the Age next succeeding the Apostles which may be a very probable Argument at least if not demonstrative of such a thing in the Apostles dayes too unless we find something in their practice and writings which may evidently prove the contrary which yet is not done and withal confessing the wisdom of the Church that brought in Bishops though they judge they were not there before if upon no other account yet for the maintenance of peace and remedy of Schism according to that known testimony of St. Hierom so much stood upon in this controversie Sect. 11 Now when thus much is fairly yielded and so willingly assented to when those who yet think themselves in conscience obliged by that Covenant which they have sworn for the extirpation of that Episcopacy with the appendices established among us yet judge themselves not obliged against Episcopacy nor against their Superiority and Jurisdiction as such but think they have fully satisfied their Obligation in the acceptance of and compliance with Episcopacy as reduced by Bishop Usher where yet that Superiority and Jurisdiction is still retained Methinks here is a fair step towards compliance an happy door of hope opened that we may agree The distance is not so wide as at first it did seem to be here are no terms now of Vsurpation Tyranny and Antichristianism assix't to Episcopal Authority Sect. 12 And what should now hinder a perfect compliance when men are satisfied that they may freely and chearfully go thus far what should hinder them but that they may make some steps farther And we all whether of the one or the other perswasion may account our selves so much concerned to promote the peace of the Church as to submit so far to the established government as the Laws under which we live require that we should 1. Except Is it that the Bishops are conceived to take too much upon them and do more than they should or are called to do Or 2. Is it that they will not suffer us to take our due and to do that which we should or that we are called and have authority to do for under these two heads must be comprised all that can with any shadow be pretended why we should not comply and submit so far as the Laws require Sect. 13 Now to give a full answer to both these I shall first premise these two things 1. That it is not the design of these papers and therefore none are here to expect it to enter upon the whole controversie of government or the jus divinum of this in particular nor here to undertake a full justification of all the particulars in the constitution or exercise of it for enough hath been already written pro and con on that subject My whole design here is not to revive but to do my part if God see us yet fit for such a blessing to put an end to disputes of this nature 2. Sect. 14 But all that I have here to do is howsoever the case stand whether there be truth or no in the charge against Bishops or Episcopacy which here I meddle not with and in the following sheets may possibly in a great measure take off to consider How far we of the inferior Orb who if we exercise our ministery in England are bound by the standing Laws of England to be under them may submit to their power obey and conform to these established Laws Now that I may give full satisfaction in this case I shall first lay down these two general conclusions which I must take as granted 1. Sect. 15 This I make one Postulatum and require it to be granted me which I think no intelligent considering man will deny Viz. That in order to the conduct of our consciences and the regulating of our actions we are not to enquire what is the calling office charge or duty of another but what is the charge office and duty incumbent upon our selves Particularly it concerns not us who are not called to this authority in the Church to be curious in examining whether the Bishops do or do not undertake a charge too great for them to manage what their power or what their duty and sins are or whether it be fit they should be established in such authority by a Law this is to go out of our sphere and to meddle where we are not concerned But They being in possession of this power and established in that authority by those Laws under which we live made by the unquestionable Supremacy and Legis-lative power in the Kingdom and to whom (a) Rom. 13.5 we must be subject Our business now only is to satisfie our selves and others whether and how far we are bound to conform to these Laws in our owning and submitting to that Episcopal authority which they have established Or how far we lawfully may do so and indeed what we lawfully may do we are in duty bound to do when by a just authority we are commanded to do it This I am sure is most necessary to gain and preserve our peace And therefore I cannot but condemn that preposterous course of some Ministers who had no way to commend their zeal to the world but by preaching to one Auditory the duties of another or inveighing against their sins Some preaching in the Court against the sins of the Country and before the Magistrate ripping up the irregularities of the Subject Others with equal yea possibly more bitterness inveighing before the people against the licentiousness of the Court the Pride of the Bishops and the sins of their Governours And what Beautifiers such men have proved we need not turn over the Annals of many ages to witness Sure I am this was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rightly to divide the word of truth (b) 2 Tim. 2.15 like that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a workman that needs not be ashamed of whom St. Paul speaks nor like the faithful and wise Steward of whom our Saviour (c) Luk. 12.42 to give to every one his own proper portion of meat in due season And when men have thus made it their business to consider (d) Mat. 7.3 the Motes in the eyes of others and neglect the Beam in their own To judge censure and condemn the carriages of their brethren and look over their own When Subjects and inferiors set themselves to examine the calling office duty and carriage and to dispute the Place authority and commands of their Superiors in Church or State The fruit of this can be nothing but Sedition or Rebellion schism or faction and mutual animosities hatred and contempt But could we learn every man to do what becomes himself if others be irregular let the sin lie upon them while we are careful to look to our own steps and faithfully to discharge the duties of our own place with how much chearfulness content and peace might we live together 2. Sect. 16 Another Postulatum I require likewise to be granted which I judge no conscientious
who commanded them to preach no more in the Name of Jesus must be ours That God hath imposed this calling upon us and therefore unless we would rather obey Man than God we may not forbear the exercise of that office which God hath laid upon us with a (t) 1 Cor. 9.16 woe if we preach not Answ 1 Sect. 21 To all this I answer 1. To be silenced or suspended or deposed is but to be denied the liberty of and so consequently to be enjoyned to forbear the publick exercise of our Ministery upon the Bishops pleasure and to be deprived of that maintenance which we had while we were allowed to exercise our Ministery in such a place And in this the Bishops pleasure is the Magistrates pleasure The Bishop proceeding according to the Laws And that the Magistrate hath power and under him consequently the Bishop to deny any particular man this liberty within his Dominions I know none that doubteth if he shall do this caussesly the sin is his but submission and obedience is our duty Sect. 22 Answ 2 2. But more The Bishops as such if they have any place in the Church Are Ecclesiastical Governours and their work is to Over-see to watch over and for the flock (v) To take care of the Church of God 1 Tim. 3.5 ne quid ecclesia detrimenti capiat Their care it must be that Tares be not sowen among the Wheat nor corrupt and heretical doctrine preached for the pure Word of God that the souls of men be not poysoned with rotten principles or leavened with Heresie or stirred up to Schisme or Sedition but that they be built up in the most holy faith instructed in sound doctrine encouraged to Piety and lead in the wayes of Purity and Peace And therefore it cannot but lie upon them to be cautious what persons they admit into the Ministry and to watch how they continue in it And their power equally extendeth to the silencing suspending or ejecting those who are Seditious or Scandalous as to the denial of their admission or to the admitting of such as are able and faithful It is no more then what the Apostle (x) Act. 20.28 32. gave in charge to those Elders or Bishops for so they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at Miletum to watch because of the Wolves that would enter And for which the Lord reproves (y) Rev. 2.14 15 20. those Asian Angels that they permitted the doctrines of Balaam and the Nicolaitans to be taught and Jezebel to prophesie And this power is clearly manifest in those Apostolical charges to (z) 1 Tim 1.3 4 6 7. 5.19 20 21 22. 2 Tim 2.14 4 2 3. Tit. 1 5 10 11. 3.10 11. Timothy and Titus which are frequent in those Epistles For the truth is if the Bishops have not this power it is not possible they should perform their duty or discharge their trust to God or his Church If any of them abuse this power it is only their personal sin and they abuse but their own power for such an authority they cannot be denied to have if they have any power or authority in the Church at all Sect. 23 Answ 3 3. And how unjust soever the censure may be in him that gives it yet that we may lawfully sit down in silence I think is beyond dispute for though our Ministery be from God and the Calling of Divine Institution yet it is conferred on particulars this or that person by men and they exercise this ministery by vertue of that Calling which they had from men Now common sense and reason telleth us that we may lawfully obey men forbidding us the exercise of a Ministery which though the ministery be from God yet we have power to exercise in such a place by vertue of that Calling only which we had from men Sect. 24 Answ 4 4. Neither doth that answer of the Apostles to the High-Priest and Council and their resolution and practice to preach the same Christ still notwithstanding that Prohibition any way lay such a necessity upon any in our case to disobey and to refuse to lay down the exercise of our ministery when we are required And as to this let me crave leave here to mind the Reader 1. That this was one of the great arguments which Johnson the Brownist made against our Church assemblies Sect. 25. The Separatists objection that it was not lawful to communicate with them because our ministery was the ministery of Antichrists Apostacy this he would prove because none could stand publick Ministers except they receive of the Prelates Priesthood and Deaconry and without and against the peoples consent they are by the Prelates alone silenced deprived and degraded from exercising any ministery in those assemblies who yet ought not to suffer themselves to be silenced and deposed from their publick ministery no not by the lawful Magistrate Here we see in this mans mouth impudence and Sedition more than enough yet this bold assertion he labours to prove by this very Reply of the Apostles who would not at the command even of the lawful Magistrate cease to preach But 2. Sect 26. Answered by a Non-conformist What answer was given to him will exactly fit our case also I shall give it in the words of Master William Bradshaw Both because they speak fully to the Objection and in this so far justifie the Bishops power as to lay a necessity both upon the Minister and people to submit with peace and also to shew how even then when they say the Church groaned under the highest exorbitancy of Episcopacy The soberer non-conformists who did not acknowledge the Prelacy did yet judge it lawfull to submit to their power and to forbear the exercise of their ministery upon their pleasure For one of these was that Master Bradshaw and set aside his dissent from the established Order of the Church I doubt not a pious sober sound Divine and even then when himself was silenced upon the account of Non-conformity writing in the defence of our Church-Assemblies justifying our Communion proving the unreasonableness of separation from them in which Book (a) Unreason of Separat p. 90 Sect. 27. he gives this answer to the Separatist 1. When he i. e. Johnson the Separatist distinguisheth between silencing and deposing by lawful Magistrates and by Prelates as indeed he seemed to do when he said We are silenced by Prelates when the Apostles would not no not by the lawful Magistrates is in our case where the Prelates do it by Authority and Commission from the lawful Magistrate a distinction without a difference Sect. 22 2. Whereas the Separatist had said The Apostles did not make their immediate calling from God the ground of their refusal but this That they ought to obey God rather than men which is a Duty required of all Ministers and Christians He answereth That Though the Apostles did not assign their immediate calling from God as the ground
of this refusal in so many letters and syllables yet that which they do assign is by implication and in effect the same for it is as much as if they had said God himself hath imposed this calling upon us and not man and therefore except we should rather obey man than God we may not forbear for opposing the obedience of God to the obedience of man they therein plead a calling from God and not from man otherwise if they had received a calling from men there had been incongruity in the answer Considering that in common sense they ought so far to obey man forbidding them to exercise a calling which they do exercise only by vertue of that calling from men else by this reason there should be no power so to depose a man from his Ministry but that notwithstanding any Commandment of the Church or State he is still to continue in the exercise of his Ministry and should be bound to give that example which the Apostles did which is not only absurd but a conceit plainly tending to manifest Sedition Sect. 29 3. We are to know That though the Apostles Prophets and Evangelists preached publickly when they were not hindred by open violence and did not nor might they leave their Ministry upon any humane authority and commandment whatsoever because they did not enter into or exercise the same upon the will and pleasure of any man whatsoever yet they never erected and planted publick Churches and Ministry in the face of the Magistrate whether he would or no or in despite of him but such in respect of the Magistrate were as private and invisible as might be 4. Sect. 30 Neither were some of the Apostles only forbidden so as others should be suffered to preach the same Gospel in their places but the utter abolishing of Christian Religion was manifestly intended in silencing them But out Churches whereof we are Ministers are no private and secret Assemblies such as hide themselves from the face of a persecuting Magistrate but are publick professing their Worship doing their Religion in the face of the Magistrate and State yea and by his countenance authority and protection And we are set over these Churches not only by a calling of our people but also by the Authority of the Magistrate who hath an armed power to hinder such publick Actions and who is also willing to permit and maintain other true Ministers of the Gospel in those places where he forbiddeth some Sect. 31 By these it appears That the case of the Apostles and Ours is not the same nor can their answer to the High Priest and Elders from whom they received no call to preach and by whom they were forbidden to preach Jesus the design of that Council being not to forbid them alone and permit others to do it but utterly to abolish Christianity with any pretence fit us that we therefore should not lawfully obey and sit down in silence and recede from the exercise of our Ministery in a particular place upon the command of those from whom we received Authority there to minister and who though they silence and exclude us yet send others to minister to the needs of the Church in the same Gospel and therefore as the said Mr. Bradshaw so we conclude 1. If after our publick calling to minister in such a known and publick Church nor by the Church only but by the Magistrate also The Magistrate shall have matter against us just or unjust as to our obedience it matters not and shall in that regard forbid us to minister to our Church and the Bishop in these censures acting according to the Laws under which he and we are it bears the same reason I see not by what warrant in Gods Word we should think our selves bound notwithstanding to exercise our Ministery still except we should think such a Law of Ministery to lie upon us that we should be bound to run upon the Swords point of the Magistrate or oppose Sword to Sword which I am sure Christianity abominates Sect. 33 2. Yea and suppose the Magistrate should do it unjustly and against the will of the Church and should therein sin yet doth not the Church in that regard cease to be a Church nor ought she therein to resist the will of the Magistrate neither doth she stand bound in regard of her affection to her Minister how great and deserved soever to deprive herself of the protection of the Magistrate by leaving her publick standing to follow her Minister in private and in the dark refusing the benefit of other publick Ministers which with the good leave and liking of the Magistrate she may enjoy Sect. 34 3. Neither do I know what warrant any ordinary Minister hath by Gods Word in such a case so to draw any such Church or people to his private Ministery that thereby they should hazard their outward state and quiet in the Commonwealth where they live when in some competent measure they may publickly with the grace and favour of the Magistrate enjoy the ordinary means of salvation by another And except he have a calling to minister in some other Church he is to be content to live as a private member until it shall please God to reconcile the Magistrate unto him and to call him again to his own Church So far this learned man though a Non-conformist Sect. 35 Now I appeal to any that dissent most if it be not all truth for the main And change but the name of Magistrate into Bishop the reason is all one we may submit to one as well as to the other Though we should deny any such Authority to the Bishop as such yet because he in this acteth under the Laws and whatsoever Autho ity he hath by vertue of his Function in the Church yet it is certain that the exercise of this Authority here is by the leave and authority of the Magistrate So that here is nothing material in this exception but it still remains out of dispute that though it should be granted that the Bishops have no such power by any authority derived from Christ which yet we say they have yet we may lawfully submit to them in the exercise of it And let us do this we do our part and we shall live in peace Sect. 36.4 Partic. Ex ∣ cept 4. Another exception laid against the Bishops is this That though it be granted that they have some authority or if they have not that yet we may lawfully obey yet They exercise an Arbitrary power and this is not to be submitted to And of this nature is that fourth exception made by the Presbyterian Divines in their first paper of Proposals to His Majesty Viz. That some of the Bishops exercised an Arbitrary power as by sending forth their Articles of Visitation inquiring unwarrantably into several things and swearing the Church-Wardens to present accordingly so by many innovations and ceremonies imposed upon Ministers and People not required by Law Sect. 37
Answ 1 I answer 1. Those things which are really innovations and imposed and not required by Law surely we are not bound to obey nor do I know any that affirms we should sin if we submit not to them nor will it be charged upon those that deny them but upon such as impose them if the peace of the Church be violated Yet let it be considered also Sect. 38 Answ 2 2. Though such and such particular Rites may not be specially ordained by a positive Law for them yet if there be a general Law impowring the Bishops to order appoint and require what shall be for the peace of the Church and order in it what shall be for the conveniencies solemnity and decency of Administration and of all this leave them to be the judges what they now do so require they cannot be said to require without or against Law And if these particulars which they require be not manifestly against the Word of God I cannot see how we can be excused from sin if we disobey considering that establishment which by Law they have among us Sect. 39 Answ 3 3. But may we do nothing but what we are bound to do yea are we not bound for peace sake to do all that we lawfully may do Suppose our Governours should lay the peace of the Church upon such slight matters as are of no consideration in comparison with it and this be indeed their imprudence and possibly their sin Yet when this is done if we submit not supposing the things to be lawful in themselves I see not but that the violation of the Churches peace will be laid upon us as well as upon them nor will their imprudence excuse our sin There may perhaps be some kind of sin in them requiring but I am sure when the things required are not materially evil there can be no sin in us in obeying Let us not therefore so much consider what they must or may require but what we may and should do when it is required and we shall have peace Sect. 40 Except Partic. 5 5. The next great Exception is The Bishops claim to be Spiritual Lords contrary to the Royal Prerogative of Jesus Christ the only Lord and King of the Church The same which Johnson the Separatist made against our Churches See Unreason of Separat p. 47 48. and expressly contrary to that rule of the (b) 1 Pet. 5.2 3. Apostle where they if those Elders be supposed to be Bishops are only to oversee the Flock and not as Lords over Gods heritage but as ensamples to the Flock Yea contrary to the Royal dignity of the King and temporal Magistrate both in civil and ecclesiastical causes For they have their voices and authority in Parliament for enacting Laws for the Common-wealth They are Rulers of Provinces and Diocesses in ecclesiastical causes in civil State and dignity some of them above all all of them above some of the Nobles Justices and other Magistrates of the Land They and their Courts handle and determine civil causes and affairs that appertain to the Magistracy they inflict civil mulcts and penalties give Licences in several cases all the Priests and Deacons are exempt from the Magistrates Jurisdiction in divers things and answerable only or chiefly to the Prelates and their Officers Sect. 41 For Answer Here is a great charge indeed but it signifies nothing as to the business before us viz. our submission for Peace sake For Answ 1 1. Should they claim to be what they are not for there is a vast difference between to be and to claim to be may we yet not lawfully obey them in things honest though we own not their claim I judge we may The claim may be unjust in them and yet the things which they require of us may be fit to be done by us Sect. 42 Answ 2 2. Though they should claim more than belongs to them yet this makes not a nullity of that authority which is their due What they may justly require as Bishops and Governours of the Church they may require had they not those Titles of Spiritual Lords and then the addition of that Title destroyes not their power of Bishops Sect. 43 Answ 3 3. But They neither are nor claim to be such Spiritual Lords as the Objection implyeth as even the (c) Bradsh unreas of Separ p. 65. learned Non-conformists have acknowledged and which their Canons and practice shew For those things which are antecedently necessary by the Law of God they do command and press not as their own but as the Laws of Christ. And for things which are of another nature the practice whereof is made necessary pro Hic Nunc by their constitutions they prescribe them not so as to bind the conscience of any to the acknowledgement and approbation thereof as necessary things but only to obey them in practice and for external order and as things indifferent in themselves which we are no longer obliged to than they are commanded And therefore they cannot be said to arrogate such an Office of Spiritual Lords as the Apostle condemns nor in that sense wherein Christ alone is Lord of his Church They never attempting to introduce a new worship of God or enjoyning subscription to new Articles of Faith But requiring only the same Articles to be believed which Christ hath revealed and ordering only the external mode and circumstances of worship the substance of which is only from Christ as to decency order and edification of which they as the Governours of the Church here must be in a very great measure acknowledged the Judges and which are by Christ left free to the Church to order according to the condition of Time and Place and other Circumstances Sect. 44 Answ 4 4. And as they encroach not upon the Prerogative Royal of Jesus Christ so neither do they infringe the Authority of the King and Civil Magistrate And to evidence this I need say no more than that which the forecited (d) Unreas of Separ p. 47. Mr. Bradshaw though no friend to the Bishop hath said in answer to this very objection 1. That the Prelates claim their voyces in Parliament not as Divine Ordinances appertaining to their Prelateships but as an honour annexed to the same by the Civil Magistrate 2. Their Authority in causes ecclesiastical over Provinvinces c. is either such as the Magistrate himself may execute and administer in his own person if he please or such as is not for Him as a Magistrate to execute The first sort The Bishops administer only by vertue of the Magistrates own Commission and therein they impair not either his dignity or supremacy much less in the other part of their authority which belongeth not to the Magistrate himself to execute especially when they use not this neither without his consent licence and approbation 3. That all are above some some above all the Nobles Justices c. is a free and voluntary honour
I think few will deny if the Church have such a liberty And she hath made use of this liberty to appoint such persons for such ministrations agreeable to the general rules of the Word and answering the general end of Discipline and Government We may then submit to that Discipline and Government notwithstanding the supposed or real personal faults of the Administrators yea though we judge no Divine institution of the particular Officers But 2. Sect. 52 It is needless as to the main designe of these papers which is onely to perswade to unity and a peaceable obedience to spend time and words in the full defence of the Calling of Bishops farther than the necessity of this argument requires Many whom it would be highly uncharitable and unchristian to deny to be holy and faithful men do cordially believe the Calling of Bishops to be Apostolical and by Divine appointment And there needs no argument to perswade such to obedience And for those whether Ministers or others who approve not of nor are satisfied in the Calling of the Bishops and their subordinate Officers as such yet that they not only may but considering the establishment ought in conscience to submit in peace and with cheerfulness too may be fully cleared by these following Considerations 1. Sect. 53 If they will not own a National or Provincial Church or any Church larger than the limits of one Congregation which yet the (g) Jus Divin Minister Evang part 2. cap. 1. p. 12 13 14. London Divines of the Presbyterian perswasion have owned and proved and therefore I judge they do so still yet they must acknowledge that This Kingdom is a Kingdom of Christians or a Christian Nation and this is indeed tantamount to a National Church then consider 2. That the state of a Christian Common-wealth cannot be perfect without some general Visitors and Overseers of the several particular Churches 3. That though a particular Church or Congregation may be compleat without them yet for the necessary union and agreement of the several particular Churches in Christian Provinces and Kingdoms it is fit and agreeable to reason and no wayes repugnant to the Word of God that under the Supreme Magistrate there should be other Governours to protect and encourage those Ministers and Churches which do their duty and to punish those which shall offend Wherein if either through want of humane Laws or some personal corruption they shall in some things pass their bounds they do no more than any other officers either Civil or Ecclesiastical through frailty and infirmity may do 4. Sect. 54 Therefore I offer these few particulars unto all serious sober considering Christians to be advisedly weighed some whereof the forecited Mr. Bradshaw (h) Unreas of Separ p. 65. used against the Separatists and may upon those grounds if they will admit no more with equal force of reason engage all peaceably to submit to and live contentedly under the Government and Discipline established by Law 1. Whether the Supreme Magistrate have not power to oversee and govern all the several Churches within his Dominions yea whether he be not bound so to do Without doubt he is 2. Whether for his further help and assistance herein he may not make choice of some grave learned and Reverend man to assist him in the same Government This I think is so rational that no considering man will deny it 3. Whether by vertue of this power these persons thus called may not lawfully try the abilities of all the several Ministers within that Dominion and give publick approbation of the worthy and inhibit those who are unworthy from the execution of their Ministery and whether may they not visit these several Ministers and Churches convent them before them and examine how they have behaved themselves in their places and punish the blameworthy 4. Whether for the more easie and orderly government of the said Churches so far forth as it appeartains to him he may not divide his Kingdom as ours is into Provinces assigning over each of them under himself some special Magistrate though we call not the Arch-Bishop or Bishop by that title but in a large sense it may pass and I know no Solaecism in an Ecclesiastical Magistrate And if we own him but so far this is enough to engage a peaceable obedience fit for learning and experience to oversee and govern all the general and particular Churches there and whether may he not also subdivide those Provinces into Diocesses assigning also unto them other more inferior officers under him and his Provincial officers to oversee the several Churches within such and such a precinct none doubts but he may 5. Whether it destroy the nature of a Ministerial or true particular visible Church that many of them should appertain to one Provincial or Diocesan government though in that respect they should be held or reputed for one Provincial or Diocesan Church That it doth hath been said by those of the separation but never proved but I am sure according to the Presbyterian principles it doth not whose Classical Provincial and National Church must be built upon the same foundation with the Diocesan Sect. 55 These things were proposed by that learned Non-conformist and thought sufficient even according to the principles of those Ministers who were not satisfied with the Bishops power without farther proaese as being clear by their own light to stop the mouth of that bold Separatist And those very things which were then accounted Arguments of force enough to prove a lawfulness of Communion in those Churches which are under this government have the same force to prove the lawfulness of the peaceable exercise of our Ministery under the same For whether we grant their Jurisdiction in the Church to have been ab initio and an Apostolical constitution or no as indeed now that I know plead it is as exercised in all the subordinate officers hands nor is it needful we should yet this we must grant that they are Commissionated under His Majesty for the exercise of this power whom we acknowledge over all persons and in all causes even Ecclesiastical Supreme Governour And upon this ground are we bound to obey them in all lawful things though we should deny their Apostolical standing And this is enough to preserve our peace for it is not essential to Peace that we are in all circumstances of the same judgement but it is essential that we for the main walk in the same way practice the same things and perform the same duties And it is not strange that divers men should agree in one necessary practice though they agree not in the reason of that necessity Neither do the established Laws require us nor were ever the Bishops so rigorous as to require that we should profess the Divine right of that constitution in manner and form as it is established but that we obey in our places in all things not contrary to the Word of God And whether we judge
the Government Apostolical and necessary or only Prudential brought in by the Church and not repugnant to the Holy rule or only as the Bishops are impowered and Commissioned under the King being here established I see not how we can without sin refuse a peaceable compliance with it Sect. 56 And I have reason to hope such a compliance in a good measure because those learned Brethren who though in their Proposals to His Majesty they desire that Chancellors Arch-deacons Commissaries c. as such may not pass any censures purely Spiritual yet when they say only as such it may intimate they would not deny them under another notion as Commissioned under His Majesty to do so These Brethren I say add this But for the exercise of Civil Government and this by their words there may seem to include the acts of Government in the Church and ecclesiastical Causes so far as the Censures are not purely Spiritual coercively by Mulcts or corporal penalties by power derived from Your Majesty as Supreme over persons and things ecclesiastical we presume not at all to interpose but shall submit to any that act by Your Majesties Commission Were indeed these Considerations well weighed they would do much to a peaceable obedience Sect. 57 Except Partic. 7 7. I know but one material exception more referring to this charge that The Bishops take too much upon them And that is The matter of Ordination and now the Re-ordination for thus it is excepted The Bishops some of them do assume sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction to themselves And now it is farther urged as unsufferable that upon their re-establishment they require a Re-ordination of all those who during the late Confusions were ordained only by a Presbytery Sect. 58 In answer to the business of a Superior ordo c. enough is already said But to the matter of Ordination and Re-ordination I say Answ 1 1. The Question is not what some challenge to themselves but how far we may yield in the thing that is challenged without sin If some challenge too much let them answer that but if we may without sin take from their hands that which we can legally have from no others I see not why we should in the least scruple to take it That Their hands are Necessary and that none can be regularly ordained without them is the Judgement of none of the least or lowest in the Church who think the Scripture speaks clearest on their side also For Though Timothy had the (h) 1 Tim. 4 14. Imposition of Hands of the Presbytery yet it is expressly said that he had (i) 2 Tim. 1.6 Pauls too and he not acting as one of them but under a distinct notion as the words if well weighed do more than intimate for whatsoever that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was which was given by that Laying on of Hands whether the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit usually in those dayes by the (k) Act. 8.17 18. Apostles hands or the Gift i. e. Authority of Ministery whether of a Bishop or Evangelist it matters not whatsoever I say the gift was it seems to be conferred (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chiefly by the hands of Paul and referred to the hands of the Presbytery (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but as assistants or associates with him But those texts seem to be more express where not only the Deacons were made by (n) Act 6.6 the sole hands of the Apostles but also in the ordaining of Presbyters we read that Barnabas and Paul those Apostles (o) Act. 14.23 did ordain Elders in every Church as they went we read not of any other hands with them St. Paul also layes this charge on Timothy (p) 1 Tim. 5.22 Lay thou hands suddenly on none intimating an act wherein he only was concerned for if there were other Presbyters or a Presbytery at Ephesus and they necessarily to joyn with him in every Ordination why is the charge only given to him why not the same caution urged on them And in that clause (q) T it 1. ◠For this cause left I thee in Creet that Thou shouldest ordain Elders in every City we see Titus infallibly left with authority to do this but we read not of any others appointed with him If any object He was an extraordinary Officer and Evangelist This signifies little for whatever he was he was an Apostolical person and for that time at least seated at that place for the particular Government of that church to perform not an extraordinary but a work of standing use in the Church the administration of an ordinary and perpetual Ordinance And why then in such a work he may not be conceived to act as a settled ordinary Officer I see not This we are sure of That Ordination was not given in those dayes without the hands of an Apostle or an Apostolical person We are not sure that it was not sometimes without the hands of the Presbytery Upon these grounds these learned and conscientious men judge a Necessity of the Episcopal or Apostolical hands though not excluding yet withal not necessarily requiring the hands of other Presbyters Sect. 59 On the other side that The Hands of Bishops are lawful in this work is granted so far by those who urge the greatest necessity of the Presbyterial Ordination yet excude not the Bishop See Jus Divin Minist Evang. 2. part who on their judgements ceaseth not to be at least a Presbyter and the Name of a Bishop doth not with them take away his interest of a Presbyter in Ordination nor nullifie the Orders because his Hands were in them Now then if we may but lawfully take it at the Bishops hands if it be required to be had from them alone though it should be supposed somewhat irregular and we can have it no other way without the violation of the Laws in being suppose they should sin in assuming that only to themselves which should be done joyntly with others yet we should not sin in taking it of them because they unquestionably have a power though possibly not the sole power Sect. 60 2. It is objected only Some Bishops challenge to themselves c. Now the matter is not what some particular men challenge but what the established constitution is It concerns not us to be of the same judgement with every particular Bishop but to obey them in that place where the Laws have set them and in that authority wherein the Constitutions of this Church have invested them Now the Laws of our Church give no such power of sole ordination nor doth any Bishop that I know or have heard practice it The Dean and Prebends were of old I doubt not accounted a standing Presbytery to the Bishop and the (r) Can. 31. Presence of four of these are expressly required to every Ordination viz. The Dean Arch-Deacon and two Prebendaries at least or in the necessary absence of them four other
the Exception is groundless nor may this Form with any reason be quarrelled at for that by the way I may here vindicate the innocency of the Church in this know 1. Sect. 4 Neither doth our Church pretend nor the Bishops assume a power of giving the Holy Ghost as the Holy Ghost is taken to signifie the saving graces of the Spirit whereby a man is regenerated sanctified or made holy who was not so before Or as it signifies those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or special gifts of the Spirit which were in the Apostles dayes frequently given and poured out accomplishing therein (d) Joel 2.28 with Acts 2.1 20. those Prophesies of old concerning this large effusion of the Spirit that should be in the dayes of the Gospel Or indeed as it signifies Those inward endowments gifts and abilities which are requisite to qualifie a person and make him fit to be ordained to such an Office for these are indeed the gifts of God and in a good measure supposed to be already in the person who is therefore first examined that the Bishop may in some measure be satisfied that he fath these abilities who comes to be ordained It cannot therefore be rationally supposed that the Church should pretend to give these at the Ordination 2. Sect. 5 Nor doth the Text necessarily speak of the Holy Ghost in that sense for though beyond all controversie Christ had power to give the Holy Ghost the Holy Ghost proceeding from him as well as from the Father who did promise (e) Joh. 14 26. 15.26 to send his Spirit who when sent was to teach them all things i.e. every way to qualifie them for and enable them proportionably to the work in which they were to be imployed yet he doth expresly tell them that this effusion of the Holy Ghost upon them they were not to expect whil'st he was with them nor to receive till after his Ascension (f) Joh. 16.7 If I go not away saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this Spirit who was to enlighten teach comfort c. will not come unto you but if I depart I will send him unto you And accordingly we find he did when after his Ascension he sent this Spirit in (g) Acts 2.3 4. fiery cloven tongues upon them Yea it seems to be evident that Christ did not at this time when he breathed on them and said Receive the Holy Ghost c. indue them with those gifts because after this we find his command to them (h) Luk. 24.49 to stay at Jerusalem until they should be indued with this power from on high Nor need we say as one (i) Mart. ex Brent doth That the Spiuit was here given only thus far as that they were lightly and in a small measure sprinkled with his grace being afterwards more fully to be indued with his power For though it be indeed the work of Christ to give to those whom he calleth to the Pastoral Office such gifts and sufficient endowments as shall make them fit for and in a good measure able to perform that charge to which they are called yet in this Commission Christ doth not as even the same Author confesseth so make them presently Preachers of the Gospel as immediately to send them forth to the work but they are yet to stay till this power and these abilities be given them from above and therefore 3. Sect. 6 It may very probably if not certainly be supposed that by the Holy Ghost there given is meant the Gift or Authority of the Evangelical Ministry whereby they were made Apostles and Preachers to the world for the collecting and gathering a Church to Christ and for the feeding and governing that Church being gathered Preaching and proclaiming Remission of sins to the world upon their sincere Repentance from dead works and unfained Faith in Jesus Christ and Retaining the sins and preaching the certain condemnation of those who will not repent nor (k) 2 Thess 1 8 9. obey the Gospel For these Ministrations are all The gifts of the Spirit as the Apostle (l) 1 Cor. 12.4 5. per totum evidently teacheth There are saith he diversities of gifts but the same Spirit What gifts It followeth There are Differences of ministrations c. And if we consider the whole series of his discourse in that Chapter concerning the several Members of the body having their distinct offices we must acknowledge that he speaks there not of Gifts as endowments and inward qualifications of men but chiefly as of their capacities and relations in the Church the places and offices to which they are called and the works to which they are sent as Apostles Prophets Teachers c. which Ministrations are all from the same Spirit and called Gifts also (m) Rom. 12.6 7. Having gifts differing whether Prophecy or Ministery And Christ is said to have (n) Ephes 4.8 11. given gifts when he sent Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastors Teachers So that we may well conceive that the thing which Christ doth when he saith Receive ye the Holy Ghost is but to give them their Commission constituting them his Apostles and Messengers to the world impowering them to remit or retain sins To preach pardon and peace and to absolve the penitent or to cast out and cut off by excommunication the impenitent In a word he committeth to them the charge of the Gospel or that ministration which is the (o) 2 Cor. 3.6.8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ministration of the Spirit constituting them Ministers of the New Testament not of the letter as in the Law but of the Spirit 4. And in no other sense doth our Church use this Form in her Ordinations not pretending to give the inward either sanctifying Graces of qualifying gifts of the holy Ghost but indeed giving a Commission to and conferring upon the Person ordained the charge and Authority of the Evangelical Ministery which is the ministration of the holy Ghost And why she may not most conveniently make use of the same Scriptural expressions when she conferreth the same Authority as to the Preaching of the Doctrine of Faith and Repentance which is as the Key of heaven committed to their ministery which bindeth or looseth Remitteth or Retaineth sins I have not yet seen any sufficient reason given But Sect. 8 Neither is this all the Authority which the particular Pastors are allowed with us viz. To preach the Word and by Doctrine to bind or loose for there is yet somwhat more committed into their hands Some part at least yea a very great part of Discipline too even in those very parts of Discipline which are said to be denied them As 1. Publick Admo ∣ nition Publick Admonition I have sometimes wondered Sect. 9 that this should be charged upon the Bishops and laid as a great exception to their Government That the particular Pastors are hindered from the exercise of their Office and in this
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Peace-offering An earnest and passionate Intreaty for PEACE VNITY OBEDIENCE WHEREIN An Impartial View is taken of the Chief Controversies among us as to Doctrine Government Liturgy and Ceremonies And it is cleared That the Differences are not so wide as by the Heats of men they seem to be Nor Any thing required but what may lawfully be submitted to by men of Humble and Peaceable that is Christian Spirits Designed Especially To perswade to a lawful Conformity a just and necessary Obedience to the Laws established for PEACE yea for CONSCIENCE sake By JOHN STILEMAN M. A. Minister of the Gospel and VICAR of TUNBRIDGE in KENT Chrysost Hom. 31. in Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Contra Rationem Nemo Sobrius Contra Scripturas Nemo Christianus Contra Ecclesiam Nemo Pacificus Senserit And as many as walk according to this Rule Peace be on them and Mercy and upon the Israel of God Gal. 6.16 LONDON Printed for Thomas Pierrepont at the Sun in St. Pauls Church-yard 1662. ILLVSTRISSIMO DOMINO Stemmatis Nobilitate nec non Primariae Eruditionis Eximiae Virtutis Egregiae Pietatis nominibus verè Honoratissimo ROBERTO Comiti Leicestriae Vice Comiti Lisle Baroni Sidney de Penshurst Serenissimae Regiae Majestati à Secretioribus Consiliis S. P. VEreor Illustrissime Comes ne insolentis audaciae crimine quod apud Dignitatem vestram deprecari expediret maximè meritò intentarer qui chartulas has tanto tamque splendido Nomini inscribere non subtimebam Non enim tantum mihi ausim tribuere ut quod in publicum emittere tenuitas mea praesumserit vestris manibus dignum censerem Sed spes est neminem mihi vitio versurum fore si Quem omnes summo prosequuntur honore ipse Colerem suspicerem admirarer Quin singularis illa Benevolentia qua obscurum me nulliusque nominis dignata est prosequi Celebritas vestra Quem Docti Mecaenatem Ecclesiae Patronum Ecclesiarum Ministri Fautorem dicunt verè dicunt Gratitudinis hoc Observantiaeque specimen efflagitat Liceat itaque rogo Primitium hoc quale quale sit Strophiolum vestro Nomini porrigere quale se angusta nostra inculta exhibere possunt viridaria parùm fateor amaenum piis tamen candidisque lectoribus spero haud insalubre Vidimus heu vidimus Angliam bellorum incendiis conflagrantem ardentes Provincias prostrata exanguia virorum civitatum cadavera in Optimates in Regem insurgentes de plebe infimos Ecclesiam omnibus calamitatum procell is objectam male-feriatorum pedibus miserè conculcatam Illius vero Dei Opt. Max. qui per tot annos exulantem Regem in solium reduxit qui Optimates Honoribus Episcopos Cathedris Pastores Ecclesiis restituit ejus inquam auspiciis jam tandem respiravit Respublica revixit Ecclesia Antiquae jam rursus vigent leges Quae certè bona si nostra nôrimus omnium animos laetitiâ omnium ora summis Divinae Benignitatis laudibus explerent omnesque ad Promovendam hanc conservandamque Ecclesiae Pacem tam divinitùs datam excitarent At vero quis crederet plurimorum mentibus etiam adhuc inhaerent penitus imo vigent discordiarum semina Hic in Leges Regem Regimen Ritus Ecclesiasticos Publicasque Formulas petulantiùs invehiturâ— Ille teneris animis scrupulos injiciens inanibus terriculamentis infirmos perturbat Hinc Leges iniquitatis insimulantur illinc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quasi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tyrannidis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sugillantur istinc reductis antiquis innocuis Ritibus Liturgiâ Religio quasi tota jam corrueret inundantis iterum Romanae Superstitionis metus esset defletur Hi nolunt Illimetuunt eâdem cum caeteris fidelibus viâ incedere legibusque circa res Ecclesiae se submittere Quis talia fando Temperet â lachrymis Summus ille Pater luminum Deus pacis qui dedit Ecclesiae unicum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui proposuit nobis unicam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tit. 14. qui praeparavit nobis unam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jud. 3. sicut promisit sic impertiat omnibus Corunum Jer. 32.39 viam unam illuminet omnium mentes Divina veritate edoceat omnes Fraternam charitatem ut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. 4 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 studiis sincerae pietatis sedulò omnes incumbamus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adolescamus in eum â—ui est Caput Christus Quod ut fiat has laborum nostrorum Primitias Ecclesiae offerre dicare visum est quò scrupulis qui tot adhuc malè habent ex animis fidelium evulsis Dubitationibus Praescissis iniquis suspicionibus amotis Christiani inter nos omnes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Legibus Ritibus Formulis Constitutionibus Ecclesiae conformes ejusdem Paci Gloriae splendori consulere inducantur Si quod absit tanta de spe decidamus hoc tamen nobis erit solatio fecimus quod potuimus in magnis vel voluisse sat est Etiam paucillum similae acceptum est Deo Levit. 5.7 11. ubi Pecudes Turtures non sunt in manibus Qua spe fretus sub Divinae Benedictionis auspiciis vestraeque Celebritatis umbrâ Clientelâ scripta haec qualiacunque sint confidentiùs ausim evulgare Vestro Nomini in aeternum observantiae Monimentum inscribere ista dedicare siliceat Dignitatis vestrae Humillimo Cultori Clientum infimo JOANNI STILEMAN Dat. Pridie Idus Maii. Anno Aerae Redemptionis M.DC.LXII TO THE Pious Judicious and Candid READER IT was an ancient observation (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gregor Presbyt in vitâ Nazian that the wickedness of Christians brought in Persecutors upon the Church and raised up Julian against Christianity What was of old we have seen in our dayes and lamentable experience hath made it manifest to any observer The Church of England did deservedly challenge as her due the title of the Best Reformed Church in the world Reformed by the Best Authority in the most Regular way according to the Best pattern and nearest to the Apostolical Canon standing as a City upon an hill and shewing to the world more holy Bishops eminently learned Divines Faithful Dispensers of the Sacred Mysteries and some even of the enemies of her Discipline being judges more of the Truth of Religion and real Power of Godliness than any Church of Europe besides not excepting even those who pretended to the most righteous Government and Purest Discipline God had here planted his Vineyard built a Tower fenced it with the Mound of Peace given to her a Defender of the Faith such a King as the world could not afford such another Under which blessings she prospered and flourished to the wonder and envy of all round about us But Prosperity is often we know abused to Sensuality In Peace and Plenty men grow wanton and when the
Protestant ever doubted Viz. That the sins of Governours and some irregularities in Government are not sufficient to discharge the subject of his duty nor are they a plea that can justifie his disobedience It is possible some Princes may be vitious or their Government faulty yet their male-administration is no ground for the peoples rebellion They shall answer their sin to God but in the mean time we must be subject It is possible there may be vices in the persons of some Bishops for they are men there may be errors in the constitution and administration of the Government for it is in the hands of men who are not yet perfect if therefore we shall neither own them nor their authority upon the same reason we must cast off all government and authority whatsoever For what government is there so righteous what persons so holy but men who are unwilling to obey will be ready to plead the government tyrannical and the persons wicked as Korah and his Complices to Moses and Aaron (e) Num. 16.3 Ye take too much upon you all the congregation is holy wherefore lift ye up your selves Yea what government so Sacred what governours so righteous but will discover too much of error and irregularity while men are men and on this side heaven if then we may have a just plea to refuse obedience until our Governours be free from the common corruptions of men and the Government every way faultless or until we judge them so and can find nothing that can be said against either Rebellion could be no sin till we get beyond the grave nor should we ever obey any humane power in Church or State till there is no Church or State on earth to be obeyed Sect. 17 These two things being granted as they cannot be denied it is easie to see what answer to make as to those forenamed pleas viz. suppose those two charges to be true against the Bishops That they take too much upon themselves or That they will not suffer us to take our due and do all that we should which yet by the way I have not seen proved yet these are not ground enough to hinder our compliance and notwithstanding all these may a sober conscientious Christian who seriously mindeth the discharge of his own duty peaceably conform to the Laws established But let us a little examine the Particulars objected CHAP. V. The Particular exceptions against Bishops as they are said to take too much upon themselves answered Sect. 1 THe first General and Great exception taken against the Bishops is That they take too much upon themselves 1. General except That the Bishops take too â—â—ch upon themselves and to this head I referre those four exceptions which the Divines of the contrary perswasion have made in their Former paper of Proposals to His Majesty concerning the Discipline and Ceremonies of the Church of England And they are these 1. The great extent of the Bishops Diocess too large for his personal inspection 2. His deputing the Administration of much of the trust to Commissaries Chancellors Officials c. secular persons 3. Some affirming Episcopacy a distinct order and assuming the sole Power of Ordination 4. Exercising an arbitrary power as in Articles of Visitation c. These are the great things charged on them Sect. 2. Answered in general and we may judge the greatest for had there been any thing of an higher nature to have been pleaded against them no doubt it would have been given in Now then suppose these things cleared and that being proved they were a real and just ground to petition and by all legal wayes to endeavour a Reformation Yet still if this desired Reformation cannot be obtained but these things must continue all this hinders not but we may lawfully obey and submit in peace Sect. 3 But to give a more full answer that may be satisfactory to every considering man I shall a little consider the particulars And because some have said more and I would gladly satisfie all scruples I shall rank the particular Exceptions in another order that I may take in and answer all that is material in the Objections There are these seven things said to prove that they take too much upon them which are the great exceptions against Episcopacy as it is with us established Sect. 4.1 Partic. ex ∣ cept 1. That they assume a power which was never instituted by God that hath no foot-steps in the New Testament and they are therefore Intruders and Vsurpers and not to be obeyâ—d Sect. 5 Answ 1 Answ 1. But suppose they are not intruders what then becomes of this plea Sub judice lis esâ— it is not yet determined against them some learned and pious men who are both able to judge and willing to be convinced of the truth yet cannot be convinced of any such usurpation yea they think that they have clear foot-steps of such a government in the Apostolical practice Suppose there were something in the Apostolical Commission besides that which was extraordinary in them which made them standing constant Officers of the Church even where they were superior to other Presbyters for that they were superior is out of question and that this superiority was a part of their extraordinary Commission is not yet proved and then because they continued not in their own persons but in their successors these must be Bishops or none which is the judgement of many and of one who is instar omnium (f) See confer at Newcastle with Mr. Henderson and with the Divines at the Isle of Wight His late Majesty and some foot-steps of such a thing seem to appear in the holy Canon where the Churches still send to Paul about their affairs and St. Paul writing to Timothy and Titus directeth them in the exercise of the (g) 1 Tim. 5.19 20 21 22. Tit. 1.5 11.3.10 Acts of Jurisdiction distinct from and over Presbyters which intimates that they had such a power as to Ordination and Censures That these had such a Jurisdiction and in particular Cities as affixt to them at least at that time is evident The one being to Abide at Ephesus and for this work (h) 1 Tim. 1.3 To charge some that they do not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 teach any other or strange Doctrine and this is an act of authority over them The other (i) Tit. 1.5 left at Creet to Govern and (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Order the affairs of that Church this is also an act of Authority And suppose these were not as some say they were only Evangelists a general occasional and extraordinary Officer for that time but constant standing Officers in the Church for ever as some not without ground do judge for there being a constant necessity of the same works why should there not be the same Officer to do those works The change of the name Apostle Evangelist then and Bishop now proves not a change of the
mal-administration of the power in their hands so far as their charge extends They judge their charge to be no more than to oversee the Churches to take care that able Pastors be provided for the particular cure and inspection of the several Flocks and that these do their duties in their places and that the people yield their due obedience to them and to their Superiors Sect. 11 Answ 2 2. It is granted That the bounds of the Episcopal charge were not so large in the Primitive times as they are now no not generally in many centuries of years But withall it must be not denied that this consideration makes not a nullity of the Office nor doth the lessening or inlarging the bounds of their charge at all make a change or alteration in the charge it self For in those little Bishopricks either there was an imparity or superiority or there was noâ— The Bishop had Presbyters under him or he had not If now ye say that he had not ye say something indeed to the purpose but it remains to be proved and the stream of Antiquity speaks the contrary For to omit the mention of the third and fourth Ages whereof none that I know ever doubted when Ignatius of Antioch in those Epistles which were never yet denied to be his and are by Videlius Vossius and our learned Vsher acknowledged to be genuine doth expresly make this distinction and requires the Obedience of the Presbytâ—r to the Bishop as those who have read Ignatius know so well that it would be lost labour to produce particular passages when it is the main design and argument of some of those Epistles as particularly that ad Trallenses which is wholly Hortatory ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Vnity in Doctrine and Sanctity of Life For the preserving of this unity and purity of Doctrine he exhorteth as to avoid all Hereticks against whom he solidly proves the Deity and Incarnation of Christ so to yield a due obedience to their Pastors both the Bishops because they watch for their souls and to the Presbyters and Deacons because they are Ministers of the Church of God and there have the place of Jesus Christ Particularly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Reverence the Bishop and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as ye reverence Christ and adds As the Apostles have commanded So again in that ad Magnesianos which is Paraenetical and Hortatory also and the designe of it is to exhort obedience to the Bishop yea though he be young which he presseth by several arguments as That we are in this case not so much to look to Age as ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The oldest are not always the wisest And farther urgeth the examples of a young Daniel and a young Samuel reproving an old Eli and Jeremy Solomon Josiah Timothy And again that it is a terrible thing to contemn the Bishop for in him is God also contemned And saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is fit to obey the Bishop and in nothing to oppose him And again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As the Lord Christ did nothing without the Father so must you do nothing without your Bishop I need cite no more though I might add much to this purpose out of those Epistles ad Philadelphenses ad Smyrnenses where he disputes of the power and authority of the Bishop I know that even these are said also to be so interpolated that it is hard to know Ignatius in Ignatius But that is a strange interpolation which shall leave nothing genuine and it would be scarce parallelled that the main design of a genuine Epistle should be spurious Grant them interpolated must it needs be the hard hap of poor Episcopacy to be principally guilty and wheresoever that is mentioned or urged though it be so often so professedly must that Epistle for the Bishops sake be either rejected as spurious or this particular be concluded the interpolation Nothing of antient records then shall have any credit with us when we have a mind to charge them with corruptions Therefore until these be proved spurious passages we shall account them genuine Ignatius Ignatius I say doing this as it proves this Imparity and Superiority as antient as his time which was the very next age to the Apostles so it hath some force to perswade us that it was so even in the Apostles days both because he was so near them and so more likely to know the practice of the time but just before him and also because he was for a good season contemporary and coetaneous with some of the Apostles particularly S. John who would certainly have contradicted him had he pleaded for a power which Christ never approved nor the Apostles owned Sect. 12 And if this Imparity or Superiority be granted to have been in those narrower limits it must not it cannot with any shadow of reason be denied where the bounds are farther extended If one two or three Presbyters may be under a Bishop then may also ten twenty an hundred More or fewer alter not the nature of the office Kings and Princes are as perfectly and justly such now when of larger Empires and Dominious as those of old who were Kings but of some single Cities or petty Territories They are not to be cast out because their Dominions are conceived too large but to be obeyed because they are Kings So neither are our Diocesans therefore less Bishops because their Bishopricks are greater than those in the Antient Ages For if any were they fewer or more were to obey the Bishop then so are we though more if by the Establishment here we are put under his jurisdiction to obey him still Sect. 13 Answ 3 3. Nor is it yet proved that Even then their bounds were so streight as to be limited to one Parish or single Congregation For if there were many of these Churches in association joined in one and so One Church for acts of Government to which particular Churches were subordinate as the (p) See Assemblies answ to Reas of Dissent Brethr. and Vindicat. of Presbyt Govern by the Province of Lond. Presbyterian Brethren not only grant but challenge and lay it a foundation of their Classical and Provincial and National Assemblies as The Church of Jerusalem Ephesus c. with other City Churches which say they consisted of more single Congregations than one Then if there were a Bishop as it appears there was either He must be yielded to be over all this association or if a distinct Bishop to every particular Congregation then those several Bishops must be under and subordinate to the Colledge of Presbyters which I have not yet seen affirmed So that here was a larger charge than of one single Parish And in after ages it is most evident that their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had not that strict sense which now it hath but the Parish was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consisting of more Parishes than one as
we now speak of a Parish though the Diocess were not so large as in succeeding times Sect. 14 Answ 4 4. But grant every tittle of the exception That the Diâ—cess is by much too large c. What then may we not submit if any undertake a charge which he is not able to manage let him look to it he must give up his own account not we for him If any of us be called or invited to or offered such a place or power if we judge it too much for one man and the account too heavy on Gods name let us refuse it no man will enforce any to be a Bishop against his will But what is this to our obedience The extent of their charge may be occasion of sin to them who undertake what they cannot perform but can be no plea for us why we should not obey when we are required Had the Bishop none to govern but some ten or twenty of us which he might do we were then bound to obey him and though more be under his charge this exempts not us from our particular duty Sect. 15.3 Partic. Ex ∣ cept 3. Another exception is That though the Bishop hath authority over the flock yet being in eodem ordine he hath no power over others of the same order i. e. over other Presbyters which yet he challengeth and where he hath no authority to command there we have no obligation to obey And therefore 1. They cannot justly require nor are we bound to yield that Canonical obedience which we are required to promise at our Ordination and to swear at our institution into a Benefice 2. Nor have they any power to silence or suspend us from our ministery nor may we lay down the exercise thereof upon their pleasure Sect. 16 Answ Gener. 1 Answ 1. To all this I answer in general 1. If the Bishop be a distinct order then there is no place for this exception But this I shall not now dispute 2. But though a Bishop and a Presbyter be yielded to be not different Orders of Ministery as Presbyter and Deacon are yet one may be in a degree of eminency in the same order above the other And if it be but 1. For the conveniency of Administration and to keep peace and unity in the Church Or 2. That the King or Supreme Governour so is pleased to order the external Oeconomy either of these is enough to oblige an humble Christian to a peaceable submission though he were not convinced of the Divine right of the Superiority For where he hath no authority but only a possession we may ober for Peace and where he hath if not a Divine yet a Civil authority we must obey (q) Rom. 13.5 for conscience akâ— Sect. 17 Answ partic 2 Answ 2. But as to the two particulars I give this Answer 1. 1. To the matter of Canonical obedience To that That they require of us Canonical obedience which we are to Promise at our Ordination and to swear at our Institution to a Parochial charge which it is said they cannot justly require nor are we bound to yield I answer Answ 1 Sect. 18 Answ 1. Why may they not justly require it Is it for want of authority in their place No certainly Authority they have if as some judge they are the Primigenial Apostolical constitution yea founded in the very Apostolical Office without question they have it then à Deo And if it should be made appear to us when our great account comes to be given to have been so what shall we answer for our denial of it But if they came in afterwards by the Prudence of the Church to govern for the prevention of faction and schism still they are continued in the Authority And such a prudential constitution gives them power enough as to this nor can we be acquitted of Schism if we obey it not Or Is it because this obedience which they require is not to be required not this neither For obedience is a duty of inferiors to superiors and they being made superiors whether by God or the King it makes no difference in this case it is due to them they may require it and we are then bound to yield it Besides what is it that they require of us is it not that we do the duties of our places in the Church This we are bound to do whether they require it or no and sure it becomes not sin to us then only because it is required Sect. 19 Answ 2 2. But suppose we are not bound to yield this Canonical obedience yet may we not lawfully do it May a man lawfully do no more than by an express Law he is bound to do without doubt he may Exigua est bonitas ad legem esse bonus Were men proved to be never so much Usurpers yet I never knew any Casuist determine it unlawful to obey him in those things which we might lawfully do and wherein we prejudiced not the right of nor did break our Allegiance to our lawful Prince It is one thing what we are bound to do another what we lawfully may do Were the Bishops proved the greatest Usurpers as some men clamour yet I could never see any that durst say our obedience to them in lawful things was unlawful or that in obeying them we should disobey Christ where we are to do but the duties which Christ hath laid upon us or at least such as He hath not forbidden us And beyond this All the Canonical obedience required of us or promised by us extendeth not For what is it that we promise even this (r) See Form of Order Priests Reverently to obey our Ordinary and other chief Ministers unto whom the Government and charge is committed over us following with a glad mind and will their godly admonitions and submitting our selves to their godly judgements What is here promised that a good Christian may not yield What do we promise more in the intent of the Law than to obey those who are set over us in licitis honestis in things lawful and honest and not repugnant to Gods Word They require no more we promise no more And this I am sure we may lawfully do so long as the Government is committed to them whether it be directly by Divine institution or only by the Authority of the King which even their greatest enemies must grant that it is it matters not as to this particular the lawfulness of our obeying thus far 2. Sect. 20.2 To the matter of silencing or suspending As to the other part of the exception There is indeed a great cry in the world against the Bishops for silencing and suspending Ministers which they are said to have no authority to do and it is pleaded that we may not submit here nor lay down the exercise of our Ministery upon their pleasure but that the (s) Act. 4 19. 5.29 Answer of the Apostles to those High Priests Rulers and Elders
granted to them by the Civil Magistrate and held in tenure from him and not claimed as pertaining to the Episcopal function by Divine right 4. Their Courts determine no other civil causes than the Civil Magistrate and his Laws do permit or if any do the fault is not in the Prelateship but in the persons Further they inflict civil punishments give licences exact oaths c. by authority from the Magistrate whose substitutes therein they are And therefore the Prelates neither in this nor in any of the former instances can be said to impair the dignity authority or supremacy of the Civil Magistrate but herein do all things in and by the protection of his authority 5. If all our Ministers be exempt from the Magistrates Jurisdiction in some things appertaining to them but in what things I know not this very exemption it self is an act of the Magistrates Jurisdiction and depends upon his pleasure and how can it then any wayes impair the same Sect. 45 These things may satisfie in answer to this exception The Honours and Lordships given to the Bishops is a civil additament which we have no reason to envy them neither doth that Title or their rule and dominion infringe the Prerogative of Christ or the Power and Authority of the King And how their Honours and power in the Church should discharge us of our obedience or be a ground of our contentions I must profess I see not how any rational account can be given to any considering man Sect. 46 Except partic 6 6. But if they have a power themselves yet how can they set up and substitute and require our obedience to other officers which in the Church are confessedly not of divine institution for this also is an exception against our Episcopacy and thus did the Presbyterian Divines give it in in their (e) 1. Pap. of Propos except 2. against Bishops Proposals to His Majesty That by reason of the disability to discharge their duties and trusts personally The Bishops did depute the Administration of much of their trust even in matters of Spiritual Cognizance to Commissaries Chancellors and Officials whereof some are meer secular persons and could not administer that power which originally pertaineth to the Officers of the Church And again in their Second paper to His Majesty presented in reference to His Majesties Declaration communicated to them before its publication they say The Prelacy which we disclaim is That of Diocesans upon the claim of a superior order to a Presbyter assuming the sole power of Ordination and of Publick admonition of particular offendors enjoyning Penitence excommunicating and absolving besides Confirmation over so many Churches as necessitated the corruption of Discipline and using of Humane officers as Chancellors Surrogates Officials Commissaries Arch-deacons while the undoubted officers of Christ the Pastors of particular Churches were hindred from the exercise of their office Sect. 47 Answ 1 Answ 1. How much these things may signifie towards the design for which they were urged by these Brethren petitioning for an alteration of the establishment which here I meddle not with sure I am should all these things be granted they signifie nothing as to the exemption of us from a peaceable submission to these officers being established And this is all that I here aim at As to the Diocesses and Superior Order I have already spoken to them the matter of Ordination I shall examine under the next exception Sect. 48 Answ 2 2. As to Publick admonition Penances Excommunication and Absolving c. I say that such censures as these are to be executed in the Church none that knows the nature of a Church and is acquainted with the Scriptures did ever or do now question The censures are necessary the ends great To preserve the Church in Purity and Peace To keep men from Scandal and Schism To recover the lapsed sinner To restore the Penitent To strengthen the weak To confirm and establish the doubtful to make the Church (f) Cant. 6.4 10 comely and beautiful in her self and terrible to her enemies as a well marshalled Army Now when we acknowledge the Censures of Divine institution and of so great necessity why should we quarrel at the Administrators which yet are not so uncapable of this trust as some may conceive The Bishops on all hands are granted an interest in the power of the Keyes even by those who will not acknowledge them above the Presbyters Now if they exercise this power alone or with others yet excluding some whom we judge to have an interest with them yet what they do they do by vertue of that authority which they have The taking too much upon them or any male-administration may be personal faults but no ground for us to refuse obedience Sect. 49 Answ 3 3. Neither do these inferior officers pass these Censures alone but with others nor do any according to our constitutions keep Courts in affairs of this nature but with someone or more Presbyters there with them Sect. 50 Answ 4 4. But grant that these Officers have not a Divine institution but substitute under the Bishop by an authority meerly humane though some conceive some footsteps of an Archdeacon in Scripture in Silas and Mark to Paul and Barnabas although not under the same name Yet 1. The Lay-Elders beyond all doubt are as much secular persons as any of these and have as little a foundation in Scripture as these as to the being Ecclesiastical officers and the passing of Church-censures and then methinks these men that could admit them may admit these If their being secular persons be an argument against these sure I am it is as strong against them and with us more for they never had any legal establishment in this Church as these have But 2. The legal establishment of these Officers by the Laws of the Kingdom is enough to engage our submission to those Laws and upon this account may even those men with a good conscience obey them who yet acknowledge not a Divine institution of them nor a Divine right in Episcopacy it self For 1. Sect. 51 I think there is very much truth in those words of Archbishop Whitgift which I find cited but miserably misapplied by Johnson the Separatist viz. The substance and nature of Government must be taken out of the Word of God and consisteth in these parts That the Word be truly taught the Sacraments rightly administred Vertue furthered Vice repressed and the Church kept in quietness and order All this is certainly of Divine institution and this we may and must submit to And this is all which the Bishops and Officers under them are impowered to do But saith he the Officers of the Church whereby this Government is wrought be not namely and particularly expressed in Scripture but in some points left to the discretion and liberty of the Church to be disposed according to the state of times persons and places Now if there be a truth in this which
and because so is the Will of God that we should do For if we yield to Episcopacy though not as a Divine yet as an Humane Constitution not repugnant to the Word of God and so much without doubt whatsoever it be more it is with us being established here by the known Laws When then they require this of men I see not how it can be avoided but by vertue of those forementioned texts it ought to be done Re-ordination being in this case as is well noted but a submission to that Order of Church Politie which is by the established Laws made by the Powers not only in being but who have the undoubted Soveraignty and legal authority again set over us In a word 8. Sect. 88 Lastly It is not of no consideration that we in this case not only consider what is necessary to make a man a Minister of Christ but also what is requisite to qualifie a man for the legal maintenance which doth belong to such a Ministery in England And those who deny the necessity of a superadded Episcopal Ordination as to the former end yet must see a necessity at least the use and lawfulness of it to the latter Upon such an account as this no man ever questioned the lawfulness of a double Marriage When the late Usurping Powers required this to be Solemnized by the Civil Magistrate no man doubted but those who were either not satisfied in Conscience of that way or doubted the ill consequences when the tide should turn the Laws as then standing not allowing the Legitimation of the issue of such a Marriage might lawfully as many and all wise men did be Married again by the Minister according to the Laws in force without incurring the guilt of any sin thereby And why may not a second Ordination be admitted upon the consideration of the like consequences One is no more a Sacrament than the other One is as much an Ordinance of God as the other The Name of God would be no more taken in vain in the one than in the other Nor can I by any thing in Scripture find there should be any sin in the one as before it is stated than in the other Sure I am the Holy Scripture no where condemneth it hath no where given us a Law against a second Ordination and (x) Rom. 4.15 where there is no Law how there should be a Transgression I say not I but a wiser than any of us even St. Paul himself could never see He that is desired to see more of this Subject let him consult that little book of Mr. Humphreys professedly handling this question of Re-ordination where he will see the lawfulness of it at least as to the receiver clearly and fully proved the main doubts and scruples about it and difficulties in it untied and solved To that I referre the Reader In the mean time This may be enough to perswade and shew that men lawfully may in this thing submit to and comply with the Orders of our Superiours without sin Having now solved these doubts as to matter of Ordination and Re-ordination and answered all the most material Objections I hope I have laid such grounds as may satisfie all serious and considering men of the if not necessity yet lawfulness of our submission to the Government the Episcopacy established with us notwithstanding these great exceptions taken against them in matters referring to the first general head wherein the Bishops are said to take too much upon themselves and to challenge a power which is not theirs CHAP. VI. The other general Exception against the Bishops as hindering the particular Pastors from the exercise of their Office answered Sect 1 WHen I have satisfied the scruples that refer to the next general head I think I have said enough as to the matter of Government and shall have sufficiently cleared this That notwithstanding all this there may be a peaceable submission a due conformity lawfully yielded General Ex ∣ ception 2 2. This Exception is That the Bishops as they are said to take too much upon themselves so will not suffer others to take their due but hinder the undoubted Officers of Christ the Pastors of particular Churches from the exercise of their office particularly as some have objected that part of Government and Discipline which they think they should and do judge they are called and have authority to administer every particular Pastor being bound to a personal ministration of all the Ordinances of Christ to that particular Church committed to his charge So it is objected Answ 1 Sect. 2 To this the Answer is readily returned in few words 1. That the particular Pastors of the several Congregations are the undoubted Officers of Christ there is none that I know among all those concerning whom the dispute now is who doth in the least deny 2. Answ 2 For the main unquestionable parts of their Office Sect. 3 they are so far from being hindered the exercise of them that they are most expressely enjoyned to perform them For the preaching of the Word and Administration of the Sacraments the two principal works of the Evangelical ministery they are expressely sent to do them and have these given in charge to them in the very forme of their Ordination (a) Form of Order Prieste Take thou authority to preach the Word of God and to minister the holy Sacraments in the Congregation where thou shalt be so appointed Here are the Keyes expressely given into their hands and no small part of the power of the Keyes viz. The Key of Doctrine to preach the Word which was never denied them and the Key of Discipline too thus far as to open to Door and let persons into the Church by Baptism when the same authority is given them to administer the Sacraments as to preach the Word Yea farther 3. Answ 3 Sect. 4 Is not a great part of the power of binding and loosing put into their hands Have they not this Commission given them yea before they receive their particular Mission by the Bible put into their hands at the very imposition of the Bishops and other Presbyters hands in these words (b) Form of Order Priests Receive the holy Ghost whose sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose sins tho dost retaine they are retained And be thou a faithful dispenser of the Word of God and of his holy Sacraments In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Ghost Where observe Their Commission is given them in the very same forme which (c) John 20.22 23. Christ himself used in commissionating his Apostles which some have quarrelled at in the practice of our Church as if it were an abuse of the Scripture and assuming a power which Christ never gave to the Bishops The Form used Receive the Holy Ghost vindicated To give the Holy Ghost nor is the Holy Ghost given to all on whom the Bishops so lay their hands But indeed
of particular and distinctive Habits or Ornaments used for the solemnity of other publick Actions none ever questioned the Royal Robes of the King on the Throne The Robes of Nobles in Parliament of Judges on their Tribunals of Professors in the Chaire in the Schooles Why should we quarrel at the Robes of Bishops in their Consistories or of Ministers in the solemnity of Religious Worship But in this we have enough acknowledged by our Brethren in their account of the Conference Those say m Account of proceed Reply to Answ §. 13. they that scruple the Surplice do it not as it is an habit determined of as decent but as they think it made an holy Vestment and so a part of external worship as Aarons Vestments were Well then it is allowed as determined of as decent Our Church determines no more requires no more Why shall we Dispute against it as an holy Vestment as Aarons was which was never so Imposed when by such a Dispute we must either violate the Laws of Charity by affixing an imputation upon our Church as if she did teach us to Judaize which she doth not or break the Peace of the Church by setting up a man of straw of our own framing and fighting against that which none maintains that we may find our selves matter of Dispute and contention And how this agrees with the Rules of Piety and sentiments of the Gospel let the world judge But if not required as an holy Vestment §. 14. Object yet it is as a Symbolical Sign to signifie purity and beauty to which nothing more suitable than white Linnen wherein the n Rev. 15.6 Angels have appeared as the Bishops o Account of proceed Ans to §. 13. say in their Answer They say so indeed but what then let it be considered 1. Whatsoever those Reverend Fathers §. 15. Sol. or any else may rationally conceive as the Reason of the Law or may in Dispute use as a Medium to prove the decency or conveniency of such an Habit yet this proves not that it is Imposed on us under such a notion or for such an end or signification nor indeed doth the Law prescribe it as such but at most as decent yea it only requires the use or wearing of it Which if we may do as it is confessed we may as accounted decent I see not how we can be acquitted of Sedition and Disobedience in contending and raising Disputes against it in such a notion as the Law mentions not § 16 2. But suppose it used and ordered to be used as a symbolical or teaching Sign to resemble purity and beauty may we not wear it Let even Mr Baxter be judge who telleth us p Baxt. five Disput disp 5. c. 2. §. 40. 1. If the Magistrate do Impose the Surplice who is a lawfull Governour as a decent Habit for a Minister in Gods service though he there passeth a hard censure upon the Magistrate for so doing for which let himself be accountable yet he acknowledgeth that he medleth with nothing but what is within the reach of his own power then he lawfully may do it Some decent Habit saith he is necessary either the Magistrate or Minister himself or associated Pastors must determine what by the same reason may the Bishop or a Synod legally Convened and acting by the Authority of the King If the Magistrate or Synod saith he again tye all to one habit suppose it indecent yet this is but an imprudent use of Power it is a thing within their reach they do not an alian work but their own work amisse and therefore the thing it self being lawfull I would obey and use that Garment 2. Yea though secondarily the whitenesse be to signifie purity and so it be made a teaching sign yet would I obey for secondarily we may lawfully and piously make teaching-signes of our food and raiment and every thing we see I know not what need be added more to justifie this use we have here enough acknowledged to engage a full compliance with and a peaceable submission to Authority in this case For what is added of the unlawfull use of it if the Magistrate make the Primary-reason thereof to be an Instituted Sacramental sign to work grace on the soul or to engage us to God is nothing at all to the purpose but to seek knots in a Bullrush or to raise Disputes and trouble the waters that are quiet when we know the Surplice is not Imposed on us nor pretended to be so on any such account or to any such end § 17 3. For the lawfullnesse and expediency of the wearing a Surplice I shall onely adde this one Argument which that truly Pious and eminently learned Mr Gataker sometimes used to one who came to him for resolution in this very case which I had from his own mouth it is this To wear the Surplice if it be unlawfull it is so either as a thing sinfull in it self and so sinfully evil or only as inconvenient or inexpedient But it is neither evil in it self nor inconvenient or inexpedient Therefore Vpon no account unlawfull And if neither sinnefull nor inconvenient what should hinder any from obeying the Law that enjoyns it 1. It was granted and it must be confessed that it cannot be said to be sinnefull or evil in it self for all Garments are equally lawfull 2. If the doubt be about the inconvenience or inexpediency of it the best way is to compare things and cases and so judge And thus did that Learned man resolve it We are called to the Ministry and enjoyned to Preach the Gospel q 1 Cor. 9.16 Woe unto us if we do it not viz. where we may have liberty to do it Now the Laws enjoyn us in our sacred Ministrations to wear this Habit if we Conforme and wear it we have leave and liberty in our places to exercise our Ministery if not it is denied Now let any sober and rational man judge which of these two is more convenient or expedient To wear a Surplice which is not evil and then to exercise our Ministry which is our necessary duty or to lay aside our Ministry and deprive the Church of the benefit of those parts and abilities which God hath given us and we are necessarily bound to employ for their edification rather than comply in the circumstance of an Habit which beyond all dispute may be worn without sin So that in the matter of the Surplice there is no such matter of scruple to a serious man as to interrupt our peace 2. And as little ground of scruple or contention is there in the gesture of Kneeling at the Communion §. 18. Kneeling at the Communion if men would seriously consider the nature of the Action and what is required For there are that I know but these three things considerable objected against it 1. Excepted against It was not used by Christ and his Apostles at the first Institution 2.
Office So that though that be true which the Annotator on the Epistle of Clemens Rom. made English in these late times citeth out of St. Augustine as to the name That Episcopi nomen est vocabulum quod ecclesiae usus obtinuit for they might give a new name but not erect a new Office Yet when the same work is still required to be done in the Church by such persons call them by what names ye please the thing is the same Again suppose though the name of Bishop and Presbyter be used promiscuously for one and the same Officer as they (l) Tit. 1.5 7. Act. 20.17 18. Phil 1.1 1 Pet. 5.1 2. seem to be yet that this person is the Bishop in the sense as now the word is used as Dr. Hammond doth judge And that at the first the Pastors were all Bishops and that They as their territories increased and the Church multiplied and their charge and work grew too great upon them ordained other Presbyters to undertake part of the charge under them I say suppose all this should be true as yet we are not confident nor can we be infallibly assured of the contrary And there are not a few that think it unquestionable and believe they can prove it too Where are we then Here is then no intrusion not usurping an authority but an Apostolical institution And then what plea can we have for disobedience whereas should it not be so but that there were onely Presbyters at the first and afterwards one chosen out of them for the avoiding of schism and faction and he called a Bishop as S. Hierom thinks and yet this in his judgment early too even when (m) 1 Cor. 1.12 one said I am Paul and another I of Apollos and I of Cophas c. and how soon that was we need not be told Yet in obeying the Bishop there could be no sin yea there would be much reason to do it if but for the avoiding of faction and schism So that here we may easily judge which is safest to practice For though the Bishops standing could not be proved there yet is no danger in obeying But if it indeed be founded in the Primitive pattern there must be danger in disobeying and our misguided judgments will be no sufficient excuse for our sin in rejecting an ordinance of God Sect. 6 Answ 2 2. But suppose the charge true that they usurp an authority which is not given them yet this must not be a ground for us to deny our obedience Discipline Order and Government are necessary to the Church for ever and to this are we bound to submit though it be sometimes put into such hands which we judge not so proper nor of primitive institution For the Thing is essential at least to the well-being and external communion of the Church viz. Government But the other The particular hands by which this is managed is of another consideration The Church may be happy if governed by One or Many or a Colledge of Equals or by some one or more among whom there is a subordination But without order and government it cannot be so Again Sect. 7 There cannot be shewed or supposed any greater irregularities in the Bishops nor indeed any such as to their entrance into or exercise of their Callings or Administrations of Government than was apparent in the Scribes and Pharisees For their entrance they were evidently usurpers (n) Mat. 23.1 They sate in Moses chair They were there it is true but they inthronized themselves in that chair and being in they held it They took to themselves the office of expounding the Law and teaching the people who being of any Tribe did without any regard of right or wrong invade that chair which was by Gods institution appropriate to the Priests and Levites Their Administration was as bad also joyning their Humane Traditions to the Law and their Will-worship to the Worship of God whereby they are said (o) Matth. 15.6 Mark 7.13 In vain to worship God and to make the commandment of God of none effect Yea making more account of and urging these Traditions with more severity than the Laws of God himself Yet the charge of Christ is what Forsake their Ministery Attend not on the Chair while they sit in it or obey not the Doctrine because they deliver it No but Hear them They are in Moses chair howsoever they got thither there they are and you must attend and Hear Observe and Do. Whatsoever they adde besides howsoever corrupt in their practice Follow not their Practice but Obey their Doctrine as far as it is of Moses Sect. 8 Do but now apply the case The worst Adversaries the Bishops have never had the boldness to charge them higher The Chair if they have invaded it is but as the Pharisees did All the Humane Traditions which they are charged I think unjustly to bring in and require conformity to are of no worse nature than those which the Pharisees used in and about Gods service and pressed upon the people Nor can their Ministery be so repugnant to Christ as the Ministery of the Scribes and Pharisees But in the Chair they are and there they are fixt and established too And though their entrance be supposed irregular which it is not yet must we obey for they are in the place of Governors If they add Inventions of their own it is their onely sin and they must answer it We are to comply in all things where we shall not sin against God So that notwithstanding this exception we may lawfully submit For it is not proved that they usurp what is not given them and if they should yet while the Government of the Church is in their hands we are not to oppose Sect. 9.2 Partic. Ex ∣ cept 2. It is again urged Though the office of the Bishop should be granted to be abinitio yet our Bishops unaertake too great a charge The large extent of their Diocesses is too much for their personal inspection wherein yet they take a personal charge over the souls of all those within their several Bishopricks Which burden must needs be too heavy for one mans shoulders The Pastoral office being a work of personal ministration and trust and that of the highest concernmen to the souls of the people for which they are to give an account to Christ So that though Episcopacy be granted yet not such as is established with us The charge of the Primitive Bishop being but over one Congregation but of the Diocesan Bishop extending to many Sect. 10 Answ 1 Answ 1. This exception is raised upon a doubtful foundation For it is not yet cleared or confessed That the Bishops of every Diocess are bound to a personal inspection or charged with the oversight of every particular soul within their jurisdiction Or that they are to be accountable for the miscarriage or perishing of any particular soul if it have not been through their fault and neglect or