Chapter III.
Containing a digression concerning the name of “priests,” the right of Christians thereunto by their interest in the priesthood of Christ, with the presumption of any particularly appropriating it to themselves.
And now the transaction of these things in the Christian church presents itself to our consideration; in handling whereof I shall not at all discourse concerning the several church-officers instituted by Christ and his apostles for the edification of his body, nor concerning the difference between them who were partakers at first of an extraordinary vocation and those who since have been called to the same work in an ordinary manner, divinely appointed for the direction of the church. Neither yet doth that diversity of the administration of government in the churches, then when they were under the plenitude of apostolical power, and now when they follow rules prescribed for their reiglement, come in my way.
Farther; who are the subject of the keys, in whom all that secondary ecclesiastical power which is committed to men doth reside, after the determinations of so many learned men by clear Scripture light, shall not by me be called in question. All these, though conducing to the business in hand, would require a large discussion; and such a scholastical handling as would make it an inconsutilous1 piece of this popular discourse; my intent being only to show, — seeing there are, as all acknowledge, some under the New Testament, as well as the Old, peculiarly set apart by God’s own appointment for the administration of Christ’s ordinances, especially teaching of others by preaching of the gospel, in the way of office and duty, — what remaineth**for the rest of God’s people to do, for their own and others’ edification.
1. But here, before I enter directly upon the matter, I must remove one stone of offence, concerning the common appellation of those who are set apart for the preaching of the gospel. That which is most frequently used for them in the New Testament is διάκονοι, so 1 Cor. iii. 5; 2 Cor. iii. 6, vi. 4, xi. 15, 23; 1 Tim. iv. 6, and in divers other places; to which add ὑπηρέται, 1 Cor. iv. 1, a word though of another original, yet of the same signification with the former, and both rightly translated “ministers.” The names of “ambassadors,” “stewards,” and the like, wherewith they are often honoured, are figurative, and given unto them by allusion only. That the former belonged unto them, and were proper for them, none ever denied but some Rabshakehs of antichrist. Another name there is, which some have assumed unto themselves as an honour, and others have imposed the same upon them for a reproach, namely, that of “priest;” which, to the takers, seemed to import a more mysterious employment, a greater advancement above the rest of their brethren, a nearer approach unto God, in the performances of their office, than that of “ministers;” wherefore they embraced it either voluntarily, alluding to the service of God and the administration thereof amongst his ancient people the Jews, or thought that they ought necessarily to undergo it, as belonging properly to them who are to celebrate those mysteries and offer those sacrifices which they imagined were to them prescribed. The imposers, on the contrary, pretend divers reasons why now that name can signify none but men rejected from God’s work, and given up to superstitious vanities; attending, in their minds, the old priests of Baal, and the now shavelings of Antichrist. It was a new etymology of this name which that learned man cleaved unto, who, unhappily, was engaged into the defence of such errors as he could not but see and did often confess,2 — to which, also, he had an entrance made by an archbishop,3 — to wit, that it was but an abbreviation of “presbyters;” knowing full well, not only that the signification of these words is diverse amongst them to whom belong “jus et norma loquendi,” but also that they are widely different in holy writ: yea, farther, that those who first dignified themselves with this title never called themselves presbyters by way of distinction from the people, but only to have a note of distance among themselves, there being more than one sort of them that were sacrificers, and which, “eo nomine,” accounted themselves priests. Setting aside, then, all such evasions and distinctions as the people of God are not bound to take notice of, and taking the word in its ordinary acceptation, I shall briefly declare what I conceive of the use thereof, in respect of them who are ministers of the gospel; which I shall labour to clear by these following observations:—