Separation Examined, Text (2 of 3)

Separation Examined · Text (2 of 3)

p. 38Socrates Scholaſt. ſpeaking of the Hymns, which Chryſoſt. appointed his own people to ſing in oppoſition to the Arians, Eccleſ. Hiſt. l. 6. c. 8.in the end of the Chapter tells us that Ignatius, a man very familiar with the Apoſtles, ſaw a viſion of Angels which extolled the bleſſed Trinity with Hymnes, that were ſung interchangeably, and delivered unto the Church of Antioch, the order and manner of ſinging expreſſed in the viſion; ſo he would make Ignatius the Author of Anthemes: I ſomewhat doubt whether that manner of ſinging was ſo ancient, but that ſinging was, I doubt not, then in practiſe.

4. Quest. & Reſp. Orth. q. 107.Juſt. Martyr (or whoſoever was the Authour of that booke) ſhews it was in uſe in that time, ſetting downe with all the benefit that comes by ſinging.

So that in the Apoſtles times, and the ages next to the Apoſtles, we finde ſinging was in uſe.

If we come a little lower to the year three hundred ſixty four I finde in 15. Canon, Concil. Laodic. none were allowed to ſing praeter Canonicos Pſaltes; here was a corruption got in by this time, croſſe to the command of Paul in his Epiſtles to the Epheſ. and Coloſſ. but this implies that ſinging had beene before in uſe in the Churches, and that the people were wont to ſing, that now they limit ſinging to the Canonicall Pſalmiſts.

That Athanaſius uſed ſinging in his Church, appeares alſo in Auguſt. Confeſſ. l. 10. c. 33. alſo that the Pſalmes of David were ſung then appeares in the ſame place, and in his 119. Epiſt. c. 18. where he affirmes, that for ſinging of Pſalmes and Hymnes, we have the examples and precepts of Chriſt, and the Apoſtles, blaming withall the Donatiſts, that learning Davids Pſalmes, they ſung Hymnes of their owne inventing, &c.

p. 39As for thoſe, who would allow ſinging, if it might be of ſome ſpirituall ſong compoſed by ſome Saint now upon ſome occaſions, I doe not now trouble my ſelfe about them, onelyonly I wiſh them to make better ſongs, then that brother of one of the Churches in London [I doe forbeare to name whoſe Church it was] who compoſed a ſong to be ſung on the day of Thanksgiving for the overthrow of the Scots at Dunbar; I heard the Song read over, and the party who read it, told me it was ſung in the Church: I deny not but the man who compoſed it, might have an honeſt heart, but ſure he had but a ſhallow head, in compariſon of what men ſhould have, that compoſe ſuch Songs.

If theſe be not grounds ſufficient to anſwer that ſcoffer, let him give me better grounds to prove ſinging of Pſalmes is no Goſpel Ordinance.

So much for the ſecond branch, the worſhip can be no ground of ſeparation. Now I come to the third.

Let us ſee if there be ſufficient ground for ſeparation in reſpect of the Congregation. The Congregations are very corrupt they ſay, hence they thinke they are bound to ſeparate, and alleadge theſe places, 2 Cor. 6.17. Revel. 18.4.

1. That there are very many corrupt perſons in the Presbyteriall Congregations, there are none deny it (and I wiſh the Independent Churches have not ſome corrupt perſons alſo amongſt them) you doe not heare them juſtifie all their Churchmembers, but you ſhall finde them complaining of this corruption, and endeavouring by degrees to correct it, yea, I beleeve, had they power in their hands, they would ſoone ſhew what they would doe: I pray heare ſome of their words, Vindica. p. 115.the London Miniſters, Though we dare not make ſeparation from a true Church, yet we doe make ſeparation in a true Church. Read over the whole Anſwer, and you may perceive their mindes, P. 76.before this in their exhortation to the Miniſters and Elders, you have this one branch of their exhortation, That they would labour to make their Congregations pure as well as peaceable, following after piety, as much as after verity and unity, that all your people under your charge, may be viſible Saints at leaſt, Review of Mr Hoo a p. 89. ad 97.you may feele how the pulſes of theſe men beat. I obſerve alſo Mr. Cawdry differing very little from Mr. Hooker, in this point about viſible Saints, being the materiall cauſe of a Church; where you may ſee what he would have, if Diſcipline were once ſtabliſhed; that the Congregations are p. 40thus corrupt, See him alſo p. 202the fault is not in them, but in the old Hierarchy, whoſe Errours while they goe about to mend, you goe away from them.

2. I am ſure, very many Parochiall Congregations in England, have both viſible and reall Saints: muſt theſe and the Miniſtry be caſt off for the ſake of other corrupt ones? whom they would gladly alſo mend, if they could, or elſe purge them out.

3. I wiſh you would give us precept or example, where there have beene Churches with ſo many viſible Saints, and ſuch Miniſters, and theſe Miniſters deſiring and labouring to reforme as they doe, and yet that Chriſtians have done, or ſhould ſeparate from them. Thoſe Texts above mentioned, and often alleadged, if you pleaſe to view them well againe, are very far from proving it: Corrupt members there were enough in the Jewiſh Church, and ſo in the Chriſtian Churches ſoone after, and in the Apoſtles times; but you have no example of ſeparating from them, but in them, ſay the London Miniſters, we doe ſeparate,

4. But I pray wherein doe theſe wicked men trouble you? I hope you will give men leave to heare the word, be they never ſo wicked, but many of you come not ſo much as to heare.

Object. But they trouble us, becauſe they mixe with us in prayer.

Anſw. No mixtures ever troubled me in Ordinances, ſo much as my owne heart, The Grecians before they went to kill the ſacrifice, uſed to cry out to the people, foreign Let us pray, Rouſ. Arch. Att. l. 2. c. 9 They prayed alſo in the Temple. c. 7.if I could ſeparate from that I ſhould bee happy.

But for Prayer, why would not you have them joyne in prayer? when as,

Firſt, Prayer is a part of naturall worſhip, the light of nature dictates this to every man, if he owne a God, then pray unto him, Jonah 1.6. Call upon thy God, &c. but I hope none in your Congregations, but owne even the true God, therefore they are bound to pray to him.

Secondly, Peter when he ſaw Simon, Act. 8.22. in the very gall of bitterneſſe, yet bid him, Pray God: Then worſt of men may pray.

Thirdly, Prayer God hath uſed to be a converting Ordinance; I have knowne one my ſelfe that now is in heaven, but was at firſt a notorious wretch', a mock-God, Captaine of p. 41Drunkards, who coming into the Church as the Miniſter was in prayer, God brake his heart, and followed it on ſo, as he became an eminent Saint.

Object. They mixe with us in our ſinging, mixed worſhip we cannot joyne in.

Anſw. I cannot conceive what harm this can do to you; is the mixing of your owne corruption in your ſervice leſſe prejudiciall to the acceptance of it with God, then the preſence of wicked men joyning in the ſervice?

If indeed you can prove to me that God will not have wicked men ſing, but if they doe, he will not accept of the ſervice of his people, this is ſome ground for your exception; but I conceive you will not be able to prove the former, much leſſe the latter.

That wicked men may ſing, I prove thus:

Firſt, If wicked men may pray unto God (as the light of nature teaches) then they may praiſe God; the light of nature teaches this alſo: nature teaches me to pray to God for what I want, and nature teaches me to praiſe God for what I receive. If then naturall men may praiſe God with their mouths [for praiſe muſt bee expreſſed with tongue or pen, if you take it properly, as I ſaid before] why not by ſinging? God hath given this gift to them, as well as to others. But that to praiſe God is a part of naturall worſhip, and belongs to all men, we may conceive by the example of the Philiſtims, Judg. 16.23. They met to offer a great ſacrifice to Dagon, and to rejoyce (becauſe of Sampſon.) Here is a day of Thankſgiving; ſo 1 Chron. 10.9. becauſe Saul was ſlaine, &c.

If we goe to the Romans, we ſhall finde nature had taught them to ſing to their feigned gods, Godw. Rom. Ant. l. 2. ſ. 2. c. 19not to tranſcribe their rites in their ſacrifices, After the portion layed out for the gods had beene burnt, then did all the people repaire to a common feaſt; where, as they were eating, they ſung hymnes and ſongs in the praiſe of their gods, and playing on Cymbals, they danced about the Altars, intimating thereby, that there was no part of their body, but ſhould be imployed in the ſervice of their gods, &c. If nature taught the Romans to ſing hymnes and ſongs to their feigned and fooliſh gods, why ſhould wicked men be debarred from ſinging to the true God?

2. We finde Exod. 15.1. Moſes and the ſonnes of Iſrael, ſang a ſong to the Lord, in v. 12. Miriam bids the women ſing; I doubt not but among theſe ſonnes and daughters of Iſrael, p. 42there were perſons as corrupt as any in our Congregations: then the preſence of wicked men doe not ſo defile you, or the Ordinance, as is ſuppoſed; to themſelves indeed it was polluted, as are all other things, but this hindred not Moſes, nor Miriam, they did not ſeparate all thoſe, who were godly, from the reſt, and ſing onelyonly with them; I doubt they ſhould have had but few ſongſters.

3. May a wicked man read a Pſalme, or one of thoſe ſongs? give me a reaſon why not? Will you debarre a wicked man from reading the word? If he may read a Pſalme, why may not he ſing the Pſalme? To read the word is worſhip, ſo to ſing the Pſalme is worſhip: It is true, he cannot ſing as hee ſhould, no more he cannot read the Pſalme as he ſhould, nor heare, &c. therefore he muſt not read nor heare the word: To ſing, is we ſee taught by the light of nature, as well as the other, to pray, read, or heare the word. This Ordinance is not, as the Sacraments, which we doe not ſee ſo by natures light, but have them by divine Inſtitution revealed, having alſo a ſealing nature annexed to them.

4. We finde the word calling upon all ſorts of perſons to praiſe God, Pſal. 96.1. Sing unto the Lord all the earth, Pſal. 68.32. Sing unto the Lord all the Kingdomes of the earth, &c. Severall ſuch texts we finde.

I might adde more Arguments, and anſwer to ſome objections, but I content my ſelfe with theſe.

Object. But they mixe with us in the Lords Supper.

Anſw. That the preſence of others defile you [eſpecially if you have done your duty to keepe that Ordinance cleare] is a thing that our Congregational men utterly deny; thoſe who are acquainted with their workes, may ſee it often mentioned, therefore I quote none.

2. I wil be bold to ſay there are many Presbyterial Miniſters, who have as few wicked men, at that Ordinance, as were in the Church of Corinth. There were more matters of exception in that Church for the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, then are in abundance of theſe Churches; beſides, you ſee what courſe they did take to keep that Ordinance clear, and when they could not obtain what they deſired of the Civil power, yet they reſolved to goe further, which gave Mr. Prynne occaſion to write againſt them.

p. 433. I doubt if we examine things well, your ſelves are moſt to blame in that for which you ſeparate. Suppoſe you be in a Congregationall Church, and have all things, as you deſire; if there be any perſon there, who falls ſcandalouſly, that he deſerves to be ſuſpended from the Ordinance, I pray tell me, what method will you take? I am ſure the method is this, If thy Brother offend, tell him, if he heare thee not, take two, if not, tell the Church, Matth. 18. What ſhall the Miniſter alone ſuſpend him [it may be he knows not of it] when no Witneſſe comes in againſt him? No ſure; yea, ſuppoſe a Miniſter ſaw a man drunke, one of his Members, and none ſaw him, or knew it but himſelfe; he deales indeed with this Member, but the man denyeth it, he ſaid he was not; the Miniſter is ſure he was drunke but wants witneſſe; the man comes to the Supper [denying the thing though the Miniſter had wiſhed him privately to forbeare] ſhall the Miniſter now debarre him? No ſure, the text laies another method, the Miniſter muſt not be the ſole Witneſſe and Judge too; For if Miniſters may debarre upon their own heads without Witneſſe, they may ſoone doe ſtrange things; now have you done thus, dealt with the Perſon, or two of you gone to the Miniſter, and told him, you know ſuch things by ſuch perſons, which you can and will prove, ſuch things, as if not repented of, make him unfit for the Ordinance? See Maſter Barro, Hoſ. cap. 5. v. 3.Hos 5:3and hath the Miniſter yet received him [if he hath, you have diſcharged your duty, and no guilt lyeth on you, you may partake] I doubt there are few have done-thus, but if they be perſons of quality (eſpecially) then you pull in your hornes, afraid to appeare, but yet you will have the Miniſter to ſuſpend him, when no Witneſſe comes in (contrary to the rule) or elſe you ſeparate; this blame will lye on your owne heads.

All your ſhift here is, we have no power to deale with men, we want an explicite Covenant.

Though I could heartily wiſh all our Miniſters would follow the practiſe of the Holland Churches, who cauſe all, Apollon.who come to the Sacrament, to promiſe to ſubject to Diſcipline, yet for the preſent I ſay this, there is an implicite Covenant in all theſe Churches, and if you be afraid to ſpeake to theſe perſons firſt, whom you would have ſuſpended, then goe to the Miniſter, and carry ſufficient Witneſſes [as you muſt doe in any Church] and p. 44I am confident, without ſatisfaction given [no more can be required in any Church] thouſands of the Presbyteriall Miniſters will keepe away ſcandalous perſons; [at leaſt you are cleare as I ſaid before] yet to ſee theſe men ſeparate for that, in which themſelves are moſt to blame.

Obj. But they baptize all Children, making no difference though never ſo ſcandalous.

A. Though this is very ſeldome urged, yet becauſe I would draw out all that can be ſaid, I adde this.

For my owne practiſe, I confeſſe in this I differ from other men farre better then my ſelfe, but yet were I a Member of ſome other Presbyteriall Congregation, I ſhould not dare to ſeparate upon this ground.

1 It is granted by our Congregationall men, Mr. Hook Survey, p. 3 p. 11.that though perſons be very wicked, yet ſo long as they live in viſible Churches, and are not proceeded againſt, they may juſtly challenge the priviledges of Church-Members: but I dare not deny them to be true viſible Churches, in which there are many ſuch, for there are many both reall and viſible Saints in ſuch Churches, where theſe wicked men are.

Obj. But then this makes againſt your ſelfe, in denying ſome children Baptiſme.

A. Learned Mr. Cawdrey came to my hand, after I had printed my little Treatiſe, had I ſeene him before, I ſhould have humbly preſented ſome anſwer to ſome things, which I ſee the…e, ſo farre as concerned my queſtion [the queſtion about Confederacy doth not concern me] alſo I would have propounded ſome Reaſons, why his third way i. e. Adoption, I ſhould not ſo eaſily admit under the New Teſtament, till thoſe Reaſons were removed. I perceive he admires at them who deny the Children of Excommunicated Parents Baptiſme, I have no place now to anſwer but only this; I ſay, it is not good to put too much upon Baptiſme, nor too little upon that dreadfull ordinance of Excommunication. What he ſaith, p. 202. about the impotence to reject prophane perſons through the iniquity of the times, which implyes what he would doe, if he had power, confirmes my practiſe.I anſwer; [as I have declared in that little Tract upon this queſtion, which the uncivill carriage of ſome in the Congregation, when I had dealt lovingly with them in private before, forced me to print] I deny not them Baptiſme abſolutely, but as I ſuſpend them from one of the Seales, ſo I doe from this alſo, till they will labour to get out of their groſſe ignorance, and ſcandalous converſations, and will ſubject themſelves to Church-Diſcipline; ſo that I doe [as ſay the London Miniſters] ſeparate in the Church, but not from the Church; as p. 45the ſtate of our lapſed Churches will give us leave: I deſire to proceed againſt ſuch, yet but gently, [as for Excommunication, that is a great worke] having the advantage in the Church, that many good Miniſters [better then my ſelfe] have not, viz. That the ſtrongeſt Party in the Towne is religious; but had many Presbyteriall men the ſame advantage, I beleeve you ſhould ſee they would be more ſtrict then now they are. Congregations muſt be mended by degrees: to purge per vices in foule bodies, is better then at firſt to give Hellebore, Scammony, and ſuch ſtrong workers; it will coſt abundance of prayer, wiſdome, labour, meekneſſe, to bring theſe Congregations fallen into this ignorance and prophaneneſſe for want of Catechizing, and Diſcipline; let the Biſhops looke to their account.

Beſides, divers Presbyteriall Miniſters doe examine their people before they will Baptize, yea, and I have heard one who is eſteemed a rigid Presbyterian ſay, That if the Presbyteriall Government were ſetled, they would Baptize none, but they would have the parents; 1. Examined in point of knowledge. 2. If they were ſcandalous, that they ſhould confeſſe their ſinne. 3. Promiſe for the time to come to reforme. 4. That if perſons would refuſe to ſubmit to Church-Diſcipline, they would deny them the Lords Supper.

Since then it is in the hearts of many to reforme, and it is the thing they would gladly have power to doe, I thinke it is very unwarrantable upon this ground to ſeparate from them; beſides, there are many reaſons they give for Baptizing of all that doe but profeſſe Christ, which though they are not ſatisfactory unto me, ſo as to give the Seale of the Govenant to one, who ſaith, He beleeves in Chriſt, but yet is groſly ignorant, ſcandalous, &c. yet their reaſons prevaile with me ſo, as to be very charitable to thoſe, who doe Baptize upon thoſe grounds; if there be any ſinne in it, let the Miniſter looke to that, that is not your fault.

Certainly, people thinke it is a very eaſie thing to reforme Churches, it may be done with a wet finger; but if they were in the place of Miniſters, and had what knowledge is fit for the place, they would finde it a hard Worke, eſpecially ſome Churches.

So then as yet we finde no grounds warrantable for this Separation: I come to the laſt; The place of meeting, it is Idolatrous, and I know not what.

p. 46I thought here to have given in ſome anſwers to this abſurd cavill, but the practiſe of this generation hath given in a full anſwer; for it was obſerved in a neighbour Towne, the Miniſter not preaching upon a day of Thankſgiving, a Trooper got into the Pulpit, and did, &c. This was ſuch a pretty thing, that divers of the Separatiſts in the Towne, who had not beene in the Steeple-houſe for ſome yeares before, ranne in haſte, and became Auditors of the Trooper. Another of them, who called himſelfe the King of England, came to me, and offered to ſupply my place [the man was mad, as errour had made him mad, but for all civill actions ſober enough:] now from theſe practiſes I gather, that either it is no ſinne to meet in a Steeple-houſe [as they call it] or elſe they have no good conſciences, theſe practiſes are frequent, if Troopers get into Pulpits.

For the lawfulneſſe of the aſſembling in theſe places, Mr. Hoſ. 2. ch. 15. Lect.Hos 2Burroughs hath pleaded. More might be added, but I ſpare the Reader.

As yet then we have found no ſufficient ground for ſeparation; I ſhall deſire yet to come nearer, and requeſt of theſe perſons, what it is they would have, which way may wee bee brought to an union; if what they propound bee rationall, and will be borne out by Scripture, wee ſhall defire to come up to them; for I am ſure in that poſture wee now ſtand, nothing can goe forward. I have not their propoſals before me, onelyonly I may ſurmiſe what they would have, and accordingly I will ſet them downe, and examine them.

Firſt, The Separatiſts firſt propoſall.We would have Miniſters lay downe their former Ordination, and come joyne with us in an explicite Covenant, then wee will call them and ordaine them, and this will be one great way to union.

Very good, but are all the Separatiſts of this minde, doe they require no more of their Miniſters? I doubt you ſhould have put in one clauſe more, i.e. They muſt not expect any maintenance, but preach &c. freely. What elſe is the reaſon that many of you do ſo cry out of Miniſters, becauſe they require maintenance of the people, when as the Spirit of God hath left ſo many expreſſe Texts in the Scripture for it [foreſeeing this generation, who runne upon expreſſe Texts.] What is the reaſon p. 47divers of you keepe backe your tythes (the maintenance the State for preſent allows) from the Miniſters in the places where you live? but if you be reall, They often alleadge Act. 20.35. &c. Briefly I anſwer, 1. Theſe Elders coming but lately out of heatheniſme, could not in an ordinary way attaine to Miniſterial abilities in ſo ſhort a time, therefore God did in an extraordinary way help them. 2. Before they were converted, they had other trades, whereby they lived in their heatheniſme, ſo they could follow other trades, if need were, but we have not other trades. 3. Our Churches are not ſo poore, ſo there is no ſuch need. I could adde more, but this is enough. But theſe ignorant men know not the weight of the work of the Miniſtry.Acts 20:35that you would according to the Word, allow honourable maintenance, 1 Tim. 5.17, 18. Then I ſhall come to your propoſall.

Anſw. 1. As I made uſe of one of your principles before, ſo now I wil make uſe of another; you admit nothing for which you have not expreſſe Scripture. Hence you throw away Infant-baptiſme, Sabbath, &c. Now I pray give us an expreſſe Text [precept or example] where we have it proved, That Miniſters firſt choſen by the people [or had the conſent of the people freely afterwards, though moſt of ours were elected at their firſt coming.] 2. Have Ordination for the ſubſtance, freely acknowledging the accidentall corruptions. 3. Men very well qualified, as any ſince the Apoſtles dayes. 4. Whom God hath uſed inſtrumentally to convert divers, or to build up thoſe who were converted: 5. Have adminiſtred the Ordinances for many yeares; that yet after all this, they muſt lay downe their Miniſteriall call, joyne with you, &c.

I ſay, I challenge all the Separatiſts in England to give me one expreſſe Text: when you have done this, we ſhall bethinke our ſelves.

I call now for expreſſe Texts, for ſuch is your owne principle; if that be a true principle, then I hope it is one for us, as well as for you. I put this once to a Separatiſt, who told me, this it was they required of Miniſters: but the poore man could not bring one, and becauſe he had held me to this rule of expreſſe Texts in another caſe [though I ſoone made him confeſſe, that neceſſary conſequence would hold, by an inſtance I gave him; Suppoſe it had not beene recorded of Chriſt, that ever he ate or dranke, yet being it is recorded in Scripture, that he was true man, like to us in all things, but ſinne; hence I would argue, If ſo, then he did eat and drinke, I beleeve that though it be not expreſely written, the man yeelded] I held him to his owne principle here, but the man ſeeing himſelfe ſo foiled, grew froward and angry, ſo I left him. To ſee the p. 48frame of theſe mens ſpirits, we may ſoone anſwer their reaſons, but their wills they hold: It is no diſputing againſt mens wills.

2. Medul. Theol. li. c. 39. ſect. 32 Survey ch. diſc part. 2 p. 66.Dr. Ames, Mr. Hooker, and many of our Congregationall men affirme, That the election of the people gives the eſſentialls to an officer, and that ordination is but an adjunct: And though there may bee ſome defect in the peoples election at firſt, yet there may be the ſubſtance of it, and that will ſave it, or an after conſent. See the places before quoted, pag. 5. If ſo, then there will be few of the Miniſters of England excepted, who are not true Miniſters: This I am ſure you freely aſſent to, and make Ordination a thing not worth the regarding; why then doe you keepe ſuch a ſtirre at that, which you looke upon as little, when as they have that, which you ſay, gives the eſſentials to an officer; what have they the eſſentials of an officer, and muſt they go and lay downe their call? you muſt rather ſay, Let them lay downe their election, then their ordination; but in ſaying ſo, you cut the throat of your owne Objection; for if they have election, then they have the eſſentials of a Miniſter, and then they are Miniſters, your owne ſelves being judges. You would make Miniſters very ſimple men to lay downe their former Call, and you would give them a Call, which they had before, elected before, and no more now.

Obj. But what we judge is one thing, they looke upon their Ordination as chiefe, and thinke they ſtand by that.

Anſ. What is that to you what they thinke, they have that which, your ſelves ſay, gives the eſſence, ſo that they are Miniſters, you cannot deny it, unleſſe you will croſſe your owne Poſition; and let them thinke ſo, why ſhould this trouble you? Suppoſe a Deacon thinkes his Ordination gives him the eſſentials of his Office, the people thinke their election doth; what then, will you ſeparate from him, and not goe to him for reliefe in caſe of want? he hath Election and Ordination, ſo that to be ſure a Deacon he is: the caſe is the ſame with our Miniſters, Iren. p. 183 184.ſee Mr. Burroughs urging this inſtance.

To cavill here, they were indeed elected, but not by the godly Party, it is very falſe, firſt of hundreds of the Miniſters, ſome viſible Saints had their Vote, or gave after their conſent; I beleeve many of you, who now ſeparate, did joyne in the Call of the Miniſter, from whom you now ſeparate, which is worſe; but however this is a feeble Objection.

p. 493 Before they renounce their Ordination, you muſt prove they have not ſo much as the ſubſtance, and eſſence of that Ordinance; they will acknowledge accidentall corruptions, but ſtill affirme they have the eſſence, and this none of you all have diſproved.

4 In this which you require you intimate, that they are no Miniſters at all, for if they be true Miniſters, though there were ſomething humane mixed in their Call, their worke muſt be to renounce thoſe humane mixtures [which they doe] but if they be not true Miniſters, have not ſo much as the eſſentials of the Office, then they are no Miniſters at all; Conſequently, wee have had no ordinances at all; if you ſay, Yes, I pray tell me, how may any one, who is not an Officer diſpenſe the Seales, preach Authoritatively, &c? You practiſe indeed ſome of you as if hee might, but it is a thing abhorred of all men, both Claſſicall, and Congregationall; God is a God of order in his Houſe, as well as in the world: In the Civill State none muſt be Juſtices of Peace, unleſſe ſet apart to the Office, Heb. 5.4 Ier. 14.14Heb 5:4Jer 14:14every man cannot make Warrants, nor execute Juſtice [yet ſome men have as much knowledge in the Law, as many Juſtices have] but in the Church of God, there muſt be no order. Our Miniſters then have been but private men, all this while they have diſpenſed the Ordinances: it is the Call to a Place, or Office, that makes men Officers or publick perſons, but Call they have none by your eſteeme.

Learned Chamier proves, To. 4. l. 5. c. 14. Survey ch. diſ. part 2. pag. 42. 45That Baptiſme adminiſtred by a private perſon is no Sacrament at all.

Mr. Hooker ſpeakes home to this point: he layed downe this concluſion; That there is a cauſall vertue put forth in a ſubordinate way under Chriſt, to bring in the ſpecificall being of an Eccleſiaſticall Office to a perſon, &c. After three things premiſed he comes to a fourth, viz. Perſons though gifted and fitted every way, be they never ſo many, they are not therefore Officers.

A call they muſt have, without which none can warrantably doe any act, which belongs to an Officer.

Without this, whatever is done in that behalfe is voyd, and of none effect.

The validity of an outward Call appeares in this, if it proceeds from ſuch, who may give it by rule, becauſe whoſoever hath regularly received this Call, he is then a true Officer, though not inwardly graced, and fitted worthily to ſuch a place, &c.

p. 50Afterwards he ſpeakes to this purpoſe againe; Pag. 3. p. 9It is a Frenzie of the Anabaptiſts, which begins to labour with the loathſomeneſſe of it ſelfe, that any Chriſtian gifted, who can teach, or adminiſter a word of inſtruction to win a Diſciple after him, that he in a corner may Baptize him; but as Paul ſaid of Jannes and Jambres, their madneſſe is made to appeare to all, &c.

If the Lord Chriſt in his infinite Wiſdome, and Kingly care, conceived it neceſſary for the honour of the place, and the execution of the worke of a Deacon, to appoint choice men, and ſolemne Ordination to Authorize them to the worke, &c.

The ſumme is, the practiſe is but loathſome, and the Acts of ſuch men are voyd, who doe ſuch things as properly belong to a Church-Officer, and are not called to the Office; thus Mr. Hooker.

Mr. Keys, p. 6 Inſt. l. 4 c. 15. ſ. 20 In par. 2. 1. Vol. p. 766. Bell. ener. to. 3. l. 2. c. 2.Cotton he ſpeakes againſt ſuch practices, ſo doth the ſtreame of all Divines, Calvin, Zanchy, Perkins, Ames, &c.

Hence then if you null their Call, you muſt null all the Acts they have done as Miniſters, and you will be troubled (as I ſaid before) which way to come into order; you had better therefore be quiet, and if you wil needs quarrell with their Ordination, yet content your ſelves with their election, which you ſay is the chiefe.

Before I paſſe on to my laſt anſwer, let me a little examine this Theſis, viz. Election gives the eſſentials, and Ordination is but an Adjunct. Heretofore I have indeed been of this opinion, never much weighing the thing, being wholly carried away with the Authority of Dr. Ames, and Mr. Hooker, and others, admiring their learning and holineſſe, ſeeing my ſelfe but a meere babe in compariſon of theſe men, and ſo I judge of my ſelfe ſtill; but I remember a paſſage of Mr. Hookers in his conference with forty Miniſters, ſaid he, We ſee things fall cut in our Churches, which puts us upon further ſearches; ſo when I obſerved what uſe is made of this Theſis in England amongſt our Sectaries, and what confuſion is brought upon us, for any number of Sectaries will elect one (be he what he will) but Election gives the eſſence, Ordination is but an Adjunct, therefore may be left out; theſe practiſes have made me to ſearch further into this opinion, this being my greateſt trouble, that if I caſt off the opinion, I muſt go croſſe to ſuch men, whom I doe ſo much admire and reverence; I am apt to thinke our holy Men did in this as our firſt p. 51Reformers did in other points; Luther let ſome words fall againſt the Law, which might have beene ſpared; ſo our Divines in their definition of ſaving Faith, in oppoſition to the Papiſts; ſo in this point the Papiſts cryed up ordination too high, ours now are runne on the other ſide, and cry up popular election as high, and cry downe Ordination, but ſurely a medium might have beene found out, which had come nearer to the rule (with ſubmiſſion I ſpeake it.)

Reverend Mr. Hooker layes downe his Theſis thus, Survey part. 2. pag. 66.Election of the people rightly ordered by the rule of Chriſt (I wiſh he had ſet downe this right order) gives the eſſentials to an officer, &c. but I doubt (with honour to this choice Saint) he hath not layed downe his Theſis ſo cleare, as Dr. Ames (whom he quotes after) I preſume he intends the acceptation of the perſon elected muſt concurre; nay, I will affirme the acceptation is as eſſential, as their election, for what if this, or that, or foure Churches more chuſe I will refuſe them all, if I pleaſe; if election gives the eſſentials, then it ſeems I muſt be a Paſtor to that people, who elects me, wil I, nill I; but this reverend Mr. Hooker will not owne: then I ſay election doth not give the eſſentialls. Secondly, I ſay my own acceptation, is as eſſentiall to my Call, as their election, therefore Dr. Ames layes it thus, Medul. Th. l. 1. c. 39. ſ. 32.Vocationis eſſentia eſt in electione Eccleſiae, & acceptatione electi; but this is not material, for our Sectaries are forward enough to accept, if any will elect.

In ſearching out this truth, I ſhall deſire to ſet by all men, and conſult with the Scriptures; I wil firſt ſearch what texts we have for Election, then what for Ordination, and this I ſet down with my ſelf, that if Ordination be but an Adjunct, & the election ſo eſſentiall, then the Texts for Election are farre more cleare, full; and thoſe for Ordination more dark and rare; for an Adjunct, the meaneſt Logician knowes, is but little in compariſon of an eſſentiall cauſe; it doth conſentire, but modo quodam; 2. It ſuppoſeth the ſubject compleat in its eſſence before; 3. Therefore poteſt abeſſe; much might be ſpoken this way.

The Texts I finde for Election are three; neither doe I obſerve our Divines to quote any more.

1. The firſt is, Act. 1.23. where we have theſe things obſervable, as here are eleven Apoſtles in this election, but we allow thoſe to chooſe, where there is no officer to guide them, and many times very weak perſons.

p. 522. It is very eaſie to chooſe one of theſe, for v. 21. It was one who had accompanied them from the time, &c. This was eaſie for the meaneſt to know, but to chooſe a man fit for a Paſtor, requires more skill then ſo.

3. If we obſerve it narrowly, they did not ſo properly elect the Apoſtle, for when they had appointed two, Joſeph and Matthias ſuppoſe one ſhould have asked Peter, or the reſt, which of theſe is the Apoſtle? he muſt have ſaid he could not tell, properly God made the election: then they knew who was the Apoſtle, like to ſome Corporations in the choice of a Mayor, the floore nominate two, but the Aldermen chooſe which they will have, whence the people ſay, The Aldermen chooſe the Mayor. 1. Something may here be gathered for popular election, but very different is this practiſe from ours; I could adde other ſcruples, but I forbeare.

2 The ſecond place is Act. 6.3. a very cleare place for the popular election of a Deacon, but the laſt words of the verſe do very much ſhake this notion of Ordination, being but an adjunct, yea, it ſhakes the eſſentiall cauſality of popular election, Doe yee looke on, &c. but they adde, whom Wee may appoint over this buſineſſe. How doe the Apoſtles appoint them over the buſineſſe? It is by Ordination verſ. 16. Thoſe that doe authoritatively appoint another, or others over ſome buſineſſe, they put forth a cauſall vertue ſurely in that appointing; theſe appointed by this Act of Ordination [the Apoſtles did not not meddle here with the election] then the Apoſtles Ordination was more then an Adjunct.

From this place Divines argue commonly, If they may chooſe Deacons, then much more Paſtors, to whom they are more engaged, muſt honour, maintaine them, &c.

Thus we argue one while a majori, the people elected an Apoſtle, ergo, they may elect a Paſtor; here now a minori, the people elect a Deacon, ergo, they may elect a Paſtor, but then thoſe Axioms one of them muſt bee falſe, a majori licet foreign ſolummodo, & à minori ſolùm foreign, both which experience proves to be falſe, and Logicians obſerve it; but put the caſe we ſhould queſtion this argument; The people may elect a Deacon, ergo, their Paſtor; election followeth the judgement, and is guided by it, but muſt we needs ſuppoſe the people to be as able to judge, who is fit for a Paſtor, as who is fit for a p. 53Deacon? Dr. Ames ſaith, à minori ad majus, ſi quantitas probabilitatis intelligatur, ſemper concluditur affirmatè. Is this as probable? Theſ. log 143.Sure it is leſſe probable, that the people ſhould be fit to judge of the fitneſſe of a Paſtor, then a Deacon. I am confident there are hundreds of Congregations in England, in which there are many reall Saints, yet all the Jeſuits in Rome might ſcatter themſelves into theſe Congregations, and not be diſcerned, if the people were left alone to their owne election: Medul. l. 1. c. 39. ſ. 31. & Bel. ener, To. 2. l. 3. c. 2. ſ. 23.Hence therefore our Divines dare not truſt the people alone with the election of an officer, but tells us they muſt have the counſell of the Presbyters, as Dr. Ames, and Mr. Cartwright upon Act. 14.23. Rhem. Teſt. We do not onelyonly give unto the Biſhops (Scripture Biſhops) Ordination, but alſo we make them the chiefe, and directors in the election, ſaith he, where is this practiſed?

The third is that of Act. 14.23. foreign, but certainly if we come to find out the ſubſtantives to this participle, they muſt be the ſame which were ſubſtantives to foreign, and they were Paul and Barnabas: I know what is ſaid about foreign to defend the peoples election, as the cuſtome was taken from the Grecians; Dr. To. 4. l. 5. c. 14. ſ. 65.Ames ſaith foreign apud veteres idem ſepe ſonant, ſo it appears by that paſſage of Baſil quoted by Chamier to prove, that no private perſon may baptiſe foreign, but if it it be taken in that ſenſe here, I doe not know how it will pleaſure the people, unleſſe we ſhould goe croſſe to the gramaticall conſtruction.

The ſumme is, Zanchy in 4 praec. Calvin in loc. Piſcat. in loc. obſ. 2 Malcol. in loc. Diodat. in loc. Engliſh Annot. &c expound it of the ordination of Paul & Barnabasthere are no places brought for the peoples election, but thoſe who are but ſhallow, will finde enough from the Texts to wrangle very hard, thouh I am for the peoples election my ſelfe.

The Texts brought for Ordination are theſe:

Act. 6.6. When they had prayed, they laid on hands on them.

Act. 13.3. When they had faſted and prayed, and laid on hands, &c. they did not ſeparate Paul and Barnabas by Election, but Ordination.

Heb. 6.2. The laying of bands there, is meant of Ordination, ſay Pareus, Dickson, Gilleſpie, Johnſon. H. Jacob urges the Text, ſo that he would overthrow all the Miniſtry of England, becauſe (he ſaid), they erred in the Foundation, but he miſtakes: Mr. Hooker proves Church-diſcipline to be a fundamentall point p. 54of Religion from this place thus: That which is a fundamentall point of Religion, that hath Divine Inſtitution, &c.

But Church-diſcipline is a fundamentall point of Religion, Heb. 6.

Laying on of hands, being by a metonymy of the Adjunct, put for Ordination; Ordination, one particular, put for the whole of Church diſcipline. So Mr. Hooker.

1 Tim. 4.14. With the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery: I know not that this Text is queſtioned by our Divines, Mr. Hooker, and our New England Divines from this Text conceive Impoſition of hands in Ordination to be neareſt the rule, as I have quoted them before.

1 Tim. 5.22. Though ſome would have it of the admitting of penitents, of which we have no example in Scripture, yet the common interpretation is of impoſition of hands in Ordination; this interpretation hath other Scriptures to confirme it, the other none.

1 Tit. 5. Ordaine Elders in every City. I doe not finde that our Divines oppoſe this place neither. What Sectaries carp at, I weigh not.

Rom. Miſcel. p. 37.10.15. How ſhall they preach, except they be ſent? Mr. Gilleſpy hath, I thinke, ſufficiently cleared this Text. To be ſure, he is not alone in his interpretation. He likewiſe clears Ordination from that, Heb. 5.4. and firſt verſes.

Now ſince the Scripture is more copious, and plaine in giving us examples, and preſidents of ordination of Miniſters, then of the peoples election of Miniſters (though I grant ſomething may well be drawne out of thoſe Texts for election againſt the Papiſts, beſides the ancient courſe of the Church) I cannot ſee any reaſon (if Scripture be our guide) why we ſhould cloath theſe Texts for Ordination with this logicall affection of an Adjunct, and the other with the affection of a formall cauſe: I ſhould put moſt upon that, where the Scripture is plaineſt and fulleſt, which I am ſure in any mans eſteeme, that obſerves thoſe Texts with an impartiall eye, is ordination.

Whether Ordination according to Scripture-light be not as eſſentiall to a Miniſter as Election, Vind. chu. Cath. viſ.let any one judge. I thinke Mr. Hudſon ſpeakes Chriſtianly, I preferre one Divine Teſtimony, before ten arguments, and one good argument, before ten humane Teſtimonies. p. 45But thus by cloathing theſe Scriptures with theſe logicall affections, we have cried up election, and cryed downe Ordination, ſectaries take advantage of this, and hence come in our diſorders. Ordination is a Divine inſtitution.

Ars eſt in rebus, and Logicke is a generall Art, ſo that we muſt give ſome logical terms to Election and Ordination: I deny not this, onelyonly it is good to bring Art to Scripture, and not carry Scripture to Art: If you aske, what logicall Arguments are there betweene a Miniſters call, and Election and Ordination? I ſaid before theſe two conſtitute the form of a Miniſter, mutatâ affectione, mutatur argumentum. Survey par. 2. pag. 68. in 4 praec.what if I ſhould anſwer, The Call is Totum integrale, Election and Ordination are membra conſtituting this Totum; Thus I make Election to be eſſentiall, and ſo I ſpeake the higheſt of Election, though I muſt profeſſe upon ſerious thought, I rather queſtion whether Election be eſſentiall, then I doe Ordination. Reverend Mr. Hooker indeed ſaith, Ordination is but the approbation of a perſon conſtituted in his office; but I am apt to thinke, Ordination doth moſt reſpect that inward, or Arcanam vocationem (as Zanchy calls it) which God gives a man into the Miniſtry, fitting and qualifying of a man firſt for the worke (which none elſe can do) and giving him an earneſt deſire to the worke, God did there as it were, ſeparate him inwardly, and now he doth it outwardly in Ordination. The particular Congregation doth but give him a Call by their election and ſubjection to him, to exerciſe this power among them pro hic & nunc; That which moves me to thinke ſo is,

Firſt, Churches may not chooſe whom they liſt (as doe our Sectaries) but perſons qualified by God.

Secondly, the Scripture is ſo full and cleare for Ordination over it is for Election, though I deny not but Election may well bee proved.

Thirdly, becauſe a man may in ſome caſes be ordained to the Miniſtry, when no election of the people doth precede, as I ſhall give inſtance afterward.

2. I argue thus:

If the election of the people doth give the eſſentials to an officer, then may a man elected execute all officiall power without ordination, and that commonly.

But no man may execute officiall power, and that commonly without ordination; ergo, election doth not give the eſſentialls; by the eſſentials here, he meanes the formall cauſe, p. 56for as for the materiall cauſe, they cannot give that, and we have but two cauſes that doe dare eſſentiam, though all foure doe dare eſſe.

The conſequence is cleare, that they may execute, &c. without ordination, for forma dat operari; but election gives the forme, ſay theſe Reverend men, and ordination is but an Adjunct, effects doe not depend upon Adjuncts, for operation the forme gives that.

The minor, that they muſt not doe ſo.

Firſt, it is croſſe to Scripture preſidents; if it were but a Deacon, Survey part. 3. pag. 9.ſaith Mr. Hooker, yet, we ſee, he was ordained.

Secondly, It is croſſe to your owne practiſe; it is frequent in New England to have a man elected, and preach halfe a yeare, a whole yeare, yea, I know one elected and preached two yeares to his people, and they maintained him all that while, and yet all that time he never adminiſtred a Sacrament to his people, but he and they, when they would partake of the Lords Supper, went ten miles to the Church, out of which they iſſued, to receive the Sacrament; but this was very hard and needleſſe, if he had the forme given him in election.

2. That which doth nextly inveſt a man with official power, ſo as now he may performe officiall acts, and before which he could not doe ſo, that doth give eſſence, and conſequently is not a meer adjunct.

But Ordination doth nextly inveſt a Miniſter with official power, ſo as now he may perfome official acts, which before he could not doe; ergo,

The minor is clear by the Scripture examples.

Secondly, it is clear by your owne practiſe, for thoſe who for two yeares, and more, ſtood onelyonly by election, but that while diſpenſed no Sacraments, when they were ordained, did preſently put forth all official acts.

The major, take all together, I ſuppoſe will not be denied; it doth nextly inveſt a man with official power, ſo as now he can performe official acts, and before he could not doe it; to ſay he had official power before given him by election, but could not act it, is ſtrange, fruſtra eſt illa potentia, &c. had ſuch a perſon continued twice as long unordained, he had not executed any official power, nay, his preaching all that time was not eſteemed preaching by way of office.

p. 57Neither can it be ſaid ſuch preach onelyonly upon triall, for I now ſpeake of ſuch, as had beene tried before, nay, have beene preachers in England long before they went over, and ſuch I am ſure, as the people would willingly had them ordained within one month after they had choſen them, they were ſo well ſatisfied in the perſons, whom they had choſen.

Fourthly, it is ſomething that ſolemnity the Scripture expreſſeth, that was in the ordination of Miniſters, prayer and faſting, and impoſition of hands: we read of no ſuch ſolemnity in election, though people ought to pray before they doe chooſe. So it was in New England, this act was very ſolemne; when notice was given of the ordination of an officer to the ſeverall Churches (as before any ordination, all the Churches adjacent had notice given) it ran in that forme, There is an Ordination to be this weeke at ſuch a Church, &c. for the election of the perſon, we knew it long before, whom they had choſen, and though the people did by their ſuffrage declare their election in this day of Humiliation, yet they declared no more then the Country knew before; and I hope you will not ſay, he was not elected before now, when firſt they choſe him to goe with them, or come to them, and there continued a yeare or two preaching, & they contributing to his maintenance; the ſame I might ſay in regard of myſelf, I had as ful an election of my people at my firſt coming, as was declared at my ordination, and it was above two years, before I could get my ordination in the place where I was elected (through the troubles of the times) but all that while I did not conceive my ſelfe inveſted with official power, till I was alſo ordained. The Scripture then expreſſing ſuch ſolemnity in this act, and not in the other, makes me thinke, this is not ſuch a ſlight Adjunct, and the other onelyonly eſſentiall.

Fifthly, I obſerve two Texts, which make me think ordination is not an Adjunct, 2 Tim. 2. And the things which thou haſt heard of me among many witneſſes, the ſame commit thou to faithfull men, who ſhould be able to teach others alſo. And that Text, 1 Tim. 5.22. Lay hands ſuddenly upon no man, neither be partakers of other mens ſins &c. Timothy is a Church-officer, here is a charge given to him to take heed, who comes into the Miniſtry, yea, he may be partaker of other mens ſinnes, if he have not a ſpeciall care, whom he admitteth into the Miniſtry, Nam ſi quem cito ordinaveris, qui p. 58indignus ſit, Communicare cum dicit peccatis qui non probatus fuerit ordinatus. Hieron in Loc. v. Zanch. in 4 praec. p. 784. &c.communicabis peccatis alienis, dum ille malè docebit, aut vivet, ſaith Gerhard in Loc. He quotes alſo Leo Papa, Ep. 87. Ad Africanos Epiſc. Quid eſt citò manus imponere, niſi ante aetatem maturitatis, antè tempus examinis, ante meritum laboris, antè experientiam Diſciplinae, ſacerdotalem honorem tribuere non probatis? Calvin alſo on the laſt words, Keep thy ſelfe pure; Ac ſi dixiſſet, ſi quid perperam fiat ab aliis, vide ne ulla ex conſenſu, vel approbatione contagio ad te perveniat. He referres it to Timothy, joyning with others in ordaining unworthy perſons; now theſe texts doe not belong to the people, but Miniſters, Officers, as was Timothy, which makes me thinke, that what the Miniſters doe in examining, trying, ordaining, is more then the peoples election; where doe we finde ſuch things ſpoken to the people? Where the greateſt blame lyes, for unworthy men coming into the Miniſtry, ſurely there muſt lye the greateſt power of admitting men into the Miniſtry, elſe the blame is not juſt; but we ſee the blame is here layed upon the Miniſters; ☞Paul no where writes to the people to commit the things they have heard, &c. nor doth he bid them not lay on hands ſuddenly, &c. he bad them indeed looke out men for Deacons, but that doth not anſwer theſe texts; but if the great ſtroke, the formall cauſe lye in the popular election, the Miniſters may well ſay, We doe but ordaine, we give but an Adjunct, the people did the maine Act, they gave the eſſence, the eſſence being given, we muſt give the Adjunct, ſo that there will be no blame left for the Miniſters.

6 It ſhould ſeeme by a paſſage of Doct. Bellar. Ener. To. 2 l, 3. c. 2. S. 12.Ames, that ordination is more then an Adjunct; Bellarmine had ſaid, Vocatio ſeu miſſio miniſtrorum non ad populum pertinet, ſed ad Epiſcopos, &c. Doct. Ames in his ſecond anſwer hath theſe words; Abſurdè ad modum diſtinguitur vocatio miniſtri, ab ejus Ordinatione & electione, tanquam pars diſtincta; neque in Scripturis, neque in antiquis Patribus alia vocatio ordinaria memoratur, quam illa, quae exurgit, quaſi Totum, ex electione & ordinatione: what Totum the Doctor meanes, is plaine by his words, Exurgit ex ordinatione & electione, he meanes Totum integrale; ſo then ordination and election are members of this Integrum, but all the members doe give eſſence to the Integrum, for Membra ſunt ſymbola cauſarum eſſentialium. If ſo, then ordination cannot be an Adjunct in reſpect of a Miniſteriall Call, for no Adjunct gives eſſence, but followes the eſſence, ſuppoſing the ſubject compleat in its eſſence before; if then ordination doth give eſſence, as well as election, this notion may hold, elſe we p. 59ſhould have an Integrum conſiſting but of two parts, and but one part give the eſſence, which cannot be. This notion of a Miniſters Call to conſiſt as a Totum ex electione & ordinatione, is much nearer the Rule, then to have election alone to give the eſſence, and ordination to be but an Adjunct.

To this agrees Mr. Jacob [a man well known] There are two eſſentiall parts of calling to the Miniſtry, Election, Ordination: Dr. Seaman quotes him, Anſ. to Diat, p. 64ſo the Calling is a Totum. As for the Objections made againſt this, if ordination be eſſentiall, what then ſhall become of our Miniſters, whoſe ordination is not legitimate? This I have ſpoken to before; and ſo, what will you doe in caſe a Church were ſo caſt by providence, that they could get no Officers to Ordaine them an Officer? [for thoſe who are of this opinion deny the People power to ordaine] it is eaſily yeelded by our Divines, that may be done in an extraordinary caſe, which ordinarily ought not to be done. See Rutherford, Due right of Presbytery, p. 187. Gilleſpie, Miſcel. p. 34. &c. for my part, I conceive then the Church faſting, and praying, for ſuch a one, who is elected, may doe that which is aequivalent to ordination, though it be not ordination formalitèr.

The ſtrong argument where-with reverend Maſter Hooker proves, That Election gives the Eſſentials to an Officer is this:

One Relate gives the eſſentiall conſtituting cauſes to another.

But Paſtor and People are Relates; ergo.

The anſwer which Mr. Rutherford gives to it, viz. That ordination made him a Miniſter before, and election doth but appropriate him; This Mr. Hooker denyeth to be any anſwer, becauſe it ſuppoſeth ordination to antecede election, which is quite croſſe to the Scripture pattern, Act. 6.3.6. But (with favour) I ſhould humbly propound this queſtion, This is not a bare ſuppoſition, for one of the young Schollars doth now preach to the Indians in their language.Whether Ordination may in no caſe precede election? As now in this caſe, Suppoſe one of the Schollars in the Colledge, or ſuppoſe foure, or more had learned the Indian Language, and upon examination they were found to be Miniſterially qualified; ſuppoſe now the Presbytery ſhould ſolemnly ſet apart theſe young men to the worke of the Miniſtry, and ſend them forth to preach among the Indians, though the Indians have not elected them; here indeed would the eſſentials of an Officer be given without election: I pray what breach of rule would here be? If it be ſaid, that the p. 60examples mentioned, Act. 6. & Act. 14. ſhew their election goes firſt; It is true indeed where there are Churches, but here are none. Beſides, Act. 13.3. when Paul and Barnabas were ſent out to preach among the Gentiles they were ordained, Though ſome deny ordination here to be meant, yet many learned men affirme it.when no election did precede; it is true, they were extraordinary Officers, but what then? though this doth not make thoſe young men extraordinary Officers, as were the Apoſtles, to have power in all Churches, yet I ſee not any breach of rule in ſeparating them to this work. If it be ſaid, what need of that Ordination, they may preach without? It is true, they may, but it is not ſo comfortable, as when men are ſet apart by a Divine inſtitution, there is an authority more conferred; they may now baptize as they finde ſucceſſe of their Miniſtry (which was the old way) and ſhal not need be put to thoſe troubles, which now they are; Suppoſe laborious Mr. Eliot were not ordained, who ſhould baptize the Indians, called home to Chriſt by him? The firſt preachers, that came into England were ordained, before elected here.as ſuppoſe they ſhould convert divers Indians forty or fifty miles from any Plantation, how ſhall theſe be baptiſed? what, ſhall they now elect, and ordaine theſe men? ſhall unbaptiſed perſons ordaine an Officer? where have we a rule for that? then it ſeemes all theſe muſt come to another Church, &c. forty or fifty miles diſtant, to a Church alſo whoſe language they underſtand not, and there be baptiſed by a Miniſter, whom they underſtand not, nor he them. Here are many odde things fall in, croſſe to all Scripture preſidents, but to have theſe ordained and ſent forth, is not croſſe to the Scripture preſidents; but if this be granted, then Ordination without election may give the eſſentials to an Officer.

But further, here you ſay election gives the eſſentials, I beſeech you, what ſhall we doe then with all thoſe Scriptures, where ordination is held out ſo fully? ſhall we omit them if they containe but an Adjunct? No, I am ſure this gracious Saint would not doe ſo, his heart was ſo awed with high thoughts of God, and his Word, that he dared not omit ſuch a Divine inſtitution, as thoſe Scriptures hold out; are then thoſe ſix or ſeven Scriptures alledged for ordination, as neceſſary to a Miniſters Call, as thoſe three which are brought for election? if not, I pray give a reaſon, why ſome Scriptures ſhould be leſſe ſet by, then others in this nature; Divine Authority we acknowledge in both: but this was far from this reverend mans thoughts, for we ſee him prove Church-Diſcipline to be a fundamentall point of Religion, from impoſition of hands; then if theſe p. 61Scriptures be equally as neceſſary to the conſtitution of a Miniſter, that none muſt dare to omit them, we doe but foreign in ſaying, that ordination is but an Adjunct, &c. In conſtituted Churches, thoſe, who omit ordination, goe croſſe to thoſe many texts of Scripture, they follow not the patterne, Some I know make little of election, but I would give it the moſtand ſo ſin againſt the ſecond Commandement, as do they, who go croſſe to the texts for election; and if election in an extraordinary caſe may ſerve without a formall ordination, in the like caſe may ordination be without election, and ſo we are even.

Further, in anſwer to the Argument, they are Relates; ſuppoſe I ſhould ſay, The election of the people gives a part of the eſſence to the Officer [for ſo we conſidered the Call of a Miniſter to be a Totum ariſing out of election and ordination, as Doctor Ames] it may be you will ſay, Relata, quà ſic, doe not give a part of the eſſence, but the whole: here then will be our trouble, whether we muſt bring Scripture to Logick, or carry our Logick to Scripture; why then doe not Miniſters act officially upon bare election, as I ſaid before? But it is anſwered, their election gives the eſſence, as he is their Miniſter, but ordination gives the eſſence, as he is a Miniſter; Mr. Hudſon hath ſpoken cloſly to this. Vind. Chur. Cathol. viſ… p. 138. ad. 151.for ordination doth inveſt a Miniſter with power to act beyond thoſe, who have called him, giving him an habituall power in actu primo to exerciſe and performe the Acts belonging to his Office elſewhere upon a Call. I know indeed our New England Divines, many (I ſay not all) as wel as reverend Mr. Hooker, are of another opinion, That a man is an Officer only to his own particular Congregation, Relatorum mutuum eſt iter; but ſuppoſe I ſhould ſay, A Miniſter bears an habitual relation to the whole Church-Catholick viſible, which ſome of our Divines doe now (I thinke) ſtrongly prove; for my part I could never ſwallow that notion, that a Paſtor preaches only, as a Paſtor, to thoſe who elected him, and to other Churches, as a gifted Brother. I dare boldly affirme in the Apoſtles times, and the pureſt Ages next them, this notion was never heard. As for this notion of a Catholick viſible Church, I have not ſo much buſied my head about it till of late, & in my weak judgement I think, there is ſo much ſaid for it by Mr. Hudſon (eſpecially) and others, that I ſuppoſe it will not eaſily be anſwered; that which made me leane to this opinion, was;

Firſt; the light which his Scriptures and Arguments bring along with them.

2 I did not ſee by this notion, that the people were at all p. 62defrauded of what is properly theirs, they may elect officers, they may have power to bring in teſtimony, to exclude unworthy communicants, yea, or may object againſt any, who ſhould be admitted Church-members (if Churches were in their firſt conſtituting) if they knew good reaſon why they ſhould not be admitted; neither are they debarred from conſenting with their officers in excommunication; I ſay, I doe not ſee but theſe priviledges may conſiſt with this notion.

3. Mr. Hudſ. vind. 160. 161. Let particular churches walk as they ſhould regularly and they have as much liberty as they can deſire; if they walk irregularly See Mr. Cottons Keyes 53.54. the ſecond Impreſſion.I ſaw this notion did not croſſe that Poſition, which I have held out, viz. That a particular Church organized, and walking regularly, may execute all the power of the Keyes within it ſelf. I ſee not how a particular Church in this caſe is at all hindred, for ſuch a Church to walke irregularly, and to claime exemption from all other Church-power, let thoſe, that will, be members of ſuch Churches, I deſire not to be ſo, but in ſuch Churches, where there may bee meanes to helpe a wicked heart.

4. In this notion I ſaw a way how Congregations, that have no Miniſters may have Miniſters ordained ſucceſſively by officers (which I am ſure was the old way) yea, and officers may be judged per pares and excommunicated; I ſaw it would bring in much order into Churches.

5. The practiſes I obſerved in New England that did imply ſuch a notion as this, did lead me much to it.

1. As that members of one Church did ſo frequently partake of the Sacraments, both the Lords Supper, and Baptiſme in other Churches; one Paſtor it may be might adminiſter the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, to the members of five or ſix Churches at one time; I know it is often ſaid that a Mayor of one Corporation, may adminiſter juſtice to the members of another Corporation, if they be under his juriſdiction, but he muſt not goe to them, but ſimilia ad pompam, non ad pugnam. The Analogie betweene a Commonwealth, and the Church will not hold, as I may touch afterward; but this I am ſure, according to that practiſe, that ſeven make a Church, they may admit five or ſix whole Churches, and a Paſtor choſen by none of them may adminiſter the Sacrament to them all at one time; but doe we finde whole Corporations goe to the Mayor of another Corporation for Juſtice? Mr. Philips Paſtor of the Church in Water-town, while Mr. Wilſon Paſtor of the Church of Boston was here in England, went to Boſton, and adminiſtred the Lords Supper to that Church p. 63(I was not then in the Country, but I heard of it ſoone after, when I went over with Mr. Wilſon) I know no ſin in that act. I thought to have given ſome Inſtances, how frequent this was in the Primitive Churches, Vind. Cath. à 192 ad 196for one Miniſter to act officially beyond the people, who elected him: But Mr. Hudſon (a man far more able) hath ſet down thoſe examples, which I would have given, and many more, to whom I referre the Reader; Yea, it was ordinary for the members of one Church to dwell one or two yeares; nay, ſix, or ſeven yeares in another Towne, and to partake of the Sacraments there as frequently, as any of the members of that Church: Indeed of late the Elders have not liked this, to have them live ſo remote from the inſpection of their owne officers, and therefore have required ſuch to joyne with the Church, where they dwell, this is good and orderly: The letters alſo of Recommendation, which the Churches make for the members, when they come over hither, requiring of the Churches here what communion, counſell, or comfort they ſhall need, promiſing the performance of the like debt to others, &c.

2. Alſo I ſaw, if a man were excommunicated out of one Church, he ſtood excommunicated out of them all, but if a man be disfranchiſed in one Corporation, another Corporation may receive him, and give him his freedome, if they pleaſe, this ſhews there is ſomething more in a Church, then in a Commonwealth.

3. I ſaw they preached frequently in other Churches, but that it ſhould be onelyonly, as gifted brethren, this is ſo harſh to conceive: I pray what act doth the mayor of one Corporation do in another Corporation like this, that carries authority in it? and that here we muſt diſtinguiſh of the Mayor, if he did this at home, he did it as a Mayor authoritatively, but in this Corporation he doth it as a private man?

Further, they are Miniſters or Paſtors onelyonly to thoſe, who elect, and the fraternity only elect (where there is no officer) but there are divers in the ſeverall Townes, who are not joyned to the Churches, ſo they did not elect, then it ſeemes they preach as paſtors, onelyonly to thoſe, who elected; but to the reſt of the Towne, as gifted men; conſequently, when God bleſſes their labours to the converſion of any of thoſe, they convert them (inſtrumentally) not as Miniſters of Chriſt, ordained, ſeparated p. 64to that worke, but onelyonly as gifted men; yea, they never convert any, as Miniſters, unleſſe ſome of thoſe, who elected them be cloſe hypocrites, and ſo they convert them; but ordinarily thoſe, who chooſe, are reputed godly already, and they are Miniſters only to them. Hence riſes that vile notion, that ſome here have taken up, That Paſtors ſhould preach onelyonly to the edification of the Saints, not to others.

4. I have heard ſince I came away, that when people have choſen an Officer, and had no Officers to ordaine him, that the Miniſters of other Congregations have done it, and the Confeſſion of Church-diſcipline by the Synod of New England, as alſo Mr. Hooker, Survey part. 2. pag. 59.allow as much.

5. If one Congregation ſhould prove pertinaciouſly ſcandalous, and hereticall, then though they doe not formally excommunicate ſuch a Congregation, yet all the Churches in the Country would proceed to the Non-communion of ſuch a Church; and for all the Churches to expreſſe ſo much to ſuch a Church, We do all renounce communion with you, &c. this amounts to a cenſure, and is equivalent to excommunication, containing in it all the effects, that appear in excommunication, and ſo I ſhould reckon my ſelfe as much excommunicated.

Mr. Burroughs ſaith, They may by a ſolemne act in the name of Chriſt, Iren. 43.refuſe any communion with them, till they repent. They may declare in the name of Chriſt, that theſe erring Churches are not to be received into fellowſhip with any Churches of Chriſt, nor to have communion one with another in the Ordinances of Chriſt; all this ſolemnly in Chriſts name: OnelyOnly ſome (may be) will ſay, if this be an Ordinance of Chriſt, bring out the texts to prove this, and then we ſhall ſee, if thoſe texts wil not beare it out, that the Churches united thus in this cenſure, have not ſome authority over that particular Church. If you goe to the old politie, the Synedrion had power over particular Congregations; if to light of nature, that will carry it; ſo that we muſt have texts to decide this Queſtion. For my part I muſt leave this to better heads.

Laying all together, the Churches ſeeme to pactiſe, as if there were ſuch a Church.

Some things there are, which a little trouble me in this notion, that make me not come off ſo roundly in receiving it; I queſtion not the Church-catholicke-viſible, but I meane that p. 65it is one organicall body, but as he ſaid Veritas eſt temporis filia, ſo I beleeve Time will cleave out this, but ſo much I ſee, as commands me to lean to that ſide.

I was thinking how dangerous this might prove; If the major part of the Catholick-viſible-church ſhould decline, grow ſuperſtitious &c. other Churches yet remaining pure, if they did not ſubject to the major part, what then? but I ſaw inconveniences alſo on the other ſide, if a Congregation be ſo entire, that they can elect, ordaine, and are exempted from all power, then Arians, Photinians, and all manner of Hereticks may elect, ordaine, &c. who ſhall deny them? and beſides, ſuppoſe the major part of Congregationall Churches ſhould decline, they would proceed to Non-communion of other particular Churches more pure, and this is in a manner all one.

Further, If ſo, then if a Miniſter be removed from one Congregation to another, or if his people ſhould dye, he now is but a private perſon, and may nor baptiſe, &c.

Hence alſo he muſt have another ordination when elected, and as oft as he is elected; I have not heard any there, but here alleadge it.I confeſſe I am not cleare in the practiſe; I have ſearched to finde what Scripturall grounds there were for it, but I find none that theſe Reverend Elders expreſſe; ſome have alleadged in conference, that Act. 13.3. Paul and Barnabas were ordained before, and now they are ordained againe: but I finde Mr. Hooker ſaying, To. 4. l. 4. c. 24. ſ. 25.here was no ordination to office at all. Survey part. 2. pag. 83. then I perceive this will not warrant it; I finde learned Chamier alſo of that opinion, he ſaith, So our Engliſh Annotations, and Calv. in Loc.there was not properly any ordination into a new Eccleſiaſticall office, but confirmatio miſſionis ad Gentes, ad quas nondum erant ex profeſsò miſſi. The Author of the Diatribe, ſaith they were Miniſters before, Act. 12. ult. but I doubt that place will not prove it, for their fulfilling of their Miniſtry or Charge there, may refer to C. 11.29, 30. the carrying of the relief to the Saints at Jeruſalem, which they might do, though no Apoſtles.

Here then we are in the dark what to judge of the text, if we reſt onelyonly upon mens opinions, there are many, who are for the contrary opinion, that here was ordination, as I have named before, and I thinke thoſe, whom Chamier quotes in the twentieth Section of the former Chapter, conceive ſo, ſaith he, Act. 13. Imponuntur manus Paulo, & Barnabae mittendis ad Evangelii praedicationem in Gentes, quid hoc eſt? Chryſoſtomus, Theophylactus p. 66Oecumenius, foreign, ad Apoſtolatum. Me thinkes when I ſee here are the ſame acts done, which are done at another Ordination, and there was no Ordination before, nor after, where any more acts were done, why this ſhould not be underſtood for Ordination, I know not: A man to be ſeparated to the work whereunto God called him (the worke of the Miniſtry) therefore to have prayer, faſting, and impoſition of hands, this was done at other Ordinations, when others were ſeparated, though not to be Apoſtles, as theſe were. I dare not ſay that theſe were not Apoſtles before now, becauſe I ſee ſo many Divines are of that opinion; for Barnabas we finde him made mention of, Act. 4.36. a Levite, and a man of excellent gifts, no doubt, as it appeares in Chap. 11. but to ſay he was an Apoſtle before, I doe not ſee it made ſo cleare, Act. 13.1. There were Prophets and Teachers, as Barnabas, ſo that Barnabas was one of them, but as yet not an Apoſtle, for we know theſe are diſtinguiſhed, Apoſtles, Prophets, &c. though I dare not gain-ſay it, but impute it rather to my ignorance; for Paul, there ſeemeth to bee more ſaid for him, Act. 9 for thoſe that ſay Ananias his impoſition of hands upon Paul, was to ſeparate him to the worke of his Apoſtleſhip (for that was one end of Impoſition of hands) I dare not oppoſe Divines in this, Pareus upon Gal. 1.1. when Paul ſaith he was an Apoſtle not by man, thinks he points to this Act. 9. but ſo he was not, though here he were firſt called to that office for his call was immediate, as Chamier notes. To. 4. l. 4. c. 24Gal 1:1Acts 9the 12. verſ. ſaith, He ſaw one in a viſion, putting his hands upon him, that he might receive his ſight, and Ananias ſaith, verſ. 17. The Lord hath ſent me, that thou mighteſt receive thy ſight, and be filled with the Holy Ghoſt. Now if that neceſſarily implyes that ergo now he was ordained to his Apoſtleſhip, I will not oppoſe, though it is poſſible that might be, though he were not yet an Apoſtle; and this is ſomewhat different from others, that firſt Ananias alone, ſecondly in a private houſe, (the queſtion is who were with Paul in the houſe) 3. before he was baptiſed, ſhould be ordained thus to be an Apoſtle, though I cannot oppoſe much, for if Chriſt will have it, it is orderly enough; but if they were men extraordinarily qualified, and not ſet apart to the office of their Apoſtleſhip, then this place of Act. 13.3. may be interpreted of their ordination to the office of their Apoſtleſhip. But ſuppoſe they were Apoſtles, yet wil this text be ſufficient proofe to maintaine, that Miniſters muſt bee newly ordained, if they remove from one particular Congregation to another? I am ſure there may bee ſufficient grounds, given, why they may remove; if indeed the caſe were now, as then it p. 67was with the Gentiles [Act. 11.19. The ſcattered Diſciples preached to the Jews onelyonly, but the G entiles had none ſent among them before in this manner, as thoſe were ſent (though Peter had beene with Cornelius) to be Apoſtles of the Gentiles) we might allow a ſecond Ordination: In Antiquity we do not finde a ſecond Ordination made mention of; ſomething we finde to the contrary, as in that Tract of Cyprian, which though it may be proved not to be Cyprians owne, yet no doubt the Authour may be as ancient as Cyprian, written in his time, as Pamelius obſerves, neither doth Goulartius oppoſe him in it; De Ablutione pedumNemo ſacros ordines ſemel datos iterum renovat, &c.

In the 67. Can. Apoſt. thus, Si quis Epiſcopus, aut Presbyter, aut Diaconus, ſecundam ab aliquo ordinationem ſuſceperit, deponiter tàm ipſe, quam qui ipſum ordinavit, niſi forte conſtet ordinationem eum babere ab haereticis, &c.

Auguſtine ſpeaking of Baptiſme and Ordination ſaith, Contra permian l. 2. c. 13.Ʋ trumque enim Sacramentum eſt, & quadam conſecratione utrumque homini datur, illud cum baptizatur, iſtud cum ordinatur; ideoque in Catholicâ utrumque non licet iterari. To the ſame purpoſe he ſpeakes in his booke, de bono conjugali, contra Jovin. c. 24.

From which places I gather it was not their manner to iterate Ordination; indeed Scripture and ſtrong Argument, is more then humane Teſtimony; but that is not ſufficient to ſay, Ordination is but the approbation of a perſon conſtituted in his office, unleſſe it could be proved that Ordination is no more, which will eaſily be denyed.

For our Moderne Divines, I do not know any that maintaine this iteration of Ordination, in caſe a man remove from the place where he was firſt ordained.

The ſecond Argument which Reverend Mr. Hooker uſeth to prove that Election gives the eſſentials, &c. is this:

It is lawfull for the people to reject a Paſtor upon juſt cauſes, and put him out of his office, ergo, it is in their power to Call him outwardly, and put him into his office. By this Rejection, he means Excommunication, for ſo he ſaith afterward, This rejection cuts him off from being a member, &c. So conſequently it muſt needs make him ceaſe from being an officer.

For that phraſe of putting him into his office, if it be taken ſecundum quid, and as to their officer, it hath not beene oppoſed, p. 68but if taken abſolutely, that their election makes him a Miniſter, (as Mr. Hooker doth) that is it which is denied.

As for the Antecedent, whether people have power to reject, (or if you meane Excommunication, as it ſeemes that is meant) that is another queſtion; If there be officers, and the people conſent with them to caſt out an officer, pertinaciouſly ſcandalous and hereticall, none doubt of that; but for the people, being but a homogeneall body, to reject, i.e. excommunicate an oſſicer, will coſt more to prove; had Reverend Mr. Hooker beene alive, and ſaw what work Church-members make here in England in very many Churches, I thinke it would have cauſed him to bethinke himſelfe againe of the peoples power. Something we heare of, is done in a Church not farre from the place where he lived, it cannot be kept cloſe; the light of that fire ſhines into England. For the people to withdraw their ſubjection from ſuch an officer, when there are no other officers to joyne with them to excommunicate him, this is not denied, for by their ſubjection to him, they made him their officer (that was ſome part) ſo they may withdraw their ſubjection againe.

But for Excommunication, Mr. Cotton ſaith, It is one of the higheſt acts of rule in the Church, Keys p. 16and therefore cannot be performed but by ſome Rulers.

Mr. Burroughs ſaith, Iren. 51.If the Church be without officers, they cannot doe that which belongs to officers to doe, they have no Sacraments amongſt them, neither can they have any ſpirituall juriſdiction exerciſed amongſt them, onelyonly brotherly admonition, and withdrawing from ſuch as walke diſorderly, for their owne preſervation.

So then here is a way for the people to preſerve themſelves though they cannot excommunicate, and thoſe Texts which Reverend Mr. Hooker brings, Matth. 7.15. and Phil. 3.2. doe not prove the Church, as a homogencal body, to have power to excommunicate their officers, though they may prove withdrawing, as alſo Rom. 16.17. may prove it.

For the reaſon of his conſequence, that ſtaple rule, ejuſdem eſt Inſtituere, deſtituere, this maxime is turned every way, ſometimes to prove the people may excommunicate their officers, becauſe they doe Inſtituere.

The people in Election put forth no act of juriſdiction, therefore they may put forth the higheſt act of juriſdiction, in excommunication; that there is no act of juriſdiction in election, p. 69Doctor Ames acknowledgeth; Ovas rationales poſſunt eligere ſibi Paſtorem, ſicut ſponſa eligit ſibiſponſum, non per juriſdictionem aut Gubernationem ſed potius per ſubjectionem. In the anſwer before he affirmes the ſame, and elſe-where: now what arguing is this, Bellar. ener. to. 2 l. 3. c. 2. S. 19. Ib. S. 13.to argue from ſubjection, to the higheſt Act of Juriſdiction? there was no Authority in election, for electio non cogit [yet there is more power ſeene in Civill elections, then Church-elections, as I ſhall touch afterward] but in Excommunication, Authority appeares. That alſo is denied, that the people doe inſtituere in conſtituted Chruches, and ordinarily what may be done in an extraordinary caſe is no ordinary rule.

Here the maxime is turned, to prove that they may Jnſtituere, becauſe they can deſtituere, but that will be denyed, unleſſe it be in the ſence before mentioned, i. e. in what manner, and how farre they did inſtituere, i.e. by a ſubjection to be their Officer, ſo they may with-draw their ſubjection from him, and not owne him to be their Officer; but to Excommunicate is more.

Queſt. But ſuppoſe this be granted, that the Fraternity cannot excommunicate ;their Officer, but with-draw their ſubjection they may, you ſay, and ſo he ceaſes to be their Officer; but what, is he now an Officer to other Churches?

A. If the with-drawing their ſubjection, and rejecting be irregular, then though they make him not their Officer de facto, [which he is ſtill de jure] yet his relation to the Church-Catholick viſible doth ſtill hold, and another Church giving him a Call, he hath then power actu ſecund… to adminiſter the Ordinances there.

For inſtance, the ſeparatiſts caſt off him, whom before they choſe for their Officer, ſuppoſing now, unleſſe he will renounce his ordination he is no Miniſter, doth he therefore ceaſe to be a Miniſter? how bufie ſome Congregationall Churches are in with-drawing from their Officers, it is too manifeſt, and many goe to the Anabaptiſts, ſome turne Seekers, and-if all the Members doe thus, doe they now ceaſe to be Miniſters?

2 But if the with-drawing be regular, the cauſe juſt, tried, &c. then that which is ſufficient ground for their with-drawing from him, is juſt cauſe, why he ſhould be excommunicated, being pertinaciouſly ſcandalous, or Hereticall, as Mr. Hooker p. 70ſuppoſeth. If then the caſe of a Church be ſo, as they are caſt by providence into ſome remote place, where are no Churches beſides to combine with, then as their election of him, &c. [as I ſaid before] may ſupply the want of ordination; ſo this with-drawing in ſuch an extraordinary caſe may be Analogum to excommunication; but (ſay our Divines) if that Church be in combination with other Churches, as now under a Claſſis, then the people ſhall not need to ſtay there, in their with-drawing, but the caſe being judged and tryed by the Claſſis, they as they ordained him, when the people elected him [the people conſenting] doe excommunicate him; then as a man caſt out of one Church, is caſt out from the Catholick Church viſible; ſo he who is caſt out from being an Officer to this Church, is caſt out from being a Miniſter to the Church-Catholicke viſible.

For the other Argument, Burro. Iren. p. 50 Nort. reſp. ad Apoll. p. 76, 78the people conveying of power to an Officer; I know of no power the people conveyes, only a deſignation of ſuch a perſon to officiate in this or that Society; but their power they receive from Chriſt immediatly (as our Congregationall men affirme) and hence they act in his Name, not in the name of the Church.

5 The laſt anſwer I would give to this Propoſall is this; if you conceive this to be the only way of Reformation, then you muſt give the Miniſters ſtrong proofe that you may ordaine; the Miniſters will as much queſtion your power to ordaine, as you queſtion the Biſhops power; ſo that we take it for granted you are able to prove this, becauſe you are ſo punctuall, you ſay, for reforming by the word. But of this practiſe I much doubt.

1 My ground is, becauſe I finde not one Iota of any ſuch thing in the New Teſtament.

Obj. Though you doe not in the New Teſtament, yet in the Old Teſtament there is, Numb. 8.10.

A. That place is the only reſuge, but

1 It is commonly anſwered, That it is no faire arguing to goe to the Old Teſtament for one thing we would have, and when another comes to the ſame Politie for an argument for their turne, now to debarre them, and tell them this is the old Politie; either leave out the Jewiſh Politie altogether, or elſe give others leave to fetch Arguments from thence, as well as your ſelves.

p. 712 If you will goe to that Politie, why may I not as well prove, That the Civill Magiſtrate may ordaine, as well as Moſes did Aaron, Levit. 8.?

3 But in that Church at that time there were Officers, Aaron and his ſonnes, thence (if that be a rule) it muſt follow, that though there be Officers in a Church, yet the people may ordaine, which I am ſure thoſe Divines, who are for the peoples power in ordination, will never admit, being croſſe to their owne Principles, and Scripture.

4 We finde in the eleventh verſe, that after that was done, Aaron did wave theſe Levites before the Lord, ſo that they were not compleat till Aaron had done his Act; whence I remember learned Maſter Cotton (in his diſcourſe with me) ſaid, the peoples foreign there, did but anſwer to the peoples foreign in the New Teſtament, and Aarons waving of them did anſwer to our foreign: this clauſe only I remember, but he had a larger anſwer, which I tooke from him in diſcourſe, by which, I remember, he did enervate this Objection, but I loſt his notes, with all my other helps, in my ſhipwrack.

Theſe men call for precept and example, give you us one for this in the New Teſtament, for you put us to that alſo, we muſt give you them out of the New Teſtament; yea, Iwould goe further, and deſire them to give me one examplein the firſt ſix hundred yeares after Chriſt, that ever the people did ordaine their Miniſter; now this is ſtrange to me, that we can finde no foot-ſtep of any ſuch thing in the Scripture, nor in the Ages next, and yet that we ſhould make it ſo frequent, that they muſt ordaine moſt frequently; for if every particular Church be Independent (as now ſuch a Church where I am in a ſmall Village, where the maintenance will not keep one Miniſter, and therefore to be ſure we cannot have more Miniſters) then if the Miniſter remove, or dye, if there come a new Miniſter, the people muſt ever ordaine, thus it muſt be in moſt places in England, few will be excepted; Iuſtin. Mart. Apol. 2and if every new election muſt have a new ordination, then it muſt alwayes be in the peoples power; In the Primitive times, there were Churches in Cities, and Villages, but that the Chriſtians in Villages did ordaine their Officers, I would gladly ſee that proved.

Ordination in thoſe times was carried by a continued ſucceſſion, the Apoſtles ordained ſome Miniſters, thoſe ordained others, p. 72ſo downwards, but never by the people.

Learned Dr. …ell. ener. to. 2. l. 3. c. 2. ſ. 6Ames ſeemes to anſwer this; for whereas Bellarmine had ſaid, In novo Teſtamento ubicun que mentio fit manunm impoſitionis, ſemper ea Apoſtolis caeteriſque Epiſcapis, nunquàm vero plebi tribuitur. The Doctor anſwers to this; In Hiſtoriâ novi Teſtamenti, exempla babemus conſtitutionis Miniſterii, & ejuſdem etiam conſervationis, ſed non reſtaurationis ejus aut reformationis poſt generalem Apoſtaſiam; omnia igitur quae pertinent ad plebem fidelem, in tali caſu non repreſentantur ibi certis exemplis. However theſe words ſeeme to carry it, as if the Doctor did hold, that the people had this power, in a generall Apoſtaſie, yet I queſtion whether the Doctor would looke upon the Churches of England now under ſuch a notion, neither would he deny the ordination of our Miniſters, to be valid for ſubſtance; but yet here one might caſt in ſomething, in times of Reformation it may be, he ſaith:

1 To Reforme the Miniſter, is to Forme it now as it was firſt formed.

But the Miniſtry was not at firſt formed by the people, ergo the Miniſtry cannot be now reformed by the people.

I thinke the Major will not be denyed, for the Minor, let any prove that. According to this ſome will ſay, We muſt have Apoſtles, they formed the Miniſters firſt [we ſpeake of ordination] I ſay, Non ſequitur, unleſſe you can prove the Apoſtles ordained only quâ Apoſtles; if ſo, I know not how thoſe Miniſters, whom the Apoſtles did ordaine, could ordaine others, but to be ſure they did.

2 I defire a text of Scripture that holds out this, that the people may ordaine in a generall Apoſtaſie.

3 I doubt we ſhall rarely finde ſuch times, when there is a Society of godly Chriſtians to ordaine, but there is ſome Miniſters alſo; ordinarily there are Miniſters who teach this people.

4 It will be a queſtion, Whether the Apoſtaſie hath been ſuch as to require this, for if Baptiſme was not repeated, but was thought valid, though adminiſtred by a Romiſh Miniſter, becauſe he was ſet apart to the worke, and kept the eſſence of the ordinance, why might not the ordination adminiſtred by thoſe Miniſters hold as well?

2 A ſecond ground that makes me doubt is this, it ſeemes ſtrange to me, that Chriſt ſhould appoint extraordinary officers, p. 73and make that a part of their work, which the people themſelves may doe; Paul leaves Titus to ordaine, but what needs that? the people might well ſay, what need Paul leave Titus to do that, which we can doe our ſelves? Fruſtra fit per plura, &c. the Apoſtles never needed but to preach, and convert the people to the faith, when they had done ſo, they ſhould have ſaid, we have now done our worke, brought you to be beleevers, you may now elect an Officer, and ordaine him your ſelves, the power is yours, (onelyonly here would have been ſome trouble about baptizing) ſince then I finde, that this was part of thier Office, then I cannot beleeve this is the peoples worke. Paul might eaſily have left us a preſident in ſome Society of Chriſtians, that would have quieted all our diſputes.

More might be ſaid (and is ſaid by others) but I ſee our New England Divines do almoſt yeeld it, by giving power to ſome Miniſters to ordaine in other Congregations.

Since nothing can be drawn from Scripture, by precept, or example to prove this, hence ſome would draw it out by Argument.

Thoſe who can do the greater, may doe the leſſe.

The people can doe the greater, viz. elect.

Ergo,

The minor is as freely denyed, as it is affirmed, election is not the greater, Scripture-light being judge. That was the deſigne I doubt of making Ordination but an Adjunct, for ſo indeed it would eaſily bee granted, if election gives the eſſence, and this only be an adjunct, the people may well ordaine; Yea, and in a Church, where there are Officers to Ordaine, I know not why they, who give the eſſence may not give the adjunct, why ſhould an adjunct be proper to the Officers only in that Church, when the eſſence doth not belong to them, Mr. N. W. Omnis quaeſtio non per aliud quod quaeritur babebit reſolutionem nec ambiguitas per ambiguitatem, ſed ex elaris manifestis, &c. Irenae l. 2. c. 10.further then as members, they joyne with the people? for ſo it ſeemes the Officers elect as members, and if you doe elect only as members, why ſhould you not alſo ordaine as members? for election is the greater, this the leſſe.

The other Argument is, the people are the firſt ſubject of the power of the keyes. Ergo: But this is not eaſily yeelded; it was a witty ſpeech of him, Let the Elders keep the keyes, and the people the keyclog; it proves ſo too often. What our Divines have ſaid about it is well knowne. I thinke they have battered this notion pretty well.

Auguſtine ſometime is quoted for this opinion, but I am confident it was never in Auguſtines thoughts; In Evan. Joan. Tract. 50. Tract. 124. I am miſtaken, if he be not rather for the Catholick Church p. 74by his words eſpecially in the latter place quoted, not mentioning what other Divines have ſpoken, there are two or three things that have made me doubt of this, ſo as I never did throughly cloſe with this notion, when I was but a private member of a Church.

1. That which is the primum ſubjectum, is the proprium ſubjectum: none doubt of this, Proprium ſubjectum eſt quod cum ſuo accidente reciprocatur. Animal eſt proprium ſubjectum ſenſus, homo riſus, hence we ſay, omnis homo eſt riſibilis, & omne riſibile eſt homo, this is Axioma foreign: but every Axiome that is foreign doth include in it the rule foreign, where the predicate is true de omni ſubjecto, omni loco, omni tempore, this is true of animal & ſenſus. So it muſt be true of the power of the keyes and the Fraternity, Omni tempore; but if we finde the power of the keyes exerciſed before there was a Fraternity, then there was ſome other ſubject before the Fraternity; When Paul came to Corinth, he preached Authoritativè, Ergo there was the power of the keyes in ſome ſubject, but the Fratemity was Non-ens at this time, how then could they be the ſubject?

Thoſe, who are the effect of the power of the keyes, are not the firſt ſubject, that is clear.

But the Fraternity is the effect; it was ſo in all the Churches, which the Apoſtles gathered, and is indeed to this day. This was one Argument troubled me.

So that which is primum, is immediatum ſubjectum: but how can this be? ſince Mediantibus Apoſtolis, and ſo now Mediantibus Miniſtris the Fraternity is made: The elector is before the elected: its true of Chriſt, who elected the Apoſtles, and gave to them the keyes, from whom by a continued ſucceſſion of Miniſters ſtill the Fratemity was made; but had not the power of the keyes had ſome effect, there had not been a Fraternity to chooſe an Officer: though they are now in time before him, whom they now elect, yet they were not before him or them [quâ fratres] who by the power of the keyes in the miniſtry made them capable to chooſe an Officer; therefore the power of the keyes was in ſome ſubject before them.

Beſides election is no part of the power of the keyes, Doma: log. p. 461. Keckes. ſyſt: log. l. 2. c. 20.therefore to argue, the people elect, ergo they are the firſt ſubject, &c. is fallacia non cauſae procanſâ [cauſae nomen hic uſurpat ur pro quo vis argumento] taking that to be a part of the power which is not.

2 If ſo, that which is primum, est abſolutum ſubjectum, cui accidens abſolutè ſint ulla limitatione partis inharet: ſic animal eſt p. 75abſolutum ſubjectum ſenſus, adeoque viſus & auditus; ideoque tantum animal dicitur rectê videre & audire: oculus non videt propriè, quia non eſt Animal: quando ergo oculus dicitur videre, id non ſubjectivè intelligendum eſt, ſed inſtrumentaliter, quod animal videat per oculum. To apply this to our caſe, the power of the keyes is in the whole body, ſo the power of preaching &c. there is the power ſubjectivè & propriè; ſo that if we aske who preached to day, we muſt anſwer, properly and ſubjectively the people preached, but inſtrumentally only the Paſtor preached; ſo for the adminiſtration of the Sacraments, this is very harſh; hence againe, becauſe animal videt, if a man dye, or beaſt, the eye which was the inſtrument of ſeeing, excepting it may be the diſſipation of the animal ſpirits, elſe as an Organ, it remains intire in the coates, humors and optick nerves, but yet it ſees not.

So it ſeemes a Miniſter, in caſe his body, the people, ſhould dye, he being but the inſtrument of their preaching, he can preach no more: this is ſtrange; how doe they preach out of their own bodies ordinatily? If the men dye, and only women and children be left, the officer hath loſt his preaching, and cannot preach to them authoritatively, becauſe the Fraternity, in whom the power was ſubjectivè, is dead.