The True Way of Concord of All the Christian Churches, Part 3 · Chapter 9

The True Way of Concord of All the Christian Churches · Part 3 · Chapter 9

p. 73CHAP. IX.

The pretended Neceſſity of an uninterrupted Canonical or Epiſcopal Ordination will never unite the Church, but is Schiſmatical: Mr. Henry Dodwells S…hiſmatical Treatiſe againſt Schiſm conſidered and confuted.

§. 1. BEcauſe the City of Rome hath not been conquered and kept by Infidels, nor Chriſtianity thence ejected, the Papiſts think that they excell other Churches in an uninterrupted Succeſsion of ordained Paſtors; and therefore they bend their wits to prove this neceſſary to every true Church, and then to prove others to be no true Churches or Miniſters of Chriſt that want it.

And becauſe they think that our Paſtors can prove no ſuch continued Succeſsion, unleſs as derived to us p. 74from Rome, and that to acknowledge ſuch a derivation, is to acknowledge them a true Church, on which we have and muſt depend, therefore they moſt earneſtly manage this Argument againſt us as their ſtrength.

Sect. II. And there is lately a young unordained Student of Trinity-Colledge neer Dublin, come out of Ireland, to propagate this and ſuch like Doctrines in London; to which end he hath lately written a large and wordy Volume, as if it were only againſt the Non-conformiſts: Which being new, and the moſt audacious and confident attempt that ever I knew made againſt the reformed Churches, by one that ſaith himſelf he is no Papiſt, and being the mo…t elaborate enforcement of the Papiſts grand Argument on which of late they build their cauſe, I think it needful to the Readers ſatisfaction not to paſs it by, though it will not ſtand with the order of this undertaken work, nor with my want of leiſure, to write a particular Anſwer to all the words of ſo exceeding prolix and tedious a diſcourſe.

Sect. III. I have oft handled this caſe already, eſpecially in my Diſput. of Church-Government, Diſp. of Ordination; and in my Eccleſiaſtical Caſes in my Chriſtian Directory, and that more largely than I muſt here doe: And the Reader that would ſee more, may read the Proteſtants Cauſe fully vindicated againſt Cornelius Janſenius (a ſtronger adverſary) by Gisb. Voetius in a full Volume de deſperata cauſa Papatus. But I ſhall here firſt briefly aſſert the Truth.

Sect. IV. 1. Chriſt and his Spirit in his Apoſtles have already inſtituted and deſcribed the Office of the ſacred Miniſtry, and determined what Power and what Obligations to the work it doth contain; and what the work is to which they are deſigned: ſo that it is not left to any Church now to make or p. 75amend, or change the O…ce: what it is I have deſcribed in the Second …art.

Sect. V. 2. Chriſt alſo, and his Spirit in his Apoſtles, have told us what are the neceſſary qualifications of ſuch as ſhall receive this Office, and be received into it: viz. what is neceſſary to the Being, and what to the Well-being of a Miniſter of Chriſt. And conſequently who are utterly uncapable; ſo that Men may by Canons enforce the Execution of theſe Canons of Chriſt, and may inſtruct each other how to underſtand them; but they cannot make a Paſtor of an uncapable unqualified perſon, no more than they can make currant Coin of forbidden Mettal, or Meat of Stones, or a Wife of a Male; …orma non recipitur niſi in materia diſpoſita; As he that muſt profeſs Phyſick, or Philoſophy, or Law, or Grammar, or Muſick, muſt be tolerably qualified to do what he profeſſeth, or elſe he is but equivocally called a Phyſician, Philoſopher, Lawyer, Muſician, &c. whatever Title, Licence, or Commiſſion he hath: ſo is it here.

Sect. VI. 3. God hath told us in Scripture, that theſe ſpecial qualifications are Chriſts own Gifts, conferred on Men for the work of the Miniſtery, Epheſ. 4. 8, 9, 10, &c. 1 Cor. 12. And that the qualifying Men thus, is Gods calling them to the Office, and the Holy Ghoſt is ſaid to ſet them over the Church by his ſpecial Gifts.

Sect. VII. 4. But for preſerving Order, and avoiding Uſurpation, God hath deſcribed how theſe Qualifications ſhall be diſcerned and judged of, which is called the External Call; which is,

1. That the Perſon ſhall diſcern them in himſelf, viz. competent Faith and Knowledge, Willingneſs and Deſire, and Ability for utterance and practice: For he that thinketh not himſelf capable, cannot conſent; and he that conſenteth not, is no Miniſter. But no p. 76Man is to be the ſole Judge of his own fitneſs; elſe the moſt ſelf-conceited would be the Invaders of the Office.

2. Therefore the Senior Paſtors are ordinarily to try them, and judge of their fitneſs, and by Ordination inveſt them, by delivery, with the power.

3. The Peoples need of them, muſt make them capable of the Correlation, and their conſent is neceſſary to their Reception: For no Man can be a Teacher to thoſe that will not hear, nor a Paſtor to thoſe that conſent not to take him for their Paſtor.

Sect. VIII. 5. The Perſon r…c…ipient being truly found and determined of, Gods own Law doth of a ſelf give him his Power, and Oblige him to his work. As it is not left to the Ordainers, to judge whether the Churches ſhall have Paſtors or nene, or what the Power and Works of the Office ſhall be, nor what Qualifica… ons ſhall be neceſſary to reception; but only to diſcern who are the Men that God chooſeth, and maketh moſt receptive, and ſo to diſcern Gods Will, which is the Perſon, and declare it and invest him; ſo it is not the Ordainer nor People that have the Office or Power to give to him that they ordain and chooſe, but it reſiſteth directly from Chriſts conceſsion in his Law: As a Woman chooſeth her Husband, and the Miniſter celebrateth Marriage for Order ſake, but Gods Law giveth the Husband his power over the Wife. And as in a Corporation or City, the King by his Charter ſaith, [Every Year on ſuch a day, ſuch Perſons ſhall Chooſe a Man thus qualified, to be their Mayor, and the Recorder ſhall ſwear him and inveſt him, and I hereby grant him, thus Choſen and Sworn, ſuch and ſuch Power, and Command him to do thus and thus.] Here the Electors do but determine of the qualified recipient Perſon, and the Recorder inveſt him, but his Power ariſeth immediately from the Kings Char…er: And if the Chooſers or Inveſter p. 77ſay it ſhall be more, or leſs, or other, it is null that they ſay, and ſhall not infringe or change his Office.

Sect. IX. Now it is ſuppoſed, that if a point of Order be omitted; If the Election day by Fire or Plague, or War, be overpaſt; If the Recorder be dead, or refuſe his Office, that this doth not totally Null the Charter: One choſen a week after, in caſe of neceſsity, may have the Power: Or if that Years Election ſhould hereby be made void, the Charter is not void, but will the next Year authorize the Perſon choſen. Interruption will not hinder this. And if one that had not a juſt Election, or Inveſtiture, ſhould intrude this Year, the Charter will authorize the next notwithſtanding: Or if the Recorder that inveſted the laſt was an Intruder, the next may yet be truly authorized: Or if the Charter were, that every former Mayor ſhall inveſt the next, it would not hinder a Succeſsion, if a former had uſurped: For the Charter ſtill reviveth it, and is ſuppoſed to appoint ſuch means as are ſufficient, if a circumſtance fail.

So is it in the preſent Caſe: If a Biſhop were an Uſurper, conterfeiting his own Ordination; or if a Presbyter pretend himſelf a Biſhop, or to have Ordaining Power when he hath not, or if an unjuſt Choice be made, the next Man hath ſtill a due way of entrance; yea, and want of ſuch a point of Order, when it is not fraudulently contemned or refuſed, Nulleth not the Office Power. Order is for the thing ordered, and for the common good, and not to be pretended againſt it. If the Phariſees that ſate in Moſes Chair were to be heard, and the High-Prieſts that were then unlawfully called (out of the true line, and buying the Office of the Romans for money) were to be ſubmitted to in their Office, much more a Chriſtian Paſtor truly qualified by God, and choſen by the p. 78Flock, and approved by Senior Paſtors, though there were ſome point of Order wanting.

Sect. X. Yea, in caſe of neceſsity were there no Ordination, but juſt Qualification and Election, it wou…d not nullifie the Office; nor hath God promiſed that no place ſhall fall under ſuch neceſsity: For Chriſt hath taught us, That He will have mercy, and not ſacrifice; and that the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath; and Paul and Apollo are for the Church. And as in Phyſick, or Soldiery, or Re… of the Poor, that muſt be done by the Law of Nature, which cannot be done according to all the Points of an Ordering Law of Man; ſo is it here: It is meet for the ſafety of Mens Health, that none practiſe Phyſick but a Licenſed Phyſician; But in Caſes of Neceſsity, (when Phyſicians are wanting) every one that hath skill may uſe it, and an able Man may be a Phyſician unlicenſed, rather than ſee Men periſh whom he may help. It hath been my own Caſe: In a great and poor Town where was no Phyſician, came an Epidemical Pluriſie; had they been neglected, moſt had dyed; Neceſsity conſtrained me to adviſe them, and they all recovered: Thereupon their Poverty and Importunity conſtrain'd me to practiſe Phyſick many Years (only gratis) and God by it ſaved the lives of multitudes; ſhould I think, in this caſe of Neceſsity, that I ſinned, becauſe I took not a Licence, (which reſolving not to continue the Practice, I could not do:) So I have known ſome skill'd in Law, that have help'd many by Council, though they were no Lawyers.

So none may take up Arms as a Soldier without the King's Commiſsion: But in caſe Traytors and Rebels ſuddenly endanger King and Kingdoms, or Enemies invade the Land, every Man is a Soldier by the Law of Nature; which alſo enableth every Man to defend his Life, Purſe, Houſe, Parents, Neighbors, againſt Thieves and Murderers.

p. 79The Law of the Land ordereth, That the Poor be kept by the Pariſhes from Begging, and that we relieve not Beggars otherwiſe. But if the Pariſhes through Poverty or Uncharitableneſs neglect them, the Law of Nature bindeth us to relieve them, rather than ſee them periſh.

All Laws, for the meer Ordering of any Duty, ſuppoſe that the Duty muſt be done, and that as tendeth to its proper end, and not that on pretence of Order it be undone. If the Coronation of a King be not performed regularly, he is King nevertheleſs by Inheritance, or Election; and he is King before his Coronation. Marriage is valid before God, by mutual conſent, before the Matrimonial Solemnization; and where this cannot be had, it is no Duty. If a Prieſt would not marry Perſons, unleſs they will make ſome unlawful Promiſe, or do ſome unlawful thing, it is lawful (and may be a Duty) to marry themſelves, declaring it publickly to avoid Scandal, unleſs the ſeverity of the Law of the Land do accidentally make it unlawful: And in ſome Countries the ſinful courſe of Prieſts may make this an ordinary Caſe. And no reaſon can be given, but that here it may be ſo.

Sect. XI. Many Caſes may fall out in which no Ordination, by Impoſition of Hands, or preſent Solemnity, may be neceſſary to this Office.

1. In Caſe a Company of Chriſtians be Caſt upon a remote Iſland, where no Ordainer can be had, and yet ſome of them are qualified Perſons: It is ſinful for them to forbear Gods Publick Worſhip, therefore they muſt chooſe the fitteſt perſon to perform it, viz. Preaching, Prayer, Praiſe, Baptizing, and the Lords Supper: And that Election ſufficiently deſigneth the perſon, that from Chriſts Charter ſhall receive the Miniſterial Power, and be obliged to the Duty (if he conſent.)

p. 802. In Caſe the Perſon be remote, and the Ordainers and he cannot meet, or Perſecutors, or Tyrants, or other Accidents, hinder their Meeting, he may be Authorized by Letters, without any other Ordination: It is well known that this hath of old been practiſed, and Biſhops have ſent ſuch Letters of Ordination, to thoſe abſent Perſons that have fled from Ordination, and ſo made them Biſhops. And it being but the deſignation of the recipient Perſon on whom Chriſts Law ſhall confer the Office, that they have to do, there is no reaſon to be given why they may not do it effectually by writing.

3. In Caſe that Death or Perſecution hath left none to Ordain, that are within reach of the Perſon to be Ordained: If Ordination by Dioceſanes were ordinarily neceſſary, yet in thoſe Kingdoms or Countries where there is none, it cannot be had; as in New-England, and lately in Britain, in Belgia, Helvetia, and other Countries.

Some may ſay, You ought to go for it, though as far as from America hither, and to ſeek it Beyond the Seas, and in other Lands, or ſtay till it may be had. But I anſwer,

1. In ſome Countries the Governors will not ſuffer Dioceſane Ordination.

2. Words are ſoon ſpoken, but to ſail from America hither, and that for every Man that is to be Ordained, is not ſoon done; ſome have not health to bear it at Sea; ſome have not money to pay for the Voyage charge.

3. It is a ſinful loſs of a Years time, in which they might do God much ſervice.

4. A Years Voyage by Sea to and fro, may hazard their Lives, and ſo fruſtrate all their end.

5. Some Princes and States forbid their Subjects to be Ordained in Foreign Lands, as we forbid Romiſh p. 81Ordination, leſt it draw a Foreign Power on them.

6. It is not lawful to deny God his Publick Worſhip, and our ſelves the benefit, by ſo long delay.

7. It is contrary to the temper of the Goſpel, which ever ſubjecteth Ceremony, Rites and External Orders, to Morals, and to Mans good, and the great Ends.

8. And it is a wrong to the honour of the Divine Nature, for Men to feign, that the Great, Wiſe, and Merciful God, layeth ſo great a ſtreſs upon a Ceremony, or Rite, or outward Order, as to damn Souls, and deny his own Worſhip, where it cannot be had.

4. And this Ordination is not neceſſary, in Caſe the Ordainers be grown ſo wicked, or heretical, as that they will ordain no good and orthodox Men, but only ſuch as are of their own ſinful way.

5. And in Caſe the Ordainers require, as neceſſary, any one unlawful thing, Subſcriptions, Profeſsion, Vow, or Practice.

If any ſay, That God will never permit us to fall under ſuch Neceſsities, they muſt prove it; and Experience diſproveth it.

Sect. XII. And if in all ſuch Caſes no Ordination be neceſſary, much leſs is Dioceſane Ordination neceſſary in all Caſes and Places: As,

1. In Countries where no Dioceſanes are, or are near.

2. In Countries where they or their Ordination is not endured by the Governors.

3. In Countries where the People being in judgment againſt it, will have no Paſtor ſo Ordained: It is not better to have none at all.

4. In Countries where Wars do hinder it.

p. 825. When the Dioceſanes themſelves will not venture to Ordain, for fear of ſuffering for it.

6. In Countries where the Biſhops are ſo corrupted, that they refuſe all that are truly fit.

7. Or where they refuſe all whom the People either chooſe, or will conſent to; and the Biſhops and People cannot agree on the ſame Man.

8. Or wherever the Dioceſanes impoſe unlawful Covenants, Promiſes, Profeſsions, Subſcriptions, Vows, Oaths, or Practices, without which they will not Ordain.

On ſome or other of theſe accounts, a Romaniſt would not be Ordained by a Greek, or Proteſtant, or Armenian, &c. and a Greek, or Proteſtant, would not be Ordained by a Papiſt; ſuppoſing ſomething to be unlawful.

9. But when a Parochial Biſhop may be the Ordainer, in ſuch Caſes, the Validity will not be denied by moſt Epiſcopal Divines.

10. And it is truly as valid in ſuch Caſes, when, 1. Senior Presbyters, 2. that are authorized by the Magiſtrate, 3. eſpecially that are chief Paſtors in Cities, and have Curates under them, do Ordain, though ſome deny to call them Biſhops.

11. As the Eraſtians think that the Chriſtian Magiſtrate may deſign the perſon, by the Peoples conſent, without any other Ordination; ſo Muſculus and ſome other Proteſtants think, that a fit perſon deſigned by the Magiſtrate, and accepted by the People, need not queſtion his Call to the Office; And it's hard to diſprove them.

12. If the Opinion of many Papiſts, and Proteſtants hold true, That a Biſhop differeth not from a Presbyter in Order (or Office) but in Degree, as the Foreman of a Jury, or the Preſident of a Synod … p. 83Colledge, or Council of State, &c. then I ſee no reaſon but the Magiſtrate may make a Biſhop of a Preſbyter, as he may make a Preſident of a Colledge, or a Mayor of a Corporation: For then the difference being but in the Accidents of the Office, and the King being Governor of the Church, as far as the Sword is to govern, and ſpecially the determiner of meer Accidents and Circumſtances, circa ſacra, why may he not ſet one Presbyter in degree above the reſt? Did not all the ſtrife of Emperors for the power of inveſting Biſhops, ſignifie this much againſt the Popes oppoſition? Both ſides granted that the People and Clergy were to be the Chooſers of a Biſhop. And it was the old Canon, that no Biſhop ſhould remove from Seat to Seat; ſo that only Presbyters, and no former Biſhops, were made Biſhops of any particular City, (or Deacons, or Subdeacons ſometime at Rome.) By which it appeareth, that the Emperors power of Inveſtiture amounted to a Negative voice, in the making of a Biſhop. The Kings of Iſrael ſent Levites to teach the People, and Solomon choſe who ſhould be the High-Prieſt: And when the Romans after ſold the Office, Chriſt bids the cleanſed Lepers, Go and ſhew themſelves to the High-Prieſt, and offer, &c.

Sect. XIII. The Caſe of the Reformed Churches nullified by the Papiſts, and whoſe Miniſters Office and Authority is denied by them, is as followeth.

I. The old Bohemians and Waldenſes had different degrees of Paſtors, of which the Superior were called Conſeniors and Seniors of one Order, who preſided among the Elders, but took not the Government of the Flocks out of their hands, nor ruled without them, and were chiefly above others in judging what Elders (or Miniſters) were to be removed from leſſer places to greater: whoſe Form of Government, moſt like the p. 84Ancients, you may ſee at large in the Deſcriptions of Laſcitius and Commenius.

II. The Churches called Lutherane, (Denmark, Sueden, Saxony, &c.) have for the moſt part ſome Epiſcopacy called Superintendency; but their Biſhops take not the power of the Keys from the Paſtors of the ſeveral Pariſhes. And they take not the power of Ordaining to be proper to the Biſhops: For the Biſhops of Denmark were made ſuch by Bugenhagius Pomeranus a Presbyter; which they ſuppoſe doth null their Succeſsive Power.

And the Engliſh have Dioceſane Biſhops and Ordination by them, and as good a Succeſsion, at leaſt of Regular Ordination, as Rome hath had.

III. The Churches called Presbyterian in Holland, France, Scotland, and other Countries, have Ordination by a Synod of the Paſtors of particular Churches, of which ſome are the chief Paſtors of Cities, and have Curates, or aſsiſting Presbyters, and therefore are ſuch Biſhops as the Scripture, Ignatius, Tertullian, yea, and Cyprian deſcribe: ſo that,

1. They think that as in Generation a Man begetteth not an Ape, or Dog, but a Man, and an Horſ… begetteth an Horſe, and every thing propagateth its own ſpecies; And as Phyſicians make Phyſicians, and Lawyers make Lawyers, &c. So Paſtors make Paſtor… as far as belongeth to an Ordainer; that is, preparing and determining the Receiver whom God ſhall give the Power to, and oblige to the duty of that Office.

2. But yet in the ſame Order they think they have a true Epiſcopacy as to degree, firſt, in the foreſaid City Paſtors that have Curates; ſecondly, in the Preſident of the Synod.

3. And they think that thoſe Writers, Papiſts and Proteſtants, are in the right, who expound the word p. 85[Presbytery] which laid hands on Timothy, of a Seſſion of Presbyters, and therefore that ſuch have power to Ordain.

4. And they think that if after their faithfulleſt ſearch, they ſhould in this be miſtaken againſt their wills, God will not therefore diſown their Churches, Miniſtry and Worſhip, no more than he will reject the Prayers of private Chriſtians for their Errors and Imperfections.

IV. Thoſe that at preſent are called Nonconformiſts in England, who were (about 2000 Ejected and Silenced, Anno 1662. Aug. 24.)

1. Many of them, (yea, moſt that were above 44 years old) were Ordained by Biſhops, (of whom I am one.)

2. The Generality of the reſt lived, when by the Rulers that had ſuch poſſeſsion as they could not reſiſt, Dioceſane Ordination was forbidden, and another ſet up, and we heard not of five Biſhops in England that did Ordain, and hardly knew how to procure it of theſe. And the Oath of Allegiance might have coſt both the Biſhop and the Ordained their Lives, or Liberties at leaſt, in the Times of Uſurpation.

3. They were Ordained by a Claſsis, or Synod of Miniſters, of whom ſome were chief City Paſtors that had Curates, (which ſaith Grotius, de Imper. Sum. Pol. were a ſort of Biſhops) and they had a Preſident.

4. Some were not ſatisfied with this, and were ſecretly Ordained by the depoſed Biſhops.

5. Some deſired Confirmation of their Ordination aforeſaid by the Synods, from ſuch Biſhops as owned it, and had it (from Biſhop Uſher at leaſt, of others I am uncertain.)

6. The Generality of them that had any Parſonages p. 86or Vicarages, or any endowed Cures in England, from the Year 1646, till the time that the Weſtminſter Aſſembly was Diſſolved, had a formal authorizing Inſtrument of Approbation from the ſaid Aſſembly, or National Synod (choſen by the Parliament;) of which the Catalogue in their Ordinance ſheweth us, that divers Biſhops were, by the Parliament, choſen Members. If any or all refuſed to be there, the Countrey Miniſters knew not that, but juſtly took them to be parts of the Synod: And though this was not an Ordination by Impoſition of Hands, they ſuppoſed that it was as valid to authorize them, as the Acts before-mentioned of ſome ancient Biſhops, who ordained abſent Men. And the main Body of the late Ejected Miniſters (very few excepted) were thus called, confirmed, approved, and put in, having alſo the Conſent or Election uſually of the Patron, and the People, and the then Rulers.

Sect. XIV. And there were many that in thoſe Times were only Ordained Deacons, and took the Synods Letters of Approbation, for the ſubſtance of an Ordination to be Presbyters, but wanting the Formality, ſubmitted to Dioceſane Ordination, when the Dioceſanes returned (of whom Dr. Manton was one.) Yea, divers ſubmitted to be Re-ordained by the Dioceſanes that had been Ordained Presbyters before. This is the Nonconformiſts Caſe, except ſome few Independents, that were not for formal Ordination, at leaſt ſo much as the reſt: yet even of them, ſuch as had Benefices in Anno 1646, 1647, 1648, had the Synods Approbation.

Sect. XV. To all this I muſt add, That by the Dioceſanes Silencing multitudes of thoſe Miniſters, whom the moſt Religious accounted the moſt able, holy, powerful Preachers (in the days of Queen Elizabeth, King James, King Charles I. beſides the 2000 p. 87Silenced in the beginning of King Charles II.) the People that were moſt ſerious in matters of Religion, were (except a few) ſo alienated from the Dioceſanes, that moſt of the ſtricter Religious Sort, would not chooſe a Miniſter that was for them and their Ordination, and ſo it would have made a more dangerous Schiſm than was made.

Sect. XVI. And as to the preſent ſtate and practice of the Nonconformiſts, (premiſing that I ſpeak only of meer Nonconformiſts as ſuch, and not Men of other Principles and Parties that Conform not, as Jews, Turks, Socinians, Papiſts, Familiſts, Quakers, &c.) let it be underſtood,

1. That they take all the Pariſhes and Congregations of true Chriſtians that have true Paſtors to be true Churches of Chriſt: And they take ſuch Miniſters as Conform, to be notwithſtanding that true Miniſters, though culpable; and therefore they ſeparate not from any ſuch Churches as no Churches, or from ſuch Miniſters as none.

2. They take particular Churches aſſociated under Dioceſanes, Archbiſhops, and Nationally under one King, and repreſented in one Convocation or Synod, to be ſtill true Churches, and ſuch as may be lawfully communicated with; and theſe Dioceſane, Provincial and National Aſſociations to be laudable as they are meer Aſſociations for Concord, and though culpable in ſome other reſpects, yet ſuch as good Chriſtians may lawfully live under ſubmiſsively, and in peace.

3. They think it lawful to preach and adminiſter the Sacraments in the Pariſh Churches, and have theſe 17 years been caſt out, and kept out much againſt their wills, and laboured, and hoped, though in vain, for Reſtoration.

4. It is not Communion with any Chriſtian Church in Faith, Love, or Holy Worſhip, or any thing of p. 88Gods Inſtitution, no nor any thing of Mans commanding, but what they believe God hath forbidden them, which they deny. To deny to take many Covenants, Oaths, Profeſsions, or to do ſome Practices which upon their beſt enquiry they verily believe to be great Sins, this is not ſeparating from any thing of God.

5. They do not depart from the Churches, but are caſt out. The Miniſters are Silenced and …cted, as they verily believe, for not ſinning and hazarding their Souls. Miniſters and People are expreſly by the Canon of the Church, Excommunicated ipſo facto, (which is ſine ſententia judicis) if they but ſay that there is any thing in the Conformity, which a good Chriſtian may not with a good Conſcience do: The Canon is viſible and plain; ſo that they cannot poſsibly avoid being caſt out, and think that the Ejecters are the Schiſmaticks.

6. When they are thus caſt out, or driven away, they yet hold diſtant Chriſtian Communion with all Chriſtians in one univerſal Church, one Spirit, one Lord, one God, one Faith, one Baptiſmal Covenant, and one Hope, Epheſ. 4. But local Communion they can have but in one place at once; and none are ſaid to ſeparate from all the Churches, where they are not preſent.

7. The King by his Licence allowed them for a time to hold their own Aſſemblies; and the Conformiſts themſelves ſwear the Oath of Supremacy, and take the King to be Supreme Governor in all Cauſes, and over all Perſons Eccleſiaſtical and Civil: And yet then accuſed the Licenſed of Schiſm.

8. Though there be ſome things in the Liturgy which the Nonconformiſts dare not Declare Aſſent and Conſent to, (and therefore ſuffer,) yet they hold it lawful both to join in Hearing, Prayer and Sacraments with the Pariſh Churches and Conformiſts, in the p. 89Lords days Worſhip and uſe of that Liturgy; and many of them do ſo ordinarily: And others do not hold it unlawful, but are hindered by Preaching themſelves where they can, which they dare not forbear: And the People that hold it lawful, yet hold that better is to be preferred when they can have it. And he that preferreth a Miniſter which he findeth moſt Edification by, doth not therefore ſeparate from all others, becauſe he is abſent from them.

9. The Nonconformiſts have in their appointed Treaties for Concord, offered to uſe the Liturgy with ſome Emendations, and to ſubmit even to the preſent Archbiſhops, Biſhops, and other parts of the Church-Government, as is expreſſed in the Kings Declaration about Eccleſiaſtical Affairs. By which (viſible in Print) it may be ſeen how far they were from ſeparating inclinations, but it could not by the Biſhops, be accepted.

10. But it is true withall, that many of the Common People having conſtantly preferred that which they thought they were bound to prefer, and ſeeing their former Paſtors caſt out and ſilenced, thought they ought notwithſtanding to adhere to them, and grew into ſo hard thoughts of the Biſhops that ſilenced them, (about 2000 at once) that they are more alienated than before from them and their Aſſemblies; as Chryſoſtoms Joannites were at Conſtantinople, till the kindneſs of Atticus and Pr…lus brought them back to the old publick Church.

Sect. XVII. It is commonly confeſſed by their ſharpeſt Accuſers, that the Nonconformiſts do well to forbear all that can be proved to be ſinful: And if they prove not Conformity ſinful, they are content to ſuffer as real Schiſmaticks.

Sect. XVIII. We all agree of the neceſsity of a continued Succeſsion in the Univerſal Church, of the p. 90ſame Faith, Religion, and Miniſterial Office which we profeſs and poſſeſs: We have no one new Article of Faith or Religion, nor any that have not continued in the Church; we have no new Office: But that the Office and Adminiſtrations cannot paſs as valid, unleſs the particular Miniſter can prove, that he had Canonical Ordination from one that had the like, and he from one that had the like, and he from another that had the like, and ſo up to the Apoſtles; this we ſuppoſe irrational, ſchiſmatical, falſe, and of malignant tendency againſt the Church and Intereſt of Chriſt.

Sect. XIX. Mr. Henry Dodwell is the Man that hath newly and copiouſly promoted this Schiſmatical Error, in a Book pretended to be againſt the Nonconformiſts Schiſm, but diſowned by the Conformable Doctors themſelves, (many of them.) And indeed, notwithſtanding the tedious wordineſs of it, it hath little in it, in compariſon of Janſenius long ago, fully anſwered by Voetius. And though I told him over and over firſt, that if he did not anſwer Voetius, and my diſpute of Ordination, we ſhould take him but to labor in vain, as to our uſe, yet hath he taken no notice of either of them at all. If he intend it in any following Book, it is but fraudulent to ſend out this great Volume firſt, to do his work before he gave any notice of what is already ſaid againſt him. Muſt we write the ſame things as oft as Men ariſe that will repeat the Arguments ſo oft confuted?

Sect. XX, His Deſign and Schiſmatical Doctrine is thus laid.

1. That the ordinary means of Salvation, are, in reſpect of every particular perſon, confined to the Epiſcopal Communion to the place he lives in, as long as he lives in it.

2. That we cannot be aſſured that God will do for p. 91us what is neceſſary for Salvation on his part, otherwiſe than by his expreſs promiſes that he will do it.

3. Therefore we must have interest in his Covenant.

4. Therefore we must have the Sacrament by which the Covenant is tranſacted.

5. Theſe as Legally valid, are to be had only in the external Communion of the Viſible Church.

6. This is only the Epiſcopal Communion of the place we live in.

7. The Validity of the Sacraments, depends on the Authority of the perſons by whom they are adminiſtred.

8. No Miniſters have Authority of adminiſtring Sacraments, but only they that have their Orders in the Epiſcopal Communion.

9. This cannot be from God, but by a continued Succeſſion of perſons orderly receiving Authority from thoſe who had Authority to give it them, (viz. Biſhops) from thoſe first times of the Apoſtles, to ours at preſent.

10. That the Holy Ghost is the Inſtituter of this Order, and to violate it, by adminiſtring without ſuch Ordination, is to ſin against the Holy Ghoſt, the Sin that hath no other ſacrifice, and promiſe of pardon.

11. That the Ordained have no more or other power, than the Ordainers intend or profeſs to give them.

12. That it is certain, that the Biſhops of all former Ages intended not to give Presbyters power of Ordaining or Adminiſtring out of their Subjection: Ergo they have it not.

Sect. XXI. This, and a great deal more to this purpoſe, is his matter.

p. 92To gather all the Confuſions, Contradictions and Abſurdities of that wordy Volume, would be tedious, and little profitable to the Reader; only theſe three things in general I tell ſuch as may be in danger of infection by it.

1. That he never agreeth with his Adverſaries of the ſtate of the queſtion, nor ſo much as explicateth the terms, nor doth any thing beſeeming a Diſputant, to make himſelf underſtood.

2. That not only by denied (falſe) Suppoſitions, he maketh all his Diſcourſe uſeleſs to the Nonconformiſts, but alſo at the firſt giveth them their Cauſe, and confirmeth them.

3. That while in his Preface he diſowneth Popery, it is the very ſting of their Argumentation which he uſeth: And that which yet by conſequence overthroweth not only the Churches, Miniſtery, Sacraments and Salvation of the Proteſtants, but of all Chriſtians on Earth, and of none more certainly, than of the Papiſts: All which I undertake, when called, to prove.

Sect. XXII. It were tedious to mention all his ambiguous confounding terms: For a few;

1. He that layeth ſo great a ſtreſs on Epiſcopacy, never tells us what he meaneth by a Biſhop; when he ought to know, that with the chief of his Adverſaries the Controverſie is very much in that: For (as Grotius de Imper. Summ. Pol. and many others) they take the chief Paſtor of every Pariſh-Church (eſpecially that hath Curates under him) for a Biſhop;See my Laſt Book againſt Johnſon of this. at leaſt if he be Paſtor of a City, or Town ſo called of old (foreign) when others deny him to be a Biſhop that hath not many Altars or Pariſhes under him.

2, Some take him for a Biſhop that is but the prime Presbyter, or different from the reſt but Gradu, non ordine, call'd Epiſcopus Praeſes: And others deny him to p. 93be one, unleſs he differ Gradu, as another Officer in ſpecie.

3. Some take him to be a Biſhop, that hath no Preſbyter, but Deacons under him, and that in a ſingle Aſſembly (as Doctor Hammond on Act. 11. & Diſſertat.) Others deny him to be one, that is not over Presbyters.

4. Some take him to be no Biſhop, that is not elected or conſented to by the people, (and the Clergy, if there be any;) Others hold him to be one, that hath the conſent of neither, but only the Pope, or the Archbiſhop, or the King electing and impoſing him, and ſome Biſhops conſecrating him.

5. Some hold him to be no Biſhop, unleſs three Biſhops Conſecrate him; Others ſay, one may make him Biſhop.

6. If three Biſhops Conſecrate one, and … another, he tell… … that Church▪ … ſee examine… … Church, againſt …

Sect. XXIII. … repeateth the neceſsity of being in, an … by it; when he muſt need… … that th… … or definition of it, is the very firſt point of … between us and the Papiſts. By the tenor of his diſcourſe, the Reader may ſuſpect that he meaneth ſome Univerſal Society of Men on Earth, under ſome one viſible humane Head, either Monarchical, or Ariſtocratical, or Democratical, a Sovereign who is …erſona Civilis, and Pars Imp…rans Conſtitutiva. But, if ſo, Proteſtants (we at leaſt) deny any ſuch, thinking this the prime eſſential difference between us and the Papiſts, (the ſecond being whether the Pope or his Council be this Head;) and he never tells who this ſuppoſed Head is.

p. 94So he frequently talketh of neceſſary Communion with a particular Church, and never tells us what he meaneth by it: Nor can I gather often, whether he means a Dioceſane Church, or a Provincial, or a National. But I perceive that he meaneth not a Parochial; when yet he knew that the Adverſaries take thoſe for particular Churches.

Sect. XXIV. 1. So he oft talks of the neceſsity of Succeſsive Canonical Ordination, and never defineth either Ordination, or Canonical Ordination; when he muſt know that ſome take Impoſition of Hands to be eſſential to Ordination, and ſome deny it, and hold that Letters may do it on the abſent, beſides other differences.

2. And ſome take thoſe to be obligatory Canons, which others contemn as of no authority. The Papiſts are not agreed what Canons are valid: And the Diſſenters and this Diſputer are not agreed in England: Many, beſides Dr. Heylin, ſay, That the Popes Canon Law is yet in force in England, except ſome Particulars that were caſt out: Others believe not this; what is ſaid againſt the Authority of the Engliſh Canons, I will not recite.

3. And ſome take it for Canonical Ordination, if it be done by one Biſhop and Presbyters; Others ſay No, unleſs by three Biſhops.

4. Some ſay it is not Canonical, without the Clergies and Peoples Election or Conſent, (as aforeſaid) and others find it neceſſary to their Cauſe to deny this.

Sect. XXV. He calls Men oft to Catholick Unity, and never tells us what it is, or how it may be known Abundance more ſuch Ambiguities make his Diſputes to me unintelligible.

Sect. XXVI. Or if he be to be underſtood in theſe and ſuch like, then he goeth all along by a begging of the queſtions, which are denied.

p. 951. He ſhould have rather proved, than taken it as granted, that thoſe are not Biſhops, whom we hold to be ſuch.

2. And that it is not the Viſible Church, which we take for ſuch.

3. And that it is not a Particular Church, which we take for ſuch.

4. And that it is no Regular Ordi…tion, which we take for ſuch.

5. And that it is no Catholick Unity, which we take for ſuch: And ſo of the reſt.

Sect. XXVII. 2. He ſuppoſeth that there is but one Epiſcopal Communion in the places where Men live; or never tells us, if there be divers Biſhops, which it is whoſe Communion is ſo neceſſary: when he knoweth that Grotius thought that of old Churches were formed in imitation of the Synagogues, and that one City had divers Churches and Biſhops, as well as divers Synagogues. And Dr. Hammond thought that Rome, Antioch, and other Cities, had two Churches and Biſhops, one of Jews, and another of Gentiles; and that Peter and Paul had two Churches at Rome: And he knoweth, I ſuppoſe, not only that there were Novatian Biſhops in the ſame Cities with the Orthodox, but that oft and long, Conſtantinople, Anti…ch. Alexandria, and many other places, had two at once by their Diviſions, but none of them ſo long as Rome.

But perhaps he taketh it to be enough to Catholiciſm, or the Validity of Ordinances, if we be ſubject to the ſpecies of Biſhops, and ſo to any one that is Conſecrated rightly or wrongly; and ſo that in Schiſms both are true Biſhops. But leſt he deny this, I will ſpare to recite its Conſequents.

Sect. XXVIII. 3. He in his Preface, and all along, ſuppoſeth, That no unlawful thing is … p. 96the Nonconformiſts, as neceſſary to their Miniſtry or Communion; which will as much ſatisfie them, as if he had told them, That Lying, Perjury, Covenanting deliberately againſt Gods Precepts, and for the corrupting his ſacred Doctrine, Worſhip, Order, and Diſcipline, are lawful things. Did he ever hear them, and confute their Reaſons?

Sect. XXIX. 4. In ſhort, he never proveth, but beggeth,

1. That when Gods Word deſcribeth the Sacred Miniſterial Office, yet the Ordainers will and words can alter it.

2. That the chief Paſtors of particular Churches, (even Cities that had all of old their ſeveral Biſhops) are not true Biſhops, unleſs Men purpoſe them to be ſo in Ordination.

3. That Presbyters who ordain with Biſhops, may not in caſes of neceſsity ordain without them; or if they do, it is a nullity.

4. That in Caſes of Neceſsity, Ability, Conſent, Election and Opportunity may not deſign the perſon that ſhall receive authority and obligation directly from Gods Law, without other Ordination.

5. That any Church on Earth can prove an uninterrupted Succeſsion of Canonical Ordination, by Biſhops themſelves ſo ordained.

6. That ſuch a Succeſsion is neceſſary ad eſſe Officii.

7. That the Covenant of Grace ſecureth not true penitent Believers of Pardon and Salvation, where they cannot have the Sacrament.

8. That the Sacrament is null as to Mens Pardon and Salvation, if the Prieſt be not truly called, or have not ſucceſsive Epiſcopal Ordination.

9. That if a preſumptuous Title (as …e ſaith may yet make all valid when Men ſeem Epiſcopall… p. 97dained, and are not; Whether able godly Men ordained by ſuch like City Paſtors or Presbyters in a Synod, and choſen by Religious People, and ſolemnly dedicated to Gods Miniſtery in the face of the Congregation, have not a better preſumptuous Title, than notorious ignorant and vicious Men, that ſay they were ordained by a Biſhop, when their Orders were forged, (of which ſort there have been many?)

10. Whether he can prove that it is not Anabaptiſtry, to baptize all again that are baptized in the Reformed Churches, that have no Dioceſanes?

11. Whether he abuſe not Gods Word and Churches, in feigning all ſuch Reformed Churches, to live in the Sin againſt the Holy Ghoſt, for ſerving God without a Succeſsion of Epiſcopal Ordination?

12. Why is it that I cannot intreat him to anſwer Voetius, de deſperata Cauſa Papatus, that hath long ago confuted Janſenius, a far ſtronger Adverſary than he? Nor my Diſpute of Ordination Twenty Years ago written, and yet unanſwered? when▪ I tell him we have not leiſure to write over the ſame things, as oft as Men provoke us to it.

Sect. XXX. I will now caſt before him theſe following Notes.

1. What proof hath he of Sacraments (beſides Sacrifices) before Abraham's days? And was there then no pardon of ſin?

2. Were Women damned that were not circumciſed? Or were the uncircumciſed Children in the Wilderneſs none of the Church?

3. Were not Infants in the Covenant of Grace, before Circumciſion entered them, into the Covenant of Iſraels peculiarity?

4. Why did Abraham think there had been Fifty righteous perſons in Sodom? And in every Nation he that feareth God, and worketh righteouſneſs, is accepted of him, Acts 10.

p. 985. Though Sacraments under the Goſpel convey greater benefits, can he prove that it placeth greater neceſsity of them, than the Law did?

6. Seeing Chriſt was not baptized till about thirty years old, was he not Holy, and the Churches Head before?

7. Can he prove that the Apoſtles were ever baptized? Or were they not before true Chriſtians?

8. The Apoſtles had not the Lords Supper till near Chriſts death, and yet had part in him before.

9. Was Paul of this Mans mind, that ſaid, He was not ſent to baptize, but preach, and thanked God that he had baptized ſo few.

10. Is not that Promiſe true, That whoever believeth, ſhall not periſh, but have everlaſting life; and that the pure in heart ſhall ſee God, &c? And will want of a Sacrament then fruſtrate all?

11. He preſumeth to ſay, That God is obliged to make good the Sacraments of thoſe that have but a preſumptuous Miniſtery, ſeeming to have Epiſcopal Ordination, when they have not. And is not the reaſon as ſtrong from the Peoples impoſsibility of avoiding the danger, when they can have no Sacraments, or none but from Miniſters that had not Epiſcopal Ordination?

12. What if the Succeſſion have been interrupted long ago in Armenia, Egypt, Syria, or elſewhere? Are all damned that were born ſince? Or which way ſhall particular perſons there remedy it, they cannot ſend to Europe for Ordainers?

13. If Laymen (as Frumentius and Edeſius) convert perſons in India, are they all damned that dye after Converſion, for want of an ordained Prieſt, and Sacraments?

14. If Baptiſm give the firſt ſanctifying Grace, then none but unholy perſons are to be baptized; and that is impenitent, unconverted Infidels, or wicked men.

p. 9915. It is confeſſed that the Lords Supper is for Confirming Men in the Faith they had before: And are not both the Sacraments of the ſame general nature? one to declare and confirm our initial Faith, and the other our progreſſive.

16. The Sacraments are to Chriſtianity, what Solemn Matrimony is to Marriage; which is valid before God upon private conſent, but is neceſſary for order, and preventing Fornication, to ſatisfie Men: ou… Church Title ordinarily depends on Baptiſm, but God knoweth and accepteth heart conſent.

17. God ſaith, Elſe were your Children unclean, but now are they holy, 1 Cor. 7. 14. Therefore it is not the Sacrament that firſt maketh them holy. And the ſeed of the Faithful have ſuch Promiſes as we make good againſt the Anabaptiſts.

18. Children may dye before they can be baptized, and are they by that natural neceſſity damned?

19. If a Man live where the Prieſts will not baptize, or give the Lords Supper, but on condition that we profeſs ſome falſhood, or commit ſome ſin, (as in the Church of Rome,) Muſt we commit that ſin, or be damned, for want of the Sacrament?

20. Doth not this lay a neceſſity upon all the Proteſtants in Italy, Spain, France, Auſtria, Batavia, Portugal, yea, Mexico, Peru, &c. to leave their Countries, and travel to ſome Land where they may have Sacraments without ſinful Conditions, and may have it from Men of right ſucceſſive Ordination? And how ſhall all theſe be able ſo to travel? And where will they find that Land on Earth that will anſwer their expectation, and can and will receive them all?

21. What if a thouſand honeſt weak Men miſtake, and think, that the things impoſed as neceſſary to their Sacramental Communion, are great Sins, and it be not ſo, (as our Doubts againſt Conformity are thought p. 100to be Miſtakes, yea, the Anabaptiſts Error:) Can he prove that all ſuch are damning Errors, for want of Sacraments?

22. Gods Oath is alſo to confirm our Faith: And if a Man may be ſaved that be…ieveth Gods …, and knoweth not of his Oath, why not he that believeth it, and knoweth not of the Sacrament?

23. Doth not his Doctrine make the Prieſts the abſolute Lords of all Mens Souls, that can deny Salvation to any, or all Men, by denying them the Sacrament? Is this the ſenſe of their having the Power of the Keys?

24. Is not this abuſe of Tibi dabo Claves, and the office of Key-bearing, the knack by which Popes have ſubdued Kings and Kingdoms.

25. Is not the Argument which this Man manageth againſt the Reformed Churches, to prove them …o Churches, and to have no Miniſtery and Sacrament the Achilles of the Papiſts, in which is their chief co…fidence, but often baffled (as by Voetius againſt Jar… nius aforeſaid.)

26. Nay, the Papiſts themſelves are far more moderate than this Man; for they take a Laymans Baptiſm, yea, a Womans to be ſufficient to ſalvation, when this Man denieth it of all the moſt learned and holy Paſtors, that have not uninterrupted Epiſcopal Ordination.

27. Biſhops have too oft conſpired to corrupt Gods Sacraments, (witneſs the Lateran Council ſub Innc. 3.) and to interdict Kingdoms, and oppreſs Princes and People, and may do ſo again: And have the People no remedy againſt them?

28. A Miniſter juſtly ordained, and unjuſtly ſuſpended, or ſilenced by a Biſhop, hath more authority than Laymen, and their Sacraments are not Nullities by the Romaniſts Confeſſion.

p. 10129. Is not this Mans Doctrine far groſſer than Cyprians, and the Africans, (yea, the D…natiſts) that denied the validity of Heretick Baptiſm.

30. A Lay-Chancellor, in theſe mens judgments, uſeth the Keys of Excommunication and Abſolution validly, and yet are not the Sacraments or Ordination of the Reformed Churches aforeſaid valid?

31. Surrogate Prieſts, by the Biſhops conſent, validly Excommunicate, that are no Biſhops.

32. No People can be ſure by this Mans Rule, that they have Sacraments, or ſhall be ſaved, (except by fa…lible preſumption) not knowing that their Prieſt hath uninterrupted ſucceſſive Ordination.

33. When your preſumptuous Ordination is diſcovered to be Null, muſt all the People be Re-baptized?

34. The Church of England giveth none the Lords Supper till 16 years old. Doth it become abſolutely neceſſary to Salvation, juſt at that Age, and not before?

35. The Burial Office pronounceth all ſaved that never Communicated, ſo they be Baptized, and not Excommunicate, nor kill themſelves.

36. What work would this Man make for Rebaptizers, if all the Proteſtan…s of all Nations muſt be Re-baptized, that have not the foreſaid Ordination?

37. Is it ſuitable to the deſcription of God and his grace in Scripture, to believe that he layeth all mens Salvation upon Sacraments performed by men Ordained, as he deſcribeth?

38. Are not we Reproached Silenced Miniſters, as like to be good Proteſtants as ſuch men as this, that ſay, that,

1. The Reformed Churches that have not Epiſcopal Ordination from uninterrupted Succeſſion, are no true Churches.

p. 1022. Have no true Miniſters.

3. Nor true Sacraments.

4. Nor part in the Covenant of Grace.

5. Nor hope of Salvation by promiſe from God.

6. That their Miniſtery and Sacraments is the Sin againſt the Holy Ghoſt.

7. That the Church of Rome hath this uninter rupted Succeſſion (as he tells me.)

8. That, as will hence follow, the French Proteſtant: were better turn Papiſts, than be as they are.

Sect. XXXI. There are as many and greater Objections that I ſhould lay before him, about his Doctrine of an Univerſal Church-Policy, and that ſort of Epiſcopacy which he rather ſuppoſeth, than proveth neceſſary, and ſuch other Points: But I will no more tire the Reader herein.

Sect. XXXII. All the definition of the Proteſtant Religion that I can extort from him, is, Communicating with the Church of England, and thoſe that it holds communion with.

1. And ſo did the Papiſts, ſaith Dr. Heylin, in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Reign, till the Pope forbad them.

2. The Church of England never renounced Communion with the Reformed Churches, which he renounceth.

3. A particular Church is no Standard of Religion: Nor England more than the reſt.

Sect. XXXIII. If he renounce Communion with all theſe Reformed Churches, and with the Romans alſo, what a Separatiſt is this Man, and how narrow is his Communion, and into how ſmall a number hath he reduced the Univerſal Church? If neither Papiſts, nor any Churches that have not Ordination from uninterrupted Succeſſion, be parts of the p. 103Catholick Church, it is very little, if not inviſible.

Sect. XXXIV. He thus teacheth almoſt all the Chriſtian world, inſtead of Love and Concord, to Unchurch, Unchriſten, and Condemn each other: The Romans, on ſuch accounts, already Unchurch all the reſt. The reſt will far more eaſily prove, that Simony, Hereſie, uncalled Popes, uncapable ones, and manifold Schiſms have oft interrupted his deſcribed Succeſſion at Rome: And ſo Turks and Heathens have matter given them againſt us all. Already by ſuch kind of Schiſmatical Principles, there are few parts of the Church on Earth, that are not by others Unchurched, and Unchurch not others: But yet it is but few of them that have proceeded to that Anabaptiſtical height, as to nullifie all their Sacraments, and to expect that almoſt all the Chriſtian world ſhould be again baptized. Yea, this is far more Schiſmatical than common Anabaptiſm: For the Anabaptiſts with us Re-baptize not them that were baptized at age by ſuch Miniſters as this Writer, and ſuch others degrade; much leſs do they damn almoſt all the Chriſtian world, or other Reformed Churches, and ſay, They have no part in Gods Covenant of Grace, and Promiſe of Salvation, and that they ſin againſt the Holy Ghoſt, as this Man doth.