Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

Bishop of Rochester.

The Scripture showeth by example, that a bishop hath authority to make a priest; albeit, no bishop, being subject to a Christian prince, may either give orders or excommunicate, or use any manner of jurisdiction, or any part of his authority, without commission from the king, who is supreme head of that Church whereof he is a member; but that any other man may do it besides a bishop, I find no example, either in Scripture or in doctors.

Bishop of Carlisle.

By what is said before, it appeareth, that a bishop, by Scripture, may make deacons and priests, and that we have no example otherwise.

Dr. Robertson.

Opinor Episcopum habere authoritatem creandi Sacerdotem, modo id magistratus publici permissu fiat. An vero ab alio quam Episcopo id rite fieri possit, haud scio, quamvis ab alio factum non memini me legisse. Ordin. conferr. gratiam, vid. Eck.

homil. 60.

Dr. Cox.

Bishops have authority, as is aforesaid, of the apostles, in the tenth question, to make priests, except in cases of great necessity.

Dr. Day.

Bishops have authority, by Scripture, to ordain bishops and priests. John, 20. Hujus rei gratia reliqui te Cretæ ut constituas oppidatim Presbyteros. Tit. 1. Act. 14.

Dr. Oglethorpe.

Autoritas ordinandi Presbyteros data est Episcopis per verbum, multisq; aliis quos lego.

Dr. Redmayn.

To the first part, I answer, Yea; for so it appeareth, Tit. i. and 1 Tim. 5. with other places of Scripture. But whether any other but only a bishop may make a priest, I have not read, but by singular privilege of God; as when Moses (whom divers authors say was not a priest) made Aaron a priest. Truth it is, that the office of a godly prince is to oversee the Church, and the ministers thereof; and to cause them do their duty, and also to appoint them special charges and offices in the Church, as may be

[blocks in formation]

most for the glory of God, and edifying of the people: and thus we read of the good kings in the Old Testament, David, Joas, Ezekias, Josias. But as for making, that is to say, ordaining and consecrating of priests, I think it specially belongeth to the office of a bishop, as far as can be shown by Scripture, or any example, as I suppose, from the beginning.

Dr. Edgeworth.

A bishop hath authority by Scripture to make a priest, and that any other ever made a priest, since Christ's time, I read not. Albeit, Moses, who was not anointed priest, made Aaron priest and bishop, by a special commission or revelation from God, without which he would never so have done.

Dr. Symmonds.

A bishop, placed by the higher powers, and admitted to minister, may make a priest; and I have not read of any other that ever made priests.

Dr. Tresham.

I say, a bishop hath authority, by Scripture, to make a priest, and other than a bishop hath not power therein, but only in case of necessity.

Dr. Leighton.

To the eleventh; I suppose that a bishop hath authority of God, as his minister, by Scripture, to make a priest; but he ought not to admit any man to be priest, and consecrate him, or to appoint him unto any ministry in the Church, without the prince's license and consent, in a Christian region. And that any other man hath authority to make a priest by Scripture, I have not read, nor any example thereof.

Dr. Coren.

A bishop being licensed by his prince and supreme governor, hath authority to make a priest by the law of God. I do not read that any priest hath been ordered by any other than a bishop.

Con.

Ad primam partem quæstionis respondent omnes, et convenit omnibus præter Menevens. Episcopum habere autoritatem instituendi Presbyteros. Roffens, Leighton, Curren, Robertsonus, addunt, modo magistratus id permittat. Ad secundum partem

Bishop of St. David's.

Respondent Coxus et Tresham in necessitate concedi potestatem Ordinandi aliis. Eboracen. videtur, omnino denegare aliis hanc autoritatem. Redmayn, Symmons, Robertson, Leighton, Thirleby, Curren, Roffen. Edgeworth, Oglethorp, Carliolen. nusquam legerunt alios usos fuisse hac Potestate, quanquam (privilegio quodam) data sit Moysi, ut Redmanus arbitratur et Edgeworth. Nihil respondent ad secundam partem quæstionis Londinensis et Dayus.

Agreem.

In the eleventh; to the former part of the question, the bishop of St. David's doth answer, That bishops have no authority to make priests, without they be authorized of the Christian prince. The others, all of them do say, That they be authorized of God. Yet some of them, as the bishop of Rochester, Dr. Curren, Leighton, Robertson, add, That they cannot use this authority without their Christian prince doth permit them. To the second part, the answer of the bishop of St. David's is, That laymen have other whiles, [in other times] made priests. So doth Dr. Edgeworth and Redmayn say, That Moses, by a privilege given him of God, made Aaron his brother priest. Drs. Tresham, Crayford, and Cox, say, That laymen may make priests, in time of necessity. The bishops of York, Duresm, Rochester, Carlisle, elect of Westminster, Drs. Curren, Leighton, Symmonds, seem to deny this thing; for they say, They find not nor read not any such example.

12th QUESTION.

Whether, in the New Testament, be required any consecration of a bishop or priest, or only appointing to the office be sufficient? ANSWERS.

Archbishop of Canterbury.

In the New Testament, he that is appointed to be a bishop or a priest, needeth no consecration, by the Scripture; for election, or appointing thereto, is sufficient.

Archbishop of York.

To the twelfth question; the apostles ordained priests by imposition of the hand, with fasting and prayer; and so following their steps, we must needs think, that all the foresaid things be necessary to be used by their successors; and therefore we do

also think, that appointment only, without visible consecration and invocation for the assistance and power of the Holy Ghost, is neither convenient nor sufficient; for, without the said invocation, it beseemeth no man to appoint to our Lord ministers, as of his own authority: whereof we have example in the Acts of the Apostles; where we find, that when they were gathered to choose one in the place of Judas, they appointed two of the disciples, and commended the election to our Lord, that he would choose which of them it pleased him, saying and praying, Lord, thou that knowest the hearts of all men, show whether of these two thou dost choose to succeed in the place of Judas. And to this purpose, in the Acts, we read, Dixit Spiritus Sanctus segregate mihi Barnabam, &c. And again, Quos posuit Spiritus Sanctus regere Ecclesiam Dei. And it appears also, that in the Old Testament, in the ordering of priests, there was both visible and invisible sanctification; and therefore in the New Testament, where the priesthood is above comparison higher than in the Old, we may not think that only appointment sufficeth without sanctification, either visible or invisible.

Bishop of London.

To the twelfth; I think consecration of a bishop and priest be required for that in those Old Laws (being yet but a shadow of the New) the consecration was required, as appears Levit. 8; yet the truth of this I leave to those of higher judgments.

Bishop of Rochester.

The Scripture speaketh, De impositione manus et de oratione ; and of other manner of consecrations, I find no mention in the New Testament expressly; but the old authors make mention also of inunctions.

Bishop of Carlisle.

Upon this text of Paul to Timothy; Noli negligere quæ in te est, quæ data est tibi per prophetiam cum impositione manuum Presbyterii; St. Anselm saith, "This grace to be the gift of the bishop's office, to the which God of his mere goodness had called and preferred him. The prophesy (he saith) was the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, by the which he knew what he had to do therein. The imposition of the hands is that by the which he was ordained and received that office: and therefore (saith St. Paul) God is my witness, that I have discharged myself, showing you

as I ought to have done. Now look you well upon it whom that ye take to orders, lest ye lose yourself thereby. Let bishops, therefore, who (as saith St. Hierome) have power to make priests, consider well under what law the order of ecclesiastical constitution is bounden; and let them not think those words of the apostle to be his, but rather the words of Christ himself."

Dr. Robertson.

Opinor requiri consecrationem quandam, hoc est, impositionem manuum, orationem, jejunium, &c. tamen nusquam hoc munere fungi posse, nisi ubi magistratus invitet, jubeat, aut permittat.

Dr. Cox.

By scripture, there is no consecration of bishops and priests required, but only the appointing to the office of a priest, cum impositione manuum.

Dr. Day.

Consecration of bishops and priests I read not in the New Testament; but ordinatio per manuum impositionem cum oratione is read there, as in the places above; and the only appointment, as I think, is not sufficient.

Dr. Oglethorp.

Præter vocationem, ceu designationem externam, quæ vel a principe sit, vel a populo per electionem et suffragia, requiritur ordinatio alia per manuum impositionem, idque per verbum Dei. Dr. Redmayn.

Besides the appointing to the office, it appeareth that in the primitive Church, the apostles used certain consecration of the ministers of the Church, by imposition of hands and prayer, Acts 6. and with fastings, Acts 14, &c. The office of priesthood is too dangerous to set upon, when one is but appointed only: therefore, for the confirmation of their faith, who take in hand such charge, and for the obtaining of farther grace requisite in the same, consecration was ordained by the Holy Ghost, and hath been always used from the beginning.

Dr. Edgeworth.

Deputation to the office is not sufficient to make a priest or a bishop, as appeareth by David and Solomon, who deputed the twenty-four above-mentioned to their offices, yet they made none of them priests, nor any other.

« PoprzedniaDalej »