An Apology for the Discipline of the Ancient Church, Part 1 · Section 5

An Apology for the Discipline of the Ancient Church · Part 1 · Section 5

p. 11SECT. V. The words of the Letter.

ANd that the Church of the laſt and longeſt conſtitution was a Preſbyterial or Combinational Church, whoſe commendable opinion and practice (and that without any ground of contradiction in the beſt judgement p. 12of unbyaſſed beleevers) it is quietly and cordially to ſubject the earthy, erring and unruly will of every creature therein unto the heavenly, infallible, and uncontrolable will of Chriſt: who peremptorily wills and enjoynes all his profeſſed ſubjects, and profeſſing Church-members to be indoctrinated and diſciplined by the preſcribed miniſtery of theſe Presbyters or teaching and ruling Elders that are of their own voluntary election and regular ordination. Whoſe office-extent reacheth from Chriſts aſcenſion to the Creations diſſolution: as is witneſſed by what is written, Acts 6.5. & cap. 14.23. Rom. 12.7, 8. 1 Cor. 12.8, 28. Epheſ. 4.7, 14. Rev. 4.6. & 5.6. & 19.4.

3. A harmleſſe motion by you.And here you make this harmleſſe motion by me, That you would reſolve (in time whoſe you are, and in whoſe hand your life and whole time is) to reveale and manifeſt unto ſome of yours, ſomewhat at leaſt of that much, which the loving and liberal Lord, and lender of pounds and talents did ſee good to commit to the care of your conſcience. This is a third motion, which I was ſtirred up to ſpread before you. This motion is my harmleſſe motion by you.

Reply.

I Do very willingly embrace this motion, and becauſe I account you in the number of thoſe you are pleaſed to call [ſome of yours] I ſhall begin with your ſelf, and reveale and manifeſt (according to the talent which my good Lord hath beſtowed on me) to you firſt what I judge of this Section, after of the reſt. And that the truth may the better appear, I proceed to anſwer methodically; I ſhall reduce your diſcourſe to theſe propoſitions, and after examine them. Of which the firſt is,

1. That the Church of the laſt and longeſt conſtitution was a Presbyterial or Combinational Church.

2. That the commendable opinion and practice of this Church is quietly and cordially to ſubject the earthy, erring, unruly will of every creature therein to the heavenly, infallible and uncontrolable will of Chriſt. This propoſition is ſo certain, that it needs no diſpute or proof. OnelyOnly I ſhall enquire whether you have performed it.

3. That Chriſt peremptorily wills and enjoynes all his profeſſed ſubjects and profeſſing Church-members to be indoctrinated and diſciplined by the preſcribed Miniſtery. None will deny this but Quakers. Neither do I well ſee how Itinerants can readily yield ſo much.

4. That this preſcribed Miniſtery muſt conſiſt of Presbyters, or teaching and ruling Elders.

5. That theſe Presbyters, teaching and ruling Elders muſt be of the profeſſing members own voluntary Election, and regular Ordination.

6. That their Office-extent reacheth from Chriſts aſcenſion, to the Creations diſſolution. This is granted in a right ſenſe.

7. And for all this you bring your proofs out of the Scripture, Acts 6.5. Acts 14.23. &c.

p. 13This is the Analyſis of the whole, and I deſcend to examine it by the parts, and ſhall open the Scriptures as I conceive they referre to the propoſition.

Propoſition 1. That the Church of the laſt and longeſt conſtitution was a Presbyterial or Combinational Church.

THat the Church you meane, viz. the Church of Chriſt is to be laſt, is eaſily granted; but whether to be the longeſt or no, is more than you or I, or any man elſe can tell. But to let this paſſe. Hic opus eſt Oedipo; for I conceive not well the ſenſe of your propoſition, becauſe you phraſe it Presbyterial, or Combinational, ſince theſe two by the contending parties are made Diſparata, and then muſt really differ. I know not therefore what to make of this; Or whether it be here a Diviſive or an Explanative particle. If you make it Diviſive, then it ſeemes not to agree with your following words; for you know that thoſe of the Presbyterial Church, though they will allow your profeſſing members liberty to elect, yet they ſtoutly, and with open mouth decry their power to Ordaine: and you allow the Church you ſpeak of to do both. If you make Or Expoſitive, then it can but onelyonly declare the ſenſe of the former word Presbyterial, and will be farre from your intent, which is, if I miſtake not, that all the profeſſing members of a Church be combined in a Church Covenant, which you know the Presbyterial Church will never admit. For although Presbyters can be content to be in their own ſenſe Covenanters, yet they abominate to be in a Church-Combination; and again, though the Church combiners will joyne in a Church Covenant, yet they will not yield to be Presbyterial Covenanters.

Theſe Diſparata then are not hanſomely coupled in this place, neither can I gueſſe at any other intent you have in it, except it be to Umpire betwixt the two parties, by finding out a Church that ſhould be both Presbyterial and Combinational, which hitherto the heat of zeale would never ſuffer the learnedeſt of both ſides to do. For the Presbyterians condemne your Combination by a Church Covenant as a Chimera, a fancy, a novelty, a meere humane invention, contrary to Chriſts Ordinance, and deſtructive of all Church power: And the Combiners on the other ſide, judge as harſhly of the Presbyterian Elderſhips in the whole reformed Churches, as of the Prelacy: nay and worſe too, if Baſtwicks words be true, which he hath in the Poſtſcript of his ſecond part, page 6. viz. The Presbyterial government not ſuiting with the humour of the Independents, they abhorre it, and all ſuch as endeavour to eſtabliſh it, and wiſh rather that the old trumpery were brought in again, and profeſſe they had rather have the government of Prelates. That which follows I forbear, that I offend not. Thus Baſtwick; which if true, 'tis not poſſible that a Presbyterial p. 14and a Combinational Church ſhould be all one as you ſeeme to make it. And therefore you muſt forgo one of the termes, and make it onelyonly Presbyterial, or onelyonly Combinational, if you will ſpeak intelligibly in this queſtion. But I ſhall make the beſt ſenſe I can of your words, and in order ſpeak to them both. And firſt of the Presbyterial Church which you call alſo Combinational, upon what ground I know not; for I meet with neither of theſe Epithets fixed to the Church of Chriſt in the Scriptures, nor in any antiquity. The firſt of theſe is new, and and the ſecond naught; for I never read of a Combination in a good ſenſe. Why can we not ſpeak as good Chriſtians have done before us, and call it the Chriſtian, Catholick, and Apoſtolical Church, but muſt pleaſe our fancies with theſe new termes of Presbyterial, or Combinational?

Act. 20.28, &c. Col. 1.24. and 13. Act. 11.26. Epheſ. 2.20.Acts 20:28Col 1:24Col 1:13Acts 11:26Eph 2:20I often read in the Scriptures of the Church of God, and that this Church is the Body of Chriſt, the kingdom of Chriſt; to whom becauſe it was united by faith it was called Chriſtian. And that this Church was built upon the foundation of the Prophets & Apoſtles, Jeſus Chriſt himſelf being the chief corner ſtone. Whence it was called Apoſtolike. And again that this Church is Totum integrale, Ameſ. medulla. lib. 1. c. 31. Sect 19.of which the parts quae totum integrant, are all ſeveral and particular Churches diffuſed in all Nations, in all places, at all times, whence it was called Catholick. But of a Presbyterial or Combinational Church I hear not.

Good Sir, conſider how harſh it ſounds to ſtile Chriſts Church the Preſbyters Church, and the number of the Profeſſors that are united by faith to Chriſt, to be combined in I know not what. But now I ſhall take into conſideration theſe termes ſeverally, and firſt I will begin with the laſt.

1. A Combinational Church. The firſt Author whom I meet with, it is Ameſius, and he defines it to be Parochialis, vel unius congregationis, cujus membra inter ſe Combinantur; lib. 1. c. 39. Sect 22. cap. 2. Sect. 4.there's your word, & ordinarie conveniant in uno loco ad publicum religionis exercitium. This your Synod at Cambridge in New England, choſe rather to call Congregational; for the word Independent they like not, (though I ſee no cauſe of diſlike, if the particular Congregations muſt not depend one of another, but remaine in full liberty, as Ames delivers in the ſame chapter, Sect. 20. & 26, 27.) And thus you there define this Congregational Church to be a company of Saints by calling, united into one body by a holy Covenant for the publick worſhip of God.

But I pray you tell me what needs this combination by a ſecond Covenant? would not the firſt in Baptiſme have ſerved, if heeded and kept, to have done all this? and it ſeemed it did, by the very text your Synod produces to prove it, Acts 2.42. For the Penitents and beleevers pricked to the heart by Peters ſermon, gladly received the word, and were baptized, and continued ſtedfaſtly in the Apoſtles doctrine and fellowſhip, and in breaking of bread, and in prayer, &c. where we read of their Baptiſme, and continuance in Church-fellowſhip, and in the duty of that fellowſhip; but that this is done by a combination, a confederation or holy Covenant, a Vow, p. 15other than that made in their Baptiſme, we read not.

2. And indeed it needs not; for what is it that Profeſſors can binde themſelves unto by Covenant, when they are admitted into the Congregation, that they have not in their Baptiſme bound themſelves to before? Whether you ſhall conſider the Myſtery, the Form, or the end.

1. In Baptiſme for the Myſtery there is an Indument, and a ſtripping,Rom. 13.14. Gal. 3.27.Rom 13:14Gal 3:27 which the ancient Church reduced to two words, Credo, Abrenuncio: In the firſt there is the putting on of the Lord Jeſus Chriſt: For as many as are baptized have put on Chriſt. Firſt, as Lord, acknowledging no other Maſter, whoſe voice to hear, whoſe doctrine to rely upon, but onelyonly his. Secondly, as Jeſus, aſſuring themſelves, that there is no other Name given under heaven whereby they may be ſaved. Thirdly, As Chriſt, as well their anointed King ſubmitting themſelves to his will: giving their names in to fight under his banner, and ſwearing themſelves his ſubjects: As alſo their anointed Prieſt, reſting in his one ſacrifice as the onelyonly ſufficient; in his ſole interceſſion, as the onelyonly powerful. Secondly, In the Abrenuncio, or ſtripping part, they renounce and forſake the Devil,Gal. 5.20.Gal 5:20 and all his works, the pompes and vanities of the wicked world, the ſinful luſts of the fleſh, among which are all Hereſies and Schiſmes.

2. For the forme it is by our Saviour appointed in the name of the three perſons of the indiviſible Trinity, and ſo it is performed; neither of Cephas the ſirnamed Rock, nor of Paul a great Apoſtle.Mat. 28.19. 1 Cor. 1.13.Matt 28:191 Cor 1:13 The reaſon wherof you may read in my expoſition of the Church Catechiſme, page 172, 173.

3. For the end, they which are baptized are thereby made the ſonnes of God by Adoption and Grace, inveſted with an inheritance everlaſting:Gal. 3.26. Rev. 1.5. Mal. 1.11. Rom. 12.1. Col. 3.5.Gal 3:26Rev 1:5Mal 1:11Rom 12:1Col 3:5 made Prieſts to God, to offer and ſlay: To offer that mund…m oblationem, pure offering, or living ſacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is their reaſonable ſervice, viz. the cleane and unbloody ſacrifice of prayers and thankſgiving: and then to ſlay themſelves, mortifying their affections and luſts.

Yea but men may be minded of all this by a new Covenant, and upon a ſecond engagement made more watchful to keep their firſt vow. Be it ſo, for this alſo the Church had provided, without this ſeparating combination, when ſhe ordained, that all baptized children when they could ſay their Catechiſm, ſhould be brought to the Biſhop to be Confirmed, which order; were it in uſe, and reſtored to its original purity, the wrangle about the formality of a Church, Covenant, and collecting of members might be quieted and compoſed; There being in Confirmation the ſubſtance of what is ſo much and ſo hotly contended for, and that farre better grounded and bottomed than any new device can be, as I ſhew you in my Catechiſme, page 6.

Thirdly, This Elogy you give to your Combinational Church, that it is their opinion and practice quietly and cordially to ſubject their earthy, erring, and unruly wit, to the heavenly, infallible, and uncontrolable will of Chriſt.

That ſo it ſhould be I confeſſe and deſire; but how it is we ſee and feele p. 16ever ſince the Combination. But what now is this but an opinion, and onelyonly commendable? I thought it had been neceſſary, & de fide; that it muſt be ſo, and could not be otherwiſe. For Opino is eutis vel non e… tis. You ſhall have it in Ameſius words. Aſſenſus ille qui praebetur veritati contingenti propter rationem pracipuè probabilem ab intellectu apprehenſam, Medulla. 1. Theſ. de fidei divina unitate.opinio vocatur. The truth muſt be contingent and probable onelyonly, of which a man retaines an opinion; it may be, it may not be; if no other reaſon can be produced for it, but a Topical. But that all men muſt ſubject their earthy will to the heavenly Will of Chriſt is ſo certain, that it cannot be denyed by any good Chriſtian: Hereafter let it paſſe then for neceſſary, and let it be a principle of faith, which is more than opinion.

2. But you go on and ſay; This hath been the commendable practice of your Combinational Church. But here you muſt give me leave to think; for if I would ſay what I know, I ſhould fetch blood and perhaps pay for it too. Your Combination was for the worſhip of God, and that cultus naturalis inſtitutus, Ameſius ſo divides it; the principles of the firſt are faith, hope, charity; the acts, hearing of the Word and Prayer, under which is an Oath: Of the laſt, Gods preſcribed Will or his Word. This is the Rule; but whats become of the practice? I will not meddle with your faith, which yet you know in many of your Combinational Churches is not ſound, nor in the Socinians, nor Antimonians, nor in the Browniſts, Familiſts, nor the Anabaptiſts, nor the Quakers, nor the Singers. Theſe youle ſay are not of you, but are gone out from you; yet you cannot deny, that theſe are Combinational Churches. The practice then of all the Combinational Churches is not commendable in Gods worſhip in this reſpect. Your hope may be great, but I fear it may be preſumption, when the foundation of faith upon which it ſhould be built is ſo uncertain and tottering. As for the charity of your party in general, I finde it dying rather …uite dead; charity teacheth a man to love his neighbour as himſelf: charity to be juſt, and to do to all men, as he would all men do to him; Amongſt your Combinational Churches, what's become of this charity, this juſtice? Religiouſly obſervant a man may find divers of you of three of the Commandments of the firſt Table, but of the third, your practice ſhews you make little accompt; and as for the ſecond Table, he who ſhall lay to heart your actions, muſt needs conceive that you eſteeme it but for a cypher. I will no farther rake into this wound. I wiſh you had not given me occa… on to do it, when you affirmed that it was the commendable practice of your Combinational Church to ſubject their earthy, erring and unruly will quietly and cordially to the heavenly, infallible, and uncontrolable will of Chriſt, to which I finde their practice ſo contrary. I pray preſſe me not for inſtances, for I am reſolved not to give the… you. but if you are deſirous to be ſatisfied of the opinions and practice of the Combinational Church I aime at, be pleaſed to reade a book written by Robert Baily a Scot, entitled, A Diſſwaſive from the Errours of the times, Printed in London, 1645. and publiſhed by Authority. Where he makes a large Narrative of p. 17the opinions and practices of your Churches in New-England; and whether he ſayes true or no, you can beſt judge, becauſe you were upon the place. If true, all is not gold that gliſters.

2 A Presbyterial Church.

THis is your other Epithet, and I ſuppoſe you mean by it a Church to be governed by Presbyters. The word foreign is equivocal, and therefore till it be diſtinguiſhed, nothing can be concluded from it.

1. Presbyter in the Old Teſtament properly belongs to the Elders of the people, either in a common notion, or as members of the Sanhedrim: not any body or perſons peculiarly Eccleſiaſtique, Numb. 11.16. Nay,Godw. ant. l. 5. c. 1. it is diſtinguiſhed from it; for in the Civil Conſiſtory the Judges were called Elders; in the ſpiritual prieſts, Matth. 21.23. & 26.3. The chief Prieſts and Elders of the people are named as two diſtinct Conſiſtories, though Voſſius, Doctor Hammon, Downham and Weames admit not this diſtinction.

2. foreign in the New Teſtament ſometimes, but rarely, is taken in the ſame ſenſe as in the Old. But moſt commonly it is attributed to an Order of Eccleſiaſtiques, whether in a higher or a lower Order and degree.

3. foreign is by the maintainers of the Congregational and Conſiſtorial Church taken for a mixed company of Lay men and Eccleſiaſticks, to whoſe government they ſuppoſe the power of the Keys is committed, and this they call the Presbyterial Church; and if I am not deceived, of this you ſpeak in this place.

But againſt this I affirme, that there never was any ſuch Presbyterial Church before Calvin, and to that purpoſe I here propoſe, and hope to make good theſe Propoſitions againſt any opponent.

1. That there muſt be government in the Church.

2. That Chriſt inſtituted this government, and Governours for it.

3. That this government muſt be perpetual.

4. That the Apoſtles were thoſe Governours for the time; and for perpetuity, their Succeſſors appointed by them.

5. That their Succeſſors were Biſhops in Name and Office.

6. That for the execution of this Office Chriſt gave to the Apoſtles the Keys, and they to their Succeſſors onelyonly.

7. That this power conſiſted in Ordination and Juriſdiction, and therefore that they onelyonly could ordaine, and juridically proceed.

8. That at firſt the Apoſtles, and after the Biſhops, did both without a Presbytery.

9. Yet that by the Apoſtles a Presbytery was inſtituted in ſome Churches, who were Eccleſiaſtiques onelyonly.

10. That yet none of theſe Presbyters were Biſhops, but aſſiſtants onelyonly, being diſtinct from them.

11. That this Presbytery without the Biſhop, could not uſe the Keys.

p. 1812. That no Lay-man was of the Apoſtolical Presbytery, nor no Lay-man after for 1500. years.

13. That at firſt the people elected not any Church-Officer.

All theſe Propoſitions will require much time to be made good. I ſhall now therefore omit the demonſtration of them, and go on to you fourth and fifth Propoſition, where I ſhall uſe ſome of them.

Propoſition 4. Viz. That this preſcribed Miniſtery muſt conſiſt of Preſbyters, or Teaching and Ruling Elders.

THe ſubject of this Propoſition is the preſcribed Miniſtery, and it hath two Attributes. 1. The Presbyters. 2. Teaching and Ruling Elders, and both muſt be diſtinctly conſidered.

1. The preſcribed Miniſtery conſiſts of Presbyters. If by Presbyters you mean Presbyters in the ſecond acception, as it comprehends thoſe of an higher and thoſe of a ſubordinate degree, this part of your propoſition is moſt true, and it ſhall be granted you. But if you exclude the Biſhop properly ſo called, I abſolutely deny it. For the Apoſtles were Biſhops, Matthias elected foreign, Acts 1.20. There you have the Name, and accordingly the Fathers of the Church called them Apoſtolos, i. e. Epiſcopos. Dominus Elegit, Cyprian. Epiſt. 9. lib. 3.Cyprian. They had the power of the Keys promiſed, Matth. 16.19. Matth. 18.18. and actually eſtated on them, John 20.23. In theſe texts you have the power which lay in juriſdiction and ordination. In that was the office. The Apoſtles were then in Name and Office Biſhops.

This is performed in the ſecond part.I will give you a breviate of what I could ſay at large for the firſt Government of the Church. I finde onelyonly in Scripture mention of three Church-Officers, Biſhops, Presbyters, Deacons.

1. The higheſt function which was Epiſcopal, the Apoſtles reſerved to themſelves for ſome time, and that for three reaſons. At firſt there were but few convicted,Acts 14.27. 1 Cor. 16.Acts 14:271 Cor 16 whence their labour was imployed in turning the firſt Key, in opening the dore of faith, that great and effectual dore; and all the helps they could make either by Prophets, Evangeliſts, Coadjutors, Paſtors, Doctors, Planters, Waterers, to this purpoſe was little enough. But none of theſe qua tales, were Biſhops. 2. After the converſion of Jews and Gentiles, yet in many Churches they yet ſetled not a Biſhop; firſt, becauſe a Presbyter fit for a Biſhops office, is not ſo eaſily found; it is Saint Pauls rule, that foreign,Epiphan. a Novice, one newly come to the faith, be not made a Biſhop. Secondly becauſe while the Apoſtles remained in or near any place, they reſerved the power,1 Tim. 3.6.1 Tim 3:6 there being no need of Biſhops; The Apoſtles for that time ſupplying the wants of thoſe Churches, either with their preſence, letters, or meſſengers, as the cauſe required. 3. And yet there is a third reaſon; The Apoſtles ſuffered the Churches to make a trial what equality p. 19of many Governours would do; but when they found the fruits thereof to be diſſenſion, and that every one would be maſter, parity and plurality breeding diſſenſion and confuſion, they committed the Church to one. I ſhall ſet you down this in Hieromes words,Hieron. Com. in Epiſt. ad Titum. even in thoſe very words which are produced againſt Biſhops. Idem eſt Presbyter quod Epiſcopus, & autequam diaboli inſtinctu ſtudia in religione fierent, & diceretur in populis Ego ſum Pauli, ego Apollo, ego Cephae, communi Presbyterorum conſilio Eccleſiae gubernabantur. Poſt quam vero unuſquiſque eos quos baptizabat, ſuos putabat eſſe, non Chriſti, in to…o orbe decretum eſt, ut unus de Presbyteris electus ſuperponeretur cateris, ut Schiſmatum ſemina tollerentur. Haec diximus & oſtendim…s eoſdem fuiſſe Presbyteros, & Epiſcopos, & ut Epiſcopi noverint ſe magis conſuetudine, quam Dominicae diſpoſitionis veritate Presbyteris eſſe majores, & in communi debere Eccleſi…m rege e. I have recited theſe words of Hierome at full, becauſe in them there be many th…ngs clearly for me, and ſome other paſſages ſeemingly againſt me, to which I will give light.

Note here then firſt the cauſe of the Biſhops creation. 1. The cauſa foreign, or occaſion, was factions and Schiſmes; and the end, that Schiſmes might be taken away: ſo his words are, cum diceretur ego Pauli, &c. ut ſchiſmata tollerentur. Secondly, The time when the Biſhop was ordained, old enough; for it was in the Apoſtles dayes; for then it was ſaid ego Pauli ego Cephae, &c. 1 Cor. 1. a ſufficient authority I ſuppoſe for the Biſhops inſtitution: it muſt needs be granted Apoſtolical if it began then. Thirdly, this inſtitution was Decretum, and pray ſay, who then could decree except the Apoſtles; or durſt decree without them. Fourthly, that this Decree was generally aſſented to; for Decretum eſt toto orbe, it muſt be then Apoſtolical and Oecumenical. Fifthly, now conſider the words of the Decree, ut unus de Presbyteris electus ſuperponeretur caeteris. Rev. 2. & 3.Rev 21. It is Unus, it is One, not many, that the care of the Church might eſpecially belong to one. Chriſt directs his meſſage to the Angel individually of ſuch or ſuch a Church. 2. He muſt be Electus, of whom Hierome ſaith not, (of that more anon) but I dare ſay conſidering the time of which Hierome ſpeaks, it was not without the conſent of the Apoſtles, if not by them. 3. Note out of whom he was to be elected; it was de Presbyteris, and I ſhall prove unto you after that they were no Lay-men. 4. Ut ſuperponerentur caeteris. He was to be ſuper over the reſt, whether Clergy or Laity, and that not onelyonly in preheminence, honour, and dignity, but in power of juriſdiction alſo; for otherwiſe how could the end be obtained here aimed at? how could Schiſme be reſtrained and removed? Thus far you ſee what makes for me; and now I ſhall clear up, what ſeemingly makes againſt me in this teſtimony.

1. The fi…ſt words ſeeme againſt me. For Hierome ſaith, Idem eſt Preſbyter quod Epiſcopus. But he can meane no more than that the Biſhop is ſometimes called a Presbyter. The Names then may be common, that's true, but not the Office. Now the Office conſiſts in Ordination and Juriſdiction, as I ſhall by and by make appear. That Presbyter and Epiſcopus p. 20was Idem ordinatione, and conſequenly in Office, Jerome could not meane, except he ſhould contradict himſelf;Hieron. ad Evagium. Ordination he reſerves to a Biſhop, and debarres a Presbyter from it. Quid facit Epiſcopus, quod Presbyter non faciat, exceptâ ordinatione? Mark, the mood is potential; He may not do it, He may not meddle with Ordination, for that ſure belongs to the Biſhop in his own judgment. In this power then the Identity lies not. 2. He muſt then meane in Juriſdiction, and that this is his meaning, is apparent, by thoſe words Communi Presbyterorum conſilio Eccleſiae gubernabantur, which your ſide catch at too, as making for the preſent Ruling Presbytery, as indeed at the firſt ſight they may, but throughly lookt into, nothing at all. I will ſhew you where the miſtake lies. Firſt, in the word Presbytery; for yours apply it to the whole Presbytery, Lay and Clergy, whereas Hierom as is manifeſt, ſpeaks onelyonly of the Eccleſiaſtique; for it is of the Presbytery that was before or when thoſe Schiſmes reigned. Secondly, he ſaith gubernabantur in imperfecto; and when was that? in the Apoſtles dayes; for then in a Church that had a Presbytery without a Biſhop, put caſe at Corinth, or had a Presbytery with a Biſhop over them, as at Jeruſalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Epheſus, it is moſt true Communi Presbyterorum conſilio gubernabantur, the Presbyters were admitted in partem ſ…llicitudinis. It cannot be denied that the Apoſtles ordaining theſe Presbyters, had power in themſelves, and might have governed durante vita, alone retaining the power; when then they gave any power to others, it was deligated; for I hope they loſt none of their power in giving Orders. Whence it will follow, that the Presbyters when admitted in ſome acts of Juriſdiction with the Apoſtles, cannot challenge a right of governing affixed to their Order, qua Presbyteri, becauſe they did aſſiſt in ſubordination and dependencie. That the Apoſtles aſſumed theſe Presbyters in acts deliberative and conſiliary to aſſiſt firſt at Jeruſalem, Acts 15. was a meer voluntary act, from which example that it was derived to other Churches, will not be denied; and hence the laſt clauſe of Jeromes words will be moſt clear, Noverint epiſcopi ſe magis conſuetudine Eccleſiae, quam Dominicae diſpoſitionis veritate Presbyteris eſſe majores, & in communi debere Eccleſiam regere. For by the Commiſſion Sicut miſit me Pater, given to the Apoſtles, and in them to their ſucceſſors onelyonly, they could not challenge it. It may well, proceeding from the voluntary act of the Apoſtles, be called an Apoſtolical Tradition and Ordinance; but in ſtrict termes Dominica it was not, nor Dominicae diſpoſitionis veritas, according to Jerome.

2. But if this ſenſe of Jeromes words like you not, I ſhall yet offer you another; At firſt, as I ſaid, the Presbyters by delegation from the Apoſtles with common advice and equal care guided the Church under the Apoſtles; but after Biſhops were appointed, the whole care by little and little was derived to one, and ſo at laſt by cuſtome Presbyters were utterly excluded from all advice and counſel, and Biſhops onelyonly intermedled with the regiment of the Church. This indeed grew onelyonly by continuance of time, and not by any Ordinance of Chriſt, or his Apoſtles; this Jerome diſlik'd, and to that purpoſe he fixes his Noverint Epiſcopi, &c. And that this is likelieſt p. 21to be Jeromes meaning in that place, his following words ſhew, Imitantes Moyſen, qui cum haberet in poteſtate ſolus praeſſe populo Iſrael, 70. elegit cum quibus populum judicaret. The Biſhops then ought to do as Moſes did. What, to have Governours equal? No, but when they might rule alone, to joyne with them others in the fellowſhip of their power and honour, as Moſes did. Moſes did not abrogate his ſuperiority above others, but took ſeventy Elders into part of his charge. So Jerome would have them. And thus much the King was content to grant, and reſtore, as you may read in his book cap. 17. about the middle. I ſaith he, am not againſt the managing of this precedencie and authority in one man by the joynt councel and conſent of many Presbyters; I have offered to reſtore it, &c. You ſee of what Presbyters I am content the preſcribed Miniſtery ſhall conſiſt, and what Presbytrry I ſhall allow you.

2. Or Teaching and Ruling Elders.

HEre again your words are dark. For if by foreign, Elders, you meane thoſe in Orders, I ſhall readily admit them to the Church miniſtry, whether Teaching or Ruling. But if you intend under theſe words to introduce into the Miniſtry either to teach or rule men, that are not of the Clergy (ſo you know we ſpeak, and ſo I muſt ſpeak for diſtinction ſake, for elſe I cannot be underſtood in this queſtion) I abſolutely deny it.

For there was never any Lay-man ex Officio, admitted to teach ordinarily in Scripture; called and ſent he muſt be before he did undertake to preach. So the Apoſtle intimates,Rom. 10.15.Rom 10:15 How ſhall they preach except they be ſent? If any be gifted, I ſhall allow him ex debito charitatis, privately and charitably to make uſe of his talent, to exhort, to reprove, to admoniſh; but publikely to divide the Word of God, and to teach, I may not admit him. For as a man muſt have inward endowments, gifts, and ſufficiencie, ſo he muſt have an outward calling before I ſhall call him a Teacher in the Church of God. And I hear you are not againſt me in this.

2. But about a Ruling Elder, I fear you and I ſhall differ; for in your Presbyterial Churches, you admit into that number thoſe who are not of the Clergy. Many of your Presbyters being meer Lay men. Of the Texts you hope to prove it, I ſhall conſider anon. And here about theſe Ruling Elders I ſhall deliver my mind. 1. Negatively. 2. Poſitively.

1. Negatively. That Ruling Elders in the Church were never Laicks. Presbyters we read of, and Presbyteries in the Apoſtolical writings, but none Lay. This negative will be proved as all other negatives are; that is, by the contrary affirmative. Theſe Ruling Elders were alwayes of the Clergy, and conſequently no Laicks: for you know d…ae contrariae propoſitiones non poſſunt ſimul eſſe verae. I ſhall therefore ſhew you what I have to ſay of Ruling Elders.

2. Poſitively. The Keys Chriſt gave to his Apoſtles, and they to their Succeſſours; and with them ſo much power as was ordinarily of permanence p. 22and perpetuity in the Church, which power conſiſted in four particulars; the Diſpenſation of the Word, the Adm…niſtration of the Sacraments, Impoſition of hands, and guiding of the Keys. With the three fi…ſt I hear not that Ruling Elders of the Laity undertake to meddle; and if they ſhall lay claim to the laſt, they muſt ſhew when and where any ſuch donation was made over unto them; otherwiſe, I ſhall call it an uſurpation. The contrary is clear in the promiſe, Tibi dabo claves, and in the performance, ſicut miſit me pater, ſic mitto vos; quorum peccata remiſeritis, &c. Let it be ſhewed that any Laick here had any Key, any power made over unto him, or that the Apoſtles ever made any deſignation of it to a Lay hand, and you ſhall for me carry the cauſe.

Well then, to whom did they aſſigne it? That is clear to me in the Scriptures, to the Biſhops that they ordain'd. I ſhall inſtance onelyonly in two, Timothy and Titus; the one at Epheſus, the other at Crete, ordained by Saint Paul; though if you would believe Anci…nt Records, I could name you many more. James the brother of our Lord Biſhop of Jeruſalem; Mark at Alexandria; Clemens at Rome; Euodius at A…tioch; Polycarp at Smyrna; Dionyſius at Athens; Caius at The…olonica; Archippus at Coloſſi; Epaphroditus at Philippi; Antipas at …ergamus; Creſcens in Galatia; Soſipater at Iconium; Eraſtus in Macedon; Silas at Corinth; with others; all which if there be any credit to be given to O…d R…cords, were ſet by the Apoſtles themſelves to be the Ruling Elders of the Church.

But perhaps you'll ſay theſe were chief in their own Churches reſpectively, but they had their Presbyteries and Presbyters to govern with them. Well, be it ſo, for in ſome it is evident it was ſo; Yet it lies upon you to prove, that thoſe Presbyters were Lay-Elders; for otherwiſe I ſhall preſume to the contrary, becauſe I finde it oth…rwiſe in the Churches of Epheſus and Crete, where Timothy and Titus were B…ſhops, and in all the Churches where I read of a Presbytery.

That it was thus at Epheſus, is beyond all exception. For Timothy was there ordained by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery.1 Tim. 4.14.1 Tim 4:14 I hope you will not ſay, that T…mothy was made the chief Paſtour there, by the impoſition of any Lay-hands. No man ever yet ſo interpreted that text; as for the fathers, they expound it of the Colledge of Presbyters, which they ſay was of Prelates,Heb. 7.7. Calv. Inſtit. lib. 4. c. 6. 2 Tim. 1.6.Heb 7:72 Tim 1:6 becauſe minor non ordinat majorem. Calvin of the Office, and that it was given by the laying on of Saint Pauls hands, and he is reſolve, that Saint Paul alone did it, becauſe of that Exhortation, Stir up the grace of God which is in thee, by the laying on of my hands. Take it in which ſenſe you pleaſe, here's no place left at Epheſus for a Lay-Preſbytery.

No nor yet in Crete; for to that end was Titus left there to ordain Elders in every City, and in the following words the Apoſtle tells what manner of perſons they muſt be,Tit. 1.5.7.Titus 1:5Titus 1:7 who were to be ordain'd; and what their office to be, Biſhops; for a Biſhop muſt be blameleſſe; theſe Elders then at Crete muſt be Biſhops; not then of the Laity.

And if you ſhall conſider what theſe Elders were to do at Crete and Epheſus, p. 23you will eaſily conceive that many of them fell not within a Lay-mans capacity. If any man did foreign, preach any other doctrine then that was ſound, the Epheſian Elder muſt prohibere; 1 Tim. 1.4. 2 Tim. 2.16. Tit. 1.9.1 Tim 1:42 Tim 2:16Titus 1:9if preach prophanely or babblingly, he muſt cohibere, reſtrain him. At Crete the ordained Elder muſt have ability foreign, to convince the gain-ſayers, and that foreign, with force of Argument.Tit. 1.10.13.Titus 1:10Titus 1:13 For particulars, if any preach otherwiſe than becomes him, foreign, his mouth muſt be ſtopped, they muſt be reproved foreign, taken up ſhort,Tit. 2.15.Titus 2:15 with all authority. Say in good ſooth, whether you conceive theſe to be the Works of a Lay-man; I wiſh all Clergy-men were ad haec idonci. But I fear few are. Laſtly, the rod, power of excommunication was in the hand of Saint Pauls Elders, which I ſhall never yield to be in your Lay Elders.

But were the Word of God in this point indifferent, which for ought I ſee is yet very reſolute againſt them: the general conſent of all antiquity, that never to your ſenſe expounded Saint Pauls words, nor never mention d one Lay-Presbyter to govern the Church, is to me a ſtrong rampire againſt all theſe new devices. And here did I liſt, I could preſſe you down with a whole load of fathers and Councils; but I ſpare you, for I fear you would caſt them off with ſome ſcorn. The Catalogue you ſhall have, if you deſire it; For my part, I ſhall cloſe up this point with the words of a wiſe learned man;Bilſon's preface to the Government of the Church. I like not to raiſe up that Diſcipline from the dead, which hath lien ſo long (if it ever liv'd) in ſilence by your own confeſſion; which no father ever witneſſed, no Council ever favour'd, no Church ever followed ſince the Apoſtles times till this our age. I can be forward in things that be good; but not ſo fooliſh, as to think that the Church of Chriſt never knew what belong'd to the government of her ſelf, till now of late; and that the Sonne of God hath been ſpoiled of half of his Kingdome (as you uſe to ſpeak) by his own ſervants and citizens, for theſe one thouſand five hundred years, without remorſe or remembrance of any man, that ever ſo great a wrong was offered him. You muſt ſhew me your Lay-Presbytery in ſome Ancient Writer, or elſe I ſhall avouch plainly, your Conſiſtory, as you preſſe it, is a Novelty.

And yet I ſhall adde one thing more by way of Apology; for I would not be a ſtumbling block to you in the leaſt; That I have made uſe of the common diſtinction, Lay and Clergy, and Presbyters or Elders of both ſorts. I have been forc'd to it, becauſe I could not otherwiſe ſpeak intelligibly and diſtinctly enough in this point. And that in this I ſpeak in the language of the Ancienteſt of the fathers; ſo ſpeaks Clemens in that famous Epiſtle to the Corinthians, ſo cryed up by antiquity; and lately ſet forth by Maſter Patrick Young. Clem. Rom. Ep. 1. ad Cor. Ignat. ad Philip. ad Magneſ. Juſt. Martyr. Apolog. 2. prope finem.foreign So Ignatius, foreign; and again, foreign, and yet again, foreign. So Juſtine Martyr, foreign. So the Canons attributed to the Apoſtles; Si p. 24quis Clericus abſcindens ſeipſum, &c. Can. 22. Laicus ſeipſum abſcindens, &c. Can. 23.

Tertull. de preſcript. In exhortat. ad caſtitatem.Tertullian. Hodie Presbyter, cras Laicus; and again, niſi Laici obſervent, per quae Presbyteri allegantur. I ſhould trouble you to reckon up infinite variety of other teſtimonies down-ward. By theſe it ſufficiently appears, that theſe two termes Presbyters and Laicks, were oppoſite termes; ſo that Presby ers were not Lay-men, nor Lay-men Presbyters; they were m…mbra dividentia, and 'tis a Logick rule, that membra dividentia muſt be foreign, ſo diſjoynd, that they never interfeer; which will not be ſo, if Presbyters and Lay-men may be affirm'd of the ſame perſon. What ſhould I tell you, that if you approve not this diſtinction of the Primitive Church, you may read it plainly in the Prophets; ſo that it is not profane, nor ſtrange. Iſaiah 24.2. It ſhall be as with the people, ſo with the Prieſt; Hoſea 4.9. There ſhall be like people, like Prieſt. And alſo Jeremy divides the Church into Prophet,Jerom. ad Nepotia…. Prieſt, and People, cap. 23.34. and cap. 26.7. As for the Clergy-men, Jerome ſhall give you the reaſon of the name; propterea vocantur Clerici, vel quia ſunt de ſorte Domini, vel quia ipſe Dominus ſors, i. e. pars Clericorum, either they are the Lords portion to do ſervice in the Church of Chriſt, or that the Lord is their portion and part; that is, to live on ſuch things that are dedicated to the Lord. And thus have I ſtopped two gappes with one buſh.

Propoſition 5. That theſe Presbyters, Teaching and Ruling Elders muſt be of the Profeſſing Members own voluntary Election, and regular Ordination.

Of the Presbyters, Teaching and Ruling Elders, as you call them, I have ſpoken hitherto; Now of that which you require in them, which are, 1. That they be of the Profeſſing Members voluntary Election. 2. That they have their Ordination frnm them, and that it be Regular. In neither of which I can aſſent to you.

1. Of Election of Presbyters and Ruling Elders.

THe Debate about Elections of Church-Miniſters, cannot be better determin'd than by the Scriptures; let us look then, how it was ab initio. I finde three ſorts of Election mention'd in the New Teſtament; By the Spirit, by lots, by voices.

1. By the Spirit ſpeaking in his own perſon, were Paul and Barnabas called from Antioch to preach to the Gentiles. By the Spirit ſpeaking in the Prophets,Acts 13.2. 1 Tim. 4.14.Acts 13:21 Tim 4:14 was Timothy deſign'd; Neglect not the grace which was given thee by propheſie, with impoſition of the hands of the Presbytery. p. 25And again,1 Tim. 1.18.1 Tim 1:18 This commandment I commit to thee according to the Propheſies, that went before of thee, that is, by direction of the Holy Ghoſt, and not by voices, as Oecuminius, Theodoret, Chryſoſtome, Throphylact, expounds the place. For this kind of Election was uſual in the Apoſtles times, the Spirit of God directing them on whom they ſhould lay their hands. By that Spirit were Peter and John directed on whom they ſhould lay their hands at Samaria. And ſo was Paul at Epheſes, when he laid the foundation of that Church; ſo that he might truly ſay, Take heed to the flock,Act. 20.Acts 20 whereof the Holy Ghoſt hath made you over-ſeers. For it was the Holy Ghoſts doing to notifie unto Paul the perſons that ſhould receive impoſition of hands, and to poure out his wonderful bleſſings on them, to make them meet Paſtours and Prophets, whereto he had choſen them.

Yea, this dured ſome time after Pauls death, as Euſebius reports,Euſeb. lib. 3. cap 23. ex. Clem. Alex. even in the time of John the Apoſtle; for after his return out of Patmos to Epheſus, being requeſted, he went to the Churches adjoining; ſome were appointing Biſhops, ſome were ſetting whole Churches in Order, ſome were foreign. i. d. Supplying the Clergy with ſuch men as were ſignified or marked out for that purpoſe by the Spirit. Or if you read it as Hanmer tranſlates it chooſing by lot, then this was done to avoid ambition and contention: however it was of thoſe who were foreign, and ſo the mix'd multitude choſe not whom they pleaſed.

2. For ſecondly, by lot, I graunt it might be done, and then Saint John followed the pattern in the Election of Matthias to the Apoſtolate;Act. 1.Acts 1 which is the ſole example, that can be given in Scripture in this kind. And in this the people could have no voice, if you will weigh the circumſtances of the Text. For firſt the company that were then preſent were onelyonly one hundred and twenty, of which eleven were Apoſtles, ſeventy two diſciples,Ver. 15.14. divers women, with Mary the mother of Jeſus; now if you deduct eighty three, and the women out of one hundred and twenty, what a ſmall remnant will there be of the people left to vote. Secondly, it is recorded indefinitely; they appointed two not determinately expreſſing who they were,Ver. 23. and ſo it might be the Apoſtles alone, or the Apoſtles and diſciples together for ought any man can ſay to the contrary. Thirdly, make what can be made of it, yet here is no more than preſentation which falls very ſhort of Election; for it is written they preſented the two. Fourthly, they committed the Election to God, Shew whether of the two thou haſt choſen:Ver. 24. and ſo it was reaſon; for the place to which one of them was to be advanced,Gal. 1.1, 17, 18, &c.Gal 1:1Gal 1:17Gal 1:18 was an Apoſtles place; and an Apoſtle might not be choſen by men, but by God alone.

And here to remove a miſtake, I ſhall intreat you to obſerve this diſtinction; that the name of an Apoſtle hath a double acception. 1. In a ſtrict ſenſe, for an eye-witneſſe of our Saviours actions, life, death, and one immediately choſen and ſent by God, and ſo there were no more but twelve. Whence ſaith Peter, Act. 1.20, 21.Acts 1:20Acts 1:21of theſe men that have accompanied with us all the time, that the Lord Jeſus went in and out among us; — p. 26Muſt one be ordained to be a Witneſſe: 2. Or elſe the name of an Apoſtle is more largely extended, for an inſtructed Witneſſe, and ſent by the Apoſtles,Phil. 2.25.Phil 2:25 who yet had that honorary name; ſo Epaphroditus is called the Apoſtle of the Philippians; Judas and Silas are ſo term'd; Titus and others, 2 Cor. 8.23. and James the brother of our Lord is call'd an Apoſtle, Gal. 1.19. He was not Jacobus Alphei, nor Jacobus Zebedei, and therefore none of the twelve; and 1 Cor. 15. this James is named as diſtinct from the twelve; for there it is written, that Chriſt appeared to the twelve, then to five hundred brethren at once; after to James. In the firſt ſenſe no man ever did, ever could chooſe an Apoſtle; for they had an immediate vocation, and immediate miſſion. In the laſt ſenſe there is not a ſyllable in the Scripture of their Election by the people. Perhaps, for ſo it is recorded by Dorotheus, that they were of the ſeventy; but when they were advanc'd and authoriz'd to be Apoſtles, that is, Biſhops in the latter ſenſe, the Apoſtles only elected them, and impoſed hands on them.

3. Hitherto we hear not a word of any Election by the Profeſſing Members to the work of the Miniſtry; let us then come to the third way, which was by voices; and let us conſider whether we can finde it that way. It is moſt true, that the Election of the ſeven Deacons was referr'd to the multitude; and to this purpoſe your text is rightly cited, Acts 6.5. But this proves not what you would inferre from it; for by this choice, the Deacons received not the charge of the Word and Sacraments, but a care to ſee the Saints provided for; and the collections and contributions faithfully and uprightly employ'd;Hieron. ad Evagrium. Epiphan. 4. Conc. Carth. cap. 4. they were only menſarum & viduarum Miniſtri. foreign, conſecrated to a ſervice, not to a prieſt-hood. And among you for ought I know, the Deacons have no other office than the care of the poor. And then I pray, what can this place make for the Election of the Presbyters, and Ruling Elders by the people? Are theſe no more but Deacons, Officers of Tables and Widows? That the people ſhould Elect theſe there was great reaſon; for they were to be Stewards and Diſpenſers of their Charity; and therefore to ſtay the murmure that might ariſe of partiality in them, and ſuſpicion of any unjuſt dealing, they adviſed the multitude to chooſe their own Almoners. The Churches treaſure was laid at the Apoſtles feet to be diſtributed as every one had need; they left it,Acts. 2. Acts 4.Acts 2Acts 4 in all likelihood, in the hands of converted Jewes to be diſtributed; theſe regarded the Widows that were Jewes, more than the Helleniſts; this cauſed the foreign the murmure; To ceaſe this, the Apoſtle beſpeaks the multitude to conſider,Acts 6.1. Ver. 3. Ver. 5. Ver. 6.Acts 6:1 foreign, of fit men for that ſervice. They did ſo, and foreign, they choſe out ſeven, and foreign they preſented or ſet out theſe before the Apoſtles, that's all. It was but a preſentation, ſo that it ſeems as yet it was in the Apoſtles power to admit or refuſe even theſe. But they accepted of their preſentation, and with prayer laid their hands on them for the Office; which was at the higheſt a diſpenſation of money, and no cure of ſouls. No hurt then can be done to our tenet by this Election, ſince as they who urge it, confeſſe they were not in orders; and therefore what hath this example to do for the Profeſſours Election p. 27of Presbyters or Ruling Elders?

Yea, but you'll ſay, the other text you cite, Acts 14.23.Acts 14.23.Acts 14:23 will ſtrike it dead; but upon a ſerious view nothing leſſe. For thus we reade there foreign, &c. Ordaining them Elders in every Church. This word is a participle, and muſt agree with ſomewhat; and if you look before, it was Paul and Barnabas; the word foreign ſignifies not to Elect, but to Ordain; of which more by and by. The Ordainers were Apoſtles, Paul and Barnabas; the Ordain'd Presbyters; here is not ſo much as a ſyllable of the people, no mention of any act of theirs. This then is ſo plain a perverting of the text, that I hope no wiſe man will ever more object it. The truth is, the Apoſtles impoſed hands to make Paſtours and Prophets in the Churches as they travelled, popular Elections they made none. For your other texts, I ſhall conſider apart, becauſe they are not directly to this purpoſe.

Thus I hope I have made it appear, that there is not any firm ground, I had almoſt ſaid any colour for Election of Presbyters or Ruling Elders by the Profeſſing Members of the Church in the Scriptures.

Yea, but did not then the People chooſe their Paſtour in the primitive ages of the Church? To gratifie you, I confeſſe they did: but this was after the Apoſtles dayes, and then Scripture muſt not be urged for it. It was not a priviledge, that belongs to them of right, but out of convenience; and was deriv'd from the rules of Chriſtian equity and ſociety. Hence it came to paſſe, that the people when their deſires were accompliſhed did quietly receive, willingly maintain, diligently hear, and heartily love their Paſtours. And could the people have tempered their grief, when their deſires were croſſ'd, their intereſt in Electing their Paſtour had been better regarded, and longer continued: But experience of their Schiſmes, Factions, Tumults, Uproars, Murders, if they might not have their wills, cauſed both Ancient fathers and Councils to miſlike that the people ſhould bear the ſway in theſe Elections, and forced Chriſtian Princes, if not wholly to exclude them, yet greatly to abridge them. I could if I pleaſed give you in a long liſt of examples of both kinds, both of whom, when, where, and how long the cuſtome of their Election continued; and by whom, and upon what occaſions abridg'd: But I ſpare you. This in a word; when they did Elect, it was not by any Scripture-right, and at moſt it was no more than a preſentation; and it lay in the power of thoſe in Authority to refuſe the preſented, which was ſometimes done. And the emergent miſchiefs took it away; which it never could have done, had it been a command of God. Now that it is poſſible, that ſuch miſchiefs may ariſe, and frequently do ariſe from popular Elections, I appeal to your conſcience, who have been an eye-Witneſſe of it in New-England.

One thing I ſhall adde more; that you, I mean your Combinational Churches in Old-England, ſhould of all other preſſe upon us popular Elections, makes me wonder, ſince 'tis your practice to eject Paſtours approved by their people; and by the approvers from above to ſettle other over p. 28their Congregations. Tell me I pray, what vote hath the people in any of theſe? If this be not to break your rule, and to practice what you declaime, I muſt profeſſe I underſtand nothing. But foreign. I conceive what you may anſwer, but I will not now reply to it.

2. The other part of your Propoſition is; that theſe Presbyters and Ruling Elders be of the Profeſſing Members Regular Ordination.

THat the Presbyters and Ruling Elders in the ſenſe above given of them, have a Regular Ordination, is neceſſary, but that they ſhall have this Ordination from or by the Profeſſing Members, I cannot yield.

That Ordination is an act of the Keys, I ſuppoſe is an axiome that will be granted on all hands. For otherwiſe, your Profeſſing Members can have no right to Ordain, who make their claim to it, becauſe they are ſubjectum clavium. Rutherfords plea for Preſbytery. Sect. 6.But that they are not ſo, Rutherford and B…res demonſtrate: whence it will neceſſarily follow, that they cannot ordain Presbyters and Ruling Elders.

Before he proves the minor, he thus diſtinguiſheth The power of the Keys is given to the Church of believers two wayes. Firſt, As to the end and object; and thus we acknowledge the Keys may be given to the whole Church, becauſe it is the object upon which the power of the Keys is to be exerciſed; for what have we to do to judge thoſe that are without? and then it was the end why Chriſt gave the Keys,1 Cor. 5.1 Cor 5 he gave ſome to be Apoſtles, &c. for the perfecting of the Saints, &c. Secondly, The Keys may be ſaid to be given to them who are the ſubject;Epheſ. 4.Eph 4 that is, to ſuch in whom the power doth reſt to uſe them, and who have authority to weild them, and in this ſenſe the beleevers in the whole body is not the formal ſubject of the Keys, neither may they authoritatively uſe them.

And this is demonſtratively thus prov'd. For that which is primum & proprium ſubjectum, cum ſuo accident reciprocatur; The attribute agrees to it primò, Rutherford. p. 12.per ſe, adaequatè, foreign as rationale or riſibile agrees to man, all theſe wayes: ſo that a man onelyonly is the firſt and adequate ſubject of reaſon or laughter, and conſequently every individual man reaſonable and riſible. To apply this to my purpoſe, if the body of any viſible Congregation be the adequate and proper ſubject of the Keys, the power muſt of right belong to every individual of that Congregation; ſo that every one hath a power to uſe them; women, young men and all: for quod competit foreign, competit foreign, but ſuch a power I dare ſay, you will not put into women and childrens hands. Then you muſt not make the whole Church the ſubject of the Keys, but that ſome Profeſſing Members have the keys in their hands and that theſe onelyonly have power to ordain.

p. 29Now let us enquire who theſe Ordainers muſt be; You ſay your Presbyters, and if I miſtake not, ruling Elders▪ We ſay Biſhops,Auſtin in Pſal. 22.Ps 22 or at leaſt Biſhops with their Presbytery. As Auguſtine ſaid excellently in another caſe, ſo ſay I in this. Fratres ſumus, quarè litigamus? non inteſtatus mortuus eſt pater; fecit teſtamentum & mortuus eſt; tam…iu contenditur de haereditate mortuorum quamdiu teſtamentum profetatur in publicum, & cum teſtamentum prolatum fuerit in publicum, tacent omnes, ut tabulae aperiantur & recitentur; judex intentus audit, advocati ſilent, praecones ſilentium faciunt, univerſus populus ſuſpenſus eſt, ut legantur verba mortui non ſentientis in monumento. I…c ſine ſenſu jacet in monumento, & valent verba ejus: Sedet Chriſtus in caelo, & contradicitur ejus teſtamento. Aperi, legamus; fratres ſumus, quare contendimus? pl cetur amicus noſter, non ſine teſtamento nos dimiſit pater. And for this Will, the ſearch will not be long, nor the trouble much; 'tis extant, John 20.21. As my Father ſent me, ſo ſend I you; and preſently he enſtates them in the power of the Keyes: Whoſe ſinnes you remit, they are remitte…, &c.John 20.23. Matth. 28.20.John 20:23Matt 28:20 And this power was to be perpetual, to remain and continue till his ſecond coming; for theſe are his laſt words; Lo, I am with you alway unto the end of the world. With them perſonally he could not be; for the Apoſtles are dead; this promiſe then muſt be made good to them and their Succeſſours.

They then queſtionleſſe had the Keyes: which conſiſted in Juriſdiction, and Ord…nation, of which I am now to ſpeak. And out of our Fathers teſtament I ſhall ſhew you how they uſed it.Act. 8.14, 17.Acts 8:14Acts 8:17 Peter and John were ſent down by the Apoſtles from Jeruſalem to Samaria to lay their hands on them that ſhould receive the Holy Ghoſt. Philip preach'd and baptizd, but he could not give the graces of the Holy Ghoſt by impoſition of hands, to make fit Paſtours and Teachers for the work of the Miniſtry. The like we finde of Paul and Barnabas in the fore-cited place, Acts 14.23. who viſited the Churches where they had preached, and ſupplyed them with Presbyters foreign Wh re it were abſurd to ſay, that this was done by lifting up of the hands of the people, ſince it was the work of Paul and Barnabas alone. And by the way,Act. 10.41.Acts 10:41 though foreign doth ſometimes ſignifie extenſio manuum, yet alwayes it doth not ſo; for Acts 10.41. we thus read, That God ſhewed Chriſt openly after he was raiſed, not t… all the people, but unto Witneſſes, foreign ordain'd by God: and I could ſhew you that foreign is foreign, in a hundred places of the Greek fathe…s and Councils. But to let this paſſe I go on,2 Tim. 1.6. Tit. 1.5.2 Tim 1:6Titus 1:5 Timothy was ordain'd by Saint Paul, 2 Tim. 1.6. and Titus by him left in Crete to Orda…n: and therefore Ordain'd himſelf. For nihil dat quod non habet. All theſe Ordinations we finde in the Scriptures by the Apoſtles themſelves.

2. Now if you ſhall demand by whom theſe Ordinations were perform'd afterwards? I ſhall anſwer you, by their ſucceſſours. Yea, but who were they? I anſwer, that it being a matter of fact and ſtory, later than the Scripture can reach to, it cannot be fully ſatisfied or anſwered from thence any further than the perſons of Timothy and Titus, Epaphroditus, &c. and p. 30the ſeveral Angels of the ſeven Churches, (who by all the Ancients are acknowledged to be ſingle perſons, that had power over all other in thoſe Churches) but will in the full latitude through the univerſal Church in thoſe times be made clear by the next and beſt evidences we have, viz. From the conſent of the Greek and Latine fathers, who generally reſolve, that Biſhops were thoſe Succeſſours. So writes Clemens, Ignatius, Iraeneus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Theodoret, Hilary, Chryſoſtome, who not? Whoſe Teſtimonies ſhall be produced with a wet finger.

And one part of their Offices in the Church was to Ordain. This is manifeſt firſt in Timothy, in the Church of Epheſus, Acts 20. There were many Presbyters before Timothy was appointed their Biſhop, yet Saint Paul ſent him of purpoſe to impoſe hands;1 Tim. 5.22.1 Tim 5:22 and ſay it was with the Presbytery; yet it can never be proved that any of that Colledge was no more than a Profeſſing Member. You know how ſtrongly all the Presbyterians pleade for the contrary; and was this injunction onelyonly perſonal, and to end with Timothies life?1 Tim. 6.13, 141 Tim 6:131 Tim 6:14 Not ſo neither. For this charge he layes upon him in fearful words; I charge thee in the fight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Jeſus Chriſt, who before Pontius Pilate witneſſed a good confeſſion, that thou keep this Commandment without ſpot, unrebukable, till the appearing of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt. 'Tis agreed by all, that Saint Paul in this Epiſtle eſpecially ſets an order for the Government of the Church,1 Tim. 5.22.1 Tim 5:22 among which, that a Biſhop lay not hands haſtily upon any man is one. This then was not Temporary, but to laſt till the end of the world.

That they were to Ordaine is every whit as plaine in Titus; for, for that intent he was left in Crete. Neither would the Church ſucceeding admit of any other but Biſhops to that buſineſſe for one thouſand five hundred years,Tit. 1.5.Titus 1:5 as I will prove unto you, if you require it by unpregnable records. Two evidences there are of it beyond exception. Firſt, the condemning Aërius as an Heretique for oppoſing Epiſcopal power. Secondly, that if any one of an inferiour rank preſumed to ordaine, his act was reverſed by the Church as unlawful, and the ordained admitted no otherwiſe to the Communion than as a Lay-man. As it befel Iſchyras, and thoſe who were ordained by Maximus and another blind Biſhop,Athanaſ. apol. 2 Greg. Presb. in vita Nanz. Conc. Conſtant. 2. cap. 4. Conc. Hiſp. 2. cap. 5. & 7. and others in the Church ſtory.

I beſeech you now, if you little regard the Fathers and Councils, yet view the Scriptures with an unpartial eye, and then if the Commiſſion our Saviour gave his Apoſtles, or the Apoſtles to their ſucceſſors: if the practice of the Apoſtles themſelves, or Apoſtolical men can any whit move, conſider whether the Presbyters or Ruling members ought to be of the profeſſing members regular ordination. Make it plaine that the power of the Keys is ſubjectivè, formalitèr, inhaeſivè, authoritativè in them, and I yield you the whole cauſe.

Your ſixth Propoſition, that their Office extent (underſtanding by that the Miniſtry which Chriſt ordained in his Church) muſt reach from Chriſts Aſcention to the Creations diſſolution, I eaſily grant. I ſhall therefore p. 31ſay nothing to that, but come to examine your proofs out of Scripture. And here I could have wiſhed that you had applyed every text to that part of the Propoſition you intended it. For it had beene farre eaſier for me to have judged of the validity of it, and more readily have ſhaped my anſwer; whereas now I can but rove at it, and therefore if I miſtake, you muſt thank your ſelf.