the assertion of Episcopall men else what is the meaning of Doctor Halls semper and ubique and what is the meaning of that irrefragable proposition no man living no History can shew any well allowed and setled Nationall Church in the whole Christian World that hath been governed otherwise then by Bishops in a meet and moderate imparity ever since the times of Christ and his Apostles unto this present age And what means that other expression Turne over all Histories seeke the records of all times and places if ever it can be shown that any Orthodox Church in the whole Christian World since the time of Christ and his Apostles was governed otherwise then by a Bishop Superiour to his Clergie unlesse perhaps during the time of some persecution or short interregnum Let me forfeit my part of the cause The instances brought to prove the falsnesse of that Assertion that Episcopacie had never met with contradiction in any Christian Congregation The one hee turns off with the evasion of a personall quarrell whereas the Histories tell us it was an ancient custome and adds an odious Marginall ill becomming his so deeply protested loyalty to his Sovereigne as if it were no lesse crime to offer an affront to a Prelate then to the King The other instances of the Reformed Churches he puts off with this shift that if wee did not wilfully shut our eyes we might see he limited his time unto this present age Good Sir bethink you take up your Remonstrance read your own words Mark the Parenthesis Episcopall Government derives it self from the times of the Apostles without any interruption without the contradiction of any one Congregation in the Christian World to this present age The limitation of time here hath reference to the continuance of Episcopacie not the contradiction of Episcopacie that 's hedged in with your parenthesis which excludes your limitation Just such another is your next having said Episcopall Government continued in this Iland ever since the plantation of the Gospel without contradiction and being here taken in the manner to salve your credit you would here alter your words and sence and make it that it cannot be contradicted that the forme of this Government hath continued in the Island ever since the first plantation of the Gospel pray review your words and see how well they admit this sense Were this Ordinance meerly humane and Ecclesiasticall if there could no more be said for it but that it is exceeding ancient of more then fifteen hundred yeares standing and that it hath continued in this Island since the first Plantation of the Gospel to this present day without contradiction You would make the sense to goe thus this proposition is true without contradiction that Episcopall Government hath continued in this Island we say the sense must be thus that this Government hath continued without contradiction or hath received no contradiction during all the time it hath continued untill this present day If any impartiall Reader would not take the words in that sence we did rather then in the sence you have drawn them to let us be counted slanderers But in excusing the last mistake he would be a little more serious The Remonstrant had said Except all Histories all Authors faile us nothing can be more certain then this truth Wee cry out here of such a shamelesnesse as dares equall this opinion of his of Episcopall Government to an Article of our Creed This he doth seriously deny professing he spake it only as an ordinary phrase in hourly discourse and did Hee so too that in Episcopacie by divine Righ Part. 2. pag. 47. faith That for his part hee is so confident of the divine institution of the Majoritie of Bishops above Presbyters that hee dare boldly say there are weighty points of Faith which have not so strong evidence in Scripture And the same Author in the same place professeth that men may with much better colour cavill at those blessed Ordinances of God viz. consecration and distribution of the holy Eucharist and baptizing of Infants then quarrell at the divine institution of Bishops God give the man lesse confidence or more truth is not this to equalize this fancie to an Article of the Creed Wee would not have cast away so much time and paper upon this worthlesse businesse but onely to cleer our selves from that uncharitablenesse falshood lying and slandring wherewith the Remonstrant here bespatters us It is in his power to save himselfe and us this ungratefull labour if hee will give lesse scope to his luxuriant pen speak more cautiously let his words be more in weight and lesse in number SECT IV. IN the next Section the Remonstrant according to his Rhetorick saith Now I hope they wil strike it is a Trope sperare pro timere He had pleaded for the establishment of Episcopacie the long continuance of it in the world and in this Island this we called Argumentum galeatum quoting Hierom for that Epithite for which his great learning scoffs us Well wee must put it up an argument or if you will an Almanack for it is growing out of date apace and calculated for the Meridian of Episcopacie c. meaning the argument though applyed to Episcopacie might serve for any other Right Custome Order Religion that might plead antiquity which hee denies not but plainly grants saying it is calculated for whatsoever Government if so long time have given it peaceable possession in so much that could the Presbytery plead so long continuance hee should never yield his vote to alter it No should not to bring in that Episcopall Government which saith the Remonstrant hath such a divine institution as not only warrants it where it is but requires it where it may be had How can these things consist Surely if your grounds for the Divine Right of Episcopacie be Convictive and Irrefragable you must renounce that Government which is meerly humane and Ecclesiasticall be the Antiquity of it never so venerable if it stand in Competition with that which may plead a jus divinnm To divert that which he saw would overthrow this plea intitling the Pope to as much strength in this argument as the Bishops he will needs add this That long continuance may challenge an immunity from thoughts of alteration uulesse where the ground of the change is fully Convictive and Irrefragable But first Sir you must not make a limitation in your conclusion above what was in your premises but since you are at a dead lift wee will take it in and yet tell you that this helps you no more then the Pope still if he may judge hee will say there is no reason for his abolition may others judge the ground is fully Convictive and Irrefragable The Bishops being Judges and the Remonstrant they determine no reason in the world for the change of Episcopacie but what if others that must be Judges in this controversie see grounds Irrefragable and
because he knowes not what to say against it If he did intend to anger us he is much mistaken for it pleaseth us well to heare him give so full a testimony that secular imployments are unsuitable to the Ministers of the Gospell Vnlesse in those two excepted cases of the extraordinary occasions and services of a Prince or State And the composing of unkind quarrels of dissenting neighbours We take what he grants us here so kindly that we pardon his unfit comparison betweene S. Pauls Tent-making to supply his owne necessities that he might not be burthensome to the Church the State imployment of our Bishops And should in this Section fully have joyned hands with him but that we must needs tell him at the parting that had our Bishops never ingaged themselves in secular affaires but ex officio generali Charitatis and had beene so free from ambition as he would make the world beleeve they are neither should wee have beene so large in this Section nor so aboundant in our processe nor would the Parliament have made that provision against the secular imployment of Clergy men as they have lately done SECT XIII THe best Charter pleaded for Episcopacy in former times was Ecclesiasticall constitution and the favour of Princes But our latter Bishops suspecting this would prove too weake and sandie a foundation to support a building of that transcending loftinesse that they have studied to advance the Babell of Episcopacy unto have indeavoured to under-pinne it with some texts of Scripture that they might plead a Ius divinum for it that the consciences of all might be tyed up from attempting to pull down their proud Fabricke but none of them is more confident in this plea then this Remonstrant who is content that Bishops should for ever be hooted out of the Church and be disclaimed as usurpers if they claime any other power then what the Scripture gives them especially bearing his cause upon Timothy and Titus and the Angels of the 7. Churches Now because one grain of Scripture is of more efficacy esteeme to faith then whole volumes of humane testimonies we indeavoured to shew the impertinency of his allegations especially in those two instances And concerning Timothy and Titus we undertooke two things First that they were not Bishops in his sence but Evangelists the companions of the Apostles in founding of Churches or sent by them from place to place but never setled in any fixed pastorall charge and this wee shewed out of the story of the Acts and the Epistles The other was that granting ex abundanti they had beene Bishops yet they never exercised any such jurisdiction as ours doe But because the great hinge of the controversie depends upon the instances of Timothy and Titus before we come to answer our Remonstrant we will promise these few propositions granted by most of the patrons of Episcopacy First Evangelists properly so called were men extraordinarily imployed in preaching the Gospell without a setled residence upon any one charge They were Comites Vicarii Apostolorum Vice-Apostles who had Curam Vicariam omnium Ecclesiarum as the Apostles had Curam principalem And did as Ambrose speakes Evangelizare sine Cathedra Secondly It is granted by our Remonstrant and his appendant Scultetus and many others That Timothy was properly an Evangelist while he travelled up and downe with the Apostles Thirdly It is expressely granted that Timothy and Titus were no Bishops till after Pauls first being at Rome That is after the end of the Histories of the Acts of the Apostles Fourthly The first Epistle to Timothy and the Epistle to Titus from whence all their grounds for Episcopacy are fetcht were written by Paul before his first going to Rome And this is acknowledged by all interpreters and Chronologers that we have consulted with upon this point Baronius himselfe affirming it And the Remonstrants owne grounds will force him to acknowledge that the second Epistle to Timothy was also written at Pauls first being at Rome For that second Epistle orders him to bring Marke alone with him who by the Remonstrants account died five or six yeeres before Paul Which could not have beene if this Epistle were written at Pauls second comming to Rome Estius also following Baronius gives good reason that the second Epistle to Timothy was written at Pauls first being at Rome Fiftly If Timothy and Titus were not Bishops when these Epistles were written unto them then the maine grounds of Episcopacy by divine right sinke by their owne confession Bishop Hall in his Episcopacy by divine right part 2. sect 4. concludes thus peremptorily That that if the especiall power of ordination and power of ruling and censuring Presbyters be not cleare in the Apostles charge to these two Bishops the one of Creete the other of Ephesus I shall yeeld the cause and confesse to want my sences And it must needs be so for if Timothy were not then a Bishop the Bishops power of charging Presbyters of proving and examining Deacons of rebuking Elders and ruling over them and his imposition of hands to ordaine Presbyters c. doe all faile And Bishops in these can plead no succession to Timothy and Titus by these Scriptures more then other Presbyters may For if they were not Bishops then all these were done by them as extraordinary Officers to which there were no successors Sixtly By the confession of the patrons of Episcopacy It is not onely incongruous but sacrilegious for a Minister to descend from a superiour order to an inferiour according to the great Counsell of Chalcedon Seventhly In all that space of time from the end of the Acts of the Apostles untill the middle of Trajans raigne there is nothing certaine to be drawne out of Ecclesiasticall Authours about the affaires of the Church thus writeth Iosephus Scaliger Thus Tilenus when he was most Episcopall and Eusebius long before them both saith It cannot be easily shewed who were the true followers of the Apostles no further then it can be gathered out of the Epistles of Paul If the intelligent Reader weigh and consider these granted propositions he may with ease see how the life-blood of Episcopacy from Timothy and Titus is drayn'd out for if they were not Bishops till after Pauls first being at Rome then not when the Epistles were written to them according to the fourth proposition and then their cause failes if any shall say they were Bishops before Pauls first being at Rome contrary to the third proposition then they make them Bishops while by the story its apparent they were Evangelists and did Evangelizare sine cathedra and so clash against the second In a word the office of an Evangelist being a higher degree of Ministery then that of Bishops make them Bishops when you please you degrade them contrary to our sixt proposition whiles the Remonstrant tryes to reconcile these things we shall make further use of them
no record is found in Divine writings 6. Whether Master Beza have not heard soundly of his distinction of the three kinds of Episcopacy in the full and learned answer of Soravia Yes and Soravia and others that have borrowed from him have heard as foundly of their defences of Episcopacy both by domesticke and forreine Divines who have sufficiently declared how well our story of the Painter suits with your Discipline but iâ— that please you not we can â—it you with an other of the Painter mentioned in Plutarch who having drawne a cocke very unskilfully and rudely could not indure any cocke to stand within view for feare of discovering the deformity of his picture So our Bishops having drawne a forme and line of government which they propose to the world as divine will not indure the true divine government to come in view for feare of discovering the irregularity of theirs 7. Whether it were not fit that we also should speake as the ancient Fathers did Sir by your leave it is safe to speake in the language the Scripture speakes but you should have done well to have spoken to the reason upon which our Quere was grounded and what further reasons we then had and still have to make this Quere may appeare by what wee have sayd before in vindicating Timothy and Titus from such like objections 8. Whether Presbyters can without sinne arrogate unto themselves the exercise of the power of publike Church-government c. to say nothing what honour here you give to your deare Sister-Churches Our answer is Yes they may take the exercise of that power without sinne though not without danger if your High-Commission were standing For our Saviour Christ when he gave to Peter the promise of the keyes made in one undistinguishable act a donation of the power both of preaching and governing and therefore if Presbyters may without sin publickly exercise the one by vertue of that donation they may by the same charter as warrantably exercise the other The last branch of your quere Whether any Father or Doctor till this age held that Presbyters were successors to the Apostles c. We wonder that any man who hath but the repute of learning shouldâ— make such a quere And for the answer we refer you to what we have said before in this booke 9. Whether ever any Bishops assumed to themselves power temporall to be Barons c. Our answer is You shew better writts for your temporalties then you have done yet for your spiritualties And our quaere was directed to shew the spirituall power of Bishops to be of more dangerous consequence then their temporall to which purpose we produced five reasons which wee perswade our selves you scarcely read over for in the third there is a fault in the printing which had you seene your charity would scarce have let passe without an observation which remaining unanswered wee conclude as before it concernes all those that have spirituall eyes to endeavour to abrogate their spirituall usurpationsâ— as well as their temporall As for the latter part of this Quere it is a begging of the whole dispute Et eadem facilitate rejicitur quâ affirmatur 10. Whether the answerers have not just cause to be ashamed of patronizing a noted hereticke Aerius c. To this we answer That if Aerius was accounted an heretique for denying Bishops to be all one with Presbyters by divine right we are not ashamed to patronize him till you have answered our allegations for his defence which are brought in this quere and in divers places in this Booke But you could not be so ignorant but to know how Bellarmine and divers others doe say That Aerius was accounted an hereticke not for denying the inequality of Bishops and Presbyters by Scripture but by the Canons of the Church But wee wonder how we escaped the brand of the heresie of the Audiani who by the same Epiphanius are called heretiques though men of a blamelesse conversation because they did not without just cause freely and boldly reprove the vices of the Bishops of their daies 11. Whether the great apostacy of the Church of Rome doe or did consist in the maintaining the order of government set by the Apostles themselves c. Sure no wee never sayd nor thought it But that a great part of the Apostacy of the Church of Rome consisted in swarving from the discipline of Christ and hiâ— Apostles as well as from the doctrine and setting up and maintaining a new Hierarchicall forme which cannot enter into our hearts to thinke the Apostles did ever set up and which the most part of the Churches in the Christian World that are professedly opposite unto the Church of Rome doe oppose as much as they doe Rome it selfe though you beare the Reader in hand they all maintaine it no lesse constantly then Rome it selfe doth which no man but he that hath captivated reason modesty to his cause and will would have so confidently and untruly spoken Once againe let us aske you whether by this bould speech all the reformed Churches of Christ be not now shut out of the number of Churches 12. Whether if Episcopacy be through the mâ—nificence of good Princes honoured with a title of dignity c. it to be ever the more declined Since the time that Episcopacy has bin honored with dignity and revenues the office hath not bin declined but the Bishops themselves haue bin declining Yet our Quere was not whether this were a ground of declining the place but rather of desiring the place As for our crying up the Presbytery because wee hope to carry some sway in it We acknowledge our selves unworthy to beare any part in it but we heartily desire that Christ may rule and wee shall most willingly subject our selves to his government 13. Whether there bee no other apparent causes to be given for the encrease of popery and superstition in the Kingdome besides Episcopacy which hath strongly laboured to oppose it c. We deny not but there may have bin other causes but none so apparant as Episcopacy But whereas in a parenthesis which you might well have left out without any detriment either to your sense or the truth you say that Episcopacy hath strongly laboured to oppose popery we answer Quid verba audimus cum facta videmus you aske againe whether the multitude of Sects you should have added which the tyranny of Bishops hath made And professed â—lovenlinesse in Gods service have not bin guilty of the encrease of prophanenesse We answer againe not so much as the forbidding of preaching and Catechising as the countenancing of sports on the Lords day as the scandalous lives of too too many episcopall men and the libertinisme of the Bishops houses and Courts 14. Your 14. Quere consists of a Paradox and a Solâ—cisme A Paradox in saying That all Churches throughout the whole Christian world have ever observed and doe constantly and uniformely obserue and maintaine Episcopall
who have laboured about the Reformation of the Church these five hundred yeeres of whom he names abundance have taught that all Pastors be they intitulated Bishops or Priests have equall authority and power by the Word of God and by this the Reader may know Doctor Reinolds his judgment concerning Episcopacie There is one thing more belongs to this Section as to the proper seat and that is the establishment which he seeks to Episcopacie froÌ„ the laws of the Kingdom to which we having answered that Laws are repealable the Parliament having a Nomotheticall power He answers though laws are repealable yet fundamentall laws are not subject to alteration upon personall abuses Secondly that he speaks not against an impossibility but an easinesse of change which our guiltinesse would willingly overlook But consider we beseech you how fitly is Episcopal Government made a piece of the fundamentall Laws of the Kingdome How did the Kingdome then once stand without Bishops as in the very page you had now to answer you might have seen once it did For doth not the Marginall tell you from Sir Edward Coke or rather from an Act reported by him in the 23 yeere of Edward the first that the holy Church was founded in the state of Prelacie within the Realme of England by the King and his progenitors which your guiltinesse will needs overlooke for feare you should see that there was a King of this Realme of England before there was a Prelacie And how then is Episcopacie one of the fundamentals of the Kingdome And whereas you say you spake onely against an easinesse of change read your words in the eighteenth page of your Remonstrance A man would thinke it were plea enough to challenge a reverend respect and an immunitie from all thoughts of alteration is this to speake against an easinesse or rather against a possibility of change For your conclusion that things indifferent or good having by continuance and generall approbation beene well rooted in Church and State may not upon light grounds be pulled up Good Sir never trouble your selfe about such an indifferent thing as Episcopacie is Never feare but if Episcopacie be rooted up it will be done by such hands as will not doe it upon light grounds SECT V. THey that would defend the Divine right of Episcopacie derive the pedigree of it from no lesse then Apostolicall and in that right divine institution so did this Remonstrant This we laboured in this Section to disprove and shew that it might be said of our Bishops as of those men Ezra 62. These men sought their Register among those that were reckoned by Genealogie but they were not found therefore were they as polluted put from the Priesthoâ—d For the Bishops whose pedigree is derived from the Apostles were no others then Presbyters this we evinced by foure mediums out of Scripture but insisted onely upon two the identitie of their name and office Before wee come to the Remonstrants answer wee will minde the Reader of what the Remonstrant saith That we have a better faculty at gathering then at strewing which if we have we shall here make good use of our faculty in gathering the choice flowers which himself hath scattered yielding unto us the mayn Scripture grounds whereby the Patrons of Episcopacie have endevoured to uphold their cause For himselfe confesseth the Bishops cause to be bad if it stand not by divine Right and compares the leaving of divine right and supporting themselves by the indulgence and munificence of religious Princes unto the evill condition of such men who when God hath withdrawn himselfe make flesh their arme And whether himselfe hath not surrendred up this divine right judge by that which followeth Our main argument was That Bishops and Presbyters in the originall authority of Scripture were the same Hee answers in the name of himselfe and his Party This is in expresse terms granted by us We argue it further That we never find in Scripture any other orders of Ministery but Bishops and Deacons He answers Brethren you might have spared to tell mee that which I have told you before And adds That when wee alleage the Apostles writings for the identity of Bishops and Presbytâ—rs we oppose not his assertion because he speaks of the monuments of immediate succession to the Apostolike times but we of the writing of the Apostles And for the two other arguments drawn from the identitie of the qualifications of Bishops and Presbyters for their Office and Ordination to their office hee answers Ne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quidem And yet notwithstanding that the Reader may not perceive how the Remonstrant betrayes his own cause he deals like the fish Sepia and casteth out a great deal of black inke before the eyes of the Reader that so hee may escape without observation But wee will trace him and finde him out where hee thinks himselfe most secure For first he falsly quotes our answer Whereas wee say That in originall authority Bishops Presbyters are the same he tels us we say That Bishops and Presbyters went originally for the same That is saith he There was at first a plain indentity in their denomination Which two answers differ Immane quantum And yet howsoever this very identity of denomination in Scripture is of no small consequence what ever the Remonstrant makes of it For the proper ends of Names being to distinguish things according to the difference of their natures and the supream wisdome of God being the imposer of these names who could neither be ignorant of the nature of these offices nor mistake the proper end of the imposition of names nor want variety to expresse himselfe the argument taken from the constant identity of denomination is not so contemptible as the Remonstrant pretends Especially considering that all the texts brought to prove the identity of names prove as intrinsecally the identity of Offices which we did cleerly manifest by that text Titus 1. 5 6 7. Where the Apostle requiring Presbyters to be thus and thus qualified renders the reason because Bishops must be so Which argument would no ways evince what the Apostle intended if there were onely an idenditie of names and not also of offices and qualifications When the names are the same and the Offices distinct who but one that cares not what hee affirmes would infer the same offices as a consequent from the identity of their names Who would say that the properties of the Constellation called Canis ought to be the same with the bruit creature so called because they have both one name And this we desire the Reader to take the more notice of because the Remonstrant passeth it over in silence Secondly the Remonstrant seemes to recant that which he had before granted tels us that though in the Apostolike Epistles there be no nominal distinction of the titles yet here is a reall distinction and specification of the duties as we shall see in due place
a Canon provides that they should not be in little Villages Ne vilesceret honos Episcopatus but these himselfe acknowledgeth are but the accessaries of Episcopacy by the donations of Magnificent Princes But what is the meaning of this where it may be had what doth he meane where it may be had with the favour of the Prince then the Primitive Church had never had any Or where it may be had with the willing subjection of the people then Episcopacy shall be an ordinance if the people will have it so Where it may be had what with quiet and conveniency then you make that which you call an ordinance of God subject to mans convenience Or what with possibility requiring that where Episcopacy may be had possibly it should what 's this lesse than a command yet saith the Remonstrant here is no expresse law of God requiring it Now we pray you review your worke and see how well you have stated the question To prove that Episcopacy was not a divine but a humane institution we produced out of antiquity some places that mention the occasion and authors of Episcopall imparity which are not as the Remonstrant absurdly the onely countenance of our cause Our first was that knowne text of Hiereme in the 1. Titus out of which we collected five things which the Remonstrant summes up thus First that a Bishop and a Presbyter are originally one Secondly that the imparity was grounded upon Ecclesiasticall custome That before this priority the Church was governed by the common Councell of Presbyters and that Bishops ought still so to governe And lastly that the occasion of this imparity was the division which through the divels instinct fell among Christians this the Remonstrant cals the summe of our collection But if his Arithmeticke be no honester then thus he shall summe no summes for us for he leaves out one Collection which is indeed principally considerable That this was not Hieromes owne opinion but the opinion of the scriptures This would have stopt the mouth of his satis imperitè Wel what saies the Remonstrant You look now that I should tell you the booke is of uncertaine credit No indeed sir we looked for no such matter because we know that booke is approved by men both of as great learning and of as little affection to Hieromes opinion as the Remonstrant is though his lesser commentaries on the epistles be questioned Or else you look that I should tell you Hierome was a Presbyter and not without some touch of envy to that higher dignity which he missed Truely sir this we looked for and the rather because Doct. Hall in his Episcopacy by Divine right part 2. page 122. saith that as he was naturally a waspish a hot good man so being now vexed with some crosse proceedings as he thought with Iohn of Ierusalem he flew out c. but what a slender answer is this Hierome was a Presbyter what then Hierome saith nothing here but what he saith from Scripture and is Scripture the lesse Scripture because produced by a Presbyter Hierome was a Presbyter and pleads for his owne order doth that make his argument the lesse creditable the author of Episcopacy by Divine right was a Bishop is it sufficient confutation of that booke to say hee was a Bishop that made it he must plead for his own honour and order Or you looke say you that I should tell you that wiser men then your selves have censured him in this point of Arrianisme No indeed for feare you should thereby comfort us against the same censure past so often upon our selves If Hierome suffer under the name of Aerian no wonder we doe but if wisermen than we have condemned him for Aerianisme wiser men then the Remonstant have quitted him of that crime But the Remonstrant thinkes to decline these common waies and set Hierome to answer Hierome which yet is no more then Bellarmine did before him and and puts us in mind that the same father passes a satis imperitè upon the same opinion in the Bishop of Hierusalem but a satis imperitè doth not condemne the opinion but the man for it may be truth which a man speakes though he speakes it imperitè yet to make sure worke the Remonstrant will set Hierome to answer himselfe what saith Hierome at first saith he Bishops and Presbyters had but one title No Hierome said not so nor did we Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus How doth the Remonstrant construe this Is this in English a Bishop and a Presbyter is the same or is it at first Bishops and Presbyters had but one title with what face can the Remonstrant charge us with infidelity in quotation and mis-englishing who useth no more fidelity himselfe that which Hierome speakes of the office he would restraine to the title that which Hierome speakes in the present tense as true in all the moments and fluxes of time he would remit to the time past They had but one title This the Remonstrant passeth from and slips from their Identity to their imparity inquiring the time and occasion of that and will needs force Hierome here to confesse Bishops in the Apostles daies because then they began to say I am of Paul c. but will take no notice at all of what our answer spake for the removing of this inference unlesse it be to slight it as a poore shift nor will take notice of that which Hierome himselfe speakes Haec propterea ut oftenderemus apud veteres eosdem fuisse Presbyteros quos Episcopos paulatim verò ut dissentionum plantaria evellerentur ad unum omnem solicitudinem esse delatam intimating that Episcopacy was not presently invented as a cure of schisme but paulatim so that should it be granted that the schismes spoken of here were those in the Apostles daies yet it doth not follow that Episcopacy should be coaetaneous to these schismes because Hierome saith Paulatim ad unum omnem solicitudinem esse delatam Let the Remonstrant now aske Hierome not us why the remedy should be so late after the disease and here we desire the reader to observe that the Remonstrant doth meerely abuse him in telling him that Clemens in his Epistle to the Corinthians taxeth the continuance of the distractions raised in the Apostles daies when it is apparent that Clement speakes of a new schisme different from that Paul speakes of raised against ther Presbyters and the former schisme mentioned in the Scripture was onely among the people As for those Bishops whom Hierome names as made by the Apostles at present we say no more but this Hierome as a Divine saith Bishops and Presbyters are the same and to prove this produceth Scripture but Hierome speaking as an Historian mentions Bishops made by the Apostles and brings no Scripture for the proofe of that but onely the testimony of Eusebius his history who alone had writ before him of that subject Now let the
it out of Hierome and Chrysostome Yet let the reader consult the 37. page of our answer which the Remonstrant leaves unanswered and judge betweene us how farre we are from such confession his onely shift now is to say our Bishops neither challenge nor exercise any such power We have evidently proved they doe both manet ergo inconcussum our Bishops and the Bishops of former times are two SECT IX HEre saith the Remonstrant we beat the aire And yet not the aire but the Remonstrant too into the confession of that which would not be confest heretofore by such of theÌ„ especially as have contended for such a Bishop as exercised spirituall jurisdiction out of his owne peculiarly demandated authority If iurisdiction exercised from an authority peculiarly demandated how not solely Well now it is granted that this sole is cryed downe by store of antiquity So then here we doe not falsifie and it is granted that Presbyters have and ought to have and exercise a jurisdiction within their owne charge But here the Remonstrant will distinguish againe it is in foro conscientiae But consider Reader whether this be the jurisdiction here under dispute Whether that store of antiquity which he confesseth to cry downe sole jurisdiction speake of a jurisdiction in foro conscientiae as his false Margent saith Clem Alexan. whom we cited doth But indeed this distinction of the Remonstrant of a jurisdiction in foro interno and in foro externo is like that distinction of Reflexivè and Archipodialiter For all humane jurisdiction is in foro externo If preaching the word which is especially aim'd at by the Remonstrant be an exercise of jurisdiction Then he that hath the Bishops licence to preach in the Diocesse hath power to exercise jurisdiction through the Diocesse and an University preacher throughout the whole Kingdome Away with these toyes He grants againe that Presbyters ought to be consulted with in the great affaires of the Church but doe our quotations prove no more Bishops had their Ecclesiasticall Councell of Presbyters with whom they did consult in the greatest matters and was it onely in the greatest matters Is this all that Cyprian saith All that the Councell of Carthage saith when it determines ut Episcopus nullius causam audiat absque praesentia Clericorum alioquin irrita erit sententia Episcopi nisi Clericorum praesentia confirmetur Doth this speak onely of great matters when it saith Nullius causam audiat Is this onely of a jurisdiction the Presbyters had in foro conscientiae Were Bishops with their Consistory wont to sit to heare and judge causes in foro conscientiae good Reader judge of this mans truth and ingenuity who not being able to divert the stroke of that Antiquity we brought to manifest a difference betweene ours and the former Bishops in the exercise of their jurisdiction would cast a mist before his Readers eyes and perswade him he grants the whole section when indeed hee grants nothing onely seekes to slide away in the darke But our Bishops have their Deanes and Chapters say you and the lawes of our Church frequently make that use of them Yes you have Deanes and Chapters but who knowes not that they have a jurisdiction distinct from the Bishops in which the Bishop hath nothing to doe with theirs nor they with his And the Bishops also derive the exercise of jurisdiction to others we know it too well to Chancellours Commissaries Officials and other of their underlings even to the commanding of Christs Ministers to denounce their censures without any discerning what equity is in the cause And what advise or assistance of Ministers is required appeares by the very stile of your excommunications G. R. Doctor of Law Commissary c. to all Rectors c. For as much as we proceeding rightly c. have adjudged all and every one whose names are under-written to be excommunicated We doe therefore commit to you c. to denounce openly under paine and perill c. Given under our Seale such a day c. Let any footsteps of such a power be shewed in antiquity Presbyters he grants had their votes in Provinciall synods we from good authority say more they had their votes in all ordinary Iudicatures But after all these grants which are as good as nothing now he comes to plead his owne We justly say that the superiority of jurisdiction is so in the Bishop as that Presbyters neither may nor did exercise it without him to what purpose is this if the Remonstrant speake of Scripture times We have proved there was no superiority in them if of latter times it is not to the question wee are proving Bishops never exercised jurisdiction without their Presbyters as ours doe He puts us to prove Presbyters exercised jurisdiction without Bishops quam iniquè But the exercise of externall jurisdiction is derived from by and under the Bishop No neither from by nor under the Bishop but from God who hath made them overseers and rulers and by the same Ecclesiasticall authority that hath made you Bishops and under Bishops not in respect of divine power but if at all in respect of Ecclesiasticall Canons onely Your Timothy and Titus we shall meet in due place Your Ignatius and the rest of your testimonies you could produce would as you say truely but surfeit the readers eyes unlesse you could bring them to prove that Bishops did and might exercise sole jurisdiction Onely because you so triumph in our supposed scapes let us intreat you or the reader for you to looke upon your cited Councell of Antioch 24 25 Canon where you say the Bishop hath power of those things that belong to the Church and see whether that speakes one word of jurisdiction or be not wholy to be understood of the distribution of the goods of the Church as both the instance given in the Canon and Zonaras on that place manifest One shift yet the Remonstrant hath more and that is to tell us that this joynt government was but occasionall and temporary in times of persecution But when a generall peace had blessed them and they had a concurrence of soveraigne and subordinate authority with them they began so much to â—emit this care of conjoyning their forces as they supposed to finde lesse need of it Doctor Downham to whom hee referres in the page before assignes other reasons Namely Presbyters desiring their ease and Scholasticall quietnesse which he saith and proves not and also the Bishops desiring to rule alone which we finde to be the true cause by experience For if the Bishops be of the Remonstrants mind perswaded that the more frequent communicating of all the important businesse of the Church whether censures or determinations with those grave assistants which in the eye of the Law are designed to this purpose were a thing not onely unprejudiciall to the honour of Episcopacy but behovefull to the Church Why should not the Bishops doe
it save onely that their ambitious desires of ruling alone swayes them against their owne judgement and the determinations of the law But indeed if this communicating of all the important businesse of the Church with those grave assistants you speake of or with the Presbyters of the whole Diocesse if you will be onely an assuming them into the fellowship of consulting and deliberating without any decisive suffrage leaving the Bishop to follow or not to follow their advise this is but a meere cosenage of the reader and doth not hinder the sole power of Episcopall jurisdiction And this is all that Downam grants lib. 1. c. 7. p. 161. where he saith that Bishops doe assume Presbyters for advise and direction as a Prince doth his Counsellors not as a Consull doth his Senators who are cojudges with the Consul And this we perceive the Remonstrant well likes of as that which makes much for the honour of their function And now sir you see that we have not fished all night and caught nothing wee have caught your sole jurisdiction and might have caught your selfe were you not such a Proteus such a Polypus to shift your selfe into all formes and Colours Having proved that Bishops in all times succeeding the Apostles had Presbyters joyned with them in the exercise of their jurisdiction and that our Bishops have none is more evident then that it needs proofe This is more to you then Baculus in Angulo it cannot but be Spina in oculis Sagittain visceribus a thorne in your eye and an arrow in your heart convincing you to your griefe that the Bishops you plead for and the Bishops of former times are two SECT X. OUr next Section the Remonstrant saith runs yet wilder it is then because we prosecute a practice of the Bishops more extravagant then the former And that is the delegation of the power of their jurisdictiō to others which the Remonstrant would first excuse as an accidentall errour of some particular man not to be fastned upon all But we desire to know the man the Bishop in all England who hath not given power to Chancellors Commissaries Officials to suspend excommunicate absolve execute all censures but one and doth the Remonstrant thinke now to stoppe our mouthes with saying it is a particular error of some men whereas it is evident enough that our English Episcopacy cannot possibly be exercised without delegating of their power to a multitude of inferiour instruments Can one Bishop having 500. or a 1000. Parishes under him discharge all businesses belonging to testamentary and decimall causes and suites to preach Word and administer the Sacraments c. to take a due oversight also of all Ministers and people without the helpe of others Nor will that other excuse doe it That it is but an accidentall error and though granted concludes not that our Bishops challenge to themselves any other spirituall power then was delegated to Timothy and Titus Sir we abhorre it as an unworthy thing to compare our Bishops with Timothy or Titus the comparison is betweene our Bishops and Bishops of former times But to please you this once we will admit the comparison and shew howeven in this particular that you count so monstrous our Bishops challenge a power never delegated to Timothy nor Titus And we prove it thus Timothy and Titus never had a power delegated to them to devolve that power of governing the Church which God had intrusted into their hands upon persons incapable of it by Gods ordinance But our Bishops doe so Ergo. The Remonstrant thinkes by impleading other reformed Churches as guilty of the same crime to force us either to condemne them or to acquit him But the reformed Churches if they doe practise any such thing are of age to answer for themselves Our businesse is with the Remonstrant and the persons and practices which he hath taken the tuition of Whom we charging as in a generality with wholy intrusting the power of spirituall jurisdiction to their Chancellors and their Commissaries their good friend tels us we foulely overreach The assistance of these creatures they use indeed but they neither negligently or wilfully devest themselves of that and wholy put it into Laicke hands This is a meere slander that Bishops devest themselves of their power we never said That they doe either negligently or wilfully decline that office which they call theirs we need not say it is so apparent And as apparent it is that they doe intrust the power of jurisdiction wholly into Laicke hands for their Chancellors and Commissaries having power of jurisdiction by patent setled upon them and exercising that jurisdiction in all the parts of it conventing admonishing suspending excommunicating absolving without the presence or assistance of a Bishop or recourse to him we thinke impartiall Judges will say wee are neither slanderers nor over-reachers In our former answer we fully cleared from Cyprian how farre hee was from delegating his power to a Chancellour c. This he sleights as a negative authority yet it is sufficient to condemne a practice that never had being in the thoughts of primitive times And we beleeve it satisfies all others because the Remonstrant saith it is very like it was so Though according to his old way of diversion he tels us as Cyprian did not referre to a Chancellor so neither to the bench of a Laicke Presbytery yet he that is but meanly versed in Cyprian may easily see that it is no unusuall thing in that holy martyr to referre the determinations of causes ad Clerum Plebe◠But the Remonstrant thinkes to patronize the practice of our present Bishops by Silvanus the good Bishop of Troas And what did Silvanus to the countenancing of this practice perceiving that some of his Clergie did corruptly make gaine of causes civill causes causes of difference betweene party and party or as you phrase it page 91. unkind quarrels of dissenting neighbours he would no more appoint any of his Clergy to be Judge but made choice of some faithfull man of the Laity Now this is as much to the purpose good sir as Posthumus his pleading in Martiall We are confuting the practice of our Bishops in making over their spirituall jurisdiction to Laymen and he brings in a story of a good Bishop that having a bad Clergy intrusted honest men with civill judicature rather then them As full to the purpose is that of Ecclesiae ecdici or Episcoporum Ecdici to prove the Antiquity of Chancellors and Commissaries For their Ecdici were men appointed to be the advocates of the Church to plead the Churches cause before the Emperours against the tyranny of their potent adversaries But we never read that the Bishops did put over the government of the Church to them we could with all our hearts give this honour to Civilians to be the Churches advocates but not the Churches Judges which the Bishops give them leave to
the substance of those cares and offices which belong to Apostles and Evangelists is transmitted to the ordinary Church-governours as farre as is necessary for the edification of the Church else the Lord had not sufficiently provided for his Church all the question is whether these Church-governours are by way of Aristocracy the common Councell of Presbyters or by way of Monarchy Diocesan Bishops Now unlesse you prove that Timothy and Titus were ordinary officers or as Doctor Hall cals them Diocesan Bishops to whom as to individuall persons such care and offices were individually intrusted you will never out of Timothy and Titus defend Diocesan Bishops Thirdly though the substance of these cares and offices were to be transmitted to ordinary Church-governours yet they are not transmitted in that eminency or personall height in which they were in the Apostles and Evangelists an Apostle where ever he lived might governe and command all Evangelists all Presbyters c. an Evangelist might governe all Presbyters c. but no Presbyter or Bishop might command others onely the common Councel of Presbyters may charge any or many Presbyters as occasion shall require In a word these ordinary Church-governours succeed the extraordinary officers not in the same line and degree as one brother dying another succeeds him in the inheritance but as men of an other order and in a different line Let the Remonstrant therefore take Timothy and Titus as he findes them that is Evangelists men of extraordinary dignity and authority in the Church of Christ Let him with his first confidence maintaine that our Bishops challenge no other spirituall power then was delegated to them We shall upon better grounds maintaine with better confidence that if they chalenge the same they ought to be disclaimed for usurpers But much more challenging such a power as was never exercised by Timothy and Titus as we demonstrated in our former answer in severall instances which are so commonly knowne as our Remonstrant is ashamed to deny them onely plaies them off partly with his old shift the abuse of the person not of the Calling But we beseech you sir tell us whether these persons doe not perpetrate these abuses though by their owne vice yet by vertue of their place and Callings Partly by retorting questions upon us when or where did our Bishops challenge to ordaine alone or to governe alone we have shewed you when and where already when or where did our Bishops challenge power to passe a rough and unbeseeming rebuke upon an Elder Sure your owne conscience can tell that hath taught you to apply that to an Elder in office which we onely spake in Scripture phrase of an Elder in generall It was your guilt not our ignorance that turned it to an Elder in office Where did say you our Bishops give Commission to Chancellors Commissaries c. to rayle upon Presbyters to accuse them without just ground c. where have not Chancellors done so and what power have they but by Bishops Commission to meddle with any thing in Church affaires And where is the Bishop that hath forbid it them Qui non prohibet facit Onely there is one practice of our Bishops he is something more laborious to justifie That is their casting out unconforming brethren commonly knowne in their Court language by the name of schismatickes and heretickes which Timothy and Titus never did nor had any such power delegated to them heretickes indeed the Apostles gave them power to reject but wee had hoped the refusall of the use of a ceremony should never have beene equalized in the punishment either to heresie or schisme But the Remonstrant hath found Scripture for it Loth not the Apostle wish that they were cut off that trouble you but sure it is one thing to wish men cut off by God and another thing to cut them off by the censure of the Church Besides this was written to the Galatians and they that troubled them were such as maintained doctrines against the foundation i. Justification by workes of the Law c. which we thinke are very neere of kinne to heretickes I am sure farre above the crime of the Remonstrants unconforming brethren who are unsetled in points of a meane difference which their usuall language knowes by no better termes then of schismatickes and factious yet even such have fallen under the heaviest censures of suspension excommunication deprivation c. which the Remonstrant unable to deny would justifie which when he shall be able to doe he may do something towards the patronizing of Bishops But in the meane time let him not say they are our owne ill raised suggestions but their owne ill assumed and worse mannaged authority that makes them feare to be disclaimed as usurpers The second Scripture ground which the Remonstrant is ambitious to draw in for the support of his Episcopall cause is the instance of the Angels of the seven Churches which because it is locus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and cried up as argumentum verè Achilleum we did on purpose inlarge our selves about it And for our paines the Remonstrant as if all learning and acutenesse were lockt up in his breast Narcissus like in love with his owne shadow professeth that this peece of the taske fell unhappily upon some dull and tedious hand c. Which if it be so it will redound the more to the Remonstrants discredit when it shall appeare that he is so shamefully foiled and wounded by so dull an adversary He objects Colemorts oft sod when he cannot but know that the whole substance of his owne booke is borrowed from Bishop Bilson and Doctor Downham And that there is nothing in this discourse about the Angels but either it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But before we come to answer our Remonstrants particulars we will premise something in generall about these Asian Angels It may seeme strange that the defenders of Episcopacy lay so much weight of argument upon the word or appellation of Angell which themselves know to be a title not impropriated to the chiefe Ministers of the Church but common to all that bring the glad tidings of the Gospell yea to all the messengers of the Lord of Hosts We conceive there are 2. maine reasons that induce them to insist so much on this First they finde it the most easie way of avoyding the dint of all the Arguments brought against them out of the History of the Acts and Epistles by placing one above the rest of the Presbyters in the period of the Apostles times And so finding in the Revelation which was written the last of all the parts of the Scripture except peradventure the Gospell written by the same penne an expression which may seeme to favour their cause they improve it to the utmost Partly because hereby they evade all our arguments which we bring out of the Scripture Doe we prove out of the
which they have made who have beene intoxicated with the Golden Chalice of the whore of Babylons abominations hath so alienated the affections of people from them as that what doome so ever they are sentenced unto it is no other then what they have brought upon themselves As for our part we are still of the same mind that honourable maintenance ought to be given to the Ministers of the Gospell not onely to live but to be hospitable Indeed we instanced in many that did abuse their large revenues But you are pleased to say That in this Ablative age the fault is rare and hardly instanceable We thinke the contrary is more hardly instanceable And as for your Ablative age if you meane it of poore Presbyters who have beene deprived of all their subsistance by the unmercifulnesse of Bishops whom they with teares have besought to pitty their wives and children we yeeld it to be too true Or if you meane in regard of the purity of the ordinances the frequency of preaching the freedome of conceived prayer We denie not but in this sence also it may be called the Ablative age But if you relate it to Episcopacy and their Cathedrals with whom it is now the Accusative age We hope that the yeere of recompense is come and that in due time for all their Ablations they may be made a gratefull ablation We have done with this section and feare not to appeale to the same judicious eyes the Remonstrant doth to judge to whose part that Vale of absurd inconsequences and bold ignorance which hee brands us withall doth most properly appertaine SECT XIV IN this Section hee comes to make good his anâ—wers formerly given to some objections by him propounded and by us further urged The first objection was from that prejudice which Episcopacy challenging a divine originall doth to Soveraignty which was wont to be acknowledged not onely as the conserving but as the creating cause of it in former times The Remonstrant thinks this objection is sufficiently removed by telling us there is a compatiblenesse in this case of Gods act and the Kings And what can wee say to this Sir you know what we have said already and not onely said but proved it and yet will confidently tell us you have made good by undeniable proofes that besides the ground which our Saviour layd of this imparity the blessed Apostles by inspiration from God made this difference c. Made good when where by what proofs Something you have told us about the Apostles but not a word in all the defence of any ground laid by our Saviour of this imparitie yet the man dreams of undeniable proofs of that whereof he never spake word Wee must therefore tell you againe take it as you please that if the Bishops disclaime the influence of Soveraignty into their creation and say that the King doth not make them Bishops they must have no being at all Nor can your questions stop our mouthes Where or when did the King ever create a Bishop Name the man and take the cause Wee grant you Sir that so much as there is of a Presbyter in a Bishop so much is Divine But that imparity and jurisdiction exercised out of his own demandated authority which are the very formalities of Episcopacie these had their first derivation from the Consent Customes Councell Constitution of the Church which did first demandate this Episcopall authority to one particular person afterwards the Pope having obtained a Monarchie over the Church did from himself demandate that authority that formerly the Church did and since the happy ejection of the Popes tyrannicall usurpations out of these Dominions our Princes being invested with all that Ecclesiasticall power which that Tyrant had usurped that same imparity and authority which was originally demandated from the Church successively from the Pope is now from the King Looke what influence the Church ever had into the creation of Bishops the same the Pope had after and looke what influence the Pope had heretofore the same our Laws have placed in the King which is so cleere that the Remonstrant dares not touch or answer There was a Statute made the first of Edward the sixth inabling the King to make Bishops by his Letters patents Onely Hence all the Bishops in King Edwards the sixt time were created Bishops by the Kings Letters patents ONELY in which all parts of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction are granted them in precise words praeter ultra jus divinum Besides and beyond divine right to be executed onely nomine vice Authoritate nostri Regis in the Kings royall stead name and Authority as the patents of severall Bishops in the Rolls declare But besides the Kings Letters the Bishop is solemnly ordained by the imposition of the hands of the Metropolitan and other of his brethren these as from God invest him in his holy calling As from God Good sir prove that prove that the Metropolitan and Bishops in such imposition of hands are the instruments of God not the instruments of the King prove they doe it by Commission received from God and not by command of the King onely Produce one warrant from Scripture one president of a Bishop so ordained by a Metropolitan and fellow Bishops and without more dispute take all Shortly resolve us but this one thing what is it that takes a man out of the ordinary ranke of Presbyters and advanceth him to an imparity and power of jurisdiction is it humane authority testified in the Letters of the King or is it divine authority testified by the significative action of imposition of hands by the Metropolitan and fellow Bishops if the former you grant the cause if the latter consider with what good warrant you can make a form of Ordination by the hands of a Metropolitan and fellow Bishops which is a meer humane invention to be not onely a signe but a mean of conveying a peculiar and superiour power from Divine Authority and of making a Presbyter a Bishop Iuredivino Finally Sir make as much as you can of your Ordination by a Metropolitan slight as much as you please your unworthy comparison between the King and our Patrons yet did the Kings Conge d'eslire give you no more humane right to Episcopacie then the hands of the Metropolitan and fellow Bishops give you of right Divine you would be Bishops by neither It is not your confident re-inforcing of your comparison that shal call carry it till you have first proved it from Scripture that God never instituted an order of Presbyters or Ministers in his Church as wee have proved God never instituted an order of Bishops Secondly that by the Laws of the land as much of the Ministeriall power over a particular Congregation is in the patron as there is of Episcopall power in the King Till then wee beseech you let it rest undetermined whether your self or we may best be sent to Simons Cell We say no more
his Remonstrance hee made no mention of Diocesan Bishops whereas all know that he undertooke the defence of such Bishops which were petitioned against in Parliament whom none will deny to bee Diocesan Bishops In his 5. pag. speaking of the changing of Civill governement mentioned in the Remonstrance he professeth that he did not aime at our Civill Governement Let but the Reader survey the words of the Remonstance pag. 8. and it will appeare plainely ac si solaribus radijs descriptum esset That the comparison was purposely made betwixt the attempts of them that would have altered our Civill governement and those that indeavored the alteration of our Church governement And whereas he bids as pag. 135. to take our soleordination and sole jurisdiction to sole our next paire of shoes withall yet notwitstanding hee makes it his great worke to answer all our arguments against the sole power of Bishops and when all is done allowes the Presbyter onely an assistance but no power in Ordination nor jurisdiction Lastly in the stating of the question he distinguisheth betweene divine and Apostolicall authority and denyeth that Bishops are of Divine authority as ordained immediately by Christ. And yet he saith That Christ himselfe hath laid the ground of this imparitie in his first agents And that by the evidence of Timothy and Titus and the Asian Angels to whom Christ himselfe wrote he hath made good that just claime of the sacred Hierarchy This is the summe of that good Reader that we thought fit to praemonish thee of Wee now dismisse thee to the booke it selfe and commend thee and it to the blessing of God A Vindication of the ANSWER to the humble Remonstrance SECT I. IF wee thought our silence would onely prejudice our selves wee could contentedly sit downe and forbeare Replyes not doubting but intelligent men comparing cause with cause and reason with reason would easily see with whom the truth rests but wee fearing that many who have not either ability or leisure to search into the grounds of things themselves would fearce thinke it possible that so much confidence as the Remonstrant shewes should be severed from a good cause or so much contempt should bee powred upon us that are not the bad defenders of a cause much worse Wee must discharge our duty in cleering the cause and truth of God and that will cleer us from all the foule aspersions which the Remonstrant hath been nothing sparing to cast upon us Whose Defence in every Leafe terms us either ignorant lyers witlesse falsifiers malicious spightfull slanderous violent and subtill Machinators against the Church and disturbers of her peace c. and this not onely in a cursory way but in such a devout and religious form as we make question whether ever any man before him did so solemnly traduce speaking it in the presence of God that he never saw any Writer professing Christian sincerity so fouly to overlash To the presence of God before whom his protestation is made our accesse is equall and at that Tribunall wee doubt not through the grace of Christ but to approve both our selves our cause And had we the same accesse unto our Sovereigne wee should lesse regard those bitter invective accusations wherewith hee hath so profusely charged us in his Sacred eares But our meanesse forbids us to make immediate addresses to the throne which he hath made his refuge yet may it please that Royall Majesty whom God hath anointed over us to vouchsafe an eye unto these papers wee have that trust in the Justice of our Sovereigne the goodnesse of our Cause the integrity of our consciences in all our Quotations as we doubt not but his Majesty will cleerly see that our Persons cause and carriage have been misrepresented to him The cause our Remonstrant saith is Gods it is true of the cause agitated though not of the cause by him defended and we desire what ever he hath done to manage it in Gods way to love in the truth and speak the truth in love The charity of our Remonstrant wee will not question though in the first congresse hee doth as good as call us Devils because so often in his book he cals us Brethren But that which hee calls truth and the truth of God we must crave leave to doe more then bring in question notwithstanding the impregnable confidence of this Irrefragable Doctor Our Histories record of Harold Cupbearer to Edward the Confessor that wayting on the Cup he stumbled with one foot and almost fell but that hee recovered himself with the other at which his father smiling said Now one brother helps another The Remonstrant calls us Brethren and supposeth hee sees us stumbling in the very entrance of our answer and what help doth our Brother lend us Onely entertains us Sannis Cathinnis and tels us it is an ill signe to stumble at the threshold Yet not alwayes an ill signe Sir wee accept this stumbling for such an Omen as Caesar had at his Landing in Affrick and our William the Conquerour at his first landing in England which they tooke for the first signe of their victory and possession An what 's this Stumble The Answer mentions the Areopagi instead of the Areopagites Grande nefas Of such an impiety as this did Duraeus once accuse our Learned Whitakers from whom wee will in part borrow our answer It is well the good of the Church depends not upon a piece of Latine But can our Remonstrant perswade himselfe that his Answerers should have so much Clarklike ignorance as never to have heard of Areopagita If he can yet we are sure he can never perswade his ingenious Readers but some one at least of that Legion which hee fancies conjured up against his Remonstrance might have heard of Dionysius Areopagita that by a man that had not studied to cast contempt upon us it might have beene thought rather a stumble in the Transcribers or Printers then the Authours But what if there be no stumble here What if the fault be in the Remonstrants eyes and not in the Answerers words What if hee stumble and not they and what if it be but a straw he stumbles at For though Areopagus be the name of the place and Areopagitae the name of the persons yet it is no such impropriety in speech to signifie the persons by the place had wee said the Admired sonnes of Iustice the two Houses of Parliament had this been such a Soloecisme and will this Remonstrant deny us that liberty for which we have Natures Patent and the example of the best Authors in other Tongues To smooth or square to lengthen or cut off Exoticke words according as will best suit with our own Dialect If we were called to give an account of this Syllabicall Errour before a Deske of Grammarians wee could with ease produce presidents enough in approved Authors but we will onely give an instance in the word it self from Ioan. Sarisburi lib. 5. de Nugis
but every man prayed according to his ability Secondly that in Ezra his time eighteene short forms of Prayers were composed for the scattered Iews which had lost the use of the holy language because they thought it best to continue their Prayers and Worship of God in that sacred tongue Thirdly but not a word of any set forms which the Priests or Levits were to use but only to helpe the ignorant Iews to expresse themselves in prayer to God in the holy language at the time or houres of prayer Which the men of the great Synagogue had appointed Peter and Iohn went up together to the Temple at the houre of prayer being the ninth houre Though we alleage not this of Maymonides as a testimony to command beliefe yet wee conceive it farre more to be regarded then any Samaritan Chronicle Secondly hee hath some scraps of Iewish Liturgies out of Capellus concerning which a short answer may serve first there is not one of the Iewish Liturgies now extant which was made before the Iews ceased to be the Church of God for besides the eighteene short formes before mentioned there were no other made till Rabbi Gamaliel his time who according to the judgment of learned Criticks is that Gamaliel mentioned in the Acts from whom Paul got such bitter principles against Christian Religion But whensoever they began Capellus would laugh should he heare what a strange conceit this Remonstrant had gotten from him that the Iewish Liturgies were as ancient as the time of Moses merely because he parallels some Iewish phrases which hee found in them with certaine phrases in the Gospell which the Iews retained by Tradition from their Fathers and put into their Liturgies But Buxtorfius would fal out with him that he should so much abuse him as to say he had affirmed that Maymonides took his Creed out of the Liturgie for the man is not guilty of any such grosse mistake he saith indeed that the Articles of the Iewish Creed are printed in the Liturgies but withall hee tels the Remonstrant that Maymonides was the first composer of them whence therefore the Iews put them into their Liturgie Thus wee leave his Iewish Liturgie which the Reader will easily see to be more Iewish then hee could justly suppose our instance of William Rufus was and that it affords him as little furtherance For Christian Liturgies which the Remonstrant had affirmed to have been the best improvement of the peace and happinesse of the Evangelicall Church ever since the Apostles times we challenged the Remonstrant setting aside those that are confessedly spurious to produce any Liturgie that was the issue of the first 300 yeers in answer to which he brings us forth the Liturgies which we have under the names of Iames Basil and Chrysostome to which our Reply may be the briefer because hee himselfe dares not vouch them for the genuine writings of those holy men Onely saith hee we have them under their names Secondly he confesseth there are some intersertions spurious in them Thirdly all that he affirmes is that the substance of them cannot be taxed for any other then holy and ancient what censure the learned Criticks both Protestants and Papists have pâ—st upon these Liturgies we hope the Remonstrant knows we will onely mind him of what the leâ—rned Rivetus speaks of the Liturgies of Iames Peter Matthew Mark has omnes profectas esse ab inimico homine qâ—i bonae semenii Domini nocte super seminavit zâ—zâ—nia solidis rationibus probavit Nobilisque illustris Philip Morneus lib. 1. de Missae partihus ejus Which because the Remonstrant so often finds fault with our misenglishing wee leave to him to see if hee can construe these Zizania to be any other then these Liturgies and this inimicus homo to be any other then the Devill Nor will his implication of the ancient Councell of Ancyra helpe him which forbade those Priests that had not sacrificed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Will the Restrant say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was to serve in the holy Liturgies that is reading set Litnrgies he may as wel say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the reading of set Homilies Balsamon Zonaras Dionysius Isidore and Gentian Harvet doe all translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aliquod munus sacerdotale subire And that the Remonstrant may not delude himself nor others with the ambiguitie of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if every meÌ„tion of these did by implication prove such a Liturgie as for which he contends Let him know that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is variously used in Antiquity sometimes for all the Ministeriall Offices so Zonaras in Concil Antioch Can. 4. and so Concil 4. Ancyra Can. 1. quoted by himselfe if hee would either have observed or acknowledged it sometimes only for prayer so Balsamon in Can. 12. Concil Sardic 6. Sometimes singing of our Psalmes is tearmed by Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The same Father expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 13. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 27. in Act. so that for the proof of such Liturgies as are the Subject of this question it is not enough to shew us the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in antiquity let him shew the thing before he so Dictator-like condemne those for giddy heads that will not take his word for proofs and believe it was the undeniable practice of antiquity to use Liturgies and formes of prayer because he saith so His supercillious censure upon our passage about conceived prayer is not worth the taking notice of he saith We are sullen and crabbed pieces tecchy and quarrelsome men and why because we said his large prayses of conceived prayer were but a vantage ground to advance publike forms the higher how truly judg what cause we had so to think wee declared from the cruell and ungodly practices of the late times which he will scarce take notice of Our arguing about the originall and confirmation of our Church Liturgie he calls wrangling For the originall the Remonstrant said it was taken out of the ancient Models not Roman but Christian here wee tooke notice of the opposition betweene Roman and Christian because by the Remonstrant made Termini sese muâ—uâ— removentes which we perceive now hee is not willing should passe for his meaning hee will not have it meant of an opposition but of a different modification Though his instances brought to exemplifie it are not all ad oppositum We will not make digressive excursions into new controversies though wee are not affraid of burning our fingers with his hot Iron Only wee tell him that the Suffrages of unquestionable Divines are not so unanimous but that from some of them wee could fetch sparks to fling in the face of him that desired their suffrages without burning our-own fingers Compare what the booke called the Old Religion speaks of the Church of
distast if there be any such wee for our parts are innocent our care for our part hath beene to informe our people that such stumbling blocks as these are not sufficient causes of Separation But wee thinke nay we know that some few Prelats by their over-rigorous pressing of the Service-book and Ceremonies have made more Separatists than all the Preachers disaffected to the Ceremonies in England Our last reason was from the difference betweene this and all other Churches To which he answers that difference in Liturgies will breed no dis-union between Churches Secondly if it be requisite to seeke conformity our is the more ancient Liturgie and our the more noble Church Therefore fit for them to conforme to us rather then we to them It is true every difference in Liturgies doth not necessitate a dis-union of Churches but here the difference is too large to be covered with a few fig-leaves It is too well known our Ceremonies and other things in our Liturgies will not downe with other reformed Churches to the second it is not the precedencie in times that gains the Glory but the exactnesse of the work Our first Reformation was onely in doctrine theirs in doctrine and discipline too For the third that ours is the more noble Church We desire not to ecclipse the glory of this Church but rather to intreat the Lord to increase it a thousand fold how great soever it be and to ennoble it in this particular in removing what ever is a stumbling block out of the way of his people But why saith the Remonstrant should we rather conforme to the Liturgies of the Reformed Churches then those of all other Christians Grecians Armenians Copths c. should we set down what wee have read in the Liturgies of those Churches wee believe the Remonstrant would blush for intimating there is as much reason to conform to their Liturgies as those of the Reformed Churches Our second quaere is not so weak as this Remonstrant supposeth it is this whether the first Reformers of Religion did ever intend the use of a Liturgie further then to be a help in the want and to the weaknes of the Ministers In way of Answer he asketh Whether we can think that our Reformers had any other intentions then all other the founders of Liturgies No indeed wee thinke no other and howsoever the Remonstrant according to his confidence tels us that the least part of their eare was the helpe of the Ministers weaknesse yet their words tell us it was the main drift of those that first brought prescribed forms of prayer into the Church and therefore wee conceived it might possibly be the intention of our Reformers also witnesse the 23 Canon of the fourth Councell of Carthage ut nemo patrem nominet profilio c. So the Composers of the Liturgie for the French Church in in Frankfort He formulae serviunt tantum rudioribus nullius liberiati praescribitur These formes serve onely for the ignorant not prescribing to any mans liberty And were it so that the mayn drift of the Composers of Liturgies were to helpe the dâ—votion of the people yet what a help to devotion many find it though we dispute not it will be hard fâ—r this Remonstrant to perswade many thousands who desire with devout hearts to worship God that the being constantly bound to the same formes though in themselves neither for matter nor composure subject to just exception will prove such a great help to their devotion But this wee are sure that if the knowing before hand the matter and the words wherewith it should be clothed make people the more intent upon devotion if this be an infallible argument it pleads against the use of present conception either in praying or preaching or any other administration either publike or private and how contradictory this is to what the Remonstrant hath professed of his reverent and pious esteem of conceived prayer let himselfe see It is neither boldly nor untruly said that all other reformed Churches though they use Liturgies do not bind Ministers to the use of them If we may trust the Canons and the Rubricks of those Churches we may both boldly and truly say it In the Canons of the Dutch Churches agreed upon in their Synod we find a Canon enjoyning some days in every week to be set apart for preaching and praying and the very next Canon saith the Minister shall conceive prayers either by the Dictate of the Spirit or by a set forme So in the first Rubricke of the Liturgie of Geneva the Minister is to exhort the people to pray quibus ei visum fuerit verbis in what words he shall think fit and though that Liturgie containe formes of prayer for publike use yet we doe not finde in all that Liturgie where they are tyed to the use of those forms and no other we finde where they are left free as in one place in Dominico die mane haec ut plurimum adhibetur formula Upon the Lords Day in the morning for the most part this prayer is used for the most part then not alwayes So in another after the Lords Super this thanksgiving or some other like it is used then they are not absolutely tied to the use of that and by this wee have learned how to construe what he hath quoted out of Master Calvine And indeed any man that reads that Epistle may easily construe what was Master Calvines judgement about Liturgies not that men should be so tied to words and forms as to have no liberty to recede from them For in the same Epistle hee doth advise to have a summary collection of doctrine which all should follow and to the observing of which all both Bishops and Ministers should be bound by Oath Yet we hope the Remonstrant will not say that Calvine did advise that Bishops and Ministers should be bound by oath not to vary from that forme of doctrine Calvine advises a set form of Catechisme will the Remonstrant say that Calvine meant the Ministers should never vary from the syllables of that forme provided they did dictate pro captu populi in quibus situs sit verus Christianismus The very words by himself quoted shew what Calvins end was in advising a set Liturgie viz. to helpe the simplicity and unskilfulnesse of some to prevent the innovation of others that the consort of all Churches among themselves might more certainly appeare all which ends may be obtained without limiting all Ministers to the words and syllables of a set forme provided they pray to that effect Which is all that is required in the Liturgies of other Churches Wee could name you many other Liturgies wherein there are not further bounds laid upon the Minister then thus Hae sunt formulae quas tamen sequitur Minister pro suo arbitrio These are forms which the Minister follows according to his liking And again Spiritus sanctus non est alligandus formulis The Holy
Christian Reader judge whether more credit be to be given to Hierome as an Historian quoting humane History or to Hierome as a Divine quoting Scriptures And yet what can be brought to prove that those Bishops were not the same with Presbyters For the diabolicall occasion of bringing in Episcopacy into the Church if there be any fault in the phrase it is Hieromes not ours therefore the weaknes and absurdity is slung in the face of that waspish hot good man Hierome not in ours The institution of Episcopacy Hierome saith was rather by the custome of the Church then by the truth of the Lords disposition to avoyd the stroke of which the Remonstrant would faine perswade Hierome to owne that which in the judgement of Belarm Spalato and almost as many as have writ before the Remonstrant never entered into his thoughts nor can be the proper meaning of his words That by the custome of the Church the father meanes the Church Apostolique and by the Lords disposition Christs immediate institution This were to make Hierome of their mind How well this may be done let their sworne friend Spalato give his verdict Sunt qui Hieronymum in rect am sententiam vel invitum velint trahere one of these must this Remonstrant be As for that passage of Hierome ad Euagrium where he saies this superiority of Bishops above Presbyters is by Apostolicall tradition Hierome in that Epistle sharpens his reproofe against some Deacons that would equallize themselves to Presbyters an opinion which the Remonstrant thinks more reasonable then that Presbyters should be equall to Bishops to make this reproofe the stronger he saith Presbyteris ad est Episcopisâ— and a little after he doth out of the Scripture most manifestly prove eundem esse Presbyterum at que Episcopum and carries this proofe by Paul by Peter and by Iohn the longest surviver of the Apostles then adde quod autem postea unus electus qui caeteris praeponeretur in schismatis remedium factum The reason why afterwards one was elected and set over the rest was the cure of schisme It is hard to conceive how this imparity can be properly called an Apostolicall tradition when Hierome having mentioned Iohn the last of the Apostles saith it was postea afterwards that one was set over the rest yet should we grant it an Apostolicall tradition in Hieromes sense it would be no prejudice to our cause seeing with him Apostolicall tradition and Ecclesiasticall custome are the same witnesse that instance of the observation of Lent which he writing ad Marcellum saith is Apostolica traditio yet writing adversus Luciferianos faith it is Ecclesiae consuetudo whereby it fully appeares that Hierome by Apostolicall tradition meant not an Apostlicall institution but an ecclesiasticall custome and so much we granted Episcopacie to have Hierome saith toto orbe decretum est and it was decreed all the world over say you in the time of the first divisions Hierome said not so say we but after these divisions not in the time of these first divisions Is this faithfull translating By what power say you besides Apostolicall could it be decreed so soone and so universally But how if it were decreed neither soone nor universally If we may believe Hierome it was neither soone nor at once but paulatim by little and little not by Apostolicall decree but by the custome of the Church Hierome saith the Presbyters governed the Church by their Canon Councell So they did saith the Remonstrant altogether till Episcopacy was setled who dare deny it sure hee dares deny it who in the 55. page of his defence chargeth us with errour and fraud for saying that though at first the name and office of a Bishop and Presbyter was the same yet in processe of time some one was honoured with the name of Bishop and confidently defends that this time had no processe but was the very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the living Apostles but how his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there without any processe of time can stand with his donec hereâ— and with Hieromes paulatim postquam postea let him see to that Hierome saith they ought so to governe still so saith the Remonstrant say we also and so in some cases they do Good sir and why not in all cases Church government you say is Aristocraticall True when it is in the hands of the best men then it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But when the men in whose hands the government of the Church is are bad then it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Kakistocraticall But our present Church government is not Aristocraticall but Monarchicall because not onely one Bishop Lords it over his Diocesse but also one Primate appoints to all other Bishops Besides if it were Aristocraticall then ought every Minister to be a member of that Aristocracy for certainely no man will account the Minister de plebe in the judgement not onely of the ancient Fathers but of reason it selfe none can be accounted plebs but the Laicks seing every Minister is elected optimatim and is as one of a thousand Next you tell us there is no Bishop so absolute as not to be subject to the judgement of a Synod It is much he should not when all the fixed members of our Synod are the Bishops meere dependants such packing used in the choice of the rest as perhaps worse was not at the Councell of Trent Thus all the art the Remonstrant hath cannot perswade Hierome to befriend our Bishops in his judgement and is it not strange boldnesse to perswade the Reader that Hierome should against his judgement befriend them in his history After the allegation we produced some reasons to shew that though it should be granted these were in the times of the Apostles yet the Invention of Bishops for the taking away of thâ—se schismes is not Apostolicall our arguments the Remonstrant according to his greatnesse cals poore negative arguments which yet we entreat the Reader to view for his further satisfaction and remember that in Sacrâ Spripturâ locus tenet ab authoriâ—ate negativè And good sir how doe we in them gâ—e about to Confute our owne Authors what doe these reasons conclude more but that Bishops were neither of Divine nor Apostolicall institution and what doth Hierome say lesse Tell not us of striking our own friend let him suffer as an Hieronymomastix that when Hierome crosses his opinion cals him a waspish hot good man In the next place you look'd for Ambrose yet you might have taken notice that we spake but of the CoÌ„mentaries that goe under the name of Ambrose which if you call a foyst all your owne side are as guilty as our selves that cite him as well as we and some for Ambrose how ever this is much lesse then your selfe did in point of Liturgie Where we desiring to see some Liturgies not Spurious you produced the Liturgy of Iames c.
in our scanning his allegations in this section to which we now proceed Where first the Reader may please to observe that the Remonstrant slideth by our marginall wherein we shewed the delineation that Eusebius makes of an Evangelist and desired the Reader to judge thereby whether Timothy and Titus were not Evangelists Onely he chargeth us with boldnesse for calling them so though himselfe afterward confesseth it page 98 p. 100. But why must this be boldnesse Forsooth because though Timothy be expressely called an Evangelist yet there is no text no not the least intimation no not so much as the least ground of a conjecture that Titus was an Evangelist And if so why doe you afterwards grant it But whether you doe or no that it was so we have proved sufficiently in our answer But let any indifferent man here consider the iniquity of the Remonstrant that challengeth us for calling Titus an Evangelist without a text for his name and yet thinks himselfe much wronged if wee grant him not that Timothy and Titus and the Angels of the Church were Bishops though he hath no text for the name nor for the office Secondly To our text 2. Tim. 4. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe the worke of an Evangelist saith he rather intimates he was no Evangelist then that he was as if it were no more then for the Remonstrant to desire his friend to doe the worke of a Secretary or Sollicitor for him this implies he is neither A very cleare glosse Paul doth not here intreat as we conceive but charge He speakes Imperative not Impetrative Compare this not with the phrases of the Remonstrant but with the phrases of the sam Apostle and then judge In the same Epistle 2 Chapt. 3. The same Apostle saith to the same person endure hardnesse as a good souldier of Christ doth that imply Timothy was no souldier of Christ but onely so imployed for the time So againe in the 15. verse of the same Chapter when the Apostle saith study to approve thy selfe a workman that needs not to be ashamed doth this prove that Timothy was not a workeman but onely for the time When Paul saith 1 Cor. 16. 13. quite your selves like men doth that shew they were not men but onely so imployed for the time How would the Remonstrant have triumphed over such a high peece of ridiculous learning in our answer had we turned off all these texts which use to be produced as proofes of Episcopall authority in Timothy and Titus with such a shift as this this doth not shew it was their worke but onely they were so imployed for the time Wee adde further That when you acknowledge Timothy was to doe the office of an Evangelist for so your comparison of your friends doings the office of a Secretary warrants us to interpret you you must necessarily meane the extraordinary Evangelist for you scoffe page 94. at an ordinary Evangelist as a new fiction which if so then consider how absurd a thing it is to bid the inferior doe the worke of a superior Superiours may be intreated to doe the worke of inferiours because they come within the spheare of their activity and comprehend either virtually or formally what the inferiours are to doe As Apostles have power to doe all that Evangelists Presbyters and Deacons can doe and Evangelists all that Presbyters c. but not è converso Would it not be absurd to bid a Curate doe the office of a Bishop Or a Presbyter the office of an Apostle From all this we conclude That when Paul bids Timothy Doe the worke of an Evangelist he bids him goe on with speed to execute his Vice-Apostolicall office in watering the severall Churches in Asia c. But saith he if he were an Evangelist he may be that and a Bishop too For wee doe but dreame when we distinguish of Evangelists Truely sir this dreame was the fruit of our reading the fancy of the Authour of Episcopacies divine right and there we finde our ordinary guifted Evangelist under which name indeed we comprise all preachers The other branch of that distinction Evangelists of extraordinary guifts and employments we finde in Scripture and in this defence too Truth is their ordinary Evangelists are a new fiction True if we speake of the office of the Evangelists but to give the title of Evangelist according to the naturall signification of the word to ordinary preachers of the Gospell is neither new nor fiction Well our argument we raise upon this ground is slight Paul besought Timothy to abide still at Ephesus 1. Tim. 1. 3. which had beene a needlesse importunity if he had had the Episcopal charge of Ephesus for then necessarily he must have resided there But what 's his answer to this argument Nothing onely saith it is slight And that other argument brought from Timothies perpetuall moving from place to place to prove that he was never fixed in an Episcopall station is of as little force with him The necessities of those times were such as made even the most fixed Starres planetary calling them frequently from the places of their abode to those Services that were of most use for the successe of that great worke yet so that after their errâ—nds fully dome they returned to their owne charge Let us once professe as much confidence in our cause as the Remonstrant doth in his We challenge him to shew in all the new Testament any one that was appointed overseer of a particular Church whose motion was as planetary as wee have shewed that of Timothy and Titus to have beene Or if that faile let him but shew that after Timothy or Titus went abroad upon the Service of the Churches they did constantly or ordinarily returne either to Ephesus or Creet and not to the places either of the Apostles present abode or appointment And let them take Timothy and Titus as theirs the patrons and presidents of Episcopacy But till they can shew this we must beleeve and affirme Timothy and Titus are Evangelists and no Bishops Our next argument from Act. 20. is but a Reed Happy Remonstrant that deales with such impotent adversaries our first argument is slight our second is of no force our third is but a reed Yet let us tell you Haeret Lateri Lethalis Arundo We affirmed upon certaine grounds Acts 20. 4 though the Remonstrant know it not that Timothy was with Paul at the meeting at Miletum and from thence argued that had Timothy been B. of Ephesus Paul would have given him a charge of feeding the flocke and not the Elders but would have given them direction for their carriage at least would not so have forgot himselfe as to call the Elders Bishops before their Bishops face In all which the Remonstrant saith we goe upon a wrong ground But sure sir you are not so ignorant of our meaning as by your questions you would seeme to be We
grant that these assembled persons were Presbyters or Bishops in a parity but neither in imparity neither under Timothy nor any other Bishop And to this purpose is our argument from the want of directions to them as inferiour yet notwithstanding the Remonstrant would be glad to picke what holes he can in our argument yet in part he grants what wee conclude That they were all Bishops onely with this addition they were not meere Presbyters but upon what ground The word it selfe imports they were Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And doth not the other word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 import as strongly they were Presbyters And the truth is they were Presbyters whom the holy Ghost had made Bishops Foreseeing how his owne words would snarle him if he should grant them all Bishops he must grant there were more Bishops then one in Ephesus he puts by that blow telling us that though they were sent for from Ephesus yet they were not said to be all of Ephesus Thither they were called from divers parts which seems to be implyed in these words ye all amongst whom c. This is but a poore evasion For first the holy Ghost tels us that Paul did now study expedition and did decline Ephesus of purpose because he would not spend time in Assia Now if Paul comming to Miletum had sent from thence to Ephesus for the Elders of that Church and they had sent for the rest of the Asian Churches Paul had stayed at Miletum till they could assemble to him this would have beene such an expence of time as Pauls haste to Ierusalem could not admit Secondly these Elders were all of one Church made by God Bishops over one flocke and therefore may with most probability be affirmed to be the Elders of the Church of Ephesus For the Apostles were alwaies exact in distinguishing Churches that of a City they alwaies called a Church those of a Province Churches Churches of Galatia Churches of Macedonia Churches of Iudea c. And that evasion which you use page 12â— that they might be all called one Church because united under one government makes your cause farre worse Because notwithstanding this union you speake of S. Iohn joyning them all together in one Epistle 〈◊〉 1. calls them the Churches of Asia and now here the Church Besides this the Syriack translation thought by some to be almost as ancient as the Church of Antioch reads it the Elders of the Church of Ephesus not onely the Elders of the Church Thirdly you say they were Bishops or Superintendents of other Churches as well as Ephesus But your selfe grants in this very page that Timothy was not yet Bishop of Ephesus and yet you all say that he was the first Bishop that ever Ephesus had And that Ephesus was the Metropolis of all Asia How then came the Daughter Churches to have Bishops before their mother as you call it Lastly that we may cut asunder the sinewes as your phrase is of your far-fetched answer borrowed from Bishop Barlow and Andrewes Whereas you lay the weight of it upon those words Ye all among whom I have gone preaching the Kingdome of God Collecting from thence that there must be some Superintendents present from all those places where he had travelled preaching Your selfe would quickly see the weakenesse of it were you not pleading your owne cause Should any man speaking with three or foure of the members of the late convocation say you all who had your hand in the late oath and Canons are in danger c. would it imply a presence of all the members of the Convocation because the speech concerned them all you know it would not But if this doe not suffice then tell us Why must his All be meant as such superintendents as you plead for except because they were called Bishops and so you would raise an argument from the name to the thing which kind of argument if it may prevaile you know your cause is lost But the Acumen of this answer by which he makes account to cut asunder the sinewes of all our proofes is this That it is more then probable that Timothy and Titus were made Bishops after Pauls first being at Rome Truely sir here you desert your old friend Episc. by Div. right out of whom you have hitherto borrowed a great part both of your matter and words He saith Timothy was at this time a Bishop and present and Pauls assessor You it seemes thinke otherwise Agree as well as you can we will not set you at variance We thinke hee was as much bishop before as after onely we desire to learne when where and by whom Timothy received his ordination to Episcopacy The first Epistle to Timothy tels us of an ordination which he had received to another office And Chronologers tell us that that Epistle was writ many yeeres before Timothy was made Bishop of Ephesus according to your computation and we leave to you to tell us when and where he received ordination to your Episcopall office we have perused the Chronologicall tables of Ludâ—vicus Capellus whom you call Iacob Cappellus and have compared him with Ba oniuâ— from thence have learned that the Epistle was writ to him before Pauls going to Rome but cannot learne from their Chronologie that ever he was made Bishops afterwards The same answer say you may serve you for Titus and the same reply serves us onely whereas you accuse us of guilt for our translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every variation from the ordinary translation must be guilty know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will be translated things that remaine when you and we are dead and rotten And if our translators did not render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so yet so they render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Revil 3. 2. Your second quarrell is to these words for a while to which because our margent allots the space of betweene five or six yeeres you thinke you have us at a great advantage If wee had said he tarried there but a little while you might have had some what whereon to fasten but we spake of a while not in respect of the shortnesse of his residence at Creet but as it stands in opposition to residence for terme of life He was left there but for a while Ergo not fixed there during life The end why the Apostle left Titus at Creet was to ordaine Elders or Bishops in every City and not to be Bishop there himselfe For as Chrysostome saith Paul would not commit the whole Iland to one man but would have every man appointed to his charge and Cure For so he knew his labour would be the lighter and the people that were under him would be governed with the greater diligence For the Teacher should not be troubled with the government of many Churches but onely intend one and study for to adorne that Therefore this was Titus his worke not to be Bishop in Creet himselfe
20. of Acts Presbyters and Bishops to be all one Doe we prove the Bishops described in Timothy and Titus to be one and the same in name and office with a Presbyter Doe we prove that their Churches were all governed Communi Consilio Presbyterorum All shall be granted us and yet the Divine right of Episcopacy be still held up by this sleight by telling us that before the Apostles left the earth they made over their authority to some prime men Demand where this is extant The Angels of the seven Churches are pleaded presently And partly because we have no other Scripture of latter inspiration and edition whereby to prove the contrary Another inducement is because the writers neere the Apostles times make frequent mention of a Bishop and as they would have us beleeve some waies distinguished from a Presbyter Some of them mentioning the very men that were the Angels of these Churches as Polycarpus of Smyrna Ignatius who is said to have beene martyred within twelve yeeres after the Revelation was written wrote letters to the severall Churches wherein he mentioneth their Bishops distinct from their Presbyters Now saith the author of Episcopacy by divine right the Apostles immediate successors could best tell what they next before them did Who can better tell a mans pace then he that followes him close at heeles And this hath so plausibâ—e a shew that all are condemned as blind or wilfull who will either doubt that Episcopacy was of Apostolicall institution or thinke that the Church of Christ should in so short a time deviate from the institution of the Apostles But now how insufficient a ground this is for the raising up of so mighty a Fabricke as Episcopacy by Divine right or Apostolicall institution wee desire the Reader to judge by that that followes First the thing they lay as their foundation is a meere metaphoricall word and such as is ordinarily applied to Presbyters in common Secondly the Penman of those seven Epistles did never in them nor in any of his other writings so much as use the name of Bishop he names Presbyters frequently especially in this booke yea where he would set out the office of those that are neerest to the throne of Christ in his Church Revel 4. And whereas in Saint Iohns daies some new expressions were used in the Christian Church which were not in Scripture As the Christian Sabbath began to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Christ himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now both these are found in the writings of S. Iohn and it is strange to us that the Apostle should mention a new phrase and not mention a new office erected in the Church as you would make us beleeve Neither thirdly in any of his writings the least intimation of superiority of one Presbyter over another save onely where he names Diotrephes as one ambitiously affecting such a Primacy Nor is there any one word in these Epistles whence an Episcopall authority may be collected So that did not the testimonies that lived soone after make the argument plausible it would appeare ridiculous But alas the suffrage of all the writers in the world is infinitely unable to command an Act of Divine faith without which divine right cannot be apprehended Suppose we were as verily perswaded that Ignatius wrote the Epistles which goe under his name which yet we have just cause to doubt of as knowing that many learned men reject a great part of them and some all as we can be perswaded that Tully wrote his All this can perswade no further that the Apostles ordained and appointed Bishops as their successors but onely by a humane faith but neither is that so The most immediate and unquestionable successors of the Apostles give cleare evidence to the contrary It is granted on all sides that there is no peece of antiquity that deserves more esteeme then the Epistle of Clement lately brought to light by the industry and labour of that learned Gentleman Master Patricke Young And in that Epistle Bishops and Presbyters are all one as appeares by what followes The occasion of that Epistle seemes to be a new sedition raysed by the Corinthians against their Presbyters page 57. 58. not as Bishop Hall saies the continuation of the schismes amongst them in the Apostles daies Clemens to remove their present sedition tels them how God hath alwaies appointed severall orders in his Church which must not be confounded first telling them how it was in the Jewish Church then for the times of the Gospell tels them that Christ sent his Apostles through Countries and Cities in which they constituted the first fruits or the chiefe of them unto Bishops and Deacons for them who should beleeve afterward p. 54. 55. Those whom hee calls there Bishops afterwards throughout the Epistle he cals Presbyters pa. 58 62 69. All which places doe evidently convince that in Clement his judgement the Apostle appointed but two officers that is Bishops and Deacons to bring men to beleeve Because when he had reckoned up three orders appointed by God among the Jewes High-priests Priests and Levites comming to recite orders appointed by the Apostles under the Gospell hee doth mention onely Bishops and Deacons and those Bishops which at first he opposeth to Deacons ever after he cals Presbyters And here we cannot but wonder at the strange boldnesse of the author of Epis. by divine right who hath endevoured to wire-draw this Author so much magnified by him to maintaine his Prelaticall Episcopacy and that both by foysting in the word withall into this translation which is not in the Text that the Reader might be seduced to beleeve that the offices of Episcopacy and Presbytery were two different offices And also by willingly misunderstanding Clement his phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he would have us understand Episcopacy as distinct from Presbyterie whereas the whole series of the Epistle evidently proves that the word Episcopus Presbyter are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And so also by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee would have us to understand that the contention then in Corinth was only about the name whereas it appeares by the Epistle it selfe that the controversie was not about the name but dignity of Episcopacy for it was about the deposition of their godly Presbyters p. 57 58. And the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is thus interpreted by Beza Eph. 1. 21. Phil. 2. 9. Heb. 1. 4. and Mead in Apoc. 11. p. 156. In which places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By all this we see that the most genuine and neerest successor of the Apostles knew no such difference Lastly it is worth our observation that the same writers who as they say testifie that these 7. Angels were in a superiour degree to Presbyters do likewise affirm
that the Apostle Iohn sate many yeeres B. of Ephesus and was the Metropolitan of all Asia in which we suppose the Remonstrant will allow his readers a liberty of beleeving him and allow us a liberty to tell him that D Whitakers saith Patres cum Iacobum Episcopum vocant aut etiam Petrum non propriè sumunt Episcopi nomen sed vocant eos Episcopos illarum Ecclesiarum in quibus aliquamdin commorati sunt And in the same place Et si propriè de Episcopo loquatur absurdum est Apostolos suisse Episcopos Nam qui propriè Episcopus est is Apostolous non potest esse quia Episcopus est unius tantum Ecclesiae At Apostoli plurium Ecclesiarum fundatores inspectores erant And againe Hoc enim non mulâ—um distat ab insaniâ dicere Petrum fuisse propriè Episcopum out reliquos Apostolos Now we returne to our Remonstrant Our answer to his objection from the Angels was That the word Angell is to be taken collectively not individually which he cals pro more suo a shift and a conceit which no wise man can ever beleeve And yet he could not but take notice that we alleaged Austin Gregory Fulke Perkins Fox Brightman Mede and divers others for this interpretation which will make the world to accuse him for want of wisdome for calling the wisedome of such men into question Before he addresseth himself to answer our reasons he propounds two queres 1. If the interest be common and equally appertaining to all why should one be singled out above the rest A very dull question which is indeed a very begging of the cause For the question in agitation is whether when Christ writes to the 7. Angels he meant to single out 7. individuall persons above the rest or else writes to the 7. Angels collectively meaning all the Angels that were in all the Churches The second question is as dull as the first If you will yeeld the person to be such as had more then others a right in the administration of all it is that weseeke for But he knew we would not yield it And therefore we may justly use his owne words that those questions are tedious and might well have beene spared And so also the instances of a letter indorsed from the Lords of the Councell to the Bishop of Durham concerning some affaires of the whole Clergy of his Diocesse No man will deny but that the Bishop of Durham is an individuall Bishop This example supposeth the Angell about whom we dispute to be meant individually which you know is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 betweene you and us Quid haec ad Rhombum We will give you instances more suitable to the purpose Suppose one in Christs time or his Apostles had indorsed a letter to the Chiefe-priest concerning the affaires of the Sanhedrim and another letter to the chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue concerning the affaires of the Synagogue and another letter to the Captaine of the Temple concerning the businesse of the Temple could any man imagine but that these indorsments must necessarily be understood collectively considering there were more Chiefe-priests then one in Ierusalem Luke 22. 4. and more chiefe Rulers of the Synagogue then one Math. 19. 18. compared with Acts 18. 8. 17. And more Captaines of the Temple then one Acts 4 1. compared with Luke the â—2 4. and so also semblably more Angels and Ministers in the seven Churches then seven But stay sir we hope you are not of opinion that any of your Asian Bishops had as much spirituall and temporall power as the Lord Bishop of Salisbury and the Lord Bishop and Palatine of Durham Cave dixeris At last you come to our proofes which you scoffingly call invincible You should have done better to have called them irrefragable like your good friends irrefragable propositions Our first argument is drawne from the Epistle to Thyatira Revel 2. 24. But I say unto you in the plurall number not unto thee in the singular and unto the rest in Thyatira Here is a plaine distinction betweene the Governours and the governed And the Governours in the plurall number which apparently proves that the Angell is collective The Remonstrant hath no way to put this off but by a pittifull shift to use his owne words He tels us he hath found a better coppy which is a very unhappy and unbecoming expression apt to make ignorant people doubt of the originall text and so in time rather to deny the Divinity of the Scriptures then of Episcopacy But this better coppy is but lately searcht into for we finde that Bishop Hall in his Episcopacy by Divine right reads it as we doe But I say unto you and the rest in Thyatira But what is this better Coppy It is a Manuscript written by the hand of Teela which if it be no truer then Itinerarium Pauli Teclae it will have little credit among the Learned But that which makes you to magnifie it the more is that doughty argument which it helped you to against us concerning the same Church of â—hyatira in which the Angell is charged for suffering that woman Iezabel And now you say in that memorable copy of Tecla it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which you interpret thy wife Iczebel And just as Archimedes you come with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And call upon us to blush for shame What say you in a different character shall we thinke she was wife to the whole company or to one Bishop alone But for our part we doe thinke you have more cause to blush for making such a Translation and rather then you will not prove the Angell of Thyatira to be an individuall Bishop you will un-Angell him and make him an other Ahab to marry a cursed Iezebel We wonder that never any protestant writer had the wit to bring this text against the papists to prove the lawfulnesse of Priests marriages no not Doctor Hall himselfe in his defence of the married Clergy Give us leave here to use your owne words page 108. Forbeare Reader if you can to smile at this curious subtilty what Cabalisme have we here judge Reader what to expect of so deepe speculations And also to repeate what you say page 110. If you please your selfe with this new subtilty it is well from us you have no cause to expect an answer it can neither draw our assent nor merit our confutation We beleeve it to be as true that Iezebel was the wife of the Bishop of Thyatira as that Tecla was the wife of Paul But to returne to the former text Let any judicious reader survey the latter part of the 23. verse which is the verse before that out of which we bring our reason there he shall finde Christ speaking to the Church of Thyatira saith And I will give to every one of you in the plurall number And then followes But I say unto you and the rest in
answer is as easily blowne away as the wind blowes away chaffe It is true every Church hath his Angell mentioned but whether Angell individually or Angell collectively that is still the question and therefore for ought you say though there were but seven Churches there might be seven and seven times seven Angels in those Churches But you intimate that Christ saith the 7. starres though he doth not say the seven Angels Now here give us leave to put our Remonstrant in mind of the imagined Syneedoche For we justly conceive that these words The seven Starres are the Angels are figurative and that there are two figures in them a metaphor in the word Starre and Angell and a Synecdoche in the word seven For we doe not thinke that the seven Starres signifie seven individuall Angels for then indeed the reader might have justly smiled at our curious speculation but we thinke them to be taken collectively Thus Revil 8. 2. Iohn saw seven Angels which stood before God by which seven Angels Doctor Reynolds doth not understand seven individuall Angels but by a Synecdoche all the Angels For there are no seven particular Angels that doe stand before God but all doe so Dan. 7. The words of Doctor Reynolds are these Quare cum commune sit omnibus electis Angelis Dei stare coram throno videtur nomine septem Angelorum significari universos Angelos Dei Item Ita numero septenario saepe significari omnes numeruni saltem infinitum numero finito docent septem columnae Pro. 9. septem pastores Math. 5. septem oculi Zach. 3. sed imprimis in istis mysteriis Apocalypseos septem Candelabra septem lampades septem phyaelae septem plagae And now let the Reader judge whether this argument be so ridiculous as the mocking Remonstrant would make it But that you may see how dull the answerer himselfe is whilst he accuseth others of dulnesse let us a little consider what pittifull shifts he useth in his answer to our last reason Our last argument is Though but one Angell be mentioned in the forefront yet it is evident the Epistles themselves are dedicated to all the Angels and Ministers in every Church and to the Churches themselves and if unto the whole Church much more unto the Presbyters of that Church To this you answer 1. By granting the argument which is to grant the cause as will appeare to any judicious Reader For the reason doth not onely say that the whole Church is concerned in the Epistles and spoken unto in them but that they are dedicated to all the Ministers as well as one to all the Churches as well as to the Angels as appeares Reuel 1. 11. send it to the seven Churches 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 not onely concerning the Churches but to the Churches But then you argue secondly if every Epistle be written to all the Churches then we must say that every of these seven Angels must be the whole company of all the seven Churches which were a foule nonsence But you must understand that though every Epistle be written to all the Churches yet not eodem modo As for example the Epistle to Ephesus was written primariò proprie formaliter to the Church of Ephesus but to the other Churches onely reflèxive per modum exempli And therefore we returne your nonsence upon your selfe For we doe not confound the Angels and the Churches we know there is a distinction betweene the Starres and the Candlestickes but we affirme that the Epistles are written to the Churches as well as to the Angels and to all the Angels as well as to any one Thirdly you say we might have saved the labour both of Ausbertus and the rest of our Authours and our owne But surely unlesse you meant to yeeld the cause you would never say so For we proved out of Ausbertus that according to his judgement by Angell is meant the whole Church And out of Perkins Brightman Fulke Fox Austin Gregory Primasius Hamo Beda Richard Thomas c. That the word Angell is to be taken not individually but collectively And further we shewed that in these seven Epistles where one person is singled out and spoken unto in particular either by way of praise or dispraise that such places are not to be understood of one individuall person but of the whole company of the Ministers in all things equall with that our Angell which are proved by such reasons which because you knew not how to answer you say we might have saved our labour and in that indeed we should have saved your credit but have done the cause much prejudice Lastly you say satis Magisterialiter for you prove it not That there are such particularities both of commendations and exceptions in the body of the severall Epistles as cannot but have relation to those severall overseers to whom they were indorsed as you have elsewhere specified But whom you are and where this is specified you refuse to tell us Onely you put us to answer Had all the Presbyters of Ephesus lost their first love Had each of them tried the false Apostles Had all those of Sardis a name to live and were dead Were all the Laodicean Ministers of one temper You say no doubt it was otherwise But this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We say No doubt that not onely the Presbyters of Ephesus Sardis Laodicea but that the whole Church had lost their first love and were become lukewarme and had a name to live and were dead wee say all that is genera singulorum not singula generum and this wee prove Because the punishment threatned by Christ is threatned not onely against that one Angell but against all the Church Reuel 2. 5. I will remove thy Candlesticke Revel 2. 16. 24. Now we have no warrant in the word of God to thinke that God would remove his Gospell from a Church because one Angell in that Church hath lost his first love when all the other and the whole Church also are â—ervent and zealous in their love to Christ. Or that God would spue out a whole Church out of his mouth for the lukewarmenesse of one man when the Church it selfe and all the other Ministers are zealous This is the reason that makes us beleeve that though one Angell be sometimes spoken unto in particular yet it must necessarily be understood in a collective sence not in an individuall sence which we hinted in our answer But the Remonstrant comes with his Index expurgatorius and answereth us onely with a Deleatur And thus he serves us also in the following reasons why Christ did not write To the Angels in the plurall number but To the Angell in the singular And this he doth throughout the whole booke passing by unanswered those things which are most materiall Vas vitreum lambens pultem non attingens
we say so too a foul imputation to charge the Reformed Churches of a secret inclination to Apostatize from their owne confessions which doe not onely maintain a justifiablenesse of their present government but a necessity of it as the only government appointed by GOD in his Church as wee shewed in five Corollaries drawn out of those confessions which the Remonstrant slides over wherein they doe not onely defend the condition they are in but tell us by consequence they would not change it for any other forme in the World Because they tell us Theirs is the form God hath set down in his Word the forme Christ hath appointed in his Church the forme by which the Church ought to be governed Can we think the Churches that thus professe and believe can ever look for a better form Or would accept another though propounded to them as better when they professe this is that form by which they ought to be governed The testimonies of particular Divines must not be put in the ballance against the confessions of whole Churches God forbid that all that hath flowed from the pens of Divines of great Learning and place in England should passe for the Doctrine of the English Church abroad Wee will beleeve you it is possible many eminent Divines of the Churches abroad have wished themselves in your condition that is in Episcopall Government not in our condition under Episcopall Government And as easily we believe they have magnified our Church as the most famous exemplary glorious Church in the whole Christian World It better a great deale becomes them then Laodicean like to say as you say pag. 26. their own is the most glorious and exemplary Church the rest are but a poore handfull and reason they should conforme to it not it to them But whether it be the beautie perfection and glory of Episcopall government or the powerfull and lively preaching of the World the powerfull and lively practice of piety which through the speciall grace of God are found in this Church then which there hath been nothing more hated or persecuted under Episco government that hath made them magnifie the Church of England there is the question which is not hard to determine To induce the Reader to believe the Reformed Churches would change theirs for our government the Remonstrant hath told us that there is little difference betweene their government and ours save in perpetuitie of moderatorship and exclusion of Lay-elders This saith the Remonstrant You say is a passage of admirable absurdity Sir wee said admirable the absurdity is your own To mend it you would perswade your selfe to feare wee know not what you speak of You speake not onely of the next Churches of France and the Netherlands Sir you spake if we remember of the Neighbour Churches and wee conceive between our Neighbour Churches the next Churches of France and the Netherlands there is not much distance sure any common understanding by Neighbour Churches would a great deal sooner understand the next Churches of France and the Netherlands then the Churches of Germany Weteraw Anhault c. Especially considering your instance in those Churches from whose Moderators our Bishops differ onely in perpetuitie of Moderatorship Which perpetuitie the Lutheran Superintendents have as well as our Bishops This made us instance in the Geneva forme as knowing no Churches whose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not fixed but such as follow their patterne between which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and our episcopacie wee shewed a sixfold difference all which the Remonstrant wisely passeth that hee may not be forced to acknowledge the difference greater then hee pretended Onely tels us with what authority Master Calvin and the deputati Synodi carried the affairs of the Church which if the personall worth of the one or the other did procure what is that to carrying all the affairs of the Church ex officio by vertue of their own peculiarly demandated authority as our Bishops do and challenge right to doe You put us in minde that you said the difference between them was little and we need not put you in minde of what our answer was Manet aliâ mente repostum nor do we intend to change You tell us our note is the note of Babylon down with it downe with it Yet as long as neither we are Edomits nor speak of Sion but of Sions enemies the note is not Babylonish As Babylon had her time to cry against Sion downe with it down with it even to the ground so the time is comming when Sion shall shout with as strong a cry against her enemies and the God of Heaven whose promise is to arise for the sighing of the poore we doubt not will vindicate his Church from those proud adversaries that have so long time tyrannized over her and Judge betweene the Sheep and the Goats Even hee Judge whether wee that plead the truth against Bishops or the Bishops whose cause the Remonstrant pleâ—ds have by violent and subtill Machinations most disturbed Sions peace and advanced Babylons power SECT XV. THe Remonstrant had said that Lay Presbytery never had footing in the Christian Church untill this age Wherein said we hee concludes so fully with Doctor Hals irrefragrable propositions as if he had conspired to swear to what the Bishop had said The Remonstrant that it seems knows both better then wee will phrase it thus how like the man looks to Doctor Hall And answers As like him as wee are like our selves insolent and scornfull Truly Sir wee could scarce conceive this likenesse by the Remonstrance and we can lesse conceive it by this defence For besides the flat contradictions which this Defence gives to Episcopacie by Divine Right for which wee doubt the Doctor will give the Remonstrant little thanks the very language of the Defence inclines to the contrary For though we acknowledge the Defence for the substance of it wholly and for the phrase of it in a great part borrowed from episcopacie by Divine Right yet the extream disdainfulnesse that breaths in every page and line pleads with us to thinke that it is not his especially if he have made that vow of leaving his insolent and scornfull language which an ancient acquaintance of his hath put the world in hope hee would Your Errata bids us pag. 33. Read Invectives truly we may read in every page Invectives and if to be scornfull and insolent be to be unlike Doctor Hall you have done the Doctor exceeding wrong to say the Remonstrant looks like him But be the Remonstrant who hee will we hope hee will not take it ill if comming into publique nameless he receive par pari remembring especially the saying of Hierom concerning Domitius a Senator to his scornfull Consull si non vis me habere ut Senatorem cur ego te habeam ut Consulem Why should wee use him as a Father that doth not use us as Brethren Make sport with our poore wit