Nazianzen in Apologet in 1 Pet. 5. vide Hegesippum apud Euseb. lib. 4. cap. 22. and Chrysostom in Tit. 1. Hom. 2. Saint Ambrose de dignitate Sacerdot c. 2. 6. Isidor Pelusiot lib. 2. ep. 125. Further out of the holy Scripture we might alledge according to Saint Hieroms interpretation that this distinction between the Bishops and his Presbyters was signified in Moses and the 70. So Hierom in Tit. 1. the distinction of Presbyters and Deacons to be that which was under the Law of the high Priest Priests and Levites So S. Hieron. Ep. 2. ad Nepotianum Ep. ad Evagrium and before him Ignat. ad Philadelph Clement ep. ad Corinth Chrysost. Hom. 20. ad pop. Antioch and after Leo ep. 66 Isidor Hisp. de officiis Eccles. l. 2. c. 5. 7. That the eminent dignity and office of Bishops was prophecied of Psal. 45. 16. where Bishops are meant say S. August in loc. Comment. called S. Hieroms in locum S. Cyril of Alex. in loc. Theodoret in locum Ruffinus in locum as the other of Presbyters and Deacons were prophecied of Isaiah 66. 21. And further for imparity of Teachers in the new Testament that answerably to Prophets in the old and sons of the Prophets among some that served in the Gospell some were as Fathers others serving with them as sont So also that we read of Builders and Master-builders in Gods building 1 Cor. 3. and we read also among those builders of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. 1 Cor. 12. 28. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Hebr. 13. 17. and under them {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Luc. 22. 27. But for the confirmation by Scripture of the office of a Bishop we adhere especially to the Epistles to Timothy and Titus and those seven Epistles Apoc. 1 2 and 3. And if it be acknowledged of institution Apostolicall and approved by God but temporary onely the contrary will be made manifest as from the proper light of the Texts alledged and from the forecited Text 1 Tim. 6. 14. So also from this Proposition which we avow No Constitution Apostolicall received by the universall Church perpetually in all ages unto this age of this controversie can without scandall and dangerous consequence be called Temporary the universall practice of the Church practising continually and perpetually an Apostolicall Institution being a most sure Commentary that it was no temporary institution Forasmuch as we are taught by the holy Ghost in divine Scripture that contention in what the Law of God is pretended not to be expresse may be warrantably taken off by the custome of the Churches of God 1 Cor. 11. 16. See Theophylact. in locum Custom I doe not say any but of the Churches of God i.e. Primitive also Universall Perpetuall interpreting the controverted Law of God whether Naturall as vers. 14. or Positive by no lesse reason Whereunto agreeth well the rule of S. Augustine contra Crescon. lib. 1. c. 32. contra Donat. l. 4. c. 24. Quod universa tenet Ecclesia c. ep 86. ad Casul epist. ad Januarium 118. si quidtota hodie c. Vincent Lyrin adversus haereses c. 2. c. 3. Quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus c. And if not by such traditive interpretation from the custom of the Churches of God according to the Apostles rule how shall we convince contentious gainsayers that the sense of those Texts Goe and teach all Nations baptizing them c. Matth. 28. and those other of baptizing the houshold of Stephanus and of the keeper of the prison 1 Cor. 1. Acts 16. or any other Scriptures to be a divine warrant as they are for Baptisme of Infants Or the sense of hoc facite c. Luk. 22. to imply a divine right of Presbyters onely to consecrate the Elements of the blessed Sacrament or the sense of those Texts Iohn 20. 1 19 26. Acts 20. 7. 1. Cor. 16. 2. Revel. 1. 10. or Psalm 118. 24. or of any other Scriptures to be a divine warrant for the translation of our one day in seven from the seventh day of the week to the first Or on the other side how shall we convince those of the Church of Rome that that Apostolicall divine Precept Iames 5.14 as to the anointing the sick with oil was a temporary Precept onely but negatively from the interpretation of the custom of the Churches of God Since miraculous gifts were also conferred by the laying on of hands which yet was not temporary Heb. 6 2. Now that this Apostolicall institution hath been universally practised and perpetually in the custom of the Churches of God of all times and places excepting onely some narrow place and time of this age of this controversie and that in Churches founded by different planters by all the severall Apostles and others sent by them as well those Churches which have in severall ages rejected the Antichristian Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome over all the Church as others and that order preserved by God from extirpation thorow all the ten persecutions and descending in each Church or City by particular continued succession as for example 27 Bishops from S. Timothy to the time of the Chalcedon Councell as was declared there act 11. that in all times primitive and following Bishops have been chief in Ecclesiasticall government in Councels in Martyrdom in Piety in Learning in the conversion of Nations in the mighty confounding of Heresies and Heretiques we beleeve we are able if any deny to make good And first here for the Primitive Churches we alledge all the forecited Testmonies of Antiquity proving Bishop to have been instituted by the Apostles themselves vide supra Yea and early within the Apostles times there having been not onely three Bishops of Rome successively Linus Cletus and Clemens and within Saint Johns time of life four Bishops of Alexandria successively Saint Mark Anianus Abilius and Cerdo three Bishops of Antioch Saint Peter Evodius and Ignatius two of Jerusalem Saint Iames and Simeon all while Saint John the Apostle yet lived Euseb hist eccles. lib. 3. cap. 12. But also Saint Iames made Bishop of Ierusalem soon after the passion of our Lord saith Saint Hierom. de Script Eccles. After the Ascension of our Saviour saith Euseb. lib. 2. cap. 1. before Saint Stevens Martyrdom for Saint Steven was Deacon to Iames Bishop of Ierusalem saith Ignatius epist. ad Trall and the ancient Author of the Epist. ad Heronem under his name and that James himself was martyred after he had governed the Church of Ierusalem 30. yeers saith Saint Hierom. de Script Eccles. And as Saint Hierom affirmeth Iames the Apostle to have been the first Bishop of Ierusalem in Gal. 1. So also Peter to have been the first Bishop of Antioch in Gal. 2. And
Mark the first Bishop of Alexandria in Prooem. in Matth. who died six yeers before Saint Peter or S. Paul saith Saint Hierom. though therein he dissent from Irenaeus lib. 3. 35. yeeres before Saint Iames the Apostle besides therefore nine recorded as Bishops in holy Scripture Timothy and Titus Bishops of Ephesus and Crete and the seven of the seven Churches in Asia besides two Apostles Bishops viz. Iames of Ierusalem and a Peter of Antioch b and one Evangelist Mark of Alexandria c there are also nine other in all 21. recorded in holy Scripture all which except two of the seven Angels are there registred for Saints who if we will beleeve as credible records of Christians as any other humane Records whatsoever were Bishops before they died viz. Clemens d and e Linus made Bishops of Rome successively by Peter and Paul Evodius f Bishop of Antioch by Peter and Paul Dionysius the Areopagite Bishop of Athens g Archippus h Bishop of the Colossians Epaphroditus i Bishop of the Philippians Epaphras k Bishop of the Colossians Gaius l also Bishop of the Thessalonians Trophimus m Bishop of Arles To which you may adde the two and twentieth Antipas Bishop of Pergamus if we will beleeve Paraeus in Apoc. 2. proving it out of Arethas Caesariensis in Apoc. 1. and Onesimus Bishop of Ephesus n if he were not the forementioned Angel of the Church of Ephesus when Saint Iohn wrote his Revelation To omit to speak here of other Bishops who were Schollars and Auditors of the Apostles Ignatius of Saint Iohn o made Bishop of Antioch by Saint Peter Papias p Saint Iohns Schollar Bishop of Hierapolis Publius and Qâ—adratus q Bishops of Athens Disciples of the Apostles Simeon the son of Cleophâ—â— r Bishop of Ierusalem after Iames and the Kinsman of our Lord This order of Bishops which began though the first we read of in Scripture be Timothy and Titus in Saint Iames of Ierusalem or Saint Mark of Alexandria continued thorowout all the following ages of the Churches of God in which Bishops have been the most reverend Martyrs such as Ignatius Polycarp Irenaeus Bishop of Lions Cyprian of Carthage and more then 30. of the first Bishops of Rome successively both in Episcopacy and Martyrdom Of Bishops also especially did consist the first four generall Councels received by all the reformed Churches the confounders of the maine heresies touching the second and third persons in the blessed Trinity and by an Act of Parliament 1. Eliz. cap. 10. next to the canonicall Scriptures made the rule of judging Heresies who also in Councell gave judgement for the inviolable practice of the Church in this order the generall Councell of Nice providing Ne in unâ civitate duo sint Episcopi Cant. 8. The generall Councell of Constantinople adjudging to Bishops the power of Ordination Can. 2. and Can. 4. in the case of Maximus The generall Councell of Ephesus distinguishing betwixt the Bishop and the rest of the Clergy Can. 7. and confirming the Bishops jurisdiction Can. 5. The generall Councell of Chalcedon determining Can. 29. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} For as much then as in the first Article we are required to swear to endeavour the reformation of Religion according to the Word of God and the examples of the best reformed Churches surely we may not in the second Article swear to endeavour the extirpation of Church-government by Bishops and so to forsake the government grounded on the Word of God and to forsake the example of all the ages of the Primitive Churches then which we conceive no late reformed Church will pretend to be more pure and to whose examples they do or ought to endeavour to reform themselves But after all this it will be said that this government by Bishops is ejured onely as it interprets Prelacy which word if it have been translated Regimen Tyranicum the Translation as farre exceeds the truth of Grammar as the Prelates are accused to have exceeded their lawfull power forasmuch as Prelacy in its originall and acception of ancient Authors Praelati we say not elati imports but lawfull preeminence and power So is Timothy called by Gregory de Cura pastor p. 2. c. 11. Praelatus Gregi and the word Prelate is often honourably mentioned in our Lawes 9 Ed. 2. 24 Hen. 8. and is no more then the Title Praepositi mentioned also with honour by St. Cyprian Epist. 10. 55. 65. Augustin de civitate Dei l. 20. c. 9. or Antistites S. Cypr. ep. 69. Sancti Antistites S. August ep. 162. and divers words in Scripture used signifying equivalently such preeminence but let it not be told indeed in other Churches that any other is here abjured then Regimen Tyrannicum But are we warranted by the following stile of Hierarchy Doth that word import originally and anciently any other then a sacred government was it not accepted and approved in it selfe by Mr. Calvin lib. de necessitate Eccl. reformandae Talem si nobis Hierarchiam exhibeant in quâ sic emineant Episcopi ut Christo subesse non recusent c. ut ab illo tanquam uno Capite pendeant ad ipsum referantur c. tum verò nullo non anathemate dignos fateor qui non eam reverentèr summâque obedientiâ observent Moreover how can we in the same Article abjure Church-government by Bishops with Heresie Schisme and Prophanenesse as there it follows yea Prelacy even before Schisme and Heresie c. when as Bishops have been in all ages the chief confounders of heresie and heretickes such was Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria of the heresie of Arrius Cyril of Alexandria of the Nestorian heresie Caelestine Bishop of Rome Augustine Bishop of Hippo Prosper Bishop of Rhegium Fulgentius Bishop of Ruspi of the Palagian heresie and many more in all ages of the Church before and since Nor was there found any one Christian thorowout all the Primitive and purest times of the Church for above five hundred yeers after Christ who thought it fit to abolish Church government by Bishops much lesse to ejâ—re it save onely one heretick Aerius so censured by Epiphanius Haeres 75. and by Saint Augustine Haeres 53. whose speech savoured of madnesse saith Epiphanius for he had said What is a Bishop differing from a Presbyter a and the occasion of it Saint Augustine lets us know lib. de Haeres c. in Aerium Aerius being a Presbyter is said to have been vexed because he could not get to be ordained a Bishop and thence arose his envy Epiphanius witnesseth as much Haeres 75. Secondly as to Schism Saint Hierom the one and onely Father alledged as denying the divine Institution of Bishops yet held them necessary to represse Schism and then surely most necessary when Schism doth as in these our dayes most abound For avoiding of Schism Saint Hierom witnesseth Episcopacy was
our Church-government as it now stands in aggregate whether might this Oath be taken had they also been included Lastly is not their practise for whose satisfaction this Covenant should be taken a added to the common sense of mankind in the like manner of speaking or understanding such speeches evidence enough to us that we cannot take this Oath and Covenant unlesse we will swear to endeavour the extirpation of Church-government by Bishops If this be so we desire to know first whether it be lawfull for subjects to swear such a Covenant as directly contradicts the oath of their Soveraigne at his Coronation as this second branch of the Covenant doth binding us to endeavour the extirpation of the government of our Church by Bishops For that our Soveraign hath taken as contradictory Oath is evidently manifest by the last clause of the oath which the Kings of England take at their Coronation when after many other gracious promises wch the King makes to his people one of the Bishops reading to the King before the people concerning the Canonicall priviledges of the Church and beseeching him that he would be the Protectour and Defender of the Bishops the Churches under their government the King answereth in these words With a willing and devout heart I promise and grant my pardon and that I will preserve and maintain to you and the Churches committed to your charge all canonicall priviledges and due Law and Iustice and that I will be your Pretectour and Defender to my power by the assistance of God as every good King in his Kingdom in right ought to protect and defend the Bishops and Churches under their government Then the King ariseth and at the Communion Table makes a solemn Oath in the presence of the people to observe the premisses and laying his hand upon the book saith The things which I have before promised I shall perform and keep so help me God and the contents of this Book How can this Oath then for the extirpation of Church-government by Bishops be consistent with the Oath or Honour of our Soveraign which we have so solemnly protested to defend in the late Protestation How can we with a solemn Oath enter into such a Covenant to which we may neither swear without our Soveraigns consent nor yet can lawfully desire nor have his consent How sad were our condition were the King willing of himselfe to violate this Oath But what should we have to answer should we by taking such a Covenant this way necessitate so far as in us lies His sacred Majesty to violate his Oath so solemnly sworn at his Inauguration Secondly that to endeavour the extirpation of Church-government by Bishops is a sin against Divine Law all those Arguments and Authorities convince which prove that Bishops are of Apostolicall institution and unalterable and consequently Divine which we shall unfold in these Propositions First that their institution stands grounded upon our Saviours own Action and Institution of the Apostles Secondly that Christ and his holy Spirit by his Apostles appointed Bishops Thirdly that Christ the Sonne of God and the Holy Ghost afterward confirmed and approved Bishops and their Commission and power which the Apostles had appointed For the first we say their institution is grounded upon our Lords own instituting and ordaining twelve Apostles above seventy Disciples who saith to these his Apostles As my Father hath sent me even so send I you a St. Joh. 20. 21. As in other ends of his mission so how not in this which we know they did according to his pattern As he was sent by his Father therefore to ordain one order of Teachers of the Gospell superiour to another which we know because he did so ordain So also sent he his Apostles to ordain which accordingly they did and whatsoever they did by Christs example therein they did by his Commission here given in an imparity Bishops succeeding the Apostles above Presbyters subordinate as the seventy a That Bishops succeeded the Apostles in the ordinary part of their function as it is the judgement of the most ancient godly Fathers b that Bishops we say as contradistinct to Presbyters were the successours of the Apostles so is it manifest from Scripture since power Episcopall as it is now taken in this dispute which we shall prove to have been given by the Apostles to Bishops and to them onely after the Apostles was undeniably in the Apostles and for a while held in their own hands without communicating it to others That the Bishops were afterwards instituted by the Apostles themselves which so many ancient Authous have averred c And namely by the Apostolicall Authority of St. Paul and their institution part of holy Scripture is made good in that the power and Office of a Bishop as the word is now taken in the Ecclesiasticall notion is prescribed in the three Epistles of St. Paul to those two famous Church-governours Timothy and Titus particularly the Office and power of a Bishop as it is now taken contradistinctly to the Office of a Presbyter in these Texts 1 Tim. 1. 3. 1 Tim. 5. 19 20 21 22. 2. Tim. 1. 6. Tit. 1. 5 11. Tit. 3. 9. 10 and some others and these Texts thus interpreted by Antiquity d And as the office prescribed there is Episcopall so these two appointed to this prescribed office of a Bishop by St. Paul himselfe 1 Tim. 1. 3. 2 Tim. 1. 6. Tit. 1. 5. Yea by the holy Ghost say Chrysost. Theophyl Oecumenius by divine Revelation saith Theodoret of Timothy And that these two were Bishops according to the Ecclesiasticall notion of the word now used ancient Fathers plentifully witnesse b Moreover this superiority to office Episcopall to have been fixed and continued to the day of death is evident as from Church-history so also from 1 Tim. 6. 14. where {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is the same with {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in the beginning of the Epistle 1 Tim. 1. 18. and includes in it the whole charge given by St. Paul to Timothy in this Epistle c From which Text also it is manifested that his Office prescribed was not personall onely but to descend by succession unto the comming of Christ d Thirdly this Office and power Episcopall that it was afterward approved and confirmed by the Sonne of God himselfe immediately and by the holy Ghost will be proved from Revel. c. 1. 2. 3. Where by the seven Stars the Angels of the seven Churches according to all reason from the Text it selfe and by the testimony of Antiquity e are seven Bishops of those seven Churches understood which Ecclesiasticall story mentions to have been in the Church long before this time as so many Angels and Apostles f of the Churches such as was Polycarp the Angell the Bishop of the Church of Smyrna made Bishop of that place by the Apostles themselves thirteen
yeers before this book of the Revelation of St. John was written and Onesimus probably the then Bishop the Angell of the Church of Ephesus Their Office Power and Commission are there intimated to have been Episcopall and charged upon them by Christ in that five of the Angels are charged as blameable and accomptable for the faults of both Presbyters and people and therefore surely were trusted with authority over Presbyters and people to have corrected and censured them Particularly Episcopall power is intimated there chap. 2. of the Revel. vers. 20. and that power of excommunication is sufficiently grounded on the 14 verse Mr. Perkins in locum affirmeth Their mission to that office also as it is there confirmed by the Sonne of God and by the holy Spirit So also to have been at first from God is in their title implied For Angels sent forth for the Churches sake are never said in holy Scripture to be any's Messengers but Gods and if his Messengers or Angels then sent by him That their superiority was fixed not weekly or annuall is clear as from the Ecclesiasticall History of Polycarp and Onesimus so also from the Text it self c. 2. 10. Where the Angell of the Church of Smyrna as Angell of the Church is bidden to be faithfull in his Office surely untill death b Nor was it personall onely but describing the Office of the Angell of any Church in like laudable or blame-worthy state unto the comming of Christ as it is implied v. 24. 25. of the second chapter For what is said to them so long as there is any that hath an eare to hear he must hear c. 2. v. 3. Nor did the personall blameworthy carriage of the Angell of the Church of Sardis c. 3. v. 1 c. or of the Angell of the Church of the Laodiceans v. 14. 16. hinder Christs approbation of their Office who are in regard of their Office not of their personall Excellency stiled the Angels of the seven Churches and the Stars in the right hand of the Son of man both which stiles that they are there singularly appropriated to these successours of the Apostles ought not to seem strange since the twelve Apostles are confessedly meant by the crown of twelve Stars Apoc. 12. 1. And St Paul the Apostle of us Gentiles speaks of himself received as an Angell of God Galat. 4. 14. Summarily therefore out of holy Scriptures thus we reason Many Presbyters and Preachers in one Church and one chief having eminency and power over all Presbyters and people therein proveth the Office of a Bishop but so holy Scripture witnesseth were in Ephesus many Presbyters Act. 20. 17. or if they were Bishops in the sense now disputed some of them at least as Irenaeus thought l. 3. c. 14. we need go no further in the argument and more afterwards surely and yet one chiefe Pastor or Bishop over all such as was Timothy in his time and the Angel of that Church whosoever he was mentioned Rev. 2. 1. So also in the Church of Pergamus there were divers Teachers true and false c. 2. v. 13 15. one Angel Governour in chief v. 1. For be it that all the Presbyters of each of the Churches might well have been called Angels c yet that one among them in each Church in such a compatible community of name is so called by way of eminency proves an eminency in the one so called which must either be of personall excellency above all the rest and this who can shew us in the Angel of the Church of Sardis Laodicea or Thyatira or else and rather of Office and power so as Iohn Baptist was called an Angel Malac 3. who was more then a Prophet and St. Paul received as an Angell Gal. 4. 14. who was more then a Minister and our Saviour Christ is called Michael Apoc. 12. 7. with his Angels fighting under him One objection more we shall take notice of viz. the pretended necessity of understanding by each of the Angels there a collective body from c. 2. v. 10. 24. But this is manifestly clear to be no necessity at all from the like manner of speaking of the holy Ghost 2 Chron. 28. 1. to the 5. Compare and judge And therefore it is not lawfull without any necessary reason to depart from the literall and determinate individuation of one chief spirituall Church-governour in each of the seven Churches for otherwise as Tertullian speaks lib. de carne Christi cap. 13. Omnia periclitabuntur alitèr accipi quà m sunt amittere quod sunt dum alitèr accipiuntur Yea there is not onely no necessity but much in the Text which doth resist such an interpretation of a collective body for it should be either an Angel put for the whole particular Church and this cannot be seeing the Angels and the Churches are accurately distinguished c. 1. v. 20. Or an Angel put for the whole collection of the Presbyters but neither may this be admitted inasmuch as in the same 20 verse the Angels are called {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} seven no more and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} not {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} stars not constellations as Suidas distinguisheth the words You have our reasons from these Scriptures why to us it seems that to swear to endeavour the extirpation of Church-government by Bishops is to swear to endeavour the extirpation of that whose Root is in holy Scripture and to swear to endeavour which we tremble to think of to wrest these Stars out of the right hand of the Sonne of man who is also the Son of God For in his right hand are they held the Angels of the Churches Revel. 1. 16 20. As Church-government by Bishops hath been evidenced by holy Scripture so was it also the judgement of the ancient godly Fathers that it was an institution Apostolicall and Divine {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} saith Theodoret l. 4. c. 18. by St. Cyprian ep. 55. the power of Episcopacy is exegetically called Ecclesiae gubernande sublimis divina potestas epist. 27. Dominus noster Episcopi honorem disponens in Evangelic And anon after ut omnis actus Ecclesiae per Episcopos gubernetur cum hoc itaque divina lege fundatum sit miror quosdam audaci temeritate c. epist. 65. Episcopos Praepositos Dominus elegit And anon after Deus Episcopos facit Athanasius epist. ad Dracontium saith that he who contemns the function of a Bishop {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and that the Office is of those things {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} c. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Ignat. epist. ad Magnes {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Idem Ignat epist ad Ephes. Oecumen. c. 9. in Tim. 4. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Theophylact. and Oecumenius found Bishops upon Ephes. 4.11 and on Hebr. 13.17 Oecumenius and
an acceptation of those proffers for Treaty towards accommodation which he so often makes and in case they shall be by any pertinaciously refused joyn themselves with his Sacred Majesty in his just defence Having thus done with the Introduction it follows that we examine the Discourse it self which proceeds in this method First to propound the motives to perswade men to take the Covenant Secondly to answer the objections or scruples which might hinder c. Here before we begin to examine the strength of the motives themselves we observe the different apprehensions of the framers of it for whereas he who framed the Introduction did it seems imagine that the taking of the Covenant might be enforced from the positive Law of God and the Law of Nature the other who was to lay down the Motives was so farre from that as to esteem it necessary towards the same end in the first place to insinuate the example of themselves of the Assembly and others who had already taken it The strength of their perswasive Arguments is this First This Covenant is already taken by the two Houses of Parliament by the Assembly of Divines the City of London and the Kingdom of Scotland Secondly It hath been already seconded from Heaven by blasting the Counsels c. Thirdly It carries in it self such a convincing evidence of Equity Truth and Righteousnesse as may raise in all enflamed affections to take it which is proved because There is almost nothing in this Covenant which was not for substance either expressed or manifestly included in the Protestation of May 5. 1641. Ergo whosoever are not wilfully ignorant or miserably seduced must infallibly take this Covenant For the first of these Arguments First in generall we do not see how the example of either party can reasonably be alledged to direct the Conscience in any controversie Secondly we have reason to believe that farre the greater number both in the City of London and the Kingdom of Scotland could not take this Oath in judgement as being not able to discern of the righteousnesse or iniquity of some of the Articles especially that which concerns Episcopacy so that a chief strength of this Argument from Example consists in the example of themselves who are of the Assembly and made this Exhortation And then we conceive they cannot justly accuse us either of immodesty or presumption if we shall openly professe that they have not in this first Essay of theirs at least which we know to have been published given evidences of so great Judgement Learning or Integrity as may warrant or encourage us in matters of Religion and cases of Conscience to subscribe to the authority of their example To the second Argument which is That it hath been seconded from Heaven c. it cannot conclude to the Conscience till it be sufficiently proved neither can that be without a revelation of the Counsels of God which if the Composer of this part hath obtained it was requisite to the end propounded that he should have made it appear till when it may be beleeved that those instances where the signature of Gods Judgements may the most plainly have been discovered have fallen upon those who have had the greatest share in the raising and managing of those Arms for the maintaining of which this Covenant is ordained So then the whole force of their perswasion will depend upon the third Argument and the proof of it which to avoid any errour in examining shall be again propounded There is almost nothing in this Covenant which was not for substance either expressed or manifestly included in the Protestation May 5. 1641. Therefore this Covenant goeth forth in its own strength with such convincing evidence of Equity Truth and Righteousnesse as may raise in all not wilfully ignorant or miserably seduced inflamed affections to joyn in the Covenant Resp. 1. We are not able by all those wayes of reasoning to which we have hitherto been used to discover the inference which is here made If by the strength of their solid reason it may possibly be made to appear yet we are confident the dependence is so deep and secret that it ought not to the end for which this discourse is declared to be intended have been left unrevealed 2. Whereas the Argument of the evident Equity Truth and Righteousnesse of this is taken from the agreement of it with that Protestation we will assume the matter of that Protestation to have been in the judgement of this Assembly Equall True and Righteous from whence it will follow that if this should according to their principles either immediately or by necessary consequence contradict that Protestation therein they must confesse it to be unequall false or unrighteous and wherein soever it doth positively dissent from it there the Truth Equity and Righteousnesse of it must be confessed to be here no way proved this being premised let us compare together this Covenant and that Protestation There we protested that we would with our lives c. defend the Doctrine of the Church of England indefinitely which is undoubtedly contained in the 39. Articles which in the further Articles of impeachment Jan. 17. 1643. by the Commons assembled in Parliament against the Archbishop of Canterbury are stiled The 39. Articles of the Church England established by Act of Parliament and in the six and thirtieth of those Articles it is avouched that the Book of Consecration of Archbishops and Bishops and ordering of Priests and Deacons confirmed by Authority of Parliament doth contain all things necessary to such Consecration and Ordering and hath nothing in it ungodly This book asserteth that it is evident to all men diligently reading holy Scripture and ancient Authors that from the Apostles times there have been these Orders of Ministers in the Church Bishops Priests and Deacons which Officers were evermore bad in reverent estimation Wherefore we there protested with our lives c. to defend that it is not ungodly therefore not false Doctrine to say That diligent reading of the Holy Scriptures will help to make it evident that from the Apostles times there have been Bishops which could not be unlesse the Scriptures did testifie that in the Apostles times they were One of the Prayers also lex orandi lex docendi thus begins Almighty God giver of all good things which by thy Holy Spirit hast appointed divers orders of Ministers in thy Church mercifully behold this thy servant now called to the work and ministery of a Bishop and the elected Bishop is afterward required to professe That he is perswaded that he is truly called to this Ministration according to the will of our Lord Iesus Christ And by consequence we there did protest to defend that also and consequently upon their own principles it is unequall and unrighteous to swear to the extirpation of them Again in that Protestation there was nothing concerning the endeavouring the preservation of the Doctrine Discipline and Worship of the Church of
up of truths confessed and undeniable 1. Scots and English are Subjects to the King 2. Of the same Protestant Religion the professors whereof do not differ in fundamentals 3. Their joyning in Arms as is alledged is for the vindication and defence of their Religiâ—n Liberties and Laws 4. Against the Popish Prelaticall and Malignant party 5. By these are meant the Souldiers raised by the King On the other side 1. The King is our lawfull Soveraign 2. Of the same Protestant Religion 3. He hath protested and engaged himself with all solemnity as at the receiving of the holy Eucharist c. to preserve and maintain the Protestant Religion the Laws and Liberties of the Kingdoms and Parliaments 4. That he hath sent many Messages for Treaties toward Peace both before and during the time of these wars and expressed a desire of making the people witnesses of the equity of his proceedings 5. He hath declared his will against both the Scots and English who take up Arms in this Cause Out of these principles whereas many more might be added in behalf of His Majestie let the question be Whether it may be lawfull and necessary for subjects to covenant together without and against the expresse will of their lawfull Soveraign to joyn in Arms against the Forces raised by his command and that for the vindication and defence of that which he hath by all possible obligations engaged himself to maintain and defend and for security of his people hath desired that differences might be composed by Treaty and that the world might judge of his proceedings in it If this be a true state of the question at least so far as is here expressed the next labour for our Consciences will be to examine whether any argument in this exhortation upon supposition that they all were truths in themselves doe infer a lawfulnesse and necessity to covenant in our case all things considered and if it be evident that they are not sufficient it may be a motive to abate the confidence of the composers of it whosoever they were in particular and to procure an examination of their own principles and actions wherein they may possibly see that they have not either in their own actions or in their judgement of others proceeded so exactly according to the Law of conscience and the word of God Now although we are confident that there is not in this exhortation any one argument which the Assembly it self will undertake so to contrive as that it shall conclude for a necessity or a lawfulnesse of taking such a Covenant in such a case all things considered and consequently the whole businesse which was of necessity for vindication of our selves from sottishnesse c. is already done Yet that it may without any danger of prejudice or errour appear that we are not guilty of such a presumption as we have excepted against in them we will as briefly as may be examine their whole discourse and evidently unlesse indeed we be bewitched to think so discover what is untrue or uncertain if any thing of those kinds shall occur and what is insufficient in their Exhortation after we have by way of Apology premised that we will not all answer them in the manner of the delivery of the reasons We have as we hope prevailed against those affections which might have arisen upon those expressions which concern our selves and though with far greater difficulty against that indignation which followed upon the apprehension of those not so very reverent expressions and reflections upon his sacred Majestie so far as not to suffer our judgements or consciences to be withdrawn from a just and meer examination of the truth having seen in them that zeal and confidence however they are excellent affections in those who are sufficiently grounded in an unfallible truth yet they do in no measure help toward a discovery of truth or a removall of scruples in a case of conscience The whole discourse was intended by the Authors of it to consist of perswasions and resolutions of scruples and is immediately resolved into an introduction and the body of the discourse As for the Introduction it contains a collection of many places from whence the composers thereof presume that the necessity of taking this League might be enforced But seeing it carries not clearly in it self any discovery of the consequences it could not in reason be premised to any other discourse then such as in the processe should clear that which was there presumed and seeing the following discourse is no way ordered to a clearing of those inferences so that the design of him who made the introduction is no further prosecuted we may here indeed observe an instance of the variance which is said to be in the Assembly but are no wayes helped in that which was the fundamentall intention of the whole the resolution of our scruples which by the serious consideration of those things here reckoned up we professe to have been exceedingly strengthened upon us and that by such inference as may be gathered if not cleerly seen by this ensuing parallel If the power of Religion described and practised by our Saviour Christ and his Apostles and expressed in the most heroicall actions of the primitive Christians or if solid reason informed by the Doctrine of the Church of England and assisted by the light of the examples of holy Saints and Martyrs and by a perfect information of the beginnings and proceedings of our present miseries and of the standing known Laws of the Land If loyalty to the King and piety to their native Couatry or love to themselves and naturall affection to their posterity if the example of men touched with a deep sense of all these such as have been the most eminent among the Clergy for piety and learning the Instruments as it is confessed used by Almighty God for the preservation of our Religion against all its enemies who with many others the most worthy of the Laity have cheerfully and constantly been spoiled of their goods and suffered a long and tedious imprisonment and are and have been ready to suffer death it selfe in the present cause of his Sacred Majestie or if extraordinary successe from God thereupon such as was necessary to raise his Majesty from a state of despised weaknesse to a power able to resist and probably able to debell all the Forces which his enemies of three Kingdoms can procure If any or all of these can awaken a Nation hitherto stupified and blinded and thereupon imbroiled in the miseries which have attended upon this war to see and imbrace the soveraign and onely means of their recovery there can be no doubt or fear that they will enter into a League with those who have lifted up under what pretence soever their hands against his Sacred Majestie but they will rather repent them of their former disobedience endeavouring to reduce their brethren to a labour for reconciliation and pardon from his Majestie at least to
Scotland the Reformation of the Doctrine of the Church of England Moreover in that we protested absolutely the defence of the Kings Person according to our Allegiance which here we do not absolutely swear to to maintain the Laws of the Land the Liberty of the Subject and onely to defend one another so far as lawfully we may which here are omitted Many other differences may be observed If yet they shall say that there is nothing almost in this which is not in that or nothing of moment which must be the meaning if their Argument be of any force at all it may not be thought unreasonable if we desire with leave from His Majestie to renew that Protestation that we may be thereby excused from this League and Covenant After the proposall of their perswasive Arguments they proceed to the taking away of scruples not all or most of such as might arise to the contrary as appears by that which we have humbly represented against the Covenant it self therefore such as they have chosen out probably because they conceived themselves best able for their Answer The scruples which they suppose are such as concern either the King or the Bishops They begin with the extirpation of Bishops where first they design to prove that they may and ought to be extirpated and after they addresse themselves to answer one speciall objection We will therefore in order propound and examine the weight and truth which is in their Arguments The first is but an intimation Some say this Government was never formally established by the Laws of this Land at all If this were true which some say the Argument were not of so great force toward the taking away of this government as it would be of power to confirm us in the belief we have of the venerable institution of this Government when we shall consider that our Predecessors who have been the Authors of our Laws had such an esteem of the government by Bishops that they thought it altogether needlesse formally to establish it by Law Now that this if any positive consideration might be a ground of that which is here intimated if true appears in that if it were true that it were not formally established yet is it so interwoven with many of our Laws that they and it must stand or fall together So that here again we may desire of them to be tender of us who have protested solemnly with our lives to defend the Laws of the Land 2. The life and soul of it is already taken away by an Act c. so as nothing of jurisdiction remains but what is precarious in them and voluntary in those who submit unto them 1. We cannot acknowledge that any essentiall part of Episcopacy such as that which is the life and soul of it must be is or can be taken away from our Bishops whether it be of order or jurisdiction however the outward coercive Power communicated to it by the secular arm hath been in the times of the famous Persecutions and may be again divided from it 2. For the Act of this present Parliament here mentioned we do believe that there was more taken away in it then was intended by the major part of both Houses at the passing of it This we gather out of those words of his Majestie in his Declaration Aug. 12. And whether that Act was penned with that warinesse and animadversion that there was not more determined by it then the major part of both Houses intended at the passing of it let themselves judge 3. However that were we cannot conceive it reasonable that their temporall lurisdiction should be taken away as was suggested that they might the better intend their Spirituall and then an argument made to take away the Spirituall part of their Government also because the former is already parted from them Thirdly That their whole Government is at best but a humane constitution If there be no fallacy in these words it is necessary that whole be taken materially as it includes each severall part and not formally onely and then we answer That the Government so far as to the superiority of Bishops above Presbyters is at least of Apostolicall constitution as is proved in our reasons against the second Article and consequently as to that which is here spoken of it is not lawfull to be taken away Fourthly It is such as is found and adjudged by both Houses of Parliament not onely very prejudiciall to the civill State but a great hindrance also to a perfect Reformation Yea who knoweth not c. We know the danger and if indeed we did not yet the honour and respect we bear to the very name of Parliaments would not suffer us to question the judgement of the two Houses onely in this case which so neerly concerns the Church of God we crave leave to represent that we doe not apprehend how that should be in it self prejudiciall to the civill State together with which the State both anciently and of late we conceive hath flourished and enjoyed a Politicall happinesse beyond most of the Nations of the earth Neither how that should be opposite to a perfect Reformation which in our Consciences we are perswaded and we think may as clearly be proved as most matters in Divinity was instituted by the Apostles and constantly obtained in the purest times of the Primitive Church to which we conceive a Reformation ought to be squared and indeed the chiefest Instruments and Defendants of that Reformation which we by the mercy of God enjoy having been Bishops some of which were Martyrs as Bishop Cranmer Ridley Hooper Latimer Ferrers Jewell Bilson c. We cannot see to what Reformation Episcopacy can be a hindrance unlesse to such a form as supposes that Episcopacy must be extirpated Which moved the well-affected thorowout this Kingdom long since to petition this Parliament as hath been desired before in the days of Queen Elizabeth and King James for a totall abolition of the same In this which is intended for a proof the fourth Argument seeing it is presumed that those who have petitioned for the abolition of Episcopacy are and have beene well affected For a judgement of that we doe onely represent that the same in the dayes of those renowned Princes by those famous Parliaments held in their times were rejected as Ignorant and Seditious And whereas it is said the well affected throughout the Kingdom c. It doth and may appear that since the sitting of this present Parliament and that after discountenance given to that party more then four and fourty thousand men of quality have petitioned for the continuance of our present Church-government besides the City of London the Counties of Dorcet Kent Surrey Westmorland Cumberland Southampton Lancaster Cornwall Oxfordshire Berkeshire Wiltshire the six shires of North-wales and besides the two Universities all the which have petitioned for the same The restriction or what else is here laid down that we are not by this