Anglican

“Aaron’s rod budded and blossomed.”

To the

Right Reverend Father in God,

Ofspring Blackall,

By Divine Providence,

Lord Bishop of Exon.

My Lord,

When your Lordship commanded the following Discourse to go abroad in Publick, I could not but think it my Duty to make it first wait on yourself, and beg leave to carry about with it your Lordship’s great Name, as its Pass-port and Protection.  On that Errand it now attends your Lordship ;  and it seems a pardonable Presumption at least, to hope, that your Lordship will not refuse to Patronize, what you have already been pleas’d to Approve.

If your Lordship has been inform’d, with what Unwillingness it first appear’d before you at Okehampton, your Lordship will easily believe, ’twas never design’d to go any farther, and therefore it came thither in a Dress suitable only to the Coarseness and Roughness of its own native Country.  Nor dare I now venture to alter it, because the honest plainness of its Garb, as well as the good Intention of it, may  ( for all I know )  be one Reason why your Lordship took a Fancy to it.

But as I shall not enquire into the Reasons which mov’d your Lordship to order it to the Press, so neither shall I offer to Apologize for what your Lordship has thought fit to Commend.  Nor, indeed, would I trouble your Lordship with one Word more, but that I have it particularly in Charge from my Brethren, not to neglect this Opportunity of expressing their just Sense of your Lordship’s great Worth, of the Happiness they enjoy under your Lordship’s Government, and of the many endearing Marks of your Care and Concern lately shown them at your Lordship’s Visitation.  This, my Lord, is what they so sincerely desire to give a Publick Testimony of, that it would be thought by them an unpardonable Omission should I wholly forbear to mention it on this Occasion.  And yet I am so Conscious of my own unfitness for such an Undertaking ;  that I must beg their leave only to give my Reasons why I have rather chosen to decline it.

And perhaps it will be deem’d no inconsiderable one, to say, That Things of this Nature, tho’ never so true, are yet generally looked on as Flattery and Design ;  especially when they come from one, to whom your Lordship hath lately done so great an Honour.

Add to this, that Panegyrics are least acceptable to those who most of all deserve them.  Besides, your Lordship’s great Worth has already reach’d farther than ’tis possible for these Papers ever to come ;  and therefore your Lordship does as little stand in need, as you would allow, of such an Undertaking.

Again, your Lordship’s Excellencies in the Pulpit are no more to be expressed, than they are to be imitated ;  and that Tongue, which can account for them and set them forth better than your Lordship’s own Performances, must be such an one as this Age hath not produc’d.

‘Twould be moreover Injurious in me, to take the Praise of your Lordship’s Charity out of the Mouths of so many innocent Children, who will shortly proclaim them in a manner much beyond what I can pretend to ;  because they will speak out of the Abundance of those Hearts, which will be fill’d with a sensible Experience of your Lordship’s great Goodness.  Not to observe, that Praises are sometimes ordain’d, in a peculiar manner, out of those Mouths.

And as unjust would it be, to engross the Commendation of your Lordship’s Affability ;  because, as universal as its Influences are, so common ought the Eulogiums of it to be, and by Consequence, they are the Right of Every One.

But  ( my Lord )  the greatest Task is, to excuse my self for not insisting at large on your Lordship’s great and real Affection to the best of Ecclesiastical Establishments, and your exact Conformity to that great Apostolical Canon, Put them in mind to be subject to Principalities and Powers, and to obey Magistrates.

These  ( my Lord )  are the brightest Gems in Your Lordship’s Mitre ;  These shed a Lustre on your whole Person, and, like the precious Ointment on the Head of Aaron, cast a cheering Influence to the Extremities of your Attire ;  These have made your Lordship the Hopes and Confidence, the Pleasure and Delight of all your Clergy.

In a Word,  ( my Lord )  Monarchy and Episcopacy are your great Care ;  the Support and Countenance of these we, in a great Measure, owe to Your Excellent Lordship, as we do Your Lordship’s Self, in a peculiar manner, to Her most Excellent Majesty.  And for both these we must be for ever indebted, since what is inestimable, as Religion and Loyalty are, can never be paid for.

That Your Lordship may so long fill the Episcopal Chair of this Diocese, as to leave a lasting Impression of Piety and Loyalty on the Minds of all your Clergy ;  That the known Loyalty of these Western Counties may always be rewarded with One of Tour Lordship’s Spirit to preside over them ;  and that, after a long and very happy Life, Your Lordship may have a Weight of Glory in the Church Triumphant, proportion’d to the Care and Concern which you undergo in, and for, the Militant and Conflicting Church ;  are the incessant Prayers  ( I dare not say, of my self, lest I should incur the Displeasure of all my Brethren, but )  of all Your Lordship’s Clergy, and, among them, in a most especial manner, of,

Heb. V. iv.

No Man taketh this Honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.

The Success, and very Being of Religion, so much depend on the Divine Commission of those who serve at the Altar, that ’tis no Wonder, the Grand Adversary of Mankind, among other Methods to compass his End, has labour’d to propagate these Two Opinions :  One, that the very Distinction between Sacred and Profane is groundless and false :  The other, that the Sacred Character is to be extended beyond the Limits that God has appointed.  The first of these brings a Contempt on the Ministry in general, and so cuts off all Religion at once :  And the second fixes the Title of Ministers on those who are none ;  which as surely, tho’ more slowly, produces the same Effect.

Now, though notwithstanding these and all other Infernal Attempts, Religion has hitherto kept up some Credit and Countenance in the World ;  and we are infallibly assur’d that the Gates of Hell shall never totally prevail against it :  yet ’tis too visible, that the Church of God has hereby suffer’d in its most Essential Parts ;  and the Divine Ordinances have been either lightly regarded, or profanely as well as ineffectually administered.  Now, to retrieve the Honour of the Christian Ministry, without which ’tis impossible Christianity itself can subsist, ’tis necessary to be satisfied in these two Points, the one plainly express’d, and the other consequentially suggested, in the Words of my Text : 

These two Points therefore, with their proper Inferences, shall be the whole Subject of my present Discourse.

I.  No one ought to exercise the Office of a Minister in the Church of God, without a Divine Commission.

This I shall prove, First, from the Words of my Text and the Arguments implied therein.  Secondly, from some other Considerations.

First, from the Words of my Text, and the Arguments implied therein.  No man taketh this Honour to himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.  For the right Understanding of which Words, we are to observe, that St. Paul, who in all Probability was the Author of this Epistle, among other Arguments to demonstrate the Excellency of the Christian Religion above the Jewish, shows, that the Sacrifice and High-Priest of the Gospel, are of far greater Worth than those of the Law.  The Jewish Sacrifices could never expiate the Guilt, and Punishment of Sin, because they were defective in their Nature, and often to be repeated.  And then, the High-Priest was a Sinner himself, and therefore not so well qualify’d to offer for the Sins of others.  Whereas, under the Gospel, as the Sacrifice is of infinite Value, so the Offerer was perfectly innocent.  But notwithstanding the Dignity, and Worth of both these, there is something else requisite, to make the Offering complete, viz. The Divine Appointment.  For tho’ there be infinite Value in the Sacrifice, and perfect Holiness in him who offers it, yet still it cannot be effectual, unless they are peculiarly appointed by God himself.  This the Apostle shows with respect to the Sacrifice, in several Places of this Epistle ;  But with respect to the Offerer, in the Beginning of this Chapter.  For in the first Verse he tells us, Every High-Priest, being taken from among Men, is ordain’d for Men in Things pertaining to God ;  that he may offer both Gifts and Sacrifices for Sins.  And then in my Text, No Man taketh this Honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.

From hence it is evident, First, That He who officiates in Divine Matters is to be set apart, and to have a distinct Commission from the rest of Mankind ;  And Secondly, This Commission must be deriv’d from Divine Institution.  For upon these two Principles the Apostle’s Argument depends.  It was necessary that the High-Priest, under the Christian as well as Jewish Dispensation, should be taken from among Men, and divinely appointed to his Office.  The Reason whereof is, because it belongs to God alone to appoint his Ministers.  So that whoever considers the Force of the Apostle’s Reasoning, will find that by Honour is meant not only the High-Priesthood, as some have fancied, but every other Holy Office in the Jewish and Christian Church.  And consequently, ’tis the Height of Presumption to execute any such Office without a Divine Commission.

By Commission, I all along mean an outward Call to the Ministry.  For tho’ an inward Call be necessary, and no one ought to undertake so high an Office without a thorough Perswasion, and Intention, that he can, and will promote and contribute to the Honour of God, and the Salvation of Men’s Souls ;  yet the outward Call is that which the Apostle here principally means ;  the being externally appointed, and constituted to any Holy Office, either immediately by God himself, or mediately by those who are divinely authoriz’d to invest Men therewith :  As Aaron, and his Sons, and the Levites, were consecrated and set apart by Moses, by virtue of the Commission he receiv’d from God for that end.

Now, besides the plain meaning of my Text, here are three other invincible Arguments implied, to prove the Necessity of such a Divine Commission, to qualify a Person for any Sacred Office.

First, the Dignity of the Office itself.  Secondly, The constant Practice among the Jews.  And Thirdly, The Example of our Saviour.

1st, The Dignity of the Office itself.  The Apostle here calls it an Honour ;  and it will appear to be an Honour of a very high Degree, if we consider its Nature and Design.  The Ministers of Religion are the Representatives of God Almighty :  They are to publish his Laws, to pass his Pardons, and to preside in his Worship :  God has committed to them the Keys of his Kingdom, and whose-soever Sins they duly remit, they shall be remitted, and whose-soever Sins they retain, thy shall be retain’d.  They are the Stewards of the Mysteries of God, the Dispensers of his Holy Word and Sacraments :  In short, they are the Messengers and Ambassadors of Heaven, and on their Ministrations the Assistances of the Holy Spirit and all the Graces of a good Life, depend.  All these Characters and Powers are ascrib’d to them in Holy Scripture ;  Which sufficiently demonstrate the Dignity of their Function, and are a plain Argument that None but God himself can give them their Commission.

For who dares, without the express Orders of Heaven, undertake an Office, which includes so many, and such great Particulars? Should any One take upon him the Character of an Ambassador ;  should he offer Terms of Peace to Enemies, pretend to Naturalize Foreigners, and grant Pardons, without a Commission from the Supreme Magistrate ;  as all his Acts would be null and void, so he would be highly criminal against his Prince, and liable to the severest Punishment.  The Application is so easy, that the Heathens themselves would never venture to officiate in Religious Matters without a supposed Inspiration from Heaven, or a previous Initiation by those whom they thought entrusted by the Deity for that purpose.

2dly, Let us consider the constant Practice among the Jews.  The Apostle here makes the Calling of Aaron the Pattern of all other Ministers in the Jewish and Christian Church.  It is usual with the Writers of the New Testament, as well as the Ancient Fathers, to enforce the Obligation of the Gospel Institutions, by comparing them with those of the same, or a like, Nature under the Law.  And therefore ’tis of great Moment to consider the Practice of the Jewish Church in the Case now before us.  And we all Know, that None could approach the Presence of God, to minister in Holy Matters, but such as were particularly appointed by him.  When God instituted Offerings and Sacrifices, and the other Positive Parts of his Worship, He at the same Time set apart a peculiar Order of Men to be the Administrators of them :  So that the Persons who were to minister, were equally of Divine Institution with the Ministrations themselves.  Thus Aaron and his Sons, and the Levites were Consecrated by the express Command of God to Moses ;  and they had all of them their distinct Commissions from Heaven, and no less than Death was the Penalty of invading their Office.  Nay, God was more then ordinarily jealous of his Honour, and vindicated it, even at the Expence of several Miracles.

Thus, when Corah, Dathan, and Abiram  ( tho’ Levites, and consequently nearer to the Lord in Holy Matters than the rest of the Congregation )  usurped the Priest’s Office, God Almighty miraculously destroy’d both them and their Associates ;  and their Censers were ordered to be beaten into broad Plates, and fix’d on the Altar, to be everlasting Monuments of their Sacrilege, and a Caution to all the Children of Israel, that none should presume to offer Incense before the Lord, but the Seed of Aaron, who alone were Commissioned to this Office.  Thus Uzzah was, by the immediate Hand of God, struck dead on the Spot, for touching the Ark, tho’ he did it out of Zeal to hinder it from falling.  To show, that no Pretence of doing God service can justify the Meddling in Holy Things.  And King Uzziah attempting to Offer Incense before the Lord, was judicially smitten with Leprosy, and so excluded for ever after, not only from all Sacred, but even Civil Society.  A plain Argument, that the Sacerdotal is not included in the Regal Office, nor derived from thence ;  but is of a distinct Nature and Institution.  I omit many other Instances of the like Nature.

Now, these Things are written for our sake, and for our Example ;  that None of us should lust after prohibited Things, and invade an Office which does not belong to us.  For, as St. Jerome rightly observes, What Aaron, and his Sons, and the Levites, were in the Temple ;  such are the Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons in the Christian Church.  These are appointed by God, as Those were ;  and therefore, it can be no less Sacrilege to usurp their Office ;  nay, it must be far greater, because the Honour of the Ministry, as the Apostle argues, rises in proportion to the Dignity of their Ministrations.  Now, it can’t be denied that Realities are more valuable than Types ;  Heaven is better than the Land of Canaan, and the Sacraments of the Gospel to be preferred before all the Offerings and Expiations of the Law.

3dly, Let us consider the Example of our Saviour, who  ( as the Apostle speaks, in the Verse after my Text )  glorify’d not himself to be made a High Priest, but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to Day have I begotten thee.&tinsp; Tho’ our Saviour wanted no Gift to qualify him for this Office, as having the Divine Nature inseparably united to his Human, and giving sufficient Evidence of his Abilities, when but twelve years old ;  and tho’ the Necessities of Mankind called loudly for such an Instructor, yet he would not enter upon his Office ’till he was externally Commission’d thereunto, by the Visible Descent of the Holy Ghost upon him, and by an audible Voice from Heaven, proclaiming him to be the Messiah ;  and he was then about Thirty Years old.  All the former part of his Life he spent in a private Capacity.

He had Power and Authority beyond any other Man whatsoever, to take this Honour to himself, and yet he abstain’d from it, till this Commission was so remarkably given him by his Father.  He came to fulfill all Righteousness ;  and therefore would do nothing that might give the least Encouragement to an undue Behaviour.  And as his Example is to be a Rule and Pattern in other Matters, so especially in this.  For indeed, there can no probable Reason be given of his deferring so long to enter upon his Office, but that he might thereby instruct us in the High Nature of the Gospel Ministry, and discourage all Persons from intruding into any Sacred Office in the Christian Church.  For his Example plainly teaches us, that no Internal Qualifications, no Good End or Intention, can warrant a Man’s Exercising any Holy Function, without a Divine Commission.

Which having thus prov’d from the Words of my Text and the Arguments implied therein, I shall now, in the Second Pace, briefly mention some few others.

First then, we may observe, that tho’ our Saviour had many Followers, yet none of them presumed to Preach or Baptize, or perform any other Sacred Office, till they were particularly Commission’d by Him.  Thus St. Mark tells us, Chap. 3. v. 14. 15. That of all those who came unto him, he Ordain’d Twelve, that they might be with him ;  and that he might send them forth to Preach, and to have Power to heal Sicknesses, and to cast out Devils ;  and afterward, the other Seventy, which went out upon a like Errand, were especially appointed by him.  So likewise, after his Resurrection, when he advanc’d the Eleven to be Apostles, he did it in a most Solemn Manner :  For first, he assur’d them of his own Authority.  All Power, says he, is given me, in Heaven, and in Earth.  After which, he breath’d on them, and said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost.  Then he gave them the Power of the Keys, and Authority to exercise all the Holy Offices in the Christian Church, and to convey the same Authority to others ;  promising, that he would be always with them and their Successors, even to the End of the World, to ratify and confirm what was done in his Name, and agreeably to this Commission.  Now from hence ’tis plain, that it was our Saviour’s express Will and Intention, that all those who are Ministers in his Church, should derive their Authority, either mediately, or immediately, from Heaven.  And accordingly we may observe,

Secondly, that in the Beginning of Christianity, all those who officiated in Divine Matters, received their Commission either from God himself, or from Apostolical Hands, and very commonly from both :  For we have many Instances hereof in the New Testament, and the other Writings of the Three First Centuries *.  The Seven Deacons were constituted by the Apostles :  And St. Paul and Barnabas Ordained Elders, or Presbyters, in every Church, which they planted † :  And the other Apostles used the same Method :  As St. Clement  ( who lived and wrote in their Time )  witnesses ;  Christ †  ( says he )  was sent by God, and the Apostles by Christ :  And after our Saviour’s Resurrection and Ascension, the Apostles went forth in the Power and Assurance of the Holy Spirit, and preached the Kingdom of God to all Countries and Cities :  And the First-Fruits, or those whom they first converted, having try’d and prov’d them by the Spirit, they constituted and ordained, Ἐις Επισκόπους κὰι Διακόνους τῶν μελλόντῶν πιστέυειν, i.e. To be Bishops and Deacons, of those who should afterwards believe.

I need not mention any more Instances :  For Scripture and Antiquity is full of them.  Which abundantly proves the Necessity of a Divine Commission, in order to the being a Minister in the Christian Church.

II.  Who may be truly said to have this Divine Commission.

I   proceed now to the Second Point I proposed to speak to, which was, to consider,

II. Who may be truly said to have this Divine Commission :  And here I shall not doubt to affirm, that None but those who are Ordain’d by such as we now commonly call Bishops, can have any Authority to minister in the Christian Church :  For, that the Power of Ordination is solely lodged in that Order, I shall prove from the Institution of our Saviour, and the constant Practice of the Apostles.  That the Power of Ordination, lodged in the Apostles, was of Divine Institution, I suppose no one will question, who reads these Words of our Saviour to them after his Resurrection :  As my Father sent me, so send I you.  And lo, I am with you always, even to the End of the World.  For from hence it is evident, First, That it was by a Divine Commission that our Saviour ordain’d, or sent his Apostles.  Secondly, That by virtue of the same Commission, the Apostles were at that Time empowered to ordain, or send others.  And, Thirdly, that this Commission to ordain, was always to continue in the Christian Church, and to remain in such Hands as the Apostles should convey it to :  All this, I say, is evident from these Words of our Saviour, when duly considered and compared.  And hence this Proposition naturally follows :  Whoever has a Power to Ordain, must derive it from the Commission which our Saviour receiv’d from God, and gave to his Apostles, and was by them convey’d to their Successors.  The only way then to know in whose Hands this Commission is now lodged, is to enquire, what Persons were appointed by the Apostles to succeed them in this Office.  Now, ’tis plain to any one that will read the Scripture without Prejudice, that there were Three distinct Orders of Ministers in the Christian Church in the Apostles Days, and which were designed to continue to the End of the World.  The lowest of these Orders was that of Deacons :  These were at first, by the Direction of the Apostles, nominated and chosen by the People, but invested in their Office by the laying on of the Apostles Hands.  They were ordain’d, not only to take Care of the Poor, but also to Preach and Baptize ;  as is evident from the Instances of St. Stephen and St. Philip who were Two of the first Seven.  Secondly, We read of a higher Order, who were also invested in their Office by the Apostles :  These are commonly called Presbyters, or Elders, in Scripture ;  tho’ that Name was not appropriated to them, ’till the latter End of the Apostolical Age, as will appear afterwards.  These had, and still have, a Power to Preach, and to administer the Sacraments, to pronounce Absolution, and in some Cases and upon some Occasions, rule and govern the Christian Church.  And then, Thirdly, we likewise read of another Order, who were Superiour to, and had Authority over, both the former :  Such were, besides the Apostles, Timothy and Titus.  For ’tis plain, from the Epistles St. Paul wrote to them, that they presided over the Presbyters :  They had Power to enforce them to their Duty, to receive Accusations against, and judicially to pass Sentence upon them :  Which abundantly proves their Superiority ;  and several others were constituted by the Apostles to the same eminent Office.  Such were St. James, surnamed the Just, and Epaphroditus ;  who are termed Apostles, or Bishops, by all Antiquity.  And such, in all probability, were those whom St. Paul calls Apostles of the Churches, and joins with Titus.  Such also were those Angels of the Churches, mentioned in the Revelation.

I know some have been pleased to tell us, That Timothy and Titus, and those Others of the highest Order, were extraordinary Officers in the Christian Church, and so of temporary Institution only ;  but this is said without any Ground, or plausible Pretence.  That they were sometimes sent upon extraordinary Messages, and had a Power, upon Occasion, to do extraordinary Things, such as Miracles, &c. is very true ;  but then the same is to be said of the Presbyters and Deacons.  Philip  ( we know )  was only a Deacon ;  and yet, God employ’d him in several extraordinary Matters.  And the working of Miracles was so common in the Beginning of Christianity, that ordinary Christians were frequently endow’d with this Power.  So that if this were an Argument for the temporary Institution of one Order, it must be so too for all the rest :  Which they, who make the Objection, dare not say ;  and thereby acknowledge, there is no Force in it.

But they farther urge, that Timothy was an Evangelist ;  because St. Paul bids him, do the Work of an Evangelist ;  But in Answer to this, Two Things may be said ;  either of which fully answers the Objection.  First, supposing the Office of an Evangelist to have been a distinct Office, and of temporary Institution only, yet there’s a vast difference between doing the work of an Evangelist, and being really such a One.  ’Tis said of Araumah, that, as a King he gave to King David.  Yet I hope, no one will from hence argue, that he was really a King.  But then, Secondly, An Evangelist was no distinct Officer at any Time in the Christian Church.  For the proper Notion of an Evangelist in the Acts and St. Paul’s Epistles, is, One who was eminently qualified to Preach the Gospel,and had taken very great Pains therein.  And therefore, the Title of Evangelist was merely accidental, and given as an Addition, or Surname, to Persons.  Thus St. Philip was call’d an Evangelist, because, by his laborious Preaching, he had converted Samaria, and propagated the Gospel in several Places :  And yet his Office was no more than that of a Deacon.  For tho’ he was dignified with that Title, he could only Preach and Baptize, and had not the Power of Laying on of Hands, which both Timothy and Titus had :  And therefore, his Office was far inferiour to theirs.  From all which, ’tis evident, that Timothy’s Power over Presbyters did not accrue to him upon the Account of his being an Evangelist, supposing he was one :  And the Meaning of the advice of doing the work of an Evangelist, can be no more than this, viz. That he should diligently Preach the Gospel, not only to those who were already converted, but to Infidels also, and thereby enlarge the Bounds of Christianity.  But this no more proves his Office of Ruling Presbyters, and Ordaining, to be temporary, than St. Philip’s being call’d an Evangelist proves the Office of Preaching and Baptizing to be so.  So that here is nothing to object against the Permanency and Continuance of the Office Timothy and Titus were ordain’d to.

Indeed,  ( to use the Words of Bishop * Stillingfleet )  They, who go about to unbishop Timothy and Titus, may as well inscripture the Epistles that were written to them, and make them only some particular and occasional Writings, as they make Timothy and Titus to have been only some particular and occasional Officers.  But the Christian Church, preserving these Epistles, as of constant and perpetual Use, did thereby suppose the same kind of Office to continue, for the sake, whereof these excellent Epistles were written.  And we have no greater Assurance, that these Epistles were written by St. Paul, than we have, that there were Bishops to succeed the Apostles in the Care and Government of the Churches.  So that, according to the maturest Judgment of this Great Man, the Office of Timothy and Titus is of the same Authority, and design’d to be of the same Continuance, with the Epistle that were written to them.  And surely, Nothing can be said more highly for the Jus Divinum of Episcopacy, than this.

From what has been said, it plainly appears, That there were Three distinct Orders set apart to the Ministry by the Apostles.  Our next Enquiry then is, To how many, or to which of these the Power of Ordination was committed.  Now, that the lowest Order  ( viz. that of Deacons )  had not this Power, is by all confes’d.  And the highest Order  ( of which Timothy and Titus were )  had it, we are assur’d by the express Testimony of St. Paul.  The only Question then is, whether the second Order  ( viz. that of Presbyters )  was ever invested with this Power.  The Affirmative of which Question can never be prov’d from Scripture, or Antiquity.  For,

1. ’Tis frivolous to argue from the Community of Names to the Sameness of Office.  And therefore, tho’ the Words Bishop and Presbyter be promiscuously used, and mere Presbyters frequently called Bishops, yet this doth not prove, that therefore all the Powers, which belong to those we now call Bishops, were ever lodged in those Presbyters.  At this Rate of Arguing, Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons, would all be but one Order :  For the Apostles are some called Διάκονοι, Deacons, as well as Presbyters :  Nay, our Saviour himself is called by that Name :  But how ridiculous and absurd would it be, to infer that Deacons have a Power to Ordain, and are Apostles, and Bishops, because those who are called Deacons in Scripture had such a Power, and were called by these Names? And yet this is the utmost, that the Arguments from the promiscuous Use of the Words Bishop and Presbyter can amount to.

The only Method to prove that the Power of Ordination belongs to Presbyters, is, to show, that whoever had a Power to Preach, and Administer the Sacrament, had also a Power to Ordain ;  or, that whoever were called by the Name of Presbyters, or Bishops, were invested therewith.  But this is what can never be done.  On the contrary, ’tis very evident, that many who were authorized to preach and administer the Sacraments, had no Power to Ordain.  St. Paul tells Titus.  That for this Cause he left him in Crete, that he might Ordain Elders in every City :  But this could be no Cause of leaving him there if the Presbyters, or Elders, had the Power of Ordination lodg’d in them :  For that Island had been converted to Christianity long before this Epistle was written, and before Titus came thither :  And, no doubt, there were many Presbyters among them, Persons to preach and administer the Sacraments to the Inhabitants of that Island. The same may be said of Timothy‘s being sent to Ephesus.  To what Purpose was he sent thither, if the Presbyters there before had Power to ordain? So that tho’ Presbyters are called Bishops in Scripture, this doth not prove, the Power of Ordination was ever committed to them.  Neither,

2. Secondly, Can this be prov’d from that perpetually quoted Passage, 1 Tim. 4. 14. where St. Paul exhorts Timothy, not to neglect the Gift that was in him, which was given him by Prophecy, with the Laying on of the Hands of the Presbytery.  For supposing, Timothy’s Ordination is here spoken of,  ( which many Learned Men have questioned ) .  I have shown before, That the Apostles themselves were called by the Name of Presbyters.  And so the Presbyters here mention’d may, very probably, be Apostles, as many of the Ancients thought.  Certainly St. Paul was one of them, or at least among them ;  and by his Authority alone the Ordination was complete, tho’ one or more who were mere Presbyters, laid on their Hands in Concurrence with him, to testify their Consent and Approbation :  as is the Custom at this Day in the Ordination of a Presbyter ;  and has been sometimes done at the Ordination of a Bishop, as in the Case of Pelagius I. Bishop of Rome *.  And ’tis remarkable, that St. Paul  ( 2 Tim. 1. 6. )  ascribes the whole of Timothy’s Ordination to his own Laying on of Hands.  In short, to make this Place any thing to the Purpose, these Three Things at least must be prov’d :  First, That by Presbytery is here meant a Company of Persons ;  Secondly, That these Persons were all mere Presbyters ;  And Thirdly, That None but such gave Timothy his Ordination.  The First of which is uncertain ;  The Second improbable ;  And the Third absolutely false.  Not to mention several other Difficulties, which must be cleared before this Text can be brought to speak the Sense, which the Patrons of the Presbyterian Cause would extort from it.  Insomuch, that we may well admire, with the Learned † Mr. Selden,  ( who can’t be suspected of Prejudice in Favour of Episcopacy )  how one can offer this Text as a Proof of Presbyters Power to ordain.  Upon the Whole, there is not the least Footstep in Scripture, or Antiquity, of such a Power being convey’d by the Apostles to any, but such, as are of an Order superiour to that of Presbyters.

For the further Clearing of which, and to solve those Difficulties this Point has been entangled with, give me leave, as briefly as I can, to lay before you my Sentiments, concerning the Apostles Proceedings in the Settlement of Officers in the several Churches, which they planted.

The Apostles  ( as I have showed ) , received from our Saviour a Divine Commission.  Whatever therefore they did in Pursuance of that Commission, must be of Divine Institution.  There is then no Reason in this Case to distinguish between Jus Divinum and Jus Apostolicum, as the Learned Bishop Beveridge has observ’d *  :  For this Commission was of Divine Authority, and they were guided by the Infallible Spirit of God in all Things relating thereunto :  So that whatever they did, which was within the Limits of that Commission, is as much of Divine Right and Institution, as if God himself had immediately order’d it :  Now the Power of Ordination being expressly included herein,  ( as I showed before )  whatever, Offices they appointed by virtue of this Power, may truly be said to be of Divine Institution.  But then as to the Settlement of Persons ordain’d to those Offices in particular Churches, the Apostles Method seems to be this : 

Having receiv’d the aforesaid Commission from our Saviour, and being fill’d with the Holy Ghost, first of all they establish’d a Church at Jerusalem, of which they made St. James President, or Bishop ;  as is evident from his Authority at the first Council held there, and from the concurrent Testimony of Ancient Writers.  To him they gave a Power of Ordaining, as well as Presiding in that Church :  And he seems to have fix’d there so soon, because of the Multitude of Believers at that place.  Under him were constituted some of the two Inferiour Orders before mention’d.  This Church being thus settled, the Apostles dispers’d themselves into several Parts of the World.  And when they had converted a considerable Number at any Place, they Ordain’d the most competent of them to the Offices of Presbyters, and Deacons.  To these they committed the Care and Government of the Church in their Absence ;  still reserving to themselves the Episcopal Power of Ordaining, and of Visiting those Churches, and setting in order the Things that are wanting.  And when there happen’d to be occasion for more Presbyters and Deacons by reason of the Increase of Believers, they either went in Person, or sent others invested with Apostolical Power ;  who sometimes were order’d to reside constantly among them, and sometimes were call’d off to attend at other Places.  So that in several Churches there were at first only Presbyters and Deacons fix’d, who took care of the Affairs of the Church in the Apostles Absence.  But before the Death of all the Apostles, Bishops were settled in every Church, according to the Model of that at Jerusalem.

Episcopacy therefore, as it implies a Superiority above Presbyters, and a Right to Ordain, is of Divine Appointment, included in the Commission, which our Saviour receiv’d from his Father, and deliver’d over to the Apostles :  But as to Diocesan Episcopacy, or the Limiting a Bishop to a certain District, tho’ that too be of Apostolical Institution, yet it is not absolutely necessary, but seems to be a prudential Appointment of the Apostles, for the Preventing of Schisms and Divisions, which were likely to arise from an Equality of Power among the Governours.  And therefore it was instituted in some Places sooner, in others later :  But wherever the Gospel was spread, it was settled before the End of the first Century.

This I take to be a true Account of the Apostles Method in settling of Churches, and the Officers therein :  And which, if seriously and impartially considered, will be found most agreeable to the Ancient Records of Christianity, in the New Testament, and the Primitive Writers.

And by this Account we may answer the most Considerable Objections, that have been made against the Divine Right of Episcopacy.  For,

1st, From hence we may easily account for all, those Places of Scripture, which are brought to prove the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters ;  as Acts 20. where the same Persons, that are call’d Elders or Presbyters in the 17th Verse, are call’d Επίσκοποι, Overseers or Bishops in the 28th.  And Phil. 1.1. the Apostle directs his Epistle to the Saints which are at Philippi, with the Bishops, and Deacons.  And in his Epistles to Timothy, and Titus, having mention’d the Qualifications of a Bishop, he proceeds to those of Deacons, without so much as naming Presbyters.  This is thought by some an unanswerable Argument against the Three-fold Order in the Christian Church.  But not to mention what is commonly said to this Objection, the foregoing Account will furnish us with a full Reply.  For I think, we may, and should, grant, that by Bishops in all those Places are meant only such, as we now call Presbyters.  Theodoret’s opinion being very probably true, viz. * That those of the Highest Order, now call’d Bishops, were at first call’d Apostles ;  and the second Order, now call’d Presbyters, had then the Title also of Bishops.  And perhaps where-ever the Word Bishop is found in Scripture as apply’d to an Ecclesiastical Overseer after our Saviour, the Middle Order is always meant †.  For tho’ the Apostles are sometimes call’d Presbyters, and Deacons, yet they are never call’d Bishops.  Their Office indeed is once call’d Επίσκοπὴ.  But in all the foremention’d Places of Scripture, by Επίσκοποι we are to understand the Middle Order, which we now call Presbyters.

For first, in St. Paul’s Charge to the Elders of Ephesus, among all his Directions, there is nothing but what is proper to be spoken to Persons of this Order :  But not a Word about Ordination.  Which certainly would not have been omitted, if that Power had been lodg’d in them :  Especially considering St. Paul had so fair an Occasion for it.  For when he had told them, they should take heed to the Flock of Christ, over which the Holy Ghost had made them Επίσκοποι, since after his departure grievous Wolves would enter in, and of themselves some should arise, speaking perverse Things, to draw Disciples after them, it would have been very natural to have given them some Caution about such as were to be admitted into Holy Orders, if the Power of Ordination had belong’d to them :  But there is not a Syllable in all that long and affectionate Charge concerning that Matter.  Which to me is a plain Argument, that ’twas none of their Province.  They had indeed the Government of the Church of Ephesus, while Timothy, their Bishop, was absent ;  or rather, before he was their Bishop, according to the best Chronologers :  And therefore St. Paul speaks much to them concerning that Matter, but nothing that intimates their Power of Ordination :  So that the Persons, to whom he there speaks, were undoubtedly of the Middle Order.

And thus likewise by Bishops in the Epistle to the Philippians, such as we now call Presbyters are meant.  And therefore in that whole Epistle St. Paul gives no Direction to them concerning Ordination.  For that was not the Business of those Επίσκοποι, but belong’d to Epaphroditus ;  whom, Chap.2.25. he calls his Brother, and Companion in Labour ;  ὑμᾶν δὲ Απόστολον, but your Apostle.  And ’tis probable, St. Paul ordain’d him to that Office, when he sent him with this Epistle.  For which Reason,at the 29 Verse of that Chapter, he charges them, to receive him in the Lord with all Gladness, and to hold such in Reputation.  And he is by all Antiquity reckon’d the first Bishop of Philippi.  And St. Jerome himself not only agrees to this Interpretation, but from hence proves, that the Apostles of Christ convey’d their whole Office, and Authority, to such only.  His Words are very remarkable *.  Paulatim tempore procedente & alii ab his quos Dominus elegerat, ordinati sunt Apostoli :  sicut ille ad Philippenses Sermo declarat, dicens, Necessarium existimavi Epaphroditum vestrum Apostolum ad vos mitere.  So that the Apostolical Office was not temporary, but design’d to continue in the Church of Christ.  And therefore the Apostles took care to Ordain some to succeed them, who were at first call’d by the same Name.  As also Theodoret expresly tells us † :  Those  ( says he )  whom we now call Bishops, were at first call’d Apostles.  And from the Character here given to Epaphroditus, he argues, That the Επίσκοποι in the Beginning of the Epistle were to be subject to him ;  and consequently no more than mere Presbyters.

The same Order is also meant under the Title of Επίσκοποι in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus ;  and their Office is there term’d Επίσκοπὴ.  For in the Qualifications for that Office, there is nothing to intimate, that such being Ordain’d would have a Power of Ordaining others :  And therefore, says Theodoret upon the place, Here again St. Paul calls a Presbyter by the Name of Bishop.  And then makes this general Remark * :  Formerly the same Persons were called both Presbyters and Bishops ;  and those now called Bishops, were then called Apostles :  But, in process of Time, the Name of Apostle was left to those Apostles strictly so called ;  and the Name of Bishops ascribed to all the rest.

So that granting mere Presbyters to be Scripture-Bishops, which some have so earnestly contended for, yet nothing can from thence be inferr’d, to prove them to have equal Powers with those we now call Bishops, who are Successors of a higher Order.  For in all the Directions to and about those called Bishops in the New Testament, there is nothing said that implies a Power of Ordination lodg’d in them.  But when St. Paul writes to Timothy and Titus, he then expressly mentions their Power to Ordain ;  and is very large in setting down Rules to direct them, when and how to exercise it.  The Reason of which Difference of Language must be this, That these latter had this Power, whereas the others had not, and consequently were of an Inferiour Order.  They might Rule, and govern the Affairs of the Church, in the Apostles Absence, and when they had no fix’d Bishop among them ;  but they had no Authority even at that time to Appoint and Ordain other Ministers :  That was always peculiar to the Apostles, and those of the Apostolical Order.  The Objection therefore of Presbyters being call’d Bishops in Scripture, is of no Force against the distinct Divine institution of Episcopacy ;  for the Bishops in Scripture can never be prov’d to have a Power of Ordination *.

The Truth of the whole Matter is this :  Those who were vested with this Power in the Beginning of Christianity, were commonly known by the Name of Apostles ;  and the Middle Order had the Appellation, sometimes of Bishops, and some times of Presbyters.  But shortly after, the Name of Apostles were appropriated to those who were constituted by our Saviour ;  their Successors in Modesty declining so High a Title ;  And then the Three Orders were distinguish’d by the Names of Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons.  And this Distinction was fix’d immediately upon the Death of the Apostles, Before, or in the very Beginning of, the Second Century ;  as appears from this, That all the Writers at, and after, that Time constantly reckon up the Three Orders under these Three Determinate Titles *.  It is therefore manifest, that from Presbyters being call’d Bishops in Scripture, no Colour of Argument can be drawn against the Three-fold Order in the Christian Church, or any thing urg’d in prejudice to the Divine Right of Episcopacy.

2dly, The foregoing Account fully Answers the common Objection, which is brought from the famous Passage of St. Jerome :  Before  ( says he  )   it may said among the People, I am of Paul, I am of Apollos, and I of Cephas, the Church was govern’d by a common Council of Presbyters :  But when this parity among the Governours occasioned Schisms and Divisions, it was decreed all over the World, that One placed above the rest should be entrusted with the Care of the Church, that so these Mischiefs might be prevented.  Now any in partial Reader of this Passage will believe, that the Time St. Jerome here speaks of, was while the Apostles were living :  For St. Paul tells us, That this was the Language of many :  when he wrote Corinthians :  And this might happen in several other Churches, if  ( as I have shown )  the Middle Order were at first left by the Apostles to govern in their Absence.  So that St. Jerome means no more than this, That at the first Planting of Churches, the Presbyters were for some Time intrusted with the Government of them ;  the Apostles not thinking it necessary, to fix Bishops every where immediately ;  but afterward, finding that this Parity among the Governours was inconvenient, they fix’d some of the highest Order in all Churches, & confin’d them within certain Limits ;  Ut Schismatis Semina tollerentur, That the Seeds of Schism might be remov’d, and the Unity of the Church preserv’d, by the constant Residence of a Supreme Governour among them.  But St. Jerome does not say, that those Presbyters had ever a Power of Ordination ;  for that he places in the Bishops alone.  And when he advances Presbyters highest, and ascribes all other Powers to them, he excepts that of Ordination ;  which he would not have done without evident Reason.  For we are to confider, that St. Jerome was a Man of a very high Spirit, and apt to grow hot upon an Opposition :  And when he wrote that remarkable Epistle to Evagrius, and those other Passages in Favour of Presbytery,  ( of which Order he himself was )  he had been highly provok’d by the Insolence  ( as he calls it )  of the Roman Deacons, who assum’d to be upon the Level with Presbyters :  And therefore he wrote in the Vehemence of Passion, when he would be sure to say all that he could for the Honour of his own Order :  And yet, after all, he is forc’d to acknowledge that a Power of Ordination does not belong to it.  Indeed, all that he says is consistent enough with the Divine Right of Episcopacy ;  which he abundantly owns, and proves too, in several places of his Works.

3dly, The Account I have given, takes off all the Force of the Objection, which is founded on the uncertain Succession of the first Bishops in some of the most eminent Churches, such as Rome, Antioch, and others ;  whereof some reckon one the first Bishop, and some another.  Now, we may observe that all the Difficulty is concerning who were Bishops of those Sees in the Apostolical Age, during the first Sixty or Seventy Years after our Saviour’s Passion :  For the Succession afterward is clear, and uncontroverted.  But this Difficulty is easily to be accounted for, if we consider, that when the Apostles were obliged to be absent from those Churches, where only Presbyters and Deacons were at first fixed, they left, or sent, upon all Emergencies, a Person, or Persons, with Apostolical Power, who were to reside there for a Time only, and then were called off again upon the like, or some other, important Occasion.  For as Diocesses were not presently settled, so at first in very few Places did any one of the Highest or Apostolical Order constantly reside :  Thus Timothy, after he had been a while at Ephesus, and exercised his Episcopal Authority there, was by St. Paul ordered to come to him at Rome :  Do thy Diligence, says he, 2 Tim. 4. 9. to come shortly unto me.  And he tells him, that Crescens was then gone to Galatia, and Titus to Dalmatia.  So that neither Timothy nor Titus were at that Time fix’d Bishops ;  at least, they were not oblig’d to a constant Residence, but executed their Episcopal Function in other Places besides Ephesus and Crete :  And no doubt, many others of the same Authority did the like.

Now, several of these Persons coming to the same Place at different Times with an Episcopal Character, were afterwards call’d Bishops of that See :  And the Writers of the following Centuries, not being able to fix the exact Time of their Residence, some call’d One the first Bishop, and some Another :  Others again reckon’d none for Bishops of those Sees, besides the Apostles, ’till some One was fix’d there.  And this has given Occasion to those different Accounts of the first Succession.  For at Jerusalem, where there was a fix’d Bishop at the Beginning, we find no Differences in this Matter :  So that the Apostles not immediately fixing Bishops in several Sees, but sometimes sending One with Episcopal Authority, and sometimes Another, is  ( I verily believe )  the true Reason, why it is so difficult to know who were the first Bishops of those Places :  For we meet with no such Difficulties after the Apostolical Age, when Bishops were every where settled, and the Limits of their Jurisdiction assign’d.  But this can be no Objection against the Divine Right of Episcopacy ;  for the Office of a Bishop implies only a Superiority of Order and Jurisdiction, to whom alone the Power of Ordination belongs :  But the Relation of a Bishop to this or that particular Diocess or District, is not absolutely necessary.  All that I contend for is, that the Power of Ordination, which was given by Christ to his Apostles, was by them convey’d to none but such as must be acknowledged distinct and superiour Order to that of Presbyters :  And consequently, such alone are invested with that Power.  For to Govern in the Church of God is not so peculiar to Bishops, but Presbyters and others may do this by their Appointment, and in Subordination to them ;  as the most zealous Asserters of Episcopacy have granted.

If then, according to the Account we distinguish between a Bishop at Large, and a Bishop with Restraint, a Bishop in the Christian Church, and a Bishop of a particular Diocess, and consider him only as One who is Superiour to Presbyters, and has the Sole Right of Ordination, we shall find that all the material Objections against the Divine Institution of Episcopacy may easily be answer’d.

And now, I presume, I have made it very plain, that None but such as receive Ordination from the Hands of those we now call Bishops, have any Authority to minister in Holy Things ;  since the Power of Ordination is appropriated to this highest Order in the Christian Church.  And to what has been said, I might, for farther Proof, add the joint Testimony of all Christendom for near Fifteen Hundred Years together ;  and challenge our Adversaries, to produce one Instance of a valid Ordination by Presbyters for all that Time.  The Story of the Scottish Culdees, and all others of a like Nature, have been abundantly confuted and exposed :  And  ( I think )  Ischyras is the only certain Instance in all Antiquity of a Person’s Officiating in Holy Things with a bare Presbyterian Ordination :  But he was no sooner discovered, but he was discarded, and all that he had done declar’d null and void.  * As for Aerius, tho’ he stiffly contended for an Equality between Presbyters and Bishops, yet I do not remember, that, tho’ a Presbyter himself, he ever pretended to Ordain others, or that any of his Followers officiated upon such an Ordination.  But however that be, this Heresy expired quickly after its Rise ;  for it began and ended in the latter part of the Fourth Century †.

Now, it seems very strange, if Episcopacy were not of Divine Institution, how it should prevail over all the World, and Presbyters tamely give up their Right, without any Complaint, or so much as leaving any Thing upon Record, to witness their Original Authority to After-Ages.  In a Word, we have as much Reason to believe the Divine Institution of Episcopacy, and that the Power of Ordination is appropriated to that Order, as we have to believe the Divine Institution of the Lord’s Day, of Infant-Baptism, and of the Canon of Scripture :  Nay, as we have to believe the necessary Continuance of any one positive Ordinance in the Gospel.  If Men will exercise their Wit and Fancy, and ply the whole Force of their Understanding, they may raise plausible Objections against the plainest Truths.  But this I dare say, that the Divine Authority of Episcopacy can’t be questioned without weakening the Foundations of Christianity itself :  For it stands upon the same Foot with the Authority of the Holy Scriptures ;  and the same Arguments that confirm the One, as effectually establish the Other.

Now then, to sum up the Evidence :  A Commission to ordain was given to None but the Apostles, and their Successors.  And to extend it to any inferiour Order, is without Warrant in Nature or Antiquity ;  for every Commission is naturally exclusive of all Persons, except those to whom it is given :  So that, since it does not appear that the Commission to Ordain, which the Apostles received from our Saviour, was ever granted to any but such as must be acknowledg’d to be of a superiour Order to that of Presbyters  ( which Order is the same with that of those we now call Bishops )  ;  therefore it follows, that No Others have any Pretence thereunto :  And consequently, None but such as are ordained by a Bishop, can have a Title to minister in the Christian Church.

III.  Inferences from what has been said.

And now I hope, I have given some Satisfaction concerning the Two Points I propos’d to speak to.  I shall therefore briefly consider their proper Inferences, and so conclude.

I. Then, From what has been said we may Infer, The prodigious Folly and Madness of those Persons, who, in Discourse or Writing, labour to expose the Gospel-Ministry to Scorn and Contempt.  He that despises you, says our Saviour Luke 10. 16. despises Me, and he that despises Me, despises Him that sent Me.  Every Reflection on the true Ministers of the Gospel ultimately terminates in God himself :  But when, as ’tis natural, Men proceed from hence to burlesque the Divine Institutions themselves, to make Comical Representations of the Sacraments, and even to ridicule the Authority of the Holy Scriptures, tho’ never so slyly, and by oblique Insinuations, this is a Flying in the Face of God, a Despising his Wisdom, an Outraging his Majesty, and a Daring his Vengeance ;  and argues a Man to be at the End of his Chain, and to have gone his utmost Lengths in Impiety.  Now, since all Sin is Folly, this must be the Height of Indiscretion, and the Extremity of Madness.  ‘Tis possible, by frequent Repetitions, Men may grow insensible of their Crime, and stupefy their Consciences to that degree, as to take Pleasure in such Excesses :  And the Ambition of getting a Name, heading a Party, and being reputed Wits and Free Thinkers, may considerably heighten their Satisfaction :  However, the pleasant Scene will quickly be shifted, and eternal Horror succeed in its stead :  And ’tis a wild Bargain, for the sake of a little momentary Mirth to expose one’s self to Everlasting Misery.  But Persons of this Character are not to be dealt with in the Way of Reason and Argument.  A Jest with them will weigh down a Demonstration ;  and the bare naming of Priest and Priest-Craft, will be thought a full Reply to all that can be offer’d for their Conviction.

II. The foregoing Considerations should oblige Men to be nicely cautious how they take upon them to administer the Sacraments, or exercise any other Holy Function in the Christian Church, without a Divine Commission.  For this is to counterfeit the Broad Seal of Heaven, and to commit Treason against the Most High :  And tho’ such Persons may not meet with a Temporal, yet they can never escape an Eternal Vengeance.  Under the Jewish Dispensation, God was wont to vindicate the Honour of the Priesthood by a sudden Execution on those who invaded it :  For temporal Rewards and Punishments being the main Sanction of the Law, this was the most proper and agreeable Method.  But the Gospel being chiefly establish’d on the Regards of Eternity, God Almighty does not think fit presently to exert his Power on such Occasions.  However, since  ( as I have shown ) , the Usurpation of the Ministry under the Gospel is an equal, nay, a far greater Crime than it was under the Law, we may conclude, that the longer the Punishment is deferr’d, the heavier it will be when it comes.  Men should therefore be well assured of the Validity of their Commission, before they presume to act upon it.  Especially considering the intolerable Mischiefs, which necessarily attend the Usurpation of the Sacred Character :  For when Persons pretend to be Ministers of the Gospel, without having received their Commission, according to Divine Appointment, as they are guilty of Sacriledge in Executing an Office to which they have no Title, so all that they do in that Capacity is null and ineffectual :  And consequently, those who are their Followers are led into a most dangerous State, since, for want of receiving the Ordinances of our Saviour from commissioned Hands, they have no assurance of being under the Gospel Covenant, or of partaking of any one Divine Grace ;  so that their Salvation is doubtful, as depending wholly on the uncovenanted Mercy of God.  And from hence

III. We may infer the great Reasonableness and even Necessity of a constant Communion with the Established Church.  And here I earnestly desire all Persons to consider this Matter seriously, as becomes those who have any Love for their own and others Souls.  They who have Episcopal Orders are lawfully commissioned to Preach, and administer the Sacraments ;  as is acknowledged on all Hands :  And, consequently, those who are baptiz’d by them, are undoubtedly admitted into the Christian Church, and have a Title, by virtue of the Divine Promise, to all the Benefits and Blessings of the Gospel.  On the other side, those who have no such Orders, can’t prove their Authority to do any of the fore-mentioned Acts, there being no Instance in Scripture of any besides an Episcopal Ordination ;  and the Christian Church, for Fifteen Hundred Years, has allowed of no other.  So that, take it in the most favourable Construction, all the Ministrations of those who dissent from us are questionable ;  there is no Certainty that anything they do in Holy Matters is valid :  Those, therefore, who join themselves to them, and have their Children Baptiz’d by them, must run the greatest Risk, and put their own and their Children’s Happiness on a disputable Point.  Now, who that has any Regard to his Eternal Interest, any Sense of the Happiness and Misery of another World, any Consideration of the Blessed state of being in Covenant with God, would thus choose an Uncertainty, and lay the whole Stress of his Christianity upon a doubtful Perhaps, when he may, if he pleases, take the sure and certain Way, and partake of the Gospel-Ordinances from unquestionable Hands ?  So that a constant Communion with the Established Church is not so indifferent a Matter as some would make it, but an indispensable Duty, and which no one, who regards his Soul as much as he does his Body or Estate, would ever neglect.  In temporal Cases we alway judge it reasonable, and our Duty, to take the safest Course ;  And why should we be so imprudent, as not to do the same in our spiritual Concerns?

I know how tenacious most People are of those Principles and Practices they have been bred up in, and long accustom’d to :  But the Natures of Things will not be chang’d by our Opinions of them.  To take the safest and securest Method in order to our Happiness, is both the plainest and most reasonable Principle we can act by :  Consequently, since the Ministers of the Established Church have an undoubted Commission, and all others who have not Episcopal Ordination a very uncertain one, if any at all, ’tis safest, and therefore most reasonable and necessary, constantly to communicate with this Church.  And all this even upon the largest Concessions.

But then, if we’ll believe the Primitive Fathers, who were certainly Men of Learning and Judgment, as well as Honesty and Integrity, the Case of those who join themselves to Pastors that have no lawful Ordination  ( and such are all those who have not receiv’d their Commission from Episcopal Hands, as is before prov’d )  is much worse.  St. Ignatius, who wrote within a hundred Years after our Saviour, having reckon’d up the Three Orders of Bishops, Priests and Deacons, expressly tells us *, that without these, there can be no Church, no Congregation of Saints, no Holy Assemblies.  Again, † Whoever belong to God and Jesus Christ, must be in Communion with the Bishop.  Be not deceiv’d  ( my Brethren )  he that joins himself to those who make Divisions cannot inherit the Kingdom of God.  And farther ‡ he assures us, that no one can do any Thing that pertains to the Church without the Bishop.  And, that none but the Bishop, and such as are constituted and ordain’d by him, have Authority to administer the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lords-Supper.  And, that the Ministrations of all others are null and ineffectual.  And those who maintain the contrary Opinion, oppose the Will of God,  ( he says )  and are to be avoided by all good Christians.

This, and much more to the same purpose, was writ by that Holy Man, just as he was about to suffer Martyrdom.  it would be endless indeed to transcribe the dismal Accounts, which both he and the other Fathers give of this Matter.  They call it the greatest Rebellion against God, a Sin of the highest Nature, and which will subject Men to the heaviest Punishment :  They tell us, that the Crime of those who associated themselves to Corah, Dathan and Abiram, and of Nadab and Abihu, does not equal it ;  and they particularly answer all the Excuses which are made by our Modern Dissenters, such as their holding the same Faith, using the same Form of Baptism, and agreeing in all the Essentials of Christianity :  They take Notice of the Pleas of better Edification, a purer Way of Worship, &c.  and largely show the Unrea­sonableness of them all *.  If therefore the Sentiments of those Excellent Men, who shed their Blood for the Cause of God, be true,  ( and certainly we have no Reason to disbelieve them )  who, that has any Regard to God or his Soul, would ever join himself to any other Communion than that of the Establish’d Church, where he is in a safe Way to Salvation, the Dissenters themselves being Judges ? Who would forsake the Means of Grace, and thereby forfeit the Hope of Glory ?

IV. From what has been said, it is natural to infer, that the Maintaining the Divine Right of Episcopacy, is a Point of the greatest Consequence, not only to the Well-being, but even Being of the Christian Church ;  since without it, all valid Ordination ceases ;  and then the Promises and Blessings of the Gospel become very uncertain to us, and  ( for all we know )  wholly void, and of no Effect.  Unless  ( says St. Chrysostom * ) , we are assured of the Validity of our Orders, all that we do signifies nothing.  We ought therefore  ( as he goes on )  to contend as earnestly for a valid Ordination, as we do for the Faith itself.  For  ( says he )  if Persons intrude into the Sacred Office, and take upon them to Ordain without a Commission, this naturally destroys Altar, Church and Priesthood.  And then what will become of Christianity itself ?  This Doctrine may perhaps sound harsh in some Men’s Ears, and be called Want of Charity, or by some other invidious Name ;  but surely, to adhere to the Institutions of Christianity, and not to Complement away the Truths of the Gospel, can never justly be term’d a breach of that or any other Christian Virtue.  For tho’ Lukewarmness may in an Age of Liberty and Licentiousness pass for Moderation, and Indifferency in Religion for a Gospel-Temper, yet transposing of Names will never alter Nature of Things.  † To contend earnestly for the Faith, and to be zealously affected for a Good Cause, and to vindicate the Doctrines and Usages of our excellently reform’d church upon all proper Occasions, will never be accounted by our Saviour  ( the best and most impartial Judge )  inconsistent with true Charity and Moderation, but rather great and shining Instances of both.  And as for Us of the Clergy, whose Business it is to interpret the Scriptures, and truly to represent the Mind of God, what a Load of Guilt shall we heap upon ourselves, if we call Evil Good, or Good Evil ?  If we handle the Word of God so deceitfully, as to soothe Men in their Errours, and prostitute our Opinions and Practices to the Humours of the Age, or to any other Temporal Consideration ?  It therefore highly concerns Us, and all Others, especially those who are of Character and Figure in the World, and whose Example is of a large Influence, to be well establish’d in the Principles of Religion ;  that so we may be true to the Church ourselves, and engage others to be so too ‡.

There are several other useful Inferences, which naturally follow from the foregoing Discourse ;  but I have trespassed on your Patience too much already, and therefore shall comprize them all in that extensive Inference of St. Paul, which equally concerns all Orders and Degrees of Men whatsoever ;  1 Cor. 15. 58. Wherefore, my Beloved Brethren, be ye steadfast, unmovable, always ;  abounding in the Work of the Lord ;  for as much as ye know, that your Labour is not in vain in the Lord.

Now to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, three Persons and one God, be ascrib’d, as is most due, all Honour, Praise, Might, Majesty, and Dominion, now and for ever.

Amen.