A plea for Scripture ordination, or, Ten arguments from Scripture and antiquity proving ordination by presbyters without bishops to be valid by J.O. ... ; to which is prefixt an epistle by the Reverend Mr. Daniel Williams.

CHAP. V. (Book 5)

Our Ordination better then that of Rome, (which is accounted va∣lid in the Church of England) because in Roman Ordinations; 1. Their Ordainers are incapa∣ble, as wanting Scriptural and Canonical Qualifications. 2. The manner of Ordaining grosly Su∣perstitious and Vnscriptural. 3. The Ordained not Elected by the People. Sworn to the Pope. 4. Their Office Idolatrous. Their Ordinations are by Bishops, ours without, answered.

THAT Ordination which is bet∣ter then that of the Church of Rome is valid,* 1.1 but Ordination by meer Presbyters is much better then that of the Church of Rome, Therefore 'tis va∣lid. The Major will not be denied by

the Church of England, because she owns the Ordination of the Church of Rome, and doth not re-ordain their Priests — The Minor I prove, Ordi∣nation by Presbyters is better then the Ordinations of Rome, because in the Church of Rome.

I. The Ordainers are incapable, and that upon these Accounts:

(1.) They have not Scriptural Qua∣lifications: Paul's Bishop must be found in the Faith* 1.2. Popish ordaining Bi∣shops are studious Maintainers of cor∣rupt Doctrine, and Enemies to the Faith, as is acknowledg'd by all Orthodox Protestants. Paul's Bishop must be apt to teach‖ 1.3. Popish Bishops are for the most part illiterate unpreaching Pre∣lates, and justified herein by their own Writers† 1.4. Paul's Bishop must be blame∣less, the husband of one wife* 1.5. Popish Bishops forbid to marry, and yet allow Fornication‖ 1.6. Paul's Bishop must be a lover of good men† 1.7. Popish Prelates are not such, for they mortally hate the sincere Professors of the Gospel, and are all sworn to contribute their Endeavours for their Extirpation, under the Notion

of Hereticks. The words of the Oath are these; Haereticos, Schismaticos, & Rebelles eidem Domino nostro [Papae] vel Successoribus praedictis pro posse perse∣quar & impugnabo* 1.8: i.e. I A. B. do swear that I will to the utmost of my en∣deavour prosecute and destroy all Here∣ticks, Schismaticks, and all other Oppo∣sers of our Soveraign Lord the Pope, and his Successors.

Shall the sworn Enemies of the Re∣formation be received as Ministers of Christ, and the Ministers of the Refor∣mation be rejected as no Ministers? Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Askelon, lest the uncircumcised tri∣umph. But I proceed. A Bishop indeed must be a Pattern of Humility and Self-denial to the Flock† 1.9. Romish Bishops are Lords over God's Heritage, have Do∣minion over their Faith, and bind them to blind Obedience.

Now if the Ordinations of such u∣surping Monsters as these, that have no∣thing but the empty name of Bishops, be valid, as the Church of England saith they are; how much more are the Or∣dinations of Orthodox faithful Gospel Ministers or Bishops, to be judg'd law∣ful?

Can any thing be more absurd then that the Ministers of Antichrist, should make true Ministers, and the Ministers of Christ make false Prophets by one and the same Ordaining Act. It's the received Doctrine of the Church of England that the Pope is Antichrist. See Homily against Idolatry, part 3. p. 69. and the sixth part of the Sermon against Rebellion, p. 316.

(2.) They derive their Power from the Pope, who hath no right to the U∣niversal Headship, either from Scripture or true Antiquity. The very Office of a Pope is contrary to the Prerogative and Laws of Christ, and consequently is a most Treasonable Usurpation.

* 1.10 II. The manner of their Ordaining is Unscriptural and Superstitious* 1.11. They ascend to the Priesthood by several Steps or Degrees, which have no footsteps in the Sacred Writings. They make them

(1.) Ostiarij, or Door-keepers, whose Office is to ring the Bell, to open the Church-Vestry, and the Priest's Book. Espencaeus† 1.12 a Popish Writer, sheweth out of Chrysostom that it belong'd to the Of∣fice of a Deacon, to admit into the Church, and shut out.

Then (2.) they make them Lectores, Readers, whose work is to read and sing the Lessons, and to bless the Bread and all the first Fruits. In the primitive Church this was not a distinct Office, for in some places 'twas the Office of a Deacon, in some, of the Minister, and in some, it belonged to the Bishops to read the Scriptures, especially on Festivals.

(3.) The next step is that of Exor∣cists, whose pretended Office is to cast out Devils, in a feigned imitation of the miraculous Operations of the first Ages of Christianity. These Sacred Conju∣rers, who take upon them to dispossess Devils, are inferiour to the very Deacons that serve Tables, and yet equal to the very Apostles, were they able to perform what they undertake. Though one would wonder, why the Bishops, the pretended Successors of the Apostles, did not reserve to themselves the power of casting out unclean Spirits, as well as that of confer∣ring the H. Spirit, which, as they say, none but themselves can do. But these Exor∣cists are Men of that extraordinary pow∣er, that they out-do the very Apostles, for they did not cast out Devils by lay∣ing on of Hands, as these pretend to do.

The Bishop tells them that they are Spirituales Imperatores ad abjiciendos Daemones de Corporibus obsessis* 1.13 — i. e. they are Spiritual Governours to cast out Devils, &c. to which purpose he gives them power of laying Hands su∣per Energumenos sive Baptizatos sive Ca∣techumenos ....

(4.) The next degree is that of the Acolythi‡ 1.14, whose Office is to be Taper∣bearers, to light Candles, to bring Wine and Water for the Eucharist. They who were Spiritual Emperours a little before to conquer Devils, are now degraded, (which yet must be called an advance∣ment) to the mean occupation of un∣der-Servitors. The badge of their Of∣fice is a Candlestick and a Pot, which are delivered to them by the Bishop. As he delivers the Candlestick, he saith, Acci∣pite cero-ferarium, & sciatis vos ad ac∣cendenda Ecclesiae lumina mancipari.... And as he delivers the Pot, he saith, Accipite urceolum ad suggerendum vinum & aquam in Eucharistiam Sanguinis Chri∣sti ....

(5.) They climb after this to the degree of Sub-deacons‖ 1.15, whose business is to prepare Water for the Ministry of

the Altar, to Minister to the Deacons, to wash the Palls of the Corporals, to present the Cup and Paten for the use of their abominable Sacrifice. The Bishop puts a Garment upon their Heads to signifie the Castigation of the Speech, and then puts the Manipulus upon their left Arm, to signifie Good Works, ib. After this he cloaths them with a Coat, to signifie Joy and Gladness, ibid. Last of all, he delivers to them the Book of Epistles to be read for the Living and the Dead, ibid. The Sub-deacons of old were but Letter-Carriers to the Bi∣shops* 1.16.

(6.) Then they make them Deacons‡ 1.17, whose Office is to Minister at the Al∣tar, to Baptize and Preach, after the example of Stephen, as is pretended. The Bishop pretends to give them the Holy Ghost, cloaths them in significant white Garments, and delivers to them the Book of the Gospels, saying, Accipe potestatem — i. e. Take power to read the Gospel in the Church both for the li∣ving and the dead.

(7.) From Deacons‖ 1.18 they ascend to the Order of Priesthood. The Form of making them is very ridiculous:

scarce any footsteps of the Apostolical Practice to be found in it.

The Person to be Ordained presents himself to the Bishop with a multitude of superstitious Rags, such as the Alb, Cingulum, Stola, the Manipulus, the Pla∣neta, &c. holding a Candle in his right hand, to signifie he must be a shining Light to the People. Then the Bishop binds the Stole about his neck, to put him in mind of the Yoke of Christ, ib. After this the Capsula being folded, is put over his Shoulders to denote Chari∣ty, then the Bishop unfolds it again, and cloaths the Priest with it, to signi∣fie Innocence, ib. The same white Gar∣ment signifies Charity when 'tis folded up, and Innocency when 'tis unfolded. You must not ask the reason of this dif∣ferent signification, for profound My∣steries are wrapt up in all the foldings of this sacred Garment, which is apt to stir up the dull mind of Man to the re∣membrance of his duty.

When they have adorn'd them in this beggarly Garment, and made them look partly like those Priests that serv'd the old Tabernacle, and partly like those that ministred at Heathen Altars, they

anoint their Hands with Oyl, greasing them with the sign of the Cross, and adding these words, Consecrentur .... istae manus ... ut quaecunque benedixe∣rint, benedicantur. The Bishop also shaves their Heads, saying, Dominus pars haereditatis meae* 1.19, &c. Their Learned Authors tell us of unaccountable My∣steries that are contained in this Pagan Ceremony. Lombard saith, the shaven Crown signifies Kingly Dignity† 1.20; Co∣rona regale decus significat. The signi∣fication is not very improper, for they lord it over God's Heritage, and exalt themselves above Kings and Princes. The same Author adds, That Denudatio Capitis est revelatio mentis; Clericus e∣nim secretorum Dei non ignarus esse de∣bet.... And no wonder their shave∣ling Priests are such great Clerks, since shaving the Pate is the mysterious Path to Knowledge. He tells us also, ob vitae continentiam caput radebant, ibid. They shav'd themselves for Chastity's sake. The unclean Stories of Monkish Lives are convincing Evidences of their Mor∣tification.

Optatus* 1.21 reproveth the Donatists for their symbolizing with the silly Custom of the Heathen, in shaving the Heads of their Priests. Docete ubi vobis man∣datum est, capita Sacerdotum radere ... cum è contra sint tot Exempla proposita fieri non debere. This Ceremony is of an Heathen Original, as appears by Mi∣nutius Foelix† 1.22, with whom agrees the Council of Eliberis‖ 1.23, who excommu∣nicated such as did so, and after the ex∣piration of two years received them in∣to Communion, upon supposition they continued in the Faith.

The Council of Trent Anathematizes any that will reject or speak against these foolish fopperies* 1.24.

How different is this Form of Ordi∣nation from the Scripture-Ordinations? Ministers in the Apostles times were Or∣dained by Fasting and Prayer, with im∣position of Hands, without any other Ceremonies that we read of. Let the World judge, whether our Ordinations, which follow the Scripture Pattern, or the Romish Ordinations, which are a meer Pageantry, are the better; and if theirs be admitted as valid, why should ours be condemned?

Shall they who pass under such un∣scriptural Forms and Shapes of Door∣keepers, Readers, Exorcists, &c. be ac∣counted Ministers of Christ, and must those who vary not from the Scriptures in their Ordinations, be reckon'd In∣truders? Can any of the sincere Pa∣trons of the Protestant Interest pass such a partial unjust Censure? Are they true Ministers, who recede from the Apostles practice as far as the East is from the West, and must those be none who make it their Rule? Shall those Ordinations which are Humane and Antichristian (and therefore laid aside in the Church of England) be received, and theirs which are Divine and Apostolical be rejected? The thing is so very clear to such as are not wilfully blinded with Prejudice and Interest, that one may justly wonder how it should ever come into debate.

III. Our Ordinations are better then [ III] the Ordinations of Rome, if we consi∣der the Persons ordained. That which we have said concerning the want of Qualifications in the Ordainers, may be also applied to the ordained in the Ro∣man Communion. Their Priests are

made without the Election of the Peo∣ple;* 1.25 and Bellarmine saith that neither their Suffragium, Concilium, or Consensus is required, which is contrary to Scrip∣ture, and Antiquity,* 1.26 as our Protestant Writers have proved against the Papists. See Willet's Synops. Papismi, 5 Contro∣ver. Quest. 2. p. 260...

All the Popish Priests are sworn to observe the Decrees of the Council of Trent, whereby their Consciences are captivated to all the Idolatries, Supersti∣tions, and Errours of the Church of Rome; they take also an Oath of Ca∣nonical Obedience to their Bishops, which makes them more the Servants of Men, then of Crist, 1 Cor. 7.23. Gal. 1. 10. This Oath is forbidden by an old Council at Chalons; Dictam. est in∣terea de quibusdam fratribus, quod eos quos ordinaturi sunt, jurare cogant .... quod contra Canones non sint facturi, & obedientes sint Episcopo qui eos ordinat, & Ecclesiae in quâ ordinantur. Quod ju∣ramentum quia periculosum est, omnes und inhibendum statuimus.

The Romish Bishops about the Ele∣venth Century, obliged all the Bishops at their Examinations to promise Sub∣jection

and Fealty in all things to St. Peter, and to his Church, to his Vicar, and to his Successors, as appears by the Roman Order,* 1.27 which in all likely∣hood was writ about that time, and where is to be seen amongst the Que∣stions made to the Bishop which was examined, those which regard Obedi∣ence and Fidelity. The form of the Oath may be seen in the Roman Pontifi∣cal.

Dr. Willet makes the Oath of Obe∣dience to the Pope a mark of Antichrist.* 1.28 If it be bad in the Pope, the chief Bi∣shop, to require such an Oath, it cannot be good in inferiour Bishops, unless they were more infallible then the Head of their Succession.

The first Instance that I can find of an Oath required by Ecclesiastical Guides to bind Persons to their Com∣munion,* 1.29 is that of Novatus the Heretick, who swore all his Commu∣nicants not to return to Cornelius. Vide Epist. Cornel. ad Fabium Antioch. praesi∣dem, in Euseb. This is much of the same nature with the Oath De jure pa∣rendo, administred in Ecclesiastical Courts to Excommunicated Persons at their Reconciliation.

In short, our Ordinations are better then Popish Ordinations, because our Candidates are admitted upon sufficient trial of their Qualifications, are not ob∣truded upon the People without their choice and consent, and nothing is re∣quired of them but Obedience to the Laws of Christ; all which are other∣wise in the Ordinations of Rome.

[ IV] IV. Ours are better then Popish Or∣dinations, if we consider the Office to which they are Ordained, which is one of the grossest pieces of Idolatry that e∣ver was in the World, viz. the offering up of their Bread-Idol, under the Noti∣on of a Propitiatory Sacrifice for the Living and the Dead.* 1.30 Forma Sacerdo∣tii haec est (saith Hunnaeus) Accipe po∣testatem offerendi Sacrificium in Ecclesia pro Vivis & Mortuis, in Nomine Patris, & Filii, & Spiritus Sancti. The words of Consecration in the Roman Pontifical are with this Addition;* 1.31 Accipe potesta∣tem offere Sacrificium Deo, Missásque ce∣lebrare.* 1.32 They make the very Essence of the Priestly Office to consist in pote∣state placabiles Deo hostias offerendi, as the Master of the Sentences speaks. The

Council of Trent makes Preaching of the Word, which is the first thing in the Apostles Commission, to be a separable Accident. Si quis dixerit, non esse in Novo Testamento Sacerdotium visibile, & externum, vel non esse potestatem aliquam consecrandi & offerendi verum Corpus & Sanguinem Domini, & pec∣cata remittendi & retinendi; sed offi∣cium tantùm, & nudum ministerium praedicandi Evangelium. VEL EOS QVI NON PRAEDICANT, PRORSVS NON ESSE SACERDOTES, anathema sit.

For these Reasons the Reformed Churches of France did not admit Po∣pish Priests,* 1.33 that had forsaken the Ro∣man Communion, into the Ministry, without long and diligent Inspection and Examination,* 1.34 they must be approved of at least for two years from the time of their Conversion: nor were they then suffered to exercise as Ministers, until they submitted to another Ordination; and they were not to receive Impositi∣on of Hands any more then if they were Strangers, without the advice of Provin∣cial and National Synods.

Now these Idolatrous Shavelings, whose Ordainers are the Pope's Crea∣tures, whose Ordination is the product of a prophane Invention, and whose work is to make a Wafer-God: I say, these are taken for true Ministers in the Church of England, though it be as hard to find the Essentials of the Mini∣stry among them, as to find a Pearl in a Dunghil. Therefore the Ordination of Presbyters, now in question, should be admitted for valid, as being more a∣greeable to the Scriptures in all the re∣spects mentioned, and not to be justly charged with any defect in things essen∣tial to the Ministry.

Object. * 1.35 Popish Ordinations are done by Diocesan Bishops, which you have not, therefore your Ordinations are null.

Answ. * 1.36 This Objection hath been an∣swered already. It supposeth three things which are notoriously false. The first is, That the sole Power of Ordi∣nation was in the Apostles. 2. That they had Successors in the Apostolica•• Office; both which we have disproved▪ And 3dly, it supposeth Popish Bishops to be the Apostles Successors, which

sounds harsh in Protestant Ears: Can they be the Apostles Successors, who have not the Apostolical Doctrine? when they urge this Succession against the first Reformers, and quote the Fa∣thers, Tertullian, Irenaeus, &c. who ar∣gue from this Topick against the old Hereticks, they are answered by our Protestants Writers,* 1.37 that the Ancients spoke not de solâ Episcoporum successione, sed de Doctrinae successione, ac ejus fidei, quam primi Episcopi ab Apostolis accep∣tam atque haustam ad posteros continuâ serie transfudernnt. To the same pur∣pose speak our Iewel, Whittaker, Rey∣nolds, Willet, &c.

If either of these three Points fail, this Objection is impertinent, how much more when all the three are precari∣ous. Our Ordinations are in all things confessedly good, except the concur∣rence of a Diocesan Bishop; the Popish Ordinations have nothing to recom∣mend them but the desiled hand of a nominal Bishop, so that the bare touch of his hand imprints an indelible Cha∣racter, where the Spirit of Christ hath left no impressions of his Image. This is to ascribe greater virtue to the Fingers of

a Prelate in making Ministers, then to the Spirit of God. Let a Person Or∣dained by Presbyters be never so well qualified, be never so faithful in the dis∣charge of his Office; let another Per∣son that is Ordained by a Bishop, be ne∣ver so defective in Qualifications, sup∣pose a Reading Curate that cannot preach, let him be never so prophane in his Life, yet this Man must pass for a true Minister, because he had the in∣effectual Blessing of a Bishop, and the other a meer Usurper, and all his, Ad∣ministrations must be null and void, for want of this Ceremony. Let the Spi∣rit of God indue a Man with never such excellent Gifts for the Ministry, it shall be in the power of a Prelate to exclude him, that he shall be no Minister of Christ, though he devote himself to the Work, and be solemnly set apart for it: nay more, it will be in his power to make a Minister of another Person, whom the Holy Ghost never designed for that Office, by any real work of Sanctification upon his heart, or confer∣ring upon him any tolerable degree of Minist••rial Abilities. They that can be∣lieve such Fancies may please them∣selves

therewith, Christ gave us another Rule to discern between false and true Pa∣stors, Matth. 7. 15, 16—20. Ye shall know them by their fruits; that is, by their Doctrine and Conversation. The Refor∣mers vindicate their Ministry against the Papists by this Argument: Christus hanc nobis regulam praef••••verit, quâ possi∣mus falsos à veris Doctoribus discernere,* 1.38 nempe eos à suis fructibus esse dignoscen∣dos, cur eq non contenti, alias praeterea temerè, & pro arbitrio confingamus? Ita∣que judicetur tum de pontificiis, tum etiam de nostris Pastoribus, ex Doctrinâ quae verus est fructus, atque etiam, si placet, utrorumque vita in disquisitionem vocetur. Quod si fiat, certò speramus, Deo favente, nos facilè in hâc causâ fore superiores. We are very willing to put our Case to the same Issue, to be judged according to this Rule of Christ, by our Doctrine and Conversation.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Arg.IV.
• * 1.2

  1 Tit. 9.
• ‖ 1.3

  1 Tim 3. 2 & 2 Tim. 4.2.
• † 1.4

  Rhem. Annot. in 1 Tim. 1. 7—
• * 1.5

  1 Tim. 3 2.
• ‖ 1.6

  Vid. E∣manuel••a's Aphor. E∣pis. 20.
• † 1.7

  Tit. 1.8.
• * 1.8

  Vid. Pon∣tif. de Co••∣sec. Elect. in Episc.
• † 1.9

  Matth. 20, 25, 26. 1 Pet. 5.3.
• * 1.10

  II.
• * 1.11

  Pontifi∣cal. Rom.
• † 1.12

  Esp. in 1 Tim. p. 226. g.
• * 1.13

  Pontif. de ord. Ex∣orc.
• ‡ 1.14

  Pontif. de ord. A∣colyth.
• ‖ 1.15

  Pontif. de ord. Subd.
• * 1.16

  Espen. in Tim. p. 214.a.
• ‡ 1.17

  Ib. de Ord. Diac.
• ‖ 1.18

  Pontif. de Ord. Presb.
• * 1.19

  Pontif. de Cler. faciend.
• † 1.20

  Mag. Sent. lib. 4. dist. 6.
• * 1.21

  Lib. con∣tra Parmen.
• † 1.22

  De Idol. van. p. 61. Oxon. Edit.
• ‖ 1.23

  Can. 55.
• * 1.24

  Sess. 23. de sac. ord. Can. 5.
• * 1.25

  Bellar. de Cler. lib. 1 cap. 7 & 8.
• * 1.26

  Vid. Cypr. Ep. 68. Euseb. VI. 10.
• * 1.27

  Tom. 10. Probl. Patr. p. 107.
• * 1.28

  Controv. 4. q. 10. p. 233, 234.
• * 1.29

  Eccl. Hist. lib. 6. c. 43.
• * 1.30

  Aug. Hunn. de Sacr. Ordin. Axiom 65
• * 1.31

  Pontific. Rom. de Ord. Pres.
• * 1.32

  Lib. 4. dist. 24. J.
• * 1.33

  Fr. Discipl. cap. 1. art. 2 & 3.
• * 1.34

  Vide B••z. contra S••∣rav.
• * 1.35

  Object.
• * 1.36

  Answ.
• * 1.37

  Sa•••••••• de voc. Mini∣str. p. 545.
• * 1.38

  Sad. ubl supra, p. 554.