Five disputations of church-government and worship

Sect. 59. As for the Episcopal Divines that dissent from the Principle of the forecited Learned Author (who saith that there is no evidence that any of the second sort of Presbyters were instituted in Scripture times) I need not deal with them in th•s Disputation: for all of them that ever I yet met with, do grant the validity of Presbyters Ordination, and the truth of the Reformed Churches and their Ministry, and Ordinances: otherwise it were easy enough to vindicate all these from them also, if they denied them.

Sect. 59. As for the Episcopal Divines that dissent from the Principle of the forecited Learned Author (who saith that there is no evidence that any of the second sort of Presbyters were instituted in Scripture times) I need not deal with them in th•s Disputation: for all of them that ever I yet met with, do grant the validity of Presbyters Ordination, and the truth of the Reformed Churches and their Ministry, and Ordinances: otherwise it were easie enough to vindicate all these from them also, if they denyed them.

Sect. 60. Argument 18. Ad hominem. If the late English Prelates had a lawful call to their Prelacy, then much more have Ministers Ordained by Presbyters a lawful call to their Ministry. But the Prelates say that they had a lawful Call to their Prelacy: therefore, &c. The reason of the Consequence (which only will be denied) is, 1. Because the Presbyters are Ordained to an Office that is of Christs Institution; but the Prelates are Consecrated to an Office that is not of Christs Institution, but against it, and against the light of Nature (in taking on them the impossible Government of an hundred, or many hundred Churches) as was showed in the former Disputation. 2. Because the Prelates hold an uninterrupted Succession of Legitimate Ordination necessary to the Being of their Prelacy (I mean, such as now we dispute against, hold this) but so do not ⟨p. 220⟩the Presbyters. The said dissenting Prelates are still upon their N•mo dat quod non habet; which therefore we may urge upon them. And 1. They cannot prove an uninterrupted Succession themselves, on whom it is incumbent, according to their principles, if they will prove their Call. 2. We can prove that they are the successors of such as claimed all their Power from the Roman Vicechrist, and professed to receive it from him, and hold it of him as the Catholic Head, and so that their Ordination comes from a seat that hath had many interruptions, and so had no power of Ordination, by their Rule: For when the succession was so oft and long interrupted, Nemo dat quod non habet: and therefore all that followed must be usurpers and no Popes: and those that received their Offices from them must be no Officers: But the Presbyters that Ordain will give a better proof of their Call then this.