he shutteth up the Gate of the Kingdom of Heaven against Unbelieving and Stubborn Persons denouncing unto them God's Vengeance and everlasting Punishment or else when he doth quite shut them out from the bosom of the Church by open Excommunication Out of doubt what Sentence soever the Minister of God shall give in this sort God himself doth so well allow it that whatsoever here in Earth by their means is loosed and bound God himself will loose and bind and confirm the same in Heaven And seeing one word is given to all and one only Key belongeth to all we say there is but one only Power of all Ministers as concerning opening and shutting At this time so much was given the Priest that no room was left to make the Bishop of an Order distinct from him The Keys belong'd to all Ministers to the Priest as well as Bishop In the Defence of the Apology of the Church of England Part. 2. Ch. 3. Divis 5. this Learned Bishop is more full and particular in his Assertions In St. Jerom's time saith he there were Metropolitans Archbishops Archdeacons and others but Christ appointed not these Distinctions of Orders from the beginning These names are not found in all the Scriptures This is the thing which we defend St. Jerom saith Sciant Episcopi c. Let Bishops understand that they are in Authority over Priests more by Custom than by Order of God's Truth Erasmus speaking of the times of Jerom saith that Id temporis idem erat Episcopus Sacerdos Presbyter These three names Bishop Priest Presbyter at that time were all one To the Testimony of Jerom the Bishop adds that of St. Austin Epist 19. saying That the Office of a Bishop is above the Office of a Priest not by Authority of the Scriptures but after the names of Honour which the custom of the Church hath now obtained The Bishop in Defence of the Church of England Part 2. Ch. 9. Divis 1. had affirm'd That against the Sacred Scripture neither Law nor Ordinance nor any Custom ought to be heard no tho' Paul himself or an Angel from Heaven should come and teach the contrary To this Harding replies If all things necessary to Salvation be contain'd in the Scriptures then whatever is not in them contained the same is not necessary if not necessary why should we be laden with unnecessary Burdens Then away with all Traditions at a Clap be they never so Apostolick Remember you not what the most Renowned Fathers have said of the Necessity of Traditions If we go about to reject the Customs that be not set forth in Writing we shall bring the Preaching of the Faith but to a bare name For so they were taken for Hereticks who denied the Distinction of a Bishop and a Priest c. Jewel rejoyns This in the Margin in an Untruth for hereby both St. Paul and St. Jerom and other good men are condemn'd of Heresie But what meant Mr. Harding here to come in with the Difference between Priests and Bishops thinketh he that Priests and Bishops hold only by Tradition or is it so horrible a Heresie as he makes it to say That by the Scriptures of God a Bishop and a Priest are all One or knoweth he how far and to whom he reacheth the name of an Heretick Verily Chrysostom saith Between a Bishop and a Priest in a manner there is no difference St. Jerom saith somewhat in a rougher sort I hear say There is one become so peevish that he setteth Deacons before Priests that is to say before Bishops whereas the Apostle plainly teacheth us that Priests and Bishops are all one St. Austin saith what is a Bishop but the first Priest that is to say the Highest Priest so saith Saint Ambrose There is but One Ordination of Priest and Bishop for both of them are Priests but the Bishop is the first All these and other Holy Fathers together with St. Paul the Apostle for thus saying by Mr. Harding's Advice must be held for Hereticks Besides as the Bishop is very express in his asserting a Bishop and Presbyter to be according to Christ's Institution all one Part 6. Chap. 9. Divis 1 2. He is no less so in granting that the Bishop has receiv'd from the Prince the several Privileges he has above a Presbyter I grant there be many special Privileges granted upon great and just Considerations of the meer favour of the Prince that a Priest being found negligent or otherwise offending in his Ministry should be convinced and punished not by the Temporal and Civil Magistrate but by the Discretion of the Bishop Mr. Harding must remember that all these and other like Privileges passed unto the Clergy from the Prince and not from God and proceed only of special Favour and not of Right Archbishop Whitgift in opposing Cartwright's Platform about the Government of the Church asserted to be de Jure divino distinguisheth between Spiritual and External Government and saith That the External Government hath both a Substance and Matter about which it is occupied and also a Form to attain the same consisting in certain Offices and Functions and in the Names and Titles of them The Substance and Matter of Government must indeed be taken out of the Word of God and consisteth in these points That the Word be truly taught the Sacraments rightly administred Vertue furthered Vice repressed and the Church kept in quietness and order The Officers in the Church whereby this Government is wrought be not namely and particularly expressed in the Scriptures but in some points left to the Discretion and Liberty of the Church to be disposed according to the state of Times Places and Persons Thus much in his Preface conform to those who went before The Ministry of the Word and Sacraments and Reprehensions c. which belong to the Priest is of God the other Offices and Functions which as he elsewhere has it belong to the external Order and Policy of the Church and consequently the Distinction between Bishop and Priest Defence Tract c. 3. Div. 38 39 40 41. and Superiority of a Bishop above a Priest are only of humane Institution More particularly Cartwright contending for a sort of Discipline which is a Matter of Faith and necessary to Salvation the Archbishop distinguisheth between such things as are so necessary that without them we cannot be saved and such things as are so necessary that without 'em we cannot so well and conveniently be saved and then adds To be short I confess that in a Church collected together in one Place and at Liberty Government is necessary with the second kind of Necessity but that any one kind of Government is so necessary that without it the Church cannot be saved or that it may not be altered into some other kind thought to be more Expedient I utterly deny and the reasons that move me so to do be these The first is because I find no one certain and
and the Reformers in King Edward's Time. IN Queen Elizabeth's Reign the first I find to mention any thing about the Office of Bishops and Priests is Dr. Alley Bishop of Exeter in his Miscellanea on his third Praelection Alley 's Poor Man's Library Tom. 1. pag. 95 96. read at Paul's in the Year 1560. on the word Bishops What difference is between a Bishop and a Priest St. Hierome writing ad Titum doth declare whose words be these Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus c. A Priest therefore is the same that a Bishop is And before Schisms and Factions by the instinct of the Devil begun in Religion and before it was said among the People I am Pauls I am Apollos I am of Cephas the Churches were Governed with the Common Councel of the Priests or Elders But after that every one thought those whom he Baptized to be his and not Christ's it was decreed throughout the World that one of the Priests or Elders should be chosen to be set over the rest unto whom all the care or charge of the Church should appertain and that the beginnings of Schisms should be taken away Some do think that it is not the sentence of the Scriptures but ours that a Bishop and Priest or Elder are one thing and they do also think the one to be a name of Age and the other to be a name of Office. Let them read again the words of the Apostle to the Philippians saying Paul and Timotheus the Servants of Jesu Christ to all the Saints in Christ Jesu which are at Philippos with the Bishops and Deacons Grace and Peace be with you c. Philippi is one of the Cities of Macedonia And truly there could not be many as they are called Bishops in one City But because at that time they called those Bishops which they did also call Priests or Elders therefore indifferently he spake of Bishops as of Priests or Elders It may yet seem doubtful to some unless it be approved by other Testimonies In the Acts of the Apostles it is written that when the Apostle came to Miletum he sent to Ephesus and did call the Priests or Elders of the same Church unto whom among other things he said thus A Hand to your selves c. And here mark you diligently how that he calling the Priests or Elders of that one City of Ephesus did afterwards call them Bishops c. And Peter which took his name of the firmness of his Faith in his Epistle saith I your fellow Elder do beseech the Elders that are among you c. Haec Hieronimus These words are alledg'd saith Bishop Aley that it may appear Priests among the Elders to have been even the same that Bishops were But it grew by little and little that the whole charge and care should be appointed to one Bishop within his Precinct that the Seeds of Dissention might be utterly rooted out In his Second Tome P. 15. the Bishop adds out of St. Jerom Sicut Presbyteri c. Like as Priests do know themselves to be subject by the Custom of the Church unto him which is made Ruler over them So let the Bishops know that they are greater than the Priests rather by Custom than by the verity of Dispensation given of the Lord. He saith also in another place with the old Fathers the Bishops were the same that the Priests were for the name of one is the name of Dignity and the other of Age and Time. So far Bishop Aley The next I meet with is Pilkington Bishop of Duresme the Author of the Confutation of an Addition with an Apology written and cast in the Streets of West-Chester against the Causes of Burning Paul's Church in London declared by the Bishop at Paul's Cross The Bishop did at Paul's Cross Exhort the people to take the burning of Paul's to be a warning of a greater Plague to follow to the City of London if amendment of Life be not had in all Estates the Author of the Addition a Papist Histor Q. Eliz. pag. 312. notwithstanding what Heylin saith to the contrary when he tells us that the Papists ascribe it to some practice of the Zuinglian Faction out of their hatred unto all Solemnity and Decency in the Service of God perform'd more punctually in that Church for Examples sake than in any other in the Kingdom imputes it to the laying aside of the midnight Mattins forenoon Masses formerly had in the Church and Anthems and Prayers in the Steeple This Bishop a Person of great Learning and good Temper in Answer to this Paper doth in the Sixth year of the Queens Reign thus express himself Yet remains one doubt unanswered in these few words when he saith that the Government of the Church was committed to Bishops as tho' they had received a Larger and Higher Commission from God of Doctrine and Discipline than other Lower Priests and Ministers have and hereby might challenge a greater Prerogative But this is to be understood that the Privileges and Superiorities which Bishops have above other Ministers are rather granted by Man for maintaining of better Order and Quietness in Common-wealths than Commanded by God in his Word Ministers have better Knowledge and Utterance some than other but their Ministry of Equal Dignity God's Commission and Commandment is like and indifferent to all Priest Bishop Archbishop Prelate by what name soever he be called Saint Jerome in his Commentary on 1 Chap. Tit. says that a Bishop and Priest is all One and in his Epistle ad Evagrium he says That the Bishop wheresoever he be is of the same Power and Priesthood If they the Papists were not too much blinded in their own foolishness they might see in the last Subsidy granted in the time of their own Reign that they grant those to be their betters and above them from whence they receive their Authority The Parliament gives them and their Collectors Power to Suspend Deprive and Interdict any Priest that Pays not the Subsidy In that doing they grant the Parliament to be above them and from it to receive their Power I had not thought to have said so much on these his few words and yet much more hangs on this their Opinion of claiming their Usurped Power above Princes and other Ministers The Learned Bishop Jewel is of the same Mind with this Author Apol. Par. 2. Ch. 5. Divis 1. Ch. 6. Divis 1. and thus much he delivereth not as his private Opinion but as the sense of the Church of England Furthermore we say That the Minister ought lawfully duly orderly to be preferr'd to that Office of the Church of God Ch. 6. Divis 3. Ch. 7. Divis 5. and that no man hath power to wrest himself into the Holy Ministry at his own pleasure That Christ hath given to his Ministers Power to bind to loose to open to shut That the Minister doth execute the Authority of binding and shutting as often as
perfect kind of Government prescribed or commanded in the Scriptures to the Church of Christ which no doubt should have been done if it had been a matter necessary to the Salvation of the Church Secondly Because the Essential Notes of the Church be these only The true Preaching of the Word and the right Administration of Sacraments So that notwithstanding Government or some kind of Government may be a part of the Church touching the outward Form and Perfection of it yet it is not such a part of the Essence and Being but that it may be the Church of Christ without this or that kind of Government and therefore the kind of the Government is not necessary unto Salvation There is no certain kind of Government or Discipline prescribed to the Churches but that the same may be altered as the Profit of the Churches requires and out of Gualters he saith Let every Church follow the manner of Discipline which doth most agree with the People with whom it abideth and which seemeth to be most fit for the place and time and let no man here rashly prescribe unto others neither let him bind all Churches to one and the same Form. I do deny that the Scriptures do set down any one certain Form and kind of Government of the Church to be Perpetual for all Times Persons and Places without Alteration It is well known Tract 17. Chap. 2. Divis 29. that the manner and form of Government used in the Apostles time and expressed in the Scriptures neither is now nor can or ought to be observed either touching the Persons How then can the Government of the Church by Bîshops Archbishops c. be Apostolical or the Functions We see manifestly that in sundry points the Government of the Church used in the Apostles times is and hath been of necessity altered and that it neither may nor can be revoked whereby 't is plain that any one kind of External Government perpetually to be observed is no where in the Scripture prescribed to the Church but the charge thereof is left to the Magistrate so that nothing be done contrary to the Word of God. This is the Opinion of the best Writers This was it's like Universally received by all the English Clergy in Whitgifts time Neither do I know saith the Archbishop any Learned Man of a contrary Judgment Either we must admit another Form now of Governing the Church than was in the Apostles time or else we must seclude the Christian Magistrate from all Authority in Ecclesiastical Matters I am perswaded that the External Government of the Church under a Christian Magistrate must be according to the Kind and Form of Government used in the Common-wealth else how can you make the Prince Supream Governour of all States and Causes Ecclesiastical If you therefore will have the Queen of England Rule as Monarch over all her Dominions then must you also give her leave to use one Kind and Form of Government in all and every part of the same and so to Govern the Church in Ecclesiastical Affairs as she doth the Common-wealth in Civil Dr. Cosins Chancellor to this Archbishop in his Answer to the Abstract Pag. 58. asserts That all Churches have not the same Form of Discipline neither is it necessary that they should seeing it cannot be proved that any certain particular Form of Church Government is commended to us by the Word of God. Dr. Low speaks to the same purpose Complaint of the Church No certain Form of Government is prescribed in the Word P. 64 66. only general Rules laid down for it Bishop Bridges God hath not expressed the Form of Church Government at least not so as to bind us What is here mention'd of Cosins Low and Bishop Bridges I have out of Dean Stillingfleet's Weapon Salve and out of a Learned MS. I have this following passage about Whitaker who making his Remarques on St. Hierom's teling us Whitaker De Ecles Regimin Contr. 4. q. 1. §. 29. p. 540. Col. 2. That the Difference between Presbyters and Bishops was brought in by Men long after the Apostles as a Remedy against Schism assures us That it 's a Remedy almost worse than the Malady for it begat and brought in the Pope with his Monarchy into the Church and this other of Bishop Morton telling the Papists That Power of Order and of Jurisdiction which they ascribe to Bishops doth de jure divino belong to all other Presbyters and particularly Morton 's Apol. Cath. lib. 1. c. 21. p. 55. That to Ordain is the jus antiquum the Ancient Right of Presbyters in fine That Dr. Laurence Humfrey and Dr. Holland Humf. against Campian Jesuit Part 2. p. 273. both of them Doctors of the Chair in Oxford did teach and maintain the same Doctrine Holland in the Act July 9. 1608. concluded that the contrary is most false against the Scriptures the Fathers the Doctrine of the Church of England the Schoolmen Lombard Aquinas Bonaventure c. CHAP. IV. Dr. Willet 's Sentiments much the same with the foremention'd Bishops The Difference between a Bishop and Presbyter as of Divine Right declur'd to be Popish and oppos'd as such The special Consecration of Bishops was Ordained not by a Divine Law but by the Church for the Dignity of their Calling Saravia for no other Difference between a Presbyter and Bishop but in Degree Bancroft for a Priority in degree only holding with Dr. Robinson Dr. Reynolds and Dr. Fulk whose Authorities he insists on to Confirm his Opinion about a Gradual Difference between Bishop and Presbyter TO these I will add another namely In his Life of Willet Dr. Andrew Willet who as Dr. Smith observes is by Bishop Hall numbred amongst those Worthies of the Church of England Hall in his Noah 's Dove to whom he gives this Elogy Stupor mundi Clerus Britannicus This Dr. in his Synopsis Papismi is very large in discussing the Difference between a Bishop and Presbyter and in his Determinations in most things agreeth with the Learned Authors I have already quoted The grand Question under Debate is Willet 's Synops Papism Contr. 5. Quest 3. Concerning the Clergy Append. Whether the Difference between Bishops and other Ministers be grounded upon the Law of God and Institution of the Apostles The Papists Bellarmine saith the Dr. affirmeth Lib. 1. De Clericis c. 14. That the Jurisdiction of Bishops as now it standeth in their Church and the Difference between them and other Presbyters is Jure Divino grounded upon the Law of God and of such necessity that he holdeth the contrary to be Heresie and those to be Hereticks that hold this Difference to arise rather of a Politick Constitution of the Church to avoid Schism than of the Institution of the Apostles yea they hold them to be no Churches at all which are not under the Government of Bishops but of other Overseers and Superintendents Surely I see not
the Polity of the Church appears to me to be thus That tho' Polity in general be necessary to the Church yet it 's not necessary that any one compleat Form of Church Polity be in Scripture Besides it 's his conclusion Sect. 10. p. 82. That neither God's being Author of Laws for Government of his Church nor his committing them unto Scripture is any reason sufficient wherefore all Churches should for ever be bound to keep them without change Again if we did seek to maintain that which most advantageth our own Cause the very best way for us and the strongest against them viz. The Noncons were to hold even as they do That in Scripture there must needs be found some particular Form of Church Polity which God hath instituted and which for that very cause belongeth to all Churches to all times But with any such partial Eye to respect our selves and by cunning to make those things seem the truest which are the fittest to serve our purpose is a thing which we neither like nor mean to follow Wherefore that which we take to be generally true concerning the Mutability of Laws the same we have plainly delivered as being perswaded of nothing more than we are of this that whether it be in matter of Speculation or of Practice no Vntruth can possibly avail the Patron and Defender long and that things most Truly are likewise most behovefully spoken Sect. 11. p. 90. And to make manifest that from Scripture we offer not to derogate the least thing that truth thereunto doth claim in as much as by us it is willingly confess'd that the Scripture of God is a Storehouse abounding with inestimable Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge in many kinds yea even that matters of Ecclesiastical Polity are not therein omitted but taught also albeit not so taught as those other things before-mentioned For so perfectly are those things taught that nothing ever can need to be added nothing ever cease to be necessary These on the contrary side as being of a far other nature and Quality not so strictly nor everlastingly commanded in Scripture but that unto the compleat Form of Church-Polity much may be requisite which the Scripture teacheth not and much which it hath taught become unrequisite sometime because we need not use it sometimes also because we cannot In which respect for my own part altho' I see that certain Reformed Churches the Scottish especially and French have not that which best agreeth with the Sacred Scriptures I mean the Government which is by Bishops inasmuch as both these Churches are faln under a different kind of Regiment which to remedy it is for the one altogether too late and to soon for the other during their present Affliction and Trouble He adds The Matters wherein Church-Polity is conversant P. 92. are the Publick religious Duties of the Church as the Administration of the Word and Sacraments Prayers Spiritual Censures and the like To these the Church stands always bound Laws of Polity are Laws which appoint in what manner these Duties shall be performed In their performance the first thing in Polity required is a Difference of Persons in the Church without which difference those Functions cannot in orderly sort be executed Hereupon we hold That God's Clergy are a State which hath been and will be as long as there is a Church upon Earth necessary by the plain Word of God himself Again where the Clergy are any great Multitude Order doth necessarily require that by Degrees they be distinguished we hold there have ever been and ever ought to be in such case at leastwise two sorts of Ecclesiastical Persons the one subordinate unto the other as to the Apostles in the begining and to Bishops always since we find plainly both in Scripture and in all Ecclesiastical Records other Ministers of the Word and Sacraments have been Moreover it cannot enter into any man's conceit to think it lawful that every man which listeth should take upon him charge in the Church and therefore a Solemn Admittance is of such necessity that without it there can be no Church-Polity These are the Principal and Perpetual parts in Ecclesiastical Polity Thus much in the Third Book where he looks on Church-Polity in the general and some special parts thereof such as a distinction between Bishops and Presbyters and a Subordination of the Presbyter to the Bishop to be agreeable to the Word of God but no compleat form of Church Polity to be found in the Scripture neither are all the Laws of God concerning the Government of the Church Immutable and Everlasting We must go to the Seventh Book for a more distinct account of the Office of a Bishop and the difference between him and a Presbyter where 't is thus But to let go the Name Bishop and to come to the very Nature of that thing Lib. 7. Sect. 2. pag. 5. which is thereby signified in all kinds of Regiment whether Ecclesiastical or Civil as there are sundry Operations Publick so likewise great Inequality there is in the same Operations some being of Principal respect and therefore not fit to be dealt in by every one to whom Publick Actions and those of Good Importance are notwithstanding well and fitly enough committed From hence have grown those different Degrees of Magistrates or Publick Persons even Ecclesiastical as well as Civil Amongst Ecclesiastical Persons therefore Bishops being Chief ones a Bishop's Function must be defined by that wherein his Chiefty consisteth A Bishop is a Minister of God unto whom with permanent continuance there is given not only Power of administring the Word and Sacraments which Power other Presbyters have but also a further Power to Ordain Ecclesiastical Persons and a Power of Chiefty in Government over Presbyters as well as Lay-men A Power to be by way of Jurisdiction a Pastor even to Pastors themselves Those things incident unto the Bishop's Office which do properly make him a Bishop cannot be common unto him with other Pastors Now even as Pastors so likewise Bishops being Principal Pastors aâ—e either at Large or else with Restraint At Large when the subject of their Regiments is indefinite and not tied to any certain Place Bishops with Restraint are they whose Regiment over the Church is contained within some definite local compass beyond which compass their Jurisdiction reacheth not such therefore we always mean when we speak of that Regiment by Bishops which we hold a thing most Lawful Divine and Holy in the Church of Christ But what doth He mean by Chiefty in Government In answer unto this he tells us how far the old Noncons went in the grant of an Inequality and how much further He goeth They which cannot brook saith he the Superiority which Bishops have Sect. 3. p. 6. do notwithstanding themselves admit that some kind of Difference and Inequality there may be lawfully amongst Ministers Inequality touching Gifts and Graces they grant Again a Priority of Order they