Quo warranto, or, A moderate enquiry into the warrantablenesse of the preaching of gifted and unordained persons where also some other questions are discussed : viz. concerning [brace] ministerial relation, election, ordination : being a vindication of the late Jus divinum ministerii evangeliei ... from the exceptions of Mr. John Martin, Mr. Sam. Pette, Mr. Frederick Woodal ... in their late book, intituled The preacher sent / by Matthew Poole ...

CHAP. XII.

THE second Question is this: Whether the Essence of the Call to the Ministry, lie in Election or Or∣dination. And here also I must take the same liberty I have used, and that is not to transcribe every word nor to take notice of such passages as are inconsiderable, but one∣ly such as have most strength, and most appearance of truth in them. In the doing of which, as I have the wit∣nesse of God, and my own conscience, so I doubt not I shall have the attestation of any disinterested person, who shall compare both together.

But, before I come to handle the point, I must needs do my Brethren that right, as to let the world know, how far they are from that generation of men that despise and deride Ordination; they say, we do highly esteem of Ordi∣nation

as an appointment of Iesus Christ, p. 275. Onely here they differ, They give Election the praecedency to Ordination, and they place the essence of the Mini∣steriall call in Election, not in Ordination. But good rea∣son, we should not condemn them unheard: I shall there∣fore do them the justice as to consider what they offer by way of Argument, and that is onely this: Ordination doth not give the essence; Ergo, election doth (for their first Argument from Acts 14. vers. 23. hath been dis∣cussed before.) That the essence of the Call lies not in Ordination, they indeavour to make good by three Ar∣guments.

Their first Argument is this, That which doth not set a man over a Church of Christ, or commit it to his charge, that doth not give the essentials of the Ministeriall office: But Ordination doth not set a man over a Church of Christ, &c. because without Election a man cannot be over any flock.

I answer to the Minor, and the proofe. 1. That it is but a begging of the question, and hath been before dis∣proved, that without Election a man cannot be over any flock.

2. Although a man could not be over a flock without Election, and Election were necessary to his Call, yet the Essence of the Call may lie in Ordination: Election may be necessary, as the causa, sine qua non, and yet Ordination may be the causa formalis of the Call to the Ministry. Suppose by some ancient Charter, the People of such a City, are invested with a right to chuse their own Mini∣ster; So that without their Election, he is not their Mi∣nister; Yet so, as that it belongs to some Gentleman, to present the person so Elected, unlesse he can shew reason to refuse him, in this case Election is necessary, and yet the Essence of the eivil Call, lies in his Presentation. Or

suppose 〈…〉〈…〉 of Canterbury, had been to chuse the A〈…〉〈…〉shop of Canterbury, yet, notwithstand∣ing the n〈…〉〈…〉 of their Election, the Essence of the Arch Bishops C〈…〉〈…〉 did lie in another thing, to wit, civilly in the gift of the King, Ecclesiastically, in his consecration by the Bishops: So, though the Election of the people were neces∣sary, yet the Essen••e of the Call, may lie in the Ordination of the Minister••

3. Although Election determine a mans imployment to this or that particular place, yet Ordination sets him over a Church of Christ, viz. over the whole Church: His Ordination sets him over a Church indefinitely: his ••••••••tion sets him over this or that particular Church. As the Act of the University, makes a man a Doctor of Phy∣sick, but the choice of such a City, or such a noble Fami∣ly, makes him the Physitian of that City, or Fa∣mily.

The second Argument is this: Ordination is to be con∣sequentiall unto a mans having the whole Essence of the Call to the office, Acts 13. 3. Paul and Barnabas had the Essence of their Call before from God, they were not of men, Gal. 1. And this example is a binding rule to us.

Answ. 1. I might say, as Divines say of Vocation, That there is a Calling, ad foedus, to the Covenant, and ad munus, to an Office. So likewise for Ordination, there is a double Ordination, the one, ad munus, to an Office, the other, adopus, to a Work. The Ordination which we spake of, and wherein the Essence of the Ministeriall Call doth consist, is an Ordination to an Office; and such an Ordination the Apostle never had, Gal. 1. 1. And such an Ordination, this Text, peradventure, speaks not of, but of an Ordination to a Work, nor is there any ground to wonder, that men should be solemnly Ordained to such a work as this, a work so great, so uncouth, so difficult, so

much exposed to contradiction, nor was it unusuall in the Church either of the Old or New Testament, to use fast∣ing and prayer, or laying of hands, as well in the designati∣on of a person to a work, as to an Office.

2. This Argument will fall as heavy upon Election as Ordination: It must be remembred that they assert that the essence of the call lies in Election; and to prove this, they urge the Election of an Apostle, Acts 1. Now from hence, I thus argue against them: If this was the prerogative of the Apostles, that they had their call nei∣ther of man nor by man, &c. then the essence of their call doth not lie in Election: But this was the prerogative of Apostles, that they were neither of men nor by men; so that although Ordination and Election were both used in reference to the Apostles, yet the essence of the call did lie in neither of them: And it is certain that in Acts 1. the essence of Matthias his call, did not lie in the election of the people (for that Barsabas had, as well as Matthias) but in the designation of God: And therefore, as our Brethren would say for themselves, in that case, that we are to distinguish between what is or∣dinary and what is extraordinary, between what was pe∣culiar to the Apostles, and what was common to other Officers; and that this was common to the Apostles, with other Officers to be admitted by Election, which therefore is a president for us in the call of other Officers, but that the essence of their call should not lie in Election, but in Gods designation, this was peculiar to them, and so is no rule to us; the same Liberty, I hope they will allow us, to say, that in this Ordination here was, 1. Something ordinary and common to the Apostles, with other Officers, which was to be ordained, which therefore doth strongly justifie the use and necessity of Ordination to other Officers. 2. Something extraordi∣nary

and peculiar, to wit, that the essence of their call did not lie in this Ordination, but in the immediate ap∣pointment of God, which therefore cannot be applied to ordinary Officers.

To say nothing of that which peradventure may be said, that Paul had the essence of his Call from this Ordination, and yet no prejudice to that other assertion that Paul had his Office neither of nor by man, Gal. 1. for though men were used as instruments in the dispensation of the rites belonging to Pauls Ordination, yet to speak properly it was not men but God, that was Pauls Ordainer, for the holy Ghost said, separate me, &c. It was not men that nomina∣ted Paul to be an Officer, but God did it, from hea∣ven.

Their third Argument is taken from the nature of Ordination, Ordination (say they) is nothing else but the solemn separation of an Officer by prayer and fasting (they after adde, and laying on of hands) to the work where∣unto he is called: It can be imagined to consist but of three things. 1. Fasting, and that is no act of worship. 2. Lay∣ing on of hands, and that was not essentiall to Ordination then, and it is questionable, whither it be still continuing or not. 3. Prayer, which therefore must be the act giving essence to Ordination seeing the others do not.

Now upon all this, they build a double argument.

1. Ordination consisteth in an action performed to God only, i. e. in prayer, therefore it cannot give the Essence of an ex∣ternall call to office, from men.

2. That action which cannot be performed in faith, before a man have his outward Call to office, cannot give him that outward call: But Ordination is such an action, &c. For how can a man pray in faith, for his blessing upon a person in a work of an office, before he can conclude, that he is so much as outwardly called to that office.

For Answer. 1. For the last clause, I also would ask our Brethren one question; Suppose the Essence of the Ministeriall Call did consist in Election, and that Pray∣ers are to be used for the person to be Elected, before his Election (which I know our Brethren will not diflike) in this case I ask them their own question How can they pray in faith for a blessing upon that person in the work of his Office, before he have the Call to the Office? Whatso∣ever they shall reply with reason, will serve for our use as well as theirs.

2. In such cases, our prayers have (as most frequently in many other cases) a tacit condition, that God would blesse him in the work, viz. if he shall be set apart for it. I may pray in faith, that God would go with me in a journey, that God would blesse me in the exercises of the Lords day, &c. Although I do not certainly know that I shall live either to go one step in my journey, or to do one exercise upon the Lords day.

3. All their Argument proceeds upon a grosse mistake and unacquaintednesse with our principles: In a word, we hold that the Essence of Ordination, consists in none of those three things mentioned, neither in fasting, nor pray∣er, nor laying on of hands, (all which are only the modifica∣tions of the work) but in something else, to wit, in this, the designation of fit persons by Officers unto the work, which designation indeed, is signified by imposition of hands, and deservedly introduced, with fasting and prayer, as be∣ing a work of greatest weight, yet still the Essence of it lies not in this.

4. For imposition of hands, it is granted by most Pres∣byterians, that I know of, that it is not so Essentiall to Ordination, as that they will pronounce that Ordination null, which wanted it, although they conceive in being a rite instituted by Christ, cannot without sinne, be neg∣lected

by men. Whether imposition of hands ought to continue in the Church, is excentricall to our present que∣stion, and therefore I shall wave it, leaving onely this Me∣morandum for the Readers consideration.

That the great Argument used for the abolition of it, because it was used in those daies for the collation of the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, hath to me, very little cogency in it; both because by the same reason, Preaching must be now laid aside, because when Peter preached, the holy Ghost fell upon them that heard him, Acts 10. 44. And because it continued all along in the old Testament, notwithstanding this, that sometimes it was used in those times for the collation of extraordinary gifts, as Deut. 34. 9. And Ioshua was full of the spirit of wis∣dom, for Moses had laid his hands upon him. But I must recall my self, and remember that it is not now my task to med∣dle with that point, but only to shew that our Brethrens Arguments are not unanswerable.

And now that we have seen the weaknesse of their Ar∣guments alledged to prove that the essence of the Ministe∣rial call consisteth in Election, not in Ordination, I shall consider whether we cannot find stronger Arguments to prove the contrary, That the essence of the call doth not lie in the Election of the people, but in the Ordination of the Ministers.