these we allow and what get our adversaries by that We hold that such Bishops be Apostolike and Divine yet Diocesan both titular and ruling Bishops and also Lord Bishops came in â—aâ—latim by litle and little by Humane policie and ambition and tyraÌ„nie long after But Ierom there saith that these Bishops were in a higher degree above Presbyters Bez. Annoâ—at in Apoc. 2.1 which Beza denyeth Also they were constant Presidents in the Meetings which Beza also denyeth Beza saith Bishops and Presbyters then differed not gradu in degree meaning in degree of power that is in Maioritie of power they differed not then But in degree of Order he granteth they did differ which I call “ Reas. for 1â— Prioritie of Order Which also Ieâ—om meaneth by his higher degree in this place And so heerein we all agree But as touching Bezaes coniecture of the Angell of Ephezus viz. that peradventure he might be a President not continuing but changeable I suppose few approve it For my part I do not Though I greatly honor the name memorie of Maister Beza yet there is no neede to be of his opinion in this A changeable Presidencie no doubt was among those Bishops Act. 20.28 But I am of minde that none of these Bishops meant by the Angells Rev. 2. 3. were changeable In all likelyhood they were constant and continuing for terme of life And such a difference Presidentiall might well com in among the many joint Pastors of the Church at Ephesus by this time and yet they all remaine †Declarâ—â— pag. 15. equall in honor and power Pastorall Howbeit these constant Presidents were Bishops then to no Diocesan multitude dispersed abroad in many ordinary set assemblies but to one ordinary assembly only as is noted often before And so the great argument of these Doctors which they take from the “ Perp. gov pag. 260. D. Down Def. 4. â— Succession of Bishops to proove our Bishops as they are in England to be lawfull may appeare to be a meere Sophisme deceit For the Bishop of Rome also may by such a shew of Succession prove his Office and Function lawfull as in deed he doth indeavour to do and doth it as well as they But though all these Bishops have one name viz. Bishops yet betweene the first and the last of them there are seene many reall and substantiall differences in their Offices To observe therefore this egregious Equivocation I remit the Reader to pag. 98. 99. 128. 129. 211. 212. before Yet Doctor Downame †sticketh hard to this †Defenc. 4.50 c. that Iames the Apostle was a Bishop Iames no proper Bishop What a proper Bishop It is simply impossible whosoever say otherwise Let the Reader marke that all our question is about Bishops properly so called not about the name Bishop vsed in a generall sense There is “ Rain confer pa. 263. 267. a generall taking of the word Bishop and there is a proper taking of it Apostles and Evangelistes may generally improperly be called Bishops the rather if they reside long in one place and do execute a Bishop like Office there As Iames I graunt did in Ierusalem and Titus in Crete yea by assignement of the Apostles And questionles so the Ancient Writers meane where they call Iames Bishop of Ierusalem and Titus Bishop of Crete For neither Iames nor Titus were nor could be proper Bishops there Which I shewe thus Every Bishop is appropriated limited and confined only to one Church Iames neither was nor could be appropriated and confined only to one Church Therefore Iames neither was nor could be a Bishop The Proposition is most evident and granted of our “ D. Bilson pag. 227. 232. adversaries The Assumption they neither ought nor dare deny For Iames having froÌ„ Christ a Ministerie and Calling to all Churches throughout the world this hee retayned still hee never lost that it were sacrilege to reduce him from it and to shorten him of this his right given him froÌ„ heaven Neither could the Apostles do it if they would Heere it will be an absurd evasion to say Iames had in him two Offices viz. an Apostles and a proper Bishops Office In respect of the former hee was still vnlimited in respect of the later he was limited to the Church of Ierusalem This I say is so absurd frivolous as nothing can be more And yet it is the only thing that can bee answered I pray can one and the same man by any distinction be capeable of privative contraries at one time Can the same man be in fetters and at libertie at once Can one be blind and see also Can a man be a Christian an insidell too No more could Iames be both appropriated to Ierusalem and not appropriated at one time Neither could the proper Bishops Office bee conioyned with an Apostleship For it were in vaine Seeing the Apostleship contayneth the whole Bishoply Office and more too But the Apostles in the Churches administratioÌ„ did no thing in vaine idly Again though the Apostleship contained in it the whol office of a proper Bishop yet this was “ Declarat pag. 30. Materially not Formally As a Privie Counsailler in England hath in him the Office and power of a Iustice of peace also a Shilling containeth a Groat But no man that meaneth plainly will say A Shilling is a Groat or a Privie Counsailler is a Iustice of peace If any do it is not rightly nor truely spoken For not the Matter but the Forme doth give the proper name Yet I do not deny all vse of vnproper speaches I grant on some occasion men may speake generally and vndistinctly of things In reasoning we must alwayes speake properly as I deeme those Ancients did of Bishops Nevertheles in ordinary teaching and specially in reasoning and disputing wee must ever vse exact and proper termes avoyding generalities and wordes vnproper Otherwise wee equivocate To this reason that the Apostles gave not Iames any power which hee had not before as an Apostle D. Downame answereth that which is both false and also most presumptuous For plainly hee saith “ Def. 4 5â—â— Iames the Apostle had not the power of Iurisdiction before he was designed Bishop of Ierusalem O hautie Bishops Who arrogat to themselves a power beyond the Apostles No marvaile if he say Pag. 59. it is no depressing of an Apostle to become a proper Bishop For only this may lâ—ft vp a Bishop above an Apostle his other idle “ Pag. 62. 63. respects and considerations neither did nor could Titus and Timothie were no proper Bishops Nay but Titus Timothie and their Bishopriks do make the most busines of all Of whom D. Bilson saith †Perpet govâ— pag. 300. Heere I must pray the Christian Reader advisedly to marke what is said answered on either side This indeed is the maine erection of the Episcopall power and function
in a Synod but it is in the power and free liking of every Parish who only have power to exclude from the Churches communion the impudent sinner If wee looke thoroughly into the wordeâ— which are in Math 18. we may finde him only to be excommunicate whom the common consent of that Church where the man dwelleth hath shut out Againe “ Epichirifis de Ganone Missae Est particularis Ecclesia ea cuâ— preceptum est vt morbidum membrum resecet Math. 18. quales ea Corinthi ad quam seribit Paulus aliae quarum se curam gereâ—â—dicat quibus se pari modo docere asserit â—nquiens Sollicitudo omnium EcclesiaruÌ„ sicut 〈◊〉 omnibus Ecclesijs doceo That is a parti ulat Church which is commanded to cut of the infected member Math. 18. Chap. â— Such as that of Corinth is to which Paul writeth and others which he saith be hath care of and in which he affirmeth that he taught altogeather alike saying The care of all Churches and As I teach in all Churches And concerning Calling to the Ministerie he saith * Ecclesiaste◠†It seemeth that there is nothing so agreeable to the ordinance of God and to the old institution as that all the whole Church of the faithfull amongst a people togeather with certain learned and godly Bishops and other faithfull men having skill in things should choose a Pastor And after againe Let therfore these proud Bishops and foolish Abbots goe shake their â—ares For it is convenient that the right of the Election should be in the power of the church of the faithfull instructed by the counsaill of learned meÌ„ Moreover he writeth thus “ Ad Valent Compar Hee that with a Councill of Bishops shall impose on Christian people any law or observatioÌ„ at their own liking he meaneth without the peoples coÌ„sent hic violento imperio ius Ecclesiae invadit Hee invadeth the Churches right by a violent command And therefore such Bishops as thus doe absque Ecclesia without the Churches consent statuentes suâ libidine Artic. 64. decreeing at their owne pleasure he saith are nomine tenus Episcopi reverà tyranni in name Bishops but in deed tyrants And thus much out of this holy man of God and noble witnes of Christ Maister Zuinglius Maister Luther another mightie and Luther principal champion for Gods truth at the same time wrote a special treatise which hath this title * Tom. 2. pag. 374. Quod Ecclesia â—us potestatem habeat indicandi de quavis doctrinâ item vocandi Ministros Evangelij aut si fideles esse desierint deponendi That the “ In this word he signifieth the CongregatioÌ„ of the people Church hath the right power to iudge of any doctrine also of calling the Ministers of the Gospell or if they cease to be faithfull to depose them What can be more for vs then this is In another place he saith “ Pag. 369. b. Chemnic examp part 2.27 a. Claves sunt totius Ecclesia The Keyes belong to the whole Church In his booke of the Privat Masse hee speaketh to the Bishops of his time thus Spiritus Sanctus vui Civitats plures constituit Episcopos Vos singuli estis pluribus Quâ authoritate Nonne ipsius Satanae c The holy Ghost appointed to one City many Bishops but you are one Bishop to many Cities By what authoritie Is it not of Sathan him selfe by you opposing against the authoritie of the Holy Ghost We conclude therfore boldly that you according to the Scriptures the H Ghosts decree are not so much as to be called Bishops but rather adversaries and destroyers both of Bishops and of the Divine decree concerning the appointing of Bishops Againe in his booke against the falsly named Order of Bishops hee saith †pag. 322. At citra iocum vides palam c. But without iest thou seest openly that the Apostle Paul calleth only them Bishops which do preach the Gospell and Minister Sacraments to the people as in our time the parish Ministers and Preachers do Therefore I beleeve without doubt that they by fight possesse the title and name of Bishops And in another treatise “ De Ministâ— Eccles instituendâ— pag. 365. b. Donabo hoc ordmibus Papisticis quod solius Episcopi autoritate instituuntur quos vocant Sacerdotes consensu aut suffragio populi cui preficiendi sunt neque requisito nec obtento cuius tamen cum sint populus Dei maximè intererat vt non sine suffragijs suis quisquaÌ„ eis imponeretur I will yield this saith he to the popish orders that Priestes as they call them are instituted by the authoritie of the Bishop alone the câ—nsent and voyce giving of the people over whoÌ„ they are to bee set neither sought nor obtâ—yned whose chiefe right nevertheles it was seeing they are Gods people that not any one should be set over them without their voyce-giving Thus teach these Pillars of the Gospell Zuinglius and Luther To whom wee will ad our two great lightes that shined sometyme in England Maister Bucer and P. Martyr Bucer Bucer hath these wordes †In Math 16. â—9 Haec potestas penes omnem Ecclesiam est authoritas modo Ministerij penes Presbyteros Episcopos Ita vt Roma olim potestas populs fuit authoritas Senatus This power sway of the governement is in the whole Church but the authoritie only of ministration therof is in the Presbyters and Bishops So as in old time at Rome the power was in the people but the authoritie or direction was in the Senat. In an other place he saith “ De regno Chrâ—â—â— 1. â— The Apostle accuseth the Corinthianâ— for that the whole church did not cast out of their company the incestuous person P. Martyr saith 7. P Martyr †In â— Cor. 16.15 Fatemur claves Ecclesia vniversae datas We confesse the Keyes are given to the whole Church By the Keyes he meaneth Governement and Ecclesiasticall power Also hee saith “ vers 3. it is no mervaile that it is the Churches right to chose Ministers seeing we see the Civill Lawes do give power to Townes to choose their Physicians and Scholemaisters at their owne liking In an other place thus he saith “ In cap. 5.11 Quoniam in Ecclesia de negotijs gravioribus quae sunt maximi momenti ad plebem â—efertur vt patet in Actis Apostolicis ideò politâ—ae rationem habet Because in the Church matters of waight are referred to the people to determine as it is manifest in the Acâ—es therefore the Church hath a respect of the Popular governement or Democracie For so P. Martyr heere meaneth by politia as wee may see if we look in the place Also namely of Excommunication hee saieth Consentiente vniversa Eccsesia Excommunicetur Hoc debet ist ad iudicium antecedere Let Excommunication be with the consent of
was helde they were they which were speciallie grieved with him who yet for feare of his pride and tyrannie durst not themselves alone accuse him as it is there signified The point is we see heere at Antioch the Churches that is the peoples concurrence and consent with other Bishops and Teachers neare adioyning in the Excommunication Deposition of one and in Ordayning to them selves another Bishop After this againe the Councill of Nice decreed Concil Nicen that the people should chose their Minister as appeareth where they say Anno. 330. If any Church Minister dye let one of the Chuch succede in his place so that he seeme fit and be chosen of the people and the Bishop consent and confirme the peoples election “ Socrat. 1.6 This order was written by this Councill Theodoret. 1.9 namely to the AlexaÌ„drian Churches because of a particular occasion but it served as a rule generally for all places as the Councill was generall Which doth plainly appeare by that which afterward the Councill of Constantinople did in “ Theodores â— 9 observing this Nicen ordinance as an order belonging to them About the yeare 420. the fourth Councill of Carthage decreed thus †Concil Cartha 4 Câ—n 22 Au câ—c 420. Eâ—â—â—â—â—pus sine Concilio Clericorum suâ—rum Cleâ—â—â—s non ordinet ita vt Civium assensum â—â—â—ventiam testimonium quarat Let 〈◊〉 a Bishop ordayne any Clergie-man wichout an assemblie of his Clergie so that let him â—â—eke the peoples consent and connivence and Mimonie This Canon will have Ministers made in no wise without the peoples consent contentment testimonie of their worthines Heere D. Downame with little shew but with great falshood turneth this word Et and into Or saying assent or connivence where he should say assent and coÌ„nivence as “ Pag 24.25 before I brieflie touched Whereby he would make the Council seeme to meane that either of these was sufficient in the making of Ministers that their assent was not simply necessarie but if they did connive or hold their peace the Councill was content and required no more But both the present wordes and all circumstances of these times do plainly declare that the Councill heere requireth in making Ministers the peoples expresse consent and testimonie also of their worthines as before I noted Of these times Calvin saith thus “ Instiâ— 4.4.10 Cum parochâ—â— no vt Presbyters destinabantur tunc loci multitudinem nominatim consentire oportuit When new Presbyters were appointed to the parishes then the people of the place must consent expresly This with the rest of the Councillâ— of Carthage was confirmed in the generall Council of Constantinople holden in Trullo about the yeare of Christ 682. Conâ—ll Constantinop Aâ— 682. Wherefore so long longer also wee may well thinke particular Congregations kept their spirituall right and power in this behalfe Which Calvin saith was such that though the Governors somtimes did of them selves first chose and then brought the matter to the people yet “ Instie 4 4.1â— they the people were not bound to those foreiudgemeÌ„ts And when the Church was deprived of this her right it is by him called Impia Ecclesia spoliatie quoties alicui populâ— ingeritur Episcopus quem non petierit aut saltem liberâ voce approbarit It is an vngodly robbing of the Church so often as a Pastor is putvpon any people whom they havenot desired or at least approved by free voyce I grant by this time many great preparations were made to bring in that Antichristian apostasie and tyrannie which afterward followed and overflowed every where Howbeit yet thus long the Churches even by publike lawes retayned their life at least wise that iniurie and violence spirituall robbery tyranny which afterward prevayled against them as yet was not generall It is to no purpose heere to inquire wheÌ„ or by whom this wrong first entered I meane this withholding froÌ„ the people of God their free consent in spirituall governement It is sufficient that we see this their freedome to be Apostolicall also to bee taught and observed in the Christian Churches next succeeding the Apostles yea even till after the time that Antichrist began the desolation of abhominarion which since hath ben every-where set vp with strong hand maintayned Also that wee see the most vndoubted instruments of God in these later times so cleerely to avouch this most singular meanes of overthrowing Antichrist and so earnestly to defend it as they do viz. as if without it there were neither any way to repell him at first nor securitie afterward for vs to stand long against his vncessant indeavours labouring still to returne and tyrannise over our soules againe This I say is sufficient for our present purpose at this time and in this place Which also being well considered can not but cause every honest man to mourne and sigh before the Lord beholding this foundation of pietie and godly life to be so despised yea so maligned and resisted as by many it is now amoÌ„g our selves where the Gospell is and hath ben entertayned thankes be to God these many yeares FroÌ„ which most iust cause of griefe it proceedeth also necessarily that we cannot but opeÌ„ our mouthes as we do to beare witnes in the behalfe of this cause of Christ being also the only true and assured meanes which doeth most nearely concerne vs as we wel vnderstand in the matter of the salvation of our soules And so much touching this point Only this moreovet for a Conclusion I desire may be hoere noted the ground whereof I take out of our adversaries Namely Whatsoever the whole Church militant ever since the Apostles hath held and was not instituted by Councills but hath ben alwayes retayned that is most rightly believed to be delivered by the Apostles The whole Church Militant over since the Apostles hath held the peoples consent in then owne Church governement it was nor instituted by Councills but it bath ben alwaye retained Therefore the peoples consent in their owne Church governement is most rightly believed to bee delivered and ordained by the Apostles The first Proposition is our adversaries “ pâ—rpâ—â— govern pag. 258. D. Bilson and †D. Downame do much magnifie it out of †Serm pag. 56. 57. Defen 4 Austin And we acknowledge it to bee true The Assumption is proved heere before in this 5. Chapter so fully and plentifully as any thing can be by Humane records and testimonies For wee have none extant better theÌ„ these At least by these it is prooved so fully as our adversaries do intend in the Proposition Wherefore the Conclusion is most certain and cleere against them viz. that the peoples consent in their owne Church governement is an institution and ordinance of the Apostles Whence also consequently it will follow that those textes of Scripture vsually alleadged for proofe of the same mentioned also pag. 76. and which I