m
r'JfV
i
.^grsAfA*.
■i THE© LOGICS
COLLECTION OF PURITAN AND
ENGLISH THEOLOGICAL LITERATURE
*
i
LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
SCki
*?//?
PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY
•■
yi •
TREATISE
OftheNatureofa
MINISTER
In all its Offices.
To which is annexed an Anfwer to Do&or
Forbes concerning the neceffity of
Bi(hops 5 to Ordain* /
. ■—
Which is an Anfwer to a Queftion 5 propofed
in thcfelate unhappy times, to the Author,
WbatisaMinijler*
LONDON
Printed by Thomas Ratcliffe for the Au<
thor 5 and are to be fold by Ed-
ward Man at the fign of the
Swan in the Strand
near TorJ^Houfe.
i 6 7 o.
To my ever moft dear and now on
Brother Francis hucy> Efy
My moft dearliBntbtr,
Send you here no new Prefent,
but fuch^as you have been long
acquainted with ; anddidfirft
by fending me the Quejlion in
the Title, occasion my Wri-
ting : and what I remember St. Bafil faith in
his Epiftle ad Amphilochium, in putting the
Queftion, you taught me. For although a ftu-
dious man cannot but read ofthefe things here
difcujfed, yet I am confident they had never by
me been digefted into Method, and by that been
fo conclufive to mine own and other mens judg-
ments, without your fatisfa&ion had provoked
it. Indeed in thofe fad times when this was
writ, there was a rebellion aoainft virtue it
felf, and mens friend/bip was extirpate, Root
and Branch*-, For the communication of friends,
* 2 fcatter 4
The Epiftlc Dedicatory.
fcatterd about the Kingdome^ was broken by
the intercepting^ yea, the betraying of Letters
to the Writers prejudice, which I felt \ but yet
ive l\ept an intercowrfe by that dumb wans lan-
guage^ of inviting, as oft as we could with fafe-
ty\ and communicated our thoughts by Letters
when we could not per fonally meet. Ton were
tyed to live ///London, by a neceffary duty you
had to a very near and dear friend of ours, who
was committed to your carcjat a parochial charo
to attend my flocl^, fo long as I could in that
timc\ How were my thoughts perplexed for you
when thofe accurfed Oaths (for which with their
dependencies I hnow the Land ought to mourn
or elfc I fear will fuffer more ) flew about
fearing by fome furprifejou might beenfnared
to a5i that-) which your foul abhorred* I was of-
ten fatisfed by letters of your freedom 5 yea
fometimes by the qnejiions you fent me about
thefe inquiries which were then farted'. As my
fears were great before^ fo my joy in your inte-
grity was high afterwards^ as my admiration^
how it could be:But do you praife God daily for
that r whofe Providence invifibly looked over
and protected you from thofe evils. And trnji in
him^ who will always preferve you loving and
fearing him } Amongfi others th'k was one que-
flion
The Epiftlc Dedicatory.
fion, you enticed me to write about , which , a?
fitch leafure, as I could Jleal from Domejiique
troubles, I anfweredin a treaiife : Ton writ to
me to Trint it\ I knew not, nor could remember
any fitch things which I medledwith\ when I
came to London, youjhew'dit me, I knew my
good freind Mr. Thomas Otwayes hand, who
tooh^thc pains to transcribe it for me', read it y
and l^new mine own Notions fome of them, and
fo gave way to the Prcfs: If there be any thing
which adds to the common Notions of Scholars,
let the Reader thank^you,who were the occafion
and informer of my fludies in if, and not fo on-
ly, but a preferver of it\ In the firft,you were a
Father \\n the fecond,aFoJier to it and by this o-
ther men may takg notice of our mutual hj.nd-
neffes and wherein our friendship didconfijl in
thofe times', When men could [carceknow, how
to live^our thoughts were imployd about think-
ingjhow to live for e, in his Definition.
Minifter is an Officer opined by God to do fomethin 2
conducing to the falvation of mens Sou!<
In the firft place, Ms Gtnm is an officer, which nature he hath
in
What a Minifter w, /// his Definition.
in Common with multitudes of others, who are fuch, either Ma-
gi ft rati cal or Servile. I need not difcourfe now of that, itisfo
apparent; Secondly, in his Difference : theftrft phrafeis, or-
dained by God-, that is, by the Commindor Inftitution of God :
There are many Officers that are inftituted and ordained by
men, who have power from God to do this Ad of Jnftituting
Officers • but a Minifter is an Officer inftituted by God : from
him he hath power in Divine things, thefe no man can have
power over, but he who hath this Authority granted him from
God, and that is it which St. Vanl affirms, Heb. 5. 4. No man
taketh this honor to himfelf but he \\>ho is called of God, a* was
Aaron. Nay prefently after he affirraeth of Chrift, that he
aflumed the Priefthood not of himfelf, but from the Father ;
fo then this Minifterial Function requireth Gods Ordination :
but by the word Ordination I not only conceive an Inftitution
of God, but like wife fome Duty commanded which God orders
thereunto ; So that by giving this Order ({0 the School, and we
in EngUJhfidW thefc holy Functions ) God exadb a Duty in thefe
men who exercife it : For the graces given thefe men being fuch
as the School calls gratis data , not fandifyingtheperfon who
hath them, but fuch as are for the fan&ification of others, God
who gives nothing in vain, will require an Account of thefe gra-
ces and abilities. And to this purpofe St. Paul, 1 Cor. 4. 1.
Let a manfo account of as as of the Minifter s of Chrifi , and Dif-
fenfators or Stewards cfthe myfieries of God; Verf. 2. Moreo-
ver , it Is required in Stewards that they fhould be faith-
full ; that is , to lay out the moneys according to their Lords
appointment and direction, according to the Lords Ordinance ;
but there is more intimated in this word Ordinance, to wit,
an enabling the perfon who is ordained to do fome fuperna-
tural Work, but the enabling muft be underftood in Atlu pri-
mo, not fecundo, that is, he is enabled with Authority to do
that is required. A man gives his keyes to his Steward, bids
him fearch fuch Rooms, fuch Boxes for fuch occafions as he
hath need-, here he hath C^ e m, the Authority and right pow-
er to do this Duty to open the doors in Acluprimo , but per-
haps his hands are weak, he cannot turn the key, or he is igno-
rant ,he knows not how to do it,yet what he doth i$ regular, he
hath Power and Authority to doit, and fhould another who
A 2 hath
The Definition explained^ per partes.
hath more ability, do it in the fecond Ad, and riot inthefirft,
he doth it like a Thief, not like a Steward : Thisfirft right is
certainly Conveyed by the Ordinance of God with holy Or-
ders, but not the fecond : and they who do thefe duties without
this Authority given them from Chrift, are therefore c died by
Chrift Thieves and Robbers, John 10. i. He that entreth not by
the door into the Sheepfold, but climbeth up another waj y he is a
Thief and a Robbery they are Thieves, but they who come by
the door, by Authority from Chrift, are the right Shepherds,
and have Authority to go into the Fold and do their Duty there;
fo that though a Minifter have Authority given him to do holy
Things, yet he may not have the Science or Integrity to do ac-
cordingly , but what he hath, fo far is ratifyed by God, but
others who have not this Authority, though they do the fame
things, yet they are refponfible for a prefumption • as may ap-
pear out of Atls 19. v. 1 3 . where certain Exorcifls took upon
them the power Divine ofCafting out Devils, which was Apo-
ftolical ^ but they ftole the keyes of this power , had them
not given them, and the Devils rent and tare them: from all
which it appears, that the enabling with this power fuch as may
be juftifyed, comes from a Divine Ordination, and not elfe.
The next Term is, Todofomething conducing to the Salvation
of mens Souls : I put thisphrafe ( to dofomething) more largely
than the Schools, and the great Confent of the Church of Rome
ufeto do, who reftrain it only to the holy Communion- as if
holy Orders were only referred to that Myfterie , and fo with
wrefting , bring in thofe little Ecclefiaftical Officers into the
Number > 9 but we may obferve, that for ought I find, a Deacon
by his Inftitution or Praftice at the firft in theNew Teftament
had nothing to do with the Communion, nor indeed hath more
now than to aftift with the Cup : And the great Power of the
Keyes toucheth not the Ad of Communion immediately, but by
reafon of admiffion or prohibiting fuch as (hall or fliallnoc
Communicate : I choofe therefore this phrafe ( to dofomething)
which comprehends all, even that and Preaching, and whatfo-
ever elfe conduceth to mans Salvation, but yet wemuft apply
this to what went before likewife, and take all together • there
are many Afts done by men, who are not Minifters, which con-
duce to others Salvation, and are very ufefull, and commenda-
ble
The Definition explained^ per partes.
ble in them, nay are done out of Duty, as the Example of a
good life, difcreetadmonifhingmenofcheir faults, incouraging
others to virtue, and the like, which are all Ads of Duty from
one Chriftian man to another, but not Ads of Ofrice • Ads of
Charity as they are Chriftians, not as they are this or that fore
of men.
We muft therefore recall the firft Term, ( that they muft do
fomething Conducing to the falvationofmen. ) This phrafemuft
be a little farther cleared likewite. There are things which
Conduce accidentally to the Salvation of others, as perfecution,
affliction ^ foit was with St. P<*/*/- fometime^afiiftinginviJlany,
which Harts up fome Divine Speech or Adion^ fo thofe wicked
perfons, who afiifted in the Crucifying of our Saviour, their
Wicked Ad made them Spedators and Auditors of thofe fuper-
natural words, which then declared him to be God, and made
them receive that Faith in him, and confefTe that he was the Son
of God; But thefe perfons are in themfelves the Devils Minifters,
though Gods almighty power and providence Conjured them
about, as he will the very Devils themfelves, and draw his ho-
nour out of their WickednefTe, his light out of their DarknefTe •
Thefe Ads in themfelves Conduce to Hell, but God wrought
them miraculoufly about to Heaven , and therefore not under-
ftood here, but fuch as in themfelves are difpofed to it^ and be-
caufe Heaven is not a refult or an E fifed naturally arifing out of
our Works, but ablefiing beftowed upon the Workers accor-
ding to their Works , for Chrifts fake , therefore thofe things
which Conduce to Heaven in themfelves muft be fuch as God
is pleafed to Covenant with us, that upon them and the doing
of them he will give this Salvation •, for no man can obtain that
by Fraud or Violence, and therefore it muft be on fuch Terms
as he Covenants for : And thefe things are thofe of the Word
and Sacraments, (as the whole Chriftian World hath named
them, though they have no fuch name given them in the New
Teftament ) to wit this : God harh provided Salvation in Hea-
ven for his Servants, the Means for them to get this Heaven is
by thefe Covenants, Sealing thefe Deeds, obeying thtfe Ordi-
nances of his for which he hath appointed Officers, and given
them Power and Authority toadminifter thefe Covenants, (Let-
ters ofAtturnev, for it is a Legal, Juridical bufmefTe, and a le-
gal.
Thcfe Powers Muft be given by God.
gal phrafe befits it ) to ad thefe things betwixt him and men ,
and teach them his Lawes and will, by which they (ball be Sha-
rers of this blefling, and they who have an Office, ) and from
that Office Authority to do Allor Some of thefe things, are the
Mimfters we fpeak of : And I think this may fuffice to fpeak,
what a "Minifter is- How he is ordained, and who they are,
will follow.
SECT. II.
Thefe Towers muft be given by God.
TO underftand thefe heads, we muft firft conceive , that a
man can receive or affume no fuch power (that is effectu-
al) to himfelf, unlefle it be given him from Heaven, as St. John
fpeaks, John 3. 27. Heaven being Gods gift, the powers , the
Covenants which bring men thither , muft be by his Appoint-
ment, and the Officers who work and effeA thefe powers muft
be by him authorized likewife •, I write thefe Condufions
briefly, being of great Evidence in themfelves, and for ought I
know denyed by none.
SECT. III.
The way to underftand who thefe are.
AN D now, in my Coaceit, the readied way to clear this
truth, will be, to fhew what Officers Chrift hath appoin-
ted to this purpofe , and this muft be done two wayes : Firft,
to (hew Hiftorieally what was done ^ and Secondly, to (hew
how thatHiftory (hall agree with the Defign it had to bring
men to Heaven , and how unfit other pretentions are to it.
The Hiftory I (hall divide into two parts- Firft, to lay the Foun-
dation of this glorious Building, to (hew what our Saviour aft-
ed himfelf in it, what the Church Difcipline was in Embrione ,
in Ovo, in the Foundation, then to (hew what Superftru&ures
the Apoftles built upon it, what it was in the birth when it was
a
What Chrift himfclf did.
a Chick. The firft muft be fought out of the Gofiells, or the
beginning of the -Atls, where the Story of our Saviours imme-
diate Commerce with this World both in his life, and after his
Death, is fet down for us : The fecond part muft be cleared from
the later pirt of the A ft s and the E fifties-, and thus my defign
is layd.
CHAP. III.
The EleSlion of the Apoftles^ and what to do.
THE firft remarkable bufinefs in the Gofpel, is the Ele-
ction of the Apoftles, which we may find recorded in
the 3d. of St. Markov. 13. and the 6th. of St. Luke v.
1 3 . In St. Mark^ we may obferve that he ordained Twelve, that
they fhould be with him , and that he might fend them forth to
f reach •, and in St. Luke we may note, that he gavethefe Twelve
the Name of Afoftles ' out of this we may Confider, that our
Saviour having many Difciples fuch as had leaned and liftned to
his Doctrine, hechofeout of them Twelve, which he gave par-
ticular Favours to, and gave them that name of Office to be
Apoftles ; That there was fome Myftery in that Number of
Twelve I am perfwaded, becaufe that after the Apoftacy of
fudas, in the 1. ohhtAfts, v.22. St. Peter faith, That accor-
ding to the prophet David, Pfal. 1 09* 7. another fhould take his
Office : It was neceffary another (hould fucceed him in that Mi*
niftry, and they chofe one and no more to Compleat the Num-
ber. What that Myftery is, is not fo apparent : That which
fits my Apprehenfion is this , That our Saviour did, in very
many things , lay the platform of his Ecclefiaftical Govern-
ment according to the pattern of the Jewifh Polity, and in this
particular he refembled the Twelve Patriarchs- but this he laid
as Pillars only or a foundation, intending it only to fupport the
reft, not to figure out the Number of thefe Officers which were
afterwards to be , a Number I know by none pretended to :
but yec they then were fo many pillars to fupport this building,
and.
8 The Number of the Apojiles^ and their Office.
and whatsoever Structure fhould be raifed mud be erc&ed up-
on thefe : But befides their Number we may mark their Of-
fice, which was two-told, about our Saviour, and about the
Church, or other men • about our Saviour, that they fhould
be with him hearing and learning his Doctrine, fpeftators of
his Miracles, and mod exemplar manner of Life, that fo they
being to bear Witnefle of him and his Actions afterwards, might
the more Conftantly and Confidently do it, when they had in
fuch a manner been Converfant with him. That which con-
cerned other men,was,That he might fend them forth to preach.
Here was an Office Inftituted, as St. Mark^ records it, and to
have power to heal ficknefTe,e£v. This Gift of Miracles was
not the Office it felf, but a fign and token by which men might
know that they were fent from God- for they taking upon them
a new Office, and pretending that they received it of God, exe-
cuting it for him, it was neceffory that they fhould bring with
them fome evidence that they had it from him, and this evi-
dence or fign of it was this power of Miracles, which accora-
panyed them. Thus St. ^r^hath defcribed the Office, and
becaufe men fhould not be miftaken in thefe Officers, St. Mar\
and St. Lake have fet down the particular Names and Characters
ofmanyofthem^ upon which I infift not, as not material to my
work. But then itmuft be marked farther, that St, Lu\e fets
down the Name of the Office, as well as the Officers, and faith
the Name was impofed by Chrift , Vehich he called Jpoftles ,
which Name is derived from ocrrcsiKKto , which is mitto , to
fend, and an Apoftleisw///^, one fent ^ thus the general na-
ture of the word fignifies, and fo the word is ufed John 13. 16.
Neither is he that is fent greater than he that fent him-, 9 Ajt6$oKoq 9
he that is fent,but in this place it is perpetually put for the Name
of this Office ^ and to the fame fenfe is that word Angel , which
with Apoftle, Amen y and divers other words, all languages ob-
ferve and derive from the Original ; Angel is derived ftom etac, which is Nuntius, a Meflenger to relate fome Affairs to
others, nowtheApoftles received this Name as men fent about
the mod excellent Errand that ever was ; the MefTengers , the
men fent. In a word, we fee there were a certain Number of
men^chofen, they are fet down what they are, what their Names
were, and the Number of the Committee , and we fee the
names
The Mijfion of the A po files.
names of their Office, as hkewife what their Authority hither-
to was, that is, to preach. No doubt but Beza's word which he
interpofeth, (to preach the Gefpel) is a good giofTe, though I think
it not the right Text. But although they have Ele&ion into an
Office provided for them, and a power and Authority to exe-
cute this Office, when they are fent, yet they muft not go before
tey are fent -, we will confider therefore cheir Million in the
next place,
SECT. IL
How and to whom the Apofiles were fent.
AND for that we muft come to St. Matthew 10. i. and eo
St. Luke 9. 1. there we may obferve , in either place,
that as before they had the power given them, fointhefe places
they were Commanded to execute this power. In St. Adarl^ it
is faid, that he ordained Twelve, that they might be Vcith him, that
he might fend them forth to p reach • ready they were for the bu-
neffe, they lacked nothing but Million, and that they had in the
former places. In St. UMatthew, 10. 5. we may obferve thefe
Twelve fent forth, we fhall fee there the place where they were
to execute the Commiffions defcribed •, \ iril, negatively , verfe
the 5. Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any City of the
Samaritans enter ye not : then pofitively, bat rather go ye to the
lofl Sheep of the houfe of Ifraet, verf. 6. Not that our Saviour
would forbid Salvation to any Soul in the World, for others be-
sides 7«p/ were Converted- [ but accidentally J the Office of
the Apofties, in our Saviours time, was while he lived r eft rained
to them; And therefore we may obferve, that St. Peter him-
felf, intheioth.ofthev^?/, until he was admonifhed by a Vi-
fion of his Errors, was of Opinion, that it was not law full for a
fety to have any Communication or keep Company with a Gentile, as
he exprefleth it to Cornelius , verf. 28. So then you fee their
Commiffion retrained in place ; and, Secondly, you m*y ob-
ferve their Commiffion explained, what they were to preach.
B SECT.
I o What the Apoftlcs were to p reach,
SECT. III.
What they were to preach.
BEfore, they had Commiilion to preach, now a Command
what to preach, St. Luke the 9th. ver. 2. to f reach the
kingdom of God • St. Matth. 10. 7. The kingdom of heaven is at
hand' y the kingdom of God, and the kingdom of heaven, are the
fam-, called from God as the King-, as we may fay Cafars
Kingdom or Empire, called from Heaven as the place, the Em-
pire of Rome, the Kingdom of Jerufalem: Now this Kingdom
is from the Eminencyof it called the Kingdom oj Heaven, be-
caufe there is as it were the Court where Gods Glory is moll
manifeftly apparent, that is called his Kingdom, as Rome * but
though his Court be there, his Kingdom is on Earths though
Heaven be the Court, yet Earth is the Country of this King-
dom-, though Heaven be his Throne, yet Earth is his Foot-ftool:
So then, by his Kingdom, or , the Kingdom of Heaven is at
hand, is meant, that Chrifts Kingdom was comming near- That
now the time was Comming, in which he fliould conquer the
Devil, and lead Captivity captive^ now the time was Comming
in which he (hould Settle his Dominions in the World : A nd this
was much the fame with the Subject of St. fohn Baptifi his Ser-
mons, Mat. 3.2. Repent ye, for the Kingdom of God is at hand •
nor indeed could other Doctrine be preached, forChrift had
not yet Conquered the Devil , nor fetled his Government,
and therefore, as their Commiffion was fetled and reftrained to
a place-, fo it was in the Dodrine much unlike what it afterwards
came to. Thus you fee that the Apoftles had now at the laft, a
Commiffion to preach -, you fee their Diocefle, to the Loft Sheep
of the houfe oflfrael-, you fee likewife what they were to preach.
The next thing to be Confidered, will be, what other Officers
our Saviour Inftituted, and what Enlargement he gave to this
Commiflion, whether any or no.
SECT.
Of the Seventy Difciples, their Commijpon , &c. 1 1
SECT. IV.
What other Commijpon our Saviour gave to
other men.
TO underftand this, let us confider Luke 10. I. where we
(bail find that our Saviour called and fent Seventy , or Se-
venty and two other Difcipl.es befides thefe Twelve before na-
med : the diverfe Lection of the Number is not material to any
thing in hand; but we may obferve, firft,that there was the fame
bufineffe, in which they were employed, as the very Apoflles
were, out of the 9th. verfe, where they were commanded to
preach the fame Doctrine : The Kingdom { of God is come nigh
unto yon : That they had the fame Affiftance for their preach-
ing, the power of Miracles ; That they had the fame way of
Congratulating Cities or houfes, whither they came ^ That there
was the fame Curfe upon them that received them notj that they
were fo to demean themfelves both to the receivers and them
who did not receive them : But herein we fee fome difference;
the Apoflles were firft ordained, and then fent- thefe ordained
and fent together. Secondly , the Apoflles were taken into a
Near attendance about Chrift, and from that had a more Inti-
mate Acquaintance with both his Life and Dodrine ^ and from
thence,although thefe were fent equally with them in all refpe&s,
yet they only had the Name of Apoflles, given them by a prero-
gative Eminence, which throughout the Gofpel is not attribu-
ted to thefe later Difciples- Befides thefe, I read not of any
perfons which had any Million from Chrift to do thefe great
Works concerning mans Salvation. But hitherto we find onely
the Authority of preaching given. We will therefore in the
next place Confider who were made Minifters of thefe Cove-
nants of Heaven, called Baptifm, and the Lords Supper ; whe-
ther thefe, all thefe, or other befides them.
B 2 S E T C.
12 Who were made Mimficrs of the Sacraments.
SECT, V.
Who were made Minijicrs of the Sacraments.
TO begin with Baptifm : that Baptifm was inftituted in our
Saviours life time, is very evident out of the 3 d. of St.Jobn,
v. 22. w* ere it is faid, That our Saviour camo intofudea, and
there tarried frith them, and baptized^ that's expounded Chapter
4. v. 2. that he did not baptise jbut his difciples : out of which it
is evident, befides the Conference he had with Nicodemtts in
the beginning of the 3 J. Chapter, That there was aBaptiim
ufed and inftituted by our Saviour, and they who were the Mi-
nifters of it were his Difciples • But now, when it was inftituted,
and what it was that was Inftituted, are mighty difficulties, not
fully cleared : For the firft part, I leave all thofe parties which fix
it to any times, which are thefe two, either when St. John bapti-
zed our Saviour, of which we may read Afat.$J$. or elfe in his
Conference with Nicodemm, John 7,. 5. where he uttered thefe
wordsj Except a man be born again of Water and the holy Spirit ,
he cannot enter into the kingdom of ' Heaven;} can confent to neither
of thefe : Not to the firu\for we find nothing like an Ordination;
but indeed by thedefcendingoftheHoly Ghoft, and the voice
from Heaven, a foundation for an Ordinance, but not an Ordi-
nance it felf : Not the fecond, for it was a private Conference
between our Saviour and that man, wherein he might well de-
clare that there had been fomefuch Thing, or that there fhould
befuch a power given; but this did not fettle anyluch power,
nor any form or Minifter of it : I conclude therefore, that as
many things were done, without doubt , which are not written, as
St. John fpeaks in the laft Chapter of bis Gofpel, and the laft
verfe : fo amongft many things this is one , which yet was
done, we may fafely Conclude , becaufc it would be a mighty
prefumption for the Difciples, to -ufurp a power of baptizing
without a Commiffion, and that they did baptize is apparent, 1
therefore Conclude that it was done, but when is not apparent :
and now let us examine what was done.
SEC T.
Whether Chrifts and Johns Baptifm one, &>c. i 3
SECT. VI.
Concerning Baptifme.
THis Queftion feems to me to be very unfatisfafiorily hand-
led by thofe who have treated of it. Tounderfland whac
can be comprehended in it, conceive with me, that there coraes
a three-fold Baptifm in Confideration in this Queflion : the
Baptifm which we are baptized with, which in expreffe terms
was ordained by our Saviour after his refurre&ion- the Baptifm
of fohn Baptifi •, and the Baptifm of the Difciples of our Saviour
in the time of hisrefidence upon Earth: the Baptifm of f$hn y
and the Baptifm of our Saviour, have been difputed with a great
deal offvehemency betwixt Calvin and the Church of Rome,
whether it were the fame with our Saviours or no } and I am in
this Conclufion againft CViw*, and do think that hecauilefly
rejects the Fathers with a Height in bis Inftitutes, when certain-
ly in it felf the Queftion is of no great ufe to any Defign of faith
or piety - y I will not trouble the Controverfie now, but fhall be
ready to give an Account of it to any man that fhall require it-,
But hint out to the Reader that one place Afts 1 9. 2. Where St.
Paul finding Difciples at Ephefus , asked them , whether they
had received the Holy Ghefi f They anfwered^ that they had not
fo much as heard that there -was an Holy Ghcfi : and he replying,
to what Were ye then baptized ? they an f were d; unto Johns Bap-
tifm: Then in the 4th. verfe, St. Paul tells them, that John
indeed baptized "With the baptifm of repentance, faying unto the
people, that theyfhould believe on him who (bould come after him 9
that is, on fefns Chrifi. when they heard this, they Veer e baptized
in the Name of the Lord fefw : Obferve, that it could not be the
fame which wasinftituted by our Saviour, becaufe they had not
heard of the Holy Gh©(t, which is an exprefle phrafe appointed
by our Saviour -, and then, that they were baptized by St. Paul,
which was a fign the firft; was not perfect -, This particular is
miferably fliftedoflf by Beza, and that (hift wonderfully extol-
led by C homier, when the Text is evident that they were re-
baptized.
SECT,
*4
Whether the Apojiles Baptifm and Johns one
SECT. VII.
Whether the Baptifm of the Difciples before
Chrifts deaths Wcvs the fame with Johns ?
THere is a fccond Controvcrfie , whether the baptifm of
the Difciples before Chrifts Death, differed from Johns f
fure it feems to differ • becaufe Johns Difciples came to him in
the 3d. otjohn, v. 26. and told him how Chrifl baptized, and
feemed envioufly to clamour, that he and his baptifm was fol-
lowed more than St. Johns • which, if it had been the fame, they
would never have done : becaufe by that their own Church was
encreafed^ but wherein this Difference was placed, we can hard-
ly difcern, by the Gofpel^ for, as I have (hewed, their Doctrine
was the fame, that the Kingdom of God was at hand, and they
could not go further but as Prophets, for yet it was not Come,
but Comming. Now there could be no baptifm into any other
Faith , than that was taught : Thus briefly of that fecond
Queftion.
SECT. VIII.
Whether our Sacramental Baptifm be the fame
with that before Chrifts death ?
NOW the third, may be betwixt that Sacramental Baptifm,
which we have, and that which they sdminiftred before
our Saviours death, whether they are the fame ? lor my part [
am againfl it, and not I alone, but mi'ny more, hnrh Ancient
and later Writers. Iirft, becaufe that preaching the Word,
was only out of Office to be done to the Jews, and they retai-
ned Circumcifion flill, the legality of the Ceremonial Law be-
ing not yet abolifhed, untill our Saviour put a period to it with
his Confttmntatum efi : It is finilhed, at his Death • for although
there might be an ufe of both together, yet both could not be
fifed Sacramentally ± and although Baptifm might have an n.
ftitution.
Whether the Apoflles Baptifm ^ &>c. 1 5
ftitution, and have Laws made and Diredions for it before, as
muft needs almoft be in the Making of any Laws, yet thefe
t?,ws had not their legal force till the execution was ordained,
which could not be untill the Abolifhing of the old, which was
not (as I fay) untill our Saviours Death ., So Heb. 9. 16. For
'tohere a Teftament is, there muft be the Death oftheTeslator-, for
a Tefiametit is of force after men are dead, othcrwife it is of no
force, tvhile men are living. Now although Chrift might
make thefe Covenants, and this Will and Teftament, in his Life,
yet it is of no force, untill after his Death. Again, the figniri-
cation and myftcry of Baptifm, which it imparts to every bap-
tized Man, is not, nor could be before his Death • for as St. Paul
fpeaks, Rom. 6. 3 . Knoty you not , that as many of m as Veere
baptized into Jefns Chrift, were baptized into his Death : ( bapti-
zed into Jefns Christ ) that is, by Baptifm Incorporated into
his myftical body, or as he fpeaks, planted, verfe5. (were bap-
tized into /;«Dw^/bythefamephrafe incorporated into his
Death, dead with him , and this enforceth the 4th. verfe; there-
fore we are buried with him by baptifm into Death : If we be in-
corporated into him by Baptifm, if incorporate into his Death
by Baptifm, then we muft be buried with him , and then we
mud be raifed with him : Now this myftery could not be ef-
fected untill our Saviours Death and Refurredion ., For, al-
though I doubt not that the Death of Chrift was powerfull to the
faving of believers, which believed in his Death to come, be-
fore it came-, yet it was a diverfeway of Faith which looked
upon Chrift to Come, and Chrift already Come. And again, as
the Faith was diverfe, fo the Means to get this Faith and the
Covenants, by which Chrift was imparted, were diverfe. Now
this Baptifm looks upon Chrift dead ; it could not therefore in
this Notion fee applyed to them before his Death, andafterhis
Death too, And to Confirm tbis,we may obferve , that the-very
Apoftles themfclves were flow in the belief of this Fundamental
Truth, the Death and Refurredion of Chrift, untill after it was
done, as you may obferve Luke 24. 25* where our Savour
chides their flownefle of belief in thefe Articles : Now if they
had not a Strong Faith in thefe Articles themfelves, it is not rea*
fonable to believe that they preached them to others, and then
xrot baptized others into it Thefe rcafons are not obferved
1 6 The Apojiles Baptifm^ &>c.
by Beflarmine, or Gamacbew, or Eftiits, or any others I meet
with who handle this •, Gamacheus y in general, affirmeth fome-
thing to this laft Argument , that Chrifts Death was powerfull
to the fdlvation of Souls even before it was, which I grant ( but
not by that meanswhich takes his Death , tor a Pattern or a
Stock, in which it muft be grafted ; for the Graft fuppofeth the
Stock and the thing drawn the pattern ) to fuch means as are
Types or Figures ofChrift to Come, notlmprefiions or Signs of
Chriit already Come.
Again, he anfwers, that it were enough without his Death, if
he inllitute fuch a power . but it muft be proved then , that he
did inftitute fuch a power : for it is moft certain, that whatsoe-
ver Covenant God makes, that he will perform ; and fince God
hath pleafed to make fuch Expreflions ofthisBaptifm as have
their foundation upon his Death, it is not probable, nor cin we
• be eafily induced to think that he ftiould do it without his
Death.
Another Anfwer he hath, which bears fomefriew of profe-
cution of the firft Argument : that although Baptifm was not
Compleat omni ex p Arte , in all Ciriumftances, in refped of its re-
mote Effect, which is to open the Gate of Heaven, untill the
refurredionofChrift, yetitwaseffentially perfed to the pro-
duction of Original Grace , which is its neareft and formal
Effed.
I reply : Neither could it do this 5 For fince Circumcifion
was yet on foot, which had that Lffed proper to it, thefe
two had not both the feme Operation at the fame time- and
again, fince the Introdudion of Original or any Grace muft be
by the Death and Merit of Chrift , men muft receive this blef-
fing by that, and that communicated by Baptifm > y for although
thefe mercies were given by other Covenants before his Death,
which related to his Death to come, yet not by thofe which
referred to his Death paffed , as this Complanting by Baptifm
did, Gamach. in 3. quaft. 66, c*f. 4,
SECT.
Another ObjeSlion anfwcred. \ j
SECT. IX.
Another Qbje&ion anfrvcred.
BUT wh.it I find not Ob je&ed by them troubled me more
than their Arguments, untiil J ftudyed the reafon ofit,
which was, What meant all our Saviours Covenants and Promi-
fes concerning Bapcifm before his Death, which are underftood
by all Conient [O be applicable to our Baptifm which we uie , if
then this Sacrament was not ordained to be exhibited > And to
this we (hall find this Anfwer ( I think ) moft reafonable : That
our Saviour did fettle Laws, and Rules and Covenants for Bap-
tifm in his life, which had not their Life and Operation till his
Death, when he fetled the frame and manner of it. So you may
find the Do&rine, and Law and Covenant concerning eating
his body and blood delivered in the 6th. of St. Johns Gofpel, ver
26, 48, &c. which yet had not its truth and force untiil the In-
ftitution of the Communion, and Commiflion to Celebrate : So
likewife for the power oftheKeyes, Matth. 18.27. 21^ the
Church, which could not be in force till Churches were fetled,
and fo muft needs thefe places be underftood. I will examine
one, John 3.5. Except a man be born of Water and the Sprit, he
cannot enter into the Kingdom of God : this cannot be underftood
at that Inftant according to that Generality, a man, any man in
general , which muft be taken indefinitely , as the Context
doth mightily evince, becaufe in the 3 d. verfe preceding it is
faid , except a man be born again, which hath an indefinite truth :
fo likewife in the following 6th. verfe, That -which is bom of
Flejb is Flefb, that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit ; this in-
volves all that are in the World. Flefi and blood cannot inherit
the kjngdem of God j therefore that which is not born again, and
fo not of Water and the Spirit : Now this cannot have this Ex-
tent at this time, for, as I faid before, Circumcifion was not
yet abolifhed : for it was impoflible that this Law could at this
time be divulged and communicated to men , and therefore it
was impoflible,' that a Law made in a.Corner without publicati-
on of it could exact an obedience •, and therefore it could not be
C but
1 8 The Laws of Baptifm not in force , &c t
but like other Laws, it was then made, Chrift taught Nicode-
mnt the Doftrine which afterwards fliould have its force and
vigor, when the time came, that it fhould be divulged and
taught. Well then, out of this that hath be^n faid , it may ap-
pear, that although there might be an Inftkution of this Sacra-
mental Baptifm , wh.ch we now ufe by the Mercy of God for
our Admittance into the Church, for our Incorporation into his
body, although this might be inftituted, and many Laws con-
cerning it made in his life , yet thofe Lawes were not of force
till after his death, and the promulgation of them then. We
will in the next place Conflder the Communion , and examine
what Minifter was appointed for that in the Gofpel, for we find
none for Baptifm yet in Chriflslife.
CHAP. IV.
What Minifler was appointed for the Commu-
nion.
THis Communion was Inftituted by our Saviour a little be-
fore his Death, in thofe famous places of three of the
Evangelifts, (for only three mention it) Mat. 26. 26. Mark, 14.
22. Luke 22. 19. to fpeak ©f which, is only pertinent to the
thing in hand The two firft Evangelifts affirm, that only his
Difciples were with him • fee Mat. 26. 19. The difciples came
and /aid to him j fo Mark, the 14- 16. The difciples went forth),
but St. Lake comes more ciofe, and in the i4th.verfeof the 22.
Chapt. faith, And when the hour VvM come, (that was to eat the
PafTeover ) he fat down With the Twelve Apoflles : So then, here
we have them who were with him, not intimated only by their
general name of Difciples, which they had in common with the
Seventy, but the name of their particular Office, which was ap-
propriate only to them : St. Luke doth particularize in the Cafe
of thefe men fent into the Town, St. Matthew verf 1 7. where
before, leaves it at large. That he fent Difciples, but how ma-
ny, or who, is not discovered by him, St, Mark. Chap. 14. v.
13. punftu-
■■■ ' ■ ■ ■ - II ■ I ,
Who k the Minifter of the Communion. 19
1 3 . punctually fees down the Number, he fent two of his Difci-
ples ; But St. Luke, 22. 8. tells who they were, James and John.
I put down this, to (hew the punctuality of that Evangelift in his
Defcription, who writing after the other, fecms more particu-
arly to fet down fome things than the other did; efpecially in
this Story. WeH, we fee who they were that were with our Sa-
viour at the Celebration of his laft Pafleover, and the laft indeed
that ever was, or could be exacted of the Jews : That at the Ce-
lebration of it, and fo like wife at the Inftitution of the Lords Sup-
per, his Twelve Apoftles were thofc that were with him. Now
they being at Supper, in the places before alledged, you may
obferve, that he took^ bread, &o. But in the ioth. of the 22. of
St. Luke, at the later end of the verfe, he kid ,this do in remem-
brance of me ; this do, hocfacite, do this thing, this thing ye fee
me do : It cannot relate to their own Actions, which were only
eating and drinking, which could in no refemblance Commu-
nicate the Death of Chrift ; But Confecrate the Bread and Wine
with a Benediction with this Expreffion, this is my body, this is
my blood , and fo in ray place diftribute this in Commemoration
of me; for although in St. Luke this very phrafe, do this y is on-
ly applyed to the Bread, yet St. Pant, according to what he had
received from the Lord, 1 Cor. 11. 25. faith, thatheufed the
fame to the Cup likewife, this do ye as oft as ye drinkjt, in re-
membrance of me ; and indeed, St. Luke doth moft punctually
imply the fame, although not exprefly enforce it, in verfe 20.
lifyvrife alfo the Cuf after Suffer, faying. This HkeVrife refer-
ring, as Sr. PWexprefleth , to the Conclufion of the 19. verfe,
Do this likewife in remembrance of me ; he faid the fame likewife
ter the fame manner concerning the Cup. Well , you fee both
of thefe how they are to be celebrated according to Chrifts In-
ftitution; now there is aQueftion raifed, which I do not find
from Chrifts time downward, until! now, Who is the Minifter of
this Sacrament ?
C 2 SECT.
2 Who the proper Minifter of this Sacrament ?
SECT. II.
Who the proper Minifter of this Sacra went ?
THcre are many difputcs, I grant, but moved newly therein
(as I hear, though I read it not ) a Queftion , Whether
there be any proper Minifter, or no, of the Communion ? Con-
fider therefore with me this Text : There were none with our
SaviouF but the Twelve Apoftles, it is faid to thefe, Bo thU\ from
that Time downward, it hath been held, that none but Apofto-
lical men, Succeflbrs of them, fhould do it : Jt is a Thing of the
grcateft and higheft Concernment to a mans Soul that ever was,
Heaven or Hell is at Stake upon it, if we mifle. Confider, it is a
kind of lifting up a Creature beyond its Nature, Bread and Wine
to the body and blood of Chrift , it is no matter which way,
one way or other •, it is a Command given to a fele&ed Num-
ber of men : Thefe are defcribed by that Office , not by a Ge-
neral Notion , to be the men are fpoken to- who then can con-
ceive butfo great a power, with fo great able fling, fhould be
Committed tofuch men ? Well then, I think it clear, here was a
Covenant inftituted, what it was, is in other places and Laws of
our Saviour defcribed, and belongs not to my bufineffe^ this
only appertains to my bufinefle, That the Apoftles were Inftitu-
ted, and they only the Minifters of it ; only this little I will adde,
left fome mens obfervation may ftagger at \u
SEC T. III.
The Communion was Inftituted before our Sa-
viours Death.
T Hat though our Baptifm may, perchance , appear to take
its force from fome Command of Chrifts after his Death,
.yet this of the Lords Supper was now inftituted before, and yet
doth relate to his Death ^ Firft, becaufe Circumcifion was not
determined,
Gods Met hod for Mans Salvation. 2 i
determined , but the Pafleover was, which prefigured the Lords
Supper^ and this which he now celebrated , and had finiflied,
was the laft which by Gods Command (hould be celebrated
among the ferves ; Secondly, becaufe the Death of our Saviour
was ac hand, fo near, that there could be no Communion inter*
pofed betwixt this and that •, and therefore it was, as it were, '
given in the very Nick of time; and, as while the paifeover was
on foot,no Communion could be expected ; to; as foon as that is
expired, no Interim betwixt this and that. This mu^ appear
in its Inftitution : 1 have done with this : I only Confider, that
as in humane Affairs, he that fliould take upon him the Kings
perfon, to ad as he, without he make him Chancellor, or Judge,
enters into an high preemption ; fo, and much greater muft
his pride be; that dares to aft Chrift in the Sacrament, to call
for a Sacramental Virtue to the Elements without his Authori-
ty, which feems to be granted only to this Sort of men, and to
none other , thus I think you fee the full Commifiion of the
Apoftles, until now retrained to the Jews % and they wereinfti-
tuted as yet Preachers of the Kingdom of God to come •, At this
Inftitution of the Communion the Celebraters of that • That
they and the other Difciples did baptize , before is evident ;
That they did not do it without a Commifiion, in honour to
them and their piety, I amrefoiveditcould not be; But what
that Baptifm was,,orwhen, or how farr they had a Commiffi- *
on I find not, and therefore dare determine nothing.
CHAP. IV.
Gods Method for Mans Salvation.
WHen our Saviour was Dead, and had fuffered for
the Sins of Mankind , he then brake down the
partition wail that was betwixt the fe\\> and Gen-
tile-, he then, as he fuffered for the Sins of the whole World :
fo he took Care how all the World (hould be partakers of thefe
Sufferings of his ;' he could by Divine power have ftamped their
Souls with infufed Graces, and by Compulfion have forced
men
22 Gods Method for Mans Salvation.
men to that Faith which fhould be faving • but then Heaven
and Hell had not been prdtmium & poena » he took therefore
fuch a Courfe as might mod ordmately bring men to his Service,
without Compulfion •, and fmce he was to leave the World
himfelf, he took Order with his Servants to Ad as if he were
prefent, and Negotiate the great Work of Salvation of Souls
by a Delegate power from mm. Therefore in the l6th. of St,
Mark, v. 14. you may obferve, that he appeared to the Eleven,
that is, to the Eleven Apoftles , for one of them, Judas , had
apoftatized, and had hanged bimfelf • and in the 15 th verfe, he
gave them Commiflion, Go ye into all the w "or -Id, and preach the
Go ff el to every C reature, that is, to every Creature that is Ca-
pable of it, &c. there was their CommiiTion. The fame Story
is thought by many to be a little more fully defcribed by St.
fohn, Chap. 20. 21. after he had appeared to them as before,
he faid, Peace be unto you, at my father fern me, fofend I jon ,
and then he breathed on them the Holy Ghoit. Mark this
phrafe, As my father fent me •, It is a particular phrafe not u-
fed elfewhere , and therefore intimates fomc extraordinary
matter. God had fent many men before, but never any befides
Chrifl: with the fulnefle of Authority, as it is defcribed Mat.
28. 18. All power is given me in Heaven and Earth. All pow-
er was never given to any before : I fend you therefore with
all power, as my Father fent me ; So the power then of Gi-
ving powers to others, which was never given before but to
my felf • and therefore in that place of St. Matthew before ci-
ted, in the laft verfe too, Jam with yon to the end of the World,
with you teaching, baptizing, giving Orders to others, for that
is mightily enforced out of the word Stent , as my father fent
me •, and, indeed, elfe he could not be with them in their perfons
to the end of the World, but in their Succeflion, by which
means he might well be faid to be with Jthem to the Worlds
end. Having now touched upon thefe places, I will Colled this,
here was in the 28 of Matthew, verf. 19. Baptifm Jnftitn-
ted, Matter, and Form ; In the Name of the father, of the Son,
and of the Holy Qhoft, which we read not prefcribed before :
we fee the Officers appointed, thefe Eleven in their perfonal
bodies, orfucceffion^ wee fee their Diocefle enlarged, preach
to all Nations, and as preaching, fo baptizing as large, they go
together
Whether the power of preaching^ &>c. 2 3
together-, we Tee the Subjects of their Sermons enlarged, be-
fore Chrifts Death. When they had to do with the Jews only,
it was, the Kingdom of God is at hand: Now it is, toobferve alt
things that I have commanded you -, , So then, chrift had given them Command before
what they fhould preach. I do not find, no not in thefe, yet any
infpired Sermon, but upon Direction • and although thefe men
had (no doubt) the mod immediate Call that ever any had , and
the molt extraordinary Gifts , in the moft extraordinary way,
yet for to enable them for their preaching , they had Conven-
tion with Chrift, which doth the moft refemble the mod Indu-
bious life of Studious Scholars, which in Books Convcrfe with
God, as pofsibly a thing can do : fo that in that time, in the
time of our Saviours Life, and untill his Afcention, we can find
no place for inward Calling, without an outward, nor an out-
ward execution, withont means to enable them for this great
Miniftry of preaching, but throughout a molt Methodical
Courfe.
SECT.
Whether thefe ^ and thefe only^ &c.
SECT. III.
Whether thefe, and thefe only were Commiffio-
nedfor Baptifm ?
THE next thing to be looked upon , is, Whether thefe and
thefe onely had the power of baptizing? No doubt we
may fay of this, that they had the Duty only, none other ;ob!i-
ged to either, but they-, and when I have named the Duty, I
think I may juilly adde the e|ssY '
be ncceffary in the Church T and therefore muft be infifted upon.
For this therefore •, the firft thing we find them ASing in this
Jtind, was to fettle their own Society, andCompleat the Num.
fcer of Twelve, and this you may find recorded in the 1. of the
Atts 9 v. 1 j. wherewfemayobferve firft, that they referred the
Election of this Apoftle to God by carting Lotts, they Chofe
two,. Barf abas and Matkias, and referred it to Divine Electi-
on -, the reifons of which , guefTed at by Divines, rather than
demonftrated, I omit-, But now there are Twelve A poftles, Bi-
(hops; for if Judas was a Bi (hop, by being an Apoftle, (as he is
termed, verf. 20. )the reft likewife were, or Twelve Deacons or
Minifters , for that phrafe is affirmed of Judas in regard of bis
Apoftleftup, verf. 25.
S E C T. VIII.
What Additions rvem made to the Apoftles.
BUT yet we muft not leave them, but examine, Whether
there were any Addi r ion made to thefe Apoftles, and what
that was ? To underftand this : We may rind St. /Win abun-
dance of places called an Apoftle • inftead of many, take this one
Inftance, Galit. t. i. Paulan Apofiie not of men, neither by man^
but by J ef us Chrift ^ An ApoPrle^otofmen, not by man, that
is, who received my Apoftlefhip not from the Authority given
to men as before, when Chrift lent his Apoftles, as his Father
fent him with power to give thefe powers, John 20. As my Fa-
ther fent me r fo fend I yon >, not ihen, of men ; thst is, from this
Authority given to them ; n&r by man^ chat is, by any Minifte-
rial Aft of mans. He received his tfap'ifm by the Miniftery of
m?n, as you may find AEtsy. 18. Futhis Apoftiefhip he recei-
ved ofGod, and by God, as the otber Apoftles did, by the im-
mediate Ordination of Chrift 5 and tn this I fhould place the Dif-
ference betwixt thefe Apoftles and others, That they are made
fuch by an Immediate Ordination of Chrift •, fork is not enough
that (fome fay) tjbe an Apoftle, was to be fuch a Minifter as
converfed wkh Chrift in his humanity, or fawhim infche Flefb #
for this did all the Seventy, which yet were not called Apoftles •
What Additions were wade to the Apofllcs,
nor is it fufficient, which others fay, they were fuch whofe Of-
fice extended to the whole world • for fo we (hall find in the
Atls almofl none Confined to any place, but chat others as weH
as Sc. PWhadaCareofall Churches . but upon this a man may
juftly enquire, why St. Paul fhould in fuch diftind: Terms (not
efmen, nor by man) defcribefcimfelf, fince it fetms every Apo-
it!e was fuch. To clear this, and giveturcher llluftration to this
Truth, Obierve, that others befidesthefe were called Apoftles,
fo you may find firft Barnabas, as well as St. Paul, Ads 14. 14.
which Vohen the Apofiles Barnabas and Paul heard, &c. Apo-
files, in the plural Number- fome have thought that this Barna-
bos was the fame with Barfabm, who Atls 1. 23. was Compe-
titor with Mathias, for the Apoftlefhipj but ( methinks ) mif;
flag the place then, it were ft range he fhould be called an Apo-
flle afterwards • and indeed their Namesdiffer, their Original
Names and their Additional Names, for Atls 1 his Name was
fofeph called Barf abas firnamed fufius ; but in Alls 4. 36. in-
ftead of fofeph is fofes, and inftead of Bar/abas is Barnabas, but
befideshim, we read Rem. 16.7. of Andronicus and funia, of
whom St. Paul faith, that they were his kinfmen^ his fellow prifi-
ntr t and of Note among the Apofiles : which words, although
tbey have received a double fenfe, either that they were Emi-
nent perfons among the Apoities, orelfe efteemed and noted
by them to be fuch perfons of Efteem ; yet rhere are many both
ancient and Modern Writers, both fuch as are for and againft
Bifhops, that agree they were Apofiles, as the words very na-
turally bear it ; and to take away the Scruple , both the Centu-
ries and Baronins agree upon it, which if there were fcruple
they would not have done : then turn to Phil. 2. 25. there you
(hall find St. Paul calling EpaphroAitus my brother, and Compani-
on in labour , and fellow fouldier, but your Meffenger. Here I
cannot but wonder at our Tranflators, who renderit Meffenger %
fuch a mean phrafe intimating any common or trivial man, who
is fent on an errand : Beta did much better, who called him
Legatum, an Embaflfador, a nobler phrafe ; but indeed the word
is ocwosohov, jour Apofile •, and fo thofe h'pithetes before exprefs
him, my brother, &c. This may likewife be (hewed out of the
I Cor. 4. 9. God hath fet forth us the Afofiles I aft , the Tranfla-
tion here likewife is notgoodj for it is not, he hath fet forth us
lair,
What Additions were made to the Apoftles^ &c. 3 3
laft, but us laft Apoftles, us that were the laft: Apoftles, who arc
they ? in particular, verf. 6. he names Apollo , thefe things I
have in a figure tranferibed to my felfand to Apollo, that ye might
learn of us, not to thinkjofmen above that which is written. Now
then, although he may mean others befide himfelf and Apollo, yet
it is fit to conceive that he fliould be in the number of thofe arc
called Apoftles, becaufe he is one of thofe from whom they
muft learn, not to thinly of men above what is Written ; and among
other Arguments, this is a main one, That we the laft Apoftles,
Apollo and ray felf, and perhaps more, are unhappy wretched
people marked out for mifers, to be made a fpe&ade of con-
temptible people, to the World % to Angels, and men. I could
herelikewife treat of Gal. 1. 19, where fames the brother of
the Lord is called an Apoftle, who by many is thought, and
from good reafon, to be none of the two fames'* which were of
the Twelve, but a third who was made Rifhop offerufalem-, but
Idefift : it is evident out of Scripture, that the holy Writmen-
tioneth more Apoftles befides the Twelve and St. Paul ; and if
befides the Scripture, any mans Language may be heard, confi-
der that of Ignatius , who was Contemporary ( as he fpeaks )
with the Apoftles, Paul, fohn and Timothy, in his Epiftle to the
Ephepans, who there fpeaks in the language of the times, and
by that language calls Timothy an Apoftle.
SECT. IX.
A Reafon of this.
NOW then, to draw this Difcourfe to fomc period, there
'were other Apoftles befides the firft Twelve , and St.
Paulthe Thirteenth, butwhy fo? becaufe, as T&^Wortf fpeaks,
upon Phil. 2. 25. in the cafe of Epaphroditus before handled,
that he was called their Apoftle, to whom the Care of them was
Committed. And again, upon the 1 Tim. 2.1. Heretofore they
called Presbyters Eijhops, and thofe Vp hie h we call Bifiops, they
called Apoftles •, bat, faith he, inprocejfe of time they left the name
of Apoftles to them who were, truly Apoftles, and they gave the
name of Bijbops to thofe which were formerly called Apoftles : So
E iikewifc
34 ^ )e Extent of the Apojlolicai power.
iikewife St. Hurome, on Gal. 1.9. Procedente Tempore & alii
ah his cjitesDom'wtosdegeratordinatifiim j4poJioli', Inprogeffe
•of time other Apoftles fyere ordained by thofeVphtch the Lord h*A
Chofen, and this is the reafon why St. Paul y where before Gal.
1, 1. fifth, he Vcaf an Apoftle not of men f mr by man, but by
fefta Chrift ; to dili inguifli him from thofe others, who were
Apoftles by Conftitution of Apoftles, not immediately by God:
and to the fame purpofe may that be underflood of St. Paut r
2 Cor. 1 1 . 5 . I f tiff of e I ^ as not a whit behind, or leffe, or infe-
"riour to the Chiefeft Apoftles. Amongft the A potties the Twelve,
there were not fome Chief, and fome Inferior but the
Twelve were the Chief, and the reft Inferiour. Now he having
his calling and enabling from Chrift immediately, was not infe-
riour to them. And though I read, I know not where, the Au-
thority ofTheodoret flighted, yet I do not remember what Satis-
faction is given to bis Reafon : Nor can well Conceive how
thefe Scriptures can in any other fenfe be reafonably ex-
pounded.
CHAP. V.
The Extent (if the Apofiolical Power.
AN D now ( me-thinksj I fee the Apoftles in the Church,
as Divines fay, Adam (if he had lived innocent) and his
pofterky would have been in the World, they had been Em-
perorsof the whole World, and all the World would have been
svery mans ; yec being in their Integrity, would have fo enjoy'd
all, thaf it (hould have been to the good of all, and hurt of
none : So thefe holy men were Bifhops , Apoftles of ail the
World, all the Churches throughout the World, had abfolute,
cot order only, as the School fpeaks, to give holy Sacraments to
any any where, but Jurifdi&ion to Govern and rule all. That
which Eafebhu faith, hath fome truth, That they divided them-
felves into feveral parts of the World, but not appropriating to
shemfelves any piece,, nor exduding ? any other from that Share
Of
L*.
How the Jpojiolical Power was Communicated. 3 $
or portion which they fuperjntended, but rebounding back of-
ten where they had b^en before > and diverting asOccafions
offered themfelvesinto other Prccinds: this they did, and might
do, by that vaft Authority Wis given them; Go preach to all Na-
tions : and by that power Equalling their Authority which was
Conferred at the Pentecofi^ but it was not with other men,
that univerfal Authority would not befit the meaner powers of
thofe who were to faceted and to follow them ♦, and therefore
we will, in the next place, Confider in what proportions they
Communicated thefe Authorities to others.
SECT. II. ■
How the Apoftolical Power was Communi-
cated.
TH E virtue of which Communication we enjoy at this day,
fome for place, fome for Authority, fomeinprt, Tome
in the Lump. For the firft , we (hall for place Confider, that
their SuccefTors were confined in place, TitnsinCreet, Timothy
in Epbefus, Epaphroditmm Philippic not that hey were Con-
fined or pegg'd here immovably, ( SohnoBifhopinhia Dio~
cefle, no not quoad Officium^ as if hi* holy Du ies which he
performed out of h,s DiocefTe were invalid, or of no ? ce v for
without doubt, if a Bifhop bapuze, preach, celebrate the Com-
munion, give Holy Orders, fecundum materram & formam %
Canonically, according to Matter and Form,ou<. of his i noteiTe,
they are firm and good to the receivers , although perhaps
without leave, or extreme neceilky, they are not Commenda-
ble- Nay, without doubt, if either Bifhop or Presbyrr remove
to other Dioceffe or Parifli he takes not a new Ordination, but
an acceptation or juft Election to that place fufficeth. ) Now
bis Confining to that place, is to reftrain the Minifi.ringof his
Office out of Duty there •, fo that he is out of Dury to have a
Care of that place, and to look to that flock which is Commit-
ted to his Charge, which is parr, not the whole as it was Com-
mitted to the Apoftles-, and no doubt (that which Dr. Field
hath learnedly difcourfed upon this fubjed) in Ancient limes
E 2 Bifhops
3 6 How the Apoflolical power was divided, &*c<
Bifhops were the Paflors of their Dioceflfe folely, Presbyters
their Affiftantsand AffocUtes, as the A pottles with that almoft
itn men fe. power were made Bifhops of the World, yet being men
with Confined bodye?, were forced to ufe Deputyes, and the
kelp of other men in their Charge even whiltt they lived-, and cer-
tainly die Church was better Governed by that Subordination,
than if every one who hath not Apoflolical Integrity fhould af.
fume Apoflolical Authority - fo it was by thefc , they had great
Dioceffes committed by the Apoftles, and (as I (hall (hew anon)
they had many Inferiors Affifting them •, but thefe were their
places over which they were made Overfecrs, and they had not
Authority of Jurifdidion over others ^ Thus I could fet down
bow almoft all the World was divided in the Apoflolical Age ;
but I let this alone.
SECT. in.
How the Apoflolical Tower was divided to
¥ articular s \ and concerning the Office of
Deacons.
NExt we will Confider, how the very Office of the Apo-
ftleftiip was divided r And the firft thing that comes into
our Con/ideration ( to begin at the foot, and dimb upward) will
be the Office of Deacon ; in handling which I find fome matter
of Difpute : Firft, about the InfHtution ofhim, when this Functi-
on was firft erected : There is a general Claim to Atts6. the
Story may thus be obferved • In the Infancy of the Church, when-
it pleafed God by the preaching of the Word to encreafe the
Church beyond the expectation of men, or leffe power than
Apoflolical , there were many poor among the Difciples; but
the piety of the Chriftians was fuch, as you may read ABs 4. 5«
in ver. 34. of the 4th. Chapter, there was no lack, faros many
4U were poJJ effort of lands or houfes y fold them, and brwght the
price and cafi it at the Apo/llesfeet y and Barnabas is prefently
particularly inftanced in ; but in the 5th. Chapter we read the
ieirfuU Story of Ananvu and Safpkira, who would feem righto
v__ , - . —■■
Keafons ivhy the Office^ &>c. 3 7
ous, to do as the fafhion of Godly men was ^ bat being hypo-
crites, were punifhed for their hypoenfies. Now thefe Sales
bringing in great fums for the relief of the poor, the Apoftles,
as itfeems, were troubled with ;c, and the Care to relieve the
poor took them ofFfrom attendance upon that mighty work of
planting the Gofpel , this was the racherawakened, by a mur-
mur ing of the Grecians againft the Hebrews-, that is, either fuch
Grecians as were mide Profdytes, or clfe fuch Hebrews as lived,
and perhaps were born amongft the Greeks, (for as yet the Apo-
ftles had no Communication with the Gentiles, ) now thefe Gre-
cian Jews murmured, becaufe it feems the Apoftles (as I can
guefs) had left theadminiftrationofthis Charity to fome who
had dealt partially^ for I am confident they themfelves would
not •, wherefore they Convented the Difciples together, and
bid them with all Care (who mult needs know the Integrity of
mens conventions better than the Apoftles., who could not
fearch hearts ) feleft fome men fit for fuch a purpofc, and ap-
pointed the Number of Sev:n ; the Difciples did accordingly,
and they chofe Stephen^ and Philip, &c. as you may read in the
5. vcrf. of the 6. Chap, andfet them before the Aposlles ; when
the Apoftles hadprajed, they laid their hands upon them y no doubt,
rectifying their Choice, and Authorizing them to the work :,
Thus we fee thefe men receiving Title to execute this O ffice.
SECT. IV.
Reafons why the Office ef a Deacon- was n&t
Iuftitnted, A&s 6.
BUT for my part (falvc femper melion judicio ) I cannot
conceive how this fhould prove that Minifterial Office of a
Deacon, which was afterwards ufed in the Church, from this
place, for thefe reafons •, Firft, becaufe this was an Occafionat
Office, neceflary for that Time, in which there being many
poor, which lived under the correction, and rod, and perfecti-
on of the politick Magiftrate, no legal Courfe could betaken
for the relief of them, but fuch as came by Charity out of the
bowels of their own Fraternity^ to wit from Chriftians, who
might
>' \
38
Reafons why the Office, <&c.
might be perfwaded, not compelled to that Duty- and by reafon
of this, there was a necefiicy to have fome Officers chofen Over-
feersofthe Poor, which by a Religious Tie, where could be no
legal, fhould be bound to the Execution of this Duty, for which
they infticured this Office 5 but why thefe fhould be called Dea-
cons,that Minifterial Office ufed in the Church, I fee neither Au-
thority nor Ground in the Scripture for it. That they fhould
not be annual Officers, as our Overfeers of the poor , lean fee
no reafon • or why in a fetled Commonwealth, where the poli-
tick Lawes provide for the poor, and Law tmkes fuch Charity a
Duty to the Commonwealth, there is no Ground. It is true,
in the Times of perfecution thefe things are necefTary , as there
is often mention both in St. Pauls Epiftles and the EcdefiaiHcal
Story j and Julian the Apoftatc himfelf, in an Epiftle to Arfa-
lius, the Heathen Pontifex ,or Chief Prieil ofGalatia, The wic-
ked Galileans, faith he, ("under which name he vented his malice
againft, theChriftians) relieve net their own poor only, but ours,
with a Counterfeit bolinejfe^ There he acknowledged the Chri-
ftians abundant Charity in thofe dayes, when he made all Chri-
ftians poor ^ and becaufe he would not be out-a&ed in a Work
of fo much piety, he gave that Piieft the Colle&ion of vaft fums
towards the relief of neceflkous people. This was necefTary in
Time of perfecution =, but what further ule is there ofit in parti-
cular Churches, than thofe Collectors for the poor which we
have, and Charity and Sweetneffe preached to men, whereby
they may be fpurred on to enlarge their hearts, beyond the
Exa&ions of Statme-Duties, to the overflowing of Charity. Now
then, becaufe it was an Occafional Office necefTary then and
there, at fuch times in fuch places, we cannot conceive why
it fhould enforce fuch an Office perpetual in the Church, and
univerfally in all places or Churches.
SECT.
A Third Reafon^ &>c. 2p
SECT. V.
Another Argument to prove the former Con-
clufion.
SEcondiy, Confiderthe bufineflfc they were defigned to , we
fliall not find that afcending to thefe Mi nifte rial Duties , k
being only to relieve the body, not the Soul, to take Care of the
Tables, to look that the Grecian widows, and poor be not defpi-
fed, in Confideration of che Native fews ; I know it is ob je&ed
by Catforive, that thefe Tables there fpoken of, was the Lords
Table, and the Miniftration they were imployed abour, was the
Communion i but thefe phrafes of Daily Miniftration , and the
muv mure of the Grecian, do inforce the other : for if they had
a daily Communion, it is not to be imagined the Apoftles would
be ftanders by at fo heavenly a Duty ^ and if they were a&ors,
it cannot be thought that any (hould be negle&ed in it : I there-
fore, with a mighty Confent of Writers, Conclude, that it was
an Ad mini (1 ration of Temporal Things • but the Adminiftration
of fuch maketh not to that Miniftry we fpeak of, which concerns
things fo Spiritual as afTeft the Soul immediately with fome Di-
vine blefiing, when thefe immediately only concern the body
and Temporal Things, and therefore could not belong to our
Miniftry.
S E C T. VI.
A third Reafonfor the former Conclufiou.
A Third Reafon may be drawn from the perfons which
were elected into the Office, which were (as Efifhanins
reports in the end of his 20. Chapter ofhi9 firft Rook, Contra
Htrefes ) of the Seventy two Difciples, of which Number there
he reckons many more of equal rank , if not an higher efteem
than thefe. Now thenif they were of thofe Seventy two r it is
not
^
Ao Sowe of thefe were Preachers.
not reafon to think that they (hould be Ordained into an Infcri-
our Order of Clergy, and the loweft of all ; for all hold that
they were Presbyters at the lead, either by their firft Ordinati-
on from our Saviour, when he fent them to preach, and baptize
the loft Sheep of the houfe of Ifrael^ or elfe by a Confirmation
from the Apoitles, after they were inverted with the whole Ec-
clefiaftical power in tLemfelves, by that Grand Charter, As my
Father fentme,&c. Now then, this had been a difparagemenc
to Presbytery. But left any man fliould doubt, whether thefe
were Presbyters or no ? let him Confidcr that extraordinary
work of St. .Stephen, who went up and down (as you may read
in the latter part ofthe6th. Chapter of the A&s , doing Mira-
cles, and difputingand preaching ( I dare call itfo,fay Mr. Tho-
mas Hooker whzthz cm) withfucha Spirit as they could not
refift. But Mr. Thomas Hooker , in his Survey of Church Difci •
fline % Part 2. Chap. 2. pag. 36. denyes St. Stephen to be a
Preacher, and that moft Sermon-like difcourfe ( I am fare) of
his AEts 7. he calls an Apology, not a Sermon . truly, I fee little
of Apology in it, and I know fome have drawn a little Body of
Divinity out of it; and I know that verf. 51. he drawt a moft
powcrfull inveftive againit their manners, which colt him his
prefent life in this World. If Mr. Hoo^r will not allow this to
be a Sermon, he can find few in the whole New Teftament.
SECT. VII.
Some of thefe were Preachers.
BU T he (hall not efcape me fo : Though this propagation of
the Gofpel will not be allowed to be a Sermon , becaufe I
cannot find an expreis Term,fo phrafing his difcourfe,i will (hew
him another of thefe Deacons in the next Chapter, Aft s 8. whofe
difcourfes to this purpofe are called preaching, & that is of Philip,
Atls8.$. Then Philip went down to the City of Samaria , and
preached Chrifi to them : The very word ufed for preaching in
Englifh as well as the Original is there placed ; H*oker himfelf ,
where before alledged, although he omits this verfe,yet cites the
38th verfe of that 8th. ( hap. where Philip is faidto baptize the
Eunuch; therefore more than a Deacon by his Doftrine : but in
vain
Whether Philip -were an Evangelifl ^ <&o. 41
vain that, as I (hall fhew hereafter. But now I will examine
Ws Anfwer.
SEC T. VIII.
Whether Philip rvere an Evangelifl y and what
an Evangelifl ?
PHUip ( faith he ) wat an Evangelifl , and fo appointed by
God, as afterwards appear*, and by virtue of that, and
not ofhisDeaconfhip, he did baptize. Indeed he is called an
Evangelift,y#fr 2 1 .8. And left we might think them two Philips,
the Text faith, he was one of the Seven; that is, oneofthofe
Seven was chofen, Afts 6. to take Care of the Poor, (but by the
way confider, that neither then or elfewhere in Scripture are
thefe Seven called Deacons J Well, firft Confider , here was a
great fpace of time betwixt the 8. and the 2 1. Chapt. he might
be an Evangelifl long after, and not one then ^ Degrees and dig-
nities came by fteps, not the higheft at firft • but fuppofe he
were, and fuppofe he was one before he was made Trcafurer or
Overfeer of the poor, and fuppofe I conceive an Evangelifl did
preach the Gofpel, might baptize ; then I Conclude that fuch a
man was at the leafl a Presbyter, and that he was as it were de-
graded in being made fuch a Deacon, by hisConfent a Deacon
hath nothing to do with Spiritual things, but only the Treafure
of the Church : And therefore it is ftrange, that both he and
mf lord Say, and Nathaniel piennes , in their Speeches at
the beginning of this Parliament , affirmed, That becaufe the
ApoRles would not have Ecdefiaftical men meddle with Tempo-
ral thing?, they inftituted a new Office out of their rank for the
performing even thefe Duties of Charity, which in nothing a-
grees with the Text • for it feems, at the firft, the Church layd
all the burthen upon the Apoftles, when they put it off, then they
chofe Ecclefiaftical men again, and fuch as were next them ei-
ther of the Septuagint, or elfe Evangeli^ certain we may be,
famous Churchmen, St. Stephen, Philip, and the reft, who have
honourable mention in Ecclefiaftical Story.
F SECT.
An ObjcSlion anfwered.
SECT. IX.
An ObjeStim anftvcred.
BUT before 1 Conclude this Argument, I will frame one
great Objection, Ads 6. 2. The A f oft les {aid, it is not rea-
fon we JbouU leave the Word of God, andferve Tables-, was it not
reafon that they fhould, and why fhould others do it ? Yes 9
much difference : one Sermon of the Apoftles and prayer of
theirs, is of greater power and force with God than twenty
others ^ they out of Duty mutt travell through the whole world,
they cannot attend the Care of the poor in a particular City, the
others, though being Evangelifts, may upon particular Occafi-
ons be called ofTfrom their place, yet they (hall return again
and overview their Charge, the people- therefore, when they
could not have their particular eyes over that blcfled work, took
thofe that were next them in that dubious time, to take Care
of the poor, and thefe men could not therefore be chofen to
an Inferiour Conftant Office, fuch as they feign their Deacons
to be, becauferhey were men of higher Employment and grea-
ter Concernment in the Church, but were chofen for that Occa-
sion ( how long I know not } to attend that Duty.
SECT. X.
Another Argument for the former Concluficn.
A Fourth reafon may be drawn from the Defign which Mr.
Booker takes for this Office, which is fuch as would make
any Nation tremble to think upon, an Erection of the greateft
Tyranny which ever was exercifed in any Commonwealth; you
fliall find it defcribed in the 36, 37 pages where before ; For
fir', he is Treafurer ; this may be without exception. Second-
ly, he muft addreffe himfelf to receive what is brought into the
Treafury, but mark, not what is, but what ought to be brought
into the Treafury,, to be committed to his Trun\ for this (briefly
. I will
The oppofwg Arguments anfrvered. 43
tfwill fct down his fenfe ) pnrpofe he muft inform himfelf, by
advice and counfel from the body, what every mans Free- will
Offerings fhould be-, this upfhot refultsourofhisDifcourfes,
that only Free-will Offerings fhould be accepted ; yet beaufe
the maintenance of Church and poor mull: not be arbitrary, they
muft underftand mens Eftates as well as they c«n , if tb*y be
negligent, admonifh them, then if they ftirr nor, goto vhrifts
Discipline, tell the Church : and fo upon contempt of that, to
Ecclefiaftical Cenfure. To this purpofe he cites two places, Dent.
16. 10. and Lcvit. 22. 18, 19. In both which places, if he had
tranferibed the words without further trouble there could
have no more appeared , but that men fhould bring their Free-
will O flferings, and then do thisor this, but the Sin lay upon him
who was to bring it in, he was not to be compelled to it, nor do
they, perhaps they will fay ; but I will reply, Ecclefiaftical Cen-
fure of putting out of the Church, making a man an Heathen, is
the greateft Compulsion in the World, and as they order it up-
on the Confutation and Advice ofthe Deacon ( it will arife to be
upon the Imagination of the Deacon ) and inftead of his Judge-
ment, perhaps oftentimes, unlefTe they be better than thofe the
Apoftles ufed before this election, the partial Affe&ion ofthe
Deacon, which would betray Souls to a moft unhappy and ar-
bitrary Government for Religion, for Eftates.
SEC T. XL
The oppofwg Arguments anfrvered.
UPon thefereafons I am perfwaded, that the Office of a
Deacon was not ?ftablifhed inthatof^f&f 6. to be as a
rule for all Churches, but onh ? thefe Eminent Men Chofen out
of and Authorized in thisgreat Exigence toexercifethat duty in
the Church at that time^ and thus I have difproved thofe An-
fwers which Mr. Hooker fcems to frame to my reafons^ his Ar-
guments for confirmation of his Jaufc I fhall undertake in a
more proper place prefently •, yer leaft men may think I intro-
duce a new Opinion into the world , know, that this was the
Opinion of St. Chrjfcfto/n, ana Oecumenitts ; i^'/*/ in 4 Sent, di ft.
E z 24, Seel,
* ' ■■ ■
a a Whether there befuch an Office, &>c,
24. Se&. 18. obferves as much ; and for OecnmentH*, throws
him out with Cftjtu Authority non ita magni eft momenti -, For
St. ChrjfoFiom (it is in his 1 4 Homily upon the Alls , about the
middle) he faith, it is fo obfcurc, that it may be fufpe&ed of
Corruption I anfwer, it is very clear, and no man will corrupt
a Father without a defign , which cannot appear in this what it
fhould be ; but rather than yield , he will charge the reft of his
Do&rine, becaufe, faith he, he affirms, non fnijfe Efifcopos
tunc in kccltfta, when Alls I. it isfaid, let another take his
Bifioprickj To this I reply, that he faith not there were no Bi-
(hops, but Apoftolosfolos^only the Apoft/es, and this is true, nor
Pxesby ter neither yet, as will appear hereafter. But now it may
be enquired, Was there no fuch Office as that of a Deacon pre*
per to the Church?
SECT. XII.
Whether there be fuch an Office as a Deacon
proper to the Chwrch ?
YEs, without queftion, in the r o(Tim. 3.8. St. Panl de-
icribesatlargetheQualificationsoffuchaman who rnuft
be chofen to that Office. I (hall need no proof of it, becaufe all
confent to this Conclufion • but ifa mart fhauld enquire when
and where he was Ordained, I muft anfwer, I know not •, nor
do I fincknyRegifterofitintheNewTeihment^ nor amongft
any learned men any Confcnt; the greateft is upon that place
in the 6. of the Alls, which feems to me to be built upon weak
grounds- the Church of Rome in general makes all their feven
Ordes to be erefted at the Inftkution of the Communion by our
Saviour- but I leave that imagination as of no moment, iince
there is no word in Scripture which feems to countenance it, and
twill pafle from this Queftion to the other ^ What his Office
wasiodo?
CHAP,
\
Mr. Hookers Opinion^ &Cu examined. 45
C H A P. ViL
What is the Office of a Deacon.
THE Office what it was, receives the greateft . Migration
from his Name, which iignifies.a.Minifier, a Servant to
the Eccleflaftical Officers, Biihop$ or Presbyters-, fo that as
when a man is known to be a Minifter or Servant to another, he
is by that made apparent to dofuch things as Conduce to the
affilhnce of him who is his Superiour or prelate in his Office,
fo do thefe in refpeft of their Superiours, Bifhops andPresby-
• ters. I do not find one word in Scripture letting down what
their Office was , we can therefore have no knowledge of it,
but from the Hirtory of the Church, from which we receive,
that their Office was to Baptize, to affiTt at the Communion
with delivering the Cup, and fometimes the Body; but not to
Confecrate ; fo likewife to a/filt in the Divine Service ; fome
other things we find various, according to the Cuftoms of Chur-
ches, but all thefe are fubordinate and minifterial Offices ; like-
wife they had power to preach upon particular occafions and
licenfes given, to wit, by that Order they had a qualification
to receive a Licenfe-, thefe things I can particularly give an
Account to be the fenfe of the Ancient Church, if any man re-
quire it, but are loath, alfo to lofe Time about it^ only I will
now undertake Mr. Hooker.
SECT. IX.
Mr. Hookers opinion concerning a. Deacon
examined^
HE therefore, Part 2- Chap. 1. falfly printed, for Chap. 2I
P a g e 33- in his third Acception of his Deacon, defines
Kim thus,
Laftly, when it ( that is, this word Deacon ) is taVen (hortly,
and as it concerns our purpofe in hand, it fetsout fuch.Qfficers
who-
a 6 Mr. Hookers opinion, &>c. examined.
who are defigned by the Church, to difpofe the State and Trea-
sures, to thofe feveral purpofes for which God hath appointed
them, as theoccafions and necefiitiesof the body, and any mem-
ber thereof may require.
This is his definition, or rather defenption at large of a Dea-
con, which I conceive to be very fhort, becaufe ic touchech but
the poor- concerning whofe Care I acknowledge, that in the
primitive Time there were certain perfons employed, becaufe
thofe times were times of perfecuaon , and the poor of the
Church could not exift without fome fuch Collections by
Church Officers to take care of them ^ but that this was the fole
Office of a Deacon I deny. He proves it thus . Rowans 12. 8.
He that diftribntes, &c. Here ( faith he ) the Apoflle reckons
thefe as a diftind kind from thofe that went before. In our
Tranflation it is, he thatgiveth ^ or in the Margent , imparteth
and that moft naturally* but to make it an Office, he changeth
the phrafe : Well , from hence, in this place, he thus argues.
Here, faith he , the Apoftlc reckons thefe as diftinft Offices.
This Term ( thefe ) might well relate to Prophefy, to Mini-
ftry, in the 7th. verfe, as well as the red, which is the moft ge-
neral way with the Ancient Fathers difcourfe upon that Text^
but he explayned himfelf before in the firfb Chapter of this 2d.
part, pag. 8, 9. That Prophefy is a Genu* to Teaching and Ex-
hortation , and thefe two diftinft Offices under that one head,
of which I ftiall difcourfe hereafter, (God willing^ • but giving ,
or, as he calls it, diftributing, ruling, (hewing mercy, are three
diftindt Species's or feveral Officesunder dl/anovia, or Miniftry :
fo then this word (thefe) muftbeby him applyed only to thefe
five at the laft named; which expofition hehrd, as he acknow-
ledgeth, from Bez,a t and before him, as I find, none. For Cal-
vin himfelf, upon that place, feems to make allthef* diftind
Gifts ^ but I pafTc by this, and will examine his Ground upon
which he builds. [ It being ( faith he ) the Apoftles aime by a
Similitude drawn from the body, vtr.j.. to difcover feveral parts,
by the Adions.which were in a peculiar manner appropriate to
them • as there are many Members in the body, and all have not
one Ofnce or Adion, To in the Church there be many Mem-
bers, but their feveral Offices appropriate to them. ] Whereas,
werethisaChriftian Duty common to all, he fliould overthrow
his
Rom. i a. 8. Expounded. aj
Bis own purpofe ^ for he fhould have fhewed things agreeing to
all alike, whenheftiould have (hewed that fome things are
peculiar. Thus I have let down his words , and the Argu»
ments, as by him usged.
SECT. III.
Rom. 12. 8. Expounded.
HEre he puts me to a great deal of Trouble to enlarge my
felf in expounding this place, which I intend to do, and
Ihew what I conceive of it, and then refute his imagination,
and (hew how inconfiftent ic is with thefenfe of thefe words
He begins his Expofition from the 4th, verfe of the iz. Chap.
to the Romans ; but he that will expound it aright muft go fur-
ther, becaufe that verfe begins with a For, and that relates to
the 3d. verfe, and that likewife begins with another For 9 which
muft look upon what went before. Let us therefore firft exa-
mine the firft verfe -, I befeechyau, &c, prefent your bodies, &<;.
which is yourreafonablefervke-, verf. 2. Be not conformed, &c.
but be transformed y &c. that y on may prove what Is that good, that
acceptable and perfeEb will of God : The prefenting the body a
facrifice, the not conforming to the world, the transforming by
renewing the mind, all tend to this, that we may pr&vs yphat is
that good and acceptable, &c. that is, have fome Arguments by
which you may know it ; he that doth thus mortify, &c. and
prefents his body thus, that doth transform and eonforra his
mind, (hall find Arguments to prove what is Gods will for him
to do- verf. 3d. For I fay unto- you \ &c. you ought to know
this, becaufe ye ought to perform this will of God -, therefore
do thefe things which may make you prove it. Now this good
and acceptable will of God, is, that y$u do not thinkjoo highly ,
for higher,) for this phrafe (ofhimfelf) is a Gloffe of our Tran-
slators, not the Text- and indeed this fame too high thinking,
whether it concerns a mans felf, or his work he hath to do, isthat
which difturbs a man in his duty, whatsoever he is, or it is ;
as if he think himfelf too good to be an hearer only, it makes
him thruft himfelf into the preachers office • or when be hath
that
4$ No Argument can be enforced^ &c.
that Office , he thinks too highly of bimfelf , that he is too
£Ooifor it; or when he thinks too highly of that Duty which
he doth, it makes him,with the Pharifec, defpife his brothc^wh©
is not excellent or eminent in that way • fo thar this fame high
thinking puts a man befides the way of Gods will • and there-
fore he adds, but to think, foberiy, temperately, modeftly • he
muftnot yln* fapere^ think more or higher than his Condition,
but he mud think foberlv, be lowly in his own eyes, not to in-
trude into others bufinefTe, or go beyond his own salification,
according as God hath dealt to every man the meafure of FMth :
By Faith I conceive as moft do, Fidelky ^ that is then, accor-
ding as he is intruded by God , according to that meafure of
truft which God hath layd upon him • there will not be diffe-
rence, I gueffe, about that, and therefore I let it parte j verfe 4.
For as Vve have many members in one body, and all members have
net the fame office ; fo We being many areoneb&dyin Chrifi y and
every one members one of another.
SECT. IV.
No Argument can be enforced from a Simile,
farther than the Para/ell leads.
HEre we fee all Chriftians are one body, of which Chrift is
the head ; that as they have a duty towards the head , of
obedience, fo they being fellow members, one towards another,
have that duty one towards another as fellow member, not to-
think too highly, but to confider their mutual afliftance each
ought to give to the other. Here now, if I would flop, let us
Confider, how it were poffible to urge me farther : Compan-
ions are not to be haled and pulled farther than the Letter, there
may be more in one part, than another-, but an Argument can-
not be drawn farther than the Comparifon leads. It is true, St.
Paul faith, in the 4th. verfe, that all members have not the fame
office • but can I force that to the parallel, when St. Paul doth
not mention it? We may find the like in many places of Scrip-
ture, as that parable of our Saviour of the Sower of the Tares,
Mat. 13. where our Saviour expounds pieces of the parable ;
we
Diverfe Gifts and Offices , &>c. aq
we may according to thofe pieces, from thence draw Argu-
ments in Queftions of Religion ; but from the reft, which he
expounds not, the Arguments will be but probable; fo here!
may fay, Mr. Hookers Argument is weak, becaufe members have
diverfe offices in the natural body ; and St. Paul faith, we area
body, and one anothers members, like the other fo far , but lea-
ving out the reft, and diverfe Offices diftind •, might I not fay,
that this doth not enforce it. But let us go on : I will not fay fo;
for although I think this Text doth not enforce it , yet I think it
true Doctrine, That there are diverfe Offices in the body of the
Church, like diverfe members in the body-, An/elm, H. Ra-
bantu Manrns^ with others, have parcelled them in their Com-
ments on this Text, Let us now go on.
Although it betrueDodrine, that as in the body many mem-
bers have diftind offices *and abilities to perform their dutyes,
which are not competible to other : fo it is in the Church, there
are diverfe Members, which have diftind Offices, and thofe Of-
fices affifted with diverfe Graces peculiar to them, and not to o-
thers; yet this Text goes, nottodifcourfe of the diftindion of
Officers, but of the Manage of them : It never parallels that,
( and all Member t have not the fame Office ) but only that (Yte art
one body \ and one another s Members.)
S E C T. V.
Diverfe Gifts and Offices.
HAving then, &c. I will ftand upon no Criticifm here , to
talk of an Hebraifm without neccflity ; methinks the Text
is full; having then diverfe Gifts ; mark, diverfe Gifts: there
are many Organical members , which have befides jtheir Offi-
ces, Abilities and Gifts, as beauty, ftrengtb, and the like, which
arepowcrfull Kftibznts ad bene oferandum % to do their Office
more dexteroufly and commendably ; Now then as we find
amongft us there are diverfe Officers, and diverfe Gifts amongft
thefe Officers, Abilities of utterance, of knowledge, and the like,
fo may in thefe men here fpoken of •, but indeed, the very Au-
thority is a Gift of God, to do thefe things of God, and thefe
G Autho-
£jo Diver fe Gifts and Offices,
Authorities or Gifts wh.ufoever are diftinguifhed by the Grace
of God that is given us, not our own Merits, but his Favour and
Grace, both gives the Gift and the Difference • but fince it is a
Gift of a Member, therefore it muft be ufed to the good of the
Members, and not for our own private ends : and here the Apo-
ftle doth not make that divifion of Gifts fo contradiftind, that
they cannot come together . but faith, that whatfoever Gift any
man hath of doing good, as he muft acknowledge it the Gift of
God, fo he muft ufe it to the good of his Neighbour, whether
Prophefy or Minifiry : that this is the fenfe, appears out of that
claufe in the Similitude not parallel'd. So we fee it doth by
this Inftance made by the Apoftle, where is no oppofidon in the
perfons, but only a difference in Gifts, which may well be in
the fame Office, without any inconfiftency orreludancy. If
any man will fee this Difcourfe more fully, let him read the fame
Apoftle i Cor. 12.4. There Are diverfities of Gifts , but the fame
Spirit; then go to verfe 9, 10. To one is given bj the Spirit
the word of vnfdom, &c. Ler any man perufe them all, and fee
whether they were Offices or Gifts, and the fame word is ufed
for thofe Gifts there as here, which is x^-'O"^ and in the 12.
verfe, to make thefc places meet, he deduceth the fame Simile
out of thefe premiffes of thefe Gifts, as in this Text hededuceth
the Condition or Scope of the Gifts from that Simile : fo that
then I conclude fome of thefe Ciks being the fame, are ufed
there, the word the fame that is ufed there , and it is im-
poffible to force thofe to Offices • therefore it fhould be a vio-
lence to force thefe : let U9 come to the particulars, whether
Prophefy ,&c. Whether this be an Office, or no, is hard to deter-
«ine, lamfureitismemionedamongft thofe were no Offices,
1 Cor. 12. 10. But let us conceive what it is? It is poflible that
it was the Gift of Prophefy to foretell the will of God concern-
ing things to come, of which there were diverfe in the firft Age of
the Church ; or elfe by Prophefy may be meant preaching,
which expounds the will of God revealed in Scripture: of both
which I may juftly affirm that of St. Paul 1 Cor. 14. 3. He that
frophefjeth Jpeakjth unto men to Edificatkn., and to Exhortation
and Comfort.
SECT.
A Conceit offome Commentators refuted. $ i
SECT. VI.
A Conceit offome Commentators refuted.
NOw fee here the Conceit of Beza, Tolet the Jefuit, ( I
know not which had it from the other ) Cornelius a La-
fide^ with other late Writers upon this place of my Text in hand;
fee how vain their Conceits are who make Prophefy here a Ge-
nt** of Teaching and Exhortation, becaufe they would make them
two r orts of Officers; and Prophefy only a general name pre-
dicated of them ; when St. Paul makes Edification, which is the
fame with Teaching and Exhortation, to be Gifts or qualities
of a Prophet, both belonging to the fame Offices.
Concerning Prophefy.
prophefy, if you will, is a Gift fometimes as well as an Office,
every Office is a Gift, but not every Gift an Office; but whether
Prophefy be taken for a Gift, or an Office; it is not a(7r-
niu to the other two, but the other are rather Integral parts or
qualifications belonging to it : and therefore I wonder at thefe
men, that they expound this Text to fuch an impofTible Senfe,
Hooker gives this reafon, becaufe % faith he, #*&?/ the Clergy mult not be altogether
tapon the receiving hand, there is time and place for them to
give, as well, yea rather than others, and take Care of the
poor, and have bowels of Compaflion towards them , and by
their* good Example exhort others to do as they do. I have
been fomethrng too tedious here^ but this will fave future
labour.
SECT. X.
His Second Argument refuted.
HIS Second Argument to prove his kind of Office, is drawn
from the! i Tim. tl 8. where the Defcription how he
muft be qualified, is fet down : I grant it , but is it fet down,
that he is an Officer to difpofe Church Treafure, and nothing
elfe, which hedifputcs for? For he offers atfucha thing, and
therefore that place, in his own Judgement, can fpeak nothing,
for it proves only, that there is fuch an Office as a Deaco^ and
how he fhould r be qualified, but no one word what the duty of
that Office is, and therefore he draws no Argument from it, but
o only
His fir ft Argument y &c. anfwered. t j
only fets it down with a figure of 2. for his fecond Argument,
although he argue nothing from it.
His Third Argument refuted.
His Third Argument is drawn from the place before hand-
led, A&s 6. to which I have (I doubt not J fpoken e-
nough s but that it may appear wherein he and 1 agree, and
wherein differ, inthispointi Confidcr with me, that he faith,
that this was a publike Office-, I grant it. Secondly , that this
fervice was about Tables : I grant it. Thirdly, page 3 5, that
the full and carefull attendance upon this work, could not ftand
with carefulLconftant,and confeiencious Attendance upon the
Miniftry of the Word, as the Office of a Minifter fo employed
did require - 9 This I deny : becaufe I have proved they were
Minifters of the Word, and have before anfwered his Argu-
ments drawn from the Apoftles, It u not meet \&c. verf. 3. and
donowadde^ It is one thing to fay, It is not meet-, another to
fay, It is inconfiftent, it cannot ftand with it. Again, many
things might be and were fit for Inferior Minifters, which were
not fit for the Apoftles : It is not meet ^ was truly faidby the
Apoftles ; But now I doubt, whether this Office was for this
occafien only, or for their lives. 1 2dly. affirm, as before, that
thefe men were Minifters. And 3%, I deny that this was of
that Deacon St. Paul fpeaks of, and was after ufed in the Church.
His continued Difcourfe is but a repetition , only a paffionatc
expreffion or two, that we moke a Deacon halfaPrieft, or a
Preparation to it, and he faith, that this was the firft In-let into .
theUfurpationofBiihops. I let thefe things pafTe, and come to
hisDifputeagainftus.
His Firft Argument from Keafon y
Anfwered.
THat which is made by Chrift a diftinft Office from Pa-
ftor and Teacher, that cannot be any part of either, or a
preparation to either. But fo the Office of a Deacon is.
H I
^8 His ad. and 3d. Arguments anjrvered.
I anfwcr : That, Firft, I deny that ever the Office of a Dea-
con was inftituted by Chrift • but by the Apoftles. Secondly,
although I grant that the Apoftles inftituted this 03 ce diftind:
from them, yet k may be a preparation or part of either • for
that which is a preparation , is diftind from that it is prepared
for, and although all the parts united together do not differ re-
ally from the whole, yet any one part doth. And Thirdly, I fay,
that although it were neither part nor preparative, yet it may
be fubfervient to them , in which Confifts the Office of a
Deacon.
His Second Argument from Keufon^
anjwered.
His Second Argument : That Office which is to attend Ta-
bles, hath nothing to do with Paftors, or Dodor*, &c.
But this Office is to attend Tables.
To the Major : That Office may do both, thofe in the Atts
did.
To the Minor h I deny that the Office of a Deacon is folely
to attend Tables • but if he leave out that word folely y his whole
Argument is larae : that which he urgeth out of v#7.f 6. is not
to the purpofe, for as I may deny them to be Deacons, becaufe
never fo called in the Scripture : fol do deny them to be thofe
Deacons St. P^/dire&s, 1 Tim. 3.
His Third Argument anjwered.
His Third Argument : If the Apoftles who were extraordi-
nary perfons, could not, (hall men of ordinary Abilities
be fufricient ?
I have anfwered this before. It is no where faid, that they
could not, they could without doubt have done much more- but
as they were men of extraordinary abilities, fo they were men
of extraordinary employments •, and it was not meet, that that
employment fhould be impeded by any of thefe leffe affairs.
Again, we deny that the Office of a Deacon exafts the duty of a
Pafto**
• i .Tir^w ■■ . - a.: * - ■ i - -
Of a Ruling Elder, ^ y
Paftor from him, but only that he fhould minifter to the pallor,
which he may do well with fuch a Charge upon him.
Page 36. Number 3. I nnderftand not thofe Figures • He
faith fomewhat that would be anfwered,
Another Argument from 1 Tim. 3. 8.
anfwered.
THE Gifts of Deacons which are required by the Apoftle,
are fuch as will not furnifh a man to be a Minifler ; ( he
means a Presbyter, I think) for fuch fhould be Apt to teach :
to be a teacher, an8 not apt to teach, i* to be a Bell without a
Clapper.
I could anfwer this in his own Coyn, but I love not fcurrility
and fharpnefle inthefe Grave and Serious things; they tafte not
of that lowlinefle of mind which fhould be amongft fellow
Members.
I anfwer therefore • That the Gifts of Deacons are not fuch
as qualifie a Bifhop, of which St. Paul (pake there ; but I will
tell you, very like them; and as that Claufe is not inferted to a
Deacon, that he fhould he apt to teach : fo it is not required of
him^ but when he is found fit toteach,anditisrequired,hemay:
I think I have fpoken enough to him. If I knew any more of
this kind, I would not account it loft time to handle it, aJthough
tyred with this.
CHAP. VIIL SECT. I.
Of a Ruling Elder.
TH E next particle or Branch of Ecclefiaftical Authority
which I will undertake to handle, is that they call a ru-
ling Elder, or a Lay Elder : he is called an Elder, but I am confi-
dent that the Name is new, and the Office not known in the Pri-
mitive Church ; nor hath any mention in Scripture, but by phan-
H 2 fy.
60 What tbofeLay Elders are, &c>
fy. Now to underftand this, I (hall firft (hew, what manner of
Office this man is imagined to have, and then anfwer fbch Argu-
ments as are brought for him 5 and fo Conclude, with mine own
reafons againft him : Firft, the Examination of his Office, what
it is to do, is fet down by Mr. Hooker, Part 2. Chap. 1. pag. 16.
I will not tranferibe all he faith, but fct down the heads.
SECT. II.
itfhat thofe Lay Elders are, according to
Hooker.
BEfore the Aflembiy meet, he is of the Common Council, and
his voyce is to be taken in with the reft in the Confultation
and Confideration of the bufineffe, ( by which, I think, he means
the bufineffe fliould be agitated that day ) Here he ciphers out
3. places of Scripture, I think to no fach purpofe • read them he
that will, Heb. 13. 17. 1 Cor. 12. 28. ^#/20. 28.
When Offences- are to be brought to the Congregation, it be-
longs to them to ripen and prepare the bufineffe, by way ofprae-
confideration, to ftate the Caufe right, &c.
Thirdly, when the Church is met, he may interpofe his Judg-
ment, without asking leave.
Thefehehathin Common with other Elders : what he hath
peculiar to himfelf, i$j
Firft, vifiting the Sick, and fach as are any way under Spiri-
tual wants, thefe men (houid fend for thefe Elders, and they (hall
be the phyfitians of their Souls i for this he quotes fames 5. 14.
but no word there, of a Lay Elder.
Secondly, by the fame reafon he (hould feek out fuch, and vi-
fit them.
Thirdly, He is to make peace amongft Members.
Fourthly, If there be a Fame of* Member, that he misbe-
haves himfelf to wards fuch as arc without, (that is, I think, not
of their Church) by which the Church may be fcandahzed, he
is to enquireof the Truth, and ( I think) inform, or elfe a41 is in
vain.-
Fifthly, He istoConfider of the perfons that are. to be ad*
mitted
Whether any fuch Elders, &c. 6 1
mkted into the Church , and to pronounce Excommunicati-
ons.
Thus, in general, we fee what manner of Office this is ; let us
now examine , whether there be fcmblances of any fuch thing
in Scripture, which they pretend fhould be the Guide in thefe
Affairs. And Firft, I will begin where I left; for that, in the
firft place, he cites Romans 12.8. Ashe found a word for his
Deacon, He that diflributes : fo he hath another for his Elder,
He that r filet b 9 with diligence.
SECT. III.
Whether any fuch Elders truly in Scripture.
THis Queftion Mr. Hooker enters upon in the fame 1 ft. Chap,
ter o?the 2d. Part, pag. 8. Here he faith, he hath nothing
to doe but with the Hierarchical party, whofe main Arguments
are, a Purfuivant , and a Prifon , armed with Authority of aa
High Commiflion. This man, ( I obferve ) though civil in ma-
ny places to others , yet very paffionately bitter, when any
thing crofles him, to fpeak againft thatCaufe which I conceive
right, and do not doubt but I (hall prove it. Firft, he under-
takes to prove this Office, that there is fuch an Office, from the
former place; but goes now fomewhat higher, Rom. 12. 7. He
argues for it firft, thus; The Gifts here mentioned and conside-
red, are not fuch as have reference to a Civil, but to an Ecdefi-
aftical Condition; fo the words, verf. 5. we are one body in
Chrift. This is po ftrong Argumenr,we are one body in Chrift,
therefore that which is fpoken of that body or members, muft be
Eccleliaftical, not Civil. In the fame body , confifting of the
members of Chrifts Church, his my fticalbody* there are many
Civil Duties, even as they are Chriftians,exa&ed from them^and
2s members of that body : Duties of Kings to Sub jeds, of Sub-
jects to Kings, Husbands to Wives, and theirs to their Husbands,
betwixt Mafters and Servants, and fo they mutually-, a iittfe of
this Divinity will make all things Eccleilaftical, and reduce all
Obedience for Chrifts fake to a Paftor or Teacher, an Elder
or Deacon, Secondly, the Operations which iflue from thefe
Functions -
(S i An Argument anfwtrttL
Functions evidence as much, Prophefjing, &c. Exhorting^&c.
I would be had put in {hewing mercy too, but we fee they do
not • /hewing mercj, giving, ruling, may relate to any member
of this body. There is nothing therefore in thefe Arguments
that enforce, thefe fhould be Ecclefiaftical duties of members in
the myftical body of Chrift.
He hath another Figure of 2, I think he means by' it another
Argument for the Caufe, that is, pag. 9.
An Argument of bis anfrvered.
Gifts here, are not fuch as are Common, and belong to all
Chriftians,as Faith, Hope, Charity, &c.
What if they are not ? are they Ecclefiaftical Orders ? that
will never follow ^ but he proves it, although to no purpofe, if
it were proved.
Fir ft, thofe Gifts are here meant , by which the Members of
the body are diftinft one from another, and have feveral Ads
appropriate to them. He proves that, becaufe verfe 4. tc.
word is again ufedinthis Chapr. a little after this Text, verfe
I 9. Against an Elder receive not an Acctifation, but before tvfo
cr three jvitneffes • Kow an Elder is underltood here, is difputa-
ble : The Grecians i Sc. Chryfofiome, TheopbyUtl, Oecumenitu,
imderftand an Elder in Age only, as £f** obferves ^ but it is
not fo univerfally true, as he affirms ; for Theodoret upon that
place expounds it of a Presbyter by Office^ and the Latines , St.
Ambrofe, &c with one Confent fuppofeit an Office. Here is a
difference , and the Arguments of no moment that arc brought
of one fide or the other, nor much material •, for the Doctrine
15 true of the lead Elder, there is Capitis reverentia Cam, fomc
Civility to be paid to Gray hairs ; fuch men fhould not fo eafily
beaccufed, or if they be, Accufations not fo eafily entertained,
as thofe are made againft others •, but I have writ this , to fhew
that this word Elder is not alwayes taken for an Officer, no not
in this Epiftle, in this Chapter ; yet here I doubt not but it is ta-
ken for an Ecclefiaftical Officer, both becaufe of the word
rule, as likewife labour in the word-, but whether two Officer*
or one, will be quellioned.
SECT. V.
That Elder here figmftes but one Office.
Frft, no man can (hew anywhere in the NewTeftament
any ufage of this word, but either for a meer Senior in
Age, or this one Presbyter, which is the Ecclefiaftical Officer ;
and befides this place,they themfelvcs will Confefs, that no ftrong
Argument can be produced, it were hard then, if there were no-
thing elfe, that thi9 word here fhould enforce it. Again , this
word Elder is ufed but once, which hath influence upon both
thefe Aftions of ruling and labouring, which were not proper
in Speech , if they were two Offices, without fome Term of
Diftihftion^ for it would be more rightly and figrrificantly pur>
an Elder that ruleth, and an Elder that laboureth- but this word
Elder being named but once, it fhould feem to enforce but one
Office, with diverfe A&ions:, for there are bnt two forts of El-
ders, as I find ; either that Lay Elder, which is an Elder by Age,
^r
What Ruling well, labouring, &c. imports. 6j
or an Ecclefiaftical Elder, who is defcribed how he fhould be
quaiifyed, either in the 3d. Chapter of this Epiftle, or thefirft
vfTitHi •, but the firft fort are not pretended to here, nor the
fecond as they pretend ; forae other word then muft afford ir,
not this word Elder.
SEC T. VI.
What Ruling well inrports.
THe next is, rule tye/l, that is, certainly, Govern his flock
Committed to him; now this word will imply no diftin-
dion from the other, presbyter, by their own Confent , this is
a part of that other teaching Elder, he is a Ruler too ; and if a
Ruler, then no doubt, if a good teacher, he rules well - 9 orelfeas
may happen out, he may be a good Teacher, and a weak Ruler ,
and again, a good Ruler, and a weak Teacher : So that if Ruling
do not make a diftin&ion in the Office, ruling well doth not; for
Offices are not difhnguiftied by the diligence or qualities of their
Officers, the men that ufe them, but their Officers, the men
that ufe them, by their Offices ; there are good and bad in every
Office, and fo in the Miniftry, but hisgoodncfTeor badnefTe in
Execution of his Office makes a Man a good or bad Officer,
but not of another kind of Office. By this phrafe then, that m-
leth well, cannot be underftood any thing which can enforce a
new Office , r will therefore remove to the 3 d. phrafe, ( labour
in the Word and Deftritte.
SECT. VIL
What w Labouring in the Word.
AND certainly, this phrafe yields no matter for an Argu-
ment againft the unity of this Office * for he nor they
cannot deny, but that both thefe are joyned in one,that the fame
man who is a Labourer in the Word, is a Ruler ; but let us ob-
ferve, that this word Labour fignifies an induftrious and pain-
I 2 full
s.
62 Hie force of the word Efpccially.
full doing that he labours for •, fo that it is more than an ordina-
ry profecuting his undertaking : Now both thefe,phrafes being
affirmed of that one word Elder, they cannot fignifie diverfe
■Officers, but diverfe performances in that Office- that one
man is more carefull in Ruling, another in Teaching; the one
rules well, the other labours welL
SECT. VIIL
What Double honour fignifies.
WE willpafleto the 4th. (Doubt* honour,) that is by all
underftood to be a double proportion, or much larger
maintenance than that of Widows • 1 will not trouble it there-
fore ^ but confidering that it is but once ufed, though in two
places applyed, as double honour to Rulers well, and much ra-
ther to Labourers, it being the fame word and fenfe in both,
and in both applyed diftinftly where diftin&ly put, and implyed-
fy where implyedly put, as the fame word Elder is exprefly or
implicitely deliyered ; that therefore cannot enforce a Diffe-
rence ; if ic be any where, it mud be in [etfccMlty.l
SECT. IX.
The force of the word Efpectally.
BUT neither doth that do it-, for that addes but an Encreafe
of the Debt, when ma]vu & minus non variant Jpeciem ■ it
is due to one, but rather there is a greater Obligation to the
other, not another due • or if there were another Debt, yet
that would not prove another kind of Office, but moreobliging
Ads of that Officer. It is then, as if we (hould fpeak of Shep-
herds • that Shepherd deferves bis wages who takes care of his
flock, even he that (hall fold them at night carefully, and let
• them out in the morning, and do many Shepherdly duties • but
when there are diverfe Shepherds belonging to the fame flock,
lie (hall bed or chiefly defer veir,. who having Cunning to-do k,
(hall:
The Arguments anfwered* 6$>
fiiall induflrioufly, and with great labour of his owrx, car«thek
Difeafes, and heal them, and both thefe may be Shepherds, and
deferve their wages, but efpecialiy the latter, and yet not diftinft
Offices > y and the firit fort may grow up to the latters abilities,
and then as well deferve as he; or as we may fey of a Privy
Counfellor, he hath a two-fold relation, to the Subject and to
the King - he deferves his honor well, that rules well ; but efpe-
cialiy he that advifeth his King well : yet thefe are not two Offi-
ces, but two dutyes of the fame Office, and, as we have feen, di-
lund Abilities have^hewn themfelves in thefe diverfeErTe&s-
This is the fenfe of the Text, there are two duties in thefe El-
ders, to rule, tolabour in the Word and Do&rihe • they that
rule well, anddothat piece well, are worthy of double honour,
but efpecialiy they that labour in the Word andDodrine, thek
flock ought to have a more particular Care of them * thus the
Text being explained, as appears to me clearly , the next thing
to do, will be to vindicate it from fuch Arguments which feem
to be deduced out of this Text, for that Imaginary Office which
isfomuchboanedof, to be already with great Evidence con-
firmed by it.
S E C T. X.
i
The Arguments anfwered.
MR. Hooker, where before, Parti. Chap. 2. p. 13. thus
layes his Foundation : the words carry a diftribution,
o/^tv, 0/ cfte, oi^aKisot
it is Ruling-Elders, and teaching Elders*,: bmldenytharjpiopcv
fltlOBi
jo The Argument anfrvered.
ficion abfolutely,. It is nor a ruling Elder and a reaching Elder,
but fuch ruling Elders and fuch Teachen, which labour not in the
Word ; There is a great difference in this frnfe, it is a Ulacy
a bene fonjunttis ad male divifa : fee it explained, every Elder is
a ruling Elder, but if he rule ill, he is not worthy of Double ho-
nour, no, he deferves reproof j It was a mighty falacy put up-
on the Reader, to fay the Companfon is made between ruling
Elders and preaching : when the words of the Text fay ,
k is fuch as rule well, and Teaching Elders are not the (e-
cond branch, Extemporary preachers have nothing to do with
it, but fuch as labour and take pains in the Word, as St. Chry.
fofiom rnoft excellently defcancs upon chat place • and the very
letter introduced] it Komocd, from whence K07r/£mc> here ufed,
fignifieth as much asone that with great labour and pains effect -
eth what he doth ^ not the Sweat in the Pulpit but the Study, as
may be more apparent, is it, which makes him capable of this
Double honour. I wonder much at the Write* therefore , not
that he was deceived, for \hzx.\$ humamm y fubjed to humane
nature ^ but that he who feemsfo punctual in Logiek, ftiould
offer fuch a fallacy, the fraud whereof is fo manifeft; but he goes
on, and J.
It is (faith he) cfpecially to be obferved, that their Works are
not the Things compared, but theperfons notified by the kind
of their Works ^ for the words are not, the Elders becaufe they
rule well, and becaufe they labour , but thofe Elders that are
ruling, thofe Elders that are labouring in the Word.
See again, what a mift he layes before the Readers eyes, in hi*
Exception, he puts thephrafe aright in the firft place, It is not
becaufe they rule well, Rule well is thephrafe of the Text; but
in his affirmative it is (thofe Elders that are ruling) there that em-
phatical Epithete (well) is left out. And then again in his fecond
Exception , That it is not becaufe they labour - 9 there ( in the
word ) is left out- but in his Affirmative it is put in , ( but thofe
Elders that are labouring in the word. ) This is mcer Jugling-,
but to his Senfe. I grant that the perfons are notified by their
Works, although not by fuch kind as he exprefTech ; The per-
fons I grant diftincT, but the diverfe perfons, and the fame Of-
fice, the Office is not diftinft.
He proceeds to this Senfe, that their phrafes are the Sub/eft
of
The Argument anjwered* y I
of the proportion only, and therefore the perform and Officers
being the Thing* compared, k is certain they muft be diftind
perfons. This is the very phrafe , he names here only diftinc%
perfons, which I grant , but dedueeth this Concefiion oat of
that Addition of Offices to perfons, but I will grant they are di-
*ftind Officers w>o ., but .not diftind: Offices, which is the
Queftion.
He goes on : Firft, thofe Conceits vanifh, that Elders are not
attended for their holineffe or private Converfation, I grant it,
but for their demeanour in the Church. Secondly , ( faith hej
nor will the Conceit hold, which faith, there be not diverfe El-
ders, but divers works of one Elder attended, when w y&v 5 cAe^
are perfons compared, not Ads, Thefe phrafes, Sija.iv 8/ M, are
not in the Text , or if they were, it would but inforce diverfe
men, or diverfe Officers, not diverfe Offices, which hernuft
prove, or lie proves nothing to the purpofe ; but Confider how
fallacioufly he deals > y now belabours to prove thence diverfe
perfons, which is granted ; then diverfe Officers, which is gran-
ted, under thefe notions hoping to beguile the heedlefle Rea-
der ; when he never comes elofc to prove diverfe Offices , which
is his only Work.
Afterwards he comes to difcourfeofthe Confequent , as he
calls it, (let bimcall it what he will) I will follow him : The
Confequent part (faith he) of this difcreet Axiom, is, The firft
Elder is worthy of this Double honour, the Second Elder is wor*
thy of Double honour, but with this difference, it is chiefly his
due, (the fecond he means) Firft, in the Order to be attended*
2dly. in meafiire , more of it is due and debt to him. Now
-(faith he) it is well known, it is required that the two parts of
a difcreet Axiom be not only difcreet , but true in themfelves %
I eonfent *, let us fee what he deduceth.
Whence (faith he) again that Conceit utterly vaniiheth, which
makes the Comparifon to be betwixt the two Ads of one man,
namely, the well ruling ofaPaftor is worthy of Double honor,.,
be it alone in itsfelf confidered-, which is an Aflertion grofly
croffe to the rule of Divinity, as the former was to the rale
ofLogidc
What the Logick of hisdeduftion is, I have (hewed, what the
Divinity, will appear anon^ hefeemstoprove it againft DivK
sitythus. £ha£
7 5
Neither ruling nor preaching^ &c.
That Interpretation which make9 the performance of the
leaft part of a Paftoral Calling, though it be with the negled of
the grcatefl: Work, worthy or Double honour •, that is grofly
contrary to the mind of God , and the verdid of Scripture, &c,
rather a double Wo is to be denounced • againfl them, than a dou-
ble honor beftowed upon them.
Eut this Interpretation doth this. £rgo y
SECT. XL
Neither ruling nor preaching are more excellent
absolutely 3 bnt in relation to circun/Jiances.
I Will difcourfe firft upon his Major: Suppofewe now, which
is molt true, that there are diverfe duties In a paftoral U.at ge,
Preaching, Adminiftring Sacraments, Ruling, Guiding his Hock,
put the queft ion which of thefe. is molt excellent, take theradi-
ftinft /»j^»/#^m/0,onlyinthernfelves , without Confideration
of times and perfons, andwhofoever (hall affirm either of thefe
moft excellent or ufefull for the Church, (hall be Confuted by
another, who will fay that at fuch a time or to fuch perfons the
other is moil: neceflary , molt honourable : without queftion to
Heathen people that have not htard of Chrift, preaching is
mod neceflary, No man can come to God, nnleffe he believe that
he #, and that he is a re^arder of them that feek. him diligently ,
Heb. 1 1. 6. But faith comes (?) hearing, Rom. 10. 14. So then,
to that State of men in that Condition preaching is moft neceflary
to generate Faith, and lay the Seeds ©f Religion j but when men
are Converted to a belief in the Principles of Religion , fo that
they are ready to cry out with the Converted people fn Atls 2.
3 7. Men and brethren^ whatfba/l Voe do * then is neceffary and
ufefull that which the Apoftles did with them ^ Baptize, them
after Converfion by preaching,. Baptifm is neceflary, then the
holy Communion tbconfirrnand ftrengchen them in all godli-
neffeandrighteoufnefle. Now it is poflible that a Soul , after
he is Converted, andftudious, himfelfmay perfevere inGod-
lineffe, and improve ( no doubt of it ) without hearing more
Sermons, but by Study and Contemplation , as in the Times
of
Neither ruling nor preachings &c. 73
of perfection mulcitudesdo, and in thofe places where they are
perfecuied, yet their Obedience to Church-difciphne and the
Canons of Ecclefiaftical Government, fuch as concern fuch per-
fons, areneceffry ; yea, becaufe many ad minifter Sacraments
who cannot have the oportunity of Preaching, therefore things
maybe necelTary then and there, and more neceflary than the
other, as likevvife in the Cafe of dying men ; not the Do&or and
Difpucer in the myfteries of Divinity , nor their Lay Elder ,
(whofe duty they make it to vifit the fick , and not to authorize
to preach) are the welcome men- but he chat can bring the Seals
of Gods Covenants by Abfolutionby the Communion, is ne-
celTary. Ccnfider again, Such a Church ( as many there have
been ) which is furnifhed with learned Preschers abundantly, in
fuch a Time a man with difcretion of ruling may be moft: accep-
table • and his endeavours applyed that way will be more grate-
full, and better to Gods Church, than his preaching, where is no
need : and as the ufe of thefe things is in differing places and oc-
c^fions moft neceflary, fo the Application oi men to ihem (fup-
pofing all thefe belonging to every Officer,) in their feveral tic
occafions, deferves Double honour, although they do neglect
that which is moft excellent. It is the moft excellent endow*
ment for a man to be a Scholar, and learned, and the greareft ex-
cellency mans foul is capable of- yet he is an honeft man and de-
ferves honour, that applyes himfelfr to Husb ndry, and a Confci-
encious Manage of a Trade, although he negfecT the heft -, a man
is not bound to be beft, but to be good-, to rule well, not beft^ co
labour in the Word, not to be molt excellent : vea, in fuch Ca-
fes, it is betcer for fuch a mm to apply himf If co ru'ing, than,
preaching, that being more needful!. And ag:in, that ord to
mglect the better, which is inferted in his Maj r, is ©0 harfh
to be applyed upon fuch occafions • for, that is barter for one,
which is not for another, at one tim:in one place, .vhich is not
at another, in another; where there is preaching abunda ■, .nd
many fuch as abound in Divine Eloquence, there prudence of
ruling is more neceflary 3 the beft preachers are not alwayes
the wifeft men. Again, where the Abilities of a man are more
fitted to the one, than to the other, there he ought principally
to apply his Endeavour : fothatifhis Abilitiesin ruling be grea-
ter, he ought to apply himfelf to that moft, and not force him-
K felf.
7 a Another Argument anfwered.
felfto that which his Difpoficion is not fo fit for. Again, as I
faid, to dying men, who can teed their Souls with that Store of
Dodrine which they had ftored themfelves with before, but
lack the Seals of Gods Covenants, thefe are molt neceffary. but
I wonder what a Lay Elder (hould do with them, who muft nei-
ther Preach, nor apply Gods Seals to any ? Again, we may oh-
fcrve out of the Text, that it is not faid, Doth noc preach, the
negative isnot there^ yes he will object, becaufe it is oppofed to
thofe that labour in the Word; It is true: but there is a diffe-
rence betwixt thofe who do not bbour in the Word, and thofe
who do not Preach - Labouring, as I have (hewed, fignifiesone
jnduRrioufly doing it, fpending his main fource and bent to it;
Now they, who finding their Abilities and the neceflities of the
Times and places in which they Converfe, requiring Ruling from
them, rather than Preaching, do noc bend their Endeavours to
preaching, but to ruling, and yet may fometimes preach like-
wife ; as St. Pdttl y who was the molt glorious preacher in the
World, yet took fometimes from preaching to bellow upon ru~
ling : fo may they likewife, who give their labour and endea-
vour to ruling well, take off fome time from it, and give it to
preaching, and yet not be K07n<£v7ec, men labouring in the
Word.
S E C T. XII.
Another Argument anjrvertd.
SO then, to his Argument •, having layd thefe premifles, thus
Expounded, Ianfwer, That labouiing in the Word is not
abfolutely greater to all per fons at all times, in all places, at all
©ecafions. If he urge the Text, that becaufe there is efpecial
Honour due to thefe Labourers , therefore their Labour defer-
ved it. I anfwer, in the dayesof St. Paul, at the planting of.
the Gofpel , it was raoft neceffary 5 but fince not in fuch places
&here it is planted, zly. I deny that upon fuch oecafions, as L
have faid, it is his duty, who finds great abilities in himfelf for
ruling, to labour in the Word, but to labour in that by which
Jie may do moft good, which is ruling. If he Ob;e& , that to
Convert
Another Argument anfrvered. J 5
Convert Souls, is the beft Work, which is the proper Effect of
Preaching. I anfwer, yet when men are Converted, keeping
them in Ecclefiaftical Difcipline is morqbencficial. And again,
although it be the beft Work for him that is excellently Gifted,
yet it is not for him who hath greater Abilities for others, and
kfo for :ic •, and therefore, although he may be more excel-
lent, whoasSt.P**/himfelfdid,canrulewell, and labour in the
Word likewife, yet he may well deferve double honour who
rules well, and more feldom preachctb •, but if he can do both,
have this word efpecially added to his double honour.
SEC T. XIII.
Another Argument anfvpered.
BUT Pag 14. be hath another of the fame, the fame Argu-
ment framed another way with this phrafe , or thus I may
reafon ; If the Apoftle in this Text doth not fpeak only of El-
ders, Preachers, then hefpeaks of Elders no Preachers.
But the firft is true : (what the firft is, I know not, for there
is no fecond, it being but one propofttionj He fpeaks in the
place of fome Elders, which are no preachers, which is thus
proved.
If he fpeak only of Preachers , then there were fome Prea-
cher*, who preached not at all ^ but there be no Preachers who
preach not at all.
The fecond part is pafi: denyal; The Confequence is proved.
If thefe Elders who are molt worthy of double honour are
faid but to labour in the Word : Then they who are accounted
but worthy of, &c. did not labour in the Word, but &c.
I have put down his Argument verbatim word for word , that
the whole force of it may appear , as well as the weaknefTe fliall
be manifeft : And I anfwer in a word, It is one thing not to la-
bour in the Word, and another not to preach it all. To labour t
as I have faid and (hewed out of the Word, is todoitinduftri-
ouQy, with his chief endeavour and mighty which doth not im-
ply that he doth it not at all, yea rather that he doth it, and that
he cannot rule well if not preach at all, but not with hi? might
K 2 and
j6 A Digrejfion concerning Preaching.
and main. I will retort this Argument. If none may preach bur
Clergy Elders, then ic feems here , that thefe muit be Clergy
not Lay Elders, which rule well • for the Text that fay es the one
labours in the Word, implycs with that, that the other doth it,
but not induftriouflf, and therefore mu ft be fuch Elders who
may preach, and would have more honour if they did it labors
oufly, or rather that honour more due.
S E C T. XIV.
A DigreJJion concerning Preaching.
BUT becaufe tbefe men feem to place the whole work of the
Miniftry in preaching, I would learn from fome of them,
whac this preaching is, which they magnifiefo much, which I
could never know to be fo defined, as to make a peculiar Work
of a Minifter, fo that it fhould, as they make it, fwallow up his
run&ion, and belong to none but fuch as they call Ecclefiaftical
Presbyters. I hope it will not be unukful to the Explication of the
Text, nor unprofitable nor unpleafant to the Reader, if I, be-
yond the bounds of an Anfwer digreffea little, to difcourfe of
thisTheam - 9 Labouring in the Word^ is not only labouring with
the Word in the pulpit, but an Indubious and fludious Endea-
vour ^ and therefore, in the 4th. Chapter of this Epiftle,verf. 1 3 .
headvifethT*W0^, to give himfelf unto readings that is, Study-
ing, Exhortation, Do&rine •, and verf. 15. Meditate on thefe
things, this is labouring in the Word, and this labour is fuch as
isexpreffed, liKeanOxe, as he expreffethit verf. 18th. of this
Chapter, Thou [bait not muzzle the mouth of the Oxe that tread-
eth out the Corn: it muft be as much, or greater, or elfe his Ar-
gument would not hold ; It is the labour of the mind by day and
night, reading, meditating.
And fuch are worthy in an efpecial manner of double honour 3
but becaufe the Apoftle advifeth to Exhortation and Doctrine,
and every Ecciefiaftick Officer is not for himfelf, but for the
Church, this reading and meditating, muft not be for his pri-
vate Contemplation, but for the publique, to teach him to rule
well, upon Occafionsto exhort to all piety , to teach the Truth
of
A Digrefpon cone em i ng F re aching. 77
of Gods will, both to believe, and to do all thefe at their feverai
Occafions, not only in the pulpit, but in Writings, and in Con-
ferences : Every man who is fit to be a Presbyter, is not cut ou:
for a popular Auditory, he may have Gifts of an higher ftrain,
and they ought to beftow their pains upon thofe greater dutyes :
As I have heard it was anfwered Erafmus, when he fcrupled to
receive a Benefice in England, becaufe he had not that Language
to teach the people , You teach their Preachers , which is more
thin to teach them v fo may we fay of thefe, that they may te?ch
Preachers, which is a greater Work : Preach to them in Confe-
rence, preach to them in their Writings. I have known in mine
experience a learned man, who had not himfelf the Faculty of
palpit-preiching, yet did more good by directing and teaching
others to preach, and advanced the Caufe of Chrift more than
Twenty peeachers could have done : Did not this Man labour in
the Word think you ? Others again who have not that Conve-
nience of doing it by Conference, have written learned books
for Preachers to ftudy, and by them Preachers preach : Did not
thefe men labour in the Word ? It is reported ofSalvianiu, that
he wrote and penned Homilies, which others preached and re-
peated, which of thefe (think you) was the Preacher ? I think
both : and both took pains, and did their utmofl endeavour, and
laboured in the Word and Do&rine ; perhaps, one could not pen .
exa&Jy, perhaps the other could not Orator, like deliver- or,
perhaps ,. and it is likely, S^lvianta could do both- but his Ser-
mon might ferve both places, and did good and was applauded,,
in both his own Church and his that preached his Sermon ; he
preached, perhaps, in two places at once, and both thefe put.
their Talents out toufe^ and I doubt not but they may hear
Well done , good and faithfu/l Servant , thou haft ken faith full in a.
little, I will make thee Lord over much. But Jet us a little. Confir
4sr what Preaching is,
SE C T>
j
y% What Preaching is.
SECT. XV,
What Preaching is.
o
I Can think it noching but teaching the Gofpel of Chrifr, that
is, his Life for Example, hisDoclrinefor Precepts, and his
Death and Refurre&ion for our Meditation ; now then this is
done by words written or fpoken, either of thefe a man preach-
eth by : He preachech, that writeth fuch Arguments as Convince
or perfwadc, as well as he that fpeaks them-, yea, perhaps, doth
more by that, and makes an Everlafhng Sermon, like a perfume
when the body is gone, yet there is a fweetnefTe remaining be-
hind, which is gratefull to all fuch as Converfe with it ; fo, the
Preacher being dead, the Sermons yet lire-, the fruit remains,
when the Tree is felled. That this is Preaching, is moft evident,
becaufc thefe teach the truth of Do&rine, and thefe perfwade to
Godlinefle, Again, it is preaching, and he preacheth, whou-
fing others words and matter in the Pulpit, perfwades the Audi-
tory either to Chriftian faith or manners, this is preaching •, and
for my part, I conceive the faying or reading a Godly Homily,
to be preaching, and more ufefull than thofe vain Sermons which
Trivial Presbyters and proud men utter, even in pulpits with you
in London ; f call them proud, bacaufe many take upon them to
preach, who fcarce ever did read a Body of Divinity, nor are
able toballance the Dodrine they deliver , by the Analogy of
Faith, oriftheycoulddoitby leafureandfludyi take not time
to doit, being alwayes preaching, but never learning j thefe
men, if they were humble, would content themfelves either with
fuch Sermons* as .are penn'd by the Church to be read or got
without book ; or with fuch excellent Sermons which St. Chrj-
foftome, Bazil, Gregory ; or the like made, as the whole Church
of the Mfifcovites do ^ for by that means both the people fhould
be inftru&ed in the fundamentals of Faith and Life, and ihey fe-
cured from that fearfull preemption, of undertaking to teach,
being not t?ught, and that vanity of being uneftabliftud in the
Faith, and being carryed about with winds of Do&rine, and
that other pride offeeking their own vain-glory ^ truly thefe
thoughts
What F reaching k. 79
thoughts have often made me itartle, when I go about to ftudy a
Sermon, and not dare to adventure on any thing which I have
not carefully Confidcred on. To repeat another* Homily or
Sermon is preaching, it is teaching the people the Gofpei of
Chrift- for it is not material who penned it, fothe Meffage of
God be delivered : and becaufe Nihil diclum cjhod non fnit
dtttum prim , I know not why men fhouid be fo fqueamifh
of it.
But I will ftoop one degree lower, fincc Preaching is Evange-
lizing, and that is teaching the Gofpels, who can fay, that read-
ing the Scripture in a known Torgue is not preaching, which
teacheth the people out of Scripture all that they ought ro know
concerning their Souls Good. Let no man trouble this Dif-
courfe with St. Pauls faying , i Cor, 9. woe u we if I f reach
not the Gofiel, and then GloiTe upon it, that St. Paul meant
none of thefe preachings I have named • it is true , he did not •
but yet Cenfider, that Sr. Pauls preaching was infallibly in-
fpired, and there he might have full affuranceof what he delive-
red with Eafe , without Pre-thought what he -(hould deliver ,
which we have not without mighty pains and ftudy j therefore
his preaching was by the power of his utterance : and yet he, Sr>
rattle did not only ufe vocal preaching, but writing, andthofe
Sermons he wrote have ben, I dare fay, more beneficial to
the Church than thofe he preached ,, a-nd then we read thofe
very Sermons which he wrote ,• HisEpiftlesare very Sermons,
we have the fame, and there is reafon, if we be not felf- conceit-
ed, that they (hould do as much good amongft us, as the Ro-
mans, Corinthians, Galathians, &c. If they be hard to us in
many places, I doubt not but they were hard to them , and we-
have befides thefe, Expositions of the Fathers in the Ancicnn
Church, by which Souls were directed to heaven, and all that
have been faved thefe 12. or 1 3 00 years have been faved by
them, unleffe feme few of late, who have found a new Road
to Heaven.
Well then, to end \ This is a low degree of preaching , but k-
preiching, and preaching the Gofpei : Thefe are Sermons which
St. /Wand the Church thought fit to be divulged, for the Sal-
tation of men,
SEC T,
8o To n>bat Preachings &c.
SECT. XVI.
To rrhat Preaching every Presbyter is bound.
IHave expounded what preaching is •, now let us fee to what
preacHng every Presb) ter is bound. Firft, without Que-
fUon, every Presbyter ftiould be a ruler - fo St. Paul in the 3d.
Chapter oi: this Epiftlc, verfe 5. For if a man know not hw to
rule his own houfe 3 how (hall he take &are to rule the Church of God?
there he fuppofeth , That he muft be a Ruler • otherwife his
Conclufion were nothing , drawn from the Governing his own
fooufe. There ruling is neceffry in aBifhoporPresbyrer, for
you will fee hereafcer , that thefc Offices had one name , and in
many things agreed. Now there you fee ruling is required in a
Presbyter, and he himfelf will no: fay that this was a Lay Presby-
ter- Butthen Confider, that in this whole Character of a Pres-
byter, there is no one word of preaching, although there is of ru-
ling, and can you think if a Presbyter were chofen, fuch as St.
Paulhere nominates, itwereamifTe? But it is objecled,Tit 1.9.
there it is required, that he fhould be holding f aft the faithfull
■word at he hath been taught, that he may be able by found Dcclrinc y
to exhort and convince the Gainfajers.
I may well think this to be a Caution of Advice, not neceflity :
But if Timothy had chofen and ordained fuch as were prefcii-
bed him, they might hive been men futficiently qualified, yec
ex abundanti , if this might be h d in another Condition, al-
though that were well, yet this would be better - there is a lati-
tude in Good, though not in Truth; butthen let let u< fcan the
Text, fuppofe it be a requifue. I irft, let usobferve, that[^ muft
hold \j aft the faithfull w or d^\ that is, the word, 1 conceive, of the
Gofpel; hold faft, that is, apprehend it ftrongly, adhere dofe
to it, as he hath learned, fo we in our Tranflation^ or in learning,
as the Margent •, or fecundum BoElrinam Strmonis y as Beza\ the
bufineffe will not be much. It muft either be holding faft that
Doftrine which he hath learned, heretofore, and then there
will be little left for new Invention-, orelfe it muft be, he muft
hold the faithfull word in his teaching ^ and then I anfwer, this
will
•— ■ - ▼ — — ■ —
To what Preaching, &c.
preach Sermons of their own miking, it is a mighty matter, yet
what are they amongft tbofe multitudes of Churches and pandi-
ts, certainly but an handfull, the Parifhes are 9284.
It cannot be then, that there is a neceflity of more abilities
to a Presbyter than to do thefe Duties in that general way, which
1 havedifcourfed, and foto endeavour in and by fuch means to
inltrud otters, and upon Study and Induftry either from himfeif ?
or more learned men , upon the ftarting any new Doubt, by
Study convince the Gainfayers, it is not required he ftiould do
it ex tempore.
SECT. XVII.
What peculiar Intercji a Presbyter bath in this
hjind of f reaching.
HAving thus Confidercd Preaching in its latitude, it will new
be worth our Thoughts to refled upon this Officer called
a Presbyter, and fee what peculiar Intereft he hath in it, diftinft
from other men. Firft then, without Queftion, fuch a preach-
ing as is Occafional, by private Conference, or in publike Af-
femblies, when in publick Opportunity is offered to manifeft the
Glory ®f God, or Convert or Confirm by Conference anyfoit
to or in the Chriftian Religion, or GodlinefTe of living , which
indeed is a g-eatpartofChriflianity, when upon occafions of
Didcourfe or otherwife, Opportunities fliall begranted to any
man, he may, if he have abilities, loConferre, as to perfwade
men to a newneffe of life ; and this is preaching in its latitude,
it is preaching the Gofpelof Chri'r, and each man that hath abi-
lities ought to do it, but each man is not bound to have abilities*,
a private mans ftrength is chiefly difcerned in holding faft the
Word of Truth, that fo he be not carryedaWay with the Veind of
Dotlrine : he hath other Offices which are his Duties, and in
which he ought to expend his Studies and Endeavours- but to
have abilities, or to endeavour to have fome Abilities for this
purpofe, is the Duty and Office of a Presbyter. It is the Duty
<&f the Shepherd to tzke care of hit Matters flieep r but it is a
comely
Who is authorised to Preach. 83
comely Charity in every Servant, though he be not the Shep-
herd, when he finds his Matters fhecp run allray, or ready to
ftarve, to throw them a lock of Hay, or call them back to the
fold ; Nay it is his Duty out of Charity , though not out of Of-
rice 3 but to take upon him the Office when he is not Authori-
zed to it, would be Intrufion, and it would bring a great Con-
fufion into the Church, as it would into a great Family, where
every mm, or every man that would, might take upon him the
Manage of any Office he would. Sr. Pant therefore faith of
fuch, Horvfiail he preach, unlefie hebefent ? that is, how fhall he
ukc upon him the Office of doing it, unleffe he be authorized
for it ^ let us then Coniider who is authorized.
SECT. XVIII.
Who is authorised to Preach.
THat this Authority mutt be joyned to every Presbyter that
hath power to adminifter the Sacraments, preaching muft
be taken in a large fenfe, for reading Homilies , for reading the
Scriptures in known languages^ for it is not poflSble to find men
of Abilities to do the other, in fuch a Nation as ours is , and yet
it is neceflary that they fhould have thefe Sacraments, becaufe by
them men receive the Covenants of God concerning their Souls,
which to teach and incourage us to, i$ the chief Duty of preach-
ing •, and this is done ([ am perfwaded) more fecurety , by the
other way projected before- but then if we will have menpreach
nothing but what they make themfelves, there had need be a
mighty ability for a Weekly Preacher to do that, and fuch in-
deed as cannot be expected from every Presbyter that may be
fit for the other •, and therefore, that way of penning their own
Sermons, is not, nor can be exacted from every presbyter : And
to preach Sermons not penned , although upon urgency there
hath been or may be fuch a Thing, yet it is nothing but lazinefs
and fupinc negligence, and underva'uing of that great Work
( by thofe to do it Conftantly ) and not worthy the thought
of Chrifuans. But whether Tresbyters alone may do this , is a
Queftion ftarted in this Age, but was difputed long fince by
L 2 learned
8 4 Who vs authorised to preach.
learned men, and how determined 1 will fet down , with mine
obfervations uponir, TheStor;' is thus- Origin, a man moft
eminent for learning of any man Hi that Age, both for humanity
and Divinity, and indeed fuch as may not only be accounted fo
for that Age in which he lived, but deferved to be placed in the
firlt rank of Scholars, both of his own or any other Age, when
he lived at Cefarea, by Authority given him from the Biihops of
jMf/?>tf ^interpreted the Scriptures publikely in the Church when
he was not a Presbyter, nor, that we know of, had received any
degree in Ecclefiaitick Office ^ Demetrim theBifhop of Alex-
andria, who envytd the deferved glory ofOrigen, and that ho-
nour which rather as a debt was paid to, than given him, for his
Excellency in Preaching, inveighs bitterly againft him, and ha-
ving little elfc to be offended with him for 5 iaith, it was an un-
heard of thing that a Layman (hould preach, and writes to the
Bifhops of j 3 'ale Bine about it^They patronage that excellentWork
of their own, and gave htm Inftance in three or four that they
knew of ^ and no doubt, (fay they) there were more which had
•been licenfed by Bifhops todofo, and did preach even before
them, I could have wifhed that the difpute had been larger fee
down, that fo the Arguments from Scripture or reafon might
have been fee down for our Inftru&ion, but for defence of him,
who it is pity did not write his own Apology. If any man ob-
ject St. Pauls HoVvcanbepreathunleffehebefent ? Iihall an-
fwer, he was fent, and by that power that had Authority to fend,
that was th^ Bifhops in that Province in which he lived, who
-had authority to delegare as Apoliles, ("of which Khali treat
hereafter) by our Saviours Charter, As mj Father fern me, fa
fend Lyon, to fend others, notwithaplenipocency, but as they
Aw expedient with divided powers, to baptize and no more, to
adminifter the Sacraments and no more, and why not preach and
no more; this way of preaching; penning, and contriving Ora-
tions to the people, requires great abilities inherent, acquired
by mighty induftry and pains- and when men are found fo Gift-
ed and enabled, although they think themfelves not worthy to
take a Paftoral Charge upon them, or to adminifter the Sacra-
ments ; yet when they find abilities for-this, and their Bifhop
think fit; why (hould they not preach? but not without the
Bilhop • he is the Supream Paftor, he may, if he find an Inferi-
or
Hit Argument anjwered. 85
onr fit for that place, give him Authority to feed, or fold, or
drive his Flock, and no more •, and he that is authorized by the
Supreara Paftor, may do it, and others who without his leave
undertake to do it, are Intruders • bat he being fo authorized
doth it orderly, lawfully •, thus did Origen, who had he lived
in our Age, could have difcourfed much more powerfully to this
Theam- and I can guefle , that this may fatisfie molt ofthat
which many in our Age object concerning their Gifts. If they
are Gifted, let their Gifts be examined, and if he (theBifhop)
find them to be fuch as can enable them for fuch a Work , let
them be licenfed, otherwife not.
CHAP. XIX.
Hk Argument anjwered.
I Have been over tedious in this Difcourfe. Here you may
difcern the vanity of his Argument from that Text, if prea-
ching be taken in that late fenfe, as 1 have expounded it, I deny
that there are any Presbyters which are not Teachers. If Prea-
chers be taken in this ftrid fenfe for fuch as preach Studied Ora-
tions, I fay that there are many Presbyters which arc not Prea-
chers, and do not labour in the Word in that fenfe, and yet there
are no Presbyters which have not the power of Adminiftring the
Sacraments.lt is very weak that he faith .tfure muft be Preacher?,
which are no Preachers- for Presbytery k doth not depend upon
preach ing in this kind,nor doth the name orofficefignitie aPrea-
cher^ but if he will, there may be preachers who do not labour,
•make it their Chief pains to preach • there may be differences \n
the Induftries of men, and induftrious men may be induftrious
in one piece of their Office, and not in another, 1 Gor. 15. 10.
St. Paul faith, he laboured more than they all y that was, without
*doubt, in preaching , aud yet 1 Cor. 1. 14. he baptized but a
few, induftrioufly attending one, and not fo much the other- but
the fenfe of the Text isapparent, I think, and do you forgive
jny tedious digreffion.
But heurgeth, that the Bifhops Factors provide ill for them-'
.for.bythe Apoftiestdecerrain^ion^ themeaneft Minifter that is
confei-
86 St. Ambrofe Expounded.
confcientious and laborious in preaching ffaould have more re-
foedl than his Diocefin, who fits, &c. but hbours not to feed
them with the Word of Life.
The Text doth not fay the meaneft eonfeientious Minifter,cVc.
but faith, that ihofe who rule rvetl y and labour in the Word like-
wife, are more deferving that honour, than they that rule well
only. It may be it is fpoken only of Bifhops • howfoever it is
only an Addition of the obligation to him who labours • and
truly I think that Bifhop who doth not labour in the Werd is wor-
thy of little^ but I confine not labouring in the fVordio preaching
only ftudyed Sermons • but to infirud Preachers, to write, to
overthrow ill opinions, and the like , and this is labouring in
the Word and Dodnne.
SECT. XX.
St. Ambrofe Expounded.
LAfHy, he hath found a piece of an Antient and truly to be
honoured Father of the Church, St. Ambrofe , which he
rejoyceth in, like one that had met with fome unexpected blef-
fing- fee how he commends it ; It carries (faith he) an Amazing
Evidence, and again afcer the place quoted, The brightneffe and
patenefTe of the Witneffe is fuch as though it had been writ
with a beamoftheSun, anddazles the Eyes ofalmoft Envy it
felf. But obferve this one thing, as he and that fort of Writers
when they will urge Scriptures which they cannot find to make
any thing for them,they put not down the words but Ciphers: So
here the words feem to ferve his turn, but the place where they
are put overthrows it- (but it is not fet down by him)l have hunt-
ed it out, and itisupontbefirftverfeofthe i Tim. 5. the words
are thefe. Apud onsnes ubique G erttes htnorabilit eft Senetlus,
unde & Sjnagcga &pofiea Ecclefva Stniores kabuit, fine quorum
Confilio nihil agebatur in Ecclefia , quod quk negligentia obfo-
teverit, ntfcio, nip forte Deft or urn defidia 9 aut fotius fuperbta,
dum feli volunt aliquid videri. Now confider, this is Writ up-
on the firft verfe before. The Words he comments on are
thefe, Rebuke not an Elder, but entreat him at a Father , and the
younger
St. Ambrofe Expounded. 87
younger men as brethren. St. Ambrofe, with all Commentators
f even Beta) doth acknowledge this word Elder to fignifie an
Elder in Age^ St. Ambrofe his words before thefe written down
are, Propter honorific entiam atatis major em natu, cam manfnetu-
dine adbonnmoput provocandum. And upon that he brings the
words cited, Amongfl all Nations old Age is honourable • and
this word is as it were put of purpofe to overthrow thofe men,
he ufeth Senetlus, not Presbyter, which word Seneclus was ne-
ver ufed for an Officer- fo then what doth St. Ambrofe mean,
but that in tb&ftVrifi Synagogue and in the Church, they .ufed
grave men to aflift and counfell, without whofe Advice no-
thing was done in the Church •, j grant it $ but thefe men were
not your Elders,but grave and learned men to advife with; I will
put in, it is fit to be fo Itill • and for that reafon Chancellors, men
learned, ufed to fit in the Confiftory. But he gives two cautions
pag. 1 5. wherefore let him know, (that i$ 9 the Reader) that the
Elders mentioned by Ambrofe , were fveh that their places and
offices Veere almofi worn cut; ( I agree ) butfuch were not the prea-
ching Elders, (I agree to that likewife-, ) but fay withal! , that
thefe men were not fuch Elders who had Office in the Church,
but were Counsellors, as he faith.
His fecond Obfervation upon St. Ambrofe, is, That the defa-
cing of the power and Rule of thefe E tiers, came, as he conjeclttres^
by the (loath, efpecially by the Pride of the Teachers , becaufe they?
alone might be lifted up. The word in St. Ambrofe was Do&c-
rum, of Doctors, which was aphrafe applyed to Bifliops, who
in his time were the only Preachers, as appears in the famous-
Story of St. Attftin, who when he was a Presbyter, was fain to
have a licenfe to preach , now then, why he fhould fay the floath
of the Bifliops, I cannot tell, for (loathfull men are willing to
have others joyned in Commiffion with them, thatfo others
may ad what through lazinefTe they are unwilling to meddle
with-, but what he faith of pride may have fom< colour, that
they would Ael all alone, andfo have all the Curchy and Appli-
cation made to them ; therefore they would admit none of thefe
Lay Counfellors with them. Here is the drift of his Speech , and
what word in all this tends to the Addition of any Ecclefiaftical
Officer? much leflc by a Divine right which is pretended to,
iaa only fome Chancellor, as I have iaid, to advife with^ and now
fuppo£
88 St. Ambrofe Expounded.
fuppofe, I fay, clean contrary to him, that the floruh and pride of
Bifbops put all bufinefsupon thefe Lay men,fo that indeed in our
Times they are more Bilhops than the Bifhops, and all through
their (loath, becaufe they would not ad inbufinelTe, and pride,
becaufe they difdained to ftoop to petty occafions, I doubt I
fhould fay true, and yet neither his Saying nor mine make one
word for their Elders fure Divino j the reft that he faith vani-
fheth of its felf : thus they would make themfdves eminent, by
the difannulling the honor of others places, they could not be
fuch as were of c^eir own rank, or did polTds any of their places,
I grant it, neither werejehey fuch Elders aswefpeakof, nor
you.
Thus nowis apparent, I hope, how weak his Arguments are,
and what he faid of that place of St. Ambrofe, that it had an ama-
zing kind of difcovery with it, I may fay of this whole difcourfe*
that it hath an amazing kind of difcovery- but what itdifcovers,
is the ftrangenefTe of thefe men, who oppofing a known truth",
and the univerfal pra&ife of the Chriftian world from Chrifts
time downward, dare urge thefe places for their Conceits, which
had very little femblance for them, although they had been ex-
pounded by praftife\ but having none but great words and
commendations of their own to that purpofe, it will eafily per-
fwade men that they made firft their Form, and then hunted
for fomething to infinuate a belief, that they were induced by
Scriptures ^ and thinking with my felf upon what defign they
fhould introduce this kind of Miniftry, I could imagine no rea-
fon, but as when cunning people would change a Monarchy in-
to an Ariftocracy, or Oligarchy, they have no way to divert the
people from their old obedience, and introduce it to themfelves,
but by making them believe they fhould have fome (hare in
that Government which was ingrofTed by one. So thefe men
breaking from Epifcopacy, would perfwade the people from
the old to the new yoak which they would impofc, that they
had a Share in Ecclefiaftical Government, and that they (hould
fend out of them into the Confiftory their Lay Elders, which
would wonderfully provide for their Security and good, much
better than before, with other Things of the like Nature
of which I may fpeak hereafter 5 but indeed their hopes arc
fruftrateinall this defign, for they could never fet up any thing
more Tyrannical or Arbitrary than this, CHAP.
What a true Yrcsbytcr is. 8^
CHAP. VII. SECT. I.
What a true Presbyter is. The Name firji
Expounded.
I Have done now with their Presbyter , of which I fee no
footing in the Word of God, or Antiquity-, I now come
next to treat of our otyn Presbyter 7 what he is : and firft, that
we may avoyd all Equivocations anddoubtfull Interpretations
of Scripture^ we will difcourfe of the guid no-minis , what is
meant by this and other Phrafes which are ufed in Scriptur* to
intimate this Office.
Firft, he is called a Presbyter, which as it naturally fignifies an
Elder in Age, fo from that analogy it fignifies a grave and reve-
rend Man ; another word is Bijhop , which we alwayes render
for , £7no Certain Concefla by all, &>c.
S- E C T. II.
Certain Conccffa by all who have engaged in
this Controverjie.
BUT now to fever Granted Truths from Queftioned, and not
to waft my time in unneceflary difcourfes, It is granted by
all that I have feen, that thefe all were ordained by the Apoftles
to do thefe Duties, to adminifter the Sacraments of Baptifm and
the Communion, to preach the Gofpel » although, I think, no
man can (hew me any place of Scripture exprefting fuch a Ca-
non, which (hall enable fuch men bearing fuch names, under
fuch Titles to be authorized to fuch Duties, but only a Con-
ftant practice of it •, but it being fuppofed that they were au-
thorized to do this Duty, we may find rules directing how thefe
fhould be performed by them ^ I let that paffe therefore', and
(hall now enter the lifts againft two Opinions which I oppofe,
one which makes Paflors and Teachers two Offices-, a fecond
which makes nodiftinftion amongft thefe.
SECT. III.
Mr. Hookers d/JiinSlion of Pajiors and Tea-
chers handled.
FOR the firft^ Mr. Htxtfyr difpnees in his Book before ci-
ted, Part 2. Chap. i. pag. 19, 20. And firft to under-
ftand his Opinion, Confider, that he makes two forts of Te+>
ehi&g Elders, one he calls Paflors^ and the other Teachers •, the
fcopeof the Paflors he defcribes with a great deal ofhandfom
Circumlocution, exceeding fine expreflicms of the Rhetorical
perfwafive part of a Preacher,, the refult of all which is , to
perfwade by fuch Arguments as have power over the Will
and the Affections, asitispag. 19. The Teachers Office u to lay
*& f**d*mtnul pi*ts ofChrifiian Faith, the Principles ofReli-
Mr. Hookers clijiin&ion of Paftors^ &c. 91
gion, as he expreffeth it in the bottom of Page 21, and the top of
22. Theie two parts he makes diftind Offices in the Church,
both of them being ruling Elders as well as teaching, and both
of them having power to adminilter the Sacraments • but in
their preaching the one is to bend his force, his endeavour, to
the Teaching and informing the Undemanding, the other to the
perfwading «nd moving the Affection • the firft he calls Teach-
ers, the fecond Paftors : Look for a reafon for this diftindion
unheard-of till of late • I find none but in a reply to Mr. Rutter*
ford, pag. 7. where it feems Mr. Rutterford urged, that thefe
formal Objects of thefetwo Offices (Information of the Judge-
ment and Exhorting) are not fo different as that they ftiould be
incompetible, pag. 7. Chap. 1.
To this he replyes, that in them/elves, and full breadth , ( that
is his phrafe ) thefe are notfo incompetible, but look^at the fyeciaU
ty of the Gift that fits for one , and which fur nifheth for the other
te attend mainly and chiefly upon each according to the Gift, they
Will prove inconfifient •, Thefe arc his words, and thefe imply,
that where there are diftinftions of Gifts and they diverfly to be
endeavoured , there fhould be diverfe Offices, or dk I fee no
force in this Difcourfe - ? but this hath no probability of colour
for it ; Confider Civil Offices, a fufiiceef Peace, onejuftice
hath a great Cunning in the Statutes, in rendring them to a legal
fenfe, he applyes himfelf and endeavours to that mod ^ another
hath a great ability in reconciling and taking up Quarrels, and
perfwading men to friendfhip , he endeavours that mon\ and
perhaps did either of thefe by framing himfelf to endeavour what
he were lead fit for, leffe attend what he were more dexterous
in^ he might attend his Office in general, but the leffe profita-
ble way, and thefe are both one Office, though in it diverfe
Gifts or Abilities , which cannot both be attended with any
mans utmoft endeavour, paffe from Civil to Eccleftaflical Of-
fices, and this very bufineffe : Among Presbyters preachers,
one hath great Excellency in giving the Grammatical fenfe of
the Text, another in expounding it Scholaflically , a Third in
the Hiftorical part of Divinity ; and thefe are feveral Gifts or
Abilities, and men according to them apply their utmoft en-
deavours , but thefe make not diftind Offices, but feveral Gifrs
and Abilities in the fame Office, which is juft the fame with
M 2 thefe;
52 M*\ Hookers diUmStion ofPajlors^ &c.
thefe; and as there is no foot-ftep in the Hiftorical pan of Di-
vnaty, to (hew any one prefident : fo is there no colour of rea-
fon for k ; Bat he quotes Scripture. The rlrft is chat place fo
largely difcourfed of before, Rom. 1 2. 7, 8. He that teacbeth, on
teachings he that exhort eth, on exhortation. This place I have at
large fhewed in the Cafe of their Beacon^ not to figiifie diilind
Ortices, but diverfities of Gifts, and it imports no*more, than
that he who finds in himfelf Abiliti s of Teaching or Exhorting,
fhould ufehis Talent as a meenber of the fame body, to the good
of his brother. But I wonder, why they fhould not rather di-
Itinguifh thefe Offices by the Names of Teacher and Exhorter,
becaufe thefe N;mes in this place fignihediftinft Abilities and
Endeavours, in thofe two waves which they intend them to- but
there is nothing in either word which intimates the nature of a
Paftor, which istogoveru|nswe!lasfeed; But thefe words arc
found Eph. 4. 1. where the words Paftor and Teacher are ufed;
and are urged for this diftinction in his Treatife of the Preachers
Office, Part 2. Chap. i„ pag. 20. but how unluckily, let any
man Confider : The words are thefe, And he gave fome Apoftles,
and fome Prophets, andfome Evangehfts, andfome Pa ft or s and
Teachers \ let any man Confider this place, and think whether
ehe Apoftle fhould put thefe as diftinft ~ Thofe which are di-
flindr, he diftinguifhes with this phrafe, ( fome Apeftles, fome
Prophets, fome Evangelifts , fome Paftors ; now mark, he doth
not fay, feme Teacher x, but fome Paftors and Teachers ; Coup-
ling thefe together as one, not diftinguifhing themastheother;
and therefore, let him not dare to fever thera whom God hath
joyned*
But he cites Beza upon this place to anfwermine Argument
which he toueheth; let us examine therefore what he far \ /
ajfent, (faith he) to Ambrofe, rtho makes theft Offices diftintl^for
ratio parum firma eft \ for (faith he) the reafonisnot firm rrhich
moved Hierom and Auftin to Confound them; that is, becaufe
the Copula is put without the Article, he faith it is not firm, but
he offers no reafon why it is not firm •, the Apoftle dimngui-
fheth the reft, with Tic c.
Fifthly, That the prcheminence that I place in a Bifhop over
a Presbyter confifts in thefc two things- The power of giving
thefe Orders , which a bare Presbyter hath not ^ and fecondly,
The power of furifdifthnoverfuch a* are only Presbyters of the
lower rankj
Thefe Truths being granted, as they rauft without impudence,
I addreffe my felfto the Queftion, wherein lean Complain for
lack of mine Adverfaries books ; for fuch as write for the Opini-
on, I profefTe I care for none h the Scriptures and Antient Fa-r
thers which I have by me fervemy turn : but 1 have their Hooker ,
and I (hall, I think , in refutation of his Arguments, difcufle
moft of that matter which is neceffary to this Quefhon • if I
rind any thing unhandled which is neceffary to this Queftion, I
fliall treat ofit afterwards.
SECT. V.
Mr. Hooker undertaken in this Controverfie.
FO R their Hooker, he undertakes this Controverfie, Part z.
Chap. i. pag. 22. in which he waftes ihat Page and the
23 d. upon a bitter invedive diftindtion of a three- fold Bifhop,
Divine, Humane, and Sathanical, and his defcription of them,
which I let alone, as impertinent Froth and Fury of a man that
is angry, not charitable , and as one inquifitive after truth , dis-
puting ^ but Page 24. he comes to Tome foberdifpute, and to
bring reafons againft this Vfurped Order ( as he calls it ) which I
undertake at this prefent.
His Firft reafon is, as he faith, the exprefle Teftimony of
Scripture , than which nothing can be more pregnant, Titus 1 .
5, 7. he only Ciphers out the place, I will put down the words;
For this cattj r e left 1 thee in Creet, that thoufhouttrfi fet in order
the things Vphich are wanting, and Ordain Eldc sin every City ,
as I had appointed thee : thenverfey. For * B.^p.&c. NoV?
(faith he) the Apoflle having enjoy ned his SckoUi to Appoint:
Elders in every City, and how they muft be qualified , he adcU ehe
reafon of his Advice ; For a Bifhop, &c. Where the Oifputeof
the Apoftle (hews, not only the Community of the Name, but
like-
His Argument anfrvered. p 7
Jikcwife the Identity of the Thing jignified thereby, otherwife
fcis Argument had not only been afalfe rcafon, but falfe in form,
having four Terms, but in truth, had not reafoned at all ; for in
had been ready to reply ( here is a Gap, as if the Copy had been
imperfedt, but may eafily be made up, thus J a Bifhop is ano-
ther thing from Presbyter.
SECT. VI.
His exprejpons 'very nnhandfome.
I Will examine this Difcourfe, and fee how partial his expreffi-
ons are to trouble the Truth. Firft, he difparageth Titw
with, although a true, yet a diminilhing Term ^ He calls him Sr.
Pants Scholar only ^ St. Pattl> in the 4th verfe, calls him his Son,
yea, his otyn Son after the Common Faith-, and the Poftfcript or
Direction is, toTitw, ordained the fir si Bijhop of the Cretians.
Secondly, He diminiftieth likewife that phrafe which is of great
force to this purpofe , that is, the phrafe to ordain Elders, he
faith, to appoint Elders, Thus when they Cipher Scripture, for
the moft pare Scripture is abufed, and the heedleffe Reader Aval-
lowesinaMifconftru&ion, before he is aware : thus having ex-
amined his mifrepeating the Story in things of importance, we
will fift his Arguments.
SECT. VII.
His Argument examined.
TH E force of it is this, that there a Bifhop and Elder are one
thing as well as name, 1 grant it for this difpute -, buc iec
us fee what will refult out of it, no more but this, that in the
Apoftolical Age this name of Bffiop and Presljter wm ufed for
one Office ^ the name Apoftle was that which was ufed for the
Superiour Dignity, which, as I (hewed before out otTheodoret,
when 1 treated of the Name Apoftle, that in their Time many
were called Apoftles which were none of the Twelve ; buc af-
N te wards,
pS Hi$ Argument anfwered.
ter wards, to avoid Confufion and an IndiihncYion betwixt the
Original Apoftk-s and the Derivative, for fuch as were made by
men, the Church ufed this name ofBi/bops, andreferved the
Name of dfoftle , to thofc men who were fo Conftituted by our
Saviour, and that one who was made by Election ofLott into
Judas his place : So we rind diverfe phrafcs not ufed to fuch
purpofe in the New Teftament, yet prevailed with the Succee-
ded of the Apoftles in fuch a manner, as they gained a Conltant
ufe among Ecclefiadical Writers ^ fuch is fcgeug amongft the
Grecians, and Sacerdos amonglt the Latins, words not ufed for
any Order in the Church of Chrift any wherein the New Te-
ftament, and yet amongft the Ancients arc ufed for the whole
Order ofPriefthood as it includes Bifhops , and fometimes for
Bifliops alone •, but as they are the fuperiour Order in that fort
of men, and in the latter Age are folely appropriated by the ufe
of Writers, to that Order, which the Scriptures and the mod
ancient term Presbyter, inferiour to the Supream, called by the
Scripture Afcfiles, and to their Succeffors, called Bijbopi among
the Ancients j therefore in the reading of Authors, notthelnfti-
tutions only, but the h(hs joquendiis to be Confidered in words.
Camhden in his Remains hath a long Difcourfe like a Lexicon,
where we may fee to how various Senfes in our Englijh Lan-
guage the fame words have arrived, by Traft of Time lofing
their old, and gainings new Senfe, efpecially in Offices; fo hath
it happened with the words Bifhop and Presbyter : they were
moft frequently in Scripture taken for one and the fame thing-
but the word AfoftU, or Angel, I can never find given to the
Inferiour Sort of Presbyters • But now this word Afofile'xs ap-
propriated, in the Language of Divines, to the Twelve, and St.
Paul only, the word Bifiop to the Superiour Sort, the word
Pritft or Presbyter to the Inferiour Sort of rresby ters. I fhali
leave therefore to difcourfe of the Names, and-comc to examine
the Text concerning the Thing, whether there be in this Text
a Parity of Minifters prescribed ? ,
SECT,
The jirji Argument , &c. anfrveretf. 99
SECT. VIII.
The Firji Argument: for a Parity anfrvered.
FO R this Parity he urgeth nothing, but the Attributing thefe
two names which we ufe, in a diitind Senfe, to one and the
fame thing, which proves no parity of Office, but only the ufe
of thefe words in thofe dayes. But I will go further, and prove
this O.fice we call Bijbop diftinft from the Presbyter, out of that
very Text; St. Paul faith, I have left thee in Ccet to do thefe
two things, that thou fhmldefl fet in order the Things that are
wanting^ an d ordain Elder sin every City ^ Mark here, Sc. Paul
had been in Greet himfelf, he had tayd the foundation of the
Gofpel, he being to go further into the World, leaves Titus to
build upon his Foundation ; and he leaves him to do two things j
that he Should fet in Order ; or Correft, or fupercorreft thoijp
things which were not perfected by himfelf; here is Epifcopacy
in one piece, he had Authority to correft, to fet in order > r things
that were out of Order, to Correct what was amiffe ; then fe-
condly, to Ordain Elders in every City j not to appoint only,
but to ordain authoritatively, to fettle them : I do not know
how a Biftiop could more exa&iy be defcribed, in fo few words;
and I wonder much, why thefe men fliould produce this Text'
which without a mind muehprejudicated with another Opinion
cannot be wreftcd to any other fenfe. Hooker takes no notice
of this, but fome others fay, That Titm was an Evangelifl.
Their Exception 7 that Titus was an Evan-
gelift, anfrvered.
THey fay fo ; but do they produce one word out of Scrip-
ture or Antiquity for it : they might fay he was an Affile
as well, and with much more fembla nee • and I think he was of
the Inferiour rank- but then, can they tell me what an Evan-
gelifi was ? This is a (hrewd Queftion • Thofe four that writ
N 2 the
i oo Their Exc eption^ that Titus, £^f . anfwered.
the Gofpcls, arc only known by that name amongft Eedefiaflt-
cal Wruas : fo that ifa man (hould fay,, the L van gel i ft: faith fo v
ve would Conclude one of them. Philip is indeed called an
E'aangdi&i Ads 2 t. but no man elfe intheNewTeflamen^ it
may be, I ec -ufe he was an excellent and powerfull Preacher.
Beza, withchofe who a ft. ft new Opinions, makes an tvange-
lifi to be one rrho was an Affociate and Companion to the Apoftlef
in their travell^ but there is nothingin Scripture or Antiquity to
give light to thatCondufion : I am fureSt. Chryfofiome , Theo-
phjlacl y &c. aresgainftitinexpreCTeTerrro, upon the 4th. to
thtEfhef. St. Ambrofe makes him a Deacon to the Apoftles,
which hath fome (hew of reafon forir, becaufe Philip was an
Evangelift. This word Evangelifi is but three Times ufed in
Scripture, Acls 21.8. where" ' Philip is called an Evangelifi - y
Ephef. 4. 1 1. where an Evangelisl is reckoned amongft the Ec-
clefiabical Officers- zTm.^.$ where he is bid dothervork^of
an Evangdift \ which could be nothing but induftrious preach-
ing the Gofpel of Jefus Chrifr- or, asfome of the Ancients, fufle-
ring for Chrift, becaufe he is bid in the lame verfe , immediately
before thefe words, to endure Afflitlion, and in the words fol-
lowing, to makf full proof 'of hu Mini/fry 5 but is there the leaf!
Colour that this Office fhould enable him to ordain Presbyters,
or Correct Mifdcmeanors, or to regulate things that arc amifTe,
which Titus was C ommifljoned to do. Again, it is generally
agreed amongft them, that this Office of an Evangelift was a
Temporary Office • but thefe Duties of Correlling, of Ordain-
ing Elders y muft needs be perpetual in the Church > and there-
fore could nor Conftitufe the nature of that temporal Office:
Well then, to difpell that cloud that would darken the light of
this Text for Epifcopccy , by faying that Titus was an Evan-
gelift^ there isno word in Scripture, nor any Author in Anti-
quity of any reputation in the World, which offers any thing to-
wards that Opinion. 2dly. If they did, yet they would be at as
great a lofTe to fliew me, that the Office of an Evangelift- was to
do fuch things as Titus is here commanded to do. 3 dly. If they
could fhew Evangelising toConfift in the performance of fuch
Duties^ yet we might juflly then Conceive them to be Bifbeps,
fuch as we require, and a Standing Office in the Church, be-
eaufe thefe Duties are fo : and it is evident, that Z/Vi^ had' Au-
thority
^^ ^_____ — — ....... I — ., I . II
Hookers llluflration from Afts a o. anfwered. i o I
thority in both tbefe kinds v Therefore there were feme men
which had fuch Authority above others, But let us go on with
Hooker y as he-doth Confirm hisMiftaken Opinion*
SECT. IX, •
Hookers TUnftr at ion from' A&s ic. anfwerect.
P4ul (faith he) A As 20. fends for the Elders of Efh'efa r
and profefleth in the 28 th. verfe, that Chrifl had mad*
them Overfesrs or Bijhps •, where not only the Name isCom-
mon, but theThingiignified by thac Name isenjoyned as their
Duty ^ ( He means, to take heed to all the flocki over which the holy
Ghoft had made them BifiopsorOverfeers), here 3 as before, are
left Gaps or Interruptions ; 1 will fill them as well asIcan,-to
make up his Senfe, thus ^ What he implyes or requires in a BU
fiop> that they (that is, thdc Presbyters) were to do, // he Shall
require to lay m hands,. to exercife JurifdiHion in foro externo^,
that they mttftdo, andfhould they have been reproved for Jo doings
they might have /hewed their Commiffion , thusfarrhe. But I
wonder where that Commiffion was given or read : I can find
no fuch Thing in that place, but that they fhould take heed , or;
have a care of their flock, which they might execute according
to that Authority was difpen fed before, by labouring in the
Word, diligent baptizing, adminiftring the Communion , but to
Convent or Summon their Flock, or Cenfurc them, or give Or-
ders and a like Authority to other.% of this there is nox^ne word
in particular. To expreflemyfelf: Although many men rea-
sonably have thought, that St. Paul Conyented both Bifiops
and Presbyter* under that general name of Presbyters • as Writs
are fent out to fummon the Barons of the Kingdom to Parlia-
ments, by which word was underftood both Earls and Dukes^
although by the Name and Notion cabled the houfe of Lords ^
So Bifiop were called along .being Presbyters, under thac name
they are all called both from Efhefpts and the Adjacent Parts,
though that bg put down only ; and then St. *PWgave then*
all their Charge, to Took to their Several Duties, and execute
their feveral Commiffions, which they had beforereceived- which
10 2 His Second Argument anftvered.
is all that thefe words can enforce •, although this is reafonable,
yet methinks this is more probable, that they were all, or for the
moft parr, but bare Presbyters, for in the firft Age of the Church,
when the Converfion of men to Chrift was new , and there were
but few Chriftians, few Presbyters were neceflary, and then
much fewer Bifbops, efpecially the Apoftles living and Hpifcopi-
zing, one of them enough for Twenty of us • and therefore one
Hi/hop for a great Nation, as Tutu for Creet, where were an
hundred Cities, was fufricient •, but Religion increafing in the
hearts of men, more Presbyters are necelTary, and they increa-
fing, there muft be a greater necefiity likewife of Bifbops, but
that any of thsfe fhould be fuch as we call Bifbops^ to have pow-
er over other Presbyters, and to give them orders, is no way ap-
parent } This therefore proves nothing for their parity. But he
addes, that the word Bifbop is never ufed in the New Teftament,
but the Actions therein required belong to any Presbyter. He
excepts the Cafe of Judo* , Ads 1.20. For my part : it is not
material how the word is ufed, but what I labour for, is, that
there is fuch a Thing as the word Bifbop now ufed doth fignifki
and that the more he or any other Trouble themfelvesagainft it,
it will appear the more clearly , as hitherto it doth. I will
proceed therefore with him, page 25. Heframeth his Second
reafon thus.
SECT. X.
Hk Second Argument anftvered.
IF they be difiinB, the Bifbop is Super tour - y but he cannot be
fuperiour ^ every Superiour Order hath fptperiokr AEis and
honours belonging thereunto , above the Inferiour ; but Bifbops
have neither above thofethat are Presbyters ; for if labouring in
the Word and DoElrine be an At~l above ruling, and is mofi wor-
thy of Double honour : then the AtJ and honour of a Presbyter is
above the Aft and honour of a Bifbop ; for they only affume the
Atls of rule, but give the Presbyters leave to labour in the Word
md Dotlrine.
I have at large difcourfed what labouring w the word and
"DoUrine
His Second Argument anfwered. io
Dotlrinets. I will not repeat now, but begin with his laft [For
they only a fume, &c.~\ which is the foundation upon which this
whole difcourfe is built • and I anfwer, that the Bifhops do not
only affume the Atlsofrule, but eftee'm it their duty to labour in
the Word. Andif Mr. Hooker would without prejudice Confi-
der, even of that kind of hbouring which he and his Sort un-
derftand it, Pulpit- preaching, the World never yielded more
fruitfull Industries than thofeof our Biftiops, whofe Works live
to bear witnefle for them being dead; and therefore I conceive
this to be an Argument of fpleen, rather than reafon h and for
the fecond Claufe of thi$ foundation, that thej give the Pres-
byter leave to labour in the Word • they do much more , for they
Epifcopize over them, and look to them, and by Authority over
them make them do it, encourage them who do, and punifh
thofe who do not •, If men have mifdemeaned themfelvcs in their
Office, nodeubt but Twenty Presbyters have done fo for one
Bifiof ; but yet neither the one nor the other arelefie fure Bi-
vino, for that ; Judas his Office was goodpSc' was an ill Officer.
Nicholas his Office was good , he an ill Officer, this chofe by
the Apoftles, that by Chrill himfelf . thus Offices are not dis-
paraged by the Officers. But Confider further, that although
labouring in the Word with the people, may be a more Excellent
Work than governing or ruling the people , as it is more excel- *
lent toperfwade, than to coropell men to vertuous Adions.They
are but half vertues that are forced; yet governing Presbyters^
which is a proper ad of Bifhops, is more excellent than hbouring
in the Word to the people, by how much the Extent of the be-
nefit is more General : Itproduceth the Good of a Dioceffe, as
that of a Partfh. Butonceagain, although I had"thought e-
nough had been faid to that Text, i Tim. 5. ij. Let the Elders
that rule well be accounted worthy of Double honour-, but ejpecia/ly
they who labour in the Word and Dotlrine ; yet I will adde fome-
what for illuftntion. Suppofe this fpeech were turned from
the Church to the Army, and a man (hould fay thus-, Xct the
Elders, the OfHcers of the Army who govern or rule well their
Regiments, or the Army, be worthy of double honour, but es-
pecially they who labour and toyl in the heat of the battel \ coufd
any man Collect from hence, that it were a better Ad to labour
in the Aft of fighting, than to fleer and direft the fighting ?
No
104 H* s Third Argument an fiver ed.
No fure : it is an Aft becomming a private Officer % and con-
cernsa few ^ but the other who rules weX, hath the whole for-
tune of the diy, the fate of a whole Kingdom fometimes depen-
ding on him ; yet if he can and do upon defperate occafions
thruft bimfdf into great hazard, he hath an efpecialty of this
Double honour due to him, and yet it would not befit him to
hazird the day, which depends on his providence, by neglect-
ing direction , to tbrutt himfelf into perpetual dangers. Thefe
Bifhopsare the Generals of this Spiritual Militia, they are to di-
rect and ovcrfee their Diocefle, to encourage, to command In-
feriour Officers to their Duties^ when they do this well they
are worthy of double honour «, but if when great occafions
ftiall require , they aft themfelves what at ocher Times they
command, and take care that others (hall do it likcwife, they
iiave an Efpecialty of Double honour due to them, which is the
full Senfe of that Text •, Elders which rule well have a double
honour, becaufe they thave a double excellency-, both do their
own, and make others do their duty^ but if they who have
abilities do rule Vvell, and labour too, then especially much more
is that honour due.
SECT. XL
H# Third Argument anfrvered.
I Come now to examine his Third Argument , which I am
forrytoread^ for it is fo full of illogical deductions, asme-
thinks it fhould not be poffible for any man to think he could
perfwade by them : It is thus framed, if they differ from Pres-
byters Jure Divino, then there arefome Miniflers by Divine Au-
thority neceffary for the gathering of the Church , and per feeling
the body of Chrifi , be fide s that of the Presbyter •, for if the
Church can be ferfetled without thefe , there is no need of
thefe.
I will ftay here a while. This Confequence is not good- for
Minifters may be neceffary for the gathering, which are not
neceffary for the perfecting the body of Chrift : we fee Pro-
phets were neceffary for the Gathering, and the Extraordinary
pare
His T bird Argument anfwered* \o<
part of Apoftles, which arc not ncceffary for the perfecting.
Now here is a Conjun&ion Gathering and Perfecting. His
iecond Confequenceisas bad : If the Church can be perfected
without thefe, there is no need of thefe- this doth not follow i
things may be neceflfary ad ejfe, ad per f Hum etfe, and yet o-
ther things may be neceflary to theeafie obtaining this Ejfe.
I do but give you the non-confequence of his manner of Argu-
ment- obferve his Minor.
But there is no CMinifter necejfary for the Gathering and Per*
feeling of the Church, befidesthatof the Presbyters : He proves
this :' fiecaufe the Apoftle fetting down the fever al Ministries
% Which Ci>rifl hadpurckafed, and by Afcention be flowed upon his
Churchy when he gave Gifts to men for that end, they are only
comprehended in thefe two, P aftor s and Teachers , Ephef. 4. 12,
1 3 . and they Who are given for this end s can and [hall undoubted-
ly attain it. Confidcr here the Inconfequence^of this Argu-
ment: ljecaufe (faith he) the Apofile id that place fets down
none other- therefore there is no other. We have examined
that Text fufficiently (I thought) already, but this Starts ano-
ther Negative note, Tbe Apoftle doth not fay there, that there
are no other but what he fets down, nor doth he put any Exclu-
(i ve Term, as thefe > and thefe only are they, i am fure in the
12. to the Romans he hath another reckoning of things like
Offices, and (6 in the 1 Cor. 12. 28. I know he may fay, thac
with a Trick of Wit thefe may be brought about by fubordina-
tion to amount to the fame thing and number, and fo 1 can re-
duce them to two only, Extraordinary, and Ordinary, or ru-
ling and teaching , a principal and fubfervient ; but uniefle he
can (hew a Negative or exclufive Term in the Texr, he cannot
draw a Negative inference : So that although the means that
our Saviour appoints (hall attain rsend, yet the means he ap-
points muft be totally taken, not one piece without another,
and this Text doth not fay, that is the Total means; this is
known in Logick, pofttaCaufa, ponitur effetlm, but it rauft be
totalis CauJ a, not partialis. But now fuppofe his Confequence
were good in Logick, will the Text bear him out in the mat-
ter ? Doth the Text name none but thefe Paftors and Teachers?
Yes fure : and although thefe two (as I have (hewed) are but
one, yet Aposlles are different, and thefe feem without diftm-
O dion
oc5 Htf Fourth Argument^ &t\ anjwered.
cUon to be necefiary to the perfecting of the body of Chrifi , and
Bifbops by all Confent fucceed the Apoftles in tlis Duty^ I
will not defcant upon Prophet, to (hew the fenfe and meaning of
it, as not pertinent • this is enough to fhew the weaknefle of
his Argument if the Text were granted to allow his deduction
out of it. But he proceeds as unluckily, as if all thi» were
granted.
where (faith he) the Jjfue is, if PaftorsandDoSIors be fuffici-
tftt Teaching Miniftryes , to perfetl the Church -, then there
weeds no more but thefe.
I will not lofe my felf in his long period * Suppofe thefe were
fufficient Teaching Miniftries, is there no more requifite but
teaching? Yes- to look to them that they do teach, and teach
ri^ht Doctrine.
But (faith he) if thefe be enough, all others be fuperfluons. I
anfwer, thefe are enough for their own Work, if they would be
good, and all induftrious workmen- but there is neceility for
fome Cufiodire Cufiodes: I am weary with this,
SECT. XIL
Mis Fourth Argument concerning JurifdiSli-
on answered.
His Fourth Argument is thus framed •, DiftinB Office smuft
have diftint! Operations : Operari fequitur effe • Butthty
(that is, Bifhops ) have n$ diftintl Operations from Presbyters :
if there be any, they mnft be Ordination and furifdillion • but both
thefe belong to Presbyters : furifdi&ion, John 20.23. Whofefoe-
verjins ye remit, &c. 'Binding andloofmg imply a potter ofCen-
furing^ as well as preaching, and both are given in the Apoftles to-
their Succeffors, the rulers and Elders of the Churches, vshofuc-
ceed them in their Commiffion.
Let him prove, that thefe who are here Elders of the Inferiour
rank Succeed the Apoftles in that part of their Commiffion, and
his Conclufion is granted ; but that he can never do, and there-
fore labours not for it : otherwife I have (hewed that there
were parts of the Apoftles fulnefie of power imparted to one,
and
- -
Ordination not given by Presbyters. 107
and part to another, as the Divine Wifdom dire&ed them to
divide it for the good of the Church-, this they muft grant, who
make P afters, Rulers, Teachers, diftinft Offices.
SECT. XIII.
Ordination not given by Presbyters.
FOR the Second, Ordination, he brings Scripture , 1 Tim.
4. 14. He only Ciphers the Text, I will put down the
words-, Neglect not the Gift that is in thee, which was given thee by
Prophefywith the laying on of the hands of the Presbyters-, His Col-
lection hence is, That this Gift Was his Presbyterial or Epifcopal
Office, and that this power Was Conveyed to him , by the laying on
of the hands of the Presbyters -, and therefore Presbyters have
power of Ordination.
I will not here difpute what is meant by Prephefie, as not per-
tinent to this Caufe -, nor will I trouble my difcourfe with what
is meant by this Gift, which hath received another Interpretati-
on by fome of belt Authority , but will pitch upon the word
Presbytery, and, it may be, oflmpofttion of hands ; For this word
n?eund;r flood for the Ecdefiaftical Au-
thority which he had ^ or fecondly were Presbytery underftood
for a Synod of Presbyters, as they call them, which none hue
themfelves affirm, yet it would not follow, that they received it
from their Jmpoption of hands, but with it, faith the Text, with
the Imf option of hands of the Presbytery : when in 2 Tim. i. 6.
hefpeaking, I think of the fame Gift, he faith, Vohich thou hafi
received by the Imp 'option of mj hands • here, by, as there, with,
and fo is the phrafe varied in the Original, MtTa, and aioc, St.
Pauls impofition had fome fignal force, but theirs was only a
Circumftance by the by, not operative : But I enforce not this k
although I am perfwaded the Text would make it good-, but an-
fwer peremptorily , That Presbytery there meant, was not a
Presbytery of the Inferiour Order, and I fpeak no more than St.
Chryfofiome in exprcfle words, This is not under flood of Presbyters
but Bifbops, and all the Ancients^ if he fliall require me to prove
it out of Scripture, That Presbytery ever fignifies a Company of
Bifiiops, which kind of Difputing is ufed amongft fome : I an-
iwer,inthis place I am not to prove, but anfwer^ and I reply,
that neither they , nor any, I think, can (hew me this word
Presbytery ufed in any other place than thefe I have named , and
then I am fure it cannot be proved that it frouldfignifiethat
inferiour Order. Thus have I done with this reafon of his, I
could colleft even hence a Strong Argument againft them, but
I will referr it,
4
SECT. XIV.
Mr. Hookers Argument ottt of St. Hicrome
anfrvcred.
AT thelaft Hooker comes to that Canvafed place of St. Hie-
rome, and here he begins to boaft of Antiquity ; If (faith
8te) vn look, n tmoitnt Timet ^ that frime pine of Hierome ad
Evagriura
Mr. Hookers Argument ^ &*c. atifrvered. 10?
Evagrium Jhews the Charter whence tilth Authority is derived,
Unum ex fe eleduminaltioriGraducollocarunt, quern Epifco-
pum nominaverunr.
This piece ofSt. Hierome fpmewhac amazed in: upon the firfl:
view of it Y not but he was a man , and might by paffion be
fomewhat tranfported ; but although I have read it in hirn be-
fore, and oftenurgedinthe School, yet me-thought not in fuch
Significant words. To underftand him therefore, Conceivethat
he writ this Epiftle to Evagriw ag^inft a Cuftom that had crept
into the Church oiRome, as it feems, thatfome men did prcferre
Deacons before Presbyters ; this I can gueiTe to happen upon the
rife of Cardinal Deacons, which begin to flourish in thofe days^
upon this St. Hiereme magnifies the P 'res byterian Order , fliews
how Presbyters and Bijbnps were one, and were called by the
fame name in Scripture, which el fe where he aifirmeth likewife,
and there he feems to make the difference betwixt a &sfi:>p in
refpe& of Jurifdidion, not to be as two Orders, but Gradw /»
erdine ; and therefore he faith, that in Alexandria which was
founded by St. Mark^ in the time of Heractim and DionyftHs-,
Presbytcri femfer unum exfe ekttum in excel fiuri Gradn collocar
turn Epifctpum nominabant.
But prefenrly he makes a Bifiop In the fame Epiftle like a Ge-
neral in an Army r and yet comes off, guidemmfacit Epi(copm
except* Ordinatione quod mn facit Presbyter ; and at the Con-
clufion of that Epiftle, compares Bifhops \Presbyters and Deacons^
to Aaron^ the Inferiour Priefts and Levites.
Whence it abundantly appears, that not only St. Hierome
otherwhere, but even here oppofeth thefemen expreily in the
QaStofOrdimti(m y and iurely evidently enough in the bufinefs
©f Jurifdidion , Comparing the FAfhopt to Generals and Aaron. ;
But then mark thefe miftakes in his Quotation , where he puts
Collocaverunt for Collocatum, as if the Presbyters had given him
his place or Dignity ; when it is* no more but this, that from St,
Mark/ time down- ward the Presbyters of Alexandria had one
chofen out of their Presbytery which was ele&ed abovethereft,
and called Bifiofo which was, that their Bifopwis-diokn a-
mong them , whether by them or no, I difputc not now. So
that this Epiftle of Hierom being read, and this place Confide-
xed 3 1 know* no- reafon why it fliould be urged againft. their
powev
i io Mr. Hookers Argument, &>c. anfwerecL
power of Ordination or J mrifiliftimi Firft, bec:ufe this was the
Practice only of a particular Church, and as he difputes con-
cerning Rome in the fame Epiftle, may mucheafier be objected
to Alexandria, Si Author it as qn&ritur, Orbis major eft urbe.
And again in the fame Epiftle , J%u id mihi prater unius urbm
Confuetudinem I This might be : but I yield not that there is
any force to this purpofe out of St. Hieromes phrafe, but on-
ly that they had one elected out of their number which was pla-
ced in an higher degree, and called a Bifrof , not naming who
ordained him , or who elected him • but fuppofe they (hould
Elect him, would it follow that they had power of Ordinatioa 1
Certainly no- the people or Patron may elect their Parfon, but
not ordain him : or, if they ftouid ilect and ordain him, which
will never be granted ^ yet would it follow, that he had Juris-
diction and fole power of ordaining others ; a Matter of a Col-
ledge is elected to his Office by the Fellows, and ordained
according to the Lawes , yet unlefTe by Authority delegated
from him , no Fellow can choofe , much Icffe nuke the leaft
Fellow or Scholar in the Houfe. Take St. Hieroms Inftance ^
The Emperor or General of an Army dies, in his place the Ar-
my choofeth and Conftitutcs another Emperor , as often hap-
pened in Rome , when they had made their Elect!on, then he
had power both of Jurifdiction in Governing them who chofc
him, and of Ordaining inferiout Officers which were under
him, but over the reft of the Army : So that although it be
true in Nature, that which can do the greater, can do the lelTe 5
yet it is not true in Politick Affairs, as thus. In an Elective
Kingdom, or the Empire, they who have power to choofe the
Emperour himfelf, yet, when they have chofen him , have not
power to choofe the leaft Conftable or Inferiour Officer, but
the Emperor only : fo that here are wonderfull inconfequences
in this Difcourfe, if much more were granted than indeed is
any way true ; and yer, as if all were true, he deduceth ftrange
Conclusions -, whence it followes ( faith he ) firft, that Bifaps
Vcere firft Presbyters : I grant it ; fecondly , that they had their
firft Conftitution andEletlion from them : I deny that propofi-
tion ; Firft, St. Paul and the Apoftles Conftituted many Bi/hops
in their feveral precincts, Timothy, Titus, many more : Then
j; deny the Confequence or Dependance it hath upon the pre-
mises .
The Truth explained. 1 1 1
mifTes v lor although all that were true in ^&rWr/*, yet that
is no rule to the whole World, befides that the fame Method
was ufed any where elfe, which is apparently grofle; his next
Deduction is as bad, Ergo, (faith he) Presbyters had their rife
and Ordination before Bifiops ; if they had, what would follow ?
It ispofiible the Apoftles might make Presbyters firft, and chufe
and make Biihops out of them, if not, the Apoftles we have, and
fhall prove were Biftiops, who were before Presbyters.
He faith, Jf they can give Ordination to Bi/bops, they may to
Presbyters ± Both the Proposition and the Deduction have been
Confuted already,
Laftofall, hededuceth, They Vvho have the fame Commijpo^
have the fame fo^er from Chrifl.
But they ak have the fame Commiffion, John 20. 2 1 . Prom mi~
f time Pater, egomittovos^ I put the words, ashcdoth, in La-
tine, it was faid to all the Apoftles Equally, and to all their
Succeffors indifferently,
I deny that the plenipotence fpoken there was fpokento all
that fuccecded the Apoftles in any part of their Office ; thtre-
are diverfe Things communicated to one, which were not ta
another, according to their very Doctrine, only Bifiops fuc-
ceededthem in their fulneffe of power, in Ruling, and Giving
Orders; and therefore thefe are bold Conclufions, which are
only fpoken, not proved by him.
S E C T. XV.
The Trutfa explained.
IRave done with his Arguments, and now apply myfelfto kt
down what I Conceive fit to prove my Conclufion , which
is, That there was fmh a Thing m Epifccpacyfetled by the Ape*
files in the Church; If I had no other reafon, it might pcrfwade
meneafity to credit it, becaufe thattheChurchinthe old Law
feems to be governed by fucha Difcipline, where (as- 1 laid out
of St, Bierome) there was Aaron, the Priefts and the Levi tes •,
for although this Argument be not neceffary, yet becaufe the
Wifdom of God is not to be paralleled in Polity fo well a* Natore^,
k
112 The Truth explained.
it fhould be reafonable for men co chink , that where is n<>
Ground for a Difference in tins fecond Church under the New
Teftament , from that former under the Old, there God fhouJd
not vary in the Difcipline ; and, I rhink, no man can (hew me a
reafon for fuch a Difference: either that men are more united r
or that the Church doth require a leflc Union now, than then •
which two, as they are the heads from which we enforce Epif-
c )pacy in that matter ofGovernment : fo they muit be the heads
from which any (trong Argument of force mull be deduced , to
(hew the difference. This being fo, it is fit for us to Conceive,
(without flrong reafon againft ir) that there is fuch a Conformi-
ty, efpecially if co this be added the great uniformity and con-
venience thac the Ancient Levitical Law had to our Ecclefiaftical
("which might abundantly be (hewed ) in other things, wichout
fotne L anguage exprefiing a difference in a dubious Cafe, it were
it we (hould adhere to Gods former practice.
But then again, our Saviour in his life-time hatching a Church
in Embrione, He, as I have (hewed, made two diftind Orders,
dpoftles, and the Seventy , and thefe both Preaching Orders,
without there werefome main reafon to the Contrary 9 we can-
not eafily fubferibe to -another Difcipline, nor furely would have
quarrell'd at that, but by reafon of pride in themfeives, that they
would be all Bifhops, like the Confpirators againft Mofes, Nttm-
bers 1 6. who being men of Quality in lfrtel, were not Content
to be Princes in their Condition, but would be Equal to the Su-
preara • So thefe men are not Content with their rank, which
is high and great in the Church of God, ualefle they (hall pluck
down thehigheft of all ^ and not be fubordinate, but fupream in
their Prelatical Principalities ; or elfe, which is a fpice of the
/ame vice, there is amongft them an Abhorring of Obedience,
which indeed is the Mother and Ground of all Virtuej and al-
though they would have all their Subjects obey them in an In-
folent manner, yet they would obey none other themfeives : and
for a Countenance to this pride and ftubborneneffe ftudy Scrip-
ture, and wreft it to their purpofe, which how weak it is for them,
/nth been (hewed, how flrong againft them, I (hall now urge.
SECT,
My Firji Argument, &>c. . 115
SEC T. XVI.
My Firji Argument from Scripture to prove
Epijcopaty.
MY lirft Argument from Scripture (hall be thus framed,
That government Which the Apoftles did fettle in 1 heir
Government of 'Churches, that is Afofiolical. But the Apoftles
did fettle fuch an Epifcopacj as I require ; Ergo, fuch an Epifco-
pacy i6 Apoftolical. My Major T conceive not to be denyed; for,
as I have (hewed, we ought not to feek for exprefle Terms to
(hew that they made a Law in fuch peremptory Words, Thac
this or this we enaft perpetually for the Government of ail
Churches, this or the like is not to be found any where, nor doth
any Government pretend to it. There is no Book unquestiona-
ble of their Canons extant, but only Regifters of their Acts f
and certain Epiftles, which fet down what they did do, and from
that AfTure us what we (hould do.
The nYft place I (hall infifton, will be that I formerly touch-
ed, Tit. 1.5. For this Caufe left I thee in Creet, that thou Jhoul-
defl fet in Order the Things that are'wanting , and Ordain El-
ders in evrry City, as I have appointed thee. This Text I have
handled before, and have (hewed that in more exprefle Terms
St. Paul could not Authorize one man to that Office, which we
pretend to, than he did here •, I have fpoken likewife of that
Shift they have for it , to fay he was an Evangelift, and by thac
Authority did Act thefe things ; to which i think may be irre-
fiftably objected , that it can no where! be (hewed that he was
an Evangelift •, and adly. it can no where be (hewed that an
Evangelift fad fuch an Authority belonging to his Office; and
therefore that muft needs be but a weak refuge to fly unto ;
A Second Shift of fome is, That this Commiflion was given to
Titus but in Common with others, as one of the Presbyters,
conjunftim, not divijim , joyned with them, not fevered from
them-, but by fuch Tricks men may cart orTall Scripture- but firfl
I would have them (hew me where ever there was fuch a Com-
miflion given to a Presbytery, which they can never do. Se-
P condly,
314 My Firji Argument, &>c.
sondiy, let them Confidcr, it would be as fafe, nay much fafei\,
for me to lay, that power given to the Presbytery , muft be by
the Sole virtue of Afibciation with the Supreame, as they can,
when 1 ih^w a Commiflion given to one Man, fay it is meant of
him in the Company of others, and the more agreeing tofenfe^
becaufe when this Commiflion is granted, it implyes at the leaft
that he muft be of the Quorum , which to none others could be
enforced : And again , when we read fuch a Precept given to
any man, it mud be underftood , that he muft have power to
execute that Authority, which certainly if he could only Ad in
Commiflion with others, he could not^ becaufe fuppofe St.
Paul Chargeth him to Ordain Elders in every City, fuch, and
(o qualified, he might anfwer , in many Cafes the others will
not joyn. Suppofe he fhould flop the mouths of Deceivers , It
is likely the great deceivers would be amongftthe Presbytery
themfelves^ he can do nothing without their Confent which is
nothing of himfelf ^ not he, but they therefore muft have the
Charge given them ; for he is not, by thefe men r capable of per-
forming it v and as for their Charge, it is no where given: Up-
on thefe rcafons, I cannot fee a poflible Colour to avoid this
Text, but that Thus had fuch a Commiflion Epif copal, teEpif*
copAcy is- taken with us>
SECT. XVIL
A Second Argument to prove Epifcopacy.
MY next place fliall be out of i Tim. in which we may
difeer n-th'e fame Commiflion , as folly delivered as be-
fore concerning Ordination, Cfoap. 5.22. Lay hands fuddeniy
in no man. The Qualities of the perfon9 upon whom he fhould
lay on hands, defcribed Chap. 3. from verf. 1. to 14. for this all"
may be (aid as was before in the Cafe of Thus-, Here is 3
Command andDire&ion to Ordain the Clergy Officers given
to one man, and therefore by the way of Eptfcopi^ing •, It w?s
* Grange unludcy Violence to the Text which the Gfofle of
Bt** give* : Do not lay hands (faith he) upon any fbddenfy,
-^01^ * # f/f, astnuch as in thee lies j for ( faith he ) This
pewer
A Second Argument to prove Epifcopacy. 1 1 5
power was not in Timothy alone, but an Election being made
by the Confent of the whole Church ; The Prieft a chief mania
the name of the Presbytery, by Impofirion of hands, did Confe-
crate him who was cbofcrv to the Lord, Is not this a ftrange
abufingofthe Wordof God, and forcing it toferve mens car-
nal defignes • St. Paul bids him not do it fuddenly , that fuppofes
he could and fhould do it, Beza faith, he cannot do it not at all,
but is only the Mouth of the reft r he hath no power to do any
thing more than another . but never (hews any reafon for what
he faith, but referres the Reader to Chapter 4th. ver. 14th.
where Timothy is faid to receive the power by the Impofi-
tion of hands of the Presbytery, of which I have fpoken fome-
what already , and God willing (hill more hereafter ; but
wh.t is all this to thepurpofe? Timothy is Commanded, there-
fore he could do it, yea, he is commanded not to do it fuddenly;
therefore he could do it both wayes, leafurely and fuddenly \
and he himfelf, in his Short Notes upon the fame Text, faith^thac
the Command is , Neminem Antifies leviter Ordinate^ Do thou
Bifbop, for fo Antifies is often ufed, Do thou ordain none light-
ly ., but this Exooiition hath no Colour for it , nor could St.
Paul properly fpeak morediftin&ly •, for it had not been accor-
ding totheufual Language of men, to fay, Do thou alone do
this, when a man is authorized to do anything; or, Do it by
thy fole power : they are not Languages ufed, nor do we ofe
to bid a man do any thing which he cannot Ad alone, but bid
him joyn with others in doing, fuch others who are neceffarily
Co-operators with him in the Work he is to do.
SECT. XVIII.
Epifcopal JurijdiSiion proved.
FO R his JxrifdiBion I need not fpeak much, all that Epiftfe
is full of it -, only I will touch upon one place, which being
me-thinks of great Brightneffe in it felf, will ferve likewife to
give light to the reft, and that fhall be, 1 Tim. 5. 1 9, 20. A-
gainfl an Elder receive not an Accnfation, hut before ( or, as the
Margin, under) two or three mtneffes- y Verf.20. Them that ; »,
refake before alf % that others alfe may fear.
P z From
j 6 Epifcopal JnrijdiBion proved.
\ rom whence thus I difcourfe : Timothy was capable of re-
ceiving Accufationsagainft Presbyters, or not receiving, which
is a great piece of Judicial Authotity^ he was iikewife Autho-
ritatively to rebuke or correct Presbyters, in fuch fort, as if they
were Sinners, and Guilty of the Accufationlaid to their Charge,
that others by their punifhment might learn to avoyd their faults.
Do thefe things found like fellow Presbyters without a Superio-
rity of Junfdidion? Can one fellow Presbyter Cenfure another,
or he who is barely a Temporal Speaker or Mouth of the reft?
This feems to me as full as could be, how his Authority was not
like Presbyters, only over their flock, but like a Superiour
Shepherd overlnfenours.
But here, with fome more Colour, in the Cafe of Timothy
they plead he was an Evungelifl^ becaufe, 2 Tim. 4. 5, he is
bid do the PVorJ^ofan Evangelift T and therefore, by the prero-
gatives belonging to that Omce, he. might do thefe works of
Jurifdidion ; ftrrdy, although he was bid dothework^of an E-
vangelifls yet that may be without being one ex officio. An
Evaxgelift is nothing but ekher a Writer or a Preacher of the
Gofpel j fo that, do the work of an Evangelifl, is no more, but
preach the Gofpel : and [ cannot nnd one man among the Anci-
ents that makes Timothy an Evangelifl by Office • but. I do find
St. Chryfoftome upon Lphef. 4. peremptorily faying, That both
Timothy and 7 itm were not Evangelifl s >, and I find no one m in
among the Ancients, nay I may adde Beza himfelf,or C alvin^no
one man making it a parr of an Evangdi(ts Office either to give
Orders, or the power of Jurifdiclion. But thefe later make them
aj Subfervient Office to the Apoftles- and if we fhould allow that,
what more proper Service than that their name implies, to
preach the Gofpel about with them, as they travelled ?. So that
k feems tome, that thefe Writers when they utter fuch Things,
being learned men fome of them, and reasonable, cannot de-
ceive thcmfelves with thofe Shadowes , but think to drive on
their Defign with the people, who hearing the name of an j?.
vangelift, and not knowing what it is, imagine any thing ofit
, what they pteafe to infinuate, which in this particular is, that an
Evangetifl had fome tranfondent power over Presbyters, both
to ordain and govern them, which was not Communicable to
others:, but they never (hew, that any fuch Authority is a/figned
them.
The Revelation averting Epifcopacy. 1 1 J
them, or any fuch Duty exacted from them. Well , it appears
that Timothy had Epifcopal Jurifdidion, as well as Titns } and
this name Sva-ngelifl given by them for this Occafion only is but
a meer Illufion, I (hall here therefore for a while leave St, Pauls
Epiftles, and go to St. John, in the Revelation, Chap, i . verf. 2Cu
The f even Stars are the Angels of the Seven Churches.
SECT. XIX,
The Revelation ajferting Epifcopacy.
HEre thefe Angels were fuch men as had Epifcopal Jurif-
di&ion, appears moft reafonably to any Indifferent Rea-
der, upon thefe Grounds -, Firft, becaufe this word Angel % as [
have (hewed, hath in its own figniflcation genuinely the fame
fen fe with Apoftle, and therefore may well be fitted to the fame
Office ^ and as that was never applyed to any under a BifBop ^
fo neither this, as any man can (hew me in the whole New Tefta-
ment That it i9 a name likewife appropriated to Spirits fent
about Apoftolicai Employments , and endowed by God who
fends them with Apoftolical Authority : So that then > whether ■
Angel be applyed to Spirits, or men, it will in both or either re-
ceive this Common fenfe to be underflood, That thefe perfons^
whether Spirits or bodies, have divine Authority to actthofc
things they are employed about : Now then> thus the word
being of fuch a fenfe, and no where otherwife underftood,- we
may from hence think it mod reafonable,, that this name fhould
be affixed to fuch men • nor do I find any man adventuring to
fhew any place where this word doth !e(Te than fignifie a
Bifliop.
Then let us Confider, that they are called after in the fe-
cond Chapter, The Angel of the Church of Ephefus, the Angel
of the Church of Smyrna, &c. which being great and populous
tegions, could not reafonably but have many Presbyters in them,
and then to write to one Angel (if the name Angel did (loop fo
low as Presbyter ) were to write to no man knew whom , be-
caufe there were fo many there; but if Angel (as it is) be un-
derflood of one in an higher and more exalted State than the
reft*
1 i 8 The Revelation averting Epifcopacy,
reft, who might be known by this name Angel % as peculiarly
due'tohim; then and then only we may underiiand who it is
that is meant by it- but if any man fhould aIlow*notbing but
Scripture to prove fo clear truth, and fay there was but one
Presbyter in each of thefe Churches, he may find that Ads 2a
-ver. 17, 18. St. Paul fent for the Presbyters { in the plural num-
ber ) of the Church ofEphefw , and when they were come to
him he faid to them •, (till they and them , in rhe plural number.
That Text will require a further Examination perhaps hereafter,
in the mean time take this, becaufe it is urged for a Unity of
Office betwixt a Bifbop and a Presbyter, from the 28 th verfe;
where St. Paul faith, Take heed toy our (elves and to all the flocks
over which the Holy Ghofthath made yon Overfeers , that is, Bt-
(hops ; then thofe that were called Presbyters before , were cal-
led Bijhops afterwards : I have often faid before, that the name
Bifhop and Presbyter , I conceive to be taken promifcuoufly in
the New Teftamcnt for the fame Office ^ That the word Apo-
file was folely that name which wasufed, by the way of propri-
ety to that Office, both to themfelves who were originally fuch,
and to thofe who by their Appointment fucceeded them - 9 But
this is it I contend for, That amongft them which they made
their Succeflbrs, they gave co fome of them a greater and fuller
power than to others, both to govern, and to ordain, which
fince the Church hath called Bijhops. Now then from hence,
whether there were many Bijhops in the Province of Ephefw,, or
many Presbyters only, yet many there were, and theie many
were fo inferiour to one, that he is called the Angela which name
was fo appropriated to him, as he might know to whom the Let-
ter was dire&edj or elfe, as if a Man (hould write a Letter, and
fuperfcribe it, to the Alderman of London, where are many , no
man could Mow whither to fend it, or who fhould receive it •
but if a man fuperfcribe it to the Mayor, every man knows who
that is: Thus mult it be with thefe, he to whom chis Letter is
fuperfcribed rauft have this Angelical Condition
particular, the 13 th verfe of the 2d. Chapter, where fpeaking to
the Angel ( or Bifiof I may call him mod Confidently ) of the
Church of Fergamm, He commends him, becaufe thou bafi net
denytd my Faith, even in thofe days wherein Antipas was my faith"
full Martyr • If a man would a^k what Commendation of his
Faith was this? What was the Excellency of it > Can any man
anfwer me but out ofEcclefiaftical Story? whereit isrecorded,.
that after a long and pious life full of all virtue led in Pergamm
ne wa*in the dayesofDomitian, for the Teftimony of his Re.
Iigion, put into a brazen Bull, and in that Bull burnt : now then
this Bifieps faith was Eminent , that in fuch a cruel and fiery
Tryal be kept S» Integrity, even in foch a Time when that
horrid Prefident of the death of Antifa* was fet before him.
Thus, I fay, Ecdefiaiucal Story isneceflary for the Expofition
of thefe Epiftles, as you may find prophane Story neceflary for
the Expofition of the Prophets in the Old Teftament ; for a man
then to talk of fuch an Officer, concerning which there is no men-
tion in the Word, nor any in Story, but a Poem, a fiction of
their own Imagination, is not like men that guided tbemfelves-
4ty Scripture, to undertake.
I dofe therefore with the 2d. Exception, which is 9 that their
Government. was not fuch as is Epifcopaf v but only fuch asis
120 The Revelation averting Ep/jcopacy,
the prefidenc of a Synod , to dired: the bufwefie, not Com-
mand more than others, and this certainly the frame of chefc
Letters doth Confute mightily, for they make the Angels re-
fponfible for the faults and herefies which were under the Go-
vernment, which they could not be, if they had only the Au-
thority of Prefidenc, but not of ^0/?/ . for a Prefident of a
Synod hath no Coercive power in himfclf , but as con/oyned
with the reft of the Synod, and involved : Nor hath he any
particular Intereft in the ruling or fwaying the Affairs of the
Chuich, but is the mouth of the Synod ; therefore, -although if
he negled his duty in the Synod he may well be cenfured for it •
yet he cannot have the faults of the Inferiour Clergy or people
layd to his Charge in particular: take one Inftance in the 15th
verfe of the 2d. Chapter- the Angel of the Church of Pergamus
is cenfured, becaufe he had them -which held the Dotlrine of the
Kichohhans^whichChrift bates : Should any one ask why the
Prefident fhould be Cenfured for thefe things- He could anfwer
I am but one man, perhaps they can matter me in the Synod, I
have nothing to do alone ^ but a Bi/hop who hath Coercive
power, and can both examine and cenfure any who are in his
Diocefre, he may be punifhed , becaufe he did not overfee the
flock of Chritf, over which the Holy Gfcoft had made him a
Ruler.
And now here again difcern the neceffity of Ecclefiaflical
Story, to expound this Scripture-, What, can any man tell, is
the ^Dotlrine of the Nicholaitans which God hates , and fo we
ought to hate, but by Ecclefiaflical Story ? which fets it down
to be as well in the Error of Opinion, the Dodrine concerning
the Creation, that it was not by God- as likewifethat ofprac-
tife, that it was Iawfull to have Wives in Common- now by
Ecclefiaftical Story we are taught , that thefe things were the
Kicklaitans Opinions, and thefe are they which God abhorrs.
And now Confider, what fault would it be in the Angel , that
thefe things were hed inhisChurch, but that he had Coercive
Authority to Command , and hinder the proceedings of thefe
Opinions.
A Third Exception is % That rru>fe Epiftles were written to
the Angels, the Prefidents, but by Name, but to the whole Sy-
nod by Intention: fo that although he dired his Epiftle but to
one.
concerning OtUinatian. 12 1
one, yet it is intended unto all •, as when a man fliould fend a
Letter to the Speaker which is to he read in Parliament. But
this is Confuted in the Text moft evidently , becaufe all thefc
things that are Commended or ceofured in any of thefe Hpiilles,
are in the fingular number : fo Chap. 2. verf. 2. / krtow thy works
and thy labour , &c. thy, in the fingular number, and fo in the
reft ; now if he had meant it to the whole Synod, although di-
rected to the Prefident, ic would have been jour works ; nor
could the Speech be proper to fay thy works, when the whole
body was intended- nay it is not imaginable, that thofe eminent
virtues with which he and the other Bilhops are honoured fhould
appertain to the whole Aflembly or Synod of them : fo like-
wife the fault he condemns that Angel of, verf. 4.. that he
(hould forfake his firft love, is not likely to be affirmed of the
Synod ; fo it is moft remarkable in the Epiftle to the Bifhop of
Smyrna,verC. 10. when hefpeaks of the reft, he changeth his
phrafe, The Dtviljha/lcaft feme of you into prifon, and the like;
So likewife to the Angel of the Church of 7%*r*>v*,verf;24.
To you I fay and unto the reft in Thyatira, as many as have not
thisDottrine^&c. Here it is evident, that when the Things con-
cern others, he advertifeth the Bi/hop to acquaint them with it,
and he changeth his manner of Speech, that notice may be taken
what was perfonal to him, and what to others. Thus you fee
with how much wit, and with what fhuffling the Intention of
thefc Scriptures hath been diverted, but toKttlepurpofe, among
fuch as Confider and weigh them.
CHAP. VIII. SECT. I.
Concerning Ordination.
I Come now at the laft to handle Ordination , becaufe I find
many things difcuffed about that, the Clearing of which
will Conduce much to the opening my bufineffe in hand;
and then that being nnidied, I (hall review my Work, and if
there appear any thing unfatisfied, I (hall infer t inch Difcourfes
as (hall beulefull to remove thofe Seruples : Mr, Hooker under-
Q^ takes
1 2 2 His Definition of Ordination conj n^a.
tikes this, where before, Part 2. Chap. 2. pag. 38. and in the
handling of if, pag. 3 9. he propofeth thefe Queftions.
1. Ordination be before Ele&ion ?
2. Ordination gives ail the Effentials to an Of-
fleer?
Whether ^ 3. What this Ordination is, and wherein lies the
full breadth and boundsof the being thereof?
4 In whom the right of difpenfing it lyes, and
by whom it may be difpenfed >
I have put down his very words, and do intend (God wil-
ling ) to handle all thefe Queftions ^ but becaufe he feems to me
to follow an un/uft method, I (hall begin with his Third Quefti-
on, To (hew what that Ordination is of which wedifpute j for
till that be Cleared, we difpute de nonConceffis, as he doth in this
Difcourfe. I will firft examine his Definition, becaufe I will not
multiply unneceffary Contentions. He defines it rhus.
SECT. II.
Htf Dejrnitionof Ordination confuted.
ORdinatlon is an Approbation of the Officer, and Solemn fet"
ling and Confirmation of him in his Office by Prayer, arid
laying dn of x hands.
In this Definition, that which I can Mame, is, firfl that which
be makes the Genus, to wit, an Approbation of the Officer. This
is a prevenient Circumftance, not an Eflential part Conflicting
Ordination-, Firft, men are Approved, then Ordained, and al-
though he calls it a Defcription not a Definition^ which phrafe
abides a larger fenfe than Definition doth; yet even there this
Term is faulty , for it muft be a Defcription of Ordination of
which this i&nopart, no more than many other Circumftances
belonging to it. Again, where he fcith it is a Setting atfdCdn-
frmmg him in hit Office. If by Office he Conceive a particular
Congregation, as by his whole difcourfe he feems to do , then
tRat is not brgeenough to contain that A& which it is dtrefied
to- for men may, yea nraftbe Ordainedbefore they are fetted
iapattkular Congre|ationsj So-tbatastfrtfrafe* Approbati-
-
My Definition fet down and explained. 123
on, precedes Ordination, fo feeling thus in his Office, isCon-
fequenttoit; laft of all, the whole Defcription is too wide for
the Thing defcribed. He takes fetljng in his Office in that
fenfe I have ftiewed, for it agrees to the Miflion of iter/;*^
and S*ul 9 Ads 13.2,3. who were ordained before, as will ap-
pear after, and is yielded elfewhcre |>y hinx This Defcripaoqt
of his is page 75. where before.
SECT. III.
My Definition fet down and explained.
HI S Definition being thus briefly perufed, now take mine.
Ordination is an Aft by which fome Man is Constituted in
fame Ecclefiaftkl^Order of Divine Inftitutio*. This I conceive
to be a Logical Definition, for Definitions (hould be as fhort as
may be, fo they be full, and explain the nature of the Thing de-
fined. The Genus is an Ad in General which agrees to it, and
diverfe others •, TheObjeftofthisA&isaMan-, the Immediate
Effeft and End it Aims at is the Conftitution of an EccJefiaftical
Order ; the Explication of which will be the Chief bufineffe to
underftand the whole Definition : Order is thedifpofition 0/
things either accorning to their place or time ; For time, as yjp-
ftercjay, to day, Order difpofeth when it (hould be done , or in
place, before, behind, at the right hand or the left, above, below;
Now becaufe there are many degrees in Church Affairs, where
one is above or below another •, therefore, when any man is put
into any degree ofjthcfe, this is called a Church Order; that
which hath no degrees, but is where it was, is the lay fort of
men*, Thefeare (aswefpeakinLogick ) otlndividujpns, they
are not in ferie pr&dicamentalu Now therefore it is faid Eccle-
(iaftical Order, becaufe there are Orders which are not Ecclefia-
cal, as Kings, Judges, &c. where there is a fub& ftipra in the
Common- wealth, but belong not to our bufineffe. Again, be-
caufe there are many Ecdefiaflick Orders in the Church of Rome,
which are not truly fuch, but only additions of human Invention,
according as their Church fancyed would conduce to the Dec 0-
rnm of Gods Service, I addc this Term of Divine Inftitution,
Q^2 which
v
22 a Ordination is not before Ele&io??.
which muft be underftood of divine Apoftolical conftitution, and
then it may again be put in thefe Prafes, that Ordination U an
AB by which a c. 1 2 5
SECT. V-
Men may be Ordained without the EleSiion of
the People.
NOW the Contrary is moft apparent in fome Cafe s As
fuppofe Mr. Hooker and Mr. Cotton were adjudged fie
men for the Converfion of the Indians, they had need be fent
with presbyterial Authority, for el fe they could not have right
Authority to admit Converted men into Chrifts Church, buc
the people to whom they were fent could not choofe them, thefe
men muft be ordained Presbyters before they are fent, and e-
lefted before Ordained, but not by the people to whom they
are fent, or the people, that is, the Commonalty from whom
they are fent, who are not Capable to difcern the fitneffe foe
foch a Work ; but their Drift is, the people over whom they
aretoPaftorize# Thus then it is evident, that in fome Cafes Ele~
dion of the Congregation or Church over which a Presbyter is*
put, cannot alwayes precede his Ordination.
But fuppofe again, a Company of Chriftians whofe Presbyter
is dead, in many Cafes they may eleft one to be ordained, be-
fore he is ordained ; and in many cafes they may deft one to this
Charge after he is ordained, (fuppofing that the power of Eleft i~
on were in them ) as thns •, in the firft Cafe they find an able and
fit man, they defire to have him ordained ; in the fecond, they
find an able man already ordained (fine Cur a, ) I put the Cafe
without Exception^ As fuppofe his or Mr, Cottons Congregati-
on deftroyed by Enemies , cannot he be elected to another:
Church, or if Elected, muft he have another Ordination ? I be*
lieve he will not fay ft); Well then, in this Queftion the An-
fwer muft be, the EJe&jpnjmuft precede Ordination,but Ele&i*
on to Ordination , not Ele&iota to a Cfore in the fecond fenfe v
Elc&ion to a Cure may and may not precedeOrdinationo
S'F CT>
1 26 St. Cyprian explained.
SECT. VI.
St. Cyprian explained.
IN all Hookers Difcourfe upon this bufincfle , I find nnthlng
remarkable produced co Confirm this Conclufion, but fome
flafties againft the Papifls , and then againft the Prelates ; but
page 42. he brings certain Quotations of Authors, to which he
aflents, among which there is only one worth the infifting on,
and that is St. Cyprian, out of whom, Lib. 1. Epift. 4. which is
a true Quotation according to the old, and Era/mm Ws Editi-
on > y but according to Pameltw, in 68 Epift. Lib. 4. The words
are, Videmm de Divina Author it ate defcendere nt Sacerdos phbt
prafente fub omnium tcnlis delegatur, & dignta & idontnt pub-
lico Judicio&Teftimonio comprobatur.
This place he ci tes rightly, but what is here, but that the peo-
ple muft be prcfent a9 they are at our Consecrations, to this pur-
pofe, to know whether they have any thing to object againft the
Man, or bis life ^ but here is no word of his Ele&ion ; and I muft
Commend the Ingenuity of the man ; for it is evident out of the
following part of the Epiftle, that he meant no more, becaufc
his Arguments inforce no more but the prefence of the people ;
yet indeed the words immediately preceding do feem upon the
firft view, to carry another meaning, they are thefe , Speaking
of the people i £>uando ("faith he ) iff a maxim e habtat potifta-
tern, vet eligcndidignos Sacerdotes, velindignos recufandii which
words, if they be underftood of more than a Cuftom of the
Church which is confirmed by many Canons, That there ftould
be no clandefltne Confecration , as well as Marriage . but that
the Confecration of Priefts and Bifiiops (hould be in the pub-
lick Church, where any man may except againft them if they
have any thing to that purpofe ; I fay, if this p§t(fiaj eligendi &
recufandi, be more than this, which St. Cyprians Arguments do
not enforce •, yet if there be more meant, it is nothing, but that
the people did Ele& their Sacerdos , which is underftood of 1
Pifhop, as I have intimated heretofore, and is clear in this place,
becaufe the Cafe diluted of, in which St, Cfffum is confulted,
His Argument from the E leSt**"* <■* Vm 12 7
is concerning a tsam^fT' . ;«- » apparent in Story , that many
times it was indulged to the People tochoofc their Bifhop, e£
pecially abour that Ace, wherein there was a kind of Impoflibi-
lity of doing otherwif^when the World was divided into fo many
^reat Schifmes, and the Emperors peremptorily abetting none,
nor deftroying any •, fo that you might know three Biftiops to-
gether in a City, one Orthodox, the other A nan, another No-
vatian^ now in thefe cafes the people chofe their Bifhop when
the old was dead , and adhered to whom they would when he
was alive, unlefle the Emperor incerpofed, as oft he did, or fome
Council Provincial , which Hfcewife was ufed ; but for Divine
right, St. Cjfrian fpeakcth of nothing, but piehfrtfcntt, they
were chofen intheprefence of the people, but to the Benefice,
whether Biftioprick or Parfonage, the Ele&ors have been various
in all Ages, and may be fo - m there being nothing determined,,
by Apoftolical Conftitution, orpra&ife^ yet there is nothing
in all this that fliews chat Ele&ion to a Benefice rouft be be-
fore Ordination, not the leaft word, but rather after- for if it
lies in the people to eleft a worthy Pried ( I To tranflatc Saccr-
dos ) to his Benefice, then he muft be a worthy Prieft before i
for elfe itftiould be, they ftiould eleft a Worthy man to be
Prieft, not eleft a Worthy Prieft to a Benefice, of which St.
Cjfrian feems to fpeak, and which is his Aym v for hisother
Quotations, they are of fuch men as are of little ufe with me , or
with any their Adverfaries -, and therefore I trouble not roy
felf to examine them.
S E C T. VIL
His Argument from the Ele&ion of Deacons r
Afis 6. examined.
AT ttielafiYheurgeth Page 41, -/#?/& About the Elefii*
on of the Deacons that were chofen, firft by the people^,
and after Ordained by the A poftIe», I fetdown mine opinion
of that Aft before, never dreaming then of this Defign, which
it i» aymed at here ; but what I feid then, will ferve my Turn
iKW; Firlh that Eleftion was Qccafionah and therefor* cannot
fee.-
1 7 8 Wh.*L ^ Ordina tion gives, &>c. _
be drawn to a Prefident ; hm >***^*3g& is the like Occafion.
2dly. It was to fuch*» Office which might eafily fall under the
Cognizance of &c people, to wit, the Caring for the poor, and
they might better difcern the fufficiency of men forfuch a pur-
pofe, than the Apoftles themfelves •, Firft then we fee here falls
to the Ground, that if the people had this liberty in an un-
der Offccr, there was much greater reafon they fhould have
it in an Officer of higher degree, in whom they had greater
Intereft, and by whofe admiriillration they were to receive grea-
ter good. This follows not , for this Office was of fuch a
Thing as they might heft know , the Integrity of thofe men
with whom they Converfedj but the other, of an higher nature,
they could not be Judges of fo well : and therefore there is a
diverfe Cafe, the people may be fit to choofe a Collector for the
Poor, a Tithing-man,butcan they be fit to choofe a Judge ? And
indeed it favours of an high preemption , which his delight in
this Conceit tranfports him with, when he faith, as he doth in
that page, That the liberty of the Apoftles in ordaining was not
fo great, as the peoples in choofing ; when the Apoftles had all
Divine Authority from Chrift folely delegated to them, and the
Apoftles did not only ordain thefemen but their very Office it
fclf. I may adde to>this, that the people in this inferiour office
did not authoritative of themfelves choofe thefe, but by parti-
cular direction and command from the Apoftles. I have anfwe-
rcd, as I conceive, all that he fpeaks concerning his firft Quefti-
on, Whether Ordination or Elc&ion be firft ? He Conceives it
not much material - y and therefore concludes, the proof of this
will appear in the Explication of the other particulars, which he
undertakes, and I will follow him.
SECT. VIII.
A
Whether Ordination gives all the EJfentials to
an Officer ?
HIS Second Queftion is, whether Ordination gives all the
EffentUls to an Officer / In handling of which he examines
two things*
Firft,
Horv their Minijlerial Offices, &c. 1 29
Firft, how farr the jEffentials of the Miniftry or Minifter may
be given by Man >
It they nr.y be given and Coriveycd by man, by what means
men may be £ud to do this, whether by Ordinatio^or any other
Appointment of Chrifts ?
Horv their Minijlerial Offices may be
given by men.
Concerning the nrft of chef', he makes his r7rft Conclufion
thus • There is a Caufd virtue put forth in a Subordinate
way by fome under Chrifl, to bring the formality or Jpecifical be-
ing °f an Ecclejiaftical Office to a per f on or party that is Called
thereunto, orftands poffeffed thereof
Alas ! what mighty words are thefe, and how eafily might the
buQnelte of this Propofition have been exprefled to the Capa-
city of any Reader , if he had faid, there is fome power under
Chrift to Conftitute Ecclefiaftical Officers 5 there is no need of
fuch high and difficult Terms of Caufai virtue, Formality, or Ec-
clefiaftical being, which do amufe a weak Capacity, and no way
fatisfie an Intelligent.
The Drift ot his Conclufion is to prove, that there is an
outward Call necelT.ry to a Minifter, which, he faith, is by none
denyed, but by Anabaptifts and Familifts, which folly and mad-
nefle labours (as he lakh J with the loathfomncfle of it felf 1 fo
he contemns them , but truly they are now grown a Considera-
ble Enemy •, but I let them parte to anfwer for themfelves, which
I am confident they cannot juftly- and indeed I grant this whole
Conclufion , and let alone his proofs ofir. But yet becaufe he
placeth a necefllty upon it as furely is Tru:b, I would ask, whe-
ther the neiefiity be not required out of the part of fuch as are
to receive the Paftor or Elder ? and I am fure he muft yield it •
for there is no reafon Men (hould receive fuch a Paftor who is
not lawfully called, (to ufe his own phrafe- ) but then why doth
he defpife the Bifhops Seal and Parchment in a Box, as he fpeaks
page 40. when there can be none other Evidence to the people
of his Call, but this ? And again, becaufe this is an biqh Tc rro,
a Caufai virtue, which he ufeth, I (hall adde fomething co the
R Explication
p Wow their Mimftcrial Office y &c.
Explication of it, which he hath omitted •, there i6 a phyfi-
cal Caufe, and a Moral Caufe. This word Caufe at the firft
reading founds like a Phyfical Operation-, and although in
his fecond Conclufion headdes this Term, Inftrument or means,
yet that is not to be allowed in a phyfical notion; for thefe pow-
ers in men have no phyfical influx into thefe ErTe&s, no not as
Inftruments •, for, as thePhiiofophersfpeak, an Inftrument hath
its particular work in the ErTeft : fo a knife or axe, which be
both Inftruments, have their feveral wayes of Operation, though
mfedby the fame hand, and do their work according to their
particular and proper difpofuions ; but row thefe Agents have
no Influence on the Subject, but only as moral Inftruments • as
a hand and feal have no phyfical Nature to pay a Debt, but on-
ly a moral force, which is granted it by the Law of the Realm;
and from thence it hath this moral force, not a phyfical. Of this
nature I conceive this power granted to men to give Orders, and
it is founded upon that great Commifiion ; As my Father [ent
me, fofend Ijou, with that Authority to grant powers to other
men -, fo that the powers, the Authority granted by them , are
Confirmed by God, they having a moral Caufality to do fuch
Things which God will Confirm, but they working not fo raoch
as Inftrumentaily any phyfical Effect Thus the Conclufion
being explained, I grant it, but in his handlingofir, many things
deferve Cenfure ; for although he bragg at the Top of the 44th.
Page, that he will lend fuch help to the weakeft Reader , that he
may lay his finger upon tke feveral Things • yet indeed he is
mightily perplexed and intricate, which I palTe, and granting
his Conclufion, will notdifiurbhis manner of handling it, only
repeate what he faith at the bottom of the 45 page , -whoever in
He proves it, becaufe his Of-
fice was extraordinary, and theirs Ordinary .• by this Office ex-
traordinary he intends an Evangelifi, I fuppofe, which he cannot
prove to be an Extraordinary Office. Much inconftancy is in
this Difcourfe, juffc now he brought this Inftance, to prove that,
an Evangelift might be called by the mediation of Men, now
he is above their reach •, and then his fecond reafon confounds
this; For, he faith, he hath proved, that an Office was not
meant by this, but by Gift was meant an Ability to do it. A
ftrange uncouth way of Argument. He concludes, pag. 58.
the outward gifting and fitting an Officer to his place, efpecially ex-
traordinary, as beyond the popper and place of a Tresbytery. But
thefirftishere.
This is moft fearful! incongruous fluff to abufe Readers with ;
Who can butguefie by his unufual language there is fomcthing
in it, but he cannot tell what. Who can tell what that is which
he„calls the outward gifting and fitting an Officer for his Call ?
I thought this Gift here fpoken of had been an Inward (as he
S calls
i q8 Htf Second Argument an fiver ecL
calls k elfewhere a gracious endowment of the (ou\) which en-
abled him to ferve God in his Bifhop. ick, which Gift was be-
ftowed upon him, as St. 1'aul defcribes, not an outward thing,
nor cm any man imagine what that outward thing fhould be.
Then he draws this Conclusion, that thefenfe of the place is,
Vejpife not t bo fe gracious Qualifications which God by bit S fir it
in the Extraordinary -way of Prof he fj hath furnifbed, and betrufi-
td thee Vrithall^ the laying on ojihe hands of the Elderfhip by way
ofCcnfetit and approbation concurring therewith, to thy farther In-
conragement and Confirmation in this work^
Now iuppofe all this were true, will this prove, that the (cope
of Ordination by Gods appointment, is not to give the Effen-
tials of an Officers Call, which was his antecedeut to be Confir-
med from this Text , there is no manner of Coherence betwixt
thefe twoPropoficions- fuppofe this were not an Ordination of
Timothy to an Office, yet doth this prove that the word of St,
Paul, 2 Tim. i. 6. By the laying on of my hands, mark the
phrafe cAix, as I before obferved., and indeed he nowobferves
out of Didoclavius • ( although I wonder what ufe they can
rnakeofkagainft us, though perhaps k may be of force againft
Mr. Rutherfords Presbyterian Ordination J I fay, all this doth
not prove, ihatTimotby was nor ordained by St. Pauls laying
on of his hands ; or ifit did, doth it prove that Timothy was not
ordained at all, beaufe we do not read of it? Or, that he could
not ordain without a prae-eleftion of fome Congregation to
a Cure, when he is Commanded, i Tim. 5. 22. not to lay hands
fuAdenly onany ? Thefe things are all filently pafled over, and the
inference from the Tedious vaunting Difcourfe can be nothing
to this purpofe : whofoever will read it a'i large, with thefe notes,
mud needs loath it as unreafonable.
His Inferences pag. 59. are withou* all relation to the former
Difcourfe ; Hence it is plain ( faith he ) that Ordination therefore
fra-fuppo/eth an Officer Confiituted, doth not Conftit ate. The reft
are like this, in which there is no manner ofDependancc betwixt
the Antecedent and the Confequent .♦ So that I cannot ima-
gine, that a man of fo fine words could have fo little rcafon 3 but
that thefe things were fragments found in his Study, and crow-
ded into this place.
SEC T,
His Jbird Argument anjivered. s 130
SECT. XIII.
His Third Argument anfwered.
HIS third Argument, is, That atlion which is Common to per-
fons and performances, or imployments, and applied to them,
7v hen there is no Office at all given ; that Atlion cannot properly be
called a Specificating A El to makf an Officer, or give him a Call.
But the All of Impojition of hand* is apply ed to perfons and per*
fermances as Jpecial Occafion is offered , when there is mo Office
given, nor intended ; therefore it is not an AH which gives in the
Ejfenrials to an Officer*
Confider, in this Argument, how it never enforceth the Con-
clufion which he is to prove. Hi* Conclafion is this f Ordinati-
on, as preceding the Eletlion of the people % doth not give Effentials
to the Call of a Minifter.
Nowinfteadof Ordination he brings in only an outward Ce-
remony, which is Imposition of hinds ^ asifamandifputing of
the efficacy of the Lords Supper, (hould fay, other men may
take bread and break it which do not CommunicatCi for fuch,
and fuch only is the force of his Argument, Impolition of hands
is ufed in fuch A&s where Orders are not given ; therefore the
EfTentials are not given by the Impofirio t of hands. To under-
ftand this the efore, Conceive, That Impo/Ition ot hands may be
and hath been ufed in Apoftolical Times, for other purpofes than
this, for Confirmation^ and in that inftance he gives, AEls 13. i t
2,3. It was a Confirmation of that Miflion of Paul and Barna-
bas. Now although Tmpofition of hands be fometimes taken for
that mod holy Rite which we call Confirmation, as Ails 8. 1 7.
and fometimes for this holy Myftery of giving Orde s, as we
have had it oft repeated in this Difcourfe, or fome expre/Bon
of a defignment to a particular Duty, as in this place Acls 13.
yet we find the Adjacent Cirumlhnce* e^ r ,ly fixing a Mans un-
derftanding upon which particular he fl:ould look, and breaking
of bread U an Action common to diverfe Occafions , yet is
fometimes ufed in Scripture for the Communion : fo likewife
Impofition of hands, which is ufed in other duties, is fometimes
S 2 particularly
I AC
Hi fourth Argument anfrvertd.
particularly propofed to fignifie Ordination, although it be ufed
in other Religious Duties, and be but a Ceremony of this, yet
:r is a Ceremony ufed by the Apofties, and pointed out by St.
Fdtu% Laj not hands negligently on any man, to Timothy as before^.
and therefore Argues a Spirit of Oppofuion in the Church of
Scotland, which, as Hooker faith, reject this Ceremony, and ufe
it not \r\ Ordination : Well- there is no force in this Argument to
prove hi&Conclufion, but only that Impofkion of hands is a» Ce-
remony Common toother-Duties, which I grant, and paffe to
Knie*t,
SECT. XIV.
His Fourth Argument a?/frvered.
HIS- Fourth Argument is- If Ordination g\ve the Ejfentialr
to an Officer befort Elellion, there may be a Faff or Without
people, an Officer fine Titulo, as they ufe tofpeak* andaPafior
fioutdiemadca Paftor at large ^ the reft is nothing but an Ap-
plication to Mr. Rutherford's Simiit 'of a Ring, which concern?
not us ; But this Argument of his invites me to fpeak of a faflo*
ralOrdinathn % whidr will perhaps give farther Illuftration to
the. whole body of this Difcourfe i A Paftor and a Flock are re-
feuves, and do mutually fepontre&tollere^ where one is, the
other muftbe- where one is not, the other cannot be. Now
then, to be made a Paftor, will requite to have a flock; thisfhali
fee prefuppofed °. and again, every Paftor hath not all Paftoral
Offices. I can well fuppofe a mighty great flock which requires
many Shepherds, but one Chief above the reft, he hath all Pa-
ftoral offices, folds, feeds, drives to field , prefenbes paftures,
medicines, and doth all this by theSupream Paftoral power that
is granted him, either by his own hands, or by theminiftry of
thofe Inferiours which are under him • but they have partial
Authorities, only to feed or fold, or catch or drive, as their
feveral fhare? aredeilgned^ thefecond part of the Divifion of
thePaftoral Charge, thefe men muft grant, who divide their
Governours into ieveral Offices , Faflors, Teachers t Rulers,
*hich have their feveral Duties affigned them,, and ic is raoft
unrea-
His Fourth Argument anfwerecL 14 j
unreafonable for them to deny the firft, That onefhouJd hare
Superiority over the reft, fince as reaibn would direft, without
feme body to over- look and attend tfiem, they would eafily en-
trench upon one another! duties y or neglecting their'own, *n-"
vite thofe others to put thcirhands to their work 5 and what this
reafon direds, that I think I have (hewed the Scripture like-
wife Crown9 with its approbation : Now the firfl fort of Pa-
yors are thofe we term Si/hops , the fecond Presbjtert ± the
flock they arc to feed is the Church of Chrifi t when they are ad-
mitted Pajlors, and fo ordained according to their ieveralDu-
ties- That which Hooker page 6 1. brings .out of one Mr. BesJ r
as if St. Auftin or fome General Councel had decreed it, is ab-
folutely to bedenyed,* namely r that an Afoftle differeth from a
Paft'or, that the Apoftle is a Paslor throughout the whole Chri-
ftlan World i but the P after is tyed to a certain Congregation^,
out of which he is not toexercife Pafloral Ads.
This rdeny r if he affirmit by DivineRight; kutifby Ec-*
clefiaftical Authority only , which hath defigned particular
Bijhofs zniPresbpert to particular places , I (hall yield much
ofit.
For thefirft part, concerningtne Apoftles , know, that their
Commifiion was univerfd, as it is fet down, Mat. 28. 19, G*
nach all Nations* &c. and John 20 As my Father fent «f, &c«
and we muft conceive this to be diviftm. not conjmElm only r
every one had aH this power, not all only- nor ssSffew
would have, Lib. z. De Romano J'&ntlfice.CapriZ.- St. Peter
only and the reft from him , for we fee the CarRmifiion granted
to all- but yet we muftknow, that their Authority was habitu
or potentia only, in every one ,. it was not ettlu in any, they
might EpifcopUe, Apotto/ize in any place of the World : They^
did Epifcopize, Apoftolize only where they were rodent • Juft
as I have Corceived, it Adam had lived in his Integrity, every
man had had an habitu il andpotential royalty over all the Crea-
tures in the world, yet he would have exercifed that Royalty
only where he lived, yet he might have Travelled any where,
and have juflly enjoyed any part of the World, although actu-
ally he could pofTefTe but his Share- Now this was the Jwif-
ditlion of e wry Apoftle in all the whole Catholick Church ■. ha*
Suuiliy.,. not-aflually, as the- Church of Rome- would have their
Apoftolml
I as Hps Fourth Argument anjrvered.
jlpoflolical Man as they call him, thePope, and all rhis was ne-
ceflary for them as Apoftles y which is, men fent for the propaga-
tion oftheGofpel, to theplanting and confirming of ( hurthes,
other powers tney had of Languages, ofMimcles, which were
ncceflary to the rlrft plantation, but no longer ; and therefore
they were not peculiar to them, but others hA the.n befides,
as likewife that mighty power of being Infpired co write Scrip-
ture, which did not appear in all of them-, and fome others be-
fides them had that power , as St. Luke and Marks., and fome
think St. Jama to be the Brthop of Jerufalem who writ that
Epiitle.
But now of thofe which were the Apcftl$s , it is evident that
thefe Gifts were not Apoftolical, ss belonging fo to them as Apo-
flics , and it will appear in the other Caufe, That the Bijhops fuc-
cecdtd them in every thing that was Apoflolical, ^though not in
thefe extraordinary Endowments, for the Apoflolical power of
planting, fetling Churches, of propagating the Gofpel through-
out the whole World, and enlarging the Kingdom of (Thrift,
mud remain for ever , and therefore , though the manner of
doing it by fuch Signs and Wonders be not communicated , yet
the Office rauft ; and therefore he who is a Bifhcp or Presbyter
by divine right, is fuch throughout the whole Word • ro this
purpofe you may obferve in that famous place of Ails 20. 28.
fo much and fo often canvafed by tbem who handle thefe Con-
troverfies in other points, but not thought on in this , you may
obferve, that St. Paul fpcaking to divers Presbyters or Bifbips,
fwhich you m\\) he faith, Take heed therefore toy §ur [elves y and
to all the fiock^over which the Holy Ghofl hath made yon Overfeers
or Bijhops , to feed the Church of God which he pur chafed With his
cwn blood. Obferve here that he fpake to many, and diverfe
Bifbops or Presbyters, ( I ftand not upon th it now ) he fpake to
them in the plural Number • but when he fpeaks of the flock
they were to pa&orize over, he puts it in rhe lingular Number;
now if the Holy Ghofl h°d made rhcm Bi/brfs of particular Con-
gregations onlv, if mutt have been the flock, every one hisfe-
veral ; but being all mad" Paftors of the Cutholick Church , he
names it one flock^ and fo likewife to feed or Sheperdiz: over,
not the Churches but the Church of Chrift , which indeed
were no way congruous, if the Holy Ghoft had made them
Officers
.
Hit Fourth Argument anfwered. 145
Officers of particular Churches, and confined them there, but
making them Officers of the Vniverftil Church which Chrift
had purcb?.fed wich his blood , and all Officers of that , it is
rightfy put in the fingul.tr number flock, and Church, This
Hkevvife the Huly Gboft intimates, everywhere defcribing the
Church to us by the n:.me-of a Field, a Vineyard, a City ? and
multitudes of fuch Expreflions, which as much as this of a flock
intimate the unity of that Body, which is his Lhurch, his Flock.,
over which thefe are Paftors in their feveral waves, not only
.their little Congregations. Now the wifdom of the Churchy
finding that although the potential and habitual power is uni-
verfal, yet the actual cannot be exercifed further than where
they have fome manner ofrefidence, hath therefore reQrained
the execution of it in other places than where they have that
refidence, both to avoid Confufi on, which otherwife muftne-
ceflarily arife out ofthejntermedlingin other mens precincts,
and likewife becaufe the main feope of their endeavours maybe
applyed to that place in a near Obligation, every one being
for the mo ft part worthy of the Incumbents utmoft labour*.
And this they did by the Apofttes own example,, who appoint-
ed Timothy, Titus, Epaphroditm, their feveral Dioceffc ; yet
we muft further Conceiee, that this Alotment of the Church is-
not fuch as doth lay any reftraint upon the power given by the
Spiris, but directs it only ; for although a Particular man may
offend by intruding into another mans Paftoral precincts, and
Officiating there, yet fatlum valet : fo that if a Bfoop give Or-
ders in another mans DiocefTe, as was the famous* Cafe of Epi~
fhanim Bifhop of Cyprus, in St. Chryfoftoms Diocejfe at Conft'an-
tinople, ora Vresbyter Adminifler the Communion in anothers
Parifb, which is the common practice •, thefe things although
done without lesve from the peculiar Pafior, are valid to the
receivers, although punifhable in the Actors : Yea, yet once a-
gain, although a manbeplacedin aPaftoral Charge, andfhall
either find upon his own certain experience, or the Judgement of
' his Superiours,that he can advance the Glory of God,or improve
his own Commiflion by removing to another place, either for
a time, as Timothy and Tittts^ and the reft beneficed in particu-
lar places, were yet upon urgencies of the publiek good called
afide from the more particular Charge to the more publick,
'where
IA4 ^* s Fourth Argument anftvered.
where they were employed- or elk, if their whole refidence
may more advance the general Good of the whole flock, o-
yer which they are mfldeOverfeers, they ought to remove to-
tally to that great Occalion : So when a man of great Abilities
(hall be beneficed in a private Corner, where perhaps k/Te Abi-
lities would as well, if not better agree, it becomes him to be
removed to a place better befitting his Qualifications, or a man
indowed with the ftrength of rational Divinity , fuchamanto
be fent to the propagating the Gofpel in the Indies among the
Heathen, and he ought to endeavour to put himfelf into fuchan
employment* becaufe he is a Paftor of the whole floc'< for
which Chriftdyed; So that now I think it appears mamfeftly,
that an Jpoflle and another Paftor differ not in this, that one
was an Univerfal Paftor, and the other a Particular . but con-
trary wife they are both habitually, or Potentia, Paftors of the
whole Word , actually paftorizing in fome particular only.
This caufed all thofe admonitions from one Sifiof to another,
of which the Fathers are full- This made fometimes Contentions^
becaufe it was the Duty of every man that was a Paftor to take
care of the whole flock he is Paftor over ; and therefore to
endeavour their good : So that here you fee his Argument
fully anfwered by a flat denial of his Minor, he is not a Pa-
ftor without a Flock, nor an Officer fineTitulo, he hath Title
to the whole Catholick Church, he is Paftor zt large j He hath
a long Difpute with Mr. Rutherford about Preaching and Ad-
miniftring the Communion out of his own Congregation, and
the Communication of Sifter Churches,which touch me not ; yet
I will give the Reader a Note , that whereas before he made
Preaching almoft the whole Aft otaPresfyter % he now feeraes to
make it no proper duty of a Paftor y pag. 63 , 64. But I let thefe
things pafle as not pertinent, and apply ray felf to his fifth and
laft Argument, pag. 67. which is.
SECT,
His Fifth Argument anfrvered. 145
SECT. XV.
His Fifth Argument anjwered.
IF Ordination gives SJfentials to a P aft or before Eletlion, then
bj that done he hath P aft oral power. A gain ft which he M-
putes thus, He that hath Compleat footer of an Office, andftands
an Officer without Exception, he cannot be hindredfuftly from do-
ing all Atls of that Office - y but this is the Condition of a I after
Ordained without the Eletlion of the people, he may according to
rule be juftly hindred from Executing any Acl of a P aft or. I
could quarrel, were I pinched with this Argument, with aimoft
every word-, ash'rft, the changing of the Terms of that Propo-
rtion he was to prove. In the Proportion he was to- prove the
Terms were, give the Efftntials of aoPaftor, now they are, a
Compleat poster and an Officer without Exception* Many things
are efTentially right which lack Completion, and are not with-
out Exception : Then again, where it was in his firft Propofi-
tion, A Paftor before Eletlion -, here is added in his fecond,
Eletlion of the people. But I infift upon this, upon which the
Ground of his Argument is founded, That an Ordained Officer
may according to rule be hindrcdrrom executing any pare of his
Office, as he enforceth: Suppofe all Congregations full. To
which I anfwer, Ordination doth not give the Act , but the.
Jus, or right to execute, and a man may have the EffentVdik
when thefe do not work : Mark, Mr. Hooker was a Paftor when
afleep, and had theEflentialsof it, but not the Operation : E£-
fentialsdo work their proper work, omnibus poptis ai agendum
requifitis : The rire it felf, although it have the Eflentials of fire,
cannot burn things too remote, or fuch Things which are not
corabuftible - y the reafon is, that thofe things which are requi-
fitc to burning, as fit diftance, difpofureof the matter, are not
rightly difpofed ; I may fay the fame of the Eye - place' the Ob-
ject too near, too far, in the dark, it cannot fee • the requifircs
to fight are not fittingly difpofed,, although the Eye have all the
Eflentials belonging to fight : So I may fay of a man Ord.imed.
If there be not a place, not any piece of the flock of Chrift which.
J fmh
146 H» F//% Argument anfwered.
hath need of him, or having need he knoweth not of their
need;, or knowing their need, cannot by diftance, or fome fuch
moral Impediment come to fupply their need, the Circumftan-
ces required to his Operations are fo taken away that he cannot
do the Duties in Ad: which he hath power to do. St. Paul
himfelf could not officiate any where where others of Authori-
ty were labouring, yet he had Authority and was ord ined by
God ; buc faith he, if all places are full, he may according to rule,
be kindred from executing any fart of P aft oral Office, I would fain
know by what rule the Afoftlts were Authorized by Chrilt to
preach to all Nations, and fo are all Paftors by Ordination, they
have Authority over the world, but are reftrained by Ecclefia-
fticai Law founded upon the Law of Nature, which forbids any
thing to go into a full place, which with another Law faith, T>em
latura nihil factum fruftra. And again, non funt multipli-
cands Entiafine neceffitate : fo that when one looks to this parr,
then the other fhould notiytermeddle without the firft give way
to him, yet he hath the power and can do the work of a P after,
when any place is empty, and he invited to it • But yet Confi-
der, with me, he doth not only build who layes on the bricks,
and mortar, or timber, but he who brings thefe Materials , and
helps to make the mortar . yea chiefly he who fleers the work,,
and dire&s this or that way •. So is it in building this Houfe, this
City of God, his Church. The Builders may fludy to provide
Materials for it, and improve their Abilities by Study in the U-
niverfities, and if they are not called thence may live there, and
write fuch Things as may direct the Workers in this Building,
and by that rather build than they ; however they have fuch a
power as may be reduced into Ad, when all Circumfiances are
fir, which is enough to give the Effentials to an Officer.
And thus you fee an Anfwer to his Arguments out of this
Difcourfe, Conceive it applyed to that Propofition, He that hath
Compleat forcer of an Office and ftandsan Officer without Ex-
ception cannot juftlj be kindred from doing all farts of his Of-
fice.
This (hould have been, who hath the Eflentials of an Offi-
cer, as I faid before $ buc let it run as it doth, I deny it flatly in
theie Terras, Ab Atluadfotentiam non valet A Wgtvmentum ne-
gative, he caabe-hindred from working, therefore he hath not
the
His Fifth Argument anfwered. 147
the power, doth not follow ; when a man fleeps he is hindred,
and that juftly, from working, yet is a P aft or -, it is true, in na-
ture- itistrueinMoralty, that which hath efTentially the power
of working may be hindred in nature ; you may put the light
out of your Chamber, which effentially hath power to enlighten
it. In morality, he who hath the virtue of Valour in a gallant
and high portion, I fpeak of A&ive valour, of Military valour, as
fuppofe our Saviour himfelf, of whom this Queilion is difputed
in the School, he had all virtues in the higheft degree, and yet
for lack of Opportunity to ufe this virtue, did never produce an
Aft of this virtue. In policy the fame, We have in England
many Barrefters,learned toenin th Law, yea perhaps as lear-
ned as any Pleaders, who by their degree of Barretters have
power to plead in any Laufe at any Barr, yet becaufe not enter-
tained by Clients, do not plead, yea cannot plead, are juftly hin-
dred from pleading • the fame footfteps of that Axiom are evi-
dent in all Pra&ique bufinefles : fo that that Confequence , he
may be hindred from working, therefore he hath not the power
to work , is very weak , when the hindrance is without j
but if it be within that emnibm fofitis ad agendum requifitis in
outward Accommodations. If then he cannot do his paftoral
Duties, then it is an Argument he is no Paftor; but his Cafe is
otherwife ; I fay again, he who is a Bifhop or Presbyter may of-
ficiate totheflockofChriitany where throughout the World,
when places are voyd , and opportunities given , otherwife
not.
Thus you fee I have enlarged my felf upon this Conclufion,
which being little fpoke of by others, required more difcourfe,
and I hope not impertinent.
He faith now, that he hathftnifyeh the negative fart of his Dif-
courfe : what it is doth not give the Effentials of the Call of a
Pajlor ; and I think I have fhewed he hath prevailed little in this,
becaufe he builds upon that falfe foundation, That a P aft or muft
have a particular ftocJ$. Then he comes to the pofitive and affir-
mative part, to (hew what doth give the Effentials,p3g. 66. which
1 find is falfe printed, and (hould be pag. 67. as the former 66.
T2 SECT.
±% His Conchtfwn, that the people, <&c,
SECT. XVI.
His Coticlufion 5 that the Pajior rightly orde-
red by the rule of Chrijl, gives the EfJ'en-
tials to Ordination^ dijc ufjed.
HIS'Conclufion is, EleFtion of the people rightly ordered by
the rule of Chrift, gives the Efjentials to an Officer, or leaves
■the Impreffion of a true outward Call , and fo an Office \ potter
Mfona P aft or.
This is the Propofition he undertakes to prove-, and here I
expected an explication of his Terms, efpecially of that, what
lie means by leaves an Impreffion • for fincc he before had de-
fpifed the Schools for treating of an Indelible Characler, not onty
for making it indelible, but for making it a C harafter, and con-
temned bo^h its being quality or relation ; I did juftfy expeft
he fliould expound what he means by this Impreffion of an out-
outward CaII* left in the receiver -, but not a wordL 1 1 muft cer-
tainly be one of thofe, either quality or relation •, for it cannot
be fubftance, or quantity, and nothing elfe can pretend. But a-
gam, I expected he (hould have (hewed, what was that rule of
Chrift he/pake of, which fnouldorder the Election of the peo-
ple, for without we know that, we difpute at random • for that
inuft beour fole guide ^ and indeed, at the firft blufn, when
Chrift is called and his rules to countenance any Caufe, it will
ftaggerany heedleffe Reader- but be not troubled with it, Chrift
never -gave rule ro the people to do any fuch Thing, If he had,
this man would have (hewed it • but the Truth is, he did not,
all the Rules he gave were by his Apoftles, as before exprelTcd,
and therefore Chrift cannot Countenance that Caufc with
which he had not the leaft bufineUe to do : and therefore al-
though the Lawes of Difputations would have required this at
hi* hands, yet he wifely avoids them, and from his Conclafion
leaps into proofs of it v the firft of which is.
SECT.
Hk Firfk Argument anfaered. 149
SECT. XVII.
His Firji Argument anfrvcred.
ONE Relate gives being and the EJfential Confirming
CdPtfe to the other.
But Psftors and Peo\le , Shepherd and F locks are Relate*.
He introduced) not his Conclufion , noris itpoifiblefor him,
out of thefe premises ^ for the natural refult out of thefe Propo-
ficions can be only, That therefore Pallor and People give the
EfTentials one to another, in which is not one full Term of his
Conclufion. But I will examine his Major, One Relate gives
leing y &c. Relatione ejfe eft adalixd, nonab alio-, and there-
fore relation, the whole Predicament is termed by the Tranfli-
tors of Ariftotle, Ad aH^md, not ab aliejuo, the whole being is
a relation to another, not from another : it is true they cannot
exift fevered, without either is neither is in a Relative Notion^
yet fo we may fay an Accidcnt,it,annot be without its fubftance,
yet that Accident doch not give the Effentials to the fubftancq.
So here you fee were high amazing words to amufe the Reader
with, butnoforcetohispurpofe : It may happen indeed, That
one relate may Caufe the other, for Caufe and ErTeft are Relates^
the Father caufeth the Son, but the Son doth not give Eflential
being to a Father, no not as a Father, but that A& which made
him a Father did it. I write this to let a Reader fee, that when
Propofitions arc delivered even by fuch a one as Mr. Hooker, who
may have Authority with the Reader , and it may be thought
will deliver nothing as an Axiom, which is not fnch , yet men
are as partial to their Opinions as their Children, and will ex-
pound every Thing that comes in their way to the Advantage of
them, yea, it will feem fo to them j and therefore even the fe
Propofitions are not to be fallowed without Examination,
But yet fuppofe this were granted, that one Relate ( ashe phrafes
it) did give the Ejfentials to another , would this prove, Thai
the Election of the people by therule of Cbrift did it? t ertain-
ly no : for the Paftor and people are the t\\o relates , not the Pa*
■fior and Elefiion of the people^ People, and the t letlion of the feo+
fl*
?o His Fir ft Argument anfrvered.
pie are two Things,This latter an Aft of the former. He fayes Mr.
Rutherford feems to be much moved with this Argument- 1 have
not feen his books , but by that I have heard .of him • it would
be ftrargehefhould • but Heave them together, and fee what
he urgeth for Confirmation of this Argument which may con-
cern my bufinefTe ^ Pag. 68. He faith, the Propofition is fupport-
ed by the Fundamental Principles of i\eafon, fo that he ran ft raze
out the receivedrules of Logickjhat muft rejetl it- 9 High language!
But why fo, I ask? He anfwers immediately, Relatafunt quorum
unum con ft at mutua altering Affcclione - y This is non-fenfe ^ for
fhould I ask, it Vnum, which of the two > he could not anfwer,
the reafon is, becaufeas relates there is the Time reafon of one as
of the other- But I think he means utrumque^ but Confider
then, what is this to his purpofe ? Suppofe they did Confift in a
mutual AfTe&ion one of another, could one properly befaid to
give the ElTentials to the other . ? The Father indeed gives the
ElTentials to his Son, and Father and Son do mutually as Father
and Son depend upon a reciprocal Affection, as he calls it, one
upon the other, but the Son cannot be faid properly to give
the ElTentials to the Father, no not as Father, becaufe all he hath
he hath from his Father ; as Suppofe again a Mafter and Servant
are relates, neither of thefe give the ElTentials one to another •
But properly chat Covenant which engaged them in their mu-
tual Duties, that Covenant gave them the ElTentials of that re-
lation, not one another- and therefore this Difcourfe, though
he think it very Evident, yet begets no Acceptance in me , al-
though declared with the name of a fundamental principle : That
which he deducetb, that relata Mtfimulnatura is moil true, but
not deduced, yea it is againft that principle he deduceth it from
for that which Conftitutes anothers being is primnatura to that
which is Conftituted, but thefe are ftmul , and therefore cannot
give ElTentials one to another. His AlTumption, that Paftor and
Flock^wz relates, no man (faith he) that hath fip'd in Logick,
can deny; I grant it: Then (faith he) the Conclufion follows
but hefets not down what- 1 am fure his doth not, That this'
Election gives the ElTentials to an Officer,
In the Conclufion he faith, Hence again it follows , that Ordi-
nat ion , Which comes after, (he means Election, ) is not for the
Con slit M ion of 'the Officer, but the Approbation of him fo Conftitu-
ted
Hps Second Argument anfwered. 1 5
ted in his Office, for re lata are utmrn mi, faith the rule ; there is
no Connexion in this neither; and for anam mi y chat mull be
underftood in that particular relation, a Father may have many
fonnes, and fo One to Many, but there are diftind: paternities,
and the Logicians fay, that although abfolute Accidents Numera
tantum diftinela, cannot exift in the fame Subject at the fame
Time, yet relative may. So one flock may have many pallors,
the Catholick Church a Thoufand vifible ones, invifible only
Chrift. The Church of Rome would defire no more, but thac
you grant, one flock muft have but one Paftor ; they will
quickly prove the Catholick Church one Flock, and then wilt
follow, "the Pope to be the Univerfal Paftor •, for none elfe pre-
tends to it •, but indeed they themfelves grant many Paftors to
the fame flock, for their Teachers are Paftors, and their Lay-
Elders have Paftoral Authority of Governing. But now pun-
dually after a long Difcourfe : A P after and Flocks 2 re relates,,
there may be many Paftors to one Flock,-, where the Flock, is
great there muft bc^ the Flock,of Chrift is the Vniverfal Church >
in which he hath placed many Paftors, and there is no Chriftian
man who is a Member of Chrifts Flock* wherefoever he is, in
the World, and finds any Paftor, but he may receive and re-
quire the Duty of a Paftor from him, and he ought to give it
him. Again, there is no Paftor wherefoever he is in the world,
if he findanyofhisMafters Flock\n anyplace who have need
of him, but he ought, out of duty, if he can, tofupplyhis
lack. And thus are the mutual bonds and relations betwixt
Chrifts Paftors and his Flock, fupplyed-, as foon as he is made
a Paftor, the Church of Chrift is his Flock\ and which way he
can advance the good of it, he ought, and is bound in Duty to
do \u
S ; E C T,
1 ^ 2 His Second Argument anjrvered.
Hps Second Argument anjrvered.
AND fo I pafle to his Second Argument, which is this,
It is law fall for a people to re j eft a P aft or upon fuft
Caufes , ( if he prove pertin*ciou(ly fcandalom in his Life,
or heretical in his dotlrine ) and put him out of his Office ;
Ergo, it is in their power to cali him outwardly, and to pm him in-
to his Office.
The Confluence is plain from the Staple rule, Ejufdem eft
Inftiruere ( he would fay I thinly) & deitruere.
The Antecedent is as certain by Gods word y Beware of Wolves,
Mat. 7. 1 5. Beware offalfe Prophets, Phil. ?. 2.
Now becaufe he begins with his Conference , I will fo
likewife ; and that which he fo highly commends for a
Staple Rule, I will examine, and from henceforth receive this
rule: That great words with him are forced to be the Cloaks
of leaft performances; I do not believe he re^d that Staple
rule in any Logick Author • and am very Confident it is ab-
folutely falfe in all Sciences. In nature it is molt evident, that
water which dettroyes fire cannot make it. Ifheanfwer, that
in general the power ot Nature which by Water doth deftroy
fire, by another hand of power doth make. I wit! apply this to
our particular, and fay, that in general men deftroy it • there-
fore men give it , by the fame way as Nature by water
deftroyes fire, and by fire makes it. If we look into Policy, we
fliall find that fometimes when Kings have fetled power, the
people have p!uckt them down ; Thofe whom the people have
Inftkuted, Kings have deftroyed -but perchance he may fay, that
lawfully out of right the fame power can deftroy , that did intti-
tute^perhaps there may be Legality in fomeof thefe In(tances,but
fee a Clearer : A Tithing man is elected by his parifh ( like as
he would have Paftors) afterwards he is fworn by the Steward
of the Court ("like his Ordination) or perhaps by fome Jufliee of
Peace-, The Parifh for hismifdemeanours cannot put him out,
but the Juftices who cannot choofe him, may. A Barretter who
received his Degree at the Innes of Court , is degraded by the
Judges, who cannot make him a Barretter, I think I fpeak
Law
His Second Argument anfrvered> 153
Law- if I do not, I am fure this may be Law without any pre-
judice to the policy of this Nation, and then I am fure this rule
is falfe ; and indeed befides Inlrances, there is reafon that that
which gives life fhould preferve, not deltroy, and that men
fliould look for other hands to pluck down, befides thofe that
fct up- but as it is not univerfally true, foitisnotuniverftlly
falfe- and I think will not be falfe inthisinftancehefpeaksof,
and therefore 1 will apply my felt" to his Antecedent , concern-
ing whichj he faith, it is as certain as the other by warrant
from the Word, and no more certain : His places out of Scrip-
ture are, Beware of Wolves, Mat. 7.15. Beware of falfe Pro\hets %
Phil. 3. 2. Here I expeded to have foundtheie two Texts in
thefe two places ; but it is not fo : both in the fame manner are
in the tirft, and fomething like that he faith in the other. The
words of the nrR are, BeWare of falfe Prophets ^tohichcometoyot*
in fheeps eloathing y but inwardly they are ravening Wolves. A.
man may wonder how he could deduce hence that Conclufion,
That it is lawful! for a people to reject, or put a Paftoroutof frs-
Office-, Confider the words, Suppofe it had been faid, Beware
of a wicked Judge when your Caufe is to be heard, or beware
of falfe Lawyers which will come to you in fheeps eloathing
with fair and excellent Language, but within are ravening
Wolves, will fecretly dellroy you-, would any man think, that
here were Commiflion granted to put either out of their Of-
fice ? It is Jult fo here, benare of falfe Prophets^ fuch as pre-
tend they are Prophets, but are not, or falfe Prophets , fuch rs-
prophefie f lfe Things- nor can there be more meant in this, than
that we fhould not be deceived by them -, for though they come
in fheeps eloathing, fpeak never fo far words, commend their
DocVme never fo much, it will dellroy you, there can be no
more in it -, This Speech is fpoke, no doubt, to all and every per-
fon in lingular, yet I hope Mr. Hooker doth not think th.it al-
though every man muft beware he is not deceived by them , \ ec
that every mm, every particular Man can depofe his Pallor,
The fame reafons which havedifproved the force of this Al-
legation, will likewife overthrow the Strength of the fecond
againft this Caufe. The 2d. Text is, Phil. 3 . 2. Bware ofDcgs,
beware of evil Doers , beware of the Concifion : Suppofe all or fome
of thefe were Faftors, which can in no firength of reafon be
U induced.
i c;4 His Second Argument anfwered.
induced, y*£ what can this word beware enforce ? Can it imply
depofe? there wis never fuch an Exposition, but only take heed
of them, thatyebenot deceived by them- fo that there isnoE
the leaft thing in the Word of God to prove that the people
may depofe their Paftor, and yet all his difcourfe which follows
in page 65. is as if this were mod true, fublatoum relator urn
tollitr.r alteram j but where is either re latum taken away, or
by whom ? Again^ ( faith he ) this rejtclion cuts him of from
be'wo a Member of 'that Congregation^here he was , andfo from
every vifible Congregation, and therefore cuts him off from having
any vifible Church-Communion With Chrifl l , &c. Confider
how he builds upon a foundation in the Air, huh no reality ^
nor inde:d were his foundation good, are his Confcquences,
and fee what an unhappy Condition fuch a Paflor were in , fith
it n evident thefe Texts of Cautions are directed to every parti-
cular man, and then the malice of one particular man may de-
ftroy a Paftors lntereft in heaven, becaufehecanputhimfrom
Church-Communion with Chrift ; but fuppofe thefe Texts were
underftood of whole Congregations, yet fometimes they are ve-
ry few : or, if an hundred, it is hard that the Opinion and Error
for the moit part of Ignorant men, though an hundred, fhould
(hut a mm out of the pale of Church-Communion-, thefe things
fall of themfelves; farrare, therefore depofe, is not, cannot be
admi ted amongft reafonablemen • yea the clean contrary might
rather be urgent • . Beware, therefore they cannot depofe, for
what a man can depofe, he need not much Caution about it, the
work is quickly done. But here if any fhould ask, What , muft
the people f ibmit to any Paflor, though heretical, though fcan-
dalous in his life ? If not, what can they do ? Certainly , to the
firft; there are fome things which Herefie or wickednefTe of life
do not hinder, that is, adminiftring the Seals of Gods Covenants
in the holy Sacrments. To this purpofe he himfelffpeaks, as I
think, Iforewarned, inthelamrendofpage^.and the begin-
ning of page 46. in higher and fuller Exprefiions than I make,
but 1 need not fetdown- only Confider this, that fuch Here-
fies as deny the Trinity, becaufe they will not nor can baptize
in the form prefcribed by our Saviour, that is, the Name of the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghoft, their baptifm is not va-
lid, and by their Miniftry r erring in the root, cannot effeftually
apply
His Third Argument anjwered. 155
apply thofe Seals ; but for other miftakes in opinion, not fun-
damental, nor fuch as immediately refleft upon that Seal they ad-
minifter ', fo they fet the Sea! rightly to , according to matter
and form, their Aft is good; and a man, a Lay-man m.iy fub-
mit unto them, but take care not to he unified either by his falfe
Doftrine or wicked life, of which he is not to take upon him,
likca Judge, to cenfure his perfon, but like a Caucelous hearer
to avoid wh f is ill, and luck out what is good ^ The (heep do
notreufethe od hay, though they fwal low not the worfe,
which the Shepherd delivers - 9 they may complain to them who
have Authority ,the Eifhops, who are to receive the Complaints
made agninlt Eiders, a .d fo have him foberly Convenced and
adjudged, but without this courfe they have no power to de-
pofe him ; and this I think they ought to do, and more than this
they have no power granted them to do.
Hk Third Argument anfrvered.
ICome now to his 3 d. Argument, into which he enters {low-
ly hi mfelf, with a long Difcourfe, the heads of which being
examined, will remove the difficulty-, pag. 69. he faith, this
Argument is taken from the manner of the Communication and
Conveyance of this power , To expreffe this, He bidsyoft know
that Conveyance of power is done two wayes , either by Atithori"
tative Commiffion or Delegation from Office , or Office, power, or
voluntary Subjetlion. The ririt is, when a particular perfon or
body and Corporation, delegates a power to another , of them-
felves and from themfelves alone, leave an Impreflion of Autho-
rity upon another. Here he hath a mighty tedious Difcourfe of
the Way of Communicating this power, of many little Inferen-
ces and Confequences, which he drawes from his Imagination
of no fuch power left to men, which, left I (houldvex the Rea-
der, lornit, and direfthimtop^geyo, 71,72. for the foun-
dation being deftroyed, the Inveftive and Scorning of his ene-
mies, (as many have done with an imagination only or rumor of
Viftory, when there was no fuch thing; will fall of its felf.
U 2 There
i <6 There k a power left by Chriji^ &c,
Ihcr.e k a power left by Chrftl to men 5 by
which they communicate powers to others.
FTrft then, I (hall (hew that there is fuch an Office, power a-
mongft men, whereby they can Convey an Office, power
Authoritativt to others. This may appear out of our Savi-
ours Commiflion, As my Father ftnt me, &c. John 20. and
the like. Now then , if our Si\i)ur was fenc to appoint Of-
tcers , then fo were they, I -will be with you to the end of the
World , that cannot be underftood of their perfons, it muft
be of their ^ueceflion^, and that Succeflion they communi»
cared by the former Authority; So Ads 13. the} fent Bar-
's, abas and Saul-, fo 14. 21. They ordained Elders in every
C hurch^ (oTitm was by St, />*•#/ left in Crtte r Timothy recei-
ved from Impolicion of his hands his power- fo in fucceftion Ti-
mothy and Titus are directed to lay on hands themielves upon
others,which 4$ by all tinder ftood of Ordination : So then there
is evident a delegate power given by men of Authority, by which:
others are Authorized to operate in this Divine Adrainiftration,
I need fay no more to this ., but enter his Second Conclufion,
which he is briefer in, but is indeed the foundation of this other.
This youmayfindpage72. thus. Second y,7~here is a Commu-
nicating power by voluntary Subjetlion, when though there be no
Office, poVeer forrmliter in the people, yet they willingly yielding
themfelves to be ruled by another, deftringand calling him to take
that rule, he accepting of Vvhat they yield pog effing that right
which they put upon -him byfreeConfent- r I £ ut down his very
words which are not fence, making no CompJeat Proportion
"but it mav be the fault of the Printer,and therefore read it pojfef-
feth that right \&c. (forfojfeffing.) Thereafon (faith he ) if,
ihofe in whtfe Choice it is, whtther any {hall rule over them or no
from their vol unrary fubjetlion it is , That the party Choftnhath
right ; andftands fcffejfedofrule and Authority over them.
This Argument rs mighty Lame, for the Minor which is not
fet down, if produced, would be, that the Cafe (lands thus with
Chriftrans^ That it is in their Choice whether any (hall rule over
them or no, which is abfoJutely frlfc, taking Chriffhns for fuch
men who have given thenafwlves and their names to Chrift in
bnptifc^
Mutual Covenanting of fix Saints ? &c. jtj
baptifm, awl fuppofn g chat they intend to be faved by perfeve-
ring accord ngcocir'it Covenant, for without doubt fuch muft
fubmit to this Government ^ and indeed I wondered how any
man had Confidence to obtrude fuch a Conelufion concerning (o
high and ma.erial points, without pretence ofreafonor Scrip-
ture, as he doth in this place ; but I remember how heretofore
I had read fomethmg to this purpofe, in his Firfr Part, and it
feems he fuppofeth this gnnted out of his former Grounds y al-
though he might havedone well to have eafed the Reader with;
a reference to it- but! have hunted it out 3 and God willing will
purfue the Chafe wherefaever.
CHAP. IX. SECT. I.
Mutual Covenanting of the Snints gives not
being to a Vifible Church.
IN his firft part therefore of this Book, page 46. he difcour-
feth ofthe formal Caufe of a vifible Church, and he puts
this Conelufion • Mutual Covenanting and Confederating
of the Saints in the fellotofhip of the faith according to the Order
ofthe Gofpel, is that which gives Confiitution and being to a Vifibte
Church. This Term Confederating of the Saints i'$ indefinite, and
feems therefore that he fhould mean all the Saints fhould Confe-
derate, whiclris impoffible in any of their Congregations • if he
had meant of any limited Company of Saints, lie fliould have
laid ofa Company of Saints, or a number of them, which he did
not, but puts it indefinite, ofthe Saints. Secondly obferve, that
whereas heinterpofe;h in his Conelufion (according to the Order
ofthe Gosjel) neither doth he, nor can any man Irving (hew any
Jikeneffeorrefemblanceofany fuch Order in the Gofpef , nor
doth he in his whole difcourfe endeavour to fliew any fuch
Thing.
Upon my perofal of this Difcourfe, I find that I have treat-
ed of it already in fome papers which pafTed betwixt me and«no-
ther s who is fince (as I hear) dead, and i-think J fentthera you ;
therefore
5 8 Hw Opinion anfrvercd.
therefore I fliall fpeak only briefly to it , firft fetting down
his Conceit, then anfwering his Arguments , then Confuting
his Conclufion.
SECT. II.
His Opinion explained.
HIS Conceit is, as [ apprehend ir, That a Company of Saints,
as he calls them, enter into a Covenant one with another,
and with one which they call Tafior, to fubmit to him in Pafto-
ral duties, and he to perform Paftoral Offices among them, as
li^ewife in refpe& of themfelves to fubmit to and exercife
Churchly Cenfurcs one towards another •, fome fuch Covenant
( if I can reach his fence) is that which gives to the receivers an
Obligation and bond, and it is in Confctence one towards ano-
ther, which bond is the formal EfTence and being of a Church ^
I conceive this, but for lack of fome Copy of one of their Cove-
nants, I can only gueiTe at it ^ by the main drift of his Difcourfc
he denyes Baptifm or Profeffion to give the being to a Member,
and only makes a Covenant to be it, a fuperadded Covenant be-
yond Baptifm. Page 47. he delivers, that this Covenant is ei-
ther Exflicite or Implicite-, Explicate, when there is an open ex-
preflion and profeilion of this Engagement in the face of the
Aflfembly • Implicite, when in their pradice they do that where-
by they make themfelves engaged to walk in fuch a Society, ac-
cording to fuch rules of Government which are executed a-
mongft them, and fo fubmit themfelves thereto , but do not
make any verbal profeflion thereof.
And thus he faith the people in the Parifhes of £#g/W,where
there is a Minifter put upon them by the Patron or Bifhop , they
conftantly hold them to the Fellowship of the people in fuch a
place, &c. This being warned, that upon their grounds there
could be no Church in the Chriftian World, but in Nerv Eng-
Undjxz could not choofe but allow this lmplicite Covenant to be
fufficient (which is the common opinion among them) although
I doubt in fome other Things he will reject an Argument drawn
from an univerfcl practice.
SECT,
His Reafons of his Third Conclnfion anfwer cd. iza
SECT. III..
Mis Conclnfions concerning this Covenant.,
P Age 48. headdes fome Conetu£om. Fir ft, an Implicit?
Covenant preferves the true nature of the Vifible Church,
Secondly, (which is much the fame ) an Implicue Covenant m
fome Cafes may be fully fufficient.
Thirdly , it is much agreeing to the Comfleatneffe of the rule ,
(what rule I would know; and for the better being of the Church,
that there be an exflicite Covenant. He gives reafons of this
Condufion v
For thereby the judgement of the Members comes to be inform*
ed 3 and convinced of their Duty more fully.
His Reafons of hk Third Conclnfion an~
fevered*
I Would ask, whether a new Duty added by this Covenant
or an old Duty which arofe out of Baptifm ? If a new, I
cannot judge of the fitneflfe without I knew the particulars, but
am affurcd, that whatfoever is added to the Covenint in bap-
tifm r although it may havepoflible Allowance in Afls of Reli-
gion to fome particular men upon fome particular Occa(ions a
yet in general to prefTe fuch a Thing upon all Chriftians, is not
tollerable v If it be no addition to that Covenant, the only re-
frefhing of that Covenant to the memory of a Chriftian ieabun.
dandy enough. This likewife anfwers his 2d Argument, page
49. They are (faith he) thereby kept from Cavilling and Start-
ing afide from the Tenure and Terms of the Covenant which they
have pnfejfed and acknowledged before the Lord, and Jo many
Witneffes* I anfwer, as before, If the Terms be additions to
what was in Baptifm, he ought not in general to prefcribe them
toallChriflians.Tfthey are not Additions, then that Covenant
\s the ftronge/l he can make whidrwas made in Baptifm. The
iarae anfwer may be applied to Us third reafon v Far (faith hej
tfarebj
j^o Hi* Reafons anfwered.
thereby their hearts stand under a Stronger Tje. I anfwer % no
(tronger than Bapcifm.
SECT. IV.
Ibis Covenant of his cannot agr'ee to Tra-
vellers.
THen he enters into a Second Queftion , how ft.r this
Covenant requires Cohabitation ? His handling of which
is very weak,,in my Judgement-, for fince he allows Merchants
and others upon diverfe Occafions to be abfent fomeumes divers
years, he gives no facisfa&ion at all to fhew how thefe men in
their abfence can partake of Church- bleflii-gs : Bnc me-thinks
they muft live without Preaching, without Sacrament, or any
blefling of any Covenant of Gods, becaufc their Pallors and Of-
ficers refide at their conltant place j bur conti rywife our
Deftrine, which makes ech Presbyter an Officer of. the Catho-
iick Church, and each Chriftian a Member of it • it follows, that
any Ship may carry a Paftor, and every man receive the Com-
forts and bleffings of Gods Covenants Iromhim, which is like
our Saviours providence for all and every particular. Bud
omit this, at this time, as notnecefTiry for our bufineffe^ and
apply my felf to his Reafons for his .onclufion, That this Co-
venant gives theElTentials to a Church ^ which he begins, page
the 50th.
SECT. V.
His Reafons anfwered.
HIS firft Argument is thus framed, in thefe words, Every
Spiritual or Ecclefiafiical Corporation receives its being
from a Spiritual Combination.
But the viftble Churches ofChriflare Eccle(iaftical or Spiri-
tual; Therefore.
lean juftly complain here, that the Terms are altered, which
in
His Rcafons anfwercd. \ 6 i
in a Logical Difcourfc fhould be the fame^ I will reduce them
therefore, and fo difcourfc upon it • Combination mud here be
taken for Covenant, or a Combination by Covenant- fo that the
fence of that Proposition is, Every Ecclefiafiical Corporation re-
ceives its being from a Combination by Covenant.
Jn the Examination of this Propofkion, I will follow his own
Exprellions, becaufe I will difpute, ex conceffis ; He inftmces in
the Corporations of Towns and Cities : There ( faith he) they
have their Charter granted them from the King or State , which
gives them warrant to unite themf elves , to carry on fuch Wor^r,
for fuch Ends, withfuch Advantage : So (faith he) their mutu-
al Engagements each to other to attend fuch Terms, to walk, in
fuch Orders which Jball be futable to fuch a Condition, gives being
to fuch a body. Thus he. Confider now , that the form of
every thing is that which laft: comes y to give every thing its
being, and make it Compleat •, Secondly, it is that which enables
every thing to do its proper work. Now Confider, a Corpora-
tion hath firft a Charter by which they are enabled to unite, by
Authority of which they afTembleand come together , and per-
haps enter into fome Engagement required by that Charter- by
this Engagement they are made the Matter of this Corporation^
but the form is the Influence of the Charter, by wMch thefe men
fo eng iged by Covenant are authorized to do this : So in every
queftion when it is moved concerning any Action, we have re-
courfe to the form • Ask why this did heat or burn? It is anfwe-
red, becaufe it was fire, had the form the burning form of fire ;
Why did that grow? becaufe it had a vegetable form. Now
ask, why did a Corporation do this or that, letthisLeafe, make
that man free? The anfwer is not made, becaufe they were Com-
bined by a Covenant, but becaufe they have a Charter to do it •,
fo that the influence which that Charter huh upon the Corpo-
ration, is the thing which gives that Corporation its being, not
their Union by Covenant, which makes them but the Matter,
when the other gives the life and being , force and operation
folely to the Corporation.
To apply this to our purpofe : Suppofe ever*; little particu-
lar Church were a Corporation, hrft they muft have a Charter
to unite in a Covenant, which nor he nor any man living can
(hew me^ and although thefe men vaunt mightily of 'crip-
X ture
1 62 Scripture Fhrafes abufedby him.
ture, and Contemn all Do&rine which is not delivered there,
yet this which feems to me their Corner Stone and main founda-
tion they have, no not the leaft (hew of any words of Scripture,
which can authorize, much lefTe exaft any fuch Covenant - but
then fuppofe they had fome fuch Commiflion, yet nor their uni-
on upon the Commiflion, but the other Authorities exprefTed
in the Charter muft be it which enables them to do whatfoever
they do, not their union by that Covenant-, forask, why any
man preacheih, adminiftreth the Sacraments, or the like, the
anfwer is not made from any union, but from the Charter which
granted it.
Now I come to his Minor, but the vifible Churches of Chrift
are Ecclejiafiical or Spiritual Corporations.
I deny this Proportion absolutely , that every particular
Church is a diftincl Corporation, ( and elfe he faith nothing to his
purpofe) but are Members, or branches of that great Corpo-
ration the whole Catholick Church.
SECT. VI.
Scripture fhrafes abufed by him.
HE offers at Scripture to prove this, page 5 1 . Every -parti-
cular Church ( faith he) is a City, Heb. 12. 22. an hcufe,
1 Tim. 3. 15. ThebodyofChrisl, Ephef 4. 13, 16. 1 Cor. 12.
12, 27, 28. Here is Cyphered Scripture, AH thefe places (faith
he there) are frozen of particular vifiblc Churches. When I view-
ed the places I was amazed, to read the hoi v Scripture foinjured,
and that mighty Article of our Creed, 1 believe the holy Catholic!^
Church, to be made fuch a Nothing, as by his A pplication of thefe
Texts it is. Let us Confider ihe particulars- thefirft place is
Heb. 12. 22. But ye are come unto Mount Sion, and unto the Ci-
ty of the living God, ( this is the phrafe he muit pitch upon to
prove it a City, but mark what follows, ) The heavenly Jeru-
falem , and an innumerable company of Angels •, then verf. 2 3 . to
the General Affembly and Church cfthefirfl.born, V?hich are writ*
ten in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the Spirits of
juft men made perfetl. I cannot imagine with what colour of
reafon
Scripture Phrafes aba fed by him. 1 6 3
reafon this can be applycd to a particular Church j for although
it may be artirmed, That fuch men who arc religioufly united
to fuch Churches are come to this glo.ious Society, yet that
that peculiar Church (hould be this City , this mount $ion, this
heavenly Jerufalem, cannot be admitted -, for rirrl it is called Ci-
ty, not Cities : now if one Church be this City , another cannot
be it • it is the heavenly Jerufalem, an Innumerable Company of
Angtls, the general Ajffembly, the Church of the firft-born, which
can be fpoken of none but thcuniverfal Catholike Church, of no
particular in the world. That it is this, and fuch a Company-
let us look then upon his fecond place, where he faith his parti-
cular Church is called an houfe, 1 Tim. 3. 15 , That thou mayfi
know how to behave thy f elf in the houfe of God, which is the Church
of the living God. Hence he collects, or no where, that a Parti-
cular Church is a Corporation, becaufe an houfe ; A poor Con-
fequence, but fee, is this fpoken of a Particular Church? Mark
the words following, the pillar and ground ofaHTrmh: Can
this be fpoke of any particular , of a little handfull of men in
2V>w England, or in one Corner there ? I am fure the Church
of Rome hath much more femblance for Rome, than they can have
for any of their Congregations, which have been and, are moft
unftablethemfelves, much leffe fupports for Chrifls Truth. His
3d. place to prove this, that particular Churches are Corporati-
ons, is becaufe they are termed the body ofchrifl, for this he pro-
duceth Eph. 4. 1 3 , 1 6. The 1 3 th verfe hath not that phrafe bo-
dy-, but only faith in general, that Christians muft grow up in
the unity of Faith to the perfect Stature of C hrift- but in the 1 6th
verfe there is the name body, from whom the whole body fitly joyned
together and compared, by that which every joynt fupplyes, accor-
ding to the Effetlual working, &c. To underftand this, read the
preceding verfe, where Chriftis called the had, and then think
with your felf, whether this little Congregation can be his body
fpoke of, or the whole Church? or whether Chrift be the head to
fo many bodies? orwhe:herallChri(tiansare not Members of
the fame body ? His laft place is, 1 Cor. 12. 12. for as the body
is one anh hath many Members, &c. I am weary of tranferibing^
Confider, the body is one • therefore not every Church a di-
ftind: body, but there is one body, the Catholick Church. Then
he urgeth, ver. 27, 28. of the fame Chapter , verfe 27. Now ye
X 2 are
i 6a Scripture Phrafes abujed by him.
are t be body ofCbtifi, and (JMembers in particular : Can a man
choofe buc wonder, to think that any man fhould offer to apply
this to a particular Church, to fay it is the body of Chrift f The
28 th verle reckons up thediverfe Officers which God gave to
govern thefe Churches, which can be affirmed of none but the
univerfal, I am lure not of their particulars, they have no Ap-
flies neither literally nor fucceffively Bifhops, no way. This doth
weary me •, but now you fee all that is brought to prove this
mighty Conclufion out of Scripture. Jn brief, to illuftrate this
Truth a little farther : Conceive, that theuniverfal Church of
Chrift is like a City, of which he is the King , or Supream . All
men in baptifm fubmit themfelves to his Government. He in-
ftirutes Officers over the whole, as I have before exprefled,
thefe cannot actually beprefent everywhere, and therefore by
confent appoint thefe and thefe in their particular Wards or Pre-
cincts; and as any man when he comes to plant in this or that
City, implicitely fubmits to the Government, as of the City, fo
of that particular part of the City where he lives : fo is it with
Chriftians where they go any where in the Chriftian world , ha-
ving in general by Baptifm fubmitted themfelves to Chrift;
and his Discipline, take it in ail places whercfoeverit is. So
likewife the Church is an bsufc , Chrift the Mafter, in which
every pcrfon , in what room foever he reft?, can receive no-
thing but from his Officers. The Church univerfal is a bedy 9
he the head, from which flow all thofe Spirits and Graces by
which the body is enlivened. Now, as nothing can induce me
to believe, that each houfe in this City fhould be the City, e-;ch
Chamber in the houfe (hould be the houfe, each member fhould
be the body : (0 a man cannot be perfwaded that thefe parti-
cular Congregations which are parts of the whole, fhoald be that
^hole which is called by thefe Names.
C H A P,
That Text, &c.
it) of another Covenant can addc to a further union than this,
matters not much-, Well then, it is proved that Baptifm doth
conflitute a Member, Now I will examine how this may be ju-
flin*ed agamft his Obje&ion, which confifts only of lnftances
againft this, and no proof of them •, An Excommunicate man
(faith he) hath no Member/hip , He that renounceth the feUoto-
Jhip of the Churchy or Vvhcn a Church is utterly dijfolved , the) e is
m Church- Member /hip.
CHAP. XII.
His Inttances Examined and Confuted. Hjc
Difiolution of a Church doth not destroy
MembzrJJjip.
I Will take all thefe apart, and difcourfe the Evidence of them,
and begin with the laft , of which I may juftly hy t pofito
quoUbetfeejuitur ejuidlibet, Let it be granted,that the Church
fhould be diflbived and torn to pieces, that being the entire bo-
dy of Chrift, Chrift could have no body, and then there would
be no Membersj but it is impoflible , the Gates and powers of
Hell (hall never have power to difToIve it • the winds fhall blu-
fter and the rain fall, but not have force to beat down the City
of the living God •, It fhall be in perfecution, and fuffer many
rnifTtes^ but the darknefle fhall not be able to comprehend or
fuppreffethelightofic ^ it is true, one of their poor particular
Congregations may be and hath been fhaken and fcattered, and
their Union diflbived, becaufe it is wrought by man, and mans
ohand guards ic ^ but it (hall never be fo with Chrifts body, it
fhall be a pillar, a ftrong fupport of all trurh, yea the ground and
foundation in which Truth is inherent, and by which Truths are
fupported : that inftance therefore fall? of irsfelf, the foundati-
on is caft down, and then the Caftle hangs only in the Air,
SECT.
How Excommunication doth extirpate Baptifut. i 7^
SECT. IL
Horp^ Excommunication doth extirpate Bap-
tifme.
1 Apply my felf then to the firft Inftance of an Excommunica-
ted man, in which cafe J would have wiflied he had brought
fome reafons to have proved they were not of the Church ^ but
he not doing it, I will undertake thequeftion againft fuch Oppo-
sition as I can find elfewhere. The Queftion is, whether an
Excommunicate man be a vifible member of Chrifts vifible
Church ? I put the Terms as ftri& as I can, becaufe I will avoid
all future Cavilling, and I anfwer affirmatively, he is^ he brings
no proof to the contrary : So we are upon even Terms, if I
fliould fay no more, only the difference will be in the Autho-
rity of the Speaker, in which Ithink he will prevail- and there-
fore I will examine it by reafon, and as well as lean fatisfie the
Objections made by fome Jefuites againft it.
To underhand this : -Confider that any part continues fo long
a member of its body, as itis united to it, and fo long it is united
to it, as it can receive influence from the head , and be arrive
and operative in its proper works,by the fountains and originals
of thofe motions, aflifted any way, by any outward applications
or inward medicines-, the members of a mans body (as it haps
out in fomePalfiesJ may be utterly unadive, fo that they can-
not ftirre or move, no not feel or be fenfible of any hurt, and
yet thefe parts remain members of the body ftitL and it may
be by phyficians directions be reftored to former vivacity, and
be quickened by fpirits as before coming from the fame foun-
tain, and this is a Sign it is a member ftill of this b^dv. That
which is a member of another body, cannot by any *& be
made a member of this, nor that which is an entire body ofat
felf; fo that when phyfick can reftore a member T thetagh it
appear to our Senfes never fo dead , yet it is dill a mem*
ber.
Again, Confider for the other Term of diflinfl'on, ^hat if
a baptized man though excommunicate be a member by his
Baptifm,
1 76 Bellarmincs Arguments anfrvered.
Baptifm, he is hkewife a vifible member by the fame Baptifm,
for Baptifm is a vifible fign of the Effect it producech, and is as
vifible in the Excommunicated man, as in him that Communi-
cates.
Thirdly, Confider that many parts of the body are by ob-
ftrudtions hindred from that influerce of blood and fpirits which
would enable them to do their duties, which yet,, that obltrudi-
on removed, hold the fame Commerce and Society, with giving
and receiving mutual correfpondenceiniheir feveral offices a-
gain with both head and members. Thefe things premifed, as-
1 think apparent Truth, I now addreffe my fctf to the bu-
£neffe.
E C T. Ill
Bellarmincs Argttments anfrvered.
THere is a great Difpute betwixt Cardinal Bellarmine and
others, Whether an Excommunicated per Ion be a mem-
ber of the Church? I muftoppofe Bellarmine s for a It hough
the Conclufion feems the fame in Thomas Hooker and him , yet
Hooker offers at no reafon for it, Bellarmine doth, lib. 3 . de Ec-
clefia militante, Cap. 6. And he faith, t xcommnnicated per/ons are
not in the Church; his firft Argument is drawn from Mat, 18. 17.
If he Will not hear the Church, let him be as an heathen, & c. This
(faith he) is underftood of Excommunication , I yield. But y
(faith he) Heathens are not if the Church, I grant that likewifc •
but do adde, neither doth the Text fay they are Heathens , no
more than Publicans , but refembling, as, Sicut, being in that
like them, that they are fevered from the Actual partaking of the
Sacraments. He addes 1 Cor. 5. 2. as he reads it with an In-
troduction, Vvhj rather have you not for row that he who hath done
this might be taken away from among you ? Then he s ips to
vcrfe 6. A little leaven leaveneth the whole Lump ; and there.*
fore in the laft verfe 13. Put away therefore from among your
felves that wicked p.rfon. In which words (faith he) the Apo-
ftle defcribes what Excommunication is.
g I yield all this , but this doth not prove , that chis man was
out
Bellarmines Arguments mfwerecL ijj
out of the vifible Church ^ for although he be fevered from
actually participating man} blefled Covenants ot God's, yet not
fevered from his member fhip This is but phyficking the fick
part, you (hall rind verfe 5. To deliver (neb an one to Satban,
for the deftrutlion of the pfb, that thejpirit may be [avedin the
day of the Lord-, hke as a man who hath a difeafed member expo*
feth it to the Chirurgion, that he may be cured of his former ma-
lady •, fo thit I oblerve two ends of Excommunicarion in this
Chapter ; , the feparatten of the perfon from the Converfation
with other members, left they fhould be corrupted by him , left
the Lump (hould be leavened ^ and apunii'hmentand chaftife-
ment of the perfon, that he may amend *, Now if that Chirur-
gery doth at anytime produce i-hatHrfed of Amendment, he
then rerurns where he was to the Actu. 1 en joying and participa-
ting of ail Gods mercies and Church- bleffings : The obitru&i-
on is removed, buc no man ought to be excommunicated for
Deftruction , but for Amendment of his own pedon h or the
faving other 1 om theconcagion of his difcafe ; fo chat it is a
fign whilft he is excommunicate that he is a member, a firk one,
only obftrucTed from the participations of many Eccleiliftical
felicities, but not taken away from the Etfe and being of a
Chriftian.
His 2d. Argument is dra^rn from a Rule of the Canon Law-,
That violators of Churches Jhould be put out of the Communion of
Cbriftianity.
This is nothing but the participation ofthofe Actual bleiUngs
that are communicated to fuch in whom thtre is no obltru&ion ;
asfuppofe a mortihed and numbed member, it partakes not of
that influence of fpints and b ! ood which others which are live-
Iyer members are indued with , but yet it remains a mem-
ber.
Thirdly , He argues from the Fathers, Hillary , St. Chryfo-
ftome, TheophylaEb, who fay, to be made as an Heathen is to be ca/t
out of the people of God, caft out of the Church : So likewife St,
Auftin y Every Chriftian^ qui a Sacerdotibus excommunic tur
Sathanae traditur,ff^ who is exoommunicated by the ^acerdotes,^
Triers of God, (I render it) is delivered to Sat ban ; Now , be-
caufe out of the Church the Devil 1?, as in the Church Chrili , I
grant all thefe phrafes to haye their Truth ; That the Excom-
2 manicated
78 Bellarmines Arguments anfwered.
municated man is out of the Church, as I faid before, that is, out
■of the participation of all thofe heavenly Covenants and mercies
which are appropriated so them who in a more conflant Con-
version and fellow fhip have Commerce with it, yet he lofeth
not all union. Suppofe then the Church a Body Politick., a City,
this Baptized perfon one of the Corporation , for fome fault
.by him committed he is by them expelled the City , umill fuch
time as either he humble himfclf for his fault, or elfe give fuch fa-
tisfa&ion as is enjoyned; This man fo long as he is out of the
City lofeth all priviledges of a Citizen, yet not all union • when
hefatistfes, he is re-admitted upon his firit Title : fothat Ex-
communication is a kind of fufpenfion from the participation and
execution of thofe Divine benedictions which other members
have; it is not a degradation from his Chriftian being-, like a
Tree which is dead in the Winter, and brings forth neither fruit,
.nor leaf, yet revives in the Spring • or elfe like a withered part,
which by Chirurgery is recovered to a lively being. Consider St.
Pauls expreflion, Rom. 11. 17. and the following part, we are
faid to be grafted into Chrifl ; now that Ad which grafts us in is
baptifm : Now, as we may fee fome branch of agraft in the Fruit
feafon bearing neither fruit nor leaf, giving forth no exprefiion
of lively hood; yet when we find by any Experience that there
is any hope in it, or a poffibility ofreftoring it to a vivacity with
care of Husbandry, we know that branch is not dead, nor ut-
terly hath loft union, becaufe his reftirution is by phyfick, not
re-graftings fo it is with Baptized perfons, which being Grafts,
not Sprouts, when any decay whatsoever is reftored or repaired
by repentance and forrowfor Sins, not by re-grafting by Bap-
tifm, it is a certain and undoubted fign that it retains fhll an uni-
on by the former Grafting: So that this Acl of Excommunica-
tion is nothing but his fufpenfion from his Acting many duties
of a Chriftian, and an obftruftion of the influences of many
Graces of God to him, but yet not a total deftru&ion of either ;
for as he may pray, repeat in himfelf, and upon that juftly re-
quire Abfolution, and the Church is bound to give it : fo before
thefe he may receive motions and incitements to them, and up-
on the ufe of thofe Talents proceed from grace to grace, until
he obtain fuch a meafure of htHiiiliation and repentance as ought
to be accepted of the Church ., and accepted upon humiliation,
not
Bellarmines Arguments anfaered. i jp
not Baptifm again ; which is a fign the branch was not cut off,
but lick only : fo that now having fpent (I hope not wafted J
fomuch time and paper in Explicating what Excommunication
doth, Conceive my Anfwers to thefe pieces of Fathers thus- By
Excommunication a man is put out from many A&ual priviledg-
es and blefiings, which thofe who are not excommunited enjoy,
that they are put out of the Lap, the Bofom, the near Carefles
and Embraces of the Church ♦ not out of the abfolute being in
or with her : And left any man ftiould think this a forced Expli-
cation, take an Inftance in Mat. 27. 46. Our Saviour complains,
Mj Godjny God why haft thouforfaken met How can this be un-
derftood ? Not that the Deity had taken away that fupernatural
hypoftatical union ; but that, for that while there was a fufpence
of the influx of the fulnetfe of thofe all-comforting graces, which
were otherwhiles conftantly attending his humanity.
Laftly, ^//^wj^difputesoutofreafon: Firft, Becaufe Ex-
communication deprives a man of all Spiritual Commerce ; and he
urgeth a piece out of Tertullian for it, Cap. 3 9. of his Apology :
Eut the fence of him and Bellarmines Suppofition is to be under-
flood as I before Explained , he is deprived of the Aftual Con-
verfation of the Church in many things, not the union • and there*
fore Tertullian in that place faith, fummum futuri fudiciiprdju-
ditium, the gr^ateft prejudice in this World of the future Judge-
ment, the greateft Injury towards it that a man can have , to be
barred from the Communion, from the affociation of prayers ;
but it cannot exclude his own praying, or the power of it by
Jefus Chrift to obtain Mercy, to whom he remains knit by his
Baptifm.
Again he urgeth, It is the greatefi punifiment the Church can
infittt. I anfwer, The greateft Excommunication is the greatefi
punifhment -, but neither man nor men have power to fever that
member from thrifts body which he hath joyned.
Again Belhrmine , Excommunication canmt be to any bu t
Contumacious and Incorrigible Sinners, becaufe they VpM not hear
the Church.
I anfwer, what follows? but that they who now are Contu-
macious, anon at another time will be humble,
I.aft of 11 he urgeth, In Abfolutionthephrafe is, Reftituote,
J reftcrtthsctotbc unity of the Church, and participation of mem-
Z 2 ben*
So Such as renounce the fellow jhip^ &>c.
hers. 1 anfwer,he migh: have added what follows by way o
Explication in their forms of Abfolution, andtojhev ommuriion
ofthe faithfull. A minis reftored to the full enjoying his union,
his mcmber(hip,by fuch a Communion which he had not before,
but only an union : So now I think it appears, if you apprehend
the Church as a body natural, Excommunication is an Obftru-
* c.
I grant it, out of that glorious Communion and participation of
Heavenly myfteries , which belong to men of right faith and
manners.
But he addcs another place out of the 1 oifohnz. 19. They
went but from us, but they were not of us ; which he expounds out
of St. Auguftine , That they Went out of the Church, but if
they had been of the Church by Elettion, they Vvould not have gone
out from us I am lorry to read fo learned a man forget himielf •
I am fure in another Controverfie he would not allow this Ex-
pofition, nor can I allow it in this-, for without doubt many
Eleft do go out of the vifible Church, underftand Election in the
mod rigid way, they do go out and come in again ; that cannot
be the right exposition therefore, ff you would have my fence
of it, we may obferve, that in the preceding verfe the Apoftle
fpeaks of many Antichrifts, of thefe he faith, that they went out of
us, that is, out of the Communion with us ; now (frith he) they
Vcerenstofus-, that is, when they went out from us ; it maybe
they had been before, but then they were grown to a defiance
of US; for if they had been of us, they would not have gone out from
us-, if they had had the fame Principles they would not have left
us. This I Conceive the fence of this Text; and indeed , I know
not whether any man hatb given it this Expofition. Thofe which
I have looked in have given me no fatisfac"Hon, of what Religion
foever : Now let us fee what concerns this Text; and perhaps
will ferve to Illuftrate other Doubts The difficulty will be in
this phr&fc, to be of us > that is, our Society-, that may be di verfe
wayes, in refpe& of that Inward Thing which unites us to
Chrift, either in a perfeft union, orinaremiffe, or in the low-
ell: degree : In a perfect union , that is, by it which St. fames
phrafeth a lively faith, a faith quickned and influenced with
Charity, that dare with Abraham forfake all Lands, Wife, Chil-
dren , yea offer his Son himfelf a facrifice to the good pleafure of
God •, this the Church oiRome calls an informed fnitb, actuated
and informed with Charity; this is the hig'neft union and com-
munion. Then there is an union lower than this which is, the
faith which believes aright, and makes a profefiion of it, but will
not bide the Teft of a Confeffion, when it comes to the Touch,
and thefe are by all held fo long to be in the Church, as thev have
this union with Chrift, and fo longretains its Community , untill
forae
Such 0$ renounce the fellow flip , &c. 183
fomeTempraaonoffear, or hope, or perhaps fome Carnal Ar-
gument pecfwade uiner wife, and then they fail into Herefie or
Apoftacy, co haveorg^in iomething; and thefe I think to be
thofe of whom the Apoftle fpike, men who lived in a formal
fhew of a right faith, by converfing in a feeming manner with
the Godly and the Church, but then went from them, ( I will
not difpute the falling from Grace here. ) But thus, when men
had this faith before fpoken of, and profeflTed ic^ or profefled it,
and had it not- they bad an union with the Church, at the leaft
outward, if but by protefiion, but inward likewife if they had
that fecond fort of faith, yet they were not of m^ the number of
thofe who had juftifying faith then when thefe left us ; but now
there is another union, and that is per Sacramentum fidci, by the
Sacrament of Faith, as Baptifm iscalied, the which no man leaves^
and this is an union by which a wicked man after his repentance
hath a Title to claim mercy and abfolution,aslikewife the Church
owes it him : So that I dare fay BelUrmine^ nor any Jefuite I
have read againfl this Doctrine, can deny that there is fuch a
Title, or that that Title is not by this union : So then they ^ent
from hs, that is, the Communion with us , that {hewed they
were not thenofus^ of that dear union of a lively faith , for then
they would not Have left us ; you lee this cannot be underftood
of lack of Election: The Lied may go out, and come in again ;
It cannot be underftood that they left union, but Communion .,
for the Antichrift himfelf hath a union with the Chnrch, though
he keeps a Communion againft if. I think this is enough to
fhew, that although this departure whieh St. ?^#fpeaksof be
by Herefie or Apo It acy, as BelUrmine infinuates, yet it is not a
leaving all union of and with thrift, but only Communion, as
I have before exprefled. Reader, be not ha(ty to Judge of this
Conclusion, and then I hope thou (halt find it moft agreeing to
all principles of Religion.
Secondly, Bellarmine quotes the Council of Nice ^ Can. 8.
& 19. where ^ faith he, Heretickjarefaidto be received into the
Churchy if they wi/l return, upon certain Conditions.
For Anfwer : It is worth our marking, that thofe two Ca-
nons re made for two forts of Heretick?, the 8 th Canon for the
Cath* i or Pftri y as the Canon calls them ^ or the Nevatians , as
Hdfamon expounds it, for they were the fame; thefe the Ca-
non
184 SWfc as renounce the fellow ftjip^ &c^
non receives into the Church upon repentance, with Unpofition
of hands only, but they muft exprefle their profeffion in wri-
ting.
I he other in the 19th Canon were the Paftliaw, or PdulU-
nites, who were re-baptized upon their re-admifiion. the firft
was a reception of futh who had gene out of the Communion of
the Church, by denying re-admiflion of Penicents, who for-
fook their Religion, by f crifking to Idols, and communication
with the Digami, fuch as h id been twice marryed, whom they
held unclean. Thefe things were their Hcrefies, and therefore
were called Catbari, becaufc they muft by thtfr Things pro-
feffe themfclves holyer than other men ^ but thefe being not
things which nullified Biptifm, although pertinaciously held, they
could not be rebaptized. But for the Paulinians , becaufe they
they denyed the Trinity , they could not baptize according to
Chriflslnllitution, and therefore fuch as came from thera to the
Church were re- baptized. You fee now, how upon explana-
tion of thefe Canons of that moft ftcred Council, the Cafe is da-
ted for me, becaufe k fcems the C*th*ri had but left the Com-
munion, as is before exprefled, and therefore the removing the
Obftrudion with proper phyfick fufftced; but the Paulinians
had no union, and therefore to be grafted into the body.
I have infifted the longer upon this, becaufe the Story cfthefe
feveral Herefies is not perhaps apparent to every one, and that
difference of Condition upon the diverfity of the Herefte, per-
haps, by a negligent Reader would not have been obferved.
What heproduceth out of the Council of Latcran, That the
Church is Congregatio fidelium, I need not examine, I yield,
ic ^ but he faith , That Heretkks are not hdeles, is denyed by
many of his own Religion-, for although that they have not a
falnefTe of faith, which he cannot exad: in a member, yet rhey
may have faith in many Articles , which may preferve them in
the unity of members , though fick members • but this ferves
not my turn, comes not home to my bufineffe ; I therefore fay,
that as homo\% Animal rationale y wlich is one of the compleateft
Definitions given to any thing, and the molt exemphr, yet eve-
ry p?rt of man is not rationale ; the hand cannot difcourfe, nor
the feet : fo the Church is Congregatio fidelium ; but it doth not
follow, that every part of the Church is faithfull. Infents are
members
Such as renounce fellowships &>c. 185
members of the Church, and fuch members as are in a faving
Condition, yet they have but Sacr amentum Fidei, and Faith in
Potent* a, they arc not atlually fideles, nay, perhaps not habitu-
ally , I am certain as we know of, they have no habit of it. But
it may be obje&ed, that thefe non ponuntObkem , as the School
fpeiksj as they reach not out their hands of faith to lay hold on
Chrift, fo they do not hinder or oppofe it, but thefe men do with
violence thruft Chrift from them : I anfwer , that violence re-
turns to their own Soul, in thrufling themfelves out of the ftatc
of grace and favour with God fro tempore, for that time they do
fo, and it hinders Grace in its operari, in its great and noble Ef-
fects which it drives at, but doth not extinguifh it in its firit Ad,
which is to make a man a member ; yea therefore they arc more
finfull, than if done by an Heathen or any who had not know-
ledge of Gods Law, nor been admitted into his memberfhip 2
Therefore the Apoftlenrgeth this Argument, Shall I take the
members of Cod, and make them the members of an Harlot f In a
word therefore, the Church is the Congregation of the faithfully
the Effential and Conflicting parts of it are fuch, yet many parts
of it are not fuch 2 which no man can deny if underftood AElu^
*^,* becaufe no man can have a&ual faith at all Times, nor is it
neceffary that faith fhouid be habitual in every member^ for In-
fants cannot be proved to have it, but only Sacr amentum fidei,
which is the firft hand which gives an Intereft in Chrift, and thus
much thefe have of whom we difpute.
The Sentences which be alledgeth out of the Fathers, may be
anfwered out of what hath been already delivered.
His only reafon is, That becaufe the Church is a multitude
united, and this union chiefly confifis in the prof effion of the Fait h 9
andintheobfervationof the fame larves and rights, no reafon mi
permit that wefiould have any of the body of the Church, which
have noCenjunftiontyitb that body, he means in thefe things, but
he handles this Controverfie negligently.
t anfwer: The perfe&ion of the union confifts in thefe things
he names, fuch are in thehigheft,andneareft and deareft way in
the Church, but the abfolute union confifts in Baptifm. •
I have perufed many plater Jefuites, but they arealmoftalt
Excerpts out of him, icarce changing his words; but becaufe
in bis Anfwer to one Argument which is objected againft him,
A% he
86 Such 05 renounce feUorpJbip, &c,
he confefTeth in my Judgement what I require, 1 will put down
that, and fo pafTeon.
It is Obje&ed $dly. (faith be) That Heretickj art in the
Churchy becaufe the] are Judged by the Church. So faith St.
Paul, i Cor. 5. 12. what have I to do to Judge them which
are without f therefore they are in the Church. He anfwers,
That although Heretickj are not of the Church, jet the) ought
to be. This is poor hitherto, for then they ought not to be
Judged untill they are of the Churchy and yet be addes, Et
froinde ad earn ferment; How do they pertain to it , if they
are not of it ? 7es ( faith he ) a* a firaj Sheep belongs to
the fold^ m yoe ufe to fay , this Sheep belongs to this fold ;
This fpeech pleafeth me, That fold nath an Incereft in that
Sheep , and that Sheep in that fold ; though it have now
no Communion with it , yet it hath an onion and intereft
in Communion, whenfoeverhe (hall legally lay Claim toit t
to i>e fed with the reft , and every way provided for as
they are : Thus I think all dray Sheep which are mark'd
ty Chrift for his, belong to his fold, his Church, and by
bis mark in Baptifm may claim it , and the Church exaft a
Chriftian obfervance from it , neither of which can be in a-
TJother man.
Thus I apprehend BeBarmines Cbnfcflion hath affifted me
in giving him fatisfa&ion 4 hut becaufe this Queftion hath
been little pryed into by fuch Writers as have come into
my hands, I will for far farther Hydrations adde forne Pro-
portions which may clear it from feme Oppofitions, which
anient of min&own tmderftanding, rather than in the pera-
Iteg any Adverlarjea Writing,
SECT,
Some difficulties cleared. 187
SECT. V.
Some difficulties cleared.
THc mighty difficulty which troubled my mind all this
while I have been difcourfing of this union , was , how
k may be faid that the fame per (on fliali be a member of Chrift,
and yet in the (late of Damnation, as without doubt many a
baptized perfon is ? Somewhat like this I read in Cardinal Ca~
jetan, who in his Treatife of the Pope and a Council , Chap .
22. having been pinched with an Argument againd the Popes
Supremacy, and being the vifible head of the vifible Church,
that the Pope may be an Heretick, yea an Apoftate, and fo
no member , much lefle the head of the vifible Church - He
Ayes to my Concludon for refuge*, ( I will uot meddle with
the force of it againft the Condnfion he Treats of, but only
as he handles it in its felf ) That the Pope mufi be a baptized
per f on, and that union of Baptifm will retain him in his Mem'
her flip ^ Then ( faith he ) if we will c aft the eyes of our minds a
little higher, we flail fee that he who hath only the Character
of faith, ( which is a baptized man ) is at the fame inslant
boeh faith full and unfaithfully a and that our Saviour faid, Suffer little Children to comt un~
to me ; whereas in things not iubftantiall to a (lory, the Hvange-
lifts mofl oft vary in the relation : and we may obferve fo great
difference both in the phrafes by which they are expreft, and
likewife in the very matter, that mens wits are much troubled to
reconcile them. So in materiall points the matter is conftantly
the fame-, but when the phrafe is the fame likewife, it is a moil
aflured Argument that things were fodifpofed in that very man-
ner and words, and fome excellent thing of high note is delivered,
which I conceive thus ^ If the Difcipks had here replyed, we .do
not hinder them from coming, we forbid only others to bring
them, ourSaviours reply was couched in the very words. Chil-
dren P Infants, come with others feet when they bring.them ; now
no mencome to God but believers ; they come then with others
feet 3 why not believe with others faith as well? Nay therefeems
tobegreatreafon for it, becaufe faith is neceffary to coming,
that is, perfonall in them that can have perfonall faith, asth<
own feet in them that have fect^ but other mens feet ferve
mm for themwho have none of their own,&ib other mens
Bft-ft
i 9S Another Argument againjl the Filiation
and for my pare I wonder why we fhould be fo fhy to allow this
faith,fince thereis nothing more frequent in Scripture,than(" as the
Bifhop fpake of St. ^#/?*»,though a man of a loofe life,and carried
away with thofe wicked and horridO pinions of u\zManichees y Fi'
lita tantarum lachrymarum nonpoteftperire;Hc who had aMother
fo zealous for him with fuch (bowers of tears, would not perifh ;
her piety was powerfull with God for his good. ) That other
mens faith and prayers are prevalent with God for their Chil-
drens or Friends good, I need not repeat the ftory of th$ Centu-
rion , Mat.8. whofe faith was powerfull to the curing of his Ser-
vant, verfe 13. So likewife Mark, 9. where Chrift cured a
mans Son by the prayer of the Father, and did it upon the Fa-
thers faith, as is evident by verfe 23. If thou canfi believe, all
things arepoffible to him that believeth •, all things, then for other
men as well as for themfelves. There are many fuch (lories, but
men throw them off with thisfhift, that thofe things are con-
cerning their bodies, not their fouls : Alas, what more reafon is
there for one than the other? But fee it more cloiely; read
M*rk^2.$ . There many men bring onefick of the palfie, Veho was
carried of four, and let down from the top of the houfe y verfe 5.
It isfaid, That J ef us feeing their faith, faid to the ficl^ ofthepaU
fie, S&n, thy fins be forgiven thee. Obferve, they were divers
perfons whofe frith he faw, and but one to whom he fpake ;
and becaufe fome avoid it, and fay, that within this word (their)
is involved his who was fick, his faith as well as theirs who carried
him : although this will appear a forced explication to them who
conHder the Text, yet let it be granted -, I hope they will not fay
his faith alone, then theirs co-operated with him in the work,
then they could operate themfelves, for no fecond caufes do co-
operate one with another, but when each hath the power, then
they had force of themfelves towards the procuring of thisblef-
fing. Confider then the blefiing, Son, thy fins are forgiven
thee •, what this was appears by the Difpute which followed ; the
Scribes faid, He fpake blafphemy, none can forgive fins but God ;
and our Saviour proved immediately that he was God, in the
21. verfe, by faying to the (ick^ofthe pal fie, arife, take up thy
, andwalk, and did the miracle : fothcit it appears evident-
tirft, that faith precedes to induce Baptifm, before men can
God, that the coming of Infants is by others feet, that
the
wrought in Baptifm, anfvpcrecL 199
the faith pre-required in Children is other mens faith : forasit
is with all fupernatut all works, there is a pa fli ye faith intheob-
jed, necefTary to make it capable of that miracle, without which,
miracles ( in the courfe of Gods ordinary doing them ) are not
wrought, and with which all things are poflible, both for our
felves, or thofe which belong to us- and this faith in a Father is
powerfull for his Son, in a Mafter for his Servant. So 15 it in
Baptifm; faith is necefTary to this great work of Adoption, but
faith of others in Children is only necefTary : and this is excellent-
ly expreft in the pradiceofthe Civil Law, which whether it re-
ceived its rife from this, or Circumcifton, or that the fame prin-
ciples which dired one, are evident in the other, ldifputenor^
but it is fome comfort even in Religion to fee it illuftrated by the
wayes of prudent nature, andtheuniverfall Axiomesofit. This
then is fo illuftrated; although Adoption require the confent of
both parties, yet perfonally that is only donein fuch as are fm ju-
ris, grownto fuch years as they are mailers of themfelves, and
their own actions : but fuch as are of fuch weak years, as they are
governed, and under parents, they can be, and are adopted by
their parents to another ^ an adopting Father, and their Cove-
nants for the behalf and in the n ime of the Child, both oblige the
Child to filia.lt duties towards his new Father, and likewife the
Father to a fatherly care of the Son, both in life by protecting
him, and in death by eftating him in his Inheritance. Thus did
God with the Children of the ferves at Circumcidon • that ad: by
the Parents made the Child a debtor to that law, and God to his
Covenant of mercy to him. So here is the hand of God accept-
ing this ad of Parents for their Children, in Nature, in the Law,
and in all footfteps of Gods Government, the fame difciplinerc
ebferved. I will conclude fomewhat like that paffage in Petrm
€ Unite enfis, a man famous for learning and piety as any of that
Age r in the Treatife of his againft the Petro-brtiftans, whofe
Opinions agreed in the point with our Anabaptifts •, You fee
multitudes of men in Scripture had a faith prevalent for others,
and thofe but fingle perfons, or a few men that carried the Para-
lytica ; fhall not the faith of the world of the whole Church be ef~
feduall to thefe Infants ? A Father begs for his Son, a Mafter
for his Servant, fhall not Chriftian Parents, yea the Chriftian
Church, be heard in prayer for thefe Infants? God hath Cove-
nanted^
aoo Another Argument againjitbc Filiation
nanted, fvhatfoever je Jbatlatl^ the Father in my name, he^toir
pveitjou % John 16.22. Ask ( fay Divines ) conitantly, faith"
fully, for good things, according to Gods will, nonponenti Obi*
cem, either for himielf or others, who do not ft op byfelf-wick-
ednefs the power of prayers ^ can then the conftant prayers of the
Church, with that unlhaken faith of hers, be denyed its efficacy,
in a thing fo pleafing to God, to fuch perfons who actually can
put no hinderance to the power and eMicacy of that prayer?
Thefe things in Chriftian men cannot be denyed-, and therefore
in brief to the Argument : Faith in all introduceth this Cove-
nant in Baptifm, and moves the receiver to be adopted to Ood ;
and therefore obferve, trm the Apoftle, as he, verfe 26. Te are
all t he Children of God by faith \ fo in the 27th verfe he brings a
reafon, For as many as are baptised into Chrifi have put on Chrifi,
Thereafonwhy they are the Children of God by faith, is be-
caufe that fuch as have this faith are moved to be baptized, and
they put on Chrtft. The faith of him who is mafter of his own
actions, makes him be baptized • the faith of him who is mafter
of his Childs adions, caufeth him to bring his Child to this Adop-
tion : and yet (methinks) it hath not only power concerning
this bleffing, before the ad of Adoption, to bring men to it,
but even in it to accept it ^ for although there were all the af-
fection in the world to it before, yet if faith fail in the Ad,
that man would hold from aeceptirg fuch a Covenant, whereby
he had no confidence to be blelTed : but this faith doth only
make him Covenant, but it felf is not the Covenant.
Thus I fuppofe I have fpoken abundantly to Mr. Hookers fe-
cond Argument, and to fuch Objections which I have thought
upon, as moft oppofing this Dodrine I have delivered : and al-
though I could frame many more of this nature, yet what is faid
to thefe will ferve the turn for them likewife- and therefore I
let them paft.
SECT.
Mr. Hookers third Argument anfrvered. 201
S E C T. X.
Mr. Hookers third Argument anfrvered.
T Homos Hookers third Argument, page 54. is thus framed,
ThisTenent dothnecejfarilj evidence the Church of Rome
to be a true Churchy which is thus gathered.
where all the members are true member /, there the Church is 4
true Church.
But all the members in aU the Congregations o/Rome are true
members, Ergo,
This Minor he proves, becaufe they are baptized. I would
firft know, what is the harm if we allow the Church oiRome co
be a true Church; true in the effentials of a Church, though
fick, and full of corrupt Doctrines. I have (hewed, and it is
molt true, that many men be in a Church, yea in the Catholick
Church, and not be faved •, and perhaps there may be an whole
Church, fuch as Mr. Hooker would have, and fcarce a man of
them faved without the fame means, as many in the Church of
Rome arc faved by. And therefore by the way I adde, that the
Church of Rome is not only a Church, but a faving Church,
fuch as I doubt not but multitudes are faved in ■, for they have
not only a Doctrine of effentially true Baptifm, to admit men in-
to the Church, but they have a Doctrine effentially true of re-
pentance, to let men out of it : and! am confident, that thofe
men which fo die, with their repentance and contrition for fins,
and a defire of a new life, and a truft in Chrift, that he hath fa-
tisfied for their fins, and have no wiifull errors, but their other
errors are fuch as are invincible, and upon that ground beg,with
DaviA, the lord to forgive them their fecret fins •, I fay, fuch a
foul (hall be faved, notwithftanding multitudes of errors both in
belief and pradice. And this Do&rine is taught in the Church of
Rome, although mixed with many errors, for which yet they
have many fuch feeming reafons, as to fuch who are not allowed
to converfe with men, or read Books of another belief, may be
fu'fcienttoexcufethem at the laft day. So that although the
errors taught in the Church of Rome are notfafe, yctthefunda-
C c mentals
ao2 Mr. Hookers third Argument anfwered.
mentals taught among them, annexed to that Do&rine of repen-
tance, may be accepted by Almighty God, according to his Co-
venant injefus Chrii), to their falvation. This Controverfie
hath been molt learnedly handled by Chilling-worth, and others ;
J let it pafs therefore, and will examine his Major, which is ex-
treamly far from truth.
Where all the members are true members, there the Churchy*
true Church. This Proposition is falfe; all the memhers of a
dog arc true members, all the members of a man are true mem-
bers- but there isno true Church where that Turk is, or where
that dog is. Thus as he fets it down, it is grofly falfe • nor can
Tadde any one term to mend it : the hkelieft I can may be
this;
That Church where every member is a true member, that
Church is a true Church • But yet this is falfe, according to them-
felves 5 for a Church as we difpute of, it is tot urn Integrate, un-
der that notion we conceive it to have members, but many times
ehere may be many hands and many feet which (tick together,
and yet do not make a true tot urn Integrate, which confifts of a
perfect body, with alt itsfeverall parts, and yet th zfc are true
parts of their feverall bodies, thctc hands of Richard, thofe of
William : (o there may be divers Lay-men Congregated, or di-
vers Paftors, which are feverally e ;ch of them true members per-
haps of other Congregations, yet in that body make not
up a true Church, which confifls of all parts, Paftors, Teach-
ers, &c.
Let me addeone term tnore^'In that Church where all the
members are true members of it, there that Church is a true
Church. This is falfe HAewife: for in a reprefentative Officer,
each member is a true member of him ; of a falfe or counterfeit
King, each member is a true member of him, but he is not a true
Officer, or true King •, and for him to urge that he who is a falfe
-Officer is no Officer, and that Congregation which is not a true
Church is no Church, then he by making thefe members of the
Church of 7 ome, and calling it a Church of Rome, makes it a
true Church himfelf. So that either this Proposition means no-
thing, or it is abfolutely falfe.
Thislfpeak, ro (hew that although the Condufion which he
conceives of an undeniable evidence, were true, (as I have
proved
Mis fourth Argument anfrvered. 203
proved it falfe ) yet it would in no means be deduced from that
Major, no not with the addition of two or three the moft af-
fixing terms I could adde to it- andfol come to his fourth Ar-
gument, which is thus framed.
SECT. XL
His fourth Argument anfrvered.
THat which is a Seal of the Covenant, and, our Incorporation
into the Church vifibie, that cannot be the form of it.
At frimum verum, Ergo.
1 put down his very words, which forceth me to adde his Mi-
nor, But Baptifm is the Seal, Sec. Ergo, Baptifm is not the
form.
This Proportion he proves thus, Becaufe the Seal comes after
the thing fealed 7 but the form goes before. Thefe things arefo
giofly delivered, andfo without Jl illuftration, that it is hard
tofpeak to it, for this is all he /peaks in that place tothisbufi-
nefs: what he addes againft Mr. Rutherford, lam nothing con-
cerned in, nor do I know, what Mr. Rutherford replyes to this,
nor can conceive it by him. In a word, I deny his Major.
That £&yl) which is the Seal may be the form of the Cove-
nant, in fuch cafes where the Seal is made an eflentiall part of it,
asinfuch deeds where Sealing is neceflary, as in Law, where
figning, fealing, and delivering, altogether, make the form of that
Covenant where they are fo required •, and Baptifm is all thefe .*
fo that if he had faid, that which is a Seal alone cannot make the
form, I would have denyed his Minor, and have faid, that Bap-
tifm is not a bare Sign, as he will and dothconfefs, but figning
and delivering on both fides.
Now to illuftrate this Propofition •, in fuch cafes fuch Seals as
I have defenbed, are the form of thofe Covenants. Confider,
that the form of every thing is that which gives it ability to work
that which is its proper work; this doth figning, fealing, and de-
livering do: every Deed is like a dead body before, but when
Cc 2 ftaled
20 4 Hw fourth Argument anfwered.
feated it receives a foul, and is able to work, which it could not
dobefore. Again, the form of every thing is the laft addition
to it 5 that which he fpeaks y in his proof that a form goes before
the thing felled, or rather informed or conflicted, and a Seal
comes after, is very vain and weak : for it is true, as it being a
conftituting principle, and a caufe of that it produceth, it is there-
ibre,asthc Logicians fpeak,pn/«* naturh,nm e/fi?##, before it in na-
ture, not in time. , The Surtis in nature before its light, becaufe
its light proceeds out of it- fire before heat, yet they arey/wW
tsmpre^ children ofthe fame birth, and one cannot be without
both are. The foul of man is before a m in in nature, becaufe it
is a eonftituting caufe , yet by them that hold it created, Crean-
deirffittditur, & infundendo creator • and they that hold it ex
Traduce, give it no prst-exiftence in time to the man ; and what
he fcyesofa Seal, it comes after : in fuch cafes where Seals are
-efientiaif, they are before the Seal comes, and like a foul put in-
eoabody, it gives [t ability to work, and in that ftate is prece-
dent in nature. So that you fee, Seals in fuch Deeds as well as
forms, are before the vivacity of a Covenant in nature, though
both ztefimul in time •, and therefore fuch Seals may be forms,
and indeed are forms, as is-beforeexpreft, being that which gives
the Covenant iealed its form and power to work, and likewife the
laft thing which comes to actuate that thing in which it is r but
-becaufe that when the Seal is gone, yet the form ofthe Covenant
remains, and forms having permanent beings as Seals tranftent,
k may be further doubted how Seals can be forms. This I urge,
though not a Book-Ob jeftton, (as indeed I do not find the
Queftion difputed in the School under this Notion ) but only
which ftarced it felfin my thoughts whileft I was writing, and
Indeed may do fo with others, for I am unwilling to let any thing
pafs which may difturb a Readers affenting 5 and therefore in An-
fwertothis-Objecliondofay, that although the Seal be gone,
yet its image, itslikenefe, when it is gone, remains in the Wax,
which is as valid to all its intentions, as it felf, and is the Seal, ef-
fective % in its morall exiftence, to all thofe morall eflfefts which
it produceth: fo itisinBaptifm-, there is that the School calls
ihe-Charafter, which remains after the aft of Baptifmisgone,
and is powerful! to all its effefts-. I did avoid to fpeak of
shi* intricate bufincf9, hoping I might have efcapeditj but
i, fince
What the Character left in Baptifm is ;
205
fince I cannot, do thus undertake know, and define it
thus.
CHAP. XIII.
What the CharaSler left in Baptifm is \ and
this CharaSler defined.
T He Char after or Relitl of Baptifm, bj which a Chrifiianis
constituted amember oj "the Catholick^Church, is spiritual
power, by Vphich the baptized man is interejfed with right s
both to receive and do what belongs to a member of Chrifts
Church.
lirft, It is a power 1 Powers are either aclive, or pajjive;
attive, to do, as fire to burn ; fa five, tofuffer, or receive, as
wood hatha paffive power to receive the tgnifying nature of fire ,
which gold hath not. This relid of Baptifm do:h both thefe ?
both enable a man to demand and receive Confirmation h to
joyn with theChriftian Congregation in devorions^and prayers •
to demand and receive abfolution, the Communion, with all
other things which a Chriftian man doth in his feverall duties and
occasions. But we rauft here diftinguifh betwixt natural powers?
zndmoral-, the firft are faculties in man, by which he is enabled
by that internall principle, to ad: what the power directs him to 2
and no man obtains any fuch, but by a realt change and alteration
in himfelf to fome abfolute quality, as a power to walk, to
fpeak, or the like, that he had not before. But in m or al porters,
astherighttoanEitate, or to an Office, thefe may cpme to a
man without any fuch alteration: As the father dyes, the fonh
immediately inverted with the power of his fathers Eflate, and
yet the fon is the fame in all abfolute things, hath no fuch change
in himfelf. Again, amanischofe a General!, a King, he hath
in himfelf no fuch change, no fuch alteration, but is the fame he
was before in all abfolute things. In moral powers we are not to
expeft an alteration in the party who receives- them, to any ab-
folute reality : lo that although in a baptised perfon, who re-
Cc 3 ceives^
206 and this CharaSler defined.
ceivesthefe mighty powers, we candifcover no alteration, yet
thefe powers are in him, by the force of this moral form, which
enables him toad or receive fuch orfuch things
Next let us confider that it is a fpiritual power : that Attribute
is given it in regard ofirsobjeft, andena, becaufe the power
aims at fpirituall blefiings, and is converfant about fpirituai!
means, to obtain this end : for as it is called morall, becaufe it
confidersnotmturalU&ions, but fuch as concern a mans man-
ners, his doing well or ill in relation to God, and that Chrifti-
an Community in which he lives- fo it is fpirituall, in refpe&of
the fpirituall converfation it hath with God, and thofe men of
whofe fociety it is.
And now we feeing the genu* in this definition, let us exa-
mine the difference ) a power ty which he is intended Vpitb right :
here is apparent that which was implyed before, that it is not a
naturall but a morall power : naturall powers enable a man to
do, as the power to move, to fpeak ^ but the morall power
gives him not ability, but authority and right to move or fpeak
thus- or now he hath intereft and right to do it, to receive and
do ( this power is both atlive and pajfive, as before ) what be-
longs to a member of Chrifts Church. This gives him intereft in
no civill right, nor Office in the Church, but only a right as a
member, that is, fuch a right as byChrifts laws appertain to
him : If a finner, in fuch a degree,he is fliut out of the Commu-
nion •, ifa penitent, he may require abfolution, and by his being
biptized, he is made capable of thefe, which otherwife before,
and without Baptifm, he was not.
SECT.
In what Predicament this Char after vs. 207
S E C T. II.
In what Predicament this Char after is,
THus this Definition being explained, there is a great Quefti-
on, what manner of thing, in what Predicament this relift
power is, 3 For my pirt^without di fpangement of my greatMa-
iter in Philofophy, Ariftotlc,\ think that chefe fyiritud & theolo-
gical powers need not be tugged into any of his Predicaments, no?
was he to be blamed as inefficient in his number, becaufe he be-
ing acquainted only with naturall things, found out names for
them in his Ten •, but being ignorant of fpirltuali, mud of ne-
cefi&ty leave them, ndfuch as ftudied them, to fhifc for their
room elfewhere : and we might therefore with more eafe invent
another for them, than be forced with unjuQ violence to hale
them to thefe, which were only provided for naturall things.
But yet becaufe thofe old names would better pleafe a Reader, I
will keep my felf to them.
Andtirft, I opine that this relict ps of a relative nature* in its
proper being, for it is that intereft which a man hath as before in
Chriftashis head, and the reft of the Church as his fellow-mem-
bers, which is a relation, for pars & tot urn, part and the whole
are relates, fo are head and member, in fuch bodies as hav#
heads-, andin this confifts the nature of this rebel, and therein
are feated all the interefts and powers which a' baptized man
hath.
Jcjuinas, with that great Army of learned men who follow
his colours, fight againft this Conc'ufion vehemently, with ma-
ny Arguments feemingly powerful!, the nature of which confid-
ing of fuch matter as is not ufuall in Englifti Authors, it may
chance not be unpleafing to him who reads this, to Rudy a little
that Chriftian Philofophy which will be opened in this difcourfe^
and I am confident, it will by drawing afide fuch curtains as are
interpofed, give admittance to fuch light as will illuftrate the bn-
finefsin hand to any eafie fight : and therefore I undertake
them, The firft Argument urged by Cabrera, (for I will take
them
.
a 08 In what Predicament this Chara&er is.
them where I find them ftrongefl: maintained ) Cabrera in $1
Jgjiefi. 63. Art. 2. D$. X. Sett. 3. Concluf. 3. thus argues,
There is no motion to a bare relation, ( ad relatlnem fcr fc t is his
phrafe) for this heproduceth Arijhtle, $.Pb)f. 77.x*. 10. for
faith he, all change is to an abfolftte form, bat there is a Motion to
this Char atter, fas he and the whole School call it . I term it
the relid ) for the Sacrament all motion is terminated in this Cha~
ratter , as is evident in him who fhould feignedly take this Sacra-
ment 5 he receives nothing but the meer Character, no grace,
nor any other fupernaturall quality, but only this Charter. I
may urge it further, becaufe, as I have (hewed, this relict may
remain in a man who is void of all grace, and full of all impiety,
and therefore is fomeihingin it felf, which is the terming, the
bound, theeffed of that motion. ~\
SECT, III.
Motion is to Relation.
IAnfwertothis, that motion is to relation, and that relations
may be the efftfts of morions, that language which Scotus
and his followers ufe in the explication of this Conclufion, is not
amifs; that it is true, fuch relations which arife ab intrinfeco^
from fome inward principle, cannot be produced without a
change in thefubjec"r, or fundament urn, or the object to which it
is referred j but fuch relations which arife ab extrinfeco, from
abroad, are terms and proper effefts of morions. His followers,
Franctfcmde Pitigiams, Ruiz, Faber Faventinus^in Qj^. Diff.
6. ^ucfi. 10. amonglt the later : aslikewife the more ancient
touching upon it, explain this diftinc'tion thus, Thefe relations
arife from within, out of the very nature of both the relates,
which putting both the relates in aftuall being, that refpe&muft
needs arife out of them, ( and thisindced mud fbew fuch relati-
on to arife from an inward principle, becaufe it refutes from their
being, like heat from fire, as foonasit is. For inftance, afon
and a father arenofooner in the world both at the fame time,
bur
~— " Motion is loRdatiofi; """' " "5 69
Butthercarifeth out of them that mutuall relation of fatbcrtfodcf'
and filiation • fo likewife no fooner is one paper dyed black, but
there arifeth that mutuall fimilitude and likenefs it hath with ano-
ther paper which was black before: that relation comes fronv
abroad, which dochnot naturally arifeoutof the being of the re-'
htes, but requires fomething clfe to give it a proper being.
They illuftrate it thus ; an agent and pattent have relation one to
the other, but the agent, as fire, and the patient, as wood,,
may both be in being, yet not have their relation one to ano-
ther : they may be at fuch a diftance, as the fire cannot work
upon the wood ; yea in a fit difhnce, and all things elk difpo-
fed, there may be fome medium interpofed, and the fire not be
agent, nor the wood patient, and without any new change in
either of them, but the removing the interpofed body, they
(hall have inftantly the relation of agent and patient; and the mo-
tion only of the interpofed body, without any new abfolute qua-
lity introduced into either, the fire or the wood, fhali caufe that
relation : thus they •, but fee it clearer in thofe moral! relations
which have a nearer affinity with this of my bufinefs in hand ^ a
man is chofen Mayor of a Town, Judge in a Circuit, he is the
fame in all abfolute things be was before, can do nophyficall or
naturall ad which he could not before, he was as wife before,
could before give fentence as well as after, but his fentence was
not definitive before thTs, only that relation which the power of
the Magiftrate gave him of being a Judge or Mayor, enabled
him with, and this was extrinfecall/rom abroad ; for he was be-
fore, the Town or parties to be Judged were before, but only
this outward inveftiture in his Office, (outward in refpett of
both the relates J gave him this being. So it is with the bufi-
nefs in hand •, the baptized man had all the abfolute qualities be-
fore that he hath afterwards ; he could receive the Communion,
he could pray with the Congregation, he could be abfolved, the
fame things he could do or fuffer, but he had right to none, he
could not do or receive thefe bleflings effectively before he was
baptized : he was before, Chrift was before, the Church wa*
before, but his relations to neither were before, bat this aft of
Baptifm introduced them. And thus relation we fee may be the
term and effect of fuch motion, for mutation or change is wbat-
foeverhathmwtf, elfea new thing is fome thing which it was
Dd not
?•>
Motion is to Relation.
i^w ut.oit'/ now that which hath a new relation, isfomcthing
that it Was not before : the Mayor is the Governor of his Town f
the Judge of his Circuit •, fo a baptized man, a Chrillian, which
he was not before. I think there needs no more be fpoken to
thenYft Argurnerit^ for the place in Ariftotle, the Scotifts fay,
it is only to be under flood of thofe relations which have their be-
ing from an inward principle, notfnehas are from abroad, that
it i§ tffie of thofe which arc in the predicament of relation, not of
all refpe&s which are tranfeendent, or of which the fix laft pre-
dicaments are conftituted^ for Suarez, makes Angelicall motion
to be to the predicament of //#*, which is one of thofe refpe&s
which conftitute a Predicament of themfelves, but are not in the
predicament of relation : And we miyobferve, that our tran-
ipofition of our body in our place to a new fittu, is a motion to a
relation, which is another Predicament of the fame nature.
ButCtbrera, where before, faith, thar Dominkns Soto defpi-
ieth this Anfwer,in 4. Difi. 1 . £l*tft> 4. Art. 2. You niay read
it towards the later end of that Article ^ His Anfwer is, That
there is nvfuch thing as a reUtion arifing out of any outward caufe^
for every relation a^ifeth immediately out of its foundation: The
inftancesof Stottu he feems to overthrow. Firft, That of fire,
(faith he) the foundation of the relation, to the patient the
wiM>d,isthcaftion of warming, nottheheat^ buc let that warm-
ing aclto the wood have its being, prefently the relation re-
fults : and for the action to Vbi, he denies Vbi to be a relation^
but the tjfe-'in : toco, to t>e in a place, which is a reall thing. I
•will not difpute thefe inftances, although they are the only in-
stances given by the Ssotifts, and they do not dbferve this reply in
this place •, but my inftances of a Mayor or Judge can in no man-
ner be excepted againft, for there is the Mayor abfolutely the
fame way endowed with all qualities and defects as before, who
is the foundation of this relation, and he living in the fame Town,
converting with the fame men, and yet hath this new relation of
being Mayor, arifing from the confutation of an outward pow-
er, and that motion from an outward caufe works no change in
him to any reall and abfolute quality. Rut perhaps he wii f fay,
that this Mayoralty is the foundation of that relation, and fo the
relation immediately refnltsont of it : Let him tell me then what
tbitMiryotaltyK^VurthatTelation he hath to that Society of
which
RelatiM may be the principle of AButx* % 1 1
which lie is Mayor ; for certainly Ire can mkc k 'nothing clfe,
but that very Mayoralty rauft be that relation.
SEC T, IV.
Kelatian may be the principle of ABio^,
I Come therefore to his fecond Argument, which is clean con-
trary to that before .- for as he faid, Motion could not be ter-
minated in relation ^ fo now he faith, Relation cannot be the prin-
ciple of any reall a&hn or faffton : but this relit! or Character of
Baptifm it the principle of thofe receivings of thofe bleffings^ before
ftoken of i therefore it cannot be a relation.
To this I anfwer, His Major bath no foundation to build upon.
Look upon all moral relations t as I have before fliewed, yea up-
on moral powers in natural relations •, as you may fee, a Father is
no fooner a Father, but prefently out of that Fatherhood arifeth
that moral power to have dominion over his Son, and that duty of
providing for him.- fo likewife from the relation of Mayoralty
arifeth that power of governing and ruling in the Corporation,
So that akhough perhaps naturall relations are not principles of
naturall a&ions, nor do they give men naturall powers, as by
being a Father, a man neither eats, nor drinks, nor fleeps the
better ; yet relations are principles of moralla&ions and pafiions,
and give their morall powers interefts and duties, which immedi-
ately refnlt out of thofe relations : and of this nature is this, they
are moral! endowments, fpiritually moral!, as before explained,
to ad or receive the bleffings appertaining to fuch members.
Ddi SECT,
2 1 1 One Kclatin may be the foundation of another.
SECT, V,
One Relation maybe the foundation of another.
AThirdreafonofhisis, That one relation cannot he the foun-
dation of another -, this is by fome confirmed, That if it
could be founded in another , there would be relation upon relation,
infinite!}.
Thisis abfolutely falfc likewife as well as the other Major. To
prove this, the inftances of S cot ut and his followers are fuchas
abide difpute \ I will avoid that, and make it as clear as day :
Two (heets of paper have the fame writings, or (if you will )
but black fpots in them, thcfe two (heets have a fimilitude or
iikenefs in them • then take two (heets of parchment, and let
them have the fame writings or fpots in them -, there the firft r*.
lation is the foundation immediately of thefecond fimilitude, as
relations \ yet clearer, Fatherhood in Thomas is a relation, fois
Fatherhood'm Peter • from hence refults a Iikenefs betwixt thefe
two, Thomas and Peter^ which is founded only upon the for-
mer relation of Fatherhood.
It is in vain for men to fay that fimilitude is only in qualities -,
for whether it be 'equality in quantities, or identity in fub fiance,
or convenience in any other Predicament, a relation refults from
one as well as the other. So then although this reli A of Baptifm
be a relation, yet it may found and fupport, he thc/ubjetlttm quo,
the immediate fubjecl, by rcafon of which other relations are ki
thejukftance. Now chat which was urged for confirmation,
that then relations might be muttiflyed infinitely, is of no force,
for there is, as we fee in the former inftances, a fixation, that
there muft be a bound beyond which it cannot go : nor is the Ar-
gument of more force in relation*, then bccaufe there is a canfe of
* caufe, therefore there (hould be infinite caufes ■> for we knew
there muft be one fixed.
SECT.
..Where is the Foundation of this Character. 213
S E C T. VI.
Where is the Foundation of this Character.
I Leave Cabrera, and come to Didacus Nuguerv in 3 . J%ueft*
63. Art. 2. Difficult. 2. who enquireth, If this Character be
a relation y sphere is its foundation, thatmufi be either natural or
fufer natural ; natural it cannot be, becaufe it is Spiritual-, and
fuper natural it cannot be, becaufe it f elf is the firfi fpiritual thing
in man ; now ever j relation mufi have fome abfdute thing to found
it on. This Argument I do not find obfervcd by any of the
School of Scotus, and therefore muft fay fomewhat to it, which
tomefeems not yet delivered in the School in this Conclufion.
I fay therefore, that it is one thing to (peak of the foundation
of a relation, another thing to fpeak of the terminus, or fubjeel,
or correlate : as thus, the fubjeel of a Fatherhoods the man who
is the Father, the correlate is his Son, the foundation is bis power
ofgettingaSon, or his ad, in that permanent being in which ic
remains. So in two white flieets of paper, the relate or fubjeel is
the whice fhcet, the correlate to which it is referred is the other
white ftieet, the foundation is the whitenefs. Thus it is in all thefe
relations which are natural^ becaufe their relations arife from
within, theirjfWW*fM»muft be internally but in morall relati-
ons, whofe originall is from abroad, there the foundation of this
relation muft be abroad : as thus, What is the \ foundation of thte
mans Mayoralty, but either the CWttr by whichitisfupport-
ed, orelfe the will of the Supream, or both, or whatfocvet
from without gave him that being of that relation. Now there-
fore in this cafe, I fay, the foundation of this relation, thisrelidr,
which is the memberfhif of Chrifi t is the will of God, who hath
thusconftituted a baptized man a member of his Church- anj
thisisafupecnaturalthing, and that which alone can endow •
man with this member (hip: this he doth by his faercd Word^
which hath confirmed this to us,
Dd | SECT,
2i4 Another Argument anfwer:i.
SECT. V1L
Another Argument anfwercd.
T Herds one little Argument more, which is, That tlx 4ift*
fition to every form is reducible to that ra*^ and feries of
things in tyhich theformitdijp'fetb tois>, but this Chara&tr is
a difyofition to G$ds graces^ which are reduced to qualities - t
therefore,
The Major ag in is falfe, mo(t eminently falfe,- (o that the
contrary h :lmo(t true : feeitfo^ heat is a difpofrtion to fire,
cold to water, yet they are fobllances : thefe accidents, mod
dift.ringrelathnf, are difpofitions to many great a&ions ofpietj
in Parents, of duty \t\ Clergymen^ of governing well in tJMa-
giftrate$ % of obedience in all their SubjeEis t yet thefe things of
divers natures. I conclude then refolutely, that thii reli;} $f
Bdptifm « a relation.
Now, next, in a relation would be enquired, whether real or
rational ; whether a real relation , or that oireafin q*Ij.
CHAP.
to bi\ be*' \ fjc weli& be a reall Relation f 1 1 5
chap, xw:
Whether the ReliSl be a reaU Relation, or of
Reafon.
DVr anting t tn 4. Z)§?. 4. £**&. 1. frope finem, (lands alone
againft all the Schools of Thomas and Scotm> and Ocham,
and whofoever : his opinion is, that this Char after is only £w
Rationis ^ I cannot approve of his Reafons, nor altogether of
his Condufion, yet do think him unconfuted by all that I have
Iceland I havelooked over fourty I think at teaft. The princi-
pal! Arguments which are urged againft him are Authorities,
iirft, out of the Florentine Councill, in that Decree of union,
which indeed might rather be called the Decree of Eugenius the
4th I but howfoever that Decree hath no more, but that thefe
three Sacraments^ Baptifm % Confirmation, and Orders, imprint
an indelible Char after, which is a Sign, all which maybe allowed
Ens Ration^. Secondly, out of the Councill of Trent , Sejf. 7.
Caf. de Sacr. Can. 9. which faith no more than the other, that
-this Char after is a fpirituall indelible Sign , fo rhat were I of the
Church of Rome, according to their own principles, even in this
Age, ( forheisexciffed from herefie by them, writing before
thefe Decrees, but his opinion is condemned by moft now after
thefe Canons ) yet I fay, even now amongft them felyes he might:
"be defended by thefe Canons, much better than they who hold it
10 bevrcall abfolnte quality -, for if it be a Sign? a Sign is a rela-
tion : and that is but a fhift to fay this word Sign is put for an
explicatory term, not as the Genw, fincein thefe twoCouncills
it enjoys the place of a Qenns, as is evident in thefe Canons-, and
then Signs may beEntia Rationis, as moft be which are not**-
t h* al Signs, but by Inftitution, of which nature this is. The
-chief reafon that I rind may be that of Pitigianns, in Theol. ff>ec,
& moral Dift. 6. jQueft. 10. Art. 1. That if the Characters of
thefe Sacraments fiouldbe Entia Rationis only, then the Prieft-
hoed of the new Teftament (houldno otherwife imprefs its 'Char 'after,
tfhanthe Priefthood of the old Law. To this I anfwer 5 That I
know
2 1 6 or of Reafon.
know no need that it (hould ; but yet Vafqnez, Sueft. 63 . Art.
S.'Difa.iH.Caf.l.Num.n.ini. faith, That this Charatter
differs from the other, becaufe that Was delible, this not • but this
is weak, becaufe delibilitj or indelibility are extrinfecall things to
the nature of a Charatter, and both what is delible and what
is indelible may have their beings upon reafon^ or elfe 6c
red.
Cabrera,in 3 £>uefi : 6i.Art.2.Difr 1. See. 2. urgeth Ar-
guments, as before agiinft relation, fo here againft this, Cha-
racters being Ens Rationis : firf}, a real attion hath a
real term ^ but this Charatter doth terminate a real attion,
therefore.
The Major is foextreamly falfc, that indeed there is no Ens
Rationis in the world which doth not terminate a real ail 1 take
the moft fictitious Chjmara that ever was, which is the moft
purely the work of humane reafon . yet even when I fay it is the
work of reafon, I make it the effett and term of a real aft, which
is mans reafon.
Again, ( faith he ) If a Charatter fhouldbe Relatio rationis,
then the effett of every Sacrament [hould be a Charatter^ becaufe
there are relations of reafon in them all.
This hath no confequence at all • for although a Charatter
were a relation of reafon, yet it doth not follow that every relati-
on of reafon (hould be a charatter.
Thus I conceive the Arguments oppofed to Durand, an-
fwered, out of their own principles who contend againft
him.
SECT.
The constitution ofMan^and likgnefs to God. 217
S E C T. If.
The co?iji tint ion of Man 3 and lihgnefs t&
God.
NO w to undcrfland the truth of this Queftion • Paula Ma-
jor a Canamns, conceive, as it is defcribed in the rirftof
Genefis y that God made ail the world, and the things that are in
it; when he had done, he made man after his own image, as it
is defcribed there; a little God to govern the world which he had
made, under God ; and not fo only, but this image did gloriouf*
iy appear in the foul of man, not only that as God made the crea-
ttres, fo he gave man the authority to give them their names,
but likewife that he gave his foul a power to make another world
as he had done this : fo that as God hath made one world, fo
man,in the power of his imagination, of his rcafonable imaginati-
on, hath made a thoufand more ; and can imagine that the infi-
nite power may, and hath made fo many worlds, that this to that
number fhould be but as a mote to this. He can make a world
in the Moon ; and as wife men do concerning this, fo fuch men
can and have philofophized what men do and ought to do in that:
he can make nations of Pigmies, Silves, Nymphs, and philoso-
phize what their natures are, and what their manners ; yea fome
have told what their religion and duty to God is ; he can go fur-
ther, and take in pieces this world, and joyn a man, an horfe,
and a bird together ; and his bufiefancie can bring forth births
monftrous, to all the effeftsofGod in nature; yea you may ob-
ferve thefe expreffions wonderfull in the prophets. Now as the
works of God which he made are fuch as we czWreali things , both
thofe abfolute entities, and thofe which are relations, for thofe
relations which God hath made by the hand of nature, ( as
fmoak and fire, father and fon, and the like, are reall relations %
fo thofe works which are wrought by mens reafon alone, thofe
dXeEntiarationis, the things of reafon, allChimara's, all men
intheMoon, all imagined things, which have no exigence in the
world, out of mans head and intellect ; thefe are things of mans
Ee makirg,
1 8 The constitution of Man^and lih^ncfs to GocL
making, and attain not that excellency of Gods works to ht reall
strings, but barely things of r^/, but they are Gods Minifters, as I may fo fpeak, fub-
jetlive, fubjed only to his commands and directions. I fhould
have wifhed that he had endeavoured to confirm thefe Propofi-
tions either out of Scripture, reafon, or antiquity • but I fee
neither, neither do I think that the matter will afford either :
he indeed names three or four late Writers, which never trou-
ble me to examine, but yet I could anfwer them if there were
need • but the Argument from them is of no force at all, and
that the very quotations are of no force, were the perfons. See
his collection from them, page 77. which perhaps he means a
third Propofition, becaufe he faith, Thirdly, In cafe the fact
twdformof all the Churches are generally corrupted, &c. I need
adde no more, Pofito qwlibetfequitur quidlibet ; fuppofeimpof-
fibilitics, and you may collect untruth enough. Chrift hath
promifed not to leave his Church defti tute ; it is true, there is no
promife to their particular Congregations, but to his Church in
generall • and therefore to difpute upon an impoflible ground,
yeelds little or no ftrength to that Argument, and fo I dc/ift
from it.
His fecond Argument begins in the end of that p^ige, and pro*
ceedsinthenext. ft is thu« urged :
if the Church can do the greater, then fhe may do the lefs \
the atls appertaining to the fame thing, and being of the fame
kind.
But the Church can do the greater, namely , give the ejfentials
MaPaftor, Ut fbpra- Ergo,
I put his words down verbatim ; but now be fhould have na-
med
this Ordinance cloth appertain* 22
medthelefs, which muft be, or he fpeaks nothings difpencc
this Ordinance of Ordination, and then I would Know what
that is, if not giving the effentials to this Officer : So here is idem
per idem, the Concluilon proved by it feJf, and therefore muft
be denyed upon the fame grounds which Ifpakeof before j and
this is all he puts down for his fecond Argument*
His third Argument, page 78. is thus framed .-
ThatVehicb is not an atJ of power, but of order , the Church
can do : he proves this Proposition ; for, ( faith he) thereafon
tyhy it is conceived and concluded that it is beyond the power of the
people , is, becaufe it is an aft of (upream jurifdillion.;
But this is an aft of order , not of power,
Suppefe I fhould deny his Major ^ have the people power to
do any thing that is an ad of order ? Indeed, I know no Ecclefi-
aftick power they have, or any fpirituall power of afting any
thing, that concerns more than their particular demeanour,
and all the reft is obedience.
But then to his Minor : To difpence Ordination is an aft of
power-, for although the thing difpenfed fas 1 have fhewed )
is called an order, yet it is an aft of power that gives it, as in a
Civil State, the precedency of place is meerly an order, but yet
it is an aft of power in the fupream Magiftrate that gives it.
Now fuch is this ; although we fhould conceive it meerly an or-
der, yet it muft be given by an aft of power : but this befides
that notion of order, hath in it felf great powers which are con-
veyed by it, of whichl. have treated fomewhat in their diftinft
notions : and this Argument is abfolutely unvalid.
He hath another Argument which follows, but it concerns
only the Presbyterians •, yet from thence he takes occafion to
afperfe Bifliops thus ;
It is as certain ( faith he) that it cannot firfily belong to a Bi-
fbop, which by humane invention and confent is preferred before a
Presbyter in dignity, only, if they will hold t hem/elves either to the
precedent, (he writes, but I think he means prefident) or pat-
tern whence they raife their pedigree, and it is from Hierom ak
Evagrium, Vnnm ex fe eleftum in altiori gradu colloca-
runt.
How miny ( to fpeak modeftly ) weakneiTes may be obfer
vcdinthisDifcourfe? Firft, That it is imputed and obtruded up-
Ff 2 on
8 To whom the right of ' dijpenfwg this
on the defenders of Epiicopacy, that they fhould confent that it
Is an humane invention, than which nothing is more againft their
Difcourfes. Secondly, That they found their opinion only
upon this place of St. Hicrome, which is as flatagiinft apparent
reafon, as the other, fince this place is commonly objected a-
gainft them^ and although St. Hierome hath fpoken enough
otherwhere, yet in thisEpiftle being preffedfomewhat with the
pride of Deacons, who were lifted up above Presbyters, by the
(loath and vanity of many, he fomewhat pafiionately defended
the caufe of Presbyters, and here of all other places fpeaksthe
leaft for Bi (hops, making the name be ufed reciprocally in Scri-
pture. But then laftly, he quotes the place falfe, and by the
change ofa letter mnkes him fpeak what he meant not : to whom
it may be anfwered in this, as Bifhop Andrews did to BeUarmine
in the like cafe, Vtrburri caret litera Cardinalis fide •, he faith,
Z)num ex fe elettumin altiori gradu collocarunt, when it is, Col-
locatum Spifcopum nominaverunt ; in which fence there is a migh-
ty difference : in the firft, as if they had placed and given their
Bifhop his authority which he had •, in the other only, that they
cal!ed him Bifhop, who was fet over the other Presbyters • fo
that it intimates, that the name grewdiflind not from the firft
inftant of the Office. I am fure I have fpoke of this place before,
and let us confider it in its fulleft and moft averfe fence that it can
abide : confider, that juft there in the heat and height of his
Difputation againft Deacons, and upon that ground his extolling
of Presbyters, to which only Order he was exalted, he proves
that the difference betwixt Bifhops and Presbyters, and the ex-
altation of them, was Apoftolical, and from the Apoftles deri-
ved to his age, from the Church of Alexandria, which was foun-
ded by St. Mark^, whereto his time from St. Mar^ww a fuc-
cefllon of Bifhops above Presbyters- and it is a derogation from
the reverence due to the Apoftles, to call their inftitmions mi j erly
humane inventions, in fuch things which concern Ecclefiailicall
Government, concerning which they had that great Commiffi-
on, As mj Father fent me, &c. and in this cafe it is moft weak of
all other, fince concerning Ordination, St. Hierome in this very
Epiftle, immediately after thefe words, faith, Quidfacit Epif-
copm excepta Ordinatione, qwd mn facial Vresbyter ? thus in
Lnglifh, what doth a Bifhop except Ordination, Which a Presbjter
cannot
Ordinance doth appertain. 279
cannot do f Here then a Presbyter c?nnot ordain • and yet to
fhewthe full fc nee of the words, underftand that a Presbyter
may do any thing, ( I upon a fudden can except nothing, noric
may be he when he wrote that Sentence ) I fay, he can do any
thing that a Bifhop doth, except ordain ^ but the affairs of ru-
ling other Elders or judging them, he cannot do by an origi-
nal ; or to uk Hookers language, by an Authority firltly feated
in him, or given to him, but by a delegated- but no delegation
canfervethe turn in Ordination, becaufe it was given to the
Apoftles by Chrift, in thofe words, As mj Father fent me^fo
fendlyou, to give Authority to ordain ; and they, and they
only who were fo authorized by the Apoftles, can doit. Thus
you fee that place out of Sr. Hierome expounded 5 his Arguments
deduced from thence falls of its felf :
If Presbyters e letted and gave firfi being to a Bifhop, then Were
thej before him, and could not receive Ordination from him, At
frimum ex conceffis. Ergo,
I fet down his words, and all his words • where hath he
fhewed that Presbyters elected their 'Bifhop t which yet may be
true, and the confequence moft weak : for after their Ordinati-
onby Bi/hops, they may elect their Bifhop 9 but not ordain him.
Elections may be, and are various, according to humane Con-
Pi:utions, affigning this or that Paftor to this or that particular
Congregation-, fometimes the Parifh, fometimes the Patron^
fometimes a i?//&o/>-, but the Ordination, and giving him power to
Officiate, muft be only by the Bifhops : the Bifhop ordains and
makes a man a Vretbyter •, a Bifhop of the Catholic^Church, he
may by humane Laws and his own confent be tyed to Officiate
and execute that Paftoral duty in this particular place : nor can
any man fh^w me Authority from Scripture, or the times near
to the Scripture-Writers, where any man was inftituted and or-
d lined co do thefefpirituall duties, by any other Authority than
Episcopal. Nay 1 think fince the Apoftles Age, no considera-
ble Church, or body of Men, did conceive Election to be of va-
lidity to do thefe duties, till now.
Well then, all the premiffes confidered, which have a full
confent of Scripture, and the practice of all Ages to confirm
them, conceive wich me, that it muft: be a bold and impudent
thing of fuch men, who dare Officiate in thefe divine duties,
F f 3 with- -
^ ^
}o To whom the right ofdifpcnfing^ &:c
without Authority granted from Chrift, which he only gaveto
the Apcfi/es, and they to their Succejfors, Bifiops-, and it is a
foohfhraflinefsinthofemen, who adventure to receive the Co-
venants of their cternall Salvation from fuchmen, who have no
Atturnment from Chriftto Seal them.
If the Cafe were dubious, which to me feems as clear as fuch a
pra&ick matter can be, I fhould fpeak more ^ but it being clear,
I need write no more in this Theam. I intended to have fpoken
to Ur.Hoh,but lately there came to my hands a Book of learned
Dr. Hammond, entituled, A Letter of Refolution to fix Queries ^
in the fifth of which,which is about Impofition of bands \ you may
find him moft juilly cenfured for that vain and un-fchelaftick O-
pinion^^.384. But the bufinefs is handled fufficiently in the be-
ginning of that Treatife, fag. 318. wherefore my pains were
vain in this Caufe.
A N
231
AnAPPENDIX.&c-
CHAP. L
In which is an Introdu&ion to the Difcourfe,
and the Qjtejiion jiated.
Since I came back to my Study , I found one conclufion
delivered in this Treatife, oppofed by a learned Scotchman,
one Doctor Forbes, in a Treatife intituled Ironicam,and in it he
hath divers Arguments not inferted in my former Papers,
againft: this propofition : That it is a proper and peculiar aft
of Epifcopacy to ordain Priefts and Bifhops , which he de-
nyesin his fecond Book , Chap. 11. Propofition 13. inhisEx-
pofition, and proofe of that propofition, page 159. And I
obfervingit whileft my Papers are with the Primer , thought
it fit to interpofe that which fatisfied my felf in his Arguments.
In the top of the page before named he begins thus. Gra-
des quidem Epifcopalis eft juris divini. f here we agree^ ) It a
tamen ut Ecclefia ejfe non definit. Sed effe pvjfit , & fit quando-
que vera Ecclefia Chriftiana in qua non reperitur hicgradus^
Here we begin to differ- I fay there neither is , nor ever was
a Chriftian Church without a Bifhop : and I will now begin to
diftinguifh , there is the univerfal Church , and there are par-
ticular Churches. The particular Churches we may, yea mud
conceive to be fometimes wirhout Bifhops, yea without Pref-
biters, as by the death of their Bifhops or Presbiters , or by
fuch perfections , as may fo fcatter them , that they dare
not (hew themfelves in their Churches, In fuch cafes thefe
places mud needes be without theft Magiftrates. And yet
thofe Chriftians who are by fuch means defrauded of this di-
vine and bleffed government , keeping their firft faith continue
members of the Catholick Church , and of that univerfal
Church, which have and ever (hall have Bifhops as long as
the World (lands , fo that if that propofition be meant of par-
ticular Congregations •, It is true they may be without a
Bifhop : But if the univerfal , they (hall never be by the pro-
mife
2 72 His firjl Argument drawn
mife of our Saviour , (I will be with you to the end of the World)
without a Bifhop. And thofe particular Churches, which may
by fuch means be without Bifhops , may be without Presbiters
likewife, upon the fame occafions. This I think is clear , [ fhall
now examine his Arguments, which oppofe this which I have
delivered.
His jirjl Argument drawn from Scripture
anfwerecL
HE faith, he will prove it before the Inftitution of Bifhops
and after. Firft, before- I am perfwaded he can (hew
me no Church before the Inftitution, for their Epifcopal autho a
rity was given in its fulnefs to the Apoftlesin that language
of our Saviour , As my father fend me fo fend Ijou 9 as I have
explained. All theCommirtion was given to them, and they
imparted all or part of it as they pleafed-, they were the firft
and only Bifhops, untill they fetled Provincial Bifhops ; they
were of the whole world , as thofe latter of particular Diocefles-
he proves that there were Churches before Bifhops out of
Scripture, but it is ciphered Scripture fir ft, A Us 8. 12. There
Philip the ^Deacon (To he terms him,) converted Souls to Chrift,
where was no Bifhop : And by his leave , if Philip were but a
Beacon, there was no Presbiter neither, and by the By, the
Independant Thomas Hooker of New England , and his fellows
may take notice , that a Beacon may preach and baptize ; for
fo did T hilip in Samaria in that verfe. But Reader take no-
tice, that although men may be converted by Presbiters, yea
Lay-men, any ^ and when they are converted and baptized, are
members of the Catholick Church, and parts of the myftical
body of Chrift , and have no Bifhop refident in that place • yet
wirhout a Bifhop it cannot be ; for the providence of God over
the Church is fuch , as that there fhall always be fuch an au-
thority refident in the Church univerfal , whither men may
in convenient time , fuch as will be accepted of God , repair
for Church-difcipline. The next place be vergeth is Ails u.
20,21,
from Scripture anfrvered. 233
20.21. But there is nothing obfervable to any fuch purpofc,
but only that they who were fcattered upon the perfecution of
Stephen, converted many Souk to the true faith. His third place
is Alls 14. 20,21, 22. Hefhould tave added the 23, without
the which all the former were imperfed to his purpofe , and
in that verfe are the words which he argues out of, that is 9
the) ordained Elders , >&t UfriffUv, Now there was a Church
heinferrs, and no Biftiop 5 I will teii him there w s a Church
and no Presbyter, untill cheApoftles ordained them , and the
AdoRIcs Barnabas and Paul ordained t aefe Presbitcrs , not a
Presbitery , and they thernfeives itinerants throughout the
World , vifited their Churches with fetters and di e^ions,
fometimes when they could not perfonaily be prefent, untill
they fctled Biihops amongft them. His next place urged is ABs
the 20. he leaves me to looke the verfe, bucaffirmes that the
Church otEphefm was governed firft by Presbiters , only from
that Chap, afterward they had a Biftiop, who was called , The
Angel of the Church of Sphefus , Apocalyps 2. That which hath
any colour for this in this Chap, muft be deduced out of the
17 th . verfe , where it is faid : That from MUetum Paulfent to
Ephefusfor the Elders of the Church , Therefore it feems the
Church was governed by Elders at that time$ but let the Rea-
der confider whether St. Pad did not Epifcopize over them,
converging the Elders before him, and giving them that moll
heavenly charge ^ And then confider thatthefe men in the 28.
verfe are called Biftiops , Take heed to the flock, over which the
HdjGhoflhatb mad? you Overfeers, (Ve read it -J but it is
Bifhop in the Original indeed, as I have (hewed in this Treatife.
The words were not diftinguifhed at the firft, but they were
promifcuoufly ufed untill the great increafe of Chriftianitvt,
when thenameofApoftlesbegmtoweareawiy, and they had
more generally fetled Churches and pianrci Bi'liops over the
other Presbiters in the chief Cities, and then thefewere called
Biftiops-, and indeed every Presbiter, who hath a charge of
Souls, is a little Biftiop in the Superintendence' of his par fti,
though not in the nature of the office ; he muft look to his little
flock , as Biftiop over them ; fo that nominally every Presbiter
with charge of So^ls , is a little Biftiop fuperintenduing thera
for their Souls good ; But a Biftiop is higher , over chem and
Gg their
2 2A An Arg. drawn from Panormitan anfwcred.
their flocks to take care that he doth his duty in thefe places of
Scripture. I fee no manner of Argument to ftiew that a
Church may exift without a Biftiop, for they had Apoftles, and
then Bifhops in their places.
CHAP. III.
His Argument drawn from Pane rm* tan an*
frvered.
HE then urgeth a Sentence out of Panomita^Olim Presbj*
ttri in commnni regebam Ecclefiam , & ordinabant fa-
cer dotes , & confecrabant omnia Sacrament a. Sed pflmodum
adfehifmatafedanda fee er tint Jen ordinaverunt Apofioli & crea-
rentPir Epfcopi. Let me examine this bold afTertion of Panor-
mitan^ and of Sr. Hierom, who hath much the fame word (Olim)
that was in the firft plantation of the Churches-, I know no re-
cord of any authentick authority in the cafe , but the Ads of the
Apoftles or their Epifties, in which I can never find that any
manor Company of men, who were barely Presbiters, did or-
dain Priefls , or did perform any Ad of Jurifdidion *V com-
munis as he fpeakes, which would intimate a Senatorian Go-
vernment; of which, as they urge none, fo I cannot imagine
what words in thefe Ads or Epiftles (hould tend thereunto ; but
then his laft Claufe I in part yeeld to , that the Apoftles did or-
dain Bifhops , and am confident they did it by divine Right,
which was given them by our Saviour , frying : As my Father
fent me Jo (end Ijou • but whether only as they fay , adfedanda
fchifmata, toappeafe fchifme, upon the occafionof fome that
faid they were Pauls , or elfe for theabfolute better govern-
ment of the Church , ( which I rather adhere to ) I leave to the
Readers Judgement . but in general think it too great a boldnefs
for men to limit Gods defignes to their weake meafures , when
God hath not determined or expreft them » therefore ft ch a paf-
fege in Panormitan is of no vallidity.
CHAP.
An Argument out of Johan. Major anfrvered. 22$
CHAP. IV.
His frji Argument: to prove their ordination
after Bijhops were inftituted^ anfrvered.
HE proceeds with the fecond Number of hisdiftin&ion, to
(hew that not onely this was done before Bifhops were
inftituted,buc after like wife the fame was done - 9 and he gives
this reafon : for faith the Doctor i Non enim ad ejfe , fed ad
me lifts ejfe Ec cleft a ncceffaria eft h&c ceconomia , This difcipline is
not neceffary to the being i but well-being of theChurch- fup-
pofe I grant it , 'tis true , no difcipline is neceffary to the being
of a Chriftian but Baptifme, by which we are made members
ofthatmyftical body of Chrift , of which he is the head •, po-
litical Lawes, Civil or Ecclefiaftical , are not neceffary to our
being Men, or Englishmen of this Country ; but to our hap-
py being in it , we may be Chriftians and members of Chriftg
Chnrch, where is no Presbkeras well asnoBifhop- Asfup-
pofe a Diocefs and Kingdom conquered by a Pagan, as alafs too
many have been , not a Bifhop or a Prieft left remaining,
Thofc noble Chriftians who remain without them have the
being of Chriftians , but not the well-being of Church-commu-
nion , enjoying the bleffed Sacrament which requires facerdotal
adminiftration , and Irkewife Church-difcipline , which con-
duce to the well-being of a Church-, but here we fee the fame
neceffity of one as the other, for Bifhops as Prcsbiters.
CHAP. V.
An Argument out of Johannes Major an-
frvered.
B
Ut he proceeds and produceth a place oat of Johannes
Major de geftis Scotorwn , that he fhould write that rbe
Gg Z Scot,
ao £ An Argument out of
Scots were governed by Priefls and Monks until Anno Domini
(429.) from whence he collects , that they were two hundred
and~thirty years without Rifhops, he might have urged other
late Writers likewife in it. Rue I anfwer to this , that the
Regilters of that illiterate age were very ill prcferved through,
out Chriftendom , but worfe in thofe parts amongfl; the FiQs
and Scots , then almoft any where , by reafon that they were
miferably oppreffed with the almoft perpetual Warrs they had
with their Neighbours ^ Brittaints and Romanes , the Sax 6ns,
and fcarce any eminent man for learning, who recorded any
thing, was acted amongfl them • and in that Gap of time in
which they place this lack of Bifhops , their troubles were at the
height •, for as there was all that fpace Warrs for dominion, fo
there w'as perfection for dcftru&ion of Chriftianity , and the
Scots in general were banifhed that Country. The Chriftians
fled every where for fafety to the adjacent Ifles to Ireland,
from whence they came, to Normandy, to Benmarke , any
where for fafety • which it may be , although unhappy to their
wordly content, yet advanced the propagation of the Gofpel ,
as it was in the Apoftlestime upon the perfecution of St. Stephen*
Well then , I think in this unhappy feafon , they can find good
Record for neither Bifhops norpresbiters, but every Chritlian
fhiftingfor himfelf, and efpecially thofe who were in authori-
ty and in Chriftian office, becaufe they of all others were
fought after , and therefore were concerned to hide their heads 5
befides this, it being the cuftome of Bifhops to place themfelves
in fome eminent Citie* , whereby they might be the more e-
mincnt , and the better overfee their Diocefles : There were
few fuch in Scotland then , but thefe Bifhops which were then
in the Kingdom were forced to inhabit many obfeure places.
All which confidered , it is not poffibJe for any man to expe& a
pedigree of their Bifhops , as it hath been preferved in more
eminent Churches , and yet in the beft of them there are
mighry difficulties to make them certain, but yet they may
know that they might have Bifhops in that time and Presbi-
lers ordained by them , although theRegifter'snot apparent-
for it is evident out of fuch ftories as we have, that King La?
riWthe firft Chriftian King we read of in our Nation, wheii
he fetlcd Chriftianity here , he was to extirpate the former Pagan
Re.,
Johannes Major anjrvered. 237
Religion , ufed by the Druids in thefe Countreys. Now they
had here three Arcb-flamins , befides divers other Flamins in-
ferior, according to their Method : fo he fetled Chriftianity , he
made three Arch-bifhops , Torke , London , Caerljon ; this
laft governed Walts and divers adjacent Countreys , London the
Mediterranean part of this Ifhnd of Brittaine , but TorJ^ had
the Northern part o( England and Scotland for his government,
and this lafted untill Anno (1470) or thereabouts, at which
time there was ereded one Arch-bifhop at Sc. Andrews ; fo that
there was a place , to which in cafe of neceflity men might re*
pair for Orders when they would, as we know by our late
fad experience in thefe laft fad times • and no doubt but many
did where they knew were Bifhops , as fince the firft planta-
tion of Chriftianity there was in waits. But to* come nearer to
this, Crathling King of Scots in Diochfans time,which was in this
Interim he mentions, entertained all Chriftians who fled out of
thefe parts of Brittaine, and gaye them the I fie of Mats to
plant in, and fetled Amfhibolns their Bifhop there; and buile
a Church, and endowed it nobly , whogovcrnedall the adjacent
Ifles , and had a fuccefilon of Bifhops after him ^ fo that they
could never lack Bifhops either to give orders to Priefls , or
to order any thing that were a miffe. Befide this, in this time
1 read ofNimas , who was Bifhop of Candida Cafa , and of
Jfrf/*/*/amongft the Pitts-, and I think it would be hard, ifnot-
impoffible, for John Major or any of his followers 3 to (hew me
fo many Presbiters men of Note as I have fhewed Bifhops,
It is true for a while after Maximus had extirpated the Scets,
upon the cruel , mercylefs, malicious, and indeed foolifh inftU
gation of the Pitts , againft the difpofition and manners of a
Rowan Conqntrour , there was about forty years^, in which.
there was not feen in that territory fo much as a Scotchman or
Woman , but all forced to fly their Countrey , and therefore
Hellandftlde might well fay that their Bifhops and Priefts were
forced to fly away , but that is a figne there they had Bifhops
then; yet as foon as Tergttfi* that gallant perfoncame with,
his conquering Army thither , no doubthe brought ail fuchper-
fons with him as were fit for the plantation of the Church , as
tvtli as his Kingdome ; and therefore I may affirm that there-
were Bifhops within this, time, prefixed by Major before the
G .3 ex-
1
2 2$ An Arg. c'rjrvn from the C h. of "Rome , anfip,
extirpation of the Scots in the time, and after by the Bifhop of
Ma* andhisfucceffors. As likewife thofe which that gallant
heroique King Fergnftns did bring with him ^ and certainly
throughout the world where were Presbiters , there were
Bifhops either in particular Diocefles or hard by, from whom
men might receive orders , or fomewhere in Chriftendom
where they might hunt them out, if there were any number
of Chriftians which might provoke that induftry , if particu-
lar per fons, as heretofore have been, and may be cafe away or
c&tt. in a /><*£*» or impeopled Land, they may be without a
Prcsbiter, although that may be more eafily purchafed, yet
they may be without him, or having one he may die, and they
ftill continue in a Chriftian condition, Man or Men , and all the
defedsof thefe Officers may befuppliedwith fohloquies, and
a holy converfation with godly prayers ; but the fame, though
a greater misfortune, is theirs , who cannot hive fo much as a
Prieft with them , who may befufficient for a few Chriftians •,
but if many, the other is neceff.ry both to ordain their Priefts \
and to govern Priefts , and them likewife ^ fo that in anfwer to
John Major , Hettor Boethivs, Bacanan, and all others of that
Crew, I anfwer, there was never any time ( I mean any con-
fiderable time ) in which the Scots lacked Bifhops after there
was a confiderable converfion of them to Chrift. But they had
Bifhops to repair to at Tork^ or at Man , Candida C*f* , or
other where; and then becaufe Major faith that they were
governed by Priefts only and not Bifhops, I think it will be a
mighty hard thing for him tofhewany judicial Ad of Govern-
ment performed by Presbiters , unlefs they were commif-
fioned by fomeBifhop, and therefore all he (aid is only faid ,
and cannot be proved-, I have done with this.
* — — _— — — — _^— — __^ — ____^__
CHAP. VI.
Another Argument drawn from the Church of
Rome, anfrvered.
Is next Argument begins fage (165,) where he fays : Ec-
clefa etiam Roman* fede vacante Prcsbiteri
H
His Arg. anfwered drawn from Deacons. 229
per undecem menfes & quirt decern dies pofl c£dem fecundi
Remani pontificis immaniffima perfecutione comitia pontificalia
Romdt prokibente, Anno Domini (2 5 9 J I will yecld all this , and
perhaps that Sea may be vacant a longer fpace at another time,
or any other Sea; but what then, the Colledge of Presbiters
may govern ., but what can he (hew from Onttphrius or P/atina,
Binipu , or any other who write thofe ftories , that they gave
orders which they fee down confta ntly at the end of every
Popes life? what orders they gave? or can they (hew that
they did confirm , which are proper to Epifcopal duties >
or only order the pontifical affairs, which they might do ; bur
not asBifhops ? they never fay they did v his next Reafon fol-
lowes.
CHAP. VII.
His Argument anfwered drawn from Deacons.
DE J ure divino efl at in Ecclefii* Diaconi fint Clerici Cd*
nonici per manuum impofitionem ordinati , & per totam
vitam adjiritli , here he ciphers two placer of Scripture, Alls 6.
Tim. 1. 3. Now confider that he faith that thefe are fttredi-
vino-, then I have fhe wed Bi (hops to be by ApoRolical con-
ftitution •, I could trouble this fpeech , but I let it done , only
this muft be queftioned , what he meanes by this , m in Eccle-
fiis Diaconi fint Clerici ; there is no queftion but every Church
throughout the world acknowledged , that Deacons are an
inferior fort of Clergy , which is all that thefe words im-
ports ; but I think his meaning is at fint inEcclefiis , Diaconi
Clerici , that there ffcould be in every Church fuch inferior
Clergy as Deacons •, and this the following words with the
force of his Argument will make good, and then I can reply
to him that there is no fuch divine Law , that there (liould be
Deacons in every Parochial Churchy that he fpeakes of in the
Afts was an occafional office fet up for that purpofe , wd
tilt*
.2 40 An Argument drawn from
-that cannot be a Law, no not a prefident, but upon the Ike oe-
cafion. That in Tim. hath no one word of the ceremonies of Or-
el ining in particular Churches , but onely what manner of
perfons they (hould be who are to be ordained , this is his
Major , now let us examine his Minor.
Jnmftra tamen Ecclefia reformat a Scotanica id haberi non-
dnmpotmt propter Ecclefiaflicam pauper tat em bonis Ecclefiafiicu
laiccrum hominnm (acrilegio dirtptis. The force of this Ar-
gument runs thus : Although Deacons be a divine ordinance
yet the Scots by reafon of their poverty , are not able to
maintaine fuch an Officer , and there is the like reafon for
Bifoops in fuch places where the fuprcam authority will not
allow them : fo that neceflity may excufemen, even where
the divine Laws requires any thing- I muft confefs that invin-
cible neceflity excufeth many Ads , but it will lie upon the
Souls of thefe Churches who live without Bifhops to anfwer
at the Iaft day to Allmighty God , and make it good before
him that their Omiflion is fuch; but the difference betwixt
Biftiops and Deacons is exceeding great • I do not find any
one place fo much as directing that Deacons (hould be in e-
very particular Church • in many there is no need of them
where a fmall congregation of twenty or a hundred may well
be officiated in the meaneft duty by a Presbiter onely ^ but
in Cathedral Churches, where are many little offices , for
which perhaps we cannot find Presbiters fo fit, or that it is
not fit that we fhould take them from their greater imploy-
ments , to bellow their time upon thofelefTer duties , in fuch
cafes there is a neceflity for thofe lefler offices to be ufed • but
if they (hall think their Deacons to be ordained for thatim-
ployment mentioned in the fixth of the Alls to minifter to the
poor, I may fay that fuch an imployment can hardly complain
of neceflity by ftcriledge ., fince that out of the collection
for the poor he may be allowed a flipend competent for fuch
an office- but then to confider that which he would have to
paralel a Bifliop , where is any fuch a fmall congregation as I
have before fpecified , all things may well be regulated by a
Presbiter , and he alone fupply all the duties belonging to
the Salvation of Souls. But if there fhould be many fuch
congregations , or that Presbiter who did govern there die
in
An Argument drawn from Scripture^ anjrvered. 24
in that Government , it is neceflary for him or them to feek out
fome Biftiop to authorize him or them for this duty. The up-
ftiot of all this is , that Deacons are not inftituted as neceflary
for all leffer Congregations , that Biftiops are authorized to give
Orders , to difpofe of fuch affairs as are ufefull or neceflary to
the Government of little or great Congregations , but efpecially
in the latter , where are ufually more t and more dangerous ex*
orbitancies. That which follows in that page is onely a Difeourfe,
but no Proof, andfolpafleto 161. page, where he labours
to prove that the presbitery s as he calls it , or Company of
presbiters gathered together , may give Orders thus.
CHAP 8.
An Argument drawn from Scripture , an-
jrvered.
ApoflolmPaulus manuum impofitionem per quam ordinate efi
Timothew y modo vocat impofitionem manuum fuarum
2. Tim. 1.6. Modo impofitionem manuum Presbiterii. i.jTim.
4. 1 4. ideft concerns Pr ef biter orum y fie enim in Novo teflamento
paffim et apud antiquiffimos Scriptores Ecclefiaftic&s. The effecT:
of which is, that St. Paul in thofe two places, termes the giving
Orders to Timothy in one place the laying on of his hands \ and in
another the Laying on the hands of the Prefbiterj , which , faith
he, was the Company or Colledge of Presbiters, as that word
is often ufed in the New Teftament y and amongft the mod an-
tient Ecclefiaflical Writers : I have expounded thefe two places
already ♦, and though he fay Ptesbitery is often ufed for a Col-
ledge, or Concelfus of Presbiters, 1 have frewed it is no
where fo ufed in Scripture , and for the moft ancient EccleliafH-
cal Writers I would have been glad to have Read , where I
(hould feek them , for remember them I do not • I will trouble
the Reader no further with this Argument, it would be but a
Repetition.
Hh CHAP.
2 42 An Arg. drawn from St. Hierom., anfwered.
G H A P. 9 .
An Argument drawn from Saint Hierome,
anfwercd.
HE comes next to the formerly examined place of St. Hierome
and Evagrinus , but he puts it down more truly than Tho-
mas Hooker doth ^ and after adds one phrafe , which the New-
England-man left out , which is , Siettt exercittu imperatorem
fact at , quibw verbis , non ah/cure indie at Prefbiteros Alex an*
drinos initio ordinate Jibi Epifcopum ^ by which words , as an
Army makes an Emperour , he doth not obfeurely intimate
that they did ordain their Bifliops , Thus Forbts , if inftead of
Ordain he had faid Ele& , I (hould not have been offendedi but
to take upon them the power to ordain was too much, unlefs
they had the Armies to maintain their Ad by force , as they
did -TheSouldiers upon the death of theEmperour proclaim and
cry up commonly their General to be the Emperour ,and make it
good with their (word; but wouldDodor Forbes or Hierom think
that they did ordain or make him Emperour , or rather accor-
ding to their power ele&? it was often feen even in the age
about St. Hierom , that two or three Armies in their feveral
places chofe fo many Emperours.* And it is not impofflble that
the Presbiters in Alexandria might have the Ele&ion of their
Bifhop, as in mod places , but theConfecrationofhim was by
others •, and mark this place of St. Hierom , the phrafe he ufeth
is P r efb it eri not Prefbiterium , which he calls the ancient Lan-
guage ; howfoever there is nothing in thefe words which can
inftance a Confecration from Presbiters, no not in the Simile of
an Army, unlefs a Rebellious Election might pafs for a Confe-
cration ^ I think I need not fpeak no more to that at this time,
but if there be any further need, Iforefee that the anfwering
ether Arguments will further illuftrate this bufinefs.
CHAP.
- An Anfw. concerning Pclagius his conjecration. 243
CHAP. X.
An Answer to the Argument drawn from the
Consecration ojf Pelagius the jirjl Pope of
that name 5 in which is difcn fed the Story
of his Conjecration } as likewife that no Ar~
gnment can be drawn from that Aci 5 That
Popes Confecrations and Elections have been
err onions.
HE proceeds, page I 61. Petlaginm httjtts nominis primum Ro~
mantim Epifcopum or dinar unt duo t pifcopi & mm Pre] bi-
ter Ofiienfis nomine Andreas qui tanquam Epifcopm' munut illud
ordinationis obivit dura non invenientur tres Epifcopi quifecHndum
Canones Pelagtum ordinarent. Thefumme is, chat this Pope,
when there could not be three Bifhops got , which according to
Canons (houid joyn together in the ordination of a Bifhop,
there being no more to be found , they took in a Presbiter to
officiate with them : and therefore he thinks Presbiters may or-
dain •, for anfwer , let no man think that I will undertake to de-
fend the Confecrations oiRome , it is a task too hard for me to
manage, or I think any other, and materially no doubt but
this was irregular , yet it may be excufed and perhaps juftihed
by what I (hall fay • take therefore the Story of thefe time?,
SECT. I.
Where is the Story of the matter offaSi in his
Conjecration.
THe firft Bifhops of Rome who fucceeded St. Peter were
chofenby theCle^y, the Nobles and People, who were
Chriftians, wd durit aflcmble together for fuch purpofe ; and
H Z; indeed
a 44 W )e w atter offaSi in Pelagius his Confecration.
indeed were men of fuch excellency that they accepted that
Bifhoprick with a dcfign to be Martyrs, which they were,
many, one after another; afterwards when it pleafed God to
blefs the Church with Chriftian Emperours, they proved Nur-
fing-fathers to their Bifhops , and under them the Bifhop grew
great-, which being difcerned, the Emperours confidering what
a great ftroak the Bifhop oiRome had in the management of all
affairs of the Empire , they put in for an Intereft in their Electi-
on, and there was no Pope elected but by their approbation,
untill the Emperour granted his Conge de Here (as I may term it.)
Now at this time Italy was full of Souldiers. Narfes that gal-
lant General of fuftinians lay then about Rome , whofe favou-
rite Pelagius was ; and Doctor Forbes mud forgive me, if I
think he is fomewhat miftaken in the Story , when in the next
page he writes that Pelagius was but a Deacon, when Binitts calls
him Arch-deacon ^ and again where he faith there, that he was
chofen by the Command of the Emperour fuffinian, when it is
recorded by Platina that after the Election he fent to fuftini4n
&lC$ftantinople to excufc the Confecration without his Approba-
tion , which could not be had in thofe bufles •, but Narfes was
as good as Justinian, and no doubt but by him the will offuslU
man might be intimated well ( Rebus fie ftantibu*) Pelagius
muft be the man , he lay under the fcandall of being acceffary to
his PredecefTors death , upon this the generality of the Bifhops
refufe to be prefent at his Confecration , onely two , and thefe
took aPresbiter to them, and ordained PtUgiut in that Ad, ra-
ther complying with the Canon fo much as in them lay t than vio-
lating it in Contempt. It is a fure Rule, Silent Leges inter Arma,
lo they are not Gods Laws. Now it is evident that there was
theterrour of that Army upon them . for the (lory related both
by Platina and by Binius , and others, affirm , that a multi-
tude of the Nobles as well as the People and Clergy fled, be-
caufe their Confciences would not allow them to be afiiftanc.
And the terrour of the Army would not permit them to oppofe-
that this ordination was not queftioned was, becaufe the Pope'
purged himfelf of that Scandal afterwards, and fo that which
made them defert him at his Confecration being removed, made
them wink at fmall faults when he was Popr. Thus the Story
being cleared for matter of faft, I will examine this Argument
iogically^ it muft run thus : SECT.
The Argument difcuffed^ &c. 247
a Divine Right ^ for that can have a lawful claim to a Divine
right, muft either draw it from God himfelf preferring it, or
elfe from fuch men who were immediately authorized by God, as
the Apoftles •, for if we will go further , we muft make all Hu-
mane Laws Divine-, for if the next to the Apoftles fhould have
their Didtator termed Divine , from their authority , the fame
reafon will be for the next to them , and fo to the laft, and fo
even the Prefcriptions of the now living Bifliops fhould be
Divine , than which nothing can be more abhorring to reafon.
Well then , what I have faid before , will ferve likewife here,
that is , that what Divine Laws were eftablifhed by the Apoftles
we may find in the Ads and Epiftles - 9 now there is no fuch De-
cree obfervable any where in them ^ The Commiffion given to
the Apoftles, by which they and their Succeflbrs were and are
authorized to fend others, was not given to them conjuntlim, as
if they fhould ad onely altogether , much lefs was there fpecifi-
edthat three of them fhould joyne init^but without doubt fepa-
rately every one had this power gi ven,to puni(h,to forgive Sins,to
Baptize , give the Communion, Osdain ; and we find upon this
foundation it is that St. Panl gave Commiffion to particular
perfons, to Titus , to Timothy, and the like ; But I need not
trouble the Scriptures about it i I do not find the Patrons of
that opinion producing any •, And therefore I wonder that Vaf-
ques did term it a Divine Right , when he attempts no where to
prove it, nor his Predeccflors or Followers, in this Condu-
fion.
The Confecration of St. James to be Bifbopof
Jerusalem, dif cuffed.
BUt they urge the Decretall Epiftles of Anacktm, and out of
him Amcetns y that $t> Peter James, and John£[ mtmjames
the Great, as the other is called James the Lefs /that thefe three
Apoftles did Confecrate the other fames Bifhop of ferstfalem :
and St. Peter, by whom he faith himfelf Anaclettu was made
Prieft , told him , that it fhould always be a Law hereafter
that there fhould be three Bifhops to Confecrate one-, I do
wonder if this were fo , how St. Peters pretended SuccefTori
fhould
2/j.S T/?e Confecration of St. James Bifbop^ &>c.
fhould be bold to difpence with this Law of St. Peters •, of which
we (hall fee more hereafter $ but it is well known by learned
men how unlike thefe Epiftles are to be thefe mens writings up-
on whom they are fathered : But I acknowledge the (lory fo far
as it affirms the Confecration of bt. "fames , for by better autho-
rity then theirs it is jufufied, which is by Enfebiw^ lib. 1 cap. 1.
But EnfebiHs fay th not that St. Peter gave it for a Rule for the fu-
ture, which this Anacletus feems to inforce •, Nay Eufebim
doth not name this Anaclettu in his Relation, which if there
had been any fuch Epiftle extant in his time, no doubt but he
would have done as well as Clemens •, buc I grant the Itory., and
as Adam Tanner a learned Jefuic fpeaks, Tom. 4. Schelaftic*
theologU difp wt atione prim *,Queft. 3. Dubio. 2. Numero 3. It
might be done ad quandemfolemnitatem ordinisEpifcopa-iis; I may
fay Zpifcopattts e)ns , than whom never man deferved more
honour in his Confecration, for he is efteemed the father of that
Epiftle which goes under his name , then he was the Brother
( that is the neareft kinfman ) of our bleffed Saviour; then a man
fo honoured for vertue, that he was called James the j uft , and fo
efteemed by Jofephus a Jew, who attributes the great Judgement
of God upon the Jews in the deftru&ion 'of ferufalem to their
iniquity of ftoning that juft man ; fo that if ever there was a man
to be honoured with fo glorious a Confecration , it was he.
But give me leave by the By to fay, that from this I can add
one ftrong Scholaftick reafon to the excellent induftry of
Doftor Hammond, who in his Preface to St. fames
the Apoftle proves from antiquity that this Bifliop of
ferufalem was none of the Twelve , either the fon ofZebedec or
Alphetit', I can add this, for if he had been any ofthem it is not
reafonable to think , that he had need of a new Confecration
to a Biflioprick , whom Chrift himfelf had ordained an Apoftle
or our Saviour made him onely Bifliop of ferufalem , as many
affirm •, let no man think that he could be Confronted again by
thefe three ^ for Orders muft not be given twice- and no man
can think that either our Saviours Ordination to make him an
Apoftle, or Bifliop, wasinfufficient- but let it be which you
will, it is not needfull to trouble the Reader with difcuffing
the truth of it , nor indeed in Ad ions fo far remote , where arc
fuch great Authorities of both fides. Is it poflible to conclude
any
jjpojlolical Canons examined. 249
any thing peremptorily? I therefore let it pafs, and for the prefent
grant he was Confecrated by thefe three. But what can follow
but this, that fo great a Perfon , offuch an extraordinary me-
rit, was fo honoured by thefe Apoflles, who ( as Clemens
faith ) did not contend for the honour themfelves , but pitched
upon him to be the firft Bifhop of that Sea, which without
doubt was then the mod glorious Epifcopal feat in the Worlds
but is there any rule given that every Bifhop (houid have that ho-
nour done him, which was given to Sz.fames ?
SECT. II.
Tbcjirft of thefe are called Apojlolicall Canons^
examined.
THc next thing in order to this difpute to be examined, will be
the firft of thofe which are called Apoftolicall Canons ^ the
words of whichCanon 2Xt(Lct a Bijbif be ordained by two or three
J5i^/?/-)chisCanon comes next to be examined,and by them who
require three Bifhops to the Confecration neceffarily- it is anfwe-
red,that thefe twoBifhops are required,but with an addition of an
Archbi(hop,twoBi(hops&anArchbi(riop.SoCardinalii?f//^rw^in
his fourth Book de Ecclefia militmnte , which is ^ de notis Eccle-
fi*<, and not x H ? 9 $' iffi *h the firft of which fignifiesEie&i-
on,by holding up the hands^the other ordination by imposition of
hands-, fo then according to his underftanding of that word
( whichis the ufual fence inalmolt all Writers) thefe Canons are
underfiood of Ele&ion , not of ordination. But then obferve
his rcafons, which he delivers afterwards; you may find that it is
neceffarily to be underftood fo in thefe Canons , both of Nice
and this of Carthage •, the Nicene faith, that all the Bifhops fhall
fend their Suffrages by writing- what can they ordain by Suffra-
ges? It is not pofiible but they may Eleft. It is as dear here.,
for faith Belfarman, in the end of this Canon it is fhewed, in
which it is provided, that if any Bifhop fhall oppofeliis own con-
fefiion or fubfeription , he fhall deprive himfelf of his honour,
which fubfeription is not to Ordination or Confecration ,but to
Election ; for indeed conceive if you can , how a man fhould
be ordained by Subfcription ^ a man may Subfcribehisconfenc
to an Election , and give his voice , which may in many cafes
pafs in an Ele&ion; a mammy Subfcribethatfucha man fhall
be ordiincd, which indeed is Election, but a man cannot be
ordained by Subfcri prions : fo that here you have the authority
of the learned Patriarch , which perfwades much with me you
have the fence of the word , and his reafon , which may have
the authority to perfwade any reafonable man ; and then I am
fure there is nothing in thefe Canons to inforce three Bifhops
to the Confecration of a Bifhop, but onely to the Election : and
here , as I cannot but wonder how thefe men fhould deduce the
neceffity of three Bifhops to the Confecration of a Bifhop , fo
Ii a I do
2^2 The fecond Proportion tf/'Vafques examined.
\ do admire that none of them , neither Bcllarmine , Bin ; us y
Vafaues, Hurtado, Occhogamia , Occandm , nor multitudes
of others,which have urged this Canon at the fourth of the Coun-
cel of Nice , have fo much as taken any notice of Balfamam ex-
pofition of it, to return any but pretended fatisfcclion to if, The
reft of authorities which are produced I liight, as not worthy
the troubling the Reader with the naming of them • but I (hall
meet with the Chief hereafter.
SECT. IV.
The fecmd part of Vafques his Proportion exa-
mined p that the Pope may difpence with the
triphcity ofBifeops.
BUt now the fecond part oU'afaues his Tropofition, is , That
although it be bj Divine right that three Bifhops fhtuldCon-
fecrate a Bi/hop , jet the Pope may difpence with it y and allow tvre
or one to doit ; as in the cafe of Aujtin the Monk, when he came
into England , but afterwards the firft Arch- bifhop of Canter-
bur] , Pope Gregory the firft , fay they , granted him a difpen-
f.ition to Confecrate Bifhops alone , unrifl there were a good
number to joyn with him. How can the Pope difperce With
Divine Law? this is too much-, but let us confidertbeS:ory,
as it is fet down even by the Admirers of the Popes great ne&j
sluftin the Monk being made Arch-bifhop otCanterbury^ wrote
to the then ?opcGregory the firft , a very learned man , and
one whofe Works are full of devotion, and indeed by whom he
wasfent fir ft hither,to frtisfie him in div-iisQiuftiors of which he
doubted, how he (hould demean himfelfin his Government in
England, amongft which this was one, Petofi longin^uitaj itinc
ris longa interiavit, fit Epifcopi facile non pojf/tnt convenire, an dc .
bent fine aliorum Epifcoporum prefentia Epifcopos ordinare. ]n
Englifh thus • I require if the great length of a Journey (hould
interpofe it felf , that Bifhops cannot meet eafily together-
whether he ought without the prefence of other Bifhops, ordain
Bifhops
The fecond Proportion of Vafques examined. 2^7
Bifhops himfelf. Mark, here the Queftion is putfomewhat
after the language of the former examined Canon 5 upon the diffi-
culty of the Journey. I need not put down the Popes anfwer
verbatim, but it is to this effect • that the having no Bifhops in
England but himfelf, might do itj but he fhould take care to fet-
tle them near together , that hereafter there might be no excufe,
and * hen they were near , they fhculd meet together , to Ce-
lebrate that Spiritual Marriage of that Bifhop- this is called a
Decretall Epiftle: but confider, Reader, if there be a word
like as Decree in this or any other Anfiver in that Epiftle, but
only an Advice upon keafon. Thus the Popes Decrees having
been made Laws , his Councels come to be Decrees- in this Epi-
ftle there is not one word like a Decree , but onely an Advice to
him- nothing like a Commiilion, ziVaJques ^ and divers others
phrafeit, for then it fhould be mandmw^ or concedimm pottfta-
tem y we Command or grant you power • nor of difpcnfation,as
Cardinall Bell ar mint t and others , for then it fhould be in that
language , we difpence with you, or mn cbfiante^ nocwithftand-
ing any Law to the contrary , but here is no fuch thing; but
fometimes he faith, fr^rW^^/rrf, your brotherhood knows
this or thn, and the like, and here (hews him the reafon why
he fhould come by more Bifhops to afiifthim, (although!
think he was deceived in his fuppofals , for there were Bifhops
in Brit tain at that time •, howfoever that reafon was gcod :o au-
thoriz: Anjlin at that time , and the like may be good for any
man in the like Condition •, for this triplicity of Bifhops to Con- ■
fecrate , cannot be necefTsry to Confecration, according to any
Divine Conllitution , but or.ely Ecdefiaftical , which cannot be
underflood to exact impossibilities , or elfe to make a particular
Church to lofe all the benefit of Epifcopall Government- But
then confider the language of all thefe men , and fee how incon-
filtent it is with their fir ft principles, that there mull be three Bi-
fhops by Divine right, to the Confecration ofaBifhcp • can
the Pope difpence with what is due by Divine authority ? or can
he gran: a Commiflion to aft agiinft Divine Laws f 1 hope they
will not fay fo , unlefs they will fet themfelves againftall that
is called God , and make an earthly.god above our Fat her which
is in enven^ then fet us confider how it was poflible that Chri-
ftian ilel.gion could have been planted , unlefs the power eiTent'u
I i 3 ally
5 4. The conftitutton of a Bifhop drfconrjed.
ally had beeninoneBifhop to Confecrate: wbcnTimotbj, Ti"
tu4 % and St. John % who you will, that went about with the pow-
er of Tongues into unknown Countreys ,to plant Keligion , and
God blefiing their induftry, the Churches increafed , learned
W en were Converted, fit to make Bifhops of. Can you think that
thefe Itinerants would fufler them, like Anflin herein England^
to fend to Rome for advice in fuch a matter, or much left for a
Commiflion , or difpenfation , to ufe their Language ? ic is not
imaginable • nay when a Church is in perfection , ( I know a
little what belongs to that ) can they fend to many Bifhops in the
fame Province, to fend their votes in writing-, or without that,
there can be no Confecrarion ? It cannot be- I conclude thus,
although in afetled Church there is a great decency in pradife-
ing,according to that Rule of having three Bifhops at a Confecra-
tion, yet in thefe Cafes it is not neceffary, and it may be valid-
ly acted by one alone - and no Commiflion or difpenfation is ne-
ceffary.
And now Reader, having walked through this intricacy, I can-
not think my felf nor the Reader fatisfied, untill I have applied
another Queftion . which is, what is it which fo enables a Con-
fecration, that, we may fay when that is done^ this man is a
Bifhop.
CHAP. XII.
In which k difcourfed what is cfjenually to the
conftitution of a Bijhop.
THc Queftion introduced. To underfhnd which ( that I
may write diftin&ly, take this for a Prdtcognlt urn , that
fince the power was given to the Apofllesin thefe words, As
mj Fatherfentmc , fo fend Lyon : 1 herefore when this power is
given by Apoftles and Apoftolical! men, then this dignity is
conferr'd upon Men. But again , becaufe that it is neceffary for
the Church of Chriftians , not onely that they have the power,
but
m i h i i i i i ii ■■ I, i iii . i ii » ' ■ iii
A dijcourfe ofPetrus Arcadius applied. 2^1*
but that this power fhould be foadminiftred, as that other men
who are to receive bleflings from it, fhould be able to take no-
tice ; ( for elfe how is it pofcible to repair to the wells head, un-
kfs they can know where it is ) that chcre is (uch a blefsing be-
ftowed upon them •, therefore this power mud be given by iornc
fuch means as are vifible , and that men may difcern when it is
granted -.for if it fhould be given by the Apoftles, without any out-
ward fign , onely with a vehitic , a kind of fecret grant, it murfl:
be moft uncertain to o, her men , becaufe each man may pretend
toit , and there is no confuting but by fome outward fign, which
being proper to this Adion, may be an infallible affurance that
then and not till then it is given : and here will be required a di-
ligent and curious inqueft; there are.diversthings pretended to,
which are not right, and they being fevered, we may then
fafely pitch upon what is the truth ; to do which, let us firft con-
fider that Ad*n% 7 d;^rinhi$YourthTomeofScholafticall Di*
vinity, upon the third of Thomas, and thefupplement, Difp. 7.
J%*tft. 2. Dttbio. 4, handling the doubt, what is the matter and
form of a Prieft andBifhop, at the 'laft page (1900. ) he
names as a C 'once $hw^ and things to be fuppofed, eight Actions
at the confecration of a Bifhop : he quotes the Romane Pontih-
call for it* I will not fet them down, the writing them is too
much paines • but what hath grown in reputation amongft Scho-
lars,, I fhalJ examine. But yet I rfiuft make another paufe.
SECT. It
A-clifcourfe 0/Petrus Arcadius illufiratedand
applied.
T Here is a learned man, one petrtts Arcaditu, who hath writ
a Book with a moft pious title , which is of the concord be-
twixt the occidental! Church , or the Latineand onentall, under
which heads he reduceth the African, and fometimes the Ma».
therian , in the adminiflrationof the Sacraments, which contro-
vercy he hath very irduftrioufly ard happly handled .in very,
wary
2%6 A difcoitrfc of Pctrus Arcadius applied.
many thing? in particular in this bufinefs • having handled be-
fore the form ufed in both Churches, at the ordination, /*>/? 6.
de Sacramento ordlnis, cap. 4. becomes to reconcile them, and
doth it upon this foundation I am now handling , that is, that
they agree in the eltentialls, that is,, the Dodrineofall the three
Churches , and the difference is onely in Accidental^ •, this f.uth
he, may be don?, firil,by faying our Saviour did foinftitute this
bacramenc, that the ConfecrauonofMiniiters (hould be by cer-
tain words and outward figns, by which it fhould fufficiently
appear to whit part of Miniftry ; they were ordained but he
left it to thearbitrement of the Church, what thefe figns and
words muft be , this he illuftrates by the Councell of Trent ,
wherein Stffioni^.Canm 3. the Councell decrees the thing, that
holy ordination (hould be made with figns and words,but deter-
mines not what •, fo that it excludes not the Grecian or African
Ordination. Again he illuftrates this by Marriage moft rightly,
( for they make Matrimony a Sacrament, as well as ordinati-
on ) there the word of God eftablifhech for men how they
(hould live in holy wedlock , but never determines what (hall be
the manner, with what words or figns they (hall be married,buc
lea yes that to the determination of every Church, yea Common-
wealth ^ thus you may perceive his Conclufion how ftrengthned.
I will fet down my Judgements and rcafons , and fopafson:
fTrft then, chat our Saviour did inftirute many holy offices in
themfelves , you may fay (even his Sacrament? ) fo as there
may be divers Ceremonies, according to the prudence of divers
Churches, isappirent^for let us confider Biptifme, the matter, as
it is pofi:ively fet down in the Initiation, is water, this mud not
be altered • and that which is called the form , which is the
words by which this Biptifme is adminiftred arein part fet down-
it muft be , In the name of the Father , the Son , and the Holy
Ghofl • but now whether it (hould be , / Baptize thee, as the La-
tine Church; or, let the Servant of God be Baptized-^ or he is
Baptized, which are feverally ufed in other Churches , is not
determined by our Saviour, and the words of either do fully
exprefs the meaning of Baptifme^ fo that neither doth the Latine
Church re-baptize thofe who are Baptized by the Graecnns, nor
theGracciansfuchas areBapt**zed by the Latines,althoughboth are
bitter enough one againft another ^fo that you may fee,there may
be
A Frecognitum explained. 257
be variation in the adminiftration of theft duties in their Circura-
ftances, where there is a Communion in theSubftancei and
truly for my part I think in fuch a man who lives in either of
thefe Churches, it would be a Schifmatical Actfor any of them
to vary from that ufage, which is in the Churches wherein he
lives ^ for although thefe things are indifferent in them elves, yet
when they are determined in the Greek Euthoiogy, and the Ro-
man Rituals, they are not indifferent to them which live amongft
them in their feveral Churches , but a varying from the Church
wherein they live mates a breach of Charity And violates the
Band of peace.
SECT, III.
Another Precognitum explained.
ANother Introduction may be, that whatsoever is inflitu-
ted by Scripture , in any of thefe holy performances*
whether as form or matter muft not be altered , nor can lawful-
ly by any man . for fince the blefsing which is beftowed , is one-
ly Gods gift, and Man is only minifterial in it • he muft ad:
according to that Method whic ; God hath prefcribed , and
that only having his Covenant, can bring the blefsing.
SEGT. IV.
Another Observation expounded.
ANother note may be that Additions explicatory , fothey
are certainly fuch, and are nor intruded for effentialt,
do not deftroy the notion of that which they explain; itisne*
ceffary , for otherwife why (hpuld men expound the Scriptures
in Sermons or otherwife ; yea , our Saviour expounded his
own Parables, and after his expofition to his Difciples , we
K write
258 Mifiakcs about Cercm. in the Church 0/* Rome*-
write further Comments our felves , but that there is in none of
thefe an alteration but a di!atatk>nofthe conceit of them; thefe
things being premitted , 1 ftul return where I left at Tanner and
the Roman pontifical.
S E C T. V.
Many mitfakgs about Ceremonies in the Church
0/Rome.
IT is an apparent truth that the Church of Rome doth very of:
clog Divine duties with fo many Ceremonies, and its mifchief
is frequent in that mifchance , that even their learned writers do
in a little time grow o fach mifhkes , as to think that fame of
thofe which are Ecclefiaflical Ceremonies, only inflituted by
the authority of the Church; to be the eflkntials, and that
which is eflential, to te but accidents ; this particular bufinefs
1 have in hand willdemonftrate thiscondufion.
SEC T. VI.
J J is an Error to thinhjhat the Anointing the
B ijljops Hand y is a necejjary Ejjential.
THe third Geremony by Tanner , out of the pontifical,
is the Anointing of the Bifhop 5 hand , which is to be ConI
fecrated in thefe words, ungantur manns ifibjterj to be Ordination , To likewife
we (hall find this Ceremony taken for the whole A . or Ordinati-
on. Tim* 5. 2 a. Lay hands fnddenlj on no man. Now then with-
out doubt if any outward Ad mult beefftntial to this Heavenly
work ; this only bting Apoftolical muft be eiteemtd moil cflen-
tial i and there I think it mod proper for men to conceive that
this is the only Ceremony tffencidly neceffary ( if any be} to
the performance of that duty , for the power originally being
given to theApoftles nakedly and abfolutely without any qualifica-
tion or mode,in what manner they fhould ufe it to others we are
to receive the manner at their ading it, for our beft Rule and
guidance which is only in Scripture delivered to be impofitionof
Hands : Thus much for that which the Doctors of the Church of
Rome called the material part in the effence of Confecration,
and we may truly term, the outward fign. Let us now examine
that which they call the form, and we may term the words which
exprefs it- the words which our Si viourufed fohnzo.zz. are,
Receive ye the Holy Ghofi ; thefe words exprefly are ufed in the
Roman Confecration and Ordination , but in the Grecian the
words are varied , but the fence referved , not giving this blef-
fing in the Imperative-mood, ( which is much flood upon by
many Schoolmen and Cafuifis ) but in a more humble ftile, The
Grace of Gcd Creates or Promotes thee to this Dignity of a Bijhops
or Priefi , or Deacon, where we find the truth more largly ex-
pounded though materially the fame , for certainly the Grace of
God is that which impowers men with trkfe authorities are gi-
ven , and men are only Inftrumental , but that they are, and
therefore there is added how this is given by the fuffhge of the
Biftiops, which denotes them inftrurrental , for the African
Church you may difcern in the Canon of ( arthage before cited,
that the Confecration is expreffed in r> Lai guage of fuch extent
as may be applied to them both , which is ( urn fundente benedi-
Bionem) one of them pourirg out 'he bene, lftion or ble/fing,
but implying ftrongly the fence, fuch as is proper for this work;
to Confirm which, all the prefent Bifhcps lay on their hands; and
this univerfally fo confented unto as agreeing to the Holy Scrip-
ture, that although in the heat of difputation, 1 find men fome-
timesovcr peremptorily aflcrting their own opinions, yet Ido not
find
, — ■-'*■■ ■' » ■ »■■..- ■■ - ..,.--.
Thefirji Objection againji the Truth. 26$
find that cither Church did rcfufc fuch as were Confecrated in
cither, although in wayes and modes differing from their own,
fo that I may juflly fay that the whole Catholick Church Concen-
ten in this Conclufion , that when words importing the bleffing
are Delivered by a Confccratang Bifliop , and thofe words are
fealed by impofition of Hands, then thefe holy Orders are effe-
ctually given ; I (hall then need to do little more in this Point
than to anfwer fuch objections , which are commonly made
againft it, or I can apprehend proper to be oppofed to it.
SECT. 1 1.
The firft Objection againji the Truth , anfwered.
THe firft is common in the School made againft the pontifi-
cal, in this point, becaufe that in all that part of the
Pontifical it is faid only , Receive je the Holy Ghofi , and that
Language is the fame in the Ordination of Priefts ^ as likewife the
Impofition of Hands- fo that by this no nvncinknow whae
Order is given- in the Church of /fo^itisanfwered that the
defign which they are about will (hew it, whether to one or to
the other Order; and agiin the manner of the Impofition of
Hands , in the Confecration of a Bifliop, divers Bifliops Tmpofe
Hands, in the Ordination of a Prieft one Bifliop only with fome
Presbyters, in the Ordination of a Deacon the Bifliop alone,
but in our Church that fcruple is clearly taken away by a great
Prudence, whereat the Ordination of a Prieft, theConfecra-
ting words are, Receive the Holj Ghofi , for the office and fr*r^ of a
Priefi^nd at che Confecration of a Bifliop the words are, Receive
the Hoi) Ghofi for the office and work^of a Bijhop in the Church of
God-, where wee fee that univerfal caufe of all Spiritual bleflings,
(I mean the Holy Ghoft ) applied tothafeparticular duty , in
which at that time he works , and therefore the Confecration
is free from that Exception.
II SECT.
266 Another ObjeB. from the Conned of Carthage
SECT. II L
Another Objection drawn from the Councel of
Carthage, anfwered.
ANother Oje&ion maybe, that the Councel oi Carthage
before cited ■ mentions the laying on the Book by two
Bifhops upon the head and fhouldersofthe Bifhop to be Confe-
crated , and therefore that is necefTary j I anfwer chat I much
reverence that Councel in which was Sz.Auguftlne , and divers
other Bifhops famous for learning and piety in their Generations-
but yet as I have faid before , this was never practiced any re-
markable time, as fundry Doctors in the Church of/^we ob-
ferve,andagainitisimpoiTib!e to beefTential becaufenorApofto-
lical and that becaufe the Holy Bible, and that higheft part of
it the New Teftament was not writ when Bifhops and Priefts were
Ordained, it is therefore worth our marking, that there is a
difference in the decrees of Councels concerning Doftrinetnd
Difcipline , or Ceremonies of the Church in a point of Do&rine,
they fhew in what fence they underftand fuch and fuch a Con-
dufion, but in the other they fet down what is to be practiced
to preferve Orders and decency in thofe Churches where they
have to do- and indeed there can be no more required of obedi-
ence than in quiet and fetled times , in which times only Coun-
cels can be Congregated , and in other times as things necefLry
by Divine right muft always be keptclofe unto , fo what is only
humane may be fpared. it is not po/Iible for humane power to
add any thing of abfolute neceffity to Diyine juftice which can-
rot be altered • now of this Nature in this Ceremony of the Go/- .
pel as is raoft apparent. For firft the Pondfical varyes extreamly
much in this very point from the Councel of Carthage-, not on-
ly in adding to it that the Book mu(t be open which is not expref-
ed in Carthagebuthy Changing thofe few Circumftances which
are particularized there , as firft where it is faid in Carthage that
*wo Bifhops (hall lay omheGofp?!, the Pontifical faith, chat
ic
An Objection againji our Practice anfwered. 261
it mud be done by the Confecrator and che afsiftingBifhop. An-
tmlvu is peremptory out of Hofiienfis that it mud be done by
three in the third part of his fums Tit. 1 4. Cap. 1 6. Sett. 9. to-
wards the end of that Section , fecondly where the Councel faith
that the Book fhall be put upon the head and the neck of the
Confecrated Biftiop.The Pontifical faith fupcr fcapulam & cervi-
€tm upon the (houlders and the neck $ thirdly whereas theCouncel
faith ( wofttndente bemdittionem ) one pouring out the blefsing;
they make them altogether to give it in thefe words, Receive
the Holy Ghofi , Antonitu where before is peremptory that three
mud do it -, thus you fee how in the Do&rine of the Church of
Rome the Compiler of that Book is preferd before that ever to
to be honoured Councel confiding of above two hundred Bi-
(hops •, amongd which were many mod eminent men and indeed
the Popes legates likewife , although they could only keep up his
pretentions to it, not prevail for hisunivetfal fuperiority, befides
this I obferve in the Ceremoniale Romannm put out by Pope Leo
the tenth and licenfed by himinthefecond Sell Altera Charta
(as the Printer calls it) or as we, fol. 11. theOrdmatorand
the red put the Book only upon the neck of the Eleft Pope when
he is made Bifhop^ fo that here in thefe Records of the Church of
Rome^bcCidcs thefe other prad ices of Chaplaines or Ceacons be-
fore mentioned we find a great liberty taken in varying from the
Councel of Carthage -, and amongft themfelves the Councel ap-
pointing che Book to be put upon the head and neck,
the pontifical upon the (houlders and the neck, the Ce-
remonial names only the neck which evidently makes it appear
that this Claufe hath been looked upon only as an humarseor-
dinance, fubjed to Change and alteration , but the other of
impofirion of Hands, as Divine which no humane power could
abrogate or alter : Give me leave fince I am in the canvafing of
the Canon to make one obfervation for the further illuflration
of a Condufion before treated of, thatisthePhrafe (mofm-
dente benediUiomm^ ) the blefsing is given by one . when the
Pontifical makes it to be given at the fame time by many , and
fo divers Doctors in the Church of Rome , which certainly may
be very confufed one begining fooner and fo ending , but to
avoid that, the Ceremonial before cited faith , that the Confe-
crator with the reft of che Bifhops faith , Accipe $f irit vm S an-
il z clam
2 68 An ObjcStion againjl oar PraSiice anfmrcd.
Bum, receive the Holy Ghoft , but he adds the Confccrator
alte ,'the reft fubmiffe , he with a loud voice, the reft with a
foft ' and now confider that one is cslled the Confecrator as
furely he mud be, and the reft do but come into his afsi fiance to
by on their Hands in token of the aflurance of it, and therefore
they fpeak lowly and humbly, he that is theConfecrator doth
Confecrate, the reft come in as afsiftants and to this purpofeV
they fpeak lowly and fubmiffly , and to this purpofe Vafaues af-
ter a long difcourfe about this Queftion concludes Biff- 240.
Number 6$. that it is enough that one fpeaks the words and v
lays on his Hands likewife , where we may obferve by him that
the Confecrators words arc , that they call the form of Con fee ra-
tion, we may fay conveigh the Confecrating virtue , this be-
ing received in all Chriftian Churches but the other unconftant
amongft themfelves. Another Argument may be objected a-
gainftus of the Church of England who ufe a giving of the Bibte
to the Bifnop who is to be Ordained in our Confecration.
SECT. IV.
An ObjeSiion againfi ourpra&ice anfwercd^dnd
the fovea of the Argument fatisjied.
IT is true and it is according to the firft Ceremony ufed in the
Pontifical; where it is faid that the Confecrating Bifhop
takes the Book from the fhoulders of the Confecrated , and with
the other afsifting Bifhops, gives it fhut to the Confecrated
with thefe words Accipe Evangtlium receive the Gofpel , we
ufe this , and with it a godly exhortation to the Bifhop f but iris
after his Confecration , for that is perfe&ed in the firft Ad, Re-
vive the Holj Ghoft for the office cfa Bifiop in the Churches of God
mw committed unto thee bj the imfofttion of our Hands . In the
name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghoft y thisonly iseflen-
tially the Confecration, and if the Arch-bifhopihouldbe (truck
dead immediately after the pronouncing thefe words h the Con-
fecrated Bifhop fliould receive no other Confecration, we ufe
likewife an examination before the Confecration according to tha
firft
11 ' ' - i i ii i inrr ii unmi ■_ ■__»■
An Objection again ji onr Practice anfmVecL 2 <5p
firdCanon in the fourthCouncd ofcarthage although not pun&u*'
ally the fame yet virtually containing all fubftantial matter in \t\
that reflected principally upon thofe Herefies which afflicted that
Church at that titne,, our examination as it included thefe, fo
it particularizeth upon fuch as more neerly concerned the diflur-
bance of our own, but neither that proceeding , nor this fubfe-
quent exhortation are effentially neceflfary adejfe to the Being
of a Bifhop , but conduce to the gravity and decency of the Ad-
miniftration of fo high a duty, as fokewife for a memorial toe-
very Bifhop to put him in mind of the bene ejfe the well and good
execution of his Order ,. which is a mod excellent office, and
being no where forbid but indeed in many places of the New
Teftament taught, yea commanded , no man can think but that
at fuch a Holy time ashisConfecration, it is feafonable to puc
the Bifhop to be Confecrated in mind of fuch performances
which the Holy Ghoft requires of him- this is all I hope is need-
ful for the fatisfadion of that Argument , drawn from the Con-
fecration of Pope Pelagius the ffrfl: , who was Confecrated bf
the impofition of Hands from two Bifhops and one Presbyter,,
firfl it is evident th cone particular ad cannot fatisfie a Right to
do that again which hath been done once , becaufe there is no
rule or law againft which no man ever trefpafTed,
Secondly, that the Errors committed in elections and Confe*.
crations of Popes are no Prefidents, becaufe they have too of-
ten much tranfgreffed in that kind. Thirdly, that Confecration
in necefTary occafions when more cannot be had , may be by
two or one only Bifhop, and yet be efTentially good. Fourthly
that nothing is effential but giving the proper blefling with impo-
fition of Hands : for the addition of one Presbyter to the two
Bifhops is ferved only to fill a gap , and to comply with an unne-
ceffary received Ceremony s it added no virtue of its felf , nor
iiRpeded the virtue of the Confecration,
chap;
2 JO An Argument from fome Father anfrvercd.
CHAP. XIV.
His Dtfcourfe examined^ and an Argument
from fome Father^ anftvered.
SECT. I.
The Preface to his Argument examined
NOw we will enter upon another Argument being Page 164.
towards the bottom , a difcourfe unnceffary for me to
write down at large , but I will fee down what is material in ir,
and fo pafs to his Argument • thus faith he, Htbent Presbyteri
Presbyters have by a Divine right the power of Ordnming(, c /w)
like as they have the power of preaching and Raptizeing . he ex-
pounds tfrsjthat where there is aBifhop there this fliould be done,
fab regimine & inffetlione Epifcopi under the government
and eye of the Bifhop , but in other places where the Church is
governed by the common Councel of Presbyters , that Ordina-
tion is valid and good which is made by theimpofitionof t{*e
Hands of the Presbytery-, Thus he, but I defire, andfodormny
more, to know where that Church was ever in theChriftian
world that gave fimpic Presbyters power to Ordain othe^ before
thefe latter times-, the practice whereof I think nothing
can excufe in fome Reformed Churches , butameerncceffity
in which Cafe the vote fupplies the Ad- but I will proceed no
further with this , all to the midft of the next Page is only Dif-
courfe, his condufion there, is, that Presbyters may Ordain, I
come with him and will confider his following Arguments.
SECT.*
An Argnm.fr om St. Ambrofe and Auguftine. 271
SECT. II.
Hi r Argument from St. Ambrofe and St. Au*
guftine anfrvered.
HE begins with St. Ambrofe upon the Epiflle to the Ephefans
Cap. 4. the words are truly cited by him which are apud
t/£gjftftm Fresbjteri conpgnant ft prafens nonfit Epifcoptts, I will
not diilurb this, before I obfervehisfecond Quotation, and
make one anfwer ferve both which is Auguftintts five quicunque
fit author in qu&ftiombm ex utroque tefiamento mixtum Queft. I O s
In Alexandria inquit presbyter Confecrat , the force of this Ar-
gument is this , that in Alexandria and throughout Egypt -in the
abfence of a Bifhop a Presbyter or Presbyters do Confecrate,
by thefe Fathers in the Citation ofSt. Auguftine he ingenioufly
frith , five quicunjue author eft Mitts operis, whether he or who-
foevtr is Author of that work , indeed it is evident that it is non
hi?, and he might have faid as much of St. Ambrofe as is apprren*,
becaufe thefcComments are much fufpe&ed upon (trong grounds,
but indeed are thought to be fome Author of that age , and then
though an Heretiqueor Schifmatiqueina matter of Story which
concerns not that bufinefs for which he is branded,! fee no reafon
why that matter of fad may not be credited , I therefore muft
allow that authority neither will I quarrel at that word in him
which is not Confecrat ( as in the counterfeit Auguftine ) but
Con ft gnat which isofalargerf-nce^ but yet becaufe that word
is often ufed for Confecration , 1 will allow that likewife, yea
I will add that, which fome Schoolmen who incline to Do&or
Forbes his opinion have obferved , which is that the word Co*--
Jeer at cannot here be taken for Confecrating the holy Eucharift
of the Confecrating the Lords Supper, for that was allowed law*
fulin anyplace, now this fecms to intimate a peculiar cuftom in
Alexandria and Egypt for that, therefore know that other
things are in Ecclefaftical Story fud to be Confecnted be-
(ides thefe of Bifhops or the Elements of the Communion,
t
ticch anfwered..
ANd now I proceed to another Argument drawn from the
, Councel of Antioch Canon 10. in which it is Ordained that
Chori Efifcofi ( which faith he , were only Presbyters^ might
Ordain Readers , Sub-de?cons and Exorcifts, but neither Priefls
nor Deacons as Bionijlw Ericjuns tran Hates it , plater Civitatis
Epifcopum we may render it befides the Bifhop of the City.
Gentianus Hervetus renders ir abjque Vrbis Epifcofo without
the Bifhop of the ( icy , but he faith Hidorus Hispalenfis hath a
third Reading which he favours above all chat is prttcrC onfeien-
tiam
An Arg. drawn from the Conned 0/Antioch. 273
mUm Epifcopi, as Imay fay without the Confcicnce of the Bi*
(hop : here he puts down three various Tranflations or Rea-
dings, I can add a fourth which is of another IftdorcjfidoriMcrcA"
tor, who put out the Councels by the advice of Fourfcore Bifhops
as he himfelf writes in his Epiftlc before them, but indeed hath
no remarkable difference from the reft , although it varyes from
them •, Now frith Do&or Forbes, Pope Damafus in his firft
Epiftle to Puri/per Bifhop of the Prime Seat of Numidia and 0-
ther Orthodox Bifliops, he condemns the ChoruEpifcopi as an
irregular Order being in themfelres but Prasfytcrt, and caking
upon them Epifcopal power. To go methodically in the exa-
mination of this Argument , I propofe to my felf three things,
1. The Confideration of the authority of the C anons made in this
Councel; next the examination of Pope Damafus his decree^nd
hft theNatureof thofeC^r/-£fi/Jr(?p; or Country Bifhops who are
therein mentioned. And firft I apply my felf to the Councel
which I am content to admit becaufe the Canons thereof were
antiently received into the Code of the Univerfal Church , and
mentioned both in the Councel ofChalcedon and the Councel in
Trullo , though Ettlus in jguartftm Diftinft. 2 j. Sett. 2. is bold
to re jeft the Canons of this Councel becaufe there was an ill ufe
made thereof againft two eminent Fathers of the Church St. A m
thanafitu and St. John Chrjfoflome who fuffered much trouble
and perfection upon the pretence of the IV. and XI L Canons
thereof from their Adverfaries , and were fentenced by them
before they well heard. But in particular concerning the Canon
of thisCouncel about the power oftheChori-Epifcopi it is wHl ob-
ferved by Eflim (ubifupra) that the words thereof are very
intricate and perplexed, as we (halt now declare in the Chapter
following.
Mm CHAP.
■ ' • •
2 74 dn Argument to Ordain Presbyters aufrvered.
CHAP. XV.
The Argument to prove thefe Chort-Epifcopi
and their power to Ordain Presbyters exa-
mined.
I Think the likelyeft man in the world to expound this Canon
is Balfamon who was Patriarch of that Church, and although
he lived a good while after this Councel, yet the fence and mean-
ing of the decrees of his own Church is likelyer to be preferved
by him and them in that Church, than in any other places , and
men which lived further remote: Therefore in his Comment
upon the Canon and thofe particular words upon which the
whole fotce of this Argumentisbmk r Mud autemfineEpifcopo
qui eft in Urbe non accipitur pro eo quod eft fine ejus mandato , fed
pro eo quod eft fine ejpn Ordinatione^feu Confecratione^ etfi tnimfu-
erit Ckori-Epifcopo mmdatum #t Prdsbjterum ordinet, & bocfe-
cerit, irrita erh Ordinatio, quia, non fit data Prasbjteru ordinandi
poteftas , than which words nothing can be more clear to fhew
that thefe Chori-Epifcopi herefpoken of could notOrdain,fo now
in anfwer to this Argument of T>o&or Forbes drawn from the
tenth Canon of the Antiochian Councel it is not of any force,
becaufe the Councel is of none, being made by Hsretiques in a
wicked Schifm , confpiring againft that ever to be honour'd
perfon Athanafius , and urged to the deftru 3 ion of that incom-
parable perfon John Chryfoftome. Secondly granting it to be of
force yet by the beft expofitor in the world for that Councel^/-
fmon expounds the dubious language of that Canon againft
Doftor Forbes , mow then the bufinefs of Pope Bamafm his
decree faHs of it felf, which introduceth a new work for me.
SECT.
Pope Damafus his decree examined. 275
S E C T. 1 1 .
Pope Damafus his decree examined.
THis Epiftle in Crabbs Edition ofthe Councels is the fourth,
but in Rinitu the fifth Epiftle of Damafus^nti it is fuffici-
cntly Pontifical, itdeftroys all Ckori-Epifcofi , and faith, that
they were prohibited as well by that Seat of Rome, as by all the
Bifhops in the world , this he faith there , and we mud take his
word fgr it only , for I find no fuch thing upon record before or
after, as will appear when I treat of the nature of them , but he
inveighs juftly againd: the Lazinefs of Bifhops, which faith, he
brought them into , like Nurces to fuckle their children for them,
whileft they the Bifhops might enjoy their eafe and pleafure.j To
conclude, the whole drift of that Epiftleis to prove that thefe
Country Bifhops are butPresbyters and therefore have no power
to Ordain Priefts , and Do&or Forbes faith clean contrary, that
although they were but Presbyters , yet by that accurfed Coun-
cel of Antioch they might Ordain Priefts-, The words of that Ca-
non DAmafa mentions , although he do not name the Coun-
cels and truly thefe words feemed to me to be of great force,
quamcjuam impojitionem Fp'tfcoporum perceperint , where he ob-
ferves the Plural number,impoiition of Hands of Bifhops , many
in the Plural number, of which more hereafter : now if they did,
I know not what can hinder them by any Canon from a remote
power to Ordain , which may beaded by only leave from the
bifhop himfelf , but thisis enough for the bufinefs ofthe decree
of Dama/ns , it feems he was angry with them , anddifpuces
againft them, and condemns them, but as Dodror Forbes well
ebferves this decree of his, was but little or not at all obey'd;
either becaufe this was no true but a counterfeit Epiftle , or whe-
ther thefe decrees of Popes extra Cathedram were not valid, I
know not, but do know this, that it wasnorobferved, fo here
we fee a wicked Couneel condemned by a Pope • and that Pope
negleded by all men afterwards ; what heurgeth out of Ifidore
Hiffalenfu is of no confederation • but only to mark that the
M m 2 Popes
2j6 This Ration Reviewed.
popes decree was not obferved in his time, for Jfidore there
which is Lib. z. de Ecclcfiafiicit officii* Cap. 6. fets down on!y
the bare words of the two Gouncels of JVcocxfarea and this of
ji*thch 9 -tbgi of Neoctf area only compares die Chori-Epifcopi to
the Difciples , this oiAntioch will prove a moft perplexed decree
in its fclf, and fuch which may probably be objected againft
Doftor Forbes^ as well as expounded for him, for that out of
Neoctfarea which compares the Chori-Epifcopi to the feventy
Difciples, Bamafns (hews that they Ordained, but only the
Apoftles , and Ifidore hath not one word of difcourfe concerning
this office , as he ufes to have concerning all others , but only
fets down the words of the Canons, fo that it remains for all
him, jullasitwas, which is moft intricate, Vamafm feeras
to conceive that the Records of this Canon did allow them with
leave of the Bifliop to Ordain Deacons and Priefts and that the
Lazinefsof Biftiops connived at it, for which reafon he condemns
them, not the fault only, but for the faults fake, the very office
this office we find continued in Ifldores time, after him in the
Church , and in late times as I (hall (hew , fo that as the Pope
thought the Canon of that Councel not obliging , f the Chri-
ftian world thought his decrees invalid, wherefore I mieht well
lay them both afide. b
! SECT. III.
This Canon Reviewed.
BUt I will I examine the Canon to fee if it have any neeeflarv
conftraaion that way There are two principal things
which are difpnteable in this Canon, fort, whether thefe Chi
ri-Epi/ccpi mightgive Orders to Presbyters with leave of the Pi.
fliop of theory whereto they appertain , fecondly, whether
any of them were Biftiops by Epifcopal Ordination, in both
which we may find the Canon Co perplexed as it will be hard to
collea a clear concfofion ofit.
For the firft it is urged by Doftor Forbes that the words of
the Canon in all Editions, of which he quotes three, make for
him
Tbi * Canon Reviewed. 277
him , the firft is of Dionjjiw ExigHus a grave Author and he
ufgeth his words truly , Nee Prdsbjternm mc Diaeonum avdc
ant Ordinare prater Civit at is Efifcopum, fpeaking olChori-Epif-
copi , they fhould not Ordain d Prieft or Deacon , pr&ter be(ide3
the Bifhop of the City , to whom he with his poffefllon is fub-
je&i Is not this rightly termed by Eft ins a perplexed Canon?
then next take the Edition otGentianus Hervetus which reads ic
abfque Vrbls Epifcopo , he muft r.ot Ordain thefe without the
Bifhop of the City , this I take to be in his Edition of Balfamon,
for fo it is there , and then why Balfaman who was Patriarch of
Ant'mh^ although a good while after, fhould not be thought
fitter to underftand the practice of that Church \ than thofe who
lived after him in other Churches , I apprehend not .- His Com-
ment upon the Text is this Sine Vrbis Epifcopo without the
Bifhop of the City , is not to be underftood without bis Com-
mand (as we term ic his Fiat) bit faith he, his Ordination or
Confecration , for faith he, if the Bi (hop Command the Chori-
Epifcopns to Ordain and he fhould do it, tbatOrdination were
void, fo that by this learned Author this perplexed^Canon muft
be underftood againft Do dor Forbes , but he hath a third^di- •
tion of ifidore Hifpalenfis which reads it prdter confeientiam
Epifcopi without the confidence of the Bifhop , and here he
magnifies this Edition and calls it probatijfima Verfto the moft ap-
proved verfion- but he doth not fet down by whom this is ap-
proved, befides himfelf , neither do I think he can , nor doth
fhew any reafon why it fhould be fo approved, but his own
Authority \ and let us fee what he hath got by it, for certainly ic
feems not to me to inforce his interpretation, which is chat he
may Ordain thefe offices with the leave of the Bifhop, foric
is not prater confenfum \ but confeientiam ; now confidence is
not the fame with confent , confent is moft proper to another
mans action, Confcience to his own, the great actions of Con-
ference being to accufe or excufe a mans felf,or to judg of a mans
own aft, or whether they have been done according to right
fcience •, b«t it meddles not with what concerns other men either
to judge, accufe, or excufe them, anlefs we are authorized
in foro publico^ or privato in confefiion,and then it is an aft of the
Confeffors Confcience only out of this regard that he is bound in
duty to apply his knowledg to others ^ and therefore to under-
ftand
278 Dr. Forbes to blame to c: fare Bellarmine
Hand this Phrafe better, let us conceive that Prater or beflde the
ConfcienceoftheBifhop, is non. fence, but if he or any others
are delighted with this word Conkience in this Canon , I will
fhew them a fourth reading where he may find ltufed mod pro-
perly and fignificantly , which WCreffcrim his fum word chorU
Epifcopus where he quotes this Canon , and therein faith that a
Cbori-EpifcQpHt muft not Ordain Priefts or Deacons propter Con-
fcitmiam Epifcopi for the conference he hath of the B-ifhop of his
City , that is becaufe his Confcience tells him that the Bifhop
is only to Ordain fuch • thus I think that it is no way evident
from the Canon that thefe men did Ordain Priefts or Deacons
we come next to the fecond, whether any of thefe Chert- Epifcop'i
had Epifcopal Ordination, and fo might in a cafe of neceflity
Ordain.
SECT. IV.
DoSior Forbes to blame for Ctnfnring Bel-
larmine too JJjarply in this point.
IN this Queflion Doftor ForheshWs foul upon Cardinal Bel-
larmine which I was forry to read , gives him ill language
calls his opinion ridiculous and childifh , andagnjn/V^ yjo.de-
teftandd eft Bellarmini impudentia , BelUrmines impudence is to
be abhorr'd or elfe miferanda impcritia , his Ignorance is to be
pityed • for although the Cardinal may feem to deferve fuch
language himfelf, after giving learned men who differ from
himfelf in judgment, as bad or worfe , yet thefe Pen.Gombates
fhould in thatrefemble thofe with fword?, where the fir ft engagers
in the quarrel being high with animofities againft each other
will give no Quarter, but after the experience of a continued
warr hath taught , that what happens to one, this day , may be
the fortune of the other to morrow , they manage the warr
more civilly in the future , fo it (hould be with us now , when
the warrs have continued a long time ; and experience hath
taught us that the rnoft learned writer is a man , and fub je& to
error- may be miltaken in his judgment, may fomerimes in
Quo-
Dr. Forbes to blame to cenfure Bellarmine. 279
Quotations mifs the right conceit of them : we fhould fpare fuch
reproachful languages , and deal with one another even our ene-
mies more courteoufly ^ but let us fee why he is fo fevere againft
Bellarmine , becaufe faith he, Bellarmine doth oppofe Damaftts
and all antiquity , in faying that there are lome Chori-Epifcopi
which had Epifcopal Confecration, and fome which had only
Presbyterial ^ 10 this I fay, Bellarmine may bemiftakenandfo
may Values the Jefuit who oppofeth him in chat conclufion^ but
1 doubt it doth not clearly appear out of antiquity, Which is mis-
taken •, Bellarmine de CUricis in his feventeenth Cap. conceives
that thtkCkri-Epifcopi which he and all writers make to be vica-
rii Epifcoporum may be of two forcs,either fuch as are meerPref*
byters or elfe fuch as are fuffragans or titular Biftiops ; the firft
fort are they which Pope Bamafm condemns , and will not fuf-
fer to encroach upon the Epifcopal office ; the other he faith
which were fuffragan Biftiops or titular might doit with leave
from the Bifhop of the Gity ; the fault of this faying appears not
to me •, for they being vicarii may be of either fort or both, and
Ifpoke it knowingly ( as will appear prefently in the nextc*p.) if
they were fuch as are called fuffragans ( as is reafonabie to think)
then they were Ordained Epifcopally and might Ordain Priefts,
yea Biftiops, and did do it, nor doth any thing in Vafcjues or
Doctor Forbes necefTarily confute it , firft for Gardinal Bellar-
mine, he feems to be of opinion , that this Canon doth approve
of the Confecration ofohdtChori-Epifcofi, and thauhey might
give the Order of Pricfthood with leave from the.chiefBiftiop,
to avoid that,that they who were presbyters might then do it,he
puts down thisdiftindion , that fome had but Presbyterian Or-
dination and fome Epifcopal and this he thinks thisGanon implyes
wben it faith fpeaking of the Chori-Epifcopl 3 etiamfi manus impo-
fitionem Epifcoporum acceperint x e *&^ 07UV l«i*wr, mark it is
in the llural number, they had the impofition of Hands of Bi-
fhops, not of one only, as Presbyters, and then again it is faid,
& ut Epif Mpi confecratif ner ant and are Gonfecrated as Biftiops,
which words faith Dodor Forbes were by the tranflator added,
and are not in the original Greek, it is probable Pope Damafm
who lived near that time , a thoufand years and more nearer
than he, and is reported to be learned in the Greek as well as
Latin, fhould know the words of the Councel, as well as he
or
o8o Dr. Forbes too bold to cenfurc Bellarmine.
or any other , yet he puts down thefe words , and they are in
both tke Le&ions of Peter CrM I will not trouble my felf to
look further , but Pope Damaftu writing againft them , and
condemning them, would not have put down this Argument
againft himfelf, i; it had not been the Language ufedinthat
Canon, what force his Arguments hare I fliall examine fpeedily,
but now let us confider the Argument which is only touched by
BclUrminc , if they were a fort oiChori-EfiJccfi which had the
impofition of Hands from divers Bifhops, what reafoncanbe
imagined why fuch fhould not Ordain Priefls, Vtfques in an-
swer to this faith, that the impofitionof the Hands ot Bifhops is
not to be understood of many Bifhops laying on their Hands at
the fame time upon the fame man, but that feveral Bifhops at
feveral times laid their Hands upon feveral Cbori-Epifcopi, but
to this may be urged that word ( quamvis ) as one, or etiamjins
another Edition, why (hould the Canon fay, although he be
Ordained by the impofition of Hands of Bifhops, and Con fe-
crated as a Biihop, this although would there fignifle nothing
for he fhould not be by it diftinguifhed from a Presbyter , but
becaufe fome were and fome were not Ordained by Bifhop$ f
it reacheth even thofe who were fo Ordained , Dot\or Forbes
is not content with this anfwer of Vafjues but adds another
of his own at the bottom of Pdgeiji.znd throughout 172,
where before cited , the fence of which is that the impofition of
Hands here mentioned is not to beunierftood pafiively for the
impofition of Hands which they receive them'elvcs, but active-
ly for that impofition of Hands which they had power of to give,.
] thinklhave fet it down as clearly as his words can be rendered,
for indeed his Language is as obfeure as the Canon it felf, but
this is mod forced , nor indeed can a man conceive Canonicaliy,
how a Chori-Efifcopw could receive that active which he menti-
ons , unlefs he had received it paffi vely firft , by the impofition
of Hands of divers Bifhops, nor can a man well imagine in that
Language, & Ht EfifcofiOrdinAntur , what that (tit) fhould
mean if it did not come to explain the former Phrafe of impofi-
tion of Hands of divers Bifhops. fo that then for ought I fee
BelUrmines expoficion againft both thefe adverf ries is the moft
clear and congruous to the Canon , let us now examine Pope
Damaftus Arguments as they are fchola ft icily urged by Vafejnes
and chat is the marrow of all that is in thisEpiflle. SECT.
Damafus Hiffirft Argument, &c. anfwered. 281
SECT. V.
Damafus bis ftrSl Argument againfk the Cho
ri-Epifcopi anfrvered.
Damafw feems to me, cithcir with Bellarmine to think there
were two forts OiChori-Epifcopi in the time of making the
Canon which may beperfwaded, becaufe although he begins
with this Argument from the Plural number before urged , yet
he never endeavours an anfwer to it ^ orelfe believing them aH
but Presbyters, he thinks that his other Argument may invalid
this ^ and notwithstanding this, being deficient in ther things
they are not Bilhops by it. His firft Argument is drawn from
the word (Chori) which fignifies Countrey, they were.buc
country Bilhops, when as allB*ftiopslhouldbeofaCity.*To
this I anfver that although fuch Canons may be made for rhe
eftablifhment of the governmenrof.Ghurches in a fetled King-
dom , where are fuch Cities for the Decorum and honour of
the Epifcopal Sea , yet it cannot be in unfetled States , as fup-
pofe theGofpel fhould be preached in the barbarous places of the
Weft- Indies i where are no fuch places to give Epifcopacy that
honour , yet the Church may and ought to be planted and go-*
vernours put into them to regulate their difcipline or elfe things
will go backward fafter than forward in the matters of Religion.
Again we may conceive iffach Canons be infifted upon, that
they fhould be underftood of prime and chief Bifhops , not fuch
ss MtVicarii Epifcepornm that is vicars of the chief Bilhops- Now
it may happen that there be a neceffity of fuch vicars , and they
may be of great ufe to the Bilhop of the City whofe Dio C efs is
large , as will appear fhortly, and thefcChori-Epifcopi although
they may be impeded in the execution of their office by the fu-
perior authority of the Bifhop of the City , yet with his cifflfenc
are impowred to Ordain in thefe cafes , which is moft agreeing
to the letter of the Canon according to any Edition , either fine
or p rueen Elizabeth 9 the Suffragans of Bedford , Chichefier,
Taunton, were Epifcopilly Gonfccrated and did joyn in the
Confecration of other Bifhops. So now 1 have fimfhed this un-
dertaking out of this debate concerning the i o. Canon ofAntioch
in which I have (hewed that if the C ounci! it felf be admitted, yet
that Particular Canon to be mod perplexed , but if it lean any
way it is againft Doftor Forbes fincck is moftreafonable to think
by that ftory which I have fet down concerning them, that there
were at the lead divers ot the Chori-Epifcopi , which had Epif-
copal Confecration , although perhaps fome, who had not; and
Ithink there is little of moment to be found in antiquity concern-
ing them which is not obferved by me, there isan Epiftleof
John, the third Pope of that name but it is reje&cd by Binim and
fo flighted by me,
And yet me thinks fome may ask my opinion of thofe Church-
es where arc no Bifhops , firftldarecenfurenoman, muchlefs
fuch
The decrees of Councils examined. 287
fucli large Congregations amongft which I know there are many
learned men , and no doubt , but full of Piety, I may be deceived *
and fo may they, hnmanum eft err are but certainly in that ac-
quaintance that 1 have with antiquity there feems to me no
ground for them there, nor in the Scripture, thefe few pieces
which this learned Gentleman had Collected are but old totcred
Rags , which cannot abide to be ftitched to this new Garment,
they have nothing to excufe themfelves but nccefiities which
whether they haVe fufficient or no, to excufe them , let their
own Souls Judge, God will, I dare not.
FIN I S.
THE
TABLE
MIliiiSMiilllM!!
Apoftles , their Eletlioi, and to
what. 7.
Their Number, whence their
Name, their Office. 8.
Towhomfent. 9.
What to Preach. 10.
The Apoftles power whence. 2 2.
The Apoftles truly had the Pow-
er of Preaching to all the
world. 23.24.
The Apoftles only commiffioned
to Baptize. 2$.
The Apoflles only to Admirtifler
the Communion. 27.
B
Baptifm instituted by our Sa
vieur. 1 2 .
The Baptifm of our Saviour
and St. John not the fame.
13.
Whether our Sacramental Bap.
tifm he the fame With that be-
fore Chrifts death. 14.15.
Net the fame , the Objetlions an.
fwered. 16.17.
The Baptifm instituted byChrift
not in force till after hisdeath.
Whether Baptifm ad mm sired
by Laymen be valid. 29.
Of Bifhops thdr diftinclionfrom
'Presbyters. pj. #
Fir ft Argument from Scripture
for their Points. $6.
The Argument examined 97.
And an fwered. pp,
7 he Exception that TitO! wot
an Evangilift but not a Bijbop
anfwered- 9p#
ObjeVion for their points from
Ads 2 O. 2 8 . anfwered. I o I .
A* outward Call necefary to 4
M imfter. I2Q .
This Call hath a UWora\ not a,
Phy cal influence. 130.
7 he Charatler left after Ordi-
nation. 132.
TheCommunion infiitutedby our
Saviour. 18.
Thi
The Table.
The Apofiles Minifiers of it.
19.20.
Jnfiittfted before our Saviours
death. 20. 21.
Mutual covenanting of the
Sams gives not the Being to
aVifible Church. 157.
What this Covenant is^Explicit,
or Implicit. 159.
The Reafons for it anfwered.
Other Arguments anfwered.
165. i67,&c,
mas Hooker for Lay-Eiders
anfwered. 62,&c 69.74.7S.
St, I auls Elder fignifics but one
Office. 66.
St. AmbrofeV words urged for
LayEldersexpounded.S6.dcc.
The dtfign of making £, ay- El-
ders. 88.
What the word Efpecially vmr
I forts. 1 Tim. 5. 17. 68.
What an Evangelift is. 1 06.
The Election of the Seventy Dif*
ciples. II.
The Differences 'beVvixt them
and the Jpftles. 96.
Beacons , at afterwards ufedin
the Church not inftituted. I
Ads 6. 37,38.
Arguments proving this. 3 9.4 O. I
The oppopng Arguments anftye- *
red. ! 43.
Some of the firfi Deacons Prea- \
chers. 40.
what the Office of a Deacon. 45.
Of Lay Elders. 59.
what a Lay-Elder is in the Dif-
ciplinarianfenfe. 60.
No fuch Elders in Scripture.
61.
places of Scripture urged for
them* anfwtreb. ibid.
Third Argument of Mr. Tho-
G if ted men may Preach jf licenc-
ed by the Bifhep^ther^ife not,
84,85.
H
what Double Honeur fgnifies
1 Tim. 5. 17. 68.
Mr. Thomas Hookers opinion
concerningDeacons examined.
45,46.
Rom. 12.8. expounded againfi
him. 47, 48* &c.
His Deacon enforced from this
place of Scripture Confuted,
53-
The firfi Confutation of Mr.
Thomas Hooker out of this
Text. n of Paflors andTcachcrs re-
fxted 90, &c
I
Ipifcoful ffirifditliott proved.
11$:
L
what Labeuring in the Word
imports , I ! im.5.17. 6j£6.
M
what tht word Minifter figni-
fies. 1.
The Definition of a Mir-ifter 2.
7V;e Definition explained. 3 &c.
T^ Power to be a Minifies mufi
come from God. 3 . 6.
Motion it u ReUti^.zo^iOg.
O
Touching Ordination. I ? I.
.>J/V. Thomas Hookers dV/^-j
ftVfl of Ordination confuted.
122.
JPW Ordtx.tt ton ts. 123.
Ordination not before I leBim.
2:4.
t/r w W47 £f Ordained Vcitb&ui
the E left ion of the Perpfe.
125
WhetherOr din ation gives all the
EffXtialstoanOtpcer. Ii8.
Of Pa floral Ordination. 1 40
«$>. Peter /W no greater po^er
given him by CbrijI, than the
other Apoflles 28,
The chief Arguments for hi s fn-
ferimtj anfwered: ibid.
A vindication of our Common
Prayer- Bool^in the number of
the Sacraments. 131.
A Digreffion concerning Preach-
'»£• 76.
What Preaching is. 78,
To what Preaching every Pres-
byter is bound- g .
The peculiar Jnterefl a Presby-
ter hath in Preaching <*■ 2 .
Who Is authorized to Preach.% 3 .
What a true Presbyter is. 89.
A Power is left byChrifi tofome
men^ whereby they communi-
cate Power to ethers. 156.
R
delation may be the principle of
Aclion. 211.
One Relation may be the Founda-
tion of another. 24:,
What Ruling \Ml imports.
I Tim. 5. 17. 5 7>
The -'pofttei only iuty ft/ted ftitb
thefowercf the Keys 29,3 O.
Other js the frill of Cod,
Durandus holds this Charatler
ro^EnsRationis. 215.
Is op pofed bj all the Schoolmen,
but their Arguments do not con'
{ute him. ibid.-
The Subject of thisCharatler is
theVrhele man. 22 J.
THE
iiiiilili-lliilllll
THE
TABLE
O F T HE
Appendix.
The Apofiles Vtere Bifiopf]
frovk. 233.
The firftof the A fofidicAl Ca-
nons examined* 249.
The anointing the Bifhops hand,
no, neceffary effential to his
Constitution^ 2$$.Seft.6.
Athanafius*/ tefimony that
mter Presbjters could notOr-
ddnjven ^AIexandria.272.
Ihe Council cf kv\t\oz\ Schif-
watical and Illegal. 274,
B
Bifhofs have ever been in the
Church.- 231.
Whether three Bifhops be neceffa-
ry to the Confecration of a Bi-
flop. 246.Se&. 1 . Anf .Reg.
A, ,
The Confecration of St. James
Bifbop of Jerufalcm , objetled
and anfwered. 248.
Wh**t is ejfential to Conftitute a
Bifbop* 263.264.
Baptifm not void by different
circumfiances in the Celebra-
tion of it. P. 2560
Balfamon Patriarch of Ami-
och'j interpretation of theCa-
non of thatConncil approved.
274, & 277.
Bellarmine too hardly dealt
nithall by Dr Forbes. 278.
Not eonfutedby him. 279,280.
Sp, Bafil'/ Opinion of the Chori-
Epifcopi, 286,
Ih
TheTaWe
TbtChHrchttnivtrfaltitvtr w*i \
nor can be without n Bifhof.
The Church of Ephetus not go-
verned by meer Elder s y but
Bijhtps, 233,
The Church was without El-
der sjill the rJpofiles Ordain-
ed them. 232.
Chriftianity may be continued,
but Church communion and
Ordinances cannot , without
Bijbops. 235.
The Cenfecration of St. James
Bifhep of Jerufalem, difcuf-
fed. i\j %
Three Bijbops are not by Divine
Right neceffary to a Bijbops
Confecration. 246.
The Canon called the Apoftlts
JCtnon^abeut the Conftcratkn
of Bifbcps examined. 249,
The Canon of the Council of
Nice examined. 250,251.
And proved to concern the Ele-
ction , mt the Confecration of
Fificps. ibid.
Thefecond Canon oftheCoun-
cil d/Carthage concerning the
Confecration of Bifhsps. 259.
The C at holike Church does con-
centre in this conclufton that
when words importing the
Bleffmg , Are delivered by a
Confecrating Bifhopjind t hofe
words are fealed by an impo-
Jition of Hands , then thofe
Holy Orders are efecluallj
given, 265. in the begin*
No Church in the ChriftiA*
wor Id ever gave frm pie Pres-
byters power to Ordain. 27O.
The Cbori-Epifcopi have not
poorer toOrdain^proved.2'7 4.
Unleft thy be Sufragans.
279. & 282.
Crefperius'/ reading of the Ca-
non of Antioch alledgtdfor
the Chori-Epifcopi, viz. ntt
praeter but propter Confci-
entiam Epifcopi 278.
Chori-Epifcopi were but Pres-
byters, becaufe Ordained by
one Bifhop alone. 282. S. 7.
c5* T^o forts o/Chori- Epif-
copi. P. 283.
yyhat they were. 284.
D
Dr. Vorbes's arguments anfwer-
edfrom P. 23 2, ^284.
Deaeons not neceffary in every
Parochial Church. 2 -j o .
Difference in the Form or words
does not difannll aSacrament.
2]6.
The diftinflion of Orders is
known by the manner of the
laying on of Hands and the
form offt>ords(dsin our Church)
ttfed in the pronunciation
oftheBlefJlng. 265.Se&.2.
Damafus his reading upon the
Canon of Antioch 276. vid.
279.
which.
The Table,
ff'hicb doth Sufficiently anfwer
Dr. Forbes his Arguments
againft all Chori-Epifcopi
having pswer of Ordination,
anfwered. 281.
His fecend Argument anfwered.
282.
Decrees of divers Councils exa-
mined. 284,285.
• E
The Church of Ephefus not Go-
verned by meer Elders 1 but
Bijhops. 23 3-
K*tyTovH$cu tranflated Eligi to
be E letted or cho fen 25 F Jin. I 3
Elders were not in the Church,
till the ApoJIles Ordained
them. 23,2
What is ejfential to the Confii-
tutionofa Bifhop.f 254.
Explicatory additions do not de-
stroy the notion of that which
thej explain ,2 5 7 .in the end.
The only effential ceremony ( if
any be ) in the Confecration of
Bijhops is the laying on. of
Hands. 264..
The effence of Ordination cheif
Ij conjifts in the pronouncing
the Bleffing with the notes of
difiinclion of the Orders then
conferred. 2 6 5 . v i d . 2 6 8 . S. 4 .
The Errors committed in the
Inauguration of 'Topes no Pre*
fident for reformed Cheches
in the Confecration cf Bijhops.
269.
The Church of Enghnfo Rites
of C onfecration defended.
Sed.4. 268.
F
Dr. Forbes*/ fir ft Argument
from Scripture anfwered..
232.
His fir ft Argument to prove their
Ordination after Bi/hops were
injfituted, anfwered 235.
His Argument taken out of Jo-
hannes Hajoranfweredfrom
235.^238.
His Argument from theChurch
of Rome anfwered. 239
His Argument from Deacons
anfwered. 240^
His Argument from Script urg
s.nfwered. ibid.
His argument out of St. Hie-
rome anfwered. 242.
His Argument from Pelagim*?
Ordination anfwered. 2 44.
245.
his Argument from St, An>
brofc and St. AuguRine an-
Jeered. % 7 1 .
Hit Argument from the council
ofAncioch. 274. ^284.
G
Gafper Hirtado'j opinion about
the Ccnfecrationef Bifhops
examined. 26:.
Vjt* The G of pel laid upon the
Bt flops Neck, not efntialto
hisConfecration^ecaufe there
werr Bi%ops before th^Gof-
pel was Written, 260. vid.
266.
The Table.
266.toz62.
GcmianusHervetusW reding
of the Canon of Antioch.
277. the begin:
H
HenricusHenrique3 opinion that
fome papers therein the Gof-
pel was written might be gi-
ven to the primitive Bijbops
in their C onfecrationjs found
invalid. 261.
I
Jmpofition of Hands the only ne-
cejfary andejfential ceremony
( if any be ) to theConfecra-
tionofBiJbops. 264.
Jna figuration of Popes no Prefix
dent for the Confecration of
reformed Bifbops.V.Z^. vid.
269.
Imf option of the Bands of Pres-
byters alone is not fuffcient
for r din at ion. 270.
Ifchyras Vcas no Priefi, becaufe
Crdainedby no Bifbop
Epifcopi to St. Peter, 284;
^ about the midft
Laodicean Canon forbids the "
Ghori-Epifcopi to all any
thing without the leave of their
Diocefan. 2 S%.
M
The manner of the impofttion of
Hands diftinguifbeth what
Orders are ccnferr*d.26$.S.2.
Moderation to be njed towards
every opponent though never
fomuchmifiaken. 278.S.4.
N .
Neceffity only can yuUify the
Ordination ofPresbytcrs.Z'jo,
No Church ever gave meer
Presbyters power teOrdain.ib,
The Canon of Nice examined.
, . , , 2 50,25r.
The Eighth Canon of theCoun-
cil of Nice 28 5
O
begin- °^ cBions *gai»s7 the Authors
Ifidore Hifpalenfis dreading °^ ion c J^i the fonfe.
oftheCanonofAnuochmakts Cr * tton °f £ &°P<*»J*ered.
nothing for Dr. Forbes.277. ' . r a . . 2 ; 6 5-
SJ The fir ft Objettton an/were d. lb.
L Objection from the Council of
J Carthage anfwered , from
The laying on of Hands only e[- l 266. to 268.
fent tally necejfary totbecon- Objetlion agahft the £burch of
fiitution of a r Bifbop. 2 64. ! Engiands/tofj ofConfecrati-
Linus and C leraens wtr eQhorl- 1 en anfwered. 268.
ObjeUio*
The Table.
Objection taken from the Conn*
cil ofAntlochanfwered- From
2jz,to 274.
P
Panormitan'j Argument an-
fwtred. 234,
Tresbjters may E left, not Or-
dain a Bifhop . 242.
PelagiusV Ordination related.
Sea. I. P. 24?.
7 be Patriarch of Antioch hi*
interpretation of the Canon of j
the Council of 'Nice. 250.&C.
The Pope cannot difpencewitk
Divine Lafts. 253.
Peirus Arcadius'j difcourfe il-
luft rated and applied. Seel. 2.
2$5,&c.
The Pontifical differs in many
things from the Canon of the
Carthaginian Council in the
rites ofConfecratio*. 267.
presbyters alone could not Or*
dain in Alexandria. 272.
the begin.
R
The Church of 'Rome doth much
differ in its rites of C'onfccra-
tion from all other Churches
undfrom the words of theCa-
non of the Council of Car-
thage 266. to 263.
The Church
28.
10.
1.
11.
27.
'7.
40.
i.
19-
13-
196.
18.
**<
196.
16,
17.19.26.
18.
8.10.20.
*9-
ay.-
46.
179-
22 }
14.U.
18.
38.
18.19. ^
22.25.
32.
S4-
28.141.
24^
*5-
*S«
20l
S4«28«
St^iWE
Si. Mark}
ftjM
17,1 61
%4
5* u
P.
198.
J22w
J26.'
12.
26*
3<
*3i
7.9.'
127*
4
t
4*
10
13
4?-
22,
4- 21.
200.
§
20. 21.22. 22.2«.3.i.XIX-
5,
Rwmtti
X0l.Xlft.i42*
X07*
l- — M
— ■■ ..-
The Table.
IX
£3.
CaUtians
$. tco 1 16.
JitWi
134;
96.99.113,
80
181"
JEphtpnns.
2o>
28.
92.
ioo.
105.
163.
5.
9*
11.
12,
2.
32.3 3'
iS3
fhiliffUns\
2.
i Timothy,
29.2a i8"i.
33-
So.
4^5^58; 59.
^13.15.18- ^6.
»I4. 107.136.
2 17. 64.65.103.
19. 65.115.
22.* 1 14.13 8;
zTimothj.
t: 5. 108.138.
10.11.
Hebrews.
4.
16.
6.
22.23.
1 Sti 7«i».'
1- 8.10;
fi.26.
(,19.
3. 9.
Revelations.
I.* 20.
^ /2.4.10.24.
2 U3.
16 22,
20,2 r.
'2I»
'Chap.
• -
1,
3.
I 5-
72.196.
162.
193.
193.
182.
193.
117.
121.
200.
22.28.31^11.
I5,l6,i7. 28.
{:■,
Ads.
j 7.25.
20.
22.
23.
P.
2.
id.-
7.
32.
2.
139.
9:
The Table.
10,2$/
I3.2*3*
■<{£
20 28.
21.8,
22.5,
31 \
9' U4'
I*
134.
13.
4
101. 118.142-
100.
107.
RotntMf,
Cfeip*7* 24.
» &
6.3, 4^5-
1$
Chap,
37.8,
5.
23,
20.
1©!
5*
2 Ctri*thU*h
12
8*,
61.
61.
194*
190.
191. 1.
62. : 2 4
37
22,
23*
Ati*.
Pag*
34*
2.
28.
1 06.
8-
13.20,25.
4
io,4>
H. 17.
16.7.
34.
Corinthfa**.
Chap. 1 14.
4 J > 2 »
(2,6. 13,.
(*2.
10/
I2.4«
36.
61.92I 5i3»
72. Q2.
1x8. 6<5.
32.) ^3.
■Z-
8.5.
14.21.
85. j 20 I7.18.
Si
9«
4-
$S>
9,10,
28.*
3.
32/
176,
177 180.
.186.
28.
19.
50.
«3-«
2i8;
30.
31.
3o>
7a.
36.
32f.
L63.
42.
37.127.133.
i 57-M3.
40.
40#
118.
4*»
i CwtnthUns,
4.6. j
9,16.
12..28.
12.
^7,28,
33.
7$.
*6}.i73.
105.
163.
1,
YheTitMBt
3$
4.13.15.1*,
1.15.
1*19 20*
8a
163.
I Si.
GalatUns,
1.1.
19.
3-26,27.
31 34.
34
33-
*73>i96*
BfhtftAnu
28.
pi.
xoo.
105.
163-
fhittffUnu
4*
S 4
CS'7>
3.10,11.
n».
134.
181.
HefotVu.
11.6.*
12.2$ 23.
I Sr. fan.
i.8>io,
2 -J ,aA
119.
3*9.
3*
15.
1<5 2 .
193.
i£>3.
182.
193.
* 2 S- 33,33.
3t2» IS3.
1 Timothj.
' 86.
3 3.
44^.58,59.
> c l 7* 64,6$. 103.
■i9» ^5.115.
114.13*
2 Timtthfr
R evciittion.
1.20
2
^2.4.1024.
**3.
St, f*A*
0.6.
DtHt.16.10,
St, *«*/&*.
"7»
I2f.
1T 0.
43.
43.
£
— __ —
The
Table.
14 22.
i«
*.*t
20
1^^4,15.
22,
*3-
12.
7.'5*
153.
St
. Z»j^
8.13-
3 9 8
10,15.5.
9>
*I3>
7:
7.
10.
730.
1«8.
itf.
28
p.r.
9-
C 17 '
29»i7 6 *
2.
ia
G Y 9 '
28.
10.4CV
IV
W*7*
*7-
1.
u#
)'S.
165
18.15.
196.
(17-
176.
10.
19*
1923.
J95.
8.
19.
*7»
18
19.
*M*
19,
18.
20-
19*'
7.626.
iS;
32.