Selected quad for the lemma: order_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
order_n bishop_n deacon_n presbyter_n 6,239 5 10.7176 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A45214 A defence of the humble remonstrance, against the frivolous and false exceptions of Smectymnvvs wherein the right of leiturgie and episcopacie is clearly vindicated from the vaine cavils, and challenges of the answerers / by the author of the said humble remonstrance ; seconded (in way of appendance) with the judgement of the famous divine of the Palatinate, D. Abrahamvs Scvltetvs, late professor of divinitie in the University of Heidelberg, concerning the divine right of episcopacie, and the no-right of layeldership ; faithfully translated out of his Latine. Hall, Joseph, 1574-1656.; Scultetus, Abraham, 1566-1624. Determination of the question, concerning the divine right of episcopacie. 1641 (1641) Wing H378; ESTC R9524 72,886 191

There are 8 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

authoritie and yet authoritie experience reason are worthy to sway with us in all matters of question and withall Hee that said I am the way said that the old way was the good way and if Custome without Truth as that Father said well be nothing but a gray-hair'd Error or as Sir Francis Bacon wittily Antiquitie without Truth is a Cipher without a Figure yet where Custom Antiquitie are backed with Truth there they are Figures multiplied with many Ciphers As for the time wherein their learned Ancients affirme The Church not to have beene governed by Bishops but by Presbyters and for the difference pretended to be betwixt the Primitive Bishops and ours wee shall meet with it in such due time and place as shall be justly occasioned What needs this frivolous waste of unseasonable words wherewith unlesse these men desired to swell up this their windy bulke why doe they tell us yet againe of that already answered and groundlesse exception against both their owne eyes and conscience where I say that this government hath continued in this Iland ever since the plantation of the Gospel without contradiction when as they cannot name any man in this Nation that ever contradicted Episcopacie till this present age or that ever contradicted this truth that Episcopacy hath so long continued in this Iland which is the only drift of my words For alas could I be so simple as not to know that this age hath bred opposition enough to the present government could I doubt whether these very men oppose it Yet let the boldest forehead of them all denie that it hath continued thus long in this our Iland or say that any till this age contradicted it so as that my assertion is just their exception false and vain As for that supplie of accessory strength which I did not beg but raise evince from the light of nature and rules of just policie for the continuance of those things which long use and many laws have firmly established as necessary and beneficiall it will stand long enough against the battery of their Paper-pellets If some statute Laws which seemed once necessary and beneficiall proving afterwards in processe of time noxious and burthensome have been justly and wisely repealed Let them tell mee whether the fundamentall Lawes of the Kingdome upon any mans abuse may be subject to alteration or whether rather their Wisdomes would not think fit to determine that the Laws must stand and the abuses be removed such is the cause we have now in hand and if we shall goe lesse I speak not against an impossibility but an easinesse of change the question being so stated which their guiltinesse would willingly over-look that things indifferent or good having been by continuance and generall approbation well rooted in Church and State may not upon light grounds be pulled up SECT V. I Justly fetch the pedegree of our holy calling from no lesse then Apostolicall and in that right Divine institution and prove it from the clear practise of their immediate successors and justly triumph in that confidence They tell me of one scruple yet remaining It is well if there be no more And what may that be That in Originall authority of Scripture Bishops and Presbyters went originally for the same Alas brethren what needed this to be a scruple in your thoughts or your words when it is in expresse termes granted by us That there was at first a plain Identity in their denomination here is one page and that not without some labour of proofs idly lost It is true that the Remonstrant undertakes to shew a cleare and received distinction of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons out of the undeniable writings of those holy men which lived in the times of the Apostles and after them with an evident specification of their severall duties And what say my Answerers to this Yet say they Let us tell him that we never finde in Scripture these three Orders Bishops Presbyters Deacons Brethren ye might have spared to tell me that which I had told you before I speak of the monuments of immediate succession to the Apostolique times Ye of the writings of the Apostles themselves How then doe you either answer or oppose my assertion Although I must also tell you that though in the Apostolique Epistles there be no nominall distinction of the titles yet there is a reall distinction and specification of the duties as we shall see in due place That ye may seem not to say nothing and may make your Readers beleeve you are not quite forsaken of Antiquity ye call Hierome Chrysostome Theophylact Irenaeus and Cyprian to the Book And what evidence will they give for you That the names of Bishops and Presbyters were not at first distinguished but used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a promiscuous sense and that some succeeding Bishops of Rome were styled Presbyters This is all but that your trifling may appeare to all the World Name but any one of our Writers who have hitherto stood up in the cause of Episcopacie that hath not granted and proclaimed this which you contend for Although withall let me tel you that you could not have brought a stronger argument against your selves for hence the world shall see how little force can be drawne from the name to the thing since the mentioned Anicetus Pius Hyginus Telesphorus Bishops of Rome are so famously known to have been in an height of elevation above Presbyters And since Cyprian who is styled by his Presbyters Frater is never found to style his Presbyters Bishops And being an holy Bishop himselfe in many Epistles stifly maintaines the eminence of his superiority And is some-whiles honored with the title of Beatissimus Papa Cyprianus which I suppose was never given to a meere Presbyter But what do I here follow them who confesse themselves out of the way At last acknowledging that their adversaries confesse that which they would needs spend time to prove let the names passe All the question is of the distinction of their offices which they wil follow as tediously as loosly And first they would faine know what we make the distinct office of a Bishop wherein they fall somewhat unhappily upon the very words of that branded Aerius Is it say they to edifie the Church by Word Sacraments Is it to ordaine others to that worked Is it to rule to governe by admonition and by other censures any or all of these belong unto the Presbytery Compare now the words of Aerius as they are related by Epiphanius whom that Father brings in speaking thus concerning Episcopacy and Presbytery There is one order of both one honor one dignity the Bishop imposeth hands so doth the Presbyter the Bishop doth administer Gods worship or service so doth the Presbyter the Bishop sitteth on the throne so doth also the Presbyter See reader and acknowledge the very phrases of that man whom holy antiquity censured even in this point both for a frantick man and an
Faith there therefore he commandeth Timothy to stay at Ephesus Titus at Crete not as Evangelists but as governors of the Churches And indeed the Epistles written to either of them doe evince the same for in these he doth not prescribe the manner of gathering together a Church which was the duty of an Evangelist but the manner of governing a Church being already gathered together which is the duty of a Bishop and all the precepts in those Epistles are so conformable hereunto as that they are not refer'd in especiall to Timothy and Titus but in general to all Bishops and therefore in no wise they suit with the temporary power of Evangelists Besides that Timothy and Titus had Episcopall jurisdiction not onely Eusebius Chrysostome Theodoret Ambrosius Hierome Epiphanius Oecumenius Primasius Theophylact but also the most ancient writers of any that write the History of the new Testament whose writings are now lost do sufficiently declare Eusebius without doubt appealing unto those in his third book of Ecclesiasticall History and 4. chapter Timothy saith hee in Histories is written to bee the first which was made Bishop of the Church of Ephesus as Titus was the first that was made Bishop of the Church of Crete But if John the Apostle and not any antient Disciple of the Apostles bee the authour of the Revelation hee suggests unto us those seven new Examples of Apostolicall Bishops For all the most learned Interpreters interpret the seven Angels of the Churches to be the seven Bishops of the Churches neither can they doe otherwise unlesse they should offer violence to the text What should I speake of James not the Apostles but the Brother of our Saviour the Sonne in law of the Mother of our Lord who by the Apostles was ordained Bishop of Hierusalem as Eusebius in his 2d. book of Ecclesiasticall History 1 chap. out of the 6. of the Hypotyposes of Clement Hierome concerning Ecclesiasticall writers out of the 1. of the Comments of Egesippus relate Ambrose upon the 1. chap. unto the Galatians Chrysostome in his 23 Homily upon the 15 of the Acts Augustine in his 2d. book and 37 chap. against Cresconius Epiphanius in his 65 Heresie The 6. Synod in Tullo and 32 Canon all assenting thereunto For indeed this is that James that had his first residence at Jerusalem as an ordinary Bishop whom Paul in his first and last coming to Hierusalem found in the City almost all the Apostles preaching in other places Gal. 1.19 and that concluded those things which were decreed in the assembly of the Apostles Act. 21. For hee was with Chrysostome Bishop of the Church of Hierusalem from whom when certaine came Peter would not eate with the Gentiles Galat. 2.12 From examples I passe to authorities which Ignatius confirmes by his own authority Whose axiomes are these The Bishop is he which is superiour in all chiefty and power The Presbytery is a holy company of counsellours and assessours to the Bishop The deacons are the imitators of angelicall vertues which shew forth their pure and unblameable ministry He which doth not obey these is without God impure and contemnes Christ and derogates from his order and constitution in his Epistle to the Trallians In an other place I exhort that ye study to doe all things with concord The Bishop being president in the place of God The Presbyters in place of the Apostolick Senate the Deacons as those to whom was committed the Ministry of Jesus Christ in his Epistle to the Magnesians And againe Let the Presbyters be subject to the Bishop the Deacons to the Presbyters the people to the Presbyters and Deacons in his Epistle to those of Tarsus But Ignatius was the Disciple of the Apostles from whence then had he this Hierarchie but from the Apostles Let us now heare Epiphanius in his 75. Heresie The Apostles could not presently appoint all things Presbyters and Deacons were necessary for by these two Ecclesiasticall affaires might bee dispatch Where there was not found any f●t for the Episeopacie that place remained without a Bishop but where there was need and there were any fit for Episcopacy they were made Bishops All things were not compleat from the beginning but in tract of time all things were provided which were required for the perfection of those things which were necessary the Church by this means receiving the fulnesse of dispensation But Eusebius comes neerer to the matter more strongly handles the cause who in his third booke of Ecclesiasticall History and 22 chapter as also in his Chronicle affirmeth that Erodius was ordained the 1. Bishop of Antioch in the yeere of our Lord. 45. in the 3. yeere of Claudius the Emperor at which time many of the Apostles were alive Now Hierome writeth to Evagrius that at Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist unto Heraclius and Dionisius the Bishop the Presbyters called one chosen out of themselvs and placed in a higher degree the Bishop But Marke dyed as Eusebius and Bucholcerus testifie in the yeere of our Lord 64. Peter Paul and John the Apostles being then alive therefore it is cleere that Episcopacie was instituted in the time of the Apostles and good Hierome suffered some frailty when he wrote that Bishops were greater then Presbyters rather by the custome of the Church then the truth of the Lords disposing unlesse perhaps by the custome of the Church hee understands the custome of the Apostles and by the truth of the Lords disposing hee understands the apointment of Christ yet not so hee satisfies the truth of History For it appears out of the 1.2 and 3. Chapters of the Revelation that the forme of governing the Church by Angels or Bishops was not only ratified and established in the time of the Apostles but it was cōfirmed by the very Son of God And Ignatius called that form the order of Christ And when Hierome writes that it was decreed in the whole World that one chosen out of the Presbyters should bee placed over the rest And when I have demonstrated that in the life-time of the Apostles Bishops were superior to Presbyters in Ordination and that each Church had one placed over it doe wee not without cause demand where when and by whom Episcopacie was ordained Episcopacie therefore is of divine right Which how the Prelates of the Church of Rome for almost 300. yeers did adorne with the truth of Doctrine innocency of life constancy in afflictions and suffering Death it selfe for the honour of Christ and on the other side how in succeding times first by their ambition next by their excessive pragmaticall covetousnesse scraping up to themselves the goods of this world then by their heresie last of all by their tyranny they corrupted it that the Roman Hierarchy at this day hath nothing else left but a vizard of the Apostolicall Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy and the lively image of the whore of Babylon our Histories both antient and moderne doe abundantly testifie Wherefore all Bishops are
knowledge and approbation The Presbyters then chose their Bishops who doubts it But upon whose order and Institution save that which S. Paul to the Superintendents met at Miletus Acts 20. Spiritus sanctus vos constituit Episcopos I marvell Brethren with what face you can make Ierome say that the Presbyters themselves were the Authors of this imparity when as himself hath plainly ascribed this to Gods own work when reading that Esay 60.17 I will make thy Officers peace according to the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. I will give thy Princes in peace and thy Bishops in righteousnesse he applies this to the Governours of the Evangelicall Church and the blessed Martyr and Bishop S. Cyprian to the same purpose The Deacons saith he must remember that the Lord himselfe chose Apostles that is Bishops but Deacons were chosen by the Apostles themselves And when ye cannot but know that the Apostles themselves were the immediate actors in this businesse if at least ye will beleeve the Histories and Fathers of the Church Irenaeus tels you plainly that the Apostles Peter and Paul delivered the Episcopacy of that Church to Linus and that Polycarpus was by the Apostles made Bishop in Asia of the Church of Smyrna and Tertullian particularly that Polycarpus was there placed by S. Iohn And S. Chrysostome clearly sayes that Ignatius was not onely trained up with the Apostles but that he received his Bishoprick from them and emphatically that the hands of the blessed Apostles touched his holy head And lastly the true Ambrose to the shameing of that Counterfeit whom you bring forth under that name tels you that Paul saw Iames at Ierusalem because he was made Bishop of that place by the Apostles your slip may talk of a Councell wherein this was done but this is as false as himselfe It is well known there never was any such Councell in the Christian world since the first generall Synod was the Nicene And Ieroms toto orbe Decretum as we have shewed could import no other then an Apostolicall act As for S. Augustine Is it not a just wonder Reader that these men dare cite him for their opinion upon occasion of a modest word concerning the honourable title of Episcopacy when as they cannot but know and grant that he hath blazoned Aerius for an heretick meerly for holding the same Tenet which they defend Lastly if Gregory Nazianzen in a pathetick manner have wished the abolition of Episcopacie as he never did what more dislike had he shown to it then he did to Synods when he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. that he never knew good come of them But reader it will be worth the while to inquire into the fidelity of these mens allegations Doe but consult the place of Nazianzen thou shalt ●●nd that he speaks not particularly of Episcopacie but of all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or precedencie and of all quarrelsome challenges of place all tyrannicall carriage of one man towards another wishing that there were no standing upon points of precedency but every man might be respected according to his vertue and adding at last Nunc autem dextrum hoc et sinistrum et medium latus c. But now saith he the right hand and the left and the middle place and the higher and lower degree and going before and going cheeke by jole what a world of troubles have they brought upon us Thus he See then Reader what a testimony here is for the utter abolition of Episcopacy from a man who was so interessed in the calling that he was wont to be styled by his adversaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Bishop of three Sees By this judge reader of the rest So then after all the clamours and colourable pretences of these men this imparity and jurisdiction was conveyed from the Apostles hands and deduced in an uninterrupted Line through all following ages to this present day How can this be say they unlesse our Bishops will draw the Line of their pedegree through the lines of Antichrist and joyne issue and mingle blood with Rome For shame Brethren eate this word What are there no Bishops but at Rome Is the whole Church all the world over Antichristian even those which are no lesse angry at Rome then your selves Hath not Episcopall imparitie continued in them all this while Is there no distinction to be had betwixt the calling and the abuse If the Antichristian Church have had Bishops so it hath had Churches Scriptures Baptisme Learning Creeds Because we have all these with them will ye say we deduce them from the loines of Antichrist Away with this impotent spight and uncharitablenesse and learne to be more modest true in your assertions and lesse confident in your appeals SECT VII LEt me balk your idle words the question is of the difference betwixt our present Bishops and the ancient this you will spread forth in three particulars The first is the manner of Election to these places of eminence which was of old ordered by the privity consent and approbation of the people which you eagerly seeke to prove out of Cyprian neither can it be denied that he is full and punctuall in this point Holy Athanasius seconds it And the old rule was Electio clericorum consensus Principis petitio plebis that a Bishop came in by the suite of the people the Election of the Clergy the consent of the Prince Ye might well have in this case spared the fetching in of the good Emperour Constantine doubtlesse this was the manner of old what variations followed afterward in these proceedings our learned Dr. Field hath well showed but sure this interest of the people continued so long even in the Roman Church that Platina can tell us Gregory the seventh was elected by Cardinalls Clerks Acoluthites Subdeacons Priests Abbots Bishops Clergie and Laitie The inconveniences that were found in those tumultuarie elections and the seditious issue of them which Nazianzen and Eusebius have laid before us in some particulars were I suppose the cause why they were in a sort laid downe But an imitation of this practise we have still continuing in our Church wherein upon the vacancy of every See there is a Conge-d'eslire that is a leave to elect sent down from the King to the Presbyters viz. the Deane and Chapter of that Church for an ensuing election of their Bishop and if this were yet more free we should not like it the lesse But in the meane time Brethren how are you quite beside the Cushion Where the objection was That the Apostles Bishops and ours were two in respect of managing their function And my defence is that our Bishops challenge not any other Spirituall power then the Apostles delegated to Timothy and Titus you now tell us of the different manner of our Elections What is this ad Rhombum we speake of their actions and exercise of power you talke of others actions to them
Were it so pleasing to his Majesty and the State to decree it we should be well content to submit to this ancient forme of Election the forbearance whereof is neither our fault nor our prejudice so as you might well have bestowed this breath to a better purpose and rather conclude that notwithstanding this forme of different choice our Bishops and those of former times are not two SECT VIII WEE follow you into the execution of our Episcopall Office wherein you will show ours and the Apostles to be two so clearely that he who will not wilfully shut his eyes may see a latitude of differences and that in three points The first in sole jurisdiction which you say was a stranger yea a monster to former times and will make it good by the power of that which in all wise writers was wont to be contra-distinguished Ordination For this maine point let my Answerers know that the Ordination is the Bishops but the sole in their sense is their own neither did our Bishops ever challenge it as theirs alone without the Presbyters but as principally theirs with them so as if the power be in the Bishop the assistance is from them the practise in both so is it in the Bishops that ordinarily and regularly it may not be done without them and yet ordinately it may not be done without them by the Bishop which hath bin so constantly and carefully ever observed that I challenge them to shew any one instance in the Church of England to the contrary Say Brethren I beseech you after all this noyse what Bishop ever took upon him to ordain a Presbyter alone or without the concurrent imposition of many hands They no lesse then Cyprian can say Ego collegae Although I must tell you this was in the case of Aurelius made a Lector And in that other testimony which you cite out of his Epistle 58. he speaks onely of the fraternities consent and approbation not of their concurrence in their act this is small game with you Neither is it lesse the order of the Church of England then of the Councell of Carthage Cum ordinatur Presbyter c. When a Presbyter is ordained the Bishop blessing him and holding his hand upon his head all the Presbyters that are present shall likewise lay their hands upon his head with the hands of the Bishop With what conscience can ye alledge this as to choak us in our contrary practise when you know this is perpetually and unfailably done by us But now that the Readers may see how you shuffle shew us but one instance of a Presbyters regular and practised ordaining without a Bishop and carry the cause else you do but abuse the Reader with an ostentation of proving what was never denied But here by the way brethren you must give me leave to pull you by the sleeve and to tell you of two or three foul scapes which will trie whether you can blush First that you abuse Firmilianus in casting upon him an opinion of Presbyters ordaining which he never held He in his Epistle to Stephen Bishop of Rome speaking of the true Church in opposition to heresies describes it thus Vbi praesident majores natu qui baptizandi manum imponendi et ordinandi possident potestatem under this name expressing those Bishops who presiding in the Church possesse the power of Baptizing Confirming Ordaining you injuriously Wire-draw him to Presbyters and foist in Seniores et Praepositos which are farre from the clause and matter Be convinced with the more cleare words of the same Epistle Apostolis et Episcopis qui illis vicariâ Ordinatione successerunt Secondly that you bewray grosse ignorance in translating Ambroses Presbyteri consignant by Presbyters ordaining Who that ever knew what belonged to antiquity would have beene guilty of such a solecisme when every novice knowes that consigning signifies confirmation and not ordaining Thirdly you discover not too much skill in not distinguishing of the Chorepiscopi some whereof had both the nature and power of Episcopacy to all purposes and therefore might well by the Bishops licence in his owne charge impose hands others not And lesse fidelity in citing the Councell of Antioch can 10. and the 13. of the Councell of Ancyra if it were not out of our way to fetch them into tryall Lastly I cannot but tell you that you have meerly cast away all this labour and fought with your owne shadow for how ever it were not hard to prove that in the first times of the Church it was appropriated to the Bishop to Ordaine which you cannot but cōfesse out of Ierome and Chrysostom yet since we speaking of our owne time and Church doe both professe and practise an association of Presbyters with us in the act of Ordination whom have you all this while opposed It is enough that you have seemed to say somthing and have showne some little reading to no purpose SECT IX YEt still you will needs beat the ayre very furiously and fight pitifully with your selves Alas brethren why will ye take so much paines to goe wilfully out of your way and to mis-lead the reader with you Who ever challenged in that sense which you faine to your selves a sole Jurisdiction Why will you with some show of learning confute that which you yeeld us to confesse we confesse this sole cryed downe by store of Antiquity we doe willingly grant that Presbyters have and ought to have and exercise a jurisdiction within their owne charge in foro conscientiae we grant that in all the great affayres of the Church the Presbyters whether in Synodes or otherwise ought to be consulted with we grant that the Bishops had of old their Ecclesiasticall Councell of Presbyters with whose advise they were wont to manage the greatest matters and we still have so for to that purpose serve the Deanes and Chapters and the Lawes of our Church frequently make that use of them we grant that Presbyters have their votes in provinciall Synods But we justly say that the superiority of jurisdiction is so in the Bishop as that Presbyters neither did nor may exercise it without him and that the exercise of externall jurisdiction is derived from by under him to those which execute it within his Dioces Thus it is to Timothy that S. Paul gives the charge concerning the rebuke of an Elder or not receiving an accusation against him It is to Titus that S. Paul leaves the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 correction of his Cretians Thus the Canons of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Thus the blessed Martyr Ignatius in his undoubted Epistle to those of Smyrna 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Let no man doe any thing in matters belonging to the Church without the Bishop Thus the Councell of Antioch orders that whatsoever belongs to the Church is to be governed managed and disposed by the judgement and authority of the Bishop who hath 〈◊〉
be scanned Objections which would to God they were onely of my own framing In the first That Episcopacy is no prejudice of Soveraigntie I justly prove for that there is a compatiblenesse in this case of Gods act and the Kings It is God that makes the Bishop the King that gives the Bishoprick what can you say to this You tell us you have already proved that God never made a bishop as hee stands in superiority over Presbyters so you told us and that is enough we were hard hearted if wee would not believe you When as wee have made good by undeniable proofes that besides the grounds which our Saviour laid of this imparity the blessed Apostles by inspiration from God made this difference in a personall ordaining of some above the rest and giving expresse charge of Ordination and Iurisdiction to those select persons in Church government the Bishops have ever since succeeded Tell us not therefore that if wee disclaim the influence of Soveraignty into our Creation and assert that the King doth not make us Bishops wee must have no beeing at all For that the Reader may see you stop your owne mouth answer me I beseech you Where or when ever did the King create a Bishop name the man and take the cause It pleases his Majestie to give his Congedelier for a Bishops Election to his See to signifie his Royall assent thereunto upon which the Bishop is solemnly ordained by the imposition of the hands of the Metropolitan and other his Brethren and these doe as from God invest him in his holy Calling which he exercises in that place which is designed and given by his Majestie What can be more plaine then this truth As for that unworthy censure which you passe upon the just comparison of Kings in order to Bishops and Patrons in order to their Clerks it shall be acknowledged well deserved if you shall be able to make good the disparity When hee shall prove you say that the Patron gives Ministeriall power to his Clerke as the King gives Episcopall power to the Bishop it may bee of some conducement to his cause Shortly brethren the same day that you shall shew mee that the King ordained a bishop the same day will I shew you that a Patron ordained a Presbyter The Patron gives the benefice to the one The King gives the bishopricke to the other neither of them do give the Office or Calling to either Goe you therefore with your Frier Simon to your Cell and consult with your Covent for more reason and wit then you shew in this and the next scornfull Paragraph wherein whiles you flout at my modest concession with an unbeseeming frump you are content silently to balke that my second answer which you know was too hot or too heavie for your satisfaction In the second the Imputation pretended to bee cast by this Tenet upon al the reformed Churches which want this governement I indevoured so to satisfie that I might justly decline the envy which is intended to be thereby raised against us For which cause I professed that wee doe love and honour those our sister Churches as the dear spouse of Christ and give zealous testimonies of my well wishing to them Your uncharitablenesse offers to choake me with those scandalous censures and disgracefull terms which some of ours have let fall upon those Churches and their eminent professors which I confesse it is more easie to be sorry for then on some hands to excuse The errour of a few may not bee imputed to all My just defence is that no such consequent can be drawne from our opinion for as much as the Divine or Apostolicall right which wee hold goes not so high as if there were an expresse command that upon an absolute necessity there must bee either Episcopacy or no Church but so far only that it both may and ought to be How fain would you heere finde mee in a contradiction Whiles I one-where reckon Episcopacy amongst matters essential to the Church another where deny it to be of the essence thereof Wherein you willingly hide your eys that you may not see the distinction that I make expresly betwixt the Being Well-beeing of a Church Affirming that those Churches to whom this power and faculty is denied lose nothing of the true essence of a Church though they misse something of their glory and perfection No Brethren it is enough for some of your friends to hold their Discipline altogether essentiall to the very being of a Church We dare not be so zealous The question which you aske concerning the reason of the different intertainment given in our Church to priests converted to us from Rome and to Ministers who in Qu. Maries dayes had received Imposition of hands in Reformed Churches abroad is meerely personall neither can challenge my decision Onely I give you these two answers that what fault soever may bee in the easie admittance of those who have received Romish Orders the sticking at the admission of our brethren returning from Reformed Churches was not in case of Ordination but of Institution they had beene acknowledged Ministers of Christ without any other hands layed upon them but according to the Lawes of our Land they were not perhaps capable of institution to a benefice unlesse they were so qualified as the Statutes of this Realme doe require And secondly I know those more then one that by vertue onely of that Ordination which they have brought with them from other Reformed Churches have enjoyed Spirituall Promotions and Livings without any exception against the lawfulnesse of their calling The confident affirmation which you alleage of the learned bishop of Norwich is no rule to us I leave him to his owne defence You think I have too much work on my hand to give satisfaction for myselfe in these two main Questions which arise from my book What high points shall wee now expect trow wee First whether that Office which by divine right hath sole power of Ordination and ruling all other Officers of the Church which hee sayth Episcopacy hath belong not to the being but onely to the glorie and perfection of a Church Can wee tell what these men would have Have they a minde to goe beyond us in asserting that necessity and essentiall use of Episcopacy which we dare not avow Do they not care to lose their cause so they may crosse an Adversary For your Question you stil talke of sole Ordination and sole jurisdiction you may if you please keepe that paire of soles for your next shooes VVee contend not for such an height of Propriety neither do we practise it they are so ours that they should not bee without us as we have formerly shewed That therefore there should bee a power of lawfull Ordination and government in every setled Church it is no lesse then necessary but that in what case soever of extremity and irresistible necessitie this should be only done by Episcopall hands we never meant
exoticall positions of unsound teachers which it selfe hath in terminis condemned and say as you are not ashamed to do We thank God we are none of you we forgive you and pray for your repentance Your Quaeres wherein I see you trust much are made up of nothing but spight and slander If I answere you with questions shorter then your own and more charitable you will excuse mee In answer then to your first I ask Who ever held the Lordships of Bishops to stand by divine right If no body whether hee that intimates it doth not falsifie and slander Why is it a greater fault in one of our Doctors to hold the Lords day to stand Iure bumano then it was in Master Calvin I aske whether it were any other then K. Iames himselfe of blessed memory that said No Bishop no King and if it were he whether that wise King did not meane to prejudice his own authoritie Whether since it hath beene proved that Bishops are of more then meerely humane Ordinance and have so long continued in the Christian Church to the great good of Church and State it be not most fit to establish them for ever and to avoid all dangerous motions of innovation Whether these answerers have the wit or grace to understand the true meaning of the Ius Divinum of Episcopacie or if they did whether they could possibly be so absurd as to raise so sensless and inconsequent inferences upon it Whether there bee any question at all in the fifth question since the Remonstrant himselfe hath so fully cleered this point professing to hold Episcopacie to bee of Apostolicall and in that right Divine Institution Whether Master Beza have not heard foundly of his distinction of the three kinds of Episcopacie in the full and learned answere of Saravia and whether hee might not have beene better advised then in that conceit of his to crosse all reverend antiquity and whether the Painter that drest up his Picture after the fancy of every passenger doe not more fitly resemble those that frame their discipline according to the humour of their people varying their projects every day then those which hold them constantly to the only ancient and Apostolicall forme Whether it were not fit that wee also should speake as the ancient Fathers did according to the language of their times and whether those Fathers could not better understand and interpret their owne meaning in the title of Episcopacie then these partiall and not over-judicious answerers and whether they have not cleerely explicated themselves in their writings to have spoken properly and plainly to the sense now enforced Whether Presbyters can with out sin arrogate unto themselves the exercise of the power of publique Church government where Bishops are set over them to rule and order the affaires both of them and the Church and whether our Saviour when he gave to Peter the promisse of the Keyes did therein intend to give it in respect of the power of publike jurisdiction to any other save the Apostles and their Successours the Bishops and whether ever any Father or Doctour of the Church till this present age held that Presbyters were the Successours to the Apostles and not to the seventy Disciples rather Whether ever any Bishops assumed to themselves power Temporall to bee Barons and to sit in Parliament as Iudges and in Court of Star-chamber c. or whether they bee not called by his Majesties writ and royall authority to these services and whether the spirituall power which they exercise in ordaining silencing c. bee any other then was by the Apostles delegated to the first Bishops of the Church constantly exercised by their holy successors in all ages especially by Cyprian Ambrose Augustine and the rest of that sacred order men which had as little to do with Antichrist as our answerers have with charity Whether the answerers have not just cause to be ashamed of patronizing a noted Heretick Aerius in that for which hee was censured of the ancient Saints and Fathers of the Church and whether the whole Church of Christ ever since his time till this age have not abandoned those very errours concerning the equality of Bishops and Presbyters which they now presume to maintain Whether the great Apostacy of the Church of Rome do or did consist in maintayning the order of government set by the Apostles themselves and whether all the Churches in the whole Christian World even those that are professedly opposite to the Church of Rome doe let in Antichrist by the doore of their Discipline since they all maintain Episcopacie no lesse constantly then Rome it selfe Whether if Episcopacie be through the munificence of good Princes honoured with a title of dignity and largnesse of revenues it ought to be ere the more declined and whether themselves if they did no hope to carry some sway in the Presbytery would be so eager in crying up that government and whether if there were not ● maintenance annexed they would not hid themselves and jeopard their eares rathe● then mancipate themselves to the charge o● souls Whether there bee no other apparen● causes to be given for the increase of Poper● and superstition in the Kingdome beside● Episcopacie which hath laboured strongly to oppose it and whether the multitudes of Sects and professed slovenlynesse in Gods service in too many have not bin guilty of the increase of profanesse amongst us Why should England one of the most famous Churches of Christendome seperate it selfe from that forme of government which all Churches through the whole Christian World have ever observed and do constantly and uniformely observe and maintain and why should not rather other less noble Churches conform to that universall government which all other Christians besides do gladly submit unto Why should the name of Bishops which hath beene for this 1600. yeers appropriated in a plain contradistinction to the governours of the Church come now to be communicated to Presbyters which never did all this while so much as pretend to it and if in ancient times they should have done it could not have escaped a most severe censure And shortly whether if wee will allow you to bee Bishops all will not bee well Whether since both God hath set such a government in his Church as Episcopacie and the Lawes of this Land have firmly established it it can bee lawfull for you to deny your subjection unto it and whether it were not most lawfull and just to punish your presumption and disobedience in framing so factious a question And thus I hope you have a sufficient answere to your bold and unjust demands and to those vain cavills which you have raised against the humble Remonstrance God give you Wisdome to see the Truth and Grace to follow it Amen To the Poscript THe best beauty that you could have added to your discourse brethren had been honesty and truth both in your allegations of Testimonies and inferences of argumentation In both which
the Laity who abound with wealth to bee maintained of the common store and that more liberally then others For if by those that rule well you shall understand both Lay-Elders and sacred also you must needs conclude that they are all worthy of double honour both those which rule and those which labour in Doctrine which conclusion the Apostle is against elsewhere whilest hee saith those which serve at the Altar must partake of the Altar And the Lord himselfe who hath appointed that those which preach the Gospell should live of the Gospell 1. Corinthians 9.13.14 Wherupon Hierome in the same place hee would saith hee have them to yeeld carnall things to those of whom they receive spiritual things because they being taken up in teaching cannot provide necessary things for themselves Yea I say yet more if St. Paul had by those that rule understood Lay-elders certainly hee would some-where have put them in minde of their duty or at least have made mention of them 1 Tim. 3. where he doth not omit to give charge even of Deacons and Deaconesses But he doth neither of the two but presently after the mention of Bishops or Presbyters that were Pastors he falls into the speech concerning Deacons and their wives so as it is a plaine proofe that Lay-Elders were utterly unknown to him Fourthly the defence of Lay-Elders out of this place is utterly against the judgment of the fathers so many as ever have expounded this text of the Apostle Neither indeed is there any necessity at all that because the Apostle saith those especially that labour in Word and Doctrine therefore we should devise new Elders to bee taken out of the common people For it was well knowne that those of the Clergie which are over the Lords flock have their distinct Offices and employments There are of them which administer Sacraments make publike prayers privately admonish faithfull people and with-hold them from sinning there are others which being indued with excellent guifts of speaking imploy themselves in being teachers guids to mens soules in the way to heaven and the labors of these men which are taken by them in word and Doctrine are justly preferred before the service of them which administer the sacraments and make prayers for the Church even by the testimony of the Apostle himselfe who saith Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the Gospell 1. Cor. 1.17 He was sent for both purposes but the chief end of his mission was the preaching of the Gospell Whosoever therefore thus rule the people whether they doe administer the Sacrament or onely preach the word or whether they doe both are worthy of double Honour where a certain number is put for an uncertain double honour that is greater and more then others although some are of opinion that here by Apostolique authority there is a greater portion assigned to the Governors then to others that appertain to the Church others interpret it of that double Honour which is fit for governours to have one of an awfull reverence and command the other of more largenesse of maintenarce that they be both observed and respected above others and that they have a more liberall provision of necessaries for their livelyhood but the first of them is the more simple exposition of the words He therefore holds those that are set over the people worthy of double honour And why double A little before he had given them order about the honoring that is maintaining of their Widowes at the charge of the Church from the Widows hee passeth to the Elders or Presbyters whom if they rule well hee would have honoured with a double alowance that is greater then that of the Widowes both by reason of their office and by reason of their family and amongst those that rule yet againe hee would have those most regarded who are imployed not so much in administring the Sacraments as in preaching the Word I doubt not but this is the most true Explication of this place FINIS Psal 27.3 Acts 17 22. Areopagus Mars-hill or The C●urt of Areopagites Branded and mislik't c. Pag. 4. * If we may not rather take it to allude to the manner of the Heathens who because their gods were multinomines according to their severall powers and vertues had certain monitors to put the suppliants in mind of the appellations of their Deities as Desiderius Heraldus thinks and to this purpose brings that of S. Augustine cited out of Seneca as he reads it Alius numina Dei subjicit or as Lipsius nomina however it cannot give the least colour to the sense intended by the Answerers Aug. Ep. 121 Aug. de bon persever c. 22. Vtinam tardi corde sic audirent disputationes nostras ut magis intuerentur orationes nostras quas semper habuit habebit Ecclesia ab exordiis suis usque dum finiatur seculum Just Mart. Apol. 2. The words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is with all intention and implied in that of the same Justin Martyr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Conc. Laod. c. 19. First the prayers of the Catechumeni preceded then those of the Penitents followed then those of the Faithfull concluded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Con. Laod. c. 8 Concil Milev 2. cont Celest Pelag. Poste à mortuus est Adrianus Cujus Deus non misereatur obiitque cum luctu magno c. * viz. the high Priest then living Buxtorfius tells us that the Creed of R. Ben Maimon was taken out of the Jews Liturgy In his speech at Norwich Assizes published M. Fisher I beseech you tell me brethren how you construe those words of Calvin which he wrote to the Protector of England Anno 1548. Oct. 22. Quod ad formulam precum rituū Ecclesiasticorum valde prob● ut certa illa extet à qua pastoribus discedere non liceat infunctione sua tam ut consulatur quorundam simplicitati imperitiae quam ut certius ita constet omnium inter se ecclesiarum consensus postremo etiam c. That is As for a forme of prayers and of rites Ecclesiasticall I do greatly approve that there be a certain one extant from which it should not be lawfull for the Ministers in their function to depart both that by this meanes provision may bee made for the simplicity and unskilfulnesse of some and the consent of all Churches amongst thēselves may more certainly appeare Lastly that thus there may be a remedy for the desultory levity of some men that affect still certain innovations as I have shewed that the Catechisme it selfe serves for this purpose So therefore there ought to be a set forme of Catechisme a set form of administration of Sacraments and of publique Prayers Quanquam descessu veteris confusus amici Juvenal You might as well have told us out of the same Author of the strange conditions that are in use amongst them which they impose upon their King if ever he come into their coast of his riding with one leg bare and their mocking of him with their Maravedis Yet the words of the Remonstrance are not nothing can be a more certain truth but nothing can be more plain then this truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Amb. de dignit● Sacerd. c. 3. Nam Alexandriae à Marco Evangelistausque ad Heraclam Dionysium Episcopos Pr●sbyteri semper unum ex se electū in excel siori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant quomodo si exercitus Imperatorem faciat c. The holy Ghost made you Bishops or Over-seers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost Tom. 5. Edition Savil. p. 499. Aug. F p. 19. Greg. Naz. Orat. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Platina in vita Greg. 7. Cypr. Ep. 33. Fi●mil Cyp●ian Epist 75. To this purpose is that which you cite out of Clemens Alex Strom. l. 5. Alluded to in that usuall allegation of Ambrose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Antioch c. 24 25. B. Down def l. 3. ch 5. Howsoever it is now in some Reformed Churches laid down Socrat. l. 7. c. 37. 2 King 5.7 Calvin Epist f 421. Aquin. Pro dormit●one victioris non fiat blatio a uto depre catio aliquanomine ejus in Ecclesia frequentetur Cypr. Rogatiano fratri l. 3. Ep. 9. Aug. Ep. 110. 2· Tim 1.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rev. 2.24 Cypr. l. 4. ad Antonianum Epist Revel 1.20 Conc. Nic. can 8 Ignat. ad Ephes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. So Cyprian Epicopis loquens c. Qui Apostolis vicaria ordinatione succedunt Ep. 69. Vnitas per Apostolos novis successoribus tradita Ep. 41 Meminisse debent Diaconi quoniam Apostolos i. e. Episcopos prapaesitos Dominus clegit Ep. 65. B. Montague Orig. contra Celsum c. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vide Justellum in notis ad Canon African 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Afr. 91 Aug. contra Crescon l. 3. Omnes vos Episcopi Presbyteri Diaconi Seniores scitis c. where against your own knowledge you translate Presbyteri Elders to bleare the Readers eys with a shew of a double sort of Elders whereas Presbyteri are there manifestly distinguished from Seniores P. Moulin Epist 3. ad Episcop Winton c.
the common Councell of Presbyters and that Bishops ought still so to govern And lastly that The occasion of this imparity was the division which through the Devils instinct fell among Christians You look now that I should tell you that the Book is of uncertain credit or that Ierome was a Presbyter and not without some touch of envie to that higher dignity he missed or that wiser men then your selves have censured him in this point for Aerianisme I plead none of these but whiles you expect that I should answer to Ierome I shall set Ierome to answer for himselfe For the first I cannot but put you in mind that the same Father citing the words of the Bishop of Jerusalem That there is no difference betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter passeth a Satis imperitè upon it but let it be so At first he sayes Bishops and Presbyters had but one title So say we too But when began the distinction Ye need not learne it of Saravia he himselfe tels you When divisions began And when that When they began to say I am Pauls I am Apollo's I am Cephas which was I think well and high in the Apostles time But this you would cleanly put of as spoken by Ierome in the Apostles phrase not of the time of the Apostle This is but a generall intimation of contentions arisen though later in the Church Excuse me Brethren this shift will not serve your turne Then belike there should have been no distinct Bishops till after-ages upon this ground that till then there were no divisions Or if so why should the remedie be so late after the disease Or how comes he elsewhere to name Bishops made by the Apostles and to confesse that before his time there had been many successions Besides he instanceth in the peculiar mis-challenging of Baptisme which only S. Paul specifieth in his owne time And Clemens seconds him in his Epistle to the Corinthians in taxing the continuance of those distractions so as by Ieroms own confession Episcopacy was ordained early within the Apostles times But then say you It was not of Apostolicall intention but of Diabolicall occasion Weakly and absurdly As if the occasion might not be devilish and the institution divine As if the best Lawes did not rise from the worst manners Were not the quarrels betwixt the Grecians and Hebrews for the maintenance of their widows an evill occurrence yet from the occasion thereof was raised the Ordination of Deacons in the Church Yea but Ierome saith This was rather by the custome of the Church then by the truth of the Lords disposition True it was by the Custome of the Church but that Church was Apostolicall not by the Lords disposition immediately for Christ gave no expresse rule for it but mediately it was from Christ as from his inspired Apostles Let Ierome himselfe interpret himselfe who tels us expresly in his Epistle to Euagrius this superiority of Bishops above Presbyters is by Apostolicall tradition which is as much as we affirme And whiles he saith toto orbe decretum est that in the time of those first divisions it was decreed all the world over that Bishops should be set up I would faine know by what power besides Apostolicall such a Decree could be so soon and so universally enacted But Ierome saith The Presbyters governed the Church by their common Counsell So they did doubtlesse altogether till Episcopacy was setled who dares deny it Yea but he saith They ought to doe still So say we also and so in some cases we do Church-government is Aristocraticall Neither is any Bishop so absolute as not to be subject to the judgement of a Synode Yea in many matters it is determined by our Laws that hee must take the advise and assistance of his Ecclesiasticall Presbytery So then S. Ierome is in his judgement no back friend of ours but in his History he is our Patron With what forehead can they perswade their Reader the Originall of Episcopacie was not in Ieroms opinion so early when they cannot but confesse that the same Father hath in flat termes told us that Iames was Bishop of Jerusalem Timothy of Ephesus Titus of Crete that ever since the time of Mark the Euangelist who died five or sixe yeares before Peter and Paul and almost forty years before S. Iohn at Alexandria till the dayes of Heraclas and Dionysius the Presbyters have alwayes chosen one to be their Bishop As for those poore negative arguments which follow palpably begging the question they are scarce worthie of a passe were it not that by them they goe about to confute their own Author affirming That upon occasion of divisions Episcopacie was constituted but he stands so close to his owne grounds as that contrary to their mis-allegation of D r Whitakers he plainly tels them Episcopacie is so proper a remedy for this evill that unlesse the Bishop have a peerlesse power there will be as many Schismes as Priests the wofull experience whereof we finde in the miserable varieties of Separatisme at this day Goe on Brethren since you are so resolved to strike that friend whom you bring in to speak for you teach your advocate S. Ierome how unlikely it is that the Apostles should give way as he professes they did to such a remedie as might prove both ineffectuall and dangerous and that their holinesse should make a stirrup for Antichrist We lookt for Ambrose to come in next and behold you bring in a foisted Commenter a man by the convictions of Whitakers Spalatensis Cocus Rivetus Bellarmine Possevine Maldonate as hath beene elsewhere shewed of not a suspected onely but a crackt credit If it mattered much what he said I could out of his testimonie picke more advantage then you prejudice to my cause But if you will heare the true Ambrose speake he tells you There is one thing which God requireth of a Bishop another of a Presbyter another of a Deacon As for the persons who brought in this imparitie you tell us out of the same Authors The Presbyters themselves brought it in Witnesse Ierome ad Euagrium The Presbyters of Alexandria did call him their Bishop whom they had chosen from among themselves and placed in an higher degree But brethren what meanes this faithlesse and halved citation Had you said all the place would have answered for it selfe the words are Nam Alexandriae à Marco Evangelista c. For at Alexandria ever since Mark the Evangelist untill the times of Heraclas and Dionysius Bishops the Presbyters have alwayes called one chosen out of themselves and placed in an higher degree Bishop as if an army should chuse their Generall Why did you avoid the name of Mark the Evangelist but that your hearts told you that he dying many yeares within the time of the Apostles this election and appellation and distinction of degrees of Bishops and Presbyters must needs have been in the life time of the Apostles and not without their