The first Proposition.
The Title of Bishop hath been by corrupt custome appropriated to one.

18. THis Proposition is false; it was no corrupt custome, but uncorrupt discretion, that appropriated the Title of Bishop to one, in every severall Diocesse. It was done by those, who detested corruption with a perfect hatred. But this Title was not so appropriated to one, as to his person, that might be layed downe at the yeares end, as the Title of Major in a Corporation; but it was appropriated to his Office or Order; and not given him, till he were of a severall Order from Pres­byter; which Order and Title can never be layed aside, or ta­ken from him.

19. Give me leave therefore to tell you, that the state of the question is mistaken by too many. For it is not, whether the word Bishop and the word Presbyter doe in Scriptures signifie one and the same Function? not yet, whether a Bishop and a Presbyter be of one and the same Order in Scripture? But the question rightly stated, is this; Whether there be an Order in Scripture distinct from the Order of Presbyter, and Superiour to that Order?

20. To quarrell about names and words had not wont to be the custome of the Church of Christ: for plaine it is, that we speak not alwaies, as the Scripture speakes. The Scripture calls Sacramen­tum hoc mag­num e [...]. So S. Hierom reads, Eph. 5.32. Matrimony a Sacrament; if we beleive S, Hierom & the Latine Fathers, from whom we borrow the word Sacrament; and yet we call it not so. The Scripture never calls Baptisme, or the Lords Supper, a Sacrament, and yet we call them both so, and custome hath appropriated that name to them; and yet no corrupt custome, I hope. The reason is, because we define a Sa­crament to be, an outward and visible signe, of an inward and spi­rituall grace, given unto us, ordained by Christ himselfe, [...] [...]ron. in [...]. 7. as a meanes whereby we receive the same, and a pledge to assure us [Page 8]thereof. Now Baptisme and the Lords Supper make good this definition, which Matrimouy doth not.

21. Neither doth the same word in Scripture signifie al­wares the same Office and Order; no, not in the same place and verse. If question be made, whether there were but one High-Priest at one time in the Iewish Church; we answer positive­ly, but one. That is, but one strictly, and properly so called. And yet we find many High-Priests at the same time. S. Mar. 14.1. S. Luc. 22.2. S. Ioh. 11.47. But we say not, that all these were High-Priests strictly and properly so called, not Pontifices simpliciter, but secundum quid, in respect of their brethren, who were under their charge. And these are called the chiefe or principall Fathers of the Priests. 1. Chron. 24.6. & 31.

22. Not in the same place and verse. For S. Mat. 26.3. we find many High-Priests, and one High-Priest. Many High-Priests assemble together unto the Palace of Caiphas the High Priest. S. Mat. 26.3. [...]. And yet but one of these was [...], properly the High-Priest; Heb. 9.7. no other but he, but that one, might go into the Sancta San­ctorum, the holyest of all. Num. 8. [...]. Lyra in Num. 8.5. None of them, but he onely, could Ordaine or Consecrate a Priest: and 1. Chron. 24.18. none of them, but he, had jurisdiction over all the Sonnes of Levi.

23. Thus we finde one Bishop and many Bishops in Asia and Creet. Titus is the Bishop of Creet, and yet in that Citty there were many Bishops. For he that is called a Presbyter, v. 5. is called a Bishop. v. 7. Thus was it in Asia. But the title of Bi­shop, even in those times was appropriated to Timothy and Ti­tus, as is evident in the Postscripts to those Epistles, wherein the former is called Bishop of the Asians, and Titus Bishop of the Cretians. These are they, that were truly and properly named Bishops of those Churches. In Scripture we find them termed so; it cannot be denyed. Beza is my witnesse, who met with no Manuscript, without these Postscripts. And, I hope, Beza is no abettor of corruptions in Scripture.

24. Timothy and Titus were ordained by S ^t Paul; and by him, for ought any man can say, they were called Bishops. I am [Page 9]certaine, they are called so by the Spirit of God; or Beza hath abused us. And these, that are thus called so in those places, were for their time, the only Bishops of those Churches. These had Iurisdiction spirituall over all Persons in those severall Churches; not only over Lay-men and Deacons, but over the Presbyter-Bishops also; even to convent, censure, silence, and to cast them out of the Church. These Bishops also had the right and power of Ordination, which the Presbyter Bishops never had.

25. What? were they in those times distinguished only by right and power, and not by titles? No such matter. Those whom we now call Bishops, were at the first named Apostles. But those, whom we now call Presbyters, or Priests, were then indifferently stiled Bishops or Presbyters. If I prove not this, I deserve blame: but if I shall make this Assertion good, I shall doe the truth and you service; and I hope, yee will doe the truth, and your selves that honour, as to lay the censure, where the fault is, even upon those, that have misled you.

26. My first witnesse shall be Theodoret; who certifies us, that Theodorer. in Philip. 1.1. while S ^t Pauls Epistles were writing, the same Persons were called both Presbyters and Bishops; but those, who are now named BISHOPS, were then called APOSTLES. But in pro­cesse of time, the Title of APOSTLE was left to those, who were [...], APOSTLES properly and truly so called. And the name of BISHOP was appropriated to those, who here­tofore were called APOSTLES. With Theodoret accords S ^t Hierome, who testifies, that Hieron. in Gal. 1.19. The Apostles ordained Apostles. Calvin saith as much upon 1. Cor. 4.9. So here are more A­postles then twelve, or thirteene.

27. Would you know, who are the Apostles, that these speake of? The Scriptures tell us of Gal. 1.19. S ^t James, of Philip. 2.25. Epaphro­ditus, an 1. Cor. 49. Apollo; who in their severall places are expresly galled Apostles. Witnesse the Greeke Text, the originall Lan­cuage of those Epistles. And S ^t Hierome justifies, that Hieron. C [...] ­tal c. 4. this S ^t James was Bishop of Hierusalem; but none of the Twelve, as too many ignorantly conceive; but Hieron. in Es. 17. decimus tertius Aposto­lorum, the thirteenth Apostle. None of those, that were im­mediatly [Page 10]ordained by Christ himselfe; he was Hieron. in Catal. c. 4. ab ipsis Apo­stolis ordainatus, ordained by the Apostles suddenly after our Sa­viours Passion. Theodoret. in Phil 2:25. Epaphroditus likewise was Bishop of Phi­lippi, and Hieron. in Tit. 3. [...]3 Apollo, Bishop of Corinth. Apostles in Scripture Language, but Bishops in the Church Language. None of these were ordained by our Saviour, but by his Apostles; yet Walo Mes­sal. p. 43.44.244. these were of the same Order and Power with their Ordainers, and clearly of a different Order from Presbyters. You shall heare, what your deare friend Wale Messalinus speakes. Apostolorum tempore Apostolos ipsos veros juisse Ecclesiarum Episcopos. E­piscopos au­tem. qui tunc fic nominabā ­tur, in Pres­byterorum or­dine stetisse, quales nunc Episcopis sub­diti sunt. Walo Messal. p. 355. In the time of the Apostles, the APOSTLES themselves were the TRUE BISHOPS of those Churches. But they, who in those times were called BISHOPS, were of the same Order with PRESBY­TERS, such as now are SUBJECT TO BISHOPS. This he confesseth to be the common opinion of the Greeke Fathers: and surely they were as well skilled in Scriptures and Church History, as any Elders in your divine Assembly.

28. The reason, why the Church of God so universally al­ter'd this Title of Apostle into Bishop, is given by Theodoret; and this it is. Theodoret. in 1. Tim. 3.1. That the name APOSTLE might be reserved to those, who were [...], APOSTLES verily and in­deed, to those, that were ordained by Christ himselfe. Well, the end of this appropriation was, that the Church might settle and continue that necessary distinction betweene the Apostles ordained by Christ, the Apostles ordained by man, and Presbyters.

29. If this distinction had not been setled in time, how should we have been able to know an Apostle properly so cal­led from an Apostle improperly so called? What a strange confusion would have overspread the face of the Church, if Epaphroditus, Timothy, and Titus, had still been called Apo­stles; Ib. as Theodoret justifies, they were in the Primitive times. If all of that Order had reteined the same Title, how should we have been able to distinguish Saint Peter from Peter the Apostle of Alexandria; S ^t Paul from Paul the Apostle of Antioch; and S ^t John from John of Hierusalem? Thus we should have had not onely 2. Cor. 11.13. false Apostles, but Hereticall and Atheisticall Apostles; which would have brought that Holy [Page 11]and Reverend name into contempt. How should we have knowne by whom the Canonicall Epistles had been written? For the Titles runne thus; The Epistle of Paul the Apostle; The Epistle of Peter the Apostle; of John the Apostle, &c. So then if this distinction had not been provided, corruption upon corruption must have followed: for Epistles have been written by more Pauls then one, and those Pauls, Apostles too.

30. The distinction then was necessary; and though the Title were alterd, the Order was not, nor yet the Office. The Fathers conceived not, that they offer'd the least affront or de­rogation to S ^t James, in calling him Bishop, whom the Scrip­ture had honoured with the Title of Apostle. If they had dee­med so, either they would not have given him that appellati­on, or they would never have called his Episcopacy, Rusin. histi l. 2. c. 1. Primatûs gloriam, the glory of the Primacie, and Euseb. hist. l. 2. c. 1. an honour of no meane esteeme. Neither had Timothy and Titus the lesse honour or power, because they were called Bishops. What the Apostles could doe, which was of ordinary Jurisdiction and power, and necessary for the preservation of the Church, that could they. Walo Messalinus, shewes much ingenuity in this acknow­ledgement. Walo Mes­sal. p. 62. EPISCOPI SUMMUM in Ecclesiastico ordine GRADUM obtinent, ut olim tennere, qui APOSTOLI voca­bantur. BISHOPS hold the CHIEFE DEGREE in the Ec­clesiasticall order, as heretofore they did, who were called A­POSTLES. But Apostles and Presbyters were never recko­ned to be of the same Order. The distinction is plaine, Act. 15.6.23. Where it is said, that Act. 15.6. The Apostles and Presbyters came together to consider of this matter. And, Ib. v. 23. The Apostles and Presbyters send greeting. This is readily acknowledged by S ^t Hierome and Walo Messalinus; as is manifested, §. 71.

31. Agreed upon it is, that Apostles and Presbyters are not the same: if then Bishops properly and strictly so called, be of the same Order with the Apostles, it followes necessarily, that our Bishops and Presbyters are not of one and the same Order or Function. Neither hath corrupt custome, but Scripture it selfe made this distinction.

The second Proposition.
That the Title of Bishop hath been by him (by this one) assumed, as in other things, so in the matter of Ordination.

32. FIrst appropriated and ascribed, and then assumed. Not first assumed, and then appropriated. If then any fault be, fall it must upon the times, wherein that custome prevai­led, or upon the Persons, that ascribed this Title to that one; not upon the Bishops; for they assumed it not; it was first ap­propriated to them, by your owne confession. But it was appro­priated and ascribed unto them in corrupt times; truly no lesse then 1600 yeares since, and assumed, or rather retained, to this day. And lawfull it is for me to assume (as you please to speak) that, what ever it be, which hath, See §. 23, 24. &c. upon so just grounds, been appropriated to me, as this Title was to the Order Apostolike. For it was done either by the Apostles themselves, or by their Orthodox Schollers. How can yee say then, that Ordin. p. 2. it was not meet?

33. But before I passe further, I cannot but take notice, that you, who have so highly cryed out upon Et Caetera, have slipt into the same error: for In other things, is neither better nor worse, but a plaine &c. which ought to have been avoided by such wise men, as have condemned it with so much detesta­tion. Secondly, you say, in the matter of Ordination. Herein had you consulted with your Assembly men, certainly you would have strook out matter; for the Greeke, and our Refor­med Churches use no matter, or element in Ordination. We use a Forme of words, and Imposition of hands onely: such Learned men cannot but know this. Matter was either igno­rantly, or superfluously put in.

34. But why hath the Title of Bishop been assumed in Ordi­nation? Does the Title Ordaine? Is that sufficiem? a Phrase not easily construed; it needs a Commentary from some of your Divines. In the mean time I shall guesse at your meaning, which I conceive to be this: He, to whom custome hath ap­propriated [Page 13]the title of Bishop, hath assumed Ordination to him­selfe. This being your meaning, I shall make bold to say, that this assertion is not true.

35. The Bishops assumed not, they took not this power of Ordination to themselves; it was conferr'd upon them with their Orders. It is so innate, so inherent to that Order, which we now call Episcopacy, that no other Order may Ordaine. Not Deacons; so you say: not Presbyters; so Epiphan. haer. 75. Epiphanius, and Hieron. ad Evagr. Ep. 85. S. Hierom; and with them all Antiquitie. In the New Testa­ment this power is only given to the Apostles, or Bishops, strict­ly so called; and executed by them only. It was given to the A­postles, in S. Mat. 10.8. Gratis accepistis, gratis date, freely ye have received, freely give, so Ambros. de dignit. Sacer­dot. cap. 5. S. Ambrose, so Hieron. in loc. S. Hierome, so Apud Bal­sam p. 1085. Gennadius Pa­triarke of Constantinople, with the whole Synod of his Patriar­chate, to Bishop Titus, Tit. 1.5. to Bishop Timothy, 1. Tim. 5.22. and to Bishop Epaphroditus, by Walo Messalinus confessi­on. p. 58.

36. Practised it was only by Apostles, or Bishops properly so called: in Scripture, Act. 14.23. by S. Paul and S. Barnabas, 1. Tim. 5.22. by Timo­thy, and Tit. 1.5. Titus. The Hieron. Ca­tal. c. 16. two former are known to be Apostles; the two latter are acknowledged by all antiquity to be Bishops strictly so called; which are the very same with Apostles. Though you will not believe me, I presume, ye will not mi­strust Walo Messalinus his fidelity to your cause. His very words are these; Walo Mes­sal. p. 44. Titus & Timotheus Apostoli tunc nomina­bantur; & REVERA ERANT EPISCOPI, JƲRE EODEM ET ORDINE, quo hodiè ha­bertur, qui Ecclesiam regunt, & Presbyteris praesunt. Titus and Tymothy were named APOSTLES, and IN VERY TRVTH WERE BISHOPS, BY THE SAME RIGHT, AND OF THE SAME ORDER, that these are at this day, who govern the Church, and have command over Presbyters. So your own dearest friend.

37. But there can be no surer Commentary of our Savi­ours words, then the Apostles daily practice. And meet it is for us in these things to doe as they did. And ought not Bishops to preserve, as much as in them lyes, that power, which God in [Page 14]his word hath committed to them. 1. Tim. 6.20. Depositum custodi, is a full command, and of a large extent: that charge which S. Paul hath committed to Timothie's and every Vincent. Ly­rin. c. 27. Bishop's trust, is not to be waved on any hand; carefully preserved it must be. For doth not S. Paul charge Timothy to 2. Tim. 3.14. continue in those things, which he hath both learned, and been assured of; and to Ib. c. 4. v. 5. fulfill his Ministry; [...], his owne Ministry, Ib. c. 1. v. 6. which was given unto him by the imposition of S. Pauls hands. Surely we ought to doe so; and I hope, God will so enable our Bi­shops, that they shall discharge their duties, though it be with hazard of their lives. And a main part of their duty it is, to Or­daine Presbyters and Deacons. For to them, and to them on­ly, this power belongs; as shall be proved §. 51.52.

The third Proposition.
That Ordination performed by him (by the Bishop, being) a Presbyter joyned with other Presbyters is, in your judgement, for substance valid, and not to be disclaimed by any, that have received it.

38. THe Bishops are so much beholding to you, as to ac­kowledge them to be Presbyters, and their Ordina­tions valid, notwithstanding their assumings and encroachings. Yee, take order therefore, that Ord. p. 13. a Presbyter so ordained shall be admitted to a charge, WITHOUT ANY NEW OR­DINATION.

39. Notwithstanding this your Magisteriall definition, I must tell you, that this your Proposition is partly true, partly false. True, in that an Ordination performed by a Bishop, is valid. But false, that it is performed by him as a Presbyter. He ordaines not as a presbyter, but as a Bishop; or if you will, is an Apostle Bishop. Not by vertue of the Order of Presbyter, but by vertue of his Episcopall or Apostolicall Order. Epiphan. haer. 75. Presbytero­rum enim Ordo non est potens generare patres; for this Order, the Order of Presbyters, is not able to beget Fathers, or Presby­ters, [Page 15] but Children for the Church. And so no validitie in their Ordaining: as shall be more fully manifested in the Confuta­tion of your next Proposition.

40. False like wise it is, That the Ordination is only so farre forth valid, as it is performed by a Bishop soyned with Presby­ters. Bishops you pull downe, as low as yee can; no Ordination good by a Bishop without assisting Presbyters; but a Minister is highly in your favour, he may, if you Authorize, Ordaine alone: for doe not you say, The Minister, that ordaineth? p. 13. But as you are out in affirming, that one, or many Presby­ters may Ordaine; so are you as wide from truth, in resolving, that a Bishop cannot Ordaine without presbyters joyned with him. For this is certaine, that the assisting Presbyters are not of the essence of Ordination; for then were there no Ordination in the Greek Church, since therein Presbyters lay on no hands at all in Ordination. As Pet. Arcud. de Concord. l. 6. c. 4. §. Igi­tur in. Petrus Aroudius manifests. Neither is there so much as mention made of Presbyters assisting, or laying on their hands by, or with, or neare the Bishops hands at Ordination, in all the Greeke Canons, or the Euchologue; but only of the Bishop ordaining a Presbyter. They had an eye upon Scripture wherein they finde S. Paul alone, and Titus alone, and Timothy alone, ordaining without assistants. Yee are care­full to preserve the credit of some late reformed Churches be­yond the Seas: give us leave to be tender of those many and famous Churches in the East, the first, the learned churches of the world; from whom we received the Scriptures, and (if the Learned be not mistaken) the best expositions thereof; even our Faith and Orders; though not immediatly.

41. I must confesse, that in the Latine Churches Concil. Car­thag. IIII. Can. 3. Presby­ters at the Ordination of a Priest, and of a Priest only, layed on their hands by the Bishops hand. But these were for atte­station, not for Ordination. The African Fathers therefore, that enjoyne this very Act of the Presbyters, ascribe Ordina­tion wholy and only to the Bishop: as is to be seen Co [...]. Afric. Can. 31.55, 80 &c. A Bishop therefore may Ordaine without the assistance of Presbyters, and the Ordination shall be good, though not Legall with us; because the Bishop may be justly [Page 16]questioned and censured, for transgressing the Canons of our Church.

The fourth Proposition.
Presbyters so ordained, being lawfully thereunto ap­pointed and authorized, may ordaine other Pres­byters.

42. IT seems hereby, that Ordination is one thing, and law­full authorizing another. That is, if I mistake not your meaning, when a Presbyter is ordained, he receives no such power, till he be afterwards lawfully authorized by you, or such as you are. And yet immediatly after, ye make Ord. p. 2. lawfull calling and Ordaining to be one and the same. A Lawfulnesse then there is in Ordination, without your concurrence or ap­probation. Yea, your own words are, that Ph. p. 15. Presbyters OR­DAINED according to this Directory, shall be for ever re­puted and taken to ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, for LAWFULL and SUFFICIENTLY AUTHORIZED Ministers of the Church of England, and capable of any Ministeriall, im­ployment. If that be not home enough, observe. I beseech you, how you resolve, that every Minister, by imposition of hands i [...] Ib. p. 22. set a part to fulfill the worke of his Ministery IN ALL THINGS. Having then so full a Commission given them in Ordination, how comes it to passe, that before they may Law­fully Ordaine, they must first be appointed and authorized by you.

43. Is it a Ministeriall Imployment to Ordaine? If it be so, then is every Minister by his Orders sufficiently authorized to ordaine, by your own confession. Is it no Ministeriall imploy­ment? Then may Lay-men conferre Orders. But if you say so, you contradict your selves in terminis: for your own words are, that Ib. p. 2. It is manifest by the word of God, that Ordination by PREACHING PRESBYTERS, is an Ordinance of Christ. But Ib. No man ought to take upon him the office of a Minister, untill he be Lawfully called and Ordained. Ordination therefore be­longs not to Lay-men, but to Ministers only, that's evident.

44. But Ordaining; it seemes by you, is one thing, and authorizing another, Ordination you yeeld to the Presbyters, but authorizing you reserve to your selves. And therein you deale evenly: for you have as much power to authorize, as they to Ordaine. You give them power to Ordaine, and they you power to Authorize: but neither of these is the grant, or ordinance of Christ. This then being a Ministeriall act, and these being before sufficiently authorized Ministers in all things, how can it be, that they must be authorized by you Lay­men, before they may lawfully Ordaine? But so you have or­dained, and so it must be. Your Ordinance is your reason.

45. You Authorize, and they Ordaine. First yee Autho­rize, then they Ordaine; and without your Authorizing they may not Ordaine; least their Ordinations be dangerous, if not invalid. For Ordained it is by you, that such and such Persons in your Ordinance set downe, or any seven of them, may Ordaine Presbyters for twelve Moneths, and no longer. Then your Or­dinance and their delegated authority expire, and others shall be set up, and authorized for this great worke. And so it shall be with you, as in Tertullian's time it was with some of your Brethren, Tertul d [...] Praescrip. c. 41. Alius hodiè Episcopus, eras alius; A Bishop to day, none to morrow; others must step up, while these sneake downe. Ordainers to day, none to morrow; Ordinance-ma­kers this day, none the next. Thus you put them in the same skale and condition with your selves.

46. Presbyters so Ordained. I take to be those, who in the former Proposition are said to be Ordained by a Presbyter-Bishop joyned with other Presbyters, being lawfully thereunto appointed and authorized. But he is lawfully appointed and au­thorized, that is, appointed and authorized by the Supreme Legislator, and according to the Law by him prescribed. We must therefore to the Law of Christ to learne, who is lawfully appointed and authorized to ordaine. For Heb. 5.4. as no man takes this honour of Priesthood to himselfe, but he that is called of God, as Aaron was; so no man takes the honour or power of Ordina­tion to himselfe, but he that is called of God to this Office, as Aaron was. For Ib. v. 1. every High Priest taken from among men, [Page 18]is Ordained for men in things pertaining to God. By Ordination then, which is Christs owne Institution, and not from your, or any humane Ordinance, does the Priest, or (if you please) Mi­nister, receive power in those things, which pertaine to God. Witnesse the Church of England, which in her Articles con­firmed by Parliament teacheth us, that Art. 23. WE OUGHT to judge those LAWFULLY CALLED and sent, who are chosen and called to this work by men, WHO HAVE PUBLICK AU­THORITY GIVEN VNTO THEM in the Congregation, to call and send Ministers into the Lords Vineyard. And your owne words are, that Ord p. 12. in Ordination every Minister is set apart to fulfill this worke. What have they to doe then with your authorizing?

47. True it is, by humane Lawes Bishops and Presbyters, have freedome granted to discharge their Offices in such and such places without molestation or controule, to gather their Tithes, as also their Revenues, and other profits setled upon them by the grace of Princes. But this is not to be lawfully authorized with an intrinsecall, but with an extrinsecall pow­er; that is, to have free Liberty to exercise that ministeriall power, which by Imposition of hands they had received be­fore, in severall Cures alotted to them. And in what City or Towne they are not received to this freedome, they are com­manded to [...]. Mat. 10.14. shake off the dust of their feet against it. But there followes an heavier doome in the next verse; which God of his great goodnesse avert from those Cities and Parishes, which have had an hand in the ruine, or removall of their Bishops or Presbyters. This seemed so impious an act to the Emperour Justinian, that he enacted this Law, Iustinian. l. 35. c. de E­pisc. & Cler. si quis audeat civitatem suo privare Episcopatu, infamis redditur; if any man dare de­prive a City of her Bishopricke, he becomes an infamous person. O, my great Masters, in what state are they, that rob whole Kingdomes of their Bishoprickes, and have made a Covenant with Hell to extirpate the office?

48. But by the way, I cannot but take notice, that he, who hath been ordained, according to our book of Ordination, by a Bishop assisted with Presbyters, is lawfully ordained. For your [Page 19]owne, wordes are, that Ord. p. 2. you hold his Ordination for substance valid, and not to be disclaimed by any, that have received it after this manner. But I shall manifest, that one or many Presbyters, as Presbyters, may not ordaine: neither may Presbyters be authorized to ordaine.

49. That one or many Presbyters quatenus, as Presbyters, may not Ordaine, or conferre any Spirituall Order, I prove first from your owne grant: for you resolve, that Ib. It is manifest by the word of God, that no man ought to take upon him the office of a Minister, untill he be lawfully called and ordained thereunto; unto that Office or Ministerie. That must be the meaning; and that's most true, and agreed upon by the whole Church of God. For the lawfulnesse thereof we appeale to the Law of Christ.

50. Three Orders of Ministers we find in the New Testa­ment, which are often mentioned by the most Ancient Fathers, and have alwayes been continued in the Catholike Church; first Apostles, or Bishops strictly so called; secondly Presbyters, and thirdly Deacons. Confessed it is on all hands, that a Dea­con may neither consecrate the Lords Supper; nor absolve, much lesse ordaine one to performe those offices. The reason is, because it belongs not to his Office or Ministery. And I pre­sume, it will prove to be as firme a truth, that a Presbyter may not Ordaine, because it belongs not to his Office or Ministerie. For though a Presbyter by his Ordere receive power to Con­secrate the Eucharist, and absolve a Penitent, he receives no power to ordaine. Being then not lawfully called and ordained thereunto, he ought not to take upon him this Office, by your owne confession.

51 My issue is this. They onely have power to Ordaine, who have this power given them by Christ, and the word of Christ. But to the Apostles onely, or Bishops strictly so called, is this power given by Christ and his word. Therefore Apo­stles onely, or Bishops strictly so called, have power to ordaine. The Major is firme, and agreed upon. The Minor onely is doubted of: I shall addresse my selfe therefore to justifie the Minor.

52. That the power of Ordination is neither given to, nor executed by any meere creature in the New Testament, but onely to and by, Apostles or Bishops strictly so called (who are of the same Order with Apostles) is evident by our Saviour's Commission immediatly issuing from himselfe, and explained by Saint Paul.

53. Our Saviour's Commission to his Apostles was this, S. Mat. 10.8. [...]; A gift yee have received, give this gift, so the Greekes: but we, freely yee have received, free­ly give, what yee have received. That is, saith Gennadius Pa­triarch of Constantinople, Apud Bal­sam. p. 1085. [...], of me, you have received this dignity of Priest­hood; freely yee have received it, freely give it. Neither is this the sence of Gennadius alone, but of 73 Bishops more, that con­curre with him in this Exposition. If these be not enough, I can tell you of Ambros. de dignit. Sacerd. c. 5. Saint Ambrose, Hieron. in Mat. 10.8. Saint Hierome, and others, that concurre with him in the same opinion.

54. This Commission was given to the Apostles; them onely he called, v. 1. and those onely at that time he sent with that Commission, v. 5. But given it was not to the Seventie: and hence it is, that not onely their number, but their names also are precisely set downe, v. 2, 3, 4. that so there might be no mistake at all in the Commission. And as it was given to the Apostles onely, so was it executed by them, and others of their ranke: but not by the Seventie, not by the Disciples or Presbyters. This is evident by Scripture and Church-historie. By Scripture; S ^t Paul and S ^t Barnabas were Apostles, and they Ordaine Presbyters in every Church, Act. 14.23. And Saint Paul ordaines Timothy, 2. Tim. 1.6. By Church-historie; Hieron. Ca­tal. c. 4. The Apostles ordained S. James Bishop of Hierusalem. Theodoret Dial. 1. S. Peter ordained Ignatius Bishop of Antioch: and Euseb hist. l. 3. c. 17. S. John ordained many Bishops in Asia. I make bold with Church History, because you allow thereof, and ordaine, Ord. p 6. that they, who are desirous of Orders, shall have triall made of their skill in Ecclesiasticall History.

55. Titus and Timothy were Apostles also; if we give cre­dit to Ignat. ad E­phes. p. 226. Ignatius and Theodoret. in 1. Tim. 3.1. Theodoret; to them the same power of [Page 21]Order is committed, which was to those 2. Cor. 11. [...]. chiefe Apostles. To Titus; Tit. 1.5. For this cause left I thee at Creet, that THOU SHOULD'ST ORDAINE PRESBYTERS, or El­ders, [...], as I have appointed thee: not as it shall please an Ordinance of Lay-men to appoint thee. The same power is acknowledged to be in Timothy, 1. Tim. 5.22. Lay hands suddenly on no man. And in Epaphroditus, by a good friend of yours; who ingenuously confesseth, that Ad Philip­penses Epa­phreditū mi­serat; ad Ec­clesiam eorum consirmādam, & constitu­endos in eâ Presbyteros & Episcopos, Walo Messal, p. 58. Saint Paul sent Epaphroditus to the Philippians, to Ordaine Presbyters in that Church.

56. Can you shew in Scripture, or Ecclesiasticall Historie, that the power of Ordination was given to, or acknowledged to be in one, or many Presbyters? Can you prove, that ever this power was exercised by one, or many Presbyters, and not censured for a nullity, not disclaimed as never done?

57. I question not, but you will presently turne me to your old and often answered Argument, 1. Tim. 4.14. Neglect not the gift, that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecye, with the LAYING ON OF THE HANDS OF THE PRESBYTERY. Therefore Timothy was ordained by Presbyters: and if Timothy, then may others also. This is the Crambe, the old burre, with which you hope at length to choke us.

58. First, I cannot but acknowledge, that Timothies Ordi­nation was orderly and legall. Secondly, I yeeld readily, that others may be ordained legally and commendably as he was. But withall I must tell you, that Timothy was ordained either by S. Paul alone, or by S. Paul with other of the Presbytery. That he was ordained by S. Paul alone, is the opinion of your great Master Calvin, and he hath Scripture to justifie it. Cal­vin's resolution is plaine and full; Calvin. In­stat. l. 4. [...] §. 16. Paulus ipse SE, NON ALIOS COMPLƲRES, Timotheo manus imposnisse commemorat: Saint Paul himselfe acquaints us, that HIM­SELFE, NOT ANY MORE, or other with him, layed hands upon Timothy. Exclusively, himselfe, not any other; marke that.

59. The text which confirmes this, is cited by Calvin in [Page 22]the same place; and this it is. 2. Tim. [...].6. Stirre up the gift of God, which is in thee, by the PUTTING ON OF MY HANDS. Evident it is, that this was done by Saint Paul. The truth is, [...]. Ig­nat. ad Phila­delph [...] 14. the Apostles in those dayes were called the Presbytery. Witnesse Ignatius, Hieron. Catal. [...].27. who lived in those times; and your pre­sent friend Walo Messalinus in these words, Walo Mes­sal. p. 21. Apostoli Pres­byterium Hierosolymitanae Ecclesiae constituunt; the Apostles were (in those times) the Presbytery of the Church at Hieru­salem. And what the Apostles were then and there, they were also in other Churches, where they came; no question to be made of that. And what power was in all the Apostles toge­ther, in respect of any Ministeriall duty, was in every one of them in particular, and by himselfe. Otherwise, how could every single Apostle, when their Colledge was dissolved, and they dispersed into severall Countries for the worke of the Gospell, performe his Office validly and effectually?

60. But suppose the most, that can be supposed, either you must give S. Paul the lye, or else you must confesse, that Saint Paul was one of those, that ordained Timothy. So then, to keep close to this president; an Apostle, or one of the same Order with an Apostle, must have a chiefe hand in Ordination. This serves to justifie the course of our Church; but it con­demnes your new Ordinance, which authorizeth Presbyters alone, without a Bishop or Apostle to ordaine.

61. Timothy was ordained by an Apostle, though perchance not by an Apostle alone: and as Timothy, so were all other or­dained by Apostles, or by such, as were of the same Order with the Apostles, and succeeded them in their Office. Hieron cont. Montani in­san. Ep. 54. Et apud nos Apostolorum locum tenent Episcopi; in S. Hieromes time, the Bishops held the Apostles roome; and so they doe at this day. In his time Bishops onely had the power of Ordination; but not Presbyters; and so is it with us at this present. Bishops have power to or­daine Presby­ters in every City. Hieron. in Tit. 1.5. EPISCOPI HABENT constituendi Presbyteros per urbes singulas POTESTATEM. But Presbyters have no such power. Hieron. ad Evag. Ep. 85. Quid facit EXCEPT A ORDINATIONE Epis­copus, quod Presbyter non facit? SET BY ORDINA­TION, and what doth a Bishop, that a Presbyter doth not! [Page 23]Saint Hierome distinguisheth plainly between the power of a Bishop, and the power of a Presbyter. Which extorted this confession from Walo Messalinus, that Walo. Mes­sal p. 288. in S ^t Hieromes time, a Bishop was distinguished from a Presbyter, jure ordinand [...]rum Clericorum, by the right of Ordination. In S. Hieromes dayes, a Presbyter might not Ordaine, no nor yet in the dayes of Atha­nasius, as is evident by that of Coluthus and Ischyras. Athan. A­pol. 2. Coluthus a Presbyter, took upon him to be a Bishop, as some of the Assem­bly doe now, and presumed to Ordaine one Ischyras a Presby­ter. But for this presumption, he was censured by Athanasius and all the Bishops of that Patriarchate, and [...]. Ib. this Imposition of hands sentenced to be no Ordination. And this censure was shortly after justified by foure Councells more, of no small note. As is to be seen in the same Apologie.

62. If you say, that this was adjudged a nullity, because one, and not many Presbyters did it, Epiphanius tells you, that Epiphan. haer. 75. Presbyterorum Ordo, the whole Order of Presbyters is not able to ordaine a Presbyter. How then can Ord p. 3. seven Presbyters be lawfully appointed and authorized to Ordaine? Can you autho­rize a Woman to Preach, or Baptize? Or a Deacon to Conse­crate the Supper of Christ? when you prove this, I shall in­cline to the other. But if Presbyters may ordaine, why did S ^t Paul, I pray you, send Epaphroditus an Apostle to Philippi, to ordaine Presbyters, where many Presbyters already were? That there were at Philippi divers Presbyters, is too plaine to be denied; for S. Paul writes Philip. 1.1. to the Bishops and Deacons in that Citie. And those Bishops were but Presbyters; as is agreed on all hands. And yet that S. Paul sent Epaphroditus thither to ordaine Presbyters, is acknowledged by Walo Mes­sal. p. 58. Thus at Ephesus were many Presbyters, Act. 20.17. and yet S. Paul manifests, that the power of Ordination, as also of conventing and censuring Presbyters within that Diocesse, was in Timothy, and in Timothy only.

63. No man, or Ordinance of man, can authorize me to doe any Ministeriall act, which God hath not given me power to performe; that is, while I am in this condition; no more then you can authorize me, to flie in the aire. No man can give Au­thority to a Deacon, while a Deacon, to consecrate the Lords [Page 24]Supper, or to absolve a Penitent. Neither can any authority give a Presbyter, while a Presbyter only, the power of Ordina­tion. The reason is, because the God of all Power and Order hath assigned and appropriated this power to an higher Order; as hath been already demonstrated.

64. And yet, mauger Gods Ordinance, Ord. p. 3. yee appoint and authorize Doctor Cornelius Burges, Doctor William Gouge, and one and twenty more, or any seven of them to Ordaine Pres­byters. But I beseech you by what authority doe you make this Ordinance? For matters meerly spirituall, the old appeale had wont to be Act. 24.14 to the Law and the Prophets. Shew me in the Old or New Testament, that ever this power was in Lay-men, or given by Lay-men. The New Testament is so full, so plaine against you, that Calvines assertion is, that Calvin. In­stit. l. 4. c. 3. §. 16. not the People, but the PASTORS ONLY, did lay hands upon their Ministers. And your resolution accords with his, viz. that it is an Ordi­nance of Christ, that Persons be set apart for the Office of the Ministry by PREACHING PRESBYTERS.

65. But in your language, I perceive, it is one thing to or­daine, another thing to authorize others to ordaine. Whereas to speak truth, Nemo potest plus juris con­ferre in a [...]iū, quam ipse habet. no man can conferre that spirituall power upon another, which he hath not in himselfe. You assume not indeed to your selves the power to Ordaine; but how much doe you abate of it, when yee authorize others to ordaine? Make the best of it, it will returne to this issue, That either these Presby­ters, before your Ordinance was Voted, had power to ordaine, or else it was not in your power to authorize them to ordaine.

66. True it is, that a Prince, or State, may give leave, or not leave, to a Bishop to ordaine, and to a Presbyter to exercise his Priestly Office within their severall Dominions. But this is only the power of Licence; it gives them liberty, but not au­thority to ordaine, or Preach. Suppose a Bishop assisted with Presbyters, should ordain without your Licence in the associa­ted Counties, were there a nullity in the Ordination? I beleeve, your blessed Assembly will not say so. If they doe, they gain­say your third Proposition; and the Scripture gainsayes them. For though the Governours of Hierusalem had charged the Apostles, that Act. 4.18. they should not Preach in the Name of Jesus; [Page 25]yet they professe, that Ib. v. 20. they cannot but speak the things, which they have seen and heard: and that Act. 5.29. they ought to obey God, ra­ther then man. God, that had given them the power and charge, rather then man, that had discharged them.

67. If you think the case is otherwise in Preaching then Ordaining, you shall see, that Act. 13.50. & cap. 14.5, 19. when S. Paul and S. Barnabas had been persecuted at Antioch, and Iconium, and Lystra; though the Rulers had used them despightfully, and Act. 13.50. the chiefe men had expelled them out of their Coasts, yet for all this Act. 14.21. from Derbe they returned againe to Lystra, and to Iconium, and to Antioch, and Ib. v. 23. ordained them Presbyters in every Church. And those Ordinations, I hope, were valid, though they were against the sence of the State.

68. If to authorize, be to give freedome, then may the Turke authorize, as well as you; and your authorizing is no more then his. And yet, I think, no Christian will deny, but that those Bishops and Priests within the Turkes Territories ought to performe the duties of their severall Orders, though the Grand Senior himselfe inhibite them. But this must be done, not in contempt, but in obedience to authority; for Rom. 13.1. we must be subject to the higher powers. But God is higher then all earthly powers; we must therefore obey God. Thus farre then we yeeld obedience to God and his word.

69. But S ^t Peter commands us to 1. S. Per. 2.13. submit to every Ordi­nance of man. He does indeed, and so we must, either by doing or suffering. We must either doe, what is injoyned, if so it may be done without offence to God: otherwise, if it may not be done, we must patiently suffer, what shall be inflicted: as God knowes a multitude of us have, since these times of triall. And herein the Turke reades to you a Lecture of justice: for he permits Christians to enjoy their Religion according to the termes agreed upon: but without any horrid abjuration of their Faith, or Liturgy, or Canonicall obedience; as also with­out any such unchristian Covenant to extirpate Episcopacy. A course unheard of among the Heathen; and savors strongly of Antichrist But a part it is of your Religion, to enforce men to forsweare their Religion and Allegiance. And herein you outstrip Julian the Apostata, in his most barbarous subtilties.

70. Your next Proposition is most consonant to veritie and Scripture; viz. Ord. p. 2. That it is manifest by the word of God, that no man ought to take upon him the Office of a Minister, untill he be lawfully called and ordained thereunto. And I have already shewed, who are lawfully called and ordained. This being true, it may not be listed in the number of your false Propositions, which I intend to confute. It shall therefore passe untouched, while I hasten to the following Proposition, which deserves a just censure.

The fifth Proposition.
The work of Ordination, that is to say, An outward solemne setting apart of Persons for the Office of the Ministerie in the Church, by Preaching Pres­byters, is an Ordinance of Christ.

71. NOt so (my great Masters) by Presbyters it is not; but by Bishops strictly so called, or (if you will) by Apo­stles, it is Christs owne Ordinance. The Seventy were Presby­ters, they ordained not, we find no such Commission given them. The Apostles did; because upon them and their Suc­cessors onely in that Sacred Office and Order, our Saviour con­fer'd this power.

72. That the Seventie were not of equall ranke or order with the Apostles, cannot be denied. If S. Hierome beare any sway, he tells us, that Hieron. Ep. 127. Mans. 6. the seventy were, secundi ordinis, & minoris gradûs, of a second Order; and of a lower degree then the Twelve were of. And Walo Messalinus himselfe professeth, that Walo. Mes­sal p. 26.27. the Greek interpreters observe, that the Apostles were of an higher dignity then Presbyters. And with them he resolves, that Ib. p. 269. they are of severall Orders. And withall he fairely ac­knowledgeth, that Ʋbi distin­gui ordines & gradus caeptisunt, at­que Episcopus major extitit Presbytero, tum Ordinatio non potuit u­trius (que) esse communis. Ib. p. 229. from the time these Orders were distingui­shed, and that a Bishop became greater then a Presbyter, OR­DINATION COVLD NOT BE COMMON TO THEM BOTH. But these Orders were distinguished in the Apostles times; as appears by Theodoret, and Beza's severall Editions of the New Testament. From the Apostles times therefore both these could not Ordaine. Besides two Orders they are; therefore not one and the same.

73. Yea, they were distinct, while the Apostles lived here on earth. If Walo Messal. say not so, believe me not. Ib. p. 62. Episco­pi SVMMVM in Ecclesiastico Ordine GRADVM obtinent, ut oli [...] tenuere, qui APOSTOLI vocabantur: Bishops hold the highest degree in the Ecclesiasticall Order, as heretofore those did, who were called Apostles. But Ib. p. 269. then it was said of the Councells moulded up of Both Orders, Act. 15.22. It pleased the Apo­stles and Presbyters. Take his own words, and weigh them well. Tunc dicebatur in Conciliis ex utroque Ordine composi­tis, & congregatis, [...]. Two Orders they were then, and two Orders they are now; though it hath pleased the Church to change a title. And that the low­er of these two did never warrantably Ordaine, is sufficiently manifested in the observations upon the third and fourth Pro­positions. Say you then what you will, frame what Ordinances you please, the Ordinations made by M ^r Edmund Calamy, and M ^r Henry Robrough, and by the whole Assembly of Assessors and Scribes, will be as good as nothing, meere nullities. And your new Presbyters shall be, what they were before, shop­men, or worse, and branded to all posterity with Ischyras.

74. Now, I hope, every reasonable eye sees, that it is more then time for you to provide, that Ord. p. 3. a Government of the Church be formed up to the full power, and worke of it; and that the whole course of Ordination of Ministers in an Ordinary way, be set up and setled for all the three Kingdomes. For this your frame is not built upon the foundation of Apostles and Prophets, Christ Iesus being the head corner stone; but upon the whimsies of your own braine.

75. Hitherto, by your owne confession, ye have gone in no ordinary, no setled way: and therefore not in the way of Christ and his Apostles. Neither is the whole course of your intended Ordination yet set up; your Wisedomes have not yet found it; no nor yet the Kirke of Scotland, from whom you take your paterne. Geneva and Amsterdam come short of your great in­tended Master piece. None of these have formed up a Govern­ment of the Church to the full power and work of it; their plat­formes worke low, and their power is empty; but your braines flye high, and we shall have a work of wonder next October.

76. The whole course, you promise fairely; as yet, God knowes, ye have provided only for part of Ordination; unlesse ye make Presbyters and Deacons the same, as you have already shufled Bishops properly so called, and Presbyters into one Or­der: cleane contrary to the ancient Church, and to the book of God. Thus you have pulled downe the ordinary way; God give you grace to see your error, that you may in time endeavour to set up the old, the ordinary way.

77. For Examination, provision is made; but especially, Ord. p 4. or first of all, That he, that is to be Ordained, must bring with him a testimoniall of his taking the Covenant of the three King­domes, framed by a Rebellious combination, against the word of God, and the Lawes of this Kingdome; but according to the directions of the World, the Flesh, and the Divell. A testimo­niall worthy of such an Ordinance, such Ordainers, and such Orders. Of this he must be sure to bring a Testimoniall. And without this neither Learning nor holinesse of life will serve the turne.

78. His age is to be twenty foure yeares, at the least, Ord. p. 4 For age they agree with our Canons. Touching The Mini­sters appoin­ted to ordain, shall proceed to enquire touching the grace of God in him. Ib. grace will be an hard matter to enquire; Ib. p. 8. an examination of two severall daies, or of two severall yeares will hardly serve the turne. Iudas had attended upon our Saviour three yeares and upwards; and yet when our Saviour told his Apostles, that S. Joh. 6.70, 71. one of them was a Divell, and would betray him, Iudas was little mistrusted by his fellow Apostles: for the text saith plainly, that S. Jo. 13 22. they looked one upon another, doubting of whom he spake. Indeed by righteousnesse and holinesse of life, you and we may judge of grace. We may also make tryall of his Ord. p. 4. Learning and sufficiency in some good measure, by examinati­on. But if we take sufficiency in a strict sence, 2. Cor. 2.16. [...], who is sufficient for these things? The man is hardly to be found in S. Pauls judgement: 1. Tim. 3.2. for he ought to be vigilant, apt to teach; and Tit. 1.9. able by sound Doctrine to convince the gain­sayers. The Independents give you daily occasion to shew your abilities.

79. Ord. p. 4. Touching the evidence of his calling to the holy Mini­stery, will be a curious point to enquire. The onely way we know, is by enquiring of the Party to be ordained, whether he [Page 29]conceive and beleeve, that he is inwardly called to this Sacred Function: and by his answer to judge. So in this particular, beleefe is necessary on both sides: for Heb. 11.1. faith is the evidence of things not seen. And neither he, nor I, can see his inward calling.

80. The Rules for examination are not much amisse; onely I would gladly know of you, Triall shall be made of his knowledge in the chiefe grounds of Re­ligion, and of his ability to defend the Orthodoxe do­ctrine contai­ned in them, against all un­sound and er­ronious opini­ons. Ord. p. 6. what is the Religion, he is to be examined in; where the chiefe grounds thereof are to be found. Which is the Orthodoxe Doctrine he is to defend: and which the unsound and erroneous opinions, he is to confute. Whether Of his skill in cases of Conscience Ib. in case of Conscience it be upon some occasions lawfull to Ro. 13 1, 2. resist the higher, 1. S. Pet. 2.13. the Supreme Powers, the King? Cleane contrary to the Doctrine of those two great Apostles, S. Peter, and S. Paul, who command us to submit, to be subject to these powers Rom. 13. [...]. for Conscience sake. Whether in case of Conscience, it be lawfull to rob men of their Wives, Mothers of their Children, and all these of their meanes; when they have neither offen­ded against the Law of God, nor the established Lawes of the Land? Whereas the Law of God is, to Ib. v. 7. give every man his owne, his due; and Jer. 22.3. to wrong no man.

81. It is required also, that Ord. p. 7. before his Ordination he Preach, and dispute. Preach before some judicious Corpora­tion; and maintaine a Dispute, as your Learned men did at Ʋxbridge. But I pray you, where doe you find it lawfull to Preach before Ordination? S. Paul is of another mind. Rom. 10.15. How shall they Preach, (saith he) except they be sent? Much about the same time, that they v. 14. beleeve in him of whom they have not heard. Indeed the Art. 23. Church of England, and Confess Au­gust. Art. 14. the Confession of Auspurge, submit to S. Paul, and professe, that it is not law­full for any man to PREACH PUBLICKLY, before he be law­fully called and sent. And who are lawfully called and sent, is dec [...]ared, §. 56, 57. &c.

82. But lawfull calling and sending are grown out of date, and though the People are not competent Ordainers, yet are they hold by you to be competent Judges of the worth and abilities of those that are desirous to take Orders. They must He is to be sent to the Church, or other place, where he is to serve, there to Preach three severall daies, and to con­verse with the People, &c. Ord. p. 8. have try­all of their gifts for their edification. And after every ones tri­all, Ib. p. 9. in the last of his three dayes Preaching before a strange and unknowne Parish, an Instrument in writing is to be affixed [Page 30]to the Church doore, and at the day appointed, any member of that Congregation may with all Christian discretion and patience, put in exceptions against him. What a frivolous thing is this? What a bable to please the People with, that they are to trye his gifts by three Lectures, which may be none of his owne; and by a fortnights or three weekes conversation, which may be easily dissembled? I shall not give you mine owne conje­ctures, least they be misconstrued: but I shall acquaint you with two observations of S. Hierome. The first shall be concerning the Peoples ability to judge of Sermons. Hieron. ad Nepotian. Ep. 2. Nihil tam facile, quàm vilem plebeculam, & indoctam concionem Linguae volubi­litate decipere. Nothing so easie, as to cheat the rude People, and an unlearned Congregation with a voluble tongue. The second is this; Hieron. ad­vers. Iovin. l. 1. c. 19. In Sacerdotibus comprobandis unusquis (que) moribus suis favet, ut non tam bonum, quàm SƲI SIMILEM quaerat. When the choice of the Priest is in the People; every man so fa­vours his owne manners, that he lookes not so much after a good man, as a man after his owne palate. We are likely then to see goodly Ministers swarme among us, if your Ordinance may prevaile.

83. Well, Ord. p. 9. upon the Ordination day, a Solemne Fast is to be kept by the Congregation in that Church, where he is to serve, that they may more earnestly joyne in Prayer to God for a blessing upon the Person, and labours of this his servant. How much bet­ter had it been, to have trod in the Ancient steps of the Church, and to have the Ordination upon the Sundaies after the Ember weekes; when the whole Church of God Fasts and Prayes for this very purpose, that it would please God, to powre downe his Spirit upon the Persons to be ordained the Sunday follow­ing; and to furnish them with such gifts and graces as are fit for so high a calling. For no question, but the Devotions of the whole Church of God together, are more acceptable to God, and more availeable with him, then the Fastings and Prayers of any one petty Parish.

84 Ib. p. 10. The person to be ordained, is to be demanded in the face of the Congregation concerning his faith in Christ Jesus. A questi­on not unseasonable for the times; for a friend of mine was que­stioned by M. Corbet for teaching, that the mother of Iesus [Page 31]Christ was the mother of God. The Mini­ster which hath Preach­ed, shall de­mand of him, who is to be ord [...]in'd, con­cerning his perswasion of the truth of the Refo [...]med Religion, ac­cording to the Scriptures. Ib. He is also to be examined, concerning his perswasion of the truth of the reformed Religion; which few men know where to finde. Where may we see the Articles of your Religion, or the rule you will be tryed by? Is the Reformed Religion contained in out 39 Articles? In the Apostles, Nicene, or Athanasius Creed? None of these are in your new Directory. It may be it is in the Harmony of Con­fessions. I would to God you would tell us, which it is. Be it what it will, it is according to the Scriptures. Is this enough? Will not the Brownist and the Anabaptist, the Papist and the Antitrinitarian, yea and the Socinian, say as much? And some of these will put the best of your Elders shroadly to it to prove the contrary.

85. But why have we not a Directory for faith, as well as for Prayers? That so we may know, what your new reformed faith is. I think as your Prayers are unformed, so your faith is unfound; it is yet to be agreed on. A wonder it is, you are so long in voting it. But your wisedomes know, that it is impos­sible to vote a Religion, which might please all the adherents to this Rebellion. As therefore ye leave every man at liberty to the spirit of prayer, so have ye left every man free to choose his Religion, so it be not destructive to your Platformes. This you esteem to be that liberty of Conscience, which stints not the Spirit, and is the only curbe to Popery.

86. But you have a great care of He is to be demanded of his Zeale and Faithfulnesse in maintai­ning the Ʋ ­nity of the Church, a­gainst Errour and Schisme. Ib. the Churches unity against Error and Schisme; he is therefore to be examined concerning his Zeale and Faithfulnesse in the maintenance of this unity. But have we not read of some, whose Faith is said to be Faction, whose Religion, Rebellion; & Tertul. de Praescrip. c. 42. whose Ʋnity, Schisme? But how shall they maintaine Ʋnity, that have dissolved the bonds of charity? Tha [...] have raised such and so many Schismes, as the Church hath hardly been acquainted with from her foundati­on? That have hatched and clucked up so many Errors and Heresies, that men and Angells stand amazed at? And yet a pre­tence of Ʋnity, and a pretence of Reformation, may work much upon the weake People, as many other pretences have. Good Lord, how like the Devill we affect to be, to make show to be, what we are least; and to endeavour that, we seek to over­throw. [Page 32]The rest of your Interrogatories are borrowed from our Book of Ordination, and from our Canons: as every thing else is, that is good in this Directorie.

87. In the Ordination I observe, that you call the Ministery Ord. p 11. a great worke, an [...] 12. holy Service: and suddenly after he is to be exhorted to Ib consider the greatnesse of his Office. I am glad, you have so good an opinion of the calling. If then it be such a worke, such an Office as yee speake of, why have you thrust such illiterate meane Persons into our Cures, as Blacke-Smiths, Taylors, Felt-makers, and the like, with unwashed hands to meddle with this holy Service? Are these men fit to under­take so great a worke? Is it probable, that such as these should Ib. both save themselves, and the People by you committed to their Charge? It is rather to be feared, that as Levit. 10.1. Num. 3. [...]. with Nadab and Abihu they offer strange fire, so with them they will perish in this fire, and draw the people into the same destruction.

88. Well, he is [...] p. 32. set apart by Imposition of hands (that an­cient Ceremonie of Ordination) to fulfill the worke of his Mi­nistery in all things. What Ministery is this? Here is none named in particular. And yet there are more Orders of Mini­sters then one, witnesse your servant Smectymnuus, who Smect. Ans. p. 63. acknowledgeth Presbyters and Deacons to be of two distinct Orders. But the Church of England, agreeably to the whole Church of God for 1500 yeares together, tells us, that Preface to the Book of Ordination. from the Apostles times there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christs Church BISHOPS, PRIESTS, and DEACONS.

89. His Ministery? Hath it no speciall, or particular name to be knowne by? Alas Ministery and Minister are words of a large extent, generall names that reach to all Orders, and per­chance further. Minister is the Genus, which hath these spe­cies under it, Bishop, Priest, and Deacon; and each of these is a Minister. But before we can tell, which of these is meant, there must be added a specificall difference: as there must be to a Creature, before we can conceive, what manner of Crea­ture, or of living Creature is intended. What though, In all things, be added; yet all these things will reach no further, then to those things, which are within the compasse or power of that his Ministery, to which he is ordained. And so for all [Page 33]this we are to seek, to what Ministery he is set apart. Whereas in our Book of Ordination, in the Pontificals, and Enchologe, every person in his Ordination is by name assigned to his parti­cular Order.

90. Indeed I must confesse, your Minister is expressed to be a Presbyter; before Ordination, pag 4. as also after Ordi­nation, pag. 15. but at Ordination, Minister. As if Presbyter and Minister were convertible termes, names of the selfe same signification. True it is, that every Presbyter is a Mini­ster, but every Minister is not a Presbyter; no more then every living Creature is a man, though every man be a living Crea­ture. I should rather conceive a Minister to be a Deacon then a Presbyter in our language; because we usually translate, [...] and [...], Ministery, and Minister, 2. Cor. 13.23. 2. Tim. 4.5. &c. But you must enjoy your owne words, and your owne meaning, though they be contrary to the sence and custome of the Church.

91. Order also is taken, that Ord p. 12. one of the Ordainers exhort and charge the People in the name of God, willingly to receive and acknowledge him as the Minister of Christ; and to maintaine, encourage, and assist him in all the parts of his Office. No question to be made of their willingnesse to receive and acknowledge a new Minister. Novelties are pleasing, and the People 2. Tim 4.3. ha­ving itching cares, will heap to themselves Teachers after their owne lusts and fancies. But when it comes to maintenance, yee shall find, that an Exhortation or Charge will not serve the turne. For though Jer. 5.31. their Prophets prophecy falsely, and the People love to have it so, yet experience hath taught you, that maintenance comes hardly from them, till your Orders and Ordinances constraine them to pay. You have been therefore, and will be enforced to take a more strict course for the main­tenance of your Ministers.

92. But when it comes to assistance, they will be forward enough: for your Ordinance is, that Ord. p. 12. the People be charged to assist the Minister in all the parts of his Office. What? Are all Presbyters? Are all Ministers? Are all Teachers? Haeretico­rum qui [...]am Larc [...] sacer­dotalia mune­ra injungunt. Tertul. de Praescrip. c. 41. By your Ordinance, not only some, but all the People are turned Pro­phets. The People must assist the Minister in Baptizing, in [Page 34]Preaching, in administring the Lords Supper: for all these belong to his Office. If this be not your meaning, you should have done well, to have expressed your selves in plainer termes, that we might understand your meaning. For this is certaine, that no man can assist a Presbyter in all the parts of his Office, that is not of the same Office. For though a Deacon may assist the Presbyter in the administration, he cannot assist him in the Consecration of the Lords Supper. And your selves will say, that a Deacon may not assist him in Imposition of hands. How then may the People assist him in all the parts of his Office? Surely either the meaning, or the expression is not good; that's plaine.

93. I have done with your Directorie, I have discharged my Conscience: and I would to God, I could Ord. p. 12. dismisse you with a Blessing. With a Prayer I may, beseeching God so abundantly to blesse you with his grace, that you may see your foule Impieties, and Repent, and in time, while it is called to day, discharge your Consciences, knowing assuredly, that you must appeare, and give a strict account for all your Ordi­nances and Actions before the impartiall Barre of that uner­ring Iudge Christ Jesus. And Heb. 10.31. a dreadfull thing it is to fall into the Hands of the Everliving God. Then an Ordinance of Parliament, or the Protection of both Houses shall stand you, and your Divine Assembly in small stead. In that day your Ordinances, and Actions, and Intentions, shall be throughly sifted, and layed open before your faces. Then S. Ioh. 5.29. they, that have done good, shall goe into the Resurrection of Life, and they that have done evill, into the Resurrection of Damnation. God give every one of us grace to lay this to heart, that so we may avoyd the wrath to come.

AMEN.