Office not upon Jus Dominicum the Law of God in the Scriptures but Ecclesiasticam consuetudinem the practice of the Church Add hereto that both Fathers and Councils equally in Opinion and Practice stuck no less to the lawfulness of Patriarchat than that of simple Episcopacy and yet I believe few among real Protestants will either assert the Divine Right of this Office of Patriarchat i. e. that it had any Warrant for it in the Word of God or yet that those Fathers and Councils so believed Which present Consideration furnisheth us with another Argument sufficient to evince that the ancient Châ—rch founded this Office only upon Custom and as they thought Christian Prudence and not at all upon the Books of the Old and New Testament § 2. Neither do the most Learned of the Modern Episcopals in the least swerve from this Opinion amongst whom I reckon D. Forbes who having for a while with the greatest tenderness and fear handled this Matter propones at length the Question If Episcopacy be of Divine Right And yet declares himself highly difficultated what to Answer for absolutly deny it he will not and positively assert it he dares not he therefore confounds it with a Synodical Moderatourship and then fairly tells us that it is of Divine Right because of the general Scripture-Precepts of Church-Order and Decency And indeed he carries himself all along in this Matter with so much nice Caution Ambiguity and Fear that he evinces the desperation of the Episcopal Cause to which so learned a Man could afford no better Defence than really to destroy what he pretends to vindicat Neither is the most Learned Bishop Vsser of another mind who has reduced it to a meer shadow and nonentity And Willet though he says that a difference is needfull for Church-Policy yet affirms that this cannot be proved by the Word of God and that in the Apostles times a Bishop and Presbyter were neither in Name nor Office distinguished And he at large answers all Bellarmine's Arguments to the Contrary See the Appendix to the second part of the forecited Question Of this same Judgement is their applauded Hooker viz. that there is no ground for their Hierarchy in the word of God while he declares himself against all particular Forms of Church-government and acknowledges that nothing for Diocesan Prelacy can be brought therefrom The necessity of Policy saith he and regimen in all Churches may be held without holding any one certain Form to be necessary in them all And the general Principles are such as do not particularly prescribe any one but sundry Forms of Discipline may be equally consonant unto the general Axioms of Scripture It hath been told them that Matters of Faith and in general Matters necessarie unto Salvation are of a different Nature from Ceremonies Order and the kind of Church-Government that the one are necessar to be expresly contained in the Word of God or else manifestly collected out of the same the other not so that it is necessarie not to receive the one unless there be something in Scripture for them the other free if nothing be alledged against them And the Learned D. Stilling fleet is at no smal pains to cashier and expunge among the rest of peculiar Forms of Government This Diocesan Prelacy out of Scriptural-Articles and not only acknowledges but also musters not a few Arguments whereby to Prove that it hath no Ground in Holy Scripture And Dr. Morton Though a zealous Defender of Episcopacy Asserts that Hierome made not the Difference between Bishop and Presbiter of Divine Institution he assâ—nts to Medina the Jesuite and asserts that there was no Difference in the matter of Episcopacy betwixt Hierome and Aerius He averres further that not only the Protestants but also all the primitive Doctors were of Hierome ' s mind And finally he concludes that according to the Harmonious Consent of all Men in the Apostolick Age there was no Difference between Bishop and Pesbyter but was afterward introduced for the removal of Schism And Jewel Bishop of Sarisburie a Man for Piety and Ability Second I am sure to few that ever filled an Episcopal Chair most expresly asserts the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter Here saith he Mr. Harding findeth great fault for that I have translated these words ejusdem Sacerdotii of the same Bishoprick and not as he would have it of one Priesthood God wott a very simple Quarrel Let him take whether he listeth best if either-other of these words shall serve his turn Erasmus saith id temporis idem erat Episcopus Sacerdos Presbyter these three Names viz. Bishop Priest and Presbyter at that time were all one And but what meant Mr. Harding here to come in with the Difference between Priests or Presbyters and Bishops Thinketh he that Priests and Bishops hold only by Tradition Or is it so horrible an Heresie as he maketh it to say that by the Scriptures of God a Bishop and a Priest are all one Or knoweth he how far and unto whom he reacheth the Name of an Heretick Verily Chrysostom saith Inter Episcopum Presbyterum interest ferme nihil between a Bishop and a Priest which is all one with Presbyter in a manner there is no difference St. Hierome saith somewhat in a rougher sort Audio Quendam c. I hear say there is one become so Peevish that he setteth Deacons before Priests that is to say before Bishops whereas the Apostle plainly teacheth us that Priests and Bishops be all one Thus far Jewel The Bishops and Priests saith the famous Bishop Cranmer were at one time and were not two things but both one Office in the beginning of Christ's Religion And In the New Testament he that is appointed to be a Bishop or a Priest needeth no Consecration by the Scripture for Election or Appointing thereto sufficient In the same MS. saith Dr. Stillingfleet it appears that the Bishop of St. Asaph Therleby Redman and Cox were all of the same Opinion with the Arch-Bishop that at first Bishops and Presbyters were the same and the two latter expresly cite the Opinion of Jerome with Approbation Thus we see by the Testimony chiefly of him who was Instrumental in Our Reformation that he owned not Episcopacy as a distinct Order from Presbytry but only as a prudent Constitution of the Civil Magistrat for the better governing in the Church And having proved that Whitgift and with him the whole Body of the English Episcopal Divines were of the same Judgement thus concludes By which Principles the Divine Right of Episcopacy as founded upon Apostolical Practice is quite subverted and destroyed Now judge if Dr. Sandersone spoke not without the allowance ye acontrary to the express Mind of his Brethren when he says that the Difference among the Advocats for Episcopacy is only Verbal and that all of them even those who yeeld that it is not of Divine Right no less
fourth or the time of the fifth Century to prove a Metropolis in the first let any-one judge that doth but consider how common a thing it was to alter Metropoles especially after the new Disposition of the Roman Impire by Constantine Yea Carolus à sancto Paulo who was most versant in these Matters and with him Dr. Stillingfleet believe that for the first six Centuries Philippi was no Metropolis § 4. But I will not enlarge in overthrowing a Fancy so wild and gross But in the end of the second Century saith Dr. Burnet the Churches were framed in another mould from the Division of the Empire and the Bishops of the Cities did according to the several Divisions of the Empire associat in Synods with the chief Bishop of that Division or Province who was call'd the Metropolitan from the Dignity of the City where he was Bishop And hence sprang Provincial Synods and the Superiorities and Precedencies of Bishopricks You see how the chiefest of Prelatists disown and disclaim this Metropolitan Fiction but none more fully than Dr. Stillingfleet who has nervously baffl'd all their Pretences prevented whatsoever Dr. Maurice advanced for I speak not of Mr. Clerkson who has also sufficiently done it and finally more particularly ruined all their Pretexts for Philippi's Metropolitan-ship either in a Civil or Ecclesiastick sense during the first Century or Apostolick age Judge therefore of Dr. Maurice his Candor which minds me of another piece of his Legerdemain to evite the force of Philippians 1. 1. For if saith he in Mr. Clerkson ' s Opinion the Bishops mention'd Philip. 1. 1. be no other than Presbyters then this place is impertinently alledged since many Presbyters are by all sides acknowledg'd to have belong'd to one Church but if he speak of Bishops in the common Ecclesiastical sense and then conclude from this Passage that there were many in the Church of Philippi his Opinion is as singular as that of Dr. Hammond which he endeavours to refute for my part I must profess I am not concern'd in this Dispute and I could never find reason to believe them any other thing than Presbyters Or were these Bishops only Presbyters ruling the Church of Philippi with common and equal Authority Then our Author must give up the Question and in stead of making many Bishops must own that there was none at all there but Presbyters only if he thus contend he will abuse his Reader with the ambiguity of a word which he takes in one sense and the Church in another That many Presbyters might belong to one Congregation none ever deni'd that many Bishops in the allowed and Ecclesiastical sense of the word had the oversight of one City sounds strange and incredible to the ancient Christians Where he sleely supposes as granted that Bishops in Philip. 1. 1. must either be understood of their simple Presbyters or of Diocesan Bishops and then equipps his horn'd Argument no other ways than if he had professedly declined all Dispute till once his Adversary had out of kindness yeelded the Question which is only about the Scriptural and Apostolick sense of the word and notion of the Office of a Bishop if that and the Office of a preaching Presbyter be not in Scripture one and the same and consequently if these at Philippi were not Scriptural Bishops no less than they were Presbyters Now that he concern'd not himself in this Dispute nor was in earnest in it I deny not his slippery dealings make it but too too apparent his simple intimation that these were only their simple Presbyters I pass having already blown off all their noticeable Depravations of Philip. 1. 1. I have yet mett with and observe that he following the Romanists insinuats that we cann't understand the Scripture's meaning untill we have their Churches Commentary His ambiguous and unhandsome conduct is no less apparent in these his Phrases common Ecclesiastical sense which he takes in one sense and the Church in another For either he may mean that the Church when she speaks of Bishops who were in after times understands by this Name only Diocesans and so touches not in the least contrary to what he insinuats the Churches received sense of this Text nor what Notion she had of Scriptural-Bishops Or his sense may be that when she speaks of Apostolick and Scriptural Bishops she then still means Diocesans and Rulers over their simple Presbyters and this he must mean if he speak to the Purpose And then I inquire what Church was of this mind Surely neither Primitive nor reformed Churches I except not that of England whose greatest Lights we have already heard disclaiming all Divine Right of Diocesan Episcopacy and identifying Bishop and Presbyter Yea many even of the Romanists are forc'd to confess so much There are Catholicks saith the Jesuite Justinianus who have stuck in the mud of Aërianism The Church then he means must be only a few factious Novelists who in despite of both Divine and Humane Records and the common Sentiment of Christians dare to obtrude on the World as a Fundamental of Religion their privat and wild Fancies Neither is it strange that so few imbrace this conceit of denying the Scripture-Identity of Bishop and Presbyter § 5. For beside these Scriptures now adduc'd let them but look unto 1 Tim. 1. 3. where they shall find a transition from Bishop to Deacons without any mention of intermediant Presbyters and consequently the Identity of these Offices Bellarmine Answers that the Apostle gives a general Instruction to the Clergy that under the name of Bishops Presbyters all the superior Clergy is comprehended But seeing they make a Distinction of these Offices so necessary it was requisite they had been handl'd in particular and not hudl'd up in a general seeing no where in Scripture there 's any more particular Distinction of Bishop and preaching Presbyter assigned but Bellarmine's main Answer to this and all such Scriptures is that the Names Bishop and Presbyter were then common to both Orders which Answer all the Hierarchicks and more particularly D. M. borrow from the Jesuite But I answer and argue with Junius against Bellarmine that seeing the Names were then common and a real community of Names imports a community of things which by these names are signifi'd it necessarily then follows that as the Names were then common so were the Offices design'd by these Names But to see the Reform'd conquering and the Jesuites foil'd some are much pain'd and in special D. M. who spends about 17 pages for the support of Bellarmine's Answer the substance whereof and of his first three Queries is that Still in the Pentateuch the High Priest is nam'd by the same Appellative without any distinction of Order or Jurisdiction that the other Priests were nam'd by and the title of a Priest was promiscuously apply'd without any distinction or marks of Eminence to the High Priest as well as to the Subordinat
never repealed by any succeeding Parliament But we are informed by the same R. Coke d that by the 1. Tac. 25. the Marian Act was repealed and so that of Edward revived And now to see him who pretends to be a Minister of the Gospel whose Office is only Ministerial and spiritual exercised only in spiritual things without reaching Men's Bodies inflicting only Rebukes and such verbal punishments to see such I say keeping Courts altogether Civil and inflicting corporal mulcts and Punishments after the manner of Worldly Potentats but especially when all this is done in their own Name would really make the indifferent Beholder averre that such imitated to the Life his Romish Holiness and believed much better his Doctrine of his receiving both spiritual and temporal Sword than that of our Saviour whereby he prohited his Apostles and their Successours all such earthly Grandure and despotick Power as resembles the Lordship and Dominion of worldly Princes § 3. But their Maxime not only intimats that Prelacy well accordeth with Mouarchy but also that any other Form of Church-government is destructive thereof Which how they will evince I know not How they can shew that Presbytrie with which I am only here concerned is destructive of or in the least inconsistent with Monarchy I cannot perceive They can I am sure neither deduce their Inference from the Practice of Presbyterians nor the Principles of Presbytrie Not from the first for though they load them as if they had been the Cause of many Civil Broyls and Calamities and especially of these ensuing the Year 38. We may justly yea with the allowance of the Hierarchie's greatest Favourers reject the Charge and send it home to the Prelats who by their attempting to introduce into the Church a Mass of Romish Superstitions and their Pride and Tyranny exercised on all sorts were become unsupportable to both Nobility and People B. Laud Montegue and such Papaturients were then earnestly labouring the reintroduction of a Mass of Romish Leaven into England though there were but too much there already which had never been cast â—ut Take one Instance or two in the words of R. Coke a high Church-of-England-man and no Lover of Presbyterians I 'm sure The Bishops saith he of the Province of Canterbury in their own Names enjoin the removal of the Communion-table in the Paroch Churches Vniversities from the body of the Church or Chancel to the east of the Chancel cause Rails to be set about the Table and refuse to administer the Sacrament to such as shall not come up to the Rails receive it Kneeling that the book of Sports on Sundays be read in Churches and enjoin Adoration I do not find that Adoration was ever enjoined before nor any of the forenamed Injunctions in any Canon of the Church Our Bishops were of the same mettal with these Innovatours in England and their most docile Schollars Laud therefore and his Faction apprehending that we would make but a small resistance against them to whom England was likely to yeeld prepared for us all her Cup with some other additional Drugs more Romish than what was obtruded on the English Witness the Form in the Administration of the Sacrament which as R. Coke acknowledges was the same in the Mass. But seeing the knowledge of the state we were in when the Nation entred into a Covenant and opposed that Stream of Romish Abominations contributes not a little to repell their fierce charges of Rebellion and Sedition the Reader will pardon me though at some length I transcribe a Passage from one who is beyond suspicion of being partial in favours of Presbytrie Covenant or ought of that nature I mean Dr. Burnet The Bishops saith he therefore were cherished by him the King viz. with all imaginable expressions of kindness and confidence but they lost all their Esteem with the People and that upon divers Accounts The People of Scotland had drunk in a deep prejudice against every thing that savoured of Popery This the Bishops judged was too high and therefore took all means possible to lessen it both in Sermons and Discourses mollifying their Opinions and commending their Persons not without some reflections on the Reformers But this was so far from gaining their Design that it abated nothing of the Zeal was against Popery but very much hightned the rage against themselves as favouring it too much There were also subtile Questions started some Years before in Holland about Predestination and Grace and Arminius his Opinion as it was condemned in a Synod at Dort so was generally ill reported of in all reformed Churches and no-where worse than in Scotland but most of the Bishops and their Adherents undertook openly and zealously the Defence of these Tenets Likewise the Scotish Ministers and People had ever a great respect to the Lord's-day and generally the Morality of it is reckoned an Article of Faith among them but the Bishops not only undertook to beat down this Opinion but by their Practices expressed their neglect of that Day and after all this they declared themselves avowed Zealots for the Liturgy and Ceremonies of England which were held by the Zealous of Scotland all one with Popery Vpon these Accounts it was that they lost all their Esteem with the People Neither stood they in better Terms with the Nobility who at that time were as considerable as ever Scotland saw them and so proved both more sensible of Injuries and more capable of resenting them They were offended with them because they seemed to have more interest with the King than themselves had so that Favours were mainly distributed by their Recommendation they were also upon all Affairs nine of of them were Privy Counsellers divers of them were of the Exehequer Spotswood Arch-Bishop of S. Andrews was made Chancellour and Maxwell Bishop of Ross was fair for the Treasury and engaged in a high rivalry with the Earl of Traquair then Treasourer which tended not a little to help foreward their Ruine And besides this they began to pretend highly to the Titles and Impropriations and had gotten one Learnmonth a Minister presented Abbot of Lindoris and seemed confident to get that state of Abbots with all the Revenue and Power belonging to it again restored into the hands of Churchmen designing also that according to the first Institution of the Colledge of Justice the half of them should be Churchmen This could not but touch many of the Nobility in the quick who were too large sharers in the Patrimony of the Church not to be very seusible of it They were no less hatefull to the Ministry because of their Pride which was cried out upon as unsupportable Great Complaints were also generally made qf Simoniacal Pactions with their Servants which was imputed to the Masters as if it had been for their advantage at least by their allowance They also exacted a new Oath of Intrants besides what was in the Act of Parliament for obedience to
Feet ye onght also to Wash one anothers Feet that every Apostle yea and every Believer is Lord and Master of the rest § 8. And writing to Euagrius I hear saith Hierome there is one so mad as to preferr the Deacons to the Presbyters that is to the Bishops For seeing the Apostle clearly teaches that Bishops and Presbyters are one and the same how can a Server of Tables and Widows proudly preferr himself to these at whose Prayers the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood is consecrated you will require a Proof hear a Testimony Paul and Timothy to all the Saints in Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons would you have another Example in the Acts of of the Apostles Paul thus speaks to the Presbyters of one Church Take heed to your Selves and the whole Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to Rule the Church c. And that none may contentiously plead that in one City there were many Bishops here also another Testimony wherein it 's most evidently proved that both Presbyter and Bishop were one and the same and then produces the 1 to Titus and 1 to Timothy 4. 8. 14. neglect not with the laying on of the Hands of the Presbytry And 1 Peter 4 and 1. 2 John 1. 3 John 1. And all these to prove that he had undertaken viz that both Bishop and Presbyter were one and the same Now it 's most observable that that he inferrs this Conclusion not only from Scriptures written long after the first Epistle to the Corinthians where it 's said I am of Paul c. but even from the last Epistle of John the longest Liver of all the Apostles And therefore no less notticeable is D. M's extream stubborness and aversion from Truth who would force Hierome to introduce Bishops presently after that Schism mention'd 1 Cor. 1. And accordingly as his bad Cause oblig'd him to do with this and the rest of Hierome's Testimonies wholly smuther'd it And indeed all hitherto who have adventur'd to graple therewith have been conquer'd thereby yea even Bellarmine himself is compell'd to give up the Cause Hierome indeavours saith the Jesuite to conclude the equality of Bishops and Presbyters from the Epistle to Titus to the Philippians and from the Epistles of Peter and John which were written after the first Epistle to the Corinthians Neither can the Jesuite find another way to be even with Hierome but by arraigning him as fraughted with self-repugnancy levity and instability in this Matter and all the Arguments he brings to prove Hierome a Favourer of Episcopacy are only so many fruitless Attempts to make that appear But let us go on with Hierome But saith he the reason why after this viz. the writing of both the Epistles of John one was chosen and set over the rest was that there might be a remedy of Schism least every one drawing the Church of Christ to himself should divide it For in Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist even to Heraclas and Dionysius the Presbyters still gave to one elected from amongst themselves and placed in a higher seat the Name of Bishop as if an Army should creat a General or the Deacons should chuse one of themselves whom they know to be industrious and name him Arch-Deacon On these words D. M. triumphs The Custome was saith he even from the days of St. Mark the Evangelist that a Presbyter was chosen who Governed the whole Society this in the Opinion of St. Hierome cuts off that imaginary Interval wherein the Chruch is said to have been Governed by a Parity of Presbyters Where he forgeth a Gloss no way contain'd in the words of Hierome whose Example of an Army and Deacons are only adduc'd to shew the manner of that Presbyter or nominat'd Bishop's entrance and not at all the measure of his Power over his Collegues And that no Power over the rest can be collected from this place is beyond Scruple clear from Hierome's present Scope who introduces this Ancient Alexandrian Practice to clear and prove the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter which according to him remain'd in the Church for a while after the Writings of John the longest Liver of all the Apostles Had D. M. perused Dr. Stillingfleet he had taught him that both Election and Ordination of this Alexandrian Bishop was only performed by his Fellow Presbyters that the Original of Hierome ' s exsors potestas any Power he mentions in Bishops over Presbyters is by Hierome attributed not to any Episcopal Institution but to the free choice of the Presbyters themselves for what doth a Bishop continues Hierome except Ordination which a Presbyter may not do Here the Jesuites and their Follower D. M. dream they find a fine Distinction made by Hierome between Bishop and Presbyter but first they must make an unseasonable Antiptosis and compell Hierome to speak contrary to the express words of this place which are in the present Tense contrary to the scope and design of this Epistle which is professedly to shew the great Dignity of Presbyters yea even their Identity with Bishops and thereby to reach a sharper reproof to the petulant Deacon And contrary finally to Hierome's most clear and most frequently repeated Doctrine of the Scriptural Identity of both Offices Were it not madness then to dream with the Jesuits that in these words Hierome makes any Distinction between the Scripture Bishop and Presbyter who is here only asserting that in all places Rome excepted where the Presbyters were more depressed and the Deacons more raised than in other Churches even then in his time a Presbyter was allow'd by the Canons and Constitutions of the Churches to do ought that a Bishop might do save Ordination alone This his Design of holding forth the most great dignity of Presbyters yea even their equality with Bishops which Bellarmine acknowledges that he may the better compesce the Insolency of the Deacons Hierome all along this Epistle prosecutes and having again cited the Epistles to Timothy and Titus to prove that a Presbyter is contain'd in i. e. is one and the same with a Bishop otherwayes a Deacon is also in a Bishop and so Hierome had crossed his own Design by the very Argument wherewith he minded to compass it and having added some other Topicks to the same purpose thus concludes his Epistle And that we may know that the Apostolick Traditions are brought from the Old Testament that which Aaron and his Sons and the Levites were in the Temple the Bishops Presbyters and Deacons claim in the Church Nunc animis opus Aenaeae nunc pectore firmo All the Jesuites and their Complices will presently be about our Ears But Solamen nobis Soeios habuisse malorum Their Attaques are no less on Hierome than us wherefore this is one of the chief places brought by Bellarmine to involve Hierome in a maze of self-contradiction and make him propugn Prelacy who is followed by others of the Hierarchicks but
chiefly the Jesuites And lastly in the rear comes D. M. concluding that the Hierarchy of the Christian Church is founded upon Apostolick Tradition and that the Apostles had the Modell of the Temple in their view when they erected this Plat-form But Junius Answers that their Conclusion is a non sequitur For saith he this comparison is not particular between each of these particular Officers under the Old Testament and these under the New but in common shewing that as they are all obliged to serve the Church of the Jews so all the Church-Officers under the New Testament ought to serve the Christian Church Moreover continues Junius tho' we should give that the Comparison were particular yet their Conclusion would not follow seeing Hierome speaks only of the Church Polity of his own time and the Question now is about Hierome's Sentiments of the Church Government and Polity in the Apostolick Age and first primitive Church And that this in Hierome's Mind was not Hierarchick but a meer Parity of Pastors Junius already evinced and Dr. Stillingfleet at more length overthrows this their Jesuitical Doctrine and Demonstrats that by Apostolical Tradition in Hierome only Ecclesiastick Custome of some Antiquity is mean'd asserts that it 's not imaginable that Jerome who had been proving all along the Superiority of a Presbyter above a Deacon because of his Identity with a Bishop in the Apostles times should at the same time say that a Bishop was above a Presbyter by the Apostles Institution and so directly overthrow all he had been saying before The plain meaning continues Dr. Stillingfleet then of Jerome is no more but this that as Aaron and his Sons in the Order of Priesthood were above the Levites under the Law So the Bishops and Presbyters in the Order of the Evangelical Priesthood are above the Deacons under the Gospel For the Comparison runs not between Aaron and his Sons under the Law and Bishops and Presbyters under the Gospel but between Aaron and his Sons as one part of the Comparison under the Law and the Levites under them as the other so under the Gospel Bishops and Presbyters make one part of the Comparison answering to Aaron and his Sons in that wherein they all agree viz. the Order of Priesthood and the other part under the Gospel is that of Deacons answering to the Levites under the Law The Opposition is not then in the Power of Jurisdiction between Bishops and Priests but between the same Power of Order which is alike both in Bishops and Presbyters according to the acknowledgement of all to the Office of Deacons which stood in Competition with them Hereby we see how unhappyly those Arguments succeed which are brought from the Analogy between the Aaronical Priesthood to endeavour the setting up of a Jus Divinum of a paralell Superiority under the Gospel All which Arguments are taken off by this one thing we 're now upon viz that the Orders and Degrees under the Gospel were not taken up from Analogy to the Temple Other passages of Jerome they also study to abuse but these now handl'd are the most specious But of such Allegatâ—ons out of Jerome hear the same Dr. And among all these fifteen Testimonies produced by a learned Writer out of Jerome for the Superiority of Bishops above Presbyters I cannot find one that doth found it upon any Divine Right but only upon the conveniency of such an Order for the Peace and Unity of the Church of God But granting some passages may have a more favourable aspect towards the Superiority of Bishops over Presbyters in his other Writings I would fain know whether a Man's Judgement must be taken from occasional and accidental Passages or from designed and set Discourses which is as much as to ask whether the lively Representation of a man by picture may be best taken when in hast of other business he passeth by us giving only a glance of his countenance or when he purposely and designedly sits in order to that end that his countenance may be truly represented He adds that Jerome in his Commentaries where he expresly declares not his own mind transcribes often out of others without setting down their names c. § 9. Most dishonest therefore is the conduct of the Loyolites and of others of the Prelatists their Associats in this Matter but above all men that of D. M. who beside all this his foul dealling following Bayly the Iesuite has scarce adventur'd to lay before his Reader in â—nglish so much as one scrape or particle of what the Reform'd bring from Jerome against the Romanists and such Hierarchick Advocats which in D. M. is the most certain product of both extream Disingenuity Diffidence But so great is the power of prejudice that they stick not to sacrifice both their Credit and whatsoever else they should reckon most estimable to such Dreams as even most of the Church of England yea and of the Romanists either acted by the love of the Truth or compell'd by its Power had condemn'd We have heard how Bishop Jewel Dr. Morton the Bishop of Spalato and Dr. Stillingfleet renounce and explode so palpable an untruth And Dr. Forbes is of the same Mind yeelding that Hierome is all one with Aërius in this that Bishops by Divine Right are not at all Superior to Presbyters And that these two are intirely of one and the same Mind we have heard also granted by the most learn'd of the Romanists as Alphonsus de Castro and Medina some whereof acknowledge that none could be of another Opinion concerning them And Benedictus Justinianus and other Romanists are of the same Mind How then were all these Doctors sitting in Council to determine of this very Matter should they chastise and brand these most partial and disingenuous Dealers we have now to do with Other Hierarchicks who would not confess so much in plain Terms yet sometimes discover both their disingenuity and true Sentiments so palpably as if they had expresly made the same Confession Dr. Pearson tho' he says nothing in his own Name yet acknowledges that Hierome hath said so much for the Authority of Presbytry and endeavoured so much to establish it that he is judged to make it well nigh equal to the Episcopal Order And Bellarmine tells us that Hierome was self repugnant and knew not what he said And Petavius tho' the most pertinacious wrangler of all the Society grants that Hierome makes Presbyters well nigh all one with Bishops but not the very same saith the Jesuite or intirely their Equalls being Inferior in so much as they want the Power of Ordination And that according to Hierome's Mind meer Custome and not the Lord 's Appointment gave to the Bishops above Presbyters any Power they have either in Ruling the Church or external Government And were things brought to this pass I 'm sure they should make but small account of the sory remainder Petavius makes
hatefull Hypothesis of some giddy Papaturiants which as we have heard even the more candide of the Episcopalls disclaim and explode I shall shut up all concerning Clement with the Suffrages of two illustrious Names neither whereof I 'm sure did ever favour Presbytry I mean Grotius and Stillingfleet Had Episcopacy saith the Doctor been instituted on the occasion of the Schism at Corinth certainly of all places we should the soonest have heard of a Bishop at Corinth for the remedying of it and yet almost of all places these Heralds that derive the Succession of Bishops from the Apostles times are the most plunged whom to six on at Corinth And they that can find any one single Bishop at Corinth at the time when Clemens writ his Epistle to them about another Schism as great as the former which certainly had not been according to their Opinion if a Bishop had been there before must have better Eyes and Judgement than the deservedly admired Grotius who brings this in his Epistle to Bignonius as an Argument of the undoubted Antiquity of that Epistle quod nusquam meminit exsortis c. that Clement no where mentions that singular Authority of Bishops which by Church custome after the Death of Mark at Alexandria and by its Example in other places began to be introduced but Clemens clearly shews as did the Apostle Paul that then by the common Council of the Presbyters who both by Paul and Clement are called Bishops the Churches were governed § 4. I proceed next to the Vindication of Polycarp Subject your selves saith he to the Presbyters and Deacons as to God and Christ and as Virgins walk with a pure Conscience let the Presbyters be simple or innocent mercifull in all things turning all Men from their Errors visiting all who are weak not neglecting Widows Orphans and those that are Poor but alwayes providing such things as are good in the sight of God and Men. Here we learn that the highest Office then in the Church of Philippi was that of a Presbyter and that there was a Plurality to whom the Philippians were to be subjected without the least mention of a particular Bishop governing those Presbyters And which deserves no overly Consideration we here see that as when Clement gives an account of Church Orders he named two only so we have the same number expressed by Polycarp but they altered their Denomination of the former Order and they whom Clement calls sometimes Bishops sometimes Presbyters Polycarp calls still Presbyters It 's most observable also how both Paul and Polycarp subject the Church of one single City Philippi to a Plurality or Multitude of Pastors whom Paul calls Bishops and Polycarp Presbyters From all which the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter most inevitably results § 5. And indeed this Passage of Polycarp so much gravells the Hierarchicks that Dr. Pearson is driven to his last Leggs and compelled to present us with a shift unworthy of its Author Who can prove saith he that the Bishop of Philippi was then alive who can shew us that the Philippians asked not Counsel at Polycarp for this cause that they then enjoyed not a Bishop for thus Polycarp bespeaks them These things Brethren I write not of my self to you concerning righteousness but you have moved me thereunto Thus Pearson and indeed it 's enough here to return the Question inverted who is able to prove if there had been a Bishop in Philippi that he was not alive For seeing he affirms it he or his Advocats are obliged to instruct what they say That which he pretends to from these words of the Epistle wherein Polycarp saith he was moved thereto by the Philippians themselves affords him not the least support there not being therein one syllable concerning the vacancy of the Bishops Seat or the Church Government during this Defect or how to fill the Chair Of all or any of these nec vol◠nec vestigium but only as is evident from Polycarp they seem to have desir'd of him some Direction concerning the blameless walk of any Christian. And indeed the Bishop within a very few lines fairly yeelds the Cause really acknowledging that he had said nothing to the purpose But seeing saith he these things are uncertain we have no certainty from the Discourse of Polycarp Well then it must follow for ought he knew that Polycarp knew no Diocesan Bishop in Philippi that he had never heard of his Death seeing nothing hereof can be gathered from him And that he had never heard of his Life or Being we may well conclude from this that he devolves the whole Church-Affairs upon a Plurality of Presbyters But once again Is it at all credible but that if Polycarp had written to the Philippians after the death of their Bishop and during the vacancy of the Chair he had comforted them after this so considerable a Loss and giv'n them Directions for chusing of a worthy Successor especially if as Pearson would have they had ask'd his counsell concerning this very Matter Had ever a Pastor like Polycarp neglected so seasonable an Office His profound silence therefore of the Death of any such Bishop in Philippi sufficiently demonstrats that this Dr. Pearson's Invention was only the product of a desperate Cause and that there was left here no doore of Escape And here let me observe that Philippi is no less fatal to the Episcopals than its neighbouring plains were to the Pompeians for they are stung and confounded with the very first words of Paul to that Church and as we have heard amongst their other wild shifts they answer that the Bishop was often absent But there was a good number of years between the writing of Paul and that of Polycarp to the Philippians and yet we see the Bishop is never come home Why taryeth the wheel of his Lordship's Chariot Hath he not sped at Court And having supplanted some of the Nobility made a prey of the Office of Chancellour or Treasourer that after so long absence there is no news of his return Nor are we ever like to hear any more of him for now say they he 's dead I had perhaps believ'd them were 't not impossible for one to die who was never alive But enough of this for such Answers would really tempt one to think that their Authors studi'd nothing more than to ridicule their oun Cause and afford Game to their Reader § 6. And here I cann't but nottice the ill-grounded vapouring of D. M. who from the inscription of the Epistle Polycarp and the Presbyters that are with him concludes that he was vested with Episcopal jurisdiction and eminency amongst these Presbyters And so much he pretends to bring out of Blondel as as his forc'd Confession which is so far from being true that it 's brought in by Blondel as an Objection and silly Conjecture of the Episcopals which he diverse ways overthrows And indeed never was there a more wretch'd deduction fram'd
contrary to the holy Canons And thus he acted suitably to his purpose seeing the enslaving the lesser and Country Churches to the Domination of these of the greater Cities made fair way for subjecting all to Rome which on many Accounts was greater than any of the rest He also hereby gratified and much obliged the Bishops of these great Cities who were desirous of nothing more than of Domination and accordingly they even at these times were giving him their mutual help for raising of the Papal Throne yea before the time of Damasus this same Council of Sardica which thought it too vile and base for a Bishop to Dwell out of a great City Decreed also That if any Bishop thought he was injured in any Cause by his Comprovincials and ordinary Judges it should in this Case be lawfull for him to appeal to the Bishop of Rome Let us honour say they the Memory of St. Peter that either these who examined the Matter or other neighbouring Bishops write to Julius Bishop of Rome and if he think it fit then let the Matter be tried and judged again and let him appoint Judges for the Purpose but if he approve of what 's already done and think not fit to call it into Question then the things already done shall be accounted firm and stable Thus these Fathers many whereof otherwise were excellent Men the first I think that ever gave such Deference and Authority to the Pope 't was not therefore incongruous that both of these Decrees should proceed from one and the same Council Hence it 's to be noted that the Tympany of these times had not only exerted it self in separating the things God had conjoin'd and in an holygarchick Confinement of the Power God had given equally to all Pastors unto a few whom they named Bishops a Name also equally belonging to all Christ's Ministers but also in subjecting of the Presbyters yea and even the Bishops of the Countrey to the very Presbyters of the City but much more the Bishops or Pastors of the Countrey to the Bishops of the Cities and these again to the Bishops of the greater Metropolitan Cities and so on till at length not to name the rest of the higher and lower roundles of this Hierarchick Ladder all centred in Rome Yet in these very times it was notwithstanding firmly rooted in Mens Minds that whosoever dispensed the Word and Sacraments and had a Flock or Congregation was a true Bishop as I have made out to be the mind of Hilary and many others of the fourth and fifth Centuries Moreover Optatus asserts that Preaching or Exponing is the proper Province of a Bishop But to proceed these Chorepiscopi or Countrey Bishops of Parish Pastors were in the third Century called absolutely Bishops at the Countrey Places or Villages so speaks the Council of Antioch He say these Fathers i. e. Paulus Samosatenus suborn'd the Bishops of the neighbouring Countrey Villages and Towns as also Presbyters his Flatterers to praise him in their Homilies Dr. Maurice answers that it appears not hence that these were Parish Bishops for Chorepiscopi had many Congregations As if these who dwelt not only in greater Towns but also in the very Countrey Villages which were near to Antioch and near to one another and that even where the far greater part of the Inhabitants were not of their Flocks yea were not at all Christians could be by any in their Wit judged to be any thing else save Parish Bishops or Pastors But let us hear one of the learn'dest of our Adversaries determining the Controversie That saith he which next occurrs to be considered is in what places Bishopricks were founded and Bishops settled We find in all Cities where the Gospel was planted and Churches constituted that Bishops were also Ordain'd Among the Jews wherever there were an hundred and twenty of them together there did they erect a Synagogue and a lesser Sanhedrin the Court of twenty three Judges Compare to this Acts 1. 15. where the number of those that constituted the first Christian Church is the same So it is like wherever there was a competent number of Christians together that a Church was there settled Yet in some Villages there were Churches and Bishops so there was a Bishop in Bethany and St. Paul tells of the Church of Cenchrea which was the Port of Corinth It is true some think that the Church of Corinth mett there Which Opinion he irrefragably Refutes and then proceeds saying Therefore it 's probable that the Church of Cenchrea was distinct from Corinth and since they had Phebe for their Deaconness it 's not to be doubted but they had Both Bishops and Deacons From the several Cities the Gospel was dilated and propagated to the places round about But in some Countries we find the Bishopricks very thick sett They were pretty throng in Asrick for at a Conference which Augustine and the Bishops of that Province had with the Donatists there were of Bishops two hundred eighty six present and one hundred and twenty absent and sixty Sees were then Vacant which make in all four hundred sixty and six there were also two hundred and seventy nine of the Donatists Bishops Thus he And now not to multiply Testimonies in so confessed and plain a Matter it 's most certain that at least for upwards of the three first Centuries you shall not meet with the meanest Dorp or countrey place where there was a Church or Congregation to hear the Word and receive the Sacraments but it had also its proper Bishop I averr no Example to the contrary either has yet no not by Dr. Maurice or any other been or can be brought from the gennine Monuments of these times Yea even from the spurious Writings of Impostures the greatest Adorers of the Hierarchy good proofs of this Truth may be adduced For the thirty eight of the Canons ascribed to the Apostles gives the care of the Ecclesiastick Goods to the Bishop as Justine Martyr gives to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who as we have seen already was purely a Parish Pastor And the 39 Canon saith Let the Presbyters and Deacons attempt nothing without the Bishop for to him the Lord's People is committed and for their Souls he must give an Account Now I demand of all Men brooking either Conscience or Candor if Souls could be committed to any save him who was their ordinary Feeder and Instructer And the Pseudo-Dionysius clearly intimats that wherever either Baptism or the Lord's Supper was administrat'd a Bishop was there and was the Dispenser thereof The High-Priest saith he that is the Bishop preaches to all Men the true Gospel every one that desires to Partake of these Heavenly Things coming to one of the learned in these Mysteries desires to be led to the High-Priest and he brings him to the High-Priest who receiving him with gladness as a Sheep on his shoulders praises the bountifull prinple by which all are
subordinate Brethren A sturdy argument forsooth as if our most blessed Master to quell his Disciples their ambition of aspiring to a preheminence over one another and to render them more content with a humble and brotherly parity could not adduce and urge his own most holy and meek example of his most wonderful condescending to take upon him the form of a Servant and do the works of a Servant among his Apostles and that so humblie as if he had been only their Companion and nothing above them but he must anone be concluded to degrade and throw down himself into a meer equality with his Disciples Can any in the exercise of his wit make such a Collection Neither can better befall him for as is his constant practice this wretched Paralogism he also borrows from another Jebusite Cornelius a Lapide who at the same rate depraves this Text of Matthew to save from a mortal blow Peter's fictitious Primacy But in the next place which is little better D. M. turns Jew on our hand Let it be further considered saith he that the Hierarchy and Subordination of Priests was established by Divine Authority in the Jewish Church and if our Saviour had pulled down that ancient Polity and commanded an equality among the Presbyters of the New Testament he would not have stated the Opposition between his own Disciples and the Lords of the Gentiles but rather between the Priests of the Mosaic Oeconomy and the Disciples of the New Testament And agian fearing least his Jâ—daism and also his self-repugnancy should not have otherways been apparent enough We do not saith he now plead as some ignorant People may pretend that there ought to be a Bishop above Presbyters because that there was a High-Priest among the Jews but rather thus that the Hierarchy that obtained in the Patriarchal and Jewish Oeconomy was never abrogated in the new Well then is there on Earth a visible High-Priest over the whole Church the Levitical Orders Rites Temple-service the very things wherein the Jewish Hierarchy consisted and shadows of Christ to come now allowable But to come to his cavill and quiet this child of Ignorance D. M. should know that beside the Disciples ambition to get up over one another according to the carnal apprehension they then entertained of Christ kingdome wherein our Hierarchick Lord Bishops are the Apostles successors indeed and all Hierarchicks men of Apostolick principles they looked also for a great worldly and civil power and dominion which was not at all comprehended in the Jewish Priesthood nor was then possessed by any of the Priests and so our Lord 's stateing the opposition between his Disciples and the Lords of the Gentiles is by far more apt for his purpose than if he had stated it between them and the Priests of the old Oeconomy which had been altogether lame and doon scarce the half of his bussiness In a word the Romishness and Falshood of all these his Cavills is manifest were there no more from this only that if they do any thing they make for the defence of that new Romish Doctrine of Peter's Supremacy which both the Fathers and all sound Protestants not only Presbyterians but also Episcopals yea some that otherwise deserve not the name of Protestants as Dr. Heylen explode prove that there was a compleat Equality Parity amongst the Apostles And they deduce their Conclusion especially from this text of Matthew's Gospel and its parallels And indeed if there be as doubtless there are any places of Scripture fit to prove it these texts deservedly hold the first place The Author of the Opus imperfectum thought by some to be Chrysostome saith on this place of Matthew Quicunque autem desiderat primatum in terrâ inveniet confusionem in coelo Whosoever desires a primacy on Earth shall find Confusion in Heaven Now suppose the truth of these words and compare them with the words of the Apostle 1 Tim. 3. 1. If a man desires the Office of a Bishop he desires a good work And it 's clear the Office of a Bishop is quite another thing than a Primacy for to desire the former is lawfull and laudable but to desire the latter is dangerous and damnable and so much by the way for I love not to transcribe the labours of others And so angry is D. M. at New Opinions and for their sake at every thing that 's New that he scarce ever advances any Argument Vindication or Defence but what is so frequently and soundly baffl'd so bare and worn as to vy even with the old ancient Garments of the Gibeonites These Texts as I said prohibite also all Pastors of Flocks to exercise Dominion Secular or State Dignities which is irrefragably made out by our Writers against Bellarmine de Pontifice and other Romanists However 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 either the Possession or Hope of such Emoluments and Dignities as also the glistering gayetie of gorgious and theatrick Ceremonies close mens mouths and keep them from acknowledging the Truth for which even a Pagan may come in to reprove them O curvae interris animae coelestium inanes Quid juvat hoc templis nostros immittere mores Et bona Dijs ex hac scelerata ducere pulpa Dull earthy minds who know no heavenly thing What profites it into the Church to bring Our own Inventions or to dream that we Can with Lust's fewel please the Deity Dicite Pontifices in sancto quid facit aurum Speak out your minds ye Priests and do not lie Can gold your holy places sanctifie It 's an old saying that the Church brought forth Riches but the Daugter devoured the Mother who when she had wooden Cups she had golden Priests but afterward she got golden Cups and wooden Priests Even their Pseudo-Clement is prolix on this subject exhorting the Bishop to be dis-engaged of all worldly cares and affairs and perpetually imploy'd in Preaching and Prayer and the like Ministerial duties And indeed all Pastors of Flocks would carefully abstain from secular and state Offices and every thing else that may abstract them from their Charges and Flocks least their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 procure them Functius's reward But if our Hierarchicks will not hear our blessed Lord and his Apostles if they will not hear the genuine writtings of the Ancients nor yet these spurious pieces whose Authros were otherwayes sufficiently Hierarchick and Ceremonious I think they might listen to the Bishop af Aiace for he was a Member of the Council of Trent John Baptista Bernard saith Suave Bishop of Aiace who thâ— he believed that residencie was de jure Divino yet thought it not fit to speak of that question delivered a singular speech saying that not aiming to establish one Opinion more then another but only so to inforce residency as that it may be really executed he thought it vain to declare from whence the obligation came or whatsoever else and
as themselves acknowledge were subject to many considerable lapses and escapes 165 The causes thereof 167 Several reasons demonstrating that if ever the Fathers so glossed these texts as not to hurt Diocesan Episcopacy they then gave not their genuine sentiments 168 SECT VIII Moe clear testimonies of the Primitive Doctors against the Divine right of Diocesan Episcopacy produced and vindicated The testimony of Ambrose or Hilary Bellarmine's perversion discovered 171 Petavius's vain attempts both to exauctorate and deprave Hilary 173 The testimonie of Chrysostome 174 He 's vindicated from Bellarmine's depravation 175 The testimonies of Pelagius Sedulius and Primasius 176 Augustine vindicated against Bellarmine and his Plagiary D. M. 177 Apart of Jerome's testimony on the epistle to Titus vindicated against the dishâ—nest dealing of Bellarmne and D. M. 178 No ground to think that ever Jerome accounted James Bishop of Jerusalem 180 All Dispensers of the Word and Sacraments are in Jerome's account the Apostles Successors 181 The rest of Jerome's testimony on the Epistle to Titus vindicated 182 His testimony out of the Epistle to Enagrius vindicated against Bellarmine and D. M. 183 This doctrine of Jerome most catholick and universally received 188 SECT IX The testimenies of Ignatius his Contemporaries and Suppars disproving what our Adversaries would force him to speak and confirming what we have prov'd to be his mind viz. that he cashiers a Diocesan Prelacy Negative testimonies 190 Clemens Romanuâ—'s positive and clear testimonies 192 Petaviuâ—'s exceptions met with 194 As are these of his Underling D. M. 197 The testimony of Polycaâ—p where Dr. Pearson's strange evasion is routed and D M â— ill gronnded vaporing exploded 199 The testimonies of Hermas where the vanity of D. M. â— Romish Cavills is discovered and Blondel vindicated 200 The testimonie of Justine Martyr where Dr. Maurice's perversions are detected as is also the unreasonableness of D. M's reasons against Justine Martyr's plaine meaning 204 Irenaeus identifies Bishop and preaching Presbyter 206 D. M's Popish querie 207 SECT X. Other Observations and Arguments eversive of Diocesan Prelacy A Bishop is a name of labour a Presbyter a name of honor Ibid The true notions of the Apostolick and Hierarchick Bishop diametrically opposite one to another 209 The example of the Apostolick Bishop followed and the Idea thereof retained by all the true primitive Bishops or Doctors which is all one with the notion of a laborious Pastor of a Congregation Ibid. This is confirmed out of the Council of Sardica and others of these times where Dr. Maurice and Dr. Beverige their sly and perverse dealing is discovered 2â—0 The subjecting of one Pastor or Church to another finally resolved into a Romish slavery 213 Every Disepnser of the Word and Sacraments is a true Bishop 214 That in the least Village and meanest Countrie-places where there was a Congregation there was a true Bishop largely evinced where Dr. Maurice his exceptions is obviated Ibid. All Bishops equal among themselves hence their Hierarchy is overthrown 216 Their Romish argument from the pretendedly uninterupted succession of Diocesan Bishops enervated 217 The argument drawn from the lists of Bishops in Rome and such great Cities satisfied First From the positions already demonstrated which are further confirmed Secondly From the confessed uncertainty of these lists Thirdly From this that in Rome there was at once a plurality of Peter's pretended successors Fourthly From this that Peter was never at Rome which is largely demonstrated Fifthly from the evident falsity of the lists of the Bishops of Jerusalem 218 That the government of the prime primitive Church was truly Presbyterian made out from a cloud of most unsuspected Authors 225 A prostasy gradually turned into a Papal Tyranny 230 The Ancients kept fast the Foundations of Christianity but strayed exceedingly in superstitious additions 231 The Hierarchicks embraceing diverse novell Enormities desert the Primitive Church where Heylen's preversion of the Ancients is discovered Matthew 20 25 c. vindicated and D. M's Romanism and Judaism detected 223 The Bishop of Aiace his Christian Discourse unchristianly eluded and slighted by the Trent-Hierarchicks 239 ERRATA pag. lin read 2 7 r. this 4 23 r. thereto is sufficient 7 1 r. palpably 8 10 r. Jac. 14 1 r. the feares of the. 26 33 dele comma 32 penult r 158. Ibid ibid r 163. Ibid. ult r 53. 37 25 dele y 59 10 dele as 69 21 r hope of their 80 25 r is injoyn'd 82 32 r life 84 1 r Act. 85 13 r their 87 ult r disaprov'd 92 15 r liked 104 33 r from 125 7 r leanes 129 6 r Apostles 137 13 r breaking on bread 140 30 r whereon 150 28 r Apostles 168 21 r expositures 175 24 r other Pastors 178 5 r in 184 12 dele that 185 18 r Apostolical 186 28 r were 188 27 adde it 197 26 dele it 202 18 r from 207 1 r our 214 6 r or Ibid. 7 r of 216 ult r are 217 20 adde acknowledged Ibid. 31 r them Ibid. pen. r de cornu 219 20. r breaks 223 1 Babylon and is called a Persian i. e. a Parthian City and the Metropolis 237 16 r allowable 239 28 r would ADDENDA pag. 71. lin 21. But saith Heylen Cosmographie pag. 332. beeing once settled in an orderly and constant Hierarchy they held the same untill the Reformation began by Knox when he his Associats approving the Genevian Plat-form took the advantage of the Minority of King James the sixt to introduce Presbyterian Discipline and suppress the Bishops pag. 96. lin 9. What was the mind of the Waldenses Hussites saith Voetius speaking of the Opposers of Prelacy Polit. Eccles. part 2. pag. 833. is evident from their most accurat History written by Joh. Paulus Perrinus which is not extant save in their vulgar Tongues Nazianzeni Querela et Votum Justum OR The Fundamentals of the HIERARCHY examined and disproved Part I. Which briefly handles the prime Arguments for the Hierarchy as also some of its Concomitants and Qualities Section I. The Scope of the ensuing Treatise THE purpose of our present Discourse is not directly to handle that much tossed Debate if an Office in the Church for species or kind superiour to that of dispensing the Word and Sacraments hath any footing or warrant in the Word of God Neither will this be judged necessary by any who call to mind that many Treatises disproving the divine right of Episcopacy as Altare Damascenum and Rectius Instruendum have had so good success that for ought I know they stand intirely without any shadow of an Answer Yea the most learned that ever pleaded for the Lawfulness of Episcopacy will not blame us though we yeeld no Scripture-ground to it but only consider it in it self as a thing indifferent of which mind among the Ancients were not only those who denyed not the exercise of his Office to be Lawfull as Hierome but also the very Bishops themselves as Augustine all of them founding this