they have considered things who are so far carried with their Zeal against the established Government of this Church as to make much use of some passages of the Schoolmen and Canonists that deny them to be distinct Orders for these are the very dregs of Popery N. B. the one raising the Priests higher for the sake of Transubstantiation the other pulling the Bishops lower for the sake of the Popes Supremacy and by such means bringing them almost to an equality So partial are some men to their particular Conceits that they make use of the most mischievous Topicks when they can serve their turn not considering how much farther these Arguments will run if they ever admit them So that although the Phrase of Priests or Bishops might have been used in former times as it was in a Paper printed among the Addenda to the first part of the Doctor 's History p. 324. which Paper was written about six years before the Necessary Erudition as is proved p. 365. of the first part Yet when our Dissenters read as no doubt they did these Remarks of the Doctor 's concerning the rise and mischievous tendences of it their presumption in urging it from that Paper where it is so shamefully condemned is as unpardonable as their endeavour to fasten it on the Necessary Erudition where the contrary is evidently asserted And is this the great Reverence that our Dissenters have for the first Reformers thus to wrest and abuse their Writings by altering their Words curtailing their Sentences and representing them as contradicting themselves as well as the Universal Church in all Ages before them in such an excellent Book and to object that against them which their Adversaries who watched for such an advantage could never find This is no otherwise to honour them than to call them to a second Martyrdom more inglorious and hateful to them than the first And yet these Dissenters could not but know that all they who had a hand in compiling that Book were either Diocesan Bishops or such Divines as lived in a willing submission to them And these things are sufficient to shew that the Dissenters are more genuine Sons of some other Church than of the Church of England according to its Primitive Constitution And thus the Declaration mentioned by our Author to be subscribed by Tho. Cromwell c. which says That in the New Testament there is no mention made of any degrees or distinctions in Orders but only of Deacons or Ministers Priests or Bishops as also the Opinions of Tindal Lambert and Dr. Barnes must be submitted to the more mature and authorized Judgment of the State Civil and Ecclesiastical expressed in the Necessary Erudition And the private Sentiments of such Divines as have written from the days of Edward VI. until now must be adjudged to be conformable to the Judgment and Determination of the Church which hath been established by Law in their days to which also they generally subscribed and then I need say no more but that the Forms of Ordaining and Consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons will determine the Question whether from the beginning of our Reformation the Church of England hath acknowledged three Orders viz. of Bishops Priests and Deacons or two only And whether the Church-Government established by Law ever since the days of Edward VI. hath not been by Diocesan Bishops But I would ask these men Could they have conformed to Episcopacy and Liturgy under King Henry the Eighth or Edward the Sixth and can they not now Was not Episcopacy the same then as it is now and the Liturgie much better now than it was then Could you conform to Henry the Eighth's Primer to his six Articles and seven Sacraments Or to the Liturgie established by King Edward the Sixth wherein were many things that were deservedly accounted Ineptias As in the Communion-Office where they commend to the mercy of God all his Servants departed hence from us And that God would command our Prayers and Supplications by the ministry of his holy Angels to be brought up into his holy Tabernacle The commending Auricular and Secret Confession to the Priest And in the Office of Baptism enjoyning a great part of that Office to be performed the people standing at the Church-door and then to take the Child by the right hand and lead it towards the Font To sign it with the sign of the Cross on the Breast as well as the Forehead The use of Exorcism in these words I command thee thou unclean Spirit in the Name of the Father c. to come out and depart from this Infant The dipping the Child three times in the Water except in case of weakness first on the right side then on the left and then with the Face towards the Water Then to put on it the Crysom saying Take thou this white Vesture for a Token of the Innocency c. Then to anoint the Infant on the head praying God to anoint him with the Vnction of the Spirit And to omit many other things anointing the sick and signing his breast with the sign of the Cross Commending at the time of Burial into the hands of God's mercy the Souls of the departed As for the Book of consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons it was added to the Liturgie by King Edward as it is received now with some few alterations mentioned by Dr. Burnet for the better p. 144. His Articles and Acts for Vniformity were as severe as any that are now And all these were established in Arch-bishop Cranmer's time and with his good Approbation In the Articles of Religion printed 1552. one concerning the Liturgy declares thus The Book of Prayers which of very late time was given to the Church of England by the Authority of Parliament containing the Manner and Form of praying and ministring the Sacraments and the Book of ordering Ministers of the Church set forth by the afore said Authority are godly and in no point repugnant to the wholsome Doctrine of the Gospel but agreeing thereunto furthering and beautifying the same not a little and therefore of all faithful Ministers of the Church of England and chiefly of the Ministers of the Lord ought to be received and allowed with all readiness of mind and thanksgiving and to be commended to the people of God. Besides the Discourse concerning Ceremonies retained in our Book was then set forth as also a Proclamation against those that innovate alter or leave down any Rite or Ceremony in the Church and that preach without License printed in the second year of Edward the Sixth to which the Form for Bidding of Prayers may be added See p. 128. of Dr. Burnet's second part All which notwithstanding Bucer and Peter Martyr approved of Conformity And Mr. Calvin himself both perswaded and approved all that was done in the second Liturgy of King Edward in an Epistle of his to the then Protector being the forty first Epistle in the Edition at Amsterdam 1667. to this effect Let there
if they will stand to what is more maturely and pertinently by them alledged and proved agreeably also to their own practice for Diocesan Episcopacy as established in the Church of England If those Dissenters who were so importunate and industrious to advance their Discipline on the ruines of the established Church had proceeded on the Principles laid down by the Divines above-mentioned whereof this is one that they lay hold on viz. That the forms of Government not being plainly exprest in Scripture are alterable and may by the Authority of the Civil Magistrate be determined to this or that species which yet they will not grant of their own Discipline they ought then to acquiesce in that Government which was established and to which all those Divines most willingly submitted as the best in all the Christian World and though by reason of their dissent from it they had drawn on themselves the execution of some moderate Penalties yet if they had been fully perswaded that they did suffer for a good Conscience and for Righteousness sake they ought like good Christians to have taken it patiently and not by Railing by Sedition by forming Schisms and meditating Rebellions seek to avenge themselves and return evil for evil but contrarily blessing being thereto called by the Example and Precepts of their great Master but when they returned evil for good and hatred for good-will and thought themselves persecuted because they could not grasp a Power to persecute their Superiours this was not agreeable to that wisdom that comes from above which is first pure then peaceable gentle and easie to be intreated And if our present Dissenters be satisfied of the purity of our Doctrine they may by the Principles which are laid down submit to that Discipline and Government that Authority doth establish there being nothing in it contrary to the Word of God but wholly agreeable to the constant practice of the Universal Church I think it sufficient to solve all that hath been alledged out of our Divines to clear these two things 1. What kind of Government was setled by the Apostles 2. What Answer may be given to the Objections so often mentioned from St. Hierom. As to the first it is evident that there was a Superiority in the Apostles to those to whom they committed the care of the several Churches whether they were Bishops or Presbyters and as the Apostles dyed their Successors in Ecclesiastical Power who in all Ages were the Bishops were the Subjects of that Superiority such as Timothy Titus Clemen Linus c. and their Successors as they stand recorded in Ecclesiastical History for what the Apostles did for the perpetual Order and Government of the Church was agreeable to our Saviour's Institution and all Antiquity bears proof to this Truth that from the Apostles days there were setled in the most eminent Churches of Hierusalem Rome Antioch and Alexandria several Bishops that had a Superiority over the Presbyters in their respective Churches and that the three Orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons were established in those Churches in those purest and most Primitive times insomuch that they who will not admit those Testimonies will be to seek for one of the best Proofs for the Canon of the Scripture As therefore we believe the Succession of Roman Emperours from the Writings of such Historians as lived near their times so may we believe the truth of such Orders of Men and of their Successions as it is delivered by Men of good Credit and Honesty that lived near those times and have handed down in undoubted written Records from Age to Age St. Polycarp Ignatius Clemens who conversed with the Apostles Ireneus Justin Martyr and others that lived with them then Origen Clem. Alexandrinus Tertullian who succeeded them and many others who lived within two hundred years after the Apostles from whom Eusebius had the Materials of his History and refers to them for the truth of his Relations He had the Acts of the Martyrs and the Books of Hegesippus concerning the Acts of the Church from which and other helps from the very Persecutors of the Christians he compiled his History and particularly the Succession of Bishops Clemens Rom. in his Epistle to the Corinthians speaks of the Officers of the Church in his time alluding to those under the Law The High-Priest hath his Office the Priest his Station and the Levite his Ministry the Lay-man his Office let every one worship God in his Order Ignatius mentions these Three Orders in his Epistles so plainly that the Enemies of those Orders have martyred him again in his Reputation denying his Epistles to be genuine which the Learned Bishop Pearson hath irrefragably asserted and so hath Dr. Beveridge the Authority of Apostolical Canons which have been owned by the Councils and expresly assert the Three Orders so that tho' while the Apostles lived the Names might be confounded yet immediately on their deaths all Ancient Writers have distinguished them because such as succeeded to their Power were Bishops and yet all the Minister's or Elders were not so for a Parity is usually the Parent of Confusion and if such a Parity had been setled by Christ or his Apostles how could it be that as St. Hierom says The whole World should agree for prevention of Schism to alter what Christ had established Was the whole World i. e. every particular Church which are it seems agreed on setting up a Bishop above Presbyters wiser than our Saviour or had they Authority so to do And if they did so by sufficient Authority why will the Presbyters as generally agree to pull them down now as their Ancients did to set them up So that I see no shadow of Reason why we may not subscribe to that which is said before the Book of Consecration That it is evident to all Men diligently reading the Holy Scripture and Ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been ever these Orders of Ministers in the Church Bishops Priests and Deacons 2. As to St. Hierom's Testimony the import of it is this That tho' the Apostles had a Superiority over Presbyters yet when they died they did not bequeath that Power to others but left it in common to the Presbyters whose management of it was such as it begat Schisms and Animosities for suppression of which it was thought fit through the whole World to chuse out of the body of the Presbyters one that should have a Presidency over the rest so that this Presidency was not an Apostolical Institution but Ecclesiastical and Prudential Constitution wherein St. Hierom doth not only contradict the Joynt Suffrage of all the Ancients but his own Testimony Against this Opinion of St. Hierom some affirm that what he said was in a Discourse against some proud Deacons that would equal themselves with the Presbyters which was as great a presumption as to invade the Office of the Bishops seeing in most things as St. Hierom says the Bishops and Presbyters were of
Scripture maketh mention That they were conferred by Prayer and Imposition of hands Nor can it be thought that by the mentioning the manner of ordaining Bishops and Priests to be the same that therefore the Reformers thought the Order to be the same because the Deacons were ordained in the same manner and yet it is granted that they were distinct Orders And for the distinction of the Orders of Priests and Bishops enough had been spoken before and their present practice did demonstrate what their Opinions were If any desire farther satisfaction in these things let him read the Casuists de Sacramento Ordinis where this distinction is obvious Ordo significat vel ipsam potestatem vel Ordinationem quâ potestas datur And they may find that Bellarmine and generally the Jesuits reckon Bishops and Priests to be but one Order as our Dissenters would have it and among the later Schoolmen it was made a Question An Episcopatus sit Ordo à Presbyteratu distinctus and they generally hold that they are one in Genere Sacerdotis but are distinct in Specie the Episcopal Character including that of a Priest and so they hold that Solum Sacerdotium est Ordo Sacramentum So they dispute against the Imposition of hands in Ordination of Priests and the usual form was by delivering the Patine and Chalice with Bread and Wine with these words Accipe potestatem offerendi Sacrificia pro vivis mortuis In nomine Patris c. And they affirm That the Pope can create a Bishop or Priest onely by saying Be thou a Bishop or Priest A Deacon is ordained by delivering of the Gospels into his hands and the Subdeacon by delivery of an empty Patine and Chalice Which superstitious uses our Reformers would destroy and reduce to the Apostolical Practice One Argument more these Dissenters mention from the Necessary Erudition as good as the rest p. 3. The Order of a Bishop or Priest is one and the same whose Office is not onely to preach and administer Sacraments but moreover to exercise Discipline namely in assoyling and loosing from sin such as be truly penitent and in excommunicating the obstinately vicious where from the Community of some Offices they would argue to the equality of the Orders though nothing is more evident than that the Bishops of this Age reserved the power of Confirmation Ordination and Diocesan Jurisdiction to themselves as their Right Jure Divino as will yet further appear But no-where doth the Necessary Erudition say That the Order of a Bishop or Priest is one and the same as they sophistically infer And they may as well affirm it to be the sence of the Council of Trent as of our Reformers who use almost the same words Non solum Sacerdotibus sed de Diaconis Sacrae Literae apertam mentionem faciunt I cannot conceive what ground these Dissenters had to fix this Errour of theirs upon unless an unwary Expression of Dr. Burnet's who perhaps considering the Arch-bishop's Judgment more than the Judgments of the rest doth assert the same as the Dissenters do But if they had it from him they had also in him a correction of this Error and it was far from the ingenuity of true Protestant Divines to publish the Error and conceal the Confutation of it Thus then Dr. Burnet discovers the whole Intrigue Dr. Burnet p. 336. of the first part That both in this Writing i.e. Dr. Stillingfleet's Manuscript and in the Necessary Erudition of a Christian man Bishops and Priests are spoken of as one and the same Office. But Dr. Burnet adds In the ancient Church they knew none of those subtilties which were found out in the later Ages it was then thought enough that a Bishop was to be dedicated to his Function by a new Imposition of hands and that several Offices could not be performed without a Bishop such as Ordination Confirmation c. But they did not refine in these matters so much as to enquire whether Bishops and Priests differed in Order and Office or only in degree But after the School-men fell to examine matters of Dignity with logical and unintelligible Niceties the Canonists began to comment upon the Rules of the Ancient Church they studied to make Bishops and Priests seem very near one to another so that the difference was but small They did it with different designs The School-men having set up the grand Mystery of Transubstantiation were to exalt the Priestly Office as much as was possible for the turning of the Host into God was so great an action that they reckoned there could be no Office higher than that which qualified a man to so mighty a performance Therefore as they changed the form of Ordination from what it was anciently believed to consist in viz. Imposition of hands to a delivering of Sacred Vessels and held that a Priest had his Orders by that Rite not by the Imposition of hands So they raised their Order or Office so high as to make it equal with the Order of a Bishop But as they designed to extol the Order of Priesthood so the Canonists had as great a mind to depress the Episcopal Order they generally wrote for preferment and the way to it was to extol the Papacy Nothing could do that so effectually as to bring down the power of Bishops this only could justifie the Exemptions of the Monks and Friars the Popes setting up Legantine Courts and receiving at first Appeals and then Original Causes before them together with many other Encroachments on the Jurisdiction of Bishops all which were unlawful if the Bishops had by Divine Right Jurisdiction in their Diocesses Therefore it was necessary to lay them as low as could be and to make them think that the power they held was rather as delegates of the Apostolick See than by a Commission from Christ or his Aposties So that they looked on the declaring Episcopal Authority to be of Divine Right as a blow that would be fatal to the Court of Rome therefore they did after this at Trent use all possible endeavours to hinder any such Decision it having been then the common Stile of that Age to reckon Bishops and Priests as the same Office it is no wonder if at this time the Clergy of this Church the greatest part of them being still leavened with the old Superstition and the rest of them not having enough of spare time to examine lesser matters retain still the former Phrases in this particular This might have been sufficient to correct the forwardness of our Dissenters to comply with the Papists in this new Notion of Bishops or Priests as one Order but because they abated nothing of their confidence by this I shall mind them of that severer Reprimand of the Doctor 's for which in their behalf I give him hearty thanks for I think he shall have none from them It is in these words N. B. On this I have insisted the more that it may appear how little
the Ordinary of the place where he had such knowledge or to any of her Majesty's Privy Council the same person shall not for his former concealment be hereafter molested or troubled Given at her Majesty's Palace at Westminster the thirteenth of February 1588. In the One and thirtieth Year of her Highness Reign GOD SAVE THE QUEEN Arch-bishop Grindall exprest in a Letter of his his great fear of two things viz. Atheism and Popery and both arising out of our needless Divisions by these means the Enemies of our Religion gain this that nothing can be established by Law in the Protestant Religion whose every part is not opposed by one or other of her own Professors so that things continuing loose and confused the Papists have their Opportunity to urge their way which is attended with Order and Government And our Religion continuing thus distracted and divided some vile wretches lay hold on the Argument on one side to confute the other and so at last to destroy all And it is observed in the Life of Mr. Hooker p. 9. they perswaded men to believe that the Bishops were Antichrist and Antichrist was to be destroyed by the Sword and beginning with Petitions they proceeded to Admonitions then to Remostrances then to numbring their Party then to that boldness that one told the Queen in a Sermon She was like an untamed Heifer that would not be ruled by God's people but obstructed his Discipline And we have heard and seen worse things in our days Arch-bishop Whitgift in his Defence of the Answer to T. C. p. 605. tells the Puritans That the Papists could not have met with better Proctors than they And 55. That they did the Pope very good Service and that he would not miss them for any thing for what is his desire but to have this Church of England which he hath accursed utterly defaced and discredited to have it by any means overthrown if not by Foreign means yet by Domestical Dissention And what fitter Instruments could he have had for that purpose who under pretence of Zeal overthrow that which other men have builded under colour of Purity seek to bring in Deformity and under the Cloak of Equality and Humility would usurp as great Tyranny and lofty Lordliness over their Parishes as ever the Pope did over the whole Church and that they were made the Engines of the Roman Conclave whereby they intend to overthrow this Church even by these mens Folly which they could not compass by all their Policy The Epistle of the Arch-bishop to the Reader before his Defence of the Answer to T. C's Admonition is worth pernsal As for Bishop Bancroft the whole design of his Book is to manifest what disturbance the endeavours of the Presbyterians to establish their Eldership did create in the Nation by such dangerous Positions and Practices as were in his time with equal violence and malice carried on for the destruction of the Church as it was then established There are some other of the mentioned Divines whose Writings I have not nor is there need to enquire farther into them seeing there is nothing alledged from them by Mr. J. H. but what being compared with their other sayings and practices doth fully frustrate his designs And when the Bishops of our Church do so ingenuously mention all that may be said for their Adversaries with so much Veracity Candor and Moderation what a Reproach is it to their Opponents to deal with them with so much Scorn and Contempt such Bitterness and Passion such Slanders and Falshoods as too many do and as T. C. did with the Archbishop Whitgift whom Queen Elizabeth called her black Husband and upheld him against the Contrivances and contrary Designs of Lechester and those Conformists whom he favoured to promote his own Sacrilegious ends As for Mr. Hooker whom Bishop King calls Malleum Hereticorum who was as meek and modest a man as well as judicious as any in his Generation he did profess to the Arch-bishop See p. 17. of his Life That he believed his Adversary Mr. Travers to be a good man and that occasioned him to examine his own Conscience concerning his Opinions and to satisfie that he consulted the Holy Scripture and other Laws Humane and Divine whether the Conscience of him and others of his judgment ought so far to be complyed with as to alter the frame of Church-Government and manner of Worship and Ceremonies as oft as their tender Consciences shall require it in which examination he had not only satisfied himself but begun his Ecclesiastical Polity for the satisfaction of others which he justly calls a Demonstration of the Reasonableness of our Ecclesiastical Laws and a hopeful Foundation for the Churches Peace and not to provoke either Mr. T. C. the Arch-bishop's Adversary nor Mr. Travers whom saith Mr. Hooker I take to be mine not mine Enemy God knows this to be my meaning Yet his Adversaries that could not answer his Arguments contrived to blot his Reputation and accused him of Incontinency which by a Trepan as the Author of his Life relates p. 22. they endeavoured to fasten on him he kept this Grief to himself many Months with great anxiety until he revealed it to Mr. Edwin Sands and George Cranmer who had been his Pupils who enquiring into the Imposture so followed it that they brought his Accusers to open Confession and Punishment which Punishment he endeavoured to prevent but was denied at which he replyed That however he would Fast and Pray that God would give them Repentance and Patience to undergo their Punishment and the first part was granted if we may believe saith my Author the penitent Behaviour and open Confession of his Accuser How his Adversaries dealt with his Books after his Death is thus related That one Mr. Clark and another Minister desired of his Widow a Month after his Death to search his Study for some Papers wherof they burnt some and tore others but Dr. Jackson having transcribed some draught of his three last Books they were compleated by Dr. Spencer who was acquainted with the Design of those Books The Doctor left them with Dr. King Bishop of Londo and he to his Son Bishop of Chichester he to Dr. Abbot Arch-bishop of Canterbury in whose Library they continued till the Death of Arch-bishop Laud and then the Library was given to Hugh Peters for his good Services and then many alterations and additions were made in them to make them speak for the power of the People above the King for which when the Lord Say quoted Hooker's Authority to King Charles the First he replyed That the Books were not Hooker's but however he would consent to what was proposed out of those doubted Books if that Lord would consent to Mr. Hooker 's Judgment in those Books which were undoubted The same may I say concerning the Judgment of such Divines as Mr. J. H. hath quoted we will stand to what is but weakly and impertinently quoted from those Divines