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
Clergy for Order and seemly Government there was always one Principal to whom by long use of the Church the name of Bishop or Superintendent hath been applied which room Titus exercised in Creta Timothy in Ephesus and others in other Places Therefore altho' in the Scripture a Bishop and an Elder is of one Order and Authority in Preaching the Word and Administration of the Sacraments as Hierom doth often confess yet in Government by ancient use of Speech He is only called a Bishop which is in the Scriptures called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 12.8 1 Tim. 5.17 Heb. 13.17 that is Chief in Government to whom the Ordination or Consecration by Imposition of hands was always Principally committed and which most ancient Form of Government when Aerius would take away it was noted amongst his other Errors Hitherto Dr. Fulke so as hereby I trust it may appear to Master Cart-wright's Reproach and to all their Shames that shall pretend any Authority from the ancient Fathers to impugn the Right Honourable and Lawful calling of Bishops not Parsons in every Parish but Bishops in their Diocesses and Provinces appointed in the Apostles times for the right Order and Government of the Church of Christ So far Rancroft who introduceth these three great Men's Authority to countenance the Presidency or Chiefty of the Bishop over Presbyters in Government as Apostolical tho' Fulke goes no higher than the Custom of the Church agreeing with Jewel and Whit gift and it must be observed that they make not the Bishop to be a distinct Order from that of Presbyters nor deny the Presbyters to be Pastors nor affirm the Invalidity of the Presbyterial Ordination only that the Ordination by Imposition of hands was Principally committed to the Bishops and as Archbishop Spotiswood reports Bancroft held the Ordination only by Presbyters to be valid and lawful Histor Church of Scotland lit 7. p. 514. Spotiswood has it in these words A Question was moved by Dr. Andrews Bishop of Ely touching the Consecration of the Scottish Bishops who as he said must first be Ordained Presbyters as having received no Ordination from a Bishop The Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Bancroft who was by maintained That thereof there was no necessity seeing where Bishops could not be had the Ordination given by Presbyters must be esteemed Lawful otherwise that it might be doubted if there were any Lawful Vocation in most of the Reformed Churches This applauded to by the other Bishops Ely acquiesced and at the day and in the place appointed the three Scottish Bishops were consecrated CHAP. V. The Learned Hooker and Bishop Bilson's Opinion impartially stated differing but little from Saravia and Bancroft THE Learned and Judicious Hooker seems also to be of the same mind with Saravia and Bancroft for in his Third Book it 's only Polity in the general that in his Opinion is necessary to the several particular Churches For Lib. 3. Sect. 1. p. 66. Edit 61. saith he even the several Societies of Christian Men unto every of which the name of a Church is given with addition betokening severally as the Church of Rome Corinth Ephesus England and so the rest must be endued with correspondent general Properties belonging unto them as they are Publick Christian Societies And of such Properties common unto all Societies Christian it may not be denied that one of the very chiefest is Ecclesiastical Polity Which word I therefore the rather choose because the name of Government as commonly Men understand it in ordinary speech doth not comprize the largeness of that whereunto in this Question it is applied For when we speak of Government what doth the greater part conceive thereby but only the exercise of Superiority peculiar unto Rulers and Guides of others To our purpose therefore the name of Church-Polity will better serve because it containeth both Government and also whatsoever besides belongeth to the Ordering of the Church in Publick Neither is any thing in this degree more necessary than Church Polity which is a form of Ordering Publick Spiritual Affairs of the Church of God. Thus Hooker looks on Polity to be necessary to the Church and why necessary but because God himself is the Author of it It is not possible that any Form of Polity much less of Polity Ecclesiastical should be good Lib. 3. §. 2. unless God himself be Author of it Those things which are not of God saith Tentullian they can have no other than God's Adversary for their Author Be it whatsoever in the Church of God if it be not of God we hate it But then he distinguished between what is of God by the Law of Nature and the Revelation made of the Divine Will in Scripture Of God it must be either as those things sometimes were which God supernaturally revealed and so delivered them unto Moses for Government of the Commonwealth of Israel or else as those things which Men find out by help of that Light which God hath given them unto that end The very Law of Nature it self which no man can deny but God hath instituted is not of God unless that be of God whereof God is the Author as well this latter way as the former The Controversie between Hooker and the Old Nonconformists was Whether any particular Form of Polity be so of God that it be set down in Scripture and the Noncons asserted That no Form of Church Polity was lawful Ubi supra or of God unless God be so the Author of it that it be also set down in Scripture Hooker on the contrary That he which affirmeth Speech to be necessary amongst all men throughout the World doth not thereby import that all men must necessarily speak one kind of Language Even so the necessity of Polity and Regiment in all Churches may be held without holding any one certain form to be necessary in them all so far He who doth moreover thus reason with the Noncons You should tell us plainly whether your meaning be that it must be there set down in whole or in Parts For if wholly shew what one form of Policy ever was so your own to be so taken out of Scripture you 'l not affirm neither do you deny that in part even this which you so much oppugn is also from thence taken Again you should tell us whether only that be taken out of Scripture which is actually and particularly there set down or else that also which the general Principles and Rules of Scripture Potentially contain The one way you cannot so much as pretend that all the Parties of your own Discipline are in Scripture and the other way your mouths are stop'd when you would plead against all other Forms besides your own seeing the general Principles are such as do not particularly prescribe any one but sundry may equally be consonant unto the general Axioms of the Scripture After the most impartial Enquiry this Learned Man's Judgment about
the Word Administring the Sacraments Imposing of Hands and guiding the Keys to shut or open the Kingdom of God. The first two must be general to all Pastors and Presbyters of Christ's Church but so do not the other two I have largely debated and made it plain as well by the Scriptures as by other Ancient Writers past all Exception there have always been selected some of greater Gifts than the Residue to succeed in the Apostles Places to whom it belonged both to moderate the Presbyters of each Church and to take the special Charge of Imposition of Hands and this their Singularity in Succeeding and Superiority in Ordaining have been observed from the Apostles times as the Peculiar and Substantial marks of Episcopal Power and Calling The Power of the Keys and Right to Impose Hands by which he always means the Power to Ordain Ministers and Excommunicate Sinners belong unto the Bishop distinguishing him from a Presbyter What the things are Chap. 12. p. 208. which must abide for ever in the Church I shewed before it shall suffice now to rehearse them namely Power to Preach the Word and Administer the Sacraments the Right use of the Keys and Imposition of Hands These four parts for Brevities sake I often reduce to two Branches which are Doctrine and Discipline comprizing in Doctrine the Dividing of the Word and Dispensing of the Sacraments and referring the rest I mean the Publick use of the Keys and Imposition of Hands to the Discipline or Regiment of the Church The Discipline and Government of the Church I mean the Power of the Keys Ch. 12. p. 213. and Imposing of Hands are two parts of Apostolick Authority which must remain in the Church for ever These Keys are double the Key of Knowledge annexed to the Word the Key of Power referred to the Sacraments Some late Writers by urging the one abolish the other howbeit I see no sufficient Reason to countervail the Scriptures and Fathers that Defend and Retain both The Key of Knowledge must not be doubted of our Saviour in express words nameth it Wo be to you Interpreters of the Law for ye have taken away the Key of Knowledge The Key of Power standeth in these words of Christ to Peter I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven c. And likewise to all his Apostles Whatsoever ye bind on Earth P. 218. c. It resteth in this place to be considered to whom those Keys were committed whether Equally to all Presbyters or Chiefly to Pastors and Bishops The like must be done for Imposition of Hands whether that also pertain'd indifferently to all or specially to Bishops This is the State of the Point in Controversie namely Whether the Power of the Keys and that of Imposition of Hands belong Equally and Indifferently to all Presbyters and Bishops or whether they do not belong chiefly and specially to Bishops But whether the one or the other be affirm'd 't will unavoidably follow that these Powers in a sense belong to both Thus much is supposed in the very state of the Question which is not whether these Powers do not at all belong to Presbyters but whether they do belong so much to Presbyters as unto Bishops so that the holding them to belong chiefly and specially unto the Bishop implies that they do tho' in a lesser Degree belong unto Presbyters They appertain both to the Presbyter and Bishop but not Equally to the Bishop chiefly and specially Now Conform hereunto the Learned Bilson saith The Bishop then or President of the Presbyters for I stand not on Names Ch. 14. p. 293. while I discuss their Powers is by Christ's own Mouth pronounced to be the Angel of the Church that is the Chief Steward over God's Houshold and Overseer of his Flock And touching the Presbyter's Power P. 319. He adds That at first the Presbyters sate with the Bishop as Assessors and Consenters before Synods undertook such Causes But after when once Councils began to have the Hearing of Grievances then sate the Presbyters with the Bishop only as Beholders and Advisers of his Judgment The Private use of the Keys in appointing Offenders upon the Acknowledging their Sins P. 317. for a time to forbear the Lord's Table we deny not to Presbyters However the Ambiguity of the Name of Bishop and Community of many things incident and appertinent both to Bishops and Presbyters urged him to lay down certain Peculiar Marks and Parts of the Bishop's Office whereby they are always Distinguished from Presbyters and never Confounded with them either in Scriptures Councils or Fathers There were many Prerogatives says he appropriate unto the Bishop Ch. 13. p. 244. by the Authority of the Canons and Custom of the Church such as Reconciling of Penitents Confirmation of Infants and others that were Baptized by Laying on their Hands Dedication of Churches c. But the things Proper to Bishops which might not be Common to Presbyters were Singularity in Succeeding and Superiority in Ordaining These two the Scriptures and Fathers reserve only to Bishops they never Communicate them to Presbyters The Singularity of one Pastor in every place preserveth the Peace and Unity of the Churches and stoppeth Schisms and Dissentions for which Cause they were first Ordained by the Apostles 246. This is a certain Rule to Distinguish Bishops from Presbyters the Presbyters were many in every City of whom the Presbytery consisted Bishops were always Singular that is one in a City and no more except another intruded which the Church of Christ counted a Schism or else an Helper were given in respect of extream and feeble age in which case the Power of the latter ceased in the presence of the former And this Singularity of one Pastor in each place descended from the Apostles and their Scholars in all the famous Churches of the World by a Perpetual Chair of Succession and doth to this day continue but where Abomination or Desolation I mean Heresie or Violence interrupt it The second assured sign of Episcopal Power is Imposition of Hands to Ordain Presbyters and Bishops for as Pastors were to have some to assist them in their Charge which were Presbyters P. 248. so were they to have others to succeed them in their Places which were Bishops And this Right by Imposing Hands to Ordain Presbyters and Bishops in the Church of Christ was at first derived from the Apostles unto Bishops and not unto Presbyters and hath for these fifteen Hundred Years without Example or Instance to the contrary till this our Age remained in Bishops and not in Presbyters Jerom where he retcheth the Presbyters Office to the uttermost of purpose to shew that he may do by the Word of God as much as the Bishop he excepteth this One Point as unlawful for Presbyters by the Scriptures Quid facit Exceptâ Ordinatione Episcopus quod Presbyter non
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
Holy Sacraments c. Moreover in the Close to the Reduction the Primate and Dr. Holdsworth aver That the Suffragans mentioned in the second Proposition may lawfully use the Power both of Jurisdiction and Ordination according to the Word of God and the Practice of the Ancient Church who yet are but the Chorepiscopi of no other Order than the Presbyters as hereafter I shall prove A Declaring therefore thus much namely That the Presbyter is of the same Order vested with the Power both of Order and Jurisdiction and an entrusting them with the Exercise thereof as in the second Proposition will contribute very much towards a well Established Comprehension And in Requital it 's not to be doubted but the Latitudinarian Nonconformist of which there are a great number in this Kingdom will readily yield to the Presidency of one Presbyter for the sake of Union to be over them and close with what the Archbishop further adds Archbishop Of the many Elders who in common Ruled the Church of Ephesus there was one President whom our Saviour in his Epistle to this Church in a peculiar manner stileth the Angel of the Church of Ephesus Revel 1. and Ignatius in another Epistle written about twelve years after unto the same Church calleth the Bishop thereof Betwixt the Bishop and the Presbytery of that Church what an Harmonious Consent there was in the Ordering of the Church-Government the same Ignatius doth fully declare by the Presbytery which St. Paul understanding the Community of the rest of the Presbyters or Elders who then had a hand 1 Tim. 4.14 not only in the Delivery of the Doctrine and Sacraments but also in the Administration of the Discipline of Christ for further proof of which we have that known Testimony of Tertullian in his general Apology for Christians Ibidem etiam Exhortationes Castigationes censura Divina nam judicatur magno cum pondere ut apud certos de Dei conspectu summum summumque futuri Judicii praejudicium est si quis ita deliquerit ut à Communicatione Orationis Conventus omnis sancti Commercii relegetur praesident probati quique Seniores honotem istum non pretio sed Testimonio adepti Tertul. Apologet. c. 39. In the Church are used Exhortations Chastisements and Divine Censure for Judgment is given with great advice as amongst those who are certain they are in the sight of God and it is the chiefest foreshewing of the Judgment which is to come if any man have so offended that he be banished from the Communion of Prayer and of the Assembly and of all Holy Fellowship The Presidents that bear Rule therein are certain approved Elders who have obtained this Honour not by Reward but by good Report who were no other as he himself intimates elsewhere but those from whose hands they used to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist Nec de aliorum manibus quà m Praesidentium sumimus Id. de Corona Militis c. 3. For with the Bishop who was the Chief President and therefore stiled by the same Tertullian in another place * Dandi quidem Baptisini habet jus Summus Sacerdos qui est Episcopus dehinc Presbyteri Diaconi Id. de Baptis c. 17 Summus Sacerdos for distinction sake the rest of the Dispensers of the Word and Sacraments joyned in the Common Government of the Church and therefore where in Matters of Ecclesiastical Judicature Cornelius Bishop of Rome used the received Form of gathering together the Presbytery Omni actu ad me perlato placuit contrahi Presbyterium Cornel. apud Cypr. Epist 46. of what persons that did consist Cyprian sufficiently declareth when he wisheth them to read his Letters to the flourishing Clergie Florentissimo illic clero tecum praesidenti Cypr. Epist 55. ad Cornel. which there did Preside or Rule with him The presence of the Clergie being thought to be so requisite in matters of Episcopal Audience that in the fourth Council of Carthage it was concluded Ut Episcopus nullius causam audiat absque praesentia Clericorum suorum alioquin irrita crit sententia Episcopi nisi Clericorum praesentia confirmetur Concil Carthag IV. cap. 23. That the Bishop might hear no mans cause without the Presence of the Clergie and that otherwise the Bishop's Sentence should be void unless it were confirm'd by the Presence of the Clergie which we find also to be inserted into the Canons of * Except Egberti c. 43. Egbert who was Archbishop of York in the Saxon times and afterwards in the Body of the ‖ 15. q. 7. c. nullus Canon Law it self True it is that in our Church this kind of Presbyterial Government hath been long disused yet seeing it still professeth that every Pastor hath a Right to Rule the Church from whence the name of Rector also was given at first unto him and to Administer the Discipline of Christ as well as to Dispense the Doctrine and Sacraments and the Restraint of the Exercise of that Right proceedeth only from the Custom now received in this Realm no man can doubt but by another Law of the Land this hindrance may be well removed And this Ancient Form of Government by the united Suffrages of the Clergy might be reviv'd again and with what little shew of Alteration the Synodical Conventions of the Pastors of every Parish might be accorded with the Presidency of the Bishops of each Diocess and Province the indifferent Reader may quickly perceive by the perusal of the ensuing Propositions I. In every Parish the Rector or incumbent Pastor together with the Church-Wardens and Sides-men may every Week take notice of such as live scandalously in that Congregation who are to receive such several Admonitions and Reproofs as the Quality of their Offence shall deserve And if by this means they cannot be reclaimed they may be presented to the next monthly Synod and in the mean time debarr'd by the Pastor from Access unto the Lord's Table Notes The Name Rector which signifieth a Governour or Ruler was anciently given in common to Prelates Bishops Abbots and Parish-Presbyters but chiefly to the Parish-Priest or Parson that had Cure of Souls as DV FRESENE observes out of the Lombardian Laws Rectores Ecclesiarum Praelati Episcopi Abbates Parochiarum Presbyteri in lege Longob l. 3. tit 1. Sect. 42. tit 10. Sect. 4. In Capitularibus Carol. M. lib. 3. tit 75. c. Maxime Rector Ecclesiae qui vulgo Curio seu Curitus ut in Charta Alaman 43. apud Goldastum DV FRESNE Glos in verb. Rector and Charles Great 's Capitulars and the Almaine Charter Lindwood also in his Provincial Constitution declares the same Communiter loquendo per ipsorum Rectorum intelligas de Rectoribus Ecclesiarum Parochialium Potest etiam intelligi de omni Praelato Ecclesiae Lindw de Consu c. nullus ver nullus Rector ver Ipsorum Rectorum and * Vid. Cowel's Interpreter in Verb. Rector
facit And whereas 't is objected That Imposition of Hands was by the Presbytery he answereth out of Chrysostom that by the word Presbytery in that place of Scripture must be understood Bishops not Presbyters because Presbyters in the Apostles time did not impose Hands on a Bishop All that we can say for the Power of Bishops above Presbyters out of the Scriptures P. 299. is this That the Holy Ghost by the mouth of St. Paul hath given the Bishop of each Place Authority to Ordain such as be worthy to examine such as be faulty and Reprove and Discharge such as be guilty either of Unsound Teaching and Offensive Living Thus much he saith to Timothy and to Tite and in them to their Successors and to all other Bishops of Christ's Church for ever The Power of Ruling the People is not solely but chiefly in the Bishop P. 304. My meaning says he is soon understood You establish one Chief in your Presbyteries by God's Essential and Perpetual Ordinance to execute that which you decree whom you call a President How far I joyn with you you shall quickly perceive To avoid Tumults and Dissentions God hath Authorized One in each Place and Church Able to have and maintain a Presbytery who with Pastoral and Fatherly Moderation should Guide as well the Presbyters that assist him as the People that are Subject to him according to the Laws of God and Man the Execution whereof is Chiefly committed to his Charge that is the Leader and Overseer of the rest whom we call a Bishop His Power I call a Moderation and not a Domination because the Wisdom of God hath likewise allowed and provided Christian means as well to Bridle him from wrongs as to Direct him in Doubts And whereas the Nonconformist tells him that this is right the Power which they give to their Presbyteries his Answer is Did you not put Lay-Men instead of Pastors to be Presbyters and make them Controulers where they should be but Advisers your Presbyteries might have some use in the Church of God tho' far less now than when they first began And amongst the many uses of Presbyteries P. 307. the Bishop is Positive That at first lest the Bishops only will should be the Rule of all things in the Church the Government of the Church was so proportioned that neither the Presbyters should do any thing without their Bishop nor the Bishop dispose Matters of Importance without his Presbytery He distinguisheth between the Private use of the Keys in Refusing to give the Lord's Supper unto the Impeninent and the Publick use of the Keys whereby the obstinate Person is excluded from all Fellowship of the Faithful as well Sacred as Civil The first belongs to the Presbyter the last was by the Church of God allowed always and only to Bishops So in another place P. 320. For our parts tho' we take the Power of the Keys to be Common to all that have Pastoral Charge of Souls in their Degree yet to avoid the infinite Showers of Excommunication which would overflow all Churches and Parishes and the intolerable Quarrels and Brabbles that would ensue if every Presbyter might Excommunicate without the Bishops consent and Licence we praise the Wisdom of God's Church in suffering no Inferiour to Excommunicate without the Bishop's consent and Licence Thus far this Learned Bishop who urgeth the singularity of Succession and Superiority in Ordination to be the Essential Marks of a Bishop as he differs from a Presbyter yet not divesting the Presbyter of all Governing Power in the Church of Christ His Pleading for a Superiority of Power in the Bishop carries in it the grant of a lesser degree of the same Power as belonging to the Presbyter and the denying Presbyters the Exercise of this Power without the consent of the Bishop is but by an Ecclesiastical Constitution such as that which makes the Reconciling Penitents and Confirmation to be rather Peculiar to the Bishop for the Honour of his Calling than for any Necessity of God's Word Thus I have gone through the Principal Writers about Church Government that were in Queen Elizabeths Reign namely Alley Bishop of Exeter Pilkington Bishop of Duresme Jewel Bishop of Salisbury and Whitgift Archbishop of Canterbury who held that according to the Scriptures there was no Difference between a Presbyter and a Bishop that in Scripture account their Office and Powers were the same and that the Apostles did not leave behind them any one kind of Church Government to be observed throughout all the Churches at all times These were followed by Dr. Cosins Dr. Low and Bishop Bridges The Learned Willet in his Synopsis Papismi a Book Published at least three or four times in Queen Elizabeths Days and afterwards by King James his Special Command doth in most things agree with the Bishops but now mention'd and being more particular than they affirming out of Jerom That Confirmation and Ordination were appropriated to the Bishop rather for the Honour of their Priesthood and the Peace of the Church than by necessity of any Law the same he saith of the Jurisdiction of the Church adding That anciently there were no distinct Consecrations of Bishops The thing wherein he may be supposed to differ from them is that an Inequality amongst the Presbyters and the Presidency of some one above the other for Orders sake he holds to be Apostolical but herein differs not from the Old Nonconformists After these I have given the Judgments of Saravia Archbishop Bancroft the Judicious Hooker and Bishop Bilson who affirm the Government of the Church to be Apostolical Tho' formerly 't was esteemed dangerous to the Civil Government to hold that Church Government must now be the same 't was in the Apostles days yet it 's look'd on by these as what ought to be The Government of the Church with them is a Divine and Apostolical Institution but not Vnalterable Bilson I confess says it is Perpetual and yet Bishop * Downame Defence of his Sermon p. 26. who most willingly and gladly professeth to consent in Judgment with Him P. 2. doth solemnly Declare in these words That although he holds the Calling of Bishops in respect of their first Institution to be an Apostolical and so a Divine Ordinance yet that he doth not maintain it to be Divini Juris as intending thereby that it is Generally Perpetually and Immutably necessary as though there could not be a True Church without it And within a few Pages after this He declares his Opinion to be the same with King James's who doth say That it is granted to every Christian King Prince and Commonwealth to prescribe to their Subjects that Outward Form of Ecclesiastical Regiment which may seem best to agree with the Form of their Civill Government but so as they swerve not at all from the Grounds of Faith and True Religion This saith Downame maketh not against the Government of Bishops as I maintain it Tho'
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
that whosoever as the worthy Lord Keeper Bacon observ'd in those days pretended a little spark of Earnestness he seemed no less than red fire hot in comparison of the other And as some fare the worse for an ill Neighbour's sake dwelling beside them so did it betide the Protestants who seeking to curb the the Papists or reprove an idle Drone were incontinently branded with the Ignominious note of Precisian all which wind brought plenty of water to the Pope's Mill and there will most Men grind where they see Appearance to be well served So far Sir Robert Cotton And as the disgracing Godly-Ministers by fastning the names of Puritan Precisian c. on 'em and the laying 'em aside from the publick exercise of their Ministry did in the Reign of Elizabeth give life to Popery so 't will still and all those Protestant Ministers that are now denied entrance into the Parish Churches will be in disgrace amongst the People and their Ministry not half so successful amongst those that mostly need it The wider therefore the Church Doors are made the greater will be the number of Pious and Painful Preachers the greater the Advantage on Truth 's side and the greater Discouragement on the other hand But that the Door may be made wide enough to answer the desired End seeing our Governours are inclin'd to lay aside the strict use of Ceremonies with some more offensive Impositions there is this one thing to wit The Ordering and Declaring the Government of the Church to be now no other but what it was held and intended to be by the first Reformers will as I humbly apprehend be the most Effectual Expedient of any else in the World. Some of our Clergy have Notions about Church-Government very Dissonant from what the Gentry and Parliament Men have and the first Reformers heretofore had and it 's feared by some thinking Persons that the Laws yet in Being have Established a Government in the Church very different from what the Legislators I mean the King the Temporal Lords and Commons generally designed The Government settled in the Church by the first Reformers and still supposed by our Gentry to continue is consistent enough with the Church state of all other Protestants but that which is really Established by Law is Inconsistent with and Destructive of it driving many Learned Godly Protestant Divines from that Conformity which is at this time made necessary to the Exercise of their Ministry in Parish Churches To clear thus much is methinks one of the most necessary things to be attempted and the very next step to be taken towards the setling a Comprehension which will be of validity with Judicious Men. What were the Sentiments of the First-Reformers about Episcopacy and Church Government during Queen Elizabeths Reign I will with the greatest impartiality declare as near as possibly I can in their own words and add some Arguments to shew that the most effectual way to settle such a Comprehension as will best secure the Protestant Religion is the Forming and Framing the Government of the Church according to the Sentiments of our First-Reformers which in the Learned Archbishop Vsher's Reduction of Episcopacy I take to be very happily copied out unto us I will begin with those who liv'd in Henry the Eighth's days for then began the Reformation CHAP. I. The Sense of our First Reformers in Henry the Eighth's Days IN this King's Reign Tindall Lambert and Barnes Men of good Learning and blessed Martyrs sealing the Truths they professed with their Blood struggled strenuously for a Reformation of Church Government Tindall looking on Corruptions in Discipline to be a principal occasion of that greater Deluge of Enormities in the Church presseth for a Reduction of all things in the Discipline to the Apostolical Institution and therefore makes Enquiry after those Officers the Apostles Ordained in Christ's Church and what their Offices were and gives us an account of his Perswasion of it thus Wherefore the Apostles following and obeying the Rule Tindall's Practice of Popish Prelates Doctrine and Commandment of our Saviour Jesus Christ Ordained in his Kingdom and Congregation TWO OFFICERS one called after the Greek word Bishop in English an Overseer which same was called Priest after the Greek Elder in English because of his Age Discretion and Sadness for he was as nigh as could be always an Elderly Man. And this Overseer hath put his hands unto the Plough of God's Word and fed Christ's Flock and tended them only without looking to any other Business in the World. Another Officer they chose and called him Deacon after the Greek a Minister in English to Minister the Alms of the People unto the Poor and Needy For in the Congregation of Christ love maketh every Man's Gifts and Goods common to the Necessity of his Neighbour There is Presbyteros called an Elder by birth Tindall on the word Elder which same is called immediately a Bishop or Overseer to declare what Persons are meant They were called Elders because of their Age Gravity c. and Bishops and Overseers by reason of their Offices And all that were called Elders or Priests if they so will were called Bishops also tho' they have divided the names now which thing thou mayst evidently see by the first Chapter of Titus and the twentieth of the Acts. Those Overseers which we now call Bishops after the Greek word were alway biding in One place to Govern the Congregation there But Deacons were Overseers of the Poor and crept not into Orders till the Church grew rich Lambert is of the same Opinion As touching Priesthood saith he in the Primitive Church Ach. Mon. Vol. 2. when Vertue bare as ancient Doctors do deem and Scripture in mine opinion recordeth the same the most room there were no more Officers in the Church of God than Bishops and Deacons that is to say Ministers as witnesseth besides Scripture full apertly Hierome in his Commentaries upon the Epistles of Paul whereas he faith That those we call Priests were all one and no other but Bishops and the Bishops none other but Priests Men ancient both in Age and Learning so near as they could be chosen Neither were they Institute and chosen as they be now adays with small regard of a Bishop or his Officer only apposing them if they can construe a Collect. To conclude I say the Order or State of Priests and Deacons was Ordained by God. The Sixth Article against Dr. Barnes was That he declared himself thus I will never believe nor yet can I ever believe that one Man may be by the Law of God a Bishop of two or three Cities yea of an whole Countrey for it is contrary to St. Paul which saith I have left thee behind to set in every City a Bishop And if you find in one place of Scripture that they be called Episcopi you shall find in many that they be called Presbyteri I was saith he brought before my Lord Cardinal
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
of strength enough to invalidate an Original any more than the Vulgar or any other Translation of the Bible can blast the Reputation of the Originals either of the Old or New Testament What hath been already urged about de Marca's disgust against 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Thorndike's quarrel with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a sufficient Answer to his Third Argument For if the Canon hath any meaning be it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or be there an Omission of this Expression it cannot but be granted that before this Council the Chorepiscopi did Ordain Presbyters and Deacons without the City-Bishop's leave and afterwards with it To the Fourth that the Council of Laodicea did many Years after this make the same Provision hath nothing of Argument in it to prove That the Council of Ancyra did so long before Laodicea's doing It now seeing it 's not by way of confirmation of an anteceding Decree is a sufficient intimation that Ancyra did it not However seeing Thorndike will provoke us to consult this 56th or rather 57th Canon of Laodicea to it we will go which on a diligent search we find to run thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hervetus renders it thus Quod non oportet in vicis pagis Episcopos constitui sed Periodeutas hoc est Circumcursentores Dionysius Exiguus Quod non oporteat in Villulis vel in Agris Episcopos constitui sed Visitores Isidore Mercator thus Non oportet in Villis vicis Episcopos Ordinari sed Visitatores i. e. qui Circumeant Constitui No Bishops ought to be appointed in the Countrey Towns or Villages but Visitors Neither of these take notice of the Various Reading for it may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so be thus translated For the future there shall not be Ordained in Countrey Places any Bishops or Periodeutae or Visitors making the Periodeutae and Countrey Bishops the same as De Marca though he observes not this various Reading does Vnde Constanter asserere audeo eundem esse Chorepiscopum Periodeutum and as the same De Marca further observes these Periodeutae were only Presbyters as in the 4th Action of the Council of Chalcedon mention is made of Alexander Presbyter and Periodeuta and in the 11th Action of Valentine Presbyter and Periodeuta whence I infer that it 's clear from this and the following parts of the Canon that till this Council Presbyters were not so very much under the Power of the Bishops but could act according to their own discretion without consulting the City-Bishops The Canon is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and thus rendred by Hervetus Eos autem qui prius constituti fuerunt nihil agere sine mente Episcopi qui est in Civitate clearly enough insinuating that until this Council the Chorepiscopi the Periodeutae who were but Presbyters did act in the Country as they judged meet without consulting the Bishop of the City and it 's well known that their work was to Ordain Presbyters Deacons c. Thus much may suffice to vindicate what we have drawn from the Council of Ancyra to establish the Power of the Chorepiscopi who agreeably enough to the 13th Canon of this Council might exercise Episcopal Jurisdiction in their own Precinct without the leave of the City-Bishop and with his Permission they might do so out of their own Charge even in the City To proceed it 's very clear that long after this time yea long after Damasus this Severity against the Chorepiscopi and Leo the Third's Attempt to suppress and banish them when Charles the Great sent Arno Invavensis to know the mind of his Holiness about them they continued in the Exercise of their Office governing the Country-Churches ordaining Presbyters c. And altho' Hincmarus as Baluzius in de Marca out of Flodoardus his History observes De Marca de Concord lib. 2. c. 13 14. wrote bitterly against those City-Bishops that had 'em in their Dioceses Fbodoard Hist Remenf lib. 3. c. 29. yet Rabanus Maurus pleads as warmly in their Defence In Histor Lansiaca apud Palladium c 106. Legimus Elpidium Monachum Presbyterum ordinatum à Timotheo Chorepiscopo Chorepiscopos in Ecclesiis vacantibus innuit Hugo Flaviniac an 776. Bercarius in Hist Episcop Verdanensium n. 13. Post hunc Episcopatus istius Ecclesiae per 12. annos vacuus extitit sed quidem servus Dei Amalbertus nomine juxta morem illius temporis Chorepiscopus factus ipsam regebat Ecclesiam For all these see Du Fresne's Glossary ver Chorepiscopus and they were continued in France and elsewhere Elpidrus a Monk was or dained Presbyter by Timothy a Country Bishop Amalbertus a Chorepiscopus governed the Church of Verdun during a Vacancy of twelve years consecrated Churches confirm'd Children c. as may be seen in Rudolphus his Life of Rabanus Maurus and in De Marca That the Chorepiscopi did exercise the Episcopal Power altho ' they were but Presbyters may plainly be seen in the Decrees that were against 'em interdicting their presuming so to do for time to come 'T was this that fill'd the Soul of Damasus 1. Vid. Epist 5. Damasi 1. Prospero Numidiae primae sedis Episcopo Leoni reparato c. with so much indignation against them that they being but Presbyters presumed to discharge the Episcopal Office And for this very reason it was that Leo the Third in Answer unto the Question mov'd by Charles the Great condemn'd them to Banishment as may be seen in the select Ecclesiastical Capitula of Charles the Great where it 's very clear that tho' the French Prelates mitigated somewhat of the Rigour of the Pope's severe Decree against them yet concurr'd so far with him as to Ordain that the country-Country-Bishops do no more enter on the Execution of the Episcopal Office ita ut amplius nihil de Cpiscopali ministerio praesumerent and they decreed That no country-Country-Bishop presume by Imposition of Hands to give the Holy Ghost to any or Consecrate any Priest Levite or Subdeacon And tho' these Capitula do null and make void all the Ordinations and Consecrations of the Chorepiscopi Nicholas the First doth ratifie and confirm them Vide. Epist 15. Nichol. 1. Tit. 1. as may be seen in his Epistle to Radolfus and thus he did for the very Reason the Capitula as well as Leo and Damasus did damn them Damasus says that they are the same with Presbyters because they are instituted according to the Form of the Seventy Disciples who were never vested with Jura Episcopalia Tit. 4. c. 3. so Leo and the select Capitula of Charles the Great the Chorepiscopi are not Chief Priests nor Bishops neither do any of the Episcopal Rights belong unto them seeing they were instituted according to the Form of the Seventy for which
cause let no one say Et ne alicui talis Ordinatio vel Confirmatio aut Consecratio Reiteratio esse videatur That when any of those who have been Ordained by the Chorepiscopi are afterwards Ordained by the City-Bishop that they were Re-ordained but let 'em attend that Saying Quod non ostenditur gestum ratio non sinit ut videntur iteratum And Pope Nicholas 1. gives this as a Reason why he judges their Ordination valid The Chorepiscopi were such as the Seventy sent out by our Lord Jesus who without doubt were vested with the Episcopal Power But tho' these Papal Determinations are different yet they agree in witnessing to this Truth That the Chorepiscopi exercis'd Episcopal Authority De Marca proves the same out of the Arabian Canons translated by Alfonsus Pisanus and from the last words of the Canon of Antioch Dr. Parker himself makes no doubt of it for says he That these Chorepiscopi had the Character of Proper Bishops Parker's Account p. 154. appears plainly from the tenth Canon of Antioch that allows them to Ordain the inferiour Officers of the Church This of Bishop Parker doth exactly agree with the 55. Chapter of Nice as translated out of Arabick by Turrianus the Jesuit When the Chorepiscopus visits the Churches and Monasteries under his Power let him gather together the Elders of Castles and expound unto 'em the Holy Scriptures and enquire whether they have any Sons or Daughters and give order that they be brought unto him that he may sign 'em pray over them impose Hands on 'em bless and institute Ministers that is say the Notes on this Chapter Lectores Exorcistae Hypodiaconi And that these Chorepiscopi were but of the same Order with Presbyters and were no otherwise Bishops than as all other Presbyters are is as clear for their Ordination was by one Bishop only not by three and when they entred on the Exercise of the Episcopal Power they had no new Consecration as may be seen in the 54. Chapter of Nice translated out of the Arabick where Turrianus renders it thus Et debet Episcopus vid. Civitatis recitare super electum scil Chorepiscopum Orationem consuetam Chorepiscopus non ordinabatur sed per oraticnem benedicebatur Benedicere illi dareque illi nomina omnium Ecclesiarum Monasteriorum qua sub Potestate ejus sunt The Notes on this Chapter have it that they were not consecrated anew to the Office of a Country-Bishop but only by the Prayer of the City-Bishop blessed Damasus 1. expresly affirms them to be but Presbyters in these words Quod ipsi iidem sunt qui Presbyteri sufficienter invenitur quia ad formam exemplum septuaginta inveniuntur prius instituti The select Capitula of Charles the Great concurring with Leo the Third Tit. 4. c. 3. and speaking of the Episcopal Rights say the same Haec verò non à Presbyteris vel Chorepiscopis qui ambo unius formae esse videntur Besides such were some of the Ancient Canons decreeing that there should be but one Bishop in a Diocess and he only in the City that made it necessary for some of those who anciently would have the Bishops to be of an Order superiour above Presbyters to hold that these Chorepiscopi tho' they had the name of Bishop given 'em and were vested with the Jura Episcopalia were but Presbyters usurping on the Episcopal Office so Damasus Leo and many French Bishops in Charles the Great 's days and it hath also put some later Writers such as Bellarmine Boverius in his Paraenetic Censure of de Dominis Archbishop of Spalato's Book de Rep. Eccles and De Marco to phansie that some made Chorepiscopi were formerly Consecrated to the Episcopal Dignity and that others were but Presbyters and thus by distinguishing the Office from the Person they hoped to extricate themselves but as Dr. Parker well observes Pag. 158. This is precariously said without any shadow of Pretence for it but meerly to salve his own Hypothesis Others Thorndike of Rights of Church p. 146. such as Thorndike are driven to the Invention of another Distinction which is between the Solemnity which an Act is executed with and the Power and Authority by which it is done And that it cannot be prejudicial to any Power to do that by another which seemeth not fit to be immediately and personally executed by it Some Acts of the Primitive Church seem to require this Distinction as the making of Presbyters by the Chorepiscopi or Countrey-Bishops mentioned in the ancient Greek Canons Which by all likelihood were not properly Bishops because not Heads of a City-Church which is the Apostolical Rule for Episcopal Churches Thus Thorndike who differs greatly from the generality of his Brethren who hold that though the Potestas Jurisdictionis may be delegated to one that is not a Bishop yet the Potestas Ordinis cannot However it must be acknowledged that there is a great difference between a Presbyter's Ordaining other Presbyters with the leave of the Bishop and his doing it by a Power derived from the Bishop One vested with a Power may not be able to exercise it without the leave of another and yet when he hath leave he then exercises a Power inherent in himself virtute officii The Bishops themselves cannot exercise the Power of Orders without the leave of the Supreme Civil Magistrate and now that they do exercise it 't is with his leave but it does not therefore follow that the Power of Orders is derived from the Supreme Magistrate to the Bishop In the Council of Ancyra it 's not said That the Presbyter shall not Ordain Presbyters unless the Bishop delegates unto him a Power enabling him so to do but he shall not exercise this Power without the consent of the Bishop which was enjoyned by the Canon to prevent Schisms and Divisions in the Church So that I cannot see how this Distinction of Thorndike so applauded by Dr. Parker can help ' em To press this yet further Henry the Eighth's Suffragans were consecrated Bishops and had the same Power virtute officii that any other Bishop receiv'd at his Consecration but may not exercise it unless by Commission from the City-Bishop But when they did exercise the Episcopal Authority was it by a Power receiv'd at their Consecration and inherent in them or by a Power deriv'd unto 'em from the City-Bishop by Commission 'T was by the former no doubt why else were they consecrated If then this Commission given by the City-Bishop to the Suffragan limiting the Exercise of his Power doth not infer that the Suffragan did not act by a Derived Power much less can these Words Let not the Chorepiscopus Ordain Presbyters or Deacons without the consent of the City-Bishop imply that the Chorepiscopus deriv'd the Power of Ordaining from the City-Bishop The Bishop of Lincoln can't Ordain Priests or Deacons in Westminster-Abby without the leave of the