So that the common distinguishing of ordination from jurisdiction or government, as if they were tota specie different, is unsound.
IV. Imposition of hands was a sign, (like the kiss of peace, and the anointing of persons, and like our kneeling in prayer, &c.) which having first somewhat in their nature to invite men to the use, was become a common significant sign, of a superior's benediction of an inferior, in those times and countries. And so was here applied ordinarily for its antecedent significancy and aptitude to this use; and was not purposely instituted, nor had its significancy newly given it by institution; and so was not like a sacrament necessarily and perpetually affixed to ordination.
Therefore we must conclude, 1. That imposition of hands in ordination is a decent, apt, significant sign, not to be scrupled by any, nor to be omitted without necessity, as being of Scripture, ancient, and common use.
2. But yet that it is not essential to ordination; which may be valid by any fit designation and separation of the person. And therefore if it be omitted, it nullifieth not the action. And if the ordainers did it by letters to a man a thousand miles off, it would be valid: and some persons of old were ordained when they were absent.
V. I add as to the need of ordination, 1. That without this key, the office and church doors would be cast open, and every heretic or self-conceited person intrude.
2. It is a sign of a proud, unworthy person, that will judge himself fit for so great a work, and intrude upon such a conceit, when he may have the judgment of the pastors, and avoideth it.[263]
3. Those that so do, should no more be taken for ministers by the people, than any should go for christians that are not baptized, or for married persons whose marriage is not solemnized.
[261] Acts xiii. 2; Rom. i. 1; 1 Tim. iv. 15.
[262] Isa. xxxiii. 22; Jam. iv. 12.
[263] Acts xiii. 2; Heb. v. 4, 10.