the infinit dishonour of our great God blessed for ever Truely besides the sparkles of Divinity and the Spirit of God illuminating in the Scriptures which writ them the excellency and goodnes of their object and matter the purity the perfection the Antiquity the universall consent and agreement of themâ— the majesty and simplicity of the languages and speech they are writ in the conviction that is in them of wicked rebellious consciences beating downe humbling the strongest Spirits the certayne event of things foretold in them the integrity of the Writers being farre from all fraud and guile setting downe their owne infirmities and the weaknesses of their families which human reason would never have done the preservation of these Holy Scriptures in all ages from the fury of the persecuters and out of the hands of those that studyed to destroy them the constancy of the Martyrs allwayes that beleeved kept them and the fearfull tragicall ends of such as were enimies of them These the Defendent sayth and many more reasons there are to prove the Scriptures to be the word of the ever living God by themselves without any Autoritie of Fathers But yet one reason moreâ— the Defendent thought fit to add before he returneth againe to the Holy Scriptures owne Autorityâ— which is sufficiently able to declare it to be the Word of God And that is this All things that are mens owne whether counsayles Lawes ordinances inventions Polityes or projects orders of government c. they are agreeable ever to the corrupt nature of man or els to carnall reason men commonly hugg their owne devices Now if the religion that is set downe in Holy Scriptures or the Scriptures themselves had ever been the fiction excogitation of mens braines as some prophane Atheisticall men thinke who suppose and say â—hat religion was by Policy invented to keep men in awe then the Defendent sayth that all men would willingly and without reluctation have embraced and received them and given them ever admittance and free entertaynment for the world ever loveth his owne Now it is notoriously knowne that no carnall men either love the Scâ—iptures or regard them nay it hath been allwayes the endeavor and the greatest plot and conspiracy of wicked and ungodly men and the adversaryes of the trueth either totally to extinguish them or to vilify their Autority as K. Iames of renowned memory in his Apology to all Christian Princes sufficiently declareth discovering therein the Popes double diligence in that busines So that were there no other reason but this alone it were of conviction enough to prove the Holy Scripture to be â—he Word of God because it so much opposeth impiety wickednes cruelty unrightuous dealing errors and darknes which carnall and sensuall men love moâ—e then light And whereas the Prelats with the Papists produce the Autority of the Fathers for the mayntayning of what they speake and in Court alledged that of Augustin Where he sayth that he would not have beleeved the Scripture if the Church had not told him it was the Scripture The Defendent for his part is sorry to see such a profane Sympathy between the Prelats Papists in these things who deale with true Christians as the Gibeoniâ—s dealt with the Israëlits in the 9. of Iudges who pretended they were Ambassadors tooke olds sacks upon their asses and old tattered bottles and clouted shooes and ragged clothes and pretended they came from a farre Country and so the Israëlits not taking counsell of the Lord were cosened and deluded by them Even so the Papists and Prelats under pretence of the ancienâ— Writers and with their old shooes and moldy bread of uncoth antiquiâ—y rob us of â—he trueth and take away from us â—he bread and staffe of life by which wee should safely and comfortably walke to Heaven and happines and under the pretence of the Fathers their Autority they abuse and deceive the simple But in this cause Augustin is not very usefull unto them for his Autority in this so waighâ—y a matâ—er is to rationall men of no great validity for the Defendent demands of any that hath but the grace of understanding that if Augustine would never have beleeved that there had been a God without the Church had told him so must his infideliâ—y make others Aâ—heists also this will not be thought good reason amongst the learnedâ— for then one mans imperfections should be a rule for multitudes to goe to hell unbelief should be a vertue And yet it is not altogether denyed but that the perswasion and report of men may be a motive to stirre up men many times to the hearing perusell of a thing which of it self doth not alwayes beget faith or but very little as dayly experience teacheth us but the thing it selfe seene or heard is that that workeâ—h and affecteth it and makes their faith so firme and stedfast that all though the same partyes should a thousand times after deny that to be so yet they to the death would persever in that their true believe As for example vve see in the people of Samaria that were by the womans perswasions brought ouâ— to see Christ and in some small measure beleeved in him from her relation that he was the Messiah yet when they had talked with him themselves they openly affirmed that then they beleeved not because the woman had told them but from more excellent reasons and grounds that they themselves had heard him And should the Samaritan woman a thousand times after that have denyed that he had been the Messiah they would never have been removed from their faith in Christ for all that The same may be sayd of Nathaniel in the first of Iohn to whom Philip saydâ— That he had found him of whom Moses spake in the Law and the Prophets Iesus of Nazarreth and Nathaniel sayd unto him Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth Philip sayd Come and see Iesus saw Nathaniel comming unto him and saith to him Behold an Israelit indeed in whom is no guile Nathaniel sayd unto him whence knowest thou mee Iesus answered and sayd unto him Before that Philip called thee when thou werâ— under the Fig tree I saw thee Nathaniel answereth saith unto him Rabbi thou art the son of God thou art the King of Israel And howsoewer Philip here was an occasion of bringing Nathaniel to Christ yet the sight of Christ and his Miracles were the things onely that begat true faith in him and such a faith as all the Philips in the world could never after have removed him from it againe And so was it with Augustine perhaps that being a learned infidell or little better a Manichee through the perswasions of learned Christiaâ—s he came to looke in the Word of God as all faith commeth by hearing but doth it therefore follow that that was onely the cause of his faith and perseverance in it or if the Church had not told him so
had rule and government in their hands And that they had povver also of ordination and imposition of hands it is likevvise apparent out of the first Epistle of Paul to Timothy the first Chapter For the Apostle speaking to Timothy sayth Doe not neglect the gift that is in thee vvhich is given thee for prophesy by the imposition of the hands of the Presbyterie Here allso the Presbyters had the right of imposition of hands And that they had the povver of Excommunication and Absolution it is likevvise manifest from the 5. of the 1. of the Corinthians and the 2. Chapter of the 2. Epistle vvhere the Apostle gives them the povver of casting the incestrous person out and upon his repentance receiving of him in againe By all vvhich Autorities of sacred vvrit it is sufficiently cleare and evident That the Presbyters had the Autoritie and povver of government and rule in the Church vvith the facultie also and abilitie of ordination excommunication and all this by Divine institution and expresse vvords of holy Scripture hovvsoever this right and their due vvas through the fraud and deceit of the Bishop of Rome and Romish Bishops aftervvards taken avvay from the Presbyters Wherefore the Defendent concludedâ— That if there were any difference betweene Presbyters and the Bishop of Rome which hee denyed that then the Presbyters in dignitie and honour exceeded and that greatly the Bishop of Rome Romish Bishops for all these Privileges of governement ordâ—nation and excommunication are in formall vvords given unto the Presbyters and no vvhere granted unto the Bishops And for farther illustration and proofe of this the Defendent with many other Arguments proved That Presbyters were better men then the Bishop of Rome if there were any difference The summe of which hee desireâ—h this Honorable Court to take notice of â—hat they may more ponderously waâ—gh the businesse in hand and see the vanitie of the information And for the Arguments in briefe they are these They who are most obedient to the Preceptsâ— Commands and Prohibitions of Christ and doe most diligently obey the Apostles admonitions they are and so ought to bee esteemed more worthy and excellent then such as regard neither of both But the Presbyters are more obedient to the Commands of Christ and doe more diligently obey the Apostles admonitions then the Romish Bishops Therefore they are more worthy excellent For the major no man can deny that knovves loyall and obedient Subiects to their Prince and his Officiers just commands are to bee preferred before Rebels and them that regard neither of both Novv Christ and his Apostles have commanded That all Ministers should feed the Flock of Christ deligently in preaching of the vvord administration of the Sacraments and that they should not be Lords over his inheritance Both which precepts and prohibitions the Presbyters do more exactly observe then Romish Bishops for they neither preach themselves nor will let others and are Lords over Christs inheritance which the Lord Iesus and his Apostles have peâ—emptorily forbid Ergo the Presbiters are more worthie then Romish Bishops Againe That name which is and hath ever bene a name and title of Dignitie and Honour is to bee preferred before that which is a name of paine labour and sollicitude But the name of Presbyter or Senior is hath beene ever a name of Honour and dignitie and a title of mightie Emperors and Princes and the name of Bishop is a name and title of labour and travell Ergo the title and name of Presbyter is to be preferred before that of the Romish Bishops For the major none that are truly noble and learned can deny And for the minor to omit many other places it vvil evidently appeare to any that vvill looke upon the â—irst Epistle to Tim. and the 5. There the Apostle sayth The Presbyters that rule well are vvorthy of double honour So that it is apparent enough That honour and dignity is contayned in that name vvhich deserveth both reward reverenceâ— respect And in the same Epistle the Apostle sayth Rebuke not a Presbyter but honour him as a Fatherâ— and speaking of Bishops he sayth He that desireth the Office of a Bishop desireth a good worke Hee sayth indeed a good vvorke but a work notwithstandig full of care watchfullnes toyle and labour From all which it is ratifyed That the name and title of Presbyter is a name full of dignity honour and splendour and the title of Bishop a compellation or name full of labour anhelation solicitude and therefore to be preferred before the title of Bishop being farre more excellent Againe That name which whensoever it is ioyned with the name of Bishop hath alwayes the first place and precedencie that name is most excellâ—nt But the name of Presbyter when it is ioyned with the title of Bishop hath ever the precedencie Ergo it is to be preferred before it For the major the adversaries cannot deny it For they conclude and establish the precedency and preminency of Peter before the oâ—her Apostles because he is often first named And for the minor the vvord of God declares it illustriously as may be seene in the 20. of the Acts and the first of Titus and the fifâ—h chapter of the first of Peter In all vvhich places the names of Presbyâ—er and Bishop being ioyned together Presbyter is ever first named To all this Peter calls himselfe a Presbiter The same doth Saint Iohn as if all Ecclesiasticall dignity vvere placed in that name But there are many arguments yet remayning to prove the dignitie of Presbyters to bee above that of Bishops if there be any difference betvveen them For They to whom in the most difficult controversies of the Church and greatest dissentions the Primitive Christians had ever recourse and who the spirit of God did in a special maner assist and who made Decrees by which the Church of God to this day is to be regulated and governed and who the Apostles themselves made their sociats and companions in both Generall and Provinciall Counsels and the which had the next place unto the Apostles in their Assemblies they are more worthy and to be had in greater honour and veneration then the other Ministers of the Church which are neither by name nor place knowne in those holy meetings But the Presbyters are such and Therefore the Presbyters are more worthy and excellent then Bishops As for the major the adversaries cannot doubt of that vvhich bestovv dignity and honour upon their Bishops according to the place and degree they had in the first Councels And for the minor none can doubt of it vvho hath read the 15 of the Actsâ— and the twentyeth chapter of the same book But they that desire to be satisfied concerning this argument at large the Defendent desireth vvould read any of his booksâ— Lastly That the dignity of the Presbyters may yet appeare above â—he title of Bishops it is thus evident Those to whom the Keyes
there had been no other meanes for him to have come to the knowledge of the Scripture this doth not necessarily follow But were it granted that had not the Church told Augustine which was the Scripture and Word of God that he had then never beleeved it to be the Word must â—his conclusion of necessity be gathered from thence That all men must be like Augustin in this or that the Autority of men is greater and above the Scripture all â—hese are poore lame consequences and not beseeming the worthy Faâ—hers of the Church in open Court to publish to the infinit dishonour of holy Scripture advancing human Autority above it which indeed is meere blasphemy against the Holy Word of God For would not every man accuse one of folly if an other being a stranger and never seeing the King and meeting him in a journey with all his Nobles richly clad as it beseemeth noble Peeres so to be for the honour of their Master and the Majesâ—y of his Court and in this company where there are so many brave personages and all so excellently apparrelledâ— and he not knowing vvhich vvas the King should aske some of his retinue or some Courâ—ier vvhich of those vvere the King Novv doth it follovv because at that time the man should not have knovvne the King vvithout this information from some of the attendantâ— that the King could no other way have beene knowne unto him or that Kings could be knowne no other wayes but by such informatioÌ„s No rational creatures wil so conclude at that time he in part beleeved from the Courtiers relation that it vvas the King But after that he seeth the King in his Court or upon his thâ—one vvith his crovvne upon his head and vvith all his State and Magnificence and his Nobles in their service vvith the reverence that is yeilded unto him then hee beleeveth no longer because the Servant told him that it vvas the King but because by his ovvne reason he is evinced of it knovving that such attendance such a guard â— so great pomp dignity and State belongeth to none but Kings And it vvould be thought not madnes only but treason to say if one had not told him that it was the King othervvise the King could not be knovvne or that he that told him vvas greater then the King or his Autority greater The same may be sayd of the Holy and ever bleâ—sed Word of God that it is a great madnes impiety to conclude That the Holy Scripture cannot be knovvne to be the Word of God vvithout the Autority of the Fathers or Church or that the Autority of either is greater then the Scriptures vvhich to affirme is vvithout doubt blasphemy in a High degree against Almighty God and his blessed revealed vvill able to provoke his indignation upon us because it is an error against the very light of Nature art and reason and the apparent Words of the Scripture vvhere the Word of God is called the immortall seed 1. Pet. chap. 1. v. 23. vvhich liveth abideth for ever Novv all seed by its invvard vertue sproutet into a blade is by it self and his ovvne fruits knovvn to be vvhat it is So is the Scripture of it self knovvne to be the Word of God and as Paul sayth in the 1. of â—he Cor. chap. 2. ver 4. the Word of God is in the Demonstration of the Spirit in povver and maketh the hearts of the beleevers burne vvith in them as it did to those that â—vent vvith Christ to Emmaus Luke the 2â— vers 32. and as the Apostle sayth in the first to the Thessalonians the 2. chap. vers 3. that they received the Word of God not as the vvord of man but as it is in the trueth the Word of God vvhich effectually vvorketh in those that beleeve and in the 4. of the Hebr. 12. Paul sayth that the Word of God is quick and povverfull sharper then a tvvo edged Svvord piercing even to the dividing asunder the soule and Spirit and of the raines and marrovv and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart So that by these testimonies and thousands more that might be produced it is sufficiently evident that the Scriptures of themselves are declaratory and by their ovvne native and inbred splendor doe conciliat Autority credit to themselves neither have they any need of 〈◊〉 from man or the Fathers Autority to prove them â—â—e Word of God For before there vvere any Fathers the Scriptures had their Autority and vvere knovvne to be Divine Neither did the Fathers or Church make them Authentick or the Word of God no more then a Piller maketh a proclamation to bee the Kings vvill and pleasure because it stands upon it but the Church or Fathers declared them so to bee neither doth or can the very Synagogue of Rome deny this How impious then and blasphemous are â—he Prelaâ—es that they dare thus vilify the holy Scriptures and make their autority nothing And can any man of judgment see any reason why one should beleeve the Fathers more then the Scriptures or why one should beleeve that these are the works of Augustin or Ambrose should doubt that this is the Gospell of Luke Iohn or that these are the Epistles of Paul Of these things the Defendent for his part can see no reason Neither can there any solid reason be yeelded why one should beleeve the Fathers more theÌ„ the Scriptures themselvesâ— when the Fathers are not to be câ—â—dâ—tedâ— but as they accord with Scripture as the very Popish Canons Papists themselves acknowledge for in the Canon law thus speakes the Pope Paâ—rum quantalibet doctrina sanctitate pollentium Scripta ex Canonâ—â—â—â— sacris consideranda nec cum credendi necessitate sed cum judicandi libertate legenda sunt Neither is Baronius his opinion other concerning the autority of the Fathersâ— as at large may be seen in his Annals an 34. § 213. and an 44. § 42. And for Bellarmine he is of the same mind in his 2 booke concerning Councels in the 12 chapter in these words Sacra Scripta Patrum non sunt regula nec habâ—nt autoritatem obligandi And when the very adversaries doe thus fully expresse themselves that whatsoever autority is in the Fathers books and writings it is onely as they harmonise and accord with the Scripture shall any man then thinke or suppose that there should yet be more autority in the writings of the Fathers or in the Decrees of Councels then there is in the holy Scriptures from whence as the Fountaine those streames doe issue very reason will confound the fatuity of this devillish doctrine for the streames brookes are never so pure nor good as the fountaine for it is ever the fountaine that gives authority of goodnes and the name of excellency to the little sucking rivers as all men knowâ— and they commend the waters ever from the fountaine they come so
the proceedings of the Prelats against himself and their dealings tovvards others of their brethren the theame of vvhich booke he the Defendent desireth the honorable Courtâ— to take a briefe relation of at this time that they may the better be informed of the falsitie of the information And first for the principall theame and matter of the booke it is the State of the questions in his Flagello Pontificis for vvhich he suffered vvith the summe of the Arguments he produced for the confirmation of the trueth The questioâ—s arising betvveen the Babylonian and the defendent concerning the autoritie of the Pope were these The first whether Christ did constitute Peter sole Monarch of the Catholick Church The second vvhether the Pope of Rome if hee bee a Bishop as hee is a Bishop hath Autoritie jurisdiction over Kings Emperors Thirdlie vvhether Popish Bishops be true Bishops or no and of the discussing of these questios the defendent saith his adversarie vvas the sole cause In the handling of the which the Defendenâ— fâ—rther affirmeth that he used all the caution that vvas possible as he supposed for man to use prefacing in his booke that being to dispute about the Autority of the Bishop of Rome he desired candidly to be understood of all menâ— for while he disputed of Episcopall autoritie he medled nor contended not against such Bishops as ackovvledge their autoritie jurisdiction from Kings and Emperors into vvhose hands the government of States Kingdomesâ— and Commonvvealths is by God committed For if the Popes themselves vvould acknovvledge their immense and unlimited autoritie from Kings and Emperors he the defendent there said if they commanded nothing contrarie to the vvill and Word of God that he for his part out of the reverence duty â— loyaltie to his Prince vvould obey it The Words in the Original are these Verum de Episcoporum autoritate locutus à bonis bene intelligi cupio Non enim litis litem moveo quatenus ab Imperatoribus Regibus Principibus Terre quorum interest salutem civium tueri potestatem â—us Imperium in socios totumque Dei gregem adepti sunt Nam si Romani Episcopi immâ—nsam illam nullis limitibus circumscriptam autoritatem indulgentia Principum acceptam ferrent voluntati Episcopali nihil voluntati divinae inimicum jubenti obtemperandum putem ob reverentiam Principi si volenti debitam c. So that the defendent having thus playnlie set downe his minde before knowing that all the jurisdiction that the Bishops in England now exercise over others is â—rom the King he thought himself not onely secure from danger but expected favâ—ur at least from the Bishops their helping hand especially when the opposing the Popes Autority in England is a thing that the King and State have ever so well allowed of And that this honorable Court may yet be fâ—rther informed of the speciall cause for which the Prelats are so displeased with the defendent it was for the truely and narrowlie disputing and discussing of the second question to wit whether the Pope of Rome if he be a Bishop as he is a Bishop have Autoritie jurisdiction not onelie over his fellow brethâ—en but over Kings and Emperors which the Defendent there denyed for many warrantable Arguments The summe of which he desireth here to relate unto this honorable Court for his just and necessarie defence justification For by the veâ—ie light of nature and unanswerable reason it is evident and manifest that where there is an equalitie and pariâ—ie amongst men there the one doth not exceed the other in power or Dominion Paris enim in Parem non esse imperium inter Naturae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est Novv Divine constitution hath made Bishops and Presbyters or Elders a like and equall vvhich that it might the better appeare the Defendent propounded there tvvo things to be proved The first vvas That Bishops and Presbyters vvere by the Word of God one and the same Secondlie That Presbyters had equall Autoritie of Governmentâ— Ordination Excommunication vvith Bishops vvherein onely consists their preeminency Autoritie above their brethren vvhich things being proved it vvill necessarilie follovv That the Pope of Rome as he is Bishop doth no vvay exceed other Bishops and Presbyters they being in all things a like and equall unto him much lesse hath any Autoritie and povver over Kings and Emperours And for the proofe of the first position the vvords Presbyter Bishop do sufficientlie evince iâ— vvhich in holy Scripture though diverse in sound signifie one and the same thing as not to cite the vvords themselves vvhich would be large The Apostle Paul to Titus in the first chapter doth sufficientlie shew vvhere the words Bishop Presbyter are confounded And likevvise in the first Epistle of Peter and the fift Chapter there Presbyter and Bishop signifie one and the same thing And the Epistlâ— to the Philippians the first Chapter and the â—irst verse doâ—h apparentlie demonstrate itâ— and diverse other places might be produced dilucidating the same thing But the 20â— of the Acts puts all out of controversie where Presbyter and Bishop signifie one the same thingâ— for officeâ— honour and function so that the identity of their officeâ— is signifyed by those tvvo expressions Neither is there a confusion of their names with a difference still of their functions administrations as some vvould cavill for in these places vvhere Presbyters are called Bishops the disputation is not about the title but about the office signified and specified by the title For vvhen S. Paul exhorts the Presbyters to have an eye to their duty charge he useth this reason that the Holy Ghost had made them Bishopsâ— And the trueth of â—his is so evident that the Rhemists themselves as learned men as any Bishops in England and as able to mayntayne an error are forced ingenâ—ouslie to confesse it saying in expresse vvords in their Noâ—es upon the 28. vers of that Chapter That in the Apostles times there vvas no difference betvveen Presbyter and Bishopâ— so that for the first position it is not onely by the Word of God clearlie evident but by the very confession of the adversaries of the trueth granted as a thing without controversy Novv for proofe of the second position that Presbyters as vvell as the Bishop of Rome have the povver and right of Government Ordination and Excommunication by vvhich in these times Bishops onely exceed Presbyters the defendent vvill here brieflie demonstrat it referring those of this honorable Court that have a desire to search into the full trueth of it to his booke And for proofe that the Government vvas committed unto them and that they exercised the same it is most perspicuous out of the first of Timothie 5. vvhere the Apostle sayth The Presbyters that rule vvell are vvorthie of double honour especially those that labour in Word and Doctrine By this testimonie it is evident that they
there at the Barr as a Delinquent for mayntayning the Religion established by publick Autority the honour of the King and the glory of his Majestie and that one Chouny a Sussex man a laick as vvell as himselfe should vvrite a Booke and set it forth by publicke autoritie mayntayning the Church of Rome to be a true Church and never to have had so much in her as the suspition of error in fundamentall poynts and that this booke should be dedicated to the Prelate of Canterbury patrionized by him vvhich Bookâ— the Defâ—ndent both read and exhibited in Court by vvhich notwithstandig the King himselfe and all his Subiects were made Schismaticks and hereticks to the infinit dishonour of God our Gratioâ—s King and King Iames of blessed memorie and our most holie profession and religion This as the defendent told the Lord of Dorset struck an amazement in him especially vvhen the author of it must be favoured and coâ—ntenanced by Canterburie and for the defending of the honour and dignitie of our Church and the honour of the King the Defendent should stand as an evill doer Novv vvhen the defendent vvas come thus farre and vvas then approaching more closely unto them all intending more fullie in the pleading of his cause to have set forth their unjust dealing they tolde him that he rayled and imperiouslie commanded him to hold his peace vvhich vvas the reason of his Apologeticus ad Praesules Anglicanos vvhere he tooke libertie to vvrite that and publish it to the vievv of all the vvorld vvhich he vvould have then spoke But after that they had silenced him they then fell a thundering against him everie one as he pleased all of them joyning in this one onely excepted that they censured him onely for his Booke and in their censure they unanimously agreed that the Defendent should pay the costs of suite a thousand pounds unto the King for a fine be debarred of his practice that his booke should be burnt and that the Defendent should lye in prison till recantation and in the meane time be delivered unto Satan And thus did the Sublime Court deale with the Defendent for doing his duty But here the Defendent craveth favour againe of the honorable Court that he may briefly letting the puny Iudges and their nonsenâ—e dye in silence say something of the Prelats haranges because they onely were the men that found themselves aggreeved aâ— his writing to say the trueth all the other are Officiers under them and are the Prelats hangbyes he meanes the Doctors to doe what they would have theÌ„ as hourely experience teacheâ—h all men And so much the more earnestly he desireth this liberty because it will make much for the demoÌ„stration of the justice of his accusation against the Prelats both in respect of the dishonor they have don unto God by it the dishonour of the King their Master King Iames of precious memory and the wrong done to himself in particular Now the first that entred this combat was Francis White Bishop of Ely who in the first place most blasphemously and with many contumelyes reproached the holy Scriptures making nothing of their divine Autority as all the standers by can witnes for he reviling the Defendent sayd That he had nothing in his booke but Scripture which was as he tearmed it the refuge of all Hereticks and Schismaticks openly averring withall That the Scripâ—ures could not be knowne to be the Word of God but by the Fathers and Saint Augustin would not have beleeved the Scriptures to be the Word of God had not the Church told him so Further he sayd That the Scripture could not be knowne distinguished from â—he Apocrypha but by the Faâ—hers nor the meaning of the Scripture found out but by the Fathers that all the Faâ—hers from all Antiquity which is most false as the defendent in a speciall booke hath sufficiently shewed made and proved a vast difference between Bishops and Presbyters and that there was ever a greater excellency and Autority in the Bishop then in Presbyters And this with an unanâ—mous coÌ„sent they all agreed in till a base fellow Calvin for so he tearmed that ever to be honoured Divine rose up in an obscure corner of the World viâ—lated and overtrew all order Autority in the Church and would allso have demolished the Autority of the Magistrates And then turning his speech to the Defendent unhumanly he called him Base fellow Brasen faced Fellow Base Dunce and sayd in the face of the Court That if he could not mayntayne his Episcopall Autority to be Iure Divino he would fling away his Rotchet And so concluding with those that had gone before him in his censure he sat downe in a very great fuâ—y and passion Afâ—er him came forth the Bishop of Yorke and in that numerous Assembly proclaymes That Iesus Christ made him a Bishop and the holy Ghost consecrated him and that he had not his Autority from the King for Bishops were before Kings and that Bishops held the Crownes of Kings upon their heads and so peremptorily averring that the Defendent ought to be knockt downe with club-Law for his ignorance assenting with the rest in their Censure he fell a sleep In the third place the Bishop of London advanced forwards speaking very loud and temerarious words against the Holy Scriptures saying That he had thought to have found some great Matters in the Defendents booke seeing him so confident and so peremptory but diligently reading of it he met with nothing in it but Scripture which as he sayd was the refuge of all Schismeticks Hereticks so according with his predecessors in their opinion and censure he concluded his part of speech But last of all came forth the Prelat of Canterbury who with a frontlesse boldnes avouched his Episcopall Autority preeminency over his breâ—hren to be onely from God very much blaming Calvin for his faâ—tious Spirit saying That their Ecclesiasticall Autority the power they exercised was from Christ Iesus and produced Timothy and Titus to proveâ— the same assertion and that Bishops were before Christian Kings and they held the Crownes of Kings upon their heads For no Bishop no King those that would have no Bishops sought to overthrow all Government in his censure he jumped in all things with the rest saving in the Fine which as he sayd hee thought too little and therefore ought of meere conscience as he told the other Iudges hee fined the Defendent a Thousand pounds more But he had one thing more to speake as he sayd concerning the Châ—rch of Rome and about that he resolved publickly there to declare himself in regard the Defendent had cast Chounyes book unto him in open Court and of the Synagogue of Rome he spake verie honorably affirming That shee was a true Church and that shee did not erre in fundamentall poynts and all this hee spake in that publick Sessions All which the Defendent hath
borrow no help from without them or fetcht in humane witnesse for the declaring of their Divinity There was no need to send unto the Prophets or the Church in old time to inquire whether the Scriptures were the Word of God amongst any that were but any â—hing acquaynted with the language of Canaan as is manifestly evident in the 2 of the Kings 22. vers 8.10 and the 2. of the â—hron 34. vers 14 15 19â— where it appeareth that when the booke of the law was found by Helchia the Priest in the house of the Lord he knew it at the first reading of it to be the Word of God the same did the King they were neither of them told by the Church or any Prophets or Fathers that it was the book of the law neither did the King send unto Hulda the Prophetesse to know whether it were a true authentick Copy all this needed not it needed then no Godfathers Godmothers to Christen and give it the name of the law of God and holy Scripture as without the with it could not have been knowne there was no need of any such thing or any humane autority for the proofe of that in those times all that were then true Israelits knew it by its owne testimony to be the Word of God and shall any man now thinke that the Scriptures are more obscure and darkeâ— and harder to be discerned by their owne testimony to be Divine and holy then when they had a vaile before them and their sacred treasuries of Divine trueths were muffled up in so many types mysteries Certainly this is not onely great ingratitude to Gods bounty but very contempt and disgrace of holy Scriptures that their most excellent self autority can have no credit amongst Christians without adventiciall assistance of vaine man Is not the witnes testimony of God greater then the testimony of manâ— If we receive the witnes of men the witnes of God is greater sayth S. Iohn in his first epistle chap 5. vers 9. But the Preâ—ats affirmeâ— the testimony of man is to be preferred before the witnes of God so that we ought not beleeve â—he Spirit witnessing but the testimony of the Fathers for they say the Scriptures can noâ— beknowne without the Fathers Christ who was truâ—h it selfe saiâ—h in the 5. of Iohn vers 36. I have a greater witnesse then that of Iohn and what was that witnes his works the witnes and approbation of hâ—s Father the Scriptures Christ here preferres the testimony of the Scripture before the testimony of Iohnâ— which was the greatest of all the Prophets and the Prelats preferre the testimony of the Fathers before the Scriptures and is not this to contemne the holy Scriptures S. Peter in that glorious transfiguration of Christ upon the mount heard the voice of God the Father notwithstanding he sayth in his 2â— epistle chap. 1. vers 19. we have also a more sound word of prophesy And Christ himselfe so reverenced the holy Scriptures that he seemeth to preferre Moses his words bâ—fore his owne saying if yee beleeve not his writings how shall yee beleeve my words and in the person of Abraham when Dives desired one might be sent to his Fathers house to warne his brethren of the danger of torment that he was in Christ sayth they have Moses and the Prophets let them heare them and he sayd nay Father Abraham but if one-went unto them from the dead they will repentâ— and he sayd unto him If they heare not Moses and the Prophets neither will they be perswaded though one rise from the dead By all which testimonies of sacred writ it is evident that if the Scripture of it self cannot prevaile with men that then there is little hope that very miracles will doe them any good for the begetting of faith in them or bringing of them to the truth much lesse the Fathers and this by Christs owne words is confirmed unto us yet the Prelats nevertheles esteeme of the Fathers autority more then of the sacred Scriptures But can any man that hath but the name of a Christian thinke that those that will not be moâ—ed by the Majest and autority of the Scriptures speaking in the name of the Lord of hosts that the autority of the Fathers will prevaile with them who are not â—o be beleeved but as they speake out of the holy Scriptures and by their Divine autority Christ denyes it and therefor we are rather to beleeve that then the phantasies and impious grolleries of a few ungodly men Is not the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of his owne self sufficiency so able to declare its owne mind and meaning that it hath no need of the Fathers help without doubt unles prophane mouthes will make it a pack of nonsense Truly one would thinke that very reason might be able to convince these wretched wranglers if they had not hardened themselves to fight against the truth yea and sett themselves to resist thâ— holy Spirit of God for if we looke upon very nature art and reason they would convince us for there is no naturall thing but will prove and shew it selfe what it is and declare its owne nature as the Sun Moone Starrs declare their owne nature and tell what they are to every beholder of them fire by it self and of its owne nature esâ—ence is knowne what it is earth and water doe the same and the same may be sayd of gold and silver all other metals they are able to witnes for themselves what they are and to distinguish their owne natures from each others to any rationall man Againe All artificiale things are knowne what they are by their proper formes and so are discriminated the one from the other every one of them carrying a sufficient indication of it self yea all humaneâ— writings â—hew from whence they comeâ— by the spirit they are writ with and doe shew whether the Authors Writers of them be learned or unlearned or be men in autority place or not and there needs no Commentaries upon them to tell whose they are The Proclamations Edicts of Kings and Princes doe sufficiently without either marginall notes or annotations declare of themselves that they come from imperiall autority and the Majest the dignity of their phrase and expression proclame to all men that the authors of them are sacred persons and hee that should call them in question without a Councell or Parlament or the Faâ—hers and Iudges of â—he lawes autority would be thought no loyall Subject and not worthy to live and that deservedly for the very maner of their penning writing doe ever convince their Readers both of the dignity of their matter and of the excellency of the personages that set them forth And shall any in this age of light be found so darkened in his judgmentâ— as to thinke the Word of God inferior to all naturall artificiall humane things yet so it is to
that the spring hath ever the precedency and is of greatest autority and without all controversy as it overthroweâ—h all reason so it is exceedingly impious against our great God the fountayne of all good and the giver of every good and perfect gift and they that shall speake so contumeliously as the â—iâ—â—â—ps doe of these Fountaynes of living waters â—he holy Scriptures as they did the Defendent wâ—ll euer mayntaine they are contemners and despisers of the holy Scriptures and in this opinion he will live and die Neiâ—her did they lesse offend in saying that the Scriptures could not be knowne from the Apocryâ—ha without the help and auâ—hority of the Fathers which poynt also the Defendent desireth this honorable Court to heare a little discussed it being a thing of so high nature concerning not onely the glory of God buâ— the good of every mans Soule the peace of the Church and the tranquillity of the whole Kingdom And therefore he humbly craveth favour that he may agitate it here a little for the furtheâ— Demonstration of the iustnes of his accusaâ—ion hee chargeth the Prelats with viz That they are disgracers and contemners of the holy Scriptures They say that the Scriptures can not be distinguished from the Apocrypha but by the Fathers which assertion is against sense and reason it self too impious for Prelats to speake Is not this an essentiall property of the Scriptures of the old Testament that they were written in the Hebrew tongue and that they did give witnes of Christ and received autority from him and that they were put into the hands keeping of the elect chosen people of God as a Treasury Now the Apocrypha had none of all this honour Neithâ—r did ever the Jews account of them as Scripture yea to this day they reject them Neither for these reasons onely are they distinguished from the Apocrypha but for many others the divinity purityâ— sublimity appeares in the Canonicall Scriptures the futility folly and falsity in the Apocrypha are too too manifest and is there any man so stupid blockish to thinke that this age wherein we live cannot distinguish or discerne gold from lead without the autority of the Fathers There is a vaster difference between the Apocrypha and the Canonicall Scriptures then is between gold and lead Every mans reason will tell him an apparent difference between brasse beanes But if any be desirous of autority to distinguish them will not Christs and the Apostles suffice The very Papists that have not abiured all honesty goodnesâ— do freely acknovvledge and confesse that those onely are Canonicall Scriptures which the Apostles did eiâ—her write or approve of But thâ—y did never approve of the Apocrypha The Canonicall Scriptures of the old Testament did in shâ—dows and figâ—res sett fâ—rth that which thâ— new Testament cleâ—rly speaks They did adâ—mâ—rate the new Testament expresseth in lively colours one anâ— the same thing They consent one with an other and yeild each other mutuall ayde and help Now the Apocrypha do neither foretell the new nor are by their autority and approbation illustrated and declared Christ commends Moses the Prophets and the Psalmes as books without all exception Luc. 24. and grounds his doctrine upon them but never honours nor graceth the Apocrypha with his Commendations or wiâ—nes How then can the Prelaâ—s without great conâ—umely unâ—o the sacred Scriptures say they cannot be distinguished and knowne from â—he Apocrypha but by the Fathers especially after the judgment of Christ himself is given and hath passed upon the Scriptures for the autorizing of them to be â—he word and will of God The Fathers as the learned acknowledge were for their times many of them worthy of honour but yet they vvere subject not to a fevv errors and often agreed not vvith themselves and are ever at variance vvith others and have been indeed the originall and cause of allmost all the coâ—troversies vvith vvhich the Churches are novv tormented And therefore to conclude this poynt the Defendent sayth that the Prelats are disgracers and contemners of holy Scripture vvhen against so much light of reason and Divine autority they say they cannot be distinguished and knovvne from the Apocrypha but by the Fathers Neither â—s the third Thesis Position freer from impudency and outrage against the Scriptures then the tvvo former In that they say the meaning of the Scripture could not be knovvne but by the Fathers For in this they doe as much as playnly affirme there is an other vvay to heaven then by â—he Scriptures vvhich if it be not a contemning and disgracing of holy Scripture then there never vvas any Nay if it be not blasphemy the Defendent knovveth not vvhat blasphemy isâ— and therefore all those that desire salvation and to goe to heaven must come to the Schoole of the Fathers and not to the Doctrine of the Scriptures And hovv then vvill the poore people doe to be saved that never knevv vvhat a Father vvas Nay hovv did all those goe to heaven that dyed before the Fathers For the Prelats say that the meaning of the Scripture cannot be knovvn vvithout the Fathers vvithout the knovvledge of the Scripture there is no salvation It is most manifest by these expressions of the Prelats that they vvith their untempered morter vvould put out the light of the Scripturesâ— make them not onely inferior to all mens vvritings but a very pack of Non-sense for vvheresoever thâ—re is any sense there can something be gathered out of it especially if it be so large a Booke And hovvsoever there bee many depths in Scripture there is also great perspicuity so that according to the ancient saying as an eliphant may svvimme a lamb may vvade thâ—re also But if it should be so as the Prelats say that without the autority and interpretation of the Fathers the meaning of them could not be knowne found out then the Dâ—fendent affirmeth they should be inferior to all other writings yea to every Letter and Epistle that men penn with understanding for they ever carry their owne sense and meaning along with them or to what end are they otherwise writ If the letter that discovered the gunpouder treason had not had a match and light of understanding in it that Popish plot had never been discoveredâ— till by its cruell flames it had declared it self and by the funerall of the vvhole Kingdome had been made knovvne and left those that survived and lived in perpetuall mourning If every Letter-vvriting and booke then that is penned vvith judgment carry its ovvne sense and meaning in it and the books for vvhich the Defendent is novv questioned and if all Proclamations Lettres and Edicts of Princes are easily to be understood and carry their ovvne interpretation vvith them so that none after their publication may pretend ignorance dare any man be so bold and audacious as to say that the Letters and Proclamations of the King of heaven and
God of the whole world can not bee understood when notwithstanding David sayth they give light and understanding to the simple and that by reading and meditating in the law testimonies of the Lord he grew wiser then his Teachers and Paul that Timothy knew the Scriptures from his youth 2â— Tim. chap. 3. vers 13. and notvvithstanding all this dare the Prelats affirme that the meaning of this Scripture cannot be knovvne vvithout the interpretation of the Fathers We have great cause to praise and blesse God that hath so graciously afforded us better Masters to be taught by It is good ever therefore to listen unto them Let us heare novv then vvhat the Prophets Christ and his Apostles have taught us concerning â—his vvaighty matter and of so great consequence let us follovv their example and instruction vvhich lead us into all truth and not listen to the contemners of holy Scripture They send those that are studious of the vvayes to heaven to the lavv and to the testimonyes Esai 8. to Moses the Prophets and the Scriptures not to the traditions of the Elders and custome of antiquity And they that bring an other doctrine are not to be listened unto neither may vve bid them God Speed The Word of the Lord is the vvaâ— light and Lanthorne to our Feet vvhich send forth sufficiently the beames of truth and shines so clearly of it self as it may be both knovvne proved expounded and unfolden by its ovvne brightnesse Tâ—ey do as it vvere lend luster unto the Sun from a smoaking snuffe that from the mist of the Fathers vvould bring light unto â—he Scriptures God is the Author of the Scriptures vvho is the originall and fountayne of all light in vvhom there is no darknes For the Prophesie came not in old time by the vvill of man but holy men of God spake as they vvere moved by the holy Ghost 2 Pet. chap. 1. vers 21. we have also a more sure vvord of Prophesy sayth the same Apostle vvhereunto you doe vvell that you take heed as unto a light that shineth in a darke place vers 19. So that the Scriptures vvere of purpose penned by holy men inspired by God himâ—elfe for a direction light to the Saints to be guided by and so they are termed by the holy Ghost So that as Peter sayd unto Christ in the sixt of Iohn vvhen he asked his tvvelve Disciples if they also would goe away To whom shall wee goe sayth he thou hast the Words of eternall life Even so we may truly say whither shall wee goe for light and direction to get to heaven but to the holy Scriptures for they have the Words of eternall life in them and this â—ayth Christ and his Apostles and yet notwithstanding all this excellent light that shineth in the Scripture the Prelats averre they are but blind guides and preferre humane darknes before the splendor of these sacred Oracles the Scripâ—ures and say without the interpretation of the Fathers â—hey can not be knowne which is unsupportable blasphemy and as much as to tell the everliving God and truth it selfe hee lyes It is most veritable that they see not the light of the Scripture the eyes of whose minds are blinded neither doe they see the light of the Sun whose eyes are plucked out If our Gospell be hid sayth Saint Paul it is hid to them that are lost in whom the God of this world hath blinded their minds that is in infidels least the light of the glorious Gospell of Christ which is the image of God should shine upon them 2 Cor. chap. 4. vers 3 4â— every one knoweth the voice of that man with whom he is acquaynted as soone as the sound of it commeth to his eares and shall we not know the voice of God so clearly and perspicuously speaking unto us in the Scriptures Those that are taught of God know it â—he true worshippers of him know and understand it those that have any familiar commerce with heaven and in heavenly things But wordly men and those that are given to the love of the same are carelesse of heaven and happines they understand not the Divine language nor heavenly voice Canany heare the voice of God and not assent unto it without the aide and autority of the Fathers what a contumely is this to holy Scripture Shall God have lesse autority credit among men then the Fathers Shall vve not beleeve God speaking unto us and shall we beleeve the Fathers Shall we not give credit to Gods word and shall wee beleeve men Let the dishonor of so great a contumacy against God be farre from Christian obedience Truly the Fathers being conscious of their owne imbecillity and vveaknesseâ— never thought themselves worthy of so great dignity as to suppose that any honour came unto the Scriptures from their interpretations and expositions who in their writings frequently exhort their Readers not to listen what they say but what the Scriptures of the Prophets and Apostles speake in them and no farther to receive their autority and doctrine then it is grounded upon the holy Scriptures expressions to this purpose the Defendent saith he could accumulate infinite out of the Fathers which for brevity he omitteth fearing to be over tedious though it be a matter of greatest importance Such was the modesty of â—he Fathers fearing to be vvise above that vvhich vvas vvritten ever making the holy Scripture the rule and measure to be guided by And in this moderation the Fathers imitated Christ the Prophets and Apostles vvho ever fetch the proofe testimony of their doctrine from the Scriptures not as novv the Prelats doe preposterously bringing autority to the Scriptures from the interpretation of the Fathers according to their ovvne sense To the Lavv and to the Prophets sayth Esay 8. vers 20. vvhosoever speaketh not according to that hath no light in him And Iosua that great Commander is inioyned by God to order and governe himselfe and the people and the whole Common wealth according to the rule of the Scripture Iosua 1. ver 7 8. Onely be thou strong and very couragious that thou mayst observe to doe according to all the law which Moses my servant commanded thee turne not from it to the right hand or to the left that thou mayst prosper whither soever thou goest This Booke of the Law shall not goe out of thy mouth but thou shalt meditate therein day and night that thou mayest observe to doe according to all that is written therein for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous and then thou shalt have good sucâ—â—sse And in the 23 chapter vers 6. he sayth Be yee therefore very couragious to keepe and to doe all that is written in the Booke of the Law of Moses that you turne not asides therefrom to the right hand nor to the left And Christ himselfe our great Master sayth Ioh. 5. vers 38. Search the Scriptures for in them yee thinke to have
oveâ—ruling their brethren and beating their fellow servants is to bee rebels against Christ and to usurp that vvhich belongeâ—h not unto them and vvhich thâ—y ought not to meddle with and therefore vvhen the Prelats doe not onely eate up and devoure this forbidden fruit but challenge a right unto it from God himselfe and say they have no depencie from the King the Defendent maintaineth that it is intollerable arrogancie against God the King and by vvhich they are delinquents in an elevated degree of contumacie against them both What an horrible impudencie is this in the Prelats or any Subject that vindicats their quarrell that they dare call the Hierarchie sacred especially when they derive it from Rome whom King IAMES of famous memorie calls Babylon and the Pope Antichrist and can any man thâ—nke that those that are lineally descended from Babylon and Anticâ—rist that great enemie of Christ his kingdome and members can be holy and sacred Certainly if the fountaine be not holy the streames cannot be holy Yea King Iames is very large in that his Booke to all Christian Princes in discovering the impiety of the Hierarchy of Rome and proves the Pope to be that man of Sin and all the Prelaâ—s of that Sea to be the Frogs that came out of the bottomles pit For the Nature of Frogs they being Amphibia is to live upon the Earth and in the vvater Novv King Iames sayth That the Prelats are the Frogs for they seeme to be Church men and are ever medling in States affayres creeping out of their stinking guâ—ters are such mighty busy bodies in other mens matters as they trouble all the Nations and Kingdomes vvhere they dvvell and inslave them all So that if the Hierarchy be sacred and the Prelats be the chiefe members of it then they are a generation of sacred frogs the holynesse notvvithstanding of the vvhich is such as fevv mens impiety is greater or more dangerous to Church and State and their usurpation upon both Autorityes deserving severely to be punished especially for that they so abuse his sacred Mast. Autority in oppressing his poore Subjects and trampling upon his prerogative so that to any eye of understanding it may sufficiently appeare by that the Defendent hath sayd that the Prelats are not onely contemners and disgraceâ—s of Holy Scripture but also invaders of the Kings prerogative Royall and enimyes of his imperiall dignity It yet remaynes to pove also that they have farther dishonoured the King their Master and King Iames of famous memory yea our most Holy religion and profession and all this in the Dâ—fendents Censure For vvhat any one of the Prelats did all the other assented to they being one Body it vvas the action of them all though acted in the person of the Prelat of Canterbury vvhich vvas this to magnify the Church of Rome defend the purity of her Doctrine affirming openly that she never erred in fundamental points and vvas a true Church as much as to proclayme the King and all his Subjects Schismaticks and Hereticks and that by the mouth of the Prelate of Canterbury vvhich the Defendent sayth is not onely injurious to the King their Master but to King Iames of famous memory his renovvned Father vvith vvhom for piety and learning all the Prelats together are not to be named the same yeare his Royall excrements are mentioned King Iames that glorious and learned Prince in his Apology to all Christian Princes and States proves the Pope of Rome to be Antichrist and the man of Sinne by many unansvverable arguments He proves likevvise the Church of Rome to be the vvhore of Babâ—lon for her abominations Spirituall Sodome for her filâ—hines and uncleannes Spirituall Egypt for her inslaving the Saints and Servants of God and all this he evinceth by irrefragable Autority thus taught he the whole vvorld his Royall Son and all his Subjects persvvadeth all Christian Princes to come out of Babylon to shake of the yoke of the Pope And in this faith he lived and dyed And this faith is King Charles his Son and our gracious Soveraigne novv Defender of and all this is Orthodox Doctrine vvhich our King did preach unto us and our Royall King novv professeth and vvhich all his Loyall Subjects to God and his Majest vvill seale vvith their blouds This heroicall King notvvithstanding and his Divine Doctrine is stamped under foot by the Prelats to the infinit dishonour of our most pious clement Prince the eternall disgrace of his most incomparable Father and the discredit indeed of the vvhole Church and Kingdome if not indangering the same to the great hardening of the Papists in their Hereticall wayes the perverting of the Kings most Loyall Subjects and teaching the Papists to rebell And to all this the dignity and glory of the Scripture is offuscated by their sable mouths So that what can any man either say or thinke of this progeny of Prelats whose contumacy and rebellion reaâ—cheth to the very clouds and what can men think of this degenerating of-spring of this age The one that they dare against God and the King openly breath out their blasphemies and call evill good and good evill The other that they should out of cowardise suffer their Royal King and his most excellent Father to be thus abused But this Defendent hopeth that this honorable Court like that noble Nehemiah vvith other true-hearted loyall Subjects remayning about the King vvill novv at last informe his Majestâ— of the intollerable insolency of the Prelats of vvhich he beleeveth they vvere formerly ignorant or not so vvell acquaynted and seeke by his Autority for redresse against their impudency As for this Defendent for his part he is resolved though left alone ever to say LET THE KING LIVE FOR EVER And although he should suffer a thousands torments from the Prelats living and dying hee will ever cry LET THE KING LIVE FOR EVER And let the name of his learned and transcendent Father liâ—e to perpetuity And let the enemies of the King and Gospell perish Neither will hee ever suffer to the uttermost of his power That either the Kings Honour or the Dignity of his most illustrious Father or the glory of our most Holy profession or the honour of the Holy Scriptures shall be contaminated or Babylon or superstition advanced in his Dominions and crueâ—ly and injustice exercised by the Prelats over his poore Subjects and hold his peace All vvhich evidently appeare in the daylie proceedings of the Prelats in their High Commission and from their speech hourelie there their practises through the vvhole Kingdome Some of vvhich he desireth in order to proveâ— that the honorable Court may be the fuller informed that he hath not causlesly in his Apology layd any crime unto their charge vvhich they are not guilty of And novv to proceed to the other thingâ— the Defendent is chargâ—d vvith Viz that he taxeth the High Commission Court of crueltie injustice vvant of