160 LIVES OF THE PURITANS. B. You then said, that every minister of God is a bishop, and to be a bishop is only to be a minister of God. You said also, that no bishop in England had authority to excommunicate. A. I said so, indeed ; and proved what I said by the word of God. I am not bound to bring myself into danger; but because I am persuaded it will advance God's glory, I will speak, be the consequence what it will. I trust in the Holy Spirit, that I shall be willing to die in defenceof the truth. B. Then what say you of my calling ? A. You are not lawfully called to bea bishop, according to the word of God. B. I thought so : But why ? A. For three reasons,-1. Becauseyou were not ordained by the consent of the eldership. B. But I had the hands of three or four bishops. A. That is not the eldership St. Paul speaks of, 1 Tim. iv. 14. B. By what eldershipwere you ordained ? Was it not by abishop ? A. I had, indeed, the laying on of the hands of one of the bishops of England, but that was the least part of my calling. B. What calling had you more ? A. I having exercised and expounded the word several times in an orderly assemblyof ten ministers, they joined in prayer; and being required to speak their consciences, they. declared upon the trial they had of me, that they were per- suaded I might becomea profitable labourer in the house of God. \ After this I received the laying on of the hand of the bishop. B. But you had not the laying on of the hands of those preach ers. A. No: I had the substance, but wanted the accident; and in this, I beseech the Lord to be merciful unto me. For the laying on of hands, as it is the word, so it is agreeable to the mighty action of ordaining the ministers of God. A. Then your ordination is imperfect as well as mine. A. Mine is imperfect for want of the accident : the Lord be merciful to me for it. And yours is imperfect for want of the substance. B. What is your second reason ? A. Becauseyou are not ordained bishop over anyoneflock.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=