manner He took the Cup saying this Cup is the new Testament and Covenant in my bloud drinke yee all hereof and as oft as you eat of this Bread and drink of this Cup you shew the Lords death till he come saith the Apostle Paul 1 Cor. 11. Moreover Christ chose twelve Apostles in Analogie to the twelve Patriarchs that like as the whole people of God under the Law did proceed out of the loynes of the twelve Patriarchs so also Gods children under the Gospel should be begotten by the Ministery of the twelve Apostles and their Successors Hee chose also seventy Disciples in Analogie to the seventy Elders of the Iews whom Moses elected to govern the people of Israel under himselfe so our Saviour would have those seventy Disciples and their Successours to be spirituall Governours of the people of God under the Gospell Moreover Christ fasted forty days in the wildernesse in reference to Moses fasting forty days upon Mount Sinai Christ entred into his Ministery in the thirtieth yeare of his age in similitude of the Priests and Levits entring in their severall Functions So that there is nothing more probable in the Scriptures then that as Christ by way of Analogie did imitate the Iews in many things so also would hee have as many degrees of Church Governours under the Gospell as there was under the Law and that he would be chief Governour himself of both Churches But that ye may believe the truth of these things the better I will let you see that the Apostles also followed the example of their Master in the imitation of the Iews in many things As in the use of Lots conforme to the ancient custome of the Iews Matthias is chosen to be an Apostle so also they continued the use of an holy Kisse at their meetings yet if they had been as precise as many people now adays they would have abolished that Ceremony because Judas betrayed his Master with a Kisse and gave it in Commandement Greet one another with an holy Kisse saith the Apostle Paul so also the use of Love-feasts proceeded from the Jews for as after their Sacrifices they feasted one another so after the celebration of the Lords Supper they had their Agapae and Love-feasts which the Apostle Paul did not discharge but forbad them in publike and licentiates them in their own private families Have yee not Houses to eat and drinke in or despise yee the Church of God saith he The day of Celebration of the Sacrament of the Supper was ever a Festivall day to them but not a day of fasting as it is with many now So also the Custome of laying on of Hands was borrowed from the Jews Numb 8. in these and some other formes and Ceremonies the Apostle did imitate the Nation of the Iews but let these serve for an example The Primitive Church also followed the example of Christ and his Apostles in this Analogizing and in particular as in the Consecration of Priests some pieces of the Sacrifices were put in the Priests hands Exod. 29.9 Even so they put the Bible in the hands of the Minister at his Ordination this was done both by the Jewish Church and the Christian to teach both That no man taketh this honour unto himselfe but hee that is called of God so also they erected a Mother-church wherever there was a Bishop even as the Iews had but one Mother-church the Temple of Ierusalem because they had but one High Priest and therefore in respect that Bishops succeeded in the room of the High Priest in the government of the Church where ever there was a Bishop there they built a Mother-church and all the rest of the Churches of the Diocesse were but pendicles of her as the Jewish Synagogues were to the Temple of Ierusalem yea these Mother-churches they built them according to the similitude of the Temple of Jerusalem for as the Temple had the Most holy Place Holy place and atrium called the Court of the Temple or Sal. porch this for the people the Holy place for the Priests and the Most holy place for the Lord of Hosts to be as it were the place of his habitation to dwell between the wings of the two Cherubims there to give his Oracle even so in the Christian Churches there was a place appointed for the people another for Churchmen the third as the most holy place where the Sacrament of the Supper was celebrated as the onely memoriall of his presence left by himselfe under the new Testament as the Arke of the Covenant was under the Old So then since both the Apostles and the Churches of Christ in the Primitive Times did imitate the Iewish formes by way of Analogie it seemes to mee that in so doing they followed the example of Christ who kept an Analogie himselfe with the Iewish Church in many things but in speciall in the number and degrees of Church Governours Now I would ask my Authour by what reason hee thinks Christ should have diminished the number of Church Governours was the number of three Typicall or was the Church Government Typicall truly neither the number of three is mysticall indeed but not Typicall neither was the Government Typicall but as necessary now under the Gospel as it was under the Law for as Christ did not governe his Church immediatly by his spirit under the Law so no more doth he governe his Church immediatly by his spirit under the Gospel but as he committed the government to certain Governours under the Law so hath he committed it to certain Governours under the Gospel But it may be answered that he hath not committed it to so many degrees of Church Governours now under the Gospel as he did under the Law I perswade my self that my opponent shall never be able to prove that Christ behoved to doe this de jure or shew mee a reason why it behoved to be so yes hee will say of necessity the first degree behoved to be taken away because the High Priest was a type and figure of Christ and all types and figures were abolished by Christs comming Reply I grant all types and figures were abolished by Christs comming but I deny that the High Priest was a type and figure of Christ as he was chiefe Governour of the Church and that for these reasons First because then all Church Government should have beene abrogated by Christs comming for if Aarons Government was a type and figure of Christs Government then it will follow that Christ now under the Gospel should governe his Church immediately by himself without any subordinate Governours for if Church Government under the Law was typicall and all types abrogate it follows necessarily that there should be no Church Government now but Christs only Secondly If Aaron as hee was chiefe Governour under the Law was a type and figure of Christ then it will follow that Christ was not Supreame Governour of his Church under the Law for Types are of things to come
power of ordination Timothy and Titus are commanded to Ordaine Elders And therefore Tim. and Tit. had the power of Ordination The Proposition cannot in reason be denied for Paul would never have commanded them to do that which they had not power to doe yea the same power of ordination is a part of that Commandement which he is bidden commit to faithfull men to be kept and propagated untill the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ The Assumption is manifest 1. Tim. 5.22 and Tit. 1.5 That they had the power of jurisdiction is proved thus They who are commanded to rebuke censure and correct with all authority and not suffer themselves to be despised to stay foolish questions and vain bablings to excommunicate the obstinate to try and prove those who desire the office of a Bishop and either to admit or reject them according to their weakenesse or ability have the power of jurisdiction spirituall But Timothy and Titus are commanded to do all these things 1 Timothy 4.11 12. 1 Tim. 3.9.17.19.20 1 Tim. 6.17 Tit. 1.11.13 and Tit. 3.10 And therefore Timothy and Titus have the power of jurisdiction spirituall The strength of this Argument I refer to the consideration of the learned for I hope no wise man will say that these priviledges can bee divided from the power of jurisdiction Now I will use one Argument yet to prove that Timothy and Titus had the power of ordination and jurisdiction jointly If those Bishops of whom the Apostle Paul speaks in his Epistles to Timothy and Titus received the power of ordination and jurisdiction by those instructions and precepts which the Apostle Paul sets downe in those Epistles then Timothy and Titus much more received the power of ordination and jurisdiction by those instructions of the Apostle Paul set downe in those Epistles But the first is true and therefore the second is true also The connexion of the proposition is valid enough for if inferiour Bishops whom the Apostle calleth also Elders in that place received the power of ordination and jurisdiction as is asserted by all the opposers of Episcopacie by the Apostles injunctions in those Epistles much more have superiour Bishops as Timothy and Titus were this twofold power by those injunctions this is an argument strong enough ad hominem although I confesse That properly Timothy and Titus have not this twofold power here by the Apostle Paul but only are commanded to put that power in execution which the Apostle Paul before had conferr'd upon them at their ordination which also they are commanded to propagate and transmit unto others for the preservation of the calling and propagation of the Gospell of Christ vntill his second comming to judgement Now for the better cleering of this Doctrine I will prove That Presbyters or inferior Bishops have no ways the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction I desire any Opponent to shew mee the place where it is recorded in the Scripture in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus they find it not Tim. and Tit. are commanded to put all the parts of the Apostolicall power in execution but not those Elders and Deacons of whom the Apostle speakes there they get no Commandement to use that power for it is more then evident That all the injunctions set down in those Epistles are given to Timothy and Titus and all those who were to succeed them in that same order and degree yea to them as they are singular men and as Superiour in Order and Degree to all those towards whom they are to exercise that power and the reason is this because one man in that same Order and Degree cannot have power over an other in that same rank and order one Bishop cannot have power over an other one Presbyter cannot have power over another That man that hath power over an other must be superior unto him in degree or he can have no authority over him that is his own properly delegate he may have but that is not his it is his in whose name he exercises that power But it will be replied That this power is given to a company of Presbyters and not to one in particular Answer This power is given here to Timothy and Titus as singular persons and therefore I will make the matter manifest by a formall argument That power which is committed to certain particular and singular men in the Ministery is not committed to a representative body of Ministers But the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction is committed to certain particular and singular men in the Ministery And therefore it is not committed to a representative body of Ministers The proposition cannot be denied for that which is committed to one singular man in a calling cannot bee said to bee committed to the whole company and trade indefinitely for example that power which is committed to one Alderman in the Citie to wit the Master or Lord Major is not committed to the whole councell of Aldermen he hath a different and superiour power to all the rest As to the assumption That this power was committed to certain singular men as to Timothy and Titus and all those who were to succeed them in the same ranke and order it is more then evident Now to note this by the way since Presbyters doe not succeed to Timothy and Titus in that same order and degree the power of Ordination cannot be committed unto them Furthermore If the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction be committed to Presbyters as they are singular men then every Presbyter hath alike power and authoritie within his own Charge every one is Pope in his own Parish and may command rule and governe as hee thinks good for who can controll him none of his brethren have any more power over him then hee hath over them for every one hath equall power and authoritie transinitted unto them and this is downright Brownisme But it may be replyed That the Presbytery hath power over all particular Ministers Answ Who hath given them this power It is not given them by Christ nor his Apostles If you reply it is agreed upon by common consent I Answer Then at least Presbyteriall Government is not of divine Ordination But I would ask this question what if I should refuse to give my consent to such a government or to subject my self to it how can I be forced to obey their Canons and Laws by whose authoritie the representative Church such as the Presbytery is cannot compell me before I subject my selfe to her authoritie the civill Magistrate cannot do it neither by the doctrine of all my opposites and some would say if any should usurpe authoritie and compell by violence it should be the destroying of our Christian Libertie and tying us whom Christ hath made free and in a word the demolishing of that platforme of government which Christ himselfe did establish any defender of Parochiall government may reason in this kind But it will be againe replyed That this authoritie is given to a
company of Presbyters Acts 8.14 and 11.22 and 15.6 7 8. to the 30. and 1 Cor. 5.3 4 5. Answer These things were done in the infancie of the Church before the Government was established and so can be no rule for after ages some will so answer I answer further there is not a word there that will confirme Presbyteriall government for none of the meetings spoken of in those places consist of persons having the like and equall authoritie but all that was done in them was done by Apostolicall power by the power of the Apostles they were convened together by the Apostles moderation those meetings were governed by their authoritie all things were concluded they had full and absolute power in their own hands although it pleased them to do nothing without the consent of their Brethren of an inferiour Order yee will find all that I have said true if yee will be pleased to see the places But most cleerly it appeareth 1 Cor. 5.3 4 5. where the Apostle by his power and authoritie coÌ„mandeth the Corinthian Ministers to excommunicate the incestuous person in an open assembly or rather to intimate that excommunication which he had already pronounced for thus he speaketh For I verily as absent in body but present in spirit have judged alreadie as though I were present concerning him that hath done this deed In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ when ye are gathered together and my spirit with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ to deliver such an one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus I hope this meeting was enjoyned by the Apostle upon an extraordinary occasion nothing was done but by his speciall appointment Here is nothing to warrant the authority of Presbyteriall Government there seems something to be in the words for Parochiall If there had been Parishes and Lay-elders in those days and truly if I were not of that judgement That the Calling of the Apostles were an ordinary Calling and to be continued with the same latitude of power and authoritie in their Successors untill the end of the World I might easily be moved to approve of Parochiall Government but never of Presbyteriall and truly if the Callings of the Apostles and Evangelists be not acknowledged to be instituted by Christ for the perpetuall Government of Gods Church Parochiall Government is that which hath greatest shew of warrant in the Scriptures as for Presbyteriall it hath not so much as any shew at all in the whole book of God Now follows that I cleere the doubts and first I know it will be objected That by this doctrine I condemne all the Churches of Christ that are governed after that manner Ans I condemne not the Churches but the Government Some perhaps may reply That since I make Episcopal government to be Christs institution I charge them with a very grosse errour I answer Let them see to that I cannot call evill good nor good evill unlesse I make my selfe lyable to the curse pronounced neither will any thing excuse them except necessity for both Gods Law and mans Law doth dispence with it but because there is no necessitie let men beware for Ego liberavi animam meam Furthermore it will be alleaged That Timothy and Titus and the Bishops of old were not like our Bishops They had not that power and authoritie nor that Lordly Government that Bishops have now They were not Barons Lords Earles Princes in such kind as they are now They had not power over the bodies and estates of offenders as Bishops have now They might not punish with the Civill Sword as well as the Spirituall Ans In Episcopall Government there are two things The one is Spirituall and de jure divino by divine right The other is Civill and de dono humano of humane gift and by the donation of Kings and Princes That is their Civill Honour their Civill Power their Temporalities their Revenues as to be Barons in Parliament to judge in causes Temporall to inflict temporall punishment all these they have by the free gift of Kings and Princes and many Kings have been very liberall in this kind to Churchmen and not without warrant from God neither according to that of the Apostle The Elders that rule wel are worthy of double honour and in speciall they that labour in the Word Doctrine 1 Tim. 5. And why should any man be offended to see Honor given to Church-men May not Kings and Princes give honour to any subject they please or are not Churchmen capable of Civill Honour and Power now under the Gospell aswell as they were under the Law As to the first I think no man will deny but Kings and Princes may advance such of their Subjects as they please it is their speciall prerogative I make no question of it And truly I see no more reason that any man should make question of the other but that Churchmen are as capable of Civill Honour and Power now under the Gospel as they were under the Law it is forbidden in no part of the New Testament I am sure hath God forbidden Ministers to give their advice to Kings and Princes for the better correcting of Vice and Sin and for managing all things in the State so that God thereby may be the more glorified and the Kingdome of Jesus Christ advanced or hath God forbidden Princes to crave their advice It was well said of a Divive That it is well with the Church when godly Prophets hang as precious Earings at the Princes eares Erasmus said well in an Epistle to Iohn Alasco If we had moe Bishops like Ambrose we should have more Emperours like Theodosius But I would aske any man this question Have not Christian Kings as great need of the concurrent Counsell and Assistance of the Governours of the Church now as the Kings of Israel had under the Law and was there ever any religious King among the Iews who had not conâ—inually the High priest to second him in all his affaires was not Aaron next unto Moses was not Eleazar next unto Iosua Had not David Zador and Abiather continually in his company Was not Azariah next unto Salomon and did not Ioash that which was right in the sight of the Lord as long as Iehoida lived and was not Hilkia chief Counsellour to Iosia and Amaria chief Judge under Jehosaphat Truly I hold this for a sure ground That what ever was done under the Law not being commanded by God then it is as lawfull for us now under the Gospell to doe the same except it be forbidden us and wee need not doubt but it will be as well approved by God now as it was then But which is more yet If any thing be commanded by God under the Law which is not ceremoniall and typicall it is then much more lawfull I think for us to do now Did not the Lord himselfe command the people of
chiefly to the twelve and caused him to descend visibly even to the view of all the beholders upon their heads in the likenesse of cloven tongues of fire which for any thing we read he did not to the seventy In the thirteenth of the Acts Verse 1. we may behold this distinction with our eyes where Barnabas Simeon Lucius Manaen and Saul are called Prophets and Teachers and not Apostles for I thinke as yet Saul was not joyned to the number of Apostles at least hee was not accounted one so Paul makes this distinction when he takes to himself the honour to plant the Gospel and to lay the foundation and makes Apollos a waterer only and a builder upon the foundation Paul plants saith hee Apollo waters but God gives the increase 1 Cor. 2.6 Moreover Acts 8. we see a manifest distinction in Philip the Evangelist who converted the Samaritans and baptized them but Peter and John behoved to be sent out of Ierusalem to lay on hands and conferre the Holy Ghost but my opponent may say that Philip was a Deacon and one of the seven mentioned Acts 6. I answer we read of Philip the Apostle and of Philip the Deacon and why not a third Philip an Evangelist read Acts 21.8 he that was Deacon was there after advanced to be an Evangelist Alwayes wee gaine thus much that Deacons must preach and administer the Sacrament of Baptisme and therefore they are not Lay-men That Deacons are not Lay-men but Preachers and a third order of Church Governours it is evident Acts 6. for as soon as there was any need of men of that office that was when the number of the Disciples was multiplied they were chosen and elected by the Apostles yea they were elected too before the Apostles went out of Jerusalem separated themselves to preach the Gospell to all Nations for they behoved to be helpers of the Apostles and to assist them in the work of Ministery to have a care of the poore under them and to baptize new converts at their command that so the Apostles might give themselves to prayer and the Ministerie of the Word Acts 6.4 The truth of this may be seen Acts 10.48 where the Apostle Peter gives commandement no question to the Deacons to baptise Cornelius and those who were with him so we may see 1 Cor. 1. that the Apostle Paul attributes the care of Baptisme to others then the Apostles where he saith that hee was not sent to Baptize it being chiefly the charge of the Deacons but to preach the Gospell not that he might not baptise for wee see the contrary in the words but because the Apostles gave themselves chiefly to Prayer and the Ministery of the Word and committed the care of Baptisme to the Deacons and the administration of the Sacrament of the Supper to the Evangelists called hereafter Elders as may be gathered out of 1 Cor. 10.11 We see also Col. 1.1 a manifest distinction between Bishops and Deacons for the Apostle writes to them as their chiefe Bishop and Overseer for as yet the Apostle reserved the chief care of that Church to himself although some think that Epaphroditus was chief Bishop of that place howsoever we see two Orders here of Church-men and I hope none will deny but the Apostle was in order and degree above them we see them also made mention of in the Epistles of Paul to Timothy and Titus over whom Timothy and Titus are placed as their chiefe Governours so that it is more then evident that Christ and the Apostles continued three Orders of Church Governours under the Gospell But I know that it will be objected that there should be but two Orders of Church Governours now under the Gospel because Christ himselfe appointed but two Apostles and Evangelists both of them called at first Disciples only distinguished by their number twelve and seventie Answ Christ appointed but two indeed because hee supplyed the room of the High Priest himself neither would hee have any more during his own Ministery he was chiefe Governour of the Church himselfe and hee would have no Suffragans as long as he lived Where the King is present himself he needs not a Commissioner nor a Vice-roy Again had Christ chosen three Orders in his owne time then there should have been foure Orders of Church Governours all the while of Christ his Ministery upon earth First Christ himselfe for I hope no man will refuse Christ for one and for the chief too and the other 3 ordained by Christ Now our blessed M. Saviour because he would keep Analogie so farre as I can conceive with the number and degrees of Church Governours under the Law he would choose but two and leave the third to be added by the Apostles after his departure which they did with all diligence as we may see Acts 6. That our Saviour used this analogie in this I will prove by other particulars wherein he observed the like analogie and first in the number of the Sacraments as his Father appointed but two under the Law Circumcision and the Paschall Lambe so hee appointed but two under the Gospell Baptisme and the Supper of the Lord the one to succeed in place of Circumcision the other in place of the Paschall Lambe And againe as Circumcision did represent unto us the guilt of sin so our Saviour would have Baptisme to represent to us remission of sins And as the Passeover represented to the people of Israel their bodily deliverance from the bondage of Egypt so our Saviour would have his last Supper to represent to us our spirituall deliverance from the bondage of sin and Satan When our Saviour instituted Baptisme hee devised no new Ceremony but took that Ceremony of Washing which the Jews used in their Purification appointed it to represent our spirituall washing from sin So likewise in the Institution of the other Sacrament hee did not devise any new Ceremony to represent his Death and Passion but took the last part of the Paschall Supper and appointed it for that usâ—e The custome of the Iews was after the Supper was ended and the Paschall Lambe caten hee that was Master of the Feast tooke as many pieces of bread as there were people present at the eating of the Lamb and there behoved to be between the number of ten and the number of twenty for there might not be fewer then ten nor more then twenty and gave every one a piece saying these words This is the bread of affliction which your Fathers eat in the wildernesse and thereafter hee took the Cup and gave it to them saying This is the cup of affliction which your Fathers dranke in the wildernesse Now our Saviour Christ reserved the same Ceremony for the Text saith that first he took bread and after that He had given thanks he brake it and gave to every one a portion and said This is my body which is broken for you Doe this in remembrance of mee And in like