Christian Concord, Part 9
But some will Object, If there be as great a Necessity of Preaching the Word, as you mention, yet while Bishops are absent, or you cannot have them for Ordination and Jurisdiction, you should only Preach or instruct people in charity, as private men, but not undertake the work of the Ministry, what necessity soever there be.
I Answer: 1. The Church of Christ is little beholden to such Objectors, that would rather the Church should never have Ministers or Ministerial administrations, then have them without Bishops. 2. Do you think that private men may publiquely Preach the Word, and that constantly, according to the Churches necessities? why then may they not as well administer Sacraments. The Apostles had as special a Commission to Preach as to administer Sacraments. 3. Then if it be proved that succession of right Ordination is interrupted, so that no man can be found that hath had such a succession from an Apostle, and so is authorized to Ordain; it seems you would have Christ have no Ministers nor governed Church on earth any more, till he send new Apostles. Or if the Preachers in New-England could convert all the Indians to the faith, and could not have a Bishop to Ordain them Ministers, you would have these Converts be without Ministers, Sacraments, Government, and Ministeriall Churches to the worlds end. 4. We were many of us Ordained long before the Bishops were down: and must we give up our Charges because they are down?
Obj. But you may not Rule or exercise Discipline without them.
Answ. This is answered already. Further. 1. We do not exercise any Rule or Discipline that moderate Episcopal men do claim to be proper to the Bishop. We have only resolved to do the acknowledged duty of Presbyters. 2. But for my part I make no question but Presbyters may and must Rule their Congregations, by all the acts of Christs Discipline; even Excommunication and Absolution. 1. Hierome excepted only Ordination as the Bishops prerogative (what time soever he spoke of.) 2. Ministers are called Rectors and Pastors of their Congregations, by Law, and by Divines 3. In their Ordination the Bishops said to them [Receive the holy Ghost, whose sins ye do Remit they are Remitted, whose sins ye do Retain, they are Retained.] 4. Almost all Episcopal Divines that I know of, do fully confess it. So Bishop Downame Defence of Consecrat. Serm. l. 3. c. 4. p. 105. gives Deacons a power of Preaching and Baptizing, and Presbyters moreover of administring the Lords Supper, and remitting and retaining mens sins. Yea Bishop Ʋsher in his Answer to the Jesuites Chall. pag. 133. saith [In the daies not only of Cyprian, but Alcuinus also (who lived 800 years after Christ) the Reconciliation of Penitents was not held to be such a proper Office of the Priest, but that a Deacon in his absence was allowed to perform the same. The ordinary course that was held herein, according to the form of the Ancient Canons, is thus laid down by the Fathers of the third Council of Toledo: That the Priest should first suspend him that repented of his fault from the Communion, and make him to have often recourse unto Imposition of hands among the rest of the Penitents; then when he had fulfilled the time of his satisfaction, as the consideration of the Priest did approve of it, he should restore him to the Communion.) So Ʋsher. It were easie to shew the concurrent Judgements of Episcopal Protestants for Presbyters Governing their Flocks; so be it, 1. That they contradict not the Bishop. 2. And that they allow the Bishop to Govern the Presbyters. But it would be tedious and needless. 5. Almost all Episcopal Divines that I know of (except one or two new ones of these times) do expound all these following Texts of Scripture, as spoken of Presbyters, Acts 20. 28. Heb. 13. 7, 17, 24. 1 Thes. 5. 12, 13. Tit. 1. 5, 6, 7. 1 Tim. 3. 2, 3, 4. 1 Pet. 5. 2, 3, 4. And so do the Fathers expound them (though I say not all of them, tantum de Presbyteris.) See Prins Catalogue p. 1, 2, 3. and History of Prel. Part 2. p. 315, 316, 317, &c. And for those that of late expound them otherwise, I doubt not but it is easie to discover their mistake, and withall how deadly a blow their interpretation giveth to their own Cause: but that I am resolved now to forbear such Disputes. 6. Church-Government by Pastors is but Directive, by expounding and applying Gods Word, and not Coercive by external force. And if a Presbyter may not Govern directively, then he may not Teach, and then he hath nothing to do. Bellarm. distinguisheth of interior Jurisdiction ad populum Christianum regendum in foro interiori Conscientiae: and exterior Jurisdiction ad eundem populum regendum in foro exteriori: and he cites Abulensis Defens. Part 2. c. 63. saying that the former power of Jurisdiction is conferred by God immediatly on every Priest in their Ordination: (Bellarm. de Pontif. l. 4. c. 22.) Spalatensis hath largely shewed that the proper Ministerial Jurisdiction is exercised on Conscience: and lib. 5. de Rep. Eccl. c. 12. he shews that the Presbyter without the Bishop may so binde and loose, and keep from the Sacrament or admit to it: which he oft shews elsewhere, as to that interior power which is only on Conscience. Yea Cardinal Cusanus, de Concord. Cathol. l. 2. c. 13. saith plainly, Omnes Episcopi & forte etiam Presbyteri, aequalis sunt potestatis quoad Jurisdictionem; licet non executionis: quod quidem exercitium executivum, sub certis positivis clauditur & restringitur, &c. unde cessante causa statuti illius, tunc cessant illa Jura positiva. Though for my part, I think the term Jurisdiction is a great deal too big to be properly appliable to any Ecclesiastical, Ministerial Government. Grotius saith well, de Imperio sum. pot. c. 8. p. 209, 210. Quod autem quaerunt nonnulli, habeatne Ecclesia Legislativam potestatem, id ex his quae superiùs à nobis explicata sunt facile dissolvitur. Nam lege divina non habet; foreign & sacerdotum non est foreign, ut ante citavimus: quare quae ante Imperatores Christianos in Synodis conscripta sunt, ad Ordinem aut Ornatum facientia, Leges non vocantur, sed Canones, habentque aut solam Consilii vim, ut in his quae singulos magis spectant quam universos, aut obligant per modum pacti volentes, & nolentes etiam pauciores ex necessitate determinationis, ac proinde ex lege naturali, non ex humano aliquo Imperio.] Yea a further power there is to give such Directions which Gods Law obligeth men to obey: but this is scarce properly called Jurisdiction. 7. As for those that say the Bishops are the sole Pastors, and the power of Presbyters is but delegate from them, and therefore they may do nothing without them, all Scripture that describe the Office of Presbyters doth fully contradict them. The same God that set in his Church Prophets, Apostles, Evangelists, did also set Pastors and Teachers: and he will require an account of them, of the discharge of their Trust. If the Objectors doctrine were true, and we had none of us Curam Animarum, it were a glad doctrine to Presbyters, who might at judgement cast all on the Bishop, and a sad doctrine to Bishops, that must answer for all. And what wise man would then be a Diocesan Bishop when he must take the Charge of many thousand souls, that must wholly be committed to others instruction, and he himself shall never see their faces, nor hear their names. See this conceit of the Objectors fully confuted by Spalatensis (no rigid Protestant) de Republ. Eccles. l. 2. c. 9. 8. Papists themselves confess that when there is no Bishop the Government lieth on the Presbyters. 9. Who knows not (the Bishops confessing it) that in Cyprians time, and according to several Canons, the Presbyters joyned with the Bishop in Ordination and Jurisdiction? And if it were a Bishop with his Presbytery that did Ordain and Govern, then it is evident that the imployment is not aliene to the Presbyters place, nor above it: though they might not do it solely, because of the Bishops precedency, yet when there is no such President, it lieth all on them; see Concil. Carthag. 4. Can. 3. & 22. yea Can. 23. it is Decreed that Episcopus nullius causam audiat absque praesentia clericorum suorum, alioquin irrita erit sententia Episcopi, nisi Clericorum praesentia confirmetur. And for the Bishops power over Presbyters, it was so limited that the same Council ordains, Can. 29. that if a Bishop shall charge a crime on a Clergy man, or Lay man, he shall be put to prove it at a Synod. And Can. 30. If the Judges of the Church gave sentence in his absence, whose cause was tried, the sentence shall be void, and the Judges shall also answer at a Synod for their fact.] And Can. 34. A Bishop sitting was not to suffer a Presbyter to stand.] And Can. 35. The Bishop was to sit higher in the Church, but at home let him know that he is a Collegue of the Presbyters.] And Can. 37. The Deacon must know himself to be a Minister or Servant, as of the Bishop, so of the Presbyter.] Yea Can. 68. It is decreed that [Ex paenitentibus. (quamvis sit bonus clericus) non ordinetur. Si per ignorantiam Episcopi factum fuerit, Deponatur à Clero; quia se ordinationis tempore non prodidit fuisse paenitentem. Si autem sciens Episcopus ordinaverit talem, etiam ipse ab Episcopatus sui ordinandi duntaxat potestate privetur.] Here you see that one that is unjustly Ordained by the Bishop may be Deposed by the Clergy; And why may they not Ordain without a Bishop, as well as Depose without him? At least they that may Depose a Clerk without him, may reject or cast out an open offendor of the people without him. And in the second Council of Carth. Can. 10. The cause of a Presbyter in criminals, was to be heard by six Bishops, and not less. And in the first Conc. Carth. a Presbyter is to be reproved of six Bishops, Can. 11. and a Deacon by three. And afterward when Bishops yet grew higher it was Decreed in Conc. Carthag. 3. (confirmed in the sixth general Council) that a Presbyter reconcile not a Penitent without consulting with the Bishop, except the Bishop be absent, or necessity constrain: So that in both those cases he might, though he had a Bishop over him. Yea it seems Deacons had some Ruling power in the Church: For the Council of Elibert, Can. 77. decree that [Siquis Diaconus Regens plebem, sine Episcopo vel Presbytero, aliquos baptizaverit, Episcopus eos per benedictionem perficere debebit.] 10. The 38. Canon. Concil. Elibert, decreeth, That in case of Necessity a Lay man may baptize. And can the Objectors prove that Lay-men have in Scripture more power given them to baptize, then Presbyters to Ordain or Govern the Church? 11. The 98. Canon of the fourth Counc. of Carthage, decreeth, That a Lay-man shall not dare to Teach, the Clergy being present, except they desire him.] Whereby it appears that in their absence, or at their desire, he might. Now I would know whether a Lay man have any better authority for such Teaching, then Presbyters have for Ordaining and Government? 12. That Presbyters have Votes in Councils (which is the greater) our Protestant Divines at large have proved against the Papists. See Dr Sutlive de Concil. cap. 8. so very many more. 13. The Episcopal Divines do affirm that the Apostles themselves having planted Churches, and Ordained Presbyters in them, did retain the Episcopal power in their own hands. Now I would fain know, when Paul is so long in Ephesus and the adjoyning parts of Asia (above three years) and so long at Rome, &c. Who did Govern the Churches that while, from which he was so far and so long absent? Were they ungoverned? or did another Bishop Govern them? Or rather did the Presbyters, whom the holy Ghost had made their Bishops or Overseers? And have not Presbyters now the same Office? 14. I would know, if a Presbyter, as such, may not Ordain or Rule, whether to enable him thereto, and make him a Bishop, he must have a further Ordination? If no: then it seems, that the first Ordination which made him but a meer Presbyter, gave him the power; though the presence of his Superiour might hic & nunc hinder the execution: if he must be Ordained Bishop, I desire some proof of it out of the Bible: Where is there either precept or president, for Ordaining any man a Bishop, that was before Ordained a Presbyter? If a Captain of a Troop, or Colonel of a Regiment, either die or be absent, the Lieutenant of the Troop, or Lieutenant Colonel of the Regiment, needs no new Commission or Authority for the Commanding of that Troop or Regiment, till another Captain or Colonel shall be chosen.
I must entreat the Reader to remember, that I am all this while necessitated to go upon the Grounds which the Episcopall Divines will own, and to cite only those Authours or Canons which are of force with them, because I am only proving that there is nothing in our Worcestershire Agreement that is contrary to their principles, or that must necessarily exclude a Protestant Episcopal Divine from our Associations. And therefore to argue against any of their opinions, would be contrary to my scope; And to have cited Calvin, Beza, Chamier, Paraeus, Musculus, or any of those multitudes of forreign Divines that are known to be against them, would have been labour in vain; and so it would have been to have cited Reynolds, Whitakers, Dr Humphrey, and such like at home, who are some known to be against them, and some no fast friends to them.
If any after all this should require an account of my own judgement about the necessity of Ordination, I say, I am not now about such a businesse, nor do I account it seasonable to say any more then this: 1. God hath determined that every Church shall have a Pastor or Pastors. 2. And he hath stated the nature of their office and degree of their power. 3. And he hath described the persons that he will have to be the Officers by their requisite qualifications. All this is done in his Laws already. 4. There is nothing therefore left to be done but to determine which are the individual persons that are fittest according to Gods description. This God himself also will do, but hath not tied himself to one way in doing it: In generall, some sign of Gods will that this is the man must be had; At first in calling the Apostles his own immediate nomination was the sign. Now the most notable sign is the most eminent unquestionable Qualification of the person, which when God conferreth so notably or discernably, that man must be taken as chosen by God, and they that reject him do sin: These Qualifications lie both in Abilities, Willingnesse, Conveniency of habitation, or other externals and interest in the people; and if God bow their mindes to consent, there is the fuller signification of his will; yet lest any by intrusion should abuse the Church, God hath made the Pastors and Overseers, Judges of mens fitnesse; or the ordinary discerners of it, for the guidance of the Church in their consent. But then if these Judges or Discerners take a man to be fit (and so ordain him) who is utterly unfit, their ordination is ipso facto null, as being against Gods will; for God gave them power only to ordain those that were so and so qualified, and forbad them to ordain others. Also if the Qualification and fitnesse of the person be eminent; the people are bound to see Gods choice, and to accept that man of themselves without Ordination rather then an insufficient man ordained. For as Cyprian saith, Plebs obsequens praeceptis Dominicis & Deum motuens, a peccatore praeposito separare se debet, nec se ad sacrilegi sacerdotis sacrificia miscere: quando ipsa maximè habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes, vel indignos recusandi; Quod & ipsum videmus de divina authoritate descendere, ut sacerdos plebe praesente, sub omnium oculis deligatur, & dignus atque idoneus publico judicio ac testimonio comprobetur, &c. Et sit ordinatio justa & legitima quae omnium suffragio & judicio fuerit examinata.] That which I especially note is the first words, that God leaves neither Bishops at liberty who to ordain, nor people whom to choose, but hath so described to them the persons, that if they grossely erre, their action is null: and therefore the people themselves are bound to cast off a wicked, or utterly unfit Pastor, though all the Bishops in the world command them to receive them (as in the Arrians time some did) And on the contrary they are bound to choose the fittest against the Bishops minde, if he would thrust an unfit one upon them. And in such a case there is sufficient signification of Gods will that [This should be the man] and then want of Ordination cannot null his calling, if he had none at all: For where there is no place for controversie there is no need of a Judge: And where God eminently qualifieth one man, and leaves another utterly unfit, there should be no controversie which should be the man. And that Judgement which is committed to Ordainers is limited, and it is directed by Gods Laws, which it may not passe or contradict. If it do notoriously, the same Law commands the people not to obey man before God. Also this Power is given to certain ends: and if it be used against those ends, so that either the ends or that means must be forsaken, it is easie to see that it is means and not the ends. For the means are not alwaies the same, God having store if any one fail. Especially the means is of positive morality, and the ends of naturall morality: For when two duties come together, and both cannot be chosen, the choosing of the lesse (which must give place to the greater) is a sin: and Positives are lesse (caeteris paribus) then Naturals: And the substantials of Positives more necessary then the Circumstantials: It is of flat necessity that the Church be taught and guided, and God publiquely worshipped: It is necessary that there be Ministers for that use. It is necessary that these men be godly, able and willing. It is fit that able Pastors be Judges who these be, lest unfit men creep in by deluding the people. But this is but in order to the former as the end. If therefore a Bishop or Pastor, or whoever shall appoint over a people an ungodly man, or an insufficient, this appointment is ipso facto null, and obligeth not the people: Nay, God hath already obliged them to worship him publiquely, &c. and therefore they are bound to choose a man unordained to this work rather then not perform it: and in so doing they obey God in choosing him whom God hath designed, and he is a true Pastor. For as Cyprian saith, (Ʋbi sup. Epist. 68. p. 200, 201.) with the whole Synod, [Desiderio vestro non tam nostra consilia quam divina praecepta respondent, quibus jampridem mandatur voce coelesti, & Dei lege praescribitur, quos & quales oportet deservire altari, & sacrificia divina celebrare, &c. Quae cum praedicta & manifesta sint nobis, praeceptis divinis necesse est obsequia nostra deserviant; nec personam in ejusmodi rebus accipere, aut aliquid cuiquam largiri potest humana indulgentia, ubi intercedit & legem tribuit divina praescriptio.] So that in truth God doth all in conveying the Ministeriall power (as Spalatensis proves of the very Magisterial) yea, he doth by his description and qualifications choose the person, and only require men to accept him whom he hath designed, by discerning and observing the signes of his Will in the nomination. And mark, that seeing all that God leaves to man is no more; therefore Ordination and Election do not so much differ as some think; both being but the Ministerial determination of the person: And therefore it being proved easily that Overseers of the Church are the stated Ordainers, it follows that they are the Principal Choosers; unless you will cross Scripture in making Ordination to be but a meer empty Ceremony. The people indeed must (necessitate naturali ad finem) consent; but that's not Election strictly. Or if they first propound the man, yet they do not Determine of him Authoritatively: that is the Church-Officers or Governours part: But if he cross Gods Word palpably by male-administration, the people have Judicium discretionis (as Davenant hath well proved, de judice cont.) and must discern their own duty, and not partake in a Pastors sin, nor obey him before God, so that this is neither to give the people any Authoritative determining choice, nor to exempt them from the Authoritative determining choice of their guides, except where their miscarriage makes it null: Much lesse to make themselves Church-Governours: No more then he makes an Army self-governours, that when they finde their Commanders Traitors, and see they would deliver them up to the Enemy, doth tell them they ought to forsake those Commanders in obedience to their Soveraign; and obey the next that is trusty, or (if none be so) choose another till they have further orders: Nay, it is hard trusting the guidance of that man again that hath once betraied us and the Church: And therefore those Bishops in England that set up Drunkards and sottish Readers, and cast out such as Ames, Parker, Bains, Bradshaw, Brightman, with multitudes, such as England was not worthy of; yea, that cast out the conformable so fast, as if they had presently been destroying the Preaching of the Gospel, I say, these have so apparently falsified their trust, that (if we were fully resolved for Bishops, yet) we cannot submit to them for Ordination or jurisdiction. The Concil. Rhegiens. decreed [Ʋt perversi Ordinatores nullis denuò ordinationibus intersint] Where then shall we have a Bishop to ordain of the old accused Tribe? Also they decreed [De remotione ejus quem ordinare perperam duo praesumpserunt.]
But then who shall be encouraged or allowed publiquely to preach without disturbance, of this the Magistrate is the Judge. Of the businesse of Election, see Grotius very right de Imperio sum. Pot. cap. 10. specially pag. 239. Ne Plebi invitae Pastor obtrudatur, & simul salvo summis potestatibus jure rescindendi electiones, siquid fortè in Ecclesiae aut Reipublicae perniciem erratum sit. As David, Solomon, &c. did exercise such power: By all this it may be discerned that our Churches, Ministers, and Administrations, cannot by Papists or Seekers be justly questioned for want of succession of right Ordination; no, not though they had not had so much as a Presbyter at first to ordain them. And yet we maintain the usefullnesse and need of just Ordination. But I have been farre longer then I intended upon this Point.