A Christian Directory, Part 3: Christian Ecclesiastics

And here to lenify the minds of Ithacian prelates towards those that seek their own edification, in such a case as this, or that refuse unworthy pastors of their imposing, I will entreat them to censure those near them no more sharply than they do the persons in these following instances. Yea, if a separatist go too far, use him no more uncharitably, than you would do these men.

(1.) Gildas Brit. is called Sapiens, and our eldest writer; and yet he calleth the multitude of the lewd British clergy whom he reprehendeth in his "Acris Correptio," traitors and no priests; and concludeth seriously, that he that calleth them priests, is not eximius christianus, any excellent christian. Yet those few that were pious he excepteth and commendeth. Shall he account them no priests, for their sinfulness, and will you force others, not only to call them priests, but to commit their souls to such men's conduct? when Christ hath said, "If the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the ditch?" and Paul, "Take heed unto thyself and unto thy doctrine; for in so doing, thou shalt both save thyself and them that hear thee?"241

The second is our second (and first English) historian, Beda, and in him the famous Johannes Episc. Hagulstadensis Eccles. who, as he reporteth, wrought very great miracles, as Eccles. Hist. lib. v. cap. 2-5, is to be read. This man had one Herebaldus in his clergy, after an abbot; who himself told Beda as followeth: – That this Johannes Ep. cured him miraculously of a perilous hurt, taken by disobedient horsemanship; and when he recovered, he asked him, whether he were sure that he was baptized? who answered, That he knew it past doubt, and named the presbyter that baptized him. The bishop answered him, If thou wast baptized by that priest, thou wast not rightly baptized: for I know him, and that when he was ordained presbyter, he was so dull of wit, that he could not learn the ministry of catechising and baptizing. Wherefore I commanded him altogether to give over the presumption of this ministry, which he could not altogether fulfil. And having thus said, he himself took care to catechise me the same hour; and – being cured —vitali etiam unda perfusus sum, I was baptized.

I commend not this example of re-baptizing, the rather because it seems the priest was not deposed till after he had baptized Herebaldus: but if he went so far as to re-baptize, and account the baptism a nullity, which was done by an unable, insufficient presbyter, though rightly ordained, judge but as favourably of men that avoid such presbyters in our age.

The third instance shall be that of Cyprian, and all the worthy bishops in the councils of Carthage in his time, who re-baptized those baptized by heretics. And consider withal that in those times many were called heretics whom we call but schismatics, that drew disciples after them into separated bodies and parties, speaking perverse things, though not contrary to the very essentials of religion, Acts xx. 30. I justify not their opinion: but if so many holy bishops counted the very baptism of such a nullity, be not too severe and censorious against those that go not at all so far from an insufficient, or ungodly, or grossly scandalous man, for the mere preservation of their own souls.

To these I will add the saying of one of the honester sort of Jesuits, Acosta; and in him of an ancienter than he: lib. iv. c. 1. p. 354. de reb. Indic. He extolleth the words of Dionysius Epist. viii. ad Demoph. which are, Si igitur quæ illuminat sacerdotum est sancta distinctio, proculdubio ille a sacerdotali ordine et virtute omnino prolapsus est, qui illuminans non est, multoque sane magis qui neque illuminatus est. Atque mihi quidem videtur audax nimium hujusmodi est, si sacerdotalia munia sibi assumit; neque metuit, neque veretur ea quæ sunt divina præter meritum persequi; putatque ea latere Deum, quorum sibi ipse conscius sit; et se Deum fallere existimat, quem falso nomine appellat patrem; audetque scelestas blasphemias suas (neque enim preces dixerim) sacris aris inferre; easque super signa illa divina, ad Christi similitudinem dicere. Non est iste sacerdos; non est; sed infestus, atrox, dolosus, illusor sui, et lupus in dominicam gregem ovina pelle armatus. His plura aut majora de evangelici ministerii et culmine et præcipitio qui expectat, cuique ad resipiscendum non ista sufficiunt, infatuatum se juxta Domini sententiam, et nullo unquam sale saliri posse demonstrat. I will not English it, lest those take encouragement by it who are bent to the other extreme.

7. Yet it will be a great offence, if any censorious, self-conceited person shall on this pretence set up his judgment of men's parts, to the contempt of authority, or to the vilifying of worthy men; and especially if he thereby make a stir and schism in the church, instead of seeking his own edification.

8. Yea, if a minister be weaker, yea, and colder and worse than another, yet if his ministry be competently fitted to edification, he that cannot leave him and go to a better, without apparent hurt to the church, and the souls of others, by division, or exasperating rulers, or breaking family order, or violating relative duties, must take himself to be at present denied the greater helps that others have, and may trust God in the use of those weaker means, to accept and bless him; because he is in the station where he hath set him. This case therefore must be resolved by a prudent comparing of the good or hurt which is like to follow, and of the accidents or circumstances whence that must be discerned.

Quest. X. What if the magistrate command the people to receive one pastor, and the bishops or ordainers another, which of them must be obeyed?

1. The magistrate, and not the bishop or people, (unless under him,) hath the power and disposal of the circumstantials or accidents of the church; I mean of the temple, the pulpit, the tithes, &c.242 And he is to determine what ministers are fit either for his own countenance or toleration, and what not. In these therefore he is to be obeyed before the bishops or others.

2. If a pope or prelate of a foreign church, or any that hath no lawful jurisdiction or government over the church that wanteth a pastor, shall command them to receive one, their command is null, and to be contemned.

3. Neither magistrate nor bishop, as is said, may deny the church or people any liberty which God in nature, or Christ in the gospel, hath settled on them, as to the reception of their proper pastors.

4. No bishop, but only the magistrate, can compel by the sword the obedience of his commands.

5. If one of them command the reception of a worthy person, and the other of an intolerable one, the former must prevail, because of obedience to Christ, and care of our souls.

6. But if the persons be equal, or both fit, the magistrate is to be obeyed, if he be peremptory in his commands, and decide the case in order to the peace or protection of the church; both because it is a lawful thing, and because else he will permit no other.

7. And the rather because the magistrate's power is more past controversy, than, whether any bishop, pastor, or synod, can any further than by counsel and persuasion, oblige the people to receive a pastor.

Quest. XI. Whether an uninterrupted succession either of right ordination or of conveyance by jurisdiction, be necessary to the being of the ministry, or of a true church?

The papists have hitherto insisted on the necessity of successive right ordination; but Voetius de desperata Causa Papatus hath in this so handled them, and confuted Jansenius, as hath indeed showed the desperateness of that cause: and they perceive that the papacy itself cannot be upheld by that way; and therefore Johnson, alias Terret, in his rejoinder against me, now concludeth, that it is not for want of a successive consecration that they condemn the church of England, but for want of true jurisdiction, because other bishops had title to the places whilst they were put in; and that successive consecration (which we take to include ordination) is not necessary to the being of ministry or church. And it is most certain to any man acquainted in church history, that their popes have had a succession of neither. Their way of election hath been frequently changed, sometimes being by the people, sometimes by the clergy, sometimes by the emperors, and lastly by the cardinals alone. Ordination they have sometimes wanted, and a layman been chosen; and oft the ordination hath been by such as had no power according to their own laws. And frequent intercisions have been made, sometimes by many years' vacancy, when they had no church (and so there was none on earth, if the pope be the constitutive head) for want of a pope: sometimes by long schisms, when of two or three popes, no one could be known to have more right than another, nor did they otherwise carry it, than by power at last: sometimes by the utter incapacity of the possessors, some being laymen, some heretics and infidels, so judged by councils at Rome, Constance, Basil; and Eugenius the fourth continued after he was so censured, and condemned, and deposed by the general council. I have proved all this at large elsewhere.

And he that will not be cheated with a bare sound of words, but will ask them, whether by a succession of jurisdiction, they mean efficient, conveying jurisdiction in the causers of his call, or received jurisdiction in the office received, will find that they do but hide their desperate cause in confusion and an insignificant noise. For they maintain that none on earth have an efficient jurisdiction in making popes. For the former pope doth not make his successor; and both electors, ordainers, and consecrators, yea, and the people receiving, they hold to be subjects of the pope when made, and therefore make him not by jurisdiction giving him the power. Therefore Johnson tells me, that Christ only, and not man, doth give the power, and they must needs hold that men have nothing to do but design the person recipient by election and reception, and to invest him ceremonially in the possession. So that no efficient jurisdiction is here used at all by man. And for received jurisdiction, 1. No one questioneth but when that office is received which is essentially governing, he that receiveth it receiveth a governing power, or else he did not receive the office. If the question be only, whether the office of a bishop be an office of jurisdiction, or contain essentially a governing power, they make no question of this themselves. So that the noise of successive jurisdiction is vanished into nothing. 2. And with them that deny any jurisdiction to belong to presbyters, this will be nothing as to their case, who have nothing but orders to receive.

They have nothing of sense left them to say but this, That though the efficient jurisdiction which maketh popes be only in Christ, because no men are their superiors, yet bishops and presbyters who have superiors, cannot receive their power but by an efficient power of man, which must come down by uninterrupted succession.

Answ. 1. And so if ever the papal office have an intercision, (as I have proved it hath had as to lawful popes,) the whole catholic church is nullified; and it is impossible to give it a new being, but by a new pope.

But the best is, that by their doctrine indeed they need not to plead for an uninterrupted succession either of popes, bishops, or presbyters, but that they think it a useful cheat to perplex all that are not their subjects. For if the papacy were extinct a hundred years, Christ is still alive; and seeing it is no matter ad esse who be the electors or consecraters, so it be but made known conveniently to the people, and men only elect and receive the person, and Christ only giveth the power, (by his stated law,) what hindereth after the longest extinction or intercision, but that somebody, or some sort of person, may choose a pope again, and so Christ make him pope? And thus the catholic church may die and live again by a new creation, many times over.

And when the pope hath a resurrection after the longest intercision, so may all the bishops and priests in the world, because a new pope can make new bishops, and new bishops can make new priests. And where then is there any show of necessity of an uninterrupted succession of any of them? All that will follow is, that the particular churches die till a resurrection; and so doth the whole church on earth every time the pope dieth, till another be made, if he be the constitutive head.

2. But as they say that Christ only efficiently giveth the power to the pope, so say we to the bishops or pastors of the church. For there is no act of Christ's collation to be proved, but the Scripture law or grant: and if that standing law give power to the pope, when men have but designed the person, the same law will do the same to bishops or pastors; for it establisheth their office in the same sort. Or rather in truth there is no word, that giveth power to any such officer as a universal head or pope, but the law for the pastoral office is uncontrovertible.

And what the Spanish bishops at Trent thought of the Divine right of the bishop's office, I need not mention.

I shall therefore thus truly resolve the question.

1. In all ordinations and elections, man doth but first choose the recipient person. 2. And ceremoniously and ministerially invest him in the possession when God hath given him the power; but the efficient collation or grant of the power is done only by Christ, by the instrumentality of his law or institution. As when the king by a charter saith, Whoever the city shall choose, shall be their mayor, and have such and such power, and be invested in it by the recorder or steward: here the person elected receiveth all his power from the king by his charter, (which is a standing efficient, conveying it to the capable chosen person,) and not from the choosers or recorder; only the last is as a servant to deliver possession. So is it in this case.

2. The regular way of entrance appointed by Christ to make a person capable, is the said election and ordination. And for order sake where that may be had, the unordained are not to be received as pastors.

3. If any get possession, by false, pretended ordination or mission, and be received by the church. I have before told you that he is a pastor as to the church's use and benefit, though not to his own. And so the church is not extinct by every fraudulent usurpation or mistake, and so not by want of a true ordination or mission.

4. If the way of regular ordination fail, God may otherwise (by the church's necessity, and the notorious aptitude of the person) notify his will to the church, what person they shall receive; (as if a layman were cast on the Indian shore and converted thousands, who could have no ordination;) and upon the people's reception or consent, that man will be a true pastor.

And seeing the papists in the conclusion (as Johnson ubi supra) are fain to cast all their cause on the church's reception of the pope, they cannot deny reasonably but ad esse the church's reception may serve also for another officer; and indeed much better than for a pope. For, 1. The universal church is so great, that no man can know when the greater part receiveth him, and when not, except in some notorious declarations. 2. And it is now known, that the far greater part of the universal church (the Greeks, Armenians, Abassines, Coptics, protestants, &c.) do not receive the Roman head. 3. And when one part of Europe received one pope, and another part another pope, for above forty years together, who could tell which of the parties was to be accounted the church? It was not then known, and is not known yet to this day; and no papist can prove it, who affirmeth it.

As a church, e. g. Constantinople, may be gathered, or oriri de novo where there is none before, so may it be restored where it is extinct. And possibly a layman (as Frumentius and Edesius in the Indies) may be the instrument of men's conversion. And if so, they may by consent become their pastors, when regular ordination cannot be had.

I have said more of this in my "Disputations of Church Government," disp. ii. The truth is, the pretence of a necessity of uninterrupted, successive ordination, mission, or jurisdictional collation ad esse, to the being of ministry or church, is but a cheat of men that have an interest of their own which requireth such a plea, when they may easily know, that it would overthrow themselves.

Quest. XII. Whether there be, or ever was, such a thing in the world, as one catholic church, constituted by any head besides or under Christ?

The greatest and first controversy between us and the papists, is not what man or politic person is the head of the whole visible church; but, whether there be any such head at all, either personal, or collective, monarchical, aristocratical, or democratical under Christ, of his appointment or allowance? or any such thing as a catholic church so headed or constituted? Which they affirm and we deny. That neither pope nor general council is such a head, I have proved so fully in my "Key for Catholics" and other books, that I will not here stay to make repetition of it. That the pope is no such head, we may take for granted, 1. Because they bring no proof of it, whatever they vainly pretend. 2. Because our divines have copiously disproved it, to whom I refer you. 3. Because the universal church never received such a head, as I have proved against Johnson. 4. And whether it be the pope, their bishop of Chalcedon, ubi supra, et Sancta Clara, "System. Fid." say is not de fide.

That a council is no such head I have largely proved as aforesaid, part ii. "Key for Catholics." And, 1. The use of it being but for concord proveth it. 2. Most papists confess it. 3. Else there should be seldom any church in the world for want of a head, yea, never any.

For I have proved there and to Johnson, that there never was a true general council of the universal church; but only imperial councils of the churches under one emperor's power, and those that having been under it, had been used to such councils; and that it is not a thing ever to be attempted or expected, as being unlawful and morally impossible.243

Quest. XIII. Whether there be such a thing as a visible catholic church? And what it is?

The ancients differently used the terms, a catholic church, and, the catholic church. By the first they meant any particular church which was part of the universal; by the second they meant the universal church itself.244 And this is it that we now mean. And I answer affirmatively, there is a visible universal church, not only as a community, or as a kingdom distinct from the king, but as a political society.

2. This church is the universality of baptized visible christians headed by Jesus Christ himself.245

There is this, and there is no other upon earth. The papists say, that this is no visible church because the Head is not visible.

I answer, 1. It is not necessary that he be seen, but visible: and is not Christ a visible person?

2. This church consisteth of two parts, the triumphant part in glory, and the militant part; and Christ is not only visible but seen by the triumphant part: as the king is not seen by the ten-thousandth part of his kingdoms, but by his courtiers and those about him, and yet he is king of all.

3. Christ was seen on earth for above thirty years; and the kingdom may be called visible, in that the King was once visible on earth, and is now visible in heaven: as if the king would show himself to his people but one year together in all his life.

4. It ill becometh the papists of any men, to say that Christ is not visible, who make him, see him, taste him, handle him, eat him, drink him, digest him in every church, in every mass throughout the year, and throughout the world; and this not as divided, but as whole Christ.

Object. But this is not quatenus regent.

Answ. If you see him that is regent, and see his laws and gospel which are his governing instruments, together with his ministers who are his officers, it is enough to denominate his kingdom visible.

5. The church might be fitly denominated visible secundum quid, if Christ himself were invisible; because the politic body is visible, the dispersed officers, assemblies, and laws are visible. But sure all these together may well serve for the denomination.

Quest. XIV. What is it that maketh a visible member of the universal church? And who are to be accounted such?

1. Baptism maketh a visible member of the universal church; and the baptized (as to entrance, unless they go out again) are to be accounted such.246

2. By baptism we mean, open devotion or dedication to God by the baptismal covenant, in which the adult for themselves, and parents for their infants, do profess consent to the covenant of grace; which includeth a belief of all the essential articles of the faith, and a resolution for sincere obedience; and a consent to the relations between God and us, viz. that he be our reconciled Father, our Saviour, and our Sanctifier.

3. The continuance of this consent is necessary to the continuance of our visible membership.

4. He that through ignorance, or incapacity for want of water, or a minister, is not baptized, and yet is solemnly or notoriously dedicated and devoted to God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in the same covenant, though without the outward sign, and professeth openly the same religion, is a visible christian, though not by a complete and regular visibility; as a soldier not listed nor taking his colours, or a marriage not regularly solemnized, &c.

5. He that forsaketh his covenant by apostasy, or is totally and duly excommunicated, ceaseth to be a visible member of the church.

Quest. XV. Whether besides the profession of christianity, either testimony or evidence of conversion, or practical godliness, be necessary to prove a man a member of the universal visible church?

1. As the Mediator is the way to the Father, sent to recover us to God, so christianity includeth godliness; and he professeth not christianity, who professeth not godliness.247

2. He that professeth the baptismal covenant, professeth christianity, and godliness, and true conversion. And therefore cannot be rejected for want of a profession of conversion or godliness.

3. But he that is justly suspected not to understand his own profession, but to speak general words, without the sense, may and ought to be examined by him that is to baptize him; and therefore though the apostles among the Jews who had been bred up among the oracles of God, did justly presume of so much understanding, as that they baptized men the same day that they professed to believe in Christ; yet when they baptized converted gentiles, we have reason to think, that they first received a particular account of their converts, that they understood the three essential articles of the covenant.248 1. Because the creed is fitted to that use, and hath been ever used thereunto by the churches, as by tradition from the apostles' practice. 2. Because the church in all ages, as far as church history leadeth us upward, hath used catechising before baptizing; yea, and to keep men as catechumens some time for preparation. 3. Because common experience telleth us, that multitudes can say the creed that understand it not.

If any yet urge the apostles' example, I will grant that it obligeth us when the case is the like (and I will not fly to any conceit of their heart-searching, or discerning men's sincerity). When you bring us to a people that before were the visible church of God, and were all their lifetime trained up in the knowledge of God, of sin, of duty, of the promised Messiah, according to all the law and prophets, and want nothing, but to know the Son and the Holy Ghost, that this Jesus is the Christ, who will reconcile us to God, and give us the sanctifying Spirit, then we will also baptize men the same day that they profess to believe in Jesus Christ, and in the Father as reconciled by him, and the Holy Ghost as given by him. But if we have those to deal with who know not God, or sin, or misery, or Scripture prophecies, no nor natural verities, we know no proof that the apostles so hastily baptized such.

Of this I have largely spoken in my "Treatise of Confirmation."

4. It is not necessary to a man's baptism and first church membership, that he give any testimony of an antecedent godly life; because it is repentance and future obedience professed that is his title; and we must not keep men from covenanting, till we first see whether they will keep the covenant which they are to make. For covenanting goeth before covenant keeping: and it is any, the most impious sinner, who repenteth, that is to be washed and justified as soon as he becometh a believer.