degrees of Ministers to wit Bishops Presbyters and Deacons That which we wish may be principally observed by these Premisses is That so many so eminently Learned and Judicious Divines and among them such as are thought to have practised the Presbyterial Discipline would not so plainly and universally have acknowledged the Necessary Use of Episcopal Prelacy except before all Presbyterial parity they had judged it the Best but yet we are to soar higher accounting that most truly the Best which hath the Best Right CAP. II. SECT I. The second general part of this full satisfaction is concerning the Right of Episcopacy which is to accord to the Word of God which is the second reserved Condition in the Common Covenant THere are but two principal wayes to understand every Accordance to the Word of God One from Primitive Antiquity especially that which bordereth immediately upon the Apostolical Age the Other by the light and evidence of Scripture it self And for our just enquiry into both we shall take along with us the Consent and acknowledgment of such Protestant Divines to whom our Opposites cannot justly impute partiality in the behalf of Bishops Antiquity speaketh unto us both by its profession and practice sometimes professing it to be so far according to the Word of God as it is Apostolical sometimes in an higher tone and accent to attribute unto it a Divine Right Touching the Apostolical Right our Opposites will not seem to be so far forlorn of Antient Patronage but that they will object four Authors against this which Objections we are to remove in the first place as rubs in our way that our Readers passage may become more even and easie unto him SECT II. First That no Antient Father hath been justly objected as gainsaying the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy no not Hierome THe Smectymnians have informed both the Honourable Houses of Parliament that The best Charter pleaded for Episcopacy is Ecclesiastical Constitution and the testimony of Hierome Which is the main Fort which they and other out Opposites rest upon The Original of Episcopal Prelacy saith he is rather from the Custom of the Church than of the Lords disposing Whence these Disputants conclude that he held it to be Meerly Ecclesiastical and the rather because this his Commentary is upon a Text of Scripture Two kind of Answers are appliable to this Objection One in respect of Hieromes person the Other in regard of his manifold Confessions to the contrary First Hierome by nature an angry man had been not a little provoked by John Bishop of Hierusalem and thereupon as a learned Doctor even of the Presbyterian Church saith Did probably vent this sentence in an humane passion Especially as another saith Holding it an indignity to see his Order contemned And that such passions were sometimes incident to this Father our next Section will further manifest But we are rather willing to rest upon the more manifest resolution of Hierome himself Secondly Therefore we come to the Construction of his words which we cannot unfold better than according to the interpretation of the above-mentioned Scultetus namely That Hierome denying Episcopacy to be of Divine disposition meant that it was not immediately ordained by Christ himself in the time of his Residence here upon earth And by affirming it to be of the Custome of the Church of Christ understood this in the dayes of the Apostles And that this is the proper and genuine interpretation of these words we appeal from if so it was passionate Hierome to Hierome dispassionate from whom we have manifold acknowledgments of the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy saying That all Bishops are the Successors of the Apostles and do now supply their places He also terms the Episcopal power of Excommunication the Apostolical Rod and correspondently he calls Damasus a Bishop his Shepheard and himself a Presbyter his Sheep Thirdly He resembleth Bishops and Presbyters in the New Testament to Aaron and his Sons in the Old calling it an Apostolical Tradition And Lastly He recounteth from Antiquity James our Lords Brother Bishop of Hierusalem Mark Bishop of Alexandria Timothy of Ephesus Titus of Crete whom the Apostles left their Successors in place of their Government So St. Hierome in as full a distinction of Bishops over Presbyters as any Prelate can do at this day Wherefore it will not we presume fall into the imagination of any discreet Reader to think that so many Apostolical Relations had unto Bishops by Hierome must needs confirm unto us his opinion of an Apostolical Institution especially those last now mentioned out of his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers which Erasmus calls A learned work and worthy of such an Author If we should yield unto our Opposites to choose them an Author out of all Protestant Divines whom they would make Umpire and Determinator between us and them in this very Case we are perswaded that Beza must be he and him shall not we refuse who directly proveth even out of Hierome That the custom of â—of choosing one among the Presbyters who should be over the rest was observed from the time of Mark thâ— Evangelist Nay and further thâ— same Theodore Beza doth quit the main Objection of Hieromes denying Prelacy to have been of Divine disposition saying roundly The Hierome is not to be thought to havâ— dated so much as to dream that noâ— of the Presbyters was placed as Preâ—â—dent â—ver the rest when he said that at the first the Church was gâ—verned by the Common Council 〈◊〉 Presbyters This is as much as an Prelatically minded man could either say or wish to be said SECT III. That Augustine objected against the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy is directly for it AUgustine a Father whose memory hath been Venerable throughout the whole Christian World is objected to have written thus to Hierome Although according to the titles of Honour usual in the Church Episcopacy be greater than Presbytery yet is Augustine inferiour to Hierome in many things Hence the Smectymnians If Augustine had known that the Majority of Bishops above Presbyters had been of Divine or Apostolical institution c. he would have said as much So they Which is much more than they themselves ought to have said for two Reasons First Because St. Hierome as they there confess had taken distaste at Augustine and thereupon written two sharp Epistles to him in both which he doth but yet Ironically extelâ— him as a great man because he was In Pontificali culmine Constitutus So they Whereby they do in a manner proclaim Hieromes peevishness every Ironie proceeding from some Splenetical tumor for although Hierome was otherwise a Saint-like man yâ—â— in respect of Moderation he was famâ— inferior to Augustine who here by his mild answer in the objected Epistle endeavoured to allay the heat of Hieromes passion with the cool breath of Christian condescension saying Augustine is in many
our selves much but may be contented with the Testimonies of our Opposites choice Advocate and against Bishops as vehement an Adversary as could be Yet he in his Commentaries upon the Verses concerning the foresaid Bishops instiled Angels in the two first Chapters of the Apocalypse from Point to Point sheweth notwithstanding how those Bishops in these Churches were reprehended by Christ for not executing Spiritual Discipline upon certain as well Clergy as People A second for too much Indulgence to the Wicked A third for suffering the Woman Jezabel and such as had been seduced by her and not handling her according to her Deserts Doctor Fulke saith as much in effect A fourth For forbearing to use Discipline against a Balaamatical Seducer Mr. Perkins likewise fetcheth his ground of Excommunication from the foresaid Texts concerning the Angel of the Church of Pergamus whom he was inclined to think was a Prelate over Presbyters as Marlorate also but even now told us That the same Angel was therefore reprehended by Christ because being President there he did not put in practice his Authority of Correction which he had over Clergy and People Let us now proceed to a Rule of Proportion to try how our Opposites Comparison can stand between an Apocalyptical Prelate and either Speaker in Parliament or Proloquutor in an Assembly or as any other for Time or Place together with some other circumstances allotted by Ordinance of Parliament But tell us have any of these Authority to take an Accusation of any Criminal Offence which haply may be committed or of controlling any one Vote be it never so exorbitant much less any Corrective Power of any one Member of the House Nor doth this differ from the Confession of Mr. Calvin first in his Collection out of the Epistle of St. Paul to Titus viz. That at that time one was set over the rest of Presbyters to govern them both in Authority and Counsel in Authority Why I confess saith he as the Conditions of Men are now a days no Order can be kept amongst Ministers except one be over the rest And how often have they acknowledged the Prelacy of one over the rest of the Clergy to be a Presidency And so their thrice Learned Advocate will resolve them saying They dream not of any Presidency void of Authority seeing that every Child knoweth that there cannot be any Presidency without Authority SECT XXV That Episcopal Government exercised in the Primitive Church was Authoritative WE dare and do protest That hereby we plead not for an irregular Prelacy No for according to the State of the Church even at this time Bishops themselves are under Canons and are as liable to Censures as others if they shall transgress Besides the Obedience enjoyned upon Presbyters hath ever been constituted by their own Consents either express or implicit and accordingly ratified by Parliaments But we are to inquire into the Judgment of Antiquity that we may the better continue in their Footsteps The most Antient Father Ignatius in those Epistles which are allowed for genuine by the most exact and industrious Authors Vedelius Scultetus and Rivetus is most frequent in this Argument for submission of Presbyters to their Bishops giving them always a Negative Voice and allowing nothing to be done without them As did also Clemens both of them being Disciples of the Apostles Cyprian not long after a Martyr of Christ professed to do nothing without the Consent of his Clergy yet held it necessary for the Church that all Acts should be managed by Bishops Tertullian though himself a Presbyter denied that Presbyters we speak of the Exercise had the right so much as of Baptizing without the Consent of the Bishop Origen a Presbyter likewise thinketh That his Accompt to God will be less than if he had been a Bishop because saith he the Bishop possessing the chief place in the Church is accomptable to God for the whole Church Ambrose noteth such a Man be he Presbyter or Lay to be a strayer from the Truth who doth not obey his Bishop We pass by Epiphanius Chrysostome and other eminent Fathers to Hierome whose Patronage our Opposites pretend to have yet in this Particular he is as much against them as any The Safety of the Church saith he doth depend upon the Dignity of the Bishop so that unless an extraordinary and eminent Power be given unto him there will be as many Schisms in the Church as Ministers And again which we wish the Presbyterial Advocates duely to mark he saith not only that Bishops are a Law unto themselves but unto Presbyters also Hitherto of the Jurisdiction it self The next Point concerneth the Continuance of it in the Person of the Bishop SECT XXVI That the personal continuance of Episcopacy was during life against the most novel Figments to the contrary FIrst The Angels or Supreme Ministers in the Revelation to whom the Epistles according to the Scriptures were written seeing that they were always chargeable to inform the Presbyters with the Contents therefore they must be supposed to be in Office before they could discharge any such Function Because Timothy Titus and all the other Apostles continued their functions until their bodily dissolution Secondly In the narrative parts of every of the said Epistles Christ giveth every of the Prelates to know That he knew their works and that he had them in estimation according to their works namely works done long before insomuch that he chargeth one To do his former works c. 2. v. 3. and commendeth another because His last works were better than his former c. 3. v. 19. Noting as well the works of his Function as of his Conversation and therefore was far from the conceipt of a Deambulatory Hebdomatical or peradventure Ephemeral Office either of the foresaid Speaker Proloquutor or Moderato Who by reason of their not continuance in their Office could not be capable of their Charge either of doing their former work nor commended for his better after work in his said Office Thirdly Besides some were questioned for not executing their Offices against the Heretical Nicolaitans and Idolatrous Balaamites and Jesabel as well out of the Convocation of Presbyters as with their consent when they were met Which proveth that in the interim between Convents and not Convents the Prelates office was permanent Whereas the Deambulatory Actors use to have their Quietus est and to forgo their Imployments for want of Continuance more or less Fourthly If we look forwards to the time to come Christ is found threatning the Prelates that were obnoxious One to be removed if he did not repent c. 2. v. 3. And denouncing against another To come against him if he should not repent and do his former works c. 2. v. 14. But useth this to be the process of Deambulatory Officers if they have offended grievously in one Parliament and Convocation to
goes under the Name of St. Ambrose and was as he confesseth an Author of the middle of the fifth Century and it was this Because saith he the following Presbyters began to be found unworthy to govern the reason of Succession was changâ—◠〈◊〉 by the care of a Council that 〈◊〉 â—rder of Succession but Deâ—eâ—◠〈◊〉 â—â—ld create a Bishop thereunto elected by the judgment of many Priests This Authority may be good to prove that the Church upon good reason altered the Method of succession but tends nothing to prove that those who succeeded by Age were not Bishops But here I would ask any impartial Reader whether from this place he hath colour of Reason to imagin D. Blondells Proposition Was it possible that all the world could in a moment alter the Government established by the Apostles and that without the contradiction or repining of any in the Church to the Contrary Was it possible for a Council to do this and no footsteps remain of this decree Nay were all those Holy Martyrs the Apostles Successors unto whose mission God gave daily Testimony by the wonderful miracles they did seduced by a lying Spirit to impose upon all Christians a Yoke as some call Antichristian Certainly he who will allow such an Extravagant Fancy hath a Faith to believe Impossibilities I might say a great deal more upon this subject but that was to forestal the ensuing Discourse which will more abundantly satisfie any Intelligent Reader But our Episcopal Government hath another sort of Enemies than those we have hitherto mentioned which are divers in the Church of Rome who designing to draw all divine Right to the Papal Chair will allow nothing to Bishops but as derived from that And therefore if you will look into that excellent History of the Council of Trent when the Spanish Bishops pressed the determination of the Divine Right of Episcopacy the Italian Bishops opposed it and were so cautions in it as if the whole Papal Fabrick was to fall by that assertion Nay we are told that the Legates had this in command from the Colledg of Cardinals inviolably to observe that Episcopacy should not be determined of Divine right And therefore he who looks into the Canons of the Council of Trent that treat of Episcopacy shall find them penned in such ambiguous Phrases that all the Divinity allowed that Order may be interpreted not to be so originally but derivatively as proceeding from their great Divine Right the Papal Chair And upon this dispute the Infallible Pope in Letters sent to his Legats in that Council tells them that the Opinion by which the Institution of Bishops was said to be of divine Right was false and erroneous because the alone power of Order was from Christ. And Jacobus Lanez the General of the Jesuits Order tells us that Bishops are of divine Ordination not Right This in that Council And in the Decretals collected by Gregory the 9th we find this Decree We call Deacon-ship and Presbyter-ship sacred Orders For those alone the Primitive Church is read to have had And it were very easie to find out Testimonies in abundance to this purpose were not these cited more than enough which I have collected out of the Council of Trent which is the Rule by which the Church of Rome is guided And though it may be objected that divers Learned Papists are of another Opinion Yet it is evident the Interest of the Papacy runs that way for certainly no interest could be carried on with greater subtlety and dexterity than the Papal was in that Council and this we see was one thing principally to be taken care of From this we may gather how fond â— thing it is in some zealous men amongâ—â— us who call the Order of Bishops Popish and Antichristian since the Papists as well as Presbyterians conspirâ— against this Order and the Parity â— Presbyters and Bishops is perfect Popery But besides these two Adversaries which seem to be so diametrically opposite in themselves and yet both conspire against the Divine Right of Episcopacy as in many other points might were it proper be made appear Wâ— have a third sort of a much later datâ— than the younger of these and that is sort of pleasant men who tell us Theâ— are for Church Government but theâ— believe that neither Christ nor his Apostles left any at all but with a dependence on the Civill Magistrates will that whatever Government was established in the Apostles time 't was only setled for the present condition of thâ— Church and not upon any lasting Reâ—son but that the Magistrate may if 〈◊〉 think fit institute a new Ecclesiasticâ— Government And this Opinion haâ— been so advanced by a learned man that he saith the Magistrate is the only Judg of what Religion his Subjects must be on that he is the only infallible Judg of Controversie and Scripture and that he that is a Subject to the Great Turk and follows the Religion of Mahomet and dies for that Faith is as much nay more a Martyr than the Primitive Christians were in the first ten Persecutions And it is to me no wonder at all that this Opinion hath after it many Followers For besides that this increaseth the Civil Magistrates Jurisdiction Dominion is a thing all mankind contend for and so cannot much offend the best Supreme Governour since 't is an errour of a good meaning to teach Subjects obedience Yet it carries along with it this advantage that it enables the Embracers of it to swim with every stream and so finds them a Religious Expedient to consult their secular interest and Advantage let the world turn upside down But certainly this Opinion as it savours much of Atheism so it hath in it little of Reason and nothing of Religion For to suppose that Christ Jesus the Supreme Head of the Church should take upon him humane nature and purchase to himself â— Church with no less a price than the blood of God and that after this great work done he should take no further carâ— of her but leave her to the direction of the changeable inclination of every humane Fansy to the Extravagancy of every ambitious humour If this be nâ—â— a fond and an unreasonable opinion know not what may merit that name But this to me seems abundantly satisfactory and to it I have not yet hearâ— the least colour of an Answer And thaâ— is since it doth most evidently appeaâ—â— from all Antiquity the consent of aâ— antient writers and the confession 〈◊〉 all that have searched into it that thâ— Apostles setled in all Churches one anâ— the same Government For thougâ— men dispute what Government was setled and every party fansie 't is theirs yâ—â— all agree there was but one how thâ—â— could one Ecclesiastical Order conforâ— and agree with the Various Forms 〈◊〉 Temporal Policies The World had theâ— Monarchies absolute mixed Aristâ—cracies Oligarchies Democracies aâ— they as different as we can imagine aâ—â—
be in the Apostles times there cannot but be the like if not a greater necessity of a Superintendency over Presbyterial parity the rather if we duly consider our next Proposition SECT II. That divers of the Apostolical Disciples were even in their times both in Dignity and Authority Superintendents over Presbyters HEre again our Opposites authentick Author Walo after much discussion of this point is ready to teach them being inforced thereunto by Scripture That those who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Assistants unto them in founding the Churches ordaining of Ministers in every City and watering the Church which they had instructed These he confesseth were so in Superiority above Presbyters as that the Apostles themselves did not forbear to term them Apostles and so predominant in Authority as Although absent from the Churches yet to instruct them by their Epistles and wheresoever any Schism arose either in Clergy or People still to rebuke them even as if they had been of their own Flock Upon these premisses thus granted we are sufficiently warranted to conclude not only that the Presbytery were continually under subjection both to the Apostolical Government but likewise to other eminent Disciples of the Apostles The same Author sticketh not to give a List of such Prelates and Superintendents as Mark Clement Titus Timothy Epaphroditus and saith he many others This being so pregnant a truth how is it that our Opposites should pretend an Eccesiastical Presbyterial Government no way Subordinate That which is objected by them is most vain and frivolous whereunto we occur as now followeth SECT III. That the aforesaid Apostolical Disciples were as Bishops over the Presbyters Among whom were Timothy and Titus by evidence from Scripture THE Texts of Scripture for proof of their Superiority and Authority are so plain that they need no Commentary And our witnesses are so impartial as not to admit of any exception For in the Text we read of an Apostolical Ordinance to Timothy and Titus respectively To set in order the things that were wanting To inhibit Heterodox Preachers To receive accusations against criminous Elders To excommunicate Hereticks To Ordain Elders yet so As to lay hands on no man suddainly Each of these and the like Apostolical Injunctions do fully express an Episcopal Function and Authority in both of these respectively over Presbyters and the whole Churches under them And though this hath been stuck at by divers of our Opposites lest that hereby Timothy and Titus might appear to be Bishops distinct from Presbyters yet now at last their chief and greatest Advocate for Presbyterial Government confesseth the Authority which these held and exercised over Presbyters yet so that Bishops as he thinks shall take no advantage thereby if they who are Pleaders may also be admitted as our Judges We proceed citing the same witness Walo Messalinus confessing That Timothy and Titus had almost equal Authority with the Apostles of Christ by whom they were ordained to govern whole Churches as Directors and Judges Of which sort besides Timothy and Tituâ— he there sets down Mark Clemens Epapâ—roditus and all those who were Assistants and fellow Labourers with the Apostles whereof we have spoken already Thus by the premises it sufficiently appeareth that there was a double Superintendency over Presbyters yet we enquire furthermore concerning Timothy and Titus whether or no they were at this time whereof we now speak distinctly Bishops In discussing whereof we shall according to our usual method first remove their Objections which are against their Episcopacy that done we shall make good the contrary by due proofs SECT IV. That Timothy and Titus were properly and distinctly Bishops notwithstanding their Title of Evangelists as is confessed by Protestant Divines of remote Churches BUt here their Walo will needs interpose seeking by an Objection as with a Spunge to wipe out all opinion of Episcopacy either in Timothy or Titus because forsooth Called Evangelists who had no peculiar Residence in any Church but general in all Churches whereas they who are by the Apostle called Bishops had a singular charge of the Church wherein they were and there were they to reside and remain for the governing thereof So he And from him our home Opposites chanting and rechanting and making it their undersong to say again and again That Timothy and Titus were Evangelists so as not to be held that which we call Bishop and they name this Assertion The hinge of the Controversie But this Objection say we hath often been taken off the hinge and laid flat on the floor by divers solid and satisfactory Answers We say not of Bishops or their Chaplains but of other Protestant Divines even of Presbyterial Churches cited here in the Margent First The Theological Professor of Hiedelberg answers That when these Epistles weâ—e written to Timothy and Titus they were exercised not as Evangelists in assisting the Apostles in the collecting of Churches but as Bishops in governing them which had been collected as saith he the general Praecepis given to them do prove which could not refer to the Temporary power of Evangelists but to them and their Successors as Bishops From whence we conclude what that learned Doctor doth there declare That the name Evangelist did belong unto them in the large sense as it signifieth a Preacher of the Gospel Tolossanus agreeth in the same answer namely that Timothy and Titus who had been Companions with Paul in his travails was afterward made Bishop of Crete Dr. Gerard answereth by way of distinction That the word Evangelist 2 Tim. 4.5 is not there specially taken for a particular degree in the Church but generally as signifying a Preacher of the Gospel and so including that Order which Timothy now had being a Bishop of Ephesus for now he did no more accompany Paul So he citing Luther also for the like interpretation of that Text. And though he doth acknowledge that both Timothy and Titus had formerly been Evangelists agreeable to the special and proper signification of the word and according hath set down their several travails from place to place yet after those travails were ended which was before these Epistles were written he concludeth both of them to have been Bishops out of several Texts of Scripture Timothy of Ephesus and Titus of Creet 6 Zwinglius likewise is downright against the Objectors proving by the example of Timothy out of the 2 Timoth. 4.5 That the Office of Evangelist and Bishop was hâ—re one and the same However our Opposites it may be will allow to Bishops the same liberty of going out of their Dioces which Calvin doth to Presbyters out of their Parishes who are otherwise bound to be Resident in their Charge Concerning whom he saith That they are not strictly tied to their Glebe or Charge but that they may be helpful unto other Churches upon necessary occasions The same admirable Divine will furthermore
elect them again upon an expected Repentance Lastly to one of these Prelates Christ made a royal Promise saying Be thou faithful unto death and I will give thee a Crown of life c. 2. v. 9. Wherein is as well implied Faithfulness in his Function as Constancy in his Christian profession especially this being written unto him even as he was President over others Which is a Faithfulness which the Spirit of God frequently mentioneth commending it in Tychicus Eph. 2.21 and in Timothy 2 Cor. 4. v. 1.2 Now let us proâ—eed to shew you the Novelty SECT XXVII That the Novelty of this Opinion of a Deambulatory Prelacy evinceth the Falsity thereof HIstory hath delivered unto us the Successions of all the four Celebrious Churches Hierusalem Alexandria Antioch and Rome as also from the Asian Churches in the Revelation An Instance in one will give light to all the rest As for example The Church of Alexandria wherein succeeded next to Mark the Evangelist Anianus An. Christ. 51. Sedit An. 22. After him Abilius An. 77. Sedit An. 13. Then Cerdon Sedit An. 10. and Justus An. 12. Finally there is not any Monuments more directly manifesting the continuance of the Succession of Emperours and Kings in their Royal Thrones than there hath been for the Residence of Bishops successively in their Episcopal Seats and Functions even to their dying day Sure we are therefore that Antiquity would have exploded that conceit which Tertullian abhorred to think That one should be a Bishop to day and none to morrow The general Council of Calcedon also judging the Depression of a Bishop down to the degree of a Presbyter to be no better than Sacriledg SECT XXVIII That the Foundation of the Deambulatory Opinion was altogether groundless A Belgick Doctor noted this Opinion as void Of any warrant from the word of God or example of Ecclesiastical History or yet probable reason Whereof a Zealot for the Presbyterians hath confessed namely That the Succession of one after another in the primitive times was after the Predecessor had slept in the Lord. The result of all these premisses discovering the sensless Novelty of this Opinion sheweth that it serveth for nothing better than the betraying of a lost Cause CHAP. V. Our last Consideration is whether this Apostolical Right of Episcopacy in some sense be called Divine ALthough the proof of the Right thereof to be according to the Word of God be demonstration enough of a Divine Right Yet will it not be amiss to know how far either the Judgment of Antiquity or the Consent of learned Protestant Divines have extended their Suffrages for acknowledgment thereof But yet first we are to satisfie our Opposites Objections in censuring this to be properly Popish SECT I. That the Doctrine of the Divine Right of Episcopacy is repugnant unto Popedome and Papal Usurpation NOthing hath been more common in the mouths of many adversly affected than first hearing of the Divine Right of Episcopacy not without some horrour of mind to impute Popery unto it but yet not without ignorance of the Popes Usurpation herein which is here discovered in the Margin by the earned Professor of Divinity in Geneva grappling with the greatest Champion of the Pope even that Romish Goliah Bellarmine who in his defence of Papal Right saith That the Pope of Rome is immediately from Christ and all other Bishops from him pretending this to be patronized by Antiquity citing that most antient Father Ignatius for his Opinion but he was confuted by our judicious Author Vedelius even out of the express words of Ignatius himself teaching That as Presbyters are immediately subject to Bishops so are likewise Bishops to Christ. So doth he also from Tertullian who recounteth the like Succession in the Church of Smyrna where the first Bishop was ordained by the Apostle St. John which he doth from St. Peter in the Church of Rome But sooner may the Roman Pope unbishop himself than presume to justifie from Antiquity that other Bishops in respect of their first Original are immediately derived from him as by the manifold testimonies of the Antients alleadged expresly already hath appeared and will furthermore become more undeniable when Antiquity it self shall be heard to speak by and by in the interim we may behold the Spanish Divines standing for the Divine Right of Episcopacy as being from Christ himself and therefore denied to be present in the Council of Trent except it should be so decided The Italian Bishops contrarily withstood this in the behalf of the Pope that it might be known to be derived not immediately from Christ but mediately by the Pope himself Can any doubt what the Pope would determine in this Case He in his letters prohibited that Episcopacy should be held to be absolutely from Divine Right This being the Case who can justly attribute Popery to them who in defending a Divine Right yet renounce and abhor the derivation thereof which is from the Pope SECT II. The Judgment of Antiquity concerning the Divine Right WE begin with the most antient Ignatius and for the vindication of the credit of this our Foreman It is testified by Vedelius the Genevan Professor concerning Ignatius his Epistles alleadging withal the like testimonies of Scultetus and Rivetus That seven of them are properly his and so genuine herein as that they take no exceptions in this Case Which he furthermore proveth out of Eusebius Ruffinus and Hierome and we shall not wander out of these seven And though all these be full of Sentences abundantly asserting the Divine Right of Episcopacy yet we shall content our selves with these few wherein he exhorteth The Presbyters to obey the Bishops as the Vicars of Christ And he telleth both Presbyters and People That he that contemneth his Bishop is Atheistical and Prophane and doth set at nought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Ordinance of Christ and the like as is more fully testified in the Margin Cyprian is our next Witness who tells us That the constituting of Bishops over the Church with Authority to govern all Acts therein is done by Divine Law So he With many other expressions to the same effect for which again I refer you to the Margin We pass to Origen our next Witness who saith of the publick Governours of the Churches of Christ That they are in a very eminent place because the Lord hath set them over his Family And again which we alleadg as making against Romish Popedome That Bishops have as much interest in that saying of our Saviour Whatsoever thou bindest on Earth shall be bound in Heaven c. as St Peter himself Gregory Bishop of Nazianzum telleth his Flock of that City That the Law of Christ had made them subject to his Episcopal Power and Jurisdiction Athanasius That whosoever he be that contemns the Function of a Bishop contemneth Christ who ordained that Office Epiphanius
writing against that grand Antiepiscopal Presbyter Aerius told him That the Superiority of Bishops above Presbyters was founded in the word of God An Author under the name of Ambrose speaking distinctly of Bishops saith That they held the person of Christ and therefore our behaviour before them ought to be as before the Vicars of the Lord. And again That the Bishop is ordained by the Lord the light of the Church Another under the name of Augustine as hath been said judged it a matter that none could be ignorant of That Bishops were instituted by Christ who instituted Bishops when he ordained the Apostles whose Successors the Bâ—shops are Hierome thus far agreeth with him to wit That Bishops in the Catholick Church supply the place of the Apostles And what else meant that which hath been before alleadged out of the Canon of six hundred Fathers in the general Council of Calcedon which judgeth The Depression of a Bishop down to the degree of a Presbyter to be in it self Sacriledg But do any Protestant Divines of remote Churches consent to any Divine Right SECT III. That two eminent Protestant Divines grant this Supposition which is the ground of the said Truth THis grant and concession is freely yielded unto us by Beza who speaking of Episcopacy saith If it did proceed from the Apostles then certainly I should not doubt to attribute it wholly as all other Apostolical Ordinances to divine disposition Another who is also a professed Advocate for the Presbyterians granteth as freely as the former That if Episcopacy be from the Apostles then doubtless it is of Divine Right But that Episcopacy had its Apostolical institution hath been sufficiently ratified unto us through this whole Discourse both from Testimonies of Antiquity from general Consent of Protestants of Reformed Churches and above all from the clear Evidence of the Scriptures themselves the Repetition whereof would be superfluous the rather because these our foresaid Opposites will ease us of that labour for Mr. Beza himself confesseth That it is a Custome not to be reprehended of setting one of the Presbyters over the rest which was used saith he from Mark the Evangelist in the Church of Alexandria So he Now then whether we say with Hierome That this Episcopacy was in Mark because the first Bishop or in Anianus who was constituted by Mark as Eutychus relateth or with Beza that it was from Mark as a thing irreprehensible It must needs be judged to be from the Ordinance of the Apostles and consequently Divine We have yet somewhat more SECT IV. That Episcopal Prelacy hath been directly acknowledged by Protestants of remote Churches to be of Divine Right 1 LUther proves this directly and Categorically saying That every City ought to have its proper Bishop by Divine Right grounding his Argument upon Titus 2.5 Who was commanded to ordain Elders in every City which Elders saith he were Bishops as Hierome witnesseth and the subsequent Text doth manifest Yea and St. Augustine describing a Bishop concurreth with them saying It was a City as if he should have said it was not a mere Presbyter but a Bishop which is here spoken of because Bishops were over Cities Thus far Luther his Tractate being a Resolution his Sentence the Conclusion and his words plainly distinguishing Bishop from mere Presbyter and alleadging from Scripture a divine Right of Episcopal Function as clearly as either our Opposites can dislike or we desire Accordingly Bucer a man of great Learning and Piety saith That these three Orders of Ministers in the Church Bishops Presbyters and Deacons were for institution from the Holy Ghost and for Continuance perpetual even from the Beginning The learned Professor in the Palatinate Scultetus hath Professedly and Positively concluded Episcopacy to be of Divine Right by as he saith efficacious Reasons clear Examples and excellent Authorities And he hath been as good as his word as in divers foregoing Sections hath been made manifest upon which Subject likewise a most learned Belgick Doctor wrote a whole book urging therein very many Arguments both from Scripture and Antiquity and assoiling the Objections to the contrary Aegidius Hunnius Divinity Professor in the University of Marpurg speaking of Episcopacy in the Apostles times saith That Paul did ordain Titus General Superintendent that is Archbishop of all the Cretian Churches and thereupon concludeth That the Order and Degree of Episcopacy is a thing not lately invented but received in the Church even from the very times of the Apostles Wherein he is seconded by Hemingius a very Learned Divine whose Observation upon Titus 1. v. 5. is That to the end that Anarchy might be avoided and all things done Decently and in Order the Apostle would have some one to ordain Ministers to dispose all things in the Church and to take care lest Haeresie should arise The worthily renowned Doctor Gerard speaks no less than the former proving Episcopacy as distinct from Presbytery to be of Divine Right not only in respect of the Original as proceeding from the diversity of Gifts but also in regard of the End The avoiding of Dissension and Schism in the Church Yea and even the Church of Geneva it self will afford us a Testimony or two from the pen of the Mirrour of Learning Mr. Isaac Causabon who tells us That three Orders of Ministers in the Church Bishops Presbyters and Deacons are founded upon the Testimony of plain Scriptures And again That Bishops are the Vicegerents of the Apostles Thus these learned Protestants Nothing now remaineth but that nam finis coronat opus we have as the Seal of this Truth the Approbation of Christ himself SECT V. That Episcopal Prelacy had the Approbation of Christ himself after his Ascension into Heaven NEver did nor could any deny but that every of the Angels of the seven Churches of Asia had the Approbation of Christ himself after his Ascension into Heaven that Book wherein they are mentioned being called the Revelation of Jesus Christ as the Author delivered by an Angel to John as unto Christs Scribe commanding him to write the seven Epistles and to direct them to the Angels of the seven Churches two of which Angels Christ commendâ—th in the same Epistles for the good discharge of their Function And is not Commendation Testimonial enough and an Argument of his Approbation The other five Bishops being more or less Delinquents are reprehended for Neglect of their Cure And is not Reproof of the Neglect of Duty in the Officers a Justification and Approbation of their Offices Finally as those which are faithful in their Offices are continued so they that were obnoxious are threatned To be removed except they did repent So that here is no Displacing of any for a first Offence nor yet an Eradicating the whole Order for the particular Abuses of some For he that calleth for Repentance and Amendment of