Page:Tracts for the Times Vol 3.djvu/238

34 office which can denominate a prince? For what is a prince but the chief ruler of a society, that hath authority over the rest to make laws for it, to challenge the obedience of all the members, and all ranks of men in it, and power to coerce them, if they will not obey? And now, Sir, I pray you attend to what follows, and then tell me, if the office of a Bishop contains not every thing that is in the definition of a chief or a prince. St. Ignatius, who was St. John's disciple, writes of the Bishop in his Epistle, &c.

"The priests of the sons of Levi shall come near; for them hath the Lord thy God chosen to minister unto Him, and to bless in the name of the Lord." (Deut. xxi. 5.) Now, my Lord, this is what we mean by the authoritative administration of the Christian clergy; whether they be by way of benediction, or of any other kind. We take them to be persons whom God has chosen to minister unto Him, and to bless in His name. We imagine that our Saviour was a greater priest and mediator than Aaron, or any of God's former ministers. We are assured that Christ sent His Apostles, as His Father had sent Him; and that, therefore, they were His true successors; and since they did commission others to succeed them in their office by the imposition of hands, as Moses commissioned Joshua to succeed him, the clergy who have succeeded the Apostles, have as divine a call and commission to their work, as those who were called by our Saviour; and are as truly His successors as the Apostles themselves were.

The third objection against this uninterrupted succession is this: that it is a popish doctrine, and "gives Papists advantage over us." The objection proceeds thus: "We must not assert the necessity of this succession, because the Papists say it is only to be found in them." I might add, because some mighty zealous Protestants say so too.

But if this be good argumentation, we ought not to tell the Jews, or Deists, &c., that there is any necessity of embracing Christ-