〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the power of those things which belong to the Church It were easie to surfet the readers eyes with the cleare testimonies of Fathers and Councells to this purpose Our learned Bishop Downam hath given a world of instances of the severall acts of jurisdiction appropriated to Bishops by antiquity exercised upon both Laicks and Clergy to him I remit my reader So as you may easily set antiquity together by the eares in this point if you please but surely the advantage will be so farre on our side that if you have not ten for one against you I will yeeld my cause There is great difference of times and in them of fashions In those persecuted times when the Church was backed with no Christian Magistrate it was no boot to bid the guides of the Church to combine their Councels and to give strength to their mutuall actions when a generall peace once blessed them and they had the concurrence both of soveraigne and subordinate authority with them they began so much to remit of this care of conjoyning their forces as they supposed to find lesse need of it From hence grew a devolution of all lesse weighty affairs to the weilding of single hands For my part I perswade my selfe that the more frequent communicating of all the important businesse of the Church whether censures or determinations with those grave assistents which in the eye of the Law are designed to this purpose were a thing not onely unprejudiciall to the honour of our function but very behovefull to the happy administration of the Church In the mean while see brethren how you have with Simon fished all night and caught nothing My word was that ours were the same with the Apostles Bishops in this that they challenge no other spirituall power then was by Apostolique authority delegated to Timothy and Titus You run out upon the following times of the Church and have with some wast quotations laboured to prove that In after ages Bishops called in Presbyters to the assistance of their jurisdiction which is as much to me as Baculus stat in angulo SECT X. YOur next Section runs yet wilder I speak of the no-difference of our Bishops from the first in the challenge of any spirituall power to themselves other then delegated to Timothy and Titus You tell mee of delegating their power to others What is this to the nature of the calling Doth any man claime this as essentiall to his Episcopacie Doth any man stand upon it as a piece of his spirituall power If this be granted to be an accidentall error of some particular man for it cannot be fastned upon all what difference doth it make in the substance of the function As if some monster suddenly presented it selfe to you you aske Was ever such a thing heard of in the best primitive times that men which never received imposition of hands should not only be received into assistance but be wholly intrusted with the power of spirituall jurisdiction Let me ask you again Was ever such a thing heard of either in the Primitive or following times that Lay-men should be so far admitted to the managing of spirituall jurisdiction as to lay their hands upon their Ministers in their Ordination Yet this is both done and challenged by too many of your good friends Why do you object that to us wherewith the Presbyterian part may be more justly choaked But herein Brethren you do foulely over-reach in that you charge our Bishops as in a generality with wholly-intrusting the power of spirituall jurisdiction to their Chancellors and Commissaries The assistance of those which are learned in the Law wee gladly use neither can well want in the necessary occasions of our judicature but that wee doe either wilfully or negligently devest our selves absolutely of that power and wholly put it into Laick hands it is a meere sclander For want of better proofs of the illegality of this course you bring a negative authority from Cyprian telling us what that holy Martyr did not That he did not send Complainants to his Chancellour or Commissarie It is very like he did not nor yet to the Bench of a Lay Presbyterie But if he did not commit the hearing of his Causes to a Lay-man we find that some others did Socrates can tell you of Silvanus the good Bishop of Troas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. perceiving that some of his Clergie did corruptly make gaine of Causes would no more appoint any of his Clergie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be a Judge but made choise of some faithfull man of the Laity to whom he committed that audience and was much honoured for it What Bishop Downam yeelds concerning the Ordinaries Vicars and Chancellors of former times till Ambrose's daies that they were onely Clergie-men you reject witn scorne and challenge any man to produce the names of any Clergie-man that was Vicar to Ambrose or Chancellour to Augustine c. What a poore brave is this I challenge you to produce the name of any Secretary or Actuary that Ambrose or Austin had because you cannot shall I conclude they had none such That instance of Sylvanus not long after Ambrose is evidence enough But the antiquity of Chancellors which were the same with Ecclesiecdici or Episcoporum ecdici is proveable enough if it were for this place and their necessary use beyond the power of your confutation But I had rather refer my reader to S. Thomas Ridley and others that have laboured in that argument and appeale to all mens judgement how soundly you have upon this ground proved that our Bishops and the former were two SECT XI HOw justly may I say Readers of these men as the King of Israel said of the King of Syria See I beseech you how they seeke a quarrell against me My just defence was that our Bishops are the same in substance and effect with those which were ordained by the Apostles they come now and tell me of an oath ex officio used in the high Commission and in our Consistories as if every particular manner of Proceeding in our Courts and judicatures must either be patterned by the Apostolike or els they are utterly unjustifiable why do they not as wel chalenge us that we give men the book to touch and kisse in taking an oath Why doe they not aske how wee can prove that those Apostolicall Bishops had Notaries Registers Advocates Consistories what frivolous and delusory exceptions are these to all wise men and how strangely savouring of a weak judgement and strong malice As for your cavil at the oth ex officio since you wil needs draw it in by head and shoulders how little soever it concernes us I returne you this answer That if any of our profession have in the pressing of it exceeded the lawfull bounds I excuse him not I defend him not let him bear away his own load but in these surely there is more to bee said for
Bishops and ours are two We do again professe that if our Bishops challenge any other power then was delegated to and required of Timothy and Titus wee shall yeeld them usurpers you kindely tell us so we deserve to be if we doe but challenge the same power and why so I beseech you brethren because Timothy and Titus yee say were Evangelists and so moved in an higher sphere Liberally and boldly spoken but where is your proofe For Timothy ye say the Text is cleare but what Text what the least intimation have you for Titus surely not so much as the least ground of a conjecture yet how confidently you avow for both and even for Timothy your glosse is clear not your text St. Paul bids him do the worke of an Euangelist what then that rather intimates that he was none for he doth not say do thine own worke but the worke of an Evangelist when I tell my friend that I must desire him to do the office of a Soliciter or a Secretary for me I do herein intimate that he is neither but so for the time employed why is it not so here And what I beseech you is the worke of an Evangelist but to preach the Evangell or good tydings of peace So as St. Paul herein gives no other charge to his Timothy then in 2. Tim. 4.2 Preach the Word be instant in season and out of season And this you say and urge to be the worke of a Bishop too well therefore may Timothy notwithstanding this charge be no other then a Bishop what need these words to be contradistinguished St. Paul sayes of himselfe Whereto I am appoynted a Preacher and an Apostle and a teacher of the Gentiles what shall we say St. Paul was an Apostle he was not a Preacher or not a Doctor but an Apostle You distinguish of Evangelists the word is taken either for the writers of the Gospell or for the teachers of it and why then was not St. Paul an Evangelist who professed to be a teacher of the Gospell unto the Gentiles These teaching Evangelists you dreame to be of two sorts the one those that had ordinary places and gifts the other extraordinary but tell me sirs for my learning where do you finde those ordinary-placed and ordinary-gifted Evangelists unlesse you mean to comprse all Preachers under this name and then a Bishop may be an Evangelist also so as the difference of a Bishop and an Evangelist vanisheth The truth is these ordinary Evangelists are a new fiction their true imployment was to be sent by the Apostles from place to place for the preaching of the Gospell without a setled residence upon any one charge upon this advantage you raise a slight argument that St. Paul besought Timothy to abide at Ephesus 1. Tim. 1.3 which had been a needlesse importunity if he had the Episcopall charge of Ephesus for then he must have necessarily resided there whereas you recite severall proofes and occasions of his absence which will appear to be of little force if a man doe duly consider the state of those times the necessity wherof in that first plantation of the Gospell made even the most sixed Sars planetary calling them frequently from the places of their abode to those services which were of most use for the successe of that great worke yet so as that either after their errands fully-done or upon all opportune intermissions they returned to their own Chaire The story therefore of those journal computations might well have been spared Your argument from Pauls calling the Elders of Ephesus to Miletus how ever you lean upon it it will prove but a Reed Your selves confesse I know not upon what certaine ground that Timothy was at the meeting Acts 20. with St. Paul Had he been Bishop there the Apostle you say in stead of giving the Elders a charge to feede the flocke of Christ would have given that charge to Timothy and not to them Besides the Apostle would not have so forgotten himselfe as to call the Elders Bishops before the Bishops face and would have given them some directions how to carry themselves to their Bishops In all which brethren you goe upon wrong ground wil ye grant that these assembled persons were Presbyters and not Bishops under some Bishop though not under Timothy otherwise why doe you argue from the want of directions to them as inferiours but if they were indeed Bishops and not mere Presbyters as the word it selfe imports your argument is lost For then the charge is equally given to Timothy and all the rest and it was no forgetfulnesse to call them as they were you are straight ready to reply how unpossible it is according to us there should be many Bishops in one City and here were many Presbyters from Ephesus but let me mind you that though these Presbyters were sent for from Ephesus yet they were not said to be all of Ephesus Thither they were called to meet St. Paul in all likelihood from divers parts which he seemes to imply when he saith Ye all amongst whom I have gone preaching the Kingdome of God intimating the super-intendents of severall places so as notwithstanding these urged probabilities Timothy might have beene both before this time and at that present Bishop of Ephesus after which if Paul tooke him along with him to Hierusalem this is no derogation to his Episcopacy And if Timothy were yet after this prisoner with St. Paul at Rome as you argue from Hebr. 13.23 this is no derogation from his Episcopacy at Ephesus but to cut the sinewes of all this strong proofe of your computation it is more than probable that whereas the whole history of the Acts ends with Pauls first beeing at Rome that Apostle survived divers years and passed many travells and did many great matters for the plantation and setling of churches whereof we can looke for no account from Scripture save by some glances in his following Epistles into which time these occurrents concerning Timothy and Titus his ordination did fall as may be justly proved out of the Chronologicall table of the experienced Jacob Cappellus compared with Baronius Now then the Reader may take his choyse whether he will believe all antiquity that have medled with this subject affirming Timothy to have been bishop of Ephesus or whether he wil believe a new hatched contradiction of yesterday raised out of imaginary probabilities Shortly it is far enough from appearing that Timothy was no Bishop but a Minister an Evangelist a fellow-labourer of the Apostles an Apostle a Messenger of the Church it rather appeares that he was al these in divers sences and upon severall occasions The like yea say of Titus whom you are pleased to create an Evangelist not being able to shew that ever God made him so save in that generall sence that might well stand with Episcopacy you tel us a story of his perigrination in the attendance of Paul wherein you shall not expect any contradiction
but you shall give me leave to take you tripping in your own Tale from Cilicia you say Paul passed to Creet where he left Titus for a while to set in order things that remain this for a while you put into a different Character as if it were part of the Text and guiltily translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things that remaine whereas ours turne it in a more full expression of an Episcopall power things that are wanting or left undone but this is not the matter you do yet again repeat the for a while urging the short time that Titus could bee left at Creet and yet in your own marginall computation there is no lesse distance of time betwixt this placing in Creet and sending for him to his next remove unto Nicopolis thā betwixt the year 46 51. the space of five years which was a large gap of time in that unsetled condition and manifold distractive occasions of the Church If afterwards hee were by Apostolicall command called away to tend the more concerning services of the Church this could no whit have impeacht the truth of his Episcopacy but the truth is he was ordained by St. Paul after all those journeys mentioned in the Acts and as Baronius with great consent of Antiquity computes it a year after Timothy so as you may well put up your conclusion as rather begged than inforced and cast it upon the Readers courtesie to beleeve you against al antiquity that Titus was an Evangelist and no Bishop where as these two may well agree together he was an Evangelist when he travelled abroad he was a bishop afterwards when hee stayed and setled at home You object to your selfe the authority of some Fathers that have called Timothy and Titus Bishops Some name if you can that Father that hath called them otherwise away with these envious diminutions when yea have a cloud of witnesses of much antiquity which averre Timothy and Titus to have both lived and dyed Bishops the one of Ephesus of Creet the other yea but so some Fathers have called them Arch-bishops and Patriarchs too What of that therein they have then acknowledged them bishops paramount and if Titus were Bishop of Creet which was of old 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hundred-cityed Island and Timothy of Ephesus the Metropolis of Asia the multitude of the territories under them whiles it inlargeth their charge doth detract nothing from the use of their office Secondly you tell us from learned D. Raynolds that the Fathers when they called any Apostle Bishop they meant it in a generall sort aad signification because they did attend that church for a time and supply that roome in preaching the Gospell which Bishops did after not intending it as it is commonly taken for the over-seer of a particular Church and Pastor of a severall flocke but what is this to Timothy and Titus you say the same may be said of them but the Doctor gave you no leave so to apply it neither do we Although to say truth all this discourse of yours is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 needlesse and extravagant whether Timothy or Titus were Evangelists or no sure we are that heere they stand for persons charged with those Offices and cares which are delivered to the ordinary Church governours in all succeeding generations And we do most justly take them as we finde them and with our first confidence maintain that we challenge no other spirituall power then was delegated unto them and unto the Angels of the Asian Churches you meane to confute us by questions and those so poore and frivolous as are not worth answer fastning that upon some particular abuse which wee disclaime from our calling as if under this claime wee were bound to justifie every act of a Bishop To answer you in your own kind when or where did our bishops challenge power to ordaine alone to govern alone when though you ignorantly turne an Elder in age to an Elder in Office did our Bishops challenge power to passe a rough and unbeseeming rebuke upon an Elder Where did our Bishops give Commission to Chancellors Commissaries Officials to rayle upon Presbyters or to accuse them without just grounds and without legall proceedings As for your last question I must tell you it is no better raised then upon an ignorant negative Did the Apostle say reject none but an Heretick Did he not wish would to God they were cut off that trouble you Is it not certainly proved true that some Scismaticke may be worse then some Hereticke which I speak not so as to traduce any of our unconforming brethren whose consciences are unsetled in the point of this mean difference as guilty of that hatefull crime but to convince the absurdity of our questionists after whose ill raised cavills thus fully answered we have no cause to feare upon their suggestions to bee disclaimed as usurpers From Timothy and Titus you descend to the Angels of the seven Asian Churches which no subtilty at all but the common interest of their condition hath twisted together in our defence In the generality whereof I must premonish my Reader that this Piece of the task fell unhappily upon some dull and tedious hand that cared not how oft sod Coleworts he dished out to his credulous guests I shall what I may prevent their surfet Your shift is that the Angel is here taken collectively not individually A conceit which if your selves certainly no other wise man can ever believe for if the interest be common and equally appertayning to all why should one be singled out above the rest If you will yeeld the person to be such as had more than others a right in the administration of all it is that we seeke for Surely it did in some sort concerne all that was spoken to him because he had the charge of al but the direction is individuall as Beza himselfe takes it as if a Letter be indorsed from the Lords of the Counsaile to the Bishop of Durham or Salisbury concerning some affaires of the whole Clergy of their Diocesse can we say that the name Bishop is there no other then a collective because the businesse may import many verily I do not believe that the Authors of this sence can believe it themselves To your invincible proofes In the Epistle to Thyatira you say it is written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I say to you and to the rest where by you must as you imagine be signified the Governours by the rest the people but what if the better Copyes read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I say to you the rest in Thyatira without the copulative as is confessed by your good friends where then is your doughty Argument Here are no divisions of parties but the Pastor and Flock And truly thus it is and my own eyes have seen it in that noble Manuscript written by the hand of Tecla as is probably supposed some 1300. years agoe as Cyrill the late renowned Patriarch of Constantinople
Faith there therefore he commandeth Timothy to stay at Ephesus Titus at Crete not as Evangelists but as governors of the Churches And indeed the Epistles written to either of them doe evince the same for in these he doth not prescribe the manner of gathering together a Church which was the duty of an Evangelist but the manner of governing a Church being already gathered together which is the duty of a Bishop and all the precepts in those Epistles are so conformable hereunto as that they are not refer'd in especiall to Timothy and Titus but in general to all Bishops and therefore in no wise they suit with the temporary power of Evangelists Besides that Timothy and Titus had Episcopall jurisdiction not onely Eusebius Chrysostome Theodoret Ambrosius Hierome Epiphanius Oecumenius Primasius Theophylact but also the most ancient writers of any that write the History of the new Testament whose writings are now lost do sufficiently declare Eusebius without doubt appealing unto those in his third book of Ecclesiasticall History and 4. chapter Timothy saith hee in Histories is written to bee the first which was made Bishop of the Church of Ephesus as Titus was the first that was made Bishop of the Church of Crete But if John the Apostle and not any antient Disciple of the Apostles bee the authour of the Revelation hee suggests unto us those seven new Examples of Apostolicall Bishops For all the most learned Interpreters interpret the seven Angels of the Churches to be the seven Bishops of the Churches neither can they doe otherwise unlesse they should offer violence to the text What should I speake of James not the Apostles but the Brother of our Saviour the Sonne in law of the Mother of our Lord who by the Apostles was ordained Bishop of Hierusalem as Eusebius in his 2d. book of Ecclesiasticall History 1 chap. out of the 6. of the Hypotyposes of Clement Hierome concerning Ecclesiasticall writers out of the 1. of the Comments of Egesippus relate Ambrose upon the 1. chap. unto the Galatians Chrysostome in his 23 Homily upon the 15 of the Acts Augustine in his 2d. book and 37 chap. against Cresconius Epiphanius in his 65 Heresie The 6. Synod in Tullo and 32 Canon all assenting thereunto For indeed this is that James that had his first residence at Jerusalem as an ordinary Bishop whom Paul in his first and last coming to Hierusalem found in the City almost all the Apostles preaching in other places Gal. 1.19 and that concluded those things which were decreed in the assembly of the Apostles Act. 21. For hee was with Chrysostome Bishop of the Church of Hierusalem from whom when certaine came Peter would not eate with the Gentiles Galat. 2.12 From examples I passe to authorities which Ignatius confirmes by his own authority Whose axiomes are these The Bishop is he which is superiour in all chiefty and power The Presbytery is a holy company of counsellours and assessours to the Bishop The deacons are the imitators of angelicall vertues which shew forth their pure and unblameable ministry He which doth not obey these is without God impure and contemnes Christ and derogates from his order and constitution in his Epistle to the Trallians In an other place I exhort that ye study to doe all things with concord The Bishop being president in the place of God The Presbyters in place of the Apostolick Senate the Deacons as those to whom was committed the Ministry of Jesus Christ in his Epistle to the Magnesians And againe Let the Presbyters be subject to the Bishop the Deacons to the Presbyters the people to the Presbyters and Deacons in his Epistle to those of Tarsus But Ignatius was the Disciple of the Apostles from whence then had he this Hierarchie but from the Apostles Let us now heare Epiphanius in his 75. Heresie The Apostles could not presently appoint all things Presbyters and Deacons were necessary for by these two Ecclesiasticall affaires might bee dispatch Where there was not found any fâ—t for the Episeopacie that place remained without a Bishop but where there was need and there were any fit for Episcopacy they were made Bishops All things were not compleat from the beginning but in tract of time all things were provided which were required for the perfection of those things which were necessary the Church by this means receiving the fulnesse of dispensation But Eusebius comes neerer to the matter more strongly handles the cause who in his third booke of Ecclesiasticall History and 22 chapter as also in his Chronicle affirmeth that Erodius was ordained the 1. Bishop of Antioch in the yeere of our Lord. 45. in the 3. yeere of Claudius the Emperor at which time many of the Apostles were alive Now Hierome writeth to Evagrius that at Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist unto Heraclius and Dionisius the Bishop the Presbyters called one chosen out of themselvs and placed in a higher degree the Bishop But Marke dyed as Eusebius and Bucholcerus testifie in the yeere of our Lord 64. Peter Paul and John the Apostles being then alive therefore it is cleere that Episcopacie was instituted in the time of the Apostles and good Hierome suffered some frailty when he wrote that Bishops were greater then Presbyters rather by the custome of the Church then the truth of the Lords disposing unlesse perhaps by the custome of the Church hee understands the custome of the Apostles and by the truth of the Lords disposing hee understands the apointment of Christ yet not so hee satisfies the truth of History For it appears out of the 1.2 and 3. Chapters of the Revelation that the forme of governing the Church by Angels or Bishops was not only ratified and established in the time of the Apostles but it was coÌ„firmed by the very Son of God And Ignatius called that form the order of Christ And when Hierome writes that it was decreed in the whole World that one chosen out of the Presbyters should bee placed over the rest And when I have demonstrated that in the life-time of the Apostles Bishops were superior to Presbyters in Ordination and that each Church had one placed over it doe wee not without cause demand where when and by whom Episcopacie was ordained Episcopacie therefore is of divine right Which how the Prelates of the Church of Rome for almost 300. yeers did adorne with the truth of Doctrine innocency of life constancy in afflictions and suffering Death it selfe for the honour of Christ and on the other side how in succeding times first by their ambition next by their excessive pragmaticall covetousnesse scraping up to themselves the goods of this world then by their heresie last of all by their tyranny they corrupted it that the Roman Hierarchy at this day hath nothing else left but a vizard of the Apostolicall Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy and the lively image of the whore of Babylon our Histories both antient and moderne doe abundantly testifie Wherefore all Bishops are
warned from hence that they throughly weigh with themselves the nature of Apostolicall Episcopacie of which they glory that they are the successors That Episcopacie had two things peculiar to it the privilege of succeeding the prerogative of ordaining all other things were common to them with the Presbyters Therefore both Bishops and Presbyters should so exercise themselves in godlinesse should so free themselves from contempt by their conversation and so make themselves examples to their flock not neglecting especially the gift of prophecying received from above but being wholly intent to reading consolation and teaching to meditate on these things to be wholly conversant in them and so perpetually imployed in this holy function and divine affairs with this promise that if they shall doe these things they shall both save themselves and their Auditors but if after the custome of some great ones they follow the pride and luxury of this World they shall both destroy themselves and them that heare them * FINIS THE JUDGMENT OF The learned Divine Doctor Abrahamus Scultetus prime professor of Divinity at HEIDELBERGE Concerning Lay-Elders OBSERVATIONS Vpon 1 Timothy by Abraham Scultetus Cap. 27. Concerning 1. Tim. 5.17 THere are some that thinke this place of Scripture is of force enough to make good a Lay-Presbytery for their eyes and judgements are dazled w th that distinction of Elders which they suppose to be cleerly intimated here by S. Paul But if they shall have diligently scanned the place compared it with other Texts of Scripture they shall soone finde that the defence of Lay Elders out of this place is both contrary to the signification of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i e. those that rule and contrary to the signification of the Word Presbyter and that it is quite against St. Pauls perpetuall Doctrine and it is against the judgement of all the Fathers that have expounded this speech of Saint Paul It is contrary to the signification of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Ecclesiasticall rule or government is an honour wherewith onely Ministers of Gods word are invested in the new Testament and not any Lay Persons We beseech you brethren saith the Apostle 1 Thes v. 12. That you know those that labour amongst you and are over you in the Lord and that admonish you and to esteeme them very highly in love for their workes sake upon which words saith Calvin it is worthy to bee observed what titles he gives to Pastors First he saith that they labor and then he sets them forth by the name of rule or governance And Beza upon the place it appeares from hence that the Church was governed by Pastors in common and that the degree of a Bishop was not thought of and therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to rule is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to leade because the shepheards are wont to goe before their flock But the Apostle Heb. 13.7 and 17. calls the Ministers of the Word Leaders Therefore according to Beza we must acknowledge those that are over the people are the Ministers of the word neither doth Iustin Martyr in his Apology to Antonius call the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any other then the pastor and teacher of the Congregation Moreover the defence of Lay-Elders out of this present text of St. Paul is contrary to the signification of the word Presbyter which when it is used concerning the polity of the new Testament doth always signifie the Ministers of the word Acts 11.30 They sent their collection to the Elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul that is to the Ministers of whom it is said Acts 14.13 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They ordained them Elders in every Church And Acts 15.2 A main question of faith is propounded to the Apostles and Elders of Hierusalem but what to be decided by Lay-Men for the Elders met with the Apostles to consider of this matter Acts 15.6 And the Presbyters are joyned together with the Apostles Verse 22. and are distinguished from the whole Church as also v. 23. and chap. 16.4 Again in the 20. of the Acts the Elders of Ephesus verse 17. are said to be made Bishops to feede the flocke of Christ ver 18. and in Acts 21.18 and the verses following the Presbyters or Elders of Jerusalem instruct the Apostle Paul what he is to doe and therefore were no Lay-men In this very Chapter when Timothy is commanded to receive no accusation against an Elder the Elder there is a teacher as shall be shewed in the next chapter Titus 1.5 that thou maist ordain Elders in every City what kind of Elders surely teachers for hee adds if any be blamelesse c. for a Bishop must be unreproveable c. And James 5.14 The sick are bidden to send for the Elders of the Church that they may pray over and anoint the sick with oyle in the name of the Lord which is no Lay-mans duty 1 Peter 5.1 The Elders I exhort who am also a fellow-Elder feede the flock How is hee a fellow-Elder but because he is a teacher as they And they are charged to feed the flook therefore Pastors 2 Ioh· 1. 3 Ioh. 1. Iohn the Apostle without all question is called an Elder Ignatius makes often mention of Elders or Presbyters in his Epistles but never of Lay-Elders And in his Epistle to those of Tarsus describing the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy of his time he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let the Presbyters bee subject to the Bishops and the Deacons to the Presbyters and the Lay-men to both Deacons and Presbyters and to the Magnesians As the Lord saith hee doth nothing without the Father so neither do you without your Bishop neither Presbyter nor deacon nor Laick Where observe that the very Deacons did not sit in the Presbytery Apostolique much lesse Lay-men Thirdly the defence of Lay-Elders out of the 17. verse of Chap. 5. of the 1. Tim. is against the Perpetuall doctrine of St. Paul for to give honour to the Presbyters or Elders is to honour them with maintenance out of the publique stock of the Church for so the Apostle before commands these that are indeed Widowes to be honoured that is to be designed to publique attendances and allowances And the reason which the Apostle gives confirmes this explication of the honour required When he saith thou shalt not muzzle the Oxe that treadeth out the corne And in Matthew the honor of Parents is chiefely to be taken of meat and maintenance which signification is very familiar and proper to the word Kabud used in the fifth commandement and so the word is expounded by Marke 7.12 But maintenance out of the stock of the Church the Apostle would not have to be given even to such poore widdows as could be otherwise provided for as before verse 16. And he himselfe laboured with his owne hands that he might not bee burdensome to others much lesse would he have the chiefe of
of Iohannes Major I wish they had not been without either before or since but what is this to my assertion There could be no interruption of that which had as yet no being neither did I ever say that Bishops were every where You come to England there you think to have me sure you desire to know of the Remonstrant Whether God had a Church in England in Q. Maries dayes or no And if so who were then Bishops Sure brethren you cannot be so ignorant as you make your selves Have you not seen M r Foxes Acts and Monuments Have you not seen M r Fr Masons Vindication of our succession Or doe ye make no difference betwixt an intermission and an interruption Doe ye not know that even the See of Rome which would faine boast of a known succession hath yet been without a Bishop longer then the whole raigne of Qu. Mary if we may beleeve Damasus himselfe after Marcellinus for 7. years 6. moneths and 25. daies And if after the Martyrdome of our Orthodoxe Bishops revolted or Popish governors held those Sees they were corrupt in their places judgement and practise there was not an utter abolition of their calling which their repentance restored to its first vigour Where I justly aver this continuance to have been without the contradiction of any one congregation in the Christian world you vainly think to choak me with a story from our own darling Heylin which tels us of the furious violence of the people of Biscay against the Bishop of Pampelona reported also by the Spanish history to which you referre us concealing yet that which the same history relates that this was done upon some attempts and wrong conceived to be offered them by the Clergy A goodly instance and fit for the gall of your inke and as good a consequence The Biscainers upon a private quarrell are enraged against the person of their Bishop for his sake for the time against his fellowes therefore some Christian Congregation denies the succession of Episcopall Government from the times of the Apostles Of the like validity and judgement is your instance of French Scotish and Belgick Churches Who doubts of either their Christianity or their contradiction to Episcopacy But if you did not wilfully both shut your own eies and endeavour to blind the eies of your Reader you could not but see that I limit the time untill this present age Good brethren whiles you object bold falshood to me learn to make some conscience of truths To let passe your untrue suggestions concerning my assertion of one and the same forme of Prayer continued from Moses to the Apostles and by the Apostles c. I cannot but wonder with what face you can reckon it amongst my untruths that Episcopall Government hath continued in this Iland ever since the first plantation of the Gospel I challenge you before that awfull Bar to which you have appealed name but one yeare ever since Christianity had footing in England which was under the British o◠Roman Government wherein there were no Bishops in this Land If you can name neither yeare nor Author be ashamed to say this truth hath had any contradiction or else I hope the Readers will be ashamed of you What a poore shift is it to tell me of the contradiction that Episcopacie hath had since the Reformation I can tell the world that your selves oppose it what of that You mislike the Government you cannot deny that it hath so long continued so as my assertion continues inviolable that the form of this government hath without contradiction continued here ever since the first plantation of the Gospel The man runs on still you say and as thinking to get credit to his untruths by their multiplication dares boldly say that except all Histories all Authors faile them nothing can be more certaine then this truth and here you cry out Os durum and aggravate the matter enviously by the instance of Divine truths concerning the maine points of our holy Creede But good sirs doe ye bethink whom you speake to Could you suppose to meete with so meane readers as should not know that no phrase is more ordinary in our hourly discourse then this when we would cōfidently affirme any truth to say It is so true as nothing can be truer Not to enter into any metaphysicall discourse concerning the being or degrees of truth wherein some that would be wise may perhaps have lost themselves would any man think it reasonable that upon such an ordinary and familiar assertion he should be called to account for the articles of his Creede and be urged to compare his truth with Gods Away with this witlesse and malicious intimation Pardon me Readers that I have spent so much time and paper in following these triflers so close their uncharitable suggestions drew me on Judge yee now whether of us have more just cause of indignation SECT IIII. HItherto they have flourished now I hope they will strike against the Libellers importune projects of innovations I urged that were this Ordinance meerly humane or Ecclesiasticall if there could be no more said for it but that it is exceeding ancient of more then 1500. years standing and in this Iland of the same age with the Gospell it self this might be a just reason to make men tender of admitting a change an argument which I seconded with so rationall inforcement as will I doubt not prevaile with all unpartiall judgements Now my witty Answerers tell me this is an argumentum Galeatum and that the Reader may know they have seen a Father cite Hierome who gave that title to a Prologue but never to an argument and as if arguments were Almanacks tell us It was Calculated for the Meridian of Episcopacy and may indifferently serve for all Religions Truly brethren you have not well taken the height of the Pole nor observed a just zenith for could you say so much for the Presbyteriall government had it continued here so long I should never yeeld my vote to alter it an uninterrupted course of so many years should settle it still So as you are plainly deceived the argument is not calculated for the Meridian of Episcopacy but for whatsoever government if so long time have given it peaceable possession there had need to be strong reasons of Law for an ejection But that it may serve for all Religions it is but an envious suggestion unlesse you adde this withall save where the ground of the change is fully convictive and irrefragable in which cause both the mouthes of Jews and Heathens and Papists and your own may be justly stopped As for that overworne observation of Cyprian that our Saviour sayes I am the way the truth and the life but doth not say I am custome it is no lesse plausible then usefull but if wee regard soundnesse of ratiocination it is an Illustration meerly negative so we may say hee saith not I am reason I am experience I am
knowledge and approbation The Presbyters then chose their Bishops who doubts it But upon whose order and Institution save that which S. Paul to the Superintendents met at Miletus Acts 20. Spiritus sanctus vos constituit Episcopos I marvell Brethren with what face you can make Ierome say that the Presbyters themselves were the Authors of this imparity when as himself hath plainly ascribed this to Gods own work when reading that Esay 60.17 I will make thy Officers peace according to the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. I will give thy Princes in peace and thy Bishops in righteousnesse he applies this to the Governours of the Evangelicall Church and the blessed Martyr and Bishop S. Cyprian to the same purpose The Deacons saith he must remember that the Lord himselfe chose Apostles that is Bishops but Deacons were chosen by the Apostles themselves And when ye cannot but know that the Apostles themselves were the immediate actors in this businesse if at least ye will beleeve the Histories and Fathers of the Church Irenaeus tels you plainly that the Apostles Peter and Paul delivered the Episcopacy of that Church to Linus and that Polycarpus was by the Apostles made Bishop in Asia of the Church of Smyrna and Tertullian particularly that Polycarpus was there placed by S. Iohn And S. Chrysostome clearly sayes that Ignatius was not onely trained up with the Apostles but that he received his Bishoprick from them and emphatically that the hands of the blessed Apostles touched his holy head And lastly the true Ambrose to the shameing of that Counterfeit whom you bring forth under that name tels you that Paul saw Iames at Ierusalem because he was made Bishop of that place by the Apostles your slip may talk of a Councell wherein this was done but this is as false as himselfe It is well known there never was any such Councell in the Christian world since the first generall Synod was the Nicene And Ieroms toto orbe Decretum as we have shewed could import no other then an Apostolicall act As for S. Augustine Is it not a just wonder Reader that these men dare cite him for their opinion upon occasion of a modest word concerning the honourable title of Episcopacy when as they cannot but know and grant that he hath blazoned Aerius for an heretick meerly for holding the same Tenet which they defend Lastly if Gregory Nazianzen in a pathetick manner have wished the abolition of Episcopacie as he never did what more dislike had he shown to it then he did to Synods when he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. that he never knew good come of them But reader it will be worth the while to inquire into the fidelity of these mens allegations Doe but consult the place of Nazianzen thou shalt â—â—nd that he speaks not particularly of Episcopacie but of all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or precedencie and of all quarrelsome challenges of place all tyrannicall carriage of one man towards another wishing that there were no standing upon points of precedency but every man might be respected according to his vertue and adding at last Nunc autem dextrum hoc et sinistrum et medium latus c. But now saith he the right hand and the left and the middle place and the higher and lower degree and going before and going cheeke by jole what a world of troubles have they brought upon us Thus he See then Reader what a testimony here is for the utter abolition of Episcopacy from a man who was so interessed in the calling that he was wont to be styled by his adversaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Bishop of three Sees By this judge reader of the rest So then after all the clamours and colourable pretences of these men this imparity and jurisdiction was conveyed from the Apostles hands and deduced in an uninterrupted Line through all following ages to this present day How can this be say they unlesse our Bishops will draw the Line of their pedegree through the lines of Antichrist and joyne issue and mingle blood with Rome For shame Brethren eate this word What are there no Bishops but at Rome Is the whole Church all the world over Antichristian even those which are no lesse angry at Rome then your selves Hath not Episcopall imparitie continued in them all this while Is there no distinction to be had betwixt the calling and the abuse If the Antichristian Church have had Bishops so it hath had Churches Scriptures Baptisme Learning Creeds Because we have all these with them will ye say we deduce them from the loines of Antichrist Away with this impotent spight and uncharitablenesse and learne to be more modest true in your assertions and lesse confident in your appeals SECT VII LEt me balk your idle words the question is of the difference betwixt our present Bishops and the ancient this you will spread forth in three particulars The first is the manner of Election to these places of eminence which was of old ordered by the privity consent and approbation of the people which you eagerly seeke to prove out of Cyprian neither can it be denied that he is full and punctuall in this point Holy Athanasius seconds it And the old rule was Electio clericorum consensus Principis petitio plebis that a Bishop came in by the suite of the people the Election of the Clergy the consent of the Prince Ye might well have in this case spared the fetching in of the good Emperour Constantine doubtlesse this was the manner of old what variations followed afterward in these proceedings our learned Dr. Field hath well showed but sure this interest of the people continued so long even in the Roman Church that Platina can tell us Gregory the seventh was elected by Cardinalls Clerks Acoluthites Subdeacons Priests Abbots Bishops Clergie and Laitie The inconveniences that were found in those tumultuarie elections and the seditious issue of them which Nazianzen and Eusebius have laid before us in some particulars were I suppose the cause why they were in a sort laid downe But an imitation of this practise we have still continuing in our Church wherein upon the vacancy of every See there is a Conge-d'eslire that is a leave to elect sent down from the King to the Presbyters viz. the Deane and Chapter of that Church for an ensuing election of their Bishop and if this were yet more free we should not like it the lesse But in the meane time Brethren how are you quite beside the Cushion Where the objection was That the Apostles Bishops and ours were two in respect of managing their function And my defence is that our Bishops challenge not any other Spirituall power then the Apostles delegated to Timothy and Titus you now tell us of the different manner of our Elections What is this ad Rhombum we speake of their actions and exercise of power you talke of others actions to them
Were it so pleasing to his Majesty and the State to decree it we should be well content to submit to this ancient forme of Election the forbearance whereof is neither our fault nor our prejudice so as you might well have bestowed this breath to a better purpose and rather conclude that notwithstanding this forme of different choice our Bishops and those of former times are not two SECT VIII WEE follow you into the execution of our Episcopall Office wherein you will show ours and the Apostles to be two so clearely that he who will not wilfully shut his eyes may see a latitude of differences and that in three points The first in sole jurisdiction which you say was a stranger yea a monster to former times and will make it good by the power of that which in all wise writers was wont to be contra-distinguished Ordination For this maine point let my Answerers know that the Ordination is the Bishops but the sole in their sense is their own neither did our Bishops ever challenge it as theirs alone without the Presbyters but as principally theirs with them so as if the power be in the Bishop the assistance is from them the practise in both so is it in the Bishops that ordinarily and regularly it may not be done without them and yet ordinately it may not be done without them by the Bishop which hath bin so constantly and carefully ever observed that I challenge them to shew any one instance in the Church of England to the contrary Say Brethren I beseech you after all this noyse what Bishop ever took upon him to ordain a Presbyter alone or without the concurrent imposition of many hands They no lesse then Cyprian can say Ego collegae Although I must tell you this was in the case of Aurelius made a Lector And in that other testimony which you cite out of his Epistle 58. he speaks onely of the fraternities consent and approbation not of their concurrence in their act this is small game with you Neither is it lesse the order of the Church of England then of the Councell of Carthage Cum ordinatur Presbyter c. When a Presbyter is ordained the Bishop blessing him and holding his hand upon his head all the Presbyters that are present shall likewise lay their hands upon his head with the hands of the Bishop With what conscience can ye alledge this as to choak us in our contrary practise when you know this is perpetually and unfailably done by us But now that the Readers may see how you shuffle shew us but one instance of a Presbyters regular and practised ordaining without a Bishop and carry the cause else you do but abuse the Reader with an ostentation of proving what was never denied But here by the way brethren you must give me leave to pull you by the sleeve and to tell you of two or three foul scapes which will trie whether you can blush First that you abuse Firmilianus in casting upon him an opinion of Presbyters ordaining which he never held He in his Epistle to Stephen Bishop of Rome speaking of the true Church in opposition to heresies describes it thus Vbi praesident majores natu qui baptizandi manum imponendi et ordinandi possident potestatem under this name expressing those Bishops who presiding in the Church possesse the power of Baptizing Confirming Ordaining you injuriously Wire-draw him to Presbyters and foist in Seniores et Praepositos which are farre from the clause and matter Be convinced with the more cleare words of the same Epistle Apostolis et Episcopis qui illis vicariâ Ordinatione successerunt Secondly that you bewray grosse ignorance in translating Ambroses Presbyteri consignant by Presbyters ordaining Who that ever knew what belonged to antiquity would have beene guilty of such a solecisme when every novice knowes that consigning signifies confirmation and not ordaining Thirdly you discover not too much skill in not distinguishing of the Chorepiscopi some whereof had both the nature and power of Episcopacy to all purposes and therefore might well by the Bishops licence in his owne charge impose hands others not And lesse fidelity in citing the Councell of Antioch can 10. and the 13. of the Councell of Ancyra if it were not out of our way to fetch them into tryall Lastly I cannot but tell you that you have meerly cast away all this labour and fought with your owne shadow for how ever it were not hard to prove that in the first times of the Church it was appropriated to the Bishop to Ordaine which you cannot but cōfesse out of Ierome and Chrysostom yet since we speaking of our owne time and Church doe both professe and practise an association of Presbyters with us in the act of Ordination whom have you all this while opposed It is enough that you have seemed to say somthing and have showne some little reading to no purpose SECT IX YEt still you will needs beat the ayre very furiously and fight pitifully with your selves Alas brethren why will ye take so much paines to goe wilfully out of your way and to mis-lead the reader with you Who ever challenged in that sense which you faine to your selves a sole Jurisdiction Why will you with some show of learning confute that which you yeeld us to confesse we confesse this sole cryed downe by store of Antiquity we doe willingly grant that Presbyters have and ought to have and exercise a jurisdiction within their owne charge in foro conscientiae we grant that in all the great affayres of the Church the Presbyters whether in Synodes or otherwise ought to be consulted with we grant that the Bishops had of old their Ecclesiasticall Councell of Presbyters with whose advise they were wont to manage the greatest matters and we still have so for to that purpose serve the Deanes and Chapters and the Lawes of our Church frequently make that use of them we grant that Presbyters have their votes in provinciall Synods But we justly say that the superiority of jurisdiction is so in the Bishop as that Presbyters neither did nor may exercise it without him and that the exercise of externall jurisdiction is derived from by under him to those which execute it within his Dioces Thus it is to Timothy that S. Paul gives the charge concerning the rebuke of an Elder or not receiving an accusation against him It is to Titus that S. Paul leaves the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 correction of his Cretians Thus the Canons of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Thus the blessed Martyr Ignatius in his undoubted Epistle to those of Smyrna 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Let no man doe any thing in matters belonging to the Church without the Bishop Thus the Councell of Antioch orders that whatsoever belongs to the Church is to be governed managed and disposed by the judgement and authority of the Bishop who hath 〈◊〉
exoticall positions of unsound teachers which it selfe hath in terminis condemned and say as you are not ashamed to do We thank God we are none of you we forgive you and pray for your repentance Your Quaeres wherein I see you trust much are made up of nothing but spight and slander If I answere you with questions shorter then your own and more charitable you will excuse mee In answer then to your first I ask Who ever held the Lordships of Bishops to stand by divine right If no body whether hee that intimates it doth not falsifie and slander Why is it a greater fault in one of our Doctors to hold the Lords day to stand Iure bumano then it was in Master Calvin I aske whether it were any other then K. Iames himselfe of blessed memory that said No Bishop no King and if it were he whether that wise King did not meane to prejudice his own authoritie Whether since it hath beene proved that Bishops are of more then meerely humane Ordinance and have so long continued in the Christian Church to the great good of Church and State it be not most fit to establish them for ever and to avoid all dangerous motions of innovation Whether these answerers have the wit or grace to understand the true meaning of the Ius Divinum of Episcopacie or if they did whether they could possibly be so absurd as to raise so sensless and inconsequent inferences upon it Whether there bee any question at all in the fifth question since the Remonstrant himselfe hath so fully cleered this point professing to hold Episcopacie to bee of Apostolicall and in that right Divine Institution Whether Master Beza have not heard foundly of his distinction of the three kinds of Episcopacie in the full and learned answere of Saravia and whether hee might not have beene better advised then in that conceit of his to crosse all reverend antiquity and whether the Painter that drest up his Picture after the fancy of every passenger doe not more fitly resemble those that frame their discipline according to the humour of their people varying their projects every day then those which hold them constantly to the only ancient and Apostolicall forme Whether it were not fit that wee also should speake as the ancient Fathers did according to the language of their times and whether those Fathers could not better understand and interpret their owne meaning in the title of Episcopacie then these partiall and not over-judicious answerers and whether they have not cleerely explicated themselves in their writings to have spoken properly and plainly to the sense now enforced Whether Presbyters can with out sin arrogate unto themselves the exercise of the power of publique Church government where Bishops are set over them to rule and order the affaires both of them and the Church and whether our Saviour when he gave to Peter the promisse of the Keyes did therein intend to give it in respect of the power of publike jurisdiction to any other save the Apostles and their Successours the Bishops and whether ever any Father or Doctour of the Church till this present age held that Presbyters were the Successours to the Apostles and not to the seventy Disciples rather Whether ever any Bishops assumed to themselves power Temporall to bee Barons and to sit in Parliament as Iudges and in Court of Star-chamber c. or whether they bee not called by his Majesties writ and royall authority to these services and whether the spirituall power which they exercise in ordaining silencing c. bee any other then was by the Apostles delegated to the first Bishops of the Church constantly exercised by their holy successors in all ages especially by Cyprian Ambrose Augustine and the rest of that sacred order men which had as little to do with Antichrist as our answerers have with charity Whether the answerers have not just cause to be ashamed of patronizing a noted Heretick Aerius in that for which hee was censured of the ancient Saints and Fathers of the Church and whether the whole Church of Christ ever since his time till this age have not abandoned those very errours concerning the equality of Bishops and Presbyters which they now presume to maintain Whether the great Apostacy of the Church of Rome do or did consist in maintayning the order of government set by the Apostles themselves and whether all the Churches in the whole Christian World even those that are professedly opposite to the Church of Rome doe let in Antichrist by the doore of their Discipline since they all maintain Episcopacie no lesse constantly then Rome it selfe Whether if Episcopacie be through the munificence of good Princes honoured with a title of dignity and largnesse of revenues it ought to be ere the more declined and whether themselves if they did no hope to carry some sway in the Presbytery would be so eager in crying up that government and whether if there were not â— maintenance annexed they would not hid themselves and jeopard their eares ratheâ— then mancipate themselves to the charge oâ— souls Whether there bee no other apparenâ— causes to be given for the increase of Poperâ— and superstition in the Kingdome besideâ— Episcopacie which hath laboured strongly to oppose it and whether the multitudes of Sects and professed slovenlynesse in Gods service in too many have not bin guilty of the increase of profanesse amongst us Why should England one of the most famous Churches of Christendome seperate it selfe from that forme of government which all Churches through the whole Christian World have ever observed and do constantly and uniformely observe and maintain and why should not rather other less noble Churches conform to that universall government which all other Christians besides do gladly submit unto Why should the name of Bishops which hath beene for this 1600. yeers appropriated in a plain contradistinction to the governours of the Church come now to be communicated to Presbyters which never did all this while so much as pretend to it and if in ancient times they should have done it could not have escaped a most severe censure And shortly whether if wee will allow you to bee Bishops all will not bee well Whether since both God hath set such a government in his Church as Episcopacie and the Lawes of this Land have firmly established it it can bee lawfull for you to deny your subjection unto it and whether it were not most lawfull and just to punish your presumption and disobedience in framing so factious a question And thus I hope you have a sufficient answere to your bold and unjust demands and to those vain cavills which you have raised against the humble Remonstrance God give you Wisdome to see the Truth and Grace to follow it Amen To the Poscript THe best beauty that you could have added to your discourse brethren had been honesty and truth both in your allegations of Testimonies and inferences of argumentation In both which
desires to goe a Mid-way in this difference holding it too low to derive Episcopacy from a merely humane and Ecclesiasticall Ordinance holding it too high to deduce it from an immediate command from God and therefore pitching upon an Apostolicall institution rests there but because those Apostles were divinely inspired had the directiōs of Gods spirit for those things which they did for the common administration of the Church therefore and in that onely name is Episcopacie said to lay claime to a Divine right howsoever also it cannot be gainsaid that the grounds were formerly laid by our Saviour in a knowne imparity of his first agents Now surely this truth hath so little reason to distaste them that even learned Chamier himselfe can say Res ipsa coepit tempore Apostolorum vel potius ab ipsis profecta est And why should that seeme harsh in us which soundeth well in the mouthes of lesse-interessed Divines but because the very title of that book hath raised more dust then the treatise it selfe Bee pleased Readers to see that this very question is in the very same termes determined by that eminent light of the Palatinate Dr. Abrah Scultetus whose tract to this purpose I have thought fit to annex Peruse it and judge whether of those two writers have gone further in this determination And if you shall not meet with convincing reasons to bring you home to this opinion yet at least-wise find cause enough to retaine a charitable and favourable conceit of those who are as they think upon good grounds otherwise minded and whilest it is on all parts agreed by wise and unprejudiced Christians that the calling is thus ancient and sacred let it not violate the peace of the Church to scan the originall whether Ecclesiasticall Apostolicall or divine Shortly let all good men humbly submit to the Ordinance and heartily wish the Reformation of any abuses And so many as are of this mind Peace be upon them and the whole Israell of GOD. AMEN THE DETERMINATION of the question Concerning the Divine Right of EPISCOPACY By the famous and learn'd Divine Dr. Abrahamus Scultetus late Professour of divinity in the Vniversity of HEIDELBERG Faithfully translated out of his Observations upon the Epistles to Timothy and Titus LONDON Printed for NATHANIELL BVTTER 1641 The Question Whether Episcopacie be of Divine right That is whether the Apostles ordained this Government of the Church that not onely one should be placed over the people but over Presbyters and Deacons who should have the power of Imposition of Hands or Ordination and the direction of Ecclesiasticall Counsels THis was anciently denyed by Aerius as is related by Epiphanius in his 75 Heresie and by Iohn of Hierusalem as appears by Hierome in his Epistle to Pammachius And there are not wanting in these dayes many learned and pious men who although they acknowledge Aerius to have erred in that he should disallow of that manner of Ecclesiasticall government which had beene received by the whol World yet in this they agree with him that Episcopall government is not of Divine Right From whose opinion why I should sever my judgement I am moved by these strong reasons famous examples and evident authorities My judgement is this First in the Apostles Epistles the name of Bishop did never signifie any thing different from the office of a Presbyter For a Bishop Presbyter and an Apostle were common names as you may see Act. 20. Phil. 1. v. 1. Tit. 1. 1. Pet. v. 12. Act. 1.20 Next In the chiefe Apostolicall Church the Church was governed by the common advice of Presbyters and that for some yeers in the time of the preaching of the Apostles For first of all companies must bee gathered together before we can define any thing concerning their perpetuall government Then the Apostles as long as they were present or neere their Churches did not place any Bishop over them properly so called but only Presbyters reserving Episcopall authority to themselves alone Lastly after the Gospell was farre and neere propagated and that out of equality of Presbyters by the instinct of the Devill Schismes were made in Religion then the Apostles especially in the more remote places placed some over the Pastors or Presbyters which shortly after by the Disciples of the Apostles Ignatius and others were onely called bishops by this appellation they were distinguished from Presbyters Deacons Reasons moving me to this opinion First Hierome upon the 1. Chapter of the Epistle to Titus writeth that a Presbyter is the same with a Bishop and before that by the instinct of the Devill factions were made in Religion and it was said among the people I am of Paul I of Apollo but I of Cephas the Churches were governed by the common counsell of Presbyters afterwards it was decreed in the whol world that one chosen out of the Presbyters should be placed over the rest From whence I thus argue When it began to be said among the people I am of Paul I of Apollo but I of Cephas then one chosen out of the Presbyters was placed over the rest But whiles the Apostles lived it was so said among the people As the first Epistle to the Corinthians besides other of St. Pauls Epistles puts it out of doubt Therefore while the Apostles lived one chosen out of the Presbyters was placed over the rest Againe There can be no other terme assigned in which Bishops were first made then the time of the Apostles for all the prime successors of the Apostles were Bishops witnesse the successions of Bishops in the most famous Churches of Hierusalem Alexandria Antioch and Rome as it is in Eusebius therefore either the next successors of the Apostles changed the force of Ecclesiasticall government received from the Apostles according to their owne pleasure which is very unlikely or the Episcopall government came from the Apostles themselves Besides even then in the time of the Apostles there were many Presbyters but one Bishop even then in the time of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee that was placed over the rest which afterwards was called Bishop did impose hands or ordaine Ministers of the Word which Presbyters alone did not presume to doe Even then therefore the calling of Bishops was distinct from the Office of Presbyters If any desire the examples of Apostolicall Bishops the books of the antient are full of the Episcopal authority of Timothy and Titus either of which howsoever first performed the office of an Evangelist yet notwithstanding ceased to be an Evangelist after that Timothy was placed over the Church of Ephesus and Titus over the Church of Crete For Evangelists did only lay the foundations of faith in forraign places then did commend the rest of the care to certaine Pastors but they themselves went to other Countries and Nations as Eusebius writes in his third Booke of Ecclesiasticall History and 34. Chap. But Paul taught sometimes in Ephesus and Crete and laid the foundations of
songs and prayers which were ever used before their sacrifices For before every of their severall sacrifices they had their severall songs still used in those times of peace all which accurately written were transmitted to the subsequent generations from the time of Moses the Legat unto this day by the ministery of the high Priest This Book did that high Priest embezell wherein was contained their Genealogies to the dayes of Phineas together with an historicall enarration of the yeares of their generation and life Then which book there is no history besides the Bookes of Moses found more ancient Thus that ancient Record That there were such forms in the Jewish Church we doubt not but that they should be deduced to the use of the Church Evangelicall to save the labour of their devotions is but a poore and groundlesse requisition Those formes which we have under the names of St. Iames who was as Egesippus tells us the first Bishop and Leiturgus of Hierusalem of Basil and Chrysostome though they have some intersertions which are plainly spurious yet the substance of them cannot be taxed for other then holy and ancient And the implication of the ancient Councell of Ancyra is worthy of observation which forbids those Presbyters that had once sacrificed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to offer or to preach or to serve in the holy Liturgies or administrations Howsoever I perswade my selfe every ingenuous reader finds reason and authority enough in this undeniable practise of antiquity to out-face an upstart conceit of some giddie heads that condemne all formes of prayer be they never so holy because such Now what should a man doe with such sullen and crabbed pieces as these If he crosse them in plaine termes he is false If he comply with them in good words he Rhetoricates What have I professed concerning conceived prayers but that which I ever allowed ever practised both in private and publike God is a free Spirit and so should ours be in powring out our voluntary devotions upon all occasions Nothing hinders but that this liberty and a publique Liturgie should be good friends and may goe hand in hand together and whosoever would forcibly sever them let them beare their owne blame I perceive this is it which these techy men quarrell and dislike that I make the applause of conceived prayer but a vantage-ground to lift up the publique forme of our sacred Church-Liturgy the higher which they are indeed loth should stand upon even termes yea above ground professedly wrangling first at the Originall then the confirmation of it For the first I had said our Liturgy was selected out of ancient modells including in a parenthesis not Roman but Christian and thereby signifying as any ingenuous reader would construe it that our said Liturgie had no relation either to the place or religion of Rome but only to the Christian and holy matter of those godly prayers Now these charitable men fly out into high termes and beseech your Honours to consider How ye may trust these men who sometimes speaking and writing of the Roman Church proclaime it a true Church of Christ and yet here Roman and Christian stand in opposition Ignorantly or maliciously when any man may see here is not an opposition meant but a different modification As when the Prophet sayes I am a worme and no man Or the Apostle It is no more I but sin Or I live yet not I but Christ liveth in me Neither is any phrase more common in our usuall speech In what sense we hold the Roman a true Church is so cleared by the unanimous Suffrages of unquestionable Divines that this iron is too hot for their fingers Being then thus qualified our Liturgie needs not be either ashamed of its originall published in King Edwards proclamation or blankt with their unjust aggravation The composers of it we still glory to say were holy Martyrs and Confessors of the blessed Reformation of Religion and if any rude hand have dared to cast a foul aspersion on any of them he is none of the Tribe I plead for I leave him to the reward of his owne merits Thus composed and thus confirmed by the recommendation of foure most religious Princes and our owne Parliamentary Acts they dare not absolutely discharge it but they doe as they may nibble at it in a double exception The one of the over-rigorous pressing of it to the justling out of Preaching and conceived Prayer which was never intended either by the Law-makers or moderate Governours of the Church The other that neither our owne Lawes nor K. James his proclamation are so unalterable as the Lawes of the Medes Persians Which bold flout how well it becomes their gravity and pretended obedience we leave at either Bar. After an over-comprehensive recapitulation of their exploits in this mighty Section they descend to two main Quaere's whereof the first is Whether it be not fit to consider of the alteration of the present Liturgie Intimating herein not an alteration in some few expressions excepted against but a totall alteration in the very frame of it as their reasons import Yes doubtlesse Sirs ye may consider of it it is none of the Lawes of the Medes and Persians What if the weak judgement of K. Iames upon some pretended reasons decreed all forbearance of any farther change What if that silly and ignorant Martyr D r Taylor could magnifie it to B. Gardner and others as complete What if great Elogies and Apologies have been cast away upon it by learned men since that time What if Innovations in Religion be cryed out of as not to be indured yet consider of the alteration Neither need ye to doubt but that this will be considered by wiser heads then your own and whatsoever shall be found in the manner of the expressions sit to be changed will doubtlesse be altered accordingly but the maine fabrick of it which your reasons drive at my hope is we shall never see to undergo an alteration Yet still do you consider of this your projected alteration whiles I consider shortly of the great reasons of your consideration First it symboliseth much with the Popish Masse Surely neither as Masse nor as Popish If an holy Prayer be found in a Roman Portuise shall I hate it for the place If I find gold in the Channell shall I throw it away because it was ill laid If the Devills confessed Christ the Son of God shall I disclaime that truth because it passed through a damned mouth Why should we not rather allow those good prayers which symbolize with all Christian piety then reject those which dwel amongst some superstitious neighbours It was composed you say into this frame on purpose to bring Papists to our Churches Well had it been so the project had been charitable and gracious What can be more thank-worthy then to reclaime erring soules But it failed in the successe Pardon me brethren if it had done so it was neither the fault of
the common Councell of Presbyters and that Bishops ought still so to govern And lastly that The occasion of this imparity was the division which through the Devils instinct fell among Christians You look now that I should tell you that the Book is of uncertain credit or that Ierome was a Presbyter and not without some touch of envie to that higher dignity he missed or that wiser men then your selves have censured him in this point for Aerianisme I plead none of these but whiles you expect that I should answer to Ierome I shall set Ierome to answer for himselfe For the first I cannot but put you in mind that the same Father citing the words of the Bishop of Jerusalem That there is no difference betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter passeth a Satis imperitè upon it but let it be so At first he sayes Bishops and Presbyters had but one title So say we too But when began the distinction Ye need not learne it of Saravia he himselfe tels you When divisions began And when that When they began to say I am Pauls I am Apollo's I am Cephas which was I think well and high in the Apostles time But this you would cleanly put of as spoken by Ierome in the Apostles phrase not of the time of the Apostle This is but a generall intimation of contentions arisen though later in the Church Excuse me Brethren this shift will not serve your turne Then belike there should have been no distinct Bishops till after-ages upon this ground that till then there were no divisions Or if so why should the remedie be so late after the disease Or how comes he elsewhere to name Bishops made by the Apostles and to confesse that before his time there had been many successions Besides he instanceth in the peculiar mis-challenging of Baptisme which only S. Paul specifieth in his owne time And Clemens seconds him in his Epistle to the Corinthians in taxing the continuance of those distractions so as by Ieroms own confession Episcopacy was ordained early within the Apostles times But then say you It was not of Apostolicall intention but of Diabolicall occasion Weakly and absurdly As if the occasion might not be devilish and the institution divine As if the best Lawes did not rise from the worst manners Were not the quarrels betwixt the Grecians and Hebrews for the maintenance of their widows an evill occurrence yet from the occasion thereof was raised the Ordination of Deacons in the Church Yea but Ierome saith This was rather by the custome of the Church then by the truth of the Lords disposition True it was by the Custome of the Church but that Church was Apostolicall not by the Lords disposition immediately for Christ gave no expresse rule for it but mediately it was from Christ as from his inspired Apostles Let Ierome himselfe interpret himselfe who tels us expresly in his Epistle to Euagrius this superiority of Bishops above Presbyters is by Apostolicall tradition which is as much as we affirme And whiles he saith toto orbe decretum est that in the time of those first divisions it was decreed all the world over that Bishops should be set up I would faine know by what power besides Apostolicall such a Decree could be so soon and so universally enacted But Ierome saith The Presbyters governed the Church by their common Counsell So they did doubtlesse altogether till Episcopacy was setled who dares deny it Yea but he saith They ought to doe still So say we also and so in some cases we do Church-government is Aristocraticall Neither is any Bishop so absolute as not to be subject to the judgement of a Synode Yea in many matters it is determined by our Laws that hee must take the advise and assistance of his Ecclesiasticall Presbytery So then S. Ierome is in his judgement no back friend of ours but in his History he is our Patron With what forehead can they perswade their Reader the Originall of Episcopacie was not in Ieroms opinion so early when they cannot but confesse that the same Father hath in flat termes told us that Iames was Bishop of Jerusalem Timothy of Ephesus Titus of Crete that ever since the time of Mark the Euangelist who died five or sixe yeares before Peter and Paul and almost forty years before S. Iohn at Alexandria till the dayes of Heraclas and Dionysius the Presbyters have alwayes chosen one to be their Bishop As for those poore negative arguments which follow palpably begging the question they are scarce worthie of a passe were it not that by them they goe about to confute their own Author affirming That upon occasion of divisions Episcopacie was constituted but he stands so close to his owne grounds as that contrary to their mis-allegation of D r Whitakers he plainly tels them Episcopacie is so proper a remedy for this evill that unlesse the Bishop have a peerlesse power there will be as many Schismes as Priests the wofull experience whereof we finde in the miserable varieties of Separatisme at this day Goe on Brethren since you are so resolved to strike that friend whom you bring in to speak for you teach your advocate S. Ierome how unlikely it is that the Apostles should give way as he professes they did to such a remedie as might prove both ineffectuall and dangerous and that their holinesse should make a stirrup for Antichrist We lookt for Ambrose to come in next and behold you bring in a foisted Commenter a man by the convictions of Whitakers Spalatensis Cocus Rivetus Bellarmine Possevine Maldonate as hath beene elsewhere shewed of not a suspected onely but a crackt credit If it mattered much what he said I could out of his testimonie picke more advantage then you prejudice to my cause But if you will heare the true Ambrose speake he tells you There is one thing which God requireth of a Bishop another of a Presbyter another of a Deacon As for the persons who brought in this imparitie you tell us out of the same Authors The Presbyters themselves brought it in Witnesse Ierome ad Euagrium The Presbyters of Alexandria did call him their Bishop whom they had chosen from among themselves and placed in an higher degree But brethren what meanes this faithlesse and halved citation Had you said all the place would have answered for it selfe the words are Nam Alexandriae à Marco Evangelista c. For at Alexandria ever since Mark the Evangelist untill the times of Heraclas and Dionysius Bishops the Presbyters have alwayes called one chosen out of themselves and placed in an higher degree Bishop as if an army should chuse their Generall Why did you avoid the name of Mark the Evangelist but that your hearts told you that he dying many yeares within the time of the Apostles this election and appellation and distinction of degrees of Bishops and Presbyters must needs have been in the life time of the Apostles and not without their
avoweth your goodly proof therefore is in the suds But to meete with you in your own kinde if you will goe upon divers Readings what will you say to that vers 20 where the Angel of Thyatira is encharged Thou sufferest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thy wife Iezebell for so it is in very good Copies to teach and seduce yea so it is in that memorable Copy of Tecla forementioned which is to be seene in the Princes Library under the custody of the industrious and learned Mr· Patrick Young as my owne eyes can witnesse and thus St. Cyprian reads it of olde What shall wee thinke shee was wife to the whole company or to one Bishop alone I leave you to blush for the shame this very proofe alone casts upon your opinion Secondly you tell us it is usuall with the Holy Ghost even in this very booke to expresse a company under one singular person as the Beast is the Civill state the Whore and the false Prophet the Ecclesiasticall state of Rome But what if it be thus in visions or emblematicall representations must it needs be so in plaine narrations where it is limited by just Praedicates or because it is so in one phrase of speech must it bee so in all Why doe you not as well say where the Lambe is named or the Lion of Juda this is a collective of many not an individuall subject The seven Angels you say that blew the seven trumpets and poured out the seven phialls are not to bee taken literally but synecdochically perhaps so but then the synecdoche lyes in the seven and not in the Angels so I grant you the word Angel is here metaphoricall but you are no whit nearer to your imagined synecdoche The very name Angell you say is sufficient proofe that it is not meant of one person alone as being a common name to all Gods Ministers and Messengers As if he did not well know this that directed these Epistles and if hee had so meant it had it not been as easie to have mentioned more as one Had he said the Angels of the Church of Ephesus or Thyatira the cause had been cleare now hee sayes the Angell 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the denoted person must be singular for surely you cannot say that all the Presbyters at Ephesus were one Angel The same reason holds for the Stars had he said to the Star of Ephesus I suppose no body would have construed it of many but of one eminent person Now he speaks of so many Stars as Angels to wit seven in those seven Churches Your fourth Argument from the Text it selfe is no better then ridiculous poorely drawn from what it doth not say Lo hee saith the 7. Candlesticks which thou sawest are the 7. Churches but he doth not say the 7. Stars are the 7. Angels of the seven Churches but the Angels of the 7. Churches Forbear if you can Readers to smile at this curious subtilty because the seven is not twice repeated in mentioning the Angels there is a deep mystery in the omission what Cabalisme have we here Had he said the seven Stars are the seven Angels of the seven churches now all had been sure but he saith not so but onely thus the seven Stars are the Angels of the seven Churches It is plaine that every Church hath his Angell mentioned and there being seven Churches how many Angels I beseech you are there now because he doth not say expressely in termes seven Angels of the seven Churches we are foyled in our proofe judge Reader what to expect of so deep speculations Lastly it is evident you say though but one Angell be mentioned in the front yet the Epistles themselves be dedicated to all the Angels and Ministers and to the Churches themselves who ever doubted it the foot of every Epistle runs what the spirit saith unto the Churches not to one Church but to all seven If therfore you argue that the name Angel is collective say also that every of these seaven Angels is the whole company of all the seaven Churches which were a foule non-sence you might have saved the labour both of Ausbertus and the rest of your Authors and your own we never thought otherwise but that the whole Church is spoken to but so as that the Governour or Bishop is singled out as one that hath the maine stroke in ordering the affairs thereof and is therefore either praised or challenged according to his carriage therein although also there are such particularities both of commendations and exceptions in the body of the severall Epistles as cannot but have relation to those severall Over-seers to whom they were endorsed as I have else where specified Had all the Presbyters of Ephesus lost their first love had each of them tryed the false Apostles Had all those of Sardis a name to live and were dead Were all the Laodicean Ministers of one temper these taxations were no doubt of individuall persons but such as in whom the whole Churches were interessed As for those conjecturall reasons which you frame to your selves why the whole company of Presbyters should be written to under the singular name of an Angel if yee please your selves with them it is well from me they have no cause to expect an answer they neither can draw my assent nor merit my confutation Take heed of yeelding that which ye cannot but yield to be granted by D. Raynolds Mr. Beza Doctor Fulke Pareus and others that the Angel is here taken individually but still if you be wise hold your own that our cause is no whit advanced nor yours impaired by this yieldance Let him have been an Angell yet what makes this for a Diocesan Bishop much every way For if the Church of Ephesus for example had many Ministers or Presbyters in it to instruct the people in their severall charges as it is manifest they had and yet but one prime Over-seer which is singled out by the Spirit of God and stiled by a title of eminence the Angel of that Church it must needs follow that in St. Johns time there was an acknowledged superiority in the government of the Church if there were many Angels in each and yet but one that was the Angel who can make doubt of an inequality It is but a pittifull shift that you make in pleading that these Angels if Bishops yet were not Diocesan Bishops for that Parishes were not divided into Diocesses I had thought Dioceses should have been divided into Parishes rather in S. Iohns dayes for by the same reason I may as well argue that they were not Parochial Bishops neither since that then no Parishes were as yet distinguished As if you had resolved to speak nothing but Bulls and Soloecismes you tell me that the seven Stars are said to be fixed in their seven Candlesticks whereas those Stars are said to bee in the right hand of the Son of God But say you still not one Star was over divers Candlesticks
Truly no who ever said that one Angel was over all the seven Churches but that each of these famous Churches were under their own Star or Angel but those churches you say were not Diocesan How doth that appeare Because first Tindall and the old translation calls them seven congregations for answer who knows not that Tindall and the old Translation are still wont to translate the word church wheresoever they finde it by Congregation which some Papists have laid in our dish Learned Doctor Fulk hath well cleared our intentions herein from their censure Tindall himselfe professes to doe it out of this reason because the Popish Clergy had appropriated to themselves the name of the Church but however they rather made use of the Word yet not so as that hereby they intend onely to signifie Parishionall meetings So Ephesians 3. To the intent that now to the Rulers and Powers in heavenly places might bee knowne by the Congregation the manifold Wisedome of GOD Doe wee thinke this blessed Revelation confined to a Parish or common to the whole Church of God So 1. Corinthians 15. they turne I am not worthy to bee called an Apostle because I persecuted the Congregation of GOD Doe we thinke his cruelty was confined to a Parish So Matthew 6.16 Vpon this Rocke will I build my Congregation was this a Parish onely So Acts 11. Herod the King stretched out his hands to vexe certaine of the Congregation Was his malice onely Parochiall but secondly ye tell us that in Ephesus which was one of those Candlesticks there was but one flock Acts 20.28 Yea but can you tell us what kind of Flock it was whether Nationall or Provinciall or Diocesan Parochiall I am sure it could not be you have heard before that those Elders or Bishops were sent for from Ephesus But that they were all of Ephesus it cannot be proved when all of them then are bidden to take heede to the Flocke of Christ whereof they are made over-seers each is herein charged to look to his owne and all are in the next words required to feed the Church of GOD which he hath purchased with his owne blood So as your second argument is fully answered in the solution of the first and in the former passages of this Section The advantage that you take from Epiphanius affirming that divers Cities of that time might have two Bishops whereas Alexandria held close to one can availe you little when it shall bee well weighed first that your Tenet supposeth and requireth that every Presbyter should bee a Bishop and therefore if your cause speed there should be no fewer Bishops than parishes Secondly that the practise of the whole Church both before and after Epiphanius is by such cleare testimonies convinced to be contrary famous and irrefragable is that Canon of Nicen Councell 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. that in one City there might not bee two Bishops so before this Cornelius writing to the Bishop of Antioch objects it scornfully to Novatian that hee did not know 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. that in a Catholike Church there ought to be but one Bishop And it is a knowne word of the Confessors of old in Cyprians time one GOD one Lord one Bishop Make much if you please of this conceit of yours that Epiphanius his Neighbour-hood might acquaint him well with the Condition of the Asian Churches But let mee adde that you shall approve your selves meere strangers to all the rules and practises of antiquity if you shall stand upon the generall plurality of Bishops in the same City or Dioces And last of all remember that Epiphanius reckons up Aerius as an Hereticke for holding Presbyters equall with Bishops Your third argument that there is nothing said in these seven Epistles that implyes a superiority is answered by the very Superscription of each Letter which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the Angel and much more by the matter of the severall Epistles For what reason were it for an ordinary Presbyter to bee taxed for that which hee hath no power to redresse That the Angel of Pergamus should bee blamed for the having of those which hold the Doctrine of Balaam or the Nicolaitans when hee had no power to proceed against them or the Angel of the Church of Thyatira for suffering the Woman Jezabel if it must bee so read to teach and seduce when hee had no power of publick censure to restraine her But what need wee stand upon conjecturall answers to convince you in this plea as likewise in the supposed Decision of the kinde of superiority which you urge in the next paragraph when wee are able to shew both who the parties were to whom some of these Epistles were directed and to evince the high degree of their superiority Ignatius the Martyr besides Tertullian is witnesse for both who tells us that Onesimus was now the Angel or Bishop of Ephesus Polycarpus of Smyrna and as commenting upon this very subject oft ingeminates the duty of subjection owing to the Bishop and the divers degrees of those 3 several stations in the Church as we already instanced away then with those your unproving illustrations and unregardable testimonies which you as destitute of all Antiquity shut up the Scene withall And let the wise Reader judge whether the Remonstrant hath not from the evidence of Timothy and Titus and the Angels of the Asian Churches made good that just claime of this sacred Hierarchy against all your weak and frivolous pretentions From the Remonstrant least your discourse should not be tedious enough you fly upon some other Defenders of the Hierarchy and fall upon the two post-scripts of Saint Pauls Epistles to Timothy and Titus wherein Timothy Titus are stiled the first bishops of Ephesus and creet which I am no way engaged to defend You say they are not of canonical authority so say I too but I say they are of great antiquity so you must confesse also Faine would I see but any pretence of so much age against the matter of those Subscriptions the averred Episcopacy of Timothy and Titus cited by these confident antiquaries surely he were senceles that would imagine the Post-scripts as old as the Text or as authenticke but we may boldly say they are older then any Records of the gain-sayers Where these Subscriptions are not seconded by authority of the ancient Church there I leave them but where they are so wel backed there is no reason to forsake them The Exception therefore which you take at the Post-script of the Epistle to Titus is not more stale than unjust You say peremptorily it was not written from Nicopolis neither was Paul then there how appeares it Because hee sayes in the body of the Epistle come to mee to Nicopolis for I am determined there to winter Hee saith not Heere to Winter but there as speaking of a third place but how slight this ground is will bee easily apparent to any man that
be scanned Objections which would to God they were onely of my own framing In the first That Episcopacy is no prejudice of Soveraigntie I justly prove for that there is a compatiblenesse in this case of Gods act and the Kings It is God that makes the Bishop the King that gives the Bishoprick what can you say to this You tell us you have already proved that God never made a bishop as hee stands in superiority over Presbyters so you told us and that is enough we were hard hearted if wee would not believe you When as wee have made good by undeniable proofes that besides the grounds which our Saviour laid of this imparity the blessed Apostles by inspiration from God made this difference in a personall ordaining of some above the rest and giving expresse charge of Ordination and Iurisdiction to those select persons in Church government the Bishops have ever since succeeded Tell us not therefore that if wee disclaim the influence of Soveraignty into our Creation and assert that the King doth not make us Bishops wee must have no beeing at all For that the Reader may see you stop your owne mouth answer me I beseech you Where or when ever did the King create a Bishop name the man and take the cause It pleases his Majestie to give his Congedelier for a Bishops Election to his See to signifie his Royall assent thereunto upon which the Bishop is solemnly ordained by the imposition of the hands of the Metropolitan and other his Brethren and these doe as from God invest him in his holy Calling which he exercises in that place which is designed and given by his Majestie What can be more plaine then this truth As for that unworthy censure which you passe upon the just comparison of Kings in order to Bishops and Patrons in order to their Clerks it shall be acknowledged well deserved if you shall be able to make good the disparity When hee shall prove you say that the Patron gives Ministeriall power to his Clerke as the King gives Episcopall power to the Bishop it may bee of some conducement to his cause Shortly brethren the same day that you shall shew mee that the King ordained a bishop the same day will I shew you that a Patron ordained a Presbyter The Patron gives the benefice to the one The King gives the bishopricke to the other neither of them do give the Office or Calling to either Goe you therefore with your Frier Simon to your Cell and consult with your Covent for more reason and wit then you shew in this and the next scornfull Paragraph wherein whiles you flout at my modest concession with an unbeseeming frump you are content silently to balke that my second answer which you know was too hot or too heavie for your satisfaction In the second the Imputation pretended to bee cast by this Tenet upon al the reformed Churches which want this governement I indevoured so to satisfie that I might justly decline the envy which is intended to be thereby raised against us For which cause I professed that wee doe love and honour those our sister Churches as the dear spouse of Christ and give zealous testimonies of my well wishing to them Your uncharitablenesse offers to choake me with those scandalous censures and disgracefull terms which some of ours have let fall upon those Churches and their eminent professors which I confesse it is more easie to be sorry for then on some hands to excuse The errour of a few may not bee imputed to all My just defence is that no such consequent can be drawne from our opinion for as much as the Divine or Apostolicall right which wee hold goes not so high as if there were an expresse command that upon an absolute necessity there must bee either Episcopacy or no Church but so far only that it both may and ought to be How fain would you heere finde mee in a contradiction Whiles I one-where reckon Episcopacy amongst matters essential to the Church another where deny it to be of the essence thereof Wherein you willingly hide your eys that you may not see the distinction that I make expresly betwixt the Being Well-beeing of a Church Affirming that those Churches to whom this power and faculty is denied lose nothing of the true essence of a Church though they misse something of their glory and perfection No Brethren it is enough for some of your friends to hold their Discipline altogether essentiall to the very being of a Church We dare not be so zealous The question which you aske concerning the reason of the different intertainment given in our Church to priests converted to us from Rome and to Ministers who in Qu. Maries dayes had received Imposition of hands in Reformed Churches abroad is meerely personall neither can challenge my decision Onely I give you these two answers that what fault soever may bee in the easie admittance of those who have received Romish Orders the sticking at the admission of our brethren returning from Reformed Churches was not in case of Ordination but of Institution they had beene acknowledged Ministers of Christ without any other hands layed upon them but according to the Lawes of our Land they were not perhaps capable of institution to a benefice unlesse they were so qualified as the Statutes of this Realme doe require And secondly I know those more then one that by vertue onely of that Ordination which they have brought with them from other Reformed Churches have enjoyed Spirituall Promotions and Livings without any exception against the lawfulnesse of their calling The confident affirmation which you alleage of the learned bishop of Norwich is no rule to us I leave him to his owne defence You think I have too much work on my hand to give satisfaction for myselfe in these two main Questions which arise from my book What high points shall wee now expect trow wee First whether that Office which by divine right hath sole power of Ordination and ruling all other Officers of the Church which hee sayth Episcopacy hath belong not to the being but onely to the glorie and perfection of a Church Can wee tell what these men would have Have they a minde to goe beyond us in asserting that necessity and essentiall use of Episcopacy which we dare not avow Do they not care to lose their cause so they may crosse an Adversary For your Question you stil talke of sole Ordination and sole jurisdiction you may if you please keepe that paire of soles for your next shooes VVee contend not for such an height of Propriety neither do we practise it they are so ours that they should not bee without us as we have formerly shewed That therefore there should bee a power of lawfull Ordination and government in every setled Church it is no lesse then necessary but that in what case soever of extremity and irresistible necessitie this should be only done by Episcopall hands we never meant