Contours of Conformity 1662-1832: 'This power was granted from the Bishops only from the age of the Apostles'

To continue the series exploring the contours of Conformity 1662-1832, we have today another excerpt from Edward Welchman's 1713 commentary on the Articles of Religion.  Welchman is identified by Stephen Hampton in Anti-Arminians as one of the Reformed divines in the early 18th century Church of England. Here Welchman reflects on Article XXIII, 'Of Ministering in the Congregation':

Since the Ministers of the Word and Sacraments are Ambassadors for Christ, and Ministers of God (2 Cor. v.20. and v.4) they must necessarily receive their Authority from God, and be sent by him; and must not assume that Authority to themselves, unless they are called to it by God. And since God our Saviour, from the Time when he called the Apostles, has not immediately called any one to the Ministry; it follows, that they must be called by those, whose Business it is to call others. Thus the Apostles ordained Presbyters and Bishops, and the Bishops ordained by the Apostles did from thenceforth ordain others ...

We know that this Power was granted to the Bishops only from the Age of the Apostles to the Time of the Reformation, but that from thenceforwards some Churches, who in other Things were rightly reformed, have allowed it also to Presbyters; whether justly or not, we leave it to themselves to consider. We neither judge, nor despise them. But the Case is widely different with our own Countrymen, who, rebelling against an excellently well constituted Church, have arrogated to themselves, this this Power of Ordination. These therefore we rightfully and deservedly account guilty of Schism and Irregularity.

It is a striking extract. The understanding of episcopacy as derived from the Apostles, via historic succession, with bishops alone having the power to ordain, would have been heartily endorsed by Laudians. Indeed, words from Jeremy Taylor's robustly Laudian sermon at the 1661 consecration of the restored Irish episcopate come to mind:

For it is evident and notorious that in Scripture there is no record of ordination, but an Apostolical hand was in it ... one of the chief, one of the superiour and Ruling Clergy: and it is as certain in the descending ages of the Church, the Bishop always had that power, it was never denyed to him, and it was never imputed to Presbyters.

As for the combination of caution ("in other Things ... rightly reformed") and generosity ("We neither judge nor despise them") regarding the non-episcopal Continental Reformed churches, this also reflects Laudian thought: the Laudian Bramhall, for example, said almost precisely the same regarding the 'Reformed churches abroad'. At the end of the period we are examining, in 1828, the same understanding was declared by Old High bishop Christopher Bethell. 

Here again we see in Welchman one of the contours of Conformity, 1662-1832. As a Reformed divine, a moderate 'Calvinist', Welchman has no hesitation in interpreting Article XXIII as requiring episcopal ordination and supporting the historic episcopal succession, while charitably allowing for the particular circumstances experienced by the 'Reformed churches abroad'. This was one of the key foundations of unity and accord in the Church of England during the 'long 18th century', an understanding shared by divines and churchmen across theological allegiances and identities.