government under which we live I consider the state of England and that of the Islands and the dignity of Bishops and the condition of the other Ministers of the Church such as it is at this day In Scotland for the time present the State hath otherwise provided but not in England and therefore ye ought not to take example by them as though your State were like theirs I hear that your Governor hath taken order about Wills and appointed one to prove them But I cannot conceive how that may be done without Episcopal Jurisdiction conferred by the Bishop Your Governour I know hath power to present to the Bishop a man proper to execute this authority of the Bishop in his name Likewise the Governor as Patron of the Churches and Parishes of his Government upon the vacancy of any living ought to present by such a time a man well qualified to succeed in the Office of a Pastour but the admission and induction of such a charge belongs to your Bishop and to no body else If I be well informed you observe nothing of all this which if it be so you 'l never be able to justifie it The example of the French Churches and of the Low-Countries doe you no good Your case is quite another They have Laws from their Soveraigns and particular places for themselves but all that you doe is contrary to the Laws and Ordinance of the King your Soveraign You hold Synodicall meetings wherein you make Statutes about the Government of the Church unto which you bind your selves and the rest that are naturall Subjects to the King wherein you unsensibly derogate from his authority The Synods of the Arch-bishops and Bishops together with the rest of the Clergy of this Realm dare not presume that which you doe nor attribute to their Canons and Statutes what you attribute to yours Yet the Assembly of Bishops and of their Clergie is of men far otherwise qualified then some dozen of the Ministers of your Islands to judge and discern what belongs to the edification of the Church their Decrees nevertheless are of no authority to tye unto them those of this Realm till the King yea in his own person have approved them and by Proclamation made them his There is no body in his Realm nor in any of his Dominions that hath power to enact Laws and Decrees but himself The Parliaments authority is great but without the Kings assent nothing takes the rigour of Law I know very vell that at the perswasion of the Ministers your Governours and others that were present to your Synods have subscribed and acknowledged your Synodicall Acts they did it even in my time but their power doth not stretch so far That may bring a greater prejudice to themselves then give force of Ecclesiasticall Law to your Decrees I doe not think that his Majesty being well informed will grant unto your Ministers or Governours of your Islands such authority They will be more pernicious to you then youthink You 'l alledge me I know your Priviledges but I dare boldly answer you that you never had any such priviledges I have read them and have the copies of them and they say that in matters Civil you shall be governed by the ancient Coustumier of Normandy and that you are not subject to the Statutes of the Parliament in such matters nor to the Subsidies other charges and impositions that are raised in England except which God forbid ever should come to pass the King were detained Prisoner by the Enemy In matters Ecclesiasticall you are freed from the Bishop of Constance and under that of Winchester yea even of old by the Popes authority and consent of the two Kings from whom also in part your neutrality in times of warre is approved excommunicating all such as would molest you Ye cannot shew concerning your priviledges but only what is renewed as often as there is a new King And for the Patent which you say you have procured from his Majesty for matters of Religion First it is in generall terms and without any clause derogating from the authority of your Bishops Secondly if it be questioned it may be told you that it was surreptitious and granted you before the King was well informed of the business To conclude you must understand that in matters of Religion the Kings Majesty will doe nothing without the counsell and advice of the Arch-bishop and your Bishop of Winchester wherefore you may doe well to insinuate your selves in their favour and conform your selves to them as we have done in the beginning You may reduce the Decrees of the Church of England and the use of the book of prayers to a good and Christian Discipline farre more solid and better grounded then that for which ye so earnestly bestirre your selves I must addone word more which will be hard of digestion This is it that you may be upbraided that as many Ministers that are naturall of the Countrey being not made Ministers of the Church by your Bishop nor by his Demissories nor by any other according to the order of the English Church you are not true and lawfull Ministers Likewise that as many among you as have not taken institution and induction into your Parishes from the Bishop nor from his Substitute lawfully ordained and authorised so to doe ye are come in by intrusion and usurpation of cure of Souls which no body could give you but your Bishop that is in terms and words Evangelicall that you are not come into the Sheep-fold by the door but by elsewhere and that by the Ecclesiasiastical Laws you are excommunicants and Schismaticks I know well enough you do not regard such Laws and think that your Priviledges will exempt you from them wherein you greatly deceive your selves For a man may tell you who are yee that would have your Ecclesiastical Decrees made by Private Authority to have force of Laws and dare scorn and reject those of the English Church made by Publick Authority by farre honester men greater Scholars without comparison more learned and farre more in number then you are The Kings Majesty by his Royall authority hath approved them this Realm hath received them But what are your Synodall Decrees who be the Authors of them and who be they that have approved them 'T is winkt at and your ignorance is born with but think not that that which is born in you be any such thing as vertue Your Priviledges do not stretch so far as that you may make Ecclesiasticall Decrees Had it been so the Priests had retained Mass and Poperie In that you hold a contrary course to that of the English Church whereof you are and must be if you be Englishmen Members it proceeds from nothing else but from the connivence and indulgence of your Governors who have given too much credit to the French Ministers and partly in the beginning to the stubborness of the Papists of the Islands When your Governors shall have a liking to
alledged how Constantine termeth Church Officers Overseers of things within the Church himself of all without the Church how Augustine witnesseth that the Emperor not daring to judge of the Bishops cause committed it unto the Bishops and was to crave pardon of the Bishops for that by the Donatists importunity which made no end of appealing unto him he was being weary of them drawn to give sentence in a matter of theirs how Hilarie beseecheth the Emperor Constance to provide that the Governors of his Provinces should not presume to take upon them the Judgment of Ecclesiastical causes to whom Commonwealth matters only belonged how Ambrose affirmeth that Palaces belong unto the Emperor Churches to the Minister that the Emperor hath Authority over the Commonwealth of the City and not in holy things for which cause he never would yield to have the Causes of the Church debated in the Princes Consistory but excused himself to the Emperor Valentinian for that being convented to Answer concerning Church Matters in a civil court he came not Besides these Testimonies of Antiquity which Mr. Cart. bringeth forth Doctor Stapleton who likewise citeth them one by one to the same purpose hath augmented the number of them by adding other of the like nature namely how Hosius the Bishop of Corduba answered the Emperor saying God hath committed to thee the Empire with those things that belong to the Church he hath put us in trust How Leontius Bishop of Tripolis also told theself same Emperor as much I wonder how thou which art called unto one thing takest upon thee to deal in another for being placed in Military and Politique Affairs in things that belong unto Bishops alone thou wilt bear rule We may by these Testimonies drawn from Antiquity if we list to consider them discern how requisite it is that Authority should always follow received laws in the manner of proceeding For in as much as there was at the first no certain law determining what force the principal Civil Magistrates Authority should be of how far it should reach and what order it should observe but Christian Emperors from time to time did what themselves thought most reasonable in those Affairs by this mean it cometh to pass that they in their practice varie and are not uniforme Vertuous Emperors such as Constantine the great was made conscience to swerve unnecessarily from the customes which had been used in the Church even when it lived under Infidels Constantine of reverence to Bishops and their spiritual authority rather abstained from that which himself might lawfully do then was willing to claim a power not fit or decent for him to exercise The order which had been before he ratifieth exhorting Bishops to look to the Church and promising that he would do the office of a Bishop over the Common-wealth Which very Constantine notwithstanding did not thereby so renounce all authority in judging of spirituall causes but that sometimes he took as St. Augustine witnesseth even personall cognition of them Howbeit whether as purposing to give therein judicially any sentence I stand in doubt for if the other of whom St. Augustine elsewhere speaketh did in such sort judge surely there was cause why he should excuse it as a thing not ususally done Otherwise there is no let but that any such great person may hear those causes to and fro debated and deliver in the end his own opinion of them declaring on which side himself doth judge that the truth is But this kind of sentence bindeth no side to stand thereunto it is a sentence of private perswasion and not of solemn jurisdiction albeit a King or an Emperour pronounce it Again on the contrary part when Governors infected with Heresie were possessed of the highest power they thought they might use it as pleased themselves to further by all means therewith that opinion which they desired should prevail They not respecting at all what was meet presumed to command and judge all men in all causes without either care of orderly proceeding or regard to such laws customs as the Church had been wont to observe So that the one sort feared to doe even that which they might and that which the other ought not they boldly presumed upon the one sort modestly excused themselves when they scace needed the other though doing that which was inexsable bare it out with main power not enduring to be told by any man how far they roved beyond their bounds So great odds between them whom before we mentioned and such as the younger Valentinian by whom St. Ambrose being commanded to yeild up one of the Churches under him unto the Arrians whereas they which were sent on his message alledged that the Emperour did but use his own right for as much as all things were in his own power the answer which the holy Bishop gave them was that the Church is the House of God and that those things which be Gods are not to be yielded up and disposed of at the Emperors will and pleasure his pallaces he might grant unto whomsoever A cause why many times Emperours did more by their absolute authority then could very well stand with reason was the over-great importunity of wicked Hereticks who being enemies to peace and quietness cannot otherwise then by violent means be supported In this respect therefore we must needs think the state of our own Church much better settled then theirs was because our Laws have with farr more certainty prescribed bounds unto each kind of power All decisions of things doubtfull and corrections of things amiss are proceeded in by order of Law what person soever he be unto whom the administration of judgement belongeth It is neither permitted unto Prelate nor Prince to judge and determin at their own discretion but Law hath prescribed what both shall do What power the King hath he hath it by Law the bounds and limits of it are known The entire community giveth general order by Law how all things publickly are to be done and the King as the head thereof the highest in authority over all causeth according to the same Law every particular to be framed and ordered thereby The whole body politick maketh Lawes which Lawes give power unto the King and the King having bound himself to use according unto Law that power it so falleth out that the execution of the one is accomplished by the other in most religious and peaceable sort There is no cause given unto any to make supplication as Hilary did that Civil Covernors to whom Common-wealth matters only belong may not presume to take upon them the judgment of Ecclesiastical causes If the cause be spiritual secular Courts doe not meddle with it we need not excuse our selves with Ambrose but boldly and lawfully we may refuse to answer before any Civill Judge in a matter which is not Civill so that we doe not mistake the nature either of the cause or of the
22. IX The Princes of the Levites 1 Chron 15 5 2 Chron 31 12 and 35 9 Nehem 12 22 X. The Head of the Levites Officers The Scribe * 2 Chron 31. 13. * Of the Singers 1 Chron. 16. 5. Nehem. 12. 42. Of the Porters 1 Chron. 9. 17. and 15. 22. Of the Treasurers 1 Chron. 26. 24. 2 Chron. 21. 11. XI The Levites themselves XII The Chief of the Nethinims Nehem. 11. 21. XIII The Nethinims Gibeonites Josua 9. 21. Solomons servants 1 King 9. 21. Nehem. 7. 60. It is not only requisite that things be done but that they be diligently done against sloth and that they be done continually and constantly * not for a time against Schism and if they be not that redress may be had To this end it is that God appointeth Overseers 1. To urge others if they be slack 2 Chron. 24. 5. 34. 12 13. 2. To keep them in course if they be well 2 Chron. 29. 5. 31. 12. 34. 12 13. 3. To punish if any be defective Jerem. 29. 26 For which cause A power of commanding was in the High Priest 2 Chron. 23. 8. 18. 24. 26. 31. 13. A power Judicial if they transgressed Deut. 17 9. Zach. 3. 7. Ezek. 44. 24. Under paine of death Deut. 17. 12. Punishment in prison and in the Stocks Jer. 29. 26. in the Gate of Benjamin Jer. 20. 2. Officers to Cite and Arrest John 7. 32. Acts 5. 18. This Corporal To suspend from the Function Ezra 2. 62. To excommunicate Ezra 10. 8. John 9. 22. 12. 42 16. 2. This Spiritual 1. Why may not the like now be for the Government of the Christian Church There is alledged on only stop That the High Priests was a Figure of Christ who being now come in the flesh the Figure ceaseth and no Argument thence to be drawn Answ. There is no necessity we should press Aaron for Eleazar being Princeps principum that is having a Superior Authority over the Superiors of the Levites in Aarons life time was never by any in this point reputed a Type of Christ so that though Aaron be accounted such yet Eleazar will serve our purpose As also the 2 Chron. 35 8. We read of three at once one only of which was the High-Priest and a Type of Christ the rest were not let them then answer to the other twaine who were Rulers or chief over the House of God Thus we grant that Aaron and the High Priests after him were Types of Christ and that Christ at his death ended that Type yet affirm that Eleazar being Praelatus Praelatorum governing and directing the Ecclesiastical persons under him and being subject to Moses was not any Type of Christ further we say that the Twelve Apostles as so many several Eleazars under Christ were in the Primitive times sent to several Coasts of the world to govern direct and teach Fcclesiastical persons and people in their several Divisions We say also that many Primates now as so many Eleazars under Christ and in several Kingdoms and States of the world to govern direct and teach Ecclesiastical persons and people in their several divisions and yet be under and responsible to Christian Princes and States who have the chief charge of matters both Civil and Ecclesiastical Object If it be further alledged that Eleazar and all Sacrificing Priests quatenus Sacrificers were Types of Christ who sacrificed himself for us and put an end to all Sacrifices typing himself Answ. Answ. This we grant and further say that the Popish sacrificing Priests Office and other performance in this regard is utterly unlawful and sinful But the other Imployments of Eleazar viz. His Governing Directing and teaching both the Ecclesiastical persons and the people were not typical nor ended but are still of use for the Apostles practiced the same so have their Successors to these very days And that this is most true the Presbyterial Classes cannot but grant for this very Authority over Ministers and people they use and therefore judg it not Typical Besides St. Paul appearing before one but a weak resemblance of the old High Priest yielded him obedience and acknowledged him a Governor of the people which had been meerly unlawful if there had not remained in him something not Tipical and not made to cease by Christ. Hence we see the Anabaptists shifts to be vain and gross when they say we ought to have no Wars for the Jews wars were but Figures of our spiritual battle No Magistrates for the Jews Magistrates were but Figures of our Pastors Doctors and Deacons and as no Magistrates so no Oaths pretending these to be abolished by Christ. Answ. As in the Priests Office there were some things not Typical not ended So Kings Types of Christ in somthing only prefigured and Typed him In many things their Office is still of singular use for they become Nursing Fathers of the Church and provide that we may live a peaceable life in all Godliness and Honesty The lawfull use of Wars and Oaths hath been often vindicated If the Pope here claim authority over all the world as Eleazar over all his brethren his Plea is groundless wicked and insolent For first each chief Bishop in any Kingdom must be subject to the King as Aaron and Eleazar to Moses 2. The Apostles sent into several Kingdoms of the World were all of equal power no one had Authority above the rest in their line or division which shews that no Primate ought to be of Authority over any other Primate under a several Prince But each Primate subject to Christ as Eleazar to Aaron and each Primate subject to his several King As Eleazar to Moses 2. Why it may be I. Out of Dic. Ecclesiae the New Reformers tell us we are to fetch our pattern from the Jewish Sanhedrim therefore it seems they are of opinion that one Form may serve both us and them II. Except there should be such a fashion of government consisting of inequality I see not in the new Testament how any could perish in that contradiction of Core which St Jude affirmeth for his plea was for equalitie and against the preferring of Aaron above the rest III. The Ancient Fathers seem to be of mind that the same Form should serve both So thinketh St. Cyprian lib. 3. epist. 9. ad Rogatianum So St Hierome Epist. 85. Ad Evagrium traditiones Apostolicae sumptae sunt de veteri Testamento ad Nepotianum de vita Clericorum So St. Leo. Ita veteris Testamenti Sacramenta distinxit ut quedam ex iis sicut erant condita Evangelicae cruditioni profutura decerperet ut quae dudum fuerant consuetudines Judaicae fierent obsevantiae Christianae So Rabanus ut de institutione Clericorum lib. 1. c. 6. They ground this their opinion upon that they see I. That the Synogogue is called a Type or Shadow and an image of the Church now Heb. 10. vers 1. II. That God himself
one either of the Ministers that made scruple to use it or of the People that took offence at it But after that some leading men of the House of Commons in that Parliament for the better driving on the design they had upon the King had let all loose in the Church whilst some few stood fast to their honest Principles and were most of them undone by it the greatest part of the Clergy to their shame be it spoken many for fear of loosing their own more in hope to get other mens livings and some possibly out of their simplicity beguiled with the specious name of Reformation in a short space became either such perfect Time-Servers as to cry down or such tame Complyers with the stronger Side as to lay down ere they needed the use of the whole Liturgy and of all the Rites and Ceremonies therein prescribed But among them ail none in the whole bunch so bitterly inveighed against nor with such severity anathematized as this of the Cross as smelling ranker of Popery Superstition then any of the rest as it is even at this day by the Managers of the Presbyterian Interest represented as of all other the greatest Stone of offence to tender Consciences and the removal of it more insisted upon then of all the other Ceremonies by such men as having engaged to plead in the behalf of other mens tender Consciences do wisely consider withall that it will not be so much for their own Credit now to become Time-Servers with the Laws as it was some years past for their profit to become Time-Servers against the Laws These out-cries against a poor Ceremony to us who were not able to discerne in it any thing of harme or Superstition worthy of so much noise afforded sometimes when two or three of us chanced to meet together matter of discourse It hapned upon a time that falling occasionally upon this Theme the Learned Primate among other things said to us that were then casually present with him that in his opinion the Sign of the Cross after Baptisme as it is appointed in the Service-Book and taken together with the words used there withall was so far from being a Relike of Popery that he verily believ'd the same to have been retained in the Church of England at the Reformation of purpose to shew that the custom used in the Church of Rome of giving the Chrisme to Infants immediately after their Baptisme was in their Judgments neither necessary to be continued in all Churches nor expedient to be observed in ours Which his opinion as it is most certainly true in the former so to me it seemeth very probable in the latter branch thereof For first how can that be with any truth affirmed or but with the least colour of reason suspected to be a Popish Custom or a Rag or Relike of Rome that hath been for above a hundred years used and that use by Law established in the Protestant Church of England but is not at all used nor for ought I can learn ever was used by the Papists in their Churches nor is it by any Order or Authority of the Church of Rome enjoyned to be used in any Church in the world that professeth subjection thereunto True it is that in the Office of Baptisme according to the Romane Ritual the signe of the Cross is very often used from first to last at least twenty times viz. in the Benediction of the Salt in the Exorcismes in the formal words of Administration and otherwise yet as luck would have it that signe is not made nor by the Ritual appointed to be made upon the Childs Forehead as with us is used Nor are those very words therewithal used nor other words to the like purpose by the said Ritual appointed to be so used shewing what the intent meaning and signification of that Sign is as in our Service Book is done And true it is also for I wil not as I think Iought not dissemble any thing that I can imagine might be advantagiously objected by an Adversary that according to the Romane Order the Minister as soon as he hath finished the Baptisme Ego baptizo te c. is in the next place to annoint the Infant cross-wise with a certain Prayer or Benediction rather to be said at the same time as by the Ritual printed at Antwerp An. Dom. MDCLII pag. 23. may appear But so far distant is that Rite of theirs from this of ours in many respects as may also by comparing their Ritual with our Service Book appear that ours cannot with any congruity be thought to have been drawen by that patterne or to have been borrowed or taken from their practice For first 1. Theirs is actus immanens a material annointing and so leaveth a real effect behind it the visible Form or Figure of a Cross to be seen upon the Childs head after the act is done But ours is a meer transient act an immaterial sign of a Cross made in the aire without any sensible either impression or expression remaining when the act is over 2. Theirs is done upon the Top or Crown of the head in summitate capitis Ritual p. 23. which is else where expressed by Vertex see pag. 49. 51. 56. which sure must needs have some other signification if it have any then ours hath Which is done upon the Childs Forehead the proper seat by the common judgment of the world and according to the grounds of Phisiognomy of shamefastness and boldness and so holdeth a perfect analogy with that which the Church intended to signifie by it in token that he shall not be ashamed c. 3. Their Cross belongeth precisely to the annointing with the Chrisme whereunto it relateth and hath such a dependance thereupon that supposing there were no such Chrisme used in the Church of Rome there would be no place left for the Cross in all that part of the Office that followeth after the formal words of Baptisme as from the frame and order of their Ritual is most evident It cannot therefore be the same with the Cross used in our Church where the Chrisme is not at all used but thought fit rather at the Reformation to be I dare not say condemned as unlawful and superstitious but laid aside as at least unnecessary and useless as many other Ceremonies still retained in the Church of Rome were because though some of them were guiltless yet they were grown so burdensome by reason of their multitude that it was fit the number of them should be abated And yet secondly there might be and in the Primates judgment probably there was a more peculiar Reason why after Baptisme our Church did substitute the signe of the Cross with the words thereto appertaining in stead of the Chrisme and the Cross attending it used in the Church of Rome The Ceremony of giveing the chrisme to Infants in all likelihood came into the church about the same time when through the misunderstanding
p. 114. l. 3. dele the. l. 20. r. are l. 30. dele p. 115. l. 24. r. they p. 116. l. 19. r. of this mind l. ult dele ut p. 117. l. r. degrees p. 122. l. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 128. l. 6. r. Scythia p. 130. l. 26. r. These p. 132. l. 26. r. pam l. ult r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 133. l. 18. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In marg p. 134. l. 4. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 150. l. 12 dele 2. p. 147. l. 2. r. Christi REcensui Librum cui Titulus CLAVI TRABALES Imprimatur Tertio Nonas Sext. 1661. MA. FRANCK S. T. P. Reverendo in Christo Patri Episcopo Londinesi à Sacris Domesticis A SPEECH Delivered in the CASTLE-CHAMBER at DUBLIN 22. of November Anno 1622. At the Censuring of some Officers who refused to take the Oath of Supremacy By the late Lord Primate Usher then Bishop of Meath WHat the danger of the Law is for refusing this Oath hath been sufficiently opened by my Lords the Judges and the quality and quantity of that Offence hath been agravated to the full by those that have spoken after them The part which is most proper for me to deal in is the information of the Conscience touching the Truth and Equity of the matters contained in the Oath which I also have made choice the rather to insist upon because both the form of the Oath it self requireth herein a full resolution of the Conscience as appeareth by those words in the very beginning thereof I do utterly testifie and declare in my Conscience c. And the Persons that stand here to be censured for refusing the same have alledged-nothing in their own defence but only the simple Plea of Ignorance That this point therefore may be cleered and all needless Scruples removed out of mens minds Two maine Branches there be of this Oath which require special Consideration The one Positive acknowledging the Supremacy of the Government of these Realms in all Causes whatsoever to rest in the the Kings Highness only the other Negative renouncing all Jurisdictions and Authorities of any Forraigne Prince or Prelate within His Majesties Dominions For the better understanding of the former we are in the first place to call unto our remembrance that Exhortation of St. Peter Submit your selves unto every Ordinance of Man for the Lords sake whether it be unto the King as having the Preheminence or unto Governors as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evil doers and for the praise of them that do well By this we are taught to respect the King not as the only Gove nor of his Dominions Simply for we see there be other Governors placed under him but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as him that excelleth and hath the preheminence over the rest that is to say according to the Tenure of the Oath as him that is the only Supream Governor of his Realms Upon which ground we may safely build this conclusion that whatsoever Power is inetdent unto the King by vertue of his place must be acknowledged to be in him Supream there being nothing so contrary to the nature of Soveraignty as to have another Superior power to over-rule it Qui Rexest Regem Maxime non habeat In the second place we are to consider that God for the better setling of Piety and Honesty among men and the repressing of Prophaneness and other Vices hath establisted two distinct powers upon earth the one of the Keys committed to the Church the other of the Sword committed to the Civil Magistrate That of the Keys is ordained to work upon the Inner man having immediate Relation to the remitting or retaining of sins That of the Sword is appointed to work upon the outward man yielding Protection to the obedient and inflicting external punishment upon the Rebellious and Disobedient By the former the spiritual Officers of the Church of Christ are enabled to govern well to speak and exhort and rebuke with all authority to loose such as are penitent to commit others unto the Lords Prison until their amendment or to bind them over unto the Judgment of the great Day if they shall persist in their wilfulness and obstinacie By the other Princes have an imperious power assigned by God unto them for the defence of such as do well and executing revenge and wrath upon such as do evil whether by death or banishment or confiscation of Goods or Imprisonment according to the quality of the offence When St. Peter that had the Keys committed unto him made bold to draw the Sword he was commanded to put it up as a weapon that he had no authority to meddle withall and on the other side when Uzziah the King would venture upon the Execution of the Priests office it was said unto him It pertaineth not unto thee Uzziah to burn incense unto the Lord but to the Priests the Sons of Aaron that are consecrated to burn Incense Let this therefore be our second conclusion that the Power of the Sword and of the Keys are two distinct ordinances of God and that the Prince hath no more authority to enter upon the execution of any part of the Priests function then the Priest hath to intrude upon an◠part of the office of the Prince In the third place we are to observe that the power of the Civil Sword the Supreame managing whereof belongeth to the King alone is not to be restrained unto temporal causes only but is by Gods ordinance to be extended likewise unto all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Things and Causes That as the Spiritual Rulers of the Church do exercise their kind of Government in bringing men unto obedience not of the duties of the first Table alone which concerneth Piety and the Religious Service which man is bound to perform unto his Creator But also of the second which respecteth moral honesty and the Offices that man doth owe unto man So the Civil Magistrate is to use his Authority also in redressing the abuses committed against the first Table as well as against the Second that is to say as well in punishing of an Heretick or an Idolater or a Blasphemer as of a Thief or a Murtherer or a Traytor and in providing by all good means that such as live under his Government may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all Piety and Honesty And how soever by this means we make both Prince and Priest to be in their several places custodes utriusque Tabulae Keepers of both Gods Tables yet do we not hereby any way confound both of their Offices together for though the matter wherein their government is exercised may be the same yet is the form and manner of governing them alwayes different the one reaching to the outward man only the other to the Inward the one binding or loosing the soul the
other laying hold on the body and the things belonging thereunto The one having speciall reference to the Judgment of the world to come the other respecting the present retaining or loosing of some of the comforts of this Life That there is such a Civil Government as this in Causes Spiritual and Ecclesiasticall no man of Judgment can deny For must not Heresie for example be acknowledged to be a Cause meerly Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall and yet by what power is an Heretick put to death The Officers of the Church have no authority to take away the life of any man it must be done therefore per brachium seculare and consequently it must be yeelded without contradiction that the Tempor all Magistrate doth exercise therein a part of his Civil Government in punishing a crime that is of its own nature Spiritual or Ecclesiasticall But here it will be said the words of the Oath being generall that the King is the only supreme Governor of this Realm and of all other his Highness Dominions and Countries How may it appear that the power of the Civil Sword is only meant by that Government and that the power of the Keys is not comprebended therein I answer First that where a Civil Magistrate is affirmed to be the Governor of his own Dominions and Countries by common intendment this must needs be understood of a Civil-Government and may in no reason be extended to that which is meerly of another kind Secondly I say That where an Ambiguity is conceived to be in any part of an Oath it ought to be taken according to the understanding of him for whose satisfaction the Oath was ministred Now in the case it hath been sufficiently declared by publick authority that no other thing is meant by the Government here mentioned but that of the Civil Sword only For in the book of Articles agreed upon by the Arch-Bishop and Bishops and the whole Clergie in the Convocaetion holden at London Anno 1562. Thus we read Where we attribute to the Queens Majesty the Chief Government by which Titles we understand the minds of some standrous folkes to be offended we give not to our Princes the Ministring either of Gods word or of the Sacraments the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen doth most plainly testifie but that only prerogative which we see to have been given alwayes to all Godly Princes in holy Scriptures by God himself that is that they should rule all Estates and degrees committed to their Charge by God whether they be Ecclesiasticall or Temporall and restrain with the Civil Sword the stubbornand evill doers If it be here objected that the Authority of the Convocation is not a sufsicient ground for the Exposition of that which was enacted in Parliament I answer that these Articles stand confirmed not only by the Royall assent of the Prince for the establishing of whose Supremacy the Oath was framed but also by a speciall Act of Parliament which is to be found among the Statutes in the thirteenth yeer of Queen Elizabeth Cap. 12. Seeing therefore the makers of the Law have full authority to expound the Law and they have sufficiently manifested that by the Supream Government given to the Prince they understand that kind of Government only which is exercised with the Civil Sword I conclude that nothing can be more plaine then this that without all scruple of conscience the Kings Majesty may be acknowledged in this sense to be the only Supream Governor of all his Highness Dominions and Countrys as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Things or Causes as temporal and so have I cleered the first main branch of the Oath I come now unto the Second which is propounded negatively That no forreign Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preheminence or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm The Forreiner that challengeth this Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Jurisdiction over us is the Bishop of Rome And the Title whereby he claimeth the Power over us is the same whereby he claimeth it over the whole world because he is St. Peters Successor for sooth And indeed if St. Peter himself had been now alive I should freely confess that he ought to have spiritual Authority and Superiority within this Kingdom But so would I say also if St. Andrew St. Bartholomew St. Thomas or any of the other Apostles had been alive for I know that their Commission was very large to go into all the world and to preach the Gospel unto every Creature So that in what part of the world soever they lived they could not be said to be out of their charge their Apostleship being a kind of an Universal Bishoprick If therefore the Bishop of Rome can prove himself to be one of this Rank the Oath must be amended and we must acknowledge that he hath Ecclesiastical Authority within this Realm True it is that our Lawyers in their yearly Books by the name of the Apostle do usually designe the Pope But if they had examined his Title to that Apostleship as they would try an Ordinary mans Title to a Piece of Land they might easily have found a number of Flaws and main defects therein for first it would be enquired whether the Apostleship was not ordained by our Saviour Christ as a special Commission which being personal only was to determine with the death of the first Apostles For howsoever at their first entry into the Execution of this Commission we find that Matthias was admitted to the Apostleship in the Roome of Judas yet afterwards when James the Brother of John was slain by Herod we do not read that any other was substituted in his place Nay we know that the Apostles generally left no Successors in this kind Neither did any of the Bishops he of Rome only excepted that sate in those famous Churches wherein the Apostles exercised their Ministry challenge an Apostleship or an Universal Bishoprick by vertue of that succession It would Secondly therefore be enquired what sound evidence they can produce to shew that one of the Company was to hold the Apostleship as it were in Fee for him and his Successors for ever and that the other Eleven should hold the same for Term of life only Thirdly if this State of perpetuity was to be cast upon one how came it to fall upon St. Peter rather then upon St. John who outlived all the rest of his Fellows and so as a Surviving Feoffee had the fairest Right to retain the same in himself and his Successors for ever Fourthly if that State were wholy setled upon St. Peter seeing the Romanists themselves acknowledge that he was Bishop of Antioch before he was Bishop of Rome We require them to shew why so great an Inheritance as this should descend unto the younger Brother as it were by Borough-English rather than to the Elder according to the ordinary manner of
Peter in the new Testament as though because the one did term the Jews a Priestly Kingdom the other us a Kingly Priesthood Those two Substantives Kingdom and Priesthood should import that Judaisme did stand through the Kings Superiority over Priests christianity through the Priests Supream Authority over Kings Is it probable that Moses and Peter had herein so nice and curious conceits or else more likely that both meant one and the same thing namely that God doth glorifie and sanctifie his even with full perfection in both which thing St. John doth in plainer sort express saying that Christ hath made us both Kings and Priests Wherein it is from̄ the purpose altogether alledged that Constantine termeth church-Officers Overseers of things within the church himself of those without the church that Hilarie beseecheth the Emperor Constance to provide that the Governor of his Provinces should not presume to take upon them the judgment of Ecclesiastical Causes unto whom commonwealth matters only belonged That Ambrose affirmeth Palaces to belong unto the Emperor but churches to the minister The Emperor to have Authority of the common walls of the city and not over holy things for which cause he would never yield to have the causes of the Church debated in the Princes consistory but excused himself to the Emperor Valentinian for that being convented to answer concerning Church matters in a Civil Court he came not That Augustine witnesseth how the Emporor not daring to judge of the Bishops cause committed it unto the Bishops and was to crave pardon of the Bishops for that by the Donatists importunity which made no end of appealing unto him he was being weary of them drawn to give sentence in a matter of theirs all which hereupon may be inferred reacheth no further then only unto the administration of Church Affairs or the determination of Strifes and Controversie rising about the matter of Religion It proveth that in former ages of the world it hath been judged most convenient for Church-Officers to have the hearing of causes meerly Ecclesiasticall and not the Emperour himself in person to give sentence of them No one man can be sufficient for all things And therefore publick affairs are divided each kind in all well ordered States allotted unto such kind of persons as reason presumeth fittest to handle them Reason cannot presume Kings ordinarily so skilfull as to be personal Judges meet for the common hearing and determining of Church controversies But they which are hereunto appointed and have all their proceedings authorized by such power as may cause them to take effect The principality of which power in making Laws whereupon all these things depend is not by any of these allegations proved incommunicable unto Kings although not both in such sort but that still it is granted by the one that albeit Ecclesiastical Councels consisting of Church Officers did frame the Lawes whereby the Church affairs were ordered in ancient times yet no Canon no not of any Councel had the force of Law in the Church unless it were ratified and confirmed by the Emperour being Christian. Seeing therefore it is acknowledged that it was then the manner of the Emperor to confirm the Ordinances which were made by the Ministers which is as much in effect to say that the Emperour had in Church Ordinances a voice negative and that without his confirmation they had not the strength of publick Ordinances Why are we condemned as giving more unto Kings then the Church did in those times we giving them no more but the supreme power which the Emperor did then exercise with much larger scope then at this day any Christian King either doth ar possibly can use it over the Church The case is not like when such Assemblies are gathered together by supreme authority concerning other affairs of the Church and when they meet about the making Ecclesiasticall Lawes or Statutes For in the one they only are to advise in the other they are to decree The persons which are of the one the King doth voluntarily assemble as being in respect of gravity fit to consult withall them which are of the other he calleth by prescript of Law as having right to be thereunto called Finally the one are but themselves and their sentence hath but the weight of their own judgement the other represent the whole Clergie and their voices are as much as if all did give personal verdict Now the question is whether the Clergie alone so assembled ought to have the whole power of making Ecclesiasticall Laws or else consent of the Laity may thereunto be made necessarie and the Kings assent so necessary that his sole deniall may be of force to stay them from being Laws If they with whom we dispute were uniform strong and constant in that which they say we should not need to trouble our selves about their persons to whom the power of making Laws for the Church belongeth For they are sometimes very vehement in contention that from the greatest thing unto the least about the Church all must needs be immediatly from God to this they apply the patern of the ancient Tabernacle which God delivered unto Moses and was therein so exact that there was not left as much as the least pin for the wit of man to devise in the framing of it To this they also apply that strict and severe charge which God so often gave concerning his own Law Whatsoever I command you take heed you doe it thou shalt put nothing thereto thou shalt take nothing from it nothing whether it be great or smal Yet sometime bethinking themselves better they speak as acknowledging that it doth suffice to have received in such sort the principall things from God and that for other matters the Church hath sufficient authority to make Laws wherupon they now have made it a question what persons they are whose right it is to take order for the Churches affairs when the institution of any new thing therein is requisite Laws may be requisite to be made either concerning things that are only to be known and believed in or else touching that which is to be done by the Church of God The Law of nature and the Law of God are sufficient for declaration in both what belongeth unto each man separately as his soule is the spouse of Christ yea so sufficient that they plainly and fully shew whatsoever God doth require by way of necessary introduction unto the state of everlasting bliss But as a man liveth joyned with others in common society and belongeth unto the outward politique body of the Church albeit the said Law of Nature and of Scripture have in this respect also made manifest the things that are of greatest necessity nevertheless by reason of new occasions still arising which the Church having care of souls must take order for as need requireth hereby it cometh to pass that there is
and ever will be so great use even of humane Laws and Ordinances deducted by way of discourse as conclusions from the former divine and natural serving for principles thereunto No man doubteth but that for matters of action and practice in the affairs of God for manner in divine service for order in Ecclesiastical proceedings about the Regiment of the Church there may be oftentimes cause very urgent to have Laws made but the reason is not so plain wherefore humane Laws should appoint men what to believe Wherefore in this we must note two things First that in matter of opinion the Law doth not make that to be truth which before was not as in matters of action it causeth that to be duty which was not before but it manifesteth only and giveth men notice of that to be truth the contrary whereunto they ought not before to have believed Secondly that as opinions doe cleave to the understanding and are in heart asserted unto it is not in the power of any humane Law to command them because to prescribe what men shall think belongeth only unto God corde creditur ore fit confessio saith the Apostle As opinions are either fit or inconvenient to be professed so mans Law hath to determine of them It may for publick unities sake require mens professed assent or prohibit their contradiction to speciall articles wherein as there happily hath bin controversie what is true so the same were like to continue still not without grievous detriment unto a number of souls except Law to remedy that evil should set down a certainty which no man afterwards is to gain-say Wherefore as in regard of divine Lawes which the Church receiveth from God we may unto every man apply those words of wisdom in Solomon Conserva fili mi praecepta patris tui My sonne keep thou thy fathers precepts Even so concerning the statutes and ordinances which the Church it self makes we may add thereunto the words that follow Et ne dimittas legem matris tua And forsake not thou thy mothers Law It is undoubtedly a thing even naturall that all free and independent societies should themselves make their own Lawes And that this power should belong to the whole not to any certain part of a politique body though happily some one part may have greater sway in that action then the rest Which thing being generally fit and expedient in the making of all Lawes we see no cause why to think otherwise in lawes concerning the service of God which in all well-ordered States and Common-wealthes is the first thing that Law hath care to provide for When we speak of the right which naturally belongeth to a Common-wealth we speak of that which must needs belong to the Church of God For if the Common-wealth be Christian if the people which are of it do publickly imbrace the true Religion this very thing doth make it the Church as hath been shewed so that unless the verity and purity of Religion doe take from them which imbrace it that power wherewith otherwise they are possessed Look what authority as touching Laws for Religion a Common-wealth hath simply Here this breaks off abruptly The Princes power in the advancement of Bishops unto the rooms of Prelacy TOuching the advancement of Prelats unto their rooms by the King Whereas it seemeth in the eyes of many a thing very strange that Prelates the Officers of Gods own Sanctuary then which nothing is more sacred should be made by persons secular there are that will not have Kings be altogether of the Laitie but to participate that sanctifyed power which God hath indued his Clergy with and that in such respect they are anointed with oyle A shift vain and needless for as much as if we speak properly we cannot say Kings do make but that they only do place Bishops for in a Bishop there are these three things to be considered The power whereby he is distinguished from other Pastors The special portion of the Clergy and the people over whom he is to exercise that Bishoplie Power and the place of his Seat or Throne together with the Profits Preheminencies Honors thereunto belonging The first every Bishop hath by consecration the second the Election invested him with the third he receiveth of the King alone Which consecration the King intermedleth not farther then only by his Letters to present such an elect Bishop as shall be consecrated Seeing therefore that none but Bishops do consecrate it followeth that none but they do give unto every Bishop his being The manner of uniting Bishops as heads unto the flock and Clergy under them hath often altered for if some be not deceived this thing was somtime done even without any election at all At the first saith he to whom the name of Ambrose is given the first created in the Colledg of Presbyters was still the Bishop he dying the next Senior did succeed him Sed quia coeperunt sequentes Presbyteri indigni inveniri ad primatus teneÌ„dos immutata est ratio prospiciente concilio ut non ordo sed merituÌ„ crearet episcopum multorum sacerdotum constitutum ne indignus temere usurparet esset multis scandalum In elections at the beginning the Clergy and the people both had to do although not both after one fort The people gave their Testimonie and shewed their affection either of desire or dislike concerning the party which was to be chosen But the choice was wholy in the sacred Colledg of Presbyters hereunto it is that those usual speeches of the antient do commonly allude as when Pontius concerning St. Cyprians election saith he was chosen judicio Dei populifavore by the judgment of God and favor of the people the one branch alluding to the voices of the Ecclesiastical Senat which with religion sincerity chose him the other to the peoples affection who earnestly desired to have him chosen their Bishop Again Leo nulla ratio sinit ut inter Episcopos habeantur qui nec a clericis sunt electi nec applebibus expetiti No reason doth grant that they should be reckoned amongst Bishops whom neither Clergy hath elected nor Laitie coveted in like soâ—t Honorius Let him only be established Bishop in the Sea of Rome whom Divine Judgment and universal consent hath chosen That difference which is between the form of electing Bishops at this day with us and that which was usual in former ages riseth from the ground of that right which the Kings of this Land do claim in furnishing the places where Bishops elected consecrated are to reside as Bishops for considering the huge charges which the ancient famous Princes of this Land have been at as well in erecting Episcopal Seas as also in endowing them with ample possessions sure of their religious magnificence and bounty we cannot think but to have been most deservedly honored with those Royall prerogatives taking the benefit which groweth out of them in their vacancy
and of advancing alone unto such dignities what persons they judge most fit for the same A thing over and besides even therefore the more seasonable for that as the King most justly hath preheminence to make Lords Temporal which are not such by right of birth so the like preheminence of bestowing where pleaseth him the honour of Spiritual Nobility also cannot seem hard Bishops being Peers of the Realm and by law it self so reckoned Now whether we grant so much unto Kings in this respect or in the fomer consideration whereupon the Lawes have annexed it unto the Crown it must of necessity being granted both make void whatsoever interest the people aforetime hath had towards the choice of their own Bishop and also restrain the very act of Canonical election usually made by the Dean and Chapter as with us in such sort it doth that they neither can proceed unto any election till leav be granted nor elect any person but that is named unto them If they might doe the one it would be in them to defeat the King of his profits If the other then were the Kings preheminences of granting those dignities nothing And therefore were it not for certain Canons requiring canonical election to be before consecration I see no cause but that the Kings Letters patents alone might suffice well enough to that purpose as by Law they doe in case those Electors should happen not to satisfie the Kings pleasure Their election is now but a matter of form it is the Kings meer grant which placeth and the Bishops consecration which maketh Bishops Neither do the Kings of this Land use herein any other then such prerogatives as foraign Nations have been accustomed unto About the year of our Lord 425. Pope Boniface sollicited most earnestly the Emperour Monorius to take some order that the Bishops of Rome might be created without ambitious seeking of the place A needless petition if so be the Emperour had no right at all in the placing of Bishops there But from the days of Justinian the Emperour about the year 553. Onuphrius himself doth grant that no man was Bishop in the Sea of Rome whom first the Emperor by his Letters-patents did not licence to be consecrated till in Benedicts time it pleased the Emperor to forgoe that right which afterwards was restored to Charles with augmentation and continued in his successors till such time as Hildebrand took it from Hen. 4. and ever since the Cardinals have held it as at this day Had not the right of giving them belonged to the Emperours of Rome within the compass of their Dominions what needeth Pope Leo the fourth to trouble Lotharius and Lodowick with those his Letters whereby having done them to understand that the Church called Reatina was without a Bishop he maketh suit that one Colonus might have the Rome or if that were otherwise disposed his next request was Tusculanam Ecclesiam quae viduata existit illi vestra serenitas dignetur concedere ut consecratis à nostro presulatu Deo omnipotenti vestroque imperio grates peragere valeat May it please your Clemencies to grant unto him the Church of Tuscula now likewise void that by our Episcopal authority he being after consecrated may be to Almighty God and your Highness therefore thankfull Touching other Bishopricks extant there is a very short but a plain discourse written almost 500. years since by occasion of that miserable contention raised between the Emperor Henr. 4. and Pope Hildebrand named otherwise Gregory the seventh not as Platina would bear men in hand for that the D. of Rome would not brook the Emperors Symoniacall dealing but because the right which Christian Kings and Emperors had to invest Bishops hindred so much his ambitious designments that nothing could detain him from attempting to wrest it violently out of their hands This Treatise I mention for that it shortly comprehendeth not only the fore-alledged right of the Emperour of Rome acknowledged by six several Popes even with bitter execration against whomsoever of their successors that should by word or deed at any time goe about to infringe the same but also further these other specialties appertaining thereunto First that the Bishops likewise of Spain England Scotland Hungary had by ancient institution alwaies been invested by their Kings without opposition or disturbance Secendly that such was their royal interest partly for that they were founders of Bishopricks partly because they undertook the defence of them against all ravenous oppressions and wrongs part in as much that it was not safe that rooms of so great power and consequence in their estate should without their appointment be held by any under them And therfore that ev'n Bishops then did homage and took their oathes of fealty unto the Kings which invested them Thirdly that what solemnitity or Ceremony Kings do use in this action it skilleth not as namely whether they doe it by word or by precept set down in writing or by delivery of a staffe and a ring or by any other means whatsoever only that use and Custome would to avoid all offence be kept Some base Canonists there are which contend that neither Kings nor Emperours had ever any right hereunto saving only by the Popes either grant or toleration Whereupon nor to spend any further labour we leave their folly to be controlled by men of more ingenuity judgment even amongst themselves Duarensis Papon Choppinus Aegidius Magister Arnulphus Ruzaeus Costvius Philippus Probus and the rest by whom the right of Christian Kings and Princes herein is maintained to be such as the Bishops of Rome cannot lawfully either withdraw or abridge or hinder But of this thing there is with us no question although with them there be the Laws and customes of the Realm approving such regalities in case no reason thereof did appear yet are they hereby aboundantly warranted unto us except some Law of God or nature to the contrary could be shewed How much more when they have been every where thought so reasonable that Christian Kings throughout the world use and exercise if not altogether yet surely with very little odds the same so far that Gregorie the tenth forbidding such regalities to be newly begun where they were not in former times if any doe claim those rights from the first foundation of Churches or by ancient custome of them he only requireth that neither they nor their agents damnifie the Church of God by using the said prerogatives Now as there is no doubt but the Church of England by this means is much eased of some inconveniences so likewise a speciall care there is requisite to be had that other evils no less dangerous may not grow By the history of former times it doth appear that when the freedom of Elections was most large mens dealings and proceedings therein were not the least faulty Of the people St. Jerome complaineth that their judgements many times went
saith of the Christian Church under the Gentiles that he will take of the Gentiles and make them Priests and Levites to himself Esa. 66. 22. there calling our Presbyters and Deacons by those Legall names III. That there is an Agreemen in the Numbers XII Numb 1. 16. and Luk. 9. 8. LXX Numb 11. 16. and Luk. 10. 1. Names Angell Mal. 2. 7. and Rev. 1. 10. Degreers Aaron Answerable unto Christ. Eleazar Archbishops Princes of Priests Bishops Priests Presbyters Princes of Levites Archdeacons Levites Deacons Nethinims Clerks Sextons * And their often enterchange and indifferent using of Priest or Presbyter Levite or Deacon sheweth They presumed a Correspondence and Agreement between them The FORM OF Church Government In the NEW TESTAMENT And first in the days of our Saviour Christ. 1. THE whole Ministrie of the New Testament was at the first invested in Christ alone He is termed our Apostle Heb. 3. 1. Prophet Deut. 18. 15. Act. 3. 22. Evangelist Esa. 41. 27. Bishop and * Pastor 1 Pet. 2. 25. Doctor Mat. 23. 10. Deacon Rom. 15. 8. II. When the Harvest was great Mat. 9. 38. that his Personall presence could not attend all he took unto him XII as the XII Patriarchs or XII Fountains as St Jerome or the XII Princes of the Tribes Num. 1. Gathering his Disciples Mat. 10. 1. Choosing out of them Luke 6. 13. Whom he would Mark. 3. 13. He called them to him Luke 6. 13. Made them Mark 3. 13. Named them Apostles Luke 6. 13. These he began to send Mark 6. 7. Gave them in charge Matt. 10. 1. and 11. 1. To preach the Gospel Luke 9. 2. To heal Matt. 10. 1. Luke 9. 2. To cast out Devils Matt. 10. 1. Gave them Power To take maintenance Matt. 10. 10. Luke 9. 2. To shake off the dust for a witness Matt. 10. 14. So he sent them Matt. 10. 5. Luke 9. 1. They went and preached Luke 9. 6. They returned and made relation What they had Done Taught Mark 6. 30. III. After this when the Harvest grew so great as that the XII sufficed not all Luke 10. 1 2. he took unto him other LXX as the 70. Palm trees Num. 33. 9. the Fathers of Families Gen. 46. the Elders Num. 11. These he Declared Luke 10. 1. Sent by two and two into every City and place whether he himself would come ibid. Gave them power as to the Apostle to Take maintenance Luke 10 7. Shake off dust Luke 10. 11. Heal the sick Preach Luke 10. 19. Tread upon serpents and scorpions and over all the power of the Enemy Luke 10. 19. These two Orders as I think St. Paul Ephes. 3. 5. doth comprehend under the name of Apostles and Prophets by the LXX understanding Prophets as wheresoever they are both mentioned together next to the Apostles he placeth Prophets 1 Corinth 12. 28. Eph. 4. 11. None of the Fathers ever doubted that these two were two several Orders or Sorts nor that the Apostles were superior to the LXX It appeareth also that the Apostles had in them power to forbid to preach Luke 9. 49. and that Matthias was exalted from the other order to the Apostleship This was then the Order while Christ was upon the earth I. Christ himself II. The XII were sent to all Nations Their successors were Bishops placed and setled in several Nations III. The LXX were sent by Christ to the particular Cities of the Jewes to prepare them for Christ with his Apostles comming to them Their Successors were Presbyters placed in particular Cities and Towns by the Apostles that they might prepare the hearts of many Christians for the receipt and employment of an Angel or Bishop over the severall Presbyters IV. The faithfull people or Disciples of whom 500. and more are mentioned in 1 Corinth 15. 6. * though at the time of the electing of Matthias and the Holy Ghost's descending there were but CXX present Acts 1. 15. The Form of Government used in the time of the APOSTLES ALbeit Christ saith the people were as Sheep without a Shepheard Mat. 9. 38. yet he termeth his Apostles Harvest-men not Shepheards for while he was in person on earth himself only was the Shepheard And they but Arietes Gregis but at his departure he maketh them Shepheards John 21. 15. as they likewise others at theirs 1 Pet. 5. 2. Acts 28. Of the APOSTLES themselves and first of their names Shelicha which is the Syrian name was the title of certain Legats or Commissioners sent from the High-Priest to visit the Jews and their Synagogues which were dispersed in other Countries with authority to redress things amiss 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Greeks were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into Delphos an Office of great credit as by Herodotus and Demosthenes appeareth Secondly of their form what it is Not to have been with Christ all his life time Acts 1. 21. so were others more Not to be sent immediately of Christ Gal. 1. 1. so were the LXX Luke 10. Not to be limitted to one place Matt. 28. 19. sowere others Luke 24. 33. 50. Not to be inspired of God so that they did not erre so were Mark and Luke Not to plant Churches so did Phillip the Evange-list Acts 8. 5. Not to work signes and Miracles So did Stephen Acts. 6. 8. and Philip Acts 8. 6. But over and above these or with these that emnient authority or Jurisdiction which they had over all not only joyntly together but every one * severally by himself I. Of Imposing hands in Ordination Acts 6. 6 Confirmation Acts 8. 17. 18. II. Of Commanding the word of the Bench Acts 4. 18. 5. 28. Of Caesars Acts 18. 2. The word of Gods command 1 Cor. 9. 14. 1 Thess. 4. 11. 2 Thess. 3. 6. 12. Of Christs Acts 1 2 4. Of the Prophets Acts 5. 32. Of the Apostles Phil. 8. The Apostles ordained matters in Churches 1 Cor. 7. 17. 11. 34 The Commandments of the Apostles of Christ the Lord are to be kept 1 Cor. 14. 37. 2 Pet. 3. 2. III. Of Countermanding Luke 9. 49. Acts. 15. 24. 1 Tim. 2. 12. IV. Of Censuring Virga 1 Cor. 4. 21. 2 Cor. 13. 10. Gladius Gal. 5. 12. Tradendi Satanae 1. Cor. 5. 5. 11. 1 Tim. 1. 20. Claves Matt. 16. 19. Sit tibi with 18. 18. and John 20. 23. In this power it is that the Bishops succeed the Apostles 1. Iren. lib. 3. cap. 3. 2. Tertul. de praescript 3. 3. Cyprian ad Plorent 3. 9. 4. Epiphan Haeres 27. Romae fuerunt primi Pettus Paulus Apostoli udem ac Episcopi 2. Chrysost. in Act 3. Jacobus Episcopus fuit Hierosolimae 6. Hieronym Epist. 85. 54. ad Marcellam de Montano de scriptoribus Ecclesiast in Petro Jacobo 7. Ambrose in 1 Corinth 11. de Angelis in Eph. 4. Apostoli Episcopi sunt Of Deacons At the beginning the whole weight of the Churches affairs lay upon the Apostles The Distribution As well of the
the English Reformation then will they make you leave the French Reformation You fail against wind and tyde you think that the Governors you shall have hereafter will be like Sir Tho. Layton you are deceived Though this day you had compassed your wish to morrow or the next day after at your Governors pleasure all shall be marred again Finally the Ecclesiasticall Government which you aske hath no ground at all upon Gods word 'T is altogether unknown to the Fathers who in matter of Christian Discipline and censure of manners were more zealous and precise then we are But you cannot of all the learned and pious antiquity shew one example of the Discipline or Ecclesiasticall order which you hold as your Bishop in his book of the perpetuall government of the Sonne of Gods Church doth learnedly teach I pass over what I have my self written concerning it in my book De diversis Ministrorum gradibus and in my Defence against the Answer of Mr. Beza and more largely in my Confutation of his book De triplicigenere Episcoporum I cannot wonder enough at the Scotchmen who could be perswaded to abolish and reject the state of Bishops by reasons so ill grounded partly false partly of no moment at all and altogether unworthy a man of such fame If the Scots had not more sought after the temporal means of Bishops then after true Reformation never had Mr. Beza's Book perswaded them to do what they have done And I assure you that your opinion concerning the government of the Church seems plausible unto great men but for two reasons the one is to prey upon the goods of the Church the other for to keep it under the Revenues and authority of Bishops being once taken away For the form of your discipline is such that it will never be approved of by a wise and discreet supreme Magistrate who knows how to govern Ye see not the faults you commit in your proceedings as well Consistoriall as Synodals men well versed in the Lawes and in government do observe them But they contemn them so long as they have the law in their own hands and that it is far easier for them to frustrate them regard neither Consistorie nor Synodes then for you to command and make Decrees Were your Discipline armed with power as the Inquisition of Spain is it would surpass it in tyranny The Episcopall authority is Canonical that is so limitted and enclosed within the bounds of the Statutes and Canons of the Church that it can command nothing without Law much less contrary to Law And the Bishop is but the Keeper of the Lawes to cause them to be observed and to punish the transgressors of your Consistories and Synodes For the present I will say no more only take notice of this that it is not likely the King who knows what Consistories and Synodes be will grant that to the Islands which doth displease him in Scotland This Gentlemen and Brethren have I thought good to write vnto you intreating you to take it well as comming from him that loves the Islands and the good and edification of the Church of Christ as much as you can doe Upon this occasion I have thought fit to add thus much concerning Dr. Hadrianus Saravia HIs learning is sufficiently known by his works his judgement in relation to the Liturgy and Discipline of the Church of England is declared by this Letter which doth further appear by his Subscriptions following 1. In Queen Elizabeth's time the form required was in these words We whose names are here underwritten do Declare and unfainedly Testify our assent to all and singular the Articles of Religion and the Confession of the true Christian Faith and the Doctrine of the Sacraments comprized in a book imprinted intituled Articles whereupon it was agreed by the Arch-bishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year of our Lord God 1562. according to the computation of the Church of England for the avoiding of the diversities of opinions and for the establishing of Consent touching true Religion put forth by the Queens Authority And in testimony of such our Assents we have hereunto subscribed our names with our own proper hands as hereafter followeth Unto this Doctor Hadrianus de Saravia the sixth Prebend of the Church of Canterbury being conferred upon him subscribes in these words Per me Hadrianum de Saravia Sacrae Theologiae Professorem cui sexta Prebenda in Ecclesia Cathedrali Christi Cantuariens conferenda est sexto December is 1595. Wherein I find he did immediately succeed Doctor Whitaker whose Subscription is in these words viz. Per me Gulielmum Whitaker sacrae Theologiae Doctorem ejusdemque Professorem Regium in Academia Cantabrigiensi cui sexta Praebenda in Ecclesia Cathedrali Chrstl Cantuarens conferenda est Decimo Maii 1595. According unto which I find Mr. John Dod of Hanwell in Oxfordshire who wrot upon the Commandements to have subscribed in these words Per me Johannem Dod in Artibus Magistrum praesentatum ad Ecclesiam de Hanwell Oxon. Dioces 28. Julii 1585. unto whom abundance more and about that time might be added Mr. Richard Rogers Doctor Reynolds of Oxford c. among whom it pleased me to find the hand of the Reverend and Learned Mr. Hooker thus subscribing Per me Richardum Hooker Clericum in Artibus Magistrum praesentatum ad Canonicatum et Praebendam de Neather-haven in Ecclesia Cathedrali Sarum 17. Julii 1591. 2. In King Jame's time and since the form of the Subscription was thus To the three Articles mentioned in the 36. Chapter of the Book of Canons First that the Kings Majesty under God is the only supreme Governor of this Realm and of all other his Highness Dominions and Countries as well in all Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall things or Causes as Temporall and that no foraign Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preheminence or Authority Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall within his Majesties said Realms Dominions and Territories That the Book of Common Prayer and of Ordering of Bishops Priests and Deacons containeth in it nothing contrary to the word of God and that it may lawfully so be used and that he himself will use the form in the said book prescribed in publick prayer and administration of the Sacraments and none other That he alloweth the book of Articles of Religion agreed upon by the Arch-bishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the Clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year of our Lord One thousand five hundred sixty and two And that he acknowledgeth all and every the Articles therein contained being in number nine and thirty besides the Ratification to be agreeable to the word of God To these three Articles Doctor Hadrianus de Saravia being instituted unto the Rectory of Great Chart in the Diocess of Canterbury anno 1609. subscribes in these words Ego Hadrianus