Ufurpers of the facred Miniftry, and, in a Word, Thieves and Robbers.

But the Example of Chrift himself is moft certainly of the greatest Weight to convince us that no man can legally enter upon the facred Miniftry, except he be fent according to the Order establish'd by God. For if the Son of God took not upon him the Preaching of the Gofpel but as fent by his eternal Father, what Sacrilegious Arrogance and Prefumption must it then be in Men to affume to themfelves this facred Function without a Commiffion from any lawful Authority? Our Saviour therefore to render us fenfible of the neceffity of a true Miffion for every Minifter of the Gofpel, judged it requifite upon feveral Occa fions to prove his own Miffion to the Jews. I fhall omit a great many Paffages for Brevity's Sake, and only quote a few from St. John, who writes thus. Now about the Midst of the Feast Jesus went up into the Temple and taught: And the Jews marvell'd, faying, how knoweth this Man Letters having never learned? Jefus anfwer'd them and faid, MY DOCTRINE IS NOT MINE, BUT HIS THAT SENT ME. Ifany Man will do his Will, he will know of the Doctrine whether it be of God, or whether 1 Speak of my felf. He that fpeaketh of himself, feeketh his own Glory, bat be that feeketh his Glory that fent me, the fame is true, and no Unrighteousness is in him. John. 7. v. 14. 15, &c.

However the Jews perfifting ftill to question his Authority he answer'd them. I AM NOT COME OF MYSELF, but he that fent me is true, whom ye know not. But I know him, FOR I AM FROM HIM, AND HE HATH SENT ME V. 28. 29.

Again, the following Words are very remarkable: He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my Words, hath one that judgeth him. FOR I HAVE NOT SPOKEN OF MYSELF, BUT THE FATHER WHICH SENT ME, HÉ GAVE ME A COMMANDEMENT WHAT I SHOULD SAY, AND WHAT I SHOULD SPEAK: John 12., V 48, 49.

Here our Saviour declares pofitively, that he fpoke nothing but what he was commanded to fpeak by his Father. And this implies no lefs, than that if he had preach'd any Doctrine either contrary to, or bes

yond

yond the Commiffion he had received from his Father (which indeed the impeccability of his facred Perfon render'd impoffible) he would have preach'd without the Authority requifite for that Function.

However to render us ftill more fenfible of the Neceffity of an uncontefted Miffion, our Saviour would. prove his by a great Number of illuftrious Miracles, and more particularly by that, which for it's Circumftances appear'd more illuftrious than the reft. For tho' all the Miracles of his Life were to fhew from whom he came, as they did by the divine Power and Goodness which fhined in them; yet the raifing of Lazarus, and the lowd Prayer he made to his Father before it, were not only intended, but exprefly declared to be done for the Notifying and proving of that Miffion, from which alone all other true Miffions were to be derived afterwards to the End of the World. For St. John exprefly tells us, that when he was upon the Point of raifing Lazarus, he lift up his Eyes and faid, Father I thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I know that thou hearest me always: But because of the People which fand by, I faid it, THAT THEY MAY BELIEVE THAT THOU HAST SENT ME. John. II. v. 41, 42. 'Tis plain our Saviour here proves his Miffion from the miraculous Power given him to raise Lazarus, as being a divine and publick Teftimony of it, fince it was afk'd for that very End in the People's own Hearing, and no fooner afk'd but granted.

Thus did our Saviour take Care not only to affert but prove his Miffion, in Order to mark out clearly to his Church the facred Source, from whence the lawful Exercife of the Ecclefiaftical Miniftry muft indifpenfably flow, Chrift himself had his Miffion from God, who gave him all Power in Heaven and in Earth. Math. 28. v. 19. He communicated it to his Apostles. As my Father fent me, even fo 1 fend you. Joh. 20. v. 21. And again. Go ye therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them, &c. Math. 28. v. 19. The Apostles, as the Church encreased, ordain'd Bishops and Priests according to the Power they had received from Chrift, and affign'd to each of them the particular Churches

Churches they were to feed and govern. Thefe took Care to tranfmit the fame Power to their Succeffors, as thefe did likewife to theirs. And fo the facred Miniftry of governing and feeding the Flock of Chrift by preaching the Word and Adminiftring the Sacraments, has been handed down by an uninterrupted Succeffion from the Apoftles throughout all Ages to the present Time, and will be continued in the fame Manner to the End of the World according to St. Paul Eph. 4. V. 11. 12. 13.

For this Reafon Tertullian in his Book of Prefcripti ons C. 37. preffed the Hereticks of his Time with this Queftion: Qui eftis vos? Quando unde venistis? Who are you? When and whence did you come? Whence have you your Miffion? How can you prove that you have enter'd by the Door, and are not Thieves and Robbers ? The fame Tertullian C. 3. writes thus. Let them produce (fays he) the Origin of their Church,, let them give us a List of their Bishops, drawn down by Suc ceffion from the Beginning: So that their first Bishop had ein ther an Apostle, or an Apoftolical Man continuing to the End, in the Communion of the Apostles for his Predeceffor. In Effest the conftant Practice of the ancient Fathers to prove against Hereticks the Truth of the Doctrine. taught by the Catholick Church was by Shewing this uninterrupted Succeffion of Catholick Bishops and Paftors in the fame Communion from the Apoftles, and on the contrary to defy their Adverfaries to fhew any fuch Succeffion of Bifhops teaching the difcriminating Doctrine of their Sects.

St. Cyprian Epift. 76. fays of Novation, that he was not in the Church, nor could he be counted a Bishop (as to the Power of Jurifdiction) because defpifing apoftolical Tradition he came of himself, and fucceeded to no Body, to wit, in his own Communion.

A Succeffion of Bishops (fays St. Auftin contra Epift. Fund. C. 4.) defcending from the See of St. Peter to the prefent Epifcopacy holds me in the Catholick Church. And St. Optatus writes thus to the Donatifts. Since you pretend to, be the Church of God, fhew the Origine of your Bishops. For. if they had pretended to produce a Catalogue of Bi

shops

fhops defcending from the Apostles, they would have been anfwer'd that thofe were not Bifhops of the Donatift, but Catholick Church, and that therefore Donatus himself was the first Bishop of the Separate Church he had fet up, and could fhew no Succeffion of Bifhops that were before him of his Communion.

This fhews plainly, what the ancient Fathers thought of all Communions, that had feparated themfelves from the Catholick Church, and that they regarded them no otherwise than as Ufurpers of the Ecclefiaftical Ministry, as Invaders of the priestly Office, and in a Word as Societies deftitute of all Power and Authority of either Preaching the Word, or adminiftring the Sacraments: The Confequence whereof is that they were no Part of the true Church of Christ, from which the true Miniftry is wholly infeparable. Nay Mr. Lefly a Writer of the Church of England, well known, has the fame contemptible Opinion of all the diffenting Proteftant Churches, as the Fathers had of the heretical and fchifmatical Communions of their Times. For in his treatife of private Judgment and Authority, pag. 222. He writes thus. The Diffenters have no Commiffion or Succeffion to fhew: They bave thrust themfelves as Guides upon the Road towards Heaven upon their own Heads not above 140 Years ago, in utter Contempt and Oppofition to all the Guides of God's Appointment from the Days of the Apostles. Whence he justly concludes that they have no Authority at all either to preach the Word, or administer the holy Sacraments, which God has inftituted, or to blefs in his Name.

Here Mr. Lefly agrees exactly with me in the important Principle I have laid down; And I fhould be glad he agreed as well with me in the Application of it. But how unjust are Men in their Balances! How clear fighted are they in feeing the Defects of others, and how blind at the fame Time not to see their own in the very fame Kind!

He tells us first, the Diffenters have no Commiffion or Succeffion to fhew. I grant they have not. But how will he fhew the Commiffion or Succeffion of the Prote Atant Church of England? Since it is an undeniable Fact

that

that for 900 Years together before the pretended Refor mation of that Church all her Bishops were in Com munion with the Church of Rome, and agreed with her in Sacraments, Dorine, and Pratice. As in Monaftical Vows, in praying for the Relief of the Dead, in the Invocation of Saints, in adoring the bleffed Sacrament, and receiving the Definitions of former Councils for Tranfubftantiation, the Veneration of holy Images. and Reliques, and the Pope's Supremacy, &c.

First then I aik from whom the first Proteftant Bishops of the Church of England had their Commiffion to teach a Doctrine, directly oppofite in all the foremention'd Articles to that of all the Catholick Bishops their Predeceffors? If they pretend to have had it from them, the Thing is wholly incredible, as will appear more fully hereafter. Yet I cannot imagine how they came by it any other Way, unless it was fent them immediately from Heaven, and fo their Miffion was extraordinary like that of the Apostles; which alfo will not be eafily believed without good Proofs, and I fear it will be a hard Task to find any.

I afk 2dly, from whom the first Proteftant Bishops of the Church of England derived their Succeffion. That is, from what Bishop of their own Communion? Since all the English Bishops before them were Roman Catholicks, that is, in the Communion of the Bishop of Rome. If they alledge the Validity of their Ordinaticn, and their being in Poffeffion of the ancient Epifcopal Sees of their Catholick Predeceffors, who certainly derived their Succeffion from the Apostles; I answer, that tho' their Ordination were valid, which we utterly deny, this would be infufficient to prove their Succeffion to be truly Apoftolical: because there is fomething more required to make good this Title than a valid Ordination, and the Poffeffion of the Epifcopal Sees of their Predeceffors; viz. their being Members of the fame Church and Communion with thofe, whofe Succeffors they pretend to be. For otherwife it will follow that the Arian and Donatift Bifbops were the true Succeffors of the Apostles: Because their Ordination was moft certainly valid, and they fill'd the ancient Sees of

03.

the