Clergy for Order and seemly Government there was always one Principal to whom by long use of the Church the name of Bishop or Superintendent hath been applied which room Titus exercised in Creta Timothy in Ephesus and others in other Places Therefore altho' in the Scripture a Bishop and an Elder is of one Order and Authority in Preaching the Word and Administration of the Sacraments as Hierom doth often confess yet in Government by ancient use of Speech He is only called a Bishop which is in the Scriptures called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 12.8 1 Tim. 5.17 Heb. 13.17 that is Chief in Government to whom the Ordination or Consecration by Imposition of hands was always Principally committed and which most ancient Form of Government when Aerius would take away it was noted amongst his other Errors Hitherto Dr. Fulke so as hereby I trust it may appear to Master Cart-wright's Reproach and to all their Shames that shall pretend any Authority from the ancient Fathers to impugn the Right Honourable and Lawful calling of Bishops not Parsons in every Parish but Bishops in their Diocesses and Provinces appointed in the Apostles times for the right Order and Government of the Church of Christ So far Rancroft who introduceth these three great Men's Authority to countenance the Presidency or Chiefty of the Bishop over Presbyters in Government as Apostolical tho' Fulke goes no higher than the Custom of the Church agreeing with Jewel and Whit gift and it must be observed that they make not the Bishop to be a distinct Order from that of Presbyters nor deny the Presbyters to be Pastors nor affirm the Invalidity of the Presbyterial Ordination only that the Ordination by Imposition of hands was Principally committed to the Bishops and as Archbishop Spotiswood reports Bancroft held the Ordination only by Presbyters to be valid and lawful Histor Church of Scotland lit 7. p. 514. Spotiswood has it in these words A Question was moved by Dr. Andrews Bishop of Ely touching the Consecration of the Scottish Bishops who as he said must first be Ordained Presbyters as having received no Ordination from a Bishop The Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Bancroft who was by maintained That thereof there was no necessity seeing where Bishops could not be had the Ordination given by Presbyters must be esteemed Lawful otherwise that it might be doubted if there were any Lawful Vocation in most of the Reformed Churches This applauded to by the other Bishops Ely acquiesced and at the day and in the place appointed the three Scottish Bishops were consecrated CHAP. V. The Learned Hooker and Bishop Bilson's Opinion impartially stated differing but little from Saravia and Bancroft THE Learned and Judicious Hooker seems also to be of the same mind with Saravia and Bancroft for in his Third Book it 's only Polity in the general that in his Opinion is necessary to the several particular Churches For Lib. 3. Sect. 1. p. 66. Edit 61. saith he even the several Societies of Christian Men unto every of which the name of a Church is given with addition betokening severally as the Church of Rome Corinth Ephesus England and so the rest must be endued with correspondent general Properties belonging unto them as they are Publick Christian Societies And of such Properties common unto all Societies Christian it may not be denied that one of the very chiefest is Ecclesiastical Polity Which word I therefore the rather choose because the name of Government as commonly Men understand it in ordinary speech doth not comprize the largeness of that whereunto in this Question it is applied For when we speak of Government what doth the greater part conceive thereby but only the exercise of Superiority peculiar unto Rulers and Guides of others To our purpose therefore the name of Church-Polity will better serve because it containeth both Government and also whatsoever besides belongeth to the Ordering of the Church in Publick Neither is any thing in this degree more necessary than Church Polity which is a form of Ordering Publick Spiritual Affairs of the Church of God. Thus Hooker looks on Polity to be necessary to the Church and why necessary but because God himself is the Author of it It is not possible that any Form of Polity much less of Polity Ecclesiastical should be good Lib. 3. §. 2. unless God himself be Author of it Those things which are not of God saith Tentullian they can have no other than God's Adversary for their Author Be it whatsoever in the Church of God if it be not of God we hate it But then he distinguished between what is of God by the Law of Nature and the Revelation made of the Divine Will in Scripture Of God it must be either as those things sometimes were which God supernaturally revealed and so delivered them unto Moses for Government of the Commonwealth of Israel or else as those things which Men find out by help of that Light which God hath given them unto that end The very Law of Nature it self which no man can deny but God hath instituted is not of God unless that be of God whereof God is the Author as well this latter way as the former The Controversie between Hooker and the Old Nonconformists was Whether any particular Form of Polity be so of God that it be set down in Scripture and the Noncons asserted That no Form of Church Polity was lawful Ubi supra or of God unless God be so the Author of it that it be also set down in Scripture Hooker on the contrary That he which affirmeth Speech to be necessary amongst all men throughout the World doth not thereby import that all men must necessarily speak one kind of Language Even so the necessity of Polity and Regiment in all Churches may be held without holding any one certain form to be necessary in them all so far He who doth moreover thus reason with the Noncons You should tell us plainly whether your meaning be that it must be there set down in whole or in Parts For if wholly shew what one form of Policy ever was so your own to be so taken out of Scripture you 'l not affirm neither do you deny that in part even this which you so much oppugn is also from thence taken Again you should tell us whether only that be taken out of Scripture which is actually and particularly there set down or else that also which the general Principles and Rules of Scripture Potentially contain The one way you cannot so much as pretend that all the Parties of your own Discipline are in Scripture and the other way your mouths are stop'd when you would plead against all other Forms besides your own seeing the general Principles are such as do not particularly prescribe any one but sundry may equally be consonant unto the general Axioms of the Scripture After the most impartial Enquiry this Learned Man's Judgment about
and the Reformers in King Edward's Time. IN Queen Elizabeth's Reign the first I find to mention any thing about the Office of Bishops and Priests is Dr. Alley Bishop of Exeter in his Miscellanea on his third Praelection Alley 's Poor Man's Library Tom. 1. pag. 95 96. read at Paul's in the Year 1560. on the word Bishops What difference is between a Bishop and a Priest St. Hierome writing ad Titum doth declare whose words be these Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus c. A Priest therefore is the same that a Bishop is And before Schisms and Factions by the instinct of the Devil begun in Religion and before it was said among the People I am Pauls I am Apollos I am of Cephas the Churches were Governed with the Common Councel of the Priests or Elders But after that every one thought those whom he Baptized to be his and not Christ's it was decreed throughout the World that one of the Priests or Elders should be chosen to be set over the rest unto whom all the care or charge of the Church should appertain and that the beginnings of Schisms should be taken away Some do think that it is not the sentence of the Scriptures but ours that a Bishop and Priest or Elder are one thing and they do also think the one to be a name of Age and the other to be a name of Office. Let them read again the words of the Apostle to the Philippians saying Paul and Timotheus the Servants of Jesu Christ to all the Saints in Christ Jesu which are at Philippos with the Bishops and Deacons Grace and Peace be with you c. Philippi is one of the Cities of Macedonia And truly there could not be many as they are called Bishops in one City But because at that time they called those Bishops which they did also call Priests or Elders therefore indifferently he spake of Bishops as of Priests or Elders It may yet seem doubtful to some unless it be approved by other Testimonies In the Acts of the Apostles it is written that when the Apostle came to Miletum he sent to Ephesus and did call the Priests or Elders of the same Church unto whom among other things he said thus A Hand to your selves c. And here mark you diligently how that he calling the Priests or Elders of that one City of Ephesus did afterwards call them Bishops c. And Peter which took his name of the firmness of his Faith in his Epistle saith I your fellow Elder do beseech the Elders that are among you c. Haec Hieronimus These words are alledg'd saith Bishop Aley that it may appear Priests among the Elders to have been even the same that Bishops were But it grew by little and little that the whole charge and care should be appointed to one Bishop within his Precinct that the Seeds of Dissention might be utterly rooted out In his Second Tome P. 15. the Bishop adds out of St. Jerom Sicut Presbyteri c. Like as Priests do know themselves to be subject by the Custom of the Church unto him which is made Ruler over them So let the Bishops know that they are greater than the Priests rather by Custom than by the verity of Dispensation given of the Lord. He saith also in another place with the old Fathers the Bishops were the same that the Priests were for the name of one is the name of Dignity and the other of Age and Time. So far Bishop Aley The next I meet with is Pilkington Bishop of Duresme the Author of the Confutation of an Addition with an Apology written and cast in the Streets of West-Chester against the Causes of Burning Paul's Church in London declared by the Bishop at Paul's Cross The Bishop did at Paul's Cross Exhort the people to take the burning of Paul's to be a warning of a greater Plague to follow to the City of London if amendment of Life be not had in all Estates the Author of the Addition a Papist Histor Q. Eliz. pag. 312. notwithstanding what Heylin saith to the contrary when he tells us that the Papists ascribe it to some practice of the Zuinglian Faction out of their hatred unto all Solemnity and Decency in the Service of God perform'd more punctually in that Church for Examples sake than in any other in the Kingdom imputes it to the laying aside of the midnight Mattins forenoon Masses formerly had in the Church and Anthems and Prayers in the Steeple This Bishop a Person of great Learning and good Temper in Answer to this Paper doth in the Sixth year of the Queens Reign thus express himself Yet remains one doubt unanswered in these few words when he saith that the Government of the Church was committed to Bishops as tho' they had received a Larger and Higher Commission from God of Doctrine and Discipline than other Lower Priests and Ministers have and hereby might challenge a greater Prerogative But this is to be understood that the Privileges and Superiorities which Bishops have above other Ministers are rather granted by Man for maintaining of better Order and Quietness in Common-wealths than Commanded by God in his Word Ministers have better Knowledge and Utterance some than other but their Ministry of Equal Dignity God's Commission and Commandment is like and indifferent to all Priest Bishop Archbishop Prelate by what name soever he be called Saint Jerome in his Commentary on 1 Chap. Tit. says that a Bishop and Priest is all One and in his Epistle ad Evagrium he says That the Bishop wheresoever he be is of the same Power and Priesthood If they the Papists were not too much blinded in their own foolishness they might see in the last Subsidy granted in the time of their own Reign that they grant those to be their betters and above them from whence they receive their Authority The Parliament gives them and their Collectors Power to Suspend Deprive and Interdict any Priest that Pays not the Subsidy In that doing they grant the Parliament to be above them and from it to receive their Power I had not thought to have said so much on these his few words and yet much more hangs on this their Opinion of claiming their Usurped Power above Princes and other Ministers The Learned Bishop Jewel is of the same Mind with this Author Apol. Par. 2. Ch. 5. Divis 1. Ch. 6. Divis 1. and thus much he delivereth not as his private Opinion but as the sense of the Church of England Furthermore we say That the Minister ought lawfully duly orderly to be preferr'd to that Office of the Church of God Ch. 6. Divis 3. Ch. 7. Divis 5. and that no man hath power to wrest himself into the Holy Ministry at his own pleasure That Christ hath given to his Ministers Power to bind to loose to open to shut That the Minister doth execute the Authority of binding and shutting as often as
Holy Sacraments c. Moreover in the Close to the Reduction the Primate and Dr. Holdsworth aver That the Suffragans mentioned in the second Proposition may lawfully use the Power both of Jurisdiction and Ordination according to the Word of God and the Practice of the Ancient Church who yet are but the Chorepiscopi of no other Order than the Presbyters as hereafter I shall prove A Declaring therefore thus much namely That the Presbyter is of the same Order vested with the Power both of Order and Jurisdiction and an entrusting them with the Exercise thereof as in the second Proposition will contribute very much towards a well Established Comprehension And in Requital it 's not to be doubted but the Latitudinarian Nonconformist of which there are a great number in this Kingdom will readily yield to the Presidency of one Presbyter for the sake of Union to be over them and close with what the Archbishop further adds Archbishop Of the many Elders who in common Ruled the Church of Ephesus there was one President whom our Saviour in his Epistle to this Church in a peculiar manner stileth the Angel of the Church of Ephesus Revel 1. and Ignatius in another Epistle written about twelve years after unto the same Church calleth the Bishop thereof Betwixt the Bishop and the Presbytery of that Church what an Harmonious Consent there was in the Ordering of the Church-Government the same Ignatius doth fully declare by the Presbytery which St. Paul understanding the Community of the rest of the Presbyters or Elders who then had a hand 1 Tim. 4.14 not only in the Delivery of the Doctrine and Sacraments but also in the Administration of the Discipline of Christ for further proof of which we have that known Testimony of Tertullian in his general Apology for Christians Ibidem etiam Exhortationes Castigationes censura Divina nam judicatur magno cum pondere ut apud certos de Dei conspectu summum summumque futuri Judicii praejudicium est si quis ita deliquerit ut à Communicatione Orationis Conventus omnis sancti Commercii relegetur praesident probati quique Seniores honotem istum non pretio sed Testimonio adepti Tertul. Apologet. c. 39. In the Church are used Exhortations Chastisements and Divine Censure for Judgment is given with great advice as amongst those who are certain they are in the sight of God and it is the chiefest foreshewing of the Judgment which is to come if any man have so offended that he be banished from the Communion of Prayer and of the Assembly and of all Holy Fellowship The Presidents that bear Rule therein are certain approved Elders who have obtained this Honour not by Reward but by good Report who were no other as he himself intimates elsewhere but those from whose hands they used to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist Nec de aliorum manibus quà m Praesidentium sumimus Id. de Corona Militis c. 3. For with the Bishop who was the Chief President and therefore stiled by the same Tertullian in another place * Dandi quidem Baptisini habet jus Summus Sacerdos qui est Episcopus dehinc Presbyteri Diaconi Id. de Baptis c. 17 Summus Sacerdos for distinction sake the rest of the Dispensers of the Word and Sacraments joyned in the Common Government of the Church and therefore where in Matters of Ecclesiastical Judicature Cornelius Bishop of Rome used the received Form of gathering together the Presbytery Omni actu ad me perlato placuit contrahi Presbyterium Cornel. apud Cypr. Epist 46. of what persons that did consist Cyprian sufficiently declareth when he wisheth them to read his Letters to the flourishing Clergie Florentissimo illic clero tecum praesidenti Cypr. Epist 55. ad Cornel. which there did Preside or Rule with him The presence of the Clergie being thought to be so requisite in matters of Episcopal Audience that in the fourth Council of Carthage it was concluded Ut Episcopus nullius causam audiat absque praesentia Clericorum suorum alioquin irrita crit sententia Episcopi nisi Clericorum praesentia confirmetur Concil Carthag IV. cap. 23. That the Bishop might hear no mans cause without the Presence of the Clergie and that otherwise the Bishop's Sentence should be void unless it were confirm'd by the Presence of the Clergie which we find also to be inserted into the Canons of * Except Egberti c. 43. Egbert who was Archbishop of York in the Saxon times and afterwards in the Body of the ‖ 15. q. 7. c. nullus Canon Law it self True it is that in our Church this kind of Presbyterial Government hath been long disused yet seeing it still professeth that every Pastor hath a Right to Rule the Church from whence the name of Rector also was given at first unto him and to Administer the Discipline of Christ as well as to Dispense the Doctrine and Sacraments and the Restraint of the Exercise of that Right proceedeth only from the Custom now received in this Realm no man can doubt but by another Law of the Land this hindrance may be well removed And this Ancient Form of Government by the united Suffrages of the Clergy might be reviv'd again and with what little shew of Alteration the Synodical Conventions of the Pastors of every Parish might be accorded with the Presidency of the Bishops of each Diocess and Province the indifferent Reader may quickly perceive by the perusal of the ensuing Propositions I. In every Parish the Rector or incumbent Pastor together with the Church-Wardens and Sides-men may every Week take notice of such as live scandalously in that Congregation who are to receive such several Admonitions and Reproofs as the Quality of their Offence shall deserve And if by this means they cannot be reclaimed they may be presented to the next monthly Synod and in the mean time debarr'd by the Pastor from Access unto the Lord's Table Notes The Name Rector which signifieth a Governour or Ruler was anciently given in common to Prelates Bishops Abbots and Parish-Presbyters but chiefly to the Parish-Priest or Parson that had Cure of Souls as DV FRESENE observes out of the Lombardian Laws Rectores Ecclesiarum Praelati Episcopi Abbates Parochiarum Presbyteri in lege Longob l. 3. tit 1. Sect. 42. tit 10. Sect. 4. In Capitularibus Carol. M. lib. 3. tit 75. c. Maxime Rector Ecclesiae qui vulgo Curio seu Curitus ut in Charta Alaman 43. apud Goldastum DV FRESNE Glos in verb. Rector and Charles Great 's Capitulars and the Almaine Charter Lindwood also in his Provincial Constitution declares the same Communiter loquendo per ipsorum Rectorum intelligas de Rectoribus Ecclesiarum Parochialium Potest etiam intelligi de omni Praelato Ecclesiae Lindw de Consu c. nullus ver nullus Rector ver Ipsorum Rectorum and * Vid. Cowel's Interpreter in Verb. Rector
THE Healing Attempt Being a Representation OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE Church of England According to the Judgment of her Bishops unto the End of Q. Elizabeths Reign Humbly Tendred To the Consideration of the Thirty Commissionated for a Consult about ECCLESIASTICAL AFFAIRS in Order to a Comprehension And Published In hopes of such a Moderation of Episcopacy that the Power be kept within the Line of our First Reformers and the Exercise of it reduced to the Model of Arch-Bishop USHER Mediocria firma LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside near Mercers-Chappel 1689. The Epistle to the Commissioners Most Reverend Right Reverend and Reverend I Bless you all in the Name of the Lord and Blessed be your Meeting this Day and this Appointment for you to Sit about so Blessed a reconciling Work. I have but this short Grace to say Blessed are the Peacemakers When such a Choice of Persons is Congregated and their Business Accommodation the Tidings hereof to the poor Outed Shepherds should methinks be so affecting as if the Angels were again upon the Wing and singing over that Hymn Glory be to God in the highest in Earth Peace and good will towards Men. Alas How many Years have passed since the Reformation wherein your Nonconformist Brethren have been a Loading and their Burthen encreasing and none of you that were willing were able to ease them when by the Artifice of the Papists and the Higher Powers influenced by them you were forced to bear the blame of those things which your Souls did abhor And now is the time come when God hath sent us such a Nursing Father and Nursing Mother to his Church as hath called you to the liberty of shewing of what manner of spirit indeed you are Blessed be his Name for it and the hoâ—â—es we have on that account This is the day which the Lord hath made we will be glad and rejoyce in it I know indeed how hard of belief the most of our Brethren generally are that any good should be done for us by a Convocation or this Meeting It is impossible they are readier to say that those But Reverendly beloved I am perswaded better things of you and things that accompany Salvation though they thus speak I am perswaded that even this will stimulate you to a greater earnestness to do them the more good for such is Christianity and that I shall not need to say any thing not any more than in the Title to put you on this grateful task The same also which ye are forward to do I have less need to be impertinent in offering Arguments to such Wits which were to bring Water to the Spring but this one thing I have need to do which is to beg of you that you will Pardon what is done if in any thing the Author seems to presume or to be more slender than he ought for want of more time and search or does in any regard offend I will also beg of you more Two things the One is To take heed how you make more conditions necessary to us for Communion with you than Christ requires of you for Communion with him The Other is That you do not Tantalize your Brethren or Procrastinate that Kindness whatsoever it is which you intend towards those who are capable to receive it For we must needs die and are as water spilt upon the ground which cannot be gathered up again Neither doth God respect any person yet doth he devise means that his banished be not expelled from him A Friend to the Design and Substance of these Papers J. H. Octob. 3. 1689. THE AUTHOR TO THE READER THE Greatest thing in Controversie amongst Protestants is Whether the Office of a Presbyter and Bishop be according to the Holy Scriptures the same and on a Just Determination of this Question depends the Peace of our Church To affirm That the Bishop and Presbyter are of different Orders That the Power of Ordination is the sole Prerogative of Bishops That Ordination only by Presbyters is void and null and that the Ordaining 'em again by Bishops is not Re-Ordination destroys the Church State not only of Dissenters but of all other Protestants in the World except of those in the Church of England nulling their Ministry Sacraments and Discipline A Comprehension therefore on these Terms is none at all It 's only an offer to Vnite with Dissenters on their doing what is to them Impossible They cannot Renounce their Ordination nor Consent to the Destroying their own nor the Church State of Reformed Protestants Abroad But lest the Impossibility they lie under be Interpreted a Peevish Humour and Obstinacy in them the Sentiments of the First-Reformers in the Days of Henry the Eighth Edward the Sixth and Queen Elizabeth are Impartially Propos'd and found to be exactly the same with theirs and what will touching Matters of Church Government Heal our Divisions The Author could Descend lower than the last of Elizabeth but there 's no need on 't and he must acknowledge that tho' a great many Eminent Writers Learned Divines of the Church of England asserted this Old Reformer's Principle yet the Canons of James I. ran another way and in his Reign the Learned were divided in their Opinions about the Office of Bishop and Presbyter and so they are at this very time However it cannot be denied that the First Reformers adher'd unto by Archbishop Usher held the same which the Dissenters have all along stifly maintain'd and have Antiquity on their side The Learned Carleton is Positive that the Power of Order by all Writers that He could see even of the Church of Rome is understood to be Immediately from Christ given to all Bishops and Priests alike by their Consecration and that in this there was no Difference between Papist and Protestant whence it follows that the Divesting the Parish Presbyter of the Pastoral Office is but a late Invention Thus much He Asserts of that Power of Order which he distinguisheth from the Power of Jurisdiction and includes in it the Power of Ordination And although according to the most taking Opinion amongst those who seem'd to be somewhat Zealous for Prelacy the Power of Jurisdiction was peculiarly appropriated to the Bishop yet this Jurisdiction following Orders could never be so separated from it but that there still remain some Convincing Instances of its belonging unto Presbyters In the Case of a Bishop's Suspension it 's clear I will only observe what is at this time most obvious On the Suspension of the Archbishop of Canterbury All Ecclesiastical and Spiritual Jurisdiction belongs to the Dean and Chapter who are but Presbyters as is daily Asserted in these words Nos Johannes Tillotson Sacrae Theologiae Professor Decanus Ecclesiae Cathedralis Metropoliticae Christi Cant ' Et Ejusdem Ecclesiae Capitulum ad quos Omnis omnimoda Jurisdictio Spiritualis Ecclessiastica quae ad Archiepiscopum Cant. pertinuit nunc ratione
Suspensionis c. dignoscitur pertinere A Condescending to settle the Power of Orders and Jurisdiction on Presbyters as well as Bishops according to the Learned Archbishop Usher's Model will as to Matters of Church Government End the Controvesie between the Moderate Episcopal and Presbyterian As to what relates unto Stinted-Forms of Prayer the Judicious Mr. Clerkson in his Excellent Discourse of Liturgies having so Learnedly and fully discussed it the Author need do no more than only Commend its Perusal to the Candid Reader with an Assurance that until it be cleared that Stinted Liturgies are Ancienter than that Learned Person Represents them to be we shall be freed from a strict Imposition THE Healing Attempt The Introduction THose who are most sensible of the late Deliverance from the Dangers we were in of being overturn'd by the Papists must be of an Opinion that the many Divisions amongst our selves had too great a hand in bringing on us what was the true Ground of our Danger that we can never be perfectly free from the Fears of a Return so long as our Breaches remain Uncured and that it 's absolutely necessary that every one do his Part towards the Settlement of a lasting Vnion amongst Protestants as the strongest Bulwark against Popery Thus much I count is very manifest to every Considering Mind for at this time Protestants of all Perswasions seem to be desirous of it Although there are different Apprehensions about the Means of attaining it as whether by an Indulgence only or whether by Indulgence and Comprehension yet is there no doubt that I know about the Vnion it self and seeing an Indulgence is already given Extending Liberty of Conscience even to the Quakers and a Bill of Comprehension is at this time on the Anvil I will humbly offer my thoughts concerning it That such as are only for an Indulgence will be angry with this Essay is no other than I expect However the Arguments for a well-Establish'd Comprehension influencing me more than the Displeasure of any Party of Men on Earth I am resolv'd in God's strength to do the uttermost in me lyeth towards the obtaining it It is a Concernment for the Protestant Faith the Salvation of Souls the Glory of God that puts me on this work all which have been Endangered through that want of Powerful Preachers in Parish Churches which hath been the Effect of our Divisions I bless God there are so many Faithful and Laborious Ministers in Publick Places and yet considering how few these are in comparison of the Churches wants I cannot but lament the Deplorable Condition of Thousands in this Nation who on this occasion are like Eternally to Perish and pray the Lord of the Harvest to Open the Door that more Labourers may enter in even men of the most Tender Consciences who no doubt will be the most successful in their Ministry In Queen Elizabeths and James the First 's days it so fell out that a strict Injunction of Subscription Depriv'd the Church of the Labours of several Divines eminent for their Learning Holiness of Life and Conversation Consult the Complaint Presented to the Right Honourable the Lords of Her Majesties Council and their Lordships Answer The Copy of a Letter written by a Gentleman in the Countrey to a Londoner touching the Answer to the Archbishop's Articles The Lamentable Complaint of the Commonalty by way of Supplication to the High Court of Parliament for a Learned Ministry and you 'l see that for Non-conformity some of the most Conscientious and Painful Preachers were brought to the Barr Marshalled with the worst Malefactors Indicted Arraigned Condemned New Christned with the odious name of Puritan Depriv'd to the Advancement of Popery Debauchery Atheism and to the great Declension of the Power of Godliness A Disgracing those Ministers that are sound in the Faith and Industrious in their Work hath been one of the most successful Engines the Antichristian Party have used The first Ten years of Queen Elizabeths Reign the Papists kept to our Churches and if Saunders and some others had not with an unexpected success nick-named some of the most Valiant Opposers of Popery and Painful Preachers with the odious names of Puritan and Precisian to the good liking of some amongst our selves they might have still continued their Communion with us This is not the Observation of some Nonconformists only The N. C. in their Complaint to the Queens Council humbly advertise their Lordships that the Adversary very cunningly new Christned them with an odious name of Puritan that whilst they were occupied in the Defence of their Innocency the Adversary might have greater freedom to go about their hateful Treachery Part of the Regist pag. 129. but of the Wise and Judicious Sir Robert Cotton who assures us that the Reason of the Papists separating from our Church and returning to their old Apostacy was not the Bull of Pius Quintus on the Bishop of London's Door as the Lord Chief Justice Coke apprehended or the forbearing to hang up Priests but in conjunction with the Idleness and Insufficiency of many Teachers conspiring with the Peoples cold Zeal Saunders his pinning the name of Puritan on some of the most Learned and couragious Protestants gave life to that Faction It was not saith this Noble Baronet the Bull of Pius Quintus on the Bishop of London's Doors Posth Cotton p. 147 148. or the forbearing to hang up Priests that have wrought this Apostacy but the Idleness and Insufficiency of many Teachers conspiring with the Peoples cold Zeal that hath been the Contriver of this Web. Until the Eleventh year of Queen Elizabeths Reign Recusants name was scarcely known the Reason was because the Zeal begotten in the time of the Marian Persecution was yet fresh in Memory and the late Persecutors were so amazed with the sudden alteration of Religion that they could not chuse but say Digitus Dei est hîc In those days there was an Emulation between the Clergy and the Laity and a strife arose whether of them should shew themselves most affectionate to the Gospel Ministers haunted the Houses of worthiest Men where Jesuits now build their Tabernacles and poor Country Churches were frequented with the best of the Shire the Word of God was precious Prayer and Preaching went hand in hand together until Archbishop Grindal's Disgrace and Hatfield's hard conceit of Prophecying brought the flowing of those good Graces to a still water the name of a Papist smelt rank even in their own Nostrils and for pure shame to be accounted such they reforted duly both to our Churches and Exercises But when they saw their great Coryphaeus Saunders had slily pinned the name of Puritan upon the sleeves of the Protestants that encountred them with most Courage and perceiv'd that the Word was pleasing to some of our own side they took heart at Grass to set little by the Service of God and Duty to their Soveraign most Men grew to be frozen in Zeal and benummed
that whosoever as the worthy Lord Keeper Bacon observ'd in those days pretended a little spark of Earnestness he seemed no less than red fire hot in comparison of the other And as some fare the worse for an ill Neighbour's sake dwelling beside them so did it betide the Protestants who seeking to curb the the Papists or reprove an idle Drone were incontinently branded with the Ignominious note of Precisian all which wind brought plenty of water to the Pope's Mill and there will most Men grind where they see Appearance to be well served So far Sir Robert Cotton And as the disgracing Godly-Ministers by fastning the names of Puritan Precisian c. on 'em and the laying 'em aside from the publick exercise of their Ministry did in the Reign of Elizabeth give life to Popery so 't will still and all those Protestant Ministers that are now denied entrance into the Parish Churches will be in disgrace amongst the People and their Ministry not half so successful amongst those that mostly need it The wider therefore the Church Doors are made the greater will be the number of Pious and Painful Preachers the greater the Advantage on Truth 's side and the greater Discouragement on the other hand But that the Door may be made wide enough to answer the desired End seeing our Governours are inclin'd to lay aside the strict use of Ceremonies with some more offensive Impositions there is this one thing to wit The Ordering and Declaring the Government of the Church to be now no other but what it was held and intended to be by the first Reformers will as I humbly apprehend be the most Effectual Expedient of any else in the World. Some of our Clergy have Notions about Church-Government very Dissonant from what the Gentry and Parliament Men have and the first Reformers heretofore had and it 's feared by some thinking Persons that the Laws yet in Being have Established a Government in the Church very different from what the Legislators I mean the King the Temporal Lords and Commons generally designed The Government settled in the Church by the first Reformers and still supposed by our Gentry to continue is consistent enough with the Church state of all other Protestants but that which is really Established by Law is Inconsistent with and Destructive of it driving many Learned Godly Protestant Divines from that Conformity which is at this time made necessary to the Exercise of their Ministry in Parish Churches To clear thus much is methinks one of the most necessary things to be attempted and the very next step to be taken towards the setling a Comprehension which will be of validity with Judicious Men. What were the Sentiments of the First-Reformers about Episcopacy and Church Government during Queen Elizabeths Reign I will with the greatest impartiality declare as near as possibly I can in their own words and add some Arguments to shew that the most effectual way to settle such a Comprehension as will best secure the Protestant Religion is the Forming and Framing the Government of the Church according to the Sentiments of our First-Reformers which in the Learned Archbishop Vsher's Reduction of Episcopacy I take to be very happily copied out unto us I will begin with those who liv'd in Henry the Eighth's days for then began the Reformation CHAP. I. The Sense of our First Reformers in Henry the Eighth's Days IN this King's Reign Tindall Lambert and Barnes Men of good Learning and blessed Martyrs sealing the Truths they professed with their Blood struggled strenuously for a Reformation of Church Government Tindall looking on Corruptions in Discipline to be a principal occasion of that greater Deluge of Enormities in the Church presseth for a Reduction of all things in the Discipline to the Apostolical Institution and therefore makes Enquiry after those Officers the Apostles Ordained in Christ's Church and what their Offices were and gives us an account of his Perswasion of it thus Wherefore the Apostles following and obeying the Rule Tindall's Practice of Popish Prelates Doctrine and Commandment of our Saviour Jesus Christ Ordained in his Kingdom and Congregation TWO OFFICERS one called after the Greek word Bishop in English an Overseer which same was called Priest after the Greek Elder in English because of his Age Discretion and Sadness for he was as nigh as could be always an Elderly Man. And this Overseer hath put his hands unto the Plough of God's Word and fed Christ's Flock and tended them only without looking to any other Business in the World. Another Officer they chose and called him Deacon after the Greek a Minister in English to Minister the Alms of the People unto the Poor and Needy For in the Congregation of Christ love maketh every Man's Gifts and Goods common to the Necessity of his Neighbour There is Presbyteros called an Elder by birth Tindall on the word Elder which same is called immediately a Bishop or Overseer to declare what Persons are meant They were called Elders because of their Age Gravity c. and Bishops and Overseers by reason of their Offices And all that were called Elders or Priests if they so will were called Bishops also tho' they have divided the names now which thing thou mayst evidently see by the first Chapter of Titus and the twentieth of the Acts. Those Overseers which we now call Bishops after the Greek word were alway biding in One place to Govern the Congregation there But Deacons were Overseers of the Poor and crept not into Orders till the Church grew rich Lambert is of the same Opinion As touching Priesthood saith he in the Primitive Church Ach. Mon. Vol. 2. when Vertue bare as ancient Doctors do deem and Scripture in mine opinion recordeth the same the most room there were no more Officers in the Church of God than Bishops and Deacons that is to say Ministers as witnesseth besides Scripture full apertly Hierome in his Commentaries upon the Epistles of Paul whereas he faith That those we call Priests were all one and no other but Bishops and the Bishops none other but Priests Men ancient both in Age and Learning so near as they could be chosen Neither were they Institute and chosen as they be now adays with small regard of a Bishop or his Officer only apposing them if they can construe a Collect. To conclude I say the Order or State of Priests and Deacons was Ordained by God. The Sixth Article against Dr. Barnes was That he declared himself thus I will never believe nor yet can I ever believe that one Man may be by the Law of God a Bishop of two or three Cities yea of an whole Countrey for it is contrary to St. Paul which saith I have left thee behind to set in every City a Bishop And if you find in one place of Scripture that they be called Episcopi you shall find in many that they be called Presbyteri I was saith he brought before my Lord Cardinal
into his Gallery and there he read all my Articles till he came to this and there he stopped and said That this touch'd him and therefore he ask'd me if I thought it wrong that One Bishop should have so many Cities underneath him Unto whom I answered That I could no further go than to St. Paul's Text which set in every City a Bishop Then asked he me whether I thought it unright seeing the Ordinance of the Church that one Bishop should have so many Cities I answered that I knew no Ordinance of the Church as concerning this thing but St. Paul's Saying only Nevertheless I did see a contrary Custom and Practice in the World but I know not the original thereof Then said He There were divers Cities some seven Miles some six Miles long and over them was there set but one Bishop and of their Suburbs also so likewise now a Bishop has also but one City to his Cathedral Church and the Country about it as Suburbs to it Methought this was far fetch'd but I durst not deny it because it was so great Authority and of so Holy a Father and so great a Divine But this I dare say that his Holiness could never prove it by Scripture nor yet by any Authority of Drs. nor yet by any Practice of the Apostles and yet it must be true because a Pillar of the Church has spoken it But let us see what the Drs. say to mine Article Athanasius doth declare this Text of the Apostle I have left thee behind c. He would not commit unto one Bishop a whole Ylde but he did injoyn that every City should have his Proper Pastor supposing that by this means they should more diligently Oversee the People Also Chrysostom on that same Text He would not that a whole Country should be permitted unto One man but He enjoyned to every man his Cure by that means he knew that his Labour should be more easie and the Subjects should be with more Diligence Govern'd if the Teachers were not distract with the Governing of many Churches but had Cure and Charge of one Church only c. Methinks these be plain words and able to move a man to speak as much as I did But I poor Man must be an Heretick there is no Remedy you will have it so and who is able to say nay Not all Scripture nor yet God Himself So far these three Worthies About this time the Notion of these blessed Martyrs found respect amongst those that bore a great Figure in the Church The Author of the True Difference between the Regal Power and the Ecclesiastical gives countenance unto it and at last Cranmer with many others fell in with it and it became a Point establish'd by Authority as may be seen in the Necessary Erudition of a Christian Man where after the Description given of the Office of Priests and Deacons it 's affirmed That of these Two Orders only Scripture makes express mention and that we may not mistake 'em it 's added of these two Orders only that is to say Priests and Deacons Scripture makes express mention and how they were conferred by the Apostles by Prayer and Imposition of hands Besides The Description they give of the Office of a Bishop or Priest for when they speak of the Divine Institution they make no distinction between 'em it 's thus The Office consists in true Preaching and Teaching the Word of God unto the People in Dispensing and Ministring the Sacraments in Consecrating and Offering the blessed Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the Altar in loosing and assoyling from Sin such Persons as be sorry and truly penitent for the same and Excommunicating such as be guilty in manifest Crimes and will not be reformed otherwise and finally in Praying for the whole Church of Christ and especially for the Flock committed to them Thus there are but two Orders only that is to say Priests and Deacons no third Order Bishops therefore must be of the same Order with Priests and their Office the same and the Superiority of one above the other only by Humane Ordinance and Appointment And whereas say they we have thus summarily declared what is the Office and Ministration which in Holy Scriptures has been committed to Bishops and Priests and in what things it consisteth as is afore rehearsed we think it expedient and necessary that all men should be advertis'd and taught that all such Lawful Power and Authority of any one Bishop or Priest for they are in the sense of these Great Divines the same over another were and be given them by the Consent Ordinance and Positive Laws of Men only and not by any Ordinance of God in Holy Scripture So far the Necessary Erudition Thus in Henry the Eighth's days the Bishop and Priest of the same Order according to the Scriptures and their Office the same the Difference therefore between 'em and the Government that is grounded thereupon by Prelatick Bishops Archbishops c. is only by the Positive Laws of Men. In a Declaration made of the Functions and Divine Institution of Bishops and Priests subscrib'd by Thomas Cromwell the Archbishops of Canterbury and York and divers other Bishops Consult the Addenda in Dr. Burnet's History of the Reformation p. 321 c. Civilians and Learned Men it is thus Resolved As touching the Sacrament of Holy Orders We will That all Bishops and Preachers shall instruct and teach our People committed by us unto their Spiritual Charge First How that Christ and his Apostles did institute and ordain in the New Testament that beside the Civil Powers and Governance of Kings and Princes which is called in Scripture Potestas gladii the Power of the Sword there should be also continually in the Church Militant certain other Ministers or Officers which should have Spiritual Power Authority and Commission under Christ to Preach and Teach the Word of God unto his People and to Dispense and Administer the Sacraments of God unto them and by the same to confer and give the Grace of the Holy Ghost to consecrate the blessed Body of Christ in the Sacrament of the Altar to loose and absoile from Sin all Persons which be duly penitent and sorry for the same to bind and Excommunicate such as be Guilty in manifest Crimes and Sins and will not amend their defaults to order and consecrate others in the same room Order and Office whereunto they recalled admitted themselves and finally to feed Christ's People like good Pastors and Rectors as the Apostle calleth them with their wholesom Doctrin and by their continual Exhortations and Monitions to reduce them from Sin and Iniquity so much as in them lieth and to bring them unto perfect Knowledge the perfect Love and Dread of God and unto the perfect Charity of their Neighbours That this Office this Power and Authority was committed and given by Christ and his Apostles unto certain Persons only that is to say unto
Priests OR Bishops whom they did Elect call and admit thereunto by their Prayer and Imposition of their hands And to the intent the Church of Christ should never be destituted of such Ministers as should have and execute the said Power of the Keys it was also Ordained and Commanded by the Apostles that the same Sacrament should be applied and ministred by the Bishops from time to time unto such other Persons as had the Qualities which the Apostles very diligently descryve as it appeareth evidently in the third Chapter of the first Epistle of St. Paul to Timothy and his Epistle unto Titus And surely this is the whole Vertue and Efficacy and the Cause also of the Institution of this Sacrament as it is found in the New Testament for albeit the Holy Fathers of the Church of Christ with all those things which were commendable in the Temple of the Jews did devise not only certain other Ceremonies than before rehearsed as Tonsures Rasures Vnctions and such other Observances to be used in the Administration of the said Sacraments but did also Institute certain Inferiour Orders or Degrees as Janitors Lectors Exorcists Acolits and Sub-Deacons and deputed to every one of those certain Offices to execute in the Church wherein they followed undoubtedly the Example and Rites used in the Old Testament yet the Truth is That in the New Testament there is no mention made of any Degrees or Distinctions in Orders but only of Deacons OR Ministers and of Priests OR Bishops Nor there is any word spoken of any other Ceremony used in the Conferring of this Sacrament but only of Prayer and the Imposition of the Bishops hand Thus the Power of Excommunication and conferring Orders by Prayer and Imposition of Hands as declared in the New Testament belongs unto the Priest which is the same with the Bishop there being no Degrees or Distinctions in Orders but only of Deacons or Ministers and Priests or Bishops and consequently no Superiority therefore of a Bishop above a Priest to be found in the New Testament during King Henry the Eighth's days CHAP. II. The Judgment of the Reformers in Edward the Sixth's Days the same 't was in Henry the Eighth's holding no Difference by Divine Law between a Bishop and Presbyter IN the First Year of Edward the Sixth's Reign an Act of Parliament passed sufficiently Declaring the Episcopal Orders as distinct from and above that of the Presbyter to be wholly from the Crown for it was affirm'd That all Authority of Jurisdiction Spiritual is derived and deducted from the King's Majesty as Supream Head of these Churches of England and Ireland The Design of this Law as Dr. Heylin has it was to weaken the Authority of the Episcopal Order Hist Edw. 6. p. 51. by forcing them from their strong hold of Divine Institution and making them no other than the King's Ministers only His Ecclesiastical Sheriffs as a man might say to execute his Will and disperse his Mandates Dr. Poynet Bishop of Winchester in this King's Reign in Answer unto a Book writ by Stephen Gardiner tho' sent out under the Name of Dr. Martin about the Marriage of Priests doth sufficiently shew that the Reformers in those days were great Approvers of Calvin's Notions about Church Government and therefore willing to lay aside even the very Name Bishop and make use of the Names Superintendent Minister Senior Elders c. for these are his words And further whereas it pleaseth Martin not only in this place but also hereafter to Jest at the Name Superintendent he sheweth himself bent to condemn all things that be good Who knoweth not that the Name Bishop hath so been abused that when it was spoken the People understood nothing else but a great Lord that went in a white Rochet with a wide shaven Crown and that carrieth an Oyl Box with him wherewith he useth once in seven years riding about to Confirm Children c. Now to bring the People from this abuse what better means can be devised than to teach the People their Error by another word out of the Scriptures of the same signification which thing by the term Superintendent would in time have been well brought to pass The name Bishop spoken amongst the Unlearned signified to them nothing less than a Preacher of God's Word because there was not nor is any thing more rare in any Order of Ecclesiastical Persons than to see a Bishop Preach I deny not but the name Bishop may be well taken but because the Evilness of the Abuse hath marred the Goodness of the Word it cannot be denied but that it was not amiss to joyn for a time another word with it in his place whereby to restore that abused word to his Right Signification Oh how the Papists would triumph over us if they had like proof for the names I say of Pope Cardinal Canon Prebendary Monk c. as we that profess Christ have for the maintainance of the terms and names Superintendent Minister Seniors Elders Brethren and such like by us used The Resolution Archbishop Cranmer gave to the Questions propounded by Edw. 6. approved by the Bishop of St. Asaph Therleby Redman and Cox See Dr. Stillingflèet's MS. makes it manifest that these great Reformers owned not Episcopacy as a Distinct Order from Presbytery of Divine Right but only as a prudent Constitution of the Civil Magistrate for the better Governing the Church In the Apostles time says Cranmer when there was no Christian Princes by whose Authority Ministers of God's Word might be appointed Resol to Q. 9. nor Sins by the Sword corrected there was no Remedy then for the Correction of Vice or appointing of Ministers but only the consent of Christien multitude by themselfe by an Uniform consent to follow the advice and perswasion of such Persons whom God had most endued with the Spirit of wisdom and counsaile Sometime the Apostles and other unto whom God had given abundantly his Spirit sent or appointed Ministers of God's Word sometime the People did choose such as they thought meet thereunto The Bishops and Priests were at one time and were not two distinct Things Resol to Q. 10. but both one Office in the Beginning of Christ's Religion The People before Christian Princes were Resol to Q. 11. commonly elected their Bishops and Priests In the New Testament he that is appointed to be a Bishop or Priest needeth no consecration by the Scripture Resol to Q. 12. for Election or appointing thereto is sufficient Thus far that Excellent Person saith a Reverend Divine of the Church of England in whose Judgment nothing is more clear than his ascribing the particular Form of Government in the Church to the Determination of the Supream Magistrate The Divine Right of Forms of Church Government Examined p. 390 c. CHAP. III. Aley Bishop of Exeter Pilkington Bishop of Durham Jewel Bishop of Salisbury Whitgift Archbishop of Canterbury of the same Opinion with Tindall Lambert Barnes
he shutteth up the Gate of the Kingdom of Heaven against Unbelieving and Stubborn Persons denouncing unto them God's Vengeance and everlasting Punishment or else when he doth quite shut them out from the bosom of the Church by open Excommunication Out of doubt what Sentence soever the Minister of God shall give in this sort God himself doth so well allow it that whatsoever here in Earth by their means is loosed and bound God himself will loose and bind and confirm the same in Heaven And seeing one word is given to all and one only Key belongeth to all we say there is but one only Power of all Ministers as concerning opening and shutting At this time so much was given the Priest that no room was left to make the Bishop of an Order distinct from him The Keys belong'd to all Ministers to the Priest as well as Bishop In the Defence of the Apology of the Church of England Part. 2. Ch. 3. Divis 5. this Learned Bishop is more full and particular in his Assertions In St. Jerom's time saith he there were Metropolitans Archbishops Archdeacons and others but Christ appointed not these Distinctions of Orders from the beginning These names are not found in all the Scriptures This is the thing which we defend St. Jerom saith Sciant Episcopi c. Let Bishops understand that they are in Authority over Priests more by Custom than by Order of God's Truth Erasmus speaking of the times of Jerom saith that Id temporis idem erat Episcopus Sacerdos Presbyter These three names Bishop Priest Presbyter at that time were all one To the Testimony of Jerom the Bishop adds that of St. Austin Epist 19. saying That the Office of a Bishop is above the Office of a Priest not by Authority of the Scriptures but after the names of Honour which the custom of the Church hath now obtained The Bishop in Defence of the Church of England Part 2. Ch. 9. Divis 1. had affirm'd That against the Sacred Scripture neither Law nor Ordinance nor any Custom ought to be heard no tho' Paul himself or an Angel from Heaven should come and teach the contrary To this Harding replies If all things necessary to Salvation be contain'd in the Scriptures then whatever is not in them contained the same is not necessary if not necessary why should we be laden with unnecessary Burdens Then away with all Traditions at a Clap be they never so Apostolick Remember you not what the most Renowned Fathers have said of the Necessity of Traditions If we go about to reject the Customs that be not set forth in Writing we shall bring the Preaching of the Faith but to a bare name For so they were taken for Hereticks who denied the Distinction of a Bishop and a Priest c. Jewel rejoyns This in the Margin in an Untruth for hereby both St. Paul and St. Jerom and other good men are condemn'd of Heresie But what meant Mr. Harding here to come in with the Difference between Priests and Bishops thinketh he that Priests and Bishops hold only by Tradition or is it so horrible a Heresie as he makes it to say That by the Scriptures of God a Bishop and a Priest are all One or knoweth he how far and to whom he reacheth the name of an Heretick Verily Chrysostom saith Between a Bishop and a Priest in a manner there is no difference St. Jerom saith somewhat in a rougher sort I hear say There is one become so peevish that he setteth Deacons before Priests that is to say before Bishops whereas the Apostle plainly teacheth us that Priests and Bishops are all one St. Austin saith what is a Bishop but the first Priest that is to say the Highest Priest so saith Saint Ambrose There is but One Ordination of Priest and Bishop for both of them are Priests but the Bishop is the first All these and other Holy Fathers together with St. Paul the Apostle for thus saying by Mr. Harding's Advice must be held for Hereticks Besides as the Bishop is very express in his asserting a Bishop and Presbyter to be according to Christ's Institution all one Part 6. Chap. 9. Divis 1 2. He is no less so in granting that the Bishop has receiv'd from the Prince the several Privileges he has above a Presbyter I grant there be many special Privileges granted upon great and just Considerations of the meer favour of the Prince that a Priest being found negligent or otherwise offending in his Ministry should be convinced and punished not by the Temporal and Civil Magistrate but by the Discretion of the Bishop Mr. Harding must remember that all these and other like Privileges passed unto the Clergy from the Prince and not from God and proceed only of special Favour and not of Right Archbishop Whitgift in opposing Cartwright's Platform about the Government of the Church asserted to be de Jure divino distinguisheth between Spiritual and External Government and saith That the External Government hath both a Substance and Matter about which it is occupied and also a Form to attain the same consisting in certain Offices and Functions and in the Names and Titles of them The Substance and Matter of Government must indeed be taken out of the Word of God and consisteth in these points That the Word be truly taught the Sacraments rightly administred Vertue furthered Vice repressed and the Church kept in quietness and order The Officers in the Church whereby this Government is wrought be not namely and particularly expressed in the Scriptures but in some points left to the Discretion and Liberty of the Church to be disposed according to the state of Times Places and Persons Thus much in his Preface conform to those who went before The Ministry of the Word and Sacraments and Reprehensions c. which belong to the Priest is of God the other Offices and Functions which as he elsewhere has it belong to the external Order and Policy of the Church and consequently the Distinction between Bishop and Priest Defence Tract c. 3. Div. 38 39 40 41. and Superiority of a Bishop above a Priest are only of humane Institution More particularly Cartwright contending for a sort of Discipline which is a Matter of Faith and necessary to Salvation the Archbishop distinguisheth between such things as are so necessary that without them we cannot be saved and such things as are so necessary that without 'em we cannot so well and conveniently be saved and then adds To be short I confess that in a Church collected together in one Place and at Liberty Government is necessary with the second kind of Necessity but that any one kind of Government is so necessary that without it the Church cannot be saved or that it may not be altered into some other kind thought to be more Expedient I utterly deny and the reasons that move me so to do be these The first is because I find no one certain and
perfect kind of Government prescribed or commanded in the Scriptures to the Church of Christ which no doubt should have been done if it had been a matter necessary to the Salvation of the Church Secondly Because the Essential Notes of the Church be these only The true Preaching of the Word and the right Administration of Sacraments So that notwithstanding Government or some kind of Government may be a part of the Church touching the outward Form and Perfection of it yet it is not such a part of the Essence and Being but that it may be the Church of Christ without this or that kind of Government and therefore the kind of the Government is not necessary unto Salvation There is no certain kind of Government or Discipline prescribed to the Churches but that the same may be altered as the Profit of the Churches requires and out of Gualters he saith Let every Church follow the manner of Discipline which doth most agree with the People with whom it abideth and which seemeth to be most fit for the place and time and let no man here rashly prescribe unto others neither let him bind all Churches to one and the same Form. I do deny that the Scriptures do set down any one certain Form and kind of Government of the Church to be Perpetual for all Times Persons and Places without Alteration It is well known Tract 17. Chap. 2. Divis 29. that the manner and form of Government used in the Apostles time and expressed in the Scriptures neither is now nor can or ought to be observed either touching the Persons How then can the Government of the Church by Bîshops Archbishops c. be Apostolical or the Functions We see manifestly that in sundry points the Government of the Church used in the Apostles times is and hath been of necessity altered and that it neither may nor can be revoked whereby 't is plain that any one kind of External Government perpetually to be observed is no where in the Scripture prescribed to the Church but the charge thereof is left to the Magistrate so that nothing be done contrary to the Word of God. This is the Opinion of the best Writers This was it's like Universally received by all the English Clergy in Whitgifts time Neither do I know saith the Archbishop any Learned Man of a contrary Judgment Either we must admit another Form now of Governing the Church than was in the Apostles time or else we must seclude the Christian Magistrate from all Authority in Ecclesiastical Matters I am perswaded that the External Government of the Church under a Christian Magistrate must be according to the Kind and Form of Government used in the Common-wealth else how can you make the Prince Supream Governour of all States and Causes Ecclesiastical If you therefore will have the Queen of England Rule as Monarch over all her Dominions then must you also give her leave to use one Kind and Form of Government in all and every part of the same and so to Govern the Church in Ecclesiastical Affairs as she doth the Common-wealth in Civil Dr. Cosins Chancellor to this Archbishop in his Answer to the Abstract Pag. 58. asserts That all Churches have not the same Form of Discipline neither is it necessary that they should seeing it cannot be proved that any certain particular Form of Church Government is commended to us by the Word of God. Dr. Low speaks to the same purpose Complaint of the Church No certain Form of Government is prescribed in the Word P. 64 66. only general Rules laid down for it Bishop Bridges God hath not expressed the Form of Church Government at least not so as to bind us What is here mention'd of Cosins Low and Bishop Bridges I have out of Dean Stillingfleet's Weapon Salve and out of a Learned MS. I have this following passage about Whitaker who making his Remarques on St. Hierom's teling us Whitaker De Ecles Regimin Contr. 4. q. 1. §. 29. p. 540. Col. 2. That the Difference between Presbyters and Bishops was brought in by Men long after the Apostles as a Remedy against Schism assures us That it 's a Remedy almost worse than the Malady for it begat and brought in the Pope with his Monarchy into the Church and this other of Bishop Morton telling the Papists That Power of Order and of Jurisdiction which they ascribe to Bishops doth de jure divino belong to all other Presbyters and particularly Morton 's Apol. Cath. lib. 1. c. 21. p. 55. That to Ordain is the jus antiquum the Ancient Right of Presbyters in fine That Dr. Laurence Humfrey and Dr. Holland Humf. against Campian Jesuit Part 2. p. 273. both of them Doctors of the Chair in Oxford did teach and maintain the same Doctrine Holland in the Act July 9. 1608. concluded that the contrary is most false against the Scriptures the Fathers the Doctrine of the Church of England the Schoolmen Lombard Aquinas Bonaventure c. CHAP. IV. Dr. Willet 's Sentiments much the same with the foremention'd Bishops The Difference between a Bishop and Presbyter as of Divine Right declur'd to be Popish and oppos'd as such The special Consecration of Bishops was Ordained not by a Divine Law but by the Church for the Dignity of their Calling Saravia for no other Difference between a Presbyter and Bishop but in Degree Bancroft for a Priority in degree only holding with Dr. Robinson Dr. Reynolds and Dr. Fulk whose Authorities he insists on to Confirm his Opinion about a Gradual Difference between Bishop and Presbyter TO these I will add another namely In his Life of Willet Dr. Andrew Willet who as Dr. Smith observes is by Bishop Hall numbred amongst those Worthies of the Church of England Hall in his Noah 's Dove to whom he gives this Elogy Stupor mundi Clerus Britannicus This Dr. in his Synopsis Papismi is very large in discussing the Difference between a Bishop and Presbyter and in his Determinations in most things agreeth with the Learned Authors I have already quoted The grand Question under Debate is Willet 's Synops Papism Contr. 5. Quest 3. Concerning the Clergy Append. Whether the Difference between Bishops and other Ministers be grounded upon the Law of God and Institution of the Apostles The Papists Bellarmine saith the Dr. affirmeth Lib. 1. De Clericis c. 14. That the Jurisdiction of Bishops as now it standeth in their Church and the Difference between them and other Presbyters is Jure Divino grounded upon the Law of God and of such necessity that he holdeth the contrary to be Heresie and those to be Hereticks that hold this Difference to arise rather of a Politick Constitution of the Church to avoid Schism than of the Institution of the Apostles yea they hold them to be no Churches at all which are not under the Government of Bishops but of other Overseers and Superintendents Surely I see not
saith one How there can be any Church where there is no Bishop Espenc in 1 Tim. 194. h. The Protestants Of the Difference between Bishops and Priests there are three Opinions The first of Aerius who did hold that all Ministers should be Equal and that a Bishop was not neither ought to be Superiour to a Priest neither that there was any Difference at all between them August de Haeres c. 53. Epiphan Haeres 75. which Opinion of his was counted amongst other Heresies The second Opinion in the other Extream is of the Papists as we have seen that would have not only a Difference but a Princely Pre-eminence of their Bishops over the Clergy and that by the Word of God. The third Opinion is between both that altho' this Distinction of Bishops and Priests as it is now received cannot be directly proved out of Scripture yet it is very good for the Policy of the Church to avoid Schism and to preserve it in Unity Of this Judgment Bishop Jewel against Harding sheweth both Chrysostom Bish Whitgift Ambrose and Hierom to have been And another most Reverend Prelate of our Church in these words I know these Names be confounded in the Scriptures but I speak according to the manner and Custom of the Church ever since the Apostles times which saying is agreeable to that of St. Augustine Epist 19. ad Hieron Secundum c. according to the Names of Honour which the Vse or Custom of the Church hath obtain'd a Bishop is greater than a Priest so that Augustine himself who was no Aerian doth ground this Distinction rather upon Ancient Custom than the Scripture The Difference between the Opinion of P. 275. Aerius on the one part and of Hierom Ambrose Austin Chrysostom on the other lyeth here Aerius would have no difference at all between a Bishop and a Priest the Fathers above allowed a difference holding it to be profitable for the Peace of the Church They only affirm'd That this Distinction was rather Authorized by the Ancient Practice of the Church than by any direct place of Scripture For the proof that a Bishop and Priest were all one in the Apostles time St. Hierom alledgeth divers places of Scripture The second Argument is thus Archbishops and Primates have the same Right of Jurisdiction over other Bishops which Bishops have over simple Priests But their Authority and Jurisdiction is rather grounded upon the Ancient Custom of the Church than any Apostolical Injunction or Institution in Scripture A fourth Argument If the Distinction of Bishops and Priests were by the Commandment and Institution of Christ and his Apostles it should necessarily be enjoyned unto all Churches But this cannot without prejudice of many Reformed Churches be affirmed which have no Bishops tho' they have other Overseers in their stead Wherefore I cannot conclude that this special Form of Ecclesiastical Government is absolutely prescribed in the Word for then all those Churches which have not that Prescript Form whether of Bishops or other should be condemned as Erroneous Churches So then here is a difference between our Adversaries the Papists and us They say it is of necessity to Salvation to be subject to the Pope and to Bishops and Archbishops under him as necessarily prescribed in the Word but so do not our Bishops and Archbishops which is a not able difference between the Bishops of the Popish Church and of the Reformed Churches Let every Church use that Form which best fitteth their state In External Matters every Church is Free not one bound to the Prescription of another so they measure themselves by the Rule of the Word Now to conclude this whole Matter and to speak distinctly of every Point that it may appear how far this Difference in Ecclesiastical Functions is Divine and wherein Humane This I judge may safely without any Contradiction be affirmed that in this Distinction of the Ministers of the Church there is some what Apostolical somewhat also Political First In the calling of Bishops as they are now Ordain'd in some Reformed Church there is somewhat Divine and Apostolical for it cannot be denied but that to have Order in the Church and to have diversity of Degrees and Ministrations to avoid confusion proceedeth from the Institution of Christ This then we say is agreeable to the Institution of Christ that there should be not a Popular Equality but a convenient Superiority and Priority in the Ministers of the Gospel as St. Paul also sheweth First Apostles Secondly Prophets c. Secondly there is somewhat Political and that of two sorts as touching the Politie Ecclesiastical and Civil To the Ecclesiastical Politie in the advancing the Dignity of Bishops these things do appertain First of all St. Hierom saith of Confirmation committed only to Bishops Disce hanc c. Know that this Observation is rather for the Honour of their Priesthood than by necessity of any Law. Hierom. adver Luciferian Secondly The Council of Aquisgrane cap. 8. saith That the Ordination and Consecration of Ministers is now reserved to the Chief Minister Solum propter Authoritatem only for Authority sake lest that the Discipline of the Church being challenged by many should break the Peace of the Church Thirdly The Author of the Book under Hierom's Name De 7. Ordinib saith That the Consecration of Virgins which is not now in use in the Reformed Churches was reserved to the Bishop for Concord sake Fourthly The Jurisdiction of the Church which in time past Hierome saith was committed to the Senate or College of Presbyters was afterward to avoid Schism devolv'd to the Bishop Fifthly S. Ambrose saith 1 Tim. 3. Episcopi Presbyteri c. A Bishop and a Presbyter have but one Ordination for they are both in the Priesthood Whereby it may appear that the Special Consecration of Bishops was since Ordain'd for the Dignity of that Calling And S. Hierom saith That in the Church of Alexandria the Presbyters did make Choice of one Hier. ad Evagr whom they placed in a Higher Degree and called him their Bishop like as if an Army should choose a General or the Deacons should choose an Industrious man whom they make their Archdeacon So it should seem that the very Election of a Bishop in those Days without any other circumstances was his Ordination Sixthly In Hierom's time it was lawful for Priests and Ministers to Preach without further Licence obtain'd from the Bishop as it may appear Distinct 95. c. 6. Qui non vult Presbyteros c. He that will not have a Minister to do that which is commanded him of God that is to Preach would be greater than Christ c. But since to stay the Humour of Contentious and Schismatical Preachers it hath seemed good to the Church to refer the Allowance of Preachers to the Ordinary according to the Decree of the Lateran Council Sub Innocent 3. c. 3. Praeter Autoritatem He that Preacheth privately or publickly without
the Authority of the Bishop let him be Excommunicated Divers other Constitutions have been made in Ecclesiastical Politie for the maintaining the Dignity of Bishops So also the Civil State hath augmented and enlarged the Privileges and Immunities of Bishops which they have rather by the Munificence of Princes than by Divine Authority As first the Division of Provinces and Cities unto Archbishops and Bishops and the limitation of their Jurisdiction was brought in by the consent of Princes Secondly The Revenues and Lands of Bishopricks have been given by Devout and Religious Princes unto Bishops and their Successors and divers Imperial Laws have been made in favour of the Maintenance of the Church Thirdly The Titles of Honour annexed to Bishopricks as that they are created Barons and made Lords of the Parliament-House here in England have been bestowed by the Liberality of the Kings of this Realm not yet above 400 years since Fourthly The Judgment of Matrimonial and Testamentary Causes and of other such like Matters hath been reserved unto Bishops by the Civil and Imperial Authority Thus we see how in Civil Policy the Dignity of Bishops by the favour of Christian Emperors hath been enlarged And hitherto I have shewed what is to be judged Political in the Distinction of Bishops from the rest of the Clergy both as touching the Civil and Ecclesiastical Policy So far Willet out of whom I observe That the Government of the Church is not de jure divino That according to the Scriptures the Office of a Bishop and Priest is the same That a convenient Priority of Order amongst Ministers is Divine and Apostolical That the Powers of Confirmation Ordination and Jurisdiction are reserv'd to the Bishops by Ecclesiastical constitutions only That in the Beginning a Bishop and Presbyter had but one Ordination and the Consecration of Bishops was added since for their greater Dignity In Hierom's days the Election of Bishops without any other circumstances being their Ordination That Priests without a Licence from the Bishop might Preach There is one thing more to be regarded touching the Difference of Bishops and other Ministers for says he We differ from the Papists in two Points First they say That Bishops are not only in a higher degree of Superiority to other Ministers but they are as Princes of the Clergy and other Ministers as Subjects and in all things to be commanded by them Secondly They affirm That Bishops are only properly Pastors and that to them only it doth appertain to Preach and that other Ministers have no Authority without their Licence or Consent to preach at all and that not principally or chiefly but solely and wholly to them appertaineth the Right of Consecrating and giving Orders so that the making the Bishop to be of a distinct Order from the Priest and the denying the Priest to have a Power to Preach without the Bishop's Licence or any hand in Ordination Willet opposeth as Popish Doctrines representing the opposite Notions to have been then held by the Church of England Hitherto the Government of the Church by Bishops lays no claim to a Divine Right On the contrary it 's generally asserted that according to the Scriptures the Priest and Bishop are the same and that the superiority of the Bishop above the Presbyter is only by Ecclesiastick Custom and the Government of the Church now different from what it was in the Apostles days Willet indeed saith That for the sake of Order the Presidence of one above the rest is Divine and Apostolical and towards the latter end of the Queens Reign the Episcopal Government is affirm'd to be Apostolical and a Divine Institution yet not to be de jure divine and unalterable Saravia about the two and thirtieth year of the Queen professeth * Hoc enim pacto fiet magis clarum quid omnes Evangelii ministri inter se habeant commune quid cuique ordini sit peculiare Ea vero in tres partes ego distribuo Prima est Evangelii Praedicatioâ— altera Communicatio sacramentorum tertia Ecclesiasticae Gubernationis authoritas De Divers Grad Minist Evang. p. 15. Quamvis unum idem Evangelii Ministerium sit omnibus Pastoribus Ecclesiae concreditum in hac tertia parte non parva inter eos invenitur Inaequalitas propter diversos Authoritatis Gradus quos primo Dominus statim ab initio postea Apostoli constituerunt p. 7. Primum ab ipso Domino Duos Gradus Evangelii ministrorum institutos videmus quorum alter altero fuit superior p. 25. Consensu totius Orbis Ecclesiarum probatur Episcoporum supra Presbyteros authoritas Quod inde ab Apostolorum temporibus patribus per universum terrarum Orbem factum ab omnibus Ecclesiis legimus usque ad nostra tempora Canonem Apostolorum immutabilem esse judico p. 44. c. 20. That the general Nature of the Evangelical Ministry common both to Bishops and Presbyters containeth these three things 1. The Preaching of the Gospel 2. The Communication of the Sacraments 3. The Authority of Church Government and doth only plead that in this last the Power of Bishops and Presbyters is not equal but the Bishop's Power is principal in Government Whence arises a Diversity of Degrees not of Orders between them and thus much he affirms hath been held by the Fathers of the Church universally ever since the Apostles days and therefore may well be look'd on as an Unchangeable Canon of the Apostles The Difference between Saravia and those who went before him lyeth here Whit gift c. Saravia The Ministry of the Word and Sacraments divinely Instituted and to continue to the End of the World but no particular Form of Government left on Record in Scripture The Superiority of a Bishop above a Presbyter according to St. Hierom rather by Custom of the Church than an Institution of Christ. Not only the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments but the Form of Government instituted by the Lord himself delivered by the Apostles confirm'd by the Observation of the Fathers ought to continue for ever The Superiority in Degree of a Bishop above a Presbyter a Divine Institution and that St. Hierom was in the same Error with Aerius Dico privatam fuisse Hieronymi Opinionem consentaneam cum Aerio Dei verbo contrariam p. 51. A Year or two after Saravia's Book came out Bancroft afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury publisheth a Survey of the pretended Holy Discipline as he calls his Book in the Preface to which he saith That we have a Church Government of our own which is in my conscience truly Apostolical and far to be preferred before any other that is receiv'd this day by any Reformed Church in Christendom And elsewhere in the Book it self P. 105. The Apostles saith he having received the Promise of the Holy Ghost after a short time dipersed themselves by advice into divers Regions and there by painful Preaching and Labouring in the Lord's Harvest they planted no doubt
very many Churches As the number of Christians grew and had their particular Assemblies and Meetings in many Cities and Countries within every one of their Circuits they placed Pastors in every Congregation they ordained certain Apostolical men to be Chief Assisters unto them whom they placed some one in this particular Country and some others in sundry Cities to have the Rule and Oversight under them of the Churches there and to redress and supply such wants as were needful And they themselves after a while and as they grew in age and escaped the Cruelty of Tyrants remained for the most part in some Head City within their Compass to oversee them all both Churches Pastors and Bishops or Superintendents and to give their Directions as occasions required and as they thought it convenient When any of these Apostolical Assistants or of the Apostles themselves died there were ever some worthy Men chosen and appointed to succeed them in those Cities and Countries where they had remained For we may not idlely Dream that when they died the Authority which was given them ceased no more than we may that the Authority of Aaron and of his Natural Sons expired with them besides it is manifest by all Ecclesiastical Histories that many Churches were planted after their Deaths And furthermore it could not be but that some Churches especially under those Apostles that were soonest put to Death were when they died in the same case that Crete was when Titus was sent thither and had therefore as much need of a Titus as Crete had Furthermore who can be accounted to be well in his wits that will imagine that Christ should ordain such an Authority but for some Threescore years especially the same Causes continuing why it was first instituted that were before Nay I may boldly say that there was greater need for the continuance of it afterward For the Apostles having so great Power to work Miracles and by their Prayers to procure from God such strange Executions of his Pleasure upon the contemptuous as did fall upon Ananias and his Wife and I doubt not but in like cases sometimes upon some others their Ruling and Commanding Authority was not so necessary then as it was afterwards when the Power to work Miracles ceased But what should I need to use many words in a matter so apparent After the Death of the Apostles and of their Assistants viz. the Bishops placed by them as is mentioned the Ecclesiastical Histories and the Ancient Fathers have kept the Register of their Names that succeeded sundry of them and ruled the Churches after them as they before had ruled them Whereupon they were called from all Antiquity the Apostles and Apostolical man's Successors This Inequality in the Ministry of the Word hath been approved and honoured by all the Ancient Fathers none excepted by all the General Councils that ever were held in Christendom and by all other Men of Learning that ever I heard of for many Hundred years after the Apostles time saving that Aerius the Heretick an ambitious Person growing into great rage for that he missed of a Bishoprick which he sued for first broached the Opinion which is now so currant amongst his Scholars that there ought to be no difference between a Bishop and a Priest Thus Bancroft who seems to be of the same mind with Saravia about the Apostolicalness of the Inequality and that he means no more P. 390. seems clear from what he urges out of Dr. Robinson Dr. Reynold's and Fulk in favour of his own Opinion and his holding Ordination by Presbyters without a Bishop to be valid I have saith Robinson maintained it in the Pulpit D. Robins Answ Exhib to the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury that the Titles of Honour which we give to Bishops are no more repugnant to the Word of God than it is for us to be called Wardens Presidents Provosts of Colleges And in my Judgment they may with as good Conscience be Governours of their Diocess as we being Ministers may be Governours of Colleges of Ministers Neither do I think that this was a late devised Policy For I am perswaded that the Angel of the Church of Ephesus to whom S. John writeth was one Minister set over the rest For seeing there were many Pastors there why should S. John write to the Angel of the Church of Ephesus and not rather to the Angels if there had been no difference amongst them And if this Presidency had had that Fault which is reproved in Diotrephes as St. Hierom proveth that the Jews had not corrupted the Original Text before Christ's coming Quod nunquam Dominus Apostoli qui caetera crimina arguunt in Sâ—ribis Pharisaeis de hoc crimine quod erat maximum reticuissent So I may say neither would our Saviour who by his Servant reproveth those Disorders which he found in the Seven Churches have passed over this great fault in silence Therefore as Titus was left to Reform the Churches throughout the whole Island of Crete so I am perswaded that in other places some of that Order of Pastors and Teachers which is Perpetual in the Church even in the time of the Apostles had a Prelacy amongst their Brethren and that this Preheminence is approved by our Saviour And if we come any lower tho' the word Episcopus signifie that care which is required of all and in Scripture be applied to all that have charge of Souls yet I do not remember any one Ecclesiastical Writer that I have read wherein that word doth not import a greater Dignity than is common to all Ministers Neither do I think that any old Writer did under the name of Bishop mean the Pastor of every Parish And thus far Dr. Robinson with whom if Master Dr. Reynolds do agree I see not whither the Factioners will turn them For this Dr. in his Book against Hart saith That in the Church of Ephesus tho' it had sundry Elders and Pastors He useth these two words in one signification as by the Sentence going before is manifest to guide it yet amongst those sundry was there one Chief whom our Saviour calleth the Angel of the Church and writeth that to him which by him the rest should know And this is he whom afterwards in the Primitive Church the Fathers called Bishop For c. the name of Bishop common before to all Elders and Pastors of the Church was then by the usual Language of the Fathers appropriated to him who had the Presidentship over Elders Thus are certain Elders reproved by Cyprian Bishop of Carthage for receiving to the Communion them who had faln in time of Persecution before the Bishop had advised of it with them and others Here then you have two for Oxford touching the Language of the Ancient Fathers when they speak of Bishops Now you shall have a Cambridge Man's Opinion I mean Dr. Fulke who in his Confutation of the Rhemish Notes upon the New Testament writeth thus Amongst the
the Polity of the Church appears to me to be thus That tho' Polity in general be necessary to the Church yet it 's not necessary that any one compleat Form of Church Polity be in Scripture Besides it 's his conclusion Sect. 10. p. 82. That neither God's being Author of Laws for Government of his Church nor his committing them unto Scripture is any reason sufficient wherefore all Churches should for ever be bound to keep them without change Again if we did seek to maintain that which most advantageth our own Cause the very best way for us and the strongest against them viz. The Noncons were to hold even as they do That in Scripture there must needs be found some particular Form of Church Polity which God hath instituted and which for that very cause belongeth to all Churches to all times But with any such partial Eye to respect our selves and by cunning to make those things seem the truest which are the fittest to serve our purpose is a thing which we neither like nor mean to follow Wherefore that which we take to be generally true concerning the Mutability of Laws the same we have plainly delivered as being perswaded of nothing more than we are of this that whether it be in matter of Speculation or of Practice no Vntruth can possibly avail the Patron and Defender long and that things most Truly are likewise most behovefully spoken Sect. 11. p. 90. And to make manifest that from Scripture we offer not to derogate the least thing that truth thereunto doth claim in as much as by us it is willingly confess'd that the Scripture of God is a Storehouse abounding with inestimable Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge in many kinds yea even that matters of Ecclesiastical Polity are not therein omitted but taught also albeit not so taught as those other things before-mentioned For so perfectly are those things taught that nothing ever can need to be added nothing ever cease to be necessary These on the contrary side as being of a far other nature and Quality not so strictly nor everlastingly commanded in Scripture but that unto the compleat Form of Church-Polity much may be requisite which the Scripture teacheth not and much which it hath taught become unrequisite sometime because we need not use it sometimes also because we cannot In which respect for my own part altho' I see that certain Reformed Churches the Scottish especially and French have not that which best agreeth with the Sacred Scriptures I mean the Government which is by Bishops inasmuch as both these Churches are faln under a different kind of Regiment which to remedy it is for the one altogether too late and to soon for the other during their present Affliction and Trouble He adds The Matters wherein Church-Polity is conversant P. 92. are the Publick religious Duties of the Church as the Administration of the Word and Sacraments Prayers Spiritual Censures and the like To these the Church stands always bound Laws of Polity are Laws which appoint in what manner these Duties shall be performed In their performance the first thing in Polity required is a Difference of Persons in the Church without which difference those Functions cannot in orderly sort be executed Hereupon we hold That God's Clergy are a State which hath been and will be as long as there is a Church upon Earth necessary by the plain Word of God himself Again where the Clergy are any great Multitude Order doth necessarily require that by Degrees they be distinguished we hold there have ever been and ever ought to be in such case at leastwise two sorts of Ecclesiastical Persons the one subordinate unto the other as to the Apostles in the begining and to Bishops always since we find plainly both in Scripture and in all Ecclesiastical Records other Ministers of the Word and Sacraments have been Moreover it cannot enter into any man's conceit to think it lawful that every man which listeth should take upon him charge in the Church and therefore a Solemn Admittance is of such necessity that without it there can be no Church-Polity These are the Principal and Perpetual parts in Ecclesiastical Polity Thus much in the Third Book where he looks on Church-Polity in the general and some special parts thereof such as a distinction between Bishops and Presbyters and a Subordination of the Presbyter to the Bishop to be agreeable to the Word of God but no compleat form of Church Polity to be found in the Scripture neither are all the Laws of God concerning the Government of the Church Immutable and Everlasting We must go to the Seventh Book for a more distinct account of the Office of a Bishop and the difference between him and a Presbyter where 't is thus But to let go the Name Bishop and to come to the very Nature of that thing Lib. 7. Sect. 2. pag. 5. which is thereby signified in all kinds of Regiment whether Ecclesiastical or Civil as there are sundry Operations Publick so likewise great Inequality there is in the same Operations some being of Principal respect and therefore not fit to be dealt in by every one to whom Publick Actions and those of Good Importance are notwithstanding well and fitly enough committed From hence have grown those different Degrees of Magistrates or Publick Persons even Ecclesiastical as well as Civil Amongst Ecclesiastical Persons therefore Bishops being Chief ones a Bishop's Function must be defined by that wherein his Chiefty consisteth A Bishop is a Minister of God unto whom with permanent continuance there is given not only Power of administring the Word and Sacraments which Power other Presbyters have but also a further Power to Ordain Ecclesiastical Persons and a Power of Chiefty in Government over Presbyters as well as Lay-men A Power to be by way of Jurisdiction a Pastor even to Pastors themselves Those things incident unto the Bishop's Office which do properly make him a Bishop cannot be common unto him with other Pastors Now even as Pastors so likewise Bishops being Principal Pastors aâ—e either at Large or else with Restraint At Large when the subject of their Regiments is indefinite and not tied to any certain Place Bishops with Restraint are they whose Regiment over the Church is contained within some definite local compass beyond which compass their Jurisdiction reacheth not such therefore we always mean when we speak of that Regiment by Bishops which we hold a thing most Lawful Divine and Holy in the Church of Christ But what doth He mean by Chiefty in Government In answer unto this he tells us how far the old Noncons went in the grant of an Inequality and how much further He goeth They which cannot brook saith he the Superiority which Bishops have Sect. 3. p. 6. do notwithstanding themselves admit that some kind of Difference and Inequality there may be lawfully amongst Ministers Inequality touching Gifts and Graces they grant Again a Priority of Order they
deny not but that there may be yea such a Priority as maketh one man amongst many a Principal Actor in those things whereunto sundry of them must necessarily concur so that the same be admitted only during the time of such Actions and no longer The Inequality they complain of is That one Minister of the Word and Sacraments should have a permanent Superiority above another or in any sort a Superiority of Power Mandatory Judicial and Coercive over other Ministers Thus you see how far the old Noncons could go and no farther and immediately after he tells us how much farther the Church of England at that time went for says he By Vs on the contrary side Inequality even such Inequality as unto Bishops being Ministers of the Word and Sacraments is granted a Superiority Permanent above Ministers yea a Permanent Superiority of Power Mandatory Judicial and Coercive over them is maintained a thing Allowable Lawful and Good. In two things Hooker differs from the old Noncons 1. They make the Superiority or Priority of Order to be but Temporary Hooker makes it Permanent 2. They deny the Bishops having a Power over other Pastors that is Mandatory Judicial and Coercive Hooker affirms it There is one thing more to be enquired into viz. whether He grants to Presbyters the Pastoral Office He calls them Pastors and in his very definition of a Bishop makes the Bishop to be a Pastor of Pastors and of Presbyters and he calls the Bishop but Principal Pastor and makes him to have a Chiefty in Regiment above Presbyters as if he held that the Presbyter had some tho' not so great a share in the Government and out of Austin That a Bishop is a Presbyter Superior and in several places a Bishop is of a Higher Degree than a Presbyter And altho' in his Third Book he makes the Episcopal Office to be a part of Church Polity perpetual as tho' the Episcopacy had been de jure Divino and Immutable yet in this Seventh Book in clearing the sense of St. Jerom he is expresly against the Immutability and Unchangeableness of the Bishop's Superiority as if he held it to be Apostolical in the same manner Bishop Downame doth of whom hereafter The words of St. Hierom on which he puts his own Comment are these As therefore Presbyters do know that the Custom of the Church makes them subject to the Bishop which is set over them so let Bishops know that Custom rather than the Truth of any Ordinance of the Lord's maketh them greater than the rest and that with Common Advice they ought to Govern the Church To this Hooker replies To clear the sense of these words therefore Laws which the Church from the beginning universally hath observ'd were some delivered by Christ himself with a Charge to keep them to the worlds End as the Law of Baptizing and administring the Holy Eucharist some brought in afterwards by the Apostles yet not without the special Direction of the Holy Ghost as occasions did arise Of this sort are those Apostolical Orders and Laws whereby Deacons Widows Virgins were first appointed in the Church This Answer to St. Hierom seemeth dangerous I have qualified it as I may by addition of some words of restraint yet I satisfie not my self in my Judgment it would be altered Now whereas Jerom doth term the Government of Bishops by restraint an Apostolical Tradition acknowledging thereby the same to have been the Apostles own Institution it may be demanded how these two will stand together namely That the Apostles by Divine Instinct should be as Jerom confesseth the Authors of that Regiment and yet the Custom of the Church be accounted for so by Jerom it may seem to be in this place accounted the Chiefest prop that upholdeth the same To this we answer That as much as the whole Body of the Church hath Power to ALTER with general consent and upon necessary occasions even the Positive Laws of the Apostles if there be no Commandment to the contrary and it manifestly appears to her that change of times have clearly taken away the very reason of God's first Institution as by sundry Examples may be most clearly proved what Laws the Universal Church might change and doth not if they have long continued without any alteration it seemeth that St. Jerom ascribeth the continuance of such Positive Laws tho' instituted by God himself to the Judgment of the Church For they which might Abrogate a Law and do not are properly said to Uphold to Establish it and to give it Being The Regiment therefore whereof Jerom speaketh being Positive and consequently not absolutely necessary but of a Changeable Nature because there is no Divine Voice which in express words forbiddeth it to be changed He might imagine both that it came by the Apostles by very Divine Appointment at the first and notwithstanding after a sort said to stand in force rather by the Custom of the Church choosing to continue it than by the necessary constraint of any Commandment from the Word requiring Perpetual Continuance thereof Thus Hooker who a little after says Bishops albeit they may avouch with Conformity of Truth that their Authority hath thus descended even from the very Apostles themselves yet the Absolute and Everlasting continuance of it they cannot say that any Commandment of the Lord doth injoyn And therefore must acknowledge that the Church hath Power by Universal Consent upon urgent cause to take it away if thereunto she be constrained through the Proud Tyrannical and unreformable Dealings of her Bishops Wherefore lest Bishops forget themselves as if none on Earth had Authority to touch their States let them continually bear in mind that it is rather the force of Custom whereby the Church having so long found it good to continue under the Regiment of her vertuous Bishops doth still uphold maintain and honour them in that respect than that any such true and Heavenly Law can be shewed by the Evidence whereof it may of a Truth appear That the Lord himself hath appointed Presbyters for ever to be under the Regiment of Bishops in what sort soever they behave themselves This Answer of the Learned Hooker makes it manifest that tho' he held the Institution of Episcopal Superiority to be Apostolical yet he was not of Opinion that 't was unalterable And altho' he held it Apostolical yet suggests as if there had been a Church Government instituted before the Episcopal took place The Apostles of our Lord says he did according unto those Directions which were given them from above erect Churches in all such Cities as received the Word of Truth the Gospel of God All Churches by them erected received from them the same Faith the same Sacraments the same Form of Publick Regiment The Form of Regiment established by them at first was That the Laity or People should be subject unto a College of Ecclesiastical Persons which were in every such City appointed for that purpose These in their Writings
they term sometime Presbyters sometimes Bishops That in process of time the Apostles appointed under them Bishops of an Order Superiour above Presbyters the cause wherefore they did appoint under themselves such Bishops as were not every where at the first is said to have been those Strifes and Contentions for remedy whereof whether the Apostles alone did conclude of such a Regiment or else they together with the whole Church judging it a fit and needful Policy did agree to receive it for a Custom no doubt but being established by them on whom the Holy Ghost was poured in so abundant measure for the ordering of Christ's Church it had either Divine Appointment beforehand or Divine Approbation afterwards This passage of Hooker moves me to think he very much agreed with his most Reverend Metropolitan Archbishop Whit gift who vehemently asserts an actual change of Church Government in the Primitive Times as well as the changeableness of it in all Ages of the Church There are other intimations in this Learned Author which oblige me to conclude that the Church of England was not in his days come to a steady Resolution either about the Nature of a Particular Church infimae speciei or of the whole belonging to the Episcopal Office. Touching the Nature of a Particular Church of the lowest Rank whether Parochial or Diocesan was not much with him for speaking of the Dissimilitudes which in some respects are found to be between the present Bishops and the Bishops in the Primitive times he grants that many things there are in the State of Bishops Lib. 7. Sect. 2. p. 4. which the times have changed saying That many a Parsonage at this day is larger than some ancient Bishopricks were To Men that have any part of Skill what more evident and plain in Bishops than that Augmentation and Diminution in their Precincts Allowances Privileges and such like do make a Difference indeed but no Essential Difference between one Bishop and another But a Learned Nonconformist assures us That he shall try among other things Treatise of Episcopacy chap. 5. pag. 49. whether the Name of a Bishoprick will make a Parsonage and a Diocess to be Ejusdem speciei and whether Magnitude do not make a specifick Difference between the Sea and a Rivulet or a Glass of Water or between a Ship and a Nutshell And I may add that if there be no Essential Difference between a Bishoprick no larger than a Parsonage and a Diocesan Bishoprick the Controversie between the Church of England and generality of Nonconformists may touching Church Government be determined by such Condescensions made by the Church to the Dissenters as are short of an Essential Alteration to Episcopacy Let there be as many Bishopricks as there are considerable Parsonages or Parishes indowed and a Provision made for the Presbyters who are to assist the Bishops in the Government of these little Churches and a Superiority of the Bishop above the Presbyters or a Chiefty in the Regiment will be no longer a bone of Contention As to what belongs to the Episcopal Function as Different from the Presbyters it 's held by some that Ordination Confirmation and Jurisdiction are proper to it Let us see then Hooker's Judgment for the first Point There may be saith he sometimes very just and sufficient Reasons to all Ordination made without a Bishop Lib. 7. Sect. 14. pag. 37. The whole Church Visible being the true-Original-Subject of all Power it hath not ordinarily allowed any other than Bishops alone to Ordain Howbeit as the ordinary course is ordinarily in all things to be observed so it may in some Cases not unnecessary that we decline from the ordinary wayes The Power of Ordination is appropriated to the Bishop by the Churches Allowance and no otherwise and the same Church allowing Presbyters to Ordain their Ordination is Good so that Ordination is not proper to a Bishop quarto modo for it doth not Convenire to him semper soli and therefore he adds in the next Page That we are not simply without Exception to urge a lineal Descent of Power from the Apostles by continued succession of Bishops in every Effectual Ordination Lib. 7. Sect. 6. pag. 14. For the second Point I make not Confirmation part of that Power which hath always belonged only unto Bishops because in some places the Custom was that Presbyters might also Confirm in the absence of a Bishop Touching the last Point How Bishops together with Presbyters have used to Govern the Churches under them Lib. 7. Sect. 7. pag. 17. It is by Zonaras saith he somewhat plainly and at large declared That the Bishop had his Seat on high in the Church above the Residue which were present that a number of Presbyters did always there Assist him and that in the Oversight of the People those Presbyters were after a sort the Bishops Coadjutors The Bishops and Presbyters who together with him governed the Church are for the most part by Ignatius joyntly mention'd They are Counsellors and Assistants of the Bishop Thus this great Man grants That tho' Government in general be necessary to the Church yet no one particular kind of Government is so That the Scriptures do not make the Episcopal Government unalterable That the Power of conferring Orders is not by a Divine Law so appropriate to the Bishops that in no case an Ordination by Presbyters can be valid That the Church Visible is the true-Original-Subject of all Power and can alter the Government of the Church That Confirmation is not essential to the Office of a Bishop That Presbyters have a share in the Government That the Difference between the Bishop and Presbyter is in the Degree the Bishop having a Chiefty in the Government and Presbyters the Bishops Coadjutors Assistants Advisers and Counsellors The Learned Bilson afterwards Bishop of Winchester speaking of the Controversie between the Old Nonconformists and the Church of England Perpetual Government of the Church expresseth himself in these words Thus far we joyn That to prevent Dissention and Confusion there must needs Epistle to the Reader even by God's Ordinance be a President or Ruler of every Presbytery which Conclusion because it is warranted by the Grounds of Nature Reason and Truth and hath the Example of the Church of God before Vnder and after the Law we accept as Irrefutable and lay it as the Ground-work of all that ensueth But whether this Presidentship did in the Apostles times and by their Appointment go round by course to all the Pastors and Teachers of every Presbytery or were by Election committed to One chosen as the fittest to supply that Place so long as He discharged his Duty without blame that is a main point betwixt us But more particularly he adds In the Apostles I observe four things needful for the first Founding and Erecting of the Church and four other Points that must be Perpetual in the Church of Christ These are the Dispensing
the Word Administring the Sacraments Imposing of Hands and guiding the Keys to shut or open the Kingdom of God. The first two must be general to all Pastors and Presbyters of Christ's Church but so do not the other two I have largely debated and made it plain as well by the Scriptures as by other Ancient Writers past all Exception there have always been selected some of greater Gifts than the Residue to succeed in the Apostles Places to whom it belonged both to moderate the Presbyters of each Church and to take the special Charge of Imposition of Hands and this their Singularity in Succeeding and Superiority in Ordaining have been observed from the Apostles times as the Peculiar and Substantial marks of Episcopal Power and Calling The Power of the Keys and Right to Impose Hands by which he always means the Power to Ordain Ministers and Excommunicate Sinners belong unto the Bishop distinguishing him from a Presbyter What the things are Chap. 12. p. 208. which must abide for ever in the Church I shewed before it shall suffice now to rehearse them namely Power to Preach the Word and Administer the Sacraments the Right use of the Keys and Imposition of Hands These four parts for Brevities sake I often reduce to two Branches which are Doctrine and Discipline comprizing in Doctrine the Dividing of the Word and Dispensing of the Sacraments and referring the rest I mean the Publick use of the Keys and Imposition of Hands to the Discipline or Regiment of the Church The Discipline and Government of the Church I mean the Power of the Keys Ch. 12. p. 213. and Imposing of Hands are two parts of Apostolick Authority which must remain in the Church for ever These Keys are double the Key of Knowledge annexed to the Word the Key of Power referred to the Sacraments Some late Writers by urging the one abolish the other howbeit I see no sufficient Reason to countervail the Scriptures and Fathers that Defend and Retain both The Key of Knowledge must not be doubted of our Saviour in express words nameth it Wo be to you Interpreters of the Law for ye have taken away the Key of Knowledge The Key of Power standeth in these words of Christ to Peter I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven c. And likewise to all his Apostles Whatsoever ye bind on Earth P. 218. c. It resteth in this place to be considered to whom those Keys were committed whether Equally to all Presbyters or Chiefly to Pastors and Bishops The like must be done for Imposition of Hands whether that also pertain'd indifferently to all or specially to Bishops This is the State of the Point in Controversie namely Whether the Power of the Keys and that of Imposition of Hands belong Equally and Indifferently to all Presbyters and Bishops or whether they do not belong chiefly and specially to Bishops But whether the one or the other be affirm'd 't will unavoidably follow that these Powers in a sense belong to both Thus much is supposed in the very state of the Question which is not whether these Powers do not at all belong to Presbyters but whether they do belong so much to Presbyters as unto Bishops so that the holding them to belong chiefly and specially unto the Bishop implies that they do tho' in a lesser Degree belong unto Presbyters They appertain both to the Presbyter and Bishop but not Equally to the Bishop chiefly and specially Now Conform hereunto the Learned Bilson saith The Bishop then or President of the Presbyters for I stand not on Names Ch. 14. p. 293. while I discuss their Powers is by Christ's own Mouth pronounced to be the Angel of the Church that is the Chief Steward over God's Houshold and Overseer of his Flock And touching the Presbyter's Power P. 319. He adds That at first the Presbyters sate with the Bishop as Assessors and Consenters before Synods undertook such Causes But after when once Councils began to have the Hearing of Grievances then sate the Presbyters with the Bishop only as Beholders and Advisers of his Judgment The Private use of the Keys in appointing Offenders upon the Acknowledging their Sins P. 317. for a time to forbear the Lord's Table we deny not to Presbyters However the Ambiguity of the Name of Bishop and Community of many things incident and appertinent both to Bishops and Presbyters urged him to lay down certain Peculiar Marks and Parts of the Bishop's Office whereby they are always Distinguished from Presbyters and never Confounded with them either in Scriptures Councils or Fathers There were many Prerogatives says he appropriate unto the Bishop Ch. 13. p. 244. by the Authority of the Canons and Custom of the Church such as Reconciling of Penitents Confirmation of Infants and others that were Baptized by Laying on their Hands Dedication of Churches c. But the things Proper to Bishops which might not be Common to Presbyters were Singularity in Succeeding and Superiority in Ordaining These two the Scriptures and Fathers reserve only to Bishops they never Communicate them to Presbyters The Singularity of one Pastor in every place preserveth the Peace and Unity of the Churches and stoppeth Schisms and Dissentions for which Cause they were first Ordained by the Apostles 246. This is a certain Rule to Distinguish Bishops from Presbyters the Presbyters were many in every City of whom the Presbytery consisted Bishops were always Singular that is one in a City and no more except another intruded which the Church of Christ counted a Schism or else an Helper were given in respect of extream and feeble age in which case the Power of the latter ceased in the presence of the former And this Singularity of one Pastor in each place descended from the Apostles and their Scholars in all the famous Churches of the World by a Perpetual Chair of Succession and doth to this day continue but where Abomination or Desolation I mean Heresie or Violence interrupt it The second assured sign of Episcopal Power is Imposition of Hands to Ordain Presbyters and Bishops for as Pastors were to have some to assist them in their Charge which were Presbyters P. 248. so were they to have others to succeed them in their Places which were Bishops And this Right by Imposing Hands to Ordain Presbyters and Bishops in the Church of Christ was at first derived from the Apostles unto Bishops and not unto Presbyters and hath for these fifteen Hundred Years without Example or Instance to the contrary till this our Age remained in Bishops and not in Presbyters Jerom where he retcheth the Presbyters Office to the uttermost of purpose to shew that he may do by the Word of God as much as the Bishop he excepteth this One Point as unlawful for Presbyters by the Scriptures Quid facit Exceptâ Ordinatione Episcopus quod Presbyter non
facit And whereas 't is objected That Imposition of Hands was by the Presbytery he answereth out of Chrysostom that by the word Presbytery in that place of Scripture must be understood Bishops not Presbyters because Presbyters in the Apostles time did not impose Hands on a Bishop All that we can say for the Power of Bishops above Presbyters out of the Scriptures P. 299. is this That the Holy Ghost by the mouth of St. Paul hath given the Bishop of each Place Authority to Ordain such as be worthy to examine such as be faulty and Reprove and Discharge such as be guilty either of Unsound Teaching and Offensive Living Thus much he saith to Timothy and to Tite and in them to their Successors and to all other Bishops of Christ's Church for ever The Power of Ruling the People is not solely but chiefly in the Bishop P. 304. My meaning says he is soon understood You establish one Chief in your Presbyteries by God's Essential and Perpetual Ordinance to execute that which you decree whom you call a President How far I joyn with you you shall quickly perceive To avoid Tumults and Dissentions God hath Authorized One in each Place and Church Able to have and maintain a Presbytery who with Pastoral and Fatherly Moderation should Guide as well the Presbyters that assist him as the People that are Subject to him according to the Laws of God and Man the Execution whereof is Chiefly committed to his Charge that is the Leader and Overseer of the rest whom we call a Bishop His Power I call a Moderation and not a Domination because the Wisdom of God hath likewise allowed and provided Christian means as well to Bridle him from wrongs as to Direct him in Doubts And whereas the Nonconformist tells him that this is right the Power which they give to their Presbyteries his Answer is Did you not put Lay-Men instead of Pastors to be Presbyters and make them Controulers where they should be but Advisers your Presbyteries might have some use in the Church of God tho' far less now than when they first began And amongst the many uses of Presbyteries P. 307. the Bishop is Positive That at first lest the Bishops only will should be the Rule of all things in the Church the Government of the Church was so proportioned that neither the Presbyters should do any thing without their Bishop nor the Bishop dispose Matters of Importance without his Presbytery He distinguisheth between the Private use of the Keys in Refusing to give the Lord's Supper unto the Impeninent and the Publick use of the Keys whereby the obstinate Person is excluded from all Fellowship of the Faithful as well Sacred as Civil The first belongs to the Presbyter the last was by the Church of God allowed always and only to Bishops So in another place P. 320. For our parts tho' we take the Power of the Keys to be Common to all that have Pastoral Charge of Souls in their Degree yet to avoid the infinite Showers of Excommunication which would overflow all Churches and Parishes and the intolerable Quarrels and Brabbles that would ensue if every Presbyter might Excommunicate without the Bishops consent and Licence we praise the Wisdom of God's Church in suffering no Inferiour to Excommunicate without the Bishop's consent and Licence Thus far this Learned Bishop who urgeth the singularity of Succession and Superiority in Ordination to be the Essential Marks of a Bishop as he differs from a Presbyter yet not divesting the Presbyter of all Governing Power in the Church of Christ His Pleading for a Superiority of Power in the Bishop carries in it the grant of a lesser degree of the same Power as belonging to the Presbyter and the denying Presbyters the Exercise of this Power without the consent of the Bishop is but by an Ecclesiastical Constitution such as that which makes the Reconciling Penitents and Confirmation to be rather Peculiar to the Bishop for the Honour of his Calling than for any Necessity of God's Word Thus I have gone through the Principal Writers about Church Government that were in Queen Elizabeths Reign namely Alley Bishop of Exeter Pilkington Bishop of Duresme Jewel Bishop of Salisbury and Whitgift Archbishop of Canterbury who held that according to the Scriptures there was no Difference between a Presbyter and a Bishop that in Scripture account their Office and Powers were the same and that the Apostles did not leave behind them any one kind of Church Government to be observed throughout all the Churches at all times These were followed by Dr. Cosins Dr. Low and Bishop Bridges The Learned Willet in his Synopsis Papismi a Book Published at least three or four times in Queen Elizabeths Days and afterwards by King James his Special Command doth in most things agree with the Bishops but now mention'd and being more particular than they affirming out of Jerom That Confirmation and Ordination were appropriated to the Bishop rather for the Honour of their Priesthood and the Peace of the Church than by necessity of any Law the same he saith of the Jurisdiction of the Church adding That anciently there were no distinct Consecrations of Bishops The thing wherein he may be supposed to differ from them is that an Inequality amongst the Presbyters and the Presidency of some one above the other for Orders sake he holds to be Apostolical but herein differs not from the Old Nonconformists After these I have given the Judgments of Saravia Archbishop Bancroft the Judicious Hooker and Bishop Bilson who affirm the Government of the Church to be Apostolical Tho' formerly 't was esteemed dangerous to the Civil Government to hold that Church Government must now be the same 't was in the Apostles days yet it 's look'd on by these as what ought to be The Government of the Church with them is a Divine and Apostolical Institution but not Vnalterable Bilson I confess says it is Perpetual and yet Bishop * Downame Defence of his Sermon p. 26. who most willingly and gladly professeth to consent in Judgment with Him P. 2. doth solemnly Declare in these words That although he holds the Calling of Bishops in respect of their first Institution to be an Apostolical and so a Divine Ordinance yet that he doth not maintain it to be Divini Juris as intending thereby that it is Generally Perpetually and Immutably necessary as though there could not be a True Church without it And within a few Pages after this He declares his Opinion to be the same with King James's who doth say That it is granted to every Christian King Prince and Commonwealth to prescribe to their Subjects that Outward Form of Ecclesiastical Regiment which may seem best to agree with the Form of their Civill Government but so as they swerve not at all from the Grounds of Faith and True Religion This saith Downame maketh not against the Government of Bishops as I maintain it Tho'
I hold the Government-Episcopal to be of Apostolical and Divine Institution yet not as Generally Perpetually and Immutably necessary He doth not hold it necessary in all Places nor in all Ages but to be changeable by Man and if herein He and Bilson accord the Perpetuity Bilson is for will admit of a Change. But whether Downame gives us Bilson's Notion when he states his own I will not contend nor is it needful I should It 's enough to my purpose that the difference he placeth between a Bishop and Presbyter is only in Degree that Confirmation and Excommunication belong unto Presbyters and that Bilson's Bishop differs more from the Bishops by Law Established than from the Nonconformist Parish Presbyters Bancroft professes to agree with Robinson Reynolds and Fulk who differed not from the Old Nonconformists and Hooker never thought the Government of the Church to be in all Places and Ages necessarily the same nor did he look on Bishops to be of a Different Order from Presbyters but to be of the same Order differing only in Degree the Bishop having only a Chiefty of Power in the Church nor did any Great Men of the Church of England in Queen Elizabeths time null the Ministry or Church State of the Reformed either in Scotland or beyond the Seas They held their Churches to be true Churches and their Government to be such as agreed with the General Rules of God's Word and tho' some esteemed the Ordination only by Presbyters to be defective yet did not judge it to be Invalid but admitted those who had their Ordination only from Presbyters abroad to Ecclesiastical Promotions on no other terms than their Subscribing the Articles of Religion which concern the Faith and Doctrines of the Sacraments only These Sentiments which our first Reformers entertain'd about Episcopacy are such as would if the Government of the Church be at this time Fram'd accordingly contribute much to the Peace of the Church and Healing our Divisions and seeing they are most admirably copied out unto us in the Learned Archbishop Vsher's Reduction of Episcopacy I will with some Notes present it to the Reader 's more Deliberate Consideration CHAP. VI. Archbishop Usher's Reduction of Episcopacy with some Notes on it The Reduction of Episcopacy unto the Form of Synodical Government received in the Ancient Church proposed in the year 1641. as an Expedient for the prevention of those Troubles which afterwards did arise about the matter of Church-Government Episcopal and Presbyterial Government Conjoyned BY Order of the Church of England all Presbyters are charged to administer the Doctrine and Sacraments The Book of Ordination and the Discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded and as this Realm hath received the same And that they might the better understand what the Lord had commanded therein Ibid. ex Act. 20.27 28. the Exhortation to St. Paul to the Elders of the Church of Ephesus is appointed to be read unto them at the time of their Ordination Take heed unto your selves and to all the Flock among whom the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers to Rule the Congregation of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so taken in Mat. 2.6 Revel 12.5 19.15 which he hath purchased with his Blood. Notes Thus it was in the Old Book of Ordering Priests and Deacons but on the Restauration of Charles II. there were such Alterations made in the Books of Common Prayer and Ordering Bishops Priests and Deacons as do plainly shew that tho' heretofore the Presbyters had Power to Rule yet now they have none In the Act of Vniformity 14 Car. 2. it is Declared That the King's Majesty according to his Declaration of 25. October 1660. granted his Commission under the Great Seal of England to several Bishops and other Divines to Review the Book of Common Prayer and to prepare such Alterations and Additions as they thought fit to offer And afterwards the Convocations of both the Provinces of Canterbury and York being by his Majesty called and Assembled and now sitting his Majesty hath been pleased to Authorize and require the Presidents of the said Convocations and other the Bishops and Clergy of the same to Review the said Book of Common Prayer and the Book of the Form and Manner of the making and Consecrating of Bishops Priests and Deacons And that after mature Consideration they should make such Additions and Alterations in the said Books respectively as to them should seem meet and convenient And should Exhibit and Present the same to his Majesty in Writing for his further Allowance or Confirmation since which time upon full and mature Deliberation they the said Presidents Bishops and Clergy of both Provinces have accordingly Reviewed the said Books and have made some Alterations which they think fit to be inserted to the same and have Exhibited and Presented the same unto his Majesty in Writing All which his Majesty having duly considered hath fully Approved and Allowed the same and recommended to this present Parliament The Books thus altered were by this Parliament confirm'd and established and the Alterations such as make the Office of the Presbyter quite another thing than it was before for tho' in the old Book of Ordering Bishops Priests and Deacons the Reading unto the Presbyters at the time of their Ordination Acts 20.27 28. did put it out of Doubt that the Presbyters were vested with the Pastoral Office having Power given 'em to Rule the Church In the new Book this Exhortation is removed from the Presbyters Ordination unto the Consecration of Bishops thereby manifestly Evincing the Pastoral Power to be taken from the Presbyter and feated with the Bishop only and accordingly the name Pastor which was in the old Book given unto the Presbyter is in the new omitted and in several places the word Curate or Priest substituted in its stead and whereas in the old Book the Presbyter was admitted to the Ministry of Priesthood in the new it 's to the Order and Ministry of Priesthood thereby making Priesthood an Order distinct from those of Deaconship and Episcopacy In the Consecrating of Bishops in the Collect to shew what they mean by Bishop more than formerly it 's added by way of Explication to all Bishops the Pastors of thy Church and in the Prayer for the Bishop Almighty God c. in the old Book 't was Replenish him so with thy Truth that He may faithfully serve thee in this Office to the Edifying of thy Church in the new it is to the well Governing thy Church And when the Archbishop and other Bishops present do lay their Hands on the Elected and according to the old Book were to say Receive the Holy Ghost c. in the new it 's added for the Office and Work of a Bishop Now committed unto thee by the Imposition of our Hands in the Name of the Father c. Thus the Alterations by Law establshed do clearly shew that both the Name and Office of a Pastor is
taken from the Presbyter and transferr'd over to the Diocesan who alone hath the Power of Ordering Priests and Deacons and of Governing or Ruling the Church whence it follows that as there is but One Pastor in a Diocess there is but one Church That all Parish-Assemblies are but parts or parcels of this One single Church under the Conduct and Government only of the Diocesan Bishop their only Pastor That all Ordinations by Presbyters are of no greater Validity than those by Deacons or Lay-men and therefore altho' Ordination is no more to be repeated than Baptism yet those who have had their Ordination only by Presbyters must be Ordained again or not admitted unto any Benefice nor allowed the Exercise of the Priestly Office nor be esteemed Lawful Priests so that as there is a vast Difference between Queen Elizabeth's Bishops and Charles the Second's so between Queen Elizabeth's Law and King Charles's Q. Elizabeth's Act runs thus That every Person under the Degree of a Bishop which doth or shall pretend to be a Priest or Minister of God's Holy Word and Sacraments by reason of any other Form of Institution Consecration or Ordering than the Form now used in the Reign of our most Gracious Soveraign Lady shall declare his Assent and subscribe to all the Articles of Religion which only concern the Profession of the true Christian Faith and the Doctrine of the Sacraments comprised in a Book Entituled Articles c. viz. 39 Articles upon pain that every such Person which shall not subscribe shall be ipso facto deprived and all his Ecclesiastical Promotions shall be void as if he had been naturally dead King Charles his Law is thus That no Parson who now is Incumbent and in the Possession of any Parsonage or Benefice and who is not in Holy Orders by Episcopal Ordination or shall not be before the said Feast-day of St. Bartholomew Ordained Priest or Deacon shall have hold or enjoy any Parsonage with Cure but shall be utterly disabled and ipso facto deprived of the same and all his Ecclesiastical Promotions shall be void as if he had been naturally dead Touching Persons ordained by any other Form than the Episcopal a Subscription to the Articles was sufficient by 13 Eliz. c. 12. to Qualifie them for Spiritual Promotion and Whittingham's whose Ordination was only by Presbyters abroad was esteemed good and he enjoyed his Benefice to the day of his death as Traverse in his Supplication to the Council affirms but tho' the Articles be subscribed unto by one having only an Ordination by Presbyters he must be ordained by the Bishop or not admitted to any Ecclesiastical Promotion or if admitted he is ipso facto deprived and whoever consults the Book of Ordering Presbyters will find that the whole of it plainly declares that the former Odination of the Person thus re-ordained was invalid and null and that till now he was never of the Presbyters Office for the Ordination of one never before ordained and the Ordination of him who was formerly ordain'd by Presbyters is the same Whether I am right in these my Sentiments I appeal to the Right Reverend and Reverend Bishops and others of the Dignified Clergy who with the greatest importunity are desired to declare their Judgments in this Matter To know what the Government of the Church of England is that is by Archbishops Bishops and what is the Office of a Presbyter what that of a Bishop is a matter of extraordinary importance If it be the same it was in Edward the Sixth and Queen Elizabeth's days which is the same with what the Learned Archbishop Vsher was for the greatest Bone of Contention between the Cons and Noncons will be removed farther Every Parish-Presbyter will be granted to be a Pastor vested with a Right to Rule the Church from whence saith the Learned Archbishop the name of Rector also was given unto him at first and to administer the Discipline of Christ as well as to dispense the Doctrine and Sacraments and the difference between the Bishop and the Presbyter to be only in Degree and not in Order as this Learned Primate ever held as he saith in an Answer to an abusive Report that went abroad of him I have ever declared my Opinion to be saith he That Episcopus Presbyter gradu tantum differunt non Ordine and consequently that in places where Bishops cannot be had the Ordination by Presbyters standeth valid and Dr. Bernard in his Animadversions on the Archbishop's Opinion asserts That in this Judgment he was not singular Dr. Davenant that Pious and Learned Bishop of Salisbury consents with him in it Determinat Q. 42. produceth the Principal of the Schoolmen Gulielmus Parisiensis Gerson Durand c. Episcopatus non est Ordo praecise distinctus à Sacerdotio simplici c. non est alia potestas Ordinis in Episcopis quà m Presbyteris sed inest modo perfectiori And declares it to be the general Opinion of Schoolmen c. And whereas the Primate saith That in Cases of Necessity where Bishops cannot be had the Ordination by Presbyters standeth valid Bishop Davenant concurs with him also and produceth the Opinion of Richardus Armathanus one of this Primate's Predecessors and one of the most Learned men in his time to be accordingly To which divers others might be added as in special Dr. Field sometimes Dean of Glocester in his Learned Book of the Church where this Judgment of the Primate Lib. 3. c. 39. lib. 5. c. 27. and the Concurrence of Bishop Davenant's is largely confirmed But that Book Entituled The Defence of the Ordination of the Ministers of the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas maintained by Mr. Archdeacon Mason against the Romanists who wrote also a Defence of Episcopacy and of the Ministry of the Church of England is fufficiently known and I have been assur'd it was not only the Judgment of Bishop Overal but that he had a Principal hand in it He produceth many Testimonies the Master of the Sentences and most of the Schoolmen Bonaventure Thomas Aquinas Durand Dominicus Soto Richardus Armachanus Tostatus Alphonsus à Castro Gerson Canisius to have affirmed the same and at last quotes Medina a Principal Bishop of the Council of Trent who affirm'd That Jerom Ambrose Augustine Sedulius Primasius Chrysostome Theodoret Theophylact were of the same Judgment also In a word if the Ordination of Presbyters in such places where Bishops cannot be had were not valid the late Bishops of Scotland had a hard Task to maintain themselves to be Bishops who were not Priests for their Ordination was no other What Dr. Bernard mentions about the Archbishop's dislike of the late Prerbyterians here in England is not so much against their Exercising the Power as the Manner of their Exercise they did not add to the Imposition of Hands Receive the Holy Ghost c. nor so much as these words Be thou a faithful Dispenser of the Word of God and of his
Cowell affirms That in our Common Law Rector Ecclesioe Parochialis is he that hath the Charge or Cure of a Parish-Church qui tantum Jus in Ecclesia Parochiali habet quantum Proelatus in Ecclesiâ Collegiatâ That a Parson and Rector were anciently the same So †Lib. 4. Tract 5. ca. pri Bracton Sciendum quod Rectoribus Ecclesiarum Parochialium competit Assisa qui institui sunt per Episcopos Ordinarios ut Personae Lindwood holds the same For De Praesump c. ne Lepra Sect. quod si ver Personatus as he avers That in aliquibus locis Rectores Ecclesiarum vocantur Personae so he is as express that haec dictio Personae est vulgare Anglicorum ponitur pro Rectore Wats in his Glossary observing the Word Personatus in Otho's Constitutions delivered by Matthew Paris in Henry the Third's days In quibus locis omnibus accipitur pro Rectoria quam a Parsonage vocamus and in Pope Innocent's Letter to the Abbot of St. Albans assures us that it signifies a Rectory and the Persona or Parson is the Rector De Confes Personar Cleric Quod in quodan ver Persona John de Athon in his Commentary on Otho's Constitutions on the Word Personae saith i.e. Rectores loquitur enim secundum vulgare Anglicorum Lindwood It is also clear from anciently acknowledged rish-Church and therefore that Vicars Perpetual were to be Rectors or Governours of the Paon the Constitution of Simon Langham where it 's Ordain'd That Nullus Rector presume to sell those Tithes of his Church not yet received Nullus Rector supple vel Vicarius ubi est Perpetuus De Consuet c. Nullus Rector ver Nullus Rector before the Annunciation of the Blessed Mary it must be understood also of Vicars Perpetual And John de Athon is very large in discussing and positive in determining it Credo respectu Rectorum Vicarium dici Intitulatum respectu vero aliorum nominare debet Rectorem Constit Otho de Instit Vicarior verb. ad Vicar For saith he out of Innocent's Extrav though if you consider a Vicar Perpetual with respect to his Rector whose Vicar he is he is not called a Rector yet if compared with others he is a Rector It 's then very plain That anciently every Parson and Vicar Perpetual were called Rectors or Governours and why but because they were vested with a Right to Govern their Churches notwithstanding which it cannot now be inferr'd that those who still bear the Name of Rector are Governours of the Church For the ancient Constitution of the Church is not only altered whereby Parish Presbytens Parsons Rectors and Vicars Perpetual have lost all their ancient Power of Ruling but by reason of Impropriations mere Laicks ever since the Statute of Dissolution that took away Appropriations from the Church have been Parsons and Rectors but not Rulers of the Church Sir Henry Spelman very Learnedly doth prove Of Tithes c. 29. That after the Appropriations the Parsonage still continues Spiritual as well in the Eye of the Common Law as of the Canon Law for if it became Temporal by Appropriation then were it within the Statute of Mortmaine and forfeited by that Act and as it continues Spiritual it must be made to a Spiritual Person and not Temporal Spiritual Things and Spiritual Men being Co-Relatives that cannot in Reason be divorced However we see that de facto Lay-men are possess'd of these Spiritual Impropriations and thereby are become the Parsons and Rectors and the Ecclesiastical Incumbent who hath the Cure of Souls is his Vicar who although according to the Ancient Dialect might be called Rector when compared with others yet not with respect to the Lay-man the Parson or Rector of the Parish He that hath the Parsonage or Rectory is the Parson or Rector and that is the Lay-Impropriator Besides according to what hath been offer'd in the first Note it 's plain that now no Governing Power is left with the Parish-Presbyter He is not only denied the Exercise of such a Power but diversted of the Power it self and if any of 'em have the Name of Rector left'em it 's vox praeterea nihil If in this I am mistaken the Fathers of the Church are humbly desired to tell the World so but whether I am mistaken or no the restoring the Parish-Presbyters to the ancient Power of Rectors and the Exercise of it will be a great step towards the healing our Breaches especially if what the ancient Chorepiscopi whom I must again mention who were but Presbyters enjoyed may be allowed them Of whom more in my Notes under the next Proposition II. Whereas by a Statute in the Six and Twentieth Year of King Henry the Eighth revived in the First Year of Queen Elizabeth Ch. 14. Suffragans are appointed to be erected in Twenty Six several places of this Kingdom the Number of them might very well be conformed unto the Number of the several Rural Deanries into which every Dioces is sub-divided which being done the Suffragan supplying the place of those who in the ancient Church were called Chorepiscopi might every Month assemble a Synod of all the Rectors or incumbent Pastors within the Precinct and according to the major part of their Voices conclude all Matters that shall be brought into Debate before them Notes The Suffragans appointed to be erected in the Twenty Sixth Year of Henry the Eighth were to be consecrated by the Archbishop and Two other Bishops or Suffragans and by them admitted to the Episcopal Dighity but yet were not to use have or execute any Jurisdiction or Episcopal Power or Authority within their said Sees nor within any Diocess or place of this Realm or elsewhere within the King's Dominions but only such Jurisdiction Power and Authority as shall be Licensed and Limited to them to take do and execute by a Commission from the Bishop of the See in which he is a Suffragan nor were they to use any Jurisdiction Ordinary or Episcopal Power otherwise nor longer time than limited by such Commission These were the Suffragans appointed to be erected by Henry the Eighth who though Consecrated and Ordained to the Episcopal Dignity yet must exercise no other Episcopal Power than was delegated to 'em by the Diocesan's Commission which was a very precarious and uncertain thing This Learned Archbishop doth therefore move that instead of this sort of Suffragan we might have men to supply the place of the ancient Chorepiscopi who were not at first under such Limitations tho without Episcopal Consecrations they were vested with the Powers and Authorities of City Bishops and that they might be conform'd to the Number of Rural Deanries A motion which if closed with by the Church of England would no doubt touching this part of the Controversie about the Government of the Church heal the Division and the Church in her Condescention herein would conform unto an ancient Practice of the
Church recogniz'd by all to be common at least in the Third Century For though Bishop Parker will not admit them to have been in the Church till the Fourth Century because no mention of 'em in any Record before the Council of Ancyra sat which notwithstanding what Angelocrator avers who would have it be after the Council of Nice because Vitalis Bishop of Antioch the first named amongst the Bishops that sate in it was not made a Bishop before the Year 331. it 's generally held to be in the Year 314. And it 's not easie to imagine that these Chorepiscopi could in so short a time spring out of Nothing and arrive to that height they were at An. 314 or as others 308. Besides there were several Chorepiscopi in the Council of Nice that was but Ten or Twelve Years after this and Rabanus Maurus Seven or Eight Hundred Years ago produced an Apostolical Argument to prove that they were as ancient as City Bishops For says he in the Book which Damasus the first wrote on the desire of Hierome the Presbyter it 's affirm'd That Linus and Cletus by the Commandment of St. Peter Ordained Presbyters who yet succeeded him not in the Apostolical Chair Clemens being by the Order of this blessed Apostle made his Successor And saith Maurus from hence it is that the Chorepiscopi as I suppose had their Rise and have ever since continued in the Catholick Church who being Ordained by their own Bishops by their Commandment did Ordain Presbyters Deacons and other Inferior Degrees and discharge all the other Offices belonging to Priesthood So far Rabanus They were but Presbyters and yet did Ordain and Exercise Episcopal Jurisdiction That they did at first exercise Episcopal Jurisdiction in the Countrey is clear from the 13th Canon of the Council of Ancyra which according to Zonaras and Balsaman is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Exactly translated by Gentianus Hervetus Chorepiscopos non â—icere Presbyteros vel Diaconos Ordinare sed nequeVrbis Presbyteros nisi cum literis ab Episcopo permissum fuerit in aliena Parochia This as Bishop Parker confesseth is the most correct Copy That it shall not be lawful for Countrey Bishops to Ordain Presbyters or Deacons nor yet for City Presbyters without the permission of their Bishop Only he omits this material Expression in another Parish or Diocess which Words do greatly confound the Learned Archbishop of Paris De Marca who will therefore have the Greek Copy corrected Quid est illud in aliena Paraeciâ ac si Chorepiscopis libera esset Ordinatio Presbyteri in sua Paraecia sine literis De Marc. de Concord Sacer. Imper. l. 2. c. 14. Sect. 1 2. What is the meaning of these words saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in alienae paroicia as if it had been lawful for-the Chorepiscopi to Ordain Presbyters in their own Precincts without the leave of the city-City-Bishop He will therefore have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in unaquâque Paraecia which agrees not only with the Translation of Dionysius Exiguus but with an ancient Copy in the Library at Oxford P. 140. as Thorndike of the Right of the Church reports who can make no Sense of De Marca's Emendation For says he can the Reading of the last words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seem probable to Reasonable Persons What Consequence of Sense is there in saying unless License be granted in every Parish Which is plain when it is said That the City-Presbyters do nothing in the Parish that is in the Countrey or Diocess without Authority by the Bishop's Letters So far Thorndike who is for the blotting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of Zonara's and Balsanion's Copy and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of the Copy at Oxford and who agrees with De Marca in adding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Canon and prefers Isidore Mercator's Translation before the Original Greek and have it thus Vicariis Episcoporum quos Graeci Chorepiscopos vocant non licere Presbyteros vel Diaconos Ordinare sed nec Presbyteris Civitatis sine Episcopi Praecepto amplius aliquid Imperare vel sine Autoritate Literarum ejus in unaquaque parochia aliquid agere Whereby contrary to all Rule by Addition Mutilation c. they impose a Sense directly contradicting the express Words of the Canon which is done in so gross a manner that Thorndike himself was compell'd to acknowledge Right of the Church pag. 141 142. That for his part he doth not believe that we have the true Reading of this Canon in any Copy that he hath heard of or seen But why is Thorndike who is followed by Dr. Hammond and Bishop Parker all differing from Queen Elizabeth's Old Episcopal Divines so concern'd to oppose the Universally Receiv'd Copies of Zonaras and Balsamon but because do they what they can it may be easily inferr'd that before the Council of Ancyra the Chorepiscopi did ordain Presbyters c. that afterwards they might do it in their own Parishes without leave in other Parishes with leave or at least in their own Parishes with leave Thus much is the Import of Zonara's Balsamon's and the Oxford Copies one of which must be receiv'd notwithstanding any thing hitherto oppos'd unto ' em The whole that Thorndike hath laid in against us narrowly look'd into comes to nothing The Reasons why our Copy is to be suspected saith he are these 1. In an Arabick Paraphrase now extant in the Oxford Library there is nothing to be found of that Clause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Isidore Mercator's Translation which seems to be that which was anciently received in the Spanish Churches before Dionysius Exiguus wherewith that Copy agreed which Hervetus translated as also Fulgentius his Breviate which Pope Adrian the first followed hath only this Vicariis Episcoporum quos Graeci Chorepiscopos vocant c. ut supra 3. Can the Reading of the last words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seem probable c. ut supra 4. Seeing this is that which is afterwards provided for by the Council of Laodicea Cap. LVI in the same Subject it seems very probable that this should be the provision which the Council of Ancyra intended as all Ignatius his Epistles and other Canons Apost XL. Arelat XIX express it To all which I reply 1. The Greek Copy compared with Translations having the Reputation of an Original is not to be neglected though in the Arabick Paraphrase the Clause about City Presbyters is omitted for it might be either negligently or willingly done Besides if this Clause had never been in the Original there still remains enough to carry our Point in that as we shall hereafter prove the Chorepiscopi were but Presbyters and yet by the other parts of this Canon had power to ordain both Presbyters and Deacons at least with the permission of the City-Bishop To the Second touching Isidore's Translation which differs from Hervetus's and Dionysius Exiguus's as well as from every Greek Copy cannot be
of strength enough to invalidate an Original any more than the Vulgar or any other Translation of the Bible can blast the Reputation of the Originals either of the Old or New Testament What hath been already urged about de Marca's disgust against 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Thorndike's quarrel with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a sufficient Answer to his Third Argument For if the Canon hath any meaning be it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or be there an Omission of this Expression it cannot but be granted that before this Council the Chorepiscopi did Ordain Presbyters and Deacons without the City-Bishop's leave and afterwards with it To the Fourth that the Council of Laodicea did many Years after this make the same Provision hath nothing of Argument in it to prove That the Council of Ancyra did so long before Laodicea's doing It now seeing it 's not by way of confirmation of an anteceding Decree is a sufficient intimation that Ancyra did it not However seeing Thorndike will provoke us to consult this 56th or rather 57th Canon of Laodicea to it we will go which on a diligent search we find to run thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hervetus renders it thus Quod non oportet in vicis pagis Episcopos constitui sed Periodeutas hoc est Circumcursentores Dionysius Exiguus Quod non oporteat in Villulis vel in Agris Episcopos constitui sed Visitores Isidore Mercator thus Non oportet in Villis vicis Episcopos Ordinari sed Visitatores i. e. qui Circumeant Constitui No Bishops ought to be appointed in the Countrey Towns or Villages but Visitors Neither of these take notice of the Various Reading for it may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so be thus translated For the future there shall not be Ordained in Countrey Places any Bishops or Periodeutae or Visitors making the Periodeutae and Countrey Bishops the same as De Marca though he observes not this various Reading does Vnde Constanter asserere audeo eundem esse Chorepiscopum Periodeutum and as the same De Marca further observes these Periodeutae were only Presbyters as in the 4th Action of the Council of Chalcedon mention is made of Alexander Presbyter and Periodeuta and in the 11th Action of Valentine Presbyter and Periodeuta whence I infer that it 's clear from this and the following parts of the Canon that till this Council Presbyters were not so very much under the Power of the Bishops but could act according to their own discretion without consulting the City-Bishops The Canon is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and thus rendred by Hervetus Eos autem qui prius constituti fuerunt nihil agere sine mente Episcopi qui est in Civitate clearly enough insinuating that until this Council the Chorepiscopi the Periodeutae who were but Presbyters did act in the Country as they judged meet without consulting the Bishop of the City and it 's well known that their work was to Ordain Presbyters Deacons c. Thus much may suffice to vindicate what we have drawn from the Council of Ancyra to establish the Power of the Chorepiscopi who agreeably enough to the 13th Canon of this Council might exercise Episcopal Jurisdiction in their own Precinct without the leave of the City-Bishop and with his Permission they might do so out of their own Charge even in the City To proceed it 's very clear that long after this time yea long after Damasus this Severity against the Chorepiscopi and Leo the Third's Attempt to suppress and banish them when Charles the Great sent Arno Invavensis to know the mind of his Holiness about them they continued in the Exercise of their Office governing the Country-Churches ordaining Presbyters c. And altho' Hincmarus as Baluzius in de Marca out of Flodoardus his History observes De Marca de Concord lib. 2. c. 13 14. wrote bitterly against those City-Bishops that had 'em in their Dioceses Fbodoard Hist Remenf lib. 3. c. 29. yet Rabanus Maurus pleads as warmly in their Defence In Histor Lansiaca apud Palladium c 106. Legimus Elpidium Monachum Presbyterum ordinatum à Timotheo Chorepiscopo Chorepiscopos in Ecclesiis vacantibus innuit Hugo Flaviniac an 776. Bercarius in Hist Episcop Verdanensium n. 13. Post hunc Episcopatus istius Ecclesiae per 12. annos vacuus extitit sed quidem servus Dei Amalbertus nomine juxta morem illius temporis Chorepiscopus factus ipsam regebat Ecclesiam For all these see Du Fresne's Glossary ver Chorepiscopus and they were continued in France and elsewhere Elpidrus a Monk was or dained Presbyter by Timothy a Country Bishop Amalbertus a Chorepiscopus governed the Church of Verdun during a Vacancy of twelve years consecrated Churches confirm'd Children c. as may be seen in Rudolphus his Life of Rabanus Maurus and in De Marca That the Chorepiscopi did exercise the Episcopal Power altho ' they were but Presbyters may plainly be seen in the Decrees that were against 'em interdicting their presuming so to do for time to come 'T was this that fill'd the Soul of Damasus 1. Vid. Epist 5. Damasi 1. Prospero Numidiae primae sedis Episcopo Leoni reparato c. with so much indignation against them that they being but Presbyters presumed to discharge the Episcopal Office And for this very reason it was that Leo the Third in Answer unto the Question mov'd by Charles the Great condemn'd them to Banishment as may be seen in the select Ecclesiastical Capitula of Charles the Great where it 's very clear that tho' the French Prelates mitigated somewhat of the Rigour of the Pope's severe Decree against them yet concurr'd so far with him as to Ordain that the Country-Bishops do no more enter on the Execution of the Episcopal Office ita ut amplius nihil de Cpiscopali ministerio praesumerent and they decreed That no Country-Bishop presume by Imposition of Hands to give the Holy Ghost to any or Consecrate any Priest Levite or Subdeacon And tho' these Capitula do null and make void all the Ordinations and Consecrations of the Chorepiscopi Nicholas the First doth ratifie and confirm them Vide. Epist 15. Nichol. 1. Tit. 1. as may be seen in his Epistle to Radolfus and thus he did for the very Reason the Capitula as well as Leo and Damasus did damn them Damasus says that they are the same with Presbyters because they are instituted according to the Form of the Seventy Disciples who were never vested with Jura Episcopalia Tit. 4. c. 3. so Leo and the select Capitula of Charles the Great the Chorepiscopi are not Chief Priests nor Bishops neither do any of the Episcopal Rights belong unto them seeing they were instituted according to the Form of the Seventy for which
cause let no one say Et ne alicui talis Ordinatio vel Confirmatio aut Consecratio Reiteratio esse videatur That when any of those who have been Ordained by the Chorepiscopi are afterwards Ordained by the City-Bishop that they were Re-ordained but let 'em attend that Saying Quod non ostenditur gestum ratio non sinit ut videntur iteratum And Pope Nicholas 1. gives this as a Reason why he judges their Ordination valid The Chorepiscopi were such as the Seventy sent out by our Lord Jesus who without doubt were vested with the Episcopal Power But tho' these Papal Determinations are different yet they agree in witnessing to this Truth That the Chorepiscopi exercis'd Episcopal Authority De Marca proves the same out of the Arabian Canons translated by Alfonsus Pisanus and from the last words of the Canon of Antioch Dr. Parker himself makes no doubt of it for says he That these Chorepiscopi had the Character of Proper Bishops Parker's Account p. 154. appears plainly from the tenth Canon of Antioch that allows them to Ordain the inferiour Officers of the Church This of Bishop Parker doth exactly agree with the 55. Chapter of Nice as translated out of Arabick by Turrianus the Jesuit When the Chorepiscopus visits the Churches and Monasteries under his Power let him gather together the Elders of Castles and expound unto 'em the Holy Scriptures and enquire whether they have any Sons or Daughters and give order that they be brought unto him that he may sign 'em pray over them impose Hands on 'em bless and institute Ministers that is say the Notes on this Chapter Lectores Exorcistae Hypodiaconi And that these Chorepiscopi were but of the same Order with Presbyters and were no otherwise Bishops than as all other Presbyters are is as clear for their Ordination was by one Bishop only not by three and when they entred on the Exercise of the Episcopal Power they had no new Consecration as may be seen in the 54. Chapter of Nice translated out of the Arabick where Turrianus renders it thus Et debet Episcopus vid. Civitatis recitare super electum scil Chorepiscopum Orationem consuetam Chorepiscopus non ordinabatur sed per oraticnem benedicebatur Benedicere illi dareque illi nomina omnium Ecclesiarum Monasteriorum qua sub Potestate ejus sunt The Notes on this Chapter have it that they were not consecrated anew to the Office of a Country-Bishop but only by the Prayer of the City-Bishop blessed Damasus 1. expresly affirms them to be but Presbyters in these words Quod ipsi iidem sunt qui Presbyteri sufficienter invenitur quia ad formam exemplum septuaginta inveniuntur prius instituti The select Capitula of Charles the Great concurring with Leo the Third Tit. 4. c. 3. and speaking of the Episcopal Rights say the same Haec verò non à Presbyteris vel Chorepiscopis qui ambo unius formae esse videntur Besides such were some of the Ancient Canons decreeing that there should be but one Bishop in a Diocess and he only in the City that made it necessary for some of those who anciently would have the Bishops to be of an Order superiour above Presbyters to hold that these Chorepiscopi tho' they had the name of Bishop given 'em and were vested with the Jura Episcopalia were but Presbyters usurping on the Episcopal Office so Damasus Leo and many French Bishops in Charles the Great 's days and it hath also put some later Writers such as Bellarmine Boverius in his Paraenetic Censure of de Dominis Archbishop of Spalato's Book de Rep. Eccles and De Marco to phansie that some made Chorepiscopi were formerly Consecrated to the Episcopal Dignity and that others were but Presbyters and thus by distinguishing the Office from the Person they hoped to extricate themselves but as Dr. Parker well observes Pag. 158. This is precariously said without any shadow of Pretence for it but meerly to salve his own Hypothesis Others Thorndike of Rights of Church p. 146. such as Thorndike are driven to the Invention of another Distinction which is between the Solemnity which an Act is executed with and the Power and Authority by which it is done And that it cannot be prejudicial to any Power to do that by another which seemeth not fit to be immediately and personally executed by it Some Acts of the Primitive Church seem to require this Distinction as the making of Presbyters by the Chorepiscopi or countrey-Countrey-Bishops mentioned in the ancient Greek Canons Which by all likelihood were not properly Bishops because not Heads of a city-City-Church which is the Apostolical Rule for Episcopal Churches Thus Thorndike who differs greatly from the generality of his Brethren who hold that though the Potestas Jurisdictionis may be delegated to one that is not a Bishop yet the Potestas Ordinis cannot However it must be acknowledged that there is a great difference between a Presbyter's Ordaining other Presbyters with the leave of the Bishop and his doing it by a Power derived from the Bishop One vested with a Power may not be able to exercise it without the leave of another and yet when he hath leave he then exercises a Power inherent in himself virtute officii The Bishops themselves cannot exercise the Power of Orders without the leave of the Supreme Civil Magistrate and now that they do exercise it 't is with his leave but it does not therefore follow that the Power of Orders is derived from the Supreme Magistrate to the Bishop In the Council of Ancyra it 's not said That the Presbyter shall not Ordain Presbyters unless the Bishop delegates unto him a Power enabling him so to do but he shall not exercise this Power without the consent of the Bishop which was enjoyned by the Canon to prevent Schisms and Divisions in the Church So that I cannot see how this Distinction of Thorndike so applauded by Dr. Parker can help ' em To press this yet further Henry the Eighth's Suffragans were consecrated Bishops and had the same Power virtute officii that any other Bishop receiv'd at his Consecration but may not exercise it unless by Commission from the City-Bishop But when they did exercise the Episcopal Authority was it by a Power receiv'd at their Consecration and inherent in them or by a Power deriv'd unto 'em from the City-Bishop by Commission 'T was by the former no doubt why else were they consecrated If then this Commission given by the City-Bishop to the Suffragan limiting the Exercise of his Power doth not infer that the Suffragan did not act by a Derived Power much less can these Words Let not the Chorepiscopus Ordain Presbyters or Deacons without the consent of the City-Bishop imply that the Chorepiscopus deriv'd the Power of Ordaining from the City-Bishop The Bishop of Lincoln can't Ordain Priests or Deacons in Westminster-Abby without the leave of the
Dean of Westmâ—nster and yet when the Bishop does Ordain any there with the Dean's leave it 's not I presume by any Power deriv'd from the Dean that he does it but by a Power inhering in himself and the Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 import no other leave than this If then these Chorepiscopi be conform'd to the Number of Rural Deanries and the Rural Deans allowed to exercise the same Power the Chorepiscopi did in the ancient Church 't will afford great Relief to the Consciences of many Worthy Protestant Dissenting Ministers without exposing the Church of England to the Reproach of Novelty To return to the Archbishop's Reduction which continues the Second Proposition thus Archbishop To this Synod the Rector and Church-Wardens might present such impenitent persons as by Admonitions and Suspension from the Sacrament would not be reformed who if they should still remain contumacious and incorrigible the Sentence of Excommunication might be decreed against them by the Synod and accordingly be executed in the Parish where they lived Hitherto also all things that concerned the Parochial Ministers might be referred whether they did touch their Doctrine or their Conversation as also the Censure of all New Opinions Heresies and Schisms which did arise within that Circuit with liberty of Appeal if need so require unto the Diocesan Synod Notes It is not to be doubted but that as soon as the Church of England grants unto the Presbyter the Exercise of the Episcopal Rights they will be content that the Rural Dean or Chorepiscopus hold his Synod of Parish-Pastors or Rectors within the Precincts of the Rural Deanry and exercise as much Power as is here desired III. The Diocesan Synod might be held once or twice in the Year as it should be thought most convenient Therein all the Suffragans i. e. Chorepiscopi and the rest of the Rectors or incumbent Pastors or a certain select number of every Deanry within the Diocess might meet with whose Consent or the major part of them all things might be concluded by the Bishop or Superintendent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Superintendentes unde nomen Episcopi tractum est Hieron Epist 85. ad Evagrium call him whether you will or in his absence by one of the Suffragans whom he shall depute in his stead to be Moderator of that Assembly Here all matters of greater moment might be taken into consideration and the Orders of the monthly Synods revised and if need be reformed And if here also any matter of Difficulty could not receive a full Determination it might be referred to the next Provincial or National Synod Notes Dr. Poynet Bishop of Winchester pleads for the Word Superintendent as much better than that of Bishop and it is a word less offensive to the Presbyterians than the other is and perhaps because the Archbishop found it so he speaks so indifferently of the Name and to give Reputation to the word Superintendent refers us unto St. Hierome But it 's to be hoped that the wiser of all Parties when they have concerted the thing will not quarrel about the Name whether one or the other IV. The Provincial Synod might consist of all the Bishops and Suffragans and such other of the Clergy as should be elected out of every Diocess within the Province the Archbishop of every Province might be the Moderator of this Meeting or in his room some one of the Bishops appointed by him and all Matters be ordered therein by common consent as in the former Assemblies This Synod might be held every Third Year and if the Parliament do then sit according to the Act of a Triennial Parliament both the Archbishops and Provincial Synods of the Land might joyn together and make up a National Council Wherein all Appeals from Inferior Synods might be received all their Acts examined and all Ecclesiastical Constitutions which concern the State of the whole Nation established This Scheme of Church-Government drawn up by this Learned Primate as it is admirably adjusted to the several Tempers of Men of different Apprehensions about some things in Church-Government so it is not in the least repugnant to any thing of Christ's Institution for there is not ascrib'd unto any of the Synodical Conventions a proper Jurisdiction over any Parochial Church That in Matters of greater moment care be taken that all things be done in every Parish by a general Consent Concord and Agreement is necessary and to this end that the Parish Rectors proceed not to Excommunication until they have consulted the Dean Rural's Synod and that what is done by these Synods be examined by Bishops in a larger Assembly and that by a larger again until we come to a National if the case so require Though it be said Let the Sentence of Excommunication be decreed against the obstinately Impenitent by the Synod yet it may be understood thus Let the Rector of the Parish consult the Synod and there come to a Resolution and Determination with the consent of this Synod Whoever will consult the Learned Writers of the Church of England particularly Dr. Burnet now Bishop of Salisbury will see cause to conclude them to be against the Power and Jurisdiction of Councils That they are rather for Concord than Regiment That particular Churches as to matters of Government are independent on any Convention or Colledge of other Bishops or Pastors whatsoever that to this very end of securing the Power of the Diocesan or city-City-Bishop the Diocesan Church is made a single Church Infimae Speciei and whatever Power Authority or Jurisdiction belong unto a particular Church of the lowest Rank they are affirmed to belong to the Diocesan Church which Dr. Barrow hath endeavoured to prove to be independent So that let the bounds of particular Churches be made Parochial or of no larger extent than a Parish-Congregation and the Parish-Minister be entrusted with Pastoral Power to be exercised as above-mentioned 't will of course follow that what is now said to belong to a Diocesan must be seated in the Parish-Church There is not so much a Controversie between the Powers Preheminences and Priviledges of a particular Church as about its Bounds and Limits Reduce the Bounds of a particular Church to those of a Parish and the Debate will be at an end as to this point That the Primate by Chorepiscopi means Presbyters vested with the Episcopal Rights is manifest from what he and Dr. Holdsworth in the end of the Reduction thus assert We are of the Judgment That the Form of Government here proposed is not in any Point repugnant to the Scripture and that the Suffragans mention'd in the Second Proposition may lawfully use the Power both of Jurisdiction and Ordination according to the Word of God and the Practice of the Ancient Church Ja. Armachanus Rich. Holdsworth CHAP. VII The Reasonableness of the Church of England's condescending to establish the Government proposed by Archbishop Usher in this Reduction IF then the
Government of the Church of England be declared to be the same held by the First Reformers and by the Renowned Archbishop Vsher any Law or Statute to the contrary notwithstanding And the Subscription of Submission be only unto the Church-Government as fram'd accordingly there are many powerful Preachers if not most of the Sober Godly amongst the Dissenters will chearfully enter into Parish-Churches and be capacitated to exercise their Ministry in Publick whom the Multitude otherwise will never hear nor be benefited by their Talents The Allowance of this can do no hurt to the Bishops unless the easing 'em of an intollerable burthen or discharging 'em of such Duties now incumbent on them as are impossible to be performed by any Besides that hereby shall all the pious and conscientious Parish-Ministers be put upon the attending those Pastoral Duties which are enjoyned them by the Lord Jesus Christ in order to the right Guidance and Edification of the particular Churches committed to their Cure. And as hereby the Church of England will be enlarged and strengthned by the Accession of many Protestant Dissenters great ease given the Bishops without the least Diminution of their Temporal Emoluments and Honours all Parish-Pastors allowed the Exercise of their Functions as the Lord Christ commanded them In like manner hereby 1. The Honour due to the First Reformers that with their Blood or other grievous Sufferings sealed to the Truth of the Reformation shall be maintained and restored I must say restored because the altering our Episcopal Government and shaping it to the measure of the Canons of 1603 and since to the Act of Vniformity in Charles the Second's Reign hath made it so much another thing than what they held and defended that we cannot entitle them to be the Assertors of it without Reproach or a Vindication The Episcopacy they were for I say was but of the same Allay with the excellent Moderation of Archbishop Vsher 2. This Primitive Government Restored doth not in the least interfere or clash with but most effectually support the Ancient Regal Power in matters Ecclesiastical But the Canonical Episcopacy advanc'd by Laud and in its Heighths of Divine Right establish'd by Charles the Second will on Examination be found to be held by some of the Clergy as unalterable to the great Diminution of the King 's Ecclesiastical Supremacy and the Power of Parliaments 3. This Government Restored will give Countenance to the Protestant Reformed Churches abroad as well as to the Churches of Dissenters at home owning their Ministry and Sacraments and holding Communion with them as with true Gospel Churches of Christ Whereas the Episcopacy Vnrestored our Nobles and Gentry of both Houses having not been aware of it does null their Church-State destroying both their Ministry and Sacraments and as that very Learned but herein more dangerous man Mr. Dodwell will have it puts 'em out of the common way of Salvation and into the same deplorable Condition with the Heathen They must be saved by an uncommon Prerogative or not at all I the rather insist on this Particular because since his present Majesty the glorious Instrument of our Deliverance hath been brought up and continues in the Communion of these Foreign Reformed Churches we lye under a special Obligatian of our declaring that we hold Communion with them And will it not be a surprising Consideration if there be any who have not yet reflected on it that our Church owns the Ministry of the Church of Rome and at the same time disowns the Ministry of the Reformed Churches even of the Churches of which His Majesty is now a Member 4. This Government Restored will remove out of the way of those Dissenters who cannot do all that is necessary to their obtaining the Advantages of this Comprehension the principal Blocks which hinder their holding Communion with the Church of England The Reason why these Dissenters cannot joyn with the Parish-Assemblies in the Established Worship so far as I can guess is not the bare use of a Liturgy nor the neglect of Discipline nor because there are some disorderly Members of their Communion but because the Specifick Nature of Christ's Instituted Churches are destroyed the Parish-Ministers who were Gospel-Pastors deposed and Church-Government made impracticable by the erecting Diocesan Churches one of which compos'd of many Parishes under the Government of one only Pastor call'd the Diocesan Bishop is made a particular Church of the lowest Rank and substituting in the room of Parish-Pastors a New Order of Sub-half-Presbyters affirming all that have been baptiz'd and live within the Terriers or Boundaries of the Diocess how ignorant or scandalous soever to be sit Matter for an Instituted Church of Christ and because of their setting up Forms of Prayer in opposition unto and suppression of Spiritual and Free Prayer the Corruptions in the Liturgy and imposing as Terms of Communion such Ceremonies as are in their Consciences sinful If therefore the desired Church-Government be settled the Parish-Churches will be established as particular Churches of Christ's Institution their Pastors Restored Government made practicable Disorders amended and tho some things remain in the Parishes which these men can't conform unto yet they will own the Parishes thus Constituted and Reformed for true Churches and admit their Members if desired unto Communion with them THE END ADVERTISEMENT PLain Dealing Being a Moderate general Review of the Scots Prelatical Clergies Proceedings in the latter Reigns With a Vindication of the present Proceedings in Church-Affairs there Printed for Tho. Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside near Mercers-Chappel