c. 16 Tom. 5 p â—â— â—n â—pist Paâ—â—â— l 19. in Phil. 1 1 l 23 in 1 Tim. 3 l 25 in Tit. 1 Tom. 5 p 455 456 498 499 521 522 523 De instituâ—â—ons Clericorurâ— l â— â— 4 5 6 Tom 6 p. 5 6 Haymo Halberstatensis in Phil. 1. â— Tit. 1 An 560. The 12 Councell of Toledo Can 8 Aâ—â—laâ—iâ—s Fortunatus d Ecclesiasticâ—â— Ofsiâ—â—s l 2 c 13 Anno 1050 Pecumenâ—a in Aâ—â—a Apost 5 15 2 in Phil 1 1 Tim: 3 Tit 1 fol 79 586 655 683 Anno 1070 Theophylact. Com in Act 20 17â— 28 in Phil 1 1 1 Tim: 3 Tit 1 p 517.576 600 801 Anno 1â—00 Conradus Bruno in Phil 1 1 1 Tim: 3 Tit 1 Anno 1130 Barnard De Consideratione ad Eugenium l. 2 34 Epist. 42 Sermâ— 23 25. 77. Super â—antiâ—â— De laudibuâ— Maria Homil 1 Concio in Concilio Rhemensi ad Pastâ—â—â—s Sâ—râ—â— THE THIRD SQVADRON THe third Squâ—dron is constituted of forraigne Cannonists and Popish Schoolemen wâ—iters and Councels from the Yeare of our Lord 1100 till this present as Iâ—o Carnaâ—â—nsis Dâ— â—alâ—luâ—â— pa. â—5 c â—8 59.72 1â—â— 143.144 Peter Lombard Sententiarum l 4. distinâ— 24. I. K. L mâ— Comenâ—aâ—iâ—m Phil. 1 1 Tit 1. 1 Tim: 3 Gratian the gâ—eaâ— Canâ—onist distinctio 18 21 22 23 24 25 39 50 60 61 62 63 64 65 6â— 67 68 80 93 95 Causa 2 qu. 7 Causa 24 qu 3 Hugo Caâ—dinalis in Phil â— 1 Tit 1 1 Tim: 3 Aquinas secundâ— secundae qu â—4 Ar 6 â—rg 1. Supplementum in tertiam pâ—rtem qu 37 Art 7 Durandus in l 4 Sentent Distinct 24. qu 5 6 Rational Divinorum l 2 Iohannis Parisiensiâ— de potestate Regia Papâ—li apud moâ—â—â—um de Ecclesia c 11 Catalogum Testium veritatis p 525 Carthusiâ—â— Caâ—etan and the Author of the Oâ—dinaâ—y glosse in Acts 15 c 20 17 28 Phil 1 1 1 Tim: â— Tit 1 5 7 cardinalis Arelatensiâ— apud AEneam Sylvium de Gestis Concilij Basiliensis l. 1 p 27 28 29 Alvarus Pelagius de Plainetu Ecclesia â— 1 Art 70. l 2 Art 1 to 17 Panormitam c 4 de Consuetudine Anselmus Lucensis Collectanea Can l. â— c. 87 127 Gâ—egorius Tholosamus Polycarp l 2 Tit 19 39 Iohn Thiery Glosâ—a in Gâ—ationum distinct 95 cap olim with all other Glosses and Canonists on that Text Heâ—â—iâ—us Gorichen in l 4 Sentent Distinct 24â— Astensis Summa pars 2 l 6 Tit 2 Artic 2 Angelus de claucisio Summa Angelica Ordo 1 The e councell of Lingon Anno 1404 of Paris Anno 1557 Duarenus de sacr Eccle injust l 1 c 7 Onus Ecclâ—sia c 14 to 27 Nicholas Cusaâ—â—â— de concoâ—diâ— Catholicâ— l. 2 c. 13. Alphonsus a Câ—stâ—o advers 〈◊〉 Sit â—piscopus Michael Medina de sacro hâ—m Oâ—ig et continetia 〈◊〉 â—spencaâ—â— in 1 Tim. c 3 Digressioâ—â—m in Tim â— 1 c 1 2 3â— and in Tit 1 â— â— The Rhemist â—nnotâ—tion on Acts 〈◊〉 sect 4 and in Tim 4. Phil 1. 1 â—it 1 â—â— Iâ—â—obus Fabor in 1 Tim â— 4 â— Tit 1. Sixtus Sevensi Bibl 〈◊〉 l â— Anno 32â— Azoâ—ius Mâ—â—â—lium pâ—râ— 2 l 3 c 1â—â— Buoniuâ— Anâ—uâ—ll Eccles â—om 1. p 5â—â— Iacobus de Grâ—ssâ—s dâ—sâ—â—lionum Auâ—â—carum parâ— 2 l 1 c 9 11 5 â— 9 1â— 14 16 l 3 c. 12 11 3.4 Petâ—â—s Bâ—â—sseldin â—uchyâ—idion Teâ—â—â—giae Pâ—storalis pâ—â—s 1 c 15. with other Pontisâ—â—â—ans though sundry else of them are the greatest sâ—icklers for â—â—isâ—opâ—ll Mâ—â—â—â—ne of Puâ—pose to advâ—nce the 〈◊〉 Supremâ—cy with the Parity of Bishops and Pâ—esbiters Iuâ—â— Dâ—â—mâ— â—sterly subverts and ruineâ—â— I shall close up this Squâ—drâ—n with the â—â—e Authorities of some Semiâ—â—â— Priests in Enâ—land As namely of Niâ—câ—â—las Smiâ—h in his modest and bâ—iefe discussion of certaine Assertions which are taught by Mr. Doctor â—â—lâ—ison in his Treatise of the â—cclesiasticall 〈◊〉 where thus he determines * I judge is no rashnes to affirm that since England enjoyed a Bisâ—â—pâ— to wit a Poâ—â—s â—ishopâ— to confirme the Papists and controll the Pâ—iests namely Richâ—â—d bisâ—op of Châ—lcedâ—â— created the generall â—ishop and superintendâ—nt both of Englandâ— and Scotland by Pope Vrbaus speciall Bull dated the 4th of August Anno 1625. The Coppy whereof you shall â—ind printed in Censura Propositionâ—m quaâ—undam c. per sacram facultatem Theologâ—a Parisiâ—nsis factae Paâ—isiis 1631 p 63 64 65 that more damage hath happened to the Catholikes in generall by reason of discord and frequent losse of charity then they have received benefit by the Sacrament of Conâ—irmation onely conferred on some few That all holy men have exceedingly eâ—deavoured to sâ—un such an high digâ—ity That a Bishop is in a State which presupposeth but yet gives not perfection which the State of Religion not onely presupposeth but giveth That a vow not to receive a Bishopricke is valid and sacred That â—o desiâ—e a Bishopricke even for that which iâ— best in it to wit for the good of soules according to St Thomâ—s sâ—cunda sâ—â—uâ—da que 185. Art 1 seemes to be presumptiâ—n and there are some who stick not to say and that commonly it is a moâ—tall sinne That these â—ropositions following are strange idle and absurd That it is dâ— iure divinâ— and that the law of God is that every particular Church as England is ought to have a Bishop That without a Bishop England were not a particular Church That unlesse every particular Church hath its Bishop or Bishops the whole and Vniveâ—sall Church could not be as Christ hath instituted it an Hierarchie composed of divers particular Churches That without a Bishop we cannot have conâ—irmation c. All which principles saith hee are worse then the concultion it selfe and demonstrated by us to â—it in that Treatise to have no foundation at all Thus this Popish Priest who proving that the Church of England may well subsist without a Popish Bishop to sway and order it grants that it may doe the like without our Protesâ—ant Prelates and that plainly resolves that it is not from any divine law or institution that the Church of England should have any Bishop at all to govern it Daniell a Iesu another Priest and a Reader of Divinity thus seconds him in his Apologie for the proceeding of the holy see Apostolike as to the government of the catholickes in England during the time of Persecution * That it is most false and of dangerous consequence that a particular Church cannot be without a Bishop That Gods law requires no more but that there be somâ— Bishops in the Church to wit so many that there bee no danger that the whole Order should suddainly be taken away by their deaths and so dispersed through the world that all Christians may bee sufficiently provided of learned and vertuous Priests If this be done the law of God is satisfied
that See was 8 yeares vacant An 1225 after Richard Poore 4 years An 1â—â—0 4 years aâ—â—er Walter de la Wiâ—e An 1588 3 yeares aâ—ter Iohn â—ierce An 1596 2 yeares aâ—ter Iohn Coldwell a An 1166 the Bishopricke of Bath and Wels upon the death of Robert continued void 8 yeares 8 moneths and 15 dayes An 1242 after Ioceline 2 yeares Anno 1262 as long after William Buttâ—n Anno 1503 as long after Oliver King An 1547. as long after William Knight An 1381 3 yeares after Gilbert Barkely An 1590 2 yeares aâ—â—er Thomas Godwin b An. 1103 the Bishoprick of Exeter after Osberâ—us decease was vacant 4 yeares Anno 1182 after Bartholmeus Iscartus 2 yeares An 1119 after William Herbert the last Bishop of Thelfords death that See now Norwich was vacant 2 Yeares An 1214 after Iohn de Grey it was vacant 7 yeares Anno 1222 afteâ— Pandulfus 3 yeaâ—es Anno 1236 after Rodulphus almost 3 years and as long after William de Releigh An 1240 after Henry Spencer An. 1406 â—lmost 2 yeares c An 1095 after the death of Wolstan Bishop of Worâ—hester that See was vacant 2 yeares An 1113 as long after Sampsons An 1123 almost as long after Theulphus An 1179. after Roger An 1184 after William de Northale 5 yeares An 1198 after Iohn de Constantijs 2 yeares An â—1212 〈◊〉 long after Mangere Anno 1373 as long after VVilliam de Lyn An 1417 as long after Thomas Pondrell An 1427 7 yeares after Thomas Polton Anno 1590 3 yeares after Ednica Freat d An 1556 the Bishopricke of Hereford after Leoneyards death continued 4. yeares vacant An 1127 after Richaâ—d above 4 yeares Anâ— 1167 after Roâ—ert de Melim above 6 yeares An 1539 after Iohn Skip above 13 yeeres An 1585 after Herbert West failing 17 yeares An 1526 the Bishopricke of Chichester was void almost 4 yeares after Iohn Reempale his death An 1006 after Richard Fitz-Iames 2 yeaâ—es An 1235 the Bishopricke of e Rochester after â—enry de Sandâ—ords death was vaâ—â—nt 3 yeares An 1277 2 yeares aâ—â—er Walter de Merton 1316 after Thomas de Waldham 3 yeares An 1401 as long after Iohn Bolteshamâ— Anno 1535 after Iohn Fisher 2 yeares An 1557 the new created Bishopricke of Oxford after the decease of Iohn King first Bishop there was vacant 10 yeares An 1568 afâ—er Hugh Carrow the 2. Bishop it was voyd 21. yeares together An 1592 after Iohn Vnderhill the third Bishop it continued void 11. yeares so little want was there of a Bishop in that See Anâ— 1559 the new created Bishopricke of Oxford after Iames Brookes the third Bishops death was vacant three yearesâ— An 1578 as long after Edmond Cheyney An 1558 the new created Bishopricke of Bristoll after Paul Bush the first Bishop was vacant 4â— yearesâ— An 1578 3 yeares after Richard Cheyney which See continued void otherwise then by Commendani 31 yeares together Anno 1593 it continued vacant 10 yeares together So little need was there of a Bishop in this See f An 1397 the Bishopricke of St. Davids after Iohn Gilberts death was vacant 4. yeares An 1592 after Marmaduke Middleton almost 2 yeares An 1133 the Bishoprick of Landaâ—â—e upon Vrbans decease was void 6 yeares An 1183 after Nicholas ap Georgant 5 yeares An 1240 after Elias de Radnor above 4 yeares An 1287 after William de Brews 9 yeares An 1213 the Bishopricke of Bangor after Robert of Shrewsbury was vacant 2 yeares An. 1374 as long after Iohn Gilbert An 1378 after Iohn Swaffham 22 yearesâ— An 1266 after 〈◊〉 the 1 of Bangor that See was vacant two yeares An 1313 after Lewelin 6 yeares Anno 1406 after Iohn Trevane 5 yeares An 1439 after Robert 5. yeares g An 1017 after Aldhunus of Durham that See continued void above 3 yeares An 1097 as long after William Carlaypho An 1140. after Geoffry Rufus above five yeares An 1207 after Philip of Poitiers above 10 yeares An 1226. above 2 yeares the King threatning the Covent that they should have no Bishop in 7. yeares An 1237 after Richard Poore 2 yeares An 1249 the King threatned to keep it vacant 8 or 9 yeares till Ethelmare his halfe Brother whom he commended to the Monkes election should be of age An 1505 after William Severus 2 yeares An 1587. after Riâ— Baâ—nâ—s almost 2 years An 1577 the Bishoprick of Chester was vacant two years If then all our Bishoprickes in severall ages have been void thus 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 15 17 20 and 30 yeares or more together at divers times to omit all annuall vacancies without any prejudice to the Church or State and with great benefit to the Kings of England who enjoyed the temporalities in the meane time tâ—en certainly Bishops are no such necessary creatures of divine institution but that we may spare them all together For if we may want them 2 3 5 9 10 15 20 30 yeares without prejudice Why not an Hundred why not 500. yeares yea why not altogâ—ther as they doe in all reformed Churches who have quite cacashierd them long agoe when as no Church can spare or want their Pastors and Ministers that are of Gods institution above 6 moneths at most h After which if the Patron present not in the interim an able and sufficient Clerke the ordâ—nary by the common Law may collate and may seqnester the profits in the meane time for the officiating of the cure which must be at no time intermitted or neglected because of divine institution and so absolutely necesâ—ary which the Bishops are notâ— I shall close up this discouâ—se with a mâ—morable I resident of the Dâ—nes An Dom 1537 Christian the third King of Denmaâ—â—e removed and suppressed by publike Edict all the Bishops of his Kingdome for their intolerable Treasons Rebellions abolishing their Bishopricks as contrary to our Saviours institutions the meanes that made them Idle proud ambitious unpreaching â—relates and seditious tâ—echerous Rebels to their â—rinces and in stead of 7 Bishops of Deâ—mark he instituted 7 Superintendents to execute the office of Bishops to give orders to others and execute all Ecclesiasticall afâ—aiâ—es which 7 Superintendents Augâ—st 26 1537. â—eceived â—heir ordiâ—ation from Iohn Bugenhagius â— Pâ—otestant minisâ—er in the Cathedrall of Hâ—sina in the preseâ—ce of the King and Seâ—ate of the Kingdome Lo â—eâ—e all Bishops cashiered as false rebellious Traytors to their Soveraigne as they have ever been in all States and ages theâ—e having been more notoâ—iâ—us Traitors Rebells and conspirâ—tors of Bishops then of all other ranks of men in the world as I â—m able to maâ—e good as contrâ—ry to divine institution and see not Iure divino as they now boâ—st and Superinteâ—dents ordained by a meere â—â—esâ—iter in their stead to conferre orders unto others in all the Danish Churches In the beginning of reformation in Germany and other places Luther and other Ministers usually ordained Deacons and Ministers and set out Bookes of
tâ—e manner of Ordination without any Bishops assistance which power of Ordination and imposition of hands hath ever since been prâ—ctised by Ministers in all reformed Chuâ—ches which have abandoned Bishops such as ours are and maâ—e themselves as contrary to Gods word â—atrick Adamsoâ— Arâ—h-Bishop of St. Andrews in Scotland in his recantation publickly made in the Synod of Fiâ—â—e Aprill 8 1591 conâ—esâ—eth that this office of a Diocesan Bishop Omne â—uthoritate verbi dei destituituâ— solo politico hâ—minum câ—nâ—mento â—uâ—datur is destitute of of all authority from Gods word and is onely â—ounded in the politicke figment of men out of which the primacy of the â—ope or Antichrist â—ath sprung and is worthily to be condemned becâ—use the asâ—embly of the â—â—esbytery penes quâ—m est jâ—risdictio inspectioâ—â—m in visitationibus tum in ordinationibus which having the jurisdiction and inspection both in visitations and in Ordinations will performe all these things with greater authority piety and zeale then any Bishop whatsoever whose caâ—e is for tâ—e most part intent not upon â—od or his â—â—â—ction but tâ—e world which he especially serves A 〈◊〉 blâ—w to our prelates Hieâ—achie For iâ— Bishops be not Iure divino and have no â—oundation in the word of â—od theâ— the power of OrdinatioÌ„ beloÌ„gs not â—to them Iure divino as they aâ—e Bishops neither can do or â—ught they to conâ—eâ—â—e Orders as Bishops but â—rely as they are Ministers And if so as is most certaine Then this power of Ordination belongs not at all to Bishops as Bisâ—ops but only as Ministers and every Minister as he is a Minister â—ath as much right and authority to give oâ—ders as any Bishop whatsoever the true reason why even among us at this day Ministers ought to joyn with the Bishop in the imposition of hands neither can our Bishops ordaine any one a Minister unlesse 3 or 4 Ministers at least joyne with him in the Ordination and laying on of hands This being an apparent â—â—uth I shal hence from the Bishops owne principles prove Presbyters Superior and greater then Bishops in jurisdiction dignity and degâ—ee These say they to whom the power of Ordination belongs of Right are â—â—eater in jurisdiction dignity â—â—d degree then those who have not this power and the Ordainer higher in all these then the ordained But the power of Ordination belongs onely jure divino to â—resbyters as presbyters not to Bishops as to Bishops themselves not as Bishops but Presbyters and Bishops when they ordaine in a lawfull manner do it onely as Presbyters not as Bishops Therefore Presbyters are Superior to Bishops in jurisdiction Order and degree and Bishops themselves â—arre greater in all theseâ— as they aâ—e Presbyters an office of divine â—â—nction then as they are Lordly Prelates or Diocesan Bishops a meer humane institution Thus are our great Lord Bishops who vaunt of the weaknesse of puriâ—â—ne principles whereas their Episcopall are farre more feeble and absurâ— wounded to death with their own weapons and all their Domiâ—eering swelling authority overthrowne by that very principle and foundation on which they have presumed to erect it the ancient proverbe being here truly verified vis â—â—nsilij â—â—pâ—rs â—olâ— ruit sâ—â— I shall close â—p this with the words of acute Aâ—tâ—â—ius Sâ—dâ—â—l who after a large proof of Biâ—â—ops and presbyterâ— to be both â—ne and the same by divine institution winds up all in this mâ—nner We couclude therefore seeing that Superior Episcopall dignity is to be avouched onely humane institution Tantum essâ— hâ—mâ—ni iuris that it is only of humâ—ne right On the contrary since it is evident by the expressâ— testimonies of Scripture that in the Apostles times Bishops were the same with Presbyters jurâ— diuinâ— pâ—tâ—stâ—tâ—â— ordinandi noâ— minus presbytâ—riâ— quâ—m Episcâ—pis convenirâ— that by Godâ— law and divine right the power of Ordination belongs as much to preâ—biters as to Bishops I have now I hopâ— sufficiently maâ—ifested our Lordly prelates Arch-â—ishops Diocesâ—n Bishops distinct from presbyters to be none of Gods institution being therefore none of Gods Bishopâ— as they vainly pretend whose then must they be not the kingsâ— for thâ—n they are onely Iurâ— humanâ— which they have publikely â—â—sâ—lâ—imed iâ— Courtâ— therefore certainly eitheâ— the Popes or the â—evils or both as many of the recited writers stile theÌ„ for I know no other that can claime or own them wherfore being neither Gods nor the Kings but the Popeâ— or Devillsâ— or bothâ— what remaines but that now at last they should be spâ—red out of our Churchâ— as no members at all of Christs Church or bodyâ— but of the Devill Pope or Antichrist of Rome whose limbs and creatures in tâ—uth they are as Mauritius dâ— i Alâ—â—dâ— Henry k Stâ—lbridâ—â— and othersâ— expresly resolves and their actions past all dispute discover many of them to be yea as meere Individuum vaginus and meere unnaturall monsters they being neithâ—r Pastors nor members of any particular Church or congregation as all other Christians are besideâ— themselves I read in the l great Dutch Chronicle written by an Augustinâ— Frier that in the year of our Lord 1033 beyond Poland there was a strange Fisâ— taken of the quantity length and breadth and shape of a living man adorned with a Bishopâ— Miterâ— a pastorall Staff a Cassock a white Surplesse a Chessible Sandalsâ— Glovesâ— and all othes Robesâ— and ornaments requisite to the Dignity of â— Prelate like a Bishop solemnly attired and prepared to say divine Serviceâ— his Cassocke might be well lifted up before and behind from the feet to the knees but not higherâ— and he permitted himselfe to bee sufficiently â—andled and touched by manyâ— but especiâ—lly of the Bishops of that Countryâ— which Fish being presented to the King and demanded in the Language of that Countryâ— and of divers otherâ— nations who hee was and answering â—othing albeit he had opened hiâ— mouth giving reverence and honoâ—r to the Bishopâ— that were there in the Kings presence one Monster and dumbe unpreaching beastâ— saluting and respecting another the King being aâ—gry when hee had determined to commit him to prisoÌ„â— or shut him up iâ— soÌ„e stroÌ„g towâ—r the Fisâ— being very sorrowfull at this newes thereupon closed his eyes and would by no meanes open them untill the Bishops of that Kingdome m kneeling downe before the king in the fishâ—s preseâ—ce had with many prayers intreated and obtained of the King that he should be sent backe againe alive to the Seashoreâ— where hee had been takenâ— that God whose workes are incomprehensible might shew his nature and Acts least otherwise a plague should there ensue both to the King and his Subjects which their suit the King had no sooner granted but presently the â—oresaid Monster opened his eyes giving great thankes as it were to the King and especially to those Bishops After with a Chariot being prepared to carry the Fish backe againe the Fish in presence of an infinite
A CATALOGVE OF SVCH TESTIMONIES IN ALL AGES AS PLAINLY EVIDENCE BISHOPS AND PRESBYTERS TO BE BOTH ONE EQUALL AND THE SAME IN IURISDICTION Office Dignity Order and degree by divine Law and institution and their disparity to be a meere humane ordinance long after the Apostles times And that the name of a Bishop is onely a Title of Ministration not Dominion of Labour not of Honour of Humility not of Prelacy of painfullnesse not of Lordlinesse with a Briefe Answer to the Objections out of Antiquity that seeme to the contrary Printed in the Yeere 1641. The EPISTLE to the READER Christian Reader THere is nothing more frâ—quent in the mouthes of our Lording Prelates and their Flatterers then to vaunt That their Hierarchie and Episcopall Sâ—periority over other Ministers is by divine Right and Institution and that all Antiquity from Christs till Calvins dayes and all learned men except a despicable small number of Factious Puritans as they term them suffragate to this Conclusion This was the more then thrasonicall bâ—ast of Dr. Laâ—d Arch-prelate of Canterbury and some others not onely at the Censure of Dr. Layton in the Star-chamber and Dr. Bastwicke in the High-Commission some few yeares past but likewise at the late Censure of Dr. Bastwicke Mr. Burton and Mr. Prynne in the Star-chamber Iune 14. 1637. where in his learned Speech since Printed by speciall command through his own underhand procurement he thus magisterially determines pag. 6 7. This I will say he might have done well to have proved it first but that his Ipse dixit only is now an Oâ—acle and abide by it That the calling of Bishops to wit Archbishops and Dâ—ocaesans superiour to and distinct from Presâ—yters else his Speech is not onely idle but impertinent is Iure divino though not all adjuncts to their callings he should have done well to have specifieâ— what adjuncts in particularâ— And I say further that from the Apostles times in all ages in all places the Church of Christ was governed by Bishops to wit Diocaesan Bishops like to our Prelates now which he will prove at Graecas Calendas And Lay-Elders never heard of till Calvins new-fangled devise at Geneva To disprove which fabulous assertion I have not only particularly encountred it in the Unbishoping of Timothy and Titus to which no Answere yet hath been returned by this Over-confident Boaster or his Champions though specially challenged to Answer it but likewise by way ef Supplement to that Treaâ—ise drawn up this ensuing Catalogue which I challenge his Arch-grace with his brother Prelates Doctors Proctors Parasites to encounter with as many contrary Authorities if they can â— wherby both learned and illiterate may with ease discern that both by divine Institution the suffrages of Fathers Councels forraigne and domestick writers of all sorts aswell Papists as Protestants and the resolution of the Church and State of England in Convocation and Parliament Bishops and Presbyters are but one and the samâ— in point of Office and Iurisdiction and that the Superiority of Bishops over other Ministers is a meer humane Institution long after the Apostles dayes introduced partly by custome partly by the Bishops owne insensible incroachmeâ—ts upon their fellow brethren but principally by the grants connivances or indowments of Christian Princes destitute of any divine foundation to support it I confesse in the * Councel of Trent it was much debated among the Popish Prelates and Divines there present Whether Bishops were by divine Ordination Superiour to Priests But the Councel being divided in opinion left the Controversie undetermined Those Bishops and Divines who held the affirmative produced nothing out of Scripture or solid Antiquity to justifie their opinions worthy answere but that Aerius was deemed an Heretick for affirming the contrary which I have â—ere disproved yeâ— * Michael of Medina who alleageth this of Aerius was so ingenious to confâ—sse that Hierome Austin and some others of the Fathers as Ambrose Sedulius Primasius Chrysostomus Theodoret Oecumenius did fall into Aërius heresie in this point it being no wonder that they did so because the matter was not cleare in all points This his boldnesse to say that Hierome and Austin did savour of Haeresie gave great scandall but hâ— insisted the more upon it The Doctors saith the History were equally divided into two opinions in this point And when this * Article was propounded in this Romish Councel That the Bishops are instituted by Christ and are Superiour to Priests de Iure divino The Legates with others answered that the Lutherans and Heretiques having affirmed that a Bishop and a Priest is the samâ— thing * putting no difference between a Bishop a Priest but by humane constitution and affirming that the Superiority of Bishops was first by custom and afterwards by Ecclesiasticall constitution for which they ciâ—e the Augustane Confession made by the German Churches it was fit to declare that a Bishop is Superiour but that it was not necessary to say quâ— jure nor by whom a Bishop is instituted From whence it appeares clearly That halfe or more of these Trent Fathers with all the Lutherans and Protestant Churches at that time were cleare of opinion That Prelates Episcopacy is not Iure divino and those who peruse that History and * Bâ—llarmine may at â—irst discerne that all our Prelates arguments and Authorities now produced to maintaine their Episcopall Iurisdiction to be divine are taken verbatim from these Popish Fathers of Trent who maintain their assertion and Bellarmine de Clericis the stoutest Champion for their cause Alas to what miserable Shifts are our Prelates driven when they must thus fly to Trent to Bellarmine for ayd to support their tottering Thrones And yet these will stand them in no stead all the Trent Prelates confessing with S. Hierom. * That in the first beginnings of Christianity the Churches were governed by a kind of Aristocracy by the common Councel of the Presbytery and that the Monarchicall government and Superiority of Bishops and Archbishops crept in by custome as the (a) History of the Councel of Trent relates at large where you may read the originall of their Courts and Iurisdictions with the steps and meanes of their exorbitant growth and encroachments upon the temporall Iurisdiction and Prerogative of Princes well worthy the greatest Statesmens consideration Besides Dionysius Cathusianus and Cardinal Contarenus in their Commentaries on Phil. 1.1 confesse that in Pauls time Bishops and Presbyters were both one and that either Order was conferred on the Presbyter That Presbyters are there meant by Bishops whence it is usually said That in the Primitive times Bishops were not distinguished from Priests Azorisus the Iesuite Moral part 2. l. 3. c. 16. confesseth that in the Apostles times every where those who were ordained Elders in Cities were Bishops Cardinal Cusanus De Concordia Cathol. l. 2. c. 13. writes the same in effâ—ct All Bishops and perchance also Presbyters are of equall power
986. Anno 1537. Thomas Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Edward Arch-Bishop of Yorke Iohn Bishop oâ— London Cutâ—bert Bishop of Durham Stephen Bishop of Winchester Robert Bishop of Carlile Iohn Bishop of Exeter Iohn Bishop of Lincolne Iohn Bishop of Bath Rowland Bishop of Covenâ—â—y and Lichfield Thomas Bishop of Ely Nicholaâ— Bishop of Salisburyâ—Iohn Bishop of Bangor Edward Bishop of Herefordâ—Hugh Bishop of Worcester Iohn Bishop of Roâ—hester Richard Bishop of Chichester VVilliam Bishop of Norwich Robert Bishop of Assaph Robert Bishop of Landaffe Richard VVolman Arch-Deacon of Sudbury VVilliam Knight Arch-Deacon of Richmond Iohn Bells Arch-Deacon of Glocester Edward Bonner Arch-Deacon of Leicester VVilliam Skippe Arch-Deacon of Dorcet Nicholas Heath Arch-Deacon of Stafford Cuthbâ—rt Marshall Arch-Deacon of Vottingham Richard Corren Arch-Deacon of Oxford VVilliam Cliffe Geoffry Dowes Robert Oking Ralph Bradford Richard Smithâ— Symon Matthew Iohn Pryn VVilliam Buokmaster VVilliam May Nichoâ—as VVottin Richard Cox Iohn Edmunds Thomas Robertson Iohn Baker Thomas Barrett Iohn Hase Iohn Tyson Doctors and Professors of Divinity and of the Civill and Canon Law with the whole convocation house and Clergie of England in their Booke intituled the institution of a Christian man dedicated by them to King Henry 8. Printed cum Privilegio subscribed with all their names and ratefied by the Statute of 32 H 8 c. 26. chap of the Sacrament of order fol. 48. c an excellent place Anno 1538. Robert Barnes Doctor of Divinity and Martyr in his workes p. 210. Anno 1540. VVilliam VVraghâ—on in his hâ—nting and finding out of the Romish Fox among the Bishops in England dedicated to King Henry the 8. and his rescue of the Romish Fox A Booke intituled The Image as well of a true Christian Bishop as of a counterfeit and Anti-christian Bishop printed about the same time Rodeâ—icke Mors his Supplication or complaint to the â—arleament of England c. 19.20 A supplication to King Henâ—y the 8. by a namelesse Author against Bishops their jurisdiction pride Lordlinesse and wealth Henry Stalbridge his exhortatory Epistle to his most deare Country of England against the Pompous Bishops of the same as yet the true members of the great Antichrist of Rome their most filthy Father Lincolne Ridley his Exposition on Ihil 1. Iohn Frith a Pious learned Martyr his answer to Sir Thomas Moore p. 116. Nayler his answer to the epistle of the great Turke printed Anno 1542. Iohn Bale afterward Bishop of Osgris in Ireland his image of both Churches on Apoc. c 6 f 42 9 f 56.65 c. 13. f. 105 116 118. c. 14 f. 126. c 15 f 150. c. 17. f 160. King Henry the 8 himselfe in his Book inscribedâ— A necessary erudition for any Christian man published with the advise and approbation of all the Prelates Clergy of England in their convocation and of the Lords Spirituall and temporall and nether house of Parliament with the Kings own Royall Epistle to all his loving Subjects before it Anno 1545. by vertue of the Statute of 32 H. 8. c. 26. chap. of the Sacrament of order Anno 1551. The Book of Ordination of Ministers and Bishops confiâ—med by act of Parliament 3 Ed. 6. c. 12.5 6. Ed. c. 1. 8. Elizab c. 1. which prescribed the 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. to be read at the Ordination of Ministers and consecration of Bishops and limits the selfe same forme of Ordination with the power of impesiâ—ion of hands both to Ministers and Bishopâ— Anno 1552. Iohn Hooper Bishop of Glocester a Martyr expition upon the 8. Commandements and in Psalm 23â— p. 40. Hugh Laâ—ymer once Bishop of VVorcesâ—er a Martyr in his Fourtâ— Sermon of the Plough and in his 2.3.4 and 6. Sermons before King Edward the 6. Anno 1â—â—5 Iâ—hn Poveâ— Bishop of VVinchester in his Apologie against Thomas Martyrâ— c 4.5 f. 43.44.52.53.59 Doctor Harpesfield Arch-Deacon of London and Iohn Bradford Martyr Fox Acts and Monuments p 1465 Anno 1558 Thomas Bombâ—edge Martyr Fox ibid p 1856. Iohn Elmer after Bishop of London in his Harborow for faithfull Subjects Master Bullingham after Bishop of Lincolne in his Letter to Master Bull Det 5 1â—64 Master Thomas Becon in his catâ—chisme in his workes dedicated to all the Bishops of England by name approved applauded by them and Printed Cum Privilegio London 1562. vol. 499.500 The Doctrine of Christ and Anti-christ vol. 3 f 409 4010. sect. 18.19 Iames Pilkington Bishop of Durham Exposition on Agge c 1. verse 1 2 3.4 9.12.13 c. 2. v. 1 2 3.4.9.10.11 on Obidias v. 7.8 and in his Treatise of buâ—ning Paules Church Incomparable Iohn Iuell Bishop of Salisbury defence of the Apologie of the Church of England Edit 16.10 part 2 cap 3 divis 5. c 4 divis 2 cap 5 divis 1 cap 7 divis 5 cap 9. divis 1 p 99.100 101.196 202 c VVilliam Alley Bishop of Exeter in his poore-mans Library part 1 Miscellanea Prâ—lect 3. f. 95 96. Printed cum Privilegio Edit. 2.1571 Alexander Nowell Deane of Paules his Reproofe of Doâ—mans Proofe LONDON 1565. cum privilegio f. 43.44.45 Doctor Lawrence Humfryes Regiuâ— Professor of Divinitie in the Vniversity of Oxford Puritano papismi Confuâ—atio ad Rat 3. p. 262.263 Iohn Keâ—ridge his Sermon on 1 â—im 3 1 2 3 London 1578 Iohn VVhitgiâ—t Arch-Bishop of Canterbury against Cart-wright p 353 Master Cart-wright in his second Replie against Whit-gist Anno 1585. â— Tract 8 of Arch-Bishops and Bishops p 404 to 616. CONFVTATION of the Remish Testament on Acts. 20. sect. 4 â—hil 1 sect. 1 1. Tim. 3. sect. 2. Tit. 1 sect. 2 Doctor VVilliam Fulk against Brislow motive 40 against Gregory Martin London 1583 p 172. Confutation of the Rhemiâ—â— Testament on Tit. 1 sect 2 phil. 1 sect 1. Master Iohn Foxe in his Acts and Monuments prescribed to be had in every Arch-Bishop Bishops Archdeacons Deanes and Prebend residentiaries house in every Cathedrall and Collegiate Church by the Canonâ— made in the Synod of London Anno 1571 Edit 1610 p 216 358 359. 360 414 430 432 434 439 517 518 599 625 961 972 1009 1016 1465 1856 both in the text and marginall Notes Doctor VVilliam VVhittaker Regius Professor of Divinity in the Vniversity of Cambâ—idâ—â— Contra Duraum l 6 sect 19 Responsio ad 6 Rationes campâ—ani Rat 10. p 122 141 Contr 2 qâ— 5. c 7 contr 4 qu 1 c 1 Master Pâ—ilip Stuâ—t his display of corruptions neare the end The â—ee hive of the Romish Church oft printed and lately reprinted Anno 1635. passing onâ— most learned Doctor Iohn Raynâ—lds in his conference with Hart Anno 1584 London 1609 c 3 divis 1. p 100 101.105 c 4 divis 2 p 122 123 c 6. divis p 185. divis 3 p 218 c. 8. divis 3 p 4â—1 divis 5 p 540 541 and his Letter to Sir Francis Knolles in refutation of Doctor Bancrofâ—s Sermon at Pauls-Crosse 9. Feb. 1588 dated sâ—pt 19. 1598 Doctor Aâ—drâ—â—willes Synopsis Papisini The 5 generall Controversie Qu
cleer by Acts 10 2â—Phil 1. 1. Tit. 1 5 7. that in Ignatius his daies Bishops Presbiters were all one both in Title office and jurisdiction that there were many Bishops in every chiefe City and Church not any sole â—ishop paramount the Presbiters over one or many Churches and that Diocâ—san Bishops were instituted long after the Apostles and therefore after Ignatius his dayes who lived in the Apostles age as all Authors forecited accord and the whole Clergie of England in their Institution of a Christian man dedicated to King Henry the 8 resolue in direct termes These Epistles therefore of Ignatius which speâ—k of one Bishop in a â—hurch distinct â—rom and superior to Presbyters must needs be â—orged Thiâ—dly Ignatius in these Epistles makes Bishops successors to Christ and to sâ—and in his stead and Presbyters to succeed the Apostles whereas all others maâ—es them successors to the Apostles only not to Christ who z leâ—t no successor or Vicar generall behind him bâ—t a remains himselfe for ever the High-Priest chiefe Shepheard and Bishop of our Sâ—ules and hath promised b to â—e with us alwaies even to the end of the world This therefore maâ—es his Authority but suspiciâ—us and coâ—teâ—ptible Fourthly Ignatius hath not oâ—e word in him that Bishops are superior to â—â—eâ—biters â—y any divine lâ—w or iâ—stitutionâ— the thing in question therefore his Authority if geâ—uine proves nothing for the oposites Fifthly Ignaâ—ius equals Bishops and Presbyters both in jurisdiction rule and Authority for â—pist â— ad â—ralâ—â—anus he writes thus â—ut be ye subject to the Presbyters as to the Apostles of Christ for the Presbyters are a certaine conjoyned Sessions and â—ssembly of Apostles Epist. 6. ad Magnesianes â—rebyteri president â—oco Sinatus Apostolis The â—resbyters rule in the place of the Senate of the Apostles Epist. 10. ad Symenses Do ye al â—ollow the Colledge of the presbiters as Apostles Now if Presbyters succeed the Apostles in the government oâ— the Church al are to be Subject to them to follow them as Christs Apostles then certainely â—hey are equall at least to Bishops who at the highest are by Gods institution only to be obeyed and followed but as Christs Apostles not to be preâ—erred before them if equalized with them as the proudest Prelate of them must acknowledge and and the c Fathers witnesse Sixthly d Ignatius confesseth that the Churches in those dayes were not ruled by the Bishops as they are now but by the Colledge Senate and Synod of the Elders communi Praesbytâ—oum concilio as Hierome e and all other after him affirme the Presbiters therefore had then equall and joynt authority with the Bishops even in point of Iurisdiction governments and did râ—le and govern the Church in common with them therefore the Bishops were not then Lords Paramount as now they maâ—e themselves but equall and one with them yea their Colleagues companions as Ignatius and the g â—ourâ—h counsel oâ— Caâ—â—hâ—ge stile theÌ„ Seventhly his words h that they shâ—uld â—e sâ—bject to the Bishop as to God and Christ if rightly understood maâ—e nothing for the Prelates Hieraâ—chieâ—â—or Saint Paul Ephes. 6 5.6 7. coâ—mands servants to be obedient unto them that are their Masters according to the flesh with â—eare and â—â—embling in singlenesâ—e of heart as unto Christ not with eye-service as â—en pleasers but as the servants of Christ doing the will of God from his heart with good will doing service unto the Lord and not to men c. Is therefore every Master a Bishop equall unto Christ and superior in inrisdiction and degree to Presbyters No So Polycarpus in his Epistle to the â—hilippians chargeth them i to be subiect to their Elders as unto God and Christ using the same words of Elders as Ignatius doth of Bishops Are Preâ—byters therefore Paramount Bishops and succesâ—oâ—s to Christ himselfe I trow not Ignatius his meaning therefore is not that Bishops are as high above Presbyters and the people as God and Christ are above the Apostles as some k ambitious Prelates fansie but only that we must obey Bishops in all things that they command and prescribe us out of Gods word as farre â—orth as we would obey God or Christ himselfe for he that heareth them heareth Christ himselfe and hee that despiseth them despiseth God and Châ—ist himselfe Luke 10.16 1 Thes. 4â— 8. In this manner likewise are we to be subject to every Minister whatsoeverâ—Heb 13.17.7.1 Thes. 2.13 This therefore proves nothing for the Prelates superiority over other Bishops especially since this Ignaâ—â—us himselfe Epist. 5 chargeth the Trallians to reverence Deâ—cons inâ—eâ—â—or to â—resbyters as Christ himselfe whose Vicars they are As for those extravagail expressions of Ignatius l Episcopus typum Dei Patris â—mnium geâ—ut quid enim aliud est Episcopus quam is qui â—mni â—â—incipatu protestate Superior est quod homini licet pro viribus imitator Christi Dei factus and the m like on n which same ground both the Popes and Prelates Monarchie they are so ridiâ—ulous â—alse ambitious and hyperbolical as favor neither of Ignatius or any Christian but rather of a meere papall and Anti-christian spiritâ— discovering these Epistles to be none of his and those â—relaâ—ts who assâ—me these speeches to themselues to be o none of Christs Mat. 11.29 All which consideredâ— this forged Aâ—tiquity will stand theÌ„ in no stead at all to prove them superior or distinct from Presbyters by any diuine institution and other Antiquity making for them I find not extant That Presbyters and Bishops by Gods law and Ordination are both one and the same of equall authority and jurisdiction as all these authorities resolve I shall undeniable manifest by this one Argument Presqyters by the expresse resolution of the Scripture have the very name and not so onely but the very office of Bishops Act. 20.17 28. Pâ—â—l 1 1 1. Tim. 3 1â— to 5. Tit. 1 5. to 1â— the same mission and commission the same function charge Ordination and quallification Matth. 28.19.20 1 Tim. 3 1. to 7. c. 4.14 c. 5 17. 2 Tim. 4.1 2 1 Pet. 5 1 2 3. Tit. 1 5. to 12. neither doth the Scripture in any place make any differeÌ„ce distinction or superiority between them or attribute any power to the one that it doth not to the other â—s the premises evidence and Matth. 20 25.26 27 28. Mar. 10 42 43 44 Luk. 22.25.26 Therefore by Gods law and institution they are one and the same and of equall authority power and jurisdiction in all things As for that distinction in power precedency and jurisdiction whiâ—â— hath since been made between them it hath proceeded partly from Canons and constitutions made by Bishops themselves p partly by meer usurpation and encrochment but principally from the grant and largenesse of Christian Princes who as they erected Bishoprickes and Diocesse