the refractory Such things as appertain to Salvation and to Faith were ordered by the Apostles by a Divine Inspiration but in the rest they did often use their own prudence as S. Paul intimates 1. Corinth 7.25 Nor are you ignorant so oft as examples are brought of Bishops placed by the Apostles in a higher degree above Presbyters what is commonly answered viz. that they had not that preeminence as Bishops but as Evangelists of whose superiority above Pastors somewhat you may have in S. Chrysostom on the IV. to the Ephesians Which reply of what strength it is I had rather stand to your iudgment then any mans Indeed S. Ambrose on that same place makes Evangelists inferior to Bishops and without Seas Yet however you shall call Titus Timothy and S. Mark whether Bishops or Evangelists it is clear they had Bishops their successors and heirs of their preeminence You determine therfore that our Churches do offend against the Divine Right yet so as you exclude them not from hope of salvation but do think that in our Church Government men may attain to Salvation for this you brought in in your Second Letter that you might deal the kindlier with us But in your larger you liken us in this point to Aerius who you say was deservedly upon this ground by the Antients put in the black Book of Hereticks Herein Great Sir I appeal to your equity Think with your self what streits you drive me to For if I should have spoke as you conceive it I could not but necessarily accuse our Church of Heresie and so doing be forced {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} to be packing to leave my station here and to provide for my self as I could Nor could I say that the Primacy of Bishops is by Divine Right but I should brand our Churches which have spilt so much blood for Christ with Heresie For questionless to be obstinately set against such things as are of Divine Right and peremptorily to gainsay what God commands is downright Heresie whether it concern Faith or Discipline Besides that I should have overthrown that Principle wherwith cheifly our Religion defends her self against Popery viz. That what things are by Divine Right are sufficiently and evidently contein'd in the Holy Scriptures I hear what you will reply That it had been safer and better for me to have been silent in these points then itch to be writing so unseasonably Because therby it comes to pass that I must necessarily offend our own Church or your nay haply both And to tell you truth I had rather have been silent for very unwillingly I sett my mind to write nor did I write but upon command Arnoldus the Iesuite the Kings Confessor publikely and in the pulpit before His Majestie inveigh'd against the Confession of our Church and further in a pestilent book revil'd it wherin he mightily insults over us in this question and odiously seeks to overthrow our Churches Government This book coming to be sold all over France through the high ways and streets at the voice of a Cryer did greatly scandalize many Nay before this the Pulpits the Markets the Court the Streets and the very Barbers shops rang with this question This is the field wherin wanton witts sport themselves daily How earnestly my Book was look'd for which should stop that insolency it doth thence appear that in Four months space it was nine times printed I could not therfore shun this task Nor was it possible to write exactly of that Argument but I must begin with the signification of the words Bishop and Presbyter and treat of the Original of the Office But here I took occasion to speak honorably of the Bishops of England I deriv'd the dignity of Bishops from the very infancy of the Church I condemn'd Aerius I said that S. Iames himself was Bishop of Hierusalem from whom in a long course the succession of Bishops of that City is deduced Only this one thing was wanting viz. that I did not say that our Church was heretical and did trample the Divine Right under her feet which indeed I neither could nor ought to do yea had I done it you your self would have noted that want of prudence in me This may serve for the Three chief points To which you further add this {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} or corollary namely your iudgment touching the Title of my book which I wrote for France Of the Calling of Pastors These words you say are novell and never used by any of the Antients in this sense I acknowledg indeed that the word Calling is unusual among the Antients nor taken in that sense But we Frenchmen speak otherwise for as many as have wrote of that Argument either Our or Papists use this word which with us signifies somewhat more then Ordination for it is taken for the Office it self If I had wrote in Latin I should have given this Title of the Office and Ordination of Pastors Neither would you have all Presbyters and Ministers of the Word of God to be called by the name of Pastors For this word you say belongs only to Bishops and that the Antients spake so If this be true Worthy Sir the Churches in France Germany Lowcountrys and Helvetia are flocks without a Pastor But S. Paul Acts the xx commandeth the Presbyters of Ephesus pascere i. e. to be Pastors of the Church v. 17. 28. And S. Peter in his 1. Epist. 5. ch. 1. 2. v. The Presbyters who are among you I exhort Pascite feed the flock of God which is among you taking the over-sight therof not by constraint but willingly not for filthy lucre which exhortation to diligence and shunning filthy lucre no doubt belongs also to the inferior Presbyters Now to think that they ought not be called Pastors whom God commands Pascere to feed the flock I cannot persuade my self But if the Word of God be Pabulum the food of Souls I see not why he should not be call'd a Pastor who doth administer this food S. Paul in the fourth to the Ephesians verse 11. makes an enumeration of Ecclesiastical Offices God gave some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and Teachers If Presbyters who labour in the Word whom we Frenchmen call Ministers be not understood under the name of Pastors I see not what place they can have in this enumeration of the Apostle S. Augustine in his 59. Epistle saith that Pastors and Doctors here are the same The same thinketh S. Hierom upon this place of S. Paul Vincentius Lirinensis expounding this place maketh no mention of Pastors but comprehends them vnder Doctors whom he calls Treatisers who certainly were a different thing from Bishops But that Bishops only are Doctors I never yet read anywhere S. Ambrose is so far from thinking the name of Pastors to belong only to Bishops that he even calls Readers Pastors Readers saith he are and may be Pastors who fatten the souls of
Of Episcopacy THREE EPISTLES OF PETER MOULIN Doctor and Professor of Divinity Answered By the Right Reverend Father in God Lancelot Andrews Late Lord Bishop of Winchester Translated for the benefit of the Publike S. Clemens in Epist. ad Corinth 1. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Our Apostles understood by our Lord Iesus Christ that there would be contention about the name of Episcopacy Printed in the Yeer 1647. To the most Reverend Prelate the Lord Bishop of Winchester Peter Moulin wisheth all health and happiness THat Honorable man your Predecessor was taken hence not without great damage both to the Church and Common-wealth The King lost a most wise Counseller and the Church a faithfull Pastor but I a Patron and a friend who though he was most carefull and desirous of my good yet oblig'd me more by his Virtues then his benefits I have his Letters by me which he wrote to me when he was sick and his recovery was almost desperate the very sight wherof doth exceedingly afflict me But yet my grief was not a little eas'd when I heard that you succeeded in his room whose learning I long since admir'd and of whose good affection I had great experience when I was with you Indeed his most judicious Majestie did not stick long upon his choice You were even then design'd his Successor in the judgment of all who knew the wisdome of the King May it I beseech God prove happy and fortunate to your self to the Church and Kingdom May He grant you with increase of Honor increase of Virtue and a fresh and lively old age That his most Gracious Majestie may long enjoy you for his Counseller and the Church daily reap more and more fruits of your industry and vigilance I wrote a Book touching the Calling of Pastors wherin some passages greiv'd the soul of your most wise King as if they were averse to the Office of Episcopacy But indeed on the other side our Countrymen complain not a little that I vndertook the cause of Bishops and condemnd Aerius who in a matter anciently and universally receivd durst oppose himself against the Practise of the Catholik Church And they take it in ill part that I said that it was generally receivd in the Church even from the first successors of the Apostles that among the Presbyters of a City some one should have the preeminence and be call'd the Bishop But though there be many things in my Book which the King set a dash of his dislike upon which as all things els he observed wisely and with an incredible sharpness of wit yet Three things there are which specially offend Him The First is that I said that the Names of Bishop and Presbyter are promiscuously taken in the New Testament for one and the same The Second that I affirm'd that there is but one and the same Order of Presbyter and Bishop The Third and that the greatest is that I think the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the Priority or Superiority of Bishops not to be of Divine Right nor a point of Faith but to be a thing wherein the Primitive Church vsed her liberty and prudence when she judged the Preeminence of One to be fitter for the mantaining of Order and conserving of Peace and that Vnity may well be kept whole and intire between Churches though they differ upon that point I confess these things were wrote by me which lest they be drawn to a wrong sense or be taken in the worser part take I pray breifly my meaning in them I said indeed that the Names of Bishop and Presbyter were taken for all one in the New Testament But I thought not that the Dignity of the Bishop was less'ned thereby since I spake only of the Name not of the Office only and I have beside clear places of Scripture the consent not only of Hierom the Presbyter but also of the most famous Bishops of the Ancient Church Chrysostom Ambrose Theodoret who took it not as a wrong to them or that any thing was abated of their honor if it were beleeved that the Names of Bishop and Presbyter were at first used in the same sense That the Order indeed of Bishop and Presbyter was one and the same that I said For so did the Ancient Church ever think and the Church of Rome thinks so to this day although there be in that Church an incredible difference betwixt the pomp of the Bishops and the meaness of the Priests Thence it is that in the Roman Pontifical there is set down the Consecration of Bishops but not the Ordination of them Indeed Order is one thing a Degree another for men of one and the same Order may differ in Degree and Dignity even as among Bishops the Degree of Archbishops is the more eminent Howbeit that this Episcopal Degree and Prerogative is by Ecclesiastical not by Divine Right I confess it was said by me For beside that to speak otherwise then I thought had not been the part of an vpright honest man you according to your wonted goodness will easily judg that a French man living vnder the Polity of the French Church could not speak otherwise but he must incur the censure of our Synods and vnder the danger {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} of degrading be forced to a recantation For to think that our Churches do err in points of Faith and in that which is of Divine Right were questionles to brand them with the note of Heresy and to shake the conscience of many weak ones Truly I came very vnwillingly to the writing of this Book but our Church requiring it and lately enforcing me for to stop the insolency of our Adversaries who in this point insult over vs out of all temper and speak of vs as of so many doltish mushrums newly sprung out of the earth and as of a company of base fellows who by force and tumult had got the Pulpit But howsoever I think I have kept such a temper that in defending our own I have not struck at your government nor by immoderate affection to a part have inclined more then was meet to either side Nor did I ever mention the Bishops of England with out due honor These things I thought fit to write to you Great Sir by whom I chiefly desire my papers may be approved I had sent my Book to you before now but that I was told by divers you vnderstood not French Now I send it because since you enjoy a more frequent and neerer presence of His Majestie I doubt not but He may have some speech with you about it and use you as an umpire in the cause And I shal most willingly stand to your iudgment well knowing that the most learned are ever the most can did and hoping that you wil not lauce too deep whatever may be salved with a fair interpretation So think of me as of a man with whom the Authority of Antiquity shal be
commonly growes from Equality how comes it to pass that there is no need of this remedy among you Again if it be true that this Form of Government was received every where by all Churches that which was every where receiv'd by all why doth not your Church receive why doth She only run counter to all the Churches which then were every where For that is a most true word you said and deserv'd an asterisk of commendation That all Churches everywhere receiv'd this Form of Government Nor were there ever before this Age any Churches which were governed by any other then by Bishops Wherfore there was no cause at all that you should go about to wipe off that suspition for I had none of you that you were not well affected to our Order I shall never be induced to beleeve it for I cannot but give credit to you affirming it in your Letters that your Countrymen complain of you for favoring and wishing so well vnto it Indeed that you wish well I doubt not at all but therto I am more perswaded by your word then by your arguments For here you slip from the Order to the Persons of Bishops of whose Learning Industrie Martyrdom you speak much and excellently But there were as you know of old men that hated the Tyrant but not his Tyranny and why not now men that love Bishops but not the Government by Bishops Pass by the men therfore it matters not for them speak of the Order it self For Calvin himself and Beza if they wrote to our Prelates know that they wrote likewise to them whom you call peevish and that their Letters which these pretend for their peevishness are produced by them and thus they oft reply To what purpose do I hear Calvins Words when I see his Deeds For the Order it self if it be such as you would have it seem the Bishops of England cannot make it better nor of Spain worse I advis'd you not to transferr the faults of Persons upon Things and to unlearn your Church that custom As for those Antients whom you worthily call the Light of the Church and who themselves were Bishops though you say much yet you say not enough For this is not enough That you would not give sentence against them That they were not wrongfully made That they did not usurp an unlawfull Office These are but terms of diminution Not give sentence against Not wrongfully made not usurpers of an unlawfull Office speak out speak as the truth is That they were lawfully made lawfully if ever any and did exercise a most lawfull Office That our at this day are to be made after their example That the same Office is to be exercised by all Ours These speak home to the Order are nothing to the Men But whatever become of those passages I cannot but commend your conclusion there nor shall I stick to set an asterisk of approbation upon it I would to God that might put an end to the whole controversie betwixt us It is this The venerable Antiquity of those first Ages shall be ever in greater esteem with me then the new upstart device of any whosoever O would to God that Antiquity might be more and more in esteem with you with all for if Antiquity might prevail if these new upstart devices were discarded then sure the Cause of this Order could not be in danger The Second dash of dislike set by His Majestie and very justly was at that place where you contend that the Order of Bishop and Presbyter is one and the same I have shew'd that it is not the same Both 1. Because the Offices are not the same For a Presbyter doth not Ordain no not in S. Hieroms iudgment As also 2. Because there is not the same Imposition of hands but a new one in a Bishop Again 3. Because among the Fathers Isidore clearly calls it the Order of Bishops And lastly 4. Because those Two Orders were distinguished by Christ in the Apostles and the Seventy Two Here you produce to us the Title of the Pontifical which is concerning Consecration not Ordination I shew'd that the Antient Bishops even of Rome it self spake otherwise otherwise the later Popes Among the Antient that the word Ordination was most usual and most approved You appeal to the Schole I acquainted you in what sense the Schole calls them the same or not the same The same in reference to the Body of Christ upon which they terminat their Seven Orders About the Body of Christ a Presbyter doth as much as a Bishop You your self say as much Of these in respect of the Body of Christ the Church of Rome makes but one Order Not the same if you respect the power to a special Act viz. of Ordination which is peculiar to a Bishop This is not mine as you imagin'd but the definition of Orders all the Schole over Nor yet that difference which afterward you put upon me both of them are from the Schole both definition and difference These things if you would speak Scholastically were not to be deny'd by you who appeal'd to the Schole But to what purpose do you say that you deal with or that you dispute against the Pontificians who will not have the Order of Bishops distinct from that of Presbyters And yet presently you subjoin Ought I to inveigh against them viz. the Pontificians because they do not make the Order of Bishops distinct from that of Presbyters when Our Churches do not make it neither He that should do this should not so much contest with the Church of Rome as with our own You dispute therfore against them but yet you will not inveigh against them you dispute against the Pontificians and yet you allege their Pontifical You dispute against them yet your own Churches do the self same thing Nor yet will you affirm what ought to be beleev'd but what the Church of Rome thinketh which thinketh the very same that your Church doth and your Church I beleeve you would have to be beleev'd You do not therfore contest with the Pontificians for I trow you have no mind to contest with your own 'T were against your Religion so to do Nevertheless your Church as you confess doth the same thing in this point that the Roman doth You say it is best to use proper terms that the things which differ in substance be distinguished in Name and yet in the same page afterward as if you were somwhat angry you ask To what end is it to stick so much upon the distinction of Words To what end then is it to make proper words which are made proper for no other end but for distinction If this be to no end it is better trust me neither to use proper words nor to make any words at all proper for we must use the better both you and we Notwithstanding this why do you reject the distinction of words here Because every Order you say is a Degree What then Since every Degree is
that you pinch not upon I say not other mens matters which belong not to you yes which somewhat concern you for our affairs are not meer strangers to you And see heer 's a larg field for you wherin you may shew the sharpness of your wit which indeed is excellent But do not do not hope that you can {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} play on both sides Your own will complain of you Ours need no such defence So you will loose the thanks of either side But although these things be evidently enough conteined in Holy Scriptures to any whose eye is single yet is not that Principle so as you have laid it For not what belong to Divine Right but what belong to Faith and Good manners are evidently enough conteined But these are not adaequate to Divine Right Howbeit you might well you might have wrote as you speak exactly had you begun not where the words were promiscuous but where the Things being always distinct the signification of the words began likewise to be distinct It was possible for you to have absteined from words aequivocal confused and promiscuously taken nor did any necessity enforce you to begin there You might also have balk'd all occasion of diverting to us Your design was touching Bishops you were to treat of them and of the Office it self Of the Bishops of England to what purpose Doth England make that lawfull which out of England is unlawfull The abuses of men wherever they are must be taxed the office it self in what country soever is the same of it self in it self by it self lawfull Nor if the Bishops be not good is the Office of Bishops not good Yea but let the Office of Bishops be let Them be no Bishops unless they make good their Name But here I know the King would set an asterisk of approbation When you derive Episcopacy from the very infancy of the Church When you acknowledg S. Iames to be Bishop of Hierusalem and a long succession of Bishops there deriu'd from him When now again you condemn Aerius See you have Three asterisks for the Three dashes For these things are most true and according to the judgment of the Antients even of Irenaeus who leads the train of the Antients The true profession is the doctrine of the Apostles and the antient state of the Church through the while world is according to the succession of Bishops to whom They deliver'd that Church which is in every place which hath reached even unto us Somwhat I added afterward concerning the novel upstart name of Calling and so of Pastors as they are now in use with you Touching that of Calling you do not deny but that it is vnusual you used I suppose a {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the figure of extenution for it is so unusual that it is not at all Calling indeed is sometime used for the Office for Ordination never But neither do you deny what I observed touching that word Pastors Nor do you produce any either among those Antients or the later Writers before our Age that was so call'd viz. a Pastor who was not indeed a Bishop Only I know not how you heap up many things together but all beside the matter that you seem not in them neither to have reach'd my meaning For what if I grant all that you allege That your flocks are not without a Pastor as it seemeth good to you to stile him That all you say out of S. Paul S. Peter the Prophets is true What are these to me who only say that the Antients spake thus that that other name is not from Antiquity I recall you therfore to this That among the Antient Christians in former ages you shew me out of their writings where the word Pastor was ever used and they spake not of the Bishop or that it was used as with you it is of a Parish Priest Prevail thus far with your self as to shew this for unless you do this you do nothing to the purpose But yet see of what force those things are that you brought there For S. Paul doth not say there that Presbyters did pas ere were Pastors this He saith Wherein the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops pascere to feed to be Pastors over the Church of God Saint Paul's Pastor therfore is a Bishop And lest you should think that the name Bishop is to be taken there appellatively as if you would say Such as haue the Cure of not properly behold the Syriack Interpreter himself reteins the Greek word when the Syriack wants not a word of her own by which to express Such as haue the Cure of And so also S. Peters Pastor 1. Epist. 5. chap. 2. v. For I wholy doubt whether that place of S. Peter belong to inferior Presbyters For He addeth there as you know {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} being Bishops over them so that He also conjoins {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} being Bishops with {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} being Pastors That word indeed I stand not upon That which follows there not Lording it over the Clergy doth plainly evince that they to whom S. Peter wrote this had {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} power and authority over the Clergy otherwise that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} that Domineering and Lording over them could not possibly be apply'd to them Wherfor S. Peters Pastor must needs be a Bishop And who indeed can doubt of this seing the conjunction of those two words took the first rise from S. Peter For wheras you inferr that the Word of God is Pabulum food that therfore they who administer this food do pascere feed I shall easily grant you that feed they do that is {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} but not therefore {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} whence cometh {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} as you know 1. e. Pastor who over and above the food of the Word administer somewhat else beside But what you bring from that place to the Ephesians chap. 4. are either uncertain For 1. One will have Pastors and Doctors to be all one 2. Another maketh no mention of Pastors 3. A Third thinketh that Readers are Pastors I shall speak of them all 1. To S. Augustine Pastor and Doctor are no otherwise the same then Order and Degree were to us a little before Every Order a Degree but not every Degree an Order so every Pastor is a Doctor but not every Doctor a Pastor Who saith this Saint Hierom. 2. Of him who makes no mention there of Pastors nor will I make mention The Monks are better inclin'd commonly to Treatisers then to Bishops 3. For S. Ambrose who understood Bishops in Apostles Presbyters in Prophets Deacons in Evangelists no wonder if at last he fell upon Readers when he had none beside them to whom after those Three he might referr them Thus say