swear that they are duties or may be done as of humane obligation by those that cannot say they are of Divine obligation 55. We hold that the first Churches that did divolve all arbitrations of differences among Christians upon the Pastors did that which brought no great present inconvenience when the People were but few and the Pastors had sufficient leisure but that which prepared for the degenerating of the Ministry and the Churches lamentable corruption And therefore that they should have foreseen this and done as St. Paul directed them and referred matters to any fit wise man among them And when they saw the mischief they should have quickly reformed it as Silvanus Bishop of Troas aforementioned did And that if there were Lay Elders in any of the ancient Churches as one passage in Origen and one in Ambrose and this of Silvanus in Socrates have made some think they were truly Lay and appointed only to such Arbitrations as these and such other Animadversions over the rest as Lay-men may do A help that I once tryed and found to be very great 56. We hold that when Constantine gave the Clergy the sole Power of Judging the Causes Civil and Criminal of all the Christians he shewed more ignorant zeal than true discretion and did let in a pestilence into the Church and that instead of that he should have only left Arbitrations to mans free choice and have set up a Christian or Righteous Magistracy to whom both Bishops and all other Christians should submit 57. We hold that when Christians so multiplyed as that they grew uncapable of Personal Communion at one Altar it was the duty of them and the Bishops to have ordered them into new Churches whcih should every one have had its proper Bishop or plenary Pastoral Office among them and not to have kept them all still in the name of one particular Church infimi ordinis when they were uncapable of the nature and end 58. We hold that it was sinfully done to make a new Office or Order of subject Presbyters that had not the Governing power of their perticular Churches neither alone nor conjunct but had only the power to Teach and Worship the Government being reserved only to the Bishop of another called a Mother Church 59. But we believe that this came not in till many hundred Years after Christ and that but by slow degrees and that after subordinate Churches and Altars were invented and set up yet the Pastors under the name of Presbyters had much of the Governing power of the Keys though with and under the Bishop of the Mother Church 60. The deposing of all the first rank or Order of Bishops which were before over each particular Church the making of a new Office of half Presbyters the making of Churches of a new species as being under a new sort of Officers the making Archbishops who should have many Churches and Bishops under them to become the Bishops of the lowest rank having none under them but above all these the making of the Pastoral work especially discipline become utterly impossible by putting that into one mans hand that cannot be done but by many or many hundred these and such like are the things that we can neither swear to nor approve 61. We hold that though the Magistrate may shape his part of the Church Government variously according to the Interest of the common good yet that the Spiritual or Pastoral part should not have been molded into the shape of the Civil Imperial Government And that so doing did give the Papacy that countenance which is the ground of its usurpation 62. For we hold that the essential constitution of the Pastoral Office and its work and the essential constitution of the Church Universal and of Individual or particular Churches are all of Divine unalterable Institution And that all Laws of Christ for such Constitution and for Administration are unalterable by man Though we hold that Circumstancials and Accidentals are alterable as being not setled by any Divine determination As e. g. how many Ministers shall be in each Church which of them shall be more regarded than the rest as being of greater wisdom how ost and when and where they shall assemble with many the like 63. We hold that as all Christians ordinarily should have personal Communion in particular Churches so those Churches and their Bishops should hold such Communion as is needful to their strength and concord and the common good 64. This Communion of Churches is to be held internally by Concord in the same Faith and Love and Religion and externally by the same profession and instrumentally 1. by Messengers and Letters and 2. by Delegates and Synods when there is need which as is said for Time Place Numbers Provinces Orders are left to humane Prudence 65. If any that divide the Country into Provinces will settle Synods accordingly and settle over them Presidents for the ordering of their proceedings and will give power to one above others to call such Synods and will call these Provinces or Nations or Empires by the name of Provincial National or Imperial Churches and the Bishops so exalted by the name of Metropolitans Primates Patriarchs c. We contend not against this as unlawful in it self though we easily see the accidental danger being taught it by long and sad experience so be it 1. that none of these be pretended to be of Divine Institution but of humane determination 2. and that they meddle with nothing but such accidentals as are left to humane prudence 3. and that they equal not their humane Association with the Christian Worshiping Churches which are of Christ's Institution 4. and that much less they do not oppress their brethren and tyrannize nor deprive the particular Pastors and Churches of their proper priviledges and work But alas when were these Rules observed by humane Churches 66. The Canons of such Synods or Councils of Bishops may be made Laws indeed by the Civil power and they are if just obligatory to the people by virtue of the Pastoral Authority of the Bishops But as to the particular Bishops they are only Agreements and no proper Laws the Major Vote of Bishops being not proper Governours of the rest and bind only by virtue of Christ's General Laws for Love and Concord 67. The Pastoral power is not at all Coactive by secular force on body or estate but only Nunciative and perswasive commanding in Christ's name as authorized by him and executed no otherwise than by a Ministerial word and by with-holding our own acts of Administration and denying our Communion to offenders Nor did the Apostles themselves pretend to any other than this power of the Word for the Keys are exercised but thus excepting what they did by Miracle And if Bishops would go no further they would work on none but Voluntiers and their usurpations might be the more easily born 67. And indeed we are fully perswaded that none but Voluntiers are âit for the
this power do not degrade the Presbyters nullifie the Churches under them and depose the ancient sort of Episcopacy quantum in se and set up another Humane sort of Churches called Diocesan and of Archbishops turned into Bishops infimi gradus in their stead together with a new Species of half-half-Presbyters 1. How far Whitgift's Disputations against Cartwright are guilty of this overlooking the true Question I leave to the Reader Only I must say for him that when his Adversarie standeth most upon the denial of all superior Episcopacy it was his part to prove what was denied And I need say no more than that Whitgift oft professeth as Dr. Stillingfleet hath collected out of him that God hath in Scripture prescribed no one sort of Church-Government And therefore not the Prelatical 2. I do not expect that ever this Controversie should be handled by two more judicious Adversaries than Saravia and Beza were And as Beza protesteth against a Parity and pleadeth for a Prostasie desireth that which he calleth Divine Episcopacy tolerating and submitting to that which he calleth Humane Episcopacy and flatly opposing only that which he calleth Satanical Episcopacy So Saravia professeth p. 1 2. p. Defens 4 5. that the General nature of the Evangelical Ministry common both to Bishops and Presbyters containeth these three things 1. The Preaching of the Gospel 2. The Communication of the Sacraments 3. The Authority of Church-Government And only pleadeth that in this last the Power of Bishops and Presbyters is not equal but the Bishops power is principal in Government Which granteth the main Question which we Nonconformist now contend for And I confes that Saravia's Writings were the first and chief that brought me to suspect that the Apostles have Successors in the point of Government as being but an ordinary and durable part of their Office which Argument he hath better managed than any man else that I have seen And p. 12. ib. He granteth that the 70 Disciples were not under the Government of the 12 Apostles He granteth that chosen Seniors of the Laity may be great Assistants in the Government Yea Def. 1. 8. p. 83. He saith that in the absence of Paul and his Assistants the Churches of Crete were wholly ruled till Titus Ordained them Pastors by such Elders A senioribus quos ratio natura in quavis Societate dat non Ordinatio quales sunt natu majores quotquot aliqua virtute in populo excellunt quibus deferre natura omnes gentes docuit quibus addo eos quos tunc temporis passim dona Sp. sancti venia excitabant sed nulli loco alligabant And no wonder for he affirmeth that in times of publick corruption of Doctrine any man that is learned and able and fit must propugne and defend the truth as he hath ability and opportunity or else be judged for hiding his talents as the unprofitable servant pag. 23. cap. 2. Yet doth he most improbably imagine that Rome and Corinth had no proper Pastors when Paul wrote his Epistles to them When as Paul had dwelt a year and half at Corinth when it was the practice of the Apostles to Ordain Elders in every Church and when among the Corinthians there were so many Prophets Instructers Speakers of Languages Interpreters c. that Paul is fain to regulate and restrain them in their Church-meetings that they might not over-do and hinder one another And yet were these People without any proper Pastor Without a Prelate it's like they were Yea when Paul directeth them to deliver the incestuous man to Satan and to exercise Church-discipline upon others that were scandalous doth not this intimate that they had among them such as were impowred to do it If only transiently and occasionally they could Worship God publickly and deliver Sacraments and Govern the Church but transiently and rarely How did they spend the Lords days when those transient guides were absent Did the major part of the people who Saravia thinketh were to exercise the foresaid Discipline also Consecrate and Administer the Sacrament or publickly pray and worship God without a Pastor Were they every Lords day to deposit their Collections and have no Pastors and so no Church-Assemblies Had they so many Sects and false Teachers to trouble them and yet no Pastors When Clem. Rom. so shortly after writeth so much to reconcile the Pastors and People that disagreed And when Paul tells the Romans and Corinthians what Officers God setteth in the Church is it like there was none fixed among them And I must note how great a charge he layeth on the Bishops when Resp ad N. p. 10. Art 12. He saith that the Bishop is aequè imo magis proprius singularum Ecclesiarum sua Dioceseos Pastor illis qui ibi praesunt resident utpote ad quem cura praecipua illorum locorum pertineat The Bishop hath more Charge or Care of all the Parishes in his Diocess than the present Pastors have O dreadful undertaking Ad quem prima praecipua Cura omnium incumbet ita ut ipse suum agnoscit gregem singulis quibus manus imponit c. How many hundred thousand individuals then hath the Bishop of London this particular Charge of whose names he never heard and whose faces he never saw Oportet enim Episcopum omnes quantum fieri potest qui ipsius curae commissi sunt nosse The Bishop must know all his Flock if possible And must he have a Flock then which he cannot possibly know nor never saw one of a hundred or thousand of them with any particular knowledge at least And Cont. quaest Resp Beza p. 103. He approveth of Zanchy's judgment that Ceremonies and things indifferent be left free and the Churches free in them And Defens p. 286. He saith Primum Episcoporum omnium Presbyterorum unum esse Ordinem Constituo I maintain that there is one Order of all Bishops and Presbyters Therefore they cannot differ but Gradu as a Deacon and Archdeacon And again ib. p. 286. Ministerii autem Evangelici unitas probatur ab horum unitate ut ita loquar identitate Eandem enim veritatis doctrinam omnes Orthodoxi docent eadem Sacramenta Ministrant eandem censuram exercent tantum Provinciarum est inaequalitas graduum diversitas The Unity of the Gospel Ministry is proved from the Unity or as I may say Identity of these All that are Orthodox teach the same true Doctrine Administer the same Sacraments exercise the same Censures Only there is an inequality of Provinces and a diversity of degrees Thus the most Learned and rational Defender of Prelacy giveth away their Cause 3. Bishop Bilson a most Learned and judicious man also saith more for Episcopacy than any of our late Writers and in my judgment saith more against the Office of Ecclesiastical Elders distinct from Pastors than can be answered But to our two main Questions before-mentioned of a Bishop over
teach them not to disdain the advice of their Presbyters but to use their Authority with so much the greater humility and moderation as a Sword which the Church hath power to take from them This is Mr. Hooker And page 14. He confesseth that according to the Custom of England and a Council at Carthage Presbyters may impose hands in Ordination with the Bishop though not without him So that by this they have the the power of Ordination to though he have a Negative Voice in it And indeed if all Ordination must be done by one of a Superiour Order who shall Ordain Bishops or Archbishops or Patriarchs or the Pope And page 18. He saith Most certain truth it is that Churches Cathedral and the Bishops of them are as glasses wherein the face and countenance of Apostolical antiquity remaineth even as yet to be seen Which is it that we also affirm every City or Church having a Bishop and Presbytery of their own And whereas page 19. He saith If we prove that Bishops have lawfully of old ruled over other Ministers it is enough how few soever those Ministers have been how small soever the circuit of place which hath contained them If this be so we grant you enough when we grant Parochial Bishops But no where doth he more palpably yield our Cause than page 21 22. where to Cartwright's Objection that the Bishop that Cyprian speaketh of is nothing else but such as we call Pastor or as the common name is Parsons and his Church whereof he is Bishop is neither Diocess nor Province but a Congregation which met together in one place to be taught by one man He hath no better answer to this than to tell us that If it were true it is impertinent and that it is not true because Cyprian had many Presbyters under him so as they might have every day change for performance of their duty And he never once attempteth to prove that Cyprian had more Churches yea or Assemblies than One but only that he was over the Presbyters in one Church or Assembly and as an Archbishop was over Bishops The same thing which I submit to but nothing against the things that I assert against him A Parson may have divers Curates under him and not divers Churches much loss a thousand that have no other Bishop And whereas page 33. It is objected that many things are innovated in our Discipline as imposing Ministers on the People without their consent Bishops Excommunicating alone Imprisoning c. His answer is that the Church may change her customes And on that ground alloweth the Ordination of Presbyters alone because the Church can give them power For he goeth in Church-matters as he doth in point of Civil Government on his false supposition that all Power is Originally in the whole Body saying page 37. The whole Church visible being the true Original subject of all power it hath not ordinarily allowed any other than Bishops alone to Ordain Howbeit as the ordinary course is ordinarily in all things to be observed so it may be in some cases not unnecessary that we decline from the ordinary ways What is more contrary than Saravia Tract de Obedient and Hooker in their Principles of Government From hence also page 38. He inferreth the no necessity of continued Succession of Bishops in every effectual Ordination And it is very observable which he granteth for it cannot be denied The Power of Orders I may lawfully receive without the asking consent of any multitude but the power I cannot exercise upon any certain People against their wills And page 38. He cannot deny but the ancient use was for the Bishops to excommunicate with the College of his Assistant Presbyters but he taunteth Beza for thinking that this may not be changed These are the men that build upon Antiquity and the Custom of the Universal Church And page 69. when the Canons for Bishops spare course of living are objected he saith that those Canons were made when Bishops lived of the same Purse which served as well for a number of others as for them and yet all at their disposing Intimating the old Course when every Church had its Bishop and inferiour Clergy But Innovation is lawful for our Prelacy And now he that can find any thing in Hooker against the points which I defend or for that Prelacy which I oppose any more worth the answering than this that I have recited let him rejoyce in the perfection of his eye-sight And if thus much be worthy to be confuted or such as this let them do it that have nothing else to do So ridiculous is the Challenge of one that glorieth to write a Book with the same Title of Ecoles Policy who insultingly provoketh us to write a full Confutation of Hooker who saith so little to the main point in Controversie our Diocesan Form of Prelacy and writeth his whole Book in a tedious Preaching stile where you may read many leaves for so much Argumentation as one Syllogism may contain that I think I might as wisely have challenged himself to conââue Mr. Fâx's Book of Martyrs or Baronius his Annals almost or at least may say as Dr. John Burges doth of Mr. Parker another sort of Parker his Book of the Cross which Dr. Ames saith was never answered that if any will reduce that gawdy Treatise into Argument it being indeed almost all made up of the fruits of Reading History Sentences c. of purpose to confute them that said the Nonconformists were no Schollars he should quickly have an Answer to it So if any will reduce all that is in Mr. Hooker's 8 Books in tedious Discourses into Syllogism which is against what I maintain I believe it will not all fill up one half or quarter of a page and it shall God-willing be soon answered In the mean time the popular Principles of his First and Eighth Book subverting all true Government I have already confuted elsewhere in my Christian Directory 5. Bishop Downame hath said much more to the main Points in the defence of his Consecration Sermon and as much as I can expect to find in any But 1. as to the mode he is so contrary to Hooker that being a very expert Logician he wasteth so much of his Book about the Forms of Arguments and Answers that he obscureth the matter by it and ensnareth those Readers who do not carefully distinguish between Matter and Words and between the force of the reason and the form of a Syllogism And he so adorneth or defileth his Style with taunts insulting scorns and contemptuous reproaches that it is more sutable to the Scold sat Billings-gate than so learned and godly a Divine and occasioneth his Adversaries to say You have here a taste of the Prelatical Spirit 2. As to the matter of his first Book I am of his mind against meer ruling Elders He and Bilson have evinced what they hold in that But as to the points in which
we differ he indeed saith much to little purpose and finally giveth away his Cause or as he merrily telleth his Adversary pag. 62. l. 3. 6. 47. he useth it as Sir Christopher Blunt's head was used after his apprension first healed and then cut off For 1. in his lib. 3. Where he speaketh of the power of Ordination he not only confesseth that it is in Presbyters with the Bishops and that the Bishops have but a superiority of power therein but is angry with his Adversary for supposing the contrary saying ch 3. p. 68. But where good Sir do I say they must have the sole power in Ordination which you have so oft objected and now again repeat make you no conscience of publishing untruths Cannot Bishops be superiour to other Ministers in the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction which is the thing which I maintain unless they have the sole power so p. 64 c. Therefore he granteth that extraordinarily in case of necessity Presbyters may Ordain that is without a Bishop page 69. and page 108. he giveth this reason for the validity of their Ordination Because Imposition of hands in Confirmation of the Baptized and Reconciliation of Penitents were reserved to Bishops as well as Ordination and yet in the absence of Bishops may be done by Presbyters And that the Papists themselves grant that the Pope may license a Presbyter to Ordain Presbyters If therefore saith he by the Popes license a Presbyter may Ordain Presbyters much better may a Company of Presbyters to whom in the want of a Bishop the Charge of the Church is divolved be authorized thereto by necessity And if all this be so no doubt but the Power of Ordination is in Presbyters as such though they are not to exercise it alone nor without or against the Bishop And so formerly they were not to Preach or Baptize nor Congregate the Church without him For why cannot a Lay-man Ordain with the Bishop but because he hath no such authority And Cap. 5. as to the power of Jurisdiction he saith the same p. 110. 111. I deny not Presbyters which have charge of souls to have Jurisdiction both severally in their Parishes and jointly in Provincial Synods And I have confessed before that Presbyters have with and under the Bishops exercised some Jurisdiction I grant that Godly Bishops before they had the countenance and assistance of Christian Magistracy and direction of Christian Laws used in all matters of moment to consult with their Clergy This was practised by Cyprian Ambrose also in 1 Tim. 5. 1. teacheth that there was a time when nothing was done without the advice of the Presbyters which therefore by Ignatius are called the Counsellors and Co-assessors of the Bishops Which course if it were used still as it would ease the Bishops burden very much so would it nothing detract from their superiority in Governing And page 115. The thing which I was to prove if it had been needful was that whereas Presbyters did Govern each one the People of a Parish and that privately the Bishop Governeth the People of the whole Diocess and that publickly So that both Ordination and Jurisdiction belong to the Presbyters Office though in the exercise of it they must be governed themselves Is not this the very sum of Archbishop Usher's Model of Primitive Episcopacy which we offered his Majesty and the Bishops at first for Concord and the Bishops would not once take it into their Consideration nor so much as vouchsafe to talk of it or bring it under any deliberation When alas we poor undertrodden Persons not only desired to be low our selves but yielded to submit to all their heights their Lordships Parliament dignities grandure and to let them alone with their real sole Ordination and Jurisdiction over us poor Presbyters and to have taken as much care of the People as they would so we could but have obtained any tolerable degree of Government to be setled in each particular Church either in all the Presbyters or in one Bishop and not have had all the particular Churches deprived of Bishops and all the Pastoral Jurisdiction But our great Controversie is handled by Bishop Downame in his second Book wherein he laboureth to prove that the Bishops Church or rather Charge was not a Parish but a Diocess And first page 4. he giveth us a scheme of the Scripture acception of the word Church as preparatory to his design In which there are many Texts cited not only without any shew of proof that they speak of what he affirmeth them to speak but contrary to the plain scope of the places And he tells us that the word Church is used in Scripture for the Church Militant Congregated in an Universal or Occumenical Synod And offereth us not one Text for instance which he doth though injuriously for all the rest Nor is there any that so speaketh He tells us that the word is used particularly to signifie the Church of a Nation in the singular number but could name no such place as to any Church since Christ but only the Jewish Church Acts 7. 38. And he saith it is used to signifie particularly and definitely the Church of a Nation in the plural number And is not this a strange kind of Allegation The Scripture speaketh of the Churches in a Nation Therefore it useth the word for the Church of a Nation in the plural number Is one Church and many all one with him Would he have applauded that man that would have said that such an Author useth the word College for the College of an University in the plural number because he named the College in an University and this to prove that an University is one College Had it not been better said The New Testament never useth the word Church for all the Churches in one Nation since Christ definitely but ever calleth them plurally Churches Therefore to call them all One National Church is not to imitate the Scripture His first Instance is Rom. 6. 4. All the Churches of the Gentiles A sad proof of a National Church What Nation is it that the word Gentiles signifieth No doubt the Gentile Churches were in Gentile Nations But that doth not prove that the Christians in any Nation are ever called in Scripture since the Jews Nation One Church but Churches His next instance is 1 Cor. 16. 1. The Churches of Galatia And the rest are all such v. 19. 2 Cor. 8. 1. Gal. 1. 2. 22. The Churches of Asia Macedonia Judaea But I hope he intended no more than to tell you that the Christians of several Nations are never called a Church but Churches as having any sort of Union than National He giveth many instances when the word Church is used definitely to signifie the Church of a City and Country adjoyning But to prove it used to signifie several Churches in City and Country adjoyning but one only Two Texts he alledgeth to prove that the word Church is used
them to the Bishop he saith that he may commit it to a Presbyter For it is Mixt and hath partly the External Jurisdiction which the Bishop received by his proper Episcopal Ordination and partly yea much rather or more the Internal by the Keys which they have by virtue of their Presbyterial Ordination in equality with the Presbyters The External because it is External may therefore be delegated to another even a Lay-man which is it which the Parliament of Scotland have lately declared to be in the King And doth not all this shew what Episcopacy is Even a Magistrates Office Circa Sacra vindicated by Grotius and others But saith he they cannot delegate the inward power which is properly of the Keys because this dependeth of the Sacred Presbyterial Order both in fieri in esse in conservari operari For the Presbyterial Order hath always the Keys annexed For when any is Ordained Presbyter the Keys are given him and Jurisdiction with Orders by Divine Right And § 28. p. 474. Seeing the Apostles gave the Keys equally to all Bishops and Presbyters No man can by Divine Right reserve part of the Keys to himself alone and leave another part to others Moreover in lib. 2. c. 3. § 61. p. 210. He sheweth that Clement Linus and Anacletus were all Bishops in Rome at once Lib. 2. c. 9. § 1. p. 282. He sheweth that Bishops and Presbyters are wholly equal in all Essentials which belong to the Ecclesiastical Ministries to be exercised towards the People And that even in Government the rest of the Presbyters without excepting any in every Church make one College of which the Bishop is the Head all Ordained to the same Cure and Government of Souls So this Diocess hath between a thousand and two thousand Ministers living some of them an hundred or sixscore Miles distance to make a College to the Bishop that is usually at London How the Bishop is bound to Govern with them see him § 4. And § 5. To be plainly understood he saith We Bishops therefore must all remember that All the Presbyters are our Brethren and Collegues in the Ministry not our Servants or Slaves and that by Divine Right they have no less power in feeding the people of God than we have And if we exercise any External ampler Jurisdiction over them not properly Ecclesiastical it is not of our own power but delegated from the Magistrates power as I shall prove lib. 6. and 10. Yet plainer § 8 9. p. 285. These Parish Presbyters have by Divine Right full Power in the Ministry of Christ and in these Parishes are the Ordinary Ministers but under the Bishop For the Bishop alone hath a General Ecclesiastical Government to settle Ministers in their Diocess But being applyed to the Government of their Church they have the ordinary power but Presbyterial in that Church By positive Right only Bishops are deputed to certain Seats Yet Presbyters have so this Ordinary power that they cannot by Humane Ecclâsiastical Right reduce it into Act till applyed by the Bishop in his Diocess And c. 9. § 11. p. 286. â 13. p. 287. He sheweth that in Vacancies or the Bishops Absence the Clergy of Presbyters have the whole Episcopal power of Government And p. 288 289. He laboureth to prove that one Church had many Bishops and that it is but Ecclesiastical Law or Custome that one Church should have but one Bishop And § 15. That if the Canons prohibited not a Bishop might make all his Parish Presbyters full Bishops as § 16. in the Ministerial Essentials towards the Faithful they are by Divine Right equals Vid. § 20. page 291. This is enough to say of Spalatensis save that all that he saith for Bishops against us is so little a part of what is said by the rest that it can require no new Answer And if this great Moderator who returned to Rome though for a miserable imprisonment and end because we are not yet near enough to Antiquity or rather being flattered into covetous and ambitious hopes be able to prove no greater a difference between Bishops and Presbyters we need not think that any other is like to do it 16. The last great Learned Sober Defender of Episcopacy and the last that I need to mention here is Doctor Hammond who in his Annotations and his Treat of the Keys and especially his Dissertations against Blondel and his Defence of them against the London Ministers hath said much in this Cause But his way is new save that he followeth Petavius in the main supposition He forsaketh almost all the Fathers and almost all the Patrons of Episcopacy of later times who have written for it in the Exposition of all the Texts of Scripture which mention the Elders and Bishops of Churches in those times supposing that they all speak of Bishops only In his Treat of the Keys he maintaineth that the power of them was given to the Apostles onely by Christ and to Bishops as their Successors by the Apostles But I take it for undeniable truth that the Bishops and Elders settled in every Church by the Apostles in their own time had this power and I need not expect a contradiction in it And how fitly those are called the Apostles Successors whom they set over the Churches in their own time even from the beginning that they settled Churches and with whom they continued in the same Churches many Months or Years as Paul in Asia I leave to others to judge But the Question is not whether Bishops have the power of the Keys but whether all Presbyters have it not also And 1. He sheweth that according to the Canons the Presbyters might do nothing in this or in other Acts of Ministration without the Bishop 2. That our English Ordainers though they say Receive the Holy Ghost whose sins you do remit it shall be remitted c. Do not give the Presbyters all the Power of binding and loosing but so much as the Bishops or the Governours are presumed to have thought sit to impart to them which he saith is 1. The declaring in the Church the absolution of penitents after the Confession 2. The absolving them by way of prayer before the Sacrament 3. And by Baptismal washing and 4. Upon Confession to the sick and in private Conference and Confession c. Which yet he saith Is by Christs Authority committed to the Presbyters 3. He saith All this will not extend to the absolving from the bond of excommunication or proportionably to such power of binding any further at most thau to confer the first power of it which if it be then given doth yet remain as the other Power of Preaching and administring the Sacraments bound and restrained from being exercised till they be further loosed by the donation of a Second Power Ans But 1. Either he was not able or not willing to tell us whether this Power be given the Presbyters or not For he avoideth it by
saying at most and if it be given If not able his ability must be plainly deficient as to the decision of our main controversie of the difference between Bishops and Presbyters which dependeth on it If unwilling he was unwilling to give us any solid satisfactory decision of this Case 2. Being his Neighbour I wrote in his Life time a Confutation of that Assertion that the ordained received their Office and Power properly from the Ordainer as the neerest Efficient of it in my Disput of Ordination in my Disput of Church-Government and I proved that the Power or Office is immediately from Christ and that the Ordainers do but design the Person that shall receive it and Ministerially deliver him possession by an investing Sign 3. Either the Office of a Presbyter is of Divine Institution or of Humane Either fixed by the Holy Ghost in the Apostles immutably or made and alterable by the Bishops If the Office be of Divine institution and fixed for the Churches constant use whether by Christ immediately or by the Holy Ghost in the Apostles than it is not in the Bishops Power to Altar it And so whatever the Ordainers please to give them is none of the measure of their Power As the Arch-Bishop may Crown or anoint the King and yet not give him what Power he please Or rather as it is of Divine appointment that the Husband should be the Governour of the Wife And she that chooseth him and he that Marrieth them cannot alter it nor do they give him his measure of Power as they please but suppose him endowed with that by God and do only choose the Person that shall receive it and Ministerially invest him in the Possession of it And if the Priest that marrieth them should by any words Contradict or limit this institution of God it were a Nullity and invalid If he do but say I pronounce you Husband and Wife He therefore pronounceth the man to have that Power of a Husband which God hath given him though he vainly say after you shall have but so much or so much of it And so it is in present Case If God have made the Ministerial Office he hath made it something constituted of its essential parts And if so what man hath Power to alter it But if it be humane yea and made by the Bishops then I confess they may alter it or destroy it And if a Presbyter have what power the Ordainers please to give him every Ordainer may alter the Office and make a new Species of Church Ministers at his pleasure Prove that and our dispute is at an end But Papists Greeks and Protestants are agreed against it 4. If Presbyters receive that which he calleth the first Power which he would not deny though he would not grant it is all that at present I am pleading for it And it isall that in their ordination they receive as he saith as to the Word and Sacraments If then the Office of a Presbyter continue the same Power of the Keys as to Excommunication and Absolution as it doth of administring the Word and Sacraments at present I rest satisfied with this In which Learned Spalatensis and those that go with him cannot be confuted For this proveth that their Divinely-instituted Office Essentially containeth this Power of the Keys though to be exercised under the inspection of a Superiour 5. And if this Inspection would prove that they have not the Power or that their Office or Order is therefore distinct it will also prove that Bishops have not the Power of the Keys because they exercise it under the Inspection of Metropolitans Arch-Bishops Primates or Patriarchs And also that they are of a distinct Order from all these And that a Physition hath no Power to Guide or Govern his voluntary Patients in order to Cure and that he is off a distinct Office from the Colledge and President because he is under their inspection And are not all Bishops under the Government of the King as well as Physitions and other Subjects And have they no Power of the Keys because he ruleth them And as a Presbyter might do nothing without the Bishop so no one Bishop could do any thing without other Bishops For he had no Episcopal Power till they ordained him And as to after Government or that which he calleth the grant of a Second Power 6. Is it any thing but Humane License to Exercise the Power of Office of Divine institution before received And is not the Magistrates License as necessary to the Bishop and the Presbyter too as the Bishops is to the Presbyter 7. And I take it for undenied among Christians that humane Power of Government extendeth but to the Ordering and not the Nulling of a Function instituted by God It is not referred to King or Bishop whether there shall be a Preaching or none Sacraments or none Church discipline and exercise of the Keys or none no more than whether there shall be a Scripture and Divine Law a Christ a Heaven and whether men shall be good or bad saved or damned But only by whom and when and how this Divine Function shall be so exercised as may best attain the end as to those circumstances not determined of by God and not contradicting Gods Institutions Therefore if the Bishops say that the Preachers of the Gospel shall be silenced perhaps by hundreds or thousands while the necessity of the Peoples Souls is undeniable their Authority in this should hinder no man from going to Preach further than their violence hindreth And so by his own Rule it must be as to Discipline if Discipline be a Work belonging to a Presbyter And as Spalatensis saith of Confirmation the Presbyter should do it though the Bishop rorbid him 8. The Second Power which the Presbyter must receive from the Prelate for Teaching Worshipping and Governing the Plock is either 1. For the exercise of it in General to any fit persons or else for the limitation of him to such a particular Flock 2. And it is either a General License or power at once given to do all his Work or to do this of Government whenever there is cause or else it is a particular License for each particular act 1. We deny not but that as a Physician Licensed to practice is not thereby made the Physician of this or that Person Hospital or City but have a particular Call for such an Exercise or Application of his skill So an Ordained Minister of Christ hath no prepared Object on which to Exercise a Pastoral Office but by a particular Call to such a Flock But however you Censure our simplicity for it we are resolved to believe till you say more against it 1. That the same may be said of a Bishop too and therefore by your Argument when this Bishop is fixed in a particular Flock he receiveth a second power as you call it and so without it hath not the power of the Keys any more than the
Presbyter and so must be of a distinct Order from the Bishops that give him his second power And who giveth them theirs And if you rise to a Patriarch or Pope what Superiour of another Order giveth them their second Power 2. That institution or fixing a man before Ordained to a particular Flock doth not make him of another Order or Office nor is a new Ordination nor is he as oft Ordained and made of another Office as he changeth his Flock or receiveth a new License from the Bishop or the King from whom I had rather have it 3. That the People as well as the Bishop if not much more do give the Minister this opportunity for the exercise of his Office as the Patient chooseth his Physician And yet it is my Opinion that this will not prove that the People are his Governours much less that they give him a new Order or Office And of old the People chose their Bishops themselves It will be as much honour for you Learnedly to prove that there were no Kings in the World till Bishops made them as to confute D. Blondels Historical proof of the Peoples ancient choice of their Bishops 2. And as to a General License I will thank the King for it yea or any man that hath power to hinder me that he will give me leave to Preach and Exercise my Office But I do not think that every man that doth not hinder me when he can doth give me power And if a Bishop be so extraordinary good as not to silence nor hinder a Minister from Preaching Christ I do not think that this man is an Usurper in Preaching the Gospel for want of a License or second Power Nor yet in exercising the rest of his Office where he and the People do consent These things seem plain to us and they that whether by Learning or the Love of Riches and Honour and Domination are made wiser than we may suffer such Fools gladly while themselves are in re vel spe Rich Honourable and wise 3. And what is Ordination but a General Investiture in the power of performing the Ministerial Office And why may not the General Power or License be given at once as at twice I think Take thou Authority to Preach the Word of God and Administer the Holy Sacraments and the Discipline of the Church when thou art thereto lawfully called that is hast opportunity and fit Objects is a General License And a Man may presently Exercise this Office on Consenters Unless the sence be Take thee power when it shall be given thee 3. But if it be a Particular License that is here meant by the grant of second power I confess that there is somewhat considerable in it and that in old time the Bishop and his Clergy living together and meeting in the same Church the Presbyters like our Parish Curates now were in all the Worship of the day and in their privater Ministry to the People to be ruled by the Bishop and to Modifie and Circumstantiate all as he directed them And so may it be again But sure a Minister is not to travel an hundred miles to the Bishop to know whether he shall visit this sick man or give the Sacrament to the other and to know what Chapter he shall read and such like If it be not a General License that is meant it must needs suppose the Bishops presence 9. And seeing the Bishops may License a Presbyter to use the Keys the opening of this will help our understandings about the nature of the Bishops Office There is no act of Jurisdiction which they do not Ordinarily commit to others The sentence of Excommunication and Absolution is ordinarily decreed by a Lay-Chancellor And Spalatensis saith that Episcopal Jurisdiction may be done by a Lay Delegate The same sentence is Pronounced in Court by a Lay-Man or a meer Presbyter The same sentence is published in the Church by a Presbyter or Deacon And a Prince may give a License to exercise the Ministry to which we were Ordained I enquire then 1. Whether the granting of this Episcopal Power be a making that Man a Bishop that it 's granted to If so a Bishop a Presbyter and a Chancellor are all of one Office when thus impowred If not so then a Lay-man or one of another Office may have power to do the Work of the Bishops Office And what is the Office tell me if you can beside Authority and Obligation to do the Work A Lay-man and Presbyter may by the Bishop be Authorized and Obliged to do the Work of a Bishop and this ordinarily as an Office For so they do Ergo a Chancellor and a Presbyter may be made really a Bishop and yet in their esteem remain a Lay-man and a Presbyter still And is not that a Lay Office which a Lay-man may be Commissioned to do If a Lay-man were but Commissioned to do the Work of a Presbyter to Teach a Church ordinarily to Administer the Sacraments and to Excommunicate and Absolve in foro internae poenitentialis either it would make the Man a Presbyter or it would be a Nullity And if it be not so with the Bishops Office what is the Reason Is it not because it is not of Divine Specification and Institution but Humane and therefore mutable or such as Men may parcel out and commit to Lay-men by pieces as they please So much to Dr. Hammond's Appropriation of the Power of the Keys in that Treatise As to his Annotations I shall have occasion to recite them hereafter among those that give up the Diocesan Cause as opposed by us and therefore shall here pass them by His Dissertations against Blondel have a Premonition about Ordination which though most confident I shall manifest when I come to the point of Ordination to be most weak and indeed have done it before his death in my Disput of Ordin His first Preliminary Dissertation of Antichrist of the Mystery of Iniquity and of Diotrephes I will not be so needlesly tedious as to meddle with any further then to say that I will believe Dr. Hammond here and in his Annot. on 2 Thes 2. when I am fallen into so deep a sleep as to dream 1. That the famous Coming of Christ and our gathering together to him which is a great Article of the Christian Faith is but Titus his Destruction of Jerusalem and that the reward promised to all that love his appearing is meant to all that love the said Destruction of Jerusalem 2. And that this Destruction was not to be called nigh or at hand which fell out so few Years after 3. And that the Gentiles of remote Countries were so shaken in mind and moved about a Question of a few Years distance of the Destruction of the Jews more than about Christ's coming to the Common Judgment 4. And that the Gnosticks were indeed such terrible Persecutors of the Church who were dispersed Subjects when their Doctrine was but that they
Prelacy to be so made And were they Christians or no Christians that made the Diocesane Form If Christians were they orderly Christians or rebellious If orderly how happened it that they were of no Church themselves when the Apostles setled so much of Church Form and Order as I have before named If rebellious they were a dishonourable original of Diocesanes And if the Church Form be not of Divine institution then the Church it self is not For forma dat nomen esse And so the cause is given up to the Brownists by these Learned moderate men so far as that there is no Church in England of Divine institution Were it not that when in general they have said that no Church Form of Government is so Divine they again so far unsay it as to confess the Parith Churches or Congregations with their Pastors to be of Divine institution and of continued necessity All that is to be said by and for them is this That the Apostles were the makers of the English or Diocesane Form but not of that only but of the Presbyterian and Independent also and so made no one necessary but left all indifferent Or that they made one of these Forms as mutable allowing men to change it Answ But 1. I have proved what they made Let them prove that they made any other of a different sort not subordinate or supraordinate if they can 2. And let them prove the mutability of that which they made and their power to change it which they assert Till one of these is proved we are or should be in possession of that which was certainly first made I am bold to conclude this argument with the speech of a bold but a wise and holy man Joh. Chrysostome de Sacerdotio lib. 3. pag. mihi 48. cap. 15. And when some Bishops have obtained that prefecture of a Province not belonging to them and others of one FAR GREATER THAN THEIR OWN proper STRENGTH CAN BEAR THEY CERTAINLY BRING TO PASS THAT THE CHURCH OF GOD SEEMETH NOTHING TO DIFFER FROM AN EURIPUS or a confused turbulent changeling thing pag. 49. AND DO NOT THESE THINGS DESERVE GODS THUNDERBOLT A THOUSAND TIMES ARE THEY NOT WORTHY TO BE PUNISHED WITH THE FIRE OF HELL NOT THAT hell WHICH THE HOLY SCRIPTURES THREATEN TO US BUT EVEN OF ONE THAT IS FAR MORE GRIEVOUS Forgive the words my Lords They are not mine but Chrysostome's or if you will not forgive the citing of them I will bear it as he did the like Only I will abate you in my prognostication or sentence that far sorer hell fire than the Scripture threameth supposing this will be sharp enough even for the most dispersing silencing persecuting Prelate and imputing those words to honest Chrysostome's vehement Oratory And I 'le tell you what went next before these words And they do not only take in the unworthy into the Priesthood but they cast out the worthy For as if they had agreed both ways to spoil the Church of God and the first cause were not enough to kindle the wrath of God they add the second or worse to the former For I judge it equally pestilent to drive out the Profitable and to take in the unprofitable which certainly they do that the flock of Christ may from no part either find consolation or be able to take breath O what would this man have said had he lived now in England CHAP. XI Argument 3. From the destruction of the order of Presbyters of Divine Institution and the Invention of a new order of Sub-half-Presbyters in their stead ARGUMENT III. THe office of Presbyters instituted by the Holy Ghost containeth an Obligation and Authority to Guide by Doctrine Worship and Discipline the flocks committed to their care But the office of a Diocesane being one only Bishop over many score or hundred Congregations is destructive of that office of Presbyters which containeth an obligation and authority to Guide by Doctrine Worship and Discipline or the exercise of the Church keys the flocks committed to their care Therefore the office of such a Diocesane is destructive of the office of Presbyters instituted by the Holy Ghost The Major is thus proved by the Enumeration of the Acts which contain the general office and by the proof of the General power extending to those Acts viz. 1. They that had the Authority and Obligation to exercise the Church keys in the Scripture sence had the authority and obligation to Guide their flocks by Doctrine Worship and Discipline But the Presbyters of the Holy Ghosts institution had the authority and obligation to exercise the Church keys in the Scripture sence Ergo they had authority and obligation to Guide their flocks by Doctrine Worship and Discipline 2. Again The office which contained an Authority and Obligation to Teach Exhort Rebuke publickly and privately to judge of persons baptizable and to baptize them to Pray Praise God and administer the Lords Supper to the Church and to judge of them that are to receive it to watch over them privately and publickly to Excommunicate the obstinately impenitent and absolve the penitent doth contain authority and obligation to Guide that flock by Doctrine Worship and Discipline But such is the Office of Presbyters as instituted by the Holy Ghost Ergo c. Here note 1. That I am not now medling with the Questions Whether such Presbyters hold this power in subordination to any superiour Bishops nor whether there lie any appeal from them to a higher power in the Church 2. Nor am I now questioning Whether in Scripture sence Bishops and Presbyters are all one in Name or thing 3. But that which I maintain is 1. That there is no proof in Scripture that God ever instituted any order of Presbyters which had not the forementioned power of the keys 2. And that God did institute such an Order of Presbyters as had that power de nomine de re And 3. That the Diocesane Office destroyeth such and setteth up others in their stead What God instituted I will prove 1. Out of the Scripture records 2. Out of the History of the Church which long retained them in some degree CHAP. XII That God instituted such Presbyters as had the foresaid power of the Keys in Doctrine Worship and Discipline and no other proved by the Sacred Scriptures THat God instituted such Presbyters and no other I shall prove by the enumeration and perusal of all the Texts of Scripture which mention them viz. as instituted in the New Testament and now in force Act. 14. 23. When they had Ordained them Elders in every Church Compared with Tit. 1. 5. That thou shouldest Ordain Elders in every City as I had appointed thee 7. For a Bishop must be blameless as the steward of God And his power is described v. 11 13. Ch. 2. 1 7 15. and 3. 10. intimate it Compare this with 1 Tim. 3. 1 2 5 6. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Let the Elders that rule well be
that the Presbyters office which was instituted by God and used by the ancient Churches contained an obligation and Authority not only to Teach and Worship but also the rest of the Power of the Keys to Rule the Churches committed to their care not by the sword or force but by a pastoral perswasive power judging who is to be taken in and put out and what persons are fit objects for the respective exercises of their own Ministerial acts which was the thing I was engaged to make good CHAP. XV. Whether this Government belonging to the office of Presbyters be in foro Ecclesiae exteriore or only in foro Conscientiae interiore THe last shift that some Prelatists have is to distinguish between the forum internum Conscientiae poenitentiale and the forum externum Ecclesiasticum and to tell us that indeed Presbyters have the Power of the Keys in private or in the first sense but not in Publick or in the second Answ 1. Note that the question is not whether they have the sole power or the chief power or with what limitations it is fit for them to exercise it nor what appeals there should be from them But whether the power of the Keys be part of their office 2. That the question is not of the power of Governing the Church by the sword which belongeth to the King and is Extrinsick to the Pastoral office and to the being of the Church As protecting the Church punishing Church-offenders corporally c. For this is proper to the Magistrate and belongeth neither to Bishops nor Presbyters as such We claim no part with the Prelates in any such secular Government as their Courts use except when they come to Excommunication and Absolution At least no coercive power at all 3. All the question is of the power of the Keys of Admission Conduct and Exclusion of judging who shall have Sacraments and Church-Communion with our assemblies that is Who shall be pronounced fit or unfit for it by our selves And that this belongeth to Presbyters in foro publico Ecclesiae I prove 1. Because they are Publick officers or Pastors over that Church and therefore their power of the Keys is a publick Church power else they had none of the Keys as Pastors of that Church at all For the Keys are to Let in and put out They are the Church Keys and he that hath power only to speak secretly to a single person doth not thereby take in to the Church or put any out nor Guide them publickly A man that is a Minister at least may convince satisfie comfort any mans conscience in secret of what Church soever he be even as he is a member of the Universal Church But he that is a publick Officer and Governour of the Church may publickly Govern the Church But a Presbyter is a publick officer and Governour Ergo. 2. The rest of his office may be publickly performed Coram Ecclesia and not in secret only He may Preach to the Church Pray with the Church Praise God with them Give them the Sacrament Therefore by parity of Reason he may publickly exercise discipline unless any by-accident pro tempore forbid it 3. Else he must be made a meer Instrument of another and not a rational free Agent and Minister of Christ Yea perhaps more like to an Asse who may carry Bread and Wine to the Church or like a Parrot that may say what he is bid than a man who hath a discerning judgment what he is to do I must publickly baptize and publickly preach and pray and publickly give the Lords Body and Bloud And if I must be no Judge my self to whom I must do this then 1. Either I may and must do it to any one without offending God to whom the Bishop bids me do it And if so I may Excommunicate the faithful and curse Gods children and absolve the most notoriously wicked if the Bishop bid me And how come they to have more power than King Balak had over Balaam or than a Christian Emperour had over Chrysostom He that saith to the wicked Thou art righteous Nations shall curse him people shall abhor him Prov. 24. 24. Wo to them that call evil good and good evil But what if the Bishop bid them If I may not preach lies or heresies if the Bishop bid me then I may not lyingly curse the faithful nor bless the wicked if he bid me If I may not forbear preaching the Gospel meerly for the will of man when God calleth me to it much less may I speak slanders yea and lie in the name of God when men bid me The French Priest did wiselier than so that being bid from the Pope to Curse and Excommunicate the Emperour said I know not who it is that is in the right and who is in the wrong but I do Excommunicate him that is in the wrong whoever he be 2. Or else it will follow that I am bound to sin and damn my soul thereby whenever the Bishop will command me which is a contradiction 3. Or else it will follow that I am a beast that am not to judge or know what I do and therefore my acts are neither sin nor duty 4. If he have not the Keys to use publickly in foro Ecclesiae he hath no power of Excommunication and Restitution at all For to Excommunicater is publickly to notifie to the Church that this person is none of them nor to be communicated with and to charge them to avoid his company 5. The Bishops themselves put the Presbyters to proclaim or read the Excommunication and if this be any Ministerial or Pastoral act certainly it is in foro Ecclesiae 6. Most of the Acts before named as their concessions as to be in the Convocation c. are acts in foro publico 7. The full proofs before brought from Antiquity of Presbyters sitting in Councils Judging Excommunicating c. are of publick not private exercise of the Keys 8. They are the same Keys or Office power which Christ hath committed to the Pastors even the Guidance of his Church to feed his lambs And ubi Lex non distinguit non est distinguendum Where doth Christ or Scripture say You shall use the Keys of Church-power privately but not in the Church or publickly 9. All this striving against Power in the Ministers of Christ is but striving against their duty work and the ends and benefits of it He that hath no Power for publick discipline hath no obligation to use it and so he is to neglect it And this is it that the Devil would have to keep a thousand or many hundred Pastors in a Diocese from doing the publick work of Discipline And as if he could confine Preaching to Diocesans only And I verily believe they are better of the two at Preaching than at Discipline he knoweth that it is but few souls of many thousands that would be taught Even so when he can confine Church discipline to the Diocesanes
mean time they observe not the peoples mindes and lives much lesse do they reforme them Nor do they take care how the people grow in the knowledge of God the faith of Christ and in true Godliness They apply not themselves to the study of the Scriptures nor perswade the people to read them in their houses they neither take care of the poor and strangers nor visit the sick as little caring how and with what faith they depart And thus they discharge their Ministry neither faithfully prudently nor profitably It is indeed of great moment that they bring not strange Doctrine into the Church but teach the Scripture Doâârine and that they use not superstitious rites but are not content with simple administration of the Sacraments according to the custome of the Primitive Church But in this they are to be blamed that they do things right and profitable not from the hearts but sleightly as on the by and what is accordingly to be else done by a faithful Minister they wholly neglect While they thus Minister they do not indeed bring Errour and superstitions into the Churches as in the foregoing ages was done But in the mean time inclining to the other extreme they take the course which by degrees will bring the people into that indifferency in Religions which is the most pestilent and to drink in Epicurism the waster and extniguisher of all religion Wherefore I beseech them in the Lord that they fully performe and discharge their Ministry and not thus by the halves Thus far he describeth our ordinary better sort of the Clergie but not our Bishops And Pa. 431. They that labour more to keep up the authority of Bishops than to save the people when they cannot convince the Ministers called by the Magistrate of error do raise a question about their calling being themselves neither lawfully chosen nor called saying what Suffragane ordained you minister what Bishop called you to the office As the Priests by Christ They questioned not his work which they could find no fault with but his power so these where they cannot by Gods word defend their own errours and abuses nor disprove our true doctrine they fly to the Episcopal power and authority as if they did passess any such umblamable and lawful power when they neither discharge the office nor have the power of true Bishops wherefore let no true sincere Minister of Christ regard the barking of these men but as content with the testimony of his Conscience and his calling to teach by the Lawful Magistrate go on in the Lords work with alacrity of spirit Here he addeth the manner of their calling at Bern by the election of the Pastors and confirmation of the Magistrates and reception of the people that you may know what he meaneth by the Magistrates Call And p. 436. having told us that Christianity falleth where the election and Pastoral care of the Ministry falleth he addeth But now they that endeavour to put out the light of truth boast much of the power of Bishops Arch-Bishops Metropolitanes Patriarcks and the Roman Pope where if you urge them to it they are not able to prove by any truth of divine institution that so much as this first ministerial power of Ministring in the Church is in those Bishops Arch-bishops Metropolitanes Patriarcks or Pope that is in these Church Lords Satrapes Let them prove that these are true Ministers of Christ I strive not about Episcopacy simply in it self whether it be to be numbred with Christs true Ministers But the controversie is whether such Bishops as our age too patiently tolerateth are to be numbred with Christs true Ministers It is greatly to be feared lest in the day of judgment they will hear that dreadful word from God Depart from me ye workers of iniquity I know you not I have added more of Musculus then directly concerneth the point now in hand because I would take him all together And because the Helvetians are not accounted Presbyterians I add Bullinger Decad. 5. Serm. 3. p. mihi 377. 378. and Serm. 4. p. 383. Where he sheweth that Diocesan Bishops have not the sole power of ordination that Presbyters and Bishops were the same and had the same work and the horrid abuses that came into the Church by the degenerating of Episcopacy And Decad. 5. Serm 10. p. 491. that in latter Ages Prelates and Bishops snatching by tyranny that power of excommunication to themselves which before was used by the Pastors in Synods in common and sacrilegiously using it against the first institution had tarned a wholesome medicine into deadly poyson and made it abaminable to good and bad But I may not recite all Wagundus was no Presbyterian being superintendent of Magdeburgh first and after of Wismaria and after of Jene and after Bishop Pomeraniensis nor yet Math. Iudex yet go they the same way as may be seen Sytagm p. 1049. de excom p. 1114. de Eccles p. 1135. de Minist Should I cite all that is said by those that never were called Presbyterians about the degeneration of Episcopacy the largeness of their charge the ruine of discipline by their tyranny ambition and grasping wealth and titles when they neither will nor can perform the work I mean by Luther Melancton Illyricus Chytraeus Tzegedine Bucer Zuinglius Oecolampadius Gryneus Aretius Gualther Pet. Martyr Paraeus Chenmitius Pelargus c. I should but over-weary the Readers patience I only add that if the Churches of France Belgia Geneva and the rest of the Presbyterians and the Churches of Transilvania Hungary and formerly Poland that were Orthodox and Bobemia Brandenburgh Saxony the Palatinate c. that set up another sort of Episcopacy had found that the old or English species would have done the Ministerial works it is not credible that they would all have rejected it III. The third part of that experience which I alledge is the Bishops own 1. This is signified by their confessions before named Ar. Bishop Ushers reasons for the ancient use of Episcopacy with their Presbyters who shall be acknowledged true Church Governours over their flocks is fetcht from the need of so many to the work And Mr. Stanley Gower late of Dorchester was wont to profess being long intimate with him that he professed to him that he took a Bishop to be but primus Presbyterorum of the same order and every Presbyter a Governour of the flock And when he asked him why then he would be a Primate as he was he told him that he took it not for any part of his office as instituted by Christ but for a Collateral Dignity which the King was pleased to bestow on him for the more advantageous discharge of his Spiritual Office What Bishop Jewels opinion was to the like purpose is plain enough in his works Bishop Reignolds that now is professed to me his opinion to be the same when he took the Bishoprick and when he saw Dr. Stillingfliets book that no form of Church Government is
parts requisite thereunto or had not as yet attained to maturity of years being not much past their nonage as we have known some of them to be or in all respects undeserving persons And yet men of age and experience eminent for learning and piety must stand unveiled before such as these to receive directions and commands from them to whom they were able and fit to give the same who through the just judgment of the Almighty have since been as much and more scorned than they do now scorn others every way their superiour but in place Here he citeth such like words also even from Bishop Andrews Gonc ad Cler. with his prediction of the fall of their order for their vicious lives So p. 6. To this specious design an open way seemed to be made by the great profaness and vicious living of the opposite party who while they were zealous for conformity to the ordinances of men and thought a main part of Christian duty to depend upon the observation of them did allow themselves carnal liberty inviolating the precepts and commandements of God And this they did as from the inbred corruption which is common to all men so likewise from a private spirit of opposition against the adversaries of their cause And p. 10 11. Speaking of advantages against the Bishops and their party saith he This perchance was not the meanest that they might thus check and shame the open prophaness gross impiety irreligion and sin of their professed adversaries The which to speak truth was so eminent oft times and notorious in many of them as might startle a meer natural Conscience to hear or behold it and cause therein an abhorrence from their courses so opposite as well to right reason as sanctifying grace much more in a mind inlightened though with the smallest ray of Evangelical truth For what could be more strange or hateful to men in whom was any spark remaining of common grace or moral virtue and who were not wholly possessed with Atheism and carried on with fullest bent to libertinism and ungodly practice than to hear those that professed themselves the followers of Christ scoffing at the purest acts of his worship blaspheming or prophaning his holy name by causless Oaths fearful imprecations direful execrations and such like speeches not to be expressed again without horror and amazement And not only so but glorying likewise in this their abominable wickedness and in other of like damnable nature in lasciviousness lusts excess of wine and strong drinks revellings wherein they thought it strange that others ran not with them to the same excess of riot speaking evil of them How much did this their apparent and overdaring impudence in sin commend and grace the seeming Saint-like conversation of their adversaries of some of them we cannot without manifest breach of charity judge of them otherwise than that they were simple harmless well meaning men who being offended and not without cause at the corruption of the times and scandalous lives of many in the sacred office of the Ministry And indeed their strict conformity in other respects to the precepts of the Gospel with their constancy in suffering for the defence of their cause did argue as much to moderate men and not possessed with prejudicate hatred of their opinion and persons For such as these could never be induced to entertain a good conceit of them no not in the least measure but judged their best actions to be counterfeit and false and thought their greatest suffering to proceed from pride and contumacy of spirit Now as it comes to pass between those that extreamly hate one another that they endeavour as much as in them lieth to be unlike each other in manner of life so it fared in this case And p. 27. 28. The slack hand of ecclesiastical discipline was another cause of the general ignorance and prophaness of these times which reached no further for the most part to the inferior Clergy how peccant soever otherwise than in disconformity to Episcopal orders Provincial or Synodical Constitutions touching external government Neither did it call people to a due account if any of their proficiency in the knowledge of Christ Jesus or censure them for non-proficiency therein yea scarcely for gross and scandalous crimes if they were persons known to be well affected to the present Government And of the change since in 1653 when Bishops were down he saith p. 29. I can speak it on my own knowledge that a Town of good note in the Western parts of the land not far distant from the Sea heretofore famed for all manner of riot and disorder by this course of late years hath been reduced to that order and discipline that it is a rare matter to see a man there at any time distempered with wine and strong drink or to hear a rash Oath proceed from any mans mouth no not when there is most frequent concourse of people thither from all the neighbouring parts Such changes through Gods mercy were not rare till Prelacy returned Reader I cite the words of this author so tediously because many would perswade those that knew not those times that none of this was true on either side And because the Author was a very high Prelatist writing openly against their adversaries 1653. VI. Dr. Gauden after Bishop of Worcester Hiera spist pag. 287. saith I neither approve or excuse the personal faults of any particular Bishops as to the exercise of their power and authority which ought not in weighty matters to be mannaged without the presence Council and suffrages of the Presbyters such as are fit for that assistance The want of this S. Ambrose S. Hierome and all sober men * justly reprove as unsafe for the Bishops and Presbyters and the whole Church For in multitude of Counsellors is safety and honor I am sure much good they might all have done as many of them did whom these touchy times were not worthy of And p 262. 263. They have taught me to esteem the ancient and Catholick Government of Godly Bishops as Moderators and Presidents among the Presbyters in any Diocess or Precincts in its just measure and constitution for power paternal duty exercised such as was in the persecuting purest and primitive times Just such we offered them in Bishop Ushers Model p. 263 I confess after the example of the best times and judgment of the most learned in all Churches I alwayes wished such moderation on all sides that a Primitive Episcopacy which imported the authority of one grave and worthy person chosen by the consent and assisted by the presence Counsel and suffrages of many Presbyters might have been restored or preserved in this Church And this not out of any factious design but for those weighty reasons which prevail with me Add to this what he saith in Hookers life of the late Bishops and remember that this man was one of the Keenest Writers against the adversaries of the Bishops in his
when vacant by the Bishops death Now all these lived together as in a little Colledge thus the Churches were planted and the Gospel disseminated through the world But at first every Bishop had but one Parish yet afterwards when the numbers of the Christians increased that they could not conveniently meet in one place and when through the violence of persecution they durst not assemble in great multitudes the Bishops divided their charges in lesser Parishes and gave assignments to the Presbyters of particular flocks which was done first in Rome in the begining of the 2d Century And things continued thus in a Parochial Government till toward the end of the 2d Century the Bishop being chiefly intrusted with the cure of Souls a share whereof was also committed to the Presbyters who were subject to him and particularly to be ordained by him nor could any ordination be without the Bishop who in ordaining was to carry along with him the concurrence of the Presbyters as in every other act of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction Pag. 308. 309. Corruptions broke in upon Church Officers especially after the 4th Centurie that the Empire became Christian Which as it brought much riches and splendor on Church employments so it let in great Swarmes of corrupt men on the Christian Assemblies And then the Election to Church offices which was formerly in the hands of the people was taken from them by reason of the tumults and disonders that were in these Elections which some time ended in blood and occasioned much Faction and Schism And Anâbitus became now such an universal sin among Churchmen that c. Pag. 310. I do not alledge a Bishop to be a distinct office from a Presbyter but a different degree in the same office c. Pag. 320. As for the sole power of ordination and Jurisdiction none among us claime it but willingly allow the Presbyters a concurence in both these Pag. 322. That whole frame of Metropolitans and Patriarks was taken from the division of the Roman Empire which made but one great National Church Pag. 331. I acknowledged Bishop and Presbyter to be one and the same office and so plead for no new office bearer in the Church The first branch of their power is their authority to publish the Gospell to manage the worship and dispence the Sacraments And this is all that is of Divine right in the Ministry in which Bishops and Presbyters are equal sharers but besides this the Church claimeth a power of Jurisdiction of making rules for discipline and applying and executing the same All which is indeed suitable to the common laws of societies and the general rules of Scripture but hath no positive warrant from any Scripture precept And all these Constitutions of Churches into Synods and the Canons of discipline taking their rise from the divisions of the world into the several provinces and beginning in the 2d and beginning of the 3d. Century do clearly shew they can be derived from no Divine original and so were a to their particular forme but of humane constitution Therefore as to the managment of this Jurisdiction it is in the Churches power to cast it into what mould she will But we ought to be much more determined by the Laws of the land In things necessary to be done by Divine precept since no power on earth can Council the authority of a Divine Law the Churches restraints are not to be considered Pag. 335. I acknowledge that without Scripture warrant no new offices may be instituted Pag. 337. I am not to annul these ordinations that pass by Presbyters where no Bishop can be had And this layes no claime to a new office but only to a higher degree of inspection in the same office whereby the exercise of some acts of jurisdiction are restrained to such a Method And this may be done either by the Churches free consent or by the Kings authority Pag. 348. In Augustines time it appears from the journal of a conference he had with the Donatists that there were about 500 Bishopricks in a small tract of ground Pag. 30. Observe the Bishops were to be ordained in the presence of the people where every one might propose his exceptions yet the popular Elections were not wholly taken away and at least the peoples consent was asked Pag. 41. Vossâis from all the manuscripts of Damasus his lives of the Popes shewes that S. Peter ordained both Linus and Gletus Bishops of Rome and after some enquiry into the matter he concludes that at first there were three Bishops in Rome at once Linus Cletus and Aneneletus in the next succession he placeth Cletus Anencltus and Clemens Pag. 48. Among the Jewes where ever there were an hundred and twenty of them together they did erect a Synagoguge Pag. 49. At a conference which Augustine and the Bishops of that Province had with the Donatists there were of Bishops 286 present and 120 absent and 60 Sees vacant And there were 279 of the Donatists Bishops Pag. 51. The Gothick Churches are said to be planted 70 years before Ulphilas their first Bishop came to them Pag. 50 He she weth the like of the Scots By the streine of Ignatius Epistles especially that to Smyrna it would appear that there was but one Church at least but one place where there was one Altar and Communion in each of these Parishes which was the Bishops whole charge Pag. 56. The enlarging of the Diocesses hath wholly altered the figure of Primitive Episcopacy That the Bishops were chosen by the people and by the Clergy and people and at last not obtruded without the peoples consent Father Paul Saript de Beneficiis oft tells you and I have fully proved by many Canons in my abstract of Church-history of Councils FINIS * Where Dr. Allestree was bred His next Neighbor a Cosins Tab. 3. b Cosins Tab. 4. c Cosins Tab. 5. d Cos Tab. 6. e Cos Tab. 2. f Cos Tab. 8. g Cos Tab. 2. Tab. 8. h Cos ibid. i Cos ibid. k Cos Tab. 2. l Act of Uniform That Parish Priests have no Governing power see Dr. Zouch as also that the King is the Ecclesiastical Supream m Cos Tab. 13. n Cos Tab. 11. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5. â Vid. Epist 2. Edict Anacleti de forma provinciali Metrapol c. Turrian pro Epist decr c. 24. De novitate hujus formae leg Blondel cont Decr. p. 1. 27. who giveth full testimony of it cont Anaclet Ep. 2. 41. Leg. Vitaâ Ambros per Baron August li. de opera Monecheââân Invit Ambros per Baron Vit. Ambros per Baron Socrat l. 3. c. 15. Theodoret Eccles Hist l. 1. cap. 10. Leg. Valentiniani Valentus Legem seu Literas in Theodoreti Eccl. Hist l. 4. c. 7. Hestor Andaeanorum c. 9. Messalianorum c. 10. cum interpretatione D. Hookeri li. 7. p. 66. de Audio Euseb l. 8. c. 1. Dr. Hanmer's Translat p. 144 145. Socrat. l. 2. c. 3. Id. ib.
of the first rank afore-described must govern it statedly as present by himself and not absent by others Chap. 12. The just opening and understanding of the true nature of the Pastoral Office and Church Government would end these Controversies about Prelacy Chap. 13. That there is no need of such as our Diocesânes for the Unity or the Government of the particular Ministers nor for the silencing of the unworthy Chap. 14. The true original of the warrantable sort of Episcopacy in particular Churches was the notorious disparity of abilities in the Pastors And tho original of that tyrannical Prelacy into which it did degenerate was the worldly Spirit in the Pastors and people which with the World came by prosperity into the Church Quaere Whether the thing cease not when the Reason of it ceaseth PART II. Chap. 1. THe clearing of the State of the Question Chap. 2. The first Argument against the aforedescribed Diocesanes that their form quantum in se destroyeth the particular Church form of Gods institution and setteth up a humane form in its stead Chap. 3. That the Primitive Episcopal Churches of the Holy Ghosts Institution were but such Congregations as I before described Proved by Scripture Chap. 4. The same proved by the Concessions of the most learned Defenders of Prelacy Chap. 5. The same proved by the full Testimony of Antiquity Chap. 6. The same further confirmed by the Ancients Chap. 7. More proof of the aforesaid Ancient Church limits from the Ancient Customs Chap. 8. That the Diocesanes cause the Error of the Separatists who avoid our Churches as false in their Constitution and would disable us to confute them Chap. 9. The second Argument from the deposition of the Primitive species of Bishops and the erecting of a humane inconsiâtent species in their stead A specifi k difference proved Chap. 10. Whether any form of Church Government be instituted by God as necessary or all be left to humane prudence and choice Chap. 11. Argument third from the destruction of the Order of Presbyters of divine Institution and the invention of a new Order of half Sub-presbyters in their stead Chap. 12. That God instituted such Presbyters as had the foresaid power of the Keyes in doctrine worship and discipline and no other proved by the Scriptures Chap. 13. The same confirmed by the Ancients Chap. 14. And by the Confessions of the greatest and learnedest Prelatists Chap. 15. Whether this Government belonging to the Presbyters be in foro Ecclesiastico exteriore or only in foro Conscientiae vel interiore Chap. 16. That the English Diocesane Government doth change this Office of a Presbyter of God's institution quantum in se into another of humane invention The difference opened Twenty instances of taking away the Presbyters power from them Chap. 17. That the great change of Government hitherto described the making of a new species of Churches Bishops and Presbyters and deposing the old was sinfully done and not according to the intent of the Apostles Chap. 18. Argument fourth from the impossibility of their performance of the Episcopal Office in a Diocesane Church And the certain exclusion and destruction of the perticular Church Government while one man only will undertake a work too great for many hundreds when their work is further opened in perticulars Chap 19. The same impossibility proved by experience 1. Of the ancient Church 2. Of the Foreign Churches 3. Of the Church of England 4. Of our selves Chap. 20. Objections against Parish discipline answered The need of it proved Chap. 21. The Magistrates sword 1. Is neither the strength of Church discipline 2. Nor will serve instead of it 3. Nor should be too much used to second and enforce it The mischeifs of enforcing men to Sacramental Communion opened in twenty instances Chap. 22. An Answer to the Objections 1. No Bishop no King 2. Of the Rebellions and Seditions of them that have been against Bishops Chah 23. Certain brief consectaries Chap. 24. Some Testinonies of Prelatists themselves of the late state of the Church of England its Bishops and Clergy lest we be thought to wrong them in our description of them and their fruits Chap. 25. The Ordination lately exercised by the Presbyters in England when the Bishops were put down by the Parliament is valid and Re ordination not to be required jure divino as supposing it null A TREATISE OF EPISCOPACY Confuting by SCRIPTURE REASON And the CHURCHES TESTIMONY That sort of Diocesan Churches Prelacy and Government which casteth out the Primitive Church-species Episcopacy Ministry and Discipline and confoundeth the Christian world by Corruption Usurpation Schismes and Persecution Meditated 1640 when the c. Oath was imposed Written 1671 and cast by Published 1680 by the Call of Mr. H. Dodwel and the Importunity of our Superiors who demand the Reasons of our Nonconformity The designe of this book is not to weaken the Church of England its Government Riches Honour or Unity But to strengthen and secure it 1. By the concord of all true Protestants who can never unite in the present Impositions 2. And by the necessary reformation of Parish-Churches and those abuses which else will in all ages keep up a succession of Nonconformists As an Account why we dare not Covenant by Oath or Subscription never to endeavour any amending alteration of the Church Government by lawful meanes as Subjects nor make our selves the justifying vouchers for all the unknown persons in the Kingdom who vowed and swore it that none of them are obliged to such lawful endeavour by their vow By RICHARD BAXTER a Catholick Christian for love concord and peace of all true Christians and obedience to all lawful commands of Rulers but made called and used as a Nonconformist London Printed for Nevil Simmons at the three Cocks at the West end of Saint Pauls and Thomas Simmons at the Prince's Armes in Ludgate-street MDCLXXXI These Books following are printed for and sold by Nevil Simmons at the three Golden Cocks at the west end of St. Pauls A Christian Directory or sum of practical Theology and cases of Conscience directing Christians how to use their Knowledge and Faith how to improve all helps and meanes and to performe all duties how to overcome temptations and to escape or mortifie every sin in four parts 1. Christian Ethicks or private Duties 2. Christian Oeconomicks or Family Duties 3. Christian Ecclesiasticks or Church Duties 4. Christian Politicks or Duties to Our selves and Neighbours in Folio Catholick Theology Plain Pure Peaceable for Pacification in three Books 1. Pacifying Principles c. 2. Pacifying Praxis c. 3. Pacifying Disputations c. in Folio The Life of Faith in three Parts The first Sermon preached before his Majesty c. The Second Instructions for confirming believers in the Christian faith The third directions how to live by faith or how to exercise it in all occasions in Quarto Naked Popery or the naked Falshood of a book called the Catholick naked Truth
Bishop and his Chancellor and other Officers are over us all The Magistrates Civil Governmeut of the Church I shall not meddle with as having no exceptions against it The Sacerdotal or Spiritual Power called the Power of the Keys determineth who shall be Members of the Church and partake of its Communion and exerciseth other acts of Spiritual Discipline of which more anon This power is said to be in Archbishops and Bishops in foro ecclesiae publico vel exteriore though also in the Governed Presbyters in foro privato interiore as they may privately comfort a penitent person and declare God's promise of the pardon of his sin The Archbishops have it in eminency As also the power of confirming the Election of the Bishops of their Provinces and the power of Consecrating Bishops with two others and the power of Convocating Provincial Synods upon the Kings Prescript and of moderating in them The power of receiving Appeals and of Visiting the whole Provinces yea to receive Appeals from the lower Judges omiting the middle ones and to exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction in any vacant Diocess under them They have power of Dispensation in all Causes not judged contrary to Gods word wherever the Pope had power and where the Pope had not power if the King or Council permit it them They may dispense with the Eating of flesh on Fasting-days with Marrying without previous publication with divers irregularities and sometime may abolish simoniacum ambitum They may grant Commendams and Dispence with Non-residence and with the keeping of divers Churches called Benefices in several Cases and with a Sons succeeding his Father and with Lay-mens possessing the Church-maintenance called Prebends The Bishops who take place in Parliament of other Barons as the Archbishops do of Dukes are all chosen really by the King who nominateth in a Writ to the Dean and Chapter the man whom they must chuse who pro forma do chuse him never contradicting the Kings Nomination Their proper Office consisteth in the powers of Order and of Jurisdiction as they distinguish them Their power of Order is threefold 1. To Ordain Priests and Deacons 2. To Consecrate Churches and Burying places 3. To Confirm Children after Baptism when they can speak and say the Creed Lords Prayer and Decalogue and others that were not Confirmed in their Childhood Besides that they may be Privy-Counsellors Lord-Keepers of the Great Seal Lord Treasurers Embassadours c. Their ordinary Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction extendeth 1. to the Interdiction of Divine Offices 2. to publick Admonitions and Penances 3. to suspension from the Sacrament and from ingress into the Church and 4. to Excommunication and Absolution and 5. to Anathematisms And as to Ministers 1. They may Sequester Benefices 2. They may Suspend ab officio beneficio and forbid them to Preach or Pray Or grant License to such as shall be tolerated to Preach 3. They may deprive 4. And depose Ministers by sentence verbal and degradation actually This Church Jurisdiction of Bishops is distinguished into Voluntary and Contentious The Voluntary extendeth to abundance of things granted them by Statute and by Common Law which I pass by That which they claim both by Municipal Law and Ecclesiastical is 1. The probate of the Testaments of the dead 2. The granting Administration of Goods to the next of Kin 3. Keeping the bona caduca where none claimeth the Inheritance 4. To receive Reasons of Administring and to be Judges of them 5. To confer Benefices or Institute such as others present 6. To grant Induction to the Instituted 7. To receive the Fruits of vacant Benefices 8. To allow the Vicar a fit proportion 9. To grant Letters Dimissory or Testimonial 10. To Visit their Diocess once in three years In which Triennial Visitation they usually go to one Town in a County and never see the face of the people in the many score or hundred Churches about them and thither they summon the Ministers and the Church-Wardens and Sides-men Where one Minister preacheth and then the Ministers must dine with the Bishop and in Court he or his Officer giveth a Book of Printed Articles containing a multitude of particulars which the Church-warden must swear to present by where because of the quality of them some Church-Wardens refuse and others because of the number some saying it is unlawful to undo their Ministers and Neighbours by such Presentments as for omitting a Ceremony for preaching or keeping a Fast in private c. and some saying it is impossible to keep the Oath and some saying that if they do it they shall be hated of their Neighbours Whereupon those that refuse are prosecuted to punishment And the rest take the Oath and Articles but not one of many doth present accordingly though the Canon enquires after the perjured And many that fear perjury or persecution themselves do hire some poor man to be Church-Warden in their stead that will venture upon all I must intreat the Reader to peruse some of their Books of Articles especially such as Bishop Mountagues and Bishop Wrens to see what was then enquired after Dr. Zouch de Jud. Eccless p. 37. § 1. Part. 3. saith Ad judices quod attinet statuto ordinatum quod personae conjugatae dummodo Doctores Juris Civilis fuerint qui ad officium Cancellarii Vicarii Generalis Officialis vel Commissarii à Majestate Regia Archiapiscopo Episcopo Archidiacono aut alio quocunque potestatem habente deputati sunt omnem Jurisdictionem Ecclesiasticam exercere quam libet censuram sive coercitionem ârrogare possint This Jurisdiction of Bishops is exercised either Universally by a Vicar General usually a Lay-man or qarticularly by a Commissary And when he please the Bishop may do it himself The other part of their Jurisdiction is called Contentious And here the Bishop may himself judge in some Cases but in the ordinary course of Jurisdiction a Civil Lawyer called his Chancellor is the Judge This Chancellor is and must be a Lay-man which even Bishop Goodman of Gloucester Myst Rel. Epist I have it and can produce it at this time under the Kings own Hand and Seal wherein he forbids that any Church-man or Priest in Holy Orders be a Chancellor and this was the occasion of all the corruption of the Spiritual Courts For Chancellors live only on the Fees of the Court and for them to dismiss a Cause it was to lose so much blood See further in him a Papist Bishop of a Protestant Diocess complaineth in Print that he could not get Reformed This Chancellor keepeth an Ordinary Court in the form of a Civil Court where are Advocates for Council and Proctors for pleading Certain men called Apparitors whose name is commonly a scorn among the people do from abroad the Country bring them in Accusations and Summon the persons accused besides those that by Plaintiffs are accused Here are judged Causes about Church Materials and Causes Criminal which he that
Heathen Judges And the thing shewed so little of the Christian Spirit of Love and was also of so ill consequence by scandals and dissentions that it was worthy to be reproved especially in Christians that were persecuted by those Magistrates Therefore almost all the differences of Christians were necessarily decided by Arbitration And none were thought so fit to be the Arbitrators as the Elders or Pastors of the Churches By which it came to pass that where Churches were great and the ceasing of persecution which came but as storms that passed away did restore that peace which cherished dissentions the work of the Elders in these Arbitrations was not small especially as added to their greater proper Office-work 17. At the same time many Heresies arose which occasioned Divisions in the Churches and sometimes among the Officers themselves 18. And the Ministers being though holy yet imperfect as well as other Christians the remnants of self-conceitedness and pride occasioned also the trouble of the Churches For when the Apostles themselves while Christ was with them strove who should be the Greatest and have the highest place it is no wonder if they did so afterward who had not so great a measure of Grace as they 19. Besides all this when the Apostolical Virtues ceased there were few Philosophers or Learned men that turned Christians and few that had excellent Gifts of Oratory fit to be Teachers of the Churches And the most of the Elders were good men but of inferiour parts Like the better sort of our unlearned godly Christians By which means it came to pass that some one of the Clergy in every Church when there were many having so much Knowledge and Oratory as to overtop the rest he was ordinarily more esteemed than the rest 20. By these four means conjunct it quickly came to pass that in every Church that had many Elders some one was chosen by the rest and by the people to be the chief and to have some special power of Church affairs And 1. In cases of frequent Arbitration there seemed a kind of necessity that some One be Umpire For if half go one way and half the other there can be no end 2. And in case of Heresies and different Opinions in Religion if One had not in each Church some deciding over-ruling power or Negative Voice it is no wonder if Divisions were the hardlier prevented and the Churches Unity hardly kept 3. And especially when some One was really wiser and abler than the rest it was thought but suitable to Nature that he rather ruled the juniors and weaker sort than that their Votes should rule him or rule without him 4. And when all men have too much self-love and Pride which enclineth them to desire pre-eminence and maketh them judge too high of themselves it was thought safer for all the Clergy and People to judge who among them was really the best and wisest man than to leave every man to be judge of himself and of the rest For so it was too likely that every man would think himself the wisest Therefore one was chosen as supposed by others even by the whole Church as the fittest man to have a deciding and overseeing power among the rest to avoid contention which their own strife about pre-eminence would cause 21. And there was a fifth cause which was not much less than any of the rest which was that often through the scarcity of fit persons One man was first settled over a new-gathered Church before any others could be had to joyn with him And therefore he being there first alone and that in sole power it was thought unfit that any that came after him should come in without his consent or Ordination because he was the sole Governour so that 1. because they came after him 2. and that by his Will if not Ordination it must needs follow that he would usually have the pre-eminence As it is now among us where the Rector of the Parish where there are divers Chapels chusing his Curates who are usually his Juniors he is constantly of greater power than they and ruleth them accidentally though his Office be the same as theirs 22. As by these means one Pastor got a pre-eminence of esteem and power above the rest so in a short time he got the title of Episcopus Bishop to be appropriated to himself alone leaving the name of Elders and Pastors and Priests unto the rest in common with himself For he was now become the prime Overseer of the whole Church both people and Elders 23. Our own experience sheweth us how it came to pass that the people themselves not only consented to all this but also desired and promoted it especially then when the effects of Clergy-ambition had not fully appeared to the World For even now when a great Parish can get one Learned able Pastor they say we will allow you so much but your Curates must take less And they will not endure that the young and weak Curates have either equal maintenance or equal honour or power over them as the chief Pastor of the Parish hath so that the people themselves are against an equality of power where there is not an equality of worth 24. Though we cannot prove that this fixed Episcopacy was either set up by the Apostles or countenanced by them nor yet that it was begun and in being in their days yet it could not be long after their days that it begun And if Hierome mistake not it began at Alexandria some years before the death of St. John the Apostle 25. All this while the Bishop was not supposed to be of a distinct Office or species of Ministry now called An Order but only an Overseer and chief of persons in the same Office with him being in common with the rest Episcopus plebis and extraordinarily Episcopus Cleri vel Episcoporum seu Presbyterorum As one of the Monks is made Abbot in a Monastery or as one Justice among many is of the Quorum or one Judge on the Bench is the chief Justice Or as the President in an Academick College 26. The chief thing in which a special power was given to the Bishops above their fellow Presbyters was in Ordination that none should be Ordained without them It being a matter of exceeding great consequence to the Churches what Ministers were set over them and therefore put chiefly in the power of these chosen men And the next part of their power was in having the chief disposal of all Church affairs as our Parish Pastors have now among their Curates so that nothing was to be done in the Church without and against their consent and pleasure 27. This Episcopacy did so universally obtain that I remember not to have read of any sort of Christians Orthodox or Heretical Catholick or Schismatical who ever refused it or spake against it till Aerius's time And even he spake not against it as flatly unlawful but as unnecessary as far as I can
have as to the kind of power 2. How their Office must degenerate from purely spiritual into secular or mixt 3. And how numerous their Flocks and large their Provinces would soon be And here you must note these things 1. That the Bishop of every Church was made Judge of these causes not alone by himself but with his Presbyters or Clergy who judged with him 2. That yet this power was not then taken to be any essential or integral part at all of the Pastoral Office but an Accidental work which Lay-men might do as well as Pastors and that it was committed to the Bishop only as the best able for Arbitration because of his abilities and interest and that as a matter of meer convenience and also for the honour of his place 3. That therefore this Judging power for ending strife and differences might be alienated from the Clergy and done by Lay-men where there was cause 4. And that the Bishop had so much more power than the Presbyters that he could commit it from them to Lay-men All this that one instance of Silvanus in Socrates lib. 7. cap. 37. and in Hanmer cap. 36. whose words were thus Silvanus also no less expressed in his other acts and dealings the good motion of his Godly mind For when he perceived that the Clergy respected nothing but gain in deciding the Controversies of their Clients O woful Clergy he thenceforth suffered none of the Clergy to be judge but took the supplications and requests of suiters and appointed One of the Laity whom for certain he knew to be a just and godly man and gave him the hearing of their causes and so ended quietly all contentions and quarrels And the likeliest way it was You see here 1. that when Princes will needs make the Clergy Magistrates to honour them the wise and good men of the Clergy will return such power to the Laity as usually fitter for it 2. And that it is no wonder that when Law-business is cast upon the Clergy if they grow worse than Lawyers in covetousness and injustice 3. And yet this was not a making Lay-men to be Chancellors that had the power of the Keys For Silvanus did only appoint Lay-men to do Lay-mens work to arbitrate differences but not to excommunicate nor to judge men to excommunication as they do now 4. And this was not a making of Ecclesiastical Elders that were not Pastors and therefore it is no countenance for such but it was a prudent casting back that work on the Laity which good Emperours had in imprudent piety cast upon the Clergy that each might do his proper work 5. But this was but one good Bishop that was so wise and honest and therefore it proved no general reformation This Judicial power went so far and took up so much of the Clergies time that the Synod Taraconens was after this put to Decree Can. 4. that the Clergy should not judge Causes on the Lords day and Can. 10. that no Bishop or Clergy-man should take rewards or bribes for Judgments And the Canons so deterred Christians from seeking Justice from the Civil Judicatures that they had few but Heathens to be Judges of Yea the Christians thought so hardly of the Judges themselves for punishing men by the Sword when the Bishops even for murder it self did punish them but with Penance that they doubted sometime whether those Christians that exercised Magistracy or Civil Judgment after Baptisme were not therefore to be taken for sinners as is visible in Innocent 1. his Epist to Epist 3. to Exuper Tholesan cap. 3. in Crab. Tom. 1. p. 459. And before in Silvester's Concil Rom. apud Crab Vol. 1. p. 280. Can. 16. it is Decreed Nemo Clericus vel Diaconus aut Presbyter propter causam suam quamlibet intret in curia quum omnis curia à cruore dicitur immolatio simulachrorum est Quod siquis Clericus in curiam introicrit anathema suscipiat nunquam rediens ad matrem Ecclesiam A Communione autem non privatur propter tempus turbidum And Constantine is said to be a Subscriber with 284 Bishops 45 Presbyters and 5 Deacons And in former Counc sub Silvest Nullum Clericum ante judicem stare licet I know that Duarenus and Grotius describe not the Bishops power as so large as the Canonists do But Duarenus confesseth that Theodosius made a Law that lites omnes controversiae forenses ad judicium Ecclesiae remitterentur si alter uter litigatorum id postularet That all strifes and controversies forensick should be remitted to the judgment of the Church if either of the contenders required it And that Charles the Great renewed and confirmed the same Law Duar. lib. 1. p. 8. And Grotius de Imper. sum pol. p. 236. saith This Jurisdiction by consent the Bishops received from Constantine with so great power that it was not lawful further to handle any business which the Bishops sentence had decided that is saith he remotâ appellatione And he there sheweth that three sorts of Jurisdiction were by the Emperours given to the Bishops 1. Jure ordinario and so they judged of all matters of Religion and which the Canons reached which went very far in heinous crimes 2. Ex consensu pârtium when the parties chose the Bishop for their Judge Vid. Concil Chalced. c. 9. 3. Ex delegatione which yet went further And even to the Jews such kind of power had been granted But of this whole matter of the Rise of such Prelacy their Courts and power Pardre Paulus hath spoken so well and truly in his Histor Concil Trident. pag. 330 331 c. that I would intreat the Reader to turn to it and peruse it as that which plainly speaketh our judgment of the History now in question Read also his History of Benefices 43. The countenance of the Emperour with these honours and immunities having brought the World into the Church or filled the Churches with Carnal temporizers the numbers were now so great that quickly the great Cities had many Parish Churches and the Country Villages about had some so that now about 400 or 500 Years after Christ most Bishops of great Cities had more Churches than one even several sub Assemblies and Altars as dependant on their Mother Church 44. Yet were their Diocesses which at first were called Parishes somewhat bounded by the Canon and Edicts which decreed that every City where there were Christians enow to make a Church should have a Bishop of their own and that no Bishop except two who bordered one on Scithia a rude unconverted Countrey and the other on the like case of which more in due place 45. And then every oppidum or populous Town like our Market-Towns and Corporations was called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã a City and not only a few among many that have that name by priviledge as it is in England now So that even at this height of Prelacy about 500 600 or 700 Years after Christ they
great priviledge of Church-Communion and that giving it to the unwilling that had but rather endure it than a Prison is a great profanation of it and a cheat to poor souls and a horrid corrupting of Christ's Churches and Ordinances 68. If wilful Church-corruptions have made any places uncapable of a present conformity to Christ's Institutions their incapacity must not become the measure and rule of our Reformation But a true Conformity to the Institution must be intended and endeavoured though all cannot come up to it at the first 69. We do not hold that every Corruption in Number or Officers or Order nullifieth a Church or maketh all Communion with it unlawful as long as the essential constitution doth remain Yea though my own judgment is that every Church in Town or Country should have a Bishop yet if they would but set up one Bishop with his assistant Presbyters in every Corporation and Great Town with the neighbour Villages according to the antient practise from the middle of the third Century for many following so that true discipline might but be made possible to them that had a heart to practice it I should greatly rejoyce in such a Reformation much more if every Parish Pastor were restored to all the parts of his Office though he exercised all under the Government of Bishops 70. We hold the Parish Churches of England that have true Ministers that are not utterly uncapable through Ignorance Heresie Insufficiency or Wickedness to be true Churches of Christ But that is because we hold the particular Ministers to be true Bishops Episcopos Gregis etsi non Episcoporum and to have the power of the Keys over all their Flocks And that is because we hold that it is not in our Bishops power to deprive them of it though they would And because we hold that when Christ hath instituted and described the Office of a Pastor or Presbyter and the Ordainers ordain a man to that Office their power shall be judged of by Christs institution and not by the Ordainers will though he mistake or would maim and change it by his wrong description And that the Ordainer is but a Ministerial Invester delivering possession according to his Masters will and not his own And as long as Christ giveth to Pastors the power of the Keys and they themselves consent to receive and use them especially if the People also consent to the exercise of them it is not the Bishops will or words that can nullifie this power And if this Answer were not good I confess I were not able to Answer a Brownist who saith that we have no true Publick Churches of God's Institution Diocesan Churches being but Humane if they had Bishops in each Church under them and being sinful when they have none and Parochial Churches being Humane or null as having no Bishops of their own nor Pastors of Christ's Institution but half Pastors and therefore being but part of a Diocesan Church But all this is sufficiently answered by our foresaid Reasons which no high Prelatist can soundly answer 71. I do hold that those Parish Assemblies that have no Ministers but such as are uncapable either through notorious Ignorance or Heresie or utter Insufficiency as to the Essentials of their Office or by disclaiming themselves any Essential part of the Pastoral Office or by notorious Preaching against Godliness and opposing the Churches necessary good are indeed no true Churches of Christ but only are Analogically or Equivocally so called As you may call a Community of Christians that have no Pastor or Church which is no Organized or Political Society 72. But yet I think it not simply unlawful to joyn at any time with such an Assembly For I may joyn with a Christian Family or occasional Assembly though not as with a Church 73. We hold that all the Christians in the World in particular Churches or out do make up one Catholick or Universal Church which is Mystical and Invisible in that 1. the Faith of Mens minds is Invisible 2. and Christ is Invisible to us Mortals now he is in Heaven But it is also Visible 1. In respect of the Members and their outward Baptism and Profession 2. and because that Christ the Head was once Visible on Earth and is still Visible in Heaven to the Glorified part as the King is to his Courtiers when the rest of the Kingdom seeth him not and will Visibly appear again to all 74. We hold that this Universal Church is One in Christ alone and that it hath no other King or Head That he hath Instituted no Vicarious Head either Pope or General Council Nor is any mortal man or men capable of such an Office 75. We hold therefore that the Roman Pope and General Councils if they claim such an Headship is an Usurper of part of Christ's Prerogative which having usurped he hath used against Christ and his interest against the Soveraignty of Princes and against the true Unity Concord Peace and Holiness of the Churches 76. And we hold that it was the modelling of the Church to the Policy of the Roman Empire which gave the Pope the advantage for this usurpation And that the Roman Catholick Papal Church is a meeâ Humane Form and an Imperial Church as much as the Archbishop of Canterbury as Superiour to the rest of England is of Man and that Body so united is a National Church And that the General Councils were never truly General as to all the Churches in the World but only as to the Roman Imperial Church None considerable ever coming to such Councils but those that were or had been in the Roman Empire or some very few that closely bordered on them Nor had the Roman Emperour who usually called or gave his Warrant for such Councils or Governed them any power over the Clergy of all the rest of the Christian World in Ethiopia the outer Armenia Persia India c. Nor did the Imperial Pope then exercise any power over them And we are perswaded that the power of the Patriarchs of Alexandria Antioch Jerusalem Constantinople and of the Metropolitaââ Primates c. stood on the same foundation with the Primacy of the Pope and that one is no more of Divine right than the other But that the Papacy is the far more wicked Usurpation as pretending to more of Christ's Prerogative 77. We hold therefore that the Roman Church as such that is as pretending to be the Church-Catholick Headed by an Usurping Universal Bishop is no true Church of Christ but a Humane and traiterous Usurpation and conspiracy therefore by Protestants called Antichristian Though those that are true Christians among them are Parts of Christ's Catholick Church and those that are true Pastors among them may be the Guides of true particular Churches 78. We hold therefore that no Power on Earth Popes Council or Prince hath power to make Universal Laws to bind the whole Church of Christ on Earth because there is no Universal Head or
Soveraign but Christ 79. By all this it is evident that we grant all these following disparities in the Church 1. The disparity of Age standing and Gifts among Ministers of the same Order 2. A kind of paternal priority where one was the Teacher Educater or Ordainer of the other 3. An accidental disparity when one only by the Patron or Magistrate hath the sole possession of the Maintenance and power of the Temple 4. We will not unpeaceably contend against the guiding power or negative Vote of One Bishop in a particular Church over the rest of the Pastors of the same Office Nor do we take such a power to make a distinct Office 5. We do not strive against the Presidency of one in Synods as Moderator No though it were durante vitâ which Bishop Hall thought would serve to heal us 6. We do not deny Obedience to any Bishop who is Commissioned by the King to exercise as a Church-Magistrate his part of the Church-Government 7. Much less do we strive against the Power of Kings and Lawful Magistrates Circa Sacra of which Grotius hath excellently written de Imper. But we take the Magistrate to be the necessary and only Ruler by the Sword to keep Peace and Order among Church men as well as among men of all other Professions 8. Yea I do not contend against the Divine Right of General Bishops or Archbishops such as Timothy and Titus nor will deny Obedience to them who take care as Visitors of Many Churches which have every one their proper Bishop one or more with true plenary Pastoral power of the Keys to guide the people of their charge 9. We refuse not to receive Ordination from such General Bishops 10. Nor do we refuse to be responsible to them when we are accused of any male Administration or to admit of Appeals from us to them 80. By all which it appeareth 1. How falsly we are charged to be against all Episcopacy 2. And how falsly and deceitfully all those Writers state the Case and plead against us that only plead for a Congregational or Parochial Episcopacy or any of this which we grant and how they cheat their Readers who make them believe that our Controversie is whether there should be any Episcopacy and not what kind of Episcopacy it should be 3. What friends they will prove to the Church that will rather do all that is done against it than endure those that grant all this which we do grant them 81. That I am not singular in all this I prove in that it was only Archbishop Usher's Reduction of Episcopacy to the Primitive state which the Nonconformists malitiously called Presbyterians did offer to his Majesty and the Bishops 1660. as the means of our Concord and which was rejected Yea that they thankfully accepted though not totally approved that higher Model expressed in his Majesties Declaration about Ecclesiastical Affairs And now I suppose I have given Strangers and Posterity a truer Description of the Judgment of the present Nonconformists than malicious turbulent ambitious Persons use to give of them or than the extreams and freaks of a few Sectaries would allow men to receive CHAP. V. Concerning the Writers of this Controversie With a Summary Answer to the Chief that write against the Cause which I defend I Have not been altogether negligent to read the Controversies on this Subject nor I hope partial in Reading them If I have it hath been because I had rather have found Conformity to the Prelacy to be lawful for then I had not above nine years been silenced and denied not only all Church maintenance but leave to preach Christ's Gospel nor had I been exposed as I have been to so much wrath and malice expressed in so many scurrilous lying invectives and libells besides other ways Even when I doubted of the use of the transient Image of the Cross I was of opinion that Prelacy was lawful and so was likely to continue if the Prelates would have given me leave But in 1640 they put a New Oath upon us Never to Consent to the Alteration of the present frame of Prelacy as under Archbishops Bishops Deans Archdeacons c. and that it ought so to stand And I thought it was then time when I was put to such a solemn Oath to search more throughly into all the matter before I sware And in searching I found in general that almost all Writers for Episcopacy either confound Diocesan Prelacy such as ours with the Episcopacy of a single Church or at least all their proof extendeth to no more than I have here granted When they offer us the definition of a Bishop which few of them do it is such as neither supposeth any more Churches than one to be his Charge nor any Presbyters under him at all but only a Power of Ordaining Presbyters and ruling them when he hath them whether in one Church or more And I find that they are so far from proving that ever the Apostles appointed a distinct Office of Presbyters which had not the power of the Keys over the People in foro interiore exteriore as they call them but had only power to Teach and Worship under Bishops as a superior Office or Order as that they prove not any such to have ever been under the Apostles themselves and some of themselves do plainly deny it Nor do they prove that long after the Presbyters were any more subject to the Bishops than the Deacons are now to the Archdeacon or the Bishops to the Archbishop who are of the same Order So that whoever else they speak to they say nothing to me and seem not to know where the Controversie lyeth viz. 1. Whether a Bishop of the lowest rank being no Archbishop or having no Bishops under him over many Churches or Societies of Christians stated under their proper Pastors or Presbyters for ordinary personal Communion in all God's publick Worship be of Divine or Lawful Humane Institution 2. Whether an Order or Office of Presbyters that have not the power of the Keys even in foro exteriore be of Divine or Lawful Humane Institution whom for brevity I shall hereafter call half-half-Presbyters So that the Question is not whether one Man was after sometime called peculiarly the Bishop and in the same Church sate over Presbyters of the same Office as Archpresbyters or as Archdeacons over Deacons or Archbishops over Bishops Nor yet whether there were or should be a General sort of Bishops or Archbishops over the Bishops of particular Churches But whether any stated Body of Worshiping Christians as afore described like our Parish Churches that have unum altare should be without a Bishop of their own or without a Pastor that hath the threefold power before described of Leading the People in Doctrine Worship and Discipline called the power of the Keys And whether he be a true Presbyter or Minister of Christ that wants this power And whether they that depose the Parish Ministers of
many Churches without Bishops under him and of half-Presbyters how little he saith the Reader will soon see yea how much on our side 4. As for Hooker till his 7th Book came lately out we had nothing in him considerable of this subject And in that Book it self so little to the purpose as to our foresaid two Controversies as is next to nothing nor worthy a Reply In his § 2. p. 4. He attempts that which few do to give us the definition of a Bishop which is A Bishop is a Minister of God unto whom with permanent continuance there is given not only power of Administring the Word and Sacraments which power other Presbyters have but also a further power to Ordain Ecclesiastical persons and a power of Chiefty in Government over Presbyters as well as Lay men a power to be by way of Jurisdiction a Pastor even to Pastors themselves And then he distinguisheth of Bishops at large or indefinite and Bishops with restraint and saith he meaneth the later And so you have what must be expected from Mr. Hooker for the information of you what Episcopacy he pleads for Where it is obvious how fraudulently through oversight or partiality I know not he dealeth For whereas he durst put no more into the definition of Episcopacy about Jurisdiction but a power of Chiefty in Government over Presbyters as well as Lay-men yet would not tell us whether Government of Lay-men under the Bishop belong to the Presbyters or not His words seem plainly to imply it what use else is there for his Chiefly and as well as Lay-men And yet twice over he would name nothing but Teaching and Sacraments which belong to the Pastor as a Pastor in general leaving it as a thing which he would neither affirm nor deny whether Pastors Governed their Flocks Yet all that Decantate Book turneth on the Hinges of this lame Definition which hath other defects which I pass by And without this we cannot know what Subject he disputeth of Whereas Saravia well noted and acknowledged three Essential parts of the Ministry in General Mr. Hooker who leaveth out one of them and yet durst not deny it should have told us whether he include it or not seeing it is the matter of most of our difference and we take him for no Pastor or Presbyter that is without the power of Government nor that to be a true Church in sensu politico that hath no other Pastor 2. And when as one part of his Adversaries deny not at least the Lawfulness of one Bishops superiority in a single Church as far as his description speaketh but only in many Churches no nor one Archbishops power over many Churches that have their own Bishops but only his power to depose all the Bishops of particular Churches and turn them all into one Diocesan Church his Definition visibly reacheth to no other sort of Bishops but such as we oppose not and so he saith nothing at all against us to any purpose through all his Book For where after he confidently tells us that the extent of his Jurisdiction alters not the Species it is but barely said and by his leave I shall fully prove the contrary anon And pag. 4. l. 7. He confesseth that de facto Many things are in the state of Bishops which the times have changed Many a Parsonage at this day is larger than some ancient Bishopricks were It 's well confest And I shall try among other things whether the Name of a Bishoprick will make a Parsonage and a Diocess to be ejusdem speciei and whether magnitude do not make a specifick difference between the Sea and a Rivulet or a glass of water or between a Ship and a Nut-shel And whereas page 6. He undertaketh to prove a Coercive Power in Bishops either he speaketh according to the common use of men or not If not he would not be understood Qui non vâlt intelligi debet negligi If he do then by Coercive he must mean by Outward force upon the body which is false and is proper to the Magistrate Parents or Masters and is disclaimed by all sober Protestant Divines yea by Papists as not at all belonging to the Pastoral Office Though we easily grant that Pastors may Coercere by nord and so may Presbyters sure yet no otherwise but by word For Excommunication and Degradation as far as belongs to them are but words and an after forbearing of their own acts of Communion But this is not the common use of the word Coercive as applyed to Government by way of distinction How much wiselier doth the more Learned and judicious Bishop Bilson still distinguish by the Power of the Word as differing from the Magistrates Coercive or by the Sword Yet note that page 8. § 5. l. 7. He is brought to acknowledge that All Churches by the Apostles erected received from them the same Faith the same Sacraments the same Form of publick Regiment The Form of Regiment by them established at first was that the Laity be subject to a College of Ecclesiastical persons which were in every such City appointed for that purpose These in their writings they term sometime Presbyters and sometime Bishops To take one Church out of a number for a pattern what the rest were the Presbyters of Ephesus as it is in the History of their departure from the Apostle Paul at Miletum are said to have wept abundantly all which speech doth shew them to have been many And by the Apostles exhortation it may appear that they had not each his several Flock to feed but were in common appointed to feed that one Flock the Church of Ephesus for which cause the phrase of his speech is this Attendite gregi Look to all that one Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops These persons Ecclesiastical being termed then Presbyters and Bishops both c. And page 9. he saith The outward being of a Church consisteth in the having of a Bishop Then the Brownists must carry it that our Parishes are no true Churches but parts of a Church because they have no Bishop Only a Diocesan Church hath a Bishop Therefore only a Diocesan is a true Church which anon shall be proved to be but Humane And page 12. He thus expoundeth Hierome as holding Episcopacy alterable The Church hath power by Universal consent upon urgent cause to take it away if thereunto she be constrained through the proud tyrannical and unreformable dealing of her Bishop Wherefore lest Bishops forget themselves as if none on earth had authority to touch their states let them continually bear in mind that it is rather the force of custome than any such true heavenly law can be shewed by the evidence whereof it may of a truth appear that the Lord himself hath appointed Presbyters for ever to be under the Regiment of Bishops in what sort soever they behave themselves Let this consideration be a bridle to them Let it
that were abroad among these new Converts or scatered Christians made them know that every Church should have a Bishop and that they might choose one of their own And few Presbyters being then Learned able men in Comparison of the Bishops by this advantage of presence among them many raw and schismatical Presbyters crept into the Peoples affections and perswaded them to choose them for their Bishops when they were chosen and ordained they encroached on the rest of the old Bishops Diocess and also refused to come to the Synods lest their failings should be known pretending that they must stay with their own People Now the Bishops that complained of this did not alledge 1. That no Bishop should be made but in a City 2. Nor that when Christians multiplyed they must not multiply Bishops accordingly but all be under their first Bishop only 3. Nor that a new Congregation had not as good right to have and chuse a Bishop of their own as the first City Congregation had But only to keep ignorant Schismatical Presbyters from deceiving the People for their own exaltation and from hindering Synodical Concord they Decreed that none in their Diocesses should have Bishops without the first Bishops consent And that being so Consecrated they should frequent Synods and should be Bishops only of that People that first chose them and not encroach on the rest of the Diocess And whereas he hence gathereth that the Country Churches ever from the beginning belonged to the City Bishops There were no such things as Appendant Country Churches from the beginning of the City Churches But it 's true that from the beginning of the Country Peoples Conversion when they were not enow to make Churches themselves they belonged to the City Churches as Members Even as now the Anabaptists and Independent Churches consist of the People of Market-Towns and the adjoyning Country Associated into one Assembly After that the Country Meetings were but as Oratories or Chappels And when they came to be enow to make dinstinct Churches of some good Bishops had the Wit and Grace to help them to Chorepiscopi Bishops of their own but most did choose rather to enlarge their own Possessions or Powers and set Subject Presbyters only over the People And that these new Bishopricks must be by the old Bishops consent is apparently a point of Order to avoid inconveniences if not of Usurpation For what power had the old Bishop to keep any Church of Christ without a Bishop of their own when it was for there good That he hath some countenance from Leo for the New Church-Form without Bishops I wonder not when Leo was one of the hottest that betimes maintained the Roman Primacy if not Universal Soveraignty And as the Care against placing Bishops in small places ne vilescat nomen Episcopi came in late so 1. It intimateth that it was otherwise done at least by some before 2. And it is but the Prelatical grandure which Constantine had pufft up which is then alledged as the Reason of this Restraint His Argument is That which was judged unlawful by the Canons of approved Councils and Decrees of Godly Bishops was never lawfully regularly and ordinarily practised But c. I deny the Major Kneeling at Prayer or Sacrament on the Lords day the Marriage of Priests the Reading of the Heathens Writings and abundance such-like were forbidden by such approved Councils especially a multitude of things depending on the new Imperial shape of the Churches which are now lawful and were lawful and ordinarily practised before Paul Kneeled and Prayed on the Lord's day Acts 20. c. Therefore the placing of Bishops in Country Parishes was not unlawful before because the Councils of Bishops afterward forbad it nor was it ever unlawful by Gods Law Methinks a Bishop that subscribeth to the 39 Articles of the Church of England which mentioneth General Councils erring even in matters of Faith should never have asserted that they cannot erre in matter of Government nor retract and alter that which was well practised before them His next Argument is this If there were any Parish Bishops then they were the Chorepiscopi But the Chorepiscopi were not such Ans 1. I deny the Major There were then many City Bishops that were but Parish Bishops or had but one Church as shall be further proved 2. Yet as to a great number it is granted that their Diocesses had many Churches at the time of Concil Eliber Sardic c. which he mentioneth But it followeth not that therefore it was so with any in the time of Ignatius or with many in Cyprian's time 3. If it were all granted de facto it will not follow that de jure it was well done and that the old Form was not sinfully changed 4. The Chorepiscopi themselves might have many Congregations under them like our Chapels and yet be Parish Bishops And it 's most probable that at first they had no more than one of our Country Parishes though afterwards they had many Churches under them as City Bishops had His next Argument is Churches endued with Power Ecclesiastical sufficient for the Government of themselves having also a Bishop and Presbytery had the power of Ordination But Country Parishes had not the Power of Ordination Ergo c. Ans 1. Government is Inferiour or Superiour They might have sufficient Inferiour power of Government though they had none of the Superiour power such as belongeth to Archbishops to whom Appeals were made As a Corporation that hath a Mayor and Assistants hath sufficient Inferiour power but not Regal nor such as Judges Lord Lieutenants c. have And if it were proved as some hold that only General or unfixed Ministers like the Apostles and Evangelists or Archbishops that were over many Churches had the power of Ordination and not the Inferiour Bishops of single Churches it would not follow that these Inferiour Bishops had not the power of Governing their own Churches with assisting Presbyters And if he will prove for us that every fixed Bishop hath the power of Ordination who hath but the Inferiour power of Governing his single Church by Admonitions Excommunications and Absolutions he will but do our work for us 2. I deny his Minor Propos If by Country Parishes he mean the Bishops of Country Parishes they had the Power of Ordination And all that he saith against it is only to prove that de facto they had not the Exercise of it in the times he mentioneth and that de jure humano it was not allowed them by Canons But 3. We grant so much of the Conclusion as that de facto few Country Parishes had a Bishop and Presbytery Because there were but few Country Parishes in the World till the third Century that were really Christian Churches or fixed Societies of Christians that had ordinary Church-communion together in the Sacrament or had an Altar But our Case is About single Churches now called Parish Churches and not about Country
Churches For they might be but single Parish Churches though they were in Cities only and the Country Members joyned with them in the Cities And his own Confession is page 35. that besides Rome and Alexandria that had many Churches in the City there is not the like evidence for multitude of Parishes in other Cities imediately after the Apostles times I suppose by his Citations he meaneth till the third Century And if this be granted us of all the great Cities of the World that they cannot be proved to have many Churches we have no great reason to look for many in the Country Villages His next Argument is Churches containing within their Circuit not only Cities with their Suburbs but also whole Countries subject to them were Diocesses But the Churches subject to the ancient Bishops in the Primitive Church contained c. Therefore they were Diocesses Ans Either this is his Description of a Diocess or we have none from him that I can find And let who will Dispute about the Names of Diocess and Parish for I will not And if by a Diocess he meaneth a Church consisting of all the Christians in City and Country associated for Personal holy Communion having One Altar and One Bishop this is that which we call a single Church or some a Parish-Church and if he call it a Diocess he may please himself But if he mean that in these Cities and whole Countries were several such Churches that had each an Altar and were fixed Societies for personal holy Communion not having any proper Bishop of their own but one Bishop in Common with whose Cathedral Church they did not and could not Communicate through Number or distance I deny his Minor proposed in this sense as to the two first Centuries though not as to the following Ages But if by Cities Suburbs and whole Countries subject he mean all the unconverted Infidels of that space for doubtless he calls not the soil or place the Church I deny the very subject There were no such Churches Infidels and Heathens make not Churches Though Hereticks made somewhat like them sicut vespa faciunt âavos as Tertullian speaketh If the Diocesan Churches Disputed for be Churches of Pagans and Infidels we know no such things But if he mean that all the Heathens in that Circuit are the Bishops Charge in order to Conversion I answer 1. That maketh them no parts of the Church Therefore the Church is of never the larger extent for the soil or Infidel Inhabitants 2. The Apostles and other General Preachers like the Jesuits in the Indies may divide their Labourers by Provinces for the Peoples Convetsion before there be any Churches at all 3. This distribution is a meer prudential Ordering of an accident or circumstance and therefore not the Divine Institution of a Church Form or Species 4. Neither Scripture nor prudence so distributeth Circuits or Provinces to Preachers in order to conversion of Infidels as that other Preachers may not come and Preach there as freely as one that claimeth it as his Province For 1. Christ sent out his Apostles by two and two at first 2. Paul had Barnabas or some other Evangelist or General Preacher usually with him And Peter and Paul are both said to be at Rome at Antioch and other places And many Apostles were long together at Jerusalem even many years after Christ's Resurrection Christ that bid them go into all the World never commanded that one should not come where another was nor have power to Preach to Infidels in that Diocess And what is the Episcopal power over Infidels which is claimed It is not a power to Ordain or to Excommunicate them It can be no other than a power to Preach to them and Baptize them when converted And this is confessed to belong to Presbyters If the Bishops would divide the World into Diocesses and be the only Preachers in those Diocesses it would be no wonder if the World be unconverted It is not Bishops that are sent by the Papists themselves to convert the Indians But perhaps you may say that the Bishops rule those Presbyters that do it I answer 1. It 's an imperfect kind of Government which a Bishop in England can exercise over Presbyters that daily Preach as Mr. Eliat his helpers to the Natives in a Wilderness many thousand Miles from them 2. But if they do rule the Preachers that maketh not the Soil nor the Heathens to be any parts of their Church but the Preachers only Therefore a Diocess with them and a Church must be different things His first Reason therefore page 36. from the Circuit is vain His second page 37. that the City Bishops had a right from the beginning over many Churches that had no other Bishops and did not after usurp it he proveth not at all For the words of Men three or four hundred years after Christ alledging ancient custome are no proof When the 25 Can. Trull cited by himself maketh thirty years possession enough against all that would question their Title And abundance of things had Custome and Antiquity alledged for them so long after that were known Innovations His third Reason is from the Chorepiscopi as the Bishops suffragan which sheweth no more but that the City Bishops whether justly or by usurpation were at last really Archbishops or Rulers of Bishops But of this before His fourth Reason from Succession will be good when he that affirmeth that no Church was governed by the Parish Discipline hath proved that all many yea or any Bishops from the Apostles days had many Churches under them that had no Bishops of their own Till then he saith nothing As to his instance of the Scythians having but one Bishop the Reason was because it was but little of their Country at first that were made Christians or that were at all in the Roman Empire So that the Bishop was setled at Tomis in the borders of the Empire in the Maritine part of the Euxine Sea that thence he might have an influence on the rest of the Scythians over whom the Romans had no power and where there were many Cities indeed but few Christians as may be seen in Theodoret Tripart Nicephor and many others Of his other three or four instances I shall after speak Chap. 3. lib. 2. He pretends to prove that the seven Asian Churches were Diocesan and not Parochial and never defineth a Diocess and Parish which is lost labour His first Argument is Churches whose Circuit contained Cities and Countries adjoining were Diocesses But c. This is before answered Our Question is Whether they were as our Diocesan Churches such as had in these Cities and Countries many Altars and Churches without Bishops under them Trees and Houses and Fields and Heathen People make not Churches nor yet scattered Christians that were Members only of the City Church His proof of the Minor is 1. These Churches comprized all the Churches of Asia Ans If he mean that all the rest
Hammond think they prove that Rome and other great Cities then had more Bishops than one by reason of the peoples diversity in Languages c. As Peter of the Circumcision and Paul of the Uncircumcision 4. Eusebius mentioneth not this as a certainty but with an it's said which is the usual note of his uncertain reports of which he hath not a few as is commonly confessed 5. Dr. Hammond is so far from believing this that many Parishes were committed so early to Presbyters under one Bishop that he thinketh there is no proof that any such Presbyters were in being in the Scripture times And though we confess that Alexandria and Rome had divers Churches in them long before other places there is no proof or probability that it was so in the Apostles days And l. 3. c. 4. Eusebius expresly saith But how many and what sincere followers have governed the Churches planted by the Apostles it cannot be affirmed but so far as may be gathered from the words of Paul And c. 19. he mentioneth in the singular number the Church not the Churches of Rome Antioch and Jerusalem And l. 4. c. 11. he saith Celadion succeeded Mark in the Church of Alexandria But he saith l. 5. c. 9. that Julianus was chosen Bishop over the Churches of Alexandria And c. 22. Demetrius came in his place And l. 6. c. 1. Demetrius took upon him the oversight of the Congregations there And c. 35. Dionysius received the Bishoprick of ruling the Churches in or about Alexandria c. Ans 1. So long after it is not denied but that Alexandria had more Assemblies than one 2. Yet it is most likely that by the Churches in and about Alexandria Eusebius meant the Churches under the Archbishop of Alexandria which had Bishops of their own 3. Before they had a Temple there might be several lesser Meetings in the City which were but as our Chapels or the Independants Meeting in several Houses at once when yet the Church was but one because they were associated for Personal Communion 4. When the Parishes were divided to several Presbyters yet then each Presbyter had the true Episcopal Office as to the People though not the Name and though they were under a superiour Bishop that is they had the whole Office of a Presbyter or Pastor to Govern the People as well as Teach them and Worship with them And so there was then no Parish like ours which is but part of a Diocesan Church and no Church of it self as the Bishops Form it because it hath but a half Pastor 5. And is not the case of all other Churches in the World that to this time were but single Churches more considerable than the case of Rome and Alexandria which differed from all the rest Obj. But all the rest did the same as soon as they had People enow to make many Churches Ans 1. I have told you Grotius and Dr. Hammond think that there were more Bishops than one in a City for some time 2. This multiplication was not till long after in the third Century and with most in the fourth when it was no wonder that the Church fell into the Imperial Form And when they did so the Roman Primacy arose with the rest 3. Yet even then the Presbyters were Episcopi gregis and had the true full Pastoral power as to their Flocks as aforesaid So that there were no Bishops that yet deposed the Presbyters as now Page 125. He saith Neither was this a thing peculiar to the Bishops of Alexandria but common to others Ignatius was Bishop not only of Antioch but of Syria Irenaeus the Bishop of Lyons was Bishop of the Churches in France c. Ans 1. This openeth the former case These were not Diocesanes deposing all the Episcopos gregis and become sole Bishops but Archbishops that had under them Bishops in each particular Church Yet note that it is the French Synod of Bishops which Euseb ib. l. 5. c. 23. Iren. is said to oversee as it 's said ibid. that Palmas did so among the Bishops of Pontus in their Synod and that Victor was President in the Bishops Synod at Rome and Theophilus of Caesarea and Narcissus of Jerusalem in the Palestine Synod Which is nothing to our case It is further said that Optatus saith that in Rome were 40 Churches and that Theodoret had 800. Ans 1. It is granted that in Optatus's days Rome had 40 which is nothing to our case in hand 2. In those 40 so late there were no half Presbyters but as this Doctor confesseth they had not only a joynt power in Governing the Flocks but in Ordination too 3. I confess Theodoret's case seemeth strange and though of late date is so incredible as contrary to the case of other Churches that I do the rather for that clause believe that Epistle to Leo to be a forgery or corrupted at least And besides this Reason I have these also for it 1. Because he himself saith that Cyrus where he was Bishop was but two days journey from Antioch Hist Sanct. Patr. de Juliano And he that knoweth how great the Diocess of Antioch was will not easily believe that a Town within two days journey to Monks that went on foot was like to have eight hundred Churches in it at that time 2. And we know out of whose shop Theodoret's Epistles come Nicephorus saith he read above 500 of his Epistles Baronius saith there is a Book in the Vaticane containing 150 of them Metius translated these into Latine But saith Rivet Crit. Sacr. l. 4. c. 21. p. 455. the Reader must remember that they have been kept all this while in the Adversaries Cabinets and by them are brought into light and into Latine so that they have no authority further than other History confirmeth them 3 Especially seeing Leontius de Sectis saith as Baronius confesseth that Hereticks fained Epistles in Theodoret's name And Bellarmine de script Eccl. mentioneth one that hath his name in Concil Ephes that neither Theodoret nor any Christian is to be charged with 4. And that this one Epistle to Leo should be cull'd out of all the rest to be alone Printed after Theodoret's Works sheweth the design and what credit is to be given to it 5. And I shall anon cite much out of Theodoret himself to shew the improbability that Diocesses had then so many Churches And so much as a just confutation of Bishop Downame not as referring to other men with whom he dealt but to the cause which we have in hand And that I answer not the whole Book is because I know of no more in it than what I have culled out which needeth an answer as to the cause which I defend Of which I make the judicious Reader Judge 6. Bishop Hall's Defence of Episcopacy meddleth so little with the point now in Question that I have no need to say any thing to it more than is already said And he granteth all that I desire 7.
As the heavenly Angels are the Guardians of the Churches so these Stars are those Angels in whose Person I speak to the Churches themselves that are signified by the Candlesticks Or As the Angels are the Guardians of the Churches so by that title I signifie the whole Ministry that guide them and by the Candlesticks the Churches and I write to the whole For as every Message begins with To the Angel so it endeth with To the Churches Obj. The Bishop was to deliver it to the Churches Ans This is precarious 1. The Apostle wrote it that both Pastors and People might immediately read it and did not intrust it as an unwritten tradition to one to be delivered to the rest 2. All the Pastors were to deliver or teach it to the People and not one Bishop only This therefore is no cogent Argument 10. As for the Disputers for Episcopacy at the Isle of Wight with King Charles they manage Saravia's Argument fetcht from the Continuance of the Ordinary part of the Apostles Office as he did before them and many others so well that for my part I cannot confute them but remain in doubt and therefore have nothing to say against them But that 's nothing to our Case whether every particular Organized Church should have a Bishop or the full Pastoral Office in it 11. As to Joh. Forbes his Irenic he maintaineth but such an Episcopacy as we offered to his Majesty in Bishop Usher's Reduction He pleadeth for such a Bishop as is the Moderator of a Presbytery p. 242 243. and as must be subject to censure himself p. 145. and that shall do nothing of weight without the Presbyteries consent p. 145. and as is still bound to the Work of a Presbyters Office p. 146. And that an Orthodox Church that hath no Bishop or Moderator hath but a certain Oeconomical defect but is still a true Church and hath the power that other Churches have that have Bishops p. 158. And that jure divino Presbyters have the Power of Ordaining as well as of Preaching and Baptizing though they must use it under the Bishops inspection in those places that have Bishops page 164. And he is more full for the Power of Presbyters Ordaining and the validity of it than any man that I now remember 12. The two Books of the Bohemian Government of the Waldensian Churches Written by Lascitius and Commenius contain that very Form of Government which I think the soundest of any that I have yet seen 13. The Learned and Judicious Grotius before he turned to Cassander's and Erasmus's temperament in Religion in his book de Imper. sum pot circa sacra in almost all things speaketh the same which I approve and plead for though he be for some Episcopacy 1. As to the Pastoral power it self in whomsoever he affirmeth it to be but Nuntiative Declarative Suasory and per consensum and not any Imperium Like the power of a Physitian a Counsellor and an Embassadour Chap. 4. But then by Imperium he meaneth that which is coactive by the Sword And he acknowledgeth the power of the Ministry by the Word upon Consenters to be of Divine Institution so that they sin against God who do reject it And if the Pastors of the Church did meddle with no other power we should the sooner be agreed For my part I take the very power of the Keys to be no other than a power of applying God's Word to the Consciences of the Penitent and Impenitent and the Church and a power of judging who is fit or unfit for Church-communion according to God's Word which judgment we can no otherwise execute but by the same Word and by forbearing or exercising our own Ministerial actions to the person As a Physitian may refuse to Medicate the unruly In chap. 6. He speaketh justly of the Princes power as in the former And so he doth chap. 7. of the use and power of Synods or Councils Chap. 8. He well vindicateth the Magistrate and denyeth to the Church or Bishops the Legislative power circa sacra and sheweth that Canons are not proper Laws Chap. 9. He sheweth the Jurisdiction properly so called belongeth to the Magistrate and not to the Pastors as such Though of old they might be also Magistrates He sheweth that the use of the Keys is called Jurisdiction but by the same figure by which Preaching is called Legislation which is true as to the Declaration who is bound or loose in foro caeli but Pastors more properly judge who is to be taken into Church-communion or excluded The prescript of Penance he saith is no Jurisdiction but as the Councel of a Physitian or Lawyer or Philosopher That the denying of the Sacraments is not properly Jurisdiction he thus excellently explaineth p. 229. As he that Baptizeth or as the old custome was puts the Eucharist into ones mouth or hand doth exercise an act of Ministry and not of Jurisdiction so also he that abstaineth from the same acts For the reason of the visible signs and of the audible is the same By what right therefore a Pastor denounceth by-words to one that is manifestly flagitious that he is an utter alien to the Grace of God by the same right also he doth not Baptize him because it is the sign of remission of sin or if he be Baptized giveth him not the Eucharist as being the sign of Communion with Christ For the sign is not to be given to him that the thing signified doth not agree to nor are pearls to be given to swine But as the Deacon was wont to cry in the Church Holy things are for the Holy Yea it were not only against Truth but against charity to make him partaksr of the Lords Supper who discerneth not the Lords Body but eateth and drinketh judgment to himself In these things while the Pastor doth only suspend his own act and doth not exercise any Dominion over the acts of others it is apparent that this belongeth to the vse of Liberty and not to the exercise of Jurisdiction Such like is the case of a Physician refusing to give an Hydropick water when he desireth it or in a grave person who resuseth to salute a profligate fellow and in those that avoid the company of the Leprous Only it must be remembred that this avoidance is by a Society governed therein by an Officer of Divine Institution Next he proceeds to the Churches duty and sheweth 1. That as Cyprian saith The Laity that is obedient to God's commands ought to separate themselves from a sinful Pastor or Prelate that is that is grosly bad 2. That they ought to avoid familiarity with scandalous Christians As a Schollar may forsake a bad Teacher and as an honest Man may leave the friendship of the flagitious As for the names of Deposition and Excommunication he saith That we must interpret the name by the thing and not the thing by the name And that the Church deposeth a Pastor when
they forsake him or refuse to use him and Excommunicateth a man when they avoid his communion and declare him unmeet for communion In all which the Church useth her own right but taketh not away another mans Then for the Canonical Enquiries after faults and impositions of Penence or delays of absolution he sheweth that both the Canons and Judgments by them being but prudential Determinations of Modes and Circumstances bound none but Consenters without the Magistrates Law except as the Law of Nature bound them to avoid offences He should add and as obedience in general is due to Church-guides of Christ's appointment And how the Magistrate may constrain the Pastors to their duty Chap. 10. He sheweth that there are two perpetual Functions in the Church Presbyters and Deacons I call them Presbyters saith he with all the Ancient Church who feed the Church with the Preaching of the Word the Sacraments and the Keys which by Divine Right are individual or inseparable Note that And § 27. He saith It is doubtful whether Pastors where no Bishops are and so are under none though over none are to be numbered with Bishops or meer Presbyters § 31. His counsel for the choice of Pastors is that as in Justinian's time none be forced on the People against their wills and yet a power reserv'd in the chief Rulers to rescind such elections as are made to the destruction of Church or Commonwealth Chap. 11. § 10. He sheweth that Bishops are not by Divine precept And § 1. That therefore the different Government of the Churches that have Bishops or that have none should be no hindrance to Unity And § 10 11. That some Cities had no Bishops and some more than one And that not only in the Apostles âays but after one City had several Bishops in iââtation of the jews who to every Synagogue had an Archisynagogus Page 357. He sheweth that there have been at Rome and elsewhere long vacancies of the Bishops See in which the Presbyters Governed the Church without a Bishop And saith that all the Ancients do confess that there is no act so proper to a Bishop but a Presbyter may do it except the right of Ordination Yet sheweth p. 358. that Presbyters ordained with Bishops and expoundeth the Canon thus that Presbyters should Ordain none contemning the Bishop And p. 359. He sheweth that where there is no Bishop Presbyters may Ordain as Altisiodorensis saith among the Schoolmen And questioneth again whether the Presbyters that have no Bishops over them be not rather Bishops than meer Presbyters citing Ambrose's words He that had no one above him was a Bishop what would he have said of our City and Corporation Pastors that have divers Chapels and Curates under them Or of our Presidents of Synods or such as the Pastor of the first Town that ever I was Preacher in Bridgnorth in Shropshire who had six Parishes in an exempt Jurisdiction four or five of them great ones and kept Court as ordinary like the Bishops being under none but the Archbishop And § 12. He sheweth that there was great cause for many Churches to lay by Episcopacy for a time And p. 360. he saith Certainly Christ gave the Keys to be exercised by the same men to whom he gave the power of Preaching and Baptizing That which God hath joyned let no man separate But then how should Satan have used the Churches as he hath done And he sheweth of meer ruling Elders as he had done of Bishops that they are not necessary but are lawful and that it may be proved from Scripture that they are not displeasing to God and that formerly the Laity joyned in Councils Only he puts these Cautions which I consent to 1. That they be not set up as by God's command 2. That they meddle no otherwise with the Pastoral Office or Excommunication than by way of Counsel 3. That none be chosen that are unfit 4. That they use no coactive power but what is given them by the Soveraign 5. That they know their power to be mutable as being not by Gods command but from man And Chap. 11. § 8. He delivereth his opinion of the Original of Episcopacy that it was not fetcht from the Temple pattern so much as from the Synagogues where as he said before every Synagogue had a chief Ruler 14. As for J. D. and many other lesser Writers Sir Thomas Aston c. who say but half the same with those forementioned it is not worth your time and labour to read any more Animadversions on them 15. But the great Learned M. Ant. de Dominis Spalatensis deserveth a more distinct consideration who in his very learned Books De Repub. Eccles doth copiously handle all the matter of Church-Government But let us consider what it is that he maintaineth In his lib. 5. c. 1. he maintaineth that the whole proper Ecclesiastical Power is meerly Spiritual In cap. 2. that no Power with true Prefecture Jurisdiction Coaction and Domination belongeth to the Church In c. 3. he sheweth that an improper Jurisdiction belongs to it Where he overthroweth the old Schoolmens Description of Power of Jurisdiction and sheweth also the vanity of the common distinction of Power of Order and of Jurisdiction and maintaineth 1. that Power of Jurisdiction followeth ab Ordine as Light from the Sun 2. That all the Power of the Keys which is exercised for Internal effects although about External Matters of Worship or Government belongeth directly to the Potestas Ordinis 3. That the Power of Jurisdiction as distinct from Order and reserved to the Bishops is but the power about the Ordering of External things which is used Principally and Directly for an External Effect that is Church order § 5. p. 35. 4. That it is foolish to separate power of Order from any power of Jurisdiction whatsoever that is properly Ecclesiastical it being wholly Spiritual 5. The Episcopal Jurisdiction not properly Ecclesiastical he maketh to consist in ordering Rites and Ceremonies and Circumstances and Temporals about the Church and about such Modal Determinations about particular persons and actions as are matters of humane prudence which have only a General Rule in Nature or Scripture 6. By which though he hold Episcopacy Jure Divino that it is but such things that he supposeth proper to the Bishop which the Magistrate may determine and make Laws for as Grotius and others prove at last and himself after and as Sir Roger Twisden hath Historically proved to have been used by the Kings of England Histor Def. Cap. 5. 7. That all Ecclesiastical power whatsoever is fully and perfectly conjunct with Order page 36. 8. That this plenitude of power is totally and equally in all Bishops and Presbyters lawfully Ordained and that it is a meer vanity to distinguish in such power of Order Plenitudinem potestatis a parte solicitudinis 9. That this equal power of the Bishop and Presbyter floweth from Ordination and is the Essential Ordinary Ministerial
power 10. That this vain separating Power of Order and Jurisdiction is the whole Foundation of Popery § 7. p. 36. passiââ 37 c. 21. He frequently calleth that the Essential power in which Bishops and Presbyters are equal and so taketh the rest but for Accidental 12. He thus describeth the Bishops power of Jurisdiction c. 3. p. 39. § 13. About those things which are constituted in the Church only by Humane Ecclesiastical Right there is in the Church true Jurisdiction not necessarily depending on the Sacred Order it self if there be any at all separate from Order Such as Licensing a Bishop to Ordain in anothers Diocess c. For these acts are not Actus Sacri neque spirituales neque attingunt directè quicquam supernaturale sed sunt merè temporales circa rem externam temporalem qua est mera applicatio c. These are not Sacred nor Spiritual nor touch any thing directly that is Supernatural but are meerly Temporal and about an External and Temporal matter Et his solis verum est c. So that it is most evident that as God hath left to Humane Prudence the Ordering of some Modes and Circumstances of Worship and Discipline and Church Order and by his General Laws so Spalatensis thought that all the Bishops proper Jurisdiction lay in these things which were of Humane Right and that all things of divine appointment were equally belonging to the Presbyters Where again I desire it may be observed 1. That Magistrates may determine of such things and so make void or needless such an Episcopacy 2. That it is most certain that many things of External Order belong to a Presbyter to determine as to one that is the Conducter of the Sacred Assemblies As what Text to preach on what Method to use what Chapter to read where and at what hour the People shall meet how long they shall stay what Tune to sing a Psalm in and abundance of the like So that even that Jurisdiction which he excepeth to the Bishop is common to him with the Presbyter that officiateth And all that can be pretended is that it belongeth to him to determine such Circumstances as equally belong to many Churches which yet Synods of Presbyters may do as effectually for Concord 3. That indeed there is no true Ecclesiastical act which tendeth not to Internal Spiritual effects Publick Admonitions and Confessions as well as private are for the humbling of the Sinner and the exercise of Repentance and Excommunications and Absolutions in publick are not only nor chiefly for the external Order of the Church but for the preserving of the peoples souls from sin and for the warning of others and for the preserving in their minds a due esteem of the holiness of our Religion and the necessity of holiness in us and to convince those without that God's Laws and Ways and People are more holy than those of the World This is a clear and certain truth and therefore according to Spalatensis Presbyters must in publick as well as private Admonitions and Absolutions and Excommunications have equal power with Bishops except as to the ordering of the Circumstantials of it Which though he sometime seem to reserve for the Bishop yet to do him right when he doth so he ââth that it is a mixt power As it is the exercise of the Keys it is Essential to the Sacred Office common to both but as it is a prudential determination of Circumstances according to Humane Right directly and principally for outward and not for inward effects it is the Bishops Jurisdiction So that really he maketh the Bishop as such to be but the Master of Order and Ceremonies where the Magistrate doth not do it himself and where it belongeth not to the Officiating Pastor as such His cap. 4. is to prove that the power for Internal Effects of Grace in the Church by External acts is exercised only Ministerially by Ministers as such Instanced cap 5. in Baptisme cap. 6. in the Lords Supper cap. 7. in Confessions and Penance and cap. 9. in that Fxcommunication which is the exercise of the Keys for he mistaketh in excluding Baptism from the Keys which indeed is the first use for intromission Cap. 12. He again purposely sheweth who are the Ministers of each Ordinance And first again Vindicateth his Uniting of Order and proper Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical as before § 4. p. 465. He confidently saith that to him it is a most certain thing that the power of Order is of the Word Sacrament and Keys and that it is plena tota integra fully totally intirely in every Bishop and lawful Prosbyter § 22. p. 472. He saith that Confirmation is neither a true Sacrament but a part of the Ceremonies of Baptism nor is it at all of Divine but of humane Ecclesiastical Institution nor doth it suppose any special power given by God to him that administreth it for any special supernatural effect But the Church for honour reserveth this Ceremony to the Bishop And § 24. He saith And why are Bishops so rigid that they will not permit to their Parish Ministers the Faculty of Confirming specially when they themselves come very seldome into those Parishes to visit And verily those Bishops which have large Diocesses of Christians in the Turkish Dominions as my Arch-Bishoprick of Spalato ought if this Ceremony were of any great account to give their Parish Ministers there living free power of Confirming Yea if the Bishops deny it them the Parish Ministers may and ought to exercise this Ceremony by their own Authority And here I will tell Posterity that if we could have but got our Prelates c. to have Confirmed to us but one Word which the King granted us pre tempore only in his Declar. of Eccles Affairs viz. that Confirmation as a solemn Transition from Infant Church-State into the Adult should be but by the Ministers CONSENT as knowing his People better than the Bishop that never before saw them or heard of them or examined them it had healed one of the greatest of our Breaches But our Concord was not thought worth this little price Though there is not in all the places that ever I lived in one Person of an hundred if five hundred that I can hear of that ever was Confirmed or ever sought it or regarded it And yet their Rubrick saith that we must not give the Lords Supper to any that are not Confirmed or ready for it Yet have we no power to require of any Man a Proof or Certificate of his Confirmation nor can we know whether he be Confirmed or not Nor can we refuse any at the Lords Table that refuseth to be examined by us whether he be ready to be Confirmed save Infants And in that 12. chap. § 25 26 27. p. 473. Spalatensis again sheweth that the Power of the Keys for binding and loosing belongeth to Bishops and Presbyters as Ministers And though he reserve the Publick use of
two or three thousand Souls without much help or many sad unavoidable Omissions the Qâestion shall be whether the Bishop may not undertake to Teach and oversee many hundreds or a thousand Parishes and Catechise Pray with and Exhort a thousand times more than any Parish Minister doth or is able to do And to do all this without ever coming into those Parishes or ever seeing the Faces or hearing the names of one of a multitude of the People or ever speaking one word to them but summoning thâm by Apparitors to a Lay-Chancellors Court to be Excommunicated first and after imprisoned while they live if they do not what the Chancellor bids them O what is mans understanding when a Carnal interest hath there clothed it self with a Sacred name Cap. 3. He telleth us of the Power of the Keys commited to the Apostles and by them to the Bishops as their Successors But whether all the Bishops Ordained by them and living with them and some dying before them it 's like were their Successors and whether all true Pastors were not such Bishops as had the Power of the Keys and whether by those Keys be meant the Government of the Flocks or also of the Governors themselves and of what extent the Churches under each Bishop was and to what end and use are the things in Question which he here saith nothing to Cap. 4. He proveth by strong affirmation that the Apostles were by Christ's last Commission Mat. 28. 19 20. to be the Bishops of their several assigned certain Provinces But confidence goeth not for proof with us He tells us of the name of Episcopacy Acts 1. 29. We never questioned whether the Apostles had the Oversight of the Church but we hold 1. That the World was the first Object of their Office from whence they were to gather Churches 2. That the Place Course or Circuit of their Travels and Ministry was not of any Divine Institution but left to their prudent choice by the Common Rules of Nature doing all things in Order and to Edifying and sometime directed in their motions by the present inspiration of the Holy-Ghost 3. That more than one Apostle was oft in the same Cities and Countries none claiming it as his peculiar Province nor denying the right of others to be there And where one was this Year another was the next 4. That when an Apostle planted a Church in any City and settled Bishops over the People they themselves were called by many of the Ancients the first Bishops of those Cities in which sence one Man had many Bishopricks 5. That the Apostles were Itinerant unfixed Bishops and not fixed Bishops such as they themselves confined to any one limited Church or Province Nor can it be proved out of all Antiquity that any one of all the Apostles was confined to any one limited Province much less what that Province was but only that their Ability Opportunity Time and Prudence limited every Man and directed him as the End required 6. And that if the Apostles had fixed themselves in particular limited Provinces they had disobeyed their Commission which was to go Preach the Gospel to all the World And no Man did ever yet so dote as to pretend that they divided the whole World into twelve Provinces and there fixed themselves And such twelve Provinces as they had been capable of overseeing would have been but a little of the World And it was but a little part comparatively that they Preacht the Gospel to Most Kingdoms of the World they never saw And those which they came into were so great and many that they Preached but to a few of the People Yet this was not their culpable Omission because they were limited by Natural Impotency and so by Impossibilities of doing more But had it been by a Voluntary setling themselves in twelve Provinces to the neglect of all the rest the Case had been otherwise But whilst they did their best for the whole World themselves and Ordained others to do the rest they performed their Office There needeth no more to be said as to those Ancients that name the Apostles Bishops Nor is their Episcopacy if proved any thing to our Case as shall be manifested Cap. 5. He thought he had proved that Power in the Church is given by the Apostles to the Bishops only Whereas with Spalatensis and most Christians we hold it given to Christ's Ministers as such and therefore to them all though in an Eminency the Apostles only had it And 1. Whereas he denyeth the Power of the 70 because they were not Apostles but Disciples We Answer 1. That Evangelists and other Ministers that were not Apostles had the Power of the Keys 2. That to deny that the 70 were at least Temporary Apostles limited to the Jews and had the power of Preaching and working Miracles would be to deny the letter of the Text. And the Apostles themselves could not Govern Churches till they were gathered 2. And yet if neither they nor John Baptist in Baptizing did exercise any power of the Keys which he can never prove it is nothing to our Case 3. When will he prove that the Evangelists and the Itinerant Assistants of the Apostles had not the power of the Keys When themselves commonly say that the higher Orders contain the powers of the lower And are the Bishops higher than the Evangelists 4. Nay when will he prove that ever any Presbyter was Ordained by the Apostles or by any others as they appointed without the power of the Keys It would weary one that loveth not confusion and lost lalabour to read long Discourses of the Power of the Keys or Government which distinguish not the Government of the Laity or Flocks from the Government of the Ministers themselves and that abuse the Church by feigning an Office of Presbyters that are not Presbyters and proving that Church-Governors are not Church-Governors For what is the Office of the Presbyter or Pastor essentially but a Stated Power and obligation to Teach and Govern the People and Worship as their mouth and guide Cap. 6. He seemeth by denying the Evangelists the power of the Keys and of Church-teaching and making them meer Preachers to the Insidels to favour the Independants Opinion who think the Laymen sent forth are to do that work But 1. Mat. 28. 19 20. Christ maketh such Officers as must Preach and Baptize and gather Churches among the Infidels before they govern them to be them that he will be with to the end of the World And the same men had the Power of teaching the Churches when they were gathered as is there expressed 2. Call them by what name you will such Itenirants were usual in the Apostles daies as Silas Apollo and many more 3. It was not the twelve Apostles only that Converted the World but such other Ministers that were called thus to labour by them or by the Spirit immediately Joseph of Arimathea is said by many to have preached here and in other
Countries 4. What man will dream that when these went abroad the World to convert men they were the fixed Bishops of particular Churches first which they thus forsook 5. Who will believe that Joseph Silas Apollo Luke Mark Nathaniel Philip or any other when they had converted any City or Countrey had no power after to teach them as a Church or give them the Lords Supper no nor to Baptize them first nor to ordain them Bishops and settle them in order but must either have an Apostle or a City Bishop to come thither after them to do it Such Fancies are obtruded on the Church because the one Ministerial or Priestly Office is first dismembred and then new Officers feigned to be made up of the several Limbs Cap. 7. As he rob'd the Evangelists of the Power of the Keys he would now rob all the meer Presbyters of it and all without shew of Scripture proof from such words of Canons or Ancients as say the Presbyters shall do nothing without the Bishops 1. As if the Presbyters were no Rulers of the Flocks because the Bishops are Rulers of the Presbyters As if a Judge or a Justice were no Governour because he is under the King 2. O Cruel Bishops that will undertake to do that for the Souls of many hundred Parishes which many hundred Ministers are too little for that the Souls of men and their own together may be damn'd by the Omission of it If the power of the Keys be appointed for mens Salvation they perfidiously betray them that thrust out the many hundreds that should do it pretending that it belongeth to one man among the many hundred that cannot do it But of the Bishops great undertaking I must say more anon Cap. 8. Of the Chorepiscopi there is little that concerneth us saving that he cometh near to grant us all that we desire while that § 15 he saith that Learned men believe that in the Church of one Region of old there was but one Altar so that lgnatius rightly conjoyneth ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã And all Schismaticks were said to set up Altar against Altar As Cypr. de Unit. Eccle. Ep. 40. 72 73 This is the sum of all that we plead for And § 29. he mentioneth the Chorepiscopis as immitating the 70 when yet he had denied the 70 to have the power of the Keys which he supposeth the Chorepiscopi to have under the Bishops Of Clemens words in due place Cap. 9. About the sence of a Canon variously read And Cap. 10. Whether Eutychius Alexandrinus erred in one thing and therefore were not to be believed in another are little pertinent to our business In his 4th Dissert the Cap. 1. is but Proem but Cap. 2. he tells us that the Apostles as Bishops Governed the Churches which they had planted without the mediation of a Colledge of Presbyters all ways and he bringeth not a word to prove it but 1 Cor. 3. 6. You have not many Fathers in Christ I have begotten you by the Gospel c. 4. 15 16. I have planted and c. 9. 19 21. I will come to you will ye that I come with the Rod and c. 5 3 4. I as absent in Body but present in Spirit have judged This is all And will not the impartial Reader wonder at humane frailty how easily men believe what they would have to be true and what an evident Nothing will go for undenyable proof Let the Reader Note 1. That the question is not whether an Apostle after that he had planted a Church remain still an Apostle to them as well as others and have the Apostolical eminency of Power which is greater than any meer Bishop had 2. But first Whether the Apostles had any fixed Provinces or Cities undertaken as their special charge in which no other Apostle had Apostolical Power And 2. Whether there were not fixed Bishops setled by them in all the Churches which they planted 3. And whether it was not so in the Church of Corinth ' in particular Yea whether they had not more Bishops or Presbyters than one For by Unius which here he applyeth to Paul he meaneth Unicus Paul only or else he abuseth his Reader and himself And 1. He that will follow Paul in his Travels will find that he went the same way that some other Apostles went viz. John and Peter and therefore that they must have the same Diocesses or have their Diocesses notably intermixt John was in Asia as well as Paul and no man can prove that he was the Second Bishop of Ephesus or Asia as Paul's successor only when he was dead Nor will the Romans be willing to grant that Peter was Bishop of no more at Rome but the Jews only as this Dr. elsewhere intimateth lest that prove not that the Gentile Church of Rome was founded by Peter but by Paul alone 2. What proof hath he that besides Peter and John there were not many other Apostles per vices in the same Cities where Paul had been And that when they did come thither they had not Apostolical Power there 3. Doth not the Text expresly say that Paul and Barnabas long travelled together And doth it any where intimate that Paul was the Governour of Barnabas or the sole Bishop of the Churches planted by them both together Sure the people that would have worshipped Barnabas as Jupiter and Paul but as Mercury did see no Sign of such a Prelacy in Paul And the Apostles seem so to have ordered the matter by going by Couples as Christ sometimes sent two and two before him as if they had done it purposely to prevent these Monarchical conceits Peter and John were together at the healing of the Criple and the successful preaching that followed thereupon Sometime Paul and Barnabas are together sometime Paul and Silas and Barnabas and Mark Paul and Sosthenes are the inscribed Names who send the first Epistle to the Corinthians and Paul and Timothy the second And in the Text alledged it is said One saith I am of Paul and another I am of Apollo and c. 1. 12. Every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas And Paul baptized none of them save Crispus and Gaius and the houshold of Stephanus By which it appeareth that Peter was among them as well as Paul and if Peter had been only the Bishop of the Jews here also Apollos would not have been brought in as a third in a way of equality And the Controversie would have been otherwise decided by Paul by telling the Jews that Peter was their sole Bishop and the Gentiles that Paul was theirs and all of them that Apollos was but their Subject But he goeth quite another way to work preferring none nor dividing Dioceses but levelling Ministers as being but the helpers of their Faith And though they had Apostolical preeminence above Apollos yet Peter and Paul are not said to have a proper Episcopacy over him And
now to his Arguments 1. Paul planted Paul onely was their Father What then Ergo Paul onely was their Bishop I deny the Consequence and may long wait for a syllable of proof Contrarily Paul onely was not their Apostle Ergo Paul onely was not their Bishop For every Apostle you say hath Episcopal Power included in the Apostolical and none of them ceased to have Apostolical Power where-ever they came though they were many together as at Jerusalem Ergo None of them ceased to have Episcopal Power The conceit of Conversion and Paternity entituling to sole Episcopacy I shall confute by it self anon 2. But Paul judged the incestuous person and speaketh of coming with the rod. And what followeth Ergo None but Paul might do the same in that Diocess I deny the Consequence Any other Apostle might do the same Where is your Proof And if all this were granted it is nothing against the Cause that we maintain And next let us inquire whether this Church had no Bishops or Presbyters but Paul As here is not a word of proof on their side so I prove the contrary 1. Because the Apostles ordained Elders or Bishops in every Church and City Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5. Therefore the Church of Corinth had such 2. If they had not Presbyters or Bishops they could hold no ordinary Christian Church-Assemblies for all Gods publick Worship e. g. They could not communicate in the Lords Supper for Lay-men may not be the Ministers of it nor the ordinary Guides and Teachers of a Worshipping Church But they did hold such ordinary Assemblies communicating in the Lords Supper And to say that they had onely Pastors that were itinerant in transitu as they came one after another that way is to speak without book and against it and to make them differ from all other Churches without proof 3. 1 Cor. 14. doth plainly end that Controversie with 1 Cor. 11. when they had so many Prophets and Teachers and gifted Persons in their Assemblies that Paul is put to restrain and regulate their Publick Exercises directing them to speak but one or two and the rest to judge and this rather by the way of edifying plainness than by Tongues c. And c. 11. they had enow to be the ordinary Ministers of the Sacraments And cb 5. they had Instructions for Church-Discipline both as to the incestuous man and for all the scandalous for the time to come and are chidden for not using it before And who but the Separatists do hold that the power of the Keys for the exercise of this Discipline is in the Peoples hands Therefore most certainly they had a Clergy And if all this go not for proof against a bare Affirmation of the contrary we can prove nothing 4. And 1 Cor. 4. 15. I scarce think that Paul would have had occasion to say Though you have ten thousand instructers if they had not had qualified Persons enow to afford them one or two for Presbyters Cap. 2. proving no more of any one Apostles fixed Episcopacy he cometh to their secondary Bishops or Apostles And whereas we judge that Apostles and Evangelists and the Apostles Assistants were unfixed Ministers appropriating no Churches or Diocesses to themselves in point of Power but planting setling and confirming Churches in an itinerant way and distributing their Provinces onely arbitrarily and changeably and as the Spirit guided them at the present time of their work and that Bishops and Elders were such Pastors as these Church-gatherers fixed in a stated relation to particular Churches so that an Apostle was a Bishop eminenter but not formaliter and that a Bishop as such was no Apostle in the eminent sense but was also an itinerant Preacher limitedly because while he oversaw his Flock he was also to endeavour the conversion of others as far as his opportunity allowed him I say this being our judgment this learned Doctor supposeth Apostles as such to be Bishops and the fixed Bishops as such to be second Apostles And I so avoid contending about Names even where it is of some importance to the Matter that I will not waste my time upon it till it be necessary In § 1. he telleth us that these second Apostles were made partakers of the same Jurisdiction and Name with the first and either planted and ruled Churches or ruled such as others had planted Answ 1. We doubt not but the Apostles had indefinite itinerant Assistants and definite fixed Bishops placed by them as aforesaid But the indefinite and the definite must not be confounded 2. And were not Luke Mark Timothy and other itinerant Evangelists as such of the Clergy and such Assistants or secondary Apostles Exclude them and you can prove none but the fixed Bishops But if they were why did you before deny Evangelists Dissert 3. cap. 6. the power of the Keys and make them meer converting Preachers below Doctors and Pastors and the same with Deacons whereas Paul Ephes 4. 11. doth place them before Pastors and Teachers But avoiding the Controversie de nomine call them what you will we believe that these itinerant Assistants of the Apostles were of that One sacred Office commonly called the Priesthood or Ministry though not yet fixed and that the assigning them to particular Churches did not make them of a new Order but onely give them a new object and opportunity to exercise the Power which they had before and that Philip and other Deacons were not Evangelists meerly as Deacons which term denoteth a fixed Office in one Church but by a further Call And that you never did prove that ever the Scripture knew one Presbyter that had not the power of the Keys as Bishops have yea you confess your self the contrary All therefore that followeth in that Chapter and your Book of James the Just and Mark and others having Episcopal power is nothing against us The thing that we put you to prove is that ever the Apostles ordained such an Officer as a Presbyter that hath not Episcopal Power and Obligation too as to his Flock that is the Power of governing that Church according to God's Word And I would learn if I could whether all the Apostles which staid long at Jerusalem while James is supposed to be their Bishop were not Bishops also with him Whether they ceased to be Apostles to the People there Or whether they were Apostles and not Bishops And whether they lost any of their Power by making James Bishop And whether one Church then had not many Bishops at once And if they made James greater than themselves Whether according to your Premonition they did not give a Power or Honour which they had not which you think unanswerable in our Case Cap. 4. come in the Angels of the Churches Rev. 1 2 3. of which though the matter be little to our Cause I have said enough before why I prefer the Exposition of Ticoniui which Augustine seemeth to favour And I find nothing here to the
as we desire If any more be necessary he granteth it us § 11. where having feigned and not proved that the people of all the Province of Macedonia were said by Paul to be at Philippi he confesseth that then every City had a Bishop and none of those that we now call Presbyters And it is more this Bastard sort of Presbyters Office that we deny than the Bishops And granting this he grants us all even that then there was no such half Officers nor Bishops that had the rule of any Presbyters which he further proveth § 19 20 21. And by the way § 16 17. he giveth us two more Observations 1. That the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã gave precedency to some Churches Where I would learn whether the Holy Ghost still observed the order in converting men to begin at the highest Metropolis and descend by order to the lowest and so to the Villages Or whether our Doctor do not here contradict what he said before of the Apostles every where disposing of the Churches according to the Civil Metropolitical Order I doubt his memory here failed him 2. Philippi and Thessalonica being both in Macedonia and these Epistles being each written to all the Province we hence learn that the Epistle to the Thessalonians and that to the Philippians were written to the same men Whether each Epistle Rev. 2. 3. to the seven Churches of Asia was written to all Asia and so all the faults charged on all that are charged on any one I leave to your arbitrary belief For none of these are proved whatever proof is boasted of Cap. 11. he further gratifieth us in expounding 1 Tim. 3. in the same manner One Bishop with Deacons then serving for a whole Diocess that is for one Assembly not having such a thing as a half Presbyter subject to any Bishop Cap. 12. he is as liberal in expounding Tit. 1. By Elders in every City is meant a single Bishop that had no half Presbyter under him and whose Diocess had but one Assembly We are not so unreasonable as to quarrel with this liberality Cap. 13. And about Heb. 13. we are as much gratified in the Exposition of the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of which more afterwards And Cap. 14 and 15. he saith the same of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Pastors and Teachers that they both are meant of none but Bishops And that Presbyters now adays are permitted and tyed to teach the people and instruct them from the Scriptures this apparently arose hence that Bishops in ordaining Presbyters gave them that power but not to be exercised till licensed by the Bishops Letters Of this detestable Opinion worse than the Italians in the Council of Trent that would have derived the Episcopal Power from the Pope I have said somewhat before and intend more in due place The Bishops do only ministerially give them possession Christ is the only Instituter of the Office by himself and his Spirit in his Apostles Can the Bishops any more chuse to deliver this possession by Ordination than to preach the Gospel Could they have made Presbyters that had no power to teach the people Is the Bishops liberality the original of the Office How much then is Christ beholden to Bishops that when a thousand Parishes are in some one of their Diocesses they will give leave to any Presbyter to teach any of the people and that when eighteen hundred of us were silenced in one day Aug. 24. 1662. that all the rest were not served so too Cap. 16. he exerciseth the same naked affirming Authority of the words Ministers of the word Luke 1. 2. and Stewards all are but Bishops And he asketh whether ever man heard of more Stewards than one in one house or of several bearers of one Key And he foresaw that we would tell him that Gods Catholick Church is one House of God and that at least all the Apostles were Stewards and Key-Bearers in that one Church and that by his Doctrine none but one of them should be Steward of Gods Mysteries or have the Keys And therefore he saith that Though the Apostles are called Stewards of the Mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4. 1. that is to be reckoned as pertaining to the many divided Families that is the many particular Churches distinct parts of the Universal Church which the Apostââs divided among themselves Answ Unless his etiam here be a self-contradicting cheat it will hence follow 1. That the Apostles are not Stewards of Gods Mysteries in gathering Churches but only to the Churches gathered 2. That in Baptizing and giving the Holy Ghost to such as yet entered not into a Particular Church they exâercised not any of their said Stewardship or Power 3. That thay have no Power of the Keyes at all over any that are not Members of a Particular Church such as the Eunuch Act. 8. And many Merchants Embassadors Travellers and many thousands that want Pastors or opportunity or hearts yea and all Christians in the first Instant as meerly Baptized Persons seeing Baptisme entereth them only into the Universal Church and not into any particular as such 4. And that till the Apostles gathered particular Churches and distributed them they had no Stewardship nor use at least of the Keyes And what if it can never be provedthat ever the Apostles distributed the universal Church into Apostolical Provinces but only pro re nata distributed themselves in the World were they never Stewards then nor Key-bearers Verily if I believed such a distribution of the World into twelve or more Provinces by them I should question the power that altered that Constitution and set us up but four or five Patriarches And were the same Apostles no Stewards or Key-bearers out of their feigned several Provinces If we must be cilenced unless we subscribe to the Dictates of such self conceited Confident men who shall ever Preach that is not born under the same Planet with them Cap. 17. he proceedeth still to maintain our Cause that even in Justin Martyrs writings and others of that Age by the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã are meant the Bishops of the several Churches who had not one Presbyter under them but Deacons only and therefore had but single Congregations but did themselves alone with the Deacon perform all the publick Offices in the Church And that no equal Presbyter was placed with them offendeth us no more than that our Parish Ministers now are presented and instituted alone yea and have power to take Curates under them as their helpers Cap. 18. He proveth truly that the Names Sacerdos and Sacerdotium are usually by old Writers spoken of sole Bishops and Episcopacy By which we are the more confirmed in our Opinion that he that is not Episcopus gregis a Bishop over the Flock is not Sacerdos true Pastor but hath only a limb of the Ministerial Office being a thing of presumptuous Prelates institution Cap. 19. He surther strengtheneth us by
grant that it is not proper to the Bishops Office to Judge Excommunicate or Absolve but only to Rule the Action by giving another power to do it Ans 1. If so then nothing but Commissioning others is the proper work of the Episcopal order and then any Presbyter may in foro interno vel externo ordinarily exercise the whole power of the Keys upon the flocks he may Excommunicate and absolve publikly as an act common to his Office with the Bishops if it Please the Bishop to give him Power which he may do without making him a Bishop And if so I enquire whether God be not the maker of the Presbyters office and not the Bishop and whether God only describing it give not all the power by way of Law Charter or Institution and the Bishop give it not only by way of ministerial solemnization and investiture and if so whether he that is duely called to the Pastoral office which God only made and discribed wust not in season do the works of that office whether men commission him or not or whether at least he any more need the Bishops commission for Church Government Excommunication and Absolution than for Preaching and Celebrating the Lords supper seeing both are now thus confessed acts common to the order of the Presbyter and the Bishop I think all this is past contradiction And I ask then whether that all giving of power to another be proper to the Bishops order If yea than a Minister cannot give his Clerk power to chuse the Psalm or tune c. If not then may not a Bishop if he please also give power to the Presbyters to ordaine and to give other men power For if it be his proper work only to give power to others to do all the sacred acts of office he may give others power to ordain and if so then Ordination will be like Preaching Sacraments and Discipline which are none of them proper to the Bishops order And is not Church discipline the exercise of the power of the keys If then the power of the keys may be exercised by the Presbyters when ever the Bishops please it seems it is common to them with him as well as Sacraments and therefore belongeth not to a Bishop as a Bishop but as a Presbyter And if in my dispute of ordination I have fully proved that the power of the Ministry is given by Christ so far immediatly as that it passeth not through the hands of Electors or Ordainers to the receiver but is given by the meer Instrumentality of the Law or institution and that the Electors and Ordainers do no more than determine of the qualified person that receives it and publickly invest him or ministerially solemnize his Possession as the Burgesses chuse and the Steward or Recorder investeth the Major of a Corparation whose power floweth immediatly from the Charter granted by the King then all this controversie is at an end and I doubt not but that 's fully proved And if commanding another to do an office work be all that is proper to the Bishop I ask whether any thing there be proper to him and so whether we must have such an office For may not the King command the Minister to do all the work which belongeth to his function may he not appoint Magistrates and make Law to command it may he not punish those that do it not Is he not custos utriusque tabulae and must he not corect mal-administration in ministers and drive them to do their duty No doubt he may Obj. But he doth not ordaine Ministers though he command them to do their duty when ordained Ans 1. Our present question is not about Ordination but commanding men to Govern the Church by Discipline or fully to Rule by the Keys the people of a particular Church If this so far belong to the Presbyters office that he may do it by the Bishops Licence let him that can tell me why he may not do it by the Kings Licence and then as they were wont to say of old exceptâ ordinatione nothing but ordination only is proper to the Bishops office And that this is not proper neither 1. This objection it self doth intimate seeing the Bishop may give another Power to ordaine and then why may not the King 2. Many of the Schoolmen and the Papists themselves confess that the Pope say some or Prelates say others may impower an Abbot or Presbyter to ordaine of which see that unanswerable book of Voetius de desperata causa Papatus against Jansenius for Presbyters ordination 3. And our Church of England causeth Presbyters to impose hands with the Bishops and Bishop Downam aforecited is angry with his answerer for supposing that he pleaded for sole power of ordination in the Bishop when he spake but for a chief power And if nothing but a chief power in ordaining be proper to a Bishop why then are the Churches so confounded and beggered and altered by a contrary practice And why is a new office of Bishops set up in the world whose work is to hinder the Ministers of Christ from their officwork under pretence of a power of Licensing them to it when God licenceth them to the work when he calleth them to that office which essenti ally consisteth in a power and Obligation to do it when they have opportunity Moreover my Lord Bacon in his considerations as hath well manifested if impartiall wise men could have bin heard that the office of a Bishop is a function consisting in the exercise of personall skill or abilities and therefore must be done by him that hath them and not committed to another as the office of a Judg or Lawyer of a Phisitian of a Tutor c. no man chooseth a Tutor or Phisitian meerly to send another to him for his Tutor or Phisitian but ââ do the work himself It is not like the place of a King whose right dependeth not on his parts or skill because he may Govern by others that are able And Grotius who one would think by their respect to him should have been regarded by them truly saith de Imperio sum potest Pag. 290 Nam illud Quod quis per alium facit per se facere videtur ad eas tantum pertinet actiones quarum causa efficiens proxima a jure indefinita est that is For this saying That whose a man doth by another he seemeth to do by himself belongeth only to those actions which neerest efficient cause is not defined by the Law But sure when God made the Pastoral office he meant that the persons called to it should do the work and not only appoint other men to do it And I would know whether the work of a Presbyter as to consecrae and celebrate the Sacrament c may be done per alium by one that is no Presbyter If not as all say not then I ask whether the Bishops work or the Presbyters be the more sacred If the Presbyters
and according to that word to declare them Impenitency openly Characterizing them to be persons unmeet for Christian Communion and such as till they repent are under the wrath of God and must expect his dreadful judgment and to command the Church in Christs name to withdraw from the Impenitent person and to have no Communion with him And all this is but the application of Gods word to his Conscience and the Churches If his seared Conscience deride it all we can do no more If he will forcibly intrude into the Communion of the Church against their wills it is like ones breaking into my house the Magistrate must restrain him as a violater of the peace as well as of the Churches liberties If the Magistrate will not the Church most remove from him If they cannot they must pronounce him morally absent as a forcible intruder and none of their Communion If the Church will not obey the Pastors sentence he hath no instrument but the same word to bring them to it Now all this being past denial let us come more particularly to enquire in all this what part there is essential to a Bishops office as such 1. Is it the making of Church Lawes or Canons About what 1. Either these Canons are but the Commanding of that which Gods Law made a duty before or of somewhat newly made a duty by themselves 2. Either they are Lawes or Commands to the Laity only or to the Presbyters or to the particular Bishops or all 1. If they do but urge the performing of some duty already made such by God in Scripture or Nature who ever doubted but Presbyters may do that even to teach and charge the people from God to obey his Laws And note that God daily maketh new duties by the Law of nature even providentially altering the Nature of things And so he maketh this or that to become Decent and Orderly and so a duty And maketh it my duty to speak this or that word to this or that person or to do this or that particular good work Even by varying occasions accidents and circumstances of things 2. But if these Canons make new duties which God hath not made 1. If it be to the Laity the Presbyters may do the like for they are Guides also of the Laity unless they are forbidden by a superior power If it be only to the Presbyters that will not reach our present case as shall be further shewed afterward 3. If it be to the Bishops themselves they cannot be Laws but meer agreements because one Bishop is not the proper Governour of another nor many of one nor the present in Council of the absent as such And here by the way it is worthy to be noted how much the Diocesanes contradict themselves in this claim of Government They say that they are of a distinct order and office from meer Presbyters because they have power to Govern them And yet they make 1. A Council of Bishops to have as high a governing power over particular Bishops of the same order 2. And an Arch-Bishop to be the Governour of Bishops 3. And a Primate or Patriarch to be the Governour of Arch-Bishops and yet not to be of a distinct Order or office but only of a distinct degree in the accidentals of the same order If Government prove a distinct Order or Office in one it will do so in the other And why may not the Magistrate make all the same Canons who ruleth them all But let us consider what these Canons may be 1. The Bishops make Canons how often Synods or Councils shall be held and when and where and when they shall be dissolved But 1. May not the King do the same And can that be proper to Bishops which the King may do Yea which all Emperours have formerly used 2. And is not this Cannon made to rule Bishops themselves who is it but Bishops or so much as them that you think should be called unto Councils And are the Bishops in Council of another order than themselves out of Council Need we an office of Bishops to rule Bishops of the same office 2. Canons are made about Temples Buildings Tithes Glebes Bells Pulpits Seats Tables Cups Fonts and other utensils And 1. who doubteth but the Magistrate may do all this yea that it belongeth to him to regulate such things as these 2. And who knoweth not that even Bishops are under these Canons also who are of the same order 3. And that Presbyters even in England are members of these Synods and so make Canons to rule the Bishops Ergo they are of a superior order to Bishops by your reasoning 3. Canons are made for the regulating of Ministers attire in the Church and out and for officiating garments as surplices c. And of these I say the same as of the former The King may do the same as Bishops may do and Bishops themselves are bound by them and Presbyters make them which three things prove that it is not the proper work of Bishops as a distinct order from meer Presbyters 4. Canons are made for worship Geâures in what gesture to pray to receive the Sacrament to use the Creed c. And the same three answers serve to this also as to the case in hand 5. Canons are made for Holidaies publick Fasts and Thanksgivings and Lecture daies And the same three considerations fall in here 6. Canons are made for the ordering officers fees and such like in Bishops Courts And here all the same three things fall in 1. The King may do it 2. It is Bishops that are ruled 3. Presbyters also make the Canons therefore it is not jure divino the proper work of a distinct Order 7. Canons are made for the choice of what Translation of the Bible shall be used in all the Churches and what version or meetre of the singing Psalmes And of this also the three former things hold true 8. Canons are made to impose a Liturgie in what words Ministers shall speak to God and to the people And 1. This also the King may do and doth 2. And it obligeth Bishops 3. And Presbyters make it 9. Canons are made against Schismaticks new Discipline and constitutions non-subscribers unlicensed Preachers for the book of Articles of ordination for Catechizing Preaching Marrying Burying Christing and such like In all which each of the said three answers hold 10. Canons are made to keep Parents from open covenanting to God for their Children in Baptism that they shall not be urged to be present that God-fathers do that office and not they As also that none be baptized without the transient Image of a Cross and such like whether this be well or ill done the three former answers all hold in this 11. All the Canons that are for the restraint of sin as neglect of Church worship prophaning of it and other abuses have the same censure 12. The circumstantiating Canons how oft Bishops shall confirm and whom they shall
called Of which sort were abundance of Christians towards each others Bishops in former ages and such are the Papists now towards you So that neither Papist nor Protestant that I ever knew silenced by you doth forbear upon Conscience of this your pretended authority at all And what a silencing power is that which scarce any man would be ever silenced by You cannot choose but know this to be true 2. And really should Magistrates themselves be so servile to you as to silence all Ministers by the Sword whom a Prelate judgeth to be silent while he knoweth not whether it be deservedly or not God forbid that Protestants like the Popes sheald make Kings to be their Executioners or hangmen A meer Executioner indeed is not bound to know or examine whether the sentence was just or not though in most cases to forbear if it be notoriously unjust but what a King or Magistrate doth he must do as a publick Judge and therefore must hear the cause himself and try whether he be really guilty or not and not only whether a Bishop judged him so Else Magistrates will either be involved in the bloody sin of persecution as oÌft as a Prelate will but command them and so must be damned and help to damn others when Prelates please Or else it is no sin for a Magistrate to silence all the holyest Ministers of Christ to the damnation of thousands of ignorant untaught Souls so be it the Prelates do but bid him and he keep himself unacquainted with the cause And next they must obey the Counsel at Laterane sub Inoc. 3. And exterminate all subjects out of their Dominions though it be all that are there and must burn Holy-Christians to ashes because the Pope or Prelates bid them 3. I need not make also a particular application of this case to the people When they know nothing but wise and sound and holy in the Doctrine or life of their Pastors and God bids them know such as labour among them and are over them in the Lord and highly esteem them in Love for their work sake they will hardly be so debauched as to violate this command of God as oft as a Diocesan will but say I know some Heresie or Crime by your Teacher which you do not and therefore he must Preach no more and you must no more use his ministry Were I one of these people I would be bold to ask the Diocesan Sir what is the Heresie or Crime that he is guilty of If he refuse to tell me I would slight him as a Tyrant General Counsels told the people of the Heresies for which they did despose their Pastors If he told me what it was I would try it by Gods word If I were unable I would seek help If the Diocesan silenced my Teacher and ten neighbour Bishops wiser than he did tell me that it was for Truth and Duty and that the Heresie was the Bishops I would hear my Teacher and believe the other Bishops before him without taking them to be of a higher order The objections against this and what is before said shall be answered in the next Chapter You see when it is but opened how the Diocesans power vanisheth into the air CHAP. XIII That there is no need of such as our Diocesans for the Unity or the Government of the particular Ministers nor for the silencing of the unworthy IT stuck much in the minds of the Ancient Doctors and Christians that Episcopacy was necessary to avoid Schism and discord among the Ministers and the people and that it was introduced for that reason And I am so averse to singularity in Religion that I will not be he that shall gainsay it A double yea a treble Episcopacy though I cannot prove instituted of Christ yet will I not contradict because one sort I cannot disprove and the other two I take to be but a prudential humane determination of the Circomstances of one and the same sacred Ministerial office-worke 1. That which I cannot disprove as to a Divine Institution is a General Ministry over many Churches like the Scors Visiters at their Reformation who as Successors to the Apostles and Evangelists in the durable parts of their office were by a conjunction of Scripture evidence and Divine authority of office to perswade Pasâors and people to their several duties and to have a chief hand in ordaining and removing Ministers 2. That which I will not contradict antiquity in is a Bishop in every particular Church to be as the chief Presbyter like the chief Justice on the bench or one of the Quorum as our Parish Ministers now are in respect to all their Curates of the Chappels under them 3. And I would not deny but at all Ministerial Synods one man may be Moderator either pro tempore or for continuance as there is cause These two last are but Prudential circumstances as Doctor Stiling fleet hath proved And in all these I like the Discipline of the Waldenses Bââemian and Polonian Churches But no Government of the Presbyters no concord no keeping out of Heresie requireth such as our Diocesans 1. Who put down all the Bishops of the particular Churches under them 2. And pretending Spiritual Power Govern by the force of the Magistrates Sword 3. And obtrude themselves on the people and Pastors without their consent and against their wills being by multitudes taken for the enemies of the Church 4. And visibly before the world introducing so many bad Ministers and silencing so many faithful ones as in this age they have done Without them we have all these means of concord following 1. We have a clear description of the duty of Ministers and people in Gods word 2. We have Ministers to Preach up all these duties by Office 3. The people are taught by Scripture what Ministers to choose 4. We find it natural to the people to before Learned and godly Ministers though many of them be bad themselves And though it be not so with them all yet the sober part do usually perswade the rest So that in London and else where those Parishes where the people choose had usually far worthier Pastors than the rest especially than those in the Bishops presentation 5. The people are obliged by God to marke those Ministers that cause division and contention and avoid them 6. The Ministers are bound to give notice to the people of false teachers and Schismaticks and to command them to avoid them And themselves to renounce Communion with them after the first and second admonition 7. These Ministers may have correspondence by Synods to keep up concord by agreement among themselves So we have over all a Christian King and Magistracy who are the rightful Governours of the Clergy as well as of all other subjects and may constrain the negligent to their duty and restrain the Heretical Schismatical and wicked from their sin And may not all this do much to keep up Concord 2. What our Diocesans really
abilities and to manage Gods work in each assembly more skillfully and guide the Church more prudently and defend the truth more powerfully than common unlearned Presbyters could do Now let it be for the present granted that for such reasons Episcopacy in each Church was justly setled and call it an order or a degree as you please It will be a difficult question what shall be judged of those that have the same place and Title without the same Qualifications and precedencie of parts Because the Reason of his power faileth If one be chosen Bishop to keep out Hetesie and he prove a Heretick and the Presbyters Orthodox whatis his power to that end If one be chosen Bishop to keep out Schisin and he prove a Schisinatick or Sect-Master and the rest concordant what is his power If one be made Bishop to teach the people better than the Presbytres and to teach the Presbyters themselves and to defend truth and Godliness and he prove more ignorant than the Presbyters and Preach not to the thousandth or hundredth part of his Diocese once in all his life nor to any at all past once in many weeks or months or years and if he do but silence the Ministers that are abler and farr more pious than himself what power hath he as a Bishop to those ends Sure I am that dispositio materâe is necessary as sine qua noâ ad receptionem formae If one be made a Schoolmaster that cannot reach the Scholars half so much as they know already but hath need to learne of them and yet will neither learne of them nor suffer them to learne without him I know not well how farr he is their Schoolmaster indeed If one be made a Physician that knoweth not half so much as I do I should be loth for Order sake to venture my life upon his trust Nor yet to venture my own life and others in a Ship that had an ignorant Pilote when the Mariners had more skill but must not use it Orders and Office that are appointed for the work 's sake essentially suppose ability for that work And without the necessary qualifications they are but the Carkasses or images of the office but of this before Therefore it is that the Christian flocks could never yet be cured by all the aât or tyranny that could be used of the esteem of real Wisdome and Godlinesâ and preferring it before an empty title or a pompous shew and from setting less by Ignorance and Impiety venerably named and arrayed then by self evidencing worth nor from valuing a Shepherd that daily feedeth them from a Wolfe in Sheeps cloathing that hathe Fangs and bloody jawes and fleeceth and devoureth the flock with the Shepherds And hence we may say that God himself useth to give Bishops to the Church whether men will or not while he giveth them such as Jerome Luther Melanââhorn Bucer Calvin Zanchius c Who had Episcopal ability and really did that which Bishops were first appointed for while the Bishops would have hindered them and sought their blood They taught the people they bred up young Ministers they kept out Heresies and Schismes they guided the churches by the light of Sacred truth and by the power of Reason and Love And who than was the Bishop who is the real Architect he that buildeth the house or he that hath the title and doth nothing unless it be hindering the builders To this already said I add but two more intimations which I desire the sober impartial Reader to consider 1. Writing is but a mode of Preaching And of the two it is worse to have inept Sermons in Publick Assemblies and so Gods worke and worship dishonoured than to have inept bookes in private And no doubt the Pastors oversight extends to publick and private Now while the meer worth of bookes without any Authority commendeth them to the world though sometimes with some few giddy Pamphlets are accepted yet that is but for a fit and ordinarily the Book-sellers sufficiently restrain all that are not of worth because they cannot sell them But if a Bishop must impose on all the people what bookes they must read in many Kingdoms it will be for the Pope and Masse in others for Exorcism and Consubstantion c. 2. Is not order for the the thing ordered Episcopacy is for the Churches benefit by the Bishops eminent gifts and parts But if the Bishop be of lower parts than the Pastors and an Envious Malignant hinderer of their work Quere Whether the order being humane cease not ubi cessat subjecti dispositio relatio ad finem when the end and the pesons capacity cease II. But how the world by the countenance of Emperours was invited to come in t the Church How worldly wealth power and honour did indue them How Bishopricks were made baites for the proud and tyrannical and Covetous How such then sought them and so the worldly Spirit had the rule and altered Episcopacy I shewed in the History before THE Second Part. Having in the former Part laid down those Grounds on which the Applicatory Part is to be built and subverted the foundations of that Diocesane frame which we judge unlawful I shall now proceed to give you the Application in the particular Reasons of our judgment from the Evils which we suppose this frame to be guilty of CHAP. I. The clearing of the state of the Question THE occasion of our dispute or rather Apology is known in England 1. Every man that is ordained Deacon or Presbyter or licensed a Schoolmaster must subscribe to the Books of Articles Liturgy and Ordination as Ex animo that there is nothing in them contrary to the Word of God And by the late Act of Uniformity that he doth assent and consent to all things conteined in and prescribed by the said books as since altered we think for the worse 2. In the year 1640 the Convocation formed printed and imposed a new Oath in these words after others Nor will I ever give my consent to alter the Government of this Church by Arch-Bishops Bishops Deans Arch-Deacons c. as it stands now established and as by right it ought to stand 3. After this the Parliament in the Wars imposed a Vow and Covenant on the Ministers and People contrary to this called the Et caetrea Oath which Vow contained a clause to endeavour the exâârpation of this Prelacy In the Westminster Assembly before it passed many Learned Divines declared that they would not take it as against Prelacy unexplained lest it should seem to be against all Episcopacy which was not their judgment they being for the primitive Episcopacy To satisfie these men that else had protested against it and the Assembly been divided the Scots and some others being against all the additional Titles of Deans Chapters c. were put in as a description of the peculiar English frame of Prelacy which they all agreed against Since His Majesty's Restoration there are many Acts
Stewards ruling many hundred Families of which more anon 3. Another part of the Bishops work in those times was to Baptize For it was part of the Apostles work Matth. 28. 19 20. And how great a work that was to try the peoples due preparations and to see that they did understandingly and seriously what they did I desire no other proof than the great care taken in all the ancient Churches of this business which brought up the Custom of baptizing but twice a year Object The Apostles baptized three thousand at once Answ The Jews were supposed to be bred up in the knowledge of other parts of Religion and wanted only the knowledge of the true Messiah and his Salvation which might be taught them in a shorter time than the Gentiles could be taught the whole substance of Religion that knew but little Therefore as soon as the Jews were convinced of the true Messiah and the righteousness of Faith and consented to the Covenant they might be baptized 2. The extraordinary effusions of the Spirit in that time did make a shorter preparation sufficient At least Baptizing must be an addition to the Bishops work 4. As the Apostles laid hands on Believers to convey the Holy Ghost so the Prelatists think that the Bishops then Confirmed Believers with Imposition of hands saith Doctor Hammond on Heb. 13. a. To teach exhort confirm and impose hands all which were the Bishops office in that place And O what a work it is to know the persons of many hundred Parishes to be capable of Confirmation and so to confirm them of which more afterward 5. I need not prove that the Bishops then were the Masters of the Assemblies and called them appointing time and place as the Rulers of the Synagogues did which sheweth that they were present with the Church Assemblies 6. The Bishops administred the Lords Supper as all confess and therefore must have some Pastoral notice of the fitness of all the Church to receive it which intimateth sufficiently the extent of the Church 7. They went before the Assemblies usually in performance of the publick worship They prayed with them and praised God And Doctor Hammond thinks that in all this in Scripture times they had not so much as a Presbyter to assist them 8. They admonished the unruly and disorderly and received Accusations and openly reproved and excommunicated the Impenitent And O how great a work is it to deal with one Soul aright as must be done before it cometh to Excommunication Much more with all in a Parish Much more in many hundred Parishes 9. It is confessed that it was the Bishops work to absolve the penitent publickly And then he must judge of their Repentance and then he must try it And for how many thousand can a Bishop do this with the rest 10. The Bishop did dismiss the Congregation with a Benediction as is maintained by those that we dispute with and therefore must be present in it 11. They were to visit and pray with the sick and all the sick to send for them to that end Jam. 4. 14. If any be sick among you let him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray over him saith Doctor Hammond Because there is no evidence whereby these inferior Presbyters may appear to have been brought into the Church so early And because the visiting of the sick is anciently mentioned as one branch of the office of Bishops therefore it may very reasonably be resolved that the Bishops of the Church one in each particular Church but many in the universal are here meant Though I am far from believing him that the sick person is bid to send but for one when the term is plural or that he must send for many out of other Churches I will take his concession that this was the Bishops work 12. Lastly They were to take care of the poor and of the Contributions and Church stock saith Doctor Hammond on 1 Cor 12. 28. The supreme trust and charge was reserved to the Apostles and Bishops of the Church So in the 41st Canon of the Apostles the Bishop must have the care of the moneys so that by his power all âe dispensed to the poor by the Presbyters and Deacons and we command that âe have in his power the Church Goods So Justin Martyr Apol. 2. That which is gathered is doeposited by the Praefect or Bishop and he helpeth or relieveth the Orphans and Widows and becometh the Curator and Guardian of all absolutely that be in want So Ignatius to Polycarp After the Lord thou shalt be the Curator of the Widows And Polycarp himself speaking of the Elders or Bishops They visit and take care of all that are sick not neglecting the Widows the Orphans and the Poor So far Doctor Hammond So that by this time it is easie to see how great the ancient Churches were yea and how great they were to be continued when all this is the Bishops Office and Work We are willing that they have Diocesses as big as they can do this work in even with a Consessus of assisting Presbyters There is no one of all these twelve alone that a Bishop can do for a Diocess of many score or hundred Churches How much less all these set together Nay what one considerable Parish would not find a Bishop with divers assistants work enough in all these kinds if it be faithfully done As for the doing of it per se aut per alium I have so far confuted it before as that I may be bold to tell them now that they may also receive the reward in se aut in alio And if he that will not work should not eat quaere whether they should eat per alium I add If all this as Doctor Hammond maintaineth was made by the Spirit in the Apostles the Bishops work if they may make new Church-Officers to commit part of their work to there may be twelve sorts of Officers made by them for these twelve parts of their work And then we shall better understand them Whatever is the work of a Bishop as a Presbyter every Presbyter may and must do according to his ability and opportunity But whatever belongeth to a Bishop as a Bishop cannot be done by another either Lay-man or Presbyter Therefore let us have but Bishops enough to do it or else confess that it is no necessary work So great a trust as the Gospel and mens souls which Christ hath committed to Bishops may not be cast upon others without his consent that did commit it to them But they can shew no consent of Christ to make new Officers to do their work by Timothy was to commit the same to others which he had received 2 Tim. 2. 2. The things thou hast heard of me among many witnesses the same commit thou to faithful men who shall be able to teach others also And who knoweth not that if a Tutor commit his work statedly to another he maketh
King will make every Market Town a City it shall have a Bishop And if he will make but one or two cities in a Kingdom there shall be but one or two Bishops And if he will make one City Regent to others that Bishop shall be so Thus Rome Constantinople c. came by their Superiority But Hierome telleth us the contrary that the Bishop of Tanais or any small City like our least Corporations was of equal Church-Dignity with Rome or the greatest 24. The same Council Can. 78. repeateth that All the Illuminate that is Baptized must learn the Creed and every Friday say it to the Bishop and Presbyters I hope they did not go every Friday such a Journey as Lincoln York or Norwich Diocess no nor the least in England would have put them to nor that the Bishop heard as many thousands every Friday as some of ours by that Canon should have heard 25. Anno 693. at a Toletane Council King Egica writeth a Sermon for them and therein tells them that Every Parish that hath twelve Families must have their proper Governor not a Curate that is no Governor But if it be less it must be part of another's Charge 26. Anno 756. Pipin called a Council in France whos 's Can. 1. is that Every City must have a Bishop And as is beforesaid every Corporate Town was a City 27. In the Epitome of the old Canons sent by Pope Adrian to Carolus Magnus published by Canisius the eighth Antioch Canon is Country Presbyters may not give Canonical Epistles but the Chorepiscopi By which it appeareth that the Chorepiscopi were Bishops as Petavius proveth in Epiphan Arrius And Can. 14 15. That No Bishop be above three Weeks in another City nor above two Weeks from his own Church Which intimateth that he had one single Church And Can. 19. That when a place wants a Bishop he that held them must not proudly hold them to himself and hinder them from one else he must lose that which he hath 28. The same Canons say Can. 94. If a Bishop six Months after Admonition of other Bishops neglect to make Catholicks of the people belonging to his Seat any other shall obtain them that shall deliver them from their Heresie So that 1. The Churches were not so big but that there might be divers in one Town 2. And converting the People is a better Title than Parish Bounds 29. It is there also decreed That no Bishop ordain or judge in another's Parish else it shall be void And they forbid Foreign Judgments because it is unmeet that he should be judged by Strangers who ought to have Judges of the same Province chosen by himself But our Diocesanes are Strangers to almost all the People and are not chosen by them See the rest Also another is that every Election of Bishops made by Magistrates be void yea all that use the Secular Magistrate to get a Church must be deposed and separated and all that joyn with him Also if any exact Money or for affection of his own drive any from the Ministry or segregate any of his Clergy or shut the Temple 30. A Council at Chalone under Carol. Magn. the Can. 15. condemneth Arch-Deacons that exercise Domination over Parish-Presbyters and take Fees of them as matter of Tyranny and not of Order and Rectitude And Can. 13. saith It is reported of some Brethren Bishops that they force them whom they are about to ordain to swear that they are worthy and will not do contrary to the Canons and will be obedient to the Bishop that ordaineth them and to the Church in which they are ordained Which Oath because it is very dangerous we all agree shall be forbidden By which it appeareth that 1. The Dioceses were not yet so large as to need such subordinate Governors as ours have Nor 2. Were Oaths of Canonical Obedience to the Bishop and Church yet thought lawful but forbidden as dangerous 31. A Council at Aquisgrane under Ludov. Pius wrote an excellent Treatise gathered out of the Fathers to teach Bishops the true nature of their Office which hath much to my present use but too long to be recited 32. Upon Ebbos Flight that deposed Lud. Pius the Arch-Bishoprick of Rhemes was void ten Years and ruled by two Presbyters Fulk and Hotho who were not then uncapable of governing the Flock but it is not like that they governed Neighbour Bishops 33. Canisius tells us of a Concilium Regiaticinum and Can. 6. is That the Arch-Presbyter examine every Master of a Family personally and take account of their Families and Lives and receive their Confessions And Can. 7. That a Presbyter in the absence of the Bishop may reconcile a Penitent by his Command c. Which shew that yet Dioceses were not at the largest 34. A Council at Papia Anno 855. order yet That the Clergy and People chuse the Bishops and yet that the Laity on pretence of their electing power trample not on the arch-Arch-Presbyter and that Great Men's Chappels empty not Churches 35. Yea Pope Nicholas Tit. 8. c. 1. decreeth that no Bishops be ordained but by the Election or Consent of the Clergy and People When they became uncapable of the ancient Order yet they kept up the words of the old Canons 36. This is intimated in the old Canons repeated at a Roman Council Anno 868. That if Bishops excommunicate any wrongfully or for light Causes and not restore them the Neighbour Bishops shall take such to their Communion till the next Synod Which was the Bishop of the next Parish or Corporation and not one that dwelt in another County out of reach And Can. 72. Because the Bishops hindred by other business cannot go to all the Sick the Presbyters or any Christians may anoint them How big was the Diocess when this Canon was first made Who would give his business rather than Distance and Numbers and Impossibility as the reason why the Bishop of London Lincoln Norwich c. visit not all the Sick in their Dioceses 37. Anno 869 till 879. was held a Council called General at Constantinople The Can. 8. is Whereas it is reported that not only the Heretical and Usurpers but some Orthodox Patriarchs also for their own security have made men subscribe that is to be true to them the Synod judgeth that it shall be so no more save only that Men when they are made Bishops be required as usual to declare the soundness of their Faith He that violateth this Sanction let him be deprived of his Honour But these later instances only shew the Relicts of Primitive Purity and Simplicity more evidently proved in the three first Centuries 38. And he that will read the ancient Records of the Customs of Burying will thence perceive the extent of Churches Doctor Tillesly after cited affirmeth pag. 179. against Selden that The Right of Burial place did first belong to the Cathedral Churches And Parish Churches began so lately as now understood having no
suos omnes coetus vehit Her Coach is their Church and which way soever she goeth she carrieth all her Congregations with her Ambros de Offic. To. 4. c. 1. sheweth that teaching his Church is the Bishop's Office And de initiandis c. 2. p. 163. To. 4. he saith to the baptized person Vidisti illic in Sacrario Levitam vidisti Sacerdotem vidisti summum Sacerdotem In which he intimateth that the Bishop as the Chief Priest was present in the Church with his Presbyters at Baptizings Which sheweth that they had not a multitude of Churches without Bishops And de Sacram. l. 1. c. 1. how the Bishop himself must touch with Oyl the Nostrils of all that were baptized with other Ceremonies after mentioned sheweth that he was usually present at every Baptism And de Sacram. l. 3. c. 1. he giveth the reason why he did wash the Feet of all that were baptized and the Church of Rome did not Vide ne forte propter multitudinem declinarit Perhaps they decline it because of the multitude But all the Diocess of Milan as a Bishoprick not as an Arch-Bishoprick had no such multitudes but that besides all his other work Ambrose could have time to wash the feet of every one that was baptized And cap. 3. Ecclesiae contuitu consideratione te ipse commenda The Church was present then And to shew by his work what his Church was he celebrated the Sacrament daily Accipe quotidie quod quotidie tibi prosit sic vive ut quotidie merearis accipere Qui non meretur quotidie accipere non meretur post annum accipere And how he discharged all this you may perceive de Dignit Sacerdot cap. 3. Episcopus non aliud nisi Episcopalia opera designat ut ex bono opere magis quam professione noscatur plus meritis esse Episcopum quam quod nomine vocitetur Quia sicut nihil esse diximus Episcopo excellentius sic nihil est miserabilius si de sancta vita Episcopus periclitetur si Sacerdos in crimine teneatur He thought not as too many now do that the Name and Seat of Bishop or Priest can do more to hallow Persecutions Worldliness and other Crimes than the Crimes can do to unhallow the Bishop or Priest And lib. 5. To. 4. pag. 180. having mentioned The Husband of one Wife he addeth Si vero ad altiorem sensum conscendimus inhibet duas usurpare Ecclesias A Bishop must no more have two Churches than a Husband have two Wives But some Bishops imitate Solomon's Lust rather than his Wisdom and will have above a thousand Churches as Wives or Concubines Adding Qui stipendiis tantum contentus Ecclesiae suae penitus non ambiat quae novit esse superflua Covetousness hath enlarged Dioceses And cap. 5. Cum dominatur populis anima servit Daemoni When he Lords it over the people his own Soul is a Slave to the Devil And cap. 6. pag. 18. Nam quid aliud interpretatur Episcopus nisi superinspector Maxime cum solio editiore in Ecclesia resideat ut ita cunctos respiciat ut cunctorum oculi in ipsum respiciant So that it is from the oversight of one Congregation where he sits among and above the Presbyters that he is called a Bishop and not from Churches which he overseeth indeed but seeth not and might well be said to be an Overseer in our vulgar sense as it signifies one that overlooketh or observeth not were he as many now And of so small a place as Forum Cornelii instead of committing it to a subject Presbyter he saith Epist 63. p. 111. ad Constant Arausicorum Episcopum Commendo tibi fili Ecclesiam quae est ad forum Cornelii quo cam de proximo invisas frequentius donec ei ordinetur Episcopus And pag. 117. Ad Eccles Vercellens post obitum Eusebii Epist he writeth to them thus to chuse another Quanto magis ubi plena est in nomine domini Congregatio ubi Universorum Postulatio congruit dubitare vos nequaquam oportet ibi dominum Jesum voluntatis authorem petitionis arbitrum fore ordinationis praesulem vel largitorem gratiae So that this famous Church was no greater than that all the people could meet and agree in the Choice or Postulation of a Bishop So To. 4. de Poenitent l. 5. c. 15. Tota Ecclesia suscipit onus peccatoris cui compatiendum fletu oratione dolore est By which it seems that all the Church that is so great a part as might be called all was used to be present each meeting when Penitents lamented their sin And in To. 3. p. 183. in 1 Cor. 11. he saith that the Angels before whom the Women in the Church must be veiled are the Bishops as God's Vicars which intimateth that ordinarily every Church-Assembly was to have a Bishop present And ibid. Hoc notat qui sic in Ecclesiam conveniebant ut munera sua offerentes advenientibus Presbyteris quia adhuc rectores Ecclesiis non omnibus locis fuerant constituti c. And p. 161. in Rom. 1. 2. Propterea Ecclesiae scribit quia adhuc singulis Ecclesiis Rectores non erant instituti By which you may conjecture what he thought of the magnitude of Churches then Tom. 3. p. 89. He so far acknowledgeth the People to have elected him that he calleth them on that account his Parents who in other respects were his Children in Luk. 18. Vos mihi estis Parentes qui Sacerdotium tulistis Vos inquam Filii vel Parentes Filii singuli Universi Parentes Like Hooker's Singulis Major Universis Minor Where you see that the whole Church and not a thousandth part did chuse him Bishop And To. 3. p. 180. in 1 Cor. 14. Verum est quia in Ecclesia that is in every Church Unus est Episcopus not in hundreds of Churches For he saith ibid. in 1 Cor. 12. Et quia ab uno Deo Patre sunt omnia singulos Episcopos singulis Ecclesiis praeesse decrevit He decreed that there should be to every Church a several Bishop When I cite all this of the state of that famous Church of Milan where the Emperor himself did oft reside and which presumed to differ in Customs from Rome I leave you to gather how it was before Christian Emperors and in all the ordinary Churches XIX Augustine was chosen by the people and brought to the Bishop to be ordained Vit. cap. 4. And cap. 5. Valerius the Bishop gave him power to preach before him contrary to the use of the African Churches but according to the custom of the Eastern Churches Which sheweth that Augustine while Presbyter and so other Presbyters ordinarily was in the same Congregation with the Bishop and not in another And upon this other Churches took up the same custom And cap. 21. it 's said In Ordinandis Sacerdotibus Clericis Consensum majorem Christianorum consuetudinem Ecclesiae sequendam esse
other Churches I have before cited a Canon which gave leave to Presbyters to preach in the countrey villages intimating it was rare heretofore 2. Filesacus saith ibid. p. 562 563. Sed ut quod res est libere eloquar illo aevo anteriore cum Parochiae vox vulgo etiam pro Dioecesi usurpatur that is for all the Bishops Charge credo Presbyteros Parochianos dictos fuisse non aliter ac siquis Dioecesanos pronunciaret hoc est In hac Parochia seu Dioecesi ordinatos titulatos But surely whilst Presbyters rarely preached there were either Churches that had no preaching which cannot be proved or else few Assemblies that had not Bishops Obj. But then you make Lay Elders of the Presbyters Ans They were the abler sort of Christians ordained to the same Ministerial or Sacerdotal Office as all true Ministers are But few of them being Learned men and able to make long Sermons were imployed only as the Bishops assistants as elders are among the Presbyterians who if they would but ordain those Elders and let them have power over the word and Sacraments though only to exercise it under the Bishops or chief Pastors guidance when there was cause they would come nearest to the ancient use XXIII And it seemeth to me an evidence that the Churches then were usually but as narrow as I assert that the Presbyters were to abide with the Bishop and attend him in his City Church For if you suppose them able to Teach or guide a flock themselves as some were such as Augustine Macarius Ephrem Syrus Tertullian c. it is scarce credible to me that the Bishop would suffer such worthy persons to sit among his Auditors when there were many countrey congregations that needed their help For that the Church was so supplied with Preachers as that besides all these Presbyters in the Bishops Church there were enow for all the rest of the countrey Parishes as now is contrary to all the intimations of Church-History And therefore when we read of so many Presbyters with the Bishop before we read of many or scarce any elsewhere surely there were no people that needed them XXIV And yet though great Cities had many with the Bishop I may add that the paucity of Presbyters under the generality of Bishops sheweth that their Dioceses then were but like Parish Churches with their Chappels Or else Aurelius and the other Bishops in the Carthage Council needed not have been in doubt whether those Bishops that had but one or two Presbyters should have one taken from them to make a Bishop of which was yet affirmatively decreed because there may be more found fit to make Presbyters of where it 's hard to find any fit to be Bishops I will speak it in the words of the learned Bishop Bilsons Perpet Govern c. 13. p. 256. In greater Churches they had great numbers of Presbyters In smaller they had often two somewhere one and sometimes none And yet for all this defect of Presbyters the Bishops then did not refrain to impose hands without them The number of Presbyters in many places were two in a Church as Ambrose writeth on 1 Tim. 3. sometimes but one In the third Council Carthag when it was agreed that the Primate of that City might take the Presbyters of every Diocese and Ordain them Bishops for such places as desired them though the Bishop under whom the Presbyter before lived were unwilling to spare him Posthumianus a Bishop demanded what if a Bishop have but one only Presbyter must that one be taken from him Aurelius the Bishop of Carthage answered One Bishop may Ordain many Presbyters but a Presbyter fit for a Bishoprick is not easily found wherefore if a man have but one only Presbyter and fit for the room of a Bishop he ought to yield that one to be Ordained Posthumianus replied Then if another Bishop have a number of Clerks that others store should relieve him Aurelius answered Surely as you helped another Church so he that hath many Clerks shall be driven to spare you one of them to be ordained by you A Diocese such as is intimated here we do not strive against XXIV Another evidence is that when ever we read of persecution turning the Christians out of their Churches you ever find them gathered into one Congregation when they could have leisure and place to meet in and usually a Bishop with them unless he were banished imprisoned or martyred and then some Presbyter supplied the place or unless they were scattered into many little parcels And you find no talk of the persecution of multitudes of Countrey Presbyters afar off but of the Bishop with his City Presbyters and Church To which add that it was One Church still which rejected obtruded Bishops and refused to obey the Emperour who imposed them All this is manifest in Gregory Neocaesar his flight with Musonius and the state of his Church In the Case of Basil and of Lucius the obtruded Bishop at Alexandria and in the Case of Antioch before described and of Rome it self It 's tedious to cite numerous testimonies in a well known case If Alexandria was in such a case or near it I hope you will doubt of no other Churches And that with this you may see what Conventicles the Christians kept when the Emperours forbad them and how resolutely the Bishops preached when the Emperours silenced them I will recite the words of Baronius himself and in him of Dionysius Alexandr apud Euseb lib. 7. c. 10. c. 17. and Cyprian ep 5. c. in Baron ad an 57. p. 542. that those who cry out against Preaching and Conventicles when they are but strong enough to drive others out of the Temples may better understand themselves Siquando c. If at any time so vehement a persecution did arise that the Christians by the Emperours edicts were utterly excluded from the Churches and assemblies notwithstanding little regarding such things they forbore not to come together in One in holy assemblies whithersoever there was opportunity This Dionys Alexand. Bishop witnesseth writing to Germanus when he mentioneth the Edicts of Valerian forbidding the Assemblies But we by Gods assistance have not abstained from our accustomed Assemblies celebrated among our selves Yea I my self did drive on certain brethren to keep the assemblies diligently as if I had converst among them And he writeth the same also to Hierax when he was banished When we were persecuted by all and put to death we celebrated the Feast with joyful minds and any place appointed us for several sorts of sufferings as the woods the desert solitudes the tossed ships the common Innes the horrid prison did seem fit to us in which we might keep our solemn Assemblies with the greatest joy That they held their Assemblies and offered sacrifice usually when it was permitted them in the prisons Cyprian witnesseth But the Acts of the holy Martyrs do fullier signifie it especially those most faithful
after one Bishops death another was not chosen As before the choice of Fabian's successor you may see by the Epistles of the Roman Clergy to Cyprian Marcion was expelled by the Roman Presbytes sede vacante Epiphan Haeres 42. And if they had the power over one another more over the flock And I need bring no particular proofs of this For when Bishops have been banished imprisoned dead and the seat vacant a year yea divers years together as it hath been at Rome was the Church no Church all that time Had it no Government Was there no power of the Keys Was the Church laid common to all This instance is so full as nothing can be said against it but that it was in Case of Necessity But that only proveth that it is the Presbyters office work though out of a case of necessity they must do it with the Bishop and not without him But a Lay-man may not do a Presbyters proper work on such a pretence However the Church by this practice hath declared it's judgment in the case VII Concil Carthag 4. Can. 23. is Ut Episcopus nullius causam audiat absque praesentia Clericorum suorum Alioquin irrita erit sententia Episcopi nisi Clericorum praesentia confirmetur If it be said that here is no mention of their Consent but of their Presence only I answer It is a presence necessary to the Confirmation of the Bishops sentence and the presence of Dissenters would rather infirm the sentence more than their absence than confirm it And the conjunct Canons shew that it is Consent that is meant For Can. 32. it 's said Irrita erit donatio Episcoporum vel venditio vel commutatio rei Ecclesiasticae absque conniventia subscriptione Clericorum where such a Connivence is meant as is joyned with subscription And if subscription of the Presbyters was necessary in these cases no less than Consent is meant in the other Which is yet more apparent by those following Canons which forbid the Bishop to Ordain without his Clergy or to accuse any of them but by proof in a Synod or to suffer a Presbyter to stand while he sitteth And the Canons that place the Bishop in consessu Presbyterorum and set him in the midst of them in the same seat in the Church and call him their Colleague The Canons which make the Presbyters Governours of the Rural Churches and make the Deacons servants to them of which the number is too great to be now recited Even here Can. 22. it 's said Episcopus sine Concilio Clerioorum suorum Clericos non ordinet Ita ut Civium assensum conniventiam testimonium quaerat And if not sine concilio * then not contra consilium And if the consent of the Laity be necessary sure the Clergies is so too Can. 29. Episcopus si Clerico vel Laico crimen imposuerit deducatur ad probationem in Synodum Can. 30. Caveant Judices Ecclesiae ne absente eo cujus causa ventilatur sententiam proferant quia irrita erit imo causam in Synodo profacto dabunt And if a Bishop must not so much as accuse but in a Synod on proof much lefs might he be judge alone Can. 33. appointeth that Bishops or Presbyters shall be invited to preach and consecrate the Oblation when they come into strange Churches So for there was no difference Can. 34. Ut Episcopus in quolibet loco sedens stare Presbyterum non patiatur 35. Ut Episcopus in Ecclesia in consessu Presbyterorum sublimior sedeat Intra domum vero Collegam Presbyterorum se esse cognoscat Can. 36. Presbyteri qui per Dioeceses Ecclesias regunt c. Can 37. Diaconus ita se Presbyteri ut Episcopi ministrum esse cognoscat vid. Can. 38 39 40. Yea even in Ordination it is said Can. 2. Presbyterquum Ordinatur Episcopo eum benedicente manum super ejus tenente etiam omnes Presbyteri qui praesentes sunt manus suas juxta manum Episcopi super Caput illius teneant Et Can. 3. Diaconus quum ordinatur solus Episcopus qui eum benedicit manus super caput illius ponat quia non ad Sacerdotium sed ad ministerium consecratur So that Priesthood was to be conferred by the hands of Priests and the Bishop's alone was not enough But Deacons might be Ordained by a Bishop without Presbyters What need I tire the Reader with other Councils testimonies when this though called Provincial having 214 Bishops and among them Aurelius Augustine c. is no less valuable than any General Council in the volumes of the Councils VIII In the Arabick Canons of the Concil Nic. 1. which I cite not for their justification but as testifying the matter of fact in the times of which they were written whensoever it was it 's said Can. 47. After one Bishop is forbid to absolve him that another hath Excommunicated Eadem Lex erit de Sacerdote id est Ut nullus Sacerdos solvat aut liget quem alius Sacerdos solverit aut ligaverit quamdiu ille qui solvit aut ligavit vixerit Post mortem vero successor ejus solvet quem mortuus ligavit sed debet Episcopus praeesse huic negotio Neque convenit ut Episcopus aut Archiepiscopus solvat aut liget eum qui digne a Sacerdote solutus aut ligatus fuit quamdiu ille qui solvit aut ligavit vixerit Here you see the Priest may bind and loose and that in foro Ecclesiastico yea so fast that no Bishop or Archbishop may loose or bind contrarily during his life Then Presbyters had the Keys And Can 57. according to other Canons cited before they say The Arch-Presbyter in the Bishops absence shall be honoured as the Bishop because he is in his place and let him be the Head of the Priests who are under his power in the Church with all that the Archdeacon is over And if one Presbyter may Rule the rest as a Bishop the Government of the flock is not above their Order or place If it be said that he doth it as the Bishops Deputy it is answered oft enough before Spiritual Power or Pastoral is deputable to none but such as are of the same Order which is not properly a deputation IX Presbyters had power to Baptize and to celebrate the Lords Supper Therefore they had power to judge who were Baptizable and who were capable of the Lords Supper For 1. Else they would not do it as Christs Ministers but as the executioners of anothers judgment And if so they may give both Sacraments to Turks and Infidels if they be bid And then indeed the Priest is not the Baptizer or Consecrater Morally but the Bishop doth it by the Priest All which are false And a Presbyter may preach and Baptize in any Infidel Kingdom where no Bishop hath any Diocese and this as an ordinary case in Turky Tartary China Japan c. And what Bishop
shall there tell him whom to Baptize where there is no Bishop And the power of Baptizing is the first and greatest Key of the Church even the Key of admission And they that do among us deny a Presbyter the power of judging whom to Baptize and give the Lords Supper to do not give it to the Bishop who knoweth not of the persons But the Directive part they commit to a Convocation of Bishops and Presbyters and the Judicial partly to the Priest and partly to a Lay-Chancellor X. Epiphanius Haeres 75. saith The Apostles did not set all in full order at once And at first there was need of Presbyters and Deacons by whom both Ecclesiastical affairs may be administred Therefore where no man was found worthy of Episcopacy in that place no Bishop was set By which it appeareth that he thought that for some time some Churches were Governed without Bishops And if so it there belonged to the Presbyters office to govern Whereto we may add the opinion of many Episcopal men who think that during the Apostles times they were the only Bishops in most Churches themselves And if so Then in their long and frequent absence the Presbyters must be the governours XI That many Councils have had Presbyters yea many of them is past doubt Look but in the Councils subscriptions and you will see it A Synod of some Bishops and more Presbyters and Deacons gathered at Rome decreed the Excommunication of Novatianus and his adherents Euseb lib. 6. c. 43. Noetus was convented judged expelled by the Session of Presbyters Epiphan Haeres 47. c. 1. See a great number of instances of Councils held by Bishops with their Presbyters in Blondel de Episc sect 3. p. 202. Yea one was held at Rome praesidentibus cum Joanne 12 Presbyteris An. 964. vid. Blond p. 203 206 207. Yea they had places and votes in General Councils Not only ut aliorum procuratores as Victor and Vincentius in Nic. 1. but as the Pastors of their Churches and in their proper right I need not urge Selden's Arabick Catalogue in Eutych Alex. where there were two persons for divers particular places or Zonaras who saith There were Priests Deacons and Monks nor Athanasius a Deacon's presence Evenof late the Council of Basil is a sufficient proof XII The foresaid Canons of Carthage which are so full are inserted into the body of the Canon Law and in the Canons of Egbert Archbishop of York as Bishop Usher and others have observed XXIII Hierom's Communi Presbyterorum Concilio Ecclesiae gubernabantur seconded by Chrysostome and other Fathers is a trite but evident testimony XIV That Presbyters had the Power of Excommunications see fully proved by Calderwood Altar Damasc p. 273. XV. Basil's Anaphora Bibl. Pat. Tom. 6. p. 22. maketh every Church to have Archpresbyters Presbyters and Deacons making the Bishop to be but the Archpresbyter CHAP. XIV The Confessions of the greatest and Learnedest Prelatists 1. THe Church of England doth publickly notifie her judgment that Church Government Discipline and the power of the Keys is not a thing aliene from or above the Order of the Presbyters but belongeth to their office 1. In that they allow Presbyters to be members of Convocations and that as chosen by the Presbyters And whereas it is said that the Lower house of Convocation are but Advisers to the Upper I answer All together have but an advising power to the King and Parliament But in that sort of power the lower house hath its part as experience sheweth 2. There are many exempt Jurisdictions in England as the Kings Chappel The Deanry of Windsor and Wolverhampton Bridgenorth where six Parishes are governed by a Court held by a Presbyter and many more which shew that it is consistent with the Presbyters office 3. The Archdeacons who are no Bishops exercise some Government And so do their Officials under them The Objection from Deputation is answered 4. The Surrogates of the Bishops whether Vicar General Principal Official or Commissaries are allowed a certain part of government 5. They that give Lay-Chancellors the power of Judicial Excommunication and Absolution cannot think a Presbyter uncapable of it 6. A Presbyter proforma oft passeth the sentence of Excommunication and Absolution in the Chancellors Court when he hath judged it 7. A Presbyter in the Church must publish that Excommunication and Absolution 8. By allowing Presbyters to baptize and to deliver the Lords Supper and to keep some back for that time and to admit them again if they openly profess to repent and amend their naughty lives and to absolve the sick they intimate that the Power of the Keys belongeth to them though they contradict themselves otherwise by denying it them 9. And in Ordination the Presbyter is required to exercise discipline And the words of Act. 20. 28. were formerly used to them Take heed to your selves and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers or Bishops to feed or Rule the Church of God Whence Bishop Usher gathereth that the Churches sence was that the Presbyters had a joynt power with the Bishop in Church Government And though lately Anno 1662. this be altered and those words left out yet it is not any such new change that can disprove this to have been the meaning of them that made the book of Ordination and that used it II. Archbishop Cranmer with the rest of the Commissioners appointed by King Edward the Sixth for the Reformation of Ecclesiastical Laws decreed the administring Discipline in every Parish by the Minister and certain Elders Labouring and intending by all means to bring in the ancient discipline Vid. Reform Leg. Eccles tit de Divinis Officiis cap. 10. And our Liturgy wisheth this Godly Discipline restored and substituteth the Curses till it can be done And the same Cranmer was the first of 46 who in the time of King Henry the Eighth affirmed in a book called The Bishops Book to be seen in Fox's Martyrology that the difference of Bishops was a device of the ancient Fathers and not mentioned in Scripture And of the opinion of Cranmer with others in this point his own papers published by Dr. Stillingfleet Irenic p. 390 391 c. are so full a proof that no more is needful III. Dr. Richard Cosins in his Tables sheweth how Church Discipline is partly exercised by Presbyters and by the Kings Commission may be much more And it is not aliene to their office IV. Hooker Eccles Pol. lib. 5. pleadeth against the Divine settlement of one form of Government And lib. 7. Sect. 7. p. 17 18. he sheweth at large that the Bishops with their Presbyters as a Consess governed the Churches And that in this respect It is most certain truth that the Churches Cathedral and the Bishops of them are as glasses wherein the face and very countenance of Apostolical antiquity remaineth yet to be seen notwithstanding the alterations which tract of time and course of the world hath
brought And much he hath elsewhere which granteth that the Presbyters are Church governours though not in equality with the Bishops V. Dr. Field lib. 5. c. 27. shewing how the Apostles first limiting and fixing of Pastors to particular Churches was a giving them Jurisdiction saith this assigning to men having the power of order the persons to whom they were to minister holy things and of whom they were to take the care and the subjecting of such persons to them gave them the power of Jurisdiction which they had not before And As another of my Rank cannot have that Jurisdiction within my Church as I have but if he will have any thing to do there he must be inferiour in degree to me so we read in the Revelation of the Angel of the Church of Ephesus c. So that with him a Bishop is but one of the Presbyters of the same Rank having the first charge of the Church as every Incumbent in respect to his Curates and so above his Curates in Degree And As the Presbyters may do nothing without the Bishop so he may do nothing in matters of greatest moment without their presence and advice Conc. Carthag 4. c. 23. It is therefore most false that Bellarmine saith that Presbyters have no power of Jurisdiction For it is most clear and evident that in all Provincial Synods Presbyters did sit give voices and subscribe as well as Bishops And the Bishops that were present in General Councils bringing the resolution and consent of the provincial Synods of those Churches from whence they came in which Synods Presbyters had their voices they had a kind of consent to the decrees of General Councils also and nothing was passed in them without their concurrence And Chap. 49. The Papists think that this is the peculiar right of Bishops But they are clearly refuted by the universal practice of the whole Church from the beginning For in all Provincial and National Synods Presbyters did ever give voice and subscribe in the very same sort that Bishops did whether they were assembled to make Canons of Discipline to hear Causes or to define doubtful points of doctrine And that they did not anciently sit and give decisive voices in General Councils the reason was not because they have no interest in such deliberations and resolutions but because seeing all cannot meet in Councils that have interest in such business âbut some must be deputed for and authorized by the rest it was thought fit that the Bishops So here are Bishops authorized by Presbyters as their Deputies in the greatest affairs in General Councils He proceedeth to prove this by instances Concil Later sub Innoc. 3. c. VI. Even Archbishop Whitgift maintaineth as Doctor Stillingfleet hath collected Iren. pag. 394. that No kind of Government is expressed in the word or can necessarily be concluded thence No form of Church Government is by the Scriptures commanded to the Church of God or prescribed And Doctor Stillingfleet there citeth many testimonies to prove this the judgment of the Church of England And if so it must be only men and not God who make any difference between a Presbyter and a Bishop in the point of Jurisdiction VII Bishop Bilson Perpet Govern p. 16. c. 391. saith The Synod of Antioch which deposed Paulus Samosat as Eusebius sheweth lib. 7. c. 38. in Concil Eliber about the time of the first Nicene Council sate Bishops and Presbyters even 36. In the second Concil Arelat About the same time subscribed twelve Presbyters besides Deacons So in Concil Rom. sub Hilario Gregor where 34 Presbyters subscribed after 22 Bishops And in the first sub Symmach where after 72 Bishops subscribed 67 Presbyters So in the third fifth and sixth under the same Symmachus Felix had a council of 43 Bishops and 74 Presbyters The Concil Antisiod c 7. saith Let all the Presbyters being called come to the Synod in the City Concil Tolet. 4. c. 3. saith Let the Bishops assembled go to the Church together and sit according to the time of their Ordination After all the Bishops are entred and set let the Presbyters be called and the Bishops sitting in a compass let the Presbyters sit behind them and the Deacons stand before them Even in the General Council at Lateran sub Innoc. 3. were 482 Bishops and 800 Abbots and Priors conventual saith Platina Thus Bilson and more VIII To the same purpose writeth the Greatest Defender of Prelacy Bishop Downam Def. lib. 1. c. 2. sect 11. pag. 43 44. and the places before cited out of him professing that the Bishop hath but a chief and not sole jurisdiction IX Bishop Ushers judgment is fully opened in his Model which we offered to the King and Bishops in vain and which he owned to me with his own mouth X. Because the citing of mens words is tedious I add that All those whom I cited Christ Concord p. 57 c. to shew that they judge the Presbyters Ordination may be lawful and valid do much more thereby infer that they are not void of a Governing power over their own flocks viz. 1. Dr. Field lib. 3. c. 32. 2. Bishop Downam Def. lib. 3. c. 4. p. 108. 3. Bishop Jewel Def. of Apol. Part 2. p. 131. 4. Saravia De divers Min. Grad cap. p. 10 11. 5. Bishop Alley Poor mans Libr. Prelect 3. 6. p. 95 96. 6. Bishop Pilkington 7. Bishop Bridges 8. Bishop Bilson Of Subject p. 540 541 542 233 234 c. 9. Alex. Nowel 10. Grotius de imper 11. Mr. Chisenhall 12. Lord Digby then a Protestant 13. Bishop Davenant Determ Q. 42. p. 191 192. 14. Bishop Prideaux cont de Disciplin Eccles p. 249. 15. Bishop Andrews 16. Chillingworth To which I add 17. Bishop Bramhall in his Answer to Mileterius's Epistle to the King 18. Dr. Steward's Answer to Fountains Letter 19. Dr. Fern. 20. Mason at large 21. Bishop Morton Apolog. XI Spalatensis is large to prove the power of the Keys to belong in common to Presbyters as such I cited the words before Lib. 5. c. 9. n. 2. c. 2. n. 48 c. XII Even Gropperus the Papist pleadeth in the Council of Trent for the restoring of Synods of Presbyters instead of Officials the thing so much detested in England as that all we undergo must rather be endured yet saith Gropperus Restore the Synodals which are not subject to so great corruption removing those Officers by whom the world is so much scandalized because it is not possible that Germany should endure them The Spaniards and Dutch men willingly heard this but not the rest Hist p. 334. lib. 4. XIII The opinion of Paulus himself the author of that History is so fully and excellently laid down of the Original of the Bishops grandeur and of the manner of introducing the Ecclesiastical Courts by the occasion of Pacifications Arbitrations and Constantines Edict as that I intreat the Reader to turn to and peruse p. 330 331
332 333. XIV Filesacus a Learned Papist copiously proveth from Councils that Presbyters were called the Rectors of the Churches pag. 560. And more than so that they were called Hierarchici and Prelates and had place in Councils especially Provincial p. 576 577 578. Pag. 574. he citeth Concil Aquisgr saying Presbyteri qui praesunt Ecclesiis de omnibus hominibus qui ad eorum Ecclesiam pertinent per omnia curam gerant Pag. 576. he proveth they were called Prelates abundantly Pag. 577. Episcoporum instar suam habebant plebem regendam XV. Mr. H. Thorndike is so large in defending the Presbyters Governing power and that as grounded on the power of Congregating in his Form of Primit Gov. and Right of Church c. that it would be tedious to recite his words Pag. 98. he saith The power of the Keys belongeth to the Presbyters and is convertible with the power of celebrating the Eucharist and that 's the Reason why it belongeth to them Nothing could be spoken plainer to our use And p. 128. The power of the Keys that is The whole power of the Church whereof that power is the root and source is common to Bishops and Presbyters And Right of Ch. p. 126 129 130 131. he saith much more to confirm this by testimonies and instances of antiquity XVI The great Jo. Gerson is cited to your hand by the same Filesacus as shewing that Curates were Hierarchical Quia eadem opera Hierarchica eis incumbunt quae Episcopis And more out of Gerson de Concil Evangel de stat Ecclesiastic tit de statu Curatorum consid 1. 4 c. XVII I will end all in the fullest testimony for these times His Majesties Declaration concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs before the passing of which it was examined by his Majesty and the Lord Chancellor before Dukes Lords Bishops Doctors of their party and many of us also that are now silenced and after all two great Bishops with Bishop Reynolds and Mr. Calamy appointed by the King to joyn with two Lords to see that it were worded according to the Kings expressed sense And it saith p. 11 c. Because the Dioceses especially some of them are thought to be of too large extent we will appoint such a number of Suffragan Bishops in every Diocese as shall be sufficient for the due performance of their work 3. No Bishop shall Ordain or exercise any part of jurisdiction which appertaineth to the censures of the Church without the advice and assistance of the Presbyters And no Chancellors Commissaries or Officials as such shall exercise any act of Spiritual Jurisdiction in these cases viz. Excommunication Absolution c. As to Excommunication our will and pleasure is that no Chancellor Commissary or Official Decree any Sentence of Excommunication or Absolution Nor shall the Archdeacon exercise any Jurisdiction without the advice and assistance of six Ministers of his Archdeaconry whereof three to be nominated by the Bishop and three by the election of the major part of the Presbyters within the Archdeaconry 4. To the end the Dean and Chapters may the better be fitted to afford counsel and assistance to the Bishops both in Ordination and other offices mentioned before c. Moreover an equal number to those of the Chapter of the most learned pious and discreet Presbyters of the same Diocese annually chosen by the major Vote of all the Presbyters of that Diocese present at the Election shall be always advising and assisting together with those of the Chapter in all Ordinations and every part of Jurisdiction which appertains to the censure of the Church and at all other solemn and important actions in the exercise of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction wherein any of the Ministery are concerned And our Will is that the great work of Ordination be constantly and solemnly performed by the Bishop and his aforesaid Presbytery 5. We will take care that confirmation be rightly and solemnly performed by the information and with the consent of the Minister of the place Who shall admit none to the Lords Supper till they have made a credible profession of their faith and promised obedience c. Besides the Suffragans and their Presbytery every Rural Dean together with three or four Ministers of that Deanry chosen by the major part of all the Ministers within the same shall meet once in every month to receive such complaints as shall be presented to them by the Ministers and Church-wardens of the respective parishes and also to compose all such differences between party and party as shall be referred to them by way of Arbitration and to convince offenders and reform all such things as they find amiss by their Pastoral Reproofs and Admonitions if they may be so reformed And such matters as they cannot by this Pastoral and perswasive way compose and reform are by them to be prepared for and presented to the Bishop At which meeting any other Ministers of the Deanry may if they please be present and assist Moreover the Rural Dean and his Assistants are in their respective divisions to see that the children and younger sort be carefully instructed by the respective Ministers c. See the rest This was the judgment of his Majesty c. 1660. And on these terms we were ready to have Conformed and United with the Prelatists so far as to go in the peaceable performance of our Offices But that very Parliament who gave his Majesty thanks for this his Declaration did lay it by so that it was never done but other Laws established which we feel Obj. You do but obtrude on us your own opinions For when you had drawn up most of those words his Majesty was fain to seem for the present to grant them you for the quieting of you Answ 1. If we did offer such things let the world judge what we sought by them 2. There is most of that about Rural Deanries put in I suppose by the Bishops consent who were to word it after it went from us and after the King had done with it on October 22. 1660. 3. Whoever motioned or desired it by this it appeareth that his Majesty and those that counselled him did not then think the work of Jurisdiction Excommunication Absolution no nor Ordination to be aliene to or above the office of the Presbyter And if that be no part of his Pastoral work they would not have appointed it him Yet finally let the Reader note that though my proofs have reached as high as the power of Canon-making Jurisdiction Court-excommunications and Ordination Yet it is no more than the power of Pastoral Guidance of our particular Parish Churches and not to be forced to administer all holy things Sacraments Absolutions c. contrary to our consciences at other mens will who know not our people and not to those that we know to be utterly Ignorant Infidels Scandalous and Impenitent that I am here pleading for I conclude therefore boldly after all this proof
it is not actual confirmation which they think necessary But a Desire of Confirmation by the imposition of the Diocesanes hands is made a thing necessary to Christian Church Communion 12. As it is before said that he hath no power to judge who shall be Confirmed and admitted into the Rank of Communicating members so he hath no power at all effectually to keep away the grossest offenders or to forbear his own actual putting the Sacrament into their hands For though the Canon seem to favour his power and the Rubrick say somewhat the same way yet it is to be noted 1. That whereas the Rubrick alloweth him to advertise the scandalous not to come to the Sacrament yet it is only the contentious that have injured others and are not reconciled whom he is plainly enabled to refuse 2. Among those that he may advertise not to come the grosly ignorant who know not what Christ or the Sacrament is the Atheist Infidel and Heretick are not numbred at all but an open and notorious evil liver or that hath done wrong to his neighbours 3. And if he be never so wicked yet unless also The Congregation be thereby offended the Curate cannot hinder him or so much as advertise him not to come And so if only a few Godly persons be offended they are not the Congregation or if the Minor part be offended they are not the Congregation And how shall the Minister know whether the Major part be offended For he hath no power to ask them much less to put it to the Vote And the Major part will never come to him nor be accusers And if the Major part which is no wonder be themselves so Ignorant Heretical or ungodly as not to be offended but rather to take the Sinners part then the Curate must give them all the Sacrament and hath no remedy 4. And he that must not live in Taverns Alehouses Play-houses or other places of wickedness specially if he live as Chrysostome did who never did so much as eat with any one in his own house may have most of his Communicants to be abominable and flagitious before it will be Notorious to him for as is said He hath no power to call any to witness any thing that are unwilling And few will be willing to enrage their neighbours when they foreknow that it will do more hurt than good 5. And if he do refuse any one he is bound to become an Informer and to give an account of the same to the Ordinary within fouteen days at the farthest Whenas 1. Perhaps he may dwell many score miles off 2. And have his studies and all other business on his hands 3. And must then bring his proofs when he is not enabled to examine any witness nor take proof of that which to all others is notorious 4. It is a great doubt whether the Sinner have not his remedy at Law against him to his undoing if he lay not by all his other business to prosecute the proof to the utmost And if he do lay by the rest of his work that while the Bishop may undoe him or suspend him 5. By this means he shall more exasperate the Sinners by prosecuting them to such a Court as the Prelates and harden them against all profiting by his Ministry than if by his Pastoral office he had himself first lovingly convinced them and suspended them only till they repent 6. When he hath all done if the sinner pay his fees and say He repenteth the Chancellor is to Absolve him And so the Curate doth only to his own vexation and the Sinners hurt deny him the Sacrament but once And if the wrath or scorns of the Sinner shew that he was far from true Repentance the Curate cannot deny him the Sacrament the next day nor ever after till he not only again commit the same sin Adultery Perjury Drunkenness c. but till it be again notorious and he will be again at the same trouble in the prosecution 7. And there are few great Parishes in England where there are no Swearers Drunkards Railers Fighters Fornicators Adulterers and such like enow to hold a Curate work through the whole year to prosecute them though he lay by almost all his other work so that by this way if he keep such from the Sacrament he must keep all away by ceasing his Ministerial work 8. The Curate cannot refuse him till he hath called and advertised him whereas the person may refuse to come to him at least by pretending business and other excuses All these things make this which seemeth his most considerable power to be in effect but next to none 13. The Curate hath no power when any person is obstinate and impenitent in the most notorious scandal or heresie or endeavoureth to pervert others to admonish him before all that others may beware nor to call him openly to Repentance 14. Nor hath he any power to judge who shall be Excommunicated as impenitent be the crime never so heinous or notorious no not so much as to concur in this power with any Bishop Chancellor or Presbyters any more than any Lay-man hath He can but Accuse them and so may an Apparitor or Church-warden or Read the Bishops or Chancellors Excommunication as he doth the Kings Proclamations or as the Clerk doth other writings 15. He hath no power to absolve publickly any person Excommunicated no more than a Lay man but as aforesaid to read the Absolution 16. He hath no power to forbear his own act of Reading an Excommunication against the faithfullest and most religious persons in his Parish whom it shall please the Bishop or Chancellor to Excommunicate that is usually a Nonconformist or a Churchwarden who dare not swear to their large books of Articles to persecute the Nonconformists c. or one that appeareth not at their Courts or a poor man that doth not pay their fees c. The poor Curate must read the Curse against them 17. He hath no power himself to forbear the open Reading of an Absolution of the most impenitent wicked man whom it shall please the Chancellor to absolve And how easily that is procured for any man that is but Rich and Conformable is well known 18. The Curate hath no power so much as to Baptize the holiest believer or the Child of such as do but fear lest it be a Sin to use the Transient Image of the Cross as a humane symbol of Christianity and an engaging dedicating sign that he will not be ashamed to profess the faith of Christ crucified and manfully to fight under his banner against the Devil the world and the flesh and to continue Christs faithful servant and souldier to his lifes end If the person to be baptized were a Turk or a Jew who both hate Idolatry and should be so scandalized at this Transient Image and humane Symbol as that they would rather never be Christians or be Baptized than receive it yet must the poor Priest let
the rest They have freedome from warfare and immunity of all things Being excited by so great rewards many flock to this discipline of their own accord and many are sent by their parents and kindred They are reported to learn there abundance of Verses Therefore some continue at learning twenty years And they think it not lawful to commit them to writeing for in other publick matters and private accounts for the most part they use the Greek Letters It seemeth to me that they do this for two causes because they would not have their discipline or learning made common or brought to the Vulgar nor those that learn it neglect their memories by trusting to writings which befalls the most who by the help of writings remit both their diligence in learning and their memory This especially they perswade that souls die not but after death pass from some to others And by this they think that men are chiefly excited to virtue neglecting the fear of death Many things also they dispute and deliver to youth about the Stars and their motion of the magnitude of the world and of the earth of the nature of things of the force and power of the immortal Gods So far Caesar which I repeated as offering it to consideration whether the foresaid Prelacy for Grandure be not liker to these Druides than to christs Ministers who must be the servants of all And yet whether they are not far more negligent in the exercise of discipline And whether this Discipline which shameth sin by thus distinguishing the Godly and upright from the ungodly and wicked be not of the very light of nature and round much in Brittain before Christianity and therefore should not be hated and banished by Christian Bishops who pretend that their office is instituted for that very use and end CHAP. XXV The Ordination lately exercised by the Presbyteries in England is valid Ergo Reordination unnecessary THat valid ordination is not to be repeated is agreed on by Protestants and Papists It is one of the ancient Canons called the Apostles Can. 67. Siquis Episcopus aut Presbyter aut Diaconus secundam ab aliquo ordinationem acceperit deponitor tam ipse quam qui ipsum ordinaverit Arg. 1. The way of Ordination which was valid in the Primitive Church is valid now But the way of Ordination by meer Presbyters was valid in the Primitive Church Ergo it is valid now The Major needs no proof at least to the point in hand The Minor I prove 1. From Hieromes frequently cited words in his Epistle to Evagrius where he tells us that the Presbyters of Alexandria from the daies of Mark till Heraclas and Dionysius made or ordained their own Bishops Having shewed that Bishops and Presbyters were of one office he addeth Qwa autem postea unus elecius est qui caeteris praeponeretur in schismatis remedium factum est ne unusquisque ad se trabens Christi ecclesiam rumperet Nam Alexandria à Marco Evangelista usque ad Heraclam Dionysium Episcopos Presbyteri semper unum exse electum in excelsori gradu collecatum Episcopum nominabant Quomodo si exercitus Imperater in faciat aut Diaconieligunt exse quem industrium noverint Archidiaconum vocent Where note 1. That Hierome undertaking to shew how Bishops were made at Alexandria mentioneth no other making of them but this by the Presbyters 2. That Presbyters made Bishops is brought by Hierome as an Argument to prove the Identity first and nearness after of their power 3. That he ascribeth to the Presbyters the Election the placing of him in a higher degree and the naming of him a Bishop 4. And that he distinguisheth the Presbyters making of a Bishop thus anciently from that which followed Heraclas and Dionysius which was by episcopal ordination or consecration Which observations are sufficient to answer all their objections that will perswade men that Hierome speaketh but of Election 2. This testimony is seconded by a more full one of Eutychius Patriark of Alexandria who out of the Records and Tradition of that Church in his Arabick Originalls thereof saith as followeth according to Seldens Translation in his Commentary pag. 29. 30. Constituit item Marâus ââââgeliâta duodecem Presbyteros cum Hanania qui nempe manerent cum Patriarcha adeò ut cum vacaret Pratriarchâtus eligerent unum è duodecim Presbyteris cujus capiti reliqui undecim manus imponerent eumque benedicerent Patriarcham âum crearent dein virum aliquem nisi quem eligerent eumque Presbyterum secum constituerint loco ejus qui sic facâus est Patriarcha uâ iâà semper extarent duodecim Neque desâit Alexandriae institutum hoc de Presbyteris ut scilicet Patriarchas crearentur Presbyteris duodecim usque ad tempora Alexandri Patriarchae Alexandrini qui fuit ex numero illo 318. Is autem vetuit ne deinceps Patriarcham Presbyteri crearent decrevit ut mortuo Patriarchâ convenirânt Episcopi qui Patriarcham ordinarent Decrevit item ut vacante Patriarchatu Eligerent sive ex quacunque regione sive ex duodecim illis Presbyteris sive aliis ut res ferebat virum aliquem eximium eumque Patriarcham crearent atque ità evanuit institutum illud antiquius quo creari solitus a Presbyteris Patriarcha successit in locum ejus decretum de Patriarchâ ab Episcopis creando Here you see in the most full expressions that the Presbyters Election imposition of hands and Benediction created their Bishop or Patriark and also chose and made or ordained another Presbyter in his roome and so ordained both Presbyters and Bishops 3. The Tradition or History of Scotland telleth us that their Churches were long governed by Presbyters without Bishops and therefore had no ordination but by Presbyters Hector Boâthius Histor Scot. li. 7. fol. 128. 6 Ante Palladium populi suffragiis ex Monacâis Culdaeis Pontifices assumerentur John Major de gestis Scotorum li. 2. cap. 2. Saith prioribus illis temporibus per sacerdotes monachos sine Episcopis Scoti in fide eruditi sunt Jahan Foâdonus makes this the custome of the Primitive Church Scotichr li. 3. cap. 8. Ante Palladii adventum habebant Scoti fidei Doctores ac Sacramentorum Ministratores Presbyteros solummodo vel Monachos ritum sequentes Ecclesiae primitivae Which Bishop usher reciting de primordiis Eccles Brit. p 798. 799. 800. Saith Quod postremum ab iis accepâssevidetur qui dixerunt ut Johan Semeca in glossa decreti Dist 93. cap. Legimu quod in prima primitiva Ecclesia commune erat officium Episcoporum sacerdotâm nomina erant communia officium commune sed in secunda primitiva câperunt distingui nomina officia So Balaeus Script Brit. Cent. 14. cap. 6. All which assure us that then only Presbyters could ordaine where there were no other the same we may say of the Gothick Churches according to Philostorgius Eclog. li.
unum nomine Vivilo quem nos ante tempus ordinavimus Presbyteros vero quos ibidem reperisti si incogniti fuerint viri illi à quibus sunt ordinati dubium est eos Episcopos fuisse an non qui eos ordinaverunt si bonae actionis cathoâici viri sunt ipsi Presbyteri in ministerio Christi omnemque legem sanctam âdocti apti ab Episcopo suo benedictionem Presbyteratus suscipiant consâârântur siâ ministerio sacro fungantur 11. Of old it was the Custom of the Church that Presbyters joyn with the Bishops in Ordination Concil Carth. c. 3. All the Presbyters present must impose their hands on the head of the Presbyter to be ordained with the Bishop Which fully sheweth that it is an act belonging to their Office and therefore not null when done by them alone in certain cases and that it was but for order sake that they were not to do it without a Bishop who was then the Ruler of the Presbyters in that and other Actions And its worth noting That ib. Can. 4. The Bishop alone without any Presbyters was to lay hands on a Deacon though not on a Presbyter Because he was ordained non ad sacerdotium sed ad ministerium not to the Priesthood but to a Ministery or service which plainly intimateth what Arch-Bishop Usher said to me that Ad Ordinem pertinet ordinare quamvis ad Gradum Episcopalem ordinationes regere The Priesthood containeth a power to ordain Priests but the Episcopal Jurisdiction as such sufficeth to ordain a Deacon Or that the Bishop ordaineth Presbyters as he is a Presbyter his Prelacy giving him the government of the action but he ordaineth Deacons as a Ruler only Arg. II. Ordination by Bishops such as were in Scripture time is valid and lawful But the Ordinations in England now questioned were performed by Bishops such as were in Scripture times Ergo the late ordinations in England now questionedare valid and lawful The Major speaking de nomine officio is granted by all The Minor I prove thus 1. The Ordinations in England now questioned were many or most performed by the cheif particular Pastors of City Churches together with their Colleagues or fellow Presbyters that had Presbyters under them But the Cheif particular Pastors of City Churches having Presbyters under them were such Bishops as were in Scripture times Ergo the Ordinations in England now questioned were performed by Bishops such as were in Scripture times I must first here explain what I mean by a particular Pastor as in an Army or Navy a General Officer that taketh up the General care of all is distinct from the inferiour particular Captains that take a particular care of every Souldier or person under their command so in the Church in Scripture times there were 1. General Officers that took care of many Churches viz. a general care And 2. perticular Bishops and Presbyters that were fixed in every City or perticular Church that took a perticular care of every Soul in that Church It is only these last that I speak of that were Bishops infimi gradûs not such as the Apostles and Evangelists but such as are mentioned Acts 14. 23. and Acts 20. 28. Tit. 1. 5. c. Now for the Major it is notoriously known 1. That ordinarily some of our Ordainers were City Pastors 2. That they had Presbyters under them viz. one or more Curates that administred there with them or in Oratorics called Chappels in the Parish ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is Oppidum and our Boroughs and Towns Corporate are such Cities as are signified by that word And there are few of these but have more Presbyters than one of whom one is the Cheif and the rest ruled by him Besides that one was oft-times President of the Assembly chosen by the rest For instance if I had ever medled in Ordainings as I did not 1. I was my self a Pastor of a Church in a City or Burough 2. I had two or three Presbyters with me that were ruled by me so that I was statedly their Chief I was statedly chosen by the neighbourhood associated Pastors to be their Moderatour which was such a power as made Bishops at Alexandria before the Nicene Council Now that such were Bishops such as were in Scripture-times I prove 1. By the Confession of the Opponents Doctor Hammond and his followers maintain that there were no subject Presbyters instituted in Scripture times and consequently that a Bishop was but the single Pastour of a single ongregation having not so much as one Presbyter under him but one or more Deacons which granteth us more than now I plead for and that afterwards when Believers were encreased he assumed Presbyters in partem curae So that our Bishops which I plead for are of the stature of those after Scripture times in the Doctors sence Defacto this is granted 2. The Bishops in Scripture times were ordained in every City and in every Church Tit. 1 5. and Acts 13. 23. So are ours They had the particular Episcopacy over-sight rule and teaching of all the Flock committed to them Acts 20. 28. and if the Angel of the Church of Ephesus were one cheif he was but one of these and over these in the same Church and charge And so have our Parochial Pastours these very words Acts 20. 28. being read and applyed to them in their ordination They had the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven committed to them and so have ours If it be said that these are but things common to the Bishop with the Presbyter 1. What then is proper to a Bishop To say Ordination is but to beg the question And Ordination it self is not proper in the sense of our own Church that requireth that Ordination be performed as well by the laying on of the hands of the Presbyters as of the Bishop 2. They use themselves to make the governing or superiority over many Presbyters to be proper to a Bishop 3. Those to whom the description of Bishops in Scripture belongeth are truly and properly Bishops But the Description of Bishops in Scripture agreeth at least to the chief particular Pastors of City Churches having Presbyters under them Ergo such are truly and properly Bishops The Minor which only needeth proof is proved by an induction of the several Texts containing such descriptions as Acts 20. and 13. 23. 1 Tim. 3. and 5. 17. Tit. 1. 5. c. 1 Thes 5. 12. Hebr. 13. 7. 17 24. 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3. and the rest 4. If our Parochial Churches or at least our City Churches those in each Town Corporate and Borough be true Churches then the cheif particular Pastors of them are true Bishops but they are true Churches Ergo. Still note 1. That I speak of Churches as governed Societies in sensu Politico and not as a Company of private Christians 2. That I speak only of particular Pastors or Bishops infimi gradus and not of Arch-Bishops and
In that they commonly profess to receive and hold the Ordainers office and power from the Pope The very office it selfe say the Italians being from him And the application and communication of it to the individual subject being from him say the Spaniards and French also But the Pope as such hath no power to make Bishops at all which I prove 1. Because the very office of a Pope as such is not of Christ yea is against Christ and his prerogative and Law and abhorred by him viz. An universal visible Vicar or Head of the Church on earth 2. Because on their own principles the Pope can have no power for want of uninterrupted succession of true Ordination nothing being more plain in Church History scarce than that such succession is long ago nulled by oft interruptions as I have proved elsewhere and as is by many Protestants proved 3. Because the Work that they ordain their Priest to is Idolatry even Bread worship besides Man worship and Image worship 4. Because all their Priests are in the Trent Oath sworn to this Idolatry and sworn to renounce all their Senses to that end and to renounce the Scripture sufficiency and to own the Papal Treasonable usurpation which all are contrary to the Office of Christs Ministers Yet are those that ordained at Rome received by our Prelates when they turn to us without reordination and their Orders are not taken by them to be null which I dispute not now Much less are the late Protestant English Ordinations null II. The Viciousness of such other Prelates Ordinations is proved by all that is said against their Calling it self before And further 1. Those Prelates that are chosen by Magistrates and not by other Bishops or the Presbyters of their Diocess or People what stale hypocritical pretext soever there may be of the contrary are by the Canons of the Universal Church no Prelates But such are those in question Ergo The Major to omit many other Canons I prove from Concil Nic. 2. Can. 3. in Bin To. 2. p. â93 Omnem electionem quae fit a Magistratibus Episcopi vel Presbyteri vel Diaconi irritam manere ex Canone dicente si quis Episcopus secularibus Magistratibus usus per eos Ecclesiam obtinuerit deponatur segregetur emnes qui cum eâ communicant Oportet enim eum qui est promovendus ad Episcopatum ab Episcopis eligi quemadmodum a sanctis Patribus Niceae decretum est in Can. qui dicet Episcopum oportet maxime quidem ab omnibus qui sunt in provincia constitui c. Argument IV. Orders conferred by such as are in orders and have the Power of Order equal with the highest Bishops is valid But the Orders lately conferred in England and Scotland by those called Presbyters were conferred by such as were in Orders and had the power of Order equal with the highest Bishop Ergo The Orders lately conferred in England and Scotland by those called Presbyters was valid As to the Major I remember Arch-Bish Usher told me himself that it was the argument by which he indeavoured to satisfie K. Charles I. 1. That Ordinis est ordinare a man that is in orders as to the sacred Priesthood may caeteris paribus confer Orders it being like Generation or univocal causation 2. That Hierom tells us the Alexandrian Presbyters did more for they made their Bishops And at this day among the Papists men of inferiour Order must with them ordain or consecrate or make their Pope And Bishops make Arch-Bishops How much more may men of the same Order confer what they have that is the Power of the Priesthood or Presbyterate As Abbots who are no Bishops have frequently done 2. And for the Minor Bishop Carleton hath these words in his Treatise of Jurisdiction pag. 7. The Power of Order by all Writers that I could see even of the Church of Rome is understood to be immediately from Christ given to all Bishops and Priests alike by their consecration wherein the Pope hath no priviledge above others Thus teaches Bonavent in 4. sent d. 17. q. 1. August Triumph li de potest Eccles qu. 1. a. 1. Joh. Gerson li. de pot Eccles Consid 1. Cardinal Cusau li. de conced Cathol 2. cap. 13. Cardinal Contarenus Tract de Eccles potest Pontif. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Rom. Pontif. cap. 22. In the Canons of Elfrick ad Wolfin Episc in Spelman p. 576. l. 17 Having shewed that there are seven Orders 1. Ostiarius 2. Lector 3. Exorcista 4. Acolythus 5. Subdiaconus 6. Diaconus 7. Presbyter though the Bishop for Unity sake have the priviledge of Ordination and Inspection yet he is there declared to be but of one and the same 7th Order with the Presbyter Haud pluris interest inter Missalem Presbyterum Episcopum quam quod Episcopus constitutus sit ad ordinationes conferendas ad visitandum seu inspiciendum curandumque ea quae ad Deum pertinent quod nimiae crederetur multitudini si omnis Presbyter hoc idem faceret Ambo siquidem unum tenent eundemque Ordinem quamvis dignior sit illa parâ Episcopi This being the Doctrine of the Church of England even in the times of Popery we have little reason with the Preface to the book of Ordination to say that it is manifest in Gods word that they are distinct orders For as it is added Can. 18. Non est alius ordo constitutus in Ecclesiasticis ministriis humane and all taken in praeter memoratos septem istos c. Dion Petavius Theolog. Dâgmat To. 4. par 2. Tomi 3. Append. c. 2. p. 677 Alterum est quod nunquam iterare illam ordinationem licet ut cum ab haeresi ad Catholicam Ecclesiam revertuntur qui vere ordinati eis denuâ manus impenitur And what ordination is valid among the Papists see in Johnsons answer to my Questions FINIS POSTCRIPT Promiscucus additions to the Chapter 4. of part second out of Mr. Gilbert Burnets bocke called The Vindication of the Church of Scotland c. PAg. 304. 305. Let me here send you to the Masters of Jewish Learning particularly to the eminently learned Dr. Lightfoot who will inform you that in every Synagogue there was one peculiarly charged with the worship called the Bishop of the Congregation the Angel of the Church or the Minister of the Synagogue And besides him there were three who had the Civil judicature who judged also about the receiving of proselites the imposition of hands c. And there were other three who gathered and distributed the almes Now the Christian Religion taking place as the Gospel was planted in Cities where it was chiefly Preached these formes and orders were reteined both names and things Pag. 306. These Presbyters were as the Bishops Children educated and formed by him being in all they did directed by him and accountable to him and were as Probationers for the Bishoprick one of them being alwaies chosen to succeed in the seat
gather from Epiphanius And after him all sorts and Sects of Christians still owned it Even the Donatists and Novatians who had their Bishops as well as others 28. In Scripture times we read not of any meer fixed Bishops of particular Churches who Ordained either Bishops or Presbyters but only Apostles and their unfixed Assistants who had an equal charge of many Churches Not that the Office of the Indefinite unfixed Ministry was not the same with the Office of the fixed Bishops in specie For both had power to do all the Ministerial work as they had a call and opportunity to exercise it But because it being the employment of the Indefinite or unfixed Ministers to Gather and plant Churches before they could be Governed the Ordination of Elders over them was part of the planting of them and so fell to their lot as part of their constituting work 29. How it came to pass that the Itinerant or Indefinite exercise of the Ministry for planting Churches so quickly almost ceased after the Apostles days is a matter worthy to be enquired after For whereas some think that de jure obligatione it ceased with the Apostles as being their proper work that cannot be true 1. Because many others were employed in the same work in the Apostles days 2. Because it is Christ's own description of that Ministry to whom he promiseth his presence to the end of the Age or World Mat. 28. 19 20. 3. Because to this day there is still lamentable necessity of such Five parts in six of the World being yet Infidels 30. It is most probable that this service abated and withered gradually by the sloth and selfishness of Pastors And that it was the purpose of the Apostles that the fixed Bishops should do their part of both these works that is Both to preach for the Converting of all the Infidel Countries near them and also Govern their particular Churches yet not but that some others might be deputed to the Gathering of Churches alone And then these Bishops finding so much work at home and finding that the Itinerant work among Infidels was very difficult by reason of Labour Danger and their want of Apostolical gifts hereupon they spared themselves and too much neglected the Itinerant work Yet I must confess that such Evangelists did not yet wholly cease Eusebius Hist lib. 5. cap. 9. saith Pantaenus is said to have shewed such a willing mind towards the publishing of the Doctrine of Christ that he became a Preacher of the Gospel to the Eastern Gentiles and was sent as far as India For there were I say there were then many Evangelists prepared for this purpose to promote and plant the Heavenly Word with Godly Zeal after the manner of the Apostles 31. It was the ordinary custome of the Apostles to preach and plant Churches first in Cities and not in Country Villages Because in Cities there were 1. the greatest number of Auditors and 2. the greatest number of Converts And so there only were found a sufficient number to constitute a Church Not that this was done through any preeminence of the City or ignobility of Villages but for the competent numbers sake And had there been persons enow for a Church in Villages they would have placed Churches and Pastors there also as at Cenchrea it seems they did 32. When there was a Church of Christians in the City and a few Converts in the Country Villages that joyned with them they all made up but one full Assembly or Church fit for personal Communion for a long time after the Apostles days the main body of the people being still Infidels so that the Christian Churches stood among the Infidels as thin as the Churches of the Anabaptists Separatists and Independants did among us here in England in the days when they had greatest Liberty and countenance 33. Though at first the Bishops being men of the same Office with the other Presbyters were not to do a work distinct and of any other kind than the Presbyters might do but only Lead them and Preside among them in the same work as their Conductors as I said before of a chief Justice c. Yet afterward the Bishop for the honour of his calling appropriating certain actions to himself alone the Presbyters not exercising those acts in time the not exercising them seemed to signifie a want of Office or power to exercise them and so subject Presbyters who were never made by the Apostles that can be proved nor by their command were like a distinct Order or Species of Church-Officers and grew from syn-Presbyters or assessours of the same Office in specie to be as much subjects to the Bishops as the Deacons were to the Presbyters 34. All this while the Bishop with his fellow Elders and Deacons dwelt together in the same City and often in the same House and met in the same Church the Bishop sitting in the midst on a higher seat and the Presbyters on each hand him in a semi-circle and the Deacons standing And the Presbyters Preaching and otherwise officiating as the Bishop appointed who ruled the action And the Converts of the Villages came to this City Church as Members of it and joyned with the rest In the days of the Author of the Epistles ascribed to Ignatius every Church had but One Altar and One Bishop with his Fellow Elders and Deacons as the note of its Unity or Individuation For so many people as had personal Communion at One Altar with the Bishop or Elders were the constitutive parts of the Churches 35. Thus it continued also in the days of Justin Tertullian and Cyprian no Bishop having more than one Church or Altar without any other formed self-communicating Church under him but only Oratories in City or Country 36. The first that brake this Order were Alexandria and Rome where Converts soon multiplyed to a greater number than could meet in one place or Communicate at one Altar wherefore sub-assemblies with their particular Presbyters were there first formed who Communicated distinctly by themselves Though there is no proof that they Communicated there in the Sacrament of a long time after that they met for Preaching and Prayer Yet even in Rome and Alexandria the only places that had more than one stated Assembly for 200 years or more there were not so many Christians then as in the Parish that I now live in See more of my Proof in the beginning of my Church History abridged whos 's first and second Chapters belogn specially to this Treatise and therefore I must refer the Reader to them 37. Even in Epiphanius time about 370 years after Christ it is noted by him as a singularity in Alexandria that they had distinct Assemblies besides the Bishops whereupon Petavius himself largely giveth us notice that in those days except in a few very great Cities there was but one Church-assembly in a Bishops charge 38. After that in Cities or Country Villages the Converts multiplyed into more
of the Churches of Asia had no Bishops but Parish Presbyters under these seven Bishops he should prove it and confute Dr. Hammond that is so contrary to him had he then lived Till then we take it as a contemptible incredible assertion that Asia had but seven Bishops and yet a multitude of Churches If he mean only that these seven were Archbishops his impertinency is too palbable Particularly he saith The Church of Ephesus Smyrna c. Contained a great City and the Country belonging to it c. Ans We talk of Churches under Churches and he talketh only of Cities and Countries Again I say Let him take his Diocess of Infidels Houses and Ground we know no such Churches Page 46. He saith Cenchrea was subject to the Church of Corinth and never had a Bishop of their own But not a syllable of proof It is not a Family Church which we speak of therefore he need not here have mentioned that But a Church associated for ordinary Communion in God's publick worship which cannot be celebrated without a Pastor Let him prove that Cenchrea was such a Church and yet had no Bishop In § 6. p. 49. He would prove that the Circuit of a Church was in the Intention of the Apostles or first Founders the same from the beginning beforâ the division of Churches as after Which I shall in due place disprove His reasons are 1. Because the whole Church since the Apostles days hath so understood the intention of the Apostles Ans 1. This is not proved 2. I shall anone prove the contrary that the Apostles had no intention that Churches should be defined by the limits of the place and Country nor did they themselves ever appoint any such bounds to any one Church and say so far it shall extend Nor did they ever take any but Christians in any Circuits for Members of the Church And I shall prove that all Churches were but such as I described single Churches with their Bishops at the first and that some Villages had Bishops four or five hundred years after And his own Reason that Churches followed the Civil Form proveth the mutability of their bounds seeing the Civil Forms were mutable His next Reason is because that division of Churches which was 300 or 400 Years after Christ with their Limits and Circuits were ordinarily the same which had been from the beginning as divers Councils testifie Ans Those Councils mean no more than that it had been an old or setled Custome as many Learned men have proved And if they could be proved to mean that from the Apostolical plantations the bounds of all the Diocess were set I marvel that any man could believe them But they say no such thing as were it not tedious to the Reader an examination of each particular would shew Else no new Churches and Bishops must be setled in the World but those that the Apostles converted in any Cities between or near them For the unconverted Cities in the inter-spaces were as much those Bishops Diocesses as the Villages of equal distance And then the making of new Cities would have made one a Bishop of many Cities contrary to the Canons His third Reason is that the Distribution of the Churches usually followed the division of the Common wealth Ans 1. If so as is said they must be various and mutable All the World was not divided just as the Roman Empire was And the Imperial divisions had great changes 2. I think it lost labour to dispute with him that holdeth this assimilating the Church to the Civil Form was of Divine Apostolical Institution If any can think so let him give us his proof that the Church Constitution must vary as Monarchical Aristocratical and Democratical States do As Empires and free Cities do And that from the King to the Constable we must have a correspondent Officer And that the Papacy as Capital in the Roman Empire was of Gods Institution And that an Emperour King or popular State may change the Form of the Churches as oft as they may the Form of their subordinate Governments Are not these small Reasons to prove that when the Apostles planted Bishops in all single Churches they intended that those Bishops should be the sole Bishops of many hundred Churches when they should be raised in the Circuit of ground which now is called their Diocesses But more of this in due place But next he appealeth to mens consciences Whether it be not unlikely that there was but one Congregation belonging to these famous Cities towards the end of the Apostles days Of which more afterward In Chap. 4. p. 69. He argueth The Presbyteries ordained by the Apostles were appointed for Diocesses and not to Parishes Therefore the Churches endued with the power of Ecclesiastical Government were not Parishes but Diocesses Ans Our Question is Whether they were single Churches as before defined or only One Diocesan Church made up of many such single Churches 1. If by Presbyteries be meant many Presbyters a College or Consessus I deny the Consequence because every Church that had Government had not such a Presbytery But one Bishop or Pastor did serve for some of the lesser Churches and yet that one had Governing power 2. I deny the Major It was single Churches that had then many Elders set over them 3. Reader it seemeth to me no small disparagement to the Diocesan Cause that the grand Patrons of it so extreamly differ among themselves Dr. Hammond holdeth that in all the Scripture times no one Church had any Presbyters at all save only one single Bishop This Bishop Downame seemeth to hold that every Governed Church had a Presbytery And no one and every one extreamly differ Yet either of them would have censure him that had gain-sayed them His proof of the Antecedent is this They who were appointed to whole Cities and Countries to labour so far as they were able the conversion of all that belonged to God were appointed to Diocesses not to Parishes But c. Ans Is not here frustration instead of edification to the Reader for want of defining a Diocess and a Parish I thought we had talkt of a Diocesan Church and here is a Diocess described which may be a single Church or no Church at all as the Bishop pleaseth Here is not so much as any Christians much less Congregations of them mentioned as the Bishops Flock But many an Apostle Evangelist and Converting Preacher hath been set over Cities and Countries to labour mens Conversion as far as they were able before they had converted any or at least enow to make a Church and after that before they had converted more than one Assembly The Jesuits in the Indies thus laboured in several Provinces before they were Bishops of those Provinces or called them Provincial Churches But now we perceive what he meaneth by a Diocess even a space of Ground containing Inhabitants to be converted if we can I will shorten my Answer to the
in their Communion and that are directed when they meet together to cast him out and not to eat with him 4. Would it not be Calumny according to all rational Laws to accuse all the Churches of Achaia of all those Crimes which the Church at Corinth is accused of without a better proof than this 5. Was it all the Churches of Achaia which 1 Cor. 14. are said to meet all in one place and to have so many Prophets and Interpreters in that one Assembly I am not at leisure to say more of this But who denieth that the same Epistle which was directed first to the Corinthians was secondarily directed to the rest of Achia and to be Communicated to them And yet not the Churches of Achaia be all said to be or dwell at Corinth When 2 Cor. 11. 10. Paul speaketh of the Regions of Achaia ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã he saith that sheweth that the matter belonged to the whole Church of Achaia But how long have they all been challenged to name one Text of Scripture that speaketh singularly of the Church of a Province or Countrey consisting of many particular Churches Yet addeth he In re manifesta non pluribus opus est Cap. 3. He only mentioneth the occasion of Clements Epistle where without any Proof he extendeth the Sedition then raised by them to the disturbance of the Civil Government and Peace And if he had proved as he endeavoureth that by ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is meant the Civil Rulers which is utterly uncertain yet the commendation of their Obedience formerly to the Civil Power as part of the Character of their orderliness and peaceableness doth not prove that Rebellion against them was part of their following disorder Cap. 4. Is to tell us 1. That Clemens puts Obedience to Rulers and due honouring of Presbyters as a Law of God which is not to be doubted of 2. That Bishops were sent by the Apostles as the Apostles by Christ but were joyned only with Deacons to attend them Mark here Reader that he doth not only acknowledge that de facto the Order of Mungrel or Half-Priests was not yet Existent but also that none such were sent by the Apostles and so not Instituted and that Clemens himself taketh notice of no such even in his times But how the Dr. will prove that no great Churches and particularly this of Corinth had but one Bishop you shall see with little satisfaction 3. He noteth that these Bishops thus sent were constituted every where Ecclesias nondum natas sed ad partum bonis Dei auspâcus festinantes brachiis atque ulnis suis susceptum administratum to receive in their Arms and Arms the Churches not yet born but by Gods Blessing hastning to the Birth whereas of his own Head he had before said that the Bishops were sent by the Apostles when Clement saith no such thing but only that they were Constituted sending being the word used of Itenerant Preachers gathering and visiting Churches and Constituting with Ordaining the usual word of Bishops and Presbyters who as such are fixed to particular Churches so now he more boldly forgeteth that Bishops were yea every where to receive Churches that were yet no Churches Where he contradicteth both Scripture and common use of the word Bishop and abuseth Clement 1. Let any Man that can shew us thatin the New Testament the word Bishop is ever used of any Pastor that was not related to a Church and as signifying that Relation and that Bishop and Flock are yet as much Relatives as King and Kingdom 2 Let him shew that can that the word was used otherwise by Christians for many a hundred years after Christ Though I grant that Ministers in general were and may be ordained sine titulo to Preach and gather Churches and help others yet never Bishops the word signifying an Over-seer of the Flock or Church to which he is related 3. If it were certain that the futurity of believing mentioned by Clemens had relation to the Constitution of Bishops and not to the Apostles Preaching only yet Clemens saith not that there were yet no Believers or no Churches where they were constituted Bishops Where there were but a few Believers the Apostles placed Bishops and Deacons over those few who should receive others into the same Society till it was full and no further who should after believe It is an abuse of Clemens to say it was to Churches yet not born when he hath no such word As if it could not be for future Believers unless at present there were no Believers And it is an abuse of him to seign him to assert that the Apostles did every where as soon as they had once Converted one Man presently make that new Baptized Novice a Bishop before they Converted any more saving perhaps one or two to be his Deacons Or that they used to make Deacons or Bishops either to Churches future that were yet no Churches When as the Scripture telleth the contrary most expresly that the Church at Jerusalem was before the Deacons Act. 7. That they ordained Elders in every Church Act. 14. 23. and not in no Church as he implyeth And Tit. 1. 5. every City is equivalent to every Church for it was not in every Infidel City that had no Christians Which beyond all modest contradiction is proved by the Rules given to Timothy and Titus for the Ordination of Bishops and Deacons Who were to be approved chosen persons that had ruled their own Houses well not Novices apt to teach well reported of those without which supposeth some to be within Tim. 3. 14 15. These things I write unto thee that thou mayest know how to behave thy self in the House of God which is the Church of the Living God a Pillar and Basis of the truth The first that were converted did not always prove the fittest to be Bishops perhaps they might be Women or weakly guiâted To feign that the Apostles did that every where which none can prove that ever they did once to make a Bishop and Deacons of the two or three first Novice-converts before there were any more Converted and to make Bishops and Deacons before there were any Christians to constitute Churches meerly for future Churches this is not Clemens act whoever else will own it 4. Lastly he noteth here that this was done by the Revelation of the Spirit whereby they examined and tryed who was worthy of that Dignity And 1. What use for examination who was worthy where there was no other to stand in Competition and where the first Convert still was taken Election is è multis And if he be compelled to grant that there were more Christians over whom the Bishop was set it is a Contradiction to say that a Bishop and his Flock though small is no Church 2. It is hard to believe that the multitude of ignorant Lads and wicked Men that are now set over Churches are Constituted by this Apostolical choice and
Many a time I have tried it and could never satisfie my Conscience without more frequent long and earnest exhortation and prayer with it than ever I knew Chancelor or Bishop use to fourty delinquents set together The present Pastor hath opportunity to do this But the Chancelor or Diocesane hath not I never heard of any such means used in their Courts that was of such a nature as true Pastoral exhortations are to melt a sinners heart into repentance But of this before 2. Another case of perticular judgment is what sinner in his sicknness before death is fit for Absolution Here they cannot make the Bishop Judge who is many a mile off nor can they tell how to deny it to be without the office of the Parish Pastor and therefore they allow him to be the Absolver and yet lest he be the Judge they bind him to Absolve all that require it and do but say they repent which must needs be a pernicious deceiving course to impenitent souls when it is known that nothing is more ordinary with many in sickness and in health than to say I repent of some one gross disgraceful sin and live in others worse without any profession of repentance and die so at last And must I absolve him from that sin which he repenteth of without the rest or from all because he repenteth of one yea commonly men have a Confession which is like a Profession of their sin and a Repentance which declareth it self to be Impenitence it self some stoutly some stupidly saying I comfess I am a swearer and a drunkard a whoremonger but you Precisians are as bad and worse for you are but hypocrites I repent of my sins daily and aske God mercy though I commit them daily and I doubt not of forgiveness for all are sinners and if one of these say also on his sick bed he repenteth without any signs of serious contrition or change of heart we must Absolve him But yet though we are not free in this it is no Diocesanes proper work and therefore requireth not their office 3. Another Judgment of individuals necessary is who is to be baptized at least of persons at age in Infidell Countries or such as ours where many thousand Anapabtists Children are unbaptized till they come to age The question is not what shall be the Law and Rule whether Scripture or Canon but who shall judge whether the person be capable according to the rule Doubtless every one hath not faith The profession that entitleth to baptisme must be 1. Of the whole essence of our part of the Covenant faith consent and future obedience 2. With tolerable understanding of what they say 3. With seeming seriousness 4. With seeming Voluntariness and fixed resolution Now how can a Diocesan judge of this that is not within many miles of the place nor never saw the person in his life It hath ever been confessed to be part of the Baptizers work though under the Government of Magistrates and in the Church the present Bishop is not denyed a negative vote or a guiding judgment in the affair 4. The very fame throughout is to be said of judging what individual persons in a Parish are grown up to a capacity of the Lords Supper whither it be done in confirmation or at any other time certainly they must renew their baptismal Covenant and moreover understand the sense of the Sacrament c. But shall the Diocesan that never seeth one of an hundred of his Diocese judge of every one of these I will stay no longer on such instances I think we need no more III. If the cases of Testaments Administrations Licenses to marry judgement of cases of divorce dispensations and such like be pretended as the proper works of Bishops I think I need not stay to confute them while it is known that so much as is not every Pastors work in it belongeth to the Magisirate and is done among us by his Commission and that usually by Laymen IV. We have therefore the Government of the Ministers themselves to speak of next which consisteth 1. In ordination 2. Instituting and inducting 3. Licensing 4. Suspending ejecting silencing and degrading 1. And ordination being that great and notable work which anciently was taken to be all that was proper to the Bishop by many of the Fathers as well as Hierome this above all must be well considered And 1. Let us consider of the Reasons for it and 2. Of the different cases 1. The reasons given for appropriating ordination to Diocesans or Bishops are these 1. Because no man can give that which he hath not 2. Because it is an act of superiority 3. Because none but Bishops ever did it in Scripture times or since without the Churches condemnation 1. The first of these reasons Dr. Hammond Praemon Dissert is earnest in urging To which I say 1. It is granted that no man giveth that which be hath not But Presbyters have the office of Presbyters therefore by your supposition they may give it Obj. But saith he Presbyters had never a power given by the ordainers to ordain Ans I deny it and prove the contrary whatever the ordainers mean 1. Those who in their ordination had an Office Power or Keys of Christs making conteining the power of ordination delivered to them Ministerially had the power of ordination delivered to them Ministerially But all true Pastors or Presbyters ordained in England had an Office Power or Kâyâs of Christs making conteining the power of ordination delivered to them Ministerially Ergo they had the power of ordination so delivered Nothing needs proof but the Minor And 1. That Christ and not the Bishops made the true Pastoral Office or Keyes is past doubt among sober Christians 2. And that it was the ordainers meaning to deliver them no new humane office but that which Christ by his Spirit and Apostles at least made instituted and described I will stand to the ordainers own profession 3. And if so I think they will confess that if they did mistake and think that the office conteined not what it conteined indeed their mistake will not disable the ordained Minister no more than the Errour of a Recorder or Steward who thinketh when he giveth the Mayor his Oath that his office hath lesser power than it hath But Gods making and not mans meaning must determine of the power 4. Therefore all the question is whether God put the power of ordination into the Pastoral office Of which now I will say but this that Dr. Hammond confesseth that there was no Pastor ordained in Scripture times that had not the power of ordination And I shall after prove that no other should be introduced since by men 2. And farther the Church of England appointeth Ministers to impose hands with the Diocesan in ordination Therefore they take not ordination but only a Superiority in ordination to be proper to their office As Bishop Downame and other of them also openly hold and profess
2. The 2d Reason that ordination is an Act of Superiority 1. Is granted because the person to be ordained is yet no Minister of Christ and therefore is Inferior to the Presbyters that ordain him till he have received his office 2. But that afterward the ordainer must be of an higher order as well as greater antiquity in office than him that is ordained by him I deny For than Bishops could not ordain Bishops nor Arch-Bishops ordain Arch-Bishops and who shall ordain the Patriarcks or if you be for him the Pope Have they all superiours to do it 3. The third Reason from History I shall confute in due place only here retorting it thus In Scripture times no fixed Diocesan ever did ordain therefore none such should now ordain 2. But next let us distinguish 1. Between ordaining to the Ministry in the Universal Church without affixing to a particular Charge and the fixing of a Pastor in that particular Church And 2. Between ordaining a Bishop or Plenary Pastor and a half Pastor called now a Presbyter 1. As Baptism as such doth joyn a man to no particular Church but only to the Universal but yet they that have opportunity should secondarily by a faither act of consent also joyn themselves to the particular Church where they live but if they live where they have no such opportunity they must do it after as soon as such opportunity cometh Even so ordination to the sacred Ministry as such doth fix a man to no particular Church but make him a Minister of Christ to the world for mens convertion and to the Universal Church for Christians edification as he shall have any particular opportunity for exercise which the Church of England expresseth by the words when thou shalt be thereunto Lawfully called meaning a call ad exercitium to the exercise of the office received But yet where there are not many unchurched Infidels to be converted but all profess Christianity it is not fit such shall be ordained sine titulo as they speak lest it occasion irregularity and poverty in the Clergy but be at once affixed to a particular Church which fixed Ministers are in Scripture usually called Bishops Presbyters and Pastors with relation to their particular flock or Church besides their primary relation to the World and to the universal Church from which the extraordinary Officers were called Apostles and Evangelists and the ordinary ones Ministers of Christ in general Though I deny not but even the unfixed may be called Bishops Elders and Pastors as being virtually such and in an Office which wanteth nothing but a particular Call to that fixation and exercise Now 1. To call a Minister already made such to a particular Church and so to make a Bishop or Pastor or Presbyter of him doth not necesarily require a Diocesan For 1. The people that are at liberty may do it and ordinarily have done as Blondel hath fully proved And in our times if a free people only choose a man already ordained and take him for their Pastor no man taketh this for a nullity no not the Prelatists themselves 2. And a Pastor Magistrate or Prince may do it without a Bishop as none deny 3. And a Minister may frequently on just occasion be removed from place to place and needeth not a Bishop for every change at least as to the being of his office 2. And as to the first ordination of a Minister as such if there must be a Diocesan to do it this is gathered either from the nature of the thing or from divine institution 1. As to the nature of the thing it sheweth no such necessity but rather contradicteth it for 1. As to Efficiency if a Bishop or Arch-Bishop or Primate or Patriark may be made without the agency of any one of a higher order then so may a Presbyter For the reason is the same 2. And as to the object 1. The first object of the sacred Ministry as such is the Infidel world to whom they are to Preach the Gospel and offer Christ and Salvation and beseech them in Christs stead to be reconciled to God to call them from darkness to light and the power of Satan unto God And to think that none but Apostles should do this and that all the world must be left to the Devil when the Apostles were dead is an unchristian thought To those that must do this Christ promised his presence to the end of the world Now. 1. The Infidel world is no more under the power of a Diocesan than of a Presbyter If it be it is either 1. As he is a Prelate 2. Or as a Diocesan 1. Not as a Prelate in general For if the world be the object of the Ministers office it can be no more of the Prelates as such 2. Not as a Diocesan For the Infidel world Egypt Tartary Japan China Persia c. is no part of any Bishops Diocese 2. And as to the work of a Preacher to the Infidels it is the very fame whether it be done by a Bishop or a Presbyter There is nothing to do for them but preach and baptize and neither of those is a work proper to a Bishop If it be said that it is not because of the object or the work are proper to a Bishop but because the sending forth a man for that work is proper to him I answer that when I have proved past contradiction that he fendeth a man to do as high a work as he could there do himself and to the very same it sheweth that ex natura rei there needeth no higher order than the Ministers to send him No more than there needeth a higher progenitor than a man to beget a man 2. And as his office is related to the Church-Universal all the same argumentation will hold good For the Church-Universal is the object of the Ministers office as well as of the Prelates and no more than his own Diocese is the special charge of a Diocesan as such and the work to which the Minister is ordained in general to the whole Church can no otherwise be proved less than the Prelates unless by proving a Divine institution which they will grant 2. And as for a Divine institution as to the ordaining power I will say but this much which may take with cordate men till I come to speak more largely of the point 1. That Doctor Hammond and as far as he knew all that owned the same cause with him doth grant that the Apostles nor any other in Scripture times did not so much as institute the office of a Presbyter as distinct from a Bishop much less ever ordain any one to such an office And that in all their Instructions to Timothy and Titus about ordination of Bishops or elders and Deacons they have not a syllable about any ordination or qualification of such subject Presbyters but only about ordaining Bishops Therefore if Bishops be the successors of the Apostles in ordination they cannot do
more than they did nor ordain any other Presbyters than Bishops 2. That if Bishops were the Institutors of Presbyters as distinct from them by a Power of parcelling out their office to others than Bishops yet have power to make more sorts of sacred Ministers by subdivision of their power They may make one office only to Preach and another only to baptize and another only to pray and another only to administer the Lords Supper and another to Excommunicate and why not another to ordaine and so ordination shall not be proper to a Bishop And so a Chancellor that hath the parcel of excommunicating and absolveing is as true a Clergy man and of as high original as a Presbyter 3. But that which Dr. Hammond betaketh himself to at last in his Answer to the London Ministers is as miserable a shift as ever a poor cause was reduced to that had never stood if it had not been more beholden to the Sword than to such foundations he durst not say that the Presbyters office is not of Divine institution And yet it was not instituted in Scripture times But it was instituted in Saint Johns time by him a lone after the writing of his Gospel which according to Jerome was about a year or two before he dyed and the Revelation which according to Jrenaeus li. 5. was about four or five years before he dyed And so all the Bishops power of ordaining subject Presbyters dependeth 1. On one Apostles Institution 2. Not proved at all by Scripture 3. But only by Church-History which hath not a syllable of such a thing as that Saint John did institute the Presbyters office âââ And this is feigned to be done by Saint John many years after Peter and Paul are said to be Bishops of Rome and James of Jerusalem and Peter of Antioch and Mark of Alexandria Yea about thirty two years after Mark was put to death according to Eusebius see then what proof the Doctor giveth us that even at Rome and Alexandria all that time there was no Bishop over Presbyters nor any that ever ordained a Presbyter that was not a Bishop 3. But suppose the Divine institution be proved of Bishops ordination of subject Presbyters let these three things more be noted 1. That at least we have brought it to the Ancients measure that excepta sola ordinatione except only ordination here is no work for to make a Bishops office of but what a Presbyter may do 2. That in this ordination they themselves acknowledg that the Presbyters may joyn even in imposing hands which is the note of Superiority the lesser being blessed by the greater and so Presbyters also by Epiphanius's leave do generare patres And Bishops have not the sole power of ordination but the chief 3. And whether a chief power in investing men in the Ministerial office do make a distinct order or office de nomine let them contend that please dere if this wereall we were agreed For my part I had rather that Bishops had not only a chief power as moderators But even a Negative voice in ordination yea and in Removals and fixing of Ministers than not For in so weighty a business two Locks and Keyes to keep out bad men are surer than one And the poor silenced Nonconformists have yielded to much more than this But yet there remaineth one part of the Diocesans work to be considered viz The judging of Heresie and Schism and the silencing suspending and degrading of Ministers that deserve it The Question is whether this be not proper to the Prelates office And here no man can wish us to swallow the terms of the questions whole without distinguishing as if they signifyed but one thing 1. As judging is 1. Either private by discerning ones own duty which belongeth to every private man 2. Or publick for the deciding of a controversieâ and this as 1. Civil 2. Or properly Ecclesiastical so in several manners and to several ends Private men Magistrates and Pastors may judge of Heresie c. 2. And as for suspending silencing and degrading either 1. It signifieth some Correction by the Sword or force and that undoubtedly belongeth only to the Magistrate and to no private man nor Clergy man at all as such 2. A Private man and much more a Congregation may and must refuse a notorious Intolerable Minister whether Insufficient Heretical or wicked and Malignant they must withdraw from him and not take him for their guide and Pastor nor trust their Souls upon his care and conduct If Cyprian had never said Plebs maximum habet potestatem vel sacerdotes dignos eligendi vel indignos necesandâ the Law of nature saith enough as it doth warrant a man to refuse an unskilful or malicious murdering Physician And Scripture requireth every man to take heed of false Teachers and deceivers and from such to turne away 3. To silence a false Teacher by Argument by word or writeing belongeth to every man that is called to contend earnestly for the faith and to answer a fool according to his folly 4. To perswade him by Argument to give over Preaching or to reform his errours 1. A private man may do it privately 2. Any Minister of Christ may do it both ex charitate ex officio authoritate as a Minister of Christ in his name For as a Physician doth medicate another Physician not as another man but as a Physician and a judge doth judge the cause of another Judge not as a private man but as a Judge so a Minister of Christ doth Preach to a Minister and perswade him not as a private man but as a Minister not as his superiour but as a Messenger of Christ who is his Soveraigne 5. Yea to Command such a man ex authoritate Nuââii vel Ministri by Ministerial authority in the name of Christ to forsake his Heresie and wickedness or to forbear the Sacred Ministry belongeth to Ministers of the same office For if a Minister Preach or speak to another Minister as a Minister himself and in Christs name then no doubt but he may command in Christs name which is but by Ministerial office to publish the Commands of Christ No doubt but he may say to another Minister I Counsel yea Command you in the name of Christ by vertue of my office and his word to forbear Adultery Theft Blasphemy Heresie or else to forbear the Sacred Ministry Yea he may say thus with due reverence to a Bishop so that for a silencing by Reason or force or by Ministerial authority and command as from Christ there is no need of the office of a Diocesan 6. The question therefore is whether we must have a Bishop to silence men by bare Authority without convincing effectual argument satisfying his Conscience or else by a distinct Superior Authority more powerful than the Ministers And 1. Seing the Diocesan as such hath not the Sword it is certain that he silenceth no further than he prevaileth
that other a Tutor And so if a Physician commit his work statedly to another or a Pilot or the Master of a Family he maketh the other a Physician a Pilot a Master And so if a Bishop or Presbyter commit his work statedly to another he maketh that other a Bishop or Presbyter And then that Bishop or Presbyter so made is himself obliged as well as empowred and the work that he doth is his own work and not his that delivered him his Commission So that this doing these twelve parts of a Bishops work per alium is a meer mockery unless they speak unfitly and mean the making of all those to be Bishops as they are or else by perfidious usurpation casting their trust and work on others For if they could prove that God himself had instituted the Species of Sub-presbyters it would be to do their own work and not another mans My next proof of the limitation of Churches in Scripture times is that Deacons and Bishops were distinct Officers appointed to the same Churches The Church which the Deacon was related to was the very same and of the same extent with the Church which the Bishop was related to as is plain in all Texts where they are described Act. 6. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 7. c. But it is most clear that no Deacon then had the charge of many hundred Churches or more than one such as I have described Therefore neither had the Bishop of that Church They that have now extended the Office of the Deacons further and have alienated them from their first works of attending at the Sacred Tables and taking care of the Poor cannot deny but that this was at least a great part of their work in the Scripture times and some Ages after at least when Jerome ad Evagr. described the Offices of the Presbyters and Deacons And was any man then made a Deacon to a Diocess or to many hundred Churches or to more than one Did he attend the Tables of many Churches each Lords day at the same time If you say that there were many Deacons and some were in one Church and some in another it is true that is They were in several Assemblies which were every one a true Church and they were oft many in one Assembly But there was no one that was related to Many stated Church Assemblies nor to a Church of a lesser size or magnitude than the Bishop was 5. And that there was no Church then without a Bishop one or more is evident from Act. 14. 23. They ordained them Elders in every Church compared with other Texts that call them Bishops And Doctor Hammond sheweth that these Elders were Bishops And indeed it was not a Church in a proper political sense that had no Bishops formally or eminently No more than there can be a Kingdom without a King a School without a School-master or a family without a Master Object They are called Churches Act. 14. 23. before they had ordained Elders Answ 1. It is not certain from the Text for the name might be given from their state in fieri or which they were now entring into 2. If it were so it is certain that the appellation was equivocal as it is usual to distinguish the Kingdom from the King the School from the School-master the Family from the Master but not in the strict political sense of the words for that comprehendeth both 3. The truth is they were true political Churches before For they had temporary unfixed Bishops even the Apostles and Evangelists that converted them and officiated among them Otherwise they could have held no Sacred Assemblies for holy Communion and the Lords Supper as having none to administer it The fixing of peculiar Bishops did not make them first Churches but made them setled Churches in such an order as God would establish 6. Lastly The setling of Churches with Bishops in every City Tit. 1. 5. doth shew of what magnitude the Churches were in the Scripture times For 1. It is known that small Towns in Judea were called Cities 2. And that Creete which was called Hecatompolis as having an hundred Cities must needs then have small ones and near together 3. And it is a confessed thing that the number of Converts was not then so great as to make City Churches so numerous near as our Parishes are And if the consideration of all this together will not convince any that the Churches that had Bishops in Scripture times consisted not of many stated Assemblies as afore described but of one only and were not bigger than our Parishes let such enjoy their error still CHAP. IV. The same proved by the Concession of the most Learned Defenders of Diocesane Prelacy THough the Scripture Evidence be most satisfactory in it self yet in controversie it much easeth the mind that doubteth to find the Cause fully and expresly granted by those that most learnedly defend those consequents which it overthrows And if I do not bring plain Concessions here I will not deprecate the Readers indignation 1. Among all Christians the Papists are the highest Prelatists And among all Papists the Jesuits and among all the Jesuits Petavius who hath written against Salmasius c. on this Subject Petavius Dissert Ecclesiast de Episcop dignit jurisd p. 22. concludeth his first Chapter in which he had cited the chiefest of the Fathers Hactenus igitur ex antiquorum authoritate conficitur primis temporibus Presbyterorum Episcoporum non tantum appellationes sed etiam ordines in easdem concurrisse personas iidem ut essent utrique i. e. Hitherto it is proved by the Authority of the Ancients that in the first times not only the Names but the Orders of Presbyters and Bishops did concurr into the same persons so that both were the same men And if so I shall shew the consequents anon And pag. 23. He thus beginneth his third Chapter as opening the only necessary way to avoid the Scripture Arguments against Episcopacy Si quis amnia illa scripturae loca diligenter expendat id necessario consequens ex illis esse statuet eos ipsos qui ibi Presbyteri vocantur plus aliquid quam simplices fuisse presbyteros cujusmodi hodieque sunt nec dubitabit quin Episcopi fuerint iidem non vocabulo tantum sed re etiam potestate i. e. If any one will diligently weigh all those places of Scripture he will conclude that this is the necessary consequent of them that those that are there called Presbyters were somewhat more than simple Presbyters and such as now they are and he will not doubt but the same men were Bishops not only in name but in deed and in power Pag. 24. Existimo Presbyteros vel omnes vel eorum plerosque sic ordinatos esse ut Episcopi pariter ac presbyteri gradum obtinerent I think that either all or most of the Presbyters were so ordained as that they obtained both the degree of Bishop and
and one Bishop XIII In a Roman Council sub Silvest it 's said Ab omni Ecclesia eligatur consecrandus Episcopus nullo de membris Ecclesiae intercedente omni Ecclesia conveniente nulli Episcopo liceat sine cuncta Ecclesia a novissimo gradu usque ad primum ordinare Neophytum Silvester Papa dixit A nobis incipientes moderamine lenitatis judicare commonemus ut nulli Episcopo liceat quemlibet gradum Clerici ordinare aut consecrare nisi cum omni adunata Ecclesia si placet dixerunt Episcopi placet What can be more fully said Let the Bishop to be ordained be chosen by all the Church no one of the Members of the Church being wanting and all the Church meeting together Let it be lawful for no Bishop without the whole Church to ordain Not to ordain or consecrate any degree of Clergy-Man but with the whole Church together in one And how great then were the Churches when even at Rome and all about it The whole Church united and every member could meet together at every Ordination and Consecration I scarce know how a testimony can be plainer XIV The Concil Sardic which first began to befriend the Grandeur of the Roman Bishop was it that first forbad Bishops to be ordained in small Villages yet note that even there it was not absolutely forbidden to all Villages but only to such Villages and small Cities where one Presbyter was enough But they allowed a Bishop to the Cities Quae Episcopos habuerunt siqua tam populosa est Civitas vel Locus mark Locus as distinct from Civitas qui mereatur habere Episcopum So that if there were but people enough for more than one Presbyter they allowed them a Bishop And Can. 14. It is decreed that As no Lay-man must be above three Weeks from Church so no Bishop from his own Church at another place Whereas if a Bishop have many Churches or many hundred or a thousand he could be but at one in a Year or two or three or more if he did nothing but travel from parish to Parish Only in the next Canon those that have Farms or Lands in the Country are dispensed with for three Weeks to be absent from their own Churches so they go to another XV. In the Epistle of the 1. Concil Nic. ad Eccles Aegypt in Crab. pag. 262. T. 1. Presbyters were to be made Solummodo sivideantur digni populus eos elegerit condecernente simul designante maxime Alexandriae Civitatis Episcopo Still the people that had the choice were no more than could meet to chuse And even in the Arabick Canons ascribed to this Council by some of late it 's said Can. 72. Sic Episcopi Sacerdotes si Civitates suas Altaria propter alia majora relinquerent male facerent which shews that each City even then had but one Altar or Meeting for Sacramental Communion though when these were written there were other Churches in Villages that had Altars And in Pisan Can. 57. Archi-presbyter in absentia Episcopi honoretur tanquam Episcopus quia est loco ejus sit caput Sacerdotum qui sub potestate ejus sunt in Ecclesia The Bishop then was but such a Head of Priests in the same Church as an Arch-Presbyter might be in his absence And Cap. 9. The Vote of the whole Diocess without the Arch-bishop shall not serve to chuse a Bishop though all gathered together XVI The Concil Vasense granted leave for Presbyters to preach and Deacons to read Homilies in Country Parishes which sheweth both that Bishops were the ordinary Preachers to their whole Flocks before and that these Parishes were yet but new and perhaps but Chappels that yet had not Altars and the Lord's Supper XVII Binnius in Concil Ephes 1. To. 2. cap. 20. saith Dalmatius told the Emperor that there were six thousand Bishops under the Metropolitan sent to the Council that were against Nestorius And there was a great number on the other side with Johan Antiochen who cast out Cyril and Memnon How great think you were these Bishops Dioceses XVIII Concil Carth. 3. cap. 39. 40. in Crab some would have had many twelve Bishops at each Bishop's Ordination but Aurelius desired it might be but three because Crebro pene per diem Dominicum ordinationes habemus they had Ordinations almost every Lord's day and Tripoli had but five Bishops How big were these Dioceses where the Bishops could meet almost every Lord's day for Ordinations and five under Tripoly was an exceeding small number And cap. 40. If a Bishop were accused at his Ordination the Cause was to be tried In eadem plebe cui ordinandus est And surely it was not to be in many hundred Congregations at once or per vices XIX Concil Antioch before this Can. 5. pag. 321. in Crab Siquis Presbyter aut Diaconus Episcopum proprium contemnens se ab Ecclesia segregaverit seorsum colligens Altare constituit vel in secunda edit privatim apud se collectis populis Altare erigere ausus fuerit c. This sheweth 1. That the Presbyters then joyned with the Bishop in the same Church 2. And that then each Church had but one Altar and to erect another Altar elsewhere was to set up another Church Can. 8. Presbyteri qui sunt in agris Canonicas Epistolas dare non possunt Chorepiscopi autem dare possunt This sheweth that then the Country Villages had Chorepiscopos with Presbyters Can. 10 Qui in vicis vel possissionibus Chorepiscopi nominantur quamvis manus impositionem Episcoporum perceperint ut Episcopi consecrati sint tamen Sanctae Synodo placuit ut modum proprium recognoscant ut gubernent sibi subjectas Ecclesias earumque moderamine curaque contenti sint This sheweth that then the Churches in Villages had their Bishops though under the City Bishops Can. 16. A Bishop that put himself into a vacant Church without the consent of a perfect Council where must be the Metropolitane must be cast out etsi cunctus populus quem diripuit eum habere delegerit which sheweth that the whole people were no more than could meet to chuse him Can. 17 18 21. imply the same Episcopus ab alia Parochia non migret ad aliam nec sponte sua insiliens nec vi coactus a populo nec ab Episcopis necessitate compulsus Maneat autem in Ecclesia quam primitus adeo sortitus est A Church and a Parish are here the same and no greater than that the people could be the compellers which implieth their concurrence which could not be in a Diocess of many hundred Churches but in one only Can. 23. The Goods of the Church are faithfully to be kept which also are to be dispensed by the Judgment and Power of the Bishop to whom is committed the people and the souls that are congregated in the Church and it 's manifest what things belong to the Church with the
c. 12. where he reciteth the same Epistle that Socrates doth But I would pretend to no more certainty than is evident II. Pius Episcop Roman in Biblioth Pat. Tom. 3. p. 15. Epist Justo Episcopo inquit Presbyteri Diaconi non ut Majorem sed ut Ministrum Christi te observent salutat te senatus paâper Christi apud Romam constitutus saluta omne Collegium fratrum qui tecum sunt in Domino And epist prima eidem Justo he reckoneth Timotby and Mark with the Presbyters educated by the Apostles Now if they were of the Senate the Colledge and the same name Presbyters as Bishops had we have no reason to think that they had not the power of the keys III. Tertullian de poenit to cast himself down at the feet of the Presbyters which implyeth that they had the power of the keys for Absolution And those whom he calleth Seniores Apolog. managed the Discipline and that not in a Chancellors Court but in the same Congregations where and when they Assembled for publick worship If any will say that Bishops are here included I will not deny it But if they will say that when he nameth the Seniors and Presbyters without distinction that he excludeth all save the Bishop alone I shall not believe that Tertullian speaketh so un-intelligibly Unless they will follow Dr. Hammond and believe as I do not that there was yet but One Presbyter who was the Bishop in a Church or in most Churches which de facto would be for us IV. The Testimonies of Clem. Roman Ignat. Justin Martyr may be gathered out of the words forecited Hierom's Testimony in this case is so plain and full and trite in every writing Epist ad Evagr. passim making them the Apostles Successors and the same with the Bishops except only in ordination that I will not trouble you with reciting it V. Cyprian neither would nor could govern his Church without the concurrence of the Presbyters before cited De Gaia desiderastis ut de Philumeno Fortunato hypodiaconis Favorino acolutho rescribam cui rei non potui me solum judicem dare cum multi adhuc de Clero absentes sint nec locum suum vel sero repetendum putaverint haec singulorum tractanda sit limanda plenius ratio non tantum cum collegis meis sed cum plebe ipsa universa Epist 36. edit Goulart He sheweth that it is the Clergies duty to take care of the widows the sick the poor the strangers he the Bishop was then absent So also Ep. 37. And Epist 10. he reprehendeth the Presbyters for reconciling and absolving the Lapsed overhastily and with neglect and contempt of the Bishop but not as if the work were not their office work to do Nay he giveth us this full plain testimony that even in this publick Absolution in foro exteriore the true custom of the Church was for the Bishop and his Presbyters together to impose hands on the penitent and so absolve them receive them and give them the Sacrament Pag. 30. saith he Nam cum in minoribus peccatis agant peccatores poenitentiam justo tempore secundum disciplinae ordinem ad exomologesin veniant per impositionem manus Episcopi Cleri jus Communionis accipiant Nunc crudo tempore persecutione adhuc perseverante nondum restituta Ecclesiae ipsius pace ad Communicationem admittuntur offertur nomen eorum nondum poenitentia acta nondum exomologesi facta nondum manu e. s ab Episcopo Clero imposita Eucharistia illis datur Epist 5. p. 15. He writeth to the Clergy in his absence to do the work of Discipline even their own part and his and as no man doubteth but they did the whole work in the publick assembly when he was absent so long time so that you may see what kind of Chappel meetings they had it being the custome for encouragement of sufferers to go to the Confessors and visit them and there celebrate the Sacrament he perswadeth them that the people may not go crowding by great companies at once lest it stir up envy and they be denied entrance it's like they were in Prison and lose all while they are insatiable to get more But that one Presbyter and one Deacon go one day and another another day by turns because the Change of persons and vicissitude of meeters would break the envy and all should be done in meekness and humility But the words I insist on are Peto vos pro fide religione vestra fungamini illic Vestris partibus meis ut nihil vel ad disciplinam vel ad diligentiam desit And if the whole work of Discipline be such as is partly their own part and partly what they may do in the Bishops absence in his stead it is within the power of their function For a Lay-man or a Deacon cannot do all the Presbyters work in his absence And Epist 6. p. 17. Having exhorted the sufferers or confessors not to grow proud by it and lamented that some after sufferings grew insolent and were a shame to the Church he addeth Nec a Diaconis aut Presbyteris regi posse Shewing that even the Government of the Confessors belonged to them both in their places And of himself he saith to his Presbyters Solus rescribere nihil potui quando a primordio Episcopatus mei statuerim nihil sine consilio vestro sive Consensu Plebis meae privata sententia gerere sed cum venero in Commune tractabimus As to them that say This was only Cyprians arbitrary condescension I answer 1. He saith Non potui And 2. he elsewhere speaketh of it as due 3. It agreeth with the Canons and customes of those times 4. Cyprian pleadeth so much for the Bishops prerogative that we have little reason to think him both so submissive and imprudent as to bring up ill customes and teach the Ministers and people to expect that as their part which belonged not to them and so to corrupt the Church And in the Ep. 11. p. 32. again he saith Ante exomologesin gravissimi extremi delicti factam ante manum ab Episcopo Clero in poenitentem impositam offerre lapsis pacem Eucharistiam dare id est sanctum Domini corpus profanare audeant The same he hath again Ep. 12. p. 37. with an examinabuntur singula praesentibus judicantibus vobis that is the people to shew how great the Church was Afterward Ep. 14. he directeth the Presbyters to absolve those by Imposition of hands themselves without him that are infirm and in danger but that the rest must be publickly reconciled in the Church praesente stantium plebe To recite all of this nature in Cyprian would be too long VI. I will add next a General Testimony viz. the constant custome of all Churches even Rome it self where the Presbyters have Governed without a Bishop in the intervals when
he knoweth how little of it will be done And who will use his wit learning and zeal to plead his cause and his parts and office thus to serve his designs and gratifie him who considereth what it is to be a Bishop a Christian or a man CHAP. XVI That the English Diocesane Government doth change this office of a Presbyter of Gods institution into another quantum in se of humane invention I Come now to prove the Minor proposition of my Argument That the Diocesane Government deposeth the Office of Presbyters which God hath instituted as much as in them lieth By which limitation I mean that if we would judge of the Power and Obligation of Presbyters as the Prelatical constitution de facto doth describe it and not as God describeth it contrarily we must take it for another thing For the proof of this it must 1. be considered what is Essential to the office and 2. How somewhat Essential is taken from them I. And 1. we grant as before that no Action whatsoever as performed at the present or for some excepted season is Essential to the Pastoral office A man ceaseth not to be a Preacher or Pastor as soon as the Sermon is done and he is out of the Church When a man is asleep or in a journey he endeth not his office Nor yet when he is interrupted by business sickness or persecution Yea if he were so sick as to be sure never to exercise his office more he keepeth the Title with respect to what he hath already done 2. Yet Exercise as Intended and as the Relative end or Terminus of the Obligation and Authority is Essential to the Office For when it is a Relation which we question and that consisteth in Obligation and Authority there is no doubt but it is ad aliquid and is specified by the Action or Exercise to which men are Obliged and Authorized As a Judge a Souldier a Physician are And it being a Calling which we speak of and that durante vita capacitate it must be such Action as is intended to be Ordinary and Constant He that Consenteth not to do the work of a Minister and that for more than a trial or a present occasion and is not Obliged and Authorized to that work at least statedly as his intended ordinary course of life is no Minister of Christ which Paul well expresseth by that phrase Rom. 1. 1. Separated to the Gospel of God 3. As God in creating man made him in his own Image so did Christ in making Church Pastors Therefore he saith As my Father sent me so send I you And he that receiveth you receiveth me and he that despiseth you despiseth me and him that sent me Luke 10. 16. And they are Embassadours to beseech men in his name and stead to be reconciled to God 2 Cor. 5. 19 20. And Christ himself is called the Angel of the Covenant and the Apostle and high Priest of our Profession and the Great Prophet and the Bishop of our Souls and the good Shepherd and the great Shepherd or Pastor of the flock and the Minister of the Circumcision And he was a Preacher of the same word of life as we are And he administred the same Sacrament of Communion as we do Now as the Office of Christ had these three Essential parts viz. to be the Teacher the High Priest and the Ruler of the Church so hath not only the Apostles but every true Pastor in his place as is proved this threefold subserviency to Christ 1. They will confess themselves that He is no true Pastor who hath not Authority and Obligation which set together are called a Commission to be a Teacher of the Church For though some men may be so weak as that they can Teach but by Reading Catechizing Conference or very short defective immethodical Sermons And though where a Church hath Many the Ablest may be the usual publick Preachers and the rest be but his assistants Yet I never found any proof of Elders that were not Teachers by office as well as Rulers and had not Commission to Teach the flock according to their abilities and might not Preach as the need of the Church required it however the weaker may give place to the abler in the exercise of his office Because his office is an Obligation and Authority to exercise his Gifts as they are for the Churches greatest edification 2. And it will be confessed that he is no Minister or Pastor who is not Commissioned by Christ to be the Churches Guide in publick Worship in Prayer praise and Sacrament of Communion However where there are many all cannot officiate at once 3. Therefore all the doubt remaineth whether the power of the Keys for Church Covernment such as belongeth to Pastors be not as Essential as the rest I say the Commission the Authority and the Obligation though violence may much hinder the exercise And this I have proved before and must not stay to repeat it Only 1. God doth not distinguish when he giveth them the Keys and office Therefore we must not distinguish 2. The very signification of the words Keys Pastor Presbyter Overseer Steward c. do not only import this Guiding Ruling power but notably signifie it as most think more notably than the Worshipping part of their office 3. Dr. Hammond and all of his mind confess that in Scripture these words are applyed to no one person or office that had not the Governing as well as the Teaching and Worshipping power 4. The truth is the Teaching and Ruling and Worshipping power are inseparably twisted together Ruling is done not by the sword here but in a Teaching way by the Word As a Physician may 1. read a Lecture of health to his Patients 2. and give every one particular directions for his own cure and this last is called Governing them So when the same Pastor who Teacheth all generally by Sermons doth make his applications to mens persons and cases particularly it is Governing the Church as when a man is impenitent he doth Excommunicate him only by teaching him and the Church that such persons as are so impenitent are under the wrath of God and uncapable of Church Communion and therefore requiring the Church as from Christ to avoid that person and declaring him to be under the wrath of God till he repent and requiring him to forbear Communion with the Church And so in other acts of Government And as in Worshipping the Pastor delivereth the Sacrament of Communion so it must belong to him to Give it or Deny it 5. And indeed the ancient Churches had usually more Pastors than Assemblies by which means every Presbyter could not daily preach and officiate But yet they were so constant Assistants in the Government as hath occasioned so many to think that it was mere Ruling Elders who joyned with the Bishops in those times And Paul himself saying 1 Tim. 5. 17. The Elders that rule well are worthy of double
honour especially they that labour in the word and doctrine doth plainly imply that there were fewer who were thus Labourers in the word and doctrine than that Ruled well For indeed the following practices of the Churches expoundeth this Text when the Churches having few Learned or able Speakers he that could speak or preach best did preach ordinarily and was made Chief or Bishop and the rest helped him in Government and other offices and taught the people more privately and preached seldomer when the Bishop bid them and there was need Being yet of the same office Obj. Why then may they not now be forbidden publick Government in foro Ecclesiae exteriore Answ 1. Our question is not chiefly what part of the exercise of their proper office may be restrained on just occasion But what it is which truly belongeth to their office 2. It is one thing to forbid it them pro tempore and another statedly for this changeth the Office 3. It is one thing to forbid a man Preaching Praying or Exercise of Discipline in a Church where there are many and all cannot speak at once and his restraint is for the better doing of the work and the avoiding of confusion And another thing to forbid a single Pastor of a Parish Church with all his Curates to do it when there is no other there nor near the place that knoweth the people to do it but it must be undone 4. And indeed the case of Discipline in this differeth from Preaching and officiating in Worship Two men cannot do the later at once in the same Congregation without confusion and hinderance of Edification But ten men or twenty may consult and consent to the acts of Discipline So that by Reason Scripture and Antiquity it is clear that if any one part were more essential to the Presbyters office than the rest it would be the Authority and Obligation to Rule the flock by the word of God and exercise the Church Keys of Discipline II. Now that this power is here taken from them notwithstanding all the forecited Concessions or Confessions that it is due to them I prove I. I might premise that Ubi non est idem fundamentum non est eadem relatio At c. There is not the same foundation therefore not the same Relation For 1. Here is not the same Election no nor Consent I opened this before Though all Antiquity gave the Church the Election of her own Pastors yet we make not that necessary to the being of the office or relation to them So there be but Consent But we take Consent of the Church to be necessary to any mans Pastoral Relation to that Church though not to the Ministery in general as unfixed For seeing it is not possible to Exercise the office without the peoples Consent it cannot be assumed as over them without their Consent Because that which cannot be Exercised should not be undertaken to be exercised But with us commonly the Patron chooseth and the Bishop approveth instituteth and giveth him induction and so he is fully setled in title and possession in their way without any of the peoples knowledge or consent Obj. You choose Parliament men who make these laws and your Ancestours consented to Patrons power Therefore you consent Answ This seemeth a jest but that the business and execution make it a serious matter to us 1. It cannot be proved that all the Churches or people gave the Patrons that power 2. We never intended to consent that Parliaments should do what they list and dispose of our Souls or of that which is necessary to the saving of our Souls 3. Else you may as well say that we consent to be Baptized and to receive the Sacraments because the Parliament whom we chose consenteth to it And so we may baptize Infidels because their great grandfathers consented that all their posterity should be Christians And you need no discipline to keep men from the Sacrament if Noah consented that all his posterity should fear God and serve him and so be saved Many men are jested out of their saith and salvation but none are thus jested into it Sin is a mockery but so is not piety 4. Our forefathers had no power to represent us by such consenting If they could oblige us to Duty by their Authority they cannot be our substitutes for the performance of duty any more than for the possession of the reward 5. What God himself hath laid upon the Person or existent Church they cannot commit to another if they would themselves because the obligation was personal and they have not Gods consent for the transmutation We cannot serve God by proxy nor be happy by proxy Obj. But how unfit are the common people to choose their Pastors They are ignorant and partial and tumultuous Do the children beget their own father or the sheep choose their own shepherd Answ 1. No but wives choose their own husbands and Patients choose their own Physicians and Clients their own Advocates and servants their own masters c. Similitudes run not on four feet If all the Church of Christ besides the Prelates and their Curates be as brutish as sheep and as silly as infants in comparison of them then they have talkt reason in their similitude Else 2. Is it not notorious in England that no Congregations have had more Learned and holy Pastors than where the People have had their choice I desire London but to consider it nay they know it by great experience what men hath Aldermanbury had Mr. Calamy Dr. Stoughton Dr. Taylor and so before What men hath Blackfryers had Mr. Gibbons Dr. Gouge and many formerly So also Antholins Lincolns-Inn Greys-Inn the Temple c. But the truth is that is an excellent person to us who is an odious or contemptible person to the high Prelatists If he will preach as Heylin writeth and make the people believe that Presbyterians are Rebels and Disciplinarians are seditious brainsick fellows and strict living is hypocrisie and praying without book and much preaching is Fanaticism and that none are worthy to preach the Gospel who will not swear to be true to this Prelatical interest that drunkenness in a Conformable man is a tolerable infirmity and their ignorantest nonsence is fitter to save souls or Edifie the Church than the labours of a Learned Holy Nonconformist that Calvin was a Rogue and Cartwright Amesius and all such as they discontented factious Schismaticks unworthy to preach or to be endured This is a son of the Church and an excellent person with the men in question But it is the man that Learnedly and Judiciously openeth the word of life that closely and skilfully and seriously applyeth it that is an example of Holiness Sobriety Love Meekness Humility and Patience to the flock who spareth no labour or cost or suffering for the saving of mens souls who is for the wisdom which is first pure and then peaceable c. This is the Pastor that is excellent
in our eyes And of such I have oft wondred that the common people should usually choose far better than the Prelates do But the truth is Wisdom and Goodness have their witnesses even in the consciences of natural men which Faction Pride and Fleshly interest doth bribe or silence and cannot endure 3. But what 's all this to us We plead not now for the necessity of the peoples Elections but only for their consent If the Patrons as now or the Clergy as formerly be the Nominators or Electors yet should the peoples consent be acknowledged necessary in the second place 4. For who is fitter to choose or refuse or consent at least than he whose everlasting interest lieth at the stake It is their own soul that must be saved or damned And in good sadness do these Diocesans love the souls of all the people better than they love their own Do you make them believe this by not seeing one of a thousand or many hundred of your flock once in all the time of your lives Doth the silencing of so many Ministers shew it Christ will have all men at age in Covenanting Baptism and the Lords Supper to be Chusers or Refusers for themselves because as Clem. Alexandr Strom. 1. saith they have free will and it is themselves that must have the gain or loss that must be in heaven or hell for ever What if a Prelate a Parliament a Patron or a forefather chuse Masspriests or Hereticks for us must we accept the choice Is this our bewaring of false prophets and of the leaven of the Pharisees and our trying all things and letting no man deceive us c. 5. But how unfit is this objection for a Prelates mouth or pen Are you the Church Governours Is all this contention that you may have the Keys alone without the parish Ministers And is this the fruit of all your Government that the common Church members are so mad so bad so untractable that they are not fit to be free Consenters to them that are to Teach and Guide them to salvation Who then is this Church Ruine and Abomination long of but your selves who have and only will have the Keys Have you not fine Churches and members that are not fit to choose no nor consent to their own Guides Why do you not take care that the Churches by discipline may be better constituted As none should be Pastors who are not fit for the duty of Pastors so none should be members who are not fit for the duty of members It 's excellent Government inded to keep such in the Church as are unfit to be there and then fetch an argument from their unfitness for their neglect of their duty and your depriving them of their power As if you should choose none but ideots or most such to be Jury men and then argue thence that they are unfit for so great a trust and so the people must lose their liberties 6. There are among the ignoranter sort of the people usually divers sober and good men and the rest use much to hearken to them Obj. But what if the people will not consent to any but a Heretick or intolerable person Answ 1. The former answers serve to this You do fairly to keep such people in the Church But as the Foreigner wondered in Henry the Eighth's days to see at once some hanged for being Papists and some burnt for being Protestants and cried out Dii boni quomodo gentes hic vivunt So it is such another case to see at once the same Prelates forcing the unwilling into the Church and to the Sacrament as if this would or could save them if their Church be salvation in despight of them even on pain of undoing and perpetual imprisonment And yet Excommunicating and casting out those that are willing to stay in As if Consent were a mark of an aliene and a reprobate and unwillingness the mark of worthiness 2. Such as you here describe are not fit to be members of a Church If they will not Consent to Church priviledges and duties they should be without the doors And you may force them to hear Teaching whether they are willing or not But you cannot make them Godly nor bring them to heaven nor give them right to Church Communion and Sacraments whether they will or not So much of Election and Consent 2. Moreover the Ordination differeth from that of Gods institution For Presbyters are now Ordained commonly neither by Archbishops Bishops or Presbyters of Christs institution in their way 1. The Bishops themselves profess that they Ordain not as Presbyters For they say such have no power of Ordination 2. They are not Bishops of Christs institution as is before proved but of another species which half themselves confess to be but humane 3. They are not Archbishops because they have no Bishops under them And so having not their power of Ordination as Officers of Gods making they have no power from him to Ordain Obj. By these two last differences you seem to give up the Cause to the Separatists Answ The Prelatists do so but so do not we 1. Because whether the Prelates will or not the people ex post facto do Consent to every worthy Pastor 2. Because we judge of Parish Ministers as God describeth them and therefore as true Bishops and consequently take the Prelates for a kind of Archbishops whatever they call themselves 3. And there is no honest Minister but hath the Consent of some neighbour Ministers and of the People And though imposition of hands be a laudable Ceremony yet it is not that but mutual Consent of themselves and the Pastors and People in which their external call consisteth as is before said II. The different Correlates and Termini make different Relations The Churches which the ancient Presbyters were related to were true entire Churches however their work might be parcelled among the members But according to the Prelates platform each Presbyter hath his charge over no Church of Christ at all but only over a hundredth six hundredth or thousandth part of a Church having no more to do with all the rest than if they were of another Diocese III. But I come to the point intended That they take from the Presbyter his essential Obligation and Authority appeareth 1. In general they commonly affirm that the Governing power belongeth not to them and that they are but the Bishops Curates By which they mean not only that the Bishops rule them but they say that the Bishop doth Teach all his Diocese per alios even by these his Curates And accordingly they have lately blotted out of their Litany Bishops Pastors and Ministers of the Church and have substituted Bishops Priests and Deacons lest the Priests should be supposed Pastors But they altered not the Collect for all Bishops and Curates And they have put out of the Office for Ordination of Priests Act. 20. 28. Now what a Presbyter doth in the person of the Bishop
and as his instrument that he doth not in the distinct person of a Presbyter He that payeth money or delivereth possession in his Masters name doth it not in his own So that if really they mean as they say that quoad personam legalem quamvis non naturalem it be the Bishop that doth Teach and Officiate per alios then no Presbyter is indeed endued with any power of Teaching Officiating or Ruling in the person of a Presbyter but only to be the Servant and Instrument of the Diocesane 2. No Presbyter hath power to judge whom he shall Baptize or whom to refuse but is to Baptize all without any exception that have Godfathers and Godmothers who will but say the words in the book The Canon 78. is No Minister shall refuse or delay to Christen any Child according to the book of Common prayer that is brought to the Church to him upon Sundays or Holidays to be Christened Else suspended three months from his Ministry Yea that is it that pays for all So Can. 79. he is bound to do in houses in case of danger Yet Can. 29. No Parent shall be urged to be PRESENT nor be admitted to answer as Godfather for his own child Now the Liturgy requireth not any Godfather to Adopt the Child and take it for his own Nor doth it allow us to refuse the Children of Turks Jews or Heathens And if these Godfathers be known Atheists Turks Jews or Heathens or the filthiest Adulterers or wicked persons if they did ever in their lives receive the Sacrament and will say as the Book bids them the Priest cannot refuse the Child But if the godliest Parent can get none to be such Godfathers or Godmothers his Child must not be Baptized I told the Bishops my self that I had a notorious Infidel boasted that he would bring his Child to be baptized and say the words of the book and see who durst refuse it And I was answered that if the Child had Godfathers there was no scruple but I should Baptize him But when I ask what if these Infidels professedly such be the Godfathers and say before-hand I will say those words and refuse me if you dare they have nothing to say that common reason should regard Now he that is but sent to Baptize those even all whomsoever that others bid him baptize and hath no more discerning or judging power of the persons capacity than a Lay-man hath is in this no Presbyter but a Prelates messenger or servant 3. They have no power to instruct admonish or reprove in secret or publick or in their own houses any one Ignorant Heretical Infidel Atheistical or scandalous wicked man that will but refuse to speak with them or to hear them And yet he must give this person the Sacrament at least till he prove that by him which his refusal to speak to him maketh impossible to be publickly proved If I have great reason by some private occasional speech or report to believe that many of the Parish know no more of Christ than Pagans do or that they among their own companions who will not accuse them profess Atheism Infidelity or Heresie or if after scandalous fames I would admonish them to repent If they refuse to speak with me or suffer me not to come and speak to them I have no remedy but must still continue them in the Communion of the Church Obj. You would not have such men forced your self Answ But I would not be forced then my self to give him the Sacrament of Communion as his Pastor who refuseth to speak with me or to hear me as his Pastor but would have power to refuse that Pastoral administration to him that refuseth the rest 4. They have no power to judge of the fitness of any one for the Sacrament of the Lords Supper in point of knowledge faith or Covenanting with God nor whether he understand what the Sacrament is any more than an Infidel or ideot so be it the Bishop do but confirm him in his childhood or he will say that he is ready to be confirmed Indeed all are required to send their children to be Catechised But 1. few Ministers use it 2. few persons in a parish come 3. If they refuse we cannot prevent their further communicating 4. It is but to say over the words of that Catechism which they are called to which experience tells us children will do like Parrots without understanding what they say And we must not ask them any other questions It is true also that they who are confirmed by the Bishop should bring a Certificate from the Minister that they can say the Creed Lords prayer Commandments c. But they may choose and not one of many doth it I went my self at thirteen years of age or fourteen to the worthy Bishop Morton with the rest of the School-boyes without any Certificate and without any examination he hastily said as he passed on three or four lines of a prayer over us when I knew not what he said And after this no Minister can refuse any one at age the Sacrament The Rubrick saith They should openly own their Baptism c. But few do it and none can be refused for not doing it And so the transition from the number of Infant members into the number of the adult is made without the Ministers Consent Though the Kings Declaration once yielded to the contrary And Communicants croud upon him in utter ignorance because they were Baptized in Infancy Nay few in a Parish not one of many hundred of my acquaintance is ever confirmed by the Bishop at all so much as ceremoniously or regard it 5. They have no power to choose what Chapter they will read to the Church in publick though a word before the Homilies lib. 2. seemed once to allow it them But every day in the year even week-days and Holidays they are tyed up to the Chapters imposed on them though Bell and the Dragon Judith Susanna Tobit and other Apocryphal writings be appointed for Lessons even about 106 Chapters of the Apocrypha in two months And though any scandal or other occasion in his Church would direct him to choose some other subject for the peoples good 6. He hath no power to choose what words to use in his publick prayers to God no not to use any that are not written for him to read out of the book And though custom hath so used Ministers to pray without book in the pulpit yet this is but connived at because it cannot easily be remedied One of them wrote a book against it as answering that part of our Savoy Reply 1660 Dr. Heylin hath largely laboured to prove that it is contrary to the Canon which indeed doth seem express against it And that 's not all However their Consciences digest it all the Conformists in England do subscribe as ex animo a covenant or promise that they will use the form in the said book prescribed in publick prayer and
them go without Christianity rather than Baptize them without this Image of a Cross unless he will be suspended from preaching Christs Gospel to the ignorant that they may be saved But if he will bear that he may do what he will that so poor souls may be the losers 19. If the commonest whore or wicked woman come to be Churched as they call it after child-bearing the Priest must use all the Office of thanksgiving without first expecting her repentance as if she were the chastest person And must give her the Sacrament 20. To conclude no Priest as such till Licensed hath power to take upon them to expound in his own Cure or elsewhere and therefore not to his family or any one of his ignorant neighbours any Scripture or matter or Doctrine But shall only study to Read plainly and aptly without glossing or adding the Homilies c. Are these Authorized Priests that may not so much as tell a Child the meaning of his Catechism or any Article of the Faith No though an ignorant person ask him The Priests lips should preserve knowledge and the Law should be enquired of at his mouth for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts But an English Priest may not expound any Matter Scripture or Doctrine but barely Read till the Bishop License him Obj. If they be not able it will do more harm than good Answ Will the righteous God be always mocked and suffer men to make merchandice of Souls and to vilifie them and set them at cheaper rates than they would do a goose a pig or a dog Is this a fit answer for those that are their Ordainers under whose examination and hands all men enter into the Ministery Will they say that they can get no better What not when they have made so many Canonical Engines to keep out better What not when such as Cartwright Hildersham Amesius Parker Dod Ball c. are cast out as unworthy When so many hundred were silenced in Queen Elizabeth and King James's days and Eighteen Hundred of us now When the Bishops have got so many Laws to hinder us from Preaching in publick and private and to banish us five miles from all Cities Corporations and places where we have preached When none but their sworn Curates Subscribers Declarers c. may preach yet can they get no better Will they keep up a Ministry whom they will themselves so ignominiously stigmatize as to tell the world that none of them all as Presbyters may be endured to expound any Scripture Doctrine or Matter but barely to Read Yea as if they would disswade them from all Learning of Humanity or Divinity as needless or hurtful things they say he shall only study to Read plainly and aptly So that he that studieth for any more than to Read doth break the Canons of the Prelatical Church Also a Priest as such hath no power to judge what Garments he shall wear nor of what colour at home or abroad He hath no power to judge in what house he may instruct or pray with any of his flock nor when so much as with his Church in publick or with any sick or afflicted neighbour in private to Fast and Pray But they are all straitly forbidden to preach or administer the Sacraments except to the sick in private houses To preach or officiate in any room save a Consecrated Chappel even in a Noblemans house To keep publick or private fasts To give the Sacrament to any that are not of their own Parish at least if they go from their own Priest because he never studied more than to Read They have not power to admit any other how Learned and Holy soever to preach in their Churches as Presbyters without Licence All these shew their Priestly power Obj. But a Surrogate may Excommunicate Answ 1. That is but ludicrous pro forma 2. Or else it is but their self-condemnations while they allow one Presbyter of a thousand to do that which all the rest are forbidden The same I say of Arch-deacons and peculiar Ordinaries Object They make Canons in Convocations and choose Convocation Priests Answ 1. It is but two Priests of many hundred that are in a Convocation And what 's that to all the rest 2. Choosing is not a Governing act Where the people choose Kings and Parliament men it proveth not that they have any Government themselves The Laity ever formerly chose their Bishops and yet were no Bishops nor Church Rulers 3. It is in the Bishops power to frustrate their choice For when they have chosen four he may put by two of them In this great Convocation which hath new moulded our Liturgy which hath formed the Engines that have done what is done the great and famous City of London had not one chosen Clerk in the Convocation No wonder then if they Conform not as not being bound by their own Consent For when they chose Mr. Calamy and my self the Bishop refused us both which I am so far from mentioning in discontent that I take it to have been a greater Mercy than I can well express 4. I take not Canon-making to be any considerable part of the Pastoral Office If two of many hundred have power to please the Plural Number of Prelates Deans and other Dignitaries whom they cannot over-vote by serving them against the Church and their Brethren doth that prove that Presbyters as such have the Governing power of their flocks I am not striving for a power of Ruling one another much less of Excommunicating Kings and Magistrates nor a power of making Laws or Ruling Neighbour Churches But only a power of Guiding their own flocks and judging of their own actions Yea and that not as Ungoverned or without Appeals But as Ruled by Magistrates consociated for Concord with other Pastors and Ruling Volunteers And if Archbishops also Rule them by Gods Laws we shall submit CHAP. XVII That the great change of Government hitherto described the making of new species of Churches a new Episcopacy and a new sort of half-sub-presbyters with the Deposition of the old was sinfully done and not according to the intent of the Apostles THere are two pretences and no more that I know of made to justifie all this foredescribed change The first is by Dr. Hammond when he was hard put to it at last in answer to the London Ministers which is That Subpresbyters were Ordained in Saint John's time and therefore by him The second is ordinary that though de facto the Apostles setled but single Pastors without Sub-presbyters at least over single Churches or Assemblies yet this was not done with an Obligatory purpose for the so fixing of it But only de facto pro tempore as a State of immaturity with a purpose and intent that it should grow up to the change of this at maturity I. To the first Pretence I answer 1. What probability is there that one Apostle when all the rest were dead should make so great a
change in their Church Orders Either it was part of the Apostolical Commission and work to settle Church Offices and orders for Government or not as to the species if Christ had not before done it or to settle it by revealing what Christ did command them either from Christ's mouth or the Spirits inspiration to ââtle the Catholick Church as Moses did the Jewish If it were none of their Commissioned Office work then it was none of John's And then it is done so as may be yet undone But if it were John's work it was Theirs And if theirs why did they not perform it Even while they had that promise Matth. 15. 20 21. Where two or three are gathered together in my Name c. And If two of you agree of a thing c. If you say that there was no need till they were all dead I answer It is a Fiction The greatest numerous Church at Jerusalem had more need of more than One to officiate among them and so had Ephesus Antioch Coritnb c. than most Churches else had in St. John's days And were all the Apostles so negligent and forgetful 2. What proof is there that St. John did make this change It is either by Scripture that it is proved or by History 1. Not by Scripture For 1. No Scripture mentioneth S. John's doing it 2. Dr. Hammond and his followers confess that it was not done as can be proved in Scripture times And Chronologers suppose that there was but a year or two between his death and the end of Scripture times that is the writing of his Apocalypse And is it probable that he began so great a Change the last year of his life 2. And History maketh no mention of it at all For I am ashamed to answer their nonconcluding reason from St. John's bringing a young prodigal to a Presbyter to be educated or his Ordaining Presbyters when it is no more than is said of the other Apostles Let them give us if they can any Satisfactory proof that S. John alone a year or two ere he died made this new species of Presbyters and Churches that we may believe it to be of God But blind presumptions we dare not trust 3. None of the Ancient Churches Councils or Doctors that ever I could find did ever hold that Subpresbyters were instituted by St. John alone and these changes made by him How then shall we think that men of yesterday can tell us without them and better than they and contrary to them the history of those times 4. By as good a course as this what humane corruption may not be defended and Scripture supposed insufficient to notifie Gods Church-institutions to us When there is nothing said in Scripture for them the Papists or others may say that S. John made this or that Change when all the rest were dead But why must we believe them 5. And the Church hath rejected this plea already long ago When Papias pleaded that he had the Millenary Doctrine from St. John himself and when the Eastern Churches pretended his Authority for their time of Easters observation here was incomparably a fairer shew of St. John's Authority than is produced by Dr. H. in the present case And yet both were over-ruled by the Consent of the Churches II. And that it cannot be proved to be the Apostles intentions that their establishment herein should be but temporary and left to the will of man to change I have largely proved in my Disput 1. of Church Government long ago I now only say 1. That which the Apostles did in execution of a Commission of Christ for which he promised and gave them his infallible Spirit was the work of Christ himself and the Spirit and not to be changed but by an Authority equal to that which did it But such was the setling of the species of Churches and Elders Ergo c. The Commission is before recited from Scripture and so is the promise and gift of the Spirit to perform it 2. Where there is full proof of a Divine Institution by the Apostles and no proof of a purpose that men should afterward change it or that this institution should be but for a time and then cease there that Institution is to be supposed to stand in force and the repeal cessation or allowed mutation to befeigned But there is full proof of a Divine institution by the Apostles that Preesbyters with the power of Government were placed over single Churches and no other saith Dr. H. And there is no proof brought us at all of either Repeal Cessation or Allowance for mutation Ergo c. They confess de facto all that we desire viz. 1. That there was then none but single Churches or Congregations under one Bishop 2. That there were no Subpresbyters Let them now prove the Allowance of a Change 3. That supposition is not to be granted which leaveth nothing sure in the Christian Churches and Religion But such is the supposition of a change of the Apostles Orders in these points Ergo. If the after times may change these Orders who can prove that they may not change all things else of supernatural institution As the Lords day Baptism the Lords Supper the Bible the Ministry yet remaining c. And if so nothing is sure Object Christ himself instituted these and therefore they may not be changed Answ 1. It was not Christ himself that wrote the Scripture but his servants by his Spirit 2. Christ himself did that mediately which his Apostles did by his Mandate and Spirit Matth. 28. 20. The Spirit was given them to bring all things to their remembrance which he had spoken to them And to cause them to Teach the Churches all things which Christ had commanded them And as Christ made the Sin against the Holy Ghost to be greater than that which was but directly against his humanity and as he promised his Disciples that by that Spirit they should do greater works than his so that which his Spirit in them did establish was of no less authority than if Christ had personally established it 4. By this rule the Prelates themselves may be yet taken down by as good authority as the Apostles other settlement was changed For if it was done by Humane Authority there is yet as great Humane power to make that further change Wherever they place it in Kings Bishops or Councils they may yet put down Bishops by as good authority as they put down what the Apostles set up and may set up more new orders still by as good authority as they set up these half-presbyters And so the Church shall change as the Moon 5. That which is accounted a reproach to all Governours is not without proof to be imputed to God and his inspired Apostles But to make oft and sudden changes of Government is accounted a reproach to all Governours Ergo For it is supposed that they wanted either foresight and wisdom to know what was to be
day 3. The remaining respects which the people had to the Prelates and their way was a hinderance to us that desired to meddle herein with none but consenters 4. A great number of Sectaries raised by the distastes of the Prelates wayes did also hinder us 5. Yet it was than possible and feasible to Ministers that were wise and willing to do so much as might very much attain the ends of discipline though not so much as they desired 6. But is this an Objection fit for the Prelatists to make or doth it not encrease their condemnation what would you say to a Physician a Pilot a Schoolmaster that should say It is not an hundred Physicians that can do what should be done for all the Patients in this City nor an hundred Pilots that can well govern all the Navy nor an hundred School masters that can well Govern all the Schools in the Diocess Therefore I will get them all turned out and I will be the only Physician with my Apothecaries the only Pilot with my Sâamân the only Schoolmaster with my Monitors and Ushers my self for the work can be but left undone Such rule the Churches must have while God for our sins will suffer it The doing it per alios is oft enough answered before Obj. V. Many Parish Ministers are young and raw and unfit to govern Ans 1. They are unfit who make this Objection who bring and keep such in and cast so many hundred out that are better however ignorant malice slander them 2. This also may be said against their preaching much more For 3. They may Rule with others when they cannot preach by others 4. There may be appeals to the next Synod or Prelate if you will have it so Obj. VI. You would have a Priest to be a Pope in his Parish Ans I can call this Objection no better than gross Impudency For 1. It s a Contradiction A Pope is a Head of the Universal Church And so it is saying that we make every Minister a Head of the Universal Church to his Parish 2. We desire more Presbyters than One in a Church 3. We desire Appeals to the next Synod and is that to be a Pope 4. Is not one Minister as able to Rule a Parish without the help of assistants and Synods as one Prelate to Rule many hundred Parishes who likely is a worse man than the Minister Impudent pride will perhaps say no. CHAP. XXI The Magistrates Sword is neither the strength of Church discipline nor will serve instead of it nor should be too much used to second and enforce it THese three assertions I will prove distinctly 1. The Magistrates Sword is not the chief strength of true Church discipline I add this because this is the Prelatists last Objection that its true that the Keys are but brutum fulmen and a leaden sword without the Magistrates For almost all men will dispise it Who will come to our Courts if they may choose Who will regard our Excommunications Do not the people now despise them what then would they do if they had their wills when we have excommunicated the Schismaticks They will Excommunicate us again The greatest Prelatists who write to me and speak with me use these very words themselves To which I answer 1. If we prove that Christ hath instituted discipline and that for such noble ends as aforementioned it is little less than blasphemy thus to reproach it As if Christ had no more Power Wisdome or Goodness than to ordain so vain and unprofitable a means to such high and necessary ends 2. The objection doth but express a carnal mind which regardeth only carnal things and thinketh as basely of all others as if nothing moved them but the interest of the flesh And as if Gods favour or displeasure and the authority of his word and Ministers were of no force or regard even with the Church of Christ 3. The objection inviteth Kings to put down all Bishops except Preachers and Magistrates For why should they put the people to so great charge and trouble especially when they love the Prelates so little as to keep them up to wield a Leaden Sword and to brandish a brutum fulmen and to make a noise to no more purpose yea to rob the Magistrate of the honour of his proper work and to make the deluded people believe that those things are done by a brutum fulmen which really are done by the Civil power 4. This objection bitterly reproacheth all the ancient Churches and Bishops and all General and provincical Councils and all the Cannons and ancient discipline of the Churches As if they had troubled the world to no pupose and all their discipline had been vain 5. The objection is notoriously confuted in that the Discipline was more powerful and had better effect before Constantius time than afterwards and was much more strictly exercised against sin And that which so long did more without the Sword than afterward by it doth not receive its efficacy from the Sword 6. A naturarei there is as much of Divine Authority as much of the power of his Precepts Prohibitions Promises and threatnings as much of Heavenly inducement as much of the terrors of Hell as much of internal goodness of holyness and evil of sins as much of Soul interest in what the Minister propoundeth for mens conviction as there is when it is backt with the Magistrates Sword And if all these have no force Christianity must be a dream and able to do no good in the world which better beseemeth Julian Celsuâ or Porphyry Symmachus or Eunapius to say than a Bishop 7. By this objection the Prelatists openly confess that their Churches consist of men so carnal as are not moved by Divine authority without the Sword And consequently what Pastors they have been to the Churches and how they have governed them and what they allow us to expect from their discipline for the time to come 8. By this Objection they condemn themselves and justifie the Nonconformists For why should we Swear that we will never endeavour any alteration of so brutish an Office as if the King and Parliament could not take down such an useless thing And why should so many hundred Ministers be forbidden to Preach Christ for not assenting consenting and Swearing to such a vaine and brutish power 9. By this they give up their cause to the Presbyterians and Independents Confessing that their discipline is uneffectual when as we that plead for another frame desire not the Magistrates Sword to interpose and desire to use discipline on none but Volunteers And either the discipline which we desire hath some efficacy or none If none what need they fear it or hinder it or silence so many hundred Ministers and write and strive and all to keep men from using such a brutum fulmen which can do no harme But if they confess that our discipline hath efficacy and theirs hath none what do they but directly
2. c. 5. That were for seventy years after their conversion without a Bishop Vlphilas being the first 4. Columbanus was no Bishop but a Presbyter and Monk nor his Successours that yet Ruled even the Bishops as Beda noteth Hist. li 3. c. 4. 5. Hâhere solet ipsa Insula Rectorem semper Abbatem Presbyterum cujus jure omnis provincia ipsi etiam Episcopi ordine inusitatâ debeant esse subjecti juxta exemplum primi Doctoris illius Columbani qui non Episcopus sed Presbyter extitit Monachus And these Presbyters did not only ordaine as being the only Church Governours but they sent Preachers into England and ordained Bishops for England at King Oswalds request as Beda at large relateth Eccles Hist l. 3. c. 3. 5. 17. 21. 24 25. The Abbot and other Presbyters of the Island Hy sent Aydan ipsum esse dignum Episcopatu ipsum ad erudiendos incredulos indoctos mitti debere decernunt Sicque illum ordinantes ad praedicandum miserunt c. Successit vero ei in Episcopatu Finan ipse illo ab Hy Scotorum insula ac monasterio destinatus c. 17. cap. 25. Aydano Episcopo de hac vita sublato Finan pro illo gradum Episcopatus a Scotis ordinatus missus acceperat c. So cap â4 c. You will find that the English had a Succession of Bishops by the Scotish Presbyters ordination And there is no mention in Beda of any dislike or scruple of the lawfulness of this course Segenius a Presbyter was Abbot of Hy cap. 5. when this was done And cap. 4. it appears that this was their ordinary custome though in respect to the Churches that were in the Empire it be said to be more inusitato that Presbyters did Govern Bishops but none questioned the validity of their ordinations And the Council at Herudford subjecteth Bishops in obedience to their Abbots And the first reformers or Protestants here called Lollords and Wicklifists held and practised ordination by mere Presbyters as Walsingham reports Hist Angl. An. 1â 89. and so did Luther and the Protestants of other Nations as Pomeranus ordination in Denmark shews and Chytraeus Saxon Chron lib. 14. 15. 16. 17. 5. Leo Mag. Epist 92. cited by Gratian being consulted a rustico Narbonensi de Presbytero vel Diacono qui se Episcopos mentiti sunt de his quos ipsi clericos ordinârânt answered Nulla ratio sâvit ut inter Episcopos habeantur qui nec a clericis sunt electi nec a plebibus expetiti c. yet thus resolveth of their ordination Siqui autèm Clerici ab ipsis Pseudo Episcopis in eis Ecclesus ordinati sunt quae ad proprios Episcopos pertinebant ordinatio eorum cum consensu judicio presidentium facta est potest âata haberi ita ut in ipsis Ecclesus perseverunt So that the mere consent of the proper Bishops can make valid such Presbyters ordination 6. Fâlicissimus was ordained Deacon by Novatus one of Cyprians Presbyters Schismatically yet was not his ordination made Null by Cyprian but he was deposed for Mal-administration See Blondel p. 312. 113. 7. Firmilian in 75 Epist apud Cyprian Saith Necessariò apud nos fit ut per singulos annos seniores praepositi in unum conveniamus ad disponenda quae curae nostrae commissa sunt ut si quae graviora sunt communi consilio dirigantur This shews that communi consilio importeth a consenting Governing Power c. Omnis potestas gratia in Ecclesus constituta ubi praesident majores natu qui baptizandi manum imponeâââ ordinandi possidânt Potestatem If any say It is only Bishops that Formilian speakes of I answer 1. He had a little before used the word Seniores the same in sense with Majores natu here as distinct from Praepositi to signifie either all Pastors in general or Presbyters in special 2. When he speakes of Majores natu in general they that will limit it to Bishops must prove it so limited and not barely affirme it 3. The conjunct acts of the office disprove that It was the same men that had the power of baptizing 8. The great Council of Nice the most reverend Authority next to the holy Scripture decreed thus concerning the Presbyters ordained by Melitius at Alexandria and in Egypt Hi autem qui Dei gratiâ nostris precibus adjuti ad nullum Schisma deflexisse comperti sint sed se intra Catholicae Apostolicae Ecclesiae fines ab erroris labe vacuos continuerint authoritatem habeant tum ministros ordinandi tum eos que clero digni fuerint nominandi tum denique omnia ex lege instituto Ecclesiastico libere exequendi If any say that the meaning is that these Presbyters shall ordain and Govern with the Bishops but not withoutthem I am of his mind that this must needs be the meaning of these words or else they could not be consonant with the Church Canons But this sheweth that ordination belongeth to the Presbyters office and consequently that it is no nullity though an irregulrity as to the Canons when it is done by them alone Socrat. lib. 5. 6. cap. 6. 9. It is the title of the twelfth Canon Concil An cyrani Quod non oportet Chorepiscopos ordinare nisi in agris villulis Now either these Chorepiscopi were of the order of Bishops or not If they were then it further appeareth how small the Churches were in the beginning that had Bishops even such as had but Vnum Altare as Ignatius saith when even in the Countrey Villages they had Bishops as well as in Cities notwithstanding that the Christians were but thinly scattered among the Heathens But if they were not Bishops then it is apparent that Presbyters did then ordain without Bishops and their ordination was valid And the Vafrities of the Prelates is disingenious in this that when they are pleading for Diocesan Churches as containing many fixed Congregations then they eagerly plead that the Chorepiscopi were of the order of Presbyters But when they plead against Presbyters ordination they would prove them Bishops Read Can. 10. Concilii Antiocheni 10. Even in the daies of ignorance and Roman Usurpation Bonifacius Mogunt alias Wilfred Epist 130 Auct Bib. Pat. To 2. p. 105. tells Pope Zachary as his answer intimateth that in Gente Boiariorum there was but one Bishop and that was one Vivilo which the Pope had ordained and that all the Prebyters that were ordained among them as far as could be sound were not ordained by Bishops though that ignorant usurping Pope requireth as it seemeth that they be reordained unless Benedictionem ordinationis should signifie only the blessing or confirmation of their former ordination which is not like For he saith Quia indicasti perrexisse te ad gentem Boiariorum inâenisse eos extra ordinem ecclesiasticum viventes dum Episcopos non habebant in Provincia nisi
so shamefully enumerate and declaim against So that it was said that the World groaned to find it self turned Arian And their fewds and inhumane contentions were so many and odious that it is a shame to read them Multitudes of Cities had Bishops set up against Bishops and some Cities had more than two or three The people reviling and hating each other and sometime fighting tumultuously unto blood for their several Prelates The Christian World was made as a Cockpit and Christian Religion made a scorn by the Contentions of the Bishops Constantines wisdom conscience and interest engaged him to use all his skil his kindness and his power to reconcile them And if he had not done what he did how unspeakably wretched would their odious contentions have rendered them And yet he professeth his heart almost broken by their dissensions and while he chid them bitterly and exhorted them kindly he could not prevail His Sons that succeeded him laboured to unite the Bishops though in different ways and could not do it Jovianus the little time he reigned declared his hatred of their contentions and how much he loved a peaceable man but that did not cure them even when they came new from under a Julian I will look no lower to the more degenerate Prelacy but recite the doleful words of Eusebius even of those that were not at the worst and came but newly from under the persecutions of former Emperours when they had but a little prosperity immediately before Dioclesians persecution they are thus described How great and what manner of glory and liberty the doctrine of piety due to Almighty God preached in the World by Christ hath obtained before the persecution of our time among all mortal men both Grecians and Barbarians it requireth more labour to declare c. The clemency of the Emperours when Heathen towards the Christians was so increased to whom also they committed the Government of the Gentiles And for the great favour they bare to our Doctrine they granted liberty and security to the Professors of Christianity What shall I say of them that in the very Palace of the Emperours and in the presence of Princes lived most familiarly which esteemed of their Ministers so highly that they granted them in their presence freely to deal in matters of Religion both by word and deed together with their wives and children and servants And thus one might then have seen the Bishops of all Churches in great reverence and favour among all sorts of men and with all Magistrates Who can worthily describe those innumerable heaps and flocking multitudes throughout all Cities and famous Assemblies frequenting the places dedicated to prayer Because of which circumstances they not contented with the old and ancient buildings which could not receive them have throughout all Cities builded them from the Foundation wide and ample Churches These things thus prevailed in process of time and daily increased far and nigh so that no malice could intercept no spiteful fiend bewitch no wight with cunning at all hinder it as long as the Divine and heavenly hand of God upheld and visited his People whom as yet he worthily accepted But after that our affairs through too much liberty ease and security degenerated from the Natural rule of piety and after that one pursued another with open contumely and hatred and when that we impugned our selves by no other than our selves with the armour of spite and sharp spears of approbrious words so that Bishops against Bishops and People against People raised sedition last of all when that cursed hypocrisie and dissimulation had swam even to the brim of malice The heavy hand of Gods high judgment after his wonted manner whilest as yet the Ecclesiastical Societies assembled themselves nevertheless began softly by little and little to visit us so that the persecution that was raised against us took first his Original from the Brethren that were under Banner in the Camp When as we were touched with no sense thereof nor went about so pacific God we heaped sin upon sin thinking like careless Epicures that God neither cared nor would visit our sins And they which seemed our Shepherds Laying aside the rule of piety practised contention and schism among themselves and whilst they aggravated these things that is contentious threatnings mutual hatred and enmity and every one proceeded in Ambition much like Tyranny it self then I say then did the Lord make the daughter of Zion obscure and overthrew from above the glory of Israel c. c. 2. We saw with our eyes the Oratories thrown down to the ground the foundations digged up the holy Scriptures burned to ashes in the open Market-place and the Pastors of the Churches some shamefully hid themselves Yet is it not our drift to describe the bitter calamities of these men which at length they suffered nor to record their dissension and insolency practised among themselves before the persecution c. Note that all this was before Arius his Heresie even before Dioclesians cruelties but not before the beginning of Church-Tyranny and ambition as is said But after this alas how much greater were their enormities and dissentions when their Tyranny was much encreased It would grieve any sober Christian to read how the Christian World hath been tossed up and down and the people distracted and Princes disturbed and dethroned and Heresies fomented and horrid Persecutions and bloodshed caused by the pride and contentiousness of Prelates And most of all this in prosecution of that Controversie which Christ decided so long ago viz. Who should be greatest It was not Religion saith Socrates l. 5. c. 22. that the two Arian Sects of Marinus and Agapius was about but Primacy They strove which of them should be the chief wherefore many Clergy-men under the jurisdiction of these Bishops perceiving the ambition the rancour and malice of these proud Prelates forsook them c. Macedonius at Constantinople was so Tyrannical that as he came in by cruelty so he caused more by presumptuous removal of the bones of Constantine to another Church that he might pull down that and this without Constantius the Emperours knowledge where the people in Factions fought it out till the Church and Streets were full of Carkasses and streams of blood saith Socrates The same man set four Companies of Souldiers on the Novations in Paphlagonia till he enraged the people with Clubs and Bills to kill them all And he was so Tyrannical in forcing Conformity that he not only forced men to the Sacrament but gagged their mouths and popt it in Nor was this only the vice of the Heterodox but the Orthodox as is aforesaid And as the French and German Bishops aforesaid did against the Priscillinaists so for their own interest against one another they flattered and restlesly instigated the Civil power even Uusurpers to execute their Wills and favoured that power that most favoured them When the foresaid Maximus had killed Gratian and reigned in France
and entered Italy after that Ambrose had stopt him a while Theophilus Alexandr sendeth an Agent Presbyter with two Letters and a rich present one to Maximus and one to Theodosius ordering him to stay the issue of the Fight and give the Present with his Letter to him that proved the Conqueror But a Servant stole the Letters from the Priest and opened the whole business and caused the Priest to fly and hide himself 50. These contentions of the Bishops and corruption of manners so distasted the more Religious sort of the people that it occasioned the multiplying of separating Heresies and greatly encreased and confirmed others especially the Donatists and Novations because men thought them to be of better lives than the Orthodox 51. Yea by their very abuse of good and holy men they drove even the Orthodox often to separated Societies as thinking so bad Prelates unfit to be communicated with As in Constantinople their abuse ejection and banishment of Chrysostome caused great numbers of his faithful people to forsake the Church and meet only in separated Conventicles And though they differed in no point of Doctrine Worship or Discipline from the rest all that they could do by tyranny and threats would never bring them again to the Church but they were called Joannites and assembled by themselves till Atticus by wise and honest means first began the reconciliatiââ by the publick inserting of Chrysostome's name among their honoured Bishops in the daily Liturgy of the Church and Proclus after wisely perfected it by fetching the bones of Chrysostome with honour from the place of his banishment into the Church But Theodoret Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 36. ascribeth it to that good Emperour Theodosius Junior It 's like a good Bishop and he consented For saith Socrates c. 40. Proclus behaved himself fairly towards all men perswading himself that it was far easier for him by fair means to allure men to the Church than by force to compel them to the Faith 52. The multitudes of Schismes and horrid enormities in the Church of Rome the grand corruption of Religion by them the shameful divisions between the Greek and Western Churches began so long ago and continued to this day with much more such evidence do tell the World that is willing to see what all this tended to as it's perfection 53. And having thus shewed how the Bishops of the Flock came to be Bishops of Bishops and how they grew from the Pastoral Office to a pompous denomination mostly secular and how the Bishops of single Churches did grow to be the Bishops of multitudes of Churches turned into one Diocesan Church of another species we shall leave it to those that are wise and impartial to judge whether a true Reformation must retrieve them and what Age and state of the Church must be our pattern to which we should endeavour to return and in what point it is that it is meet or possible for Christians unanimously to fix between the Apostolical institution and the height of Popery And what satisfying proof any man can give that in a line of 1500 Years that it is the right point that he hath chosen CHAP. IV. The Judgement of those Nonconformists now silenced who 1660. addressed themselves to King Charles the Second for Concord in the matter of Church-Government what they then offered and what those of the Authors mind now hold as to the Right of what is before Historically related AS I have delivered our Judgment about the History of Prelacy so shall I next freely and truly express my own Judgment and those that have concurred with me about the right of Church-Government it self supposing those 100 Propos ad Lud. Molinaeum which I have published about the Nature of Church-power and the extent of the Magistrates power in Church-matters For Truth hath great advantage when it appeareth 1. compact and entire 2. and in the open light Since the writing of this our judgment is more fully published in the Nonconformists first and second Plea for Peace Prop. 1. Since the Fall of Man as God hath given a Saviour to the World by whom he hath made a new Covenant with or for Mankind so hath he delivered all things into the Redeemer's hands and given him all power in Heaven and Earth making him the Administrator General and Head over all things to the Church 2. Some things are under Christ as Utensils viz Inanimates and Braites some are under him as meer enemies subdued as Devils some are under him as generally Redeemed and subjects de jure or quoad obligationem to be Ruled and used upon terms of Mercy And so are all Mankind in general till the day of life and grace is past some are under him as Visible Consenters and Professed subjects so are the Baptized and visible professors of Christianity And some are under him as sincere Heart-Covenanters Justified and Sanctified and to be Glorified by him 3. As Nature it self is now delivered up to Christ and the Law of Nature is now part of his Law and the Instrument of his Government both for the common good and order of the Redeemed World and also as sanctified to the special good and order of his Church Even so is the Office of Magistracy now under him and derived from him and dependant on him in both these forementioned respects Notwithstanding all the vain arguments which Mr. Brown a Scotch Divine Cont. Velthusium hath written to the contrary which need no confutation to an intelligent Reader 4. But the Office of the Sacred Ministry is much of Grace and Institution and less of Natural original than Magistracy For though it be of Natural obligation that one man teach another and that there be some fitter persons than the multitude to instruct the people and guide them in Gods Worship Yet that in specie there should be Preachers of the Gospel and Administrators of this instituted worship and Church-discipline this is it self of Christs Institution as the Doctrine worship and discipline which are their Office-work are of his Institution 5. And though a great part of a Christian Magistrates work be also Instituted viz. to promote Christs Instituted Doctrine Worship and Discipline yet so much also of his work is natural as that he may be called a Magistrate though he be not a Christian Magistrate while he executeth Gods Laws of Nature for the common good But he is at least less fitly called a Minister or Priest of God who shall only teach the Law of Nature and guide an Assembly in meer Natural Worship omitting all that is by Institution Or if any think otherwise it being but de nomine at least this is certain that the Christian or Evangelical Ministry is by Institution 6. Therefore though so far as the Mosaical Magistracy was founded in Nature or in any Revelation expounding the Law of Nature we may under the Gospel fetch proofs thence for the Christian Magistrates Authority and Obligation Yet can we fetch
knowledge of the Presbyters and Deacons that are about him who cannot but know what are the Church Goods c. Here 1. The Church contained only the souls that were congregated in it and not many Congregations 2. All the Church Goods were known to the Presbyters and Deacons so that the Bishop did dispose of them while he lived but could alienate none at his death which sheweth that it was but one Church or Congregation where the Bishop and Presbyters joyned in the Ministry Cap. 25. hath the same Evidence The Bishop dispenseth all the Goods and Lands of the Church to all that need but must not appropriate them to his Kindred c. but use them by the consent of his Presbyters and Deacons XX. Concil Carthag 4. cap. 14. The Bishop's dwelling was to be near the Church But if he had many Churches they would have told which Can. 17. The Bishop was to exercise the care of Government of Widows Orphans and Strangers by his Arch-Presbyter and Arch-Deacon which sheweth that they had not many Churches where each appropriate Presbyter and Deacons did it Can. 22. The Peoples consent and testimony was necessary to every Clerk ordained which sheweth how large the Churches or People were Can. 35. The Bishop is ordered to sit above the Presbyters in the Church and in their Consess but at home to know himself to be their Colleague which sheweth that they were all belonging to one Church and not to many far from each other XXI Concil Laodic Presbyters must not go into the Church or Sacrarium as the other Ed. before the Bishop nor sit in the Seats but must go in with the Bishop or sit in lower Seats till he comes Which sheweth that they were all in one Church And if there had been many Churches distant where there were no Bishops but Presbyters only it 's like that Case would have been excepted as well as is the Case of the Bishop's Sickness and Peregrination See Binnius three Versions To. 1. pag. 292. and Crab's two Vol. 1. pag. 310. Can. 28. Forbidding the Agapae or Church Feasts to be made in the Church implieth that other Houses could contain the Church Members And Can. 58. Forbidding Oblationes fieri vel celebrari in domibus ab Episcopis vel Presbyteris doth shew that till they built Chappels there was but one Congregation in a City which was where the Bishop was XXII Decretum Innocent 1. P. Rom. in Crab Vol. 1. pag. 453. Dicit De consignandis infantibus manifestum est non ab alio quam ab Episcopis fieri licere Nam Presbyteri licet sint Sacerdotes Pontificatus tamen apicem non habent c. And for how many one Bishop can do this with all his other work also you may judge XXIII To look back Concil Carthag 2. Can 3. decreeth Chrismatis confectio puellarum consecratio a Presbyteris non fiant Vel reconciliare quenquam in publica missa Presbytero non licere Crab. pag. 424. But this being an ordinary publick work this supposeth the Bishop still present in every Church to do it and to have a Church no more numerous than he could do it for whereas if Discipline were but moderately exercised according to the ancient Canons there could not be fewer than many hundreds in a day for the Bishop either to excommunicate or absolve in this Diocess where I live Leg. Albaspin Not. pag. 268. And the fourth Can. fortifieth this by this exception Si quisquam in periculo fuerit constitutus se reconciliari divinis altaribus petierit si Episcopus absens fuerit debet utique Presbyter consulere Episcopum sic periclitantem cum praecepto reconciliare Where note that reconciliari altaribus is the Phrase for being reconciled to the Churches And that no Presbyter might do it but in case of the persons danger the Bishops absence and with the Bishops Command Which still sheweth that the Bishop was usually present And as Albaspineus noteth a Presbyter might not do it for a dying Man till he had consulted the Bishop and told him all the case and had his Command Which supposeth him near for the man may be dead before our Ministers can ride to the Bishop and have his Commission and supposeth the Church to be but small XXIV To make short and leave no place for doubting I will joyn several Canons which decree that No Man shall be a Clerk to two Churches nor an Abbot to two Monasteries nor a Bishop to two Cities or Churches So Concil Oecumen Nic. 2. Can. 15. in Bin. pag. 394. Clericus ab hoc deinceps tempore in duabus Ecclesiis non collocetur Ab ipsa enim domini voce audivimus non posse quenquam duobus dominis servire And Concil Chalcedon Can. 10. juxta Dionys Non licet Clericum conscribi in duabus simul Ecclesiis And though then the Can. 17. sheweth that there were Singularum Ecclesiarum Rusticae Parochiae vel possessiones yet these were but like our Chappels and not called Churches but only the Bishop's Church And if the Secular Power made any place a City it was thereupon to follow the Secular Order So of Abbots Concil Venet. Can. 8. in Crab pag. 948. no one was to have two Monasteries Vid. Concil Agath Can. 38. And Photius Balsamon Nomocan Tit. 1. cap. 20. pag. 21. Ne in una Provincia duo Metropolitani aut in una Civitate duo Episcopi aut in duabus Civitatibus unus Clericus Neque in duabus Civitatibus quis potest esse Episcopus Excepting only even then Episcopum Tomensem Ille enim reliquarum Ecclesiarum Scythiae curam gerit Because the Christians were few and from under the Roman Power Et Leontopolis Isauriae sub Episcopo Isauropolis est He addeth Porro 35 Const tit 3. l. 1. Cod. c. 3. c. ait Eum qui quamcunque veterem aut recens conditam civitatem proprii Episcopatus jure aliove privilegio privat tametsi Principis permissu id faciat infamia notat mulctatque bonis constitutio ac simul inceptum irritum facit So that no City new or old might be deprived of its Privilege of having a Bishop Now seeing Corporations and Market Towns are in the old sense Cities and seeing Parish Churches such as ours are true Churches as Communities how many Cities and how many hundred Churches have many Bishops now He addeth Can. 15. âonc 7. and saith Si non permittitur cuiquam in duabus Ecclesiis Clericum fieri multo magis praesul duo Monasteria non moderabitur Quemadmodum neque unum caput duo corpora Therefore by parity of reason much less should one Church-man or Bishop be the head of many hundred or a thousand Bodies without any subordinate Head or Bishop under him Why may not an Abbot as well rule a thousand Monasteries per alios non Abbates as a Bishop a thousand Churches per alios non Episcopâs More Testimonies of Councils added to the former Chap.