A85313:49
Presbyterial ordination vindicated. In a brief and sober discourse concerning episcopacy, as claiming greater…
Presbyterial ordination vindicated. In a brief and sober discourse concerning episcopacy, as claiming greater power, and more eminent offices by divine right, then presbytery. The arguments of the Reverend Bishop Dr Davenant in his determination for such episcopacy are modestly examined. And arguments for the validity of presbyterial ordination added. With a brief discourse concerning imposed forms of prayer, and ceremonies. Written by G.F. minister of the gospel in defence of his own ordination, being questioned, because it was performed by Presbyters.Presbyterial ordination vindicated. In a brief and sober discourse concerning episcopacy, as claiming greater power, and more eminent offices by divine right, then presbyterie. The arguments of the Reverend Bishop Dr Davenant in his determination for such episcopacy are modestly examined. And arguments for the validity of presbyterial ordination added. With a brief discourse concerning imposed forms of prayer, and ceremonies. Written by G.F. minister of the gospel in defence of his own ordination, being questioned, because it was performed by Presbyters.
London: printed for Nathanael Webb, 1660
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
And though some say, that it is a Trite Argument, that is drawn from the words Presbyter and Bishop, being used promiscuously, yet it is such an Argument as hath so much strength in it, that it was never answered. We use to say that Nomina sunt rerum notae & symbola, whence if the same persons are called Presbyters or Bishops, surely their power cannot be distinct. Officers are known by their names, and distinct Officers by distinct names in some places in the Scripture, though in others they may have a general name common to others: Though Paul in one place calls himself a Minister, and Peter an Elder, yet in other places we find they are called Apostles: So the Officers have their distinctions, ⟨p. 7⟩Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers, Eph. 4.11. But Presbyter and Bishop are never thus differenced, no not in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, where of all places they should have been, if in those Epistles the Apostle lay the foundation of Episcopacy (as say our Brethren) but there they are the same, as is plain to see, and confessed by the Fathers, Papists and Protestants. Yea and besides the same Names, what qualifications are required of one, are required of the other, the same work is enjoined both, Acts 20.28. 1 Pet. 5.1, 2. [Greek or Hebrew]. The same Names, the same Qualifications, the same Charge, conclude the same Function. How then Reverend Davenant comes to find this eminency of power to be given and confirmed by the Apostles, let us now consider.
And though some say, that it is a Trite Argument, that is drawn from the words Presbyter and Bishop, being used promiscuously, yet it is such an Argument as hath so much strength in it, that it was never answered. We use to say that Nomina sunt rerum notae & symbola, whence if the same persons are called Presbyters or Bishops, surely their power cannot be distinct. Officers are known by their names, and distinct Officers by distinct names in some places in the Scripture, though in others they may have a general name common to others: Though Paul in one place calls himself a Minister, and Peter an Elder, yet in other places we find they are called Apostles: So the Officers have their distinctions, ⟨p. 7⟩