A Second DISCOURSE ABOUT Re-Ordination. BEING An Answer to two or three Books come out against this Subject, in behalf of the many concerned at this season; who for the sake of their Ministry, and upon necessity, do yield to it; in defence of their Submission.  
By JOHN HUMPHREY, Min.  
TOGETHER, With his testimony, which from the good hand of the Lord, is laid upon himself, to bear, in this generation, against the evil, and to prevent, or repress (as much as by him may be possible) the danger, of the Imposition.  
But when I speak with thee, I will open thy mouth, and thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God, he that heareth, let him hear, and he that forbeareth, let him forbear,  Ex. 3.27. Peccavi? sed forsàn non sponte. Tuquoque in mult is delinquis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Peccavi? Ne hoc quidèm satis scis an peccavi? Ilt maximè stomacheris, tamen vita hominum momentanea, ac paulo post, omnes morimur. 
London, Printed for Tho. Williams at the Bible in Little Britain● and Tho. Johnson at the Golden Key in St.   

Reverendis, pietate & eruditione praestantibus, Ecclesiae Anglicanae Ministris, praecipuà verò ijs ad quos haec potissim ùm spectant, Patribus, Fratribus, & Commilitonibus, sub Christo Duce merentibus, longè charissimis, salutem plurimam.  
AD exoptatam toties, & ab omnibus exoptandam, Ecclesiae nostrae faelicitatem, ingenerandam, & illaesam conservandam (salvo aliorum judicio) duo quidem apprimè utilia, & maximè accommodata, fore existimo; modò unum a nobis solertèr inquiri, alterum a Superioribus pergratè impetrari, eorundemque benignitate & mandato, in effectum tandem deduci possit. Hoc est, si praeter receptam Ecclesiae visibilis notionem, aliam non adeò strictam, tantae verò latitudinis, indagare possemus, ut unionis Ecclesiasticae sit fundamentum: deindè si magis sobrij qui notionem istam concoquere, & parochiales nostras (quas vocant) Ecclesias ferre possunt, ad mutuam inter Presbyterum & Episcopum concordiam componendam, potiùs quàm a causà alicujus partis stare, se totos & ex animo applicarent.  
Inter arduas, acerrimas, & calidissimas nuperarum & praesentium (proh dolor!) contentionum nostrarum disceptationes & controversias, ancipiti Marte utrinque agitatas, non minima lis fuit, de subjectà faederis externi materiâ, sive de verâ ecclesiae visibilis notione; quae prout in usu & in more recepta, adeò arcta & angusta est, ut nonnullis rent controversam altiùs ruminantibus, & ad rationis normam accuratè exigentibus, dubitandi ansam dederit, a●ecclesiae quas appellant nationales, sint verè ecclesiae, & patrocinio dignae; in quibus scilicet, omnes, quemadmodùm inter Judeos, quotquot e parentibus Christian is nati, fidei Christianae per Baptisma initiantur, templa frequentant, concionibus interfunt, pro veris & genuinis habentur membris.  
Theologi nostri communiter ecclesiam per fidelium, sive renatorum ex naturae statu ad statum gratiae evocatorum, caetum definiunt; Visibilem verò ab istius renascentiae (sive salvificae fidei & paenitentiae) professione denominant. Hanc professionem Congregationales, ambabus (quod aiunt) ulnis amplectuntur, & in praesidiùm sibi substruunt, dum sine tali, quae indicio sit hominem saluificâ gratia imbutum esse, pro membro nemimem admittunt. Professio non propter se requiritur, sed propter professorem ipsum, ut quis, & qualis ipse sit, nobis innotescat, & dum professio ejusmodi, scilicèt nullius inferioris, sed vere renatae fidei (sive gratiae,) a Theologis nostis undique comprobatur, illi principijs suis adhaerere, & seriò rem agere videntur, cum in quantum possunt, hoc prospiciunt, ut illi omnes quos in gregem suum recipiunt (usque quo saliem ecclesiae judicium extendi possit) tales reapse sint, quales se esse profitentur; cum nos qui professionem talem aeque ac illi praetendimus, & propugnamus, in principijs nostris tergiver sari, vel saltem remissiores quam illa postulant nos gerimus, dum promiscuè illos in gremium ecclesiae acceptamus, qui neque professionem omninò unquàm formalitèr ediderunt, nisi per susceptores in Baptismo aut ullâ probabili conjecturâ, tali quae requiritur professioni consentaneos vita & moribus se indicant. Quanto igitur causae nostrae prejudicio, hic cum fratribus nostris in hanc arenam, veluti in propriam suam aream, descendimus, facilè apparet, ubi si victos nos esse non fate●amur aut herbam demus, haud fortasse prudentiae nostrae & fortioribus rationibus, sed omnia potiùs consuetudini, opinioni, & ut cum Poeta loquar, defendenti numero accepta referenda erunt.  
Observaudum est igitur, & aequa animi lance nobis perpendendum, quod quocunque Apostoli se contulerunt, Evangelium eos praedicasse, & quosdam ibidem loci credidisse, sive sermonem eotum recepisse, in Actis legimus, & ita institutis divinis se subjectasse (scilicet baptizabantur, in doctrinâ istâ, communicatione, panis factione, & precibus perseverabant) & ex hâc materiâ, sive ex ijs in unum caetum hoc modo coeuntibus, conslata & constituta est ecclesia. Simon verò & ipse credidit, & Baptizatus perdurabat apud Philippum. Unde pace frairum meorum, hoc colligerem. Doctrinae scilicet Evangelicae exosculationem, in oppositione ad quascunque alias religiones, & sui subjectationem institutis divinis (sive cultus, sive disciplinae) in loco quo quis vivit usurpatis, ut medijs ad gratiam savisicam, si eâ adhuc se destitutum sentiat obtinendam, esseid (scilicet unicam ad hoc praerequisitam conditionem) quod membrum constituit, sive ad receptionem alicujus in ecclesiam sufficit. Qui institurus ex legis auditu in lege aquiescit extrinsecus Judaeus est, teste Apostolo. Ro. 2. Tu credis unum esse Deum, bene facis, dic●t Jacobus de ijs qui titulo tenus etiam, duntaxàt Christiani erant. Quid ni igitur, sola fides assensus, sive historica, cum externo. Dei cultu juncta, visibilem, sive Judaeam, sive Christianum efficeret?  
Verum est fateor quod scriptura dum loquitur de mombris alicujus ecclesiae in genere, prout liquet in Epistolis Pauli ad Corinthios (quos inter, nonnulli ad vitia proclives, turpem agebant vitam) cum fideles appellat, alijs etiàm titulis omnibus insignit, & ea cumulatè illis attribuit, qualia renatis tantùm competunt: Nullatamen inde emergit consequentia, hoc necesse esse ab illorum professione se tales esse (quasi sui ipsorum praecones fierent Christiani) oriri, sed hinc potiùs, ve ab hoc priùs ostenso, quod hujus rei caput, commodiùs statui mihi videtur. Quid? quòd nihil omninò sanè impedit, quin Ecclesiae Charitatis judicium a parte potiori totum denominans, professioni alicujus praegrediatur, & dum quispiam medijs ad salutem ducentibus utatur, & in viâ ejus, pede quo c●cpit, pergit, meliora & majora de illo speret & canat, quam de se ipsemet depraedicare, vel potest, vel audet.  
Membrum visibile nihil aliud est secundum conimunem Theologorum conceptum (si rectè calle as) quam pro Christiano, sive pro membro reputar, vel in foro aut aestimatione hominum, membrum haberi; Et dum ipse formal●s rei hujusce ratio, reverà in nostrâ aestimatione humanâ, solammodò consistit, si●lli qui congregationalium vestigia premunt, neminem pro membro habere velint, apud eos, nisi talem professionem quâ salvisicae gratiae spciemen illis praebeatur, edat; Et nos aliquem pro Christiano aut membro reputare, qui symbolo Apostolicae Doctrinae suam dederit assensum, parati sumus, quid obstat, qui● totum hoc negotium in Ecclesiae potestate s●tum sit, statuere ominino de eo, prout maxime rationibus ejus conducit; ita ut privatus quisque sive minister sive alius, ejusdem judicio, potiùt quam cujusdam hominis de selpso testimonium perhibentis professione acquiesceret? Imnò quum ab Ecclesia non assensus solum requiritur, sed etiam publica culius divini frequentatio & disciplinae ecclesiasticae (quaecunque extat) submissio, quâ, si turpi vitâ offendiculum, aliqui, bonis praebeant, & indig●os tali aestimatione se ostendant, eijci ipsos ex statu ill●, sive excommunicari, cons●●iunt: Cui damno quaeso fuerit, charitatem suam (quae omnia credit, omnia sperat) laxare quantùm sieri potest? Et cui nocumento promiscuè omnibus (nondum excommunicatis) libertatem & jus ad externis divini culius institutis utendum concedere, prout media sunt, al conditionem fo●deris acquire ●d●m, dum nos etiam non-minus quam illi, ad faederis beneficia & s●●●tem obtinendam, conditionem ipsam (scilicet verae justificantis fidei & resipiscentiae) aeque requisitam & necessariam stutuimus & inculcamus.  
Quod ad hanc professionem attint quae ad membrorum in ecclesiam receptionem, eorumque●ibera●● ad sacramenta accessum, aedeo necessaria decantatur (si ad investigandam veritatem animi cogitata enunciare liceat) hoc tantùm ipse reperio, eos qui a Johanne baptizati sant, confessos f●●sse peccata saa, & Eumichum a Philippo baptizatum, fidem suam, nempe Christum esse Dei filium, asseruisse, hoc est, fidem assensus sive historicam, & professionem aliam ad hanc rem accomodatiorem, ab ullo ad incorporationem (ut ita loquar) ejus in ecclesiam, requisitam esse in Evangelio non memini. Verum quidem est sub veteri testamento, cum primùm Israell Deus legem tradidit, totum eorum caetum legimus a Jehova stipulatum esse sponsionem, fore sibi Deum, tum ut ambulent in vijs ejus; verùm sponsio haec & pro se & pro liberis (Deut 19.25.) sufficiebat, adeò ut nulla alia professio, ad insitionem eorum in statum istius ecclesiae injuncta legitur, in suis generationibus. Nihil moror bonos illorum reges & Praepositos, identidem ad renovandum faedus, populum generalitèr compulisse, cum per idololatriam defecerunt a Deo suo, aut cum emergens aliqua occasio hoc postulabat. Sed renovationem talem ad constituenda ecclesiae membra, & ad sacramentorum suorum usum, nusquam requisitam esse, loca ista Gal. 2.15. Ro. 3.1. Ez. 16.20. et similia, ubi Israelitas, Judaeos, natu esse, & privelegia externa inde fluxisse, satis testantur.  
Et hîc quidem termini ipsi visibilis & Invisibilis, ab hominibus excogitati, & Ecclesiae applicati, praesertim prout istud ipsum Apostoli (Ro. 2.) Judaeum distinguentis, in illum qui in propatulo, & qui in occulto Judaeus est, referant, non parum opinioni huic meae fidem facere videntur. Quicquid in membro aliquo visum, certum & apparens, dici potest, nihil aliud est, quàm quod iste religionem Christianam, illius instituta publice observando istîusque disciplinae se morigerum praestando, amplectitur; Et quod ad gratiam ejus corde latentem attinet, ejusdem professio verbalis, credibilem illam quidèm, sed visibilem nullo pacto propriè loquendo reddere potest. Porrò, sententiam hanc Parabola illa Evangelicade tritico & zizanijs dilucidat plurimùm. Narrant Patrifamilias servuli tritico immista esse zizania; Sciunt, oculis cernunt, procerto habent, esse zizania. Quemlibet igitùr hominum quotquot vivunt appello sciscitorque qui potest quispiam visibile esse ecclesiae membrum, idemque eodem tempore apparens zizanium? Et apparuerunt etiam zizania. Secundum communem nostorrum Theologorum de hac re praedictum sensum hoc quidèm prorsus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse teneo. A professione scilicet verè renatae gratiae, in numerum regeneratorum (prout fert eorum sententia) unusquisque ascribendus est, hoc est pro regonerato existimandus sive censendus; Et existimatione aliorum regenerari, ac visibilitèr renatum, sive membrum visibile esse, eodem recidit. Hoc verò in loco, homo qui zizanium dicitur, apertè se prodit esse zizanium, & proinde in aliorum existimatione nihil minus quam regenerati nomen sibi asciscit; Unde nihil dilucidiùs consequi potest, quàm zizania visibilia membra non esse censenda, cujusdam professionis ergô, a quâ tritici nomen sortirentur, sed reverà quia in agro unà cum tritico nascuntur & concrescunt, hoc est, quia divina instituta, preces scilicet publicas, conciones, sacramenta, unà cum alijs religionem nostram amplexantibus, attendunt & exosculantur, immò etiam ut medijs a Deo illis ad salutem adipiscendam concessis, utuntur. Hoc equidèm illud est quod de ipsis palam fit, etsi alitèr visibilitèr, zizania, quam plurimis forsan Dei servis innotescunt.  
Neque silentio etiam praetereundi sunt termini isti salvatoris ipsius nostri, huc spectantes qui commodissimè omnium nobis inserviunt, cùm distinctione illa vocatorum & electorum, idem hoc depingit. Multi quidèm sunt vocati pauci verò electi. Mat. 22.14. Per vocatorum vocabulum illos denotat (ut ex textu patet) qui convivio interfuerunt (sive cum, sive absque veste ●uptiali) hos ab alijs discriminans qui extranei ab Apostolo vocantur 1 Cor. 5.12. Eph. 2.12. & ita a receptione Evangelij eos invitantis, & institutis ejus sui ipsius deditione (quod forsan ista phrasis convivas fieri, sibi vult) neutiquam verò ex professione gratiae (sive nuptialis vestis) definiendi sunt.  
Quid quaeso fratres, num tota moles populi Iraelitici quatenus populus Dei, circumcisus, & faedere inito factus peculiaris, in verè renatorum catalogum asciti fuerunt, vel asciti reputabantur? Quî fit igitùr ut clamitet aliquandò Propheta, Omnes esse in corde incircumcisos? Qui fit ut promissum illud, Ego circumcidam cor tuum, & cor seminis tui, ad Israelitas pertineret faederatos? Immò, quî fit ut novi faederis ipsius palmaria quaedam promissio sit, Leges meas cordi eorum inscribam, si nulli intra faederis terminos sint admittendi nisi tales, qui illam legem jam corde inscriptam habere censentur? Ecclesia igitur (prout mihi maximè videtur) assimilanda est Scholae cuidam, in hoc a Deo i●stitutae, ut introducerentur quamplurimi ibi convertendi, potiùs quàm corporationi, sive sodalitio, eorum solùm qui jan● sunt conversi, aut renati. Et quod ad faedus attinet cui sese obligant cum huic initientur, quam commodè fieri posset, si quod ego sentio potissimùm, expromere liceat, facile videamus. Videntur mihi quidem Theologi cum Dei faedere (licet sine injuriâ aut opprobio) hic agere, perinde ac Hanun cum Davidis servis qui praecidit vestes eorum per medium, dum dimidiatam ejus partem, promissoriam scilicet, unicè nobis proponunt, & partem alteram, comminatoriam silentio obruunt altissimo; Quod si totum ejus quod nobis promulgatum est, utrisque partibus, tam comminatione quam promissione comprehensum, rise perpendamus, quantum ad rem nostram momenti habeat, haud dictu opus est. Eadem scriptura quae nobis annuntiat. Qui credit salvabitur, annunciat etiam Qui non credit damnabitur; nisi respiscatis omnes peribitis. Et sicut quibusdam salus annunciatur, ita & quibusdam judicium, ex Pauli Evangelio. Ro, 2.16. Cum omnibus el●ge recitatis maledictis, Deut. 27. dicendum erat Israelitis, Amen, Nonne illud animarum ijdem faederi astrictio fuit, ac cùm benedictiones morem gerentibus illis sunt promissae? Deut. 19, 14. cum 19 Deut. 30.19. etc. Et quaenam alia in illa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Amen repetitione excogitari potest sides, praeter illam assensus? Sicut Adamus dum in statu integritatis, & propter illam, sub vita remansit, vel tum quoad maledictionem conditionalem, sive positis conditionibus denuntiatam, Dei erat fs deratus, adeò at pacti illius initi haec pars fuerit, ut si ex vetito fructu comederet illi moriendum sit: Ita homo in statis naturae & pecca●i, & propter illud sub morte adhuc constitutus Dei federatus esse potest, quoad be●edictionem conditione posità promissam, quòd si credat & resipisat, salvus fiet. Atque ut nulla alia praeter sidem assensus, Adamo, quâ comminationi illi credidit, unde ad fructum vetitum devitandum cautus redderetur, & ad pactum illud (quoad comminationis partem) cum Deo feriendum, adesse, potuit: Ita sides assensus quâ Dei promissis credit homo, utpote verissimis, unde ad mediis omnibus quibus eorum compos evadat utendum incitatur, ad ineundum jam faedus (quoad promissionis partem) etiam sufficit. Ad obedientiam pollicendum quid ni valeret fides solum historica, procerto se aliter damnatum fore homini suggerens, cùm ad quod promissum est inviolatè praestandum, nihil valeat, nisi ipsa salvifica Dei gratia? Adeo ut aliud prorsus sit faedus ferire, & longè aljud faedus percussum servare. Ps. 78.10. Faedere illo se devinxit Adamus, quod maledictionem complectebatur, priusquam illi, ulla se ex parte reddidit obnoxium.  
Adolescentes recèns in Academicorum numerum co-optati, ad jusjurandum quod vocant matriculationis adducuntur, se statuta Academiae esse praestituros; Subit mihi memoria dicti illorum dicentium, Sacramentum illud paenale esse, adeò ut licèt, in leges pecces, non tamen insimulandus perjurij, si paenam a legibus ententatam exequaris. Tali sanè aliquâ interpretatione (quantùm ego ratione assequi possum) oportet nos publicam illam nostram coram Ecclesia sponsionem dignari, quâ nos hùc adigimus ex pactione factâ, nempe conditiones latas praestituros esse, eodem animo scilicet, quo beneficijs inde manantibus nos fruituros esse speramus, nec inclementiùs nostractari mussitabimus, si debitum, promissis violatis, supplicium luamus. Eò res redit; Obligatio est quaedam, nomine paenae; sub mulctà pa●tio; conditionata promissio; Unde quo modo, illis, qui conditionem adhuc nondum assecuti sunt, liceat tamen eidem se devincire, & irregenitus Dei faederatus fièri, luculenter patet, & difficultas om tis expedita est. Quâ enim aliâ ment quaeso, a Deo saltem approbatâ potuit universus p●pulus Israel sanctissimà restipulatione illa pro●iteri, Omnia haec verba quae dixit Jehova saciemus, cum plerique corum ob pervicacem a●imum in diserto ceciderunt? Quo etiam ilio sensu populum istam, icto faedere, alloquitur Moses? Hodie vobts vitam & mottem proposui, benedictionem & maledictionem, quare vitam elige, u● vivas tu cum semine t●o. Inspice Lector ingeniose, Deut. 11.26.27, 28, 29. & ejusmodi quamplurima loca, & quantùm haec nostrâ ●eferunt, accuratè tecum perpende; & si unicum hoc tandem subjungam, ne gravare, viz. impossibile quidem esse, ut qu●spiam credat Eva●gelio, vel vera solum essa illa quae nobis annunciat, quin comminationi Dei ad futgram iram devitandam (M●r. 3.7.) astrictus te●eatur, & e● saltem ratione, a mundo prorsus insideli, & ab alienatis omninò a faedere, & statu Israelis contra-distinguatur.  
Insicias ire non possumus, in formâ Baptismi ab ecclesiâ nostrâ institutâ ab antiquis patribus acceptà & collectis illorum ex eth●icis, membris adultis, potiùs quam nostris natu membris (aut naturâ Christianis, Gal. 2.15.) accomodatâ professionem requiri ab om●ibus baptizandis adeò intensam ut nibil supra; Verùm u● vix subit intollectum, quomodò talis professio, infantis nomine, fieri queat; ita si quibus Lyturgiam nostram recognoscendi demandata sit potestaas, ausi siat vel pilum latum ab antiqui consuetud ne (quae aliquando vetisstas erroris est) discedere, & in locum istorum verborum actualiter prolatorum, Cre●o, abrenun●io, alia substituere, m●met obligo, polliceor, vel similia (secundùm ipsissimum Catechismi verbum Tria meo nomine compromissor pollicitus est) interpretatione ad normam mei sensus factâ, & quae dam alia verba hic & illic occurentia permutare, quae externa ecclesiae privilegia tanquam ad vere sanctificatos tantum pertinentia, nimis in arctum videntur compingere; hujusmodi forsan consilium plus conferret ad futuram ecclesiae pacem adversus seperatistarum phalanges, stabiliendam, quam si recognoscentis stylum, multi alij in ejusdem Liturgiâ loci, etiam paterentur; id quod, ad presentes fratrum nostrorum animos sedandos, & res ipsa, aequitasque Christiana, & religion is quidem communis salus, postulare quodammodo videtur.  
Nullus dubito quin si publicâ authoritate, mandetur populo professio quidem adeò intensa, quâ intensior excogitari vix possit, ad membrorum confaederationem & usum institutorum divini cultus in parochijs singulis instituta, ij praecipuè qui moribus magis discincti, & formâ tenus dun taxat Christiani sunt, sine minimo conscientiae gravamine, palam profiteri, in proprio suo nomine, parati adstarent, Sinceram ego in Domino siduciam constituo; verè paenitentiam ago; Christum mihi in Regem & Prophetam aeque ac in sacerdotem ascisco; spiritum pro sanctificatore meo accipio, & ut brevi absolvam, quicquid vis amplius; nec haec dicentes magis urgeret scrupulus, quàm illos qui baptizando Infanti susceptores adhibiti, illius nomine (quod plerumque ipsi nesciunt) ministro roganti, Abrenuncias carnem, mundum, & Diabolum? respondent, haec omnia abrenuncio. Qualis quidem professio, cùm nulli nisi verè renato homini competere possit, necesse est ut gravis admodum & vix ferenda impositio talis, quibusdam videretur, si omnibus in Parochijs suis degentibus, hujusmodi interrogationes proposituri essent, qui●us pro certo scirent, se nihil aliud, quam ad aperta mendacia in medium proferenda, viam illis straturos, & solennem Religion is istum actum in inane formalitatis ludibrium versuros iri, se apprehenderent. Praetereà si aliqui forsan e membrorum numero ob professionis istius defectum, excludendi comperirentur, maximè pij hi forent, quibus tenera asset conscientia, & singularis cordis integritas, qui non ausi sint tale aliquid de se profiteri, quod excusso penitus pectore, pro comperto satis habeant necne, animi penderent. Haec seriò perpendenti, ne mirum sit tibi candide Lector, si externi visibilis membri definitionem a religionis Christianae ejus amplexu solo, quem instituta divina publicè attendendo, quodammodò ut oculis cernatur palàm facit, quàm a regenerationis professione, desumere maluero.  
Consitendum mihi est rem meam, in hoc, agi maximam, propter opinionem, & libros quos de caenae Domini, ante hàd in lucem emisi. Ecclesia sane & Faederis externum statum sive Relationem, generali nostrae ad sacramenta admissioni, e parts nostrâ omnes (in quantum scio) substruimus praesidium & fundamentum; Jam verô si verbo dei, aut ratione aliqua indubitata firmatum sit, neminem ecclisia membrum, sive Dei faederatum, esse posse, nisi qui ab ecclesia tanquam vere renatá fide & resipíscentiâ (ob ejus talem professionem) jamiam praeditus esse supponatur; Liceat mihi ingenue & liberè ut honestum & integrum plane decet virum, palam edisserere, necesse esse unicuique nostrûm, a sententiá istâ perpulchrâ licet, & pergra●á quá sacramenta ecclesiae ex instituto dei, conversionis media esse statuimus & propugnavimus, pedibus recedere; Et in locum ejus, hoc tantum, scilicèt, media quidèm conversionis esse, sed ex accidenti tantùm, non ex primâ ordinantis dei, vel ipsius administrantis ecclesiae, intentione, substituere opòrtet; quamnis naturá suâ adeò apprimé comparata, sive apta nata sint ad consequendum talem effectum, immo & secundum divinum ipsum decretum de eventu, non rarô etiam istum consequantur.  
Video quidêm Ecclesiarum protestantium & (quod pluris facimus) nostrae etiam, vulcum in hacre (si ad Jahakobi verba alludam) quod Ecce non est erga nor, dum vere paenitentes & fideles ad sacro sanctum hos Domini institutum adhortans, caeteros alios seriò cavere sibi jubendo, quodammodo absterrere, & amandare prorsus videtur; Ac proinde cum jam non tantus sit metus separationis, qu antus ita pridêm, Occasions hâc data quae forsan nunquam iterum occurret, Certiores omnes facio, librum quendam authore Baxtero nostro oculatissimo, De jure ad sacramenta, post mea hujus farinae scripta omnia editum, tantae pe●spicacitatis & perspicuitatis quoad notiônem, tantae plenitudinis quoad argumentorum officacium, & concurrentium Theologorum sententijs adeo suffultum, ut cùm Generali quidem a parte ecclesiae admissioni, (ut ut a parte recipientis strictus sit) non minus quam egomet possum, patrocinetur, dissimili licet, Professionis s●â (quâ omnino insistit) ratione, cui tanquam commnni ad sacramenta accessus fundamento innititur: Omnibus author sum, ut in majorem hujuse rei controversae cautelam, & conscientiae, & meae & suae ipsorum securitatem, istum revolvant simul etiam cum ecclesiae nostra Liturgia & tanquam fide digniorem, & tutiori fortasse, saltem prout hu●c quam maxime conseotienti (si rite quidem tentatur) doctrinâ refertum, pra mei● qualibuscanque scriptis omnibus, sibi habeant, & amplexentur▪ Animam quidem libero meam; Interim cogitationes hasce largiores quasdam meas, quae contra communem opinionum aliorum torrentem promovere nihil forsàn valebunt, mihi reservo; hoc unicum tamen in genere, Cordatiorum & prudentiorum judicio discutiendum, humilimè prop●nens, Annon vulgò recepta Protestantium sententia (quam Reverendus ille vir & sagaciter & fideliter, nobis obtulit) tam arctum visibilis ecclesiae fundamentum jacientium, quale est, nullius nisi verè regeneratae fidei professio, faenestram ad congregandas (sive po●ius segregandas) ecclesias adeo latam aperuerit, ut nisi huic malo, ejusmodi excogitato remedio sit occursum, major erit inflicti vulneris hiatus, quam ut ullo alio adhibito medicamine valeat, coalescere; Immò ut si quis vel maximo percitus desiderio hoc satageret, jurandum illi esset, in illo die dicendo, non essem obligaturus, Etiam domi meae non est pa●is neque vestis, ut ruina ista sub manu mea sit.  
Quantum ad alteram praesent is iustituti partem attinet: Deploraendum sane est nobis adeo minutulas in Opinione differentias, tantam inter Ecclesiae ejusdem silios, ac Religionis ejusdem professores, animorum facere disjunctionem, & affectus Christiani divortium. Miseret me nostrae ecclesiae, si honoris & dignitatis inter Ecclesiasticos accumulation, ut olim inter Abraham & Lothum fortunarum accretio, fra●res disjungeret; Profectus est Lot orientem versus, & separaverunt se alterum ab altero. Magnam quidem antiquitati venerationem de●eri, in confesso est; Et qui in veterum scriptis velobitèr versa●tur Episcopatum Apostolorum vestigia propemodum prensare minime dubitant, veruntamen ut omnia non revoluta & immota manentia, successu temporis situm contrahunt: Ita accidit Ecclesiae, ut inter Episcopatum primitivum, & qui mundum jam invasit, modernum, differentiam certe aliquantulam vel●caecus aspiciat. Quae differentia si ratione formalitatis cujusdam veluti in negotio electionis (quae qualis fuit primitiva, ex epistolis Cypriani apparet) solummodo esset, non adeo magni momenti (licet observanda tamen) res foret: Sed quum in precipuo ipsius regiminis Ecclesiastici sine, qui sanctitatis scilic●t publicae & animarum salutis (non externa so●ùm concordiae) promotione consistit, sita est: & finis iste procul disbio sine Presbyterorum cooperatione & mutuo auxilio, tam in ducendo quam docendo gregem, adeo faeliciter obtineri nequeat, res quidem no● parvi sed maximi ponderis hic agitur, qui sicco pede, immo siccis coulis, baud sane praetereunda est. Quam bo●um & amaenum (si verbis loquar Psalmi●tae) videtur, si ad portandum onus grave plures admoveantur humeri, & ad opus grande peragerdum, plures adhibeantur manus, & ita scilicet habitarent fratres etiam una. Si Mosi oms●lium Jethronis adeo arrisit (juxta Hieronimum) quantum quaeso Episcopo incumbit, ut Presbyteris aurem facilem praeberet vel hoe potissimum nomine, quo seipsum onere levaret, & de ratione disspensationis suae aliquid diminuere, in magnum futurum diem satagevet. Equitas vestra innotescat omnibus hominibus, Dominus Prope est.  
Non est quidem privati cujusque unionis publicae terminos cudere, quae unanimi consensu & mutua ope eorum qui ad opus istud designati sunt (vel fuerunt) transigenda est. Si nihil aliud nisi Declaratio Regia extaret, pacem quadantenùs conciliandi via & methodus nobis praemonstraretur, modo illorum qui eam confecturi essent, voluntas ipsa, non deficeret. Quantum ad meipsum attinet, libere ego & apertè protestor, Ecclesiae Anglicanae faelicitatem in co, prout mihi persuasum habeo, consistere, si Episcòpi ad moderatiorem aliarum partium, de ijs, quae justa sunt, sententiam utcunque potius descendant, quam si omnes in omnibus ad illorum mores & praescripta se componere manibus pedibusque festinarent. Imm● etiam ut pleniùs loquar, quamvis Toleratio magis sobrijs, pacem publicam excolentibus, & nulli incommoda●tibus, ad conscientiae suae fruitiovem concessa, res foret pijs & probis pergrata, quae maximas ex animo gratias Deo ijs eliceret; Tantillum tamen, quae Christiani, eadem lege & omine, inter ●urcas, & inter Papicolas Protestants frui possunt & fruuntur, be ●esicium homini acceptum refer, jejunum certè & sterile, benignitatis inops quidem, immo & vile pronuncio, prae eo, quod nos expetivimus, & in ner●ine Domini adhuc postulamus, justam nempe & aequam inter utriusque partis fratres, vel saliem Episcopum inter, & Praesbyte o●e●us juxta Ecclesiae Primitivae exemplar, ex compositione fa●tam conc●rdiam; quae sola omnibus ijs quae ad gloriam regni Christian Anglia spectant, respondebit. O Hierosolymam; Hierosolymam, exclamat Salvator optimus noster, & flevit super ea, dicens, si vel tu nosses hoc saltem tuo die quae ad pacem tuam pertinent, sed ea nunc occulta sunt oculis tuis.  
Inter alia, in quibus vel minima concessio plurimum praestaret, intricata Ordinationis renovandae materia, quae reverà in casu nostro, ad concordiam ineundam primus gradus est, se nobis offert; quam si fratres mei omninò, in actu signato, illicitam esse existimarent, a part● suâ, cedere, nullo pacto possent, ideoque meum qualecunque hoc de subjecto scriptum, Ecclesiae Dei hoc temporis puncto acceptum fore spero: Et si Ecclesiae nostrae Antistites in actu exercito, omni iustâ & debita moderatione erga eos quorum voluntas prompta, at conscientia hâc in re tenerrima est, uti nolunt: praecipuè cum animadvertant ad quam aquas concessiones Antagonistae mei reducti sunt, sive ultrà offerunt, negotio huic ultimam manum imposuero, & textu illo verbit paulùm immutatis, non sine indignatione, invitâ quidem at justè efferbescenti tamen, missos facio. Ecqua re pretium est in manibus. sapientum ad possidendam pacem, at deest animus illis?  
Ut ut verò res evaserit, nos semper sub manu, oculis, & potestate Dei gratiosissimi sumus, qui pacis Author est & conservator Concordia; & in super sub Regis clementissimi imperio, qui propositiones ad pacem & unionem inter suos subditos Christianos reducendam & conservandam publice produxisse haud delignatus est, quasque proptereà ex animo suo profectas esse, Religio est, nobis existimare. Si verò ille postquam omnia expertus est, concordiam hanc, per mutuam scilicet inter Presbyterum & Episcopum compositionem, tentatam, re infectâ dimittere cogatur; neutiquam spero hoc faciet, nisi in clementissimis saltem illis verbis Achischi ad Davidem. Ut vivit Jehova tu recta es, & bonum videtur in oculis meis egredi te & ingredi te mecum in castra, quia non deprehendi in te malum; ex quo die venisti ad me in diem hunc, sed in oculis istorum satraparum bona adhuc non videtis.  
J. H.   

A SECOND DISCOURSE UPON Re-ordination.  
HAving met with a certain Book of some worthy person, under the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and an unknown name, with Animadversions on my Discourse about Re-ordination, I perceive the Lord is pleased to call me forth to a new endeavour upon this subject, for the sake of my Brethren, unto whom I am already engaged. It is a truth, this author hath from Mirandula, Non est in potentia hominis facere aliquid apparere intellectui suo verum quando, or quia vult, and when I find so sober and temperate a person, who is willing, and professing it his advantage, to be of the opinion he opposes, if he could, declaring to me that he is not satisfied with what I have written, I cannot but in ingenuity be ready to have the less thoughts myself of the same, and advise my Readers to be the more cautious in receiving it: Nevertheless, so long as I find a kind of requiting temper in my breast (to my cost) apt to entertain the hardest prejudice, my own heart, or others, or the tempter can suggest against myself in this thing, which is followed many times with dark and dread reflections, and yet when I consult with my judgement alone, (which I ought) and follow the little unclouded reason that I have at any time to use about it, it appears to me, that both what this author says may be fully answered, and what I have, is for the main not touched, or in the weight not impaired, I can but be sorry my ability hath been no more to serve those I have desired, and be content, such as I have, to lay out yet once more in their behalf, and my own; though I must needs say, with such a heavy and weakened spirit in good earnest, that I have more need to crave their prayers unto God and be supported myself, then to offer fresh support and furthersatisfaction to others. He giveth power to the saint, and to them that have no might he increaseth strength.  
A hard task it is upon me, unto him I look up; and I cannot well tell from whence to derive my discourse, which is sure to meet with so much prejudicated interest, and opinion. It is Custom I know and the common apprehension that rules the many, and while their heads run shallow, it is not enough for a man to embark in a sound bottom, unless we have something of the tide also, and stream with us. I remember what a strange thing the Antipodes seem to Lactantius, as others of the Fathers; and to believe any habitable land beyond the Ocean, was to the ancient Clemens another world, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is enough certainly to make truth itself seem a crime if it appears but singular, and if Paul himself, but offers to bring some new thing, they will determine it beforehand to be babbling; though it was the spread doctrine of the Christian Religion. And yet is not this all, but there are the several engagements of men's spirits, and concernments to be met with also, wherein, one must look to run the fate of such who are engaged in arbitrations, who when they have most carefully discharged their trust, do reap but ill will on both sides; and only have left them the testimony of their own conscience, that though both parties (that are extreme) be displeased, yet both have cause to be content. He pursued, and possed safely, even by the way, that he had not gone, with his feet.  
There is a School adage well applied to the Intellect, Intus existens prohibet alienum; and I perceive indeed here that the common notion which lies upprrmost, hath so filled the minds of most, that Orders makes us Ministers, (which should be rightly understood) and that we are Ministers already, that they have no thoughts hardly left them free born for the discussion of this matter. It is besides the Original humour of man, to be apt to think of himself more high than he ought to think (as the Apostle speaks) and not soberly, according to the measure God hath dealt him; and hereupon is the Ordainer ready to believe that in Orders he conferrs no less than the holy Ghost itself, his grace or gifts, or the spiritual power at least of the Ministry, which all are indeed the prerogative (I take it) alone of Jesus Christ; and does argue, both the pride of some men's understandings that dare assume so much without God's word, and the lowness of others, to take it up upon trust, as if our Protestants all, as well as the Papists were of that opinion. A large presumption, that lying at the bottom of this dispute, does require some of our first and most serious thoughts about it, as introductory to our business. I said, I will answer also my part, I also will show my opinion.  
To fetch this matter from the beginning; Let us look unto the Priests under the Law, and observe what God almighty hath said in the first place. Exod. 29.9. The priest's office shall be Aaron's and his sons, for a perpetual statute. I gather from hence, that the Right, power, dignity, office of Priesthood, did flow immediately upon the priests under the law from this statute, which is undoubtedly Gods will appointing of it. If the spiritual power or authority of the priest (as our Book of Orders calls us) came only by such a delegation, that conveighes the same through man's hands, than was the priests under the law no priests, or had no power, for they were not ordained priests, but born priests; and this right and power of priesthood was theirs, we see expressly, by this statute for ever. We read indeed of the priests sanctifying themselves often to some particular work, as to carry the Ark, to cleanse the Sanctuary, and the like, but we read not that they were to be consecrate to their office, as I yet find. We read indeed that the high Priest as he succeeded, was to be consecrate, and anointed, and so Aaron's garments were kept on purpose, but forasmuch as this dignity itself of the high priesthood, came also by birth, it is apparent, that their anointing and consecration did not give them their right and office, but only solemnize and confirm it; as princes who are so by birth cannot have the regal office conveyed, but declared and ratified by their inauguration. As for the rest of the priests, we read of one consecration only by Moses at once for all of them. Leu. 8. Exod. 29. And certainly we may conceive if God did intent that the Ministerial power should be conveyed ordinarily through the hands of man any otherwise then as the signifiers of his will, than should not one consecration (it is like) have sufficed for all, but he would have commanded every one of them to be particularly consecrate, or set apart for the receiving that power by man in their generations. Besides when Aaron's sons are consecrate at once by Moses, this is all you shall find in it. An Investiture by several ceremonies (you may see Leu. 8.) which all are manifestly (without the least word or form of conferring power) by the way only of external solemnisation; and an Atonement made by sacrifice for them, because else they might not approach the holy God in their fins; and therefore, is is said, This shalt thou do to hollow them to minister in their office, Exod. 29.1. It is not said, This thou shalt do to give them their office Their office was conferred by God's appointment, and the hallowing them is only to the work, that they might stand before the Lord to execute their service in the holy place.  
And now let us come to look also under the Gospel; All power (says Christ) is given me in heaven and earth, Go, preach, and baptise. Here we see from whence the authority of the Ministry is derived, and that is from him only who is the Master of discipline, and fountain of power. And does he say this to his Apostles only? No: it follows, And lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world. Again, when he ascended and gave gifts to men, as he gave some to be apostles, so he gave some to be pastors and teachers, Eph. 4 It is he then gives the office; putting us in the Ministry, as Paul speaks 1 Tim. 1.12. In Mat. 9.38. It is the father sends forth labourers into the harvest; and though those Elders (it is likely) at Ephesus (Acts 20.) were ordained, yet as for their power, it is express the holy Ghost made them Overseers. We receive our commission and authority from them whose embassadors we are, but we are not the embassadors of men, but the Stewards of God, 1 Cor. 4.1. and embassadors of Jesus Christ, 2 Cor. 5.20. Who then is that faithful Steward, whom his Lord shall make ruler of his household, Luke 12.42. It is the will (I gather) and appointment of the Lord which gives the formal being of a ruler to this steward, and at for the servants they might indeed deliver him the keys, and so be said if you will to make him steward (which is to be known also) by the way of investiture and external possession.  
The London Divines, who are to be much regarded in such works of theirs, In Jus. Diu. Min. Evan c. 11. after they have told us that the contrary is maintained by many Reverend Divines (which by the way, may dash some, who think this Opinion of mine to be singular) and are laying down arguments to prove that Orders do give the Ministerial Office (which arguments I shaal answer in due place) they check themselves in their course, and tell us, they mean it only as to the essence of the outward call; and if that indeed be all, let us take their meaning thus, that it gives the Office before men, so that a man is (and is to be) taken for a Minister thereupon, which in the Court of the Church he was not before, and that does hit the truth (I think) and bottom of this matter. I do not doubt but we may say (as we do ordinarily) that Ordination makes us Ministers, nay that it makes us so, as we were not before; but then we must understand this aright; There is therefore this distinction (which is clear in its own light) to be received here, unless we will remain still in the dark; and that is this, The Ministerial power which a man hath, by virtue of that grand warrant, Go and Teach all Nations, must be considered as good, In foro Dei, or In foro Ecclesiae. There are many worthy Persons who devoting themselves to this service, have preached a good space (as Origen of old) before they have taken orders, (when perhaps they have forborn the Sacraments) and we may not doubt but some of them have converted souls; Now where there is conversion, there is Faith, and where there is that preaching as begets Faith, the Preacher must be sent; which is express Ro. 10.15. and consequently such a man then must have his Commission in the Court of God, when he hath none yet in the court of man, and is not a Minister yet indeed as to the Church, before Orders. Ordination then does make a man a Minister, as Baptism makes a Christian, when he hath saving grace before. The Orders of the Church does give the Ministry, as the absolution of the Church does forgive sins; that is, where a man hath true faith and repentance, and so is forgiven in heaven. It is the prerogative of God to forgive sins, and yet doth the Church forgive them in her court, that is, declares and pronounces to the penitent remission, as our Liturgy hath it. It is the prerogative royal of Jesus Christ to appoint his own officers in his Church, and yet does the Church make a man a Minister in her court, that is, declares, pronounces him to be such, approves and confirms his call from the Lord by this solemnity. There is no man taketh to himself this honour, but he that is called of God, Heb. 5. This calling then of God is that which gives the honour and office in his sight, and the call of man (whereof Orders is the consummation) does give it him before men, by solemnisation. If it must be first given of God before a man may take it to himself, I gather à fortiori, it must be first given of God before another can apply it to him by the ceremony thereof. And Abraham received circumcision, a sign of the righteousness of faith which he had whiles he was uncircumcised.  
As for the outward call those Divines speak of, it must be opposed to the inward; The inward call is this call of God as distinguished from man's. Herein I have conceived three things. 

1. The Institution, which is Gods appointing such an office to be, and that those who have such gifts shall be such officers.  
2. The Gift, which is God's endownents of a person adapting him for this office, and that peculiarly above others; which I put in, because the abilities of a person are warily to be considered, according to men's several capacities, dispositions, condition, and those circumstances of providence, and otherwise, which render several men of the same parts, serviceable to their generation, under several employments.  
3. Consent, which is the resigning a man's self hereunto, and does lie in those holy and sincere desires and ends, that the spirit of God alone can stir up, and a man ought to have, that does devote his life to so sacred a function, to wit, that his great aim in the prevailing Interest of his heart be nothing else but the glory of his Redeemer and Salvation of men's souls.   When God now hath given the second of these to wit the gift; the first alone does necessarily convey to him the Power, and makes the third his duty. Unto every one of us is given Grace according to the measure of the Gifts of Christ. Eph. 4.7. By grace is meant there (I suppose) Authority or Office (as we shall see more somewhere) and then it follows, where there are Christ's gifts this Authority to use them is given with them. So 1 Cor. 12.7. The Manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. The Gifts alone do infer a power to edify the Church by them. Hence in that place before Eph. 4. if we compare vers. 8. with v. 11. while Christ is giving gifts in the one, he gives the office in the other; And the reason is good, because the power does slow upon the gifts, from the Institution. A power let me say again, but in God's sight; for it is not for every man to pretend gifts and strait be a Minister, which I shall meet with well enough, if you will attend a little till its due place. When the Lord in the parable gave the man his talon, that alone impower'd him and obliged him to traffic with it. There was no need more in a Prophet then to be inspired with a Prophecy to be sent of the Lord. No more can there be likewise required in a Minister to give him his Office before God, than this call of God. And as for the farther call of man, which is yet required to a Minister before men, that was not to a prophet, when there are already the three things mentioned, what can there be more herein distinguished there from (besides the commending a man to God's grace, or the invocation of his blessing upon him for his work, which is the most signal end of this Rite. Act. 14) then I and our Protestant Divines do account of it. viz. Such a Person presents himself to the Ordainers, they examine him, and what is it they are to search and to find? Why if they consider what it is, it is this, whether the man hath the gift, whereupon they may conclude that he is commissioned according to Christ's Institution, and also hath sincere ends of being faithful in his place; if they find this, here is the call of God, and what is there remaining possible for them to do besides what is done, but to confirm it before men, that they may receive him? So that this Rite in its essence (to use those Divines word) is but the solemn Approbation, Declaration, or Confirmation of our call by God; and the immediate effect of it, is the value, repute, outward Authority, Account, or Esteem with men as Ministers of his, to all ends and purposes in the Church, and place where a man shall be so appointed. And this is that thing which orders does really and effectually give, which is not a matter neither of small moment, but of great consequence, even so much as the free passage of the Gospel comes to in the Church where we are; which must therefore, and will keep up the head of Orders while the World lasts. Now Sirs! The immediate effect of an action must be the end of the Agent, and forasmuch, as in this Change of times and Government which God hath brought upon us, this end and effect, doth fail us in our first Orders, we see how there arises upon a man even from Providence itself, without any other arguing, the necessity, the duty (supposing him at first, and still fit) and reason of his Re-ordination. And this I take it is the marrow of what I have in my first sheets, which is not yet so much as tasted or touched, by my Opposer, neither in his Book where he disputes upon this question, nor in his Appendix, which he hath against me in the way of animadversion. I shall take both now into consideration, I will speak, that I may be refreshed, I will open my lips and answer.  

SECTION II.  
THere are two things in general any one may see, upon which the stress of what this Adversary hath, doth lie. The one is a supposition, which hath prepossessed the thoughts of most concerning the nature or end of Ordination; The other is the form the Bishop uses, supposed agreeable hereunto, and inconsistent to our case. To begin with the first, which hath cost me some words already, and requires many more. Ordination (let us know) may be taken more comprehensively, as it comprizes election foregoing, so it is Acts 14.23. & Tit. 1.5. where those two words in the Greek text, I count equivalent, and well rendered in the old translation, When they had ordained them Elders by election: Or else it is taken strictly and properly for the Rite itself distinguished from Election. So is it, Act. 6.6. Act. 13 3. 1 Tim. 4.14. 2 Tim. 1.6. which places I think are all we have express upon this matter. In the last sense, it concerns my discourse, and it is the solemn invocation of God's grace or blessing upon a person in the work of the Ministry by the way of Approbation, Declaration or Confirmation, of our Vocation; as I have been discoursing before, and in my first papers. I know it stands the Church of Rome upon, to speak higher than thus. Ordo est sacrum quoddam quo spiritualis potestas traditur ordinato & officium, says the Master of their Schools, Lib. 4. Dist. 24. and 'tis no wonder if his Scholars that follow, turn this into Sacramentum quo character indelebilis in anima imprimitur: I see also some of the eminent Sons of our own Church, for her form sake, derived from thence, cannot leave the like conceptions. But I suppose if our foreign Protestant Divines be generally looked over, we shall find that definition, Ordinatio est vocationis confirmatio, most current; which Dr. Baldwin hath taken up as common with them, in his Cases. When Calvin, and our Divines that follow him, speak of the Sacraments as symbols of grace, they understand it not as signs conferring grace, but as signs of grace conferred, Rom 4.11. and define them the confirmations of our grace. Now what they take from the Sacraments, they are not like to give to Orders. Ordo (says Bullinger in his Decades) est Symbolum delegati muneris: The Symbol of God's grace, says Calvin in his Comments and Institutes. There must be this grace or gift then, this munus delegatum, (to wit a deo) before, or the Rite cannot (according to their Doctrine) be the Symbol of it; and this is so, for a man is tried, and the Ministerial grace found in him, and then does the Church use this Rite as a sign, token, symbol, by way of testimony, or ratification of it. Vocatio debet habere publicum ecclesiae testimonium, & ritus ordinationis nibil aliud est quam talis publica testificatio, says Chemnitius. De Eccles. Electioni saepe addi solet publica quaedam per preces & manuum impositionem inauguratio, & velut in ipsius muneris administrationem missio, quae confirmatio dici solet. Arminius Disp. priv. thes. 59 Ordinandi potestas seu in ministerio confirmandi The Leyden Divines. Praesentatio & confirmatio. Musculus. Ministrorum approbatio. Erasmus Sarcerius. Consecratio & in muneris possessionem immissio. Wendiline. Personae examinatae ad functionem obcundam introductio & confirmatio Polanus (Syntag. l. 7. c. 10.) Wollebius.  
There is one proof which I will note, instead of many; It is known that the common thoughts of the learned, whether ancient or modern upon Acts 13. are that Paul and Barnabas were there ordained to their apostleship: so Chrysostom, so Dr. Hammond on the place. Now Paul's apostleship was certainly given him immediately by Christ, Ordination then (if this be ordination according to the full stream) is not, must not, cannot be this Collation of the power itself, but this testification before the Church, whereof we are speaking, or a confirmation. Melius est (says that learned Professor of Wittenberg at first mentioned) vocare ordinationem solennem ritum quo testificatur de legitima vocatione donisque necessariis. In the Harmony of Confessions, It is taught that such be chosen who have gifts, and are of a Hameless life etc. above all that they be proved whether they be such, and so afterwards prayers and fastings being made, they may be confirmed or approved of the Elders by the laying on of hands. The Bohemian Confession. So the Helvetian yet more full, but I shall have occasion to cite that more to my need somewhere hereafter, Manus impositiones verba sunt mystica quibus confirmatur ad opus Electus, says St. Ambrose upon 1 Tim 4. and thus is it called Oratio & benedictio among the ancients. If I were near some good Library I might perhaps turn over a score of Common places and Compends of Protestant Divinity to prove this further; but I do see half a dozen more before my eyes, and brought to my hands without labour; Hunnius, Amesius, Crocius, Junius, Tarnovius, Voetius, Lutherans and Calvinists, who express Ordination accordingly, Declaratio solennis, Constitutionis testificatio, missio solennis in possessionem, manifestatio, promulgatio coram Ecclesiae, as Dr. Seaman hath them in his book of Ordination, and tells us They are to be understood of the rite of Ordination, to wit, as I intent it, distinguished from election, and in that sense may be admitted, and so is it rightly compared (he acknowledges) by our Protestants to Coronation, p. 16. Now then, as there may be reason of State sometimes for a double inauguration of the Magistrate; So may there be (if I may so speak) reason of Church, for re-ordination of the Minister; and so long as both agree in their nature, the one may be (I suppose) a good argument for the other. There is a learned but too vehement adversary I see upon this subject, that does mention oliver's double investiture, before a Lord Mayor, and before a parliament, as Protector; but he might have made mention of other examples, that would have relished better. Our English of old did feel of what advantage it was against them to the affairs of France, that Charles the 7th was crowned more than once. Yet will not I rest here; for we have sacred instances in Scripture even of the most famous of all the Kings of the Jews, who were anointed from the Lord by the hand of Prophets and Priests, and yet inaugurated again after before the face of all Israel. And if what the forequoted judicious Doctor intimates to us (pag. 15.) be good, that anointing to Kings amongst the Jews was in some sense essential to their calling, this one comparison alone, I judge, must needs strike a great stroke to the determining this matter.  
It is true that the Papists and Schoolmen and some Ancients, who make Orders to be a Sacrament, and a means of conferring the Holy Ghost, may look on it, as injurious to the Rite itself (as doth appear by a sentence of Austin and Cyprian this Author quotes) to repeat the same; but our Protestants, and especially the more learned Rabbis of them (who tell us that this imposition of Hands was doubtless taken up from the custom of the Jews (some add in their Synagogues) in ordaining their Elders, and not from the sacred mouth and command of Christ as Baptism was) are not and need not be so straight laced in this matter. It is true also, that some of our own grave Divines are willing to put as high an honour as they can on this Ordinance; Mr. Hocker who strives to do so, Ec. Pol. p. 410, 411, 412, 413. hath these words. What Angel in Heaven could have said to man as our Lord did to Peter, Feed my sheep, Preach, Baptise, Do this, whosoever sins you retain are retained? O wretched blindness if we admire not so great power; more, if we consider it aright, and notwithstanding imagine any but God can bestow it! The learned Grotius De Imp. Sum. Pot. circa sac. c. 10. will have these two things accurately distinguished, Ipsa facultas, or jus, praedicandi, Sacramenta et claves administrandi, and applicatio hujus facultatis ad certam personam; the one he attributes wholly to Christ, the other only he allows to Ordination. The eminent Voetius De desp. cause. Pap. lib. 2. sect. 2. c. 20. is proving that solemnizatio, seu consecratio, seu ordinatio, seu investitura (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocant patres groeci) illa externa quam nos confirmationem dicimus, does not tribuere ministerium, or is not ejus fundamentum. I note the words in the expression, as well as the position of greater concernment to us. Honest Mr. Perkins upon Gal. 1.1. does speak here as truly, fully, and well methinks to my mind as any mortal man can. I gather from hence (says he) that the right to call belongs to God; the Father thrusts forth Labourers into his Vineyard; the Son gives Pastors and Teachers; the Holy Ghost makes Overseers. It may be objected that the Church hath Authority to call and ordain Ministers. I answer, that the Church's Authority is no more but a Ministry or service, whereby it doth testify, declare, and approve whom God hath called. Whose doctrine that is, that Orders do Imprint a Character those that read the Council of Treat may know; That some of the eminent Papists do understand by this ind lible Character, nothing but spi●itualis potestas, those that read Bellarmine and Lombard's definition before, may know; unto what parties then consequently these two opinions, on one side, that Ordination does give the Spiritual power, and on the other, that it is the Confirmation of our Call, do appertain, may be known without a Monitor also. There is five Disputations about Church Government of Mr. Baxters, the second whereof, as soon as the Book came to my hand, did put me methinks out of countenance, to see when I had been beating long about something, with what fullness and perspicuity h● hath gone before me. Let me set down a few passages. The Ordainers (p. 146.) do not give the power, as from themselves to others, nor doth it pass through their hands. It is the standing act of Christ in his Law that giveth the power immediately. The ordinary judgement I think of Divines is, that the Ministerial Authority is from Christ, but mediately, But this acute and known Divine says immediately: He explains it p. 147. As in the making of Bailiffs for our Corporations, either the people, or the Burgesses have the power of choosing, and the Steward or Recorder of swearing him, and performing the Ceremonies; and yet none of these confer the power, which he receives from the Prince alone, by the Charter of the Cities or Towns, as his Instrument. So is it in the Ordaining of Ministers: The People may choose, and the Pastors may invest, but it is God only by the Gospel's Charter that conferrs the power from himself. You will say, though we have a Charter, a man is not a Magistrate till chosen, nor completed till sworn, therefore it is mediately. I answer, true, it is mediately, or through the means of the people and Steward doing that which is their part, which is only designing the person, but not mediately through them as deriving the power, (which they have not themselves) that is, if you will, it is through them, putting the condition according to the Charter, for the Charter requires this, that a man be chosen, and sworn, but the condition being put, the power flows immediately from the charter itself: Why so here; The power is immediately (says he, p. 234.) from Christ, and men do but open the door, or determine of the person that shall from Christ receive the power, and then put him solemnly into possession.  
This is what is clear and well, but there is a little more needful to make it full. Although in this business of the Magistrate which is Civil, where the authority is of man, and the officers, officers of men, it is enough to look no further than men, and an outward court only; yet in the business of the Ministry, where the authority is spiritual, and the officers appointed, the officers immediately of Jesus Christ and not of man, we are to look further unto God and his inward court also, and account that a man hath, and must have, his authority first in his sight, before he hath it in man's, and consequently what is done in man's court is by the way of Ministry signifying his will, for the declaration or confirmation thereof with us; to wit, The right, faculty, authority, or commission which a man hath coram Deo and the court of his own conscience, as being truly called of God, is allowed or approved by this public testimony of the Church, so that he is received, reckoned, or numbered (as it is said of Mathias) amongst the Ministers of Christ, which is the very direct and proper effect of this external act of investiture and solemnisation.  
I will take an eminent passage from Mr Hooker, who must be forced to understand here with us. The cause why we breathe not as Christ did on them unto whom he imparted power, is for that neither spirit nor spiritual authority may be thought to proceed from us, which are but delegates or assigns to give men possession of his graces, Ec. Pol. p. 431. And here then, I shall humbly call in my Episcopal fathers and brethren, who have been apt to wonder at me in my first sheets, that I should hold that Orders does not give the Ministerial power, when they may rather wonder at themselves that they should think it, whereas such a person as this, who was as like as any (by the rest of his discourse) to maintain it if he durst does disclaim it, as the doctrine of the Papists, by their practice (who do breath on the person whom they ordain, as Christ did) and not as the belief of our Church. And as for the delegation and assignment he speaks of, his meaning is express enough, to be no other than as when a Lord does give or grant an estate to a person, he sends his servant to use those Ceremonies, which are to signify that grant of his, by way of delivery, upon which he is received as the owner and possessor thereof. I will express it fully for him with a concluding passage from the aforesaid bright author. Ordination is one means conjunct with others for designation of right qualified persons described in the Law of Christ for the reception and exercise of the Ministerial office, and the ends of it (besides taking care the office fail not) are, To judge in all ordinary cases of the fitness of persons; and, To solemnize their admittance, by such an investiture, as when possession of a house, is given by a ministerial delivery of a key, or of land by a turf; or as a soldier is listed, a King crowned, Marriage solemnised after consent and title, in order to a more solemn obligation and plenary possession. Such is Ordination. Mr. Baxter p. 149. When the King sends over a Lord Lieutenant into Ireland, he hath a power by virtue of that high dignity, of making a Knight; now while he uses the Ceremonies of dubbing, he uses them not as the signification of his Princes will, but of his own; He acts not here as an Assign, but does it as an act of his own grace. We are not to conceive that God hath given such a power to the dignity of a bishop, that he may so make Ministers; No, no, their authority (as the solid and learned Mr. Perkins before) is but a Ministry, wherein therefore, they must act from God only as the approvers, signifiers, or publishers, of his will, (and all those ceremonies they use, are the same external signification thereof) that such a one upon their examination is constituted by him according to his word and Charter, to be one of his Ministers, and that the Church is to receive him accordingly. Now then there must be this will first, before the signification of it, and the will creates the power immediately. The giving the power is one thing, with Mr. Hooker, most right, and the external investiture or delivery is another. But you will say, When an Estate or office is given by a person, and the delivery made also, how can this be done again? I answer, the office cannot be again given, but the signification that it is given, may be again. The Lords will is one, and the same, but the signification of it by outward ceremonies, may be various or multiplied. The ceremonies of the same consecration Leu. 8.33. are repeated seven days together. Besides there is a difference in the point of Delivery. There is a delivery of possession in the thing itself; As if I give one a book, and deliver it, and there is a delivery by a ceremony only, as the token of that possession: Here now there may arise controversy, whether such a delivery were legal and sufficient, or the like; and what course then can be best taken to put all out of doubt, but to have a new delivery which will be without exception. The case is so with us just; There is question whether Presbyters be Ordainers, and it may be questioned haply more to others purpose, whether in their Orders there was not a defect of some words of formal delivery, as Take thou authority; and if a quiet man then shall take the way to make all sure, there is no need that he should understand by those words of the Bishop, (and the imposition of his hands) that he does give him the power and office of a Minister, which he hath already, but rather that this is not given at all by mortal men, but only is indeed a a second time declared or signified before the face of the church as given of God, by these external rites of investiture, delivery, or possession. I am sorry to see what a thin vail of words only can cloud man's understanding. If I should say that Orders, is the solemn delivery of the Ministerial authority to a person by the Bishop as a delegate of Jesus Christ, it may be it would be received, and yet when I say it is the confirmation of Christ's call, it is all one, but understood with more safety; which if it shall appear once in its light to my orthodox Adversary, I shall not need to say any thing else in comparison, to his satisfaction. The whole force of his arguing against me in this thing, he knows full well, does lie in this supposal, that Ordination does give the ministerial power and office, and is to be taken only to that end; Now if the ground does fall from under him here, there is nothing left him hardly to stand upon, in the controversy.  
Before I pass, let me here humbly lay down a caution: I would not have any offer to think that I and the forementioned author do go about to make light of Orders, as if when a man hath parts, he may straight go and be a Preacher of his own head. There are none, I know, that hold Qualification a call, coram ecclesia; I am not a man of that complexion; I am so much for a solemn allowance of the Church, that I contend it should be twice done, rather than not be done to purpose; God is a God of Order, and hath provided against confusion and intrusion into his Church. I am ready then with that eminent person, to account, not only that it is a great sin to neglect Ordination, where it may be had, and that the Church is to disown such, and that it is required by Christ, and so necessary, necessitate praecepti & medii too ad ordinem, & bene esse: but I am willing to go so far, that he requires it in his Charter to every Church which is constituted, as a part of the condition, which until it be put, the Authority coram hominibus is suspended. And yet so long as being put, it operates only to the power as a condition, doing but its own part; this hinders not but the same may be put, and put again, so long as it is not omni modo, to the same effect; and the nature thereof, or part it does, will bear it. What is that you will say? and In what regard possible can the effect be any other, and not altogether the same? An Answer to these two Questions will unloose the knot here of Re-ordination.  
For the former: There are three things goes to a Minister. 

1. The testimony of their Conscience, of their sincere desire, not of lucre or honour, but to edify the Church.  
2. A faculty to do that to which they have a desire and will.  
3. The Ordination of the Church, which approves and gives testimony of their will and ability.   So Mr. Perkins, in whose judgement methinks I rejoice, to see how fully he agrees with me in his Notion of Orders, which yet I must confess I took not from him, or any other Book, but from its own light in my first sheets. Now whether this testification or approbation of the Church is such a thing, or no, I leave to this fair Adversary himself to judge; and I hope he will see, as those abilities, and desires, the chief part of the condition, Christ's Charter requires, may and are to be renewed still, or increased, so may the approbation of the same (ad bene esse) be renewed also, and our Ministry be the better, not as all the worse for it.  
For the latter: When I allow thus much to Orders to be a condition, that is causa sine qua non, of our Office-power, I understand it (you must note it well) to be so truly, and only in the Court of the Church. A condition is such a thing you may say, as cannot be repeated, for it being put, the effect follows, and when the effect is obtained, the thing can have no longer the nature of a condition. I answer then, The Court of the Church, wherein alone I affirm that Orders is this condition, is varied and doubled, and hence it is, that the condition itself also is doubled, and the effect flowing from the same varied likewise. While the court of the Church was Presbyterian, any Orders if Scriptural only, was the condition; but n●w it is Episcopal, no Orders but Canonical also is the condition. In both courts then, or either of them, unless a person be ordained he is no Minister, and so the condition requisite to our authority coram Ecclesia, is the same in both, to wit Orders; but as these Orders which are the condition are diversified, and Episcopal Ordination distinguished from Presbyterian, so the condition, I hope, is not the same: In like manner the effect which flows from the condition being put, in either or both these courts, is this Church-authority (as I speak) or the receiving us as Ministers in the court of the Church, and so is the same, but as these courts wherein we are so received (and are the termini relationis) are varied and not the same, in that regard the effect also must be diversified or multiplied, and so not the same, though the same; which ends the difficulty.  
Having laid this caution, there follows an Objection, which as to the main, hath sometimes been a stop upon my mind. I do conceive that the Ordainers do act from God to the people, and the approving or declaring a man's Ministry more than once, draws happily the ampler reception, and no absurdity in it: but I may be mistaken perhaps, and the Ordainers act from the Church or people to God, in presenting him a servant from amongst them to his house; Even as when the Levites were separate to God, Num. 8. it is said, Aaron shall offer them before the Lord for an offering of the children of Israel, v. 11. And hence are the children of Israel themselves to lay their hands upon them, v. 10. whereby there might be signified happily their parting with their right in them, which to do again were a kind of owning their right still, and look like sacraledge in it. But this conceit I guess is some of that close superstition which is still apt to exercise my thoughts in this matter. It is manifest, that when God saved the firstborn of the Israelites in Egypt, he challenged them to himself; the firstborn of the  were to be offered in sacrifice to him, and for the firstborn of their Sons he accepts the Levites; and hence it is they were the offering of the people, and that they laid their hands on them in offering them, because (I say) it was in lieu of their firstborn, which is all plain in the Text: vers. 16, 17, 18. Now as for us under the Gospel, when Jesus Christ the only true first-both is offered, there is up such propriety and discrimination, and consequently no offering of the Ministry in lieu thereof. Besides, though the Levites, whose office was but a service only, (to help Aaron and his Sons, vers. 19) were an offering of the Children of Israel, the Priests, which was not a bare Service, but a Dignity, were no offering of the people, but taken by God into that honour and office of himself. The Subjects of a Prince may present him with slaves to do his work, but they present him not with Ambassadors (as we are) to be entrusted with the affairs of his Kingdom. It may be yet said, it is true, he that hath this honour, must have God's calling, and consequently the Ordainers act from God in ordaining him; but there may be a middle way, to wit, that they act not from God to the Church or people, nor from the Church to God, but from God to God, and so their whole act be terminated in the sanctifying or separating a person to him, without reference at all otherwise, to the Church or people. As for this, though the thing be conspicuous in its own nature and solemnity, let us suppose (until it appears farther) it were so, and then must we take into consideration what this separating or sanctifying a man unto God is. Under the Law it is plain there were sacrafices appointed, and by these the Priests and Levites were cleansed that they might draw nigh to God; Under the Gospel there is no Sacrifice, but only there are Prayers, and consequently the commending a man to the grace of God for his work by Prayer, is all that sanctification there can be in this matter; and as for the imposition of Hands itself, it is nothing but the express designation of the person upon whose head we crave the dissension of his blessing. To which purpose Calvin in his institutions tell us, that this rite was taken from jacob's blessing his grandchildren, which was by Prayer, Gen. 48.15, 16. And Grotius is quoted by Mr. Stilling fleet, speaking about the Jews ordaining their Elders, Epi. ad Gal. Tunc orabant ut sic Dei efficacia esset super illum, sicut manus efficaciae Symbolum ei imponebatur. By this Dei efficacia we must not understand the authority or power of the Ministry, as if in our taking Orders we did pray to God to give us that, as my Antagonist thinks strangely often, for Grotius himself, in his Book de Imp. before quoted, acurately tells us, that comes not by Orders. Christ 〈◊〉 procul dubio, is est à quo jus illud praedicandi, sacrament a exhibendi & clavibus utendi, oritur & vim suam accipit: but we must understand thereby, the solemn invocation of the divine presence and assistance to be upon or with the person upon whom the hands are laid, (to use the words of that Learned Author) which may be repeated I hope, if need be, without question. To proceed here while we are upon it.  
In a form of Church policy presented in a Convention at Edenbourgh, anno 1560. I read in Spotswood, p. 156. Other ceremonies than the public approbation of the people, and the declaration of the chief Minister, that the person there presented is appointed to serve that Church, we cannot approve, for albeit the Apostles used imposition of hands, yet seeing the miracle is ceased, the using the ceremony we judge not to be necessary. In another, anno 1578. presented to the Parliament. Ordination is the separation and sanctifying of the person appointed by God and the Church, after he is well tried, and found qualified. The ceremonies are Fasting, Prayer, and Imposition of hands of the Eldership, p. 292. This notion of Ordination is that I suppose is like to pass with the Presbyterian, and perhaps one may think though a double approbation or declaration draws in it no absurdity, yet a Consecration of a thing or person to the Lord more than once, may seem heinous. Let us know therefore, that there is really no more in the thing under this conception, then under the other. This Learned man my Adversary himself, does well quote Mason and another, who holding with him, that the Office of a Bishop and Presbyter is the same, differing only gradu, not ordine; answer their new investiture with this, that our Church calls it not an Ordering, but Consecration, so that a double Consecration in the same Office, is not to be accounted belike any matter, they themselves being judges. The Temple under the Law we find new consecrated by Hezekiah: The Priests at the same time do new consecrate themselves, 2 Chron. 29.30, 34. In the Gospel too we read again of Festum Encaeniorum, Jo. 10.22. But there is one instance alone does satisfy me in this thing beyond exception, and that is of Solomon, whom we read not only to be anointed, which is consecrated, but it is said expressly, to the Lord (that makes it sacred) a second time. If there was any native evil or absurdity in the thing itself, to have a double consecration or investiture unto the same Office or work, how comes this to pass, that holy David, and his most wise Son, with the Fathers and Elders of all Israel, should make no scruple at all at it? There is this one Text much wanting therefore in my former sheets, which I now offer further to my case, 1 Chron. 29.22. where I note three things. 

1. That Ordination makes a man a Minister, (I count) as they are said in the words to make Solomon King. We none deny but Orders make a Minister, only let it be understood from hence, Perfectiuè, Complementally, by way of Declaration, or Solemnization.  
2. That a double investiture or consecration to the same Office, is expressly exemplified in Scripture (for which I quote this place) and why it should be more to be Re-ordained, than Re-annointed, no Protestant I believe can tell. So that where I have compared Ordaining in my Book still to a double Marrying, I wish I had rather put in Anointing, to make the simile the more sure.  
3 That it is probable what Mr. Rosse (Pans. p. 8.) tell us, that this Zadock was Highpriest at the end of saul's reign, but David favouring Abiathar, preferred him, and retained them both, and consequently that he was anointed the second time Priest, as Solomon the second time King. So I close my first general. And they made Solomon King the second time, and anointed him to the Lord to be chief Governor, and Zadock to be Priest.     

SECTION III.  
FOr the second general: The Form which the Bishop uses, I will confess it freely, to be so compiled to the ordinary conception of Orders, as is most proper for such as are made ex non Ministris Ministri, (as he speaks) yet let not my tender Brethren be troubled at this, seeing that hinders not but it may serve too, for those that are only declared to be Ministri, and confirmed, or regularly, legally, canonically made what they were truly in the sighs of God before; It is the offence of men's minds makes this so grievous. There is no Ordination indeed is any more than a Declaration and Allowance before the Church of a man's call from God, and let a man read the Form quite over, one may rather wonder at it, as a happiness there is no more incongruity to our case, then complain there is so much, as if it were compiled with some tender regard hereto, that if any were ordained before (as beyond Sea) otherwise, they might not scruple for all that (if they thought good) to submit to it. The words Ordered, and Admined, is the worst this sober man himself can pick out, which when I see in the instruments of our Orders, as it were purposely interpreted for us, secundum ritus Ecclesiae Anglicanae admissimus & Legitimè & Canonicè ordinavimus, I cannot but conclude what I have said, and say that it is well this form indeed is no worse, (I mean more improper) seeing as yet we have no other. And if there shall come any future change hereof, I must fore note that that can neither be objected or pleaded as to me in the matter.  
In this whole Form there are these things. The Exhortations, and Prayers; The Ceremonies; The Deaconship; The Questions and Responses between Bishop and Minister; and after all (though that be beyond my Question) the instrument of our Orders.  
For the first: There are several persons to be Ordained together, it may be twenty or thirty, (there was thereabouts Ordained with me) The Exhortations now and Prayers are delivered at once indefinitely; and that alone I hope does take away all scruple quite in that whole matter; for the case is the same as in our Sermons and Prayers in the Congregation, which will not I suppose be refused, because some one or other expression therein, is not apt and adequate to the case of every individual person. Nevertheless upon a view of the whole I find not one petition or direction that may not be used in our case, let it have its grains of allowance and fair interpretation; and as for what this Author suggests as if we prayed to be made Ministers, or to receive the Ministerial power (which we have and are already) he may as well say, we are exhorted to be made so, and receive the same, equally with as much sense and truth in it. No there are prayers for God's guilts and grace and assistance of his spirit to ou● Ministry, w●ich I hope might be put up for the Ordainers themselves; and we are exhorted to our duty accordingly, but the Bishop prays not, that by his act the power may be given, which he holds no doubt to flow indispensibly thereupon; not through his prayer (which is for things contingent) but Christ's institution. Effectus ordinationis proprius est collatio potestatis, ad illum per se dirigitur, eundemque (say such) perpetuo et infallibiliter consequitur.  
For the second the Ceremonies, such as the delivery of the Bible and the like I know no exception by any: only if the meet repetition of imposition of hands be impleaded, then hath my kind Adversary to answer for the same as well as I, who is so far from disallowing a second laying on of hands that he may be, Godfather to it himself, while in that distinction of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordinativa et optativa (from Mr. Vines) he hath christened the thing with the right name; and if he can come off from Austin, (as he quotes him) and other ancients for this, who look on this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 itself to be sacramental, and so not to be iterated, I hope I shall not be concluded ab authoritate bumanâ neither in the same matter.  
For the Deaconship, I have I think spoke enough in my first sheets, p. 92, 93. This haply is a thing, may be got to be waved by the Bishop, if it be desired, for which I have quoted Aquinas; If not, it is but used we know as formality, to any by himself, who are ordained Priest and Deacon at the same time; and though a man's spirit may be apt to rise at such a kind of favour, that we, who are Presbyters before, should be now promoted to the Order of a Deacon (ad ordinem Diaconatus promovimus) yet seeing it is but the Canonical stamp upon our Ministry (and that only) we come for, which belike is to be made at the leaning the hand twice upon it, so that we must be the half first, before the whole, and he that wills the end, wills the means; let us but get our hearts sincere in the thing, that we do this for the Gospel's sake, and I am persuaded seriously (as of some other like things) it may be received of the pious and the wise, with a smile perhaps on the face, rather than with a wrinkle on the conscience. It is delivered by the ancients, and received by the learned, that those Deacons we read of in the Acts were chose (at least some of them) out of the 70. Christ sent forth to preaches which may therefore be some good allay to a man's spirit in this auk ward submission. This Gentleman indeed hath an expression (p. 67.) very apt to raise indignation, and to that end ingenuously used, to wit, that be will choose rather to lose the exercise of his Ministry for a season, rather than take gradum Simeonis. He does well to put in the word for a season to excuse it; for suppose this man under no such University Oath (as in our case we are not, I hope) could he indeed with a good conscience, give up his Ministry, rather than from a Master of Arts, become a Batchel our again? Is this a reason sound enough for so great a matter, because he will not abase himself to a lower degree for a moment in the Church, than he is in already? There is certainly no bottom here. This sober man would not indeed have all his brethren, that are tender herein, to go presently out of the Vineyard, to accompany him, would he? Suppose a Minister, nay suppose twenty that do much good in their place, yet being sensible of the burden of their calling, and made more tender by him, shall be glad now of his book and example, and so satisfy their consciences, to leave their charge, and give off; will this bring any real pleasure and solid content to this man's heart, and can he comfortably rejoice in it before the Lord, to hear of it? Alas! that the grand Interest of Jesus Christ should lie no more near some of the be● of his servants, that they should bring it so easily to the stake? Must a Christian many times be content to become a fool, what if for once, he submit to be made so, for Christ's sake? Sir! though you would not undervalue yourself for a fellowship with Simeon in the College, I hope you will be content to lose some degrees of reputation and estate too, to continue with Simeon in the Temple waiting for the consolation of Israel.  
For the fourth Question and Responses. This one thing is plain at the first sight. Here is the part of the Bishop and the part of the Minister, and each one is to look to his own part. For the Minister, let him be serious and careful of what he says for himself, so as to be sure he does not in the least offend his conscience; which he shall not do if he purposes and endeavours to perform what he promises; if perhaps his soul is tender herein, as to some passages in regard of the pious sense of his frailty, as when the words run strict, Will you use all endeavour to do thus and thus, and the answer is, I will do so; what if for I will, he somewhere say I desire? More particularly, when the duties of the Deacon are proposed and he considers that upon his being Priest the proper work of that Office, which is inferior (and which he would not engage unto) does cease according to the plain Text, Act. 6.3, 4, 5. what if he altar the word so, and say I will do what concerns me, (or the like) and so likewise for other expressions. No Bishop (I hope) will find fault with such a matter. For the Ordainer, let him likewise consider well, that what he says and does be according to his own established judgement; for this rule, I must account equitable to both, that neither party are to account themselves responsible to God herein for the parts (words or acts) of the other, but their own. When I join with a man in an action (saith Mr. Burroughes) I am to look to the action and principle that I go upon, but let him with whom I join look to the principle he goes upon. If he will go on a false ground when he may go on a true, let him look to it. Iren. p. 184.  
And here I cannot but be sorry to hear how it hath fared with some in our case, they have been loath to tell the Bishop that they were ordained before, and he hath been loath to know it; but if they will be ordained, he will ordain them. This is not fair play: He should inquire whether they were so or no, and if they were, let him endeavour to convince them if he can of the nullity of their former Orders, if he cannot, let him hear their reason why they submit to be Re-ordained. When this is done, I will suppose the Bishop keeps his mind, and so tells a man plainly, that for as much as he is his Ordinary, who ought not to allow of any to exercise the Ministry without Orders, and he for his part does believe in his Conscience, that all Orders by Presbytery only is null and void, and therefore for the satisfaction of him, his Bishop, and of others, and the present Church, he requires this same of him. This is plain dealing from him. The Minister I will suppose likewise to remain of the same mind, and he still declares his former Ministry to be valid, yet in regard that he is fully prrswaded that Re-ordination is not where forbidden by God's word, and our Rulers are to be obeyed in indifferent things, and this conduces moreover, or is made necessary to the exercise of his Ministry where he is called, he does upon this account yield to the same. This is plain also. Here is plain dealing on both sides: Now it was the saying of one very grave Bishop (which I think fit his Brethren should know) in the case to one after some such kind of debate, whom he spoke to there about, I will Ordain you in my sense, (says he) and you may be Re-ordained in your own, (or words to that effect) which I mention and offer even for the most clear and honest determination of this matter, whereas if either side do hid, they can hardly come off with this soundness of mind, and wholeness of conscience.  
In a conference (as I have heard) between the Presbyterian and present Bishops, it was proposed for an Accommodation in this case, that an Hypothetical form might be used, Si non ordinatus sis, etc. I perceive my Author (p. 3.) would hardly have been content with this, If there could be an invincible doubt whether a man were de facto ordained or no, than he could belike approve hereof, and not else; but he looks not here half way to the bottom. A man may be sure he was ordained, and yet be in doubt whether his ordination by Presbytery be valid: But I will suppose a man assured of the one, and fully persuaded of the other, yet had this Accommodation been good; because this Hypothetical form, we are to conceive, not directly to regard the Conscience of the party to be Re-ordained, as in doubt of his former Orders (for then the salve would not have reached near the soar, when there is not one of a hundred doubt of any such thing) but to regard the judgement or opinion of the Presbyterian and Episcopalian in general, and consequently the judgement of each Bishop and particular party in the case: The one holds Ordination by the Presbytery only, to be null, the other holds it valid; neither side are like to be convinced by, or yield to the other, but must leave it, who are in the right, to the great Judge: In the mean time, the mutual condescension on such a form by either party, prejudices neither opinion or cause, and yet the practice of the thing on both i● agreed. From which way then proposed for a decision, I shall gather this one thing which is manifest, that Re-ordination must not be look● on (by those wise men that made this proposition) as a thing unlawful in itself, but such as might be done, only the inconveniences (that it might not be injurious to our former Orders) be avoided, which when they cannot be by that way which took no effect, I offer it to the considerately judicious, whether the same thing in the substance is not done by what I have been laying down, to wit, by the Ordainers and Ordained free Declaration of their conscience (or account upon which they act) one to another.  
I come now to those words in the form, which are the chief soar, Receive the Holy Ghost, Take thou Authority. These words cannot be said to us who have the Ministerial power and Office already, says my Adversary, and that indeed is the core that slicks in most throats. There are several things therefore I will speak to this, for one thing sometimes takes with one, and another with others. It it but words however we see, is stood upon, as for the thing itself it is won.  
1. Let us know then, this form Receive the Holy Ghost, hath been ever excepted against (since our Church hath been Protestant) by some Learned men. Papisticus quidam ritus stultè quidem ab illis, & sine ullo scripturae fundamento institutas, & à disciplinae nostrae authoribus non magno primum judicio accipius minore adhuc in Ecclesia retinetur, Ecclesiast discip. p. 53. as Hooker quotes it. Our Presbyterians accordingly we know have avoided such kind of words in their Ordination, (which are not expressly mentioned in any ancient Author to be used for a thousand years, says one) so that this scruple if it be any thing, will lie upon others that are ordained but once, as well as us; and our ancient Presbyterians (even the most rigid of them) themselves, if ordained in our Church, must come to the bar also, who did heretofore submit to the same. The result whereof then must be this, that though the Church perhaps might do well, to examine these words, whether better expunged or not, yet if she does retain the same, her sons are to look on their part to be but passive herein, and leave the justification on her score.  
2. Let us take it for most just and allowable, that these words, seeing they have been so much called in question, be permitted a free interpretation; and as the Bishop may take his, if we may but have ours, there will be no prejudice at all in them. By the Holy Ghost, as Christ used the words at first, Jo. 20: I am persuaded is meant clearly, the promise of the Spirit he had told them of, and what that was is declared fully, Act. 2. at the day of Pentecost. I know it is said, that the manner of delivery Receive, does infer something else than that, at present conferred; but is merely a handsome gloss, which yet some answer, sic datus fuit Apostolis spiritus hoc loco ut aspersi duntaxat fuerint, nondum plena ejus virtute imbuti. This I will say, if we may but be so bold to think that the Holy Ghost is not given by the Bishop here, as it was given by Christ by his Disciples, then must we have the liberty of our own sense in the thing; and what then, if by the Holy Ghost we understand nothing else but what is most genuine to any indifferent person; to wit, his more special presence for support and assistance of us in our Ministry; who does not see the words to be inoffensibly compatible to our case as others? Neque dubitari potest (says  Mason) quin singulari quodam modo, praesto illis fuerit ipse Spiritus sanctus ad illos dirigendos, sustinendos, assistendos, juxta Christi promissionem, Ecce ego vobiscum sum usque ad finem seculi. Huc spectat egregium illud S. Leovis dictum. Qui mihi oneris est author, ipse fiet administrationis adjutor. De Min. Ang. l. 5. c. 10.  
3. To deal faithfully, let us consider what ●hat sense of these words is which is or hath been most currant with our Bishops and Church themselves. The holy Ghost essentially we know is every where, and so not to be given; There must then I count be necessarily here, a Metonymy efficientis pro effectu. The effects of the holy Ghost are various; The effect they would have, is such as they may hold de praesenti, always, and certainly conferred hereby to make the rite significant to purpose. The ordinary effects now for which the Spirit in Scripture is taken, are his graces, or gifts; For his grace, they will not say, they do confer that (I take Grace strictly, for else any thing from God's good will may be called grace;) For Gifts, they are more wise too, then to tie them hereto, any more than Grace; There is some effect else therefore must be found out, and that is, power; Receive the holy Ghost, with them then, is a power from the holy Ghost, and this power specified by the next words, Whose sins you forgive, etc. that is a power to forgive sins. So Hooker p. 412. and Mr. Mason (those two like famous sons of our Church) Spiritus sanctus hoc in loco potestatem spiritualem denotat quâ peccata remittuntur. And so Bellarmine might be added and more ancient authors. And this I hope will help my adversary to his full weight, if he can but really understand with such, and believe that this sense is not strained and forced. To this than I have distinguished for the purpose, between the part of the Bishop and Minister; These words we know are delivered by the Bishop, and as they belong to his part, let them be put upon his account, and he will justify them in this sense. He believes our former ordination to be null, and so pronounces them to us, as if we had none of this spiritual power derived to us before, and as if he did now give it us hereby. And this we may suppose too he speaks truly according to his very conscience. Now if there was required any answer here again on our parts directly and clearly acknowledging the same, this were a scruple indeed to me invincible; but when there is nothing of this nature to be said by us, but the hearing only given to what he says, and the interpretation left free; Let us make the best of it, and lay not upon ourselves what belongs not to our charge. And here that the faith of the Bishop may be strengthened (while it will stand us in stead) if he can believe such a thing indeed as will justify him in his own sense, the using these words, to wit, that our former Ordination is null, there is one plea I think of more moment for him then that only which is ordinarily urged, and this author hath confuted, (to wit merely, that it was not done by a Bishop) and that is this. It is not only the Bishops, but the Presbyterians (who are against Re-ordaining) do hold that the Ministerial authority is conferred by Orders; Now in our Orders by Presbyters there was no words at all actually to convey this power, as these in the Episcopal Orders (according to them) do; and consequently they being destitute of their end, even that my Author also himself accounts the end, and only end thereof, they may if they can, think them null on that account. And I do remember I have noted one or two learned Authors somewhere pointing at this as a defect, and telling us that the Jews in the imposing their hands on their Elders (from whence the apostles, it is thought, took the rite up) did use some words still, particularly to express the authority they did convey, intimating as if else it were scarce an ordination.  
4. To follow this, whereas my Opposer does not only suppose, but seems to believe, and argue upon it (even altogether) that the Ministerial power is indeed conveyed hereby, as our Bishops think themselves; I will ask him, whether he thinks, if these words were not used, that power which they impart, were given without them, Yea, or No? If he thinks No, then must his Ordination I say by Presbytery be null, where no such words of giving authority was used at all, and he be re-ordained upon that score: If he thinks Yea, yet holds as he does that Orders give it, Why should a rite so material and significant be omitted before, and the defect not be supplied by a new solemnity, and so that at least, in Gregory's Decretals take place? In talibus non est aliquid iterandum, sed cautè supplendum, quod incautè fuerat praetermissum.  
6. But to set us upon our right bottom; when some Episcopal Divine, do plead Ordination by Presbyters to be null upon that maxim, Nemo dat quod in se non habet. Mr. Baxter answers, p. 234. It is the first error of the adversary to hold, that this power is given by men as first having it themselves. So p. 147. This falsely supposeth that the Ordainers are the givers of power, the master error in their frame; Christ hath it, and Christ giveth it: Men give it not, though some of them have it; for they have it only to use, not to give. Let me say the same here to my present adversary, and I need say no more. If the Ministerial power be given by Orders, then are Orders of necessity to the being of the Ministry, but that Orders are not of absolute necessity necessitate medii ad esse ministerii, it is proved by that author (cap. 3.) beyond answer, as by Vo●tius, and others. The truth is, there is no Protestant Divine I know, but grant in Ecclesiâ constituendâ, or in a case of necessity a man may be a Minister without Orders; and if there were but one instance in the world where a man's ministry is valid unordained, the power is proved thereby to be immediately from Christ, and the esse ministerii not to depend upon ordination. I shall content myself with one instance, and that is of Barnabas, of whom we read in Acts 11.19. that he was sent forth by the Church of Jerusalem, and then is ordained after with Paul at Antioch, Acts 13 2. Now I demand, was Barnabas ordained before, or no? If he was not, then is not the Ministerial power given by, nor the being of the Ministry depend upon, Ordination: If he was, then have we here plain text and example for Re-ordination.  
7. To understand this clearly, and more fully, though before touched The Ministerial power must be considered (as I have intimated) Coram Deo, or Coram Hominibus; when a man hath God's gifts, and a heart to devote them to the use of the Church, it is Christ's will he should be his Minister, and as his will makes it his duty, it must give him right and power; now when the man hath this, it is his will moreover that these gifts be approved, and power declared, by the Church, that he may be received as his Minister or Ambassador, by men, and those particularly unto whom he is sent. This is done by this Solemnity, this is one end and proper nature of it; and so the authority he had before Coram Deo, is made current Coram Ecclesia, and he reputed and passed straight by all amongst the Order (as we call it) of the Clergy. Understand me I pray here: The authority of the Ministry Coram Deo, and Coram Hominibus, I count not two authorities, but the same, one Spiritual authority, which being derived to a man from the standing act of Christ's will in his institution, immediately upon his inward call, in the Court of Heaven and his own Conscience, does not yet pass in the Court of the Church, till this call be approved and confirmed by her Pastors, which she requires for Orders sake, and calls Ordination. And here now is a firm and true foundation laid against that Objection, which is apt to rise upon us, that if the Ministerial power flows immediately from Christ's charter and call, then may any man pretend hereunto, and take upon him to be a Minister without Orders, which were to open the door to Fanaticism and Confusion: But God forbidden we should not be able to put a bar upon such, which we can clearly maintain; It is this, to wit, that whatsoever a man's call is in the sight of God, the Church is to take no cognizance of it, until by some of her chief appointed Pastors to that purpose, it be approved, testified, and declared by this Solemnity. If a man hath indeed abilities and a heart for Christ's service, than i● he bond to submit them to trial, and get them allowed; if he does not, he sins, and the Church is to take no notice of him till then (1 Tim. 5.22. 1 Tim. 3.10.) so that you may see how the actual exercise of a man's Ministry does depend (even altogether) hereupon, though the power does not, and that Text made good How can they preach except they be sent, in this sense of the words they are ordinary used, whether truly or no, I here say not. Let a David be excommunicate for Adultery, he shall be held Coram Ecclesia out of the Church, as well as an Ahaz; let a man be truly called, while his calling is not approved by the Church, (which is by Orders) we shall not account him a Minister any more than he that is not called, and if a man be not called, yet if he be ordained, his Ministrations are not to be doubted of as valid to the Church, while he is to repent of his bad Conscience before God. To give more life to this: As what hath been said may appear from its own light, so will it appear more fully from the case of necessity, wherein the validity of the Ministry without Orders is agreed to by all. If the Ministerial power did not come to a man Coram Deo, so that he is a Minister in God's sight before Orders, than could not necessity dispense with them, because necessity falls not upon God, There is no impossible with him. But when the authority order give, is only this authority Coram Hominibus, that is the reception or acceptation thereof with men: (the value or esteem of us as Ministers at the Church's bar, in their sight or account, what we are in Gods before) let a man plead impossibility, whether natural (as suppose him among the Indies) that he cannot be ordained; or moral (suppose him among the papists) that he cannot without s●nne against his conscience; this plea, Nemo tenetur ad impossibile is good at man's bar, for upon man necessity does come, and he is to be dispensed with, and his ministry therefore to pass, which else in Ecclesia rectè constitutâ were to be quite refused for order's sake. I cannot omit here one simile to the same point, which is laid down strongly by Grotius, De Imp. p. 270. Potestas maritalis est a Deo; applicatio ejus potestatis ad certam personam ex consensu vonit; quo tamen ipsum Jus non datur. Nam si ex consensu daretur, posset consensu etiam dissolvi matrimonium. For my part I cannot but conceive thus; A man and a woman consents in their hearts, and privately give the same to one another; This contract between themselves makes them husband and wife before God, and his standing Law conveigheth to the man his power, and obligeth both to their duties: yet are they not to live together before marriage, if it were only for the shame, or sake of the world, besides that it is their duty hereupon (as matter of public order) to seek the matrimonial investiture which is valid according to the Land: So is it here, when a man having Gods gifts does consent seriously between him and his Soul to dedicate them to his service, the same standing law or will of his in his word or institution about this matter, does make it his duty and give him power; yet is he not to have the exercise of it, before this investiture of Orders, not only because of the bastardy of the Ministry that will else follow, when men shall be received without trial and approbation; Nor only because God commands this as his duty, so that he sins (if it may be had) to neglect it; but because the Church or People are not to receive or account such as Ministers, as they will not a couple man and wife, till the Solemnity. Let these also first be proved, then let them use the Office. In short (as at first) They may be both (I suppose) held to be coram Deo upon consent only what they are not coram hominibus before public confirmation.  
8. However we understand these words, this methinks might give a reasonable man satisfaction, that it fares with us, but as with the Apostles themselves; Christ had before given them ministerial power, for they did preach and baptised while they continued with him, Jo. 4.2. and yet does he use this same form of words, that seems no less than a new Commission. Nay that which is yet more, as Christ used this form but once, and that at their second mission; So is it with us, the Presbyterian used it not at first, and we have it without repetition.  
9 I will suppose what is supposed, that Receive the Holy Ghost is equivalent with Take thou Authority, and understand it of the ministerial power, and consequently that there is moreover here a formal delivery of that Authority or Office to a Person, so that he may be said to be made a Minister thereby as he was not (eo modo) before; and yet let us but understand also this aright as we ought, that it is all done only by way of external investiture or solemnisation as it is in the inauguration of Princes (who are said to be made Kings when they are Crowned or Anointed) and there is no hurt at all comes to our Cause at last; which from thence indeed may have but the more clear demonstration, how the thing may without any absurdity in the world be done more than once. This I take to be the common Protestant doctrine, and rest upon it.  
There remains now but one thing more, that after all this may beget some scruple, and that is, the instrument of our Orders There is that of the Deaconship, which if one does not like, he may be civil to the Bishop's Officers, and leave. For the other of Presbyter which is needful for him to have, if it will not satisfy him that they are the Bishop's words, not ours, I will suppose he hath declamed himself before, and the instrument is in his own hands. I shall say no more, but for my own part my Orders of Deacon (as quite useless otherwise) I thought good to cancel, before whom it seemed to me fit, in testimony of my owning my former Ministry; and for those of Presbyter which I keep, if any should chance to see them, they may find these words, in the backside, or bottom of them. I was ordained so long since by a Classis of the Presbytery, and doubt not therefore of being a Minister before, yet do these Orders make me so secundum ritus ecclesiae Anglicanae Canonicè & legitime (according to this express tenor) as I was not before, and in that sense only have I submitted to the same.  
To conclude, If there was another form whereby our Ministry might be confirmed, or some Bishops would vary this to serve a private turn, than were the Items my Adversary hath given us sufficient, to make us to choose and seek that rather than yield hereunto, for so far does his arguing reach, even in full force: but while there is no such thing to be had, it makes it methinks a very high imagination, ever to enter the heart of a serious Christian, if he can find it there too, to have his Brethren of the same mind with him, to think, that he, and they should be ready to leave their holy Function and Charge (without some other conjoined grand reason) rather than to bear with a little unhandsomness from our Superiors (for their Constitution's sake) in the impropriety only of a formality which is not neither a matter of worship, and so as it is said of Dani●l, a matter of our God, but a matter, or ceremony of Order only. We can never indeed be too tender of displeasing the Lord, but let us take heed, we do not displease him by our fear that he will be displeased without reason from his Precepts, Is. 29.13. Alas! What do we make of God Almighty? I cannot but call to mind a passage of Plutarch (De Superstitione) where he is saying, that that man is less impious qui opinatur nullos esse deos, quam qui tales esse credit qual●s superstitiosus. I had rather (says he) it should be said there is no Plutarch at all, quam hoc dici, esse Plutarchum, hominem ad iram pronum vindictae ob levissimas causas cupidum, ob minima quaeque indignantem. Do we believe God indeed is gracious, kind, and most wisely tender to his Children, and can we think that when he bears with their Infirmities, he will not consider reason, and their necessity? The Lord Jesus we know did expressly excuse his Disciples breach of the Jews Sabbath, and David's eating the Shewbread, so long as there was occasion. Substantial duties must overrule ceremonials. And if we may guess by this, and Paul's conforming for his Ministry's sake, so often to the Jews, there is haply much more may be submitted to, than some think in the case of superior reason. Let a man tend the main at his heart God hath set him upon, and he is not like to be unaccepted in these matters. See 1 K. 15.5. 2 Ch. 30.19. Mat. 9.13 Neither are we to conceive under the Gospel, that the Lord hath enjoined every thing to a pin as in Moses Tabernacle. When some good men shall come to have more noble and evangelical apprehensions of the Almighty, and have rolled their thoughts but once over the several forms, rites or modes he hath been a serving withal, for these sixteen hundred years all abroad the whole Christian world, they may perhaps be brought to blush inwardly at the poorness of such understandings, that would narrow the infinite to their complexions. He hath showed thee O man what is good, and what doth the Lord require of thee but to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God   

SECTION IU.  
HAving demolished these two Forts in general which are the shelter of my adversary, there are two arguments only in particular which he offers, the one is, from authority, and the other from the third Commandment.  
For authority He first quotes the 67. Canon of the apostles which I have myself mentioned. Unto which, I shall only produce him by way of answer, another of the same. Presbyter ab uno Episcopo ordinetur, Can. 2. Here I must put himself upon a solution if he comes off in another question he handles in his book which concerns others, and he hath done it effectually, by a verdict of a Synod of Rome itself, An. 494. that these Canons nullatenus recipit Catholica Ecclesia. He pleads farther, the practice of our English Church, which does not re-ordain a popish Minister, nor those formerly that were ordained beyond the Seas; unto which he adds the story of Archbishop Bancroft (which you may read Spotswood Hist. of Scot p. 514.) and also that the episcopally ordained were not constrained by the Gallican and Belgic Churches, to be re-ordained after the mode of their Churches. As to all which, I account it were good for some of more skill in the history of latter times than I, concerning things of this nature to give us a relation of what hath been done in this case. There hath been examples no doubt of some that have, & some that have not been re-ordained. That which I say to this argument merely of practice herein, is, that it does truly seem very pressing on the part of our rulers and imposers, but as for the part of the submitter, I cannot for my part but freely believe, that any, or either of these mentioned, might be ordained again if the exercise of their Ministry depends upon the same; and so I give in my answer. From a non solet, to a non licet, is a non sequitur. And here I will not omit one pertinent relation. A present grave Minister and of note in Northampton shire (I have no commission to print his name) being ordained in the Low Countries came to Bishop Davenant he told him that they held his ordination valid; nevertheless in regard of his settling in the Ministry here, he thought it good before they parted, to ordain him again himself; giving him liberty in the point of Subscription, and what Indulgence else he desired I hear not. This instance is singularly full to my purpose, and being in a Bishop who was so eminently a solid and pions Doctor, cannot but at the very sight, remove some prejudice as to my opinion, and indeed as I hear, hath prevailed (it may be more than such an argument alone the exemple ought) upon many. Let our Church Rulers be pleased but to tread in these steps, that is, declare our former Ministry hitherto to be good, require a new only ad praesentem statum; by the way of confirmation, vary a few of their expressions (where they see fit) accordingly, and give a like indulgence as this above, in such circumstances as they find do afflict any that are tender in conscience and then I suppose both my brethren and I, and they and we, may soon come to composition in this controversy.  
For the third Commandment, his other Argument, it is the same and no other than what I have laid down myself in my first sheets, to wit, the second Objection there, which one would have thought might have saved my Opponent his labour, as to the half of his work; for it is this one thing upon the matter is the substance of his Book, upon my question; wherein, as soon as a man hath turned over any lease that concerns me, he may guess what will be objected against me before hand; The form namely, and the Ordinance in vain; that is, more words perhaps, but this Argument still for the main; one light in a several change; the old Moon and the new Moon, but the same.  
I must confess when the objection at first came into my mind in those sheets (where I fetch what I have only from my own spirit as I go along) it did lie sore upon it a good while, but I must needs say also, that the answer there I give to it, was as fully satisfactory to me as that was pressing before, and I did think it would be so also to others, or else those sheets might hardly have passed my hands. It does therefore now stand me upon (though I have spoke to this there so largely already, and have some things also before which might be sufficient) to gather up together all the forces that I have had, or further have, to fight as it were at once, neither with small or great in comparison, save with this his King, or master-argument he relies upon in this matter.  
He that is ordained (says he) with a valid ordination, ought not to be reordained, because by submitting thereto, he doth take an ordinance of God in vain. This he proves. To take an ordinance for no end, or for no such end as God hath appointed it unto, is to take it in vain. But to be reordained, after preceding valid ordination is to do so; because ordination is to set us apart to the office of the Ministry, and we have the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 already. This is his marrow, without the exact writing out more of his words, which I hope neither he nor I care to stand upon in this dispute; Unto which I have therefore many things to say, for when I have in effect but one thing to speak to, there are many things I must needs speak to it.  
1. There is a passage in an Author whom he otherwhere names with honour (as he is worthy) which I will set down in the first place, because I cannot choose but receive it. We have no ground to think that the Apostles had any peculiar command for laying on of hands upon persons in prayer over them, or ordination of them, but the thing itself being enjoined, the setting some apart for attendance on the Churches by them planted, they took up and made use of a laudable rite and ●austom then in use upon such occasions. Mr. Stillingfleet, Iren p. 270. Now though Doctor Seaman, Mr Lyford, and the London Ministers (to whom my Opposer turns us) may have spent their pains well to prove that no man may ordinarily enter the Ministry without Orders, while as Calvin hath it, illa Apostolorum accurata observat●o aught to be Praecepti vice to us; Yet is there doubtless some difference to be put between such Ordinances, which Christ Jesus our Lord hath left from his own mouth to his Church, as Baptism is, and such as the Apostles took up themselves from the present Custom of the Jews, and we follow for their example.  
2. I have distinguished plainly in my Book between our Ministry, and the use and exercise of it, I deny that Ordination is in vain which is not to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Ministry itself, and the reason is irrefragable, because a man may be a Minister already and yet be ordained, as the case was with Paul and Barnabas. Act. 13. which our Author himself opens, enlarges and grants, p. 4. I will put this in other words. Ordination is either to the office or to the work; Now I deny our Author his definition, Ordination is the setting a man apart to the work and Office of the Ministry, (in the sense he understands separating a man to his office) for we have but one place only, from which we gather this Genus definitionis, that Orders is a separating or setting a man apart, to wit, that in the Acts. Separate me Paul and Barnabas, and there it is manifestly to the Work only, and not the Office which they had already, as himself, and I argue upon it, and I lay as the sure foundation of our Case. It is true, that the Office (or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, if you call that so) cannot be renewed or repeated, but the Work may, the Work is. And if this pious man would not dislike it (as he says P. 4) if our Bishops when any are removed to a new Charge would call their Presbyters, and commend such to the grace of God for their Work by the imposition of hands, supposing that Text Act. 13. (which I mainly rely upon) be warrant sufficient for the same: It is not to be thought but another, who is, I will suppose just so much byassed towards the other side as he is toward his own, or poised equally, should think it but a small matter to be content moreover, that they use their own form, seeing they have yet no other, and our Reverend Episcopal men do not we know use to do such things as these without their Order appointed. Nay if this may be done, as to the Work renewed in another place, why not I pray also as to the Work repeated in the same? supposing at least a man shall not be permitted to use his Ministry without it, and otherwise I persuade not the tender to it.  
3. There is more here barely than this. The exercise of our Ministry is not to be considered at large, but restrictively, as to our Church. There is our Ministry, and use of it (I have said in my Book) in our English Church. It is to the last only I count we are re-ordained. To which purpose we must distinguish of those words of our Author's [after preceding valid Ordination] Ordination is valid either in fore Scripturarum, which is vera only: Or in foro Episcopali sive praesentis Ecclesiae, which is legalis, and Canonical also. Our preceding Ordination is valid (we believe) in the first sense, but in the second sense, our preceding Ordination is not valid, and so it is we are re-ordained. I return therefore the Argument; If when a man's former Ordination is valid, he may not, when it is not valid, he may, be re-ordained; but our former Orders are rendered by the change of the present times to be invalid, in the sense mentioned, and consequently in that sense may we take new, and in that sense the form proper thereunto methinks also be born. Our Ministry was the same Silver under the Presbytery, but the Canonical stamp by the Bishop, makes it received according to the constitution of the present Church; Even as the State-money, though current before, must submit to be new coined for all that, or else now it will not go.  
4. I say farther hereupon, Our taking new Orders is not then the taking an Ordinance to no end, nay it is a taking them to a right end, the very end which by Orders is to be had: Ordination (this Author will say) is a separating a Person to God. For what now I pray? why for the Work no doubt whereunto he is (or shall be) called. So in the Text Act. 13. The use then, and exercise of the Ministry, is the end to which a man is ordained. I will explain it by a clear place, Numb. 8.11. Thou shalt offer the Levites before the Lord, compare it with ver. 14. and it is, Thou shalt separate them, that is their Consecration; Well mark then what follows, that they may execute the service of the Lord There is the end. And so ver. 15, 22 After that they shall go in to do the service of the Tabernacle. Now have said, though a man cannot be Re-ordained to his Ministry, (which he hath already) yet may he, to the use or exercise of it, to wit, t●a●h: may go into the Tabernacle, that he may execute the service of the Lord. You will say haply, these Levites and the Ministers are to be consecrate here to have their right to, or liberty of doing their holy service in respect of God, because God requires this before they enter upon their work; but we are separate again now only in respect of man, because he requires it, or else will not allow this right and liberty to the same. I answer, this is true, and therefore let the Requirers look to it, when a person is consecrate already to God, and thereupon he expects his service from him, it man will hinder, let him see how he can answer it; but as for the Submitter, this is manifest, that whether he does this in conscience to God's command (as he must) at first, or in obedience to his Superiors, in the doing it again, yet is the end in both the very same, and that is only what is most just and honest, that he may execute the service of his God, that he may have the free use of his Ministry in his place. And whether my Author dare say this is to no end, or not to the end proper to it, I leave it to his own breast to judge.  
5. There is not this one end only in Orders to separate or set a man apart for his work, but others also, to wit, there is the invocation of God's blessing upon us, assistance and grace with us in our work, which is so certain and plain, that when the Holy Ghost had said in one place separate to me, in another he tells us, they were commended to God's grace. Quid aliud est manuum impositio nisi oratio super bominem? says St. Austin, as he is quoted De Baptis. contra Don. l. 3. c. 16. Now this end is repetible I hope, and if t●ere was nothing else, does alone take off the keenenesse of my Opposers edge. The Church I think may say her Prayers over twice, when Christ said the very same words thrice, Matth. 26.44. But to speak exactly, and to the touch of the word and truth, the separating a man to God for his work, and sanctifying him by Prayer, is indeed the very same. There is therefore another end, arising from the nature of the Solemnity that stands me in most stead: Ordination I have said does not give the jus or spiritual power to a Minister before God; what then, (it may be demanded) does it give? why truly I have said it, and it is so; It does give him his power or authority before men, (that is, his authority comes hereby to be received) it does give him the repure and value of a Minister, as to all intents in the Church; And now for as much as a man cannot reap this effect by virtue of his former Orders he already hath, there is (as I have said, and must say still) the very same ground at this season for Re-ordination, as for Ordination at first. Let my Reader see my first sheets from p. 32. to 37. and though this Gentleman hath quite waved all that concerns this, I must confess myself, (next to the plain Texts, Act. 13.2. Mat. 28.19.) I place my chiefest strength there.  
6. Where things are not unlawful, not forbidden by God, why is it not an end sufficient for what we do, to obey out Superlors, and that they have their end in it, supposing them (as in chàrity we are bound) good men, and that they aim at God's glory in their commands? Nay, why is it not enough to follow prudence, what we judge most expedient, to study peace, to further our own and our neighbours good? Are not these honest and justifiable ends? It is true indeed, if a thing have evil in it, a good end will not justify it, unless that evil does cease to be so in the comparison; but I cannot lightly see evil in that thing which is neither against the light of nature, or positive institution. Let me add more particularly: In things which are at our Liberty, a man is not to walk only after his own conscience, but to have respect also to the conscience of those with whom he is. Conscience I say, not thy own but of the others, 1 Cor. 10.29. Thou art free for thy own part, as to the use of thy Ministry upon thy former Orders; but some persons, perhaps thy Friends, perhaps of chief note in the Parish, perhaps such as live up according to their knowledge, and indeed fear God, do think in their consciences that you are not such a Minister as you should be, unless you have Orders from the Bishop, and whilst their consciences are such, they scruple really, and so haply cannot act in Faith, to join with you in some Ordinances, as the Sicrament, and the like. Here are they distressed: They may not neglect their duty, and yet if they do it while they doubt it unlawful to partake from you, they sin, because it is not in Faith. Now if by thy yielding to this matter, thou canst bring satisfaction to their consciences, and so gain them herein, why is not this end such as is warrantable for thy submission? Nay if thou wilt not do it, why may they not say Now walkest thou not charitably that seekest only thy own and not thy people's satisfaction. Even as I (says the apostle) please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many that they may be saved.  
7. An Ordinance which is taken the second time for the same end it was taken rightly at first, is not taken for no end, or for no such end as God hath appointed it unto; for it is taken to the end he hath appointed it. But such is our case in Re-ordination; It is taken for a solemn allowance or approbation of our Ministry, the recommending us to God's grace for our work, the free passage of the Gospel; And where the ends are repetible (as in preaching, praying, administering the Sacrament) and made necessary to be repeated, the means must be repetible, and repeated also. I do therefore deny his argument, which is founded still on that only, that the ministerial power is conferred by orders, and that that is the the only proper end thereof, which is but a supposition. Whereas then he asks his friend, whether the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Apostle speaks of, was conveyed to him in his first Orders, and tells us thereupon, this is ludere cum sacris, to have the Bishop and his Chaplains pray that he may now receive that gift; this I take it, is a passage too low for this author; for let him seriously but remind the thing, and it is not like our Church should pass such an escape as to compile a standing prayer for necessary effects, or accounted such; she may say in her ordering, modo imperativo, Take, Receive, the Ministerial power, but she does not pray modo optativo, that it may be given by the same.  
8. As for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then, he mentions, which is spoken of Timothy, there is no man can certainly tell what that Gift is. It may be the miraculous gift of the Holy Ghost given in those times, or some extraordinary talon at least not given to others. It is not unlikely, methinks, that Timothy might be so careful and attentive upon the ordinary work of his proper charge, that the Apostle is fain to put him in mind that he wholly neglect not this. It may be likewise some further degrees only, or the increase of the abilities he had, and so Calvin hath it, Deum cumulasse cum novis donis, vel priora duplicasse. Now if either of these be the sense, as is most obvious, it is nothing for my adversary. It may be also (to serve my Opposer) docendi of ficium as our London Divines, or the Ministerial function, as he supposes it. Let us suppose this then with him (at least till we come to see it more unlikely) yet so long as it is said directly of Timothy to be in him, or given him, by prophecy, that is, so full and express a signification of Gods will (which I have touched in my first sheets) as by Revelation: As the will of the Lord doubtless, and that alone must be the fountain of his officers power, and that being sufficiently signified must be enough to make a man his Minister; the imposition of hands that is mentioned besides, can conduce after this, no otherwise indoed, but by way of solemnisation. And so Mr. Perkins says of the like case, Acts 13. This imposition was rather a confirmation, than a calling.  
9 I remember amongst more impertinent things, that sometimes burdened my thoughts against Re-ordination, there was that text Deut. 12.32. What thing soever I command you, observe to do it, thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it. Unto which, though I had these many reasonings; That this text speaks of those precepts which were exactly commanded by God, but our matter is a rite taken up by the apostles probably of themselves, as is noted at first; That God in Moses Law stood more punctually (we may think) upon the exterual performance then under the Gospel: That the thing we do merely as it is, making no more nor less of it, only we use it over again, and repetition is not addition, in the sense here at least, where it is opposed to diminishing; That the Text forbids doing any other thing then the same God hath commanded (as not to follow the Heathen in their Rites in the verses before) but it forbids not, the doing the same, upon occasion; yet did not all this give full contentment to my mind (being weak) until that instance came into it 2 Chron. 30.31. where we have a special Ordinance of God, the Feast of unleavened bread, which was expressly commanded to be kept seven days, and it is said the whole assembly took counsect, and kept other seven days also. Now unless we shall think that the whole assembly understood not the meaning of that Text, or else did wilfully break it, here is repetition exactly proved no addition to God's Commandment. This Instance therefore I will humbly advance in this place, to the farther lighs and satisfaction of our case. Here is (we see) an appointment of God, one of their three most solemn Feasts; They had no precept nor precedent to repeat is; yet does the whole Assembly consult and approve it, and though they did it of their own heads, and mere good wills, and to the same end only it was instituted, and already performed, yet dare not my Adversary. I hope, accuse them in it of taking an Ordinance in vain, or breach of the third Commandment.  
10. Let us know in the last place, that there are many things, especially in matters of Ceremony only, and Order, wherein an Ordinance or Ordinances may be used, not only without its principal, but without its proper end, in case it be directed to an end of an higher nature and concernment, to the honour of God, and advantage of the Gospel. Thus are those Synodical Rites prescribed, Act. 15.29. Thus Paul keeps the Jews Sabbath, Act. 13.14, 42. Thus James and the Elders advise Paul to conformity to the Law, Act. 21.20. The great command which lies upon him, is to preach, and further the Gospel, 1 Cor. 9.16. The Jews are never able to abide him, if he be against their Ceremonies; Hence does he therefore take their advice, and purifies himself, shaves, vows, etc. Samuel is commanded of God to anoint David; He fears if Saul hear of it he will kill him; upon this he pretends a Sacrifice and does it: Here is an Ordinance of God taken up for an end (we see) quite  to is, yet is it justified by God himself, upon the account of his own Superior command, 1 Sam, 16. The most remarkable instance of all, is the Apostles circumcising Timothy. Act. 16.3. where I will ask, to what end did Paul do this? not I hope to the proper end of that rite, for that were deadly, Gal. 5.3. Col. 2.17. but for the winning the Jews, the satisfying of them (1 Cor. 9.19, 20.) the sake of the Gospel, vers. 23. And this I do for the Gospel's sake. We see then that an Ordinance may be used, and yet not taken in vain, although it be not directed to that end which it is properly appointed to, in the case of Superior command, or overruling reason.  
There is some answer I find essayed to this by this Author, p 76. Circumcision, and these Rites, he counts well, are abolished since the death of Christ, and so I take it are called by the Apostle Ordinances of men, and Rudiments of the world, because held in use by man, when they ceased to be the precepts of God. Now if we should question whether an abolished Rite (or consequently a mere humane Ordinance) might be used without its end, only in order to the propagation of the Gospel, I perceive he would not gainsay it. But Ordination (says he) is not an abolished Ordinance, and to take an Ordinance of God which is in force, and make it serve another end than that to which it is directed by him, this he thinks (I suppose) not justifiable by Timothy's circumcision. To reply, (besides what I have instanced in God's advice to Samuel, which cannot therefore be evil) we must distinguish here between the Rite itself of Ordination, and the Form wherein it is wrapped. For the Rite itself, which is the Ordinance of God, (or rather an Apostolical practice we follow for their example) it is directed to its proper end, when we are Ordained twice, as when we are Ordained once, for we have the assistance of God's spirit implored, or we are commended to the grace of God for our work thereby, as at first, and that is the principal end (not to name another) of this Rite, as it was Primitively used, if we will take the Holy Ghosts own thoughts of it, who hath described the thing clearly but once, and that is thus, Act. 14.26. with Act. 13.2. Yea, let a man only have a call to a new place, and my Adversary himself does fully consent with me in this. For the Form then upon which he stands; It is true, that upon the common supposition, there are words that confer the Ministerial power, (as he speaks) which cannot be directed to that end in our case: But besides, that this is a mistake (those words indeed being to be taken only as words of Investiture and Solemnity not efficacy, that is, declaring, not conferring of power) I say that the form, this Form upon which he so beats, is not the Ordinance of God, but is for certain man's composure or invention, and so a humane Creature, or Ordinance of man; and consequently though it were granted that an Ordinance of God might not be used to any other end, but that to which it is directed by him, yet does our force from these instances remain, because that a mere humane Ordinance or Rite may, and he dare not gainsay it. These Jewish Rites when abolished were Ordinances or Commandments of men, Col. 2.20, 22. and they are so used by the Apostles, I will conclude with the mention to my Reader of a convenient Book at this time, to wit, Mr. Sprint his Cassander Anglicanus, and if he will but apply those Arguments he hath upon this head unto our single case, I believe he will hardly escape unsatisfied from him, who does labour upon this very account to maintain in general, that it is necessary for a Minister to conform to the Ceremonies prescribed in the Church of England, in the case of deprivation. And the Watchman said, If ye will inquire, inquire, return, come.   

SECTION V.  
THus much for the Author's book itself, and I hope I have not barely skimmed over his words, but set myself to bestow my pains upon his substance, where the water sticks with him: And here perhaps some of his Brethren, when they see such a point as this managed in effect with the force only of one Argument throughout, (which therefore I have so solemnly stood upon at once) may be apt to impute it to barrenness, when others perhaps more solid, may take it but as a note of his judgement, that knows so well the very lock where indeed his only strength lies. I proceed to hit Appendix, which he hath more particularly bestowed upon me in his courteous Animadversions; I shall therein humbly take the occasion of supplying further notes as I go the way along with him over my own Papers.  
In the first Section he gins with the kind notice of the occasion that drew me forth on this subject, which I must commit to the Lord, who knows that many times the personal failings of some of his frail Creatures in those things which are perhaps lawful in themselves, and good to others, may procure from him, the leaving them in those perplexities from which they cannot get out again, until they have run the gantilop through those his providences which he hath appointed for them in the way to the shelter of their former quiet, and healing of his mercy.  
I do humbly implore this in the first place, and must take notice at the beginning of some words of my own, where I speak of having made no use of the notions of others, I must except so much light (besides what else may be obvious) as I have In two parenthesis, (p. 33. and p. 83.) which fell in after I had done the rest, yet cannot pass without confession, and crave the Readers ingenuity. I have observed what a little escape sometime (as another would think) Augustine takes notice of himself in his Retractations.  
For passing my judgement on Re-ordination, I laid down as first two distinctions. There are some things (I said) that are indifferent in their nature, so as in some case they may be done, and yet are by Divines indefinitely counted evil. And there is evil which is notional only, or moral evil. That which my Opponent says to this, is only that he quotes Dr. Saunderson, ingenuously intimating from whence I took my first distinction, and not disallowing my second, differs only in his verdict, that he accounts not this thing in the number of such indifferents, (to wit, indifferentia ad unum) but a thing unlawful, and not an imaginary, but moral evil. He does not give us any reason here, pro or con, only passes to the next; but I desire my Reader to note I do not leave the business so, but when I have given in my opinion otherwise, I proceed in my discourse, to lay down the nature of Orders, which I humbly offer as the free and open account for that my judgement. I have been therefore so large upon this before, as I must continue, and seeing this Author opposes nothing, but runs upon the common by as to the contrary, to wit, that Orders do give the Ministerial Authority and Office, which is not, I take it, well understood of those themselves that receive it. I shall seasonably take here into remembrance, those Arguments which the London Divines do offer for this assertion, and if they be answered, my Brethren I suppose will not be seeking to find out any, more likely or solid, from others.  
Their first Argument is this, If Election does not give the essentials of the Ministerial Office, than Ordination doth. I answer. As for those many eminent and learned Divines, besides the Ministers of New England, that do hold Election gives the Ministerial Office, and these worthy judicious Divines of London, that hold Ordination doth it, may I think both fairly part stakes. When the former do say and prove that Ordination is but the confirmation of a man in his Office, not the giving the Office, I like well the liberty of their judgements; but when they have will taken from Orders this which is too high for man to assume, and give it to Election and the people, I understand not with them▪ It is Mr. Perkins I Judge clearly in the right here, who hath told us, Our calling is of God, and the Church's Authority is a Ministry to approve and confirm that call. This I do assent to, in opposition to both of these Learned parties; to wit, that Ordination does not give the power or Office, but is only the confirmation of our call, against the one; and that that call is of our inward call by God, and not so low as the outward only of Election by the people. Ordinationis ritus est talis publica testification quâ vocatis, in conspectu Dei & ipsius nomine, doclaretur esse legitima, & divine, says Chemnetius. Unto which I will add one signal testimony, and that is out of the Confession of the famous Churches of Helvetia, speaking that the Ministerial charge it to be committed to such only as are found skilful in the Law of God, of a blameless life, and to bear a singular affection to the Name of Christ (the three things our Perkins before acurately hath) it follows, which seeing it is the true Election of God, is tightly allowed by the consem of the Church, and by the laying on of the hands of the Priest, Harm. Confess. printed Anglicae Cambridge, 1586.  
Their second Argument is from Tit. 1.5. Ordination does 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they press the word Act. 6.3. I answer this Text Tit. 1.5. is parallel with Act. 14.23. (see Fulk in locum) and in both the word ordained (though the Greek differ) is taken comprehensively, as it includes election, and so in those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom we may appoint, the plural we includes (I think) those whom the Apostles speak to, as well as themselves, and makes for us; for is follows then, Ordination does 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 constituere or make a Minister, as election does, and election as ordination, that is, they do both go to the designation of the person, as in the making Magistrates in Corporate Towns, but the power does flow immediately from the Charter, from Christ's institution.  
The third Argument is from Ro. 10 15. this sending (say they) is missio potestativa, a sending with authority. I answer it is true (compare Jer. 23.21. with it) but this Authoritive mission, is not Ordination. This appears irrefragably by the climax in the Text, themselves have noted, Without calling upon the name of the Lord, no salvation; without faith, no calling upon him; without hearing no faith; without preaching no hearing; and without being sent, no preaching: consequently if by being sent, is meant Ordination, it must follow, without Ordination, no Salvation; which God forbidden, seeing Histories are not wanting to tell us not only of some persons, but people (as I remember) have been converted by private Christians, and scattered Disciples which have not been in orders. see Theodorat lib. c. 14. et c. 23, 24. Peter Martyr disproving the opinion of those that hold Ordination so necessary,  citra eam non posset esse Ministerium in ecclesia, does quote John the Baptist who preached and baptised, and no doubt converted many, and Paul before the 13. of the Acts, and Moses who consecrated Aaron and his sons and offered varia sacraficiorum genera (says he) and had no consecration, Loc Com. De Ec. p. 849.  
The fourth Argument is from 1 Tim. 4.14. This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they say here is Docendi officium, for which they quote those two Texts, Eph. 4.8. Rom. 12.6. Answ. I must confess I myself have been bended to this same conceit upon the score of the last Text; but when I have more narrowly consulted the same, I find that I and they have been quite out. The question is, whether the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be in●er reted Office? And if the Apostle does use it in that sense otherwhere, we shall be apt to believe it so here; if he does not, this belief will sink of its own accord. Now than if we look the first of these quoted Texts, we shall find the word there to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and so is a plain mistake, that concerns not our search. For the other Text then, let us look into it, and we find the Apostle does distinguish the industria between the two words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gifts and Grace, and the one of them, according to the sense there, must signify authority and office, and the other endowments or abilities for the same. Now which of the two words is it that signifies the former? Truly one might think at the first sight it were the first, being ready to read the sense thus, Having gifts— whether prophecy or ministry, etc. making those latter words (which import Office) refer to Gifts: But when we look better, we shall find otherwise, and must read the sense of the words as in their own order they lie, to wit, according to the grace given to us, whether Prophecy or Ministry, etc. And so these latter words refer indeed to the word Grace, which is the truth. That this may appear, let us know, that Grace property is God's favour in general, and the word therefore is put in Scripture usually for several effect; of it. Remission of Sin and Reconciliation is one effect of his favour, and that is called Grace; The internal habits infused, Faith, Repentance, Love, etc. are effects of his favour, and they are called Grace; The Gospel is an effect of his favour, and that is called Grace, the Grace of God that bringeth Salvation to all men. So likewise is the putting a person into that Dignity to be one of his Ministry, an effect of his favour (and very great favour, if we can prise and use it right) and therefore the Office and authority of our Ministry is called Grace also, and so it is called Grace in the Text. I know not indeed of any that have said this before me, but I am confident I am in the right, as my eye sees, when the Sun shines. We will compare it with one or two Texts elsewhere, and no man shall be able to deny it. See Rom. 15.15, 16. I put you in mind because of the grace which is given to me of God, that I should be a Minister, etc. So Gal. 1.15, 16. with Gal. 2.9. And in the same Chapter here, Rom. 12. v. 3. I say, through the grace of God given to me, to every one of you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought. What is that Grace there? but according to the authority I have as a Minister to rebuke and admonish such. And when we are come so nigh, no wonder if at the next breath as it were, the Apostle uses the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same sense, and consequently the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be the more certainly and strictly restrained to its proper sense, as distinguished here-from; so that the meaning of these words are, Having endowments varying according to the office when 'em he hath put us, let him that exhorteth wait on his exhorting, and he that teacheth on teaching, etc. I conclude this grand Objection with a double Note (that I may be sure to run it quite through while I have it under my P●n, to trouble me no more as it hath done) 1. That the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then, being not used elsewhere in any sense, but that written is ●eculiar to it; as when we say gifts of healing (See 1 Cor. 12. where it is often iterated) we are not lightly to believe that it should be taken in a forced sense here without we had some support for it. 2. That forasmuch as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the general word put for several of its effects in Scripture, and this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is indeed one special effect in particular among them, distinguished by the Apostle himself from the rest, to wit, Qualification or Abilities (whether ordinary or extraordinary) for ones office, as it is never taken our of its proper sense elsewhere, so, for aught I know, it may not, without spraining the word quite, and putting its right foot out of joint.  
The last argument is from the great solemnity of the Ordinance, the eminency of the persons Ordaining, and the care they are to take in it: 1 Tim. 5.22. I answer, these particulars and the like, when they have enlarged them, may serve well to keep up the due credit there ought to be upon this solemn approbation of our Ministry by our Church Rulers, which, as God requires of them, lest unworthy persons should pretend his call and intrude; So does he of us (if any of us have indeed his call) both for the benefit or blessing of those Public Prayers which we do humbly expect as one express end of this Rite, and also for the procuring us our reception in the Church, which is another, a Right whereunto is derived to us by the same. I desire my Reader to mark this once for all, as a matter of more weight than haply he thinks of; It is not only that a man is hereby received as a Minister (which he was not before) but he hath hereby a right conferred on him to be received as such (which he was not to be before) by the Church in the free use of his Ministry, and the people, that the command of God does take hold on them hereupon, to render that honour and obedience which is du● to him in his name, He that receiveth you receiveth me. Which when it comes to be weighed, will I hope be accounted a very sufficiently competent end of man's solemnity. And thus much this argument of these my Reverend Fathers and Brethren of 0532 0 London may help to maintain, but otherwise I suppose it proves nothing; Of whom therefore I humbly take my leave, craving their pardon, that when I have found naught here, to glean upon the Vine of my proper Opposer, I have turned back my hand as a grape gatherer into their Basket.   

SECTION VI.  
IN my second Section, After other Propositions for the deciding this matter, I distinguish between what Ordination is required for the setting apart a man to the Office of a Minister in the sight of God (Let me add, and give him the Right of reception according to Scripture with men) and what is requisite to the actual making him received as a Minister, and give him authority or full repute to exercise that office in the Church or place where he shall be called; or more shor●, between the Ministry, and use of that Ministry in the English Church: Ordination now I said by Presbytery only suffices to the one, b●t re-ordination by the Bishop is required to the other. I will illustrate it by an instance, Even as the anointing of David by Samuel in the House of Jesse was sufficient to set him apart to be the Lords anointed, or to make him King before God, yet must he be anointed or inaugurated again in Hebron, to declare him King, and give him, acceptation with the People: 1 Sam. 16.11. with 2 Sam. 2.4.  
Let me note here, when I say Ordination does set a man apart for the Ministry, I mean not so as that it gives it him. I cannot but conceive that a man's Inward call must needs give him his Ministry, the jns or faculty, before God, as his Outward gives it him before men, that is, causes it to be received by them; and that there is consequently an Internal separation, when a man upon acknowledgement to God of his gifts, does seriously dedicate himself to this service before him, as an Outward and solemn by Ordination; which whether it be Presbyterial of Episcopal it is all alike as to what the word requires, but is not accepted alike in our present Church, which stands upon her proper form and mode of Government.  
I will enlarge a little here. There is a Fundamental right as Presbyterians say, and I believe, in every Minister to Ordain others, according to that rule, which is dignified by a great Pen, Ordinis est conferre ordines. Nevertheless when the Church came to see it good, for the avoiding of faction, and keeping peace, to give a pre-eminence to the Bishop above the Presbyter, there is no reason, but the Presbyter, upon consent, might as to the actual exercise hereof, de jure suo cedere, so as to Ordain none without the Bishop, which coming more and more into debate, it is no wonder if you begin at the second Canon of the Apostles, and go over all the Councils and Fathers, and find this still the allowed prerogative of the Bishop to have the power of Ordination, according to that which is so well known of Cassander. Convenit inter omnes on Apostolorum aetate inter Episcopos & Presbyteros nullum discrimen fuisse, sed postmodum Schismatis evitandi causâ, Episcopum Presbyteris fuisse praepositum, cut chirotonia, id est ordinandi potestas concessa est. Now forasmuch as the authority of Councils, or Fathers, is received or not received of particular Churches, according to their proper concernments and complexion; As Presbytery hath served herself of the Scripture, to the neglect hereof, It cannot be expected but Episcopacy should serve her turn likewise of Antiquity; which being added to present power, must needs discountenance other Orders, and if they come once not to be received and owned, the ground is laid for their refreshment or iteration.  
I remember in the Council of N●ce we have this Canon, Can. 17. Si quis ausus fuerit aliquem qui ad alterum pertinet ordinare in sua ecclesia cum non habeat consensum Episcopi ipsius, à quo recessit Clericus, irrita erit hujusmodiordinatio. Let me ask here any Divine, Presbyterian or Episcopal, Suppose a man ordained by another Bishop than his own, and without his leave, is that man truly ordained or no? There are none in our days will deny it, and yet according to these Canons such a man's Ordination was null, and consequently if he would enjoy the use of his Ministry under his Bishop he must be re-ordained. Now let any learned man tell me how such Ministers in this case could submit to that Canon in those days (which no doubt but most did submit to, seeing that Council was so authentic in the word) and then will our case be also opened and justified to my hands. In short, it is sufficient for the Church to receive a man as a Minister, that is Ordained only by the Presbytery, as of old by any Bishop as their own, according to Scripture, which knows no difference between Bishop and Bishop, or Bishop and Presbyter in this case, but it would and will not serve according to Ecclesiastical constitution.  
Let us now see what my Opposer says here, and it is the same only he hath every where. If the Presbyterial ordination leave a man not capable of having any thing conferred on him but only the free use of his Ministry in the English Church, why will he submit to such a form as was purposely instituted to confer the very Ministry itself? why are such prayers put up to God as suppose him to be no Minister? This is answered already, and we see the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same still.  
There is no form to be conceived such, as to confer the Ministry itself unto any, or to put up Prayers, that a man may be made a Minister, as he conjectures and speaks, p. 68 I do therefore produce him the very words of this form, to serve my turn. Take thou authority to preach the Word, and minister the Sacraments where thou shalt be appointed; which are so apt as if they w●re studied to ordain a man, not to the Office, but to the Work only of his place: Hereunto he candidly gainsays nothing, only tells us there are more words used than these, to wit, Receive the Holy Ghost, whose sins ye remit, etc. unto which words in particular, and the form in general, I have spoken at large at first: What I must say over again to answer him as I go along, is; Our Ordainers must not be looked upon according to this Author, as Creators of the Ministerial power, which is given alone by Jesus Christ, but as the signifiers and approvers of his Will and Grant. There is indeed one grand Warrant (I must say) Commission or Charter from Christ in general, empowring them who are qualified, as his word describes, to be his Ministers. The Ordainers now are to inquire whether a person have these qualifications, that is, as it were, whether he be in the Commission, and then if he be found there, what they do besides, is but the declaring this, by the solemnity. The Commission then or Ministry itself is from our Lord, and Orders do but give the same its free passage in the Church where a man is. Now this passage is hindered by the change of the times, and therefore, the Right Reverend (as he speaks) is troubled to remove this hindrance, and so, not to do only what is already done. He is troubled, not to make a man again a Minister of Christ, but a Canonical Minister (if you will) of our Church, that is, to make him pass for such according to their Laws and Canons, when else he cannot pass, and therefore is this also done by that form so prescribed, the words whereof, which stick, we are to conceive with all forms of Orders else must be interpreted only, as I have said, to be declarative, not operative of our power, by way of investiture, possession, or solemnisation. Even as it is in the inauguration of Princes, which as I have but now instanced in David above, and Solomon before, may be valid at first, and yet done over again, to establish them more formally or legally amongst their people.  
I will take a little liberty here of more words. Ordination I count is the confirmation, declaration, and solemn allowance of a man's Ministry by our chief Pastors and Rulers, that may give us the value and reception as Ministers to all intents in the Church, particularly for the execution of our charge where we are. Now there being none according to the form of our English Church and Nation, of authority to do this but the Bishops, though our former Orders have been sufficient hitherto, and are yet good as to our Right, yet growing insufficient (through this change) or enervate as to the effect, the renewal of them according to the present Polity (unless there be some mysterious danger in submitting at all hereto) does become expedient to us, and obliging; and obliging (without some other greater reason) because expedient to us, for the sake of the Gospel.  
To advance this yet farther: There be some learned men do give much here to the Magistrate. Grotius (says Mr. Baxter) commendeth the saying of Musculus, that would have no Minister question his Call, that being qualified, hath the Christian Magistrates Commission. I observe Grotius himself does allow Confirmation of a Minister, distinctly to the Magistrate; and Dr. Seaman hath quoted Gerrhard to the same purpose; I might (I think add something out of Peter Martyr, Chemnitius, and most others. Now if these great men held that Ordination made a Minister, the Magistrate could have no part assigned him at all about that business; but if Ordination only declares a man's Ministry; If it be Christ alone gives us our Office, and man only procures us an outward Authority for repute and reception as Ministers in the Church where we are called (which I take it is true) then as I do not doubt, but that upon supposition there were no Ministers in a place to ordain, the Magistrates allowance is good: So do I propose it to be considered, whether the Magistrates appointing who shall be Ordainers, Presbyters, or Bishops, may not still determine the validity by either in the Church where he is Supreme? and consequently, though our Orders before were of force, now the pleasure of our Lawgivers is otherwise, whether we may not be re-ordained upon that accourt? This l●o●er, because there may be some consciences perhaps that can act upon such a ground as this, when they cannot otherwise, though I intent to lay no further stress upon it.  
I return then to my Opposer, who (p. 67 68) is hunting some of my ex●ressions, but should do well to take the substance with them. I am in my last Proposition, there proposing such Scriptures which concern the fift Commandment, Our Superiors are to be obeyed in all things, 1 Pet 2.13. Col. ●. 22. This thing is what they require, and impose u●on us: and that I take therefore to be a plain ground for our submission. There is a late book of some tender and learned Divines, concerning the interest of words in prayer, who when they have told us, p. 72. that what we call the Church of England, is nothing else than a company of men by a Civil Power made Bishops, and called to advise the State in things concerning Religion, do add, p. 73. We again say, far be it from us to oppose Civil Authority, either exercised by Lay-people, or Ecclesiastical persons. We further s●y, we are bound to obey the Civil magistrate in all things; in things lawful actually, in things unlawful by suffering. I do note this passage as that which may do good to many, and tend to healing, when the rest of that book may make them but very sore; to wit, that though they should have received such prejudicated and hard thoughts of the Government by Bishops, as if they were anti-C●ristian, against their Covenant, or the like, yet may they see here, how, or under what notion they may obey them for all that; to wit, as the King is Supreme both in causes Ecclesiastical and Civil, the Bishops, I perceive, are taken with them for Magistrates appointed under him in the one, as the Judges & Justices are in the other, & so they allow obedience to them, is to other Superiors, so long as they require only things lawful; and that our matter in hand is such, it suffices I count) that it is not where forbidden in the light of Nature or Scripture, directly or consequentially, and therefore it is lawful, for which I have quoted that known Text, Where there is no Law, there is no transgression. In his rebus (says Austin) the qu bus nihil certi statuit Scriptura, instituta majorum pro lege tenenda sunt. That which can be supposed to be replied to this, is only, that it is like the Law forbids the repetition of such an Ordinance, and therefore I do clear this by other instances.  
The first was of Marriage, which hath been ordinarily by the Magistrate and the Minister both in these times. I m● se●f have had a comple come to me, after they were long married, and had a child, and I made no question to marry them again, for the satisfaction of their consciences. The like apprehensions therefore I have perceived in me about this matter. I see indeed some others are ready to question perhaps, whether such who have done thus, have done lawfully; but why not, I pray, as well as contract themselves, and give their mutual consent fi●st, and be married after? Such a consent, de proesenti, no doubt does pondre fundamentum relation it, so that they are Man and Wife coram Deo thereby; and what does the solemnity after but declare them so coram hominibus, and give them that account legally in the world: Now if this testification be not sufficient, but men will account them as unmarried, unless it be by a Minister; nay, suppose the Laws of any place would not allow it otherwise, who would advise but they should do it again? Nay, this is not enough; who would advise that they rather part quite, leave one another, and be no more Man and Wife, rather than be married again? Such is the case and question of ours in hand, for aught I can see, and no less, in this matter of Re-ordination. For the form he objects: I answer, the impropriety of some words in s●ch a case, as to the one, will not argue and infer the same, I hope, altogether in the other; whereof it suffices that I have spoken before already.  
A second instance I have, is of the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy: These are taken at our Degrees, at our Orders, and upon particular occasions, as the Law and Magistrate requires; and yet cid I never hear any plead against this, that it would be taking an Ordinance in vain. Holy Bradford the Martyr tells his Judges, that he had taken the same Oath against the Pope six times: Unto this my Opponent says nothing and indeed nothing can be said. If that only argument of his varied in words be good, that a man cannot be Ordained twice, because the end of Ordination is attained as one Administration, than a man may not have either of these Oaths twice administered to him, because the end (to wit, the obliging a man to the contents: is attained at once; and so the Laws and Magistrate that require this on sundry occasions, do require the taking Gods Name in vain. Let my Author come off here if he can. The swearing by God's Name we know is a solemn Ordinance, & part of God's Worshi; Deut. 10.20. and if this may be repeated upon the forms of Courts, be order of the Law, & command of our Superiors; let this be satisfaction likewise to us, that what is in vain, as to one end is not so to another; that what is in vain, in regard of ones self, is not in vain in regard of our obedience, or satisfaction of others.  
A third instance is of the Lords Prayer, which we have appointed in he Liturgy to be twice used in one Service. This he dare not condemn simply, for if he did there is a Text Mar. 14.39. would justify i●: But he says, In the Lord's Prayer there are things which every one had need to have renewed, and hence it is we use it often. Why so is the Grace and Blessing of God with and upon us for our work, which we pray for in our Orders, that which is continually to be renewed, and consequently, what we may pray for again: and as for our praying to be made Ministers, it is but a fond imagination.  
For what I allege, that the Scripture speaks of one Baptism, I would not have this ingenuous Author think I place any argument in it, only so far as concerns Authority: He knows (I suppose) that Divines ordinarily, Ancients and neoterics, for want of some express Text against iteration of Baptism (though the Unity there be indeed specifical, not numerical) do plead those words One Baptism, when yet they have not yet so much as this to plead here, One Ordination.  
For the consent of Chemnitius and Doctor Balwin, whom I quote in the close of this Section, my Antagonist methinks (p. 77.) is hardly fair, or kind to me in it; not fair, because the Doctor does lay down his arguments to prove a man's former Orders valid, so that he is not to think him in doubt thereof, which is his answer; not kind, because when he accounts the Authorities I have for me to be so few (though he considers not, I think, our Divines frequent judgement of Ananias imposition of han is upon Paul in the way) and should therefore methinks at least remember what Solomon bids, Rob not the poor, because he is poor, Pro. 22.22. he cannot yet find in his heart to leave me so much as one only; as if, when charity believeth all things, a denvieth not, he would, with a neglect of Christ's Precept towards me, fulfil his words by me: And from him that hath not, shall be taken away even that which he hath.   

SECT. VII.  
IN my third Section, I come to Objections. My first is from Scandal, which I have said down as it most touched me: I shall speak here of this head, which is become so needful, more at large.  
Scandal, I humbly conceive, may be divided into that which tends only to displeasure, or that which tends unto sin.  
For scandal of displeasure, there are, I will account, two cases.  

1. When a man doth that thing, whereby, or whereat another is angry only, or distasted, so that he hath the less esteem or kindness for him, and perhaps speaks evil of him for it, and that is all. In this case, I suppose, though a man is not willingly to offend any at all, yet as to the main here, he is to walk uprightly with God, and his own Conscience, and not to be much troubled how others do take it (1 Cor. 10.30. but rather account this a part of that Lesson that Christ teaches us, to wit, of self-denial, and the Light of Nature likewise, Ne te quaesiveris extra. Nay, though a man should haply hereupon go from my Ministry to another, I should but be apt only to think he might profit better there. It is not this passive, but active Scandal (though I choose not to use School-terms) which makes us culpable in lawful things. Again, when a thing is scandalous, per se, it must be avoided, but when it is so per accidens only, the greater accidents must weigh down the less.  
2. When a man doth that thing whereby his Brethren are grieved, they account it to be amiss, and of ill consequence, and so are prously afflicted at it. In this case, a man (I judge) is to be much more tender and wary, so that if the matter be only of private concernment, he should lose very much rather, and non nisi paerè intolerabili difficultate (to use the words of De Valentia, this Author hath quoted in season) be brought to do it: But if the matter be of public concernment, to wit, in the commands of the Magistrate, or Church-Order, I cannot think that the grief of a Brother can be equal in the Scales with the offending the Magistrate, and breaking peace, if there be no more indeed in it, than that he is grieved. I am not convinced yet, that any Scandal (as men call it) that tends only to displeasure, whether of anger or grief, is scandalising my Brother in Scripture sense, upon which there is laid such stress as there is: That one bare word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 14.15. is sit methinks to be interpreted by the context and scope of the other words that go along with it.   
There is, then in the next place, that Scandal which tendeth to sin (Scandalum activum) which is Scandal indeed, in the sense of God's Word, and the Schools, to wit, such an act in things evil or indifferent, as does praebere alteri occasionem ruinae. Of this, I judge, there are mainly three cases in Scripture.  

1. When a man doth that, which opens the Mouth of wicked men against the Ways of God, and causeth them to blaspheme, vent their malice, or the like; In this case the distinction of Scandalum datum, and acceptum, I think, does properly take place. Let a man take heed here how he gives occasion. This will highly aggravate an evil, Ro. 2.24. enough to break a David's bones; Woe be to him by whom the offence cometh. But if the occasion be only taken, Jesus Christ hath taught us by his example, toward the Paarisees, (which therefore by Divines is called Scandalum Pharisaeorum) what reckoning we are to make hereof; who when he was told, they were offended at him, answered thus, Let them alone. And here also may that of Tertullian be mentioned, Scandalum, ni fal●o●, non bonae rei, sed malae est exemplum, aedificans ad delictum. Bonae res neminem scandalizant nisi malam mentem. De Virg, Vel. Lib.  
2. When a man doth that, whereby some that are new Coverts or weak Christians, are so unable to bear, that it turns them from their profession. It is probable, that this is that chief matter the Scripture does intent, when it takes such special care against Scandal. Thus happily our Saviour words are to be construed, when he speaks so dreadfully of scandalising any of his little ones, Matth. 18.7. Suppose it by Persecucution, or otherwise. Thus perhaps is that great case in the Epistles to be understood, concerning the weak Jews, who were so held by the Law to their Ceremonies, and Meats, that they were ready to leave the Gospel, rather than see them trespassed; from whence we may conjecture the sense of such expressions, For Meat destroy not the Work of God; Suppose it the work of Conversion, begun in such a person, and Destroy not him with thy Meat for whom Christ died. Hooker I remember, a man of strong mind, rests himself alone in that apprehension. In this case I suppose there is none, but will judge that Charity (so highly concerned) which is the end of God's Commandments, must overrule any command of man, so that we must suffer any thing in the Outward man, rather than work the eternal loss of our Brothers Soul. The worst the Magistrate can do, will hardly amount to so much as to have a Millstone tied about the neck, and be thrown into the Sea, but this were certainly more eligible (unless Christ's own words will not go) than the other.  
3. When a man acts in indifferent things, whereof he being instructed, or having knowledge, another by his example is induced to do the same, having not that knowledge, and so sins. And this may be either when the thing as to the account upon which he acts is sin indeed, as in the 1 Cor. 8. where the Apostle says, Some with Conscience of the Idol, cat it as a thing offared to an Idol, we may understand it (comparing it with 1 Cor. 10.) that some of these Corinth's being but new converted, had hankering thoughts yet towards their Idol, as the Jews towards their abolished Rites, so that when they saw any others eating of those Meats in those Temples, upon the account the Idol was nothing, they upon the account of that fear and worship they were formerly wont to give them, did eat after their pattern, and so eating, it was flat Idolatry: Or when the thing is evil only, or sin because they think it so to be▪ To him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean as in the ordinary case about Days and Meats, and those Rites in question, where a Weak Brother (as we may conjecture the case to be) seeing one eat what is lawful for him, because his Conscience is instructed, follows him, and eats too, though it be with a Doubting and resisting Conscience, and so falls into sin. And this is that Scandal Dr. Hammond says (in his tract of Scandal) the Apostle intends Ro. 14. in the whole context, v. 13. to the end, So that we may do nothing (says he) though to us never so lawful, which we have reason to fear, that another who thinks it unlawful, may yet without sat is fying his Conscience be likely to do after us. In this case upon my farthest thoughts (that have been apt heretofore to take it up in a huddle, that Scandal of Brethren weighs light to the command of Authority, as some Doctors speak) I am convinced now at the present of these two things, hath that the Magistrate cannot command m● to use a thing which will scandalise my Brother in this sense, which the Scripture does so stand upon, as to lay down a negative Chapter about the same; and that if he do, I break not the fist Commandment, to forbear doing the thing, until I see how I may avoid the Scandal if I do it; The reasons are, 

1. Because of the Superior command; the Scripture says, do it not, Lay not a stumbling block in the way, for thy Brother to fall, and God is to be obeyed before Man.  
2. Because the Apostle tells us expressly, that to sin against our weak. Brother, so as to wound his Conscience, is to sin against Christ, 1 Cor. 8.12. and no Law can command me to sin against the Lord.  
3. Because Humane Laws can bind only the Outward man, and not the Conscience, (to wit, immediatè, ratione consequentiae, etc.) and therefore so long as I do it not out of contempt or neglect of him, but in Conscience to Christ, and tenderness to my Brother, I am to conceive it is his pleasure (if a good man) I should forbear till it may be safe, and it not, I must suffer his will, rather than do it.     
And here we are cast upon that point, which is so sore and nearly concerning all of us at this season, in regard of our present impositions that are fallen, or falling now upon us. The worthy D. before mentioned, had once given me some ease, in a notion of his, upon 1 Cor. 8. which since I have read this Tract mentioned, I find, serves me not; but how light soever he may male of other Scandal (which is but called so) in comparison of public Authority; Yet as for Scandal in this sense, which he makes the whole drift of one place (as I have said) there is none can lay more weight upon me in it, than he, so that I must confess my own Conscience not to be tender only, but even as I may say, raw in this case.  
As for my Adversary, I must embrace him for his kindness and worthiness, who hath not brought here the rough hand of Mars, but of a Physician, where it is need, and offers his relief, and that is from two learned Authors he quots, 

1. That Scandals are not culpable, where there is not some moral reason in them.  
2. That when a thing cannot be forborn, sine maxima aliqua difficultate, the Law of Scandal binds not.   This indeed is some Sugar to the wound, but the Salve is behind, where he add, He may do well to weigh this, whether he endeavoured first to sa isfy his Brethren about him, for many things may be lawfully done, after we have given a reason and laboured to prevent stumbling, which could not else be done without sin.  
These words of his though they be a rebuke to me, I accept thankfully, and that not only because I am a man, that when I maintain my subject, am yet ready to acknowledge my fairings, and crave God's mercy, but also because I take this item to be that which does afford us the only true and substantial solution, unto this so deeply touchy and sore objection of scandal; and that is, it must be answered by practice; to wit, the argument from Scandal against indifferent things enjoined, let it be pressed as sharp as it can, does not destroy the action, and void the duty, but infers circumspection: My meaning is, that it follows not, that therefore the thing may not be done at all, but that there is care and prudence to be used, that the Scandal be avoided in the doing, and the act forborn (and that, only) in the mean season.  
In the instance of the Apostle about meats, although he will have a man carefully abstain, when he knows or is told that some are by, who are like to be stumbled at it, yet when he knows it not, or is not told so, he bids him eat with a free spirit, and without making any question; for the earth is the Lords, and the fullness thereof: From whence I shall gather, that when a man hath considered the action he is about (suppose it required of his Superiors, and that he is satisfied of the lawfulness of it) an 〈◊〉 hath taken that care as to satisfy all he can think are like to be stumbled at it, so that his Conscience does sincerely tell him the Coasts are now clear to his appearing, to wit, that there are none he knows likely to be induced to the same (or something else thereby) against their Consciences; that is, led to sin by it (for if it be only that some are like to be displeased, obedience to Governors overrules that) then may he act freely, and account himself quit from this scruple.  
Let me instance in a late needful matter of this season: Suppose a man thought it best for the condition of his people, at the interim, to read the Book of Common-Prayer, and had still the liberty of his Majesty's Declaration, let it be for as little while as it will: This scruple only sticks with him; others hearing hereof (thinks he) may follow my example, and if they do what I do without my reasons and grounds, they may go beyond their Conscience, and so sin. Hereupon than he openly declares, that whereas he uses Common Prayer, and perhaps does gratify his people's desires in any of the Offices o● it, th●● yet he still does it only according to the liberty vouchsafed in the Gracious Declaration. Now if any of his Brethren, upon the relation hereof follows him, he shall not sin against his Conscience, because the liberty his Majesty's Declaration gives him, is to do it only according to his Conscience. Again; Suppose another hath some of his People, that question farther, not only his reading, but their hearing, they think it sin to join with him; if he shall read it then, he fears (and justly) that he shall lay a stumbling block in their way, and so may wound their Consciences. Hereupon, he goes to every one of these parties privately, and satisfies them of the lawfulness of what he does, and perhaps, for their sakes, will omit certain passages which they cannot bear; and if there remains but one or two haply unsatisfied, he wishes them to lay down their Erroneous Conscience as soon as they can; but in the mean time, if they cannot, (seeing it does ligare, though not obligare (as Divines speak) and they must not go against it) to forbear coming in a while till the Psalm; and so is the Scandal obviated, as to them, and he left free as to others, to the general edification.  
I am here led by the way to answer one Objection concerning this Common Prayer, because I perceive it does begin to sink upon ●●ens Consciences, and that is this only, that it is (they say) taken out of the Mass: The scruple is thus urged. The Apostle, 1 Cor. 10.28. determines, that in case our Brother saith unto us, This hath been offered to an Idol, we must not eat for his sake that shown it. Here the case is the like; our Brethren tell us, such and such parts of the Common-Prayer ●●ve been offered in Idolatrous Service, for they are in the Mass, therefore we may not use it for their sakes that are Scandaled at it: How the Scandal is to be carefully avoided, I have said, that is, by practice: But for the Argument, I answer, not barely that the Scriptures are in the Mass, because they will say, Purely Divine Institution is not capable of defilement: Nor only will I instance in the Creed, a pure Humane Composition; and yet what heart can serve him, to think because that form is used in the Mass, it is so defiled, that it cannot be used in our Church? But directly I must say, that there is here a clear mistake (for God forbidden it should be any thing else) It follows not, because such and such prayers and passages a●● in the Mass, that therefore a Brother may say, This is offered in an Idolatrous Service, because while the Mass is saying, only in those prayers, and passages, or Confession of Faith (which are innocent and honest things in themselves, and so acknowledged) it is not an Idolatrous Service (I say all that while it is not) but such a Service as God requires of us, and them, and a●l others, which is the invocation and acknowledgement of his holy Name, according to the Scriptures and his own Commandment. If this Argument were used against the Ceremony of bowing towards the Communion Table, it might haply come close. That Act of Adoration certainly is given by the Papists to the Bread which they believe to be Christ himself, so that a Brother may say here truly, This is offered to an Idol. The Apostle than says, Do it not for his sake. One may say, I do it only as the Ancients, Bowing toward the East, in token of Christ's Coming; Not to the Altar, as the Papists, in token of his Presence there. But this I doubt will not serve, because it is not to the point; The point in earnest lies not upon thy Conscience, but on the Conscience of him that shows it. The strong Christian might say as well, he knew that an Idol was nothing, and had his account to himself, yet must not he eat for Conscience sake; What Conscience? Why, not his own, but the others, v. 29. to wit, that are scandaled at it. Whether this can be answered (I confess) I know not; But for Common-Prayer only, if the strong Christian I account, could have said to his Brother, You are mistaken Sir, you have been told false, this meat was not offered to an Idol, there had been an end between them; So is the answer in this matter.  
To return to our particular point of Re-ordination We may consider, a man may perhaps in the first place avoid the Scandal by doing it in private, that none know of it; If not so, those that are capable to be scandalised in this sense we speak of, are but our fellows in the Ministry, and we are not ordinarily to suppose them as weak Brethren, but to have knowledge; if they have not, there is a good space likely between thy Ordination and theirs, that they may inform themselves, which we may believe of them, and so the fear be the less, that they should be wounded by us; However, I will suppose that a man does consider whether there be any about him like herein to follow his example; As for such as speak against him for it, or give him ill words, he passes; but as for such as approve it, and are pleased with him, as glad perhaps to be born ●ut to do the same, these are the men to be feared, and thereupon he goes to them, and imparts his grounds or accountant on which he acts (or hath acted) that if they are not satisfied with the same, they may forbear, and if they do follow him; he may have reason to judge that they do it with the like Conscience as to the lawfulness of it, as he hath, and then is the Objection of Scandal prevented, which could not else perhaps be answered; and what the most learned man cannot do with his parts, the prudent may do with his pains, and the humble heart go beyond the best head in the world.  
And here for the discharge of my own Soul, in reference to such who may be induced by me unto this thing, I must humbly lay two charges upon them; The first is, that they do throughly ponder the Book of Orders, and every thing besides, that will be required of them, beforehand, and if they be not persuaded in their minds that it is lawful for them, let them not do i● (I charge them) for the worl●; I will not be guilty of wounding their Souls, but tell them, if they do it and doubt, if they act not in faith, it is sin unto them, that is sure. The second than is, if they be satisfied themselves, that yet, if they do but imagine any of their Brethren like to follow them, wi●h a Conscience unsatisfied, they take special care to prevent it, which else doth put in a bar to them, whereas if they go to them, and satisfy them with their reasons, or else warn them to forbear, so that they understand from them that they are not like to do it for their example till satisfied, the passage is open; And let them then be sure they have a sincere heart in the main, I humbly hope as they act in faith, so they may with co●fort an● success. And the Priest said unto them, go in peace; befo●● the Lord is your way wherein you go.   

SECTION VIII.  
IN my fourth Section, I come to a second Objection. Ordination is that which, according to Divines, does give the Ministerial Offices; This is the end, they account hereof; Now when a man is a Minister already there is not this end, and consequently the Ordinance taken in vain. Thus have I laid it down, and my Answer to it is this, There is more ends than one in Ordination, as in Baptism, and other Institutions. It is not necessary to the using an Ordinance, that a man be capable of all its ends, but of some right end of the same. We have had the Objection in hand before, as the main Argument of this Author's Book, and there you have therefore my full and complete Answer to it. That which I have to do here, is only the maintaining this present Solution. Unto which then, thus he replies, We grant this, but then a man must take it in such a form of words, as is expressive only of that end whereof he is capable. As in Aged Marriage, the Prayer for Issue must not be used.— But let this Gentleman hold a little, for he goes on upon a supposal, that in our Orders there are Prayers put up for us, to be made Ministers. (to use his own words, p. 68) which if it were true, it would indeed be just alike with us here, as to pray for the blessing of Children, upon a couple that are passed it. But he may soon know the Church hath no such odd Prayer, inconsistent with the reason of the form itself. He adds, One that is ordained already, and so a Minister, may be ordained again in order to the free exercise of his Ministry, but not ordained with that Ordination, whose chief end it to give the Ministerial Commission and Authority. Unto this, as his whole strength, I have spoken at first in my two generals, about the form, and supposition of the nature of Orders. That I have now to take notice of, and cannot pass, without injury both to ingenuity and myself, is the Candour and Integrity of my Adversary. He is pleased to grant me here the Question I dispute for: My Question is, Whether and how a Minister ordained, by the Presbytery, may take Ordination also by the Bishop? and I determine it, though he cannot be ordained again to his Ministry, he may as to the free use of it in the English Church. Now my Adversary does directly yield this; I desire. If my Brethren to see and own it. Nevertheless in th● question included, how this may be done, he is a ●i●tle more ●●iff than I am. He supposes the form that is used, is impro●er to our case; I have therefore proposed my Desire (p. 92 in my sheets) for another; Thus we agree still, but then w● part here; if this cannot be had, he thinks the substance unlawful for the shadows sake, and I am apt to think that for the substance sake, being lawful, the shadow may be born, if indeed it cannot be helped. I proceed, The common and general and of Baptism, was for remission of sins, yet was Jesus Christ baptised, who was not capable of that end. He answers; Let Mr. H. if he can prove that in the Baptism of Christ, any words were used by John, expressive of such an end, as Christ was not capable of: But what a poor come off is this, when he hath spoken so like a Scholar, and judicious man besides? That Christ was baptised, we know; That Baptism was for remission of sins, whereof Christ was uncapable, we know likewise, and consequently, that an Ordinance may be used by a man who is not capable of its grand end, but some other, is proved; But with what form of words (whether any or none) John baptised Jesus with, neither I nor he do know. I argue then from what I know; This Author answers in what he does not know, and that is, very near, he knows not what to answer.  
And here I find next, he hath made a great skip; for when I have said, there are more ends than one in Orders, I open myself. Ordination gives a man his Commission (according to others) and installs him in it; it makes a man a Minister, and also signifies him to be such before men; it gives the Office, and also makes him received at such in the Church where he is sent. It is true, a man who is ordained already, is not capable of the one end, but he is of the other: He that was a Minister before, cannot be made so now, as to have the Office given him, but he may have the same Office declared or signified, I hope, more than once (as in the Inauguration of Princes) when there is need for the better execution thereof, and acceptation with the people. This my Opponent should not have pasied, as also that I am wary still of the first of these ends, to say I do suppose it only, and not grant it: It may suffice, that I have in my first work maintained my question, notwithstanding that supposition, without which, many of my Brethren perhaps would scarce have received it into their thoughts to digest it: But now the light I will conceive, may have broken in at lest something upon their minds through the crannies I have there, I may follow the same here more openly, and if this Supposition also belaid aside, there is no remora jest in the business.  
But to follow him where he please, he produces after this my chief Instance, which is such (I must confess) that I dare a●one venture all my whole Cause upon it. Paul is made a Minister by Christ himself, Act. 26.16, 17, 18. yet was he Ordained af●er by the hands of men, Act. 13. These words of mine he quotes, where I shall take in by the way a passage from Chemnitius upon the same. Paulus licet immediate vocatus tamen a●● Ananiam mittitur, qui imponat manus ut Ecclesiae constet de vocatione, Act. 9.17. Et Act. 13.3. cum inter gentes ablegandus erat, rursus impositione manuum ordinarius Gertium Doctor constituitur, & hic ritus ideo fuit adoibitus ut publica esus vocatio decleretur legitima, nec alii consimiliter de to gloriarentur. Loc. Com. De Ec. This great Divine we see is express for Re-ordination. For my part I see not how any can deny but Ananias laid his hands on Paul for the confirmation of his Ministry, as well as for the receiving of his sight; yet dare not I place any of my strength there, but build on what is sure. Paul is made a Minister, that is certain, by Christ himself. I have appeared to thee for this purpose, to make thee a Minister,— and now I send thee, etc. So 1 Tim.. 12. I thank Jesus Christ— putting me in the Ministry. Again, Gal. 1. He stands upon it expressly, that he had not his Ministry of men, nor by men, but by Jesus Christ From whence then it appears, that a man may be a Minister already, and yet be Ordained; or what is all one, a man may be Ordained, and not to this end of his receiving his Office or Ministerial Authority thereby, and yet the Ordinance not be taken in vain. Here then is my answer made good, the proof full, and must stand against the world. Let us lee what my Adversary says to it. Here is something (says he) supposed which cannot be proved, either that Paul was before a Minister, when some learned men say he was but only a Probationer and Candidate to the Office, or that Paul was now in the 13. Act. made a Minister, when others do say that laying on of hands, there, was rather Optative than Ordinative. As for which, I must needs wonder more than once, hat a judicious man should be so slight here, where indeed my strength lies. I wonder first, how he does account, that what I have said, can possible suppose the last of these; to wit, that Paul was made a Minister here, when that which I say and pro●●e is the direct contrary, that he was a Minister before. And I wonder again, what proof this Gentleman would ha●e more, that Paul was a Minister before, than to have Christ's own mou●h ●rerally to say it, and Paul also to be his Witness? What face can any learned man put upon this? Was Christ's immediate Massion Authoritative to all the rest of the Apostles, and Paul be only a Probationer until his Order●? If this be their learning, I had rather hear reason. Vulgus aliquendo plus sapit (says Lactanius) quiatantum quantum satis est sapit. The truth is, this worthy Author and I do fully agree, that this Ordination of Paul and Barnabas was not to their Office (non co spectabat ut Ep●scopal●m gratiam eis largiretur, says Mason) bu● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as it is express; and consequently, besides the setting a man apart to his Office, there may be another Ordination, if it be to the same ends as theirs was in this place: Whereas therefore we are bid (he goes on) to tell the Bishop, if he should ask wherefore wilt thou be Ordained, that we come to be Ordained to that end, that very end S. Paul was here Ordained to; I say this as very good wholesome counsel and advise. Lot here then we are again agreed, and it remain: only to inquire, what were those ends these Apostles here were ordained to, and if we are capable of the same, we may be re ordained. As for what h● annexes hereunto, it is either answered already in the form, or belongs to the next Section.  
There are there o'er two ends, I humbly suppose, of this Ordination of these Apostles, the one appears in the Text, the other arises from the nature of the Ordinance itself.  
For the first, this is most manifest, that the Holy Ghost calls forth these persons to a special work of the Ministry, and so the words, Separate to me ver. 2. are interpreted: Ver. 4 So they being sent forth by th● Holy Ghost. Now those Elders that were there, do here upon join in imposition of hands and prayer, and that action i● described by the holy Penman of the Acts himself, Act. 14.26. to be a recommending them to the Grace of God for their work. From whence I gather, that if any of my tender and worthy Brethren be out of their places, and have a Call to a new, or intent to apply themselves thereunto as they ought, there is the same reason for a fresh imposition of hands upon them wi●h prayer, as there was here for Paul and Barnabas, to wit, to commit them to the Gr●c● of God for that particular charge. There is one thing only may be apt likely to come into their thoughts against this; to wit, that this looks at first sight like Independantism; But I beseech them let not that stumble ary; It is the End we say in Moral, that sp●cificates the Action, and so long as this be done on an Episcopal or Presbyterian account, it can be no Independent opinion. There is none I hope will say, my Creed is the Independent Creed, and think, that therefore I should leave it. There are two things therefore I will offer here, to remove this scruple from my Brethren, being needful, to wit, a Precedent, and also Satisfaction.  
For the Precedent I find one, which is most apposite in the Archbishop of St. Andrews His. Scot p. 451. One Mr. Robert Bruce having Preached ordinarily in Edinburgh, ten years upon the approbation of the general Assembly, maintaining it to be equivalent to any Ordination, upon ten day's debate, they came to agree, that the Commissioners did acknowledge his calling to be a Pastor in Edinburgh lawful, and yet that he should be Ordained. Here I note, that a man who is acknowledged a Minister already, may be Ordained by the judgement of Presbyterians, even of the Scots themselves; And that the account I offer is not Independent; the story goes on, and tells us further, this was the form they agreed upon, that the Imposition of hands was not used as a Ceremony of his Ordination to the Ministry, but of his Ordination to a particular Flock. This was acted Anno 1598.  
For satisfaction upon this, whereas we have the distinction here between a general and particular Ordination; I desire this particular Ordination be understood, not to the Office, but to the Work. It is the Independent tenant, I take it, that all power Christ hath given to the Church, is to be applied to the diffusive body, and so they account it is the people by their choice do constitute their own Pastor in that individual relation; Consequently, when that particular gathered company dissolves, that man ceases to be a Pastor, and while it lasts, upon the same consequence, he cannot ever separate from it, Relata mutuò se ponunt & tollunt. For my part, who am apt to believe that Christ hath given Pastors and Teachers to his Church, only as Catholic, Eph. 4. I know not whether it be warrantable to be Ordained a particular Pastor in this s●nse, supposing, as most do, that Election or Orders gives the Office; Methinks however, I should not choose to be so made, for the reason mentioned, as also because there is reason in the mouth of those men of Dan, Is it not better to be a Priest to a Tribe in Israel, than to the House of one man? This I take it to be Independentism. But when a man is already of Minister of the Catholic Church, to have a particular laying on of hands only, unto the work unto which he is called in a several place, I am assured in my belief, that we are most fully waranted by this only instance of these Apostolical persons, who were no Independents I think, at least in this point in hand, being certainly Catholic Ministers, and yet Ordained to that particular work (not to the Pastorship) of some Countries whereunto they were at present called. And here I cannot but observe farther the gracious providence of God, which for the time hitherto, as it were determined our case. Our present Ecclesiastical Rulers would not let a man have Institution without Episcopal Orders; and there hath been an Act of Confirmation of all Ministers already, in any living, though ordained only by Presbyters. Now than if any of my tender Brethren, scrupled this business, as being without precedent, if they were already in a living God provided against their scruple and confirmed them. If they are out of a living, than God hath provided for them in his Word, this instance undeniable of Paul, that a man who is a Minister already, may be Ordained for all that, unto the particular work of that new place, whereunto he shall be called. And why may not this be strengthened from the Priest under the Law, who though he was dedicated to God and his Office at once, did consecrate himself often to some particular service upon emergent occasions? There is nothing more can be objected against it, but the Form, which is already answered.  
The other end of their using this Rite here, I will conceive to be that which I have mentioned from that great Divine before named, Et hic ritus ideo fuit adhibitus ut publica ejus vocatio declaretur l●gi●ma. St. Paul. was called immediately to the Gospel, at first by Christ, and here by the Holy Ghost to this work: O●hers might not know this, or believe it. This act then of these eminent Prophets and Teachers at Antioch, is as it were he public testimony of the Church thereof. There was none could question the other Apostles Authority, who was known to have been with Christ in his life, but as for Paul, unto whom he appeared miraculously afterwards, though he had the same Authority (and by him alone) then given, yet as the Disciples of the Jews ●urst not trust this, until they were confirmed by Ananias, so was it convenient no doubt also for the Gentiles, that this Di●ine Call of his should be approved and attested by this Ordination which must ●rom hence therefore be irrefragably defined (as I have said) the Confirmation only of our Vocation. Two sorts there are now of my Brethren in distress about being re-ordained, some that have a call to a new place, and some that cannot else keep their old; Though the former of these (I confess) have their way here most plain, yet may the rest (I think) be kept from stumbling also; who though they cannot take a fresh Imposition of hands so clear to the first end as the former, for the committing them to God's blessing upon their new charge, yet may they submit here to the latter end, for Confirmation of their Ministry, as well as any.  
It is a serious question I propose, therefore in my Book, when we see in this place for certain (by this instance of Paul and Barnabas) that the reason of Ordination is not for to give the Ministerial Function, and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Timothy is something else; What is the reason of it the●? Why really (I say) I think it is this; This solemn Rite does give an Outward Authority before the Church, that is, the current repute or valuation to a man of a Minister: So that he who was truly called of God before, is now received as such, by all, as to the exercise of his Function, with freedom and acceptation. I cannot express myself more fully, not argue more firmly than I do upon it. The Reason of a precept is to be looked on as the Precept: but the reason why we should be ordained at all, does now arise upon us to be re-ordained (to wit, because else we cannot have this reception, or enjoy this End of Ordination, thus expressed, in our Church) and consequently so far as we have Precept, or Scripture example to warrant or command the one, it is, and must be of force for the other. And here, there is but one thing since, I must profess, hath ever been upon my mind to give any check unto this, and that is, if the End I speak o● could be proved in Scripture, than there were nothing indeed more satisfying; but the Scripture does not express this End of Orders; and if we know not that God hath appointed this for an End thereof, then will it not be a safe ground for our acting upon it. I answer. There are two means whereby we may know, thing to be of Divine warrant, or conformable to God. Wi●●, the Scripture, and Right Reason: That which is evident by, and co●fora●t to the true light of Nature, or natural Reason, is to be accounted jure Divino in matters of Religion, says the Authors of Jus D●vin. Reg. Ee. c. 3. Now though it be the first end mentioned, only, that I date say is express in the Word, yet must I needs affirm, that this other I stand upon, is so evident in the nature itself of the Solemnity, and consonant to the dictates of Reason, that I am persuaded there is none of my Brethren that shall receive it in the clearness of it, but will be satisfied in their Consciences that they follow no other than the mind of God in it: Nevertheless I shall not be wanting (through his grace) to strengthen their assurance herein, with an instance or two from Scripture itself, to put it (if possible) even beyond dubitation; The one is in Acts 1. Where we have a kind of Divine Ordination of Mathias into the Apostleship by lots: It is said v. ult. They gave forth their lots, and the lot fell upon Mathias, and he was rumbred with the eleven Apostles. Here it is apparent, that the immediate effect of this external signification of Gods Will by lot, whereby Mathias is constituted one of the Apostles, is this same value, repute, account, as an Apostle (or as a Minister, which I stand upon) He was numbered, that is, with the most Learned, only reputed, reckoned, acknowledged amongst the Apostles. The other instance is in Num. 27. where we have a Civil Ordination (if I may so say) of Joshua to the Government, as of us to the Ministry: Now the Lord there, v. 18. commands Moses to take him, and set him before the Congregation, and lay his hands upon him. Here is this same Symbolical Rite (from whence it is supposed by some to be taken up in the New Testament;) And wherefore must be do this? I pray read on v. 20. And thou shalt put some of thine honour upon him, that all the Congregation of the Children of Israel may be obedient. Lo● here the very genuine natural reason of such Solemnities: The meaning is I take it, as much as to say, Commend him in public as appointed of God (Hoc ritu denotat eum (says one) legitime a deo electum esse) and meet for the Office, that h● may thereby have a value, repute, honour, or authority before the people, as may qualify him (like thy Successor) for the execution of his charge, and acceptation with them; I will close it up with (hemnitius Application, Impones Josuae manus & dabis ei p●rcem gloriae tuae, ho est, authoritatem, quâtis hactenus ornatus fussti, dabis successori tuo: Ita quoque publice authoritas coram ecclesia, tribuitur ei, cui manus sunt impositae, I must add, lest this be mistaken, There is (I count) the jus and faculty, coram deo, and this Authority, coram ecclesia. It is the last flows from Orders, the other only from Christ.  
And here there be some (I suppose) of my Episcopal Fathers may act upon such an account as this: The Presbyterians have thought it good in their Orders to have no such Form of Words as are actually conferring of power (the true reason, by the way, though they have not all known one another's minds, being indeed, lest we should think the spiritual power itself to be conferred hereby, which is but the outward investiture only) and hereupon they are apt to think such no Ministers, or without power, and so ordain them again. But though I take this to be the very best plea that such who go so high can have, yet must I needs judge it a conception both injurious and fond, to believe, that a man who is set apart to the Office of a Minister by all other solemnity that is needful, shall yet have no Authority given him by God, for that Office only, for the defect of a Formality. That there are not such words used as are in the Episcopal Orders, is a conceit never like to lodge with me. Such men as these (I judge) have not yet learned what Mr. Hooker hath taught them, that neither Spirit, nor spiritual Authority proceedeth from man; Or what others have added more perspicatiously, that it is derived to us, as that of elected Magistrates in C●●●es immediately from our Charter, which they have from the King, and we from Christ Jesus. But now Sirs, if you will distinguish here betwixt our Authority Spiritual, and our authority only before men, and account that those words, Take thou Authority, are necessary, if you will, for the giving only the last, that is, that unless our Orders be these which are according to our Church, they will not suffice now to the putting that estimation upon us, as Ministers, that we may have the f●ee use of our Ministry thereby, and thereupon re-ordination only be urged, and used, I must sit down here, and dri●e the n●i● along with you.  
There is one thing only remains to be vindicated in this Section, and that is, that other instance I have produced for me on this subject, to wit, of the Apostles themselves, who are sent out by Christ with Authority to preach the Gospel, Mat. 10.7. in his life, and yet after he is risen, he renews their Authority, Jo. 20.21. As my Father sent me, so send I you. There is a second mission, and yet is not this all, for if we mark the Text, we find that this was the same day at evening (v. 19) when he risen, while his Disciples are in a house at Jerusalem, and Thomas expressly not with them, v. 24. There must be another time therefore, wherein this Commission is again delivered, unless Thomas had not the same Power or Commission with the rest, and that we have expressly on a Mountain in Galilee, where Christ had appointed them to meet him, Mat. 28.16. And there is their grand Commission finally repeated and established. Go, Preach and Baptise, I am with you to the end of the world. Now let the question (say I in my sheets,) be put then, to the highest, whether an Authority or Commission to an Office or Work, may be renewed? (even supposing Orders did give the Ministerial Authority) and it is here exemplyfied and proved in the most signal Precedent we can have in the earth. Who can think that to be unlawful, which Christ did to his Apostles himself? But I will not let this go thus. I have before somewhere distinguished from Hooker, between the spiritual power or commission itself, and the delivery of i●. I will choose to say here (if I may) that the Commission itself and Authority Christ gave the twelve to be his Apostles, might be but one and the same, and given at first (which besides that we cannot but think Christ gave them the Office when he gave them the Name of the Office, Thomas absence mentioned at the time the power of binding and losing was particularly given, may be perhaps a medium o prove) yet the delivery of it by way of charge, was often, as he saw it goo●, for the ful●er enforcement thereof, or establishment of them in the same. And this is no new Doctrine, but as a person worthy of all credit in a matter of this nature, as being most throughly read in the Fathers does tell us, that the powers Matth. 16.19. Jo. 20.23. Mat 18.18. are t●ken to be one and the same powers by the Doctors of the Primitive Church, which they do unanimously acknowledge to be given unto the Apostles, both in right and possession (as to the essential parts of the powers) before Christ's death. Chry●ost. de sacerdo●io. 3. Ambros. l. 1. de paenit. c. 1. & 6. Hier. ad Heliod. de vita so it. Athanas Sc●m. in i●lud [perfecti in pagum] Cypr. de simplicit. Praelat.  
The learned Author proceeds, and having considered and compared their say with themselves and the Scriptures, gives us two assertions; First, They do not deny (says he) the said powers to have been given (as to their essentials) unto the Apostles, when he called them to the Apostleship, and gave them the name of Apostles. Second●y, They agree, that all the Apostles received those powers, when our Saviour breathed on them, and that this was a solemn Ordination of them, giving them more grace to accompany their Ministry, than they had in their first call, and less solemn Ordination. Chrysoft. in Joh. hom. etc. Cyp. de simp. Prael. August. De Civit. dei. 64, & Quaest. ex●vet. & nov. Test. c. 9●.  
He yet adds, This is the more proper Ordination of the Ministers of the New Testament, the full original, and seminal tradition of the Ministerial Powers, whereby all future Ordinations of the like kind are sanctified; and for these causes our Saviour iterated their Ordination to the Pastoral extraordinary and ordinary Offices, and the rather, lest his death might be thought to have made void their first more secret and covert Ordination. Mr. Lloid of Primitive Episcopacy and Ceremonies.  
I must confess I am not taken with the attributing that to the Text in John, which is excellently proper to the last of Matthew, Mat. 20.18, 19, 20. Seeing the mission we find in the one, (Jo. 20.21. with the 19 and 24.) appears not to me (by what hath been before touched) to be indeed numerically the same, as to time, place, and persons with the other. Nevertheless, we are beholding to this man enough, that upon search he hath found, that the re-ordaining the Apostles, is not strange to the Ancients, when Reordination yet in thesi is apt to be so, both to them, as him also.  
Let us see now what our Author answers to this, which I must needs say beforehand, may very much satisfy us herein, because indeed he falls so short of saying any thing to weaken our belief of it. There be some judge (says he) the Apostles Commission, Mat. 10. was temporary, and did expire at their return. But, besides that this is a rate conceit in Divinity, as if the Ministry were a Cloak to be put on, and off again upon occasion; and that it is nothing however to their second mission, Jo. 20.21. when we find they have yet after, a third, Mat. 28. It appears expressly that the Disciples Baptised, Jo. 4.2. and wrought Miracles, Mat. 17.16. when they abode with Jesus. The words of that Text then Mat. 3.14. are here worthy of consideration. And he appointed twelve 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they might be with him, and that he might send them to preach. Here it seems there was some work belonging to the Office of their Apostleship, which they were to pe●●ota● while they were with him, as well as when they were abroad. This is plain, that when he sent them to Preach, he gave them power to heal the Sick, and do Miracles; and seeing this ●ower did certainly continue with them after they were returned to him, how shall we think any other power which was given with it, and much less (I hope) the whole Office itself, could cease? And therefore this Opponent himself dare put no trust in this, but frames another Answer, that their first Commission was but partial not to all acts, as to administer the Sacraments, absolve Penitents and the like, Unto which, I shall not need to red what some say, that when Christ said do this he gave his Disciples power to administer the Sacrament, & when he said whose sins ye remit, etc. Jo. 20. he gave them power of Absolution; and yet after both, we read of that chief Commission he finally leaves with them Mat. 28.19. Nor shall I stick in the found words of a grave Author, They received with the Name of Apostles, the power to Minister all the Doctrine and means to Salvation, which Christ intended in due time to deliver, unto them Acts 1.24.25. Act. 26.16. And therefore when the Sacrament of the Eucharist was instituted, they needed not a new Ordination, but only a signification of Christ's pleasure, that they should use the power before given them, in the administration of this Ordinance, which is but an extension of the power to a new object. But I reply, that which is most clear and obvious, and what his Answer does not touch (I am sure) in the least; whether the instance itself urged does, the root of the Scruple, or no●, he may d●ffer in his apprehension with me, if he will. The Lord Christ had given them Commission for the P●e●ching of the Gospel and Baptising, that is certain before; and yet does he renew here the same Authority again to them, Go Preach and Baptise, Mat. 28. What is it now for this Opposer to say here, that their Commission granted at first, was partial, such as did not authorise them to all Ministerial acts, as to administer the Sacrament, confirm the Baptised, which were not then in being; when the Commission they have last, (or is again delivered to them) is this, Go preach and baptise; That is, Such as does authorise them to that part of their Office, or those Ministerial acts they were authorized to before: Is not here an Authority, or Commission to the same Ministerial Acts, or Work, renewed, or refresh●ds▪ That is the point in hand. This Gentleman then, for aught I see, might rather have borrowed an answer from me here, that the Apostles were sent out at first only to the Jews, and after to all Nations, and therefore they had a new Commission. To which I reply; 

1. The Lord Jesus, if he pleased, might at least (if any will say he did not) have given them their Commission so large at once as to reach Jew and Gentile, and appointed the execution thereof to each according to the due season; And if then he chose to do it at twice, we may conceive even from thence, that the renewal of a Commission hath not therefore any such appearance sure of evil in it as is fancied by my Opposer.  
2. Though C●rist did say to his Disciples, Go not in the way of the Gentiles, at his first sending of them, he did not say, Go not in the way of the Jews, at his last, but while he saves, Go teach all Nations, the Jewish Nation is one, and the Chief of those Nations: And while Peter was the Apostle of the Circumcision, and James and others, did abide among the Jews, the Commission was the same in effect as to them; So that here is an Authority to the same persors, work, and place repeated yet however, Did Peter, and James, and J●hn, that preached to the Jews, preach by virtue of their last Commission, or not? If they did not, their last was in vain, if they di●, than was their first and last to the same effect, which is the point won.  
3. Though the renewal of the Apostles first Commission was by way of enlargement, being confined to the execution at least before to the Jews only, yet when Paul's Commission from Christ at first was extended to the Gentiles at large, the Holy Ghost Commissions him again with confinement as to such and such particular Countries. Now then, if a new Commission may be given to th● s●●●e wo●●, ei●her when i● is narrower or ●arger, the Wit of man may have something to object, but the Conscience may I hop● have enough to be satisfied, as to the main; though the work be but of equal extent as it was; For in the Enlargement there is the same, though with more; in the Confinement, though less, there i● only the same.  
4. Let this be so, yet here is in general nevertheless a double Commission to the same work exemplified, for they have Commission to preach to the Jews, and then Commission to preach to all Nations; So that Re ordination hereby is proved, though not our Re-ordination. You may say there is not the same reason for us as for them, but this we gain hence however, that there may be some reason why a Commission may be repeated, and if there may be one, we are put in heart there may be another, and we are sure it is not unlawful altogether.  
5. When we see that a Commission may be renewed upon the change of the Persons to whom a man is sent, why not upon the change of the Court which sends? So is the Case here; Ordination is the commissionating a man only in the Church's Court; Now the Court of the Church is changed, and that Commission will not pass upon the change that would before, and therefore is renewed.  
6. I have made this more statedly serve our case (p. 44.) in my first Sheets, I will conclude therefore the matter: If the Lord himself, whose sending his Disciples as the head of his Church, could not be without the furnishing of them both with abilities and power, does iterate their Commission (at least as to the delivery) more than once; What should we stand upon Man's Ceremony? which is, we are sure, but a formal delivery, or investitive only at first, when the Right and Faculty is never from him at all, as Grotius speaks; And as Dr. Ames in his Case, Ordinatio est nihil al●ud quam sol●mnis declarationt coronatio regis & ●nauguratio magistratus; And so it comes to no more, to be i●crated upon need or good Cause, than for me to repeat, And they made Solomon King the second time, that is, what hath been once already signified before. And Jesus said again unto him yet the third time, Simon Son of Ionas lovest thou me? Lord my Sheep.     

SECTION IX.  
IN the Fifth Section, there is a Third Objection; To be ●●●ra●ined does seem virtually in the Act to renounce, make void, or offer injury to our first Oraers, and that does looklike some great evil. Unto which, that I may speak heat something more fully, I will acknowledge, so far as I can judge, that this conceit hath gotten into men's minds far and wide from the Ancients, which makes some (the Papists especially) think so hainoufly of Re-ordination, as if there were no less than Sacrilege in it: Indeed this Author, and our Brethren, at this season, have got a conceit that it is injurious to the Third Commandment, which requires the reverend use of God's Ordinances, which may be done I hope, when an Ordinance is repeated, as when it is used but once; But if they could then show me in the scattered Sentence: of the Fathers, that this were their harmonious reason why they are against it, it would do more with me for conviction, than any thing else I yet know, because it would make me suspect then some Moral evil perhaps to be in it, when all I apprehend yet is Notional only (as I said at first) or but in men's imaginations.  
The rise then, or spring of this conceir, I guess to flow from St. Cyprians time, when Rebaptisation was in the World: That pious Bishop and Martyr does plead thus still in his Writings, There is one Church, one Faith, one Baptism; those that are out of the Church have not the ●rue Faith, and so no Baptism; And therefore they that are baptised of Heretics must be rebaptized. Pro certo tenentes neminem for as baptizart extra ecclesiam posse, cum sit baptism● unum intra sanctam ecclesiam constitu●um, Lab. 1. Ep. 12. Hereupon there was none (we must conceive) rebaptised, but they supposed their former Baptism to be void, this being the pleaded ground for their Rebaptisation. And though those Disciples Act. 19th. who doubted not of the validity of the Baptism they had, did not void John's Baptism (I hope) in the least, for their being baptised again into the Name of Jesus; Yet while the Party himself here, and the Church were both persuaded otherwise of theirs, this act might be accounted coram ecclesia, a kind of professed avoidance thereof, and their heresy with it; And consequently when they came to think that Rebaptisation did make pull their first Baptism, the s●me thoughts from thence we may conjecture came to ●o●iess them about Orders. But as the Fathers which succeeded Cyprian, and Councils, did lay aside his Rebaptisation, concluding the ground he went upon err●nions, and consequently that the former Baptism of such as were rebaptized (ho●vsoever they thought that re-baptived them) was good and valid according to the Word of God: So do I believe, that after Ages will disprove the ground upon which Re-ordination is now by some required, and our former Orders being valid or good before God, or according to his Word, it is not our being re-ord●ined can make them null or void, but only they are so in the judgement of such as lie under tha● conception.  
To look then more throughly (if we can) into this business, Suppose a man a Minister already, and in Orders, does Re-ordination now make him no Minister, or to have been none, or evacuate his former Ministerial Acts the time before? If that be true, then should I never plead for Re-ordination sure, then must I be ready to think it Sacrilege as soon as any; but this certainly can n●ver be. The Papists do hold that there is an indelible Character imprinted in Orders (under iterari non posse) and anathematise those that gainsay it. To save their curse, I deny not, with our Hooker, and Mason, if by their Character they mean only spiritualis potestas (as some of them do) that there is such a thing, (and they quoad homines we may say impressed hereby) which our Divines also do hold indelible; So that the Office being once received cannot be taken away, even by degradation itself, though the Work may sometime be made to cease. Now if it were Orders did indeed give this power, as my Opposer, with the most, do think, then must those Orders we take first, stand good and valid against any other we take after (if there were twenty) which can neither make nor mar, as to that end, which is already attained thereby. And here in the way may be one plain Conviction on this Gentleman, that when he does plead, that I make null my first Ordination and therefore my Profession will not prevail against my Fact, he quite intersares with himself, who still pleads all the way besides, that my first Orders having given me my Ministry already, it is that renders my second in vain.  
There are two Books (let me therefore here mention it) come out against Re-ordination, one before, and this Author; two Arguments it is they harp upon; The former stands mainly upon this, That a second Ordination does in the fact make null the first; The other insists upon this, That our first Ordination (if he be understood as he must) does null the second, to wit, by rendering it in vain. Now let u● set these two Arguments together by the ears, and they must needs fall by the hands of one another; for it a man's first Ordination be indeed made null, then is not his second in vain; and if his second be in vain, then is not his first null. The truth is, were the supposition true which they go both upon, it is the last Argument were of force, and the former must be nothing.  
Neither would it hence follow, because the Character (if one will call the Power or Office so) is not repeated, therefore the Rite (which does solemnize it) may not, any more, than because the Regal Office, is but one and the same (which must be still urged) therefore the anointing or in estiture can be but once also. If a man who is Consecrated, shall desert his first Ordination, and steal away himself from the Ministry into the Laity, when he believes God originally called him, and his labours like still to be serviceable to him, not disabled, not put to it, by distress, or force, for the safety of his Conscience, S●u●s peace, Gods greater glory; and any will call that Sacrilege; there may be I think some appositeness indeed in the tern; but if the Papist will call Reordination barely so, and make that the reason why a man may not be Re-ordained, which he renders for the very account upon which he yields hereunto, to wit, because he thinks his Power or Office indeed indelible, and that being entered in the Ministry, he may not go back, and to is constrained to it; it is but giving an innocent thing ill words, and as it seems to me rather in our case, it is plain in the whole, A cujus contrarium verum est.  
I cannot therefore but take up a few word; here (if it be only to see the Genius at least) of that other Opposer of Re-ordination. Does not he really renounce his Ordination, recede from his Office and d●vest h●m●●lf of Authority, who taketh up his Ministry ●●●d anew passes under this constituting investing Ordinance? M●. C. p. 33. w●ich is the chief battering Ramm of that Book. But God forbidden this indeed should h● so, when Christ's Disciples had their Commission, Go Preach and Baptise, renewed to them, a● hath been said before: was that second act indeed an actual and formal avoidance of the first? When the Holy Ghost does separate to him Paul for the work whereunto he calls him, Act. 13. Does that mission, or sending forth of the Holy Ghost, make null his first Ministry, and authorative mission, by Jesus Christ? Act. 26.16.— 18. When a Jew was baptised in Christ's time, did that null his Cicumcision? When those Disciples Act. 19 were rebaptized, was that Baptism indeed a voiding of their first? Or, Christ's Baptism really a renunciation of john's? How can any prove that? Was the Ordination of Barnabat by those at Antioch a divesting him of any authority he had by being sent forth before, by the Church of Jerusalem? This cannot be. Yet again, when the men of Judah came and annonited David King in Hebron, was the passing of David under this constituting investing Ceremony (to speak with him) really a renouncing his former anointing by Samuel, and receding from that Kingly Power and Office which was given him at first by that mouth, which said, Arise, anoint him, for this is he? And the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward. Was Charles the seventh of France his Coronation at Rheimes, after he was Crowned at Poitiers before, and King by birth, any thing else but a farther establishment of his title, only for the satisfaction and better obedience of his people? It is but so indeed here; And for that the Dream was doubled unto Pharaoh twice, it is because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass.  
The bottom then of my Adversaries mistake, I have already opened, and cannot omit one note more from Mr. Baxter, of whom I have made herein so necessary use before, who gathering an Argument, as solidly as learnedly, from the Magistrate 10 the Minister, in thi● case, does tell us, that our Divines in abundance have proved the power of Princes (howsoever men may have an hand in their Election and Investiture) to be immediately from God (for which he mentions particularly Spalatensis, Sara●ia, and Bilson, that any who will may inform themselves) whereupon he hath these words, p. 146. And for my part, I think I shall never consent to any that will give more to men in making a Minister, than in making a King. All power is of God; the Powers that be, are ordained of God.  
I must therefore here humbly desire these worthy Authors, and others, that they consider well such expressions when they use them, that Orders is the taking up the Ministry, a constituting Ordinance, which if they conceive so, as if it gave the Ministry coram deo, I must invert that of the Father, ment●m e'en, linguam corrige, and say, if they will keep their words, they must correct their apprehension. I do like well indeed to see the meaning of this Author to be so full, who thinks that to be re-ordained, does offer injury to our Ministry itself, as if we did thereby even recede from our Office, (the contrary whereof is true) or vacate our Ministerial Acts, which might well highly provoke his quickest worth and zeal against it; but when perhaps he hath let his thoughts cool a little more on the matter, he may come to conceive with us, that the Ministry itself is not conferred by our Orders at the first, and consequently that it cannot be endamaged by being re-ordained in the least, but that these Orders first and last both do operate upon, or to the same, only by way of declaration before men, for the reception of us in the Church, where we are (as hath been said) not otherwise, than we see the like of Princes as to their Kingdoms, in the instances now mentioned, and scarce yet out of sight.  
And here I cannot say, but we may divide perhaps between the Ministry itself, and our Orders; the Ministry, which is from Christ, and his institution alone, and Orders which are of man. Let us be alured in the first place, that our Ministry, or Office itself, receives no damage by these second Orders, (which a man does not indeed recede from, but cleave to thereby) and the great fear is over; and as for our former Orders barely, whether they receive any injury hereby or no, it may be perhaps another matter. For my part I must acknowledge that there is injury offered to the same, but I will not say hereby, in what we do. The doing injury is one thing, and the suffering injury is another; we are here but sufferers, It is a Christians du●y to bear injury when he must not do i●. Let me say then, it is even the duty of these first Orders of ours, to suffer wrong in this case, so long as it is not from us who cannot help it. The wrong is, that we cannot enjoy that right we should have by them, and while by taking new, we do but pursue ●he same ends of setting off our Ministry, or giving i● its free passage, for which we took them a● first, and cannot now have it upon their score they ought (at I may so say) to be content with us, and put it up from the time. We do not ourselves, think the worse of them for being vilified; Besides, let the Bishop think them to be null, and we think them to be good, our thinking is nothing to the thing itself, if they be valid indeed, and according to truth, they will be so, whether others think so or no; and we go no more from any thing we have by them, by taking new, than we do go from the wealth we have, when we get more.  
What then is the matter here in good earnest? Why the doing this, you may say perhaps, will at least make men think our former Orders to be null, though they be not, and this is something. I answer, no, you cannot say so much as this, or it may make them think only, that they will not pass in these times, and that a man is forced therefore to do but the same thing legally a●d canonically, which was done otherwise before; and this is that no doubt, but most think indeed, as the plain truth, according to the vulgar reason, although we may put it in the fairer words (if we will) of so●e moderate Bishops themselves, that our loriner Orders are lawful before God and the Church, but not legal, according to the Order of the Nation, And yet is not this ●he p●int indeed neither at the bottom, what others may think (while the objection is that we renounce or rel●t●quish our former Ministry thereby) but what they may thi●k, we think ourselves in the doing hereof, or upon what account it is we do it. I have therefore framed my answer, in my former shee●s to this Objection, thus; that I humbly judge, So long as a man doth clearly and unfeignedly, bo●h before and after, as he hath occasion, declare himself to the contrary, this will not I hope by the Lord, and ought not by man, to be laid to his charge, because expression in this case, does give construction to the action. The Bishop you may say, do should our former Orders null, and requires new; If we yield, Do not we in the fact grant the same? I say again, No; If we declare otherwise, and yield not to the fact on that accounted, for I mu●t gi●e St Ambrose's due memento here Si ratio redde●d sit● ro omni ot●oso verbo, cave etiam aliquando ne d● vittoso ble●tio. I have cleared this, by the instance of the Reubenites. J●s. 22. which methinks, may satisfy the ingenuous; though in the application, for those words, we have been content (p. 57) I wish I had put we have forced ourselves, for that is more, I find for my own art, than I am even yet able to say. Flect● mihi cor meum Domine, mi Deus, confiteor enim haec tibi, & indulgen●●●m peto.  
That which is replied by this Author, and by Mr. C. in effect both, is this only. Protestatio non valet contra factum. I answer; There may be. Fact of a man which contradicts his Profession in the nature of the thing itself (as I might perhaps take some of their instances, but that I should fill too much Paper to speak to them) and here it is true (if it be so) a man's Protestation cannot prevail against his Fact; Or there is a Fact of a man that contradicts his Profession only in the conceit of some persons, but does not do so in the thing itself, nor in the estimation of others that judge aright of it; And in this Case, it should be apparent methinks, that the Fact must receive interpretation by the man's declaration; For while some may judge one thing of it, and some another, it is they only can judge charitably, that take his own account of it. Had the setting up of the Altar by the Rubenites been Idolatry in the thing itself, or had they done it really to estrange themselves from the God of Israel, their Protestation had been nothing to justify their Fact; but when it was indeed no such matter, but only judged a renunciation, by their mistaken Brethren, their Profession we see alone did honestate the Act, and gave all satisfaction: Such is truly I deem our Case in this Objection.  
And now I am methinks something engaged ●o take into farther cognizance the main B●dy of that other Book I have mentioned, the Tenor of whore Discourse does run thus, Re ordination does accumulate nothing to the v●lidity, liberty, or dignity of our Ministry, which he descants upon in several learned Pages, and therefore we may not be re-oraained. For which methinks, I would write only, this Re-ordination does super-induce the Canonical Stamp of allowance in the present Church, upon our Ministry, and so propose it back to him, whether therefore we must not be re-ordained? To speak to this, I must first in the way tak●notice, tha● when Divines do tell us of the validity of an Ordinace▪ I perceive by some words of Austin about Baptism, they account, that wh●n there is the essentials of an Ordinance, then is ●he Ordinance valid: In which sense, it is not to be concei●ed, that we who have exercised our Ministry several years upon our first Orders, should doubt in the least of the validity thereof, which ●his very ready Author alone (if there were not a world besides) hath sufficiently proved: But when we speak of the validity of Orders, in this dispute, I would have it understood as to the effect. I answer then to this Authors whole discourse, with that one distinction I have in my first Sheets, which I believe himself by this time will yield to be too true; And that is," The validity of our former Ordination may be taken either in regard of what it ought to do, or in regard of what it does do: I say there, that the Orders we have first, aught to give the same outward authority, liberty, acceptation to our Ministry, as Episcopal Orders, but they do not; They ought I count according to the Law of God, but they do not do so, according to the present constitution of our Church and Land; and hence is it men are re-ordained. I will put this in other terms, as more proper perhaps for these present Sheets: Ordination (I have said) is that which gives us the Reception as Ministers, in the Church where we are; Now there is the Right of this Reception, and the actual Fruition. I am persuaded that when a man is ordained only by Presbyters, it is the Will of God that the Church should receive him as an Officer of his, which reaches the Rulers to permit him the exercise of his Ministry, as well as the People to render their honour and obedience they own to him for his works sake. If they will not receive him accordingly, let them look to answer the denial to his Lord; Nevertheless, in regard ●he Right of Reception is for Reception itself, and it is the actual enjoyment hereof is the end why a man does take Orders at all, to wit, that he may actually use this Calling, that his Ministry may have its present free passage in the Church, and in his Place, which he cannot have now unless he takes Episcopal Orders also, it is not enough that he hath the Right already, when he Fruition is farther to be sought, and s●eking, but the same end, and engagement towards God, that pu● him upon seeking Orders at first, must now even put him upon Re-ordination.  
And here I will not forget before I go off, to re-mind my R●ader, that when I make this Reception, or free course of our Ministry, the End of Orders, upon which I build so much as I do, I in end i●●ll the way on●y as one end thereof: There are two ends (besides the designation it s●lf of the person, or the outward application of the jus ad pers●nam) I do setly make, or apprehend of Ordination, which may be distinguished, as to the Ordainers, and the Ordained, and I desire it may be well observed; The Acts I count are the end of the Ordainers, the Effects of the Ordained.  
The first and chief end (as most express) of this Rite, is, the commending a person to the Grace of God for this Charge of the Ministry that is now so solemnly laid upon him, which is all one as to say the separating, consecrating, or sanctifying him by prayer, as to the Act of the Ordainers; and in the Effect as to the Ordained, the blessing, grace, presence, assistance of God's Spirit upon, and with him, for his studies, work, and success, thereby obtained. Praecipuè servatur iste ritus, ut tota ecclesia communibus precibus deo ministerium vocati commendet, says Chemnitius: Which Prayers we are not to account to be inanes but though there is no promise (it is true) extant in Scripture, whereby God hath obliged himself to give Grace (or Gifts) in the administration of this Rite, as there is to the Sacraments; yet may our Faith be strengthened to expect some benefit more peculiarly upon these Prayers, when this Imposition of hands, according to Apostolical practice, is joined with them, from such Texts, Gen. 48.14. Deut. 34.9. Mar. 10.16. Provided only we take that of Calvin also wisely with us, Quaeritur an per externum signum gratia fuerit data? Respondeo, quoties ordinabantur ministri, precibus totius coclesiae fuisse deo commendatos, atque hoc modo impetratam fuisse gratiam a deo non autem virtute sgni fuisse illis datam. Neither may you argue here against Re-ordination. If we are to believe in God for this Grace, or Gift (as it is in Timothy) or Spirit of God, to enable us in our Office, to be given upon the Church's prayers now, then can it not b● sought by prayer again: For, Though the formality of the Function a baits not, maju● & minus (as Mr. C. himself speaks) yet the qualification of the subject may. And not only so, but we have the Apostles impowered by Christ, yet waiting for Power from on high, Lu. 24.49. And there is an instance hath been mentioned, that may also effectually satisfy us herein, and that is of David, who in his first anointing by Samuel, had the Spirit of God come upon him (to wi●, for Government, or his Office) and yet is the solemnity repeated after (when there was need) without any more scruple at al● for that matter.  
The second End hereof, is the Conciliating to a person an Authority in regard of men (which I make so much use of) that his Ministry be received (I say) thereupon by all in the Church where he is. This, as to the Act of the Ordainers, is their public testimony, approbation, and declaration of him as called of God; and in the Effect to the Ordained, is this his Reception (I so much press) by the Church, as to the exercise of his Ministry, and acceptation with his people. Now though it be true (what I must finally inculcate) that our first Orders, or solemn approbation by the Presbytery, hath given us a R●ght from God, or from his Word, to this Reception mentioned: Yet seeing (I account) we cannot have the Fruition hereof without the Canonical allowance also of the Bishop, and it is the actual enjoyment hereof (I say) in the present exercise of our Function, and free course of the Gospel, is the ultimate end here without question we look at in Orders, it is this Reason must warrant a man in his submission, though nothing I know will the Imposition of Re-ordination.  
There remains now the last Objection in my sixth Section and that is from Baptism; Baptism cannot be iterated, therefore not Orders. My Answer to this is, There is not hear par ratio, Baptism is a Sacrament, and there is a promise of Grace annexed to Sacraments, and that as to Baptism is Regeneration, which whether real or relative is but once, and therefore Baptism is not repeated; but there is no such Grace and promise to Orders. Quod Baptismus non sit iterandus de re magna agitur, says an eminent Doctor. And for the Papists then, Quod Baptismi proprium est ad Ordines suos confer, he accounts not equal. See Exam. Con. Trid. de charactere. This is my Answer. Nevertheless, in regard that the dread which is upon men's Spirits in this thing, does mainly I think arise from hence, I thought good to add thus much farther upon Truth's score, to wit, That howsoever the universal judgement of the Church stands firm against Rebaptising now, yet we find in the Scripture, that there hath been some particular reasons, that even Baptism itself hath been repeared, and the former not renounced, but confirmed hereby. This is in the instance of Act. 19.5. which I have opened there. For reply whereunto, my Opponent, after the quoting of Vossius against Rebaptisation (which might as well have been a hundred) and Optatus, who hath belike a singular conceit that John's Baptism to these Disciples was null, because it was after Christ's Precept was given, who in the mean while forgot sure that plain Text, Jo. 3.22.23. that Jesus baptised (which was by his Disciples, Ch. 4.2. and they could not do it without a Precept) when John did; I say, after this he comes to confession, in the end, of two or three literate Pages & grants these Disciples first Baptism good, and yet rebaptized, and not only so, but because John's Baptism was in eum qui veniret, and Christ's was in eum qui jam venisset, and so not the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he adds, there was as much ground to administer Christ's baptism after Johns, as john's after Circumcision; Here then is there a good plea for us. Whether a man is Circumcised or Baptised, Baptised into Christ to come, or already come; Circumcision and Baptism both was still an external entrance or admission into the Church and Covenant of God; and consequently, if the entrance into the Church may be solemnised more than once, the entrance into the Ministry may be so, I hope with less scruple. Thus we see not only that this Argument comes to nothing against us, but may happily be rather inverted for us; So that it fares here with this Author methinks according to those words of the Prophet, Either the Bud does yield no Meal, or if it do▪ yield, the Stranger (his Adversary) swallows it up.  
In the close I find methinks a little leven in the mind of my Adversary, which it may be, some or other of my expressions, being not grave enough, or too much engaged, might raise. If I be culpable I am sorry, but for my part I shall return nothing of that nature, but my respects, which he hath merited I count highly, that he hath been so fair all along before. And as for what he objects, why was not Mr. H. as tender to be re-ordained to stop the mouth of peevish people heretofore, as well as now? I with hearty that the answer were not so easy as it is, to wit, can sa patet. It was little glory to Paul that he was a Pharisee, in comparison of his being a Curistian, and yet in how much stead did a seasonable owning thereof stand him in? Act. 23.6. Religion itself may then sometimes put a man u●on policy, & that leaden Rule of tempori aptari, have a golden & pious construction, when a Christian for a good end, does accommodate himself to others present spirit and affections. I ●●e this man does think, that if he, or other like worthy persons, should do as I have done, the better sort of their hearers would be so offended, as to leave them; but if by the better, he means the sober as well as the pious, I dare undertake for them, that if he cannot otherwise enjoy his Ministry, they shall go near to be the first, to advise him to it. For my part, when I see a worthy Minister of Christ, that doth much good, and Ordained in these times, and another who is a thing in Pastor's clothing, ready to despise him as no Minister, only because he had not the same Orders himself hath, and many of his Parish join thoughts with him; Methinks a kind of pious scorn and just indignation only might serve him, to let such know how easy this Ceremony might be had if he pleased. And truly as for some young men who have been taken by Presbyters into Orders, for their piety, and gifts, and not the University sake; I should be apt to advise such here unto, of choice, (if their Consciences serve to hold out) for the sake of the Gospel, lest their Ministry else in short time come to be contemned, when men of known learning, if they stand out, are not subject to that disparagement; Nay farther, whereas it is in the mouths of money, that unless they do this, they can have no preferment, and that is judged a carnal argument (as this Author at first bespeaks his friend to that purpose) We are to consider well, before we condemn any. If a man shall think Re-ordination unlawful, and be tempted to do it upon preferment, the Lord rebuke the tem t●tion, and forgive him,. If he think it lawful, and some conceived advantges besides the Gospel draws him in, when else he is loath, this argues the mind unfixed and does also need mercy, But if a man is destitute of a place, and merely for the service of God in his calling, because he cannot else have another, does submit hereunto, and call this preferment, you may pardon the man's words, but his meaning is such, as includes the true end, why the thing indeed is to be done. I say not this to entice any to go on farther in these times, than their hearts serve them, or that they should not consider when they do this, how far they are to pass besides: He is a wary person, that will go in at no gate at first, until he is assured well, all the others also, that lie in his way, are open. But I speak it, because the great concernment of the Gospel, the burden of the work, the pleasure and readiness of the flesh, to be discharged, the self-denial in bearing the brunt, and the incumbent duty (as men are best fit for doing service) are not weighed like wise as fully, I doubt upon the contrary. And so I have done with this Opponent, and what I have said to him, may suffice I hope for Mr. C. also, for he that answers the one, must also (as to the main) answer the other. I remember the Comedian,  
Menander fecit Andriam, & Perinthiam;  
Qui utram vis rectè norit, ambas noverit.  
There remains at last an Epistle in the beginning of his Book, which does particularly oblige me to him for his undeferved good thoughts of me, as Vir doctus, candidus, & pacis ecclesiae studio sissimus; I must confess, I find not myself entirely pleased with the first of these titles, which yet he advances superlative kindly in the Inscription. It is an easy matter for a man in writing a few sheets, to observe some passages himself, and take the notices he meets with in his common reading out of others, with some sparsed say, as shall in every where, and so seem learned (perhaps in such helped sentences) when his learning is indeed but scanty, mean, and ordinary.  Mecum habito, & novi quam sit mihi curla supell●●. 
I dare not therefore at parting, assume to myself this favour of his, lest my Maker condemn it in me for pride, which in him is courtesy; Only I must take notice justly as to this Author, that the more true worth and learning there is in a m●n himself, so much the more ready is such a one to the f●●rest construction of another. Quod summè de●iderct homo, est benig nitas ipsius.  
Thus is this heavy work at last dispatched off my hands, which I count so, not only in regard of the harder travel through my great indisposition, in the birth of it, but also in regard of the fruit, while my tender and pion: Brothers whose turns it should serve, (and so the Church in them) have so many things more to stick at besides this, that they are like to be quite heartless, as to their regard or acceptance hereo●; Yet could I not break off the thread begun, but God who rules our spirits, wills, and the event, would have it run its length our, although I must say, I could scarce ever come to it, but with a mind full of Clouds or trouble, for which cause I have been forced often, first to have besought heaven; when this good man (my Adversary) methinks trips over my Book, touching things only as he goes along, tanquam canis ad Nilum, with his foot dipped in Oil, and a mind that is free and at case. Yet must I humbly leave it to the Lord now at last, by whom he will save Isra●l, by him that boweth on his knees, or him that lappeth.   

SECTION X.  
I Have now done with this fair Adversary in all things that may be a stumbling block to my pious Brethren, whose case I will suppose to be such as makes this matter of Re-ordination to become necessary, to the exercise of their Ministry in their place; And in that necessity I am humbly persuaded (with u●●● in mercy) that the Lord, who is pleased to bring them by his good providence into the same, will allow them to submit to it, so long as their hearts and aims be sincere to him in the doing. I know indeed, our S●●irits are ready to ●●rhour frarful thoughts of the present growing Hierarchy, as if it were some angerous thing to yield to it, though no more than to beehive an Imposition of hands from it, in our case: But the memory only methinks of those blessed Martyrs, Cranmer. Ridly, Lat●mer, Hooper, and such late pious men as Lake, Hall, ●●her, who were all Bishops of the same constitution wi●h ours now, should remove such kind of impressions; And ●ar larger C●arity, at least toward others, heal our misgivings toward ourselves, when there are such multitudes involved with us in the case: I hope verily there is no more evil in Re-ordination upon that account, than in Ordination, though it be indeed a very uncouth I opposition. Let every good man on God's name, be fully persuaded in his own mind (for I know not what the aboding of some men's hearts may mean) and take heed also to others, while he looks that there be weighty cause for what he does, lest the offence that is taken by his Brethren, affect the Lord with a like displeasure at it, and make him know, to his cost, how wary he had need to walk in those very things which are indifferent to him in their Nature, when they be dangerous perhaps in their example, for the sake of others, at this tender season. It may therefore after all this be said to me, that while I am opening the Gate for my Brethren to pass, it is as it were with the wrong hand, so that I cannot go through my own self at the same whose Condition hath not been altogether such as theirs, and as I plead for, to justify a person in this thing. It is the old rule in our Metaphysics, Entianon sunt multiplicanda sine necessitate. And I must confess I was put on this thing on the sudeen, and unremoved from my place, that is, before I was ware, and before it was need. Now I s●e what this honest Moniter advises (p. 2.) that a man should have pectus praeparatum & consequently not do a matter of this nature before he be better satisfied in every circumstance, than I could probably so soon. I see more particularly, he bids me w●●gh in the point of scandal (which hath indeed been sore to me) whether I endeavoured first to satisfy my Brethren about me, which I have quoted before, And it appears in the over-hastiness, as he admonishes me likewise (p. 64.) a kind of virtual or interpretative justification of those that require it (when I dare undertake only on the part of those that submit to it) And some prejudice to others also, by a petition to the King which might prevent it (p 70) for which I should be sorry indeed, if it were so: Besides the failings in the Ground, or End, and manner of performance, which is apt to accompany Praecipitancy in all actions. As to all which, for aught I see, I must answer with acknowledgement, This witness is true, as the Apostle speaks, Tit. 1.13.  
— Pudet haec oppobria nobis  
Et dict potuisse & non potuisse refelli.  
I must crave liberty therefore here to divide between my Opinion and my Fact. There is no necessity, when I justify Re-ordination, and my Brethren in their submission thereunto, that I should therefore become the Pharisee, and justify myself: I may acknowledge a curpability in my performance, and condemn it, through the failing of Circumstances, when yet I maintain my cause, and my Brethren, who in the uprightness of their hearts may have done this thing & have peace in it. 〈◊〉 dare not really say this was well in me, I will say rather, Quis intelligit errores suos, munda me Domine, a deflexione mea, There is no man, as well as I, but when a thing in the main seems to him lawful, may be mistaken in the application thereof to his own condition. Humanum est errars, labi, decipi.  
I confess I did not doubt in the least when I did this, but that my former Ordination was valid, and in the taking this new upon me, I find it is like a double garment put on for the fashion, and experiencedly proves uneasy to be worn. I must needs say, I could never imagine, so small a matter would have run so in my thoughts, as this hath done; it is indeed methinks to me, like a heavy Rugg upon my bed in the Summer, that to be under it makes me sweat, and I cannot well go to my rest till I have fairly justled it off again, when others perhaps, of a complexion more cool, may be glad they have it on. Let it suffice, I have shown my good will toward conformity, land have enough for once. My judgement is still as large as it was, but my heart is made afraid. I shall not step a foot urther by God's grace, henceforth than I see (or judge) my way s●fe, and my Soul clear.  
I perceive that a Christian is not only to weigh the matter he does conform to in these times, but he must weigh well also his own spi●●●, whether he can bear it, when he hath-done it. It is not enough that a thing is lawful or honestum, but that it be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also, decorum, what is fit, not base, not unworthy of him. I must confess in my apprehension, it is a thing not worthy of the S●iti● of a Christian, who is not to be the servant of man, to be captivated barely to opinion and custom, in such petty things as Re-ordination in itself seems to me to be; and it is me hinds to have ignoble thoughts of the Divine Nature, to think that God should be moved at that which he hath neither commanded, nor forbidden, though he looks indeed at our ends in every thing that they be upright to him. As I shall thank God therefore, though I have born this part for the sake of my Brethren, that upon my example they may not be held by supers●●i●●on against what is needful for their own condition and the yielding on necessity (we may judge) saves the guilt of consent to the enjoining:) So now I have done, and apprehend it not to be worthy without that need as to me, I can be content it be to me, but as jeremics Girdle, that is, profit me nought, whiles I care not to look for any other advantage by it. Even as David when he had longed for the Waters of Bethlehem, and his Worthies had fetched it to him, he judged the thing so ill, to have hazarded the life of those valiant men, upon such an account, when it was not on necessity, or for the saving of his own, that he laid this penance, at just on that appetite of his, that caused it, to deny and cross it, so that he would not drink thereof, but poured it upon the ground. I could willingly do something the like with these Orders of mine, if I have hazarded any of my worthy brethren's Consciences by Scandal in the doing.  
It is truly an irksome thought sometimes to me, to hear how some of our Bishops do expect not only that a man should be Re-ordained, but that we should think our former Ministry to be null too, until that be done. If this indeed (as one might think) were personated only, it would vex a man to the heart, that ever any of us should yield to be so un-ingeniously dealt withal; but when we see the real confidence with which they carry it, so that for aught I see, they do believe themselves verily in it, insomuch as some of them when they have done, have bid those whom they have Re-ordained, to repent of their Ministering the Sacraments before, it may overcome out indignation methinks into a melting affection, or smile at the conceit, and make us bear with them. As if indeed the Bishop's name were distinguishedly in Christ's Charter for Ordination, as it is in the Canons of men; or as if any should tell me in earnest, that the Lawn were de essentia to the Ceremony, and the hands availed not without the Sleeves on.  
The truth is, while there was some fair and lively hopes of an accommodation between Episopacy, and the sober and moderate of the Presbyterians and others, according to his Majesty's gracious Declaration, the business of Conformity, according to Primitive Pattern, might look something lovel; but now it hath pleased those that sit at the Helm of these things, to carry their affairs so high, that our expectations that way are cut off, and the thirsty of the Land, after some good issue thereof, made to fail. I do not know of what consequence the removing from our station at first may be, or to what Rock it may come. When Paul had presaged the Voyage to be dangerous, and the minds of the Shipmen mis-give them themselves, though the winds blew softly, and the temptation was strong, the Centurion did not well to set out, or venture on, and so leave the fair Havens behind. Unless I could be sure my heart would serve me to hold throughout, and I could see safety there, at the end, I will not stand the danger of having gone so far, but will rather discount my action, and crave mercy, than look to be justified by what I have done. A Traveller goes on his way, and comes to two Ditches, he makes a shift to get over one, but then seeing another so broad, and how deep he knows not, he steps back. I do perceive I have made so large a stride at once, though in a little thing one would think, that I have left most of the wary and considerate of my Brethren behind me, I mean such at least, where necessity or a remove to a new charge, hath not made their case more clear than mine was; and I am so much convinced of the piety and integrity of many, or the most of them, that I can be contented methinks, that my Soul should be amongst theirs, (though my eyesight as yet does differ,) to far no otherwise than with them in state and Conscience, who have been my former fellows, and are yet quite free from all act or acts whatsoever, in or about this matter. I do consider what I make my Pen to utter, and I do beseech the Lord, unto whom the secrets and reasons of the heart is known, that I may stand in my spirit before him, or in my reckoning between him and my Soul (however in Man's Court I stand) according to the same.  
Not that I will be enslaved to narrow up my faith to their standard, or tie up my judgement to any party, but I will acknowledge such men's sober practice, and good conversation. And as for those rules of their life, to confess Jesus Christ, to take heed of offending any of his little ones, to own the grace of God in his Children, to prefer in the esteem of heart, the power of godliness, before the formality and garments of it, I cannot but be con●iced by them, and carry in my mind that exhortation of the Apostle, My Brethren, have not the faith of Christ in respect of persons, in which due regard as Christian, what is the Bishop more indeed than the Pawn, or the Knight than a single man, which though they may in all external honour due to them, stand for more upon the board, yet must they be but all one in the bag, and in their accounts before the Lord.  
I know indeed Quod factum est, when a thing is done, infectum fieri non potest, it cannot be undone in the act itself, but yet it may in the effect, or the effects. It is a gracious Text in jeremy, In those days, and in that time, saith the Lord, the iniquiy of Israel shall be sought for, and there shall be none, and the sins of Judah, and they shall not be found. What we find here was committed, but God's favour and pardon puts them into such an estate, that it is as good for them as if there were none, or all one in the effect, as if it had never been at all. When a man shall come to find the same freedom of spirit, the same boldness of access in the sight of the Lord, the same exercise of Grace to, and influence of his Face from him, it is all one in the effect toward God. When the sad impressions shall be wiped out of his mind, when the sanctified experience shall be left, and the bitterness be over, the regret and torment be no more, it is all one in effect towards himself. When his blood and courage, cheerfulness & life, shall be returned in the sight & presence of his Brethren, and to the duty of admonishing, hearthing and quickening them in the same faith, and the same Lord; here it is all one in respect of others. In short, when supposing a man hath taken new Orders, but is ready to stand to, & preservation considered) make use of his old, being content to far no otherwise than those that have not, or as he should have done before. Here methinks they are all one to him, as if there were none.  
Were the Ministerial Office given by Orders, as the Bishop holds, and we in our case took his Orders for this end as he gives them, than could they not be retained by us, but should be nulled, and acknowledged in vain: but if we take them to another end, and that indeed not for ourselves, but for the Canonical repute only to satisfy others, both must be held, or one spared as there is need, but the pre-eminence must be given by us to the first born; which I have reason to speak, I count, both sadly by my experience, and soberly when I compare them; the more careful examination, solemn confession, pious exhortations, frequent prayers, that were at the former, may not be forgotten; So that the times only excepted, (to speak freely, and with no gall) a man's taste alone must tell him which were to be chosen. No man having drunk old Wine, straightway desireth new for he saith the old is better.  
I understand very well, I writ not not now, as one that is like to thrive by it; I see the way I should have gone, if I looked for that. I must write for truth, though with the loss of advantage; I must write for my relief, though with the hazard of my name; I do trust God with both, and I do even choose weakness and folly (if I may, as a Christian) to remove guilt, and a load off from me, before wisdom and strength to bear it like a man. I may be accused for weak to intimate any trouble, or for unwise to venture any loss; but if my weakness shall ease me, and my folly give me victory, that I may have done expecting any good from this World, and frail man, I shall remember that Text of the Apostle, The Foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the Weakness of God is stronger than men. And then say with good Lactantius, Habeant divites suas divitias habeant sapientes suam sapientiam relinquant nobis nostram stultitiam. Let those that are great, have their Riches and Dignities, those that seem Wise, their Wisdom, let them leave us the Foolishness of Integrity, and Simplicity of Christ.  
Not but if one would be seeking, I might have stood as fair perhaps in the aspect of the times as another; Nor if that I were yet hardy enough, I foresee not what room is making for those that will, that none may say, he is moved to this by a failure herein. But I am made sensible, that to be grasping after present things, is to catch an arm full of thorns: I am made to perceive on what a brink we yet are, and that a man must know first what he can swallow well, that hath a stomach for all that comes. I would fain have both a better heart for it, and have done more good than where I have been, and if advantage came free, I should have bid it come, but if it come with fetters on my legs, or any entanglements on my Soul, I bid it farewell. The real hazard of solid good, as composure of mind, a retired frame, and a whole conscience, for the show only of happiness, and ceremony thereof, is one of the vanities of man. It is not the bulk of riches, or dignities, but their extracted Spirits, which is the content of them, and the service of God by them, which is to be sought. It is but a very little can be enjoyed of the whole World. I was verily faulty, that prudential persuasion, and seeming concernment, did draw me more hastily, if not farther, in this thing, than else I should have gone; And it is really such an ugly thing to me, when one cannot down freely with every thing else, to be trapped into this, that I cannot endure it, do what I can; neither is it in the revolution of these thoughts which was my soar, can be my cure, but in the Abrenunciation of them. It is not application of money will heal a wound, nor a dainty bit, or comfortable draught assuage the mind. There is a time with the Spirit of man, when he is not to be regarding outward good, and favour with men: Seekest thou great things for thyself? seek them not. I had rather, for my part, have peace only in my Conscience, and satisfaction to my heart, than a Mitre on my head, and a Rochet on my back. I had rather have my gracious Saviour Christ alone pleased with me, than all the Bishops, Lords, and Rulers of the Land. The fine Needle work on the Cap (as Plutarch, I think, somewhere speaks to that sense) does not help the headache; Nor the gilded Slipper the breaking of the Shin. It is the confession of evil, and the forsaking of evil, makes the Soul well: Let me but have the smile of God upon my Soul when I have done, and let others write for what they will, and get what they can. And what indeed were three or four hundred pound a year to reconciliation with God, and remission of Sin? Lord lift thou up the light of thy Countenance upon us (says David) and it shall be more cause of gladness to the heart, than the increase of Corn and Wine.  
It pleased God in the late times, when the Ordinance of the Sacrament lay waste in many places, to draw me forth (as a man made for displeasure) upon the subject of Free-admission, which got the Tongues and Pens of many of my Brethren upon me then, and a very hard Character of me ever since. Divine Providence hath turned the scales of things, and I find there be those of other Complexions, in the same Religion, that have more Candour in their grains of allowance for my imperfections, and acceptation of my poor labours, being ready (as having served them something) upon the overture of occasion, to wipe out those vibices nominis, with the marks of a contrary nature. But those smile perhaps now, I sh●ll urn into wrinkling, and must be content; who do judge it hardly honest, indeed for any, to be ambitious of Favour, as to be vain glorious of Grace, where they cannot stand sincere in it. I must needs say, I did not (as I remember) design at that time the serving any Party, or Interest; but that chief which I perceive does reign much in my heart, that is the interest of tender Consciences, who being in distress then upon so necessary a point of practice, I thought it might be a service acceptable to Truth and them, to offer the best relief I could against the stream of Separation: And as for men of another temper●● it was not my joy (God knows) but my sad fears, lest what I intended for the pious in the ease of their straightened Spirits, should be used by such of larger principles to their despite, and remissness in their own duty; If I have swerved in any thing therein, though in the least, I submit myself to the judgement of our Church, and the Scripture. I have at this time also, through Providence, been drawn out now upon this subject, made necessary likewise to many: I know it is stood upon as a matter of moment to Episcopacy, and a threshold to her; and I do not see that, so long as if men of Conscience come in, it must be the way they can, I could have counterfeited to her purpose so effectually, as in sincerity herein (I think) to the Church I have done, for I remember the Comedian, Paulum interesse censes, ex animo omnia ut fert natura, facias, an de industria? And yet I must quit any claim of Grace, or engagement from her by this, who do herein desire, (or desire at least that I may desire) to serve no other end than the same of my dear Brethren, to wit, the relieving the tender in Conscience, the keeping such in the Ministry, together with the intents also (I must not deny) of all due, holy. Ecclesiastical Peace, which if I have hitherto pursued with more indifferency, as to what kind of Government Providence please, than I ought, I crave mercy, who have not, I must confess, yet learned to speak evil of any. And while I am now little careful in these expressions, if my own heart be satisfied, what Party is pleased, or offended, I am methinks very fearful, lest any of those, whose case my Discourse does concern, be stumbled, or discouraged, who I hope will consider, how much more easy it were for me to lay aside my Opinion and Fact together, if there were for it, a truly full, and sufficient conviction, than to be put upon the distress of the distinction to uphold the one, and repent the other.  
But why indeed should any be stumbled at me, when he is only made wary and set upon his duty? When I say Duty, I suppose it will be conceived still in reference to the use of a man's Ministry; So that if his Conscience stick otherwise, and he cannot pass besides, this may be lawful, and yet not obligatory, to do it in vain; And consequently if a man hath done it, and it is not like to reach that end, upon the same account, the Case of a Recession, or testimonial Dereliction, is the same. And why should any be offended, seeing as Antonininus says, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. If there be any hurt herein, it is to myself, what is it to them? And I have reason to know what is best for me. It is not now a time with me to be fearing what I shall lose, or what I shall suffer, but to take heed what I do, to confess him, who indeed ought to be our Fear. A Prison itself to the Body, is but Liberty to the carrying a Prison in the Thoughts; and the shackells on a man's legs, are but light gear to a load upon the mind. My Brethren, says St. James, Count it all joy, if you fall into divers Temptations. I remember Ignatius, when he is as it were provoking the Lions, and his friends (I will suppose) looking upon him, and bewailing in him too much forwardness towards his danger, and approaching Martyrdom, he thus bespeaks them, in his Epistle to the Romans, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. You must pardon me my Friends, I do know what is best for my own self, now I begin to be a Disciple. Let me humbly say so; I am sensible these open words and acknowledgements of mine, are like to bring me into the mouths of Men, though not of Lions; On the one side, my owning this unusual, and displeasing thing Re-ordination, in the Doctrine (though true, and never so necessary to others) and the not bearing up the Imposition, and my own Deed (though the Confession be never so honest and necessary to me) on the other side, will put me as it were between the upper and nether jaw of Censure, to be ground by the teeth of all that please, but I cannot help it, and so long as it is but what is from without, for my quiet from within, it shall I hope but serve only, as it were, to yield Meal to me, to feed me in heart (They shall be as Bread to us, says Caleb) and I shall bear it (through Grace) with vigour upon that account, which methinks I find even now in some measure returning like the blood and spirits to my heart, that hath been even quite down before, so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Now I begin to come to myself, and consider that warfare wherein a man can never so well put on his harness, as when he is stripped, and ready to forsake all. There be some Spirits made fittest to honour God in a case of confession, and some to honour him in ways of facility and submission; I am persuaded the Lord Almighty will have enough to stand by him as his Confessors, and also to carry on his work, of the Gospel, as gentle, not opposing themselves, and bearing with the evil; and yet keeping each of them a good Conscience herein, being ready, as to preparation of mind, to choose rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season. Whosoever shall be ashmed to confess me in this adulterons generation, of him shall the Son of Man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of the Father. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 X 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Let the Fire and the Cross (as that blessed Saint and Martyr goes on) the coition of wild Beasts, the breaking of the Bones, the disjointing of the Members, the dissolution of the whole Body, and the spite of the Devil come upon me, so long as I may be partaker of Christ Jesus.  
The tru●h is, the volubility of these times, have brought such snares on men's Consciences, that will require both the candour of our Rulers, and also much disquisition, and resolution in our own selves, to divide aright between the Gnat and the Camel, that when we do not strain at the one, yet we may not swallow the other. The same self-denial and mortification, it is in my thought, will not fit every condition. Methinks I see many good men with their Isaac bound in their hand, ready to lay him on the Altar; The Child of their hopes smiles upon them; they have pleasing opportunities, tempting advantages, stripping necessities, and they cry, Oh pity us! Oh do not put us under the knife! O spare us, do not cast us away. Alas! how a man feels his own frailty, whiles his bowels yerns at these cries! Well now (say they) if we should do thus, or ●hus, for our advantage, and shall come after for to be troubled in Conscience for it, when it is done, God may say to us, go to your advantages, and let them relieve you; you have what you sought, you get no more of me, and can they ease you? But if we shall deny our advantages to save our Conscience, and come after to find it nothing, or but a mere scruple for which we have relinquished them and so are troubled for that, then may we go to God directly for our comfort, who we are sure can ease us, and by the testimony alone of our integrity, make up what we have lost. It is a noble instance of the famous Marquis of Vice, who when his Honours, and State, and Wife, and Children hung about him, could shake off all, as the drops of rain, from his Cloak at once, for the sake of his Conscience. From which contemplation, I will humbly in the presence of the Lord, from henceforth lay down this rule (ingenuously acknowledging it to him, as my failing, that I had not laid it to myself, animo obfirmato before) that when the Soul is in doubt about any thing, which it is like to be troubled for, either way when it is done, it must determine to take that way, which is most like to relieve it again, in that trouble. If my Conscience can relieve me against my advantages, and my advantages cannot relieve me against my Conscience, then let my Isaac be sacrificed, and my hopes he cast on the Lord, who can raise them up again if he sees good, when they are slain, but let not a man dispirit his Soul, and lose the comfort of his mind, if not also the peace of his Conscience, which is not to be recompensed with the world. And yet need we not be so narrow-spirited towards God, his Church, or Cause, (which is the promoting holiness and peace) but that as to others, and in other things, as to ourselves, we may judge, that when a person hath found in the bottom of his Soul, wherein he is like to be most serviceable to this grand end, he need not hid himself among the stuff, from the Providences, which without sin, lie before him. This being one top-step of denying one's self, to deny self-denial in its season. Through good report, and through evil report, by honour and dishonour.  

VIri, fratres, & patres, Sinite me, nullius quamvis pretii hominem, cogitationes hasce onerati pector is, nimis anxias, ad animi aegritudinem sublevandam, aperire, & quasi in gremia vestra effundere, neque aegrè ferte, neque irascimini. Dolet, me sa●è favori, humanitati, & indulgentiae vestrae adeò molestè inniti, ut tan●am ejus coplam, quanta conditioni meae opus est, m●hi facére, vos sollicitarem. Infelicitèr quidem & haud satìs auspicatò, res mihi gesta est, qui ad provinciam hanc scrupulosam suscipiendam, praepopere nimiùm me contuli, priusquaem ad maturioris consilii calculos, totam recocassem materiam; quae mihi tamen non tantum molestiae in disputando, quantum in onere praecipitis istius facti ferendo conslavit. De quo, licèt uberiorì orationis filo jam verba profuderim, nondùm tamen acquiescens animus, intolerando hoc fasce, omninò se levare gestit.  
Serenissimus Rex nupera Declaratione injunxerat, ut Episcopus Presbyteros nonnullos ruri viventes accerseret, eosque in ritu impositionis manuum, & examine ordinandorum, sibi socios adjungeret. In observantiam hujus declarationis, Placuit Episcopo, ut & ego inter alios fuerim accersitus. Mihi hoc in casu, & aequum, & ad praesentem rem necessarium, visum est, non quò apologiam praetexerem, sed ut ingenuitati litarem, Episcopum submonere, me à solis Praesbyteris ordinatum esse, meque istam ordinationem satis validam & sufficientem existimare. Quo facto ansâ hac de re inter nos benigne conferendi datâ, me ut primus ordinationem meam instaurare, non gravarer, neve opus desererem, per quàm amicè tantâ humanitate, suavitate, & persuasion is vehementiâ, cui accessit quorundam familiarium etiam consilium, inductus.  
Hùc animum adveterant (uti credo) amici, & cogitationes desixerant, quo scilicet pacto in generatione meâ Deo potissimùm inservire possem; Id quod, principiis me is quatenùs palàm facta sune perpensis, ad tempus praesens ut accommodem me, alliciebat. Verò enim verò, hic communis situs est lapis, in quem summae etiam probitatis viri aliquandò impingunt, quòd in dando aequè ac in petendo consilio, non tam conscientiam solam & Dei gloriam, quàm prudentiam, & res nostras praesentes spectemus. Cogitabamus equidèm, & probabilis quaedam conjectuxa nos pascebat, nempè fieri posse, ut factum hoc praesenti mihi esset utilitati, quod isti consilio caput erat.  
Non potui quin iterùm animo revoluerem, nimirùm aspernari favoris illecebras, & commodi allectamenta, nec quicquam illorum gratiâ committere, quod alitèr quisquam facturus non esset, rome esse Christiano maximè dignam. Sed Eheù! Quis mortalium in hâc vitae scenâ omnibus numer is absolutus est? Cogitanti haec, unica consideratio praeter caetera, mentem meam, rursùs mihi verberabat, qua vel sola alii fortasse omnem ex animo scrupulum eximere potuisset. Functio ministerialis mihi onus grave visa est, jam si iniquit as temporum ob Episcopalis ordinationis defectum, me ex istius officii dignitate exueret, quid aliud profectò ageret, quam ut onere isto me levaret? Ac proinde novo me ordinis instituto obstringere, tanquam honesti alicujus, & sui ipsius abne gationis faciem prae se tulit, immò istud ipsum, ossicii, ad quod jam sejunctus eram, ratio postulare videbatur. Hoc novum commod is istis prominentibus facem praeferebat, & subtilis hac tentatio (si quidem tentatio) captivum duxit, in aurem insusurrans, ista si recusarem, fore, ut conscientia mihi exprobraret me nihilo minns gratificari carni, desidiae indulgendo, quam si istis indulgerem, & ita Christianâ illa sui ipsius abnegationis consolatione privarer.  
Unius tantùm bidui spatium cogitandi mihi erat; objectio scandali palmaria, quae in re leviori, paulò antè me pupugerat, & ob id vel sola me retardare potuisset, antony's debuisse●, mihi cum quodame familiaribus colloquenti, hebes & stupitla (minimè verò dicam, non prorsus omninò ulla) fortè reddita erat; Spes ingeniosa & peracuta affulgebat. Res ipsa, in se inaifferens, non contra conscientiam, ast contra animi genium & ductum visa est. In formulâ ordinationis, quaedam verba Respon sionibus inserta, ad ministrum spectantia, maximum scrupulum injecere, & in quibus ego maximè haerebam, ea alius fortasse siceo pede praeterilsset. Ut tandem huic malo remedium quoad potui adhiberem; verba ista paululùm mutavi, & libertatem non subscribendi deposcebam. Jam nihil reliquum putabum, quod posteà mihi negotium facesseret. Impraesentiarum, & dierum duorum, vel trium intervallo, res omnis in vado erat; Sed paucis post, mens mea dubia & ●nceps esse coepit. Id imprimis metuebam tantùm, nè in praeooncept is ist is verbis claudicassem. Hic metus angit animum, & in varias de re ipsâ scrupulos conjecit: Hi scrupuli me aliis objectionibus immersexe. Has objectiones annotare, & singulis prout mihi occurrebant, & me cruciabant, respondere, operae praetium d●xi. Singulari Providentiae manu credo factum, ac proinde priorem meam istam Diatriben conscribebam; Ex quâ siquis fructum quendam perceperit, omnem soli Deo tribuo gloriam.  
Quantum ad me attinet, mentis meae tranquillitas non adeò diù durabat. Quod hominis judicio est confirmatio, non semper est cordi satisfactio. Alterum hunc librum in lucem emitto, & confessionem etiam subjungere non verebar. Liber conf●ssionum Augustinums cohonestavit. Ex quo●erim Dissertatio mea dubitationum flactus mihi composuit, quantum ad materiam Re●ordinationis, ante oculos obversabatur ipsum factum, ejusque modus. Scio quòd Deus est justus, qui non asfligit ex animo suo, m●c●●itiâque afficit filios viri. Deliquisse me, memet judico, quia animi molestiâ afficit; Meipsum judico ne judicer, & ab ipso condemner. Quoad animi igitur desideratam promunitionem, circumstantias concomitantes, agendi finem & allectamenta, me à crimine non libero. Praefestinationis meae me penitet. Homo agnoscit, ignoscit Deus. Ad oujus miserecordiam confugere malim, & fratrum meorum emendicare preces, quam ex eo quod feci me justum depraedicare. Si corum quae in lucem emisi me poeniteret, & mihi fortasse & aliis injurius essem; Non scripti (praeterquam quòd in omnibus peccamus sed facti me piget. Fratribus meis in re per se licitâ patrocinarer, me ●ero ipsum, ob temeritatem ejusdem ad praesentem statum meum applicationem, purgare non aggrediar. Dum Concionibus intersumus, dum preces recitamus, interdùm peccamus. Et quis est, qui non aliquandò cafactitat, quae posteà si omisisset, magis in rem suam fuisse comperit.  
— Quid enim ratione timemus,  
Aut cupimus! Quid tam dextro pede concipis ut te  
Conatus non poeniteat, votique peracti?  
Credebam, si necessitatem ad intercludendam omnem è vineâ cui devinctus eram, elabendi viam mihi injungerem, fore ut mens mihi in opere defixa, in illud minùs vacillanter, tota incumberet; sed non sine dolore profiteor rem mihi non adeò foelicitèr cecidisse. Et reipsa experior, me jam antè satìs obstrictum, hoc posteriori nodo adeò implicatum affligi, ut diutiùs tollerare non possim, quin istum relaxandi & explicandi tentarem viam. Avertat Deus me ulteriùs progressurum ob hoc factum, quàm saluâ conscientiâ alitèr nequirem.  
In eum locum jam res rediit, ut nonnullis, nihil, nisi plena conformitas in omnibus, sive novis sive pristinis arridet, quibus an unquàm me totum dedere, animum recolligam posthàc, non sacis scio. Videor igitur mihi videre, mecum quidem hic agi, perindè ac cum homine, qui in foramen quoddam irrepsit, ibique capite & humeris immissis haeret; nec totum corpus suum post se attrahere, nec sine corpore quò se vertat, habet; Anteriorem idcircò corporis partem, quam commodissime potest retrahere cogitur: Quod dum facit, si caput suum salvum & incolume tueri potest, illaesionem quandam aliarum partium aequanimiter feret, atque satis benè actum secum putabit.  
Hoc sanè pro comperto habeo, hanc Re-ordinationem, maximam esse ad quamcunque aliarum impositionum materiam, sine percolatione deglutiendam, inescationem, ne quod jam concoxi, effectu careat, & irritum videatur. E contra mihi subolet, si uni●um hoc meum factum (omninum fortassè non minus informe) jam mentem meam adeò momordit, quid fiet si praeter hoc, ad mores scenae hujus quoscunque me composuero? Sunt instinctus quidèm interni, & mentis hallucinationes, quae rationem superant; nec satis scio, an quid periculi latentis maneat qui se praesenti generationi devovet, inre licet pusilla, vel quousque ego progressus sum, eò quòd Genius meus, ad canendum receptui, quò i● pristinam stationem regrediar, adeò indesinentèr aurem vellicans me exsuscitat, subindé submurmurans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, discede à tentoriis, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Sed hoc certe scio, & nimis exploratam habeo, Ex quo hoc feci, irrequieta mihi mens redditur, & internâ pace vix noctu vel interdiu, nisi valetudinariâ, frui potui: Tota facti istius fuêre concomitantia memoriae displacentia, quorum extimescnd●e imagines, & nova imaginationum commenta, & terrores occurrunt, quae tanquam furiae (ut cum Tullio loquar) respirare non sinunt, & (ut cum Terentio) nec consilii locum, nec remedii copiam relinquunt. Abomnibus igitur & singulis mihi impetranda est venia, adhibendi inusitatum aliquod, sed efficax remedium, quod animum meum ex hoc ergastulo acturùm ut potero, adsemel, & adsemper (favente Deo) expediam.  
Non possum quin ex animo doleam, me ad hoc compelli; absque quo esset, causam non video cur non praesenti foro feliciter aeque ac alij quam plurimi mei ordinis, u●i potuero. Sed ita optimo maximo visum est, ut actio ea quae maximam, & favor is & em●lumenti mihi conciliandi, speciem prae se ferebat (quantum ad effectum attinet, quem hùc me impellendo, certo certiùs (ut vereor) tandem cousequetur) ad utriusque ascensum, quam maximè viam occluderet, & penitùs me amandaret. Quod ille benè vertat precor. Jacturae quidem unius timor, & capiatio alterius, occasionem (quantum sentio) meae in hoc negotio claudicationis praestitêre: Jam verò utrumque periclitari, & conscientiae paci unicè studere; Quanti ad Dei gloriam intersit inquirere, & om●ia caetera mea in prompru illi posthabere, Christianam quandam compensationem fore spero, quamque ab illo, acceptam fero. Immò quanta vindicatio? 2 Cor. 7.11. Praestat certè nobis Dei nomen magni facere, per conf●ssionem nostram & Christiano pudore suffundi, quàm peccatum retinendo, dignitatem aucupari, & ad manum temporum turoi●è● adblandiri. Non qùod Divinâ aspirante gratiâ, ego unquam genuinum naturae meae ductum, concordiae studendi, & conscientijs tenerorum fratrum (in quantum possum) succurrendi, sequi desinam; Imm● si quem virum probum videro, qui sine ullâ mentis intemperie ad omnes praesentis scenae articulos componere se potest, gandio afficiar, nec ingenium ejus improbem; At mihi tamen, potiùs quam ipse diutiùs talem agam vitam, in quâ, nec Deo, nec Hominibus, inseruîre possum, omnis lapis est movendus, ut quo vis modo, quâ vis conditione, ex his angusti●s emergam. Tu quisquis es, qui paratus astas ut me judices, acced as propiùs, & rem omnem a principio audi, ac modo candidus sis & sincerus Christianus, nullam mihi, neque imprudentiae, neque indigni alicujus facinoris notam inures, sed potiùs sedato animo & placido recedens, necesse est, benè est, optumè factum, acclamabis.  
Si Episcopi a solis Prabyter is Ordinatos pro verè ministris habe●ent, & quibus confirmatio in super Canonica arridet, eam amplecti, alijs, quorum conscientia illam aversatur, eâdem supersedere, liberum, & quasi indifferens relinquatur, Si summa ratio non dictitaret, aequitas saltem Christiana postularet, moderationi, sive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, tali, gratificarinos debere, quae quidem nobis cum primùm nostrûm quam plurimi ordinationem suam renovarent, affulsit; porrò alterum alteros ferre, & uniformi (quantùm sua cujus●que conscientia tulerit) pietati operari. Nec esset, quod qui se conformarent eos quos vocant Non-conformantes, contemptui haberent, nec hi illos vicissim judicarent, Ro. 14.3. Si ver● Ordinationis innovatio exigatur, ob hanc potissimùm rationem, quòd pristina nostra Ordinatio exautorata, & pro irritâ habenda est, quasi nulla in nos a Christo authoritas, nisi per Episcopum derivari possit, omnesque qui illam exosculari erubescant, functione ministeriali (quod averruncet De us) excludendi sint, Certè fratres, hoc in casu, contumeliliâ adeò gravi, adeò indignâ afficerentur, ut ego quippè solus adhua causae huic palam & ex confesso devinctus, non immeritò ab illo um castris, meoque pristino Ministerio, transfuga viderer, si non in eodem me cum illis conjungerem, meque suae sortis participem facerem; Si non & injuriam quam fortè intuli resarcire, illisque in omnibus quoad potero satisfacere, paratus fuero; cùm res non levis momenti sit; utpote quae ad Dominum qui operarios in messem mittit, aeque ac ad operarios ipsos, hominumque animas spectet, & cùm regula illa ●rica, Non dimittitur peccatum donec restituatur ablatum, nihil minùs fo●asse a me efflagitare videatur.  
Noveri●t igitur universi & singuli quicunque volunt quod ego J. H. Ordinatus a Class Praesbyterorum An. 1649. Et Ordinatuc denuò ab Episcopo An. 1660. Palàm, in Divinae majestatis gloriam, & conscientiae meae pacem, profiteor, viz. Quamvis Ordinationis instaurationem in quibusnam casibus licitam, & verbo Dei consentaneam esse credam, & in procinctu ad eandem propugnandam steti, ita ut neminem alium, hac in re, labe aspergam; Quoniam tamen hic defectus proprij, sive multo potiùs, defectuum meorum convictus sum, meque non rectè fecisse, cui in loco quo remansi, cum alijs confirmato, hoc neutiquam, vel saltem nondùm, opus erat; Praecipuè quoniàm ad sauciati pectoris vulnus, ictumve conscientiae sanandum, nihil ferè intentatum reliqui, & catera omnia planè desperata sunt, ut quo me vertam alitèr, non habeam; Ut nihil de formae incongruitate enarrem, cujus causà ad Diaconatum veluti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (ut loquuntur) descenditur; quae quidem contumelia est (quo penitiùs intueor) indiguatione omni ingenua & liberali, vere dignissima: Ego ultrò, & spontaneo ductu, a nemine, nisi a manu. Dei impulsus, & verè 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, totum illum actum & actus quoscunque, sive voluntate, sive verbis, sive facto, quibus nim is temerè, & non sat is consideratè, in, circa, aut ante, ordinationis istam instaurationem, me subjeci, quorum paenitere, & dolere me fateor, immò & confiteor coram Domino Deo meo; Retracto, revoco, abdico, abr●nuncio, derelinquo, procul abjicio, eaque cum quibnscunque ad ea pertinentibus, per has praesentes literas, quantum in me situm est, facta infecta, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, reddo omnia. Etin illo die spernent quisque sua idola. Seperabis ea, & apage dices eorum cuique. Denique ut paucis expediam, cùm mihi persuasum omninò habeam, priorem meam ordinationem fuisse, & esse satis validam, ego me in pristinum meum statum confero, eique adhaerebo. Ita quidem eò tandem ventum est, ut dum Episcopalis Ordinatio, priori nostrae insultare, & in irritam illam reddendo, blandiri sibi admodùm videtur, accidit illi rectissimè, secundum illud Prophetae. Propinquus est dies Jehovae; Quemadmodùm feceris, fiet tibi, retributio tua revertetur in caput tuum.  
Nonnulli forsan animum induxêre, fore, ut posteritas a tans multis hoc seculo denùo ordinatis, exemplum & testimonium sibi sumeret, ad annibilandum in posterùm Praesbyterorum Ordinationem, id cùm non possit non praebere maximam Ecclesijs reformatis transmarinis offensionem, aeque ac Reverendis nostris in Britanniâ fratribus: Etiam, per me, scriptis mandetur, quod hunc in finem, sive hanc in rationem & sententiam, nos quidem minimè gentium huic nosmet subjecimu●; Absit longissimè, sed in id incubuimus potiùs Re-ordinationem (rem quamvis insolentem Ecclesiae) propugnaremus, quàm nostram priorem pro invalidâ & in cassâ haberemus; Fateor hâc in re, me ad Episcopale regimen colendum, nimis proclivem aliquibus videri posse; Sed nullâ ego reverà Hierarchicâ afficior gloriâ, notâ istius nominis insigniri, sed potiùs si ultrà quam tutum est prolapsus sim, hoc erit mihi pro victoria ex charactere isto, si ad●apocalypsin, ita alludere, mihi licuerit. Porrò & in posteros feratur, quòd ego ipsemet, qui alijs praeivi, & difficile opinionis hujus defendendi onus fratrum meorum simul ac mei ipsius causâ, in me suscepi, licet opi●ionem hanc meam pro virili tuear, tamen Facti istius conscientiam ferre nescius, & difficultates infandas, praesertim ut indiès jam res se vertunt. Ob id paenitentiam hanc, ingenuam & publicam, liberè egi, istique valedixi.  
Saepo equidem rationes meas mecum subduxi, quo nempe pacto, juxta naturae genium, conscientiam & conditionem, honore Deum afficere quam maximè potuero; Et jacta est jam mihi alea, quae & optimè huic vitae pro●osito evenit; Quocircà, in hujus rei testimonium, me scilicet, neque ex parte se subjectantium voluntarium, (quoad principia quae propter exigitur) alicujus assensum, sed submissionem duntaxat ad excercitium Ministerij & liberîorem evangelij cursum hâc vice necess●●iam, approbare; ad fratres meos, ut unà cum illis conjungar, unà gratìs praedicem; aut ejiciar, unà denique mala aut bona quaecunque subeam, me recipio. Faxit Deus ut omnia Ecclesiae felicitèr succedant. Et Ittai dixit Davidi, in quocunquè loco tu eris, sive ad mortem, five ad necem, ibi futurus erit Servus tuus,  
J. H.    

SECTION XI.  
AFter the finishing this second Discourse upon this Subject, there is a third Book come out against me on the same, entitled, A peaceable enquiry about Re-ordination, under an unknown Name, like the former. I wish rather an acquaintance with the Author, to embrace him in my love, than to scratch him with my Pen; whom I receive as another person of learning, industry, candour, and worth. I am now from my Study and Books, and cannot bestow that time and examination upon his labours as they require; I shall sit down only as it were, and looking over his leaves, point out the answers to what concerns me in it, which I have given already to the former Author.  
His Book hath six Chapters. In the first (p. 1. ad 5.) he premises twenty Distinctions which may pass. In his second, he l●ies down as many Propositions, (p. 6. ad. 20.) whereof three only require my animadversion.  
Prop. 5. He citys learned Authors on both sides, some desining Ordination only to be a public approbation and confirmation, and others a protestative mission, or collation of Office-power, and then tells us, we may call it either of these, provided, we will acknowledge it to have the force of a Condition, or causa sine quâ non of that power. Unto which I have this to say, that if this person had bestowed as many thoughts to compound these two Opinions, and show us how they may stand together, as he hath showed kindness in granting both of them to us, he might bo●h have saved himself some labour, and made us more beholding to him. See ante, p. 16. where you have this same thing preconceived by myself. There is his 14th. distinction therefore he hath laid down, as idle, and without use in him, that may take its place here, to wit, This Ministerial power may be considered in foro Dei (or conscientiae) and in foro huma●o. They are his own terms, if he had but been so happy also to apply them. See ante, Sect. 3. p. 30. In the first consideration (I have said there) a man hath this power, and must have it before Orders, and so his first Argument (p. 11, 12.) from the Coronation of a King, and Elected Magistrate, will make for us, and show him how Investiture follows the Office, and not gives it. In the second consideration, we will acknowledge it, that ordinarily extra casum necessitatis, it come by Orders, and so his next two Arguments, (p. 13.) are answered, to wit, It is not enough that a man is qualified and desires the Office; But being Ordained, he becomes a M●●ister as he was not before. In this sense, be it granted him, that Orders is a Condition, as he would have it, which being put, Office power does follow, and being denied, is suspenced, to wit, coram hominibus, as to the Church. And so that question which he asks, Are all Prophets, are all Teachers? is so far from posing of us, that we shall not need to answer him only, And have all gifts? although while the Apostle (1 Cor. 12. with Ro. 12.) makes the Gifts and Office to be Commensurate, that w●re enough; But we can say farther, when a man hath the Gift and spiritual Power from God, yet hath he not his right of Reception before Men, till his Orders. It is Orders, I will account myself, gives a person his Church-Authority, and transferts him ab esse Laico, ab esse Clericale, (if you will) in her Court. And this I hope does cut those in the hamm quite, that will be running before they be sent, to wit, before they be sent by the Church. And yet while in foro Dei, a man hath his Gifts and Office, and so is a Minister before, in that respect, this Gentleman I hope will stand to his word, that there is not then, so much intrinsecal to the Ordinance, which may hinder its repetition. I pray let us suppose a pious, laborious, worthy Minister, that hath exercised the Ministry many years upon approbation only of an Assembly; I might instance in Mr. Bruce, (ante, p. 71.) or in one perhaps of eminent note for this particular, at home, not Ordained Presbyter till the Bishops now came in; Let me ask any sober-spirited man hereupon, whether such a ones Ministerial Acts for ten, a dozen years, or more past, were all ipso facto, null and void? and whether he believe really, that such a man could have no spiritual power derived to him from Christ, for that service, whereby there are so many probably have been edified? What maps heart could serve him to say this? The direct clear contrary vo●e whereunto, in Mr. Bruce his case, you have had before, and for my part, if I could once believe so, I might at next turn believe also, that the hands of a Bishop alone, laid on a man's head, shall fetch dow the Holy Ghost (or this spiritual effect) upon him straight, when the hands and prayers of twenty Presbyters can do nothing▪ After which, I were fitted to believe even what you would have next. And yet shall we leave open a gap here, as may let in consuon into the Ministry? No, there is a middle and right way to be taken, and that is (as I judge) what I have proposed in this Distinction thus applied, which I therefore humbly offer to the sober in heart to consider of, and as for his other Arguments that follow, (p. 14.) out of the London Divines, they are answered, ante Sect. 5. p. 48. to 51.  
Prop. 8. and Prop. 15. Methinks, although it be true that the Bishop in his account does Ordain a man again to the Office, and will look on it as a proper Ordination, the man himself yet, may take it, having I will suppose, a call to a new place, as an Ordination to a particular work, or otherwise, as a regular confirmation only of his former Ministry, and so declare it resolutely when he does it. Why may he not blend in practice, what this man distinguishes in notion? And as for the Form only, which is but man's composure, what if it be a little misused, so long as it will serve that turn in some sort we take it for, though it were framed indeed at first for another? Even as a Key we know sometimes will serve to opens two or three Locks, when it was at first hammered out for one of them only.  
His next Chapter contains twenty argumentative interrogations, unto which I will say in general, If the Office-power a Minister hath given him, coram Ecclesia by Orders, which is I count in itself, nothing else but the repute of us as Ministers, or reception in that relation, as we stand in before toward God, being called of him, be to be put in the predicament of Relation, that one axiom only, M●ltiplicatis terminis, multiplicantur relationes, may serve to un-wind this Author out of many of those intricacies he hath thought good to twist himself in, in this third Chapter, See aunt, p. 17. In particular I answer.  
To the first, The case is the same as in the repetition of the Oath of Allegiance, to the Magistrate. Ante, p. 57 The swearing is specifically the same, to wit, the matter of the same Precept, and the repetition which makes it differ numerically only, is the command of our Superiors. Add to this that instance, 2. Ch. 30.23. Say the same of it, and apply it to Orders.  
To the Second, It is answered at large; A●te, Sec. 4. p. 36. etc.  
To his Third, and Fifth, I would ask whether joseph's being Christ's reputed Father, was a Relation? If it were, I should answer what is hinted before: But to choose what I think, Ordination (I will say) adds no new being, nor begets any new Relation, but declares or testifies that to the Church which is already. As when a Couple have mutually given their consent, the conjugal Relation arises from thence before God, and if they be married after, both by the Magistrate, and Minister, it is but the same thing new declared, and that is all. And thus I remember among the Arguments Voetius uses to prove, that Ordinatio non est Fundamentum Ministerii, he produces this for one, Conjugii Fundamentum est mutuus consensus non vero externa solemnizatio which he confirms out of the Lawyers.  
To his Fourth, between, See Ant, p. 90.  
To his Sixth, Christ, I conceive, exerts not any Act in Ordination, as to collation of power (whatever he do as to his Grace or Spirit) but the Charter of his Gospel only, or Institution, is his standing Act, and the Church declares a man in Office according to the same.  
To his Seventh, Re-ordination is an injury indeed on the part of those that require it to the nullifying our former Ministry, but not, I hope, on the part of those that submit to it only for the use of that Ministry they cannot enjoy otherwise. Necessity excuses by the verdict of this man's own twelfth Proposition.  
To the Eight, We must conceive no otherwise of this investiture with Ministerial power in Orders, than of the investiture with Regal in the Inauguration of Princes, the repetition whereof (instanced by me in Scripture) does I hope, answer this Interrogation.  
To the Ninth, and Tenth, The Deaconship as well as the Priesthood in our Case is taken only we know by way of Form for the Canonical Stamp upon our former Ministry, and let a man lock to it only that he avoid lying in his own Answers, and I do judge, supposing him at present disposed, and under the need of it, that it is to be born by him, when he cannot help it, as a Christian bears affronts and indignities for the sake of the Gospel.  
To the Eleventh, Necessity that knows no Law is not bounded by Number.  
To the Twelfth, Our people are to be taught by us, to believe (as we do) that our former Orders are valid, which prevents these scruples.  
To the Thirteenth, and Fourteenth, The arguing is pertinent, as to our Rulers, if they will please to hearken to it, but the Case of Imposition, is not the same with the Submission.  
To the Fifteenth, This is prevented by the explication of our account of, and sense about our re-ordaining.  
To the Sixteenth, what should hinder, but a man may pray in Faith for God's Grace or Blessing upon his Office or Work more than once?  
To the Seventeenth, I had thought to have found something against Prelacy in the Abstract, as Anti C●ristian, akinn to the Papal Hierarchy, or the like, and so dangerous to be meddled with at all, or to be come near in the least, but when that which is objected is personal only, I pray Quorsumhaec? The validity of Orders, I hope, as of Baptism, depends not on the goodness of the Priest. Luther, and others of our first Reformers, never took any other than the Romish Orders.  
To the Eighteenth, If Re-ordination be but proved in thesi, it is fair for me, for I will confess, that as it is clothed with all its circumstances in hypothesi it is very hard to be digested, and this good man methinks should not go to make it harder, while he sits down so industriously, as it were, to prick thorns into his brethren's hearts, that are herein too tender and bleed already, There are 27 Particulars raked up out of the words of the Bishop, or , as incongruous in the Form, which let them look to that speak them: For my part, I care not to have it said, in regard of the change of the Church's Court from Presbytery to Episcopacy, that I am new Ordered, or Admitted, any more than for a M●. or Arts in one University to be admitted Mr. also in the other. There are 20 other Particulars therefore he adds, which come more close, whereof though some are much strained, and some concern those that come to be Ordained at first, as the Re-ordained, which is pi●ty; Yet do I assent to him so far, that whatever words or engagements a man utters for himself, he hath need to be very tender of them, insomuch that I myself find some kind of guilt reflected on me, methinks (I crave mercy) in one passage I thought not on in the least before, to wit, the first Question in the Deaconship is, Do you think you are moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon you this Office and Ministration? I took this Cursorily as no more than, Do you think you have Gods Call to the Ministry? And the Answer being so gentle, I think so, it passed with me without more thought: A man may (I think) say he is moved by the Holy Ghost to his duty, and while he submits to this Form only, for the confirming his Ministry, I cannot deny but this may be said; yet let the words be strictly taken (as this man does urge them) of that Work and Office of the Deaconship, as distinct from the Priesthood, if I were put upon it now, I could hardly say it again without some explication. It must be conceived therefore, when the Bishop dispenses with the Canons, as to the Ordaining a man Deacon and Presbyter in one day, there is no expression necessary there to, but he may dispense with likewise; And consequently, let every man be sure to crave his liberty accordingly, as to the variation of any such expression, which is against his Conscience, and that is the proper, clear, and full remedy in this matter. If possibly one Bishop should deny a man so poor a thing as this (which I conceive none will) let him go to another.  
To the Nineteenth, I consent with full conviction, that it is wholesome and prudent advice, for a man that goes about this business, to consider first with himself well, how far his Conscience will go, and whether he can thereby attain his end by it, to wit, as the getting into, so the keeping his Ministry got, which if he can, with a satisfied heart, by a full conformity, or His Majesty's gracious indulgence either, it is well, I shall be glad (however it be with myself) if my labour be not in vain in the Lord unto any.  
To his Twentieth, I acknowledge the same as to the main, but crave the Applications of his Thirteenth Distinction, and Proposition.  
His Fourth Chapter contains Animadverssons particularly upon my Tract, which he reduces to Ten Arguments.  
Arg. 1. From Paul's using Circumcision, and the Jewish Rites, to which he speaks p. 66. and 73. Ans. I see no● well to what end he shows his reading here, unless to confirm me more herein: It appears by the Authorities and Particulars he recites, that Paul and the Jews used those Rites after Christ's death to another than their proper end; And if he so industriously grant the use of those Rites, which were the Ordinances of God, without that end to which they were at first appointed by him; Why does he make so much ado for us to use that Form which is only the Ordinance and Composure of men, to another end than that to which it was framed at first by them? See Ant, p. 44. And lo here the Apple of that strife (or paring of it) about which they contend.  
Arg. 2. From the precedent of Barnabas and Paul, Act. 13. This he speaks to, p. 74. ad 82. Ans. The first instance of these hath methinks even non-plused this man. Orders is with him an Authoritative M●ssion; Barnabas now is sent forth Authoratively by the Church at Jerusalem, yet Ordained here with Paul at Antioch; what says he to this? Why this only, It might be judged an occasional Embassy. But how I pray could he be sent by them on this Embassy without the Office? The exercise of Authority supposes the Existence, says he somewhere himself. And how could he have the Office according to him unless he was Ordained? Here then is a double Ordination by men: for, as for any immediate Ordination of Barnabas from Christ before, as of Paul, we read not; And this Person does hold, that a men cannot be a Minister, or have his Office, but by Orders: And yet does the fellow-instance with this take much deeper root in my Soul. Paul we are sure was called and sent by Christ himself immediately to the Gentiles, and yet Ordained after with Barnabas. Now if a man may be Ordained by men, who was Ordained before by Christ himself, how much rather I pray may he be Ordained again, that is Ordained only before by men? And thus doth that which he answers to weaken this, add strength to it; which is, A twofold Ordination, one extraordinary, and the other ordinary cannot justify a twofold Ordination that is ordinary. But what is this opposing words to real things? It justifies it I say the rather. The call to the Ministry is either Inward, which lies in Gods gifting and inclining a person for the Office (as he speaks) or Outward. This call from without, we must know is either Extraordinary or Ordinary; which by the way may convince this Author of a farther defect in his apprehension, while he would make the Inward call in us, to answer that which was Extraordinary then. Well, Paul is called Extraordinarily by Christ, at first from without, appearing to him on purpose that he might send him, etc. and yet called again by Orders for all that. Here then is an external call we see double. What can he possibly say to this? Yes, What can he say to the bottom of the matter? The reason why Divines and he do hold the unlawfulness of Re-ordination, is because they conceive a man is made a Minister already by his first Orders; But he●e we have a Precedent for certain, that one who is a Minister already, may be Ordained. Our foot here is upon a Rock. Two thing he hath to answer; 1. Some say this Ordination was to a higher Office. But who says so? When Christ had made Paul his Apostle, what Office I pray can be given by man after, higher than this? 2. We deny (he adds) this to be a proper Ordination. But though he does so, I do believe there is not so much as one of the Ancients can be produced to have dreamt of such a denial; and presuming that there is not 10 to 100 of all Divines else, that ever interpreted this place otherwise, than of Ordination, I may conclude (I hope) that Orders is and must be that, and nothing else but that, which is, or may be gathered of it here, rather than to say with this person, that that which is here, is not to be accounted Ordination. While therefore he endeavours to prove by several particulars, that these persons were not Ordained here to their Office, let us by Ordaining to the Office, understand what such learned men as are of his mind do, that is, Ordained for the conferring of their Office, Ut Episcopalem gratiam largiretur; He little thinks how he is plea●ing for me, who do hold this certainly to be true; and consequently, when Ordination does no more than ●hat he allows it here to do, what is the repetition of it, to be so pleaded against, if occasion be? Let this Author therefore, that admires that I do not prove this Imposition of hands to be a proper Ordination, when it is generally received to be no otherwise than ●o, know, what is more material for him to prove if he can, to wit, that Ordination precisely taken, as distinct from Election, is any thing any where else in Scripture, than it is here. If he cannot do this, he may put up, and have done; If he can, yet will it serve our turn, so that a twofold Ordination however, will be proved to our hands. And here while we are upon this Consideration, and I myself with these Authors, do distinguish some some where between Ordaining to the Office and the Work, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as it is here. I must offer these two or three things by way of Quaere. 

1. Whether all Ordination by man be not indeed to the Work? Numb. 8.22. Ex. 29.1. Act. 14.26.  
2. Whether the distinction accordingly (where we are put to the need) be not rather to be made only of the Work, and so a man be said Ordained either to the Work in general of the Office, or to the Work of a particular charge?  
3. Whereas some do distinguish between the power of Preaching and Administering the Sacraments, and an outward faculty to exercise the same (or ●o that purpose) and do account that Orders give the one, and that after a man must have a Licence from the Bishop for the other; Whether the bottom truth here (the notion being but licked aright) be not indeed this; That the Office and Power itself is given only of God, and then that which Man does by approbation of his Call in sanctifying him by Ceremony to the Work, gives him this authority or faculty before man, as to his work in general, and the Bishop's Licence after, is no more than as Claudius Lisias giving Paul leave to speak in his Province, to wit, the liberty of using this Faculty under his Jurisdiction.    
Arg. 3. From the most genuine End of such solemnities as this, and so consequently hereof. This he endeavours to disprove, p. 88 ad 90. Ans. As for this end I make of Orders, to wit, to be a public restification or allowace of that Call, and Ministry which a man hath from God for his reception and acceptation in the Church, which comes in fine, to no less than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is no such subtle or crafty device as he imagines, but the most honest plain truth in the Lord, of this business, as I judge, and am humbly persuaded too farther, from him; apprehended by Protestants ordinarily, though pressed to a more clear, or (to say rather) full understanding thereof by me, than perhaps by others. This appears I account, from the general nature of such Solemnities, and so to be argued from its own light, as home est animal, & animal substantia (yet not without convenient patronage, neither from Scripture, (ante p. 74.) and therefore the Arguments of this Author which he offers only from this particular place of Act. 13. might be waved as to him easily, by saying that, though this was not the end of that benedictory dismission there, yet may it be the end always of every proper Ordination. But forasmuch as I do take that to be Ordination, and for aught I know, so full and proper, as proper can be, I shall choose to consider a little more, what we find there in that place. In the first place, we find manifestly a call of the Holy Ghost. This call, separate me, I can understand no otherwise than as I do the Prophecy, that went before on Timothy, to wit, to be by Revelation, to some of those Prophets and Teachers, there (for hence it is probable that they are told us to be Prophets, when it had been enough to say only they had been Teachers else) who being as it is said, in the Church, and Ministering to the Lord, we must conceive the Body of them met together with them, and when these Prophets and Teachers, to whom this was revealed, do in the midst of the Congregation, thus solemnly lay hands on these persons according to the spirits bidding of them, what can be more plain in the thing its self, than that this is an open testification of that call or public approbation in the face of that Church, which being the most famous than in Christendom, the notice of it, and consequently esteem of them accordingly, does necessarily follow upon the same. And what now are his several particulars against this, if any one were minded to set himself to answer the same?  
Arg. 4th. and 5th. and 6th. Apari; From Marriage, from the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, and from the Lords Prayer, whereof he speaks p. 91. ad 95. Ans. Here I perceive very good confirmation. The formal Contract (says he) which may be, and often is, before the Marriage, gives the relation. Again, The proper end is the satisfaction of the world, and therefore if the first solemnity give not satisfaction, a second may be, without profanation. Just thus do I conceive of Orders; He hath spoken my parallel thoughts for me, as to Re-ordination. So likewise, for the other instance he is already forestalled. See ante p. 56.57.  
Arg. 7th. From Christ's personal Baptism; This I urged in my Book, thus only, to wit, That an Ordinance may be used by a person who is not capable of its principal end, because there may be more ends than one of an Ordinance, and he may be capable of some other of them, though not that. Now what means here these heaping of Commentators and particulars, to show that there was some end for which Christ submitted to Baptism? Who ever was so impious to think otherwise? That I said, or say, is John's Baptism in Scripture, is the Baptism of Repentance for remission of sin; Christ is not capable of this end, yet baptised. What is there in these three leaves to contradict this, unless it be his first answer only, from A Lapide to wit, Christus quasi reus & penitens Johanni se sister it etc. But will indeed such Doctrine hold that Christ Jesus did repent as well as die in our behalf? What if I should use here those words he hath upon me in the next page, about Rebaptisation, Oh how strong was that temptation that trapan'd so learned a person into Antinomianism? But I dare not so ludicrously also add his Prayer.  
Arg. 8. p. 101. ad 110. He produces ten interpretations of Act. 19 to wave that single instance of Rebaptization. That which I shall observe here, only is, how hard it is for a man to be well read in Books, and not sacrifice to them, to the spoil of his own judgement, and how the strength of a man is indeed weakness. There can be but one true meaning or interpretation of the Text; If any one then of these ten be true, the other nine are certainly false, and when he proposes all as probable, it follows necessarily, that it must be ten to one, whether that he takes be right or no. And as for that he hath chose, though he may be extolled that he hath said so much as to make it seem possible, yet while it is so much strained at the very sight, it is less probable than the last, and most anciently received of his interpretations. For my part, I hold it base, to forsake any truth because humane authority would face us down. There are to me here these four things to be held. 

1. That these persons were baptised, and rebaptized, as the former Author more judiciously (from Vossius) as less nicely, hath acknowledged.  
2. That both these Baptisms were in●o Christ, and so one and the same so far as I say, to wit, as to the Author, matter, form, and main end, and yet not altogether the same so, but one was John's Baptasm, and the other Christ's, that they might be rebaptized.  
3. That the reason of the doing must be gathered from the Text itself, and that intimateth, that these Disciples understood not their former Baptism, at least so as they ought, either they knew not that they were Baptised into Christ at all, or not sufficiently that Christ, into whom they were Baptised, seeing they were Baptised into him as to come, when he was dark to the World.   Now Christ being come, and fully revealed, the Apostles instructs them more fully, and explicitly herein, and so baptises them formally, as Diodate speaks, and expressly in the Name of Christ Jesus. As happily it was upon higher instruction, it may be said, into an higher Form, but not into another School, or Church State, and so be strong for us, Ante, p. 90. Upon this account it follows, according to what I have said, that though the universal judgement of the Church stands good against Rebaptisation now, yet was there a particular Reason once in the Church, why a person might be rebaptized. And this does serve my turn, that there is not that heinous dread in the nature of the thing itself; and yet so long as this particular reason could not endure any longer than the interval wherein Baptism was administered into Christ to come, which is now ceased, I am not Trapan'd into Rebaptisation, as this man, Non satis quidem ingenuo vultu, does speak, but may disapprove of the same now together with the Catholic Church, as well as any other.  
Arg 9 From Christ's own Re-ordaining his Apostles. To this he speaks p. 111. ad. 115. And this indeed I do stand upon, and have there fully already prevented all that I think can be opposed; and what he hath else may pass only for illustration. I suppose he himself will not expect I should add any more See. p. 76. ad. 80.  
Arg. 10. From the double 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon Timothy, mentioned in two Texts in the two Epistles; Upon which this Author hath spoken methinks so setly, gravely, and deliberatively, that all I can say is, that he hath made me to believe something more probable of that which I took before as possible only. And as for the two Authorities of mine, he farther quotes here in the end, I have not the Books at hand (where I am) to examine them. This he discourses p. 116. ad. 122. Where he ends his Animadversions.  
After all then, in both these Authors, there is the Objection of the Covenant, which though I would fain wave as extrinsical to Re-ordination itself, & for my own part, being not concerned in it, yet does it still recur to my mind, so that I doubt I shall hardly be found faithful to my Brethren in the Case, if I speak not something at least to that also before I leave. Unto this therefore, I 'tis considerable first, whether that which is said ordinarily by the Presbyterian, that the Bishop does not Ordain quâ Prelate, but quâ Presbyter (See 1 Tim. 4.14. express with 2 Tim. 1.6.) or quâ Precedent at most of that Presbytery, is not only that which is true, but gives allay also, to this matter?. If it does not, or not what is sufficient, yet taking this in however, let us know next There are some things which may be unlawful at one time to do, or to be done, and at another be unlawful to be omitted, and not done. Let me ask a person every way else disposed, whether he does not think it his duty to follow his Ministry, and unlawful for him to forsake the same, were it not for this only? If he thinks so, it follows, that though, so long as he could use his Ministry without Episcopal Orders, he might judge himself bound against taking of them; Yet now, when without these Orders he cannot use his Ministry (if the times prove indeed still so hard) and so to refuse the same, is by consequence, to do that which he judges, as to him, is sin, to wit, the quitting the Ministry he is engaged in; Here if he thinks that he stands bound by his Covenant still (supposing him satisfied of Re-ordination otherwise, for therefore do I put this Objection last when all else is done) he makes that sacred Engagement, intended by him only to Piety, to become to him a Bond of Iniquity; in which case, I think all Divines are clear in their Solution. The matter of an Oath no doubt must be a thing lawful, if a thing then lawful to be done, or omitted before, become now unlawful, the matter of the Oath does cease, and cessante materia cessat obligatio. I dare not tender this, but with all due serious caution, tenderness, and submission. Let the concerned look more to it.  
In his fifth Chapter he hath liberally proposed his Concessions, which, above all he hath besides, is worthy to be regarded: He will yield to Examination from 1 Pet. 3.15. To the Bishop's Approbation upon the same. To a Licence from Act. 21.37, 39 To a Benediction from Act. 20 32. To Imposition of hands, as a Sign of consent, Levit. 24.14. And all this, both upon a man's undertaking a new Charge, and also upon the dissolution of his legal title, in the same. Nay let me add his own words in the close, There is nothing that I can devise about Re●ordination in thesi, the Right Reverend Bishop can demand, but it shall be yielded, except only the formal investiture with Ministerial Power. Lo here how frankly he deass with us! which cannot but bring to mind what the former Author hath yielded also before him; who in the fourth page of his Book, will first like well of a Confirmation of our first Orders, as being not exactly Canonical. And secondly, Not dislike a second Ordination 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Bishop, upon the remove of a man unto a new Charge: Upon which, if this fresh Author yields a little farther, it is not without the same Foundation; For if the Work, and Office (or the Work of the Office in general, and a particular Charge) may be distinguished as to a new place; why not also as to the old, when it is necessity puts them upon the distinction, in either? These Concessions I take therefore from both, as to the main upon the matter, to be what I have contended for. I desire none to make use of me that have not need of me, as such more particularly have, who enter, or have entered a new place; And when any do it, I humbly lay this charge on them, that they look on this matter no otherwise but as a legal establishment, or the Canonical Stamp of allowance (as I have expressed it) of their former Vocation; which they may pardon the rather, because that Orders itself (as I account) considered aright, comes to nothing in the nature of it, otherwise than this. And as for this investiture with power as they call it, which does so stick, As I judge, with both these Authors, that it is in this point indeed the sum of our dispute does lie, and the bent of my discourse therefore hath been driven thereat: So am I persuaded, that what I have said, really, may satisfy the unpraeocupated in judgement. And I must add, that though there be some Circumstances about the ordering otherwise, which have been to me very sore, and do require care in the prevention, and good satisfaction, according to a man's temper beforehand; yet as to this particular merely, it seems to me as I understand the same (and the words are not our part) to have so little hurt in it truly, that of all the rest I know of to molest, I could methinks be soon satisfied in this. And if these Authors do indeed stick at all the rest for the sake of this only, they are huge Conformists methinks I may say, that stick at nothing. However this be, while we see how tenderly these candid Brethren do offer towards Submission, in point of Conscience in the thing, there is all the reason in the world, that our Church Rulers, who have the same thoughts of this investiture as they, should come to composition with them. To this effect, this Author does spend his sixth and last Chapter, by way of Petition, and pathetical Considerations, to persuade to it, wherein therefore I have nothing to oppose, or answer, but to join heart and ink along with him. In the mean while, winding up the Controversy (or the Agreement rather) which is between us in this manner.  
Re-ordination may be considered in the Imposition, or our Submission. For the Imposition, we agree, we are sorry for it, and dare not justify it. For the Submission, it is either voluntary, or merely in compliance with the Times, which appears injurious to our former Orders, and virtually to justify the imposing, and so we agree likewise. I dare not approve this, but so far rather, as I have been any ways culpable, I repent it: Or upon necessity, so that a man cannot else have the use of his Ministry, and in this Case it is, I state Re-ordination. Here th●n finally Reordination is to be considered again in Thesi, or Hypothesi: In thesi my Adversaries do indeed come up to me (for this only investiture with power, they stick at, belongs to the Form, being words, not in the Presbyterian Orders) while thus much is granted, as you see before; so that I count I have performed the task I at first undertook, having put in this Clause [Provided a man may crave liberty, if it be clogged in any Circumstance against his Conscience] in my first Sheets. In Hypothesi, I am willing to come to them, and join thus far, that if we take the Form exactly in every Circumstance, and its appurtinances, it is hard to be swallowed, and certainly requires condescension, which if it may be obtained in general, in a new mould, it were best; if not, every individual person must consider well the whole matter for himself (which I charge him in the Lord, for the delivery of my own Soul, and his, carefully to do) and then to crave, or take his liberty in those things which are against his Conscience, or else forbear. And if any good men shall do thus, with comfort to themselves, and people, so that as to the main they are satisfied, I shall not, I hope, have cause to repent of what I have written, nor these Brethren of mine, of their kind Concessions, for which I thank them, and cannot take my leave of them, without this due commendation. In many things have these candid, pious, and worthy Adversaries done virtuously, but in this, they have excelled them all. To wit, that they have freely let so much shelter stand for me, while yet they have been beleaguring of me; I mean in such huge fair Proposals, towards an accommodation. When thou besiegest a City, thou shalt not cut down the Frees that are for meat, by smiting thy Axe into them, for thou thyself mayest afterwards come to eat of them.   

SECTION XII.  
I Have but one thing more therefore to do now, and that is, to fall, together with these Authors, at the feet of the present Governors of our Church, in the behalf of my Brethren, whose hearts cannot serve them for all what can I say, to yield to this business of Re-ordination, at least, as it is clogged with all its Circumstances. We must therefore humbly request, in the first place, according to the petition of others, as that which is most full & easy, that there may be a general confirmation for all sufficient men of the Orders that are passed. It hath pleased His Gracious Majesty, to shed many Royal Favours from his Golden Rays upon you & if you shall vouchsafe this to us, we shall take it as an Act of Grace from you, which would, I am persuaded set you more right in the eyes of the Reformed Churches abroad, & also in the hearts of the people in this Nation. If this may not be obtained, I shall, in the 2d. place, make bold to renew the Proposal in my last Sheets, that for as much as I see by these sober Adversaries, that my Brethren would be content with thankfulness to submit to a new Imposition of hands by the Bishop if it might be done only in such a form as were optative (as the one expresses it) not ordinative; You would but be pleased, that unto the Forms of ordering of Priests, & Deacons, there might be a new framed, as proper for Confirmation, by the Bishop, of such who have been ordained by Presbyters only. This I do offer methinks with some confidence, as that which is not only moderate between both parties, but of standing use, as to such still as may come over to us from other Churches, and so conducing to, and not derogating from, the Episcopal Dignity. If neither of these will be granted, yet we hope at least for Charles the Second, and His Declaration sake, you will not deny to the tender all due regard in Circumstances, as in Expressions, Subscription, and otherwise, that those that are willing to come on, may come off with all fair, meet, and satisfying accommodation. I must confess, I am one of the meanest and unworthiest of my Brethren, to take such a petition into my mouth, in their behalf; but yet one whom the Lord hath called forth to be concerned in it more than any; and as I am a person more indifferent than others, not loosed from my own shell to study a Side, or be engaged to a Party, I may the rather speak the truth to you, as near as I can, in Righteousness.  
It hath pleased God, that this thing, since I did it, hath filled my heart with many thoughts, and much trouble; And if I believe that Providence hath a hand in every thing that is going, I shall be worse than one of those upon whom the Tower of Siloh fell, if I should not be deeply sensible of the Case of my Brethren, whose Spirits are in doubt, and groaning under the perplexities of this, and the like Impositions; And therefore, after I have been put to so heavy a distress, to clear up my own relief, and have endeavoured (according to my tenuity) to satisfy them, that if it be still imposed, their Consciences may not be wounded for want of satisfaction in the doing; so must I also apply myself to you from the Lord, and his hand upon me in it (which you must pardon therefore, and put accordingly upon his account) for that only sure, and proper remedy in the thing, which is, to prevent the wound quite, by removing the occasion. You may be happily loath to have any think, that less than the Ministerial Function itself, is given by your hands in Orders, but be you adured, if you continue requiring Re-ordination in our Case, your honour here will but turn to a formality, and the truth will be sought out for our Apology.  
It must be acknowledged by you, and by me, that this Re-ordination is ordinarily at least, if not quite against the hair of the Literate World, whether Councils, Schoolmen, or Fathers, in so much that I must needs be afraid, the Truth itself, were it not for the grand necessity put upon us else at this season, would hardly bear me out in the defence of it, so unusual, so unpleaded for by Divines Ancient and Modern, so absonant to the ears of yourselves, that even you that require it, will not own it, but when you have done, would have us count our former Orders null, lest it be monstrous; And if any of us do defend the same, and are sure to be opposed by those that oppose you, yet unless we will come up to this (which is to acknowledge ourselves Intruders, and Usurpers of the Ministry all the time before) we cannot for aught I see have any refuge in you, which is indeed so hard, and injurious (especially when our former Bishops have allowed what I assume) that I cannot but bring my complaint to you, and lay it at your doors. There are the Ceremonies I see with this you are bringing in upon us, 'tis a thousand pities so many good men should be troubled with them, or at them methinks, as they are like to be, which I am not yet convinced, but they might be spared, or born perhaps (the scandal first pre●ented) as the water off ones Hat, or the hairs upon one's , i● was ineptiae tolerabiles, therefore Calvin called them: Yet if these be stood upon, I count, the constant use of the same, or the like, or many more than them in the ancient Church, the moderate judgement of some of the eminent of our Reformed Divines abroad, the consent and practice of our holy Martyrs at hom●, and the long establishment thereof by Law in our Church, will put such a countenance upon them that they must needs bear their sail high, whether they can all of them endure the shock of that Text, Deut. 12.32. in dispute or not. But for this matter of Re-ordination, it is such an odd thing, the very Smectymnuus of the present Episcopacy, it will never turn to account (as one would think) unless to cast a reflection on you in the judgements of the Churches abroad, and Ages to come, unto whom the multitudes involved, and other circumstances considered, it will appear such a Fact, quale nec Ant●quitas vidit, & aegre credent posteri, the spectacle whereof, will not only, like Amasa, unless it be covered with a cloth, cause many to make a stand at your ways, but like the offering of the King of Moab upon the wall, raise their Tents, and departed from you. And there was great indignation against Israel.  
There are two ways now to cure this, either to cease this matter, or maintain it; if you will stand to it, that you Ordain, and Re-ordain, that it is not forbidden, but rather justifiable by the words of God, and that we are not to have our fear taught us by the Precept of men, it were something; but if you will impose it, and dis-own it, and be ashamed of it, and would have us nullify our former Ministry to that purpose, to wit, to be contented to be held Usurpers of holy things, sacrilegious persons, and all our Ministerial Acts to be void, as the Acts of mere Laics before, it is really intolerable, no mortal flesh can be pleased with it. Come, come, my Lords and Brethren, there is no need of this; The matter is not so much as you should be afraid of it; There is a time to begin a Custom, and to break an old. And why not? Non desunt leges, non deest Senatus-consulium, dico apperté, nos, nos, consuls desumus. There is no wanting the Scripture in the instances of Paul, and the Apostles, nor reason; there is wanting only a Will in you to bestow an hours time or two to alter a few words in your Form, to suit it to our case, and the business might come to a perfect agreement.  
One instance there is indeed from antiquity, often in the penns of the learned, it is out of Athanasius, of some persons with Ischyras amongst them, whom they would not allow (as they say) to be Ministers, because one Coluthus that Ordained them, only was a Presbyter; Unto which may be added the story of the purblind Bishop, 2 Concil. Hispal. 3. can. 5. circa an. 656. But Dr. Field upon the Church, in his fift Book, hath mentioned this, and given by the by full satisfaction. It is one thing herein (he counts) what they judged according to their Canons, and what we ought to judge according to the Law of God; And so the Author of Sum. Conc. quotes Pope Innocent, Adversus formam Canonum ad Ordinem venire tentans ordine & honore privetur. I believe they judged at this time, in this instance, according to their own constitutions, that a man must be Ordained by a Bishop, and so do you now according to yours, and therefore I plead for Re-ordination on he part of the Submitter; But on the part of the Requirer, that may dispense with their own Canons, or alter them, I must say, it is not so in the reformed Churches, who have had more light since them of old. It is not so according to the Law of God, with that worthy Dr. mentioned. Non ita fuit ab initio, with St. Jerome; and whether the Law of God or Canons of Men must take place, judge you. It is this we stand upon, when a man is in Orders, whether by Presbyters or Bishops, he is Christ's Minister according to his Word, put in Office by him. You are personages now of quality, as of great learning, so of much honesty, and would not (we believe) do the least injury in your deal unto any in other matters; Here now is a matter of as great and manifest wrong, as can be, which your opinion does us, and that opinion that does wrong, is a sinful opinion; to wit, it takes away that Office from a person which Christ hath given him, and holds it thursdays. If it was a grievous thing in these times to put a Minister out of his Place, what is it to put a Minister out of his Office? A Thief is not more dangerous than such an opinion, which (believe it) shall be brought to the Bar one day, to answer unto Christ for what it does. There is no great Person, or Parliament men, that holds any honour from the King, if he hath an English spirit, but will venture his life, rather than lose his honour, while the King is pleased to continue it; And can you or they think, that we who have been Ordained Ministers of Christ, should so easily desert that Ministry as not valid, or not maintain it to be good? You may expect as well, we should deny the Lord that bought us, as the Lord that sent us, or recede from that authority which we received neither from you, nor the Presbytery, but from him only. We can rather die here, than yield to any.  
Men and Brethren, let me speak to you freely of the Patriarch David, of our Right Reverend Forefathers, your Predecessors, and the eminent Sons of our Church, who have defended the reformed Churches, and Presbytereal Ordination, and I must call each of you, with the whole Honourable, the present Parliament, to Record, who are men of spirit and righteousness, that this same matter be revised, as a point of the greatest Right or Wrong that can be in debate; wherein it is not only we, that are concerned, but Christ, our Master and Lord, (Who rejecteth you, rejecteth me) together with the Souls of his people; And what have these Sheep done? If therefore there does pass any Act that we in our case shall be forced to be Re-ordained, we do hope that you also shall be enjoined to frame such a form, or alter this so, as that the Prerogative of Christ be not touched, nor our former Ministry, or the reformed Churches slurred, and then it may be happily well enough in this matter.  
And alas indeed! what shall we make of all those who cannot submit to be Re-ordained otherwise? Shall they be Jews or Samaritans? Ministers or not? I know not how they may look on the Ministry, that have greatness, wealth, and honour, tumbling in upon them with it; but as for others, that desire or expect only to get their bread and raiment by it, and are intent upon the work, their business, and their account, which makes them groan under the weight, with a who is sufficient for these things? If I know any thing of flesh and blood, there cannot be a thought almost more pleasing to it, than to conceive, that if the times will now destroy their former Orders, or not let them pass, then may they look on Providence as giving them a discharge from their labour; and consequently that there can hardly be a piece of self-denial more close, than for a man sincerely upon that account, to tie up himself by this taking new (when he is willing to be free) as the likeliest way to set his mind at quiet from that temptation, and force himself upon his work, if his heart be indeed fully up, and without flaw, even with this; And will your honours now I pray, conspire with the flesh and blood of sinful man, that because some persons will not submit to you in this thing, you will find a means how to gratify the same to the full? Truly, if you were indeed able to take away a man's Office, as easily as you may his Place, it would be giving them such a play day, that it cannot be said how many would gladly accept there s●; But when the Office remains indelible, As I must tell them, that supposing this be so, that their Orders will pass, though they may look on Providence thereby to dispense with them for all that which they may not do in their calling without new Orders, if their Conscience cannot submit to them (for if it can, they know what they have to do) yet will it not dispense with them, or acquit them from any thing they can do, only upon their old, and there is no doubt but much still may be done, and will be permitted to any Ministers that are peaceable, and able in this case: So must I tell you, that this is a better way to punish such for their non-submission, than to pleasure their flesh for it; Let them be held still for Labourers in the Vineyard, that the Mr. may not be offended with you who hath employed them, nor their Talents be wrapped up in a Napkin, or the people be deprived of their pains, though it be only by permission, as assistants to others for the good of the Church, and help of them, when the Titles themselves, with Institution and Induction are bestowed, only according to the Law of the Land. This is that will satisfy those that are truly pious at the heart, and stick hereat only upon Conscience; For let them but glorify God, and save men's Souls, and they have their main end, being desirous to do Gods work with a little, and leave their wages with him; And this will also best fetch in others, who when they refuse only out of obstinacy, or unsound ends, they will soon grow weary, while they see (as I am speaking) they shall have work as they are Ministers of Christ, but preferment only as Ministers according to the constitution of the Nation.  
Though this be hard, I hearty wish it may not be worse, but humbly hope and crave it may be better. And having now taken upon me to speak to your Honours, I must importune you yet farther in the Name of the Lord, more in general than about this thing only, to wit, for the multitudes of his Servants, who have their faces towards Zion, in a way of different persuasions. Let not my Lords think it to be merely pride, and humour design and faction, perverseness and obstinacy, or fanaticism altogether, but rather in many a serious Spirit, a zeal of God, a care of their Souls, a breathing after purity, at least Epictetus his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as to every one of them; And therefore suffer a plain man, only from his own heart, to beseech you, in the Name of the Almighty, the God of you, and me, and them, if there be any bowels, if there be any candour, if there be any sense of the hatches you were yourselves under but lately, that you put forth your in●erest which God hath given you at the Helm (it may be to some of you for such a time as this) to preserve what indulgence you can for all tender Consciences (as God's Sovereignty) so far as ever it can stand with the promotion of sober holiness, necessary government, and due order.  
It was the prudence of Themistocles, as I remmber, to counsel Greece to let the Persians have their Bridge unplucked down; it would be yours I am persuaded here, to let the sober of other Parties have a Bridge made for them, that when they would they might come honourably over to you, as it was for them to let their enemies have their Bridge, that when they would, they might be gone again from them. Alas, what were the parting with a Ceremony or two for England's peace? What were it, when you have all that Money and Dignity can yield you, and are sharing it amongst you, to leave others poor Conscience for their part? Let them but see a countenance of hearty Piety above Ceremony, of Grace above Profaneness, and that you let God's Children alone in those things wherein they do you no hurt, it will bring them very near to you. Oh that men were brought to this pass, that they were hearty willing to let their Brethren come in, and be one with them! It is pity certainly, that any Spirits should be such, that the same things will not content them sometimes, with the good leave and complacency of their Brethren, unless they may have them in spite and opposition; And why should any use violence, where more may be won with courtesy? Then Abner called to Joab, and said, shall the Sword devour for ever? Knowest thou not it will be bitterness in the end? How long shall it be ere thou bid the people return from following of their Brethren?  
And now methinks there lies before you, O you Rulers, many thousands at your feet crying quarter, quarter for our Souls, quarter for our Consciences; we are not able to submit to some of these Impositions: Though the things may be lawful, yet so long as they are against their Consciences, it is sin to them, and they cannot do them but they wound their Souls, He that doth them and doubteth is damned if he do them. O for God's ●ake! take heed, do not shove, do not press them upon damnation. If the Christian that only by his example, gives occasion to another to do the same thing he does, before his Conscience be satisfied, shall judge himself that he hath sinned, and dare not do the same again, lest the wrath of God be kindled; what shall we think of such (if there be any such) that are ready to provide all severity and rigour to force men's Consciences, which for to do were the highest of scandal? And if it be better to have a Millstone about ones neck, and be hurled into the bottom of the Sea, than to offend one of God's little ones; what is it to offend thousands, and ten thousands? I profess to God, if I were a great person, I should not think I ought to be more careful in the taking away a man's life in judgement, than in passing such Impositions, that may ensnare men's Consciences; and if I should indulge myself otherwise, and think to find a way to engage the Lord towards me in his tender mercies, I should think this were like to be the best; to be pitiful to his Children, in having regard to their grieved Consciences. He shall have judgement without mercy, that hath showed no mercy. If the tender Christian himself, that by temptation from without, does feel one scalding drop of God's wrath to be so hot, when he shall but yield to the most small thing against his Conscience, what shall those Rivers of Brimstone be hereafter, for those that drive men forward, and make no Conscience, though men do sin against their Consciences? If innocent blood does cry so loud from Earth to Heaven for vengeance, what shall the blood of men's Souls? O Sirs! You w●ll not, you will not, I hope, seek the blood of men's Consciences. It must be a very hard thing for an honest man, and good subject, to be put upon it, to lose all that he hath for a Ceremony; And yet as that Ancient said to the Child that asked him why he chod him for so little a matter, Custom (says he) is no little matter; So say I, Conscience is a great matter, when the thing is little for which a man suffers. Not that I would indulge myself in such scruples, or that while Charity hopeth all things, and believeth all things, and on some you have compassion, this should hinder the making difference between a Scruple of Reason and Affliction, and the Refractoriness of Faction. Will the Unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy Crib?  
I pray God to incline you all to those ways of Prudence, Humility, and Charity, that if it be possible, you may win the hearts of good men to you, who like the Disciples that were amazed when they heard of Saul in the Synagogue, Is this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem? may begin as it were every where, to wonder at themselves, and at one another, how they came to be filled with former prejudice and misapprehension, as if with a change of the times, and a taste of Affliction, your Character was changed, and Titus the Bishop turned Titus the Emperor, Neminem a se tristem demittere.  
Now the God of Peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the Sheep, through the blood of the everlasting Covenant, make you perfect in every good work, to do his Will, working in you that which is, wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom he Glory for ever.  
FINIS.    

ERRATA.  
PAge 8 l. 8. for fit, r. fitly disposed. p. 26 l. 28. for on, r. upon. p. 32. l. 40. r. declared. p. 55. l. 37. put in the space 20. p. 75. l. 19 make the full point a comma. p. 82. l. 22. blot out we, and transpose they in its place. p. 86 l. 40. insert ut vis p 98. l. 31. r. convinced. ib. l. 34. insert pardon the words. p. 99 l. 27. for must, r. may. ib. l. 32. for frequent, r. fervent. p. 103. l. 15. for too, r. so. p. 105. l. 35. r. praeproperè. p. 106. l. 19 r. adverterant. ib l. 22. r. verùm. p. 107. l. 24. r. varios. p. 109. l. 11. r. exploratum. p. 111. l. 3. r. quibusdam. p. 114. l. 21. for the second ab, put ad. p. 115. l. 3. r. down. p. 126. l. 35. for the second and, r. or. p. 136. l. 40. r. dimittere. Being upon review of these, with some other literal escapes, I am informed by Letter, concerning the Party whom I mention p. 35. to have been Re-ordained by Bishop Davenant, that he had received only Litentiam in ordine incaeptorum in the Low Countries, which the Bishop indeed taking for complete Ordination, did yet ingenuously tell him for all that, that he cared not, to have him Ordained more apud nos r●c●pto, were it not others might except. But when the Party certified him hereupon, about the way of these Churches, and that this went not with them for the Ordo perf●ctorum Pastorum, he was better satisfied; so that this Party avertes, he was but Ordained, not Re-ordained, and desires to have it divulged, lest more be led by his example. It is the Reverend and Learned Mr. William Barlee.