write so where the Episcopal power seemed to be devolved upon them but pray Sir If a society consisting of Members all equal in power but having a Head or President for order and good Rule do regret his loss during the vacancie in these very termes wherein lyeth the inconsistence How foolish then is that stricture of your vanity which you here subjoin viz. but. I believe few of you know these writings whereas to be plain with you in my thought neither you nor I have given any great Specimen of this knowledge or said so much as the half of what is obviously to be found in almost any printed debate anent this matter Sir I must tell you further if I my selfe were alone concerned in this reflectionâ— I would scarce look upon it as a reproach worth the wipeing off to be as great a stranger to these things as ye take me to be nor would I think many cubits were added to my stature to be as knowing in them as your self yet it is known that I tell the world no news when I say that there have been and to this day are not a few great men of our way who have given such proof of their knowledge in these ancillarie and minutious things whereof you represente us as ignorant as have made your greatest Rabbies finde that wherein they gloried they were not short of them and if ye know not this yet seem to have lost your silly self in the Labyrinth of Antiquitie and by this means are fallen under the shameful reproach of being peregrinus Domi and if ye know it and yet so superciliously assert the contraire what Apologie can ye make for speaking so great an untruth that will either satisfie the world or your own Conscience But Sir ingenously I professe I pitie you for your Vanitie and folly for it seems ye think this the only expedient to make the world beleeve the pregnancie of your pate and Pronounce you worthie of the Chair but Sir it will onely make the more serious weep to remember who did once fill it and should have filled it still when they consider how it is become the seat of a scorner and the lesse serious will laugh at your prodigious folly I have only one overture to propose unto you that your vanity may be with some handsomeness hereafter coutched and the world may let pass what you say without quarrelling at it as a known falshood And it is this in your after comparings and measurings of your abilities that you may be taken notice of for a Nonsuch be so wise as to compare your self with your Fellow-Curats if ye hope to bear the bell but when ye insinuate a comparison with so many burning and shining lights and then in your Juvenile pride and self-conceit arrogate a preference to these ye do only force men to take notice of and enquire into your shame and short-coming And if I mistake not fall upon the most certain method of making your self â—â—ink above ground Sir if in these two or three lines I have digressed contrary to my inclination the occasion will justifie it and charity persuades to it But 3. You tell us that in the Council of Nice Speaking of the power of Metropolitans the Canon sayes let the ancient customes be in force It 's answered 1. We finde that Council did conveen in the year 325. Now admit that certain Customes concerning Metropolitans as well as Bishops were bâ—ought into the Church about 165. years before the Councel which is the highest period from whence they can be calculat These customes in this respect might will therein be termed Antient without the least contrariety to my assertion 2. It 's evident enough from many suffrages that as the primitive Episcopacie which succeeded to Presbyterie the Government first institute by our Lord and his Apostles and exercised in the Christian Church did only import the humane invention of a Prostasia for Order So the custome of Metropolitans in these times did differ nothing from it as may appear from the 33. Canon of these called Apostolical already cited wherein he is only termed Primus Gentis Episcopus and tyed to the advice of his Coëpiscopi In the next place you tell us that nothing can be alledged against your Episcopal power but Some few or disjointed places of some Authors which at most Prove that they judged not the origen of Bishops to be divine and none save Aerius repute an Heretick did ever speak against the difference betuixt Bishops and Presbyters Sir if you did not here acknowledge almost all that I desire I could easily shew you that not only the Scriptures of the New Testament and the agreeable practice of the Apostles and their Immediate successors are against your Prelatick excrescent power but that even for several ages thereafter while both Bishops and Metropolitans did exercise their Prostasian your Diocesan Prelat having the sole power of Ordination and jurisdiction was unknown yea expresly reprobate but because the appendix whereunto I have already referred and Smectymnus do plainly make out this point I shall not detain you As for Aâ—rius it 's true he held that a Bishop and a Presbyter do not differ and that Augustin cals this proprium ejus dogma his proper Opinion and Epiphanius dogma furiosum et stolidum a furious and foolish opinion and that both of them do ranck him among Hereticks but seing they also accuse him of Arrâ—anisme and withal do also taxe him for error in some points which are clâ—ar truth viz. that it is not lawful to pray and offer for the dead their censure is as little to be noticed as his Testimony specially seing many Learned men do plainly assert that not only Hierom but even Augustin himself Chrisostom and many others of the Fathers were of the same opinion with Aërius as to the matter of this difference but for Ierom you go about to alleviat his Testimonye viz. Idem ergo est Presbyter qui Episcopus Therefore a Presbyter is one and the same with a Bishop noverint Episcopi se magis consuetudine quan dispositionis dominicae veritate Presbyter is esse majores c. And let the Bishops know that they are above Preebyters more through custome then any divine warrant Because he himself was but a Presbyter Pray Sir who were they whom your men cite so fast for Bishops were not they themselves Bishops and yet the truth is there were Bishops also at that time of his Opinion 2. You say that his fervent if not sirie Spirit drives him along in every things to an excess Good Sir where is now your veneration for Antiquity and the holy fathers For us seing we do not found on mans Authority this your brusk character discovering more of your partiality then of Ieroms infirmity doth not offend Only this I must say that whatever be his fervor in his other writtings yet I am sure that both in his Commentarie upon Titus and in
you shall make these things found in Ignatius consistent even with the strain of pure Religion and the truth of the Gospel let be to the Orthodoxie and Piety of Ignatius and the simplicity of his times then shall I cede to the Authority of these Letters Only in the mean time let me tell you that for all the pains that Hamond hath taken to assert their Faith the words above cited do savour so strongly of most gross and corrupt interpolation that not only I reject their Testimony as to the matter of Prelacie but do esteem even the passages that may be therein found for Presbyterie as to the Trallians be subject to the Presbyterie as to the Apostles of Iesus Christ The Presbyters are the Council of God and joint Assembly of the Apostlâ—s and such like of little or no value 2. You mention Cyprians time but hold I preceive your second Edition mends your first and this your practice like to that of your more innocent friend Mr. Coluin in his verses of giving us second Editions bearing additions without advertissment had indeed abused me If by accident I had not fallen in the review of my papers to make use of your second Copie and in this you tell us in the next place of the Apostolicall Canons a work of very venerable Antiquitie at least the first fiftie of them though perhaps none of the Apostles But first why say you Perhaps in a matter beyond all peradventure 2. Not to trouble you with Criticisms he who would be resolved anent the Authority of these Canons let him only read them And as I am confident he will be farre from thinking either the first 50 or the rest of them Apostolicall So I am certain the mention made in the 3. Can. of Sacrificium Altare Oleum in Candelabrum Incensum oblationis tempore a Sacrifice Altar oyl in the lamp and incense in the time of offering the 17. Can qui viduam duxit Episcopus aut Presbyter aut Diaconus esse non potest he who hath married a widow cannot be a Bishop or a Presbyter or a Deacon the 25. Can. Ex his qui caelibes in Clerum pervenerunt jubemus ut Lectores tantum cantores si velint nuptias contrahant Of Bachelors who hath entered into orders Readers only and Singers if they will may marrie the great and constant distinction therein made inter Clericum Laicum and the many other vanities therein to be found specially in the last part of them will easily render their venerable Antiquity of no moment in our present Controversie so that neither your 40 but in effect the 38. Canon though it were more positive and expresse for your Prelatick preheminence nor your Synodicall injunction to the same purpose both posterior to the first Primitive purity are of any regard but 3. so wretched is the cause that you defend that even in your clearest evidences your partiality and hypocrisie is manifest You alledge the Apostolicall Canons in defence of your Prelatick Order and yet you consider not that the same Canons do not only condemn your Prelates But subvert their present constitution I shall not insist upon the 24. Canon Episcopus aut Presbyter in fornicatione aut perjurio deprehensus deponitor Let a Bishop or a Presbyter guilty ofsornication or perjury be deposed the 20. Episcopum aut Presbyterum qui fideles delinquentes quid ergo si Innocentes percutit terrorem ipsis hoc modo incutit deponi praecipimus We command that the Bishop or Presbyter who smiteth delinquents and so becometh a terrour unto them be deposed what then if they smite the innocent the 28â— 41. 53. 57 75. which I am most assured if observed would remove all the present Bishops and Curats in Scotland but the Canons I offer are the 4. Omnium aliorum Pomorum Primitiae Episcopo Presbyteris domum mittuntor Manifestum autem est quod Episcopus et Presbyteri inter Diaconos reliquos Clericos eas dividunt Let the first â—ruits of all others aples be sent home to the Bishop and Presbyters for it is Manifest that the Bishop and Presbyters divide them among the Deacons and the rest of the Clergie 33. Cujusque gentis Episcopos oportet scire quinam inter ipsos primus sit neque sine illius voluntate quicquam agere insolitum illa autem quemque prosetractâ—re quae ad Parochiam ejus loca ipsi subdita attinent sed neque ille citra omnium voluntatem aliquid facito 36. Bis in Anno Episcoporum celebrator Synodus pietatis inter se dogmata in disquistionem vocanto and 80. Dicimus quod non oporteat Episcopum aut Presbyterum publicis se adminiâ—â—rationibus immiscere sed vâ—care commodum se exhibere usibus Ecclesiasticis animum igitur inducito hoc non facere aut deponitor together with the obvious strain of the whole plainly insinuating the Bishop to be the person to whom the flock is principally and immediatly committed and who as the Primus Presbyter the first Presbyter ought chiefly to minde the charge In which Canons although I grant that their appears a precedencie of Order given to the Bishop over the Presbyters who in these times were many Ministers living in one City and Society having the charge in common among themselves and with and under their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over the Church and Flock in their bounds and also to the first Bishop of a Province over his Coëpiscopi Yet I am sure your Prelatick power and Superiority acclaiming the sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction is no where thereby approved but rather condemned Your third Testimony you bring from Cyprian in whose time you say That the power of Bishops was well regulate and Setled and here knowing that he professeth That he would do nothing without the Clergie that he could do nothing without them nor take upon him alone Whereby the antient Prostasia and not your Prelacie is plainly and only held forth You insinuate as much as if he had afterward retracted this opinion and this you prove very pitifully 1. From his answere to one Rogatian a Bishop that he by his Episcopall vigour and Authority had power presently to punish a Deacon for an affront received which yet doth not at all seclude the Presbyters according to the Rule of the Canon Law Episcopus non potest judicare Presbyterum vel Diaconum sine Synodo Senioribus The Bishop cannot judge a Presbyter or a Deacon without the Synod and Eldersâ— 2. From this Censure of Hereticks and Schismaticks for proud contempt of their then Bishops which we do as little allow as you do 3. From a letter written by the Presbyters and Deacons of Rome after the Death of Fabian wherein they complain of the want of one to Moderate and with Authority and advice to take accompt of Matters whence you say that surely they thought little of Persbyters being equal in power to Bishops who
his Epistle ad Evagrium he confirms his assertion above set down with Scripture Arguments most calmly solidly and unanswerably 3. You alledge that Notwithstanding that he make the Bishop and Presbyter to differ in degree only and not in office and that by Ecclesiastick and not Divine Authority yet he confesseth that Presbyters did not ordain and that the origen of the exercising power was in the dayes of the Apostles to prevent schismes c. It 's answered he saith indeed quid enim facit exceptâ ordinatione Episcopus quod Presbyter non facit But as he is there pointing only at the custome then in use so this doth nothing derogate from that equality yea identitie of power which he attributeth to both from Scripture what you mean by the origen of the exercising power c. Is not so clear It 's true he affirmeth that at Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist to Heraclas and Dionysius Bishops the Presbyters did always name one chosen of themselves and placed in higher degree Bishop but what says this more then that in all that time for orders sake they had successive Presidents at first it 's like moveable and thereafter fixed during life And we have already both acknowledged and regreted the grievous abuse occasioned by that latter practice You adde that he compares the Bishops Presbyters and Deacons in the Church â—to the high Priest Priests and Levites in the Temple and since there was at that time from Ecclesiastick custome then allowed which according to his use and as he useth to speak promiscuously writing of Lent he here indifferently termeth an Apostolick Tradition a ground of resemblance why might he not use the similitude without stretching it either to evert what he had said or countenance your Prelacie Lastly you alledge that he sayes that it was decreed through the whole World that a Presbyter should be over the rest to roote out the seede of difference It 's answered that this in toto orbe decretum est may and is to be understood not of an express Decree which doth no where appeare but of a General consentient custome taking place every where both the truth of the thing and Hieroms after Paulatim ad unum omnis Solicitudo est delata by little and little all the care is devolved upon one do abundantly cleare How ever this may be warrantably said that as this custome did with time universally obtain and in Ieroms dayes not having much exceeded the limits of a simple Prostasia was by him also approved as the remedy of dissention so he holding it to be not of Divine disposition no doubt if he had these other holy men were this day to see the hundred part of these sad and fearful effects that it hath produced nothing could be able to breake their astonishment at the surprizing sight of such prodigious consequences of this Mystery of iniquity but sorrow and Lamentation together with deep regrete that they did not better forsee and more timously resist the first tendencies and beginnings of this evil Now whether or not Antiquity be on your side and if our grounds from Scripture against your Episcopall Authority be not much confirmed both by Ierom and the other passages here handled I willingly submit it to all the lovers of truth but lest you think that by the representation I have made in the beginning of my answere to your alledgeance from Antiquity of the early and strange rise and grouth of Episcopacie I do thereby derogate from that light and purity which with you I acknowledge in these Primitive times I must note first That pride as it was the first sin and corrupter of Mans integrity from which the felicities of Paradise could not exempt him So is it of all sins the most inward rooted and subtile attending a man in all conditions finding Matter in all occasions and immixing it self even in our fairest and purest actions 2. That the Disciples of our Lord notwithstanding of his own presence holy instruction and humble example were not free of the motions of this evil the History of the Gospel doth plainly testify 3. I note that the times of the Apostles the most pure and powerfull that ever the Church enjoyed were many wayes infested with this plague I mention not the contentions betuixt Paul and Barnabas which no doubt sprung from this latent corruption but he who considereth the great numberâ— and many wicked practices of false Apostles Hereticks and Schismaticks in these days boasting against and despising even Paul himself with the affected Preheminence of Diotrephes and the then begun working of the mystery of iniquity toward the exalting of the Son of perdition in place of denying must of necessity marveil how this Devil of pride could in so gracious and short a time destitute of all Earthly encouragements so greatly prevail and plainly perceive that this active Spirit would not be wanting to imbrace and improve all occasions and opportunities offered 4 That as order did no doubt at first in all meetings require a President whom I also easily grant to have been as any occasion did require rather recommended by desert no evil consequence being then apprehended then presented by a constant and compleat Rotation So it is very probable and confirmed by Hieroms suffrage that contentions did first both fixe the presidencie or prostasia and exalt it to any notable eminencie but whether by way of remedy or by way of victory to the increase of the Maladie is indeed the most observable points and as I apprehend that whereupon we will divide and therefore I note 5. That although the Authority of able and holy men at first advanced to a fixed Presidencie might then appeare as in these dayes of great simplicity and humility in it self very innocent and in the event also effectuall to concord Yet without all question at best it was but an humane invention copied from the patern of the manner of the then Civil Government of the Empire to which our Lord expresly commanded his Disciples not to conforme 6. That seing affected preheminence and the contentions thence arising did clearly occasion the introducing of this Prostasia though in many yea most places the prevailing number of good men might thereto advance worthy and deserving persons studying more the prospering of the Gospel and unity of the Church then adverting to the bad consequences that thence might ensue Yet it is not only most certain that this promotion was that whereunto these strivings did every where directly aspire but also most probable that even in the first beginnings many ambitious pretenders wanting a just opposition did carry their design and were preferred 7. That by plain dealing I may satisfy all pretenses I observe that albeit power and Authority unite in the Prostasia of one amongst many may be thereby rendered more strong and effectual Yet seing the benefits of this union and advancement doth only flow from the accidental worth and ability of the person
that happens to be promoted and that the order or institution it self destitute of divine warrant and promise and clearly occasioned by evil contention and introduced into the house of God by humane invention could not at first have any thing in it recommendable and hath since produced most corrupt â—ruits Neither the existence of Many excellent and great men in this degree nor the laudable yea extraordinary advantages that the Church hath received from them in the concret can now justify and maintain the Order it self in the abstract If this arguing were good able and well qualifyed men vested with such a power or placed in such a condition have proven and may prove notable instruments of Good therefore it is reasonable and expedient that such a constant order should be erected we might not only have Bishops but most of the Monastick Orders of the Roman Church We finde Peter with the singular benefite of the Church exercing a power of Life and Death and that given him from above and not assumed could therefore an order of Church-men pretending to the like Authority be rationally thence maintained in the Church No wayes Accidental advantages do not commend unwarranted institutions much less can they justle out our Lords express constitution But it is he the perfect orderer of his own house who hath positively defined and blessed its Officers and their power and not left the matter Arbitrarie to the probable contrivances of apparent benefite farre less to the dissembling pretenses of mens Lusts and corrupt Interest 8. It is to be noted that although the great measure of Grace given to the Primitive Church and the hard and frequent persecutions wherewith it was exercised did for a time hinder that strange depravation and incredible â—ruption of wickedness whereunto the setting up of the Ancient Prostasia the rudiment of your Prelacie did from its first beginnings secretly and covertly bend Yet this is most evident that so soon as the Church of God obtained the countenance and was favoured by the more fond in many things such as excessive Doâ—ations and Grants of privileges then prudently pious benevolence of Secular Princes this Prelatick order which in its depression had been indeed honoured with many shining lights and Glorious Martyres attaining then to its ascendent did not only debauch the Lords Ministers for the most part unto idleness avarice and luxurie but continually climb up according to its proper Genius of Ambition until the Devils design in its rise and progress was fully discovered and consummate in the revelation of the Son of perdition 9. This being the rise progress and product of Prelacie in the first Churches as may be clearly gathered from the writtings of these times how it was introduced in other Churches thereafter gathered and brought in may be found in their Histories Only this is certain that as in almost no Church it can be shewed to have been coëvous with Christianity and in all the western Churches where it obtained place was ever a sprig of Romes Hierarchie propagate by her ambition and deceit and the like practices So the Church of Scotland in special was in the beginning and for some centuries thereafter instructed and guided by Monks without Bishops until palladius from Rome did set up Prelacie among us as many Authors witness Nay we may finde it on Record that even in the 816. year a Synod in England did prohibite the Scots any function in their Church because they gave no honour to Metropolitans and other Bishops By these observations having in some sort delineate the mysterious and crooked windings of this excrescing Power in its first motions and setting forth and very clearly and naturally traced its progressions and thence deduced that most prodigious production of the Antichristian Papacie as any considerate man may thereby easily perceive not only how it might but how de facto it hath crept into the whole Church without an Apostolicall introduction notwithstanding of all your contrarie insinuations so I am confident that what ever other advantages these primitive times had above our latter dayes yet our discovery made after so full a revelation compared to the obscure appearances of this wickedness in the first ages of the Church cannot be thereby rationally disproved and your scurrile disparaging of the latter times of reformation as the fagg end oâ— sexteen hundred years doth with little less success plead for the Pope and Antichrist then for your Anâ—ichristian Prelacie As for the rest of your discourse wherein you tell your N. C. that though the ancient Bishops were better men then either Bishops or Presbyters alive Yet in Presbyteries Specially in the matter of Ordination they were sine quibus non and what ever be the present abuse of the Episcopall power Yet it is a rational and most necessary thing that the more approven and gifted be peculiarly incharged with the inspection of the Clergie an order of men neâ—ding much to be regulate and seing all humane things and Presbytery also are liable to be abused the common maxime remains to be applied remove the abuse of Bishops but retain their use In answere hereto I need not inlarge he who knows Church History best will easily grant that as for the first Centurie and an half we have no vestige upon record of your Prelatick power So when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had place their concurrence in Presbyteries was only for order as being the Modâ—rators a consideration of the same exigence and effect whether they be fixed or unfixed and not from any peculiar power proper to them as a superior order A thing so certainly disowned by the primitive Church that even after the Bishops thought themselves well stated in their Prelacie and were beginning to contend among themselves for the Papacie Hierom doth plainly deny them any such prerogative above Presbyters and was not therefore contradicted by any How much more then doth this condemn that sole power both of Ordination and Jurisdiction whereunto your Bishops do pretend As for your alledged reason and necessity of promoting the better gifted over the unruly Clâ—rgie whatever application it may have to that naughty Company of your insufficient and profane Curats or Conformity to the Court yea the worlds prejudice against our Lord Jesus his Ministers and all his followers Yet these two things are most evident 1. That as that lowely and ministerial Government appointed by Christ in his own house admitting no superiority or inequality of power among Ministers is not subjected to and alterable at the arbitriment of humane reason so the advantage of Gifts whereupon you would found it doth so little favour your conclusion that the direct contrarie is recommended by our Lord as its best evidence and fruit he that will be chief among you let him be your Servant and that not only as to the grace of humility but in plain opposition to that superior Authority exercised in Secular Rule whereof the imitation in this place is expresty
this matter would fall under the compasse of this crime However not to rake into this abysse of wickedness that Act of Supremacie giving to the King over all Persons Meetings and in all Causes of the Church all the power that Christ as head of the Church in these things hath or can acclame a piece of such desperat solly that I am assured that as he that sitteth in the Heaven doth laugh so shall he one day have all its contrivers and abettors in dirision in this I am very positive that according to the present legall establishment made in these matters to derive the power of your Courts from or connect the same with the power and headship of our Lord Jesus is utterly impossible That we then who as Ministers of the Gospel do take upon us and exercise no power save that which is our Lords cannot join and partake with your Meetings your self may judge But you say That all that is Divine in Discipline is that scandalous persons be noted and separated from worship but how this shall be administred can be no matter of Religion or of the concernment of Souls providing it be done 'T is answered to argue thus all that is Divine in Preaching is that the truth of the Gospel be declared but how this shall be performed can be no matter of Religion or of the concernment of Souls providing it be done would it not be false and weak reasoning 2. As your Providing it be done viz. rightly is a salvo whereby a man may as pertinently argue against all means whatsomever which certainly are nothing useful providing the end for which they are appointed be rightly done so this quality hath such an exigence even of these midses which you suppose to be of no import that it plainly subverts your Argument But 3. Your position that all that is Divine in Discipline is that scandalous persons be noted c. Is false in as much as this is no more clearly to be found in Scripture then the Persons and Officers therewith incharged are evidently thereby ordained yea this matter is so certain that there is scarce one place to be seen in Scripture for the warrant of Discipline which doth not with the same evidence hold out the persons intrusted with its administration And I will give unto thee the keyes of the Kingdom of heaven Whose sins soever ye remit they are remitted unto them Feed Over-see Rule the slock are Commissions so full ordaining the persons as well as designing their work that I can hardly impute the laxeness of your reasoning to your oversight In the next place for as for your quibling with your N. C. anent the foolish answere which you put in his mouth it is altogether frivolous as shall be shewed in your 7. Dial. you urge That seing that Presbytries do by Divine right acclaime a power oâ— jurisdiction they ought to meet in these Courts let the Law call it what it will even as iâ— the King should abrogate all Laws for the worship of God and declare that all that assemble to worship God shall be understood to worship Mahomet and thereupon command all to meet though we meet not on that ground yet you hope we would sâ—ill meet to worship God how ever it be interpret 'T is answered If the jurisdiction competent to Presbyteries by Divine right were in these Courts your Argument might have some weight but seing they are not the former Presbyteries but new Courts set up as I have already declared no more deriving power from Jesus Christ then your late High-commission how can you think in reason that either the right and power of Presbyters or his Majesties call should oblige Ministers to com to the one more then the other For my part as I esteem it a less sin upon the Kings call to come to a Court of his own erecting then to abuse Christs warrant to the establishing of a Court as his which by its institution manifestly disowns him So I should sooner resolve upon the Kings command to meet in the High-Commission then by coming from the motive of our Lords warrant acknowledge your Exercises of the Brethren for his Courts which are so palpably setled upon the basis of another Authority As for your Similitude not to insist upon such claudicant Arguments it is like to the legs of the lame which are not equall but make it straight thus the King dissolves all Christian Churches and erects Mahometan Mosches charging all to repaire there to worship and declaring that he will account thâ—ir so doing a testimony of their compliance with the change by him made Now if one should stand up and for the perswading of just recusants say that they may safely go there and worship God without either owning of Mahomet or regarding the construction may be made of it Pray Sir how would you understand it And what ever you or any reasonable man think should be the practice or Christians in this case I am content the N. C. be thereby judged I confesse the termes of the Similitude are hard But remember they are of your own choosing and my work is only to make them just to conclude therefore it is not Mens interpretation or mis-interpretation although in many cases these homologations whereby either Enemies may be hardened or friends stumbled require also a very weighty consideration that we regard in this matter but the reall state of things whereby as Christ's power is ejected forth of your Courts So the Divine jurisdiction of Presbyters cannot possibly therein have place To this you subjoin that suppose Episcopacie were Tyrannie and Bishops were Tyrannes in the Church Why ought you not to submit to them as well as you did to the late Tyrannes in the State It is answered if I did think there were any Emphasis more then the strain of your discourse in this your urging Our submission to the late Usurpers I could tell you that though the cases were parallel as they are not all the submission made by us to Oliver would not make out your inference And that it is Your and not Our submission which only can serve your turn I need not mention that Mr. Sharp Now of St. Andrews was the first if not the only Minister in Scotland that took the Tender and thereby deserting his Fellow-prisoners procured his own liberty Nor how the late introductors of Episcopacie were most or many of them such as by subscriving the Tender abjuring the King and the like compliances had wholly deboshed their Consciences unto the perfidious re-establishing of your abjured Prelacie whereas the tenacious honesty of the faithfull of the Land was both then and is now accounted their bigotrie and folly But to the purpose 1. If Bishops had only been intruded upon Presbytries as they were in former times it is not questioned but Faithfull Presbyters not Outed of their possession founded on Divine right might have continued the same with a due Testimony and opposition
Devil did that and so do all Sects do you therefore mean that it should be laid aside as an insufficient Judge or that we use it no better then the Devil did I desire you may explain your self if not for our concernment at least for the Scriptures vindication In the mean time I am heartily willing that both what you and what I have said be rightly pondered and whether the Church in matters of Government be lest to rove in your pretended liberty or more excellently established by the infinite wisdom unspeakable love and most tender care of its only Lord and Head let Scripture and Reason impartially decide But to conclude all you tell us with a preface That the Angels of the Churches afford us fairer likely hoods for Bishops then ever we shall finde in the Bible for Presbyterie It 's answered seing you your self do acknowledge that nothing in it whether you mean in this place or in the whole Scripture the words are ambiguous amounts to a demonstration I remit the matter to the Scriptures by me adduced whereby I am confident all your Likelihoods are more then counterballanced He who is further desiâ—ous to have them removed may consult M. Durham upon the Text for my own part since ever I had the understanding to consider that the Râ—velation was made in a Mystick phrase that the Seven starres who are the Angels do certainly signifie the many teachers that were in every one of these Churches that in the Candle-sticks as in the Starres we finde the same oneness and number and lastly that though to the Angel be the inscription for address yet we finde the body of all the Epistles written directly to the whole Churches these things I say occurring I protest I could never discerne more reason in this argument for subjecting these Churches unto seven superior single Prelates then for making the same Prelats really Angels or turning every Church into a Candle stick Or if I may adduce another instance not absimilare to your Faire Likelihoods for interpreting the two Witnesses to be the two arch-Arch-Bishops of St. Andrews and Glasgow When you have spent your endeavours upon the Authority of Episcopacie you think to seconde it in the next place with its Antiquity derived you say from the times next to the Apostles whereupon you conclude in these words That how this excrescing power should have crept into the whole Church and no mention when it came in no Prince or Universal Council to introduce it in the times of persecution when the Church usually is purest and most free of pride no Secular consideration to flatter but the first brunt of the persecution alwayes against it and how none opposed it if this was not introduced by Apostles or Apostolicall men passeth my Divination And really Sir as to its particular Methods and increase so doth it mine And so much more then it doth yours that I am perswaded from clear Scripture that it was not only not introduced but plainly reprobate by our Lord and his Apostles Yet am I so little thereby stumbled that the more dark and obscure I finde its rise and progresse I am the more confirmed that it is the very Mysterie of iniquity and do so much the more admire the incorruptible and eternall Truth of the Gospel which as in the beginning it foretold the coming and took very early Notice of the first motions of this prodigie of wickednesse So hath it through the many ages of its exaltation preserved it self against and now in the latter dayes overcomes its Malice But to review your discourse more particularly I have already shewed that the Ministery and Government institute by our Lord and confirmed and practised by the Apostles was plainly Presbyterian if so what place for further inquirie Is your alledged traditional subsequent humane institution of Prelacie of greater moment 2. That even in the Primitive times and for 140. years after our Saviour no vestige of Prelacie appears upon record is the consentient opinion of the best Searchers both on your and our part 3. This plea of Antiquity hath already been so fully handled and improved both by yours and ours specially Hamond on your part and Blondel Salmasius and other Learned servants of Christ on ours that there needs nothing be added and where the advantage is the Ingenuous may easily discerne He that desires a solid and short accompt of the matter may read the appendix to the jus Divinum Ministerii Evangelici But you proceed to give in some poor scrapes of pretended Antiquity which not only the most sure and clear and farre more ancient Scriptures of Truth but even the convincing answeres which they have often receaved might well have made you to forbear And first you say That Ignatius his Epistles are plain language And so they are indeed but too plain for you to have cited as the following passages compared with the Scriptures subjoined may evince In the Epistle to the Tralliani we have what is a Bishop but he that is possest of all Principality and Authority beyond all as much as is possible for men Reverence the Bishop as ye do'Christ as the holy Apostles have Commanded c. As the Lord Christ doth nothing without his Father so must ye do nothing without your Bishop Let nothing seem right or equall to you that is contra to his judgement In the Epistle to the Philad Let the Princes obey the Emperours the Souldiers the Princes the Deacons and the rest of the Clergie with all the People and the Souldiers and the Princes and the Emperour let them obey the Bishop no doubt the Bishop of Rome In the Epistle to the Smyrnenses The Scripture saith honour God and the King but I say honour God as the Author and Lord of all things and the Bishop as the Prince of Priests resembling the image of God of God for his principality of Christ for his Priesthood c. There is none greater then the Bishop in the Church who is consecrated for the Salvation of the whole World c. Let all men follow the Bishop as Christ the Father c. It is not Lawfull without the Bishop to baptize or offer c. He that doth any thing without consulting the Bishop Worshippeth the Devil Now on the other hand let us hear what the Scripture saith to this purpose Who then is Paul who Apollo but Ministers by whom ye beleeve Be ye followers of me even as I also am of Christ for we preach not our selves but Christ Iesus the Lord and our selves your Servants for Iesus sake Not that we have dominion over your faith but are helpers of your joy for by faith ye stand But so shall it not be among you whosoever will be great among you shall be your Minister and whosoever of you will be the chiefest shall be Servant of all to these adde the practices and other professions of the Apostles concerning themselves and their fellow-Labourers and really Sir when
Christians ought not to press or judge one another in the performance or forbearance of things in themselves indifferent as acceptable and well-pleasing to God without his warrant and therefore the force and effect of humane Laws ordering and commanding things in order to the Politick ends of Government and in so farre by the Lord commanded to be obeyed are not by this Doctrine in the least demurred Now that your Ceremonies and other impositions being all relative to the service and worship of God wherein as every thing is to be observed with the faith of the Lords acceptation so nothing can be acceptable without his warrant are not of the nature of things as objected to civill commands but plainly such wherein Paul pleads for liberty is manifest Nay you your self know so well that the very things scrupled at by us as enjoyned toward a religious observance would be readily complied with upon any other reasonable occasion and that thousands who detest the Surplice would chearfully engadge in a Camisado for their Prince's service that I add nothing If you say that the things in debate though commanded for religious uses are never the less enjoyned not as acceptable to God and under this formality but are only necessary because commanded You bewray not only a sinful gaudie licentiousness of doing things for and in the house of the God of Heaven not commanded by the God of Heaven wherein even Heathens let be Christians have been tender but expose the purity and simplicity of Religion to all the corruptions of mans vain imagination As to what you adde anent the pretext which this liberty may give to offenders to decline Discipline it is yet less to the purpose in as much as submission to Discipline doth in effect flow from the Lords Authority whereby it becomes necessary and Mens part therein is only a naked ministerial application Lastly if you object that publick Peace and Order require your conforming obedience Your opinion and method in this point is much different from the Apostles he makes it his great argument not only for not judging and censuring Non-conformists but also in the case of offence for complying with them in their forbearance That we ought to follow the things which make for peace and wherewith one may edisie another But you and your partie for all the noise you make for publick Peace before you tolerat a Non-conforming in the greatest indifferencies and howsoever tender and innocuous will sooner both deprive your Brethren of Peace and for your vain trifles destroy the work of God whereas though you had faith in these things yet you ought to have it to your selves before God But Sir it is already too manifest that as in practice you know not the way of Peace so in this discourse by pressing a strict obedience from the free Spirit of Christian liberty which you seem to commend you palpably condemn your self in that which you appear to allow Having thus farre in the pursute of your reasonings digressed in the explanation of true Christian Liberty because of its after use in the perusal of your remaining purposes I shall not stick in the considering of what you make your N. C. add That we forbear the things pressed for avoiding the scandal of others I have already told you that the reasons of our forbearance have no less then the indispensable motive of the will and Oath of God Yea suppose the things required were meere externals and indifferent as they are not yet I have so clearly proven that your abridging of our Christian liberty therein by vertue of your commands is in it self repugnant to the Apostles Doctrine and in its effects pernicious that your requiring to make the restraint of Authority abused to these impositions the warrant of Practice to the forcing of Conscience and the offending of a Christian Brother is a Sophisme no better then if the hardie practiser or proud imposer who is expressly commanded in Christian tenderness to regard his Brothers offence should by a vain pretending of his own offence taken from the others indulged forbearance or recusancie thereby turne the Argument and elude the exhortation to the very scorne of Scripture That which I rather observe is that seing that to give Scandal is not ill defined by you to be a stretching of our liberty to practice to the drawing of others to the like or grieving or making them weak who have not the same clearness why do you not begin your application at Prelats Who having first streatched their practice to the ensâ—aring do also frame unjust decrees to the forcing of such who have no clearness to conform And on the other hand ought you not to indulge such who only desire to reâ—uge their Conscience in the Sanctuary of an allowed forbearance But these are the men whom having first sinfully spoiled of liberty you scornfully abuse by telling they may now act without regard to Scandal since you do permit them no liberty to the contraire But I hasten to your more closs examination of the matter of Conformity And first you ask why do not our Ministers join with your Courts for Church-discipline It 's answered it were tedious to examine the follies of you and your N. C. in this point we join not in your Courts because they are not the Courts of Jesus Christ but of the King and Prelates If this you deny read the Act Par 1. 1661 Sessâ— 1. Concerning Religion and Church-Government the proclamation of Councel thereafter discharging all Presbytries untill Authorized by the Bishops and the Act Par. eod Sess. 2. For the restitution of Bishops where as you will finde that Presbytries were made Precarious as to their continuance not as to their right which is indeed Divine by the first Act and then simpliciter discharged and broken up by the Proclamation so that which returnes in their place by the last Act and what ensued is not the former Presbyteries but only the Exercises of the Brethren having both their regulation and authority from the Bishops who have all their church-Church-power and Jurisdiction in a dependance upon and subordination unto the soveraign power of the King as Supream So that the Kings Authority and Prerogative Royal is plainly the proper fountain and last resort of all the power and jurisdiction to be found either in your Church or its Meetings Nay further this 〈◊〉 so certain that as his Majesty doth not so much as pretend a Commission from Jesus Christ as the anointed King of his Church for this effect which yet the Pope in his most wicked usurpation did alwayes Judge necessary so if it be Treason as it is dict sess of the same Parliament act 3. to derogat from the prerogative of the Imperial Crown of this Realm and if absolute supremacie in Ecclesiasticks incapable either of superior or conjunct do thereto by the late Act of Supremacie appertain certainly to make our Lord so much as a sharer with the King in
ensnared and thereafter more cruelly persecute and oppressed not repeating what hath been said by others in their vindication I shall briefly run over what you here subjoin You say then That Separation being a tearing of the Body of Christ to forsake the unity of the Church when there is scarce a colour of pretence for it must be a great sin 'T is answered I will not stand to descant upon the nature and several degrees of Separation and how that non-conforming to and compliance with a prevalent backsliding partie in effect the worst of Separatists which is our present case is very different from the case of Separation from a Church formerly acknowledged and joined with nor love I to inquire how farre a mans entrie into the Ministrie by open perjury and violence and his profane and flagitious deportment therein notourly known may in the perturbed state of the Church supply the want of a declarative sentence making void his mission Nor lastly will I make use of your own plain laws viz. the Act anent the restitution of Bishops and the late Act of Supremacie whereby all church-Church-power mark it is made dependent upon and subordinat unto the Kings Supremacie to prove your Ministers to be but Court Curats But in this I am plain and confident that if the Prophets who by their lyes and lightness cause the people to erre and speak peace to such as despise the Lord and strengthen their hands who walk in the imagination of their own heart be not to be hearkened unto if we ought to bewarre and flee from false Prophets whose fruits of ungodliness as well as heresie as is clear from the context do discover them to be but ravening wolves destroying Souls under the sheeps cloathing of an exterior call and hypocritical composure if such who cause divisions and offences contraire to the received truth and who serve not our Lord Jesus but their own belly are to be avoided and lastly if these Destroyers and Offenders be the only persons guilty of all the Separation and other inconveniences which ensue then are your Curates as dignoscible by all or one or other of these characters as the night is by darkness justly yea necessarily to be disowned fled from and avoided and only chargeable with that schisme whereof you endeavour to make us guilty But you add That in a schismatical time-serving humour we come sometimes to Church to â—vite the punishment of Law but seldom that we may retain our interest with our partie that we hear some of you but not others that some go to Churches in the Countrey but not in the City and finally some join with you in the ordinary Worship of Prayer and praise yet will not join in the Eucharist which is but solemn praise Sir if you had been candid in this reflection in place of imputing this variety to humour and faction it would indeed have moved you to pity the strait of so many good people redacted to such a multiâ—arious perplexity which yet in its outward appearance is but light in comparison of these inward inquietudes wherewith the contraire workings of the fear of God love of truth abhorrencie of wickedness tenderness toward Authority respect to union and peace and fear of punishment do continually sollicite them If I might presume so farre upon your credite I could tell you that in my certain knowledge some have been against their Consciences forced by violence and spoill to hear your Curates who therefore have mourned many Moneths thereafter and certain of them even unto death That others whom the generality of your Curates did either offend or according to the Lords prediction Ier. 23. v. 33. after long triall not profite at all have searched by a choise to remedy the evill for that there are better and worse not only as to private but also as to Publick transgressions you groundlessly deny and lastly that some have prevailed with themselves to hear and join with you in prayer and praise who have yet still scrupled in their Consciences to communicate with you in that Sacrament which beside the adjunct of solemn praise is designedly institute to signify and confirme our communion in as well as our union with Christ from whom we have reason to apprehend that many of you according to Scripture-rules and the grounds which your conversations hold out are at great distance If then these things be so let it satisfy you in this point that as the Generality of the whole land would account it a great reliefe to be delivered of all your Tribe and many of the godly are convinced that your Ministery being neither of nor for our Lord Jesus is not to be owned so all these umbrages of compliance which you observe are only the effects of curiosity fear or some other humane frailty wherewith by you we can neither in Charity nor ingenuity be urged But you are so desireous to win us to this conformity of owning your Curates that you are willing to suppose them to be but Intruders occupying the places of our faithfull shepherds violently torn away and yet you argue that although the high priest-hood was in our Lords dayes violently invaded by the Romans and by them exposed to sale and those Symoniacks did also usurp thâ— right of others yet we find Cajaphas as high Priest Prophesâ—ing and our Saviour answering to his authoritative adjuration and though the Pharisees were wretched teachers and very guilty persons yet our Saviour saith hear them for they sit in Moses chair which you saâ— is unanswerable and was the doctrine of our own Teachers 'T is answered not to insist upon the particular and full answere already made by others for dissolving the apparent force of this objection it is to be considered 1. That as this argument doth proceed upon parallel instances and similitudes for the most part lame and unequal so the Jews their particular customes and observances in the examples adduced are to us so hid and unknown and the Jewish constitution in General of a Church and Nation joined in one special people unto God by virtue of a Divine Law for matters both Civil and Religious committed even in its Civil part to the custody and interpretation of their Religious Officers is so manifestly different from that of the Christian Church gathered in one out of all and every Nation only for things Religious without any alteration in their Civil State under Jesus Christ their Head and King and the Ministers by him sent forth that little light as to our present purpose can be thence concluded 2. That not only in the point of the Churches Ministerie but also in its worship and other ordinances to reason from the dispensations of Soveraigne Providence in the decline of Churches the lawfull compliance of good men with these Churches in owning them in things found and bearing with corruptions which they could not remedy and lastly from the Lords assistance and presence that never the less hath therein
Kingdome But can you or any man thence conclude that therefore he acted from an ordinary power and facultie a priviledge proper to his office Why then should men be so absurdly unequal as from the like extraordinary interpositions of Princes in Church perturbations to attribute to them a proper inherent right and perpetual prerogative Next you say That the Emperours also judged in matters of Schisme But seing that any judgement given by them was consequent to the Churches determination though perhapes with a little attemperation for conveniency whereof determinations in these matters do very naturally allow the instance is no more favourable then the rest you have adduced But the Code Basilicks Capitulers of Charles the great shew that they never thought it without their sphere to make laws in Ecclesiastick matters 'T is answ This objection shewes that either you are little acquainted with what is in these Books or little advertent to the conclusion you have in hand The laws you mention are either imperial confirmations of the truth owned by the Church or for condemning and punishing of declared hereticks or for authorizing and ordering a slender umbrage of jurisdiction called episcopalis audientia granted to Church-men in charitable and favourable cases or for restraining and correcting their dissolute manners or lastly anent the regulating of Hospitals Alms-houses other things pertaining to the outward policy of the Church Pray Sir what make these for your Supremacie Or was ever this part of his Majesties power by us questioned But where wil you finde in all approven antiquity that ever a Prince by vertue of a pretended inherent right in his Crown or any acclaimed prerogative and Supremacie in causes Ecclesiastick took upon him with one blow summarily to overturne the established Ministery of a Church by himselfe formerly by solemn Oath confirmed introduce new Office-bearers set up a new frame of Church-government declaring himselfe to be the sole head and fountain thereof to whom all others as subordinat must be accountable for their admistrations In what antient record did you ever read of a Commission granted by a King for Ecclesiastick affaires impowering Secular persons to appoint Ministers to be censured by suspension and deposition and Church-men to punish by fining confining incarcerating and other corporal paints What Emperour or Prince did ever assume to himselfe in the right of his royal power at once to impose upon a whole Church a new liturgie and form of service never before heard of among them Or did it ever enter in the heart of a Christian Potentat to declare for a Law that what ever he should please to enact anent Church-meetings and matters should upon the publication be by all obeyed and observed and in suite of it to statute that if either Minister or other person not allowed by his or his Bishops authority do preach expone Scripture or pray except in his own house and to these only of his own family it shall be judged a Coventicle and liable to pains of Law These are a part of the native fruits of your Supremacie If you look back to confirme it by antient precedents pray give us but one parallel I grant that Iustinian in some of his Constitutions after having declared and confirmed the truth received by the Church and dâ—termined by her Councils not only condemnes but anathematizes the contrary heresies But seing his using of that phrase peculiar to the Church and properly importing a power acknowledged not to be competent to secular Athority doth only express his more enixe detestation of these errours and approbation of the Church her censures against them it cannot with any colour of reason be made use of for your purpose But you proceed to tell us that the Bishops not excepting the Bishope of Rome were named at least their elections approven by the Emperours And what then For my part if the Emperour and all Christian Princes should agree at once to reduce them aswell as they advanced them it should not be accounted an invasion of the Churches power or priviledge But because it is like that these Emperours you speak of did indeed regard them as true Church-officers nevertheless medled as is mentioned in their elections I answer further that the true cause of Princes their first medling in the elections of Bishops was either the diffidence of the Bishops as to that office and title wherein not being satisfied from Scripture-warrant they were inclined to apply to the Emperour for the supplement of his confirmation or els their solicitous ambition which in thesearly contests that they had for precedency did prompt them among other artifices to fortify their pretensions by the Emperour's favour and suffrage However this is very certain that whether the Emperour 's medling was first procured by the Bishops address or did flow from their own proper motive had these Church-men contained themselves within the rules and limits set to them by our Lord they had never judged the Emperours confirmation requisite to the validity of their office and title and therefore seing the true account of this matter is that the aspiring of Ecclesiasticks did give the first rise unto this secular medling whether we take it to be no usurpation as being conversant about that which to say the truth is not Christian let be Ecclesiastick or to be a partaking in the Church-men their usurpation either of the two doâ—h equally make void your argument After the reasons which we have heard you conclude That Kings their medling in Ecclesiastick affaires was never controverted till the Romane Church swelled to the hight of tyranny and since the reformation it hath been still stated as one of the differences betwixt us and them It is answered If Princes had at first exceeded and intruded too far in Church-matters and then the Pope acted by a worse spirit and no less aspiring had risen up against his Masters and thrust himselfe into their rooms what would this make for your advantage Or doth it to either of them conclude a right Suppose a Papist debating this question should argue thus that the Pope his headship in Ecclesiastick affaires in England was never controverted till Henry the Eight impatient through lust did arrogate to himself the Supremacy and since that time it hath still been stated as one of the controverted differences would you think this reasoning pungent Why then is not your discerning equall to your judgement But the clear truth in this matter is that although the Emperours of old did at no time lay claime to this Supremacy questioned yet they and the succeeding Princes having too much connived at and countenanced the Antichristian ambition working in Prelacy toward the Papacy it was from the righteous judgement of God that upon its exaltation they were blinded and involved in these contentions and justly plagued by the transcendent insolence of an evill which they had too much fomented And therefore your dating the period of these contests