") t \^./ ^'W^1 H
Scs*isik
o
T II E
PRIESTHOOD
OF T H E
Old and New Testament b Y
SUCCESSION-
In Seven LETTERS.
SHEWING
That there is no other Way to prove the Lawfulnefs of Mini fieri al Million.
WITH
An Answer to the Principal Objections.
By ROBERT C ALDER, M. A. Late Presbyter of the Suffering Church of S c o tland.
Ezra, ii. 6x.
Thefe fought their RtgifUr among theft that were reckoned by Genealogy; but they were nof U und ; therefore were they, as polluted, put from the Priefthood.
Hebrews, v. 4.
And ro l\Tan takerh this Honour to hin.felf, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.
EDINBURGH:
printed for J. "W 1 l s o n, Eookfeller in the Exchange.
5 c s 4W 3.
TO THE
RE A D E R-
Succession being the Divine Char- ter of the Gofpel Priefthood in the New Teftament, as it was for the Atf* ronical Priefthood in the Old, according to the Scriptures, it concerns every one who fets np for a Minifter, to be furc of his evidence ; yea, and it concerns the people, (as I make out in theie follow- ing Letters) to know whether or not they live under the conduct of fuch a Miniftry, as may lawfully Preach, admU nifter Sacraments, abfolve Penitents, and thruft out ftubborn Offenders, which can no otherwise be but by slfofohcai Sue- ceffioru
Now, if a Presbyterian tells me, that their Presbytery fucceeds to that Presby- tery mentioned in i Tim. iv. 14, that laid hands on Timothy ; I Ihall afk him, by way of reply, How can he prove that more«than a Jefuit, if ha were (b ridi- culous as to allerr, That his order was in the days of Mofes, from that Scripture, Numb. xxvi. 44. O/Jefui came the family of fA? Jefuits i For neither of them can produce catalogues of their Succeffiom a 2 Wc
We can condefcend upon the time when Presbytery, Jefuitifm, and Soctnia- hiftn began, and that was fourteen, if nor fifteen hundred years after the days of the Apofles. Wc may therefore rea- fonably conclude, that that Church Go- vernment that lafted longed in the Church, and has been univerfai in Eu* rope, Afia, and Africa, the beginning whereof we cannot trace in any age be- twixt us and the ApoStlesj that, I fay, fhould be the Government, that did pre- lerve the Faith that was once delivered, to the Sat/its, and transmitted to pofterity; and thzz a is the Government to which Chriil promifed, that the gates of Hell jbou/d not prevail cgainfi it, and to be zviih it to the end of the zuorld.
They have a dreadful account to make, who wilfully Ihut their eyes a- gainft the light, and make their follow- ers KvaJlow down, for undoubted ora- cles, falfe maxims and fayings, or erro- neous gloi'fes upon true texts ot Scripture.
I fnall briefly hint at (bme popular tricks, whereby they miflead the poor people ; as,
I. To call. Epifcopacy, Popery : It is ordinary to give odious names to any thing that they intend to make hateful.
I
C v ]
I thought it unworthy of John I\no^t in his pious and ferions Treatife on Failing) in his Book of ComtnfruPrayef, printed at Edinburgh by the heirs of Andrew Hart, 1635-, to exprels himlclf thus : Popes, Cardinals, and H'wned Btj'hops. By this fcandalous epithet, he intended to raite monltrous ideas in the heads of the people, to make Biihops odious. Thus his pretended SuccciTors call re- ibrmed Epilcopacy Pbftty, tho' it be the greatett bulwark in the world againlt it. II. A fecond initance of their abating
o
the people, is making them believe, that the Advocates for Prelacy make a fairer abearance from human fv?ittng$% than from canonical Scriptures. Nazianz. Que?. Pag. 109. Whereas,
There can be nothing more falfe. For we tell them, that we have the Divine Inltitution of the Old Teftamcnt for our Pattern, to wit, the inequality of Higb-prieft, Priejls, and Levites. And we defy the earth to prove, that our Saviour changed the imparity of the Old Teftamcnt into a parity of the New. Yea, the contrary was foretold by the Prophet Ifaiah, lxvi. 21. And I wilt take of them for Priejis and LeVrtef, faith the Lord. Here was an imparity a 3 to
r vi ]
ro be in the New Teftament. We tell them that our Saviour, in his own Col- lege, had twelve Apoftles above the ievcnty Difciples j here is one rank or clafs above another, whom he governed when perfonally upon earth, and he de- puted the higher order to govern after his Afcenfion. And we tell, from Jfts vi. 6. and viii. 14. that thefe Apojl/es conferred a power upon men that were full, of the Holy Ghoft, to (hare with them in the Government, and that by the fignificant ceremony of imfofing of hands, but not an equal power with them- felves. For Philip the Deacon converted Samaria to the Chriftian Religion, and baptized them ; but could not lay hands upon them ; for that belonged to an higher office, as appears from the fore- cited places of Scripture.
We tell them, That St. James was Bi- ihop of Jerufalem, where (according to Presbyterians) there were at lead thirty thoufand Chriftians, as 1 make out in this Lflay : And we fee, that St. "James prefided authoritatively in the firft ge- neral Council at Jerufaiem, Ails xv.
Again, we tell them, That allowing the Presbytery mentioned, 1 Tim. iv. 14. was a lociety of Presbyters, (con- trary
[ vii ] trary to ihc opinion of St. Jerome and Mr. Calvin, their pretended Patrons); yet that ordination of Timothys was mainly and chiefly the aft of the Apoitle St. Paul, w:io calls it the laying on of bis hands, 2 Tim. i. 6.
We tell them of the feven Churches *of dfu> with learned Presbyterians their concefnons or their being Epifcopal.
We teli them, that penjbtna in the gainfayinv ofCo\"dh, Jude verie 17. figni- fies an inferior Clergyman's rifing up againft his fuperior in, the Church, and that this lin may be committed under the Gofpel, as well as under the Law.
We teli them, that they may as well unferipture the Epifiles to Timothy and Titus , as to unbifhop themfelves.
Thefe, I think, with feveral other Scriptures, backed with the practice of the Universal Church, and the Expofi- tion of the Ancients, may prove futfici- ent to confute that falfehooJ, to wir, That Pre/atijls make a fairer jhezu from human fVritings} than from canonical Scripture.
111. Another fallacy they impofe upon their followers, is, That Bifjop and Pres- byter is all one in Scripture ; the names are common, and therefore no o^e order
above
[ viii ] above another. At this rate they may realon, that all the Pncfts in the Ola Teltament were High-pridts, becaufe Aaron and his Tons are called Prieits, Lev. i. 7, b. and alio argue thus, That St. Stephen the Deacon was an Apoitle, hecaule the sJfojile St. Paul calls him- ieif a Deacon.
IV. Another falfe way of reasoning they ufe to impute upon their Readers and Followers, is, That,
The ancient and modern advocates for Prelacy have different opinions about Bfip copacy, and therefore there is no real foun- dation for it.
I have anfwered this before, thus : Put this argument in the Jews mouths againft Chriitians, then the Chriflian Re- ligion is nothing, becaufe the Profeflors divide among tliemfelves j fome aflert* ing the divinity of Chrift, and others denying it: Again, off goes rhe cano- nicalnels of the Scriptures, becaufe tome books are doubted among Chriitians. Others may conclude, there is no (iich thing as Antichrif, becaufe of the diffe- rent opinions about him. Again, Herod and Pontius Pilate, were right when they agreed to crucify Chrift, and St. Paul and Barnabas were wrong, becaufe they
contended
contended among themfelves : Yea, by this way of arguing, Satan's kingdom is right, and Cbrifl's is wrong, becaufc the iiibjects of Satan agree, and Chnjl's fubjeots have contentions among them- felves.
V. Another trick they put upon the readers of their books againfl us, is, That they never take notice of the anfwers given by us to their principal argu- ments: For example, they ftill cite ar- guments from Dr. Stillingfleet's Ireni- cum, which, they think, make for them ; but they never take notice of his own retradations and anfwers to him (elf; as many fpeak of David's (ins, but few of his repentance.
When they objefl, that St. Patrick or- dained three hundred and fixty-five Bi- fhops in Ireland, who, fay they, could not be Diccetans, becaufe fo many ; which is very falfe j for there might be a thoufand Dioccfles in Ireland : It is all one whether a Diocefe be one mile or twelve miles. They never heed the anfwer given to them, That every one of tkefe Bijbops had nine Presbyters un- der them.
When they object againfl: us, That it was the cuitom of Alexandria to elect
one
c ■■?*. i;
one of their own number whom they called Bijhof ; they tupprefs the return we make to them, to wit, That neigh* bourinv Bifcops were called, to give the covfummatroe a& of Confe oration.
VI. A fixth thing I charge upon thenr in abiifmg their followers, is their ar- guing from an Accejfiry to a Princi* IP*/, or from what is not cffential to that which is : As for example, to argue from a Diocefe to a Bifoop, which is not an eflential correlative • for the Apoftles were Bifhops at their firft confecration, before ever there was a Diocefe, or a Parifh, in a Magiftratical way : It is net a particular place, but power in the Priedhood, that we plead for, in any part of the world.
I add to this, their arguing from the primitive Chriftians, their ftate of perfe- ction to their after-date of profperity ; which is to reafon from a circumftance to a fubftance.
I have anfvvered, and flill continue to anfvver thus : I fuppofe that, when the Ifraelites had been fettled in the land of Canaan, fome crack-i>rain'd Schi (ma- tick had fet up againft the rational con- flituiions in Church and State, and en-' deavoured to withdraw them from obe- dience
[ * 1
diencc to their Governors, by arguing from their prefent (tare, to the (late of their forefathers in the wildernels, by a pathetical popular harangue, after this manner :
0 Sirs ! What innovations are now flnce the days of our forefathers t In the zutldernefs there was no Circumcifion, no fiat eh Temflcs arid Synagogues, no leaning at taking the Pafchai Lamb ; for they took it flanding,, in hajle, and with their fiaves in their hands : there were no feafts of Tabernacles then. Tea / then Mofes and Aaron were protejled againf as ufurpers of the people, their natural right of liber* ty and property in Church and State, by the Saints of the LORD, who fuffered martyrdom in a congregational way, fay- ing, Numb, xvi. at the beginning, You take too much upon you j for all the congregation is holy as well as you* And did not the furvivers of thefe holy Martyrs cry out agamfl Mofes, faying You have killed the people of the Lord. Verle 41.
Ought not fuch a litigious fellow to be lent to a wildernefs with his adhe« rents, rather than be permitted to difturb the peace of the land of promife ?
VII.
C *« ]
VII. The lafl thing I charge our anta- gonilts with, is, That the prefent Pres- byterian champions do not infill: upon the proof of their Miniftry, from the point of Apoftolical SuccelTion, as I prove here, that their predeceflbrs did, very judicionfly, againil the Erajlians and Independents ; witnefs their Jus Reg* EccL printed in 1647. If they have now quitted this plea, it is certainly becaufe they could not prove it ; as I, with fub million to better judgments, endeavour (and I hope with (uccefs) to prove Epifi copal Ordination by Apo\iolical SucceJJion, in this Performance, which I defy a counter party to overthrow, unlefs they demon 'rate to the world, that there is fome other thing than SuccelTion that is the fundamental Charter of the Mini- dry, which, I am fure, that the pretence to grace, gtft^ found doClrine, and popular cails cannot be : And if men, that are called PrfAe\tanisy obje<5t many inconve- niencies againft me for this undertaking, I have in this fmall tractate anfwered them . And it will be found, that all the abfurdities will light at their doors who oppofe,and cannot be charged uponthefe that do defend, That the Goffel prtfflr hood is founded upon slpoflohcal Succejjicn.
It
It was the Presbyterian principle in the 47th year of God, and it is as true now as it was then; let them therefore prove that they arc the Succcftbrs of the dpofi/es, or the SucccfTors of that Presbytery^ which, they fay, laid hands on Timothy ; or the SuccelTors of the fixed Moderators, which they acknow- ledge in the firft three Centuries ; or the Succctfbrs of the Culdees in Scotland. Yea, le-t them give a catalogue of their Succeflion from 'John Knox ; for if they hold not by the Succcffion, and prove what they affirm, they have no advan- tage of Independents, Brozunijis, Era/H- ans, nor Enthufiafls. And if they flicker themfclves under the wings of any of the forementioned Sectarians, let them andver their predeceflbrs arguments a- gainit them, which i have abridged in thefe following Letters. Let them tell us when was fipifcopal Ordination que- ftioncd, as we can prove that the Ordi- nation of Ifchyras by Cdluthus, a Pres- byter in Athanafius's time, was rejected as invalid. The powTer of Ordination is what St. Jerome grants to be the privi- lege of the Bijhop above the Presbyter, in his letter to E cagrius, when he lays, What is it that a Bijhop does that a B Presbyter
( xlv )
Presbyter may nrt do, except Ordination '? And in his Dialogue to the Latifenanr, he fays, That the welfare of the Church Confijls in the dignity of the High-pritfl, to whom, if there be not fome mat chiefs power alloived, there will be as many di* vifions in the Church, as there are Priefls.
It is but reafoilablc that the Chrijhan Church Ihould be as orderly and regular as the Jezvijh Church was ; and the fird Chriftians borrowed many of their ufages from the Jews : For example, The two Sacraments ofBaptifm and the. Lord's Sup* per, were anfwerable to the Jewijh Bap- tifms and their Pojh&niutns after the Paf fover • : Ordination by impofitionof hands, is derived from their Ordination in the Synagogue ; our Cathedral Churches anfwer to their Temple, and our Paroch Churches to their Synagogues ; our Churching of Ij/omen to their Purifications : And why not our Bifoofs, Pnejls, and Deacons, conform to their High priefls, Priefls, and Levites, and the Apoflolical Succejji- on preferved and proven, as well as the Aaro mi 'calf
Arife, 0 LORD, into tfy refl,, thousand the ark of thy flrength.
Let thy Priefls be cloalhed with rtghte* oufnefs, and let thy Saints Jh out for joy.
LETTER
OF THE
DIVINE RIGHT
OF THE
PRIESTHO OD
E Y
SUCCESSION- LETTER I.
S I Rf
YO U earneftly defined me to give in writing, the fubftance of what pall: betwixt us, for four or five days together, upon the divine right of the Prieflhood or Church GorernmerJ ; of its conveyance from its firft inftituti- on to the end of the world, and of what is the proper fubjefl of that pow- er; And how to diltinguifh a true Mi- ll 2 niilry
[ i6 ]
niftry from a falie, a Minifter lawfully lent, from an Intruder, Pretender or Invader of that facred Function ; and you feenVd to be convinced, that per- fonal gifts, either natural or acquired, were not of thcmfelves fufficient to capacitate any private perfon in Church or State, to exercife any office in either, without a commiflTion- from the un- doubted fuperior to authorife them in their fpecifical offices : For, as capacity to command foldiers, or to judge be- tween neighbours, was not fufficient for any peribn to aiTume a Captain's office in the field, nor a Sheriff's pod in a (hire ; fo neither was a man's pro- found jkill in fcripture or ecclefiaftical learningj enough for him, to take up the mmiiterial Calling, without his being folemnly inverted with a power to excrce the fame, by a perfon or per- forms, that had power to convey holy Orders from Christ jndhU Apoftdes. You granted alio, that pretence to the fpirit of perfonal holinefs, was not fufficient o authorife men to preach, baptize, or abiblve penitents, or thruit our (lubborn offenders : For then every religious Lunatick, deep Difiembler, and hypocritical juglcr, may thuril
himfelf
[ '7 ]
himfelf into the holy Miniflry, and fet up a teacher of every erroneous opi- nion.
Neither can the civil Magiflratc be the fountain of this power, as Eraftians do maintain ; neither can the people or body of believers confer this power, according to the Independents : This the learned and judicious Presbyterians, in their "Jus divinum r if} minis eccle- •fiafthi, printed 164'', have proven in the 9th and 10th Chapters of that book ; and in the 1 ith Chapter, li They prove, that Christ's own Church Oificers arc the proper receptacles and immedi- ate Subjects of that Church power. w
And in their Appendix to that book, in anfwer to certain queries from the Independents, u They prove, that the Miniflry comes by (ucceffion from the Apoftles, by ihis promife, Marth. xxviii, 20. Lo I am with you to the end of the z'jor/tl. " And in that Appendix they cite the Teftimony of Indepen- dents, confefling, that the conveyance of miniftcrial power thro1 a Popilh Channel, cannot make void mini- ftcrial Ordinances. This is confon- ant to what Mr. Samuel Rutherfoord, in his Plea for Presbytery, C. 10. P. .'^r. B 3 as
[ i8 ]
as it is cited by Mr. William Vilanr in his Revlev: of the h'/fiory of the Induh genies, P. 535. " We have not feparate " from Rome's Bapri!m, nor Ordination "of Pallors."
And Mr. William Robertfon, in his Diff titers Self condemned, cap. 5. print- ed in 17 io, cites the authority oi the learned Diffenters, averting the lame thing upon the matter, and particu- larly, the Jits divinum minijleni evan- geihi\ done by a Provincial AfTembly, and printed at London in 1654, Part 2.
P- 4T> 43>
We are not (fay they), " to renounce 44 divine Ordinances, becaufe of cir- " canfftantial defilements annexed to " them : Baptifm and Ordination were u found for fubftance in the Church *' of Rome, and therefore to be re- u formed, bin not renounced/'
Again Part 2. P. 33. they tell us, *• That the Miniftry ; which is an Infti- H tutiori of Christ, palling to us thro1 " Rome, is not made null and void ; no " more than the Scriptures, Sacraments, " or any oiher gofpel Ordinance, which " we now enjoy, and which do all de- " feend to us from the Apoftles, thro* 11 the Romilh Church."
Again
[ '9 3,
Again the Aflembly of Presbyterian
Miniftcrs (lays the (aid Mr, R.) toils us in that fame book, P. ;8. Pan 2. u Wo u muft diliingmfti betwixt the Church
M arid the apoiiafy of it, between the
u corn and the tares that arc in it : This n the Apolile fcems to do ( 2 7he(T. ii. u 4. ), where lie purs a diffcrer.ee be* " tvvecn the Temfle of God, in which " the Man rf Sin ihall Gt as God, and 14 between the Man of Sin% fitting in 11 this 1 cmple. The Man of Sin is no u part of this Temple of God, hut a " plague of leprofy, infecting, defiling, u and polluting it. But yet (fay they), " the Temple of God (which is his " vifiblc Church, as appears trom 1. u Cor. iii. 16. 17. Rev. iii. 12. and l: xi. I. 2 Cor. vi. 16.), doth remain li where the Man oj Sin fits, even as " the Church of Pergamus did, where u the Seat of Satan was ; and tho' we u renounce the sJntichnjjianifm, which 11 pollutes the Temple of G017, yet c< we do not (lay rhey) renounce the u Temple itfelf. "
So irom this they conclude, that the Apollacy, Idolatry, and ialfe Wor- ship of the Church of Rome, does not unchurch her.
But
[ M ]
Bin farther they (ay Part 2. Page 42.
7 We will alittle compare the Apoftacy "of the Ten Tribes, with the Apoftacy H of the Church of Rome. The Tn " Tribes old not only worfhip God af. " ter a falfe manner, by fetjjng up V their Golden Calves in Dan and /&//> u el, but afterwards, in the reign of " slhab, they dircclly worshiped falfe " Gods, and fet up Baal and sfjlarotk " and fell away, (wholly as they fay) •* from the true God, and yet notwith- " (landing of ail this, when the Pro- " phet came to anoint Jehu, he faith nn- " to him ( 2 Kings ix. 6. ) Thus faiih il the Lord God of Ifracl, 1 have anoin- " ted thee King over the people of the " Lord, even over Ifrael ; here note " ( fay they ) that they are called the " people of the Lord, notwithftanding u of their Apoftacy. ;?
To this Sir you replied, that you ne- ver thought Presbyterians laid any claim to* a Succeflion from the Apoftles, nor did you ever think them the Suc- ceflbrs of that Piesbytery, that laid hands, together with St. Paul, upon Ti- mothy, 1 Tim. iv. chap, verfe 14. u Ne- " gleet not thegiftthat is ipthce, which
" was -I
r 21 :
Ci was given thee by prophecy, with the il laying on of the hands of* the Presby- u tery," compared with 2 Tim. i. 6. " Wherefore I put thee in remembrance, " that thou (lir up the gift of God " which is in thee, by the putting on of ') my hands."
And you told me, that the Papifts af- firm with great aflurance, that neither Epifcopal nor Presbyterian, nor any fet of Proteftants, have Ordination by Apo- ftolical Succeffion, and that the Prote- ilant Bifhops could nor prove their Suc- ceffion; becaufe, as Papifts affirm, there was an interruption made in the days of Queen hffizabeth, when there was no Protcftant Bifhop alive, and to be Popifn Biihops would not give Or- dination to Proteftants; for this would be to continue a Schifm againil them- lelves.
For this you defired my thoughts and reading in a few lheets of paper, becaufe you had other avocations, and had nor all the bocks that I cited, bat that you would tru'ft my integrity in the citation of authurs. Withal you told in- genuoufly, that the difficulties which troubled Chronologrers, fhould be no itumbiiug to you -? becaufe ail parties
who
C 22 J
who allowed the divine Right of Scrip* tures, were equally obliged to anfwer Deifts and mockers of Revealed Religi- on ; and learned men have given as great fatisfaction in this point, as the mauer will hear.
I therefore lay down this pofition, Tnat the power of Church Government is founded upon a continued Succeflion from its firft Inftitution.
It was fo in the Aaronical Priefthood^ and now h in the Chriftian and Apo* tlolical.
I. Firft then, That Succeflion by di- vine Inflitution, was the principle of n- niry in the OldTeftament, and the teft whereby to difcover prefumptuous Up- ftarts, Self-Seekers, and Self-Senders> we fee clearly, from the hiftory of the whole fixieenth chapter of the Num- bers, when Corah and his mutinous confederates commenced a rebellion againft Moies their fupreme Magiftrate, who, in Dent, xxxiii. 5. is called King in Jelhurun ; and a Schifm againft Aaron their High Prieft; that Gor> decided the controverfy by a miraculous judgment againft the mutineers, who did not pre- tend to bring in a new Creed, nor a new Worfhip, but to derive their power from
the
t H ]
tne people, faying, Numb. xvi. 3. that all the congregation was holy as well as Moles and Aaron.
2. Was it not e; fy for the mcanefl cf the people to know, who was the Succcflur of Aaron, when Manafleh, brother to Jaddi High Prieft of Jerufa- Jem, ier up a Temple in mount Ce- rizim in Samaria, by means of Sanballat his father-in law, an uncircumciied hea- then I
3. When Jeroboam, the fon ofNchat, had pcfleflcd himfclf of the kingdom oflfracl, with the Ten Tribes revolting -from Rchoboam, is it not (aid, that he -made the people of Hracl to fin? And was not this by inventing a new Pricft- hood, out of the lowed of the people, which were not of the Tribe oi Levi; by which means the thread of the Aaronical Succeifton was broke ? And by fetting up cukes at Dan and Bethel, as we read at large in the ift of the Kings, xii. 26, 30, jr.
4. Did not our Saviour determine the debate betwixt the Jews and the Sama- ritans, when he fa)s. John iv. 22. Sal- vation, is of the Jews, ikat is} fays a learned Commentator, Salvation comes by the Jews to others ?
5. Is
*** 1 •
5. Is it not obfervcible from Luke xvi'u 1-4. thct Christ 1 > is lending the Sa- maritan Leper, with the nine Jewifli Lepers, to the Priefts of Jerufaiem, and not (ending him to the ichifmatical Priefthood of Samaria, that the caufe was decided in favours of 'the Church of the Jews, for all the fcandals and corruptions it was charged with ?
6. Did not our Saviour fufficientiy difcover his ayerfion to the Samaritan Priefthood and Worihip, when it is (aid, Luke ix. 53. "And they did not re- " ceive h-uti, becaufe his face was as " though he would go to Jerufaiem 5" that is, fay the large Crkicks, becaufe the Samaritans knew Christ and his Apoftles to be Jews, and that they were going to Jerufaiem to pray, or, as Dr. Whitby lays, to celebrate the Paflover.
7. l&ftfy, Does not the care which the Jews took to preferve the lift of their Priefts, as well as of their Kings, and that becaufe their whole Temple Service, the effect of their Sacrifices and Expiations, depended on it, ihew how exact they were to keep up the difference betwixt a Priefthood of God's Inftitution, from one of human inven- tion, like to Jeroboam's ?
And
[ 2? 1
And do we not find, thai Jofephus being a Pricft, not only depends on genealogical tables for the proof of his defcent, but adds, that all their PriclU were obliged to prove their Succeffion from an ancient line; and if rhcy could not do it5 they were excluded from of- ficiating as Priefls, and that in whatfo- ever part of the world they were, they tifed this diligence r This is cited by Dr. Whitby in his Commentary on Matth. i. 6. out of Jofephus contra App. lib. i. p. 1036; and the truth of what Jofenhns fays, appears from the Text cited inthe title-page of this book, Ezra ii. 62. The children of Ha- baiah fought their regider among thofe that were reckoned by genealogy j but they were not found ; therefore were they, as polluted, put from the Pried- hood.
Follows a CATALOGUE of
the Jeu'ifb High Priejls, from the fir ft Injtitution of Aaron, to our Saviour's day.
1 Aaron. 2 Eleazar. 3 Phineas. 4 A-
bifhua. 5 Bukku 6 Uzzi. 7 Zerahiah.
C 8 Meraiotht
C 26 ] SMcraioth. 9 Amariah. loAhitub. n Zadok. 12 Ahimaaz. 13 Azanah. 14 Johanan. i-yAzariah. i6 Amariah. 17 Ahitub. 18 Zadok. 19 Shallum. 20 Hilkiah. 21 Azariah. 22 Seraiah. 23 Jchozadak,who vventinto captivity when the Lord carried away Judah and je- rufalena by the hand of Nebuchad- nezzar,
Thefe Ihave fet down out of the ! ft Chron. vi. 4 to 16. according to the fyl- hbicarion of our Engli/h Bible, omit- ting feveral others in the foreiaid lift, who were mentioned as High Priefts : As for example,after Amariah the ninth High Prieft, Eli, Ahimelech and Abia- thar, fuppofing Scripture fufficient for my purpofe.
The reft during the time of the cap- tivity till the Maccabees, and from them to the clays of our Saviour, I have fet down out of the great hiftorical and geographical Dictionary, having com- pnreditwith Dionyfius Petavius.
During the Captivity were.
1 Tofuc. 2 Joachim. 3 Eliafhib. 4 Je- hoida the ;d. 5 Jonathan. 6 Jaddus, 7 Onias the 1 It. 8 Simon the Juft.
9 Eleazar
C *7 ]
9 Elcazar the 2d. 10 Manaflcs. 1 1 Onins the 2d. 12 Simon the 2d. 13 Onias the 3d. 14 Jaibn who bought the Priefthood. 1 5 Menelaus, a Simoniack. 16 Lyfmachus, a Simoniack. 17 Alci- mus, an Ufurper.
Follow thofe who begin anno 3886 of the World, and of Rome 586.
1 Mattathias. 2 Judas Maccabxi-s. 3 Jonathas. 4 Simon 3d. John called Hircan. 6 Ariftobnlus King and Pried.
o
7 Alexander Jannius. 8 Hyrcan. 9 Ar;- itobulns. 10 Hircan re-e/taMiihfed. 1 1 Antigonus. 12 Anar.cl. 13 Ariftobulus. 14 Anahel re-eltabliihed. i5jeius Ton ofPhabes. 16 Simon. 1 7 Matthias. 18 Joazar. 1.9 Eleazar 3d. 20 Jefus ion of Sias.
In the year of CUR I S T from 1 6 to 62.
l Ifhmael. 2 Eleazar 4th. 3 Simon. 4 Caiaphas. 5 Jonathas and his brother Theophiius. 6 Simon, iirnamed Can- theras. 7 Matthias 2d. 8 Elionee. 9 Si- mon Canrheras re-efiablifhcd. 10J0- fcph. 11 Ananus. 12 Ilmael. 13 Jo- C 2 icph
C 48 ] Jeph called Cab*. 14 Ananus fbn of A- nanus. i5jefusfonof Damneus. 16 Jefus (on of Gamaliel. 17 Matthias 3d, ion of Theophilus. \ 8 Phanafus,who was High Prielt when Jerufalem was taken. Sir, I thought it needlels to infert the years of die world in which the High Priefts governed the Church, becaufe it was not to my chief defign, and the omiffion can do no prejudice to my un- dertaking ; and I have St. Matthew his fir ft Chapter, and St. Luke his third, for my patterns, giving a II It of our Sa- viour's Genealogy, without mentioning the years or time of his Anceitors.
I think this may ferve to prove, that the Church in the Old Tcftament, compiling of the Miniilry of Prietts and Levites, was preferved in the Succeflion of the High Prtefts. The next thing I am to prove, is, that the Prielthood of the New Teftamcnt can be proven af- ter the lame manner, which Ihall be the (abject of my next Letter. In the mean time I give you my hearty (er- vice, and defire to know, wh.^t Obfcrves or Cenfures yourfelf or any of your Friends have upon this, and the faults ihail be amended in the next to you,
From your humble Servant, &c.
L FITTER
[ *9 ]
LETTER II.
SHEWING
that the Chriftian Priefthood
fcendf by Apoftolical Succeflion
ftQtn Ch r I s t, as the Jewiih
Priefthood defended by Aafonical
Slicceflion by God's In&iiution.
GO D is the God of order, there- fore ail things ought to be done in order and* decently. 1 Cor. xiv.
We find in i Chron. ^v. When David brought up the Ark from Obed- edom, that in the i ith verfe he calls for Zadok and Abiathar the Prices, faying to them, that they were the Chief of the Fathers of the Lcvites, and therefore "They and their brethren " ihould fanftify themfelves, to bring " up the Ark of the Lord : and verfe u 13. for, becaufc ye did it not at the " firft,the Lord our Gcd made a breach 11 upon us, for that we lbnght him not u after the due order. "
C 3 Wc
E jp 1
We find in the Old Tcftament, that an order was in {tinned in the Church of the Jews, and that they were govern- ed by High-Pried, Priefis and Levites, and that there were Priefts of the fir ft and fccond order ; 2 Kings xxiii. 4. And in the 1 Chron. vi. jgrf and 32. when David had appointed the Singers a in the Houfe of the Lord, after the " Ark had reft, that they waited on " their office, according to their order. "
All Societies civil and military, all trades and occupations rnuft and ought to have their rules of order ; and it is not prefumed, that the Chriftian Church fhould want its own laws, to govern its members, or that,- as the Author to the Hebrews fays, Chap. iii. i. 2. " That " the Apoftle and High Priell of our 11 Profefiion, Christ Jesus, who was " faithful to him that appointed him, li as alfo, fvlofes was faithful in all his u houie. Verfes 5-. and 6. Mofes verily * was faithful in his houfe as a fervant, u for a teitimony of thole things which " were to be fpoken after ; But Christ *: as a Son over his own Houfe. "&c.
As Christ came not to deflroy the fatv, but to fulfill it j fo neither came
he
[ 31 ]
he to deftroy the Priefthood, bur to better ir, he hirnfelf -cinq a Prieft
for ever, after the order of Melchife- dee.
Thefe words Hob. xii. 26. "Yet once "more, I {hake not the fiarrhpnly, but "alio Heaver,, " are not meant of the material Heavens or Earth, but of the Judaical State and Levitieal worfhip and Service, which, Heb.ifl. 10. H Stood u in meats and drinks, in divers waih- " ings and carnal ordinances, impolcd 11 on them until the time of Refor- " mation. *9
Thele things were ftiaken at the Coming of Christ, and Heb, xii. 27. This word, once more, fignifies the " Removing of thofe things than "are fliaken, as of things that are " made, that thofe thiugs that can* " not be fhaken may remain: " That is, the Levitieal Priefthood and Sacrifi- ces were to be lhaken, that the Gofpel Priclthood and State might remain un- fhaken, and continue to the end of the world : For our Saviour did not alter Judaiini to another religion, but from a ceremonial to a fubltantial, from a literal to a myftical, from a carnal to a fpiritual Judaifm.
I
... C 3* ]
I could multiply as many Scriptures from the Ok! and New Tettament, as nrp-ht fill as many iheets as I defian ' to write upon this Subject, to prove that, |
Neither the Son of God, nor the Holy Choir, nor good Angels, nor good Men, ever came on Gcd's embafly or fervice, without a fpecial mandate or commjiTion from himfelfj and con- feqnently they who come of themlelves in his name, not being fent by him, can never promife a bleffing to their labours, in an ufbrped Miniftry ) Thus Jerem. xxiii. 32. "Behold, I am a- " gainft thofe that prophefy falfe dreams, " faith the Lord, and do tell them ; 11 and caufe my people to err by their u lies, and by their lightnefs ; yet I " lent them not, nor commanded them; •« therefore the-y fhall not profit this u people at all, laith the Lord.''
It is feldom thatfuch Self fenders and Sclf-feekers preach found doctrine un- mixed with error ■ for when they go out of the com mon road, the plain and ftraight way, to wit, Apoftolical SucceiTion, they are forced to betake themfelves to pi- tiful defences, fuch as inward calls, im- pulfcs of the fpirit, perfonal gifts, the
power
[ S3 ] power of the people, or of the magi- strate; but (b it is not with thofe that are truly fent of God. We find, St. John i. 6. that Christ's Fore-runner John the Baptiit was fent of God.
We have many paflages in the fcrip- tnrc, of Christ's being fenr, as John xiii. 20. " Verily verily, he that receiv- " eth whomfoever 1 fend, receiveth me; " and he that receiveth me, receiveth "him that fent me. " Matth. x. y; 6. 7, 3. Christ fends his Twelve Apoflles to the loll: fheep of Ifrael. And after the Pvefurrection he fays to them, John xx. 21. uAs my father fent me, fo fend I you." And Matth, xxviii. 18, 19. 20. " And Je&s came and {pake " unto them; All power isgiven unto me 11 in Heaven and in Earth ; go ye there- li fere and teach all Rations, baptizing " them in the name ofrhe Father, and of u the Son, and of the Holy Gholt ; teach- " ing them to ohferve ail things, what- 11 foevcr 1 have commanded you ; and " lo 1 am with you alvvay unto the end " of the world. »
We read in St. Luke x. j. That the feventy Diiciples went not till they had their mailer's commiflion to go, And in the days of the Apofties, we find
that
I 34 1 that the new order and office of Deacons, did not exercife their part of" Church Government, umill they were aurho- riied thereto by the Apoftles, who were their fuperiors, altho' thefe feven were men full of the Holy Gboft. See Acts eh. vk and firft fix verfes.
If then the Son of GOD,, who had the fpirit without meafure, did not ad- venture upon his prophetical office, till he got a folemn coniecraticn after his baptifm, the Holy Ghoft defcending upon hinr in a vi-fible glory ? and a voice was heard, faying, " This is my be- loved fan in whom I am well pleated :,? How wary ought men to be (tho* never fo well gifted) before they venture up- on the (acred miniftry, without power given to them by Christ, to whom all power in Heaven and Earth was given ? He that- comes upon his private fpirit, and not hearing what the fpirit lays to the Church, gives ground to libel him with thefe queries: " Friend " how corned thou hither I And how " canft thou preach except thou be " fent I " When Christ Jesus, the great prophet of the world, would not go on, till he received an ordination from Heaven, to the convicVion of men's
lenfes,
C 35 ]
fcntes, they feeing the Holy Ghofl de- fccnd, and hearing a voice declaring that Jefus was the pcrfon that the Fa- ther tent to teach and reform the world.
7 lie neceflity of mankind ftood in need of Christ's coming into the world, thoufands of years before the fiillnels of time ; and when he came, it flood in need of his preaching before he entered upon the courle of his mi- niilry; yet this his not coming (boner, : a fecret in the bofom of" Omni - fcience, who knows how to govern the world, {hop Id teach men not to take up the miniitry but in Christ's own way, who came net into the world till the Father fent him, nor let up for a Prophet or Minifter tail he got com- million : So likewife his Apoftles whom he fent, as his father fent him, recei- ved th^ir conlecration in thele words. St. John xx. 22, 23. u When he <c breathed on them, he (aid, receive " ye the Holy GhoR • wholoevcrs fins 11 ye remit, they are remitted unto " them, and whoibever's {ins ye retain, %i they are retained- "
The receiving the Holy Ghoft, did not fignify the power of working mi- racles
I I* ]
racles, or the ufe of fpeaking the lan- guage of every country they came to ; for that was not given tili fifty days af- ter the refurrection, or ten days after the afcenfion : Nor did it fignify the fanclifyng graces of the fpirit ; for that muft come by our working together with the fpirit of God in the ufe of the means, to wit, the Word, and the Sacraments, by our own induftry in working out the work of our falration : And all Chriitians are obliged to have faith, hope and charity, which are the graces of the fpirit.
Thefe words then of confecration, recetve ye the Holy G&oft, fignifies a ghoftly or Ipiritual power to teach and govern a christian corporation, to ab- i .e penitents, to receive Jews and Heathens into their fociety, when in- structed in the faith, and with authority to thrult itubborn offenders out of the Church ; and this power of governing by laws was to continue in the days of miracles, even over perfons that had the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghoft : So the feven who were made Deacons by the Apoitles in A6te \i. 6. were by eleftton prefented before the Apoitles, who laid hands on them, not
to
C 37 ]
to confer the Holy Ghoft upon them ; for we find they were full of the Holy Ghoft before their nomination and election ; but to confer a ihare of the Government upon them for the exi- gencies of the times. And we find in Afts x. 44. 45. 46. 6*c. when Peter had preached to Cornelius the Ccnturi- on?and his friends, that the Holy Ghoit fell upon them, to the aftonifhment of the Jews, who heard the Gentiles fpeak with tongues : We find that thefe very heathens were baptized with water, be- caule they received the Holy Ghoft, as well as the Jews : So we fee, that the extraordinary gifts were not excepted from the law of Christ, which was to be a perpetual and {landing ordi- nance in his Church. Marth. xxviii. 19. Go teach and baptize &c. The gift of pro- phecy and of tongues did not execm perfbns from obeying the rules and canons of their fnperiors. St. Paul governing authoritatively the Churches of his own plantation, gives rules to thefe in Corinth, who were extraordi- narily gifted ; 1 Con xiv. 40. and parti- cularly to exercife their gifts decently and in order
D In
t 38 1
in fhort then, the Apoftles proved their mi (lion from Christ in their own time, fupplied their mortality by or- daining their cotemporaries and fiirvi- vors, and they theirs, transmitting the firft commifiion that Christ gave, and To on to the end of the world. Read Acts xiv. 23. Tit. i. y# 2 Tim. i. 6. 2 Tim* ii. 2. Rev. i. 20.
It follows then, that there can be no lawful exercife of a ministerial power, but what is conveyed by Succeffion from the Apoftles : And no man can invade this office, without incurring the guilt of Sacrilege and prefumptuous usur- pation j for tho' St. Paul fays of himfel^ 1 Cor ix. 16. fVo unto me if I f reach not the Gofpel ; yet may we fay to an In- vader, Wo be to thee if rhou preach the Gofpel, without a call or million from the God of order : For the fpirit gives no commiffion to break his own efta- blifhments ; fuch a perfon cannot profit the people by his ufurped adminiflra- rion, as the Prophet, Jerem. xxiii. 32. faidefthe falfe Prophets in his days ^ lor, if the anger of the Lor*d was kind- led againft: Uzzah, who put his hand to the Ark to lave it, when ttv. \ xen in Nachon's threfhinq floor did fliake it, and
if
C 39 ] if the LaRD (mote him ri.ll he died, what judgment may not fuch Invaders be afraid of, when God puniftied Uz- zah, even when there was a fecming ncccility of faving the Ark ; 2 Sam. vi. 6. 7. 1 Chron»xiii. 9. 10. ? Azariah with four-fcore of Priefts withftood Uzziah, and told him that it did not appertain to him to burn Incenfe to the LORD -7 2 Chron. xxvi. 1 8. So may we lay to Intruders, It does not belong to you to preach or baptize ; for, as the Apoflle lays, Heb. v. 4- " No man taketh this N honour unto himfelf, but he that was " called ok God, as was Aaron-"
And this call from God cannot be from a giddy multitude, that follow e- very kind of vain doctrine, and have itching ears, taking a forfeit at ancient and wholefome truths, heaping up preachers to themfclves : Of fuch 3r« Paul fpeaks, 2 Tim. iv* 3.
Yet fucn men will intrude themfclves upon lawful pallors and their labours, and pretend to have come in at the door that was never opened to them, as Satan frefented himfelf when the Sons of GOD came together j Job i. 6. So do thefe thrnfl themfclves into the Church, and accufe, libel, and (lander D z the
_C 4° ]
the true? mintfters of God's word, as the devil did Job, calling him a Tern- porizer, and one that ferved GOD J or im tercft\ and all this notwithstanding of the teltimony that God gave of job, for a man of honefly, integrity, and Without hypocrify. -
I add no more at this time, think- ing it fufficient already what 1 have giv- en out of the Old Teftament, to prove the SucceiTion of the Jewifli Prielthood. My next ffaall be of the Chriflian PrielU hood j in the mean time I reft.
Your Humble Servant, &c.
L E T T E R IIL
S H E W r N G
lhat Antients and Moderns proved the Mijfhh of the Chriftian Prieft- hood, as well as the Faith, /;}lSuc- ceffion.
II E Poft-Apoftolicaj writers made Succejfion of ' Etjbofs to be the teft, rule, and iiandard of a Gofpel Prieji-
hood
bood% and a diftinguifhing mark again ft Innovators, Hcreticks, Schifmaticks, lm- poitors, Usurpers and Upltarts ; and if this line were once broke, that which was cut of], was but like a finger fepa- rmed from the body, from which it could receive neither life nor morion,
I begin with St. Ircnaeus Bifliop of Lions, who lived in the 160th year of God, in feveral parts of his learned book againit Heretics. And, tirft, from the 3d Book and 3d Chapter. " We " can reckon thofe from the Apollles " fucceflors, to our times, who taught " no fuch things;" meaning the Herefi that he is confuting. And in that fame Chapter, he fays, becaufe it was too te- dious to reckon thefucceffion of all Chur- ches, therefore he pitches upon the fucceflion of the mod confpicnous, and moil ancient, and belt known Churches, founded, as he fays, by the moft glori- ous Apoflles St. Peter and St. Paul; and there he gives a catalogue of Biihops, to his own days. "Again, lib. iii. c. 40. He fhews, that where " The Church " is, there is the Spirit 5 and where the " Spirit is, there is the Church. They " defraud themfcives of eternal life " who are not in the Church ; That D 3 , "Church
" Church, which is founded upon the 11 Apoftles, Prophets, and Teachers." Eph. iv. And fpeaking of the Schif- maticks who neglect heatkeninc: to the Word of God, and the ufc of Holy Or- dinances, he (ays, " They are eilran- " ged from the truth, they wallow in v error; being tofTed thereby, they " have one fentimcnt of the fame thing " at one time, and a different one at a- " nother, as times change, and never " have folid nor fixed knowledge, affec- " ting rather to be triflers and players <f upon words, than to be the Difciples " of the Truth." And lib. iv. c. 4.3. •' We rauft obey thefe Priefts who are H in the Church, who have their fuo " ceflTion from the Apoftles, and who, " with the fuccefTion of Epifcopacy, 11 have received the fure Gift of truth, " according to the will of ihe Father: " As for others who cut themfelve.s off <l from the principal fucceffion, what- " ever part of the world they are in, u rhey ought to be fufpecled as Here* " ticks, Dividers, laucy Hypocrites, " Self-pleafers, doing things for gain or " vain-glory; all iuch perfons depart " from the truth/'
And lib. iv. c. 14. fpeaking on Eph« iv. " Of Christ's giving to his Church
" firfl
r ^ j
" firftApoftlcs, then Prophets, and then " 1 etchers, he fay!?, Where the gifts of
u onrLoKD are, there muft we learn " the truth, and that is with thofe that u have foccefllon in rhe Church from u theApoftles. Chrilt made fo many or- " ders in the Church for our fake, and " thofe expound the Scriptures without 11 hazard of mifleading ns."
The next authority I produce, is from Tcrtullian, who lived in the 200th year of our Lord, in his Book Of Prescrip- tions tigauijl Hereticks, chap, xxxiu
u Let them (faith he), declare the o- " riginal of their Churches; let them " turn over, and find out the order of " their Bilhops, running down by fuc- u ceffion from rbe beginning • that this u firft Bifhop of their's had an Apoftle, 14 or Apoltolic men, that never fepara- u ted from theApoftles, for his founder " and predeceflur ; for, after this manner 11 do the Apoltolic Churches make their 11 computations, as thcChnrch ofSmyr- " na has Polycarp placed there by St. " John, and the Church of Rome " has Clement ordained by Peter ; and 94 even as other Churches can demon- " (Irate, who were ordained Bilhops o- u >cr them, by thofe of the Apoltolic " fuccefiion."
The
r. 44 )
The nera teftimony is from St. Au- gnfline, who lived in the 396th year of God, againft Fauitus, the Manichee.
u Doft thou not fee what weight the c< authority of the Catholic Church has " in this matter, which being eftablifh- " ed on the mo ft: firm foundations of " the Apoftolic See, does endure to " this very day, by the race of Bilhops, " Ihcceedirg one to another, and by " the confent of ib many nations under " their government :"
Succeflion was the touch -ftoir, by which the Church examined minifteri- al Million, and the doctrine of Faith that was once delivered to the Saints j and very good reafon, for there is no o- ther way : As for the Eraftian, Indepen- dent, and Enthnfiaftick way, none have advantage of one another, and all of them are liable to unanfvverable abiiir- dities. The Church of England holds by fucceffion, and the Presbyterian au- thors of the Divine tight of Church Go- vernment, when they grappled with In* dependents, held by the fame,
The learned Dr. Burnet, in his expo- (Ition of the twenty-third article of the Church of England, lets us fee, that a Succeflion of Pallors ought to be in the
Church ;
L" 4* ]
Church; that this is fettled by the Apof- ties, and mud continue to the end of the world, and, P. 257. of that book, lays down the danger of men's taking this authority without a lawful vocation.
" The argument of this from the 11 (landing rules of order, of decency, " of the authority in which the Holy u Things ought to be maintained, and u the care that muft be taken toreprefs " vanity and infolence, and all the ex- u travagancies of light and ungoverned " fancies, is very clear. For, if every * man may afTume authority to preach u and perform Holy Functions, it is cer- " tain religion mult fall into diforder, " and under contempt : Hot-headed " men, of warm fancies, and voluble 11 tongues, with very little knowledge " and difcrerion, would be apt to thru ft " thcmfelves into the teaching and go- " verning of others, if they themfelves " were under no government. This " would loon make the public worihip u of God to be loathed, and break and u diilblve the whole body.
" A few men of livelier thoughts, %i that begin to kt on foot fuch ways, u might, fur fome time, maintain a Ik* 11 tie credit; yet (b many others would
u follow
I 46 3
* follow at that breach, which they hadT ' once made on public order, that it 1 could not be porfible to keep the So- 1 ciety of Chriftians under any method, 1 if this were once allowed. And 1 therefore thole, who, in their heart, c hate the Chr-rjlian Religion, and defire ' to fee it fall under a more general' i contempt, know well what they do, ' when they encourage all thofe Enthu- • fiafts that deftroy order, hoping, by 1 the credit which their outward ap- 1 pearances may give them, to compals 1 that which the others know them* 1 felves to be too obnoxious, to hope ' that they can ever have credit enough ' to perfuade the world to. Whereas, ' thofe poor deluded men do not fee 1 what properties the other make ■ of them. The morals of Infidels 1 fhew, that they hate all religions 1 equally, or, with this difference, that 1 the itri&er any are, they muft hate ' them the more : the root of their quarrel beingat all religion and virtue. And it is certain, as it is that which thofe who drive it on fee well, and therefore they drive it on, that if once the Public Order, and the Na- tional Confutation of a Church is diflbl-
" vcd.
t 47 1
* vcd, the flrcngth and power, as well " as the order and beauty of all religion " will foon go after it: For, humanly " fpeaking, it cannot lubfift without it." We lee then how Succejjlon is the only way to prove a lawful Priefthood: There is no fenfe can be made of the'e words, Loy I am with you to the end of the world, but by holding to ^tpoftoiical Succejjlon: It is an argument of a deC- peratc caufc, when we mnft defend ourfelves with fophiftry, quibbles, and naughty fnbtilties : minilterial acts per- formed hy fiich Self-corners and Self- fenders are null and void; for thefe can- not be called Workers together zvithGOD, becaufe God has not lent 'them ; and he has not promifedj to work with thofe whom he has not fent : So that thefe falfe Prophets deceive, and are decei- ved j men's Salvation is not only uncer- tain, but extremely in danger. Men- put a trick upon their own fouls, who yet are very wary, that they be not cheated by their neighbours in a penny of their temporal intcreft : It is fuch men that Atheifts, Deills, hypocritical Politicians, make ufc of, to overturn order, and at lad thc'Chnltran Religion itfelf: And it is a plague of God upon men to be
left
C 48 ]
left a prey to every damnable Herefy ; efpecially if temporal intereft be at the bottom. And it is impoffible to confute the errors of Eraftianifm, Independen- cy, or Enthufiafm, without holding by the Succeflion; and this is to hearken to the words of the Prophet, Jeremiah vi. 16. u Stand ye in the ways and fee, " and aik for the old paths, where is u the good way, and wralk therein. "
Sir, Let me hear more frequently from you, and of the cenfures which friends or foes, or men of different fen- timents, pafs upon what is already font to you, by,
S T R, Your humble Servant, Sec.
LETT ER
[ 49 3 LETTER IV.
P R O V I N G
:Qrdination of EpifcopaiPresb)tcrs -and Deacons in thefe three kingdoms, bv the continued Succeflion of Bi-
j % As t .
foops, in the Univetjal Church, fince the days of the dpofllcs.
S I R,
Have fhewed the neceffity of lineal and uninterrupted fucceflion,to prove the validity of the minifterial function, and the great danger in the want of it ; particularly, that the admiriftrations of fuch are null and void, becaufe God hath not lent them. With all J fhew the conceflions of Presbyterians, p. 3, 4, 5, of this book, toivit, that Ordi na- tion handed dczvn by Papijls, is not in- valid by that conveyance.
Now I prove, that Epifcopal Presby- ters and Deacons, in Scotland, Eng- land, and Ireland, have Apoftolical Or- dination and true Million, from Bifhops fucceeding to one another, fince the days of the Apoftles.
£ 1
I 5° 3
I begin with the year 1^62, after the Restoration of King Charles II. who in that year reftored Epifcopacy in Scotland, all the former Biftiops, nn- der the Spotfwoodian Metropolitanlhip, being dead, except Biihop Sydferf of Galloway.
In the forefaid year, Mr. Sharp, Mr. Lfghton, Mr. Fairfoul, and Mr. Ha- milton, were called up to London, and thcfewere firft ordained Deacons, after Presbyters, and afterwards confecrated by Bifhop Juxon, Lord Biihop of Lon- don, in King Charles I/s time, and af- terwards translated to Canterbury in King Charles II /s time.
This account of their Ordinations and Confecrations is given by Mr. Ro- gers in his hiilory of the Refloration,
I have not the book at hand, nor can I get it among my acquaintances, but I remember that he finds fault with them, for taking Ordination at that time: be- caufe he thinks it may infer the invali- dity of theirPresbyterian ad miniftrations,
I am not to infill: on this point : but it is certain, thatfeveral Presbyterians fub- mitted to Epifcopal Ordination, as Mr. Manton, Chaplain to Oliver Cromwell, was ordained m 1660 by Biihop Sydferf,
being
C 5-1 ]
being then at London. Mr. Calamy, Mr. BurgcG, Mr. Fnlwood, and Mr. Humphrey, received Epifcopal Ordi- nation a long time after they had per- formed minillerial acts in the Presbyte- rian way. For this, fee the learned Dr. John Durrel, in his ^indicia Ecclefix Angl'icana, in the 4th leaf of his anfvver to the Apologias preface: that part of the book is not marked with figures, but it is in the 8th page; fee alfothe 7th chap, page 56. And for the earned defire of foreign Presbyterians to have Epilco- pal Ordination, fee his 34th chap, of the fame book. We find alio, that Mr. Richard Baxter received Ordination from Biihop Hall, to put matters beyond doubt.
I here fet down the proof of the E* pifcopal Clergy's Ordination from the year 3662, up to the beginning of the Reformation by Arch-Bilhop Cranmer in the year 1 5*3 g • and from Cranmer to St. Aultin the monk, the firft Arch- bifhop of Canterbury, fent by Gregory the Great, in the year 568, or yo6 by- others. And from Gregory up to the days of the Apoftles, St. Peter the A- poftle of the Circumcifion, and St. Paul the Apoltie of the Uncircumcifion.
E 2 The
[ J* ]
The Succeifion of Bifhops, and Atch» bifhofs in Britain, up to the dp\\les.
1662 James Sharp, Archbifiop of St. An- drews
1660 William Juxon, tranflaUd from London to Canterbury
1633 William Laud
1610 George Abbot
1 604 Richard Bancroft
1583 John Wbitgift
1575 Edmund Grindal
1559 Matthew Parker
1555 Reginald Pool
1533 Thomas Granmer
1504 William Warham
1502 Henry Dean
i486 John Morton Cardinal
1454 Thomas Bourchier Card.
1452 John Hemp Card.
1443 John Stafford Card.
1 4 1 4 Henry Chicheley Card.
1396 Thomas Arundel Lord Chancellor
1 38 1 William Courtney
137; Simon Sudbury Lcrd Chan.
1367 William Whideiey
1366 Simon Langham Card, and Lord Chan.
1349 S.:mon Iflippe
1348 Thomas Bradwardin /
1333 John Stratford Lord Chan.
1327 Simon Mepham
1313 Waiter Reynolds
1294 Robert Winohclfey
1278 John
C 53 1
1278 John Pekliam
1272 Robert Kilwarby Card.
1244 Boniface of Savoy
1234 S. Edmund
1229 Richard Wctherfhed
1206 Stephen Langtpn Card.
1193 Hubert Walter Lord Chan, and Lord Chief
Juflice 1 191 Reginald Fitz-Jocel in
I 184 Baldwin S. Benedicli 1 171 Richardus Monachus
I I 62 Thomas Becket Lord Chan . 1 138 Theobaldus
1 1 22 William Corboyl
1 1 14 Rodolphus Chief Juflice
1039 S. Anielm
Vacai'it Sedes Annos 4, 1070 Lanfrancus 1052 Stigandus 1050 Robertus Gemeticenfis 1038 S. Eadlinus 1020 Agelnothus 1 01 3 Livingus 1006 S. Elfegus
993 Ahricus
990 Siricius
988 Ethelgarus
959 S. Duni'tan Lord Treafurer
934 S. Odo
924 W olfel mus Lord Chan.
915 Athelmus
889 Pleigmundus
871 Atheldredus
830 Coelnothus
829 Theogildus
804 Wolfredus
E 3 591 Athelardtw
I 54 3
|
791 AtlielarJus |
|
|
762 Lambertus |
|
|
759 Bregwinus |
|
|
740 Cuthbertus |
|
|
735 Nothelmus |
|
|
731 S, Tatwinus |
|
|
093 S. Brithwaldus |
|
|
668 S. Theodoras, a Grecian |
|
|
Vacavit Sedes Annos 4. |
|
|
654 S. Adeodatus, or Deus dedit, |
iv as * .the firji |
|
Englifhma-n that ruled this See. |
|
|
634 S. Honorius |
|
|
624 S. Julius |
|
|
619 S. Melitus |
|
|
614 S. Laurentius |
|
|
596 S. Auguilinus Monachus |
Follows a LIST of the Bijhops of Rome, from Gregory the Great , to
the dpojlks,
590 Gregorius Magnus 578 S. Pelagius 573 S. Benedichis 560 Joannes $tius $55 S. Pelagius 540 Vigilius 537 S. Sylverius 535 S. AgapetUs 532 Joannes idus 530 Bonifacius 2dus
J 26 Fcclix
C 55 ]
526 Foelix 4//*/
524 Joannes 1 7/iu j
5 14 S. Hormiida
490 S. Synv.nachus
497 Anaftafius 2 J us
492 S. Gelaflus
483 Foelix j/zaj
468 Simplicius
461 S. Hilarius
440 Leo Magnus
432 Sixtus it ins
424 S. Cocleitinus
419 S. Bomfacius \mus
417 S Zozimus
402 S. Innocentius
398 S. Anaftafius
355 S. Siricius
367 S. Damafus
385 S. Foelix idui viventc Liherio
352 S. Libeiius
3 37 Julius . 336 Marcus 314 Sylvefter 311 S. Miltiades Martyr 309 S. Eufebius M. 304 S. Marcellus Ml 297 S. Marcellinus M. a84 S. Cajus M. 275 S. Eutychianus /If. 273 S. Foelix \mus-. M. 261 S. Diony fius M. 260 S. Sixtus idus M* 257 S. Stephanus I\L 255 Lucius M, 254 S. Cornelius /Jf. 239 S. Fabianus I\L
238 S. Anthcrus
C 56 ]
238 S. Anthems M. 233 S. Pont inn us M. 227 S. Urbanns M. 23 1 S. Califtus /If. 203 S. Zepherinus M. 194 S. Vi&or M, 179 S. Eleutherius 3f. 175 S. Sorer Tkf. 167 S. Anicetus I\L 158 S. Plus M. 154 S. Hyginus M. 142 S. Teiefphorus M. 132 S. Sixtus M. 121 S. Alexander M% 112 S Euariitus/tf. 103 S. Anacletus 71/.
93 S. Clemens M.
81 S. Cletus A/.
70 S. Linus
44 S. Peter Apeflh and Martyr \B1Jh0p of the Circumcifion, and St. Paul of the Uncir- cumciiion.
You fee, Sir, what proof we have for the miniftry by Apoftolical Succeflion j and I hope, you will not fay that this is the worfe, becaufe Bellarmin makes it one of the marks of a true church; for Presbyterians made Succeffion their plea againll the Independents, as I have fhovvn you in my firft Letter: It is true, that Chr 1ST was the Son of Go:>, tho' the Devil faid it, and truth is the fame
from
C 57 1
from Papi ft s mouths, as well as from Proteftants.
You find in the lift of* the Bifhops of Rome, that three and thirty of them fucccffively died Martyrs : And that the three orders of divine inltitution, to zvit} the Bilhop, Prieft, and Deacon, was not only at Rome, but in other places, has been proven feveral times by learned men. Hear what Mr. Cal- vin lays in the 4th book of his inftitu- lions, zjth chap, at the beginning.
" There is a threefold Miniftry com- u mended to us in the Scripture, and a whatever Miniltry was in the primi- 11 tive Church, was diftinguilhed into P three orders : For, from the order " of Presbyters, there was chofen Paf* '; tors and Doctors; the reft were to in- P fpect manners and cenlures : The •f care of the poor was committed to '* Deacons. St. Jerom mentions five iC orders in the Church, to wit, Bi- li ihops, Presbyters, Deacons, the Fb il deles or Faithful, and the Catechu- " menij three of tbefe were of the " Clergy, the other two of the Laity/'
It is in the perions o^ Bilhops, that the Succeflion of the inferior Clergy, Presbyters and Deacons, is prclcrvea :
and
[ 53 "]
and that three eliding names, orders and offices, were in the days of mira- cles and martyrdom, is clear from A- naftafius, who lived in the gth century, and from Platina, who both wrote the lives of the Popes.
We find that Euariftus, who lived in the i 1 2th year of God, ordained five Bilhops, fix Presbyters, and three Dea- cons.
Alexander, who lived in 121, or* dained five Bifhops, five Presbyters,, and three Deacons.
Sixtus or Xyftus, who lived in 1 3 2, or- dained four Bifliops, eleven Presbyters, and eleven Deacons,
Telefephorus, who lived in 142, or- dained eight Deacons, fifteen Presby- ters, and thirteen Bifhops ; and Hygi- nus, his fucceffbr, ordained five Dea- cons, fifteen Presbyters, and fix Bi- lhops.
It is plain, then, that thefe holy men and martyrs fhould underttand Apofto- lical practice and government, and the meaning of the Scriptures, as well (if not better), than thole who live fix- teen hundred years after them.
There is nothing more clear, than that this diftinccion was in the fir ft
three
[ 59 J
three centuries; for mention is made of three orders in all the EpifUes of St. Ignatius, who was St. John the Apoftle's fcholar, to wit, of Bifhops, Presbyters, anci Deacons ; and you know that the genuine edition of thefe Epillles is vin- dicated againlt the [ophiftry that is uied to fupport a cau(e, which cannot other- wife (land but by thefe pitiful fliif- tings.
Clemens Romanus, ^'ho lived in the 8th year of God, enumerates four orders in the Church, in his firft E- piftie to the Corinthians, § 40. His words are,
11 To the High Prieft proper offices " are committed : To Pricits, their " proper ftation is affigned: Levites " have their proper Miniftries; and a " Layman is bound by Laick precepts. " Let every one of you, brethren, give * thanks to God, living confeientioufly, " without tranfgrefiing the prefcribed " rule of his (ervice or miniftry."
This diltinftion of orders and offices was not in Rome, but in other places; for the great Origin in Alexandria, in hii book concerning prayers, when he h ^s fpoken of the duties common to all Chriltians, iubjoirs thefe words.
"Bcfides
C 60 ]
"Befides thefe common and univer- " fal debts, there is a debt peculiar to " thefe that are widows, maintained by " the Church. And there is a debt " peculiar to Deacons, and another pe- " culiar to Presbyters. But of all thefe u peculiar debts, that which is due by u the Biihops is the greateft-: It is ex- " acted by the Saviour of the whole 11 Church, and the Biiliop muft (mart " feverely for it, if it be not paid."
Again, in the eleventh homily on Je- remiah's prophecy, he has thefe words; " More will be required of me who u was a Presbyter, than of a Deacon $ " more of a Deacon than of a Laick ; " but he has mod to account for, who " has eccleiialticai principality over us, " to wit, the Biihop."
That Si/ccejjion is the divine Charter and Teft of the Miniftry, ] think is pret- ty clear. You will find that Eufebius, and others, reckon the Succeflbrs of the A- poi les to their own time, in the four great patriarchal Churches, to wit, Je- rulalem, Rome, Antioch and Alexan- dria • of which la ft patriarchal St. Je- rem fays, that it was a cuitom for the Presbyters of the place, from the days of St. Mark, downwards to IJeraclas
and
r 61 ]
and Dionyfias, in the time of a vacancy, tochufe one of their number, whom they (tiled their Bilhop ; and what will this prove, that he was only a fixed Moderator? Or that their ele&ion and nomination was a confummadve aft? Or was there no more done in making him a Billiop, but their chufingr Was there no confecration following there- upon, by Pifhops of neighbouring pla- ces ? Eofebrus, a Bilhop in Palettine, obferves no different form of confecra- tion and ordination in Alexandria from other churches ; for Anianus was ordain- ed by St. Mark, Eiifcb. Ecc. HijL lib. 2. cap. 24. Abiiius fucceeded to Ania- nus. Euf. lib. 3. cap. 13. and was or- dained by St. Luke, by the traditions in the Apoflolical Constitutions. Cer- don fucceeded to Abiiius, Euf. lib. 3. § 24. ordained by feveral Biihops that went to the city for that purpole, ac- cording to Severus Alexandrinus, co- temporary with Eutychius, who lived in the ninth century. Primus fucceed- ed to Cerdon.
This Primus lived in the days of A-
drian, who in his letter to Servianus
the Conful, which is inferted in the
life of Saturninus, by Vopifcus a Latin
F hiftorian,
F 62 ]
hiftorian, wliich letter was written In the year 132, giving a chara&er of the Egyptians, he the faid Adrian mentions their Patriarchs, Biihops and Presby- ters.
I know it will be faid, that Biihops had no diocedes, and a Bifliop then was but a paftor of a fingle congregation. To which I anfwer, that it is not a dio* cefs that makes a Biihop, more than a pariihmakesa Mini iter, but the power of ordaining and governing, preaching and adminiltring Sacraments, and the power of the keys, whether they -have ■dioceflcs or parifhes. But fecondly, it will be found, that the Apoftles gover- tied, and exercifed acts of authority and jurifdi&ion, even in their abfence, over the colonies of their own plantations : So did St. Paul, i Cor. v. 3. For I Verily as abferit in body, but prefent in ffirit, have judged already, as though I were •prefent, concerning him that has fi done this deed. Alfo, Col. ii. 5. and 2 Cor. >:i. 28. And be fides thofe things that are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the Churches. Did not St. John authoritatively govern the feven churches of A-fia'? And if it be enquir- ed, How can any man govern a pro- vince
t *3 1
vince of fo many parifhes ? I anfwer, as well as the High Prieit governed rhe national church of the Jews : Or, as St. John and St. Paul governed the church- es of their own gatherings, with their inferior clergy : as well as a King can command three kingdoms, or as Xerxes could command an army of an hundred and feventy thouland men, by his offi- cers and inferior commanders.
If men ihall dill infill: upon a con- gregational way, a local, prefential and pcrtbnal communion, which the Author of the Enquiry into the Conjiitution and Difcifline of the Primitive Church, prin- ted in 1692, page 26. feems to do \ I anfwer, that the diftinftion of the three orders of the clergy, to wit, Bifhops, Presbyters and Deacons, is as manifeit as that of the Old Tcftament of High Prielts, Prieils and Lcvites, which or- der was but very low as to a wcrldly condition, when the Ifraelices were in the Wildcrnefs ; and fnch was the cafe of the primitive Chriflians in the firit three centuries.
No doubt but thefe fit ft Bifhops vvifli- ed for the proiperity which came af- terwards to their fucceflors in Conitan- tine the Great's time j lb that their F 2 narrow
narrow and pinching circumftances, wa« no rule for pofterity, more than the cale of the Ifraelites in the Wildernefs, was for their offspring in the land of Ca- naan, where there were eonfiderable variations, without altering the fubftan- tial part of the Priefthood, when in the Wildernefs.
That Author, (I fay), page 26. who is called Sir Peter King, tells, that a dio- cefs then was but like a parifh now, and vouches St. Cyprian's authority for if, Ep. 63. § io. p. 177. JVe celebrate the Sacrament, the whole brotherhood being frefent.
I have anfwered this and much more, in the vindication of St. Ignatkis's E- piflles, and I told that the Archbiihop of Canterbury may fay fo, on every Eafter day, of the whole national church of England ; and I cited the learned Thomas Edward, againft Mr. Clarklon, giving an in(tance out of Jofephus de hello Judaic o} lib. 7. cap. 17. quoted by Euftbius, lib. 3. cap. <f. that,
41 Three millions of Jews, legally " clean, communicated with the High " Pried, and partaked at the altar in u the Temple of Jerufalem, tho' they " approached it not in their own per-
ions;
r *5 ]
m fons ; and he add?, that this was about
* the (pace of two hours, in one and
* the fame afternoon. The inference
* that the (aid Mr. Edward makes of " this, is, Let Independents ihow how " all the males in liiael, (the women, " if clean, not excepted), could perfon- " ally communicate with the High " Prieft, and I will folve how all Eng- ■ land and Wales may communicate m with one Bilhop, three times a year!"
Now if they would lay any thing to their purpofe, they ought not to prove, the fbme congregations had Bifhops,but that all that had congregations under them wereBifhops; in d chat there warno diitinclion betwixt a Bilhop and a Presby- ter, as Prieftsand Levites, in fynagogues among the Jews, were not High Prielts.
I refer- the congregational men to what the Presbyterians (aid in Jus Re- vim. Eft/, printed in 16^7, p. 214. who aflerr, and (in my judgment) do prove very pointedly, that in divers cities there were mere congregations than one, particularly in Jerufalem ; p. 214. " I. From the multitude of believers u in that church. 2 From the mulii- " rude of church officers there. 3 From u the variety of languages there. 4 11 From the manner of Chriflians pu-
F3
" blic
. [ 66 ]
" blic meetings in thefe primitive " times, both in the church of Jerufa- il lem, and in other churches; p. 216* u Upon thefe words, Acts xxi. 20. u And M when they heard it, they glorified u God, and faid unto him, Thou feeft, il brother, how many thoufands of Jews " there are which believe, &c." Our " tranflation (fay they) feems herein u very defective, rendering it how ma- " ny* thoufands ; whereas it fho.uld be, 11 according to the Greek, how many ten " thoufands ? And thefe myriads (ecm to M have been in the church of Jerufalem, " feeing it is faid of them, " verfe 22. " The multitude mult needs come to- u gether, for they will hear that thou " art come." Now confidering this em- " phatical expreflion, not only ■ thou- " lands, myriads in the plural number; " not only myriads, ten thoufands in f* the plural number; but how many ten u thoufands; we cannot in reafon i;na- " ginc, but there were at leait three " ten thoufands, viz. 3^000 believers, " ani how all thele flionld meet toge- " thcr in one congregation, for all ordi- " nances, let the reader judge."
From their conceflTion, I reafon thus; Thefe thirty thoufand believers, (and for ought we know, of many myriads,
there
[ 67 ]
there might be an hundred thoufand be- lievers), 1 fay the thirty thoufand could make up thirty congregations • were there thirty Bilhops in Jcrulalem; where- as, at that time, we hear but of St, James, who was the only Bifhop ?
In this national church of Scotland, feveral Bilhops had congregations, yet all the Minilters in the dlo^efs who had congregations, were not Bifhops : For every captain is a foldicr, but every (bl- dier is not a captain ; every moderator is a minuter, but every minifter is not a moderator. Now let thole, who in for* mer times founded their divine ri^htof* church govcrnmentupon Apoftolicalfuc- ceffion,(as the Awhorsof the divine right of church government rref ended to do), prove it from the Presbytery that laid hands upon St. Timothy, with St. Paul. l Tim. iv. 14. and 2 Tim/1.6, conform to the primitive Prceftos, Prseies or Mo- del ator, as 1 have proven Succeffiom from Bifhops defcending from the A- pofllcs [o our own days, and then the de- bate is ended • and we are both fortified igainft the Romifh champions, wrho de- ny the Aportolical Succeffion of all Pro- teftants, which I lhall touch, with other things, briefly in my next to you': in the mean time I bid you a hearty farevvel.
L ETTER
I 68 ]
LETTER v.
BEING
Jin Anfwer to fever al Objections agairfi the former Letter.
SIR,
I Received yours, and I give you hear- ty thanks for the account you give me of the late convcrfaiion you had with a mix'd company, who, upon your reading of my letters to them, gave their different fentiments. One (aid, that he thought all governments were alike, and that the people, cfpecially the vul- gar, were not concerned in the Clergy's difputcs, if (bund doctrine be preached to them ; nor fhould (Paid he) Clergy- men jumble the people with the notion of Succeilion ; for all national churches cannot give the authentic regilters of their defcent from the Apoftles, and
Clergymen
C 69 3
Clergymen fhould preach nothing but Faith and Repentance.
Another faid, if a Chriflian, not in orders, IhouW preach the Golpel in 3 heathen ifland, that he has a call .from God to the miniftry of that place, i£ he has profelyted,. and fufficicntly in- Itru&ed the people in Chriltianity.
Again you tell me, that others who were Presbyterians gave their different fentiments : Some told, that the Pres- byterians pleaded SuccefHon, as 1 do acknowledge in my former lcrers, and do cite their own authority for it ; par- ticularly, The divine right; of church government, printed in 1647; fo that I had nothing to fay againft them upon my own hypothefis and conceflion. Another feemed not to lay ftrefs upon Succeffion, becaufe he thought it un- certain , for the Romanics could not condefcend upon St. Peter's immediate Succeflbrs, as the Author of parochial Bilhops made out, (as he thought) to a demonitration. Another faid, that the church government in the firft three hundred years, was Presbyterian, ac* cording to thefe Scottifh pleaders for Presbytery ; and that the Culdees, who were the firft, (at lead early) Proteflors
of
[ 70 ] of Chrifliamry in Scotland, wanted Bl* fhops ; and confequently were Pres- byterians. Yea alio, that the firft Re- formers were Presbyterian; and there- fore Presbytery was natural to Scot- land,
Another (who was a moderate Epifco- pal man) faid, that he could not come up to fuch rigorous meafures as I laid downj; becaule this would unchurch all the foreign Proteftants, who write very difcreetly for the Englifh Epifcopacy, and could heartily fubmit to it : and that they had (bund doftrine and wor- lhip j and that Archbifhop Spottifwood, with thole that went along with him, received confecration only, without be- ing made Prie(ts,in England.
Another pleaded the Eralltan prin- ciple ; another the Independent way. But, lait of all, the Roman Catholic came in for his lhare, and told, that no Proteftant Kirk nor Church could plead SuccefTion; and inflanccd our A- poftacy in Arch-Biihop Cranmei's days, the Naig-head Ordination; and that there were no Biihops in Queen Eliza- beth's days, that could contecrate Mat- thew Parker, Arch-Bi (hop cf Canterbury, who fucceeded to Reginald Pool after
Cranmer;
r 71 j
Cranmer ; and that all the right which Parker and his Succeifors had, was mere- ly Parliamentary, and not Divine nor Canonical. You therefore defire me to give you my thoughts plainly and briefly upon all, which I fhall do, ( if I can ) to the fatisfa&ion of the ingenuous and unprejudiced.
Firft then, as to the Latitudinarian way, of thinking any miniftry, whether Pre- lacy, Presbytery or Independency, alike, if the men preach found doctrine ; it is a very erroneous, and consequently a very dangerous, opinion ; for a princi- ple I cannot call it, becaufe it has no foundation cither in reafon or revelation ; for it opens a door to all Herefy, and to every Impoftor: It is inconfiftent with God's providence and Christ's promife : with God's providence in the governing of his kingdom of heaven upon earth, as if be had left his ratio- nal creatures without laws and rules to conduft them, in their private or pu- blic, temporal or fpiritual, capacities. As alfo, it is inconfiftent with the pro- mife that the Saviour of the world, the great Shepherd of the flock, and the High Prieft, and Bifhop of our louls, made to the Apoftles, his fubftitutes and
. deputes,
E 7* ]
deputes, namely, to be with them to the end of the world : For, as the fa- eraments cannot be altered in their mat- ter, nor in their form, no more mud the Apoftolical Succeffion be left to an arbitrary loofnefs of the wills of thofe that are given to changes, and with whom none fhould meddle. It is a& necellary for Clergymen to preach up the Apoiiolical Succeffion of the mini- ftry, as it is to inftruft the people in that fundamental article of the Creed, I believe in the Holy Catholic Church, the Remiluon oi' fins, 5cc. For a Church is a fock'ry of men profcffing the chriftian religion under lawful Payors, who have power to preach, adminifter facraments, and remit fins. It is as lawful for minifters to teach the peo- ple what rs the true Miniltry, as it is to direct them what th£ true Church is; and we have our Saviour's example, in- ftrucling the woman of Samaria, St. John iv. 24. wrhere the true Church was.
If it be neceflary for the people to have the feals of the Covenant of Grace, it is neceflary to have them from per- fons authorifed to difpcnfe the myfte- ries j otherwife they are given but by
a
t >3 J a dead hand ; and tho* the vulgar ho Hot tcholars or antiquaries, yet reafon tells them, that whofoever has the e>:~ ercife of any office, ccclcfiaftic or ci- vil, fhou!d have it from the perfbn or perfons that have power to give it; o- therwile, it is an ufurpction. It is na- tural to argue, that Minifters fliould jnake Minifters, upwards to the ftrft in- ltitution, as they know that the mo- narchy of the three kingdoms is heredi- tary, and may know, when an invafioh or ufurpation makes an interruption in the Succeffion : after the fame manner we can inlbrm the meancfi capacity, that Epifcopacy has been the ftand'ing government of the Church fi.nce the Afceniion of our Saviour, and the De- fcent of the Holy Ghoft, throughout tfll nations ; and the adverfaries to that government cannot condefcend on the age when Epifcopacy began, or made any encroachment upon the govern* me nt that Christ appointed in his Church to the end of the world. But, on the other hand, if we can make cut when Presbytry, Independency or Eraftianifm, began, then it is eafy to prove, that none ofthefe come by A- poftblical Succeffion j and consequently, G that
C 74 ]
that they are not of divine right, nor are their miniilerial aftsof any value to the people.
If noble families prove their antiqui- ty from their charters, we think that the minifters of the gofpel fhonld prove theirs by Apoftolical SuccefTion, which is their warrant to be faithful and law- ful ihepherds. And the people are concerned to know, from what hand they receive their royfteries, and their abfolution, as perfons in a great family, the Oeconomus or Steward, that gives them their meat in due feafon ; or for men to have difcharges for payment of their debts j or for a penitent rebel to have remiflion for Hish-Treafon.
Is it poflible, that iuch an univerfal change as Rpifcopacy in the Eaftern and Weftern Churches; could furprize n^n in an inftant ?
" When I fhall fee (fays a learned Au- " thor) all the democracies and arifto- " cracies in the world, lie down and " fleep, and awakeinto monarchies, then " will I begin to believe, that Presby- " terian Government, having continued " in the Churches during the Apoftles " times, Giould prefently after (againft " the Apoftles do&rine, and will of
Christ),
C rs 1
"'Christ), be whirled about like a '' (lone in a mafque, and be transibr- " med into Epilcopacy.."
Next, as to the plea of neceffity, and the cafe of a learned and pious man's coming into an ifland, or any other place in the world, inhabited by heath- ens and infidels, and having inftrucled them in the Chriftian Religion, has not fuch a man ( fay fome ) a call from God to be an Apoftle to that people, which he hath brought over to the know- ledge of Ch R I st, without the ceremo- ny of an ordination, or the plea of A- poftolical Succeflion?
I anfwer firft, that neceffity is neither the cafe nor the plea of the Anu-pre- lutiiis in Britain : for they judge and teach, that mat party is the true go- vernment (as they think), according to (capture and primitive antiquity; and that they are obliged to eppofe Im- parity or Prelacy, as not agreeable to either : And though their anceftors laid claim to Succeffion againit the Indepen- dents in 1647, in their 'Jus Reg. EccL yet not being able now to prove their plea, they are forced to ilielter them- felves with the principles which in former times they vigorouily oppofed, G 2 by
[ 76 ]
by fuch arguments, as they cannot an» iwer, when managed againft them by Epifccpal hands, who ftuck clofely to Apoilolical Succeffion, and proved their claim by this very principle : fo that ic is not necefiity that our Presbyterians pretend for their want of an Epilcopacy, but a law for the divine right of Presby- try, and an obligation by an oath to raze and extirpate it from off the face of the earth.
As for the foreign Presbyterians> who wife they had Epifcopacy, and do write very honourably of it, I fay, they are under no fuch neceffity ; for if they have not fire in their own houfes, they may light their candle in their neighbours. They may follow the ex- ample of the united Brethren of Bo- hernia, called Huflkes, who, after a long and tedious war with the Romanifts, were allowed by the council of Bafil to nave their worlhip in a known tongue, and the ufe of the Cup in the Sacra- ment of the Lord's Supper; but feve- ral Huiiites refufing to join in vsith the Romiih communion, were thereupon forced to fly the mountainous places near Silelia, where they lived together in great unity, amity and piety; They be- thought
[ 77 ]
thought themfelves how to preferve a feed of the miniftry, lawfully ordain, ed by the fucceffors of the Apofllcs : For this caufe, they waited a long time, to fee if it fhould pleafe God to in- cline fomc of the Romiih Biihops to break off* and then they were fare of continuing the SucceiTion • but finding no appearance of this, they gave over hopes, and betook themfelves to another expedient, Which was *nrto 1467, when about feventy Presbyters, (battered throughout Bohemia and Moravia, met together, and, after feveral prayers and tears, befoupht God to direct them in that weighty cafe : And after having tried the will of God by lot, they went to the Waldenfes. StephanustheirBifhop, having called another Bifhop with fome few Presbyters, declared and proved their uninterrupted Succefhcn by Bif- hops from the Apofllcs, to that very time: The Bohemian miniftcrs being convinced, received confecration from them, and thereby became happy in- ftruments of prcferving the Apoltolical Succeffion in the Bohemian Church,
I have recorded the itory more fully
in my Divine Right of Epttcopacy, p. 24,
26, 27, out of Dr. Durell, his Jfindicia
G 3 Ecc/ejim
l ?3 g
Ecclejh AngL cap. 34, ^. 506. and from a learned and worthy countryman of our own, in a pamphlet called, '• The Primitive Church Government, in the practice of the Reformed Church of Bohemia."
There may be interruptions in fome national Churches, and corruptions in o- thers, but the Apoitolical Succeffion has never failed ; fo that the reformed Churches are not expofed to the necef- fity of making rniniiters of perlbns whom they judge to have gifts, grace, found doctrine, and the call of the peo- ple, for want of Apoitolical Succeftion.
And as for the cafe of a pious and learned ChfifHan Layman falling into an heathen country, which he inftrufts in the Chriftian Religion, this is no ar- gument for him to take up the miniltry at his own hand: he may teach the mo« rals of Christianity, and devotions, but not meddle wirh the myfteries of Re- lipion, the Prieahood and Sacraments.
Our bleiled Lord has promifed his effectual preiencc to be with the ficred Prieithood, and their adminiltrations, to the end of the world, which (we are (tire) he has performed from the time of his glorious Refurrection to our own
days j
C 79 ] days ; confcquentlv, no pretended nc- ceiriry can authorife men to take a courfc of minidration in the Church,
which directly overturns the Apottoli- cal SnccefTion. The Father Almighty's providence never permitted fuch a ne- celfity as ihould overthrow his beloved Son's promife, of being with the Chrif- tian Prielthood and their adminiflrations, io long as mortality continued. His promifes arc yea and amen ; and we ;>rc lure they will never fail : For though there be many devices in a man'shearr, we are fure, that the council of the Lord it fhail (land, Prov. xix. 21. as it has done from the beginning of the promife till this very day.
In ihort, then, the Briiifh Presbyteri- ans pretend no neceftity ; but, on the contrary, are (worn confederates againft Epifcopacy, as fuch : And the foreign Churches need not lye under (ivTi a ne- ceiTuy; they may remove it when they will : No temporary, accidental, or con- tingent neceffity can be made a rule a- gainft the abfolute neceility which God has made a perpetual {hmdard in his Church ; for no institution of God cin be taken away but by the fame authori- ty that made it divine. Divine com- mands
[. 8o ]
mands cannot be taken away but by divine countermands. The ncceflity is not forced, but chofen, affected, and of their own making; therefore let us pray God to take away the prejudice of their education, and bring them into the bofom of the Church.
The next objection is, that the near- er you come to the Apoftles, the Suc- ceftion is more uncertain j for example, it is difputed, whether Linus or Cle- mens, Cletus or x\nacletus, did fucceed to St. Peter, and was never yet deter- mined. To which I anfwer, firft, that the Presbyterians, who pleaded Succefli^ on againft the Independents, were obliged to give an anfwer to this, if it had been then obje&ed againft them ; 2, I an- fwer, that it is not (as I told you before), diocefles that make Biihops more than parifhes make Minifters, but the power of ordination and conferring commif- fions on the cotemporaries and fufvir- vors ; for St. Peter was before them Bifhop of the Circumcifion, and St. Paul of the Uncircumcifion ; and the twelve Apoftles were Biihops before they went to teach all nations ; and why might not Linus and Clemens be fo too, wiihouthaving any encouragement from
the
the civil magiftrates, who then were their pcrfecutors, inftcad of appointing them DiocefTes, Parilhes, Salaries, Mantes and Glebes; Their cafe was but like the High-Pried, Pricfts and Levites in the Wildernefi : So that you are not to ar- gue from the (late of adverfity to profperity, or from changeable circum- stances to unchangeable fubftantials j the one might have been ibeceflbr to St. Peter, the other to St. Paul.
Next, for the bufinefs of the Anti- Popes Anacletus and Innocent the 2d, the one at Rome, and the other at A- vignon ; this is a very fenflefs argu- ment againft the Apoftolical Succeffion ; for if both were Bilhops in any other part of the world, they had power to confecrate or ordain Succeflbrs to the ApolUes where ever they lived j and their contentions for place did not un- bilhop them, more than the diile.ifion betwixt St. Paul and St. Barnabas did un-apoftolare them : For, fuppofe that two Presbyters having right ordination, fhould coniend who ihould be Miniiler of a Parifh, having templing emolu- ments, and a lulty benefice, and in their contention the one fhould preach in the Kirk, and the other in the Kirk- yard,
r « 3
yard, and both of them baptize that iame day, arc not both their baptilrns valid for all their contentions ?
Again you tell me, that one of the Presbyterians of the company {aid, Why any more difpute, if (according to my letter) the Presbyterians own their mi- niftry to be founded on Apoftolical Sue- ceffion? I anfwer, that the poiltion is true; but let them prove that they themfelves have.it, according to Scrip- ture, and the univerfal practice of the Church, whicLis the bed living com- mentary upon it, and is the fureft proof for the Canon of the Old and New Teitament, infant Baprifm, and the obfervation of the Lord's day.
Then, as to their plea from the Cul- dces, the early ProfeflTors of Chriftianity without Bifnops in Scotland, particular- ly in the lile of Hyi, Jona or Icolmkil, it is both unrcafonable and falfe : For \mo. How unrcafonable is it to argue from oMcure, uncertain and fabulous ac- counts, againft the clear principles and evident pra&ice of the univerfal Church, in the Eaftern and Weltern parts there- of? &do. Suppoling it as true as it is falfe, 1 afk, Were thefc Culdees without Biihops, Succellbrs to the Apoftles ?
pio
r 83 ]
$tio. Are the Presbyterians now Sue- cellbrs to thefc Culdees as iuch ? 4/;. If thefe Monks were Presbyterians, u hy are not the Presbyterians Monks, accor- ding to the cultom of their fuppofed preciecciTors the Culdees ? 5/2. Either that time of the Monks was a perfect or imperfect (late of the Church. If a perfect (late, then all the Chriftian world over was wrong except theni- felves j which I think will take a confi- derable time to prove: If imperfect, why fhould it be a tlandard, a rule, yea, or an argument for Presbyterian Go- vernment ? Samaria was converted to Chriftianity, and baptiled by Philip the Deacon; therefore that Church Go- vernment fhould neither have Bifhops nor Presbyters : Some part of the Indies were converted to the faith by Edefius and Frumentius, two Laymen; there- fore thefe parts ought not to have Cler- gymen : A woman is faid to be the firft inftrument of converting the Iberians to the faith ; therefore (according to this way of arguing) it is the female fex, and not males, nor Clergy, fhould govern in that part of the world, bto. May not St. Jerom's queftion, in his e- piitle to Evagrius, Why dolt thou object
to
I 84 ]
to me the cuflom of one City? May \t not ( I fay ) be pertinently retorted to the Culdean Presbyterians, Whydo you object to us the cuflom of a fmall II- land ? But taftly, the thing h falfe in matter of fact ; for, upon a critical re* view, it will be found, that the Mona- flerics of thefe times were the fchools and univerfities, where youth were brought up, and fitted to be put in ho* ly Orders; and being recommended by their iuperiors, were ordained by pro- per Bifhops ; and they w-ere but as thofc Monks in France, and other countries governed ly Biihops. Whoever defires full fatisfaflion in this point, let him read our learned and accurate country- man's remarks upon Sir James Dalrym* pie his Hiftorical Collections, with an Anfwer to the Vindication of the Eccle- fiaftical part of them, printed at Edin- burgh in 1714*
1 come now to another paflage of your promifcuous converfation, which is, That Presbyterian Government con* tinued for the firft three hundred years in the Univ-erfal Church ; which if it did, it w7as certainly an iinfupportable grievance, when it was ftiaken off in an inftant j and it were ftrange how all
Europe.
Europe, Afia and Africa, fliouldjump from Presbytry into Prelacy in one day's time, without the confent and •deciGon of a General AfTcmbly. What! Was there not one cog to bark? Not one watchman to give the alarm ? Nay certainly, this their faying is as true, as that the watchmen about the holy grave were afleep, when Chr i st's Difcipks came and ftole the body of our Saviour by night : St. Matth,xxviii. 13, 15. And it is this lie that keeps the Jews in their o'bftirutfc unbelief to this very day ; and this lie was the contri- vance of the falfe teachers at that time : What a judgment is it, then, to be un- der the nrilriftry of thole that deceive, and are deceived I
• I have elfevvhere -expofed the abfur- dity arid falfehood of this opinion, in thefe following queftions ; as xfiio. If Prelacy began after Presbytry, in the four hundredth year of God only, will it not follow that the Fathers and Coun- cils, and the holy Writers, iuch as St, Angnftinc, St. Atha-nafius, St. Bafil, and Eufebius, were Apoltates, Blockheads, yea and Anti-Chriftians, in varying from the primitive model, Christ's inftttu* tion, and th-c Divine Right of Church, H Government
.1 86 ]
Government, if it be true that Presbytry was the government of the firft three Centuries? ido. Will it not S0II0W, that Aerius, who was condemned for an Heretick, for afterting a parity a- mong the Clergy, and that there was no difference betwixt Biihop and Pres- byter, that he (I fay) was the only or- thodox man in the Church, though he had not fuch a following as St. Afcba- narius; againfi the whole world, when he oppofed the Arians \ ^tio. How came the Presbyters, who were an hundred times more in number than the Bifhops, not to ereft a General Aflembly, to proteft their right againft the General Council of Nice, confiding only of 3 1 8 Bifhops, and remonftrate a* gainft the encroachments and ulurpati- ons which were made upon the Divine Right of Presbytry, which ( according to Scotch Presbyterians ) continued for three hundred years after the Apoftles? qto What fenfe fhall we make of Christ's promife, of being with the Apoftles to the end of the world, if he was not with their lawful SnccefTors the Presbyters but for 300 years? And how comes the Antichriflian Govern- ment of Prelacy, to continue above
thirteen
[ 37 ]
thirteen hundred years afterwards, with* out any national Church Government in the world being ever Presbyterian J 5/0. Will it not follow, that Old Tc (la- ment Prophecies of the Minillry's be- ing in an Imparity in the New Telia* ment, and the Magiftrates becoming a blefTing in the Chriftian Church, have fail'd, as well as Christ's promife of being with his Church to the end- of" the world ? Now, as to that of the Mi. niftry's being one order above another, we find in Ifaiah lxv'i. 2 1 . And I will take of them for Priejts and for Leviles. That the Prieits were above theLevitcs is not quclhoned, but that the Prieits had Chief Priefts, is proven from 1 Chron. xxiv. 6. Chief of the Fathers of the Prills and Levites ; fo it is in verfc 2i. So, Ezra viii. 29. Watch ye and keep them until ye weigh them before the Chief of the Priefts, and the Levites. and Chief of the Fathers of Ifrael at Jerufalem, in the Chambers of the houfe of the LORD, So, Neh. xi. 14. 15. 16. There are two named Overfecis, which is the fame with Billiops. Next, as to the Magiltrates being propheti- cally promifed in the' Old Tcftamenr, to become a blefling to the Chriftian H 2 Church,
[ 83 J Church, is clear from I fa. xl'ix. 23. That Kings fnould be nurfing Fathers,, and Queens nurfing mothers : I (ay, Will it not follow, that thefe things have failed in the prophecies, if Pari- ty was the true Church Government in the three firft centuries ; and if Pre- lacy came in with Conftantine the Great, the firfl Chriftian Magiftrate,, chat that Magiftracy was a curfe in- ftead of a Melting ? 6. Will it not fol- low that, in the firft three centuries, the Presbyterians who refilled Biihop- ricks in the time of perfecution, and accepted of it in the time of profperi- ty, were temporizers, and that (as the Devil ftid of Job ) they would not lerve God for nought.
jmSi Will it not follow, that Mr. Cal- vin was an fieretick, who faid he knew bo curie that was great enough for them that would refule the Cyprianick Epif- copacy ? Or that Beza was mad, who counted thofe mad that refilled the Englilh Epilcopacy I Or that Mclanc- thon was befide himfelf, when he laid, " Would to God it lay in me to refule i4 Epilcopacy; for 1 forfee that here* " after will grow 'up a greater tyranny " in the Church than ever :"
As
[ 89 ]
As for that pretence, that Presby- terians were the firft reformers in Scot- land, and therefore they have a right to continue that government; This is of a piece with that of the Culdces, :;nd it is both falte and unrealbnable ; falic, becaufe there were no Presbyterians at that time, nor was ever a Presbyte- rian government heard of in the world before it: For, if (bme Pricfts, as John Knox, had a hand in the refor- mation, this d\d not make them the Apoftles Succeflbrs ; for though they had ordination in themfclves by Bit- hops, they could not ordain Presbyters, more than perfons that are baptifed are commiflioned to baptize others. I am furprifed to read Mr. John Lauder's an- fvver to Mr. Dodwell, in the preface of his book, called The ancient Bijhofs considered, pag. 2 2. 23. thus rcatbning, 4t The ordained receive no more power u from their ordainers, than they atfual- u \y intended to give them ; But when u the Popilh Prelates ordained the Paf 11 tors, they never intended to give them " the power of Bifhops, but the power 41 of Presbyters only ; wherefore they " actually received no more but the
u power
»3
C so 3
f< power of Presbyters, when they u were ordained.9'
His anfwer is, " We muft not think " that intentions can alter the nature of ** things ; if a petfbn intending to give " half a crown to a beggar, give him " a whole crown, will the intention 4 convert the crown into an half u crown."
To which I anfwer, that fecrct and concealed intentions cannot alter the nature of the thing, if the revealed in- tention of the Church be pronounced in the due form of words; for exam- ple. If a wicked Pneft, in compact with the Devil, intending to baptize in in that name, iliould baptize in the name of Father. Son and Holy Ghofl:, is not the Baptifm valid for all this ? So 1 apply, that the Bifhops, before the reformation, did not ordain Priefts by their fecret wills to give them [he power of ordaining others, but with the revealed will of the Church. In- deed, if a Biihop fhould be in fuch a miitake, forgetting himfelf, and fhou4d ordain one a Prleii, whom he intended but to ordain a Deacon, the perfon or- dained is a Presbyter, notwithlhnding the miltakc, and the Biihop cannot re- tract
[ 91 ]
tracl the thing that is done; but the perlbn giving a crown to a beggar, when he intended to give but an half crown, may well call back for the o- ther half. But Ejrilcopal confecration was never given to John Knox, either defign'dly or by a miflake : Therefore Mr. Dodwcll's argument (lands where it was.
But, in the next place, I dill enquire, -Were the fir It reforming Presbyterians the Apofiles their fucceflbrs I And can the prefent incumbents reckon up their fucceffion to thefe Presbyters, after their fetclement in a Superintendency and Book of Common-prayer ?
Bvo. If Presbyterian government'fhould continue in Scotland, becaufe Presby- ters had the main hand in the reform- ation, (if we may believe them) then why fhould not Epifcop:xy continue in England by the lame way of realb- ning ? And why fhould Presbyterians life all wit and power to extirpate the fuccclhon of the firft reformers in Eng- land.
As for the moderate fpifcopalian, his opinion in your mixed co.nvcriation, who laid, This opinion of SuccclTion would unchurch all foreign proLcltants,
which
C 92 3
which is very uncharitable : I anfvvcr, imo, That Sncceflion is not an opinion, but a certain, fure and lolid principle : Neither is it uncharitable ; for the judg- ment of charity mult not claih with the judgment of certainty and defcretion: For, allow them to be a diffuhve Church, becaufe they own the fundamental ar- ticles of the Creed, ycu can never make them a part oi' the reprefentative Church ; that is, that their teachers are the SucccflTors of the A pottles. Withall you cannot call me uncharitable, becaufe I defend this principle ; for all the charity in the world can not make them to be what they are not : More- over, if their Church minittry be of di- vine right, this will unminilter ten thoufand times more minillers in the Chriftian world than they are in num- ber. Yea, let them take to them the popilh Hierarchy to their Presbyterian Parity, the number of Chriftians under Epiicopacy will exceed them both. Now, to tell me that this gives a handle to the Papitts. and diminifhes the body of the Proteltunts, is not to the purpofe ; for it is not party that we are contend- ing for, but truth : 1 would not have the word Popery made a bugbear nor a
fear-
C 93 1
fear-crow, to deter men from acknow- ledging the good things in that Church ; neither do 1 wiih that the word Protef- tancyfhould be made like the great Diana of the Ephefians, to countenance every error that is among thole that proteit againft Papifts. This is not to hold with Papifts againft Proteftants, but to contend for the truth j or to believe that Christ is the Son of God, tho' the Devil laid it ; for would not a Presbyte- rian hold with a Popilh Prieft, disputing againft a Socinian, who denies the divi- nity of Christ ? yea, and with a Turk, maintaining the abfolutc decree, againit an Arminian ? Yea, would he not hold with a Popifli Prieft, defending, againft a Quaker, the (acraments of Baptilm and the Lord's (upper, to the end of the world? And do not the Socinians and the Quakers go under the name of Protectants ? Yea, will not Presbyterians go in with the Jefuits, defending the pTivilcge of the iubjects to dethrone malverling Kings, againft the Protcltants that hold the doctrine of paflive obedi- ence an.t non-rcfiftance f And why may not Kpitcepai Minitters hold with the Papifts in .the principle of Apoftoiical Soccellion ? Now, to tell us that this
unchurches
[ 94 J
unchurches the grcatcft part of Proteft.- ants, is not relevant; for they do un- church thcmielves; and k is not rea- fouable to think, that charity or compli* mem can make thenv minifters who have not Apoftolical Succeffion : for we ihould reafon them up to us, and not humour them in their errors ; cfpecially when their fault is a thing that can be helped, as I have already made out. It is the greateft charity in the world to tell men their duty and their danger. It is truly their error that hinders the enlargement of the reformation. I find in the learned and reverend Doctor Thomas Brett, in his account of Church Government and Governors, that in the conference at Hampton-court, Paov 38. Monfieur Rogne, who was the French Ambaffador at that time, (aid, " That if the reformed Churches had u kept the fame orders among them " that were in England,, he was afliired u there would he many tboufonds of 11 Proteflanis more there than row there u are/'
So that we fin againft knowledge and confcicnce, to think them right whom we know to be in the wrong. We have a rnaxiin, incommodum non foloit a raw
mentum ;
C 95" 3
vientum ; the objection from inconvc* lliency docs not lolve an argument that is true in itfelf. If, at the beginning of the reformation, a Popifh Prieft ibould have argued agaihft Luther and Calvin, thus; What! Is all the Chrif- ■tian wcrld wrong but you, who come without miracles to prove )our being fent ? What Church in the world do you join with, when you skip from us? Would we think this a good argument aigainft the reformation ? Would it be a good argument againft preaching the Gofpel, that there is no falvation but in Jesus Christ, from A els iv. 12. bc- caufc, fome might lay, this would damn the unconverted Jews and Gentiles ? Would this be uncharitable doctrine to preach, that Cheats, Oppreflbrs:, Whore- mongers, and debauched p-erfons, cannot •enter into the Kingdom of Heaven ; whereas it is but to warn them of their danger., and to bring them to their duty? If any, by fraud, tyranny, and many other unjuit ways, has made a great e- ftate, ihall hear a fermon upon repen- tance, and proving that re (tit ut ion of ill-gotten goods is a neceflary ingredient to make repentance acceptable, if he fhould lay with himfelf) reflitwion will
beggar
C 96 3
beggar my mimerous family, can tills, I fay, be an apology for the wretched <ufurer not to reftore goods unjuftly purchased? Or will it fave him in the day of Judgment? If we ihould argue againft a rigid Supralapfarian, preaching abfohne reprobation, faying, That this <lo<ftrine of abfolute decrees renders iome dcfperate, and makes others be- come theirown executioners, fhould this prevail with the orthodox Divine, to give over preaching found doclrine, for all the inconveniencies that follow ? So I fay, that if the principle of A poftolical Succeffion be true and neceffary, ten thouiand arguments from inconveni- ency cannot overthrow it. , The authority the moderate Epifco- palian gave in defence of his opinion, was an inftance from Archbiihop Spottsf- wood's Hiftory, that, in King James VPs time, three Scots Divines went to London, and received confecration, without being ordained Deacons or Priells, which Bifliop Andrews pleaded Ihould be done before they were con* fecrated, becaufe their Scots ordinati- on was not by Bifhops. It was anfwer- ed ( as is (aid ) by Archbiihop Bancroft, that ordination, where Bifhops could
not
C 97 ]
pot be hail, muft be cflccmcd lawful, as it was the cafe of foreign proteftanr Churches, and this reafon prcvail'd in the meeting. To which I anfwer, ijt, That neither charity nor courrefy, nor ten thoufand authorities, can make wrong right, or falfehood truth : zdly\ That Dr. -Bancroft had a much better rca* Ion, which was the thing that fatkfy'd Bifliop Andrews, and that was, the lefler was included in the greater ; and -that Nectarius was made from a Layman Bifliop of Confhntinople, and Ambrofe Biihop of Milan j fo that a fingle con- fecration makes a BHhop, who by his character is a Prieit and a Deacon. See Heylin's hiftory of Presbytery, Page 387. I may add, 3 r//y, That this fame was pretty vmcanonical, and of bad confequence; therefore the Bifhops of England thought it not fit to make this a preparative, and they mended it at the confecration of Biihop Sharp.
But then they tell us. That Dr. Bur- net, in his Expolition of the 23d article, acknowledges foreign Divines to be true miniflers : To this I anfwer, Firfl, Let him, or any, reconcile that with the neceflity of Apoftolical Succcflion, which I have cited from his Expolition I of
c 98 ]
of the articles, Page, 27. Bin I -give another anfvver to him out of the Ads of the Apoftles, xii. 2. and Herod kil- led James the brother of John zvith the fword, 3. And be can fe he faw it p leafed the Jezus, he proceeded further to take Peter a/fo. I leave the application to my Reader. But you'll find, in his Ex- pofition of that article, when he has done all he can for that fucceffionlels niiniftry, that his reafon is no better than that of the Papilh, who permit women to baptize in cafe of neceffity.
The next thing you mention in your mix'd convention, was the Eraftians pleading for magiftrates being the foun- tain of Minilterial or PrieRly power, which is largely and learnedly confu- ted by the Presbyterian authors of the divine right of Church power, in the year 1647, The mediums on which they infift, from Page 82, to 96. are, 1. "The keys of the kingdom of " heaven were never given to the civil " magiftrate as fuch ; therefore they • cannot be the proper fubje<5t of Church u government. There was full power of c Church government in the primitive u Church when no magiftrarc was chrif- " tian; yea when all magiftrates were " perfecutors of the Church; and fo far
" from
r 99 i
' from being their nnrfmg Fathers, that 1 they were their cruel Butchers ; 1 therefore the magiftrate is not the 1 proper fubjeit of this power, 3, 1 The magtltratical power, really, fpe- ; cifically, and eiTentially, differs from 1 ecclefialtical power ; therefore can- ! not be the proper fubjeft of" it. 4.
• The civil magiftrate is no proper 1 Church Officer ; therefore not the
• proper fubjeft of this power. 5. The ( civil magiltrate, as tiich, is not pro*
• pcrly fubjcvfl to Chr ist's mediatory 1 kingdom j therefore is not the re- ' ceptacle of Church power from 1 Christ j for whatfoever ecclefiaiti- ! cal ordinance, office, power, or au- 1 thority, Christ gives to men, he
: gives it as mediator, and head of the
1 Church, by virtue of his mediatory
1 office, and for gathering, edifying,
1 and perfectingof Christ's kingdom,
1 which is his Church; therefore they
' cannot have formal Church power
: from Christ, 6. Magiftrat.es can-
! not be the proper fubjeft of Church
( power, becautc of the abfurdities
that follow thereupon. As 1. Con-
fulion betwixt the office of the ma-
giltracy and of the miniitry. 2. It
1 2 " confounds
C too ]
1 confounds the Church and Common- 1 wealth. 3. Heathens, women, and ' children, might be Church governors. \ <\. The Church government mighc 1 be monarchical in one man, &c."
I add one thought to this, from that earned and pious gentleman Mr. Robert NeUon, his Companion to the fads and feftivals of the Church, Page 558', That tho' the magistrate cannot con- 1 fer fpiritual power, yet when the \ Church received the beneSt of in- corporation and protection from the State, the Church was content to fuffer Tome limitations to the exercife of its power, and thought herfelf fufficiemly recompenfed by the ad- vantage that accru'd to her by the incorporation." The forefaid learned Presbyterian au- thors, irom the ioth to the mh chap- ter of the forefaid book, fhew, that thd community, or body of the faithful, cannot be the receptacle of Church power.
'• 1 « Becaufc they haveo.o commiflion "from Christ. 2. No warrant for the " exercife of the a&ual execution of " the power of the keys. 3. They #< have no promife of the fpirit ol the
" mini! try,
C ioi ] u miniftry, and gifts to that end. 4. u They arc nowhere in (cripturecoun-
11 ted Church governors. 5. Several " absurdities follow from making them u Church governors. As 1 . It lays a " foundation for the Brownilts confuted " democracy, and abhorcd anarchy ; " for if every member of the body be ■ an officer, where is the organical u body: and, If all be governors, " where are the governed \ If all be M eyes, where are the feet: and, if * there be none governed, where is il government. 2. Hereby the com- " munity or body of the faithful, even t( the meanelt member, are veiled "from Christ with full power and f* authority, actually to difcharge and " execute all acts of order and jnrif. " di&ion, without exception ; for cx- ? ample, to preach the word authori- . 11 tatively, dilpehfe Sacraments, to or- " dain officers, admoniih offenders, ex* u communicate the obflinateand incor- " rigiblc, and to abfolve penitents "
u 3. An abfurdity cited from Mr. « Bailhe, Chap. 9. P. 1 o3. his DiiTuafive " again ft Independents, is, That pco- " pie will be extremely unfitted for, u and unwarrantably taken from their I 2 " fevcr.il
[ 102 ]
u feveral duties, that lye upon them, ,% in. point of confcience, to diicharge in " their general and particular callings, " in fpiritual and fecular matters, on " the Lord's day, and on their own " days."
M 4. The community of the faithful " being accounted the proper (ubject * of the power of the keys, has not " only power to elect, but alfo to or- u dain their own paftors and teachers.
" Their affirmative inference is, j 11 That Christ's own officers are the I u proper receptacle "bf Church power, | 11 Chap. 11. from Page 180, to Page ] " 195. I need not abridge their proofs, " for there, and in their Appendix, 4i in anfwer to feme queries from the 4i Independents, at the end of that book, u they ihew that the rriiniftry came, and " mult come, in a feries of Succeflion f< from the Apodles, and that ordinati- u on is valid, tho' it come from the " Papii'is."
As to the laft account you give of the papiu, in your promifenous company, who pcfitiveiy aliened, that there was no Apoilplical Succeffion to be had in any protectant Church whatfoever, and that the Pricfthood of England, that
laid
r '°3 .1 .
laid the greatcft claim to it, is bur a mere Usurpation.
I aufwer, ?. That this is grounded upon a falfehood and calumny, pur- po(ely invented to bring contempt upon the reformation ,• which is, that fo many, as Parker, Sandys, Grindal, Horn, Juel, Scorie, 2>cc. went to a tavern at the fign of the Naig-head in Cheap- lide, a ltreet in London, and ordained one another. This is proven, by Francis Maibn and Bilhop Bramhall, to be a manifeit untruth ; for they produced the public regilters, which Archbifhop Abbot caufed publifh, and flievv to fome Priefts, that made a handle of this figment, to delude their Dilciples and to gain Profeiytes.
2. I anfwer, That in Queen Mary of England's days, Bonner Bilhop of Lon» don, Nicolas Heath Archbiihop of York* and Thurlby Bifnop of Ely, had no or- dination but by protectant Biihops ; and if this was invalid, the Prieits or- dained by them were no Priefts, and could not confecrate the Holt. And if this be true, then the worihip of the Holt at that time was idolatrous.
3. I find other Papifts, fuch as Cud- femius, cited by Doctor trideaux. in
his
[ io4 ]
his fafci cuius controverfiarinn, Pag. 246. printed at Oxford in 1649, acknow- ledge, that the Ordination and Sue- ceffion of the Englilh Church is both catholic and valid j only that it is fchif- raaticai.
But I find, that the perfon who en- deavours to prove the invalidity of the orders of the Church of England, infifls upon other topicks, which is very folid- ly confuted by the learned Doctor Gilbert Burnet, in his Vindication of the ordination of the Church of England, printed anno 1677. His argument is, That the minHters of the Church of England are not Prieiis, becaufe their form of ordination is defective ; which is thus :
Receive the Holy Ghojl : whofe fins thou forgivefl, they are forgiven, whafe. fins th'Ai retained they are retained ; and be thou a faithful difpenfer of the word of GOD \ and his holy Sacraments, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoft. Amen. After which, the Bifhop delivers a bible to him, faying, " Take thou authority to " f reach the word, and minijler the holy u Sacraments in the congregation where " thou jhak be fo af pointed,"
from
C I** J
From this he fubfumes, " That by
• the form of ordination, the power
* of conlecrating the Sacrament of " Christ's Body and Blood, is not gi- " ven, the words only importing a " power to difpenfe the Sacraments, H which any Deacon may do.^
To which it is anfvvcred, That, if our form be the fame in which Christ ordained his Apoftles, we may be very well fatisfy'd that it is good and fuffici- ent : And that it is fo, we read, St. John xx. 22. Befides, it is anfvvcred to the Papifls, that we judge not any form ib eilential as to annul all ordina- tions fiiiat have been made by any o- ther ; for then we fliould condemn the ordination both of the primitive Church- es, and of the eattern Churches at this day.
They cannot but acknowledge, that the form of giving orders ill their Churches, was notinlututedbyCHR is r, nor received in the Church for divers ages, which made Pope Innocent lay, " That the forms of ordination were " ordered and invented by the Church, 11 and were therefore to be obferved ; " otherwife ic was fu flick in in giving " orders, to fay, be thouaBilhop, or,
" be
[ lo6 1
* be thou a Prieft. Dr. Burnet, Page 2 2 " So that if this be an effential defeft in the Engitfh ordination, then there were no true Priefts in the primitive Church for divers ages, nor at this day in the Greek Church ; yet neither of thefe can be acknowledged by the Church of Rome.
Page 40. Heihews, that the power of confecrating the Sacraments, is very fully and formally given in our ordina- tion, in thefe words, " Be thou a faith- " ful difpenfer of the word of God, and u of his holy Sacrament. " And that they bewray great inconiideration, that think the word difpenfing,. is barely the distributing of the facrament, which a Deacon may do j for difpenfing is more than distributing ; and it fignifies to ad- minifter the facrament by virtue of this office, as a Steward of the myfteriesof God. 1 Cor. far. 1. And that this is the true meaning, appears from com- mon ufe, which makes it more than barely to diltribute, and from the de- clared meaning of thole who ufe it, which is the only rule to judge of $li doubtful expreffions.
A iecond objection is, That the Church of England has no other than
C I ©7 ]
a Parliamentary power. It is anfwered, that they who compiled the Liturgy and Ordinal, had no other power that way than what Chriftian Princes did give before in the like cafes ; aud it is known how far the civil magiftrate may make laws, and give commands about facrcd things. It is known what orders David and Solomon, Jehofaphar, Hezekiah and Jofiah, gave in fuch cafes, I Chron. xxiii. 6. xxiv. 19. 1 Kings ii. 27. 2 Chron. xvii. 7, 8, 9. xxix.
A third objeftion is, That we have our orders from thofe that were not Bifhops, becaufe they have no more power than the fir ft proteftant Arch- oilhop of Canterbury Matthew Parker had, who was the chief, and from whom (as it were the conduit of all) jurifdic- tion was derived to the reft. That he had no fuch power and jurifdiction the Papifts prove ; becaufe they that con- firmed and confecrated him, had no fuch power to confer upon him of themfclves ; to wit :
William Barlow Bifliop of Bath and Wells, afterwards elect of Chichcfter ; John Scorie late of Chichefter, now e- left cf Hereford ; Miles Coverdale of
Exeter,
t 108 ] Exeter,' and John Hodgfkins Bifltop Suffragan ; " Who were none of" them " a dual Bifliops of any See, but two " elect only; and another quondam " only; and fo had no actual jurifdic- " tion at all ; the fourth only Suffragan *' to Canterbury, and who had nojurif- " diction but what he had from the " Archbifhop of Canterbury, much lefs, " authority to give him jurifdiftion o- " ver himfelf, and all the Bifhops in " the land; as the other three had no " power at all to give him, much lets " fo tranfcendent an one; becaufe none " can give what he has not."
To which I anfvver, That the very objection from a Popifn champion's pen, is enough to juftify the ordinations of the Church of England : But he is dif- ingenuous in frying, that Matthew Par- ker was the firft proteftant Archbifhop of Canterbury; for Thomas Cranmer was 26 years before him, and in his time confecrations and ordinations were given to thofe that turned Popifh in Queen Mary's days, and eiteemed valid,
2. To fay that none can inflall a
Biihop in a jurifdi&ion above himfelf
is falfe j for, Who inverts the Popes
with
C .I0.9 *J
with their jurifdielion ? Do not the Cardinals do ir, and arc they not as much the Pope's Suffragans as Hodg- flairs was Canterbury's ?
3. Jf he infills upon the twoBifhops being clcJt to other Sees, and that one of them had no See at all, let me aflc, l\\ When St. Athanafias was baniihed out of Alexandria, and others thruft in bis place ; or when Liberius was baniihed out of Rome, and F:elix (whom they acknowledge a righteous Biihop) put in his place ; they could have ordained Pricfts and Bilhops, had rhele orders been null, becaufe they were violently thruft out of their Sees? Certainly per- lecution and violence rather makes the glory of eccleiiaftical functions fhine more brightly, but cannot be imagined to ftrip them of their character, and to difable them from exercifmg the office of their funftion. P. 78.
And to tell us that thefe Bifhops had not power from Jesus Christ, but from the Queen and Parliament, is falfe and trifling; for they gave but the ci- vil Sanction, legal Security and Pro- tection, to thofe that had their power from Christ by Apoftolical Succef- fion : For, does it annul the ordinations K of
I no 3
of the Gallican Church, that it did fub- mit to the Anti-popes at Avignon ? Does it annul the ordination of the eaft- crn Churches, that the Patriarch of Con- flantinople is inftalled by an order from the Grand Signior I P. 90.
You fee, Sir, four Biihops acknow- ledged by the Papifts to be in the days of Queen Elizabeth, and they being Biihops., had power of conferring or- ders by Apoftolical Succeffion. I add to this, that the Papifts, efpecially the Jefuits, are as great enemies to Epifco- pacy, particularly the primitive and proteftant Prelacy, as the Presbyterians and other Seflarians can be j for they would have all the power fwallow'd up into the Popedom. I read a paffage of a letter out of the book, called, Foxes and Firebrands Part II. P. 1 1 . and ci- ted by Dr. Brett, P. 119. in a letter from a Popifh miflionary in the days of King Edward, rehearfed' at large by the faid Doctor, fpeaking of the Protel- tants abroad, with a defign to make Ed- ward and his heirs their chief defender; and to have Biihops as well as in Eng- land, " Which, (fays he) if it come to H pafs that Heretick Biihops be fo near, " andfpread abroad, Rome and the Cler* " gy utterly fall,"
Zo
[ III ]
So you find what a grofs miftake they are in that call our protcftant Epifco- pacy Popifh, which the Papacy endea- vours to ruin, and which itfelf would ruin the Papacy, if it had fuch footing abroad as it has in Britain and Ireland- Sir, I add no more, but that I con- tinue
Your Mod Humble Servant, &c.
LETTER VI.
Proving that Deifls hate Epifcopacy, as being the Support of the Cbrijliaii Religion.
SIR,
told you in my laft, that though the Papifts have preferved the Apofto- lical Succeffion, yet they have limited the Primitive fcpifcopacy too much, and are the preatcft enemies to the Pro- tcftant Prelacy ; otherwife the Refor- mation might have had greater footing through Cliriftendom before this time of day. 1 mult now let you know, that K 2 the
[ It* 1
the Delfts, who are the greateft erre- raies in the world to the Chriitian Re- ligion, cannot get their caufe wrought in a more effectual way, than by un- dermining the Hierarchy. An excel- lent inftance I have out of the Turkifh Spy : The author is a perfon that ap- pears a great bigot for the Alcoran, yet hates all revealed Religions alike : Vol. IL P. 1 86. where he ihews, that there is no fubvcrting of Chriflianity, till E~ pifcopacy is firlt abolifhed.
" The Chriftian Church (fays he) " feems to be a (lately building, where- " of Prelacy is the corner-ftone ; if " this were removed all would fall to u the ground. That which they call " the Hierarchy, if it could once be " diffolved, or pulled down, we fhould " foon fee all Chriftendom laki in ruins. " This Hierarchy is a gradual fubordi- " nation of Archbifhops, Biihops, and " Prielts ; the inferior depending u- " pon the fuperior, and all deriving " their orders and dignities from their " chief Patriarchs. Thefe are the links u which compofe that chain that fattens u Chriftendom together : Were this " once broke, the united inrereft of a Europe would icon fall to pieces.
" The
C "3 ] .
" The way mufl be by beginning at the u lowcrmoft link ; could but the Priefts " be rendered independent on the Bif- u hops, and on each other, it would be u a fair ftcp to the difmantling of the " out-works, thefc Prielts drawing an " infinite number of peopleafter them ; " as it is apparent in Geneva, Holland, M Swifterland, and other places, where u they have quite abolifhed the order " and authority of Bilhops : And it is " obfervable, that none of thefc fore - u mentioned countries, fince that time, 11 have ever been inftrumental in op- € pofing the victorious arms of the Ot« (i toman Empire; as if, with the down- " fall of Epiicopacy, the charm were a diffipated, which had for fbme ages 11 precipitated thefe nations (among o- " thers), to a raih and oblHnate refinance u of that force, which is deltineci by u fate to conquer and reform the world. " Weigh well this thought, and thou u wilt find that the order of Bilhops is " cfiential and neceflary to the good cf- C( tate of Chriftcndom 5 And that the '• only way for the MufTulmans to un- " dermine all Europe, will be to (up " plant this order, and introduce an " ecclefialttcal independency among K 3 the
[ >M ] " the Priefts, by which means every " one fhall alRime to himfelf, not on- *' ly his proper fragment of the torn dignity, but the whole fundamental power of a Bifliop, taking upon him to do thefe offices, which, before, it was not accounted lawful for any but a mitred head to perform. Hence in time will follow innumerable in- conveniencies, diftaftes and broils; and perhaps as many Schilms as there are particular Priefts to head them : Since every one will be apt to think himfelf capable of dilating to all the rell, and judge it below him to re- ceive the law from any. Thus will there be a clear ftage for ambition, avarice and lull, to act their pans on; and when, by the craft of defigning u men, the fuperflition of bigots, and eg the eaiinefs of the credulous, the u greateft part fhall be fodivided, that u it will be difficult to find two men * of the fame mind in articles of faith ; H it will then be eafy, either by the in- H telligible reafons of the Alcoran, or 11 the "more cogent arguments of the *' fword, to plant the true and undefiled u faith in thefe countries." Dr. Brett,
his
[ It* ]
his Account of the Ancient Govern- ment, P. 96, £mc.
Sir, This letter deferves our (efious con- fideration ; for the more you fliake off
Epilcopaey the more near you come to Turcilm; for, what a prodigious (warm of monftrous |Hcreiles were broached in England after the revolution of 1 64 t, Pagitt's Hereliography, and Edwards's Gangrena, abundantly reftif y : And there was a defign then fet on foot to enlarge the Proteftant intereit, and that was by joining in communion with the Turks, u Becaufc," laid the Projectors, " They 14 were Orthodox in the main : For il the}: believed in one God; theylook- 4< ed on Christ as a great Prophet ; lt they owned the abfolute decrees, and " they hated Popery." This you may •read in feveral pamphlets of the learn- ed Dr. Lefly, and particularly in his Rehearfals. In fhort then confider that the Papifts, Presbyterians and Deifts, efpecially the lad two, are the greatcft enemies to Epifcopacy j and fo 1 bid you FareweU
LETTER
t 116 ]
LETTER VII.
Shewing the Defence of Epifcopacy,
from the pen ofaprofefed Enemy to
the Efablijhed Church ^England.
SIR,
THE reverend and learned Dr. Brett, P 82, 83, &c. has furnifh- ed rnc with a furpriling paflage of a part of a gentleman's fpeech, in the Houfe of Commons, upon that which was commonly called. The Root and Branch bill ; which was entitled, An a ft for the utter aboltfnng of all Archbi- Jhops, B 7/7; ops, their Chancellors and Com- miffaries, Deans, Deacons and Chapters, Archdeacons, Prebendaries, Canons, and all their Under officers* Sir E. D's Col< leftion of Speeches, P. 63.
His
[ H7 1
His words arc thefe, ibid. P. 127.
" They who deny that ever any fuch u Bifhops, (that is, Biihops prefiding l( over Presbyters) were in the beft and 11 purefl times, 1 intreat fomc one of " them (if any fuch be here) to (land " up and Jhew me, teach me, how I " may prove, that there never was an " Alexander at Maccdon, or a Julius " Cxfar, or a William the conqueror in
* the world. For, Sir, to me as plain it 'Ms, that Bilhops-prefidcnt have been " the confhint, permanent, and perpc-
* tual governors of the Church of God
* in all ages. And this being matter " of fac), I do hope that hiftorical " proof will be lufficicnt adequate il proof in that, which in its fa& is <l matter of hiftory ; but proofs here
* are fo manifold and clear, that I il borrow the free and true affertion of l< a worthy and learned gentleman, (Sir ,l Thomas Afton's Review of Epiico- u pacy, P. 1.). It may be thought -want " of will rather than want of light, which " makes men deny the antiquity of Bijbofs " in the primitive times. u I herefore
f nnfwcr not me, but anfwer Ignatius, " antwer Clemens, Tertullian, Ireneus ; f1 nay anfwer the whole undifputcd con- currence
[ 118 J
" currence of the Afian, the European,. " and the African Churches, all ages, " all places, all pcrfons : Anfwer, I * fay, all thefe, or do as I do, fubmic " to the fufficient evidence of a truth." " Again, P. 139. he fays, " Parity of u degrees in Church Government hath u no foundation in holy fcripture, and " is as abfonous to reaion as parity m a u (late or family. Indeed it is a fancy, u a dream, a mere non-entity j it neither 11 hath nor never had a being. If ir be 41 any thing, it is abfolute Anarchifm, " and that is nothing; for privation of *'• government is not a government." " And then again he Ihews, P. 144. u That a Bifhop's office was perpetual, 14 not temporary, in thefe words : " Bur, " Sir, I have heard fome among us fay, f* if then we muft have a Bifhop, let " him be like a pilot, only for a voy- l< age ; let him be like yourfelf, a a fpeaker only for a Parliament. But *f I do affirm, ab initiation fuit Jic. Your " Bifhop of old was not occafional, fro # re nata, and immediately degraded j u nothing fo 5 but continued a fixed, a conitant, perpetual moderator and " prefident for life, unlefs outed for u his own demerits Vp
What
C "9 ]
What but demonftrative truth could have extorted fuch a fpcech from a de- clared enemy to all the Bilhops in Eng- land, andaprofefe'dfoe to the Hierarchy. I conclude then from Jeremiah vi. i6. Ask for the old paths ; where is the <Jood way, and zualk therein, and ye (hall find reft for your fouls : But they fid, we will not walk therein.
Ad
leu.
T e s t i m onies of F \ither j9 and of Mr. Calvin, of the Power and Siicccffion o/^Bifhops.
I Need not cite paffages from St. Ig- natius ; for it were almoft to tran- fcribe more than the half of his gen- uine Epiftles, to prove the diftinftion betwixt Bifiiops, Presbyters, and Deacons. Our Lord, whole precepts we ought to revere and obferve, fettling the hon- our of the Bifliop, and the ftate of the Church, fpeaks thus in the Gofpel, and fays unto Peter, I fay unto thee, thou art
Peter,
C 120 ]
Peter, and upon this Rock I 'will but Id my Church, and the gates of Hell Jhall not -prevail againfl it ; and unto thee will I ■give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and whatfoever thou fh alt bind on Earth, jhall be bound in Heave //, and zvhatfoever thou (halt loofe on Earth, pall be loofd in Heaven. From thence forwards the ordination of Bilhops, and the ftate of the Church, has continu'd through all the changes of times and Succeffions, (o as that the Church is founded upon the Bilhops, and every aft of the Church is governed by them, who are its Prelates. Cyp. Efifi. 27.
St. Augiijline, in his commentary on Pfal. xlv. 17. Inftead of thy Fathers thou foalt have Children, zvhom thou may eft make Princes in all lands; has thefe, words ; il What is the meaning of this, <; Inftead of thy fathers thou {halt have "children? The ApofUes were fent " as fathers : Inftead of the Apoftles., *' fons are born to thee j they are made <■ Billiops : For from whence are " thefe Bilhops born that are now " in the world ? The Church herfelf " calls them Fathers ; fhe bare them, " fhe has placed them in the feats of " the Fathers : Do not then think thy-
" felf
[ t« .1
4< felf -deferred, becaufe thou Iceft not ff Peter, becaufe thou fceft not Paul, " becaufe thou feed: not thofc by whom " thou wait born ; out of thine own " offspring thou had obtained a f'atl'Cr- " hood: Inltead of thy Fathers, Sons " are born to thee: Thou fhalt make " them Princes over all the earth.
" What Afaron-ztid his fbns, and the il Levites did in the Temple, this the " Bifliops, Pritfts and Deacons claim to <; themlelves in the Church: That we " may know that the Apoflolical tra- li ditions were taken from the Old Tcfc Cl tament, and that the fafcty of the " Church depends en the dignity of the u High Pricfts, to whom, if a greater 14 and more eminent power was not " given, there would be as manySchiims " as Prie(ts." Jerome's tpidlc to Eva- grins.
f But do you think it fufficknn to " fay, that they are Orthodox and (bund u in faith ? Suppofe they arc, yet (till 11 their ordination is null and invalid j " and then what can their faith or any " thing olfe fignify ; Chriitians ought
as -earrceilly <to contend for valui Ofci-
<l nation, as they ought to do for their
" very faith itfclf j for if it be ijjgful
L "*or
<t
'" fo*r every pretender to confeerate, " and make themfelves Priefts, then V farewel Altar, fare w el Church and " Prieithood too." St. CkryfoJL lorn. 3. Pave 822. Edil.SaviI.
u I bad always a great reverence " for the Bifhops of your Church, to 11 whom 1 gave inward reverence as 11 as well as outward refpetf:, and would 44 gladly have ferved them in fettling of 44 the Engliili Church ; and my judg- li merit is, if we may have fuch an "" Hierarchy, in which the Bifhops Co *' cxcell others, that they refule not
* fubjeclion to Chiust, but would " depend upon him as their only head,
* and refer themfelves to bim-$ in which u they prelerve brotherly communion u among themfelves ; that they are u- " nited by nothing more than the truth ; il in which cafe I denounce him wor- M thy of all curies, who does not rib- u ferve fuch an Hierarchy with all re- " verence and obedience: And I would << torGoD fuch a Su-cccffio^n had con- << tinned to this day; it fhould eafily " have obtained from us the obedience
* that it deferves. I do account the "government by Archbifhopsa moder- " ate honour, as being within the com-
pafs;
C '=3 ]
li pafs of a man's power to execute,
* which the Pope's pretended authority 11 is not ; and the antient Church did
* appoint Patriarchs and Primates in " every province, as a bond co unite " Bifhops in concord/' Calvhtis anfwtr to Mr. Cartwrights reprefcntation of drcbbi(hops and Bijhofs.
From the Spirit of Corah, Dathan, w\Abiram} Good Lord deliver us; amen,
FINIS.
L 2
T H E
SECOND PART
OF THE
SUCCESSION
OF THE
PRIESTHOOD
I N T H E
Old and New Testament.
O R,
A Challenge to all that want Epif* copal Ordination, to prove the Validity of their Minifterial Arts.
By ROBERT CA LD E #, M.A. Late. resbyter Scotland.
Presbyter of the Suffering Church of
Jeremiah, xxiii. 31.
Behold I am again ft them that prophetic falfc dreams, faith the Lord, and do tell them, and caufc my people to err by their lies, and by their lightnefs; yet I fcQC them not, nor commmded them: Therefore they null nqt profit this people, at all, faith the Lord.
St. John x. 1.
Verily, Verily, I fry onto you, he that enrereth not by the door into the fheep fold, but climbcth up Tome other way, tlie fame is a Thief and a Robber.
Would to Goi fitch a Succeffnn had continued to this day ; it \uvdd tafilf h.ive obtained from us the obed'ence that it defer ves. Calv. de neceif. Reior. Purr 1. P. 96.
EDINBURGH:
Printed for J. Wilson, Bookfellcr in the Exchange.
TO THE
READER-
]F the Apcftolical Sfaccdlian be the foundation of the Goipcl Miniltry to the end of the world, it naturally follows, that they who cannot prove their Miniftry by this rule and Itandard, cannot be Minilters of Jfsus Christ, who promifed to be with the ApolHcs, and their fuccedors to the end of the world : Coniequently their minilterial adts m uft be null and void, and they cannot profit the people, being but Ufurpers of the Sacred Priejlhood, tho' they fhjaiald write tcru-thoufcnd volumes, and ^bjeft ten thouftnd inconveniencies againft-our principles, iuch as unchur- ching all that want this Succeilion. It is reafonabiy prefumed, that the govern- ment that has laded always in the Church, is the iame that was eftahlilhed by our Saviour, and that which is not lb old as an hundred chiefs of kindred in Scotland, by fome two, fome three hundred of years and upwards, cannot be the government of Christ's inlli- tution. Ver, fuch is the corruption of mankind, that when picture and pro- fit
\ cxxviii \]
fit has debauched the confcience, and got the attendant over reafon, the fu- preme faculty of the foul, and makes it a flave to intereft againd duty, it will find a thoufand fhifts and fubterfugcs to defend the caufe it has efpou(ed ; fo Advocates, when they plead the caufe of Criminals, by many quirks and tricks in law, endeavour to bring the Pannels off. It is a fad matter that this fhould be among Chriilians, who are all bound to truth and finceruy ; but it falls out ( according to the Proverb ), Shew me the man anjd I ihall fhew you the law : So fhew them worldy inter- eft, and they will find out fcripiure. So we may fay, new kings new laws : We may add, new models of Church government, new glofTes andnew fenfes upon fcripture, according to the change- able fafhion of the times. Mr. Lacie, a ringleader of the Camiiars in England, being about to fet off' his married wife, and to take another, pretended a call from the Spirit to ratify the deed ; yea, and found fcripture for it, in Hof. i. 2. Go, take unto tkee a tuije of zu/:oredojns. Nothing fo ridiculous or abfurd but may be rendered probable by argument or reafon. There was never a damnable
Hcrefy
f\ cxxix ]
Hcrefy but got fome follower?. I in- stance the Cainians in the fecond cen- tury, called after Cainr who held, that the way to be faved was to fatisfy their lulls: They compoled a book which they called St. Paul's Afcenfion to Heaven, which they filled with blafphemies, and gave out, that thefe were the revelations made to him, when he was rapt up to the third Heavens. They had a great veneration for Cain, Corah, Datkan and slbiram, the Sodomites, and parti- cularly, for Judas, becaufe his treach- ery occafioned the murder of Jesus Christ. Ephraim Pagit's Herefiogra- phy gives an account of moft abominable Herefies that broke forth in Oliver CromwePs days, to the great fcandal of Chriftianity. The Independents, in 1647, in their warm difputes with the Pres- byterians, gave the fame names to them which Presbyterians gave to the Biihops and the Clergy, to wit, Brats of . Anti- chrift, the whore of Babylon, the Beuit, and the Man of Sin: And the Enthu- fiaits, who thought that every man and woman among them was taught of God, gave out, that the order of minifters was juft what the Independents called the Presbyterians. -And the truth is,
Lay
r cxxx
Lay afide the practice of the univerfal: Church, ancient and modern, and let- men put their own fcnfe on the fcrip- tures-, that which the Tremblers pro. duced for themfelves by the found of the letter,. was, and ftill.is, more taking* than all the fcriptures which the other two parties produced for thcmtelves. For example, That there was no need of minifters in the.gofpel days : That the faints fhould be all taught of God ; for the prophefies were to be fulfilled; That the Spirit was to be poured out on all flefh ; That all God's people were Prielts, Rev. i* 6..
I have fhewed in the Preface to the firft part of the Suc'ceffion to the Prieft> hood, feveral methods that our enemies take to imppfe upon their followers : as I. To call Epifcopacy. Popery. 2. Their confidence in giving out, that the advo- vocates for Epifcopacy make a fairer ihow from antiquity than from cano- nical fcripture. 3. That Biihop and Presbyter is all one in Icripture. 4. That mens different opinions about E- piicopacy, is an argument that there is no foundation for it. 5 That they never notice the anlwers given to their arguments* 6. That they argue from
-an
[ exaxi ]
-en acccflory againft the principal ; and from circumftances againft (ubftance. 7. That they never offer to prove their own miniftry. There can be no argil* ;ing, fays a moraiift, with a man that is ob- ftinate in his opinion ; for when he has once contradicted you, his mind is bar- red up againft all light; none but man- ly fouls can unfay what they have laic', and forfake an error when they have found themfelvcs in the wronp.
It is not every one that has the hu- mility of St Anguiline, who is famous for his retractions, and would not ftand againft light, which fome reckon to be -a fin againft the Holy Ghoft; hearing they will not hear, and feeing they will •not fee- Hcrefy^and Schifm are works of the fleih, according to the Apoftle St. Paul, and not an error of the judgment only j for it is obferved, that Herefy and Schifm bred: forth upon the profpec/t of (ome worldly defign.
I charge the party Ideal with as guil- ty of abuling, perverting, and mifap- plying the holy fcriptures. It is in the power of their teachers, to make mul- titudes of the fimpler fort abhor the obfervation of Chrtftmas, by telling, from St. Luk$ ii. 8. That Christ's
nativity
cxxxii nativity could not be in the winter*' i time, becaufe the fhepherds were keep- ing their flocks at night ; as if all conn- tries were alike, or as if fhepherds did not io in colder countries. They feek no more againft Biftiops gowns or ca- nonical garbs, than chat the Pharifees wore long robes ; when it is evident, that it was pride, covetoufnefs and hypocri- ly, that our Saviour charged them with, and not their garbs. Paul left a cloak at Troas, therefore he was no Bifhop, is enough to deceive the poor people ; but it is all one if it ferve a turn. Mr. Richard Hollingworth, in his Modeft Plea for the Church of England, P. 78U &c, mentions, in the time of the long parliament, feveral diihoneft: pcrverfions of fcripture, as the agreement be- twixt the Garlick and Onions of Egypt, and the ceremonies of the Church of England, it were eafy to fill feveral fheets to this purpcfc,* but I /hall men- tion ibme few, whereby they general- ly abnfe the people in preaching and in printing : As,
1. St. Luke xxii, 25*. The Kings of the Gentiles exera'fe dominion over them, &c. ver. 26. But ye jhall not be fo; but he % that is jrreatejl among
you.
£ cxxxiii
you, let him he as the younger are to tl: elder, and he that is Chief as he that does ferve. i Pet. v. 5. I fa. xxvii. Matthew xx. 2 5*. Mark x. 42.
Anfw. 1. Put this Scripture in Level- lers mouths, the ufe they will make of it is, That there fhould he no govern- ment, civil nor ecclcfiaflical, (upreme nor fubordinate, among Chriitians, and that heathen Kings turning Chriitians, ihould abdicate their kingdoms and power, and level thcmfelves with their fubjevSls j which is againlt the common fenle of mankind, 2. It is as imperti- nently applied to ecclefiaftical go- vernment; for a parity among church- officers, never was in the world > for in the Old Teftament there were High- priefts, Priefts and Levites ; and Chrift in his Collcce was above the twelve and the feventy : And lure the Apoftles governed the churches which they planted. 3. May not the occaiion of our Saviour's uttering thefe words lead meft to the right underltanding of them ? For two Apoftles dreaming that their mailer was to be a temporary King, or iecular Monarch, petitioned that they fhould be next the King in his court : He tells them that his kingdom was of M another
cxxxiv ] another nature, and that they were not to govern like heathen Kings, at their will and pleafure, thoJ they were to fit upon the twelve thrones of Ifrael: His government was for the good of his fubjecls, and not like fome fccutar Princes, that governed tyrannically, ma- king their will a law. ^.. The words Chief and Greater fuppofes an order of fuperiority and fubordination among them, but withal recommends humili- ty. 5. Tho' our Saviour did not put the (word in the hands of church go- vernors (which is the civil magidrate's office), yet be gave them the power of the keys, to receive converts, and thruft contumacious offenders out of the church, where he appointed dif- ferent orders for the government there- of. 6. The libelling the Bifhops for meddling in fecular affairs, or for ty- ranny, comes very ill from thofe whofe principle it is to dethrone Kings, and to force nations againil their confiden- ces, under pain of excommunication and forfeiture, to fwear to their Cove- nants and engagements : flich men are not difpleafed that the kirk fhould have the power of the (word and of the keys together; but it grieves them that
the
[ cxxw
the Pope ihouldhave it, and thcmfclvcs lhould want it.
But hilly, What can this Scripture make for Presbyterian government in a parity, when the words Chief and Greater in that fame text relate to an imparity? But, in fhorc, let thole who make ufe of thefe texts againlt us, tell us what Icrvice it can do them? Are they the Succcflors of thefe Apoltles in their miniitry, or in the humility that was recommended to ihcm by their m after i
There is another Scripture they have put in the mourns of the ignorant vul- gar, and that is 1 Pet. v. 3, 4. Not as being Lords over Cod' 's heritage; this they cxpreily let down agamft Lord Biihops: At this rate, the Quakers may argue againit Mr. James and Mr. John, Matth. xxiii. 10. and io may a melan- choly bigot fcruplc to call any man Fa- ther, from the 9th veife : Whereas, be- fides the common way of commenting upon the word Heritage, it may be rendered lot, portion or pofleflionj fo in the Old Testament, in the books ot Jolhua and Judges, it is taken, and lo in the New Tcflament, the Apoltles and their Succcflors the Bilhops, were M 2 Treafurers
£ cxxxvi 3
Treafurers of the flock that came in to the church, by fome that fold their e- itates, and other benevolences of the people, and this was difpofedof to the Clergy and the poor, as the chief go- vernors of the church found conve- nient: Thefe who had the manage* mem of that facred money, were not to look upon themfelves as Lords or Proprietors of that flock, which was mortified for pious ufes, but as Stewards anfvverable for their trull. 8ii Dr Whit- by on that place.
Another paliage of Scripture they abufe, againft the hierarchy, liturgy, ra- tional rites and ceremonies, and the laws of the church, by virtue of the power which the governors have to do things in order and decently, is Colojf. ii. 21. Touch noty tajle not, handle not ; which the Apoille fpeaks not as his own words, but as the words of the hercticks and falfe teachers in his own days, who forbad the life of marriage, and of meats, as of themlelves unlaw- ful : The found of words, without con* fidering the fenfe, is enough to them : Many other Scriptures are thus perver- ted, to keep up raftiod and fchilm.
2. In
r cxxxvii
2. In the ne\t place, when the holy Scriptures arc thus treated* what may ihey not do with ccclefiadical hiftory and Polt-apoftolical writers and fathers, which are not translated in ail nations as the Scriptures f Of this we have too many evidences : For what more clear than St. lgnatius's Epiilles, for Bifhops, Presbyters and Deacons ? What fhift have they againfl this I Either to deny their authority altogether, or elfe, as fbme of our countrymen do, to make them Presbyterian ? And cho' they be confuted to a demonttration, yet {til!, right or wrong, they are wedded to their new opinion, to as to baffle all ec- clefiadical hiftory : Is there anything more clear than St. Cyprian, for the diltinition among clergymen ? yet a Cyprianus Ifotimus will make him Pres* byterian, tho' Monfieur Daille acknow- ledges, " That it is clearer than the fun '• at mid-day, from the Epiftles of Sr. 44 Cyprian, That not only the offices, H but alfo the names of Bilhop and Pres- 44 byter, were diitinguifhed all the Ro* 44 man world over/'
It will appear in the following letters
what ufe they make of St. Jerome, to no
purpole, for their cauie. Mr. William
M 3 Jamefon
L 'cxxxviii Jamefon will make Gregory Nazianzen, Bilhop of Conftantinople, plead agarnft his own order, in thefe words, " Would " to God there were no Prelacy, no " prerogative of places!" Whereas the father fpeaks againffc the ambitiorTand intrufion of Maximus, a Cynick philo- ibpher, whom he had converted to Chriltianity ; and moft ungratefully would take his place over his head : he therefore fpeaks of the growing power of Biihops over one another, and nor of Biihops over their own Presbyters and Deacons. See Dn Pin on the life and writings of Greg. Nazianzen, and alio the Author of the Anfwer to the Parochial Bilhop. This letter of the parochial Biihop to a prelatical Gentle- man, cites a fentence out of llidorus Pelufiota on the title-page of his book, thus, "Seeing it is evident, how valt a " difference there is betwixt the an- "eient humble miniftry, and the pre- " fent tyranny, why do you not crown " with garlands the lovers of parity and "equality?'' But he leaves the reader to find this fentence in the writings of that holy and learned man, and perhaps we may read the mod of all his epif- ties before we light on it. This wor- thy
£ cxMxix "2 thy perfon was a Prieit of Damiata, a city in Egypt, and lived a monadic life ; he was a fevcre cenfor of the a- hufes in his time, particularly of thoie that were guilty of fimony, covctouf- nefs and felling of brdiiia'rioiH j and charges the Eilhop of Dam iata with thefe crimes, which he juftly might do, and object againlt them the humility, (elf-denial and fimplicity of their anccl- tors, without the lead intimation of their being Presbyterians. But the defign of Nazianzen, Querela, and of this parochial Bifhop,was to make their readers believe, Gregory Nazianzen and llidorus were Presbyterian, in their judgments ; whe- ther this be ex infeitia out nequitia, out of ignorance, which is want of know- ledge, or out of delign, which is want of confeience and honeity, I ftiall not determine ; but it is certain that there may be tyranny and ambition in a Pres* byterian parity as much as ever was feen in a Papal hierarchy, and this kings and kingdoms have found to their lad experience.
There is another wrong handle which
they make of Tcrtullian, who lived in
the fecond century, and that to fupport
themfclvcs in extemporary prayers ;
which
[ «1 J
which is, Sine momtore quia de f colore \ " We pray without a Monitor, bccaufe " from the heart/' Which is fpoken in aliufion to the heathen worlhip, ia the invocation of their greater deities "by name, repeated by the Pried, and by the people after him, and both had a Monitor or Cuflos that corre&ed them when they went wrong.
Or, becaufe we pray heartily for long life to Emperors, without any to force us to it ; for fo the words in that fentence do bear, Onnnus vitam fro* hxam fro imperatorikus*
Or, third/y, It Signifies, we go to our fecret prayers without a prompter or monitor.
Fourthly, It was a worfhip in which the people did vocally join, and which they were acquainted with before hand, which is clear in another paflage from Tcriullian upon prayer. " Our voices " mult be low, and we mud not lpeak il louder than is necefiary/' So it is in our book of Common Prayer. " I be- ' feech you,as many as are here pre fen rt 4i to accompany me with a pure heart " and humble voice/' All thefe make good fenfe.
For if the Minifler did compofe a prayer with which the people were ac- quainted,
I cxli ]
quainted, or prayed extempore, ftill he was a monitor, prompter or rouler in devotion to them.
?. There is a third way our adverfa- ries take, and that is to perplex and jumble the controverfy with the notion they have of congregations, as the In- dependents, and of parifhes, as the Pres- byterians do; but both agree that it was without a Bifhop. I have proven St. James his dioccfan prelacy over the Presbyters of Jerufalem, and St. John's over the Afiatick churches, and St. Paul's over his own plantations ; and furely that kind of government is pre- fumed to be throughout the world; for the Apoftlcs intended uniformity ; I Cor.iv. ir. ;i. 17. xi. 16. But there were no pariihes then as we have now. P.rifnes, according to MorerTs ditftio- nary, were appointed by Fabianus the the 21ft Pope, who divided Rome a- mong the (even Deacons, and Diocef- fes by Dionylius aligning a church- yard and parilh to every Presbyter. Pope Marcellinus brought the number of dioccfles to twenty five. The fir (I who initialled pariihes in England was Honorius, Archbiihop of Dover.
"in the fir ft ages of Chriftianity," fays the learned Mr. William Nelibn, in hrs
Right
I cxlii ]
Right of the Clergy of Great Britain;;! " there were no determinate boundaries. Bat when St. Peter had ordained Priefts, and Cletus had ordained them .1 to a certain number, Evariftus,. who was alfo Bifhop of Rome, affigned to each Prieft his title, that is his parifli, which was the place where the converts ufu- ally aflembled. to worfhip. Forty years- after, Hyginus Bilhop of Rome placed a Prieft in every parifh, and the chief of thefe Priefts he called Cardinal Pref- byters. Pope Dionyfius. was the fir It that divided the weilern dioceiTes into. parilhes.;>
"The word .Parocbia, fays the fame au- thor, was by the ancient writers ufed in a more large and comprehenfive fenfe ; for the churches of Alexandria, Car- thage, Corinth, Ephefus and Jerufalem, were called parifnes j but then it was not only a particular one that was com- prehended by that word, but all the towns and villages near that city,within which circuirthere were many churches and congregations of Chriftiaiis."
"This (faith he) appears by Eufcbius> who tells us that L set its was prefident at Alexandria, and of the reft of Egypt.; but that the ibperintendency of the pa- riihes where L&tus had. the civil go- vernment,
£ cxliii ]] Tcrnmcnt, belonged to Demetrius, who was Bifhop Parochiae, that is of the whole church of Alexandria, and was as large as the civil diocefs."
The learned Dr. Thomas Brett, in the 7th chapter of Ancient Church Go- vernment, tells us, that the church re- venues throughout the whole diocefs, were (till collected and paid to -the Bi- fhop, by whom they were divided into lour parts ; which cuftom continued in fome places to the ninth century, or •longer; for in the council of" Salisbury, conveened anno Dom. 807, it was de- creed (according to ancient cuftom) that the tythes ihould be divided into four parts, viz. one to be allotted to the Bifhop, another to the Clergy, a third to the poor, and a fourth belonging to the buildings for the churches : So that then minHters were not maintained as now, by the church dues arifing within the precincts where they ferved.
The places fet apart for public wor- ship were at firft called titles, feveral of which were within the city itfelf, and others in country villages which be- longed to that city, and were within the bounds of the Epiicopal diocefs. He tells us that, before the end of the fifth century, the Presbyters of Rome had
fixed
I cxliv ] fixed titles, which they added to the!* names in fubfcriptions : So wrote C#lius Januarius Presbyter, Tituli Veftinae, &c. whereas before, we find Presbyters in general called Priefts of fuch an Epifco- pal church, as a Pried of Rome, Alex* andria, or Antioch.
The fame erroneous notion our ad* verfaries have of the word Altar : They tell us, there was one altar in every con* gregation, and therefore that a Biihop could have no more under his care than as many as could conveniently hear and receive the Sacrament from him: Whereas, cur Saviour and his Apoftles, and their immediate Succefibrs, retain- ed as many of the Jewiih cuftoms as did conffi with Chriftian liberty • fo Clemens Romanus, in his firft epiftle to the Corinthians, calls the Bifhops, Priefts and Deacons; High-priefts, Priefts and Levites ; fo thefe Presbyters and Deacons kept altars in fubordination to their Bifhops ; as the Jewiih fynagogues had altars, but in fubordination to the temple, and yet all of them but one al- tar by the principle of unity, as well as all made but one Jewiih church j fo we fay, one faith, one baptifm. There were two altars in the temple, and yet but one in a fpiritual ienfe, 2 Chron* vii.
7-
I cxlv ]
7. The two tribes, and the half iribc upon Jordan, were allowed an altar, when the children of Ifrael found that they intended nofchifm, Jofa. >;xii. 22. There were feveral altars in Canaan before the building of the temple, Sfwbres vi. 26. Wc find, 1 Kinrrs xix. 26. "the prophet complains, That the altars were thrown down.
There was then but one church hi an imparity of Priefthood in old Ifrael, and what ihould change it to a parity in the new Ifrael, is not eafy to find by fcripture. reafbn, or the practice of the univerfal Church. We find the Jewiih form of church government never alter- ed under their Captains Motes and Jo- ftiua j nor under the Judges ; nor under the Kings; nor in the wildernefs ; nor in the land of Canaan ; nor did the Chriftian Priefthood alter under Hea- then perfecutors, nor under Christian patrons, k is true, we "find our Scot- tifh martyrs for the Solemn League and Covenant, left a teltimony againft Epif- copacyj but the primitive Bilhops in the days of miracles and martyrdom, died for Christ, never repenting of their Prelacy, looking on it as a Chrifti- an order, and not an ufurpation j but they think that their Moderator makes N up
L cxlvi
up the Bifhop, thof he be not the cen* | ter of unity, nor the Succeflbr of the Apoftles.
4. A fourth ftraragem theyufe, is to argue from the infancy of the church to the increafe thereof, as if the fume coat which ferved our Saviour when a child, ihould ferve him when he came to the full Itature of his manhood. When magistrates turned Chriflian, ma* ny things were in better cafe than when they were Pe-rfecutors ; St. Paul wrought with his own hands : But cer- tainly it is better now that hrs fucceffors have a legal maintenance ^ better have cathedral and parifh churches, than to have hired houfes, as St. Paul, Afts xxviii. 31, 3 32 . or upper rooms, or go from houfe to hcufe.
5. Another device th^y have, is a very M(e way of reafoning ; when we tell them of the antiquity of Bifhops, they tell us, " Antiquity does not fe- " cure from error/' This arguing from opinion to matter of fact, is molt un- reafonable j it is as if you would reafon thus, Papias vented his opinion of the Millennium, therefore there was no Bi* ihop at Jerufalem nor Alexandria,6r. Or thus, There are various difpmes abottt civil government, fome founding it in
the
I cxlvii ] the people, lomc in the peers, feme in parliaments, others in the right of he- ritage ; thelc things are uncertain ; therefore it is not certain that the Prince of Orange came to England in 1688, which was known all Europe o- ver. This, I think, any perfbn will judge a bad argument,
6. Another falfe way of arguing, is carting up the privilege that Presbyters had of old j whereas many things were granted to them by pcrmiffion, but ne- ver the power to ordain others : But this is not their cafe ; Presbyters then did things Efifcofo per?nittente, but now they aft Epifcopo prohibente ; the one in dependence of the BHhop, the other in oppofition to the Bifhop.
But lad of all, and the faddeft of all is,, their abufing the credulity of the people, men of weak judgments, firong paffions, and wild fancies, keeping them in ignorance of the dreadful fin of fchifm, which fome fathers, particular- ly St. Cyprian, reckons a lin againft the Holy Ghoft ; and lb St. Bernard makes three branches of that fin, Nolle obedire, fimulata Pietas, et omn: Scktfma. Re* bellion, hypocrily, and Schifm, from all
which fins ?ood Lord deliver us
o
The
t ffr 3
T H E
S E. C O N D PART'
OF T K E.
SUCCESSIO N
O F T H E
PRIESTHOOD
OF THE
Old and New Testament.
LETTER L
S I R,
" | Congratulate yourfafe return, and J| I give you hearty thanks for the di- Adrift account you give of the entertain- ment my laft Performance on the Suc- ceffion of the Prieftbood met with, and the various fentiments of men about it, how it plcafes tome, and difpleaies o- thers j particularly becanfe it gives of*
fence
[ M9 ] fence by unchurching foreign Protcl- tants that wiili well to Epifcopacy : In afmWcr to which I lend you the fol- lowing thoughts."
I. r^T^% HAT fuch men do not well J[ underftand the nature of of- fence or fcandal in the Scrip- ture ftile, when they take it for pro- voking men to ailgcr and difpleaiinp them ; for very often it fignifics to lay a trap, (hare, or {tumbling block in the way of the weak, and to pervert them from their duty : And, in this ca(c, offence may be given, tho' not taken ; and in other calcs offence may be taken and not given. They who preach Ihif- matical or heretical doctrine to their de- luded difciples, give offence to them • and yet they are not provoked to anger, but are led into fin: He that fpareth the rod (faith Solomon) hateth the child. Proi\ xiii. 2_j. Here the foolifa fond father gives offence to the child, and yet both are pleafed, and think they love one another. The father that corrects the Child, does his duty, 2nd gives no offence tlvV the cnild be diipleaicd.
An i whereas it is laid, That it un- churches a great body of Prcteilams ; I
N 3 anfwer
anfwer as formerly, That truth will be truth tho' the Profeffbrs be never fo few, and a multitude can never make error to be truth ; Multitude errantium non parit error: patrocinium ; It is hot great numbers of mifled perfons that can make faUehood truth, or right wrong. .Let therefore the reformed Churches jook to the confeOjUcnce themfelves ; for, as the Apoftle fays, 2 Cor. xiii. 8. IV e can do nothing atfainil the truth, but for the truth. Illud pojjiimus ( fays the Moralift) quod jure poffumus ; IVe can do that which we can do lawfully, or by an unerring rule of duty. It is not our faying that foreign Reformers are true ifttmfters that will make them ior if they cannot prove that they are the Succeflors of the Apoitles; and that is the thing they cannot pretend to. 1 :m informed, that the learned Dr. Grabb, when he examined the funda- mental charter of the miniftry, found th t it could never be proven but by Su ceffion, and that no reformed Church co, lid lay claim to it but England ; and therefore left Germany, his own 0 untry, and came over to England, vhere he lived and died m the bofom of an Afflftolic Church.
Again
[ »*» ]
Again the word Proteftant may de- ceive the fimple and unwary, by the very foupd of it; but wile men kpow, that 'neither Protcftancy nor Popery is our religion, but€hrhtianity only/ and the definition of a Church, is a body of believers proioilng the Cnriltian rcligi- gion under lawful pallors. Now, law- ful ministers mult prove their million immediately or mediately; immediately, none now a-days pretend to it but Eathufiafts or Semienthufiads ; and we know not what to make of them in point of rcafoning j for when we think we have them, we immediately lofe them : They run hither and thither, wanting a (olid foundation to fix on.
Let, then, thefe whom I deal with at prefent, diiVmguifh themfelves from Entkijiafts, Erajtians, or Independents, again ft whom the learned authors of "Jus Reg. EccL argued molt folidly,- (as i 1 have ihev/d in the firft part ), and fiiew their mtniitry by Apoltolical Snc- ceiTion, as they pretend, or eife give over the carde, and anlwer the argu- ments of thefe learned Presbyterians in the 1637.
If the found of the word Proteftant catch a man by his ear, without foli.
diiy
[ >r- ]
dity in the brain, he may (wallow down any Berefy that ever was condemned in; the primitive ages; for Jews and Turks', ilo proteft againft Papifts : Enthufiafts that deny an ordained minittry, and In- dependents who flight Apoltolical Suc- ceffion, are Proteflants ; Socinians, that deny the divinity of our Saviour, are Proteftants ; Deifts, who ridicule revealed religion, are Proteftants ; and Athcifts, that mock the notion of a deity, go under the name of Prote- ftants : So, it is very dangerous to mif- lead men with the name of a thing which dcdroys Chriftianity : For, as I faid, neither Proteitancy nor Popery is religion, but Chriftanity ; So that the quellion remains ftill unanfwered, viz. Whether or not they, who go under the name of miniftcrs in the reformation, can prove that they are the Apoilles Succcffcrs ; becauie there is no oiher way to prove a lawful miniftry ?
However (omc of the foreign Prote- ftants, io called, plead necellity, and wiih they might have an Engliih EpHco- pacy, and others pretend a divine Right of Presbytery : But the Britiih Prcshyte* rians abjure Epiicopacv, ami inch arc excommunicated by Calvin, and are accounted madmen by Beza.
But
c m 3
Fur I fee no ground for their pretence to nccefiityj for they might get aa Apoftolical ordination by having a con- fecration from England or Greece, with- out impofing unlawful terms of com- munion upon them y and tins might tend much to the reformation ot ChriU rendom ; but the hand of Joab makes the impediment.
I offer another thought upon this head, the unchurching of foreign Pro- teftants, and that is, If Presbyterians be right in this debate,, and Epifcopais wrong, this will unchurch twenty rhouland more chrifiians than the fo- reign Churches are • for it has been of- ten told them, That let them join rheir Presbyterian parity with the Popifli hierarchy, there are three times more Chriftians in the world, than Papifts and Presbyterians are, and that under Epifcopacy and Apoftolical Succeflion. Let it bo alfo confidered, that the foreign Churches have the fhadovv of Epifcopacy, and (as Calvin fays), nature : abhors a parity. There is a pro fed: E- • pifcopacy in Denmark and Norway, and j other places have Superintendents and [ general Superintendents, tho'thcy can- ! not lay claim to Apoftolical Succelfion;
but
t m 3
but of the S'ucceflion of Sweden I fhall treat hereafter.
I know it is faid, that Presbyterian Churches are more charitable ; for they, acknowledge the validity of Epiicopal ordination, but we do not acknowledge theirs : This is like the Popifh argu- ment, That Protectants acknowledge there may be falvation had in the Popifti Church, but the Papifts deny that Pro- teftams can be faved. I a-nfwer, That the confent of both parties in an opini- on, is not a rule ; but Metaphyseal prin- ciple and truth is the r.ule to fleer by. '1 he Logicians tell us, that contingent proportions may be true or falfc, as the matter is to which it is applied. Herod and Pontius Pilate, tho* differing in< o- ther tilings, yet agreed againft truth itfelf. It was an argument the Dona- tifts, a four, churlifhand peeviih pack of Schifmaticks from the Catholic Church, made nfe of againft the Ortho- dox, " That it did acknowledge the " baptifm of the Donatifts, and did not " rebaptiz? them ; but fo did not the <wDonatifts with them ; therefore, by the " conieihon of adverfaries, the balance " was caft on their i\i\o who did re* " baptize thole that departed from the
" Catholic
< Catholic Church. ff The Orthodox did not rebaptize thofe that came over to them from the Donatifts, nor diet they re-ordain their Pridh, norNovatiau Prietts : The rcafon is, becaufe they had Apoftolical uiccctTion by Bifhops* But the argument vhich the Papifts make ufe of, is not univerGUly true on either fide: For fome cufuifts among the Romanics do affirm, that the Rul- ticks, and the fimpler fort of thole in Germany, that go under the name of Hereticks, and do not err 'fti'fly, {land- ing out againft fight, cannot be formal Hereticks, becaufe they have the Ca- tholic faith in their baptifm, which cannot be loft but by erring ftnbbornly. Again, feverai Proteftants are as dog- matic as the Papifts are, and affirm, u That a man living and dying in 'he " Popifli principles cannot be faved. " And Mr. Dodwell, in two letters, makes a ftrcng doubt of it.
As for the reft of the arguments which feem to plead for Presbytery, I fhall take notice of them hereafter. In the mean time i reft yours, to fervc you.
LETTER
I 1J6 1
LETTER IL
Wherein is considered the pretended Defence which Presbyterians make for their cavfe, out oj St. Jerome, on Titus i. 5.
SIR,
f Shall firft fet down St. Jerome's very words, and conficcr whether they are of any advantage to the Pres- byterian caule. The words are thefe, be- fore fuch time as, by mitigation of the Devil, factions, or parties, were made in religion, and people began to fay, 1 am of Paul, at d I of Apollos, and 1 of Ce- phas, the Chinches were governed by the Common Council of Presbyters j but afterwards, when every one ac- counted any whom he had baptized to be his own, and not Chr ist's, it was decreed through the whole chriftian
world
world, That one chofen out of the Presbyters fhould be fct over the red:, unto whom the care of the Chwrca fhould belong, that the feeds of Schiihi might be taken away. n
They do the reverend and learned Father a great injury, rhar interpret this with a Presbyterian meaning} for ic will appear, they make him guilty of preemption, falfehood, and grofs con- tradiction ;
Firfl, In averting a thing for which he brings no proof, either from Scrip- ture or Poft-apoftolical writers • for Sr. Jerome, living in the beginning of the fifth Century, affirms quite contrary to all that were before him, to wit, St. Clemens, St. Ignatius, and all the four centuries precceding his time, if his meaning be Presbyterian.
Secondly, They will render him guil- ty of biafphemy, to wit^ Thai Christ and his Apoltles did inftilotc a Presby- terian parity j but it was found very in- convenient, and therefore it was iownd expedient that Presbytery fhould be converted into an Epifcopacy, that h+ a government of divine right ihould be turn'd intoone of human right; becaufe the devil prevailed more on PresbyteVy O than
C 158 ]
than on Epifcopacy, and that the govern* ment of Christ's inftitution was not fuch a fence and bulwark as the remedy that men found out afterwards ; a great refledion upon the wifdom of our Sa- viour and his Apoftles, who could fore- fee the inconveniencies that fhould en- fue upon Presbyterian government.
Thirdly, Will not this make him guil- ty of grofs contradictions, if his mean- ing be Presbyterian ? Becaufe in many places, particularly in his 85th Epijlle to Evagrius, he aflerts, " That Bilhops, "Presbyters and Deacons, are in the New "Tel lament correfpondent to High- ** priefts, Priefts and Levites in the Old " Teftament. " And in that fame Epif- tle he tells us, "That, from the days of « St. Mark the Apoitle, the Church of "Alexandria was governedby Bilhops till " the time of Dionyfius and Heracles, "whofucceededtoDemetrius,inthe 231, M 'which was in the third Century. " And in the forememioned Epiftle, does he not propofe the queftion, " What is it "aBifhop can do, but what a Presbyter " may do, except ordination ? " And, in his Dialogue with the Luciferians, he fays, "'The wellfare of the Church "conffls in the dignity of the High- pried
I »59 ]
" prieft, to whom, if fomc matchlefs, u power be not given, there will be as " many divifions in the Church as there u are Priefts. ?;
fourthly, Is not this a reflection upon Presbyterian government, that they themielvcs were forced to make Bifhops, becaufe they could not fubfiit without a change ; and that this was in the Apoftles days, whether before or after Timothy was made Bifhop of Ephe- iius, or Titus at Crete?
Fifth/)\ Is it not a reflection upon St. Jerome himfelf, or all the Presbyterian apologifts for him, that they can never condefcend upon the time, place, or perfons, by whom this change was made, throughout the whale zvor/d, as the Father words it I for it is certain the imparity was before the general council of Nice: and if it was in the Apoliles days, I have proven in the firll part, that they kept the government of their own plan- tations in their own hands, and intend- ed that their SuccelTors lhould do the fame.
Sixthly^ If univerfal cuftom did make Epilcopacy a law, and a (landing govern- ment throughout the world, continuing for 1503 years, by what rule have O 2 Presbyterians
t 1 60 3
Presbyterians right to reverfe that cn- ftom, without gathering the world to- gether to rcaflume their pretended
o I
right ? Are they lure to (land out againft the mitigation of the devil at this time, more than they did in their firft inllitu- tlon, when they wfere forced to meta- morphofe their Presbytery into an Epif- copacy ? Are they fure to keep peace and unity better than in the days of the Apoftles ? Was it not for the better that this change was made ? And if a man may pais from his own right, by what law can he recover it upon his repentance, if he do not fliew the very condition upon which it was firft fur- rendered, and the breach made upon the other fide ? The Hebrew lervant, by the ceremony of having Bis ear thruft through with an aw/} Deut. xv. 1 7. was to be a fervant for ever. Now if Presbytery, for very good reafons, did alter itfelf into Epifcopacy, when fchifms broke forth in the church of Corinth in the days of the Apoftles, and that one order above another was found to be the proper remedy for this fore difeafe, and this remedy did continue for 15*00 years; What reafon is there to alter this Icheme of government,
when
[ i6i ]
when wo have not the Apoflles alive (who had an infallible conduct) to in- terpofe their authority, and to counter- mand their own decrees throughout the world ?
But /ajlh, If] we can fall upon a plain expolition to lave St. Jerome, that great light of the phurch, from fpeak> ing unrruthSjj abfurdities, and inconli- ftencics, this delerves very well to be coniidered : For it is certain, he (peaks not the lenle of Aerius, who, in the 4th emury, wras condemned as an he- retkk, for laying that Bifhops and Pre J* bytcrs were all one, which is the Prcl- byterian opinion. His fenle then can be no otherwifc than this, which is a- grceable to other ancients and his own expreiTions : u Thar, in the days of the Apoilles, the name of Bilhop and Pref- byrer was common, but this aid not in- fer a parity in the church ; for the A- pottles were above thefe Biihops and Presbyters, and kept the government of the churches which they planted, in their own hands: But the church in- crcafing, and the Apoitles being near to the hnilhing of their courfe, and run- r.ing out their race, they let up their Succeilbra, to whom the name of Biihop O 3 was
C 162 ]
was peculiarly appropriate, as having the power of the Apoftles over Presby- ters and Deacons, and fo to continue to the end of the world." This is agree- able to reafon, and to the pra&ice of the univerfal Church ; and will make good fenfe of the words of St. Jerome, in his comment on Titus i. "Let Bifhops * know, that it is more from cuftom 4 than by any appointment of our Lord, £ that they arc fuperior to Presbyters."
All which may be granted without injury to the caufe which we plead for ; for the Father means, that this di- ftin&ion was made rather by Apoliti- cal inftituiion and practice, than by our Saviotrt; which does not deny our Savi- our to have been the foundation of this government • for, in the days of his hu- miliation, he being the virtual Church, kept all the government of his college of Apoftlts and Difciples in his own hand ; but in that lame college there was one rank above another, to whom government and power was to be given at the rcfurreclion, and exerciled after the alrenfion,
I think the handle that Presbyterians make of the learned Dr. Sage's words, makes nothing to their purpofc for a
parity,
r 163 ]
parity, viz. " That the twelve Ap< (lies " firft commifTion had not constituted '• them governors of the Chriftian " Church, if their eommiffion had not
" been Renewed after the rcliirrcetion of " Ghrift; for the Chriiiian Church could " not be founded rill our Lord was rilcn, 11 feeing it was to be founded on his re- " furreftion."
It is clear then, that St. Jerome's words plead nothing for Presbyterian parity • for what fhould exempt him from the cendire of the Church, of being con- demned for an heretick, more than Ac- rius, who, in the end of the fourth cen- tury, miffing a Biihoprick, fell upon this revenge, to make himfelf a Biihop in his own opinion, bccaule the Church thought him unfit For a Biihoprick ?
It is acknowledged, that St. Jerome was a man of too warm a temper, and of very keen refentments when pro- voked • and 1 will not fay but he had reafon to plead for his own order of Prieithood, that was infuhed by (ome rich Deacons, whofe infolence came to that height, as to take precedency of the Presbyters • 4* who (as St. Jerome " confcfles) might dp any thin- that a " Bifliop did, except ordination/' It
is
[ *64 1 is a very odd expedition that Dr. Rhind, in his Ft ndi cation of the Kirk, puts upon St. Jerome's words, Excefta Ordmatiune, that is, The ordering of the meetings, k is plainly as fenielefs an interpretation as jefuits put upon them, making the words to be an error of the printer, ai- ledging it ought to be tfecefta Qramatt* one, having gotten Ordination. But what will not men fay, when they arc refolved againft the cleared liqht \ If men are refolved net to look upon tr,e light, they will clofe their eyes. 1 (hall take notice of the reft of your argu- ments at greater conveniency. Fare- wcl.
POSTSCRIPT.
I Find the very learned Author of the Brief Account of the Ancient Church-Government, Page 201. accufe Blondcl and Salmalius (the two cham- pions for Presbyter}7) with partiality and breach of promile, by their appeal- ing to St. Jerome as a patron of Prefc bytery, in his 85th epiftle to Evagrius, citing a paflage which the forefaid ad- vocates for Presbytery think does make
for
[ 165 ]
for them, and not anfwering the cleared paflagc in it all, which makes for Epifc copacy, to wit, Ut fciamus Apoflo/tcas tradittones, &cc. That we may know that the Apoflo/ical traditions are taken from the Old Tejlament ; what Aaron and his fons, and the Levites, were in the temple, the fame \ Bijhops, Presbyters and Deacons, Jbou/d claim to t hem f elves in the Church.
This Blondel leaveth unfpoken of, tho' he intitleth his book, Apologia pro fententia Hieronynti, faying he would treat of it in his fixth Section ; but in his book he has only three lections. And ib Salmafius (who wrote before him), in his book againft Epifcopacy, hath left it untouched, laying he will anfwer to it in his book De Ordine Ec- clefajlico ; but when he wrote that book, he forgot his promife.
LETTER
[ 166 1
LETTER III..
In Anfwcr to thofe that endeavour to
prove the validity of the Minijlerial Acts of thofe thai want Epifcopal Ordination.
S I R,
YOU defire rne to fay fomething in the cafe of thejewiih Church and Priedhood, as it was dated in our Savi* our's time : Which feems to make very much for foreign churches, and for thofe that want Epifcopal Ordination. For? as Dr. Burnet fays in his Expofition of the 23d article, Page 382. u God had, * by exprefs law, fixed the Priedhood " in the elded of Aaron's family ; and " that therefore, tho', that being a theo- " cracy, any prophet impowered of God u might have transferred this office from u one perfon, or branch of that family,
" to
c »«; a
" to another; yet, without fuch an au- " thority, no other perfon might make " any fuch change. But after all this, " not to mention the- Maccabees, and " all their fucccilors of the Afmonean 11 family, as Herod had begun to change " the High-Prieflhood at pleafure, fo 11 the Romans not only continued to do " this, but, in a molt mercenary man- " ner, they fet this facred function to " (ale. Here were as great nullities in u the High-priefts that were in our Sa- 11 viour's time, as can be well imagined u to be : For the jews keeping their " genealogies fo exadUy as they did, it " could not but be well known in whom " the right of this office refted j and u they all knew, that he who had ir, " purchalcd it ; yet thefe were in facl u High-priefts ; and lince the people M could have no other, the atonement " was ftifl performed by their miniftry. 11 Our Saviour owned Caiaphas, the (a- u ciilegious and ufurping High-ptieii, "John xviii. ?2, 23. and as fuch he " prophefied, John xL 51. This Ihews " that, where the neceflity wras real and " unavoidable, the Jews were bound u to think that God did, in confideration 14 of that, difpenfe with his own precept.
This
>
[ 168 1
u This may be a juft inducement for us " to believe, that vvhenfoever God, by " his Providence, brings Chriftians uiv H der a vifible necelTity, of being either " without all order and joint worlhip, or e: of joining in an unlawful worlhip ; or u finally, of breaking thro' rules and u methods, in order to the being united " in worihip and government; that of u thefe three, of which one mult be 41 chofen, the lafl is the lealt evil, and u has the feweft inconveniencies hang;- " ing upon it, and that therefore it may < be chofen;"
I mud (ay, that they are far to feck, who will make this a defence for the lavvfulnefs of the ordination of foreign or Biitifh Presbyterian kirks ; for none of them pretend neceffify, but af« fert the divine right of Presbytery, in oppofition to Enifcopacy, by their own expolition of the fcriptures, contrary to the univerfal and primitive praflice of all the churches in the world. So that the Presbyterians will never thank the champion that makes fuch a defence in their behalf. And yet, in my opinion, they have no better : Their prcdecef* fors (as I have cited in the firit part,) declaimed magiftrares and people, as
the
C 169 j
the foundation of the miniflry, and ve- ry folidly refuted thefc opinions, and founded it upon Succeffion j hut being unable to prove their o^vn, they mult wander, or flicker themfelvcs under the wings of Independency or Enthufiafm ; conlequcntly their minifterial a:ts mult be void : There is a nullity in their bap • films, and in prcfuming to adminiller the Eucharift. But, in the next place, I anfwer with the learned author of the Invalidity of Lay Ba£>tffm} in his Appcn - dix, page 176, £kc.
Prrm That tho' things were as the expohtor reprefents them concerning the Jevvifli Church, yet it will not fol- low, that the miniftrat-ions of thofe that cannot prove their miniftry by Apofto- lical Succeflion are valid > befcaufc the Chriftian Church never was, nor ever will be reduced to that ftate of the Jew* ifh Church : For the fuppofed ufurpa- tion affefted the whole church of the Jews ; becaufe the atonement by the Jewiih High -pried could only be made in that one place called the Holy of Holies, which was in the temple at Je* rufalem. Even a true High-prieft could not do it in any other part of the world. But the miniRrations of the Chriftian P Priefthood
[ 170 1
Prieilbood are not fo confined to place; they are equally valid over the face of the whole earth ; fo that if wicked ci- vil powers in one country fhould baniih or deftroy Chriftian High-priefts, the Bifhops : Or, in another country, thofe High-priefts themfelves Ihould defile God's worftrip, to that degree that it would endanger our falvation to join therein; yet (till God's prornife of be* ing with his Apoftles, his High-priefts, to -the end of the xvorld ; and that the gates of -hell (hall not prevail againjl his Church, Secures us t'ru-s much, that this deftruo tion or defection of the Chriftian High- priefts, lliall not he uraverialj fome ihall be found on earth with wham we may communicate, and from whole hands men may receive valid ordinati- on, to minifter in holy 'things : So tbar, if in one city or kingdom they are per- secuted, they may flee into another j and if they are deftroyed in one domi- nion, they may he found in another. And this in fad has been hitherto ve- rified, from the firft planting of Chri- ftianity to this day.; infbmuch, that no Chriftian Church has been reduced to that univerfal defection here fuppofed to have been in the Jevvifli: For even
in
C 171 ]
in the worft times of Popery, they that reformed; without Bifliops to head them, might, if they would, have pro- cured miniflers to be ordained by Greek or oriental Bifliops, or by reformed Bi- fliops in England, if their own corrupt Bifhops refufed to ordain them. And it is not fufficient to object, that the la- bour and travel, thus to obtain valid or- dination, is excefiive great, and in fbme eircumftances next to impoffible j for men can cafily overcome thefe imagi- nary mountains of trouble and danger, in cafe of health, wealth, pleafure or profit : for the wonders of the deep, ftorms, tempefts, the fear of robbers, pyrates, and mercilefs murderers, do not terrify them from their purfnits i And is not a valid miniilry preferable to thefe ? So that the cafe of the uliirp- ed Priefthood of the Jews could not be helped in any other part of the world j but fo is it not in the Chriftian Church; for the atonement could only be made at one altar, from which, by fuppofi- tion, rhe infUtuted High-prieft vyas for- cibly kept by the fecular power of the Romans.
Secondly, This learned Author, in an-
Aver to Dr. Burnet's Exbofnion, which
P 2 * fays
t 172 3
lays, ". That God had, by an exprcfe u Jaw, fixed the High-priedhood in the " elded cf Aaron's family;" denies, that this exprefs law is to be found in the Canon of holy Scripture j for we find the inditution to have been ex* prefsly in Aaron and his fons. See Exod. xxviii. I, 2y 40, 41, 42; 43. See alfo xl. 13, 14, 15. Again in Lev. xvi. we have an exacl: defcription of the a- toncment, and ot the High-pried's mi-- niftration thereof in the holy place once a year, but not one word of Aaron's elded fon. Verfes 32, 34. SteLev. xxi. 10. Numb. iii. 10. xviii. I, 7.
It will be laid to this, That God him> felf commanded Mofes to conlecrate E- leazar the elded fon of Aaron, to be High-pried indead of his father, Numb. xx. 25, 26, 27, and that therefore the law confined the High-priefthood to the elded fon's line.
The confequence cannot be allowed from this particular indance ; becaufe the (landing law about the Priefihood is, That it jha/l be in Aaron and bis fons ; and there is another law concerning the very fame office, that excludes the eld- ed, as well as any other of Aaron's fons, from that great dignity, if he
Ihould
C 173 ] .
fhould chance to have any impediment mentioned in that lav/. Set L>'-j. xxi. 17 to 23. And it cannot be fairly af- firmed that God would lecure the eldelt fons from every one of thefc blcmilhes, that they might minidcr before bin! within the veil.
Again, the fcriptures record feverai Higlvprielts who were not of the line of Eleazar the cldcft, but of Ithamar the younger (on of Aaron. For gxan«* pic, Eli, in the time of the Judges, 1 Sam. ii. 27, 30. Ahimelech in the reign of King i'aul, 1 'Sam. xxi. 1. xxii. 15. called alfo Abiathar, Mark ii. 26. the High-prieit whom King Saul flew. So likewile another Ahimelech in the reign of King David, 2 Sam. viij. 18. and in the reign of King Solomon Abi- athar. Thefe, it is plain, were not of the line of Eleazar j for his (ons arc mentioned particularly by name, l Chron. vi. and not one of thefe High* prietls is reckoned among them j yet they executed the office, and no mark of infamy is let upon them for lb do- ing, becaufe thev were not the Gran- gers who, by the law of Moles, were to die for coming within the veil. And certainly if they had been invaders oC P 3 the
. C 174 1 the High-priefthood, God would have given us fome notice of his difpenfing with his own fuppofed law, or elfc fome mark of his difpleafure at their ufurpa- tion, to have warned others from the like fin for the future : as he did upon King Saul, for but offering a burnt-offer- ing, when he had no authority to do h, being no Pried.
We do not fee that the Priefthood v -as fixed in the eldcft of Aaron's fami- ly ; and therefore when any other of Aaron's fons got into the High Prieft- hood, which required that it Ihould be in Aaron and his Ions, the effential Law of God concerning the High Priefthood was not vacated. And this was the cafe of the Maccabees, and all their Succef- f >rs of the Afmonean family ; they were of the fons of Aaron, and therefore va- lid High-priefts.
* Again, fays the fame learned Author, the