gather from Epiphanius And after him all sorts and Sects of Christians still owned it Even the Donatists and Novatians who had their Bishops as well as others 28. In Scripture times we read not of any meer fixed Bishops of particular Churches who Ordained either Bishops or Presbyters but only Apostles and their unfixed Assistants who had an equal charge of many Churches Not that the Office of the Indefinite unfixed Ministry was not the same with the Office of the fixed Bishops in specie For both had power to do all the Ministerial work as they had a call and opportunity to exercise it But because it being the employment of the Indefinite or unfixed Ministers to Gather and plant Churches before they could be Governed the Ordination of Elders over them was part of the planting of them and so fell to their lot as part of their constituting work 29. How it came to pass that the Itinerant or Indefinite exercise of the Ministry for planting Churches so quickly almost ceased after the Apostles days is a matter worthy to be enquired after For whereas some think that de jure obligatione it ceased with the Apostles as being their proper work that cannot be true 1. Because many others were employed in the same work in the Apostles days 2. Because it is Christ's own description of that Ministry to whom he promiseth his presence to the end of the Age or World Mat. 28. 19 20. 3. Because to this day there is still lamentable necessity of such Five parts in six of the World being yet Infidels 30. It is most probable that this service abated and withered gradually by the sloth and selfishness of Pastors And that it was the purpose of the Apostles that the fixed Bishops should do their part of both these works that is Both to preach for the Converting of all the Infidel Countries near them and also Govern their particular Churches yet not but that some others might be deputed to the Gathering of Churches alone And then these Bishops finding so much work at home and finding that the Itinerant work among Infidels was very difficult by reason of Labour Danger and their want of Apostolical gifts hereupon they spared themselves and too much neglected the Itinerant work Yet I must confess that such Evangelists did not yet wholly cease Eusebius Hist lib. 5. cap. 9. saith Pantaenus is said to have shewed such a willing mind towards the publishing of the Doctrine of Christ that he became a Preacher of the Gospel to the Eastern Gentiles and was sent as far as India For there were I say there were then many Evangelists prepared for this purpose to promote and plant the Heavenly Word with Godly Zeal after the manner of the Apostles 31. It was the ordinary custome of the Apostles to preach and plant Churches first in Cities and not in Country Villages Because in Cities there were 1. the greatest number of Auditors and 2. the greatest number of Converts And so there only were found a sufficient number to constitute a Church Not that this was done through any preeminence of the City or ignobility of Villages but for the competent numbers sake And had there been persons enow for a Church in Villages they would have placed Churches and Pastors there also as at Cenchrea it seems they did 32. When there was a Church of Christians in the City and a few Converts in the Country Villages that joyned with them they all made up but one full Assembly or Church fit for personal Communion for a long time after the Apostles days the main body of the people being still Infidels so that the Christian Churches stood among the Infidels as thin as the Churches of the Anabaptists Separatists and Independants did among us here in England in the days when they had greatest Liberty and countenance 33. Though at first the Bishops being men of the same Office with the other Presbyters were not to do a work distinct and of any other kind than the Presbyters might do but only Lead them and Preside among them in the same work as their Conductors as I said before of a chief Justice c. Yet afterward the Bishop for the honour of his calling appropriating certain actions to himself alone the Presbyters not exercising those acts in time the not exercising them seemed to signifie a want of Office or power to exercise them and so subject Presbyters who were never made by the Apostles that can be proved nor by their command were like a distinct Order or Species of Church-Officers and grew from syn-Presbyters or assessours of the same Office in specie to be as much subjects to the Bishops as the Deacons were to the Presbyters 34. All this while the Bishop with his fellow Elders and Deacons dwelt together in the same City and often in the same House and met in the same Church the Bishop sitting in the midst on a higher seat and the Presbyters on each hand him in a semi-circle and the Deacons standing And the Presbyters Preaching and otherwise officiating as the Bishop appointed who ruled the action And the Converts of the Villages came to this City Church as Members of it and joyned with the rest In the days of the Author of the Epistles ascribed to Ignatius every Church had but One Altar and One Bishop with his Fellow Elders and Deacons as the note of its Unity or Individuation For so many people as had personal Communion at One Altar with the Bishop or Elders were the constitutive parts of the Churches 35. Thus it continued also in the days of Justin Tertullian and Cyprian no Bishop having more than one Church or Altar without any other formed self-communicating Church under him but only Oratories in City or Country 36. The first that brake this Order were Alexandria and Rome where Converts soon multiplyed to a greater number than could meet in one place or Communicate at one Altar wherefore sub-assemblies with their particular Presbyters were there first formed who Communicated distinctly by themselves Though there is no proof that they Communicated there in the Sacrament of a long time after that they met for Preaching and Prayer Yet even in Rome and Alexandria the only places that had more than one stated Assembly for 200 years or more there were not so many Christians then as in the Parish that I now live in See more of my Proof in the beginning of my Church History abridged whos 's first and second Chapters belogn specially to this Treatise and therefore I must refer the Reader to them 37. Even in Epiphanius time about 370 years after Christ it is noted by him as a singularity in Alexandria that they had distinct Assemblies besides the Bishops whereupon Petavius himself largely giveth us notice that in those days except in a few very great Cities there was but one Church-assembly in a Bishops charge 38. After that in Cities or Country Villages the Converts multiplyed into more
Churches For they might be but single Parish Churches though they were in Cities only and the Country Members joyned with them in the Cities And his own Confession is page 35. that besides Rome and Alexandria that had many Churches in the City there is not the like evidence for multitude of Parishes in other Cities imediately after the Apostles times I suppose by his Citations he meaneth till the third Century And if this be granted us of all the great Cities of the World that they cannot be proved to have many Churches we have no great reason to look for many in the Country Villages His next Argument is Churches containing within their Circuit not only Cities with their Suburbs but also whole Countries subject to them were Diocesses But the Churches subject to the ancient Bishops in the Primitive Church contained c. Therefore they were Diocesses Ans Either this is his Description of a Diocess or we have none from him that I can find And let who will Dispute about the Names of Diocess and Parish for I will not And if by a Diocess he meaneth a Church consisting of all the Christians in City and Country associated for Personal holy Communion having One Altar and One Bishop this is that which we call a single Church or some a parish-Parish-Church and if he call it a Diocess he may please himself But if he mean that in these Cities and whole Countries were several such Churches that had each an Altar and were fixed Societies for personal holy Communion not having any proper Bishop of their own but one Bishop in Common with whose Cathedral Church they did not and could not Communicate through Number or distance I deny his Minor proposed in this sense as to the two first Centuries though not as to the following Ages But if by Cities Suburbs and whole Countries subject he mean all the unconverted Infidels of that space for doubtless he calls not the soil or place the Church I deny the very subject There were no such Churches Infidels and Heathens make not Churches Though Hereticks made somewhat like them sicut vespa faciunt âavos as Tertullian speaketh If the Diocesan Churches Disputed for be Churches of Pagans and Infidels we know no such things But if he mean that all the Heathens in that Circuit are the Bishops Charge in order to Conversion I answer 1. That maketh them no parts of the Church Therefore the Church is of never the larger extent for the soil or Infidel Inhabitants 2. The Apostles and other General Preachers like the Jesuits in the Indies may divide their Labourers by Provinces for the Peoples Convetsion before there be any Churches at all 3. This distribution is a meer prudential Ordering of an accident or circumstance and therefore not the Divine Institution of a Church Form or Species 4. Neither Scripture nor prudence so distributeth Circuits or Provinces to Preachers in order to conversion of Infidels as that other Preachers may not come and Preach there as freely as one that claimeth it as his Province For 1. Christ sent out his Apostles by two and two at first 2. Paul had Barnabas or some other Evangelist or General Preacher usually with him And Peter and Paul are both said to be at Rome at Antioch and other places And many Apostles were long together at Jerusalem even many years after Christ's Resurrection Christ that bid them go into all the World never commanded that one should not come where another was nor have power to Preach to Infidels in that Diocess And what is the Episcopal power over Infidels which is claimed It is not a power to Ordain or to Excommunicate them It can be no other than a power to Preach to them and Baptize them when converted And this is confessed to belong to Presbyters If the Bishops would divide the World into Diocesses and be the only Preachers in those Diocesses it would be no wonder if the World be unconverted It is not Bishops that are sent by the Papists themselves to convert the Indians But perhaps you may say that the Bishops rule those Presbyters that do it I answer 1. It 's an imperfect kind of Government which a Bishop in England can exercise over Presbyters that daily Preach as Mr. Eliat his helpers to the Natives in a Wilderness many thousand Miles from them 2. But if they do rule the Preachers that maketh not the Soil nor the Heathens to be any parts of their Church but the Preachers only Therefore a Diocess with them and a Church must be different things His first Reason therefore page 36. from the Circuit is vain His second page 37. that the City Bishops had a right from the beginning over many Churches that had no other Bishops and did not after usurp it he proveth not at all For the words of Men three or four hundred years after Christ alledging ancient custome are no proof When the 25 Can. Trull cited by himself maketh thirty years possession enough against all that would question their Title And abundance of things had Custome and Antiquity alledged for them so long after that were known Innovations His third Reason is from the Chorepiscopi as the Bishops suffragan which sheweth no more but that the City Bishops whether justly or by usurpation were at last really Archbishops or Rulers of Bishops But of this before His fourth Reason from Succession will be good when he that affirmeth that no Church was governed by the Parish Discipline hath proved that all many yea or any Bishops from the Apostles days had many Churches under them that had no Bishops of their own Till then he saith nothing As to his instance of the Scythians having but one Bishop the Reason was because it was but little of their Country at first that were made Christians or that were at all in the Roman Empire So that the Bishop was setled at Tomis in the borders of the Empire in the Maritine part of the Euxine Sea that thence he might have an influence on the rest of the Scythians over whom the Romans had no power and where there were many Cities indeed but few Christians as may be seen in Theodoret Tripart Nicephor and many others Of his other three or four instances I shall after speak Chap. 3. lib. 2. He pretends to prove that the seven Asian Churches were Diocesan and not Parochial and never defineth a Diocess and Parish which is lost labour His first Argument is Churches whose Circuit contained Cities and Countries adjoining were Diocesses But c. This is before answered Our Question is Whether they were as our Diocesan Churches such as had in these Cities and Countries many Altars and Churches without Bishops under them Trees and Houses and Fields and Heathen People make not Churches nor yet scattered Christians that were Members only of the City Church His proof of the Minor is 1. These Churches comprized all the Churches of Asia Ans If he mean that all the rest
rest of his Reasonings for such Diocesan Churches I will put a few Questions more pertinent than his Queries p. 67. about the state of such Diocesan Churches Q. 1. Whether the Apostles were not by this description Bishops of all the World as their Diocesses And whether therefore it follow that there were no Bishops under them in particular Churches Q. 2. Whether Apostles and Evangelists did not go from City to City sometime staying some Months or Years at one and then passing to another And whether this made all the interjacent Countries their Diocesses changing their Bishops as oft as they thus changed their Habitations Q. 3. Whether more than one such Apostle or Evangelist were not both at once and successively in the same place to labour the conversion of all they could And whether therefore there were many Bishops to a Diocess Q. 4. Where we shall find the proof that the Apostles or Evangelists set the bounds of Diocesses And whether this description of his own do make Diocesses bounded by circuit or space of Ground or by the Abilities of the Bishop to endeavour conversion Q. 5. When the Apostles forbad any other to labour mens conversion in their Cities or Countries where they or others had been before them And did not one plant and another water and usually more than one at once Q. 6. Whether Mat. 28. 19 20. Discipling or Preaching to convert men and then baptizing them be not the way of gathering Churches and therefore proveth that before conversion they are no Churches and are not Christians only members of the Church And are those Diocesan Churches that are no Churches Q. 7. If one be setled in a single Congregation in the City with a purpose to endeavour the conversion of the Country is not a Diocesan Church there the same as a single Congregation though the Diocess be larger Q. 8. If when Congregations multiplyed Bishops were not multiplyed but one would keep many Churches under himself alone doth it prove that this was well done because it was done and that God consented to this change His next Reason is because Churches were not then divided into Parishes Which in due place I shall prove to be a sufficient Reason against him Churches were Societies constituted of Pastors and their Christian Congregations as afore defined And his inference is vain that Presbyteries were not settled in Parishes because the Churches were not yet divided into Parishes For they were Parishes that is single Churches without dividing The space of Ground called Parishes was not then marked out Nor was a Diocesan Church like ours that hath no subordinate Bishops divided into Parishes for there were no such Diocesan Churches to be so divided But the Universal Church and the Apostolical Provinces were made up or constituted of Parishes I mean of particular Churches as greater numbers are of unites and as Villages are of Houses But to say that Churches were not divided into Parishes in the sence in question is all one as to say Churches were not divided into Churches Our Controversie is like this Whether all the Families in the Town should have but One common Master And he that affirmeth it should argue thus Masters were not at first appointed to Families but to Villages For Villages were not at first divided into Families when there were none but single Houses erected True but Families were Families before there were Villages to be divided As Villages were not made before Houses and then divided into Houses nor Cities before Streets and afterwards divided into Streets nor Kingdoms before Cities and Corporations and then divided into Corporations or inferiour Societies Nor Academies before Colleges and then divided into Colleges so neither were Provincial or Diocesan Churches made before single Churches and after divided into them but were made by the coalition of many single Churches which should not have been changed for that use in specie by altering the species of their Pastors and depriving them of their Proper Bishops In his 5th Chap. He pretendeth to confute the Asseâtion that for the first 200 years the City Churches were but single Congregations Here we use to except only Alexandria and Rome in all the World And we confidently extend the time to 150 years and very probably to 200 and moreover say that till the fourth Century most or very many Churches were no other if not long after in many Kingdoms All his talk p. 80. against shallow giddy Heads that see no further than their Nose end because it was denied that Pastors were set in single Congregations to convert also the Infidels about I have nothing to do with For I assert that as all Ministers are bound to endeavour the conversion of such if they have opportunity not wanting power so those are most bound to it that have best opportunity which is the Neighbour Bishops But till men are converted they are no parts of the Church no nor of that particular Church eo nomine because converted by that Bishop as shall be proved without some further consent and ground The rest about the largeness of the Church of Jerusalem c. shall be considered in due place In his Chap. 6. p. 104. I desire it may be noted that he saith I do not deny but that at the first and namely in the time of the Apostle Paul the most of the Churches so soon after their conversion did not each of them exceed the proportion of a populous Congregation And p. 114. that Metropolitans he thinks were intended by the Apostles or at least suadente naturâ necessitate flagitante as Beza saith And I suppose a Diocesan Church will find no better ground than a Metropolitan viz. Humane Prudence or I think intended In chap. 7. He pretendeth to prove that in the Apostles times Parishes began to be distinguished under one only Bishop c. But what 's the proof Rome and Alexandria are all the Instances But 1. his proof that Evaristus divided Parishes about An. 100 is worth nothing as having no sufficient evidence but fabulous reports 2. He allegeth Eusebius l. 2. â 15. saying of St. Mark that he is said first to have constituted the Churches of Alexandria But this is no proof 1. Because Eusebius's following words out of Philo do make it most probable that by the Churches of Alexandria he meant the Churches in and about Alexandria which proveth not many in the City it self 2. If he had planted many Churches in the City it is no proof that he varied from the practice of the other Apostles who as Act. 14. 23. placed Elders that is saith Dr. Hammond Bishops in every Church Or that the Elders of each Church had not the true Pastoral or Episcopal power of Governing the Flock which is all that we plead for And if it had been proved that Mark had been over them it followeth not that he was not over them as an Archbishop but as a meer Bishop only 3. Grotius and Dr.
Hammond think they prove that Rome and other great Cities then had more Bishops than one by reason of the peoples diversity in Languages c. As Peter of the Circumcision and Paul of the Uncircumcision 4. Eusebius mentioneth not this as a certainty but with an it's said which is the usual note of his uncertain reports of which he hath not a few as is commonly confessed 5. Dr. Hammond is so far from believing this that many Parishes were committed so early to Presbyters under one Bishop that he thinketh there is no proof that any such Presbyters were in being in the Scripture times And though we confess that Alexandria and Rome had divers Churches in them long before other places there is no proof or probability that it was so in the Apostles days And l. 3. c. 4. Eusebius expresly saith But how many and what sincere followers have governed the Churches planted by the Apostles it cannot be affirmed but so far as may be gathered from the words of Paul And c. 19. he mentioneth in the singular number the Church not the Churches of Rome Antioch and Jerusalem And l. 4. c. 11. he saith Celadion succeeded Mark in the Church of Alexandria But he saith l. 5. c. 9. that Julianus was chosen Bishop over the Churches of Alexandria And c. 22. Demetrius came in his place And l. 6. c. 1. Demetrius took upon him the oversight of the Congregations there And c. 35. Dionysius received the Bishoprick of ruling the Churches in or about Alexandria c. Ans 1. So long after it is not denied but that Alexandria had more Assemblies than one 2. Yet it is most likely that by the Churches in and about Alexandria Eusebius meant the Churches under the Archbishop of Alexandria which had Bishops of their own 3. Before they had a Temple there might be several lesser Meetings in the City which were but as our Chapels or the Independants Meeting in several Houses at once when yet the Church was but one because they were associated for Personal Communion 4. When the Parishes were divided to several Presbyters yet then each Presbyter had the true Episcopal Office as to the People though not the Name and though they were under a superiour Bishop that is they had the whole Office of a Presbyter or Pastor to Govern the People as well as Teach them and Worship with them And so there was then no Parish like ours which is but part of a Diocesan Church and no Church of it self as the Bishops Form it because it hath but a half Pastor 5. And is not the case of all other Churches in the World that to this time were but single Churches more considerable than the case of Rome and Alexandria which differed from all the rest Obj. But all the rest did the same as soon as they had People enow to make many Churches Ans 1. I have told you Grotius and Dr. Hammond think that there were more Bishops than one in a City for some time 2. This multiplication was not till long after in the third Century and with most in the fourth when it was no wonder that the Church fell into the Imperial Form And when they did so the Roman Primacy arose with the rest 3. Yet even then the Presbyters were Episcopi gregis and had the true full Pastoral power as to their Flocks as aforesaid So that there were no Bishops that yet deposed the Presbyters as now Page 125. He saith Neither was this a thing peculiar to the Bishops of Alexandria but common to others Ignatius was Bishop not only of Antioch but of Syria Irenaeus the Bishop of Lyons was Bishop of the Churches in France c. Ans 1. This openeth the former case These were not Diocesanes deposing all the Episcopos gregis and become sole Bishops but Archbishops that had under them Bishops in each particular Church Yet note that it is the French Synod of Bishops which Euseb ib. l. 5. c. 23. Iren. is said to oversee as it 's said ibid. that Palmas did so among the Bishops of Pontus in their Synod and that Victor was President in the Bishops Synod at Rome and Theophilus of Caesarea and Narcissus of Jerusalem in the Palestine Synod Which is nothing to our case It is further said that Optatus saith that in Rome were 40 Churches and that Theodoret had 800. Ans 1. It is granted that in Optatus's days Rome had 40 which is nothing to our case in hand 2. In those 40 so late there were no half Presbyters but as this Doctor confesseth they had not only a joynt power in Governing the Flocks but in Ordination too 3. I confess Theodoret's case seemeth strange and though of late date is so incredible as contrary to the case of other Churches that I do the rather for that clause believe that Epistle to Leo to be a forgery or corrupted at least And besides this Reason I have these also for it 1. Because he himself saith that Cyrus where he was Bishop was but two days journey from Antioch Hist Sanct. Patr. de Juliano And he that knoweth how great the Diocess of Antioch was will not easily believe that a Town within two days journey to Monks that went on foot was like to have eight hundred Churches in it at that time 2. And we know out of whose shop Theodoret's Epistles come Nicephorus saith he read above 500 of his Epistles Baronius saith there is a Book in the Vaticane containing 150 of them Metius translated these into Latine But saith Rivet Crit. Sacr. l. 4. c. 21. p. 455. the Reader must remember that they have been kept all this while in the Adversaries Cabinets and by them are brought into light and into Latine so that they have no authority further than other History confirmeth them 3 Especially seeing Leontius de Sectis saith as Baronius confesseth that Hereticks fained Epistles in Theodoret's name And Bellarmine de script Eccl. mentioneth one that hath his name in Concil Ephes that neither Theodoret nor any Christian is to be charged with 4. And that this one Epistle to Leo should be cull'd out of all the rest to be alone Printed after Theodoret's Works sheweth the design and what credit is to be given to it 5. And I shall anon cite much out of Theodoret himself to shew the improbability that Diocesses had then so many Churches And so much as a just confutation of Bishop Downame not as referring to other men with whom he dealt but to the cause which we have in hand And that I answer not the whole Book is because I know of no more in it than what I have culled out which needeth an answer as to the cause which I defend Of which I make the judicious Reader Judge 6. Bishop Hall's Defence of Episcopacy meddleth so little with the point now in Question that I have no need to say any thing to it more than is already said And he granteth all that I desire 7.
they forsake him or refuse to use him and Excommunicateth a man when they avoid his communion and declare him unmeet for communion In all which the Church useth her own right but taketh not away another mans Then for the Canonical Enquiries after faults and impositions of Penence or delays of absolution he sheweth that both the Canons and Judgments by them being but prudential Determinations of Modes and Circumstances bound none but Consenters without the Magistrates Law except as the Law of Nature bound them to avoid offences He should add and as obedience in general is due to Church-guides of Christ's appointment And how the Magistrate may constrain the Pastors to their duty Chap. 10. He sheweth that there are two perpetual Functions in the Church Presbyters and Deacons I call them Presbyters saith he with all the Ancient Church who feed the Church with the Preaching of the Word the Sacraments and the Keys which by Divine Right are individual or inseparable Note that And § 27. He saith It is doubtful whether Pastors where no Bishops are and so are under none though over none are to be numbered with Bishops or meer Presbyters § 31. His counsel for the choice of Pastors is that as in Justinian's time none be forced on the People against their wills and yet a power reserv'd in the chief Rulers to rescind such elections as are made to the destruction of Church or Commonwealth Chap. 11. § 10. He sheweth that Bishops are not by Divine precept And § 1. That therefore the different Government of the Churches that have Bishops or that have none should be no hindrance to Unity And § 10 11. That some Cities had no Bishops and some more than one And that not only in the Apostles âays but after one City had several Bishops in iââtation of the jews who to every Synagogue had an Archisynagogus Page 357. He sheweth that there have been at Rome and elsewhere long vacancies of the Bishops See in which the Presbyters Governed the Church without a Bishop And saith that all the Ancients do confess that there is no act so proper to a Bishop but a Presbyter may do it except the right of Ordination Yet sheweth p. 358. that Presbyters ordained with Bishops and expoundeth the Canon thus that Presbyters should Ordain none contemning the Bishop And p. 359. He sheweth that where there is no Bishop Presbyters may Ordain as Altisiodorensis saith among the Schoolmen And questioneth again whether the Presbyters that have no Bishops over them be not rather Bishops than meer Presbyters citing Ambrose's words He that had no one above him was a Bishop what would he have said of our City and Corporation Pastors that have divers Chapels and Curates under them Or of our Presidents of Synods or such as the Pastor of the first Town that ever I was Preacher in Bridgnorth in Shropshire who had six Parishes in an exempt Jurisdiction four or five of them great ones and kept Court as ordinary like the Bishops being under none but the Archbishop And § 12. He sheweth that there was great cause for many Churches to lay by Episcopacy for a time And p. 360. he saith Certainly Christ gave the Keys to be exercised by the same men to whom he gave the power of Preaching and Baptizing That which God hath joyned let no man separate But then how should Satan have used the Churches as he hath done And he sheweth of meer ruling Elders as he had done of Bishops that they are not necessary but are lawful and that it may be proved from Scripture that they are not displeasing to God and that formerly the Laity joyned in Councils Only he puts these Cautions which I consent to 1. That they be not set up as by God's command 2. That they meddle no otherwise with the Pastoral Office or Excommunication than by way of Counsel 3. That none be chosen that are unfit 4. That they use no coactive power but what is given them by the Soveraign 5. That they know their power to be mutable as being not by Gods command but from man And Chap. 11. § 8. He delivereth his opinion of the Original of Episcopacy that it was not fetcht from the Temple pattern so much as from the Synagogues where as he said before every Synagogue had a chief Ruler 14. As for J. D. and many other lesser Writers Sir Thomas Aston c. who say but half the same with those forementioned it is not worth your time and labour to read any more Animadversions on them 15. But the great Learned M. Ant. de Dominis Spalatensis deserveth a more distinct consideration who in his very learned Books De Repub. Eccles doth copiously handle all the matter of Church-Government But let us consider what it is that he maintaineth In his lib. 5. c. 1. he maintaineth that the whole proper Ecclesiastical Power is meerly Spiritual In cap. 2. that no Power with true Prefecture Jurisdiction Coaction and Domination belongeth to the Church In c. 3. he sheweth that an improper Jurisdiction belongs to it Where he overthroweth the old Schoolmens Description of Power of Jurisdiction and sheweth also the vanity of the common distinction of Power of Order and of Jurisdiction and maintaineth 1. that Power of Jurisdiction followeth ab Ordine as Light from the Sun 2. That all the Power of the Keys which is exercised for Internal effects although about External Matters of Worship or Government belongeth directly to the Potestas Ordinis 3. That the Power of Jurisdiction as distinct from Order and reserved to the Bishops is but the power about the Ordering of External things which is used Principally and Directly for an External Effect that is Church order § 5. p. 35. 4. That it is foolish to separate power of Order from any power of Jurisdiction whatsoever that is properly Ecclesiastical it being wholly Spiritual 5. The Episcopal Jurisdiction not properly Ecclesiastical he maketh to consist in ordering Rites and Ceremonies and Circumstances and Temporals about the Church and about such Modal Determinations about particular persons and actions as are matters of humane prudence which have only a General Rule in Nature or Scripture 6. By which though he hold Episcopacy Jure Divino that it is but such things that he supposeth proper to the Bishop which the Magistrate may determine and make Laws for as Grotius and others prove at last and himself after and as Sir Roger Twisden hath Historically proved to have been used by the Kings of England Histor Def. Cap. 5. 7. That all Ecclesiastical power whatsoever is fully and perfectly conjunct with Order page 36. 8. That this plenitude of power is totally and equally in all Bishops and Presbyters lawfully Ordained and that it is a meer vanity to distinguish in such power of Order Plenitudinem potestatis a parte solicitudinis 9. That this equal power of the Bishop and Presbyter floweth from Ordination and is the Essential Ordinary Ministerial
contrary that needeth a Reply Cap. 5. he would prove the Angels to be Archbishops which if done would not touch our Cause who meddle not with Archbishops but onely prove that the full Pastoral or Episcopal Office or power of the Keys as over the Flock should be found in every particular Church that hath unum Altaere To prove Metropolitans again he tells us how that in Provinces we find Churches mentioned in the Plural number and in Cities onely a Church singularly not perceiving how hereby he overthrows his Cause when he can never prove that in Scripture many particular Churches are called A Church Diocesane or Metropolitan as united in one Bishop as our Diooesane and Metropolitan Churches now are Nay indeed though the Society be specified by the Government yet the Name sticketh in their teeth here in England and they seldom use the Title of the Church of Canterbury and York for the whole Province and they use to say the Diocese of Lincoln London Winchester Worcester Coventry and Litchfield c. rather than the Church of Lincoln London Coventry and Litchfield c. lest the Hearers would so hardly he seduced from the proper sense of the word Church as not to understand them His Proofs of the Civil or Jewish distinction of Metropolitans § 4 5 c. let them mind that think it pertinent But § 9. we have a great word that It may be proved by many examples that after this Image the Apostles took care every where to dispose of the Churches and constituted a subordination and dependence of the lesser on the more eminent Cities in all their Plantations Answ This is to some purpose if it be made good The first Instance is Acts 14. 26. 16. 4. and 15. 2 3 22 23 30. Not a word else out of Scripture And what 's here Why Paul and Barnabas are sent to Jerusalem from Antioch to the Apostles and Elders about the Question and were brought on their way by the Church and passed thorow Phenice and Samaria Chosen men are sent to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas Judas and Silas with Letters from the Apostles Elders and Brethren even to the Brethren of the Gentiles in Antioch Syria and Cilicia And when they came to Antioch they delivered the Letters and Paul and Timothy as they went thorow the Cities delivered them the Decrees to keep that were ordained by the Apostles and Elders that were at Jerusalem Doth not the Reader wonder where is the Proof And wonder he may for me unless this be it The Apostles and Elders were at Jerusalem when they wrote this Letter and thence sent it to Antioch Syria and Cilicia Ergo They established the Bishop of Jerusalem to be the Governour and Metropolitan of Antioch Syria and Cilicia The Apostle Paul went from Antioch to other Cities and delivered them these Decrees Ergo Antioch is the governing Metropolis of those Cities I think the major Propositions are Every City from which Apostles send their Letters to other Cities and every City from which an Apostle carrieth such Letters or Decrees to other Cities is by those Apostles made the Governing Metropolis of those other Cities What dull Heads are the Puritans to question such a Proposition as this But it is not given to all Men to be wise And we ignorant Persons are left in doubt Q. 1. Whether the Universal Headship or Papacy of the Bishop of Jerusalem be not of Apostolical Institution and that more than by one Apostle even by all of them that were then at Jerusalem Q. 2. Whether the Apostles did not this as they did other parts of Church-settlement by the Spirit of God and so whether it be not jure Divino yea by a more eminent Authority than the Scriptures which were written by parts by several single Men some Apostles and some Evangelists when this is said to be done by all together Q. 3. Whether Christ's Life Death Resurrection Ascension and sending the Apostles thence into all the World and not into the Roman Empire onely do not incomparably more evidently make Jerusalem the Universal Metropolis of the Earth and so set it above Rome which is but the Metropolis of one Empire Q. 4. Whether then an Universal Head of the Church or Vicar of Christ be not jure Divino and so a Jerusalem Papacy be not essential to the true Church and Religion Q. 5. Whether then all the Emperours Bishops and Churches that did set up Rome Alexandria Antioch and Constantinople above Jerusalem were not Traytors against the Universal Sovereign of the Church and guilty of Usurpation and gross Schism Q. 6. To what parpose this Sovereignty was given to Jerusalem which was never possess'd and exercised Q. 7. Whether Peter's being at Rome could alter this Church-Constitution and one Apostle could undo what all together had done Q. 8. Whether the Apostles carried this Metropolitical Prerogative with them from place to place where-ever they came And whether it did belong to the Men or the Place And whether to the Place whence they first set out or to every place where they came or to the place where they dyed Judge what is the proof of any of these Q. 9. When they were scattered which of their Seats was the Metropolitan to the rest or were they all equal Q. 10. If the Power followed the Civil Power of the Metropolitane Rulers whether Caesar did not more in constituting the Church-Order and giving power comparatively to the Metropolitanes than Christ and his Apostles Q. 11. Whether it was not in Caesar's power to unmake all the Church Metropolitans and Bishops at his pleasure by dissolving the Priviledges and Charters of Cities Q. 12. If it please any King or be the Custom of any Kingdom as it is in many parts of America that the Kingdom have no Cities or Metropolis whether it must have any Churches Bishops or Metropolitane Q. 13. Whether when Paul wrote his Letters from Corinth to Rome he thereby made the Bishop of Corinth the Governour of the Bishop and Diocess of Rome And whether little Cenchrea was over them also because Phoebe carried the Letter And did his writing from Philippi to Corinth subject Corinth to the Bishop of Philippi And did his writing from Rome to Galatia Ephesus Philippi the Colossians and from Athens to the Thessalonians and from Laodicea and Rome to Timothy and from Nicopolis to Titus and John's writing from Patmos to the Asian Metropolitanes produce the same effect Q. 14. If Paul's carrying the Letters from Antioch to other Cities proved Antioch the Governour of the rest whether when he returned from the other to Antioch again he made not the other the Governours of Antioch I am ashamed to prosecute this Fiction any further His following Citations from the Fathers I think unworthy of an Answer till it be proved 1. That these Fathers took the Metropolitane Order as such to be of Apostolical Institution and not in complyance with the Roman Government by meer humane
the Apostles there must be but just 13 or 14 in the whole world if they succeed them fully in the accidentals of their office But if not than their residence in Cities will not prove that they must succeed them in that accident any more than in the number 2. Because as is shewed the Apostles tyed not themselves to Cities only and what they did in preferring Cities was occasional as is said before 3. Nor is there the least proof beyond an ostentation of vain words and confidence that ever the Apostles setled Churches according to the civil form and put the Bishops of lesser Cities under the Metropolitans No more than that among themselves that Apostle was Ruler of the rest who had the Metropolis for his Seat The Papists themselves not pretending that Peter was Ruler of the rest because Rome was his Seat but that Rome must have the ruling Universal Bishop because it was the Seat of Peter And if the Metropolis made not one Apostle Ruler of the rest why should it do so by their successors And I never heard any attempt to prove that Mathew Bartholomew Lebbeus James the Apostle Thomas Philip and every one of the Apostles had a distinct independent Metropolis for his Episcopal Seat 4. Indeed it s but vain words of them that pretend that the Apostles fixed themselves in any Seat at all but it is certain by their Office and by History that they oft removed from place to place in order to call as much of the world as they were capable and were somtimes in Metropoles and sometimes in other places and though the ancients make them the first Bishops of Churches they do not say that they were Bishops of any particular Churches only exclusively to all others But the same Apostle that Planted ten or twenty Churches was the first Bishop of them all pro tempore setling fixed Bishops to succeed them 5. And whoever dreamed that Mark who was no Apostle was the Ruler of other Apostles at least that came into his Province because Alexandria was the second Metropolis 4. This pretended forming of the Churches as aforesaid is contrary to the Ends of Church institution and Communion which are the publick worshipping of God and personal Communion of Parochians or Cohabitants in that worship Sacraments and holy living in mutual assistance Whereas in a great part of the world Country Villages are so far from any Cities that if they must travel to them for this publick Communion they must spend all the Lords day in travaile and yet miss their Ends and come too late Nor can Women Children and aged ones possibly do it at all But if they are to have no such personal Communion with the City Churches but have it ordinarily among themselves then whatever men may say that strive about the Name they are not of that particular City Church as such but are of another Church at home which must have a BishopÌ because it is a Church 5. Their Civil and City or Diocesan frame contradicteth the plain institution or Law of Christ and of his Spirit For 1. Math. 28. 19. 20. it is the very Commission of the Apostles and their successors with whom Christ will be to the end of the world to Teach or Disciple all Nations and then to Baptizc them and so gather them into the Church Universal and then Teach them as Disciples all his Laws which includeth Congregating them in perticular Churches where they must be so taught Now as it is all Nations even the whole Countryes and not the Cities only that must be Discipled or convicted and Baptized so it is the whole Nations Villages and all of Baptized persons that must thus be Congregated into particular Churches and taught 2. To which add Act. 14. 23. the positive exemplary and so obliging ordinary practice of the Apostles They ordained them Elders in every Church so that 1. It is Gods will that Villages have Churches 2. And it is Gods will that every Church have a Bishop at least therefore it is Gods will that every Village have a Bishop which have a Church or that some Villages have Bishops And though every City be mentioned Tit. 1. 5. that only sheweth that de facto then and there Village Churches were rare or none but not de jure they must not be gathered nor doth he say ordain Elders in Cities only much less give them Rule according to the City power And as Ceuchrea had a Church which was no City so Act. 14. 23. will prove that they should have a Bishop For every Church is to have a Bishop And Ceuchrea was not a family-family-Church and so the name not used equivocally And Bishop Downams assertion that it was a Church with a mean Presbyter under the Bishop of Corinth is a naked unproved saying that deserveth no credit and is contradicted by Doctor Hammond who saith there was there no meer Presbyter in being 6. Had this form been setled as they Pretend in Cities only and Diocesses there would have been uncertainty and contentions what places should have Bishops and Churches and what places should have none For it is uncertain and litigious what place is to be taken for a City and what not For ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sometimes signifieth any great Town and some times strictly Towns incorprate and sometimes more strictly eminent Corporations now called Cities with us here in England And how great would the difficulty have been to determine when a Town was big enough to pass for a City or when it had privileges enow for that title If it be said that the account and name then and thus used was the directory they will then make Gods Church to depend for being upon a Name with heathen people If they will call Ceucbrea a City it shall have a Church otherwise it shall have none But there was no such controversie in those times 7. According to their model Churches shall be mutable and dissolvible at the will of the Magistrate yea of every Heathen Magistrate For if he will but change the priviledges and title of a Town and make it no City it must have no Church or Bishop And if he will remove the privileges and title the Church and Bishop must remove And if he will endow a big Village or Town with City privileges and name a Church and Bishop must be then made anew But who can believe that Christ thus modled his Churches in his institution 8. Yea after their model an infidel or Christian King aâiud agenâ that never thinketh on it or intendeth it shall change the Churches and destroy them If by war a City be turned into no City or if the King for other reasons un-un-city it or if change of Government put it into another Princes power that shall for his convenience un city it the Church in City and Country is at an end though there remain people enow to constitute a Church 9. Yea a fire or an Earthquake by this Rule
of Presbyter Which he proceedeth to shew that he thinks was done that there might be a store of Bishops prepared for all Countries Pag. 25. he thus far differs from Doctor Hammond but not from the truth as to hold that Plures in eadem Ecclesia velut Ephâsina Episcopi fuere There were many Bishops in one Church as in that of Ephesus Which he taketh for a particular Church and not a Province and saith that the simple manners of the Church would then bear this till Ambition had depraved men and Charity and Humility and the imitation of Christ waxed cold then came that which Hierome speaketh of that For a remedy of Schism one was chosen out of the company of Presbyters and set above the rest So Pag. 26. In eadem capita passim ambo conferebantur And p. 27. Hoc si ita est quid aliud restat nisi ut penes eosdem Nam plures una in Ecclesia fuisse tales iisdem ex locis argumentum ducitur tam nomen illud duplex quam conveniens nomini potestas authoritas utraque fuisse dicatur that is If this be so what else remaineth but that both the double name and the agreeable double power and authority be said to have been in the same persons for that there were many of them in one Church may be proved from the same places And Pag. 95 96 97 98 99. he sheweth out of Justin Martyr first That all things in the sacred Assemblies and Sacraments were done by the Bishop alone and that he was the Curator and Moderator both of the Sacraments to be administred and of teaching the people and of the Churches money The Bishop consecrated the Sacraments and by the Deacons administred them to the people He prayeth and preacheth He had the care of the Church-moneys and kept them with it he relieved the Orphans Widows Sick Prisoners Travellers c. And from Tertullian that the Christians received not the Sacrament from the hands of any but the Bishops Were there not then as many Bishops as Church-Assemblies And that they chiefly did baptize And p. 112. he citeth the Can. 7. 8. Concil Gangrensis which anathematizeth those that without the Bishops consent durst give or receive the Church Oblations c. And p. 141. out of Prosper de vita contempl c. 20. that a Bishop must excel in knowledge that he may instruct those that live under him And p. 144 145 147. he citeth Can. 3. Concil Arelat 3. an 813. That every Bishop in his own Parish do perfectly and studiously teach the Presbyters and all the people and not neglect to instruct them And Concil Turonens 3. Can. 4. Let every Bishop diligently study by sacred preaching to inform the flock committed to him what they must do and what they must avoid And Concil Rhemens 2. Can. 14. That Bishops preach the Word of God to all And Concil Cabilonens 3. Can. 1. That Bishops be diligent in reading and search the mysteries of Gods Word that they may shine by the brightness of Doctrine in the Church and cease not to satiate the souls subject to them by nutriment of Gods Words And p. 147. That in the formula by which the Kings of France committed Episcopacy to any it is said You shall study by daily Sermons to edifie or polish the people committed to you according to Canonical Institution And ibid. Can. 19. Concil Constant in Trullo The Church Presidents must every day but especially the Lords day teach all the Clergy and people the things that belong to piety gathering from the Scriptures the sentences and judgments of verity And p. 149. he citeth Concil Lateran sub Innoc. 3. c. 10. allowing Bishops to take helpers in preaching when business or sickness hindred them And p. 150 152 153. he mentioneth it as somewhat rare that at Alexandria Presbyters preached and at Antioch Chrysostom and at Hippo Augustine while Flavianus and Valerius were Bishops I do not cite all this now as to prove the sense of Antiquity but the sense of Petavius who plainly intimateth that the Churches were no larger of a long time than that a Bishop might preach to all the Clergy and People every Lords day and that in Scripture times all or near all the Presbyters were Bishops which is it that we contend for and consequently you may judge what the Churches were And though it still look much farther than Scripture times I will shew you what Petavius thought of the Magnitude of City-Churches even near four hundred years after Christ in Epiphanius's days in his Animadvers on Epiphan ad Haer. 69. p. 276. Singularem tunc temporis Alexandriae morem hunc fuisse vel saltem paucis in Ecclesiis usurpatum c. i. e. That this was a singular custom of Alexandria or at least used in few Churches you may hence conjecture because he so expresly mentioneth this custom as peculiar to the Alexandrian Church to wit that in the same City there should be many Titles to each of which should be assigned a proper Presbyter who should there perform the Church Offices But yet the same was formerly elsewhere instituted that is at Rome where the Presbyters did every one rule his own people being distributed by Titles that is setled Sub-Assemblies To them the Bishops on the Lords days sent Leaven or hallowed Bread in token of Communion See what a shift they were at first put to lest the several Assemblies should seem several Churches For it is not to be imagined that this was done to signifie that common Christian Communion which they had with all other Christian Churches but that nearest Communion which belongeth to those that are embodied under one Pastor or the same Pastor in Common that is one particular Church Even as if these divers Altars or Tables were at a distance in the same Church and the Bishop would signifie the Union of the several Companies in the same Society by sending some of the Bread which he had blessed to them all But Petavius proceedeth Non dubito majoribus duntaxat in urbibus c. I doubt not but that it was in the Greater Cities only that there were more than one Titles within the bounds or Liberties when within the same Walls they would not be contained and meet together and so had Presbyters put on the several Churches But in the smaller and less frequented Cities there was one only Church into which they all did come together Of which sort were the Cities of Cyprus And therefore Epiphanius noteth the custom of Alexandria as a thing strange to his Country-men and unusual Hence was the original of Parishes which word was transferred from the Country Churches to the City Churches And adding the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã with their Bishops or Curators setled in Rome by Servius Tullius he saith Quibus Christianorum in agris Paroeciae quam simillimae fuerunt Nam illic ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. To which the Parishes of the
Christians in the Countries were most like For there also were Bishops or rather Chorepiscopi rural Bishops placed of old which some Latine interpretations of the Canons call the Vicars of the Bishops but others far more rightly than they the Country or Village Bishops of which more after So that you see in Petavius opinion even when Epiphanius wrote the ordinary Cities of the World had but one Assembly in each City and Suburbs And only some extraordinary Cities of which only Alexandria could be named by Epiphanius and Rome also by Petavius and no more by any other Author had divers setled Titles under their several Presbyters And even those Titles in those two Cities were but Chappels like our Parish Chappels received consecrated Bread from the Bishops Church lest they should think that they were a distinct body of themselves Yea and that the Villages that had Assemblies had their proper Bishops And so I dismiss Petavius with thanks for his free Concession 2. My next Witness is Bishop Downame the strongest that hath written against Parish Bishops for Diocesanes who lib. 1. cap. 1. before recited saith Indeed at the very first Conversion of Cities the whole number of the people converted being somewhere not much greater than the number of Presbyters placed among them were able to make but a small Congregation And cap. 6. pag. 104. At the first and namely the time of the Apostle Paul the most of the Churches so soon after their Conversion did not each of them exceed the proportion of a populous Congregation Though this reach not so low as Petavius Concession it is as much as I need to the present business 3. My third Witness shall be that learned moderate man Mr. Joseph Mede who in his discourse of Churches pag. 48 49 50. saith Nay more than this it should seem that in those first times before Diocesses were divided into those lesser and subordinate Churches which we now call Parishes and Presbyters assigned to them they had not only one Altar to a Church or Dominicum but one Altar to a Church taking Church for the Company or Corporation of the faithful united under one Bishop or Paster and that was in the City or place where the Bishop had his See and Residence Like as the Jews had but one Altar and Temple for the whole Nation united under one High Priest And yet as the Jews had their Synagogues so perhaps might they have more Oratories than one though their Altar were but one there namely where the Bishop was Die solis saith Justin Martyr omnium qui vel in oppidis vel ruâi degunt in eundem locum Conventus fit Namely as he there tells us to celebrate and participate the holy Eucharist Why was this but because they had not many places to celebrate it in And unless this were so whence came it else that a Schismatical Bishop was said Constituere or collocare aliud altare And that a Bishop and an Altar are made correlatives See St. Cyprian Epist 40 72 73. de unit Eccles c. So that Mr. Mede granteth that every Church that had a Bishop had no more people than communicated at one Altar To which purpose he goeth on further to Ignatius Testimony of which anon 4. Bishop Bilson's Testimony Perp. Gov. cap. 13. pag. 256. See afterward 5. Grotius is large in his endeavours to prove that not only every City had a Bishop but also every stated Assembly of which there were divers in one and the same City and that the Government was not suited to the Temple way but to the Synagogues and as every Synagogue had its chief Ruler of which there were many in a City so had every Church in a City its Bishop and that only the Church of Alexandria had the custom of having but one Bishop in the whole City Thus he de Imper. Sum. Pot. p. 355 356 357. And in his Annot. in 1 Tim. 5. 17. Sed notandum est una urbe sicut plures Synagogas ita plures fuisse Ecclesias id est conventus Christianorum cuique Ecclesiae fuisse suum praesidem qui populum alloqueretur Presbyteros ordinaret Alexandriae tantum eum fuisse morem ut unus esset in tota urbe praeses qui ad docendum Presbyteros Per urbem distribueret docet nos Sozomenus l. 1. c. 14. Epiphanius c. Thus Grotius thought that of old every stated Assembly had a Bishop that had power of Ordination I confess I interpret not Zozomen nor Epiphanius as Grotius doth nor believe I that he can bring us frequent proof of two Churches with Bishops in one City much less many unless in Doctor Hammond's instance before and after mentioned But the rest I accept 6. I may take it for a full Concession from Bishop Jeremy Tailor which is before cited though in few words Praef. Treat of Repent I am sure we cannot give account of souls of which we have no notice And I am sure a full Parish is as many as a more able and diligent man than ever I was can take such notice of as to do the Pastors Office to them 7. But the last and greatest Champion for Diocesanes is Doctor Hammond his Concessions are mentioned before but now are purposely to be cited But remember still that we are yet speaking but of the matter of Fact In his Annot. in Act. 11. 30. he saith Although this Title of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Elders have been also extended to a second Order in the Church and now is only in use for them under the name of Presbyters yet in the Scripture times it belonged principally if not alone to Bishops there being no evidence that any of the second order were then instituted though soon after before the writing of Ignatius Epistles there were such instituted in all Churches Though so suddain a change be unlikely I pass it by In his Dissert p. 208 209 211. cap. 10. sect 19 20 21. 11. sect 2. c. he saith Prius non usquequaque verum esse quod pro concesso sumitur in una civitate non fuisse plures Episcopos Quamvis enim in una Ecclesia aut coetu plures simul Episcopi nunquam fuerint nihil tamen obstare quin in eadem civitate duo aliquando disterminati coetus fuerint a duobus Apostolis ad fidem adducti c. as I have before more largely cited him Yea Dissert Epist Sect. 30 31. he will have the question stated only of a Bishop in singulari Ecclesia in singulari coetu The controversie is not Quibus demum nominibus cogniti fuerint Ecclesiarum rectores sed an ad unum in singulari Ecclesia an ad plures potestas ista devenerit Nos ad unum singularem praefectum quem ex famosiore Ecclesiae usu Episcopum vulgo dicimus potestatem istam in singulari coetu ex Christi Apostolorum institutione nunquam non pertinuisse
Bishops and distinct from Cathedrals that they could not be there buried before they were built and in Being which saith Selden began in England seven hundred years after Christ here one and there one as a Patron erected it Selden of Tythes pag. 267. Yea in seven hundred he findeth but one of Earl Puch in Beda and in Anno 800. divers appropriate to Crowland and so after And it was the Character of a Parish Church to have Baptisterium Sepulturam pag. 262. So that before a Bishop's Church however called had but one place that had Baptisterium Sepulturam Yea long after that Parishes had very few Members in most places so long was it e'er the People were brought to Christianity And they were then as our Bishops make them now not proper Churches but Chappels of Ease Selden ibid. pag. 267. tells you that Ralph Nevil Bishop of Chichester and Chancellor of England requested of the King that the Church of Saint Peter in Chichester might be pulled down and laid to another Parish because it was poor having but two Parishioners Sure it was never built for two Persons But it 's like many were Heathens Or if not so then in the Years 700 and 800 they were so Though Master Thomas Jones hath well proved that the Brittish Churches were far extended before Gregory sent Austine and that our Bishops and Religion are derived from them Even at Tours in France in the days of Saint Martin notwithstanding all his Miracles the Christians were not so many as the Heathens at least till one publick Miracle towards his later time convinced some CHAP. VI. The same further confirmed by the Ancients I. EUsebius Demonstrat Evangel pag. 138. saith When he considered the Power of Christ's Word how it perswaded innumerable Congregations of Men and by those Ignoble and Rustick Disciples of Jesus ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã numerosissimae Ecclesiae were constituted not in certain unknown and obscure places but erected in the most famous Cities Rome Alexandria and Antioch through all Egypt and Lycia through Europe and Asia ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in Villages and Countries or Regions and all sorts of Nations By this it appeareth that Villages had Churches then II. Though of later date consider the History of Patrick's Plantation of Churches in Ireland who is said himself in his own time to have three hundred sixty five Churches and as many Bishops and three thousand Presbyters as Ninius reporteth Not only Thorndike taketh notice of this but a better Author Usher de Eccles Brit. Primord pa. 950. And Selden in his Comment on Eutychius Origines Alex. pag. 86. from Antoninus and Vincentius thus mentioneth it Certe tantum in orbe terrarum tunc temporis Episcoporum segetem mirari forsan desinet quisquis crediderit quod de B. Patricio Hibernensi Antoninus Vincentius tradunt Eum scilicet solum Ecclesias fundasse 365. totidemque Episcopos ordinasse praeter Presbyterorum 3000. Qua de re consulas plura apud praestantissimum virum Jacobum Usserium c. So that here was to every Church a Bishop and near ten Presbyters No Man will doubt but the Bishops themselves were taken out of the better sort of the Laity and the Presbyters of the second sort and all below many private Christians now among us And were there three hundred sixty five Cities think you in Ireland Yea or Corporations either It 's easie to conjecture what Churches these were III. All History Fathers and Councils consent that every City was to have a Bishop and Presbytery to govern and teach the Christians of that City and the Country people near it which is but a Parish or Presbyterian Church For the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã signifieth in the old common use any big Town yea little Towns that were distinct from Country Farms and scattering Villages so that all our Corporations and Market Towns are Oppida and such Cities as ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã signified Therefore even by this Rule we should have a Bishop to every such Town 1. Crete was called Hecatompolis as having an hundred Cities as Homer saith it had And what kind of Cities were those Which were to have an hundred Churches and Bishops in a small Island 2. Theocritus Idyl 13. de laudibus Ptolem. vers 82. saith that he had under his Government thirty three thousand three hundred and thirty ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Cities And if so they must be as small as our Boroughs if not some Villages certainly he had not above twice the number of Cities eminently so called that Stephanus Byzantinus could find in the whole World in his Book ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 3. He that will peruse and compare the Texts in the New Testament that use the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã above sixscore times and see Grotius on Luk. 7. 11. c. shall soon see that the word is there used for such Towns as I am mentioning if not less IV. Sozomen lib. 5. cap. 3. tells us that Majuma which was Navale Gazae being as part of its Suburbs or the adjoyning part but twenty Stadia distant was because it had many Christians honoured by Constantine with the name of a City and had a Bishop of their own And Julian in malice took from them the honour of being a City but they kept their Bishop for all that It had the same Magistrate with Gaza and the same Military Governors and the same Republick but was diversified only by their Church-State For saith he each had their own Bishop and their own Clergy and the Altars belonging to each Bishoprick were distinct And therefore afterward the Bishop of Gaza laboured to subject the Clergy of Majuma to himself saying that it was unmeet that one City should have two Bishops But a Council called for that purpose did confirm the Church-Right of Majuma V. Gregory Neocaesariensis called Thaumaturgus was by force made Bishop of that City where all the Christians were but seventeen at his Ordination such was the Bishop's Church And when he had preached and done Miracles there till his Persecution there is no mention of any Presbyter he had with him but of his Deacon Musonius that fled with him Though when he died he left but seventeen unconverted And when he had converted some at Comana a small Town near him he did not set a Presbyter over it and make it part of his own Diocess but appointed Alexander the Collier to be their Bishop and that over a Church who were no more than met and debated the Case of his Election and Reception See Greg. Nyssen in Orat. in Greg. Thaumat Basil de Spirit Sancto cap. 19. Breviar Roman die 15 Novemb. Menolog Graec. VI. Concil Nic. Oecum 1. Can. 13. decreeth that every one that before death desireth the Sacrament was to have it from the Bishop One Ed. in Crab saith Generaliter omni cuilibet in exitu posito poscenti sibi Communionis gratiam tribui Episcopus
Altars with the form were introduced till two hundred Years after Christ which maketh some the more question the Antiquity of Ignatius and Clem. Const and Can. Apost I yield to Baronius ad An. 57. that the Christians had Churches that is places consecrated for Church-Assemblies under those peaceable Emperors that went before Dioclesian For Eusebius besides others expresly telleth us so Spaciosas amplas construxerunt Ecclesias But I desire the Reader to mark his words Lib. 8. cap. 1. A man might then have seen the Bishops of all Churches in great reverence and favour among all sorts of Men and with all Magistrates Who can worthily describe those innumerable heaps and flocking multitudes through all Cities and famous Assemblies frequenting the places dedicated to Prayer Because of which Circumstances they not contented with the old and ancient Buildings which could not receive them have through all Cities builded them from the Foundation wide and ample Churches Here note 1. That here is no mention of any more Churches than one in each City Cities and Assemblies are numbered together 2. That these Buildings are called Churches 3. That these Churches were built greater than the old ones anew from the Foundation because the old ones were too narrow to contain the People But not superadded to the old ones 4. That the Bishops are called The Bishops of all Churches in relation to the same kind of Churches as are here described So that then a Bishop's Church met in one enlarged place Yet all these were no Temples but such as the silenced Ministers have of late built in some parts of London for the Christians were in continual danger of the demolishing of them which fell out in Dioclesian's time But till this Calm which Eusebius here describeth for about two hundred and fifty Years after Christ the Christians oft met in Vaults and secret places where they might be hid and not in open Churches unless now and then in a Calm between Platina in vit Xisti tells us that even at Rome it self about the Year 120. there were few found that durst profess the Name of Christ And see what he saith In Vita Clement 1. Anaclet Mantuan lib. 1. fastor de Clem. Anacl Evarist Alex. Xist Calist Urban c. In whose times Killing Banishing and Persecuting caused Scatterings hidings and as Pliny tells us many Apostasies See what Gers Bucer saith pag. 221 222 223. of all the Ages now in question about this matter As Tertullian saith Apol. c. 3. adeo in hominibus innocuis nomen innocuum erat odio Did the Rabble but see or hear the Christians they were raged against them and cried to the Judges Tollite impios Saith Polydor. Virgil. de invent rer l. 5. c. 6. Romae non reperio quod sciam aliud antiquius templum aedificatum aut dicatum vel ad usum Sacrorum fuisse conversum quam Thermas Novati in vico patricio quas Pius Pontifex Praxidis eximiae sanctitatis foeminae rogatu divae Pudentianae ejus Sorori consecravit qui fuit annus circiter 150. But the name Templum here is not used by Polydore as by the Ancients for a large and comely Fabrick For saith Tertullian after that Apol. c. 37. Christians leave Temples to the Heathens And saith Pope Nicholas in Epist de depositione Zachariae Rodoaldi Episc recited in his Life by Papir Massonus Fol. 132. Col. 2. Deinde propter frigidiorem locum in Ecclesia Salvatoris quae ab Authore vocatur Constantiniana quae prima in toto terrarum orbe constructa est You see that by this Pope's own Testimony there was no Church in the whole World built before this one at Rome by Constantine The meaning is no large sumptuous place called a Temple but only commodious meaner Rooms or Buildings And the same Pap. Masson in Vita Bonifacii fol. 55. noteth that Hierom even in his time so late Basilicas Christianorum tres tantum commemorasse When upon the great increase of Christians but one odd Idol Temple even in Alexandria was begged of the Emperor for the Christians Ruffin lib. 2. cap. 22. and divers others tell us what tumult and stir it caused And when Euseb de Vita Constant lib. 3. c. 49 50. tells us of his building of Churches except Constantinople it is but one in a City even the great Cities Nicomedia in Bythinia and Antioch And Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 12. saith that even in Constantinople which he made so great and beautiful that it was no whit inferior to Rome and by a Law engraven on a Pillar commanded that it be called Second Rome he built from the Foundation but two Churches Pacis Apostolorum I could find in my heart were it not tedious here to translate all Isidor Pelusâota's Epist 246. lib. 2. in which he openeth the difference between Templum and Ecclesia and inveigheth against that Bishop as no Bishop who cried up the Temple as the Church while he persecuted and vexed the Godly who are the Church indeed and against them that are for sumptuous Temples and unholy scandalous Churches and tells us he had rather have been in the times when Temples were less adorned and the Churches more adorned with Heavenly Graces than in those unhappy times when Temples were too much adorned and Churches naked and empty of Spiritual Graces So that when there was but one Temple in a City except two or three and when that was called the Church because it contained the Church it 's evident what the Churches then were V. The ancient Agapae shew how great the Churches then were when as all the Church did feast together and these continued in Tertullian's time in some places at least And several Church-Canons mention them after that And Chrysost saith Homil. de Oportet haeres esse p. mihi 20 21. that in the Primitive times there was a custom that after Sermon and Sacrament they all feasted together in the Church which he highly praiseth But it was not many hundred Churches that feasted in one Room And after he saith The Church is like Noah's Ark but Men come in Wolves and go out Lambs c. shewing that by the Church he meant the Assembly And after All have the same Honour and the same Access till all have communicated and partaked of the same Spiritual Meat The Priests standing expect them all even the poorest Man of all By this he sheweth what Church he meant and how great the Church was Et Serm. 21. pag. 313. Redundat injuria in locum illum Ecclesiam enim totam contemnis Propterea enim Ecclesia dicitur quia communiter omnes accipit This doth not only shew what Church he meaneth but fully confirmeth what I said before that The whole Church was in that place and that the place is therefore called the Church because it commonly receiveth all But note that this was not preach'd at Constantinople but yet at the great Patriarchal Church of Antioch And I
may add as to the former Evidences To. 5. Serm. 52. pag. 705. when he had shewed that in the Church there must be no division he expoundeth it by ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Qui seipsum ab hoc conventu sejunxerit So that the Assembly was the Church and not a thousandth part of the Church only See more of the Churches feasting together in Baronius ad an 57. pag. ed. Plant. 543. to spare me more labour about this VI. Another Evidence of the Limits of the ancient Churches is that which I oft mentioned in the particular Testimonies that every where all the People either chose or expresly consented to their Bishops and they were ordained over them in their sight And this no more could do than could meet in one place and one part of a Church hath no more right to it than all the rest The Consequence is evident And for them that say that it was only the Parishioners of the Cathedral Church that voted I answer Now Cathedrals have no Parishes and heretofore the Cathedral Parish was the whole Church The Testimonies fully prove that it was All the Church or People that were the Bishop's Flock And for some hundreds of Years there were no Parishes in his Diocess but one and therefore no such distinction Pamelius's heap of Testimonies and many more for the matter of fact I have already cited And however some talk now to justifie the contrary course of our times it is so clear and full in Antiquity that the People chose their Bishops at first principally and after secondarily after the Clergy having a Negative Voice with them and their Consent and Testimony ever necessary even for eight hundred Years at least that it would be a needless thing to cite any more Testimonies of it to any versed in the Ancients Papists and Protestants are agreed de facto that so it was See Cyprian lib. 4. Epist 2. of Cornelius lib. 1. Epist 2. of Sabinus and lib. 1. Epist 4. Euseb Hist lib. 6. cap. 29. tells us that Fabian by the People was chosen to succeed Anterus And Cyprian saith it was Traditione Apostolica vid. Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 14. lib. 2. cap. 6. lib. 7. cap. 35. Sozomen lib. 6. cap. 24. lib. 8. cap. 2. of Chrysostom lib. 6. cap. 13. vid. Augustin Epist 110. Theodoret Hist lib. 1. cap. 9. in Epist Concil Nicaeni ad Alexandr The Bloodshed at the Choice of Damasus was one of the first occasions of laying by that custom at Rome And yet though they met not so tumultuously they must consent Leo's Testimony I gave you before with many more Theodor. lib. 5. cap. 9. of Nectarius sheweth that Bishops were then chosen Plebe praesente universa fraternitate as Cyprian speaketh of Sabinus So the Concil Parisien even an 559. But for more plentiful proof of this see M. A. Spalatens de Rep. Eccles lib. 1. cap. 22. n. 10. lib 6. cap. 7. lib. 3. cap. 3 n. 12. c. Blondel de Jure plebis more copiously and de Epis Presbyt Bilson perpet Govern cap. 15. lib. of Christian Subjection oft And it is to be noted that when the People's Confusion had made them seem uncapable any longer to chuse 1. This was long of the Prelates themselves who by that time had so far enlarged their Churches that the People were neither capable of doing their ancient Work and Duty nor yet of being ruled by the Clergy aright 2. And when the People were restrained from the Choice by Meetings and Vote the Magistrates in their stead did undertake the Power 3. And when it fell out of the People's hands into Great Mens the Proud and Covetous who could best seek and make Friends did get the Bishopricks whereupon the Churches were presently changed corrupted and undone 4. And the sense of this moved the few good Bishops that were left to make Canons against this Power and Choice of Princes and great Men decreeing that all Bishops obtruded by them on the Churches should be as none but be avoided and all avoided that did not avoid them And the Roman and Patriarchal party cunningly joyned with these honest Reformers to get the Choice out of the Magistrate's hands that they might get it into their own and so Christ's Church was abused among ambitious Usurpers The Decrees against Magistrates Choice of Bishops you may see Can. Apost 31. Decret 17. q. 7. c. siquis Episc Sept. Synod c. 3. Decret 16. q. 7. Oct. Synod c. 12. Act. 1. c. 22. Decret 16. q. 7. Nicol. 1. Epist 10. Epist 64. with more which you may find cited by Spalatens lib. 6. cap. 7. pag. 675 676 677. And it is to be noted that though still the Clergy had a Negative or first Choice yet when they procured Charles the Great who was to rise by the Papal help to resign and renounce the Magistrates Election he restored the Church to its Ancient Liberties as far as enlarged Dioceses and ambitious Clergy-men would permit it His words are these Sacrorum Canonum non ignari ut in Dei nomine Sancta Ecclesia suo liberius potiretur honore assensum ordini Ecclesiastico praebuimus ut scilicet Episcopi per Electionem CLERI POPULI secundum statuta Canonum de PROPRIA DIOECESI remota personarum munerum acceptione ob vitae meritum sapientiae donum eligantur ut exemplo verbis sibi subjectis usquequaque prodesse valeant Vid. Baron To. 11. n. 26. Decret Dist 63. c Sacrorum Where note that 1. he includeth the People of the whole Diocess 2. And doth this as according to the sacred Canons So that for Men to dream that only the Parishioners of a Cathedral Church which had no proper Parish or the Citizens only were to chuse is to feign that which is contrary to notorious Evidence of Law and Fact as well as of the reason of the thing For where all are the Bishops Flock and chuse as his Flock there all the Flock must chuse and a parcel can claim no privilege above all the rest VII The next Evidence is this In the first Age it is very fairly proved by Doctor Hammond that there were by the Apostles more Bishops and Churches than one in many Cities themselves And if one City had more than one Church and Bishop then much more many distant places in Towns and Countries That one City had more than one he sheweth by the distinction of Jews and Gentiles Churches As Peter was appointed chiefly for the Jews and Paul chiefly for the Gentiles so he sheweth it very probable that at Rome Antioch and other places they had several Churches And thus he reconcileth the great differences about Linus Clemens and Cletus or Anacletus And especially on this reason that they had not the same Language And indeed when in great Cities there are Christians of divers Languages it is necessary that they be of divers Congregations
any Parish or Congregation belonging to them When find you Augustine teaching in any Church but one in Hippo as part of his charge Of Epiphanius I need not speak seeing it is confest that in Cyprus no City had two Churches in his days and that it was their custome to place Bishops in villages as Socrates Sozomen and Nicephorus agree So that the matter of fact is certain except four or five Churches if so many in all the world 400 years after Christ and except but two or three hundred years after Christ you will find no Bishop in any Church but one as part of his own Charge But the consequence inferred hence will be denied because the other Parishes might be taught by Subpresbyters without him Answ But I would ask 1. Whether all the rest of the Parishes were not the Bishops Charge yea part of his Church yea equally with the other part As to what Onuphrius and others say of the stations and the Bishops going from Church to Church 1. It was scarce any where but in Rome 2. It was of later times 3. It was only in the City 4. It was commonly the same auditors that followed him to several Churches And it 's true that other Bishops went to the memorials of the Martyrs oft and had as monuments more Churches than assemblies And it 's true that of later times certain Canons bind the Bishops to visit all their Parishes And the eldest oblige him to visit all the people which sheweth that yet his Docese was not great If he be the Bishop of the Church and the office of a Bishop be to guide the Church in Worship and by Discipline then he is bound to do this to all the Church indeed if you make but a meer Presbyter of him then as many may divide the work between them so each might know his proper part as things stood when Parishes or Chappels were divided But if a Bishop as such be the uniting head as the King of a Kingdom he must be equally related to the whole But if it were not equally who can believe that there was so great a difference in the parts of the same Church as that one parcel of them only should have right to their Bishops presence teaching worshipping and personal guidance and ten twenty an hundred a thousand other parcels have no right at all What! a Bishop of a whole Church not at all obliged to Teach or Guide in personal worshipping any part of that Church but one Some great change was made in Churches before men could arrive at such a conceit Even now among us a Bishop taketh himself by the constraining Law of man which is his Rule to visit his Diocese once in three years I do not mean one Church of fourty or an hundred in his Diocese much less to preach himself usually in those few Towns he comes to but to call his Curate Priests together and to set one of them to preach his Visitation Sermon But where find you this done by three Bishops in the world for 300 years after Christ unless that Archbishops visited the Bishops Churches under them Now they say there have been Bishops in England who have once in three years confirmed some children abroad throughout their Diocese I do not mean one of two hundred but where find you that then the Bishop went out of his City to do this 2. My next question therefore is Whether the Bishops of those times were not at least as conscionable and careful and laborious in their offices as any now are if not much more What! not a Gregory a Basil a Chrysostome an Augustine a Fulgentius a Hillary c. What! not they that preached almost daily They that write so strictly of the labours of the Ministery They that lived so austerely and favoured not the flesh that speak so tenderly of the worth of souls And would all these think you undertake to be Bishops of a whole Church and yet so leave the whole work upon others as never to come among them and teach them and examine them nor give them the Sacrament in all the Parishes of the Diocese save one This is not credible If you say that in Alexandria it was certainly so that distinct congregations were committed to the Presbyters I answer 1. Yet so as that they might any part of them as living in the same city come and hear the Bishop when they would 2. They might communicate with him per vices if they would 3. They were all bound to do so at the great festivals of the year 4. They were all personally governed by the discipline of the Bishop and Presbyters conjunct in Council But of this next XXI Another evidence is that the whole Plebs or people of the Bishops charge till Churches were setled under Presbyters far off in the countreys were bound by the Canons to come to the Cathedral Church and communicate with the Bishop at Easter Whitsuntide and some other such festivals even after they were distinguished into several Auditories and Communicating Assemblies under Presbyters which I have before proved from the particular Canons which certainly proveth that the Dioceses were no more than could assemble in one place XXII Another evidence is that Presbyters did but rarely preach in the two or three first ages except in Alexandria or in some few Churches which had got some extraordinary men Chrysostome's preaching at Antioch Augustin's at Hippo while they were but Presbyters are noted as unusual things And it is said of Augustine as forecited that it being not usual in other Churches for the Presbyters to preach in the Bishops presence the example of that Church by the humility of the honest Bishop who preferred his abler Presbyter before himself did lead many other Churches into the same practice Spalatensis and many others have given large proofs that the Bishops and not the Presbyters were the ordinary preachers in their Church * Filesacus saith De Episcop authorit cap. 15. Sect. 1. pag. 344. Episcopos consuevisse ex ambone verba facere refert Concil Lateran sub Martino Concil Trull c. 33. Permissum deinde Presbyteris quanquam non passim nec in quibuslibet ecclesiis Diaconis olim id concessum sed raro p. 351. ait Balsamon juris Graeco-Romani li. 2. cap. 9. in Alexii Comneni Bullis Populum docere solis est datum Episcopis magnae ecclâsiae Doctores Patriarchae jure docent These were like our Canons as he shews at large and this was in later ages when a Bishop might teach per alium And p. 351 352. Concil Trull c. 64. docet ex Greg. Nazianz. solis Episcopis convenire concionari sanctas scripturas interpretari Presbyteris vero non nisi Episcoporum concessione Of the Bishops teaching see the numerous citations in Filesacus cap. 1. And if any be stumbled at the name Presbyteri Parochiani usual in the Councils and Fathers as if they were Countrey Presbyters who preached then in
other Churches I have before cited a Canon which gave leave to Presbyters to preach in the countrey villages intimating it was rare heretofore 2. Filesacus saith ibid. p. 562 563. Sed ut quod res est libere eloquar illo aevo anteriore cum Parochiae vox vulgo etiam pro Dioecesi usurpatur that is for all the Bishops Charge credo Presbyteros Parochianos dictos fuisse non aliter ac siquis Dioecesanos pronunciaret hoc est In hac Parochia seu Dioecesi ordinatos titulatos But surely whilst Presbyters rarely preached there were either Churches that had no preaching which cannot be proved or else few Assemblies that had not Bishops Obj. But then you make Lay Elders of the Presbyters Ans They were the abler sort of Christians ordained to the same Ministerial or Sacerdotal Office as all true Ministers are But few of them being Learned men and able to make long Sermons were imployed only as the Bishops assistants as elders are among the Presbyterians who if they would but ordain those Elders and let them have power over the word and Sacraments though only to exercise it under the Bishops or chief Pastors guidance when there was cause they would come nearest to the ancient use XXIII And it seemeth to me an evidence that the Churches then were usually but as narrow as I assert that the Presbyters were to abide with the Bishop and attend him in his City Church For if you suppose them able to Teach or guide a flock themselves as some were such as Augustine Macarius Ephrem Syrus Tertullian c. it is scarce credible to me that the Bishop would suffer such worthy persons to sit among his Auditors when there were many countrey congregations that needed their help For that the Church was so supplied with Preachers as that besides all these Presbyters in the Bishops Church there were enow for all the rest of the countrey Parishes as now is contrary to all the intimations of Church-History And therefore when we read of so many Presbyters with the Bishop before we read of many or scarce any elsewhere surely there were no people that needed them XXIV And yet though great Cities had many with the Bishop I may add that the paucity of Presbyters under the generality of Bishops sheweth that their Dioceses then were but like Parish Churches with their Chappels Or else Aurelius and the other Bishops in the Carthage Council needed not have been in doubt whether those Bishops that had but one or two Presbyters should have one taken from them to make a Bishop of which was yet affirmatively decreed because there may be more found fit to make Presbyters of where it 's hard to find any fit to be Bishops I will speak it in the words of the learned Bishop Bilsons Perpet Govern c. 13. p. 256. In greater Churches they had great numbers of Presbyters In smaller they had often two somewhere one and sometimes none And yet for all this defect of Presbyters the Bishops then did not refrain to impose hands without them The number of Presbyters in many places were two in a Church as Ambrose writeth on 1 Tim. 3. sometimes but one In the third Council Carthag when it was agreed that the Primate of that City might take the Presbyters of every Diocese and Ordain them Bishops for such places as desired them though the Bishop under whom the Presbyter before lived were unwilling to spare him Posthumianus a Bishop demanded what if a Bishop have but one only Presbyter must that one be taken from him Aurelius the Bishop of Carthage answered One Bishop may Ordain many Presbyters but a Presbyter fit for a Bishoprick is not easily found wherefore if a man have but one only Presbyter and fit for the room of a Bishop he ought to yield that one to be Ordained Posthumianus replied Then if another Bishop have a number of Clerks that others store should relieve him Aurelius answered Surely as you helped another Church so he that hath many Clerks shall be driven to spare you one of them to be ordained by you A Diocese such as is intimated here we do not strive against XXIV Another evidence is that when ever we read of persecution turning the Christians out of their Churches you ever find them gathered into one Congregation when they could have leisure and place to meet in and usually a Bishop with them unless he were banished imprisoned or martyred and then some Presbyter supplied the place or unless they were scattered into many little parcels And you find no talk of the persecution of multitudes of Countrey Presbyters afar off but of the Bishop with his City Presbyters and Church To which add that it was One Church still which rejected obtruded Bishops and refused to obey the Emperour who imposed them All this is manifest in Gregory Neocaesar his flight with Musonius and the state of his Church In the Case of Basil and of Lucius the obtruded Bishop at Alexandria and in the Case of Antioch before described and of Rome it self It 's tedious to cite numerous testimonies in a well known case If Alexandria was in such a case or near it I hope you will doubt of no other Churches And that with this you may see what Conventicles the Christians kept when the Emperours forbad them and how resolutely the Bishops preached when the Emperours silenced them I will recite the words of Baronius himself and in him of Dionysius Alexandr apud Euseb lib. 7. c. 10. c. 17. and Cyprian ep 5. c. in Baron ad an 57. p. 542. that those who cry out against Preaching and Conventicles when they are but strong enough to drive others out of the Temples may better understand themselves Siquando c. If at any time so vehement a persecution did arise that the Christians by the Emperours edicts were utterly excluded from the Churches and assemblies notwithstanding little regarding such things they forbore not to come together in One in holy assemblies whithersoever there was opportunity This Dionys Alexand. Bishop witnesseth writing to Germanus when he mentioneth the Edicts of Valerian forbidding the Assemblies But we by Gods assistance have not abstained from our accustomed Assemblies celebrated among our selves Yea I my self did drive on certain brethren to keep the assemblies diligently as if I had converst among them And he writeth the same also to Hierax when he was banished When we were persecuted by all and put to death we celebrated the Feast with joyful minds and any place appointed us for several sorts of sufferings as the woods the desert solitudes the tossed ships the common Innes the horrid prison did seem fit to us in which we might keep our solemn Assemblies with the greatest joy That they held their Assemblies and offered sacrifice usually when it was permitted them in the prisons Cyprian witnesseth But the Acts of the holy Martyrs do fullier signifie it especially those most faithful
Pastor be ready to give an account of his Ministry and to answer any thing that shall be alledged against him And that the vote of the Synod obligeth all against unnecessary singularity 10. We refuse not that one in every such Synod be the moderator and if as of old every City ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or Corporation had a Bishop so if but every Corporation or market Town or every circuit that hath as many Communicanââ as can know one another by neighbourhood and some conversation and sometimes assembling like a great Parish with many Chappels had but so much power as is essential to a true particular Pastor and Church yea or but the power that a free Tutor Philosopher or Physician hath to manage his office by his skill and not as an Apothecary or meer executor of a strangers dictates we should quietly submit 11. And as we refuse not such Bishops even durante vita capacitate in every Church or City that is Corporation so if it please either the King or the Churches by his permission to give one grave and able man a general care of many Churches as even the Scots superintendents had at their reformation as Spotswood of Lothian c. not by violence to silence and oppress but by meer Pastoral power and only such as the Apostles themselves used to instruct junior Pastors to reprove admonish c. we resist not And so if Godly Diocesans will become Arch-bishops only of this sort and promote oâr work instead of hindering it we shall submit though we cannot Swear approbation it being a thing that Christian Ministers may doubt of and no Article of our Creed 12. And if the King do cumulate wealth and honour on them and give them their place in Parliaments to keep the Clergy from contempt yea or trust any of them under him as Magistrates with the Sword whether we like it or not we shall peaceably submit and obey them as Magistrates 13. And if for order sake these Diocesans should have a negative voice unless in cases of forfeiture or necessity in the ordination of Ministers to the Church universal not taking away the power of particular Churches to choose or at least freely consent or dissent as to the fixing of Pastors over themselves we would submit to all this for common peace Specially if the Magistrate only choose men to Benefices and Magistracies and none had the Pastoral power of the Keyes but by the Election of the Clergy and the peoples consent which was the judgment and practice of the universal Church from the beginning of Episcopacy till of late 14. And lastly we hold the Magistrate the only Governour by the Sword as well of Pastors as of Physicians and all others And though he may not take the work of our proper calling out of our hands no more than the Physicians yet he may by justice and discretion punish us for male-administration and drive us to our duty though not hinder us from it And we consent to do all under his Government Judge now whether we set up Popes or Tyrants By all this it is apparent that it is none of the designe of this Treatise to overthrow or weaken the Church of England but to strengthen and secure it against all its notorious dangers 1. By reforming those things which else undoubtedly will cause a succession of dissenters in all generations though all we the present Nonconformists are quickly like to be past troubling them or being troubled by them even of themselves many will turne upon the same reasons which have convinced us 2. By uniting all Protestants and turning their odious wrath and contentions into a reverence of their Pastors and into mutual Love and help This Treatise being hastened in three presses since Mr. Dodwel sent me his Letter that required it I have not time to gather the Printers Errata but must leave them to the discretion of the Reader Only for English Prelacy before the first Chapter and in many other places should be The described Prelacy I will end with the two following Testimonies One ad rem the other ad hominem The Lord pity his Ship that is endangered by the Pilots October 14. 1680 Richard Baxter Justin Martyr's Apolog. We had rather die for the confession of one Faith then either lie or deceive them that examine us Otherwise we might readily use that Common saying my Tongue is sworn my mind is unsworn vid. Rob. Abbot old way p. 51. Thorndike of forbearance of Penalties It is to no purpose to talk of reformation in the Church unto regular Government without restoring the Liberty of choosing Bishops and the Priviledge of Injoying them to the Synods Clergy and people of each Diocess So evident is the right of Synods Clergy and people in the making of this of whom they consist and by whom they are to be governed that I need make no other reason of the neglect of Episcopacy than the neglect of it THE CONTENTS PART I. Chap. 1. THe Reasons of this Writing Chap. 2. The English Diocesane Prelacy and Church Government truly described that it may be known what it is which we dissent from Chap. 3. Our judgement if the History of the ancient Church Government and of the rise of the Diocesane Prelacy Chap. 4. The judgement of those Non Conformists now silenced who 1660 addressed themselves to King Charles II. for the matter in Church-Government What they then offered and what those of the Authers mind now hold as to the Right of what is before but Historically related Chap. 5. Concerning the several Writers on this Controversie wherein there are sufficient animadversions on some and sufficient Confutations of the Cheif who have written for the Prelacy which we dissent from As 1. Whitgift 2. Faravia 3. Bilson 4. Hooker 5. Bishop Downams Defence 6. Bishop Hall 7. Petavius 8. Bish Andrews 9 Bish Usher in some passages 10. Of the Dispute at the Isle of Wight 11. John Forbes 12. The two Books of the Bohemian Discipline consented to 13. Grotius applauded 14. J. D. 15. M A. de Dom. Spalatensis considered and much of him approved 16. Doctor Hammond answered viz. his Annotations his Dissertat against Blondel c. who have written against Prelacy Chap. 6. It is not pleasing to God that Cities only should have Bishops and Churches with the Territories Chap. 7. The Definition and Reasons of a Diocesan Church considered and confuted Chap. 8. Whether the Infidel Territories or Citizens are part of a Diocesane Church Chap. 9. Whether converting a Diocess give right to their Converter to be their Bishop and Ruler Chap. 10. That a particular Church of the first or lowest order must consist of neighbour Christians associated for personal Communion in local presence in holy worship and Conversation and not of Strangers so remote as have only an internal heart Communion or an external Communion by the Mediation of others Chap. 11. That a Bishop or Pastor of a Particular Church
forbear pronouncing of all Traytors Murderers Adulterers Perjured Atheists c. that never profest Repentance at their Burial that God hath of his mercy taken to himself the soul of this our dear brother except the unbaptized c. aforesaid And note 1. that the Parish Priest hath no power to do these things either by himself or in conjunction with the Bishop or any other 2. And that there is not one Suffragan Bishop or Chorepiscopus in England under the 26 Bishops to do any part of their work in these 97025 Parishes CHAP. III. Our Judgment of the History of the Antient Church-Government and of the rise of the Diocesan Prelacy I Shall anon shew more fully that there are two things especially in which we think the very Species of our Diocesan Prelacy to be altered from the antient Episcopacy One is in the Extent of their Office as to their subject Charge a Bishop infimae speciei of the lowest species having then but One Church and now a Bishop infimae speciei having many hundred Churches made into one or nullified to make One 2. In the Work of their Office which was then purely Spiritual or Pastoral and is now mixt of Magistratical and Ministerial exercised by mixed Officers in Courts much like to Civil Judicatures The History of their rise I suppose is this 1. Christ made a difference among his Ministers himself while he chose twelve to be Apostles and special Witnesses oâ his Doctrine Life and Resurrection and Ascension and to be the Founders of his Church and the Publishers of his Gospel abroad the World 2. As these Apostles preached the Gospel themselves and planted Churches so did many others as their helpers partly the seventy sent by Christ and partly called by the Apostles themselves And all these exercised indefinitely a preparing Ministry before particular Churches were gathered abroad the World and afterwards went on in gathering and calling more 3. Besides this preparing unfixed Ministration the same Apostles also placed by the peoples consent particular fixed Ministers over all the several Churches which they gathered 4. These fixed Ministers as such they named indifferently Bishops Elders Pastors and Teachers Whereas those of the same Office in general yet unfixed are called either by the General name of Christ's Ministers or Stewards of his Mysteries And in regard of their special works some were called Apostles some Prophets and some Evangelists 5. These Apostles though unfixed and having an Indefinite charge yet went not all one way but as God's Spirit and prudence guided them they dispersed themselves into several parts of the World 6. But as they did many of them first stay long at Jerusalem so afterward in planting and setling Churches they sometimes stayed several months or years in one place and then went to another And so did the Evangelists or Indefinite Assistants whom they sent forth on the same work 7. While they stayed in these newly planted Churches they were themselves the chief Guides of the People And also of their fixed Bishops 8. This abode in settling the particular Churches and their particular Bishops or Elders occasioned Historians afterward to call both Apostles and Evangelists such as Timothy Titus Silas Silvanus Luke Apollo c. the Bishops of those Churches though they were not such as the fixed Bishops were who undertook a special Charge and care of one particular Church alone or above all other Churches 9. On this account the same Apostle is said to be the first Bishop of many Churches as Peter of Antioch and Rome Paul of Corinth Ephesus Philippi c. When indeed the Apostles were the particular fixed Bishops of no Churches but the Bishops equally of many as a sort of unfixed Episcopacy is included in Apostleship 10. On this account also it is that Timothy is said to be Bishop of Ephesus because he was left there for a time to settle that and other Churches of Asia near it as an Assistant of the Apostles And so Titus is called the Bishop of Crete because he staid in that Island which was said to have an hundred Cities on this work which belonged not to a particular Bishop but to the more indefinite Ministry 11. How many such fixed Bishops Elders Pastors or Teachers each particular Church must have the Apostles never determined by a Law But did de facto settle them according to the number of souls and store of qualified persons In some Churches it is possible there might be but one with Deacons In others it is evident that there were many as at Jerusalem Corinth c. 12. The particular Churches which were the charge of these fixed Bishops or Elders were Societies of Christians conjoyned for Personal Communion in God's Worship and mutual assistance in holy living And though for want of convenient room or liberty they did not always meet all in the same place yet were they ordinarily no more than could meet in one place when they had liberty and never more than could hold personal Communion if not at once yet at several times in publick worship As it is now in those places where one part of the Family goeth to Church one part of the day and another on the other part And those by-Meetings which any had that came not constantly to the publick Assemblies were but as our House-Meetings or Chapel-Meetings but never as another Church Nor were their Churches more numerous than our Parishes nor near so great 13. At the first they had no Consecrated nor Separated places for their Church-Meetings but Houses or Fields as necessity and opportunity directed them But as soon as they could even nature taught them to observe the same appointed and stated places for such Assemblies Which as soon as the Churches had peace and settlement they appropriated to those sacred uses only though they had not yet the shape or name of Temples 14. Though the Pastors of the Church were all of one Office now called Order being all subordinate Ministers of Christ in the Prophetical Priestly and Regal parts of his Office in the Power and Duty of Teaching Worshiping and Government yet was the disparity of Age Grace and Guifts to be observed among them and the younger Pastors as well as people owed a meet reverence and submission to the Elder and the weaker to the stronger who had notoriously more of God's Grace and Guifts So that in a Church where there were many Pastors it was not unlawful nor unnecessary to acknowledge this disparity and for the younger and weaker to submit much to the judgment of the elder and more able 15. While they kept only to the exercise of the meer Pastoral work of Teaching and Worshiping and that Government which belongeth hereunto they had little temptation comparatively to strive for a preeminence in Rule or for a Negative Voice But aliene or accidental work did further that as followeth 16. The Apostles did reprove those Worldly contentious and uncharitable Christians who went to Law before
than could meet in one Assembly and had allowance to Communicate in their sub-assemblies yet were they appointed on certain great and solemn Festivals to Communicate all with the Bishops at the chief City Church which sheweth that the sub-assemblies then were few and small 39. Thus was the Apostles Order by degrees subverted and whereas they settled distinct Churches with their distinct Bishops no Bishop having two Churches under him that had not also their proper Bishop now One Church was made of many without many Bishops sub-Presbyters first in the same Church being introduced at last sub-Churches also were set up And when they should have done as we do with Bees let every new Swarm have a new Hive and should have multiplyed Bishops and Churches homogeneal as sufficient numbers of Converts came in instead of this the City Bishops kept all under them as if they had been still one Church yet not as Archbishops that have Bishops under them and kept their sub-Presbyters as their Curates to officiate in the several Churches that had all no Bishops but One. 40. The causes of this were apparently most of the same which are mentioned before for the making of sub-Presbyters Especially 1. The selfishness of the Bishops who were loth to let go any of the people from under their superiority Because it was more honour to rule many than one single Congregation and he was a greater man that had many sub-Presbyters and whole Assemblies at his command than he that had not And also many afforded greater maintenance than a few And 2. the same Reasons that made men at first set up one Presbyter as Bishop over the rest to avoid Divisions and to determine Arbitrations did now seem strong to them for the keeping up the Authority of the City Bishop over the sub-Assemblies round about them 3. And Cities only having been possessed of Bishops for many Years if not Ages before there were Christians enow to make up Country Churches both the Bishops and the City Inhabitants easily overlooking the Reason of it took this for their Prerogative and did plead Prescription As if Schools being planted only in Cities first the Cities and Schoolmasters should thence plead that none must be setled in Country Villages but what are ruled by the City School-Masters And thus the Cities being far the strongest and the Interest of the Citizens and Bishops in point of honour being conjunct and none being capable of a Country charge but such as the City Bishops at first Ordained to it because then there were no other Bishops without resistance it came to pass that both Churches and Presbyters were subjected to the City Bishops 4. And it greatly advanced this design that the Churches which were planted in the Roman Empire did seek to participate of all secular honour that belonged to the place of their Residence And as Dr. Hammond hath largely opened though not well justified did form themselves according to the Model of the Civil Government so that those Cities that had the Presidents or chief Civil Rulers and Judicatures in them did plead a right of having also the chief Bishops and Ecclesiastical Judicatures And thus not only Cities ruled the Country Villages but in time the distinct powers and pre-eminences of Archbishops Metropolitans Primates Patriarchs and the Roman chief Patriarch or Pope came up And the Pagan Common-wealth and Christian Church within the Roman Empire and the neighbouring parts that were influenced by them had a great resemblance 41. But that which most notably set up this exsort swelling and degenerate Prelacy was the mistaken zeal of Constantine together with his Policy and the ambition of Christians and Bishops that were gratified by it For 1. As Constantine perceived that it was the Christians that were his surest strength and when the Heathen Soldiers turned from one Emperour to another as they were tempted he knew that if he only did own the Christians they would unanimously own him and be constant to him so also his Judgment and Zeal for Christianity did concur with his Interest and Policy And as all the Secular and Military Rulers depended on him for honour and power throughout the Roman world he thought it not seemly to give the chief Christians who were the Bishops less honour than he did to the Heathens and to common men Nor did he think meet to deny to the Christian Churches such priviledges as might somewhat set them higher than his other subjects 2. And the Bishops and Christians coming from under long scorn and contempt and coming newly from under the cruel Persecution of Dioclesian and affrighted anew by Maxentius and Licenius they were not only glad to be now honoured and advanced but greatly lifted up with such a sudden wonderous change as to be brought from scorn and cruel torments to be set up above all others As we should have been had we been in their case and it 's like should no more have feared the ill consequents of too much exaltation than they did 3. And the Christian people thought that the exaltation of their Bishops was the honour and exaltation of their Religion it self as well as of their persons 42. Whereas as is aforesaid the Christians had commonly stated the power of Arbitrating all their Civil differences in the Bishop alone when the Apostle intimated that any Wise man among them as such was fit for that business it grew presently to be accounted a heynous crime or scandal for any Christians to go to Law before the Civil Magistrate And Constantine finding them in possession of this custom did by his Edict confirm it and enlarge it decreeing that all Bishops should be Judges of all the Christians causes by consent and that no Civil Judge or Magistrate should compel any Christian to his bar Insomuch that in Theodosius his days when one of Ambrose his Presbyters had a cause to be tryed he denyed himself to be a Christian that he might have it decided by the Civil Magistrate that was Christian also So that even Christian Magistrates might not judge unwilling Christians but the Bishops only Yet had not the Bishops then the power of the Sword but decided all as Arbitrators and enforced their Sentences with rigorous penances and Church-censures By which means 1. many the more turned Christians without the Faith and Holiness of Christians that they might both partake of the Christians honour and immunities and specially that they might be free from corporal penalties for their crimes And who would not do so if it were now our case 2. And by this means the rigorous penalties of the Church by penances were the more easily submitted to as being more easie than corporal pains and mulcts And when thus by the Laws and countenance of so great an Emperour the Bishops were made the Judges of all that were Christians at present and all that would turn Christians that desired it it is easie to understand 1. what a Lordship they must needs
have as to the kind of power 2. How their Office must degenerate from purely spiritual into secular or mixt 3. And how numerous their Flocks and large their Provinces would soon be And here you must note these things 1. That the Bishop of every Church was made Judge of these causes not alone by himself but with his Presbyters or Clergy who judged with him 2. That yet this power was not then taken to be any essential or integral part at all of the Pastoral Office but an Accidental work which Lay-men might do as well as Pastors and that it was committed to the Bishop only as the best able for Arbitration because of his abilities and interest and that as a matter of meer convenience and also for the honour of his place 3. That therefore this Judging power for ending strife and differences might be alienated from the Clergy and done by Lay-men where there was cause 4. And that the Bishop had so much more power than the Presbyters that he could commit it from them to Lay-men All this that one instance of Silvanus in Socrates lib. 7. cap. 37. and in Hanmer cap. 36. whose words were thus Silvanus also no less expressed in his other acts and dealings the good motion of his Godly mind For when he perceived that the Clergy respected nothing but gain in deciding the Controversies of their Clients O woful Clergy he thenceforth suffered none of the Clergy to be judge but took the supplications and requests of suiters and appointed One of the Laity whom for certain he knew to be a just and godly man and gave him the hearing of their causes and so ended quietly all contentions and quarrels And the likeliest way it was You see here 1. that when Princes will needs make the Clergy Magistrates to honour them the wise and good men of the Clergy will return such power to the Laity as usually fitter for it 2. And that it is no wonder that when Law-business is cast upon the Clergy if they grow worse than Lawyers in covetousness and injustice 3. And yet this was not a making Lay-men to be Chancellors that had the power of the Keys For Silvanus did only appoint Lay-men to do Lay-mens work to arbitrate differences but not to excommunicate nor to judge men to excommunication as they do now 4. And this was not a making of Ecclesiastical Elders that were not Pastors and therefore it is no countenance for such but it was a prudent casting back that work on the Laity which good Emperours had in imprudent piety cast upon the Clergy that each might do his proper work 5. But this was but one good Bishop that was so wise and honest and therefore it proved no general reformation This Judicial power went so far and took up so much of the Clergies time that the Synod Taraconens was after this put to Decree Can. 4. that the Clergy should not judge Causes on the Lords day and Can. 10. that no Bishop or Clergy-man should take rewards or bribes for Judgments And the Canons so deterred Christians from seeking Justice from the Civil Judicatures that they had few but Heathens to be Judges of Yea the Christians thought so hardly of the Judges themselves for punishing men by the Sword when the Bishops even for murder it self did punish them but with Penance that they doubted sometime whether those Christians that exercised Magistracy or Civil Judgment after Baptisme were not therefore to be taken for sinners as is visible in Innocent 1. his Epist to Epist 3. to Exuper Tholesan cap. 3. in Crab. Tom. 1. p. 459. And before in Silvester's Concil Rom. apud Crab Vol. 1. p. 280. Can. 16. it is Decreed Nemo Clericus vel Diaconus aut Presbyter propter causam suam quamlibet intret in curia quum omnis curia à cruore dicitur immolatio simulachrorum est Quod siquis Clericus in curiam introicrit anathema suscipiat nunquam rediens ad matrem Ecclesiam A Communione autem non privatur propter tempus turbidum And Constantine is said to be a Subscriber with 284 Bishops 45 Presbyters and 5 Deacons And in former Counc sub Silvest Nullum Clericum ante judicem stare licet I know that Duarenus and Grotius describe not the Bishops power as so large as the Canonists do But Duarenus confesseth that Theodosius made a Law that lites omnes controversiae forenses ad judicium Ecclesiae remitterentur si alter uter litigatorum id postularet That all strifes and controversies forensick should be remitted to the judgment of the Church if either of the contenders required it And that Charles the Great renewed and confirmed the same Law Duar. lib. 1. p. 8. And Grotius de Imper. sum pol. p. 236. saith This Jurisdiction by consent the Bishops received from Constantine with so great power that it was not lawful further to handle any business which the Bishops sentence had decided that is saith he remotâ appellatione And he there sheweth that three sorts of Jurisdiction were by the Emperours given to the Bishops 1. Jure ordinario and so they judged of all matters of Religion and which the Canons reached which went very far in heinous crimes 2. Ex consensu pârtium when the parties chose the Bishop for their Judge Vid. Concil Chalced. c. 9. 3. Ex delegatione which yet went further And even to the Jews such kind of power had been granted But of this whole matter of the Rise of such Prelacy their Courts and power Pardre Paulus hath spoken so well and truly in his Histor Concil Trident. pag. 330 331 c. that I would intreat the Reader to turn to it and peruse it as that which plainly speaketh our judgment of the History now in question Read also his History of Benefices 43. The countenance of the Emperour with these honours and immunities having brought the World into the Church or filled the Churches with Carnal temporizers the numbers were now so great that quickly the great Cities had many Parish Churches and the Country Villages about had some so that now about 400 or 500 Years after Christ most Bishops of great Cities had more Churches than one even several sub Assemblies and Altars as dependant on their Mother Church 44. Yet were their Diocesses which at first were called Parishes somewhat bounded by the Canon and Edicts which decreed that every City where there were Christians enow to make a Church should have a Bishop of their own and that no Bishop except two who bordered one on Scithia a rude unconverted Countrey and the other on the like case of which more in due place 45. And then every oppidum or populous Town like our Market-Towns and Corporations was called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a City and not only a few among many that have that name by priviledge as it is in England now So that even at this height of Prelacy about 500 600 or 700 Years after Christ they
so shamefully enumerate and declaim against So that it was said that the World groaned to find it self turned Arian And their fewds and inhumane contentions were so many and odious that it is a shame to read them Multitudes of Cities had Bishops set up against Bishops and some Cities had more than two or three The people reviling and hating each other and sometime fighting tumultuously unto blood for their several Prelates The Christian World was made as a Cockpit and Christian Religion made a scorn by the Contentions of the Bishops Constantines wisdom conscience and interest engaged him to use all his skil his kindness and his power to reconcile them And if he had not done what he did how unspeakably wretched would their odious contentions have rendered them And yet he professeth his heart almost broken by their dissensions and while he chid them bitterly and exhorted them kindly he could not prevail His Sons that succeeded him laboured to unite the Bishops though in different ways and could not do it Jovianus the little time he reigned declared his hatred of their contentions and how much he loved a peaceable man but that did not cure them even when they came new from under a Julian I will look no lower to the more degenerate Prelacy but recite the doleful words of Eusebius even of those that were not at the worst and came but newly from under the persecutions of former Emperours when they had but a little prosperity immediately before Dioclesians persecution they are thus described How great and what manner of glory and liberty the doctrine of piety due to Almighty God preached in the World by Christ hath obtained before the persecution of our time among all mortal men both Grecians and Barbarians it requireth more labour to declare c. The clemency of the Emperours when Heathen towards the Christians was so increased to whom also they committed the Government of the Gentiles And for the great favour they bare to our Doctrine they granted liberty and security to the Professors of Christianity What shall I say of them that in the very Palace of the Emperours and in the presence of Princes lived most familiarly which esteemed of their Ministers so highly that they granted them in their presence freely to deal in matters of Religion both by word and deed together with their wives and children and servants And thus one might then have seen the Bishops of all Churches in great reverence and favour among all sorts of men and with all Magistrates Who can worthily describe those innumerable heaps and flocking multitudes throughout all Cities and famous Assemblies frequenting the places dedicated to prayer Because of which circumstances they not contented with the old and ancient buildings which could not receive them have throughout all Cities builded them from the Foundation wide and ample Churches These things thus prevailed in process of time and daily increased far and nigh so that no malice could intercept no spiteful fiend bewitch no wight with cunning at all hinder it as long as the Divine and heavenly hand of God upheld and visited his People whom as yet he worthily accepted But after that our affairs through too much liberty ease and security degenerated from the Natural rule of piety and after that one pursued another with open contumely and hatred and when that we impugned our selves by no other than our selves with the armour of spite and sharp spears of approbrious words so that Bishops against Bishops and People against People raised sedition last of all when that cursed hypocrisie and dissimulation had swam even to the brim of malice The heavy hand of Gods high judgment after his wonted manner whilest as yet the Ecclesiastical Societies assembled themselves nevertheless began softly by little and little to visit us so that the persecution that was raised against us took first his Original from the Brethren that were under Banner in the Camp When as we were touched with no sense thereof nor went about so pacific God we heaped sin upon sin thinking like careless Epicures that God neither cared nor would visit our sins And they which seemed our Shepherds Laying aside the rule of piety practised contention and schism among themselves and whilst they aggravated these things that is contentious threatnings mutual hatred and enmity and every one proceeded in Ambition much like Tyranny it self then I say then did the Lord make the daughter of Zion obscure and overthrew from above the glory of Israel c. c. 2. We saw with our eyes the Oratories thrown down to the ground the foundations digged up the holy Scriptures burned to ashes in the open Market-place and the Pastors of the Churches some shamefully hid themselves Yet is it not our drift to describe the bitter calamities of these men which at length they suffered nor to record their dissension and insolency practised among themselves before the persecution c. Note that all this was before Arius his Heresie even before Dioclesians cruelties but not before the beginning of Church-Tyranny and ambition as is said But after this alas how much greater were their enormities and dissentions when their Tyranny was much encreased It would grieve any sober Christian to read how the Christian World hath been tossed up and down and the people distracted and Princes disturbed and dethroned and Heresies fomented and horrid Persecutions and bloodshed caused by the pride and contentiousness of Prelates And most of all this in prosecution of that Controversie which Christ decided so long ago viz. Who should be greatest It was not Religion saith Socrates l. 5. c. 22. that the two Arian Sects of Marinus and Agapius was about but Primacy They strove which of them should be the chief wherefore many Clergy-men under the jurisdiction of these Bishops perceiving the ambition the rancour and malice of these proud Prelates forsook them c. Macedonius at Constantinople was so Tyrannical that as he came in by cruelty so he caused more by presumptuous removal of the bones of Constantine to another Church that he might pull down that and this without Constantius the Emperours knowledge where the people in Factions fought it out till the Church and Streets were full of Carkasses and streams of blood saith Socrates The same man set four Companies of Souldiers on the Novations in Paphlagonia till he enraged the people with Clubs and Bills to kill them all And he was so Tyrannical in forcing Conformity that he not only forced men to the Sacrament but gagged their mouths and popt it in Nor was this only the vice of the Heterodox but the Orthodox as is aforesaid And as the French and German Bishops aforesaid did against the Priscillinaists so for their own interest against one another they flattered and restlesly instigated the Civil power even Uusurpers to execute their Wills and favoured that power that most favoured them When the foresaid Maximus had killed Gratian and reigned in France
baptizing 2. and then to teach and guide them Yet all are not called equally to the exercise of all these parts But some were by the Apostles and the Holy Ghost indefinitely employed in an unfixed course in converting men and gathering Churches yet officiating also in gathered Churches where they came And others were fixed in the stated relation of Pastors to particular gathered Churches to teach and rule them and worship among them yet so as also to Preach for the conversion of unbelievers as far as they had ability and opportunity 21. The unfixed Officers were called Ministers in General and Stewards of God's Mysteries and Evangelists But the fixed Officers were also especially called Bishops Pastors and Elders Though sometime âarely the other also had such Titles because of their doing the same work transiently in the Churches where they came 22. They that were unfixed Preachers or Evangelists had not that special and particular Charge of all the souls in particular Churches and in some one Church above all the rest as fixed Bishops or Pastors have But they had a greater Obligation than these Bishops to preach to Infidels because it was their ordinary chief work 23. The Pastors of particular Churches had such a Charge of those particular Flocks above all other Flocks materially as that they were not obliged equally to do the same for others as they did for them Though yet when they had a particular call they might transiently or occasionally perform the work of the Pastoral Office to other Churches 24. This relation to their particular Flock was not such as disobliged them from their higher regard of the Universal Church For our relation to that is stricter and more indissoluble than to any particular Church And we must always finally prefer the Church Universal though materially we are to labour in our particular Churches principally and sometimes only because by such Order the Church Universal is best edified 25. The Apostles usually but not only planted Churches in great Cities rather than in Country Villages 26. This was not that hereby they might oblige others to confine Churches to Cities only nor because they had any special honour for a City but because they were the places of greatest ââââcourse and had best opportunity for Assemblies and most materials to work upon 27. Neither the Apostles nor others for some Ages after Christ did divide the Countries about such Cities and assign part of theâ to be the Diocess of one Bishop and the other part to the Bishop of the next adjoyning City Nor was there any bounding of Parishes or Diocess nor any determination to which Bishop such and such ground or Villages of unconverted Infidels did belong Only as natural prudence guided them and the spirit of God they so dispersed themselves that none might hinder another in his work but as most tended to the propagation and orderly governing of the Churches 28. Therefore no City Bishop had such a Particular Charge of the souls of all the individual Infidels either in his City or the Country round about him which some feign to have been his Diocess as he had of the souls of the Church which he was Pastor of Though he was bound to do all that he could to convert all as he had opportunity he stood not in any Pastoral relation to this or that individual Infidel as he did to all the individual Christians of his charge Ignatius requireth the Bishop to know all his Flock by name and enquire after them even the servants but not so of all Infidels in his City or Circuit 29. No man was therefore the Pastor of any Christians in a particular Church relation meerly because he converted them Nor was there ever any Law made by Christ or his Apostles that all should be members of that particular Church whose Overseer did convert them much less that at a distance they should be the members of his Episcopal charge though in another Church 30. The Apostles setled in every particular Church one or more with the Pastoral power of the Keys to teach and govern that Church and to lead them in publick worship And every such Body should still have one or more Pastors with such power And no Pastor or Bishop should have more particular Churches under his special immediate Charge than one unless as an Archbishop who hath Bishops in those particular Churches under him 31. A particular Church of Christ's Institution by his Apostles is A sacrrd Society consisting of one or more Pastors and a capable number of Christian Neighbours consociate by Christs appointment and their own consent for personal communion in God's publick worship and in holy living In this definition 1. The Genus is a sacred Society so called 1. to distinguish it from a meer community or unbodied company of Christians 2. and to distinguish it from Civil and prophane Societies For the Genus is subalternate and the species of a superiour Genus 2. The constitutive parts are Pastor and People 3. I say Pastors as distinguishing it from all other societies as headed by other Officers or Rulers As Kingdoms by Kings Colleges by their Governours Schools by School-masters Families by Parents c. For Societies are specified by their Governours 4. I say one or more because it is the Office in some person that is the constitutive part the number being indifferent as to the Beings though not as to the well being of the Society 5. The People being the other material part of the Society I call them Christians that is Baptized Professing Christians to distinguish them from all Infidels who are uncapable to be members 6. I call them Neighbours because the Proximity must be such as rendereth them capable of the Ends of the Society For at an uncapable distance they cannot have Church-communion 7. I put in a capable number because too few or too many may be utterly uncapable of the Ends One or two are uncapable defectively such multitudes as can have no Church communion are uncapable through excess of which more after 8. The form is the Relative Union of Pastor and People in reference to the Ends Which I mean in the word Consociate 9. The foundation or prime efficient is Christ's Institution 10. The Condition sine qua non is their mutual consent 11. The end or terminus is their Communion 12. The matter of this Communion is both God's publickworship and a holy life which distinguisheth them from such as associate for civil ends or any other besides these 13. The proper species of this holy Communion is that it be Personal By which I mean such as Pastor and People may ordinarily exercise in presence to distinguish it from that sort of Communion 1. which we have only in spirit in faith judgment and affection with Christians in all parts of the World And 2. from that external Communion which several Churches hold together by Messengers Delegates or Letters For if that kind of distant Communion would
teach them not to disdain the advice of their Presbyters but to use their Authority with so much the greater humility and moderation as a Sword which the Church hath power to take from them This is Mr. Hooker And page 14. He confesseth that according to the Custom of England and a Council at Carthage Presbyters may impose hands in Ordination with the Bishop though not without him So that by this they have the the power of Ordination to though he have a Negative Voice in it And indeed if all Ordination must be done by one of a Superiour Order who shall Ordain Bishops or Archbishops or Patriarchs or the Pope And page 18. He saith Most certain truth it is that Churches Cathedral and the Bishops of them are as glasses wherein the face and countenance of Apostolical antiquity remaineth even as yet to be seen Which is it that we also affirm every City or Church having a Bishop and Presbytery of their own And whereas page 19. He saith If we prove that Bishops have lawfully of old ruled over other Ministers it is enough how few soever those Ministers have been how small soever the circuit of place which hath contained them If this be so we grant you enough when we grant Parochial Bishops But no where doth he more palpably yield our Cause than page 21 22. where to Cartwright's Objection that the Bishop that Cyprian speaketh of is nothing else but such as we call Pastor or as the common name is Parsons and his Church whereof he is Bishop is neither Diocess nor Province but a Congregation which met together in one place to be taught by one man He hath no better answer to this than to tell us that If it were true it is impertinent and that it is not true because Cyprian had many Presbyters under him so as they might have every day change for performance of their duty And he never once attempteth to prove that Cyprian had more Churches yea or Assemblies than One but only that he was over the Presbyters in one Church or Assembly and as an Archbishop was over Bishops The same thing which I submit to but nothing against the things that I assert against him A Parson may have divers Curates under him and not divers Churches much loss a thousand that have no other Bishop And whereas page 33. It is objected that many things are innovated in our Discipline as imposing Ministers on the People without their consent Bishops Excommunicating alone Imprisoning c. His answer is that the Church may change her customes And on that ground alloweth the Ordination of Presbyters alone because the Church can give them power For he goeth in Church-matters as he doth in point of Civil Government on his false supposition that all Power is Originally in the whole Body saying page 37. The whole Church visible being the true Original subject of all power it hath not ordinarily allowed any other than Bishops alone to Ordain Howbeit as the ordinary course is ordinarily in all things to be observed so it may be in some cases not unnecessary that we decline from the ordinary ways What is more contrary than Saravia Tract de Obedient and Hooker in their Principles of Government From hence also page 38. He inferreth the no necessity of continued Succession of Bishops in every effectual Ordination And it is very observable which he granteth for it cannot be denied The Power of Orders I may lawfully receive without the asking consent of any multitude but the power I cannot exercise upon any certain People against their wills And page 38. He cannot deny but the ancient use was for the Bishops to excommunicate with the College of his Assistant Presbyters but he taunteth Beza for thinking that this may not be changed These are the men that build upon Antiquity and the Custom of the Universal Church And page 69. when the Canons for Bishops spare course of living are objected he saith that those Canons were made when Bishops lived of the same Purse which served as well for a number of others as for them and yet all at their disposing Intimating the old Course when every Church had its Bishop and inferiour Clergy But Innovation is lawful for our Prelacy And now he that can find any thing in Hooker against the points which I defend or for that Prelacy which I oppose any more worth the answering than this that I have recited let him rejoyce in the perfection of his eye-sight And if thus much be worthy to be confuted or such as this let them do it that have nothing else to do So ridiculous is the Challenge of one that glorieth to write a Book with the same Title of Ecoles Policy who insultingly provoketh us to write a full Confutation of Hooker who saith so little to the main point in Controversie our Diocesan Form of Prelacy and writeth his whole Book in a tedious Preaching stile where you may read many leaves for so much Argumentation as one Syllogism may contain that I think I might as wisely have challenged himself to conââue Mr. Fâx's Book of Martyrs or Baronius his Annals almost or at least may say as Dr. John Burges doth of Mr. Parker another sort of Parker his Book of the Cross which Dr. Ames saith was never answered that if any will reduce that gawdy Treatise into Argument it being indeed almost all made up of the fruits of Reading History Sentences c. of purpose to confute them that said the Nonconformists were no Schollars he should quickly have an Answer to it So if any will reduce all that is in Mr. Hooker's 8 Books in tedious Discourses into Syllogism which is against what I maintain I believe it will not all fill up one half or quarter of a page and it shall God-willing be soon answered In the mean time the popular Principles of his First and Eighth Book subverting all true Government I have already confuted elsewhere in my Christian Directory 5. Bishop Downame hath said much more to the main Points in the defence of his Consecration Sermon and as much as I can expect to find in any But 1. as to the mode he is so contrary to Hooker that being a very expert Logician he wasteth so much of his Book about the Forms of Arguments and Answers that he obscureth the matter by it and ensnareth those Readers who do not carefully distinguish between Matter and Words and between the force of the reason and the form of a Syllogism And he so adorneth or defileth his Style with taunts insulting scorns and contemptuous reproaches that it is more sutable to the Scold sat Billings-gate than so learned and godly a Divine and occasioneth his Adversaries to say You have here a taste of the Prelatical Spirit 2. As to the matter of his first Book I am of his mind against meer ruling Elders He and Bilson have evinced what they hold in that But as to the points in which
definitely to signifie these Churches Congregate into a Synod or Consistory But I believe his word of neither place One is Mat. 18. 17. Tell the Church c. If I say that tell the Church signifieth tell the Society containing Pastors and Christians though it is the Pastors that you must immediately speak to and the offender must hear I give as good proof of my exposition as he doth of his If I speak to a man and hear a man though it be only his ears that hear me and his tongue that speaketh to me yet by the word man I mean not only ears and tongue If the King send a Command to a Corporation to expel a seditious member though the Mayor or Aldermen only do it Authoritatively and the People but executively yet the word Corporation doth not therefore signifie the Officers only The other Text is Act. 15. 22. But I will not believe him that the whole Church signifieth the Synod only For though they only decreed it I think the rest consented and approved it and are meant in the word the whole Church I grant him that Rom. 16. 1. the word signifieth the Church of a Village or Town But he will never prove that it is not meant of a Church of the same Species as City Churches were And as to the House or Family Churches which he mentioneth Rom. 16. 5. 1 Cor. 16. 19. Col. 4. 15. Phil. 2. Dr. Hammond expoundeth Col. 4 15. of the Church that did meet in his house and so some do all the rest But that we stand not for nor doth it concern us But when he addeth a multitude of Texts as using the word Church indefinitely not defining the place Society of a Nation or City quantity c. most of the instances brought are of Churches definite as to place and of the same Species as the Apostles Instituted though when the Church of such a place is said to do a thing it 's no determination what number of the members did it His first instance is Acts 4. 31. and next Acts 15. 3 9 c. The Churches had rest through all Judaea and Gallile and Samaria Acts 15. 3. Speaks of the Church of Antioch which v. 27. it 's said they gathered together v. 4. mentioneth the Church at Jerusalem v. 11. mentioneth the Churches of Syria and Cilicia Acts 18. 22. Speaketh of the Church at Caesarea Rom. 16. 16. Speaks of the Churches where Paul lately travelled v. 23. Gaius was the Host of a definite whole Church at Corinth And when 1 Cor. 4. 17. he speaketh of his teaching in every Church it is an Universal enunciation but of Churches of a certain or definite species and so of the rest Then p. 5. he telleth us what is truly and properly a Church on Earth and saith Every company of men professing the true faith of Christ is both truly a Church and a true Church Ans. Yes As Canis caelestis is truly a Dog and a true Dog but not properly but equivocally A Church in its most famous signification is a Society constituted of the Pastor and Flock as a School of the Schoolmaster and Schollars And an accidental meeting of Christians in a Market or Ship is no more properly called a Church than School-boys meeting in such places are a School No nor occasionally praying together neither So p. 5. He concludeth that the Christian People of one City and Country adjoyning whether Province or Diocess are one Church yea of any Nation or part of the World not because under one Spiritual Government or Priest-hood but because one People or Commonwealth ruled by the same Laws professing the same Religion All this is de nomine only But are we not likely to dispute well when we never agree of the Subject or terms of the Question We have no mind to contend about Names Let him call the World or a Corporation or Kingdom or Ecclesiam Malignantium by the name of a Church if he will so that we first agree what Church we dispute of We talk not of any accidental meeting or Community but a Society before defined constituted of the pars gubernans and pars subdita And of this sort we know of Divine Institution an Universal Church Headed by Christ and particular Churches headed under him by their Bishops or Pastors A Church without a Head in Fair Ship or Temple we talk not of Nor yet of a Church that hath but an Accidental Extrinsick and not an Essential Constitutive Head to them as they are Churches of Christ's Institution Whether it be the Emperour of Germany or of Constantinople Mahometan Christian Papist or Protestant we believe that every Soveraign is so the Head that is the Ruler of the Church that is of the Christians in his Dominions We denominate â formâ Bishop Downame may denominate whence he please à materiâ or ab accidente c. and say They are one Church that are under one Prince Law of one Religion Do with your Equivocals what you will But forget not that it is a Pastoral particular Church of the Holy Ghost's Institution that we Dispute about Otherwise I deny not Diocesan or Patriarchal Churches nor deny that the Papal Kingdom is a Church of a certain species right or wrong And forget not his Concession p. 6. and we need no more Indeed at the very first conversion of Cities the whole number of the People converted being sometimes not much greater than the number of the Presbyters placed among them were able to make but a small Congregation But those Churches were in Constituting they were not fully Constituted till their number being increased they had their Bishop or Pastor their Presbyters and Deacons without which Ignatius saith there was no Church c. Of wâââh after He next Cap. 1. laboureth much to prove that the words Ecclesia Paraecia and Diocaesis of old were of the sââe signification About words we have no mind to strive But all the proofs that he brings of the extent of a Church to more than one Congregation or Altar are fetcht from later times when indeed Churches were transformed into Societies much different from those before them He citeth Concil Carth. 2. c. 5. 3. 42 43 c. that places that had no Bishops before should not receive Bishops without the consent of the Bishop whom they were before under Indeed by these Canons we see much of the state of the Church in those times and partly how the Case was altered Every Church had a Bishop of its own Those Churches were almost all first planted in Cities The multitudes were Heathens but the City Christians with those in the Country near them were enow to make a Church or Congregation In time so many were Converted in the Country Villages that they were allowed Assemblies like our Chappels at home And some of them had Country Bishops set over them And in many places greater Towns which they then called Cities were anew converted The Presbyters
that were abroad among these new Converts or scatered Christians made them know that every Church should have a Bishop and that they might choose one of their own And few Presbyters being then Learned able men in Comparison of the Bishops by this advantage of presence among them many raw and schismatical Presbyters crept into the Peoples affections and perswaded them to choose them for their Bishops when they were chosen and ordained they encroached on the rest of the old Bishops Diocess and also refused to come to the Synods lest their failings should be known pretending that they must stay with their own People Now the Bishops that complained of this did not alledge 1. That no Bishop should be made but in a City 2. Nor that when Christians multiplyed they must not multiply Bishops accordingly but all be under their first Bishop only 3. Nor that a new Congregation had not as good right to have and chuse a Bishop of their own as the first City Congregation had But only to keep ignorant Schismatical Presbyters from deceiving the People for their own exaltation and from hindering Synodical Concord they Decreed that none in their Diocesses should have Bishops without the first Bishops consent And that being so Consecrated they should frequent Synods and should be Bishops only of that People that first chose them and not encroach on the rest of the Diocess And whereas he hence gathereth that the Country Churches ever from the beginning belonged to the City Bishops There were no such things as Appendant Country Churches from the beginning of the City Churches But it 's true that from the beginning of the Country Peoples Conversion when they were not enow to make Churches themselves they belonged to the City Churches as Members Even as now the Anabaptists and Independent Churches consist of the People of Market-Towns and the adjoyning Country Associated into one Assembly After that the Country Meetings were but as Oratories or Chappels And when they came to be enow to make dinstinct Churches of some good Bishops had the Wit and Grace to help them to Chorepiscopi Bishops of their own but most did choose rather to enlarge their own Possessions or Powers and set Subject Presbyters only over the People And that these new Bishopricks must be by the old Bishops consent is apparently a point of Order to avoid inconveniences if not of Usurpation For what power had the old Bishop to keep any Church of Christ without a Bishop of their own when it was for there good That he hath some countenance from Leo for the New Church-Form without Bishops I wonder not when Leo was one of the hottest that betimes maintained the Roman Primacy if not Universal Soveraignty And as the Care against placing Bishops in small places ne vilescat nomen Episcopi came in late so 1. It intimateth that it was otherwise done at least by some before 2. And it is but the Prelatical grandure which Constantine had pufft up which is then alledged as the Reason of this Restraint His Argument is That which was judged unlawful by the Canons of approved Councils and Decrees of Godly Bishops was never lawfully regularly and ordinarily practised But c. I deny the Major Kneeling at Prayer or Sacrament on the Lords day the Marriage of Priests the Reading of the Heathens Writings and abundance such-like were forbidden by such approved Councils especially a multitude of things depending on the new Imperial shape of the Churches which are now lawful and were lawful and ordinarily practised before Paul Kneeled and Prayed on the Lord's day Acts 20. c. Therefore the placing of Bishops in Country Parishes was not unlawful before because the Councils of Bishops afterward forbad it nor was it ever unlawful by Gods Law Methinks a Bishop that subscribeth to the 39 Articles of the Church of England which mentioneth General Councils erring even in matters of Faith should never have asserted that they cannot erre in matter of Government nor retract and alter that which was well practised before them His next Argument is this If there were any Parish Bishops then they were the Chorepiscopi But the Chorepiscopi were not such Ans 1. I deny the Major There were then many City Bishops that were but Parish Bishops or had but one Church as shall be further proved 2. Yet as to a great number it is granted that their Diocesses had many Churches at the time of Concil Eliber Sardic c. which he mentioneth But it followeth not that therefore it was so with any in the time of Ignatius or with many in Cyprian's time 3. If it were all granted de facto it will not follow that de jure it was well done and that the old Form was not sinfully changed 4. The Chorepiscopi themselves might have many Congregations under them like our Chapels and yet be Parish Bishops And it 's most probable that at first they had no more than one of our Country Parishes though afterwards they had many Churches under them as City Bishops had His next Argument is Churches endued with Power Ecclesiastical sufficient for the Government of themselves having also a Bishop and Presbytery had the power of Ordination But Country Parishes had not the Power of Ordination Ergo c. Ans 1. Government is Inferiour or Superiour They might have sufficient Inferiour power of Government though they had none of the Superiour power such as belongeth to Archbishops to whom Appeals were made As a Corporation that hath a Mayor and Assistants hath sufficient Inferiour power but not Regal nor such as Judges Lord Lieutenants c. have And if it were proved as some hold that only General or unfixed Ministers like the Apostles and Evangelists or Archbishops that were over many Churches had the power of Ordination and not the Inferiour Bishops of single Churches it would not follow that these Inferiour Bishops had not the power of Governing their own Churches with assisting Presbyters And if he will prove for us that every fixed Bishop hath the power of Ordination who hath but the Inferiour power of Governing his single Church by Admonitions Excommunications and Absolutions he will but do our work for us 2. I deny his Minor Propos If by Country Parishes he mean the Bishops of Country Parishes they had the Power of Ordination And all that he saith against it is only to prove that de facto they had not the Exercise of it in the times he mentioneth and that de jure humano it was not allowed them by Canons But 3. We grant so much of the Conclusion as that de facto few Country Parishes had a Bishop and Presbytery Because there were but few Country Parishes in the World till the third Century that were really Christian Churches or fixed Societies of Christians that had ordinary Church-communion together in the Sacrament or had an Altar But our Case is About single Churches now called Parish Churches and not about Country
of the Churches of Asia had no Bishops but Parish Presbyters under these seven Bishops he should prove it and confute Dr. Hammond that is so contrary to him had he then lived Till then we take it as a contemptible incredible assertion that Asia had but seven Bishops and yet a multitude of Churches If he mean only that these seven were Archbishops his impertinency is too palbable Particularly he saith The Church of Ephesus Smyrna c. Contained a great City and the Country belonging to it c. Ans We talk of Churches under Churches and he talketh only of Cities and Countries Again I say Let him take his Diocess of Infidels Houses and Ground we know no such Churches Page 46. He saith Cenchrea was subject to the Church of Corinth and never had a Bishop of their own But not a syllable of proof It is not a Family Church which we speak of therefore he need not here have mentioned that But a Church associated for ordinary Communion in God's publick worship which cannot be celebrated without a Pastor Let him prove that Cenchrea was such a Church and yet had no Bishop In § 6. p. 49. He would prove that the Circuit of a Church was in the Intention of the Apostles or first Founders the same from the beginning beforâ the division of Churches as after Which I shall in due place disprove His reasons are 1. Because the whole Church since the Apostles days hath so understood the intention of the Apostles Ans 1. This is not proved 2. I shall anone prove the contrary that the Apostles had no intention that Churches should be defined by the limits of the place and Country nor did they themselves ever appoint any such bounds to any one Church and say so far it shall extend Nor did they ever take any but Christians in any Circuits for Members of the Church And I shall prove that all Churches were but such as I described single Churches with their Bishops at the first and that some Villages had Bishops four or five hundred years after And his own Reason that Churches followed the Civil Form proveth the mutability of their bounds seeing the Civil Forms were mutable His next Reason is because that division of Churches which was 300 or 400 Years after Christ with their Limits and Circuits were ordinarily the same which had been from the beginning as divers Councils testifie Ans Those Councils mean no more than that it had been an old or setled Custome as many Learned men have proved And if they could be proved to mean that from the Apostolical plantations the bounds of all the Diocess were set I marvel that any man could believe them But they say no such thing as were it not tedious to the Reader an examination of each particular would shew Else no new Churches and Bishops must be setled in the World but those that the Apostles converted in any Cities between or near them For the unconverted Cities in the inter-spaces were as much those Bishops Diocesses as the Villages of equal distance And then the making of new Cities would have made one a Bishop of many Cities contrary to the Canons His third Reason is that the Distribution of the Churches usually followed the division of the Common wealth Ans 1. If so as is said they must be various and mutable All the World was not divided just as the Roman Empire was And the Imperial divisions had great changes 2. I think it lost labour to dispute with him that holdeth this assimilating the Church to the Civil Form was of Divine Apostolical Institution If any can think so let him give us his proof that the Church Constitution must vary as Monarchical Aristocratical and Democratical States do As Empires and free Cities do And that from the King to the Constable we must have a correspondent Officer And that the Papacy as Capital in the Roman Empire was of Gods Institution And that an Emperour King or popular State may change the Form of the Churches as oft as they may the Form of their subordinate Governments Are not these small Reasons to prove that when the Apostles planted Bishops in all single Churches they intended that those Bishops should be the sole Bishops of many hundred Churches when they should be raised in the Circuit of ground which now is called their Diocesses But more of this in due place But next he appealeth to mens consciences Whether it be not unlikely that there was but one Congregation belonging to these famous Cities towards the end of the Apostles days Of which more afterward In Chap. 4. p. 69. He argueth The Presbyteries ordained by the Apostles were appointed for Diocesses and not to Parishes Therefore the Churches endued with the power of Ecclesiastical Government were not Parishes but Diocesses Ans Our Question is Whether they were single Churches as before defined or only One Diocesan Church made up of many such single Churches 1. If by Presbyteries be meant many Presbyters a College or Consessus I deny the Consequence because every Church that had Government had not such a Presbytery But one Bishop or Pastor did serve for some of the lesser Churches and yet that one had Governing power 2. I deny the Major It was single Churches that had then many Elders set over them 3. Reader it seemeth to me no small disparagement to the Diocesan Cause that the grand Patrons of it so extreamly differ among themselves Dr. Hammond holdeth that in all the Scripture times no one Church had any Presbyters at all save only one single Bishop This Bishop Downame seemeth to hold that every Governed Church had a Presbytery And no one and every one extreamly differ Yet either of them would have censure him that had gain-sayed them His proof of the Antecedent is this They who were appointed to whole Cities and Countries to labour so far as they were able the conversion of all that belonged to God were appointed to Diocesses not to Parishes But c. Ans Is not here frustration instead of edification to the Reader for want of defining a Diocess and a Parish I thought we had talkt of a Diocesan Church and here is a Diocess described which may be a single Church or no Church at all as the Bishop pleaseth Here is not so much as any Christians much less Congregations of them mentioned as the Bishops Flock But many an Apostle Evangelist and Converting Preacher hath been set over Cities and Countries to labour mens Conversion as far as they were able before they had converted any or at least enow to make a Church and after that before they had converted more than one Assembly The Jesuits in the Indies thus laboured in several Provinces before they were Bishops of those Provinces or called them Provincial Churches But now we perceive what he meaneth by a Diocess even a space of Ground containing Inhabitants to be converted if we can I will shorten my Answer to the
two or three thousand Souls without much help or many sad unavoidable Omissions the Qâestion shall be whether the Bishop may not undertake to Teach and oversee many hundreds or a thousand Parishes and Catechise Pray with and Exhort a thousand times more than any Parish Minister doth or is able to do And to do all this without ever coming into those Parishes or ever seeing the Faces or hearing the names of one of a multitude of the People or ever speaking one word to them but summoning thâm by Apparitors to a Lay-Chancellors Court to be Excommunicated first and after imprisoned while they live if they do not what the Chancellor bids them O what is mans understanding when a Carnal interest hath there clothed it self with a Sacred name Cap. 3. He telleth us of the Power of the Keys commited to the Apostles and by them to the Bishops as their Successors But whether all the Bishops Ordained by them and living with them and some dying before them it 's like were their Successors and whether all true Pastors were not such Bishops as had the Power of the Keys and whether by those Keys be meant the Government of the Flocks or also of the Governors themselves and of what extent the Churches under each Bishop was and to what end and use are the things in Question which he here saith nothing to Cap. 4. He proveth by strong affirmation that the Apostles were by Christ's last Commission Mat. 28. 19 20. to be the Bishops of their several assigned certain Provinces But confidence goeth not for proof with us He tells us of the name of Episcopacy Acts 1. 29. We never questioned whether the Apostles had the Oversight of the Church but we hold 1. That the World was the first Object of their Office from whence they were to gather Churches 2. That the Place Course or Circuit of their Travels and Ministry was not of any Divine Institution but left to their prudent choice by the Common Rules of Nature doing all things in Order and to Edifying and sometime directed in their motions by the present inspiration of the Holy-Ghost 3. That more than one Apostle was oft in the same Cities and Countries none claiming it as his peculiar Province nor denying the right of others to be there And where one was this Year another was the next 4. That when an Apostle planted a Church in any City and settled Bishops over the People they themselves were called by many of the Ancients the first Bishops of those Cities in which sence one Man had many Bishopricks 5. That the Apostles were Itinerant unfixed Bishops and not fixed Bishops such as they themselves confined to any one limited Church or Province Nor can it be proved out of all Antiquity that any one of all the Apostles was confined to any one limited Province much less what that Province was but only that their Ability Opportunity Time and Prudence limited every Man and directed him as the End required 6. And that if the Apostles had fixed themselves in particular limited Provinces they had disobeyed their Commission which was to go Preach the Gospel to all the World And no Man did ever yet so dote as to pretend that they divided the whole World into twelve Provinces and there fixed themselves And such twelve Provinces as they had been capable of overseeing would have been but a little of the World And it was but a little part comparatively that they Preacht the Gospel to Most Kingdoms of the World they never saw And those which they came into were so great and many that they Preached but to a few of the People Yet this was not their culpable Omission because they were limited by Natural Impotency and so by Impossibilities of doing more But had it been by a Voluntary setling themselves in twelve Provinces to the neglect of all the rest the Case had been otherwise But whilst they did their best for the whole World themselves and Ordained others to do the rest they performed their Office There needeth no more to be said as to those Ancients that name the Apostles Bishops Nor is their Episcopacy if proved any thing to our Case as shall be manifested Cap. 5. He thought he had proved that Power in the Church is given by the Apostles to the Bishops only Whereas with Spalatensis and most Christians we hold it given to Christ's Ministers as such and therefore to them all though in an Eminency the Apostles only had it And 1. Whereas he denyeth the Power of the 70 because they were not Apostles but Disciples We Answer 1. That Evangelists and other Ministers that were not Apostles had the Power of the Keys 2. That to deny that the 70 were at least Temporary Apostles limited to the Jews and had the power of Preaching and working Miracles would be to deny the letter of the Text. And the Apostles themselves could not Govern Churches till they were gathered 2. And yet if neither they nor John Baptist in Baptizing did exercise any power of the Keys which he can never prove it is nothing to our Case 3. When will he prove that the Evangelists and the Itinerant Assistants of the Apostles had not the power of the Keys When themselves commonly say that the higher Orders contain the powers of the lower And are the Bishops higher than the Evangelists 4. Nay when will he prove that ever any Presbyter was Ordained by the Apostles or by any others as they appointed without the power of the Keys It would weary one that loveth not confusion and lost lalabour to read long Discourses of the Power of the Keys or Government which distinguish not the Government of the Laity or Flocks from the Government of the Ministers themselves and that abuse the Church by feigning an Office of Presbyters that are not Presbyters and proving that Church-Governors are not Church-Governors For what is the Office of the Presbyter or Pastor essentially but a Stated Power and obligation to Teach and Govern the People and Worship as their mouth and guide Cap. 6. He seemeth by denying the Evangelists the power of the Keys and of Church-teaching and making them meer Preachers to the Insidels to favour the Independants Opinion who think the Laymen sent forth are to do that work But 1. Mat. 28. 19 20. Christ maketh such Officers as must Preach and Baptize and gather Churches among the Infidels before they govern them to be them that he will be with to the end of the World And the same men had the Power of teaching the Churches when they were gathered as is there expressed 2. Call them by what name you will such Itenirants were usual in the Apostles daies as Silas Apollo and many more 3. It was not the twelve Apostles only that Converted the World but such other Ministers that were called thus to labour by them or by the Spirit immediately Joseph of Arimathea is said by many to have preached here and in other
Countries 4. What man will dream that when these went abroad the World to convert men they were the fixed Bishops of particular Churches first which they thus forsook 5. Who will believe that Joseph Silas Apollo Luke Mark Nathaniel Philip or any other when they had converted any City or Countrey had no power after to teach them as a Church or give them the Lords Supper no nor to Baptize them first nor to ordain them Bishops and settle them in order but must either have an Apostle or a City Bishop to come thither after them to do it Such Fancies are obtruded on the Church because the one Ministerial or Priestly Office is first dismembred and then new Officers feigned to be made up of the several Limbs Cap. 7. As he rob'd the Evangelists of the Power of the Keys he would now rob all the meer Presbyters of it and all without shew of Scripture proof from such words of Canons or Ancients as say the Presbyters shall do nothing without the Bishops 1. As if the Presbyters were no Rulers of the Flocks because the Bishops are Rulers of the Presbyters As if a Judge or a Justice were no Governour because he is under the King 2. O Cruel Bishops that will undertake to do that for the Souls of many hundred Parishes which many hundred Ministers are too little for that the Souls of men and their own together may be damn'd by the Omission of it If the power of the Keys be appointed for mens Salvation they perfidiously betray them that thrust out the many hundreds that should do it pretending that it belongeth to one man among the many hundred that cannot do it But of the Bishops great undertaking I must say more anon Cap. 8. Of the Chorepiscopi there is little that concerneth us saving that he cometh near to grant us all that we desire while that § 15 he saith that Learned men believe that in the Church of one Region of old there was but one Altar so that lgnatius rightly conjoyneth ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã And all Schismaticks were said to set up Altar against Altar As Cypr. de Unit. Eccle. Ep. 40. 72 73 This is the sum of all that we plead for And § 29. he mentioneth the Chorepiscopis as immitating the 70 when yet he had denied the 70 to have the power of the Keys which he supposeth the Chorepiscopi to have under the Bishops Of Clemens words in due place Cap. 9. About the sence of a Canon variously read And Cap. 10. Whether Eutychius Alexandrinus erred in one thing and therefore were not to be believed in another are little pertinent to our business In his 4th Dissert the Cap. 1. is but Proem but Cap. 2. he tells us that the Apostles as Bishops Governed the Churches which they had planted without the mediation of a Colledge of Presbyters all ways and he bringeth not a word to prove it but 1 Cor. 3. 6. You have not many Fathers in Christ I have begotten you by the Gospel c. 4. 15 16. I have planted and c. 9. 19 21. I will come to you will ye that I come with the Rod and c. 5 3 4. I as absent in Body but present in Spirit have judged This is all And will not the impartial Reader wonder at humane frailty how easily men believe what they would have to be true and what an evident Nothing will go for undenyable proof Let the Reader Note 1. That the question is not whether an Apostle after that he had planted a Church remain still an Apostle to them as well as others and have the Apostolical eminency of Power which is greater than any meer Bishop had 2. But first Whether the Apostles had any fixed Provinces or Cities undertaken as their special charge in which no other Apostle had Apostolical Power And 2. Whether there were not fixed Bishops setled by them in all the Churches which they planted 3. And whether it was not so in the Church of Corinth ' in particular Yea whether they had not more Bishops or Presbyters than one For by Unius which here he applyeth to Paul he meaneth Unicus Paul only or else he abuseth his Reader and himself And 1. He that will follow Paul in his Travels will find that he went the same way that some other Apostles went viz. John and Peter and therefore that they must have the same Diocesses or have their Diocesses notably intermixt John was in Asia as well as Paul and no man can prove that he was the Second Bishop of Ephesus or Asia as Paul's successor only when he was dead Nor will the Romans be willing to grant that Peter was Bishop of no more at Rome but the Jews only as this Dr. elsewhere intimateth lest that prove not that the Gentile Church of Rome was founded by Peter but by Paul alone 2. What proof hath he that besides Peter and John there were not many other Apostles per vices in the same Cities where Paul had been And that when they did come thither they had not Apostolical Power there 3. Doth not the Text expresly say that Paul and Barnabas long travelled together And doth it any where intimate that Paul was the Governour of Barnabas or the sole Bishop of the Churches planted by them both together Sure the people that would have worshipped Barnabas as Jupiter and Paul but as Mercury did see no Sign of such a Prelacy in Paul And the Apostles seem so to have ordered the matter by going by Couples as Christ sometimes sent two and two before him as if they had done it purposely to prevent these Monarchical conceits Peter and John were together at the healing of the Criple and the successful preaching that followed thereupon Sometime Paul and Barnabas are together sometime Paul and Silas and Barnabas and Mark Paul and Sosthenes are the inscribed Names who send the first Epistle to the Corinthians and Paul and Timothy the second And in the Text alledged it is said One saith I am of Paul and another I am of Apollo and c. 1. 12. Every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas And Paul baptized none of them save Crispus and Gaius and the houshold of Stephanus By which it appeareth that Peter was among them as well as Paul and if Peter had been only the Bishop of the Jews here also Apollos would not have been brought in as a third in a way of equality And the Controversie would have been otherwise decided by Paul by telling the Jews that Peter was their sole Bishop and the Gentiles that Paul was theirs and all of them that Apollos was but their Subject But he goeth quite another way to work preferring none nor dividing Dioceses but levelling Ministers as being but the helpers of their Faith And though they had Apostolical preeminence above Apollos yet Peter and Paul are not said to have a proper Episcopacy over him And
now to his Arguments 1. Paul planted Paul onely was their Father What then Ergo Paul onely was their Bishop I deny the Consequence and may long wait for a syllable of proof Contrarily Paul onely was not their Apostle Ergo Paul onely was not their Bishop For every Apostle you say hath Episcopal Power included in the Apostolical and none of them ceased to have Apostolical Power where-ever they came though they were many together as at Jerusalem Ergo None of them ceased to have Episcopal Power The conceit of Conversion and Paternity entituling to sole Episcopacy I shall confute by it self anon 2. But Paul judged the incestuous person and speaketh of coming with the rod. And what followeth Ergo None but Paul might do the same in that Diocess I deny the Consequence Any other Apostle might do the same Where is your Proof And if all this were granted it is nothing against the Cause that we maintain And next let us inquire whether this Church had no Bishops or Presbyters but Paul As here is not a word of proof on their side so I prove the contrary 1. Because the Apostles ordained Elders or Bishops in every Church and City Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5. Therefore the Church of Corinth had such 2. If they had not Presbyters or Bishops they could hold no ordinary Christian Church-Assemblies for all Gods publick Worship e. g. They could not communicate in the Lords Supper for Lay-men may not be the Ministers of it nor the ordinary Guides and Teachers of a Worshipping Church But they did hold such ordinary Assemblies communicating in the Lords Supper And to say that they had onely Pastors that were itinerant in transitu as they came one after another that way is to speak without book and against it and to make them differ from all other Churches without proof 3. 1 Cor. 14. doth plainly end that Controversie with 1 Cor. 11. when they had so many Prophets and Teachers and gifted Persons in their Assemblies that Paul is put to restrain and regulate their Publick Exercises directing them to speak but one or two and the rest to judge and this rather by the way of edifying plainness than by Tongues c. And c. 11. they had enow to be the ordinary Ministers of the Sacraments And cb 5. they had Instructions for Church-Discipline both as to the incestuous man and for all the scandalous for the time to come and are chidden for not using it before And who but the Separatists do hold that the power of the Keys for the exercise of this Discipline is in the Peoples hands Therefore most certainly they had a Clergy And if all this go not for proof against a bare Affirmation of the contrary we can prove nothing 4. And 1 Cor. 4. 15. I scarce think that Paul would have had occasion to say Though you have ten thousand instructers if they had not had qualified Persons enow to afford them one or two for Presbyters Cap. 2. proving no more of any one Apostles fixed Episcopacy he cometh to their secondary Bishops or Apostles And whereas we judge that Apostles and Evangelists and the Apostles Assistants were unfixed Ministers appropriating no Churches or Diocesses to themselves in point of Power but planting setling and confirming Churches in an itinerant way and distributing their Provinces onely arbitrarily and changeably and as the Spirit guided them at the present time of their work and that Bishops and Elders were such Pastors as these Church-gatherers fixed in a stated relation to particular Churches so that an Apostle was a Bishop eminenter but not formaliter and that a Bishop as such was no Apostle in the eminent sense but was also an itinerant Preacher limitedly because while he oversaw his Flock he was also to endeavour the conversion of others as far as his opportunity allowed him I say this being our judgment this learned Doctor supposeth Apostles as such to be Bishops and the fixed Bishops as such to be second Apostles And I so avoid contending about Names even where it is of some importance to the Matter that I will not waste my time upon it till it be necessary In § 1. he telleth us that these second Apostles were made partakers of the same Jurisdiction and Name with the first and either planted and ruled Churches or ruled such as others had planted Answ 1. We doubt not but the Apostles had indefinite itinerant Assistants and definite fixed Bishops placed by them as aforesaid But the indefinite and the definite must not be confounded 2. And were not Luke Mark Timothy and other itinerant Evangelists as such of the Clergy and such Assistants or secondary Apostles Exclude them and you can prove none but the fixed Bishops But if they were why did you before deny Evangelists Dissert 3. cap. 6. the power of the Keys and make them meer converting Preachers below Doctors and Pastors and the same with Deacons whereas Paul Ephes 4. 11. doth place them before Pastors and Teachers But avoiding the Controversie de nomine call them what you will we believe that these itinerant Assistants of the Apostles were of that One sacred Office commonly called the Priesthood or Ministry though not yet fixed and that the assigning them to particular Churches did not make them of a new Order but onely give them a new object and opportunity to exercise the Power which they had before and that Philip and other Deacons were not Evangelists meerly as Deacons which term denoteth a fixed Office in one Church but by a further Call And that you never did prove that ever the Scripture knew one Presbyter that had not the power of the Keys as Bishops have yea you confess your self the contrary All therefore that followeth in that Chapter and your Book of James the Just and Mark and others having Episcopal power is nothing against us The thing that we put you to prove is that ever the Apostles ordained such an Officer as a Presbyter that hath not Episcopal Power and Obligation too as to his Flock that is the Power of governing that Church according to God's Word And I would learn if I could whether all the Apostles which staid long at Jerusalem while James is supposed to be their Bishop were not Bishops also with him Whether they ceased to be Apostles to the People there Or whether they were Apostles and not Bishops And whether they lost any of their Power by making James Bishop And whether one Church then had not many Bishops at once And if they made James greater than themselves Whether according to your Premonition they did not give a Power or Honour which they had not which you think unanswerable in our Case Cap. 4. come in the Angels of the Churches Rev. 1 2 3. of which though the matter be little to our Cause I have said enough before why I prefer the Exposition of Ticoniui which Augustine seemeth to favour And I find nothing here to the
alterable policy And 2. That this Opinion rose as early as he pretendeth 3. And that these Ancients were not deceived âât our English Bishops rather Bilson Jewel c. who took Patriarchs and Metropolitanes as such for Creatures of Humane Original While Ignatius his being Bishop of a Church in Syria shall prove him the Bishop of all Syria and the Church of God dwelling in Syria in Antiochia shall be equivalent with the Church in Antiochia governing all Syria I shall not undertake to hinder such men from proving any thing that they would have believed His Cap. 6. of the promiscuous use of the Names of Bishop and Presbyter and Cap. 7. that prepareth the stating of the Controversie need no answer but to say that we deny not but where a single Presbyter was he had himself the power of Governing that Church but where there were many though all had the full Office severally they were bound to use it in Concord And whether one amongst them shall have a precedency or guidance of the rest we think as Dr. Stillingfleet hath proved to be a matter alterable by humane prudence according to the various condition of the Churches And if any take both such Bishops and Archbishops to be Jure Divine with Dr. Hammond it will be somewhat to his Cause but nothing to ours Cap. 8. he openeth his conceit which in time I shall shew doth yield us the whole Cause that every place of Scripture which mentioneth Bishops or Presbyters meaneth Diocesan supereminent Bishops only And first he proveth it of the Elders Bishops of Ephesus Acts 20. because the whole flock is meant of all Asia Fully proved because Irenaeus said as he thought that the Bishops were convocate from Ephesus and the nearest Cities But 1. Irenaeus saith not Bishops only but Bishops and Presbyters conjoining them as two sorts and not Bishops or Presbyters as the Doctor doth 2. The nearest Cities and all Asia we take not for words of the same importance 3. We take not your bare word for the validity of the Consequence that because the Bishops of several Cities were there therefore it is all Asia that is singularly called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the whole Flock and not each Bishops Flock respectively q. d. Each of you look to your several Flock 4. We think if you calculate the time Acts 20 and 21. and consider Paul's haste Acts 20. 16. that few impartial men will believe that Paul's Messengers that were wont to go on foot did so quickly go all over Asia and so quickly get together all the Bishops of Asia to Miletum unless they all resided at Ephesus as our English Bishops do at London and Governed their unknown people by a Lay-Chancellour 5. And Irenaeus ibid. p. 312. saith Et omnia hujusmodi per solum Lucam cognovimus we know all such things by Luke alone pretending no other Tradition And if it be in Luke it is yet to be thence proved 6. But he pleadeth our Cause too strongly by supposing that each City then had a Bishop without any subject half Presbyter and so that no such Office was yet made Cap. 9. Of Timothy's Episcopacy concerneth not our Cause Though I hope that neither he nor his Church were so bad as the Angel or Church in Rev. 2. is described And it 's easier to answer the strength of Dr. Hammond than for him to answer the Evidence brought by Prin in his Vnbishoping Timothy and Titus to shew the itinerant life and Ministry of Timothy contrary to the life of a fixed Bishop And if non-residency have such Patrons and Timothy have taught men to leave their Churches year after year and play the Pastor many hundred Miles distant it will make us dream that non-residence is a duty And if all these years Timothy's Metropolitan Church at Ephesus had no ordained Presbyter but Passengers that fell in I blame them not or wonder not at least that they lost their first love for it 's like they seldom had any Church Assemblies to Communicate and Worship God together Cap. 10. Cometh to the case of Philippi Phil. 1. 1 2. And 1. § 3. he saith It is manifest that Epaphroditus Bishop of Philippi was at Rome with Paul when he wrote this Epistle and he supposeth that there were yet no Presbyters but Bishops And so when Paul wrote to all the Saints which are at Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons he meant to those that are not at Philippi where there was no Bishop but in other Cities of Macedonia that had every one a Prelate without ever a Presbyter under him With some this expounding may go for modest if not true Two probable Arguments I object against his improbable Expositions of this Text and that Acts 20. before mentioned 1. Where did he ever read that all the Province of Macedonia was called Philippi and the Saints said to dwell at Philippi that dwelt all over Macedonia 2. Where did he ever read in Scripture many Episcopal Churches under one Metropolitan called One Church in the singular Number as in Acts 20. 28. or One Flock either 3. Will any knowing man deny that he contradicteth not only Hierom and Theodoret but the common Exposition of the Fathers by this his odd Opinion And is it not gross partiality for the same man that can so easily cast off the judgment of almost all the Ancients at once to lay so much of the whole stress of his Diocesan and Metropolitan Cause upon the Fathers assertions yea doubtful reports and to take it for so immodest a thing in others to deny belief to them in such uncertain matters But he setteth Epiphanius his words against Aerius against them all Even that Epiphanius who ordained in the Bishop of Jerusalem's Diocess to his displeasure and that combined with that Theophilus Alexand. of whom Socrates writeth such horrid and unchristian practices to root out Chrysostom and raise a flame in the Church of Constantinople who liker a mad man than a sober Bishop came from Cyprus not only into the City but the Church where Chrysostom used to officiate to inflame his people and declame against and censure their Bishop to whom he was an inferiour and that parted with him in a wrathful Prognostick and dyed by the way home And yet even this one man saith nothing to his advantage but that the Apostles placed Bishops only with Deacons in some Churches that had not fit men to make Presbyters of which we not only grant but doubt whether ever they made any but Bishops though in great Cities there were many of them And § 8 9 10. when it seemed to serve his turn he yet further gratifieth us by granting yea maintaining that one Congregation had not two Bishops yet nothing hindreth but that in the same City there might sometimes be two distinct Assemblies converted by two Apostles perhaps of distinct dialects and rites and these governed by distinct Bishops with a divided or distinct Clergie which is almost as much
maintaining that the word Presbyter in the places of the New Testament cited by him doth mean only a Bishop that is a Pastor of one only Congregation that had no Presbyter under him but Deacons and that no mention is made by the Apostles of other Presbyters § 6. And he gratifieth us with Epiphanius his Reasons § 4. because as yet there was not a multitude of Believers And that the Elders that Paul speaketh to Timothy of ordaining and rebuking and those that were worthy of double honour were only Bishops that had no subject Presbyters Whether they were set over the Churches as Moses was over Israel with a design that they should make subordinate Officers under them I shall enquire in due place Cap. 20. He goeth over most of the other Texts in the New Testament that mention Elders shewing that they mean such Bishops and that even at Hierusalem the Elders Acts 15. were not our new half Priests but the Bishops of all the Churches of Judaea and so of others here again repeated by him But it sticketh with me that these Bishops having no subject Presbyters are found so oft in the Metropolitane City and so oft in travel and so oft many hundred Miles from home that I doubt it was but a few Churches in the world that kept the Lords day and assembled for publick Worship or had any Sacraments frequently but lived as the Atheists and impious contemners of Church-Communion now do or else that with the Fanaticks we must hold that Lay-men or Deacons did play the Priests in all Church Offices Cap. 21. He vindicateth that one remaining Text Jam. 5. 14. which mentioneth Presbyters visiting the sick as meant only of Bishops and not of mungrel Priests And so being secured that these were never found in the Scripture times and consequently no Bishop except Archbishops that had more worshipping Churches than one we must look who presumed to institute another Office And here § 3. he perswadeth us to be so civil to Ignatius as thankfully to acknowledge him the first Patron of our Office-dignity intimating that there is no earlier proof of the invention of this mungrel Office than the Epistles of Ignatius Cap. 22. He tells us that the word Presbyter is also taken for Bishops by Polycarp Papias Irenaeus Tertullian and Clemens Alexand. so that our cause will be carried beyond Scripture times But again finding so many Bishops with Polycarp I doubt he maketh Bishops too unwearied Travellers and too great non-Residents and Gods Publick Worship too often interrupted by their absence Cap. 23 24 25 26. He speaketh of Deacons the word and Office which we have now no business with but to note that cap. 26. § 8. he is again at Epiphanius allowing a single Bishop without Presbyters but not without Deacons because he cannot be a Bishop without Deacons which I believe not nor do our Prelates but without subject Presbyters he may better than with them And § 10. he excellently argueth from the Epistle to Timothy that seeing Paul instructeth him in all things belonging to the Church of God 1 Tim. 3. 15. and yet never mentioneth these Medioxumos Presbyteros mungrel or middle Priests it is plain that the reason is because none such were instituted when the Apostle wrote To which I add nor afterward by the Apostles as far as can be proved and therefore never should have been Cap. 27. He speaketh of the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Tit. 1. and 2. and 1 Tim. 5. shewing that these Women were in Orders Of which I have no mind to contend so that by the Name it be not inferred that they are she-Bishops and that they argue not as a Preacher did since we were silenced I can name the Man and place from St. John's Epistle to the Elect Lady to prove that there were Lord-Bishops in the Apostles daies viz. an Elect Lady supposeth an Elect Lord But there are no Elect Lords but Elect Lord-Bishops Ergo We have not yet seen all Dr. Hammond's confutation of our Diocesan Prelacie In his fifth Dissertation we have more Cap. 1. He speaketh of Clemens Rom. and whereas we think that the confusion among Historians came partly from the little notice that came down from those times of such particulars and partly from the identity of the Office of Linus Cletus and Clemens being all Bishops at once of a great Church the Half-Presbyters being not yet ordained he gratifyeth us by proving that not only at Rome but also in Antioch Ephesus Corinth and Jerusalem there were more Churches than one with their several Bishops Even one of the Jews and one of the Gentiles how the local Diocese were then divided is hard to tell and where it was that one Apostle had Power of the Keys and where not I shall improve this Concession in due place Cap. 2. Of Clements Epistle he first takes notice of the Inscription to the Church of God dwelling or sojourning at Corinth The same Phrase as Philip. â 1 2. And by this Church he proveth by confident affirming that all the Churches of Achaia are meant And that the same is to be said of Paul's Epistle to the Corinthians he unresistibly proveth by saying that Quisquis eas vel leviter degustaverit tuo scilicet gustu hoc omnino pronunciandum esse nobiscum statuet Nec igitur de hac Clementis ambigi poterit And so all that Controversie is ended But though without Scripture proof imagination might handsomely feign that the many Churches of Achaia are called singularly the Church of Corinth as one because of the Unity of the Metropolitane yet 1. I would have heard somewhat like reason for and some instances of the use of such a speech as this ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã The Church of God dwelling or sojourning at Rome to the Church of God dwelling or sojourning at Corinth And why and where and by what good writers all Achaia is called Corinth or all Macedonia Philippi or all the Cities about it indeed as the County of Worcester the County of York of Warwick c. are usual Titles so may the Church of York Worcester Warwick be in the Diocesans sense But whoever said of all the County or Diocess To the County Diocess dwelling at York Worcester Warwick As if all the Countrey and Towns belonging to that Circuit were called Warwick c. 2. Doth not his own proof evidently confute him 2 Cor. 1. 1. To the Church of God which is at Corinth with all the Saints which are in all Achaia Are the last words Tautological doth with signifie no addition at all If by the Church which is at Corinth be meant all the Churches and Christians in Achaia what sense is there in the addition of with all the Saints which are in Achaia O what kind of proof will satisfie some Learned Men 3. Was it all the Churches of Achaia that the incestuous person 1 Cor. 5. dwelt with and that are chidden for suffering him
in their Communion and that are directed when they meet together to cast him out and not to eat with him 4. Would it not be Calumny according to all rational Laws to accuse all the Churches of Achaia of all those Crimes which the Church at Corinth is accused of without a better proof than this 5. Was it all the Churches of Achaia which 1 Cor. 14. are said to meet all in one place and to have so many Prophets and Interpreters in that one Assembly I am not at leisure to say more of this But who denieth that the same Epistle which was directed first to the Corinthians was secondarily directed to the rest of Achia and to be Communicated to them And yet not the Churches of Achaia be all said to be or dwell at Corinth When 2 Cor. 11. 10. Paul speaketh of the Regions of Achaia ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã he saith that sheweth that the matter belonged to the whole Church of Achaia But how long have they all been challenged to name one Text of Scripture that speaketh singularly of the Church of a Province or Countrey consisting of many particular Churches Yet addeth he In re manifesta non pluribus opus est Cap. 3. He only mentioneth the occasion of Clements Epistle where without any Proof he extendeth the Sedition then raised by them to the disturbance of the Civil Government and Peace And if he had proved as he endeavoureth that by ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is meant the Civil Rulers which is utterly uncertain yet the commendation of their Obedience formerly to the Civil Power as part of the Character of their orderliness and peaceableness doth not prove that Rebellion against them was part of their following disorder Cap. 4. Is to tell us 1. That Clemens puts Obedience to Rulers and due honouring of Presbyters as a Law of God which is not to be doubted of 2. That Bishops were sent by the Apostles as the Apostles by Christ but were joyned only with Deacons to attend them Mark here Reader that he doth not only acknowledge that de facto the Order of Mungrel or Half-Priests was not yet Existent but also that none such were sent by the Apostles and so not Instituted and that Clemens himself taketh notice of no such even in his times But how the Dr. will prove that no great Churches and particularly this of Corinth had but one Bishop you shall see with little satisfaction 3. He noteth that these Bishops thus sent were constituted every where Ecclesias nondum natas sed ad partum bonis Dei auspâcus festinantes brachiis atque ulnis suis susceptum administratum to receive in their Arms and Arms the Churches not yet born but by Gods Blessing hastning to the Birth whereas of his own Head he had before said that the Bishops were sent by the Apostles when Clement saith no such thing but only that they were Constituted sending being the word used of Itenerant Preachers gathering and visiting Churches and Constituting with Ordaining the usual word of Bishops and Presbyters who as such are fixed to particular Churches so now he more boldly forgeteth that Bishops were yea every where to receive Churches that were yet no Churches Where he contradicteth both Scripture and common use of the word Bishop and abuseth Clement 1. Let any Man that can shew us thatin the New Testament the word Bishop is ever used of any Pastor that was not related to a Church and as signifying that Relation and that Bishop and Flock are yet as much Relatives as King and Kingdom 2 Let him shew that can that the word was used otherwise by Christians for many a hundred years after Christ Though I grant that Ministers in general were and may be ordained sine titulo to Preach and gather Churches and help others yet never Bishops the word signifying an Over-seer of the Flock or Church to which he is related 3. If it were certain that the futurity of believing mentioned by Clemens had relation to the Constitution of Bishops and not to the Apostles Preaching only yet Clemens saith not that there were yet no Believers or no Churches where they were constituted Bishops Where there were but a few Believers the Apostles placed Bishops and Deacons over those few who should receive others into the same Society till it was full and no further who should after believe It is an abuse of Clemens to say it was to Churches yet not born when he hath no such word As if it could not be for future Believers unless at present there were no Believers And it is an abuse of him to seign him to assert that the Apostles did every where as soon as they had once Converted one Man presently make that new Baptized Novice a Bishop before they Converted any more saving perhaps one or two to be his Deacons Or that they used to make Deacons or Bishops either to Churches future that were yet no Churches When as the Scripture telleth the contrary most expresly that the Church at Jerusalem was before the Deacons Act. 7. That they ordained Elders in every Church Act. 14. 23. and not in no Church as he implyeth And Tit. 1. 5. every City is equivalent to every Church for it was not in every Infidel City that had no Christians Which beyond all modest contradiction is proved by the Rules given to Timothy and Titus for the Ordination of Bishops and Deacons Who were to be approved chosen persons that had ruled their own Houses well not Novices apt to teach well reported of those without which supposeth some to be within Tim. 3. 14 15. These things I write unto thee that thou mayest know how to behave thy self in the House of God which is the Church of the Living God a Pillar and Basis of the truth The first that were converted did not always prove the fittest to be Bishops perhaps they might be Women or weakly guiâted To feign that the Apostles did that every where which none can prove that ever they did once to make a Bishop and Deacons of the two or three first Novice-converts before there were any more Converted and to make Bishops and Deacons before there were any Christians to constitute Churches meerly for future Churches this is not Clemens act whoever else will own it 4. Lastly he noteth here that this was done by the Revelation of the Spirit whereby they examined and tryed who was worthy of that Dignity And 1. What use for examination who was worthy where there was no other to stand in Competition and where the first Convert still was taken Election is è multis And if he be compelled to grant that there were more Christians over whom the Bishop was set it is a Contradiction to say that a Bishop and his Flock though small is no Church 2. It is hard to believe that the multitude of ignorant Lads and wicked Men that are now set over Churches are Constituted by this Apostolical choice and
Tryal by the Holy Ghost Cap. 5. § 5. He now acknowledgeth that where many were at first Converted not always the first but the fittest was chosen Bishop And how prove you that he and his Flock were no Church The same he maintaineth § 11. And after from the choice usually made by suffrages and other reasons well confuteth the former conceit when he took it to be Blondels but sure he could not believe that they were Ecclesiae nondum natâ or future Believers that chose Bishops by Suffrages But having so fully in this Chapter confuted his former as Blondel's opinion I doubt not but Blondel is in this as easily reconciled to him as he to himself and meant no more but 1. That the Apostles used not to make Bishops of the first Converts simply but to choose them out of the ancient grown and proved Christians 2. And that being so chosen not he that was first Baptized but he that was first ordained had the presidence in the Conâessus of their Presbyters Which the Dr. might easily have seen and spared his insulting upon the contrary supposition But let it here again be noted that § 9. he expresly and confidently asserteth all that I now desire viz. That Clemens doth speak of that time of the Churches beginning in which there were not yet many Believers and therefore without doubt neither Presbyters instituted If he means no Subject Presbyters or if he means not many in a Church but one Bishop I desire no more For then no Bishop had more Church Assemblies than one nor any half Presbyters were ordained by the Apostles For Clemens doth not tell us what the Apostles did in the beginning of their Preaching only but giveth us this as an account of all their course in settling Offices in the Churches where they came Cap. 6. He confesseth that Clemens mentioneth but two Orders Bishops and Deacons and we would have no more and § 4. is over angry with Blundel for gathering hence that he did not do as those that from the Jewish Elders or Priests or the 70 gather another order what is there in this Collection that deserveth the sharp words of that § Cap. 7. Whether Clemens well cited Isai 60. 17. we need not debate But if yet any think that the Dr. hath not fully granted us our Cause let him take these additions § 7. He well gathereth from Clemens that this form of Government founded in Bishops and Deacons in each Church being setled by Men entrusted by Christ is no less to be ascribed to Gods Command than if Christ himself had constituted Bishops and Deacons in every City Let who dare then approve of the alteration by the Introduction of another Order of Priests And § 8. He noteth also out of Clemens that the foresight of the contention that would be about Episcopacy caused this establishment of Bishops and Deacons No doubt God foreknew both that the popular sort would oppose Government and that the Monarchical Prelates would depose all the Bishops of the same Church save themselves and the Arch-Prelates would depose all the Bishops of particular Churches and set up half Priests in their stead And he doth well not to pass the following words in Clemens though hard yet plainly subverting the Doctors opinion that from this same foresight the Apostles constituted the foresaid Bishops and Deacons in every Church ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. ac descriptas deinceps ministrorum officiorumque vices reliquerunt ut in defunctorum locum alii viri probati succedere illorum munia exequi possent as Pat. Junius translateth it The word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã can allow no such doubt as shall make this much of the sense to be questionable 1. That upon the foresight of the Contentions about Episcopacy the Apostles made by the Spirit an established Description of the Orders and Offices which should be in the Church not only in their times but afterwards 2. And that the approved men that should hereafter be ordained should succeed in those same Orders which the Apostles had established and described even to the same Work or Office ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 3. That the Apostles thus setled or described no mungrel or half Priests but only Bishops and Deacons nor any Churches that had not each a Bishop and Deacon 4. Therefore no such half Priests should be brought in but only such as the Apostles instituted or described I can scarce speak my thoughts plainlier than by the Doctors next words § 9. It is evident that by the immediate impulse of the Spirit of God Bishops were constituted Deacons only joyned to them in every Church and so at Corinth and the rest of the Cities of Achaia And that by the command of the same Divine Prophesie or Revelation successors were assigned to them after their departure not a new order invented Christ thus consulting and providing for the Churches peace c. And § 14. he well granteth 1. That the form of Church Government was no where changed by the Apostles and so no middle order instituted by them 2. That through all their Age and when they were consummate in the middle under their Disciples the Government of every Church was in the power of the Bishops and Deacons in common But whereas § 13 c. he layeth this as the ground of his Cause 1. That it was not the Church at Corinth alone but of all Achaia that Clemens writeth to under this name 2. And that there were not many Bishops in one Church but one to each of these particular Churches I desire the Reader 1. To try impartially whether in all the Drs. Book there be one word of cogent Evidence to prove what he saith yea or to make it credible or likely 2. To consider these Reasons following for the contrary 1. As is said whether Scripture custom of speech will allow us to call all the Churches of a Region A Church in the singular Number Shew one Text for it if you can 2. Whether any ancient Ecclesiastical use of speech will allow us to say that the Churches of Achaia dwell at Corinth as Clemens speaketh p. 1. 3. Whether I have not proved from 1 Cor. 14. c. that the Church of Corinth had more Ministers or Clergy men or Pastors in it than one in Paul's time And therefore was not without so soon after 4. Whether it be credible that when it was but one or two Persons p. 62. by whom or for whose cause the Preâbyters were ejected that it is like either this one or two were members of more particular Churches in Achaia than one or two Or that all the Churches of Achaia would so far own one or two mutineers in a particular Church as to cast out many of their Ministers for their sakes 5. Yea when Clemens whole scope intimateth that this one or two did this because they aspired after Power or Preeminence themselves Could they expect themselves to be made the Rulers of more
than one or two Churches 6. And what was the cause of this one or two like to touch the Bishops of the other Churches And what Cognisance was all Achaia like to have of the cause of one or two distant persons so as for them to rise up against their own Bishops 7. If it was not all nor many Pastors that were thus turned out as Clemens words import why should all Achaia be called seditious and blamed for it 8. Doth not the common Law of Charity and Justice forbid us to extend those words of reproof to a whole Province which cannot be proved to extend farther than to a single Church and principally toucht but one or two 9. I have before proved that Paul by the Saints at Corinth meaneth but one Church Therefore it 's like that Clemens doth so too 10. The Bishops and Deacons that Clemens speaketh of were set up ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Cum consensu totius Ecclesiae or as the Dr. will needs have it applaudente aut congratulante tota Ecclesia indeed with the good liking Pleasure or Approbation of the whole Church And shall we be perswaded that all the Cities and Countrey of Achaia were that whole Church which approved or consented to these particular Pastors that were put out Or that had Cognisance of them or acquaintance with them 11. He expresly saith pag. 62. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã That the Church of Corinth for the sake of one or two moved Sedition against the Presbyters And why doth he never say it was the Church of Achaia 12. p. 63. He supposeth the Person Emulating to be a Believer of power in explaining Doctrine wise in judging of Speeches c. And would have the concern'd Person say p. 69. If the Sedition be for me and the Contention and Schisms I will remove I will be gone wither you will and will do what the People pre-determine of or command only let the Flock of Christ with the Presbyters set over them live in peace And is it like that the Flock that this Person must say so to was all Achaia 13. And p. 73. He requireth those that begun the Sedition to be obediently Subject to the Presbyters and not to their Bishop onely And is it like to be the Bishops of other Churches through all Achaia that this one or two is required to Obey and be in Subjection to I have given my Reasons to prove that these Presbyters were in the One Church of Corinth Compare his if you can find them to the contrary and Judge Impartially as you see cause Cap. 8. Hath nothing that concerneth us but the recitall of his grand Concession lest we should think that in Clemens days the great Bishop of Corinth or any in Achaia had any more Church-assemblies than one to whom he could do all the Pastoral Offices himself he thus concludeth § 9. Indeed mention is found only of Bishops with Deacons constituted in each City sometimes under the Title of Bishops sometimes of Presbyters there being no token or foot-step at all appearing of such as we now call Presbyters c. To which I wholly agree though not that there was but one Presbyter in Corinth Cap. 9. He is offended much with Blondel for reproaching Hermas and yet using his Testimony As if a Hereticks or an Infidels Testimony might not be used in point of History And § 14. he again cometh to his supposition of Bishops without Subject Presbyters as if it served his turn more than ours Cap. 10. About Pius words hath nothing that I find the cause concerned in Cap. 11. Is of little moment to us both parties have little that is cogent but velitations about dubious words Cap. 12. Is but about the sense of the word applyed to Ireneuâ which Dr. H. taketh here and by many after to mean a Bishop and wonders that Blondel pleadeth for a parity of order from a common Name But it is not so much without reason as he maketh it For if Bishops and Presbyters were in the first times called by one Name and the highest Person in the Church then was ordinarily known by the name Presbyter and the appropriating of Bishop to one sort and Presbyter to another came afterwards in by such insensible degrees that no man can tell when it was it sounds very probable that it was the true Episcopal Power or the same Office and Order that was first commonly possessed by them to whom the name was Common And so much of Dr. Hammond's Dissertations wherein I must desire the Reader to note 1. That I meddle not with other mens Causes nor particularly with the question Whether one man in each Church had of old a guiding superiority over the rest of the Presbyters Nor yet whether the Apostles had such successors in the General care of many Churches such as Visiters or Arch-Bishops but only 1. Whether every Presbyter were not Essentially a Bishop or Governour of the Flock having the power of Keys as they call it in foro interiore exteriore both for resolving Consciences and for Church-order 2. Whether every particular Church which ordinarily communicated together in the Lords Supper and had unum Altare had not one or more such Bishops 3. Whether it was not a sinful corrupting change to bring in another Species of Presbyters and so to depose all the particular Churches and Bishops and set up a Dioâesane Bishop inâââis ordinis with half Churches and half-Priests under him in their stead 2. And note That as it concerned me not to speak to all that the Doctor hath said so I have carefully chosen out all that I thought pertinent and of a seeming weight as to the cause which I mannage and have past by nothing in the whole Book which I thought an understanding Reader needeth an answer to There is yet the same Authors Vindication of his Dissertations to be considered But I find nothing new in them to be answered by me nor that I am concerned for the Cause in hand any further than to give you these few Observations 1. That again p. 5. he saith That by observing the paucity of Believers in many Cities in the first Plantations which made it unnecessary that there should by the Apostles be ordained any more than a Bishop and Deacon one or more in each City and that this was accordingly done by them at the first is approved by the most undenyable ancient Records 2. That p. 7. he again well averreth that the Jewish and Gentile Congregations occasioned several Churches and Bishops in the same Cities And p. 14. 15. That Timothy was placed by Paul Bishop of the Gentiles at Ephesus and S. John and another after him Bishop of the Jews Pag. 16. He thinketh that Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus or Angel when Rev. 2. was wrote Pag. 17. From Epiphanius he reckoneth above 50 years from the Revelation of John Rev. 2. to the writing of Ignatius's Epistles By which we may Calculate the time when the
Office of half-Presbyters began to be invented according to his own Computation That pag. 21. passim his supposition of the 24 Bishops of Judaea sitting about the Throne of James Bishop of Jerusalem and his other supposition of their being so ordinarily there And of the Bishops of Provinces in other Nations being so frequently many score if not hundred Miles off their people in the Metropolitane Cities when the people had no other Priest to Officiate doth tend to an Atheistical conceit that the Ordinary use of Sacred Assemblies and Communion is no very needful thing when in the best times by the best men in whole Countreys at once they were so much forborn Pag. 26. Again you have his full and plain Assertion That there were not in the space within compass of which all the Books of the new Testament were written any Presbyters in our modern Notion of them created in the Church though soon after certainly in Ignatius time which was above 50 years after the Rev. they were Pag. 60. He supposeth that whoever should settle Churches under a Heathen King among Heathens must accordinly make the Churches gathered subordinate to one another as the Cities in which they are gathered were though Heathen subordinate to one another of which more in due place Pag. 76 77. He saith that As Congregations and Parishes are Synonimous in their Style so I yield that Believers in great Cities were not at first divided into Parishes while the number of Christians in a City was so small that they might well assemble in the same place and so needed no Partitions or Divisions But what disadvantage is this to us who affirm that one Bishop not a Colledge of Presbyters presided in that one Congregation and that the Believers in the Regions and Villages about did belong to the care of that single Bishop or City Church A Bishop and his Deacon were sufficient at the first to sow their Plantations For what is a Diocess but a Church in a City with the Suburbs and Territories or Region belonging to it And this certainly might be and remain under the Government of a single Bishop Of any Church so bounded there may be a Bishop and that whole Church shall be his Diocess and so he a Diocesan Bishop though as yet this Church be not subdivided into more several Assemblies So that you see now what a Diocess is And that you may know that we contend not about Names while they call the Bishop of one Congreation a Diocesane we say nothing against him A Diocesan in our sense is such as we live under that have made one Church of many hundred or a thousand But Reader be not abused by words when it is visible Countreys that we talk of As every Market-Town or Corporation is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a City in the old sense so the Diocess of Lincoln which I live in at this reckoning hath three or fourscore Diocesses in it and the Diocess of Norwich about 50 Diocesses in it c. That is such Cities with the interjacent Villages Pag. 78. He saith When they add these Angels were Congregational not Diocesan they were every of them Angels of a Church in a City having authority over the Regions adjacent and pertaining to that City and so as CHURCH and CONGREGATION ARE ALL ONE AS IN ORDINARY USE IN ALL LANGUAGES THEY ARE Thus were Congregational and Diocesan also What follows of the paucity of Believers in the greatest Cities and their meeting in one place is willingly granted by us I must desire the Reader to remember all this when we come to use it in due place And you may modestly smile to observe how by this and the foregoing words the Dr. forgetfully hath cast out all the English Diocesans While he maketh it needful that the Cities be Ecclesiastically subordinate as they are Civilly and maketh it the very definition of a Diocesan Bishop to be a Bishop of a City with the Country or Suburbs belonging to it But in England no lesser Cities ordinarily at least nor Corporation-Towns are at all Subject to the great Cities Nor are any Considerable part of the Countrey Subject to them nor do the Liberties of Cities or Corporations reach far from the Walls or Towns So that by this Rule the Bishop of London York Norwich and Bristow would have indeed large Cities with narrow liberties But the rest would have Diocesses little bigger than we could allow to conscionable Faithful Pastors But he yet addeth more p. 79. he will do more for our cause than the Presbyterians themselves who in their disputes against the Independents-say that Jerusalem had more Christians belonging to the Church than could conveniently meet in one place But saith the Dr. This is contrary to the Evidence of the Text which saith expresty v. 44. that all the Believers were ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã meeting in one and the same place The like may be said of the other places Act. 4. 4. and 5. 14. For certainly as yet though the number of believers increased yet they were not distributed into several Congregations Will you yet have more p. 80 81. When the London Ministers say that the Believers of one City made but one Church in the Apostles days he answereth This observation I acknowledge to have perfect truth in it and not to be confutable in any part And therefore instead of rejecting I shall imbrace it and from thence conclude that there is no manner of incongruity in assigning of one Bishop to one Church and so one Bishop in the Church of Jerusalem because it is a Church not Churches BEING FORECED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WHERE THERE WERE MORE CHURCHES THERE WERE MORE BISHOPS I am almost in doubt by this whether the Dr. were not against the English Prelacy and he and I were not of a mind especially remembring that he said nothing against my disputations of Church Government written against himself when I lived near him Observe Reader 1. That even now he confessed that a Church and Congregation is all one 2. And here he confesseth that where there were more Churches there were more Bishops and his words Because it is a Church not Churches seem to import that de jure he supposeth it is no Church without a Bishop and that there should be no fewer Bishops than Churches And then I ask 1. Where and when do all the Christians in this Diocess of above an hundred miles long Congregate who meet but in above a thousand several Temples and never know one of a thousand of the Diocess 2. Doth not this grant to the Brownists that the Parish Churches are no Churches but onely parts of the Diocesane Church 3. And then if it be proved that the Diocesane Church form is but of humane invention what Church in England will they leave us that is of divine institution This is the unhappiness of overdoing to undo all and of aspiring too high to fall down into nothing And doth he not speak
much to the same purpose p. 87. One City with the Territories adjoyning to it being ruled by one single Bishop was to be called a singular Church And therefore that which is said to be done in every Church Act. 14. 23. is said to be done in every City Tit. 1. 5. Tâe sum of which observation is only this that one City with the Territories adjoyning to it never makes above one Church in the Scripture Style And yet he largely proveth the contrary that there was one Church and Bishop of Jewish Christians and one of Gentiles whereas a Province or Countrey or Nations consists of many Cities and so of many Episcopal Sees or Churches The like he hath again p. 90 § 53. But whereas p. 88. âe would Prove that a Province or Nation of many Churches may be called one Church because the Churches in all the World are so called in our Creed and in the Scripture I answer That he can never prove that many Churches are ever in Scripture called one save only the Universal Church which is but one being Headed by one Head even Christ The Universal Church as he said before of a Church compared to Persons is One Collective body as a Political Society related to Christ or constituted of Christ and all Christians And a particular Church is one as constituted of the Ministerial Pastors and People But find any Text of Scripture that calleth the Churches of a Nation or Province one Church in all the new Testament if you can In pag. 103. he giveth Reasons for his singularity in interpreting so many Texts of Scripture and sheweth that as the Fathers differ from each other as Tirinus sheweth so we may also differ from them and I know not of any Expositor that ever wrote that hath more need of this Apology than Grotius and he And I mislike not his Reasons But then how unsavoury is it for the same person to expect that we should in reverence to one expository word in Irenaeus and another in Epiphanius forsake the common sense of the Fathers where they do agree or that we must bow to every ancient Canon But I would not have him thought more singular than he is lest when I have answered him the Prelatists forsake him and say that they are still unanswered therefore I crave the Readers special observation of his words p. 104 105. I might truly say that for those minute considerations and conjectures wheren this Doctor diffârs from some others who have written before him as to the manner of interpreting some few Texts he hath the Suffrages of many of the learnedst men of this Church at this day and as far as he knows OF ALL that embrace the same cause with him Of which I only say that if he do but minutely differ from others and not at all from the most I hope my confutation of him will not be impertinent as to the rest But if he lay the very stress of his cause upon novel Expositions of almost every Text which mentioneth Bishops Presbyters Pastors and quite cross the way of almost all save Petavius that ever went before him then think whether that cause stand on so firm ground as some perswade which needeth such new foundations or ways of support at this Age in the judgement of such learned men as these Pag. 119 120 121. He proveth that Diocesane Bishops are the only Elders of the Church which James adviseth the sick to send for supposing the City Churches even of Jerusalem to be yet no bigger than that one Bishop and a Deacon who yet was not this Visiter of the sick might do all the Ministerial work Where I confess he quite outgoeth me in extenuating the Churches in S. James's time If the Church of Jerusalem had seven Deacons I will not belive him pardon the incivility that they had but one Presbyter And pardon me a greater boldness in saying if he had tryed but as much as I have done what it is to do all the Pastoral work for one Parish of 2 or 3000 Persons in publick and private he could not possibly have been of this Opinion Nor do I think it likely that when it is a singular Person that James bids send for the Elders of the Church but that it implyeth that the Church where he was had more Elders than one I confess that if it had been spoken either to Persons plurally or of Churches plurally the phrase might well have signified the single Elders of the several Churches But to say to each sick man singularly Let him send for the Elders of the Church singularly in common use of speech signifieth that there were many Elders for that man to send for in the Church And whereas he asketh whether a sick man must send for the Colledge of Presbyters I answer that a sick man may well send for the Presbyters or Ministers either one after another as there is occasion or more than one at once if need require for his Resolution If we say to a sick man in London send for the Physicians of the City and let them advise you c. it signifieth that the City hath more Physicians than one and that he may advise with one or more at once oâ per vices as he findeth Cause and no man would speak so to him if London had but one Physician and Norwich another and York another c. And when p. 121. he supposeth the Objection that they have a mean opinion of visiting the sick because they say it is not the Bishops work which he well maketh it to be methinks this should suit with no English Ears who will quickly understand that they speak de facto of our Bishops to whom a sick man may send an hundred or fifty or twenty Miles to desire him to come presently and pray with him if his disease be a Phrensie which depriveth him of his Wits and all about him be as mad And the Bishop with us may be said to visit the sick of his Diocess as a man may be said to weed a Field that plucketh up a weed or two where he goeth or to build a City because he knockt up a Naâl or two in his own House Pag. 120. It is observable which he saith Indeed if it were not the Bishops work to visit the sick how could it be ây the Bishop when other parts of his Office became his full Employment commited to the Presbyter For 1. he could not commit that to others if he first had it not in himself And 2. This was the only Reason of ordaining inferior Officers in the Church that part of the Bishops taâk might be performed by them Ans Either he believed that the Office of a Subject Presbyter or Order as they call it was instituted by God and setled in the Church as necessary by his Spirit and Law or not If he do then Qu. 1. Whether the work of these Presbyters after the institution be not the work of their own
for Chronology and History A few leaves of whose over-large Collections Dr. Hammond hath Answered as you have heard and given his reason for going no further because Blond extendeth the Ministerial Parity but to 140. But to us it is not so inconsiderable to see by what degres the Prelacy rose and to see it proved so copiously that even in after Ages the species extent and of Churches and the Order or Species of Presbyters were not altered notwithstanding accidental alterations And therefore I shall undertake to bring proofenough of what I now plead for from times much lower than 140 such as I think the impartal will rest satisfied in though interest and preconceived Idea's are seldom satisfied or conqueredly a Confutation CHAP. VI. That it is not of Gods institution nor is pleasing to him that there be no Churches and Bishops but in Cities or that a City with its territories or Country adjacent be the bounds of each Church SOme late most esteemed defenders of Diocesanes especially Dr. Hammond lay so great a stress upon the supposition that the Apostles setled the Churches in the Metropolitane and Diocesane order and that they did partly in imitation of the Jewish policy and partly as a thing necessary by the nature of the thing that even in Heathen Kingdomes when Churches are gathered in any Cities they must have a difference of Church power over each other as they find the Cities to have a civil power as you heard before from Dr. H. that I think it meet here breifly to prove 1. That it was not of the Apostles purpose to have Churches and Bishops placed only in Cities and not in Villages 2. Nor that Church power should thus follow the civil 3. Nor that a City with its territories should be the measure of the habitation of each Churches members The licet in some cases I deny not but the oportet is the question yea and the licet in other cases The two first are proved together by these reasons following 1. Christ himself our grand examplar did not only preach and convert Christians in Cities but in Country villages where he held assemblies and preacht and prayed yea in mountains and in Ships And though he planted no particular Churches with fixed Bishops there yet that was because he did so no where He performed all offices in the Country which he did in the Cities except that which was appropriated to Jerusalem by the Law and the institution of his last supper which could be done but in one place 2. There is no Law of God direct or indirect which maketh it a duty to settle Churches and Bishops in Cities only and forbiddeth the setling them in Country villages This is most evident to him that will search the Scripture and but try the pretended proofs of the late Prelatists for the vanity of their pretensions will easily appear They have not so fair a pretense in the New Testament for asserting such a Law as the Pop hath for his supermacy in Peter feed my sheep And where there is no Law there is no obligation on us unto duty and no sin in omission If they say that the Apostles did plant Churches only in Cities comprehending their territories I answer 1. They prove that they planted them in Cities but the silence of the Scriptures proveth not the Negative that they planted none in Villages 2. Nor have they a word of proof that each Church contained all Christians in the Cities with all the interjacent Villages 3. Much less that they must contain all such when all the Countries were converted and the Christians were enow for many Churches 4. Nor can they ever prove that the Apostles planting Churches only in Cities was intended as a Law to restrain men from planting them any where else Any more than their not converting the Villages or the generality of the Cities will prove that they must not be converted by any other Or than that their setting up no Christian Magistrates or converting no Princes will prove that there must be no such thing Whoever extended the obligation of Apostolical example to such Negatives as to do nothing which they did not 5. The reason is most apparent why they preached first in Cities because there is no such fishing as in the Sea They had there the frequentest fullest audirories And so they planted their first Churches there because they had most converts there And it is known that Judea a barren mountainous Coutrey of it self had been so harressed with Wars that there was little safety and quiet expected in Countrey Villages and the Roman Empire had been free from the same plague by such short intervals that as many people as could got into the Cities for all that know by experience what War is do know the misery of poor Country people who are at every wicked Soldiers mercy It was therefore among poor scattered labourers a hard thing to get a considerable auditory which maketh Mr. Eliots and his helpers work go on so heavily among the scattered Americans who have no Cities or great Towns because they can rarely speak to any considerable numbers Now to gather from hence either that Villages must have no Churches or no Bishops is an impiety next to a concluding that they must not be assembled taught or worship God 3. The reasons are vain and null which are pretended for such a modelling of Churches to the form of the civil Government and thus confining them to Cities For 1. There is no need that one Bishop be the Governour of another at all 2. And therefore no need that the Bishop of a Metropolis govern the Bishop of a lesser City or he the Bishop of a Village 1. God hath not given one Bishop power over another as meer Bishops As Cyprian saith in his Carth. Council none of us are Bishops of Bishops but Colleagues Dr. Hammond himself saith that the Bishops are the Apostles Successors and the Apostles were equal in power and Independent Annot. in 1 Tim. 3. c. p 732. Jesus Christ dispensing them all the particular Churches of the whole world by himself and administring them severally not by any one Oeconomus but by the several Bishops as inferiour heads of unity to the severalbodies so constituted by the several Apostles in their plantations each of them having ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a several distinct commission from Christ immediately and subordinate to none but the supreme donor or plenipotentiary Indeed if it be not Bishops but Archbishops or Bishops of Bishops which are the Apostles Successors in order over the Bishops as they are supposed to be over the Priests then such an order of arch-Arch-Bishops is of divine right But not as Metropolitanes or for the Cities sake but as general Officers to take care of many Churches succeeding the Apostles 2. And that Apostolical succession is not the foundation of the Metropolitan or City power is plain 1. Because if the Bishop or Arch-Bishop be the immediate successors of
may end a Church by Wood and stone though the Country still have never so many Christians and when the City is gone the Church is gone 10. Yea it will be in the power of every king even of Heathens whether Christ shall have any Church or Bishop in his kingdoms or not Because he can un-un-city or dispriviledge all the Cities in his kingdom at his pleasure and consequently unchurch all the Churches 11. And by their way Christ hath setled as various Church forms as there be forms of Government in the world For all Dominions are not divided into Provinces under Prisidents c as the Roman Empire was In many Countries the Metropolis hath no superiority over the other City or the Country and so that will be of divine institution in one Country which will be a sin in others 12. Yea by this Rule many vast Countries must have no Bishops or Churches at all because they have no Cities as is known among the Americans and others must have but one Church and Bishop in a whole Country of many hundred Miles 13. And by their Rule all the Bishops of England are unbishoped and their Diocesan Churches are unchurched For 1. Some of them in Wales and Man have no Cities now called such 2. Others of them have many Cities not only Coventry and Lichfield Bath and Wells now called Cities but abundance of Corporations really Cities 3. And the Cities in England Scotland and Ireland have no Civil Government over all the Countries Corporations Villages of the Diocefe at all nor are they Seats of Presidents or Lieutenants that have such Rule so that our Dioceses are not modelled to the form of the Civil Government What subjection doth Hartfordshire Bedfordshire Buckinghamshire c. owe to the Town of Lincolne 14. By their model it is not Bishops and Metropolitans alone that are of divine right For if the Church Government must be modelled to the Civill the Imperial Churches must have had Officers to answer all the Proconsuls and Presects the Lieutenants the Vicars the Consular Presidents the Corrâctors c. For who can prove that one sort or two oaly must by imitated and not others 15. They must by their rule set up in England an inconsistent or self destroying form For in many if not most Counties our Lord Lieutenants Deputy Lieutenants and Sherifs and most Justices dwell in Countrey mannors and Villages and not in Cities And so either Cities must not be the Seats of Bishops and Churches or else the Seat of Civil Government must not be the Seat of the Ecclesiastical If they say that Assizes and Sessions are kept in the County Towns I answer 1. So Church assemblies called Synods or Councils may be held in them and yet not be the Bishops Seat For they are not the Judges or Justices Seat because of Assizes and quarterly Sessions 2. The observation is not universally true Yea no Assizes or Sessions at all are therefore held in any Town because it is the County Town but because it is the convenientest place for meeting The choice of which is left to the Judges and Justices who sometimes choose the County-Town and sometimes another as they please As Bridgnorth in Shropshire Aleshury not Buckingham ordinarily in Buckinghamshire and so of others 3. And thâse County Towns are few of them either Cities or Bishops Seats As Buckingham Hartford Bedford Cambridge Huntington Warwick Darby Nottingham Sherwsbury Ipswich Colchester Lancaster Flint Denbigh Montgomery Merioneth Radnor Cardigan Carnarvon Pembrook Carmarthen Breeknock and divers others 16. This model of theirs is in most parts of the world or many quite contrary to the Interest of the Church and therefore forbidden by God in Nature and Scripture by that rule Let the end be preferred and the means which best serve it Let all things be done to edification For in most of the world the Rulers are enemies to Christianity and disposed to persecute the Pastors of the Church therefore they will least endure Ecclesiastical Courts and Bishops in their Imperial Cities and under their noses as we say Obj. The Romans did endure it Ans For all the ten persecutions the Romans gave ordinarily more liberty of Religion than most of the world doth at this day Bishops and Pastors are glad to keep out of the way of Infidel and Heathen Rulers And I think verily our most Zealous English Prelates would be loath if they had their language to go set up a Church and Bishops seat at Madrid Vienna Jngolsted yea at Florence Milan Ravenna Venice Lisbone Warsaw c. And if they must needs be in those Countries they would rather chose a more private and less offensive seat 17. I think that few Churches or Bishops in the world except the Italian if they are of the opinion now opposed by me The Greek Church is not For though for honor sake they retain the name of the ancient Seats yet they ordinarily dwell in Countrey Villages And so doth the Patriarck of Antioch himself often or at least Antioch is now no City of which he hath the name And Socrates and after him other Historians tell us that of old this practise varied as a thing indifferent in several Countries according to their several customes which had no Law of God for them and therefore were not accounted necessary 18. Our English Bishops have been for the most part of another mind till Dr. Hammond and others turned this way of late Not only Jeâel Bilson and many others have asserted that Patriarks Metropolitans and Primates and such like are of human right and mutable but few if any were found heretofore to contradict them And at this day many Bishops ordinarily dwell in their Country houses As the Bishop of Lincolne did at Bugden the Bishop of Coventree and Lichfield formerly at Eccleshall Castle the Bishop of Chester now at Wigan and so of others And I think that is the Bishops Seat where usually his dwelling is and not where a Lay-Chancellor keepes a Court or where a Dean and Chapter dwell who are no Bishops 19. There have as Dr. Hammond hath well proved been of old several Churches in one City one of Jews and one of Gentiles with their several Bishops and Clergy Therefore one City with its territories is not jure Divino the measure or boundaries of one only Church 20. If the Church Government must be modelled to the Civil then in every Monarchie or Empire there must be one Universal Pastor to rule all the rest as there is one King And in every Aristocracy there must be a Synod of Prelates in Church Supremacy and in every Democracy who or what But then the Papacy will be proved not only lawful but of Divine institution as the Head or Church Soveraign of the Roman Empire though not of all the world at Rome first and at Constantinople after And indeed I know no word of reason that can be given to draw an impartial man of Judgment to doubt
but that Metropolitans Primates Patriarcks and the Pope as Head of the Churches in the Empire stood all on the same ground and had the same Original as all Fathers Councells and History shew which truely proveth that as an Universal Papacy is a Treasonable Usurpation so an Imperial Papacy that is through the Roman Empire is but a human Creature and Metropolitans Patriarcks c. are the like and they that will feigne the one to be of Gods institution or necessary must say that the other is so to But after all this one consequence puts the world in hope that Diocesans may come in time to be reformed For seeling Kings may make and unmake Cities and consequently Bishop-pricks at their pleasure whenever it shall please his Majesty or any other wise and Holy Prince to declare every Corporation and Market Town to be a City we must needs have a Bishop in every one of them according to the principles of the Prelates themselves And then the Diocese will not be so great but a diligent Pastor may possibly sometimes see the greater number of his flock Obj. But they that do say that the Apoâles took this course do not say that it is so obligatory but that in cases of necessity we may do otherwise Ans 1. They alledge the very Law of nature for it that it must be so even in Heathen Empires ex natura rei as Dr. Hammond before cited 2. All meer positves give places to natural duties caeteris paribus in cases of true necessity we may break the rest of the Lords day we may omit the Lords Supper we may stay from the Church assemblies we may forbear to preach or pray or meditate or read So that the exception only of necessity will but equal this Diocesan model to other possitive ordinances which are indeed Divine Obj. What if we prove but the lawfulness of it though not the Duty Ans If you prove it not of Divine institution I have proved it to be sinful and shall do much more by all the evils which attend it And so much for these City Diocese and Metropolitans and modelling the Church Government to the state CHAP. VII The Definition and reasons of a Diocesan Church considered and overthrown I Have already shewed that we dispute not about aery notions nor Non-existence but about such Dioceses as we see and have and that by a Diocese we Non-conformists mean only a large circuit of ground with its inhabitants conteining many perticular Parishes And by a Diocesan Church we mean all the Christians within that circuit who have but one Bishop over them though they be of many Parish Churches yea few Presbyterians take the word so narrow as this For I think too many of them do with Rutherford distinguish between a worshipping Church and a Governed Church and sadling the horse for Prelacy to mount on do affirm that many about twelve usualy of these worshiping Churches like our Parishes may make but one Governed or Presbyterial Church But a Diocese in England containeth many hundred and some above a thousand Parishes as is said But the Diocesans Hammond and Downam define not a Diocese as we see it as conteining many Churches or holy assemblies but only as being the Church of one City with its territories Now the question is what it is that is the specifying difference by which a Diocesan Church is distinguished from others and constituted 1. Not that it is in a City For an Independent Church or a Presbyterian Church may be in a City When there is but one Church there or many Independent ones these are no other than those allow whom you take for your chief adversaries 2. Is it then the circuit of ground that is the boundary of these Churches either this ground is inhabited or not if not then earth and trees make their Churches If inhabited it is by Infidels or by Christians or both If by Infidels they are no members of any Christian Church and therefore not of a Diocesan Church Unless they will professe to have Churhes of Infidels If they be Christians either they are no more nor more distant than as that they may at least the main body of them come on the Lords daies to the City Church into one assembly or else they are enow to make more or many Church assemblies If the former than what differ they from a Parish Church or an Independent Church which is planted in a City When each of them are but one congregation where is the difference but in the arbitrary Name But if the City and territories have Christians enow for many Churches then either they are formed into many or not If they are they should by their own confession have many Bishops If not either Church Societies are Gods ordinance or not If not the City should have none If they are where hath God exempted the Country from the priviledge or duty any more than the City But if they should say that a Diocesan Church is one Church in a City and its territories consisting of Christians enow to make many of whom the most part take up with oratories for Churches this would suite our Notion of a Diocesan Church but not theirs For they say that it is not necessary that a Diocesan Church have more than one Congregation Therefore it must needs follow that their Diocesan Church must differ from our Parish or Congregational Churches only in potentiâ and not in actu or else earth or Infidels must be the differencing matter Unless they will say that the Order of Prelacy in it maketh the difference which is the office of a Pastor who is actually Governour but of one congregation but is in potentia to be the Governour of more when he can convert them and then is the Governour of them all in that territory when they are converted But if one congregation or many make not the difference a meer possibility in the Infidels of becoming Christians cannot make the difference because the Subjects of that possibility are no members of the Church at all Therefore the difference must be only in the office of the Bishop And if so then an Independent Church that hath a Bishop is a Diocesan Church And so an Independant and a Diocesan Church may be all one And then if a Bishop were but setled in a Parish Church in the City or Countrey it would make it a Diocesan Church And then when we have proved that the Country should have Churches and not meer Oratories and that every Church should have a Bishop and so that a Bishop is not to be appropriated to a City and its territories we have done all And that society which should have all Gods Church ordinances should have a Pastor necessary for the exercising of them all But every true Parish Church should have all Gods ordinances belonging to a single Church therefore they should have a Pastor at least to exercise them And a Pastor authorized to exercise all
particular Church ordinances of Christs is a true Bishop But every true particular Church should have such a Pastor Therefore they should have a Bishop By the Church ordinances I mean 1. Teaching 2. Ministerial Worship in Prayer Praise and Sacraments 3. Discipline secret and publick in that Church And let them remember that they that instead of proof do but crudely affirme that Cities only may be Bishops Seats do but beg the question But because he that puts us hardest to it Downame doth lay so much on these two differences of a Diocesan Church from a Parochial 1. That a Diocese conteineth the City and territories though at first it have but one Congregation 2. That converting the rest of the City and territories giveth the Bishop a right to Govern them all I will further distinctly consider of both these CHAP. VIII Whether the Infidel Territories or Citizens do make part of a Diocesane Church 1. WE distinguish between a Diocese and a Diocesane Church 1. The word Diocese first was of civil signification and so we have nothing to do with it 2. It may signifie a Country of Infidels whom a Minister of Christ endeavoureth to convert And so it is no Church of it self nor no part of a Church if a Church be in it as is past all question And so we deny not but that 1. Every Minister should convert as many Infidels as he can 2. That he that is resident on the place as Pastor of a Cohabiting Church hath better opportunity than a stranger usually to convert the neighbour infidels And therefore hath more obligation to endeavour it because men must divide and order their work as their opportunities do invite and guide them 3. But yet that God set no man his Ministerial Charge by the measure of ground And therefore that if such a city-City-Bishop have a smaller number of Infidels in his territories than will take up his time and labour besides the care of his Church he ought not to confine his labour to them nor neglect other territories that need his help but may must and should go further in his endeavours as Augustine and other later Bishops among the Saxons notwithstanding the neighbourhood of the Brittains and as Wilfred alias Boniface among the Germans c. And if any other Minister come among the Infidels in the Territories of a City that hath a Church while they have need of such help the Bishop were a beast if he should forbid him on pretense that it is his Diocess where another hath nothing to do But as unoccupied Countries belong to any occupant so an Infidel Country belongeth to any preacher that hath opportunity to convert them And if a Diocesane prohibit such preaching he is to be neglected or reprehended but not obeyed Yet I deny not but prudence may direct preachers as it would do occupants in the aforesaid case to distribute their labours so as one may not hinder but help another But that is not a Law of propriety otherwise than as mutual consent obligeth And it is but the determination of circumstances and that not about any part of a Church and therefore nothing to the constitution of a Church And as is shewed as Christ sent his Disciples out by two and two so the Apostles oft went two together or an Apostle and an Evangelist which shewed that no one claimed the Diocess But still were it otherwise Infidels are not of the Church CHAP. IX Whether converting a Diocese give right to the Converter to be their Bishop or Governour 1 WE deny not but that Converts owe a peculiar love and respect to those as their fathers in Christ which did convert them which Paul claimeth of the Corinthians 2. And we deny not but caeteris paribus that man being as fit a man as others and his abode being nearer and his Church being not full but capable of them this advantage should encline his converts to choose him rather than another for their Pastor But yet converting them as such giveth him not a right to govern them as their Pastor nor necessitateth them to choose him As I prove 1. Because a Lay man as Frumentius and Edesius and Origen c. may convert men who are not Pastors to them or any 2. Because Conversion and Baptism as such is but mens admission into the Universal Church as in the Eunuchs case Act. 8. is manifest and not into any particular Church It uniteth them to Christ but not to any particular Pastor For they Baptize not into their own name 3. Because when two or three go together as Paul and Barnabas Silas Timothy Luke c. it is to be supposed that one converteth not all but one some and another some and therefore if converting gave right there must be many Bishops and Churches in a place 4. Because when a Church is settled a strange preacher that cometh after yea one that hath a charge elsewhere may convert many neighbours that were not Converted and yet it will not follow that he must come and set up another Church there for that nor that they must remove their dwelling to follow him 5. Because a man may and abundance of excellent preachers have done it convert many souls in many Countries where they go at great distances from each other But he cannot be the Bishop of so many people or Churches so far dispersed 6. Because it would make it uncertain who it is that hath any where the Episcopal power For Conversion is 1. a secret work known only to the person converted 2. And it is an obscure and usually a gradual work not done at once but by such degrees that the convert seldome knoweth himself who it was that converted him Though he may know that one mans ministry so far convinced him and another so far and so on It will be hard to say just when it came to a conversion And if you say it is he that perswaded him to be baptized that may be a lay man or long after his Conversion Princes in some Countries force or perswade thousands to be baptized If you say that it is he that Baptized him than Paul should be Pastor but to few of the Corinthians who thanked God that he baptized none of them but Stephanus houshold Gaius and Crispus as being not sent to baptize but to preach the Gospel 7. Because else many persons should be necessitated to choose a bad or very weak man if not a heretick for their Bishop when they may have far better and ablermen For it hath been known that a bad Minister and a heretical Minister much more a very weak Minister hath converted men But God doth not allow such converts therefore to cast their Souls under the danger and disadvantage of such a ones Ministry or oversights when much fitter may be had 8. Because both nature and Scripture example direct men to another course that is 1. To be members of the Church where they are cohabitants if there
that other a Tutor And so if a Physician commit his work statedly to another or a Pilot or the Master of a Family he maketh the other a Physician a Pilot a Master And so if a Bishop or Presbyter commit his work statedly to another he maketh that other a Bishop or Presbyter And then that Bishop or Presbyter so made is himself obliged as well as empowred and the work that he doth is his own work and not his that delivered him his Commission So that this doing these twelve parts of a Bishops work per alium is a meer mockery unless they speak unfitly and mean the making of all those to be Bishops as they are or else by perfidious usurpation casting their trust and work on others For if they could prove that God himself had instituted the Species of Sub-presbyters it would be to do their own work and not another mans My next proof of the limitation of Churches in Scripture times is that Deacons and Bishops were distinct Officers appointed to the same Churches The Church which the Deacon was related to was the very same and of the same extent with the Church which the Bishop was related to as is plain in all Texts where they are described Act. 6. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 7. c. But it is most clear that no Deacon then had the charge of many hundred Churches or more than one such as I have described Therefore neither had the Bishop of that Church They that have now extended the Office of the Deacons further and have alienated them from their first works of attending at the Sacred Tables and taking care of the Poor cannot deny but that this was at least a great part of their work in the Scripture times and some Ages after at least when Jerome ad Evagr. described the Offices of the Presbyters and Deacons And was any man then made a Deacon to a Diocess or to many hundred Churches or to more than one Did he attend the Tables of many Churches each Lords day at the same time If you say that there were many Deacons and some were in one Church and some in another it is true that is They were in several Assemblies which were every one a true Church and they were oft many in one Assembly But there was no one that was related to Many stated Church Assemblies nor to a Church of a lesser size or magnitude than the Bishop was 5. And that there was no Church then without a Bishop one or more is evident from Act. 14. 23. They ordained them Elders in every Church compared with other Texts that call them Bishops And Doctor Hammond sheweth that these Elders were Bishops And indeed it was not a Church in a proper political sense that had no Bishops formally or eminently No more than there can be a Kingdom without a King a School without a School-master or a family without a Master Object They are called Churches Act. 14. 23. before they had ordained Elders Answ 1. It is not certain from the Text for the name might be given from their state in fieri or which they were now entring into 2. If it were so it is certain that the appellation was equivocal as it is usual to distinguish the Kingdom from the King the School from the School-master the Family from the Master but not in the strict political sense of the words for that comprehendeth both 3. The truth is they were true political Churches before For they had temporary unfixed Bishops even the Apostles and Evangelists that converted them and officiated among them Otherwise they could have held no Sacred Assemblies for holy Communion and the Lords Supper as having none to administer it The fixing of peculiar Bishops did not make them first Churches but made them setled Churches in such an order as God would establish 6. Lastly The setling of Churches with Bishops in every City Tit. 1. 5. doth shew of what magnitude the Churches were in the Scripture times For 1. It is known that small Towns in Judea were called Cities 2. And that Creete which was called Hecatompolis as having an hundred Cities must needs then have small ones and near together 3. And it is a confessed thing that the number of Converts was not then so great as to make City Churches so numerous near as our Parishes are And if the consideration of all this together will not convince any that the Churches that had Bishops in Scripture times consisted not of many stated Assemblies as afore described but of one only and were not bigger than our Parishes let such enjoy their error still CHAP. IV. The same proved by the Concession of the most Learned Defenders of Diocesane Prelacy THough the Scripture Evidence be most satisfactory in it self yet in controversie it much easeth the mind that doubteth to find the Cause fully and expresly granted by those that most learnedly defend those consequents which it overthrows And if I do not bring plain Concessions here I will not deprecate the Readers indignation 1. Among all Christians the Papists are the highest Prelatists And among all Papists the Jesuits and among all the Jesuits Petavius who hath written against Salmasius c. on this Subject Petavius Dissert Ecclesiast de Episcop dignit jurisd p. 22. concludeth his first Chapter in which he had cited the chiefest of the Fathers Hactenus igitur ex antiquorum authoritate conficitur primis temporibus Presbyterorum Episcoporum non tantum appellationes sed etiam ordines in easdem concurrisse personas iidem ut essent utrique i. e. Hitherto it is proved by the Authority of the Ancients that in the first times not only the Names but the Orders of Presbyters and Bishops did concurr into the same persons so that both were the same men And if so I shall shew the consequents anon And pag. 23. He thus beginneth his third Chapter as opening the only necessary way to avoid the Scripture Arguments against Episcopacy Si quis amnia illa scripturae loca diligenter expendat id necessario consequens ex illis esse statuet eos ipsos qui ibi Presbyteri vocantur plus aliquid quam simplices fuisse presbyteros cujusmodi hodieque sunt nec dubitabit quin Episcopi fuerint iidem non vocabulo tantum sed re etiam potestate i. e. If any one will diligently weigh all those places of Scripture he will conclude that this is the necessary consequent of them that those that are there called Presbyters were somewhat more than simple Presbyters and such as now they are and he will not doubt but the same men were Bishops not only in name but in deed and in power Pag. 24. Existimo Presbyteros vel omnes vel eorum plerosque sic ordinatos esse ut Episcopi pariter ac presbyteri gradum obtinerent I think that either all or most of the Presbyters were so ordained as that they obtained both the degree of Bishop and
affirmamus So that it is a Bishop of one Assembly or Church which Doctor Hammond will have the question stated about 2. And such a Church or Assembly as great Cities a while had divers of and so divers Bishops 3. And this was after the Scripture times for they had divers Bishops with a divers Clergy 4. But that in Scripture times the Order of Sub-Presbyters cannot be proved instituted 5. And in his Annotations he expoundeth all the Texts of the New Testament of Bishops that mention Presbyters 6. But in his Answer to the London Ministers not daring yet to hold that they were of Humane and not of Divine Institution he holds that they were instituted in the end of St. John's days after all the Scripture was written which was about two or three years before his death and so were of Divine Institution though all the rest of the Apostles were dead Before I apply this I will subjoyn his words of more numerous Witnesses to our opinion with himself for he saith 8. Doctor Hammond of the rest Vindication against London Minsters pag. 104. And though I might truly say that for those more minute considerations or conjectures wherein this Doctor differs from some others he hath the suffrages of many of the learnedst men of this Church at this day and as far as he knoweth of all that embrace the same Cause with him I purposely pass by such Bishops as Cranmer Jewel c. and such conformable Divines as Doctor Whitaker Fulke c. as being not high enough to be valued by those that I have now to do with As Jewel Art 4. p. 171. sheweth that every Church must have one Bishop and but one and out of Cyprian that the Fraternitas universa was to chuse him Et âpiscopus delegatur plebe praesente de universae fraternitatis suffragio Episcopatus ei Sabino deferretur And mentioneth the Rescript of Honorius the Emperor to Boniface that If two Bishops through division and contention happen to be chosen we will that neither of them be allowed as Bishop but that he only remain in the Apostolick Seat whom out of the number of the Clergy Godly discretion and the consent of the whole Brotherhood shall chuse by a new Election How big yet was the Church even then Now all this being asserted 1. It is evident that they hold that in Scripture times no Church consisted of more than one ordinary stated worshipping Assembly 2. And that every such Assembly had a Bishop For if there were no Presbyters there could be no Assembly but where a Bishop was present for the Lords days were then used for publick Worship and the people could not do that without a Minister for they had Communion in the Lords Supper every Lords day And therefore they must have a Bishop or have no such Worship And Doctor Hammond departeth from Petavius in holding that no Church had more Bishops than one So that de facto he granteth all that I desire 1. That the Churches were but so many Assemblies having each a Bishop 2. And that no Sub-Presbyters were instituted in Scripture times And by what right the change was made we shall enquire anon CHAP. V. The same proved by the full Testimony of Antiquity THat the particular Churches infimae speciei vel ordinis of which combined Associated Churches were constituted were no larger than is before described and had but Unum Altare I shall prove Historically from Antiquity I. And Order requireth that I begin with Clemens Romanus But let the Reader still remember that while I cite him and others oft cited heretofore by many I do it not to the same end as they who thence prove that Bishops and Presbyters were then the same but to prove the Churches to be but such single Congregations as are fore-described Ep. ad Cor. pag. 54 55. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã i. e. Per regiones igitur urbes verbum praedicantes primitias eorum spiritu probantes Episcopos Diaconos eorum qui credituri erant constituerunt Here are these concurrent evidences to our purpose 1. In that he speaketh only of Bishops and Deacons and neither here nor elsewhere one syllable of any other Presbyters but Bishops it is apparent that in those times there were no Subject-Presbyters distinct from Bishops in being Nor could Doctor Hammond any other way answer Blondel here but by confessing and maintaining this and so expounding Clemens as speaking of Bishops only before other Presbyters were in the Church And if so then there could be none but Churches of single Assemblies then or such as one man could officiate in because there was then no more to do it 2. In that Cities and Countries are made the Seats of these Bishops for though some would make them to be mentioned only as the places where the Apostles preached the obvious plain sense of the words is connexive of preaching and constituting Bishops by preaching they made believers in Cities and Countries and over those believers they placed Bishops and Deacons which implieth it to be in the same places And whereas some would strain the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã to signifie Provinces and not Country Villages it must then as distinct from Cities have meant many Cities and so have stled Bishops and arch-Arch-Bishops intimating Subject-Presbyters under them But here is no such word or intimation Yea when the Countries are made first the Place of the Apostles preaching as they confess let any impartial man judge whether this be like to be the sense They preached in Provinces that is in the Cities of Provinces and in Cities And if there were Country Churches and Bishops seâied by the Apostle's its easie to see that each particular Church-Assembly had a Bishop when even the City Churches themselves were no bigger than Petavius and others mention 3. Ad hominem Though I believe that the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã eorum qui credituri erant be intended only to signifie the subsequence of believing to their preaching yet waving that to them that suppose it to intend the subsequence of believing to making Bishops it must needs imply that the Churches then consisted but of few and were yet to be filled up But whether one Bishop to have many Churches is a question which must be otherwise and aliunde decided 4. The magnitude of the Churches is plainly intimated when he saith p. 57. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. Constitutos itaque ab illis vel deinceps ab aliis viris celebribus cum consensu universae Ecclesiae qui inculpate ovili Christi inservierunt c. If the Bishops were chosen by the Consent of all the Church it was no greater a Church than would and did meet to signifie their consent and not such as our Diocesses now are 5. Also the same is intimated by pag. 69. If it be for me that Contention Sedition and Schisms arise I will depart I will be gone whither you will and will do what
and one Bishop XIII In a Roman Council sub Silvest it 's said Ab omni Ecclesia eligatur consecrandus Episcopus nullo de membris Ecclesiae intercedente omni Ecclesia conveniente nulli Episcopo liceat sine cuncta Ecclesia a novissimo gradu usque ad primum ordinare Neophytum Silvester Papa dixit A nobis incipientes moderamine lenitatis judicare commonemus ut nulli Episcopo liceat quemlibet gradum Clerici ordinare aut consecrare nisi cum omni adunata Ecclesia si placet dixerunt Episcopi placet What can be more fully said Let the Bishop to be ordained be chosen by all the Church no one of the Members of the Church being wanting and all the Church meeting together Let it be lawful for no Bishop without the whole Church to ordain Not to ordain or consecrate any degree of Clergy-Man but with the whole Church together in one And how great then were the Churches when even at Rome and all about it The whole Church united and every member could meet together at every Ordination and Consecration I scarce know how a testimony can be plainer XIV The Concil Sardic which first began to befriend the Grandeur of the Roman Bishop was it that first forbad Bishops to be ordained in small Villages yet note that even there it was not absolutely forbidden to all Villages but only to such Villages and small Cities where one Presbyter was enough But they allowed a Bishop to the Cities Quae Episcopos habuerunt siqua tam populosa est Civitas vel Locus mark Locus as distinct from Civitas qui mereatur habere Episcopum So that if there were but people enough for more than one Presbyter they allowed them a Bishop And Can. 14. It is decreed that As no Lay-man must be above three Weeks from Church so no Bishop from his own Church at another place Whereas if a Bishop have many Churches or many hundred or a thousand he could be but at one in a Year or two or three or more if he did nothing but travel from parish to Parish Only in the next Canon those that have Farms or Lands in the Country are dispensed with for three Weeks to be absent from their own Churches so they go to another XV. In the Epistle of the 1. Concil Nic. ad Eccles Aegypt in Crab. pag. 262. T. 1. Presbyters were to be made Solummodo sivideantur digni populus eos elegerit condecernente simul designante maxime Alexandriae Civitatis Episcopo Still the people that had the choice were no more than could meet to chuse And even in the Arabick Canons ascribed to this Council by some of late it 's said Can. 72. Sic Episcopi Sacerdotes si Civitates suas Altaria propter alia majora relinquerent male facerent which shews that each City even then had but one Altar or Meeting for Sacramental Communion though when these were written there were other Churches in Villages that had Altars And in Pisan Can. 57. Archi-presbyter in absentia Episcopi honoretur tanquam Episcopus quia est loco ejus sit caput Sacerdotum qui sub potestate ejus sunt in Ecclesia The Bishop then was but such a Head of Priests in the same Church as an Arch-Presbyter might be in his absence And Cap. 9. The Vote of the whole Diocess without the Arch-bishop shall not serve to chuse a Bishop though all gathered together XVI The Concil Vasense granted leave for Presbyters to preach and Deacons to read Homilies in Country Parishes which sheweth both that Bishops were the ordinary Preachers to their whole Flocks before and that these Parishes were yet but new and perhaps but Chappels that yet had not Altars and the Lord's Supper XVII Binnius in Concil Ephes 1. To. 2. cap. 20. saith Dalmatius told the Emperor that there were six thousand Bishops under the Metropolitan sent to the Council that were against Nestorius And there was a great number on the other side with Johan Antiochen who cast out Cyril and Memnon How great think you were these Bishops Dioceses XVIII Concil Carth. 3. cap. 39. 40. in Crab some would have had many twelve Bishops at each Bishop's Ordination but Aurelius desired it might be but three because Crebro pene per diem Dominicum ordinationes habemus they had Ordinations almost every Lord's day and Tripoli had but five Bishops How big were these Dioceses where the Bishops could meet almost every Lord's day for Ordinations and five under Tripoly was an exceeding small number And cap. 40. If a Bishop were accused at his Ordination the Cause was to be tried In eadem plebe cui ordinandus est And surely it was not to be in many hundred Congregations at once or per vices XIX Concil Antioch before this Can. 5. pag. 321. in Crab Siquis Presbyter aut Diaconus Episcopum proprium contemnens se ab Ecclesia segregaverit seorsum colligens Altare constituit vel in secunda edit privatim apud se collectis populis Altare erigere ausus fuerit c. This sheweth 1. That the Presbyters then joyned with the Bishop in the same Church 2. And that then each Church had but one Altar and to erect another Altar elsewhere was to set up another Church Can. 8. Presbyteri qui sunt in agris Canonicas Epistolas dare non possunt Chorepiscopi autem dare possunt This sheweth that then the Country Villages had Chorepiscopos with Presbyters Can. 10 Qui in vicis vel possissionibus Chorepiscopi nominantur quamvis manus impositionem Episcoporum perceperint ut Episcopi consecrati sint tamen Sanctae Synodo placuit ut modum proprium recognoscant ut gubernent sibi subjectas Ecclesias earumque moderamine curaque contenti sint This sheweth that then the Churches in Villages had their Bishops though under the City Bishops Can. 16. A Bishop that put himself into a vacant Church without the consent of a perfect Council where must be the Metropolitane must be cast out etsi cunctus populus quem diripuit eum habere delegerit which sheweth that the whole people were no more than could meet to chuse him Can. 17 18 21. imply the same Episcopus ab alia Parochia non migret ad aliam nec sponte sua insiliens nec vi coactus a populo nec ab Episcopis necessitate compulsus Maneat autem in Ecclesia quam primitus adeo sortitus est A Church and a Parish are here the same and no greater than that the people could be the compellers which implieth their concurrence which could not be in a Diocess of many hundred Churches but in one only Can. 23. The Goods of the Church are faithfully to be kept which also are to be dispensed by the Judgment and Power of the Bishop to whom is committed the people and the souls that are congregated in the Church and it 's manifest what things belong to the Church with the
knowledge of the Presbyters and Deacons that are about him who cannot but know what are the Church Goods c. Here 1. The Church contained only the souls that were congregated in it and not many Congregations 2. All the Church Goods were known to the Presbyters and Deacons so that the Bishop did dispose of them while he lived but could alienate none at his death which sheweth that it was but one Church or Congregation where the Bishop and Presbyters joyned in the Ministry Cap. 25. hath the same Evidence The Bishop dispenseth all the Goods and Lands of the Church to all that need but must not appropriate them to his Kindred c. but use them by the consent of his Presbyters and Deacons XX. Concil Carthag 4. cap. 14. The Bishop's dwelling was to be near the Church But if he had many Churches they would have told which Can. 17. The Bishop was to exercise the care of Government of Widows Orphans and Strangers by his Arch-Presbyter and Arch-Deacon which sheweth that they had not many Churches where each appropriate Presbyter and Deacons did it Can. 22. The Peoples consent and testimony was necessary to every Clerk ordained which sheweth how large the Churches or People were Can. 35. The Bishop is ordered to sit above the Presbyters in the Church and in their Consess but at home to know himself to be their Colleague which sheweth that they were all belonging to one Church and not to many far from each other XXI Concil Laodic Presbyters must not go into the Church or Sacrarium as the other Ed. before the Bishop nor sit in the Seats but must go in with the Bishop or sit in lower Seats till he comes Which sheweth that they were all in one Church And if there had been many Churches distant where there were no Bishops but Presbyters only it 's like that Case would have been excepted as well as is the Case of the Bishop's Sickness and Peregrination See Binnius three Versions To. 1. pag. 292. and Crab's two Vol. 1. pag. 310. Can. 28. Forbidding the Agapae or Church Feasts to be made in the Church implieth that other Houses could contain the Church Members And Can. 58. Forbidding Oblationes fieri vel celebrari in domibus ab Episcopis vel Presbyteris doth shew that till they built Chappels there was but one Congregation in a City which was where the Bishop was XXII Decretum Innocent 1. P. Rom. in Crab Vol. 1. pag. 453. Dicit De consignandis infantibus manifestum est non ab alio quam ab Episcopis fieri licere Nam Presbyteri licet sint Sacerdotes Pontificatus tamen apicem non habent c. And for how many one Bishop can do this with all his other work also you may judge XXIII To look back Concil Carthag 2. Can 3. decreeth Chrismatis confectio puellarum consecratio a Presbyteris non fiant Vel reconciliare quenquam in publica missa Presbytero non licere Crab. pag. 424. But this being an ordinary publick work this supposeth the Bishop still present in every Church to do it and to have a Church no more numerous than he could do it for whereas if Discipline were but moderately exercised according to the ancient Canons there could not be fewer than many hundreds in a day for the Bishop either to excommunicate or absolve in this Diocess where I live Leg. Albaspin Not. pag. 268. And the fourth Can. fortifieth this by this exception Si quisquam in periculo fuerit constitutus se reconciliari divinis altaribus petierit si Episcopus absens fuerit debet utique Presbyter consulere Episcopum sic periclitantem cum praecepto reconciliare Where note that reconciliari altaribus is the Phrase for being reconciled to the Churches And that no Presbyter might do it but in case of the persons danger the Bishops absence and with the Bishops Command Which still sheweth that the Bishop was usually present And as Albaspineus noteth a Presbyter might not do it for a dying Man till he had consulted the Bishop and told him all the case and had his Command Which supposeth him near for the man may be dead before our Ministers can ride to the Bishop and have his Commission and supposeth the Church to be but small XXIV To make short and leave no place for doubting I will joyn several Canons which decree that No Man shall be a Clerk to two Churches nor an Abbot to two Monasteries nor a Bishop to two Cities or Churches So Concil Oecumen Nic. 2. Can. 15. in Bin. pag. 394. Clericus ab hoc deinceps tempore in duabus Ecclesiis non collocetur Ab ipsa enim domini voce audivimus non posse quenquam duobus dominis servire And Concil Chalcedon Can. 10. juxta Dionys Non licet Clericum conscribi in duabus simul Ecclesiis And though then the Can. 17. sheweth that there were Singularum Ecclesiarum Rusticae Parochiae vel possessiones yet these were but like our Chappels and not called Churches but only the Bishop's Church And if the Secular Power made any place a City it was thereupon to follow the Secular Order So of Abbots Concil Venet. Can. 8. in Crab pag. 948. no one was to have two Monasteries Vid. Concil Agath Can. 38. And Photius Balsamon Nomocan Tit. 1. cap. 20. pag. 21. Ne in una Provincia duo Metropolitani aut in una Civitate duo Episcopi aut in duabus Civitatibus unus Clericus Neque in duabus Civitatibus quis potest esse Episcopus Excepting only even then Episcopum Tomensem Ille enim reliquarum Ecclesiarum Scythiae curam gerit Because the Christians were few and from under the Roman Power Et Leontopolis Isauriae sub Episcopo Isauropolis est He addeth Porro 35 Const tit 3. l. 1. Cod. c. 3. c. ait Eum qui quamcunque veterem aut recens conditam civitatem proprii Episcopatus jure aliove privilegio privat tametsi Principis permissu id faciat infamia notat mulctatque bonis constitutio ac simul inceptum irritum facit So that no City new or old might be deprived of its Privilege of having a Bishop Now seeing Corporations and Market Towns are in the old sense Cities and seeing Parish Churches such as ours are true Churches as Communities how many Cities and how many hundred Churches have many Bishops now He addeth Can. 15. âonc 7. and saith Si non permittitur cuiquam in duabus Ecclesiis Clericum fieri multo magis praesul duo Monasteria non moderabitur Quemadmodum neque unum caput duo corpora Therefore by parity of reason much less should one Church-man or Bishop be the head of many hundred or a thousand Bodies without any subordinate Head or Bishop under him Why may not an Abbot as well rule a thousand Monasteries per alios non Abbates as a Bishop a thousand Churches per alios non Episcopâs More Testimonies of Councils added to the former Chap.
5. UPon the Review finding some considerable Evidences from Councils before omitted some shall be here added 1. The Roman Clergy called a Council at Rome Bin. pag. 158. c. saith that in the Interregnum they had the charge of the Universal Church and Cyprian wrote to them as the Governors of the Church of Rome when they had been a year or two without a Bishop And their Actions were not null 2. A Carthage Council with Cyprian condemn even a dead man called Victor because by his Will he left one Faustinus a Presbyter the Guardian of his Sons and so called him off his Sacred Work to mind Secular things Did this favour of Bishop's Secular Power Magistracy or Domination 3. How came the Carthage Councils to have so many hundreds in so narrow a room or space of Land but that every ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Corporation or big Town had a Bishop Anno 308. at a Carthage Council the very Donatists had two hundred and seventy Bishops And at Arles two hundred Bishops heard the Donatists Cause 4. The Laodicean Council decreed Can. 46. that the Baptized should learn the Creed and on Friday repeat it to the Bishops or Presbyters which implieth that a Bishop was present with every Church And Cap. 57. It is ordained that thenceforth Bishops should not be ordained in small Villages and Hamlets but Visiters should be appointed them But such Bishops as had heretofore been there ordained should do nothing without the Conscience of the City Bishop Which implieth 1. That every big Town had a Bishop 2. And Villages before 5. Epiphanius Haer. 68. pag. 717. c. saith That Peter separated from Meletius in the same room and as Meletius went to the Mines he made new Bishops and gathered new Churches so that in several Cities there were two Bishops and Churches Which implieth that they were Congregations for Personal Communion 6. The Nicene Council cap. 8. alloweth Rural Bishops then in use whom Petavius proveth to have been true Bishops 7. Greg. Nazianz. pag. 528. c. sheweth how Churches were enlarged and changed when the strife began between Mea Tua Antiqua Nova Nobilior Ignobilior Multitudine Opulentior aut Tenuior 8. After Lucifer Calaritanus ordained Paulinus Antioch had long two Bishops half being his Flock and half cleaving to Meletius 9. Nazianzen had in the great City of Constantinople but one of the small Churches the Arians having the greater till Theodosius gave him the greater And those Hearers he was Bishop over 10. A Council at Capua ordered that both the Bishops Flocks in Antioch under Evagrius and Flavian should live together in Love and Peace 11. Many Cities tolerated Novatian Bishops and Churches among them and oft many other Dissenters Which sheweth that but part of the City were one Church 12. The Council at Carthage called the last by Binius decreed that Reconciliation of Penitents as well as Chrisme and consecrating Virgins is to be done only by the Bishops except in great necessity For how many Parishes can a Bishop do all this and all the rest of his Office And when Christians were multiplied they that desired a Bishop where was none before might have one But else aliud Altare is again forbidden to be set up 13. Another Carthage Council decreeth Can. 15. That the Bishop have but vile or cheap Houshold-stuff and a poor Table and Diet and seek Authority or Dignity by his Faith and desert of Life Can. 19. That he contend not for transitory things though provoked Can. 23. That he hear no Cause but in the presence of his Presbyters else it shall be void that is sentenced without them unless confirmed by their presence Note this being a constant work required a constant presence and it is not a selected Chapter of Presbyters that is named And must those of many hundred Parishes dwell in the City or travel thither for daily Causes of Offenders c. Can. 28 30. Bishops unjust Sentence void and Judgment against the absent 14. A Council at Agathum Can. 3. saith If Bishops wrongfully excommunicate one any other Bishop shall receive him Which implieth that the wronged person lived within reach of a Neighbour Bishop's Parish For it doth not bind him to remove his Dwelling And leave to go daily twenty or forty Miles to Church is a small kindness And I have already cited Can. 63. If any Citizens on the great Solemnities Easter the Lord's Nativity or Whitsuntide shall neglect to meet where the Bishops are seeing they are set in the Cities for Benediction and Communion let them for three Years be deprived of the Communion of the Church So that even when Churches were enlarged yet you see how great a part of them met in one place 15. Divers Canons give the Bishop a third or fourth part of all the Church Profits And if those Churches had been as big as our Dioceses it would have been too much of all Conscience 16. A Synod at Carpentoracte decreed that the Bishop of the City shall not take all the Country Parish Maintenance to himself Which implieth as the former that his Country Parish was small 17. A Council at Orleance Anno 540. decree Can. 3. about ordaining a Bishop that Qui praeponendus est omnibus ab omnibus eligatur The Dioceses yet were not so large but that All met to chuse 18. So Concil Byzazen saith it must be By the Election of all 19. Another at Orleance Anno 545. saith No Citizen must celebrate Easter out of the City because they must keep the principal Festivities in the presence of the Bishop where the holy Assembly must be kept But if any have a necessity to go abroad let him ask leave of the Bishop Here is but one City Assembly and Individuals must be known to the Bishop and ask his leave to go abroad And Can. 5. saith A Bishop must be ordained in his own Church which he is to oversee Which implieth that he had but one Church and Country Chappels 20. Another Orleance Council hath the like deposing all Bishops that come not in by common consent And requiring them both in their Cities and Territories to relieve the Poor from the Church-House Let us have such Dioceses as the Bishop can do this for and we consent 21. A Synod at Paris Can. 8. says Let no Man be ordained a Bishop against the Will of the Citizens nor any but whom the Election of the People and Clerks shall seek with plenary Will None shall be put in by the Command of the Prince c. 22. King Clodoveus called a Synod at Cabilone which Can. 10. decreeth That all Ordination of Bishops be null that was otherwise made than by the Election of the Comprovincials the Clerks and the Citizens 23. The Const Trul. Can. 38. sheweth how the unhappy changes were made decreeing That whatever alteration the Imperial Power shall make on any City the Ecclesiastical Order shall follow it And so if the
King will make every Market Town a City it shall have a Bishop And if he will make but one or two cities in a Kingdom there shall be but one or two Bishops And if he will make one City Regent to others that Bishop shall be so Thus Rome Constantinople c. came by their Superiority But Hierome telleth us the contrary that the Bishop of Tanais or any small City like our least Corporations was of equal Church-Dignity with Rome or the greatest 24. The same Council Can. 78. repeateth that All the Illuminate that is Baptized must learn the Creed and every Friday say it to the Bishop and Presbyters I hope they did not go every Friday such a Journey as Lincoln York or Norwich Diocess no nor the least in England would have put them to nor that the Bishop heard as many thousands every Friday as some of ours by that Canon should have heard 25. Anno 693. at a Toletane Council King Egica writeth a Sermon for them and therein tells them that Every Parish that hath twelve Families must have their proper Governor not a Curate that is no Governor But if it be less it must be part of another's Charge 26. Anno 756. Pipin called a Council in France whos 's Can. 1. is that Every City must have a Bishop And as is beforesaid every Corporate Town was a City 27. In the Epitome of the old Canons sent by Pope Adrian to Carolus Magnus published by Canisius the eighth Antioch Canon is Country Presbyters may not give Canonical Epistles but the Chorepiscopi By which it appeareth that the Chorepiscopi were Bishops as Petavius proveth in Epiphan Arrius And Can. 14 15. That No Bishop be above three Weeks in another City nor above two Weeks from his own Church Which intimateth that he had one single Church And Can. 19. That when a place wants a Bishop he that held them must not proudly hold them to himself and hinder them from one else he must lose that which he hath 28. The same Canons say Can. 94. If a Bishop six Months after Admonition of other Bishops neglect to make Catholicks of the people belonging to his Seat any other shall obtain them that shall deliver them from their Heresie So that 1. The Churches were not so big but that there might be divers in one Town 2. And converting the People is a better Title than Parish Bounds 29. It is there also decreed That no Bishop ordain or judge in another's Parish else it shall be void And they forbid Foreign Judgments because it is unmeet that he should be judged by Strangers who ought to have Judges of the same Province chosen by himself But our Diocesanes are Strangers to almost all the People and are not chosen by them See the rest Also another is that every Election of Bishops made by Magistrates be void yea all that use the Secular Magistrate to get a Church must be deposed and separated and all that joyn with him Also if any exact Money or for affection of his own drive any from the Ministry or segregate any of his Clergy or shut the Temple 30. A Council at Chalone under Carol. Magn. the Can. 15. condemneth Arch-Deacons that exercise Domination over Parish-Presbyters and take Fees of them as matter of Tyranny and not of Order and Rectitude And Can. 13. saith It is reported of some Brethren Bishops that they force them whom they are about to ordain to swear that they are worthy and will not do contrary to the Canons and will be obedient to the Bishop that ordaineth them and to the Church in which they are ordained Which Oath because it is very dangerous we all agree shall be forbidden By which it appeareth that 1. The Dioceses were not yet so large as to need such subordinate Governors as ours have Nor 2. Were Oaths of Canonical Obedience to the Bishop and Church yet thought lawful but forbidden as dangerous 31. A Council at Aquisgrane under Ludov. Pius wrote an excellent Treatise gathered out of the Fathers to teach Bishops the true nature of their Office which hath much to my present use but too long to be recited 32. Upon Ebbos Flight that deposed Lud. Pius the Arch-Bishoprick of Rhemes was void ten Years and ruled by two Presbyters Fulk and Hotho who were not then uncapable of governing the Flock but it is not like that they governed Neighbour Bishops 33. Canisius tells us of a Concilium Regiaticinum and Can. 6. is That the Arch-Presbyter examine every Master of a Family personally and take account of their Families and Lives and receive their Confessions And Can. 7. That a Presbyter in the absence of the Bishop may reconcile a Penitent by his Command c. Which shew that yet Dioceses were not at the largest 34. A Council at Papia Anno 855. order yet That the Clergy and People chuse the Bishops and yet that the Laity on pretence of their electing power trample not on the Arch-Presbyter and that Great Men's Chappels empty not Churches 35. Yea Pope Nicholas Tit. 8. c. 1. decreeth that no Bishops be ordained but by the Election or Consent of the Clergy and People When they became uncapable of the ancient Order yet they kept up the words of the old Canons 36. This is intimated in the old Canons repeated at a Roman Council Anno 868. That if Bishops excommunicate any wrongfully or for light Causes and not restore them the Neighbour Bishops shall take such to their Communion till the next Synod Which was the Bishop of the next Parish or Corporation and not one that dwelt in another County out of reach And Can. 72. Because the Bishops hindred by other business cannot go to all the Sick the Presbyters or any Christians may anoint them How big was the Diocess when this Canon was first made Who would give his business rather than Distance and Numbers and Impossibility as the reason why the Bishop of London Lincoln Norwich c. visit not all the Sick in their Dioceses 37. Anno 869 till 879. was held a Council called General at Constantinople The Can. 8. is Whereas it is reported that not only the Heretical and Usurpers but some Orthodox Patriarchs also for their own security have made men subscribe that is to be true to them the Synod judgeth that it shall be so no more save only that Men when they are made Bishops be required as usual to declare the soundness of their Faith He that violateth this Sanction let him be deprived of his Honour But these later instances only shew the Relicts of Primitive Purity and Simplicity more evidently proved in the three first Centuries 38. And he that will read the ancient Records of the Customs of Burying will thence perceive the extent of Churches Doctor Tillesly after cited affirmeth pag. 179. against Selden that The Right of Burial place did first belong to the Cathedral Churches And Parish Churches began so lately as now understood having no
probabiliter ex oblatione dare debebit The other Ed. saith Et cura probatio sit Episcopi We are content that the Diocess be as great as the Bishop will perform this for to examine all such dying men and give them the Sacrament or send it them after his distinct Examination VII Gregor Nazianz. Epist 22. pag. 786. To. 1. perswading the Church of Caesarea to chuse Basil for their Bishop sendeth his Letters to the Presbyters the Monks the Magistrates and the whole Laity And though I doubt not but by that time there were Country Congregations by this the magnitude of the City Church may be gathered where the whole Laity could be consulted and could chuse And Basil made this Gregory his chief friend Bishop of Sasimis a small poor dirty Town And yet Gregory himself it seems had in some near Village a Chorepiscopus with Presbyters and Deacons as in Glycerius his Case appeareth Epist Greg. 205. pag. 900 901. And Nazianzum where he plaid the Bishop under his Father two Bishops at once one in Title the other in Practice without Title was but a small Town VIII Basil an Arch-Bishop was so much against enlarging Dioceses and taking in many Churches to one Bishop that he taketh the advantage of the difference between him and Anthymius to make many Bishops more in his Diocess over small places yea it seemeth some places were so small as that they never before had any Pastors at all as appeareth by Gregory Nazianzene Epist 28. IX Theodoret tells us lib. 4. cap. 20. Hist Eccles that even in the great Alexandria the Presbyters and Deacons were all but nineteen when Lucius came to banish them to Heliopolis a City of Phoenicia which City had not one Christian in it By which it appeareth that even then under Christian Emperors Christianity was not received by the multitude when some Cities had not a Christian X. Theodor. ib. l. 4. c. 16. saith that when Eulogius and Protogenes the Presbyters of Edessa were banished to Antionone in Thebais they found the most of the people Heathens and but few of the Church yet had that little number a Bishop of their own XI Id. l. 4. c. 20. In Peter Bishop of Alexandria's Epistle wherein he sheweth such actions then done by the Soldiers in scorn of the Godly proclaiming Turpitude not to be named under the name of scornful Preaching as have been done by others lately among us it 's said of Lucius Qui partes lupi nequitia improbe factis agere impense studebat quique Episcopatum non consensu Episcoporum Oâthodoxorum in unum convenientium non suffragiis vere Clericorum non postulatione Populi ut sacri Ecclesiae Canones praescribunt So that great Patriarch himself was chosen Postulatione Populi as shewing the custom of all the Churches which beginning when the people were but one Congregation continued as it could in some degree when they came like a Presbyterian Church for even then it was no otherwise to have many Congregations XII Id. c 22. saith that Valens found the Orthodox even in the great Patriarchal City of Antioch in possession but of one Church which good Jevinian the Emperor had given them of which he dispossessed them And when they met afterwards to worship God at a Hill near the City Valens sent to disturb them thence And Cap. 23. Flavianus and Diodorus Presbyters Meletius the Bishop being banished led them to a River side where they congregated till they were thence also driven by the Emperor And Flavianus when he could not preach collected Mâtter Reasons and holy Sentences as Sermon-Notes for others to preach in the Gyânasâââ Bellicum where they resolved to meet whatever came on it Then Aphraates a Monk taught them and when Valens told him that Monks must pray in private and not preach in publick Aphraates told the Emperor that he had set the House of God our Father on fire and troubled the Church and therefore he was called to its publick help to shew how far they obeyed a silencing Emperor By all which it appeareth that even then the Orthodox Patriarchal Church of Antioch was but one Assembly which met in one only place at once XIII Id. l. 4. c. 29. When Terenâius the Emperor's victorious General being Orthodox was bid by the Emperor to ask what he would of him as a Reward he asked but One Church for the Orthodox and was denied it which intimateth their numbers XIV Dolicha where Eusebius made Maris Bishop was parvum Oppidum a little Town and infected with Arianism where an Arian Woman killed Eusebius with a Tile when he went to ordain Maris Bishop Theodor. lib. 5. cap. 4. XV. Euseb Eccles Hist l. 5. c. 16. tells us that Apollonius saith of Alexander a Montanist Bishop that the Congregation whereof he was Pastor because he was a Thief would not admit him By which it appeareth that his Church was but one Congregation And l. 7. c. 29. The Synod of Antioch say of Dionysius Alexandr that he wrote not to the person of Paulus Samosatenus but to the whole Congregation that is his Church And they say He licensed the Bishops and Ministers of the adjoyning Villages and Cities to preach to the People Which sheweth what Dioceses and Churches then were XVI Socrates l. 1. c. 8. tells us that Spiridion was at the same time a Bishop and a Shepherd And whether his Parish was one Church or many hundred you may easily judge when so holy a Man could spare time all the Week to keep his sheep XVII When Constans the Emperor affrighted Constantius to restore Athanasius Constantius craved of Athanasius that the Arrians in Alexandria might have one Church to themselves Athanasius told him It was in his power to command and execute but craved also a request of him which was that in all Cities there might also be one Church granted for them that communicated not with the Arrians But the Eastern Arrian Bishops hearing that put off the decision of both the Requests By which a willing person may conjecture at the quantity of the Episcopal Churches in those times XVIII Even in Ambrose's days the great Church of Milan was no greater than could meet in one Temple to chuse a Bishop And Ambrose was chosen by them Socrat. l. 4. c. 25. And Baronius in Vita Ambrosii ex Paulino saith pag. 9. Quod solitus erat circa Baptizandos solus implere quinque postea Episcopi tempore quo decessit vix implerent What then was all the rest of his work and how many Churches could he thus oversee And the Arrians for whom the Emperor made all that stir with Ambrose were so few in Milan that when the Emperor would have had one Church for them and could not get it by fair means or force Ambrose thus jesteth at the Empress and the Arrian Gothes Quibus ut olim plaustrum sedes erat it a nunc plaustrum Ecclesia est Quocunque foemina illa processerit secum
arbitrabatur And cap. 25. Cum ipso semper Clerici una etiam domo mensa sumptibusque communibus alebantur vestiebantur Yea he ordered just how many Cups in a day his Clergy-men with him should drink and if any sware an Oath he lost one of his Cups Through God's Mercy sober Godly Ministers now need no such Law By this it evidently appeareth that the Church which he and his Presbyters ruled was not many hundred but one Congregation or City-Church There being no mention of any Country Presbyters that he had elsewhere as far as I remember And when Augustine was dying the People with one consent accepted of his choice of Eradius to be his Successor Epist 110. pag. 195. To recite all that is in Austin's Works intimating these Church-limits would be tedious XX Epiphanius's Testimony I have before mentioned as produced by Petavius that there were few Cities if any besides Alexandria in those Countries that had more than one Congregation and particularly none of his own And Doctor Hammond trusteth to him and Irenaeus to prove that the Apostles setled single Bishops in single Congregations in many places without any Sub-Presbyters XXI Socrates l. 5. c. 21. saith The Church of Antioch in Syria is situate contrary to other Churches for the Altar stands not to the East but to the West Which Speech implieth that besides Chappels if any there was but one Church that was notable in Antioch while he calleth it The Church at Antioch without distinction from any other there XXII Socrates l. 7. c. 3. tells us a notable story of Theodosius Bishop of Synada who went to Constantinople for Power to persecute Agapetus the Macedonian Bishop in that City But while he was absent Agapetus turned Orthodox and his Church and the Orthodox Church joyned together and made Agapetus Bishop and excluded Theodosius who made his Complaint of it to Atticus the Patriarch of Constantinople a wise and peaceable Man who desired Theodosius to live quietly in private because it was for the Churches good May such causes oft have such decisions and Lordly troublesome Prelates such success By which story you may guess how many Congregations both Parties made in Synada XXIII Socrates l. 7. c. 26. tells us that Sisinnius was chosen Bishop of Constantinople by the Laity against the Clergy And cap. 28. Sisinnius sent Proclus to be Bishop of Cyziâum but the People chose Dalmatius and refused him And this custom of the People's Choice must needs rise at first from hence that the whole Church being but one Congregation was present For what Right can any one Church in a Diocess have to chuse a Bishop for all the rest any more than the many hundred that are far off and uncapable to chuse XXIV Sozomen's Testimony even so late is very observable lib. 7. cap. 15. who mentioning the differences of the East and West about Easter and inferring that the Churches should not break Communion for such Customs saith Frivolum enim merito quidem judicarunt consuetudinis gratia a se mutuo segregari eos qui in praecipuis Religionis capitibus consentirent Neque enim easdem traditiones per omnia similes in omnibus Ecclesiis quamvis inter se consentientes reperire posses And he instanceth in this Etenim per Scythiam cum sint Civitates multae unum dântaxat hae omnes Episcopum habent I told you the reason of this Rarity before Apud alias vero nationes reperias ubi Pagis Episcopi ordinantur Sicut apud Arabes Cyprios ego comperi He speaketh of his own knowledge No wonder then if Epiphanius be to be interpreted as Petavius doth when in Cyprus not only the Cities had but one Church but also the Villages had Bishops To these he addeth the Novatians and the Phrygian Montanists And let none think their instances inconsiderable For the Montanists were for high Prelacy even for Patriarchs as in Tertullian appeareth And the Novatians were for Bishops and had many very Godly Bishops and were tolerated by the Emperors even in Constantinople as good People and Orthodox in the Faith And Novatus was martyred in Valerian's Persecution as Socrates l. 4. c. 23. saith XXV Even Clemens Roman or whoever he was that wrote in his name Epist 3. sheweth that Teaching the People is the Bishop's Office and concludeth in Crab p. 45. Audire Episcopum attentius oportet ab ipso suscipere doctrinam fidei Monita autem vitae a Presbyteris inquire a Diaconis vero ordinem Disciplinae By which Partition of Offices it is evident that the Bishop only and not the Presbyters then used to preach to the Church and that the Presbyters though ejusdem ordinis and not Lay-Elders used to instruct the People personally and give them Monita vitae and that they were all in one Church together and not in several distant Churches XXVI Paul himself telleth us that Cenchrea had a Church and the Scripture saith They ordained Elders in every Church And though Downame without any proof obtrude upon us that it was under the Bishop of Corinth and had a Presbyter of his to teach them yet of what Authority soever in other respects the Constitutions called Clements or the Apostles be they are of more than his in this where lib. 7. cap. 46. in that old Liturgy Lucius is said to be Bishop of Cenchrea ordained by the Apostles XXVII Gennadius de viris illustr l. 1. c. 10. saith that Asclepius was Vici non grandis Episcopus Bishop of a Village not great XXVIII Saith Cartwright Four or five of the Towns which were Seats of the Bishops of the Concil Carthag which Cyprian mentioneth are so inconsiderable that they are not found in the Geographical Tables XXIX And faith Altare Damascen p. 294. Oppidum trium Tabernarum Velitris vicinum was a Bishop's Seat for all the nearness and smallness of the Towns And Gregor lib. 2. Epist 35. laid the Relicts of the wasted Church to the Bishoprick of Veliterno Castrum Lumanum had a Bishop till Gregory joyned it to Benevatus Bishop of Micenas and so had many Castra ordinarily Remigius did appoint a Bishop within his own Diocess when he found that the number of persons needed it Viz. apud Laudunum clavatum Castrum suae Dioeceseos Of Spiridion the Bishop of Trimithantis I spake before XXX Theoph. Alexand. Epist Pasch 3. in Bibl. Pat. To. 3. concludeth thus Pro defunctis Episcopis in locis singulorum constituti In urbe Nichio pro Theopempto Theodosius In Terenuthide Aisinthius In oppido Geras pro Eudaemone Pirozus In Achaeis pro Apolline Musaeus In Athrivide pro Isidoro Athanasius In Cleopatride Offellus In Oppido Lato pro Timotheo Apelles And the nearness and smallness of some of these sheweth the Dioceses small The same Theoph. Alex. saith Epist Canon Can. 6. De iis qui ordinandi sunt haec erit forma ut quicquid est Sacerdotalis ordinis consentiat eligat tunc Episcopus examinet
vel ei etiam assentiente Sacerdotali ordine in media Ecclesia ordinet praesente populo Episcopo alloquente an etiam posset ei populus ferre testimonium Ordinatio autem non fiat clanculum Ecclesia enim pacem habente decet praesentibus sanctis ordinationes fieri in Ecclesia Undoubtedly as Balsamon noteth by Saints is meant fideles the People Here then you see that the Churches then were such where all the Clergy were present with the Bishop who ordained Ministers to a single Church where all the people could be present to be consulted XXXI In the Life of Fulgentius it is said that Plebs ipsius loci ubi fuerat Monasterium constitutum differre suam prorsus Electionem donec inveniret B. Fulgentium cogitabat where the Bishops resolved to ordain though the King forbad it them And though the King persecuted them for it it is added Repleta jam fuerat Provincia Bizacena novis Sacerdotibus pene vix paucarum plebium Cathedrae remanserant destitutae And the Phrase plebium Cathedrae doth signifie a Bishop's Seat in one Congregation of People One Plebs was one Congregation and had its proper Cathedram XXXII Sozomen after Socrates mentioning the diversity of Church Customs as aforesaid l. 7. c. 19. saith that at Alexandria the Arch-Deacon only readeth the Holy Scriptures in other places only the Deacons and in many Churches only the Priests and on solemn days the Bishops By which words it appeareth that then every Church was supposed to have a Bishop Priests and Deacons present in their publick Worship For the Bishop on his solemn days could not be reading in many Churches much less many hundred at once XXXIII Histor Tripartit l. 1. c. 19. out of Sozomen l. 1. c. 14. Edit Lat. Basil p. 1587. telleth us how Arius seeketh as from the Bithynian Synod to Paulinus of Tyre Euseb Caesar Patroph Scythopol ut una cum suis juberetur cum populo qui cum eo erat solennia Sacramenta Ecclesiae celebrare Esse dicens consuetudinem in Alexandria sicut etiam nunc ut uno existente super omnes Episcopo Presbyteri scorsim Ecclesias obtinerent populus in eis Cââââctas solemniter celebraret Tunc illi una cum aliis Episcopis c. By this with what is said before out of Epiphanius it is undeniable that this gathering of Assemblies by the Presbyters in the same City and administring the Sacrament to them besides the Church where the Bishop was was taken to be Alexandria's singularity even as low as Sozomen's time And yet note that here is even at Alexandria no mention of many Churches in the Countries at a distance much less hundreds thus gathered but only of some few in that great City And if even in a great City and in Epiphan and in Sozomen's days a Presbyter's Church was an Alexandrian Rarity what need we more Historical Evidence of the Case of the Churches in those times XXXIV Ferrandus Diaconus in Epist de 5. Quaest saith to Fulgentius Sanctos Presbyteros Diaconos beatamque Congregationem which was his Church saluto And that you may again see what Congregation or Church that was In vita Fulgentii cap. 17. pag. 8. it is said that the Plebs sought and chose him and that in despight of Foelix the ambitious Deacon who sought the place and sought the life of Fulgentius Populus super suam Cathedram eum collocavit Celebrata sunt eodem die Divina solenniter Sacramenta de manibus Fulgentii Communicans omnis populus laetus discessit And if in the noble City of Ruspe so late as the days of Fulgentius the Bishop's Church-members were no more than could chuse him set him on his seat and all communicate that day at his hands it is easie by this to judge of most other Churches XXXV Concil Parisiens 1. in Caranz pag. 244. Can. 5. saith Nullus civibus invitis ordinetur Episcopus nisi quem Populi Clericorum Electio plenissima quaesierit voluntate Non principis imperio neque per quamlibet conditionem Metropolis voluntate Episcoporum Comprovincialium ingeratur Quod si per ordinationem Regiam honoris sui culmen pervadere aliquis nimia temeritate praesumpserit a Comprovincialibus loci ipsius Episcopis recipi nullatenus mereatur quem indebite assumptum agnoscunt Siquis de Comprovincialibus recipere eum contra indicta praesumpserit sit a fratribus omnibus segregatus ab ipsorum omnium Charitate remotus Here again you see how late all the Church was to chuse every Bishop plenissima voluntate and consequently how great the Church was And were this Canon obeyed all the people must separate from all the Bishops of England as here all are commanded to do from all those Bishops that do but receive one that is put in by the King and not by the free choice of all the Clergy and People of his Church Note that Crab Vol. 2. pag. 144. hath it contra Metropolis voluntatem But both that and Caranza's Reading who omitteth contra seem contrary to the scope and it 's most likely that it should be read Metropolis voluntate contra Episcoporum comprov scilicet voluntatem XXXVI Leo 1. P. Rom. Epist 89. pag. mihi 160. damning Saint Hillary Magisterially yet saith Expectarentur certe vota Civium testimonia populorum quaereretur honoratorum arbitrium Electio Clericorum quae in Sacerdotum solent ordinationibus ab his qui norunt patrum regulas custodiri ut Apostolicae authoritatis norma in omnibus servaretur qua praecipitur ut Sacerdos Ecclesiae praefuturus non solum attestatione fidelium c. Et postea Teneatur subscriptio Clericorum honoratorum testimonium ordinis consensus Plebis Qui praefuturus est omnibus ab omnibus eligatur And how great must that Diocess be where all the Laity must chuse and vote c. It 's true that Epist 87. c. 2. p. 158. he would not have little Congregations to have a Bishop to whom one Presbyter is enough and no wonder at that time that this great Bishop of Rome the first that notably contended for their undue Supremacy in the Empire was of that mind who also Epist 88. saith of the Chorepiscopi Qui juxta Can. Neocaesar sive secundum aliorum decreta patrum iidem sunt qui Presbyteri The falsehood of which being too plain Petavius in Epiphan ad Haeres 74. p. 278. judgeth that these words being in a Parenthesis are irreptitious And ibid. Epist 88. he saith that by the Can. all these things following are forbidden the Chorepisc and Presbyter Presbyterorum Diaconorum aut Virginum consecratio sicut constitutio Altaris ac benedictio vel unctio Siquidem nec erigere eis Altaria nec Ecclesias vel Altaria consecrare licet nec per impositiones manuum fidelibus baptizandis vel conversis ex haeresi Paracletum Spiritum Sanctum tradere nec Chrisma conficere nec Chrismate Baptizatorum frontes
now may do to meet by parcels in several Houses sometimes in a danger yet their ordinary Meetings when they were free was all together in one place And Unum Altare was the note of their Individuation with Unus Episcopus when Bishops grew in fashion in the eminent sense 2. That the first that broke this Order and had divers Assemblies and Altars under one Bishop were Alexandria and Rome and no other Church can be proved to have done so for about three hundred Years after Christ or near nor most Churches till four hundred yea five hundred Years after 3. That when they departed from this Church temperament they proceeded by these degrees 1. They set up some Oratories or Chappels as are in our Parishes which had only Prayers and Teachings without an Altar Oblations or Sacraments in the City Suburbs or Country Villages near the People coming for Sacramental Communion to the Bishop's Church 2. Afterward these Chappels were turned into Communicating Churches But so as that at first the Bishop's Presbyters who lived sometimes in the same House with him and always near him in the same City and were his Colleagues did preach and officiate to them indifferently that is he whom the Bishop sent and after that a particular Presbyter was assigned to teach a particular Congregation yet so as that more of the Bishop's Presbyters commonly had no such Congregations but the most of them still attended the Bishop in his Church and sate with him on each hand in a high raised Seat and whilst he did usually preach and administer the Sacrament they did but attend him and do nothing or but some by assisting Acts as Lay-Elders do in the Presbyterian Churches principally employed in personal oversight and in joyning in Government with the Bishop And those same Presbyters who had Congregations joyned with the rest in their Weekly Work and made up the Consessus or College of Presbyters 3. And next that and in some places at the same time Communicating Congregations were gathered in the Country Villages so far off the City as that it was found meet to leave a Presbyter Resident among them but under the Government of the City Bishop and Presbytery of whom he was one when he came among them And all this while the Churches were but like our greater Parishes which have divers Chappels where there is liberty of Communicating 4. After this when the Countries were more converted there were more Country Parish-Congregations set up till they attained the form of a Presbyterian Church differing only in the Bishop that is a certain number of the Neighbour Country Parishes in one Consistory but with a Bishop did govern all these Parishes as one Church that is It was many Worshipping Churches as sis eight or ten or twelve joyning to make up one governed Church But at the same time many Pastors and People being convinced of the Church-form which they had before been under and of their own necessity and privileges did require the same Order among themselves as was in City Churches and so had their proper Bishops who were called Chorepiscopi or Country Bishops But these Country-Bishops living among the poorer and smaller number of Christians had not so many Presbyters to attend them as the City-Bishops had So that some Country Congregations had Bishops and some had none And the Churches being chiefly governed by the Synods who met for obliging Concord to avoid Divisions these Synods being made up of the City-Bishops at first they there carried it by Vote to make all the Country-Bishops under them and responsible to them Which they the rather and the easilier consented to because many obscure and unworthy Fellows did insinuate into the esteem of the Country-Christians who had no Bishops near them to advise them better and so became the Corrupters of Doctrine and the Masters of Sects and Heresies By this time one part of the Country Churches had Bishops of their own and the other had none but only Presbyters under the city-City-Bishops and Presbytery But yet it was but few Neighbour-Parishes like our Market-Towns and the Villages between them that were thus under the city-City-Bishop For every such Town was then called a City in the larger sense as it signifieth Oppidum and most such Towns had City-privileges too which was no more than to be Corporations and not to have a Nominal Eminency as now some small places have above greater as Bath rather than Plimouth Ipswich Shrewsbury c. Next to this the Emperors being Christians and desiring without force to draw all the People from Heathenism to Christianity they thought it the best way to advance the Christians in worldly respects which ever win on common minds And so they endued the Churches and Bishops with such Honours and Powers heretofore described as were like to the Honour and Power of the Civil Governors in their kind And the Bishops being thus lifted up did first enlarge their own Dioceses as far as they could and advance their Power and the World came unchanged into the Church both in Cities and Villages where the Christians were before so few that many think the Heathens were called Pagani in distinction from the Citizens who were Christian And then the Bishops put down the Chorepiscopi as presuming too much to imitate their Power And next to that lest every Corporation or Market-Town having a Bishop their Dioceses should not be great enough and ne vilesceret nomen Episcopi lest a Bishop's Name should not be honoured enough but become cheap by reason of the number and of the smallness of his Church they first ordered that no such small Cities or other places as had People enough for but one Presbyter should have a Bishop and afterward by degrees put down many smaller Bishops Churches and joyned them to their own And so proceeded by the advantage of Civil Alterations on Cities Names and Privileges to bring themselves to the state that they are in wherein one Bishop infimi ordinis that is no Arch-Bishop hath many hundred or above a thousand Churches and multitudes of Cities called now but Corporations Burroughs or Market-Towns I have repeated so much of the History lest the Reader forget what it is that I am proving and that he may note that if I prove now that in later Ages they kept but the Vestigia or Reliques of the former to prove how it was before their times and if I prove but a Church of Presbyterian Magnitude to have so long continued it sufficeth against that which we now call a Diocess And that we do not play with Names nor by a Diocesane Church mean the same thing with a Parochial or Presbyterian but we mean such as our Dioceses now are where a Bishop alone with a Lay-Chancellor's Court or with some small help of an Arch-Deacon Surrogate or Dean and Chapter without all the Parish-Ministers besides doth rule a multitude of distant Congregations who have no proper Bishop under him And now I proceed I.
ones called Pro-Consular which were taken by the publick Notaries Certainly the Gravel-pits afforded them advantage for the celebrating of their publick Assemblies in the time of persecution especially at Rome where in the digged gravel there remain many subterraneous ample recesses Though when the persecution was vehement they were thence also excluded as the letters P. Cornelii ad Lupic Episc Vien testifie saying Christians may not missas agere keep their meetings for Church worship publickly no not in the vaults or pits So much of the Churches and publick assemblies of the Christians c. saith Baronius Which Polyd. Virgil secondeth c. 6. yea the Bishops durst scarce be seen in the streets so hot were the persecutions as Euseb lib. 6. cap. 31. Therefore as I before noted they had yet no capacious Temples as Illyricus well gathereth Catalog Testi verit p. 112. But they began to have days of peace and liberty under Alexand. Severus Gordian Philip Galienus Flavius Claudius Aurelianus Probus and then they did enlarge their too small rooms to that described by Euseb lib. 8. c. 1. XXVI Another evidence is that Monasteries were built before Chappels and Countrey Parish Churches and far more numerous so that we frequently read of Monasteries under a Bishop with their Abbot or Presbyter when we read little or nothing of Parish Churches in the Countries under him And if these had been as common why are they not as much mentioned in the ancient records of the Church The Egyptian Monks and those in Judaea and those in Britain in Beda and the life of Hierome Fulgentius and abundance such witness this XXVII Another evidence is the Canons that none but a Bishop must publickly reconcile a penitent nor pronounce the blessing in the Church c. Of which before in particular Canons XXVIII Another evidence is that Presbyters or Bishops were not to remove from the Places they were Ordained in But those places of old were single Churches usually in Cities with the suburbs that could come to the same Church as Dr. Field saith Concil Arelat 1. cited by Spelman pag. 40. because we had 3 Brittish Bishops there In quibuscunque locis ordinati fuerint Ministri in ipsis locis perseverent And ipse locus was not a circuit of 40 or 50 or 100 miles long but the Bishops Parish or Vicinity Of the Bishops not removing without a Synod many Councils speak XXIX Another evidence is that the Canons which take down the Chorepiscopi and turn them to periodeutae Visitors or Itinerants and which forbid the making of Bishops in small Cities or villages 1. Were of late date 2. And were in aspiring times and had a reason answerable ne vilescat nomen Episcopi 3. And therefore intimate that it was otherwise before as I have before shewed XXX A Separatist or Schismatick was then known by his withdrawing from his proper Church and so was an Apostate or deserter And he that stayed away certain days was to be excommunicate And they that fall into sins and never present themselves to the Church to shew their penitence even when they fall sick and desire Communion shall not have it till they shew fruits worthy of repentance faith Concil Arelat 1. Can. 22. But 1. in our way when the Church that I am of is an hundred miles long and hath above a thousand Parishes who can tell when a man is at the Church and when he is not unless you make half a years work to examine the matter in a thousand Assemblies 2. And a man may wander and never be in the same Assembly once in three years and yet be still in his own Church because the Docese is the Church 3. Unless the Bishops presence as well as remote relation be necessary And then no man cometh to Church but he that cometh where the Bishop is for ubi Episcopus ibi Ecclesia And the Parish Church is with them no Church unless equivocally as a Community For as Learned Dr. Field saith and they must all say None are to be ordained but to serve in some Church and none have Churches but Bishops all other being but assistants to them in their Churches Lib. 5. c. 27. p. 139. Therefore they call the Parish Priests the Bishops Curates and Dr. Field maketh the Bishops Church or Diocese and a particular Church all one If then one Parish priest of a thousand be an Arrian Antinomian Socinian Papist Seeker c. he that separateth not from that one Priest and Parish meeting separateth not from his Bishops Church nor any particular Church For his Church is a countrey which while he is in he is no Separatist if he joyn with any part of it XXXI But my greatest evidence which I trust to above all the rest is The greatness of the Bishops work which no mortal man can truly and faithfully discharge and do for a Diocese in the opposed sence nor for more than one of our greater Parishes I have recited some of the particulars before and I shall again have occasion to do it more at large I now only name these parts 1. To be the ordinary Baptizer or still present with all that are Baptized to anoint their nostrils c. as aforesaid 2. To be the Confirmer of all the baptized in all the Diocese 3. To be the ordinary preacher to his flock and to expound the Scriptures to them 4. To be the only publick reconciler or absolver of all penitents 5. To be the publick Priest to be the Guide of the people in publick worship and to administer the Lords Supper 6. To take particular account and care of all the peoples souls and admonish teach and exhort them as there is special need 7. To be the Excommunicator of the impenitent or ever one and the chief 8. To Ordain all Ministers and Subministers 9. To oversee and rule the Clergy 10. To receive all Oblations Tithes Gifts and Glebes and be the distributer of them 11. To visit the sick in all his flock 12. To take a particular care of all the poor the sick the strangers the imprisoned c. as their Curator 13. To keep almost daily but constantly weekly Assemblies for all the publick offices 14. To keep Synods among his Colleagues Bishops and Presbyters 15. To try and hear Causes with the Bishops and Synods and with his Presbyters at home about all scandals c. that come before him of which one Town may find him work enough the convincing and gentle reproof and exhortation will take up so much time 16. The looking after and convincing or confuting Hereticks 17. The reconciling disagreeing neighbours 18. The confecting of oyl and holy bread c. to furnish all his Presbyters with 19. The Benediction of Marriages and Solemnizing of Funerals with a multitude of other Ceremonies 20. And besides all this the right government of his own house And if he had Children the education of them 21. The oversight of all the Schools
them go without Christianity rather than Baptize them without this Image of a Cross unless he will be suspended from preaching Christs Gospel to the ignorant that they may be saved But if he will bear that he may do what he will that so poor souls may be the losers 19. If the commonest whore or wicked woman come to be Churched as they call it after child-bearing the Priest must use all the Office of thanksgiving without first expecting her repentance as if she were the chastest person And must give her the Sacrament 20. To conclude no Priest as such till Licensed hath power to take upon them to expound in his own Cure or elsewhere and therefore not to his family or any one of his ignorant neighbours any Scripture or matter or Doctrine But shall only study to Read plainly and aptly without glossing or adding the Homilies c. Are these Authorized Priests that may not so much as tell a Child the meaning of his Catechism or any Article of the Faith No though an ignorant person ask him The Priests lips should preserve knowledge and the Law should be enquired of at his mouth for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts But an English Priest may not expound any Matter Scripture or Doctrine but barely Read till the Bishop License him Obj. If they be not able it will do more harm than good Answ Will the righteous God be always mocked and suffer men to make merchandice of Souls and to vilifie them and set them at cheaper rates than they would do a goose a pig or a dog Is this a fit answer for those that are their Ordainers under whose examination and hands all men enter into the Ministery Will they say that they can get no better What not when they have made so many Canonical Engines to keep out better What not when such as Cartwright Hildersham Amesius Parker Dod Ball c. are cast out as unworthy When so many hundred were silenced in Queen Elizabeth and King James's days and Eighteen Hundred of us now When the Bishops have got so many Laws to hinder us from Preaching in publick and private and to banish us five miles from all Cities Corporations and places where we have preached When none but their sworn Curates Subscribers Declarers c. may preach yet can they get no better Will they keep up a Ministry whom they will themselves so ignominiously stigmatize as to tell the world that none of them all as Presbyters may be endured to expound any Scripture Doctrine or Matter but barely to Read Yea as if they would disswade them from all Learning of Humanity or Divinity as needless or hurtful things they say he shall only study to Read plainly and aptly So that he that studieth for any more than to Read doth break the Canons of the Prelatical Church Also a Priest as such hath no power to judge what Garments he shall wear nor of what colour at home or abroad He hath no power to judge in what house he may instruct or pray with any of his flock nor when so much as with his Church in publick or with any sick or afflicted neighbour in private to Fast and Pray But they are all straitly forbidden to preach or administer the Sacraments except to the sick in private houses To preach or officiate in any room save a Consecrated Chappel even in a Noblemans house To keep publick or private fasts To give the Sacrament to any that are not of their own Parish at least if they go from their own Priest because he never studied more than to Read They have not power to admit any other how Learned and Holy soever to preach in their Churches as Presbyters without Licence All these shew their Priestly power Obj. But a Surrogate may Excommunicate Answ 1. That is but ludicrous pro forma 2. Or else it is but their self-condemnations while they allow one Presbyter of a thousand to do that which all the rest are forbidden The same I say of Arch-deacons and peculiar Ordinaries Object They make Canons in Convocations and choose Convocation Priests Answ 1. It is but two Priests of many hundred that are in a Convocation And what 's that to all the rest 2. Choosing is not a Governing act Where the people choose Kings and Parliament men it proveth not that they have any Government themselves The Laity ever formerly chose their Bishops and yet were no Bishops nor Church Rulers 3. It is in the Bishops power to frustrate their choice For when they have chosen four he may put by two of them In this great Convocation which hath new moulded our Liturgy which hath formed the Engines that have done what is done the great and famous City of London had not one chosen Clerk in the Convocation No wonder then if they Conform not as not being bound by their own Consent For when they chose Mr. Calamy and my self the Bishop refused us both which I am so far from mentioning in discontent that I take it to have been a greater Mercy than I can well express 4. I take not Canon-making to be any considerable part of the Pastoral Office If two of many hundred have power to please the Plural Number of Prelates Deans and other Dignitaries whom they cannot over-vote by serving them against the Church and their Brethren doth that prove that Presbyters as such have the Governing power of their flocks I am not striving for a power of Ruling one another much less of Excommunicating Kings and Magistrates nor a power of making Laws or Ruling Neighbour Churches But only a power of Guiding their own flocks and judging of their own actions Yea and that not as Ungoverned or without Appeals But as Ruled by Magistrates consociated for Concord with other Pastors and Ruling Volunteers And if Archbishops also Rule them by Gods Laws we shall submit CHAP. XVII That the great change of Government hitherto described the making of new species of Churches a new Episcopacy and a new sort of half-sub-presbyters with the Deposition of the old was sinfully done and not according to the intent of the Apostles THere are two pretences and no more that I know of made to justifie all this foredescribed change The first is by Dr. Hammond when he was hard put to it at last in answer to the London Ministers which is That Subpresbyters were Ordained in Saint John's time and therefore by him The second is ordinary that though de facto the Apostles setled but single Pastors without Sub-presbyters at least over single Churches or Assemblies yet this was not done with an Obligatory purpose for the so fixing of it But only de facto pro tempore as a State of immaturity with a purpose and intent that it should grow up to the change of this at maturity I. To the first Pretence I answer 1. What probability is there that one Apostle when all the rest were dead should make so great a
with six or seven in a day if he did nothing else shall before he can examine their cases have thousands more of their and others to examine So that nothing of this nature can be more notorious than that our controversie with the Bishops is but such as these Whether the Lord Mayor alone shall not only oversee all the Families in the City but be the Only Governour of them so that Husbands Parents and Masters shall only teach and exhort their families but the Lord Mayor alone shall rule them as to their daily works their speeches and their lives Or whether the City and the whole Diocese shall have but one Schoolmaster who shall be the sole governour of all the Schools in all those hundred parishes 20 or 40 or 100 miles distant and the Schools shall have under him only Curate Ushers who shall only teach the boyes as far as they are willing to learn and for all their untractableness disobedience absence and faults shall present their names to a Chancellors Court set up by the sole ruling Schoolmaster Or whether all the Colledges in the University shall have no Governour but the Vicechancellor and the rest be but Tutors to the Voluntiers Or whether all the Patients in a Diocese shall have but one Physician to govern the Patient by prescripts and under him only Apothecaries to carry about his medicines and directions Indeed if it were the Physicians work to play the Soldier and cut all their throats it might be done in a short time But healing requireth more ado And if it were the Bishops or Chancellors work to do no more than to read an accusation and say Do you Repent and as some do because they must be thrice admonished to say at once I admonish you I admonish you I admonish you I excommunicate you or to do as the Pope doth Interdict whole Kingdoms at once as Herod killed all the children in hope that he should meet with Christ among them then a few hands might do the work But whether it be possible to exercise the discipline of Christ in their Diocesan way on one of a thousand let the impartial judge As also whether that Church be fitlier said to be governed or ungoverned where one of a thousand is governed indeed whenas it is the body of the people and not one of a thousand that is called the Church CHAP. XIX The same Impossibilty proved by Experience THey say Experience is the teacher of fools But O how well were it for the Churches of Christ if their Reverend Bishops who think themselves only meet to govern them had but learnt by it these 1300 years at least The Experience which I offer you is 1. That of the ancient Churches what work the enlargement of their Diocesses and growing great by the greatness of their charge made quickly by the destruction of true discipline abundance of forecited testimonies shew To which what sad complaints might I add out of Socrates Chrysostome Isidore Pelusiata and many others which made Gregory Nazianz Orat. 1. Say so much of the difficulty of a Bishops work and to depose himself when contentious men were ready to depose him and to wish so earnestly that there had never been greatness and Priority and difference of Seats as Upper and Lower among the Pastors of the Churches being tired with their contentions pride and envy even of the Orthodox themselves who instead of doing the work contended for power and preeminence I cited some of Chrysostomes sayings before de sacerdot l 3 c. 16. 17. where he sheweth the greatness of a Bishops work and p. 57. So p. 58. Nisi quotidie Episcopus omnium domos circumierit in hac parte vel eas superans quibus nullum aliud studium est quam in foro versandi deambulandique hinc omnino offensiones infinitae emergent Neque enim ij soli qui aegrotant sed qui sani sunt invisi se volunt Id quod non religionis ac pietatis sed honoris dignitatisque potius nomine plurimi sibi vendicant Ac si quem forte contigerit ex ditioribus potentioribusque Christianis ecclesiae usu lucroque communi ita urgenti ab Episcope frequentius invisi hic protinus Episcopus palpatoris atque adulatoris notam sibi inurit Chrysostome speaketh like a man that knew by experience what a Pastors work is And if our Bishops must go to every house how many years pilgrimage would it be to go but once through all their Dioceses Bernard saith Epist 82. Cum praesideant urbibus valde populosis coetus ut itadicam patrias propriae Diocaeses ambitu circumcludant occasione inventâ ââ quacunque veteri privilegio satagunt ut vicinas sibi subdant civitates quatenus duae quibus vix due Praesules sufficiebant sub uno redigantur antistite And the doleful lapse of discipline hereupon all History witnesseth Which made Erasmus say Eccles lib. 1. Quantum negotiâ credimus esse cum praeter vicos paâos viginti frequentes amplae civitates such as our big Market Towns uni parent antistiti Et multorum praesulum ditio tam late patet ut siquam maxime forent expediti omnibus mundanis negotiis non possent tamen in omnibus oppidis Concionari quum bodie una civitas quamplures requirit Ecclesiastes How much less will one perform all the rest of the Bishops work Saith Musculus Loc. Commun de Minist p. mihi 438. Quare viderint Episcopi c. Let Bishops look to it who when they cannot or do not rightly Minister to one Church extend their power not to some few Churches but to whole Provinces Let them read Chrysostome on Tit 1. Per civitates in every City c. These things made Luther say advers falsò nominatum ordinem Episcop To. 2. p. 310. Perinde habet c. It is with these wicked ungodly Bishops all one as if the Devil himself should mitred and ringed sit in the chair and himself rule the people And Bishop Hooker in 8 precep saith Et certe si jam vigeret antiquus ille ergae populum amor If they had the ancient Love to the people they would themselves confess that there is more work in one City than the best men can easily do They know well enough that the Primitive Church had no such Bishops till the time of Silvester the first I cite this ex Altar Damascen having not the Book at hand Filesacus tells us ex Concil Triburiensi c. 26. Relata est coram sancta Synodo quaeremonia plebium eo quod sint quidam Episcopi nolentes ad predicandum vel ad confirmandum suas per annum paraecias circuire de Orig. Paraec p. 537. What would they have done if they had been in our times See Isidore Pelus Ep. 246. l. 2. p 236. teaching Bishop Eusebius and Theodosius what a Church is who had so far lost the true Episcopacy as to take walls for men and to abuse and scorn
the true Church or godly people while the Walls were adorned as if Christ had come from Heaven more for Walls than Souls c. of which before In a word nothing is more evident than that true Discipline was shut out at the times and in the degrees as Diocesses were enlarged and that in Aârick and other places where the Churches or Diocesses were more small and numerous discipline was best preserved II. The second sort of experience is that of almost all the Reformed Churches who have found the Pastoral work and Discipline particularly to be so great as that less than all the Parish Ministers concurring could not perform it 1. Those Churches which with Calvin set up Presbytery exclude no Pastor from the Governing part but took in Elders of the people to help them because experience had told them that all the Ministers were too few what then would one Bishop and Chancellour or Vicar have been able to do 2. The Lutherans who set up superintendants commonly so set them over the Pastors as not to take away the true Pastoral power of governing their particular flocks as finding by experience that the old way of Prelacy would not do it And usually they join Magistrates with them as they also in the Palatinate did And it is such an oderate supriority which is exercised in Hungary Transilvania and in Poland till the Papists rooted them out thence 3. The Helvetian Divines exercise a certain measure of power in keeping the unfit from the Sacrament but not what they judge to be the Churches duty because the Magistrate never would consent That the Pastors are for it as needful to the right ordering of the Churches you may see in Polani Syntag. at large and in most of their Divines of Basil Bern Zurich c. I will now only cite the honest hearty words of Musculus above 100 years ago because he was a man most clear and candid and that did mancipate his judgment neither to Luther Calvin nor any party as such but took liberty to differ from them all as in the points of Redemption perseverance c. At Bern in his Loci Commun ed. 1567. p. 421 He proveth Bishops and Presbyters and Doctors and Pastors to be all one And p. 422. that in the Apostolick Primitive Church they governed the Church in common being subject to no head or president But after the Apostles daies as Hierome saith to avoid schism but as he thinketh more out of a desire of Majority one got the name and presidency of a Bishop But saith he whether this counsel did profit the Church or not by which such Bishops were introduced as Hierome saith by custome rather than by truth of divine disposition to be above the Presbyters it hath been better manifested to after ages than when this custome was first brought in which we must thank for all the insolency wealth and tyranny of the Principal and Equestral Bishops yea for the corruption of all the Churches which if Hierome had seen undoubtedly he would have known that it was the devise not of the Spirit of God to take away schisms as was pretended but of Satan himself to lay waste and destroy the ancient Ministers for feeding the Lords flock whereby it might come to pass that the Church might have not true Pastors Doctors Presbyters and Bishops but under the masks of those names idle-bellies and magnisick Princes who will not only not themselves feed the people of God with sound Apostolick Doctrine but also take care by most wicked violence that it be done by no one else By this devise of Satan it is brought to pass that instead of Bishops the Churches have potent Lords and Princes for the most chosen out of the order of Nobles and great men who being upheld by their own and their kindreds power may domineer over the flock of God as they list And p. 423. The office appointed to the Bishops that came after the Apostles times was to preach to the people to adminster the sacred things to prescribe repentance to take the care of the clergy and the people both in City and Country to ordain to visit to take care that the goods of the Church be rightly kept and dispensed and to take the patronage of Church-matters with Princes And if the Bishops had but staid here it had been better with the Church Or if the Prelates and Pastors of our times would return to these Canonical Rules there might be hope that the Eccleasiastical State and order might possibly be reformed and the controversies of these times might be ended by the word of God Hence it is plain that the office of true Presbyters and Bishops in the Church of Christ is to feed the Lords flock with sound Doctrine and to be truly Pastors and Teachers But now the false Bishops pretend a Pastoral Cure when going to the Assembly-Offices they are as they take it Episcopally cloathed They put on a white stole longer than ordinary with a girdle not such as John Baptist wore c. The maskd Pastor thus dressed doth not feed the flock of God but performeth the Church service in such a gesture Ceremony and dralect that all the matters of the Church may be nothing else than certaine vaine and pompous shewes so that if one of the Apostles were there he would never so much as dreame that this were the Episcopal feeding of the Lords flock Thus the Bishop doing once or twice a year doth Suffciently performe his Office what ever he do the rest of the time The ordination of Ministers and other things accounted Ecclesiastical he committeth partly to his suffiragane and partly to his Vicar or Chancellor The office of Teaching he committeth to some Doctor or Monk so sworne as that he shall not dare to speake a word or hisse besides what is prescribed him in the formes of Lawes Thus far I confess he speakes of the Popish Bishops But who would believe he meant not ours that had seen them And how little do they differ Well you shall next hear him speak of Protestant Bishops Pag. 425 Let us now come to other Ministers Pastors and Bishops divers from these who do nothing in the Church of Christ but Preach and teach They have certaine daies of the weeke on which they Preach And that is well They Preach only out of the holy Scriptures And that well too But this is not well that very many of them speak formally and coldly and not from the heart so that what Seneca somewhere saith agreeth to them Animum non faciunt quia animum non habent They make not men hearty or serious because they are not so themselves And that of the Roman Orator thou wouldst never talk thus if thou speakest from the heart Nor do they accommodate the word of God to the Hearers by pertinent and profitable distribution but they think they have well performed their office if they have any how spoken out the hour In the
tended to gathering they would no longer dwel with him but got them into the desert As soon as Theophilus understood that they abhorred his manner of living he was wonderfully incensed and promised to work them a displeasure and being prone to anger and revenge bestirred himself against them and endeavoured by all means to work them mischief And he began to despight Dioscorus the Bishop for it grieved him to the gutts that the Worshippers made so much of Dioscorus and reverenced him so highly To beshorter than Socrates Theophilus not knowing else how to be revenged set the Monks against him and his Brethren and accuseth them of holding contrary to the Scripture that God had no body hands or feet and so taketh on him to be of their opinion till he had set them altogether by the cars And the ignoranter Monks being the greater number he took their side and so they went first to it by zealous reproaches one part calling the other Originests and the other part calling them Anthropomorphites and at last it came to a deadly Battel And saith Socrates Theophilus perceiving that his fetches framed after his will went with great power towards the Mount Nitria where there religious houses stood and aided the Monks against Dioscorus and his Brethren And the Religious men thus beset with great danger had much ado to save their lives Socr. l. 6. c. 7. Did ever Presbyterians commit such an unchristian and inhumane vilany as this by such false dissimulation and malice And here we see how the quarrel began against Origens Works not for the passages that are truely culpable but for the sounder parts and how it came to pass that Chrysostome was not so forward to condemn them as his Condemners did require him to be Theodoret. lib. 4. Hist Eccl. c. 13. Tells us that when the Emperour Valens his order was brought to Eusebius Samosatenus for his removal and banishment Eusebius tels the Officer That if the People should know it they would drown him in the River Euphrates and therefore contrived to slip away by night What would they say if our Churches were such as this orthodox Episcopal Church was Theodor. lib. 3. c. 13. The Virgins openly sung in reproach of Julian the Emperour Ratae illum consceleratum tyrannum contemnendum esse omnium irrisione ludendum judging that wicked Tyrant to be contemned and made a mocking stock by all And yet he was a lawful Emperour and none of the cruellest Persecutors Theodor. l. 3. c. 13. When the People of his Church had found out Eusebius their banished Bishop they earnestly perswaded him to return contrary to the Emperors Edict and not to suffer his flock to be left to the Wolves which were the Bishops set over them by the Emperour And is not this more than the people are now condemned for who only hear the Ministers privately Cap. 14. When the Emperors Arrian Bishop was set over them not one of all the People rich or poor servant or labourer husbandman or Artificer man or woman young or old would come as they used to the Church nor come in sight of the Bishop nor speak with him But though he lived very modestly he came to the Church place alone They would not bathe with him nor bathe in the same water but throw it first into the Channel when he left the City this was Eunomius Do our hearers deal as harsshly as this Afterward when Lucius was set over them the Children in the streets did burn their ball because his Asses feet had touched it Id. ib. c. 16. When the Bishop of Edessa was removed and another set over them the people frequented private meetings in the Suburbs And when the Emperour commanded his Prefect Modestus to take Souldiers and disturb them and drive them away the women ran with their Children hoping to die with them And Eulogius the Presbyter asked Was the Emperour made Priest when he was made Emperour And how the Presbiters and People of Antioch continued their meeting whether the Emperour would or not though he disturbed them by Soldiers Theodor c. 17. Basils answer to the Prefect when he offered him the Emperours favour was that Children were to be so talk'd to but Men bread up in divine studies would suffer any death rather than suffer one syllable of divine Truth to be blemished Quod autem ad Imperatoris amicitiam c. But as for the Emperors friendship I much value it saith he joyned with godliness but if it want that I say it is pernicious In one of us this answer would have been enough to make us seem as bad as it made Basil esteemed good Id. 11. c. 19. When the forenamed Lucius was made Bishop of Alexandria and Peter their Bishop put out the People would come to the Church place though he persecuted them as he had done the other omnes pariter ceperunt Lucium convitiis lacerâre they all began to tear Lucius with revilings because he persecuted the Monks of Egypt Id. l. c. 38. Audas a Bishop in Persia demolished their Temple or Pyreum by violence For which the Emperour of Persia killed him and destroyed all the Christian Churches Id. l. 4. c. 21. When Moses was desired by Queen Mavia to be her Bishop among the Saracens he would not let Lucius ordain him because he had persecuted good men But said to him Quis impius non tua causâ conventus Ecclesiasticos petulanter insectatus est Quis e laudatorum virorum numero non parte exulavit Quam immanitatem barbaram malefici abs te in dies singulos admissa non superarunt Do Nonconformists speak more harshly to our Bishops Theodoret himself frequently calleth Julian a Tyrant cap. 22. The Heathens kept their Feasts openly Telis autem Apostolicae doctrinae propugnatoribus tyrannus iste se hostem praebuit And when he was dead they openly rejoyced at his death Id. cap. 30. l. 4. With what bold language doth Izaak tell Valens of his fighting against God and casting out his Ministers and Gods fighting against him and what he would be sure to meet with at the end if he kicked against the pricks Lib. 5. c. 17. The Christian people of Thessalonica rose and killed some of Theodosius his Officers which provoked him by his Souldiers to kill seven thousand of them for which Ambrose brought him to do open pennane To mention all the blood shed at Rome as at Damascus election and else and Constantinople and Alexandria would be tedious even that which was shed on the account of Bishops Lucius Calaritanus was a pious Bishop but so hot for separation from those that had been Arrians that he is numbered for it with the Hereticks though an orthodox Bishop The Novatians were Episcopal and so were the Donatists and yet how have they been judged of for their Schism I need not tell Apollinarius father and son Paulus Samosatenus Nestorius Dioscorus Eusebius Nicomed Theodorus Mopsuest and how many more
2. c. 5. That were for seventy years after their conversion without a Bishop Vlphilas being the first 4. Columbanus was no Bishop but a Presbyter and Monk nor his Successours that yet Ruled even the Bishops as Beda noteth Hist. li 3. c. 4. 5. Hâhere solet ipsa Insula Rectorem semper Abbatem Presbyterum cujus jure omnis provincia ipsi etiam Episcopi ordine inusitatâ debeant esse subjecti juxta exemplum primi Doctoris illius Columbani qui non Episcopus sed Presbyter extitit Monachus And these Presbyters did not only ordaine as being the only Church Governours but they sent Preachers into England and ordained Bishops for England at King Oswalds request as Beda at large relateth Eccles Hist l. 3. c. 3. 5. 17. 21. 24 25. The Abbot and other Presbyters of the Island Hy sent Aydan ipsum esse dignum Episcopatu ipsum ad erudiendos incredulos indoctos mitti debere decernunt Sicque illum ordinantes ad praedicandum miserunt c. Successit vero ei in Episcopatu Finan ipse illo ab Hy Scotorum insula ac monasterio destinatus c. 17. cap. 25. Aydano Episcopo de hac vita sublato Finan pro illo gradum Episcopatus a Scotis ordinatus missus acceperat c. So cap â4 c. You will find that the English had a Succession of Bishops by the Scotish Presbyters ordination And there is no mention in Beda of any dislike or scruple of the lawfulness of this course Segenius a Presbyter was Abbot of Hy cap. 5. when this was done And cap. 4. it appears that this was their ordinary custome though in respect to the Churches that were in the Empire it be said to be more inusitato that Presbyters did Govern Bishops but none questioned the validity of their ordinations And the Council at Herudford subjecteth Bishops in obedience to their Abbots And the first reformers or Protestants here called Lollords and Wicklifists held and practised ordination by mere Presbyters as Walsingham reports Hist Angl. An. 1â 89. and so did Luther and the Protestants of other Nations as Pomeranus ordination in Denmark shews and Chytraeus Saxon Chron lib. 14. 15. 16. 17. 5. Leo Mag. Epist 92. cited by Gratian being consulted a rustico Narbonensi de Presbytero vel Diacono qui se Episcopos mentiti sunt de his quos ipsi clericos ordinârânt answered Nulla ratio sâvit ut inter Episcopos habeantur qui nec a clericis sunt electi nec a plebibus expetiti c. yet thus resolveth of their ordination Siqui autèm Clerici ab ipsis Pseudo Episcopis in eis Ecclesus ordinati sunt quae ad proprios Episcopos pertinebant ordinatio eorum cum consensu judicio presidentium facta est potest âata haberi ita ut in ipsis Ecclesus perseverunt So that the mere consent of the proper Bishops can make valid such Presbyters ordination 6. Fâlicissimus was ordained Deacon by Novatus one of Cyprians Presbyters Schismatically yet was not his ordination made Null by Cyprian but he was deposed for Mal-administration See Blondel p. 312. 113. 7. Firmilian in 75 Epist apud Cyprian Saith Necessariò apud nos fit ut per singulos annos seniores praepositi in unum conveniamus ad disponenda quae curae nostrae commissa sunt ut si quae graviora sunt communi consilio dirigantur This shews that communi consilio importeth a consenting Governing Power c. Omnis potestas gratia in Ecclesus constituta ubi praesident majores natu qui baptizandi manum imponeâââ ordinandi possidânt Potestatem If any say It is only Bishops that Formilian speakes of I answer 1. He had a little before used the word Seniores the same in sense with Majores natu here as distinct from Praepositi to signifie either all Pastors in general or Presbyters in special 2. When he speakes of Majores natu in general they that will limit it to Bishops must prove it so limited and not barely affirme it 3. The conjunct acts of the office disprove that It was the same men that had the power of baptizing 8. The great Council of Nice the most reverend Authority next to the holy Scripture decreed thus concerning the Presbyters ordained by Melitius at Alexandria and in Egypt Hi autem qui Dei gratiâ nostris precibus adjuti ad nullum Schisma deflexisse comperti sint sed se intra Catholicae Apostolicae Ecclesiae fines ab erroris labe vacuos continuerint authoritatem habeant tum ministros ordinandi tum eos que clero digni fuerint nominandi tum denique omnia ex lege instituto Ecclesiastico libere exequendi If any say that the meaning is that these Presbyters shall ordain and Govern with the Bishops but not withoutthem I am of his mind that this must needs be the meaning of these words or else they could not be consonant with the Church Canons But this sheweth that ordination belongeth to the Presbyters office and consequently that it is no nullity though an irregulrity as to the Canons when it is done by them alone Socrat. lib. 5. 6. cap. 6. 9. It is the title of the twelfth Canon Concil An cyrani Quod non oportet Chorepiscopos ordinare nisi in agris villulis Now either these Chorepiscopi were of the order of Bishops or not If they were then it further appeareth how small the Churches were in the beginning that had Bishops even such as had but Vnum Altare as Ignatius saith when even in the Countrey Villages they had Bishops as well as in Cities notwithstanding that the Christians were but thinly scattered among the Heathens But if they were not Bishops then it is apparent that Presbyters did then ordain without Bishops and their ordination was valid And the Vafrities of the Prelates is disingenious in this that when they are pleading for Diocesan Churches as containing many fixed Congregations then they eagerly plead that the Chorepiscopi were of the order of Presbyters But when they plead against Presbyters ordination they would prove them Bishops Read Can. 10. Concilii Antiocheni 10. Even in the daies of ignorance and Roman Usurpation Bonifacius Mogunt alias Wilfred Epist 130 Auct Bib. Pat. To 2. p. 105. tells Pope Zachary as his answer intimateth that in Gente Boiariorum there was but one Bishop and that was one Vivilo which the Pope had ordained and that all the Prebyters that were ordained among them as far as could be sound were not ordained by Bishops though that ignorant usurping Pope requireth as it seemeth that they be reordained unless Benedictionem ordinationis should signifie only the blessing or confirmation of their former ordination which is not like For he saith Quia indicasti perrexisse te ad gentem Boiariorum inâenisse eos extra ordinem ecclesiasticum viventes dum Episcopos non habebant in Provincia nisi
unum nomine Vivilo quem nos ante tempus ordinavimus Presbyteros vero quos ibidem reperisti si incogniti fuerint viri illi à quibus sunt ordinati dubium est eos Episcopos fuisse an non qui eos ordinaverunt si bonae actionis cathoâici viri sunt ipsi Presbyteri in ministerio Christi omnemque legem sanctam âdocti apti ab Episcopo suo benedictionem Presbyteratus suscipiant consâârântur siâ ministerio sacro fungantur 11. Of old it was the Custom of the Church that Presbyters joyn with the Bishops in Ordination Concil Carth. c. 3. All the Presbyters present must impose their hands on the head of the Presbyter to be ordained with the Bishop Which fully sheweth that it is an act belonging to their Office and therefore not null when done by them alone in certain cases and that it was but for order sake that they were not to do it without a Bishop who was then the Ruler of the Presbyters in that and other Actions And its worth noting That ib. Can. 4. The Bishop alone without any Presbyters was to lay hands on a Deacon though not on a Presbyter Because he was ordained non ad sacerdotium sed ad ministerium not to the Priesthood but to a Ministery or service which plainly intimateth what Arch-Bishop Usher said to me that Ad Ordinem pertinet ordinare quamvis ad Gradum Episcopalem ordinationes regere The Priesthood containeth a power to ordain Priests but the Episcopal Jurisdiction as such sufficeth to ordain a Deacon Or that the Bishop ordaineth Presbyters as he is a Presbyter his Prelacy giving him the government of the action but he ordaineth Deacons as a Ruler only Arg. II. Ordination by Bishops such as were in Scripture time is valid and lawful But the Ordinations in England now questioned were performed by Bishops such as were in Scripture times Ergo the late ordinations in England now questionedare valid and lawful The Major speaking de nomine officio is granted by all The Minor I prove thus 1. The Ordinations in England now questioned were many or most performed by the cheif particular Pastors of City Churches together with their Colleagues or fellow Presbyters that had Presbyters under them But the Cheif particular Pastors of City Churches having Presbyters under them were such Bishops as were in Scripture times Ergo the Ordinations in England now questioned were performed by Bishops such as were in Scripture times I must first here explain what I mean by a particular Pastor as in an Army or Navy a General Officer that taketh up the General care of all is distinct from the inferiour particular Captains that take a particular care of every Souldier or person under their command so in the Church in Scripture times there were 1. General Officers that took care of many Churches viz. a general care And 2. perticular Bishops and Presbyters that were fixed in every City or perticular Church that took a perticular care of every Soul in that Church It is only these last that I speak of that were Bishops infimi gradûs not such as the Apostles and Evangelists but such as are mentioned Acts 14. 23. and Acts 20. 28. Tit. 1. 5. c. Now for the Major it is notoriously known 1. That ordinarily some of our Ordainers were City Pastors 2. That they had Presbyters under them viz. one or more Curates that administred there with them or in Oratorics called Chappels in the Parish ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is Oppidum and our Boroughs and Towns Corporate are such Cities as are signified by that word And there are few of these but have more Presbyters than one of whom one is the Cheif and the rest ruled by him Besides that one was oft-times President of the Assembly chosen by the rest For instance if I had ever medled in Ordainings as I did not 1. I was my self a Pastor of a Church in a City or Burough 2. I had two or three Presbyters with me that were ruled by me so that I was statedly their Chief I was statedly chosen by the neighbourhood associated Pastors to be their Moderatour which was such a power as made Bishops at Alexandria before the Nicene Council Now that such were Bishops such as were in Scripture-times I prove 1. By the Confession of the Opponents Doctor Hammond and his followers maintain that there were no subject Presbyters instituted in Scripture times and consequently that a Bishop was but the single Pastour of a single ongregation having not so much as one Presbyter under him but one or more Deacons which granteth us more than now I plead for and that afterwards when Believers were encreased he assumed Presbyters in partem curae So that our Bishops which I plead for are of the stature of those after Scripture times in the Doctors sence Defacto this is granted 2. The Bishops in Scripture times were ordained in every City and in every Church Tit. 1 5. and Acts 13. 23. So are ours They had the particular Episcopacy over-sight rule and teaching of all the Flock committed to them Acts 20. 28. and if the Angel of the Church of Ephesus were one cheif he was but one of these and over these in the same Church and charge And so have our Parochial Pastours these very words Acts 20. 28. being read and applyed to them in their ordination They had the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven committed to them and so have ours If it be said that these are but things common to the Bishop with the Presbyter 1. What then is proper to a Bishop To say Ordination is but to beg the question And Ordination it self is not proper in the sense of our own Church that requireth that Ordination be performed as well by the laying on of the hands of the Presbyters as of the Bishop 2. They use themselves to make the governing or superiority over many Presbyters to be proper to a Bishop 3. Those to whom the description of Bishops in Scripture belongeth are truly and properly Bishops But the Description of Bishops in Scripture agreeth at least to the chief particular Pastors of City Churches having Presbyters under them Ergo such are truly and properly Bishops The Minor which only needeth proof is proved by an induction of the several Texts containing such descriptions as Acts 20. and 13. 23. 1 Tim. 3. and 5. 17. Tit. 1. 5. c. 1 Thes 5. 12. Hebr. 13. 7. 17 24. 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3. and the rest 4. If our Parochial Churches or at least our City Churches those in each Town Corporate and Borough be true Churches then the cheif particular Pastors of them are true Bishops but they are true Churches Ergo. Still note 1. That I speak of Churches as governed Societies in sensu Politico and not as a Company of private Christians 2. That I speak only of particular Pastors or Bishops infimi gradus and not of Arch-Bishops and
General Pastors And therefore it they say It is not the Presbyters but the Diocesane that is the cheif Pastor of your Parish Church I answer there is none above the Resident or incumbent Presbyters that take the particular charge and oversight The Bishop takes but the general charge as a general Officer in an Army If they do indeed take the particular Pastoral charge of every Soul which belongs to the Bishops infimi gradus then woe to that man that voluntary takes such a charge upon him and hath such a charge to answer for before the Lord. If they say that the Presbyters have the particular charge for teaching and Sacraments but the Bishops for ruling I answer 1. It is Government that we are speaking of if they are Bishops infimi gradus then there are no Bishops or Governours under them And if so then it is they that must perform and answer for Government of every particular Soul And then woe to them 2. Governing and teaching are acts of the same Office by Christs institution as appears in 1 Tim. 5 17. Acts 20. 28. c. And indeed they are much the same thing For Government in our Church sense is nothing but the explication of Gods Word and the application of it to particular Cases And this is Teaching Let them that would divide prove that Christ hath allowed a division If one man would be the general Schoolmaster of a whole Diocess only to oversee the particular School-masters and give them rules we might bear with them But if he will say to all the particular Schoolmasters you are but to teach and I only must govern all your Scholars when governing them is necessarily the act of him that is upon the place conjunct with teaching this man would need no words for the manifestation of the vanity of his ambition The same I may say of the Masters of every Science whose government is such as our Church Government is not Imperial but Doctoral yea of the Army or the Navy where the government is most imperial Now for the Argument 1. The consequence of the Major is undeniable because every such Society is essentially constituted of the Ruling and Ruled parts as every Common-wealth of the pars imperans and the pars subdita So every organized Church of the Pastor and the Flock 2. And for the Minor if they denyed both our Parish Churches and our City Churches that is those in Towns Corporate to be true Churches they then confess the shame and open the ulcer and leprosic of their way of governing that to build up one Diocesane Church which is not of Christs institution but destructive of his institution they destroy and pull down five hundred or a thousand Parish Churches and many City Churches If they will also feign a specifique difference of Churches as they do of Pastors and say that Parish Churches are Ecclesiae dociae but Diocesan Churches are only Ecclesiae gubernatae of which the Parish Churches are but parts I answer 1. The Scripture knoweth no such distinction of stated Churches All stated Churches for worship are to be governed Churches and the government is but guidance and therefore to be by them that are their Guides 2. I have before proved that every worshipping Church that had unum altare was to have a Bishop or Government by Presbyters at least Arg. III. That Ordination which is much better than the ordination of the Church of Rome or of any Diocesane Bishops of the same sort with theirs is valid The Ordination now questioned by some in England is much better then the Ordination of the Church of Rome or of any Diocesane Bishops of the same sort with theirs Ergo the Ordination now questioned by some in England is valid The Major will not be denied by those which we plead with because they hold the Ordination of the Church of Rome to be valid and their Priests not to be re-ordained The Minor I prove If the Ordination that hath no Reason of its validity alledged but that it is not done by Diocesane Bishops be much better than the Ordination of such as derive their power from a meer Usurper of Headship over the universal Church whose succession hath been oft interrupted and of such as profess themselves Pastors of a false Church as having a Head and form of divine Institution and that ordain into that false Church and cause the ordained to swear to be obedient to the Pope to swear to false Doctrine as Articles of Faith and ordain him to the Office of making a peice of Bread to be accounted no Bread but the Body of Christ which being Bread still is to be worshipped as God by himself and others to pass by the rest than the Ordination now questioned in England is much better than the Ordination of the Church of Rome But the Antecedent is true Ergo so is the consequent And for the other part of the Minor I further prove it If the Office and government of the Romish Bishops and of any Diocesanes of the same sort with them be destructive of that form of Episcopacy and Church Government which was instituted by Christ and used in the Primitive Church then the Ordination now questioned by some in England is much better than that which is done by such Diocesanes But the Office and Covernment of the Romish Bishops and of any Diocesanes of the same sort with them is destructive of that form of Episcopacy and Church Government which was instituted by Christ and used in the Primitive Church Ergo The Ordination now questioned by some in England is much better than that which is done by such Diocesanes The Reason of the consequence is because the Ordination of Presbyters now in question is not destructive of the Episcopacy and Government instituted by Christ and used in the Primitive Church Or if it were that 's the worst that can be said of it And therefore if other Ordination may be valid notwithstanding that fault so may it N. B. 1. I here suppose the Reader to understand what that Ordination is now questioned in England viz. Such as we affirm to be by Bishops not only as Presbyters as such are called Bishops but as the cheif Presbyters of particular Churches especially City Churches having Curates under them and also as the Presidents of Synods are called Bishops 2. Note that all I say hereafter about Diocesanes is to be understood only of those Bishops of a Diocess of many hundred or score Churches which are infimi gradus having no Bishops under them who are only Priests who are denied to have any proper Church Government And not at all of those Diocesane Bishops who are Arch-Bishops having many Bishops under them or under whom each Parish Pastor is Episcopus Gregis having the true Church Government of his particular Flock And thus because the Major is of great moment I shall handle it the more largely The Viciousnes of the Romish Ordinations appeareth thus 1.
Socrat. l. 7. c. 44. Joh. 5. 22. Gen. 3. 15. Joh. 17. 2. Mat. 28. 18 19. Eph. 1. 21 22. * The London Ministers Thanksgiving to the King is to be seen in Print As also their desire of B. Usher's Primitive Model of Government * Now 18 years this being written 9 years ago Whitgift âaâavia Vid. p. 104. 110 111. 120 121. 1 Cor. 16. 1 2. Bilson Hooker answered as far as our cause requireth Remember also that Hooker's third Book is written to prove that no one Form is commanded in Scripture Therefore not the Prelatical How little doth this agree with Dr. Hammond â And yet must I sweat never to consent to any alteration Bishop Downame Answered He fell after under the frowns of Bishop Laud himself his Book of perseverance being prohibited * Ambrose in Eph. 4. Aug. qu. in vet N. Test q. 101. Cypr. l. 3. ep 17. Concil Carth. Graec. c. 43. Carth. 2. c. 4. Conc. Arausic c. â * The Prelates pretence for innovation All the cause is laid on Magistrates â Doth a publick Church Pastor govern but privately what meaneth he by that which can be good sence A private man may rule privately that is by Counsell Judicium publicum is the Officers judgment â In my Treat of the true way of Concord I have also disproved the Instances of Rome and Alexandria Bish Hall Petavius Bish Andrews B. Usher â Lib. 3. c. 30. de Doctrin Christian which Augustine seemeth to approve The Dispute at the Isle of Wight John Forbes Grotius â Be it known to posterity that if the Prelates would have granted us but so much liberty our distracted Churches might have had Concord J. D. c. M. Ant. de Dom. Spalatensis â Yea never into one Parish of ten or twenty â â Dr. Hammond answered The Annotations * Quemad modum hodiâ ab aliquât seculâs Antioch in a sides Patr. noâ est in ea uâbe unââ nomen habet sed in Meredin ad ripaân Châbar in finibus Mesopotainae Jos Scaliger Animad in Euseb pag. 211. Yet I confess that he that converteth many caeteris paribus is fittest to be chosen for their Pastor on which account Greg. Nazianz. was chosen at Constantinople for the Success of his Ministry against Arianism And in my Church-History I have told you of a Council that decreed that if a Bishop neglected to turn any of his City from heresie he that converted them should have them for his flock which sheweth that there might on just cause be then more Bishops and Churches than one in a City and that they were not necessarily measured by the compass of ground but Churches might be mixt among each other as to habitation on such occasions ââââ Chrysostom de sâcerdotio cap. 17 p. 57 Even about so small a part of a Bishops or Pastors charge as the care of Virgins saith But if any one say that there is no need of a Bishop to meddle with such things as these Let him know that upon him will fall all the cares of Virgins duty and so all the accusation which shall be cast on Virgins And therefore it is much better if he administring the business himself he shall be void of those causes which he must susteine by others offences thus leaving that administration to live in fear of giving account or being judged for the sins which others do commit Adde also that he that performeth this office by himself transacteth all with great facility But he that is necessitated to do it by the vicarious labour of others besides that it is a great business to him to perswade all mens minds well to performe the work certainly he himself hath not so much remission of his labour by abstaining from that office as he must sustaine business and troubles from them that resist and strive against his judgment and opinion And if so great a Bishop as the Patriarks of Constantinople must not do so small a part of his work per alios alas what a life do our Diocesans live ââat Christ Mat. 18. in his âââl the Church ââanâth ââll the congregation assembly or multitude and not only ââ tell an absent Diâââsan Bishop when âerâaps âne ââââââ 20 4â 6âââles to tell him see Grotius himself in his Aâât on the Text and his ââââort of sertullian and others See also Eâââmus on the place And many others say the same though some would have the Church to be only the Bishop or as others the Presbytery Ruâherfords contrary reason is but a fallacy viz. The same Church that must be heard must be told but it is not the Congregation but the Elders that must be heard Ergo c. Ans The Church consising of the Pastor and people must be told and they have all ears that without confuson can hear at once but they cannot without confusion all speak at once therefore one must speak for all For this argument would equally prove that it is not any Presbytery or Court or many Ministers that should be told if it be but one that is to speak to the âinner And it is not necessary that theâ all speak to him As the chief Judge speaketh for all the Bench and the Prosecutor for all the Synod and yet the Court or Synod may be complained to so is it hear The samâ man âay see with two eyes and hear with two ears and yet speak but with one tongue yet this reason once deceived me Seeing then that Christ instituted thus much of discipline in each particular Church it is clear that by his iâstitution every particular Church associated for presential Communion should have one or more âââtors authorized for so much discipline which is that which we plead for * Disput of Church Gover 2. That unjust excommunications bind not see the judgment of the most approved casuists in Bapt. Fragoso de Regim Reipub. p. 1. l. 1. pag. 112. Col. 2. Gregor Sayrus To. 2. l. 1. c. 17. num 2. 5. 8. c. And indeed they conclude that out of the case of scandal Magistrates Laws unjust materially that is to the Common hurt or that are against common good bind not in Conscience ut Id. Fragoso ib. p. 112. n. 234. 336. Wââ citeth the consent of Silvest Tabien Bald. Bartol Hostiens Doctorum Communiter So that Mr. John Humfrey is not singular in his resolution of this Case though I gave him many cautions and limitations in the Letter part of which he hath printed in the end of his book 2 Cor. 5. 19. Act. 26. 18. Mat. 28. 20. * Hierome saith he dyed in the eighth year of Nero. aid âoi Scaliger Anim. in Euseb Dorothaeun resutantem pag. 195. 1. Petavius 2. Bishop Downame 3. Master Mede 4. Bilson 5. Grotius 6. Bishop Jeremy Tailor 7. Doctor Hammond 8. All the Divines in the same Cause Cyprian in the Separation of Feliciss and sive Presbyters Epist 44. ed. Goul pag. 93. saith Deus unus
Christus unus una Ecclesia Aliud Altare constitui aut Sacerdotium novum sieri praeter unum Altare unum Sacerdotium non potest â Cypr. l. 1. âp 66. Tit. 1. 5. Ordain Elders in every City A Village saith Euseb l. 5. c. 16. Vid. Baron an 233. n. 10. It is the eighth Canon in Crab. Vid. Petavium in Epip haeres 69. p. 276 277 278 c. The chief Champion of Prelacy strongly proveth that the Chorepiscopi were true Bishops * Leg. Altare Dam. pag. 290. Saith D. Field l. 5. c. 28. In Antiquity a Parish contained the Citizens and all such Borderers as dwelt near and repaired to any chief Church or City A Diocess both then and now importeth the Villages Churches dispersed in divers places aâder the Regiment of one Bishop Mark this tââe use of the words against what Downame and others ââetend I know the learned Albaspinaeus laboureth to prove that the Agapae were not at the sacrament and in that place But he thinketh that they were meetings of the whole fraternity and it s like no house was much greater than the Church-house so that this makes no difference So Sr. Hen. Spelman Concil p. 152. saith in Theodor. time about An 672. Parish divisions here began Seld. of Tythes proveth that the division of Parishes in England began but about 700 years after Christ And Dr. Tillestly doth not deny the time but thinketh that though Patrons as Selden saith might probably begin this yet Bishops also had a hand in it Of this see an excellent Tract of Church Benefices by Pad Paul Sarpi translated by Dr. Denton confirming many things beforesaid And it is a considerable proof which Dr. Tillesley against Selden saith p. 179 The right of a Bââial place did first belong to the Cathedral Church and herein the custome of our Kingdom and others was not different And if the Diocese was such as that all were to be buryed at the Cathedral it was not so big as ââââ of our Parishes in London which are fain to take other ground for buryal and their Church will not hoââ the tenth part of the living as auditors Leg. plura apud Gers Bucer pag. 231 232 233 234 235. I may add also as anther evidence that in the beginning for a considerable time Confirmation was closely joyned to Baptism and therefore ordinarily none were Baptized but by a confirmer or in his presence And the Bishops say that only Bishops did confirm And if so then let it be considered to how large a Diocese a Bishop could be present at every Baptism Yea if Confirmation had been at a greater distance seeing all that were baptized were confirmed it is easy to know for how many one Biâhop cannot do this Did our Bishops use it they would know I do not think that in this city one person of 50 or 100 is confirmed though the Bishop dwell among them Perhaps in some Dioceses not one of 1000 for we rarely hear of any at all * In the subscrâptions of Councils you shall find sometime a Bishop and one Deacon sometime a a Bâshop and a Presbyter as at Arles id Spelman p. 42. * not many Churches See Leo 1. Epist 88. p. 158. So Lib. poenitential Theodori Cantu in Spelman p. 155. Concil Arelat 1. c. 21. Conc. Lâod c. 57. c. 4 5. Aqu. 1. 2. q. 18. art 3. 5. 10. q. 72. art 9. Cajet Medin ib. Act. 2. 1. 42 44 46. Heb. 10. 22 c 13. 7 17 24. Act. 14. 23. Act. 20. 1 Thes 5. 12 13. 1 Cor. 5. 14. per tot 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. 5 c. 1 Cor. 16. 1 2. 1 Cor. 11. Mat. 28. 19 20. Mat. 18. 15 Tit. 3. 10. Yet I doubt not that they were not to Consecrate Ministers alone without the Bishop Epist 28. p. 64. Edit Goulartii The next Epis 7. is worthy to be read of all that suffer for the truth to keep them from pride unruliness and scandal and so is the 8. See Instances in Blondel §. 3. p. 183 184. Note it is not consilio but concilio And c. 30. he sheweth instances of Concil Antisiodor c. 7. Tarrac c. 13. Concil Tolet. 1. ex Gregor l. 4. ep 88. Synod Eliber c. * King James Dr. Low Ep. Bridges Cosins Sutliffe Crakenthorp Hales Chillingworth c with Chemnitius and many Lutherans and Calvinists * By this judge how big the Diocese was * But no one in all the land was appointed to this day In the new Rubrick is added If he humbly and heartily desire it But if he will but say so the Priest must not judge These are not our Bishops * Now neâr sixty five I have âately heard two excommunicated for teaching School and being married without License and a thiâd no cause named * As they that toââe the Covenant unwillingly now maintaine that therefore it binds them not * Thâ ophilus âââ Sisters sân and successor * What should such Religious men be now called that had no more knowledge so great errour and so great fury and tumultuating âââeâlion * Saith Dr. Hanmer in his Margin This âishâp hath more fellows in the world * Ithaciaââ * Most of the prophane * 1. Yeâ but thââ did by persecuting the âest 2â They could not because they were Diocesans and would not because too may of them hated the best * The deâoist * O good Bishops * Very true * Marke what they were sequestred for * Marke * Leave iâ to God to judge of the secrets of âhe heart â He maketh our Prelates no sober men See Stillingfleets Iren p. 379. c. * The story of Eranistus dividing into Titulos much less proper Parishes is confuted by the most knowing isistorians
were but as if every Corporation or Market-Town in England had a Bishop who ruled also the adjacent Villages For though when they began to swell it was once decreed by one Council that Villages and every small City should not have a Bishop lest the Name of a Bishop should grow vile or cheap yet this was but with this addition those Villages or small Cities where there was not a sufficient number of Christians whereas Gregory at Neocesarea thought seventeen a sufficient number to have a Bishop And the Canons that every City should have a Bishop remained still in force 45. Yet was it for about 440 Years so far from these great Bishops to usurp the Sword or any coercive or coactive power on mens Bodies or Estates that they unanimously held that the Magistrate himself was not to punish mens Bodies for Heresie or a false Religion Till at last the bloody violence of the Circumcellian Donatists did cause Augustine in this to change his mind and think them meet for the Magistrates coercion 46. When Bishops grew carnal and ungodly and more regarded the keeping up their Power Parties and Opinions than Charity they beganto distrust the Spiritual Weapons of their warfare and instead of true vigilancy against errours and confutation of them by clear reason and a holy life they fled to the Rulers to do it by the Sword But though Ithacius and Idacius with their Synod of Bishops excited Maximus to take this course against the Priscilianists yet not only St. Martyn did therefore to the death avoid their Synods and Communion and petitioned the Emperour for the Hereticks peace but even St. Ambrose also at Milan would have no Communion with those Bishops that had done this thing 47. About the Year 430 or after Cyril at Alexandria did lead the way and actually used the Sword against the Lives Estates and Liberties of Offenders An example which others quickly followed And easily did he step from the great Judicial Power before described to a forcing power the preparations being so great and the Emperour so ready to exalt them and the people of Alexandria so turbulent and inclined by pride and passion to such ways 48. As the Prelacy thus swelled so the Churches grew suddenly more corrupted with all manner of Vice The Bishops began with sorrow to confess unto the Hereticks that the greater number in the Churches were naught When they should chuse their Bishops they could seldom agree but frequently instead of holy peaceable Votes did turn to Devilish rage and blood-shed and covered the Streets and Church-floors with the Carkasses of the slain especially in the Case of Damasus and others at Rome and oft at Alexandria and Constantinople Frequently they fell into fewds and fought it out and murdered people by multitudes Even the strict holy Monks of the Egyptian Desarts were as forward as others to fighting blood-shed and sedition Even in their ignorance for such a paultry and sottish an Opinion as that of the Anthropomorphites as that God hath the shape and parts of a man so that they forced that deceitful treacherous Bishop Theophilus Alexandr to flatter them and curse the Books of Origen not for his errours but for the opposite truth and to take on him to hold as they did When God tryed them with a Julian who did persecute them very little they reproached him to his face and tryed his patience as well as he did theirs The Antiochians scornfully bid him shave his Beard and make Halters of it In a word when Constantine had brought the World into the Church the Church grew quickly too like the World 49. But it was not the people only but the Pastors both Prelates and Presbyters that grew licentious wicked proud contentious turbulent and the shame of their Order and Profession and the great disturbers and dividers of the Churches except here and there an Ambrose an Augustine a Chrysostome a Basil a Gregory an Atticus a Proclus and a few such that so shined among a darkened degenerate Clergy as to be singled out for Saints Abundance got these great and tempting Prelacies by Simony and more by making friends to Courtiers And not a few by Carnal compliances with the people what abundance of most sharp Epistles did Isidore Pelusiota write to Eusebius the Bishop and to Sosimus Martianus Eustathius c. of all their horrible wicked lives and yet could never procure their Reformation What abundance of Epistles did he write against them to other Bishops and yet could not procure their correction or removal What a sad character doth Sulpitius Severus give of the Bishops that prosecuted the Priscilianists and in particular of their Leader Ithacius of his own knowledge What abundance of Prelates are shamefully stigmatized by Socrates Sozomen Theodoret Euagrius c When a Rebel rose up against his Prince and got but the stronger party and possession how quickly did they flatter him and own him I find but one Bishop besides St. Martin in all France and that part of Germany that disowned Maximus that murdered Gratian The rest applauded him for their own ends Nor in that part of Italy I find not any besides Ambrose and one Hyginus that disowned him Not that I think it my part to condemn all the holy Bishops who professed subjection to Usurpers in possession Even holy Ambrose could write to the odious Tyrant Eugenius Clementissimo Imperatori Eugenio concluding Nam cum privato detulerim corde intimo quomodo non deferrem Imperatori When I honoured thee a private man from the bottom of my heart how can I but honour thee being Emperour And how far have the Roman Bishops gone in this even to Phocas and such as he When good Gregory Nazianz. was chosen and settled Bishop of Constantinople and loved and honoured by a good Emperour yet was he rejected though he easily yielded even by the Synod of Bishops in the arrogancy of their minds because that he came not in by them With what pride what falshood what turbulency did Theophilus Alexand. carry on all his business with the Monks and for the deposing of Chrysostome And how arrogantly and turbulently did Epiphanius joyn with him and even Hierome make himself partaker And how easily did he get a Synod even where Chrysostome lived to second them such lamentable instances are more easie than pleasant to be cited And that Episcopacy which was set up to prevent Heresie and Divisions did afford the Heads of most of the Heresies and Divisions that befell the Churches How few of all the Heresies mentioned by Epiphanius after that Prelacy was in force were not Headed and carried on by Prelates And when the Arian Heresie sprung up by a Presbyter the Prelates so numerously received it that they seemed to be the far greater part if not the main body of the Imperial Church Witness the perverting of many Emperours the many Councils at Sirmium Ariminum c. And the many new Creeds which Socrates and Hilary
As for Petavius I need not confute him for he granteth me most as to matter of Fact that I desire as I shall after further shew His Fundamental Assertion is That the two Offices of Bishops and Presbyters were both placed in the same person in the Apostles days at which Salmasius justly laugheth For what is that but to say that then there was no such person as a Subject Presbyter much less as our half-Presbyters And Salmasius justly congratulateth his concession that solo confensu hominum vitandi schismatis gratia unus enumero Episcoporum eorundemque Presbyterorum electus est qui praeesset caeteris Quod nemo dici prohibet Nam etsi Episcopalis ordo jure divino introductus est non eodem tamen illo jure decretum est ut unus in singulis civitatibus Ecclesiis esset Episcopus sed Ecclesiae authoritate conciliorumque sanctionibus viz. It was only by Mans consent and for the avoiding of Schism that one was chosen out of the number of Bishops who also were Presbyters to be above the rest This saying none forbiddeth For though the Episcopal Order was introduced by Divine Right yet was it not by the same right decreed that One should be a Bishop in each City and Church but by the authority of the Church and the sanctions of Councils Of this sober Jesuit more anon 8. The Learned Bishop Andrews in his Epistles to Pet. Molinaeus hath said somewhat but in his Scheme Printed at Oxford 1641. before the Treatises for Episcopacy much more But as to his Description of the Jewish Form we dare not thence gather that Christians may imitate them while we know that the cessation of the Jewish Policy and Law is so largely pleaded for by Paul and that Christ is the perfect Lawgiver to his Church and that we must not add or alter on pretence of supposed parity of reason And as to his Reasons for Diocesanes from the New Testament though the well ordering of them make them very taking yet when examined they are no other but what we have found and answered in others 9. The truly Learned Reverend and Godly Primate Usher in the same forementioned Collection of Treatises hath one of the Original of Bishops and Metropolitans and another of the Proconsular Asia But 1. The utmost which he pleadeth for is no more than we acquiesce in as that it was his Model or Reduction published since by Dr. Bernard which we humbly offered to his Majesty as the means of our common concord And he hath himself told me his Judgment that Bishops and Presbyters differ not as two Orders but in Degree And that Ordinis est Ordinare or that he that hath the Order hath intrinsical power to Ordain though he is regularly to do it under the Bishops oversight And therefore it is not invalid and null but only irregular or schismatical when it is done disobediently against the Bishop and so may be disabled in foro exteriore which Dr. Bernard also hath published of him and Dr. Mason in the same Treatise fullier proveth And he took Presbyters to be Governours of the Flocks and the Synods of Bishops to be but for Concord and not to have a proper Governing power over the particular Bishops as he hath himself expressed to me Him therefore that is for us we need not confute And yet I must confess that the great Argument which he and Bishop Andrews and Saravia and all others use from the title of Angel given to the Bishops Rev. 2. and 3. did never seem of any weight to me nor moved my understanding that way at all Believing that Tyconius his old Exposition mentioned by Austin is liker to be true and that indeed it is neither one Prelate nor all the Clergy but the whole Churches that is meant by the Angel of the Churches For the Prophecy coming by Vision the word Angel is mentioned in the Vision phrase and oft in that book is by all confessed to signifie collective Bodies and more than single Individuals As Usher de Babilone himself holdeth that by the false Prophet in the singular number is meant the Roman Clergy It would be more tedious than necessary to recite the instances in that Book I therefore who because of its obscurity am apt to be distrustful of almost all Arguments that are fetcht from the dark Prophecies of Daniel or the Revelations am little satisfied with this from the name Angel And who can believe them that say Timothy was then the Bishop of Ephesus and so excellent a person as that none was like minded as described by Paul and yet that Christ had this against him that he had lost his first love and must remember from whence he is fallen and repent and do his first works or be rejected Rev. 2. 4 5. And in a word that the Apostles who placed holy persons in the Ministry had set such over those eminent Churches as were neither hot nor cold and had the rest of the faults that are mentioned by Christ And the whole style of the Text doth easily prove this Exposition against theirs Rev. 2. 2 4 7. As the praises and dispraises there seem to referr to the whole Church so v. 7. what can be more express than Hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches And v. 10. Behold the Devil shall cast some of you into prison that ye may be tryed and ye shall have tribulation ten days be thou faithful c. And again v. 11. He that hath an ear let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches which is repeated and spoken to every one of the seven v. 14 15. It is liker to be the whole Society than the Bishop that is reproved for having false Teachers and Hereticks among them and are called quickly to repent And v. 20. that suffered the Woman Jezebel to teach For the Bishops could not hinder false Teachers but by Excommunicating them and disswading the People from hearing them But the People could have done more even refused to hear them V. 23. And all the Churches shall know seemeth to intimate that this was written to the Church V. 24. Unto you I say and to the rest in Thyatira as many as have not this Doctrine and have not known the depth of Satan c. Was this spoken to the Bishop only Chap. 3. v. 1. Was it the Bishop of Sardis only that had a name to live and was dead and that was warned to be watchful and strengthen the things which remain that are ready to die whose works were not perfect before God that must remember how he had received and heard that had a few Names in Sardis c. And so of the rest Obj. But it is said Chap. 1. v. 20. The seven Stars are the Angels of the seven Churches and the seven Candlesticks are the seven Churches Ans And what can a man gather hence to satisfie himself in this point whether the sense be
as we desire If any more be necessary he granteth it us § 11. where having feigned and not proved that the people of all the Province of Macedonia were said by Paul to be at Philippi he confesseth that then every City had a Bishop and none of those that we now call Presbyters And it is more this Bastard sort of Presbyters Office that we deny than the Bishops And granting this he grants us all even that then there was no such half Officers nor Bishops that had the rule of any Presbyters which he further proveth § 19 20 21. And by the way § 16 17. he giveth us two more Observations 1. That the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã gave precedency to some Churches Where I would learn whether the Holy Ghost still observed the order in converting men to begin at the highest Metropolis and descend by order to the lowest and so to the Villages Or whether our Doctor do not here contradict what he said before of the Apostles every where disposing of the Churches according to the Civil Metropolitical Order I doubt his memory here failed him 2. Philippi and Thessalonica being both in Macedonia and these Epistles being each written to all the Province we hence learn that the Epistle to the Thessalonians and that to the Philippians were written to the same men Whether each Epistle Rev. 2. 3. to the seven Churches of Asia was written to all Asia and so all the faults charged on all that are charged on any one I leave to your arbitrary belief For none of these are proved whatever proof is boasted of Cap. 11. he further gratifieth us in expounding 1 Tim. 3. in the same manner One Bishop with Deacons then serving for a whole Diocess that is for one Assembly not having such a thing as a half Presbyter subject to any Bishop Cap. 12. he is as liberal in expounding Tit. 1. By Elders in every City is meant a single Bishop that had no half Presbyter under him and whose Diocess had but one Assembly We are not so unreasonable as to quarrel with this liberality Cap. 13. And about Heb. 13. we are as much gratified in the Exposition of the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of which more afterwards And Cap. 14 and 15. he saith the same of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Pastors and Teachers that they both are meant of none but Bishops And that Presbyters now adays are permitted and tyed to teach the people and instruct them from the Scriptures this apparently arose hence that Bishops in ordaining Presbyters gave them that power but not to be exercised till licensed by the Bishops Letters Of this detestable Opinion worse than the Italians in the Council of Trent that would have derived the Episcopal Power from the Pope I have said somewhat before and intend more in due place The Bishops do only ministerially give them possession Christ is the only Instituter of the Office by himself and his Spirit in his Apostles Can the Bishops any more chuse to deliver this possession by Ordination than to preach the Gospel Could they have made Presbyters that had no power to teach the people Is the Bishops liberality the original of the Office How much then is Christ beholden to Bishops that when a thousand Parishes are in some one of their Diocesses they will give leave to any Presbyter to teach any of the people and that when eighteen hundred of us were silenced in one day Aug. 24. 1662. that all the rest were not served so too Cap. 16. he exerciseth the same naked affirming Authority of the words Ministers of the word Luke 1. 2. and Stewards all are but Bishops And he asketh whether ever man heard of more Stewards than one in one house or of several bearers of one Key And he foresaw that we would tell him that Gods Catholick Church is one House of God and that at least all the Apostles were Stewards and Key-Bearers in that one Church and that by his Doctrine none but one of them should be Steward of Gods Mysteries or have the Keys And therefore he saith that Though the Apostles are called Stewards of the Mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4. 1. that is to be reckoned as pertaining to the many divided Families that is the many particular Churches distinct parts of the Universal Church which the Apostââs divided among themselves Answ Unless his etiam here be a self-contradicting cheat it will hence follow 1. That the Apostles are not Stewards of Gods Mysteries in gathering Churches but only to the Churches gathered 2. That in Baptizing and giving the Holy Ghost to such as yet entered not into a Particular Church they exâercised not any of their said Stewardship or Power 3. That thay have no Power of the Keyes at all over any that are not Members of a Particular Church such as the Eunuch Act. 8. And many Merchants Embassadors Travellers and many thousands that want Pastors or opportunity or hearts yea and all Christians in the first Instant as meerly Baptized Persons seeing Baptisme entereth them only into the Universal Church and not into any particular as such 4. And that till the Apostles gathered particular Churches and distributed them they had no Stewardship nor use at least of the Keyes And what if it can never be provedthat ever the Apostles distributed the universal Church into Apostolical Provinces but only pro re nata distributed themselves in the World were they never Stewards then nor Key-bearers Verily if I believed such a distribution of the World into twelve or more Provinces by them I should question the power that altered that Constitution and set us up but four or five Patriarches And were the same Apostles no Stewards or Key-bearers out of their feigned several Provinces If we must be cilenced unless we subscribe to the Dictates of such self conceited Confident men who shall ever Preach that is not born under the same Planet with them Cap. 17. he proceedeth still to maintain our Cause that even in Justin Martyrs writings and others of that Age by the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã are meant the Bishops of the several Churches who had not one Presbyter under them but Deacons only and therefore had but single Congregations but did themselves alone with the Deacon perform all the publick Offices in the Church And that no equal Presbyter was placed with them offendeth us no more than that our Parish Ministers now are presented and instituted alone yea and have power to take Curates under them as their helpers Cap. 18. He proveth truly that the Names Sacerdos and Sacerdotium are usually by old Writers spoken of sole Bishops and Episcopacy By which we are the more confirmed in our Opinion that he that is not Episcopus gregis a Bishop over the Flock is not Sacerdos true Pastor but hath only a limb of the Ministerial Office being a thing of presumptuous Prelates institution Cap. 19. He surther strengtheneth us by
made against the belief of an obligation by this Vow One is made for a change in Corporations requiring a Declaration by all in any place of Trust that there is no obligation on me or any other person from the said Oath Vow or Covenant even absolutely no obligation at all without exception of the clauses that are for the Protestant Religion for Repentance of our sins against Popery Heresie Schism Prophaneness c. The Act of Uniformity imposeth it on all Ministers c. to declare or subscribe that there is no obligation from that Vow on me or any other person to endeavour at any time any alteration of Government in the Church The Vestry Act imposeth the like on all Vestry men and so of others 4. All Ministers swear to obey the Bishops in liââtis honestis which is called the Oath of Canonical Obedience 5. And last of all an Act past at Oxford by which we are to be banished five miles from all Cities and Corporations and all places where we have preached and imprisoned six months in the Common Jail if we come nearer any of them except on the Road till we have taken an Oath that we will not at any time endeavour an alteration of the Government of the Church which plainly importeth as much objectively as the Et caetera Oath of 1640 Though not endeavouring be somewhat less than not consenting And so black a Character is put upon the Non-conformists with a some of them in the beginning of the said Act that all Reason Religion and Humanity obligeth us for the satisfaction of our Rulers for the vindication of our selves and for the just information of posterity plainly and truly to lay open our Case even those reasons for which we forbear that Conformity and by so doing incurr all this besides the greater loss of our Ministerial Liberty to labour for the saving of the peoples souls and the edifying of the Church of God What is said in the beginning may sufficiently inform the Reader 1. That it is not every man's Cause that is called a Non-conformist no nor a Presbyterian or Independant that I here maintain 2. That I am not writing a Justification of the Covenant 1. As to the Act of Imposing 2. Or of taking it 3. Nor as to the obligation of it to any thing unlawful Leaving such matters as alien to my work 3. And that I am not so rash as to assert that it obligeth any man to endeavour in his place and calling any change of our Church Government no not of a Lay-Chancellor's use of the Keys whatever I think Because it is made a matter of so grievous penalty by an Act. All that I have to do is to enquire whether the Diocesane Prelacy as now stated be so lawful that we may take all these Oaths and Subscriptions to it and so necessary that the King and Parliament have no power to change it or make an alteration if they please and we endeavour it by obeying them if they should command us And I go upon such Principles as Doctor Burges Master Gataker and many others in the Assembly that were ready to protest that they were not against the Primitive Episcopacy no nor a moderate one that did not in all things reach it I will rather be guilty of Repetition than of leaving the rash or heedless under a pretext for their mistake or calumny My own judgment is as followeth 1. That every particular Church consisting of as full a number as can associate for true personal Communion in Worship and holy living should be guided by as many Pastors or Elders of the same Office as the number of souls and the work requireth 2. That it is lawful if not usually laudable and fit if these Presbyters consent that one among them who is wiser and fitter than the rest be statedly their Guide Director or Moderator in the matters of Doctrine Worship and Discipline in that Church for order and concord and for the peoples sakes and their own And especially that in Ordinations they do nothing without him 3. That these particular Churches with their Bishop and Presbytery are Independant so far that no other Bishop or Church hath a Divine Right to Govern them saving what is anon to be said of General Pastors or Visiiters and the power of each Minister in the Universal Church as he is called 4. That as to the Communion of several Churches among themselves these particular Churches are not Independent but must hold Concord and Correspondency by Letters Messengers or Synods as there shall be cause 5. That in these Synods it is lawful and orderly oftentimes to make some one the Moderator or Guide of their debates And that either pro tempore or quamdiu sit maxime idoneus or durante vita as true Prudence shall discern it to be most conducible to the end 6. That where the Churches Good and the calling of the Infidel World requireth it there should be itinerant Ministers like the old Evangelists Silas Apollo Timothy Titus c. to preach the Gospel and gather Churches and help their Pastors And if such be not necessary in any place yet the fixed Pastors should when there is cause be itinerant and help to convert the Infidels and Hereticks and do both the general and particular work 7. That the judgment of Antiquity moving me much but more the Argument from the necessity that the same form of Government be continued in its ordinary parts which Christ at first setled in the Apostles and is not proved repealed do move me to incline to think that the Apostles must have such Successors as general Planters and Overseers of many Churches And who should before all particular Bishops have a chief hand in the ordaining of particular Bishops and Pastors and removing them as the Churches good requireth As the Seniors have in the Bohemian Waldenses Government And though I am yet in doubt my self whether such general Ministers or Arch-bishops be jure divino of Christs institution I do not deny it or contend against it And though I would not assert or swear to their right I would obey them 8. That all this Church-power is to be exercised only by Gods word managed by convincing Reason Love and good Example and that no Bishops or Arch-bishops have any power of Corporal Coaction Nor should give Church Communion to any but Voluntary Consenters nor should mix and corrupt the exercise of the Keys with unseasonable interpositions of the Sword even in the Magistrates own hand 9. But yet that the King and Magistrates are the Rulers by the Sword over all Pastors and their Flocks to see that all men do their duties and to regulate them by Laws about holy things subserviently to the Kingdom and Laws of Christ and in consistence with the preservation of the Office of the Ministry and real liberties of the Flocks 10. And therefore though we think Churchmen usually very unfit for any Magistratical Power yet we
signare nec publice quidem in Missa quemquam poenitentem reconciliare nec formâtas cuilibet Epistolas mittere By which it appeareth how big that Man's Diocess must be who besides all his other work must be present to sign every baptized person and reconcile every Penitent in every Congregation And it 's worth the noting what kind of works they be that the Bishop's Office is maintained for XXXVII From the great Church of Rome at its first Tide time let us look to the great Church of Constantinople even in the days of a better Bishop Chrysostom Besides that they had long but one Temple of which anon Chrysostom saith in 1 Thes 5. 12. Orat. 10. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. Et primum debet imperare praeesse volentibus lubentibus qui ei gratiam habent quod imperet p. 1472. p. 1473. Sacerdos in hoc suum contulit negotium Nulla est ei alia vita quam ut versetur in Ecclesia Qui Christum diligit cujusmodicunque sit Sacerdos eum diliget quod per eum sit veneranda assecutus Sacramenta And Doctor Hammond saith this Text speaketh only of Bishops 1 Thes 5. 12. Et ibid. Pro te precatur dono quod per Baptismum datur tibi inservit visitat hortatur monet media nocte si vocaveris venit And how many Parishes can a Bishop thus serve And how many score miles will they send and he go to visit the Sick at midnight And Chrysost in 1 Cor. 14. p. 653. saith Conveniebant olim omnes psallebant communiter Hoc nunc quoque facimus They had no separating Choristers sed tunc in omnibus erat una anima cor unum Nunc autem nec una quidem anima illam concordiam videris consensum sed ubique magnum est Bellum Pacem nunc quoque precatur pro omnibus is qui praeest Ecclesiae ut qui in domum ingreditur paternam sed hujus pacis nomen quidem est frequens res autem nusquam Tunc etiam domus erant Ecclesiae though called Conventicles Nunc autem Ecclesia est domus vel potius quavis domo deterior When Churches grew to be Dioceses they grew worse than when they were in houses But he that here is said praeesse Ecclesiae is he also that pronounceth Peace to them XXXVIII Gregory Nyssen speaking of the gathering of true Churches by preaching saith in Ecclesiast Hom. 1. p. mihi 93. He is the true Preacher who gathereth the dispersed into one Assembly and bringeth those together into one Congregation or Convention who by various Errors are variously seduced XXXIX He that readeth impartially Beda's Ecclesiastical History shall find that in England between six and seven hundred years after Christ they were but single Churches that had Bishops For indeed the famousest and holiest of them in the Kingdom of Northumberland were but Scots Presbyters and such as were sent by them without any Episcopal Ordination Aidan Finan c. And though they did Apostolically preach in many places to convert the Heathen Inhabitants yet their Churches of Christians were small yet presently the Roman Grandeur and Ceremoniousness here prevailed and so by degrees did their Church-form Yet saith Cambden Brit. ed. Frank. p. 100. When the Bishops at Rome had assigned several particular Churches to several Presbyters and had divided Parishes to them Honorius Arch-Bishop of Canterbury about the Year 636. first begun to distribute England into Parishes as is read in the Canterbury History But it 's plain in Beda if he did then begin it he went but a little way with that division The same Cambden also tells us that the Bishoprick of York devoured seven Bishopricks and the Bishoprick of Lincoln more c. Some Seats were but removed but many Bishopricks were dissolved and turned into one which yet were erected when Christians were fewer saith Isaackson Chronolog There was one at Wilton the See at Ramesbury one at Crediton one at St. Patrick's at Bodmin in Cornwall and after at St. Germains one at Selsey Island one at Dunwich one at Helmham and after at Thetford one at Sidnacester or Lindis one at Osney one at Hexham c. And at this day Landaff St. Asaph's Bangor St. David's are no Cities where we have Bishops Seats as notices of the old way XL. Isidorus Peleusiota lib. 1. Epist 149. to Bishop Tribonianus distinctly nameth the Bishop's Charge and the calamity if he be bad that will befall himself first and then the whole Church Himself for undertaking and not performing and the whole Church ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Quod hujusmodi viro Sacerdotium indigne mandavit The whole Church then was no bigger than to chuse the Bishop and be under his present inspection as he intimateth And Epist 315. to Bishop Leontius If thou tookest on thee the care of the Church against thy Will and art constrained by the Suffrages and the Contentions and Hands of the People God will be thy helper But if by Money c. Lib. 3. Ep. 216. p. 342. He reckoneth up such and so much work as necessary for a Bishop as no man living can do for above one ordinary Parish And frequently he describeth the City and Congregation at Pelusium as the place where the wicked Bishop and his wicked Priests together destroyed the interest of true Religion XLI I conclude this with the words of Eusebius with the Collection of Papirius Massonus a Writer of the Popes Lives Fabianus ab iis electus est ad Episcopatum urbis Ac forte evenit ut in locum ubi convenerant Columba e sublimi volans capiti ejus insideret Id pro foelici signo accipientes magno consensu alacritate animorum ipsum elegerunt Haec Eusebius Hist l. 6. Ex quo loco collegimus Electionem Episcopi Romani non ad paucos sed ad omnes olim pertinuisse Pap. Masson in vita Fabiani fol. 18 col 2. And if all the whole People of the great Church of Rome were then no more than could meet in one Room to chuse their Bishop what were the rest of the Churches in the World and how many Congregations did they contain CHAP. VII More Proofs of the aforesaid Limits of Churches THe thing that we are proving is that every Bishop should have but one Church supposing him to be no Arch-Bishop and that this Church should be such and so great only as that there may be personal Communion in publick Worship and holy Conversation between the Members and not so great as that the Members have only a Heart-Communion and by Delegates or Synods of Officers As to our Historical Evidence of the matter of fact it runs thus 1. That in the first state of the Churches it cannot be proved that any one Church in all the World consisted of more stated Communicating Assemblies than one or of more Christians than our Parishes But though through Persecution they might be forced as an Independant Church
brought And much he hath elsewhere which granteth that the Presbyters are Church governours though not in equality with the Bishops V. Dr. Field lib. 5. c. 27. shewing how the Apostles first limiting and fixing of Pastors to particular Churches was a giving them Jurisdiction saith this assigning to men having the power of order the persons to whom they were to minister holy things and of whom they were to take the care and the subjecting of such persons to them gave them the power of Jurisdiction which they had not before And As another of my Rank cannot have that Jurisdiction within my Church as I have but if he will have any thing to do there he must be inferiour in degree to me so we read in the Revelation of the Angel of the Church of Ephesus c. So that with him a Bishop is but one of the Presbyters of the same Rank having the first charge of the Church as every Incumbent in respect to his Curates and so above his Curates in Degree And As the Presbyters may do nothing without the Bishop so he may do nothing in matters of greatest moment without their presence and advice Conc. Carthag 4. c. 23. It is therefore most false that Bellarmine saith that Presbyters have no power of Jurisdiction For it is most clear and evident that in all Provincial Synods Presbyters did sit give voices and subscribe as well as Bishops And the Bishops that were present in General Councils bringing the resolution and consent of the provincial Synods of those Churches from whence they came in which Synods Presbyters had their voices they had a kind of consent to the decrees of General Councils also and nothing was passed in them without their concurrence And Chap. 49. The Papists think that this is the peculiar right of Bishops But they are clearly refuted by the universal practice of the whole Church from the beginning For in all Provincial and National Synods Presbyters did ever give voice and subscribe in the very same sort that Bishops did whether they were assembled to make Canons of Discipline to hear Causes or to define doubtful points of doctrine And that they did not anciently sit and give decisive voices in General Councils the reason was not because they have no interest in such deliberations and resolutions but because seeing all cannot meet in Councils that have interest in such business âbut some must be deputed for and authorized by the rest it was thought fit that the Bishops So here are Bishops authorized by Presbyters as their Deputies in the greatest affairs in General Councils He proceedeth to prove this by instances Concil Later sub Innoc. 3. c. VI. Even Archbishop Whitgift maintaineth as Doctor Stillingfleet hath collected Iren. pag. 394. that No kind of Government is expressed in the word or can necessarily be concluded thence No form of Church Government is by the Scriptures commanded to the Church of God or prescribed And Doctor Stillingfleet there citeth many testimonies to prove this the judgment of the Church of England And if so it must be only men and not God who make any difference between a Presbyter and a Bishop in the point of Jurisdiction VII Bishop Bilson Perpet Govern p. 16. c. 391. saith The Synod of Antioch which deposed Paulus Samosat as Eusebius sheweth lib. 7. c. 38. in Concil Eliber about the time of the first Nicene Council sate Bishops and Presbyters even 36. In the second Concil Arelat About the same time subscribed twelve Presbyters besides Deacons So in Concil Rom. sub Hilario Gregor where 34 Presbyters subscribed after 22 Bishops And in the first sub Symmach where after 72 Bishops subscribed 67 Presbyters So in the third fifth and sixth under the same Symmachus Felix had a council of 43 Bishops and 74 Presbyters The Concil Antisiod c 7. saith Let all the Presbyters being called come to the Synod in the City Concil Tolet. 4. c. 3. saith Let the Bishops assembled go to the Church together and sit according to the time of their Ordination After all the Bishops are entred and set let the Presbyters be called and the Bishops sitting in a compass let the Presbyters sit behind them and the Deacons stand before them Even in the General Council at Lateran sub Innoc. 3. were 482 Bishops and 800 Abbots and Priors conventual saith Platina Thus Bilson and more VIII To the same purpose writeth the Greatest Defender of Prelacy Bishop Downam Def. lib. 1. c. 2. sect 11. pag. 43 44. and the places before cited out of him professing that the Bishop hath but a chief and not sole jurisdiction IX Bishop Ushers judgment is fully opened in his Model which we offered to the King and Bishops in vain and which he owned to me with his own mouth X. Because the citing of mens words is tedious I add that All those whom I cited Christ Concord p. 57 c. to shew that they judge the Presbyters Ordination may be lawful and valid do much more thereby infer that they are not void of a Governing power over their own flocks viz. 1. Dr. Field lib. 3. c. 32. 2. Bishop Downam Def. lib. 3. c. 4. p. 108. 3. Bishop Jewel Def. of Apol. Part 2. p. 131. 4. Saravia De divers Min. Grad cap. p. 10 11. 5. Bishop Alley Poor mans Libr. Prelect 3. 6. p. 95 96. 6. Bishop Pilkington 7. Bishop Bridges 8. Bishop Bilson Of Subject p. 540 541 542 233 234 c. 9. Alex. Nowel 10. Grotius de imper 11. Mr. Chisenhall 12. Lord Digby then a Protestant 13. Bishop Davenant Determ Q. 42. p. 191 192. 14. Bishop Prideaux cont de Disciplin Eccles p. 249. 15. Bishop Andrews 16. Chillingworth To which I add 17. Bishop Bramhall in his Answer to Mileterius's Epistle to the King 18. Dr. Steward's Answer to Fountains Letter 19. Dr. Fern. 20. Mason at large 21. Bishop Morton Apolog. XI Spalatensis is large to prove the power of the Keys to belong in common to Presbyters as such I cited the words before Lib. 5. c. 9. n. 2. c. 2. n. 48 c. XII Even Gropperus the Papist pleadeth in the Council of Trent for the restoring of Synods of Presbyters instead of Officials the thing so much detested in England as that all we undergo must rather be endured yet saith Gropperus Restore the Synodals which are not subject to so great corruption removing those Officers by whom the world is so much scandalized because it is not possible that Germany should endure them The Spaniards and Dutch men willingly heard this but not the rest Hist p. 334. lib. 4. XIII The opinion of Paulus himself the author of that History is so fully and excellently laid down of the Original of the Bishops grandeur and of the manner of introducing the Ecclesiastical Courts by the occasion of Pacifications Arbitrations and Constantines Edict as that I intreat the Reader to turn to and peruse p. 330 331