although there be no Bishops in Fâ—ance Spaine or England Give me thereâ—oâ—e a mulâ—itude of Christians how great soever who want not a Bishop to ordaine Priests and I will boldly affirm that there is nâ— need that the governour of that society should be a Biâ—â—op Yea let us suppose the Ordinaâ—ion oâ— Priests and the Ministry of the Chuâ—ch not to be necessary in the Church and presently it followes that there is no need the universall Church should bee governed by Bishops who are superior to Priests That in the time of Persecution it is neither good nor convenient nor any solace or comfort to the Church to have a Bishop That thoâ—e who of Bishops are made Religious persons may be said in some sort to fly â—igher and not at all to descend That if the Catholickes of England should yeeld to this motion nameâ—y to receive the Bishop of Chalcedon as their pâ—oper Pastor and Bishâ—p they could by no meanes excuse themselvesâ— from being worthy of that reprehension which the Câ—rinthians received from Saint Paul namely that they rashly and indiscreetly put themselves into subjection that they should bestow their temporall goods so as they could exspect no reward from God as exercising humility Obedience Patâ—ence for which no crowne of Righteousnesse is prepared yea that they may by their blind receiving oâ— him though by the Popes owne Bull and authority expose themselves to manifest perill by falling into mortall sinne c. These Positions of theirs were publikely taught and maintained by many other Priests both in England and Ireland as appeares by the censure of the faculty of Paris and Nicholas Iâ— Maistre his Instauratio antiqui Principatus Episcoporum Parisijs 1633. Written upon this occasion in answer of these Treatises and some others Some of which Propositions though they were censured as Eronious by the faculty of the Divineâ— of Paris Anno 1631. through the power of the Bishop of Chalcedon as striking at the Popes Supremacy and the Bishops Hierarchie yet in all that censuâ—e I finde not one passage of Scripture produced to prove them contrary to the word of God and therfore that censure of theirs not much to be regardâ—â— THE FOVRTH SQVADRON THe 4th Squadron consists of Forraigne Protestant Churches and writers which I shall muster ranke in order according to their antiquities as neare as I may I shal begin with the VValdenses Taborites Albigenses Auâ—â—ites whose opinions and resolutions touching these particulars are registred at large by AEneas Sylvias histor Bohemiae c 35 by Renaerus contr Waldenses lib c 6. by Refutatio Waldensuim Bibl. PatruÌ„ Tom. 13 p. 383 by Thomas Waldensesâ— operum Tom. 1 l 3 Arti câ— 29 30 31 32 Tom 2. de Sacramento ordinis c. 117 118 Tom c 60 61 62 by Alphonsus de castro adversus hereses Tit Episcopus de Sacramento ordinis by Illiritus Catalogus Testium veritatis p 426 433 445 by Mr. Iohn Fox Acts and Monnments p 210 Albertus Pighius Hierarch Eccles. l 2 c 10 Gersomus Bucerus de Gubernatione Ecclesiae p 599â— 600 601. Marsilius Patavimus Anno 1320 seconds them in his Defensoris Paris pars 2 c. 15 16 17 18 19 20 and who Annâ— 1330 is backed by Michall Cezenas Henricus de Iota Nicholaus orem Ioannes de Ianduno Petrus de Corbaria Ioannes de Polaco Iohn of Castele â—rancis de Archatara and divers others of thaâ—age Witnesse Extravagant Ioannis 23 Antoninus quarta pars Summe Catalogus Testium veritatis p 512 524 525 529 Fox Acts and Monuments p 358 359 360. with others AEtates Ecelesiae written about that time c. 2 Registred in Catalogo Testium veritatis p 453 454â— Laurentius Valla The restorer of the Elegance of the Latine tongue succeed next in order Annotationes in Act. c. 15 c 20 in 1 Tim: 3 Tit. 1 Iohâ— Hus and Hierome of Prague two learned Godly Martyrs tread in their footsteps witnes AEneas Sylvius Historâ— Bohem c 35 Fox Acts and Monuments p 55â— 559 Gerson Bucerus de Gubernatiâ—nâ— Ecclesiae p. 602 603 After these successively ensued Ioannis Luâ—atwitz in Confessione â—aâ—oratrum contr. Rokeâ—zanum c 13 apud Lidij Waldeâ— siam p 53 Erasmus of Rotâ—â—rdam Annotaâ— paâ—â—pht in Act 1â— in 1 Tim: 3 4 Phil. 1 Tit 1 1 â—et 5 Scholia in â—pist â—ieronym 〈…〉 adversus aâ—â—â—ertâ—m 〈◊〉 Martin Luther in â—salm 2 â—â— 134 in Epist. ad Galâ—â—es 〈…〉 1 Artâ— 15 The Synod of â—eâ—icon Artic 6â— The Synod of Modisâ—aâ—ia Arâ—â—c 8 11 12 Gâ—rsâ—m Bucâ—râ—â—d 〈◊〉 Eâ—â—â—â—siae p 370 373 374 4â—â— 49â— 500 51â— 518.575 616 61â— 618 Câ—ristian the 3 King of Denmarke Anno 1537â— and the whole State of Denmaâ—â—e together with â—Gus◠〈◊〉 Cricus â—ing of Sweden about the same â—ime who sâ—ppressed banished and hanged up the Lordly Bishops of their Reâ—lms aâ— false Traitors and Rebels contrary to Chists insâ—itution and having no foundation in the word of God Clâ—â—traeâ—s Clâ—râ—n Saxon l 6. p. 49. lâ— 7 p 219 2â—â— lâ— 9. p 259 261 262 263 270 279 l 10 p 297 309 311 340 341 342 l 12 p. 358 359 l 13 p 388 l 14 p 407 421 l 15 pâ— 433 434. Philip Melanâ—â—hon Aâ—gam Responsâ— Pezel paâ—â— 7â—Comâ— in 1 Cor 4 Et disâ—utatio dâ— Politia Ecclesiasâ—ica dâ— coniâ—gâ—o Sacerdotum Oecolampaâ—ius in Rom 12 â—aldâ—iâ—us â—â—â—nglius in Amica sâ—a Parenaesi aâ— Communâ—m Helveâ—iorum â—mitatem operum Tom. 1. p 115 117 in Pâ—â—l 1.1 Tom. 3 pâ— 504. Opus Articulorâ—m Artic. 34â— 36 Francis Lambert his Summa Châ—iâ—â—ianiâ—atis Anno 1536. Prâ—sat Mr. Balliâ—ger in Act. 20 v 28 decad. 5. Ser 3 4 Brentius Apol. 〈◊〉 wettemb c 21. Pellicanâ—s in Mat. c. 16 18 in Act 16 20. Mustulus locâ—rum Com. locut de Ministris verbi Dâ—i p. 596.597 598. Mr. Iohn Calvin Instijâ— l 4 c 3 sect. 8 c 4 sect 2 in Phil 1 1 1 Tim. 3 8 Tiâ—â— 1 5.7 Antidotum Concilij Tridentinâ— Ses. 7 de Conformationâ— Martin Bâ—cer de vt usu Ministerij in Maâ—th 16 Araetius Problem Loâ—us de Oâ—siâ—ijs Eccles. â—â— Piâ—l 1 1 in 1 Timâ— 3 4â— Tit. 1 5 7. Mr. Ralph Gâ—â—lâ—her on Acts. 20. verse â—8 Phil. 1 1 1 Tim. 3. Tit 1.5.7 Mâ—rtin Chemâ—â—tius Examen â—onâ—ilij Tridâ—â—t pars 2 de Sacâ—amento 〈◊〉 223 224 Innocentius Gentiletus examâ—â—â—onâ—ilij Tridâ—nt Ibid Ioaâ—nis Maâ—oâ— Kinâ—sius Maâ—lorat on Phil. 1 1 1 Tim. â— Tiâ— 1 5 7 Acts 20 28. 1 Pet 5 1 2 〈…〉 2 â— 8 in 〈…〉 c 53 〈…〉 5 â— 14 Coâ—â—â— 3 câ— 3 〈…〉 ligâ— in 4 Pâ—aecept Defide c 25 sâ—ct 9 in Pâ—â—l 1 1 â—yperius in Tit 1 17 dâ— Mâ—thâ—do Tâ—â—ologiâ— l 3 Matthiâ—s Illâ—rieus Clavis Sâ—ripturae Tit Presbiter Catalogus Testiâ—m Veâ—itaâ—â—s p 426 433 445 512 524 525 529 553 554 488 528 c. 〈…〉 Basilius
3 Doctor Thomas Bilson after Bishop of VVinchester in his true difference betweene Christian Subjection and unchristian Rebellion Oxon 159â— p 125 126. Iohn Bridges Bishop of Oxford his defence of the Princes Supremacy p. 359. The Petition to Queen Elizabeth p 7 20 21 Discursus de Gubernatione Ecclesiastica Anno 1584 Thomaâ— VVheteâ—sall his discourse of the corruptions now in question London 1607 Doctor Richaâ—d Field of the Church l. 5 c 27 Master Richard Hooker his Ecclesiasticall Polity â—â— 5 sect 7. â— Tho Wilson his Christian Dictionary Title Bishop Doctor Henry Airay Sermon 2. on Phil 1 1 Doctor Thomas Tailor in his Commentary upon Titus 1 v 5 7 p 121 122 Mr: Robert Parker De Politia Ecclesiastica Christi Hiorarchia apposita 1614 a learned discourse Paul Bayne his answer to Bishop Downâ—ham his consecration Sermon Doctor William Ames in his Bellarminus enervatus Printed by License at Oxford Anno 1629. Tom 2 l 3 c 3 4â—Iamss Peregrin his Letters Patents of the Presbitery Anno 1632. Doctor Iohn Bastwicke his Flagollum Pontificis Episcoporum Laâ—ialum his Apologeticus with above 40 Anonymous Tâ—eatises that I have seene All these unamiously testifie that Bishops and Presbiters by Gods law and divine institution are all one equall and the same That the superiority of Bishops over other Ministers is only of humane and canonicall institution long afteâ— the Apostles most of them coÌ„demning it as Anti-christian unlawfull Diabolical pernicious to Religion the Church of God the cause of all the tyranny schismes corruptions disorders errors abuses that now infest the Church or hinder the power the purity of Religion and progresse of the Gospell To these I might accumulate the Statute of 25 H. 8 c 19 20 21 26 H 8. c 1 27 Hâ— 8 c 15 31 H. 8 c 9.10 37 H 8 c 17 1 Ed. 6 c 21 2 Phil Marie c 8 1 Eliz c. 1 5 Eliz. c 1 8 Eliz. c. 1. The Patents of 31 H 8 pars 4. to enable Bishops to consecrate Churches Chappels and Church-yards with the Kings License first obtained of 36 H. 8 pars 13. to Robert Holgaâ—e Arch-Bishop of Yorke to enable and authorize him to keep a Metropolicall visitation the Patents for the creation of the Bishoâ—rickâ— of Oxford Glocester Bristol Peterâ—â—rougâ— and VVestminster An. 34 35 H â— the Patents of Miles Goverdake Bishop of Exeter Iohn Povet once Bishop of VVinchester and Iohn Story Bishop of Rochester 5 E. 6 pars Prima and of all the other Bishops made in his Raigne by vertue of the Statute of 1 E. 6 c 2. wiih all the High-Commission Patents grounded on 1 Eliz c. 1. all which expresly resolves That all manner of Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction wherby Bishops are extinguished from and elivated above ordinary Ministers is wholy vested in and for ever inseperably united and annexed to the imperiall Crowne of this Realme that our Arch-Bishops Bishops Arch-Deaconsâ— and other â—cclesiâ—sticall Persons have no manner of jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall but only by under and from the Kings Majesty that they ought to have the jurisdiction delegated and devided to theÌ„ by speciall Letters Patents and Commissions under the Kings great Seale to execute the same not in their owne names and right but only Nominâ— vice Authoritate nostris Regijs as King Edwards Patents run in the Kings owne name right and Authority as his Officers and subsâ—itutes making out all their Proces Citations Excommunications Commissions oâ— Administration Probate of wills and writs of Iurâ— Patronâ—â—us c in the Kings name only and under his Seale of Armes not their owne under paine of imprisonment and a premunire for the neglect and wilfull contempt whereof all our Bishops and their Officers have encurred severall Premunires to the forfiture of all their temporalities goods estates and liberties to his Majesty who may much enrich his Exchequer thereby All which Acts and Patents judicially condemne and overturn our Bishops pretended superiority over their fellow Brethren by a divine right the very claime whereof alone makes them all liable to a Premunire and meer perjur'd persons both to God and the King beeing directly contrary to the very oath of Supremacy prescribed by 1 Eliz c 1 which every Bishop oft times takes and every graduate and Clergie man whatsoever who must either abjure this pretended Ius Divinum with which they would support the Hierarchie or prove perjur'd disloyall Subjects to their Soveraigne Having thus presented you with this large Catalogue of Authorities proving the parity â—quality and identity of Bishops and Presbiters by divine right and institution I shall now challenge all our great swelling â—relates and their sâ—attereâ—s joyntly and severally â—sâ—ecially the two Arch-Bishops who have made so many throsonicall braggâ—s of the proofe of their divine Title in open Court befoâ—e thousands of people to produce a contrary Catalogue of Authâ—rities of thesâ— severall kinds evidenâ—ing theiâ— divine pretended right supeâ—ioâ—ity and jurisdiction over other Minisâ—eâ—s â—f they are able to do it and to give a satisfactory answer to this Treatise I shall suâ—sâ—ibâ— to their opinion and recant what I have written But if they cannot performe â—t as I am certaine they are altogether unable then let them retract their former vaine glorious vauntsâ— and abjure their pretended Ius Divinum by subscribing to that truth which they are unable to contradict and laying downe their Bishoprickes at least their Rochestsâ— as they have oft-times solemnly protested they would doe If they can or will doe neither they must give all the world leave to passe this censure on them That they have neither that learning truth or honesty in them as hitherto they would make the world beleeve they hadâ— And that they may have no starting hole to evade I shall in as few words as may be answer what ever they can Object for themselves out of any undoubted Aâ—tiquity which is but thisâ— That Acceâ—s was branâ—ed for an Hereticke by Epiphaâ—iâ—s and Auguâ—tine for affirming Bishops and Presbiters to bee equall one to the other by divine instiâ—ution This is all that either the (o) Papists or (p) our Prelates do or can alleage for their Hierarchie out of the Fathers or Antiquity and this in truth is a good as nothing For first this opinion of Aerius was never condemned as Hereticall by any Counsell or Father whatsoever but only by Epiphanius who alone is unsufficient to brand or make any man an Hereticke Saint Augustine indeed if the Booke be his cites this opinion of his out of Epiphanius in his Book de haeresibus c 53 yet he brands it not as an Heresie but stiles it Proprium Dogma in expresse termes to wit his proper assertion and his owne too taxing him only of Heresie forâ—siding with the Arrians in their branded heresie (q) Isiodor Hispalensis Gratian reciting the Heresie of Arrius makes no mention a all either of this as an Heresie or error
in him passing it over in silence and expresly averrâ—ing it theÌ„selves as a truth Wherefore no ancient Counsell or Author whatsoever but Epiphanius branding it either for an heresie or Error I see not well how it should be so esteemed Secondly this hath been the constant received Doctrine both of Christ and his Apostles of all the Fathers and learned Orthodoxe writers in all ages as the precedent Catalogue witnesseth therefore no Heresie or Error as Epiphanius and some few of late out of him alone have rashly deemed it Thirdly it cannot properly be called an Heresie because the superiority of Bishops over other Ministers by a dâ—vine institution as no fundamentall point of faith neither hath it any foundation at all in Scripture as I have elsewhere manifested Therefoâ—e it is most absurd to call it an heresie Fourthly Epiphaâ—ius there condemnes Aerius as much for reprehending and censuring Prayer for the dead as for affirming Bishops and Presbiters to bee equall But this our Prelates must confesse unlesse they renounce this Doctrine of our Church was no Error or Heresie in Aerius but rather in Epiphanius why not therefore the other Fifthly Epiphanius himselfe doth not condeâ—ne Aâ—rius his opinion in this particular for an Hereticko but onely as a fond opinion as his words Eâ— quod tota res stuâ—titiae plena est apud prudentes manifestum est Sixthly St. Hieromâ— Naziaâ—zen Basill Sedulius Ambrose Chrisostome and Augustine taught the same Doctrine that Aerius did at or about the same time but they were never taxed of Heresie or Error for it either then or since why then should Aâ—rius only be blamed who argues just as Hierome doth producing the same Scâ—ipture to prove his assertion as Hieromâ— hath done in his Epistle to Evagrius on Tit. 1. Seventhly Epiphanius his refutations of Aerius his Arguments and opinion is very ridiculous false and absurd For first he saith that Presbiters then had not the power of ordination neither did they use to lay on hands in the election and Ordination of Ministers which is a meere falshood as Hierom in Soph. c. â— with the â—th Counsell of Carthage witnes and I have elsewhere manifested at large Secondly he saith that Presbiters had no voice in the Election of Bishops and Ministers which is (s) contrary to all Antiquities extant and a most palpable untruth Thirdly he saith that there were then more Bishops then Presbiters and men sufficient worthy enough to be made Bishops but noâ— Presbyters and therfore the Apostle writing to the Philippians and others makes mention only of Bishops not of Presbyters because they had then Bishops but not Presbyters A miserable ridiculous answer which subverts that he contends for and constitutes Bishops without any Ministers under their command or jurisdictionâ— whence it will necessarily follow That seeing the Apostles instituted Bishops without Ministers under them aâ—d more Bishops then Presbiters there ought now to bee no Presbiters subject to Bishops but Bishops to be plâ—ced in every churchâ— without any Ministers under â—hem but Deacons only and more Biâ—hops then Ministers which I presume the Lordly Prelates will not grant for this would over-turne not only their Lordships but their â—iocesâ—e and Episcopalities Fourthly he saith that the Apoâ—â—les first constituted Bishops onely in the Church withâ—ut Elders and then they afterwards elected Elders as they fâ—und them worthy which is contrary to Stâ— t Ierome and â—ll antiquity averring that Elders were first ordained in euery Church 〈◊〉 14â— 23 Tit. 1 5 and that they afterward elected a Bishop out of themselves Fifthly he saith that the Apostles used to write to the Bishops of one Church in the plurall number when there was but one Bishop there which is very improbâ—ble yea contrary of all other expositors on â—hil â— 1. Tit. 1 5 7 Act. 20 17 2â— Sixthly he peremptorily determines Timothy to be a Bishop which I have elsewhere proved false and fâ—om this false ground would prove Bishops and Presbiters distinct Seventhly he interprets an Elder in the 1 Tim. 5.1 to be a Presbiter which most Fathers else expound only to be an ancient man Eightly he would prove Timothy a Bishop and Bishops to be Superior too and distinct from Presbiters because Paul exhorts him not to rebuke an Elder but to exhort him as a Father and not to receive an accusation against an Elder but under two or three witnesses which are grosse inconsequence as I have else where manifested so that Epiphanius whilst he goes about to prove Aerius his assertion still of folly steps into many Errors follies and absurdities himselfe as Bellarmine is inforced to confesse though desirous to make the best of it In a word then as all the forecited Authors in generall â—o in speciall Chemnitius examen Concilij Tridentini part 4. de Ordinis â—acramento Danaus in Augustium de haresibus c. 53 Theodorus Bibliander in Chronagr Bucanus lâ—corum com c 32 Magdeburgenses cent â— c. 5. de haresibus Beza de diversis ministorum gradibus c 22. Bersomus Bucerus de Gubernationâ— Ecclesia p 2â—â— to 29â— Bishop Ioâ—â—ll defence of the Apologie part 2 c. 9. divis 1. p 196 202. Doctor Humphry confâ—tat Puritanâ— Papismi ad Rat 3 p 261.262 Doctor VVâ—itakeâ— câ—ntr Duraum l 6. sect â—â— ad ratio 10 Campiani Resp. Contr. lib. â— qu. 5. c. 7. Doctor Fulke and Mr. Cartwright confutation of the Remish Testament Phil. 1.1 Bishop Bridges in his defence of the Princes Supremacy p. 359. Doctor VVillâ—t Synopsis Papismi contr. 8. qu. 3. part 2. Dr. Reynolds in his Letter to Sir Francis Knolls and to Michael Medina a Papistâ—de Sacr. hom Orig. l. 1â— c. 5. Doctor Armes in his Bellarminnus enarvatus Tom. 2. l 3 c 4. to omit others do all joyntly acquit Aâ—â—ius both â—roÌ„ the guilt of Heresie or Error in thiâ— very point and taxe Epiphanius for censuring him without the judgement of a Synod or of the Church condemning his answers to Aerius his reasons as notoriously absurd impertinent yea as foolish Childisâ— worthy to be hissed and derided I shall therfore conclude as doth our learned w Whittaker in this case verily if to condemne prayers for the dead and to equâ—ll Presbitersâ— with Bishops be hereticall Nihil Catholicum esse potest Nothing can be Catholicke so farre as it from being either an Heresie or Error as oâ—r absurd Prelates and their Sycophants Pretend If they object the Authority of x Ignatius that he advanceth Bishops above Presbyters commanding them to obey the Bishops as the Apostles obeyed Christ and willing the people to be subject to their Bishops as to God and Christ and to their Elders as to Christs Apostlâ—s therfore in his daies Bishops were Superior to Presbiters To this I answer that these Epistles of Ignatius are false and spurious as many y of our learned men have proved at large therefore of no Authority Secondly it is
and multiplyed them or divided them as they saw occasion so they limitted q and granted them all that Episcopall power and jurisdiction whereby they were distinguished from or advanced above Ordinary Ministers as appeares by the Originall Charters of the foundations and erections of our own English Bishop-rickes the forecited Statutes and by our owne and forraigne Histories Now that jurisdiction and superlority thus acquired is but meere and humane not divine Againe Bishop-ricks are meer hâ—mane institutions directly contrary to the Holy Ghost who ordained many Bishops in every Church and City not one Bishop over many which he can never well instruct rule and oversee Acts 20. 17.28 1 Tim. 5.17 Pâ—il 1 1 Tit. 1â— 5 7. 1 Pet. 5 1 2 3. Now that Episcopal jurisdiction which distinguishetâ— Bishops â—rom Presbyters was r created with and annexed to their Bishâ—pricks yea it is delegated botâ— by the â—ing to Lay Commiâ—â—ioneâ—s and visitors and by Bishops themselves to Officials commiâ—â—aâ—ies and meere Lay men 26. H. 8. c. 1.31 H. 8 c 9 37. H. 8 c 17.1 â— 6 c. 2.1 Eliz c 1. Therefore it is meerely humane and belongs not to Bishops by any divine right neither is it peculiar unto them alone Moreover Bishoprickes with all Episcopall juâ—isdiction incident to them have been s usually granted hereâ—oâ—ore by our Kings of England to their Chancellours Treaâ—uâ—ers Secretaries Kinsmen and temporall Oâ—hcers being meere Lay-men as an advancement and augmentation onely of their temporall revenues and civill temporall things And in Germany at this day they are given to Dukes Earles and Nobles yea to Children and inâ—ants only as a temporall digâ—ity and revenue Thereâ—oâ—e they are â—nly tempâ—rall â—ffices and revenues and meere huâ—ane inâ—titutions which may well be spareâ— in the Church not divine oâ— Gods and Christs institution Moreover most of the t reâ—ormed â—â—otesâ—ant churches beâ—ond the 〈…〉 the Reâ—â—â—maâ—â—n 〈…〉 Bishopricks and Dioceâ—an Bishops as Anti-christian and humane inâ—â—â—tutions pernicious to the Church of Christ and to the power puâ—ity and progresâ—e of the Gospell making Biâ—â—ops proud Lordly idle Luxuâ—ious covetous Tyrannicall Symoniâ—call Seditious Schâ—smaticaâ— â—ppâ—essive vindictive prophane impious lascivious unchasâ— perâ—ideous rebellious â—recherous to their Soveraigns Therefore certainly they are no divine instiâ—ution useâ—ull or necessary for Gods Church and people oâ— which they have been the bane and ruine in all ages as our Acts and Monuments of Martyrs testifie they being the Authors of all perseâ—â—tions in our Church and of al our Martyrs Buchery bloodâ— shed And in truth our Kings in all former ages have â—eemeâ— Bishops not alâ—ogeâ—her so usefull or necessary in our Church as some now make them which may appeare by the long vacancies oâ—â—â—veâ—s Bishoprickes in sundry ages of which I shall give you a â—hoâ—â— taâ—â— and so conciâ—â—e u Anâ—â— 653 After the death of Honorius Arch-Bishop or Canâ—erbury that See continuâ—â— void 18 moneths Annâ— 669. After Adeotaâ—usâ—is death it remained voâ—d almost 4 yeares An 690. Afâ—eâ—Thâ—odorus his death it was void almoâ—t â—uâ—â— two yeâ—resâ— and as long aâ—ter â—aâ—â—yusâ—ecease An 734 After â—uâ—hberâ—s death An 758. â—t was vacant above one yeare Anno 762 two years aâ—ter â—regwins death An 790 3 years aâ—â—er Lambâ—râ—s death An 830 aâ—ove one Yeare after VVâ—â—reds decease An 958 almost 3 yeares after Odo his expiâ—ation An 1089. 4 yeâ—res after Laâ—â—â—akes departure An 1109 5 yeares after Anâ—elmes death Anâ— 36. 2 years after VViâ—liam Carkeâ— Aâ— 11 â— â—3 yeaâ—s aâ—ter Riâ—hard VVeâ—â—erâ—neâ— An 1242 2 yeares aâ—â—eâ— St. â—dmâ—nâ— An 1270 â—s long aâ—â—er â—oniâ—acâ— An 1502 2 yeares after 〈◊〉 Deane Aâ— 15â—8 oâ—e â—ear aâ—â—e◠〈…〉 v Aâ— 644 aâ—â—er Pauâ—â—nus the 〈◊〉 Aâ—â—h-Biâ—hâ—p 〈◊〉 â—oâ—keâ— that â—ee wâ—s vacant 20 â—â—me say 3â—â— yeeâ—es An 1114 sâ—â—ur yeares afâ—er â—â—â—mas the second An 1140 â—lmost 2 â—eares aâ—ter Tâ—â—â—stan An 〈◊〉 10 Years after Rogers deâ—thâ—An 1213. 4 Yeaâ—es after 〈◊〉 An 1255 13 â—loneths after VVâ—â—â—eâ— Gâ—ay Anâ— 13â—3 after â—homas de caâ—bridge above 2 yeares An 315 â— Years after â—illiamâ—â—Greenfielâ— Aâ—â— 1240â— 2 yeâ—res afâ—er VViâ—liam de Melâ—â—â— An 1405 2 years and an haâ—â—e aâ—te◠〈◊〉 Sâ—â—ope that Arch-traitor beneaâ—eâ— for his Treâ—son Anâ— 1423 2 Yeares after Henry Boweâ—â— An 14â—9 almost 4 Yeares after Iohn Kâ—mp An 1464 2 Yeares after VVilliam Bâ—â—th almost a â—ull yeaâ—â— both after Cardinall VVolpe and â—â—â—ard Lee Anâ— 1559 â—â—â—er â—â—câ—olas Heath 2 yeares Anâ— 1568 after Thomas â—oung above one yeare Thus long have both our Arch-Bishoprickes been void in severall ageâ— without any prejudice to Church or State w Anno 619 after Mellitus his translation from London to Canterbury that see continued void 31 Yeâ—res together An â—64 2 Yeares An 1133. 7 Yeares aâ—ter Guilbert An. 1187 alter Gilbert Folâ—oâ— above 2 yeares An 1279 above one yeare aâ—â—er Iohn de Chishul An 1303 almost 2 yeares after Richard de Granefâ—rd Anno 1501 after Thomas Saâ—age above two yeares An 1171 after the death of Henry de Bloyes the Bishopricke of Winchesteâ— was void above 3 yeares An 1238 after Peter de la Roch 5â— yearsâ— An 1243. after William de Rawley 16 Yeâ—res Ethelmanus holding it 9 yeares without consideration Anno 1259 after Henry de Wengham 6 yeares An 1492 after Peter Coventry aboue one Yeare An 1500 after Thomas Langton 2 yeares An 1528 aâ—ter Richard Fox 2 Yeares An 1530. after Cardinalâ— Woolsey almost 4 yeaâ—es w An 1131 after the death of Hâ—rnaus first Bishop oâ—Ely that See was void above 2 yeares An 1169 after Negellus the Second Bishop 5 yeares An 1197 afteâ— William Longchamp above one Yeare An 1214 after Eustachius above 5 yeares An 1256 after William de Kilâ—enny above one yeare An 1297 after William de Luda 2 Yeares An 1373 after Iohn Barnet 2 yeares An 1434 after â—hillip Morgan 3 yearesâ—An 1486 after Iâ—â—n â—oorion 3 yeares An 1500 aâ—â—er Iâ—hn Alcocke one whole yeare An 1533 as long after Nicholas West An 158â— after Richard Coxe almost 20 yeares together x â—n 11â—7 after the death of Roâ—ert de Chisney the 4 Bishâ—p oâ— Lincoln that See continued vâ—cant almost 17 yeares Ceâ—â—ry â—enâ—y the 2 his base Sâ—nne taâ—ing the â—rofits thereof without any consecration An 1184 afâ—er Walteâ— de Câ—â—stâ—rtiis 2 â—eares An 1200 after St. â—ugh almost â— years â—n 1206 after William de Blâ—yes 3 yeâ—res An 1490 after Iohn Rusâ—el 2 yeares An 1513 after William Smith one yeare y An 1086 the Bishoprick of Coventry and Lichfâ—eld was vacant 2 yeares after the death of â—eter and as long An 1â—27 after Robert â—each as long An 118 after Giâ—acdus Puella as long An 1208 â—fter Geofâ—ry de Muschamp An 1238 almost 3 yeares after Alexanderâ—e Saâ—ensby An 1243 after Hugh Pateshul 2 yeâ—es An 1386 as long after â—ichard Scroope An 1490 as long after Iohn Huâ—â—e z An 1099 after Osâ—ond his death the second Bishop of Salisbury
that See was 8 yeares vacant An 1225 after Richard Poore 4 years An 1â—â—0 4 years aâ—â—er Walter de la Wiâ—e An 1588 3 yeares aâ—ter Iohn â—ierce An 1596 2 yeares aâ—ter Iohn Coldwell a An 1166 the Bishopricke of Bath and Wels upon the death of Robert continued void 8 yeares 8 moneths and 15 dayes An 1242 after Ioceline 2 yeares Anno 1262 as long after William Buttâ—n Anno 1503 as long after Oliver King An 1547. as long after William Knight An 1381 3 yeares after Gilbert Barkely An 1590 2 yeares aâ—â—er Thomas Godwin b An. 1103 the Bishoprick of Exeter after Osberâ—us decease was vacant 4 yeares Anno 1182 after Bartholmeus Iscartus 2 yeares An 1119 after William Herbert the last Bishop of Thelfords death that See now Norwich was vacant 2 Yeares An 1214 after Iohn de Grey it was vacant 7 yeares Anno 1222 afteâ— Pandulfus 3 yeaâ—es Anno 1236 after Rodulphus almost 3 years and as long after William de Releigh An 1240 after Henry Spencer An. 1406 â—lmost 2 yeares c An 1095 after the death of Wolstan Bishop of Worâ—hester that See was vacant 2 yeares An 1113 as long after Sampsons An 1123 almost as long after Theulphus An 1179. after Roger An 1184 after William de Northale 5 yeares An 1198 after Iohn de Constantijs 2 yeares An â—1212 〈◊〉 long after Mangere Anno 1373 as long after VVilliam de Lyn An 1417 as long after Thomas Pondrell An 1427 7 yeares after Thomas Polton Anno 1590 3 yeares after Ednica Freat d An 1556 the Bishopricke of Hereford after Leoneyards death continued 4. yeares vacant An 1127 after Richaâ—d above 4 yeares Anâ— 1167 after Roâ—ert de Melim above 6 yeares An 1539 after Iohn Skip above 13 yeeres An 1585 after Herbert West failing 17 yeares An 1526 the Bishopricke of Chichester was void almost 4 yeares after Iohn Reempale his death An 1006 after Richard Fitz-Iames 2 yeaâ—es An 1235 the Bishopricke of e Rochester after â—enry de Sandâ—ords death was vaâ—â—nt 3 yeares An 1277 2 yeares aâ—â—er Walter de Merton 1316 after Thomas de Waldham 3 yeares An 1401 as long after Iohn Bolteshamâ— Anno 1535 after Iohn Fisher 2 yeares An 1557 the new created Bishopricke of Oxford after the decease of Iohn King first Bishop there was vacant 10 yeares An 1568 afâ—er Hugh Carrow the 2. Bishop it was voyd 21. yeares together An 1592 after Iohn Vnderhill the third Bishop it continued void 11. yeares so little want was there of a Bishop in that See Anâ— 1559 the new created Bishopricke of Oxford after Iames Brookes the third Bishops death was vacant three yearesâ— An 1578 as long after Edmond Cheyney An 1558 the new created Bishopricke of Bristoll after Paul Bush the first Bishop was vacant 4â— yearesâ— An 1578 3 yeares after Richard Cheyney which See continued void otherwise then by Commendani 31 yeares together Anno 1593 it continued vacant 10 yeares together So little need was there of a Bishop in this See f An 1397 the Bishopricke of St. Davids after Iohn Gilberts death was vacant 4. yeares An 1592 after Marmaduke Middleton almost 2 yeares An 1133 the Bishoprick of Landaâ—â—e upon Vrbans decease was void 6 yeares An 1183 after Nicholas ap Georgant 5 yeares An 1240 after Elias de Radnor above 4 yeares An 1287 after William de Brews 9 yeares An 1213 the Bishopricke of Bangor after Robert of Shrewsbury was vacant 2 yeares An. 1374 as long after Iohn Gilbert An 1378 after Iohn Swaffham 22 yearesâ— An 1266 after 〈◊〉 the 1 of Bangor that See was vacant two yeares An 1313 after Lewelin 6 yeares Anno 1406 after Iohn Trevane 5 yeares An 1439 after Robert 5. yeares g An 1017 after Aldhunus of Durham that See continued void above 3 yeares An 1097 as long after William Carlaypho An 1140. after Geoffry Rufus above five yeares An 1207 after Philip of Poitiers above 10 yeares An 1226. above 2 yeares the King threatning the Covent that they should have no Bishop in 7. yeares An 1237 after Richard Poore 2 yeares An 1249 the King threatned to keep it vacant 8 or 9 yeares till Ethelmare his halfe Brother whom he commended to the Monkes election should be of age An 1505 after William Severus 2 yeares An 1587. after Riâ— Baâ—nâ—s almost 2 years An 1577 the Bishoprick of Chester was vacant two years If then all our Bishoprickes in severall ages have been void thus 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 15 17 20 and 30 yeares or more together at divers times to omit all annuall vacancies without any prejudice to the Church or State and with great benefit to the Kings of England who enjoyed the temporalities in the meane time tâ—en certainly Bishops are no such necessary creatures of divine institution but that we may spare them all together For if we may want them 2 3 5 9 10 15 20 30 yeares without prejudice Why not an Hundred why not 500. yeares yea why not altogâ—ther as they doe in all reformed Churches who have quite cacashierd them long agoe when as no Church can spare or want their Pastors and Ministers that are of Gods institution above 6 moneths at most h After which if the Patron present not in the interim an able and sufficient Clerke the ordâ—nary by the common Law may collate and may seqnester the profits in the meane time for the officiating of the cure which must be at no time intermitted or neglected because of divine institution and so absolutely necesâ—ary which the Bishops are notâ— I shall close up this discouâ—se with a mâ—morable I resident of the Dâ—nes An Dom 1537 Christian the third King of Denmaâ—â—e removed and suppressed by publike Edict all the Bishops of his Kingdome for their intolerable Treasons Rebellions abolishing their Bishopricks as contrary to our Saviours institutions the meanes that made them Idle proud ambitious unpreaching â—relates and seditious tâ—echerous Rebels to their â—rinces and in stead of 7 Bishops of Deâ—mark he instituted 7 Superintendents to execute the office of Bishops to give orders to others and execute all Ecclesiasticall afâ—aiâ—es which 7 Superintendents Augâ—st 26 1537. â—eceived â—heir ordiâ—ation from Iohn Bugenhagius â— Pâ—otestant minisâ—er in the Cathedrall of Hâ—sina in the preseâ—ce of the King and Seâ—ate of the Kingdome Lo â—eâ—e all Bishops cashiered as false rebellious Traytors to their Soveraigne as they have ever been in all States and ages theâ—e having been more notoâ—iâ—us Traitors Rebells and conspirâ—tors of Bishops then of all other ranks of men in the world as I â—m able to maâ—e good as contrâ—ry to divine institution and see not Iure divino as they now boâ—st and Superinteâ—dents ordained by a meere â—â—esâ—iter in their stead to conferre orders unto others in all the Danish Churches In the beginning of reformation in Germany and other places Luther and other Ministers usually ordained Deacons and Ministers and set out Bookes of
A CATALOGVE OF SVCH TESTIMONIES IN ALL AGES AS PLAINLY EVIDENCE BISHOPS AND PRESBYTERS TO BE BOTH ONE EQUALL AND THE SAME IN IURISDICTION Office Dignity Order and degree by divine Law and institution and their disparity to be a meere humane ordinance long after the Apostles times And that the name of a Bishop is onely a Title of Ministration not Dominion of Labour not of Honour of Humility not of Prelacy of painfullnesse not of Lordlinesse with a Briefe Answer to the Objections out of Antiquity that seeme to the contrary Printed in the Yeere 1641. The EPISTLE to the READER Christian Reader THere is nothing more frâ—quent in the mouthes of our Lording Prelates and their Flatterers then to vaunt That their Hierarchie and Episcopall Sâ—periority over other Ministers is by divine Right and Institution and that all Antiquity from Christs till Calvins dayes and all learned men except a despicable small number of Factious Puritans as they term them suffragate to this Conclusion This was the more then thrasonicall bâ—ast of Dr. Laâ—d Arch-prelate of Canterbury and some others not onely at the Censure of Dr. Layton in the Star-chamber and Dr. Bastwicke in the High-Commission some few yeares past but likewise at the late Censure of Dr. Bastwicke Mr. Burton and Mr. Prynne in the Star-chamber Iune 14. 1637. where in his learned Speech since Printed by speciall command through his own underhand procurement he thus magisterially determines pag. 6 7. This I will say he might have done well to have proved it first but that his Ipse dixit only is now an Oâ—acle and abide by it That the calling of Bishops to wit Archbishops and Dâ—ocaesans superiour to and distinct from Presâ—yters else his Speech is not onely idle but impertinent is Iure divino though not all adjuncts to their callings he should have done well to have specifieâ— what adjuncts in particularâ— And I say further that from the Apostles times in all ages in all places the Church of Christ was governed by Bishops to wit Diocaesan Bishops like to our Prelates now which he will prove at Graecas Calendas And Lay-Elders never heard of till Calvins new-fangled devise at Geneva To disprove which fabulous assertion I have not only particularly encountred it in the Unbishoping of Timothy and Titus to which no Answere yet hath been returned by this Over-confident Boaster or his Champions though specially challenged to Answer it but likewise by way ef Supplement to that Treaâ—ise drawn up this ensuing Catalogue which I challenge his Arch-grace with his brother Prelates Doctors Proctors Parasites to encounter with as many contrary Authorities if they can â— wherby both learned and illiterate may with ease discern that both by divine Institution the suffrages of Fathers Councels forraigne and domestick writers of all sorts aswell Papists as Protestants and the resolution of the Church and State of England in Convocation and Parliament Bishops and Presbyters are but one and the samâ— in point of Office and Iurisdiction and that the Superiority of Bishops over other Ministers is a meer humane Institution long after the Apostles dayes introduced partly by custome partly by the Bishops owne insensible incroachmeâ—ts upon their fellow brethren but principally by the grants connivances or indowments of Christian Princes destitute of any divine foundation to support it I confesse in the * Councel of Trent it was much debated among the Popish Prelates and Divines there present Whether Bishops were by divine Ordination Superiour to Priests But the Councel being divided in opinion left the Controversie undetermined Those Bishops and Divines who held the affirmative produced nothing out of Scripture or solid Antiquity to justifie their opinions worthy answere but that Aerius was deemed an Heretick for affirming the contrary which I have â—ere disproved yeâ— * Michael of Medina who alleageth this of Aerius was so ingenious to confâ—sse that Hierome Austin and some others of the Fathers as Ambrose Sedulius Primasius Chrysostomus Theodoret Oecumenius did fall into Aërius heresie in this point it being no wonder that they did so because the matter was not cleare in all points This his boldnesse to say that Hierome and Austin did savour of Haeresie gave great scandall but hâ— insisted the more upon it The Doctors saith the History were equally divided into two opinions in this point And when this * Article was propounded in this Romish Councel That the Bishops are instituted by Christ and are Superiour to Priests de Iure divino The Legates with others answered that the Lutherans and Heretiques having affirmed that a Bishop and a Priest is the samâ— thing * putting no difference between a Bishop a Priest but by humane constitution and affirming that the Superiority of Bishops was first by custom and afterwards by Ecclesiasticall constitution for which they ciâ—e the Augustane Confession made by the German Churches it was fit to declare that a Bishop is Superiour but that it was not necessary to say quâ— jure nor by whom a Bishop is instituted From whence it appeares clearly That halfe or more of these Trent Fathers with all the Lutherans and Protestant Churches at that time were cleare of opinion That Prelates Episcopacy is not Iure divino and those who peruse that History and * Bâ—llarmine may at â—irst discerne that all our Prelates arguments and Authorities now produced to maintaine their Episcopall Iurisdiction to be divine are taken verbatim from these Popish Fathers of Trent who maintain their assertion and Bellarmine de Clericis the stoutest Champion for their cause Alas to what miserable Shifts are our Prelates driven when they must thus fly to Trent to Bellarmine for ayd to support their tottering Thrones And yet these will stand them in no stead all the Trent Prelates confessing with S. Hierom. * That in the first beginnings of Christianity the Churches were governed by a kind of Aristocracy by the common Councel of the Presbytery and that the Monarchicall government and Superiority of Bishops and Archbishops crept in by custome as the (a) History of the Councel of Trent relates at large where you may read the originall of their Courts and Iurisdictions with the steps and meanes of their exorbitant growth and encroachments upon the temporall Iurisdiction and Prerogative of Princes well worthy the greatest Statesmens consideration Besides Dionysius Cathusianus and Cardinal Contarenus in their Commentaries on Phil. 1.1 confesse that in Pauls time Bishops and Presbyters were both one and that either Order was conferred on the Presbyter That Presbyters are there meant by Bishops whence it is usually said That in the Primitive times Bishops were not distinguished from Priests Azorisus the Iesuite Moral part 2. l. 3. c. 16. confesseth that in the Apostles times every where those who were ordained Elders in Cities were Bishops Cardinal Cusanus De Concordia Cathol. l. 2. c. 13. writes the same in effâ—ct All Bishops and perchance also Presbyters are of equall power
as to Jurisdiction although not of execution which executive exercise is restrained by certaine positive Laws not Divine but Canonicall whence the cause of these Laws ceasing (b) the Laws themselvs determine And Johannes Semeca a Popish Canonist avers That in the first primitive Church the Office of Priests and Bishops was the same but in the second primitive Church to wit some space after the Apostles times both their names and Offices began to be distinguished The same Doctrine together with the Identity and Parity of Bishops and Presbyters is professedly averred not only by those hereafter cited in the Catalogue but also by * Huldrick Bishop of Ausburg about the year of Christ 860. in his Epistle to Pope Nicholas in defence of Priests Marriage by John Crespin L'estate de L'eglise printed 15â—2 fol. 14.97 by Phippe de Mornax Tableaâ— des Differens par 2. c. 6. p. 67 68 69. c. and by Mornay Lord Plessie in his Mystery of Iniquity in the French Edition p. 7.9 10.72.80 to 87 9â— 92.95 to 123.125.128.152 to 155.159.160.172.179.197.210 to 218 234.2â—4 266 267.281.293.304.307.319 320 366â— 389 395.397.404.410.412â— 418.424 to 427 452â— 464.467 468.469.503.518.519.520.524 to 528 533.535.545 546 547.567.568 569.603 Yea * Iohn Maâ—jor de Gestis Scotorum l. 2. c. 3. wâ—ites that in ancient times the Scots were instructed in the Christian faith by Priests and Monks and were then without Bishops And Iohn Fordon Scotichronicon l. 3. c. 8. before him records That before the coming of Palladius the Scots had only Presbyters or Monks to instruct them in the Faith and administer the Sacraments following the custome of the primitive Church And * from Palladius dayes till the reigne of Malcolm the 3d the Bishops of Scotland had no Diocesse at all and so were no Diocesan Prelates but every Bishop whom holinesse had made reverend in that age exercised his Episcopall function without distinction in every place he came If then Bishops and Presbyters were all one and the same in the first Primitive Church which church â—ogether with that of Scotland was anciently governed only by Presbyters not by any Lordly Prelaâ—es or Diocesan Bishops which Dr. William Fulke in his Answer of a true Christian c. p. 20.50 professeth â—o be Antichristian Paâ—all and no divine institution why the Churches of Scotland and England may not now be governed by Presbyters only without Bishops aswell as at first I cannoâ— conceiveâ— their regiment of late having been so tyrannicall unchristian antichristian and exorbitant that they have almost wholly ruined our Religion Church State and lefâ— them in a most perplexed if not desperate condition which proves their Hierarchy to be rather Antichristian and Diabolicall then Divine And how can it be otherwise if we rightly consider the Persons or Condition of our Hierarchyâ— and their Antichristian Attendants I remember a merry Sâ—ory in * Giraldus Cambrensis and out of him related by Mr. Camden in his Britannia p. 604. It hapned that a certaine Iew travelling towards Shrewsbury with the Archdeacon of Malpas in Ches-shire whose surname was Peche that is Sinne and a Deane named Devill when he heard by chance the Archdeacon telling that his Archdeaconry began at a place called Ill-street and reached as farre as to Malpas towards Chester he considering and understanding withall aswell the Arch-deacons Surname as the Deans came out with this merry and pleasant conceit Would it not be a wonder quoth he and my fortune very good if ever I get safe againe out of this Countrey where Sinne is the Arch-deacon and the Devill is the Dean where the entry into the Archdeaconry is Illstreet and the going forth of it Malpas It was * St. Bernards complaint in his age that Iesus Christ elected many Devils to be Bishops as he chose Iudas to be an Apostle Since then there be so many Archbishops Deanes and Bishops Devills so many Archdeacons Sinners if not Sinne and the entrance into these Offices by reason of Symony Ambition and the like a meer Illstreet and their going forth of them by reason of their wicked lives and exorbitant actions occâ—sioned by their very Office Malpas it is almost a wonder and very good fortune if any â—onest godly Minister or Professor ever get safe againe out of their Courts and Diocesse or escape drowning in their Seas Hence is it that the devoutest men in all ages since Prelates became Lords paramount to Ministers have either utterly refused to accept of Bishâ—pricks or resigned them after acceptance as I have * elswhere manifested by sundry examples and shall here furâ—her exemplifie by â—ther evidences (a) Ribadenerra a Iesuite records it to the great praise of Bernardine of Sennes canonized at Rome for a Saint that out of his humility he refused the 3. Bishopricks of Sennes Ferrara and Vrban which severall Popes offred to him and though one Pope put a Bishops Miâ—er on his head with his own hands yet he put it off againe humbly beseeching him not to impose the charge of any Bishoprick upon him and to change that estate of Poverty to which God had called him because he should bring more advantage to the Church by preaching the Word of God and ayding the Soules of many Bishopricks then by being a Bishop in one Church The Pope hearing his reasons confessed them true and left him to his own liberty (b) Vincent Ferrier another Popish Saint is highly magnified for that ' being urged by the Pope to accept the Bishopricke of Leride the Archbishopricke of Valence and a Cardinalship it was impossible to move him to accept of any of these charges deeming it a greater advantage to free one Soule from the chaines of Sinne then to gain all the great preferments of the world For he perceived that these honourable dignities seemed like so many golden chaines whereby he should be detained at the Court and deprived of liberty to goe and preach the Gospell with poverty as God had commanded him So Thomas of * Aquin canonised for a Saint is highly applauded for refusing the Archbishopricke of Naples with other great dignities offered unto him by the Pope In like sort * Raimond of Rocheâ—ort another Roman Saint is extolled for refusing to accept the Archbishopricke of Arragon which the Pope himselfe conferred upon him and commanded him to accept within few dayes at which news he was very sad and most humbly and instantly intreated his Holinesse not to lay such a burthen upon him which he knew not how to beare and seeing that the Pope was resolved to enforce him to accept it he fell sicke with indignation a â—ieuere continuing upon him till he died of regret and so discharged him of this care * Antoninus another â—ate Romish Saint being elected Archbishop oâ—Florence by Pope Eugenius the 4th refused to accept thereof because being retired out of the tempests of the world he should therby return into â—hem to the
great perill of his Salvation The Pope hereupon commanded him by his Bull to accept it threatning else to excommunicate him whereupon by the advise of his Covent and the Magistrates of Florence who informed him that he ought to obey the Pope herein he unwillingly accepted it and kneeling down before them he lift up his eyes and hands to heaven saying O my Lord thou knowest full well that it is much against my will to accept this charge which I have undertaken for feare to resist thine and thy Vicars will and since thou knowest it I beseech thee direct me to doe what I ought Then entring into his See he had only 8. persons in his house He had no Cupboord Tapistry or hangings of Say in his Chamber no vessels of Silver no Horses nor Coaches riding upoâ— a Mule that was given him saying that the goods of the poore ought not to be spent in nourishing beasts and providing Superfluities He had the Scripture alwayes read at his Table and ever said they should doe him a speciall favour to thrust him from his Archbishopricke wherein he continued with as great regret as he received it Adde to these that * Linus the first Bishop of Rome after Paul and Peter resigned up his Bishoprick te Anacleâ—us that Pope Cyriacus as Fasciculus Temporum Henry of Erford Nauclerus Crispinâ—and others write quitted his Bishopricke in a short space against the will of the Clergy whence some have excluded him out of the number of the Roman Pontiâ—s that (a) Pope Stephen tâ—e 6. renounced his Episcopacy and became a Monke repenting of the cruelty shewed by him to his predecessor Formosuâ— that Pope Celestine the 5th as Platina Luitprandius Anastaâ—ius and all (b) oâ—hers in his life accord voluntarily renounced the Papacy as a charge exceeding his forces and hindering his Devotion and this (c) Anno 1448. (d) Pope Felix the 5th renounced and deserâ—ed the Papacy which he formerly swaâ—ed Lo here five Popes reâ—ouncing and resigning their Bishopricks Herman a Weda Archbishop of Colen who deceased An. 1552. desired often to dye a simple Christian without any charge or dignity rather then to die a Priest or a Bishop To come nearer homâ— Dubritius Bâ—shop of Landaffe voluntarily reâ—ounced his Archbishopricke so Sampson Paulus Leonorius and Amon made Bishops volens nolens voluntarily gave over their Episcopacies St. Patrick the first Archbishop or primate of all Ireland and Benignus his third Successor in that See willingly resigned their Prelacies retiring themselves to Glastenbury Abby And Anno 1366. (d) Richard Havering Archbishop of Dublin voluntarily renounced his Archbishopricke upon this occasionâ— One night he dreamed that a certaine Monster heavier then the whole world stood eminently aloft upon his brest from the weight whereof he chose rather to be delivered then alone to have all the goods of the world When he wakened he thought thus with himselfe that this was nothing â—ls but the Church of Dublin the fruits whereof he received but took no paines for the same the case of most Prelates now as soon as he could therfore he came to the Pope of whom he was much beloved and there renounced and gave over the Archbishopricke for he had fatter and better livings then the Archbishopricke came unto Why should not our Archbishops and Bishops now follow these many vertuous examples in resigning and abandoning all their Bishopricks for the setting of a sweet peace and blessed Harmony in our distracted Church and State which their ambition pride tyranny Exorbitances and Innovations have almost brought to ruine Had they but their humility and piety they would speedily renounce their most pernicious Hierarchy to imbrace a fraternall unity and parity with their fellow-brethren whom Christ hath made their equals as these and other Prelats have done and as our present * Archbishop of Canterbury confesseth that famous Nazianzen rather thâ—n the peace should be broken freely resigneth the great Patriarchate Constantinople and retired whose steps he should doe well to follow But if he or they refuse to do it for our Churches peace and Kingdomes safety let them know that it is no new thing to abolish Bishopricks by Act of Parliamâ— by which * most Bishopricks were first created and so not Jure Divino How many Bishopricks have been supprest in Ireland and Wales in Later ages * Mr. Camden can at large informe us almost halfe the Ancient Bishopricks there being not now extant The Bishopricke of Westminster was no sooner erected almost but instantly suppressed And 7. Ed. 6. The * Bishopricke of Durham by Act of Parliament was dissolved and the Lands and hereditaments thereof given to the King but 1. Mariae Paâ—l 2. c. 3. Popery â—lowing in againe that Bishopricke was revived and reerected yet not so fiâ—mly but that it and all others are still subject both to a temporall and finall dissoluâ—ion when eveâ— his Majesty or the state in Parliament shall thinke meet as all the Prelates and the whole Convocation expreâ—ly acknowledge in their * Institution of a Christian man dedicated to King Henry the 8. and ratified by Parliament as the Abbies Priories and such like Nests of Antiâ—hristianisme in this Realâ— though seâ—led by Laâ—s and long Prescription were all suppressed by pâ—blick * Acts of Parliament in a moment If any deâ—m the continuance of our Lorly Prelates necessary in regard of their presence in Parliaments which some conceive cannot be held without the presence of these â—ordâ— Spirituall I Answer first that Abbots and Priors before the dissolution of Monaâ—teries were Spirituall Lords in Parliament aswell as Bishops since then Parliaments both may have been and are now held without Lord Abbots and â—riors they may by the same reason be held without Loâ—d Bishops Secondâ—â— Bâ—shops sit nâ—t in Parliament of right as they are Bâ—shops for as Bishops they are not * propeâ—ly Peers and shal be tryed in case of Treason by a common Iury as Scrâ—ope Fisher and Cranmer were buâ— as they hold of the King per a Baroâ—iam in right of their Churches which few of them at this day doe Therfore their siâ—ting in Parliament is not of right but of meere grace of the King who may Sommon or not Sommon â—hem at â—is pleasure sincâ— they are no Lords nor yet so stiled by the King in any of their Patenâ—s though they so inâ—itle themselves in some of their (b) late Prinâ—ed Books Thirdly In (c) matters of Treason Felony blood and Capitall Crimes debated in Parliament the Bishops both by Common and Canon Law oâ—ght not to give their votes nor yet to be present in the house but to depart which no other Peeres doe â—ut they * If then the Parliament in these cases of highest naâ—ure may passe a compleat Iudgement without them their presence is not necessary in it nor they any needfull members of it Fourâ—hly Bishops in former ages
eâ—en under Popish Kings when they had most sway have been excluded Parliaments much more then may they be so now (c) Gardner and Bonner in King Edwards dayes and all Bishops that were married as most then were in the first Parliament in Queen Maries reigne were excluded the Parliament and in King Edward the 1. his time at the Parliament held at S. Edmonds Bury Anno 1296. all the Bishops were put out of the Parliament and Kings protection and that Parliament held good and made Laws without them And Anno 1273. in the 20. yeare of Henry the 3. the Statute of Merton cap. 9. toâ—ching Bastardy was made by the Lords temporall and Commons without and against the consent of the Bishops â—hâ—se two Presidenâ—s are cited by Bishop Iewell in his Apology against * Harding f. 620. who there affirmes that a Parliament may be held without any Bishops to which * Mr. Crompton and Bishop Bilson likewise assent therfore I shall no lâ—nger debate it as being pasâ— all doubt concluding this point in Bishop Bilsons words a great Champion for Episcopaâ—y which are full and notable * Claime you Bishops that interest and prerogative that without you nothing shal be done in matters of Religion by the Laws of God or by the liberties of this Realm By the Laws of the Land have no such priviledge Parliaments have been kept by the King and his Barons THE CLERGIE WHOLLY EXCLVDED And when the Bishops were present their voyces from the Conquest to this day were never negative â—y Godsâ—aw you have nothing to doe with making Laws for Kingdomeâ— Common-wealths oâ— may teach you may not command Pâ—rswasion is your part compulsion is the Princes Iâ— Princes imbrace the Truth you must obey them If they pursue Truth you must abide them By what Authority then claime you this dominion over Princes that their Laws for Religion shal be voyd unlesse you consent After which he proves at largâ— that the Kings of Iudah and Israel of old with many godly Christian Kings and Emperours since have made not only Civil but â—cclesiasticall Laws without a Council or any suffrage of Bishops Much more then may they hold a Parliament without their presence as Bishop Jewel proves at lange It was a noâ—able Speech and true of Ludovicus Cardinall Arelatensis in the Councel of Basill (q) where he maintained the parity of Bishops and Presbyters That rich and Lordly Bishops feare the power of the Prince and to be spoyled of their temporalities neither have they free liberty to speak as is required in Councels Albeit if they were true Bishops and true Pastors of Soules they would not doubt to put their lives in venture for their Sheep nor be afraid to shâ—d their blood for their Mother the Church But at this present the more is the pitty it is too rare to find a Prelate in this world which doth not prefer his temporalities before his Spiritualities with the love whereof they are so withdrawn that they study rather to please Princes then God and confesse God in corners but Princes they will openly confesse Concluding â—hat the poor are more apt to give judgement then the rich because their riches bringeth feare and their poverty causeth liberty For the poore feare not tyranny as rich men do who being given over to all kind of vanities idlenesse and sloth will rather deny Christ then lacke their accustomed pleasures Such are they whom not their flock but their revenues make Bishops Have ye not heard how they said they would consent to the Kings will and pleasure But the Inferiors are they which have had truth righteousnesse and God himselfe before their eyes and they are greatly to be commended for shewing themselves such men unto the Church of God If â—hen any desire the continuance of Lord Bishops in Church or Parliament yet it wil be necessary to strip them of their Temporalities and Lordships and to confine them to one living with Cure where they may reside and preach like other Ministers because their Temporalities will make them Temporizers and to vote amisse agâ—nst God and the Republike both in Parliament and Convocation as this Cardinall truly informs us from experience To close up all in a few words I shall desire 〈◊〉 â—ordly Prelates and others to observe that Rev. 4.4.10.11 c. 5 6.11 12.14 c. 7.11 12 13 14â— 15. c. 11.15 19 17 18. c. 19.4 5 6. The 24 Elders are placed next in rank to the very throne of Christ as being next to him in Authority and Iurisdiction no Archbâ—shops or Bishops â—â—ing there named much lesse interposed between them That the Angels whom our Prelates will needs interpret â—o be Diocesan Bishops in the 2d and 3d of the Revelation though the Contents of our last â—ranslated Bibles expresly define them to be the Ministers not Bishops of the 7 Churches stand round about the Elders and are remoters from Christs throne then theyâ—therfore not so honourable That Christ standeth in the midst of the Elders to signiâ—ie that â—hey are subject to no Diocesan Bishop but Christ alone and â—hat no Lord Bishops but Elders only belong to the Kingdome and Government of Christ who is never said to be in the midst of Archbishopâ— and Bishops none of his institution but of the 24. Elderâ— only That these Elders alone worship and prostrate themselves give thanks and resolve doubts upoâ— all occasionsâ—not Bishops And that when the Kingdomes of this world become the Kingdome of oâ—â— Lord and his Christ and when the Lord God omnipotent is said to raigne the Elders are still said to be about Christs throne and to adore and praise him there being no mention at all of Bishops Therfore our Prelates must needs confesse themselves to be but Elders only properly or else acknowldge that Elders by divine â—nstitution are Superiour to them in dignityâ— and that Archbishops and Bishops have no place at all appointed them by Christ about his throne or withâ—n his Church and Kingdome and therfore must needs be Antichristian and inâ—oâ—erable in our reformed Church out of which I doubt not â—re long to see them quite ejected and cast unto the Dunghill as most unsavoury Salt toward which dâ—sired good worke I presume this little Catalogue may conâ—ribute some assistance especially if thou correct these ensuing Errors of the Printer ere thou begin to read it occasioned by the Authors absence and the Printers unacquaintednesse with the Authors names theâ—ein recited which slips of course find easie pardon ERRATA PAg. 1. Câ—lum 2. line 19 read Papiasâ— p. 2. col 1. l. 101. and 15. â— Alâ—xandrinus l. 25. Nazianzâ—num l. 30. Aerius col 2. l. 11. Primasius 22. Nazianzeâ—â— l. 25 26. Rhabanus Maurus l. 35. Oâ—â—umeniuâ— l. 43. for 34.1 3 4. p. 3. col r. l. 5. â—vo l. 6. Decretalium l. 2â— Plaâ—ctu l. 29. â—anormitan l. 31. Tholâ—sanus l. 32. Gratianum l. 37. for Claâ—isio â— Clavasiâ— col 2. Sit
c. 16 Tom. 5 p â—â— â—n â—pist Paâ—â—â— l 19. in Phil. 1 1 l 23 in 1 Tim. 3 l 25 in Tit. 1 Tom. 5 p 455 456 498 499 521 522 523 De instituâ—â—ons Clericorurâ— l â— â— 4 5 6 Tom 6 p. 5 6 Haymo Halberstatensis in Phil. 1. â— Tit. 1 An 560. The 12 Councell of Toledo Can 8 Aâ—â—laâ—iâ—s Fortunatus d Ecclesiasticâ—â— Ofsiâ—â—s l 2 c 13 Anno 1050 Pecumenâ—a in Aâ—â—a Apost 5 15 2 in Phil 1 1 Tim: 3 Tit 1 fol 79 586 655 683 Anno 1070 Theophylact. Com in Act 20 17â— 28 in Phil 1 1 1 Tim: 3 Tit 1 p 517.576 600 801 Anno 1â—00 Conradus Bruno in Phil 1 1 1 Tim: 3 Tit 1 Anno 1130 Barnard De Consideratione ad Eugenium l. 2 34 Epist. 42 Sermâ— 23 25. 77. Super â—antiâ—â— De laudibuâ— Maria Homil 1 Concio in Concilio Rhemensi ad Pastâ—â—â—s Sâ—râ—â— THE THIRD SQVADRON THe third Squâ—dron is constituted of forraigne Cannonists and Popish Schoolemen wâ—iters and Councels from the Yeare of our Lord 1100 till this present as Iâ—o Carnaâ—â—nsis Dâ— â—alâ—luâ—â— pa. â—5 c â—8 59.72 1â—â— 143.144 Peter Lombard Sententiarum l 4. distinâ— 24. I. K. L mâ— Comenâ—aâ—iâ—m Phil. 1 1 Tit 1. 1 Tim: 3 Gratian the gâ—eaâ— Canâ—onist distinctio 18 21 22 23 24 25 39 50 60 61 62 63 64 65 6â— 67 68 80 93 95 Causa 2 qu. 7 Causa 24 qu 3 Hugo Caâ—dinalis in Phil â— 1 Tit 1 1 Tim: 3 Aquinas secundâ— secundae qu â—4 Ar 6 â—rg 1. Supplementum in tertiam pâ—rtem qu 37 Art 7 Durandus in l 4 Sentent Distinct 24. qu 5 6 Rational Divinorum l 2 Iohannis Parisiensiâ— de potestate Regia Papâ—li apud moâ—â—â—um de Ecclesia c 11 Catalogum Testium veritatis p 525 Carthusiâ—â— Caâ—etan and the Author of the Oâ—dinaâ—y glosse in Acts 15 c 20 17 28 Phil 1 1 1 Tim: â— Tit 1 5 7 cardinalis Arelatensiâ— apud AEneam Sylvium de Gestis Concilij Basiliensis l. 1 p 27 28 29 Alvarus Pelagius de Plainetu Ecclesia â— 1 Art 70. l 2 Art 1 to 17 Panormitam c 4 de Consuetudine Anselmus Lucensis Collectanea Can l. â— c. 87 127 Gâ—egorius Tholosamus Polycarp l 2 Tit 19 39 Iohn Thiery Glosâ—a in Gâ—ationum distinct 95 cap olim with all other Glosses and Canonists on that Text Heâ—â—iâ—us Gorichen in l 4 Sentent Distinct 24â— Astensis Summa pars 2 l 6 Tit 2 Artic 2 Angelus de claucisio Summa Angelica Ordo 1 The e councell of Lingon Anno 1404 of Paris Anno 1557 Duarenus de sacr Eccle injust l 1 c 7 Onus Ecclâ—sia c 14 to 27 Nicholas Cusaâ—â—â— de concoâ—diâ— Catholicâ— l. 2 c. 13. Alphonsus a Câ—stâ—o advers 〈◊〉 Sit â—piscopus Michael Medina de sacro hâ—m Oâ—ig et continetia 〈◊〉 â—spencaâ—â— in 1 Tim. c 3 Digressioâ—â—m in Tim â— 1 c 1 2 3â— and in Tit 1 â— â— The Rhemist â—nnotâ—tion on Acts 〈◊〉 sect 4 and in Tim 4. Phil 1. 1 â—it 1 â—â— Iâ—â—obus Fabor in 1 Tim â— 4 â— Tit 1. Sixtus Sevensi Bibl 〈◊〉 l â— Anno 32â— Azoâ—ius Mâ—â—â—lium pâ—râ— 2 l 3 c 1â—â— Buoniuâ— Anâ—uâ—ll Eccles â—om 1. p 5â—â— Iacobus de Grâ—ssâ—s dâ—sâ—â—lionum Auâ—â—carum parâ— 2 l 1 c 9 11 5 â— 9 1â— 14 16 l 3 c. 12 11 3.4 Petâ—â—s Bâ—â—sseldin â—uchyâ—idion Teâ—â—â—giae Pâ—storalis pâ—â—s 1 c 15. with other Pontisâ—â—â—ans though sundry else of them are the greatest sâ—icklers for â—â—isâ—opâ—ll Mâ—â—â—â—ne of Puâ—pose to advâ—nce the 〈◊〉 Supremâ—cy with the Parity of Bishops and Pâ—esbiters Iuâ—â— Dâ—â—mâ— â—sterly subverts and ruineâ—â— I shall close up this Squâ—drâ—n with the â—â—e Authorities of some Semiâ—â—â— Priests in Enâ—land As namely of Niâ—câ—â—las Smiâ—h in his modest and bâ—iefe discussion of certaine Assertions which are taught by Mr. Doctor â—â—lâ—ison in his Treatise of the â—cclesiasticall 〈◊〉 where thus he determines * I judge is no rashnes to affirm that since England enjoyed a Bisâ—â—pâ— to wit a Poâ—â—s â—ishopâ— to confirme the Papists and controll the Pâ—iests namely Richâ—â—d bisâ—op of Châ—lcedâ—â— created the generall â—ishop and superintendâ—nt both of Englandâ— and Scotland by Pope Vrbaus speciall Bull dated the 4th of August Anno 1625. The Coppy whereof you shall â—ind printed in Censura Propositionâ—m quaâ—undam c. per sacram facultatem Theologâ—a Parisiâ—nsis factae Paâ—isiis 1631 p 63 64 65 that more damage hath happened to the Catholikes in generall by reason of discord and frequent losse of charity then they have received benefit by the Sacrament of Conâ—irmation onely conferred on some few That all holy men have exceedingly eâ—deavoured to sâ—un such an high digâ—ity That a Bishop is in a State which presupposeth but yet gives not perfection which the State of Religion not onely presupposeth but giveth That a vow not to receive a Bishopricke is valid and sacred That â—o desiâ—e a Bishopricke even for that which iâ— best in it to wit for the good of soules according to St Thomâ—s sâ—cunda sâ—â—uâ—da que 185. Art 1 seemes to be presumptiâ—n and there are some who stick not to say and that commonly it is a moâ—tall sinne That these â—ropositions following are strange idle and absurd That it is dâ— iure divinâ— and that the law of God is that every particular Church as England is ought to have a Bishop That without a Bishop England were not a particular Church That unlesse every particular Church hath its Bishop or Bishops the whole and Vniveâ—sall Church could not be as Christ hath instituted it an Hierarchie composed of divers particular Churches That without a Bishop we cannot have conâ—irmation c. All which principles saith hee are worse then the concultion it selfe and demonstrated by us to â—it in that Treatise to have no foundation at all Thus this Popish Priest who proving that the Church of England may well subsist without a Popish Bishop to sway and order it grants that it may doe the like without our Protesâ—ant Prelates and that plainly resolves that it is not from any divine law or institution that the Church of England should have any Bishop at all to govern it Daniell a Iesu another Priest and a Reader of Divinity thus seconds him in his Apologie for the proceeding of the holy see Apostolike as to the government of the catholickes in England during the time of Persecution * That it is most false and of dangerous consequence that a particular Church cannot be without a Bishop That Gods law requires no more but that there be somâ— Bishops in the Church to wit so many that there bee no danger that the whole Order should suddainly be taken away by their deaths and so dispersed through the world that all Christians may bee sufficiently provided of learned and vertuous Priests If this be done the law of God is satisfied
Faber Centur Eccles Magdâ— 1 l 2 c 7 Col 530 531 507 508 Cent. 1. c â— Col 125 126 Centuâ— 4 c. 5 de haresibus c 10 Peter Martyr Locaâ—â—m comâ— Tom 1. Glass 4 â—ocus 6 Tom 2 dâ— Eucharistia locuâ— 1. Obiect 50 Virellas Religioniâ— Christi coâ—pendium l 3 c 11 â—osâ—annus in Tit 1 5. 7 Hemingâ—us and Iohn Mayâ—â— in Phil 1 1 1 Tim: 3 Tit. 1 5 7. Antonis Sadâ—el ad Repetita Tarriani Responsio p 50 51 61 De Legitimâ— vocaâ—ione Pasâ—oram p 66 to 88 ad Repetiâ—â— Tuâ—riani locus 12 p 406 to 500 Pezelius Aâ—gum Respons pars 7 de Ordin ministr. in Argument 1 Cosâ—â—r â—levian in Piâ—l 1 1 Theodoret Beza de dibesâ—â—s ministrorum gradâ—â—as contâ—a Sarabiam Annotat. in Phil 1 1 Tit 1. 5 7 Viretâ—s de Minisâ—â—is Verbi Dei Sacram l 11 c 19 de Adulterinis Saâ—ram Stephanus Ezegedimâ—s locorum Com de Ministr Sab 4 p. 202 Lavather in Ezech com 10 George Soâ—iâ—â—â— Methodo Theologia Pâ—scator Theses Theologiâ— locus 23 Thes 50 in Act 20 28 Pâ—il 1. 1 1 Tim. 3. 4 Tit. 1.5 7 Iunius Controaâ—ares 5 lib. 1. c 14. n 2 15â— 23 c 25. n. 4.14 Contr. 3. l. 1. c. 8. n 24â—Contrâ—â— l 1. c. 5. n. 24. Morney Lord of Pâ—essa Tractatus de Ecclesia c 11 Holanâ—â— Syntaginâ— Theologiae l. 7 â— 11 Bucanus loc. 42.44 Theodorus Biblainder in Chromagr Arinis Scultâ—tus Paraus Selneccorus Tossianâ—â— Anâ—onius Fayus Ioâ—nnis Mâ—dâ—â—lneâ—â—s Eilhardâ—s Lubmus George VVeinrichus â—â—dâ—ous willichus Cosmaâ— Megalianus Thâ—mâ—s Venâ—torius Fredericus Baldwenus Gâ—oâ—ge Deâ—vadius on Phil. 1 1.1 Tim. 3. 4 5 Tit. 1.5.7 De oâ—ficio jusâ—iâ— Miâ—istorum speculum Sâ—â—â—rdotâ— Carolus Mâ—linaeus Comment in Edictâ—â—â— 2 Contâ— paâ—nas datus abusâ—â— Papaâ—â—m p. 148 to 1â—6 Petrus Molmeus de voâ—aâ—ionâ— Miniâ—trorâ—m l 1 c 7 l 2 c 8 9 10 l 3 c. 6 3 8 Daniell Chamierus Paâ—stratiae Catholica Tom 2 De Oâ—â—um Ponâ—if l 10 c 6 l 9 c 14 15 Gersom Bucerus de Gubernatione Eâ—clesiaeâ— Mâ—â—â—lâ— 1618 in answer to Bishop Downhams Sermon â—nd his defence thereof never yet replied to the best and learnedest Treatise extâ—nt of this Subject with infinite others (m) Doctor Reynolds the greatest bookeman of his age or since confessing that all learned men in forraigne Nationsâ— that he had read and mâ—ny more no doubt which he had not reâ—d treating of this Subject did all coâ—sent in this particular of the Parity of Bishops and Presbyters by Gods law and divine institution To these I might add many sâ—ottish writers aâ— Mr. Iohn Knox in the troubles of Frankâ—ord in his History of the Church of Scotland in his godly Letter to the faithfull Mr. Robert Roâ—â—â— Comment in Ephes 4 the wholâ— Synod of Fâ—â—se An 1591 Patricke Adâ—msoâ—Arch-Bishop of St Anâ—rewes his Polinody thereinâ—Andrew Mâ—lium in his Mâ—sâ— Patricij Adamsoni Palniodia Celsâ— Commisâ—ionis Aâ—â—omia printed Anno 1620. Altare Damascenum A protestation and Treâ—tise from Scotlâ—â—d Printed 1608. VVilliam Cooper Bishop of Gallâ—â—aâ— in his Sermon before the States Anno 1606. The review of the Synod of Perth with sundry others concurring in the selfe same judâ—ment with all eageâ—nesse that may be THE FIFTH SQVADRON THe 5. Squadron is compacted and made up of our owne domesticke writers Martyrs Authors aswell ancient as Modern which I shall here digest iâ—to a Chronologicall order Anno 390 we have Sedulius Scotus in 1 Tim 3 Titâ— 1 Bibl. Patr. Tom. 5 pars 3 p 516. b. 519. gâ— h. An. 5â—0 Gildaâ— in his Acris coâ—â—eptio Cleri Angliâ— 720 Venerable â—eda in acta Apost â— 20 Tom 5 Col 657 Anno 790 Alcuminus de Divinis officijs c 35 16. Col 1082 108â— Epistola 108 ad sparatuâ—â— Comment in 5 Ioan l 5â— Cap 25 Col. 547 548 549 Anno 1080 Anselme Arch-Bishop of Canterbury (n) stiled the Pope of the other world by Pope Vrbâ—n himselfe Commeâ—t in Ephes. 4 Tom 2 p 280 in Phil 1 in 1 Tim. 3.4 Titus 1 ibid p. 295 356 357 Anno 1140 Iohn Saresbury com in Phil. 1. Titâ— 1â— 1. 4 1 Tim. â— 3 de Nuges Curialium l 8 c 17 23 Anno 1160 Petrus Blesensis de Iâ—stitutione Episcop Tractatus Epistola 18 22 25 43 64 Anno 12 40 Alexander Alensis Summa Theologia pars 4. qu. 26 n. 8 9. Artic. 1. in 1 Tim. 8. Tit. 1 An 1280. Richadus de media Villa in l 4. Sent Distinct 24. Anno 1320. William Occham in Catalogo Testium veritaris p 524 525 589. Foxe Acts and Monuments p 358. 359 360. Nicholas Lyra in Act 20 Phil. 1 1. Tim. â— Tit. 1 1. Pet 5 Anno 1350 Richard Fitz-ralph Arch-Bishop of Ardmagh and Primate of all England Responsio ad quest Armenorum l â—1 c. 1 to 7. apud Thomam Waldensem Tom. 3. c. 60.61 62 63. Catalogum Testium Veritatis p 52 S. Robert Holcot in l Sapientiâ— Sect. 77 163. An. 1380. our Famous English Apostle Iohn Wickliff Dialogorum l 4 c. 15.16 17 18.26 apud Thomam Waldensem Tom 1 l 3 Artic 3 câ— 29 30 31 32. Tom. 2 de Saâ—cramento ordinis c 117 118. Tom. 3 c 60 61 62 63. Thomam Walsinghamum hist. Angliae p. 299â—303 304 Fox Acts and Monuments p 414 Geofry Chancer the Pâ—oughmans tale patt 1 2 Pierce Plowman passus 23 Anno 1390 William Swinderbg Martyr Fox Acts and Monuments p 430. 431 434. See the Epistle of Lucifer to the Prelates c written about that age thought to bee his Anno 1391 Walter Brute Martyr Ibid p. 439. Annoâ— 2425. Sir Iohn Old-Castle the Lord Câ—bham Martyr Fox Ibid p 517 518 522 All the Disciples of Wicklifâ—e in that age Walsingham hist. Anglia p 372. Antiqu Ecclesia Brit p 302 Anno 1430 Alexander Fabritius destructorium viviarum pars 4 c 8 B 5 14. C c. 21 B. C. I c. 22. D pars 5 c 2 E I l c 14 A pars 5. c 2 L. pars 6.3 Iohn de Bâ—rgo Pupilla Oculi pars 6 7 c. â— C D William Lyndewood Provinc Constit l 3 Tit. de vita honestate Clerìcorum f 86 cap Ordinis Iohn de Aton Constit. Othonis de officio Archiepisc. f. 44. c Archiepiscopum Reginald Peacocke Bishop of Chichester Anno 1457. de AEqualitate Ministrorum lib. apud Balaum Cent 8 Scriptorum Brit c â—19 Anno 1536 Iohn Lambert Martyr Fox Acts and Monuments p 1009 1016 Cuthbert Tonstall Bishop of Duresme and Iohn Stokes by Bishop of London in their Epistle to Cardinall Poole Fox p. 972 9â—3 in Thomas Bâ—con his reports of certain men vol 3 fol. 267 VVilliam Tyndall Martyr Obedience of a Christian man in his workes p 114 124. 133 192 185. The practise of Popish Prelates p. 342.343.354 in Fox p.
986. Anno 1537. Thomas Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Edward Arch-Bishop of Yorke Iohn Bishop oâ— London Cutâ—bert Bishop of Durham Stephen Bishop of Winchester Robert Bishop of Carlile Iohn Bishop of Exeter Iohn Bishop of Lincolne Iohn Bishop of Bath Rowland Bishop of Covenâ—â—y and Lichfield Thomas Bishop of Ely Nicholaâ— Bishop of Salisburyâ—Iohn Bishop of Bangor Edward Bishop of Herefordâ—Hugh Bishop of Worcester Iohn Bishop of Roâ—hester Richard Bishop of Chichester VVilliam Bishop of Norwich Robert Bishop of Assaph Robert Bishop of Landaffe Richard VVolman Arch-Deacon of Sudbury VVilliam Knight Arch-Deacon of Richmond Iohn Bells Arch-Deacon of Glocester Edward Bonner Arch-Deacon of Leicester VVilliam Skippe Arch-Deacon of Dorcet Nicholas Heath Arch-Deacon of Stafford Cuthbâ—rt Marshall Arch-Deacon of Vottingham Richard Corren Arch-Deacon of Oxford VVilliam Cliffe Geoffry Dowes Robert Oking Ralph Bradford Richard Smithâ— Symon Matthew Iohn Pryn VVilliam Buokmaster VVilliam May Nichoâ—as VVottin Richard Cox Iohn Edmunds Thomas Robertson Iohn Baker Thomas Barrett Iohn Hase Iohn Tyson Doctors and Professors of Divinity and of the Civill and Canon Law with the whole convocation house and Clergie of England in their Booke intituled the institution of a Christian man dedicated by them to King Henry 8. Printed cum Privilegio subscribed with all their names and ratefied by the Statute of 32 H 8 c. 26. chap of the Sacrament of order fol. 48. c an excellent place Anno 1538. Robert Barnes Doctor of Divinity and Martyr in his workes p. 210. Anno 1540. VVilliam VVraghâ—on in his hâ—nting and finding out of the Romish Fox among the Bishops in England dedicated to King Henry the 8. and his rescue of the Romish Fox A Booke intituled The Image as well of a true Christian Bishop as of a counterfeit and Anti-christian Bishop printed about the same time Rodeâ—icke Mors his Supplication or complaint to the â—arleament of England c. 19.20 A supplication to King Henâ—y the 8. by a namelesse Author against Bishops their jurisdiction pride Lordlinesse and wealth Henry Stalbridge his exhortatory Epistle to his most deare Country of England against the Pompous Bishops of the same as yet the true members of the great Antichrist of Rome their most filthy Father Lincolne Ridley his Exposition on Ihil 1. Iohn Frith a Pious learned Martyr his answer to Sir Thomas Moore p. 116. Nayler his answer to the epistle of the great Turke printed Anno 1542. Iohn Bale afterward Bishop of Osgris in Ireland his image of both Churches on Apoc. c 6 f 42 9 f 56.65 c. 13. f. 105 116 118. c. 14 f. 126. c 15 f 150. c. 17. f 160. King Henry the 8 himselfe in his Book inscribedâ— A necessary erudition for any Christian man published with the advise and approbation of all the Prelates Clergy of England in their convocation and of the Lords Spirituall and temporall and nether house of Parliament with the Kings own Royall Epistle to all his loving Subjects before it Anno 1545. by vertue of the Statute of 32 H. 8. c. 26. chap. of the Sacrament of order Anno 1551. The Book of Ordination of Ministers and Bishops confiâ—med by act of Parliament 3 Ed. 6. c. 12.5 6. Ed. c. 1. 8. Elizab c. 1. which prescribed the 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. to be read at the Ordination of Ministers and consecration of Bishops and limits the selfe same forme of Ordination with the power of impesiâ—ion of hands both to Ministers and Bishopâ— Anno 1552. Iohn Hooper Bishop of Glocester a Martyr expition upon the 8. Commandements and in Psalm 23â— p. 40. Hugh Laâ—ymer once Bishop of VVorcesâ—er a Martyr in his Fourtâ— Sermon of the Plough and in his 2.3.4 and 6. Sermons before King Edward the 6. Anno 1â—â—5 Iâ—hn Poveâ— Bishop of VVinchester in his Apologie against Thomas Martyrâ— c 4.5 f. 43.44.52.53.59 Doctor Harpesfield Arch-Deacon of London and Iohn Bradford Martyr Fox Acts and Monuments p 1465 Anno 1558 Thomas Bombâ—edge Martyr Fox ibid p 1856. Iohn Elmer after Bishop of London in his Harborow for faithfull Subjects Master Bullingham after Bishop of Lincolne in his Letter to Master Bull Det 5 1â—64 Master Thomas Becon in his catâ—chisme in his workes dedicated to all the Bishops of England by name approved applauded by them and Printed Cum Privilegio London 1562. vol. 499.500 The Doctrine of Christ and Anti-christ vol. 3 f 409 4010. sect. 18.19 Iames Pilkington Bishop of Durham Exposition on Agge c 1. verse 1 2 3.4 9.12.13 c. 2. v. 1 2 3.4.9.10.11 on Obidias v. 7.8 and in his Treatise of buâ—ning Paules Church Incomparable Iohn Iuell Bishop of Salisbury defence of the Apologie of the Church of England Edit 16.10 part 2 cap 3 divis 5. c 4 divis 2 cap 5 divis 1 cap 7 divis 5 cap 9. divis 1 p 99.100 101.196 202 c VVilliam Alley Bishop of Exeter in his poore-mans Library part 1 Miscellanea Prâ—lect 3. f. 95 96. Printed cum Privilegio Edit. 2.1571 Alexander Nowell Deane of Paules his Reproofe of Doâ—mans Proofe LONDON 1565. cum privilegio f. 43.44.45 Doctor Lawrence Humfryes Regiuâ— Professor of Divinitie in the Vniversity of Oxford Puritano papismi Confuâ—atio ad Rat 3. p. 262.263 Iohn Keâ—ridge his Sermon on 1 â—im 3 1 2 3 London 1578 Iohn VVhitgiâ—t Arch-Bishop of Canterbury against Cart-wright p 353 Master Cart-wright in his second Replie against Whit-gist Anno 1585. â— Tract 8 of Arch-Bishops and Bishops p 404 to 616. CONFVTATION of the Remish Testament on Acts. 20. sect. 4 â—hil 1 sect. 1 1. Tim. 3. sect. 2. Tit. 1 sect. 2 Doctor VVilliam Fulk against Brislow motive 40 against Gregory Martin London 1583 p 172. Confutation of the Rhemiâ—â— Testament on Tit. 1 sect 2 phil. 1 sect 1. Master Iohn Foxe in his Acts and Monuments prescribed to be had in every Arch-Bishop Bishops Archdeacons Deanes and Prebend residentiaries house in every Cathedrall and Collegiate Church by the Canonâ— made in the Synod of London Anno 1571 Edit 1610 p 216 358 359. 360 414 430 432 434 439 517 518 599 625 961 972 1009 1016 1465 1856 both in the text and marginall Notes Doctor VVilliam VVhittaker Regius Professor of Divinity in the Vniversity of Cambâ—idâ—â— Contra Duraum l 6 sect 19 Responsio ad 6 Rationes campâ—ani Rat 10. p 122 141 Contr 2 qâ— 5. c 7 contr 4 qu 1 c 1 Master Pâ—ilip Stuâ—t his display of corruptions neare the end The â—ee hive of the Romish Church oft printed and lately reprinted Anno 1635. passing onâ— most learned Doctor Iohn Raynâ—lds in his conference with Hart Anno 1584 London 1609 c 3 divis 1. p 100 101.105 c 4 divis 2 p 122 123 c 6. divis p 185. divis 3 p 218 c. 8. divis 3 p 4â—1 divis 5 p 540 541 and his Letter to Sir Francis Knolles in refutation of Doctor Bancrofâ—s Sermon at Pauls-Crosse 9. Feb. 1588 dated sâ—pt 19. 1598 Doctor Aâ—drâ—â—willes Synopsis Papisini The 5 generall Controversie Qu
cleer by Acts 10 2â—Phil 1. 1. Tit. 1 5 7. that in Ignatius his daies Bishops Presbiters were all one both in Title office and jurisdiction that there were many Bishops in every chiefe City and Church not any sole â—ishop paramount the Presbiters over one or many Churches and that Diocâ—san Bishops were instituted long after the Apostles and therefore after Ignatius his dayes who lived in the Apostles age as all Authors forecited accord and the whole Clergie of England in their Institution of a Christian man dedicated to King Henry the 8 resolue in direct termes These Epistles therefore of Ignatius which speâ—k of one Bishop in a â—hurch distinct â—rom and superior to Presbyters must needs be â—orged Thiâ—dly Ignatius in these Epistles makes Bishops successors to Christ and to sâ—and in his stead and Presbyters to succeed the Apostles whereas all others maâ—es them successors to the Apostles only not to Christ who z leâ—t no successor or Vicar generall behind him bâ—t a remains himselfe for ever the High-Priest chiefe Shepheard and Bishop of our Sâ—ules and hath promised b to â—e with us alwaies even to the end of the world This therefore maâ—es his Authority but suspiciâ—us and coâ—teâ—ptible Fourthly Ignatius hath not oâ—e word in him that Bishops are superior to â—â—eâ—biters â—y any divine lâ—w or iâ—stitutionâ— the thing in question therefore his Authority if geâ—uine proves nothing for the oposites Fifthly Ignaâ—ius equals Bishops and Presbyters both in jurisdiction rule and Authority for â—pist â— ad â—ralâ—â—anus he writes thus â—ut be ye subject to the Presbyters as to the Apostles of Christ for the Presbyters are a certaine conjoyned Sessions and â—ssembly of Apostles Epist. 6. ad Magnesianes â—rebyteri president â—oco Sinatus Apostolis The â—resbyters rule in the place of the Senate of the Apostles Epist. 10. ad Symenses Do ye al â—ollow the Colledge of the presbiters as Apostles Now if Presbyters succeed the Apostles in the government oâ— the Church al are to be Subject to them to follow them as Christs Apostles then certainely â—hey are equall at least to Bishops who at the highest are by Gods institution only to be obeyed and followed but as Christs Apostles not to be preâ—erred before them if equalized with them as the proudest Prelate of them must acknowledge and and the c Fathers witnesse Sixthly d Ignatius confesseth that the Churches in those dayes were not ruled by the Bishops as they are now but by the Colledge Senate and Synod of the Elders communi Praesbytâ—oum concilio as Hierome e and all other after him affirme the Presbiters therefore had then equall and joynt authority with the Bishops even in point of Iurisdiction governments and did râ—le and govern the Church in common with them therefore the Bishops were not then Lords Paramount as now they maâ—e themselves but equall and one with them yea their Colleagues companions as Ignatius and the g â—ourâ—h counsel oâ— Caâ—â—hâ—ge stile theÌ„ Seventhly his words h that they shâ—uld â—e sâ—bject to the Bishop as to God and Christ if rightly understood maâ—e nothing for the Prelates Hieraâ—chieâ—â—or Saint Paul Ephes. 6 5.6 7. coâ—mands servants to be obedient unto them that are their Masters according to the flesh with â—eare and â—â—embling in singlenesâ—e of heart as unto Christ not with eye-service as â—en pleasers but as the servants of Christ doing the will of God from his heart with good will doing service unto the Lord and not to men c. Is therefore every Master a Bishop equall unto Christ and superior in inrisdiction and degree to Presbyters No So Polycarpus in his Epistle to the â—hilippians chargeth them i to be subiect to their Elders as unto God and Christ using the same words of Elders as Ignatius doth of Bishops Are Preâ—byters therefore Paramount Bishops and succesâ—oâ—s to Christ himselfe I trow not Ignatius his meaning therefore is not that Bishops are as high above Presbyters and the people as God and Christ are above the Apostles as some k ambitious Prelates fansie but only that we must obey Bishops in all things that they command and prescribe us out of Gods word as farre â—orth as we would obey God or Christ himselfe for he that heareth them heareth Christ himselfe and hee that despiseth them despiseth God and Châ—ist himselfe Luke 10.16 1 Thes. 4â— 8. In this manner likewise are we to be subject to every Minister whatsoeverâ—Heb 13.17.7.1 Thes. 2.13 This therefore proves nothing for the Prelates superiority over other Bishops especially since this Ignaâ—â—us himselfe Epist. 5 chargeth the Trallians to reverence Deâ—cons inâ—eâ—â—or to â—resbyters as Christ himselfe whose Vicars they are As for those extravagail expressions of Ignatius l Episcopus typum Dei Patris â—mnium geâ—ut quid enim aliud est Episcopus quam is qui â—mni â—â—incipatu protestate Superior est quod homini licet pro viribus imitator Christi Dei factus and the m like on n which same ground both the Popes and Prelates Monarchie they are so ridiâ—ulous â—alse ambitious and hyperbolical as favor neither of Ignatius or any Christian but rather of a meere papall and Anti-christian spiritâ— discovering these Epistles to be none of his and those â—relaâ—ts who assâ—me these speeches to themselues to be o none of Christs Mat. 11.29 All which consideredâ— this forged Aâ—tiquity will stand theÌ„ in no stead at all to prove them superior or distinct from Presbyters by any diuine institution and other Antiquity making for them I find not extant That Presbyters and Bishops by Gods law and Ordination are both one and the same of equall authority and jurisdiction as all these authorities resolve I shall undeniable manifest by this one Argument Presqyters by the expresse resolution of the Scripture have the very name and not so onely but the very office of Bishops Act. 20.17 28. Pâ—â—l 1 1 1. Tim. 3 1â— to 5. Tit. 1 5. to 1â— the same mission and commission the same function charge Ordination and quallification Matth. 28.19.20 1 Tim. 3 1. to 7. c. 4.14 c. 5 17. 2 Tim. 4.1 2 1 Pet. 5 1 2 3. Tit. 1 5. to 12. neither doth the Scripture in any place make any differeÌ„ce distinction or superiority between them or attribute any power to the one that it doth not to the other â—s the premises evidence and Matth. 20 25.26 27 28. Mar. 10 42 43 44 Luk. 22.25.26 Therefore by Gods law and institution they are one and the same and of equall authority power and jurisdiction in all things As for that distinction in power precedency and jurisdiction whiâ—â— hath since been made between them it hath proceeded partly from Canons and constitutions made by Bishops themselves p partly by meer usurpation and encrochment but principally from the grant and largenesse of Christian Princes who as they erected Bishoprickes and Diocesse
multitude of both sexes ascending into it in a decent manner with the said Bishops â—ate down between them like â— Domestical tame creature endued with reason The Bishops whiles they were yet fâ—rre off from the Sea descended out of the Chariot and the Fish likeâ—â—se â—omming downe from the chariot by himselfe stood upon his feet and began to walke between two Bishops putting one of his hands upon one Bishops shoulderâ— the other upon the other Bishops â—houlder so lovingly â—id these Monsters embrace on the other as if he had beenâ— a reasonable creature neither wondred he or was he moved with the tumult of the peopleâ— who flocked round about theÌ„ but walked modestly When he was come to the Sea-shore hee courteously beheld the Biâ—hops and rout of people there present and craving leave to depart of the Bishops with all humility by the gesture of hiâ— body and obtaining it he thereupon went into the Sea-water And going into the Water on his feet as high as his belly the Seâ— being hard â—y to deep for him to wade inâ— turning himselâ—e towards the Bishops and people expending the end of this matter he bowed downe his head in a most humble mannerâ— bestowing a blessing on them with his right hand in forme of â— crosseâ— and foâ—thwith descended into the depth of the Sea after which he was no more seene of any man Thus the Historian veâ—batim Now what should I make this strange dumbe Devill or Monster in the shape the habit and attire of a Lordly Bishop so courteous loving and â—â—miliar towards these Lordly Bisâ—opsâ— and they reâ—iprocally thus to him or what doth or could all this pretend But that Lordly Prelates with their pontificiall Masse-array and muming disguises are meere monsters in Gods Church and for the most part as mute as thiâ— dumbe or other fishes in the Pulpit opening their mouthes wide oft-times to bite yea devoure their fellow Brethren and Godâ— faithâ—ull people with their teeth like so many ravening wolâ—es or Sea Monsters but seldome or never piously to instruct theÌ„ wth their diligent pious gracious preaching tongues and that therefore they shal one day and I hope that day is now at hand with all their Anti-Christian Pompe Pride Vestments Trinkets and masking massing disguised be eternally cast out of the Church of God sent backe againe to the Sea of Rome from whence they came and there so utterly drowned that they shall never be seen nor heard of more in our or any other true Christian Church This hath beene already fulfilled not long after the appaâ—ition of this Monster in n Denmarke and most of the reformed Churches beyond the Seas which cast out their Lordly Prelates as meere Anti-christian dumbe mishappen ravenous Monster devouring Christs deare flocke and likewise in Biscaie among the Papists o where Biâ—hops aâ—e so execrable to the people that they will admit no Bishop so much as to come among them or enter into their Territories such terrible monsâ—ers are they insomuch that when Ferdinand the catholicie came in Progresse thither accompanied among othersâ— with the Bishop of Pampâ—line the people arâ—se in Armes draue back the Bishop and gathering all the dust which they thought he had troden onâ— and â—lung it â—nto the Sea And certainly their late intollerable tyâ—anny pride ambâ—tion cruelty oppression coveâ—uousâ—es Poperie secularity for now they are altogether seculaâ— not spirituall Lords iniustice malice persecutions impieties and monstrous prophannes haue deservedly made our Bishops as detestable as execrable to all sorts of English men who now groane and languish under these outragious dumbe silencing and silent Monsters as ever â—hey were or are to Bisâ—aneâ—s so as we shall doubtlesse shortly see their fatall finall ruine who now seeke nothing but the utter overthrow both of our Church our State and our Religion as I will make good at my uttermost perill to all their faces and proue it to their shame We know that two of their Cathedrals Ely Chichester where Bishop White and Mountague two late Innovaters and Champions of the Prelates Lord it were lately sâ—attered much of them blown downe and that the Bishop of Lincolnes chaire with the fall of his study of Bugden shattered all to peices with a poore despicable instrument a suddaine unexspected blastâ— of wind all in one day on Novemb. 4 1636. What is this and their present great wrath and malice against Gods people but a certaine prognosticke that p their time and Lording tyranny is short and their totall finall ruine neer at hand though to carnall reason it seemes impossible and that a suddain unexpected puffe of wind even the prayers câ—ieâ— and teares of those many Godly Ministers and poor christians they haue lately siâ—enced persecuted oppressed and still proceed to vexe and greiue with all despite and cruelty not withstanding all Godâ— plagues all late discoveries of â—heir vilenes tyranny and injusâ—ice shall shortly and suddainly overturn their Lordly Chaires throw downe their Epicureous Sees Dismount their mushrom Lordships unexspectedly sprung out of the earth the dunghill and swoln so great with pride and ambition that they will bee all head yea heads and Lords over all in Church and State affaires and dash q , these Babilonish brats of Rome in peices so as they shall never recover or get head againe In the meaâ—e time I shall pray and conclude all in the words of our English Letanyâ— From all our Lordly Prelates evill and mischiefe from the crafts and assaults of the Devill who rules and workes both in and by them from their wrath and unjust damnations in any of their courts and Highâ—commissions meere Spanish inquisitions from all their blindnes of heart their pride vaine gloryâ— and Hypocrisie their envy hatred malice and all their uncharitablenesse from all their sedition priuy conspiracy with Rome Priests Iesuites and betweene themselvesâ— to ruine root out our faithfull preaching Ministers and Religion and set up popery from al their false doctrine and Heresieâ— both in Presse and Pulpit from their hardnesse of heart against their poore persecuted and oppressed Brethren against all Gods mercies threatnings Iudgements aâ—d Plagueâ— of late inflicted and from all their contempt of Gods word and commandementsâ— in suppressing the frequent Preachers and preaching of the one and most insolent violation of the other especially the 2 4 6th Commandâ—menâ—s by setting up Altars images crucifixes crosses c bowing downe unto them by idolizing their owne canonsâ— ceremonies anâ— Romish Fopperies by maintaining the open prophanation of Gods holy Sabbath with all Heathenish sports and pastimesâ— and spurring men on headlong to this sinne and starving murthering the very soules of thousands of Gods people by robbing them of their â—pirituall â—ood and encouraging them to al sin and dissolutenes r Good Lord deliver us And leâ— all the people say Amen FINIS * Histoâ—y of the Councel of Trent Edit 3. p. 589 590 591. to â—16 *