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
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
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
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
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.
be to defend the Church against the tyranny of others but not to tyrannize over the Church Doctor Downeham was more ingenuous in this then this Remonstrant who grants that till about 400 yeeres after Christ Bishops had no ordinary Vicars that were not Clergy men No say we nor Clergy men neither the office was not knowne in those times neither can they produce any instance of any either of Laity or Clergy that ever those times saw in that office This saith the Remonstrant is a poore brave But till he can produce such instances our challenge will stand strong enough notwithstanding his great words But his put off is poorer to fly from officers intrusted with spirituall jurisdiction unto such inferiour instruments Secretaries and Atturneys as are of necessary service in all Courts of judicature whether Civill or Ecclesiasticall To make all sure the Remonstrant referres his Reader to Sir Thomas Ridley whose Treatise he stumbled upon in an ill houre for the maine of his cause for he tels us page 116. that Chancellors are equall or neere equall in time to Bishops as both the Law it selfe and stories shew So that while the Remonstrant is over studious to prove the Antiquity of Chancellors he overthrowes the Antiquity of Bishops incidit in Scyllam c. As for that he spake of the Ecclesiae Ecdici that they were the same in former times that our Chancellors are now If there be more credit to be given to his Papias and Gothofred then to the originall Canons themselves where they are called not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we yeeld the cause SECT XI HAving entered upon the differences betweene ours and former Bishops in point of jurisdiction we descended into a discovery of this in three particulars First in the sole jurisdiction ours assume Secondly In that delegation they make of this power Thirdly in their execution of that jurisdiction and here wee fall upon that unchristian and unnaturall proceeding of theirs by oathes Ex officio which the Remonstrant is very angry at and that hee may still approve himselfe the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or advocate of the worst causes engages all his strength and wit for the maintaining of that which hath beene the ruine of so many persons the racke of so many consciences the worst part of the Spanish Inquisition quo siculi non invenere Tyranni Tormâ—ntum majus To defend this he cares not how he abuseth us Mr. Calume the Lawyes the Scriptures So that he may but uphold this oath that is now sinking under the weight of its owne guilt First he abuses Scriptures in producing Exod. 22. 10 11. Num. 5. 19. as presidents for the oath Truly sir the onely text that would best have fitted your purpose is that of Caiphas the High Priest adjudging our Lord in the name of the living God Which how tyrannous an adjuration it was will easily appeare to any that consults interpreters upon that place Your alledged texts helpe you not a whit that of Exod. 22. 10 11. speakes to this purpose A man commits goods to his neighbour they miscarry under his hand it is knowne he had them how they miscarried it is not knowne in this case the man is to cleare his innocencie upon his oath what is this to the compelling of a man in cases criminall to betray himselfe by an oath The other text Numb 5. 19. availes you lesse for if such an oath were now lawfull then oathes Ex officio might be ministred in causes of death It is knowne Adultery was death by Moses his law and it is as well knowne that this Law of the water of jelousie was not morall but judiciall peculiar to the policie of the Jewes and that upon particular causes to wit the invate jealousie of that Nation which could no otherwise be appeased As for your instance out of Master Calvins Epistle wherein you would make your reader beleeve that the Consistory of Geneva did give such an oath to Camperell whereby he and the rest should be tied to discover their purposes and intentions No such thing appeares in the Epistle We finde indeed that two of that company having confesâ—ed the wickednesse wherewith they were charged and the rest impudently denying it Calvin thought it fit to make them confesse the truth upon oath Corneus who had confessed all before pressing them not to forsweare themselves prevailed so as that they confessed all and the dancing also above what was charged upon them All that we can collect is that an oath was thought meet to be given to make them confesse to Gods glory what was proved by two witnesses but that they were bound to confesse their intentions here is no syllable of it in the epistle And therefore to what purpose you bring in this to warrant your oath Ex officio unlesse it be for want of better instances we know not The Acts of Dioclesian Maxim Let them be blamed that called him Maximilian poore men cannot have their Presse wayted on as your greatnesse may You doe as good as passe by so doe you the practice of the ancient times and which is a greater jeofailer then our Maximillian and think it is enough to tell us this hinders not but in case of a justly grounded suspition and complaint of a halfe approved offence a man should manifest his innocency by oath When as we produced these testimonies to shew that of old no party was put to his oath upon halfe proofe nor proceeded against but upon apparent testimonies of more witnesses then one which might be conceived to be impartiall Whereby it is manifest that the proceedings in judicature for which you contend herein differ from them of old So hot is the man in the quarrell of his oath that he strikes his own friends to reach a blow at us charging his good friend Gregory with a plain contradiction for the words are his not ours in which he saith we contradict our selves This is the poore all hee hath said in defence of the oath Ex Officio and could he have said more it is like we should have heard it If the reader desire to see further how abominable this oath is how cryed downe by learned men how contrary to the Word of God the law of nature to the civill and and Canon lawes and to the statutes of our kingdome he may finde it in that proud braying schismatick Master Parker for so he is called in print For our parts we shall need to say no more about this oath God in mercy to his afflicted having put into the hearts of our Worthies to condemne it to hell from whence it came SECT XII OUr next Section the Remonstrant tels us he is resolved to neglect we should have as soone beleeved him if he had said so of all the rest we beleeve the neglect springs neither from a desire to ease us nor to anger us but
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
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