Page images
PDF
EPUB

too high on the Church fide, those who wrote of the other fide, thought it impoffible to carry Matters too high that way. Hereupon, when these Things were debated here in the Reign of King Henry VIII. fome ftrange and particular Notions were then firft advanced; of which an Account is given us by Bishop Burnet, in the first Volume (1) of his Hiftory of the Reformation.

SIV. Here the Queftion was put in this Manner, Whether the Apostles lacking a higher Power, as in not having a Chriftian King among them, made Bishops by that Neceffity, or by Authority given by God? Archbishop Cranmer gave a long Anfwer to this, which would be tedious to recite here. But the Substance of it is, That all Bishops, Parfons, Vicars, and fuch other. Priests, are to be appointed to their feveral Offices by the Prince, in fuch Manner as Civil Officers are, and that they have no Power or Authority in Spiritual Matters, but what they receive from the Prince: That the Apofles and Bishops of the Primitive Church exercised this Power only through Neceffity, as being chofen by the People for that Purpoje, because there was then no Chriftian Prince. An Opinion for which he could not produce the leaft Authority from Scripture; nor did he pretend to give any. But he knew it would be very agreeable to the Humour of that arbitrary Prince, whofe Pleafure feems generally to have had a great Influence on the Principles of this Prelate. But I find no other Bishop or Divine came entirely up to this Opinion, except the Bishop of S. David's, who declared, That because they lacked a Chriftian Prince, by that Neceffity they ordained other Bishops. Others, who could not come up to this Opinion entirely, when they had declared That the Apofties made

(1) Collection of Records, Book III. Num. 21. Quest. 9.

[blocks in formation]

Bishops and Priests by Authority given unto them of Chrift; yet, to mitigate the Matter, put in a Suppofition of their own, without pretending any other Ground for it, That they luppoled they ought to have asked Licence of their Chriftian Governors, if then there bad been any. But others plainly faid, That the Apofles made Priests by their own Power given them by God, and that they had no need of any other Power. And if the Power was given them by God,as all the rest alfo confefs'd, except the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of S. David's, they could have no need of any other Power: For certainly no Human Power can be needful to confirm or corroborate a Power given by God.

SV. The next Question but one is put in thefe Words, Whether a Bishop hath Authority to make a Prieft "by Scripture, or no? And whether any other but only a Bishop may make a Prieft? Archbishop Cranmer anfwers as before, A Bishop may make a Prieft by the Scripture, and fo may Princes and Governors alfo, and that by the Authority of God committed to them, and the Peaple alfo by their Election: For as we read, That Bishops have done it, and the People, before Chriftian Princes were, did commonly elect their Bishops and Priests. It feems, this great Man could not distinguish between Nominating or Electing, and Making or Ordaining à Bishop or Priest. But, fure, every Body else must fee the Difference. A General of an Army, for Inftance, has a Friend whom he is willing to oblige in any Requeft, or whom perhaps for fome particular Reafons he dares not difoblige; this Perfon recommends one to him to be made an Officer in the Army, and accordingly the General gives that Perfon a Commiffion; will any one fay that it was the Recommendation or Nomination made that Perfon an Officer, and not the Commiffion? Whereas had he been recommended or nominated ten thousand times over,

yep

yet without the General's Commiffion he could have had no Command in the Army. So alfo Princes have generally had fuch an Influence over the Bishops that have been their Subjects, that they have not dared to refuse to confecrate or ordain fuch as they have nominated to them; but still it was not the Nomination made thofe Perfons Priests or Bishops, but the Confecration or Ordination. And where the Bishops have refused the Perfon fo nominated, which has fometimes happen'd, the Nomination has been of no Service to him; it has been found that could not make him either Bishop or Priest. But this Learned Archbishop (for fo undoubtedly he was, however in this and many other Inftances his Judgment feems to have been byaffed by his King) pretends it may be proved by Scripture, that Princes and Governors may make a Prieft, whereas there is not an Inftance of a Prince or Governor in all the Scripture, that did make a Priest,except Jeroboam the Son of Nebat; and this was fo far from being approved or allowed by God, that it is exprefly recorded, (m) that this Thing became Sin unto the House of Jeroboam, even to cut it off, and deftroy it from off the Face of the Earth. He adds, the People alfo may do it by their Election. And there is indeed one Inftance (n) of the People's electing feven Men to be made Deacons or Minifters. But it is plain, that it was not the People's Election, but the Apostles Appointment and Ordination which made thofe Men Minifters. The Apostles Words are, Look ye out feven Men of honeft Report, full of the Holy Ghoft and Wifdom. And what follows? Do they fay, when you have chofen thefe Men, they will, by vertue of this Election, have Authority to execute the Office to which they are defigned? No fuch Thing. But look ye out Men, not whom ye, but whom

(m) 1 King. xiii. 34.

(n) 4. vi,

WE may appoint over this Bufinefs. And accordingly they chofe feven according to the Apoftles Direction, whom they fet before the Apoftles: And when they had prayed, they, the Apostles, laid their Hands on them. So that here is a plain Difference between Choofing or Nominating, and Making or Ordaining a Minifter. The Apoftles gaye the People Leave to nominate or choose fit Perfons to be Minifters or Deacons, but referved the Making, Appointing, or Ordaining them to that Office entirely to themselves.. And it was plainly not the Election, but the Ordination,or Appointment by Impofition of Hands, that made them Deacons. Had they been only elected. by the People, and not appointed or ordained by the Apostles, they had been no Minifters of the Church. And Archbishop Cranmer himself was inconfiftent with the Opinion which he gave in this Anfwer; for in another Anfwer of his to this fame Question given us by (o) Strype, he fays, We read not, that any other, not being a Bishop, hath fince the Beginning of Chrift's Church ordained a Prieft. However, the Bishop of S. David's thought fit to fay upon this Occafion, That Bishops have no Authority to make Priests, without they be authorized of the Chriftian Prince. But in this he was fingular; for the others, all of them, did fay, that Bishops be authorized of God to make Priefs. Some of them indeed did add, That they cannot use this Authority, without their Chriftian Prince does permit them; but the Majority did not give their Opinion with that Limitation.

SVI. Now this being the moft material Point with relation to the Independency of the Church upor the State, viz. Whether Bishops, who are the chief Governors of the Church, derive their Authority from God

(0) Memor, of Archbifpop Cranmer, Appendix, Num,xxvjii, § xi,

[ocr errors]

er from the Chriftian Prince? I could not but think it proper to be very particular in this Matter. And the Reign of King Henry VIII. being, I am perfuaded, the first time this was made a Question, I judged it convenient to give an Account how the Queftion was then propofed, and what Answers were made to it. But as the Anfwers were then various, and contrary to one another, fo have the Opinions been ever fince: That is, there has ever fince been a Party, who have efpoufed the Opinions then given by Archbishop Cranmer and Bishop Barlow, (though it is evident Cranmer did not always hold that Opinion) who, from Thomas Eraftus, a Dutch Phyfician, (who I think was the first that wrote a Book on pur. pofe to pretend to prove it) have been called Eratians: Who has fince been followed by Prynne and Hobbs, and the Author of the Book falfly called The Rights of the Chriftian Church, and many others. But it is not my Purpose at this time to examine the Arguments thefe Men, or any of their Followers, have brought to prove their Qpinion in this Cafe: I think it will be fufficient to fhew, that it is directly contrary to the Scriptures; and then every one that believes the Scriptures, muft fee, that whatever Arguments they have, or can produce, muit be falfe and groundless.

§ VII. The Scriptures teach us, (p) that Chrift is the Head of the Body, the Church. Confequently, whoever has any Power in that Body, muft derive it from him. For no Man can challenge a Power in a Body, Society, or Corporation of Men, but he who derives it from the Head of that Corporation. And Christ tells us, (g) that all Power is given unto him both in Heaven and in Earth; that is, all Spiritual

(p) Cal. i. 18.

(q) Matth. xxviii. 18. Power,

« PreviousContinue »