Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

118

APPENDIX.

SIN

[ocr errors]

INCE the Publication of the First Edition of this Book, I am inform'd, that fome Gentlemen of no mean Character, have made further Objections against the Subject thereof, which (because they look very plaufible at firft fight, and may therefore preju dice too many against what I have propos'd) I fhall endeavour here to anfwer, as briefly and plainly as I can.

Obj. IX. AND First 'tis said, that if Lay Baptifm be Invalid, and the Divine Commiffi the Aqoftles in Epifcopacy only, then all thofe Foreign Reformed Churches which have no Epifcopal Ordination are effectually Unchurch'd, as being (by the Principles afferted by me) deftitute of a Chriftian Miniftry, and confequently of Chriftian Baptifm, which is a confe quence fo dreadful, and even contrary to the Conceffions of many Epifcopal Divines of the Church of England, that none ought to admit of that Doctrine, from which (if granted ) fo great a mischief muft neceffarily arise.

on to Baptize be convey'd fin

Anfm. That Lay-Baptifm is Null and Void, I humbly conceive, I have prov'd; if not, let the Authors of this Objection fhew, either the Infufficiency, or Fallacy of the Arguments I have produc'd for that purpose; otherwife

I

[ocr errors]

I shall take it for granted, that they acknowledge fuch Baptifms to be Invalid of ele, that at beft they can give no folid Reafons for their Validity.And therefore, till I hear further from them upon this fingle Topick, I hall give my felf no more trouble about it, but proceed to the conveyance of the Divine Commiffion to Baptize, and this (fuppofing Lay-Bapathy to be Invalid) can be convey'd from the Apoftles in the Chriftian Miniftry only; fo that all our Bufinefs here, is to know how the Chriftian Ministry was handed down, and fucceffively continued from the Apoftles to our Days, and this will determine who can Adminifter Valid Baptifin.

[ocr errors]

THAT the Chritian Miniftry was conveyed from the Apoftles in Epifcopacy only, we have a Cloud of Witneffes; Firft, The Inftitution of our Saviour himself; Secondly, The Practice of the Apostles, both recorded in the Sacred Oracles of infallible Truth, the Holy Scriptures; Thirdly, all Ecclefiaftical Hiftory and Fourthly, the constant and und interrupted Practice of the Univerfal Church of Chrift in all Ages and Places, for One Thousand Five Hundred Years together from the Apoitles Days. These all bear teftimony to this great Truth, as has been fufficiently demonftrated by a vast number of the beft Christian Writers, particularly fome of our own Nation, and that very lately, (vid, Those ↓ have mention'd' in Answer to the Third Obje ChiguodT

I 4

ction,

Etion, and another Entitled, The Divine Right of Epifcopacy, Printed for Richard Sare, at Grays Inn-Gate in Holborn, 1708,) who have obviated and anfwer'd the Objections of all Enemies fo excellently well, that it would be no lefs than Prefumption in me, to attempt to fay any thing more upon that Subject, after fuch Learned Authors; to whom therefore I refer the Reader for his fatisfaction in this Point, and pass on to confider the Objection it felf.

[ocr errors]

IF then the Premifes above-mention'd be true; If Lay-Baptifm be Invalid, c. then (fays the Objector)"All thofe Foreign Res form'd Churches, &c. are effectually Unchurch'd, "being deftitute of a Christian Ministry, and "confequently of Chriftian Baptifm. Why truly, if thofe Foreign Reform'd are Unchurch'd, upon the truth of thofe Premifes, I cannot help that, 'tis the Objector himself that tells me they are fo; and I know of no way for him to help them out of that Difficulty at prefent, but either to prove the Premises falfe; or elfe to perfwade them to receive Epifcopal Ordination. But 'tis faid, “this " is a dreadful confequence, It may be fo and very dreadful too, if they are fo far Un church'd as to be reduc'd to a state of abfolute Infidels, which I hope the Objector does not mean when he fays they are Unchurched; if he does, I must tell him, that (tho? I am no Latitudinarian) I have more charitable

Thoughts

Thoughts concerning Thousands of them than he has, upon the Suppofition of their being deftitute of Chriftian Baptifm: For I believe Abundance of them may be included in the Number of those whom I have fpoke of in the Words of a moft Excellent Modern Author; (towards the End of my Answer to the Fourth Objection) and that therefore they may very fairly be efteem'd AS MUCH IN THE CHURCH as the Catechument, or Candidates for Chriftian Baptifm, were us'd to be in the Primitive Times. This, I think, abates much of the Dreadfulnefs of the Confequence to the Honeft and Sincere; but it cannot be hence inferr'd, that their Miniftry and Miniftrations are Good and Valid; or that they who know their Defects, fhould concur and communicate with 'em in fuch their Deviati ons from the Divine Inftitutes.

པ་

BUT (to proceed) this, fays the Objector, is" even contrary to the Conceffions of many "Epifcopal Divines of the Church of England. I fuppofe he means fome of the Writers fince the Reformation, who have endeavour'd to make Excufes and Salvo's for the Presbyterian and Lay-Ordinations Abroad: In re ference to whom, I muft needs fay, that 'tis justly to be fear'd they have done more Hurt by fuch their Conceffions, than at the Time of their Writing them they were aware of: For 'tis not to be doubted, that many put a great Value upon the Judgment of fuch

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Learn

Learned and Good Men, and thereby have been induc'd to believe that fuch Ordinations are Good and Valid; and confequently, that there's no need for those Foreign Reformed to feek for Epifcopal Ordination: whereby tob many of the Foreign Teachers themselves are, inftead of being cur'd of, confirm'd in their Errors, and it may be ) hinder'd from fo much as but Enquiring whether they are in the Right or no. With Submillion to better Judgments, fuch large Conceffions of those many Epifcopal Divines have been not only prejudicial and hurtful to the Reform'd Abroad, but even contrary to the Doctrine and avow'd Practice of the Church of England, which they were oblig'd in Confcience, by their Sub fcription, to fupport and maintain. For, does The not teach in her 23d Article, Thatoffic 66 is not lawful therefore 'tis finful, and com trary to their Inftitution) for any Man to take upon him the Office of Miniftring the Sai σε craments, before he be lawfully Call'd and Sent? And does the not confine this LAW FUL CALLING AND SENDING, to EPISCO PAL ORDINATION, in the Preface to her Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining, and Confecrating of Bishops, Priefts and Dea cons? Does he not call this EPISCOPAL ORDINATION CHRIST'S COMMISSI ON AND AUTHORITY; when in her 26th Article The teaches, That the Minifter, when he Adminifters the Sacraments, does it “fin

[ocr errors]

Christ's

« AnteriorContinuar »