the Word Administring the Sacraments Imposing of Hands and guiding the Keys to shut or open the Kingdom of God. The first two must be general to all Pastors and Presbyters of Christ's Church but so do not the other two I have largely debated and made it plain as well by the Scriptures as by other Ancient Writers past all Exception there have always been selected some of greater Gifts than the Residue to succeed in the Apostles Places to whom it belonged both to moderate the Presbyters of each Church and to take the special Charge of Imposition of Hands and this their Singularity in Succeeding and Superiority in Ordaining have been observed from the Apostles times as the Peculiar and Substantial marks of Episcopal Power and Calling The Power of the Keys and Right to Impose Hands by which he always means the Power to Ordain Ministers and Excommunicate Sinners belong unto the Bishop distinguishing him from a Presbyter What the things are Chap. 12. p. 208. which must abide for ever in the Church I shewed before it shall suffice now to rehearse them namely Power to Preach the Word and Administer the Sacraments the Right use of the Keys and Imposition of Hands These four parts for Brevities sake I often reduce to two Branches which are Doctrine and Discipline comprizing in Doctrine the Dividing of the Word and Dispensing of the Sacraments and referring the rest I mean the Publick use of the Keys and Imposition of Hands to the Discipline or Regiment of the Church The Discipline and Government of the Church I mean the Power of the Keys Ch. 12. p. 213. and Imposing of Hands are two parts of Apostolick Authority which must remain in the Church for ever These Keys are double the Key of Knowledge annexed to the Word the Key of Power referred to the Sacraments Some late Writers by urging the one abolish the other howbeit I see no sufficient Reason to countervail the Scriptures and Fathers that Defend and Retain both The Key of Knowledge must not be doubted of our Saviour in express words nameth it Wo be to you Interpreters of the Law for ye have taken away the Key of Knowledge The Key of Power standeth in these words of Christ to Peter I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven c. And likewise to all his Apostles Whatsoever ye bind on Earth P. 218. c. It resteth in this place to be considered to whom those Keys were committed whether Equally to all Presbyters or Chiefly to Pastors and Bishops The like must be done for Imposition of Hands whether that also pertain'd indifferently to all or specially to Bishops This is the State of the Point in Controversie namely Whether the Power of the Keys and that of Imposition of Hands belong Equally and Indifferently to all Presbyters and Bishops or whether they do not belong chiefly and specially to Bishops But whether the one or the other be affirm'd 't will unavoidably follow that these Powers in a sense belong to both Thus much is supposed in the very state of the Question which is not whether these Powers do not at all belong to Presbyters but whether they do belong so much to Presbyters as unto Bishops so that the holding them to belong chiefly and specially unto the Bishop implies that they do tho' in a lesser Degree belong unto Presbyters They appertain both to the Presbyter and Bishop but not Equally to the Bishop chiefly and specially Now Conform hereunto the Learned Bilson saith The Bishop then or President of the Presbyters for I stand not on Names Ch. 14. p. 293. while I discuss their Powers is by Christ's own Mouth pronounced to be the Angel of the Church that is the Chief Steward over God's Houshold and Overseer of his Flock And touching the Presbyter's Power P. 319. He adds That at first the Presbyters sate with the Bishop as Assessors and Consenters before Synods undertook such Causes But after when once Councils began to have the Hearing of Grievances then sate the Presbyters with the Bishop only as Beholders and Advisers of his Judgment The Private use of the Keys in appointing Offenders upon the Acknowledging their Sins P. 317. for a time to forbear the Lord's Table we deny not to Presbyters However the Ambiguity of the Name of Bishop and Community of many things incident and appertinent both to Bishops and Presbyters urged him to lay down certain Peculiar Marks and Parts of the Bishop's Office whereby they are always Distinguished from Presbyters and never Confounded with them either in Scriptures Councils or Fathers There were many Prerogatives says he appropriate unto the Bishop Ch. 13. p. 244. by the Authority of the Canons and Custom of the Church such as Reconciling of Penitents Confirmation of Infants and others that were Baptized by Laying on their Hands Dedication of Churches c. But the things Proper to Bishops which might not be Common to Presbyters were Singularity in Succeeding and Superiority in Ordaining These two the Scriptures and Fathers reserve only to Bishops they never Communicate them to Presbyters The Singularity of one Pastor in every place preserveth the Peace and Unity of the Churches and stoppeth Schisms and Dissentions for which Cause they were first Ordained by the Apostles 246. This is a certain Rule to Distinguish Bishops from Presbyters the Presbyters were many in every City of whom the Presbytery consisted Bishops were always Singular that is one in a City and no more except another intruded which the Church of Christ counted a Schism or else an Helper were given in respect of extream and feeble age in which case the Power of the latter ceased in the presence of the former And this Singularity of one Pastor in each place descended from the Apostles and their Scholars in all the famous Churches of the World by a Perpetual Chair of Succession and doth to this day continue but where Abomination or Desolation I mean Heresie or Violence interrupt it The second assured sign of Episcopal Power is Imposition of Hands to Ordain Presbyters and Bishops for as Pastors were to have some to assist them in their Charge which were Presbyters P. 248. so were they to have others to succeed them in their Places which were Bishops And this Right by Imposing Hands to Ordain Presbyters and Bishops in the Church of Christ was at first derived from the Apostles unto Bishops and not unto Presbyters and hath for these fifteen Hundred Years without Example or Instance to the contrary till this our Age remained in Bishops and not in Presbyters Jerom where he retcheth the Presbyters Office to the uttermost of purpose to shew that he may do by the Word of God as much as the Bishop he excepteth this One Point as unlawful for Presbyters by the Scriptures Quid facit Exceptâ Ordinatione Episcopus quod Presbyter non
Dean of Westmâ—nster and yet when the Bishop does Ordain any there with the Dean's leave it 's not I presume by any Power deriv'd from the Dean that he does it but by a Power inhering in himself and the Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 import no other leave than this If then these Chorepiscopi be conform'd to the Number of Rural Deanries and the Rural Deans allowed to exercise the same Power the Chorepiscopi did in the ancient Church 't will afford great Relief to the Consciences of many Worthy Protestant Dissenting Ministers without exposing the Church of England to the Reproach of Novelty To return to the Archbishop's Reduction which continues the Second Proposition thus Archbishop To this Synod the Rector and Church-Wardens might present such impenitent persons as by Admonitions and Suspension from the Sacrament would not be reformed who if they should still remain contumacious and incorrigible the Sentence of Excommunication might be decreed against them by the Synod and accordingly be executed in the Parish where they lived Hitherto also all things that concerned the Parochial Ministers might be referred whether they did touch their Doctrine or their Conversation as also the Censure of all New Opinions Heresies and Schisms which did arise within that Circuit with liberty of Appeal if need so require unto the Diocesan Synod Notes It is not to be doubted but that as soon as the Church of England grants unto the Presbyter the Exercise of the Episcopal Rights they will be content that the Rural Dean or Chorepiscopus hold his Synod of Parish-Pastors or Rectors within the Precincts of the Rural Deanry and exercise as much Power as is here desired III. The Diocesan Synod might be held once or twice in the Year as it should be thought most convenient Therein all the Suffragans i. e. Chorepiscopi and the rest of the Rectors or incumbent Pastors or a certain select number of every Deanry within the Diocess might meet with whose Consent or the major part of them all things might be concluded by the Bishop or Superintendent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Superintendentes unde nomen Episcopi tractum est Hieron Epist 85. ad Evagrium call him whether you will or in his absence by one of the Suffragans whom he shall depute in his stead to be Moderator of that Assembly Here all matters of greater moment might be taken into consideration and the Orders of the monthly Synods revised and if need be reformed And if here also any matter of Difficulty could not receive a full Determination it might be referred to the next Provincial or National Synod Notes Dr. Poynet Bishop of Winchester pleads for the Word Superintendent as much better than that of Bishop and it is a word less offensive to the Presbyterians than the other is and perhaps because the Archbishop found it so he speaks so indifferently of the Name and to give Reputation to the word Superintendent refers us unto St. Hierome But it 's to be hoped that the wiser of all Parties when they have concerted the thing will not quarrel about the Name whether one or the other IV. The Provincial Synod might consist of all the Bishops and Suffragans and such other of the Clergy as should be elected out of every Diocess within the Province the Archbishop of every Province might be the Moderator of this Meeting or in his room some one of the Bishops appointed by him and all Matters be ordered therein by common consent as in the former Assemblies This Synod might be held every Third Year and if the Parliament do then sit according to the Act of a Triennial Parliament both the Archbishops and Provincial Synods of the Land might joyn together and make up a National Council Wherein all Appeals from Inferior Synods might be received all their Acts examined and all Ecclesiastical Constitutions which concern the State of the whole Nation established This Scheme of Church-Government drawn up by this Learned Primate as it is admirably adjusted to the several Tempers of Men of different Apprehensions about some things in Church-Government so it is not in the least repugnant to any thing of Christ's Institution for there is not ascrib'd unto any of the Synodical Conventions a proper Jurisdiction over any Parochial Church That in Matters of greater moment care be taken that all things be done in every Parish by a general Consent Concord and Agreement is necessary and to this end that the Parish Rectors proceed not to Excommunication until they have consulted the Dean Rural's Synod and that what is done by these Synods be examined by Bishops in a larger Assembly and that by a larger again until we come to a National if the case so require Though it be said Let the Sentence of Excommunication be decreed against the obstinately Impenitent by the Synod yet it may be understood thus Let the Rector of the Parish consult the Synod and there come to a Resolution and Determination with the consent of this Synod Whoever will consult the Learned Writers of the Church of England particularly Dr. Burnet now Bishop of Salisbury will see cause to conclude them to be against the Power and Jurisdiction of Councils That they are rather for Concord than Regiment That particular Churches as to matters of Government are independent on any Convention or Colledge of other Bishops or Pastors whatsoever that to this very end of securing the Power of the Diocesan or City-Bishop the Diocesan Church is made a single Church Infimae Speciei and whatever Power Authority or Jurisdiction belong unto a particular Church of the lowest Rank they are affirmed to belong to the Diocesan Church which Dr. Barrow hath endeavoured to prove to be independent So that let the bounds of particular Churches be made Parochial or of no larger extent than a Parish-Congregation and the Parish-Minister be entrusted with Pastoral Power to be exercised as above-mentioned 't will of course follow that what is now said to belong to a Diocesan must be seated in the Parish-Church There is not so much a Controversie between the Powers Preheminences and Priviledges of a particular Church as about its Bounds and Limits Reduce the Bounds of a particular Church to those of a Parish and the Debate will be at an end as to this point That the Primate by Chorepiscopi means Presbyters vested with the Episcopal Rights is manifest from what he and Dr. Holdsworth in the end of the Reduction thus assert We are of the Judgment That the Form of Government here proposed is not in any Point repugnant to the Scripture and that the Suffragans mention'd in the Second Proposition may lawfully use the Power both of Jurisdiction and Ordination according to the Word of God and the Practice of the Ancient Church Ja. Armachanus Rich. Holdsworth CHAP. VII The Reasonableness of the Church of England's condescending to establish the Government proposed by Archbishop Usher in this Reduction IF then the
and the Reformers in King Edward's Time. IN Queen Elizabeth's Reign the first I find to mention any thing about the Office of Bishops and Priests is Dr. Alley Bishop of Exeter in his Miscellanea on his third Praelection Alley 's Poor Man's Library Tom. 1. pag. 95 96. read at Paul's in the Year 1560. on the word Bishops What difference is between a Bishop and a Priest St. Hierome writing ad Titum doth declare whose words be these Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus c. A Priest therefore is the same that a Bishop is And before Schisms and Factions by the instinct of the Devil begun in Religion and before it was said among the People I am Pauls I am Apollos I am of Cephas the Churches were Governed with the Common Councel of the Priests or Elders But after that every one thought those whom he Baptized to be his and not Christ's it was decreed throughout the World that one of the Priests or Elders should be chosen to be set over the rest unto whom all the care or charge of the Church should appertain and that the beginnings of Schisms should be taken away Some do think that it is not the sentence of the Scriptures but ours that a Bishop and Priest or Elder are one thing and they do also think the one to be a name of Age and the other to be a name of Office. Let them read again the words of the Apostle to the Philippians saying Paul and Timotheus the Servants of Jesu Christ to all the Saints in Christ Jesu which are at Philippos with the Bishops and Deacons Grace and Peace be with you c. Philippi is one of the Cities of Macedonia And truly there could not be many as they are called Bishops in one City But because at that time they called those Bishops which they did also call Priests or Elders therefore indifferently he spake of Bishops as of Priests or Elders It may yet seem doubtful to some unless it be approved by other Testimonies In the Acts of the Apostles it is written that when the Apostle came to Miletum he sent to Ephesus and did call the Priests or Elders of the same Church unto whom among other things he said thus A Hand to your selves c. And here mark you diligently how that he calling the Priests or Elders of that one City of Ephesus did afterwards call them Bishops c. And Peter which took his name of the firmness of his Faith in his Epistle saith I your fellow Elder do beseech the Elders that are among you c. Haec Hieronimus These words are alledg'd saith Bishop Aley that it may appear Priests among the Elders to have been even the same that Bishops were But it grew by little and little that the whole charge and care should be appointed to one Bishop within his Precinct that the Seeds of Dissention might be utterly rooted out In his Second Tome P. 15. the Bishop adds out of St. Jerom Sicut Presbyteri c. Like as Priests do know themselves to be subject by the Custom of the Church unto him which is made Ruler over them So let the Bishops know that they are greater than the Priests rather by Custom than by the verity of Dispensation given of the Lord. He saith also in another place with the old Fathers the Bishops were the same that the Priests were for the name of one is the name of Dignity and the other of Age and Time. So far Bishop Aley The next I meet with is Pilkington Bishop of Duresme the Author of the Confutation of an Addition with an Apology written and cast in the Streets of West-Chester against the Causes of Burning Paul's Church in London declared by the Bishop at Paul's Cross The Bishop did at Paul's Cross Exhort the people to take the burning of Paul's to be a warning of a greater Plague to follow to the City of London if amendment of Life be not had in all Estates the Author of the Addition a Papist Histor Q. Eliz. pag. 312. notwithstanding what Heylin saith to the contrary when he tells us that the Papists ascribe it to some practice of the Zuinglian Faction out of their hatred unto all Solemnity and Decency in the Service of God perform'd more punctually in that Church for Examples sake than in any other in the Kingdom imputes it to the laying aside of the midnight Mattins forenoon Masses formerly had in the Church and Anthems and Prayers in the Steeple This Bishop a Person of great Learning and good Temper in Answer to this Paper doth in the Sixth year of the Queens Reign thus express himself Yet remains one doubt unanswered in these few words when he saith that the Government of the Church was committed to Bishops as tho' they had received a Larger and Higher Commission from God of Doctrine and Discipline than other Lower Priests and Ministers have and hereby might challenge a greater Prerogative But this is to be understood that the Privileges and Superiorities which Bishops have above other Ministers are rather granted by Man for maintaining of better Order and Quietness in Common-wealths than Commanded by God in his Word Ministers have better Knowledge and Utterance some than other but their Ministry of Equal Dignity God's Commission and Commandment is like and indifferent to all Priest Bishop Archbishop Prelate by what name soever he be called Saint Jerome in his Commentary on 1 Chap. Tit. says that a Bishop and Priest is all One and in his Epistle ad Evagrium he says That the Bishop wheresoever he be is of the same Power and Priesthood If they the Papists were not too much blinded in their own foolishness they might see in the last Subsidy granted in the time of their own Reign that they grant those to be their betters and above them from whence they receive their Authority The Parliament gives them and their Collectors Power to Suspend Deprive and Interdict any Priest that Pays not the Subsidy In that doing they grant the Parliament to be above them and from it to receive their Power I had not thought to have said so much on these his few words and yet much more hangs on this their Opinion of claiming their Usurped Power above Princes and other Ministers The Learned Bishop Jewel is of the same Mind with this Author Apol. Par. 2. Ch. 5. Divis 1. Ch. 6. Divis 1. and thus much he delivereth not as his private Opinion but as the sense of the Church of England Furthermore we say That the Minister ought lawfully duly orderly to be preferr'd to that Office of the Church of God Ch. 6. Divis 3. Ch. 7. Divis 5. and that no man hath power to wrest himself into the Holy Ministry at his own pleasure That Christ hath given to his Ministers Power to bind to loose to open to shut That the Minister doth execute the Authority of binding and shutting as often as
they term sometime Presbyters sometimes Bishops That in process of time the Apostles appointed under them Bishops of an Order Superiour above Presbyters the cause wherefore they did appoint under themselves such Bishops as were not every where at the first is said to have been those Strifes and Contentions for remedy whereof whether the Apostles alone did conclude of such a Regiment or else they together with the whole Church judging it a fit and needful Policy did agree to receive it for a Custom no doubt but being established by them on whom the Holy Ghost was poured in so abundant measure for the ordering of Christ's Church it had either Divine Appointment beforehand or Divine Approbation afterwards This passage of Hooker moves me to think he very much agreed with his most Reverend Metropolitan Archbishop Whit gift who vehemently asserts an actual change of Church Government in the Primitive Times as well as the changeableness of it in all Ages of the Church There are other intimations in this Learned Author which oblige me to conclude that the Church of England was not in his days come to a steady Resolution either about the Nature of a Particular Church infimae speciei or of the whole belonging to the Episcopal Office. Touching the Nature of a Particular Church of the lowest Rank whether Parochial or Diocesan was not much with him for speaking of the Dissimilitudes which in some respects are found to be between the present Bishops and the Bishops in the Primitive times he grants that many things there are in the State of Bishops Lib. 7. Sect. 2. p. 4. which the times have changed saying That many a Parsonage at this day is larger than some ancient Bishopricks were To Men that have any part of Skill what more evident and plain in Bishops than that Augmentation and Diminution in their Precincts Allowances Privileges and such like do make a Difference indeed but no Essential Difference between one Bishop and another But a Learned Nonconformist assures us That he shall try among other things Treatise of Episcopacy chap. 5. pag. 49. whether the Name of a Bishoprick will make a Parsonage and a Diocess to be Ejusdem speciei and whether Magnitude do not make a specifick Difference between the Sea and a Rivulet or a Glass of Water or between a Ship and a Nutshell And I may add that if there be no Essential Difference between a Bishoprick no larger than a Parsonage and a Diocesan Bishoprick the Controversie between the Church of England and generality of Nonconformists may touching Church Government be determined by such Condescensions made by the Church to the Dissenters as are short of an Essential Alteration to Episcopacy Let there be as many Bishopricks as there are considerable Parsonages or Parishes indowed and a Provision made for the Presbyters who are to assist the Bishops in the Government of these little Churches and a Superiority of the Bishop above the Presbyters or a Chiefty in the Regiment will be no longer a bone of Contention As to what belongs to the Episcopal Function as Different from the Presbyters it 's held by some that Ordination Confirmation and Jurisdiction are proper to it Let us see then Hooker's Judgment for the first Point There may be saith he sometimes very just and sufficient Reasons to all Ordination made without a Bishop Lib. 7. Sect. 14. pag. 37. The whole Church Visible being the true-Original-Subject of all Power it hath not ordinarily allowed any other than Bishops alone to Ordain Howbeit as the ordinary course is ordinarily in all things to be observed so it may in some Cases not unnecessary that we decline from the ordinary wayes The Power of Ordination is appropriated to the Bishop by the Churches Allowance and no otherwise and the same Church allowing Presbyters to Ordain their Ordination is Good so that Ordination is not proper to a Bishop quarto modo for it doth not Convenire to him semper soli and therefore he adds in the next Page That we are not simply without Exception to urge a lineal Descent of Power from the Apostles by continued succession of Bishops in every Effectual Ordination Lib. 7. Sect. 6. pag. 14. For the second Point I make not Confirmation part of that Power which hath always belonged only unto Bishops because in some places the Custom was that Presbyters might also Confirm in the absence of a Bishop Touching the last Point How Bishops together with Presbyters have used to Govern the Churches under them Lib. 7. Sect. 7. pag. 17. It is by Zonaras saith he somewhat plainly and at large declared That the Bishop had his Seat on high in the Church above the Residue which were present that a number of Presbyters did always there Assist him and that in the Oversight of the People those Presbyters were after a sort the Bishops Coadjutors The Bishops and Presbyters who together with him governed the Church are for the most part by Ignatius joyntly mention'd They are Counsellors and Assistants of the Bishop Thus this great Man grants That tho' Government in general be necessary to the Church yet no one particular kind of Government is so That the Scriptures do not make the Episcopal Government unalterable That the Power of conferring Orders is not by a Divine Law so appropriate to the Bishops that in no case an Ordination by Presbyters can be valid That the Church Visible is the true-Original-Subject of all Power and can alter the Government of the Church That Confirmation is not essential to the Office of a Bishop That Presbyters have a share in the Government That the Difference between the Bishop and Presbyter is in the Degree the Bishop having a Chiefty in the Government and Presbyters the Bishops Coadjutors Assistants Advisers and Counsellors The Learned Bilson afterwards Bishop of Winchester speaking of the Controversie between the Old Nonconformists and the Church of England Perpetual Government of the Church expresseth himself in these words Thus far we joyn That to prevent Dissention and Confusion there must needs Epistle to the Reader even by God's Ordinance be a President or Ruler of every Presbytery which Conclusion because it is warranted by the Grounds of Nature Reason and Truth and hath the Example of the Church of God before Vnder and after the Law we accept as Irrefutable and lay it as the Ground-work of all that ensueth But whether this Presidentship did in the Apostles times and by their Appointment go round by course to all the Pastors and Teachers of every Presbytery or were by Election committed to One chosen as the fittest to supply that Place so long as He discharged his Duty without blame that is a main point betwixt us But more particularly he adds In the Apostles I observe four things needful for the first Founding and Erecting of the Church and four other Points that must be Perpetual in the Church of Christ These are the Dispensing
Holy Sacraments c. Moreover in the Close to the Reduction the Primate and Dr. Holdsworth aver That the Suffragans mentioned in the second Proposition may lawfully use the Power both of Jurisdiction and Ordination according to the Word of God and the Practice of the Ancient Church who yet are but the Chorepiscopi of no other Order than the Presbyters as hereafter I shall prove A Declaring therefore thus much namely That the Presbyter is of the same Order vested with the Power both of Order and Jurisdiction and an entrusting them with the Exercise thereof as in the second Proposition will contribute very much towards a well Established Comprehension And in Requital it 's not to be doubted but the Latitudinarian Nonconformist of which there are a great number in this Kingdom will readily yield to the Presidency of one Presbyter for the sake of Union to be over them and close with what the Archbishop further adds Archbishop Of the many Elders who in common Ruled the Church of Ephesus there was one President whom our Saviour in his Epistle to this Church in a peculiar manner stileth the Angel of the Church of Ephesus Revel 1. and Ignatius in another Epistle written about twelve years after unto the same Church calleth the Bishop thereof Betwixt the Bishop and the Presbytery of that Church what an Harmonious Consent there was in the Ordering of the Church-Government the same Ignatius doth fully declare by the Presbytery which St. Paul understanding the Community of the rest of the Presbyters or Elders who then had a hand 1 Tim. 4.14 not only in the Delivery of the Doctrine and Sacraments but also in the Administration of the Discipline of Christ for further proof of which we have that known Testimony of Tertullian in his general Apology for Christians Ibidem etiam Exhortationes Castigationes censura Divina nam judicatur magno cum pondere ut apud certos de Dei conspectu summum summumque futuri Judicii praejudicium est si quis ita deliquerit ut à Communicatione Orationis Conventus omnis sancti Commercii relegetur praesident probati quique Seniores honotem istum non pretio sed Testimonio adepti Tertul. Apologet. c. 39. In the Church are used Exhortations Chastisements and Divine Censure for Judgment is given with great advice as amongst those who are certain they are in the sight of God and it is the chiefest foreshewing of the Judgment which is to come if any man have so offended that he be banished from the Communion of Prayer and of the Assembly and of all Holy Fellowship The Presidents that bear Rule therein are certain approved Elders who have obtained this Honour not by Reward but by good Report who were no other as he himself intimates elsewhere but those from whose hands they used to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist Nec de aliorum manibus quà m Praesidentium sumimus Id. de Corona Militis c. 3. For with the Bishop who was the Chief President and therefore stiled by the same Tertullian in another place * Dandi quidem Baptisini habet jus Summus Sacerdos qui est Episcopus dehinc Presbyteri Diaconi Id. de Baptis c. 17 Summus Sacerdos for distinction sake the rest of the Dispensers of the Word and Sacraments joyned in the Common Government of the Church and therefore where in Matters of Ecclesiastical Judicature Cornelius Bishop of Rome used the received Form of gathering together the Presbytery Omni actu ad me perlato placuit contrahi Presbyterium Cornel. apud Cypr. Epist 46. of what persons that did consist Cyprian sufficiently declareth when he wisheth them to read his Letters to the flourishing Clergie Florentissimo illic clero tecum praesidenti Cypr. Epist 55. ad Cornel. which there did Preside or Rule with him The presence of the Clergie being thought to be so requisite in matters of Episcopal Audience that in the fourth Council of Carthage it was concluded Ut Episcopus nullius causam audiat absque praesentia Clericorum suorum alioquin irrita crit sententia Episcopi nisi Clericorum praesentia confirmetur Concil Carthag IV. cap. 23. That the Bishop might hear no mans cause without the Presence of the Clergie and that otherwise the Bishop's Sentence should be void unless it were confirm'd by the Presence of the Clergie which we find also to be inserted into the Canons of * Except Egberti c. 43. Egbert who was Archbishop of York in the Saxon times and afterwards in the Body of the ‖ 15. q. 7. c. nullus Canon Law it self True it is that in our Church this kind of Presbyterial Government hath been long disused yet seeing it still professeth that every Pastor hath a Right to Rule the Church from whence the name of Rector also was given at first unto him and to Administer the Discipline of Christ as well as to Dispense the Doctrine and Sacraments and the Restraint of the Exercise of that Right proceedeth only from the Custom now received in this Realm no man can doubt but by another Law of the Land this hindrance may be well removed And this Ancient Form of Government by the united Suffrages of the Clergy might be reviv'd again and with what little shew of Alteration the Synodical Conventions of the Pastors of every Parish might be accorded with the Presidency of the Bishops of each Diocess and Province the indifferent Reader may quickly perceive by the perusal of the ensuing Propositions I. In every Parish the Rector or incumbent Pastor together with the Church-Wardens and Sides-men may every Week take notice of such as live scandalously in that Congregation who are to receive such several Admonitions and Reproofs as the Quality of their Offence shall deserve And if by this means they cannot be reclaimed they may be presented to the next monthly Synod and in the mean time debarr'd by the Pastor from Access unto the Lord's Table Notes The Name Rector which signifieth a Governour or Ruler was anciently given in common to Prelates Bishops Abbots and Parish-Presbyters but chiefly to the Parish-Priest or Parson that had Cure of Souls as DV FRESENE observes out of the Lombardian Laws Rectores Ecclesiarum Praelati Episcopi Abbates Parochiarum Presbyteri in lege Longob l. 3. tit 1. Sect. 42. tit 10. Sect. 4. In Capitularibus Carol. M. lib. 3. tit 75. c. Maxime Rector Ecclesiae qui vulgo Curio seu Curitus ut in Charta Alaman 43. apud Goldastum DV FRESNE Glos in verb. Rector and Charles Great 's Capitulars and the Almaine Charter Lindwood also in his Provincial Constitution declares the same Communiter loquendo per ipsorum Rectorum intelligas de Rectoribus Ecclesiarum Parochialium Potest etiam intelligi de omni Praelato Ecclesiae Lindw de Consu c. nullus ver nullus Rector ver Ipsorum Rectorum and * Vid. Cowel's Interpreter in Verb. Rector
of strength enough to invalidate an Original any more than the Vulgar or any other Translation of the Bible can blast the Reputation of the Originals either of the Old or New Testament What hath been already urged about de Marca's disgust against 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Thorndike's quarrel with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a sufficient Answer to his Third Argument For if the Canon hath any meaning be it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or be there an Omission of this Expression it cannot but be granted that before this Council the Chorepiscopi did Ordain Presbyters and Deacons without the City-Bishop's leave and afterwards with it To the Fourth that the Council of Laodicea did many Years after this make the same Provision hath nothing of Argument in it to prove That the Council of Ancyra did so long before Laodicea's doing It now seeing it 's not by way of confirmation of an anteceding Decree is a sufficient intimation that Ancyra did it not However seeing Thorndike will provoke us to consult this 56th or rather 57th Canon of Laodicea to it we will go which on a diligent search we find to run thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hervetus renders it thus Quod non oportet in vicis pagis Episcopos constitui sed Periodeutas hoc est Circumcursentores Dionysius Exiguus Quod non oporteat in Villulis vel in Agris Episcopos constitui sed Visitores Isidore Mercator thus Non oportet in Villis vicis Episcopos Ordinari sed Visitatores i. e. qui Circumeant Constitui No Bishops ought to be appointed in the Countrey Towns or Villages but Visitors Neither of these take notice of the Various Reading for it may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so be thus translated For the future there shall not be Ordained in Countrey Places any Bishops or Periodeutae or Visitors making the Periodeutae and Countrey Bishops the same as De Marca though he observes not this various Reading does Vnde Constanter asserere audeo eundem esse Chorepiscopum Periodeutum and as the same De Marca further observes these Periodeutae were only Presbyters as in the 4th Action of the Council of Chalcedon mention is made of Alexander Presbyter and Periodeuta and in the 11th Action of Valentine Presbyter and Periodeuta whence I infer that it 's clear from this and the following parts of the Canon that till this Council Presbyters were not so very much under the Power of the Bishops but could act according to their own discretion without consulting the City-Bishops The Canon is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and thus rendred by Hervetus Eos autem qui prius constituti fuerunt nihil agere sine mente Episcopi qui est in Civitate clearly enough insinuating that until this Council the Chorepiscopi the Periodeutae who were but Presbyters did act in the Country as they judged meet without consulting the Bishop of the City and it 's well known that their work was to Ordain Presbyters Deacons c. Thus much may suffice to vindicate what we have drawn from the Council of Ancyra to establish the Power of the Chorepiscopi who agreeably enough to the 13th Canon of this Council might exercise Episcopal Jurisdiction in their own Precinct without the leave of the City-Bishop and with his Permission they might do so out of their own Charge even in the City To proceed it 's very clear that long after this time yea long after Damasus this Severity against the Chorepiscopi and Leo the Third's Attempt to suppress and banish them when Charles the Great sent Arno Invavensis to know the mind of his Holiness about them they continued in the Exercise of their Office governing the Country-Churches ordaining Presbyters c. And altho' Hincmarus as Baluzius in de Marca out of Flodoardus his History observes De Marca de Concord lib. 2. c. 13 14. wrote bitterly against those City-Bishops that had 'em in their Dioceses Fbodoard Hist Remenf lib. 3. c. 29. yet Rabanus Maurus pleads as warmly in their Defence In Histor Lansiaca apud Palladium c 106. Legimus Elpidium Monachum Presbyterum ordinatum à Timotheo Chorepiscopo Chorepiscopos in Ecclesiis vacantibus innuit Hugo Flaviniac an 776. Bercarius in Hist Episcop Verdanensium n. 13. Post hunc Episcopatus istius Ecclesiae per 12. annos vacuus extitit sed quidem servus Dei Amalbertus nomine juxta morem illius temporis Chorepiscopus factus ipsam regebat Ecclesiam For all these see Du Fresne's Glossary ver Chorepiscopus and they were continued in France and elsewhere Elpidrus a Monk was or dained Presbyter by Timothy a Country Bishop Amalbertus a Chorepiscopus governed the Church of Verdun during a Vacancy of twelve years consecrated Churches confirm'd Children c. as may be seen in Rudolphus his Life of Rabanus Maurus and in De Marca That the Chorepiscopi did exercise the Episcopal Power altho ' they were but Presbyters may plainly be seen in the Decrees that were against 'em interdicting their presuming so to do for time to come 'T was this that fill'd the Soul of Damasus 1. Vid. Epist 5. Damasi 1. Prospero Numidiae primae sedis Episcopo Leoni reparato c. with so much indignation against them that they being but Presbyters presumed to discharge the Episcopal Office And for this very reason it was that Leo the Third in Answer unto the Question mov'd by Charles the Great condemn'd them to Banishment as may be seen in the select Ecclesiastical Capitula of Charles the Great where it 's very clear that tho' the French Prelates mitigated somewhat of the Rigour of the Pope's severe Decree against them yet concurr'd so far with him as to Ordain that the Country-Bishops do no more enter on the Execution of the Episcopal Office ita ut amplius nihil de Cpiscopali ministerio praesumerent and they decreed That no Country-Bishop presume by Imposition of Hands to give the Holy Ghost to any or Consecrate any Priest Levite or Subdeacon And tho' these Capitula do null and make void all the Ordinations and Consecrations of the Chorepiscopi Nicholas the First doth ratifie and confirm them Vide. Epist 15. Nichol. 1. Tit. 1. as may be seen in his Epistle to Radolfus and thus he did for the very Reason the Capitula as well as Leo and Damasus did damn them Damasus says that they are the same with Presbyters because they are instituted according to the Form of the Seventy Disciples who were never vested with Jura Episcopalia Tit. 4. c. 3. so Leo and the select Capitula of Charles the Great the Chorepiscopi are not Chief Priests nor Bishops neither do any of the Episcopal Rights belong unto them seeing they were instituted according to the Form of the Seventy for which
cause let no one say Et ne alicui talis Ordinatio vel Confirmatio aut Consecratio Reiteratio esse videatur That when any of those who have been Ordained by the Chorepiscopi are afterwards Ordained by the City-Bishop that they were Re-ordained but let 'em attend that Saying Quod non ostenditur gestum ratio non sinit ut videntur iteratum And Pope Nicholas 1. gives this as a Reason why he judges their Ordination valid The Chorepiscopi were such as the Seventy sent out by our Lord Jesus who without doubt were vested with the Episcopal Power But tho' these Papal Determinations are different yet they agree in witnessing to this Truth That the Chorepiscopi exercis'd Episcopal Authority De Marca proves the same out of the Arabian Canons translated by Alfonsus Pisanus and from the last words of the Canon of Antioch Dr. Parker himself makes no doubt of it for says he That these Chorepiscopi had the Character of Proper Bishops Parker's Account p. 154. appears plainly from the tenth Canon of Antioch that allows them to Ordain the inferiour Officers of the Church This of Bishop Parker doth exactly agree with the 55. Chapter of Nice as translated out of Arabick by Turrianus the Jesuit When the Chorepiscopus visits the Churches and Monasteries under his Power let him gather together the Elders of Castles and expound unto 'em the Holy Scriptures and enquire whether they have any Sons or Daughters and give order that they be brought unto him that he may sign 'em pray over them impose Hands on 'em bless and institute Ministers that is say the Notes on this Chapter Lectores Exorcistae Hypodiaconi And that these Chorepiscopi were but of the same Order with Presbyters and were no otherwise Bishops than as all other Presbyters are is as clear for their Ordination was by one Bishop only not by three and when they entred on the Exercise of the Episcopal Power they had no new Consecration as may be seen in the 54. Chapter of Nice translated out of the Arabick where Turrianus renders it thus Et debet Episcopus vid. Civitatis recitare super electum scil Chorepiscopum Orationem consuetam Chorepiscopus non ordinabatur sed per oraticnem benedicebatur Benedicere illi dareque illi nomina omnium Ecclesiarum Monasteriorum qua sub Potestate ejus sunt The Notes on this Chapter have it that they were not consecrated anew to the Office of a Country-Bishop but only by the Prayer of the City-Bishop blessed Damasus 1. expresly affirms them to be but Presbyters in these words Quod ipsi iidem sunt qui Presbyteri sufficienter invenitur quia ad formam exemplum septuaginta inveniuntur prius instituti The select Capitula of Charles the Great concurring with Leo the Third Tit. 4. c. 3. and speaking of the Episcopal Rights say the same Haec verò non à Presbyteris vel Chorepiscopis qui ambo unius formae esse videntur Besides such were some of the Ancient Canons decreeing that there should be but one Bishop in a Diocess and he only in the City that made it necessary for some of those who anciently would have the Bishops to be of an Order superiour above Presbyters to hold that these Chorepiscopi tho' they had the name of Bishop given 'em and were vested with the Jura Episcopalia were but Presbyters usurping on the Episcopal Office so Damasus Leo and many French Bishops in Charles the Great 's days and it hath also put some later Writers such as Bellarmine Boverius in his Paraenetic Censure of de Dominis Archbishop of Spalato's Book de Rep. Eccles and De Marco to phansie that some made Chorepiscopi were formerly Consecrated to the Episcopal Dignity and that others were but Presbyters and thus by distinguishing the Office from the Person they hoped to extricate themselves but as Dr. Parker well observes Pag. 158. This is precariously said without any shadow of Pretence for it but meerly to salve his own Hypothesis Others Thorndike of Rights of Church p. 146. such as Thorndike are driven to the Invention of another Distinction which is between the Solemnity which an Act is executed with and the Power and Authority by which it is done And that it cannot be prejudicial to any Power to do that by another which seemeth not fit to be immediately and personally executed by it Some Acts of the Primitive Church seem to require this Distinction as the making of Presbyters by the Chorepiscopi or Countrey-Bishops mentioned in the ancient Greek Canons Which by all likelihood were not properly Bishops because not Heads of a City-Church which is the Apostolical Rule for Episcopal Churches Thus Thorndike who differs greatly from the generality of his Brethren who hold that though the Potestas Jurisdictionis may be delegated to one that is not a Bishop yet the Potestas Ordinis cannot However it must be acknowledged that there is a great difference between a Presbyter's Ordaining other Presbyters with the leave of the Bishop and his doing it by a Power derived from the Bishop One vested with a Power may not be able to exercise it without the leave of another and yet when he hath leave he then exercises a Power inherent in himself virtute officii The Bishops themselves cannot exercise the Power of Orders without the leave of the Supreme Civil Magistrate and now that they do exercise it 't is with his leave but it does not therefore follow that the Power of Orders is derived from the Supreme Magistrate to the Bishop In the Council of Ancyra it 's not said That the Presbyter shall not Ordain Presbyters unless the Bishop delegates unto him a Power enabling him so to do but he shall not exercise this Power without the consent of the Bishop which was enjoyned by the Canon to prevent Schisms and Divisions in the Church So that I cannot see how this Distinction of Thorndike so applauded by Dr. Parker can help ' em To press this yet further Henry the Eighth's Suffragans were consecrated Bishops and had the same Power virtute officii that any other Bishop receiv'd at his Consecration but may not exercise it unless by Commission from the City-Bishop But when they did exercise the Episcopal Authority was it by a Power receiv'd at their Consecration and inherent in them or by a Power deriv'd unto 'em from the City-Bishop by Commission 'T was by the former no doubt why else were they consecrated If then this Commission given by the City-Bishop to the Suffragan limiting the Exercise of his Power doth not infer that the Suffragan did not act by a Derived Power much less can these Words Let not the Chorepiscopus Ordain Presbyters or Deacons without the consent of the City-Bishop imply that the Chorepiscopus deriv'd the Power of Ordaining from the City-Bishop The Bishop of Lincoln can't Ordain Priests or Deacons in Westminster-Abby without the leave of the