prooved by Scripture reason and Authors of all sorts that none which read these passages of his can ever hereafter call this into question more Having runne thus long abroade I now in the last place returne to our owne Church and writers The Booke of ordination of Ministers ratified by two severall Acts of Parliament namely 3. Ed. 6. c. 12. and 8. Eliz. c. 1. and subscribed to by all our Prelates and Ministers by vertue of the 36. Canon as containing nothing in it contrary to the word of God expresly orders that when Ministers are ordained ALL THE MINISTERS PRESENT AT THE ORDINATION SHALL LAY THEIR HANDS TOGETHER WITH THE BISHOP ON THOSE THAT ARE TO BE ORDAINED And the 35. Can. made in Convocation by the Bishops and Clergy An. 1603. prescribes that the Bishop before hee admit any person to holy Orders shall diligently examine him in the presence of those Ministers that shall ASSIST HIM AT THE IMPOSITION OF HANDS And if the said Bishop have any lawfull impediment hee shall cause the sayd Ministers carefully to examine every such person so to be ordered Provided that they who shall assist the Bishop in examining AND LAYING ON OF HANDS shall be of his Cathedrall Church if they may be conveniently had or other sufficient preachers of the same Diocesse to the number of three at the least And according to this Booke of Ordination and Canon when ever any Ministers are ordained all the Ministers there present joyne with and assist the Bishop in layng on of hands on every one that is ordained So that both by the established Doctrine and practise of the Church of England the power of laying on hands and right of ordination is common to every of our Ministers as well as to our Bishops who as they cannot ordaine or lay hands on any without the Bishop so the Bishop can ordaine or lay hands on no Ministers without them so that the power and right of ordination rests equally in them both With what face or shadowe then of truth our Prelates now can or dare to Monopolize this priviledge to themselves alone against this Booke of Ordination their owne Canons subscriptions yea their owne and their Predecessors common practise to the contrary which perchance their overgreat imployments in temporall businesses secular state affaires have caused them wholly to forgett at least not to consider let the indifferent judge But to passe from them to some of our learned writers Alcuvinus De Divinis Officiis c. 37. writes that Bishops Presbyters and Deacons were anciently and in his time too elected by the Clergy and people and that they were present at their Ordination and consenting to it That the Bishops consecration in his dayes used in the Church of Rome wherein two Bishops held the Gospell or New Testament over the head of the Bishop consecrated and a third uttered the blessing after which the other Bishops present layde their hands on his head was but a Novelty not found in the old or new Testament nor in the Roman tradition And then heâ— prooves out of Hieroms Epistle to Evagrius and his Commentary on the first to Titus that the ancient consecration of Bishops was nothing else but their election and inthronization by the Elders who chose out one of their company for a Bishop and placed him in a higher seat then the rest and called him a Bishop without further Ceremony just as an Army makes a Generall or as if the Deacons should choose one from among them and call him an Archdeacon having no other consecration but such as the other Deacons had being advaunced above others onely by the Election of his fellow-brethren without other solemnity By which it is plaine that in the primitive Church Presbyters did not onely ordaine Presbyters and Deacons before there were any Bishops elected and instituted but likewise that after Bishops were instituted they ordained and consecrated Bishops as well as Elders and Deacons and that the sole ordination and consecration of Bishops in the Primitive and purest times was nothing but the Presbyters bare election and inthronization of them without more solemnity So that the other Rites and Ceremonies now used are but Novelties Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury on the 1. Tim. 4. 14. expounds these words with the laying on of hands of the Presbytery in this maner Hee cals that the laying on of hands which was made in his ordination which imposition of hands was in the Presbytery because that by this imposition of hands hee received an Eldership that is a Bishopricke For a Bishop is oftentimes called a Presbyter by the Apostle and a Presbyter a Bishop which in his Commentary on the third Chapter on Phil. 1. 1. Tit. 1. 5. 7. hee prooves to be but one and the same in the Apostles time and in the Primitive Church So that by his resolution the imposition of hands and power of ordaining Elders and Bishops belongs to Presbyters as well as to Bishops Our English Apostle John Wickliffe and his Coaetanean Richard Fitzralphe otherwise called Richardus Armachanus Arch-bishop and Primate of Ardmagh in Ireland if we beleeve either their owne writings or Thomas Walden who recites their opinions arguments and takes a great deale of paines though in vaine to refute them affirmed and taught First that in the defect of Bishops any one that was but a meere Preist was sufficient to administer any Sacrament or Sacramentals whatsoever either found in Scripture or added since Secondly That one who was but a meere Preist might ordaine another and that hee who was ordained onely by a simple Preist ought not to doubt of his Presbytership or to be ordained againe so as hee rightly performed his clericall office because the ordination comes from God who supplies all defects Thirdly That meere Preists may ordaine Preists Deacons and Bishops too even as the inferior Preists among the Jewes did ordaine and consecrate the High Preist as Bishops consecrate Archbishops and the Cardinals the Pope Fourthly That the power of order is equall and the same in Bishops and Preists and that by their very ordination they have power given them by Christ to administer all Sacraments alike therefore to conferre orders and confirme children which is the lesse as well as to baptise administer the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and preach the Gospell which is the greater Fiftly That Christ sitting in heaven hath given the power of consecrating and ordaining Preists and Deacons of Confirmation and all other things which Bishops now challenge to themselves to just Presbyters and that these things were but of late times even above 300. yeares after Christ reserved and appropriated to Bishops onely by their owne Canons and Constitutions to increase their Caesarian Pompe and pride And Waldensis himselfe who undertakes to refute these propositions saith expresly That no man hitherto â—ath denied that God in an urgent case of necessity gave the power of ordination to any one that is
to Troas Acts. 20. 4 5. and from thence to Italy Philippi and Rome Heb. 13 23. Phil. 1 1 c. 2. 19. Col. 1 1. 2 Tim. 4. 9 13. hee being never resident at Ephesus for ought appeares in Scripture or authentique story after Paules returne out of Macedonia His abode therefore at Ephesus being but for so short a time and hee so great a Nonresident from it afterward cannot possibly argue him to be a Diocaesan Bishop of that Church Answ 3. Thirdly Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to abide is oft applyed in Scripture to a short abode for a day or two or some little space as well as to a perpetuall fixed residence as Math. 15 32. Marke 8. 2. So it is in the objected text where it is put only in opposition to Paules journey into Macedonia in respect whereof Timothy continuing at Ephesus till his returne might be truely said to abide there though after his returne hee remooved thence to other Churches as Gersonius Bucerus De Gubernatione Ecclesiae p 502. to 518 observes Answ 4. Fourthly Paul did not injoyne but beseech Timothy to abide at Ephesus therefore his residence there was but arbitrary at his owne pleasure not coactive not injoyned by vertue of any Episcopall office this Text therefore cannot proove Timothy to be Bishop of Ephesus no more then his stay at Corinth and other places whether Paul sent him proove him to be Bishop of those Churches Answ 5. Finally Admit Timothy to be both the first and sole Bishop of Ephesus which is false yet this makes nothing for but against our Hierarchicall and Diocaesan Bishops for Ephesus was but one City one Parish one Church one flocke and Congregation as is evident by Acts. 20. 17 28 29 c. 18 24 25 26 c. 19 1. to 18 Ephes 1 1 c. 4 4 16 c. 6 21 22 23. 1 Tim. 1 3 c. 5 17 to 23. Rev. 1 20 c. 2. 1. So that the argument from this example is but this Timothy was onely Bishop of one City Parish Church Flock and Congregation not of many Therefore all Bishops ought to be so too as well as hee Obj. If any object that the City of Ephesus was a Dioces for it had many Elders therefore many Parishes and severall Congregations Acts. 20 17 28. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Answ 1. I answer that the argument followes not For first in the Apostles times and in the primitive Church every particular Church and Congregation had many Elders Ministers and Deaâ—ons in it who did joyntly teach and instruct it and likewise governe and order it by their common Counsell and consent as is evident by Acts 1. 14. to 26. c. 2. 1. to 47. c. 3. 1. c. 4. 3. 8. 9. 20. 21. 23 31. to 37. c. 5. 18. to 33. 42. c. 6. 1. to 9. c. 11. 29. 30. c. 14. 23. c. 15. 2. to 23. 25 32. c. 20. 17. to 30. c. 21. 18. Phil. 1. 1. 1. Tim. 5. 4. to 14. c. 5. 17 Tit. 1. 5. 7. Jam. 5. 14. 1. Cor. 14. 23. to 33. Ignatius Epist 5. 6 8. 9. 10. 11. 13. 14. Policarpus Epist. ad Philippenses Irenaeus contra Haeres l. 3. c. 2. l. 4. c. 43 44. Tertull. Adversus Gentes Apolog. c. 39. Hieronymus Sedulius Chrysostomus Primasius Remigius Haymo Kabanus Maurus Oecumenius Theophylact Anselmus Petrus Lombardus and sundry others in their Commentaries and expositions upon Philip. 1. 1. 1. Tit. 5. Acts. 15. and 20. 17. 28. The fourth Councell of Carthage Can. 22. 23. 24. 25. The Councell of A 〈…〉 en under Ludovicus Pius Can. 8. 10. 11. The 12. Councell of Toledo Can. 4. and all writers generally accord Secondly wee at this day have many Prebends Canons and Ministers in every Cathedrall and Collegiate Church yea in every Colledge in our Vniversities and elsewhere yet but one Church and Congregation Thirdly We have in many other Churches in the Country where the Parishes are large and there are divers Chappels of ease many Curates and Ministers yet but one Church one Parish not a Dioces neither is the cheife Minister either a Bishop or Diocaesan though hee have diverse Curates and Ministers under him to assist him in his Ministery yea in many places where there is but one Church no such Chappels of ease and the Parish great we have severall Ministers Lecturers and Curates in some 4 or 5 in most 2 or 3 yet no Dioces no Bishopricke Neither is this a Novelty but an ancient constitution not onely instituded by the Apostles and continued ever since but likewise enjoyned by the Councell of Oxford under Stephan Langhton Archbishop of Canterbury in the yeare of our Lord 12 22. which decreed that in all Parish Churches where the Parish is great there should be 2 or 3 Presbyters at the least according to the greatnes of the Parish and the value of the Benefice least that one onely Minister being sicke or otherwise debilitated Ecclesiasticall Benefits which God forbid should be either withdrawne or denied to the Parishioners that were sicke or willing to be present at divine offices The multitude or plurality therfore of the Elders in the Church of Ephesus is no argument at all to proove that is was a Dioces or that Timothy was a Diocaesan Bishop because hee had Ministers and Curates under him for then our Deacons Archdeacons and Pluralists who have many livings Chappels and so many Curates and Ministers under them should be Diocaesan Bishops too by this reason Secondly I answer that admit there were divers Churches and Congregations in Ephesus which is very improbable the greatest part of the Citizens being Idolaters and the Citty itselfe a worshipper of the great Goddesse Diana and of the Image which fell downe from Jupiter Acts. 19 21. to 41. yet it can not be prooved that Timothy was cheife Bishop and Superintendent over all these Churches but onely of one of them as every Minister and Bishop of England is a Minister and Bishop of the Church of England but not a Minister and Bishop in and over all the Curches of England but in and over his owne Parish Church and Dioces onely For Paul himselfe who planted that Church and resided in it for three yeares space during which time it is like there was no Diocaesan Bishop of it but himselfe expresly cals the Elders of the Church of Ephesus Bishops and Overseers of that Church and that by the Holy Ghostes owne institution and thereupon exhorts them to take heed to all the flocke and to feed and rule that Church of God which hee had purchased with his owne blood Acts. 20. 28. 1. Tim. 5. 17. Since therefore every one of these Elders by the Holy Ghostes institution and Paules resolution was no other but a Bishop over his owne flocke if severall both to instruct and rule it it is certaine that Timothy if hee were a Bishop of Ephesus and there were many Churches there was onely Bishop of one of them not of all and
it being a sweet and pleasant gaine as some handle it now before they lay any further Title thereunto even as they are Diocaesan Bishops Seaventhly I must informe our Bishops for their learning that An. 31. H. 8. in the Patent Rolls part 4. King Henry the 8. granted a Patent to all the Archbishops and Bishops of England to endble them to consecrate Churches Chapples and Churchyards by vertue of his speciall Patents and Commissions under his great Seale first obtained without which they could not doe it and that all the Bishops in King Edward the 6. time had speciall clauses in their Letters Patents authorizing them to ordaine and constitute Ministers and Deacons as Bishop Ponets Bishop Scoryes Bishop Coverdales Patents 5. Edw. 6. pars 1. 2. with others in his Raigne testifie at large Neither doe or can our Archbishops or Bps at this day consecrate any Bishop or Arch-bishop unlesse they have the Kings owne Letters Patents authorizing and commaunding them to doe it as the Patents directed to them uponevery Bishops consecration and experience witnesse It seemes therefore that their power to consecrate Churches Chapples Churchyards Ministers and Bishops belongs not to them as they are Bishops and that it is meerly humane not divine since they claime and execute it onely by vertue of the Kings Letters Patents therefore it cannot advance them above Pres byters by any divine right Eightly All accord that in cases of necessity when or where Bishops are wanting or when there are none but Simontacall or Hereticall Bishops who refuse to ordaine such as are Orthodoxe or will not subscribe to their heresies there Presbyters and ordinary Ministers may lawfully conferre orders confirme and doe other Acts which Bishops usually ingrosse to themselves so Ambrose Augustine Richardus Armachanus Wicliffe Thomas Waldensis Feild Ames with others in their forequoted places and generally all divines resolve without dispute Yea that learned Morney Lord of Plessis in his Booke De Ecclesia c. 11. Amesius with sundry others affirme that the people alone in case of necessity where there are no Bishops nor Ministers may lawfully elect and ordaine Ministers as well as baptise and preach both which Papists and Protestants affirme that Laymen may lawfully doe in cases of necessity the right of ordination and election of Ministers being originally in the whole Church and people Ministerially onely in Bishops and Ministers as servants to the Congregation and the imposition of hands no essentiall but a ceremoniall part of ordination which may be sufficiently made without it as Angelus de Clavasio Peter Martyr and others both Papists and Protestants affirme But when Paul left Titus in Crete to set in order the things that were wanting and to ordaine Elders in every City there where present no other Bishops or Elders to ordaine Ministers as is likely but Titus onely for we read of none else but Titus then in Creeâ—e which was then but newly converted to the faith and hee is enjoyned to ordaine Elders in every City which prooves there were none there before for what need then of any yea of many others to be newly ordained and that in every City Titus his example of ordination therefore in this exigent and necessity in a Church then newly planted is no argument to proove him a Diocaesan Bishop since other ordinary Ministers might ordaine in such a case as all acknowledge yea and the people too without either Minister or Bishop to assist them Ninthly I answer that it is most evident that Titus did not ordaine Elders in every City by vertue of any Episcopall inherent Iurisdiction of his owne but as Paules Substitute who appointed him to doe it and prescribed him what maner of persons hee should ordaine Tit. 1. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. This therefore cannot proove Titus to be a Bishop or that the sole right of ordination is appropriated unto Bishops as Bishops but rather the contrary Lastly Admit that the power of ordaining Pres byters belonged only to Bishops Iure Divino yet is no good consequent Ergo they are superior to Presbyters in order and degree Iure Divino since the conferring of orders an act of service of Ministry onely not of Authority and no more then an externall complement or Ceremony is farre inferior to the authority of preaching baptising consecrating and administring the Sacrament which every Minister may doe as well as a Bishop The Bishops and Ministers in the primitive Church had many of them the gift of tongues of prophecy of healing and working miracles which some Bishops then and all now want yet these extraordinary endowments made them not superior in Iurisdiction order or degree to those Bishops who then wanted those gifts or to ours now who take farre more state upon them then those Bishops did Many Bishops there are and have beene that could not at least would not preach though Bellarmine himselfe yea the Councell of Trent and all men acknowledge that it is the cheifest and most honourable part of their Episcopall function as making them Christs Ambassadors Are they then inferior in order dignity power and degree to Bishops yea to Ministers Vicars and poore Curates who are both able and willing to preach That which makes any man superior in order Iurisdiction or dignity to his equall must be an authority superior to that which his equall hath not the accession of any inferior dignity or power The making of an Earle a Knight or Country-Iustice addes nothing to his former honour in point of superiority or precedency If a Bishop be presented to an ordinary benefice prebendary or Deanery as some are and have beene by way of Commendam it accumulates nought to his Episcopall authority being inferior to the power of the Keyes preaching and administring the Sacraments which every enjoyes Iure divino as absolutely as any Archbishop or Bishop can no wayes advaunce Bishops in Iurisdiction or degree above Pres byters and ordinary Ministers no more then the Bishop of Durham his being a Count Palatine with his large temporall jurisdiction farre exceeding that of all our Archbishops and Bishops advaunceth him in order or degree above them all So that this grand objection to proove Titus a Bishop yea a Bishop superior in Jurisdiction order and degree to Ministers is both false and idle Obj. 4. If any object that it is a received maxime in the Schooles that hee which ordaines is greater then hee who is ordained and that the Apostle saith that the lesser is blessed of the greater Therefore Titus and so likewise Bishops who ordaine Ministers in point of Jurisdiction order dignity and degree Answ 1. I answer First that this objection takes that for granted which I formerly refuted and evidenced to be a falsehood to wit that the power of ordination belongs onely to Bishops not to Presbyters and so is build on a false sandy foundation Secondly I answer that this proposition
weapons and all their domineering swelling authority overthrowne by that very principle foundation on which they have presumed to erect it the ancient proverb being here truly verified Vis consilij expers moleruit sua I shall cloze up this with the words of acute Antonius Sadeel Who after a large proof of Bishops and Presbiters to be both one and the same by Divine institution Windes up all in this manner We conclude therefore seeing that superior Episcopall dignity is to be avowched onely by humane institution tantum esse humani Iuris that it is onely of humane right On the contrary Since it is evident by the expresse testimonies of Scripture that in the Apostles times Bishops were the same with Presbiters Iure Divino potestatem ordinandi non minus Presbiteris quam Episcopis convenire that by Gods law and Divine right the power of Ordination belongs as much to Presbiters as to Bishops Page 51. l. 17. betweene same and since this should have beene inscribed So Alexander Narcissus were both Bishops of Ierusalem at the same time Paulinus and Miletus both Bishops of Antioch together Theodosius and Agapetus were both Bishops of Synada at the same season Valerius and Augustine were both joynt Bishops of Hippotogether by the unanimous consent of the Clergie and people and when as Augustine was loath to be joyned a Bishop with Valerius alleaging it to be contrary to the Custome of the Church to have two Bishops in one City they repyled Non hoc esse inusitatum that this was no unusuallthing confirming this both by example of the African and other forraigne Churches Whereupon hee was satisfied In the Church of Rome wee know there have beene sometimes two sometimes three and once foure Popes and Bishops at one time Some adhering to the one some to the other but all of them conferring Orders making Cardinalls and exercising Papall jurisdiction In the Churches of Constantinople Alexandria Jerusalem Antioch and Affricke during the Arrian Macedonian Novatian heresies and Schisme of the Donatists there were successively two or three Bishops together in them and other Cities the one orthodox the other hereticall and schismaticall Yea the first Councell of Nice Canon 7. admitts the Novation Bishops which conformed themselves to the Church and renounced their Errors to enjoy the title and dignity of a Bishop and to be associated with the Orthodox Bishops if they thought fit And St. Augustine would have the Donatists Bishops where there was a Donatist Bishop and a Catholicke if the Donatists returned unto the unity of the Church that they should be received into the fellowship of the Bishops office with the Catholicke Bishops if the people would suffer it Poterit quippe unusquisque nostrum honoris sibi socio copulato vicissim sedere eminentius c. utroque alterum cum honore mutuo praeveniente Nec novum aliquid est c. As he there defines Therefore this was then reputed no novaltie Platina records of Rhotaris King of the Lombards who declined to the Arians that in all the Cities of his Kingdome hee permitted there should bee two Bishops of equall power the one a Catholicke the other an Arian and that hee placed two such Bishops in every City Danaeus proves out of Epiphanius that anciently in most Cities there were two or three Bishops Nicephorus writes That the Scythians neere Ister have many and great Cities all of them subject to one Bishop But among other people wee know there are Bishops not onely in every City but also in every Village especially among the Arabians in Phrygia and in Cyprus among the Novatians and Montanists Yea no longer since then the Councell of Later an under Innocent the 3d. there were divers Bishops in one Citie and Diocesse where there were divers Nations of divers languages and customes Which though his Councell disallowes where there is no necessity Yet it approves and Permitt where there is a necessity Nay those Canons Constitutions and Decretalls which prohibit that there should be many Bishops in one City or that there should be Bishops in Castles Villages or small Townes and Parishes least the dignity of Bishops should become common and contemptible Manifest that before these Canons and Constitutions there were many Bishops in one City and Diocesse and a Bishop in every little Castle Towne and Countrey Village And to come nearer home the Statute of 26. H. 8. c. 14. ordayneth that there shal be many suffragan Bishops exercising Episcopall jurisdiction in one and the same Diocesse of England with the Statutes of 31. H. 8. c 9. 33. H. 8. c. 31. 34. H. 8. c. 1. which erected divers new Bishopricks in England and divided one Diocesse into many both intimate and prove as much Why then there may not now bee divers Bishops in one City one Church aswell as there was in the Apostles time in the primitive Church and formes ages or as well as there are now divers Archbishops and Bishops in one Kingdome divers Ministers in one Cathedrall and Parish Church I cannot yet conceive unlesse Bishops will now make themselves such absolute Lordly Monarks and Kings as cannot admit of any equalls or corrivalls with them and bee more ambicious proud vayneglorious covetous unsociable then the Bishops in the Apostles and Primitive times whose successors they pretend themselves to bee in words though they disclay me them utterly in their manners lordlines pomp and supercilious deportment which they will not lay downe for the peace and unity of the Church of Christ I shall conclude this with that notable speech of Saint Augustine and those other almost 300. Bishops who were content to lay down their Bishopriks for the peace and unity of the Church Et non perdere sed Deo tutius comendare An vero Redemptor noster de caelis inhumana membra descendit ut membra eius esseâ—â—us et nos ne ipsa eius membra crudeli divisione lanientur de Cathedris descendere formidamus Episcopi propter Christianos populos ordinamur Quod ergo Christianis populis ad Christianam pacem prodest hoc de nostro Episcopatu faciamus Quod sum propter te sum si tibi prodest non sum si tibi obest Si Servi utiles sumus cur Domnini aeternis lucris pro nostris temporalibus sublimitatibus invidemus Episcopalis dignitas fructuosior nobis erit si gregem Christi deposita magis collegerit quam retenta disperserit Fratres mei si Dominum cogitamus locus ille altior specula vinitoris est non fastigium superbientis Sicum nolo retinere Episcopatum meum dispergo gregem Christi quomodo est damnum gregis honor Pastoris Nam qua fronte in futuro seculo promissum a Christo sperabimus honorem si Christianam in hoc seculo noster honor impedit unitatem To which I shall adde as a Corollary a like Speech of that holy devout man S. Bernard
Feastes pastimes sports and ordinary labor even in Gods owne day as the Doctrine of the Church of England when as acute Master Iohn Sprint in his proposition for the Christian Sabbath day printed by license London 1607. p. 4. newly reprinted and learned Doctor John White in his way to the true Church 5. times printed by Authority yea sett forth and defended by Doctor Francis White now Bishop of Ely expresly brand it not onely as a Popish and Heathenish practise but likewise as a point of Popish religion which directly tends to the maintenance of open sinne and liberty of life and expresly allowes most palpable wickednesse directly tending to the desolation of publike government and private honesty being that which hath made the Papists the most notorious Sabbath-breakers that live Zanchius and Musculus also branding this very Doctrine of liberty they now teach and the practise of 〈◊〉 as Popish and all the Bishops Cleargy King Lords Commons and Parliament of England in King Henry the S. his raigne condemning it in two severall bookes as meerly Iewish to checke the dotage of those Novell Doctors who defi 〈…〉 the strict sanctification of the Lords day by abstinence from dauncing sports and pastimes Iudaizing when as that they plead for is truly such This grosse prophanation therefore of the Lords day both in Doctrine and practise aggravated with the late suspending silencing excōmunicating pursevaning vexing persecuting depriving croushing of many learned painfull godly conscionable Ministers both against all the Rules of Canon Law Common Law Statute Law conscience reason piety charity justice and the Presidents of all former ages meerly for refusing out of conscience upon their Episcopall Mandates to have any hand or finger in acting in proclaiming any thing which might animate their people to this pestiferous sinne punished within these three yeares with many memorable particular judgements of God immediately executed from heaven hath no doubt so farre provoked our most gracious God that now he can hold off his hands no longer from smiting us with his dreadfull Iudgements which some of us have allready felt and most of us now feare who questionlesse will never take off his Pests and Iudgements from us till your Lordships shall take off your most unjust Suspensions and censures from those who have thus suffered in his quarrell and all of us repented of this our crying sinne of prophaning Gods owne sacred day both in point of Doctrine and practise An abhomination never more rife in any then this our present age by reason of your Lordships patronizing propagating and defending of it in such a publike shameles violent maner as no former age can ever paralell to Gods dishonor your owne eternall infamie and the fitting of your selves and this whole Kingdome for those publike judgements not onely of a late extraordinary cold winter and two successive drie summers which threaten a famine of bread to recompence that Famine of Gods word that you have lately caused to omitt all other miseries which we suffer but likewise of that plague which is now dispersed In the pulling downe whereof as your Lordships have had nodoubt a deeper hand then others so you have great cause to feare you shall feele the irresistable mortiferous stroke thereof as much or more then others The Plague you well know is Gods owne Arrow Psal 91. 5. who ordaineth his arrowes against the Persecutors Psal 7. 13. And are not some at least of your Lordships such It is Gods owne hand 2. Sam. 24. 14. 15. Ier. 21. 6. Now Gods hand shall finde out all his Enemies his right hand shall finde out those that hate him Psal 21. 8. And are not many of your Lordships in that number It is Gods owne brandished sword Psal 8. 6. And whom doth God wound and slay therewith but the †head of his Enemies and the hayry scalpe of those who goe on still in their trespasses And are not to many of your Lordships such who even now in the very midst of Gods Iudgements proceed on still in your malicious violent implacable hatred enemities and persecutions against Gods faithfull Ministers Saints and the very power of holinesse in your Lordly Pompe ambition avarice pride envy arrogance cruelty oppression injustice luxury secularity suppression of preaching prayer fasting Communion of Saints and what ever savours of piety and in profaning of Gods owne sacred day both in your doctrine practise which is seldome worse solemnized or more prophaned as Master Bucer long since observed Quam in ipsis Episcoporum aulis then in Bishops owne Pallaces where neither Lord nor Chaplaine nor servant make any great conscience of prophaning it sundrie wayes to give the better example of piety and holinesse unto others How then being heavy laden with these many sinnes and having the prayers the cries the clamours the teares the sighes and groanes of all Gods people against you if not of the whole Kingdome to the dayly imprecations of many distressed Ministers people whom you have most injuriously and inhumanely handled without any lawfull cause can you but feare Gods vengeance and expect his plagues to sweepe such Clods of sinne and mischiefe such Pests and Prodigies as you are cleane away Be wise now therefore O yee Kings for such are you now become by giving absolute Lawes and prescribing what Ceremonies Articles Rites Oathes and Novelties you please even in your owne names and rights alone unto his Majesties people and executing all Lordly Kingly Soveraignity and Dominion over mens bodies and estates as well as soules contrary to your Saviours expresse Inhibition Math. 20. 25. 26. be learned O yee Iudges of the earth for such are you now in many temporall Courts and would be gladly such in more in steed of being preaching Bishops in our Pulpits and Pastors of mens soules Serve the Lord in feare for that is in truth your duty not to be Lords your selves or reverenced and served with feare as Lords are wont to be and rejoyce unto him not with Organes Choristers Pipes and Daunces but with trembling kisse the sonne whom you have hitherto buffeted persecuted in his faithfull Ministers and Servants least he be angry and ye perish in the way even now when his wrath is kinded but a litle and his plagues but newly kinded least if ye refuse to turne from all your former sinnes and wickednesses hee begin at last to bruise you with this his rod of Iron and dash you in peeces like a Potters vessell and there be none to deliver you from this his raging fury Remember I beseech you that of the Prophet Nahum God is jealous and the Lord revengeth the Lord revengeth and is furious the Lord will take vengeance on his adversaries and he reserveth wrath for his enemies And though he hath a long time suffred you with much patience as he doth other vessels of wrath fitted to destruction to spoyle oppresse and
instituted onely at first by severall Councells and Princes are no divine or Apostolicall but onely a humane institution This all the Archbishops Bishops and Clergy of England in their institution of a Christian man dedicated to King Henry the 8. fol. 59. 60. resolve in these tearmes IT IS OVT OF ALL DOVBT that there is no mention made neither in Scripture neither in the writings of any authenticall Doctor or Auctor of the Church being within the time of the Apostles that Christ did ever make or institute any distinction or difference to be in the preeminence of power order or Jurisdiction betweene the Apostles themselves or between the Bishops themselves but that they WERE ALL EQVALL IN POWER AVTHORITY AND IVRISDICTION And that there is now and since the time of the Apostles any such diversity or difference among the Bishops IT WAS DEVISED BY THE ANCIENT FATHERS of the primitive Church for the conservation of good order and unity of the Catholike Church and that either by the consent and authority or else at least BY THE PERMISSION AND SVFFRANCE OF THE PRINCES AND CIVILL POWERS for the time ruling For the sayd Fathers considering the great and infinite multitude of Christian men so largely increased through the world and taking examples of the old Testament thought it expedient to make an order of Degrees to be among Bishops and spirituall governours of the Church and so ordained some to be Patriarkes some to be Metropolitans some to be Archbishops some to be Bishops and to them did limit severally not onely their certaine Diocesse and Provinces wherein they should exercise their power and not exceed the same but also certaine bounds and limits of their Jurisdiction and power c. The same is averred by learned Bishop Hooper in his Exposition upon the 23. Psalme fol. 40. who sayth that Archbishops were first ordained in Constantines time yea Archbishop Whitgift himselfe confesseth as much that Archbishops are neither of divine or Apostolicall but humane institution since the Apostles times And Patricke Adamson Archbishop of S. Andrewes in Scotland in his publike recantation in the Synode of Fiffe in Scotland Anno 1591. professed sincerely ex animo that Bishops and Ministers by Gods word were all equall and the very same That the Hierarchy and superiority of Bishops over other Ministers NVLLO NITITVR VERBI DEI FVNDAMENTO had no foundation at all in the word of God but was a meere humane Institution long after the Apostles times from whence the Antichristian Papacis of the Bishop of Rome hath both its rise and progresse and that for 500. yeares last past it hath beene the cheifest instrument of persecuting and suppressing the truth and Saints of God in all Countries and Kingdomes as all Histories manifest Thus this Archbishop in his Palinody disclaiming not onely Archbishops but ever Diocaesan Bishops to be of divine but onely of humane institution long after the Apostles giving over his Archbishopricke thereupon and living a poore dejected life This being then granted on all hands it is cleare that Titus could not be Bishop of all Creete for then hee should be an Archbishop having divers Bishops under him those Elders which hee placed in every Citty of Creete being no other but Bishops Tit. 1. 7. as all acknowledge and Arch-bishops were not instituted till after the Apostles and Titus dayes For these reasons I conceive that Titus was not Bishop of Creete having no Episcopall or Archiepiscopall See there appointed to him which learned Gersonius Bucerus hath at large manifested to such who will take paines to peruse him Obj. 1. If any object 1. that the Postscript of the Epistle to Titus stiles him Titus ordained the first Bishop of the Church of the Cretians Ergo hee was Bishop or Archbishop of Creete Answ 1. I answer 1. that as this and all other Postscripts are no part of the Scripture or Epistles as Mr. Perkins workes proove at large but an addition of some private person since as is evident by the words themselves in the preterimperfect tense and third person IT WAS WRITTEN TO TITVS c. therefore no convincing authority so this clause ordained the first Bishop of the Church of the Cretians is no part of the Postscript but a late appendix to it not found in any of the Coppies of this Epistle which the Fathers follow in their Commentaries in few or no ancient Greeke Latine or English Coppies and Translations of this Epistle in few or no Testaments or late Commentators And had Titus been Bishop of Creete it is like Paul would have given him this Title in the Epistle where hee stiles him Titus his owne Sonne after the Common faith c. 1. v. 4. as well as in the Postscript which in truth is none of his but some others Perchance Oecumenius his addition the first that mentions it 1050. yeares after Christi since hee speakes of Bishops by name in that Epistle Tit. 1. 7. But of this see more in the answere to the Postscript of Timothy Secondly I answer that this Postscript is directly false for it saith that this Epistle was written from Nicopolls of Macedonia Now it is cleare by the 12. verse of the third chapter of this very Epistle that Paul was not at Nicopolis when hee writ it but at some other place for hee writes thus to Titus when I shall send Artemas unto thee or Tychicus be diligent â—ocome unto me to Nicopolis for THERE not here I have intended to winter Now had Paul then been at Nicopolis hee would have written thus for here not there I have intended to winter there being ever spoken of a place from which we are absent here only of a place present The Postscripâ— therfore being false as Mr. Perkins workes hence conclude can be no part of Canonicall scripture nor Epistle none of Paules penning but a meere ignorant Appendix of some scribe or comentator of after times and so no solid proofe to manifest Titus Bishop or Archbishop of Creete not at Nicopolis when this Epistle was written Obj. 2. If they secondly object that Paul left Titus in Creete to set in order the things that were wanting Tit. 1. 5. Ergo hee was a Bishop Answ 2. I answere that this is a meere inconsequent and I may argue in the like nature Our Archbishops and Bishops especially those who turne Courtiers Counsellers of State and Nonresidents leave their Archdeacons Chauncellers Commissaries Vicars generall and Officialls to visit order correct their Dioces and to set in order those Ceremonies Altars Images and Church ornaments which were well wanting now too much abounding in them Ergo Archdeacons Chauncellers Vicars generall and Officials are Archbishops and Bishops of those Dioces The King sends his Indges Commissioners and under Officers to some Counties or Citties to sett Causes Counties people Armes Forts Citties in good order and to see defects in these supplied Ergo Iudges Commissioners and Officers are Kings Churchwardens ought
but a meere Preist to wit in the want or defect of Bishops All the Archbishops Bishops Archdeacons and Clergy of England in their Booke intituled The institution of a Christian man subscribed with all their hands and dedicated to King Henry the 8. An. 1537. Chapter of Orders and King Henry the 8. himselfe in his Booke stiled A necessary â—rudition for any Christian man set out by authority of the Statute of 32. H. 8. c. 26. approoved by the Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Netherhowse of Parliament prefaced with the Kings owne Royall Epistle and published by his speciall commaund in the yeare 1543. in the chapter of Orders expresly resolve that â—reists and Bishops by Gods Law are one and the same and that the power of ordination and excommunication belongs equally to them both Learned Martin Bucer in his Booke of recalling and bringing into use againe the lawfull ordination of Ministers and of the office of Pastors in his Scripta Anglicana written here in England p. 254. 255. 259. 291. 292. 293. and on Math. 16. layes downe these Conclusions First That the power of ordination rests principally and originally in Christ himselfe Prince of Pastors Secondly That this power is secondarily and derivately in the whole Church whose consent is requisite in the election and ordination of Ministers Thirdly That the actuall power of Ordination and imposition of hands belongs as well to Presbyters as to Bishops that they ought to joyne with the Bishop in the laying on hands and that Timothy was ordained by the Presbyters Fourthly That Bishops and Ministers have the power of imposition of hands in them onely instrumentally not originally as servants to the whole Congregation Fifâ—ly That the examination and ordination of Ministers ought to be made publikely in the Church where they are elected to be Ministers before all the Congregation All which he prooves by sundry Scriptures and Histories Peter Martyr his coaetaman Regius professor in the â—niversity of Oxford in the dayes of King Edward the 6. in his Commentary upon the 2. Kings 2. 23. and in his Common places printed at London Cum Privilegio An. 1576. Class 4. Loc. 1. Sect. 23. p. 849. writes thus The Papists cannot object grievous sinnes against the Ministers of the Gospell but they oppose onely some slight that I say not ridiculous thinge they say that our Pastors have no imposition of hands and thence they indeavour to conclude that they are not to be reputed just Governours of the Church and that the Congregations which are taught and governed by them are no true Churches but Convenâ—â—cles of revâ—lters And this they say as if the imposition of hands were so necessary that without it there can be no ministry in the Church when notwithstanding Moses consecrated Aaron his Brother and his Children offering divers kindes of Sacrifices on which no man formerly had layd on hands Likâ—wâ—se Iohn the Baptist brought in a new right of Baptisme and administred it to the Iewes when as yet no hands had beene layd upon him and hee himselfe had beene baptised of no man Paul also called by Christ in his journey did not presently goe to the Apostles that they might lay hands upon him but hee taught in Arabia for 3. yeares space and ministred to the Churches before that hee went up to the Apostles his Antecessors as himselfe witnesseth in his Epistle to the Galathians We reject not the imposition of hands but retaine it in many Churches which if we receive not from their Bishops we are not to be blamed for it for they would not confâ—rre it on us unlesse wee would depart from sound Doctrine and likewise bind our selves by Oâ—th to the Roman Antichrist In which words hee resolves First That the imposition of hands is no such essentiall part of a Ministers ordination but that it may be omitted and that those who are elected and lawfully called to the Ministery by the suffrage of the whole Church and people are Ministers lawfully called and ordained without this Ceremony Secondly That the imposition of hands belongs to Ministers as well as Bishops and that those who are ordained Ministers in the reformed Churches where they have no Bishops onely by the laying on of hands of other Ministers are lawfully ordained Thirdly That this position that the power of ordination belongs onely to Bishops that those are no true Ministers who are ordained without a Bishop is but a vaine ridiculous Popish Cavill Our Prelates therefore should be ashamed to ground both their owne and Titus his Episcopall Hierarchie upon it Learned Doctor Whitaker writing against Bellarmine saith that this text of the 1. Tim. 4. 14. makes very much against the adversaries For from this place wee understand that Timâ—thy receiveth imposition of hands from the Elders who at that time governed the Church by a common Councell and against Duraeus hee argues thus Luther Zwinglius Oecolampadius Bucer and others were Presbyters and Presbyters by Gods Law are the same with Bishops therefore they might lawfully ordaine other Presâ—yters Doctor Fulke in his Confutation of the Rhemâ—sh Testament Annot. on Tit. 1. Sect. 2. and Doctor Willet in his Synopsis Papismi the 5. generall Controversie quaest 3. part 2. write thus Although in the Scripture a Bishop and an Elder is of one order and authority in preaching the word c. yet in government by ancient use of speech hee is onely called a Bishop which is in the Scripture called cheife in governement to whom the ordination or consecration by imposition of hands was allwayes principally committed Not that imposition of hands belongeth onely to him for the rest of the Elders that were present at ordination did lay on their hands or else the Bishop did lay on his hands in the name of the rest We differ from the Papists in this They affirme that not principally and cheifly but solely and wholly the right of consecrating and giving Orders appertaineth unto Bishops But concerning the power of giving Orders we say that though it were cheifly in the Apostles yet the Pastors and Elders together with them layd on their hands Acts. 13. 3. 4. and as S. Paul speaketh of his laying on of hands 2. Tim. 1. 6. so hee maketh mention of imposition of hands by the Eldership 1. Tim. 4. 14. And the Rhemists on that place mislike not the practise of their Church that their Preists doe lay on their hands together with the Bishop upon his head that is to be ordained What else doth this signifie but that they have some interest in ordaining together with the Bishop The 4. Councell of Carthage Can. 3. Decrees thus Let all the Preists that are present hold their hands next to the Bishops hand upon the head of him that is to be ordained Againe Can. 14. of the same Councell The Bishop must not give orders but in the presence and assembly of the Clergy By this then it is manifest that imposition of hands doth not wholly and
lives and practises of our Bishops that I speake not of any others how they now openly fight against God his Word his Ministers Ordinances worship people grace holines yea morall vertue honesty civility and that with both hands both swords at once wee may rather wonder that the Lord himselfe doth not visiblie descend from heaven and raine downe fire and brimstone on us as hee once did on Sodome and Gomorrah and then tumble vs all headlong into hell yea our Archbishops Bishops and Prelates specially may justly feare hee will strike them all quite dead with Plague as hee did Pope Lucius the second who died of the pestilence Pope Caelestine the second swept away with the same disease both within the compasse of two yeares Wichardus Arch-bishop of Canterbury elect who going with great presents from King Oswy unto the Pope to Rome to fetch thence his pall and conse 〈…〉 ion hee and most of his company there perished with the Pest Thomas Bradwardin Archbishop of Canterbury An. 1348. The Bishop of Marselles and all his Chapter An. 1348. Daniel the 13 Bishop of Prague Anno 1116. The Bishope of Par 〈…〉 Rhegium and Millain Anno 1085. with many other Archbishops and Bishops forecited heretofore that they might no longer be an insufferable Plague and burthen to the earth or provocation and greivance even to heaven it selfe or else deale with them in that exemplary way of Iustice as hee did with Thomas Arundle Archbishop successively both of Yorke and Canterbury one of their predecessors a greivous persecutor of Gods people and great silencer and suspender of his Ministers who occupying both his tongue his braines and Episcopâ—ll power as too many of his successors have done since to stop the mouthes and tye vp the tongues of Gods Ministers and hinder the preaching course of Gods word was by Gods just judgmeÌ„t so stricken in his tongue with which hee had oft staundered the poore Ministers Saints of God as seditious factions people rebels Conventiclers to K. Henry the fourth as some of his Rochet doe now to his Maiesty that it swelled so bigge he could neither swallow nor speake for some dayes before his death much like after the example of the rich glutton and so hee was starved choked and killed by this strange tumor of his tongue This say all the marginall writers was thought of many to come upon him by the iust hand of God for that hee so bound and much stopped the word of the Lord that it might not be peached in his dayes Our Prelates now have farre greater cause then hee had then to feare Gods Iudgements in this or a more grievous nature and that in these regards First Because they have his Example with many other like Presidents of divine revenge upon persecuting truth-suppressing Prelates to wante and terrifie them which this Prelate never heard of and so are more inexcusable then hee Secondly Because his silencing of the Preachers and hindring the preaching of the Gospell proceeded rather from error ignorance of the truth and misguided zeale then malice or hatred against the Gospell Ministers and professors of it But our Bishops proceedings in this kinde proceeds from direct and willfull malice and emnity against the truth Gospell Ministers and Saints of God against inward conviction and the testimony of their owne consciences staring them in the face the very sinne against the holy Ghost himselfe or next degree thereto into which they are dangerously fallen Thirdly Because hee persecuted silenced or suspended none that professed the same truth faith and doctrine which hee and the Church of England then embraced but onely those whom hee and the Church of England then deemed both heretickes and Schismatickes But our Prelates now silence suspend excommunicate deprive imprison persecute those who professe and maintaine the established doctrine and discipline of the Church of England which themselves pretend to defend and strive for those who are members yea pillars of our owne Orthodoxe Church and neither seperate from it in point of doctrine nor discipline being likewise altogether spotles innocent undefiled in their lives even because they preach and defend Gods truth and the Doctrines the Articles of the Church of England against Papists Arminians and superstitious Romanizing Novellers A thing so strange that the like was never heard or read off in any age Church State but ours onely yea a thing so detestable as not found among the Savage b 〈…〉 ite beasts as Tygers Lyons Wolves Beares who ever hold together and prey not one upon the other Parâ—it cognatis maculis similis fera being as old as true and therefore most monstrous most detestable in our Christian Church and Prelates who must needs expect the extremity of Gods Judgements to light upon them for it Fourthly Because hee put downe preaching and silenced Gods Ministers in times of health and prosperity onely but our Prelates even now in this time of sicknesse and mortality when God in speciall maner cals upon them To crie aloude and spare not to lift up their voyces like a trumpet and shew the people their transgression and the howse of Jacob their sinnes yea which is the hight and upshot of all impiety they take advantage of this present pestilence and mortality to put downe all Lectures and preaching when as all former ages have set them up together with prayer and fasting to as a speciall anti 〈…〉 and preservative * against the Plague which they now pretend to be a meanes to spread it An impiety that heaven and earth may well stand amâ—azed at and future ages will hardly credit yea the very capitall sinne of which the Iewes were guilty f who both killed the Lord Jesus and their owne Prophets and persecuted and chased out as the margin renders it the Lords Ministers forbidding them to preach to the Gentiles that they might be saved to fill up their sinnes alway for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost A text which should smite through the loynes and hearts of all persecuting Prelates and silencers of Gods Ministers who prohibit and put downe preaching the cheife and most principall office whereunto Preists or Bishops be called by the auehority of the Gospel as all the Bishops and whole Clergy of England have resolved in the Institution of a Christian man dedicated by them to King Henry the 8. and subscribed with all their names as the very Councell of Trent it selfe hath deemed in these words Praedicationis munus Episcoporum praecipuum est as the Church of England herselfe in the Homily of the right use of the Church p. 3. 4. 5. and before them all our Saviour Christ himselfe his Prophets and Apostles have past all dispute concluded I shall therefore desire these dumbe silencing and silent Prelates who would have all other Ministers as lasie mute and silent as themselves favouring all dumbe dogs that
〈…〉 4. 3. 16. 1. Sam. 10. 1. c. 26 6. 11. Ps 92. 10. 1. Kings 1. 39. c. 19. 15. 16. * Bishop Iewell Reply to Harding Article 4. Divis 5. 6. 18. Richaâ—dus Armachanuâ— De Quaest Armenorum l. 11. c. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. ‡ Contr. haer l. 3. haer 75. ‡ Anselmuâ— Haymo Rabanus Primasius Calvin Deering and David Dickson on this text * Heb. 4. 14. 15. c 8. 1. c. 9. 11. c. 10. 21. ‡ Heb. 13. 20. 1. Pet. 5. 4. * Ephes 4. 10. 11. 1. Cor. 12. 28. Math. 9. 37. 38. ‡ Acts. 1. 25 26. Gal. 2. 8. 9 11. 14 1. Cor. 12. 28. 29. 2. Cor. 11. 5 * Canon 33. 35. An. 1603. ‡ Canon 31. ‡ 1. Tim. 4. 6. 2. Tim. 4. 5. 1. Thes 3. 2. * 3. Ed. 6. c. 12. 8. Eliz. c. 1. * Eusebius Eccles Hist l. 3. c. 39. p. 55. ‡ Bibliotheca Patrum Tom. 1. p. 96. * Apolog. c. 39. Tom. 1. p. 692. 693. 694. * Eusebius Eccles Hist l. 5. c. 16. ‡ Eusebius Eccles Hist l. 5. c. 23. * Eusebius Eccles Hist l. 5. c. 20. o Ibid. e. 26. * Eusebius Eccles Hist l. 7. c. 8. p See his life before his workes * Aretius Theolog Problemata Locus 62. De Officiis Eccl. Sex 9. p. 184. 186 Chenmitius Examen Concilij Tridentini pars 2. De Sacramento Ordinis c. 4. p. 223. 224. ‡ Iliad 1. 10 * De Vita Constantini l. 4. c. 24. * So is the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used by Basil Epist 52. not to ride in visitation like a Lordly Prelate but to consider of the miserable state of the Church to be carefull for it as Bishop Iewell witnesseth in his Defence of the Apology of the Church of England part 2. c. 3. Divis 5. p. 107. ‡ Enarratio in Psal 126. Tom. 8. pars 2. p. 726. 727. * Let our great Prelates marke this well * De Civitate Dei l. 19. c. 19. Tom. pars 2. p. 516. †Note this * fol. 116. Act. 20. * See Fulke and Cartwright Ibid. m. ‡ Bishop Iewel Defence of the Apology part 2. c. 3. Divis 5. p. 107. * Marsilius Patavinus Defens Pacis pars 2. c. 15. 16. Richardus Armachanus Resp ad Quaest Armenorum l. 11. c. 1. to 8. Fox Acts and Monum p. 1009. 1116. 1465. * Bishop Iewell Defence of the Apol. part 2. c. 3. Divis 7. part 111. Thomas Beacon his Catechism Vol. 1. f. 499. 500. Chrysost Opus Imperf in Matth. Hom. 3. 43. Ambros de Dign Sacerd c. 4. ‡ August De Civ Dei l. 19. c. 19. Hier. Ambr. Sedul Primas Haymo Rab. Maur. Chrysostom Theodoret. Theophylact. Oecumenius Anselmus Beda in 1. Tim. 3. 1. 2. Bernard De Consid ad Eugen. 2. 3. * Math. 10. 1. to 16. Marke 6. 7. to 12. Luke 9. 1. to 6. compared with Luke 10. 1. to 21. ‡ Clemens Epist apud Surium Tom. 1. p. 141. and others who have since followed this forgery of his * L. 3. c. 4. Eccl. Hist. ‡ See Mercator Atlas Minor p. 812. * Math. 7. 26. 27. ‡ The Instit of a Christian man Ch. os Orders and Thomas Beacons Catech. f. 499. 500 * See the Fastbookes then printed ‡ Ioel. 2. 14 to 20. 4. 2. 1. to 28. Isay 22. 12. 13. 14. 2 Chron. 6. to 24. to 40. c. 7. 13. 14. 15 Zeph. 2. 1. 2. 3. Ionah 3. 5 to 10. Ezech. 9. 4. Mal. 3. 16. 17. Ezra 9. 10. †See Bishop Wrens Injunctions for Norwich and his Visition Artiles and yet this Can. bindes them not strictly to any forme as the Words Or to this Effect declare f Ier. 7. 16. c. 11. 14. c. 14. 11. c. 29. 7. c. 37 3. 4. c. 42. 2. 4. 20. Ioel. 2. 17. * Isay 22. 12. 13. g Ps 119. 21. Iudg. 5. 23. Mal. 2. 2. c. 3. 9. 1. Cor. 16. 22. h Luke 18. to 3. Rev. 6. 9. 10. Psal 28. 4. 5. ‡ 1. Sam. 4. 18. * Fox Acts Monuments London 1610. p. 502. ‡ Platina Onuphrius Bale Stella Volateranus Celestin 5 Bonifac. 8. * Georgius Pontan Bohemiae piae l. 3. p. 36. Godwin Catalog of Bps. p. 212. 216 460. 564. 585. Mathew Westminst An. 932. p. 361. Newbrigens l. 1. c. 14. ‡ De Sacram. l. 3. c. 1. l. 5. c. 1. e Tract 9. 16. 20. 21. 25. 27. 29. 35. 37. in Ioan. f Hom. 5. 6. 8. 9. 10. 13. 28. in Genes g Catech. Orat. 7. 14. Catech. Mystag 14. h Socr. Eccl. Hist. l. 7. c. 2. i Fox Acts. Monum p. 1366. k Fox Acts Monuments p. 15. 59. See p. 1115. 1153. 1457. 1579. 1696. ‡ See his Visitation Articles and injunctions for Norwich †Before the 39. Articles of the Dissolution of the last Parliament p. 20. 21. 22. 42. 43. * Magna Charta c. 29 25. Hen. 8. c. 19. 21. 27 H. 8. c. 15. 37. H. 8. c. 17. 1. Ed. 6. c. 2. 1. Eliz c. 12 5. Eliz. c. 1. 12. Eliz. c. 13. 8. Eliz. c. 1. o Inconformity therefore it notâ— the thing the Bishops ayme at but the suppression of the Gosple p 1. Cor. 9. 16. q Isay 56. 7. Ier. 7. 11. Math. 21. 13. Marke 11. 17. Luke 19. 46. See Dr. Boyes Postill on the first Sunday after the Epiphany p. 132 and on the 10. Sunday after Trinity p. 446. 447. ‡ To wit for affirming That his Majesty and the Lords of the Councell would be heartily glad if all those that went over to new-New-England were drowned in the bottom of the Sea A most trayterly seditious speech as of his Majesty the State delighted in the destruction of his faithfull subjects whom hee is bound by Oath and duty to protect and preserve p Of the right use of the Church of the time and place of prayer q Dr. Boyes Postill on the 10. Sunday after Trinity p. 448. r Hom. of the repairing keeping cleane of Churches p. 80 of the time place of prayer p. 131. s Hom. of the right use of the Church of repairing Churches of the time place of prayer * Hom. 1. 2. 3. 5. 10. 29. in Gen. Hom. 5. in Math. †Defence of the Apology part 5. c. 3. Divis 4. p. 449. 450 * O Blasphemy b See Doctor Iames his Treatise of the corruption of the Scriptures c. by the Prelates of Rome part 2. 3. 4. c See the Homilies of the Right use of the Church of the time and place of prayer of keeping cleane of Churches d Ier. 23. 13 14. 15. * Gen. 18. 19. See 2. Chron. 36. 15. 16. 17. * Fasciculus Temporum 1144. Cent. Magd. 12. Col 1407. stella a Antiq. Eccl. Brit. p. 13. Godw. p. 53. * Fox Acts Monuments p. 364. b Alberti Argentinensis Chron. An. 1348. p. 147. * Georgius Pont. Bohemiae piae l. 3. p. 34. * Behold Constantiensis ad Herman Appendix An. 1085. p. 357. * Thomas