A treatise of the nature of a minister in all its offices to which is annexed an answer to Doctor Forbes concerning the necessity of bishops to ordain, which is an answer to a question, proposed in these late unhappy times, to the author, What is a minister?

CHAP. XII. In which is discoursed what is essentially to the constitution of a Bishop.

THe Question introduced. To understand which (that I may write distinctly, take this for a Praecognitum, that since the power was given to the Apostles in these words, As my Father sent me, so send I you: Therefore when this power is given by Apostles and Apostolicall men, then this dignity is conferr'd upon Men, But again, because that it is necessary for the Church of Christians, not onely that they have the power,

but that this power should be so administred, as that other men who are to receive blessings from it, should be able to take no∣tice; (for else how is it possible to repair to the wells head, un∣less they can know where it is) that there is such a blessing be∣stowed upon them; therefore this power must be given by some such means as are visible, and that men may discern when it is granted: for if it should be given by the Apostles, without any out∣ward sign, onely with a vehitie, a kind of secret grant, it must be most uncertain to other men, because each man may pretend to it, and there is no confuting but by some outward sign, which being proper to this Action, may be an infallible assurance that then and not till then it is given: and here will be required a di∣ligent and curious inquest; there are divers things pretended to, which are not right, and they being severed, we may then safely pitch upon what is the truth; to do which, let us first con∣sider that Ad••m Tanner in his fourth Tome of Scholasticall Di∣vinity, upon the third of Thomas, and the supplement, Disp. 7. Quest. 2. Dubio. 4. handling the doubt, what is the matter and form of a Priest and Bishop, at the last page (1900.) he names as a Concessum, and things to be supposed, eight Actions at the consecration of a Bishop: he quotes the Romane Pontifi∣call for it; I will not set them down, the writing them is too much paines; but what hath grown in reputation amongst Scho∣lars, I shall examine. But yet I must make another pause.

SECT. II. A discourse of Petrus Arcadius illustrated and applied.

THere is a learned man, one Petrus Arcadius, who hath writ a Book with a most pious title, which is of the concord be∣twixt the occidentall Church, or the Latine and orientall, under which head•• he reduceth the African, and sometimes the Ru∣therian, in the administration of the Sacraments, which contro∣vercy he hath very industriously and happily handled in very

many things in particular in this business; having handled be∣fore the form used in both Churches, at the ordination, title 6. de Sacramento ordinis, cap. 4. he comes to reconcile them, and doth it upon this found••tion I am now handling, that is, that they agree in the essentialls, that is, the Doctrine of all the three Churches, and the difference is onely in Accidentalls; this saith he, may be done, first, by saying our Saviour did so institute this Sacrament, that the Consecration of Ministers should be by cer∣tain words and outward signs, by which it should sufficiently appear to what part of Ministry; they were ordained but he left it to the arbitrement of the Church, what these signs and words must be, this he illustrates by the Councell of Trent, wherein S••ssion 23. Canon 3. the Councell decrees the thing, that holy ordination should be made with signs and words, but deter∣mines not what; so that it excludes not the Graecian or African Ordination. Again he illustrates this by Marriage most rightly, (for they make Matrimony a Sacrament, as well as ordinati∣on) there the word of God establisheth for men how they should live in holy wedlock, but never determines what shall be the manner, with what words or signs they shall be married, but leaves that to the determination of every Church, yea Common-wealth; thus you may perceive his Conclusion how strengthned. I will set down my Judgements and reasons, and so pass on: first then, that our Saviour did institute many holy offices in themselves, you may say (even his Sacraments) so as there may be divers Ceremonies, according to the prudence of divers Churches, is app••rent; for let us consider Baptisme, the matter, as it is positively set down in the Institution, is water, this must not be altered; and that which is called the form, which is the words by which this Baptisme is administred are in part set down; it must be, In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; but now whether it should be, I Baptize thee, as the La∣tine Church; or, let the Servant of God be Baptized; or he is Baptized, which are severally used in other Churches, is not determined by our Saviour, and the words of either do fully express the meaning of Baptisme; so that neither doth the Latine Church re-baptize those who are Baptized by the Graeci••ns, nor the Graecians such as are Baptized by the Latines, although both are bitter enough one against another; so that you may see, there may

be variation in the administration of these duties in their Circum∣stances, where there is a Communion in the Substance; and truly for my part I think in such a man who lives in either of these Churches, it would be a Schismatical Act for any of them to vary from that usage, which is in the Churches wherein he lives; for although these things are indifferent in them••elves, yet when they are determined in the Gree•• Euthology, and the Ro∣man Rituals, they are not indifferent to them which live amongst them in their several Churches, but a varying from the Church wherein they live makes a breach of Charity and violates the Band of peace.

SECT. III. Another Precognitum explained.

ANother Introduction may be, that whatsoever is institu∣ted by Scripture, in any of these holy performances, whether as form or matter must not be altered, nor can lawful∣ly by any man; for since the blessing which is bestowed, is one∣ly Gods gift, and Man is only ministerial in it; he must act according to that Method whic•• God hath prescribed, and that only having his Covenant, can bring the blessing.

SECT. IV. Another Observation expounded.

ANother note may be that Additions explicatory, so they are certainly such, and are not intruded for essentials, do not destroy the notion of that which they explain; it is ne∣cessary, for otherwise why should men expound the Scriptures in Sermons or otherwise; yea, our Saviour expounded his own Parables, and after his exposition to his Disciples, we

write further Comments our selves, but that there is in none of these an alteration but a dilatation of the conceit of them; these things being premitted, I shal return where I left at Tanner and the Roman ponti••ical.

SECT. V. Many mistakes about Ceremonies in the Church of Rome.

IT is an apparent truth that the Church of Rome doth very of•• clog Divine duties with so many Ceremonies, and its mischief is frequent in that mischance, that even their learned writers do in a little time grow o such mistakes, as to think that some of those which are Ecclesiastical Ceremonies, only instituted by the authority of the Church: to be the essentials, and that which is essential, to be but accidents; this particular business I have in hand will demonstrate this conclusion.

SECT. VI. It is an Error to think that the Anointing the Bishops Hand, is a necessary Essential.

THe third Ceremony by Tanner, out of the ponti••ical, is the Anointing of the Bishops hand, which is to be Con∣secrated in these words, ungantur manus istae oleo Consecrato; that is when he Anoints his hands, he saith, let these hands be anointed with holy oyl: And Francis Silvius, I must say truly a learned man and most perspicuous writer in his fortieth Quest. upon the supplement of Thomas Art 5. in resp. ad 8^m., saith that the essential Consecration of a Bishop consists in this uncti∣on, and the words pronounced with it; (for the Church of Rome calls the o••tward sign the matter, and the words the form)

and this to be it, he proves by a very strong Argument against the Romanist: because in the whole frame of Ordination, the Bishop Consecrated, is cal••ed in the ponti••ical untill then, Bi∣shop Elect only; But then absolutely Bishop from that time; and his Argument is as weakly answered by Tanner where before quoted that, Neque obstat quod in pontisicali ordinandus Episco∣pus post unctionem primum vocatur Consecratus, antea vero solum Electus id ••nim ad scriptorem Rubrici & modum l••quendi pertinent, plus non significat quam ante unctionem nondum esse plene Consecra∣tum, That is that the Language of the Ponti••ical ought to be attributed to the writer of the Rubrick, and that there is no more imported in it, but that before the Unction he is not fully Bishop: Truly I think Silvius doth desire no more, but if men can shift off such grave and weighty observations with saying it was a fault in the Writer or Printer; there can no authority be produced but may be so answered: But he is more to bl••me who transcribed it false, but why hath it not been amended, and that fault corrected: The truth is, the Ponti••ical it self is to blame, there is no such thing in that much more antient Ponti∣••ic••i, I mean the fourth Councel of Carthage, Canon 2. I will put down t••e words, because I am likely to make use of them hereafter; the words are these.

Episcopus quum ordinatur duo Episcopi ponant & teneant Evan∣geliorum codicem super caput & cervicem ejus & uno fundente benedictionem reliqui omnes Episcopi qui adsunt, manibus suis caput ejus tangant. That is, a Bishop when he is ordained, two Bishops shall put and hold the Book of the Gospel over his head and neck, and one giving him the blessing; the other Bi∣shops shall put and hold the Book of the Gospel over his head and neck, and one giving him the blessing; the other ••ishops which are present shall touch his head with their hands; here is not any word of anointing, and therefore according to this Canon neither of these Unctions, I mean head and hand are ne∣cessary, for although the Canon may name somethings which are not necessary, yet it is not to be imagined that it should leave out any thing which is necessary.

SECT. VII. Another Error concerning the Book, con∣futed.

THere is therefore another opinion which has gained great Reputation with many Schoolmen, and that is of some who place the essentials of a Bishops Ordination in the first ••ere∣mony named in the Pontifical, and that is the same with that of the Councel of Carthage; to wit the putting the Book upon the Head of the Consecrated Bishop, and the laying on of Hands, and the Benediction; this certainly is most conform to that Ca∣non of Carthage, but as I said before, as it is not reasonable to think that these Canons should omit any essential thing by Divine Apostolical institution; so it is reasonable to conceive it may add something Ecclesiastical to that which is Divine, so it be not destructive to the foundation, of which nature I shall show there is somewhat in this Canon: For the Book which was imposed on the head and shoulders of the Bishop to be Conse∣crated, is the Book of the Gospel, or four Evangelists; Now it is impossible that that Ceremony should be necessary, be∣cause what is necessary to any thing must agree, to all of that kind which this cannot, because there were Bishops when this Book was not written; yea when not one of the ••ospels were written, this therefore cannot be essential to the Consecration of a Bishop, which must needs follow his Consecration; this Argumenr is taken notice of by divers although not in this ••ase, but in that which concerns a Deacon, where the Book of the Gospels is delivered at his Ordination to the Deacon, and by most of the Church of Rome is made the matter essential to that Ordination as they call it, or as we, the outward sign of it, you see this Argument which they are pinched with: Let us consider how they shift from it, Vasques in his (238) Disp. Cap. 4. Num∣ber 43. and Ochogamia in his Book of Sacraments in his title of Orders Cap. 4. out of him affirmed that this Order of Deacons,

(as well as is evident of Bishops) was before the Gospels were written, and they were then ordained without that Ceremony, but by a Dispensation of Christ, that is Ochogamia's Phrase; but Vas∣ques by a Commission of his, the Phrase doth not materially differ; with these kind of shifts any thing may be affirmed, can they shew any the least word in the New Testament intimating any such probability, a dispensation must be upon a former Law, there could be no Law made to ordain with giving Gospels be∣fore either all, or any of them were written, and it is most evi∣dent that none of them were writ, when the first Bishops were made, Gasper Hurtado goes therefore another way to work, and although he grants that at first they were ordained only by the imposition of Hands, yet he saith that it is probable that af∣terwards Christ instituted, that when the Gospels were writ, they should be delivered to the ordained: it is an easy thing to say, it is probable but he should give a reason why we should think it reasonable; I have reason to think that when the Gos∣pels do abundantly deliver to us such things which are necessary for us to know concerning the will of Christ, and there is no such thing in the Gospels, and they would be of great ease to the satisfaction of such men as expect to receive Divine blessings from some men in holy Orders; It is necessary that they should have some means chalked out to them, by which they might be assured, that these are such hands by which they expected those blessings are promised to be given them; but above all others, I wonder at Henricus Henriques, who is so bold in his sum of mo∣ral Divinity Lib. 1••. Cap. 8. Tit. 1. in his Comment to affirm, that probabilius videtur quod in primitiva Ecclesia dabatur Dia∣cono charta in qua continebantur Mysteria fid••i quae habentur in Evang••lio, which is, that it seems probable, that in the primi∣tive Church there was given to the De••con som•• paper in which were contrived written the Mysteries of Faith which are in the Gospel: He saith it seems so, I would ask to whom it seems so; certainly to no man living fifteen hundred years after and up∣wards, nor did ever any man say, he saw any such Scripture, nor heard of it before; It cannot therefore seem probable to any man, for sure such a Scripture would have given a Glorious light to many other Doctrines which now lye in darkness, I therefore love occandus for a clear and ingenious con••ession in this point

who in quartum sententiarum ••ist. 24. Proposition 1. Page 83. saith thus, Contra hoc est unum Argumentum cujus solutionem fateor me nescire, & gaudenter & libentur ignorabo. Against this Conclusion, which is that the delivery of the Book should be essential to the Order of a Deacon; against this there is one Argument whose answer I know not, and am chearfully and willingly ignorant of. And then he urgeth this Argument of mine, and shews that even St. Mathews Gospel who was his tutelar Saint, was not writ when Deacons were instituted, he calls him Pater meus Spiritualis, this ••s it was honest, so it was in∣genious; and then he quotes Durandus rightly in Quartum Dist. 24. Quest 3. who agrees with me much in my opinion conce••ning this matter, and saith, that in the Arician Diocess where he was Bishop; this Ceremony of the Book was never used, so that there is neither Scripture for it, nor any universal Tra••ition, and therfore hath no strong ••ound••tion; the chiefest argument that ••ives me any consideration, is that Canon of the fourt•• Coun∣cel of Carthage, of which I spake before, where in express terms, the use of the Book of the Evangelists is enjoyned in the ordina∣tion of a Bishop; but doth that follow, it is therefore necess••ry essentially, I think I have writ before that it is reasonable to think that Eminent Councell consi••••ing of 200. and odd Bishops many of them as eminent for learning and piety as the world h••d; we may justly think that such a Councel would omit no essential∣ly mater••all circumstance, but that it should add nothing to the Apostolical Canons is not reasonable, and this might now be, because now that Book was extant which ••t the first in the Apo∣stles time was not, so that I am confident that such who lived in obedience to that Church ought to observe it, there being no opposition to the essential part; but indeeed rather an explication of it, and yet I may say that the Church of Rome did not, doth not observe the manner of using the ••ook there enjoyned; for as Hu••tado difficultate decima de ordine (olim) saith he, heretofore the Book was not imposed by Bishops as that Canon requires but by Deacons, and now by the Bishops ••hapl••ines, for the use of the Book was impossible to be Apostolical as it is before pro∣ved, it may be used, and ought to be when ordained in a well governed and setled Church, but it is not essential to the Ordi∣nation or Consecration▪