the Catholick Bishops their Predeceffors. But fince it would be highly abfurd to grant this (because Perfons cut off by Herely and Excommunication from the Church founded by the Apostles cannot poffibly be call'd their true Succeffors) 'tis manifeft the English Proteftant Clergy will never prove their Succeffion to be Apoftolical, unlefs they can convince us that they are Members of the fame Church and Communion with the Catholick Bishops that went before them, any more than the Arian and Donatist Bishops formerly were. Hence it plainly follows, that if fome Expedient be not found out to fill up a Gap of 900 Years, in all which Space of Time there were no Proteftant Bishops or Parfons in whole Great Britain, they may as well pretend to derive their Succeffion from Aaron as from the Apofties.

A

But to return back to Mr. Lefley, he tells us 2dly that the Diffenters thrust themselves as Guides upon the Road towards Heaven upon their own Heads NOT ABOVE HUNDRED AND FORTY YEARS AGO. And pray how many more Years ago is it, that the Bishops and Parfons of the Reform'd Church of England appear'd first as Guides upon the Road towards Heaven? If Mr. Lefly be unwilling to fatisfy his Proteftant Brethren in a Point of that importance, I fhall do it for him. The pretended Reformation of England began about the Year 1533. and Queen Elizabeth came not to the Crown till An. 1558. So that it was not finifh'd till fome Years after the Middle of that Century. Now if we count back 140 Years from the Time that Mr. Lesly wrote his Book of private Judgement and Authority, we may by a very eafy Computation difcover the exact Epocha of Time, when his Proteftant Bishops and Parfons appear'd firft as Guides upon the Road towards Heaven: And the Difference of Age between his Church, and that of the Diffenters will be found to be fo inconfiderable, as no Ways deferved his notice. We are likewife fure the Proteftant Guides of the Church of England were never fent or fought for by any of the Popish Bishops their Predeceffors; and fo they likewife fympathize in this with the Diffenters, that they thrust themselves as Guides upon the Road of their own Heads unless they

will claim an extraordinary Miffion immediately from God; for which if they can fhew the Teftimony of Miracles, as the Apostles did, we shall be ready to believe them.

Laftly Mr. Lefly tells us, that the Diffenters thruft themselves as Guides upon the Road in utter Contempt and Oppofition to all the Guides of God's Appointment from the Day's of the Apostles. It feems then that there were Guides of God's Appointment from the very Time of the Apoftles till the pretended Reformation; and if they were of God's Appointment, they could not be Falfe Guides. But of what Religion were thefe Guides of God's Appointment? Were they Proteftants or Papifts? They could not be Proteftants before there were any Reform'd Churches in Being: 'tis plain then they were all Papifts before the Reformation; at least in the Ifland of Great Britain, where no Religion but Popery was ever profefs'd for 900 Years together till the Change of it introduced by Henry VIII. carried on by Edward VI. and finifh'd by Queen Elizabeth. It was therefore effected in utter Contempt and Oppofition to all the Bishops and Paftors, who had been the Guides of God's Appointment for nine hundred Years together.

And how then can Mr. Lefly reproach the Diffenters with this unwarrantable Proceeding, fince it is plain they only follow'd the Example his Church had set them? Nay may we not legally conclude against him as he do's against the Diffenters, that his Church has no Authority at all either to preach the Word or administer the holy Sacraments which God has inftituted, or to blefs in his Name? And fo according to his own Principle fhe is no Part of the true Church of Christ as being deftitute of a lawful Miffion, and guilty of having ufurped the facred Miniftry without Commiffion or Succeffion.

But let that be at it will, it is manifeft both from Scripture and Tradition, that there can be no lawful Miniftry without a lawful Miffion: which is precifely the Principle I have establish'd: Nor do I know Proteftant fo unreafonable as to deny it, tho' they all differ from us in the Application of it. On the con

any

trary

;

trary all the Reform'd Churches labour with their utmost Force to prove the Legality of their Miflion, fome one Way fome another and it fhall now be my Bufinefs to prove that it is impofiible for any of them to make good their Title: Which if I do, every Proteftant, whatever Reform'd Church he is a Member of, must be fenfible that he is out of the Way of Salvation: Becaufe Salvation cannot be attain'd to in a Church, in which there is no lawful Adminiftration of the Sacraments, or under the Conduct of Guides, who have not enter'd into the Sheepfold by the Door, and are ftigmatized by Chrift himfelf with the infamous Character of Thieves and Robbers.

AR T. II.

The Disagreement amongst Proteftants concerning their Miffion.

Ifagreement and Contradictions in a Dispute about a Title, which for it's importance ought to be clear and uncontested, is of itself a strong Proof of it's Nullity. There is not, for Example, a Bifhop or inferiour Paftor in the Communion of the Church of Rome but can prove the Validity of his Title to the facred Miniftry as clearly as an Officer in the Army can fhew his Commiffion for the refpective Poft he is in. And it cannot be doubted but the Reform'd Churches would prove theirs with the fame uncontefted Evidence, and there would be the fame Harmony amongit them in this Point, as there is amongst Roman Catholicks, if their Title to the Miniftry were grounded upon a folid Foundation like that of the Church of Rome: Whereas on the contrary nothing perplexes Proteftants more than the Queftion Tertullian put to the Hereticks of his Time, who are yon? Whence did you. come? That is, when we prefs them to give an Ac

count

count of their Miffion or Vocation to the Ministry of the Gospel. Because the first Reformers having broke off from the Communion of the whole World (as both Luther and Calvin atteft in their Writings) it is hard to conceive what Way a lawful Miffon could poffibly be convey'd to them: And if the first Reformers had no lawful Miffion, their Succeffors can have none.

Here then they all find themselves involved in an* inextricable Labyrinth of Difficulties what Way foeever they turn themselves, and they vary in their Opinions about it just according as they are prefs'd on this or that Side by the Arguments of their Adverfaries. They who chiefly confider the Difficulty of maintaining their Pretentions to an ordinary Miffion fly for Sanctuary to an extraordinary one: And they who find themselves driven out of this Entrenchment endeavour to make the best shift they can by having Recourse to an ordinary one.

Luther and Calvin with fome others, as they were the Apoftles of the Reformation, fo we find them at the Head of that Party, which stood up for an extraordinary Miffion. For they confider'd that they had fet up a new Gospel, a new Church Government, a new Ministry, a new Communion, and had feparated themfelves from all Chriftian Societies in the World. They judg'd it therefore the best and safest Courfe they could take never to trouble their Heads with proving their Ordinary Miffion, which they plainly faw was a defencelefs Caufe; and fo refolved to fet a good bold Face upon the Matter, and challenge to themselves an immediate Miffion to reform the Church not from Men, but from God himself. But leaft thofe, who may be fenfible of the Folly and Extravagance of this Pretenfion should fufpect the Truth of it, and Imagine I pretend to fight against my own Shadow, I fhall prove it with the utmost Evidence from their own Writings.

First Martin Luther fpeaks thus of himself. I am fure (fays he) I have my Dorine from Heaven. Tom. 2. Fol. 333. And again, I was THE FIRST TO WHOM GOD VOUCHSAFED TO REVEAL the Things which have been

preach'd

NOT

preach'd to you. Tom. 7. Fol. 274. and Tom. 2. Fol.. 305. he writes thus. Since now I am certain I preach the Word of God, it is not fit I fhould want a Title for the Recommending of this Word and Work of the Miniftry, TO WHICH I AM CALL'D BY GOD: WHICH I HAVE RECEIVED OF MEN, NOR BY MEN, BUT BY THE GIFT OF GOD AND REVELATION OF JESUS-CHRIT. This is a plain and pofitive Averring that he had not his Doctrine by Succeffion from any that went before him, nor by Confequence from the Apostolical Church, which furely was before him: And this alone fuffices to condemn him and his Doctrine, unless he can prove effectually that he had it immediately from Heaven.

Calvin is full as plain upon the matter Epif. 190. to the King of Poland, where he writes thus. Since by the Pope's Tyranny the Succeffion has been interrupted, the Church could not be reestablish'd without a NEW MINISTRY

So that the Commiffion our Saviour gave us to affemble the Churches was WHOLLY EXTRAORDINARY. And fince the Supporters of true Piety appear'd fuddenly in an EXTRAORDINARY Manner, their Vocation is not to be examined by the COMMON RULES, but they were raised IMMEDIATELY BY GOD, to the End that having establish'd the Churches, they foould ordain other Paftors to fucceed them.

In another Work entituled the true method of Reforming the Church, he writes in the following Manner. I bave already faid that an ordinary Vocation is neceffary when the State of the Church is uncorrupted, or at leaft tolerable. But will this tie up the Hand of God, and hinder him from RAISING IN AN EXTRAORDINARY MANNER Prophets and other Minifters to re-establist his Church, when it is utterly ruined? Then he proceeds to apply this to the firft Reformers as Men raifed by God in an extraordinary

Manner.

Theodorus Beza, who fucceeded Calvin in the Government of the Church of Geneva, maintain'd the fame in his Conference with the Cardinal of Lorain at Poiffy, where he tells his Adverfary, that tho' fome of the first Reformers might have infifted upon their Miffion as derived from the Church of Rome, yet they voluntarily renounced their Ordination as the Mark of the Beast,

and