under Ecclesiasticall Censures The ancient Church pretended to no more had no other way or means of preserving Unity as said Treat 1. c. 13. When we ask of Those that dissent from this Church in following their own sense or interpretation of Scripture Who shall judge The Papists think we then come into their Road and oppose their Plea to our Sectaries But we are still in the midst between them Not establishing a Papal Infallible Judge nor allowing Private Judgment to stand against the Publick Not calling them to be tryed at Rome as if that Church should judge for all but to submit to the Publick Judgment of this National Church of which they were Members and in which there is such power as is said of judging for others and of censuring or binding the obstinate Gainsayers as Treat 2. c. 1. nu 36. If it be objected There was such Authority in the Governours of this Church before Reformation how then could Private Judgement take place against them to introduce the Reformation We answer It is possible there may be cause of dissenting from the chiefe Governours of the Church and that Reformation may take its first rise from Private Judgement as Tr. 1. c. 9. but then to be managed with all peaceable moderation and subjection as is there shewn and more largely Tr. 2. c. 1. Now whether our Reformation took rise from some private judgement intimated to them in Authority or from the immediate inclination and judgment of those that had the Authority it is not materiall seeing all was carryed peaceably and the work done not against but by those that were the chiefe Governours in the Church V. As for that due Subordination of Pastors and Governours in the Church seen and set forth in the true ancient Episcopal Government it is wronged on both sides The first invasion was made upon it by Papal usurpation under the title of Vniversal Bishop or Pastor which in the judgement of Gregory the first is to make him in effect the onely Bishop and all others but his Ministers as the same Gregory declared against John of Constantinople affecting that Title and cleared himselfe and his Predecessors from assuming it to themselves But it was not long ere his Successors challenged and obtained it and ever since have used it to the vassalage of Christian Bishops where they will suffer themselves to be so abused On the other side every Sect risen in these dayes has lift up a hand to pull down that office and power making spoil of the Means and Maintenance thereunto belonging The Church of England in her Reformation did according to the Universall Practice of the Church retain the Episcopal Government vindicating it from Papal Usurpation and is now put to defend it against the invasion of all other Sects which therefore stand convinced of down-right Schisme as will appear below I have the longer stayed upon these Instances because they doe much tend to the clearing of the businesse in hand Now more particularly to the Case which is thus in generall resolved §. III. Resolution of the case The true Protestant Church of ENGLAND is unjustly charged with Schisme by the ROMAN for that Division which followed between them upon the Reformation But does justly charge all other Sects with Schisme which have divided from it since that Reformation There are three words to speak of here by way of Explication 1. National Church for we have often spoken in the Treatises and still shall speak of the Church of England as of a Nationall Church That therefore is to be accounted a Nationall Church which has in it the whole subordination of Church governments as the third Councel of Carth. Can. 2. Provinciae quae primas sedes habent viz. One Primate with severall Bishops Priests and Deacons Whether the extent of it be bounded with the Limits of the Nation or according to the Precincts appointed by the Ancient Councils or the Supreme Civil Power Every Congregation nay every House may bear the name of a Church the Church in their hâ—use Rom. 16. 5. but as part onely of and in subordination to the National Church So the Churches of Ephesus Rome Corinth upon the first planting of Christianity in these Cities began in a singular Congregation but being inlarged to a due fulnesse had every of them the exercise or practise of that whole subordination of power and Government II. For the word Reformation We must distinguish between that which is Publick or Nationall the reformation of a whole Church in forbidding and casting out errors or Corruptions in beliefe or practice and that which is Private or particular the Reformation of a mans self in not admitting or ceasing to professe Errors prevailing or imposed by the Church of which he is a Member or in which he was baptized and Educated upon which Reforming of himselfe may follow a dividing from that Church by Excommunication or at least by Non-communion III. Touching the words Schisme or dividing of Communion we must distinguish Actual non-communion or want of Actual Communion with a Church from Schisme or the guilt of Schisme The first which is want of Actual communion may happen between two Nationall Churches disagreeing in some practises and that disagreement followed with too much heat as Tr. 1. c. 17 18. and sometimes between a Church and particular Members of it through mis-informations passion exasperations But Schisme is a wilfull i.e. voluntary causles dividing or separating from those we ought to hold Communion with And as before said of Non-communion so observe that the guilt of Schisme may fall either upon a Nationall Church causlesly dividing from or refusing to hold communion with other Churches or else upon the Members and parts of a National Church withdrawing their obedience from their lawfull Pastors or Governours and dividing from them and the Congregations under them setting up a distinct communion or joyning themselves to any such elsewhere set up The case between the Churches of England and of Rome stands according to the first consideration of Schisme as it falls between two Nationall Churches and if the division which followed upon the Reformation must be call'd Schism we shall see in examining the cause of our Reformation that the guilt of it falls on them not us But the case between the Church of England and other Sects which have divided from it stands according to the second consideration of Schism between a Nationall Church and the Members thereof Which dividing from it stand guilty of the highest degree of disobedience unto their Governours and the highest breach of Charity both towards their Governours and also all the people of God continuing in obedience to and Communion with them Lastly there are degrees in the height and guilt of Schism A Schism by a bare recess from the Communion of an established Church setting up a distinct Communion from it but leaving it in its own condition and establishment
all the Members thereof how much more Vniversall practise This the Adversaries of Episcopall-government whether they be of the Classicall or Congregationall way turn off with a light finger as if it had no weight in it or as if the Apostle had said nothing in alledging the Customes of the Church Scripture is the onely thing they will be tryed by We refuse not to meet them there but let them consider that they come against the Established authority of their own Nationall Church against the custome and practise not onely of that but of all the Churches of God and there are bound to bring plain and expresse Scripture to demonstrate that Episcopacy or such a superiority over other inferiour Pastors or meere Presbyters is directly unlawfull for else the Custome and Practise of the Churches by the Apostles rule must be observed so long as in force i. e. till due Authority change them supposing they are changeable and that it is in the power of the present Church to change them It were well the Adversaries of the Episcopall Function would yeild more Authority to Universall Practise or Tradition of the Churches of God at least in their respect to some points they will acknowledge themselves bound to maintaine As first That Scripture is the Word of God I do not ask upon what grounds they finally believe this themselves but how they would maintaine it against Heathen or Jew and perswade them to it but upon the witnesse of universall Tradition which speaks to the conviction of all men upon the ground of common Sense or Reason as abovesaid 2. or Secondly That the observation of the Lords day comes from the Apostles How would they convince such a one as Mr. Trask was by the places of Scripture mentioning the Apostles meeting upon the first day of the week or that place which names the Lords day Rev. 1. which might be on Easter day the annuall Lords day He according to the doctrine of these men slighting the Witnesse of Universall Tradition or Practise found nothing in Scripture expresse but the Commandement for the Seventh day or Jewish Sabbath so obstinately held for that till he was reclaimed by the labour and travail of our learned Bishops and made to see how the continued and undeniable practise of the whole Church did clearely shew those passages in Scripture were intimations of this practise then beginning and that their observing of the Seventh day or Jewish Sabbath for they observed that too as occasion served was but in complyance with the Jewes for a time while the Temple stood In like manner the Universall practice of the Church the best interpreter of Scripture where there is not any place of it so plaine as to take away all gainsaying tells us those passages we shew in Scripture for this Government contain so many intimations and sometimes exercises of that Episcopall power which should continue in the Church after the Apostles and assures us those other instances brought by the Adversaries against that Function cannot inferre any other way of Government And therefore we had good cause to say above Episcopall Government was conformable to Gods Word which is our second consideration §. XIV Episcopall government conformable to the word Secondly then take we a briefe survey of the Grounds on both sides which yet I cannot in reason enter upon without asking leave to suppose it possible which never was seen in any particular that Universall Tradition or Practise can be contrary unto Scripture but yeilding that as possible to the Adversaries it is cleare they are bound as abovesaid to demonstrate this Practise or Government is against Scripture and that their way is peremptorily there prescribed How impossible it is for them to do this appeares at first sight by their severall judgements upon the passages of Scripture concerning Church-government Some of them look upon these passages and think they see a Classicall or Presbyterian others of them look upon them and are as strongly perswaded they see a Congregationall or Independent way Where 's the clear Evidence then which they pretend against Episcopall Government To examine their chiefe Instances briefly and plainly for the satisfaction of ordinary Capacities make the triall of those that are alledged for the Classicall way because that pretends to more regularity and to a better foundation than the other Their Instances are from the mention made in Scripture of Presbytery and Presbyters or Elders and the name of Bishop applyed to them We read 1 Tim. 4. 14. the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery But what evidence is there in this to demonstrate that the power of ordination was put into the hands of meer Presbyters For first it is a question whether this laying on of hands was for ordination here or for some other purpose Secondly when that is granted it is a question whether the word Presbytery here implies the office to which Timothy was ordained or the Persons ordaining him for both interpretations are admitted Thirdly admit the Persons ordaining are meant yet never can it be proved they were meer Presbyters for besides that the word Presbytery or Eldership included the Apostles and all the chief Rulers of the Church 1 Pet. 5. 1. who am also an Elder and John Ep. 2. v. 1. Ep. 3. v. 1. the Elder St. Paul saith expresly he laid hands on Timothy 2 Tim. 1. 6. Neither can they in all Scripture give one instance of Imposition of hands for Ordination permitted to meere Presbyters alone So for the places alledged by them mentioning Bishops and Deacons onely as the Ministers of the Church Phil. 1. 1. or calling them first Elders and then presently Bishops Tit. 1. 5. 8. Acts 20. 17. 28. If we say that in these and the like places those first Elders set in the Churches newly planted were Bishops properly or that the Elders or Bishops there mentioned were of both sorts some Bishops properly some inferiour Presbyters the Adversaries could disprove neither part evidently or if in the third place we should grant them what they aime at that these were onely Presbyters it would be nothing to the purpose unlesse they could directly shew the power of Ordination and Government over those Churches fully committed to them For supposing those Elders to be such Presbyters the name Bishop might be appliable to any of them in as much as he had over-sight of any flock which Name was appropriated after to the more Generall Pastor who had oversight of the Presbyters and particular Flocks or Congregations within such Precincts And what marvail is it if the distinction of these two sorts of Elders or Bishops did not nay could not appeare so clearly in the beginning of the new planted Churches and whilst the Apostles were on earth governing the Churches as it did after the Churches were enlarged and the Apostles gone off Then clearly appeared who succeeded them and how far in that ordinary power which was to continue
Churches as Jerusalem Antioch Rome Ephesus Corinth and this practice and succession setled before St. John the Apostle dyed All which as it clearly shewes those severall Angels of the severall Churches to whom our Saviour by Saint John did write could be no other then such Bishops having chief care of and rule in those Churches therfore more chargeable with the Corruptions prevailing in them So doth it clearly convince that plea of the Adversaries which amounts to a charging the first Bishops with Usurpation and invasion upon the right of Presbyters or particular Congregations to be a conceit altogether unreasonable for it is beyond all Imagination that Saint John would have suffered such an invasion or that those first Bishops who conversed with the Apostles and were their disciples should make such an invasion and immediately subvert the Apostolicall order pretended for the Presbyterian Consistory Or that those first Bishops being holy men and many of them Martyrs for still we finde the heathen Persecutors sought chiefly after the Bishop of the Church that the chief Pastor being smitten the flock might be more easily scattered should be so ambitious and unjust or lastly that the Presbyters then should be so tame as not once to complain of the wrong done them or to transmit their Protestation against it to Posterity To conclude this Tryal by Scripture It comes to this issue The Adversaries were bound to shew direct Authority of Scripture against Episcopal Government it being in possession established by the continued Authority of this Nationall Church and which is more by the perpetuall practice of the Catholick Church against this it was expected they should bring some places of Scripture forbidding that power of Ordination and Jurisdiction to be committed to speciall hands such as Bishops properly taken or commending it to the Consistory of Presbyters or some instances at least of that power exercised by such a company Whereas all they can evince out of Scripture is that there were Presbyters strictly so taken and of the inferiour rank which being granted them we shew there was a Prelacy still over such Presbyters still there were special men that had an inspection and rule over them and when the Apostles went off the practise of the Church shewes the power was left in the hands of special men called Bishops properly So that the Government of the Church by Bishops appears as was said above conformable not onely to the Universal practise of the Church after the Apostles time but also to the Word of God i.e. to the practise and patterns we have there 1. of our Saviour appointing twelve Apostles and besides and under them seventy Disciples of a lower rank 2. of Apostolical practise by which we find the power exercised by special Elders viz. the Apostles themselves or other choice men appointed thereunto by them whereas all Elders had power of the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments 3. of the several Angels of the several Churches to whom the Epistles were directed Rev. c. 2. 3. which is the last instance in holy Writ to this purpose §. XV Episcopacy most agreeable to the reason of Church-government Lastly The Government of the Church by Bishops was said above to be most agreeable to the reason of Church-government for preserving Unity and excluding Schism This is very obvious in the writings of the Fathers St. Cyprian had much to do with the Novatian Schismaticks of his time which caused him to write many Epistles upon that occasion and a Book intituled De Vnitate Ecclesiae wherein he shewes the Unity of the Church as to the preventing of Schisme stands much upon this that there be one Bishop in one Church St. Hierom whom they of the Presbyterian perswasion take for their best friend because he strives to advance the Order of Presbyters as much as he can yet as he denies the power of Ordination belongs to Presbyters so he acknowledges that Bishops were appointed over Presbyters to keep out Faction and Schism that the people should not say as they did at Corinth I am of Paul I of Apollos I of this Teacher I of that And for his saying of Presbyters that they did anciently communi consilio with joint advice rule the Churches is not to be understood exclusivè to the Bishop for such a time was never known in the Church but joyntly with him as his Council so were the Presbyteri Civitatis to the Bishop and their advice was more used and there was more cause for it before the many Canons and decrees of Councils gave rule in most particulars what the Bishop should do as it was by that time S. Jerom wrote and whatever he saith for the advancing of the order of Presbyters it is but to set them above all Deacons even those that immediately attended on the Bishop and it seems carried themselves too high it is not to equal them to Bishops whose Prelacy St. Jerome acknowledged and thought it very necessary for this purpose of keeping out Schism which the Parity of Presbyters would expose it to And I would appeale to the reason of any of that perswasion whether it were not more convenient and necessary for keeping all in order to have one aged grave learned and experienced in the way of the Church to be the standing Moderator of the Classis or company of Presbyters than to change their Moderator year by year and leave the place open to every young unexperienc'd Presbyter that can make a faction to advance him unto it I have heard this inconvenience complained on by some of the new erected Classes whereas a Bishop being such a Moderator as is fixed and above all competition is more enabled to keep all ordinary Presbyters in their station and within their bounds And then again I would demand whether the Apostles who complained of Divisions as in the Church of Corinth and of false Teachers there and elswhere were not careful to provide the most reasonable Expedient in government against them It cannot be denyed and upon this score and to this very end of preserving Schism it cannot be thought otherwise but that the Apostles gave beginning to this Government throughout the Church 1. Notwithstanding those of the Classicall perswasion bear themselves much upon Mr. Blondels Collections whose pains might have been better implyed to the use of the Church upon some other Argument For in this it is impossible to drive out of Antiquity though ransaked over again any more to the purpose of the Presbyterian claim than has been already acknowledged and the weakness of it discovered viz. That it seems to be the judgement of some Fathers that the name Bishop was at first common to all Elders and that those Bishops mentioned Phil. 1. 1. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. were Presbyters or Elders of the second rank But what advantage is this to the cause they would establish without proving also that the power of Ordination and Government which we appropriate to
A Compendious DISCOURSE UPON THE CASE As it stands between the Church of England and of Rome on the one hand and again between the same Church of England and those Congregations which have divided from it on the other hand TOGETHER WITH The Treatise of the Division of the English Church and the Romish upon the REFORMATION Enlarged with some Explicatory Additionalls By H. F. D.D. LONDON Printed by J. G. for R. Royston at the Anstel in Ivy-lane 1655. To the READER BE pleased to understand that for amending not a few faults escaped in the first Edition of the Treatise touching The Division of the English and Romish Church upon the Reformation the Printer intended a second In order to which the Corrections were sent up to him with some explicatory Additionalls but other more necessary imployments intervening caused him to lay it aside and when I thought he had forgotten it and was willing he should doe so he lets me know he had reprinted some sheets of it I did not like he should after almost two years suppression send it abroad with no more advantage it came therefore into my minde to draw up the Case into a more compendious and methodicall Discourse and to adde the other part of the Case as it stands betweene us and those that have divided from us still making references to the like points and passages as they lye scattered in the Two Treatises before printed This of the Division c. and that other of Certain considerations touching this Church What is here done is intended and accordingly contrived with such brevity and plainnesse as the Cause would well permit for satisfaction of those who not acquainted with large Controversies are ready to receive the instruction given them and being still in the Vnity and Communion of this Chu are willing to continue therein notwithstanding the Temptations on both sides or else following the seduction of the one side or the other Romish or Sectarian in the simplicity of their hearts are not unwilling to return upon discovery of the Error and danger of their Way Which that they may see I pray God in time to open their Eyes ERRATA PAge 15. l. 28. adde former p. 24. l. 11. after serving God adde Rom. 12. 1. p. 28. l. 15. for or Western r. and Western l. 25. after of which tima adde i. e. of the four first generall Councels p. 31. l. 20. for Christ alwayes r. and alwayes p. 45. l. 27. after yet adde they think p. 49. l. 13. for Act r. Article p. 54. l. 6. for of r. or p. 87. ult. for preserving r. preventing p. 111. 16. for understanding r. undervaluing p. 122. l. 25. for know r. knew p. 126. l. 11. for that may r. that they may p. 129. l. 25. for his r. their p. 136. l. 15. for the old Prophet r. old Prophets p. 144. for cares r. jarres A Compendious Discourse upon the case as it stands between the Church of England and of Rome on the one side And again between the same Church of England and those who have divided from it on the other §. I. The Church of England I Need not premise any thing for distinguishing the three Parties concerned in this case They are too much at odds and their differences too many and notorious yet lest there be a mistake in Names because all the Sects in this Nation call themselves Churches and Churches of England therefore by the Church of England is understood the Church of Christ in this Land established upon the Reformation holding out her Doctrine and Government in the 39. Articles her Liturgy and Publick Divine Service in the Book of Common-Prayer and all those are called Sectaries and are proved so to be who of what perswasion soever have departed from or refused to hold communion with this Church upon dislike of Doctrine Government Liturgy Rites and Ceremonies or any of these The Church of England standing thus between the Church of Rome on the one hand and the aforesaid Sects which have divided from it on the other hand is challenged and assaulted by both put now to defend it self against both Which brings to mind the Device of some Romanist who to make himself merry has pictured an English Protestant standing between a Papist and an Independent borrowing Arguments and Reasons from the One to oppose or answer the Other Against the Papists he must plead as do all Sectaries Invisibility of the Church Scripture alone Liberty of private judgment against other Sects he must help himself by urging as do the Papists the visible condition of the Church the Authority of it Catholick Tradition and Practice and the Succession of Bishops and Pastors Well the Romanists may thus seemingly please themselves but indeed This of all other Reformed Churches has been and is by reason of its most regular Reformation their great eye-sore and heart-sorrow And the English Protestant or obedient Son of the Church of England as he is well set between a Papist and Sectarie as between two Extremes so he onely is able to stand against the opposition or pretensions of both for if we examine the false Grounds and deceiving Principles of Both as to this point of the Constitution Government and Communion of the Church we shall clearly see the Truth lyes in the midst between both and the Church of ENGLAND holds and maintains it To give some Instances §. II. First instance in Holy and Catholick I. The Church of Christ according to the Article of our Beliefe is One Holy Catholick The Romanists run away with the name Catholick appropriating it to themselves and every Sect with the title Holy holding themselves the only Congregations of Saints And as the Romanists enforce the name Catholick to the prejudice of the Title Holy admitting no Church to be Catholick that will not defile it self with their errors and corruptions So Sectaries under pretence of advancing Holinesse and purity and of gathering a Holy Church and assembly of known Saints overthrow the Catholick and draw the Church of Christ into a corner confining it to their own Sect or perswasion Now see the Church of England in the midst which by a most regular and warrantable Reformation had respect to both and in relation to the title Holy provided for purity of Doctrine and worship so that there can be no just complaint of Errors retained and for purity of life by coercion of Ecclesiasticall censure so that no scandalous or notorious offender should be suffered So in relation to the title Catholick this Church did retain as for Belief so for practice whatever had that stamp of Consent of all Ages upon it not confining the Church of Christ within the bounds of her perswasion but leaving it stil Catholick and communicable to all such Christian Assemblies as doe not wilfully cut themselves off but are careful so far as they have means to hold the Vnity of faith with the bond of charity which is necessary
pretending only to private or selfe-reformation Such was the Schism of former Separatists whilest this Church stood free from violence They went their way and it remained where it was This incurrs the guilt aforesaid of high disobedience and breach of Charity but not in so high a degree as that which followes A Schism that not only divides from the Communion but also offers violence to the destruction of the Church pulls down what was not only persons and Governours to set themselves in their places but also the form and government it selfe to set up their own in stead of it This is higher and farther than ever any of the Ancient Schismatikes went which changed not the form of Government alwayes used in the Church and this will be considerable in the violence of our modern Schism But before we charge them according to the premises let us clear the Case as it stands between the Church of England and that of Rome charging us with Schisme upon the Reformation §. IV. Our Defence against the Church of Rome Our Defence in generall comes to this as it was touched Tr. 1. c. 4. 5 6. This Church had Cause for such Reformation and Authority for the doing it sufficient both For when such Errors prevail in a Church and come to such generall practice it is high time by due Reformation to cast them out and when they are in Authority be convinced and doe it then is the Reformation just and lawfull First there was sufficient Cause by reason of Error and corruption in belief and Worship such as we could not continue in without gross dissembling and wrong to our consciences and Gods honour The truth and evidence of this stands upon the examination of those doctrines touching Faith and Worship wherewith the English Church was generally tainted according to the Romish infection The tryall whereof was in part made Tr. 1. c. 30. to shew that the points wherein they and we differ cannot be as they would impose upon the world Catholick doctrines i. e. the beliefe and practice of the Church in all ages since the Apostles or as S. Jude ver. 3. calls it the faith once delivered But farther to the end that they which cannot examine all the Romish doctrines whether they be Catholick or professed in all Ages may briefly and more neer at hand see so far into that Church as to perceive it is not such a Church that they who have means to know better can safely or conscionably communicate with We will make a brief tryall or estimate of a Church by the Faith Worship Sacraments professed practiced administred therein for these the Romanists will not deny to belong immediately to the constitution of the Church and therefore fit to give us direction for holding or not holding Communion As for example If we finde any Church or Congregation of Men calling themselves Christians deny directly and peremptorily any Article of the Creed or Belief into which all Christians are baptized as professed Arrians and Socinians doe it is evident their Error is immediately against the foundation they doe not deserve the name of Christian Churches We doe not so charge the Church of Rome But albeit she holds the Foundation yet finde we her superstructures in no less matters than of Faith and Worship to be such as the Foundation will not safely bear nor any good Christian coming to the knowledge of them conscionably endure For when any Church propounds any thing as matter of Faith Worship without manifesting the truth thereof to mens consciences by clear consequence from those prime Fundamentals into which they are baptized or from Scripture it selfe it is intolerable For this Rule is just and reasonable Whatever the Church propounds so to be believed and practiced it stands bound so to manifest the same else it sets it selfe in Gods stead taking an immediate dominion over mens faith and consciences but in all other things which the Church propounds and enjoynes as matters of Order Ceremony discipline for the more significant profession of that Faith or the more decent performance of that Worship every Member of the Church is to obey or to bring as expresse warrant from Gods word against the particular he refuses to doe as the command is expresse which binds him to obey those that are over him in the Lord Were this Rule well held to there would have been more peace in the Church It was necessary for peaceable subjection Tr. 2. c. 1. will be useful below against those that causelesly divide from this Church And as to the present Case we did not quarrell at the Church of Rome for matters of Rite Order or the like but of Faith and Worship The superadded Articles being so farre from a manifestation by clear consequence as above said that they proved clearly inconsistent with the Word and the worship then in an unknown tongue against the Apostle plainly 1. Cor. 14. against the reason of a reasonable serving of God beside that Worship which was given to Images against the express words of the second commandment Lastly examine a Church by the Sacraments in it administred Those two which confessedly are of Christs appointment Where we finde the Cup denyed to the Cummunicants we see a direct breach of Institution a defrauding the People of God of that part of the Sacrament which affords and makes them partakers of Christs blood-shed also where we finde a daily propitiatory Sacrifice established we plainly see a depravation of the Sacrament and a derogation to the One oblation upon the Cross Thus to say nothing of Primitive Antiquity it is cleer to every one that sees any thing there is just Cause of Reformation where such Errors and Corruptions have prevailed and of ceasing to communicate at least as to those Errors and Practises with that Church which will not being admonished reform them so that if the Question be put to any man whether he will be of the English Church as it was corrupted together with the Romish or as it was after reformed it amounts to this Whether he would be a sick and diseased man or whole and healthfull Whether keep company with persons infected or with those that are cleare and sound The choice is easie to a man in his wits §. V. Iust and sufficient Authority for publick Reformation But to cast those Errors and Corruptions out of a Church by publick Reformation is required Sufficient Authority That also was not here wanting both the Civill and the Ecclesiasticall Both these were seen in the Ancient lawful Synods gathered and held for the same purpose of Reformation And therefore every Nationall Church having within it self the whole subordination of Ecclesiasticall Power or Government the Permission and Authority of the Supreme Civill Power concurring may reform it self i. e. make a publick nationall Reformation The Antient Council of Arles in France the severall Councils of Carthage in Africa of Toledo in Spaine did so and that not
Romanists alledging that the present Sects of these dayes may plead against the Church of England from which they have divided what the Church of England can against the Roman for as it was above premised the case betweene English and Romish Church is as between two Nationall Churches having full authority for publick Reformation but the case between the English Church and those that have divided from it is between a Nationall Church and the members of it by which appears they could have no sufficient Authority for publick Reformation without and against the Authority in being to pull down and set up as they have done and it will appear they could have no just Cause for so much as a Separation from the Communion of this Church §. IX Grounds laid for convincing them of Schism Now for making good the charge of Schisme against them we will premise some undeniable Truths which speak the Authority of Church-governours the obedience due thereunto the condition of Schism and the danger and guilt of it I. That the Church of Christ is a Society or Company under a Regiment Discipline Government and the Members constituting that Society are either Persons taught guided governed or Persons teaching guiding governing and this in order to preserve all in Unity and to advance every Member of this visible Society to an effectuall and reall participation of Grace and Union with Christ the Head and therefore and upon no lesse account is obedience due unto them Eph. 4. 11 12 13 16. and Heb. 13. 17. and he that will not hear the Church be as a Heathen and Publican Mat. 16. II. That every Nationall Church has power as to determine in matters of Faith according to Gods word so to determine in things indifferent Rites Ceremonies matters of order as in prudence it sees most fit for the better and more convenient performance of Gods worship or administration of Discipline and Government This is plain by the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. 26 40. The Rule above delivered speaks to this purpose That the Church propounding or determining matters of Faith or of the substance of Worship ought to manifest it out of Gods Word cannot doe it besides the same as the 20 Act of our Church hath it and we may expect such manifestation or proof before we yeild the absolute assent of belief unto any thing so propounded But in the Churches determination of things in themselves indifferent and enjoyning the observation of Rites and Ceremonies it is enough that the particular be not against Gods Word and he that will not yeild obedience to it is bound to shew it plainly contrary to the Word or else stands guilty of disobeying the known precepts of the Word which command obedience to Authority I will not be enough to say The Governours of the Church did not hold to their Rule for this Rite or Ceremony is not to edification is not decent it might be better otherwise For this is to set a mans owne judgement against that of the Church in matters of prudence a spice of that pride and self conceit which is the Mother of all disobedience Schism and though a private judgement might truly say some things might be better done in and about Gods Worship or Service yet unlesse such a one can say as truly those things are unlawfull to be done and that by direct warrant from Gods Word he ought not to disobey III. When the Apostle used an argument from Custome against certaine disorders We have no such Custome nor the Churches of God 1 Cor. 11. 16. he plainly shews what force the Customes of a Church so they be not against Gods Word have to binde the Members of that Church as from Introducing any New Custome without Authority so to observe such Customes as the Church hath and he that will not is reckoned by the Apostle there among the Contentious or disturbers of the peace of the Church for against such he urges that Much more are we to take notice of the strength of Universall Tradition the Custome and Practice of the whole Church in all Ages for of this we shall have occasion below against the Contentious IV. In the same Epistle for it is mainly spent upon this Argument he commends Charity as a Remedy against that Pride which upon conceit of Knowledge or Spiritual gifts cap. 12. pufft them up and made them swell one against another and despise one another the ready way to Division and breaking all asunder This Charity not that which does workes of mercy or relieves the poor as we see by ver. 3. cap. 13. but which bindes together the body of the Church Edifying it selfe in Love as Eph. 4. 16. Charity in opposition to Schism this I say he commends and by severall properties discribes It vanteth not is not puffed up ver. 4. not against Equals much lesse in setting our private judgement against our Governors It thinketh no evill ver. 5. It receives satisfaction easily from Equals interprets their Words and Actions to the best much more the commands and doings of our Governours Charity seeks not her owne endureth all things ver. 5 7. suffers much rather than come to open difference and contention with Equals so will peaceable Charity suffer much ere it come to a division from the Church much lesse will it seek that which is anothers that especially which belongs to the Governours their power meanes preferments Thus Schism takes beginning from Pride and self-conceit goes on by uncharitablenesse to enormous excesse of disobedience and injustice and renders all Knowledge Faith and other good workes for want of this Charity unprofitable nothing worth as the Apostle in that Chapter often tells us V. The Apostle when he set Titus over the Churches of Crete directs him in the use of his power as to this point of dealing with the Contentious Tit. 3. 10 11. A man that is an Heretick reject being self-condemned Every Schismatick is this Heretick for so the word Heresie and Heretick signifies and according to the use of it then implyed one that obstinately stood out against the Church or that lead any Sect after the strictest Sect or Heresie of the Pharisees Act 26. 5. after that which they call Heresie Act. 24. 14. a Factious company divided from the Church so they called or accounted of Christians and Gal. 5. 20. we have it reckoned among the workes of the Flesh Debates Contentions Heresie So here Heretick that leads a Faction a Sect or that wilfully followes or abets it A Man therefore that is a Heretick contentious disobedient to the Order and Authority of the Church reject for he is self-condemned having both passed the Sentence upon himself by professing against or dividing from the Church and also done execution like that of the Churches censure and excommunication upon himselfe by actuall separation or going out of the Church A fearfull condition Now the application of the Premises to the convincing
of those that have divided from the Church of England is very easie and obvious Disobedient they are to the lawfull Authority in this Church and that not onely in their denying to obey the Orders Decrees Constitutions Lawfully made by them which had the Authority but in an utter withdrawing of their obedience for the future yea in abolishing and taking away as much as in them lay that very Authority and Office too a step farther than ever the Antient Schismaticks went And all this against the Constitution and Custome not onely of this Church but of all the Catholick Churche against that Charity which Saint Paul enjoynes as most necessary to preserve the Unity of the Church and to keep out Schism against all the admonitions not once and againe as the Apostle bids Titus but often given them yea satisfactions endeavoured by the Governours and Writers of this Church in all the particulars of Government Worship and Ceremony which the Contentious from time to time excepted against §. X. Answer to their plea against this Chu Let us then hear what they plead to this charge by way of exception against the Church of England and briefly rejoyne so as may be to the satisfaction of them at least who desire to continue in the Unity of the Church of England notwithstanding the Temptations of the Times and to the reduction of such as follow the Schism in the simplicity of their hearts deceived by the faire pretences thereof Their generall pretension for themselves and exception against this Church is their desire or seeking of Purity Holinesse strict walking which they could not have or exercise in that way they desired under the Government or in the way of Worship used in this Church of England Answ The pretence of Purity Holinesse and strict life has a faire glosse and to endeavour it really and conscionably is the duty and should indeed be the desire and care of every Christian But we finde the Pharisees in the Jewish Church pretending to it above all other and by the forced exercises of it drawing admiration from the beholders and bringing in Proselites to their Sect and it would be worth the examining at least in the Consciences of these Pretenders whether their righteousnesse exceeds the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees Our Saviour has also foretold that false Teachers shall arise in his Church and come in Sheeps cloathing but may be known by their fruits We finde also that the Antient and famous Schisms of the Novatians and Donatists had the pretence of purity and strictnesse Novatus about the year 250. was so strict that he denyed reconciliation to all that after Baptisme fell into Adultery or in times of persecution yeilded to Idolatry and broke with the Church for re-admitting such upon their unfeigned Repentance His followers were called Cathari or Puritans upon this pretence and many followers he had yea many of the Confessors such as suffered for the Christian Faith were carryed away with that false pretence and sided awhile with him till seeing their errour they returned again to the Unity of the Church and condemned his Schism as Saint Cyprian relates it to Cornelius Ep. 46. Donatus in the next age after him discontented because he could not be made Bishop of Carthage divided himself and his party from the Communion of the Church despising it as a mixed company of good and bad and rebaptizing all that revolted from the Church to his Communion confined the true Church onely to those of his perswasion for under that pretence of Purity he drew many away and it proved a Schism of great extent and long continuance If therefore this be one Reason wherefore our pretenders cannot as they conceive have that Purity or partake of the Ordinances as they ought because of Carnall Christians suffered in the Communion of the Church of England and unworthy receivers admitted to the Sacrament it was long agoe refuted by S. Austin in his learned workes against the Donatists demonstrating by severall places of Scripture which acknowledge and by severall parables of our Saviour which represent the condition of the Church on Earth to be such for mixture as a heap of Chaff and Wheat in the same Floor of good Fish and bad in the same Net of Corne and Tares in the same Field and that neither the unworthinesse of the Minister or of other Receivers makes Gods Ordinance ineffectuall or pollutes him that comes in Charity and with a Conscience undefiled or cleansed from selfe-pollutions It is in the power and belongs to the duty of Church-Governours to cast out the scandalous or such as walk disorderly but when that is done it is not for any man to judge he or she is carnall and unsanctified for this is to take the Lords Fan out of hand with which he will purge his Floor Mat. 3. and by breach of charity to offend against his Brother Nay if that be not done but that disorderly persons are yet suffered and come to the place of Worship yea to the Lords Table the guilt rests upon the Governors that are to see to it the Ordinance is not lesse effectuall to thee if by self-conceit and uncharitablenesse thou render not thy selfe uncapable of the benefit as the Pharisee did when he saw the Publican in the Temple with him yea for any thing thou knowest such a disorderly person may come at that time when thou art offended with him as the Publican then did truly penitent and converted XI Triall of Purity of Religion In the next place I would know what hinderance or prohibition of purity or strict life had they in the Communion of this Church Did the Governors thereof forbid any thing which St. James requires to pure Religion c. 1. ult. to keepe themselves unspotted of the World by Covetousnesse Selfe-seeking Swearing Drunkennesse Lusts of the flesh the common spots of the World Or did they forbid to visit the Fatherlesse and Widdow in their affliction or any works of Charity Might they not have done all these with praise and commendation had they continued in the Communion of this Church And for these other exercises of Devotion Prayer Reading Hearing which though belonging to pure Religion S. James thought good to omit we shall see the reason of it presently might they not be had duly frequently Was there any thing forbid but the irregular use or seditious abuse of them Private Meetings or Conventicles which were preparatories to Separation and Schism in a performance of those Duties to the despising of the Church or publique Assemblies But they will say they could not have these exercises in publique purely administred or performed that is as it will appeare below not according to their own devising and phansie Good reason there is that every Christian should have a special care of performing these duties of Prayer Reading Hearing but seeing our Pretenders to Purity seeme to place the summe of Religion in these especially I would wish
them to examine the purity of their Religion by the Apostles trial of it Jam. 1. ult. who thought good to omit the mention of these exercises because of the Pharisees seeking the esteem of holinesse by such performances because of Christians then as now in our Times resting too much on a fansy of their faith performance of such Exercises without works and deeds answerable And therefore the Apostle described pure Religion by such duties of Charity absteining from all spots of the world or works of the Flesh as make better proof of the sincerity of Religion If the making of Fatherlesse and Widdowes the turning men out of their Estates the invading of other mens Rights had by the Apostle been made the trial of pure Religion then might the Contentious of our dayes have pretended to Purity and Religion and have blessed the Lord that they were become rich though with the spoiling of others as they did Zech. 11. 5. but if Charity and denying of worldlinesse and lusts be the marks then let them try whether their way of Religion bring forth such fruits or be in a capacity to do it When the Romanists alledge the many pious and charitable works as building of Churches Colledges Hospitals Schools and the applying maintenance thereunto done by men in their Religion our pretenders to Purity will be ready to say it was the Doctrine of Merit that did it not reflecting upon themselves to consider what kind of Doctrine theirs is which pulls downe the Monuments of Piety and Charity and converts the publique to private use But when we shew that since the Reformation which cast out Popish merit as many good works for the computation has been made done in the like kinde as have been done in any one Age before we shew the fruits of our Religion and challenge theirs which onely can shew for their way and doctrines tend to no other issue a distempered zeal in destroying much of that which before was raised to pious uses and a self-seeking in the enriching themselves by the spoiles Swearing and drunkennesse the usuall and noted spots of the World are as it is fit very much declined in their way of purity but the Pharisee could say more he was no Extortioner no Adulterer and Saint James implied many other spots of the World which pure Religion must keep a man from and S. John 1. Ep. c. 2. 16. reducing the things of the world to three heads makes two of them the lust of the Eye and pride of Life and therefore tells us that Coveting Injustice Sacriledge and the Pride of life that either causes them or is maintained by them are the Exorbitant Iniquities of the world and therefore Spots which by S. James his rule will not consist with pure Religion I have been the longer upon this Argument because there is scarce any other thing by which the Devil hath gained more or the Church lost more than by this pretence of Purity the common plea of all Sects in all Times Now as to their Reply above that they could not have those duties of exercises of hearing praying in publique purely administred satisfaction will be given below when we come to consider of the offence they take at the Liturgy forms of publique Service Rites and Ceremonies used in and about Gods worship in this Church But first of their Exceptions against the Government it selfe for we charge them of separating or withdrawing their Obedience from their lawfull Pastors and Governours Such as Bishops were in this and in all the Catholique Church in all Ages XI Their Plea against the Government of this Chu. They plead it is no lawfull government of the Church but to be cast out as Antichristian This last contentious age has called the office of a Bishop into question and made a vast controversy of it I will not follow it at stretch but onely observe such grounds as Truth and Peace seems mainly to rest on and which every ordinary capacity may understand and receive satisfaction so far as to keep himself in the unity of the Church It is fitting therefore in the first place to remove the prejudice under which the Adversaries usually represent Bishops to vulgar eyes as men swell'd with their titles of Honour large Revenues attendance of Chancellors Commissaries Officials Lording it over the flock not feeding it Why persons Ecclesiasticall should be thought uncapable of the Honour or unfit for the means which the piety of former times has applyed unto them out of a religious respect I know no cause besides the ingratitude and sacrilegious disposition of this latter Age But to wave these Additionals as external to the very office of a Bishop and to passe by Abuses that might be in government through the iniquity of Persons and corrupter Times all which are capable of Reformation by due Authority that which is concerned in this Controversy is the Function and very office of a Bishop By the office be the times what they will he is set in the Church as a chiefe or more generall Pastor within such precincts or compasse commonly called a Diocesse having inspection and superintendency in which stands his Prelacy over particular Pastors and Flocks providing or ordaining such Pastors as need requires and doing all this with the advice and assistance of his Presbyters or some of the inferiour Pastors anciently called Presbyteri civitatis and they nothing without him Such an office will appeare to be conformable as to the perpetuall practise of the Catholick Church so to the Word of God and most agreeable to the reason of Church-government as to the preserving of Unity and keeping out Schisme the main concernments of the Church and therefore they must appeare also highly guilty of Sacriledge and Schisme that not onely deny obedience to the established Authority of this Office but have endeavoured to subvert the very Function it self §. XIII Episcopall Government is by universall Practise of the Chu First the practise of the whole Church in all Ages is against them Into this Island the Christian faith was received if not in the Apostles times as some think yet in the next age at farthest as all do acknowledge and with that faith the government by Bishops was received and ever since continued neither did the Catholique Church ever know any other Government till the last hundred yeares So the force of the Apostles argument 1 Cor. 11. 16. falls upon the Contentious of this Age and explodes their new way of ordaining Pastors and ruling their Churches without Bishops The Churches of God never had any such Custome yea in some Councils they declared against it upon occasion given by the presumption of some Presbyters that took upon them to ordaine as in the Case of Ischyras and some others ordained by one Coluthus who carried himselfe as a Bishop but was found to be none in Athanas Epist. certainly the lawfull Customes of any Nationall Church are by the Apostles reason binding to
those who are against Set Forms see great reason against that too thinking it fit as indeed it is that none should use their gifts publiquely but such as are called allowed and ordained to it by the Church and if so then also should they think it sit that those who are so allowed as publique Ministers in the Congregation should use their gifts so and in such a way as the same Church sees sit and allowes for if these will plead liberty of using their spirituall Gifts against the Constitution of the Church and that by this 14. chapter to the Corinthians then may the other with as good Reason plead Liberty for all gifted men for all that had such gifts as here the Apostle speaks of and seeks to order might have their turn of speaking and using them But they are both out of the way and inconsequent in their reasoning from this Chapter not distinguishing Times and Gifts nor acknowledging duly the Authority of the Church and therefore under pretence of such Gifts pleading for Liberty of using them that is as it often proves of venting what they please in the Congregation whereas they ought in all humility to expect the Churches approbation of their Gifts and then know they must use them with submission still to the Church in such a way as is thought most fit for preventing the above-mentioned inconveniences for preserving Order and Vnity in the Church for setting forth an Vniformity in Gods Worship and upon all these respects for edification of the people Calvin no friend to Popery or sloathfulnesse in Ministers but a person furnished with as great gifts as any of our Pleaders for this Liberty can pretend to is said to have often wished that all the Churches had one and the same Form of publique Service or Liturgy and that upon these Reasons The holding of Unity in the Church and the excluding of Novelty Faction and boasting of Gifts But see whether this Pride of spirit and self conceit for I can call it no otherwise when once it sets it self against the Churches constitution without expresse Scripture has proceeded in some from a despising of the Churches Prayers to an understanding of the Lords Prayer because a Set form and to a neglecting the use of it altogether as far below them then to a conceiting of themselves to be above prayer it self as needing not to pray at all Such I have met with miserably cutting themselves off not onely from the comfort of the prayers of Christs Church on Earth but from the benefit of his intercession in Heaven and evacuating as to themselves the eternal Priesthood of Christ for if they need not pray they need not confesse nor ask forgivenesse nor beg Grace or any spirituall help and so need not the Intercession of Christ for obteining such mercies for his being our Advocate 1 Joh. 2. 1. supposeth our Confession of sin required c. 1. v. 9. and his being our High Priest inferrs our coming to the Throne of Grace Heb. 4. 16. or our coming to God by him Hebr. 7. 25. And as for those that so much prize the prayers of their owne conception to an undervaluing of that which the Lord framed and taught us let them consider how little they deserve his Intercession when they come by him to put up their owne prayers despising or wilfully neglecting his But we knowing the perfection of that prayer which conteins all things fitting to be asked doe often use it in the publick prayers of the Church and alwayes with our own that if any thing needfull be through our imperfection Omitted in our own it may be supplyed in the use of that and knowing that Christ is ready to hear receive the requests of every humble spirit which is carefull to doe and make use of what he has taught us We therefore delight to expresse or to sum up our desires often in his form of words for as Saint Cyprian in his exposition of the Lords Prayer tels us Christ when we beg his intercession using that prayer will acknowledge his own Words will remember the prayer he taught us Thus much of set Forms and Prayers of the Church §. XX Exception against Rites and Ceremonies They farther pretend they cannot hold Communion in the publick Worship of God according to the way and form of the Church of England by Reason of Rites and Ceremonies used therein Here they are chiefly offended at the Habit of the Minister standing up at Creed and Gospel Ring in Marriage Cross in Baptism Kneeling at the Lords Supper Bowing at the Name of Jesus And the reason of their offence is because they take them to be Burthensome and therefore against Christian Liberty yea Superstitious and therefore against purity of Worship For the first Where Ceremonies are burthensome for Number it is a fault in that Church and cause of offence and complaint but not of separation or breaking Communion St. Augustine in his Epist to Januar took notice of the encrease of Ceremonies then and in part complained they began to be burthensome in the Church of Rome the number was excessive before Reformation and gave just Cause to complain of the burthensom observance of them but that was not any Cause of dividing Communion had they not beene many of them burthensome for Weight as well as for Number and insupportable by reason of apparent superstition Now the Ceremonies and Rites reteined in this Church were few for number and eased of that weight or superstition that was in any of them The truth is if the Pretenders of Liberty of Conscience do therefore quarrel at our Rites and Ceremonies as contrary to Christian Liberty because appointed and enjoyned by the Church they do daily shew they use that Liberty as a Cloak for their unruly and contentious Spirits that cannot abide the commands of Authority but would do every thing according to their own devising and will when they have power impose severely Orders and Constitutions of their own for so they do where they can erect their new Communions imposing Conditions of admittance into and of Continuance in that Communion such as they think good but such as Christ or his Apostles never required such as the Catholique Church never knew as for example their Triall by Lay-Elders and denial of Communion or Church-fellowship yea of the Sacrament of Christs Body and Blood to him that will not undergo that Triall or is not approved by it according to those rules they please to use but is found unanswerable to that measure of knowledge or gifts which they expect of which and other devices of theirs we may say as the Apostle did 1 Cor. 11. 17. We have no such Custome nor the Churches of God But in the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England they finde Superstition and why because such Rites and Ceremonies were derived from and abused in Popery unto Superstition They were used indeed in the Church of Rome and abused too
in the Church For our Saviour left his Apostles with full power extraordinary and ordinary for the planting and propagating his Church through the World The ordinary power they were to leave unto others after them for continuing of his Church to the Worlds end viz the power of Reconciliation in the Ministry of the Word Sacraments the power of ordaining and sending others and the power of jurisdicton and government How and into what hands they communicated these severall powers That 's the question Some of the Ancients apprehend it thus That they committed the whole power to those first Elders they placed in every City where the Church was planted so that those first Elders were properly Bishops having power to ordain other Ministers and Labourers as the encrease or extent of the Church required Other Fathers or ancient Writers seem to apprehend those first Elders to be meer Presbyters to whom the whole power was not committed but that afterwards upon the encrease of the Church other speciall Men were intrusted with it to ordain others as need required and as Generall Pastors to rule and over-see the whole Church with all the particular Congregations and Presbyters or inferiour Pastors belonging to it Either way is sufficient for establishing the Episcopall power and government and the Adversaries thereof as they cannot disprove it if we say those first Elders were Bishops properly so neither will they gain any thing if we grant them in courtesy thus much that the first Elders were meer Presbyters For see briefly what they can say against the first or draw from the second Against the first they usually say 1. If those Bishops at Philippi were so properly then were there more than one Bishop in one City or Church Answ This indeed was absurd and inconvenient and never suffered in the Church inlarged and established but in the Church Nascent or beginning it might be very reasonable by way of provision for the future enlargement establishment of that Church So we find 12. Apostles left in the Church of Jerusalem by our Saviour in order to their propagating and governing the Church through the whole World And so in some great Cities where and from which the Gospel might suddenly spread it self the Apostles might provisionally leave more than One Elder vested with power for the supply of the Church enlarged Secondly If the Elders or Bishops mentioned in those places were Bishops properly vested with such power then would the Apostle also have remembred the other sort of Elders between them and Deacons Answ But what if there were not yet in that Church Elders or Presbyters of the second sort For no Church at first was full Or if there were such in that Church why might he not salute both sorts under that general name Bishop Thirdly But then the Apostle did not distinctly set down the Office of the one or the other for having set down the office of a Bishop he presently goes to the Deacon 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. 5. Answ It was not the Apostles purpose in those places distinctly to set down the Office of Elders nor of Deacons but the general qualification of the Persons to be admitted to those Offices We may ask of them Where has the Apostle distinctly set down or described the Office of a Lady-Elder They are fain to force it out of one word Ruling 1 Tim. 4. 17. which belongs to the Preaching Elders as they well acknowledge In the places above mentioned the Apostle gives as I said qualifications fitting the Persons of both sorts of Elders that then were or should be in the Church for the duties there hinted teaching ruling do belong to both sorts of Elders but with Subordination of the one to the other And if they will have the word rule 1 Tim. 4. 17. insinuate a distinct Office of Elders from the preaching Elders without any intimation of such an Office anywhere else in Scripture why might not we say with more reason that the same word in the forementioned place 1 Tim. 3. 5. belongs to Bishops of both sorts according to their order and station to rule or take care of the Church of God Especially seeing we shew elsewhere in the same Epistle such a Prelacy or supereminent power of rule given to Timothy distinctly from other Elders as Lay hands suddenly on no man Rebuke not an Elder receive no accusation against an Elder c. cap. 5. v. 19. 22. Like speciall power given to Titus as we see in that Epistle besides all the acts of ordinary power exercised by the Apostles and not communicated in general to Presbyters And so the exhortation of the Apostle Acts 20. 28. might generally fit both sorts of Elders or Bishops supposing those of the inferiour rank present there that they should all of them feed the Flock according to their several stations and in that subordination of Rule which was in the Church But if we grant them that those Elders or Bishops in the above cited places were not Bishops properly but ordinary presbyters What can they draw from thence advantagious either to the Classicall or Congregational pretension when as there is no instance in all Scripture of the Power vested in a Classis or consistory of Presbyters or in every particular Congregation but on the contrary where ever there is mention of the exercising of the power for ordination by laying on hands or for Jurisdiction in rebuking or receiving accusation against an Elder in rejecting Heretiks or the like we find it always done by the Apostles or speciall men appointed thereunto as Timothy Titus Nor is it to any purpose to reply as they doe These were extraordinary men Apostles or Evangelists and so exercised that power as such For albeit in the office of Apostle and Evangelist there was something extraordinary and supposing Timothy Titus may passe under the Title of Evangelists yet the power of ordination and Jurisdiction was ordinary and to continue in the Church and to be communicated unto others as was most convenient What help therefore can the Adversaries have in the Apostles and Evangelists being extraordinary persons unlesse they can shew the power did ordinarily belong to and was exercised by the company of Presbyters or else demonstrate it was left in their hands by expresse and peremptory order from the Apostles So that here they would be non-suited laying their plea only by Scripture against Universall Tradition and practice of the Church for the Scripture story goes not downe to the departure of the Apostles Now after they were gone off it clearly appeared by the practice of the whole Church in what hands the chief power and Government was left viz. not to Presbyters in common but in speciall hands according to the instances and examples of the exercising that power in the Apostles Time The Ancient Records also which continue the Church story from that Time give us the succession of Bishops from the Apostles in the more eminent