also of Deacons a Even a Bishop is called a Deacon wherupon S. Paul writing to Timothy said to him though a Bishop Fullfill thy Deaconry From thence you may gather that the Names of Bishop and Deacon are taken for the same Nay the very Apostles themselves call themselves sometimes Presbyters sometimes Deacons and so their whole Office a Deaconry and yet is not Deacon or Presbyter the same that Apostle Why therfore did you not add that too that it might appear that the other suffered as much as Bishops and that in the begining not only the names of Bishops but of other Orders also were taken in like manner promiscuously wheras the Things the Offices themselves were distinct 2. Wheras then in those very places where the Fathers speak so That then they communicated in Names they presently apply a remedy and give this item that the Things themselves are otherwise And instantly add Afterward the proper name was given to each of Bishop to a Bishop of Presbyter to a Presbyter By the rule of speech then who would urge the common name when the proper had taken place For no body would now call a King a Tyrant or a Souldier Latronem as of old they were wont a Robber neither sure would they call a Presbyter a Bishop as when S. Hierom wrote had he called himself Bishop and S. Augustine Presbyter you know he would have been laughed at for his pains 3. Add further that in those very places wherin the Fathers speak so before they speak they are forced {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} to object by way of exception concerning the use of names and to premise some what that should put the thing out of question S. Chrysostom What meaneth this were there then more Bishops of one the same city by no means No not then when S. Paul wrote Theodoret It could not be that many Bishops should be Pastors of one City S. Hierom There could not be many Bishops in one City S. Ambrose God appointed several Bishops over several Citys So that they do cleerly shew the Offices were then distinct when they make the inference touching the name I collect then how ere it was for the names at first Be it they then neglected the Propriety of speech yet that even then there was but one Bishop but one Pastor in one City And this holdeth among us even at this day but doth it so among you Thus if you had prefacd touching the Thing it self and had afterward inferr'd touching the names though to what end is it to make any stir about the name when we are agreed on the thing that they were a little while taken one for another and had not spoken so loosly concerning the promiscuous use of the names his Majestie would not I beleeve have set his dash of dislike upon that passage The next is touching the Order Where I pray consider whether they be to be called One and the same Order whose Offices are not one and the same But that they are not the same Offices even they who less favour the Episcopal Order do confess in that they ever except Ordination Again whether they be to be called One and the same Order wherin there is not One and the same but a new and distinct Imposition of hands For that in all Antiquity there was Imposition of hands upon Bishops no man I think will deny And whether the Antient Church were of this opinion let Isidore be the witness who b in plain words calls it the Order of Bishoprick To the Schole indeed if you referr it they do not agree among themselves Your Altisiodorensis our Major and others are for the distinction of the Order But they who are most against it though they will not grant it a Sacrament of Orders the whole force wherof they bound within the Eucharist yet an Order they grant since an Order is nothing else but a Power to a special Act as namely to Ordain which is competible to Bishops only For what a thing were this if that from whence Ordination and so all other Orders proceed should it self not be an Order For we pass not for the Church of Rome or the Pontifical If they please themselves with the name of Consecration let them enjoy it Even the Church of Rome it self did anciently speak otherwise For instance The Church of Rome saith Tertullian c gives out that Clement was ordained by S. Peter Otherwise also the Fathers even they whom you allege even S. Hierom d who affirms that S. Iames the brother of our Lord was presently after the Passion of our Saviour ordained Bishop And of Timothy e Timothy had the gift of Prophecy together with his Ordination to Episcopacy S. Ambrose f For unlawfull it was and might not be that the Inferior should ordain the superior to wit a Presbyter a Bishop S. Chrysostom g For Presbyters could not have ordained the Bishop For the Latin word Ordination is agreable to the Greek {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and is often rendred by it nor is any word more frequent where mention is of making Bishops then that of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Theodoret h Titus was ordained by S. Paul Bishop of Creet But you say an Order is one thing a Degree another Yet you know that in Holy Scriptures these words are taken one for another no less then those of Bishop and Presbyter where the Deaconry is called {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} a Degree i which notwithstanding you will not I know deny to be an Order You know also that it is so among the Fathers among whom you may often read that a Deacon or Presbyter may {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} fall from his Degree and be degraded no less then a Bishop Indeed every Order is a Degree but not every Degree an Order But both are in Episcopacy though in one respect an Order in another a Degree A Degree as it hath a superiority even without any power an Order as it hath a power to a special act For were it a Degree only it had been enough to have used the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the superlative which denotes a Degree superior to that of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Presbyter the Comparative neither would there have been need to fetch in a new word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} a Bishop meerly to design a Degree For as touching Archbishops t is quite another reason They are not indued with a power to any special act For even they if they were not Bishops before receive their Ordination from Bishops And as they are Archbishops they are not necessary to the Ordination of Bishops for by the Fourth Canon of the Council of Nice Three Bishops together have power to ordain a Bishop But we very well know that the Apostles and the Seventy two Disciples were
Of Episcopacy THREE EPISTLES OF PETER MOULIN Doctor and Professor of Divinity Answered By the Right Reverend Father in God Lancelot Andrews Late Lord Bishop of Winchester Translated for the benefit of the Publike S. Clemens in Epist. ad Corinth 1. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Our Apostles understood by our Lord Iesus Christ that there would be contention about the name of Episcopacy Printed in the Yeer 1647. To the most Reverend Prelate the Lord Bishop of Winchester Peter Moulin wisheth all health and happiness THat Honorable man your Predecessor was taken hence not without great damage both to the Church and Common-wealth The King lost a most wise Counseller and the Church a faithfull Pastor but I a Patron and a friend who though he was most carefull and desirous of my good yet oblig'd me more by his Virtues then his benefits I have his Letters by me which he wrote to me when he was sick and his recovery was almost desperate the very sight wherof doth exceedingly afflict me But yet my grief was not a little eas'd when I heard that you succeeded in his room whose learning I long since admir'd and of whose good affection I had great experience when I was with you Indeed his most judicious Majestie did not stick long upon his choice You were even then design'd his Successor in the judgment of all who knew the wisdome of the King May it I beseech God prove happy and fortunate to your self to the Church and Kingdom May He grant you with increase of Honor increase of Virtue and a fresh and lively old age That his most Gracious Majestie may long enjoy you for his Counseller and the Church daily reap more and more fruits of your industry and vigilance I wrote a Book touching the Calling of Pastors wherin some passages greiv'd the soul of your most wise King as if they were averse to the Office of Episcopacy But indeed on the other side our Countrymen complain not a little that I vndertook the cause of Bishops and condemnd Aerius who in a matter anciently and universally receivd durst oppose himself against the Practise of the Catholik Church And they take it in ill part that I said that it was generally receivd in the Church even from the first successors of the Apostles that among the Presbyters of a City some one should have the preeminence and be call'd the Bishop But though there be many things in my Book which the King set a dash of his dislike upon which as all things els he observed wisely and with an incredible sharpness of wit yet Three things there are which specially offend Him The First is that I said that the Names of Bishop and Presbyter are promiscuously taken in the New Testament for one and the same The Second that I affirm'd that there is but one and the same Order of Presbyter and Bishop The Third and that the greatest is that I think the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the Priority or Superiority of Bishops not to be of Divine Right nor a point of Faith but to be a thing wherein the Primitive Church vsed her liberty and prudence when she judged the Preeminence of One to be fitter for the mantaining of Order and conserving of Peace and that Vnity may well be kept whole and intire between Churches though they differ upon that point I confess these things were wrote by me which lest they be drawn to a wrong sense or be taken in the worser part take I pray breifly my meaning in them I said indeed that the Names of Bishop and Presbyter were taken for all one in the New Testament But I thought not that the Dignity of the Bishop was less'ned thereby since I spake only of the Name not of the Office only and I have beside clear places of Scripture the consent not only of Hierom the Presbyter but also of the most famous Bishops of the Ancient Church Chrysostom Ambrose Theodoret who took it not as a wrong to them or that any thing was abated of their honor if it were beleeved that the Names of Bishop and Presbyter were at first used in the same sense That the Order indeed of Bishop and Presbyter was one and the same that I said For so did the Ancient Church ever think and the Church of Rome thinks so to this day although there be in that Church an incredible difference betwixt the pomp of the Bishops and the meaness of the Priests Thence it is that in the Roman Pontifical there is set down the Consecration of Bishops but not the Ordination of them Indeed Order is one thing a Degree another for men of one and the same Order may differ in Degree and Dignity even as among Bishops the Degree of Archbishops is the more eminent Howbeit that this Episcopal Degree and Prerogative is by Ecclesiastical not by Divine Right I confess it was said by me For beside that to speak otherwise then I thought had not been the part of an vpright honest man you according to your wonted goodness will easily judg that a French man living vnder the Polity of the French Church could not speak otherwise but he must incur the censure of our Synods and vnder the danger {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} of degrading be forced to a recantation For to think that our Churches do err in points of Faith and in that which is of Divine Right were questionles to brand them with the note of Heresy and to shake the conscience of many weak ones Truly I came very vnwillingly to the writing of this Book but our Church requiring it and lately enforcing me for to stop the insolency of our Adversaries who in this point insult over vs out of all temper and speak of vs as of so many doltish mushrums newly sprung out of the earth and as of a company of base fellows who by force and tumult had got the Pulpit But howsoever I think I have kept such a temper that in defending our own I have not struck at your government nor by immoderate affection to a part have inclined more then was meet to either side Nor did I ever mention the Bishops of England with out due honor These things I thought fit to write to you Great Sir by whom I chiefly desire my papers may be approved I had sent my Book to you before now but that I was told by divers you vnderstood not French Now I send it because since you enjoy a more frequent and neerer presence of His Majestie I doubt not but He may have some speech with you about it and use you as an umpire in the cause And I shal most willingly stand to your iudgment well knowing that the most learned are ever the most can did and hoping that you wil not lauce too deep whatever may be salved with a fair interpretation So think of me as of a man with whom the Authority of Antiquity shal be
Nor shall you ever read that they by that word pointed out such as either in City or Country had the care of some few persons distinguished by Parishes For that the Presbyters Vrban or Rural were by the Bishop designed to that imployment Who indeed at the begining were of the Bishops family and did live as you very well know of the Sportula i. e. of the Oblations of the Church before the distinction of Parishes came up And the word Calling in the sense you take it is altogether as unknown In stead whereof they used the words Ordination or Constitution And the very name of Minister is of the same stamp which they would never have understood to be spoken of any but a Deacon as it is derived indeed from no other fountain but the Greek {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} But we must pardon you you must speak the language of your Church which hath no Bishops another kind of Presbyters Elders they call them another kind of Deacons and I add another kind of Calling then ever the Antient Church acknowledged I for my part in my best wishes for your Church and so for all the Reformed do wish this that you may keep constant in the other points of Faith but for Government and Order that God would vouchsafe to you no other but that which He hath vouchsafed Vs i. e. by Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Such as those we read of in the Histories of the Church and in the Councils and the Antient Fathers unto whom or self-conceit shrewdly deceives me or most like are Our most like I say in their Order not in their Worth but would to God in their Worth also And that no Policy no form of Government in any Church whatsoever cometh neerer the sense of scripture or the manner and usage of the Antient Church then this which flourisheth among us These I intrust to you that if you please they may be with you But know withall that I have ever been both by Nature and Choice addicted to Peace And my Age now requires it of me who ere long must be packing but cheifly living under a King whose Word is that of our Saviour Blessed are the Peacemakers And I assure you I shall never incline to any immoderate or harsh counsels but shall qualifie as much as I may your writings with a fair interpretation For neither can we bragg of our happiness more then antiently S. Augustine did whose saying it was What we teach is one thing what we are fain to tolerate another To the most Reverend Father the Lord Bishop of Winchester MOst Reverend Prelate I sent unto you my Book concerning the Calling of Pastors and with it some Letters wherin I endevour'd to satisfie you touching some points wherin I seem'd to your most Gracious King too ill affected to the Order of Episcopacy Which Letters if you have received I doubt not but you will judge of me as of a man who both thinketh and speaketh honorably of your Order I am not so proudly arrogant as to oppose my self to all Antiquity and to reject that as a thing faulty and wicked which hath been received in the Church from the very next Age to the Apostles I was ever of this mind that concord might be kept whole and intire between Churches living howere under a different form of Ecclesiastical Government so that Christ be preached as he is set forth in the Gospel the Christian Faith remain safe and sound But among the rest of your Order I ever highlyest esteemed you for many causes which I had rather acquaint others then yourself withall As a witness of which my affection I send you this new Book which the command of the Church whom I serve and the impudent insulting of a Court-Iesuite forced from me I desire that you would be a means to pacifie the Kings anger against me That He would consider with Himself and weigh it in an equal ballance that there can be no place in the French Church for a Pastor that should teach the Primacy of Bishops to be of Divine Right without which there could be no salvation without which the Church could not stand To affirm this were nothing els but to damn all our Churches to the pit of Hell to pronounce the sentence of condemnation upon my own Flock Which should I do you your self would account me a sensless ungracious fellow and worthy to be spit upon by all But enough of this For an overlabored Defence specially to an understanding man and in a clear and manifest point is altogether needless God preserve you and prosper your endeavours that they may redound to the edification of the Church Farewell Paris XVI Calends of Decemb. 1618. Your Honors most devoted Peter Moulin The Bishops Answer to the Second Epistle THe Post was not yet gone he staied here a day or two but he had these letters here inclosed sealed up as they are when lo I received your Second by the hands of S. William Beecher Agent for the King lately come from you I presently recalled my former yet opened them not but as they were inclosed them in these For I would not so trespass as to commit the same fault again but rather make amends for my former tardiness with the quickness of this Answer You shall therfore with my First receive these Second together with my thanks for both but {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the First Second as it were to wit in these Second Letters my First thanks now and in the First my Second as it falls out Thanks I say both for that your Book formerly sent and this Later shortly as I hope to be sent For S. William Beecher will deny either that it was bound when he came thence or els brought to him and in that consideration he came the later to me but he bad me look for it for that I should not look in vain As for pacifying the Kings anger against you beleeve me you need not much trouble your self There is nothing in Him which needs pacifying there are ways wherby you may more and more gain him and make him yours and it would be worth your labour if you do it And do it you may if you take that course which you cannot learn better of any man living then of himself As for me I gladly acknowledg that you are more moderate toward us then most of your men commonly are and the more you convers with Antiquity will be daily more and more nay I add and much more would be if your Church would give you leave and I would to God it would It should seem that shee hath transfer'd the faults of Persons upon Things and for some abuse hath taken away the lawful use a fault which you should by little and little unlearn Her You while you follow and sway with it follow not the bent of your own mind and iudgment for Iiudg of your affection by your pen
commonly growes from Equality how comes it to pass that there is no need of this remedy among you Again if it be true that this Form of Government was received every where by all Churches that which was every where receiv'd by all why doth not your Church receive why doth She only run counter to all the Churches which then were every where For that is a most true word you said and deserv'd an asterisk of commendation That all Churches everywhere receiv'd this Form of Government Nor were there ever before this Age any Churches which were governed by any other then by Bishops Wherfore there was no cause at all that you should go about to wipe off that suspition for I had none of you that you were not well affected to our Order I shall never be induced to beleeve it for I cannot but give credit to you affirming it in your Letters that your Countrymen complain of you for favoring and wishing so well vnto it Indeed that you wish well I doubt not at all but therto I am more perswaded by your word then by your arguments For here you slip from the Order to the Persons of Bishops of whose Learning Industrie Martyrdom you speak much and excellently But there were as you know of old men that hated the Tyrant but not his Tyranny and why not now men that love Bishops but not the Government by Bishops Pass by the men therfore it matters not for them speak of the Order it self For Calvin himself and Beza if they wrote to our Prelates know that they wrote likewise to them whom you call peevish and that their Letters which these pretend for their peevishness are produced by them and thus they oft reply To what purpose do I hear Calvins Words when I see his Deeds For the Order it self if it be such as you would have it seem the Bishops of England cannot make it better nor of Spain worse I advis'd you not to transferr the faults of Persons upon Things and to unlearn your Church that custom As for those Antients whom you worthily call the Light of the Church and who themselves were Bishops though you say much yet you say not enough For this is not enough That you would not give sentence against them That they were not wrongfully made That they did not usurp an unlawfull Office These are but terms of diminution Not give sentence against Not wrongfully made not usurpers of an unlawfull Office speak out speak as the truth is That they were lawfully made lawfully if ever any and did exercise a most lawfull Office That our at this day are to be made after their example That the same Office is to be exercised by all Ours These speak home to the Order are nothing to the Men But whatever become of those passages I cannot but commend your conclusion there nor shall I stick to set an asterisk of approbation upon it I would to God that might put an end to the whole controversie betwixt us It is this The venerable Antiquity of those first Ages shall be ever in greater esteem with me then the new upstart device of any whosoever O would to God that Antiquity might be more and more in esteem with you with all for if Antiquity might prevail if these new upstart devices were discarded then sure the Cause of this Order could not be in danger The Second dash of dislike set by His Majestie and very justly was at that place where you contend that the Order of Bishop and Presbyter is one and the same I have shew'd that it is not the same Both 1. Because the Offices are not the same For a Presbyter doth not Ordain no not in S. Hieroms iudgment As also 2. Because there is not the same Imposition of hands but a new one in a Bishop Again 3. Because among the Fathers Isidore clearly calls it the Order of Bishops And lastly 4. Because those Two Orders were distinguished by Christ in the Apostles and the Seventy Two Here you produce to us the Title of the Pontifical which is concerning Consecration not Ordination I shew'd that the Antient Bishops even of Rome it self spake otherwise otherwise the later Popes Among the Antient that the word Ordination was most usual and most approved You appeal to the Schole I acquainted you in what sense the Schole calls them the same or not the same The same in reference to the Body of Christ upon which they terminat their Seven Orders About the Body of Christ a Presbyter doth as much as a Bishop You your self say as much Of these in respect of the Body of Christ the Church of Rome makes but one Order Not the same if you respect the power to a special Act viz. of Ordination which is peculiar to a Bishop This is not mine as you imagin'd but the definition of Orders all the Schole over Nor yet that difference which afterward you put upon me both of them are from the Schole both definition and difference These things if you would speak Scholastically were not to be deny'd by you who appeal'd to the Schole But to what purpose do you say that you deal with or that you dispute against the Pontificians who will not have the Order of Bishops distinct from that of Presbyters And yet presently you subjoin Ought I to inveigh against them viz. the Pontificians because they do not make the Order of Bishops distinct from that of Presbyters when Our Churches do not make it neither He that should do this should not so much contest with the Church of Rome as with our own You dispute therfore against them but yet you will not inveigh against them you dispute against the Pontificians and yet you allege their Pontifical You dispute against them yet your own Churches do the self same thing Nor yet will you affirm what ought to be beleev'd but what the Church of Rome thinketh which thinketh the very same that your Church doth and your Church I beleeve you would have to be beleev'd You do not therfore contest with the Pontificians for I trow you have no mind to contest with your own 'T were against your Religion so to do Nevertheless your Church as you confess doth the same thing in this point that the Roman doth You say it is best to use proper terms that the things which differ in substance be distinguished in Name and yet in the same page afterward as if you were somwhat angry you ask To what end is it to stick so much upon the distinction of Words To what end then is it to make proper words which are made proper for no other end but for distinction If this be to no end it is better trust me neither to use proper words nor to make any words at all proper for we must use the better both you and we Notwithstanding this why do you reject the distinction of words here Because every Order you say is a Degree What then Since every Degree is