986. Anno 1537. Thomas Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Edward Arch-Bishop of Yorke Iohn Bishop oâ— London Cutâ—bert Bishop of Durham Stephen Bishop of Winchester Robert Bishop of Carlile Iohn Bishop of Exeter Iohn Bishop of Lincolne Iohn Bishop of Bath Rowland Bishop of Covenâ—â—y and Lichfield Thomas Bishop of Ely Nicholaâ— Bishop of Salisburyâ—Iohn Bishop of Bangor Edward Bishop of Herefordâ—Hugh Bishop of Worcester Iohn Bishop of Roâ—hester Richard Bishop of Chichester VVilliam Bishop of Norwich Robert Bishop of Assaph Robert Bishop of Landaffe Richard VVolman Arch-Deacon of Sudbury VVilliam Knight Arch-Deacon of Richmond Iohn Bells Arch-Deacon of Glocester Edward Bonner Arch-Deacon of Leicester VVilliam Skippe Arch-Deacon of Dorcet Nicholas Heath Arch-Deacon of Stafford Cuthbâ—rt Marshall Arch-Deacon of Vottingham Richard Corren Arch-Deacon of Oxford VVilliam Cliffe Geoffry Dowes Robert Oking Ralph Bradford Richard Smithâ— Symon Matthew Iohn Pryn VVilliam Buokmaster VVilliam May Nichoâ—as VVottin Richard Cox Iohn Edmunds Thomas Robertson Iohn Baker Thomas Barrett Iohn Hase Iohn Tyson Doctors and Professors of Divinity and of the Civill and Canon Law with the whole convocation house and Clergie of England in their Booke intituled the institution of a Christian man dedicated by them to King Henry 8. Printed cum Privilegio subscribed with all their names and ratefied by the Statute of 32 H 8 c. 26. chap of the Sacrament of order fol. 48. c an excellent place Anno 1538. Robert Barnes Doctor of Divinity and Martyr in his workes p. 210. Anno 1540. VVilliam VVraghâ—on in his hâ—nting and finding out of the Romish Fox among the Bishops in England dedicated to King Henry the 8. and his rescue of the Romish Fox A Booke intituled The Image as well of a true Christian Bishop as of a counterfeit and Anti-christian Bishop printed about the same time Rodeâ—icke Mors his Supplication or complaint to the â—arleament of England c. 19.20 A supplication to King Henâ—y the 8. by a namelesse Author against Bishops their jurisdiction pride Lordlinesse and wealth Henry Stalbridge his exhortatory Epistle to his most deare Country of England against the Pompous Bishops of the same as yet the true members of the great Antichrist of Rome their most filthy Father Lincolne Ridley his Exposition on Ihil 1. Iohn Frith a Pious learned Martyr his answer to Sir Thomas Moore p. 116. Nayler his answer to the epistle of the great Turke printed Anno 1542. Iohn Bale afterward Bishop of Osgris in Ireland his image of both Churches on Apoc. c 6 f 42 9 f 56.65 c. 13. f. 105 116 118. c. 14 f. 126. c 15 f 150. c. 17. f 160. King Henry the 8 himselfe in his Book inscribedâ— A necessary erudition for any Christian man published with the advise and approbation of all the Prelates Clergy of England in their convocation and of the Lords Spirituall and temporall and nether house of Parliament with the Kings own Royall Epistle to all his loving Subjects before it Anno 1545. by vertue of the Statute of 32 H. 8. c. 26. chap. of the Sacrament of order Anno 1551. The Book of Ordination of Ministers and Bishops confiâ—med by act of Parliament 3 Ed. 6. c. 12.5 6. Ed. c. 1. 8. Elizab c. 1. which prescribed the 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. to be read at the Ordination of Ministers and consecration of Bishops and limits the selfe same forme of Ordination with the power of impesiâ—ion of hands both to Ministers and Bishopâ— Anno 1552. Iohn Hooper Bishop of Glocester a Martyr expition upon the 8. Commandements and in Psalm 23â— p. 40. Hugh Laâ—ymer once Bishop of VVorcesâ—er a Martyr in his Fourtâ— Sermon of the Plough and in his 2.3.4 and 6. Sermons before King Edward the 6. Anno 1â—â—5 Iâ—hn Poveâ— Bishop of VVinchester in his Apologie against Thomas Martyrâ— c 4.5 f. 43.44.52.53.59 Doctor Harpesfield Arch-Deacon of London and Iohn Bradford Martyr Fox Acts and Monuments p 1465 Anno 1558 Thomas Bombâ—edge Martyr Fox ibid p 1856. Iohn Elmer after Bishop of London in his Harborow for faithfull Subjects Master Bullingham after Bishop of Lincolne in his Letter to Master Bull Det 5 1â—64 Master Thomas Becon in his catâ—chisme in his workes dedicated to all the Bishops of England by name approved applauded by them and Printed Cum Privilegio London 1562. vol. 499.500 The Doctrine of Christ and Anti-christ vol. 3 f 409 4010. sect. 18.19 Iames Pilkington Bishop of Durham Exposition on Agge c 1. verse 1 2 3.4 9.12.13 c. 2. v. 1 2 3.4.9.10.11 on Obidias v. 7.8 and in his Treatise of buâ—ning Paules Church Incomparable Iohn Iuell Bishop of Salisbury defence of the Apologie of the Church of England Edit 16.10 part 2 cap 3 divis 5. c 4 divis 2 cap 5 divis 1 cap 7 divis 5 cap 9. divis 1 p 99.100 101.196 202 c VVilliam Alley Bishop of Exeter in his poore-mans Library part 1 Miscellanea Prâ—lect 3. f. 95 96. Printed cum Privilegio Edit. 2.1571 Alexander Nowell Deane of Paules his Reproofe of Doâ—mans Proofe LONDON 1565. cum privilegio f. 43.44.45 Doctor Lawrence Humfryes Regiuâ— Professor of Divinitie in the Vniversity of Oxford Puritano papismi Confuâ—atio ad Rat 3. p. 262.263 Iohn Keâ—ridge his Sermon on 1 â—im 3 1 2 3 London 1578 Iohn VVhitgiâ—t Arch-Bishop of Canterbury against Cart-wright p 353 Master Cart-wright in his second Replie against Whit-gist Anno 1585. â— Tract 8 of Arch-Bishops and Bishops p 404 to 616. CONFVTATION of the Remish Testament on Acts. 20. sect. 4 â—hil 1 sect. 1 1. Tim. 3. sect. 2. Tit. 1 sect. 2 Doctor VVilliam Fulk against Brislow motive 40 against Gregory Martin London 1583 p 172. Confutation of the Rhemiâ—â— Testament on Tit. 1 sect 2 phil. 1 sect 1. Master Iohn Foxe in his Acts and Monuments prescribed to be had in every Arch-Bishop Bishops Archdeacons Deanes and Prebend residentiaries house in every Cathedrall and Collegiate Church by the Canonâ— made in the Synod of London Anno 1571 Edit 1610 p 216 358 359. 360 414 430 432 434 439 517 518 599 625 961 972 1009 1016 1465 1856 both in the text and marginall Notes Doctor VVilliam VVhittaker Regius Professor of Divinity in the Vniversity of Cambâ—idâ—â— Contra Duraum l 6 sect 19 Responsio ad 6 Rationes campâ—ani Rat 10. p 122 141 Contr 2 qâ— 5. c 7 contr 4 qu 1 c 1 Master Pâ—ilip Stuâ—t his display of corruptions neare the end The â—ee hive of the Romish Church oft printed and lately reprinted Anno 1635. passing onâ— most learned Doctor Iohn Raynâ—lds in his conference with Hart Anno 1584 London 1609 c 3 divis 1. p 100 101.105 c 4 divis 2 p 122 123 c 6. divis p 185. divis 3 p 218 c. 8. divis 3 p 4â—1 divis 5 p 540 541 and his Letter to Sir Francis Knolles in refutation of Doctor Bancrofâ—s Sermon at Pauls-Crosse 9. Feb. 1588 dated sâ—pt 19. 1598 Doctor Aâ—drâ—â—willes Synopsis Papisini The 5 generall Controversie Qu
and multiplyed them or divided them as they saw occasion so they limitted q and granted them all that Episcopall power and jurisdiction whereby they were distinguished from or advanced above Ordinary Ministers as appeares by the Originall Charters of the foundations and erections of our own English Bishop-rickes the forecited Statutes and by our owne and forraigne Histories Now that jurisdiction and superlority thus acquired is but meere and humane not divine Againe Bishop-ricks are meer hâ—mane institutions directly contrary to the Holy Ghost who ordained many Bishops in every Church and City not one Bishop over many which he can never well instruct rule and oversee Acts 20. 17.28 1 Tim. 5.17 Pâ—il 1 1 Tit. 1â— 5 7. 1 Pet. 5 1 2 3. Now that Episcopal jurisdiction which distinguishetâ— Bishops â—rom Presbyters was r created with and annexed to their Bishâ—pricks yea it is delegated botâ— by the â—ing to Lay Commiâ—â—ioneâ—s and visitors and by Bishops themselves to Officials commiâ—â—aâ—ies and meere Lay men 26. H. 8. c. 1.31 H. 8 c 9 37. H. 8 c 17.1 â— 6 c. 2.1 Eliz c 1. Therefore it is meerely humane and belongs not to Bishops by any divine right neither is it peculiar unto them alone Moreover Bishoprickes with all Episcopall juâ—isdiction incident to them have been s usually granted hereâ—oâ—ore by our Kings of England to their Chancellours Treaâ—uâ—ers Secretaries Kinsmen and temporall Oâ—hcers being meere Lay-men as an advancement and augmentation onely of their temporall revenues and civill temporall things And in Germany at this day they are given to Dukes Earles and Nobles yea to Children and inâ—ants only as a temporall digâ—ity and revenue Thereâ—oâ—e they are â—nly tempâ—rall â—ffices and revenues and meere huâ—ane inâ—titutions which may well be spareâ— in the Church not divine oâ— Gods and Christs institution Moreover most of the t reâ—ormed â—â—otesâ—ant churches beâ—ond the 〈…〉 the Reâ—â—â—maâ—â—n 〈…〉 Bishopricks and Dioceâ—an Bishops as Anti-christian and humane inâ—â—â—tutions pernicious to the Church of Christ and to the power puâ—ity and progresâ—e of the Gospell making Biâ—â—ops proud Lordly idle Luxuâ—ious covetous Tyrannicall Symoniâ—call Seditious Schâ—smaticaâ— â—ppâ—essive vindictive prophane impious lascivious unchasâ— perâ—ideous rebellious â—recherous to their Soveraigns Therefore certainly they are no divine instiâ—ution useâ—ull or necessary for Gods Church and people oâ— which they have been the bane and ruine in all ages as our Acts and Monuments of Martyrs testifie they being the Authors of all perseâ—â—tions in our Church and of al our Martyrs Buchery bloodâ— shed And in truth our Kings in all former ages have â—eemeâ— Bishops not alâ—ogeâ—her so usefull or necessary in our Church as some now make them which may appeare by the long vacancies oâ—â—â—veâ—s Bishoprickes in sundry ages of which I shall give you a â—hoâ—â— taâ—â— and so conciâ—â—e u Anâ—â— 653 After the death of Honorius Arch-Bishop or Canâ—erbury that See continuâ—â— void 18 moneths Annâ— 669. After Adeotaâ—usâ—is death it remained voâ—d almost 4 yeares An 690. Afâ—eâ—Thâ—odorus his death it was void almoâ—t â—uâ—â— two yeâ—resâ— and as long aâ—ter â—aâ—â—yusâ—ecease An 734 After â—uâ—hberâ—s death An 758. â—t was vacant above one yeare Anno 762 two years aâ—ter â—regwins death An 790 3 years aâ—â—er Lambâ—râ—s death An 830 aâ—ove one Yeare after VVâ—â—reds decease An 958 almost 3 yeares after Odo his expiâ—ation An 1089. 4 yeâ—res after Laâ—â—â—akes departure An 1109 5 yeares after Anâ—elmes death Anâ— 36. 2 years after VViâ—liam Carkeâ— Aâ— 11 â— â—3 yeaâ—s aâ—ter Riâ—hard VVeâ—â—erâ—neâ— An 1242 2 yeares aâ—â—eâ— St. â—dmâ—nâ— An 1270 â—s long aâ—â—er â—oniâ—acâ— An 1502 2 yeares after 〈◊〉 Deane Aâ— 15â—8 oâ—e â—ear aâ—â—e◠〈…〉 v Aâ— 644 aâ—â—er Pauâ—â—nus the 〈◊〉 Aâ—â—h-Biâ—hâ—p 〈◊〉 â—oâ—keâ— that â—ee wâ—s vacant 20 â—â—me say 3â—â— yeeâ—es An 1114 sâ—â—ur yeares afâ—er â—â—â—mas the second An 1140 â—lmost 2 â—eares aâ—ter Tâ—â—â—stan An 〈◊〉 10 Years after Rogers deâ—thâ—An 1213. 4 Yeaâ—es after 〈◊〉 An 1255 13 â—loneths after VVâ—â—â—eâ— Gâ—ay Anâ— 13â—3 after â—homas de caâ—bridge above 2 yeares An 315 â— Years after â—illiamâ—â—Greenfielâ— Aâ—â— 1240â— 2 yeâ—res afâ—er VViâ—liam de Melâ—â—â— An 1405 2 years and an haâ—â—e aâ—te◠〈◊〉 Sâ—â—ope that Arch-traitor beneaâ—eâ— for his Treâ—son Anâ— 1423 2 Yeares after Henry Boweâ—â— An 14â—9 almost 4 Yeares after Iohn Kâ—mp An 1464 2 Yeares after VVilliam Bâ—â—th almost a â—ull yeaâ—â— both after Cardinall VVolpe and â—â—â—ard Lee Anâ— 1559 â—â—â—er â—â—câ—olas Heath 2 yeares Anâ— 1568 after Thomas â—oung above one yeare Thus long have both our Arch-Bishoprickes been void in severall ageâ— without any prejudice to Church or State w Anno 619 after Mellitus his translation from London to Canterbury that see continued void 31 Yeâ—res together An â—64 2 Yeares An 1133. 7 Yeares aâ—ter Guilbert An. 1187 alter Gilbert Folâ—oâ— above 2 yeares An 1279 above one yeare aâ—â—er Iohn de Chishul An 1303 almost 2 yeares after Richard de Granefâ—rd Anno 1501 after Thomas Saâ—age above two yeares An 1171 after the death of Henry de Bloyes the Bishopricke of Winchesteâ— was void above 3 yeares An 1238 after Peter de la Roch 5â— yearsâ— An 1243. after William de Rawley 16 Yeâ—res Ethelmanus holding it 9 yeares without consideration Anno 1259 after Henry de Wengham 6 yeares An 1492 after Peter Coventry aboue one Yeare An 1500 after Thomas Langton 2 yeares An 1528 aâ—ter Richard Fox 2 Yeares An 1530. after Cardinalâ— Woolsey almost 4 yeaâ—es w An 1131 after the death of Hâ—rnaus first Bishop oâ—Ely that See was void above 2 yeares An 1169 after Negellus the Second Bishop 5 yeares An 1197 afteâ— William Longchamp above one Yeare An 1214 after Eustachius above 5 yeares An 1256 after William de Kilâ—enny above one yeare An 1297 after William de Luda 2 Yeares An 1373 after Iohn Barnet 2 yeares An 1434 after â—hillip Morgan 3 yearesâ—An 1486 after Iâ—â—n â—oorion 3 yeares An 1500 aâ—â—er Iâ—hn Alcocke one whole yeare An 1533 as long after Nicholas West An 158â— after Richard Coxe almost 20 yeares together x â—n 11â—7 after the death of Roâ—ert de Chisney the 4 Bishâ—p oâ— Lincoln that See continued vâ—cant almost 17 yeares Ceâ—â—ry â—enâ—y the 2 his base Sâ—nne taâ—ing the â—rofits thereof without any consecration An 1184 afâ—er Walteâ— de Câ—â—stâ—rtiis 2 â—eares An 1200 after St. â—ugh almost â— years â—n 1206 after William de Blâ—yes 3 yeâ—res An 1490 after Iohn Rusâ—el 2 yeares An 1513 after William Smith one yeare y An 1086 the Bishoprick of Coventry and Lichfâ—eld was vacant 2 yeares after the death of â—eter and as long An 1â—27 after Robert â—each as long An 118 after Giâ—acdus Puella as long An 1208 â—fter Geofâ—ry de Muschamp An 1238 almost 3 yeares after Alexanderâ—e Saâ—ensby An 1243 after Hugh Pateshul 2 yeâ—es An 1386 as long after â—ichard Scroope An 1490 as long after Iohn Huâ—â—e z An 1099 after Osâ—ond his death the second Bishop of Salisbury
as to Jurisdiction although not of execution which executive exercise is restrained by certaine positive Laws not Divine but Canonicall whence the cause of these Laws ceasing (b) the Laws themselvs determine And Johannes Semeca a Popish Canonist avers That in the first primitive Church the Office of Priests and Bishops was the same but in the second primitive Church to wit some space after the Apostles times both their names and Offices began to be distinguished The same Doctrine together with the Identity and Parity of Bishops and Presbyters is professedly averred not only by those hereafter cited in the Catalogue but also by * Huldrick Bishop of Ausburg about the year of Christ 860. in his Epistle to Pope Nicholas in defence of Priests Marriage by John Crespin L'estate de L'eglise printed 15â—2 fol. 14.97 by Phippe de Mornax Tableaâ— des Differens par 2. c. 6. p. 67 68 69. c. and by Mornay Lord Plessie in his Mystery of Iniquity in the French Edition p. 7.9 10.72.80 to 87 9â— 92.95 to 123.125.128.152 to 155.159.160.172.179.197.210 to 218 234.2â—4 266 267.281.293.304.307.319 320 366â— 389 395.397.404.410.412â— 418.424 to 427 452â— 464.467 468.469.503.518.519.520.524 to 528 533.535.545 546 547.567.568 569.603 Yea * Iohn Maâ—jor de Gestis Scotorum l. 2. c. 3. wâ—ites that in ancient times the Scots were instructed in the Christian faith by Priests and Monks and were then without Bishops And Iohn Fordon Scotichronicon l. 3. c. 8. before him records That before the coming of Palladius the Scots had only Presbyters or Monks to instruct them in the Faith and administer the Sacraments following the custome of the primitive Church And * from Palladius dayes till the reigne of Malcolm the 3d the Bishops of Scotland had no Diocesse at all and so were no Diocesan Prelates but every Bishop whom holinesse had made reverend in that age exercised his Episcopall function without distinction in every place he came If then Bishops and Presbyters were all one and the same in the first Primitive Church which church â—ogether with that of Scotland was anciently governed only by Presbyters not by any Lordly Prelaâ—es or Diocesan Bishops which Dr. William Fulke in his Answer of a true Christian c. p. 20.50 professeth â—o be Antichristian Paâ—all and no divine institution why the Churches of Scotland and England may not now be governed by Presbyters only without Bishops aswell as at first I cannoâ— conceiveâ— their regiment of late having been so tyrannicall unchristian antichristian and exorbitant that they have almost wholly ruined our Religion Church State and lefâ— them in a most perplexed if not desperate condition which proves their Hierarchy to be rather Antichristian and Diabolicall then Divine And how can it be otherwise if we rightly consider the Persons or Condition of our Hierarchyâ— and their Antichristian Attendants I remember a merry Sâ—ory in * Giraldus Cambrensis and out of him related by Mr. Camden in his Britannia p. 604. It hapned that a certaine Iew travelling towards Shrewsbury with the Archdeacon of Malpas in Ches-shire whose surname was Peche that is Sinne and a Deane named Devill when he heard by chance the Archdeacon telling that his Archdeaconry began at a place called Ill-street and reached as farre as to Malpas towards Chester he considering and understanding withall aswell the Arch-deacons Surname as the Deans came out with this merry and pleasant conceit Would it not be a wonder quoth he and my fortune very good if ever I get safe againe out of this Countrey where Sinne is the Arch-deacon and the Devill is the Dean where the entry into the Archdeaconry is Illstreet and the going forth of it Malpas It was * St. Bernards complaint in his age that Iesus Christ elected many Devils to be Bishops as he chose Iudas to be an Apostle Since then there be so many Archbishops Deanes and Bishops Devills so many Archdeacons Sinners if not Sinne and the entrance into these Offices by reason of Symony Ambition and the like a meer Illstreet and their going forth of them by reason of their wicked lives and exorbitant actions occâ—sioned by their very Office Malpas it is almost a wonder and very good fortune if any â—onest godly Minister or Professor ever get safe againe out of their Courts and Diocesse or escape drowning in their Seas Hence is it that the devoutest men in all ages since Prelates became Lords paramount to Ministers have either utterly refused to accept of Bishâ—pricks or resigned them after acceptance as I have * elswhere manifested by sundry examples and shall here furâ—her exemplifie by â—ther evidences (a) Ribadenerra a Iesuite records it to the great praise of Bernardine of Sennes canonized at Rome for a Saint that out of his humility he refused the 3. Bishopricks of Sennes Ferrara and Vrban which severall Popes offred to him and though one Pope put a Bishops Miâ—er on his head with his own hands yet he put it off againe humbly beseeching him not to impose the charge of any Bishoprick upon him and to change that estate of Poverty to which God had called him because he should bring more advantage to the Church by preaching the Word of God and ayding the Soules of many Bishopricks then by being a Bishop in one Church The Pope hearing his reasons confessed them true and left him to his own liberty (b) Vincent Ferrier another Popish Saint is highly magnified for that ' being urged by the Pope to accept the Bishopricke of Leride the Archbishopricke of Valence and a Cardinalship it was impossible to move him to accept of any of these charges deeming it a greater advantage to free one Soule from the chaines of Sinne then to gain all the great preferments of the world For he perceived that these honourable dignities seemed like so many golden chaines whereby he should be detained at the Court and deprived of liberty to goe and preach the Gospell with poverty as God had commanded him So Thomas of * Aquin canonised for a Saint is highly applauded for refusing the Archbishopricke of Naples with other great dignities offered unto him by the Pope In like sort * Raimond of Rocheâ—ort another Roman Saint is extolled for refusing to accept the Archbishopricke of Arragon which the Pope himselfe conferred upon him and commanded him to accept within few dayes at which news he was very sad and most humbly and instantly intreated his Holinesse not to lay such a burthen upon him which he knew not how to beare and seeing that the Pope was resolved to enforce him to accept it he fell sicke with indignation a â—ieuere continuing upon him till he died of regret and so discharged him of this care * Antoninus another â—ate Romish Saint being elected Archbishop oâ—Florence by Pope Eugenius the 4th refused to accept thereof because being retired out of the tempests of the world he should therby return into â—hem to the
c. 16 Tom. 5 p â—â— â—n â—pist Paâ—â—â— l 19. in Phil. 1 1 l 23 in 1 Tim. 3 l 25 in Tit. 1 Tom. 5 p 455 456 498 499 521 522 523 De instituâ—â—ons Clericorurâ— l â— â— 4 5 6 Tom 6 p. 5 6 Haymo Halberstatensis in Phil. 1. â— Tit. 1 An 560. The 12 Councell of Toledo Can 8 Aâ—â—laâ—iâ—s Fortunatus d Ecclesiasticâ—â— Ofsiâ—â—s l 2 c 13 Anno 1050 Pecumenâ—a in Aâ—â—a Apost 5 15 2 in Phil 1 1 Tim: 3 Tit 1 fol 79 586 655 683 Anno 1070 Theophylact. Com in Act 20 17â— 28 in Phil 1 1 1 Tim: 3 Tit 1 p 517.576 600 801 Anno 1â—00 Conradus Bruno in Phil 1 1 1 Tim: 3 Tit 1 Anno 1130 Barnard De Consideratione ad Eugenium l. 2 34 Epist. 42 Sermâ— 23 25. 77. Super â—antiâ—â— De laudibuâ— Maria Homil 1 Concio in Concilio Rhemensi ad Pastâ—â—â—s Sâ—râ—â— THE THIRD SQVADRON THe third Squâ—dron is constituted of forraigne Cannonists and Popish Schoolemen wâ—iters and Councels from the Yeare of our Lord 1100 till this present as Iâ—o Carnaâ—â—nsis Dâ— â—alâ—luâ—â— pa. â—5 c â—8 59.72 1â—â— 143.144 Peter Lombard Sententiarum l 4. distinâ— 24. I. K. L mâ— Comenâ—aâ—iâ—m Phil. 1 1 Tit 1. 1 Tim: 3 Gratian the gâ—eaâ— Canâ—onist distinctio 18 21 22 23 24 25 39 50 60 61 62 63 64 65 6â— 67 68 80 93 95 Causa 2 qu. 7 Causa 24 qu 3 Hugo Caâ—dinalis in Phil â— 1 Tit 1 1 Tim: 3 Aquinas secundâ— secundae qu â—4 Ar 6 â—rg 1. Supplementum in tertiam pâ—rtem qu 37 Art 7 Durandus in l 4 Sentent Distinct 24. qu 5 6 Rational Divinorum l 2 Iohannis Parisiensiâ— de potestate Regia Papâ—li apud moâ—â—â—um de Ecclesia c 11 Catalogum Testium veritatis p 525 Carthusiâ—â— Caâ—etan and the Author of the Oâ—dinaâ—y glosse in Acts 15 c 20 17 28 Phil 1 1 1 Tim: â— Tit 1 5 7 cardinalis Arelatensiâ— apud AEneam Sylvium de Gestis Concilij Basiliensis l. 1 p 27 28 29 Alvarus Pelagius de Plainetu Ecclesia â— 1 Art 70. l 2 Art 1 to 17 Panormitam c 4 de Consuetudine Anselmus Lucensis Collectanea Can l. â— c. 87 127 Gâ—egorius Tholosamus Polycarp l 2 Tit 19 39 Iohn Thiery Glosâ—a in Gâ—ationum distinct 95 cap olim with all other Glosses and Canonists on that Text Heâ—â—iâ—us Gorichen in l 4 Sentent Distinct 24â— Astensis Summa pars 2 l 6 Tit 2 Artic 2 Angelus de claucisio Summa Angelica Ordo 1 The e councell of Lingon Anno 1404 of Paris Anno 1557 Duarenus de sacr Eccle injust l 1 c 7 Onus Ecclâ—sia c 14 to 27 Nicholas Cusaâ—â—â— de concoâ—diâ— Catholicâ— l. 2 c. 13. Alphonsus a Câ—stâ—o advers 〈◊〉 Sit â—piscopus Michael Medina de sacro hâ—m Oâ—ig et continetia 〈◊〉 â—spencaâ—â— in 1 Tim. c 3 Digressioâ—â—m in Tim â— 1 c 1 2 3â— and in Tit 1 â— â— The Rhemist â—nnotâ—tion on Acts 〈◊〉 sect 4 and in Tim 4. Phil 1. 1 â—it 1 â—â— Iâ—â—obus Fabor in 1 Tim â— 4 â— Tit 1. Sixtus Sevensi Bibl 〈◊〉 l â— Anno 32â— Azoâ—ius Mâ—â—â—lium pâ—râ— 2 l 3 c 1â—â— Buoniuâ— Anâ—uâ—ll Eccles â—om 1. p 5â—â— Iacobus de Grâ—ssâ—s dâ—sâ—â—lionum Auâ—â—carum parâ— 2 l 1 c 9 11 5 â— 9 1â— 14 16 l 3 c. 12 11 3.4 Petâ—â—s Bâ—â—sseldin â—uchyâ—idion Teâ—â—â—giae Pâ—storalis pâ—â—s 1 c 15. with other Pontisâ—â—â—ans though sundry else of them are the greatest sâ—icklers for â—â—isâ—opâ—ll Mâ—â—â—â—ne of Puâ—pose to advâ—nce the 〈◊〉 Supremâ—cy with the Parity of Bishops and Pâ—esbiters Iuâ—â— Dâ—â—mâ— â—sterly subverts and ruineâ—â— I shall close up this Squâ—drâ—n with the â—â—e Authorities of some Semiâ—â—â— Priests in Enâ—land As namely of Niâ—câ—â—las Smiâ—h in his modest and bâ—iefe discussion of certaine Assertions which are taught by Mr. Doctor â—â—lâ—ison in his Treatise of the â—cclesiasticall 〈◊〉 where thus he determines * I judge is no rashnes to affirm that since England enjoyed a Bisâ—â—pâ— to wit a Poâ—â—s â—ishopâ— to confirme the Papists and controll the Pâ—iests namely Richâ—â—d bisâ—op of Châ—lcedâ—â— created the generall â—ishop and superintendâ—nt both of Englandâ— and Scotland by Pope Vrbaus speciall Bull dated the 4th of August Anno 1625. The Coppy whereof you shall â—ind printed in Censura Propositionâ—m quaâ—undam c. per sacram facultatem Theologâ—a Parisiâ—nsis factae Paâ—isiis 1631 p 63 64 65 that more damage hath happened to the Catholikes in generall by reason of discord and frequent losse of charity then they have received benefit by the Sacrament of Conâ—irmation onely conferred on some few That all holy men have exceedingly eâ—deavoured to sâ—un such an high digâ—ity That a Bishop is in a State which presupposeth but yet gives not perfection which the State of Religion not onely presupposeth but giveth That a vow not to receive a Bishopricke is valid and sacred That â—o desiâ—e a Bishopricke even for that which iâ— best in it to wit for the good of soules according to St Thomâ—s sâ—cunda sâ—â—uâ—da que 185. Art 1 seemes to be presumptiâ—n and there are some who stick not to say and that commonly it is a moâ—tall sinne That these â—ropositions following are strange idle and absurd That it is dâ— iure divinâ— and that the law of God is that every particular Church as England is ought to have a Bishop That without a Bishop England were not a particular Church That unlesse every particular Church hath its Bishop or Bishops the whole and Vniveâ—sall Church could not be as Christ hath instituted it an Hierarchie composed of divers particular Churches That without a Bishop we cannot have conâ—irmation c. All which principles saith hee are worse then the concultion it selfe and demonstrated by us to â—it in that Treatise to have no foundation at all Thus this Popish Priest who proving that the Church of England may well subsist without a Popish Bishop to sway and order it grants that it may doe the like without our Protesâ—ant Prelates and that plainly resolves that it is not from any divine law or institution that the Church of England should have any Bishop at all to govern it Daniell a Iesu another Priest and a Reader of Divinity thus seconds him in his Apologie for the proceeding of the holy see Apostolike as to the government of the catholickes in England during the time of Persecution * That it is most false and of dangerous consequence that a particular Church cannot be without a Bishop That Gods law requires no more but that there be somâ— Bishops in the Church to wit so many that there bee no danger that the whole Order should suddainly be taken away by their deaths and so dispersed through the world that all Christians may bee sufficiently provided of learned and vertuous Priests If this be done the law of God is satisfied
although there be no Bishops in Fâ—ance Spaine or England Give me thereâ—oâ—e a mulâ—itude of Christians how great soever who want not a Bishop to ordaine Priests and I will boldly affirm that there is nâ— need that the governour of that society should be a Biâ—â—op Yea let us suppose the Ordinaâ—ion oâ— Priests and the Ministry of the Chuâ—ch not to be necessary in the Church and presently it followes that there is no need the universall Church should bee governed by Bishops who are superior to Priests That in the time of Persecution it is neither good nor convenient nor any solace or comfort to the Church to have a Bishop That thoâ—e who of Bishops are made Religious persons may be said in some sort to fly â—igher and not at all to descend That if the Catholickes of England should yeeld to this motion nameâ—y to receive the Bishop of Chalcedon as their pâ—oper Pastor and Bishâ—p they could by no meanes excuse themselvesâ— from being worthy of that reprehension which the Câ—rinthians received from Saint Paul namely that they rashly and indiscreetly put themselves into subjection that they should bestow their temporall goods so as they could exspect no reward from God as exercising humility Obedience Patâ—ence for which no crowne of Righteousnesse is prepared yea that they may by their blind receiving oâ— him though by the Popes owne Bull and authority expose themselves to manifest perill by falling into mortall sinne c. These Positions of theirs were publikely taught and maintained by many other Priests both in England and Ireland as appeares by the censure of the faculty of Paris and Nicholas Iâ— Maistre his Instauratio antiqui Principatus Episcoporum Parisijs 1633. Written upon this occasion in answer of these Treatises and some others Some of which Propositions though they were censured as Eronious by the faculty of the Divineâ— of Paris Anno 1631. through the power of the Bishop of Chalcedon as striking at the Popes Supremacy and the Bishops Hierarchie yet in all that censuâ—e I finde not one passage of Scripture produced to prove them contrary to the word of God and therfore that censure of theirs not much to be regardâ—â— THE FOVRTH SQVADRON THe 4th Squadron consists of Forraigne Protestant Churches and writers which I shall muster ranke in order according to their antiquities as neare as I may I shal begin with the VValdenses Taborites Albigenses Auâ—â—ites whose opinions and resolutions touching these particulars are registred at large by AEneas Sylvias histor Bohemiae c 35 by Renaerus contr Waldenses lib c 6. by Refutatio Waldensuim Bibl. PatruÌ„ Tom. 13 p. 383 by Thomas Waldensesâ— operum Tom. 1 l 3 Arti câ— 29 30 31 32 Tom 2. de Sacramento ordinis c. 117 118 Tom c 60 61 62 by Alphonsus de castro adversus hereses Tit Episcopus de Sacramento ordinis by Illiritus Catalogus Testium veritatis p 426 433 445 by Mr. Iohn Fox Acts and Monnments p 210 Albertus Pighius Hierarch Eccles. l 2 c 10 Gersomus Bucerus de Gubernatione Ecclesiae p 599â— 600 601. Marsilius Patavimus Anno 1320 seconds them in his Defensoris Paris pars 2 c. 15 16 17 18 19 20 and who Annâ— 1330 is backed by Michall Cezenas Henricus de Iota Nicholaus orem Ioannes de Ianduno Petrus de Corbaria Ioannes de Polaco Iohn of Castele â—rancis de Archatara and divers others of thaâ—age Witnesse Extravagant Ioannis 23 Antoninus quarta pars Summe Catalogus Testium veritatis p 512 524 525 529 Fox Acts and Monuments p 358 359 360. with others AEtates Ecelesiae written about that time c. 2 Registred in Catalogo Testium veritatis p 453 454â— Laurentius Valla The restorer of the Elegance of the Latine tongue succeed next in order Annotationes in Act. c. 15 c 20 in 1 Tim: 3 Tit. 1 Iohâ— Hus and Hierome of Prague two learned Godly Martyrs tread in their footsteps witnes AEneas Sylvius Historâ— Bohem c 35 Fox Acts and Monuments p 55â— 559 Gerson Bucerus de Gubernatiâ—nâ— Ecclesiae p. 602 603 After these successively ensued Ioannis Luâ—atwitz in Confessione â—aâ—oratrum contr. Rokeâ—zanum c 13 apud Lidij Waldeâ— siam p 53 Erasmus of Rotâ—â—rdam Annotaâ— paâ—â—pht in Act 1â— in 1 Tim: 3 4 Phil. 1 Tit 1 1 â—et 5 Scholia in â—pist â—ieronym 〈…〉 adversus aâ—â—â—ertâ—m 〈◊〉 Martin Luther in â—salm 2 â—â— 134 in Epist. ad Galâ—â—es 〈…〉 1 Artâ— 15 The Synod of â—eâ—icon Artic 6â— The Synod of Modisâ—aâ—ia Arâ—â—c 8 11 12 Gâ—rsâ—m Bucâ—râ—â—d 〈◊〉 Eâ—â—â—â—siae p 370 373 374 4â—â— 49â— 500 51â— 518.575 616 61â— 618 Câ—ristian the 3 King of Denmarke Anno 1537â— and the whole State of Denmaâ—â—e together with â—Gus◠〈◊〉 Cricus â—ing of Sweden about the same â—ime who sâ—ppressed banished and hanged up the Lordly Bishops of their Reâ—lms aâ— false Traitors and Rebels contrary to Chists insâ—itution and having no foundation in the word of God Clâ—â—traeâ—s Clâ—râ—n Saxon l 6. p. 49. lâ— 7 p 219 2â—â— lâ— 9. p 259 261 262 263 270 279 l 10 p 297 309 311 340 341 342 l 12 p. 358 359 l 13 p 388 l 14 p 407 421 l 15 pâ— 433 434. Philip Melanâ—â—hon Aâ—gam Responsâ— Pezel paâ—â— 7â—Comâ— in 1 Cor 4 Et disâ—utatio dâ— Politia Ecclesiasâ—ica dâ— coniâ—gâ—o Sacerdotum Oecolampaâ—ius in Rom 12 â—aldâ—iâ—us â—â—â—nglius in Amica sâ—a Parenaesi aâ— Communâ—m Helveâ—iorum â—mitatem operum Tom. 1. p 115 117 in Pâ—â—l 1.1 Tom. 3 pâ— 504. Opus Articulorâ—m Artic. 34â— 36 Francis Lambert his Summa Châ—iâ—â—ianiâ—atis Anno 1536. Prâ—sat Mr. Balliâ—ger in Act. 20 v 28 decad. 5. Ser 3 4 Brentius Apol. 〈◊〉 wettemb c 21. Pellicanâ—s in Mat. c. 16 18 in Act 16 20. Mustulus locâ—rum Com. locut de Ministris verbi Dâ—i p. 596.597 598. Mr. Iohn Calvin Instijâ— l 4 c 3 sect. 8 c 4 sect 2 in Phil 1 1 1 Tim. 3 8 Tiâ—â— 1 5.7 Antidotum Concilij Tridentinâ— Ses. 7 de Conformationâ— Martin Bâ—cer de vt usu Ministerij in Maâ—th 16 Araetius Problem Loâ—us de Oâ—siâ—ijs Eccles. â—â— Piâ—l 1 1 in 1 Timâ— 3 4â— Tit. 1 5 7. Mr. Ralph Gâ—â—lâ—her on Acts. 20. verse â—8 Phil. 1 1 1 Tim. 3. Tit 1.5.7 Mâ—rtin Chemâ—â—tius Examen â—onâ—ilij Tridâ—â—t pars 2 de Sacâ—amento 〈◊〉 223 224 Innocentius Gentiletus examâ—â—â—onâ—ilij Tridâ—nt Ibid Ioaâ—nis Maâ—oâ— Kinâ—sius Maâ—lorat on Phil. 1 1 1 Tim. â— Tiâ— 1 5 7 Acts 20 28. 1 Pet 5 1 2 〈…〉 2 â— 8 in 〈…〉 c 53 〈…〉 5 â— 14 Coâ—â—â— 3 câ— 3 〈…〉 ligâ— in 4 Pâ—aecept Defide c 25 sâ—ct 9 in Pâ—â—l 1 1 â—yperius in Tit 1 17 dâ— Mâ—thâ—do Tâ—â—ologiâ— l 3 Matthiâ—s Illâ—rieus Clavis Sâ—ripturae Tit Presbiter Catalogus Testiâ—m Veâ—itaâ—â—s p 426 433 445 512 524 525 529 553 554 488 528 c. 〈…〉 Basilius
cleer by Acts 10 2â—Phil 1. 1. Tit. 1 5 7. that in Ignatius his daies Bishops Presbiters were all one both in Title office and jurisdiction that there were many Bishops in every chiefe City and Church not any sole â—ishop paramount the Presbiters over one or many Churches and that Diocâ—san Bishops were instituted long after the Apostles and therefore after Ignatius his dayes who lived in the Apostles age as all Authors forecited accord and the whole Clergie of England in their Institution of a Christian man dedicated to King Henry the 8 resolue in direct termes These Epistles therefore of Ignatius which speâ—k of one Bishop in a â—hurch distinct â—rom and superior to Presbyters must needs be â—orged Thiâ—dly Ignatius in these Epistles makes Bishops successors to Christ and to sâ—and in his stead and Presbyters to succeed the Apostles whereas all others maâ—es them successors to the Apostles only not to Christ who z leâ—t no successor or Vicar generall behind him bâ—t a remains himselfe for ever the High-Priest chiefe Shepheard and Bishop of our Sâ—ules and hath promised b to â—e with us alwaies even to the end of the world This therefore maâ—es his Authority but suspiciâ—us and coâ—teâ—ptible Fourthly Ignatius hath not oâ—e word in him that Bishops are superior to â—â—eâ—biters â—y any divine lâ—w or iâ—stitutionâ— the thing in question therefore his Authority if geâ—uine proves nothing for the oposites Fifthly Ignaâ—ius equals Bishops and Presbyters both in jurisdiction rule and Authority for â—pist â— ad â—ralâ—â—anus he writes thus â—ut be ye subject to the Presbyters as to the Apostles of Christ for the Presbyters are a certaine conjoyned Sessions and â—ssembly of Apostles Epist. 6. ad Magnesianes â—rebyteri president â—oco Sinatus Apostolis The â—resbyters rule in the place of the Senate of the Apostles Epist. 10. ad Symenses Do ye al â—ollow the Colledge of the presbiters as Apostles Now if Presbyters succeed the Apostles in the government oâ— the Church al are to be Subject to them to follow them as Christs Apostles then certainely â—hey are equall at least to Bishops who at the highest are by Gods institution only to be obeyed and followed but as Christs Apostles not to be preâ—erred before them if equalized with them as the proudest Prelate of them must acknowledge and and the c Fathers witnesse Sixthly d Ignatius confesseth that the Churches in those dayes were not ruled by the Bishops as they are now but by the Colledge Senate and Synod of the Elders communi Praesbytâ—oum concilio as Hierome e and all other after him affirme the Presbiters therefore had then equall and joynt authority with the Bishops even in point of Iurisdiction governments and did râ—le and govern the Church in common with them therefore the Bishops were not then Lords Paramount as now they maâ—e themselves but equall and one with them yea their Colleagues companions as Ignatius and the g â—ourâ—h counsel oâ— Caâ—â—hâ—ge stile theÌ„ Seventhly his words h that they shâ—uld â—e sâ—bject to the Bishop as to God and Christ if rightly understood maâ—e nothing for the Prelates Hieraâ—chieâ—â—or Saint Paul Ephes. 6 5.6 7. coâ—mands servants to be obedient unto them that are their Masters according to the flesh with â—eare and â—â—embling in singlenesâ—e of heart as unto Christ not with eye-service as â—en pleasers but as the servants of Christ doing the will of God from his heart with good will doing service unto the Lord and not to men c. Is therefore every Master a Bishop equall unto Christ and superior in inrisdiction and degree to Presbyters No So Polycarpus in his Epistle to the â—hilippians chargeth them i to be subiect to their Elders as unto God and Christ using the same words of Elders as Ignatius doth of Bishops Are Preâ—byters therefore Paramount Bishops and succesâ—oâ—s to Christ himselfe I trow not Ignatius his meaning therefore is not that Bishops are as high above Presbyters and the people as God and Christ are above the Apostles as some k ambitious Prelates fansie but only that we must obey Bishops in all things that they command and prescribe us out of Gods word as farre â—orth as we would obey God or Christ himselfe for he that heareth them heareth Christ himselfe and hee that despiseth them despiseth God and Châ—ist himselfe Luke 10.16 1 Thes. 4â— 8. In this manner likewise are we to be subject to every Minister whatsoeverâ—Heb 13.17.7.1 Thes. 2.13 This therefore proves nothing for the Prelates superiority over other Bishops especially since this Ignaâ—â—us himselfe Epist. 5 chargeth the Trallians to reverence Deâ—cons inâ—eâ—â—or to â—resbyters as Christ himselfe whose Vicars they are As for those extravagail expressions of Ignatius l Episcopus typum Dei Patris â—mnium geâ—ut quid enim aliud est Episcopus quam is qui â—mni â—â—incipatu protestate Superior est quod homini licet pro viribus imitator Christi Dei factus and the m like on n which same ground both the Popes and Prelates Monarchie they are so ridiâ—ulous â—alse ambitious and hyperbolical as favor neither of Ignatius or any Christian but rather of a meere papall and Anti-christian spiritâ— discovering these Epistles to be none of his and those â—relaâ—ts who assâ—me these speeches to themselues to be o none of Christs Mat. 11.29 All which consideredâ— this forged Aâ—tiquity will stand theÌ„ in no stead at all to prove them superior or distinct from Presbyters by any diuine institution and other Antiquity making for them I find not extant That Presbyters and Bishops by Gods law and Ordination are both one and the same of equall authority and jurisdiction as all these authorities resolve I shall undeniable manifest by this one Argument Presqyters by the expresse resolution of the Scripture have the very name and not so onely but the very office of Bishops Act. 20.17 28. Pâ—â—l 1 1 1. Tim. 3 1â— to 5. Tit. 1 5. to 1â— the same mission and commission the same function charge Ordination and quallification Matth. 28.19.20 1 Tim. 3 1. to 7. c. 4.14 c. 5 17. 2 Tim. 4.1 2 1 Pet. 5 1 2 3. Tit. 1 5. to 12. neither doth the Scripture in any place make any differeÌ„ce distinction or superiority between them or attribute any power to the one that it doth not to the other â—s the premises evidence and Matth. 20 25.26 27 28. Mar. 10 42 43 44 Luk. 22.25.26 Therefore by Gods law and institution they are one and the same and of equall authority power and jurisdiction in all things As for that distinction in power precedency and jurisdiction whiâ—â— hath since been made between them it hath proceeded partly from Canons and constitutions made by Bishops themselves p partly by meer usurpation and encrochment but principally from the grant and largenesse of Christian Princes who as they erected Bishoprickes and Diocesse