he pleads not a few that have called them Traitors rather then Martyrs and Dâ—formers rather then Reformers of our Religion His other Argument for the Liturgie is taken from that supply of strength it hath received from the recommendation of foure most Religious Princes your own Parliamentary establishments and more especially from the Proclamation of King Iames of famous memory the validity of which plea your Honors are best able to judge and therefore we leave it at your Bar yet these two things we know first that this form was never established to be so punctually observed so rigorously pressed to the casting out of all that scruple it or any thing in it as many of his Majesties Subjects now doe to the almost justling out of the preaching of the Word and Conceived Prayer altogether And secondly as sure we are that your Honors thinke neither your own Lawes nor the Proclamation of that most famous and ever admired Prince to be as unalterable as the Lawes of the Medes and Persians And now having briefly shewed that Liturgies are not of that antiquity that this Remonstrant pretends but that conceived prayer was in use in the Church of God before Liturgies and is iustified from their own mouthes and not to be found fault with by any but a gracelesse man and having likewise shewed that our Liturgie was taken out of Models not only Christian but Romane and hath since the first compiling of it suffered alteration to the worse and though established by Law and confirmed by Proclamation was never intended to the justling ouâ— either of preaching or conceived prayer these things declared we humbly crave your Honors leave to propound these two Queries QUERE I. Whether it be not fit to consider of the alteration of the present Liturgie First because it symbolizeth so much with the Popish Masse as that the Pope himselfe was willing to have it used if he might but confirme it It was made and composed into this frame on purpose to bring the Papists to our Churches which we finde to be with so little successe as that it hath rather brought many of us to them then any of them to us and hath lost many of ours from us Because many things therein contained are stumbling blocks before the feet of many such as these the clogging it with Ceremonies and the often and impertinent reiterating of the Lords Prayer the ill translation of the Psalmes and other Scriptures the many phrases in the very prayers which are liable to just exception And whereas the Minister by the Scripture is the peoples mouth to God this booke prescribes Responsories to bee said by the people some of which are unsutable to what the Minister pronounceth some of them seeme to savour of Tautologie some are made to be so essentiall to the prayer as that all which the Minister saith is no prayer without them as in the Letany Because it is so much Idolized as that it is accounted the only worship of God in England and is now made the upholder of a non-preaching Ministery and is cryed up to that height as that some are not ashamed to say that the wit of men and Angels cannot mend it and that it is a sufficient discharge of the Ministers duty to reade this Booke There are such multitudes of people that distaste this booke that unlesse it be altered there is no hope of any mutuall agreement between Gods Ministers and their people There is such a vaste difference betweene it and the Liturgies of all other reformed Churches as that it keepes them at a distance from us and us from full Communion with them QUERE II. Whether the first reformers of Religion did ever intend the use of a Liturgie further then to be an help in the want or to the weaknesse of a Minister All other reformed Churches though they use Liturgies yet doe not binde their Ministers to the use of them A Rubrick in King Edwards booke left it unto the discretion of the Minister what and how much to reade when there was a Sermon The Homilies which are appointed to be read are left free either to be read or not by preaching Ministers and why not then the Liturgie especially considering that the ability to offer up the peoples wants to God in prayer is part of the Ministeriall office as well as preaching And if it can be thought no lesse than sacriledge to rob the people of the Ministers gift in preaching and to tie them to Homilies it can be no lesse to deprive them of their gift in prayer The ground of the first binding of it upon all to use was not to tie godly men from exercising their gift in prayer but the old popish Priests that by a seeming returne to our Religion did through indulgence retaine their places from returning to the old Masâ—e That which makes many refuse to be present at our Church service is not only the Liturgie it selfe but the imposing of it upon Ministers And we finde no way to recover our people to a stinted prayer but by leaving it free to use or not to use If it be objected that this will breed divisions and disturbances in Churches unlesse there be a uniformity and that there are many unable It hath not bred any disturbance in other reformed Churches Why should the free liberty of using or not using a Liturgie breed more confusion than the free liberty of reading or not reading Homilies especially when Ministers shall tâ—ach people not to condemne one another in things indifferent If there be a care taken in those that have the power to make Ministers to choose men gifted as well for prayer as preaching there cannot be conceived how any inconvenience should follow Or if afterwards it should appeare that any Minister should prove insufficient to discharge the duty of prayer in a conceived way it may bee imposed on him as a punishment to use set formes and no other But why any Minister that hath the gift of prayer in an abundant measure as well as of preaching should be hindered from exercising his gift well because another useth it ill is a new Divinity never heard of in Gods Church till Bishop Wrens daies who forbad all use of conceived prayer in the Church SECT III. VVE come now with your Honours favour to the second point disputed in this Remonstrance Episcopacy it selfe against which whatsoever hath been either spoken or written by any either learned Divines or well reformed Churches as his conscience knowes there are of both that have writ against it is Taxed by him as no other then the uniust Clamors either of weak or factious persons Sure the man thinkes he hath obtained a Monopoly of learning and all Knowledge is lockt up in his bosome and not oâ—ly Knowledge but piety and peaceableness too for all that are not of his opinion must suffer either as weake or factious if he may be their Iudge We know
not what this Arrogancy might attempt to fasten upon your Honors should the bowels of your compassion bee enlarged to weigh in the Ballance of your wisdomes the multitude of Humble petitions presented to you from severall parts of this Kingdome that hath long groaned under the Iron aâ—d Insupportable yoake of this Episcopall Government which yet we doubt not but your Honours will please to take into your prudent and pious consideration Especially knowing it is their continuall practise to loade with the odious names of Faction all that justly complain of their unjust oppression In his addresse to his defence of Episcopacy he makes an unhappy confession that he is confounded in himselfe Your Honours may in this beleeve him for hee that reades this Remonstrance may easily observe so many falsities and contradictions though presented to publike view with a face of confident boldnesse as could not fall from the Pen of any but selfe-confounded man which though we doubt not but your Honours have descryed yet because they are hid from an errant and unobserving eye under the Embroyderies of a silken Language wee Humbly crave your Honours leave to put them one by one upon the file that the world may see what credit is to be given to the bold assertions of this confident Remonstrant First in his second page he dubs his Book the faithfull messenger of all the peaceable and right affected sons of the Church of England which words besides that unchristian Theta which as we already observed they set upon all that are not of his party carry in the bowels of them a notorious falsity and contradiction to the phrase of the booke for how could this booke be the messenger of all his owne party in England when it is not to be imagined that all could know of the comming forth of this booke before it was published and how can that booke crave admittance in all their names that speakes in the singular number and as in the person of one man almost the whole booke thorow But it may besome will say this is but a small slippe well be it so but in the seventh page hee layes it on in foure lines asserting these foure things First that Episcopall Government that very same Episcopall Government which some he saith seekes to wound that is Government by Diocesan Bishops derives it selfe from the Apostles times which though we shall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more fully confute anon yet we cannot here but ranke it among his notorious for how could there be such Government of a Diocesse by a Bishop derived from the Apostles times when in the Apostles times there were no Bishops distinct from Pâ—esbyters as we shall shew and if there had beene Bishops yet they were no Diocesans for it was a hundred yeares after Christ or as most agree 260. before Parishes were distinguished and there must be a distinction of Parishes before there could be an union of them into Diocesses Secondly it is by the joynt confession of all reformed Divines granted that this sacred Government is derived from the Apostles What all reformed Divines was Calvin Beza Iunius c. of that minde Are the reformed Churches of France Scotland Netherlands of that Iudgement we shall shew anon that there is no more Truth in this Assertion then if he had said with Anaxagoras snow is black or with Copernicus the Earth moves and the heavens stand still Thirdly he saith this Government hath continued without any interruption What doth he meane at Rome for we reade in some places of the world this Government was never known for many yeares together as in Scotland â— we reade that in Ancient times the Scots were instructed in the Christian faith by Priests and Monkes and were without Bishops 290. yeares yea to come to England we would desire to know of this Remonstrant whether God had a Church in England in Q. Mariâ—s daies or no and if so who were then the Bishops of this Church for some there must be if it be true that this man saith this Government hath continued without any interruption unto this day and Bishops then we know not where to finde but in the â—ine of Popish succession Fourthly he saith it hath thus continued without the contradiction of any one Congregation in the Christian world It seemes he hath forgotten what their own darling Heylin hath written of the people of Biscay in Spaine that they admit of no Bishops to come among them for when Ferdinand the Catholike came in progresse accompanied among others with the Bishop of Pampelone the people rose up in Armes drove back the Bishop and gathering up all the dust which they thought he had trode on flung it into the Sea Which story had it been recorded only by him would have been of lighter Credit But we reade the same in the Spanish Chronicle who saith more then the Doctor for he tels us that the People threw that dust that the Bishop or his Mule had trode on into the Sea with Curses and Imprecations which certainly saith he was not done without some Mysterie those people not being voide of Religion but superstitiously devout as the rest of the Spaniards are so that they is one Congregation in the Christian world in which this Government hath met with contradiction And are not the French Scottish and Belgicke Churches worthy to be counted Christian Congregations and who knows not that amongst these this Government hath met not only with verball but reall contradiction Yet he cannot leave his But within two pages is at it again and tels us of an unquestionable clearnesse wherein it hath been from the Apostles derived to us how unquestionable when the many volumes written about it witnesse to the world and to his conscience it hath been as much questioned as any point almost in our Religion And that assertion of his that tels us that the people of God had a forme of prayer as ancient as Moses which was constantly practised to the Apostles dayes and by the Apostles c. though we have shewed how bold and false this assertion is yet we mention it here as deserving to be put into the Catalogue And that he may not seeme Contra Mentem ire but to be of the same minde still p. 18. he saith Episcopall Government hath continued in this Island ever since the first plantation of the Gospell without contradiction Had he taken a lesse space of time and said but since the resuscitation of the Gospel we can prove it to him and shall that since the reformation Episcopacy hath been more contradicted then ever the Papacy was before the extirpation of it Yet still the man runs on thinking to get credit to his untruthes by their multiplications for pag. 21. hee saith Certainly except all Histories all Authors faile us nothing can be more certain then this truth Oâ— Durum Nothing more certain what is it not more certain
of beholders led them to censure any line or proportion as not done to the life he mends it after direction If any fault bee found with the eye hand foot c. he corrects it till at last the addition of every mans fancie had defaced the first figure and made that which was the Picture of a man swell into a monster Then bringing forth this and his other Picture which hee had reserved he presented both to the people and they abhorring the former and applauding the latter he cryed Hunc populus fecit This the deformed one the People made This lovely one I made As the Painter of his Painting so in Bezaes sence it may be said of Bishops God at first instituted Bishops such as are all one with presbyters and such are amiable honourable in all the Churches of God But when men would bee adding to Gods institution what power preheminence Iurisdiction Lordlynes their phansie suggested unto them this divine Bishop lost his Originali beauty and became to be Humanus And in conclusion by these and other additions swelling into a Pâ—pe Diabolicus Whether the Ancient Fathers when they call Peter Marke Iames Timothy and Titus Bishops did not speak according to the Language of the times wherein they lived rather then according to the true acception of the word Bishop and whether it bee not true which is here said in this Booke that they are called Bishops of Alexandria Ephesus Hierusalem c. in a very improper sense because they abode at those places a longer time then at other places For sure it is if Christ made Peter and Iames Apostles which are Bishops over the whole world and the Apostles made Marke Timothy and Titus Evangelists c. It seemes to us that it wonld have beene a great sinne in them to limit themselves to one particular Diocesse and to leave that calling in which Christ had placed them Whether Presbyters in Scripture are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that it is an office required at their hands to rule and to governe as hath beene proved in this Booke The Bishops can without sinne arrogate the exercise of this power to themselves alone And why may they not with the same lawfulnesse impropriate to themselves alone the Key of Doctrine which yet notwithstanding all would condemne as wel as the Key of Discipline seeing that the whole power of the Keyes is given to Presbyters in Scâ—ipture as well as to Bishops as appears Mat. 16.19 where the power of the Keyes is promised to Peter in the name of the rest of the Apostles and their successors and given to all the Apostles and their successors Mat. 18.19 Iohn 20.23 And that Presbyters succeed the Apostles appeares not onely Mat. 28.20 but also Acts 20 28. where the Apostle ready to leave the Church of Ephesus commends the care of ruling and feeding it to the Elders of that Church To this Irenaeus witnesseth lib. 4. cap. 43.44 This Bishop Iewell against Harding Artic. 4. sect 5.6 saith that all Pastors have equall power of binding and loosing with Peeter Whether since that Bishops assume to themselves power temporall to be Barons and to sit in Parliament as Judges and in Court of Star-Chamber High Commission and other Courts of Justice and also power spirituall over Ministers and People to ordaine silence suspend deprive excommunicate c. their spirituall power be not as dangerous though both bee dangerous and as much to be opposed as their temporall 1. Because the spiritual is over our consciences the temporall but over our purses 2. Because the spirituall have more influence into Gods Ordinances to defile them then the temporall 3. Because spirituall Judgements and evills are greater then other 4. because the Pope was Anticstrist before he did assume any temporall power 5. Because the Spirituall is more inward and lesse discerned and therefore it concernes all those that have Spirituall eyes and desire to worship God in spirit and truth to consider and and endeavour to abrogate their Spirituall usurpations as well as their Temporall Whether Acrius bee justly branded by Epiphanius and Austin for a Hereticke as some report for affirming Bishops and presbyters to be of an equall power Wee say as some report for the truth is he is charged with heresie meerely and onely because he was an a Arian As for his opinion of the parity of a presbyter with a Bishop this indeede is called by Austin proprium dogma Aerii the proper opinion of Aerius And by Epiphanius it is called Dogma furiosum stolidum a mad and foolish opinion but not an heresie neither by the one nor the other But let us suppose as is commonly thought that he was accounted an Heretike for this opinion yet notwithstanding that this was but the private opinion of Epiphanius and borrowed out of him by Austin an opinion not to be allowed appeares First because the same Authors condemne Aërius as much for reprehending and censuring the mentioning of the dead in the publique prayers and the performing of good works for the benefit of the dead And also for the reprehending statu jejunia and the keeping of the week before Easter as a solemne Fast which if worthy of condemnation would bring in most of the reformed Churches into the censure of Heresie Secondly because not onely Saint Hierome but Anstin himselfe Sedulius Primasius Chrysostome Theodoret Oecumenius Theophilact were of the same opinion with Aërius as Michael Medina observes in the Councell of Trent and hath written Lib. 1. de sacr hom Origine and yet none of these deserving the name of Fools much lesse to be branded for Hereticks Thirdly because no Counsell did ever condemne this for Heresie but on the contrary Concilium Aquisgranens sub Ludovico Pio Imp. 1. anno 816. hath approved it for true Divinitie out of the Scripture That Bishops Presbyters are equall bringing the same texts that Aerius doth and which Epiphanius indeed undertakes to answer but how slightly let any indifferent Reader judge Whether the great Apostacie of the Church of Rome hath not been in swarving from the Discipline of Christ as well as from the doctrine For so it seems by that text 2. Thess. 2.4 And also Revel 18.7 and divers others And if so then it much concernes all those that desire the purity of the Church to consider how neere the discipline of the Church of England borders upon Antichrist least while they indeavour to keepe out Antichrist from entring by the doore of doctrine they should suffer him secretly to creep in by the doore of discipline especially considering what is heere said in this Booke That by their owne confession the discipline of the Church of England is the same with the Church of Rome Whether Episcopacy be not made a place of Dignity rather then Duty and desired onely for the great revenues of the place And whether if the largenesse
the rest the residue of the people The people governned and the governours in the plurall number What can be more evident to prove that by Angell is meant not one singular person but the whole company of Presbyters that were in Thyatira This also further appeares because it is usuall with the holy Ghost not only in other books of the Scripture but also in this very booke of the Revelation to expresse a company under one singular person Thus the Civill state of Rome as opposite to Christ is called A beast with ten hornes and the Ecclesiasticall state Antichristian is called the whore of Babylon and the false Prophet and the devill and all his family is called An old red Dragon Thus also the seven Angels that blew the seven trumpets Revel 8.2 And the seven Angels that poured out the seven Vialls are not literally to be taken but Synecdoâ—hically as all know And why not then the seven Angels in those Epistles Master Meedâ— in his Commentaries upon the Revelation pag. 265 hath these words Denique ut jam semel iterumque monuimus quoniam Deus adhibet angelos providentiae sitae in reruÌ„ humanarum motibus conversionibus ciendis gubernandisque administros idcirco quae multorum manibus peraguntur Angelo tamen tanquam rei gerendae praesidi Duci pro communi loquendi modo tribuuntur Adde thirdly that the very name Angell is sufficient to prove that it is not meant of one person alone because the word Angell doth not import any peculiar jurisdiction or preheminence but is a common name to all Ministers and is so used in Scripture For all Ministers are Gods Messengers and Embassadours sent for the good of the Elect. And therefore the name being common to all Ministers why should wee thinke that there should bee any thing spoken to one Minister that doth not belong to all The like argument wee draw from the word Starres used Revel 1.20 The seven Starres are the Angels of the seven Churches Now it is evident that all faithfull Ministers are called Starres in Scripture whose duty is to shine as lights unto the Churches in all purity of doctrine and holinesse of conversation And in this sence the word is used when it is said that the third part of the starres were darkened Revel 8.12 and that the Dragons taile drew the third part of the starres of Heaven cast them to the Earth Revel 12.4 Which is meant not onely of Bishops but of other Ministers unlesse the Bishops will appropriate all corruption and Apostacy unto themselves Adde fourthly out of the Text it selfe It is very observable that our Saviour in opening the mystery of the Vision Revel 1.20 saith The seven Candlestickes which thou sawest are the seven Churches but hee doth not say The seven starres are the seven Angels of the same Churches But the Angels of the seven Churches wherein not without some mystery the number of the Angels in omitted least we should understand by Angell one Minister alone and not a company And yet the septenary number of Churches is twice set down Lastly though but one Angell bee mentioned in the forefront yet it is evident that the Epistles themselves are dedicated to all the Angels and Ministers in every Church and to the Churches themselves And if to the whole Church much more to the Presbyters of that Church This is proved Revel 1.11 What thou seest write in a Book and send it to the seven Churches which are in Asia And also by the Epiphonema of every Epistle He that hath an eare to heare let him heare what the Spirit saith to the Churches Upon which words Ambrosius Ausbertus in his second booke upon the Revelation saith thus Vnâ eadâ—mque locutione Angelos Ecclesias â—num esse designat Nam cum in principio locutionuÌ„ quae ad sepâ—em fiunt Angelos dicat Angelo illius Ecclesiae scribe in â—ine tamen carundem non dicit qui habet aurem audiat quod spiritus dicat Angelo sed quid Ecclesiae dicat By one and the same phrase of speech hee sheweth the Angels and the Churches to bee one and the same For whereas in the beginning of his speech which he makes to the seven Churches he saith And write to the Angell of the Churches yet in the close of the same he doth not say Hee that hath an Eare let him heare what the Spirit saith to the Angel but what he saith to the Church And this is further proved by the whole argument of those Epistles wherein the admonitionâ— threatnings commendations and reproofes are directed to all the Ministers of all the Churches Revel 2.10 The devill shall cast some of you into prison c. Rev. 2.16 I will fight against them with the sword of my mouth Rev. 2.24 I will put upon you no other burden c. I say unto you and the rest of Thyatira as many as have not this doctrine and which have not known the depths of Satan c. And when it is said in the singular Number as it is often I know thy works and thy labour c. vers 2. vers 4. Repent and doe thy first works and verse 13. Thou hast not denied my Faith c. and cap. 3.26 Because thou art neither hot nor cold c. All these and the like places are not to bee understood as meant of one individuall person but of the whole company of Ministers and also of the whole Church because that the punishment threatned is to the whole Church Revel 2.5 Repent and doe thy first works or else I will come unto thee quickly and remove thy Candlestick out of his place Rev. 2.16 Repent or else I will come unto thee quickly and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth Revel 2.24 I will not put upon you any other burden Now wee have no warrant in the Word to thinke that Christ would remove his Gospell from a Church for the sinne of one Bishop when all the other Ministers and the Churches themselves are free from those sinnes And if God should take this course in what wofull and miserable condition should the Church of England be which groaneth under so many corrupt Prelates By all this it appeares that the word angell is not to be taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not properly but figuratively And this is the judgement of Master Perkins upon the second Chapter of the Revelation and of Master Brightman and of Doctor Fulke who in answer to the Rhemists in Apoc. 1.20 hath these words S. Iohn by the angels of the Churches meaneth not all that should weare on their heads myters and hold crosier staves in their hands like dead Idolls but them that are the faithfull messengers of Gods Word and utter and declare the same Againe they are called the angels of the Churches because they be Gods messengers Master Fox likewise in his Meditation upon the Revelation pag. 7 9.17â— is of this
in their Polemicks yet in their Practicks a power that Timothy and Titus and those angels never did Thirdly Whereas this remonstrant saith If there can be better evidence under Heaven for any matter of fact let Episcopacy be for ever abandoned out of Gods Church We beseech you remember how weake we have discovered his Evidence to be and then the Inference upon all these we humbly leave to your Honours Wisedome and Iustice. SECT XIIII HAving thus considered the validity of those arguments whereby this remonstrant would suffult Episcopacy we descend now to inquire what satisfaction he gives to those objections which himselfe frames as the maine if not the sole arguments that Episcopacy is asfaultable by and they are two First that pleading the Divine right of Episcopacy is to the prejudice of Soveraignty Secondly that it casts a dangerous imputation upon all those reformed Churches that want this Government To the first the prejudice of Soveraignty he answers there is a compatiblenesse in this case of Gods Act and the Kings it is God that makes the Bishop the King that gives the Bishopricke But we have proved already that God never made a Bishop as he stands in his Superioritie over all other Presbyters he never had Gods Fiat and if they disclaime the influence of soveraignty unto their creation to a priority and assert that the King doth not make them Bishops they must have no being at all Sure we are the Lawes of the Land proclaime that not onely Bishopricks but Bishops and all the Iurisdiction they have is from the King whereas the Remonstrant acknowledgeth no more but the bare place and exercise to be from Regall donation which cannot bee affirmed without apparent prejudice of that Soveraigntie which the Lawes of the Land have invested our Princes with And for his unworthy comparison of Kings in order to Bishops and Patrons in order to their Clerkes when he shall prove that the patron gives ministeriall power to his Clerke as the Kâ—nâ— according to our Laws gives Episcopall power to the Bishop â— it may be of some conducement to his cause but till then we leave the unfitnesse of this comparison and the unthankfulnesse of those men to the indulgence of their Soveraigne to their deserved recompence His learned answer to such men as borrowing Saint Ieroms phrase speake Saint Pauls truth is in summe this That he knâ—wâ—s not how to prescribe to mens thoughts but for all his Rhetoricke they will thinke what they list but if they will grant him the question they shall soone be at an end of the quarrell which one answer if Satisfactory would silence all controversies to as good purpose as he did Bellarmine who said Bellarmine saith it is thus and I say it is not and where is Bellarmine now To the second objection that Episcopacie thus asserted casts an imputation upon all the reformed Churches that want that Government hee saith that the objection is intended to raise envie against them who if they may be beleeved love and honour those sister Churches and blesse God for them But doe they not plucke all this envie upon themselves who in their Conferences Writings Pulpits Vniversities Disputes High Commission Declamations have disclaimed them us no Churches that have disclaimed the Prelats and have honoured the most glorious Lights of those Reformed Churches Calvin Beza and others with no better titles than of Rascalls Blasphemers c. But the pith of his answer after a few good words is this that no such consequent can be drawne from their opinion for their Ius divinum pleads only for a Iustifiablenesse of this holy calling Not for an absolute necessity of it warranting it where it is and requiring it where it may be had but not fixing upon the Church that wants it the defect of any thing of the Essence of a Church but only of the glory and perfection of it neither is it their sin but their misery And is it so doth not this Ius divinum argue a Necessitie but onely a Iustifiablenesse of this calling nor is the want of it a want of any thing of Essence but onely of perfection wee had thought that page the twentieth where this Remonstrant strives to fetch the pedegree of Episcopacie from no lesse than Apostolicall and in that right Divine institution he had reckoned it among those things which the Apostles ordained for the succeeding administration of the Church in essentiall matters but here it seemes he is willing to retract what there fell from him there it was to his advantage to say this government was a thing essentiall to the Church and here it is no lesse advantage to say it is not essentiall But if it be not Essentiall then what is the reason that when a Priest who hath received orders at Rome turnes to us they urge not him to receive ordination among us againe but when some of our brethren who flying in Queene 〈◊〉 dayes had received Imposition of hands in the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas returned againe in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth they were urged to receive Imposition of hands againe from our Bishops and some did receive it If those Churches that want Bishops want nothing essentiall to a Church then what Essentiall want was there in the ordination of those Ministers that received Imposition of hands in those Churches that might deserve a Re-ordination more than if they had first received their ordination at Rome And what is the reason that Bishop Mountague so confidently affirmes that Ordination by Episcopall hands is so necessary as that thâ— Church is no true Church without it and the Ministery no true Ministery and ordinarily no salvation to be obtained without it And if this Remonstrant should leave Bishop Mountague to answer for himselfe yet notwithstanding he stands bound to give us satisfaction to these two questions which arise from his owne Booke First whether that Office which by divine right hath the sole power of Ordaining and Ruling all other Officers in the Church as he saith Episcopacy hath belong not to the being but onely to the glory and perfection of a Church Secondly there being in this mans thoughts the same Ius divinum for Bishops that there is for Pastors and Elders whether if those Reformed Churches wanted Pastors and Elders too they should want nothing of the Essence of a Church but of the perfection and glory of it But this Remonstrant seemes to know so much of the minde of those Churches that if they might have their option they would most gladly embrace Episcopall Government as littlâ— differing from their owne Moderatorship save onely in the perpetuitie of it and the new Invention as hee odiously calls it of Lay Elders But no question those learned Worthies that were entrusted by the Churches to compile their confessions did comprise their Iudgements better than the Composer of this Remonstrance And to his presumption wee oppose their Confession Wee will begin with
the French Church who in their Confession speake thus Credimus veram Ecclesiam gubernari debere ea politia quam Dominus noster Iesus Christus sancivit ita videlicet ut sint in ea Pastores Presbyteri sive Seniores Diaconi ut doctrinae puritas retineatur c. Ar. 29. Credimus omnes Pastores ubicunque collocati sunt cádem aequali potestate inter se esse praeditos sub uno illo capite summoque solo universali Episcopo Iesu Christo Art 30. Gallicae confessionis Credimus veram hanc Ecclesiam debere regi ac gubernari spirituali illâ politiâ quam nos Deus ipse in verbo suo edocuit it a ut sint in ea Pastores ac ministri qui pure concionentur Sacramenta administrent sint quoque Seniores Diaconi qui Ecclesiae senatum constituant ut his veluti mediis vera Râ—ligio conservari Hominesque vitiis dediti spiritualiter corripi emendari possint Tunc enim ritè ordinate omnia siunt in Ecclesia cum viri fidâ—les pii ad ejus gubernationem deliguÌ„tur juxta Divi Pauli praescriptum 1 Tim. 3. Confes. Belgic Art 30. Caeterum ubicunque locorum sunt verbi Dei Ministri eandem atque aequalem Omnes habent tum Potestatem tum AUTHORITATEM ut qui sunt aeque Omnes Christi unici illius universalis Episcopi capitis Ecclesiae Ministri We beleeve that the true Church ought to be governed by that policie which Christ Jesus our Lord established viz. that there bee Pastors Presbyters or Elders and Deacons And againe Wee beleeve that all true Pastors where ever they be are endued with equall and the same power under one chiefe Head and bishop Christ Jesus Consonant to this the Dutch Churches We beleeve say they the true Church ought to be ruled with that spirituall policie which God hath taught us in his Word to wit that there bee in it Pastours to preach the Word purely Elders and Deacons to constitute the Ecclesiasticall Senate that by these meanes Religion may be preserved and manners corrected And so again We beleeve where ever the Ministers of God are placed they All have the same equall power and authoritie as being All equally the Ministers of Christ. In which harmony of these Confessions see how both Churches agree in these five points First That there is in the Word of God an exact forme of Governement set downe Deus in verbo suo edocuit Secondly That this forme of Governement Christ established in his Church Iesus Christus in Ecclesiâ sancivit Thirdly That this forme of Government is by Pastors Elders and Deacons Fourthly That the true Church of Christ ought to be thus governed Veram Ecclesiam debere regi Fifthly That all true Ministers of the Gospell are of equall power and Authority For the reason he assignes why those Churches should make this Option wee cannot enough admire that such a passage should fall from his pen as to say there is Little difference betweene their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and our Episcopacie save onely in perpetuity and lay Elders for who knowes not that between these two there is as vast a difference as between the Duke of Venice and an absolute Monarch For 1. the Moderator in Geneva is not of a superiour order to his Brethren nor 2. hath an ordination differing from them nor 3. assumes power of sole Ordination or Jurisdiction nor hath he 4. maintenance for that office above his Brethren nor 5. a Negative voyce in what is agreed by the rest nor 6. any further power then any of his Brethren So that the difference betweene our Bishops and their Moderators is more then Little But if it be so little as this Remonstrant here pretends then the Alteration and Abrogation of Episcopacie will be with the lesse difficultie and occasion the lesse disturbance SECT XV. BUt there is another thing wherein our Episcopacie differs from the Geneva Moderatorship besides the perpetuity and that is the exclusion of the Lay Presbytery which if we may beleeve this Remonstrant never till this age had footing in the Christian Church In which assertion this Remonstrant concludes so fully with Bishop Halls Irrefragable Propositions and his other book of Episcopacie by divine right as if he had conspired to sweare to what the Bishop had said Now though we will not enter the Lists with a man of that learning and fame that Bishop Hall is yet we dare tell this Remonstrant that this his assertion hath no more truth in it then the rest that wee have alreadie noted Wee will to avoyd prolixity not urge those three knowne Texts of Scripture produced by some for the establishing of Governing Elders in the Church not yet vindicated by the adversaries Nor will wee urge that famous Text of Ambrose in 1 Tim. 5. But if there were no Lay Elders in the Church till this present age wee would be glad to learne who they were of whom Origen speakes when he tels us it was the Custome of Christian Teachers first to examine such as desired to heare them of whom there were two orders the first were Catechumeni or beginners the other was of such as were more perfect among whom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 câ— Nonnulli praepositi sunt quì in vitam mores eorum qui admittuntur inquirant ut qui turpia committant iis communi Caetu Interdicant qui vero ab istis abhorrent ex anima complexi meliores quotidiè reddant There are some ordained to enquire into the life and manners of such as are admitted into the Church that they may banish such from the publique Assembly that perpetrate scandalous Acts which place tells us plainely First that there were some in the higher forme of heares not Teachers who were Censores morum over the rest Secondly that they were designed or constituted to this work 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thirdly that they had such Authority instrusted into their hands as that they might interdict such as were scandalous from the publique Assemblies We would gladly know whether these were not as it were Lay Elders That there were such in the Church distinguished from others that were called to teach appeares Augustine writing to his Charge directs his Epistle Dilectissimis fratribus clero senioribus universae Plebi Ecclesiae Hipponensis where first there is the generall compellation Fratribus Brethren then there is a distribution of these Brethren into the Clergie the Elders and the whole People so that there were in that Church Elders distinguished both from the Clergie and the rest of the People So againe Contra Cresconium Grammaticum Omnes vos Episcopi Presbyteri Diaconi Seniores scitis All you Bishops Elders Deacons and Elders doe know What were those two sorts of Elders there mentioned in one comma ibidem cap. 56. Peregrinus Presbyter seniores Ecclesiae Musticanae Regiones tale desiderium prosequuntur where