the Authority of the Bishop let him be Excommunicated Divers other Constitutions have been made in Ecclesiastical Politie for the maintaining the Dignity of Bishops So also the Civil State hath augmented and enlarged the Privileges and Immunities of Bishops which they have rather by the Munificence of Princes than by Divine Authority As first the Division of Provinces and Cities unto Archbishops and Bishops and the limitation of their Jurisdiction was brought in by the consent of Princes Secondly The Revenues and Lands of Bishopricks have been given by Devout and Religious Princes unto Bishops and their Successors and divers Imperial Laws have been made in favour of the Maintenance of the Church Thirdly The Titles of Honour annexed to Bishopricks as that they are created Barons and made Lords of the Parliament-House here in England have been bestowed by the Liberality of the Kings of this Realm not yet above 400 years since Fourthly The Judgment of Matrimonial and Testamentary Causes and of other such like Matters hath been reserved unto Bishops by the Civil and Imperial Authority Thus we see how in Civil Policy the Dignity of Bishops by the favour of Christian Emperors hath been enlarged And hitherto I have shewed what is to be judged Political in the Distinction of Bishops from the rest of the Clergy both as touching the Civil and Ecclesiastical Policy So far Willet out of whom I observe That the Government of the Church is not de jure divino That according to the Scriptures the Office of a Bishop and Priest is the same That a convenient Priority of Order amongst Ministers is Divine and Apostolical That the Powers of Confirmation Ordination and Jurisdiction are reserv'd to the Bishops by Ecclesiastical constitutions only That in the Beginning a Bishop and Presbyter had but one Ordination and the Consecration of Bishops was added since for their greater Dignity In Hierom's days the Election of Bishops without any other circumstances being their Ordination That Priests without a Licence from the Bishop might Preach There is one thing more to be regarded touching the Difference of Bishops and other Ministers for says he We differ from the Papists in two Points First they say That Bishops are not only in a higher degree of Superiority to other Ministers but they are as Princes of the Clergy and other Ministers as Subjects and in all things to be commanded by them Secondly They affirm That Bishops are only properly Pastors and that to them only it doth appertain to Preach and that other Ministers have no Authority without their Licence or Consent to preach at all and that not principally or chiefly but solely and wholly to them appertaineth the Right of Consecrating and giving Orders so that the making the Bishop to be of a distinct Order from the Priest and the denying the Priest to have a Power to Preach without the Bishop's Licence or any hand in Ordination Willet opposeth as Popish Doctrines representing the opposite Notions to have been then held by the Church of England Hitherto the Government of the Church by Bishops lays no claim to a Divine Right On the contrary it 's generally asserted that according to the Scriptures the Priest and Bishop are the same and that the superiority of the Bishop above the Presbyter is only by Ecclesiastick Custom and the Government of the Church now different from what it was in the Apostles days Willet indeed saith That for the sake of Order the Presidence of one above the rest is Divine and Apostolical and towards the latter end of the Queens Reign the Episcopal Government is affirm'd to be Apostolical and a Divine Institution yet not to be de jure divine and unalterable Saravia about the two and thirtieth year of the Queen professeth * Hoc enim pacto fiet magis clarum quid omnes Evangelii ministri inter se habeant commune quid cuique ordini sit peculiare Ea vero in tres partes ego distribuo Prima est Evangelii Praedicatioâ— altera Communicatio sacramentorum tertia Ecclesiasticae Gubernationis authoritas De Divers Grad Minist Evang. p. 15. Quamvis unum idem Evangelii Ministerium sit omnibus Pastoribus Ecclesiae concreditum in hac tertia parte non parva inter eos invenitur Inaequalitas propter diversos Authoritatis Gradus quos primo Dominus statim ab initio postea Apostoli constituerunt p. 7. Primum ab ipso Domino Duos Gradus Evangelii ministrorum institutos videmus quorum alter altero fuit superior p. 25. Consensu totius Orbis Ecclesiarum probatur Episcoporum supra Presbyteros authoritas Quod inde ab Apostolorum temporibus patribus per universum terrarum Orbem factum ab omnibus Ecclesiis legimus usque ad nostra tempora Canonem Apostolorum immutabilem esse judico p. 44. c. 20. That the general Nature of the Evangelical Ministry common both to Bishops and Presbyters containeth these three things 1. The Preaching of the Gospel 2. The Communication of the Sacraments 3. The Authority of Church Government and doth only plead that in this last the Power of Bishops and Presbyters is not equal but the Bishop's Power is principal in Government Whence arises a Diversity of Degrees not of Orders between them and thus much he affirms hath been held by the Fathers of the Church universally ever since the Apostles days and therefore may well be look'd on as an Unchangeable Canon of the Apostles The Difference between Saravia and those who went before him lyeth here Whit gift c. Saravia The Ministry of the Word and Sacraments divinely Instituted and to continue to the End of the World but no particular Form of Government left on Record in Scripture The Superiority of a Bishop above a Presbyter according to St. Hierom rather by Custom of the Church than an Institution of Christ. Not only the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments but the Form of Government instituted by the Lord himself delivered by the Apostles confirm'd by the Observation of the Fathers ought to continue for ever The Superiority in Degree of a Bishop above a Presbyter a Divine Institution and that St. Hierom was in the same Error with Aerius Dico privatam fuisse Hieronymi Opinionem consentaneam cum Aerio Dei verbo contrariam p. 51. A Year or two after Saravia's Book came out Bancroft afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury publisheth a Survey of the pretended Holy Discipline as he calls his Book in the Preface to which he saith That we have a Church Government of our own which is in my conscience truly Apostolical and far to be preferred before any other that is receiv'd this day by any Reformed Church in Christendom And elsewhere in the Book it self P. 105. The Apostles saith he having received the Promise of the Holy Ghost after a short time dipersed themselves by advice into divers Regions and there by painful Preaching and Labouring in the Lord's Harvest they planted no doubt
I hold the Government-Episcopal to be of Apostolical and Divine Institution yet not as Generally Perpetually and Immutably necessary He doth not hold it necessary in all Places nor in all Ages but to be changeable by Man and if herein He and Bilson accord the Perpetuity Bilson is for will admit of a Change. But whether Downame gives us Bilson's Notion when he states his own I will not contend nor is it needful I should It 's enough to my purpose that the difference he placeth between a Bishop and Presbyter is only in Degree that Confirmation and Excommunication belong unto Presbyters and that Bilson's Bishop differs more from the Bishops by Law Established than from the Nonconformist Parish Presbyters Bancroft professes to agree with Robinson Reynolds and Fulk who differed not from the Old Nonconformists and Hooker never thought the Government of the Church to be in all Places and Ages necessarily the same nor did he look on Bishops to be of a Different Order from Presbyters but to be of the same Order differing only in Degree the Bishop having only a Chiefty of Power in the Church nor did any Great Men of the Church of England in Queen Elizabeths time null the Ministry or Church State of the Reformed either in Scotland or beyond the Seas They held their Churches to be true Churches and their Government to be such as agreed with the General Rules of God's Word and tho' some esteemed the Ordination only by Presbyters to be defective yet did not judge it to be Invalid but admitted those who had their Ordination only from Presbyters abroad to Ecclesiastical Promotions on no other terms than their Subscribing the Articles of Religion which concern the Faith and Doctrines of the Sacraments only These Sentiments which our first Reformers entertain'd about Episcopacy are such as would if the Government of the Church be at this time Fram'd accordingly contribute much to the Peace of the Church and Healing our Divisions and seeing they are most admirably copied out unto us in the Learned Archbishop Vsher's Reduction of Episcopacy I will with some Notes present it to the Reader 's more Deliberate Consideration CHAP. VI. Archbishop Usher's Reduction of Episcopacy with some Notes on it The Reduction of Episcopacy unto the Form of Synodical Government received in the Ancient Church proposed in the year 1641. as an Expedient for the prevention of those Troubles which afterwards did arise about the matter of Church-Government Episcopal and Presbyterial Government Conjoyned BY Order of the Church of England all Presbyters are charged to administer the Doctrine and Sacraments The Book of Ordination and the Discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded and as this Realm hath received the same And that they might the better understand what the Lord had commanded therein Ibid. ex Act. 20.27 28. the Exhortation to St. Paul to the Elders of the Church of Ephesus is appointed to be read unto them at the time of their Ordination Take heed unto your selves and to all the Flock among whom the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers to Rule the Congregation of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so taken in Mat. 2.6 Revel 12.5 19.15 which he hath purchased with his Blood. Notes Thus it was in the Old Book of Ordering Priests and Deacons but on the Restauration of Charles II. there were such Alterations made in the Books of Common Prayer and Ordering Bishops Priests and Deacons as do plainly shew that tho' heretofore the Presbyters had Power to Rule yet now they have none In the Act of Vniformity 14 Car. 2. it is Declared That the King's Majesty according to his Declaration of 25. October 1660. granted his Commission under the Great Seal of England to several Bishops and other Divines to Review the Book of Common Prayer and to prepare such Alterations and Additions as they thought fit to offer And afterwards the Convocations of both the Provinces of Canterbury and York being by his Majesty called and Assembled and now sitting his Majesty hath been pleased to Authorize and require the Presidents of the said Convocations and other the Bishops and Clergy of the same to Review the said Book of Common Prayer and the Book of the Form and Manner of the making and Consecrating of Bishops Priests and Deacons And that after mature Consideration they should make such Additions and Alterations in the said Books respectively as to them should seem meet and convenient And should Exhibit and Present the same to his Majesty in Writing for his further Allowance or Confirmation since which time upon full and mature Deliberation they the said Presidents Bishops and Clergy of both Provinces have accordingly Reviewed the said Books and have made some Alterations which they think fit to be inserted to the same and have Exhibited and Presented the same unto his Majesty in Writing All which his Majesty having duly considered hath fully Approved and Allowed the same and recommended to this present Parliament The Books thus altered were by this Parliament confirm'd and established and the Alterations such as make the Office of the Presbyter quite another thing than it was before for tho' in the old Book of Ordering Bishops Priests and Deacons the Reading unto the Presbyters at the time of their Ordination Acts 20.27 28. did put it out of Doubt that the Presbyters were vested with the Pastoral Office having Power given 'em to Rule the Church In the new Book this Exhortation is removed from the Presbyters Ordination unto the Consecration of Bishops thereby manifestly Evincing the Pastoral Power to be taken from the Presbyter and feated with the Bishop only and accordingly the name Pastor which was in the old Book given unto the Presbyter is in the new omitted and in several places the word Curate or Priest substituted in its stead and whereas in the old Book the Presbyter was admitted to the Ministry of Priesthood in the new it 's to the Order and Ministry of Priesthood thereby making Priesthood an Order distinct from those of Deaconship and Episcopacy In the Consecrating of Bishops in the Collect to shew what they mean by Bishop more than formerly it 's added by way of Explication to all Bishops the Pastors of thy Church and in the Prayer for the Bishop Almighty God c. in the old Book 't was Replenish him so with thy Truth that He may faithfully serve thee in this Office to the Edifying of thy Church in the new it is to the well Governing thy Church And when the Archbishop and other Bishops present do lay their Hands on the Elected and according to the old Book were to say Receive the Holy Ghost c. in the new it 's added for the Office and Work of a Bishop Now committed unto thee by the Imposition of our Hands in the Name of the Father c. Thus the Alterations by Law establshed do clearly shew that both the Name and Office of a Pastor is
taken from the Presbyter and transferr'd over to the Diocesan who alone hath the Power of Ordering Priests and Deacons and of Governing or Ruling the Church whence it follows that as there is but One Pastor in a Diocess there is but one Church That all Parish-Assemblies are but parts or parcels of this One single Church under the Conduct and Government only of the Diocesan Bishop their only Pastor That all Ordinations by Presbyters are of no greater Validity than those by Deacons or Lay-men and therefore altho' Ordination is no more to be repeated than Baptism yet those who have had their Ordination only by Presbyters must be Ordained again or not admitted unto any Benefice nor allowed the Exercise of the Priestly Office nor be esteemed Lawful Priests so that as there is a vast Difference between Queen Elizabeth's Bishops and Charles the Second's so between Queen Elizabeth's Law and King Charles's Q. Elizabeth's Act runs thus That every Person under the Degree of a Bishop which doth or shall pretend to be a Priest or Minister of God's Holy Word and Sacraments by reason of any other Form of Institution Consecration or Ordering than the Form now used in the Reign of our most Gracious Soveraign Lady shall declare his Assent and subscribe to all the Articles of Religion which only concern the Profession of the true Christian Faith and the Doctrine of the Sacraments comprised in a Book Entituled Articles c. viz. 39 Articles upon pain that every such Person which shall not subscribe shall be ipso facto deprived and all his Ecclesiastical Promotions shall be void as if he had been naturally dead King Charles his Law is thus That no Parson who now is Incumbent and in the Possession of any Parsonage or Benefice and who is not in Holy Orders by Episcopal Ordination or shall not be before the said Feast-day of St. Bartholomew Ordained Priest or Deacon shall have hold or enjoy any Parsonage with Cure but shall be utterly disabled and ipso facto deprived of the same and all his Ecclesiastical Promotions shall be void as if he had been naturally dead Touching Persons ordained by any other Form than the Episcopal a Subscription to the Articles was sufficient by 13 Eliz. c. 12. to Qualifie them for Spiritual Promotion and Whittingham's whose Ordination was only by Presbyters abroad was esteemed good and he enjoyed his Benefice to the day of his death as Traverse in his Supplication to the Council affirms but tho' the Articles be subscribed unto by one having only an Ordination by Presbyters he must be ordained by the Bishop or not admitted to any Ecclesiastical Promotion or if admitted he is ipso facto deprived and whoever consults the Book of Ordering Presbyters will find that the whole of it plainly declares that the former Odination of the Person thus re-ordained was invalid and null and that till now he was never of the Presbyters Office for the Ordination of one never before ordained and the Ordination of him who was formerly ordain'd by Presbyters is the same Whether I am right in these my Sentiments I appeal to the Right Reverend and Reverend Bishops and others of the Dignified Clergy who with the greatest importunity are desired to declare their Judgments in this Matter To know what the Government of the Church of England is that is by Archbishops Bishops and what is the Office of a Presbyter what that of a Bishop is a matter of extraordinary importance If it be the same it was in Edward the Sixth and Queen Elizabeth's days which is the same with what the Learned Archbishop Vsher was for the greatest Bone of Contention between the Cons and Noncons will be removed farther Every Parish-Presbyter will be granted to be a Pastor vested with a Right to Rule the Church from whence saith the Learned Archbishop the name of Rector also was given unto him at first and to administer the Discipline of Christ as well as to dispense the Doctrine and Sacraments and the difference between the Bishop and the Presbyter to be only in Degree and not in Order as this Learned Primate ever held as he saith in an Answer to an abusive Report that went abroad of him I have ever declared my Opinion to be saith he That Episcopus Presbyter gradu tantum differunt non Ordine and consequently that in places where Bishops cannot be had the Ordination by Presbyters standeth valid and Dr. Bernard in his Animadversions on the Archbishop's Opinion asserts That in this Judgment he was not singular Dr. Davenant that Pious and Learned Bishop of Salisbury consents with him in it Determinat Q. 42. produceth the Principal of the Schoolmen Gulielmus Parisiensis Gerson Durand c. Episcopatus non est Ordo praecise distinctus à Sacerdotio simplici c. non est alia potestas Ordinis in Episcopis quà m Presbyteris sed inest modo perfectiori And declares it to be the general Opinion of Schoolmen c. And whereas the Primate saith That in Cases of Necessity where Bishops cannot be had the Ordination by Presbyters standeth valid Bishop Davenant concurs with him also and produceth the Opinion of Richardus Armathanus one of this Primate's Predecessors and one of the most Learned men in his time to be accordingly To which divers others might be added as in special Dr. Field sometimes Dean of Glocester in his Learned Book of the Church where this Judgment of the Primate Lib. 3. c. 39. lib. 5. c. 27. and the Concurrence of Bishop Davenant's is largely confirmed But that Book Entituled The Defence of the Ordination of the Ministers of the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas maintained by Mr. Archdeacon Mason against the Romanists who wrote also a Defence of Episcopacy and of the Ministry of the Church of England is fufficiently known and I have been assur'd it was not only the Judgment of Bishop Overal but that he had a Principal hand in it He produceth many Testimonies the Master of the Sentences and most of the Schoolmen Bonaventure Thomas Aquinas Durand Dominicus Soto Richardus Armachanus Tostatus Alphonsus à Castro Gerson Canisius to have affirmed the same and at last quotes Medina a Principal Bishop of the Council of Trent who affirm'd That Jerom Ambrose Augustine Sedulius Primasius Chrysostome Theodoret Theophylact were of the same Judgment also In a word if the Ordination of Presbyters in such places where Bishops cannot be had were not valid the late Bishops of Scotland had a hard Task to maintain themselves to be Bishops who were not Priests for their Ordination was no other What Dr. Bernard mentions about the Archbishop's dislike of the late Prerbyterians here in England is not so much against their Exercising the Power as the Manner of their Exercise they did not add to the Imposition of Hands Receive the Holy Ghost c. nor so much as these words Be thou a faithful Dispenser of the Word of God and of his
THE Healing Attempt Being a Representation OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE Church of England According to the Judgment of her Bishops unto the End of Q. Elizabeths Reign Humbly Tendred To the Consideration of the Thirty Commissionated for a Consult about ECCLESIASTICAL AFFAIRS in Order to a Comprehension And Published In hopes of such a Moderation of Episcopacy that the Power be kept within the Line of our First Reformers and the Exercise of it reduced to the Model of Arch-Bishop USHER Mediocria firma LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside near Mercers-Chappel 1689. The Epistle to the Commissioners Most Reverend Right Reverend and Reverend I Bless you all in the Name of the Lord and Blessed be your Meeting this Day and this Appointment for you to Sit about so Blessed a reconciling Work. I have but this short Grace to say Blessed are the Peacemakers When such a Choice of Persons is Congregated and their Business Accommodation the Tidings hereof to the poor Outed Shepherds should methinks be so affecting as if the Angels were again upon the Wing and singing over that Hymn Glory be to God in the highest in Earth Peace and good will towards Men. Alas How many Years have passed since the Reformation wherein your Nonconformist Brethren have been a Loading and their Burthen encreasing and none of you that were willing were able to ease them when by the Artifice of the Papists and the Higher Powers influenced by them you were forced to bear the blame of those things which your Souls did abhor And now is the time come when God hath sent us such a Nursing Father and Nursing Mother to his Church as hath called you to the liberty of shewing of what manner of spirit indeed you are Blessed be his Name for it and the hoâ—â—es we have on that account This is the day which the Lord hath made we will be glad and rejoyce in it I know indeed how hard of belief the most of our Brethren generally are that any good should be done for us by a Convocation or this Meeting It is impossible they are readier to say that those But Reverendly beloved I am perswaded better things of you and things that accompany Salvation though they thus speak I am perswaded that even this will stimulate you to a greater earnestness to do them the more good for such is Christianity and that I shall not need to say any thing not any more than in the Title to put you on this grateful task The same also which ye are forward to do I have less need to be impertinent in offering Arguments to such Wits which were to bring Water to the Spring but this one thing I have need to do which is to beg of you that you will Pardon what is done if in any thing the Author seems to presume or to be more slender than he ought for want of more time and search or does in any regard offend I will also beg of you more Two things the One is To take heed how you make more conditions necessary to us for Communion with you than Christ requires of you for Communion with him The Other is That you do not Tantalize your Brethren or Procrastinate that Kindness whatsoever it is which you intend towards those who are capable to receive it For we must needs die and are as water spilt upon the ground which cannot be gathered up again Neither doth God respect any person yet doth he devise means that his banished be not expelled from him A Friend to the Design and Substance of these Papers J. H. Octob. 3. 1689. THE AUTHOR TO THE READER THE Greatest thing in Controversie amongst Protestants is Whether the Office of a Presbyter and Bishop be according to the Holy Scriptures the same and on a Just Determination of this Question depends the Peace of our Church To affirm That the Bishop and Presbyter are of different Orders That the Power of Ordination is the sole Prerogative of Bishops That Ordination only by Presbyters is void and null and that the Ordaining 'em again by Bishops is not Re-Ordination destroys the Church State not only of Dissenters but of all other Protestants in the World except of those in the Church of England nulling their Ministry Sacraments and Discipline A Comprehension therefore on these Terms is none at all It 's only an offer to Vnite with Dissenters on their doing what is to them Impossible They cannot Renounce their Ordination nor Consent to the Destroying their own nor the Church State of Reformed Protestants Abroad But lest the Impossibility they lie under be Interpreted a Peevish Humour and Obstinacy in them the Sentiments of the First-Reformers in the Days of Henry the Eighth Edward the Sixth and Queen Elizabeth are Impartially Propos'd and found to be exactly the same with theirs and what will touching Matters of Church Government Heal our Divisions The Author could Descend lower than the last of Elizabeth but there 's no need on 't and he must acknowledge that tho' a great many Eminent Writers Learned Divines of the Church of England asserted this Old Reformer's Principle yet the Canons of James I. ran another way and in his Reign the Learned were divided in their Opinions about the Office of Bishop and Presbyter and so they are at this very time However it cannot be denied that the First Reformers adher'd unto by Archbishop Usher held the same which the Dissenters have all along stifly maintain'd and have Antiquity on their side The Learned Carleton is Positive that the Power of Order by all Writers that He could see even of the Church of Rome is understood to be Immediately from Christ given to all Bishops and Priests alike by their Consecration and that in this there was no Difference between Papist and Protestant whence it follows that the Divesting the Parish Presbyter of the Pastoral Office is but a late Invention Thus much He Asserts of that Power of Order which he distinguisheth from the Power of Jurisdiction and includes in it the Power of Ordination And although according to the most taking Opinion amongst those who seem'd to be somewhat Zealous for Prelacy the Power of Jurisdiction was peculiarly appropriated to the Bishop yet this Jurisdiction following Orders could never be so separated from it but that there still remain some Convincing Instances of its belonging unto Presbyters In the Case of a Bishop's Suspension it 's clear I will only observe what is at this time most obvious On the Suspension of the Archbishop of Canterbury All Ecclesiastical and Spiritual Jurisdiction belongs to the Dean and Chapter who are but Presbyters as is daily Asserted in these words Nos Johannes Tillotson Sacrae Theologiae Professor Decanus Ecclesiae Cathedralis Metropoliticae Christi Cant ' Et Ejusdem Ecclesiae Capitulum ad quos Omnis omnimoda Jurisdictio Spiritualis Ecclessiastica quae ad Archiepiscopum Cant. pertinuit nunc ratione
Priests OR Bishops whom they did Elect call and admit thereunto by their Prayer and Imposition of their hands And to the intent the Church of Christ should never be destituted of such Ministers as should have and execute the said Power of the Keys it was also Ordained and Commanded by the Apostles that the same Sacrament should be applied and ministred by the Bishops from time to time unto such other Persons as had the Qualities which the Apostles very diligently descryve as it appeareth evidently in the third Chapter of the first Epistle of St. Paul to Timothy and his Epistle unto Titus And surely this is the whole Vertue and Efficacy and the Cause also of the Institution of this Sacrament as it is found in the New Testament for albeit the Holy Fathers of the Church of Christ with all those things which were commendable in the Temple of the Jews did devise not only certain other Ceremonies than before rehearsed as Tonsures Rasures Vnctions and such other Observances to be used in the Administration of the said Sacraments but did also Institute certain Inferiour Orders or Degrees as Janitors Lectors Exorcists Acolits and Sub-Deacons and deputed to every one of those certain Offices to execute in the Church wherein they followed undoubtedly the Example and Rites used in the Old Testament yet the Truth is That in the New Testament there is no mention made of any Degrees or Distinctions in Orders but only of Deacons OR Ministers and of Priests OR Bishops Nor there is any word spoken of any other Ceremony used in the Conferring of this Sacrament but only of Prayer and the Imposition of the Bishops hand Thus the Power of Excommunication and conferring Orders by Prayer and Imposition of Hands as declared in the New Testament belongs unto the Priest which is the same with the Bishop there being no Degrees or Distinctions in Orders but only of Deacons or Ministers and Priests or Bishops and consequently no Superiority therefore of a Bishop above a Priest to be found in the New Testament during King Henry the Eighth's days CHAP. II. The Judgment of the Reformers in Edward the Sixth's Days the same 't was in Henry the Eighth's holding no Difference by Divine Law between a Bishop and Presbyter IN the First Year of Edward the Sixth's Reign an Act of Parliament passed sufficiently Declaring the Episcopal Orders as distinct from and above that of the Presbyter to be wholly from the Crown for it was affirm'd That all Authority of Jurisdiction Spiritual is derived and deducted from the King's Majesty as Supream Head of these Churches of England and Ireland The Design of this Law as Dr. Heylin has it was to weaken the Authority of the Episcopal Order Hist Edw. 6. p. 51. by forcing them from their strong hold of Divine Institution and making them no other than the King's Ministers only His Ecclesiastical Sheriffs as a man might say to execute his Will and disperse his Mandates Dr. Poynet Bishop of Winchester in this King's Reign in Answer unto a Book writ by Stephen Gardiner tho' sent out under the Name of Dr. Martin about the Marriage of Priests doth sufficiently shew that the Reformers in those days were great Approvers of Calvin's Notions about Church Government and therefore willing to lay aside even the very Name Bishop and make use of the Names Superintendent Minister Senior Elders c. for these are his words And further whereas it pleaseth Martin not only in this place but also hereafter to Jest at the Name Superintendent he sheweth himself bent to condemn all things that be good Who knoweth not that the Name Bishop hath so been abused that when it was spoken the People understood nothing else but a great Lord that went in a white Rochet with a wide shaven Crown and that carrieth an Oyl Box with him wherewith he useth once in seven years riding about to Confirm Children c. Now to bring the People from this abuse what better means can be devised than to teach the People their Error by another word out of the Scriptures of the same signification which thing by the term Superintendent would in time have been well brought to pass The name Bishop spoken amongst the Unlearned signified to them nothing less than a Preacher of God's Word because there was not nor is any thing more rare in any Order of Ecclesiastical Persons than to see a Bishop Preach I deny not but the name Bishop may be well taken but because the Evilness of the Abuse hath marred the Goodness of the Word it cannot be denied but that it was not amiss to joyn for a time another word with it in his place whereby to restore that abused word to his Right Signification Oh how the Papists would triumph over us if they had like proof for the names I say of Pope Cardinal Canon Prebendary Monk c. as we that profess Christ have for the maintainance of the terms and names Superintendent Minister Seniors Elders Brethren and such like by us used The Resolution Archbishop Cranmer gave to the Questions propounded by Edw. 6. approved by the Bishop of St. Asaph Therleby Redman and Cox See Dr. Stillingflèet's MS. makes it manifest that these great Reformers owned not Episcopacy as a Distinct Order from Presbytery of Divine Right but only as a prudent Constitution of the Civil Magistrate for the better Governing the Church In the Apostles time says Cranmer when there was no Christian Princes by whose Authority Ministers of God's Word might be appointed Resol to Q. 9. nor Sins by the Sword corrected there was no Remedy then for the Correction of Vice or appointing of Ministers but only the consent of Christien multitude by themselfe by an Uniform consent to follow the advice and perswasion of such Persons whom God had most endued with the Spirit of wisdom and counsaile Sometime the Apostles and other unto whom God had given abundantly his Spirit sent or appointed Ministers of God's Word sometime the People did choose such as they thought meet thereunto The Bishops and Priests were at one time and were not two distinct Things Resol to Q. 10. but both one Office in the Beginning of Christ's Religion The People before Christian Princes were Resol to Q. 11. commonly elected their Bishops and Priests In the New Testament he that is appointed to be a Bishop or Priest needeth no consecration by the Scripture Resol to Q. 12. for Election or appointing thereto is sufficient Thus far that Excellent Person saith a Reverend Divine of the Church of England in whose Judgment nothing is more clear than his ascribing the particular Form of Government in the Church to the Determination of the Supream Magistrate The Divine Right of Forms of Church Government Examined p. 390 c. CHAP. III. Aley Bishop of Exeter Pilkington Bishop of Durham Jewel Bishop of Salisbury Whitgift Archbishop of Canterbury of the same Opinion with Tindall Lambert Barnes
and the Reformers in King Edward's Time. IN Queen Elizabeth's Reign the first I find to mention any thing about the Office of Bishops and Priests is Dr. Alley Bishop of Exeter in his Miscellanea on his third Praelection Alley 's Poor Man's Library Tom. 1. pag. 95 96. read at Paul's in the Year 1560. on the word Bishops What difference is between a Bishop and a Priest St. Hierome writing ad Titum doth declare whose words be these Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus c. A Priest therefore is the same that a Bishop is And before Schisms and Factions by the instinct of the Devil begun in Religion and before it was said among the People I am Pauls I am Apollos I am of Cephas the Churches were Governed with the Common Councel of the Priests or Elders But after that every one thought those whom he Baptized to be his and not Christ's it was decreed throughout the World that one of the Priests or Elders should be chosen to be set over the rest unto whom all the care or charge of the Church should appertain and that the beginnings of Schisms should be taken away Some do think that it is not the sentence of the Scriptures but ours that a Bishop and Priest or Elder are one thing and they do also think the one to be a name of Age and the other to be a name of Office. Let them read again the words of the Apostle to the Philippians saying Paul and Timotheus the Servants of Jesu Christ to all the Saints in Christ Jesu which are at Philippos with the Bishops and Deacons Grace and Peace be with you c. Philippi is one of the Cities of Macedonia And truly there could not be many as they are called Bishops in one City But because at that time they called those Bishops which they did also call Priests or Elders therefore indifferently he spake of Bishops as of Priests or Elders It may yet seem doubtful to some unless it be approved by other Testimonies In the Acts of the Apostles it is written that when the Apostle came to Miletum he sent to Ephesus and did call the Priests or Elders of the same Church unto whom among other things he said thus A Hand to your selves c. And here mark you diligently how that he calling the Priests or Elders of that one City of Ephesus did afterwards call them Bishops c. And Peter which took his name of the firmness of his Faith in his Epistle saith I your fellow Elder do beseech the Elders that are among you c. Haec Hieronimus These words are alledg'd saith Bishop Aley that it may appear Priests among the Elders to have been even the same that Bishops were But it grew by little and little that the whole charge and care should be appointed to one Bishop within his Precinct that the Seeds of Dissention might be utterly rooted out In his Second Tome P. 15. the Bishop adds out of St. Jerom Sicut Presbyteri c. Like as Priests do know themselves to be subject by the Custom of the Church unto him which is made Ruler over them So let the Bishops know that they are greater than the Priests rather by Custom than by the verity of Dispensation given of the Lord. He saith also in another place with the old Fathers the Bishops were the same that the Priests were for the name of one is the name of Dignity and the other of Age and Time. So far Bishop Aley The next I meet with is Pilkington Bishop of Duresme the Author of the Confutation of an Addition with an Apology written and cast in the Streets of West-Chester against the Causes of Burning Paul's Church in London declared by the Bishop at Paul's Cross The Bishop did at Paul's Cross Exhort the people to take the burning of Paul's to be a warning of a greater Plague to follow to the City of London if amendment of Life be not had in all Estates the Author of the Addition a Papist Histor Q. Eliz. pag. 312. notwithstanding what Heylin saith to the contrary when he tells us that the Papists ascribe it to some practice of the Zuinglian Faction out of their hatred unto all Solemnity and Decency in the Service of God perform'd more punctually in that Church for Examples sake than in any other in the Kingdom imputes it to the laying aside of the midnight Mattins forenoon Masses formerly had in the Church and Anthems and Prayers in the Steeple This Bishop a Person of great Learning and good Temper in Answer to this Paper doth in the Sixth year of the Queens Reign thus express himself Yet remains one doubt unanswered in these few words when he saith that the Government of the Church was committed to Bishops as tho' they had received a Larger and Higher Commission from God of Doctrine and Discipline than other Lower Priests and Ministers have and hereby might challenge a greater Prerogative But this is to be understood that the Privileges and Superiorities which Bishops have above other Ministers are rather granted by Man for maintaining of better Order and Quietness in Common-wealths than Commanded by God in his Word Ministers have better Knowledge and Utterance some than other but their Ministry of Equal Dignity God's Commission and Commandment is like and indifferent to all Priest Bishop Archbishop Prelate by what name soever he be called Saint Jerome in his Commentary on 1 Chap. Tit. says that a Bishop and Priest is all One and in his Epistle ad Evagrium he says That the Bishop wheresoever he be is of the same Power and Priesthood If they the Papists were not too much blinded in their own foolishness they might see in the last Subsidy granted in the time of their own Reign that they grant those to be their betters and above them from whence they receive their Authority The Parliament gives them and their Collectors Power to Suspend Deprive and Interdict any Priest that Pays not the Subsidy In that doing they grant the Parliament to be above them and from it to receive their Power I had not thought to have said so much on these his few words and yet much more hangs on this their Opinion of claiming their Usurped Power above Princes and other Ministers The Learned Bishop Jewel is of the same Mind with this Author Apol. Par. 2. Ch. 5. Divis 1. Ch. 6. Divis 1. and thus much he delivereth not as his private Opinion but as the sense of the Church of England Furthermore we say That the Minister ought lawfully duly orderly to be preferr'd to that Office of the Church of God Ch. 6. Divis 3. Ch. 7. Divis 5. and that no man hath power to wrest himself into the Holy Ministry at his own pleasure That Christ hath given to his Ministers Power to bind to loose to open to shut That the Minister doth execute the Authority of binding and shutting as often as
he shutteth up the Gate of the Kingdom of Heaven against Unbelieving and Stubborn Persons denouncing unto them God's Vengeance and everlasting Punishment or else when he doth quite shut them out from the bosom of the Church by open Excommunication Out of doubt what Sentence soever the Minister of God shall give in this sort God himself doth so well allow it that whatsoever here in Earth by their means is loosed and bound God himself will loose and bind and confirm the same in Heaven And seeing one word is given to all and one only Key belongeth to all we say there is but one only Power of all Ministers as concerning opening and shutting At this time so much was given the Priest that no room was left to make the Bishop of an Order distinct from him The Keys belong'd to all Ministers to the Priest as well as Bishop In the Defence of the Apology of the Church of England Part. 2. Ch. 3. Divis 5. this Learned Bishop is more full and particular in his Assertions In St. Jerom's time saith he there were Metropolitans Archbishops Archdeacons and others but Christ appointed not these Distinctions of Orders from the beginning These names are not found in all the Scriptures This is the thing which we defend St. Jerom saith Sciant Episcopi c. Let Bishops understand that they are in Authority over Priests more by Custom than by Order of God's Truth Erasmus speaking of the times of Jerom saith that Id temporis idem erat Episcopus Sacerdos Presbyter These three names Bishop Priest Presbyter at that time were all one To the Testimony of Jerom the Bishop adds that of St. Austin Epist 19. saying That the Office of a Bishop is above the Office of a Priest not by Authority of the Scriptures but after the names of Honour which the custom of the Church hath now obtained The Bishop in Defence of the Church of England Part 2. Ch. 9. Divis 1. had affirm'd That against the Sacred Scripture neither Law nor Ordinance nor any Custom ought to be heard no tho' Paul himself or an Angel from Heaven should come and teach the contrary To this Harding replies If all things necessary to Salvation be contain'd in the Scriptures then whatever is not in them contained the same is not necessary if not necessary why should we be laden with unnecessary Burdens Then away with all Traditions at a Clap be they never so Apostolick Remember you not what the most Renowned Fathers have said of the Necessity of Traditions If we go about to reject the Customs that be not set forth in Writing we shall bring the Preaching of the Faith but to a bare name For so they were taken for Hereticks who denied the Distinction of a Bishop and a Priest c. Jewel rejoyns This in the Margin in an Untruth for hereby both St. Paul and St. Jerom and other good men are condemn'd of Heresie But what meant Mr. Harding here to come in with the Difference between Priests and Bishops thinketh he that Priests and Bishops hold only by Tradition or is it so horrible a Heresie as he makes it to say That by the Scriptures of God a Bishop and a Priest are all One or knoweth he how far and to whom he reacheth the name of an Heretick Verily Chrysostom saith Between a Bishop and a Priest in a manner there is no difference St. Jerom saith somewhat in a rougher sort I hear say There is one become so peevish that he setteth Deacons before Priests that is to say before Bishops whereas the Apostle plainly teacheth us that Priests and Bishops are all one St. Austin saith what is a Bishop but the first Priest that is to say the Highest Priest so saith Saint Ambrose There is but One Ordination of Priest and Bishop for both of them are Priests but the Bishop is the first All these and other Holy Fathers together with St. Paul the Apostle for thus saying by Mr. Harding's Advice must be held for Hereticks Besides as the Bishop is very express in his asserting a Bishop and Presbyter to be according to Christ's Institution all one Part 6. Chap. 9. Divis 1 2. He is no less so in granting that the Bishop has receiv'd from the Prince the several Privileges he has above a Presbyter I grant there be many special Privileges granted upon great and just Considerations of the meer favour of the Prince that a Priest being found negligent or otherwise offending in his Ministry should be convinced and punished not by the Temporal and Civil Magistrate but by the Discretion of the Bishop Mr. Harding must remember that all these and other like Privileges passed unto the Clergy from the Prince and not from God and proceed only of special Favour and not of Right Archbishop Whitgift in opposing Cartwright's Platform about the Government of the Church asserted to be de Jure divino distinguisheth between Spiritual and External Government and saith That the External Government hath both a Substance and Matter about which it is occupied and also a Form to attain the same consisting in certain Offices and Functions and in the Names and Titles of them The Substance and Matter of Government must indeed be taken out of the Word of God and consisteth in these points That the Word be truly taught the Sacraments rightly administred Vertue furthered Vice repressed and the Church kept in quietness and order The Officers in the Church whereby this Government is wrought be not namely and particularly expressed in the Scriptures but in some points left to the Discretion and Liberty of the Church to be disposed according to the state of Times Places and Persons Thus much in his Preface conform to those who went before The Ministry of the Word and Sacraments and Reprehensions c. which belong to the Priest is of God the other Offices and Functions which as he elsewhere has it belong to the external Order and Policy of the Church and consequently the Distinction between Bishop and Priest Defence Tract c. 3. Div. 38 39 40 41. and Superiority of a Bishop above a Priest are only of humane Institution More particularly Cartwright contending for a sort of Discipline which is a Matter of Faith and necessary to Salvation the Archbishop distinguisheth between such things as are so necessary that without them we cannot be saved and such things as are so necessary that without 'em we cannot so well and conveniently be saved and then adds To be short I confess that in a Church collected together in one Place and at Liberty Government is necessary with the second kind of Necessity but that any one kind of Government is so necessary that without it the Church cannot be saved or that it may not be altered into some other kind thought to be more Expedient I utterly deny and the reasons that move me so to do be these The first is because I find no one certain and
perfect kind of Government prescribed or commanded in the Scriptures to the Church of Christ which no doubt should have been done if it had been a matter necessary to the Salvation of the Church Secondly Because the Essential Notes of the Church be these only The true Preaching of the Word and the right Administration of Sacraments So that notwithstanding Government or some kind of Government may be a part of the Church touching the outward Form and Perfection of it yet it is not such a part of the Essence and Being but that it may be the Church of Christ without this or that kind of Government and therefore the kind of the Government is not necessary unto Salvation There is no certain kind of Government or Discipline prescribed to the Churches but that the same may be altered as the Profit of the Churches requires and out of Gualters he saith Let every Church follow the manner of Discipline which doth most agree with the People with whom it abideth and which seemeth to be most fit for the place and time and let no man here rashly prescribe unto others neither let him bind all Churches to one and the same Form. I do deny that the Scriptures do set down any one certain Form and kind of Government of the Church to be Perpetual for all Times Persons and Places without Alteration It is well known Tract 17. Chap. 2. Divis 29. that the manner and form of Government used in the Apostles time and expressed in the Scriptures neither is now nor can or ought to be observed either touching the Persons How then can the Government of the Church by Bîshops Archbishops c. be Apostolical or the Functions We see manifestly that in sundry points the Government of the Church used in the Apostles times is and hath been of necessity altered and that it neither may nor can be revoked whereby 't is plain that any one kind of External Government perpetually to be observed is no where in the Scripture prescribed to the Church but the charge thereof is left to the Magistrate so that nothing be done contrary to the Word of God. This is the Opinion of the best Writers This was it's like Universally received by all the English Clergy in Whitgifts time Neither do I know saith the Archbishop any Learned Man of a contrary Judgment Either we must admit another Form now of Governing the Church than was in the Apostles time or else we must seclude the Christian Magistrate from all Authority in Ecclesiastical Matters I am perswaded that the External Government of the Church under a Christian Magistrate must be according to the Kind and Form of Government used in the Common-wealth else how can you make the Prince Supream Governour of all States and Causes Ecclesiastical If you therefore will have the Queen of England Rule as Monarch over all her Dominions then must you also give her leave to use one Kind and Form of Government in all and every part of the same and so to Govern the Church in Ecclesiastical Affairs as she doth the Common-wealth in Civil Dr. Cosins Chancellor to this Archbishop in his Answer to the Abstract Pag. 58. asserts That all Churches have not the same Form of Discipline neither is it necessary that they should seeing it cannot be proved that any certain particular Form of Church Government is commended to us by the Word of God. Dr. Low speaks to the same purpose Complaint of the Church No certain Form of Government is prescribed in the Word P. 64 66. only general Rules laid down for it Bishop Bridges God hath not expressed the Form of Church Government at least not so as to bind us What is here mention'd of Cosins Low and Bishop Bridges I have out of Dean Stillingfleet's Weapon Salve and out of a Learned MS. I have this following passage about Whitaker who making his Remarques on St. Hierom's teling us Whitaker De Ecles Regimin Contr. 4. q. 1. §. 29. p. 540. Col. 2. That the Difference between Presbyters and Bishops was brought in by Men long after the Apostles as a Remedy against Schism assures us That it 's a Remedy almost worse than the Malady for it begat and brought in the Pope with his Monarchy into the Church and this other of Bishop Morton telling the Papists That Power of Order and of Jurisdiction which they ascribe to Bishops doth de jure divino belong to all other Presbyters and particularly Morton 's Apol. Cath. lib. 1. c. 21. p. 55. That to Ordain is the jus antiquum the Ancient Right of Presbyters in fine That Dr. Laurence Humfrey and Dr. Holland Humf. against Campian Jesuit Part 2. p. 273. both of them Doctors of the Chair in Oxford did teach and maintain the same Doctrine Holland in the Act July 9. 1608. concluded that the contrary is most false against the Scriptures the Fathers the Doctrine of the Church of England the Schoolmen Lombard Aquinas Bonaventure c. CHAP. IV. Dr. Willet 's Sentiments much the same with the foremention'd Bishops The Difference between a Bishop and Presbyter as of Divine Right declur'd to be Popish and oppos'd as such The special Consecration of Bishops was Ordained not by a Divine Law but by the Church for the Dignity of their Calling Saravia for no other Difference between a Presbyter and Bishop but in Degree Bancroft for a Priority in degree only holding with Dr. Robinson Dr. Reynolds and Dr. Fulk whose Authorities he insists on to Confirm his Opinion about a Gradual Difference between Bishop and Presbyter TO these I will add another namely In his Life of Willet Dr. Andrew Willet who as Dr. Smith observes is by Bishop Hall numbred amongst those Worthies of the Church of England Hall in his Noah 's Dove to whom he gives this Elogy Stupor mundi Clerus Britannicus This Dr. in his Synopsis Papismi is very large in discussing the Difference between a Bishop and Presbyter and in his Determinations in most things agreeth with the Learned Authors I have already quoted The grand Question under Debate is Willet 's Synops Papism Contr. 5. Quest 3. Concerning the Clergy Append. Whether the Difference between Bishops and other Ministers be grounded upon the Law of God and Institution of the Apostles The Papists Bellarmine saith the Dr. affirmeth Lib. 1. De Clericis c. 14. That the Jurisdiction of Bishops as now it standeth in their Church and the Difference between them and other Presbyters is Jure Divino grounded upon the Law of God and of such necessity that he holdeth the contrary to be Heresie and those to be Hereticks that hold this Difference to arise rather of a Politick Constitution of the Church to avoid Schism than of the Institution of the Apostles yea they hold them to be no Churches at all which are not under the Government of Bishops but of other Overseers and Superintendents Surely I see not
they term sometime Presbyters sometimes Bishops That in process of time the Apostles appointed under them Bishops of an Order Superiour above Presbyters the cause wherefore they did appoint under themselves such Bishops as were not every where at the first is said to have been those Strifes and Contentions for remedy whereof whether the Apostles alone did conclude of such a Regiment or else they together with the whole Church judging it a fit and needful Policy did agree to receive it for a Custom no doubt but being established by them on whom the Holy Ghost was poured in so abundant measure for the ordering of Christ's Church it had either Divine Appointment beforehand or Divine Approbation afterwards This passage of Hooker moves me to think he very much agreed with his most Reverend Metropolitan Archbishop Whit gift who vehemently asserts an actual change of Church Government in the Primitive Times as well as the changeableness of it in all Ages of the Church There are other intimations in this Learned Author which oblige me to conclude that the Church of England was not in his days come to a steady Resolution either about the Nature of a Particular Church infimae speciei or of the whole belonging to the Episcopal Office. Touching the Nature of a Particular Church of the lowest Rank whether Parochial or Diocesan was not much with him for speaking of the Dissimilitudes which in some respects are found to be between the present Bishops and the Bishops in the Primitive times he grants that many things there are in the State of Bishops Lib. 7. Sect. 2. p. 4. which the times have changed saying That many a Parsonage at this day is larger than some ancient Bishopricks were To Men that have any part of Skill what more evident and plain in Bishops than that Augmentation and Diminution in their Precincts Allowances Privileges and such like do make a Difference indeed but no Essential Difference between one Bishop and another But a Learned Nonconformist assures us That he shall try among other things Treatise of Episcopacy chap. 5. pag. 49. whether the Name of a Bishoprick will make a Parsonage and a Diocess to be Ejusdem speciei and whether Magnitude do not make a specifick Difference between the Sea and a Rivulet or a Glass of Water or between a Ship and a Nutshell And I may add that if there be no Essential Difference between a Bishoprick no larger than a Parsonage and a Diocesan Bishoprick the Controversie between the Church of England and generality of Nonconformists may touching Church Government be determined by such Condescensions made by the Church to the Dissenters as are short of an Essential Alteration to Episcopacy Let there be as many Bishopricks as there are considerable Parsonages or Parishes indowed and a Provision made for the Presbyters who are to assist the Bishops in the Government of these little Churches and a Superiority of the Bishop above the Presbyters or a Chiefty in the Regiment will be no longer a bone of Contention As to what belongs to the Episcopal Function as Different from the Presbyters it 's held by some that Ordination Confirmation and Jurisdiction are proper to it Let us see then Hooker's Judgment for the first Point There may be saith he sometimes very just and sufficient Reasons to all Ordination made without a Bishop Lib. 7. Sect. 14. pag. 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 in some Cases not unnecessary that we decline from the ordinary wayes The Power of Ordination is appropriated to the Bishop by the Churches Allowance and no otherwise and the same Church allowing Presbyters to Ordain their Ordination is Good so that Ordination is not proper to a Bishop quarto modo for it doth not Convenire to him semper soli and therefore he adds in the next Page That we are not simply without Exception to urge a lineal Descent of Power from the Apostles by continued succession of Bishops in every Effectual Ordination Lib. 7. Sect. 6. pag. 14. For the second Point I make not Confirmation part of that Power which hath always belonged only unto Bishops because in some places the Custom was that Presbyters might also Confirm in the absence of a Bishop Touching the last Point How Bishops together with Presbyters have used to Govern the Churches under them Lib. 7. Sect. 7. pag. 17. It is by Zonaras saith he somewhat plainly and at large declared That the Bishop had his Seat on high in the Church above the Residue which were present that a number of Presbyters did always there Assist him and that in the Oversight of the People those Presbyters were after a sort the Bishops Coadjutors The Bishops and Presbyters who together with him governed the Church are for the most part by Ignatius joyntly mention'd They are Counsellors and Assistants of the Bishop Thus this great Man grants That tho' Government in general be necessary to the Church yet no one particular kind of Government is so That the Scriptures do not make the Episcopal Government unalterable That the Power of conferring Orders is not by a Divine Law so appropriate to the Bishops that in no case an Ordination by Presbyters can be valid That the Church Visible is the true-Original-Subject of all Power and can alter the Government of the Church That Confirmation is not essential to the Office of a Bishop That Presbyters have a share in the Government That the Difference between the Bishop and Presbyter is in the Degree the Bishop having a Chiefty in the Government and Presbyters the Bishops Coadjutors Assistants Advisers and Counsellors The Learned Bilson afterwards Bishop of Winchester speaking of the Controversie between the Old Nonconformists and the Church of England Perpetual Government of the Church expresseth himself in these words Thus far we joyn That to prevent Dissention and Confusion there must needs Epistle to the Reader even by God's Ordinance be a President or Ruler of every Presbytery which Conclusion because it is warranted by the Grounds of Nature Reason and Truth and hath the Example of the Church of God before Vnder and after the Law we accept as Irrefutable and lay it as the Ground-work of all that ensueth But whether this Presidentship did in the Apostles times and by their Appointment go round by course to all the Pastors and Teachers of every Presbytery or were by Election committed to One chosen as the fittest to supply that Place so long as He discharged his Duty without blame that is a main point betwixt us But more particularly he adds In the Apostles I observe four things needful for the first Founding and Erecting of the Church and four other Points that must be Perpetual in the Church of Christ These are the Dispensing
Cowell affirms That in our Common Law Rector Ecclesioe Parochialis is he that hath the Charge or Cure of a Parish-Church qui tantum Jus in Ecclesia Parochiali habet quantum Proelatus in Ecclesiâ Collegiatâ That a Parson and Rector were anciently the same So †Lib. 4. Tract 5. ca. pri Bracton Sciendum quod Rectoribus Ecclesiarum Parochialium competit Assisa qui institui sunt per Episcopos Ordinarios ut Personae Lindwood holds the same For De Praesump c. ne Lepra Sect. quod si ver Personatus as he avers That in aliquibus locis Rectores Ecclesiarum vocantur Personae so he is as express that haec dictio Personae est vulgare Anglicorum ponitur pro Rectore Wats in his Glossary observing the Word Personatus in Otho's Constitutions delivered by Matthew Paris in Henry the Third's days In quibus locis omnibus accipitur pro Rectoria quam a Parsonage vocamus and in Pope Innocent's Letter to the Abbot of St. Albans assures us that it signifies a Rectory and the Persona or Parson is the Rector De Confes Personar Cleric Quod in quodan ver Persona John de Athon in his Commentary on Otho's Constitutions on the Word Personae saith i.e. Rectores loquitur enim secundum vulgare Anglicorum Lindwood It is also clear from anciently acknowledged rish-Church and therefore that Vicars Perpetual were to be Rectors or Governours of the Paon the Constitution of Simon Langham where it 's Ordain'd That Nullus Rector presume to sell those Tithes of his Church not yet received Nullus Rector supple vel Vicarius ubi est Perpetuus De Consuet c. Nullus Rector ver Nullus Rector before the Annunciation of the Blessed Mary it must be understood also of Vicars Perpetual And John de Athon is very large in discussing and positive in determining it Credo respectu Rectorum Vicarium dici Intitulatum respectu vero aliorum nominare debet Rectorem Constit Otho de Instit Vicarior verb. ad Vicar For saith he out of Innocent's Extrav though if you consider a Vicar Perpetual with respect to his Rector whose Vicar he is he is not called a Rector yet if compared with others he is a Rector It 's then very plain That anciently every Parson and Vicar Perpetual were called Rectors or Governours and why but because they were vested with a Right to Govern their Churches notwithstanding which it cannot now be inferr'd that those who still bear the Name of Rector are Governours of the Church For the ancient Constitution of the Church is not only altered whereby Parish Presbytens Parsons Rectors and Vicars Perpetual have lost all their ancient Power of Ruling but by reason of Impropriations mere Laicks ever since the Statute of Dissolution that took away Appropriations from the Church have been Parsons and Rectors but not Rulers of the Church Sir Henry Spelman very Learnedly doth prove Of Tithes c. 29. That after the Appropriations the Parsonage still continues Spiritual as well in the Eye of the Common Law as of the Canon Law for if it became Temporal by Appropriation then were it within the Statute of Mortmaine and forfeited by that Act and as it continues Spiritual it must be made to a Spiritual Person and not Temporal Spiritual Things and Spiritual Men being Co-Relatives that cannot in Reason be divorced However we see that de facto Lay-men are possess'd of these Spiritual Impropriations and thereby are become the Parsons and Rectors and the Ecclesiastical Incumbent who hath the Cure of Souls is his Vicar who although according to the Ancient Dialect might be called Rector when compared with others yet not with respect to the Lay-man the Parson or Rector of the Parish He that hath the Parsonage or Rectory is the Parson or Rector and that is the Lay-Impropriator Besides according to what hath been offer'd in the first Note it 's plain that now no Governing Power is left with the Parish-Presbyter He is not only denied the Exercise of such a Power but diversted of the Power it self and if any of 'em have the Name of Rector left'em it 's vox praeterea nihil If in this I am mistaken the Fathers of the Church are humbly desired to tell the World so but whether I am mistaken or no the restoring the Parish-Presbyters to the ancient Power of Rectors and the Exercise of it will be a great step towards the healing our Breaches especially if what the ancient Chorepiscopi whom I must again mention who were but Presbyters enjoyed may be allowed them Of whom more in my Notes under the next Proposition II. Whereas by a Statute in the Six and Twentieth Year of King Henry the Eighth revived in the First Year of Queen Elizabeth Ch. 14. Suffragans are appointed to be erected in Twenty Six several places of this Kingdom the Number of them might very well be conformed unto the Number of the several Rural Deanries into which every Dioces is sub-divided which being done the Suffragan supplying the place of those who in the ancient Church were called Chorepiscopi might every Month assemble a Synod of all the Rectors or incumbent Pastors within the Precinct and according to the major part of their Voices conclude all Matters that shall be brought into Debate before them Notes The Suffragans appointed to be erected in the Twenty Sixth Year of Henry the Eighth were to be consecrated by the Archbishop and Two other Bishops or Suffragans and by them admitted to the Episcopal Dighity but yet were not to use have or execute any Jurisdiction or Episcopal Power or Authority within their said Sees nor within any Diocess or place of this Realm or elsewhere within the King's Dominions but only such Jurisdiction Power and Authority as shall be Licensed and Limited to them to take do and execute by a Commission from the Bishop of the See in which he is a Suffragan nor were they to use any Jurisdiction Ordinary or Episcopal Power otherwise nor longer time than limited by such Commission These were the Suffragans appointed to be erected by Henry the Eighth who though Consecrated and Ordained to the Episcopal Dignity yet must exercise no other Episcopal Power than was delegated to 'em by the Diocesan's Commission which was a very precarious and uncertain thing This Learned Archbishop doth therefore move that instead of this sort of Suffragan we might have men to supply the place of the ancient Chorepiscopi who were not at first under such Limitations tho without Episcopal Consecrations they were vested with the Powers and Authorities of City Bishops and that they might be conform'd to the Number of Rural Deanries A motion which if closed with by the Church of England would no doubt touching this part of the Controversie about the Government of the Church heal the Division and the Church in her Condescention herein would conform unto an ancient Practice of the