commonly growes from Equality how comes it to pass that there is no need of this remedy among you Again if it be true that this Form of Government was received every where by all Churches that which was every where receiv'd by all why doth not your Church receive why doth She only run counter to all the Churches which then were every where For that is a most true word you said and deserv'd an asterisk of commendation That all Churches everywhere receiv'd this Form of Government Nor were there ever before this Age any Churches which were governed by any other then by Bishops Wherfore there was no cause at all that you should go about to wipe off that suspition for I had none of you that you were not well affected to our Order I shall never be induced to beleeve it for I cannot but give credit to you affirming it in your Letters that your Countrymen complain of you for favoring and wishing so well vnto it Indeed that you wish well I doubt not at all but therto I am more perswaded by your word then by your arguments For here you slip from the Order to the Persons of Bishops of whose Learning Industrie Martyrdom you speak much and excellently But there were as you know of old men that hated the Tyrant but not his Tyranny and why not now men that love Bishops but not the Government by Bishops Pass by the men therfore it matters not for them speak of the Order it self For Calvin himself and Beza if they wrote to our Prelates know that they wrote likewise to them whom you call peevish and that their Letters which these pretend for their peevishness are produced by them and thus they oft reply To what purpose do I hear Calvins Words when I see his Deeds For the Order it self if it be such as you would have it seem the Bishops of England cannot make it better nor of Spain worse I advis'd you not to transferr the faults of Persons upon Things and to unlearn your Church that custom As for those Antients whom you worthily call the Light of the Church and who themselves were Bishops though you say much yet you say not enough For this is not enough That you would not give sentence against them That they were not wrongfully made That they did not usurp an unlawfull Office These are but terms of diminution Not give sentence against Not wrongfully made not usurpers of an unlawfull Office speak out speak as the truth is That they were lawfully made lawfully if ever any and did exercise a most lawfull Office That our at this day are to be made after their example That the same Office is to be exercised by all Ours These speak home to the Order are nothing to the Men But whatever become of those passages I cannot but commend your conclusion there nor shall I stick to set an asterisk of approbation upon it I would to God that might put an end to the whole controversie betwixt us It is this The venerable Antiquity of those first Ages shall be ever in greater esteem with me then the new upstart device of any whosoever O would to God that Antiquity might be more and more in esteem with you with all for if Antiquity might prevail if these new upstart devices were discarded then sure the Cause of this Order could not be in danger The Second dash of dislike set by His Majestie and very justly was at that place where you contend that the Order of Bishop and Presbyter is one and the same I have shew'd that it is not the same Both 1. Because the Offices are not the same For a Presbyter doth not Ordain no not in S. Hieroms iudgment As also 2. Because there is not the same Imposition of hands but a new one in a Bishop Again 3. Because among the Fathers Isidore clearly calls it the Order of Bishops And lastly 4. Because those Two Orders were distinguished by Christ in the Apostles and the Seventy Two Here you produce to us the Title of the Pontifical which is concerning Consecration not Ordination I shew'd that the Antient Bishops even of Rome it self spake otherwise otherwise the later Popes Among the Antient that the word Ordination was most usual and most approved You appeal to the Schole I acquainted you in what sense the Schole calls them the same or not the same The same in reference to the Body of Christ upon which they terminat their Seven Orders About the Body of Christ a Presbyter doth as much as a Bishop You your self say as much Of these in respect of the Body of Christ the Church of Rome makes but one Order Not the same if you respect the power to a special Act viz. of Ordination which is peculiar to a Bishop This is not mine as you imagin'd but the definition of Orders all the Schole over Nor yet that difference which afterward you put upon me both of them are from the Schole both definition and difference These things if you would speak Scholastically were not to be deny'd by you who appeal'd to the Schole But to what purpose do you say that you deal with or that you dispute against the Pontificians who will not have the Order of Bishops distinct from that of Presbyters And yet presently you subjoin Ought I to inveigh against them viz. the Pontificians because they do not make the Order of Bishops distinct from that of Presbyters when Our Churches do not make it neither He that should do this should not so much contest with the Church of Rome as with our own You dispute therfore against them but yet you will not inveigh against them you dispute against the Pontificians and yet you allege their Pontifical You dispute against them yet your own Churches do the self same thing Nor yet will you affirm what ought to be beleev'd but what the Church of Rome thinketh which thinketh the very same that your Church doth and your Church I beleeve you would have to be beleev'd You do not therfore contest with the Pontificians for I trow you have no mind to contest with your own 'T were against your Religion so to do Nevertheless your Church as you confess doth the same thing in this point that the Roman doth You say it is best to use proper terms that the things which differ in substance be distinguished in Name and yet in the same page afterward as if you were somwhat angry you ask To what end is it to stick so much upon the distinction of Words To what end then is it to make proper words which are made proper for no other end but for distinction If this be to no end it is better trust me neither to use proper words nor to make any words at all proper for we must use the better both you and we Notwithstanding this why do you reject the distinction of words here Because every Order you say is a Degree What then Since every Degree is
Two Orders and those distinct And this likewise we know that every where among the Fathers Bishops and Presbyters are taken to be after their example That Bishops succeeded the Apostles and Presbyters the Seventy two That these Two Orders were by our Lord appointed in those two Cyprian k Deacons must remember that our Lord chose the Apostles that is Bishops and Prelates But the Apostles after the Ascension of our Lord appointed Deacons for themselves as Ministers of their Episcopacy and of the Church Nay S. Hierom l With us Bishops hold the place of the Apostles All Bishops are successors of the Apostles And that is a famous place in him in him and S. Augustine too upon the 44. Psalm In stead of thy Fathers thou shalt have children i.e. in stead of Apostles Bishops S. Ambros in 1. Corinth 12. 28. God hath set in the Church Caput Apostolos first Apostles Now the Apostles are Bishops the Apostle S. Peter giving us assurance of it And his Bishoprick let another take And a little after Are all Apostles He saith right for in one Church but one Bishop And in Ephes. 4. The Apostles are the Bishops From hence we have a fair passage to the last point Whether this Order be by Divine Right Very glad I was to hear it from you That the Authority of Antiquity should be ever in great esteem with you I love you for that word Nor will it be the least of your praises if your deeds make your words good For my part it hath been my opinion ever I was ever of that mind But or I am deceiv'd in the whole story of Antiquity or the Apostolical men i. e. the Disciples of the Apostles or as Eusebius calls them {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} they that conversed with them both they who are not mentioned in Holy Scripture as Polycarpus and Ignatius and they who are expresly mentioned as Timothy Titus Clemens were Bishops while the Apostles were alive and were constituted and ordained by the Apostles themselves (a) Polycarp by S. John (b) Clemens by S. Peter (c) Titus and (d) Timothy by S. Paul I give you these witnesses Concerning Polycarp (e) Irenaeus (f) Tertullian (g) Eusebius (h) Hierom. Concerning Ignatius (i) Eusebius and (k) Hierom. Concerning Timothy (l) Eusebius (m) Hierom (n) Ambrose (o) Chrysostom (p) Epiphanius Concerning Titus (q) Eusebius (r) Ambrose (s) Theodoret Concerning Clement (t) Tertullian (u) Eusebius (x) Hierom. Not to speak of (y) Linus z Dionysius (a) Onesimus (b) Epaphroditus (c) Caius (d) Archippus concerning whom we have the like testimonies of the Fathers And not of these alone even S. Mark the Evangelist and that while the Apostles lived who saw it for S. Mark dyed in the (e) Eighth year of Nero full Five years before S. Peter and S. Paul were crown'd with martyrdom And not He alone S. Iames also the Apostle Witness for S. Mark (f) Hierom for S. Iames (g) Eusebius out of Clement and Hegesippus (h) Hierome (i) Chrysostom (k) Ambrose (l) Epiphanius (m) Augustine Could any then take it ill that you said That Episcopacy was received in the Church from the very next times to the Apostles you said too little you might have said more and if you had Antiquity would have born you out that it was received from the Apostles themselves and that they the Apostles themselves were constituted in the Episcopal Order There was nothing in that passage of yours that any could be offended with unless haply that in stead of was called the Bishop you should have said was the Bishop For we do not contend about the Name all the controversy is about the Thing This was done or we must give one general dash through all the Ecclesiastical Historians And when was it done After the Ascension of our Lord saith Eusebius (n) Presently upon the Passion of our Lord so S. Hierom. (o) Done by whom They were placed in the Office of Episcopacy by the Apostles (p) Tertullian By the Apostles so Epiphanius By the Ministers of our Lord so (q) Eusebius Ordeined by the Apostles so (r) S. Hierom. Constituted by the Apostles (s) so S. Ambrose Will any man then deny that S. Iames S. Mark Titus Clemens were Bishops by Apostolical Right Was any thing done by the Apostles which was not by Apostolical Right By Apostolical i. e. as I interpret it by Divine For nothing was done by the Apostles that the Holy Ghost the Divine Spirit did not dictate to them Sure if by the Apostles by the same Right which those Seven were by Acts. 6. whom I am sure you your self will grant to be by Divine Right Deacons the Holy Scripture doth no where call them that is only a word of the Church I hope what the Apostles did they did by Divine Right and that it cannot be denyed but their Deeds of which we are certain not only their Words or Writings are of Divine Right And not only those things of which S. Paul wrote to the Corinthians (t) but those other also which He set in order at His being at Corinth if they were known to us what they were were by the same right to wit by Divine all of them both these and they from the Holy Spirit all And yet though they be by Divine Right we do not say these things belong to Faith They belong to the Agenda or Practice of the Church to the Credenda or points of Faith t is but improper to refer them T is very strange therfore which you say That your Countrymen openly complain of you both that you vndertook the cause of Bishops bylike your Country-men are enemies to Bishops would not have their cause pleaded but are desirous it should be lost as also that you condemned Aerius who was antiently condemned in Asia by Epiphanius in Europe by Philastrius in Africa by S. Augustine whose name all the world over is in the Black-Book of Hereticks nor undeservedly seeing He durst oppose himself as you your self confess to the Consent and Practice of the Catholik Church You should rather complain of them who for this complain of you As for that where you would not have your papers to be ript up to the quick I know no body here that doth it Should any he would have somewhat to stick upon in the very Title take which word you will that of Pastor or that of Calling They are both novelties the word Pastor I 'm sure in this sense and Calling too and not of any Age but this last nor of all that For I pray who of the Antients ever spake so among whom you shall scarce find the word Pastor used but when they speak of Bishops which form of speech S. Peter taught them when he joined Pastor and Bishop in our Saviour
writings we keep by us whose acts and zeal we remember as no way inferior to the zeal of the most eminent Servants of God whom either France or Germany brought forth Whosoever shall deny this must needs be either senslesly wicked or as envying Gods glory or foolishly besotted not see at high noon I desire therfore this suspition may be wipid off from me specially when I take notice that even Calvin and Beza whom they usually pretend to as abettors of their peevishness wrote many Letters to the Prelates of England and intreated them as the faithfull servants of God as men that deserved well of the Church Nor am I such a boldface as to pass sentence upon those Lights of the Antient Church Ignatius Polycarp Cyprian Augustine Chrysostom Basil the Two Gregories Nissen and Nazianzen all of them Bishops as upon men wrongfully made or usurpers of an unlawfull office The reverend Antiquity of those First Ages shall ever be in greater esteem with me then the novel device of any whosoever I come to the Second part of your censure I said that there is but One Order of Bishop and Presbyter You contrary-wise are of opinion that the Order of Bishops is another and diverse from that of Presbyters and to that purpose bring many testimonies from the Fathers who speak of the Ordination of Bishops neither do I oppose for the Antient's speak so indeed And although the Roman Pontifical absteins from that word yet the Antient Bishops of Rome did use it Leo then in his 87. Epistle which is to the Bishops of the Province of Vienna commandeth I that a Bishop who is not rightly ordained he displaced and in the same Epistle he often useth the same word Now between an Order and a Degree you make this difference that a Degree denotes only a Superiority but an Order is a power to a special Act That therfore every Order is a Degree but not every Degree an Order Very well For though many do not observe this difference of words yet it is best to use proper terms that things which differ in substance be distinguished in names too But these do not prejudice me at all For you should have considered with your self whom I have to deal with I dispute against the Pontificians who make Seven Orders Door keepers Readers Exorcists Acolyths Subdeacons Deacons Presbyters but the Order or character of Bishops they will by no means have to be diverse from that of Presbyters Could I disputing with them use other words then such as are receiv'd by them Could I deal with them about the Order of Bishops which they acknowledg not Should I have inveigh'd against them for not making the Order of Bishops distinct from that of Presbyters when our own Churches make it not He that should do this should not so much contest with the Church of Rome as with our own Then to what purpose is it to insist so much upon the distinction of Words since every Order is by S. Paul call'd a Degree Nor can a Bishop be depriv'd of his Orders but he must be degraded and fall from his Degree I pray weigh my words well Every Bishop is a Presbyter and a Priest of the Body of Christ and of these the Church of Rome makes but one Order It plainly appears that I do not in these words affirm what ought to be beleeved but what is the sense of the Church of Rome But heer somewhat falls in which may beget a doubt It is confess'd by all that every Bishop is a Presbyter but a Presbyter is not a Deacon Hence it comes to pass that there is another manner of difference betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter then betwixt a Presbyter and a Deacon Since therfore a Presbyter differs in Order from a Deacon it seems to follow that a Bishop differs not in Order from a Presbyter Nor is it without some doubt that you say that Order is a power to a special Act. For a power to a special Act is given to many without Order as to them who are extraordinarily delegated to the performance of some special actions Then you deny that Archbishops are another Order from Bishops And yet an Archbishop hath a power to some special actions as namely to call a Synod and to do other offices which are not lawfull for Bishops and which are not permitted to Archbishops themselves under the Papacy but when they have received the Archiopiscopal Pall from the Pope You out of your great wisdom will consider whether it be apparent by these that the power to a special Action may be conferr'd even by a Degree without a Diversity of Order The Third point is still behind to wit that I said that Episcopacy is by the most Antient Ecclesiastical but yet not by Divine Right You on the other side resolve and mantein that it is by Divine Right and to that purpose produce many examples of Bishops S. Mark Timothy Titus Clemens Polycarp S. Iames Bishop of Hierusalem all who received the Order of Episcopacy from the Apostles themselves And you quote a great number of Fathers who affirm as much Learnedly all and according to the truth of the Primitive Historys But what then Why say you if Bishops were constituted by the Apostles plain it is that the Order of Episcopacy is by Apostolical and so consequently by Divine Right This indeed is to make your self master of the whole strength of the cause But that Axiom of yours All things that are of Apostolical Right are likewise of Divine seemes to me by your good leave to be liable to some exceptions Many things were ordered about Ecclesiastical Policy which even the Church of England acknowledgeth not to be of Divine Right by not observing the same S. Paul in 1. Timoth. v. would have Deaconesses appointed in the Church But this fashion was long ago out of date The same S. Paul 1. Corinth XIV would that at the same Hour in the same Assembly Three or Four should prophecy i. e. as S. Ambrose understands it Interpret the Word of God and that the others should judg of what was spoken which custome is long since ceased The Apostles command touching abstinence from things strangled and blood was for many Ages observed by the Antient Church witness the Apologetie of Tertullian chap. IX the Council of Gangra Canon II. and the Trullan Canon LXVII and there is frequent mention of the same point in the Councils of Worms and Orleance yet S. Augustine in his XXXII Book against Faustus chap. XIII saith that Observing hereof was generally neglected by the Christians and that they who were posses'd with that scruple were laugh'd at by others You have not the Apostles alone but even that precept of Christ himself Touching shaking off the dust of the feet against the refusers of the Gospel If any should now go about to lay the foundation of Christian Religion among the Tartars or Sinenses were he bound to observe that Rite against