themselves as good successe as the best Minister Yea a tyrant robber or murtherer may justifie himself in his wickednesse as being sent by God providentially Then Zimri had as just a warrant to destroy the house of Baasha as Iehu had to destroy the house of Ahab and Iosephs brethren did well in selling him since they did it by special providence Gen. 45. 50.7 3. The Apostle speaks of such a sending as must be acknowledged by all to be of God an authoritative mission such as Embassadours have who are sent with publick Letters of Credence to negotiate the Affairs of those that imploy them For 1. They are called Preachers or Heralds the participle in the original Rom. 10.14 noting the Office as Rom. 12.7 8. 1 Thess. 5.12 Heb. 13.17 so in the parallel place Isa. 52.8 they are called Watchmen both which terms connote Authority 2. People are blamed for not hearing them Rom. 10.16 21. but the not hearing of such as are not sent is no fault but a vertue Iohn 10.5 8. Indeed divine truth is ever obligatory who ever brings it but a double tie lies upon people when truth is conveighed by a divine messenger Otherwise any private person had as much power of binding and losing as a Minister There is a wide difference between an arrest or pardon reported by a private person and the same applied under the Broad-Seal by a person delegated from the Supream Magistrate 3. The Socinians reply to the Text and say That a speciall Call was necessary in the Apostles daies because the doctrine by them delivered was new and unheard of but this mission is not necessary in our daies because we preach no new Doctrine but onely that which the Apostles have formerly taught and written Answ. But the Answer is easie For 1. We have already proved That there is a necessity in the Church of Christ of a constant perpetual and ordinary mission 2. It is false that the Apostles and Prophets taught any new Doctrine Act. 24.14 26.22 28.23 they believed and taught nothing but old truths formerly delivered by Moses and the Prophets 1 Iohn 1.7 New indeed they might be in respect of the manner of proposing Joh. 13.34 or the singular ratification thereof by miracles Mark 1.27 or the apprehension of the Auditors Acts 17.19 but not as to the substance of the Doctrine Compare Iohn 13.34 with 2 Epist. of Iohn vers 5. 1 Ioh. 2.7 3. As to the first and third Consideration the Gospel is alwayes new to children ignorant persons or Heathen c. And therefore if Socinians will be true to their own principles they cannot plead against a called Ministry 4. In the dayes of the Apostles the truths of the Gospel were owned by all the Churches and so not new as to their apprehensions yet then came none to the Ministry without a Call Witnesse the Epistles to Timothy and Titus Thus at last we have vindicated this Text from all those mists that are cast upon it to darken it and made it to appear That none ought to take upon them the Office of a Minister unlesse they be lawfully Called and Ordained thereunto Our second Argument is taken from Heb. 5.4 5. And no man taketh this honour unto himself but he that is called of God as Aaron so also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high-Priest but he that said unto him Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee No man taketh i. e. ought to take Verbs active as our English Annotators upon the place observe in the phrase of Scripture sometime import not the act it self but onely an Office as Gen. 20.9 Levit. 4.12 13. Psa. 32.8 This honour the Priestly Office is not only a bâ—rthen but an honour what ever the carnal world esteem of it The Apostle here makes a general Proposition No man ought to take the ministerial honour upon him unlesse called by God This Proposition is not limited but illustrated First By Aaron who undertook not this Office till called thereunto Exod. 28.1 no more did any other of the Priests in the Old Testament 2 Chron. 29.11 16.16 It cost Câ—rah and his Company dear for doing otherwise The Prophets also make mention of their Commissions in the beginning of their Prophecies The word of the Lord came to Isaiah Ieremiah Hosea c. And when Amaziah objected against Amos Amos did not plead any general liberty the Israelites had of prophesying but tels Amaziah I was no Prophet I was an Herdsman and a gatherer of Sycamore fruit and the Lord took me as I followed the flock c. If then the Priests and Prophets of the Old Testament could not take this honour upon them till call'd and appointed who can shew any just reason why any under the New Testament should do otherwise especially if we consider That the Gospel-Ministry is more weighty and glorious then the Legal was Secondly By Christ who though he be God blessed for ever the true God coequal and coeternal with the Father yet he glorified not himself to be made an high-Priest but was sealed and inaugurated by his Father into this great Office And therefore he saith expresly Iohn 8.54 If I honour my self my honour is nothing it is my Father that honoureth me of whom you say that he is your God Now we desire all Christians in the fear of God to consider That if the Lord Jesus would not honour himself to become our Mediator till he was anointed by his Father and designed to this Office it cannot but be great presumption for any man to glorifie himself and make himself a Minister before he be lawfully ordained thereunto we may truly say to such as Christ doth You that thus honour your selves your honour is nothing Thirdly We argue from the Titles that are gâ—ven to the Ministers of the Gospel They are called Embassadours 2 Cor. 5.20 Stewards Tit. 1.7 Meâ— of God Tim. 6 11. compared with 2. King 5.8 Watchmen Ezek. 3.7 Angels Revel 2.1 which are all names of Office and require a special designation from God Stewards do not use to officiate without warrant Luke 12.42 Embassadours do not go forth to treat with forain States without publick Commission As they must have Instructions for the matter of their Message so they must be enabled with publick Authority for the managing of their Work Adde further that Ministers are called Gods Mouth and how shall a man take upon him to be Gods mouth who is not sent from God They are called the Good souldiers of Iesus Christ souldiers in an eminent degree to fight against iniquity and heresie and therefore must be listed by Christ into that number and must have his warrant for the discharge of their duty They are Gods Servants and Ministers and therefore must be sent by him or else they are their own masters not Gods servants And that all these things concern our Ministry as well as theirs in the Primitive times
these very gro unds and Principles Now then if the denying of our Ministry during the raign of Episcopacy to be a lawfulâ— Ministry be the parental cause of such horrid and desperate consequences we doubt not but it will be abhorred and abominated by all sober and godly Christians And that our people that read these lines will be rooted and established in this great Truth That the call to the Office of the Ministry which some of our Ministers did receive during the prevalency of Episcopacy was lawful and valid for the substance of it though mingled with many circumstantial defects CHAP. III. Wherein the great Objection against our Ministry as being derived from Rome is answered But the great objection of which we even now spake against this proposition is IF we justifie the lawfulnesse of Episcopal Ordination then it will also follow that we must justifie the Ordination that is in the Church of Rome For if Ordination by our Bishops be lawful then these Bishops themselves must be be lawful Ministers and then their Ordination must also be lawful and so by consequence it will follow That those in the Church of Rome from whom the Protestant Ministers in the beginning of the Reformation had their Ordination were true Ministers of Christ. For if they were not then were not our Ministers made by them the Ministers of Christ. And if they were then may a Minister of Antichrist be a Minister of Christ and Ordination received from the Pope of Rome be a Scripture Ordination Before we answer to this great Objection we shall premise this one distinction It is one thing to receive a Ministry from the Apostate Church of Rome as the author of it another thing to receive a Ministry from Jesus Christ through the Apostate Church of Rome Our Antiministerial adversaries if they would argue aright their objection must be thus framed The Ministry which hath the Pope of Rome or which is all one That hath Antichrist for the author of it is Popish and Antichristian But such is the Ministry of the Church of England Ergo. We deny the Minor For we say That our ministry is derived to us from Jesus Christ. We are his Ministers and his Ambassadors It is he that gave Pastors and Teachers to his Church as well as Apostles and Evangelists We say That Ordination of Ministers by Ministers is no Romish institution but instituted by the Lord Jesus himself long before Antichrist was That our Ministry is descended to us from Christ through the Apostate Church of Rome but not from the Apostate Church of Rome And that this great objection which some say is unanswerable must of necessity be summed up into this argument Those Ministers which stand by an institution of Christ descending to them from the Apostles through the antichristian Church of Rome are ministers of Antichrist and not of Christ. But such are our Ministers Ergo. But here we deny the Major as utterly false we say That the Ministry which is an institution ofChrist passing to us through Rome is not made null and void no more then the Scriptures Sacraments or any other Gospel-Ordinance which we now enjoy and which do also descend to us from the Apostles through the Romish Church Now that this great Truth so necessary to be known in these dayes may be fully made out to our respective Congregations we shall crave leave a litle to enlarge our selves in the proof of it and shall for this end offer these ensuing considerations to be seriously weighed by all that fear God amongst us That the Lord Jesus hath given the Ministery to the Church to continue till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man unto the measure of the stature of the fulnesse of Christ which will never be till the day of judgement And he hath promised to be with the Apostles teaching and baptizing alway even unto the end of the World which must needs be understood of them and their successors He hath promised that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church which Mr. Hooker Mr. Cotton and others expound of the universall visible Church existing in its particulars The Apostle Paul also saith That the Sacrament of the Lords supper is to be observed and to continue till the comming of Christ. And that glory is to be given to God by Christ Jesus in the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 throughout all generations and ages It is also prophesied concerning the Kingdom and Government of Jesus Christ both invisible and visible that it shall abide to the end of the world Luc. 1.33 Isaiah 9.6.7 By all these teâ—ts it is evident That there was iâ— and shall be a true Church and a true Ministery preserved by Jesus Christ even unto the end of the World How can glory be given to God in the Church throughout all ages if there should be an age in which the Church should be utterly lost How can the Sacrament be continued in the Church till Christ come if there were so many hundred years in which there was no true Ministery How can it be said That Christ is with his Ministers alway even unto the end of the World and that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church and that there is no end of Christs Government if during all the raign of Antichrist there was no true Church-state in the world no true Ordinance as some say no true Ministery And therefore though we should not be able to tell how the Church and Ministry was preserved in the midst of that great and general Apostasie that hath been in the Christian World yet notwithstanding we ought to believe that it is so because Christ hath said it shall be so and heaven and earth shall â—asse away but not one title of Gods word shall passe away Mr. Bartlet in his Model of the Congregational way spends the most part of a Chapter to prove That the essentials of a Church-state together with the Officers Ordinances and administrations thereunto appertaining hath and shall abide for ever in the World This he proveth both by Prophesies promises and precepts of Scripture and also by divers reasons The same task is also undertaken by Mr. Philips of Watertown in New-England but for brevity we forebear transcribing them We read Revel 12. of a great wonder in heaven a woman cloathed with the Sun c. This woman represents the Christian Church she is persecuted by the heathen Emperours and overthrows them by the blood of the Lambe and by the word of her testimonie and by not loving her life unto the death Afterward she is persecuted by Antichrist and then she flies into the wildernesse where she hath a place prepared her of God that they should feed her a thousand two hundred and threescore dayes Vers. 6. and she iâ— said to be
Ignatius requires of Hero to whom he saith Keep that depositum which I and Christ have committed unto you Christ in his Word hath concredited this holy depositum And whatsoever is agreeable in Ignatius to this holy word we imbrace Other things which neither agree with Christ nor with the true Ignatius we reject as adulterinâ— and not to be born So much in answer to this objection Proposition 4. THat when it is said by Irâ—naeus lib. 3. cap. 3. That the holy Apostles made Bishops in Churches and particularly That Polycaâ—pe was made Bishop of Smyrna by the Apostles and that the Apostles made Linus Bishop of Rome after whom succeeded Anacletus and that Clemens was made the third Bishop by the Apostles And when it is said by Tertullian lib. de praescription That Polycarpe was made Bishop of Smyrna by S. Iohn and Clement Bishop of Rome by S. Peter This will nothing at all advance the Episcopal cause unlesse it can be proved that by the word Bishop is meant a Bishop as distinct from Presbyters a Bishop as Gerrhard saith pâ—rasi Ponâ—ificiâ not a Bishop phrasi Apostolica a Bishop in a Popish not in an Apostolical sense which is all one with a Presbyter For it is not denyed by any that ever wrote of Episcopacy That the names of Bishop and Presbyter were used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Apostles dayes and many years after And therefore Irenâ—us in his Epistle to Victor cited by Eusebius lib. 5. cap. 23 calls Aâ—iâ—etus Pius Higinus Telesphorâ—s Xistâ—â—s Presbyters of the Church of Rome and afterwards Presbyter◠〈◊〉 qui te pracesserunt The Presbyters that went before thee And so also Nec Polycarpus Aniceto suasit ut servaret qui sibi Presbyterorum quibus successerat consuâ—tudinem servandam 〈◊〉 dicebaâ— Tâ—rtullian also in his Apolog. cap. 39. callâ— the Presidents of the Churches Seniorâ— or Presbyteâ—â— when he saith Praesident probati quique Senioreâ— c. It is not therefore sufficient for our Episcopal Brethren to say That Bishops over Presbyters are of Apostolical institution because the Apostles made Bishops in Churches unlesse they do also prove that those holy men who are called â—ishopâ— were more then Presbyters Otherwise we must justly charge them of which they unjustly charge us to be guilty of endeavouring from the name Bishop which was common to Presbyters with Bishops to prove a superiority of Bishops over Presbyters Adde to this That when our Brethren do frequently urge those places of Irenaeus where he â—aith That he was able to number those that were madeBishops by the Apostles their successors unto his time and often urgeth the successions of Bishops unto whom the Apostles committed the charge of the Church in every place This will nothing at all as we conceive advantage the Episcopal Hierâ—rchy unlesse they do also prove That those Bishops were Hierarchical Bishops and not the very same with Presbyters For the same Authoâ— doth speak the very same things of Presbyters calling them also Bishops For he saith lib. 4. cap. 43. Quapropter â—is 〈◊〉 in Ecclesia sunt Presbyterâ—s obaudirâ— oporâ—et his qui successionâ—â— hâ—beâ—â— ab Apostolâ—s sicu◠〈◊〉 qui cum Episcopaâ—us successiâ—â—â— charisâ—a veritatis certâ—m secundum placitum Patris accâ—perunt Reâ—iquos vero qui absistuâ—â— Ã principâ—lâ— successione quâ—cunque loco colliguntur suspectos habere vel quasi hâ—reticâ—s mala 〈◊〉 vel quasi sciâ—dâ—ntes â—latos sibi placeâ—â—â—s 〈…〉 â—t hypocritas 〈◊〉 grati◠〈◊〉 gloriae hoc 〈◊〉 So also 〈◊〉 4 cap. 44 Ab omnibus â—aâ—ibus absistâ—re oportet adhaerere vero his qui Apostolorum sicut praediximus doctrinam custodiunt cum Presbyâ—â—rii ordine sâ—rmonem sanum conversationem sine offensa praestant ad informationem corrâ—ctionem aliorum Observe here 1. That Presbyters are called the Successors of the Apostles 2. That they are also called Bishops 3. That the Apostolical doctrine is derived from the Apostles by their succession 4. That there is nothing said in the former places of Bishops which is not here said of Presbyters And that therefore those placeâ— do not prove That the Apostles constituted Bishops in the Church distinct from and superiour over Presbyters As for that which is said about the succession of Bishops from the Apostles unto Irenaeus his time we shall hâ—ve â—ccasion to speak to afterwards Adde also That when in Antiquity Iames the Brother of our Lord is said to have been made Bishop of Hierusalem by the Apostles and Peter to be ordained Bishop of Antioch or Rome c. This doth not contribute to the proof of what it is brought for to wit That there were Bishops properly so called in the Apostles dayes For as Dr. Reynolds againsâ— Hart cap. 2. saith When the Fathers termed any Apostle a Bishop of this or that City as namely Saint Peter of Antioch or Rome they meant in a general sort and signification because they did attend that Church for a time and supply that room in preaching the Gospel which Bishops did after but as the name of Bishop is commonly taken for the Overseer of a particular Church and Pastor of a several flock so Peter was not Bishop of any one place therefore not of Rome And Dr. Whitakers lib. de Pontif. qu. 2. cap. 15. saith Patres cum Iacobum Episcopum voâ—ant auâ— etiam Pâ—trum non propriè sumâ—nt Episcopi nâ—men sed vocant eos Episcopos illarum Ecclesiarum in quibus aliquandiu commorati sunt Et si propriâ— de Episcopo loquatur absurdum est Apostolos fuisse Episcopos Nam qui propriè Episcopus â—st is Apostolus non potest esse quia Episcopus est unius tantum Ecclesiae Aâ— Apostoli plâ—â—ium Ecclesiarum fundatores inspectores erant Et postea Hâ—â— eniâ— non multum distat ab insania dicere Petrum fuisse propriè Episcopum aut reliquos Apostolos That the Fathers when they call Iames or Peter Bishops do not take the name of Bishop properly but they call them Bishops of those places where they abode for any long time And in the same place If we speak properly of Bishops it is absurd to say That the Apostles were Bishops For he that is properly a Bishop cannot be an Apostle For a Bishop is onely of one Church But the Apostles were the Founders and Overseers of many Churches And again he saith It doth not much differ from a phrenzy and madnesse to say That Peter or any of the Apostles were properly Bishops For the truth is This were to degrade the Apostles and to bring them into the Rank and Order of common and ordinâ—ry Officers of the Church which is no little Sacriledge And therefore such kind of quotations out of Antiquity do little avail our Brethren So much for the fourth Proposition Proposiâ—ion 5. THat when the distinction between a Bishop and Presbyter first began in the Church of Christ it was not
whole Kingdom wherein speaking of the Sacrament of Orders it is said expresly That although the Fathers of the succeeding Church after the Apostles instituted certain inferiour degrees of Ministery yet the truth is that in the New Testament there is no mention made of any other degree or distinction in Orders but onely of Deacons or Ministers and Presbyters or Bishops and thoroughout the whole discourse makes Presbyters and Bishops one and the same But of this Proposition we have had occasion to speak formerly to which we refer the diligent Reader Now from hence it followeth inevitably That if according unto the judgments of our Episcopal Divines Episcopacy be the same Order of Ministry with Presbytery thâ—â— it hath no more intrinsecal power of Ordination and Jurisdiction then Presbytery hath And that all that distinction that was put between them by Antiquity was meerly in restraining the use and exercise of that power which was truly and really inherent in them The actus primuâ— was common to both although for order sake the actus secundus was inhibited the Presbytery And this leads us to speak something about the practise of Antiquity in the point of Ordination of Ministers which is that in which we believe the Reader doth desire especially to be satisfied and which is that for which we have undertaken this discourse about Antiquity and in which our Adversaries do most triumph For it is said by all Anti-Presbyterians That the way of Ordination now in use is quite contrary to Antiquity and that whatsoever is done in this kind without a Bishop over Presbyters is null and void In answer to this we shall crave leave to hold forth these ensuing Propositions about Ordination out of Antiquity for as to what the Scripture saith of that we have already spoken Several Propositions declaring the Iudgment and Practise of the Ancient Church about Ordination of Ministers Proposition 1. THat in the first and purest times when the Church of Christ was governed by the Common Councel of Presbyters There was Ordination of Presbyters without Bishops over Presbyters For these Bishops came in postea paulatim as Hierome saith And Panormitanus lib. 1. Decretal de consuetudine cap. quarto saith Olim Presbyteri in communi regebant Ecclesiam ordinabant Sacerdotes paâ—iter conferebant omnia Sacramenta Proposition 2. THat after that Bishops were admitted into the Church yet notwithstanding Ordination by Bishops without the assistance of his Presbyters was alwaies forbidden and opposed Cyprian in his exile writing to his charge certifies them that Aurelius was ordained by him and his Colleagues who were present with him By his Colleagues he meanes his Presbyters as appears epist. 58. And Firmilianus saith of them that rule in the Church Quod baptizandi manum imponendi ordinandi possident potestatem And who those be he expresseth a little before Seniores Praepositi by whom the Presbyters as well as the Bishops are understood In Synodo ad Quercum anno 403. it was brought as an accusation against Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That he had made Ordinations without the company and sentence of his Clergy In the Councel of Carthâ—ge it was decreed Can. 20. Vt Episcopus sine Consilio Clericorum suorum Clericos non ordinet And Can. 2. Cum â— dinatur Presbyter Episcopo eum benedicente manum super caput ejus tenente etiam omnes Presbyteri qui praesentes sunt manus suas juxta manum Episcopi super caput illius teneant When a Presbyter is ordained The Bishop blessing him and holding his hand upon his head all the Presbyters that are present shall likewise lay their hands upon his head with the hands of the Bishop By this laying on of the hands of Presbyters is not onely signified the Presbyters consent to what the Bishop doth but Ordo ipse confertur gratia ordini necessaâ—ia impeâ—ratur quemadmodum per impositionem manuum Episcopi The Order it self is conferred and grace necessary is impetrated as it is by the hands of the Bishop as saith Forbefius in his Irenicum The Presbyters impose hands saith the same Author non tanquam duntaxat consentientes ad consensum enim sufficiunt suffragia plebs etiam consentit nec tamen ejus est manus imponere sed tanquam Ordinantes seâ— Ordinem conferentes ex potestate Ordinandi Diuinitùs acceptâ gratiam Ordinato hoc adhibito ritu apprecantes Not onely as Consenting for to manifest their consent their suffrages had been sufficient and the people also gave their consent and yet they impose not their hands but as Ordaining and conferring Orders and by the power of Ordination conferred to them by God praying for grace upon him that is Ordained using the ceremony of laying on of hands The same Author brings a famous example of Pelagius Bishop of Rome the first of that name who was made Bishop of Rome by Two Bishops and one Presbyter named Andreas In the Councel of Nice it was decreed That No Bishop should be made but by Three Bishops at least And yet this Pelagius being by Iustinian Anno 555. appointed to be Bishop of Rome and not being able to obtain Three Bishops to ordain him he being suspected then of a crime from which he afterwards cleared himself he received Ordination from Two Bishops and one Presbyter And this Ordination Canonica habita est in hunc usque diem is accounted Canonical even to this day By which it is evident that Presbyters lay on hands in Ordination together with the Bishop as partners in the power And that Pelagius and his successours would never have owned this way of Ordination had they not believed That a Presbyter had a power derived to him from Christ to confer Ecclesiastical Orders And this leads us to a Third Proposition Proposition 3. THat even according to the Judgment of Antiquity Presbyters have an intrinsecal power and authority to ordain Ministers and when this power was restrained and inhibited it was not propter legis necessitatem but onely propter honorem Sacerdotii It was not from the necessity of any Divine law for bidding it but onely for the Honour of Episcopacy It was not from the Canon of the Scriptures but from some Canons of the Church Leo Primus ep 88. upon complaints of unlawful Ordinations writing to the Germane and French Bishops reckons up what things are reserved to the Bishops Among which he sets down Presbyterorum Diaconorum consecratio and then adds Quae omnia solis deberi summis Pontificibus authoritate Canonum praecipitur And Isidore Hispalensis lib. 2. de Offiâ—iis Ecclesiasticis cap. 7. speaking of Presbyters saith His enim sicut Episcopis dispensatio mysteriorum Dei commissa est Praesunt enim Ecclesiis Christi in confectione divina corporis sanguinis consortâ—s cum Episcopâ— sunt similiter in doctrina populorum in Officio praedicandi Sed sola propter authoritatem
Us can testifie perswades all Scholars unto Opinionum varietas opiâ—antium unitas non sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And that We shall be willing to entertain any sincere Motion as We have also formerly Declared in Our Printed Vindication that shall further a happy Accommodation between Us. 6. The last sort are the Moderate Godly Episcopal men that hold Ordination by Presbyters to be lawfull and valid That a Bishop and a Presbyter are one and the same Order of Ministry that are Orthodox in Doctrinal Truths and yet hold That the Government of the Church by a perpetual Moderatour is most agreeable to Scripture-patern Though herein We differ from them yet We are farre from thinking that this difference should hinder a happy Union between them and Us. Nay We crave leave to profess to the world That it will never as We humbly conceive be well with England till there be an Union endeavoured and effected between all those that are Orthodox in Doctrine though differing among themselves in some Circumstances about Church-government And the Lord hath strangely made way for this long-desired Union by the bitter wofull and unutterable fruits of Our Divisions which have almost destroyed not only the Ministry but even the very heart and life of Religion and Godlinesse Memorable is the Story of Bishop Ridley and Bishop Hooper two famous Martyrs who when they were out of Prison disagreed about certain Ceremonial Garments but when they were put into Prison they quickly and easily agreed together Adversity united them whom Prosperity divided The time is now come wherein the ruine of all the Godly Orthodox and Ordained Ministry is by some men designed and endeavoured And therefore though hitherto We have continued sinfully divided yet now the Consideration of our Common Danger and the Preservation of the Ministry and therein the Preservation of the Glorious Ordinances Churches and precious Truths of Jesus Christ should marvellously constrain Us to study to finde out and being found out cordially to imbrace all lawfull waies to Unity and Agreement Thus much We thought fit to signifie that so Our Endeavours in the ensuing Discourse may not be misâ—interpreted and mis-represented There are two other things also which We are necessitated to communicate unto the Christian Reader First That this Book should have come out two Years ago but was hindred by multitude of necessary and indispensable Businesses intervening And that since our first undertaking of it there have been many Treatises written of most of these Subjects of which We speak to very good purpose which had prevailed with Us to have spared Our Pains had We not been encouraged by a saying of Austines That it is good and profitable to the Church of Christ that the same things be written of by divers Men in divers Books because those Books which come to the view of some will not come to the sight of others and by this means the Truths of Christ will be the sooner and easier spread and propagated We confesse that We have been necessitated in the Point of Episcopacy to borrow some things out of Smectymnuus and Our Reverend Presbyterian Divines in their Conference at the Isle of Wight and in Our Discourse about Election out of Mr Hudson and some others Which We have done because being to handle the same Subjects We thought it needless to adde any thing to what they have said and also That by this means We might revive the Memory of those Books which We believe are quite forgotten by most and are assured were never sufficiently answered by any Secondly The other thing which We would make known is That in this Our large Treatise We have purposedly declined all affectation of Language We have not laboured 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to feast the ear with curious phrases Our endeavour is to speak non diserta sed fortia We have alwaies disliked those Books which have in them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Sea of words and but a drop of sound Reason Our Care hath been more after Matter then Words And We hope the unbiassed and judicious Reader will finde that though the Garment with which We clothe Our Matter be rough and hairy like Esau yet the Voice is alwaies the Voice of Iacob For We have studiously avoided all Bitternesse of Speech even against those that make it a great part oftheirReligion to rail and reproach Us and who account Us the filth of the world and the off-scouring of all things We have learned of Our blessed Saviour To blesse those that curse Us to do good to them that hate Us and to pray for them which despitefully use Us and persecute Us. And of the blessed Apostle To instruct them in meeknesse that oppose Us if God peradventure will give thâ—m Repentance to the acknowledgement of the Truth It is a great Comfort to Us that the Government of the Church is upon Christs shoulders and he that could bear the wrath of God no doubt will uphold his own Government maugre all opposition And it is no lesse Joy unto Us that the Ministers of Christ are Stars in his right hand and therefore safe and secure from the hurt of unreasonable men We reade in the Revelation of a Woman cloathed with the Sunne and the Moon under her feet and a Crown of twelve Stars upon her head This Woman represents the true Church Every true Christian is cloathed with Christs Righteousnesse as with the Sunne and hath the world as the Moon under his feet and wears the Ministers and their Gospel-Doctrine as a Crown upon his head He that treads this Crown under his feet hath little of true Christianity in him But howsoever though We be trodden under feet and reproachfully used for what We have written yet it is no little Satisfaction to Us that We have discharged Our Consciences both to God and men And if some people will not wear Us as Crowns upon their heads We shall wear their Reproaches as Our Crown and shall pray unto the Lord who only teacheth to profit that he would give a good Successe to this Undertaking of Ours for the Glory of his Name the Benefit of his Church and more especially for the Establishing of our respective Congregations That he would direct protect providefor support sanctifie and comfort the Godly Ministry against all the sad Discouragements they meet with That he would keep out Popery root out Error Herâ—sie Atheism and all Prophanenesse and make Peace and Truth Holinesse and Righteousnesse to kisse one another in these three Nations The PREFACE THe Necessity and Excellency of the Gospel Ministery is so transcendently great as that it cannot but be accounted a very glorious Service in all those that shall undertake to represent it in its Beauty to the Sonnes of men and to vindicate it from all that seek to asperse undermine and destroy it Our Saviour Christ when he Ascended up into Heaven left the Ministry as his choisest Legacy next to the Gift of his
temporary but morall and so perpetuall All the Disciples of Christ now need the same means as the Christians during the Age of the Apostles that we also might be baptized into Christ to be baptized into his death buried with Christ by Baptism that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father even so we also should walk in newnesse of life Neither doth the Baptism of the Spirit disanull the Baptism of water but rather confirm it For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body whether we be Jews or Gentiles bond or free 3. If we consider the nature use or efficacy of Baptism it is called by the holy Ghost a saving Ordinance and is unto believers and their seed in the New Testament as the Ark was to Noah and his â—amily in the Old world who being in the Ark was saved from perishing in the waters when the rest were drowned so Baptism that doth now save us not only or mainly the outward part of it the putting away the filth of the flesh which yet is an Ordinance to further our salvation but when the Spirit of Regeneration effectually concurs so that we finde that there is a renewing of the holy Ghost and thereby the answer of a good Conscience towards God Thirdly For the Sacrament of the Lords Supper it is evident 1. That it is an Ordinance of God appointed by Jesus Christ for he alone who gives grace hath power to appoint the means whereby he will convey grace as no man can create new Articles of Faith to be bâ—â—eeved so no man can appoint new Sacraments to be received Only Jesus Christ the Prince and Mediatour of the New Covenant the High Priest of our profession who hath all power in Heaven and Earth and who alone is able to fill all his own Ordinances which in externall appearance seem but mean with inward efficacy and sprituall fullnesse He hath first instituted this Sacrament and also administred it even the same night in which he was betrayed 2. This Ordinance was not only appointed to and for the Apostles to whom it was first administred but unto all believers both Jews and Gentiles by whom it is to be received not only once as Baptism for we reade no Institution to baptize the same person more then once But our Lord hath prescribed the frequ ent reiterated use of this Sacrament that we should often â—at this Bread and drink this Cup and accordingly the Apostles and the primitive Christians did frequently celebrate thiS Ordinance 3. It is evident that this Sacrament was appointed not only for that age but for all succeeding generations therefore Believers are commanded to frequent this Ordinance and in eating this Bread and drinking this Cup to shew forth the Lords Death till he come for our Lord that will have his Church to continue in all successions till the day of his appearance hath both enjoyned all Beleevers as their duty to perpetuate the use of this Sacrament in their severall generations and hath also foretold for their comfort that this Ordinance shall continue till the day of his last coming So then these Ordinances being appointed by God to continue to the end hereby it appears that the Lord hath designed the Office of the Ministry to hold up and hold forth his Ordinances to the end of the world If the Promises which Christ hath made to uphold the Ministry be perpetuall then the Office is perpetually necessary But these Promises are perpetual That Christ hath made promises to uphold the Ministry hath been proved in the former Proposition out of Mat. 28.20 c. The only doubt which can remain is Whether these Promises were limited to that age wherein the Apostles lived or whether they do reach all succeeding ages to the end of the world Wherein who can better resolve us then Christ himself in the words of the promise Go teach and baptize and lo I am with you alwaies to the end of the world 1. This Promise we grant was made first and immediatly to the Apostles but the Query is Whether solely and only unto them as they were Apostles It cannot be denied but many precepts and promises given to them were of a different nature 1. Some to the Apostles as Apostles and 2. Some to Apostles as Ministers and 3. Some to Apostles as Beleevers If any demand how shall we know when Christ spake to them as Apostles when to them as Ministers and when to them as Christians We answer That the best way to discern this is to consider the nature of these precepts and promises if they be of an extraordinary nature â—â—ove what God hath commanded or promised to all beleeverâ— oâ— to all ordinary Ministry Then these commands or promises are peculiar to Apostles as Apostles as extraordinary Officers For instance When Christ had called the twelve He gave them power against unclean spirits to cast them out and to heal all manner of sicknesses and all manner of diseases And these being extraordinary promises it appears they were made to the Apostles as Apostles and not to them either as Beleevers or as Ministers If they be of a common nature wherein all Saints and Disciples of Jesus Christ are equally concerned then though they were given to the Apostles yet not only to them as Apostles but to them as Beleevers who also partake of like precious faith with them through the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ When Christ commanded them to watch for ye know not what hour the Lord will come this duty was laid upon them immediatly and apart from others as appears His Disciples came to him privately saying When shall these things be Yet this duty is of such a nature as is common to all beleevers and so elsewhere Christ expounds it What I say unto you I say unto all Watch When Christ taught his Disciples to pray in them he taught the same duty to all beleevers And all these commands to deny our selves take up the Crosse and follow him are so given to the Apostles as they also oblige all beleevers So when Christ praied for the Apostles that God would sanctifie them with all truth he prayed not for them alone but for all that were given to him of the Father which should also beleeve in him through their Word So all those great and precious promises which pertain to life and godlinesse whereby all beleevers partake of the divine nature having escaped the pollutions which are in the world through lust were given not only to the Apostles but to all Beleevers The ignorance or non-observance of this distinction hath led the Papists into many absurdities as when Christ gave the Cup to the Apostles because they all were Ministers therefore they do not conceive themselves obliged by that example to give the Cup to the Laity whereas Christ gave the Cup to the Apostles not
the Bottomlesse pit which were innumerable called two like their types Moses and Aaron who brought Israel out of Egypt or as Elias and Elisha which reduced Israel out of Baalism yet these Witnesses though in number few continue in their successions all the reign of the Beast for the daies of their prophecying in Sackcloth are One thousand two hundred and sixty years and so expire not till the 42 moneths of the Beasts Reign be expired Now fifthly we adde that these Sackcloth Prophesiers were not only Saints who mournfully bewailed the abominations of those times that the holy City should be trampled under foot but also that they were holy pious Ministers distinct from the Saints in Office and in the act of their Prophetical function which is intimated to us 1. From the power bestowed upon them the Lord gives to them not only to pray and to mourn but to Prophesie Rev. 11.3 Not so much by prediction of things future as by Preaching the everlasting Gospel It was a mighty power from on high that a few contemned persecuted Ministers should have gifts to be able and power to be couragious to preach against the son of perdition when all the world wondered after the Beast 2. From their effectual exercise of that power and that in their publick detecting those Antichristian abominations and denouncing the wrath of God against them It is said in the daies of their Prophesie though they were poor men and had no carnal weapons to defend themselves or offend their enemies yet in a spiritual sense fire proceedeth out of their mouths and devoureth their enemies Revel 11.5 For the Lord did make his words in their mouth to be fire and the people wood and it devoured them Ier. 5.14 and the holy Ghost adds further that these Prophets tormented them that dwel upon the earth v. 10. 3. The Spirit of truth doth not only call these two by the name of Prophets but elsewhere distinguisheth the Prophets and Righteous men He that receiveth a Prophet in the name of a Prophet shall receive a Prophets reward and he that receiveth a Righteous man in the name of a Righteous man shall receive a Righteous mans reward Where Christ incouraging poor Preachers of the Gospel against all the hard and harsh usage of the world intimates to us 1. That there are some who by way of Office and distinction from others are Prophets and Preachers 2. That there is some eminent reward due to Prophets 3. That they who do any good to Prophets even because of that Office shall receive a Prophets reward And in this very Prophesie concerning Antichrist the Spirit maketh these two distinct the Prophets and the Saints Babylon is therefore ruined because in her is found the blood of the Prophets and of the Saints Rev. 17.24 Now if we descend from the words of this Prophecy and come to observe the answerable event in History we shall finde that in every age there were Ministers opposing the tenents of Antichrist Their particular names times places and their manner of resisting the man of sin it will be too large to insist upon yet a brief Catalogue of Ministers is here inserted From the time of Christ and his Apostles for 600 years our famous Iewell against the Romanists hath abundantly proved that the truths professed in the reformed Churches were maintained by the Ancients And in the succeeding Centuries when the Man of Sinne began to prevail there were in their several Ages Godly and Learned Ministers who opposed the Popish Errours defending the sufficiency of Scripture Communion in both kindes Justification by free Grace disclaiming the defilements of worship in adoring Images Invocation of Saints praying for the Dead worshipping Reliques and openly testifying against the rising and swelling power of the Pope declaiming against his Supremacy and title of Universal Bishop as Antichristian From the 600 year of Christ to the 700 besides Isidore Hesychius and others there were in this Island these two famous Preachers Aidan who converted from Paganism the Kingdom of Northumberland which then contained not only the Country now so called but also Cumberland Westmoreland Lancashire Yorkshire the Bishoprick of Durham and some part of Scotland Also Finan by whose Ministry the Lord turned to the Christian faith the Kingdom of the East Saxons and of Mercia as our own Countryman doth testifie Bâ—sides our famous Countrymen Bede Alâ—vinus and many others there were Adlebertus and Clemens and Sampson with many other Priests who did mightily withstand Pope Boniface Besides Taurinensis Agobarduâ— Rabanus Maurus there was Scotus accused by the Pope for an Heretique and murdered as is conceived by his own Scholars for his opposing the carnal presence And Bertram a Priest in France was so clear a Protestant in the point of the Sacrament in a Book that he set forth that some Romanists say it was writ by Oecolampadius under the name of Bertram And the most learned of the Papists confess that Walafridus Strabo Ionas Bishop of Orleans and Hinâ—marus Archbishop of Rhemes departed from the received opinion of the Church Catholique In this Age the most unlearned and unhappy are recounted Radulphus Flaviaâ—ensis Stephanus Eduensis Smaragdus and our English Alfricke whose Saxon Homily was appointed to be read publikely to the people against the carnal presence In this Age more light began to appear even in the heat and height of Antichristianism not only by the Ministry of Fulbert Bishop of Chartres Anselme of Laon Author of the Interlineal Gloss Oecumenius Theophylact and others but especially by Berengarius and his disciples Besides Arnulphus the Martyr Hugo de Sancto Victore Robertus Tuitiensis Gulielmus de sancto amore Ioâ—chim Abbas Niceas were Peter Bruis and his Scholar Henry of Tholousâ— two famous Preachers against Popish errours insomuch as Peter was apprehended and burnt In this Age the Waldenses appeared who were the famous opposers of Antichrist In this Age are recorded Alâ—â—ssiodore Peter de Vinâ—is Arnoldus de nova villa and those two famous Preachers Gerardus and Dulcinus who preached that the Pope was Antichrist and Rome Babylon Besides our famous Robert Grosthead Bishop of Lincolne the great hammer of the Romanists who wrote to the Pope that he was Antichrist In this Age appeared for Christ Thomas Bradwardin Richard Armachanus Taulerus a famous Preacher in Germany and that glorious instrument of the Lord Iohn Wickliff In this Century besides Peter de Alliaco Nichol. Clemangis and many others we need name no other but those great Worthies and Martyrs Savanorola a famous Preacher in Florence with Iohn Huss and Hierom of Prague whose memories are pretious throughout all the Reformed Churches In this Age the Father of mercies raised up Martin Luther and so many others and from that time the defection from Rome was so eminent that it hath visibly continued to this day and concerning the following times
28. Eph. 4.11 12. Supposing therefore at present what hath been already proved that there is such an Office in the Church to last by Divine Institution to the end of the world The present Discourse enquires about the Subjectum recipiens of this high and weighty Office and the work of it whether it lie in common or be appropriated by Divine Ordinance to some peculiar and speciall persons who are not only favoured to be Christs Sheep but honoured also to be Shepherds under him This Question is not de lanâ caprinâ nor needlesse For 1. It is manifest that there be some who constantly supply the room of Preachers and arrogate to themselves the reverence and maintenance due to none but Ministers and yet they themselves were never ordained to this Office By this means many Congregations are deprived of Government and of the Sacraments and such as would willingly take care of their souls in a regular and ordinary way are excluded by such intruders as will neither be solemnly set apart for the Ministry by imposition of hands with fasting and prayer nor give way to them that would 2. Others there be that plead for a liberty of preaching or as they phrase it for the exercise of gifts in publick even in these Congregations where there are ordained Ministers and this to be by those who pretend not to be Preachers and Ministers strictly and properly so called when and as often as such persons please and that this liberty ought to be given to every Christian who desires it and may probably be presumed to be fitted for it We therefore that we may as much as in us lies take away the stumbling block which by these practices is laid before blinde Papists and remove the scandal given to Reformed Churches and hinder the progresse of this sinne in our own shall 1. Bear witnesse to these truths 1. That none may assume the Office of the Ministry unlesse he be solemnly set apart thereunto i n this Chapter 2. That none may undertake the work of the Ministry except he be a Minister in the next Chapter 2. Answer all the considerable Arguments we could meet with used in defence of the fore-named errours in the Chapter following and this we shall do with clearnesse and brevity as the matter shall permit and in sincerity and with a spirit of meeknesse as becomes the Ministers of the Gospel Thes. 1. That none may assume the Office of the Ministry unlesse lesse he be solemnly set apart thereunto appears by these Arguments First We argue from that known Text Rom. 10.15 And how shall they preach except they be sent This is set down by way of Interrogation Vt oratio sit penetrantior saith Pareu◠The Prohibition is made more emphatical by the interrogation and the form of expression makes it morally impossible to preach without mission The Apostle useth a four-fold gradation How shall they call upon him in whom they have not believed How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard How shall they hear without a preacher How shall they preach except they be sent The last link of the chain is of equal truth with the former As no man can call rightly on him in whom he believes not and no man can believe in him of whom he never heard and no man can hear without a Preacher so also no man can preach except he be sent and therefore he that breaks this last link breaks this golden chain of the Apostle and sins against God Besides this last link is an eternal truth As no man to the end of the world can call upon him in whom he believes not or believe in him of whom he hears not or hear without a Preacher so it is and will be true to the end of the world that no man can preach except he be sent The Apostle scrueth up the necessity of mission as high as the necessity of preaching and if one be perpetual the other must be so also Now from all this we gather 1. That mission is essential to the constitution of a Minister The Apostle doth not say How shall they preach except they be gifted though this be true but how shall they preach except they be sent Implying that gifting without sending doth not constitute a Minister 2. That this mission is not only of extraordinary but of ordinary teachers because faith is as much annexed to their teaching as teaching to their mission and faith is not the fruit of humane invention such is preaching without mission but of Divine Ordinance And therefore since we have no extraordinary Preachers we must either conclude there is no faith in the world or that there is an ordinary way of sending Ministers by whom as Gods instruments faith is wrought and if so their persons must enter that way and not runne before they be sent 3. That there is a necessity of a constant and perpetual as well as of an ordinary mission If faith depends upon hearing hearing upon preaching preaching upon mission then if faith be necessary in all ages of the world mission is also necessary yea ordinary mission because extraordinary is ceased A person may be praedo but he cannot be praco without mission and whatsoever may be done in some few extraordinary cases where regular mission cannot be had yet to run without sending and to leap over the wall where God hath opened a door is as high presumption in Divinity as it is in the civil state to break open an house without humane authority To all this it is replied 1. Some say That this sending is meant of sending by the election of the people but not by the Ordination of Ministers Answ. This cannot be for the people are the parties to whom the Preachers are sent Ministers are sent to the people not by the people The same party cannot be the person sending and the persons sent unto An Embassadour is not sent by the State to whom he brings his Embassie but by the States which gave him his Commission 2. Others say That this sending is to be understood of a providential not of an ecclesiastical and ministerial sending Answ. This is confuted by the next words in the Text How shall they preach except they be sent as it is written How beautifull are the feet of them that preach the Gospel of peace and bring glad tidings of good things These words are taken out of Isa. 52. and must needs be understood of a ministerial sending The Ministers he speaks of are called Watchmen Isa. 52.8 and the Prophet himself is mentioned as one of them Rom. 10.10 They are a Prophecy of the acceptation that the Ministers sent by God should have amongst the people of God in the times of the Gospel And that this Text is to be understood of more then a bare providential sending appears further Because 2. If providential sending were sufficient then women-Preachers are as much sent of God and may promise
man what may we say of those that intrude upon the work of the Ministry if they miscarry they destroy souls and this is indeed to destroy the man Si navem poscat sibi peronatus arator non meritò exclamet frontem melicerta perisse de rebus In brief shall an exact scrutiny passe upon such as are to feed the bodies of poor men and not upon such as feed the souls Act. 20.28 The work of the Ministry the preaching of the Word is a work of the highest consequence and importance that ever God committed to the sons of men The reconciling of men to God 2 Cor. 5.19 Even an heavenly Embassy of infinite and eternall consequence Now if God allow not these works which are of an inferiour nature to be done by men untried and unappointed to the Office how shall he approve of such as adventure upon this work of preaching the Word which is negotium negotiorum the work of works without any trial or commission If none may administer the Sacrament but he that is lawfully called and ordained thereunto then neither may any preach but he that is lawfully called and ordained But none may administer the Sacraments but he that is lawfully called and ordained thereunto Therefore The minor is easily granted and proved from the nature of the Sacraments They are Seals of the righteousnesse by faith If it be an intolerable usurpation amongst men for a private man to take the broad seal of the Kingdom and put it to what instruments he pleaseth much more intolerable is it for a private man to usurp the dispensation of the broad Seal of the Kingdom of heaven As in all States there are Keepers of the Seals appointed whose office it is to dispose them according to Law Even so it is in the Church of God Jesus Christ hath appointed Keepers of his Seals those whom he cals Stewards of the mysteries of God to whom he hath committed the word of Reconciliation and to whom he hath given power to baptize and to administer the Lords Supper The connexion is clear because that these two works are joyntly in the same Commission Mat. 28.19 20. and of the two the preaching of the Word is the greater work This the Apostle intimates 1 Cor. 1.17 Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the Gospel The negative particle is here as in many other places taken for the comparative he was sent rather to preach then to baptize and by this manner of expression it appears that to preach was his more proper and especiall work This account all the rest of the Apostles had of it therefore they did put off ministring to Tables that they might give themselves to the Word and Praier In the consideration of the greatnesse of this work the Prophet Isaiah being sent about it cries out Wo is me I am undone the Prophet Ieremiah Ah Lord God behold I cannot speak for I am a childe and Paul also Who is sufficient for these things Of this account it hath been alwaies had in the Church of God ancient and modern till these unhappy times of licentiousnesse And therefore we humbly entreat all those that do conscienciously and as we beleeve justly scruple to have their Children baptized by or receive the Lords Supper from the hands of any un-ordained person that they would seriously consider upon what warrant they hear un-ordained men preach Seeing there is the same Commission for preaching and for baptizing and that preaching is the great if not the greatest work of a Minister To usurp authority over the Church is a sin But to preacâ— without calling and Ordination to the work is to usurp authority over the Church Therefore The first Proposition is clear by its own light the other is easily proved by asserting Preaching to be an act of authority which is evident both in that the Apostle 1 Thes. 5.12 gives this charge Know them that are over you in the Lord and admonish you where to admonish is to be over Heb. 7. without controversie the lesser is blessed of the greater and this is further eviâ—enced in that the Apostle suffers not women to preach because they may not usurp authority over the man 1 Tim. 2. but is commanded to be in subjection upon which place Oecumenius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The very act of teaching is to usurp authority over the man Besides them the publike work of the Ministry of the Word is an authoritative administration like unto that of Criers Heralds and Embassadors to be performed in the name of the Lord Jesus and therefore may not be performed by any but such as are authorized and immediatly or mediatly deputed by him 2 Cor. 5.19 20. appears because in preaching the key of the Kingdom of Heaven is used to take men in or shut men out and this key is in the hand of ordinary Teachers as well as extraordinary yea the power of binding and loosing is exercised For though to preach be no act of jurisdiction strictly so called yet it is an act not only of order but of power not such as is common to every member of the Church but peculiar to such as are in publike Office Now to perform any authoritative act without authority what is it other then to usurp authority Gifts conferre the faculty of administration but not the power The Question which the Pharisees put to our Saviour being propounded to these men By what authority dost thou these things and who gave thee this authority Could they answer as Christ Ioh. 7.28 I am not come of my self That which the Scripture reproves may no man practice but the Scripture reproves uncalled men for preaching Therfore The major will not be denied The minor appears in that the false Prophets are reproved Ier. 23.21 32. not only for their false doctrine telling their own dreams and stealing the Word of God from his people but also for running when they were not sent I am against them saith the Lord a fearfull commination If God be against them who shall be with them if they finde not acceptance with God all that approbatiâ—n and applause which they finde from men what will it profit He is not approved whom man approves but he whom God approves The false Prophets themselves accuse Ieremiah Jer. 29.27 for making himself a Prophet which though it was a most unjust and false imputation yet it holds forth this truth That no man ought to make himself a Prophet the false Prophets themselves being witnesses It is very observable that Shemaiah the Nehelamite a false Prophet and a dreamer writes to Zephaniah the sonne of Maasiah the Priest and to all the Priests and accuseth Ieremiah for a mad man in making himself a Prophet and tells them that upon this account they ought to put him in prison and in the stocks It seems by this that it was no little sin and deserves no little punishment even in the judgement of false Prophets
to preach without a lawfull call The Apostles in the Synod of Ierusalem speak of certain men that went out from them and troubled the Gentiles with words subverting their souls They went out They were not sent out but they went out of theiâ— own accord this is spoken of them by way of reproof And then it followes they troubled you with words subverting your souls He that preacheth unsent is not a comforter but a troubler of the people of God not a builder but a subverter of souls There be many in our daies like Ahimaaz they will be running without either call or message and haply they may out-run Gods Cushi's we wish they meet with no worse successe then he in a spirituall sense to prove uselesse Messengers We argue from the practice of the Ministers of Christ If they have been as carefull to make proof of their mission as of their doctrine then is mission required in him thâ—t will Preach the Word But they have been thus carefull Therefore If any gifted man may preach without a Call why doth the Apostle so often make mention of his Call Rom. 1.1 Gal. 1.15 16. 1 Cor. 1.1 when the Disciples of Iohn murmured against Christ for baptizing Ioh. 3.27 28. Iohn answers A man can receive nothing unlesse it be given him from heaven ye your selves bear witnesse of me that I said I am not the Christ but that I am sent before him Here Christs undertaking to baptize is justified by his Mission When the chief Priests and the Scribes with the Elders asked Christ Luk. 20.2 Tell us by what authority doest thou these things or who gave thee this authority Christ makes answer by demanding another question The Baptisme of Iohn was it from heaven or of men Which teacheth us these two truths First That none ought to preach without being authorized and sent Secondly That this Call and Sending is not only from men but from heaven True it is such as is the Ministry such ought the Call to be if the Ministry extraordinary the Call extraordinary if the Ministry ordinary the Call must be ordinary but we reade of no Ministry allowed in Scripture without a Divine Call There is a threefold Call to the Ministry mentioned Gal. 1.1 The first is of or from man only when any is designed to this work errante clave that hath no inward qualification or Call from God This though it authorizeth to outward administrations in the Church yet will not satisfie the conscience of him that so administers The second is by man as the instrument when any is designed to the Ministry by those whom God hath intrusted with the work of Ordination according to the rule of the Word these God cals by man Act. 20. This is the Call of ordinary Pastors The third by Jesus Christ immediatly and by this it is that Paul proves himself an Apostle an extraordinary Minister Lastly we argue thus That work may not be performed by any which cannot by him be performed in faith But preaching by a Brother Gifted but not Called nor Ordained cannot be done in faith Therefore A Gifted unordained brother may not Preach Concerning the major we shall say little the Apostles general Canon Rom. 14. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin doth evidently demonstrate it The truth of the minor appears in that there is no warrant in Scripture which is the ground of faith for such a practice For first there is no 1. Precept that such should preach if there were a precept it was then a necessary duty that every gifted person ought to perform it was a sin if any gifted person should not preach though he could preach but one Sermon only in all his life Where is the necessity laid upon them as the Apostle speaks of himself that they preach the Gospel 2. There is no Precept that any should hear them or obey them in the Lord or maintain them these duties of the people areappropriated to those that are Preachers by Office Mal. 2. The Priests lips should preserve knowledge and the people should enquire the Law at their lips Luk. 10.16 The hearing of them is the hearing of Christ and the refusing of them is the refusing of Christ It is not so said of any that preach without mission but contrarily there is a strict charge not to hearken to such Ier. 17.14 and a complaint of them that heap to themselves teachers 2 Tim. 4. Thus the Apostle Heb. 13 7 17. Remember them obey them submit your selves to them that have the rule over you and have spoken to you the Word of God So 1 Tim. 5.17 Let the Elders that rule well be accounted worthy of double honour c. Nothing of this is spoken of gifted Brethren yet if they may lawfully preach all this may they challenge and all that hear and plead for them are bound in conscience to yield because all this is due for the works sake 1 Thess. 5.12 Secondly There is no promise in Scripture made unto any that Preach and are not thereunto lawfully Ordained We say no promise either of 1. Assistance A Minister must depend upon God for his inabling unto the great work which he undertakes for all our sufficiency is of God and we have no sufficiency of our selves so much as to think any thing 2 Cor. 3.5 and God hath promised this assistance only to those whom himself sends Thus Exo. 4.10 Go saith the Lord to Moses and I will be with thy mouth Isa. 6.7 8 God touches the mouth of Isaiah and sends him Ioh. 20.21 22. Christ sends and gives the holy Ghost to the Apostles and to them is the promise Ioh. 13. The Spirit of truth shall lead you into all truth Doth God do thus to those that run and are not sent O let the great errours broached of old by Origen and others that presumed the the undertaking of this work without a Call and in our daies by Anabaptists Socinians and others that despise a regular lawfull Call bear witness Surely we may say that if any amongst us Preach without a Call and yet Preach the truth they have not their assistance by vertue of any promise from the hand of God 2. Protection Thus God hath promised to those whom he sends on his message Thus the Lord encourageth Ieremiah ch 1.18 19. I have made thee this day a defenced City and an iron pillar and a brazen wall against this whole Land and they shall fight against thee but shall not prevail against thee for I am with thee saith the Lord to deliver thee Thus also Act. 18.9 the Lord incourageth Paul Be not afraid but speak and hold not thy peace for I am with thee and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee So also Act. 23.11 Be of good chear Paul c. And as we finde that God hath promised protection to those he sends so also the Ministers of God have incouraged themselves to a faithfull discharge of their duty against
all opposition especially upon this ground that they had their commission from God and his immutable promise for protection Isa. 49.1 2 3 4 5. Isa. 51.16 Ier. 26.14 15. But no where hath God made any such promise to those that intrude themselves into this work but threatens to be against them as hath been declared The Angels of God have a charge to keep us in our waies Psal. 91. but they that go out of them may fear the portion â—f the sonnes of Sceva the Jew Act. 19.15 that they be beaten by the evil spirit they undertake to cast out 3. Success in respect of the weighty ends of the Ministry the principall the glory of God the secondary the conversion and salvation of souls How is it possible that he who intrudes himself into the work of the Ministry should glorifie God in the work since God is honoured only in his own waies and means and therefore cannot be glorified when his waies are not observed To obey is better then sacrifice saith the Prophet and to hearken then the fat of Rams Christ glorified not himself to be made an High-priest such therefore as assume the Ministry glorifie themselves and not God Neither is there any promise made neither is it to be expected that he who assumes this work of the Ministry without a Call should ever become the instrument of the conversion and edification of souls Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the preaching of such as are sent Rom. 10.14 17. but unsent Preachers have the curse of God upon their labours that they shall not profit the people at all Ier. 23.32 Luther hath a good saying to this purpose Deus non fortunat labores corum qui non sunt vocati quamvis salutaria quaedam afferant tamen non aedificant that is God doth not prosper their labours who are not called and though they preach some profitable truths yet do they not profit the people Hence it comes to pass that they that hear uncalled Preachers fall i nto so many errours as a just punishment of God upon them according to that the Apostle saith 2 Tim. 4.3 4. For the time will come that they will not indure sound doctrine but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves Teachers having itching ears and they shall turn away their ears from the truth and shall be turned unto fables Gods blessing of conversion is promised only to his own Ordinance which they cannot expect who either by preaching without a Call or hearing such as so preach do overthrow Thirdly There is no one approved example recorded in Scripture of any one not being Sent and Called either immediatly or mediatly by God especially in a constituted Church that undertook this work of preaching or any other work appropriated by God to the Ministry And thus we have also finished this second Chapter and sufficiently and clearly proved as we suppose That it is unlawfull for any man not lawfully called and set apart to the Office of a Minister to undertake and intrude upon the work of Preaching appropriated by God to that Office CHAP. VI. Answering the Arguments brought for the Preaching of men out of Office IN this Chapter we shall give Answers to the chief and main Arguments produced by such as maintain this unwarrantable practice of Preaching by men out of Office for though a Christian ought not to depart from the plain rule of the Word of God though he be not able to satisfie all the Sophistical cavils of gain-saying adversaries yet that we may remove all stumbling blocks and occasions to fall out of the way that if it be possible some may be reclaimed from their â—rrour others may be more firmly established in the truth when they see discovered the vanity and invalidity of pretenders Arguments for the preaching of gifted men out of Office we shall likewise undertake this task The first and principal Argument is drawn from 1 Cor. 14.31 Ye may all prophesie one by one that all may learn and all may be comforted Whence is thus inferred That the Apostle giving liberty to the gifted Brethren of the Church of Corinth out of Office to Prophesie you may All Prophesie warrants this practice of Preaching in all men that have gifts though they be not set apart to this Office In Answer to this Argument we first lay down this Rule which is also of excellent use for the understanding of many other places of Scripture viz. That this universal All is to be restrained and limited according to the subject or matter treated of As when the Apostle saith All things are lawfull for me he means not simply All things but restrainedly All indifferent things of which he was there treating 1. Cor 6.12 and 10.23 In like manner when the same Apostle 2 Cor. 5.17 saith All things are made new This Proposition is to be restrained from the subject and matter of which he was speaking unto Beleevers The like may be observed in many other places Luk. 13.15 1 Cor. 12.7 Isa. 9.17 c. These things thus premised We say First In this place of the Apostle Ye may all prophesie the word All is to be restrained according to the subject of which the Apostle speaks He saith not of the Body or People of the Church of Corinth that they might All Prophesie but of the Prophets in that Church that they might All Prophesie This is evident both from the antecedent and subsequent words In the 29th verse the Apostle saith Let the Prophets speak two or three c. then he subjoyns For ye may All prophesie and then it follows immediatly And the spirit of the Prophets shall be subject to the Prophets By this discourse of the Apostle it evidently appears that the liberty of prophecying was not given to every member of the Church of Corinth but only to the Prophets that were in that Church Now it is clear they were not all Prophets c. 12.29 Are all Prophets i. All are not Prophets and therefore all had not granted them this liberty of prophecying And thus far we have the consent not only of Beza and others upon the place but even of the most sober of our adversaries who will not assert a promiscuous liberty of prophecying to every member of the Church but only to such as are gifted and qualified for the work and desired by the Church to exercise that Gift Secondly The Prophets both in this place and where ever else in the Scriptures mentioned were an order of Ministry not only gifted Brethren but constituted Officers in the Church Thus 1 Cor. 12.28 God hath set in his Church first Apostles secondly Prophets thirdly Teachers c. As the Apostles and Teachers were Officers set by God in his Church so also were the Prophets Reade also Eph. 4.11 12. When Christ gave 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gifts Officers for the good of the Church he gave amongst these Officers Prophets And we do not beleeve that there can
Call is alwaies joyned either with the gift of Miracles or the gift of Tongues or some other extraordinary thing by which men are enabled undoubtedly to demonstrate to others their immediate Call Thus the Prophets were all of them endued with the gift of fore-telling things to come and Iohn Baptist was enabled to make proof of his immediate Call by shewing the Prophecies both of Isaiah and Malachy that were concerning him which prophecies were applied to him by the Angel Luke 1.15 16 17. before he was born appropriated by himself Ioh. 1.23 and confirmed by Christs testimony of him Mat. 11.9 10 11. And therefore let all those that boast of their Revelations and say they are called by God to preach as the Apostles were shew the signs and tokens of their Apostleship as the Apostles did let them shew the gift of miracles or of Tongues or of foretelling things to come or some supernaturall prediction that such as they should be sent into the world or at least some rare and extraordinary work of God that so the world may beleeve that they are in truth sent by God and are not Impostors and Seducers as the false Prophets were Ier. 14.14 Secondly They that are immediatly called by God will preach no other doctrine but what is agreeable to the Word of God This is the distinguishing character brought by the Prophet Ieremy Jer. 23.16 Hearken not unto the words of the Prophets c. For they prophesie a lye unto you for I have not sent them saith the Lord yet they prophesiâ— a lie in my Name Thus Ier. 29.8 9. Let not your Prophets and your Diviners deceive you neither hearken to your Dreams c. for they prophesie falsly unto you in my Name He that boasteth of dreams visionâ— â—nd Revelations and holds forth any doctrine contrary to the written Word he is an Impostor and a Seducer And this is the chief Note of difference without which the former iâ— insufficient Prima ac praecipua probationis regula saith Gerhard est harmonia congruentia doctrinae cum doctrinâ a Deo revelarâ The first and chief rule of triall is the harmony and agreement of the doctriâ—e they preach with the doctrine of thâ— Scriptâ—res For our Saviour Christ telâ— us That false Christâ— should arise and false Prophets and should shew great signs and wonders insomuch if it were possible they should deâ—eive the very Elect. And the Apostle tels us that the coming of Antichrist shall be after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders These wonders are called lying wonders either because they should be false and counterfeit or if â—rue yet they may be called lying wonders miranda not miracula because wrought by Satan to confirm erroneous doctrines and lies Such are Popish miracles falsly so called which are as our Annotations upon the place say either lyiâ—g prodigies or prodigious lies This caution was given to the Children of Israel by Moses Deut. 13.1 If there arise among you a Prophet or a dreamer if dreams and giveth thee a sign or a wonder and the sign or the wonder come to passe whereof he spake unto thee saying Let us go after other Gods c. Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that Prophet or that dreamer of dreams for the Lord your God proveth you to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul c. From all which we gather That whosoever groundeth his authority of preaching upon an immediate call and braggeth of heavenly visions and divine revelations if he preach strange doctrine contrary to the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles although he should confirm it by signs and wonders and although he should undertake to foretell things to come and these predictions should come to passe yet notwithstanding we are not to hearken unto him but to reject him as a Seducer and his wonders as lying wonders and to say with the Apostle Paul Though we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel unto you then that which we have preached unto you let him be accursed Excellently to this purpose doth Austin answer to the Donatists boasting of their Revelations but departing from the sincerity of Evangelical doctrine Let them not therefore say it is a truth because Donatus or Pontius or any other did such and such miracles or because this Brother or that Sister saw such a vision or dreamed such a dream Let these fictions of deceitful men or wonders of lying spirits be laid aside c. And having laid them aside Let them demonstrate their Church not by such lying prodigies because against giving heed to such we are warned in the Word of God but by the prescript of the Law the predictions of the Prophets by the Book of Psalms by the voice of the great Shepherd by the Preachings and Writings of the Evangelists that is by â—…the Authority of Canonicall Books of Scripture So much for the first Question Quest. 2 Whether are we to expect any immediate and extraordinary Call to the Ministry in these daies Answ. Though we cannot nor ought not to set bounds to the infinite power of free-will of God nor will we dispute what God may do out of his free-grace in times of generall Apostacy yet we shall make bold to give in this answer to this great Question That we do not reade that we are commanded in Scripture to wait for and expect such a Call neither do we know of any promise that God hath made to encourage us to wait nor do we conceive that there is any absolute necessity of such an expectation For God as Chemnitius observes hath by his Apostles delivered and prescribed to his Church a certain form by which he would have men enter into the Ministry and that is a mediate Call neither is there now any need of an immediate For it is Gods will that the Ministry even to the end of the world should be tied to that doctrine which is delivered to the Church by the Apostles Adde to this That the Apostles though they themselves were called immediatly by God yet notwithstanding they did not wait till others that should succeed them in the work of the Ministry were chosen also immediatly by God But they themselveâ— ordained Ministers and gave order to Timothy and Titus about the way and method of electing and ordaining Elders which we are assured they would never have done if the immediate Call had not ceased together with their persons When Christ went up to heaven he gave two sorts of Officers to his Church some extraordinary as Apostles Evangelists Prophets and these were temporary some ordinary as Pastors and Teachers and these are perpetual Now as we are not to expect in our daies such extraordinary Officers as Apostles Evangelists and Prophets no more are we to expect such an extraordinary way of calling as they had but as our Officers are
must one be ordained to be a witnesse with us c. that is with us Apostles And then follows And they appointed that is the Apostles and not the 120. Disciples But suppose that they had been appointed by the 120. Disciples yet we answer 1. That the whole and sole power of choosing was not in the people for they were guided and directed in their choice by the eleven Apostles It was Electio populi praeeuntibus dirigentibus Apostolis By the guidance and direction of the Apostles and so it comes not up to the proof of the Proposition The Apostle tels them in expresse terms ver 21 22. of those men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Iesus went in and out among us beginning from the Baptism of John c. 2. That the people cannot in any good construction be said to have chosen Matthias any more then Barsabas For they appointed two And when the people had made their choice Barsabas was as capable of being an Apostle as Matthias The truth is Matthias was chosen by God himself and by God only and therefore it is said vers 24. Thou Lord which knowest the hearts of all men shew whether of these two thou hast chosen It was the divine lot not the 120. that chose the Apostle Object But it is said ver 26. He was numbred with the eleven Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is say they he was together chosen by suffrage of the 120. Disciples Answ The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 primarily â—nd properly signifieth to choose by stones or counters with which they were wont to give voices in commission or judgement But here it must necessarily be taken in a more general sense for the generall consent and approbation of the whole company For it is certain That Matthias was chosen by lot and not by stones by God and not by the people And therefore when it is said He was numbred the meaning is he was acknowledged to be one of the 12. Apostles They all rested contented with the lot as being confident that God disposed and approved the event thereof and as our Annotations say By a common declaration of their generall consent he was numbred among the eleven Apostles The Second Text is Concerning the choise of Deacons where the whole and sole power of choosing is put into the hands of the people And therefore say they the choise of a Minister belongs by divine right wholly and solely unto the people Answ. 1. The people had not the whole and the sole choise of the Deacons but were herein guided directed and limited by the holy Apostles They were limited to the number of seven and to the company out of which those seven were to be chosen and to certain qualifications which must be in these seven Look ye out among you seven men of honest report full of the holy Ghost and wisedom whom we may appoint over this businesse And we are confident that if the brethren had failed in any of these particulars the Apostles would have refused to have laid their hands upon them And therefore this Text comes not up to the proof of the Objection But suppose That the people had had the whole and sole choice of the Deacons yet it will not follow that therefore they should have the whole and sole choise of their Ministers For it is a certain Rule Argumentum a minori ad majus non valet affirmativè It is no good way of arguing to say That because a man is able to do the lesser therefore he is able to do the greater Now the Office of a Deacon is inferior to the office of a Presbyter And besides it will no way follow That because people are able without advice and direction from others to choose men to gather and distribute money to the poor that therefore they are able wholly and solely to choose men that shall divide the Word of God amongst them as skilfull workmen that need not be ashamed The third Text is Act. 14.23 And when they had ordained them Elders in every Church and had praied with fasting c. The Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. which signifieth a choosing by lifting up or stretching out the hand And Beza translates the words Cumque ipsis per suffragia creassent per singulas Ecclesias Presbyteros And when they had created for them by suffrages Elders in every City This Text seems to make much for the whole and sole power of the people in the Election of a Minister But we answer That though the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth primarily and properly to choose by lifting up of the hands as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to choose by stones or counters yet also it oftentimes signifieth simply to choose or to appoint or to ordain without the use of the ceremony of lifting up of hands Thus it must necessarily be taken Act. 10.41 And thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 1.26 is also to be understood for a bare numbring and accounting We could here cite multitude of Authors where the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used for decerning appointing constituting and that without lifting up of hands but they are reckoned up to our hands by many Authors to which we refer those that desire to be satisfied herein For our parts we incline rather to this latter signification of the word And to the Text we say 1. That whatsoever is meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet certain we are that the persons that did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were Paul and Barnabas and not the people For it is said expresly And when they had ordained them Elders This they must needs be Paul and Barnabas It is six times used of them in five verses ver 21 22. When they had preached c. they returned to Lystra confirming the souls of the Disciples and ver 23. when they had ordained c. and had prayed they commended them to the Lord and ver 14. after they had passed throughout Pisidia they came c. and they preached By all which it appears that the persons that did ordain were Paul and Barnabas and therefore whether this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were a creating by suffrages which we think not for being but two there could be no place for suffrages or a bare ordaining and appointing sure we are that in Grammaticall construction this ordaining must be the act of the Apostles and not of the people and therefore this Text comes not up to the proof of the Objection Object It is Objected by a Learned man That the Syriack version doth insinuate that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be understood not of the Apostles Ordination of Elders but of the Churches Election of Elders thus And when they that is the disciples fore-mentioned had by votes made to themselves Elders in every Church and had prayed they commended them that is Paul
the Universal Church yet we are far from thinking that he is actually an Universal Minister The Apostles had the actual care of the Church Universal committed unto them and wheresoever they came had actual power to perform all Ministerial Offices without the consent or call of particular Churches And besides they were not fixed to any particular charge but were Ministers alike of all the Churches of Christ. But it is far otherwise with ordinary Ministers They are fixed to their particular Congregations where they are bound by divine right to reside and to be diligent in preaching to them in season and out of season All that we say concerning their being Ministers of the Church universall is That they have power by their Ordination in actu primo as M. Hudson saith to administer the Ordinances of Christ in all the Churches of the Saints yet not in actu secundo without a speciall Call which is farre differing from the Apostolicall power Object If a Minister may act as a Minister out of his own Congregation why do you your selves ordain none but such as have a title to some particular charge Answ. It is true We say in our Government That it is agreeable to the Word of God and very convenient That they that are to be ordained be designed to some particular Church or Ministerial employment not hereby limiting their Office but the ordinary exercise of their Office We distinguish between a Minister of Christ and a Minister of Christ in such a place between the Office it self and the ordinary â—xercise of it to such or such a people And yet notwithstanding we ordain none without a Title thereby to prevent 1. A vagrant and ambulatory Ministry For we conceive it far more edifying for the people of God to live under a fixt Ministry 2. A lazy and idle Ministry For when men shall have an office and no place actually to exercise it this might in a little space fill the Church with unpreaching Ministers 3. A begging and so a contemptible Ministry For when Ministers want places they are oftentimes wholly destitute of means and thereby come to great poverty even to the very contempt of the office it self So much for the sixth Argument Arg. 7. If the whole essence of the Ministeriall Call consisteth in Election without Ordination then it will necessarily follow that when a Minister leaves or is put from that particular charge to which he is called that then he ceaseth to be a Minister and becomes a private person and that when he is elected to another place he needs a new Ordination and so toties quoties as often as he is elected so often he is to be ordained which to us seems a very great absurdity That this consequence doth necessarily follow is confessed by the Reverend Ministers of New-England in their Platform of Church-Discipline where they say He that is clearly loosed from his Office-relation unto that Church whereof he was a Minister cannot be looked upon as an Officer nor perform any act of Office in any other Church unlesse he be again orderly called unto Office which when it shall be we know nothing to hinder but Imposicion of hands also in his Ordination ought to be used towards him again For so Paul the Apostle received Imposition of hands twice at least from Ananias Act. 9.17 and Act. 13.3 4. But this seems to us to be a very great absurdity and contrary to sound doctrine which we prove 1. Because every Minister hath a double relation one to the Church-Catholique indefinitely another to that particular Congregation over which he is set And when he removes from his particular Congregation he ceaseth indeed to be a Minister of that place but not from being a Minister of the Gospel And when called to another he needs no new Ordination no more as M. Hudson well saith then a Physician or Lawyer need a new License or Call to the Barre though they remove to other places and have other Patients and Clients For Ordination is to the essence of the Ministeriall Office and not only in reference to a particular place or charge The Reverend Assembly of Divines in their Advice to the Parliament concerning Church-government say That there is one generall Church visible held forth in the New Testament and that the Ministry was given by Iesus Christ to the génerall Church-visible for the gathering and perfecting of it in this life until his second coming which they prove from 1 Cor. 12.28 Eph. 4.4 5. compared with ver 10 11 12 13 15 16. of the same Chapter Now if Ministers be seated by Christ in the Church-Catholique as well as in their particular Churches then it followeth That they have a relation as Ministers to the Church-Catholique and though their relation to their particular Church ceaseth yet their Ministeriall relation ceaseth not because they were Officers of the Church-Catholique and there doth still remain in them a power in actu primo to dispense all the Ordinances of Christ though their Call ad actum secundum sive exercitum pro hic nunc as M. Hudson phraseth it ceaseth Even as every private Christian hath also a double relation one to the Church generall another to the particular place whereof he is a member And when he removes from his Congregation he doth not cease to be a member of the visible Church for then his Baptism should cease for every baptized person is a member of the Church but only of that particular Church And when he joyns with any other Congregation he needs not to be baptized again but is received by vertue of his former Baptism So it is with a Minister of the Gospel When he leaves his particular Congregation he continueth still to be a Minister though not their Minister and needs no more to be ordained anew then a private Christian to be baptized anew because neither Ordination nor Baptism do stand in relation to the particular Congregation but to the Church-Catholique Secondly If a Minister when he removes or is removed from his particular Congregation ceaseth to be a Minister then it will follow 1. That if the Church that called him prove hereticall and wickedly separate from him that then the sin of the people should nullifie the Office of the Minister Or. 2. If the Church refuse to give him competent maintenance and starve him out from them or if the major part unjustly combine together to vote him out for such power our brethren give to particular Churches that then the covetousnesse and injustice of the people should make void the Function of their Minister Nay 3. By this doctrine there will be a door opened for the people of a City or Nation to un-minister all their Ministers which things are very great absurdities and contrary to sound doctrine Thirdly Because there is no Scripture to warrant the iteration of Ordination in case of removall The Apostles went about Ordaining Elders in every Church And Titus was
left in Crete to Ordain Elders c. But there is no mention made of any command for reiterated Ordination neither indeed can it be For Ordination being a setting a man apart to the Office of the Ministry as we shall hereafter prove and not only to the exercise of it in such a place though the local exercise should cease yet his Office still remains and therefore needs not be reiterated To this truth we have the consent of the Universall Church who do not only not allow but condemn a second Ordination Neither do we know any of the Reformed Churches that teach or practise after this manner but many that teach and practise the contrary Object What then will you answer to the example of Paul who had hands twice laid upon him once by Ananias Act. 9. and afterward at Antioch Act 13 Answ. 1. It will not easily be proved Thaâ— the Imposition of hands by Ananias upon Paul was for the consecration of him to the Office of an Apostle and not rather for the recovering of his sight and for that only The Text seems to hold out the last Sure we are that Paul was baptized after this Imposition of hands and it is not probable that he was outwardly and visibly ordained to his Apostolical Office before his Baptism As for Act. 13. M. Hooker in his Survey par 2. pag. 83. saith expresly That here is no Ordination to Office at all for the Apostles had their Office before and if so then it makes nothing for our New-England Brethren to prove an iterated Ordination unto the same Office Of the like minde with M. Hooker is Learned Chamier who saith That before this Ordination Paul and Barnabas had preached and exercised the Offiâ—e of their Apostleship And therefore we doe not think saith he that this Imposition of hands was an Ordination properly unto any New Ecclesiasticall Function but onely a confirmation of their sending to the Gentiles to whom they were not yet professedly sent For in that excursion of theirs unto Antioch there is no mention made of the Gentiles and that was a kinde of Prologue to that great work which now they were to put in full execution The Text it self seems to give countenance to this Interpretation because it saith Separate me Paul and Barnabas for the work c. not for the office but for the work whereunto I have called them Called they were before and designed by God to be Preachers to the Gentiles and now they were publiquely inaugurated to that great and eminent service Chrysostome Theophylact and Oecumenius as they are cited by Chamier say That this Imposition of hands was unto the Office of an Apostle Thus Deodate They laid their hands on them that is for a sign of Consecration unto the Office of an Apostle But how can this be when the Apostle Paul himself tels us that he was an Apostle not of men neither by men but by Iesus Christ immediatly and also when he was an Apostle as Calvin saith long before this time And therefore we rather think that this separation was not unto the Apostolicall Office but unto that great and as Calvin cals it now unusual work of preaching unto the Gentiles But howsoever whether this Imposition of hands were unto the Apostolicall Office or only unto a peculiar work it makes nothing for the proof of that for which it is brought to wit That an Officer loosed from his Office-relation may be ordained again unto the same Office For Paul was never loosed from his Office after he was once called unto it If the Imposition of hands by Ananias were unto the Office of an Apostle as we beleeve it was not yet if it were we then demand Either this Ordination was afterward null and void or remained firm and valid If it alwaies remained firm what need a new Ordination If null and void we desire a proof of it which we are sure they cannot produce and till that be done this instance makes nothing for the proof of their assertion Besides all this we adde That this separation and imposition of hands was by the immediate appointment of the holy Ghost The holy Ghost said Separate me c. and ver 4. They were sent forth by the holy Ghost This was an extraordinary thing and therefore not sufficient to ground an ordinary practice upon Thirdly and lastly If the whole essence of the Ministerial Call consisteth in popular Election then will two other great absurdities follow 1. That Ordination can in no case precede such Election 2. That there must be Churches before there be Ministers First that Ordination can in no wise precede Election Now though ordinarily no man is ordained in the Presbyterian way without a title to some châ—rge yet we conceive many cases may be put in which Ordination may lawfully go before Election We shall only give two Instances 1. When an ordained Minister removes upon warrantable grounds from one charge to another the people to whom he removes â—hoose him not as oâ—e that is to be made a Minister but as one already made and now to be made their Minister for his removing from his former place doth not nullifie his Ministerial office as we have sufficiently proved 2. When there is a necessity of sending men as there is now in New-England for the conversion of Heathen people we thâ—â—k it very agreeable unto Scripturâ—-rules that these men shoâ—ld be first ordained before they be elected by the Heathen to whom they are sent And the reason is because that the conversion of souls is the proper work of the Ministry When Christ went up into heaven he left not only Apostles Prophets and Evangâ—lists but also Pastors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministry for the edifying of the body of Christ Eph. 4.11 12. And the office of oâ—dinary Ministers is to be Embassadors for Christ and in Christs Name or in Christs stead to beseech people to be reconciled unto God not only to build them up in grace when reconciled but to be instrumental to reconcile them to open their eyes and to turn them from darknesse to light and from the power of Satan unto God c. We finde no place in Scripture to warrant a Church to send out gifted brethren without Ordination for the work of conversion What may be done in extraordinary cases where Ordination cannot be had we dispute not but where it may be had there we conceive it most agreeable to the Word that men should be first Ordained before sent Hereby they shall have a divine stamp upon them they shall go with more authority and shall have power to baptize those whom they do convert which otherwise they cannot lawfully do It is an unscriptural opinion and of pernicious consequence that some amongst us have taken up That a Minister should preach only for the building up of Saints and not for the conversion of sinners That when a Minister converts
reported But from whence had he thiâ— History Even from Clemens Fabuleus and Hegesippus not extant 2. It is no wonder that Timothy and Titus are called Bishops by Eâ—sebius and Theodoret because that the Apostles themselves are called Bishops by the writers of those times who spake of former times according to their own Thus Peter is said to be Bishop of Rome and Iames of Hiâ—rusalem Now it is evident as we shall hereafter prove That the Apostles were not Bishops properly and formally but onely eminently and vertually 3. As they are called Bishops so also they are called Apostles Theodoret calles Titus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Timothy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And yet we believe that there are few of our Episcopal Divines will undertake to prove them to be Veri Nominis Apostolos Some call them Archbishops Metropolitans Patriarches and yet will not be easie to perswade a person disengaged from Prelacy that there were Archbishops and Metropolitans in the Apostles dayes The truth is That which Thucydides saith of the ancient Greek Historians may as truly be said of Eusebius Irenaeus and others c. That those things which they received from their Fore-fathers they delivered to their posterity without strict examination and thereby in many things more deceived themselves and were the cause of deceiving others as we shall have occasion to shew afterwards For our parts we answer clearly That the Fathers and Councels speak of the Officers of former times according to the stile of their own times That Timothy had an Office above a Bishop as Wale Messalinus saith though afterwards from the custome of the Church and some acts that Bishops did like his but not solely he was allusively if not abusively and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called a Bishop And as another faith Timothy and Titus are called Bishops by the ancients because they did those acts that by humane custome were afterwards appropriated to Bishops in regard of Presidency but they did them not as Bishops which they are not called in Scripture hut as Evangelists which they were and so one of them is called 2 Tim. 4.5 2. The second argument to prove that Timothy and Titus were no Bishops relates especially to Timothy and it is this If Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus it must be when the first Epistle was written For it is in that Epistle in which he is said to receive his pretended charge of exercising his Episcopal power in Ordination and Jurisdiction But now this first Epistle was written when Paul was at Macedonia as the learned both new and old Papists and Protestants agree And it was after this when Paul came to Miletum accompanied with Timothy and sends for the Elders of the Church of Ephesus unto him and commends the government of the Church unto these Elders whom he calls Bishops Now surely if Timothy had been constituted their Bishop in the sence of our Adversaries the Apostle would not have called the Elders Bishops before their Bishops face and in stead of giving a charge to the Elders to feed the flock of Christ he would have given that charge to Timothy and not to them And no doubt he would have given some directions to the Elders how to carry themselves toward their Bishop And because none of these things were done it is a clear demonstration to us that Timothy was not at that time Bishop of Ephesus To avoid the force of this argument there are some that say That Timothy was not made Bishop of Ephesus till after Pauls first being a prisoner at Rome which was after his being at Miletum But these men while they seek to avoid the Scylla of one inconvenience fall into the Carybdis of another as great For if Timothy was not made Bishop till Pauls first being at Rome then he was not Bishop when the first Epistle was written to him which all agree to be written before that time And then it will also follow That all that charge that was laid upon him both of Ordination and jurisdiction and that intreating of him to abide at Ephesus was given to him not as to the Bishop of Ephesus which he was not but as to an extraordinary Officer sent thither upon special occasion with a purpose of returning when his work imposed was finished From both these considerations we may safely conclude That if Timothy were neither constituted Bishop of Ephâ—sus before Pauls first being prisoner at Rome nor after Then he was not constituted Bishop at all But he was neither constituted Bishop before nor after c. Ergo not at all 3. To prove that Timothy and Titus were not Bishops in a Prelatical sence we argue from the matter contained in these Epistles In the first Epistle wherein all that is alledged for Episcopacy is contained for in the 2 Epistle there is nothing at all said about it Chap. 1. Vers. 3. He beseecheth Timothy to abide at Ephesus when he went into Macedonia which had been a needless importunity as Smecttymnuus well observes if Timothy had had the Episcopal charge of Ephesus committed to him by the Apostles for then he might have laid as dreadful a charge upon him to abide at Ephesus as he doth afterwards to Preach the Gospel 2 Tim. 4.1 2. And in his Epistle to Titus Chap. 1.5 he saith For this cause left I thee in Creete that thou shouldst set in order the things that are wanting c. In which words the Apostle specifieth the occasional imployment for which he was desired to stay in that place Now as the Reverend Presbyters in their conference at the Isle of Wight have well noted These expressions I besought thâ—e to abide still at Ephesus I left thee in Creete do not sound like words of instalment of a man into a Bishoprick but of an intendment to call him away again And if we consider his actual revocation of them both of which we shall afterwards speake and the intimation in these texts of his intention that they should not stay there for continuance and the reason of his beseeching the one to stay and of his leaving the other behind him which was some present defects and distempers in those Churches they will put fair to prove That the Apostle intended not to establish them Bishops of those places and therfore did not Add to this That when Paul undertook in 1 Tim. 3. to set out the Office of a Bishop he mentioneth nothing in that Office which is not competent to a Presbyter and therefore omits the Office of a Presbyter as we have formerly said including it in the Office of a Bishop which certainly he would never have done if he had at the same time made Timothy an HierachicalBishop with a power to do that formally which was unlawful for a Presbyter to do And in his Epistle to Titus he directly confounds the names and offices of Presbyters and Bishops and makes them one and the same Titus 1.5.6 which he certainly would not have
themselves of power of Governing then as Dr. Bilson saith they could lose their Apostleship Had they set up Bishops in all Churches they had no more parted with their power of Governing then they did in setting up Presbyters for we have proved that Presbyters being called Rulers Governours Bishops had the power of Governing in Ordinary committed to them as well as the office of teaching c. Nor do we see how the Apostle could reasonably commitâ— the Government of the Church to the Presbyters of Ephesus and yet reserve the power of Governing viz. in ordinary in his own hands who took his last farewell of them as never to see them more As the reserving of that part of the power of Governme nt called Legislative in the Apostles hands hindred not but that in your Majesties judgment Timothy and Titus were Bishops at Ephesus and Creet to whom the Apostle gives rules for ordering and governing the Church So likewise there is no reason why the Apostle reserving of that part of the power of Government called Executive in such cases and upon such occasions as they thought m eet should hinder the setting up of Bishops if they had intended it and therefore the reserving of power in their hands can be no greater reason why they did not set up Bishops at first then that they never did There is a third answer given which is quite contrary to the second and that is that these Bishops of Philippi were Bishops in a proper sence and that at that time when the Apostle wrote his Epistle there were no single Presbyters at Philippi 1. This answer is quite contrary to the sence that Hierom Theodoret and Theophylacts and others give of this text 2. This answer supposeth that there were more Bishops then one planted in one City by the Apostles which is quite contrary to the judgment of Episcopall divines and quite destructive of the Episcopal Hierarchy Theodoret sayth that the Apostles by Bishops understands single Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Otherwise it had been impossible for many Bishops to go vern one City And so also Theophylact The Apostle calls Presbyters Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For there were not many Bishops in one City And the truth is To affirm That there were many Bishops in one City in the Apostles dayes is in plain English to grant the cause and to say That the Apostolicall Bishops were mere Presbyters 3. Another text brought by us to prove the Identity of a Bishop and Presbyter was 1. Tim. 3. where the Apostle reckoning up the qualifications of a Bishop passeth from Bishops unto Deaconâ— leaving out the qualifications of Presbyters there by giving us to understand that Presbyters and Bishops are all one To this it is answered That because Paul wrote to Timothy and Titus who were Bishops therefore there was no need to write any thing concerning the choice or qualification of any other sort of officers then such as belonged to their Ordination and inspection which were Presbyters and Deacons onely and no Bishops 1. This answer would have some weight in it if it could be proved That Timothy and Titus were Bishops in a forâ—all sence or if there could be found any rule for the Ordination of an Hierarchicall Bishop or for the qualification of him in some other place of Scripture but we are sure that neither the one nor the other can be made out 2. It is reasonable to think as our Divines at the Isle of Wight say the Apostle when he passeth immediately from the Bishop to the Deacon in the place forementioned would have distinctly exprest or at least hinted what sort of Bishop he meant whether the Bishop over Presbyters or the Presbyter Bishop to have avoided the confusion of the name and to have set as it were some mark of difference in the Eschocheon of the Presbyter-Bishop if there had been some other Bishop of a higher house 3. According to the judgement of Episcopal men as our divines do well observe Bishops might then have ordained Bishops like themselves for there was then no Canonâ— forbidding one single Bishop to Ordain another of his own rank and there being many Cities in Creete Titus might have found it expedient to have set up Bishops in some of those Cities So that this answer fights against the principle of those that hold Timothy and Titus to have been Bishops 4. This answer is opposite to all those that hold Timothy and Titus to have been made by the Apostle Arch-Bishops of Ephâ—sus and Crâ—â—tâ— If they were Arch-Bishops then their Office was to constitute Bishops in a proper sence There is one of no little note among our Prelatical Brethren that stoutly maintains this and till our Brethren be reconciled among themselves we need make no other reply to this answer 5. Whereas out of 1 Pet. 5. we proved That the Elderâ— are not onely called Bishops but have the whole Episcopal power committed unto them being commanded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To feed and take the Episcopal charge of the flock of God To this it is said That by Elders are meant Bishops in our Brthrens sense Because These Elders are required to feed the flock 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not as being Lords over Gods heritage So it is translated But say some it must be translated Not as being Lords â—ver the Clergy committed to your care which hints unto us say they That these Elders were Bishops over Presbyters and not meer Presbyters This Interpretation is Novel and not to be found for ought we can discern in all Antiquity and we believe our more Moderate Brethren are ashamed of it and therefore we will be very brief in answer to it All that we shall say is 1. That though after the Apostles dayes there came in this Nominal distinction between the people and their Ministers insomuch as the people were called Laici and their Ministrs Clerici yet it is evident that in the Apostles dayes there was no such distinction The people of God are in this very Epistle called an holy Priesthood 1 Pet. 2.5 and a royal Priesthood 1 Pet. 2.9 And Deut. 32.9 The Lords portion and the lot of his inheriâ—ance And if the Reader wil be pleased to view al the translations that have been of this text he will never find it translated As being Lords of the Clergy but as being Lords of Gods heritage 2. We answer That the Apostle as if on purpose he had intended to have fore-armed us against this misunderstanding of the words in the latter clause of the verse he sheweth what he maeneth by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not as Lords over Gods heritage but as being ensamples to the flock The latter is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the former By 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he means 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the sense of the whole verse can be no other but this That the Elders be careful not to