hated the Bishop and this as the Historian calls it his usurped power This president of the Alexandrian Bishop the Bishop of Rome did soone follow Et Romanus Episcopatus non aliter quam Alexandrinus quasi EXTRA SACERDOTII FINES egressus ad secularem principatum erat jam delapsus The Bishop of Rome as well as the Bishop of Alexandria breaking the limits of the Priestly function did degenerate into a secular Principalitie which purchased no lesse envie to him then that to the other And though these two Bishops went at first abreast in this point yet in a short time the Roman had outstripped the Alexandrian in that power till the Church degenerating more and more that Roman Priest advanced his power not onely above all the Bishops but all the Monarchs in the Christian Orbe Yet notwithstanding he that shall look into the Ancients shall finde first that the best of them held that they were not to be molested with the handling of worldly affaires Cyprian Epist. 66.1 Singuli divino Sacerdotio honorati non nisi altari sacrificiis deservire precibus atque orationibus vacare debent Molestiis secularibus non sunt obligandi qui divinis rebus spiritualibus occupantur Secondly that they complained of them as of heavy burthens Aug. calles it Angaria yea Austin himselfe in his 81. Epistle Complaines that worldly businesse hindered his praying and so pressed him that vix respirare potuit and Gregory the great non sine dolore in secularibus versabatur praefat in Dial. Thirdly Cyprian construed it as one great cause of persecutions raised against the Church de lapsis Sect. 4. Fourthly it was much cryed downe as unlawfull by the holy Fathers many Canons forbidding it and that under paine of being removed from their places Can. Apost Can. 6. Can. 81. hee that did presume to administer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Roman command or Administration of Military affaires or civill place as Zonaras there he should be deposed Can. Apo. Can. 83. hiring of ground medling with worldly affaires is to be laid asid by them Otherwise they are threatned to be liable to Ecclesiasticall censures Conc. Cal. Cano. 3. Conc. Carth. Can. 16. We will ad this for a conclusion in this point it is observed by Athanasius Sulpitius Severus and other Ecclesiasticall Historians that the Arians were very expedite in worldly affaires which experience they gained by their constant following and attendance upon the Emperours Court and what troubles they occasioned to the Church thereby is notoriously knowne to any that have seene the Histories of their times And in this our Bishops have approved themselves more like to the Arian Bishops then the purer Bishops of purer times but how ever cleare it is that our Bishops and the Bishops of former times are Two Two in election to their office Two in the discharge of their office Two in their Ordination Iurisdiction processes Censures Administrations and the difference betweene our Bishops and those of former times is greater then between the great Bishop of Rome and them SECT XIII BUt it seemes our Remonstrant soared above those times even as high as the Apostles dayes for so hee saith If our Bishops challenge any other spirituall power then was by Apostolike Authority delegated to and required of Timothy and Titus and the Angels of the seven Asian Churches let them be DISCLAIMED as VSVRPERS And the truth is so they deserve to be if they do but challenge the same power that the Apostle did delegate to Timothy and Titus for Timothy and Titus were Evangelists and so moved in a Sphere above Bishops or Presbyters For Timothy it is cleare from the letter of the Text 2 Tim. 4.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Doe the worke of an Evangelist if Timothy had beene but a Presbyter or Bishop Paul had here put him upon imployment Vltra Sphara Activitatis And to any man that will but understand and consider what the Office of an Evangelist was and wherein it differed from the Office of a Presbyter or Bishop it will bee manifest that Timothy and Titus were Evangelists and no Bishops for the title of Evangelist is taken but two wayes either for such as wrote the Gospell and so wee doe not affirme Timothy and Titus to bee Evangelists or else for such as taught the Gospell and those were of two sorts either such as had ordinary places and ordinary gifts or such whose places and gifts were extraordinary and such Evangelists were Timothy and Titus and not Bishops as will appeare if wee consider what was the Difference betweene the Evangelists and Bishopsâ— Bishops or Presbyters were tyed to the particular care and tuiâ—ion of that flock over which God had made them Overseers Acts 20.28 But Evangelists were not tyed to reside in one particular place but did attend upon the Apostles by whose appoyntment they were sent from place to place as the necessity of the Churches did require As appeares first in Timothy â— whom S. Paul besought to abide at Ephesus 1 Tim. 1.3 which had been a needlesse importunity if Timothy had had the Episcopall that is the Pastorall charge of Ephesus committed to him by the Apostles for then hee might have laid as dreadfull a Charge upon him to abide at Ephesus as he doth to Preach the Gospell But so far was Paul from setling Timothy in Cathedrâ in Ephesus that he rather continually sends him up and downe upon all Church services for we â—inde Acts. 17.14 That when Paul fled from the tumults of Berea to Athens he left Silas and Timothy behinde him who afterwards comming to Paul to Athens Paul sends Timothy from Athens to Thessalonica to confirme the Thessalonians in the faith as appeares 1 Thes. 3.1.2 from whence returning to Paul to Athens againe the Apostle Paul before hee left Athens and went to Corinth sent him Silas into Macedonia who returned to him againe to Corinth Act. 18.5 afterwards they travelled to Ephesus from whence we read Paul sent Timothy and Erastus into Macedonia Act. 19 22. whither Paul went after them from whence they divers other Brethren journied into Asia Acts 20.4 All which Brethren Paul calles as it is probable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the messengers of the Churches 2 Cor. 8.23 And being thus accompanied with Timothy and the rest of the Brethren he comes to Miletum and calls the Elders of the Church of Ephesus thither to him of which Church had Timothy beene Bishop the Apostle in stead of giving the Elders a charge to feede the flock of Christ would have given that charge to Timothy and not to them And secondly the Apostle would not so have forgotten himselfe as to call the Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before their Bishops face Thirdly It is to be conceived the Apostles would have given them some directions how to carry themselves towards their Bishop but not a word of this though Timothy were then in
of beholders led them to censure any line or proportion as not done to the life he mends it after direction If any fault bee found with the eye hand foot c. he corrects it till at last the addition of every mans fancie had defaced the first figure and made that which was the Picture of a man swell into a monster Then bringing forth this and his other Picture which hee had reserved he presented both to the people and they abhorring the former and applauding the latter he cryed Hunc populus fecit This the deformed one the People made This lovely one I made As the Painter of his Painting so in Bezaes sence it may be said of Bishops God at first instituted Bishops such as are all one with presbyters and such are amiable honourable in all the Churches of God But when men would bee adding to Gods institution what power preheminence Iurisdiction Lordlynes their phansie suggested unto them this divine Bishop lost his Originali beauty and became to be Humanus And in conclusion by these and other additions swelling into a Pâ—pe Diabolicus Whether the Ancient Fathers when they call Peter Marke Iames Timothy and Titus Bishops did not speak according to the Language of the times wherein they lived rather then according to the true acception of the word Bishop and whether it bee not true which is here said in this Booke that they are called Bishops of Alexandria Ephesus Hierusalem c. in a very improper sense because they abode at those places a longer time then at other places For sure it is if Christ made Peter and Iames Apostles which are Bishops over the whole world and the Apostles made Marke Timothy and Titus Evangelists c. It seemes to us that it wonld have beene a great sinne in them to limit themselves to one particular Diocesse and to leave that calling in which Christ had placed them Whether Presbyters in Scripture are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that it is an office required at their hands to rule and to governe as hath beene proved in this Booke The Bishops can without sinne arrogate the exercise of this power to themselves alone And why may they not with the same lawfulnesse impropriate to themselves alone the Key of Doctrine which yet notwithstanding all would condemne as wel as the Key of Discipline seeing that the whole power of the Keyes is given to Presbyters in Scâ—ipture as well as to Bishops as appears Mat. 16.19 where the power of the Keyes is promised to Peter in the name of the rest of the Apostles and their successors and given to all the Apostles and their successors Mat. 18.19 Iohn 20.23 And that Presbyters succeed the Apostles appeares not onely Mat. 28.20 but also Acts 20 28. where the Apostle ready to leave the Church of Ephesus commends the care of ruling and feeding it to the Elders of that Church To this Irenaeus witnesseth lib. 4. cap. 43.44 This Bishop Iewell against Harding Artic. 4. sect 5.6 saith that all Pastors have equall power of binding and loosing with Peeter Whether since that Bishops assume to themselves power temporall to be Barons and to sit in Parliament as Judges and in Court of Star-Chamber High Commission and other Courts of Justice and also power spirituall over Ministers and People to ordaine silence suspend deprive excommunicate c. their spirituall power be not as dangerous though both bee dangerous and as much to be opposed as their temporall 1. Because the spiritual is over our consciences the temporall but over our purses 2. Because the spirituall have more influence into Gods Ordinances to defile them then the temporall 3. Because spirituall Judgements and evills are greater then other 4. because the Pope was Anticstrist before he did assume any temporall power 5. Because the Spirituall is more inward and lesse discerned and therefore it concernes all those that have Spirituall eyes and desire to worship God in spirit and truth to consider and and endeavour to abrogate their Spirituall usurpations as well as their Temporall Whether Acrius bee justly branded by Epiphanius and Austin for a Hereticke as some report for affirming Bishops and presbyters to be of an equall power Wee say as some report for the truth is he is charged with heresie meerely and onely because he was an a Arian As for his opinion of the parity of a presbyter with a Bishop this indeede is called by Austin proprium dogma Aerii the proper opinion of Aerius And by Epiphanius it is called Dogma furiosum stolidum a mad and foolish opinion but not an heresie neither by the one nor the other But let us suppose as is commonly thought that he was accounted an Heretike for this opinion yet notwithstanding that this was but the private opinion of Epiphanius and borrowed out of him by Austin an opinion not to be allowed appeares First because the same Authors condemne Aërius as much for reprehending and censuring the mentioning of the dead in the publique prayers and the performing of good works for the benefit of the dead And also for the reprehending statu jejunia and the keeping of the week before Easter as a solemne Fast which if worthy of condemnation would bring in most of the reformed Churches into the censure of Heresie Secondly because not onely Saint Hierome but Anstin himselfe Sedulius Primasius Chrysostome Theodoret Oecumenius Theophilact were of the same opinion with Aërius as Michael Medina observes in the Councell of Trent and hath written Lib. 1. de sacr hom Origine and yet none of these deserving the name of Fools much lesse to be branded for Hereticks Thirdly because no Counsell did ever condemne this for Heresie but on the contrary Concilium Aquisgranens sub Ludovico Pio Imp. 1. anno 816. hath approved it for true Divinitie out of the Scripture That Bishops Presbyters are equall bringing the same texts that Aerius doth and which Epiphanius indeed undertakes to answer but how slightly let any indifferent Reader judge Whether the great Apostacie of the Church of Rome hath not been in swarving from the Discipline of Christ as well as from the doctrine For so it seems by that text 2. Thess. 2.4 And also Revel 18.7 and divers others And if so then it much concernes all those that desire the purity of the Church to consider how neere the discipline of the Church of England borders upon Antichrist least while they indeavour to keepe out Antichrist from entring by the doore of doctrine they should suffer him secretly to creep in by the doore of discipline especially considering what is heere said in this Booke That by their owne confession the discipline of the Church of England is the same with the Church of Rome Whether Episcopacy be not made a place of Dignity rather then Duty and desired onely for the great revenues of the place And whether if the largenesse
AN ANSWER TO A BOOKE ENTITVLED AN HVMBLE REMONSTRANCE In which The Originall of LITURGY EPISCOPACY is discussed And Quaeres propounded concerning both The PARITY of Bishops and Presbyters in Scripture Demonstrated The occasion of their IMPARITY in Antiquity discovered The DISPARITY of the Ancient and our Moderne Bishops manifested The ANTIQUITY of Ruling Elders in the Church vindicated The PRELATICALL Church Bownded IEREMY 6.16 Thus saith the Lord stand in the wayes and Behold and aske for the Old Way which is the Way and walke therein Tertul. de praescr adv haeres Id Dominicum verum quod prius traditum id autem extraaeum falsum quod sit posterius Written by SMECTYMNVVS LONDON Printed for I. Rothwell and are to be sold by T. N. at the Bible in Popes-Head-Alley 1641. MOST HONOVRABLE LORDS AND YE THE KNIGHTS CITIZENS AND BVRGESSES of the Honourable House of COMMONS ALthough we doubt not but that book which was lately directed to your Honours bearing the name of an Humble Remonstrance hath had accesse unto your presence and is in the first approaches of it discovered by your discerning spirits to be neither Humble nor a Remonstrance but a heape of confident and ungrounded assertions so that to your Honours a Reply may seeme superfluous Yet lest the Authour should glory in our silence as a granting of the cause we humbly crave your Honours leave to present not so much to your selves as to the world by your hands a review of this Remonstrance in which the Authour after too large a Preface undertakes the support of two things which seeme to him to bee threatned with danger of a present precipice the Liturgy and the Hierarchie It was a constitution of those admired sonnes of Iustice the Areopagi that such as pleaded before them should pleade without prefacing and without Passion had your Honours made such a constitution this Remonstance must have beene banished from the face of your Assembly for the Preface fils almost a fourth part of the Booke and the rest swels with so many passionate Rhetorications as it is harder for us in the multitude of his words to finde what his argument is that we have to answer then to answer it when it is found We would not trace him in his words but close immediately with his argments did wee not finde in him a sad exemplification of that Divine Axiome in Multitudine verborum non deest peccatum in the multitude of words there wants no sinne for though the Authour is bold to call upon your Honours to heare the words of truth and confidence yet how little truth there is in this great confidence the ensuing discourse shall discover His very first wordâ— are confident enough and yet as false as confident wherein he Impropriates all honesty unto these his Papers and brands all others with the name of Libellers and yet himselfe sins deeply against the rule of honesty and lies naked to the scourge of his owne censure First in setting a brand upon all writings that have lately issued from the presse as if they had all forgotten to speake any other language then Libellous it seemes himselfe had forgotten that some things had issued by Authority of the King and Parliament Secondly in taxing implicitely all such as will not owne this Remonstrance for theirs as none of the peaceable and well-affected Sons of the Church of England Thirdly in censuring the way of petitioning your Honours the Ancient and ordinary free way of seeking redresse of our evils for a Tumultuary under-band way Fourthly in condemning all such as are not fautors of this Episcopall Cause as none of his Majesties good Subjects engrossing that praise onely to his owne party saying The eyes of us the good Subjects of this whole Realmâ— are fixed upon your Successe c. Fiftly in Impropriating to the same party the praise of Orthodox pag. 6. as if to speak a word or think a thought against Episcopacy were no lesse Heresie then it was in formeâ— time to speake against the Popes supremacy or the monkes fat Belly whereas whether the Episcopall part be the Orthodox peaceable well affected part and his Majesties onely good Subjects wee leave to your Honours to Iudge upon the numerous Informations that flow in unto you from the severall parts of this Kingdome Nor can they decline your Iudgment seeing now you are through Gods blessing happily met in a much longed for Parliament but whether so much longed for by him and his accomplices as by those against whom he whâ—â—s his Style the Prayers that have obtained this happy meeting and the prayses that doe attend it will decide in â—hat great day The Helena whose Champion this Remonstrant chiefely is is that Government which hee calles Sacred viz. that Governement by Arch-Bishops Bishops Deanes Archdeacons c. which saith he through the sides of some misliked persons some have endeavoured to wound Misliked Persons and why not offending persons why not guilty persons when this Honourable house hath â—ound just cause to charge some of them with crimes of the highest nature Our zeale for your Honours make us feare lest your assembly shold suffer in this word as if your proceedings against such persons should be grounded upon compliance with such as doe mislike them rather then upon their owne demerits or the Iustice of this Court But what ever those Persons be the Government it self is Sacred which by the â—oynt confession of all reformed Divines derives it selfe from the times of the â—lessed Apostles without any interruption without contradiction of any one congregation in the world unto this present age This is but an Episcopall Bravado therefore we let it passe till we come to close and contend with him in the point where we shall demonstrate that in the compasse of three lines hee hath packt up as many untruths as could be smoothly couched in so few words as any man of common understanding that lookes upon the face of the Governement of almost all reformed Churches in the Christian world may at first view discover But before we come to this there are yet two things in this Preface which we count not unworthy observation The First is the comparison which he makes between the two Governments the Civill which with us is Monarchie and the sacred which with him is Episcopacy Of the first he saith if Antiquity may be the Rule as he pleades it for Episcopacy or iâ— Scripture as he interprets Scripture it is VARIABLE and ARBITRARY but the other DIVINE and VNALTERABLE so that had men petitioned for the altering of Monarchicall Government they had in his Iudgement beene lesse culpable â—oth by Scripture and Antiquity then in petitioning the alteration of the Hierarchicall Had he found but any such passage in any of his Lewd Libellers as his modesty is alwayes pleased to tearme them certainly if we may borrow his owne phrase the eares of the three Interessed
committed to and exercised by Presbyteriall hands For who are they of whom the Scripture speakes Heb. 13.17 Obey them that have the Rule over you for they watch for your soules as they that must give an account c. Here all such as watch over the soules of Gods people are intituled to rule over them So that unlesse Bishops will say that they only watch over the soules of Gods people and are only to give an account for them they cannot challenge to themselves the sole rule over them And if the Bishops can give us good security that they will acquit us from giving up our account to God for the soules of his people we will quit our plea and resigne to them the sole rule over them So againe in the 1 Thessa. 5.12 Know them which labour amongst you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you In which words are contained these truthes First that in one Church for the Thessalonians were but one Church 1 Ca. there was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â— but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not one chiefe Bishop or President but the Presidency was in many Secondly that this presidency was of such as laboured in the word and Doctrine Thirdly that the Censures of the Church were managed not by one but by them all in Communi Them that admonish you Fourthly that there was among them a Parity for the Apostles bids know them in an Indifferency not discriminating one from another yea such was the rule that Elders had that S. Peter thought it needfull to make an exhortation to them to use their power with Moderation not Lording it over Gods Heritage 1 Pet. 5.3 By this time we have sufficiently proved from Scripture that Bishops and Presbyters are the same in name in Office in Edifying the Church in power of Ordination and Iurisdiction we summe up all that hath beene spoken in one argument They which have the same Name the same Ordination to their Office the same qualification for their Office the same worke to feede the flock of God to ordaine pastors and Elders to Rule and Governe they are one and the same Office but such are Bishops and presbyters Ergo. SECT VI. BUt the dint of all this Scripture the Remonstrant would elude by obtruding upon his reader a commentary as he calls it of the Apostles own practise which hee would force to contradict their own rules to which he superadds the unquestioÌ„able glosse of the cleare practise of their immediate successors in this administration For the Apostles practise we have already discovered it from the Apostles own writings and for his Glosse he superadds if it corrupts not the Text we shall admit it but if it doe we must answer with Tertullian Id verum quodcunque primum id adulterum quod posterius whatsoever is first is true but that which is latter is adulterous In the examination of this Glosse to avoyd needlesse Controversie First wee take for granted by both sides that the first and best Antiquitie used the names of Bishops and Presbyters promiscuously Secondly that in processe of time some one was honoured with the name of Bishop and the rest were called Presbyters or Cleri Thirdly that this was not Nomen inane but there was some kinde of Imparitie betweene him and the rest of the Presbyters Yet in this we differ that they say this Impropriation of name and Imparity of place is of Divine Right and Apostolicall Institution we affirme both to be occasionall and of humane Invention and undertake to shew out of Antiquitie both the occasion upon which and the Persons by whom this Imparity was brought into the Church On our parts stands Ierome and Ambrose and others whom we doubt not but our Remonstrant wil grant a place among his Glossators Saint Ierome tells us in 1 Tit. Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus antequam Diaboli instinctu studia in Religione â—ierent diceretur in populis ego sum Pauli ego Apollo ego Cephae Communi Presbyterorum Consilio ecclesiae gubernabantur Postquam verò unusquisque eos quos baptizaverat suos putabat esse non Christi in toto Orbe decretum est ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur caeteris ad quem omnis Ecclesiae Cura pertineret schismatum semina â—olicrentur Putat aliquts non Scripturarum sed nostram esse sentâ—ntiam Episcopum Presbyterum unum esse aliud aetatis aliud esse nomen officii relâ—gat Apostoli ad Philippenses verba dicentis Paulus Timotheus servi Iesis Christi qui sunt Philippis cum Episcopis Diaconis c. Philippi una est urbs Macedoniae certè in unâ Civitate non poterant plures esse ut nuncupantur Episcopi c. sicut ergo Presbyteri sciant se ex Ecclesiae consuetudine ei qui sibi praepositus fuerit esse subjectos Ita Episcopi noverint se magis consuetudine quam dispositionis Dominicae veritate Presbyteris esse majores in Communi debere Ecclesiam regere A Presbyter and a Bishop is the same and before there were through the Devils instinct divisions in Religion and the people began to say I am of Paul and I of Apollo and I of Cephas The Churches were governed by the Common Counsell of the Presbyters But after that each man began to account those whom hee had baptized his owne and not Christs it was decreed thorow the whole world that one of the Presbyters should be set over the rest to whom the Care of all the Church should belong that the seeds of schisme might be taken away Thinkes any that this is my opinion and not the opinion of the Scripture that a Bishop and an Elder is the same let him reade the words of the Apostle to the Philippians saying Paul and Timothy the servants of Jesus Christ to them that are at Philippi with the Bishops Deacons Philippi is one City of Macedonia and certainly in one Citie there could not be many Bishops as they are now called c. and after the allegations of many other Scriptures he concludes thus as the Elders therefore may know that they are to be subject to him that is set over them by the Custome of the Church so let the Bishops know that it is more from custome then from any true dispensation from the Lord that they are above the Presbyters and that they ought to rule the Church in common In which words of Ierome these five things present themselves to the Readers view First that Bishops and Presbyters are originally the same Idem ergo est Presbyter qui Episcopus Secondly that that Imparitie that was in his time betweene Bishops and Elders was grounded upon Ecclesiasticall Custome and not upon divine Institution Episcopi noverint c. Thirdly that this was not his private judgement but the judgement of Scripture Putat aliquis c. Fourthly that before this Prioritie was upon this occasion started
the Church was governed Communi Presbyterorum Consilio by the Counsell of the presbyters in common and that even after this imparity it ought to be so governed Sciant Episcopi se Ecclesiam debere in communi regere Fifthly that the occasion of this Imparity and Superiority of Bishops above Elders was the divisions which through the Devils instinct fell among the Churches Post quam verò Diaboli instinctu Saravia would take advantage of this place to deduce this Imparity as high as from the Apostles times because even then they began to say I am of Paul and I of Apollos but sure S. Ierome was not so weake as this man would make him to speake Inconsistencies and when he propounds it to himselfe to prove that Bishops and Presbyters are in Scripture the same to let fall words that should confute his own proposition whereas therefore S. Ierome saith that after men began to say I am of Paul and I of Apollos c. it was decreed that one of the Presbyters should be set over the rest c. This is spoken indeed in the Apostles phrase but not of the Apostles times else to what purpose is that coacervation of texts that followes But suppose it should be granted to be of Apostolicall antiquity which yet we grant not having proved the contrary yet it appeares it was not of Apostolicall intention but of Diabolicall occasion And though the Divell by kindling Divisions in the Church did minister Occasion to the invention of the primacy or prelacy or one for the suppressing of Schisme yet there is just cause to thinke that the Spirit of God in his Apostles was never the author of this Invention First because we reade in the Apostles dayes there were Divisions Rom 16.7 and Schismes 1 Cor. 3.3 11.18 yet the Apostle was not directed by the holy Ghost to ordâ—ine Bishops for the taking away of those Divisions Neither in the rules hee prescribes for the healing of those breaches doth hee mention Bishops for that end Nor in the Directions given to Timothy and Titus for the Ordination of Bishops or Elders doth he mention this as one end of their Ordination or one peculiar duty of their office And though the Apostle saith O portet haereses inter vos esse ut qui probati sunt manifesti fiant inter vos yet the apostle no where saith Oportet Episcopos esse ut tollantur haereses quae mainifestae fiunt Secondly because as Doctor Whitaker saith the remedy devised hath proved worse then the disease which doth never happen to that remedy whereof the holy Ghost is the author Thirdly because the holy Ghost who could foresee what would ensue thereupon would never ordaine that for a remedy which would not onely be ineffectuall to the cutting off of evill but become a stirrup for Antichrist to get into his â—addle For if there be a necessity of setting up one Bishop over many presbyters for preventing schismes there is as great a necessity of setting up one Archbishop over many Bishops and one patriarch over many Archbishops and one pope over all unlesse men will imagine that there is a danger of schisme only among presbyters and not among Bishops and Archbishops which is contrary to reason truth History and our own Experience And lest our adversaries should appeale from Hierome as an incompetent Judge in this case because a Presbyter and so a party we wil therefore subjoyne the judgements of other ancient Fathers who were themselves bishops The Commentaries that goe under the name of Saint Ambrose upon Ephes. 4. mention another occasion of this Discrimination or priority and that was the increase and dilatation of the Church upon occasion whereof they did ordaine rectors or Governours and other officers in the Church yet this he grants that this did differ from the former orders of the Church and from apostolicall Writ And this Rectorship or Priority was devolved at first from one Elder to another by Succession when hee who was in the place was removed the next in order among the Elders Succeeded But this was afterwards changed and that unworthy men might not bee preferred it was made a matter of election and not a matter of Succession Thus much we finde concerning the occasion of this imparity enough to shew it is not of Divine Authority For the second thing the persons who brought in this Imparity the same Authours tells us the Presbyters themselves brought it in witnesse Hierome ad Evag. Alexandriae Presbyteri unum ex se electum in Excelsiori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant quomodo si exercitus Imperatorem faceret aut Diaconi de se Archidiaconum The Presbyters of Alexandria did call him their Bishop whom they had chosen from among themselves and placed in a higher degree as if an army should make an Emperour or the Deacons an Archdeacon Ambrose upon the fourth of the Ephesians tells us it was done by a Councell and although he neither name the Time nor place of the Councell yet ascribing it to a Councell hee grants it not to be Apostolicall this gave occasion to others to fixe it upon Custome as Hieronym in Tit. and August Epist. 19. secundùm honorum vocabula quae Ecclesiae usus obtinuit Episcopatus Presbyterio major est And had that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Prelacie had the Seale and confirmation of Divine or Apostolicall Authority Gregory Nazianzene would never in such a Patheticke manner have wished the Abolition of it as hee doth in his 28. Oration And now where is that acknowledgement and conveyance of Imparitie and Iurisdiction which saith this Remonstrant was derived from the Apostles hands and deduced in an uninterrupted line unto this day where is it we find no such Imparity delivered from Apostolicall hands nor acknowledged in Apostolicall writings yet had there beene such an acknowledgement and conveyance of imparity how this should have beene deduced to us in an uninterrupted Line wee know not unlesse our Bishops will draw the Line of their Pedigree through the loynes of Antichrist and joyne issue and mingle blood with Rome which it seemes they will rather doe then lose this plea for their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their tyrannicall prerogative as Nazianzen calls it Suffer us therefore humbly to appeale to your Honours whether this Remonstrant hath not given sentence against himselfe who is so confident of the Evidence of his cause that he doth not feare to say if there can be better Evidence under Heaven for any matter of fact then there is for his Episcopacy Let EPISCOPACY BEFOR EVER ABANDONED OVT OF THE CHVRCH OF GOD. SECT VII YEt it seemes himselfe in the height of his confidence was not without Jelousies of some thing might be spoken against his Cause therefore he seemes to heare what is spoken against it That the Apostles Bishops and ours are two there was no other then a Parochiall Pastor a Preaching Presbyter without
sentence of Saint Ambrose because saith hee Hoc Iudicium Nostrum cum fratribus consacerdotibus participatum processerit Nor was there any kinde of censures that the Bishops did administer alone Admonitions were given by the Elders Augustine tells us the Elders did admonish such as were offenders to the same purpose speakes Origen contra Celsum Lib. 3. So excommunication though that being the dreadfullest thunder of the Church and as Tertullian calls it summum praejudicium futuri Iudicij the great fore-runner of the Judgement of God was never vibrated but by the hand of those that laboured in the Word and Doctrine yet was no one man in the Church invested with this power more then another Therefore saith Hierom Presbytero si peccavero licet me tradere satanae in interitum carnis If I sinne a Presbyter not a Bishop onely may deliver me to Satan to the destruction c. where the Reader may please to take notice that Saint Hierom speakes not of one particular Presbyter but of the Order of Presbyters The same S. Hierom saith againe Sunt quos Ecclesia reprehendit quos interdum abijcit in quos nonnunquam Episcoporum Clericorum censura desaevit There be some whom the Church reprooves and some which shee casts out against whom the censures of Bishops and Presbyters sharply proceed where we see the Censures whereby wicked men were cast out of the Church were not the sole hands of the Bishops but likewise in the hands of Presbyters Syricius Bishop of Rome signifies to the Church of Mâ—llaine that Iovinianus Auxentius c. were cast out of the Church for ever and he sets downe how they did it Omnium Nostrum tam Presbyterorum quam Diaconorum quam totius etiam clerisciscitata fuit sententia There was a concurrence of all Presbyters Deacons and the whole Clergie in that sentence of Excommunication The truth herein may be further evidencâ—d by this because the whole Clergie as well as the Bishops imposed hands uâ—on such as repâ—nting were aâ—solved Nec ad communicationem saith Cyprâ—an venire quis possit nisi prius ab Episcopo Clero Manus illi fuerit imposita No man that hath beene excommunicated might returne to Church-Communion before hands had been laid upon him by the Bishop and Clergie Also writing to his Clergie concerning lapsed Christians he tells them Exomologe si facta manu eis a vobis in poenitentiam impositâ c. that after confession and the laying on their hands they might be commended unto God so when certaine returning from their heresie were to be received into the Church at Rome in the time of Cornelius they came before the Presbyterie and therefore confessed their sinnes and so were admitted But though the sentence of Excommunication was managed oneâ—y by the hand of those that laboured in the Word and Doctrine yet we will not conceale from you that neither Excommunication nor absolution did passe wâ—thout the knowledge and approbation of the body of the Church to which the Deliquent did belong So we have learned out of Tertullian that their censures were ordered in their publike assemblies and good reason because the people were to forbeare communion with such 2 Thes. 3.6 14 15. and publick Censures of the Church were inflicted not onely for the Emendation of delinquents but for the admonition of others and therefore ought to be administred in publick that others might feare 1 Tim. 5.20 Origen speaking of the Duty and Power of the Church in cutting off a scandalous Person though a Presbyter making the case his owne he saith thus In uno consensu Ecclâ—sia universa conspirans excidat me dextram suam projiciat a se He would have the consent of the whole Church in that Act. And when the lapsed Christians were received againe into the Church the Peoples consent was required therein else why should Cyprian say Vix plebi persuadeo imò extorqueo ut tales patiantur admitti I can scarce perswade the people to suffer such to be admitted and in another Epistle written to his people in his Banishment he promiseth to examine all things they being present and judging Examinabuntur singula praesentibus judicantibus vobis But of this power of the People wee shall have a further occasion to speak afterwards when we come to discourse of Governing Elders Onely may it please your Honours from hence to take notice how unjustly our Bishops have invaded this right and power of Presbyters and people in Church censures and devesting both of it have girt it wholly upon themselves and how herein they and the Bishops of former times are TWO SECT X. ANd as our Bishops and the Bishops of former times are TWO in point of Sole Iurisdiction so also in the Delegation of this power of Iurisdiction unto others to their Chancellours Commissaries Officers c. Was ever such a thing as this heard of in the best primitive Times that men that never received Imposition of hands should not onely be received into assistance but be wholly intrusted with the power of Spirituall Iurisdiction Even then when it is to be exercised over such persons as have had hands laid upon them We may observe in Cyprian whilst persecution separated him from his Church when questions did arise among his people he doth not send them to his Chancellour or Commissarie No he was so farre from suâ—stituting any man much lesse a lay man to determine or give Judgement in such cases that hee would not assume that power wholly to himselfe but suspends his Judgement till the hand of God should restore him to his Church againe that with the advice and Counsell of the Presbyters he might give sentence as may appeare to any that shall peruse his Epistles Sure if God had ever led his Church to such a way of deputation it would have been in such a case of Necessity as this was or had any footsteps of such a course as this beene visible by this holy Martyr in the goings of former ages hee needed not have deferred the determination of the question about the receiving of some penitent lapsed ones into the bosome of the Church againe till his returne and the returne of his Clergie as he doth We will instance in his 28 Epistle wherein giving direction for the excommunicating of such as would rashly communicate with lapsed Christians he gives this charge not to his Chancellor or Commissarie or any other man upon whom he had devolved his power and set him as his Deputie or Vicar generall in his absence but ad clerum to the whole Presbyterie This Truth is so cleare that Bishop Downam the great Adâ—ocate of Episcopacie confesseth that in Ambrose his time a good while after which was about 400 yeers til the Presbyters were in a manner wholly neglected the Bishops had no Ordinaries Vicars Chancellors or Commissaries that were not Clergie-men
opinion and hath gathered to our hands the opinions of all Interpreters hee could meete and saith that they all consent in this that under the person of an Angell the Pastors and Ministers of the Churches were understood Saint Austin in his 132. Epistle saith thus Sic enim in Apocalypsi legitur Angelus c. Quod si de angelo superioruÌ„ coelorum non de Praepositis ecclesiarum vellet intelligi non consequenter diceret habeo adversum te c. And so in his second Homily upon the Revelation if that booke be his Quod autem dicit angelo Thyatirae â— habeo adversum te pauca dicit Praepositis Ecclesiarum c. This also Gregory the Great lib. 34. Moralâ— in Iob cap. 4. Saepè sacrum scripturam prâ—dicatores Ecclesiae pro eo quod patris gloriam annunciant angelorum nomine solere de signare hinc esse quod Iohannes in Apocalypsi septem Ecclesiis scribens angelis Ecclesiaâ—um loquitur id â—st Praedicatoribus populorum Master Fox citeth Primasius Haymo Beda Richard Thomas and others to whom we referre you If it be here demanded as it is much by the Hierarchicall side that if by angell bee meant the whole company oâ— Presbyters why Christ did not say to the angels in the plurall number but to the angell in the singular Wee answer that though this question may savour of a little too much curiosity yet wee will make bold to subjoyn three conjecturall reasoÌ„s of this phrase of speech First It is so used in this place because it is the common language of other Scriptures in types and visions to set down a certaine number for an uncertaine and the singular number for the purall Thus the Ramme Dan. 8.3 is interpreted vers 20. to be the Kings of Media and Persia And the enemies of Gods Church are set out by foure hoâ—nes And the deliverers by foure Carpenters Zach. 1.18 20. And the wise and foolish Virgins are said to be five wise and five foolish And many such like And therefore as we answer the Papists when they demand why Christ if he meant figuratively when he saith this is my body did not speake in plaine language this is the signe of my body We say that this phrase of speech is proper to all Sacraments So we also answer here this phrase of speech Angell for Angels is common to all types and visions Secondly angell is put though more be meant that so it may hold proportion with the Vision which Iohn sawâ— Chap 1.12.20 He saw seven golden Candlestickes and seven Starres And therefore to hold proportion the Epistles are directed to seven angels and to seven Churches And this is called a mystery Revel 1.20 The mystery of the seven Starres c. Now a mystery is a secret which comprehends more then is expressed and therefore though but one angell be expressed yet the mystery implyes all the angels of that Church Thirdly to signifie their unity in the Ministeriall function and joynt commission to attend upon the feeding and governing of one Church with one common care as it were with one hand and heart And this is more fitly declared by the name of one angell then of many Wee often finde the name of one Prophet or Priest to be put for the generall body of the Ministery or whole multitude of Prophets or Priests in the Church of Israel or Iudah when the Spirit of God intendeth to reprove threaten or admonish them Thus it is Iere. 6.13.18.18 Isa. 3.2 Hos. 9.8 Ezek. 7.26 Hos. 4.6 Mal. 2.7 Neither should it seeme strange that a multitude or company of Ministers should bee understood under the name of one angell seeing a multitude of Heavenly angels implyed in one service for the good of Gods Saints is sometimes in the Scripture shut up under one angell in the singular number as may be gathered from Gen. â—4 7 2 Kings 19.35 Psal. 34.7 compared with Psalme 91.11 Gen. 32.1.2 Kings 6.16 17. And also a multitude of devils or evill angels joyntly labouring in any one worke is set forth under the name of one evill or uncleane spirit 1 Kings 22.21 22. Mark 1 23 24. Markâ— 5.2.9 Luke 4.33 34. Luk. 8.27.30 1 Pet. 5.8 Heb. 2.14 Ephes. 6.11.12 But now let us suppose which yet notwithstanding we will not grant that the word Angell is taken individually for one particular person as Doctor Reynolds seemes to interpret it together with Master Beza yet neverthelesse there will nothing follow out of this acception that will any wayes make for the upholding of a Diocesan Bishop with sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction as a distinct superior to Presbyters And this appeares First because it never was yet proved nor ever will as we conceive that these angels were Diocesan Bishops considering that Parishes were not divided into Diocesses in S. Iohns dayes And the seven starres are said to bee fixed in their seven Candlestickes or Churches not one starre over divers Candlestickes Neither can those Churches be thought to be Diocesan when not only Tindall and the old translation calls them seven Congregations but we reade also Acts 20. that at Ephesus which was one of those Candlesticks there was but one flock And secondly we further finde that in Ephesus one of those seven Churches there were many Presbyters which are all called Bishops Acts 20.28 and we finde no colour of any superintendency or superiority of one Bishop over another To them in generall the Church is committed to be fed by them without any respect had to Timothy who stood at his elbow and had beene with him in Macedonia and was now waiting upon him to Ierusalem This is also confirmed by Epiphanius who writing of the Heresies of the Meletians saith that in ancient times this was peculiar to Alexandria that it had but one bishop whereas other Cities had two And hee being bishop of Cypres might well be acquainted with the condition of the Churches of Asia which were so nigh unto him Thirdly there is nothing said in the seven Epistles that implyeth any superiority or majority of rule or power that these angels had over the other angels that were joyned with them in their Churches It is written indeed in commendation of the angell of the Church of Ephesus that he could not beare them that were evill and that he had tryed them which say they were Apostles and are not had found them lyars And it is spoken in dispraise of the angell of Pergamus that he suffred them which held the doctrine of Balaam c. But these things are common duties requirable at the hands of all Ministers who have the Charge of Soules But suppose that there were some superiority and preheminency insinuated by this individuall angell yet who knoweth not that there are divers kinds of superiority to wit of Order of dignity of gifts and parts or in degree of Ministery or in charge of power and jurisdiction And how will it be proved that
in their Polemicks yet in their Practicks a power that Timothy and Titus and those angels never did Thirdly Whereas this remonstrant saith If there can be better evidence under Heaven for any matter of fact let Episcopacy be for ever abandoned out of Gods Church We beseech you remember how weake we have discovered his Evidence to be and then the Inference upon all these we humbly leave to your Honours Wisedome and Iustice. SECT XIIII HAving thus considered the validity of those arguments whereby this remonstrant would suffult Episcopacy we descend now to inquire what satisfaction he gives to those objections which himselfe frames as the maine if not the sole arguments that Episcopacy is asfaultable by and they are two First that pleading the Divine right of Episcopacy is to the prejudice of Soveraignty Secondly that it casts a dangerous imputation upon all those reformed Churches that want this Government To the first the prejudice of Soveraignty he answers 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 Bishopricke But we have proved already that God never made a Bishop as he stands in his Superioritie over all other Presbyters he never had Gods Fiat and if they disclaime the influence of soveraignty unto their creation to a priority and assert that the King doth not make them Bishops they must have no being at all Sure we are the Lawes of the Land proclaime that not onely Bishopricks but Bishops and all the Iurisdiction they have is from the King whereas the Remonstrant acknowledgeth no more but the bare place and exercise to be from Regall donation which cannot bee affirmed without apparent prejudice of that Soveraigntie which the Lawes of the Land have invested our Princes with And for his unworthy comparison of Kings in order to Bishops and Patrons in order to their Clerkes when he shall prove that the patron gives ministeriall power to his Clerke as the Kâ—nâ— according to our Laws gives Episcopall power to the Bishop â— it may be of some conducement to his cause but till then we leave the unfitnesse of this comparison and the unthankfulnesse of those men to the indulgence of their Soveraigne to their deserved recompence His learned answer to such men as borrowing Saint Ieroms phrase speake Saint Pauls truth is in summe this That he knâ—wâ—s not how to prescribe to mens thoughts but for all his Rhetoricke they will thinke what they list but if they will grant him the question they shall soone be at an end of the quarrell which one answer if Satisfactory would silence all controversies to as good purpose as he did Bellarmine who said Bellarmine saith it is thus and I say it is not and where is Bellarmine now To the second objection that Episcopacie thus asserted casts an imputation upon all the reformed Churches that want that Government hee saith that the objection is intended to raise envie against them who if they may be beleeved love and honour those sister Churches and blesse God for them But doe they not plucke all this envie upon themselves who in their Conferences Writings Pulpits Vniversities Disputes High Commission Declamations have disclaimed them us no Churches that have disclaimed the Prelats and have honoured the most glorious Lights of those Reformed Churches Calvin Beza and others with no better titles than of Rascalls Blasphemers c. But the pith of his answer after a few good words is this that no such consequent can be drawne from their opinion for their Ius divinum pleads only for a Iustifiablenesse of this holy calling Not for an absolute necessity of it warranting it where it is and requiring it where it may be had but not fixing upon the Church that wants it the defect of any thing of the Essence of a Church but only of the glory and perfection of it neither is it their sin but their misery And is it so doth not this Ius divinum argue a Necessitie but onely a Iustifiablenesse of this calling nor is the want of it a want of any thing of Essence but onely of perfection wee had thought that page the twentieth where this Remonstrant strives to fetch the pedegree of Episcopacie from no lesse than Apostolicall and in that right Divine institution he had reckoned it among those things which the Apostles ordained for the succeeding administration of the Church in essentiall matters but here it seemes he is willing to retract what there fell from him there it was to his advantage to say this government was a thing essentiall to the Church and here it is no lesse advantage to say it is not essentiall But if it be not Essentiall then what is the reason that when a Priest who hath received orders at Rome turnes to us they urge not him to receive ordination among us againe but when some of our brethren who flying in Queene 〈◊〉 dayes had received Imposition of hands in the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas returned againe in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth they were urged to receive Imposition of hands againe from our Bishops and some did receive it If those Churches that want Bishops want nothing essentiall to a Church then what Essentiall want was there in the ordination of those Ministers that received Imposition of hands in those Churches that might deserve a Re-ordination more than if they had first received their ordination at Rome And what is the reason that Bishop Mountague so confidently affirmes that Ordination by Episcopall hands is so necessary as that thâ— Church is no true Church without it and the Ministery no true Ministery and ordinarily no salvation to be obtained without it And if this Remonstrant should leave Bishop Mountague to answer for himselfe yet notwithstanding he stands bound to give us satisfaction to these two questions which arise from his owne Booke First whether that Office which by divine right hath the sole power of Ordaining and Ruling all other Officers in the Church as he saith Episcopacy hath belong not to the being but onely to the glory and perfection of a Church Secondly there being in this mans thoughts the same Ius divinum for Bishops that there is for Pastors and Elders whether if those Reformed Churches wanted Pastors and Elders too they should want nothing of the Essence of a Church but of the perfection and glory of it But this Remonstrant seemes to know so much of the minde of those Churches that if they might have their option they would most gladly embrace Episcopall Government as littlâ— differing from their owne Moderatorship save onely in the perpetuitie of it and the new Invention as hee odiously calls it of Lay Elders But no question those learned Worthies that were entrusted by the Churches to compile their confessions did comprise their Iudgements better than the Composer of this Remonstrance And to his presumption wee oppose their Confession Wee will begin with
the French Church who in their Confession speake thus Credimus veram Ecclesiam gubernari debere ea politia quam Dominus noster Iesus Christus sancivit ita videlicet ut sint in ea Pastores Presbyteri sive Seniores Diaconi ut doctrinae puritas retineatur c. Ar. 29. Credimus omnes Pastores ubicunque collocati sunt cádem aequali potestate inter se esse praeditos sub uno illo capite summoque solo universali Episcopo Iesu Christo Art 30. Gallicae confessionis Credimus veram hanc Ecclesiam debere regi ac gubernari spirituali illâ politiâ quam nos Deus ipse in verbo suo edocuit it a ut sint in ea Pastores ac ministri qui pure concionentur Sacramenta administrent sint quoque Seniores Diaconi qui Ecclesiae senatum constituant ut his veluti mediis vera Râ—ligio conservari Hominesque vitiis dediti spiritualiter corripi emendari possint Tunc enim ritè ordinate omnia siunt in Ecclesia cum viri fidâ—les pii ad ejus gubernationem deliguÌ„tur juxta Divi Pauli praescriptum 1 Tim. 3. Confes. Belgic Art 30. Caeterum ubicunque locorum sunt verbi Dei Ministri eandem atque aequalem Omnes habent tum Potestatem tum AUTHORITATEM ut qui sunt aeque Omnes Christi unici illius universalis Episcopi capitis Ecclesiae Ministri We beleeve that the true Church ought to be governed by that policie which Christ Jesus our Lord established viz. that there bee Pastors Presbyters or Elders and Deacons And againe Wee beleeve that all true Pastors where ever they be are endued with equall and the same power under one chiefe Head and bishop Christ Jesus Consonant to this the Dutch Churches We beleeve say they the true Church ought to be ruled with that spirituall policie which God hath taught us in his Word to wit that there bee in it Pastours to preach the Word purely Elders and Deacons to constitute the Ecclesiasticall Senate that by these meanes Religion may be preserved and manners corrected And so again We beleeve where ever the Ministers of God are placed they All have the same equall power and authoritie as being All equally the Ministers of Christ. In which harmony of these Confessions see how both Churches agree in these five points First That there is in the Word of God an exact forme of Governement set downe Deus in verbo suo edocuit Secondly That this forme of Governement Christ established in his Church Iesus Christus in Ecclesiâ sancivit Thirdly That this forme of Government is by Pastors Elders and Deacons Fourthly That the true Church of Christ ought to be thus governed Veram Ecclesiam debere regi Fifthly That all true Ministers of the Gospell are of equall power and Authority For the reason he assignes why those Churches should make this Option wee cannot enough admire that such a passage should fall from his pen as to say there is Little difference betweene their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and our Episcopacie save onely in perpetuity and lay Elders for who knowes not that between these two there is as vast a difference as between the Duke of Venice and an absolute Monarch For 1. the Moderator in Geneva is not of a superiour order to his Brethren nor 2. hath an ordination differing from them nor 3. assumes power of sole Ordination or Jurisdiction nor hath he 4. maintenance for that office above his Brethren nor 5. a Negative voyce in what is agreed by the rest nor 6. any further power then any of his Brethren So that the difference betweene our Bishops and their Moderators is more then Little But if it be so little as this Remonstrant here pretends then the Alteration and Abrogation of Episcopacie will be with the lesse difficultie and occasion the lesse disturbance SECT XV. BUt there is another thing wherein our Episcopacie differs from the Geneva Moderatorship besides the perpetuity and that is the exclusion of the Lay Presbytery which if we may beleeve this Remonstrant never till this age had footing in the Christian Church In which assertion this Remonstrant concludes so fully with Bishop Halls Irrefragable Propositions and his other book of Episcopacie by divine right as if he had conspired to sweare to what the Bishop had said Now though we will not enter the Lists with a man of that learning and fame that Bishop Hall is yet we dare tell this Remonstrant that this his assertion hath no more truth in it then the rest that wee have alreadie noted Wee will to avoyd prolixity not urge those three knowne Texts of Scripture produced by some for the establishing of Governing Elders in the Church not yet vindicated by the adversaries Nor will wee urge that famous Text of Ambrose in 1 Tim. 5. But if there were no Lay Elders in the Church till this present age wee would be glad to learne who they were of whom Origen speakes when he tels us it was the Custome of Christian Teachers first to examine such as desired to heare them of whom there were two orders the first were Catechumeni or beginners the other was of such as were more perfect among whom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 câ— Nonnulli praepositi sunt quì in vitam mores eorum qui admittuntur inquirant ut qui turpia committant iis communi Caetu Interdicant qui vero ab istis abhorrent ex anima complexi meliores quotidiè reddant There are some ordained to enquire into the life and manners of such as are admitted into the Church that they may banish such from the publique Assembly that perpetrate scandalous Acts which place tells us plainely First that there were some in the higher forme of heares not Teachers who were Censores morum over the rest Secondly that they were designed or constituted to this work 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thirdly that they had such Authority instrusted into their hands as that they might interdict such as were scandalous from the publique Assemblies We would gladly know whether these were not as it were Lay Elders That there were such in the Church distinguished from others that were called to teach appeares Augustine writing to his Charge directs his Epistle Dilectissimis fratribus clero senioribus universae Plebi Ecclesiae Hipponensis where first there is the generall compellation Fratribus Brethren then there is a distribution of these Brethren into the Clergie the Elders and the whole People so that there were in that Church Elders distinguished both from the Clergie and the rest of the People So againe Contra Cresconium Grammaticum Omnes vos Episcopi Presbyteri Diaconi Seniores scitis All you Bishops Elders Deacons and Elders doe know What were those two sorts of Elders there mentioned in one comma ibidem cap. 56. Peregrinus Presbyter seniores Ecclesiae Musticanae Regiones tale desiderium prosequuntur where
Kingdomes yea all the neighbour Churches and if we may say the whole Christian world and no small part beyond it had rung with the lowd cryes of no lesse then Treason Treason Truth is in his Antiquity we find that this his uninterrupted sacred Government hath so far invaded the Civill and so yoked Monarchy even in this Kingdome as Malmesbury reports That William Rufus oppressed by Bishops perswaded the Iewes to confute them promising thereupon to turne England to their Religion that he might be free of Bishops And this is so naturall an effect of unalterable Episcopacy that Pius â—he fourth to the Spanish Embassadour importuning him to permit Bishops to bee declared by the Councell of Trent to be Iure Divino gave this answer That his King knew not what he did desire for if Bishops should be so declared they would be all exempted from his Power and as indepedent as the Pope himselfe The second thing observable is the comparison hee makes betweene the late Alterations attempted in our Neighbour Church by his Episcopall faction and that Alteration that is now justly desired by the humble petitioners to this Honourable House The one being attempted by strangers endevouring violently to obtrude Innovations upon a setled Church and State The other humbly petitioned to the Heads and Princes of our State by Multitudes therein almost ruined by an Innovating Faction yet doth not this Remonstrant blush to say if these be branded so he cals the just censures of this Honorable House For Incendiaries how shall these Boutefeux escape c. thus cunningly indeavouring either to justifie the former by the practise of the latter or to render the latter more odious then the former The attempts of these men whom he would thus render odious hee craves leave to present to your Honours in two things which are the subjects of this quarrell The Liturgie and Episcopacy and we humbly crave your Honours leave in both to answer SECT II. FIrst the Liturgie of the Church of England saith he hath bin hitherto esteemed sacred reverently used by holy Martyrs daily frequented by devout Protestants as that which more then once hath been confirmed by the Edicts of religious Princes and your own Parliamentary Acts c. And hath it so whence then proceed these many Additions and Alterations that have so changed the face and fabrick of the Liturgie that as Dr. Hall spake once of the pride of England if our fore-fathers should revive and see their daughters walking in Cheapside with their fannes and farthingales c. they would wonder what kinde of creatures they were and say Nature had forgot her selfe and brought forth a monster so if these holy Martyrs that once so reverently used the Liturgy should revive and looke for their Letany stampt by Authority of Parliament they would be amased and wondering say England had forgotten her selfe and brought forth c. Martyrs what doe we speake of Martyrs when we know Sir that one of your owne Bishops said it in the hearing of many not so long since but you may well remember it That the service of the Church of England was now so drest that if the Pope should come and see it he would claime it as his owne but that it is in English It is little then to the advantage of your cause that you tell us it is translated into other languages and as little service have they done to the Church of England who have taught our Prayers to speake Latine againe For if it be their Language chiefly that overthrowes the Popes claime take away that and what hinders then but the Pope may say these are mine As for other Translations and the great applause it hath obtained from Forraigne Divines which are the fumes this Remonstrant venditates what late dayes have produced we know not but the great lights of Former ages have beene farre from this applauding we are sure judicious Calvine saith that in the Liturgy there are sundry Tolerabiles Ineptiae which we thinke is no very great applause To vindicate this Liturgy from scorne as he calles it at home or by your Honours aide to reinforce it upon the Nation is the worke of his Remonstrance for the effecting whereof he falls into an unparallell'd discourse about the Antiquity of Liturgies we call it unparalleld because no man that we have seene ever drew the line of Liturgy so high as he hath done Concerning which if by Liturgy this Remonstrant understand an Order observed in Church assemblies of Praying reading and expounding the Scriptures Administring Sacraments c. Such a Liturgy we know and do acknowledge both Iewes and Christians have used But if by Liturgy hee understand prescribed and stinted formes of Administration Composed by some particular men in the Church and imposed upon all the rest as this he must understand or else all hee saith is nothing wee desire and expect that those formes which he saith are yet extant and ready to be produced might once appeare Liturgy of this former sort we finde in Iustine Martyr and Tertullian But that there were not such stinted Liturgies as this Remonstrant disputes for appeares by Tertullian in his Apol. Cap. 30. where he saith the Christians of those times did in their publique assemblies pray sine monitore quiâ— de pectore without any Prompter but their own hearts And that so it should be the same Father proves in his Treatise de Oratione Sâ—â—nt quae petantur c. There are some things to be asked according to the occasions of every man the lawfull ordinary prayer thaâ— is the Lords Prayer being laid as a foundation It is lawfull to build upon that foundation other prayers according to every ones occasions And to the same purpose S. Austin in his 121. Ep. Liberum est c. it is free to aske the same things that are desired in the Lords Prayer aliis atque aliis verbis sometimes one way and sometimes another And before this in that famous place of Iust. Mar. Apo. 2. He who instructed the people prayed according to his ability Nor was this liberty in prayer taken away and set and imposed formes introduced untill the time that the Arian and Pelagian Heresies did invade the Church and then because those Hereticks did convey and spreade their poyson in their formes of Prayer and Hymnes the Church thought it convenient to restraine the liberty of making and using publike formes And first it ordained that none should pray pro Arbitrio sed semper eaedem preces that none should use liberty to vary in prayer but use alwaies the same forme Conc. Laod. Can. 18. yet this was a forme of his owne composing as appeares by another Canon wherein it was ordered thus None should use any forme unlesse he had first conferred Cum fratribus instructioribus with the more learned of his brethren Conc. Carth. 3. Can. 23. and lastly that none should use set
he pleads not a few that have called them Traitors rather then Martyrs and Dâ—formers rather then Reformers of our Religion His other Argument for the Liturgie is taken from that supply of strength it hath received from the recommendation of foure most Religious Princes your own Parliamentary establishments and more especially from the Proclamation of King Iames of famous memory the validity of which plea your Honors are best able to judge and therefore we leave it at your Bar yet these two things we know first that this form was never established to be so punctually observed so rigorously pressed to the casting out of all that scruple it or any thing in it as many of his Majesties Subjects now doe to the almost justling out of the preaching of the Word and Conceived Prayer altogether And secondly as sure we are that your Honors thinke neither your own Lawes nor the Proclamation of that most famous and ever admired Prince to be as unalterable as the Lawes of the Medes and Persians And now having briefly shewed that Liturgies are not of that antiquity that this Remonstrant pretends but that conceived prayer was in use in the Church of God before Liturgies and is iustified from their own mouthes and not to be found fault with by any but a gracelesse man and having likewise shewed that our Liturgie was taken out of Models not only Christian but Romane and hath since the first compiling of it suffered alteration to the worse and though established by Law and confirmed by Proclamation was never intended to the justling ouâ— either of preaching or conceived prayer these things declared we humbly crave your Honors leave to propound these two Queries QUERE I. Whether it be not fit to consider of the alteration of the present Liturgie First because it symbolizeth so much with the Popish Masse as that the Pope himselfe was willing to have it used if he might but confirme it It was made and composed into this frame on purpose to bring the Papists to our Churches which we finde to be with so little successe as that it hath rather brought many of us to them then any of them to us and hath lost many of ours from us Because many things therein contained are stumbling blocks before the feet of many such as these the clogging it with Ceremonies and the often and impertinent reiterating of the Lords Prayer the ill translation of the Psalmes and other Scriptures the many phrases in the very prayers which are liable to just exception And whereas the Minister by the Scripture is the peoples mouth to God this booke prescribes Responsories to bee said by the people some of which are unsutable to what the Minister pronounceth some of them seeme to savour of Tautologie some are made to be so essentiall to the prayer as that all which the Minister saith is no prayer without them as in the Letany Because it is so much Idolized as that it is accounted the only worship of God in England and is now made the upholder of a non-preaching Ministery and is cryed up to that height as that some are not ashamed to say that the wit of men and Angels cannot mend it and that it is a sufficient discharge of the Ministers duty to reade this Booke There are such multitudes of people that distaste this booke that unlesse it be altered there is no hope of any mutuall agreement between Gods Ministers and their people There is such a vaste difference betweene it and the Liturgies of all other reformed Churches as that it keepes them at a distance from us and us from full Communion with them QUERE II. Whether the first reformers of Religion did ever intend the use of a Liturgie further then to be an help in the want or to the weaknesse of a Minister All other reformed Churches though they use Liturgies yet doe not binde their Ministers to the use of them A Rubrick in King Edwards booke left it unto the discretion of the Minister what and how much to reade when there was a Sermon The Homilies which are appointed to be read are left free either to be read or not by preaching Ministers and why not then the Liturgie especially considering that the ability to offer up the peoples wants to God in prayer is part of the Ministeriall office as well as preaching And if it can be thought no lesse than sacriledge to rob the people of the Ministers gift in preaching and to tie them to Homilies it can be no lesse to deprive them of their gift in prayer The ground of the first binding of it upon all to use was not to tie godly men from exercising their gift in prayer but the old popish Priests that by a seeming returne to our Religion did through indulgence retaine their places from returning to the old Masâ—e That which makes many refuse to be present at our Church service is not only the Liturgie it selfe but the imposing of it upon Ministers And we finde no way to recover our people to a stinted prayer but by leaving it free to use or not to use If it be objected that this will breed divisions and disturbances in Churches unlesse there be a uniformity and that there are many unable It hath not bred any disturbance in other reformed Churches Why should the free liberty of using or not using a Liturgie breed more confusion than the free liberty of reading or not reading Homilies especially when Ministers shall tâ—ach people not to condemne one another in things indifferent If there be a care taken in those that have the power to make Ministers to choose men gifted as well for prayer as preaching there cannot be conceived how any inconvenience should follow Or if afterwards it should appeare that any Minister should prove insufficient to discharge the duty of prayer in a conceived way it may bee imposed on him as a punishment to use set formes and no other But why any Minister that hath the gift of prayer in an abundant measure as well as of preaching should be hindered from exercising his gift well because another useth it ill is a new Divinity never heard of in Gods Church till Bishop Wrens daies who forbad all use of conceived prayer in the Church SECT III. VVE come now with your Honours favour to the second point disputed in this Remonstrance Episcopacy it selfe against which whatsoever hath been either spoken or written by any either learned Divines or well reformed Churches as his conscience knowes there are of both that have writ against it is Taxed by him as no other then the uniust Clamors either of weak or factious persons Sure the man thinkes he hath obtained a Monopoly of learning and all Knowledge is lockt up in his bosome and not oâ—ly Knowledge but piety and peaceableness too for all that are not of his opinion must suffer either as weake or factious if he may be their Iudge We know
not what this Arrogancy might attempt to fasten upon your Honors should the bowels of your compassion bee enlarged to weigh in the Ballance of your wisdomes the multitude of Humble petitions presented to you from severall parts of this Kingdome that hath long groaned under the Iron aâ—d Insupportable yoake of this Episcopall Government which yet we doubt not but your Honours will please to take into your prudent and pious consideration Especially knowing it is their continuall practise to loade with the odious names of Faction all that justly complain of their unjust oppression In his addresse to his defence of Episcopacy he makes an unhappy confession that he is confounded in himselfe Your Honours may in this beleeve him for hee that reades this Remonstrance may easily observe so many falsities and contradictions though presented to publike view with a face of confident boldnesse as could not fall from the Pen of any but selfe-confounded man which though we doubt not but your Honours have descryed yet because they are hid from an errant and unobserving eye under the Embroyderies of a silken Language wee Humbly crave your Honours leave to put them one by one upon the file that the world may see what credit is to be given to the bold assertions of this confident Remonstrant First in his second page he dubs his Book the faithfull messenger of all the peaceable and right affected sons of the Church of England which words besides that unchristian Theta which as we already observed they set upon all that are not of his party carry in the bowels of them a notorious falsity and contradiction to the phrase of the booke for how could this booke be the messenger of all his owne party in England when it is not to be imagined that all could know of the comming forth of this booke before it was published and how can that booke crave admittance in all their names that speakes in the singular number and as in the person of one man almost the whole booke thorow But it may besome will say this is but a small slippe well be it so but in the seventh page hee layes it on in foure lines asserting these foure things First that Episcopall Government that very same Episcopall Government which some he saith seekes to wound that is Government by Diocesan Bishops derives it selfe from the Apostles times which though we shall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more fully confute anon yet we cannot here but ranke it among his notorious for how could there be such Government of a Diocesse by a Bishop derived from the Apostles times when in the Apostles times there were no Bishops distinct from Pâ—esbyters as we shall shew and if there had beene Bishops yet they were no Diocesans for it was a hundred yeares after Christ or as most agree 260. before Parishes were distinguished and there must be a distinction of Parishes before there could be an union of them into Diocesses Secondly it is by the joynt confession of all reformed Divines granted that this sacred Government is derived from the Apostles What all reformed Divines was Calvin Beza Iunius c. of that minde Are the reformed Churches of France Scotland Netherlands of that Iudgement we shall shew anon that there is no more Truth in this Assertion then if he had said with Anaxagoras snow is black or with Copernicus the Earth moves and the heavens stand still Thirdly he saith this Government hath continued without any interruption What doth he meane at Rome for we reade in some places of the world this Government was never known for many yeares together as in Scotland â— we reade that in Ancient times the Scots were instructed in the Christian faith by Priests and Monkes and were without Bishops 290. yeares yea to come to England we would desire to know of this Remonstrant whether God had a Church in England in Q. Mariâ—s daies or no and if so who were then the Bishops of this Church for some there must be if it be true that this man saith this Government hath continued without any interruption unto this day and Bishops then we know not where to finde but in the â—ine of Popish succession Fourthly he saith it hath thus continued without the contradiction of any one Congregation in the Christian world It seemes he hath forgotten what their own darling Heylin hath written of the people of Biscay in Spaine that they admit of no Bishops to come among them for when Ferdinand the Catholike came in progresse accompanied among others with the Bishop of Pampelone the people rose up in Armes drove back the Bishop and gathering up all the dust which they thought he had trode on flung it into the Sea Which story had it been recorded only by him would have been of lighter Credit But we reade the same in the Spanish Chronicle who saith more then the Doctor for he tels us that the People threw that dust that the Bishop or his Mule had trode on into the Sea with Curses and Imprecations which certainly saith he was not done without some Mysterie those people not being voide of Religion but superstitiously devout as the rest of the Spaniards are so that they is one Congregation in the Christian world in which this Government hath met with contradiction And are not the French Scottish and Belgicke Churches worthy to be counted Christian Congregations and who knows not that amongst these this Government hath met not only with verball but reall contradiction Yet he cannot leave his But within two pages is at it again and tels us of an unquestionable clearnesse wherein it hath been from the Apostles derived to us how unquestionable when the many volumes written about it witnesse to the world and to his conscience it hath been as much questioned as any point almost in our Religion And that assertion of his that tels us that the people of God had a forme of prayer as ancient as Moses which was constantly practised to the Apostles dayes and by the Apostles c. though we have shewed how bold and false this assertion is yet we mention it here as deserving to be put into the Catalogue And that he may not seeme Contra Mentem ire but to be of the same minde still p. 18. he saith Episcopall Government hath continued in this Island ever since the first plantation of the Gospell without contradiction Had he taken a lesse space of time and said but since the resuscitation of the Gospel we can prove it to him and shall that since the reformation Episcopacy hath been more contradicted then ever the Papacy was before the extirpation of it Yet still the man runs on thinking to get credit to his untruthes by their multiplications for pag. 21. hee saith Certainly except all Histories all Authors faile us nothing can be more certain then this truth Oâ— Durum Nothing more certain what is it not more certain
sixth verse he gives a delineation of the persons that are capable of such Ordination and in the seventh the Reason why the person to be ordained must be so qualified for a Bishop c. Now if the Bishop and Elder be not here the same but names of distinct office and order the Apostles reason rendred in the seventh verse of his direction in the fift and sixt verses is with reverence be it spoken inconsequentiall and his demand unjust If a Chancellor in one of the Vniversities should give Order to his Vice-chancellour to admit none to the decree of Batchelour in Arts but such as were able to preach or keepe a Divinity Act For Batchelours in Divinity must be so what reason or equity were in this So if Paul leaving Titus as his Locum teneus as it were in Creet for a season should give order to him not to admit any to be an Elder but one thus and thus qualified because a Bishop must be so Had a Bishop been an Order or Calling distinct from or superiour to a Presbyter and not the same this had been no more rationall or equall then the former therfore under the name of Bishop in the seventh verse the Apostle intends the Elder mentioned in the fift verse Consonant to this is the Language of the same blessed Apostle Acts 20. verse 17.18 where such as in 17 verse he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders in the 28. he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in ordinary English Bishops though our Translation there we know not for what reason reads it Overseers not so rendring the word in any other Text. And though this Remonstrant undertakes to shew a cleare and received distinction of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons as three distinct subordinate Callings in Gods Church with an evident specification of the duty charge belonging to each of them or els let this claimed Hierarchy be for ever hooted out of the Church Yet let us tell him that we never find in Scripture these 3 Orders Bishops Presbyters Deacons mentioned together but onely Bishops Deacons as Phil. 1. and 1 Tim. Nor do we finde in Scripture any Ordination to the office of a Bishop differing froÌ„ the Ordination of an Elder Nor do we finde in Scripture the specification of any Duty charged upon a Bishop that Elders are secluded from Nor any qualification required in a Bishop that is not requisite in every Presbyter some of which if not all would be found were they not the same But if this Remonstrant thinke to helpe himselfe by taking Sanctuary in Antiquity though we would gladly â—est in Scripture the Sanctuary of the Lord yet we will follow him thither and there shew him that Hierome from the Scriptures proves more then once Presbyters and Bishops to be the same And Chrysostome in Philip. 1. Homil. 2. with his admirer Theophilact in Philip. 1. affirmes that while the Apostles lived the Names of Bishops and Presbyters were not distinguished and not only while the Apostles lived but in after ages Doth not Irenaeus use the name of Bishops and Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a promiscuous sence Are not Anicetus Pius Hyginus Telesphorus Sixtus whom the Papists call Bishops and the popes predecessors termed by Eusebius presbyters Nor was it strange in the primitive times to heare Bishops called presbyters when Presbyters writing to their Bishops have called him Frater So Cyprian Epist. 26. in the beginning is stiled by his Presbyters Deacons and confessors nor was that holy Martyr offended with that title nor they condemned of insolency that used it But what should we burthen your patience with more testimonies when the evidence of this truth hath shined with so strong a beame that even our Adversaries have stooped to it and confessed that their Names were the same in the Apostles time But yet say they the Offices were distinct Now here wee would gladly know what these men make the distinct Office of a Bishop Is it to edifie the Church by word and Sacrament is it to ordaine others to that worke is it to rule to governe by admonition and other censures if any of these if all these make up the proper worke of a Bishop we can prove from Scripture that all these belong unto the Presbytery which is no more then was granted by a Councell For the first Edifying of the Church by word and Sacraments though we feare they will some of them at least scarce owne this as their proper worke for some have beene citeâ— into the High Commission for saying it belongs to them yet Sir we are sure Scripture makes it a part a chiefe of the Episcopall office for so in the 1 Pet 5.2 they are said to doe the worke of a Bishop when they doe feede the flocke of God And this is such a worke as we hope their Lordships will give the poore Presbyters leave to share with them in or if not we will tell them that the Apostle Peter in that forecited place and the Apostle Paul Acts. 20. binds this worke upon our hands and Woe unto us if we preach not the Gospell But this branch of Episcopall and Presbyteriall office we passe with brevity because in this there lies not so much controversie as in the next which they doe more wholly Impropriate to themselves the power of Ordination Which power that it was in former times in the hands of Presbyters appeares 1 Tim. 4.14 Neglect not the gift which was given thee by Prophesie and by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery The gift here spoken of is the Ministeriall gift the exercise whereof the Apostle exhorts Timothy not to neglect which saith he he had received not by the laying on of the hands of one single man whether Apostle or Bishop or Presbyter But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Presbytery that is the whole company of Presbyters for in that sense onely wee â—inde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taken in Scripture as in Luke 22. vers 66. Act. 22. vers 5. which the Christian Church called the Ecclesiasticall Senate as Ierom in Isay 3. Nos habemus in Ecclesia Senatum nostrum Coetum Presbyterorum an Apostolicall Senate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ignatius Epis. ad Magnes and some times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Ancyr Can. 18. And though the Apostle in his second Epistle to Tim. 1.6 makes mention of the laying on of his hands yet to maintaine the Harmony of Scripture it must not be denied but there was imposition of hands by the Presbytery as well as by himselfe so it was a joynt act So that in this there is no more difference then in the former And if there be no difference betweene Presbyters in feeding or ordaining let us see if there be any in the third part of their office of Ruling which though our Bishops assume wholy to themselves yet we shall discover that it hath beene
inequality without any Rule over his brethren Ours claime an eminent Superiority and a power of Ordination and Iurisdiction unknowne to the Primitive times That this which hee supposeth hee heares us say is Scripture Truth we have shewed already c. that there was a parity between Presbyters and Bishops and that eminent superioritie and power of Ordination and Iurisdiction which our Bishops claime was unknowne to Scripture and are now prepared by Gods assistance to prove it was unknowne to primitive times But how doth this Remonstrant meete with this Reply ALAS ALAS HOVV GOOD PEOPLE may be abused by misinformation It seemes the man Judged this Reply so poore as in his thoughts it was more worthy of his pitty then of his paines to answer or rather knew there was more in this Reply then hee knew how to answer and therefore waves it with his Rethoricke And this we rather thinke because hee knowes but little in Antiquity that knowes not that there is so vast a difference betweene our Bishops and those that were not onely in the Apostles dayes whom wee have proved to be undistinguished from Presbyters But those Bishops that were in the Church 400 yeares after when there began to bee some discrimination that Episcopacy may well be likened to the Shippe Argo that was so often repaired as there was nothing left of the First Materialls yet stil it challenged the first Name Which difference we spread before your Honours in three particulars first in point of Election to their office secondly in point of Execution of their office thirdly in point of state-Imployment First having discovered already upon what occasion this priority began to have existence in the Church and from whom it first received its being not from God but from Consent and Custome of the Churches according to Ambrose Ierom Augustine c. Wee come now to Declare what was the manner of Election unto this Prioritie in these times and to shew first how therein these Bishops did differ from ours for all their Elections were ordered by the privity consent and approbation of the people where the Bishops was to serve Were there no other Authours to make this good Cyprian alone would doe it among other places let his 68. Epistle witnesse where he saith plebs Maxime habet potestatem c. The people specially have power either of chusing worthy Priests or rejecting the unworthy for this is derived from Divine Authority that the Priests should bee chosen in the presence of the people before all their eyes and approved as fit and worthy by their publike vote and Testimony This hee proves by the Testimonie of Sacred writ both Old and New Where wee observe first that the speciall power of Judging of the worthinesse or unworthinesse of a man for the Prelacy was in the breast of the People Secondly the speciall power of choosing or rejecting to his place according as they Judged him worthy or unworthy resided in the People Plebs maximé Habet potestatem c. Thirdly that this power did descend upon the People De Divina Authoritate Nor was this the Judgement of one Sole man but of an Affrican Synod consulted by the Spanish Churches in point of Election as the inscription of the Epistle shewes The Obtrusion of a Bishop upon the Church of Alexandria without the Presence desire and vote of the Clergie or People is Condemned by Athanasius not onely as a breach of Canon but as a Transgression of Apostolicall prescript and that it did compell or necessitate the heathen to blaspheme Nor did onely Christian Bishops but Christian Princes acknowledge the Right and power of Election of Bishops to be in the People so that admired Constantine the great Promover and Patron of the peace of the Christian Church writing to the Church of Nicomedia against Eusebius and Theognius tells them the ready way to lay asleepe the Tumults that did then disturbe the Church about the Election of a Bishop was si modo Episcopum fidelem integrum nacti fuerint quod quidem in praesentia in vestrâ situm est potestate quodque etiam dudùm penes vestrum Iudicium fuerat nisi Eusebius de quo dixi pravo eorum qui cum juverunt Consilio hâc praeceps ruisset rectum Eligendi Ordinem impudenter conturbasset Gelas in Act. Concil Nicen. part 3. if they would get a faithfull and upright Bishop which saith he is in your power presently to doe and was long agoe if Eusebius with the ayd of his faction had not rushed in upon you and impudently disturbed the right Order of Election That which this sacred Emperour calls the right order of Election what is it but the Election by the people in whose power he saith it then was and long had beene to choose a Bishop and by whose power the next Bishop was chosen So the same Author tells us that after Eusebius and Theognius were cast out of their severall seats for Arianisme by the Councell of Nice others were appointed in their roomes by the Clergy and people of each Diocesse To this Election in Nicomedia wee could if it were needfull in so cleare a Truth adde many the like Presidents of popular Elections which for brevities sake we passe over Not questioning but that which hath beene spoken is sufficient to informe the intelligent Reader that our Bishops and the Bishops of former times are Tvvo in point of Election SECT VIII A Second thing wherein we have undertaken to shew that our Bishops and the Bishops of former times are Tvvo is in the Execution of their Office and here there are three things wherein he that will not wilfully shut his eyes against all light may see a Latitude of difference betweene ours and former Bishops First in that Sole Iurisdiction which our Bishops assume to themselves Secondly in the Delegation they make of the power of exercising this Iurisdiction unto others Thirdly in the way of the exercise of that power For the first of these Their sole Iurisdiction That our Bishops assume this to themselves it is knowne and felt and that this Sole Iurisdiction was a stranger a Monster to former times wee shall now prove and make cleare that the power of Ordination Admonition Excommunication Absolution was not in the hands of any sole man First for Ordination Cyprian in his exile writing to his Charge certifies them that Aurelius was ordained by him and his Colleagues who were present with him who were these Colleagues but his Presbyters as he himselfe expounds it writing to Lucius in his owne name and the name of his Clergie and people Ego Collegae fraternitas omnis c. I and my Colleagues and my whole people send these Letters to you c. So that it is cleare in Cyprians time Presbyters had a hand in Ordination and Bishops did not Ordaine alone Firmilianus saith of them that rule in the Church Quod baptizandi MANVM
IMPONENDI ET ORDINANDI possident potestatem And who those be he expresseth a little before SENIORES Praepositi by whom the Presbyters as well as the Bishops are understood And as these places prove that Bishops in the Primitive time could not ordaine alone without the Presbyters so there are that give us light to understand that the Presbyters might ordaine without the Bishop The Author of the Comment upon the Ephesians that goes under the name of Ambrose saith Apud Aegyptum Presbyteri consignant si praesens non sit Episcopus In Egypt the Presbyters ordaine if the Bishop be not present so saith Augustine in the same words and the Chorepiscopus who was but a Presbyter had power to impose hands and to ordaine within his precincts with the Bishops Licence Now Licences conferre not a power to him that hath it not but onely a facultie to exercise that power he hath The Iniquitie of our times hath beene such that a Minister may not Preach to his owne flocke without a Licence doth this Licence make a man a Minister and give him power to preach or onely a facultie and libertie to exercise that power Should a Bishop give a Laike a Licence to preach or to ordaine doth that Licence make him a Minister or a Bishop Sure all will say no why because in the Laike there is not Actus primus the roote and principle of that power which Licence onely opens a way to the exercise of and therefore that must bee concluded to be in those Chorepiscopi or Presbyters by vertue of their place and calling and not by vertue of a Licence So that the power of Ordination was so farre from residing in the Bishop alone as that the Presbyters and Chorepiscopi had power to ordaine as well as he Neither was this onely a matter of Ecclesiasticall Custome but of Ecclesiasticall Constitution which binds the Bishop First in all his Ordinations to consult with his Clergy Vt Episcopus sine Consilio Clericorum suorum Clericos non ordinet That the Bishop shall not ordaine a Clergy man without the counsel of the Clergy this was Cyprians practice Epist. 33. Secondly in his Ordinations to take the concurrent assistance of his Presbyters Cum ordinatur Presbyter Episcopo cum benedicent◠manum super caput ejus tenente etiam omnes Presbyteri qui praesentes sunt manu◠suas juxta manum Episcopi super caput illius teneant 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 In which Canon we have the unanimous vote of two hundred and fourteene Bishops declaring that the power of Ordination is in the hands of Presbyters as well as Bishops And whereas it may be objected that Hiorome and Chrysostome affirming Bishops to differ from Presbyters in the power of Ordination seeme to imply that that power is soly theirs Here we desire it may be observed First that these Fathers put all the difference that lyes betweene Bishops and Presbyters to be in point of Ordination Quid facit Episcopus quod non facit Presbyter exceptâ Ordinatione And therefore Chrysostome himselfe confesseth that in his dayes there was little or no difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter Inter Episcopū et Presbyterū interest fermè nihil c. Secondly That this difference is not so to be understood as if these Fathers did hold it to be by divine right as Bellarmine and our Episcopall men would make us beleeve but by a humane constitution And therefore they doe not speak De jure but de facto Quid facit c. not quid debet facere And this Hierom confesseth So Leo prim ep 88. upon complaints of unlawfull Ordinations writing to the Germane and French Bishops reckons up what things are reserved to the Bishops Among which he set down Presbyterorum Diaconorum consecratio and then adds Quae omnia solis deberi summis Pontificibus Authoritate Canonam praecipitur So that for this power of Ordination they are more beholden to the Canon of the Church then to the Canon of Gods Word Thirdly we answer that this very humane difference was not in the Primitive Antiquity It was not so in Cyprians time as we even now shewed And when it did prevaile it was but a particular custome and sometimes usurpation of some Churches For it was otherwise appointed in the Councell of Carthage and in Egypt and other places as is declared in the former part of this Section And even in Chrysostomes time it was so little approved of that it was one great accusation against Chrysostome himselfe That hee made Ordinations without the Presbytery and without the consent of his Clergie This is quoted by Bishop Downam lib. 1. cap. 8. pag. 176. SECT IX NOr had the Bishop of former times more right to the power of sole Iurisdiction then of sole Ordination And here we have Confitentem reum our very Adversaries confesse the Votes of Antiquity are with us Cyprian professeth that hee would doe nothing without the Clergie nay he could doe nothing without them nay hee durst not take upon him alone to determine that which of right did belong to all and had hee or any other done so the fourth Councell of Carthage condemnes the Sentence of the Bishop as Irrita nisi Clericorum sententiâ confirmetur Would yee know the particulars wherein the Bishops had no power of Judicature without their Presbyters First in judging and censuring Presbyters themselves and their Doctrine For this the Canon Law in Gratian is full and cleare Episcopus non potest Iudicare Presbyterum vel Diaconum sine Synodo Senioribus Thus Basill counselled and practised epist. 75. So Ambr. lib. 10. epist. 80 Cyrill in epist. ad Iohannem Antiochen Thus Gregory ad Iohan. Panormitan lib. 11. epist 49. Secondly in judging of the Conversation or Crimes of any of the members of the Church Penes Presbyteros est Disciplina quae facit hom ines meliores That Discipline that workes emendaion in men is in the power of the Elders And therefore when any was questioned in point of conversation hee was brought saith Tertullian into the Congregation where were Exhortations Castigations and Divine censures And who had the chiefe stroke in these Censures he tells us after Praesident probati quique seniores All the approved Elders sit as Presidents And those censures that passed by the whole Presbytery were more approved by the Church in Ancient times then such as were passed by one man for wee finde that when Syagrius and Ambrose passed Sentence in the same case the Church was unsatisfied in the Sentence of Syagrius because he past it sine alicujus fratris consilio without the counsell or consent of any of his Brethren But were pacified with the
but this is but a blind wherewith the Bishop would Dorre his Reader for wee challenge any man to produce the names of any Clergie-man that was Vicar to Ambrose or Chancellour to Augustine or any other of the Bishops of these times so that herein our Bishops and theirs are TWO SECT XI A Third branch wherein the difference betweene our Bishops and the Bishops of former times inpoint of Exercising their Jurisdiction is visible is the way or manner of exercising that power For brevities sake we will onely instance in their proceedings in Causes Criminall where let them tell us whether any good Antiquity can yeeld them one President for THEIR OATH EX OFFICIO which hath been to their COURTS as Purgatory fire to the Popes Kitchin they have forgotten that old Maxime in the Civill Law Nemo tenetur prodere seipsum which as it is grounded upon naturall equity so it is confirmed by a Law enacted by Dioclesian and Maximilian Nimis grave est quod petitis c. It is too grievous that the adverse part should be required to the exhibition of such things as should create trouble to themselves Vnderstand therefore that you ought to bring proofes of your intentions and not to extort them from your adversaries against themselves Shall the Lamp of Nature in the night of Ethnicisme enable Heathen Princes yea Persecutors to see and enact thus much and shall not the glorious Sunne of the Gospell convince these of their iniquities in transgressing this Law that call themselves the Fathers of the Church If neither the light of Nature nor Gospell light can yet the Custome of the Church to which they so oft appeale may both convince them of this iniquitie and discover to all the world the contrarietie of their proceedings to the proceedings of former times in this particular For of Old both the Plaintiffe and Defendant were brought face to face before the parties in whose power it was to judge which way of proceeding Athanasius affirmes to be according to Scripture the Law of God And because those that condemned Macarius did not thus proceed he condemnes their Sentence as malicious and unjust Of old no Sentence passed against any man but upon the Testimony of other witnesses besides the Accusers after Complaint exhibited the first thing they applyed themselves to was to consider the person and qualitâ—e of the Accuser Concilâ— prim Constant. Can. 6 Then they heard the Witnesses who were two at least Can. Apost Can. 75. And these witnesses must be such as might not be imagined to be partiall nor to beare enmity nor malice against the party accused Ambros. Epist. 64. so Gratian Caus. 3. quae 5. cap. Quod suspecti Of old None might be party witnesse and Iudge which Gratian proves at large Caus. 4. qu 4. cap. Nullus unquam praesumat accusator simul esse Iudex testis We grant indeed the Canon Law permits in some cases Tryall without witnesses Si crimen ita publicum est ut meritò debeat appellari notorium If the crime be so publique that it may deservedly be called Notorious Which Law further determines what is notorious saâ—ing Offensam illam nos intelligimus manifestam quae vel per confessionem vel probationem legitime nota fuerit aut evidentiâ Rei quae nulla possit tergiversatione celari We count that offence manifest which either by confession or by lawfull proofe comes to be knowne or by evidence of fact so as it can be hid by no tergiversations So that all was done in former times with mature deliberation upon examination and evidence produced and proved by such witnesses as against whom the dâ—fendant could lay in no just exception And not as now an accusation whispered against a man he knowes not by whom to which he must take his Oath to answer before he knowes what his accusation is Which Oath if he takes without further witnesse he is censured upon the witnesâ—e of his owne Oath If he takes it not he is sent presently to prison there to lie without Bayle or Mainprize till the insupportable miseries of his long durance compel him to take an Oath against Nature Scripture Conscience and the just Defence of his owne innocencie That our Bishops therefore and former Bishops are Two in the point of executing their Judicatory power we need spend no more time to prove But come to the third thing in which the difference betweene ours and former Bishops is to be evidenced SECT XII ANd that is State Imployment or attendance upon Civill and Secular affaires c. which both Christ and Saint Paul prohibits which prohibition reacheth every Bishop to speake in Chrysostomes words as well as Timothy to whom it is directed Nullus ergo Episcopatu praeditus haec audire detrectet sed agere ea omnia detrectet Let no man that is a Bishop refuse to heare what the Apostle saith but to doe what the Apostle forbids We deny not but that Bishops were in the Primitive times often incumbred with secular businesse but these were put upon them sometimes by Emperours who sought the ruine of the Church as Iulian of whom Niceph lib. 10. cap. 13. doth report that in Clerum coaptatos Senatorum munere ministerio perversè fungi jussit Sometimes the gracious disposition of Princes towards Christian Religion made them thus to honour Bishops thinking thereby to advance Religion as Constantine the Great enacted that such as were to be tryed before Civill Magisâ—rates might have leave to appeale ad Iudicium Episcoporum atque eorum sententiani ratam esse tanquam ab ipso Imperatore prolatam And this the Historian reckoneth as one argument of his reverend respect to Religion Sometimes the excellency of their singular parts cast Civill dignities upon them Tiberius granted a Questors dignitie unto a Bishop for his eloquence Chrysostome for his notable stoutnesse and freedome of speech was sent as the fittest man to Gainas with the Emperours command Sometimes the people observing the Bishops to be much honoured by the Emperour would sollicite them to present their grievances to the Emperour And sometimes the aspiring humour of the Bishops raised them to such places as appeares by Cyrill who was the first Bishop in Alexandria who had civill dignities conferred upon him as Socrates relates it from whom Civill authority did descend upon succeeding Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of whom Nicephorus therefore recorded Episcopatum majoricum fastu prophanorum Magistratuum more quam praedecessores ejus Episcopi ingressus est unde adeo initium sumptum est in Ecclesia Alexandrina ut Episcopietiam profana negotia curarent He entred upon his Episcopacie with more pomp then his predecessors with a pomp conformable to the Heathen Magistrates Both these Historians relate the sad consequence that followed upon this that Orestes the Roman Governour seeing his power much weakned by the Bishops interposing in secular affaires
Pauls presence and in the presence of the Elders The cleare evidence of which text demonstrates that Paul did not leave Timothy at this time as Bishop of Ephesus But it is rather evident that hee tooke him along with him in his journey to Hiâ—rusalem and so to Rome for wee finde that those Epistles Paul wrote while hee was a prisoner beare either in their inscription or some other passage of them the name of Timothy as Pauls companion viz. The Epistle to the Philippians Colossians Hebreâ—es Philemon which Epistles he wrote in bonds as the contexture which those two learned professors the one at Heydelberge the other at Saulmur make of Saint Pauls Epistles doth declare So that it appeares that Timothy was no Bishop but a Minister an Evangelist a fellow labourer of the Apostles 1 Thess. 3.1 an Apostle a Messenger of the Church 2. Cor. 8.3 a Minister of God 1 Thess. 3.2 these titles the Holy Ghost gives him but never the title of a Bishop The like we find in Scripture concerning Titus whom Paul as it is conceived by learned men did first assume into the fellowship of his Labours in the place of Iohn and made him his companion in his journey through Antioch to Herusalem so we find Gal. 2.1 from thence returning to Antioch againe from thence hee passed through Syria and Cilicia confirming the Churches from Cilicia he passed to Creet where having Preached the Gospell and planted Churches he left Titus there for a while to set in order things that remaine Yet it was but for a while he left him there for in his Epistle which he wrote to him not many yeares after hee injoynes him to come to him to Nicopolis where he did intend to winter but changing that purpose sends for him to Ephesus where it seemes his Hyemall station was and from thence sends him before him to Corinth to enquire the state of the Corinthians His returne from thence Paul expects at Troas and because comming thither he found not his expectation there he was so grieved in his spirit 2 Cor. 2.12 that hee passed presently from thenâ—e into Macedonia where Titus met him and in the midst of his afflictions joyed his spirits with the glad tydings of the powerfull and gracious effects his first Epistle had among the Corinthians 2 Cor. 7 5 6 7. Paul having there collected the Liberalities of the Saints sends Titus againe to the Corinthians to prepare them for the same service of Ministring to the necessities of the Saints 2 Cor. 8.6 And makes him with some others the Conveyers of that second Epistle to the Corinthians All these journeyes to and fro did Titus make at the designement of the Apostle even after hee was left in Creet Nor doe we finde that after his first removall from Creet he did ever returne thither Wee reade indeed 2 Tim. 4.10 hee was with Paul at Rome and from thence returned not to Creet but into Dalmatia All which doth more then probably shew it never was the Intendment of the Apostle to six Titus in Creet as a Bishop but onely to leave him there for a season for the good of that Church and to call him from thence and send him abroad to other Churches for their good as their necessities might require Now who that will acknowledge a Distinction betweene the Offices of Bishops and Evangelists and knowes wherein that Distinction lyes will not upon these premisses conclude that Timothy and Titus were Evangelists and NOT Bishops I but some of the Fathers have called Timothy and Titus Bishops We grant it true and it is as true that some of the Fathers have called them Archbishops and Patriarks yet it doth not follow they were so Wee adde secondly that when the Fathers did call them so it was not in a proper but in an improper sense which we expresse in the words of our Learned Orthodox Raynolds You may learne by the Fathers themselves saith hee that when they tearmed any Apostle a Bishop of thiâ— or that City as namely Saint Peter of Antioch or Rome they meant it in a generall sort and signification because they did attend that Church for a time and supply that roome in preaching the Gospell which Bishops did after but as the name of Bishop is commonly taken for the Overseer of a particular Church and Pastor of a severall flocke so Peter was not Bishop of any one place therefore not of Rome And this is true by Analogy of all extraordinary Bishops and the same may be said of Timothy and Titus that he saith of Peter But were it true that Timothy and Titus were Bishops will this remonstrant undertake that all his party shall stand to his Conditions If our Bishops challenge any other power then was by Apostolique Authority delegated to and required of Timothy and Titus and the Angells of the seaven Asian Churches let them be disclaimed as usurpers Will our Bishops indeed stand to this then actum est Did ever Apostolique authority delegate power to Timothy or Titus to ordaine alone to governe alone and doe not our Bishops challenge that power Did ever Apostolique authority delegate power to Timothy and Titus to rebuke an Elder no but to entreate him as a Father and doe not our Bishops challenge to themselvesâ— and permit to their Chancellours Commissaries and Officialls power not only to rebuke an Elder but to rayle upon an Elder to reproach him with the most opprobrious tearmes of foole knave jack-sauce c. which our paper blushes to present to your Honours view Did ever Apostolique authority delegate to Timothy and Titus power to receave an accusation against an Elder but before two or three witnesses and doe not our Bishops challenge power to proceed Ex officio and make Elders their owne Accusers Did ever Apostolique authority delegate power to Timothy or Titus to reject any after twice admonition but an Heretick and doe not our Bishops challenge power to reject and eject the most sound and orthodox of our Ministers for refusing the use of a Ceremony as if Non-conformity were Heresie So that either our Bishops must disclaime this remonstrance or else themselves must be disclaimed as usurpers But if Timothy and Titus were no Bishops or had not this power it may bee the Angells of the seven Asian Churches had and our Remonstrant is so subtile as to twist these two together that if one fayle the other may hold To which we answer first that Angell in those Epistles is put Collectively not Individually as appeares by the Epistle to Thyatira cap. 2. vers 24. where wee reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But I say unto you in the plurall number not unto thee in the singular and unto the rest in Thyatira c. Here is a plaine distinction betweene the members of that Church By you is signified those to whom hee spake under the name of the Angell By
the rest the residue of the people The people governned and the governours in the plurall number What can be more evident to prove that by Angell is meant not one singular person but the whole company of Presbyters that were in Thyatira This also further appeares because it is usuall with the holy Ghost not only in other books of the Scripture but also in this very booke of the Revelation to expresse a company under one singular person Thus the Civill state of Rome as opposite to Christ is called A beast with ten hornes and the Ecclesiasticall state Antichristian is called the whore of Babylon and the false Prophet and the devill and all his family is called An old red Dragon Thus also the seven Angels that blew the seven trumpets Revel 8.2 And the seven Angels that poured out the seven Vialls are not literally to be taken but Synecdoâ—hically as all know And why not then the seven Angels in those Epistles Master Meedâ— in his Commentaries upon the Revelation pag. 265 hath these words Denique ut jam semel iterumque monuimus quoniam Deus adhibet angelos providentiae sitae in reruÌ„ humanarum motibus conversionibus ciendis gubernandisque administros idcirco quae multorum manibus peraguntur Angelo tamen tanquam rei gerendae praesidi Duci pro communi loquendi modo tribuuntur Adde thirdly that the very name Angell is sufficient to prove that it is not meant of one person alone because the word Angell doth not import any peculiar jurisdiction or preheminence but is a common name to all Ministers and is so used in Scripture For all Ministers are Gods Messengers and Embassadours sent for the good of the Elect. And therefore the name being common to all Ministers why should wee thinke that there should bee any thing spoken to one Minister that doth not belong to all The like argument wee draw from the word Starres used Revel 1.20 The seven Starres are the Angels of the seven Churches Now it is evident that all faithfull Ministers are called Starres in Scripture whose duty is to shine as lights unto the Churches in all purity of doctrine and holinesse of conversation And in this sence the word is used when it is said that the third part of the starres were darkened Revel 8.12 and that the Dragons taile drew the third part of the starres of Heaven cast them to the Earth Revel 12.4 Which is meant not onely of Bishops but of other Ministers unlesse the Bishops will appropriate all corruption and Apostacy unto themselves Adde fourthly out of the Text it selfe It is very observable that our Saviour in opening the mystery of the Vision Revel 1.20 saith The seven Candlestickes which thou sawest are the seven Churches but hee doth not say The seven starres are the seven Angels of the same Churches But the Angels of the seven Churches wherein not without some mystery the number of the Angels in omitted least we should understand by Angell one Minister alone and not a company And yet the septenary number of Churches is twice set down Lastly though but one Angell bee mentioned in the forefront yet it is evident that the Epistles themselves are dedicated to all the Angels and Ministers in every Church and to the Churches themselves And if to the whole Church much more to the Presbyters of that Church This is proved Revel 1.11 What thou seest write in a Book and send it to the seven Churches which are in Asia And also by the Epiphonema of every Epistle He that hath an eare to heare let him heare what the Spirit saith to the Churches Upon which words Ambrosius Ausbertus in his second booke upon the Revelation saith thus Vnâ eadâ—mque locutione Angelos Ecclesias â—num esse designat Nam cum in principio locutionuÌ„ quae ad sepâ—em fiunt Angelos dicat Angelo illius Ecclesiae scribe in â—ine tamen carundem non dicit qui habet aurem audiat quod spiritus dicat Angelo sed quid Ecclesiae dicat By one and the same phrase of speech hee sheweth the Angels and the Churches to bee one and the same For whereas in the beginning of his speech which he makes to the seven Churches he saith And write to the Angell of the Churches yet in the close of the same he doth not say Hee that hath an Eare let him heare what the Spirit saith to the Angel but what he saith to the Church And this is further proved by the whole argument of those Epistles wherein the admonitionâ— threatnings commendations and reproofes are directed to all the Ministers of all the Churches Revel 2.10 The devill shall cast some of you into prison c. Rev. 2.16 I will fight against them with the sword of my mouth Rev. 2.24 I will put upon you no other burden c. I say unto you and the rest of Thyatira as many as have not this doctrine and which have not known the depths of Satan c. And when it is said in the singular Number as it is often I know thy works and thy labour c. vers 2. vers 4. Repent and doe thy first works and verse 13. Thou hast not denied my Faith c. and cap. 3.26 Because thou art neither hot nor cold c. All these and the like places are not to bee understood as meant of one individuall person but of the whole company of Ministers and also of the whole Church because that the punishment threatned is to the whole Church Revel 2.5 Repent and doe thy first works or else I will come unto thee quickly and remove thy Candlestick out of his place Rev. 2.16 Repent or else I will come unto thee quickly and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth Revel 2.24 I will not put upon you any other burden Now wee have no warrant in the Word to thinke that Christ would remove his Gospell from a Church for the sinne of one Bishop when all the other Ministers and the Churches themselves are free from those sinnes And if God should take this course in what wofull and miserable condition should the Church of England be which groaneth under so many corrupt Prelates By all this it appeares that the word angell is not to be taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not properly but figuratively And this is the judgement of Master Perkins upon the second Chapter of the Revelation and of Master Brightman and of Doctor Fulke who in answer to the Rhemists in Apoc. 1.20 hath these words S. Iohn by the angels of the Churches meaneth not all that should weare on their heads myters and hold crosier staves in their hands like dead Idolls but them that are the faithfull messengers of Gods Word and utter and declare the same Againe they are called the angels of the Churches because they be Gods messengers Master Fox likewise in his Meditation upon the Revelation pag. 7 9.17â— is of this
this angell if he had a superiority had any more then a superiority of order or of gifts and parts Where is it said that this angell was a superior degree or order of Ministery above Presbyters In which Epistle it is said that this angell had sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction and therefore as our learned Protestants prove against the Papists that when Christ directed his speech to Peter in particular and said I will give unto thee the keyes of the kingdom of Heaven c. That this particularization of Peter did not import any singular preheminence or majority of power to Peter more then to the other apostles But that though the promise was made to Peter yet it was made to him in the name of all the rest and given to all as well as one And that therefore it was spoken to one person and not to all that so Christ might fore signifie the unity of his Church as Cyprian Austin Hierome Optatus and others say So when Christ directs aâ— Epistle to one angell it doth not imply a superior power over his fellow angels but at most onely a presidency for order sake And that which is written to him is written to the rest as well as to him And therefore written to one not to exclude the rest but to denote the unity that ought to bee betweene the Ministers of the same Church in their common care and diligence to their flocke And this is all that Doctor Reynolds saith as you may reade in his conference with Hart cap. 4. divis 3. ad finem For it is evident that Doctor Reynolds was an utter enemy to the Iâ—â— Divinum of the Episcopall preheminency over Presbyters by his Letter to Sir Francis Krolls And learned Master Beza also saith something to the same purpose in his annotations upon Revel 2.1 Angelo i. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quem nimirum oportuit imprimis de his rebus admoneri ac per eum caeteros collegas totamque adeo Ecclesiam Sed hinc statui Episcopalis ille gradus postea humanitus in Ecclesiam Dei invectus certe nec potest nec debet imo ne perpetuum quidem istud 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 munus esse necessariò oportuisse sicut exorta inde Tyrannis oligarchica cujus apex est Antichristana bestia certissima cum totius non Ecclesia modo sed etiam orbis pernicie nunc tandem declarat If therefore our Remonstrant can produce no better evidence for his Hierarchy then Timothy and Titus and the Angels of the Asian Churches Let not this Remonstrant and his party cry out of wrong if this claimed Hierarchy be for ever hooted oâ—t of the Church seeing it is his owne Option And yet we cannot coÌ„ceale one refuge more out of Scripture to which the Hierarchy betake themselves for shelter And that is the two Postscripts in the end of Pauls second Epistle to Timothy and of that to Titus where in the one Timothy is said to be the first bishop of Ephesus and in the other Titus is said to be the first Bishop of the Church of the Cretians to both which places wee answer That these two Postscripts and so all the rest are no part of Canonicall Scripture And therefore our former and ancienter English translations though they have these Postscripts yet they are put in a small character different from that of the text that all men might take notice they were no parts of the text Although our Episcopall men of late in newer impressions have inlarged their Phylacteries in putting those Postscripts in the same full character with that of the text that the simple might beleeve they are Canonicall Scripture The Papists themselves Baronius Serrarius and the Rhemists confesse that there is much falsity in them The first Epistle to Timothy is thus subscribed the first to Timothy was written from Laodicea which is the chiefest City of Phrygia Pacatiana Here we demand whether Paul when he writ the first Epistle to Timothy was assured he should live to write a second which was written long after And if not How comes it to be subscribed thâ— first to Timothy which hath relation to a second Besides the Epistle is said to be writ from Loadicea whereas Beza in his Annotations proves apparently that it was written from Macedonia to which opinion Baronius and Serrarius subscribe It is added Which is the chiefest City of Phrygia Pacatiana But this Epithete is no where read in the Writers of those ages saith Beza Sed apud recentiores illos qui Romani imperii jam inclinantis provincias descripserunt So that by this place it is evident that the subscription was added a long while after the writing of the Epistles by some men for the most part vel indoctis saith Beza vel certe non satis attentis Either by a learned or negligent man The second Epistle is thus subscribed the second Epistle unto Timothy ordeined the first Bishop of the Church of the EphesiaÌ„s was written from Rome when Paul was brought before Nero the second time Now these words Ordained the first Bishop is wanting saith Beza in quibusdam vetustis codicibus in veteri vulgatâ— editione apud Syrum interpretem If Saint Paul had written this Postscript he would not have said to Timothy the first Bishop c. whereas it was not yet certaine whether ever there should be a second Neither would it bee said when Paul was brought c. But when I was the second time brought before Nero. The Syriack Interpreter reads it Here ends the second epistle to Timothy written from Rome The Epistle to Titus is thus subscribed Written to Titus ordained first Bishop of the Church of the Cretians from Nicopolis of Macedonia Here it is said that this Epistle was written from Nicopolis whereas it is cleare that Paul was not at Nicopolis when he wrote it Tit 3.12 Be diligent to come to me to Nicopolis for I have determined there to winter He doth not say Here to winter but there Where note for the present hee was not there And besides it is said that Titus was ordained the first Bishop c. And who was the second or was there ever a second And also He is said to be Bishop not onely of a Diocesse but of all Creet Was there ever such a second Bishop Adde lastly that it is said Bishop of the Church of the Cretians Whereas it would bee said of the Churches of the Cretians For the Christian Churches of any Nation are called Churches by Luke and Paul not Church Therefore Codex Claremontanus subscribes Here ends the Epistle to Titus and no more So the Syriack Finitur Epistola ad Titum quae scripta fuit è Nicopoli The old Vulgar Edition hath nothing of the Episcopacy of Titus By all this it appeares that if the Bishops had no more authority to urge us to subscribe to their Ceremonies then they have authority for their Episcopall dignity by these
Subscriptions there would be no more Subscription to Ceremonies in the Churches of England But some will say that there is one objection out of Scripture yet unanswered and that is from the inequality that was betweene the twelve Apostles and the seventy Disciples To which we answer First that it cannot bee proved that the twelve Apostles had any superiority over the seventy either of Ordination or Jurisdiction Or that there was any subordination of the seventy unto the twelve But suppose it were yet we answer Secondly that a superiority and inferiority betweene Officers of different kindes will not prove that there should be a superiority and inferiority betweene Officers of the same kinde No man will deny but that in Christs time there were Apostles Evangelists Prophets Pastors and teachers and that the apostles were superior to Evangelists and Pastors But it cannot bee proved that one apostle had any superiority over another apostle or one Evangelist over another And why then should one Presbyter be over another Hence it followeth that though we should grant a superiority betweene the twelve and the seventy yet this will not prove the question in hand Because the question is concerning Officers of the same kinde and the instance is of Officers of different kinds amongst whom no man will deny but there may be a superiority and inferiority as there is amongst us between Presbyters and Deacons And now let your Honours judge considering the premisses how farre this Episcopall government is from any Divine right or Apostolicall institution And how true that speech of Hierome is that a bishop as it is a superior Order to a Presbyter is an Humane praesumption not a divine Ordinance But though Scripture failes them yet the indulgence and Munificence of Religious Princes may support them and to this the Remonstrant makes his next recourse yet so as he acknowledgeth here Ingagements to Princes onely for their accessory dignities titles and Maintenance not at all for their stations and functions wherein yet the author plainely acknowledgeth a difference betweene our Bishops and the Bishops of old by such accessions For our parts we are so farre from envying the gracious Munificence of pious Princes in collating honourable maintenance upon the Ministers of Christ that we beleeve that even by Gods owne Ordinance double Honour is due unto them And that by how much the Ministery of the Gospell is more honourable then that of the Law by so much the more ought all that embrace the Gospell to bee carefull to provide that the Ministers of the Gospell might not onely live but maintaine Hospitalitie according to the Rule of the Gospell And that worthy Gentleman spake as an Oracle that said That scandalous Maintenance is a great cause of a scandalous Ministery Yet wee are not ignorant that when the Ministery came to have Agros domos locationes vehicula equos latifundia as Chrysost. Hom. 86. in Matth. That then Religio peperit divitias filia devoravit Matrem religion brought forth riches and the Daughter devoured the Mother and then there was a voyce of Angels heard from Heaven Hodie venenum in Ecclesiam Christi cecidit this Day is poyson shed into the Church of Christ. And then it was that Ierome complained Christi Ecclesia postquam ad Christianos principes venit potentiâ quidem divitiis major sed virtutibus minor facta est Then also was that Conjunction found true That when they had woodden Chalices they had golden Priests but when their Chalices were golden their Priests were wooden And though we doe not thinke there is any such incompossibility but that large Revenues may be happily managed with an humble sociablenesse yet it is very rare to finde History tells us that the superfluous revenues of the Bishops not onely made them neglect their Ministery but further ushered in their stately and pompous attendance which did so elevate their Spirits that they insulted over their brethren both Clergy and People and gave occasion to others to hate and abhorre the Christian Faith Which Eusebius sets forth fully in the pride of Paulus Samosatenus who notwithstanding the meannesse and obscurity of his birth afterwards grew to that height of Insolâ—ncâ— and pride in all his carriage especially in that numerous traine that attended him in the streetes and in his stately throne raised after the manner of Kings and Princes that Fides nostra inviâ—â—ia odiâ— propter fostum superbiâ—m cordis illius facta fuerit obnexia the Christian faith was exposed to envy and hatred through his pride And as their ambition fed with the largenesse of their revenewes discovered it selfe in great attendance stately dwellings and all Lordly pompe so Hierom complaines of their pride in their stately seates qui velut in aliqua sublimi specula constituti vix dignantur vidâ—re mortales alloqui conservos suos who sitting aloft as it were in a watch tower will scarce deigne to looke upon poore mortalis or speake to their fellow servants Here we might bee large in multiplying severall testimonies against the pride of Ecclesiasticall persons that the largenesse of their revenues raysed them to but we will conclude with that grave complaint of Sulpitius Severus Ille qui ante pedibus aut asello ire consueverat spumante equo superbus invebitur parvá prius ac vili cellula contentus habitare erigit celsa Laquearia construit multa conclaviu sculpit postes pingit armaria vestem respuit gressiorem indumentum molle desiderat c. Which because the practise of our times hath already turned into English wee spare the labour to translate Onely suffer us being now to give a Vale to our remonstrants arguments to recollect some few things First whereas this remonstâ—ant saith If we doe not shew out of the true genuine writings of those holy men that lived in the Apostles dayes a cleare and received distinction of Bishopsâ— Presbyters and Deacons as three distinct subordinate callings with an evident specification of the duty belonging to each of them Let this claimed Hierarchie be for ever rooted out of the Church We beseech you let it be rememred how we have proved out of the genuine and undeniable writings of the Apostles themselves that these are not three distinct callings Bishops are Presbyters being with them all one Name and Office and that the distinction of Bishops and Presbyters was not of Divine Institution but Humane and that these Bishops in their first Institution did not differ so much from Presbyters as our present Bishops differ from them Secondly Whereas this remonstant saith If our Bishops challenge any other power then was by Apostolike authority delegated to and required of Timothy and Titus and the Angells of the Asian Churches Let them bee disclaimed as usurpers Wee desire it may be remembred how wee have proved first that Timothy and Titus and the Angels were no Diocesan bishops and secondly that our bishops challenge if not
meritoriously opposed And are there not some Bishops in the Kingdome that are so far from opposing the Man of sin that even this Remonstrant is in danger of suffering under the name of Pâ—ritan for daring to call him by that name we doubt not but this Râ—monstrant knowes there are But if he will against the light of his own Conscience bear up a known errour out of private repects wee will not say these papers but his own conscience shall owne day be an evidence against him before the dreadfull Tribunall of the Almighty But there is yet a second thing that should endeare Episcopacie and that is the carefull peaceable painefull conscionable mannaging of their Charges to the great glory of God and the comfort of his faithful people Which in not seeming to urge hee urgeth to the full and beyond This care conscience paines of our Bishops is exercised and evidenced either in their Preaching or in their Ruling for their preaching it is true some few there are that Labour in the Word and Doctrine whose persons in that respect wee honour but the most are so farre from Preaching that they rather discountenance discourage oppose blaspheme Preaching It was a Non-preaching Bishop that said of a preaching Bishop He was a preaching Coxcomb As for the discharge of their office of ruling their entrusting their Chancellors and other Officers with their visitations and Courts as ordinarily they doe whiles themselves attend the Court doth abundantly witnesse their care in it The many and loud cryes of the intolerable oppressions and tyrannies of their Court-proceedings witnesse their peaceablenesse their unjust sees exactions commutations witnesse their conscionablenesse in mannaging their Charges to the great glory of God and the comfort of his faithfull people And hence it is that so many at this day here ill how deservedly saith this Remonstrant God knows and doe not your Honours know and doth not this Remonstrant know and doth not all the nation that will know any thing know how deservedly Some nay Most nay All the Bishops of this nation heare ill were it but onely for the late Canons and Oath But why should the faults of some diffuse the blame to all Why by your owne argument that would extend the deserts of some to the patronage of All and if it bee a fault in the impetuous and undistinguishing Vulgar so to involve all as to make Innocency it selfe a sinne what is it in a Man able to distinguish by the same implication to shrowd sinne under Innocencie the sinne of many under the Innocencie of a few But have our Bishops indeed beene so carefull painfull conscionable in managing their Charges how is it then that there are such manifold scandalls of the inferiour Clergy presented to your Honours view which he cannot mention without a bleeding heart and yet could finde in his heart if he knew how to excuse them and though hee confesse them to be the shame and misery of our Church yet is hee not ashamed to plead their cause at your Honours BARRE Onuphrius-like that was the Advocate of every bad cause and to excite you by Constantines example in a different Cause alleadged if not to suffer those Crimes which himself calls hatefull to passe unpunished yet not to bring them to that open and publique punishment they have deserved But what if pious Constantine in his tender care to prevent the Divisions that the emulation of the Bishops of that age enraged with a spirit of envie and faction were kindling in the Church lest by that meanes the Christian faith should be derided among the Heathens did suppresse their mutuall accusations many of which might be but upon surmises and that not in a Court of Iustice but in an Ecclesiasticall Synode shall this bee urged before the highest Court of Iustice upon earth to the patronizing of Notorious scandalls and hatefull enormities that are already proved by evidence of cleare witnesse But oh forbid it to tell it in Gath c. What the sinne alas that is done already Doe wee not know the drunkennesse profanenesse superstition Popishnesse of the English Clergie rings at Rome already yes undoubtedly and there is no way to vindicate the Honour of our Nation Ministry Parliaments Soveraigne Religion God but by causing the punishment to ring as farre as the sinne hath done that our adversaries that have triumphed in their sinne may be confounded at their punishments Doe not your Honours know that the plaistring or palliating of these rotten members will be a greater dishonour to the Nation and Church then their cutting off and that the personall acts of these sonnes of Beliall being connived at become Nationall sinnes But for this one fact of Constantine wee humbly crave your Honours leave to present to your wisedome three Texts of Scripture Ezek. 44.12 13. Because they ministred unto them before their Idolls and caused the house of Israel to fall into iniquity therefore have I lift up my hand unto them saith the Lord and they shall beare their iniquity And they shall not come neere unto mee to doe the office of a Priest unto me nor to come neere unto any of mine holy things in the most holy place c. The second is Ierem. 48.10 Cursed be hee that doth the work of the Lord negligently and the third is Iudges 6.31 He that will plead for Baal let him be put to death while it is yet morning We have no more to say in this whether it be best to walk after the President of Man or the Prescript of God your Honours can easily judge SECT XVII BUt stay saith this Remonstrant and indeed he might well have stayed and spared the labour of his ensuing discourse about the Church of England the Prelaticall and the Antiprelaticall Church but these Episcopall Men deale as the Papists that dazle the eyes and astonish the senses of poore people with the glorious Name of the Church the Church The holy Mother the Church This is the Gorgons head as Doctor White saith that hath inchanted them and held them in bondage to their Errors All their speech is of the Church the Church no mention of the Scriptures of God the Father but all of the Mother the Church Much like as they write of certaine Aethiopians that by reason they use no marriage but promiscuously company together the children only follow the Mother the Father and his name is in no request but the Mother hath all the reputation So is it with the Author of this Râ—monstrance he stiles himselfe a Dutifull sonne of the Church And it hath beene a Custome of late times to cry up the holy Mother the Church of England to call for absolute obedience to holy Church full conformity to the orders of holy Church Neglecting in the meane time God the Father and the holy Scripture But if wee should now demand of them what they meane by the Church of England this Author seemes
to be thunder-stricken at this Question and cals the very Question a new Divinity where he deales like such as holding great revenues by unjust Titles will not suffer their Titles to be called in Question For it is apparent Ac si solaribus radiis descriptum esset to use Tertullians phrase that the word Church is an Equivocall word and hath as many severall acceptions as letters and that Dolus latet in universalibus And that by the Church of England first by some of these men is meant onely the Bishops or rather the two Archbishops or more properly the Archbishop of Canterbury Just as the Iesuited Papists resolve the Church and all the glorious Titles of it into the Pope so do these into the Archbishop or at fullest they understand it of the Bishops and their party met in Convocation as the more ingenuous of the Papists make the Pope and his Cardinals to be their Church thus excluding all the Christian people and Presbyters of the Kingdome as not worthy to be reckoned in the number of the Church And which is more strange this Author in his Simplicitie as he truly saith never heard nor thought of any more Churches of England then one and what then shal become of his Diocesan Churches and Diocesan Bishops And what shall wee think of England when it was an Heptarchy had it not then seven Churches when seven Kings Or if the Bounds of a Kingdome must constitute the Limits and Bounds of a Church why are not England Scotland and Ireland all one Church when they are happily united under one gracious Monarch into one Kingdome Wee reade in Scripture of the Churches of Iudea and the Churches of Galatia and why not the Churches of England not that we denie the Consociation or Combination of Churches into a Provinciall or Nationall Synod for the right ordering of them But that there should be no Church in England but a Nationall Church this is that which this Author in his simplicity affirmes of which the very rehearsall is a refutation SECT XVIII THere are yet two things with which this Remonstrance shuts up it selfe which must not be past without our Obeliskes First he scoffes at the Antiprelaticall Church and the Antiprelaticall Divisions â— for our parts we acknowledge no Antiprelaticall Church But there are a company of men in the Kingdome of no meane ranke or quality for Piety Nobility Learning that stand up to beare witnesse against the Hierarchie as it now stands their usurpations over Gods Church and Ministers their cruell using of Gods people by their tyrannicall Governement this we acknowledge and if hee call these the Antiprelaticall Church we doubt not but your Honours wil consider that there are many Thousands in this Kingdome and those pious and worthy persons that thus doe and upon most just cause It was a speech of Erasinus of Luther Vt quisque vir est optimus ita illius Scriptis minimè offendi The better any man was the lesse offence he tooke at Luthers writings but we may say the contrary of the Prelates Vt quisque vir est optimus ita illorum factis magis offendi The better any man is the more he is offended at their dealings And all that can be objected against this party will be like that in Tertullian Bonus vir Cajus Sejus sed malus tantum quia Antiprelaticus But he upbraides us with our Divisions and Subdivisions and so doe the Papists upbraid the Protestants with their Lutheranisme Calvinisme and Zuinglianisme And this is that the Heathens objected to the Christians their Fractures were so many they knew not which Religion to chuse if they should turn Christians And can it be expected that the Church in any age should be free froÌ„ divisions when the times of the Apostles were not free and the Apostle tells us it must needs be that there be divisions in Greg. Naz. dayes there were 600 Errours in the Church doe these any wayes derogate from the truth and worth of Christian Religion But as for the Divisions of the Antiprelaticall party so odiously exaggerated by this Remonstrant Let us assure your Honours they have beene much fomented by the Prelates whose practâ—se hath beene according to that rule of Machiavill Divide Impera and they have made these divisions and afterwards complained of that which their Tyranny and Policie hath made It is no wonder considering the pathes our Prelates have trod that there are Divisions in the Nation The wonder is our Divisions are no more no greater and wee doubt not but if they were of that gracious spirit and so intirely affected to the peace of the Church as Greg. Naz. was they would say as he did in the tumults of the people Mitte nos in mare non erit tempestas rather then they would hinder that sweet Conâ—ordance and conspiration of minde unto a Governement that shall be every way agreeable to the rule of Gods word and proâ—itable for the edification and flourishing of the Church A second thing wee cannot but take notice of is the pains this Author takes to advance his Prelaticall Church and forgetting what he had said in the beginning that their party was so numerous it could not be summed tells us now these severall thousands are punctually calculated But we doubt not but your Honours will consider that there may be mulâ—i homines pauci viri And that there are more against them then for them And whereas they pretend that they differ from us onely in a Ceremony or an Organ pipe which however is no contemptible difference yet it will appeare that our differences are in point of a superiour Alloy Though this Remonstrant braves it in his multiplyed Quere's What are the bounds of this Church what the distinction of the professours and Religion what grounds of faith what new Creed doe they hold different from their Neighbours what Scriptures what Baptisme what meanes of Salvation other then the rest yet if hee pleased hee might have silenced his owne Queres but if hee will needs put us to the answer wee will resolve them one by one First if he ask what are the bounds of this Church we answer him out of the sixt of their late founded Canons where we find the limits of this Prelaticall Church extend as farre as from the high and lofty Promontory of Archbishops to the Terra incognita of an c. If what Distinction of professors and Religion we answer their worshipping towards the East and bowing towards the Altar prostrating themselves in their approaches into Churches placing all Religion in outward formalities are visible differences of these professours and their Religion If what new Creed they have or what grounds of Faith differing from their Neighbours we answer Episcopacy by divine right is the first Article of their Creed Absolute and blinde obedience to all the commandements of the Church that is the Bishop and his Emissaries election upon faith
foreseene the influence of works into Iustification falling from grace c. If what Scripture we answer the Apocrypha and unwritten Traditions If what Baptisme a Baptisme of absolute Necessity unto salvation and yet insufficient unto salvation as not sealing grace to the taking away of sinne after Baptisme If what Eucharist an Eucharist that must be administred upon an Altar or a Table set Altar-wise rayled in an Eucharist in which there is such a presence of Christ though Modum nesciunt as makes the place of its Administration the throne of God the place of the Residence of the Almighty and impresseth such a holinesse upon it as makes it not onely capable but worthy of Adoration If what Christ a Christ who hath given the same power of absolution to a Priest that himselfe hath If what Heaven a heaven that hath a broad way leading thither and is receptive of Drunkards Swearers Adulterers c. such a heaven as we may say of it as the the Indians said of the heaven of the Spaniards Unto that heaven which some of the Prelaticall Church living and dying in their scandalous sinnes and hatefull enormities goe to let our soules never enter If what meanes of salvation we answer confession of sinnes to a Priest as the most absolute undoubted necessary infallible meanes of Salvation Farre be it from us to say with this Remonstrant we do fully agree in all these and all other Doctrinall and practicall points of Religion and preach one and the same saving truths Nay we must rather say as that holy Martyr did We thank God we are none of you Nor doe we because of this dissension feare the censure of uncharitablenesse from any but uncharitable men But it is no unusuall thing with the Prelats and their party to charge such as protest against their corrupt opinions and wayes with uncharitablenesse and Schisme as the Papists do the Protestants and as the Protestants doe justly recriminate and charge that Schisme upon the Papists which they object to us So may we upon the Prelats And if Austin may be Judge the Prelats are more Schismaticks then we Quicunque saith he invident bonis ut quaerant occasiones excludendieos aut degradandi vel crimina sua sic defondâ—re parati sunt si objecta vel prodita fuerint ut etiam conventiculorum congregationes vel Ecclesiae perturbationes cogitent excitare jam schismatici sunt Whosoever envie those that are good and seeke occasions to exclude and degrade them and are so ready to defend their faults that rather then they will leave them they will devise how to raise up troubles in the Church and drive men into Conventicles and corners they are the Schismaticks And that all the world may take notice what just cause wee have to complaine of Episcopacie as it now stands wee humbly crave leave to propound these Quaeries Quaeries about Episcopacie VVHether it be tolerable in a Christian Church that Lord Bishops should be held to be Iure Divino And yet the Lords day by the same men to be but Iure Humano And that the same persons should cry up Altars in stead of Communion Tables and Priests in stead of Ministers and yet not Iudaize when they will not suffer the Lords day to be called the Sabbath day for feare of Iudaizing Whereas the word Sabbath is a generall word signifying a day of rest which is common as well to the Christian Sabbath as to the Jewish Sabbath and was also used by the Ancients Russinus in Psal. 47. Origen Hom. 23. in Num. Gregory Nazian Whether that assertion No Bishop No King and no Ceremonie no Bishop be not very prejudiciall to Kingly Authoritie For it seemes to imply that the Civill power depends upon the Spirituall and is supported by Ceremonies and Bishops Whether seeing it hath beene proved that Bishops as they are now asserted are a meere humane Ordinance it may not by the same Authoritie be abrogated by which it was first established especially considering the long experience of the hurt they have done to Church and State Whether the advancing of Episcopacie into Ius Divinum doth not make it a thing simply unlawfull to submit to that Government Because that many consciencious men that have hitherto conformed to Ceremonies and Episcopacie have done it upon this ground as supposing that Authoritie did not make them matters of worship but of Order and Decencie c. And thus they satisfied their consciences in answering those Texts Colos. 2.20 21 22. Math. 15.9 But now since Episcopacy comes to be challenged as a Divine Ordinance how shall wee be responsable to those Texts And is it not as it is now asserted become an Idoll and like the Brazen Serpent to be ground to powder Whether there be any difference in the point of Episcopacie between Ius Divinum and Ius Apostolicum Because we finde some claiming their standing by Ius Divinum others by Ius Apostolicum But wee conceive that Ius Apostolicum properly taken is all one with Ius Divinum For Ius Apostolicum is such a Ius which is founded upon the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles written by them so as to be a perpetuall Rule for the succeeding Administration of the Church as this Author saith pag. 20. And this Ius is Ius Divinum as well as Apostolicum But if by Ius Apostolicum they meane improperly as some doe such things which are not recorded in the writings of the Apostles but introduced the Apostles being living they cannot be rightly said to be jure Apostolico nor such things which the Apostles did intend the Churches should be bound unto Neither is Episcopacie as it imports a superioritie of power over a Presbyter no not in this sense jure Apostolico as hath beene already proved and might further be manifested by divers Testimonies if need did require We will only instance in Cassander a man famous for his immoderate moderation in controverted Points of Religion who in his Consultat Articul 14. hath this saying An Episcopatus inter ordines Ecclesiasticos ponendus sit inter Theologos Canonistas non convenit Convenit autem inter omnes in Apostolorum aetate Presbyterum Episcopum nullum discrimen fuisse c. Whether the distinction of Beza betweene Episcopus Divinus Humanus Diabolicus be not worthy your Honours consideration By the Divine Bishop he meanes the Bishop as he is taken in Scripture which is one and the same with a Presbyter By the humane Bishop he meanes the Bishop chosen by the Presbyters to be President over them and to rule with them by fixed Lawes and Canons By the Diabolicall Bishop he meanes a Bishop with sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction Lording it over Gods heritage and governing by his owne will and authority Which puts us in minde of the Painter that Limmed two pictures to the same proportion and figure The one hee reserved in secret the other he exposed to common view And as the phansie
of their revenues were taken away Bishops would not decline the great burthen and charge of soules necessarily annexed to their places as much as the ancient Bishops did who hid themselves that they might not be made Bishops and cut off their eares rather then they would bee made Bishops wheras now Bishops cut off the eares of those that speak against their Bishopricks How it comes to passe that in England there is such increase of Popery superstâ—tion Arminianisme and profanenesse more then in other reformed Churches Doth not the root of these disorders proceed from the Bishops anâ— their adherents being forced to hold correspondence with Rome to uphold their greatnesse and their Courts and Canons wherein they symbolize with Rome And whether it bee not to be feared that they will rather consent to the bringing in of Popery for the upholding of their dignities then part with their dignities for the upholding of Religion Why should England that is one of the chiefest Kingdomes in Europe that seperates from Antichrist maintaine and defend a discipline different from all other reformed Churches which stand in the like Separation And whether the continuance in this discipline will not at last bring us to communion with Rome from which wee are separated and to separation from the other reformed Churches unto which wee are united Whether it bee fit that the name Bishop which in Scripture is common to the Presbyters with the Bishops and not onely in in Scripture but also in Antiquitie for some hundreds of yeeres should still bee appropriated to Bishops and ingrossed by them and not rather to bee made common to all Presbyters and the rather because First we finde by wofull experience that the great Equivocation that lyeth in the name Bishop hath beene and is at this day a great prop pillar to uphold Lordly Prelacy for this is the great Goliah the master-peece and indeed the onely argument with which they thinke to silence all opposers To wit the antiquity of Episcopacie that it hath continued in the Church of Christ for 1500 yeeres c which argument is cited by this Remonstrant ad nauseam usque usque Now it is evident that this argument is a Paralogisme depending upon the Equivocation of the name Bishop For Bishops in the Apostles time were the same with Presbyters in name and office and so for a good while after And when afterwards they came to bee distinguished The Bishops of the primitive times differed as much from ours now as Rome ancient from Rome at this day as hath beene sufficiently declared in this Booke And the best way to confute this argument is by bringing in a Community of the Name Bishop to a Presbyter as well as to a Bishop Secondly because wee finde that the late Innovators which have so much disturbed the peace purity of our Church did first begin with the alteration of words and by changing the word Table into the word Altar and the word Minister into the word Priest and the word Sacrament into the word Sacrifice have endevoured to bring in the Popish Masse And the Apostle exhorts us 2 Tim. 1.13 To hold fast the forme of sound words and 1 Tim 6.20 to avoid the prophane novelties of words Upon which text we will onely mention what the Rhemists have commented which wee conceive to be worthy consideration Nam instruunt nos non solum docentes sed etiam errantes The Church of God hath alwayes been as diligent to resist novelties of words as her adversaries are busie to invent them for which cause shee will not have us communicate with them nor follow their fashions and phrase newly invented though in the nature of the words sometimes there bee no harme Let us keepe our forefathers words and wee shall easily keepe our old and true faith that wee had of the first Christians let them say Amendment Abstinence the Lords Supper the Communion Table Elders Ministers Superintendent Congregation so be it praise yee the Lord Morning Prayer Evening Prayer and the rest as they will Let us avoide those novelties of words according to the Apostles prescript and keepe the ole termes Penance Fast Priests Church Bishop Masse Matâ—in Evensong the B. Sacrament Altar Oblation Host Sacrifice Halleluja Amen Lent Palme-Sunday Christmasse and the words will bring us to the faith of our first Apostles and condemne these new Apostates new faith and phrase Whether having proved that God never set such a government in his Church as our Episcopall Government is wee may lawfully any longer be subject unto it bee present at their Courts obey their injunctions and especially bee instruments in publishing and executing their Excommunications and Absolutions And thus we have given as wee hope a sufficient answer and as briefe as the matter would permit to The Remonstrant With whom though we agree not in opinion touching Episcopacie and Liturgie yet we fully consent with him to pray unto Almighty God Who is great in power and infinite in wisdome to powre downe upon the whole Honourabe Assembly the Spirit of wisdome and understanding the spirit of Councell and might the spirit of knowledge and of the feare of the Lord. That you may be able to discerne betwixt things that differ separate betweene the precious and the vile purely purge away our drosse and take away all our tinne root out every plant that is not of our heavenly Fathers planting That so you may raise up the foundations of many generations and be called The Repairers of breaches and Restorers of paths to dwell in Even so Amen FINIS A POSTSCRIPT THough we might have added much light and beauty to our Discourse by inserting variety of Histories upon severall occasions given us in the Remonstrance the answer whereof wee have undertaken especially where it speaks of the bounty and gracious Munificence of Religious Princes toward the Bishops yet unwilling to break the thread of our discourse and its connexion with the Remonstrance by so large a digression as the whole series of History producible to our purpose would extend unto Wee have chosen rather to subjoyne by way of appendix an historicall Narration of those bitter fruits Pride Rebellion Treason Vnthankefulnes c. which have issued from Episcopacy while it hath stood under the continued influences of Soveraigne goodnesse Which Narration would fill a volume but we wil bound our selves unto the Stories of this Kingdome and that revolution of time which hath passed over us since the erection of the Sea of Canterbury And because in most things the beginning is observed to be a presage of that which followes let their Founder Austin the Monk come first to be considered Whom wee may justly account to have beene such to the English as the Arrian Bishops were of old to the Goths and the Jesuits now among the Indians who of Pagans have made but Arrians and Papists His ignorance in the Gospell which he preached is seene in his idle
firebrand to the civill warres that followed In this time Peckam Archbishop of Can. in a Synod was tempering with the Kings liberties but being threatned desisted But his successor Winchelsey on occasion of Subsidies demanded of the Clergie made answer That having two Lords one Spirituall the other Temporall he ought rather to obey the Spirituall governour the Pope but that he would send to the Pope to know his pleasure and so persisted even to beggerie The Bishop of Durham also cited by the King flies to Rome In the deposing of this King who more forward then the Bishop of Hereford witnesse his Sermon at Oxford My head my head aketh concluding that an aking and sick head of a King was to be taken off without further Physick Iohn the Archbishop of Canterbury suspected to hinder the Kings glorious victories in Flanders and France by stopping the conâ—eyance of moneys committed to his charge conspiring therein with the Pope But not long after was constituted that fatall praemunire which was the first nipping of their courage to seeke aide at Rome And next to that the wide wounds that Wickleffe made in their sides From which time they have beene falling and thenceforth all the smoke that they could vomit was turned against the rising light of pure doctrine Yet could not their pride misse occasion to set other mischief on foot For the Citizens of London rising to apprehend a riotous servant of the Bishop of Salisbury then Lord Treasurer who with his fellowes stood on his guard in the Bishops house were by the Bishop who maintained the riot of his servant so complained of that the King therewith seized on their liberties and set a Governour over the Citie And who knowes not that Thomas Arundell Archbishop of Canterbury was a chiefe instrument and agent in deposing King Richard as his actions and Sermon well declares The like intended the Abbot of Westminster to Henry the fourth who for no other reason but because hee suspected that the King did not favour the wealth of the Church drew into a most horrible conspiracie the Earles of Kent Rutland and Salisbury to kill the King in a turnament at Oxford who yet notwithstanding was a man that professed to leave the Church in better state then hee found it For all this soone after is Richard Scroop Archbishop of York in the field against him the chiefe attractor of the rebellious party In these times Thomas Arundell a great persecutor of the Gospel preached by Wifclefs followers dies a fearefull death his tongue so swelling within his mouth that hee must of necessity starve His successor Chickeley nothing milder diverts the King that was looking too neerely into the superfluous revenewes of the Church to a bloody warre All the famous conquests which Henry the fifth had made in France were lost by a civill dissension in England which sprung first from the haughty pride of Beaufort Bishop and Cardinall of Winchester and the Archbishop of York against the Protector Speed 674. In the civill warres the Archbishop sides with the Earle of Warwick and March in Kent Speed 682. Edward the fourth Mountacute Archbishop of Yorke one of the chiefe conspirators with Warwicke against Edward the fourth and afterwards his Jaylor being by Warwickes treason committed to this Bishop In Edward the fifths time the Archbishop of York was though perhaps unwittingly yet by a certaine fate of of Prelacie the unhappy instrument of pulling the young Duke of Yorke out of Sanctuary into his cruell Unckles hands Things being setled in such a peace as after the bloodie brawles was to the afâ—licted Realme howsoever acceptable though not such as might bee wished Morton Bishop of Ely enticing the Duke of Buckingham to take the Crowne which ruin'd him opened the vaines of the poore subjects to bleede afresh The intollerable pride extortion bribery luxurie of Wolsey Archbishop of Yorke who can bee ignorant of selling dispensations by his power Legantine for all offences insulting over the Dukes and Peeres of whom some hee brought to destruction by bloodie policie playing with State affâ—ires according to his humour or benefit causing Turnay got with the blood of many a good Souldier to be rendred at the French Kings secret request to him not without bribes with whom one while siding another while with the Emperour hee sold the honour and peace of England at what rates hee pleased and other crimes to bee seene in the Articles against him Hol. 912. and against all the Bishops in generallâ— 911. which when the Parliament sought to remedie being most excessive extortion in the Ecclesiasticall Courts the Bishops cry out sacriledge the Church goes to ruine as it did in Bohem with the Schisme of the Hussites Ibid. After this though the Bishops ceased to bee Papists for they preached against the Popes Supremacie to please the King yet they ceased not to oppugne the Gospel causing Tindals translation to be burnt yet they agreed to the suppressing of Monasteries leaving their revenewes to the King to make way for the six bloodie Articles which proceedings with all crueltie of inquisition are set downe Holinsh. pag. 946. till they were repealed the second of Edward the sixth stopping in the meane while the cause of reformation well begunne by the Lord Cromwell And this mischiefe was wrought by Steven Gardiner Bishop of Winchester The sixe Articles are set downe in Speed pag. 792. The Archbishop of Saint Andrewes his hindring of Englands and Scotlands Union for feare of reformation Speed 794. As for the dayes of King Edward the sixth we cannot but acknowledge to the glorie of the rich mercie of God tâ—at there was a great reformation of Religion made even to admiration And yet notwithstanding we doe much dislike the humour of those that crie up those dayes as a compleat patterne of reformation and that endeavour to reduce our Religion to the first times of King Edward which wee conceive were comparatively very imperfect there being foure impediments which did much hinder that blessed work The three rebellions One in Henry the eighths time by the Priests of Lincolne and Yorkeshire for that reformation which Cromwell had made The other two in King Edwards dayes One in Cornewall the other in Yorkeshire The strife that arose suddenly amongst the Peeres emulating one anothers honour Speed pag 837. The violent opposition of the Popish Bishops which made Martin Bucer write to King Edward in his booke de Regno Christi Lib. 2. cap. 1. and say your Majestie doth see that this restoring againe the Kingdome of Christ which wee require yea which the salvation of us all requireth may in no wise bee expected to come from the Bishops seeing there be so few among them which doe understand the power and proper Offices of this Kingdome and very many of them by all meanes