a number for the whole Kingdom yet at that time they thought it expedient to establish no more and tho' when the Church should be sufficiently provided with Ministers it would be highly reasonable that the Superintendents should have Places appointed them for their continual residence yet in that juncture 't was necessary that they should be constantly travelling throw their districts to Preach and Plant Churches c. To establish his gloss he says the Compilers of the first Book of Discipline viz. Mr. J. Winrame John Spotswood J Willock J. Douglas J. Row and J. Knox were still of prelatical Principles But tho' this were as true as 't is false the quite contrary would rather follow viz. that they had resolv'd to change afterward the Superintendents for Diocesan Bishops To prove they were Prelatists he says three of them were Superintendents begging the Question as if Superintendent and Bishop were one and the same But Douglas died Arch-bishop of St. Andrews But is 't strange that he who in favours of a Tulchan Bishoprick had a stomach able to deject Simoniacal Pactions and durty Bargains made no bones of sacrificing his former Principles to his interest But Spotswood was a constant Enemy to Parity as appears from his Son's account of him But his Son says not so much Moreover which quite spoils our Author's Cause he makes without naming any other John Knox the Author of that Book of Policy yea he averrs that in his Father's Judgement the Old Policy was undoubtedly the better than the New John Row defended the lawfulness of Episcopacy at the Conference appointed by the General Assembly 1575. But J. Row no less then the other Collocutors in their Report to that Assembly tho' for the iniquity of the time not in so many words yet really condemn'd Prelacy and was also a Member of that Assembly which with one voice found and declar'd the Office unlawfull in it self Judge then of his confidence who yet adventures hence to conclude that he was a Prelatist He adds out of Knox that Superintendents and Overseers were nominated that all things in the Church might be carried with Order and well which reason for establishing Superintendents saith our Author will continue to hold so long as the Church continues But let him once prove that Knox speaks of the constant and ordinary Church regimen and guidance and not of the settling and ordering of a Church little more then in fieri and as yet not all sufficiently constitute otherwise we have a meer Paralogism At the Admission of Spotswood continues he John Knox asserted the necessity of Superintendents and Overseers as well as Ministers the necessity I say not the bare expediency in the juncture The words are first was made a Sermon in the which these Heads were handled first the necessity of Ministers and Superintendents or Overseers c. We have indeed here the necessity of Superintendents mention'd but that it arose above an expediency we do not hence learn That Knox asserted the necessity of Superintendents as well as Ministers or an equal necessity of the one and the other can by no means be inferr'd Yea who can with our Author believe that tho' any People had aboundance of sufficient and lawfully ordain'd Ministers yet in Knox's Judgement if Superintendents were wanting such a People could no more be counted a Church than if they had no Minister at all He brings also some Expressions out of the first Book of Discpiline as After the Church shall be established and three years are past no Man shall be called to the Office of a Superintendent who hath not two years given a Proof of his faithfull Labours in the Ministry of some Church Such passages indeed suppose some continuance of Superintendents tho' no perpetuity For our Reformers could never think that within three years or thereabout the Church should be fully established few or no Churches to be planted unto which full settlement the forecited passage of the Book of Policy allows the use of Superintendents This Book of Discipline saith our Author supposeth that Superintendents and Colledges were to be of equal continuance for the Superintendent was still to be at the choosing and installment of Principalls and Rectors c. But this his Argument he himself overthrows The Assembly saith he May 27. 1561. addresseth to the Council that special and certain Provision might be made for the maintainance of the Superintendents Ministers Exhorters and Readers c. Now who sees not that this Address speaks after the same manner concerning all these so that using our Author's way of arguing we should inferr that our Reformers thought the Exhorter which confessedly was a kind of Function purely temporary was no less to be perpetual than the Superintendent yea or the Minister And the Assembly at Edinburgh December 25. 1565. appointed Mr. Knox to pen a comfortable Letter in their Name to encourage Ministers Exhorters and Readers to continue in their Vocation c. From these and the like Acts he may as well conclude the equal duration of Exhorters and Ministers as he inferrs from the Book of Policy the equal duration of Superintendents and Colledges He would next prove from the account of the Election and Admission of Superintendents prefix'd to the old Psalms that according to our Reformers this was an Office distinct from that of other Pastors of Divine Institution and so perpetual The Order and Form saith he for admitting a Superintendent and a Minister was all one and there was nothing in it importing the one Office to be temporary more than the other But therefore there 's nothing elsewhere importing so much is a clear non sequitur In the mean while from what he grants 't is plain that the Superintendent wanted the very specific difference of a Diocesan Bishop wherefore tho' they us'd this Phrase The Office to which God call'd him and this Question to the People Will ye not acknowledge this your Brother for the Minister of Christ Jesus your Overseer and Pastor Will ye not maintain and comfort him against all such as wickedly would rebell against God and his Holy Ordinance And that Petition Send unto this our Brother whom in thy name we have charged with the chief care of thy Church within the bounds of L. c. They can thereby mean no other Office no other Ordinance of God and for kind no other Charge than what 's giv'n to every particular Pastor For we find mention'd the chief of the Apostles in Labour viz and Care who yet were all equal Neither is it strange that they thus set apart him who was for the time found needfull in these dark times and places to plant and erect Churches preach perpetually where there were none and in a word in several things compleatly to imitate the ancient Evangelist Thus Paul and Barnabas were separated with a solemnity of Fasting Prayer and Imposition of Hands And yet the Work or
Office not upon Jus Dominicum the Law of God in the Scriptures but Ecclesiasticam consuetudinem the practice of the Church Add hereto that both Fathers and Councils equally in Opinion and Practice stuck no less to the lawfulness of Patriarchat than that of simple Episcopacy and yet I believe few among real Protestants will either assert the Divine Right of this Office of Patriarchat i. e. that it had any Warrant for it in the Word of God or yet that those Fathers and Councils so believed Which present Consideration furnisheth us with another Argument sufficient to evince that the ancient Châ—rch founded this Office only upon Custom and as they thought Christian Prudence and not at all upon the Books of the Old and New Testament § 2. Neither do the most Learned of the Modern Episcopals in the least swerve from this Opinion amongst whom I reckon D. Forbes who having for a while with the greatest tenderness and fear handled this Matter propones at length the Question If Episcopacy be of Divine Right And yet declares himself highly difficultated what to Answer for absolutly deny it he will not and positively assert it he dares not he therefore confounds it with a Synodical Moderatourship and then fairly tells us that it is of Divine Right because of the general Scripture-Precepts of Church-Order and Decency And indeed he carries himself all along in this Matter with so much nice Caution Ambiguity and Fear that he evinces the desperation of the Episcopal Cause to which so learned a Man could afford no better Defence than really to destroy what he pretends to vindicat Neither is the most Learned Bishop Vsser of another mind who has reduced it to a meer shadow and nonentity And Willet though he says that a difference is needfull for Church-Policy yet affirms that this cannot be proved by the Word of God and that in the Apostles times a Bishop and Presbyter were neither in Name nor Office distinguished And he at large answers all Bellarmine's Arguments to the Contrary See the Appendix to the second part of the forecited Question Of this same Judgement is their applauded Hooker viz. that there is no ground for their Hierarchy in the word of God while he declares himself against all particular Forms of Church-government and acknowledges that nothing for Diocesan Prelacy can be brought therefrom The necessity of Policy saith he and regimen in all Churches may be held without holding any one certain Form to be necessary in them all And the general Principles are such as do not particularly prescribe any one but sundry Forms of Discipline may be equally consonant unto the general Axioms of Scripture It hath been told them that Matters of Faith and in general Matters necessarie unto Salvation are of a different Nature from Ceremonies Order and the kind of Church-Government that the one are necessar to be expresly contained in the Word of God or else manifestly collected out of the same the other not so that it is necessarie not to receive the one unless there be something in Scripture for them the other free if nothing be alledged against them And the Learned D. Stilling fleet is at no smal pains to cashier and expunge among the rest of peculiar Forms of Government This Diocesan Prelacy out of Scriptural-Articles and not only acknowledges but also musters not a few Arguments whereby to Prove that it hath no Ground in Holy Scripture And Dr. Morton Though a zealous Defender of Episcopacy Asserts that Hierome made not the Difference between Bishop and Presbiter of Divine Institution he assâ—nts to Medina the Jesuite and asserts that there was no Difference in the matter of Episcopacy betwixt Hierome and Aerius He averres further that not only the Protestants but also all the primitive Doctors were of Hierome ' s mind And finally he concludes that according to the Harmonious Consent of all Men in the Apostolick Age there was no Difference between Bishop and Pesbyter but was afterward introduced for the removal of Schism And Jewel Bishop of Sarisburie a Man for Piety and Ability Second I am sure to few that ever filled an Episcopal Chair most expresly asserts the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter Here saith he Mr. Harding findeth great fault for that I have translated these words ejusdem Sacerdotii of the same Bishoprick and not as he would have it of one Priesthood God wott a very simple Quarrel Let him take whether he listeth best if either-other of these words shall serve his turn Erasmus saith id temporis idem erat Episcopus Sacerdos Presbyter these three Names viz. Bishop Priest and Presbyter at that time were all one And but what meant Mr. Harding here to come in with the Difference between Priests or Presbyters and Bishops Thinketh he that Priests and Bishops hold only by Tradition Or is it so horrible an Heresie as he maketh it to say that by the Scriptures of God a Bishop and a Priest are all one Or knoweth he how far and unto whom he reacheth the Name of an Heretick Verily Chrysostom saith Inter Episcopum Presbyterum interest ferme nihil between a Bishop and a Priest which is all one with Presbyter in a manner there is no difference St. Hierome saith somewhat in a rougher sort Audio Quendam c. I hear say there is one become so Peevish that he setteth Deacons before Priests that is to say before Bishops whereas the Apostle plainly teacheth us that Priests and Bishops be all one Thus far Jewel The Bishops and Priests saith the famous Bishop Cranmer were at one time and were not two things but both one Office in the beginning of Christ's Religion And In the New Testament he that is appointed to be a Bishop or a Priest needeth no Consecration by the Scripture for Election or Appointing thereto sufficient In the same MS. saith Dr. Stillingfleet it appears that the Bishop of St. Asaph Therleby Redman and Cox were all of the same Opinion with the Arch-Bishop that at first Bishops and Presbyters were the same and the two latter expresly cite the Opinion of Jerome with Approbation Thus we see by the Testimony chiefly of him who was Instrumental in Our Reformation that he owned not Episcopacy as a distinct Order from Presbytry but only as a prudent Constitution of the Civil Magistrat for the better governing in the Church And having proved that Whitgift and with him the whole Body of the English Episcopal Divines were of the same Judgement thus concludes By which Principles the Divine Right of Episcopacy as founded upon Apostolical Practice is quite subverted and destroyed Now judge if Dr. Sandersone spoke not without the allowance ye acontrary to the express Mind of his Brethren when he says that the Difference among the Advocats for Episcopacy is only Verbal and that all of them even those who yeeld that it is not of Divine Right no less
only from these titular Bishops and Rent-gatherers to the Courtiers supported with all the might Wit and Artifice of an awfull gripping politick Regent and no few other potentand subtile Courtiers driving their own ends as has already appeared and is most evident from the best accounts now extant of these Affairs and this is the undoubted Cause why the six Collocutors at the Assembly in August 1575. think it not expedient presently to answer directly to the Question of the Function of Bishops But he who stilleth the noise of the Seas the noise of their waves having restrain'd these impetuous Tempests how cordially did our Church proceed to the utter extirpation of Prelacy Forsamekle they are the words of the Assembly holden at Dundee Anno 1580. July 12. Sess. 4. as the Office of a Bishop as it is now used and commonly taken within this Realme hath no sure warrant authority or good ground out of the Book and Scriptures of God but brought in by the folly and corruption of mens invention to the great overthrow of the true Kirk of God the whole Assembly of the Kirk in one voice after liberty given to all Men to reason in the matter none opponing themself in defence of the said pretended Office findeth and declareth the samine pretended Office used and termed as is above said unlawfull in the self as having neither fundament ground nor warrant in the word of God c. And in all this our Church as she clearly here expresses did nothing save what she was oblig'd to do by her own Principle in the first Book of Discipline which affirms that all thing necessary for the instruction of the Church is contain'd in the Books of the Old and New Testament And that whatsoever is without express commandment of God's Word is to be repress'd as damnable to Salvation Our Reformers therefore except our Adversaries say which even impudence it self dare not say that they believ'd the Hierarchy to be founded on the express command of God's Word were bound by this their Principle to oppose it as a manifest corruption and according to this Principle whensoever Prelacy by force of the secular arm and fraud of serpentine policy and as one well words it by terrors and allurements crosses and commodities banishment and benefices for by other means it could never be admitted overwhelm'd this Land and discover'd the Hypocrisie or Gallio-like Disposition of many all the true Lovers of our Reformation still then had in greater or lesser measure as their love was to this truly Protestant yea truly Catholick and Christian Principle of our Reformers their Feasts turned into Mourning their Songs into Lamentation their Tears for Meat and their Harps hang'd on the Willows And now suppose that our Reformers in that unstable condition of our Church and very first rudiments of Protestancy had in some of their Doings or Saying afforded some colour or appearance either for the scruples of the curious or the quirks and cavils of the captious does not pray this most unanimous most clear and every way most unexceptionable Act of our most full and free Generall Assembly that consisted for the far greater part of the very same Men who were the Actors and Promoters of our first Reformation most fully open our Remormers their minds shew their ultimat tendency and scope and finally for ever determine the present Controversie § 8. He hath more to say of John Knox I return therefore to attend him His next Plea is with Calderwood about Beza's Letter to Knox where he denies that Beza wrote being inform'd by Knox of the Courts intention to bring in Bishops and adds that if any thing of Knox ' s Sentiments can be collected from Beza ' s Letter it seems rather he was for Prelacy than for Presbytry For Beza saith he seems clearly to import that Knox needed to be caution'd against Prelacy Beza's Words are But I would have you my dear Knox and the other Brethren to Remember that which is before your eyes that as Bishops brought foorth the Papacy so false Bishops the relicts of Popery shall bring in Epicurism to the World They that desire the Churches good and safety let them take heed of this Pest and seeing ye have put that Plague to flight timously I heartily pray you that Ye never admit it again albeit it seem plausible with the pretence or colour of keeping unily which pretence deceiv'd the ancient Fathers yea even many of the best of ' em Where Beza without giving any proof thereof clearly supposes as a thing believed by Knox no less than by himself that the Bishops whom some were then labouring to introduce into Scotland were false Bishops the relicts of Popery which had already been once driv'n out of Scotland and on this supposition as any Orators use to do from Principles common to themselves and these to whom they are speaking he admonish'd him and the rest to beware of this Plague Certain it is then if we believe Beza that he knew if by a Letter from Knox or otherwise concerns not the matter in hand that Knox judg'd the Bishops then to be introduc'd to be no others than were the Popish Bishops whom Knox and his fellow Reformers had lately expuls'd Scotland and both sorts of Bishops to be equally false and Anti-christian And now consider this Letter of Beza written near the same time with that of Knox to the Assembly and the disinterested shall soon perceive that the former explains the latter and sufficiently shews what Knox meant by the Tyranny mention'd therein Moreover whosoever finds so much against Episcopacy in Beza even tho' it had been spoken by him without any relation or respect to Knox and remembers how universal and firm Concord was between these excellent Persons Qui duo corporibus mentibus unus erant will easily conclude that Knox bore but small kindness to Prelacy § 9. He comes next to prove Knox was not for Parity Had he been saith he so perswaded how seasonable had it been for him to have spoken out so mnch when he was brought before King Edward ' s Council The Question was then put to him whether he thought that no Christian might serve in the Ecclesiastical Ministration according to the Rites and Laws of the Realm of England Yet he answer'd nothing but that no Minister in England had Authority to separate the Lepers from the whole which was a chief part of his Office Plainly founding all the unlawfulness of being a Pastor of the Church of England not only the unlawfulness of the Hierarchy which he spoke not one word about but on the Kings retaining the chief Power of Ecclesiastical Discipline As if Knox had judg'd nothing in the Church of England unlawfull but the King 's retaining the Ecclesiastical Discipline in his own hand which all Men even Episcopals no less than Presbyterians know to be an arch and palpable untruth Does not as for example our Assembly Anno 1566.
temporary Bishops Paroch-ministers by the first Book of Discipline head 8 were deposeable by the Superintendent and the Elders of their Parishes The Superintendent was to be Judged by the Ministers and Elders of the whole Province But the fraud is palpable the words of the Book of Discipline are that if a Minister be worthy of Deposition the Elders of his Parish may with consent of the Kirk and Superintendent depose him Where you see the Kirk or Minister and Elders of the Province are no less interested in the Deposition of a Minister than in the judging of a Superintendent He suppress'd therefore all mention of the Kirk which even Spotswood whom he cites expresses to the end he might make his Reader believe no Minister save the Superintendent only had any power in Deposition of Ministers But privat Ministers saith he were to be admitted by their Superintendents but the Superintendents by the Superintendents next adjacent and the Superintendents had the Power of Ordination The first Book of Discipline and several Acts of the Assemblies But had only the Superintendents the Power of Ordination yea not only was there no plurality of Superintendents present at the Action but also John Knox who was no Superintendent ordain'd or admitted Spotswood Superintendent of L. yea every particular Minister when commissionated by the Assembly had no less Power of Ordination or any other thing whatsoever than is either in the Book of Discipline or any where else giv'n to the Superintendent Neither might any one particular Minister while he was a Commissioner more than the Superintendent be translated from one district to another without the Counsel of the whole Church or Assembly neither were there meaner Qualifications requisite in any Commissioner And I think Knox who was never a Superintendent was in these not inferiour to any of ' em But he had a living five times so much as another Minister But then I 'm sure he had five times as much to do with it being perpetually to Travell Preach and Exhort far and wide c but if this Rule had been keep'd our Bishops had got five times less than any other Minister for rarely did they any such Duty either at home or abroad In the mean while The Power of Riches and the baseness of Poverty maketh not a Bishop either higher or lower But Superintendents saith he were constant Members of General Assemblies had Power to Visit and to try the like c. of the Ministers of all the Churches of the Diocess and were to try those who stood Candidates for the Ministry had Power of granting Collations on Presentations But whatsoever he had of these belong'd also to every particular Pastor when commissionated by the General Assembly but tho' the Superintendent or Commissioner is only nam'd in such Cases as in trial of the Candidats granting Collations Deposition of Ministers c. He is to be understood as the Moderator and mouth of the Synod where he Superintended for Example the Assembly in the case of transportation chargeth the Ministers to obey the Voice and Commandment of their Superintendent and yet by the very same Act none can be translated without the Consent of the most part of the Elders and Ministers of Kirks conveen'd in the Synodal Assembly and yet from this very Act he adventnres to conclude the Canonical Obedience of Pastors to their Superintendents But he had Power to nominal Ministers to be Members of the General Assembly For Assembly 1562. 't was ordain'd that no Minister leave his Flock for coming to the Assembly except he have Complaints to make or be complain'd off or at least be warn'd thereto by the Superintendent And the L. Glamis in a Letter to Mr. Beza saith that after the Reformation it fell out by custom that the Bishops and so many of the Ministers Pastors and Elders as the Bishops appointed came to the General Assembly But touching what he alledges as said by the L. Glamis I can find it no where save in the Works of Saravia and Beza's Answer to Glamis his second Question wherein these words are found neither meets with nor presupposes any such Clause But be it that L. Glamis said so what will they hence infer he says indeed that this came to pass after the Reformation but how long 't was after the Reformation before this was practis'd he says not ' T was saith he receiv'd by Custom by no Decree of the Church then or Acts of the Assembly And lastly he speaks of Bishops not of Superintendents And I never find that any about these times gave Superintendents the name of Bishops and so this makes nothing for our Author's purpose Wherefore if ever L. Glamis had any such Expression whereof I much doubt in my mind he mean'd it of the Tulchans who for some space after the Leith-convention made some steps toward such a Superiority otherwise all the accounts we have of these times and in special the Acts of our Assemblies demonstrat that there was no such Power or Priviledge giv'n to any then in Scotland yea so much our Author himself presently proves and overturns this his own Argument by citing another out of the Assembly July 1563 1568 he should have said viz. Anent the Order hereafter to be used in General Assemblies They all voted and concluded as followeth viz. that if the Order already received pleases not by reason of the plurality of Voices it be reformed in this manner First that none have place to Vote except Superintendents Commissioners appointed for visiting the Kirks and Ministers brought with them presented as Persons able to reason and having knowledge to judge with the aforenamed shall be joined Commissioners of Burghs and Shires together with Commissioners of Vniversities Secondly Ministers and Commissioners shall be Chosen at the Synodal-convention of the Diocess by the Consent of the rest of the Ministers and Gentlemen that shall conveen at the said Synodal-convention c. From this Act 't is clear that the former in 1562. has only been mention'd never concluded or at least cass'd and repeal'd by some intervenient Assembly otherways there had been no place or ground for the Act of 1568. which presupposes that ev'n these that were not at all thus Chosen at the Synod were free to come and Vote at the Assembly So far was this liberty from being put in the Superintendent or Commissioner's Power And indeed from this Act 't is most evident and 't is left on Record also by the Vindicatour of Philadelphus that before the time of this Act all Ministers who pleased were free to Vote at the Assemblies yet with our Author Petrie must be a mixer of lies for saying so much But Calderwood saith our Author leaves out intirely these words brought with them i. e. with the Superintendents and Commissioners of Kirks presented as Persons able to reason and having knowledge to judge whereby the Power of Superintendents and Commissioners for visiting of
our Reformers believed it to be an indispensible part of the Christian Religion positively and expresly commanded in the Scriptures Do not therefore his saying establishing however no such thing as Parity c and the rest of his Discourse mutually give the lie and flee in the face of one another And indeed he here at once overthrows whatsoever he said on this Subject and now for ever to silence all reasonable men and stop them from such desperat adventures as this of our Authors take the following Argument Whatsoever our Reformers believed to be without the express and positive Testimony of the Scriptures that they believed to be a damnable Corruption in Religion and as such to be avoided This the major is put beyond scruple by what we have brought from the first Book of Discipline Knox and the Confessions of our Author Now I subjoin But they believed that Episcopacy was altogether without any express or positive Testimony yea or any Warrant or Ground from the Word of God the Books of the Old and New Testament Ergo c. The minor is no less evident from what is already adduc'd and moreover from the latter Helvetian Confession which was all save the allowance of the remembrance of some Holy Days which they expresly disprov'd approv'd and subscribed by our whole General Assembly at Edinburgh December 25. 1566. For in that Confession mark it pray carefully and by no means forget that our Church and Reformers who approv'd and subscrib'd this Confession firmly believ'd that whatsoever is without the express Commandment of God's Word is damnable to Man's Salvation they say There 's giv'n to all Ministers in the Church one and the same Power or Function And indeed in the beginning Bishops and Presbyters ruled the Church in common none preferr'd himself to another or usurped any more honourable Power or Dominion to himself over his fellow Bishops But according to the words of the Lord who will be first among you let him be your Servant they persevered in Humility and helped one another by their mutual Duties in Defending and Governing the Church In the meantime for preserving Order some one of the Ministers did call the Assembly and proposed these things that were to be consulted in the Meeting He did also receive the Opinions of others and finally according to his Power he took care that no confusion should arise so S. Peter is said to have done in the Acts of the Apostles who notwithstanding was never set over the rest nor indu'd with greater power and honour but the beginning took its rise from Vnity that the Church might be declared to be one And having related Hierome's Doctrine of the Idenity of Bishop Presbyier thus they conclude Therefore none may lawfully hinder to return to the ancient Constitution of the Church of God and embrace it before human Custome Thus far the Authors of that most famous Confession who both in the Title page and after the Preface expresly assert that our Church of Scotland together with the Churches of Poland Hungary Geneve Neocome Myllhusium and Wiend approved and subscribed this their Confession From all which it 's easie to gather and perceive with how black a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our first Reformers and whole primitive Church Protestant branded Prelacy or Imparity amongst Pastors Section IX The Forraign reform'd Churches truly Presbyerian BUT let 's hear the Judgement of the rest of the Reformers and Reform'd transmarine Churches Gerard a famous Lutheran divine altho' for Orders sake he admit of some kind of Episcopacy which really he makes as good as nothing above a Moderator-ship yet even for that umbrage allows nothing but humane Institution and will acknowledge no distinction by Divine Right between Bishop and Presbyter The Papists saith he especially place that superiour Power of Jurisdiction which they make to agree to Bishops in this that the Bishops can Ordain Ministers but the Presbyters cannot And all along this Question he strongly proves that during the Apostolick age there was no such thing as a distinction between a Bishop and a preaching Presbyter and enervats all the Arguments that both Romanists and other Prelatists commonly bring to the contrary But we need not insist on the Testimonies of particular Men we have the joint suffrages of the body of Lutheran Divines Luther himself being the mouth to the rest in the Articles of Smalcald It 's clear say they even from the Confession of our Adversaries that this Power to wit of preaching dispensing the Sacraments Excommunication and Absolution is common to all that are set over the Churches whither they be called Pastors Presbyters or Bishops Wherefore Hierome plainly affirms that there is no difference between Bishop and Presbyter but that every Pastor was a Bishop Here Hierome teaches that the distinction of degrees between a Bishop and a Presbyter or Pastor was only appointed by humane Authority And the matter it self continues Luther and his Associats declares no less for on both Bishop and Presbyter is laid the same Duty and the same Injunction And only Ordination in after times made the difference between Bishop and Pastor And by Divine Right there is no difference between Bishop and Pastor § 2. As for Calvin his judgement in this matter was altogether conform to his practice which by the very Adversaries themselves is made the very Patern of Presbytry for he asserts the Idenity of Bishop Presbyter Pastor and Minister and this Idenity of Bishop and Presbyter he founds on Titus 1. and 5. compared with the 7 as Hierome had done long before him and Presbyterians do now And when he descends to after times succeeding these of the Apostles he tells us that then the Bishop had no Dominion over his Collegues sc. the Presbyters but was among them what the Consul was in the Senat and his Office was to propone Matters enquire the Votes preside in Admonition and moderat the Action and put in Execution what was decreed by the whole Consistory All which exceeded little or nothing the Office of a Moderator And that even this saith he was introduced through the necessity of the time by humane consent is acknowledged by the Ancients themselves But I shall not insist in citing Calvine nor Beza who every where is full sufficiently to our purpose both of 'em being aboundantly vindicated and evinc'd to be Presbyterian in a singular tractat by the most judicious Author of Rectius Instruendum from the attempts of one who pretended to be Mathematico-Theologus but was in reality Sophistico-Micrologus And were there any doubt concerning these as indeed there 's none their Practice and that of the Church wherein they liv'd our very Adversaries being Judges sufficiently discuss it and prove them to be truly Presbyterian and to them subscribes the stream of transmarine Writers Systematicks Controvertists and Commentators As for Example the famous and learn'd Musculus asserts and proves from
threatning Emulation Hatred and mutual Enmity proudly usurping Principalities or Prelacys as so many places of Tyrannicall Domination To this time doubtless did the Nicene Fathers look in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ancient Customes that they mention which will be denyed by none who remember that even things of a very late date used then to be called ancient and which is yet more they were wont to pretend Apostolick Authority and Tradition for every one of their Innovations For this their Pride and Superstition and such Vices God sent a long and most grievous Persecution after which it might have been reasonably thought they would have returned to the Humility and Simplicity of the Gospell and Apostolick Age. But so far were they from this that the Gangren began faster than ever to consume the Vitals of Chrsitianity and having got a Christian Emperor to indulge and enrich them they quickened their Pace and in the gadiness of Pride and giddiness of Superstition extravaging without bounds in this Declension they piece and piece laid aside the Scripture and in the model of their Government and Worship eyed and followed three patterns the Jewish Policy Ceremonies and Temple where there was one High-Priest the magnificent and splendid Government of the Roman Empire over which there was one Head one Emperor And lastly the way of the Roman Pagan Priests in which there was also at Rome a Pontifex Maximus or High-Priest over all the many Degrees of Priests in the Empire and so in process of time it came to pass that he who by his first Institution was design'd to be a Pastor of a Flock or Congregation and to imitate the Apostolick Simplicity and Humility turned to be the great Antichrist the son of Perdition and grand Emissary and Lieutennant of the red Dragon and these who were ordain'd to be his Fellow-Pastors and Ministers of the Gospel became his Underlings and Slaves in that Apostacy and being martial'd into a thousand Ranks and Orders proved so many Squadrons of hellish Locusts so that scarce in any part of the Creation of God was there ever a more sad and direfull Depravation if it were not when our first Parents fell into the Cloutches of the old Serpent or when the Sons of God became his greatest Enemies and those morning Stars the beautifull Angels turned into infernal Firebrands black and abominable Devils Most observable notwithstanding yea and adorable is Divine Providence in this that even in the growth and increase of this black Apostacy the Church in Opinion and Doctrine at least still held fast the great and capital Articles of Christianity as the sufficiency of the Canonicall Books of Scripture the Doctrine of the holy Trinity of free Grace of Justification by Faith in Christ's Blood c. Their great sin lay not in the Defect but in the Excess by superadding to these golden Foundations a heap of hay and stuble the wild Fancies of Apostatising Brains And in process of time equalizing yea and preferring them to these Divine and most necessary Truths comprehended in the Books of the Old and New Testament Then it was when tho' they still acknowledged the Identity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter or Pastor of a Congregation they must among'st the rest of their novell Foppereis raise one Bishop or High-Priest as they spoke over a number of other Pastors and Churches whose Ordination and Consecration must be accompani'd with a dale of Alloy suitable to this their humane and unwarrantable Institution He must have a Cudgell put in his hand to signifie his Rule and Authority over the People and a Ring to signifie his Pontifical Honour and the hidden Mysiereis wherewithall he is intrusted The Bishop being consecrated shaven and anointed it was his proper Work and Office to erect and consecrate Churches to make their Chrism or Holy Oyl For the Art of Besmearing was pretty early in the Church no later at least than their Diocesan and therewith to anoint the forehead Eyes and Ears of the Baptized to receive the Penitents and perform such greasy businesses about them These and the like Actions were reserved as the special Ornament and Badges of the High-Priest's Honour And indeed hitherto they acted congruouly for 't was but meet that their own Antichristian Inventions the Institution whereof never came into God's mind should be appropriated to their own Church-Officer whom God never appointed Caetera conveniunt sed non levis error in uno est For they debased and polluted God's Ordinance I mean the Ordination of Pastors which they threw in among their Trash and left likewise to their Bishop or High-Priest as a part of his peculiar Province Superstitionists sometimes for such Fooleries deprave the Scripture which Dr. Lightfoot one of the learn'd est of the Church-of England Divines observes and baffles Here saith he Episcopacy thinketh it hath an undenyable Argument for Proof of its Hierarchy and of the strange Rite of Confirmation c. And this is very like another Practice for Antiquity also not a white lower than their Diocesan they made another fixed Church-Officer whom they called an Exorcist His Office was to dispossess and cast out Devils Now surely such an ordinary Church-Officer was never appointed by God and therefore 't is most likely that some of those Exorcists needed some to have casten the Devils out of themselves or at least to have giv'n them a a round doze of Hellebore no less then did any of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their Patients But seeing they made such a Church-Officer and the dispossessing of Devils was among'st the greatest and most miraculous Works that ever was practis'd even by the greatest Apostles It may be thought that this Exorcist was one of their highest Church-Officers a Metropolitan certainly Arch-Bishop or Patriarch but he was none of these yea he was no Bishop no Presbyter no Deacon no Sub-Deacon yea not so much as an Acolyth that is a Candle-carier for they us'd in fair-day-light and Sun-shine to light Candles in the Church to obey and fulfill as they said that Scripture John 1. 9. That was the true Light which lighteneth every Man that cometh into the World This Exorcist was yet a degree lower than their Candle-Carier and therefore was plac'd in the very rear and tail of all their Clergy So dangerous yea and unaccountable were many of their Actings but especially in the matter of Church-Office-bearing Moreover I appeal to all the judicious and conscientious if out of a conscientious desire of conforming to the primitive Church our Adversareis make such a horride noise bussle and Schism for their Hierarchy For suppose it to be as true as I hope by this time to all the unbyassed it 's manifested to be false that in all points they could vouch their Hierarchy to be warranted by the true primitive Church and the Government of the one intirely like that of the other yet do they not desert her in many other things