to be Preâ—byter and then Bishop Which taketh away that distinction of Priority in order not of degree as if the calling Episcopall were a Numeral not a Mâ—nerall function a Priority in order and not a Superiority in degree For the word properly signifieth a staire or step as Act. 21. 35 Paule stoode 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vpon the staires Which interpretation of mine both Councils and Fathers do coâ—firme Concilâ—uâ— African calleth the three functions ecclesiasticall of Bishops Priests and Deacons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the three degrees of the Church Conc. Sardicen No man may be called to be a Bishop which hath not risen by euery 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad culmen Episcopatus Conc. CalcedoÌ„ To reduce a Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 backe to the degree of a Priest is sacriledge So NaziaÌ„ speaking of Athanasius saith that he had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as much preheminence honor for his virtue as by his dignity degrees Of Saint Basill also he saith that he rose to his Bishoprik 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the order and law of the spirituall Ascent which metaphor Saint Hierom himselfe vseth to Nepotian if thou desire the office of a Bishop gaudeo de ascensu I reioyce at thy Climing and of the same Nepotian fit Clericus per solitos gradus Presbyter In the infancy of the Church these degree were not distinct for they were not extant The first that were made were Deacons Act. 6. Presbyters there were none solemnly ordeined that we read of till Act. 14. 23. Ibid. 14. 23. The highest degree which was the function Episcopal the Apostles reserued vnto themselues a long time and that for 3. maine reasons First there was no Church established and but a few at the first conuerted wherefore all their whole labor they bent in turning the first key to open that dore of faith Act. 14. 27. namely the conuersion of the Gentiles which the Apostle 1. Cor. 16. calleth a great dore effectual al the help they could make either by Prophets Euangelists Coadiutors Pastors Doctors Planters Waterers or whatsoeuer was litle enough for that worke Secondly after the conuersioÌ„ of many people euen in setled Churches they hasted not to place a Bishop for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No great thing is suddenlâ—e brought to passe saith Nazian and a Presbyter fit to make a Bishop is hardly found saide a Carthaginian Bishop in an open Synod NaÌ„ ad haec idoneus quis saith Saint Paule though our Church here for a long time doubled the Echo with a quisquis The rule therfore of the Apostle being vnto Timothie that in no case he should take him that was Neophytus a new conuert and make him a Bishop of them the Church was at that time full euen for that cause also they absteined Thirdly few being found fit for that high calling the Apostles left some Churches to be gouerned by Presbyters reseruing stil the highest command to them selues but when they founde that humour whereof Saint Iames speaketh that euery man would bee a maister like Plinie his Amphisbaena a Serpent which hath a head at each end of her body both striuing which shold be the maister-head in the mean time toiles the body most miserably in the end reÌ„ts tears it self most lothsoÌ„ly finding I say those 2. effects which vse to follow Parity Plurality viz. dissention confusion it was generally decreed as Hierom confesseth Vt vnus caeteris superponeretur that one should be placed aboue the rest to gouerne both Presbyters and Flocke and that the whole care of the Church ad vnuÌ„ pertineret should belong to one he should be stiled by the name of Bishop particularly ouer this Clergy here assembled Timothie who is subscribed in the end of that second Epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first Bishop of the Church of Ephesus by impositioÌ„ of hands 〈◊〉 so was Titus also stiled Bishop of Creta as in the subscriptioÌ„ of that epistle appeareth Yea but these were S. Paules Bishâ—p say some and betweene them and ours a great 〈◊〉 True 1. For varietie of giftes and graces of the spirit A maine difference as 〈◊〉 as betwen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 12. 8. their knowledge for the most part 〈…〉 Reuelation ours acquired with much study and ndustry 2. In respect of the honour and reuerence which their Clergy and flocke performed to them A great difference ye see Saint Paul describes it 1. Thes. 5. to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more then a superaboundant aw and loue For maintenance they and we somewhat semblable theirs impeached by persecution ours exhausted by Sacriledge It is a prety obseruation though a sharp one which a Romish writer of the Church story long since made that the word Conscientia hath had very ill lucke in the Church of Christ it could neuer yet be at once in full Syllables in the Apostles timeâ— when there was Con and Sci a 〈◊〉 and a 〈◊〉 Clergy then entia was defectiue they had the 〈◊〉 of the Spirit but no indowment of possessions Afterwards when there was Con and Entia a religious yea a superstitious and a very 〈◊〉 Clergy then Sci was 〈◊〉 they were not then the 〈…〉 And in my time saith he Con and Sci are both gon and like Philâ—poemenes armie in Plutarch which had neither head nor feete but whole bellie they be all Entia they haue all the Honours all the Mannors and all the â—at of the land But with vs againe it is come round for now that we haue Con and Sci a learned God be thanked and a religious Clergy the Entia are gone our maâ—ntenance is imbâ—aseled our honors enuied yea euen that poore Ens Vrum which by Gods and the Kinges fauour we enioy was of late cast whole into the Kings mercy as if they would haue made vâ— non 〈◊〉 But the authoritie and preheminence ouer the Cleargie is all 〈◊〉 in them and vâ— they receiuing it from the Apostles and wee deriuing it from them which is manifest in two principall things wherein the Bishops then and we now are Superior vnto the other Clergy which for your better memorie may be reduced to two words each very like to other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 First Collation of Rewardes which Saint Paul calleth Ordination Tit. 1. 5. the highest honor that a Bishop can reward a Scholler of desert withall to make him a Priest of the High God Secondly Iuâ—iciall Censure iâ— their Consistorie and Visitation not of the Flocke onely but of the Pastors also both which Iurisdictions Distributiue and Correctiue the Apostles kept vnto themselues till they appointed Bishops either Substitutes in their absence or Successors after their death In the Church of theâ—â—alonica where there were many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
both Preachers Gouernours yet saith Saint Paul If any man obey 〈…〉 note him by a letter and shall I come vnto you with a Rod saith he to the Corinthians which Church had many Presâ—yters there is the Censure reserued For the other Philip though full of the holy Ghost and of power hauing preached and conuerted many in Samaria yet had no authoritie to lay-hands vpon any but the Apostles were faine to send from Hierusalem Peter and Iohn to doe that office there is Imposition of hands reserued both these they conueyed vnto Bishops First for Ordination by laying on of hands in this Church of Ephesus there were many Presbyters long before Timothie was appointed their Bishop yet Saint Paul sent him of purpose to Impâ—se handes 1. Tim. 5. 22. and for that intent also he left Titus in Creta Neither would the Church of Christ succeeding admit any other but Bishops to that businesse as not iustifiable for the Presbyters either by Reason example or Scripture First for Reason it is a rule which admits no contradiction saith the Apostle that he which blesseth should bee greater then he which is blessed taking it for the benediction which is ex authoritate not deuotione for the subiect may blesse the Prince man blesseth God in heartie deuotion but the blessing of authoritie comes from the greater as honour is in him that confers it not in him that takes it And this is Saint Ambrose his reason Secondly for example not one to bee shewed through the whole storie Ecclesiasticall that any besides a Bishop did it If some one of the inferior ranke presumed to doe it his Act was reuersed by the Church for vnlawfull as in the case of Collâ—thus a Presbyter of Alexandria whereof Athanasius and Epiphanius do both make mention who took vpon him to giue orders for which both himselfe was censured and what hee did was reuoked and they receiued as meere Lay-men and no otherwise vnto the communioÌ„ whom he had ordered Thirdly For scripture there is none either of Holie men or of the Holy-Ghost not holymen for all the Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with one consent do contradict it Chrysostome vpon the 1. Tim. 3. and 4. Theodoret vpon the same places Oecumenius vpon 1. Tim. 5. Ambrose is peremptory that it is neither Fas nor Ius consonant neither with Gods nor mans law that any besides a Bishop should do it Yea Hierom himselfe who setteth a Presbyter like him in Sophocle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aduanceth him as high as he can to make him go aequis ceruicibus with a Bishop yet takes him this one peg downe Excepta Ordinatione what is it saith he that a bishop doth which a Presbyter may not do sauing Ordination No scripture of the Holy-ghost either analogically by consequent or directly by precept For analogie none but the Apostles did it or might do it as before you heard not directly for to what Presbyter was the authority committed as a Presbyter vnto Timothy a Bishop of Ephesus it was said lay hands hastily on no man And to Titus a Bishop of Creta I have left thee here to ordaine presbyters But to each of these there is an obiection First for example that of Ananias Act 9. who being neither Apostle not Bishop onely a disciple laide his handes vpon Paul and had a commission for it True but they were Manus curatoriae not confirmatoriae as appeareth verse 12. to restore his sight not to giue him his function Els should he haue beene first actually consecrated an Apostle of Christ before hee had beene baptised into Christ which was Psal 18. Secondly for scripture Saint Pauls precept seemes to imply a practise of consecration by the Presbyteri in those wordes neglect not the grace which is in thee and was given thee cum impositione manuum presbyterii faire colours in show but they will not hold Shall the Fathers bâ—e iudges They al with one consent interpret the Presbytery by the Praelacy that is by the Bishops for they onely say the Fathers may doe it Shall moderne writers and the best of them Maister Caluin presbyterii nor the Colledge saith hee is here meant for the Bishops had then and after a colledge of priestes to assist them in their sacred businesse which Saint Hierom calleth Senatum ecclesiae but the office as if Paul shoulde haue said neglect not the grace which was giuen thee when by imposition of handes thou wert made presbyter which interpretation he borrowes from Saint Chrysost. Shal Saint Paul himselfe determine it In the second Tim 1. 6. Stirre vp saith he the grace which is in thee by the laying on of My hands So that either Saint Paul was himselfe that whole Presbyter 〈◊〉 as hauing in him being an Apostle which Bishops also haue all the fuÌ„ctions Ecclâ—siastical as the Philosopher speaks of anima rationalis that it hath in it all the inferior faculties both sensitiue and vegetatiue Or at least he was principal in the action without him it might not be done Which were it so yet Master Caluin stands resolute that S. Paul alone did it it preuentes a third obiection taken out of the 4. Carthaginian Councell where there is a Canon that when a Bishop laies handes to giue Orders all the priestes present do withall lay their handes iuxta manum Episcopi True First iuxta manum so that the Bishops hand must necessarily and 〈◊〉 bâ— on Secondly there is 〈◊〉 scripture a twofould 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or stretching forth of the hand the first extended to coÌ„secrate and bâ—esse So did the â—aâ—riaâ—chs and priestes in the ould testament our Sauiour and his Apostles in the new The other stretched out ad testimoâ—um for a witnesse and assent The Bishops hand is the first for that blesseth and consecrateth the preâ—byters assisting do with their handes 〈◊〉 and approue what hee doth How will that appeare demonstratiuely because if there were an error in the ordination as that a man either insufficient for learning or scandalous for life or otherwise Canonically impeached were admitted into Orders the Bishop only was censured the assisting presbyters neuer called in question whereof the examples are infinite and therefore the diuines haue very well obserued out of that place 1. Tim. 5. 22. lay handes hastily on no man that the Bishop as hee hath manuÌ„ porrigendaÌ„ he only hath authority to impose haÌ„ds so he hath also manuÌ„ corrigendam if as S. Basil speaketh he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hands too hasty and easy for admittance into orders without triall and testimony his hand onely is to bee corrected For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is thou Timothy not the Presbyters that communicatest with their sinne whom thou so admittest So then since neither the error was imputed vnto the Clergie assistant nor the Censure inflicted vpon them the
coÌ„clusion is found therefore the authoriâ—â—â— not committed vnto them Whereupon some because if they grant Imposition of handes they see a superioritie must needes follow haue therefore done as it is recorded of a Painter in the time of Queene Mary who hauing drawne King Henry the 8. against the Queenes comming through the Citty in Triumph with a Bible in his hand beeing checked by a great Counsailor of State and willed to wipe it out because he would be sure to leaue no part of the booke visible hee wiped out Bible hand withall so they with the superiority haue remoued also the â—â—remony insomuch that in some Churches as it is well knowne to your Maiesty when they admit any into Orders they shake haÌ„ds with them as bidding them welcome into their coÌ„pany grounding it vpon a Text of Scripture to say no more wrongfully interpreted Gal. 2. 9. where it is said that the â— chiefe Apostles gaue vnto Paul and Barnabas dextras societatis the right hanâ—s of fellowship as if they at that time had either giuen or confirmed vnto them their function Where as the truth is that the Apostles finding the doctrine of Paul and Barnabas to bee all one with theirs and alâ—o their preaching very effectuall in conuerting many to the faith thervpon they entred a Couenant that Paul and Barnabas should take the charge of the Gentiles and they them selues would be Apostles of the Circumcision and vpon this they strooke handes But Paul and Baâ—nabas Act. 13. 2. receiued also imposition of handes at Antioch If before they came to the Apostles as some thinke then this shaking of handes be it for ordination was superfluous If after as others more probably coniecture then were this defectiue The truth is that the A postle Paul receiued not his function by handes either imposed or stroâ—ken but by especiall reuelation Gal. 1. 1. 2. The handes imposed Act. 13. were commendatiue the right handes stroken Gal. 1. were stipulatiue and therefore no meane Praesbyterial The Professors of Boem wish Imposition of handes in consecration to be retained as signifying 4 thinges fit for a Minister for some of them will haue Ceremonies to bee significant And so much shall serue for the first part We come now to the second that is to Correctiue iurisdiction which Saint Paul to Titus 1. 4. in one worde calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a setting of things to rights Correction iudicial is either Correctiue or Coactiue either restraining where there is too much forwardnes or inforcing where there is a slacknes this the Rod that the sworde Apostolical Veniam ad vos in virga 1. Cor. 4. there is the poâ— vâ—inam abscindantur qui perturbant vos there is the sword Apostolique â—al 5. 12. Both these the Apostles kept in their owne handes as will appeare for example in the Church of Corinth where there were many excellent Preachers Presbyters of eminent gifts yet none of them could proceede against the incestuous offendor before they had receiued a Commission from S. Paul who beeing offended that they had no sooner informed him Iam iudicâ—â—i saith hee as soone as he heard it I haue already decreed to deliuer him to Satan He did not say decreed that you shall deliuer him and therefore willeth them in the name of Christ and his spirit that his authoritie being with theÌ„ to execute that his decree and deliuer him vp whether by excommunication or corporall infliction is not to this purpose But where they placed Bishops vnto theÌ„ they transmited the same preeminence Against an elder receiue no accusation saith Saint Paul to â—imothy he saith not against a Co-Presbyter as his equal but he speaketh vnto Timothy a Bishop as a Iudge of Presbyters saith Epiphan In particular if any of the Clergie do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preach any other doctrin theÌ„ that which is â—ound prohibe command him not to do it If any of them do preach prophanely or bablingly Cohibe restraine him that their doctrine spread not to further hurt If Timothy might not thus censure alone which is the opinion of some without the consent of the bench what needed that dreadful charge vnto him 1. Tim. 5. 21. I charge thee before God Christ Iesus his elect Angels that thou proceede in this order without preiudice or partialitie the 2 cuâ— throâ—es of al vpright proceedings For had hee bin to sit in the Consistory only to cap voices himselfe hauing no Negatâ—ue scarse a casting voice allotted him what feare might bee either of his preiudice to the cause or partiality to the accused sithence that as in Arithmetâ—ke the number of voices do there ouer sway and not the waight of reason Again of al Presbyters is expected the abiâ—â—ty to ech of theÌ„ coÌ„mitted the authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to censure gaine-â—aiers but with force of argument not in place of iudgement For vnto Titus alone a Bishop was that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that vniuersal authority Tit. 2. 15. commended both for pulpit Consistory for I haue lefâ— thee at Creta to reas esse thinges amisse saith the Apostle vnto him Tit. 1. 5. For particulars if any preach otherwise then becomes him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is thy duâ—â— to put him to silence Tit. 1. 10. And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reproue some of them sharpely as the word signifieth eueÌ„ with cutting them short that their vnround doctrine infect no further And againe if an Heretique after the first and second admonition recant not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 avâ—yde him that is excoÌ„municate him Tit. 3. 10. To say this authority was committed vnto either of them as Euangelistes First that is but a coniecture for there is as good proofe that Timothie was an Apostle as that he was an Euangelist for he that sayde vnto him 2. Tim. 4. 5. Fac opus Euangelistae Doe the worke of an Euangelist which is the ground of that gift the same sayd also of him 1. Cor. 16. 10. Operatur opus Domini sicut ego Hee worke the Lords worke euen as I And we all know Saint Paul was an Apostle Secondly the worke of an Euangelist ceased with the function as beeing but temporarie and personall but these things which Saint Paul inioynes to Timothie as a Bishop must remaine in the Church gouernment to perpetuall succession For so the Apostle 1. Tim. 6. 14. chargeth him before God and his sonne Christ that hee keepe these Inâ—unctions without stayne or changâ— ill the comming of our Lord Iesus Christ. Which tiâ—othie could not performe in his own persoÌ„ who as the Apostle knew could not liue so long therfore as S. Ambrose well obserueth it is spoken to Timothie a Bishop as a precept for those that should succeed him in the same function much lesse were they imposed vpon him as a Presbyter for though the names in Scripture be
often confounded yet the functions are distinct For in the 24. of Matthew Verse 45. hee that was appointed Rector super familiam Steward of the houshold vnder the chief Lord was in the 49. verse called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a fellow seruant with the rest of the Meany all seruants vnder one Lorde but yet some superior to other in Office In the Ciuile state being more familiar vnto you this distinction will be more apparant For the stile of Barâ—n is a tiâ—tle belonging to men of great Honor and of noble birth but yet communicable to men scarse of meane Worship Yea euen in that honourable rank both Earles and Lords are called Barons yet their places and Dignities vnequall euery Earle being a Baron but euery Baron not an Earle So in this case both Bishops and Priests in respect of that generall seruice to our Lord the Dispensation of his word and mysteries are all Presbyters and fellow-Presbyters but the stiles being communicable the tearmes are not conuertible for euery Bishop is a Presbyter but euery Presbyter is not a Bishop For S. Peter calleth himselfe a Presbyter 1. Pet. 5. 1. and yet he was an Apostle the communitie of names confound not the offices Neither shal we euer read that any of those things inioyned by Paul to Timothie were committed to Presbyters either to a singular person or to a whole Colledge where there was not a Bishop Wherevpon the very same authoritie both of Ordination and Iurisdiction the Churches succeeding reserued to their Bishops onely I maruaile saith Hierom that the Bishop of the Diocesse wherein Vigilantius is a Presbyter doth not crush that vnprofitable vessell with his Apostolique rod. And it is thy humilitie saith Saint Cyprian to Rogatianus a Byshop that thou wouldest complaine to me of the conâ—umelie offered vnto thee by a Deacon whereas thou mightest pro Episcopatus tui vigore Cathedrae authoritate that is through the strength of thine office as thou art a Byshop and the authoritie of thy Chayre haue power sufficient to reuenge thy selfe on him And therefore willeth him â—hat if the Deacon doe still persist in that his malipert cariage he should either Deponere or abstinere Depose him from his Ministerie or suspend him at his pleasure And thus much of the Superioritie of Bishops ouer their Clergie the nature whereof what it is you see Wee must nowe come to examine the authoritie whereon it is grounded and that is in these wordes Spiritus sanctus the Holy Ghost For his authoritie runs through all the partes as in the beginning I told you Of his immediate disignment of any to the place we speake not yet though â—ome referre the calling of Timothie to his Bishopricke vpon those words per Prophetiam thereunto Oecumenius vpon that place infers that generall conclusion that Bishops were not made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pell-mell at all aduentures but by the Commandement of the Holy Ghost wee speake of their appointment by men indued with the Holy spirit from aboue that is the Apostles for euery ordinance Apostolick wee take to be the action of the Holy Ghost In triall whereof we will follow M. Beza Surely saith he Si ab ipsis Apostolis profecta esset c. If I could finde this superioritie of a Bishop ouer the rest of his Clergie to haue proceeded from the Apostles I would not feare to attribute it Divinae in solidum dispositioni Wholly and fully to the diuine Institution Let vs then ioyne that issue Saint Augustine shall beginne That which the whole Church reteineth and no Councell hath first decreed and was neuer alâ—red must be beleeued to be an Apostolicall ordinance Now â—or this particular Saint Hierom himselfe câ—nfessethâ— that not one Church onely but the whole world decreed the superioritie of Bishops Vt vnus coeteris superpoâ—erâ—tur As for a Councell that first erected it there is none The Canons which for the antiquitie of them are called Apostolorum Canones distinguish theâ— Degrees as we now haue them The Nicen Councel which is the first generall we haue in print extant reckoneth them in the same order with the same prerogatiues and establisheth them to be continued according to the ancient and former custome with this short Aphorisme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For alteration there was none for 1500. yeeres together vntill young Iosua his emulation enuying that some had the Key of Knowledge more then other Enuiest thou for my sake ioyned with Corah his repining that some had the Key of power and Iurisdiction aboue others You take too much vpon you Moses and Aaron I say not for 1500 yeeres did any Church alter that Gouernment or opinion perhaps a pedling Heretique or two Theâ—alâ—s in the Church of Ierusalem and Aerius else-where fancied vnto themselues a Paritie but their ground was Malecontentment as Eusebius and Epiphanius both witnes because they could not be made Bishops which they earnestly affected Egesippus the ancienst Historian cited by Eusebius hath branded Theblis with a marke that will not out while there are bookes extant viz. That the Church of Ierusalem remained no way infected with error in so much that she was by men stiled a Virgin the first that corrupted her was Thebulis because he was not made Bishop So that by Saint Augustines inference the Institution is Apostolicall and therfore by M. Beza his concession Diuine But this is perhaps but an oblique and indirect proofe Surely we are no Arcadians to fetch our Pedegree from beyond the Moone shall Histories of fact or Testimonies of the auncient be our Heraldes for record Eusebius the most auncient of the Historiographers that wee haue for 300. yeeres succession nameth the persons and calculateth the times of the Bishops of foure principall Churches of the worlde Ierusalem Antioch Rome and Alexandria Socrates and Theodoret the rest who lineally succeeded the Apostles in those Sees vntill the Councell of Nice who with 314. Bishops more subscribed vnto that Generall Councill And that which Eusebius witnesseth of those foure the same doth Irenaeus more auncient then hee by almost two hundred yeeres iustifie to bee the case of all the Churches in the world that the Bishops theÌ„ gouerning could deriue their succession from them to whom the Apostles by hand deliuered the saide Churches to gouerne in euery place Which certeine successiue propagation Saint Augustine maketh the maine roote of Christian societie and Tertullian the maine proofe of true doctrine And heere if I would seeme ambitious in heaping Authors I might goe downeward from Irenaeus through the whole course of the Fathers delineating this succession and thereby trouble rather your patience then mine owne memorie The best course therefore to determine this question in this short time allotted mee will bee as I think if we make him the vmper whoÌ„ they make our Accuser that is S. Hierom
factions in your kingdome as Socrates did his wife Zantippe to try your owne patience and the Churches constancie But to answere the point if this superioritie came by a custome in the Apostles times and they wee must thinke did nothing derogatorie to their Masters precept why then should Hierom say it came not by the truth of the Lords ordinance Clemens Alexandrinus by a pretty distinction vpon that place 1. Cor. â— yee are Gods husbandry giueth mee a good hint for a fit resolution The Apostles saith hee manured the Church with a double tillage there was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first that of the Euan. Iohn 20. Haec scripta sunt direct written precepts which our Lord had left them the other which Saint Paul 1. Cor. 11. calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things vnwriteÌ„ which they either did or spake as the times occasioned and the holy Ghost directed If any thinke that this maketh way to Popish traditions vnwritten verities It is no other then Saint Pauls owne distinction of Praeceptum and Concilium out of his owne practise 1. Cor. 7. 6. that hee spake some thinges by permission some things by precept This speake I saith hee againe Verse 1â— not the Lord did Paul vtter any thing contrary or not agreeing to the Lorde his Maisters doctrine No but perswading himselfe Verse fourtie that hee also had the spirit of God though I haue saith hee Verse 25. no commandement from the Lorde yet I give this aduise So meaneth S. Hierom that this Matority of Bishops is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that vnwritten husbandry whereof Clemens speaketh vz that there is no written precept or expresse rule from Christ but yet that it is an Apostolicall tradition and grew to be a custome euen then in all Churches for so Irenaeus long before him calleth it TraditioneÌ„ ApostolicaÌ„ toti mundo manifestaÌ„ Neither doth this obiection out of HieroÌ„ make more against the Priority of Bishops then against the obseruing of the Lordes day wherof that speech of Saint Hierom may be as well yea more truely verified that it is rather ex consuetudine Ecclesiae quam Doninicae dispositionis veritate That the seuenth day shouâ—de bee kept holy there is expresse scripture both afore the lawe vpon the Creation and in the lawe at the fourth commandement but where is there any place either in the Gospels that our Sauiour comanded or in the Acts and Epistles that the Apostles ordained the alteration of Sabatumin DominicaÌ„ the first day to be sanctified for the seuenth In the first of the Reuelation it is once named and called Dies Dominicus which by all testimony was not the seuenth day and so in the ould testameÌ„t there is a day which David so intitlâ— tâ— hic est dies This is the Lords day he hath made it we will reioice and be glad in it and that by all assurance was not the Sabboth The truth therefore is that the Church finding the obseruation but not the first ordinance thereof continued it to be kept and accounted it as an Apostolicall institution And the very same is the true sense of S. Hieroms speech in this point of praelacy sauing that the placing of Bishops is more apparant in the epistles to Timothie and Titus Otherwise hee shoulde much haue forget himselfe for in his episâ—le to Marcella confuting or rather contemning the errors of Montanus this he puts for one With theÌ„ saith he the Bishops are thrust into the third place but with vs in the Christian orthodoxall Churches Apostolorum locum tenent Episcopi The Bishops haue the Aposils room that is the first place Yea els-where he acknowledgeth it to bee Dominica dispositio The Lordes own ordinance though indirectly obliquely that out of the old testameÌ„t 1. alleâ—orically out of Ps. 45. wherin the Church of Christ is repâ—eleÌ„ted in the person of SalomoÌ„s Queen vpoÌ„ those words ver 16. Prepatribus â—ati 〈◊〉 tibi 〈◊〉 Let it not greeâ—e thee saith S. Austen that the 〈…〉 not Peter Paul by whom thou wast begoâ—â—eÌ„ for oâ— thine own brood a fatherhood is grown vnto thee Insteed of fathers childreÌ„ are borne vnto thee Quos 〈…〉 principes sâ—per omneÌ„â—erraÌ„ that is saith S. HieroÌ„ The Gospeâ— being spred through all quarters of the world in them Bishops are placed rulers of the Church Secondly by coÌ„parisâ—n wherein he plainâ—ly 〈…〉 what he meant by those wordes the Custome of the Church namely an Apostolike ordinance Vt Scâ—amus saith he Apostolicas traditiones sumptas de veteâ—i testamento c. That we may know how the Apostles grounded their traditions or ordinance vpon the old Testament and from thence fetcht their Modele this is one particular That which Aaron his sonnes and Leuites were in the Temple the very same let Bishops Presbyters and DeacoÌ„s challenge in the Church to theÌ„ sclues Tâ—is were sufficieÌ„t if we should rest here but neither S. Hierom not they must so passe as if it were not directly the Lords owne institution For Spiritus sanctus not onely by the Apostles who had receiued him in great measure but euen by Christ himselfe who Ioh. 3 was indued with the spirit without measure ordained this Superioritie if we will credite S. Hierom his ancients by many yeeres S Cypri Let the Deacons remember that Apostolos id est Episcâ—pos Doâ—inu ipse elegerâ—t The Lord himselfe choose Apostles that is Bishops but the Apostle after our Sauior his ascention choose Deacons to serue them at the Altar c. For that the Apostles were Bishops besides the rest of the Fathers Hierom himselfe by allusion confesseth Non omâ—es Episcopi Episcopâ—sâ—â—t All that are in the place and carry the name of Bishâ—ps are not Bishops Atteâ—de â—etrum sed 〈◊〉 consider Looke vpon Peter but withall behold Iudas For they whom we now call Bishops were then called Apostles saith Theod. Yea though they all were silent in that point the Holy gâ—ost will confirme it who speaking of Matthiâ—s choise into Iudas his roome in expresse termes calleth Apostolatum Episcopatum Actes 1. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of the Psa. 109. Let another take his Bishopship Saint Hilary with many of the Fathers â—fâ—irme that our Sauiâ—r in direct words appointed this superioritie Episcopall ouer their brethren in that place and part of his last Sermon Mat. 24. 45. Who is a faithfull and wise seruant quem Dominus constituet super familiam whoÌ„ the Lorde shall make ruler â—uer his houshold But that which is in the Apocalyps is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 admits no contradiction where our Lord himselfe willeth S. Iohn to write vnto the 7. Angels of the 7. Churches Wherin 3. things are very worthy obseruatioÌ„ First he calleth them Angels there is their eminence both for dignitie and integirtie Secondly they had the tryall both for proofe and reproofe of their Clergie
ONE OF the foure Sermons PREACHED BEFORE THE KINGS Maiestie at Hampton Court in September last THIS Concerning the Antiquitie and Superioritie of Bishops Sept. 21. 1606. BY The Reuerend Father in God William Lord Bishop of Rochester LONDON Imprinted by I. W. for Matthew Law 1606. To the Kings most Sacred MAIESTIE IT was your MAIESTIES expresse Commaundement most dread Soveraigne that this SERMON should be printed your HIGHNES intention therein very honorable that neither by misreport it might bee traduced nor through obliuion perish in the ayre wher it was vttered but that they which heard it might record it they which heard it not might read it that almight be satisfied This royal purpose of your Maiestie either preiudice to the question or malignitie to the person will I feare pervert for more largely and soundly hath this Theme bin haÌ„dled yet the labor lost in fore-stalled coÌ„ceits by meÌ„ more popularly applauded more profoundly learned then my selfe and therfore smal hope that I shal persuade But be the euent as it haps I haue in the meane time discharged both my conscience in discussing the point sincerely I trust vnoffensiuely withall my dutie to your Maiestie whose vnworthy seruant I am and for your Highnes many gracious fauours most deeply obliged in which acknowledgement I will liue die and which is the whole requital I can make heartely pray for your Maiesties long life and prosperous reigne that you may be which I am sure your Maiesty desires a King of Peace as in Iuda Israel your temporall state so in Mount SioÌ„ also in the state among the Persons Ecclesiastique effecting in vs all both of Kyâ—ke and Church vnitie in doctrine vnanimitie in affection vniformitie in obedience to your Maiesties Supremacie whether in matters either absolutely necessary as inioyned by God or in themselues indifferent but authoritatiuely necessarie as Commanded by your selfe in which desire rather then hope I end and rest Your MAIESTIES poore Chaplein most deuoutely bound VV. ROFFENS TO THE MINISTERS of SCOTLAND my Fellow Dispensers of Gods misteries BRETHREN for as I esteeme you so will I stile you iudge you of vs as you please some of your sort being at this Sermon when it was preached were desirous that it might be printed The end of their request themselues best know If to traduce it in their Preachings as many of your Ministers serue other Bookes of mine not sparing my self as I am credibly informed they shall do as many vse but not as they ought Charities precept is to speake well of all yea euen Ciuilities rule not to backebite the absent If to read it for their further satisfaction as not accustomed to the accent of our Pronuntiation for so it was said it hath pleased his Maiestie I should yeelde to their request although their Notes they tooke with some personal conference easie for them to attaine might without this noyse haue effected that If to answere it for that also was giuen out let it bee with modestie and learning nothing shall bee more welcome and yet we may say therin as the Emperor of the Coblers Crow Satis istarum auium habemus domi Indeed this purpose for answere I rather suspect because I vnderstood of a Challenge offered in an Admonition Epistolar to your late Parliament directly confroÌ„ting the maine subiect of this SermoÌ„ namely that the Calling Episcopall hath neither Gods word ancient Canon nor learned Father to abbett it To say this not to prooue it is but Hercules tragicall club in the Poet massy in shew but of cloth straw an affrighting vanity to aver it not to be able to maintaine it were but Ignorances brood in Nazian breaking the shel and cackling afore it be full hatcht a praecipitate boldnesse to auouch it and make it good were a labour worthy your trauaile and of vs much desired And yet neither this your Challenge nor the MaintenaÌ„ce thereof wheÌ„ it comes might any way concerne vs it being a combate within your owne lists sauing that the Challengers not enduring 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishops within their owne Church could not refraine but contraâ—y to S Peâ—ers charge in the very same letter make themselues 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishops and Censurers of other Prouinces by intituling the Church-gouernors among vs PAPISTICALL English Bishops A slanderous Epithete pardon mee brethren and yet S. Hierom saith that hee which is suspected much more accused of Heresie may without pardon asking breâ—k the bondâ— of patience a slander Isay vntrue and vnchristian For first euery opinion or Ceâ—remonie which in the Cockpit of Elderlings iâ— concluded to be POPERIE is not so Secondly the world can witnes that English Bishops haue for Religion done that which neuer any Clerolaicall Consistorien or Bench Presbyterian either Southern or Northern durst hath or can performe viz. written learnedly and laboriously disputed soundly suffered manfully and died constantly in defiance of PAPISTRIE readily inclining both their heads to blockes and their bodyes to stakes rather then by DECLINATORS from their lawfull Princes tribunall appealing to any Synodicall Conuention whatsoeuer This doutbles is PAPISTICAL the other APOSTOLICAL for S. Paul appealed to Caesar his iudgement seat as the supreme whereas PAPISTS PVRITANS wil haue the King but an HONORABLE MEMBER not a châ—ef Gouernor in the churches of his own DominioÌ„s But to return if an Answer hereunto be the Babe we must atteÌ„d and of it I oft heaâ—e not â—uno Lucina but Charitas Veritas â—erte opeÌ„ Let loue of truth coÌ„ceiue it truth of iudgemeÌ„t breed it variety of reading frame it modestiâ— of stile deliuer it ornaments of learning cloath and adorne it and we will embrace it not doubting then but like a modest true borne childe it will speake in the language and with reuerence of Antiquitie In the meane time God grant both you and vs Obedience and Humeâ—â—â—y that to our Soueraigne this within our owne hearts so shall we neither vnder-vallue him nor ouer-weene our selues Farewell in Christ. Your louing friend and fellowe Minister in the Gospell W. ROFFENS Obseruaos Regis praecepta iuramenti Dei Eccles. 8. 2. Escapes made in the Printing Onely one or â— of substance the rest which are but in points or accents the courteous Reader may please to amend in the body of the Sermon Pag. 16. lin â— for Psa 18. read Verse 18. Pag. 19. lin 9. for No meane Praesbyteriall The professors of Boem wish c. read No meane Presbyterian the Professor of Berna wisheth c. Pag. 20. lin 2. that his authoritie read that is his authoritie Pag. 21. lin 17. of that gift read of that gesse Actes 20. 28. Take heed to your selues and to the whole flocke In quo Spiritus SaÌ„ctus vos posuit Episcopos in which the holy ghost hath placed you Bishops to feed the Church of God which he haeth purchased with his own blood THe Conuenting of Bishoppes and
whom Master Beza with others doe principally relie vpon Nam cui notior For who saith Beza was better acquainted with the Historie of the age succeeding the Apostles then Hierom Yes surely a dozen more in print of as great note and truth as hee who all concord the Succession and Superioritie of Bishops to bee Apostolicall But what sayth Hierom First hee will haue this same Excelsiorem gradum of Bishops ouer the Clergie to beginne in Alexandria à Marco Euangelista Aster S. Marke the Euangelist for they would make the preposition to bee exclusiue as if in Saint Markes time neither that Prelacie was heard of nor then els-where but in the Church of Alexandria onely Well could Bishops goe no higher for their Superioritie they need not bee ashamed of their Progenie for Saint Marke dyed and Anniâ—nus presently succeeded him sixe yeeres before the death of either Saint Peter or Saint Paul thirtie fiue yeeres before the death of Saint Iames the Apostle fortie fiue yeeres before Simon Cleophas who was one of our Lordes disciples of whom we reade Luke 24. Who was Bishop of Ierusalem after Saint Iames and therefore made Bishop because hee was our Lordes kinsman as Eusebius witnesseth So that this Superioritie though it began as they say in the next Successor to Saint Marke was extant in the Church these Apostles viventibus videntibus approbantibus liuing seeing approouing it for silence argues if not an approbation yet no dislike But Hierom confesseth that Saint Marke himselfe the inâ—erpreter of Saint Peter for the Gospel which beareth Saint Markes name hee receiued from Saint Peters owne mouth as some write was the first Bishop of Alexandria And were there Bishoppes onely in Alexandria No for Hierom also witnesseth that Iames the iust our Lordes brother was the first Bishop of Ierusalem and so ordayned by the Apostles presently after our Lordes passion yea Bishops doubtlesse but not Superiors ouer their brethren before that time which was after Saint Marke Ignatius who as Hierom himselfe recordeth conuerâ—ed with the Apostles and saw Christ in the flesh by good likely-hood as some thinke one of those fiue hundred brethren of whom Saint Paul 1. Cor. 15. 6. speaketh Or rather as Ignatius of himselfe witnesseth euen then when Christ sayde to his Disciples Handle mee and see for a spirit hath not flesh bones c Luke 24. â—9 The second Bishop of Antioch after Saint Peter writeth to the Anâ—iochians for amongst them hee was a Presbyter to remember Euodius their Bishop who first receiued from the Apostels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Praelacie and Superioritie aboue vs for Episcopus est sacerdotum Princeps saith the same Father els-where And afterwardes when himselfe came to bee Bishop of the same Church beeing caâ—yed to Rome to bee martyred for his profession hee writeth vnto the Pastors and Clergie of Antioch that they would be diligent in feeding the Flocke committed vnto them vntill God did shewe vnto them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 him that should rule ouer them after his death But in his Epistles ad Sarsenses inioyning in particular each order his subiection Presbyters be obedient to your Bishop Deacons be subiect to your Presbyters and Lay-men to all His conclusion is very patheticall My soule for theirs who obserue this order the Lord will be alwayes with theÌ„ This was blessed Ignatius to whom our Sauiour appeared and spake in the flesh And Clemens of Alexandria in a Storie that hee rehearseth of S. Iohn reporteth that the said Apostle after his returne from Pathmos in some places where he came made Bishops and chose into the Clergie such as the Holy-Ghost thought fit and vpon occasion of a yong man of whom he tooke especial liking turned vnto a Bishop who was as the story speketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Superior or set ouer them all committed the youth to his Custodie which Bishop after his returne he called Caput illius Ecclesiae the head of that Church Yea Hierom himself acknowledgeth that vnles to the Bishop there be giuen Exors quaedâ—m ab omnibus emiâ—â—ns potest as an extraordinary peâ—reles preheminence aboue the rest tot essent schismata quot sacerdotes there would be as many schismes as there are Preestes And this shall serue foâ— the first obiectioÌ„ out of Hierom. But the second is that which they vrge most for that seemeth to strike home namely that this Maioritie of Bishops came rather ex consueâ—udine Ecclesiae by the Churches custome quam dominicae dispositionis veritate then by the truth of the Lordes ordinance Some I know both Papists and Protestants are so angry with Hierom for this that they ranke him with Aerius in the number of rank Heretikes as maintaining by this speech the Parity of ministers A wrong to that Father doubtles For what Church meant he to whose custome he ascribed it the church in the Apostles times or after if in the Apostles times shall wee thinke S. Hierom wold fasten vpon them such a crime as that they would erect such an office contrarie or not consonant vnto their Maisters prescript And yet it is certaine hee meant of that Church for in the same place shewing what occasioned this Preheminence of one aboue the rest he saith it began when the Divell made that faction in the church that one wold say I am of Paul and another I am of Apollos a thirde I am of Cephas and an other I am of Christ and this was as appeareth 1. Cor. 1. in the time and prime of the Apostles Yea indeede Hierom is direct that the suppressing of schismes occasioned the first sourse and erection of Bishops as the best remedy against them And when were schismes more rise then in the Apostles times There is no Church to whom Saint Paul writeth an epistle but he complains of them Where by the way two thinges wee may obserue here-hence by this occasion of Saint Hieroms speech First that of Saint Cyprian that this maligning the superiority of Bishops is an infallible note of Schismatikes For as you might know that Demetrius and his fellow Goldsmiths by raising a tumult against Paule were Dianaes tradesmen because they foresaw if Christ were preached downe must Diana and withal their gaine so may wee descrie who are inclined to Faction by their spurning against this superiority because if Bishops bee raised their Schismes must bee scattered Secondly if aduancing of Bishops bee the suppressing of Schismes as their owne author affirmeth and Saint Paul prophesieth 1. Cor. 11. Oportet haereses esse that there must and will be heresies and Schismes while the world standeth then surely it behoueth your Maiestie to whome the care of Church and kingdome is committed if you will haue Schismes abandoned to maintaine and continue this government Episcopall vnlesse as it pleased you to write to your most noble sonne you wil retaine
Apoc. 2. 2. Thou hast examined them which professe themselues Apostles and are not there is their preeminence for iurisdiction ouer their brethren Thirdly the perpetuâ—tie of their place during life Else what need that threat verâ—e 5 I will remoâ—ue thy Candlestick For had he but stâ—ied a month or a yeer the Presbytery would haue turned him out of his socket when his turne was expired But as with M. Beza we begun so will we coÌ„clude al with M. Caluin who dâ—rects vs for the finding out of Church gouermeÌ„t according to the diuine InstitutioÌ„ vnto vetereÌ„ EcclesiaÌ„ the ancieÌ„t Church wherin we shall see ImagineÌ„ quanaaÌ„ a certain representaâ—ion thereof For howsoeuer saith he the Bishops of that time made some Canons exorbitant froÌ„ Scripture yet with such caution did they constitute their Discipline vt facile videas niâ—il â—ere hac parte haâ—uisse a verbo Dei alienuÌ„ that it may easiâ—y appeare nothing therin almost to differ froÌ„ the writteÌ„ word For this particular in hand in the next Paragraph he exeÌ„plifieth the forme therof Out of their nuÌ„ber of Presbyters Pasâ—ors Doctors in euery city they chose one to be the chief whoÌ„ they entituled a Bishop for which he adds a reasoÌ„ Ne ex â—qualitate vt fierâ— solet dissidia nasâ—erentur And lest you should think as some do this Bishop to be but a ParsoÌ„ of a Congregaâ—ioÌ„ he proceedeth to tell vs that to euery such citâ—e attributa erat certa regio an whole territory or Country was annexed the villages wherof set their Pastors that fed them from the Cathedrall Church or Colledge of Presbyters whereof the Bishop was chiefe and where he sate A liuely Idea thereof still remaineth with vs in the Churches of the olde fundation And this makes way to the partes ensuing namely first Posuit their Cathedrall Seat and Secondly In quo their Diâ—cesan iurisdiction But I feare I haue beene too troublesome already and therefore will here stay my course God for his great mercies sake grant that the wordes which haue beene spoken may turne to his glory and our Instruction in Christ Iesu To whom with the Father and the Holy Ghost c. FINIS 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naz Thucyd 1. Pet. 4. 15. Naz. ep 42. ad Procop. 1. Cor. 11 17. August 2. Tim. â— 17. 2 Tim. 4 3. 1. Cor. 15. 32. 1. Cor. 14. 8. Exo 9. 16. Mat 5. 14. 1. Tim 3. 5. Philip 2. 4. Ezech. 31. 39. Exod. 19. 19. Heb. 5. 4. 2 Pet. 1. 9. Apoc. 2. 7â— â—say 51. 17. 1. Sam. 3. â— â—ct 2. Iudg. 12. 6. Philip. 3. 17. Mat. 28. 19. Mat. 15. 13. Eccle 1. 10. Ezech. 28. 3. Dan. 9. 2. The praier 1. Cor. 14. 4â— Tit. â— 15. 1. Pet. 2. 13. Cant. 6. 36. 〈◊〉 polit 1. Cor. 14. 33. Zach. â—â— 7. Apoc. 37. Mat. 16 19. Luc. 11. 52. Cor. 〈…〉 Ephes. 4. 7. 1. Cor. 12. 31. 1. Cor. 12. 28. 1. 〈◊〉 â— 17. Act. 6. 4. Act. 1. 2. Cor. 1â— 5. â—alâ— 2. 9. Mat. 17. 1. Mat. 26. 37. Nâ—zâ—an Epiphan Mat. 3. 16. â—7 1. Cor. 12. 12. â— Tim. 3. 13. â—ct 21. 35. 〈◊〉 Sardie Chal. Nazi vit Athâ— vit Basil. Hier. ad Nepot Idem in epit Nep. Act. 66. Ibid. 14. 27 1. Cor. 16. 9. Naziâ—◠〈◊〉 2. Cor. 2. 16. 1. Tim. 3. 6. Iam. 3. 1 â— lin nat hist. Hieron in Tit. cap. 1. epist. ad Euagr. 1 Cor. 12. 8. 1 Cor. 5. 13. 〈…〉 Plut. in Philopae Tit. 1. 5. 1. Thes. â— 12. â— Thes. 3. 14. 1 Cor 4 vlt Act. 8. 1. Tim. 5. 22. Tit. 1. 5. Heb. 7. 7. Ambros. in 1. Tim. 3. Athanas. Apol. 2 in liâ—â—â—is Pres. Marit â—piphan 〈◊〉 69. Chrysost. Theodoret. Oecumen Ambros. vbi supra Hieron ad Fuagr Aiax â—â—agel 1. Tim. 5. 21. Tit. 1. 5. Act. 9. verse 12â— 1. Tim. 4. 14 Hierom in Esa. 3. 2. Tim. 1. 6. Caluin Iustit lib. 4. c. 3. rod. 29. 1. 1. Tim. 5. 22. 〈◊〉 Act. and Monument Gal. 2. 9. Act. 13. 2. Tit. 1. 4. 1. Cor. 4. 〈◊〉 Gal. 5. 12. 1. Cor. 5. â— Tim. 5. 29. Epiph. lib. â— Haeâ— 75. 1. Tim. 1. 4. â— Tim. 2. 16. 1. Tim. 5. 21. Tit. â—9 Tit. 2. 15. Tit. 2. 15. Tit. 1. 5. Ibid. vers 10. Tit. 3. 10. 2. Tim. 4. 5. 1. Cor. 16. 10. 1. Tim 6. 14. Ambrose in 〈…〉 cap. 6. Mat. 24. 45. 1. Cor. 4â— 1. Pet. 5. 1. Hierom. ad â—iparium Cyprian ad Rogat 1. Tim. 1. 18. Oecumen ibid Luc. 24. 49. Ad tract de diuersis grad cap. 23. August de bapt contra Donat. ca. 24. lib. 4. Hier. ad Euag. Can. Apost vbique Nicen. Con 4. Can. 6. c. 7. Numb 11. 29 Numb 16. 3. Epiphan haeres 75. gesip apud 〈◊〉 lib. 4. cap. 22. Euseb. hist. Eccles. â—parâ—â—m Socrat. Theodoret. 〈◊〉 lib. 4. ca. 63. August ep 42. 1. Tertul. de prescript Pag. 145. in resp ad Sarav Hier ad euagr Euseb. li. 1. cap. 24. Luke 24. Euseb. li. 4. ca. 22. Hieron pâ—oâ—em in Euang. Matthei Hieron de scriptor Eccles. in lacobi Hieron in â—gnatio 1. Cor. 15. 6. Ignat. ad Smyrn Ignat. ad Antioch IdeÌ„ ad Trall Ignat. ad Antiochen Idem ad sar Euseb. lib. 3. cap. 23. Hieron aduers. 〈◊〉 HieroÌ„ in Tit. 1. Hieron ibideÌ„ 1. Cor. 1. Cypr. ad Rogat Act. 19. 1. Cor. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pâ— â—2 1. Cor. â— Ioan. 〈◊〉 1. Cor. 〈…〉 1. Cor. 7. 6. Psalme 12. verse 40. vers 25. Iâ—enae Gen. 2. Exod. 20. Apoc. 1. Psalme 118. HeroÌ„ ad Maâ— Aug. in â—s 44. â—â—â—ron ibid. 〈…〉 â—oh 3. Cypâ— ad rogat Hieron ad â—liod Theodoâ— in â—hilip 1. Acts. 1. 20â—â—sal 109. Hilar. in Math. 24. Apoc. â— 1. 2. 5 Instit. lib. 4. cs â— Sect. 1. Sect. ◠〈◊〉