very many Churches As the number of Christians grew and had their particular Assemblies and Meetings in many Cities and Countries within every one of their Circuits they placed Pastors in every Congregation they ordained certain Apostolical men to be Chief Assisters unto them whom they placed some one in this particular Country and some others in sundry Cities to have the Rule and Oversight under them of the Churches there and to redress and supply such wants as were needful And they themselves after a while and as they grew in age and escaped the Cruelty of Tyrants remained for the most part in some Head City within their Compass to oversee them all both Churches Pastors and Bishops or Superintendents and to give their Directions as occasions required and as they thought it convenient When any of these Apostolical Assistants or of the Apostles themselves died there were ever some worthy Men chosen and appointed to succeed them in those Cities and Countries where they had remained For we may not idlely Dream that when they died the Authority which was given them ceased no more than we may that the Authority of Aaron and of his Natural Sons expired with them besides it is manifest by all Ecclesiastical Histories that many Churches were planted after their Deaths And furthermore it could not be but that some Churches especially under those Apostles that were soonest put to Death were when they died in the same case that Crete was when Titus was sent thither and had therefore as much need of a Titus as Crete had Furthermore who can be accounted to be well in his wits that will imagine that Christ should ordain such an Authority but for some Threescore years especially the same Causes continuing why it was first instituted that were before Nay I may boldly say that there was greater need for the continuance of it afterward For the Apostles having so great Power to work Miracles and by their Prayers to procure from God such strange Executions of his Pleasure upon the contemptuous as did fall upon Ananias and his Wife and I doubt not but in like cases sometimes upon some others their Ruling and Commanding Authority was not so necessary then as it was afterwards when the Power to work Miracles ceased But what should I need to use many words in a matter so apparent After the Death of the Apostles and of their Assistants viz. the Bishops placed by them as is mentioned the Ecclesiastical Histories and the Ancient Fathers have kept the Register of their Names that succeeded sundry of them and ruled the Churches after them as they before had ruled them Whereupon they were called from all Antiquity the Apostles and Apostolical man's Successors This Inequality in the Ministry of the Word hath been approved and honoured by all the Ancient Fathers none excepted by all the General Councils that ever were held in Christendom and by all other Men of Learning that ever I heard of for many Hundred years after the Apostles time saving that Aerius the Heretick an ambitious Person growing into great rage for that he missed of a Bishoprick which he sued for first broached the Opinion which is now so currant amongst his Scholars that there ought to be no difference between a Bishop and a Priest Thus Bancroft who seems to be of the same mind with Saravia about the Apostolicalness of the Inequality and that he means no more P. 390. seems clear from what he urges out of Dr. Robinson Dr. Reynold's and Fulk in favour of his own Opinion and his holding Ordination by Presbyters without a Bishop to be valid I have saith Robinson maintained it in the Pulpit D. Robins Answ Exhib to the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury that the Titles of Honour which we give to Bishops are no more repugnant to the Word of God than it is for us to be called Wardens Presidents Provosts of Colleges And in my Judgment they may with as good Conscience be Governours of their Diocess as we being Ministers may be Governours of Colleges of Ministers Neither do I think that this was a late devised Policy For I am perswaded that the Angel of the Church of Ephesus to whom S. John writeth was one Minister set over the rest For seeing there were many Pastors there why should S. John write to the Angel of the Church of Ephesus and not rather to the Angels if there had been no difference amongst them And if this Presidency had had that Fault which is reproved in Diotrephes as St. Hierom proveth that the Jews had not corrupted the Original Text before Christ's coming Quod nunquam Dominus Apostoli qui caetera crimina arguunt in Sâ—ribis Pharisaeis de hoc crimine quod erat maximum reticuissent So I may say neither would our Saviour who by his Servant reproveth those Disorders which he found in the Seven Churches have passed over this great fault in silence Therefore as Titus was left to Reform the Churches throughout the whole Island of Crete so I am perswaded that in other places some of that Order of Pastors and Teachers which is Perpetual in the Church even in the time of the Apostles had a Prelacy amongst their Brethren and that this Preheminence is approved by our Saviour And if we come any lower tho' the word Episcopus signifie that care which is required of all and in Scripture be applied to all that have charge of Souls yet I do not remember any one Ecclesiastical Writer that I have read wherein that word doth not import a greater Dignity than is common to all Ministers Neither do I think that any old Writer did under the name of Bishop mean the Pastor of every Parish And thus far Dr. Robinson with whom if Master Dr. Reynolds do agree I see not whither the Factioners will turn them For this Dr. in his Book against Hart saith That in the Church of Ephesus tho' it had sundry Elders and Pastors He useth these two words in one signification as by the Sentence going before is manifest to guide it yet amongst those sundry was there one Chief whom our Saviour calleth the Angel of the Church and writeth that to him which by him the rest should know And this is he whom afterwards in the Primitive Church the Fathers called Bishop For c. the name of Bishop common before to all Elders and Pastors of the Church was then by the usual Language of the Fathers appropriated to him who had the Presidentship over Elders Thus are certain Elders reproved by Cyprian Bishop of Carthage for receiving to the Communion them who had faln in time of Persecution before the Bishop had advised of it with them and others Here then you have two for Oxford touching the Language of the Ancient Fathers when they speak of Bishops Now you shall have a Cambridge Man's Opinion I mean Dr. Fulke who in his Confutation of the Rhemish Notes upon the New Testament writeth thus Amongst the
into his Gallery and there he read all my Articles till he came to this and there he stopped and said That this touch'd him and therefore he ask'd me if I thought it wrong that One Bishop should have so many Cities underneath him Unto whom I answered That I could no further go than to St. Paul's Text which set in every City a Bishop Then asked he me whether I thought it unright seeing the Ordinance of the Church that one Bishop should have so many Cities I answered that I knew no Ordinance of the Church as concerning this thing but St. Paul's Saying only Nevertheless I did see a contrary Custom and Practice in the World but I know not the original thereof Then said He There were divers Cities some seven Miles some six Miles long and over them was there set but one Bishop and of their Suburbs also so likewise now a Bishop has also but one City to his Cathedral Church and the Country about it as Suburbs to it Methought this was far fetch'd but I durst not deny it because it was so great Authority and of so Holy a Father and so great a Divine But this I dare say that his Holiness could never prove it by Scripture nor yet by any Authority of Drs. nor yet by any Practice of the Apostles and yet it must be true because a Pillar of the Church has spoken it But let us see what the Drs. say to mine Article Athanasius doth declare this Text of the Apostle I have left thee behind c. He would not commit unto one Bishop a whole Ylde but he did injoyn that every City should have his Proper Pastor supposing that by this means they should more diligently Oversee the People Also Chrysostom on that same Text He would not that a whole Country should be permitted unto One man but He enjoyned to every man his Cure by that means he knew that his Labour should be more easie and the Subjects should be with more Diligence Govern'd if the Teachers were not distract with the Governing of many Churches but had Cure and Charge of one Church only c. Methinks these be plain words and able to move a man to speak as much as I did But I poor Man must be an Heretick there is no Remedy you will have it so and who is able to say nay Not all Scripture nor yet God Himself So far these three Worthies About this time the Notion of these blessed Martyrs found respect amongst those that bore a great Figure in the Church The Author of the True Difference between the Regal Power and the Ecclesiastical gives countenance unto it and at last Cranmer with many others fell in with it and it became a Point establish'd by Authority as may be seen in the Necessary Erudition of a Christian Man where after the Description given of the Office of Priests and Deacons it 's affirmed That of these Two Orders only Scripture makes express mention and that we may not mistake 'em it 's added of these two Orders only that is to say Priests and Deacons Scripture makes express mention and how they were conferred by the Apostles by Prayer and Imposition of hands Besides The Description they give of the Office of a Bishop or Priest for when they speak of the Divine Institution they make no distinction between 'em it 's thus The Office consists in true Preaching and Teaching the Word of God unto the People in Dispensing and Ministring the Sacraments in Consecrating and Offering the blessed Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the Altar in loosing and assoyling from Sin such Persons as be sorry and truly penitent for the same and Excommunicating such as be guilty in manifest Crimes and will not be reformed otherwise and finally in Praying for the whole Church of Christ and especially for the Flock committed to them Thus there are but two Orders only that is to say Priests and Deacons no third Order Bishops therefore must be of the same Order with Priests and their Office the same and the Superiority of one above the other only by Humane Ordinance and Appointment And whereas say they we have thus summarily declared what is the Office and Ministration which in Holy Scriptures has been committed to Bishops and Priests and in what things it consisteth as is afore rehearsed we think it expedient and necessary that all men should be advertis'd and taught that all such Lawful Power and Authority of any one Bishop or Priest for they are in the sense of these Great Divines the same over another were and be given them by the Consent Ordinance and Positive Laws of Men only and not by any Ordinance of God in Holy Scripture So far the Necessary Erudition Thus in Henry the Eighth's days the Bishop and Priest of the same Order according to the Scriptures and their Office the same the Difference therefore between 'em and the Government that is grounded thereupon by Prelatick Bishops Archbishops c. is only by the Positive Laws of Men. In a Declaration made of the Functions and Divine Institution of Bishops and Priests subscrib'd by Thomas Cromwell the Archbishops of Canterbury and York and divers other Bishops Consult the Addenda in Dr. Burnet's History of the Reformation p. 321 c. Civilians and Learned Men it is thus Resolved As touching the Sacrament of Holy Orders We will That all Bishops and Preachers shall instruct and teach our People committed by us unto their Spiritual Charge First How that Christ and his Apostles did institute and ordain in the New Testament that beside the Civil Powers and Governance of Kings and Princes which is called in Scripture Potestas gladii the Power of the Sword there should be also continually in the Church Militant certain other Ministers or Officers which should have Spiritual Power Authority and Commission under Christ to Preach and Teach the Word of God unto his People and to Dispense and Administer the Sacraments of God unto them and by the same to confer and give the Grace of the Holy Ghost to consecrate the blessed Body of Christ in the Sacrament of the Altar to loose and absoile from Sin all Persons which be duly penitent and sorry for the same to bind and Excommunicate such as be Guilty in manifest Crimes and Sins and will not amend their defaults to order and consecrate others in the same room Order and Office whereunto they recalled admitted themselves and finally to feed Christ's People like good Pastors and Rectors as the Apostle calleth them with their wholesom Doctrin and by their continual Exhortations and Monitions to reduce them from Sin and Iniquity so much as in them lieth and to bring them unto perfect Knowledge the perfect Love and Dread of God and unto the perfect Charity of their Neighbours That this Office this Power and Authority was committed and given by Christ and his Apostles unto certain Persons only that is to say unto
and the Reformers in King Edward's Time. IN Queen Elizabeth's Reign the first I find to mention any thing about the Office of Bishops and Priests is Dr. Alley Bishop of Exeter in his Miscellanea on his third Praelection Alley 's Poor Man's Library Tom. 1. pag. 95 96. read at Paul's in the Year 1560. on the word Bishops What difference is between a Bishop and a Priest St. Hierome writing ad Titum doth declare whose words be these Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus c. A Priest therefore is the same that a Bishop is And before Schisms and Factions by the instinct of the Devil begun in Religion and before it was said among the People I am Pauls I am Apollos I am of Cephas the Churches were Governed with the Common Councel of the Priests or Elders But after that every one thought those whom he Baptized to be his and not Christ's it was decreed throughout the World that one of the Priests or Elders should be chosen to be set over the rest unto whom all the care or charge of the Church should appertain and that the beginnings of Schisms should be taken away Some do think that it is not the sentence of the Scriptures but ours that a Bishop and Priest or Elder are one thing and they do also think the one to be a name of Age and the other to be a name of Office. Let them read again the words of the Apostle to the Philippians saying Paul and Timotheus the Servants of Jesu Christ to all the Saints in Christ Jesu which are at Philippos with the Bishops and Deacons Grace and Peace be with you c. Philippi is one of the Cities of Macedonia And truly there could not be many as they are called Bishops in one City But because at that time they called those Bishops which they did also call Priests or Elders therefore indifferently he spake of Bishops as of Priests or Elders It may yet seem doubtful to some unless it be approved by other Testimonies In the Acts of the Apostles it is written that when the Apostle came to Miletum he sent to Ephesus and did call the Priests or Elders of the same Church unto whom among other things he said thus A Hand to your selves c. And here mark you diligently how that he calling the Priests or Elders of that one City of Ephesus did afterwards call them Bishops c. And Peter which took his name of the firmness of his Faith in his Epistle saith I your fellow Elder do beseech the Elders that are among you c. Haec Hieronimus These words are alledg'd saith Bishop Aley that it may appear Priests among the Elders to have been even the same that Bishops were But it grew by little and little that the whole charge and care should be appointed to one Bishop within his Precinct that the Seeds of Dissention might be utterly rooted out In his Second Tome P. 15. the Bishop adds out of St. Jerom Sicut Presbyteri c. Like as Priests do know themselves to be subject by the Custom of the Church unto him which is made Ruler over them So let the Bishops know that they are greater than the Priests rather by Custom than by the verity of Dispensation given of the Lord. He saith also in another place with the old Fathers the Bishops were the same that the Priests were for the name of one is the name of Dignity and the other of Age and Time. So far Bishop Aley The next I meet with is Pilkington Bishop of Duresme the Author of the Confutation of an Addition with an Apology written and cast in the Streets of West-Chester against the Causes of Burning Paul's Church in London declared by the Bishop at Paul's Cross The Bishop did at Paul's Cross Exhort the people to take the burning of Paul's to be a warning of a greater Plague to follow to the City of London if amendment of Life be not had in all Estates the Author of the Addition a Papist Histor Q. Eliz. pag. 312. notwithstanding what Heylin saith to the contrary when he tells us that the Papists ascribe it to some practice of the Zuinglian Faction out of their hatred unto all Solemnity and Decency in the Service of God perform'd more punctually in that Church for Examples sake than in any other in the Kingdom imputes it to the laying aside of the midnight Mattins forenoon Masses formerly had in the Church and Anthems and Prayers in the Steeple This Bishop a Person of great Learning and good Temper in Answer to this Paper doth in the Sixth year of the Queens Reign thus express himself Yet remains one doubt unanswered in these few words when he saith that the Government of the Church was committed to Bishops as tho' they had received a Larger and Higher Commission from God of Doctrine and Discipline than other Lower Priests and Ministers have and hereby might challenge a greater Prerogative But this is to be understood that the Privileges and Superiorities which Bishops have above other Ministers are rather granted by Man for maintaining of better Order and Quietness in Common-wealths than Commanded by God in his Word Ministers have better Knowledge and Utterance some than other but their Ministry of Equal Dignity God's Commission and Commandment is like and indifferent to all Priest Bishop Archbishop Prelate by what name soever he be called Saint Jerome in his Commentary on 1 Chap. Tit. says that a Bishop and Priest is all One and in his Epistle ad Evagrium he says That the Bishop wheresoever he be is of the same Power and Priesthood If they the Papists were not too much blinded in their own foolishness they might see in the last Subsidy granted in the time of their own Reign that they grant those to be their betters and above them from whence they receive their Authority The Parliament gives them and their Collectors Power to Suspend Deprive and Interdict any Priest that Pays not the Subsidy In that doing they grant the Parliament to be above them and from it to receive their Power I had not thought to have said so much on these his few words and yet much more hangs on this their Opinion of claiming their Usurped Power above Princes and other Ministers The Learned Bishop Jewel is of the same Mind with this Author Apol. Par. 2. Ch. 5. Divis 1. Ch. 6. Divis 1. and thus much he delivereth not as his private Opinion but as the sense of the Church of England Furthermore we say That the Minister ought lawfully duly orderly to be preferr'd to that Office of the Church of God Ch. 6. Divis 3. Ch. 7. Divis 5. and that no man hath power to wrest himself into the Holy Ministry at his own pleasure That Christ hath given to his Ministers Power to bind to loose to open to shut That the Minister doth execute the Authority of binding and shutting as often as
deny not but that there may be yea such a Priority as maketh one man amongst many a Principal Actor in those things whereunto sundry of them must necessarily concur so that the same be admitted only during the time of such Actions and no longer The Inequality they complain of is That one Minister of the Word and Sacraments should have a permanent Superiority above another or in any sort a Superiority of Power Mandatory Judicial and Coercive over other Ministers Thus you see how far the old Noncons could go and no farther and immediately after he tells us how much farther the Church of England at that time went for says he By Vs on the contrary side Inequality even such Inequality as unto Bishops being Ministers of the Word and Sacraments is granted a Superiority Permanent above Ministers yea a Permanent Superiority of Power Mandatory Judicial and Coercive over them is maintained a thing Allowable Lawful and Good. In two things Hooker differs from the old Noncons 1. They make the Superiority or Priority of Order to be but Temporary Hooker makes it Permanent 2. They deny the Bishops having a Power over other Pastors that is Mandatory Judicial and Coercive Hooker affirms it There is one thing more to be enquired into viz. whether He grants to Presbyters the Pastoral Office He calls them Pastors and in his very definition of a Bishop makes the Bishop to be a Pastor of Pastors and of Presbyters and he calls the Bishop but Principal Pastor and makes him to have a Chiefty in Regiment above Presbyters as if he held that the Presbyter had some tho' not so great a share in the Government and out of Austin That a Bishop is a Presbyter Superior and in several places a Bishop is of a Higher Degree than a Presbyter And altho' in his Third Book he makes the Episcopal Office to be a part of Church Polity perpetual as tho' the Episcopacy had been de jure Divino and Immutable yet in this Seventh Book in clearing the sense of St. Jerom he is expresly against the Immutability and Unchangeableness of the Bishop's Superiority as if he held it to be Apostolical in the same manner Bishop Downame doth of whom hereafter The words of St. Hierom on which he puts his own Comment are these As therefore Presbyters do know that the Custom of the Church makes them subject to the Bishop which is set over them so let Bishops know that Custom rather than the Truth of any Ordinance of the Lord's maketh them greater than the rest and that with Common Advice they ought to Govern the Church To this Hooker replies To clear the sense of these words therefore Laws which the Church from the beginning universally hath observ'd were some delivered by Christ himself with a Charge to keep them to the worlds End as the Law of Baptizing and administring the Holy Eucharist some brought in afterwards by the Apostles yet not without the special Direction of the Holy Ghost as occasions did arise Of this sort are those Apostolical Orders and Laws whereby Deacons Widows Virgins were first appointed in the Church This Answer to St. Hierom seemeth dangerous I have qualified it as I may by addition of some words of restraint yet I satisfie not my self in my Judgment it would be altered Now whereas Jerom doth term the Government of Bishops by restraint an Apostolical Tradition acknowledging thereby the same to have been the Apostles own Institution it may be demanded how these two will stand together namely That the Apostles by Divine Instinct should be as Jerom confesseth the Authors of that Regiment and yet the Custom of the Church be accounted for so by Jerom it may seem to be in this place accounted the Chiefest prop that upholdeth the same To this we answer That as much as the whole Body of the Church hath Power to ALTER with general consent and upon necessary occasions even the Positive Laws of the Apostles if there be no Commandment to the contrary and it manifestly appears to her that change of times have clearly taken away the very reason of God's first Institution as by sundry Examples may be most clearly proved what Laws the Universal Church might change and doth not if they have long continued without any alteration it seemeth that St. Jerom ascribeth the continuance of such Positive Laws tho' instituted by God himself to the Judgment of the Church For they which might Abrogate a Law and do not are properly said to Uphold to Establish it and to give it Being The Regiment therefore whereof Jerom speaketh being Positive and consequently not absolutely necessary but of a Changeable Nature because there is no Divine Voice which in express words forbiddeth it to be changed He might imagine both that it came by the Apostles by very Divine Appointment at the first and notwithstanding after a sort said to stand in force rather by the Custom of the Church choosing to continue it than by the necessary constraint of any Commandment from the Word requiring Perpetual Continuance thereof Thus Hooker who a little after says Bishops albeit they may avouch with Conformity of Truth that their Authority hath thus descended even from the very Apostles themselves yet the Absolute and Everlasting continuance of it they cannot say that any Commandment of the Lord doth injoyn And therefore must acknowledge that the Church hath Power by Universal Consent upon urgent cause to take it away if thereunto she be constrained through the Proud Tyrannical and unreformable Dealings of her Bishops Wherefore lest Bishops forget themselves as if none on Earth had Authority to touch their States let them continually bear in mind that it is rather the force of Custom whereby the Church having so long found it good to continue under the Regiment of her vertuous Bishops doth still uphold maintain and honour them in that respect than that any such true and Heavenly Law can be shewed by the Evidence whereof it may of a Truth appear That the Lord himself hath appointed Presbyters for ever to be under the Regiment of Bishops in what sort soever they behave themselves This Answer of the Learned Hooker makes it manifest that tho' he held the Institution of Episcopal Superiority to be Apostolical yet he was not of Opinion that 't was unalterable And altho' he held it Apostolical yet suggests as if there had been a Church Government instituted before the Episcopal took place The Apostles of our Lord says he did according unto those Directions which were given them from above erect Churches in all such Cities as received the Word of Truth the Gospel of God All Churches by them erected received from them the same Faith the same Sacraments the same Form of Publick Regiment The Form of Regiment established by them at first was That the Laity or People should be subject unto a College of Ecclesiastical Persons which were in every such City appointed for that purpose These in their Writings
the Word Administring the Sacraments Imposing of Hands and guiding the Keys to shut or open the Kingdom of God. The first two must be general to all Pastors and Presbyters of Christ's Church but so do not the other two I have largely debated and made it plain as well by the Scriptures as by other Ancient Writers past all Exception there have always been selected some of greater Gifts than the Residue to succeed in the Apostles Places to whom it belonged both to moderate the Presbyters of each Church and to take the special Charge of Imposition of Hands and this their Singularity in Succeeding and Superiority in Ordaining have been observed from the Apostles times as the Peculiar and Substantial marks of Episcopal Power and Calling The Power of the Keys and Right to Impose Hands by which he always means the Power to Ordain Ministers and Excommunicate Sinners belong unto the Bishop distinguishing him from a Presbyter What the things are Chap. 12. p. 208. which must abide for ever in the Church I shewed before it shall suffice now to rehearse them namely Power to Preach the Word and Administer the Sacraments the Right use of the Keys and Imposition of Hands These four parts for Brevities sake I often reduce to two Branches which are Doctrine and Discipline comprizing in Doctrine the Dividing of the Word and Dispensing of the Sacraments and referring the rest I mean the Publick use of the Keys and Imposition of Hands to the Discipline or Regiment of the Church The Discipline and Government of the Church I mean the Power of the Keys Ch. 12. p. 213. and Imposing of Hands are two parts of Apostolick Authority which must remain in the Church for ever These Keys are double the Key of Knowledge annexed to the Word the Key of Power referred to the Sacraments Some late Writers by urging the one abolish the other howbeit I see no sufficient Reason to countervail the Scriptures and Fathers that Defend and Retain both The Key of Knowledge must not be doubted of our Saviour in express words nameth it Wo be to you Interpreters of the Law for ye have taken away the Key of Knowledge The Key of Power standeth in these words of Christ to Peter I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven c. And likewise to all his Apostles Whatsoever ye bind on Earth P. 218. c. It resteth in this place to be considered to whom those Keys were committed whether Equally to all Presbyters or Chiefly to Pastors and Bishops The like must be done for Imposition of Hands whether that also pertain'd indifferently to all or specially to Bishops This is the State of the Point in Controversie namely Whether the Power of the Keys and that of Imposition of Hands belong Equally and Indifferently to all Presbyters and Bishops or whether they do not belong chiefly and specially to Bishops But whether the one or the other be affirm'd 't will unavoidably follow that these Powers in a sense belong to both Thus much is supposed in the very state of the Question which is not whether these Powers do not at all belong to Presbyters but whether they do belong so much to Presbyters as unto Bishops so that the holding them to belong chiefly and specially unto the Bishop implies that they do tho' in a lesser Degree belong unto Presbyters They appertain both to the Presbyter and Bishop but not Equally to the Bishop chiefly and specially Now Conform hereunto the Learned Bilson saith The Bishop then or President of the Presbyters for I stand not on Names Ch. 14. p. 293. while I discuss their Powers is by Christ's own Mouth pronounced to be the Angel of the Church that is the Chief Steward over God's Houshold and Overseer of his Flock And touching the Presbyter's Power P. 319. He adds That at first the Presbyters sate with the Bishop as Assessors and Consenters before Synods undertook such Causes But after when once Councils began to have the Hearing of Grievances then sate the Presbyters with the Bishop only as Beholders and Advisers of his Judgment The Private use of the Keys in appointing Offenders upon the Acknowledging their Sins P. 317. for a time to forbear the Lord's Table we deny not to Presbyters However the Ambiguity of the Name of Bishop and Community of many things incident and appertinent both to Bishops and Presbyters urged him to lay down certain Peculiar Marks and Parts of the Bishop's Office whereby they are always Distinguished from Presbyters and never Confounded with them either in Scriptures Councils or Fathers There were many Prerogatives says he appropriate unto the Bishop Ch. 13. p. 244. by the Authority of the Canons and Custom of the Church such as Reconciling of Penitents Confirmation of Infants and others that were Baptized by Laying on their Hands Dedication of Churches c. But the things Proper to Bishops which might not be Common to Presbyters were Singularity in Succeeding and Superiority in Ordaining These two the Scriptures and Fathers reserve only to Bishops they never Communicate them to Presbyters The Singularity of one Pastor in every place preserveth the Peace and Unity of the Churches and stoppeth Schisms and Dissentions for which Cause they were first Ordained by the Apostles 246. This is a certain Rule to Distinguish Bishops from Presbyters the Presbyters were many in every City of whom the Presbytery consisted Bishops were always Singular that is one in a City and no more except another intruded which the Church of Christ counted a Schism or else an Helper were given in respect of extream and feeble age in which case the Power of the latter ceased in the presence of the former And this Singularity of one Pastor in each place descended from the Apostles and their Scholars in all the famous Churches of the World by a Perpetual Chair of Succession and doth to this day continue but where Abomination or Desolation I mean Heresie or Violence interrupt it The second assured sign of Episcopal Power is Imposition of Hands to Ordain Presbyters and Bishops for as Pastors were to have some to assist them in their Charge which were Presbyters P. 248. so were they to have others to succeed them in their Places which were Bishops And this Right by Imposing Hands to Ordain Presbyters and Bishops in the Church of Christ was at first derived from the Apostles unto Bishops and not unto Presbyters and hath for these fifteen Hundred Years without Example or Instance to the contrary till this our Age remained in Bishops and not in Presbyters Jerom where he retcheth the Presbyters Office to the uttermost of purpose to shew that he may do by the Word of God as much as the Bishop he excepteth this One Point as unlawful for Presbyters by the Scriptures Quid facit Exceptâ Ordinatione Episcopus quod Presbyter non
Church recogniz'd by all to be common at least in the Third Century For though Bishop Parker will not admit them to have been in the Church till the Fourth Century because no mention of 'em in any Record before the Council of Ancyra sat which notwithstanding what Angelocrator avers who would have it be after the Council of Nice because Vitalis Bishop of Antioch the first named amongst the Bishops that sate in it was not made a Bishop before the Year 331. it 's generally held to be in the Year 314. And it 's not easie to imagine that these Chorepiscopi could in so short a time spring out of Nothing and arrive to that height they were at An. 314 or as others 308. Besides there were several Chorepiscopi in the Council of Nice that was but Ten or Twelve Years after this and Rabanus Maurus Seven or Eight Hundred Years ago produced an Apostolical Argument to prove that they were as ancient as City Bishops For says he in the Book which Damasus the first wrote on the desire of Hierome the Presbyter it 's affirm'd That Linus and Cletus by the Commandment of St. Peter Ordained Presbyters who yet succeeded him not in the Apostolical Chair Clemens being by the Order of this blessed Apostle made his Successor And saith Maurus from hence it is that the Chorepiscopi as I suppose had their Rise and have ever since continued in the Catholick Church who being Ordained by their own Bishops by their Commandment did Ordain Presbyters Deacons and other Inferior Degrees and discharge all the other Offices belonging to Priesthood So far Rabanus They were but Presbyters and yet did Ordain and Exercise Episcopal Jurisdiction That they did at first exercise Episcopal Jurisdiction in the Countrey is clear from the 13th Canon of the Council of Ancyra which according to Zonaras and Balsaman is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Exactly translated by Gentianus Hervetus Chorepiscopos non â—icere Presbyteros vel Diaconos Ordinare sed nequeVrbis Presbyteros nisi cum literis ab Episcopo permissum fuerit in aliena Parochia This as Bishop Parker confesseth is the most correct Copy That it shall not be lawful for Countrey Bishops to Ordain Presbyters or Deacons nor yet for City Presbyters without the permission of their Bishop Only he omits this material Expression in another Parish or Diocess which Words do greatly confound the Learned Archbishop of Paris De Marca who will therefore have the Greek Copy corrected Quid est illud in aliena Paraeciâ ac si Chorepiscopis libera esset Ordinatio Presbyteri in sua Paraecia sine literis De Marc. de Concord Sacer. Imper. l. 2. c. 14. Sect. 1 2. What is the meaning of these words saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in alienae paroicia as if it had been lawful for-the Chorepiscopi to Ordain Presbyters in their own Precincts without the leave of the City-Bishop He will therefore have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in unaquâque Paraecia which agrees not only with the Translation of Dionysius Exiguus but with an ancient Copy in the Library at Oxford P. 140. as Thorndike of the Right of the Church reports who can make no Sense of De Marca's Emendation For says he can the Reading of the last words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seem probable to Reasonable Persons What Consequence of Sense is there in saying unless License be granted in every Parish Which is plain when it is said That the City-Presbyters do nothing in the Parish that is in the Countrey or Diocess without Authority by the Bishop's Letters So far Thorndike who is for the blotting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of Zonara's and Balsanion's Copy and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of the Copy at Oxford and who agrees with De Marca in adding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Canon and prefers Isidore Mercator's Translation before the Original Greek and have it thus Vicariis Episcoporum quos Graeci Chorepiscopos vocant non licere Presbyteros vel Diaconos Ordinare sed nec Presbyteris Civitatis sine Episcopi Praecepto amplius aliquid Imperare vel sine Autoritate Literarum ejus in unaquaque parochia aliquid agere Whereby contrary to all Rule by Addition Mutilation c. they impose a Sense directly contradicting the express Words of the Canon which is done in so gross a manner that Thorndike himself was compell'd to acknowledge Right of the Church pag. 141 142. That for his part he doth not believe that we have the true Reading of this Canon in any Copy that he hath heard of or seen But why is Thorndike who is followed by Dr. Hammond and Bishop Parker all differing from Queen Elizabeth's Old Episcopal Divines so concern'd to oppose the Universally Receiv'd Copies of Zonaras and Balsamon but because do they what they can it may be easily inferr'd that before the Council of Ancyra the Chorepiscopi did ordain Presbyters c. that afterwards they might do it in their own Parishes without leave in other Parishes with leave or at least in their own Parishes with leave Thus much is the Import of Zonara's Balsamon's and the Oxford Copies one of which must be receiv'd notwithstanding any thing hitherto oppos'd unto ' em The whole that Thorndike hath laid in against us narrowly look'd into comes to nothing The Reasons why our Copy is to be suspected saith he are these 1. In an Arabick Paraphrase now extant in the Oxford Library there is nothing to be found of that Clause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Isidore Mercator's Translation which seems to be that which was anciently received in the Spanish Churches before Dionysius Exiguus wherewith that Copy agreed which Hervetus translated as also Fulgentius his Breviate which Pope Adrian the first followed hath only this Vicariis Episcoporum quos Graeci Chorepiscopos vocant c. ut supra 3. Can the Reading of the last words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seem probable c. ut supra 4. Seeing this is that which is afterwards provided for by the Council of Laodicea Cap. LVI in the same Subject it seems very probable that this should be the provision which the Council of Ancyra intended as all Ignatius his Epistles and other Canons Apost XL. Arelat XIX express it To all which I reply 1. The Greek Copy compared with Translations having the Reputation of an Original is not to be neglected though in the Arabick Paraphrase the Clause about City Presbyters is omitted for it might be either negligently or willingly done Besides if this Clause had never been in the Original there still remains enough to carry our Point in that as we shall hereafter prove the Chorepiscopi were but Presbyters and yet by the other parts of this Canon had power to ordain both Presbyters and Deacons at least with the permission of the City-Bishop To the Second touching Isidore's Translation which differs from Hervetus's and Dionysius Exiguus's as well as from every Greek Copy cannot be
of strength enough to invalidate an Original any more than the Vulgar or any other Translation of the Bible can blast the Reputation of the Originals either of the Old or New Testament What hath been already urged about de Marca's disgust against 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Thorndike's quarrel with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a sufficient Answer to his Third Argument For if the Canon hath any meaning be it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or be there an Omission of this Expression it cannot but be granted that before this Council the Chorepiscopi did Ordain Presbyters and Deacons without the City-Bishop's leave and afterwards with it To the Fourth that the Council of Laodicea did many Years after this make the same Provision hath nothing of Argument in it to prove That the Council of Ancyra did so long before Laodicea's doing It now seeing it 's not by way of confirmation of an anteceding Decree is a sufficient intimation that Ancyra did it not However seeing Thorndike will provoke us to consult this 56th or rather 57th Canon of Laodicea to it we will go which on a diligent search we find to run thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hervetus renders it thus Quod non oportet in vicis pagis Episcopos constitui sed Periodeutas hoc est Circumcursentores Dionysius Exiguus Quod non oporteat in Villulis vel in Agris Episcopos constitui sed Visitores Isidore Mercator thus Non oportet in Villis vicis Episcopos Ordinari sed Visitatores i. e. qui Circumeant Constitui No Bishops ought to be appointed in the Countrey Towns or Villages but Visitors Neither of these take notice of the Various Reading for it may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so be thus translated For the future there shall not be Ordained in Countrey Places any Bishops or Periodeutae or Visitors making the Periodeutae and Countrey Bishops the same as De Marca though he observes not this various Reading does Vnde Constanter asserere audeo eundem esse Chorepiscopum Periodeutum and as the same De Marca further observes these Periodeutae were only Presbyters as in the 4th Action of the Council of Chalcedon mention is made of Alexander Presbyter and Periodeuta and in the 11th Action of Valentine Presbyter and Periodeuta whence I infer that it 's clear from this and the following parts of the Canon that till this Council Presbyters were not so very much under the Power of the Bishops but could act according to their own discretion without consulting the City-Bishops The Canon is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and thus rendred by Hervetus Eos autem qui prius constituti fuerunt nihil agere sine mente Episcopi qui est in Civitate clearly enough insinuating that until this Council the Chorepiscopi the Periodeutae who were but Presbyters did act in the Country as they judged meet without consulting the Bishop of the City and it 's well known that their work was to Ordain Presbyters Deacons c. Thus much may suffice to vindicate what we have drawn from the Council of Ancyra to establish the Power of the Chorepiscopi who agreeably enough to the 13th Canon of this Council might exercise Episcopal Jurisdiction in their own Precinct without the leave of the city-City-Bishop and with his Permission they might do so out of their own Charge even in the City To proceed it 's very clear that long after this time yea long after Damasus this Severity against the Chorepiscopi and Leo the Third's Attempt to suppress and banish them when Charles the Great sent Arno Invavensis to know the mind of his Holiness about them they continued in the Exercise of their Office governing the Country-Churches ordaining Presbyters c. And altho' Hincmarus as Baluzius in de Marca out of Flodoardus his History observes De Marca de Concord lib. 2. c. 13 14. wrote bitterly against those City-Bishops that had 'em in their Dioceses Fbodoard Hist Remenf lib. 3. c. 29. yet Rabanus Maurus pleads as warmly in their Defence In Histor Lansiaca apud Palladium c 106. Legimus Elpidium Monachum Presbyterum ordinatum à Timotheo Chorepiscopo Chorepiscopos in Ecclesiis vacantibus innuit Hugo Flaviniac an 776. Bercarius in Hist Episcop Verdanensium n. 13. Post hunc Episcopatus istius Ecclesiae per 12. annos vacuus extitit sed quidem servus Dei Amalbertus nomine juxta morem illius temporis Chorepiscopus factus ipsam regebat Ecclesiam For all these see Du Fresne's Glossary ver Chorepiscopus and they were continued in France and elsewhere Elpidrus a Monk was or dained Presbyter by Timothy a Country Bishop Amalbertus a Chorepiscopus governed the Church of Verdun during a Vacancy of twelve years consecrated Churches confirm'd Children c. as may be seen in Rudolphus his Life of Rabanus Maurus and in De Marca That the Chorepiscopi did exercise the Episcopal Power altho ' they were but Presbyters may plainly be seen in the Decrees that were against 'em interdicting their presuming so to do for time to come 'T was this that fill'd the Soul of Damasus 1. Vid. Epist 5. Damasi 1. Prospero Numidiae primae sedis Episcopo Leoni reparato c. with so much indignation against them that they being but Presbyters presumed to discharge the Episcopal Office And for this very reason it was that Leo the Third in Answer unto the Question mov'd by Charles the Great condemn'd them to Banishment as may be seen in the select Ecclesiastical Capitula of Charles the Great where it 's very clear that tho' the French Prelates mitigated somewhat of the Rigour of the Pope's severe Decree against them yet concurr'd so far with him as to Ordain that the Country-Bishops do no more enter on the Execution of the Episcopal Office ita ut amplius nihil de Cpiscopali ministerio praesumerent and they decreed That no Country-Bishop presume by Imposition of Hands to give the Holy Ghost to any or Consecrate any Priest Levite or Subdeacon And tho' these Capitula do null and make void all the Ordinations and Consecrations of the Chorepiscopi Nicholas the First doth ratifie and confirm them Vide. Epist 15. Nichol. 1. Tit. 1. as may be seen in his Epistle to Radolfus and thus he did for the very Reason the Capitula as well as Leo and Damasus did damn them Damasus says that they are the same with Presbyters because they are instituted according to the Form of the Seventy Disciples who were never vested with Jura Episcopalia Tit. 4. c. 3. so Leo and the select Capitula of Charles the Great the Chorepiscopi are not Chief Priests nor Bishops neither do any of the Episcopal Rights belong unto them seeing they were instituted according to the Form of the Seventy for which
that whosoever as the worthy Lord Keeper Bacon observ'd in those days pretended a little spark of Earnestness he seemed no less than red fire hot in comparison of the other And as some fare the worse for an ill Neighbour's sake dwelling beside them so did it betide the Protestants who seeking to curb the the Papists or reprove an idle Drone were incontinently branded with the Ignominious note of Precisian all which wind brought plenty of water to the Pope's Mill and there will most Men grind where they see Appearance to be well served So far Sir Robert Cotton And as the disgracing Godly-Ministers by fastning the names of Puritan Precisian c. on 'em and the laying 'em aside from the publick exercise of their Ministry did in the Reign of Elizabeth give life to Popery so 't will still and all those Protestant Ministers that are now denied entrance into the Parish Churches will be in disgrace amongst the People and their Ministry not half so successful amongst those that mostly need it The wider therefore the Church Doors are made the greater will be the number of Pious and Painful Preachers the greater the Advantage on Truth 's side and the greater Discouragement on the other hand But that the Door may be made wide enough to answer the desired End seeing our Governours are inclin'd to lay aside the strict use of Ceremonies with some more offensive Impositions there is this one thing to wit The Ordering and Declaring the Government of the Church to be now no other but what it was held and intended to be by the first Reformers will as I humbly apprehend be the most Effectual Expedient of any else in the World. Some of our Clergy have Notions about Church-Government very Dissonant from what the Gentry and Parliament Men have and the first Reformers heretofore had and it 's feared by some thinking Persons that the Laws yet in Being have Established a Government in the Church very different from what the Legislators I mean the King the Temporal Lords and Commons generally designed The Government settled in the Church by the first Reformers and still supposed by our Gentry to continue is consistent enough with the Church state of all other Protestants but that which is really Established by Law is Inconsistent with and Destructive of it driving many Learned Godly Protestant Divines from that Conformity which is at this time made necessary to the Exercise of their Ministry in Parish Churches To clear thus much is methinks one of the most necessary things to be attempted and the very next step to be taken towards the setling a Comprehension which will be of validity with Judicious Men. What were the Sentiments of the First-Reformers about Episcopacy and Church Government during Queen Elizabeths Reign I will with the greatest impartiality declare as near as possibly I can in their own words and add some Arguments to shew that the most effectual way to settle such a Comprehension as will best secure the Protestant Religion is the Forming and Framing the Government of the Church according to the Sentiments of our First-Reformers which in the Learned Archbishop Vsher's Reduction of Episcopacy I take to be very happily copied out unto us I will begin with those who liv'd in Henry the Eighth's days for then began the Reformation CHAP. I. The Sense of our First Reformers in Henry the Eighth's Days IN this King's Reign Tindall Lambert and Barnes Men of good Learning and blessed Martyrs sealing the Truths they professed with their Blood struggled strenuously for a Reformation of Church Government Tindall looking on Corruptions in Discipline to be a principal occasion of that greater Deluge of Enormities in the Church presseth for a Reduction of all things in the Discipline to the Apostolical Institution and therefore makes Enquiry after those Officers the Apostles Ordained in Christ's Church and what their Offices were and gives us an account of his Perswasion of it thus Wherefore the Apostles following and obeying the Rule Tindall's Practice of Popish Prelates Doctrine and Commandment of our Saviour Jesus Christ Ordained in his Kingdom and Congregation TWO OFFICERS one called after the Greek word Bishop in English an Overseer which same was called Priest after the Greek Elder in English because of his Age Discretion and Sadness for he was as nigh as could be always an Elderly Man. And this Overseer hath put his hands unto the Plough of God's Word and fed Christ's Flock and tended them only without looking to any other Business in the World. Another Officer they chose and called him Deacon after the Greek a Minister in English to Minister the Alms of the People unto the Poor and Needy For in the Congregation of Christ love maketh every Man's Gifts and Goods common to the Necessity of his Neighbour There is Presbyteros called an Elder by birth Tindall on the word Elder which same is called immediately a Bishop or Overseer to declare what Persons are meant They were called Elders because of their Age Gravity c. and Bishops and Overseers by reason of their Offices And all that were called Elders or Priests if they so will were called Bishops also tho' they have divided the names now which thing thou mayst evidently see by the first Chapter of Titus and the twentieth of the Acts. Those Overseers which we now call Bishops after the Greek word were alway biding in One place to Govern the Congregation there But Deacons were Overseers of the Poor and crept not into Orders till the Church grew rich Lambert is of the same Opinion As touching Priesthood saith he in the Primitive Church Ach. Mon. Vol. 2. when Vertue bare as ancient Doctors do deem and Scripture in mine opinion recordeth the same the most room there were no more Officers in the Church of God than Bishops and Deacons that is to say Ministers as witnesseth besides Scripture full apertly Hierome in his Commentaries upon the Epistles of Paul whereas he faith That those we call Priests were all one and no other but Bishops and the Bishops none other but Priests Men ancient both in Age and Learning so near as they could be chosen Neither were they Institute and chosen as they be now adays with small regard of a Bishop or his Officer only apposing them if they can construe a Collect. To conclude I say the Order or State of Priests and Deacons was Ordained by God. The Sixth Article against Dr. Barnes was That he declared himself thus I will never believe nor yet can I ever believe that one Man may be by the Law of God a Bishop of two or three Cities yea of an whole Countrey for it is contrary to St. Paul which saith I have left thee behind to set in every City a Bishop And if you find in one place of Scripture that they be called Episcopi you shall find in many that they be called Presbyteri I was saith he brought before my Lord Cardinal
the Authority of the Bishop let him be Excommunicated Divers other Constitutions have been made in Ecclesiastical Politie for the maintaining the Dignity of Bishops So also the Civil State hath augmented and enlarged the Privileges and Immunities of Bishops which they have rather by the Munificence of Princes than by Divine Authority As first the Division of Provinces and Cities unto Archbishops and Bishops and the limitation of their Jurisdiction was brought in by the consent of Princes Secondly The Revenues and Lands of Bishopricks have been given by Devout and Religious Princes unto Bishops and their Successors and divers Imperial Laws have been made in favour of the Maintenance of the Church Thirdly The Titles of Honour annexed to Bishopricks as that they are created Barons and made Lords of the Parliament-House here in England have been bestowed by the Liberality of the Kings of this Realm not yet above 400 years since Fourthly The Judgment of Matrimonial and Testamentary Causes and of other such like Matters hath been reserved unto Bishops by the Civil and Imperial Authority Thus we see how in Civil Policy the Dignity of Bishops by the favour of Christian Emperors hath been enlarged And hitherto I have shewed what is to be judged Political in the Distinction of Bishops from the rest of the Clergy both as touching the Civil and Ecclesiastical Policy So far Willet out of whom I observe That the Government of the Church is not de jure divino That according to the Scriptures the Office of a Bishop and Priest is the same That a convenient Priority of Order amongst Ministers is Divine and Apostolical That the Powers of Confirmation Ordination and Jurisdiction are reserv'd to the Bishops by Ecclesiastical constitutions only That in the Beginning a Bishop and Presbyter had but one Ordination and the Consecration of Bishops was added since for their greater Dignity In Hierom's days the Election of Bishops without any other circumstances being their Ordination That Priests without a Licence from the Bishop might Preach There is one thing more to be regarded touching the Difference of Bishops and other Ministers for says he We differ from the Papists in two Points First they say That Bishops are not only in a higher degree of Superiority to other Ministers but they are as Princes of the Clergy and other Ministers as Subjects and in all things to be commanded by them Secondly They affirm That Bishops are only properly Pastors and that to them only it doth appertain to Preach and that other Ministers have no Authority without their Licence or Consent to preach at all and that not principally or chiefly but solely and wholly to them appertaineth the Right of Consecrating and giving Orders so that the making the Bishop to be of a distinct Order from the Priest and the denying the Priest to have a Power to Preach without the Bishop's Licence or any hand in Ordination Willet opposeth as Popish Doctrines representing the opposite Notions to have been then held by the Church of England Hitherto the Government of the Church by Bishops lays no claim to a Divine Right On the contrary it 's generally asserted that according to the Scriptures the Priest and Bishop are the same and that the superiority of the Bishop above the Presbyter is only by Ecclesiastick Custom and the Government of the Church now different from what it was in the Apostles days Willet indeed saith That for the sake of Order the Presidence of one above the rest is Divine and Apostolical and towards the latter end of the Queens Reign the Episcopal Government is affirm'd to be Apostolical and a Divine Institution yet not to be de jure divine and unalterable Saravia about the two and thirtieth year of the Queen professeth * Hoc enim pacto fiet magis clarum quid omnes Evangelii ministri inter se habeant commune quid cuique ordini sit peculiare Ea vero in tres partes ego distribuo Prima est Evangelii Praedicatioâ— altera Communicatio sacramentorum tertia Ecclesiasticae Gubernationis authoritas De Divers Grad Minist Evang. p. 15. Quamvis unum idem Evangelii Ministerium sit omnibus Pastoribus Ecclesiae concreditum in hac tertia parte non parva inter eos invenitur Inaequalitas propter diversos Authoritatis Gradus quos primo Dominus statim ab initio postea Apostoli constituerunt p. 7. Primum ab ipso Domino Duos Gradus Evangelii ministrorum institutos videmus quorum alter altero fuit superior p. 25. Consensu totius Orbis Ecclesiarum probatur Episcoporum supra Presbyteros authoritas Quod inde ab Apostolorum temporibus patribus per universum terrarum Orbem factum ab omnibus Ecclesiis legimus usque ad nostra tempora Canonem Apostolorum immutabilem esse judico p. 44. c. 20. That the general Nature of the Evangelical Ministry common both to Bishops and Presbyters containeth these three things 1. The Preaching of the Gospel 2. The Communication of the Sacraments 3. The Authority of Church Government and doth only plead that in this last the Power of Bishops and Presbyters is not equal but the Bishop's Power is principal in Government Whence arises a Diversity of Degrees not of Orders between them and thus much he affirms hath been held by the Fathers of the Church universally ever since the Apostles days and therefore may well be look'd on as an Unchangeable Canon of the Apostles The Difference between Saravia and those who went before him lyeth here Whit gift c. Saravia The Ministry of the Word and Sacraments divinely Instituted and to continue to the End of the World but no particular Form of Government left on Record in Scripture The Superiority of a Bishop above a Presbyter according to St. Hierom rather by Custom of the Church than an Institution of Christ. Not only the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments but the Form of Government instituted by the Lord himself delivered by the Apostles confirm'd by the Observation of the Fathers ought to continue for ever The Superiority in Degree of a Bishop above a Presbyter a Divine Institution and that St. Hierom was in the same Error with Aerius Dico privatam fuisse Hieronymi Opinionem consentaneam cum Aerio Dei verbo contrariam p. 51. A Year or two after Saravia's Book came out Bancroft afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury publisheth a Survey of the pretended Holy Discipline as he calls his Book in the Preface to which he saith That we have a Church Government of our own which is in my conscience truly Apostolical and far to be preferred before any other that is receiv'd this day by any Reformed Church in Christendom And elsewhere in the Book it self P. 105. The Apostles saith he having received the Promise of the Holy Ghost after a short time dipersed themselves by advice into divers Regions and there by painful Preaching and Labouring in the Lord's Harvest they planted no doubt
cause let no one say Et ne alicui talis Ordinatio vel Confirmatio aut Consecratio Reiteratio esse videatur That when any of those who have been Ordained by the Chorepiscopi are afterwards Ordained by the City-Bishop that they were Re-ordained but let 'em attend that Saying Quod non ostenditur gestum ratio non sinit ut videntur iteratum And Pope Nicholas 1. gives this as a Reason why he judges their Ordination valid The Chorepiscopi were such as the Seventy sent out by our Lord Jesus who without doubt were vested with the Episcopal Power But tho' these Papal Determinations are different yet they agree in witnessing to this Truth That the Chorepiscopi exercis'd Episcopal Authority De Marca proves the same out of the Arabian Canons translated by Alfonsus Pisanus and from the last words of the Canon of Antioch Dr. Parker himself makes no doubt of it for says he That these Chorepiscopi had the Character of Proper Bishops Parker's Account p. 154. appears plainly from the tenth Canon of Antioch that allows them to Ordain the inferiour Officers of the Church This of Bishop Parker doth exactly agree with the 55. Chapter of Nice as translated out of Arabick by Turrianus the Jesuit When the Chorepiscopus visits the Churches and Monasteries under his Power let him gather together the Elders of Castles and expound unto 'em the Holy Scriptures and enquire whether they have any Sons or Daughters and give order that they be brought unto him that he may sign 'em pray over them impose Hands on 'em bless and institute Ministers that is say the Notes on this Chapter Lectores Exorcistae Hypodiaconi And that these Chorepiscopi were but of the same Order with Presbyters and were no otherwise Bishops than as all other Presbyters are is as clear for their Ordination was by one Bishop only not by three and when they entred on the Exercise of the Episcopal Power they had no new Consecration as may be seen in the 54. Chapter of Nice translated out of the Arabick where Turrianus renders it thus Et debet Episcopus vid. Civitatis recitare super electum scil Chorepiscopum Orationem consuetam Chorepiscopus non ordinabatur sed per oraticnem benedicebatur Benedicere illi dareque illi nomina omnium Ecclesiarum Monasteriorum qua sub Potestate ejus sunt The Notes on this Chapter have it that they were not consecrated anew to the Office of a Country-Bishop but only by the Prayer of the City-Bishop blessed Damasus 1. expresly affirms them to be but Presbyters in these words Quod ipsi iidem sunt qui Presbyteri sufficienter invenitur quia ad formam exemplum septuaginta inveniuntur prius instituti The select Capitula of Charles the Great concurring with Leo the Third Tit. 4. c. 3. and speaking of the Episcopal Rights say the same Haec verò non à Presbyteris vel Chorepiscopis qui ambo unius formae esse videntur Besides such were some of the Ancient Canons decreeing that there should be but one Bishop in a Diocess and he only in the City that made it necessary for some of those who anciently would have the Bishops to be of an Order superiour above Presbyters to hold that these Chorepiscopi tho' they had the name of Bishop given 'em and were vested with the Jura Episcopalia were but Presbyters usurping on the Episcopal Office so Damasus Leo and many French Bishops in Charles the Great 's days and it hath also put some later Writers such as Bellarmine Boverius in his Paraenetic Censure of de Dominis Archbishop of Spalato's Book de Rep. Eccles and De Marco to phansie that some made Chorepiscopi were formerly Consecrated to the Episcopal Dignity and that others were but Presbyters and thus by distinguishing the Office from the Person they hoped to extricate themselves but as Dr. Parker well observes Pag. 158. This is precariously said without any shadow of Pretence for it but meerly to salve his own Hypothesis Others Thorndike of Rights of Church p. 146. such as Thorndike are driven to the Invention of another Distinction which is between the Solemnity which an Act is executed with and the Power and Authority by which it is done And that it cannot be prejudicial to any Power to do that by another which seemeth not fit to be immediately and personally executed by it Some Acts of the Primitive Church seem to require this Distinction as the making of Presbyters by the Chorepiscopi or Countrey-Bishops mentioned in the ancient Greek Canons Which by all likelihood were not properly Bishops because not Heads of a City-Church which is the Apostolical Rule for Episcopal Churches Thus Thorndike who differs greatly from the generality of his Brethren who hold that though the Potestas Jurisdictionis may be delegated to one that is not a Bishop yet the Potestas Ordinis cannot However it must be acknowledged that there is a great difference between a Presbyter's Ordaining other Presbyters with the leave of the Bishop and his doing it by a Power derived from the Bishop One vested with a Power may not be able to exercise it without the leave of another and yet when he hath leave he then exercises a Power inherent in himself virtute officii The Bishops themselves cannot exercise the Power of Orders without the leave of the Supreme Civil Magistrate and now that they do exercise it 't is with his leave but it does not therefore follow that the Power of Orders is derived from the Supreme Magistrate to the Bishop In the Council of Ancyra it 's not said That the Presbyter shall not Ordain Presbyters unless the Bishop delegates unto him a Power enabling him so to do but he shall not exercise this Power without the consent of the Bishop which was enjoyned by the Canon to prevent Schisms and Divisions in the Church So that I cannot see how this Distinction of Thorndike so applauded by Dr. Parker can help ' em To press this yet further Henry the Eighth's Suffragans were consecrated Bishops and had the same Power virtute officii that any other Bishop receiv'd at his Consecration but may not exercise it unless by Commission from the City-Bishop But when they did exercise the Episcopal Authority was it by a Power receiv'd at their Consecration and inherent in them or by a Power deriv'd unto 'em from the City-Bishop by Commission 'T was by the former no doubt why else were they consecrated If then this Commission given by the City-Bishop to the Suffragan limiting the Exercise of his Power doth not infer that the Suffragan did not act by a Derived Power much less can these Words Let not the Chorepiscopus Ordain Presbyters or Deacons without the consent of the City-Bishop imply that the Chorepiscopus deriv'd the Power of Ordaining from the City-Bishop The Bishop of Lincoln can't Ordain Priests or Deacons in Westminster-Abby without the leave of the