A Serious REVIEW OF PRESBYTERS RE-ORDINATION BY BISHOPS: In a Letter written unto a Minister in Warwickshire, resolving this Case of CONSCIENCE, Whether a Minister ordained by Presbyters, may with a good conscience be reordained by a Bishop, Presbyter, and Deacon, so that they will declare their Ordination to be merely accumulative, and the man shall not renounce his Ordination by it.  1 Tim. 4.14. 
Neglect not the gift which thou hast received by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery.  
Ex toto codice biblico, ne apex quidem proferri potest, quo demonstretur, immutabili quadam necessitate, ac Dei ipsius institutione, potestatem ordinandi eo modo competere Episcopo, ut si Minister ab Episcopo Ordinetur ejus vocatio& Ordinatio censeatur rata; sin à Presbytero, quod tunc irrita coram Deo& frustranea sit habenda.  Gerhard. Loc. come. de Minist. Eccles. p. 261. 
LONDON, Printed for Ralph Smith at the Sign of the Bible in Cornhill, near the Royal Exchange.   

A SERIOUS REVIEW OF PRESBYTERS Re-ordination BY BISHOPS.  
Reverend Sir,  
I Cannot( though unknown to you) but be affencted with, and afflicted for the sad dilemma into which I discern you, as many other faithful Ministers are reduced by our rising Prelates; I have, Sir, received from your friend a Question stated in the form of a Case of Conscience, to which you desire my resolution; you may, Sir, have the satisfactory determination of much more Learned and Judicious Casuists, than myself; yet seeing you desire them, I dare not withstand my weak conceptions, which God in mercy succeed.  
Sir, your Case is thus stated by yourself, and must be considered, before it can be resolved.  
Whether a Minister ordained by Presbyters, may with a good conscience be re-ordained by a Bishop, Presbyter, and Deacon, so that they will declare their ordination to be merely accumulative, and the man shall not renounce his ordination by it?  
Sir, before I give Answer to your Enquiry, I must understand your terms, which are a little strange, and ambiguous; and so obstructive to a Resolution. And Sir, were I with you, I should demand  
First, Who you mean by Deacon? I take it for granted, not a Scripture-Deacon; for he is a stranger to our Church, unless under the Name of an Over-seer to the poor; and if she knew him, I find not that he was ever entrusted with the power, or had an hand in Ordination of Ministers; nor can I suppose you mean a Deacon, in sensu Ecclesiastico, who is at most but half a Minister( though I know no Warrant for it) and is not admitted to Consecrate Wine( though Water) much less to Ordain Ministers. I must therefore conclude you intend a Deacon, in sensu Cathedrali, who is a Presbyter in Office, but archdeacon in Hierarchical Order, and presenteth to the Bishop( too commonly with a* lie in his mouth) the persons to be Ordained, and accompanieth the Bishop in Imposition of hands.  
Secondly, By Presbyters I understand Ministers of the Word and Sacraments, entrusted with the keys, Order and Authority of the Church, and exercising the same communi concilio, jointly, without any single Presbyter promoted into a degree above the rest of his Brethren, and distinguished by the Title of Bishop, as a term of honour, or priority in Order.  
Thirdly, Ordained, I understand to intend the Solemn admission into the Office and Investiture with the Authority of a Minister of the Gospel, unto the administration of Word and Sacraments; and all Pastoral duties in and to Christ his Church; which was done with fasting and prayer, and imposition of hands, and so by Re-ordained, I must understand a passing under the same formalities which are appointed for such admission and investiture.  
Fourthly, By Renouncing his ordination( viz. that formerly received) I conceive you intend it to relate unto the mans mind and mouth, so as that he that is Re-ordained, doth in himself intend, and verbally declare, not to renounce or depart from the force and Authority of his Ordination, or make void the Office, Admission, and Investiture formerly received: which yet I doubt, is really( at least in f●ro Ecclesiae) done by the Act of Re-ordination.  
Fifthly, What do you mean by their declaring of their Re-ordination to be merely accumulative? its proper and genuine signification is, an adding, augmenting, increasing the heap and store, and making it to run over, and improperly, it signifieth a multiplication and addition of things or actions unto the increase and perfection of what is already lawful and sufficient, but capable of greater measure, degree, and perfection; and is different from Repetition or Reiteration of the same words or actions, being a confluence of new and different things, though unto the augmentation of the same subject; and therefore I think cannot be well predicated of Re-ordination, which is rather a Reiteration of the same Act and Administration, than any new Accumulation.  
Moreover, I should inquire whether the Accumulation they will declare when they Re-ordain, be predicated of the Agent Accumulating, or the Subject Accumulated: If of the First, then it means that they will freely, most willingly ordain according to that of Cicero, Ut pro tuo in nos Officio,& nostro in te study munus hoc Accumulatissime voluntati tuae largiamur. And if by this fallacy our Prelates can make men willing to be Re-ordained, they may well declare their Act to be most accumulative; for I am jealous they love and long to be thus accumulating their caconical Clergy, though by the sinful defections of such whom they can seduce, and will insult over: But if it be meant of the last, viz. the subject accumulated, the most charitable sense in which we can understand it, is, that they will Reiterate Ordination with some difference in the manner thereof, but it is Redundant, and no way necessary, without which you were before sufficiently a Minister: and that will seem irrational, and accumulative against the Reformed Churches and Religion, more than advantage them, proving like the Lawyers Accumulation of Suits and Actions against a man Arrested; in which sense Calepinus doth thus describe it out of Zasius, Cumulatio est plurium rerum vel actionum coacervatio contra eundem in judicio legitime proposita. And such Accumulation is to be dre●ded and declined, lest it bring us under the guilt of Accumulating in Aretus his sense, 
Aretius come. in 2 Tim 4 3.  Sine Judicio& temere quaevis obvia accumulare; which will be much below us as men, much more as Ministers.  
Sixthly, and Lastly, What do you mean by a good conscience? I shall not stand Critically to observe goodness of conscience, quoad honestatem, or quietem; well knowing, the one attends the other, as the cause and effect; but would inquire after it, quoad firmitatem vel infirmitatem, its strength or weakness, and so refer its goodness to this particular Act; for I should be loth to deny that mans conscience to be generally and ordinarily good, which may not be so good as to guide him in, and guard him against such a Dilemma, wherein the distress of his condition may distemper his mind, and darken his judgement, that it directs him not, or at least doth not conscientiously awe him to follow his direction; but that he yieldeth to that sinful Act, which may afterward create him sorrow, and wound his conscience to the check of all his comforts.  
Your Question, Sin, stated, and the terms of it thus explained, I must profess that if any( as too many) be induced to be Re-ordained by Bishops who have heretofore been Ordained by Presbyters, I wish they were so wary and prudent, as to do it with some such explicit cautions and explications; which although they must needs bespeak the weaknesses of such as subject thereto, yet would bear some witness to the truth and Order which by such Re-ord●iners are designed to be, if possible, obliterated and exploded; but Sir, how fair soever are their pretences and persw●sions, I do not believe that any of them will Ordain on any such terms: I could tell you a Story of some well known( whose names, for reverence to them, I conceal) who came to Thomas de Candida Casa the Excommunicate Scotch Bishop, and demanded Ordination, with some such Declaration as you suggest to salue their Re-ordination, but received this present return, Keep your sense and intention to yourselves, for what do you tell me of them? if you desire to be ordained, I will ordain you: And yet this Journey-man Consecrator is well known to be more found and sober, than most of the present English Prelates. But could this be admitted and assured to us, that you might make such protests publicly, and have them entred on Record, yet Sir, my judgement and most serious thoughts do resolve your enquiry in the Negative thus ( viz.)  A Minister Ordained ( i.e.)[ Solemnly admitted into, and invested with the Office of a Minister of the Gospel of Christ] by Presbyters[ lawful, but ordinary Ministers, among whom none is dignified with the gradual Title Bishop] cannot with a good conscience[ rightly informed, and duly acting the man unto the discharge of duty, and obtainment of peace] be Re-ordained by a Bishop, Presbyter, and Deacon[ archdeacon, all lawful Presbyters] notwithstanding[ himself intend, and do verbally declare not to] renounce his first Ordination, and the Re-ordainers do declare their Re-ordination to be merely Accumulative, and an Act Redundant, and no way needful.] 
Sir, such Re-ordination, notwithstanding such Cautions, is very ridiculous, and must, in my apprehension, be very irrationally and irreligiously demanded, and accordingly subjected unto without any regard unto right Reason, or the righteous institution of an holy God, and so unsuitable to men, and then much more inconsistent to the good conscience of Ministers of God, who are or ought to be men rectified by Art, and replenished with grace, bespeaking the seriousness of their spirits, by their actions, no less than by their expressed words. In sense hereof, I sh●ll desire your serious consideration of these two things, which m●y help to clear your mind, and est blish your heart in a matter of great moment, however some esteem it.  
Fi●st, Re-ordination( like rebaptisation) properly so called( ●s in your e●se it must be) is a plain solecism in Divinity ●nd Christianity; neither to be taught, nor Acted in Christs Church, without preposterous levity, ridiculous vanity, and palpable profaneness, never owned, nor allowed, practised, or pleaded for, in the Church of God, until our sinful, shameful self-deceiving dayes, interpreting words and actions according to our own lust and will, contrary to their natural, genuine, known, and received signification. I pray Sir, inquire and resolve in what place, or Age of the Church was it demanded, or admitted, that Ordination was judged valid, and Accumulatively Reiterated? It cannot be unknown to you, that the Church hath had much controversy, and many hot Contests about Ordination to the ministry differently administered; but when, where, or which of them did differ, disagree, or doubt of this position, viz.[ That Ordination which is valid by the essentials thereof, though irregular in point of Order and Circumstance, and unlawfully taken up, or administered, yet ought not to be Reiterated!] What Council, Father, yea Pope or Bishop, did ever pronounce a validity in Ordination, and yet required the men to be Re-ordained? Is not Re-ordination, on this distinction, viz.[ your Ordination is lawful before God and the Church, but not legal, according to the Order of the Nation] the novellous fancy of our late monstrously exacting Bishops? The many debates concerning the Ordination of Arrian, Novatian, and donatist Bishops, is no less obvious, than those of rebaptisation; yet when, or where was it judged, that they should be Re-ordained? The Fathers particularly, and they convened in the Council of Nice, collectively did inquire concerning their validity, and nullity, and having determined them valid, they Decreed, 
council. Nicen. Can. 19, 27, 57. Gelaes. Cyzizen. lib. 2. Actor. council.  {αβγδ}, After hands laid upon them, let them remain in their Office: And more particularly, Ubicunque autem sieve in vicis, sieve in civitatibus ipsi soli inventi fuerint Ordinati qui inveniuntur in clero, in eodem ordine permanent: Giving direction for the pre-eminence of the catholic, above the Heretically ordained Bishops; 
Theoderet. Ecclesiast. Hist. lib. 1. cap. 9.  and directing a Confirmation of them that were so Ordained, and so giving them an indulgence or Licence, to Officiate and exercise the Office they had received: never requiring them to be re-ordained, or advising others to re-ordain them: Although it's true, Jansenius would infer it from their accepta manuum impositione, receiving the laying on of hands, yet he doth not understand Re-ordination properly so called, but first ordination, supposing, what they had received, was null and void; and he is very abundantly, and clearly answered by Voetius, 
Voetius desperata causa Papatios, lib. 2. Sect. 2. cap. 14. pag. 198.  who well noteth that their imposition of hands, was the note of the Indulgence extended to them as paenitentiaries after their fall, which might be repeated. Not any act of Ordination which could not be reiterated: and well observeth the council judged them ordinatos, and directeth that they should in Clero manner: And therefore confirmation of the Orthodox Bishops did not clericatum, ordinem, or potestatem confer, said usum& ordinis exercitium concedere, and primam vocationem ad ordinem vel clericatum confirmare.  
Again, Sir, the difference in and about the way of Ordination, used in the Greek from that of the Latin Church did occasion no little strife: yet the question was whether that Ordination were not voided and null, and so they who passed under it, were to be Ordained, as being yet without office or authority? not whether though their Ordination were valid, they should be reordained? upon which case Pope Caelestinus the third, doth exactly distinguish between the {αβγδ} ordinare iterum ordinare, reordinare and confirmare, ipsum ordinem confer, and supplementum adjungere ad ordinis exercitium; between officium ingredi, intrare and in officio permanore, Reordination and liberty of exercise: and doth in this case direct the Archbishop of Hydruntinum( the Metropolitan See of Apulia) utrum reordinandus sit, an sine periculo ainae suae in sic recepto ordine debeat celebrare addito si quid noverit in supplemento ordinis adjungendum; so that nothing but the danger of damnation for administering without authority and office, will( according to him and truth) direct reordination.  
Ancient Ecclesiastical Canons do direct many things to make Ordination valid, as that it be done by a Bishop in his own diocese without simony, that he be Orthodox, in communion with the Church, and the like, but it never directeth proper reordination; but in such cases determineth a nullity of the Ordination in such points faulty and defective: and yet when such cases have chanced, and fallen under consideration, the c●nonists, Schoolmen, and Popish Casuists themselves have concluded a validity in such Ordination unlawfully received and conferred; yea if it be done by a Bishop degraded, and excommunicated, yet some of them determine it to be valid; and conclude against all reordination where they can judge a validity, notwithstanding the apparent irregularities thereof. Haeretici Episcopi verum ordinem conferunt, si cum debita intentione formam Ecclesiae servant; confer possunt de facto, 
Richard. de Media villa, distinct. 25. Artic. 1. quaest. 2. dist. 19.  non tamen de jure,& sic recipere potest Sacramenta ab haereticis ministris& praecisis, ab Ecclesia valida esse, si alia necossaria adsint, propositio est de fide. Swarez. Degradatio non potest omnem usum auferre, nam sacerdos degradatus potest consecrare,& Episcopus degradatus ordinare, licet peceent gravissime id facientes. Tolet. de degradatis. And the Cannons called Apostolical damn re-ordination in a proper sense, as profane and intolerable, Si quis Episcopus, aut Presbyter, aut Diaconus secundam ab aliquo ordinationem susceperit; 
Can. Apost. 67  deponitur tam ipse qui ipsum ordinavit.  
It is, Sir, most apparent that the great controversy between the Papists and Protestants is concerning the nullity or validity of their Ordination as it is expressly stated by our learned Morton, non de differentia omni, 
Cathol Apollo. part. 1. cap. 33. pag. 96, 97.  said de differentia ordinis, seu potestate ordinandi quaestio est instituenda; the question is not of every differing circumstance, but of the different power ordaining: hence the impudent charge and loud clamours of the Papists is, ordinationes Protestantium sunt more laicae, the Ordinations of the Protestants are by mere lay persons, who have no power to ordain, and therefore are voided and null; and so by the nullity of the Ministry they design, yea openly determine the non entity of all the Reformed Churches, against which the entity of our Churches, and validity of our Ministry is strongly and learnedly defended by Arnobius, 
Arnab. ce Ministeaio Ecclesiae sacro sancto lib. 1. cap. Sadeel. ad Turria Sophis. R●spon. pars 1. Boetius desperata causa ●apatus.  Sadeel, and Voetius among foreign, and Raynolds, Jewel, Archdeacon Mason, Bishop Morton, Davenant and Pilkington with many others of our own judicious sincerely Protestant Divines: but neither the one nor the other did so much as dream of a re-ordination, accumulative reiteration of the same Ordination already valid, though irregular: when the Bishops of England were to Consecrate Bishops for Scotland, though it was debated whethet the Scotch-men were Ordained, and some hot-spur Prelates would needs judge a nullity of their Ordination, because done by Presby●ers only, yet our Arch-bishop Bancroft over-ruled them, and determining their Ordination valid, did not, nor durst admit their re-ordination.  
However our late renowned Usher is reported to have judged Ordination by Presbyters without a Bishop( where he might be had) to be schismatical, I am sure he never advised, nor would have allowed a reordination; nor was it ever enjoined to be done by our Church, that a Popish Priest converted to our Religion, should be reordained; judging the corrupt Ordination received in Rome to be valid. However our now Cassandrian Bishops, may be grown so Jesuitical, as to drive on their Rome-reconciling design, by the false interpretations, and fallacious distinctions of such, as are so foolish, or rather faithless to God and his Church, as to deceive themselves by them; and in words to profess what is directly contrary to the action they administer, cheating men into a subjection to what they think to decline; and pretend accumulatively to reiterate the Ordination they judge already valid: yet it is evident to any intelligible observer, and will( I doubt) be too soon visible and sensible, that they intend nothing less, whilst the Divine right they desire to accumulate to their Hierarchy; the making of the holy hands of their Bishops essential to Ordination; the constituting of a caconical Clergy under sworn obedience to their Ordinary; and unchurching of the Reformed Churches in order to their Union with Rome, doth speak nothing more plainly than the nullity of their Ministry whom they pretend to reordaine, otherwise methinks they should at least deal in re-ordinations that are manifest, what they do in rebaptisation doubtful; If thou be not ordained, I ordain thee.  
Can we imagine men, especially Ministers, to be so ignorant of the nature of Ordination, as not to know it cannot be reiterated; things and actions which create relation, honour, or office cannot be reiterated: The married cannot be re-married without vanity; did not the running to a minister, after the supposed Justice of the Peace had done his appointed do, resolve the Justices act to be no marriage: or do any of his Majesties Knights think they have nothing but Olivers Dubbing reiterated, and that they really enjoyed that honour before His Majesties Royal Act conferred it? yet Ordination( though a piece of Church polity, and ecclesiastic Order, and as such to be kept from all Reiterating contempt) is more than these; for it is Gods Ordinance, though mans administration, done in his Name and Authority, not to be made profanely common by groundless contemptible Reiteration; Constituting an Officer between God and his people; conferring the Power and Authority of dispensing the holy things of God, and mysteries of salvation; actually and solemnly investing with an Office, Honour, and Authority, which can be no more Reiterated without palpable profaneness, than baptism. I cannot but wonder, that those who are so zealous for the reverence of baptism, that they will scarce Reiterate it after a Lay person, or Midwife, should have so little regard for Ordination on which the very Esse of Baptism doth depend.  
Sir, to wind up this Consideration, I must be free to tell you, that Re-ordination( in the sense your case must intend it) is a most ridiculous fancy, notorious fallacy, and false interpretation, never known in the Church under all the Controversies, about the Churches Ministry, not rationally( to any intelligent man) to be required by any that design not to delude the simplo, nor subjected to by any who intend not to the keeping of a Living, or gaining some preferment to cheat their consciences, and expose their Ministry, with Gods Church, and true Religion, to scorn, contempt, and ruin: And if this can be done with a good conscience, judge you. I conclude it must have considerates, cautions, and weighty provisoes and salvoes to make it so much as a Question, or case of Conscience. I see your case could not make the enquiry naked, lest it should have reflected with shane.  
But, Reverend Sir, the second thing I desire to offer to your consideration, is this,  
The salvoes in your case supposed( though the most probable and specious that can be provided) will not avail to prevent the profaneness and sin that is obvious in Re-ordination; for that they are manifestly fallacious, and inconsistent with that sense, and signification, they seem to bear, and Men( in a Dilemma) are willing to suppose they will admit.  
Which will appear plainly, if we consider the nature of them. And first  
Suppose your Bishop, with his Cathedral Colleagues, shall condescend to declare their Re-ordination to be merely accumulative, their Declaration is so ambignous, that it cannot be easily understood, either as I have noted it must be such in respect, of themselves ordaining, and then indeed there may be a truth in what they declare; but this will not relieve your case; for they professing a Bishop essential to Ordination, are willing by a Re-ordination, to put a nullity on the Ordination made without him, if any will be deceived by the word accumulative, to submit unto, and receive it.  
If( as it must be understood in your case) it be intended of the subject ordained, then this Declaration is plainly false( which a Jesuited spirit will not stick to pronounce, if fools will be pleased with a sound of words, which signify no such thing as is conceived by them;) and so the very end of speech( the Interpreter of the mind) is most abominably perverted, and judge you how this can be done with a good conscience.  
Sir, Re-ordination will( on serious thoughts) appear no accumulation, and where is then your salvo? I say, 
Re-ordination accumulateth not.  it is no accumulation, in the act and formality thereof, because it is a repetition, a reiteration of the same act, whereas a formal accumulation is an access of different acts to the same end; as in a Rhetorician a multiplying of different words to express the same thing, in whom a repetition of the same words would be judged vain babbling: So in a Lawyers svit, it is bringing many Actions to the confinement of the same Prisoner, secured by one, in whom the reiterating the same plaint, must be judged a groundless, malicious vexation. In riches and honour, it is not tumbling over the same heap, and mumbling over the same Titles that doth accumulate, this is childish toying with them; there must be in accumulation an access of new matter to that which is full without it, and different acts to the end, which needeth them not.  
Now Sir, will you please to tell me, or yourself, what new act is done in your Re-ordination? It is true, there is an access of different persons, and rites, which are mere circumstances, and add nothing, but the act in the nature of it, is the same which was done before; what is the act of your Bishop, Presbyter, and Deacon, but a solemn separating of you to the work of the Ministry? Missio solemnis in possessionem honoris, saith Tarnovius. That by which committitur in nomine& loco Dei ab ordinatoribus cura gregis dominici, saith hurnius: By which Authoritas coram ecclesia tribuitur, saith Chemnitius. Let the Bishops themselves tell us, whether their ordering of Priests, be any thing else, but the Ministerial creation of an Officer in Christs Church, solemn investiture of a person with the power and authority of dispensing the mysteries of salvation; and hath not this been done by the Ordination of Presbyters without a Bishop? Deny it who can, or dare, and yet speak God's mind: And then Sir, where is your accumulation? Different Rites and Modes may attend one and the same action: If a Lawyer bring the same action by Bill, Plaint, Information, Inditement, or Presentment, it is still but the same action; let the Prisoner discharge one, he dischargeth all.  
As, Sir, your Re-ordination is not accumulative in the formality of the act, so it accumulateth not any effect to your Ministry, or yourself in your Ministry; which if it did, we might the better admit the term in an improper sense. If it add or augment any thing to your Ministry, it must be in one of these three Respects. The 

Validity  
Liberty  
Dignity   thereof.  
But, Sir, it accumulateth nothing to the validity of your Ministry: Which, if it could do, you not only might with a good conscience be Re-ordained, but could not with a good conscience decline or refuse it; but Sir, your Ministry is not capable of such accumulation; essentials cannot be accumulated, they must concur simul& semel; either you are, or are not a Minister of Jesus Christ, an Officer in his Church, ambassador authorised to transact and seal the Covenant of salvation between God and his people. The formality of the function and order admits not majus and minus, as may the qualification of the subject. The Question in the Church( as I have before noted) hath ever been of the simplo, and positive nullity; or validity of the Ministry; no degrees of the Office being enquirable; and if, Sir, your Re-ordination shall be accumulative to the validity of your Ministry, that accumulation must be of an exceeding operative, and extensive influence, that it may make up the defects of your baptizing, and administering the Lords Supper, and ministration between God and immortal souls; for the validity of these dependeth on, and is suitable to the validity of your Office and Authority. Take heed this fancied accumulation do not accumulate rebaptisation, nay Church annihilation, and make Rome run over with English Proselytes.  
If, Sir, your Ministry, in point of the validity thereof, were capable of accumulation, yet what can a Bishop( much less an English Bishop) advanced above, and distinct from a Presbyter, add unto your Ordination?  
Let it, Sir, be observed  
1. That( our very enemies being judges) Presbyters may in ease of necessity, nay convenience, ordain, and their Ordination is so valid, and sufficient, that no act was ever judged able to accumulate thereunto: We cannot be ignorant of the Authority admitted to, and acknowledged in the Chorepiscopi, who were no more than ordinary Presbyters; and that it is generally pleaded, that in the vacancy of a Bishop, and where he cannot be had, Presbyters may, and must ordain; That the Church do not perish through want of Ministers; And( were we minded to lay hold on necessity) it is in your case most evident, the Bishops were suspended by Authority of Parliament, excluded from their places, some of them imprisoned, some exiled or dead, all interdicted( by a lawful Authority, not to be disobeyed) from giving Orders: another Power erected, by the just( though not full) Authority of our Nation, so as that they could not in safety Ordain, or men be Ordained by them; either they must( for at the best a punctilio of Order) have disobeyed Authority, and hazarded their Liberties,( which as no good conscience could then have required, so it cannot now by an imaginary accumulation rebuk the not so doing) or be Ordained as they were.  
But, Sir, not to be beholding to Prelatical Concessions, let it be observed  
2. Ordination hath been given in the Church of Christ by Presbyters without Bishops, yet the accumulative Re-ordination of the Bishop was never dreamed of, or demanded, to add to the validity thereof. The Scripture tells us of Timothy his Ordination by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery, but is so far from mentioning the accumulative re-ordination of a Bishop to make that valid, that it no where vouchsafeth that honour to them, as to Record one Ordination by a person so promoted, and as such acting: We red indeed of St. Pauls hands laid on Timothy, but whether by way of conveyance of some extraordinary gift, or conferring the Office of his Ministry, remains controverted; but that it was not by way of confirmation, or accumulation, to the validity of what the Presbytery had transacted is agreed by all; and be it what it will, that it was Apostolical, not( in our Prelates sense) Episcopal, must needs be acknowledged by all: I cannot but much approve of Chemnitius his Note, which he makes upon this passage, viz. Non tantum dicit mearum manuum impositione 1 Tim. 4. ne existimetur discrimen sieve ab apostles, sieve a Presbyteris quis ordinetur: 
Chemni. Examen council. tried. de Sacra. Ordi. p. 226.  Attributing( as to this act) to all Presbyters, an equality of power, and validity to that of the Apostles: There is nothing more plainly reported in Ecclesiastical History, or the Writings of the Fathers, than that ordinations by Presbyters have been acted, allowed, and by some Councils directed. In Alexandria, 
Tom. 4. p. 780. in Eph. 4.  Per totum Aegyptum, si desit Episcopus, consecrat Presbyter, saith Augustine. And Consignant Presbyteri, si praesens non sit Episcopus, saith Ambros. And the ordinations of the Scots before they had any Bishops in Ireland and Scotland, cannot be denied; nor yet the known and defended constant course of the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas; and yet it was never known, that ever Bishops Re-ordination was advised; nor hath it been yet asserted, that their act could, or was necessary to accumulate the least unto the validity of their Ministry, most earnestly pleaded for, and vigorously defended by our own Prelates whilst truly Protestant.  
If our prompt Accumulators shall tell us, that the ordination of Coluthus his Presbyters in Alexandria, was by a Council declared null, and the ordained were returned into the order of laics, I should Reply, It was not because he and other Presbyters did ordain them, sine Episcopo, but because they were ordained by him, who being infamis ambitione, made himself Episcopum imaginarium, and so ordained them; and the Decree of the Council doth suggest so much, when it decreeth Ut se pro Presbytero haberet qualis ante fuisset; and then it concludeth more against the Ordination Episcopo solo especially, he usurping and ordaining without the Election of the Church( as was Ischyras, whose ordination occasioned so much trouble) than against Presbyters ordaining sine Episcopo.  
3. The intrinsical power of ordination is in Presbyters as such, and no way in Bishops otherwise then as they are Presbyters, and not at all as they are Bishops, which is at most but a gradual promotion, framed by human prudence, and distinct from Ministerial Order and Office created by Gods Ordinance; it must( in despite of all contrary Opponents) be acknowledged Episcopi& Presbyteri una est ordinatio, uterque enim est sacerdos; that Bishops and Presbyters are ejusdem ordinis,& authoritatis, is a truth which hath shined with that brightness, that even those( the very Papists) whom it most concerneth, cannot deny it, and it hath by our late( unhappy to be abhorred) challenge, of divine right of Episcopal difference from Presbytery, been written so legibly, that( almost) all men may run and r●ad it.  
If the Laudenses of our Age will yet presume to contend for the different order and office of a Bishop in any thing more than degree, by divine right enjoying an Authority, I should advice them to install Timothy and Titus in their Cathedral Seas, unbishop'd by Mr. Prynne, and contradict the Catalogue of Learned Witnesses of all sorts, and in all Ages from the time of Christ and his Apostles to our d●yes, who are all produced and proved no less Heretic●l in this point, than Aerius himself, collected by the s●me Author: And ●s a Bridle to their impudence, call to mind the grave, and public check given( at Oxford by the Learned Dr. Holland, Regius professor in that University) unto their grand Patron Arch-Bishop laud, who( in his Divinity exercise for his degree) starting this Notion, was openly rebuked as a seditious person; who by a novel Popish Opinion, would unchurch all the Churches beyond the Seas; and sow division between them and us.  
Now Sir, no Bishop as Bishop, hath the power of Ordination, for, if he had, so far must his single Ordination, alone, and without Presbyters, be, from a crime( ●s it w●s complained of, and charged on Chrys●stome; and as which it hath been interdicted by more Councils than one;) th●t he must needs be essential to the {αβγδ} ordinare, to make it valid, and no Presbyters may without profaneness accompany him in the act, they must be all Bishops, and only Bishops who do ordain, which none but Bedlam Divines will once affirm. If then Bishops ordain by the same intrinsical power, and Authority, and no other, which is in the Presbyters, who have already ordained, by what can their act accumulate to the validity of Ordination?  
It must, Sir, be remembered, that the power of Ordination is originally, formally, and by Gods institution in the Presbyters; but by mans limitation, restriction, and self-devised polity, hath been placed in Bishops, not officij, but honoris causa; and what validity, a point of human order, or honour, can add to Gods Ordinance, judge you: For I must subscribe to the conclusion of the profound Gerhard, 
Loc. come. de minist. Ecclesiast. p. ●61.  Ex toto codice biblico ne ●pex quidem proferri potest quo demonstretur immutabili quadam necessitate, ac ipsius Dei institutione, potestatem ordinandi eo modo competere Episcopo, ut si Minister ab Episcopo ordinetur, ejus vocatio& ordinatio censeatur rata; sin à Presbytero, quod tunc irrita coram Deo,& frustranea sit habenda.  
4. Truly Sir( were it not for offending our present rising Prelates, who can very ill brook any cloud to their honour) I should be bold to affirm, a Presbytery may better accumulate to the validity of the ordination made by a Bishop( so far as it is capable of such accumulation) than a Bishop can accumulate to the Ordination of Presbyters without him.  
When, Sir, I consider the honourable mention made of Presbytery( in reference to this very act) in Scripture, wholly silent of the Bishops sole and single power, unless Timothy and Titus can be re-install'd, which( notwithstanding the bold assertions sounded in our late consecrating Sermons) will be ad grac●s calendas. When I observe the Commission for all administrations between God and his Church to be given to Presbyters as such, without the least regard to an Episcopal order or degree. When I consider the general concurrent, and consentient judgement, 〈◇〉 of Ancient and Modern Writers, Witnessing the Presbyters first existence in the Church( as at least the Elder Brother to Episcopacy) and acting alone in the purer and primitive time of the Church, without, and before Bishops( in our sense) and that by an intrinsical power, and immediate institution from God, without any Ecclesiastical Cannon, or human institution, which never appeared to authorize, or animate( but only to contract, limit, abridge, I had almost said sacrilegiously take away) the liberty of Presbyters; as it hath done the power of Bishops,( honoris causa without any warrant from God) farther than human policy will allow it) wherein yet the prime Authority of Presbyters was preserved in its lustre, sparkling in these two particulars.  
1. Bishops were created by the Presbyters, and promoted in superiorem gradum by them;( who neither did, nor could create an Officer in Christs Church, whatever power they had to confer the dignity of a primus Presbyter, which the effect doth seem to reflect as an evil.) And this is most evident in all Ecclesiastical story, and the writings of the Fathers, concurrent judgement,& remaining vestigia( in Romes Cardinals, and Englands Dean and Chapter) of this practise among all Christians, both Papists and Protestants; and methinks, cannot be denied by our Cassandrian Prelates, if they remember the instance of Presbyterian Ordination produced out of Jerom by our late learned Usher, Primate of Armagh, unto his late Majesties demand at the Isle of Wight; Quod autem postea unus electus est qui caeteris praeponeretur in schismatis remedium factum est, ne unusquisque ad se trahens Christi Ecclesiam rumperet, nam& Alexandriae à Marco Evangelista usque ad Heraclam& Dionysium Episcopos, Presbyteri semper unum ex se electum in excelsiori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant, quo modo si exercitus imperatorem faciat aut diaconi eligent de se quem industrium noverint,& Archidiaconum vocent: or will but consent to the determination of their grand Master of accommodation, Cassander himself; 
Cassand. lib. Consul. Artic. 14.  Convenit inter omnes in Apostolorum aetate inter Episcopos& Presbyteros NULLUM DISCRIMEN fuisse, said postmodum schismatis evitandi causa, Episcopum Presbyteris fuisse praepositum, cvi chirotonia id est ordinandi potestas concessa est: so that Presbyter had the power of Ordination by original constitution, and Bishops by the Presbyters after concession, and whether the Creator may not by his intrinsical original power accumulate to the ministerial act of his creature, let wise men judge.  
2. The power and authority intrinsically placed, and originally established on the Presbyters, is to them preserve d, by those Canons, that contract their liberty, and concede honoris causa, a power to Bishops; so as that the concurrence of Presbyters is made essential to all Acts of Ordination and Jurisdiction. It cannot be unknown how strictly it was forbidden that Bishops should ordain, excommunicate, or do any act without their Presbyters. That of the Council of Carthage is obvious, Episcopus sine consilio clericorum sucrum clericos non ordinet. And no less considerable is the constitution of Urban, Ordinationes factae sine communi sensu clericorum irritae, and the complaint against Chrysostome, for ordaining without Presbyters; and Cyprian's constant practise, 
Epist 33, 34.  and careful Apology to his Presbyters, as afraid of being shent for ordaining Aurelius and Celerinus( though with his Cathedral Presbyters at hand) with an hos Fratres dilictissimi)( not my sworn Vassals) à me,& Collegis( not subject Council) qui praesentes erant, Ordinatos sciatis, quod vos scio libenter amplecti, doth most clearly manifest the same. I must not stand to multiply evidences, being confined to a Casuistical discussion; and therefore shall say no more but this, that whosoever will but studiously inquire into, and seriously observe the estate of the Ministers of the Church, established by the Scripture, or exercised in the pure and primitive time of the Church, dazzled with the light of this truth, shall be constrained,( as was the Lord Digby, 
His Letter to Sir K. Digby.  no mean Zealot for our Bishops) to confess, That they who would reduce the Church to the form of Government thereof in the Primitive times, would be found pecking towards the Presbytery of Scotland( As we of late were, and by Solemn Covenant stand bound to do in England) Which( saith he) for my part I believe in point of Government, cometh nearer than either yours or ours of Episcopacy to the first age of Christs Church, though in a blind and preposterous zeal he says it is never awhit the better, and may wish Episcopacy to have been made an Article of the Scotch( as it is of the English) Creed.  
I say, Sir, when I consider this primacy of Presbyters to Bishops, and that Primitive Power, and Authority, found in them, and preserved to them, by the Canons of the Church, placing Prelates in their Chairs; I see not how it can well be denied, that the Ordination of Presbyters may rather add to that by Bishops, than that of his, to this of theirs; which for Bishops once to pretend, is a most plain and proud presumption, worthy, at least, degradation.  
3. But, Sir, before our English Bishops can pretend to accumulate to the Ordinations of Presbyters made by Presbyters without a Bishop, it will be necessary that they clear and make plain their own Episcopacy. If they may be censured by the Papists, or tried by the Ancient Canons of the Church, they will find a non entity of their Episcopacy determined by the one, and declared by the other. That they, as Bishops, are no Officers of Christ, must be confessed; and their succession( the only note of the validity of their Episcopacy) under the notion of Apostolical constitution, is so ambiguous and uncertain; nay, the interruptions thereof are so legible and manifest, that the v●lidity of their Episcopacy may admit a most intricate and perpetual dispute: And the irregularities of their constitution( without the choice of the Clergy, or consent of the people) their consecration by Heretical, Apostate, and Symoniacal Prelates, and other things, will conclude a nullity in them as Bishops; and how then shall they stamp validity upon Presbyters Ordination? Of all Bishops in the world, our Bishops can make the poorest pretence to the sole( if any) power of Ordination; for that if they ordain not as Presbyters, they have not any Evangelical Ecclesiastical power whereby to do it, 
Discourse concerning the solemn League and Covenant. p. 13.  being( as a late Episcopal Divine hath well noted) His Majesties Lords, but not the Churches Bishops, much less Christ his Officers; having been promoted by a Clandestine Cathedral choice, and a Royal Act of His Majesties peculiar grace, Nec plebe nec clero consentiente, neither people nor Clergy consenting, much less choosing; as was Acted and appointed in the Primitive Churches, and is necessary to the constitution of the Churches Officers; and on that account if any Officers( in the enjoyment of their Dignities and Revenues) yet merely politic, and having no power ( qua tales) in, or over the Church, and so can accumulate nothing to the validity of the Ministry of such as at first pass their hands, much less those, who are Ordained by Christ, and his Churches known Officers.  
Sir, these things considered, 
Dr. Gaudens Analysis. p. 12.  I do not more wonder to see some proud, ambitious Prel●tes, extol Bishops as the only and chief Conservators, Cisterns, and Conduits, of all Ecclesiastical Authority and Power, from the very Apostles; than to find some Presbyters( whom I judged more serious and sincere) to establish them in an opinion so strange, and false, by their subjecting themselves to their Re-ordination, on the selfdeceiving, Church-deluding apprehended accumulation to the validity of their Ministerial Power and Authority, which to imagine is a fancy and vile absurdity, and to declare is a notorious falsity, or cheating fallacy; for that Episcopal Ordination can in no wise iugment or add unto the validity of the Ministry conferred by the Ordination of Presbyters.  
Though, Sir, your Re-ordination may not accumulate to the validity of your Ministry, it is supposed it may to the liberty thereof; so as that you may thereby be capable of exercising the same in this Nation, and to hold, and obtain any Ecclesiastical Promotion, or bnfice, or to be thereupon admitted, instituted, and inducted.  
This accumulation I infer from that distinction of Ordination, into lawful and legal, which I understand some of our rising Prelates do make in this case, whereby to engage carnal, worldly minds, to continue their outward terrene possessions, or grasp at future preferment, by profaning the Ordinance of God passed upon them, making it of none effect, by prostituting their Ministry to the pride and lusts of men: and likewise from that slight and subtle Salvo, some have framed for the quieting their consciences, and satisfying the scandal given to most serious men, by their Re-ordination, which they pretend to take only as a licence to exercise the Office, they had before received in Ordination. I could, Sir, tell you of some( from whom better things have been expected) who did demand to be thus licenced by a Re-ordination, by Thomas de Candida Casa( no way in power to ordain, or licence, having the Title Bishop, and praeterea nihil, his very relation to the Christian Church being disputable) and when their sense was disowned, and rejected by him, declaring in positive terms, If they would be ordained, he would ordain them, yet they prostituted themselves to his Re-ordination, and defend it by this false and foolish plea, they have only received a licence to officiate; an handsome cheat to such as pretending conscience towards God, do pursue Gospel Ministry, as the reward of their former time and study, or step to their future honour and preferment.  
But, Sir, not to insist upon the care that ought to be in all men, especially Christian Magistrates, and Church Governours, not by their power to impede, obstruct, limit, or restrain, the Ministry of the Gospel, by subjugating the Authority thereof, to the liberty of exercise which they shall allow; I do believe that the Christian Magistrates, or lawful-rightful-Governours of the Church, may put Abiathar from the Priests Office; abridge any Ministers liberty by way of punishment, for some notorious crime, and interdict his exercising, in whole or in part, the Office, and Authority, with which he stands invested; but as I never find it practised by any, save Pagan, or Popish and Heretical Powers, so to put positive qualifications, and prescribe beyond Gods Word, a way of ordering, or inaugurating into the Office of Gods appointment, and bar the Gospel from being dispensed otherwise than under such conditions; I question whether it fall much short of the raging of the people, and tumults of the Heathen, complained of in Ac●… 〈…〉 I am sure Moses was very wary of restraining prophesying in God's Camp; and Paul was so far from hindering, that he rejoiced, that Christ was preached, not only under disorder, but out of envy: and it is required that all Christians pray, That the Gospel may have a free passage, and be glorified. But not to stand on this, I say, Sir,  
That Re-ordination accumulateth nothing to the liberty of your Ministry: Not in general, to the exercise of it in the world or Church; nor in special, to the exercise of it in our Church or Kingdom.  
Re-ordination accumulateth not to the liberty of the general exercise of the Ministry in the World or Church, which as it never was from the first coming of the Gospel proposed; so no men have a power or authority to prescribe it, as a ground of liberty, or can do it without profaneness; the Gentiles( who were without the Church) cannot do it, and the Christians( within the Church) never did, nor durst do it, under all the debates between the Greek and latins, Orthodox and heretics, Protestants and Papists, the enquiry was ever, Whether they were ordained? and their ordination voided or valid? and they ever appeared afraid to Re-ordain( in the sense in your case) distinguishing between the {αβγδ} ordinare, and confirmare; that Solemn Act which stamped Christ his authority, and that political Act, by which they indulged liberty of exercise, as I have before observed; for indeed Gods authority, is the Key, and only Key of liberty to Gospel Ministry, against which, the door which is barred by human power or policy, must be broken open by Divine wrath and vengeance. Which of the Prophets demanded liberty on other grounds, than, Thus saith the Lord? Which of the Princes( other than proud Pharaoh) ever barred them, with a What is the Lord? Observe my prescriptions in order to your liberty among my people? Have not false Teachers pretended to Divine Mission, as the only Picklock to the liberty of their delusion? When our Saviour sent out his Disciples, he sent them with bare authority, naked Ordination, and gave them in charge, that against every house, or City shut against them, they should shake off the dust from off their feet, with this severe enforcement, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgement, 
Mat. 10.  than for that City: Heaping up liberty to Gods Authority by a Re-ordination of mans invention, is undoubtedly accumulative, treasuring up wrath against the day of wrath. Let not men deceive themselves or others, let any Re-ordained, or Re-ordainers, tell me the Age, or Nation, that ever judged men coming in the Name of the Lord, carefully ordained, validly invested with Christs authority, and did require them to be re-ordained( in a proper sense) as the Key of their liberty; it is miserable in a case of Conscience to mistake the question.  
Re-ordination accumulateth not the liberty of exercising your Ministry particularly in this Church and Kingdom. It was never required or prescribed as a qualification thereunto: Have not many, ordained else-where, and after a different order than our Church or Kingdom directs, enjoyed their liberty, nay obtained Dignity and Promotion, enjoyed Church-Livings and benefice in England, and were never required to be Re-ordained? inquire, 
Cabala. p. 79. Lord Keepers Letter to the Duke.  Sir, after the Dominican Friar, who translated our Liturgy into Spanish( to promote the accommodation with Rome, by the Spaniards seeing its symmetry to the Romish Worship) and was secured to our Church by the Bishop of Lincoln, then Lord Keeper, with a good bnfice, and a Prebends place to boot, and many other Priests ordained in Rome: I hope Ordination of Presbyters is as good, valid, and regular, as that of Papists. And, Sir, inquire among the Dutch and French Divines, and you shall find Mr. Hoffeman within twelve Miles of Oxford, and another his Neighbour in Berkshire at the same distance, and many others, nay many Scotch men inducted, and instituted, on their Presbyterial Ordination, and were never required to be re-ordained. If our Prelates would not be angry, that they were slighted, I could tell them of some honest old Puritans, whose sons went into Scotland to be ordained, to avoid their Oath( of Vassalage) to the ordinary, and yet without other ordination, were preferred in England.  
How cometh Re-ordination to be now, and never before, the reason of our liberty? I am sure Cardinal pool was more reasonable, who choose rather to show his holiness Authority, by this confirming, accumulative dispensation, viz. Ac omnes Ecclesiasticas, seculares, seu quorumvis ordinum regulares personas, quae aliquas impetrationes, dispensationes, concessiones, gratias indulta, tam ordines, quam beneficia Ecclesiastica, seu alias spirituales materias, praetensa authoritate supremitatis Ecclesiae Anglicanae, licet nulliter& de facto obtinuerunt,& ad cor reversae Ecclesiae unitati restitutae fuerint, in suis ordinibus& beneficiis, per nos ipsos, seu à nobis ad id deputatos misericorditer recipiemus, prout jam multae receptae fuerint, secumque supper his opportune in Domino dispensavimus: but never required them to be re-ordained, as do our Prelates, in this, more monstrous, than this popeling; for that they own a validity, and yet will re-ordain; what he judged a nullity, yet did only confirm and indulge by the power of the Church, and procure to be corroborated by an Act of a most Popish Parliament, more sober and serious in this point, than those Zealots who moved in the late Parliament, That all Ordinations without Prelates should be declared voided, 
The Act for restoring Ministers.  though the more judicious majority determined any ordained Ministers, by any Ecclesiastical persons, to be continued in their Livings; which I hope our Prelates will admit, which no Bishop in England dare deny to be lawful, and valid, and profess themselves Protestants, however they fancy them not regular, and orderly, and so illegal; supposing, and suggesting, a Bishop( by the Laws of our Church and Kingdom) to be essential to make a Minister that shall have institution and induction to any Living, and so have Liberty to exercise his Office, and Capacity to take preferment, and Dignity in our Church; Which if it be so,  
I wonder how Arch-bishop Bancroft did over-rule his Colleagues, and confer dignity according to the English order, on the Scotch Presbyters, and not first ordain them?  
How comes a Bishop to be more essential to make a Minister capable of liberty and dignity now, than heretofore? Are not the Laws, Civil and Ecclesiastical, the same they were when Dutch and Scotch Presbyters were promoted, inducted and instituted? I remember no Act of Parliament, nor Canons of the Church since made, save the Canons of 1640. which I must confess I much wonder provided not for it, the jus divinum of Episcopacy having obtained that height, by which it now operates,( into the Ministry annulling) Reformation, and Reformed-Churches-subverting, Rome-accommodating design; being then managed with very great vigour. I hope our Prelates will prove their Canons to be consistent with, and authorised by our Statute Law, before they give us Laws ruling the Church, out of their own breasts.  
I am sure neither the Statute, nor Canon-Law of England, doth make a Bishop essential to ordination, so as that without him it should be voided, and the Minister that shall preach, or be inducted and instituted into any Ecclesiastical bnfice and Promotion, should first be ordained by a Bishop. I have red again and again the Statute of 13 of Queen Elizab. directing institution and induction, and find indeed subscription to the Articles, which only contain the confession of the true Christian Faith, and Doctrine of the Sacraments( not 39 in number, 
Canons 1603.  or any concerning Discipline, as the Canons do direct) to be a qualification essential to induction and institution, but any ordination to be a capacity and reason of liberty and dignity; the very words of the Statute run thus, viz. That the Churches of the Queens Majesties Dominions may be served with Pastors of sound Religion: Be it enacted by the Authority of this present Parliament, That every person under the degree of a Bishop, which doth, or shall pretend, to be a Priest or Minister of Gods holy Word and Sacraments, by reason of any other form of institution, consecration, or ordering, then the form set forth by Proclamation in the time of King Edward the sixth, and now used, shall declare his assent, and subscribe to the Articles, &c. not, he shall be re-ordained by a Bishop. I observe Mr. Prynne( that profound Lawyer) telling our Prelates, that their requiring Re-ordination, 
In his Epistle added to the unbishoping Timothy and Titus. Reprinted Anno 1660.  and refusing, without it, to give institution and induction, do act expressly against the Law. And although the ordering of the Priests according to the book of Edward the sixth, be corroborated by the Statutes of 5 and 6. of Edward the sixth, cap. 1. and 8 Eliz. cap. 1. yet other Ordination is not so much as prohibited by any negative or exclusive clause, much less is it irrited or made voided. The thing may be forbidden which yet is valid, and must not be reiterated when done. I hope our Prelates will confess, Prohibitio,& irritatio facti, differunt, ut irritatum quod lege fit, lege exprimitur necesse est, alias praesumitur, legislatorem voluisse non irritare factum etiam prohibitum: They cannot be ignorant of the Lex Cincia of the Romans, limiting Fees and Gifts, and punishing donatores largiores, who gave ultra mensuram praescriptam, yet did not donatum ipsum rescindere; and therefore the Law neither prohibiting other Ordination, nor providing that it should be ipso facto voided; the lust and pride of men, not the law and power of the Kingdom, lieth in the way of their Ministry, who were ordained without a Bishop, and doth make him accumulative, so necessary to Ordination. For my part, had I a Living to bestow, I should adventure a Quare impedit against that Bishop who should deny my Presbyter admission, on this ground, He is not ordained by a Bishop: But they will tell me, cursed Cows have but short horns; However, I know my liberty, I desire not to have occasion to try it.  
If any yet fear their liberty to be blocked up by the Canons of( what is called) our Church, let him consider;  
That our Statute-Law provides, that No Canons or Constitutions can be put in execution within this Realm by the authority of the Convocation of the Clergy( much less of single Prelates) which shall be contrariant, or repugnant to the Kings Prerogative Royal, or the Statutes of this Realm: And let every rational man, in any measure acquainted with our Statutes, judge, whether to deny institution and induction without Re-ordination, be not repugnant and contrariant to the Laws and Statutes of this Realm? and to deny ordination to the unordained, without subscription to their three caconical Articles, be not repugnant to the Statute confining the subscription to only a confession of Faith, and Doctrine of the Sacraments; they adjudge Discipline, and tie up to the number of 39. and so( according to the Lord Digby's wish) make their Hierarchy, and order of it, Articles of the true Christian Faith? And whether this be not repugnant and contrariant to His Majesties Prerogative Royal, exercised in His late gracious Declaration of indulgence in causes Ecclesiastical, dispensing with subscriptions of that Nature; and is not this presumption the higher, when acted by single and particular Bishops, without the authority of the Convocation of the Clergy; but praemunire is naturally incident to an English Prelate.  
But Secondly, Let him consider the Canons do no way dam up his liberty; only those of 1603 do direct the matters of ordination and institution, and they make subscription essential to such as come to a Bishop for either, but do not require all men that will be Ministers, to come to a Bishop, and all Bishops to re-ordain before they institute, or determine a nullity of the Ordination by Presbyters without a Bishop; or debar the Bishop from instituting and inducting on such a ground; they were never so understood or practised, nor indeed can be; but it is ordinary for men to be most caconical in their words and pretences, who are least such in their deeds and practices.  
You see, Sir, that Ordination by Presbyters is not in its own Nature, nor by the Laws of our Church or Kingdom, any bar to the liberty of your Ministry; and in that respect Re-ordination accumulateth not. In vain is it objected, but it is made, and pleaded de facto so to be; for no defect in Ordination, but a plain excess of ignorance, pride, and profaneness, is the cause thereof, which if it can wilfully captivated mens consciences in one thing, will soon accumulate burdens not to be born. If this humour can bring Presbyters under a Bishops Girdle, I wish we do not see it shortly subject Bishops to the Pope, and make re-consecration by him as accumulative to them, as re-ordination is to Presbyters, for that it is a plain fancy, fomenting nothing but evil, under a feigned advantage. A Master of Arts in Oxford, and zealous son of the Church of England( so called) and desirous that all should receive the Bishops Blessing, said lately to a Minister in London, It would never be well, till the Pope were restored to his Western Jurisdiction here in England.  
That a fancy of accumulated liberty should beguile young and weak Ministers, I do not wonder; but that men, Learned, Acute, and Ingenuous, yea I hope conscientious should( as I know some have done) deceive themselves, into a re-ordination by pretence of taking a Licence to preach, to officiate the Ministry he had before received, is to me very strange, and to them( if I mistake not) matter of Repentance, and public Recantation, for that ordination and licence are not words more different in their sound and signification, than things different in their nature and use; the one being an Ordinance of God done in his immediate Name and Authority, the other an Order of human prudence and polity; the one creating an Office, the other indulging an exercise thereof. What Author, Ancient or Modern, do make Re-ordination and Licence to be Synonimous? What Age or Church did ever confounded these two? Doth not the Church of England make them different? Is not a Licence distinct from, given after, or before, but apart from Ordination? I wish these men to consider with themselves, Whether if our Prelates soare to the height of their power, and summon them according to the Canons, to show their Licence for officiating, will they think that to produce Letters of Order under the hand and seal of Thomas de Candida Casa will satisfy them, and they shall not be constrained to obtain Letters of Licence to exercise their accumulative re-ordination, or lose their secured Liberty of their Ministry? Or do they think that every Licentiate Reader of Homilies in the Church of England, hath passed the same formalities for a Licence which themselves have passed under in Re-ordination? It is a poor plea, That they are satisfied in their own judgements, that Re-ordination is no other but a Licence, when it is no such thing, and they are, after it, as much to seek for a Licence, as they were before.  
I must, Sir, be bold to say, it is a plain cheat, to baffle conscience with an imagined sense, signification, and nature of words, and things, which the genuine and proper interpretation of them, will not admit, and the vulgar and received acceptation and use will not allow, but contradict; they who thus do, with a good conscience, shall go alone for me; the Lord keep me in simplicity, which is godly sincerity, for I see not the help of your liberty one ston higher by Re-ordination, than the validity of your Ministry, but it may be the accumulated dignity thereof must make amends for all.  
Yet, Sir, I must confess, my sight is not so clear, as to see what lustre Lawn sleeves can add to a lawful ordination, more than a Scotch Presbyter in a Black Coat. The truth is, Sir, I apprehended  
That Re-ordination by a Bishop may more abstract from, than accumulate to the Dignity of your Ministry; so as to render it one iota more honourable in itself, or acceptable to the people, subjected to it. For, Sir,  
What is therein a Bishop that may be imagined to augment the Dignity of a Gospel-Ministry? Admit we that he is primus Presbyter, promoted honoris causa, into an higher degree; yet he must know, Ordination is an Act of his Presbytery, not priority; the last, hath no intrinsical power of ordination; and Christs Ordinance is not under the influence of his honour; it is full in its self; neither needeth, nor can receive accumulation from him, as I have before observed. It is not for the highest men to add unto Gods heaps. When we have served up Episcopacy to its height of honour, and debased Ministry to the meanest step of a country Curate, yet, that must be acknowledged to be an human order, but this Gods Ordinance, the oriency and efficacy whereof consists in Christ his institution, not his servants dispensation; that hath no intrinsical power, to convey the Authority of Jesus Christ, as this hath. My Lord the Pope himself must be poor and plain Jack Presbyter, if he will ordain an Officer in Christ his Church; and in case of want, will aclowledge the meanest Presbyter hath as much Authority to consecrate his holiness, as the Stateliest Cardinal in Rome: How then can this Honour accumulate to the Dignity of Ministry? It may indeed gratify the fond Humour of such, who judge things by their sensible State and Pomp, not by their reality and Spiritual Nature; and many times dishonour God by the Stately Representations of their own devices, which darken the Glorious Simplicity of His own Institutions: Yet, Sir,  
Supposing the priority of a Bishop to be an honourable piece of order adding lustre to ordination, the Question is,  
Whether it be worth, and can warrant the reiteration of Gods Ordinance, and solemn invocation of his holy Name? I believe Ordinations as Oaths, are profaned, when vainly, triflingly, without weighty cause, on a mere punctilio of honour, they are reiterated, though to accumulate the honour of some circumstance, which would have been well added at the first, but now cannot be enjoyed without exposing Gods Ordinance to scorn, causing it to receive honour from men; whilst what hath been done in his Name, must be undone, that it may be dressed up in the bravery of mans invention, not Gods prescription: Right Reason will refuse to reiterate the essentials which confer an office; for to accumulate the Dignity which any circumstance might have added; and shall Religion admit thereof? let good conscience judge. But, Sir,  
It is an enquiry( I think soon resolved) Whether the ordination which wanted this circumstantial punctilio of political civil honour( for the Classical Moderator maintained the ecclesiastic Order) did not accumulate dignity by some more honourable circumstances( in a near vicinity to the essentials of Ordination) of Gods own appointment, and adding much to the lustre of the Ministry conferred? Particularly,  
1. The Election of the people; the Solemn( though silent) suffrages of the whole Assembly highly esteemed, nay made essential by the Council of Carthage, and in the dayes of Cyprian. Though I could not tie the Keys of Christs Church at the Peoples Girdle, I think there is one ward in every Lock in Gods house that cannot open,( save by an Act of force) without the consensus plebis. I well know the ordering of Priests doth pretend to this, though it be done in a Chamber, or Prelates chapel, some scores( if not hundreds) of Miles from the place of the Priests Relation, and where no man hath knowledge of him.  
2. Solemn, serious, and soul-humbling Fasting, in which Ordainers, Ordained, and the whole Assembly, abstain from all creature-comforts, enforcing prayer in the imposition of hands, according as was used by the Apostles and Church in their time. This circumstance( if I may so call it) doth shine with that brightness, that our Ordainers of Priests will pretend to it, and profess they observe it, though any day in any place( without any solemn separation of a day to that purpose) will pass this act, 
See the Preface of the Book of the Consecration of Bishops, and ordering of Priests. Canons of 1603. Can. 31.  and at the best any Sunday or holiday,( never allowed for fasting, nay, interdicted by the Primitive and our own Church) is appointed for this work; and to palliate the neglect of this most sacred duty, it must be ordained, that Priests and Deacons be ordered on the four Sabbaths after the Ember-weeks, Superstitious Fasts, nay, mock-Fasts, being an abstinence from flesh to fish, without any regard to the nature of that soul-humbling, prayer-enforcing duty, which ever did in the times of the Apostles and primitive Church,( whom these men pretend to follow) and still ought to accompany the duty and very act of Ordination.  
3. The imposition of hands by those persons who are known undeniable Officers of the Lord and his Church, enjoying an indisputable intrinsical power to ordain, being the chiefest and most certain Cisterns and Conduits of all Ecclesiastical power, and creators of Episcopacy itself, and every Bishop that is an Officer in Christs Church, not the civil state; all which is disputable in our English Bishops, acting as Bishops( as the Antithesis to Presbyters in this debate doth suggest) being at most but civil Officers, and subjects of civil Honor, and so abstracted from their fellow-Presbyters, and Presbyterial Power, can add no more to Ordination than any other of his Majesties Lords, if by his Majesties command, joined with a Presbytery in this act and administration.  
Unto these I might add the grave, solid, serious instructions, and solemn charge, which is given in Christ his Name and Authority to the ordained and People, who are to receive him, the which whilst the Prelatical Ordination doth pretend unto, is done in a most flat, formal, and perfunctory manner.  
Sir, On these considerations I dare appeal to the People,( the onely proper judge of this Dignity) to declare the Christian gravity, authority, and splendour of Presbyterial Ordination, without a Chair of State, a Reverend Father in God, or archdeacon with his Reverend Father in God, I present unto you this man to receive the order of Priesthood( not admitted or in being under the Gospel) or the like expressions of worldly state and pomp.  
And, Sir, the Re-ordination now ordinarily received, to accumulate this pretended dignity, is darker than what is usual, and directed by our Law or Canons, being done in a private Chamber, or any( nay almost every) day of the week( if not month and year) by him who ordains out of poverty for profit, making a trade of making Ministers, which looks very like Simony( especially that forbidden by the ancient Canons called the Apostles) passing Deacon and Priest in one day, contrary to the Canons of our Church, and that without fasting antecedaneous or concomitant( I had almost said or solemn Prayer) by a person enjoying the Title of a Bishop, and praeterea nihil,( and that among such fools as will give it) having been degraded, if not excommunicated and exiled by both Church and Kingdom, of which he was a subject, and he out of his own diocese, so as that his Authority is disputable, and by ancient Canons his Ordination null, and so a Re-ordaining unto a Reordination; and that which is worst of all publishing under his hand and seal notorious falsehood, viz. that the persons ordained have subscribed the Articles directed; which( if many lye not, whom I the rather believe, because I know the pretermission thereof hath brought much griest to his Mill) they did not do: and that he had ordained them according to the form and order appointed in the Church of England, when scarcely any thing thereof is observed. Sir, they that thus accumulate to the dignity of their ministry, must think their people are( under the foolishness of Preaching) made such fools, as to prefer a dark lantern unto the bright Sun; and a supposed Bishop in Lawn sleeves unto an undoubted Minister of Jesus Christ in a black Coat.  
But, Sir, it is to be feared, that the reflection of it will abstract more from the Bishops Re-ordination, then it can accumulate to the dignity of the Re-ordained Ministry: For, Sir, howsoever some may be willing to resolve it, Re-ordination cannot but present to the people that hear of it, brethren that fear it, and enemies who conclude it, a nullity, or at least vanity and material defect in the first Ordination; all men say, what is once well done is twice done, and conceive what is twice done was not at the first well done. Oliver's second investiture with the pomp of a Parliamentary Assembly, by the hands of a Speaker, and prayer of a Chaplain, did no little abstract from his first Instrument, and installment in the presence of the Judges, Lord Mayor of London, Officers of the Army, and other Gentlemen; and conclude a nullity of his Authority, and make Necessity the onely plea for his usurped actings. Nor can Oliver's Knights be re-Knighted by his Majesty, and men not conclude their first Knighthood vain.  
Let it, Sir, be remembered, that Ordination is the conferring an Office and Authority, and then whoever seeth it reiterated, avoid if they can a nullity in the first: Must not young Divines, who( by fancied pretended Antiquity) dream a Bishop is essential to ordination, conclude it a Certainty, when they see the Ordained by Presbyters come to a Bishop to be Re-ordained? Will not the people, who observe the debate between Bishops and Presbyters, conclude the Presbyters in an error, when they see them renouncing their own principle by coming under the Bishops hands to be re-ordained? Will not the Papists soon pronounce a nullity on the Ministry of the Reformed Churches, who are without Bishops, when they see English Presbyters re-ordained by their Restored Bishops, though formerly ordained by the Presbyters? And however some Cassandrian re-ordainers may fallaciously pretend and profess their re-ordination to be merely accumulative( redundant, superfluous, and needless) can any rational man conceive they intend not by it, and will shortly improve it, as an Argument of the nullity of the first Ordination without a Bishop? And judge it invincible; an instance de facto being of more force with them, than the institution of God? They that clamour on the single case of Coluthus his Presbyters( no way parallel to ours) and Epiphanius's censure of Aerius his parity of Bishops and Presbyters, how will they boast and roar out the many Re-ordained English Presbyters at the first Ordained by the intrinsical power of a Presbytery without a Bishop, and politically backed with the Authority of Parliament?  
Sir, well may our Re-ordainers declare their Re-ordination to be merely accumulative, whilst it layeth heap upon heap unto confusion; being likely, yea certain to accumulate scandal to the Reformed Churches: stumbling to weak Christians and young Divines: suspicion of profane and voided administrations of Word and Sacraments; and so the loss of Church and Christianity itself; necessitating another Austin to come from Rome for Englands fourth conversion: strength to the vain fancies, erroneous Opinions, proud humours, Cassandrian design, and Oppressive rage of Prelates against others who dare not herein submit unto the Bishops Benediction: Strife and Endless controversy about the divine right, superiority and essentiality of a Bishop to Gods Ordinance, in a Ministers Ordination; and so run us into the Labyrinth of succession, so long traveled into, and never to be resolved: Scorn, Reproach and contumely to Presbytery, Gods undoubted, authentic, and Primitive Institution, and the Church her chief, sure, never-failing Pillar: and contempt and derision of the Ministry of the Reordained, as seated in a man of levity, vanity, or perfidy, and profaneness, cheating the Church with a false Commission; and dispensing Gods Ordinances by a feigned Authority, Ruling Gods people by usurpation; or rather prostituting their consciences and Gods Ordinance to the lust, pride, state, and pomp of a Lordly Prelate: these, Sir, are according to my little Reason, the large heaps naturally accumulated by a Reordination; to which it is indeed a new act or access of new matter; they being filled up by other principles and practices of error and profaneness; and so it may be declared in truth to be accumulative, which otherwise is a vanity and falsehood, whilst as we see it accumulateth nothing to the validity, liberty, or dignity of the Ministry of the Re-ordained; and certainly such a Declaration can never be a good salvo on which a good conscience may submit to be Re-ordained.  
Reverend Sir, your second salvo is no more significant, or less shameful and sinful than the first; supposing( what cannot rationally be supposed) that your Re-ordainers will admit you a liberty to declare at your Re-ordination that you neither do nor will renounce your Ordination received by the laying on of hands of the Presbytery without a Bishop, so as to charge that with vanity; and your administrations( by the authority thereof) with iniquity; but you will yet own that as valid; and by virtue thereof still exercise your Ministry; though to satisfy such as exact it, and to obtain your liberty you do thus submit to be Re-ordained; must not all that hear you, or of your profession, charge you with notorious fallacy and horrid hypocrisy? and your Re-ordainers themselves, laugh at your self-deceit; and every man say to you quid verba audiam cum facta videam? What signifies this protest? doth he not really renounce his Ordination, recede from his office, and divest himself of authority, who thus taketh up his Ministry, and anew passeth under this constituting investing Ordinance? Was it ever known in the Church that Ordination judged valid, was reiterated? is not the second act an actual and formal avoidance of the first?  
It is well observed by the Reverend Hooker that great Oracle of the Church of England) They who have once received the power and Office of the Ministry, 
●cclesiast. Po●cie, lib. 5. Sect 7. p. 411.  may not think to put it off and on like a Cloak as the weather serveth, reject and resume it as often, and in what manner themselves please; the which he judiciously brandeth to be a profane and impious contempt of Gods Ordinance; and farther determineth, that although degradation doth utterly cut off the use and exercise of the Ministry, yet( as in separation of the married) after reconciliation and restitution to the former dignity there neither is, nor needeth a reiteration of the former knot; what should it avail the re-married to profess they will not renounce their former marriage? or Oliver at his Re-investiture to profess he was Protector before? Many by a subsequent act, charge themselves with uncleanness or usurpation; who will not call themselves Whores, Fornicators or Usurpers, modesty may interdict, a verbal owning of that guilt, which a reiterated action doth Reallize unto the spectators.  
Sir, in your case the Re-ordained must needs fall under reluctancy of conscience, and an apprehension that his Reordination doth charge vanity and usurpation on his past ministerial actings; otherwise whence comes his apollogetical protest? what needs such a contradictory profession? which amounts to thus much, I will not do what I am about to do; I will not charge myself, or divest myself of that authority which this renewed act doth charge upon me, and take from me, that it may give it to me again; think you, Sir, such a contrary profession can any way alter the nature of Re-ordination? if not; is it not most insignificant and senseless? a me●r cheat to a mans self? and a frivolous blind to such spectators who will be blinded by an insignificant sound, not understanding the nature of the renewed act?  
Sir, I must he bold to say that Re-ordination with such a profession, is like the making oaths and promises with a profession of self-devised sences and salvo's, which are contrary to the Grammatical construction, Logical Resolution, or genuine interpretation of the same: I have known some who would subscribe to be true and faithful to the Common-wealth of England as established without King and House of Lords, so far as it was consistent with the Word of God, and the Solemn League and Covenant; which were directly contrary thereunto; and one who had thus suscribed, falling in with his Majesty at his march to Worcester; being taken by the Republicans, and tried for his life, was charged with his Engagement, and perfidy in not keeping it, to which he pleaded the sense in which he subscribed; but was retorted on, The words will bear no such sense; and according to their genuine sense he was condemned and hanged, though as a soldier quarter was granted him before, and it pleaded in bar to his trial.  
I understand Dr. John Gauden( my known Antagonist) doth now profess he did swear the Solemn League and Covenant( from which he now absolveth himself and others) with a profession that his judgement was for Bishops and Episcopacy,( and his mind on a bishopric he might have added) and that he would endeavour to reform Episcopacy; and so swear this Covenant as far as it was consistent with his former Oaths, the Laws of the Land, and preservation of Episcopal Government; the express words of the Covenant being to extirpate Prelacy, that is to say, the Government by Arch-bishops, Bishops, their Chancellors, and Commissaries, Deans, Deans and Chapters, Arch-deacons, and all other Ecclesiastical Officers depending on that Hierarchy: which is a flat contradiction: I am sure preservation and extirpation, are inconsistent; yea, Sir ( Horresco referens) I hear of some, who, to be created Doctors, second ined or reordained Ministers, or to get induction and institution to a good bnfice; have subscribed the caconical Articles with this senseless salvo, Secundum Licentiam Rege Concessam, referring to His Majesties late Declaration concerning Ecclesiastical affairs; which, only dispenseth with the act of subscribing, to such as in conscience cannot comform to the subscription required by the Canon, but maketh no interpretation of the Articles; and so their subscribing is a pure insignificant cheat; the doing of that by the Kings leave, which they were required to do before, and His Majesty indulged them to leave undone; the mention of which they foolishly fancy to be a nullifying their act,& release of their obligation; but they will find it to be otherwise, when they come to be censured as Revolters after subscription.  
Sir, This kind of acting is apparently inconsistent with a good conscience; because irrational and irreligious; contrary to the nature of a man, a Christian, much more a Minister: For, Sir, it is a suspension of the judgement; yea, a forcible and violent stifling of Reason, and that diseretive power, with which every man is naturally endowed, and by which he ought to be Acted in every Action; whatever submission to a Judicium forense, Superiors may demand, Nature will teach us that every individuum among men, ought to be Acted by his own judicium rationale, discretion and determination, and not halt between two opinions, with strangers serve God and Ashtoreth, and with Israel, worship Baal, and profess for the Lord; it is repugnant to mans nature, to cheat himself in an Action, by an interpretation directly contrary to the nature of the Act, and Gods Ordinance: yea, this is repugnant to the very end of speech: the interpreter of the mind, unto the security, and satisfaction of others; which ought ever to make so certain a sound, as should comment on, not cloud, much less contradict the present Action.  
Sir, it is an apparent vile and abominable hypocrisy to give a verbal gloss on that action which in its nature is expressly contrary thereunto: To act iniquity with a professed integrity, is most horrid, and may not be endured. It is a notorious mocking of God, to profess a preservation of the Dignity of his Ordinance, in the very act of prostituting it, unto a profane contempt.  
If, Sir, this salvo can satisfy a good conscience, let us never blame the jesuits mental reservation, or fallacious equivocation, whilst we assume the impudence of doing and professing openly, 
Becan. 5. Man. controv. 14. N. 4, 6. Oxford Reasons against the Covenant. Sect. 7.21. Pro. 30.20  what their modesty or subtlety( not honesty) doth more conceal, and so verify the scandal( by them) cast on the Protestants, in special the Calvinists( of late spitefully applied to Presbyterians) That they will swear and protest one thing in words, and in their own sense mean and act another: if this kind of acting may be admitted, what sin may not be safely committed, and meet with a present Apology? Who will not with Solomons adulterous woman, wipe his mouth, and say, I have done none iniquity? or as the learned Mercer glosseth, Rem turpem verbis occultis& honestis exprimere? Will not this build a Bridge on which a good conscience may pass to Rome for holy orders, and subscribe to the Articles of the Council of Trent, so far as they are agreeable to the Word of God?  
Sir, Resolve your case, by a parallel case( not yet come upon us) and you will the better judge it. Suppose the Anabaptists had prevailed, and( possessing the Power of the Nation) Resolved, None should enjoy liberty or dignity, in Church or Common-wealth, unless baptized in an adult estate; and therefore they require the present Possessors( baptized in infancy) to be rebaptized, or relinquish their enjoyments; the rebaptizers will( please fools so far, to) declare their rebaptisation is merely accumulative, and the rebaptized shall declare they do not renounce their former baptism: may a man with a good conscience, be thus rebaptized? judge you. I know no difference between your case and this, s●ve, that Baptism is a Sacrament, and I am sure Ordination is a Sacred Ordinance of God, and no more to be profaned than a Sacrament.  

Lib. 5. Sect 29. p. 246  Sir, I observe a passage in Hookers Ecclesiastical polity, which I have often thought worth the observation of our temporising Non-conformists, who think( by good professions) to palliate their profane compliances, and preserve their credit: It is this; some Ministers not satisfied to wear the Surplice, were by some men( more prudent than pious) persuaded to do it, and to prevent the danger of their peoples scandal, to profess publicly against it, which they accordingly did, making this profession, Brethren, our hearts desire is, that we might enjoy the full liberty of the Gospel, as in other Reformed Churches they do, elsewhere, upon whom the heavy hand of Authority hath imposed no grievous burden, but such is the misery of these our days, that so great happiness we cannot look to attain unto: Were it so, that the equity of the Law of Moses could prevail, or the zeal of Hezechias be found in the hearts of those Guides and Governors under whom we live; or the voice of Gods own Prophets be duly heard; or the examples of the Apostles of Christ be duly followed, yea or their precepts be answered with full and perfect obedience, these abominable RAGS, POLLUTED GARMENTS, MARKS and SACRAMENTS of IDOLATRY, which Power, as you see, constraineth us to wear, and conscience to abhor, had long ere this day been removed both out of sight, and out of memory: But as now things stand, behold, to what a narrow straight we are driven! On the one side we fear the words of our Saviour, Wo be to them by whom scandal and offence cometh! And on the other side at the Apostles speech we cannot but quake and tremble, If I preach not the Gospel, wo be unto me! Being thus hardly beset, we see not any other remedy, but to hazard your souls the one way, that we may the other way endeavour to save them; touching the offence of the weak, therefore we must adventure it; if they perish they perish: Our Pastoral charge is Gods absolute Commandment; rather than that shall be taken from us, we are resolved to rak this filth, and to put it on, although we judge it to be so unfit and inconvenient, that as oft as ever we pray or preach so arrayed before you, we do, as much as in us lieth, to cast away your souls that are weak-minded, and to bring you to endless perdition: But we beseech you Brethren, have a care of your own safety, take heed to your own steps, that ye be not taken in those snares, which we lay before you; and our prayer in your behalf to Almighty God, is, That the poison we offer you, may never have power to do you harm. An hearty profession, and good warning to the people, but horrid iniquity, to make a choice of sin, though the least, and presumption, to tender poison with Prayer to God for prevention of its effect: Could this be made in faith? But observe Mr. Hooker's gloss upon this profession, Our people being accustomend to think that thing evil, which is under any pretence publicly reproved, and the men themselves worse which reprove and use it too, would conclude it was to little purpose for them to salue the wound, by making protestations in disgrace of their own actions, with plain acknowledgement that they are scandalous, or by using fair entreaty with weak brethren: It cannot be endured to hear a man openly profess, he putteth fire to his Neighbours house, but yet so halloweth it with prayer, that he hopeth it shall not burn. It had been better to have observed St. Basil's advice both in this, and things of the like nature, Let him which approveth not his Governors Ordinances, either plainly show his dislike, if he have {αβγδ}, str●ng and invincible reason against them, according to the true will and meaning of the Scripture; or else let him quietly, with silence, do that which is enjoined: Obedience with professed unwillingness to obey, is no better than manifest disobedience. If, Sir, this learned man had been as rational, religious, and sound in other parts of his polity, as he is in this, he would have made me a forward Builder in his Ecclesiastical fabric; for I am convinced, that they who restrain piety by prudence, will find its forcible retort upon them to their shane and sorrow.  
Reverend Sir, I have with all plainness answered your desire, and given my thoughts in your case of conscience; if in any thing I have mistaken you, or not made an Answer to what you expected, be pleased in your next to intimate the defect; I shall( according to my poor ability) make a supply: I wish, Sir, you, and men in the like dilemma, may not deceive yourselves in the state of your question: The rendering Bishops essential to Ordination, is undoubtedly endeavoured as that which can best settle them in their rich and honourable seats, and suggests in them a divine superiority above Presbyters; in order whereunto the re-ordaining of men ordained by Presbyters without a Bishop, is( whatever is pretended, by whatever fallacy it can be effected) designed as a Declaration of the nullity of their Ministry so ordained. Sir, zeal and sincerity are the only supports of Reformed Religion, most shamefully betrayed by the sinful compliances of some self-deceiving men; let it be your and my care to prepare for the across, and glory in it, and with due courage to bear witness to the least of the truths of the Gospel, on which depend the very being of the Reformed Churches, and enforcement of the Covenanted Reformation; committing ourselves in all well-doing( as well as speaking) to him who judgeth righteously.  
I am Sir, The meanest of your brethren in 
 the great work of Gospel-Ministry, 
 ZACH. CROFTON. land. the 26th. Febr. 1660/ 61