Five disputations of church-government and worship

Sect. 29. If it be Objected that they had no power to Ordain without a Bishop: I answer, 1. Nor a Bishop quoad exercitium, without them, according to our Laws and Customs, at least •••ually. 2. Ordaining with a Bishop proveth them to be Ordainers; and that it is a work that belongeth to the order or office of a Presbyter: or else he might not do it at all, any more then Deacons, or Chancellors, &c. may. And if it be but the work of a Presbyters office, it is not a Nullity, if Presbyters do it without a Prelate, if you could prove it an irregularity.

Sect. 30. Argument 11. If the Ordination of the English •relates be valid, then much more is the Ordination of Presbyters, (as in England and other Reformed Churches is in use.) But the Ordination of English Prelates is valid, (I am sure in the judgement of them that we dispute against:) therefore so is the Ordination of English Presbyters much more.

Sect. 31. The reason of the Consequence is, because the English Prelates are more unlike the Bishops that were fixed by Apostolical Institution or Ordination, then the English Presbyters are, as I have showed at large in the former Disputation: the Scripture Bishops were the single Pastors of single Churches, personally guiding them in the worship of God, and governing them in presence, and teaching them by their own mouths, visiting their sick, administering Sacraments, &c. And such are the English Presbyters: But such are not the late English Prelates that were the Governors of an hundred Churches, and did not personally teach them, guide them in worship, govern them in presence, and deliver them the Sacraments, but were absent from them all save one Congregation. These were unliker to the Scripture fixed Bishops, described by Dr. H. H. then our Presbyters are: therefore if they may derive from them a Power of Ordination, or from the •aw that instituted them; then Presbyters may do so much more.