparing those places which are cited out of the Hebrew in the Greek of the New Testament but also one place of the Hebrew with another as Ainsworth often observes in his Annotations That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 often signifies properly to choose in some places is granted provided that you acknowledge it may signifie sometimes as properly to ordain for it may indifferently be applied as well to Magistrates when by vote or suffrage they constitute which is by way of authority to ordain as to People when they elect or choose by way of priviledge or of power Whereas you say the Scripture speaks expresly of choosing in Act. 1. 22. and yet the Translators supply the text with the word ordain it is a great injury not only to the Translators but to the Scripture it self and to the Holy Ghost who is the author of them The 21. and 22. Verses being taken in together to make up one entire sentence tell us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One must be made witnesse with us of Christs resurrection Here the Scripture speaks expresly of making not of choosing and of one to be made not by the people but by God Among those who were present there were not people only but those who were greater then Ministers and Elders and they appointed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or presented and nominated two that God might choose one * Non audent unum aliquem certo nomina re sed duos in medium producunt Dominâ—s sorte declaret utrum ex iis velit succedere Calv. inst l. 4. c. 3. s 13. Shew whether of these two thou hast chosen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here indeed the Scripture speaks of Gods choosing one and such a kind of choosing may well be called ordaining because it is a constitutive and consummating act whereby the people are bound to receive one as set over them by God But in the making of Matthias an Apostle the people had no such power as in this sense to choose him if they had why were lots used for then they might have pitched on one without using such a means of decision Hen. Stephan calls the act of choice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 creare magistratum the making of an Officer for it is as he sayes a new-found sense of the word to signifie laying on of hands And if the Apostle Luke should use it for laying on of hands Engl. pop cer p. 155 166. Carth. on Act. 14. 23. it was never used so before his time by any writer holy or prophane And unlesse his purpose was to write that which none should read it must needs be that as he wrote so he meant Election by voyces sayes Cartwright Ans Henry Stephan sayes that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a-among other things creare magistratum the making of a Magistrate at cum accusatiâ—o personae creare Sic etiam Act. 14. citing the words of the Text and adds At vetus interpres Quum constituissent But then he tells you Sunt tamen qui ad ritum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. impositionis manum id referri putent quum alioqui novum usum huic verbo hic tribuere minimè necesse videntur Here you discover either negligence or fraud The sense of the word which he approves in that Text Act. 14 is creating or constituting others he sayes understand by it imposition of hands this he calls a new use of the word and sayes it may seem not necessary yet he does not deny but the word may beare that sense because he knew well what he had said before that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 manum portendo attollo manum porrigo and that in Imposition of hands there is a lifting up and stretching out of the hands for what is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he also expresses it The Text speaks of constituting and because in constituting Church-officers imposition of hands was the rite used in the Apostles times therefore it should not seem so strange a thing to hold that as the act of Paul and Barnabas in choosing Presbyters so also the consequent act of imposing hands should be comprehended under that one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seeing the etymologie of the word agrees to the latter if the use do not Certain it is that the Greek Fathers and Councels do use the word for imposition of hands most frequently as Bilson instances at large * Of Perp. Government which they would never have done if the nature of the word would Dr. Fulk in locum sayes both election by the Church and Ordination by imposition of hands of the Apostles are comprehended under that one word not have borne such a use And it is as certain that many Greek words are used in the New Testament in such a sense as they are no where else to be found those common words of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are enough to prove it And if you will needs have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie nothing but an act of choice or election by voices as you call it yet Paul and Barnabas were the choosers and this makes nothing for popular election which you would haue to be the unum and unicum necessarium in the Calling of a Minister and yet you cannot prove by this word as there used that the people chose at all and much lesse that
calling of a Minister But as to the regular and ordinary lawfull Calling of a Minister if precept and examples out of Scripture the generall practise of the Church in all ages from the Primitive downward with that of the Reformed Churches ever since the foundations of the Second-Temple-mysticall have been laid among them or arguments drawn out of Scripture and from the judgement of Protestant Divines conforme thereunto will determine any Question I shall presume notwithstanding all you have insisted on unto the contrary That Ordination h. e. an act of Ministers and Elders as such whereby they IN THE NAME OF CHRIST separate and set apart a meet person to the Work and office of a Minister is necessary and more or lesse essentiall to his Calling For Imposition of hands though many things unavoydably as either You those Authors which you have cited or the nature of the thing gave occasion have been touched upon about it yet it followes now more particularly to be considered Yet stay a while Upon perusall of the papers after the Presse had made some progresse I take notice of a double oversight one in my self another in you besides some errata's of the Printer In the transcribing of your part a few things are unwittingly omitted which should be in the margin yet for the things themselves you shall find an answer Only one passage which is with you pag. 8. in the body of the Tract I forgot to set down at length and therefore though out of place I supply it here which should have been inserted pag. 29. before the fourth reason This meaning your third is the reason of Crocius in Anti Soc. diâ—p 24. see 3. defence of the Protestants against the Socinians Distinguimus inter necessitatem Vocationis Ordinationis sayes he We distinguish between the necessity of having a Call and of being Ordained * Illa est necessaria ratione mandati haec ratione ordinis consâ—itutionis Ecclesiasticae Illa est constitutio in officio quae si legitima est duo habet 1. Vt à Dco quis eligatur 2. Vt per antâ—cedentem poâ—uli consensum eligatur A Deo eligitur cum ipse donis exornaâ— c. A Calling is necessary by reason of Gods command Ordination is necessary in respect of order and Ecclesiasticall constitution The Calling is the Constitution of one in Office which if it be lawfull hath two things in it 1 That one be chosen of God 2 That he be chosen by the antecedent consent of the people One chosen of God when he is adorned with gifts c. To this besides what I have already said pag. 28. lin 22. seq I shall now adde further 1. That the Socinians insisting only upon this question Whether a Constitution by way of Ordination be altogether necessary to the making of a Minister are not as you think to be opposed neither are the Reformed Churches nor Protestant Divines of any other judgement then they and therefore what needs Crocius to defend the Protestants against them in this point or professe himself Anti-Socinian unlesse he will say more for Ordination then they have done which cannot well be but by holding it to be essentiall 2. It 's granted that there is lesse necessity of Ordination then of Calling yea that Ordination is not alwayes alike necessary but according to the state of the Church And it might be proved that there is a case wherein it is so far from being necessary that it is not lawfull But it will not thence follow that in no case it is essentiall 3. Those Scriptures which prove the lawfulnesse of it will prove more For we cannot argue from the bare example of the Apostles Thus they did therefore we may do the same Because it follows not in all things Therefore De Eccl. Pontis Praejud Disser 6. p. 149. Crocius in a later Work flies to 1 Tim. 5. 22. for his ground and proof and there we have a precept 4. That Order and Ecclesiasticall constitution which he speaks of can be understood of none other then Apostolicall and those things which the Apostles wrote about Order were commandements 1 Cor. 14. 37. 5. Whereas he sayes A Calling is necessary by Gods command and after seems to shew what he means by Calling namely that the person constituted be chosen by the antecedent consent of the People You know full well no command of God can be found for this way of Calling but as it is gathered out of examples by consequence from Act. 1. and the 6 chap. And if those examples imply a command for the Peoples Election one way I would hear some solid reasons why the like command is not to be concluded out of examples for Ordination 6. Whether the antecedent consent of the People be alwayes necessary is not the point at present under debate But this is his sense That the power of choosing is the right of the whole Church and belongâ—th not to the People alone as we commonly understand the word And the antecedent consent of Ministers and Elders is I 'le be bold to say it necessary unto a Call And that granted suffices to the matter of Ordination as it is here considered 7. To that That one is chosen of God when he is adorned with gifts I think you your self make some scruple of it When the Ministers of England have pleaded among other things to prove their Calling the gifts which God had given them Those of the Separation in their Writings are wont to tell them Qualification is no Calling Neither dare I say Every one that is sit to be a Minister is called to be one And in a mediate Calling the testimony of competent Judges concerning Abilities and the right to exercise them is most necessary and that useth to be in the orderly way of Gods prescribing in the Word by Ordination Now Sir give me leave to minde you of an oversight in yourself You told us in your Title-page of the Judgement of the Reformed Churches as a distinct part from that of Protestant Divines Why are none of their Confessions cited or Books of Discipline Make they for you or against you If they be on your side would you spare to tell us Suppose they were against you yet you might not conceale it while you pretend to hold it out As for particular men their Judgement is not tanti if it agree not with the Church in generall He that made the Observations on the Harmony of Confessions in English will help you out a little but the Confessions themselves are not as it seems for your turn As for the Divines which you have cited of the Lutherans there are but two Hunnius and Tarnovius and of the Calvinists but three Ames Voetius and Cortiuâ— Though each of them be Reverend yet they are but of yesterday either living or lately dead too few to make up a full verdict touching the Historicall part of the point in question Indeed you have not
Ordination consisteth in the appointing of such for the holy Ministry by persons in office Ruth Due right of Presbyteries p. 186. â— dist have first chosen will not easily be proved * It is not of the substance of the calling to bee chosen by voices of the people Dr. Fulke on Act. 14. 23. 4. Whereas you speak of Ordination commonly so called you name neither Church nor Divine who state it as you do here and I think you can name none Be it an act of Ministers or Elders after Examination and Election there must be something added to make it a definition or description In stead of the quid rei you give us only the quâ—â—dâ— If your proofs have no more strength then your expâ—â—ation hath clearnesse and fulnesse you may still conceale your â—aâ—e and that will be your best advantage In that sence Ordination is not essentiall to the Calling of Minister Ans 1. This implies there is a scripture-Scripture-sense wherein Ordination is essentiall to the Calling of a Minister or else you oppose it in all sences and then what needs those words in that sence If there be a sence wherein you with the Reformed Churches and Protestant Divines do grant it why is that concealed 2. If your Thesis had been intirely expressed it would run thus Ordination as it is commonly taken for an act of Ministers or Elders after Examination and Election is not essentiall to the calling of a Minister Put then what 's the meaning of it That no act of Ministers and Elders about the calling of a Minister is essentiall thereunto or none but Examination and Election I suppose it is not your sence that Examination and Election by Ministers or Elders is essentiall to the calling of a Minister and thaâ— these together are commonly called Ordination That no act of Ministers or Elders whatsoever is essentiall to a Ministers calling will not be found to be the judgement of the Reformed Churches and Protestant Divines and that without limitation and restriction which Formadat esse Materia est part quid ditatis yet in your Title you pretend unto 3. The word essentiall may prove a blind to some readers being a term of art which learned ones agree not about That forme gives being and yet matter is part of the quiddity as also Quod essentiaÌ„am rei non constituit sine eo essentia rei salva esse potest Propria adjuncta non constituunt essentirei Ergo sine iis essentia rei salva esse potest â—x consequenti nâ—n debent vocari essentialia Heiz Nullus Philosophorum in â—oto orbe terrarâ—i dabit tibi Majorem Rod. Goclen ad Piscâ—â— Piscator in Thesibus p. 604. the distinction of essentiall into 1. antecedent 2. constituent and 3. consequent is common in the Schooles yet in a learned company I have heard it to be by one of them little lesse then hissed at One Heizo propounding this argument against Piscator The essence of a thing may be without that which doth not constitute it Proper adjuncts do not constitute the essence Therefore the essence may be without them and consequently they are not to be called essentiall Rodolphus Goclenius Professor at Marpurg answers for Pisc No Philosopher in all the world will grant the Major So as if Ordination were not constitutive yet if it did necessarily follow upon that act which doth as suppose Election by Ministers or Elders with the consent of the Church it might be called essentiall What think you of this Whether Ordination be not at ' * Zanc. makes Election and Ordination parts of Calling So Ames If parts then essential or integrall least an integrall part of a Ministers calling and whether some integrall parts be not essentiall to an integrall whole and Ordination such a part of Calling 4. In plain words I suppose this to be your meaning No man who desires to be a Minister needs be Ordained and if he be he is not thereby made a Minister And this you assert without any distinction of time or state of the Church or of Calling whether it be mediate or immediate ordinary extraordinary or mixt You might as well say Mariage as an act of Ministers or Magistrates after the consent of the parties is not essentiall to the calling of man and wife none need to be so married and if they be they are not thereby made man and wife Wise men would soon perceive that your word essentiall would not be a sufficient salvo against the danger of such a position families are likely to be destroyed by it notwithstanding He that sayes no act of Ministers or Elders is essentiall to a Ministers call will say as much with fairer pretence of Magistrates and then either nothing is essentiall or something to be done by the people or something immediately on Gods part what followes upon this but either Erastianisme that there is no Church-power or Order Brownisme that all power is in the body of the people or Enthusiasme that every man is to act in sacris as he is led by inspiration without respect to politie If this be your judgement yet methinks it sounds not like the judgement of the Reformed Churches and Protestant Divines Papists use to impose such a sence upon them and they use to disclaim it Yet I do not wonder that you are thus bold with them seeing you begin with First Second and Third c. which must be understood either of Scripture or Reason or both as if right reason and that Spirit which leadeth into all truth were fully on your side in this cause whereas I fear they are not 5. As to your position in your own terms Ordination is not essentiall to the calling of a Minister the Reader who is to judge betwixt us both must observe this mysterie Ordination is taken two wayes in the Reformed Churches among Protestant Divines 1. First and most frequâ—ntly for the rite of imposing hands which is the last act whereby a Ministers calling is consummated This because they call it a rite they do not count essentiall that is alwâ—yes and in all cases absolutely necessary especially as appropriated unto Bishops distinct from Presbyters jure divino but they hold it to be lawfull and more or lesse necessary in a setled and well-ordered Church 2. Ordination signifies that act wherein and whereby Church-governours do in the name and stead of Christ set apart one to be a Minister and by such separation make him one with Prayer Fasting and either with or without Imposition of hands Here they distinguish of the time and state of the Church and though in my observation the terme essentiall be used sparingly yet the necessity of this thing in the substance of it in a mediate calling and regular state of the Church is every where asserted * Nemo ad ordinariam in Ecclesia functionem admitti debeat nisi legitime vocatus eoque legitime electus ordinatus Zanch. in
4 praec You in all your Exercitation confound those things and whereas your Position as you state it and explain it in the beginning runs upon this latter sence those Authors which you cite speak of the former only So as if your sense and the Reformed Churches be cleerly held forth you and they will be found opposites Nothing to be done by Ministers or Elders at any time or in any state of the Church or in any case which may befall a Minister in his calling is essentiall thereunto That 's your sense Unto the ordinary mediate calling of a Minister in the regular state and condition of the Church it is necessary or essentiall that those who are already Ministers do try examine approve and actually set apart those who are to succeed them in the same kind of Calling and this uses to be by prayer fasting and imposition of hands This latter I believe will appear to be the judgement of the Reformed Churches and their Ministers at least wise for any thing that you have yet produced unto the contrary which what it is comes now to be considered 1. Arg. Treat p. 5. The word To ordain Tit. 1. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 even when it is used concerning Officers signifies to fixe settle establish one who was in office before as appears by Psal 2. 6. where the Septuagint use the same word Paul doth to Titus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ans In this paragraph you seem to imagine this argument If Ordination be essentiall to the calling of a Minister then Titus 1. 5. compared with Act. 14. 23. must prove it to be so because in those places we read of some who were made Ministers by Ordination only and have little else to guide us in things of this kind but examples Hereupon you set your self by way of undermining to make a shew that no such proposition can be gathered out of those Texts and instead of laying down your grounds directly for your own position you give us in an oblique insinuation that the contrary cannot be proved And though it might suffice to say that the places instanced in bear not the whole stresse of the affirmative against your thesis and if the whole of your implied assumption was granted yet the consequence remains unproved yea suppose all were true which is contained in your own expresse assertion that the word To ordain Tit. 1. 5. signifies to fixe settle c. It follows not therefore Ordination is not essentiall because though it have such a signification in some places in Titus it may have another Yet I shall answer more particularly 1. Here is no proof that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Titus 1. 5. must have the same sense and signification with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Psal 2. 6. 2. The Hebrew of the Psalm should rather be consulted with then the Septuagint a corrupt translation Especially because it renders that passively contrary to all other Greek * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aq. 5 Ed. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sym. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sexta ed. Translators as spoken by David or Christ which should be active as spoken by God The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is I have annointed or powred out ordained authorised * The translation of the Seventy cannot be retained but force must be offered unto the Hebrew text in three places as Rivet and others upon the Psalm observe * Ainsw on the place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Que verba retineri non possunt quin vis flat Ebraico textus tribus in locis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—sakti legatur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nisakti in Niphal pro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 malki regem meum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 malko rex ejus pro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kodeshi sanctuÌ„ menÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kodsho Rivetus Musculus besides the same observation with Rivet observes further against the Greek translator Et adjecit quod in textu non est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. in eo Chaldaus Paraphrastes Ebraicam veritatem retinuit 3. As for the Hebrew word it may relate to Gods decree Yet have I see my King upon my holy hill of Sion that is my eternall decree and purpose Which is the more probable because of that which followes in the next verse I will declare the decree c. In Prov. 8. 23. where we have the phrase used passively * I was set up from everlasting from the beginning or ever the earth was it cannot be understood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 otherwise then of Christs eternall generation or that decree of God whereby he was assigned to his Incarnation and Offices In neither way it will agree to your sense of of fixing setling or establishing one who was in office before 4. There is a vast difference between setling per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of might and per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of authority God might set a King in Sion especially as you understand it by force but Titus could set Elders from city to city no otherwise then by the peaceable exercise of spirituall power And therefore there 's the lesse likelihood that we should have recourse to the 2. Psalme to understand that phrase in Titus And if you will needs compare them some authoritative act must needs be understood in both places and all power of making Ministers did not belong unto those in Crete among themselves but unto Titus as one sent unto them to set others over them For in both places not simply fixing setling and establishing but such a fixing c. as is by vertue of power and authority so to do must needs be understood But you adde Now if you understand the Psalm of David in the type he was a King many years before he took in the hill and fort of Zion 2 Sam. 5. 5 6. Or if you understand it of the Apostles preaching up Christ as the Apostles do the Psalm Act. 4. 25. c. Christ received all power at his ascension and did but settle his Kingdome by their Preaching the Apostles were but witnesses of Christs glory and in being so did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Answ 1. It s well you put an if concerning the Psalm as to be understood of David in the type because it s noted that almost all the Orthodox Fathers doe understand all things in this Psalme simply and immediately of Patres Orthodoxi fero omnes de Christo simpliciter immediate accipiunt interpretantur quaecunquein hoc Psalmo dâ—câ—ntur Rivetus in arg partitione Psal 1 Sam 16 13. 2 Sam. 2. 4. c. 5. 1. 3. 8. Christ 2. It may be questioned whether that act of Davids taking in the Hill of Zion be here directly pointed at because we reade of his annointing by Samuel at Bethlehem and at Hebron twice * but never of any annointing at the Hill or
Fort of Sion and therefore have no ground for the Hebrew phrase here used in the strict and proper acception of it 3. How the Apostles understand the Psalme and this passage of it appeares by those words Act. 4. 27. Against thy holy Child Jesus whom thou hast annointed * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys in Psal 3. both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and the people of Israel were gathered together Here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek answers to Nasakti in the Hebrew and both together imply that God had mad Christ Jesus whom the Jewes crucified both Lord and Christ Acts 2. 36. 4. As for the Apostles that they may be said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to settle his Kingdome by their preaching we find no such phrase in Scripture you doe but dreame in â—sing of it and though its true they were witnesses of Christs glory yet it s also true they were more theâ— witnesses as you use the word in way of Diminution but to 〈◊〉 settle and establish Christ upon his Throne either by preaching witnessing or other way is no where ascribed unto them Thus you proceed And however the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be taken sometimes yet Titus 1. 5. it cannot be taken for making him an Elder who was none before For what is injoyned there is to be done by Titus onely or by Titus joyning with other Ministers For the text saith I have left thee to ordaine But neither did the Apostles much lesse might other Ministers make a Minister by a sole act of their own Answ How the word may be taken sometimes is not much materiall the ordinaâ—â— acception is chiefly to be looked at For that must take place in Titus unlesse some reason from the text it self or from the nature of the things there spoken of can be given to the contrary If all the places in the New Testament of this kind where it is used be enquired into it will be found to signifie either the making of him an officer who was none before or to give him a greater power then he had at first For instance Mat. 24. 45. Who is then a faithfull and wise servant whom his Lord hath made ruler 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over his houshold to give them meat in due season Luk. 12. 14. Man who made me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Judge or divider over you Act. 7. 10. Pharaoh made him speaking of Joseph governour over Egypt and all his house 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the second sense see Mat. 24. 47. Verily I say to you he shall make him ruler 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over all his goods Mat. 25. 21. I will make thee ruler 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over many things The like in Luk. 12. 42. 44. When Deacons were first to be constituted in the Church of Jerusalem the Apostle speaks thus unto the multitude Look you out among you seven men of honest report full of the Holy Ghost and wisdome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom we may appoint over this busines * Act. 6. 3. To produce like places out of the Septuagint is as needlesse as it would be endlesse or out of the first and most ancient of the Greek * Vide Concil Nicenum can 4 Ancyranum can 10. 18. Antiochenum can 23. Laodicenum c. 11. 16. Sardicense can 4. 6. Councels One place out of Clemens his Epistle to the Corinthians which is of great repute among the learned may give some light unto the text in hand speaking of the Apostles and of their preaching in countries and cities he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they made the first fruits of them that believe Bishops and Deacons not by popular election but by vertue of the spirit of discerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * Clemens in epist ad Corinth p. 54 55. What they did themselves in this kind they did also appoint to be done by Evangelists as they saw occasion But you say however the word may be taken sometime yet Titus 1. 5. it cannot be taken for making him an Elder who was none before And your reason is because what is enjoyned there is to be done by Titus only or by Titus joyning with other Ministers Ans Be it granted that Titus only was to ordain what need then that other Ministers should joyne with him And if other Ministers were to joyne yet that cannot be proved from the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there used Something was peculiarly enjoyned him for wherefore else receives he a commission and commandement from Saint Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I have appointed thee That which followes that the Apostles much lesse other Ministers might not make a Minister by a sole act of their owne is a meere petitio principii Your as for example is no proofe Was Titus a Minister to Crete when he came thither or was he not if he was shew us whose act concurred with Saint Paul's and whose authority he took in to settle him there as a Minister to them Thus you go on as for example Acts 14. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the word translated they ordained in the plurall number may be referred to the people as well as to Paul and Barnabas Answ The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the one place doth no more referre to the people then the other word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When the people are spoken of it refers to them but Paul and Barnabas only are here distinguished from the people To that which followes For it is such a word as properly belongs to the people as well as their Rulers when they gave their votes and never to the Rulers without the people Answ The truth is it belongs properly either to Rulers or people to gether or a part as there is occasion Your never to the Rulers without the People is too confident an assertion if so be de facto no instance could be given to the contrary yet de jure no reason is produced why it might not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Suidas hath it signifies both Plebiscitum a Law made by the people and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the ordinary word used in Demosthenes and in the Attick laws for Senatus consultum a Law made by the Senate As when the people make a Law they are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so may the Rulers in like manner in those Lawes which are made by themselves alone What think you of this passage in Julius Pollux 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * Julius Pollux l. 8. c. 9. § 1. The Thesmothetae doe privarely prescribe when judgement is to be given and promulge publique accusations and suffrages to the people Whose suffrages were these if not the Rulers And of that in Demosth. Phil. 1. cited by Hen. Steph. whom you quote so often 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of making an Officer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
find cited in him and many more of like nature which are more fully insisted on by a Parisian Lawyer to the same purpose * Johan Darâ— is de Hierarch Ecclesiast p. 10. 4. But this is especially to be noted That Voetius thinks Ordination or as he there expresses himself Coronation or Investiture may be wanting only aliquo in casu in some case and instances in the time of persecution cum nec plebe nec presbyteri in unum convenire possunt when neither the People nor Elders câ—n meet together Wherein he seems to suppose it is necessary at other times The reasons which he gives why it should not be necessary in the case concludes as much against the one as against the other In time of persecution Ministers cannot assemble to Ordain nor People saith he I adde to Elect and therefore that case which voyds the one voyds the other also and more strongly A few Ministers may more safely meet privately to Ordain then many people to Elect. The case of Greg. Thaumaturgus if truly stated out of Voetius whence you had it as all the rest of this Paragraph doth much confirm thiâ— For as he was not Ordained so neither was he Elected in your sense h. e. chosen by the people nor so much as present neither did he consent but was compelled there went nothing to his Call but an act of the Bishop Deo consecrans eum qui corpore non aderat Consecrating him who was not present bodily unto God And if this be all that is essentiall to a Call a company of Ministers and Elders may perform it as well as one Bishop alone The same Gregory as you may read elswhere being called to Cumas to Ordain a Pastor for Histor. Pontif. Jurisd Parisiis 1624. l 2. c. 1. that Church the People being divided in their Election he alone chose Alexander Carbonarim dedit civitati Sacerdatem nihil moratus consensum aut electionem Populi The seventh Argument 7. The inconveniences will be very great which follow upon this That Ordination is essentiall to the calling of a Minister For of necessity for the maintenance of it it must be asserted that the Romish Priests by whom Ordination comes to us And therefore to Beza it was all one to be Ordained by the Ordinary and to be Consocrated in Romana Ecclesia in Ac. 14. 23. are the Ministers of Jesus Christ and the Church of Rome wherein they are the true Church Spouse of Christ yea that there is a personall succession of Ministers uninterrupted by Heresie or whatsoever else may nullifie a Ministers Calling from the Apostles times to this presons and if there be but one who when he Ordained was no Minister â—â— not Ordained all that were Ordained by him are no Ministers if Ordination be essentiall Ans Is this the best or the worst of your Wine that you have kept it for the last Whatever you intended your Arguings like violent motions grow weaker and weaker neerer the end If you think there 's none like this as David said of Goliahs sword I think your cause will utterly perish as that Giant did by his own weapon And though you make a flourish with many words yet this in short is the substance of your argument If Ordination be essentiall to the calling of a Minister then the Church and Ministery of Rome are true and Personall succession uninterrupted is necessary 1. I deny the consequence and shall expâ—ct your proof hereafter for at present you do not so much as offer any And why have we nothing of Voetius here do you not know that he maintains the lawfulnesse of that Call which Luther and other of the first Reformers had in the Church of Rome for the substance of the thing and yet denies that it follows thence that the Church of Rome is a true Church * Lib. 2. sec 1. cap. 6. pag. 97. To cleare the ground of this denyall I distinguish between the Church and her externall Politie That which is essentiall to the Churches Being never ceases but that which is essentiall to her outward Politie may because Politie it self is not essentiall The Church for Being like Christ as God never dies but in her externall Order like Christ as man she dies and rises again If this be no good argument Election is essential therefore it hath been from the beginning of the world and shall continue to the end as the Church and Calling have done and shall do as you know it iâ— not then must you needs acknowledge your own inconsequence in the former For every one of your aggravated inconveniences will fall as heavy on the head of Election as you think they do on Ordination and besides them many more As 1. That there must be a true Church before there can be a true Ministery i. e. the effect before the cause and the end attained before the means of attaining are provided 2. That the government of the Church is purely and strictly Democraticall or popular for if the People without Ministers and Elders are sole Judges of their own Saintship and of fitnesse for the Ministery and consequently of soundnesse of Doctrine and the right way of Worship what can be denied them 3. That a Ministers calling as a Minister extends not beyond the bounds of a single Congregation or that one Congregation may make a Minister to serve themselves or any other 4. That the providence of God hath failed concerning the essentials of Ministers calling for many generations every where because the right of electing Ministers hath been denied to Christian people As to the Inconveniences themselves let them be considered distinctly and have the patience to heare what the Reformed Churches and Protestant Divines do think of them The first inconvenience is 1. That the Romish Priests by whom Ordination comes to us are the Ministers of Jesus Christ To make this the more odiâ— us you swell it out with a windâ— parenthesis That to Beza it was all one to be Ordained by the Ordinary and to be Consecrated in Romana Ecclesia in Ac. 14. 23. Herein you wrong him and abuse the Reader for he speaks not of Ordination in your sense as distinguished from Imposition of hands neither doth he account it all one to be Ordained by the Ordinary and to be Consecrated in the Roman Church as if every one that is Ordained by a Bishop in any of the Reformed Churches were in that respect to be looked upon as Consecrated in the Romane Church To say nothing of those who are Ordained by Ordinaries in the Greek Church And this is plain by his own words speaking of the woâ—d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quidam saith he hoc referre malunt ad manuum impositionem quae ipsa fit prorsus necessaria ut hoc praetextiâ— accepto vocationem nostram irritam esse dicant quoniam Ordinarii quos vocant nobis manus non imposuerunt sive quòd non sumus in Romana
That which follows of your own is Something extraordinary its likely was in the Apostles Laying on of hands For he says the gift was given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the laying on of my hands as it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by prophecie which was peculiar to extraordinary Officers but it was but with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 4. 14. They it seems had but a bare concurrence but the efficiencie was in Paul as our Brethren of Scotland expresse it To which I answer 1. All this is but its likely and it seems by which its likely to prove nothing and it seems you your self saw as much aforehand 2. To say there was something extraordinary in the Apostles laying on of hands is ambiguous because it may relate either to the ground or manner of doing or to the effect or accidentall consequent thereof There might be something extraordinary but that can be no prejudice to the ordinary use of this rite unlesse they â—ad only some extraordinary ground for their using of it 3. In comparing 2 Tim. 1. 6. 〈…〉 4. 14. there is indeed a difference between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 â—nd with and from thence the Papists and Prelates woâ—â—â—â—fer That the efficiency of Timothy's Presbyteratus was iâ— Paul as in a Bishop and in the Presbyterie by a bare concurrence and thence infer the necessity of a Bishop unto Ordination But this is eâ—ually vain as in them to one end so in you to another For that in 2 Tim. 1. 6. you may remember what was said in the beginning of this answer to your Third And as you tell us pag. 17. touching laying on of hands in 1 Tim. 5. 22. that its not necessary to be understood of Ordination because it was used in other cases So might it be put off here But be it granted that Ordination is intended in 2 Tim. 1. yet it will not follow that Paul ascribes any thing to himself as excluding the Presbyterie Junius speaking to this Text sayes In a common thing the arguing from position of one to the removing or denying of another is inconsequent As after this manner Paul laid hands on Timothy therefore the Presbyterie did not * Junius in Bel. Cont. 5. lib. 1. cap. 3 ar 5. 1 Tim. 1. 18. Ac. 16. 1 a. Those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by prophecie do shew the moving cause and what incouraged Paul with the Presbytery to lay hands on him viz. It was prophecied that Timothy should be an excellent Minister as Cartwright upon the place interprets it That phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do both of them equally imply an instrumentall efficiencie in Paul and in the rest of the Presbyterie That the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by with a genitive case doth usually signifie an instrumentall working yet not in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is amongst Cartwrights Annotations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with is sometimes put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by as Act. 13. 17. chap. 14. 27. 15. 4. In the 12. v. of that chap. Then all the multiâ—ude kept silence and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul declaring See Beza in loca what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them In the Greek 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this latter place but in all the rest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet the like thing viz. what God did by them as by instruments is intended in them all The reason why the Apostle useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 1 Tim. 4. 14. may be because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 goes immediately before in the same verse in that phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where it hath another sense than the next words will beare if it had been used there also How fit it would have been for the words to have run thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. by prophecy by laying on of hunds let the learned judge 5. If the efficiencie was in Paul singularly and in the Presbyterie by a bare concurrence as you say it seems there using of it then makes nothing at all for our using of it now unlesse we had such concurrence and then Laying on of hands in these times is not only non-essentiall but unlawfull We must wait with the Seekers for some New Apostles to revive this way of Ordaining and the practice of those who being themselves out of Office are deputed to lay on hands is most presumptuous because there is no instance so much as of their concurrence and much lesse of their acting alone in this kinde 6. Those words as our Brethren of Scotland expresse it seem to relate unto the former passages and then they are injurious because you go about to put a sense upon them which I think you know they will not owne That the Presbyterie Ordained only by a bare concurrence and not as Causa socia a joint cause in way of efficiencie I shall now consider their words as you alledge them Paul's hands were the mean the laying on of their hands the rite and signe of his Ordination And therefore they adde as you say It s not to be used with opinion of necessity Ordination may be done by word alone without ceremony And again If the use of Imposition of hands in Ordination be accounted and used as a sacred Rite and as having a sacred signification the use of it not being necessary it becomes unlawfull by reason of the by gone and present superstitious use of the same in Popery Ans 1. All this you heap together by substraction as you please And though it 's true the first words Pauls hands were the mean are to be found in the place intended yet your conscience will tell you that the Author used them to one end and you unto the contrary Take them fully and let a third be Judge between us Thus he Because Imposition of hands was used in Ordination not only by the Apostles who had power to give extraordinarily the gifts of the Holy Ghost but likewise by the Presbyterie or Company of Elders and Timothy did not only receive 2 Tim. 1. 6. 1 Tim 4 14. that gift which was in him by the laying on of Pauls hands as the mean but with the laying on of the hands of the Presbyterie as the rite and signe of his Ordination therefore the Church in after-ages hath still kept and used the same rite in Ordination which rite shall without leave be yet retained in the Church 2. For my part I see no ground at all either in the nature of the thing or in the Texts for that distinction of mean and signe The Professors of Leyden are not afraid to call Ordination a mean Ad legitimam Pastorum ordinariorum vocationem duo potissimùm media sunt adhibenda vocandorum Synop. pur Theol â—isâ— 42. n. 31. Electio electorum Ordinatio Two meanes are
What he sayes of the precise urging of the Ceremony is to be understood of the urging of it upon Popish grounds The foolish questions which he means are those in a Popish Canon de triplici manuum impositione una Ordinatoria altera Confirmatoria tertia Curatoria and such like 5. It 's granted that he sayes expresly that Laying on of hands is not essentialis pars ritus legitimae vocationis and that it is in rerum indifferentium numero retineri omitti potest pro more regionis in qua electus ordinatur This last is more then you have yet acknowledged And if it be to be reteined pro more regionis according to the custome of the Country it must continue in use among us for ought that you have said or can say to prove it Non-essentiall Now thus it follows And with them agrees the Church of Scotland The Engl. pop cer pag. 168 169. Church hath full liberty to use any other decent rite or to use no rite at all beside a publike declaration the Church is not not tyed to use any rite at all by the Word of God in the giving of Ordination Ans What 's the matter that you cite this book so often Are you in love with English Popish Ceremonies or do you take that Book for an Oracle Or do you think the Church of Scotland will abide by every expression to be found therein Or is there no other way to know the sense of the Church of Scotland but by that Book Are you of the same judgement with that Church or any of those Protestant Divines whom you have cited so much as in this one head of Ordination and the rite of it I feare nothing lesse The Church of Scotland is at an agreement within it self and with such eminent Divines abroad as Chemnitius and Danaeus but you and they differ if I be not mis-informed more then a little But 2. to the thing it self Liberty of devising new rites in Ordination is neither sâ—fe to be granted by way of doctrine nor to be used in practice especially in those Churches which have suffered much under pretence and by the abuse of such liberty and who in other things are strict urgers of examples as binding and that in matter of Rite 3. Those Scriptures which tye the Church to Ordination tye her also to the Rite which we are speaking of Or tell us where you find a Scripture for the one and not for the other That which follows whether intended as a fifth reason or as an excursion only I know not though it be confused yet it sufficiently discovers what you aim at viz. To make those who were Ordained by Bishops no Ministers under pretence that they were Ordained by them as a Superiour Order unto Presbyters and so you slide into another Question Whether the Person ordaining or imposing hands be of the essence of the Call I shall lay down all your own words entire and then answer Thus you pag. 16. Yea suppose it essentiall and then whereas it hath been held against the Brownists that the Ministery in the Church of England is not null though the Bishops laid on their hands who should not have had a finger in it because an extrinsecall Circumstance failing or being corrupted a thing ceases not to be yet if it be made Essentiall what shall be said Seeing both in the Bishops intention in ordaining and in the profession of the Party ordained hands were laid on him not as a Presbyter formally but as one of a superior Order to Elders and for such an Order there is no Divine institution As therefore that Baptisme must be repeated which was administred by a person not lawfully called to the ministration of it if the Person ministring be essentiall to Baptisme so must that person be Ordained again who had hands laid on by a Bishop as a Bishop if Laying on of hands be essentiall to the Ministery Whatsoever wants its Essentials is not though it seems to be Ans Let the Questions be propounded distinctly which are here involv'd and then it will be easier for any one to judge 1. What will follow concerning the Ministery in the Church of England if Laying on of hands be essentiall I answer That the Ministers of England who have Hands laid on them have that which is essentiall to their Calling Who can imagine otherwise upon the supposition 2. But seeing Ministers in England were Ordained by Bishops as a superiour Order to Elders and no such Order is of Gods appointing nor ought to be is not their Calling null in that respect Ans No iâ— is not 1. Because neither Church nor State did ever declare Bishops to be a superiour Order though some of them for they were but some made such a claim The State hath often declared against it not only by books approved by them as in the dayes of Henry the 8. but by severall acts of Parliament in King Edwards time and since 2. Because Bishops only and alone were never authorised to lay on hands excluding other Prâ—sbyters but together with them 3. Bishops were Elders first before they came to be Bishops and of Elders were made Bishops in way of accumulation not in way of privation Their error that they thought themselves a superiour Order above Presbyters could not make them no Presbyters 4. All Ordinations are counted valid which are performed in a setled Church with the consent of Magistrate Ministers and People whether the Ordainers be Bishop Superintendent or a Presbyterie This principle is maintained both by the Lutherans and Calvinists as you use to distinguish For the Lutherans I refer you to Hen. Ekhardus in opusculo de Ordine Ecclesiastico pag. 5â— and to Nicolaus Hunnius Demonst Min. Lutherani pag. 294. For others Zanchy sayes quo supra Nihil refert sive ab omnibus praesentibus Ministris sive ab uno omnium nomine imponantur manus It matters not whether hands be laid on by all the Ministers who are present or by one in the name of the rest So he And I think it might be added nor how many be present the Quorum is but of prudentiall determination Pareus speaks more largely * Comment ad Rom. 10. 15. The lawfull Calling of the Church is that which is instituted in every Church by publike authority for Orders sake unto edification Neque enim uniformis est omnium ubique quoad circumstantias externas sed libertati Ecclesiae relicta 5. To speak my own judgement When sin cleaves to the manner of Calling through the generall error or corruption of all sorts who are concerned in it though such a Calling cannot be said to be legitima or legi proxima but is displeasing to God and null in some sense as unworthy receiving of the Sacrament is counted no receiving 1 Cor. 11. 20. and sinfull fasting no fasting Zach. 7. 5. yet it is not otherwise to be invalidated here below than by doctrinall censure and
as you understand Election and if you will needs have Election understood there it will follow that Paul and Barnabas did both elect and ordain and while you grasp in all for the People you will leave them nothing 4. If lifting up of hands by the people were as directly intended and as often expressed as laying on of hands by Apostles Elders is your zeale for the People would make you think it necessary To what purpose should laying of hands be so often mentioned if the Holy Ghost intended it should be meerly arbitrary whether it be used or no 5. Consider what Antonius Walaeus hath said propounding the question Whether Imposition of hands be necessary * Video in omnibus Confessionibus Nostrarum Ecclesiaâ—um praetâ—r unam aâ—t alte am eam requiri Sane cum Apostoli semper eam usurparint inâ—o Apostolus praeceptum dat Timotheo 1. Tim. 5 22 Ne â—ito â—â—iquam manus Imponito nos omittendam non judicamus quia in negativo illo mandato etiam affirmativuÌ„ continetur ubi cuÌ„ pro totâ electione Pastoris sumatur per Synecdochen certe pro ritu aut parte essentiati habenda est alioquin pro toto sumi non possit aut saltem proadjuncto proprio omnibus vocationibus communi Ant. Wal. l. de Funct Eccl. I perceive saith he that it is required in all the Confessions of our Churches except one or two And surely seeing the Apostles alwayes used it yea the Apostle gives Timothy a commandment 1 Tim. 5. 22. Lay hands suddenly on no man we judge it is not to be omitted because in that negative commandement an affirmative is also contained where being taken by a Synecdoche for the whole Election of a Pastor it must be taken either for a rite or for an essentiall part otherwise it could not be put for the whole or at least for a proper adjunct and that which is common to all Callings Now you begin to draw towards a conclusion and propound this question If therefore laying on of hands be not essentiall why should those be kept altogether from labouring in the Lords harvest who cannot or have not receivedit and in a way too that is as questionable as the thing it self If the Calling may be true without it why is it equally pressed with it Is there more need of an adjunct an accessory a solemnity then of Ministers peace salvation to peoples soules by Preaching Assoon as they had but an Altar they offered on it when they came out of Babylon and stayed not till all the Temple in all its furniture and utensils was ready Ezra 3. Before they were wholly carried away into Babylon they worshipped and served God with those vessels which were left in the Sanctuary though they had not all 2 Chron. 36. 7. 10. 18. What higher point of Separation is there than to make voyd or deny a whole Ordinance for want of a Circumstance Ans 1. Here are many rash insinuations As 1. That some are kept altogether from labouring in the Lords harvest who cannot or have not received Imposition of hands 2. That the way to receive Imposition of hands speaking of the present is as questionable as the thing it selfe 3. That Calling and Imposition of hands are equally pressed 4. That nothing should be prest about the Calling of a Minister but that which is essentiall I shall speak a little to these and then answer your main question For the first The fault of our times is and long hath been a boundlesse liberty usurped by some and connived at by others Perhaps some may be denied approbation for and admittance unto the publike Ministery by way of charge not because they had not but because they would not though tendered to them receive imposition of hands But who are kept back altogether Many both men and women are said to have laboured much in the Lord by their private endeavours who did not yet stretch themselves Phil. 4. 3. Rom. 16. 12. beyond their line to preach publikely un-ordained This liberty in a morall way is denied none For the second I suppose your Margin is intended where you tell us We have the word Presbyterie but once spoken of in all the Scripture as belonging to the Churches of the New-Testament Calvin understands by it the office of a Presbyter not a company of them Those who take it for a company differ among themselves Some say a company of Preachers as the Leyden-Professors Synops purior Theol. disp 43. n. 37. Some take it for a company of extraordinary Ministers as Apostles Evangelists Prophets Scoti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Paracles p. 228. Others for a company of Ruling Elders as well as others Eng. pop cer p. 171. Some understand it of a Congregationall Presbyterie as the Non-conformists against See the answ to Bp. Downham serm p. 93. Downham and the Scots against Tilenus Some of a Classical Provinciall Presbyterie as the LONDON-Ministers Ans 1. You should do well to let us know your own judgment whether we shall repute you Prelaticall Brownist Anabaptist Independent Erastian Seeker Sceptick Or whether you understand it of a Conclave of Cardinals Would you have it a cypher to signifie nothing or ad placitum What means this pretending of ambiguity where there is none You cannot but perceive that most of these opinions fall into one against those that place the power of Ordination in the People There might be a company of Preachers and of extraordinary Ministers and some Ruling Elders and yet all in one Presbyterie No man yet ever dreamed that it signified a company of Believers without Officers 2. What of that that it is but once spoken of in all the Scriptures You cannot find the word Excommunication so much as once nor Trinity will you therefore be Erastian or Arrian Shew us one place for Ordination by the people or calling to the office of a Minister without it Wheresoever there were divers Apostles Evangelists Prophets or Bishops and Elders orderly assembled for acts of power there was the substance of a Presbyterie we have neither fitter nor other name in Scripture to call such an Assembly by Such there were both at Jerusalem Act. 15. and at Antioch Act. 13. 1. and at Philippi Phil. 1. â— And therefore though we read of the name but once we have the thing often 3. For Calvin these are his own words upon that Text 1 Tim. 4. 14. Presbyterium qui hîc collectivum nomen esse putant pro Collegio Presbyterorum positum rectè sentiunt meo judicio They who think Presbyterie in this place to be a Noun collective put for a Colledge of Presbyters do think rightly in my judgement Therefore though he think another sense non malè quadrare may agree with the words yet you have no reason to set him at a distance from others and from himself 4. As touching the Leyden-Professors whereas your printed book hath disput 43. n. 3â— I suppose your Copy
had disp 42. for there only is shew of something for your purpose but nothing indeed Though the power of Ordaining or Confirming Pastors say they belong to the whole Presbytery yet of old the Presbytery did execute that in the rite of laying on of hands not so much by Ruling Elders as by Pastors who did especially attend on prophecy or explication of the Scripture and application of it to the use of the faithfull unde Prophetia cum Manuum impositione per quam olim fiebat Ordinatio Pastorum ab Apostolo conjungitur 1 Tim. 4. 14. By this it appears they have a singular opinion of the word Prophecy not of the word Presbytery for they plainly suppose the Presbyterie consisted of two sorts of Elders and yet that preaching Elders only laid on hands And well they might suppose that as doth your Author so often cited pag. 171. because much of Prayer and Teaching is to accompany the act of Imposition before and after 5. That which you cite out of the answer to Tilenus under the title of Scoti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Paraclesis is not to be found in it as applied to the word but this he sayes in generall There were many Presbyteries in the Apostles times in which no Bishop properly so called could preside Quia pars magna ex Apostolis Evangelistis ejusmodi viris constabat qui Episcopis longè erant superiores Because a great part not the whole did consist of Apostles Evangelists and such like men which were far superior unto Bishops 6. None affirms that the word Presbytery as it is used in 1 Tim. 4. 14. does necessarily imply a company of Ruling Elders as well as others But upon the supposition that there are two sorts of Elders proved by other places they may be included under that one word because its comprehensive of them both The Presbyterie may be in the essentiall consideration but cannot be whole in the integrall without them He that says The number of preaching Elders in one city together with those Elders Eng pop cer which in the same city laboured for Discipline only made up that company which the Apostle 1 Tim. 4. 14. calleth a presbyterie must be understood to speak of that company in the generall notion of it rather than in the peculiar or individuall And this is plain by those words of his which follow a little after The Doctor himself speaking of Forbes in his Irenicum by the Presbyterie whereof the Apostle speaks understandeth as we do Consessus Presbyterorum 7. That some understand it of a Congregationall Presbytery is granted and some exclusively as if there were no other as you your self perhaps But whatever the Nonconformists against Downham do surely the Scots in generall do not nor those in particular who wrote against Tilenus And howsoever they use the word Parish or Congregation as distinct from Diocesse yet they use it in so large a sense as serves to take in the greatest City of England to make but one Congregation The words of him that wrote against Tilenus lib. citat cap. 28. pag. 218. are these Diversae sunt Londini paroeciae distinctae quarum tantus est numerus tam exiguus Note locus ut impossibile sit omnes simul semel convocari tamen pro una tantùm habentur congregatione seu paraeciâ 8. For the London Ministers it appears plainly pag. 191. that they bring the word Presbytery as used in 1 Tim. 4. 14. only for the proof of this Position That there is a pattern of a Presbytery in the Word of Christ And that not only because they find the thing as in other places but the name as here And if we find the nature of a Presbytery we shall more easily discern what use is to be made of it 9. All this while I heare nothing but a windy noise that the way to receive Imposition of hands is as questionable as the thing it self Sir to be plain with you before ou◠parting If you can say no more against the way of receiving then you have said against the lawfulnesse and expediencie of Laying on of hands which is worth the while in reference to practise than you have said yet You may begin when you please and bring both ends to nothing To your third insinuation that Calling and Imposition of hands are equally prest I answer 1. Were it so you need not wonder because there are few who zealously oppose the one but they oppose the other also if you mean it of a Church-Call the thing it self is struck at Most of those who care not for having Hands laid on them do as little value the Peoples choice were it not that the people are purs-bearers the beneficium is sure to come from them whosoever conveighs the officium Gifted men would plead only the right of their own gifts but that the Peoples gifts byas them towards the peoples Call 2. He that scruples to have Hands laid on him may well be suspected to question something else the rather because they make a new Sect beyond all in ordinary enumeration who pretend the unlawfulnesse of this Rite and therefore Church and State have need to watch against the creeping in of such To the last That nothing should be prest about the Calling of a Minister but what is essentiall I answer Consider of qualifications whether every one of them be essentiall or no if they be not yet whether they may not be prest Is there any Church in the world that urgeth only essentials Many things may be said for Imposition of hands that cannot be said for every rite if it be but a rite This is to me in stead of all That liberty whereby we pretend to lay aside this will imholden us to devise some other in stead of it and that 's at least dangerous Be it but an adjunct in one sense it will prove an inseparable one Ordination is likely to fall with it and this monster like to arise in the room of it the Church will be all body in visible administrations to it self to act her own part and Christs confusedly But it remains to answer your Questions a little more particularly If the Calling may be true without it why is it equally pressed with it Ans It is as well pressed but not equally and therefore pressed though it were not essentiall because so to do is conforme to the Apostles practise not only in the particular thing but in other cases as Act. 15. Order in the particulars of it is not essentiall and yet particulars may be pressed for Orders sake and that by way of commandement 1. Cor. 14. 37. Is there more need of an adjunct an accessory a solemnity than of Ministers peace and salvation to peoples soules by Preaching Ans The necessity of Ministers peace and salvation are strong obligations to binde those who desire the office of a Minister not to refuse a lawfull adjunct accessory and solemnity Woe