IMPRIMATUR,  
Liber cui Titulus [A Short Defence of the Orders of the Church of England, etc.]  
H. Maurice Rmo in X to P.D. Willielmo Archep. Cant. a Sacris. Oct. 24. 1687.   

A Short Defence OF THE ORDERS OF THE Church of England, As by Law Established: Against some scattered Objections of Mr. Webster of Linne.  
By a Presbyter of the Diocese of Norwich.  
LONDON, Printed, and are to be Sold by Randal Taylor, near Stationers-hall. MDCLXXXVIII.   

The Objection against our Ordination in the Church of England, as established by Law, according to my best Apprehension, is this.  
THat whereas our first Liturgies after the Reformation, in the Form prescribed for the Ordination of Bishops, Priests and Deacons, appointed not the Bishop ordaining to signify in the words of Ordination, for the sake of what Office the Persons ordained were to receive the Holy Ghost; that Particular being since added, as it seems to acknowledge a former Omission, so it leaves a large Chasm between those Rightly and Canonically ordained, and those who were not so, to the utter Nullity of our Orders; that Addition made to our late Rituals not being sufficient to repair the former defect. For Instance; Tho Archbishop Cranmer might be Canonically ordained himself, and so might rightly ordain others; yet those so ordained by him, or his fellow Bishops ordaining Dr. Matthew Parker only by the defective Reformed Service-Book, Parker was really no Bishop, and so those afterwards ordained by him were no true Bishops, Priests or Deacons. Because none can confer that power on another, which he never had really in himself; which, if true, the whole English Hierarchy falls to the ground.   

Answer.  
THis Objection looks somewhat plausibly at first, and had it any thing of real Weight in it, would be much more pertinent than the so often alleged and baffled Romance of the Nagshead Ordination; but if duly considered, has nothing of Solidity in it: For  
1. It takes for granted what we deny, and what those of the Roman Church upon their own Principles can never prove, viz. That Orders are a Sacrament: Three things, says Merbesius, a late and well approved Writer of that Communion, aught to concur to the Being of a true Sacrament; 
Tria ad veri Sacramenti essentiam concurrere debent, 1. Nempe Promissio Gratiae ex eo derivandae. 2. Signum aliquod sensibile cum praescriptâ verborum formâ, quod veluti Medium seu Organum ad applicandum Promissionem adhibeatur. 3. Denique Divinum Mandatum, quo Christus hujusmodi Sacramentum, fidelibus vel omnibus vel aliquibus administrari jusserit. Ben. Merhes. Sum. Christ. p. 3. q. 4.  First, a Promise of Grace to be derived from it: Secondly, some sensible Sign, with a prescribed form of Words, which should be made use of as a Mean or Instrument whereby to apply the Promise; and Thirdly, some Divine Command, by which Christ has enjoined the administration of such a Sacrament, either to the whole Body, or some particular member of the Faithful. Now it will be extreme difficult to discover all these Circumstances in that which they call the Sacrament of Orders: For should we grant, that by them Grace is derived to the Person Ordained, or should we own a Command of Christ for the Collation of Orders, yet where's that set Form of words appointed by Christ himself for the Administration of this Sacrament. In Baptism we have the words of Institution indeed, and those retained throughout the Universal Church, without any considerable Variation; In the Eucharist we have the same general Agreement: But here we have a vast unaccountable difference between the Greeks and those of the Roman Church, and again between the Ancient and Modern Church of Rome: Where yet we may reasonably suppose, they could not have differed so much, had our Saviour left any particular form of words for that Solemnity: If there were no form of words prescribed, then, according to the Rule before-cited, Orders can be no Sacrament, and the Church of England is as much at liberty to departed from the present Example of the Roman Church, as that was to quit its own Ancient Rituals, or to vary from the Eastern, or any other Christian Churches.  
Besides, That Indelible Character, which is said to be given in Orders, is a principal proof of their being a Sacrament; but it would be a very hard task to reconcile that Decree of Gregory the Seventh Bishop of Rome of that name, with this notion of an Indelible Character. We following the steps of the holy Fathers, 
Ordinationes iliorum qui ab Excommunicatis sunt ordinati, Sanctorum Patrum sequentes vestigia, irritas fieri censemus. Conc. Rom. 4. A. 1078. Lab. & Coss. T. 10. p. 370.  declare the Orders of those who are ordained by Excommunicate Persons to be void and of no effect. For if the Character of Orders be indelible, Excommunication cannot obliterate it, nor make Orders conferred by the Excommunicate invalid. Nor will that forementioned Character agree very well with that Rule of Pope Celestine the First, given to the Bishops of Vienne and Narbonne; Let no mere Layman, no Man that has been twice Married, 
Nullus ex Laicis, nullus Bigamus, nullus qui sit viduae maritus aut fuerit, ordinetur; & siquae factae sint ordinationes illicitae, removeantur, quonium stare non possunt. Concil. gen. T. 2. p. 1621.  none who is or has been the Husband of a Widow be put into holy Orders; or if any such unlawful Ordinations have been made, let them be taken away as such which cannot stand good. Here again it's plain enough, That if the Character be as, supposed, Marrying twice, or marrying a Widow, which can scarcely be proved Sins, cannot possibly expunge it; to which I might add the Answer of Leo the First to the Inquiries of Rusticus Bishop of Narbonne, concerning such as only pretended to be Bishops, and those ordained by them: Only this I conclude, That if the Judgement of a Bishop of Rome be so August and Sacred as some would persuade us, Order imprint no Indelible Character upon the Soul, and consequently are not Sacrament. 
Signa, quum ad res divinas pertinent, Sacramenta appellantur. Aug. Ep. 138. ad Marcellinum 2. Edit. Par. 1679.  For should the Assertors of this Sacrament fly to that trite Saying of St. Augustine, That Signs, when they are applied to Sacred Rites, are called Sacraments; that would weaken, not secure their Cause. But if Orders must be a Sacrament in the strictest sense, I desire that passage of Aquinas may be remembered, That since the Matter of Sacraments, in the sensible parts or outward signs of Sacraments are determined, 

Cúm determinata sit Sacramentorum materia, determinatae scilicet sensibiles res, multó magis determinata esse debet verborum in Sacramentis forma. Aquin. Sum. p. 3. q. 60. a. 7.  
Si mutatio materiae aut Formae Essentialis seu Substantialis sit, nullum efficitur Sacramentum. Suar. p. 3. T. 3. D. 2. s. 4.   much more ought the Form of words in Sacraments to be determined: And that of Suarez, If there be any change of the Matter, or of the Essential and Substantial Form, there is really no Sacrament. Which Passages, how they'll agree to those things hereafter to be mentioned, may be left to every ordinary Considerer.  
2. It cannot be imagined reasonable, that those Persons who dispute so much among themselves concerning the Essence of Orders, should Cavil against our Church, as wanting any thing Essential in them; for common Sense teaches those, who will engage in Controversy with others, first to agree among themselves what the Subject of the Controversy shall be. Now it's to be considered, That whereas the Ancient Ordinals of the Church of Rome, required only Imposition of the hands of Bishops and Presbyters in Ordination; later years have added the Ceremony of exposing the Chalice with Wine, and the Patten with an Host upon is, to the touch of him who is consecrated Priest, with these words, Receive thou Power to offer Sacrifices to God, and to celebrate Masses both for the living and the dead, 
Accipe Potestatem offerre Sacrificium Deo, & Missas celebrare tam pro vivis quám pro mortuis, in nomine Domini, Amen.  in the name of God, Amen. And this last has almost justled the more ancient Ceremony out of doors; being grown into so great a Reputation, that Aquinas plainly concludes, That since the principal Action of the Priest is to Consecrate the Body and Blood of Christ, 
Cum Principalis Actus Sacerdotis sit Corpus & Sanguinem Christi consecrare, rectè in ipsâ Calicis datione sub certa verborum Formâ imprimitur Sacerdotalis character. Aq. Suppl. q. 37. a. 5.  the Sacerdotal Character is truly imprinted in the delivery of the Chalice with a particular form of words: Which Conclusion of his he proves by this Argument, 
Ejusdem est Formam aliquam inducere, & Materiam de proximo praeparare ad Formam; unde Episcopus in Collatione Ordinum duo facit, Praeparat enim Ordinandos ad Ordinis susceptionem, & Ordinis potestatem tradit; Praeparat quidem in instruendo eos de proprio officio, & aliquid circa eos operando, ut idonei sint ad potestatem accipiendam: quae quidem praeparatio in tribus consistit, scilicet Benedictione, manus Impositione & Unctione; per Benedictionem Divinis obsequiis mancipantur, & ideo benedictio omnibus datur; sed per manus Impositionem datur plenitudo gratiae, per quam ad magna officia sunt idonei, & ideo solis Diaconibus & Sacerdotibus fit manus Impositio, quia eis competit Dispensatio Sacramentorum, quamvis uni sicut principali, & alteri sicut Ministro; sed Unctione ad aliquod Sacramentum tractandum consecrantur, & ideo Unctio solis Sacerdotibus fit, qui propriis manibus Corpus Christi tangunt; sicut etiam calix inungitur qui continet Sanguinem & Patena quae continet Corpus, sed potestatis collatio fit per hoc, quod datur eis aliquid quod ad proprium actum pertinet: Ibid.  That it belongs to the same Person to induce the Form, and to prepare the Matter immediately for that Form. Whence in conferring Orders the Bishop does two things; for he first prepares those to be ordained for the susception of Orders, and in the next place gives the Power belonging to the Order: He prepares them, both by instructing them concerning their proper offices, and by doing somewhat about them, whereby they may be fitted for the Reception of Power; which Preparation consists in three things, viz. In the Benediction, in Imposition of hands, and in Unction: By the Benediction they are obliged to Divine Obedience, and therefore that is given to those of all Orders; by Imposition of hands is given the fullness of Grace, by which they are fitted for great Offices, and therefore only Deacons and Priests have hands imposed upon them, (He might have added Bishops; but here our Dissenters agree with the Parasites of Rome, that Bishops are neither a distinct Order, nor of Divine Right) because to them belongs the Dispensation of Sacraments, though to Priests as Principal, to the other but as Ministers; but by Unction they are Consecrated to handling the Sacrament, and therefore it's given only to Priests, who touch the Body of Christ with their own hands, and both the Chalice which contains the Blood, and the Patten which holds the Body, are Anointed; but the Collation of their Power and Authority, consists in delivering something to them which belongs to their proper work. And whereas it's his second Argument or Objection against this Conclusion, That our Lord gave his Disciples the Sacerdotal Power when he said, 
Dominus dedit Discipulis Potestatem Sacerdotalem quando dixit, Accipite Spiritum Sanctum, quorum remiseritis peccata, etc. Joan. 20. Sed Spiritus Sanctus datur per Manûs Impositionem, ergo & in ipsâ Manus Impositione imprimitur Character Ordinis— Respondit, Dominus Discipulis dedit Sacerdotalem potestatem, quantum ad Principalem actum, ante passionem in Coenâ, quando dixit, Accipite & Manducate, unde subjunxit, Hoc facite in meam Commemorationem, sed post Resurrectionem dedit eis Potestatem Sacerdotalem, quantum ad actum secundarium, qui est ligare & solvere. Ibid.  Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whose Sins ye remit they are remitted, etc. John 20. and the Holy Ghost is given by laying on of hands, that therefore the Character of Orders is impressed by that Imposition of hands: He endeavours to answer it, but with absurdity enough, That our Lord gave his Disciples Sacerdotal Power; as to its Principal Act, before his Passion in his Supper, when he said, Take and Eat; and therefore he subjoined, Do this in Remembrance of me: But after his Resurrection, he bestowed upon them Priestly power, only as to its Secondary or inferior Act, i. e. as to the Power of binding and losing, which was given, (as alleged in the Objection,) by Imposition of hands. In which answer he perverts the sense of our Saviour's words, Take and Eat, by restraining them to the Apostles alone, whereas they were intended to all Believers: And he mistakes the Evangelical story; For though St. John tells us of that Power of binding and losing, as given after the Resurrection, in the Chapter by him cited, v. 22, 23. Yet he might have found the same Commission given to all the Apostles, even before the Institution of that Supper, Matth. 18.18.  
But to pass by such ordinary mistakes; The Determination of Pope Eugenius the Fourth, in that famous Council of Florence, is very positive in the case; for enumerating the Sacraments received by the Roman Church, and giving some account of their Nature, for the Instruction of Armenians, he tells them, That the sixth Sacrament is that of Orders, whose Matter that is, by the touching of which the Order is conferred; 
Sextum Sacramentum est Ordinis, cujus Materia est illud per cujus traditionem confertur Ordo; sicut Presbyteratus traditur per Calicis cum vino & patenae cum pane porrectionem; Forma Sacerdotii talis est, accipe potestatem offerendi, etc. Concil. g. T. 13. p. 538.  as the Order of Priesthood is given by offering the Chalice with Wine, and the Patten with Bread, to be touched by the person ordained; and the Form of Priesthood is that, Receive thou Power to offer Sacrifice, etc. To which Passage the formerly-cited Merbesius gives a very trifling Answer, That the Council of Florence (forsooth) did not determine this Conciliariter, or as a Matter of Faith and Dogmatically, but only at the rate of Common discourse, without telling whether the Patten or Chalice were the Essential, or only the Accidental matter of Orders; which is wholly Impertinent, and no way reconcileable to what follows in the Conclusion of that Decree, viz. These things being thus explicated, the Armenian Orators, in their own name, 
His omnibus explicatis Armenorum Oratores nomine suo & sui Patriarchae & omnium Armenorum hoc saluberrimum Synodale Decretum, cum omnibus suis Capitulis, declarationibus, definitionibus, traditionibus, praeceptis & statutis, omnem que Doctrinam in ipsâ descriptam; nec non quicquid tenet & docet Sancta sedes Apostolica & Romana Ecclesi, cum omnia devotione & obedientiâ acceptant, suscipiunt & amplectuntur. P. 540.  and in the name of their Patriarch, and of all the Armenians, do with all Devotion and Obedience, submit to, and embrace this most wholesome Synodical Decree, with all its Canons, Declarations, Definitions, Traditions, Precepts and Appointments, with all that Doctrine laid down in it; and whatsoever else that holy Apostolic See, and the Roman Church maintains and teaches. And to the same purpose, and almost in the same words speaks Cardinal Pool, 
Concil. T. 14. p. 1740.  our Countryman, in his Decree concerning the Reduction of England to the Roman Communion. But notwithstanding the Expressiveness of three such very considerable Authorities, others of the same Communion have presumed to think otherwise, and to fix the Essence of Ordination only in Laying on of hands, without regard to any Form of Words whatsoever; declaring Laying on of hands and Prayer to be the only Ancient and Catholic Ceremonies, in the conferring of Holy Orders: So Durandus, giving an account of what constitutes a Priest, assures us, That, according to Canonical Tradition, when a Priest is ordained, the Bishop giving him his Blessing, 
Secundúm Canonicam traditionem, Presbyter cum Ordinatur, Episcopo cum benedicente & manum benedictoriam supra caput ejus tenente, & omnes Presbyteri qui adsunt, manus suas juxta manus Episcopi teneant, supra Caput illius Spiritum Sanctum invocantes, quae Manus impositio operum Sancti Spiritus exercitationem significat. Durand. Rational. l. 2. c. 10.  and holding that hand with which he gave the Blessing upon his head; all those Priests who are present, lay their hands upon his head too, by the hands of the Bishop, invoking the influences of the Holy Ghost upon him; which Imposition of hands signifies the power of exercising the gifts of the Holy Ghost. In which words, since he agrees so exactly with, as to transcribe the third Canon of the fourth Council of Carthage, I need not repeat that again: It's true, he mentions afterwards the Ceremony of touching the Chalice and Patten, but of that only as additional or accidental, not Essential. And Casalius in his Book concerning Ancient Christian Rites, though he plainly determine Orders to be one of the seven Sacraments of the new Law, yet never mentions the touching the Vessels, but only Imposition of hands; which, 
Ordo est Signaculum quoddam Ecclesiae, quo Spiritualis potestas traditur Ordinato— Impositio autem manuum confert gratiam & cum effectu consistit. Casal. de vet. Christ. Rit. c. 26.  as he proves from Scripture, confers Grace, and has its due effects; and yet he gives us Aquinas his Definition of that pretended Sacrament. The first Council held at Cologne in the year 1536. asserts the same Doctrine, That the Episcopal Office consists chief in two things, the first of which is the laying on of hands, 
Episcopi munus in ducibus po●●ssimum consistit, 1. In Imposi●i●ne manuum quae est Ordinum Ecclesiasti corum collatio, & Institutio Ministrorum— Postea vero— Impositio manuum est Ost●um per quod Intrant, qui Ecclesiarum gubernaculis admoventur. Conc. T. 14. p. ●. 3.  which is the Collation of Ecclesiastical Orders, and the Institution of Ministers. And afterwards, Imposition of hands is that Door by which those are admitted, who are raised to the Government of the Church. So the Council at Mentz, Anno 1549. Let the Parish Priests teach their People, 
In collatione Ordinum quae cum Impositione manuum velut visibili signo traditur, doceant Parochi, ritè ordinatis gratiam divinitùs conferri, quâ ad Ecclesiastica munera, ritè & utiliter exercenda, apti & idonei efficiantur, & quà rata sint & efficacia, quae à ritè ordinatis in Ecclesiâ, juxta Christi & Ecclesiae Institutionem geruntur. Hanc vero gratiam esse Ordinis & Muneris, non Hominum aut personarum, nec ad cujusquam privatam, sed ad Communem totius Ecclesiae utilitatem accomodari. Ideoque in ritè ordinatis, sive boni sive mali sint, efficacem esse, atque ita inter dispares Ministros Domini nostri dona semper aequalia semper bona & sacra permanere. Concil. T. 14. p. 679.  That in the Collation of Orders, which are given by the Imposition of hands, as the visible sign, That Grace is conferred by Heaven upon those who are regularly ordained, by which they are made apt and fit to exercise Offices in the Church duly and profitably, and by virtue of which those Church Matters, which are managed by Men ordained according to the Institution of Christ and his Church, are rarified and made efficacious: That this Grace belongs not to the Person, but to the Office, and is accommodated, not to any Man's private, but to the public benefit of the Church, and therefore is effectual in those rightly ordained, be they good or bad; and therefore the gifts of our Lord, though given to Ministers very differently qualified, are still the same, always good and always holy. Which Doctrine perhaps even in some other particulars, is not very agreeable to those opinions espoused by divers of the Roman Communion. I need not add here the Sentiments of Habertus and Goar, the learned Editors of the Greek Pontifical and Euchology, intending to take notice of them afterwards: But I cannot well pass by the Judgement of Bonus Merbesius in the Case, who though he take a great deal of pains to appear Neuter in it, yet apparently enough inclines to this, That the Essence of Orders consists in this Imposition of hands, for which he refers us to several Texts of Scripture, several determinations of Councils and say of the Greek Fathers; but there's nothing more remarkable than what he alleges out of that learned Jesuit Maldonate, who plainly, and without any hesitancy determines, That in conferring Orders, Imposition of hands is not to be looked on as an unnecessary Ceremony, 

Impositio manuum non est habenda tanquam Caeremonia non necessaria, sed tanquam pars essentialis Sacramenti, idque tenendum videtur fide Catholica.  
1. Quia in Scripturâ ubicunque fit mentio de ordinatione, declaratur per manuum Impositionem, & videtur mihi esse temerarium Scripturam deserere & consectari Chimaeias, i. e. rationes naturales.  
2. Quia veterem Ecclesiam nunquam ordinasse sine Impositione manuum, ex omnibus Authoribus antiquis perspicuum est, de Traditione autem Calicis, & Hostiae nulla est apud eos mentio.  
3. Quia videtur nimis durum esse, Caeremoniam, quam nobis perspicuè tradent Apostoli, excludere à naturâ Sacramenti, & inducere illam de quâ nulla mentio fit in Scripturâ.  
4. Quia hoc est labefacere totum Sacramentum & victoriam concedere Haereticis; nam si Impositio manuum non est essentialis Caeremonia; per quam hoc Sacramentum exhiberi debeat, non potest probari ex Scripturis Ordinem esse Sacramentum. Merb. Sum. Christ. de Sacram. Ord. Disp. 6.   but as an Essential part of that Sacrament, and that to him this seems a necessary point of the Catholic Faith; for which he gives these Reasons,  
1. Because wherever Scripture mentions Ordination, it expresses it by Laying on of Hands, and it seemed to him a Rash thing to Desert Scripture, and pursue Chimeras, i. e. mere Natural Reasons.  
2. Because it's evident by all Ancient Writers, that the Primitive Church Ordained none but by Imposition of Hands; but there is no mention at all made by any of them of touching the Chalice and Patten.  
3. Because it seems very absurd, to exclude that Ceremony which was unquestionably delivered down to us by the Apostles from the Essence of the Sacrament, and to introduce another never so much as mentioned in Scripture.  
4. Because this were to ruin the whole Sacrament, and to give up the Victory to Heretics; for if Imposition of Hands be not the Essential Ceremony whereby this Sacrament is to be exhibited, Orders can never be proved a Sacrament by Scripture: For whereas he seems to take it for granted, That the matter of every Sacrament ought to be determined in Scripture; He urges it well enough, That the Chalice and Patten not being taken notice of there, that Ordinance, to which such unscriptural Circumstances are Essential, can be no Sacrament.  
And this Merbesius takes to be more Ancient and Catholic, though he acknowledges the other at present to be the more Common and Prevailing Opinion. Habertus makes Dominicus a Soto, a Spaniard, Confessor to Charles the 5th. and present at the Council of Trent, to be the first Inventor of it, but without Reason, since, as I have proved before, both Aquinas and the Florentine Council espoused the same Absurdity long before: Against it Merbesius urges this Argument, If the Sacerdotal Grace be given by Imposition of Hands, 
Si per manuum Impositionem, datur gratia Sacerdotalis, illa ipsa Manuum Impositio Presbyteratus essentiam proculdubio constituit; Atqui per manuum Impositionem datur; Ergo.  then certainly that Imposition of Hands must constitute the Essence of the Sacerdotal Order; but the first is true, therefore the last. This he proves from that of the Apostle to Timothy, Ep. 2. c. 1. v. 6. and from the discourses of Moring to that purpose; from the general silence of all Ancient Ritualists, and from the particular silence of some of latter date, who indeed mention that Adjectitious Ceremony, but yet only as Accidental, and not Essential to Ordination: Nay, he draws in the Council of Trent itself as an Abettour of his Opinion, by that passage concerning Extreme Unction, where they tell us, That Bishops or Priests Regularly Ordained by them, with the Imposition of the Hands of the Presbytery, 
Legitimi istius Sacramenti Ministri sunt, aut Episcopi, aut Sacerdotes ab ipsis rite ordinati per Impositionem Manuum Presbyterii. Sess. 14. c. 3.  are the only lawful Ministers of that Sacrament. Thus we see the Division of those of the Roman Church among themselves concerning this Matter; by which, according to their own Writers, they reduce themselves to this Dilemma, Either to determine the touch of the Vessels to be the Essence of Orders, and consequently Orders no Sacrament, or else to allow its Essence to be Imposition of Hands; which Imposition of Hands the Church of England, according to the Custom of the Ancient Universal Church, has ever used since the Reformation, though not believing Holy Orders so conferred to be a Sacrament.  
I might here take notice of that Conceit of some of their Parasitical Canonists, That the Bishop of Rome has that Plerophory of Power in himself, that his bare word can make a complete Priest or Bishop without any Ceremony at all; which is fairly exposed by the learned Archbishop of Spalleto, as which, 
Spalat. de Republics. Eccles. l. 2. c. 4. s. 19  among other things sufficiently proves Orders no Sacrament, unless we can have a Sacrament without either Matter or Form. To proceed then,  
3. Seeing our Ordination is thus far Regular, we are to consider, Whether those words made use of in our eldest Reformed Rituals are not significant enough; Or, Whether that Form of conferring Orders, was not sufficient to impart Sacerdotal Power to the Persons Ordained: Now, that it may not be left undetermined by the Ordainers, what particular Offices any Persons are Ordained to, the Archdeacon, as in the case of Deacons, so in that of Priests, speaks thus openly to the Bishop, Reverend Father in God, I present to You these Persons to be admitted to the Order of Priesthood; After several Intercurrent Questions, the Bishop declares to the People, Good People, these be they whom we purpose, God willing, to receive this day to the Holy Office of Priesthood, etc. After which words, methinks there needs no plainer a designation to any Ecclesiastical Employ; Public notice is given likewise in the Ordination of a Bishop, that all there present may know what Character he is to bear. After these things and some particular Questions proposed to the Parties, and some Prayers put up to God; For a Priest, the Bishop with the Priests then present, lay their hands upon every particular Man's Head, The Bishop using these words, Receive thou the Holy Ghost, whose sins thou dost remit they are remitted, and whose sins thou dost retain they are retained, & be thou a Faithful Dispenser of the word of God, and of his holy Sacraments, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. As for a Bishop, the words whereby Matthew Parker in particular was ordained, 
Vide Registrum Cantuar ad calcem operum Bramhalli Ep. Armach. ex Autographo publicatum.  were these; Take the Holy Ghost, and remember that Thou stir up the Grace of God, which is in thee, by Imposition of hands, for God hath not given us the Spirit of Fear, but of Power, and Love, and Soberness. If now an Imitation of the Apostles be valid, nothing can come nearer, to what Scripture tell us of them, than those words in the Consecration of a Bishop: Nor any thing more agreeable to the Pattern of our Lord, in the Commission he gave his Disciples, than those used in the Consecration of a Priest. And where so public an Advertisement is given to the Congregation, of what Office those Consecrated are appointed to, though words to the same purpose may be repeated again, as in our later Books of Ordination, though they may serve to illustrate the matter in hand more fully, yet there can be no such necessity of them, as that the want of them should invalidate the whole Ordinance: And as we have no Account in Antiquity, of any particular form of words appointed by our Saviour for the conferring of Orders; so we are assured that according to the most Ancient Methods and Ordinals of the Church of Rome itself, it's not the Words but the Imposition of hands that's essential to Ordination.  
Besides, If the Church of Rome, in the Collation of Orders according to their latest Pontificals, do no more than we do, it must seem very unreasonable to condemn us as Defective. What they do then in the Ordination of Priests, which I shall only Instance in at present is this, The  presents those to be Ordained to the Bishop with these words, Most Reverend Father, our Holy Mother the Catholic Church, requires that You ordain these Deacons, here present, to the Burden of Priesthood, 

Archdiaconus praesentat Ordinandos Pontifici, dicens— Reverendissime Pater, postulat sancta mater Ecclesia Catholica, ut hos praesentes Diaconos ad onus Presbyterii ordinetis— Quorum meritis Archdiacono testimonium exhibento, Pontifex annunciat Clero & populo dicens— Quoniam fratres Charissimi, etc.— & postea— Horum siquidem Diaconorum in Presbyteros ordinandorum auxiliante Domino, etc.  
Post haec surgunt omnes, & ordinandis coram Pontifice binis & binis successive genu flectionibus, Pontifex stans ante Faldistorium suum cum Mitra & nullâ oratione, nulloque cantu premissis, imponit simul utramque manum super caput cujuslibet ordinandi successiuè, nihil dicens, idemque faciunt post eum omnes Sacerdotes qui adsunt.  
Quo facto tam Pontifex quàm Sacerdotes tenent manus dexteras extensas super illos, & Pontifex stans dicit, Oremus fratres Charissimi, etc.— & postea precatur Exaudi nos quaesumus Domine Deus noster, etc.— Ut super hos famulos suos quos ad Presbyterii manus elegit coelestia dona multiplicet, etc.  
Tum Pontifex claudit & inungit manus cuilibet successive, quas sic consecratas aliquis Ministrorum Pontificis albo panniculo lineo simul, viz. dextram super sinistram alligat. Omnium manibus unctis & consecratis Pontifex, tradit cuilibet successive calicem cum vino & aquá & Patenam superpositam cum Hostiá & ipsi illam accipiunt inter indices & medios Digitos & Cappam Calicis & patenam simul tangunt, Pontifice singulis dicente, Accipe Potestatem, etc.  
Quo finito Pontifex cum Mitrâ sedens super Faldistorium ante medium altaris, imponit ambas manus super capita singulorum coram eo genu flectentium, dicens cuilibet, Accipe Spiritum Sanctum, quorum remiseris peccata remittuntur & quorum retinueris retenta sunt. Pontif. Rom. in Ordin. Presb.   after the Arch-deacons attestation to their Merits, the Bishop at large declares to the People his design to promote those Deacons so presented, to the Office of Priesthood, requiring their testimony to their Conversation, etc. Then having given an Exhortation to the Persons to be Ordained, when it's done, all stand up, and those designed for Ordination kneel down successively by two and two, before the Bishop. The Bishop standing before his Faldstool with his Mitre on, without any Prayer or Anthem premised, puts, both his hands successively upon the head of every one, not speaking a word: After him all the Priests who are present do the same; which being done, the Bishop and Priests together lay hands on them; and the Bishop standing, exhorts the people to pray to God to send his manifold gifts upon those whom he has now called to the Priestly Office, (which very expression intimates the Sacerdotal Character already imprinted) and the Prayer to that purpose follows. After several other Ceremonies and Prayers, the Bishop having anointed their hands, and one of his Attendants having tied them together with a Linen Fillet, he reaches out to them the Chalice with some Wine and Water in it, and the Patten with an Host upon it, which they take between their fore and middle fingers, touching the Bowl of the Chalice and Patten at the same time, when the Bishop uses those words, Receive thou power, etc. And here Mass being celebrated, the Ordained Communicate, but only in one kind, and standing before the Altar, make a Confession of their Faith in the words of the Apostles Creed; which when they have done, the Bishop sitting upon his Faldstool, with his Mitre on, before the middle of the Altar, and they kneeling down before him, he puts his hands upon every one of their heads, saying to every one distinctly, Receive the Holy Ghost, whose sins, etc. These are the most considerable Circumstances in ordaining a Priest of the Church of Rome, in all which if Imposition of Hands only Impress the Sacerdotal Character, and the touching of the Vessels be only Novel and Adventitious, than it plainly follows, That the Bishops of that Church in giving Holy Orders, do no more declare what particular Office that Imposition of hands relates to, than the Church of England in her eldest Rituals since the Reformation.  
But if we examine things farther, we shall find them much more defective; for whereas by the Roman Rubric, the Bishop lays hands on the Ordained three several times, and the first time uses no words at all; it's the conclusion of the formerly-cited Merbesius (and he pretends to good company in it) that That first Imposition of Hands that's in silence, confers the Priestly Character; which he proves by 1 Tim. 4.14. Stir up the Gift which is in thee, and which was given thee by Prophecy, and by the Laying on of the hands of the Presbytery; where the Apostle resolves Orders into that particular Action. Then telling us how general his Opinion is, he concludes, Therefore it's the first Imposition of Hands, by which they are made Priests; 
Ista igitur prima Manuum Impositio, ea est per quam Sacerdotes efficiuntur, cum neque per secundam Manuum Impositionem fiant Presbyteri ut vidimus, nec per tertiam cum illa in fine ordinationis factitari solet. Merb. de Sacr. Ord. D. 6. g. 52.  since it's certain, they are neither made so by the second laying on of Hands (the Exhortation annexed to which, as I observed before, supposes the Priestly power already given) nor yet by the third, which is only used in the Conclusion of Ordination. From all which it seems very probable, That let our Ordination be never so Imperfect, since we really use some Words at the instant of Imposition of hands, and those very pertinent and authentic, that Ordinance is at least more complete in our Church than in theirs, who lay on hands indeed, but declare nothing at all, either of their Reason for it, or their Meaning in it.  
4. The greatest Bigots of the Roman Communion never charge the Greeks (though they account them Schismatics for the most part) with want of a lawful Priesthood; yet their Rituals are certainly, by Roman rules, as defective as ours can be imagined. In that Church, He who was a Deacon before, and now to be ordained Priest, being brought according to prescription before the Bishop or Patriarch, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Pontific. Gr. de Consecr. Presbyt.  the Patriarch makes the sign of the Cross three times upon his Head, when he fixing his eyes upon the Holy Table, and kneeling on both knees on the step, the Chancellor calls aloud, Silence. Then the Patriarch holding his right hand upon his Head, speaks aloud, so that all may hear, The Divine Grace which always makes sound those things that are weak, and completes what's imperfect, promotes N. N. the most reverend Deacon to be a Priest: Let us therefore pray for him, that the grace of the All-Holy Spirit may descend upon him. Then again signing him three times, and laying his hand upon his head; when the Deacon has said, Let us pray, the Patriarch repeats that Prayer softly, O God who art without beginning and without end etc. After this follow the general Intercessions, which when they are ended, or while they are repeating, the Patriarch laying his hand again upon his head as before, Prays to God to fill him with the gifts of his Holy Spirit, that He may be capable of doing all things belonging to his Function. I need not insist upon other Ceremonies, the Person ordained having received his Character before: Where it's observable, that as the Greek Church assigns the Office no otherwise but as the Church of England does, viz. by giving notice to the People, what Order the Person is Consecrated to; so the Greek Church differs much from that of R●me, in the form of the Words used, which argues their opinion of the no necessity of such a set Form, and consequently that Orders are no Sacrament, as that word Sacrament is understood in the strictest Sense by Ecclesiastical Writers: Yet Habertus is so far from supposing any deficiency in the Greek Church, that in Effect He charges the Church of Rome with Innovation; for he tells us, 
Traditionis potius quam Scriptorum Authoritate constat. Pont. Gr. obs. Hab. 1.  That the words used upon touching the Vessels, are rather built upon Oral Tradition, than upon the Authority of any good Writers. He refers us to several Testimonies of the Greek Fathers, of greatest Reputation, given to this Form, Originally used in their Church. He observes, that the Church of Rome objected nothing to the Greek Rituals in the Florentine Council: He shows, that Ordination and Laying on of hands, when applied to Men, set apart for the Service of the Church, are the same thing: That therefore in their Ecclesiastical Writers, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, all signifying Laying on of hands, are all indifferently used for Ordination. He alleges that of the Writer De Ecclesiastica Hierarchia, That the Imposition of the Bishop's hands, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. c. 5.  giveth both the Character and Authority of a Priest; and gives us withal such an Instance of the Indulgence of the Roman See to those of the Greek Communion in Italy, as must either prove their full satisfaction with the Grecian Priesthood, or else that the Roman Bishops have very little care of their good. It's the Decree of urban the Eighth, Let the Protector of the Greek Nation provide, that some Eastern Bishop, consecrated after the Greek manner, reside at Rome to perform Divine Offices, 
Caret Protector, ut Graecus aliquis ex Oriente ritu Graeco consecratus Episcopus Romae sit, ad Divina Officia atque Ordinationes ritu Graeco peragendas, qui quae ad Caeremonias & ritus Orientalis Ecclesiae faciunt, docere alumnos possit, & ipse per omnia fervet; Jurent queque Italo Graeci statum Ecclesiasticum ac sacros Ordines usque ad Presbyteratum ritu Graeco suscepturos, quandoque & ubi Superioribus visum fuerit. Ibid.  and to Ordain according to the Grecian Rites, who may be able to teach Novices those things which belong to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Eastern Church, and may observe them exactly himself; and let the Greeks living in Italy, give Oath to take the Ecclesiastical Life, and Holy as Orders upon them, according to the manner of the Greeks, as far as the Order of Priesthood, when and where their Superiors shall think fit: Which is not only a fair attestation to the validity of the Grecian Orders, but seems to imply the Greeks dissatisfaction with the Roman Hierarchy, and a strange kind of Condescension in the Universal Bishop, to recede from his own Rights, and to give leave to a supposed Schismatical Clergy, to increase and thrive within his Jurisdiction. And Romanists have sufficient reason to acquiesce in this Liberty of theirs, if what Father Gore, in his Notes upon the Euchology informs us be true, That Imposition of Hands is not only an Adjunct of Holy Orders, 
Neque enim Comes est solùm & adventitia, non Integrans tantum & ex decentia requisita, sed intrinseca omnino necessaria & essentialis Materia; quâ adhibitâ sicut olim Apostoli, prout in eorum Acts & Scriptis legimus Diaconos Presbyteros & Episcopos creârunt, absque illâ pariter nullum in sublimiores Hierarchiae Ecclesiasticae gradus successores Episcopi possunt evehere. Goar. in Euch. p. 256.  or merely adventitious, not only an Integral part, or a thing required for Decencies sake; but that it's wholly the Intrinsical necessary and Essential Matter of them; by which as the Apostles of old created Deacons, Presbyters and Bishops, as appears by their Writings, and the History of their Acts; so without that, the Bishops who succeed them, can raise no Man to Superior Orders in the Sacred Hierarchy. And as he tells us afterwards, If we examine the Euchology never so strictly, we shall find no other matter of Orders so much as once mentioned, 
Cum in Universâ Ecclesiâ unam Sacramentorum administrandorum rationem essentialem (materiam nimirum & formam) statuere necesse est, nec in Graeca illius portione, alia quam manus Impositio queat assignari; Indubie sequitur, in Latinâ eandem quoque essentialem esse reputandam. ibid.  but Imposition of Hands; and his Inference from all is very remarkable, and much against the now prevailing Tenet of the Roman Church, That since it's necessary there should be some one Essential Rule or Method of dispensing Holy Orders in the Universal Church, and that there can be no other Matter of Orders assigned in the Eastern parts of that Church, but only Imposition of Hands; it must follow without Dispute, that even in the Latin Church, the same exclusive of all other Ceremonies, is Essential to them: And to this Opinion of his, methinks that of St. chrysostom agrees very well, who tells us in plain terms, This is Ordination, The Hand is laid upon the Man, but God Operates the whole, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chrys. in Act. Ap. Hom: 14.  and it's God's Hand which touches the Head of the Person Ordained, if he be Ordained Regularly. If then all this be true, if we have indeed the concurrence of so large a part of the Catholic Church as the Greek is, and that the Form of words used by them, is no more Demonstrative of the Order to be conferred, than ours in the Church of England was at the beginning of the Reformation; we can be no more denied, to have a Regular Succession of Church Officers than they. And we may suppose, such Considerations moved St. Clara, P. Walsh, and others of the Roman Communion, to allow our Orders as full and valid to all intents and purposes: But that we want a Power to offer other Sacrifices, than those of Praise and Thanksgiving, is a Want no more intolerable in our Priests or Presbyters, than it was in the Apostles themselves. And I have not yet heard of any Catholic Tradition, that either our Saviour used those words, Receive thou Power to offer Sacrifices, etc. to any Apostle; or that the Apostles used it to any of those whom they afterwards Commissioned to Preach the Gospel.  
5. Our Orders then being valid, as to to their Essentials, notwithstanding that great Pretended defect; it will follow, that all that Charge laid upon our Church of Heresy and Schism, can no way render them imperfect or ineffectual: And if the Roman Doctrine of the Indelible Character be true, those who assert that must for their own sake defend our Church, especially since it's apprehended by some, as we observed before, that a denial of the Indelible Character would irrecoverably ruin the Sacrament. And such indeed was the Doctrine of the Ancient Church, in which the Heretics and Schismatics are with all Severity prohibited to ordain any, or to Administer Sacraments; yet if they would still without fear of Ecclesiastical Censure presume to do such things, their Actions were good, and in full force; Antiquity so concurring with that Common Law Maxim, Quod fieri non debet factum valet; That which of itself, or so and so circumstatiated, ought not to be done; yet when it is once done, stands good and irreversible. I wonder not indeed that Baptism, though given by Heretics, should be approved in the Church of Rome, since they allow Laymen, Women, Persons unbaptised, nay, Jews or Turks to baptise in cases of necessity: But in so doing, they seem much to forget a standing Rule of their own, That none can give that to another, which he never had himself: For, as I remember, they tell us, That Baptism is one of those Sacraments which imprint an indelible Character. Yet such is the Doctrine of their great Aquinas. They deny indeed, that any can give Holy Orders, except Bishops; but He who is once made a Bishop, must continue so to his life's end; nor can the Irregularity of his Conversation, nor any Schism created by him in the Church, nor any Heresy invested or propagated by him, take away that Episcopal Power personally invested in him, howsoever the Exercise of that Power, may be restrained by Civil or Ecclesiastical Constitutions; and consequently those capable of Orders, who are consecrated by such Bishops, are really Deacons, Priests, or Bishops, according to the particular Character impressed on them: So we may find Arrian Bishops Ordaining others of equally Heretical Sentiments with themselves; which Persons so Ordained, if at any time they abjured their Heretical Pravity, were received into the Orthodox Church, and admitted to exercise the same Offices, they were formerly assigned to, without Re-ordination: To this purpose we read in the Answers to the Orthodox, published among the works of Justin Martyr, That the Crime of an Heretic returning to the true Faith, if it had been only some false Opinion, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Resp. ad Orthod. 14.  was to be rectified by a change of Judgement, if it were an Error in Baptism, by Confirmation, if in Orders, by laying on of Hands; which laying on of Hands was no Reordination, but only a particular Ceremony, whereby the lapsed in time of Persecution, as well as those who had fallen into Heresy, Laymen as well as Clergy Men, were readmitted into Catholic Communion: So Dionysius of Alexandria, in Eusebius, tells us, That it was an Ancient Custom, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 7. c. 2.  that such should be received into the Church by Prayer, with laying on of hands; and Aurelius Bishop of Carthage, determining concerning the Schismatical Dotanists, orders, That seeing it was not lawful to iterate that, which was to be given but once, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Conc. gen. T. 2. p. 1083.  if they hearty renounced that Error, they may be received into that one Church, the Mother of all Christians, by laying on of hands: And the same care is taken in the Eighth Canon of the first Council of Nice, which is plain itself, and so interpreted by Balsamon, Zonaras and Aristenus, and farther illustrated by our Learned Beverege. The same is attested on the part of the Latin Church, 
August. count. Epist. Par. l. 2. c. 13. Anastasii 2. Epistola ad Anast. Imp. de Acacio & Acacianis. Conc. gen. T. 4. c. 7. 8.  by St. Austin, in his answer to the Epistle of Parmenian the Donatist, and by Anastasius, the Second of that Name, Bishop of Rome, in an Epistle to Anastasius, Emperor of Constantinople. The care taken was only this; That the persons should be qualified according to the Canons of the Church, in that case provided, and that the Persons ordaining should be really Bishops; which things being secured, the Ordained upon Readmission to Catholic Communion, retained their Offices and Powers still.  
To conclude this then, If Orders be no Sacrament in a strict sense; if the Essence of them consist only in Imposition of the hands of Bishops; if the Greek and Ancient Latin Church, and the most learned persons of the Latin Communion, now agree in that Doctrine; if the Church of England in her first reformed Rituals, gave as clear an Assignation to his particular Office to the Person ordained, as either the Greek or Roman Church do at present; and finally, if real Heresy or Schism, cannot annihilate Episcopal Sacerdotal power: The consequence of all must be, That our Orders are still good and valid, and the Established Church of England, so far at least a true and sound Member of the Catholic Church of Christ.  
And now it were no difficult Matter, to retort the Objection against our Adversaries, and prove the invalidity of their Orders, upon the Principles and Practices of their own Church. For,  
1. They tell us, That it's the Intention of the Priest, not the Form or Matter of Institution, that makes the Sacrament: So that though a Man be ordained a Priest or a Bishop with all the Ceremonies of the Pontifical, and by a Bishop with those very words now made use of in the Exhibition of the Vessels; yet if the Bishop minds not what he's about, or intent not to do what the Church intends, the Ordained remains still without either Character or Power, by which means if one Bishop has but once failed in the Collation of Orders, they run down, for aught they know, in infinitum, without any due Consecration; and since humane Frailties are so many, and the Artifices of Hell so incessant and prevailing, as we must needs have a great many Doubts naturally grow upon us, concerning the Intentions of those whole lives we see Extravagant and Impious; so from thence we necessarily deduce an Infinity of Uncertaintys. If this Conceit were only the Caprice of some wild Head, it were the less considerable: But it's the determination of their oraculous Council of Trent, 
Si quis dixerit, in Ministris, dum Sacramenta conficiunt & conferunt, non requiri intentionem saltem faciendi quod facit Ecclesia, Anathema sit. Sessio. 7. Can. 11.  that If any shall say there is not required in Ministers, while they Consecrate and dispense the Sacraments, an Intention at least of doing what the Church does, Let that Person so saying be accursed: And the Annotators upon the Plantin Edition of that Council, refers us to the Decrees of Eugenius the 4th. in the Florentine Council, where we are taught, That the Sacraments are perfected by three things; By outward Signs, 
Omnia Sacramenta tribus persiciuntur, videlicet, Rebus tanquam Materia, Verbis tanquam Forma, & Persona Ministri conferentis Sacramentum, cum intentione faciendi quod facit Ecclesia; quorum si aliquod desit, non perficit Sacramentum. Instruct. ad Armenos. Conc. gen. T. 13. p. 535.  as the Matter, by Words, as the Form; and by the Person of the Minister dispensing the Sacrament, with an intention of doing that which the Church does; of which three things, if any one be wanting, there can be no Sacrament. It were an easy work to confute this Opinion, as being both Unscriptural and Irrational; 
Sacramenta ministrari possunt à bonis & à malis, à fidelibus & infidelibus, infra Ecclesiam & extra; quia si dispensari possint tantum à bonis, nullus esset certus de susceptione Sacramenti, cum nullus fit certus de bonitate Ministri, sicut nec de propria, & ita oporteret semper iterari, & malitia unius praejudicaret alienae saluti. Lindwood. Constit. prov. l. 1. tit. 7. gl. pro quibus citat B. Thom. Edit. Oxon. 1679. Intra Catholicam Ecclesiam, in Mysterio Corporis & Sanguinis Domini, nihil à bono majus, nihil à malo minus perficitur Sacerdote, quia non in merito Consecratis, sed in verbo perficitur Creatoris & virtute Spiritus Sancti. Decreti p. 2. c. 1. Qu. 1. citat. ex Augustino contra Epist. Parmen. l. 2.  and how it thwarts the Doctrine of some great Men of your own, may be seen by those Passages in the Margin; but as they assert it, it is Argumentum ad Homines; the consequence of which we know well enough, the Truth we shall leave them to make good as well as they can. But, if we look upon Consecration to Church Offices only as an Holy Ordinance, but no Sacrament: We may then challenge the Church of Rome as introducing a Nullity in their Orders, by so notorious a deviation from the Examples of Christ and his Apostles, from the Methods of the Ancient Universal Church, and from their own Authentic Constitutions; to prove which Crime of theirs, we may recur to those Authorities before insisted on: From which we learn, That Imposition of Hands was the only Essence of Orders; that their modern Ceremonies are mere Innovations, and, as by them used, shameful Corruptions of the first Institution: For tho' we allow that Power to the Governors of every true Christian Church, to add some significant Ceremonies to a Divine Ordinance (provided they are neither Indecent, Superstitious nor Troublesome, and therefore might pass by that addition of touching the Consecrated Vessels among other little Fooleries of that Church;) Yet since they have fixed the Essence of that Ordinance, in that touching of those Vessels, and have made Imposition of Hands, rather an impertinent Formality, than a matter of Necessity, as may appear from that of Gregory the Ninth, In fragmentis Decretalium; we cannot but conclude, that they have gone beyond all bounds of Just Ecclesiastical Authority. For in that Decree. as it's plain, that Imposition of Hands is made a mere non-essential Circumstance; so it infers a Power in persons Ordained, to execute their Functions in all parts, 
Presbyter & Diaconus cum ordinantur Manus impositionem tactu corporali, ●itu ab Apostolis introducto, recipiunt; Quod si omissum fuerit, non est aliquatenus iterandum, sed statuto tempore ad hujusmodi Ordines conferendos, cautè supplendum quod per errorem extitit praetermissum. Concil. general. T. 11. p. 384. c. 52. Epist. ad Archiepiesc. Lond. In margin vero decretalium melius legitur, Lugdunensem.  as occasion requires, without it; for it lays no prohibition on them, and yet order the supplying of all defects only at Canonical times, the Interstices of which, are long enough to admit various exertions of Diaconal or Sacerdotal Power. Nor does the Gloss upon this part of the Canon Law help the matter at all, though it be clogged with a Superfaetation of Notes: For tho' the first be, That a Deacon and Presbyter ought to be Ordained by Imposition of Hands; the second, that that manner of Ordination is deduced from Apostolical example; 
Nota 1. Quòd Presbyter & Diaconus per manus Impositionem debet Ordinari. Item Nota. Quòd Ordinatio Sacerdotis & Diaconi, introducta est exemplo Apostolorum. Item nota, quòd idem est in parte quod in toto. Item, Quòd duo imperfecta faciunt unum perfectum. Decretal. Greg. l. 1. Tit. 16. c. 3. gl. p. 282. Edit. Lugd. 1671.  yet sure it's concluded, that there's the same virtue in a Semi-Ordination, as in our Completed, and that two Imperfects makes one Perfect. We cannot deduce any thing from the whole, but That an Ordinance unquestionably sacred, and of Divine Original, is so far perverted by those of the Roman Church, as to have lost its Nature; which conclusion we may be the more confirmed in, if we observe that Assertion of some Modern Casuists, That where by any Mistake it has so happened, that the Person to be Ordained, did not touch both the Patten and Chalice with that exactness required by the Roman Rubric; 
Bonacina. D. 8. q. 2. puncto 3.  or where it is rationally doubted, whether they did touch them or not, there they ought to be Ordained again, the former Ceremonies being wholly Insignificant: Which strange Sleight of Apostolical Practice, and weight laid upon this new Invention, I can no way reconcile to that Position of Alexander Alensis, Those things which are ordered by Men, may be altered by Men; but those which are instituted by God, 
Quae ab homine Ordinata sunt, ab homine possunt mutari, quae autem à Deo instituta sunt, non nisi dictante Deo debent mutari. Alonsis Sum. p. 4. q. 9 Memb. 1. & 2. art. 2.  may not be changed but by the Command of the same God. Besides, as to Sacraments they tell us, They must be administered In Forma Ecclesiae, 
Decret. p. 2. c. 1. q. 1. c. 51. Hi qui c. 52. Si quis.  or that otherwise they are ineffectual. What Church then must that be, according to whose Form Orders must be conferred? Must it be the Ancient or Modern Church of Rome? The Question is Reasonable, since they have varied from themselves so much; for we can find no Western Ritual mentioning the Touch of the Vessels, for the first Nine hundred years after Christ: If at last the Ordination of Pastors in the Church of God, be instituted by Christ and his Apostles; and if the manner how those first Church-Governors collated Holy Orders, be expressed on Sacred Writ: Then those who have varied so much from their Prescriptions, and yet pretend to confer the same Divine Grace still, have to the utmost of their Power evacuated both the Diaconal and Sacerdotal Offices within their own Church; and if urged severely with their own Principles, must appear at best but an Embryo, an unshaped and incomplete Church, their Priesthood, Sacraments and Government, falling at once to the ground.  
2. It's obvious to any to object to them, That Laying on of hands, without using any Words at all, whereby the meaning of that action should be guest at, is a Ceremony of no Consequence at all: Yet the very Essence of Orders, according to their Schoolmen before cited, consists in such a mute Imposition of hands; by which it appears, That the Sacrament of Orders, as they call it, is of a very different Nature from all the rest: For should the Priest Anoint a Man with Oil, though in a Dying State, and say nothing; who would call it Extreme Unction? Who would dream that the Priest Baptised every Man whom he should Sprinkle Water on, unless he used the words of Institution? And we conclude, That those of the Roman Communion, would scarce believe the Bread and Wine Transubstantiated into the Body and Blood of Christ, by the bare Contact of the Priest's Hand, without those powerful Words Hoc enim est Corpus meum; the words being as Essential to the Sacrament, as the Elements, or the particular action of the Priest. Now if a Bishop lay his hand upon my Head, and say nothing, who knows whether it be to give me his Blessing, to confirm me after Baptism, to Consecrate me to some sacred Employ; or whether it were not an action purely accidental, or a mark of some personal kindness to me? For a Bishop, as a Bishop, may intent by such an action any one of these things, as well as Ordination: It's true, they have some circumstantials and appendages in their present Rituals demonstrative enough, but those may be omitted, and a perfectly mute Imposition of hands be made use of alone, as being only Essential to the thing designed; for if the Essentials of an Ordinance be used, the Circumstances can add nothing to its Perfection or Imperfection: So the Roman Church allows Baptism of Infants a complete Sacrament, when administered by such persons who have no Authority to Consecrate the Elements, or by Priests in such straits of time, as render their Consecration impracticable. If we should grant what some would fain persuade us, That Imposition of hands, and touching the Vessels, are both Essential to Ordination: Notwithstanding this, As when they allow Bread and Wine both as Essentials to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, yet they esteem it enough, to administer that Sacrament in one kind to all Communicants; so it may upon the same grounds be determined sufficient, to give Orders only by one Mean, the virtue of the other Essential being supposed to be in that one by Concomitancy: But a Ceremony wholly silent, is so very unintelligible to the vulgar, that though they could be brought to apprehend its general meaning, yet unless there were so many different Modes of laying on of Hands, it were impossible for them to distinguish between Bishops, Priests and Deacons, to the great trouble and dissatisfaction of those, who among a thousand Doubts and Uncertainties, must partake of the Ordinances of God by their hands: And this defect themselves are so sensible of, that though Imposition of hands be only a dumb Circumstance, yet when the Vessels are exhibited, in which Action they now generally fix the Essence of Orders, the Bishop ordaining uses a particular Form expressive of the Office then conferred. But it is  
3. Such a Form, as if well examined, would leave us more at a loss for the validity of their Priesthood, than all their precedent silence, Take thou Power, etc. where it would give us very great satisfaction, if they would inform us, what kind of Sacrifices their Priests offer, Whether Typical, and so Carnal and Sensible, Or else Spiritual: If Spiritual, we know of none such relating to their public Duties, but Prayers and Praises, in their largest extent Spiritual Sacrifices indeed, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ: 
1 Pet. 2.5.  We know of none concerning them in private, but such as all Christians may offer as well as Priests, Presenting their Bodies a living Sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, 
Rom. 12.1.  which is their reasonable Service. If their Sacrifices are Typical, by whom were they Instituted? Or what are they Types of? If of the Messiah to come, their Priesthood must be either Judaic or Pagan, whose various Sacrifices, either more expressly, as commanded by God, or more darkly, as taken up from Arguments of Gratitude, or from Imitation, were their great expressions of their Hope of a Messiah to come, or of some extraordinary Provisions of Immense Goodness, for the World's Redemption from that prodigious Corruption it was immersed in: If their Priesthood be such, they must no more pretend to be an Evangelical, much less the one Holy Catholic Church. If their Sacrifices be Types of the Messiah already come, they are the Prophecies of things long since past, and just as good Sense. If they instance in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, we believe that to be in Eucharistical Commemorative Sacrifice, of which as oft as we partake worthily, we present a just Offering of Thankfulness to God for the infinitely meritorious Death and Passion of our Saviour; and this Sacrifice is still purely Spiritual. But if they would persuade us, That in that Eucharist, the real, natural and substantial Body of the incarnate Son of God is broken as upon the Cross: that the same Blood which then ran in his veins, is actually shed as by the Nails and Spear: That every Priest as oft as He consecrates the Elements, does so break his Body and shed his Blood, and then offer them in Sacrifice to God the Father: We believe no such Sacrifice can be now offered. The Jewish Sacrifices grew needless, when Christ had offered himself, not as they had been useless before, but as they had relation to him: As their Sacrifices were no longer required, so no Priests were needful to attend them: And this is the Argument used by the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, when having asserted the Imperfection of Judaic Sacrifices, the impossibility that the Blood of Bulls and Goats should take away sin; he shows us how Jesus Christ (to whom he applies those words of David, Sacrifices and  Offerings thou wouldst not, etc.) takes away the use of those Sacrifices, that he may evidence the absolute necessity and validity of his own, by which be satisfied and accomplished the will of God. By which will we are Sanctified, through the offering of the Body of Jesus Christ once for all: 
Heb. 10.10, 12, 14, 18.  Again, This Man after He had offered one Sacrifice for Sins, He sat down for ever on the Right Hand of God. And, By one offering he has perfected for ever them that are sanctified. Now Christians generally relieve, T●●t Christ by this one offering of himself, obtained remission of sins for all them that Believe; and then the Apostles consequence is very natural, Where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin, if no more offering for sins, than none at all, and then no need of such sacrificing Priests. Nor has Estius at all proved the necessity of the Continuance of such propitiatory Sacrifices, notwithstanding that great one of our Saviour upon the Cross, who indeed was the only acceptable High Priest, who had power to offer so perfect a Sacrifice. It might be added, That the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Incruentum Sacrificium of the Ancients agrees very ill with this Transubstantiated Corporeal Sacrifice, but well enough with the notion of a Commemorative and Spiritual one. We might urge that of the learned Oughtram, concerning the Essential difference between that of Aaron and the Evangelical Priesthood. That Aaron's office as a Sacrificing Priest, was to manage the affairs of Men with God, according to that of the Author to the Hebrews, Every High Priest taken from among Men is ordained for Men in things appertaining to God, 
Heb. 5.1.  that he may offer both gifts and Sacrifices for men: Whereas the business of the Apostles and their Successors in the Ministry of the Gospel, is to manage the business of God with Men, according to that of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 
1 Cor. 5.20.  We are Ambassadors of Christ, as though God did beseech you by us, we pray in Christ's stead that you would be reconciled unto God: St. Paul speaks of himself as a real Sacrificing Priest, upon account of his offering up the Gentiles to God, who were acceptable because Sanctified by the Holy Ghost; 
Rom. 15.16, 17.  but in the same place he calls himself not the Minister of the Gentiles to Christ, but the Minister of Christ to the Gentiles; and therefore it's observable, That Evangelical Ministers are not where in Scripture called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Oughtram. de Sacris. l. 1. c. 19  with relation to any such Corporeal Sacrifices as the Jews offered, it not being the Ministry of the Apostles, but the Priesthood of Jesus Christ, that succeeded in the room of Aaron's. But the prosecution of these things would carry us too far beyond the bounds of the present Controversy; only from the whole it will follow, That the Sacrificing Priests of the Roman Church, by deserting the Commission given by Christ to his Apostles, are indeed relapsed into Judaisme, or worse: By which means their boasted Succession is quite broken off, to the ruin of their Church's Catholicism; if, as they tell us, a Succession of Christian Priests and Bishops be one necessary mark of such a Church.  
And now we have reason to admire the Goodness of Almighty God, who, as He made the Jews the bitterest Enemies of our Saviour, the preservers of those Sacred Oracles which confirmed his Messiahship, and by them, as Instruments, delivered down those Holy writings to us Gentiles, to our Conviction, though they had no such effects upon that Obdurate People; so he has made the Church of Rome, the Conveyancer of a Truly Apostolical Hierarchy down to us, though they have almost lost it among themselves: They continue still the Imposition of Hands, though only as a Collateral and non-essential Ceremony, which we hope may have other Effect upon them, than what's agreeable to their own Mistaken Principles: But since their abuse or contempt of it, cannot alter the Nature of the thing itself, We, deducing that Practice of Imposition of Hands from them, as they from the Apostles, and laying its due weight upon that Apostolical Institution, without Additions or Alterations: We enjoy that Ordinance full and complete among ourselves, and enjoy that Succession really, which they have so long Impertinently boasted and valued themselves upon.  
FINIS.