A30189:399
An answer to two treatises of Mr. John Can, the leader of the English…An answer to two treatises of Mr. Iohn Can, the leader of the English…
An answer to two treatises of Mr. John Can, the leader of the English Brownists in Amsterdam the former called, A necessity of separation from the Church of England, proved by the Nonconformists principles : the other, A stay against straying : wherein in opposition to M. John Robinson, he undertakes to prove the unlawfulness of hearing the ministers of the Church of England ... / by the late learned, laborious and faithful servant of Jesus Christ, John Ball.An answer to two treatises of Mr. Iohn Can, the leader of the English Brownists in Amsterdam the former called, A necessitie of separation from the Church of England, proved by the Nonconformists principles : the other, A stay against straying : wherein in opposition to M. Iohn Robinson, he undertakes to prove the unlawfulnesse of hearing the ministers of the Church of England ... / by the late learned, laborious and faithfull servant of Jesus Christ, John Ball.
London: printed by R.B., 1642
Chapter 1 › Section 8 › CAN. Necess. of Separ. pag. 55. › ANSWER.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
First, the Ministers of the Gospel, derive not their authority or office from the Bishop, Patron, Presbytery or people, but immediately from Jesus Christ, whose servants they are, whose words they preach, whose Sacraments they administer, whose flock they feed, by whom they are protected, and to whom they must give account. If he be an Antichristian Minister who derives his authority from the Classis or Bishop, he is Antichristian likewise who derives it from the community of the faithful: for neither the one; nor the other can justly challenge that authority to themselves.
First, the Ministers of the Gospell, derive not their authority or office from the Bishop, Patron, Presbyterie or people, but immediately from Iesus Christ, whose servants they are, whose words they preach, whose Sacraments they administer, whose flocke they feed, by whom they are protected, and to whom they must give account. If he be an Antichristian Minister who derives his authoritie from the Classis or Bishop, he is Antichristian likewise who derives it from the communitie of the faithfull: for neither the one; nor the other can justly challenge that authoritie to themselves.
The Bishop, College Ecclesiastical or Church, cannot make a Minister formally or virtually, but only as Stewards they put him in office whom Christ the King of Saints and head of the Church hath designed. Wherein, if Pastors or people shall walk disorderly, challenging more than of right belongeth unto them, or giving up their right through sloth, negligence, ignorance or security: or not attending unto the direction of the great Shepherd of the flock, shall choose a man unfit or not well qualified, or shall proceed rashly, tumultuously upon misguided affection, in that weighty business; though they incur just blame and reprehension, yet that makes not a nullity of the Ministry, or of the Ordinances dispensed upon that Election and Ordination. Your self telleth us, and that from the example of the Scribes and Pharisees, That men being lawfully called to the Ministry are to be heard, howsoever in some qualifications defective. And if disorderly proceeding in election, or want of just and fit qualification in the person elected, do not make the election void: how shall the mere want of consent in the people cause a nullity in the ministration? If the careless or wilful neglect of administration and execution of his office cause not a nullity of the choice,