Spirituall or sole government Ecclesiasticall yea though over but one Congregation Much more him who exerciseth such spirituall Lordship over a great many CoÌ„gregations Also What is Sole authoritie Spirituall in our sense sole authoritie Spirituall and sole governement Ecclesiasticall we call that which is exercised without the Christian peoples free consent D. Downame laboureth with divers vaine shifts to defend the English L. Bishops herein He can not abide that it should bee saide of them that they exercise “ Def. 1.58.47.43 sole authoritie or sole government Yea in many places hee * Def 3 118.11â—.126.142 sheweth indignation that such wronge should be done them in beeing so reported of But it is strange Are they ashamed to heare of that which they cease not to practise and maintaine every day and that in the sight of the world yea each of them over divers hundreds of Congregations For the people with vs no where enioy any free consent But the D. saith “ Def. 1.43.44 The Bishop hath the Archbishop above him Yea but who is above our 2. Archbishops spiritually No body Againe he saith Provinciall Synods are above the Bishop Idly spoken Is the Diocesan Synod above their owne Bishop Or is the Provinciall Synod above their Archbishop Surely no more then the Vniversall Councill is above the Pope Which is cleane contrarie Now this is it which hee should have affirmed buthe durst not He shifteth further saying “ Pag. 44. Do we not all with one consent acknowledge the Kings Maiestie to have the Supreme authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall Yea verily wee do But that is Civilly as “ Reas. for ref p. 62. â—â— els-where I have shewed Hee hath no authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall Spiritually that is his authoritie properly maketh no Church Minister nor Excommunicateth any person Which I suppose your selves do hold even as we do But this is the point in England the Archb. is Spiritually Supreme or hath Supreme authority spiritual in his Province I say thus he is Supreme sole viz. spiritually Wherfore the Doct. Ignorantia Elenchi grosly sophisticateth in shifting from the poâ—â—t in hand to an other matter Where hee speaketh of “ Def. 1. p. 43 Chancellors adioyned to the Bishops and of Presbyters consent with him that †Pag. 42. Presbyters have power to rule their flocke in publike Ministerie and in privat attendance that some of them have voyces in Synods c. I wot not what all this is Sure I am it is as idle as the rest For so much at least is seene in the Popish Church where yet is founde spirituall Lordship sole governement in their Bishops yea oppression violence tyrannie also over the peoples consciences as we well know So that the “ Pag. 43. Supreme and lowdest by and †Pag. 47. the plainely which hee giveth to vs hee ought to take to him selfe Another shift of the Doct. is where because the Hebrew Adoni the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Latin Dominus may be given to Bishops therefore “ Def. 3.147 he would conclude that in English they may be called Lords D. Bilson reasoneth †Perp gov pag. 58. 59. so likewise and that very largely He would prove the same also from the Duch terme Here from the French Monsieur c. But I deny this reason absolutly For heerein there is no consequence Our English terme Lord and Lordship doth alwayes imply Sole government but none of those forraigne termes doth so alwayes Wherefore such reasoning is Equivocating also * Ioh. 13.13 1. Cor. 8.6 12.5 2. Cor. 1.24 Againe Christ only is our Lord in respect of Spirituall Lordship he only is to bee called a Spirituall Lord. But our Bishops are Lords and are so called with vs in respect as they bee Spirituall Lordes as the Doctor “ Def. 3.150 observeth well Wherefore our Bishops Lordship is vnlawfull and derogatorie to Christ Doct. Bilson saith further †Perp. gov pag. 62. If we sticke at titles Christ calleth them Gods Lo how nothing satisfyeth these men Would he have Bishops called by the name of Gods also But I would know of him where doth Christ call them Gods Surely it is but his fancie They are in deed so called no where D. Downame presseth that Bishops are called “ Def. 3.146.150 Angells which is a more honor able title then Lord. And therefore that Bishops may bee called Lords I deny that the name Angell is so honorable a title as a Spirituall Lord which is given to our Bishops This is proper to Christ only as before is said the name Angell is not And so his reason is false Againe though the name Angell be given to Bishops sometime and in one respect yet it is very false to say they may lawfully be stiled and called by the dayly appellation of Angells or that they may ordinarilie vse that title as they do the title name of Lord. Againe the name of Lord is given them as importing their sole governement as before is said But the name Angell importeth not so much neither is it given to any Creature in such respect Therfore from the name of Angell the title of Lorde followeth not Indeed the name of Angell is given to Bishops because they are Gods messengers to shew vs his will not in respect of their governement at all though the Doct. presumeth so to say without “ An Allegorie is no proofe proofe Lastly hee knoweth that all Preachers are in the word called Angells or Messengers but for all Preachers to be called in English Lords or your Lordship surely it would be a very arrogant thing And though hee “ Def. 1.34.46 alleage that the Angel of the church of Ephesus in Rev. 2.1 be one and but one before many Ministers yet neither doth this importe any Lordship in him either in name or practise neither is this precedence or praeeminence signifyed by the word Angel but it is gathered by coÌ„paring this word with the knowen circumstances of those times Further he alleageth that “ Def. 3.152 Princes are called Pastors and for the same cause are Lords Wherein there is no truth nor indeed any good sense The like is that where hee addeth the title of Father is as great as Lord. Nay the name of Father is amiable but Lords may and also they vse to force and compell Neither did the Pope at first take the name of Father peculiarly to him selfe to note thereby any Lordship as his due but to deceave the world by his pretended love over all wherein he desired to seeme a commoÌ„ Father In another * Def. 4.71.72 place he teacheth that Bishops in the New Testament were called Apostles VpoÌ„ which grouÌ„d he “ Def. 3 15â— would conclude that therefore the name of Lord is lawfull for them I answer The name of Apostle and also of Bishop may be vsed sometime
Schismatickes and peace-breakers but look vnto the word of God theÌ„ them selves will be found to bee the makers of the Schisme in departing from the said word of God by their Traditions The true cause of Vnitie We see then by this that the true iust cause of Vnitie in the churches of Christ is to cleave vnseparably to Christes Testament Which meÌ„ not willing to follow alwayes but seeking to walke rather in the wayes and customes and inventions of men thereby they give occasion indeed of much strife The true cause of dissension in Religion discord dissention This is the true cause of our differences in religion It is as fenseleâ— which D. Downame maintaineth that Diocesan and Provinciall Bishops having no Superior Ecclesiasticall can be causes of Vnitie Def. 2.114 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For none of these can do any thing but each in his owne circuit Now what is that to Christian Vnitie when nevertheles there may be for all theÌ„ so many opinions as there be independent Provinciall Bishops Only a Vniversall Church and Bishop if we list to follow Mens policies and not Christes Testament may in deed cause a kinde of Vnitie But againe such Vnitie without Veritie is vnto Christian people plaine tyrannie And we professe that absolute Vnitie vnder a Visible Head is not so good as the TyraÌ„nie of such a one is mischievous Christ rather would his faithfull servantes should be prooved and exercised by Schismatikes then their consciences oppressed by tyrants Some perhaps will say that thus we seeme to desire dissentions seeing we refuse reasonable likelie meanes of Vnitie I answer First The Pope hath better colour so to obiect then Provincialls as before is said Second our meanes of Vnitie which we imbrace are far more likely to effect the same then their way For they have a Provinciall L. Bishop without the word but we have Christs written word his churches helpe also These meanes among vs will settle more vnitie and peace in truth a hundred times especially within the body of our Churches then our adversaries have or can have by their L. Bishops The Magistrats favor a speciall cause of Vnitie If our Magistrates would shew vs their favor and aide which our adversaries enioy this that I say would quickly vniversally be evident But for want of the Magistrates said favor I grant mo differences do appeare amonge vs then would otherwise In which case yet no ChristiaÌ„ ought to be offended but to consider both that vnder the Apostles it hath been so and that Allmightie God she weth heereby that it is “ See D. Downam Def. 3.67.68 better so to bee then vnder Humane tyrannie though pretending Vnitie Doct. Downame setteth vp his rest vpon a †Def. 3.4.6 Vniversall Synod for Vnitie This is his chiefest buck lar But alas how vaine is it For first a Vniversall Synode indeed is impossible to be had especially by vs in these dayes For when and where had any Christians the least benefit by a Vniversall Synod since the Pope hath ben detected What a meanes then of Vnitie is that which our Adversaries pretend Namely which is not possible to be had or howsoever most rare difficult Secondly such a Synod at the D. stands for viz. Setting downe Decreta tanquam Dictatoria 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclesijs Decrees as it were vncontroulable and not vnder the examination of the Churches is by the learned “ Pag. 101. c. 105. 106 c. before plainly condemned to whom I will adde M. Chemnicius †Exam. Concil Trid. part 1. pag. 3. condemning the Council of Trent for this very cause in these very wordes denying also that any of the Primitive Councills were such And yet a Vniversall Councill if it may bee had and other Councills so far as they may be had we allow and imbrace and do acknowledge great benefit by them namely so that their Decrees may bee examined and tryed by Gods worde of them to whom Gods word appertaineth This vse I say of a Generall Synod wee allow as well as he which in deed is the only true vse of Synods Certainly Provinciall and Diocesan Synods wee allow more then he doth For hee so admitteth these Synods that yet the Head Bishop in any of theÌ„ is to “ Def. 4.82.83 2.114 over rule all And what vse of them is there then The L. Bishop may have as good Counsel and advise with lesse trouble and charge But these are not that Meanes of Vnitie which hee pretendeth It is as I said the Synod Vniversall and that of supreme and absolute power spirituall over all Christians and that from Christes expresse ordinance Which verily also taketh away Soveraigne power froÌ„ all within England Note this ill Consequent to reforme our selves in religion what need so ever there be Which I leave to the wise to consider of Yea this his opinion doth in the end necessarily induce a Pope as I have said Hitherto of perverting the true intensive Nature of Christes Visible Church viz. where the people of the ordinary Congregations are barred their free consent in the Church governemeÌ„t Where we have seene what great and lamentable evills follow therevpon even to the making of a plaine path way for the Popes reentrance among vs. What extent or limit is there of a Church in the New Testam Now wee shall see that the same mischiefe cometh likewise by extending the Churches outward Body larger and further then it ought to bee The iust extent of the outward Body or the true boundes and limites of Christes Visib Church alwayes vnder the Gospell is one ordinarie Congregation only See also before pag. 10. 157. The reason is because so we finde it to bee in the whole New Testament of Christ All the which I have proved and declared plainly els where viz. before pag. 87. and Declarat pag. 10. 19. 20. c. It is to prophane and vnchristian advisedly to affirme that in the New Testament Christ or his Apostles have limited and defined no Church Oâ— that men may change those boundeâ— which Christ or his Apostles have seâ— The Papistes them selves are not 〈◊〉 grosse as †Pag. 150. before I have noted they would desire no greater hand vpon vs then that we should so answer them Some certain limites therefore and bounds of a Church questionles Chrisâ— hath set But our adversaries and namely “ Def. â— c. D. Downame refuseth the ordinary Congregation They avouch and maintayne a diocesan and Provinciall Church to be of Divine institution in the New Testament What maintaine they A Diocesan Church Nay in deed Christes Visible Church â—hen must be not only Diocesan A Diocesan Church requireth a Vniversall Church nor only Provincial no nor only Patriarâ—hall but eveÌ„ Vniversall I say where Christes Visible Church is not beleeved to bee by Christ limited only to one ordinary
An Attestation of many Learned Godly and famous Divines Lightes of Religion and pillars of the Gospell iustifying this doctrine viz. That the Church-governement ought to bee alwayes with the peoples free consent Also this That a true Church vnder the Gospell contayneth no more ordinary Congregations but one In the discourse whereof specially Doctor Downames also D. Bilsons chiefe matters in their writings against the same are answered Calvin Instit 4.3.2 Hee laboureth the destruction and ruine of the Church whosoever either seeketh to abolish this order and this kinde of government whereof we treate or maketh light of it as not so necessary ANNO DOM. 1613. To my Christian and beloved friends in London and elswhere in England Grace and peace be multiplied in IESVS CHRIST our Lord. THe great and long afflictions which it hath pleased God to call me vnto onlie for testifying his heavenly truth against the grievous corruptions of the Church in our Land are well knowen vnto you all my most deare and loving friends In the middest of which my troubles what comfort J have receaved from you though I publish not yet both a most thankefull remembrance thereof remaineth in my heart and with God a most precious recompence is laid vp for you at the last day I confesse I might â—og since have ben discouraged through many things which I finde both within and without me Besides I have not escaped the bytings of false brethren Also I am not ignorant that divers yea of those that least should doe not only distast but also speake evill of my innocencie without all cause In very deed they can not tell why But God the righteous Iudge seeth it who yet stil sustayneth and strengthenth my infirmitie by whose grace J am that I am Wherefore in his Name J do still beare witnesse to the truth denyed by many men do now take in hand to intreat heere concerning the Christian peoples power right of †Also coÌ„sequeÌ„tly that a true Church vnder the Gospell coÌ„taineth no mo ordinary Congregations theÌ„ one is not Diocesan properly free consent in their outward spirituall governement given theÌ„ by Christ Jesus in the Gospell And therefore to his gracious assistance heerein I also do trust In the which affaire I thinke it very behoofull for the better manifestation of my lawful and iust indeavour and no lesse needfull for Gods glory to speake to this matter propounded in this Treatise not my selfe alone but to shew openly vnto all who have but a sparke of love to the truth such an Attestation of faithfull and worthy Witnesses with mee in this matter being the maine foundation of our greatest controversie touchinge Church governement that I hope hereafter none will set against this my seeking both of mine owne and your soules good nor cavill at it but such as are too worldly and too earthly minded In my Discourse vpon this cause as touching obiections D Down Defenc Anno. 1611. chiefly I gather out of Doctor Downame such as seeme to any purpose J answer them Him beere J specially deale with because of a friend he is not long since turned from vs and become our adversarie yea the latest I thinkc which openly sheweth him selfe against vs and so is like to be now most in mens eyes also hee hath heaped togeather the most thinges that the best of such Defenders have heeretofore written Besides all this the maner of his writings is with such an “ Defence 1. pag. 16 17. 2. pag 122. insolent conceit of him selfe with such * Defence 2. pag 55. 15. contempt indignation and despite against vs as commonly is not seene in any but those that slide backe from the truth which they had once tacted of And withall though in his Defence he deale with another yet in many passages hee very sharply provoketh me in particular besides other wrongs that he hath done me well knowen For these causes both I write this that I do and I chieflie nominate him for our adversarie as in this treatise so also †In the Declaration elswhere My Christian and loving friends for whose sake most of all I labour and have laboured to make our said question which is long intricat trouble some to be short and plaine and to make the matter it selfe also appeare so waightie as indeed it is Now your partes are wisely and religionsly to ponder in your heartes and to make vse of this same As the Apostle spake to Timothie so do I vnto you Consider Brethren what I say and the Lord give you vnderstanding in all things Amen Iuly 18. Anno 1612. Yours ever in the Lord HENRY IACOB The contents of this Booke divided into Nine Chapters CHAP. I. The great importance of the matter heere handled viz. That the people ought to have their free consent in their owne Churche governement And the causes of publishing this Attestation to it Pag. 9. CHAP. II. The Methode and order of this Treatise Pag. 20. CHAP. III. The Testimonies of many particular late Writers of blessed memorie making for vs in this matter Pag. 21. CHAP. IIII. The publike consent of many late yet excellent Churches heerein with vs. Pag. 48. CHAP. V. The Testimonies practise of the best Antiquitie after the New Testament heerin likewise with vs. Pag. 52 CHAP. VI. Our very Adversaries sometimes do acknowledge with vs the truth of this doctrine in plaine termes and sometimes to the same full effect specially when they deale against the Papistes Pag. 70. CHAP. VII Consequences of exceeding great importance following vpon the peoples free consent in their Church-governement inconveniences intollerable following from the contrary Pag. 84. CHAP. VIII An answer to divers chiefe Obiections of the Adversaries of this cause noting also briefly their immodest not Christian like reproches against this Evangelicall doctrine Pag. 199. CHAP. IX A short Advertisement to the vpright hearted and Christian Reader touching this Writing and Cause Pag. 316. An Attestation of many Learned Godly and Famous Divines Lightes of Religion pillars of the Gospell instifying this doctrine viz. That the Church government ought to be alwayes with the peoples free consent c. CHAP. I. The great importance of the matter heere handled viz. That the people ought to have their free consent in their owne Church-governement And the causes of publishing this Attestation to it WHEREAS many thinges at divers and sundrie times heeretofore have ben writteÌ„ which prove a plaine necessitie by Gods Word to reforme the Church Church-governement now in England verily among them all there is almost no other point so evident so direct and ful to this purpose that is Chap. 1. none in a maner so absolutly importeth the saide necessitie of reformation as this doth which is vtterly wanting among vs namâ—ly That the Church-governement ought tâ—â—â—e exercised alwayes with the peoples free consent One or two maâ—â—â— grounds of our whole controversie It
is true another ground thereof there is likewise that of no lesse importance in this matter which is That Christes true Visible and Ministeriall Church vnder the Gospell consisteth not of many ordinarie Congregations but only of one Which I have at large prooved to be a truth and have made it manifest in my Declaration pag. 10.11.12 c. and in Reas. for Reform pag. 19.20 65.66 And againe †Chapt. 8. heere after I do shew it further Yet the former point in some respect may bee thought rather the chief because this secoÌ„d is a depeÌ„dant on the former followeth by a necessarie consequence from it as partly is shewed in the said Declarat pag. 13.14 and more fully in the VII Chapt. of this present Treatise insuing Againe that requiring the peoples free consent noteth Christes Visible Churches nature and essence intensivè The Churches nature intensivè as the Scholes do speake that is it sheweth thâ— ground of the power and life thereof The other sheweth the essence of it extensivè Extensivè that is the largenes of the Body of the Church iust extent or the due limites and bounds thereof outwardly Wherefore that requiring the peoples free consent is manifestly a most proper and speciall Argument in our cause and such as toucheth the quicke in the matter of the said reformation most neerely D. Downame erreth greatly in his late Defence making his first booke thereof full long tedious only to disprove Lay Elders as he calleth them Thinking without all reason that if hee speed well therein he hath gotten the victorie Wherevpon hee most fondly inferreth thus “ Defenc. 1. pag. 62. Who seeth not that the disproofe of their Presbyteries is a direct proofe for our Bishops And in another place * Defenc. 2.2 Who seeth not that vpon the overthrow of the Presbyteries the governement by Bishops is necessarily inferred Who seeth not Verily neither hee nor any man living seeth it Hee was tolde sufficiently by his Refuter †Ibid. pa. 10. of this his vaine and frivolous inference But hee seemeth so in love with his owne folly that he caÌ„ indure no maÌ„ to shew him his errour Nay such a minde hee beareth that in his Defence he goeth about with pretended Logike to make this his idle conceit seeme reason and therevpon hee saith his adversarie must “ Defen 1.6 confesse him selfe ignorant in Logike if hee will deny this his inference And so ‡ Pag. 62. this passage concerning Lay Elders he hopeth will be acknowledged not to bee impertinent Never a whit truly The question of Elders wholy impertinent For this passage still is not only impertinâ—nt and idle but even a false defence of those whom he peadeth for if he will yet holde his opinion still He hath not Logike at commaund neither can hee by his Sophistrie amonge men of anie vnderstandinge make that to seeme which is not Where hee saieth it is “ Pag. 61. presupposed on both sides it is his folly to say so And in saying his Refuter witnesseth it hee grosly abuseth him He doth the contrarie in the same place which hee alleadgeth out of him For the Doctor leaveth out his Refuters wordes presently following those which hee alleageth Which later words are flat against him So iustly and truly our Doctor dealeth in his writings Like to this is his great boast which hee maketh heere in his booke and often afterwards also viz. that he hath found out twoo sortes of Disciplinarians as his wisedometermeth them one “ Defenc. 1.60 and 2.147 elder and more learned the chiefe of whom he saith are Calvin and Beza Another new shallow and ignorant sort of whom he maketh †Defenc. 2.2 82.130 Maister Cartwright chiefe adioyning others of vs since vnto him But what difference â—ndeth hee in these Disciplinarians â—orsooth the elder he saith holde â—resbyteries in Cities to governe â—hole Dioceses and Provinces and â—erein he avoucheth “ Defenc. 2.2 they ioyne with â—e Bishops in England against the new sort of â—isciplinarians The new sort * Defen 1.60 boldly and â—â—noranâ—ly hold Parishionall Presbyteâ—ies Naythis Doctor slandereth either â—gnorantly or maliciously For wee whoÌ„ he maketh of the new shallow â—nd ignorant sort we I say Wee agree with Calvin Beza in substance differ not â—ne haire from Calvin and Beza touâ—hing the substance of this matter We as they they as we do acknowâ—edge both the one and the other that â—s both the Parishionall and the Dioâ—esan Presbyteries yea the Provinciâ—ll and larger too if occasion serve â—t is false which he imputeth to Calvin â—nd Beza that they maintayne the Church-governement by Diocesan Provinciall Presbyteries absolutly without any relation to the peoples â—onsent in the ordinarie Congregations Also that heerein they ioyne with the Bishops in Englande or that they materially differ from vs. All which God willing we shal shew to be vntrue and that most cleerely in the 3. Chapt. also in the 7. 8. here following Wherefore these be all slanderous forgeries of the Doctors devising of purpose to make our innocencie odious by all the shifts be can to cast some “ Defen 1.53 colour of iust cause or shew of reason for his leaving of our acquaintance Wherefore D. Downame left his first profession to whom heeretofore he ioyned him self namely while there was som expectation of his Maiesties favour towards vs. And this is fully enough for answer to the substance of his whole first booke Seeing to trouble our selves much with impertinent stuffe would be in vs also great folly Yea to speake the truth the prosecuting of all the rest of his Defence besides is such likewise that is cleane from the maine purpose toucheth not the chiefe question betweene vs. Indeed he propouÌ„deth one part of the question wel in the title of the second booke of his Defence but his prosecuting of it both there and every where els even to the end is as if we denyed Bishops and their governement in the Churches of Christ We deny not Church government by Bishops Which is nothing els but lyes malicious forgerie against vs by equivocating falshood slander to make vs seeme as if wee were against both the expresse letter of the New Testament EquivocatoÌ„ and also of the most ancient Ecclesiasticall Writers where we know any maÌ„ may see Bishops their government to be coÌ„mended as from God and as the ordinance of the Apostles Which is the very practise likewise of Doct. Bilson against vs in his booke Of the perpetuall governement of Christs Church Whose trace our Doctor followeth step by step But as I said both their great and large volumes about this matter are nothing els but two heapes of equivocations or sentences wholy impertinent such as we admit with them or some conclusions wherein they plainly contradict theÌ„selves elswhere Little cause therefore had
they who lately published that book of D. Bils in Latin so to do vnles they meant to shew abroad further his most impertineÌ„t ambiguous vncertain writing yet fraught with bitternes enough against vs. In a word we desire that all men should know that our question is not whether Bishops and their governement be Apostolicall about the proving whereof the greatest part of these twoo Doctors bookes are spent Further though we denie Diocesan Provinciall Bishops of any sort to bee Apostolical yet we do not “ See Reas for Reform Pag. 7. 38 simply deny but that some kinde of them also may bee lawfull were it not that certaine waightie circumstances in these our dayes do stande against them Yea there are Circumstances now verie evident and pregnant against the best sort of Diocesan Bishops which were not in 200. or 300. yeares after Christ So that no reason can be made because they were lawfull in the second or third age therefore they are lawfull now The case being thus it is to be noted that the DD. do not propound the true question betwene vs. For if the peoples free coÌ„sent in their owne Church-governement were not as it is Christs ordinaÌ„ce in the New Testament certainly no CircuÌ„stance nor any thing els could make Diocesan or Provinciall Bishops at all reproveable For which cause the true question indeed betwene the Prelacie and vs or the principal maine question is Whether the people ought to have alwaies their free coÌ„sent in their owne Church government But this specially “ See his Defen 1 38.47 4.80.99 D. Downame putteth away from him with high disdaine coÌ„tempt rayling hatefull accusations and exclamations So that with this hee will not vouchsafe to medle Wherein truely we may see him to be I can not say learned but a cunning bolde and exquisite Sophister And this may be in generall a sufficient Answer even to his whole Defence Although for some other respectes I hope some body will one day examine his particular passages more exactly in a place for the purpose But to our point in hand We cleerâ—y see by this that it is the peoples coÌ„â—ent in the affaires of their owne spiâ—ituall that is Church governement which maketh the matter putteth the difference in deed betweene the Ecclesiasticall Reformation which in all dutifulnes wee seeke and that Church-governement which the L. Bishops in Engl. do exercise I say this concerning the peoples right heerein is it which toncheth the life of our coÌ„troversie Where vnderstand Note that I meane only such people as are not ignorant in religion nor scandalous in their life For only of such Christes Visible Church ought to consist Well to proceed theÌ„ with our point Questionles hence it is that generally the Adversaries of the forenamed Reformation do so strangly reiect yea so hatefully resist and strive against this same Christian doctrine heere propouÌ„ded coÌ„cerning the churches only true governement with the peoples free coÌ„sent as they do Wherein they expresse shew litle ChristiaÌ„ patieÌ„ce for they prosecute those that hold teach the same though out of meere conscience with all bitter reproches base skoffings iniurious slanders and vnmercifull dealings And all this it is plaine not for any manner of evill that they finde in this doctrine or for any incoÌ„venience therin For in truth there is none at all as partly I have shewed “ Reas. for reform pag. 28 heretofore it will further be manifested heereafter But they so hate this doctrine only because of the inevitable consequence of the said reformation which it bringeth with it Which crosseth overturneth wholy their divers enormous worldly carnall desires as any man that looketh into the case may easily see Howsoever it be yet the truth and the agreeablenes heereof with the holy Gospell of Iesus Christ with the assuring of our soules in the way to eternall life as it hath appeared to the world ever since the discovery of Antichrist more cleerely then it did for many yeres before so doubtles it will more and more appeare yet still be made further manifest to al men even where the Gospell is receaved as it is in many places yet not so sincerely as it ought to be See chapt 7. pag. 156. c. For my part because I well perceave that the Antichristian idolatrie and tyrannie of the Church of Rome caÌ„not by Divinitie be souÌ„dly resisted as experience in time will shew neyther was it resisted by our Forefathers at the beginning but by maintayning this Evangelicall point of doctrine among others therefore I have coÌ„descended the more willingly after diligent inquirie thereinto to approve the said point of doctrine viz. that the Church governement ought to be exercised alwayes with the peoples free consent Which also even for “ For that the Papa cie els will come in See Chap. 7. this same cause I can not but beleeve to be the holy ordinance of Iesus Christ for his Church vnder the Gospel and to have ben delivered vnto vs by the Apostles in their perpetuall practise of Church-governement But specially seeing for the same we have the most sure evidence of Gods word in the New Testament which I †Argnm. 3. 9. of the Divine beginning of Chrsts Visible church Declarat pag. 20 â—1 Reas. for Reform pag. 45. 46 47. 48. have heeretofore gathered and observed at large Secondly seeing we have for it a plentifull and cleere Attestation of many Learned Godly and famous Divines both New and Old confirming our faith and strengthening our consciences therein Which Attestation I have thought it needfull at this time and in this place to gather and produce for many causes First my desire is that it may ly open to the sight of all men what a great holy agreement of good men heerein we have which being added to the forenoted fundameÌ„tal certaintie thereof in Gods word giveth so full a satisfaction to every good Christian that who can desire more Secondly all ChristiaÌ„ Civill Magistrates may heereby take good content and be satisfyed touching the innocencie of this way in the Church governement which we holde For when they shall see with what a cloud of such witnesses we are coÌ„passed in defence of this matter they can not imagine any inconvenience by it to their governement notwithstanding all the clamours and invectives of partiall Adversaries against it Lastly heereby also our adversaries virulent tongues and pens if it be possible may bee ashamed to abuse vs as they do with al kinde of vnworthy reproches and slanders when they shall see whom they hate and persecute revile togeather with vs. Wherefore for the publishing of this matter there appeareth every way very great and necessarie reason CHAP. II. The Method and order of this Treatise NOw heerein I purpose to proceed thus First I will shew who among the New Writers are our Maisters Teachers in this point of doctrine
and whose faith wee follow therein whom I put first namely for their singular perspicuitie and resolutnes in it Then I will rehearse the practise of the most ancient times after the Apostles After that I will remember our very adversaries consent with vs heerein sometimes Then I will shew some certaine firme consequences whiche follow from this ground necessarily also some true great inconveniences in reâ—ecting this doctrine Moreover I will answer some of the adversaries chiefest obiections noting also briefly their immodest and vnchristian reproches against this Evangelicall truth And finally adding a brief advertisement touching this cause we will commit the whole coÌ„sideration thereof to the vpright hearted and discreet Christian Reader CHAP. III. The testimonies of many particular late Writers of blessed memorie making for vs in this matter BEGINNING therefore with the New Writers I iudge it meet and convenient to alleage in the formost place the resolut determination of Maister Beza Beza because he of al others is thought by some vnadvised persons to be most against vs in this point Now hee disputing this question at large in his Epist 8â— setteth downe this conclusion Populo invito nihil obtrudatur Let nothing be imposed on the people or Congregation agâ—aâ—t their willes Then the which verily we desire no more this is all in substance that we seek in our assertion Againe vnles it bee so the Church-governement either is a Monarchie or a verie Oligarchie But Maister Beza expresly condemneth both these and the later namely on Math. ca. 18.17 Wherefore howsoever Maister Beza interpreteth some things otherwise then we do vseth some times other phrases then we perhaps do thinke so fit or so frequently to be vsed yet touching this point in question hee agreeth wholy with vs in substance and in effect For let this which he in these wordes setteth downe be yeelded vnto vs theÌ„ wee are satisfyed for the substance of Church-governemeÌ„t To which purpose Maister Beza saith also in Confes 5.35 The Apostles intended in the Churches which they planted that no Pastor should bee obtruded on a flocke against their willes Yet moreover I pray the Reader to note that even hee also strongly maintayneth this right of the people in the affayres of their soules many tymes in more free and large termes As where he saith “ Confes 5.34 I finde no where in any Christian Church built vp that any is promoted either to the Ministerie of the word or Deaconship or Eldership any other way then by a publike and free election And †Sect 35. I repeat againe that which I said before It was never receaved in Christian Churches established that any should be admitted to an Ecclesiastscall function but being freely and lawfully chosen of that Church which it concerneth Againe “ ibid. Pastors are not to be chosen without the consent of the whole Church Also * ibid. They whosoever they are bring Tyrannie into the Church if they call any man to a publike function at their owne will the consent of the multitude being neglected Againe “ ibid. Presbyters were chosen by the voyces at least by the allowance of the whole assembly Vpon the Act. 14.23 he saith See Oecumen in hunc loc Also Badei Commentar The force of this word Chirotonein is to be noted that wee way know Paul and Barnabas did nothing by their private will neither exercised any tyrannie in the Church He meaneth that they here made Ministers by the peoples voyces or free consent not otherwise And vpon 1. Time 5.22 All the authoritiâ— of making Ministers was not in Timothie alone but election being made by the consent of the whole Church then the President of the assemblie did consecrate him by laying on of handes And on 2. Cor. 2.8 By the publike consent of the Church declare that you embrace that penitent sinner againe as a brother even as by the publike iudgement of the Church he was cast out In all the which it is easie to see Maister Bezaes minde and resolution in this question to bee cleerely with vs. As for that which D. Downame “ Defens 4. pag. 81. obiecteth out of him where he calleth one Morellius †Deâ—grad Ministr 6.23 Fanaticall because he pleaded in like maner for the popular governement The D. abuseth Beza and vs all Morellius pleaded for the popular governement in far vnlike maner He sought in Churches perfectly established to bring all things in particular and ordinarily to the peoples hearing examining iudging and voice-giving But neither Beza nor we intend so Wee acknowledge that the ordinarie sway of all Ecclesiasticall authoritie ought to bee in the true Bishop or Pastour of the church and we affirme that right wel so it may bee although never anie thing be imposed on the Church by him against their willes Which thing D. Downame him selfe also acknowledgeth may be and “ Def. 4. p. 21 was heeretofore in a state of the Church * Rather about 420. about 400. yeres after Christ which hee seemeth to allow of Saving that he cunningly falsifyeth the wordes of the Councill which there he mentioneth to wit in saying the assent or connivence of the people where the Councill saith “ Concil Carth. 4. Can. 22. the assent and connivence But to proceed By this before alleaged all men may see Maist Bezaes iudgement in this cause to be as I said cleerely with vs. And so much concerning him In the second place we will consider Maister Calvin 2. Calvin a Pastor and Guide of the Church of Geneva before Mai. Beza Hee also every where in all his writings is a most earnest patron of this point which heere we professe I will note certain of his sentences to this purpose Saith he “ Instit 4.5.15 Est haec ex verbo Dei legitima Ministri vocatio vhi ex populi consensu approbatione creant qui visi suerint idonei Preesse autem Electioni debent alij Pastores nequid per levitatem vel per malae studia vet per tumultum à multitudine peccetur This is the lawfull calling of a Minister by the word of God where they which seeme fit are created by the consent and approbation of the people Indeed other Pastors ought to moderate and order the Election least the multitude should offend through lightues or ill affection or tumult And a litle before Videmus ipsum Paulum ex populi suffragijs Episcopos creare solitum We see that Paul him selfe was wont to create Bishops by the voyce giving of the people Againe Falluntur qui putant vel Timotheum Ephesi vei Titum in Creta regnum exercuisse vt suo vterque arbiâ—rio omnia disponeret Praefuerunt enim tantum vt bonis salutaribus consilijs populâ— praeirent non vt soli exclusis alijs onnibus agerent quod placereÌ„t They are deceaved who thinke either that Timothie at Ephesus or Titus in Crete did
the whole Church This ought to go before that iudgement And Non absque consensu Ecclesiae quispiam excommunicari potest lus hoc ad Ecclesiam pertinet neque ab illâ eripi potest Witthout the consent of the Church not any one can bee excommunicated This right belongeth to the Church neither ought it to bee taken away from it And the consent of the people is still to be observed in Excommunication both that tyrannie may be avoyded that it may be done with greatâ—er fruit and gravitie The same worthy man greatly coÌ„mendeth the pietie of a Bishop at Troie in France who about the yeare 1561. left his Popish state and did betake him to a flocke of Christians there Epict. â—â— and taught them the word of God purely But quia ei gravis scrupulus â—iectus est de suâ vocatione quod in ed Ecclesis ac populi Elestionem seu Censirmationem uâ— is habuerit ideò c. Beâ—ause he had a great scruple in his conscience about his Calâ—aâ—g seeing hee had not therein the Elâ—ction or Confirmation of the Church and people Therefore hee sent for the Elders of the reformed Church and desired theÌ„ that they would consider godly and wisely whether they would chose confirme and haâ—e hâ—n for their Bishop Which if they thought good to do hee would doe his indeavour that as hee began so hee would go on as hee was able by teaching and exhorting to edifiâ—â— and increase the Church committed to him But if they thought him not fit for so great an Offâ—â—â— they should speake it freely and openly hee was â—eadie to give place c. And hee desired that they would speedily deâ—berate with the Church about the matter Which when it was done hee was acknowledged â—aâ— reâ—eaved of all with one consent as a true Bishop Wherefore his authoritie and pâ—â—iâ— doth much profit the Church of Chriâ—t God bee praised who governeth and gâ—ideth the kingdome of his Sonne in this manner O where shall wee see such Bishops in these dayes 8. Musculus Musculus also speaketh and reasoneth cleerely with vs heerein Hee saith †Com. plac Of Min. Elect. There is no doubt but the Apostles keâ—t that maner of ordayning viz. after the church had chosen And After fasting and praying which was wont to be done in the Congregation of the faithful They ordayned Elders which were first chosen of the faithfull And this forme of Electing and ordayning Elders and Bishops the Apostle commended vnto his fellow workman Titus and Timothie saying “ Tiâ— 1 5. For this cause I left thee in Crete c. For who would beleeve that he ordained that Titus should do otherwise then both hee and the rest of the Apostles were accustomed to do Therefore both by example and ordinace of the Apostle in the primitive church Elders Pastors Bishops and Deacons were in the Ecclesiasticall Meetings chosen of the people by lifting vp of handes Also hee saith The Forme of Election vsed in the Apostles times is conformable to the libertie and priviledge of the Church whereof Cyprian made mention and that forme of choise whereby men began to be thrust vpon the people of Christ beeing not chosen of it doth agree to a Church which is not free but subiect to bondage And this forme of electioÌ„ by the peoples choise he calleth the Old the Fittest the Divine the Apostolicall and lawfull election the other to come from the corrupt state of the Church and Religion 9. Bullinger Bullinger assirmeth thus “ Decaâ— 5.4 The Lord from the beginning gave authoritio to the Church to chose and ordayne fit Ministers And Those which thinke that the Bishop Archbishop have power to make Ministers vse these places of the Scripture * Tit. 1. Therefore I left thee at Crete that thou mightest appoint Elcers Towne by Towne And againe “ 1. Tim. 5. Take heed that thou lay not thy handes rashly on anie But we answer that the Apostles did not vse any tyranny in the Churches nor themselves alone to have don these thinges which pertayned either to Election or Ordination other men in the Church shut out For the Apostles and Elders did create Bishops and Elders in the Church but communicating their counsaill with the Churches yea and with the consent and approving of the people Yea of Ministers that governe anic Church without or against their consent thus he saith “ In 1. Coâ— 5.4 Vâ—bem prodere diâ—untur Legati qui diversum ab eo quod ab vrbe prescriptum est agunt Those embassadors are said to betray the Citie who do any thing divers from that which is prescribed them by the Citie 10. Gualter Gualter likewise is as plaine as can be Saith hee of the calling of Ministers †Hoâ—â—il in Act 13.1 Divinitùs vocatos esse censebimus quâ—scunque Dei spiritus donis necessarijs instruxerit legitiâ—â—s Ecclesiae suffragijs elegerit Aliquas enim in hac causa partes Ecclesiae mandatas esse hiâ— locus perspicuè tradit Ecclesiae calculum spiritus requirit We wil esteeme them to have a calling from God whomsoever Gods spirit hath â—â—abled with necessarie giftes and hath chosen by the Churches lawful giviâ—g of voyces For this place plainly sheweâ—h that in this cause there are some partes committed to the Church The Spirit requireth the Churches iudgâ—ment Afterward he saith “ In Act. 14. â—â— Foedá tyranâ—ide Ecclesiarum slatus opprimitur The state of the Churches is oppressed by filthy tyrannie where at this day the Churches have not this libertie to give their free consent at least For heere he respecteth that right and iust order according to the rule of the Gospell which before he had described †In Act. 1. â—â— Ministrorum verbi Ecclesiae Electiones atque ordinationes non occultè intra privatos parietes à paucis hominiâ—us sed publicè ab Ecclesia in totius Ecclesiae conspectu fieri debent Neque noâ— movet quod Paulus alibi vni Tito vel Timâ—theo ius potestatem Episcopoâ— eligendi tribuere videtur Non enim illos privata authâ—ritate quiâ—quam agere voluit sed pro antistâ—tum â—fficio iubet curare vt Ministri digni idones legittimè crdinentur Nec verisimile est illis plus concessum fu isse quà m Apostolis ipsis qui inconsulta Ecclesia nihil in hac causa vnquam statuerunt Nam paulo post Diaconos coram Ecclesia publicè eligunt Paulus oum Barnabá collectis viritim suffiagijs Presbyâ—eres per Ecclesias singulas ordinavisse leguntur Act. 6. 3.4 The Elections and ordinations of the Ministers of the word and of the Church ought not to bee made secretly within privat walls by a few men but publikly by the Church and in the face of the whole Church Neither doth it moove vs that Paul inan other place seemeth to give right power of chofing Bishops to Titus aloâ—e
was helde they were they which were speciallie grieved with him who yet for feare of his pride and tyrannie durst not themselves alone accuse him as it is there signified The point is we see heere at Antioch the Churches that is the peoples concurrence and consent with other Bishops and Teachers neare adioyning in the Excommunication Deposition of one and in Ordayning to them selves another Bishop After this againe the Councill of Nice decreed Concil Nicen that the people should chose their Minister as appeareth where they say Anno. 330. If any Church Minister dye let one of the Chuch succede in his place so that he seeme fit and be chosen of the people and the Bishop consent and confirme the peoples election “ Socrat. 1.6 This order was written by this Councill Theodoret. 1.9 namely to the AlexaÌ„drian Churches because of a particular occasion but it served as a rule generally for all places as the Councill was generall Which doth plainly appeare by that which afterward the Councill of Constantinople did in “ Theodores â— 9 observing this Nicen ordinance as an order belonging to them About the yeare 420. the fourth Councill of Carthage decreed thus †Concil Cartha 4 Câ—n 22 Au câ—c 420. Eâ—â—â—â—â—pus sine Concilio Clericorum suâ—rum Cleâ—â—â—s non ordinet ita vt Civium assensum â—â—â—ventiam testimonium quarat Let 〈◊〉 a Bishop ordayne any Clergie-man wichout an assemblie of his Clergie so that let him â—â—eke the peoples consent and connivence and Mimonie This Canon will have Ministers made in no wise without the peoples consent contentment testimonie of their worthines Heere D. Downame with little shew but with great falshood turneth this word Et and into Or saying assent or connivence where he should say assent and coÌ„nivence as “ Pag 24.25 before I brieflie touched Whereby he would make the Council seeme to meane that either of these was sufficient in the making of Ministers that their assent was not simply necessarie but if they did connive or hold their peace the Councill was content and required no more But both the present wordes and all circumstances of these times do plainly declare that the Councill heere requireth in making Ministers the peoples expresse consent and testimonie also of their worthines as before I noted Of these times Calvin saith thus “ Instiâ— 4.4.10 Cum parochâ—â— no vt Presbyters destinabantur tunc loci multitudinem nominatim consentire oportuit When new Presbyters were appointed to the parishes then the people of the place must consent expresly This with the rest of the Councillâ— of Carthage was confirmed in the generall Council of Constantinople holden in Trullo about the yeare of Christ 682. Conâ—ll Constantinop Aâ— 682. Wherefore so long longer also wee may well thinke particular Congregations kept their spirituall right and power in this behalfe Which Calvin saith was such that though the Governors somtimes did of them selves first chose and then brought the matter to the people yet “ Instie 4 4.1â— they the people were not bound to those foreiudgemeÌ„ts And when the Church was deprived of this her right it is by him called Impia Ecclesia spoliatie quoties alicui populâ— ingeritur Episcopus quem non petierit aut saltem liberâ voce approbarit It is an vngodly robbing of the Church so often as a Pastor is putvpon any people whom they havenot desired or at least approved by free voyce I grant by this time many great preparations were made to bring in that Antichristian apostasie and tyrannie which afterward followed and overflowed every where Howbeit yet thus long the Churches even by publike lawes retayned their life at least wise that iniurie and violence spirituall robbery tyranny which afterward prevayled against them as yet was not generall It is to no purpose heere to inquire wheÌ„ or by whom this wrong first entered I meane this withholding froÌ„ the people of God their free consent in spirituall governement It is sufficient that we see this their freedome to be Apostolicall also to bee taught and observed in the Christian Churches next succeeding the Apostles yea even till after the time that Antichrist began the desolation of abhominarion which since hath ben every-where set vp with strong hand maintayned Also that wee see the most vndoubted instruments of God in these later times so cleerely to avouch this most singular meanes of overthrowing Antichrist and so earnestly to defend it as they do viz. as if without it there were neither any way to repell him at first nor securitie afterward for vs to stand long against his vncessant indeavours labouring still to returne and tyrannise over our soules againe This I say is sufficient for our present purpose at this time and in this place Which also being well considered can not but cause every honest man to mourne and sigh before the Lord beholding this foundation of pietie and godly life to be so despised yea so maligned and resisted as by many it is now amoÌ„g our selves where the Gospell is and hath ben entertayned thankes be to God these many yeares FroÌ„ which most iust cause of griefe it proceedeth also necessarily that we cannot but opeÌ„ our mouthes as we do to beare witnes in the behalfe of this cause of Christ being also the only true and assured meanes which doeth most nearely concerne vs as we wel vnderstand in the matter of the salvation of our soules And so much touching this point Only this moreovet for a Conclusion I desire may be hoere noted the ground whereof I take out of our adversaries Namely Whatsoever the whole Church militant ever since the Apostles hath held and was not instituted by Councills but hath ben alwayes retayned that is most rightly believed to be delivered by the Apostles The whole Church Militant over since the Apostles hath held the peoples consent in then owne Church governement it was nor instituted by Councills but it bath ben alwaye retained Therefore the peoples consent in their owne Church governement is most rightly believed to bee delivered and ordained by the Apostles The first Proposition is our adversaries “ pâ—rpâ—â— govern pag. 258. D. Bilson and †D. Downame do much magnifie it out of †Serm pag. 56. 57. Defen 4 Austin And we acknowledge it to bee true The Assumption is proved heere before in this 5. Chapter so fully and plentifully as any thing can be by Humane records and testimonies For wee have none extant better theÌ„ these At least by these it is prooved so fully as our adversaries do intend in the Proposition Wherefore the Conclusion is most certain and cleere against them viz. that the peoples consent in their owne Church governement is an institution and ordinance of the Apostles Whence also consequently it will follow that those textes of Scripture vsually alleadged for proofe of the same mentioned also pag. 76. and which I
free consent and namely that it was so vnder the Apostles which I have shewed “ Pag. 68. 69 before to be certainly true hence it followeth that it is a plaine vntruth a falshood which the Doct. so often “ Def. 1.28 and 4.2.3.38.39.46 affirmeth viz. that the Bishops in the Apostles time were such for the substance of their calling as ours now in England are Ours are sole governours they were not so They admitted the Congregations consent in all important matters of their governement ours do what they please without them yea commonly against their liking Besides the Apostolike Bishops had not any addition of Civill coactive power as ours have Last they had no mo ordinarie set Congregations to their pastorall charge but only one ours are the Pastors each of thē of many hundred Congregations All which are evident substantiall differēces in the churches and Bishops estate as hath ben also observed purposely “ Divine beginning of Christs true visib Church pag. 3. 4. 5. Declarat pag. 12. 13 14. Reas. for ref p. 41. 42. 43. els where In which respect the very ground which the D. buildeth on is false his very text Rev. 1.20 is misinterpreted abused so his Sermon whole Defence standing therevpon is frustrat And he doth Equivocat plainly Fiftly where the Christian people have their free consent in Church governement there never is seene anie Pluralist nor Nonresident Pastor For they wil never indure their Pastor to be a Nonresident from them nor yet to bee distracted with mo charges of soules then their owne Which certainly al that feare God and have care of them selves theirs will esteeme to bee a most godly thing to beholde Besides also they wil never indure any Covetous nor Proud nor adulterer nor drunkard nor ignorant nor false Teacher And as their Pastor and Guide is such will they bee also in a maner alwayes every where The adversary confesseth that “ D. Bils perp gov pag. 344 The wisedom of Gods Church in taking the cōsent of the people in the Election of their Bishops hee can not but commend he findeth so great and good effectes of it in the Church stories For thence it came to passe that the people when their desires were accomplished did quietly receave willingly maintaine diligently heare heartily love their Pastors yea venter their whole estate and hazard their lives rather thē then Pastors should miscarie Verily this sheweth it to bee Gods ordinance in that he accompanyeth it with such and so great blessings Contrariwise Pluralist-Pastors and Nonresidents who of any conscience can allow Who that hath any sparke of religion or care of good life doth not detest and abhorre them and most worthily as being in deed of the reliques of Antichrist and instruments of Satan All blindnes in the people and wicked conversation floweth from these as frō fountaines Continual iarres and warres betwene the Pastor and his flocke And therehence groweth contempt of Religion Yea questionles that which the Pest is in mans body the same are Nonresidents and Pluralitie-men in Christes Church Whose fruits are too plentifull among vs. Archb. Whitgift saith “ Answ to the Admon pag. 44. 45. Now the Church is full of hypocrites dissemblers drunk ands whoremongers Ignorant Papistes Atheistes and such like D. Bilson also †Perp. gov pag. 155. Toom Church comes all sortes Atheistes Hypocrites c. All which filth ought verilie to be imputed chiefly to Nonresidentes and Pluralists Now in Diocesan and Provinciall Churches and larger where the people have not their free consent in the Church governement there must of necessitie be Nonresidents and Pluralitie-men First the chief and best Pastor of a verie large Countrey hee whom they call the Angell of such a Church is no other indeede then a great Pluralist and Nonresident For he hath the proper charge of soules over “ Def. 3.145 2.67 all his Circuit as D. Down professeth they all holde That is to say over manie hundred ordinary set Congregations where for the most part they themselves are never present and never do fo much as see the faces of so many people of whom yet they vndertake to bee their proper Pastors Are not these huge Pluralists Nonresidents in the time of the Gospell And thus hee †Def. 2.127 approoveth Theodorets taking to him selfe to be Pastor of 800. parishes Yea it cometh to passe that some Bishops are Pastors to many mo Againe note how Do. Belson shrinketh not to make Pluralistes and Nonresidentes a Divine Ordinance and Apostolike which he doth to the end that Diocesan Bishops might seeme to be Divine Saith he against the mislikers of Pluralitie and Nonresidencie “ Perp gov pag. 328. Saint Paul him selfe knew not these curious positions when he appointed Titus to take charge and oversight of the whole Island of Crete and saw no cause why one man might not performe many Pastorall and Episcopall duties to all that were in the same Countrey with him And this touching the chiefe and best and †Pag. 247. only proper Pastor in a Diocesan Church and larger Secondly his Substitutes will all seeke to bee in proportion like their Superiors Whereof in deede there is great cause For if the most Angelike Pastor he who in his Office cometh nearest vnto Christ bee such that is so great a Pluralist and Nonresident then who in conscience can mislike Nōresidents Who would not desire to be plurifyed abundantly Who would not iudge the greatest Pluralist the worthiest Pastor most excellent servant of Christ I say even inferior Nonresidents and Pluralistes in such Church estates must needes not only aboūd but also superaboūd True reason requireth it and experience among our selves doth shew it Whereby what wofull wrack and havocke of mens soules is happened in our Lande every-where any that looke about consider may see And hee that seeth can not have so flintie a heart as not to sorrow and mourne for it Against which Spirituall desolation yea rather ruine and destruction no remedie can bee had without giving the Christian people their free consent in their spirituall governement For none have that care of other mens soules as Christian people would have of their owne Sixtly heere are other Consequents of a most high nature both in respect of God and also in respect of our selves First in respect of God thus I gather and conclude If this opinion be false viz. that the peoples consent in the Church governement is the Apostles ordinance and Christes immutable commaundement for vs then Christ in his New Testament is not the Teacher Institutor Framer “ Impious opinions Lord and Lawgiver of his Visible Church which is the Kingdome of heaven vpon earth At least hee only is not And the New Testament is not compleat nor all-sufficient for matters of Religion Nor so compleat as the Old Testament was And Christes divine Offices of Prophesie
are not perpetuall Evangelistes are not perpetuall also Bishops yea Presbyters are not perpetuall in Churches vnder the Gospell But a Congregation is perpetuall absolutly “ Math. 16. â—â— the gates of destruction shall never overcome it Wherefore this power is essentially in the Congregation And so the consequence is false “ Pag. 77. These directions are perpetuall therfore peculiar to Bishops I say this sequele can not bee true Wherewith is conioyned an other false reason viz. They were not common either to other Christians or other Ministers therfore peculiar to Bishops Nay they were common They may bee and are exercised by divers formes of administrations as before I shewed not all waies by Bishops And yet I grant thy are to bee exercised most commonly vsually and ordinarily by Bishops I meane true Bishops His owne distinction heere is good There is †Pa. 102. 147 potestas and forma vel modus potestatis The power the accidentall forme and maner of the power It is true the power is perpetuall the accidentall forme or maner thereof is variable In which respect the consequence also of his newe “ Pa. 77. Proposition which †Pag. 78. once againe he taketh for granted once againe I deny The proofe of his Assumption we grant yet with a distinction In the Epistles to Tim. and Tit. the office of Bishops is described generally but not as peculiar to Bishops materially not formally And only so that power was to continue in the Church till the end Also this viz. materially that power was not a higher power then Episcopall But formally it was And so his consequence is false For an Evangelists power was higher yea the Churches power by whom simply sometime both the making of Ministers and Censures are performed is “ 1. Cor. 3.22 higher then the Bishops power Againe hee saith this power of Bishops is so much of the Apostolical power as was to coÌ„tinue to the end But then hee should not make the Bishops power more then the Apostolicall as †See before pag. 240. 248 hee doth Which thus also appeareth viz. the Apostles excluded not the peoples consent but his Bishops doe Howe then saith hee it is Apostolicall Besides in all this hee Equivocateth for this power of Bishops is the Apostles as I said generally not properly materially not formally Hee would finde “ Pag. 79. a difference in his Refuter but it is easily reconciled viz. vnderstanding him of divers kindes of Bishops thus Some kinde of Bishops are in Christs Testament some absolutly have noe place there The former have power from Christ the later have none After hee maketh great outcries of †Pag. 80. 81. Schismatical novelties dreames dotages fantasticall fanaticall spirits and phrensie Right as the Papists cry out Haeretiks Haeretiks TheÌ„selves being the greatest Haeretiks of all But the ChritstiaÌ„ reader may know that this is the Doctors fury malice against our Attestators before cited and against others also who follow them Yea against “ See before pag. 73. 74. c. himselfe it is some of his frindes His slaÌ„der that we maintain such popular government as Morellius strived for is sufficieÌ„tly answered †Pag. 24. before Some of the Separation I grant are to offensive this way which I am heartily sory for They take the wordes in Math. 18.17 Tell the Church more popularly theÌ„ ther is need or then reason or good order would Howbeit in this yet they hold the substaÌ„ce of the true Church-goverm They erre but in the CircumstaÌ„ce of order though it be to “ Bera Anâ—â— cat in Math. 18.17 foule That is they will examine al scandalls c. whatsoever in the presence vnder the iudgment of the whole multitude perpetually necessarily I say perpetually necessarily Wherein I wonder they see not the many very ill Consequents which wil must insue many times As touching vs what we hold heerin I have shewed †Pag. 22. 24. 82. 83. before And our Docts doe most iniuriously “ Def. 4.81 Perp. gov pag. 355. wrong Beza the Geneva discipline if that be Geneva discipline which Viret Calvin Beza taught theÌ„ in saying they differ materially froÌ„ vs. Our D. asketh Is there any shew in Scripture or in reasoÌ„ that the sheep should rule their sheapheard or the flocke their Pastor The very voice of a Iesuit not of a Minister of the Gospel Bellarm. argueth iust so “ Bellarm. de Clersc 1. 7. against the old ProcestaÌ„ts As to the point let him know that reasonable sheep vnder the Gosp have more to do in their spiritual governmeÌ„t theÌ„ brute beastes have to doe in their governement sensuall Lastly heere hee can easily skoffe and revile the modest Christian offer of disputatioÌ„ those that favour it some of vs hee will helpe to persecute but vndertake that Offer honestly plainly he never will Hee saith †Pag. 82. wee vnderstand the speech of “ 1. Tim. 5.22 Laying on of hands as directed not to Timothie but to the people to Titus †Tit. 3.10 Avoid an haeretik or excommunicat him that is thou people Which is falfe we vnderstand it not so He doth therfore heerin slaÌ„der vs. We know these words are directed to Timothie Titus yet to them not as Lords over the people nor as Sole rulers but as Guides and directors of them As Fathers to informe them not as Maisters to overrule them and force them To them therefore by name as the principall Agents in all ordinary government the Epistles and these precepts were written And so the Apostle heere held it not needfull to mention the people though neither doth he exclude them Seeing their consent in such affaires is “ See before pag. 76. Also toward the end of this chap. elswhere in Scripture sufficiently proved And the Apostles practise in this behalfe they knew well enough Which knowen practise of the Apostles it heere behoved Timothie Titus to have regard vnto togeather with these precepts written to them For they stand togeather well enough He saith the Churches at first were governed by the Apostles c. I answere they were But not without the peoples concurrence and consent as presently before is observed But D. Downame avouched †Def. 4 8â— Our Bishops at this day have not greater authoâ—â—tie in menaging Church causes then Timothie and Titus had Which is notoriously vntrue These following the Apostles tooke the peoples consent with them our Bishops do not They only taught them perswaded them vsed spirituall power ours if they can not perswade the people or their Pastors will cast them in prison punishing their bodyes their purses He saith Timothie Titus might vse the presense or consent of the people or the counsell and advise of the Presbyters in 〈◊〉 of greatest moment as Princâ—s doe in Common-wealths I thought it was a stately
be noted that the Doct. seemeth to take delight to abuse the people with bastard writings fabulous false and apocryphall stuffe which he vseth as his familiar friends and witnesses very often as the Epistles of Clemens and Anacletus Dionysius Areopagita the Canons of the Apostles Bastard writingâ— Dionysius Areopagita the Canons of the Apostles the Subscriptions of the Apostles Epistles this Dorotheus from whom the other witnesses heere by him cited do take this report Therefore in this it is not necessarie to credit them any more theÌ„ him Further to these the like reasons of ours If Timothie and Titus who first were EvaÌ„gelists did become proper Bishops afterward then men may coÌ„ioyne things which God hath severed yea limit depresse them whose Ministrie God hath made generall vnlimited and superior Hee answereth “ Pag â—â— these are nice points which none of the Fathers did ever vnderstand Certes wee have a grosse Doctor who maketh nice to sever those whom God hath severed Evangelists and Bishops or Pastors are so plainly severed by God made divers †Ephe. 4.11 â— Cor. 12.28 persons that nothing can be more plaine Where also it is as cleeâ—e that Evangelists are by God made Superior in the Church and Bishops or Pastors inferior whom hee maketh cleane contrary Hee excepteth against 1. Cor. 12.28 because Evangelists “ Pag. 95. are not mentioned there Yet there it appeareth that all Church-ministeries are severed by God of which Evangelists are one as in the Ephe 4 11. appeareth By comparing these textes togeather So that also even from 1. Cor. 12.18 Evangelists distinction from Bishops and their Superioritie to them is proved well enough Himself graÌ„teth Evangelists to be extraordinary generall and vnlimited Ministers and that Timothie and Titâ—â— were such Which is the truth But this is false when they †Pag. 94. betooke them 〈◊〉 certaine Churches that they were appropriated and limited to them Wherefore neither were they proper Bishops of them Againe The D. can not leave his equivocating any more them 〈◊〉 Black-amore can change his skin For though vulgarly sometime an Evangelist is vnderstood to bee a writer of the Gospell yet the Apostle vnderstandeth not so Ephes 4.11 But heere they are vnlimited Companions and Coadiutors to the Apostles An Evangelist In this sense and so we also doe meane Matâ—hew Iohn neither were nor could bee Evangelists nor Marke a Bishop Whosoever saith otherwise they plain â—y contradict the Apostle But he pretendeth that the ancient Fathers held that Evangelistes and Apostles also might bee Bishops See “ Pag. 222. 223. Vnreverent behavior toward Antiquitâ—e before what a frivolous reason this is Also see how vnreverent hee is to Antiquitie whom hee pretendeth devoutly to honor Hee will have them indeed to seeme fighters with God and resisters of the plaine letter of the text rather then defend them as we doe with an honest excuse It is honest to say they called EvaÌ„gelists Apostles Bishops in a generall sense or if they did not well heerein yet that they did it in not sifting nor much minding that which nowe with vs is a maine questioÌ„ therefore is ought to be more exactly considered nowe But to say of them either that they deny Temoth Titus were Evangelists or that they deny Evangelistes were by God made severall from Bishops or that those were superior to these or that those were extraordinary and general Ministers or to say they hold the Apostles did and could make them being such to become ordinary Ministers limited to one Church and one with Bishops and that they hold this out of consideration and due sifting the matter I say thus to affirme of the Fathers as the D. doth is to make them resist the plaine letter of the text and to fight with God Yet he for his part boldly saith or rather shamelesly that “ Pag. 95. it was no debasing to Timothie Titus wheÌ„ they were made Bishops but an advancemeÌ„t Albeit he knoweth the text above noted viz. Eph. 4.11 maketh a Bishop or Pastor inferior to an Evangelist And prove it hee would 1. †Pag. â—6 Timothie receaved a neâ—e “ 1. Tim. 4.14 2. Tim. 1.6 Ordination and so more authoritie This is vtterly vntrue Hee receaved no newe Ordination This was only when he was taken by the Apostle to be an Evangelist And after this hee never receaved more authoritie Heâ— addeth were men admitted to the extraordinary function of Evangelists by the ordinary meanes of imposing hands I answere Yeaâ— som Evangelists might be like as som Apostles viz. Paul Barnabas whose functions verily were extraordinary were “ Act. 13.3 so admitted Then saith hee may we thinke that any but the Apostles haâ— that authoritie wheresoever they came which Timothie had at Ephesus Titus in Creteâ—l answere yea questionles Evangelists had wheresoever they came specially in the absense of an Apostle He obiecteth Philip the Evangelist had †Act. 8.14.17 not authoritie to impose hands I answere though heere he follow “ Perpe gov pag 83.84 D. Bilson yet both do misse the purpose This imposition of hands heere is an other thing it was to give the miraculous gift of toungs It was not to ordaine to the ministerie Happily it was to furnish men for the ministerie afterwarde but this made them not Ministers Indeed only the Apostles could by laying on of hands give the gift of toungs and the gift of prophesie but in the Apostles absense others as Evangelists c. might lay on hands to ordaine Ministers Wherefore this is to rove fare from the point The rest is answered “ Declarâ—â— pag. 29. elswhere viz. Paul spake not in the generall improper sense wherof there is noe reason nor cause but properly where he willeth Timothie after he was at Ephesus to do the worke of an †2. Tim. 4.5 Evangelist The Fathers “ Pag 244. before are answered to whom Zuinglius also heere may be adioyned He would seeme to bring new matter but it is his olde stuffe viz. that “ Pag. 98. Timothies and Titus function in Ephesus Crete was not to end with their peâ—soâ—s but to be coÌ„tinued to their Successors It is answered †Pag 243. before That is Materially it ended not but formally it ended with their persons It continued to their Successors but vnder an other forme of ministerie viz of proper Bishops Which also I noted in my Declarat pag 30. Hee saith their “ Pag. 100. Apostles were so assigned somtime Act. 8.14 being assigned to Ephesus and Crete was an ordinary function I deny it as touching them Hee hath not a word to prove it Hee saith in Timothie and Titus as Evangelists †Pag. 101. nothing was extraordinary but their not limitation to any certain Churches Which is vntrue their calling to the ministrie was not ordinary It was without the peoples
voice-giving which was then ordinary in Pastors calling Timothie I say came not to Ephesus by the peoples election nor Titus to Creet Paul only authorised them to that Ministrie Therfore their calling or sending thither was also extraordinary And Tâ—mothie attained giftes by extraordinary meanes viz by the Apostles miraculous laying on of hands though the D. deny it Then he addeth 3. other errors 1. The power of ordination and iurisdiction was wholy in Timothie and 〈◊〉 Titus Our Attestators “ Above pa. 23 26 36 38.4â— disprove thâ—â— 2. The function may bee the very sam where one person governeth the church wholy and alone where thâ— people do necessarily coÌ„cur with him Though his wordes bee not these yet his sense is cleerly so And all the next page hee beateth vpon the same Fearfully affirming that the difference “ Pag. 102. seemeth not to bee so essentiall Though he hold so yet see howe hee faltereth 3. Where he addeth the title or calling to a Church seemeth to be variable Which are all grosse vntruths coâ—uted in my †Pag 12 at 34 35. 38 c Declarat the 3. runneth amoÌ„g those evill opinions heere “ Pag. 133.134 before censured That which he addeth as it were a proofe for him the Iewes Church governors came to their places †Pag 103. by succession and lineall discent but in the Churches of Christ by free electioÌ„ is absolutly against â—imselfe For neither of these titles or coming to the Church-governement had bene lawfull by any meanes but because God so ordayned And it being so ordained by God in his word it was theÌ„ absolutly vnchangeable by men as in the Lawe so likewise vnder the Gospel which is the Law of Christ Where he saith the Apostles committed not the power of ordination and iurisdiction to all Ministers I answer they did as I have “ Declarar pag 25. elswhere shewed Their committing it to †Pag 104. Timothie c. denyeth it not to the other Presbyters in the several Churches neither doth the Angells power in the RevelatioÌ„ 2. exclude the ioint power of his fellow presbyters with him nor yet the peoples free concurrence with them all His last reason is If while the Apostles lived it was behoofull to substitute Bishops in the Churches then much more after their decease But the former is evident Therfore the later also This I wholy grant we mislike not Bishops In the end he falleth to the authoritie of those bastard “ Pag. 105. subscriptions namely of the epistles to Tim. and Titus Touching the which I referre him to Mr. Cudworth in his Supplement to Mr. Perkins on the * At the end of chap. 6. Galatians Where he shall finde them to be of no “ Pag. 106. greater antiquitie nor better credit then such counterfait drosse may be The †Pag. 107. testimonies of the Fathers which follow “ Pag. 244.259 have ben sufficiently answered Nowe I will gather briefly our Proofes that Timoth. or Titus were not proper Bishops Proofes that Timothie c. was no Bishop They are 8. in nomber First the H. Ghost made †Ephe. 4.11 Evangelists and Bishops or Pastors distinct persons Therefore the Apostles could not make them one And consequently Timothie and Titus being Evangelists as is known neither were nor could be made proper Bishops Sec An EvaÌ„gelist had an Office “ Ibid. superior extraordinarie temporarie and vnlimited a Bishop was inferior ordinarie perpetuall and limited to one Church Now these qualities are incoÌ„patible they can neither bee togeather nor successively in one person Therefore Timothie and Titus Evangelistes neither were nor could bee proper Bishops at any time Thirdly After Timothie had bene at Ephesus hee was an Evangelist 2. Tim. 4.5 For Paul chargeth him so to bee and cary himselfe Neither is there cause nor reason why Paul here should speake improperly and generally Therfore he spake properly “ See pag. 240. he was still a proper Evangelist and consequently not a proper Bishop And so likewise Titus Fourt Timothies Ministie at Ephesus extended to other distinct and intire Churches viz. to Smyrna to Sardis to Pergamus to Colossi to Hierapolis to Laodicea c. and not to the Church in Ephesus only But the Bishop of Ephesus ministrie was limited and appropriated to the Church in Ephesus only as also of Smyrna to Smyrna of Sardis to Sardis c. As the Angells in Rev. 2. do shew Therefore Timothie was not properly the Bishop of Ephesus And then neither Titus of Crete Fift Timothie was thesame no other at Ephesus then hee was at Philippi and Corinth at Athens and Thessalonica in Phrygia Galatia Mysia Troas But in these bee was no proper Bishop of any place Therefore neither was hee a proper Bishop at Ephesus So likewise * Declarat Pag. 29.30.6 Titus in Crete Sixt proper Bishops in those dayes were not called without the coâ—â—ent and voyces of their Church as before “ Pag. 164.251 hath bene shewed But Titus came to Crete and Timothie into Asia only by the Apostle Pauls sending vtterly without the peoples calling to whom they ministred in all those Churches Therefore Titus in Crete Timothie in Ephesus were no Bishops SeaveÌ„th If Titus were a proper Bishop in Crete then many distinct and intire Churches were not committed to him but only one But to Titus in Crete many distinct intire Churches were committed and not one only Therefore Titus in Crete was no proper Bishop The Assumption is plaine because hee had many “ Tit. 1.5 Cities in his charge And every City had a distinct and intire Church for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 †Act. 14.23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In every City in every Church do signifie all one thing And Eusebius “ Euse 4.22 maketh them so likewise But every proper Bishop is limited and appropriated to one Church only The D. saith assigned But that word is to loose Indeed a Bishop is limited appropriated as it were confined to one Church D. Bilson saith †Perpet gov pag 227. 232. affixed Therefore Titus was no Bishop nor Timothie neither Lastly Whatsoever reason maketh Titus Timothie Provinciall Bishops in Crete and in Asia the same serveth to make Paul or Peter Vniversall Bishops and to have Vniversal Bishops their Successors at Rome But no reason is sufficient to make Paul or Peter Vniversall ordinary Bishops of Rome nor that they should have Vniversall Bishops their Successors Therefore no reason sufficient to make Titus in Crete or Timothie at Ephesus Provinciall Bishops And so much of Timothie and Titus that they were indeed no proper Bishops which point yet Doct. Bilson “ See before pag. 241. confesseth to be their only holde After this let vs now shew how D. Downame grosly †Def. 2 14â— abuseth Calvin and Beza affiâ—ming that they ioyne with the Bishops
Luther Bucer P. Martyr Viret Calvin Beza Danaeus Vrsinees Gualter c. And not the later only but the elder Christians also For all these we have seene do consent with vs in our profession And it is a slander that in Geneva or any where els the reformed Churches do substantially differ from our iudgement As may be seene through out the 3. 4. Chapters before If any thing dissonaÌ„t from those testim may now be found in some of these Churches which I will not deny then it cometh to passe with theÌ„ as with goodly and faire Houses A Similitude which being inhabited by men will neede sweeping very oft If they bee not swept cleaned they will soone become foule And so truly it may be in some of the Churches before named Which can be no preiudice to vs who seeing transgression creepe in do wish all men and even them also ad originem reverti Cyprian cont Epist StephaÌ„ De Vnit. Eccles. to returne to the originall and first Plantation both of them selves in particular and specially of all Churches at the first In the which only there is safetie As for this intemperat Doctors rayling wordes in calling this our doctrine “ Def. 1.41 4.80.99 Brownisticall Anabaptisticall †Def. 3.142 4.81 fanaticall fantasticall dotage phrensie c. We will beare it knowing as Cyprian said of some such in his dayes “ Cyprian Epist 4.2 Non possunt laudare nos qui recedunt à nobis We must looke for hatefull and â—â—â—lent wordes from them that fall from vs. Yet in the meane whyle let him know also that in this he reprocheth not so much vs as those pillars of the truth and lights of the Gospell before named zuinglius Luther Bucer Martyr Viret Calvin and the rest of whom we have directly receaved this doctrine and profession These are our Maisters heerein as in the beginning I said Our Do. obiecteth often that these are partiall that this is their owne cause And that as well we might cite “ Def. 4.30 Mai. Cartwright and Mai. Travers as some of these Yea hee will have Ierome also to be †Def. 4.137 partiall Yet we frankly acknowledge Ierome to be theirs touching the lawfulnes of Dioces Ierome not ours simply Bishops Although he and many other of the Fathers beside are with vs in this that Diocesan Bishops are not Apostolicall but Humane And this verily they teach far from partialitie Partiall they may be for the said Prelacie not against it And the truth is they were notoriously partiall for it it was indeed their owne cause Who are partiall They may be partial are wont so to be counted who are likely to get by their opinion some temporall commoditie not they who loose by it Now the Fathers Cui bono CassianuÌ„ erotema specially vnder Constantine after by approoving Diocesan Prelacie got great honor power and rule among the people and wealth and pleasure what they desired Which by opposing against it they should have lost WheÌ„ce certainly it is that D. Downame might as well cite B. Whitgift B. Bancroft and B. Bilson for his authors as some of those ancientes viz. as wel as B. Eusebius B. Epiphanius B. Theodoret B. Damasus B. Leo B. Chrysostom c. Who questionles in this point were very partiall And no les if not more may be thought of some of those Diocesan L. Bishops who began our Church reformation in England They by proceeding no further did get much temporall commoditie which by setting the Church state neerer to the forme Apostolike they must needes have lost And so they though otherwise as likewise those Ancientes were good and godly Fathers yet they were meÌ„ and might easily be partiall in this Good and godly Fathers yeâ— Men. Which and more wee may thinke of many of our Diocesan Lord Bishops since Most of all of D. Downame himselfe who besides these temporall hopes beeing a Diocesan L. Bishops fonne had neede of much grace I coÌ„fesse to cause him to degenerat But I pray then hath he done wisely to obiect as hee doth every foot against those singular instrumentes and very effectuall reformers our Attestators others like them that they were partiall and that this was their owne cause Indeed they were partiall that is they tooke part throughly with the sinceritie of the Gospell and stood against all Papall and Pontificall over-ruling of Gods people spiritually so should this Doct. and others do well if they were partiall likewise But partiall otherwise they neither were nor could be viz. they did not get but lost by this their proceeding great worldly honor much power and rule among the people large wealth daintie pleasure and ease which ours now do abound with as all the world seeth Whereby the worlde seeth likewise which side may rather plead partialitie to be in those whom they take to be their adversaries In many places D. Downame signifyeth that the godly late defenders of the Gospell do mislike only “ Def. 4.151.157.158.161 popish tyrannizing Bishops not orthodoxall Bishops as he presumeth ours to bee But let him know that those are Orthodoxall who imitate the Apostles and the patterne of the Church left vs in the New Testament And they are tyrannizing not Orthodoxe †viz. in this nor truly believing who imitate the popish though otherwise they be not papists Cicero said well to Antonie †Cicer. Philippic 2. Miror te Antoni quorum fasta imitere corum exitus non perhorrescere I wonder Antonie said hee that thou fearest not their iudgement whose deedes thou imitatest Now how wee imitate the very forme of the Popish Church-government all the world seeth and the Gospell rueth What meaneth the racke and the wracke of many consciences viz. the Oath ex officio What the Bishops depriving and imposing of Ministers without Imitation of Popish Church-governement yea contrarie to the Congregation What meane also such Excommunications What their imprisoning of Christians and punishing their purses with fees fines c. Are these the partes of Orthodoxe Bishops Are these things approved of those godly Writers Nothing lesse Likewise his vaine and frivolous seeking to avoid the Waldenses Wickliffe Hus Zuinglius Luther Oecolampadius Bucer Martyr Calvin c. our Tindal Fr. and Ioh. Lamberts Bradsord Bale c. is of no worth Some of theÌ„ signifie that they disalow not Diocesan Bishops simply Well no more do I as I have shewed “ Pag. 15.16.73.89.97 before Yet heereby appeareth no allowance of ours in England Our old English translators of the New Testament some other Writers since doe expresse the word Church by Congregation But saith our Doctor heere by they meane the †Def. 2.106.107.108 Vnivesall Church Which answer is vntrue and absurd That is where they speake of a Visible Ministe Church of which only our question is Speaking of this that they
should by a Congregation signifye either Vniversall or Provinciall or Diocesan Church is a most false vnlikely conceit Can any of these bee one Visible Congregation in the singular nomber He alleageth as hee thinketh textes for his pupose Matt. 16. Ephe. 1. and 5. Which surely may well yea they are to bee vnderstood of a Visible Congregation viz. indefinitly taken See heereof the Divine beginning and institution of Christes Visible Church Argum. 26. 23. Of Mai. Beza “ Def. 4.166 hee affirmeth that hee wished with all his heart for the Diocesan Bishops governemēt in Geneva Which is as true as that which the Iesuits blazed abroad how Beza before his death recanted his religion Beza lived to cōvince the Iesuits of vntruth to their faces If hee were now alive he would do the like to this Doct. and those other of whō he saith hee heard it The like audacitie is in that his report that the most learned iudicious Divines in France and Geneva could bee content that Diocesan Bb. governement were renewed among them The most learned in France and Geneva Verily as they were who renewed it Scotland of late Most learned and most iudicious were they Laus proprio sordescit in ore And I feare rather that knowen parable to be heerein verifyed When the trees would have a King the Olive Figtree and Vine refusing the Bramble tooke it on him and said to the trees †Iudg. 9.15 Come put your trust vnder my shadow When all shiftes faile the adversaries will calumniate vs as not dutifull to the King and Civil governement Which though D. Downame saith “ Def. 1.45 hee will not dispute yet he maliciously insinuateth As touching dutifull affection to the Kings person none can say more if he list then D. Downame him selfe in my particular Yea what wordes I spake whē he held his peace to a Noble Lord of Scotl. An. 1601. when neither of vs durst be seene nor heard abroad for feare of whom Verily of those who were his best friends since If I was thē so dutifully animated toward the K. when we only hoped for his Maiestie God forbid I should bee lesse now when we have him Being so maligned traduced as I am I could not but speake of this Touching our duty generally to his Maiesties authoritie and place the evidence of reason sense plead for vs. Tertull. ad Scapul We acknowledge with Tertullian that he is Solo Deo minor Lesse then God only In Church governement we impeach not his Soveraigtie neither in matter nor manner Therefore no way at all The matter is only about Ezcommunication and Making of Ministers and such like things Of the essentiall forme whereof Christ only is institutor his Ecclesiasticall servantes bee the Ministers The King is neither Author nor Minister Vnto this I suppose all agree For the maner Seeing we holde each whole Church in the greatest extent can be no mo ordinarie Congregations then one how can these either by their comming togeather or by their consenting in any Spirituall busines only for them selves I say how can these impeach the Kings power one haire His Supreme Vniversall overseeing and ordering them and all others yea his chastising them when they do any thing amisse how can it be let how can it be hindered by such a handfull And because hee must vse Substitute Rulers in his general overseeing the Churches of his Dominions we frō our hearts do honor them also and submit to them as to Gods Lieutenants in their severall places Only we testifie that if the Kings power be committed to any Ecclesiasticall person especially Civill coactive power it draweth with it both a breach of Christes ordinance who said to such Ministers “ Luc. 22.25 Math. 20.25 2. Chro. 19.11 You shall not be so and also a torture to Christian subiects cōsciences Wherefore we desire of God that the King would be pleased to appoint as Ichosaphat did a Zebadiah to bee generall Governor vnder him in Church causes so far as it pertaineth to the King to deale in them and as King Henry 8. a L. Cromwell his Vicegerent in rebus Ecclesiasticis and as his Maiestie him selfe did as I have heard in Scotland before hee came among vs. Which may be far more easily performed with inferior subordinate Officers vnder them also for this purpose in every place in a Monarchie then in any Popular or Aristocraticall Cōmon wealth Vnitie how And verily this is it and not a Diocesan Bishop which would bring great vnitie and that according to God If D. Downame wil vrge which he grateth vpon in this said †Def. 1.45 pag. 45. that the Churches indepēdent authoritie standeth not with the Kings Supremacie in causes Ecclesiasticall and that which els where wee say viz. nothing may be obtruded on the Church against their willes I answer indeed every Churches power is independent spiritually and immediat vnder Christ our meaning therefore is that by ptetended Spirituall authoritie Chap. 9. nothing may be obtruded imposed on any true Church against their willes But we grant that Civill Magistrates may and sometime ought to impose good things on a true Church against their willes if they stifly erre as somtime they may And me thinks Doct. Downame also should bee of this minde with vs. This is thus answered often before pag. 115. c. Hitherto our answer to some of our Adversaries chiefest obiections and evill wordes And so I draw to an end CHAP. IX A short advertisement to the vpright hearted and Christian Reader touching this Writing Cause YET first I desire the Christian Reader to be advertised of a few things pertayning to this Cause Seavē things I intreat him to take notice of First how great a blame and shame it is to D. Downame a principall Logician to treate so largely as in his Sermon defenc he hath done concerning the Nature Forme and Constitution of Christs true Visible Church and yet in all this not once to define the same Which defect of D. Bilson also is to be noted in his perpetuall governement of the Church Surely this one matter viz. a Definition of Christes true Visible Church vnder the Gospell well performed would have saved a great deale of paines and trouble would have prevēted much error And thus it is wiselie taught by Cicero that “ Cicer. Offic. 1. all purposes reasonable ought to be begū with a Definitiō of the matter in band For the avoyding therefore of this imputation I have in †The Divine beginning institution of Christs Visible Church another Treatise defined the said Visible Church of Christ Which I did and rested not on some others who have Defined the Church heertofor because I desired to distinguish cleerly betweene the Iewish Church and the Christian which verily differ not in Accidentes alone but in kinde of governement and in essentiall constitution The Iewish Christian Church
governement differ substantially Which difference I know not who hath touched heeretofore and included in any Definition In so much that from hence hath arisen no small occasion of grievous errors Howbeit yet for the precise name of Definition or Description I strive not let men call it what they will Only I take mine to bee convertible with Christs true Visib Church vnder the Gospell and that sufficeth me Further some thinke it long For whose sakes I will heere againe set downe in effect the same Definition though in other words more short Thus it is A DefinitioÌ„ of Christs true Visible Church A Visible Church of Christ vnder the Gospell is a Spirituall Body politike of no mo ordinarie Congregations then one the people also having power of free coÌ„sent in their ordinarie governement This is shorter yet as full as the other Secondly whereas Do. Downame in his booke of his Sermon and Defence picketh out mee in particular besides his proper antagonist to traduce and calumniat I held it necessarie to Answer him in the pointes that concerne me and by the way some other adversaries now and then who oppugne this cause also which is the originall of all their il will against me Professing for my part that my purpose is heereafter to cease this manner of dealing in this matter vnles I might do it vpoÌ„ more equall conditions which I do not expect The Lord I doubt not wil raise vp others that shall more effectually beare witnes vnto this truth in due time Even vntill the Toleration heereof in England which hath ben most Christianly Supplicated for shal finde grace and favor in his Maiesties eyes for the which I shall not cease to pray continually Thirdly whereas the Writings and Disputes about this cause have ben and are very many intricat and tedious I have heere indeavoured to make the vnderstaÌ„ding thereof short easie and perspicuous Namely by reducing the whole substance of this controversie only to 2. Heads The sumnâ—â— and substance of all our controversie viz. the Peoples free consent in their ordinarie Church governement and that the extent of Christes true Visible Church vnder the Gospel containeth one and not many ordinarie Congregations Which 2. points being plainly and honestly handled will bring an end of other differences also which are vsually considered in our generall controversie I hope therefore this my indeavour will bee profitable to such as would vnderstaÌ„d this cause briefly and distinctly at least my intent was that it should be being my selfe very desirous to draw our long contention as much as I could to a short issue Fourthly I desire that this and all other my writings may be not sinisterly taken Being with much vehemencie charged that for no iust cause I have refused to conforme to the Church order in England I could therefore do no lesse but give out yea vnto posteritie the the true and most important Reasons of my dissenting heerein Also I have ben constrayned by Do. Downame and such other to cleere and confirme the said reasons And this is the only true cause as the Lord knoweth of all my writing Which how iust it is I desire all fearing God vprightly to consider Fiftly I pray all good Christians not to forget nor neglect the due consideration of this matter but to waigh with them selves how important it is indeed Which I have somwhat largely opened before in the “ CoÌ„sequent 5.6.7 8. pag. 129. c. 7. Chapter in divers and sundry respectes It preserveth Christs Honor Ordinance and casteth out Humane Tradition it bringeth to our selves true assurance and cutteth of from the Papistes and others all pretence which otherwise against vs is not little Sixtly the verie Attestation of those most worthie Divines and Churches which heere I alleage gathered out of their publike recordes shall I hope abundantly acquit both my selfe and many other faithfull servantes of Christ in the iudgement of all honest and sounde Christians from the most iniurious slanders given out by D. Downame and other adversaries to our reproach among the ignorant as namely where they call vs Shismatikes Innovators Enemies of Vnitie c. When men shall perceave that we are indeed taught these assertions which wee holde not to speake of the Scripture out of Zuinglius Luther Bucer F. Martyr Viret Musculus Bullinger Gualter Chemnieius Vrsinus Iunius Danaeus Calvin and Beza with many other like rare men of God all coÌ„senting togeather in the substance of these points as before I have shewed more at large then it will be a sufficient satisfactioÌ„ to them on our behalfes And our adversaries shall finde it to be well with them if they themselves can stande cleere of the said crimes of Schisme Noveltie Enmitie to vnitie peace and truth of the Gospell Nay verily they can not stande cleere of these crimes Last of all these our worthy Attestators Teachers shall I hope likewise yet have so much credit and honor yeelded to them in England that their Disciples shall not for their doctrine only bee afflicted imprisoned and more severely punished then those that professe to be the Disciples of the Romish Enemie An enemie indeed not conceited both to Christ to our King the Realme In which hope and full perswasion I humbly commend all this that I have Lud to Gods holy providence gracious blessing to all Christians chatable vpright iudgement To God only wise through Iesus Christ bee praise for ever and ever AMEN An Addition THAT the abusers of Mai. Beza and Mai. Calvin about Mat. 18.17 may see their ill doing I thought good to set downe heere some more of their testimonies a part by themselves Which shew plainly that howsoever they seeme sometime to speake not so warily as they might touching the word Ecclesia in this place calling it the Church-Senat or Presbyterie yet their true and right meaning indeed is that here Ecclesia signifyeth not the Church Senat only meerely as some obstinatly charge theÌ„ to meane They do heere in this word comprehend also the people and their power of free coÌ„sent in Excommunication which is the matter spokeÌ„ of by Christ in this place of Math. I say here in this word they include the people also teach that they must be tolde and that they must be hearkened vnto in a degree in a certain order viz. mediatly finally They intend not that Christ heere committeth this busines to the Presbyterie only and absolutly Thus saith Beza vpon this word “ Bez. Annotat in Mat. 18.17 Doceo Aristocratiam non esse novum institutum Dei verbo Democratiae Ecclesiastica repugnans sicut nonnulls ex vnicâ voculâ temerè arreptâ sunt arbitrati And presently before â—e saith Neque verò Oligarchiam velim in â—cclesiam Dei invehi quae illam tantopere deâ—rmavit atque adeò penitùs transformavit â—lso †In Mat. 16.18 Vocabulo Ecclesiae significari Civium â—nventum nemo
the sense of the word Ecclesia pa. 109. 209. 210. 211. 308. French Liturgie with vs. pag. 50. Genevian Discipline with vs. pag. 49. Giftes no calling of a Minister pag. 162. Gualter with vs. pag. 37. 38. 39. 40. H. The world Hateth our profession and why pa. 17. 18. Helvetian confession with vs. pag. 49. I. Iames no proper Bishop pag. 238. 239. The Iewish Church governement differed substantially from the Christian pag. 158. 317. The forme of the Iewish church governement is ceased pag. 184. 185. 279. Iunius with vs. pag. 43. 44. 45. Iulianus of Alexandria the first Diocesan Bishop and yet but a Titular Diocesan pag. 92. K. Christes Kingdom commissive pag. 145. L. Lord and Lordship vnlawfull for the Ministerie pag. 118. A Spirituall Lord who pag. 118. Christ only ought to be a Spiritual Lord. p. 121. Luther with vs. pag. 31. 32. c. And Lutherans pag. 51. 52. M. P. Martyr with vs. pag. 34. 35. 150. 193. The civill Magistrat advanced by our profession pag. 18. 20. 115. 137. 313. 315. Every Metropolitan not a Diocesan pa. 254. Metropolitans in place not in office pag. 231. c. 235. 213. Outward Meanes necessarie to salvation and namely Christes pag. 150. 152. 154. 155. 194 195. 269. They who make Ministers must have Divine authoritie to do it pa. 163. 74. 75. 194. 147. Musculus for vs. pag. 36. N. We desiâ—e things Necessary pag. 18. 19. 193. The grievous hurt by Nonresidents pag. 129 To mislike Pluralists and Nonresidents are curious positions with our adversaries p. 132. P. The Palatine Catechisme with vs. pag. 51. Who cause Papistes to increase in England pa. 183. 186. Papistes more sound in the generall opinion of the Church then some protestantes p. 150. 180 A Parish in our reasoning what it is pag. 201. 202. 209. A Church no more but a Parish pag. 30. 103. 104. 108. 214. See Ecclesia Partiall who are pagt 301. In Church government the Peoples consent is Apostolicall pag. 68. 69. Evident Scriptures for the Peoples consent in church censures pag. 279. 140. 281. 282. Likewise in making of Ministers pag. 70. 164 165. 291. c. Power in the People administration in their Guides pag. 33. 42. 298. 278. 82. 83. What maner of People pag. 17. Great good cometh to Religion by granting the Peoples consent in church governemeÌ„t p. 130 The Papacie not to be overthroweÌ„ but by holding the Peoples free coÌ„sent p. 18. 156. 157. c. Our maine question is about the Peoples free consent in church governement pag. 10. 16. The Peoples necessary freedom power right in church gov what and how much ordinarily pag. 18. 22. 48. 61. 73. 82. 83. 278. Piscator for vs. pag. 46. Oâ—â— Profession giveth good satisfaction chiefly to the Magistrat p. 19. 20. 191. 313. 315 In reasoning we must alwayes speak Properly pag. 240. Some Protestants opinion holding changeablenes in the Churches forme and governement not without impietie pag. 133. 141. R. Rebaptizing refuted pag. 172. Reordayning lawfull and fit pag. 173. To receave our Ministerie derivatively and successively from the church of Rome a miserable answer pag. 170. 173. S. Who are Schismatiks pag. 138. 176. The Separation how they erre pag. 249. 280. Sole governement pag. 252. Succession a popish reason pag. 238. The Archb. with vs spiritually Sapreme pa. 119. â—ynods some lawfull Apostolike necessariâ— 116. 117. 179. Some not Apostolike nor lewfull p. 31. 48. 100. c. 111. c. 117. 178. A Synod absolut induceth a Pope p. 105. 110. 111. c. 179. T. Tertullian proveth not a Diocesan church or Bishop pag. 233. Tilenus for vs. pag. 43. 164. 166. Timothie and Titus no proper Bishops pag. 241. 264. Toleration of vs not vnmeet e. pag. 137. 193. 194. 195. 318. V. Viret for vs. pa. 28. 29. No Vnitie by Diocesan or Provinciall Churches and Bishops pag. 174. 176. 188. Gods written word the true cause of Vnitie pa. 175. 176. After Gods word the Magistrates helpe is the chief cause of Vnitie pag. 177. 315. The hurtfull error of some Protest antes granting one Vniversall Visible Church vnder the Gospell pag. 112. 181. 182. 189. 190. A Vniversall Church Visible induceth a Pope pag. 112. c. 181 c. 187. 189. To deny the peoples consent in Church governement to be a Divine ordinance bringeth in a Vniversall Church Visible pag. 157. 180. 189. and by a likely consequence will set the Pope above the King pag. 191. 192. Vniversalitie a popish reason pag. 221. 222. 223. Some Vniversall errors pag. 233. W. D. Whitaker for vs. pag. 47. 106. 107. Z. Zuinglius for vs. pag. 29. 30. 214. 215. 216.