(40) And is not Churchdifcipline the exercifeof the power of the keys? If then thepower ofthe keys may be exercifed by the Presbyters, when e- ver the Bifhops pleafe, it feems it is common to them,with him, as well as Sacraments, and therefore belongeth not to aBithop as a Bithop, but as a Presbyter.. `` DiS frut. of And if in my difpute of ordination I have fully proved that the Chum', Go- power of the Miniflry is given by Chritt fo far immediatly, as. that it Ter. 2. .paffeth not through the hands ofEleEfors or Ordainers to- the receiver,but js given by the meer Inflrumentality ofthe Law or inftitution, and that the EleEtors and Ordainers do no more than dot rmineof the qualified perlon thatreceives it,and publickly,invefi him,9r minillerial l y folemnize his .Poffcflion, (as the Burgelfes chufe, and the Steward or. Recorder invefteth the Major ofa Corporation, wholepower floweth immediatly from the Charter granted by theKing )then all this controverfe is at an end and I:doitbt not but that's fullyproved. .,And ifcornmanding another to do an office work be all that isproper to the Bithop, I askwhether any thing there beproper to him ? and fo whether we mull have filch an office ? For may not:the Ding command the Mi- Miler to do,all the work which belongeth to his funftion? may he not appoint Magiftrates, and make Law to command it ? may he not punifh thofe that do it not ? Is he not cuftos utriufg,,tahule:? and mutt henot cored} oral-adrniniftration in miniflers, and drive them to do their duty ? No doubt he may. Obj. But he dot!) not:ordaine Minifterry though he command them to do their dutywhen ordained.. tlnf. a. Ourprefentqueflion is-not about Ordination, but command- ing mento Govern the Church by Difcipline or fully to Ruleby the Keys the people of a particular Church. It this fo far belong to the Presbyters office that hemay do it by the Bifhops Licence, let him that can, tell me why he may not do it by the Kings Licence ? and then (as they were wont to fay ofold) exceptbordinationé, nothingbutordination only ispro* per to theBifhops office. And that this is not proper neither, I. This objeElion it felfdoth timare, feeing the Bithop may give another Poorer to ordsine: (and then: why may.not -the King? ) a: Many ofthe Schoolmen, and the Papilla themfelvesconfefs , that the tope (fay fome ) , or Prelates (fay.others )' may impower an Abbot or Presbyter to ordaine, of whiclafee that un. anfwerable book of Voetias de defperata. caufa Papatus againfi :Janfenius for Presbyters ordination.... 3. Andour Church of Englandcaufeth Prefo ,byters to impofe:.hands with theBilhops,andBithop"Downam aforecited is angry with his anfwerer, for fuppofeugthat he pleaded for foie power of ordination in the Bìlhop, when he fpake but fora.cheifpower. And if nothing but a cheifpower in ordainingbe proper to a Bithopr why then, are,. the Churches fo confounded, and beggered, and altered, by a cotatrary praEeicc ? Arad, whyis., anew office o?Bifhops.fet. up.inthe world
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=