have not yet attained the cognizance of their Purification Baptisme the other of those which are now come on so farre as to professe the Christian Religion in this latter ranke are appointed some which do inquire into the lives and manners of those that come that they may be a meanes to keepe off such Candidates of Religion as doe carry themselves amisse from their Assemblies And the rest that are like themselves they may gladly receive In which passage it is most evident that Origen speakes of those which are newly admitted into the Church who by reason of their late knowledge and acquaintance with those which they left behinde them in Pagan superstition might bee fit Monitours to knowe and notifie the condition of such Candidates as did offer to come into the Church Now these trusty Answerers would make the World believe that this is spoken of some Sage Elders that were to governe the Church and to deceive the Reader unfaithfully turne the words Nonnulli Praepositi sunt as if they were some ruling Elders indeed Whereas the word signifies and intends onely a designation of such Novices as were well approved to an Office of Monitorship concerning those which would professe to bee Converts And now to return your owne words wee would gladly knowe whether these were not as it were Lay Elders As for those other testimonies which you have drawne hither out of Augustine Optatus and the Letters of Fortis and Purpurius out of Baronius I could if neede were double your files in this kinde might that doe you any service I could tell you out of the acts of the Purgation of Foelix and Caecilianus of Episcopi Presbyteri Diaconi Seniores out of the Synodal Epistle of the Cabarsussitan councell as mentioned by Saint Augustine in his Enarration upon the Psalmes Necesse nos fuerat Primiani causam Seniorum literis ejusdem Ecclesiae postulantibus audire atque discutere which is a more pregnant place then any you have brought and could reckon You up yet more out of the Code of the African Canons Can. 91. Out of Gregory Turonensis who speaking of the Bishop of Marselles brings him in to say Nihil per me feci c. I did nothing of my selfe but that which was commaunded me à Dominis nostris Senioribus Out of Gregory the great in his Epistles more then once I could weary you with supply of such authorities But Brethren I shal sadly tel you that you do herein nothing but abuse your Reader with a colourable pretence For all those places you alleage are nothing at all to the purpose in hand VVho can make question but that Carthage and Hippo and other African Cities had old and grave men in them VVho can doubt that they had Magistrates and men in authority Such as we stil are wont out of the ancient appellation to style Aldermen Who can doubt that they did in all great occasions of the Church take the advise and assistance of these prime men But wil it hence follow that in the sense you contend for they had a Setled Lay Presbytery Was their Church ere the more according to your construction governed by Pastors Elders Deacons That these forecited were such as we have intimated is most evident in the Affrican Canons Can 100 they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the old men And in the 91 Canon we find as a Commentary upon this point Debere unumquemque nostrum in civitate sua convenire Donatistarum Praepositos aut adjungere sibi vicinum Collegam ut pariter eos in singulis quibusque Civitatibus per Magistratus vel Seniores locorum conveniant That is That every one of us should in our own Cities meet with the chiefe Governours of the Donatists and take with him some neighbour as his Colleague or Assistant that they together may give them a meeting by the Magistrates or Elders of the places But you will say there were those which were called Seniores Ecclesiastici ecclesiasticall Elders also True there were such Iustellus confesses so much and learned Isaacus Causabonus whose manuscript notes I have seene and his worthy Sonne Mericus Causabonus in his notes upon Optatus yield no lesse but these they do truly say were but as our Church-wardens men that were trusted with the utensils stock and outward affairs of the Church or as I may more fully compare them our vestry-men who are commonly and of old designed under the name of the eight men or twelve men in every great parish as I am sure it is in the Western parts to order the businesses of Seats and rates and such like externall occasions now that those places which you have cited intend no other Elders then these you shall he convinced out of your own testimonies The place which you bring out of Saint Austen cōtra Cresconium Grāmaticum runs thus Omnes vos c. All you Bishops Presbyters Deacons and Elders do know c. where you see plainly that the Elders which hee means are below Deacons and so you shall find them wheresoever they are mentioned now those that you contend for are by your own claime in a Key above them Optatus whom you cite is cleer against your sense whiles he makes only quatuor genera capitum only four sorts of mē in the Church Bishops Presbyters Deacons the faithful Laity And in his first book against Parmenian Quid commemorē Laicos c. he reckons up meer Laicks Ministers Deacons Presbyteros secundo sacerdotio constitutos Presbyters in the second degree of Priesthood principes omnium Episcopos and the chiefe of all Bishops Shortly brethren that there were in the Church of old ruling Elders which were in a rank above Deacōs and had together with the pastors a setled power of governmēt in the Church it is an opinion no lesse new then unjustifiable I do here solemnly professe that if any one such instance can be brought I wil renoūce Episcopacie for ever Do not thē against the light of your own knowledge set a face on proofs of those things which never were but give glory to God in yielding to so undoubted and cleer a truth SECT XVI XVII.XVIII THe rest that remaines is but mere Declamation not worthy of any answere but contempt and silence It is most true that the religious Bishops of all times have strongly upheld the truth of God against Satan and his Antichrist What can you say to this You tell mee of some irreligious ones that have as strongly upheld Satan and his Antichrist against the truth of GOD What is this to the calling can not I tell you of some wicked and irreligious Presbyters shall the function it selfe therefore suffer You tel us What an unpreaching Bishop once said of a Preacher I challeng you to shew any unpreaching Bishop in the Church of England this day it is your slander this not their just Epithete the scandalls of our inferiour Ministers I professe I
Faith there therefore he commandeth Timothy to stay at Ephesus Titus at Crete not as Evangelists but as governors of the Churches And indeed the Epistles written to either of them doe evince the same for in these he doth not prescribe the manner of gathering together a Church which was the duty of an Evangelist but the manner of governing a Church being already gathered together which is the duty of a Bishop and all the precepts in those Epistles are so conformable hereunto as that they are not refer'd in especiall to Timothy and Titus but in general to all Bishops and therefore in no wise they suit with the temporary power of Evangelists Besides that Timothy and Titus had Episcopall jurisdiction not onely Eusebius Chrysostome Theodoret Ambrosius Hierome Epiphanius Oecumenius Primasius Theophylact but also the most ancient writers of any that write the History of the new Testament whose writings are now lost do sufficiently declare Eusebius without doubt appealing unto those in his third book of Ecclesiasticall History and 4. chapter Timothy saith hee in Histories is written to bee the first which was made Bishop of the Church of Ephesus as Titus was the first that was made Bishop of the Church of Crete But if John the Apostle and not any antient Disciple of the Apostles bee the authour of the Revelation hee suggests unto us those seven new Examples of Apostolicall Bishops For all the most learned Interpreters interpret the seven Angels of the Churches to be the seven Bishops of the Churches neither can they doe otherwise unlesse they should offer violence to the text What should I speake of James not the Apostles but the Brother of our Saviour the Sonne in law of the Mother of our Lord who by the Apostles was ordained Bishop of Hierusalem as Eusebius in his 2d. book of Ecclesiasticall History 1 chap. out of the 6. of the Hypotyposes of Clement Hierome concerning Ecclesiasticall writers out of the 1. of the Comments of Egesippus relate Ambrose upon the 1. chap. unto the Galatians Chrysostome in his 23 Homily upon the 15 of the Acts Augustine in his 2d. book and 37 chap. against Cresconius Epiphanius in his 65 Heresie The 6. Synod in Tullo and 32 Canon all assenting thereunto For indeed this is that James that had his first residence at Jerusalem as an ordinary Bishop whom Paul in his first and last coming to Hierusalem found in the City almost all the Apostles preaching in other places Gal. 1.19 and that concluded those things which were decreed in the assembly of the Apostles Act. 21. For hee was with Chrysostome Bishop of the Church of Hierusalem from whom when certaine came Peter would not eate with the Gentiles Galat. 2.12 From examples I passe to authorities which Ignatius confirmes by his own authority Whose axiomes are these The Bishop is he which is superiour in all chiefty and power The Presbytery is a holy company of counsellours and assessours to the Bishop The deacons are the imitators of angelicall vertues which shew forth their pure and unblameable ministry He which doth not obey these is without God impure and contemnes Christ and derogates from his order and constitution in his Epistle to the Trallians In an other place I exhort that ye study to doe all things with concord The Bishop being president in the place of God The Presbyters in place of the Apostolick Senate the Deacons as those to whom was committed the Ministry of Jesus Christ in his Epistle to the Magnesians And againe Let the Presbyters be subject to the Bishop the Deacons to the Presbyters the people to the Presbyters and Deacons in his Epistle to those of Tarsus But Ignatius was the Disciple of the Apostles from whence then had he this Hierarchie but from the Apostles Let us now heare Epiphanius in his 75. Heresie The Apostles could not presently appoint all things Presbyters and Deacons were necessary for by these two Ecclesiasticall affaires might bee dispatch Where there was not found any fâ—t for the Episeopacie that place remained without a Bishop but where there was need and there were any fit for Episcopacy they were made Bishops All things were not compleat from the beginning but in tract of time all things were provided which were required for the perfection of those things which were necessary the Church by this means receiving the fulnesse of dispensation But Eusebius comes neerer to the matter more strongly handles the cause who in his third booke of Ecclesiasticall History and 22 chapter as also in his Chronicle affirmeth that Erodius was ordained the 1. Bishop of Antioch in the yeere of our Lord. 45. in the 3. yeere of Claudius the Emperor at which time many of the Apostles were alive Now Hierome writeth to Evagrius that at Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist unto Heraclius and Dionisius the Bishop the Presbyters called one chosen out of themselvs and placed in a higher degree the Bishop But Marke dyed as Eusebius and Bucholcerus testifie in the yeere of our Lord 64. Peter Paul and John the Apostles being then alive therefore it is cleere that Episcopacie was instituted in the time of the Apostles and good Hierome suffered some frailty when he wrote that Bishops were greater then Presbyters rather by the custome of the Church then the truth of the Lords disposing unlesse perhaps by the custome of the Church hee understands the custome of the Apostles and by the truth of the Lords disposing hee understands the apointment of Christ yet not so hee satisfies the truth of History For it appears out of the 1.2 and 3. Chapters of the Revelation that the forme of governing the Church by Angels or Bishops was not only ratified and established in the time of the Apostles but it was coÌ„firmed by the very Son of God And Ignatius called that form the order of Christ And when Hierome writes that it was decreed in the whole World that one chosen out of the Presbyters should bee placed over the rest And when I have demonstrated that in the life-time of the Apostles Bishops were superior to Presbyters in Ordination and that each Church had one placed over it doe wee not without cause demand where when and by whom Episcopacie was ordained Episcopacie therefore is of divine right Which how the Prelates of the Church of Rome for almost 300. yeers did adorne with the truth of Doctrine innocency of life constancy in afflictions and suffering Death it selfe for the honour of Christ and on the other side how in succeding times first by their ambition next by their excessive pragmaticall covetousnesse scraping up to themselves the goods of this world then by their heresie last of all by their tyranny they corrupted it that the Roman Hierarchy at this day hath nothing else left but a vizard of the Apostolicall Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy and the lively image of the whore of Babylon our Histories both antient and moderne doe abundantly testifie Wherefore all Bishops are
hereticke Brethren God speed you well with your Question As for the first which is edifying the Church by Word and Sacraments we make no difference your distance may we both hold it our worke and make it so and if any one have beene slack herein the fault is personall we neither defend nor excuse it The maine quarrell you grant to be in the second which is the power of Ordination impropriated as you enviously and untruly speake to our selves This you say was in former times in the hands of the Presbyters and undertake to prove it from 1 Tim. 4.14 Neglect not the gift which was given thee by Prophesie and by laying on the hands of Presbytery a place that hath received answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which I wonder ye can so presse when Calvin himselfe as you well know in his learned Institutions even in his last and ripest judgement construes it quite otherwise taking it of the office and not of the men however elsewhere otherwise wherein he also followes the judgement of Ierome Primasius Anselme Haymo Liranus Erasmus and others as our learned Bishop Downam hath largely shewed To countenance this sense of yours you tel us you find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so taken in Scripture and cite Luc. 22.66 and Act. 22.5 Wherein you do meerly delude the reader you find indeed the Elders of the people so called but the Elders of the Church never to make good your own construction therefore you must maintaine that Lay-men did and must lay on hands in Ordination which Calvin himself utterly abominates Neither need we to give any other satisfaction to the point thē that which we have from S. Paul himselfe 1 Tim. 3.6 Stirre up the gift of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands mine not others I aske then Was Timothy ordained more then once once surely S. Pauls hands were laid upon him when therefore the Presbyters Yes you say this was a joynt act of both else the Harmony of Scripture is not maintained Pardon me Brethren if I think Mr. Calvin was more skilled in the harmony of Scripture then our selves yet in his eare it sounded well that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be the Office to which Timothy was ordained by Paul and not a company of men that ordained him Yet give me leave to marvell how you can have the boldnesse to say This power is communicated to Presbyters when you know that not onely other Antiquity but even Hierome himself and that Councell of Aquisgrane which you cite doe still except Ordination which yet we doe not so appropriate as to lay our hands alone upon the head of any Presbyter The third part of our office consists in Ruling which though our Bishops you say assumed to themselves you will discover to have bin committed to and exercised by Presbyteriall hands For evidence whereof you cite Heb. 13.17 Obey them that have the Rule over you for they watch for your souls Brethren what an injurious imputation is this Do we not give you the title of Rectores Ecclesiarum Doe we not in your institution commit to you regimen animarum Why will ye therefore bear your Readers in hand that we herein rob you of your right It is true that here is a just distinction to be made betwixt the government of soules in severall Congregations and the government of the Church consisting of many Congregations that task is yours this is the Bishops wherein their rule yet is not Lordly but brotherly or paternall your argument reacheth not home to this and yet you strain that place of 1 Thes 5.12 beyond the due breadth whiles you tenter it out to either a paritie or communitie of censure Injoy now what you have so victoriously purchased but give me leave to summe up my reckonings also Since then how ever the name was at first promiscuously used yet the Office of Bishops and Presbyters differed even by Apostolike Institution and the Acts pertaining thereto of Ordination and power of ordinary government and censures were in that very first age of the Church manifestly differenced therefore Bishops and Presbyters were not one SECT VI. THE practise of the Apostles is so farre from contradicting their rules which your brotherly charity would fasten upon my assertion as that it is a most cleare proof and illustration of it Their practise is irrefragable in the charge which they gave to Timothy and Titus as we shall prove in due place Now if to this we shall adde the unquestionable glosse of the more cleare practise of their immediate successors I know not what more light can be desired for the manifestation of this truth Whereto ye boldly answer If this gloss corrupt not the text we shall admit it implying therein too presumptuously that the universall practise of the whole Primitive Church succeeding the Apostles may prove a Burdeaux-glosse to marre the Text. Brethren goe you your owne way let me erre with such guides But ye are disposed to be liberall somewhat ye will grant us besides that which we grant you It is agreed that the name of Bishops and Presbyters were at first promiscuously used It is yeelded by you That in process of time some one was honoured with the name of Bishop and the rest were called Presbyters But what I beseech you was this process of time Here lies your either error or fraud We doe justly and confidently defend that this time had no processe at all it was in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the living Apostles which we shall plainly make good in the sequell It is also yeelded that this was not nomen inane but seconded with some kind of imparity What then is the difference All the question you say is of divine right and Apostolicall institution of this imparity Let me beseech the Reader to consider seriously of the state of this difference in the mistaking whereof I have not a little unjustly suffered And to remember how I have expressed it in my Remonstrance fetching the pedegree of Episcopacy from Apostolicall and therefore in that right Divine institution And interpreting my self not to understand by divine right any expresse Law of God requiring it upon the absolute necessity of the being of a Church but an institution of Apostles inspired by the holy Ghost warranting it where it is and requiring it where it may be had Now whether it may be thus Apostolicall or a meerly humane and Ecclesiasticall invention is the question in hand On your part you say stand Ierome and Ambrose Two stiffe champions indeed And surely I must needs confesse this is the onely countenance of your cause which yet hath been blanked more then once Ierome tels us you say right down in Tit. 1. Idē est ergo Presbyter c. Out of whose testimony you in summe collect That A Presbyter and a Bishop were originally one That the imparity was grounded upon Ecclesiasticall custome That before this priority the Church was governed by
the common Councell of Presbyters and that Bishops ought still so to govern And lastly that The occasion of this imparity was the division which through the Devils instinct fell among Christians You look now that I should tell you that the Book is of uncertain credit or that Ierome was a Presbyter and not without some touch of envie to that higher dignity he missed or that wiser men then your selves have censured him in this point for Aerianisme I plead none of these but whiles you expect that I should answer to Ierome I shall set Ierome to answer for himselfe For the first I cannot but put you in mind that the same Father citing the words of the Bishop of Jerusalem That there is no difference betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter passeth a Satis imperitè upon it but let it be so At first he sayes Bishops and Presbyters had but one title So say we too But when began the distinction Ye need not learne it of Saravia he himselfe tels you When divisions began And when that When they began to say I am Pauls I am Apollo's I am Cephas which was I think well and high in the Apostles time But this you would cleanly put of as spoken by Ierome in the Apostles phrase not of the time of the Apostle This is but a generall intimation of contentions arisen though later in the Church Excuse me Brethren this shift will not serve your turne Then belike there should have been no distinct Bishops till after-ages upon this ground that till then there were no divisions Or if so why should the remedie be so late after the disease Or how comes he elsewhere to name Bishops made by the Apostles and to confesse that before his time there had been many successions Besides he instanceth in the peculiar mis-challenging of Baptisme which only S. Paul specifieth in his owne time And Clemens seconds him in his Epistle to the Corinthians in taxing the continuance of those distractions so as by Ieroms own confession Episcopacy was ordained early within the Apostles times But then say you It was not of Apostolicall intention but of Diabolicall occasion Weakly and absurdly As if the occasion might not be devilish and the institution divine As if the best Lawes did not rise from the worst manners Were not the quarrels betwixt the Grecians and Hebrews for the maintenance of their widows an evill occurrence yet from the occasion thereof was raised the Ordination of Deacons in the Church Yea but Ierome saith This was rather by the custome of the Church then by the truth of the Lords disposition True it was by the Custome of the Church but that Church was Apostolicall not by the Lords disposition immediately for Christ gave no expresse rule for it but mediately it was from Christ as from his inspired Apostles Let Ierome himselfe interpret himselfe who tels us expresly in his Epistle to Euagrius this superiority of Bishops above Presbyters is by Apostolicall tradition which is as much as we affirme And whiles he saith toto orbe decretum est that in the time of those first divisions it was decreed all the world over that Bishops should be set up I would faine know by what power besides Apostolicall such a Decree could be so soon and so universally enacted But Ierome saith The Presbyters governed the Church by their common Counsell So they did doubtlesse altogether till Episcopacy was setled who dares deny it Yea but he saith They ought to doe still So say we also and so in some cases we do Church-government is Aristocraticall Neither is any Bishop so absolute as not to be subject to the judgement of a Synode Yea in many matters it is determined by our Laws that hee must take the advise and assistance of his Ecclesiasticall Presbytery So then S. Ierome is in his judgement no back friend of ours but in his History he is our Patron With what forehead can they perswade their Reader the Originall of Episcopacie was not in Ieroms opinion so early when they cannot but confesse that the same Father hath in flat termes told us that Iames was Bishop of Jerusalem Timothy of Ephesus Titus of Crete that ever since the time of Mark the Euangelist who died five or sixe yeares before Peter and Paul and almost forty years before S. Iohn at Alexandria till the dayes of Heraclas and Dionysius the Presbyters have alwayes chosen one to be their Bishop As for those poore negative arguments which follow palpably begging the question they are scarce worthie of a passe were it not that by them they goe about to confute their own Author affirming That upon occasion of divisions Episcopacie was constituted but he stands so close to his owne grounds as that contrary to their mis-allegation of D r Whitakers he plainly tels them Episcopacie is so proper a remedy for this evill that unlesse the Bishop have a peerlesse power there will be as many Schismes as Priests the wofull experience whereof we finde in the miserable varieties of Separatisme at this day Goe on Brethren since you are so resolved to strike that friend whom you bring in to speak for you teach your advocate S. Ierome how unlikely it is that the Apostles should give way as he professes they did to such a remedie as might prove both ineffectuall and dangerous and that their holinesse should make a stirrup for Antichrist We lookt for Ambrose to come in next and behold you bring in a foisted Commenter a man by the convictions of Whitakers Spalatensis Cocus Rivetus Bellarmine Possevine Maldonate as hath beene elsewhere shewed of not a suspected onely but a crackt credit If it mattered much what he said I could out of his testimonie picke more advantage then you prejudice to my cause But if you will heare the true Ambrose speake he tells you There is one thing which God requireth of a Bishop another of a Presbyter another of a Deacon As for the persons who brought in this imparitie you tell us out of the same Authors The Presbyters themselves brought it in Witnesse Ierome ad Euagrium The Presbyters of Alexandria did call him their Bishop whom they had chosen from among themselves and placed in an higher degree But brethren what meanes this faithlesse and halved citation Had you said all the place would have answered for it selfe the words are Nam Alexandriae à Marco Evangelista c. For at Alexandria ever since Mark the Evangelist untill the times of Heraclas and Dionysius Bishops the Presbyters have alwayes called one chosen out of themselves and placed in an higher degree Bishop as if an army should chuse their Generall Why did you avoid the name of Mark the Evangelist but that your hearts told you that he dying many yeares within the time of the Apostles this election and appellation and distinction of degrees of Bishops and Presbyters must needs have been in the life time of the Apostles and not without their
Were it so pleasing to his Majesty and the State to decree it we should be well content to submit to this ancient forme of Election the forbearance whereof is neither our fault nor our prejudice so as you might well have bestowed this breath to a better purpose and rather conclude that notwithstanding this forme of different choice our Bishops and those of former times are not two SECT VIII WEE follow you into the execution of our Episcopall Office wherein you will show ours and the Apostles to be two so clearely that he who will not wilfully shut his eyes may see a latitude of differences and that in three points The first in sole jurisdiction which you say was a stranger yea a monster to former times and will make it good by the power of that which in all wise writers was wont to be contra-distinguished Ordination For this maine point let my Answerers know that the Ordination is the Bishops but the sole in their sense is their own neither did our Bishops ever challenge it as theirs alone without the Presbyters but as principally theirs with them so as if the power be in the Bishop the assistance is from them the practise in both so is it in the Bishops that ordinarily and regularly it may not be done without them and yet ordinately it may not be done without them by the Bishop which hath bin so constantly and carefully ever observed that I challenge them to shew any one instance in the Church of England to the contrary Say Brethren I beseech you after all this noyse what Bishop ever took upon him to ordain a Presbyter alone or without the concurrent imposition of many hands They no lesse then Cyprian can say Ego collegae Although I must tell you this was in the case of Aurelius made a Lector And in that other testimony which you cite out of his Epistle 58. he speaks onely of the fraternities consent and approbation not of their concurrence in their act this is small game with you Neither is it lesse the order of the Church of England then of the Councell of Carthage Cum ordinatur Presbyter c. When a Presbyter is ordained the Bishop blessing him and holding his hand upon his head all the Presbyters that are present shall likewise lay their hands upon his head with the hands of the Bishop With what conscience can ye alledge this as to choak us in our contrary practise when you know this is perpetually and unfailably done by us But now that the Readers may see how you shuffle shew us but one instance of a Presbyters regular and practised ordaining without a Bishop and carry the cause else you do but abuse the Reader with an ostentation of proving what was never denied But here by the way brethren you must give me leave to pull you by the sleeve and to tell you of two or three foul scapes which will trie whether you can blush First that you abuse Firmilianus in casting upon him an opinion of Presbyters ordaining which he never held He in his Epistle to Stephen Bishop of Rome speaking of the true Church in opposition to heresies describes it thus Vbi praesident majores natu qui baptizandi manum imponendi et ordinandi possident potestatem under this name expressing those Bishops who presiding in the Church possesse the power of Baptizing Confirming Ordaining you injuriously Wire-draw him to Presbyters and foist in Seniores et Praepositos which are farre from the clause and matter Be convinced with the more cleare words of the same Epistle Apostolis et Episcopis qui illis vicariâ Ordinatione successerunt Secondly that you bewray grosse ignorance in translating Ambroses Presbyteri consignant by Presbyters ordaining Who that ever knew what belonged to antiquity would have beene guilty of such a solecisme when every novice knowes that consigning signifies confirmation and not ordaining Thirdly you discover not too much skill in not distinguishing of the Chorepiscopi some whereof had both the nature and power of Episcopacy to all purposes and therefore might well by the Bishops licence in his owne charge impose hands others not And lesse fidelity in citing the Councell of Antioch can 10. and the 13. of the Councell of Ancyra if it were not out of our way to fetch them into tryall Lastly I cannot but tell you that you have meerly cast away all this labour and fought with your owne shadow for how ever it were not hard to prove that in the first times of the Church it was appropriated to the Bishop to Ordaine which you cannot but cōfesse out of Ierome and Chrysostom yet since we speaking of our owne time and Church doe both professe and practise an association of Presbyters with us in the act of Ordination whom have you all this while opposed It is enough that you have seemed to say somthing and have showne some little reading to no purpose SECT IX YEt still you will needs beat the ayre very furiously and fight pitifully with your selves Alas brethren why will ye take so much paines to goe wilfully out of your way and to mis-lead the reader with you Who ever challenged in that sense which you faine to your selves a sole Jurisdiction Why will you with some show of learning confute that which you yeeld us to confesse we confesse this sole cryed downe by store of Antiquity we doe willingly grant that Presbyters have and ought to have and exercise a jurisdiction within their owne charge in foro conscientiae we grant that in all the great affayres of the Church the Presbyters whether in Synodes or otherwise ought to be consulted with we grant that the Bishops had of old their Ecclesiasticall Councell of Presbyters with whose advise they were wont to manage the greatest matters and we still have so for to that purpose serve the Deanes and Chapters and the Lawes of our Church frequently make that use of them we grant that Presbyters have their votes in provinciall Synods But we justly say that the superiority of jurisdiction is so in the Bishop as that Presbyters neither did nor may exercise it without him and that the exercise of externall jurisdiction is derived from by under him to those which execute it within his Dioces Thus it is to Timothy that S. Paul gives the charge concerning the rebuke of an Elder or not receiving an accusation against him It is to Titus that S. Paul leaves the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 correction of his Cretians Thus the Canons of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Thus the blessed Martyr Ignatius in his undoubted Epistle to those of Smyrna 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Let no man doe any thing in matters belonging to the Church without the Bishop Thus the Councell of Antioch orders that whatsoever belongs to the Church is to be governed managed and disposed by the judgement and authority of the Bishop who hath 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the power of those things which belong to the Church It were easie to surfet the readers eyes with the cleare testimonies of Fathers and Councells to this purpose Our learned Bishop Downam hath given a world of instances of the severall acts of jurisdiction appropriated to Bishops by antiquity exercised upon both Laicks and Clergy to him I remit my reader So as you may easily set antiquity together by the eares in this point if you please but surely the advantage will be so farre on our side that if you have not ten for one against you I will yeeld my cause There is great difference of times and in them of fashions In those persecuted times when the Church was backed with no Christian Magistrate it was no boot to bid the guides of the Church to combine their Councels and to give strength to their mutuall actions when a generall peace once blessed them and they had the concurrence both of soveraigne and subordinate authority with them they began so much to remit of this care of conjoyning their forces as they supposed to find lesse need of it From hence grew a devolution of all lesse weighty affairs to the weilding of single hands For my part I perswade my selfe that the more frequent communicating of all the important businesse of the Church whether censures or determinations with those grave assistents which in the eye of the Law are designed to this purpose were a thing not onely unprejudiciall to the honour of our function but very behovefull to the happy administration of the Church In the mean while see brethren how you have with Simon fished all night and caught nothing My word was that ours were the same with the Apostles Bishops in this that they challenge no other spirituall power then was by Apostolique authority delegated to Timothy and Titus You run out upon the following times of the Church and have with some wast quotations laboured to prove that In after ages Bishops called in Presbyters to the assistance of their jurisdiction which is as much to me as Baculus stat in angulo SECT X. YOur next Section runs yet wilder I speak of the no-difference of our Bishops from the first in the challenge of any spirituall power to themselves other then delegated to Timothy and Titus You tell mee of delegating their power to others What is this to the nature of the calling Doth any man claime this as essentiall to his Episcopacie Doth any man stand upon it as a piece of his spirituall power If this be granted to be an accidentall error of some particular man for it cannot be fastned upon all what difference doth it make in the substance of the function As if some monster suddenly presented it selfe to you you aske Was ever such a thing heard of in the best primitive times that men which never received imposition of hands should not only be received into assistance but be wholly intrusted with the power of spirituall jurisdiction Let me ask you again Was ever such a thing heard of either in the Primitive or following times that Lay-men should be so far admitted to the managing of spirituall jurisdiction as to lay their hands upon their Ministers in their Ordination Yet this is both done and challenged by too many of your good friends Why do you object that to us wherewith the Presbyterian part may be more justly choaked But herein Brethren you do foulely over-reach in that you charge our Bishops as in a generality with wholly-intrusting the power of spirituall jurisdiction to their Chancellors and Commissaries The assistance of those which are learned in the Law wee gladly use neither can well want in the necessary occasions of our judicature but that wee doe either wilfully or negligently devest our selves absolutely of that power and wholly put it into Laick hands it is a meere sclander For want of better proofs of the illegality of this course you bring a negative authority from Cyprian telling us what that holy Martyr did not That he did not send Complainants to his Chancellour or Commissarie It is very like he did not nor yet to the Bench of a Lay Presbyterie But if he did not commit the hearing of his Causes to a Lay-man we find that some others did Socrates can tell you of Silvanus the good Bishop of Troas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. perceiving that some of his Clergie did corruptly make gaine of Causes would no more appoint any of his Clergie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be a Judge but made choise of some faithfull man of the Laity to whom he committed that audience and was much honoured for it What Bishop Downam yeelds concerning the Ordinaries Vicars and Chancellors of former times till Ambrose's daies that they were onely Clergie-men you reject witn scorne and challenge any man to produce the names of any Clergie-man that was Vicar to Ambrose or Chancellour to Augustine c. What a poore brave is this I challenge you to produce the name of any Secretary or Actuary that Ambrose or Austin had because you cannot shall I conclude they had none such That instance of Sylvanus not long after Ambrose is evidence enough But the antiquity of Chancellors which were the same with Ecclesiecdici or Episcoporum ecdici is proveable enough if it were for this place and their necessary use beyond the power of your confutation But I had rather refer my reader to S. Thomas Ridley and others that have laboured in that argument and appeale to all mens judgement how soundly you have upon this ground proved that our Bishops and the former were two SECT XI HOw justly may I say Readers of these men as the King of Israel said of the King of Syria See I beseech you how they seeke a quarrell against me My just defence was that our Bishops are the same in substance and effect with those which were ordained by the Apostles they come now and tell me of an oath ex officio used in the high Commission and in our Consistories as if every particular manner of Proceeding in our Courts and judicatures must either be patterned by the Apostolike or els they are utterly unjustifiable why do they not as wel chalenge us that we give men the book to touch and kisse in taking an oath Why doe they not aske how wee can prove that those Apostolicall Bishops had Notaries Registers Advocates Consistories what frivolous and delusory exceptions are these to all wise men and how strangely savouring of a weak judgement and strong malice As for your cavil at the oth ex officio since you wil needs draw it in by head and shoulders how little soever it concernes us I returne you this answer That if any of our profession have in the pressing of it exceeded the lawfull bounds I excuse him not I defend him not let him bear away his own load but in these surely there is more to bee said for
but you shall give me leave to take you tripping in your own Tale from Cilicia you say Paul passed to Creet where he left Titus for a while to set in order things that remain this for a while you put into a different Character as if it were part of the Text and guiltily translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things that remaine whereas ours turne it in a more full expression of an Episcopall power things that are wanting or left undone but this is not the matter you do yet again repeat the for a while urging the short time that Titus could bee left at Creet and yet in your own marginall computation there is no lesse distance of time betwixt this placing in Creet and sending for him to his next remove unto Nicopolis thā betwixt the year 46 51. the space of five years which was a large gap of time in that unsetled condition and manifold distractive occasions of the Church If afterwards hee were by Apostolicall command called away to tend the more concerning services of the Church this could no whit have impeacht the truth of his Episcopacy but the truth is he was ordained by St. Paul after all those journeys mentioned in the Acts and as Baronius with great consent of Antiquity computes it a year after Timothy so as you may well put up your conclusion as rather begged than inforced and cast it upon the Readers courtesie to beleeve you against al antiquity that Titus was an Evangelist and no Bishop where as these two may well agree together he was an Evangelist when he travelled abroad he was a bishop afterwards when hee stayed and setled at home You object to your selfe the authority of some Fathers that have called Timothy and Titus Bishops Some name if you can that Father that hath called them otherwise away with these envious diminutions when yea have a cloud of witnesses of much antiquity which averre Timothy and Titus to have both lived and dyed Bishops the one of Ephesus of Creet the other yea but so some Fathers have called them Arch-bishops and Patriarchs too What of that therein they have then acknowledged them bishops paramount and if Titus were Bishop of Creet which was of old 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hundred-cityed Island and Timothy of Ephesus the Metropolis of Asia the multitude of the territories under them whiles it inlargeth their charge doth detract nothing from the use of their office Secondly you tell us from learned D. Raynolds that the Fathers when they called any Apostle Bishop they meant it in a generall sort aad signification because they did attend that church for a time and supply that roome in preaching the Gospell which Bishops did after not intending it as it is commonly taken for the over-seer of a particular Church and Pastor of a severall flocke but what is this to Timothy and Titus you say the same may be said of them but the Doctor gave you no leave so to apply it neither do we Although to say truth all this discourse of yours is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 needlesse and extravagant whether Timothy or Titus were Evangelists or no sure we are that heere they stand for persons charged with those Offices and cares which are delivered to the ordinary Church governours in all succeeding generations And we do most justly take them as we finde them and with our first confidence maintain that we challenge no other spirituall power then was delegated unto them and unto the Angels of the Asian Churches you meane to confute us by questions and those so poore and frivolous as are not worth answer fastning that upon some particular abuse which wee disclaime from our calling as if under this claime wee were bound to justifie every act of a Bishop To answer you in your own kind when or where did our bishops challenge power to ordaine alone to govern alone when though you ignorantly turne an Elder in age to an Elder in Office did our Bishops challenge power to passe a rough and unbeseeming rebuke upon an Elder Where did our Bishops give Commission to Chancellors Commissaries Officials to rayle upon Presbyters or to accuse them without just grounds and without legall proceedings As for your last question I must tell you it is no better raised then upon an ignorant negative Did the Apostle say reject none but an Heretick Did he not wish would to God they were cut off that trouble you Is it not certainly proved true that some Scismaticke may be worse then some Hereticke which I speak not so as to traduce any of our unconforming brethren whose consciences are unsetled in the point of this mean difference as guilty of that hatefull crime but to convince the absurdity of our questionists after whose ill raised cavills thus fully answered we have no cause to feare upon their suggestions to bee disclaimed as usurpers From Timothy and Titus you descend to the Angels of the seven Asian Churches which no subtilty at all but the common interest of their condition hath twisted together in our defence In the generality whereof I must premonish my Reader that this Piece of the task fell unhappily upon some dull and tedious hand that cared not how oft sod Coleworts he dished out to his credulous guests I shall what I may prevent their surfet Your shift is that the Angel is here taken collectively not individually A conceit which if your selves certainly no other wise man can ever believe for if the interest be common and equally appertayning to all why should one be singled out above the rest If you will yeeld the person to be such as had more than others a right in the administration of all it is that we seeke for Surely it did in some sort concerne all that was spoken to him because he had the charge of al but the direction is individuall as Beza himselfe takes it as if a Letter be indorsed from the Lords of the Counsaile to the Bishop of Durham or Salisbury concerning some affaires of the whole Clergy of their Diocesse can we say that the name Bishop is there no other then a collective because the businesse may import many verily I do not believe that the Authors of this sence can believe it themselves To your invincible proofes In the Epistle to Thyatira you say it is written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I say to you and to the rest where by you must as you imagine be signified the Governours by the rest the people but what if the better Copyes read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I say to you the rest in Thyatira without the copulative as is confessed by your good friends where then is your doughty Argument Here are no divisions of parties but the Pastor and Flock And truly thus it is and my own eyes have seen it in that noble Manuscript written by the hand of Tecla as is probably supposed some 1300. years agoe as Cyrill the late renowned Patriarch of Constantinople
be scanned Objections which would to God they were onely of my own framing In the first That Episcopacy is no prejudice of Soveraigntie I justly prove for that there is a compatiblenesse in this case of Gods act and the Kings It is God that makes the Bishop the King that gives the Bishoprick what can you say to this You tell us you have already proved that God never made a bishop as hee stands in superiority over Presbyters so you told us and that is enough we were hard hearted if wee would not believe you When as wee have made good by undeniable proofes that besides the grounds which our Saviour laid of this imparity the blessed Apostles by inspiration from God made this difference in a personall ordaining of some above the rest and giving expresse charge of Ordination and Iurisdiction to those select persons in Church government the Bishops have ever since succeeded Tell us not therefore that if wee disclaim the influence of Soveraignty into our Creation and assert that the King doth not make us Bishops wee must have no beeing at all For that the Reader may see you stop your owne mouth answer me I beseech you Where or when ever did the King create a Bishop name the man and take the cause It pleases his Majestie to give his Congedelier for a Bishops Election to his See to signifie his Royall assent thereunto upon which the Bishop is solemnly ordained by the imposition of the hands of the Metropolitan and other his Brethren and these doe as from God invest him in his holy Calling which he exercises in that place which is designed and given by his Majestie What can be more plaine then this truth As for that unworthy censure which you passe upon the just comparison of Kings in order to Bishops and Patrons in order to their Clerks it shall be acknowledged well deserved if you shall be able to make good the disparity When hee shall prove you say that the Patron gives Ministeriall power to his Clerke as the King gives Episcopall power to the Bishop it may bee of some conducement to his cause Shortly brethren the same day that you shall shew mee that the King ordained a bishop the same day will I shew you that a Patron ordained a Presbyter The Patron gives the benefice to the one The King gives the bishopricke to the other neither of them do give the Office or Calling to either Goe you therefore with your Frier Simon to your Cell and consult with your Covent for more reason and wit then you shew in this and the next scornfull Paragraph wherein whiles you flout at my modest concession with an unbeseeming frump you are content silently to balke that my second answer which you know was too hot or too heavie for your satisfaction In the second the Imputation pretended to bee cast by this Tenet upon al the reformed Churches which want this governement I indevoured so to satisfie that I might justly decline the envy which is intended to be thereby raised against us For which cause I professed that wee doe love and honour those our sister Churches as the dear spouse of Christ and give zealous testimonies of my well wishing to them Your uncharitablenesse offers to choake me with those scandalous censures and disgracefull terms which some of ours have let fall upon those Churches and their eminent professors which I confesse it is more easie to be sorry for then on some hands to excuse The errour of a few may not bee imputed to all My just defence is that no such consequent can be drawne from our opinion for as much as the Divine or Apostolicall right which wee hold goes not so high as if there were an expresse command that upon an absolute necessity there must bee either Episcopacy or no Church but so far only that it both may and ought to be How fain would you heere finde mee in a contradiction Whiles I one-where reckon Episcopacy amongst matters essential to the Church another where deny it to be of the essence thereof Wherein you willingly hide your eys that you may not see the distinction that I make expresly betwixt the Being Well-beeing of a Church Affirming that those Churches to whom this power and faculty is denied lose nothing of the true essence of a Church though they misse something of their glory and perfection No Brethren it is enough for some of your friends to hold their Discipline altogether essentiall to the very being of a Church We dare not be so zealous The question which you aske concerning the reason of the different intertainment given in our Church to priests converted to us from Rome and to Ministers who in Qu. Maries dayes had received Imposition of hands in Reformed Churches abroad is meerely personall neither can challenge my decision Onely I give you these two answers that what fault soever may bee in the easie admittance of those who have received Romish Orders the sticking at the admission of our brethren returning from Reformed Churches was not in case of Ordination but of Institution they had beene acknowledged Ministers of Christ without any other hands layed upon them but according to the Lawes of our Land they were not perhaps capable of institution to a benefice unlesse they were so qualified as the Statutes of this Realme doe require And secondly I know those more then one that by vertue onely of that Ordination which they have brought with them from other Reformed Churches have enjoyed Spirituall Promotions and Livings without any exception against the lawfulnesse of their calling The confident affirmation which you alleage of the learned bishop of Norwich is no rule to us I leave him to his owne defence You think I have too much work on my hand to give satisfaction for myselfe in these two main Questions which arise from my book What high points shall wee now expect trow wee First whether that Office which by divine right hath sole power of Ordination and ruling all other Officers of the Church which hee sayth Episcopacy hath belong not to the being but onely to the glorie and perfection of a Church Can wee tell what these men would have Have they a minde to goe beyond us in asserting that necessity and essentiall use of Episcopacy which we dare not avow Do they not care to lose their cause so they may crosse an Adversary For your Question you stil talke of sole Ordination and sole jurisdiction you may if you please keepe that paire of soles for your next shooes VVee contend not for such an height of Propriety neither do we practise it they are so ours that they should not bee without us as we have formerly shewed That therefore there should bee a power of lawfull Ordination and government in every setled Church it is no lesse then necessary but that in what case soever of extremity and irresistible necessitie this should be only done by Episcopall hands we never meant
exoticall positions of unsound teachers which it selfe hath in terminis condemned and say as you are not ashamed to do We thank God we are none of you we forgive you and pray for your repentance Your Quaeres wherein I see you trust much are made up of nothing but spight and slander If I answere you with questions shorter then your own and more charitable you will excuse mee In answer then to your first I ask Who ever held the Lordships of Bishops to stand by divine right If no body whether hee that intimates it doth not falsifie and slander Why is it a greater fault in one of our Doctors to hold the Lords day to stand Iure bumano then it was in Master Calvin I aske whether it were any other then K. Iames himselfe of blessed memory that said No Bishop no King and if it were he whether that wise King did not meane to prejudice his own authoritie Whether since it hath beene proved that Bishops are of more then meerely humane Ordinance and have so long continued in the Christian Church to the great good of Church and State it be not most fit to establish them for ever and to avoid all dangerous motions of innovation Whether these answerers have the wit or grace to understand the true meaning of the Ius Divinum of Episcopacie or if they did whether they could possibly be so absurd as to raise so sensless and inconsequent inferences upon it Whether there bee any question at all in the fifth question since the Remonstrant himselfe hath so fully cleered this point professing to hold Episcopacie to bee of Apostolicall and in that right Divine Institution Whether Master Beza have not heard foundly of his distinction of the three kinds of Episcopacie in the full and learned answere of Saravia and whether hee might not have beene better advised then in that conceit of his to crosse all reverend antiquity and whether the Painter that drest up his Picture after the fancy of every passenger doe not more fitly resemble those that frame their discipline according to the humour of their people varying their projects every day then those which hold them constantly to the only ancient and Apostolicall forme Whether it were not fit that wee also should speake as the ancient Fathers did according to the language of their times and whether those Fathers could not better understand and interpret their owne meaning in the title of Episcopacie then these partiall and not over-judicious answerers and whether they have not cleerely explicated themselves in their writings to have spoken properly and plainly to the sense now enforced Whether Presbyters can with out sin arrogate unto themselves the exercise of the power of publique Church government where Bishops are set over them to rule and order the affaires both of them and the Church and whether our Saviour when he gave to Peter the promisse of the Keyes did therein intend to give it in respect of the power of publike jurisdiction to any other save the Apostles and their Successours the Bishops and whether ever any Father or Doctour of the Church till this present age held that Presbyters were the Successours to the Apostles and not to the seventy Disciples rather Whether ever any Bishops assumed to themselves power Temporall to bee Barons and to sit in Parliament as Iudges and in Court of Star-chamber c. or whether they bee not called by his Majesties writ and royall authority to these services and whether the spirituall power which they exercise in ordaining silencing c. bee any other then was by the Apostles delegated to the first Bishops of the Church constantly exercised by their holy successors in all ages especially by Cyprian Ambrose Augustine and the rest of that sacred order men which had as little to do with Antichrist as our answerers have with charity Whether the answerers have not just cause to be ashamed of patronizing a noted Heretick Aerius in that for which hee was censured of the ancient Saints and Fathers of the Church and whether the whole Church of Christ ever since his time till this age have not abandoned those very errours concerning the equality of Bishops and Presbyters which they now presume to maintain Whether the great Apostacy of the Church of Rome do or did consist in maintayning the order of government set by the Apostles themselves and whether all the Churches in the whole Christian World even those that are professedly opposite to the Church of Rome doe let in Antichrist by the doore of their Discipline since they all maintain Episcopacie no lesse constantly then Rome it selfe Whether if Episcopacie be through the munificence of good Princes honoured with a title of dignity and largnesse of revenues it ought to be ere the more declined and whether themselves if they did no hope to carry some sway in the Presbytery would be so eager in crying up that government and whether if there were not â— maintenance annexed they would not hid themselves and jeopard their eares ratheâ— then mancipate themselves to the charge oâ— souls Whether there bee no other apparenâ— causes to be given for the increase of Poperâ— and superstition in the Kingdome besideâ— Episcopacie which hath laboured strongly to oppose it and whether the multitudes of Sects and professed slovenlynesse in Gods service in too many have not bin guilty of the increase of profanesse amongst us Why should England one of the most famous Churches of Christendome seperate it selfe from that forme of government which all Churches through the whole Christian World have ever observed and do constantly and uniformely observe and maintain and why should not rather other less noble Churches conform to that universall government which all other Christians besides do gladly submit unto Why should the name of Bishops which hath beene for this 1600. yeers appropriated in a plain contradistinction to the governours of the Church come now to be communicated to Presbyters which never did all this while so much as pretend to it and if in ancient times they should have done it could not have escaped a most severe censure And shortly whether if wee will allow you to bee Bishops all will not bee well Whether since both God hath set such a government in his Church as Episcopacie and the Lawes of this Land have firmly established it it can bee lawfull for you to deny your subjection unto it and whether it were not most lawfull and just to punish your presumption and disobedience in framing so factious a question And thus I hope you have a sufficient answere to your bold and unjust demands and to those vain cavills which you have raised against the humble Remonstrance God give you Wisdome to see the Truth and Grace to follow it Amen To the Poscript THe best beauty that you could have added to your discourse brethren had been honesty and truth both in your allegations of Testimonies and inferences of argumentation In both which
In the meane time God blesse all good men from such charity and our sacred Monarchy from such friends The forme of the Episcopall Government of the Church hath contrarily been ever one and the same without any considerable variation and if it have anywhere invaded the Civil administration and yoked Monarchy it is the insolence of the persons not the fault of the Calling And if William Rufus a Prince noted for grosly irreligious oppressed by tyrannicall Popish Prelates did let fall this cholerick word that he would have the Jews confute them and that rather then faile England should turne Jewish on this condition Is this an argument for any Christian to use for the confuting of godly and loyall Protestant Bishops which are ready to be censured rather for too great observance of Soveraignty Let any but a Jew judge whether this be a fit instance for a Christian Any thing serves against Episcopacie The testimony of a Pope whom these men honour highly Pius 4. is also brought in as irrefragable against the Divine right of Bishops And what sayes Antichrist He tels the Spanish Ambassador that his Master suing for the Councels declaration of this truth knew not what he demanded for Bishops so declared would be exempted frō his Regall power and as independent as the Pope himselfe Tell me brethren Do ye like or beleeve this assertion because a Pope said it Or can ye blame him who would have all Episcopall Jurisdiction derived meerly from himselfe to be unwilling that their right should be yeelded to have the same grounds which he pretends for his owne And if there might be this danger in those Kingdomes where the Clergy challengeth an exemption from the power of all Secularity why is this enviously upbraided to those of ours who doe gladly professe notwithstanding the Apostolicall that is Divine right of their calling to hold their places and exercise of their Jurisdiction wholly from His Majesty Not lesse spitefull nor more true is your observation of the comparison made betweene the indeavours of alteration in our neighbour Church by our Episcopall faction and that which is now justly desired by the humble Petitioners to the honourable House It is a foule sclander to charge the name of Episcopacy with a faction for the fact imputed to some few Fie brethren are ye Presbyters of the Church of England and dare challenge Episcopacie of faction Had you spoken but such a word in the time of holy Cyprian whom you frequently cite as a patterne of good discipline what had become of you Neither is the wrong lesse to make application of that which was most justly charged upon the practises and combinations of libelling Separatists to humble and peaceable Petitioners the one railing down-right upon an established and holy Government whom I deservedly censured the other modestly suing for a reformation of the abuses of Government Surely whiles the worst are thus patronized by our indulgent answerers it is an hard question Whether the Libellers themselves or these their mis-zealous Advocates are more justly to be branded for Incendiaries SECT II. AFter this overflowing of your gall you descend to the two maine subjects of this quarrell Liturgy and Episcopacy I had truly said that our Liturgy hath been hither to esteemed sacred reverently used by holy Martyrs frequented by devout Protestants as that which hath been confirmed by Edicts of religious Princes and our owne Parliamentary Acts. And hath it so say you Whence then proceed so many Additions and Alterations that have changed the face and fabrick thereof Additions and Alterations What in the present Liturgie where or what tell me I beseech you brethren are they visible or are they not If not how come ye to see them if so why cannot we perhaps somewhere in stead of Priest there is Minister perhaps Absolution is interpreted by a Remission perhaps in private baptisme there is mention of a lawfull Minister perhaps in stead of Purification of women there is Thanksgiving And can ye know the Book when ye see it again after these Alterations these Additions Is it not now with this mis-altered Liturgie as with the disguised Dames mentioned of old by D. Hall whom you name I dare say for honors sake so mis-shapen by their monstrous fashions that their redivived Grandsires could not now know them Can ye but blush at this envious and groundlesse suggestion And why should not I speake of Martyrs as the Authors and users of this holy Liturgie why should not we glory in their name and Authority sleight you them as you please we blesse God for such Patrons of our good cause What a poore returne is this Whiles I tell you what our holy Martyrs did You tell me what one of our Bishops said As if we were bound to make good every word that falls from the mouth of every Bishop Even of the best man we may say as the Psalmist doth of Moses effutiit labiis he spake unadvisedly with his lips As for the words themselves If a Bishop have said that our Liturgy hath been so wisely and charitably framed as that the Devotion of it yeeldeth no cause of offence to a very Popes eare as onely aiming at an uncontroversory Piety I see not what hainous fault can herein be imputed to the speech or the Author Would you think it requisite that we should chide and quarrell when we speak to the God of Peace It is no little advantage therefore both to our cause and Piety that our Liturgie is taught to speak severall Languages both for use and example and thereby our Church hath gained much justification and honour As for that sharp censure of learned M r Calvins Tolerabiles ineptiae how ever it might well have been forborne by him In alienâ republicâ and by you to presse it upon our owne we honor the name of that noble instrument of Gods glory in his Church yet withall we fear not to say without any disparagement to his worth That our Liturgie both in the frame and survay of it passed the judgement of no lesse reverend heads then his owne Neither would you think it could become any of our greatest Divines to meddle with the wafers or Lords-day markets of his charge let every Church take care of their own affaires As for that unparalleld discourse of mine concerning the Antiquity of Liturgies Vnparalleld you say because no man that you have seene ever drew the line of Liturgie so high as I have done I must tell you that perhaps there may bee some things in the world that may have escaped your not-omniscient eies and perhaps this may bee one I cannot help your wonder but I shall justifie my own Assertion In the meane while ye doe almost yeeld the question ere you argue it If by Liturgie you say this Remonstrant understand an Order observed in Church assemblies of praying reading and expounding the Scriptures administration of Sacraments c. Such a Liturgie wee know and acknowledge both Iews
knowledge and approbation The Presbyters then chose their Bishops who doubts it But upon whose order and Institution save that which S. Paul to the Superintendents met at Miletus Acts 20. Spiritus sanctus vos constituit Episcopos I marvell Brethren with what face you can make Ierome say that the Presbyters themselves were the Authors of this imparity when as himself hath plainly ascribed this to Gods own work when reading that Esay 60.17 I will make thy Officers peace according to the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. I will give thy Princes in peace and thy Bishops in righteousnesse he applies this to the Governours of the Evangelicall Church and the blessed Martyr and Bishop S. Cyprian to the same purpose The Deacons saith he must remember that the Lord himselfe chose Apostles that is Bishops but Deacons were chosen by the Apostles themselves And when ye cannot but know that the Apostles themselves were the immediate actors in this businesse if at least ye will beleeve the Histories and Fathers of the Church Irenaeus tels you plainly that the Apostles Peter and Paul delivered the Episcopacy of that Church to Linus and that Polycarpus was by the Apostles made Bishop in Asia of the Church of Smyrna and Tertullian particularly that Polycarpus was there placed by S. Iohn And S. Chrysostome clearly sayes that Ignatius was not onely trained up with the Apostles but that he received his Bishoprick from them and emphatically that the hands of the blessed Apostles touched his holy head And lastly the true Ambrose to the shameing of that Counterfeit whom you bring forth under that name tels you that Paul saw Iames at Ierusalem because he was made Bishop of that place by the Apostles your slip may talk of a Councell wherein this was done but this is as false as himselfe It is well known there never was any such Councell in the Christian world since the first generall Synod was the Nicene And Ieroms toto orbe Decretum as we have shewed could import no other then an Apostolicall act As for S. Augustine Is it not a just wonder Reader that these men dare cite him for their opinion upon occasion of a modest word concerning the honourable title of Episcopacy when as they cannot but know and grant that he hath blazoned Aerius for an heretick meerly for holding the same Tenet which they defend Lastly if Gregory Nazianzen in a pathetick manner have wished the abolition of Episcopacie as he never did what more dislike had he shown to it then he did to Synods when he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. that he never knew good come of them But reader it will be worth the while to inquire into the fidelity of these mens allegations Doe but consult the place of Nazianzen thou shalt â—â—nd that he speaks not particularly of Episcopacie but of all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or precedencie and of all quarrelsome challenges of place all tyrannicall carriage of one man towards another wishing that there were no standing upon points of precedency but every man might be respected according to his vertue and adding at last Nunc autem dextrum hoc et sinistrum et medium latus c. But now saith he the right hand and the left and the middle place and the higher and lower degree and going before and going cheeke by jole what a world of troubles have they brought upon us Thus he See then Reader what a testimony here is for the utter abolition of Episcopacy from a man who was so interessed in the calling that he was wont to be styled by his adversaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Bishop of three Sees By this judge reader of the rest So then after all the clamours and colourable pretences of these men this imparity and jurisdiction was conveyed from the Apostles hands and deduced in an uninterrupted Line through all following ages to this present day How can this be say they unlesse our Bishops will draw the Line of their pedegree through the lines of Antichrist and joyne issue and mingle blood with Rome For shame Brethren eate this word What are there no Bishops but at Rome Is the whole Church all the world over Antichristian even those which are no lesse angry at Rome then your selves Hath not Episcopall imparitie continued in them all this while Is there no distinction to be had betwixt the calling and the abuse If the Antichristian Church have had Bishops so it hath had Churches Scriptures Baptisme Learning Creeds Because we have all these with them will ye say we deduce them from the loines of Antichrist Away with this impotent spight and uncharitablenesse and learne to be more modest true in your assertions and lesse confident in your appeals SECT VII LEt me balk your idle words the question is of the difference betwixt our present Bishops and the ancient this you will spread forth in three particulars The first is the manner of Election to these places of eminence which was of old ordered by the privity consent and approbation of the people which you eagerly seeke to prove out of Cyprian neither can it be denied that he is full and punctuall in this point Holy Athanasius seconds it And the old rule was Electio clericorum consensus Principis petitio plebis that a Bishop came in by the suite of the people the Election of the Clergy the consent of the Prince Ye might well have in this case spared the fetching in of the good Emperour Constantine doubtlesse this was the manner of old what variations followed afterward in these proceedings our learned Dr. Field hath well showed but sure this interest of the people continued so long even in the Roman Church that Platina can tell us Gregory the seventh was elected by Cardinalls Clerks Acoluthites Subdeacons Priests Abbots Bishops Clergie and Laitie The inconveniences that were found in those tumultuarie elections and the seditious issue of them which Nazianzen and Eusebius have laid before us in some particulars were I suppose the cause why they were in a sort laid downe But an imitation of this practise we have still continuing in our Church wherein upon the vacancy of every See there is a Conge-d'eslire that is a leave to elect sent down from the King to the Presbyters viz. the Deane and Chapter of that Church for an ensuing election of their Bishop and if this were yet more free we should not like it the lesse But in the meane time Brethren how are you quite beside the Cushion Where the objection was That the Apostles Bishops and ours were two in respect of managing their function And my defence is that our Bishops challenge not any other Spirituall power then the Apostles delegated to Timothy and Titus you now tell us of the different manner of our Elections What is this ad Rhombum we speake of their actions and exercise of power you talke of others actions to them
it then you wil seem to take notice of You ask for any precedent of it in good antiquity I give a precedent as ancient as Moses Exod. â—2 10 11. and that other oath and real imprecation in the cause of jelousie Num. 5.19 But perhaps it wil fit you better that I instance in M. Calvins case who together with the Consistory of Elders appointed the said oath to be given to Camperell a Minister of Geneva and to the other parties accused of an offensive dancing in the house of widow Balthasar in which corporal oath three interrogatories being put to the deponents two of them are said to be concerning their purposes and intentions If yet you cal for other precedents I cal your eys home and wil you to look into our Courts of Kings Bench Common Pleas Exchequer Star-chamber wherein the defendant is ordinarily put to answer the bill and interrogatories upon oath As for that old Maxime of Nemo tenetur prodere seipsum you may if it please you object it as well to Moses to Calvin to our Courts it is easily thus satisfied that no man is bound at the suit of a party so to answer criminous Articles or such as are Propinqui actus as Lawyers interpret it But as Petrus de Ferrariis well determins it Proditus per famam tenetur seipsum ostendere purgare when a fame accuses him he may clear himselfe by an oath it is to be presupposed that a man is brought into question by some of those Lawfull meanes which open a way to a further inquiry and then as Aquinas well if there be a Semi-plena probatio or a strong fame or evident tokens an oath is seasonably imposed But sure the intention of the oath is quite mistaken for it is meant to acquit and justifie not to accuse neither is any man pressed to answer further then he is bound in law neither are the Compulsions simple and absolute but onely Causative as the learned Apologist hath fully declared If then a Dioclesian or Maximilian as you cal him shall enact that the adverse party shall not be required to exhibite such evidences as should create troubles to themselves it is no other then is every where practised in all Courts of Iudicature and may well stand with the oath ex officio as it is formerly limited Be advised therfore til you understand the case better to forbear to talke of the Lamp of nature in the night of Eth nicisme but know that the light of the law of God and rigt reason common practise give sufficient alowance to that which your misprision cavills at in those whom ye ought to acknowledge the Fathers of the Church You tell us of the custome of the Church proceedings in the time of Athanasius and the rule of Gratian as if we disallowed those just courses where there is a direct manifest accusation and evident proofes to bee had but what doth this hinder that in case of a justly grounded suspition and a complaint of a halfe-proved offence a man should manifest his innocence by oath That ye might seem to have seene the Canon-law you tell us that in some cases it allowes tryall without witnesses namely where the crime may be justly called notorious then deeply expound notorium by manifestum therein plainly contradicting your selves for if that be manifest which is lawfully known by confession or by probation or by the evidence of the thing what probation can there be besides confession and evidence without witnesses But this errour is as trifling as your accusation and after all this wast of words notwithstanding some personall abuses of Officers in undue processes of their Courts our Bishops and the former are not two SECT 12. YOur next Section hath more pompe of reading in it then the rest but to as little purpose I shall trouble you with neglecting it we cannot anger a gay man more then in passing by him unseene my ground was that our Bishops differ not in respect of any spirituall power from that which was delegated from Apostolike authority to Timothy Titus you spend your time in proving that they differ in their imployment in secular and state affaires but I aske is this difference or fault universall or not sure you cannot say they are all thus misimployed and if not why is this blame cast upon al why should the calling others innocence suffer My cause shall yeeld you your postulate herein and be no whit the worse it is true the ordinary managing of secular affaires is not proper for a Bishop Chrysostoms counsell Julians practise Constatines bounty Cyrâ—lls insolent pompe the Romane Bishops degenerating into a secular principality Cyprians grave limitation the just inhibitions of many Canons are of an undoubted truth and we could easily if need were ad many more to these and tell you of those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that must upon the Apostolike Canons be avoyded by sacred persons and the rigorous charge of Cyprian against Geminius victor for ordaining Geminius Faustinus a Presbyter but the Executor of his last will with many other the like instances but what are these to the work in hand Two exceptions must necessarily bee admitted the one of extraordinary ocsicaons and services as when a Prince or state having had good proofe of the abilities of an Ecclesiasticall person shall thinke fit as now it is done in this great Northerne negotiation to call for his Counsaile or to employ his present agency for a time in some main businesse that may import the publike good and safety of the Church or Common-wealth so St. Chrysostome once so St. Ambrose twice was imployed in Embassie from the Emperours The very trade of Tent-making did as much take up St. Paul for the time as a state-imployment might have done and how many have we knowne that have not unprofitably professed Physicke both for soule and body and done much good in both The other of a charitable interposition in matters of difference for peace and reconciliation and composing of the unkinde quarrels of dissenting neighbours wherewith St. Ambrose and St. Austine were so extreamly taken up that the latter makes no little complaint of the importunity of those continuall interpellations such as both his morning studies were distracted by them and the afternoon wholly spent in them and professeth he could not have the opportunity of opening his estate and heart to Bishop Ambrose by reason of that continuall audience of causes daily brought before that great Prelate surely if the charity of more of ours have not rendered them more guilty of secularity in this kind than the supposed ambition of others there will be no cause why our Bishops and the Bishops of former times should be two SECT 13. IT is true the Remonstrant soares above these after-times even as high as the Apostles As if you knew not this before when as all this while you have indeavoured to shew that the Apostles
Bishops and ours are two We do again professe that if our Bishops challenge any other power then was delegated to and required of Timothy and Titus wee shall yeeld them usurpers you kindely tell us so we deserve to be if we doe but challenge the same power and why so I beseech you brethren because Timothy and Titus yee say were Evangelists and so moved in an higher sphere Liberally and boldly spoken but where is your proofe For Timothy ye say the Text is cleare but what Text what the least intimation have you for Titus surely not so much as the least ground of a conjecture yet how confidently you avow for both and even for Timothy your glosse is clear not your text St. Paul bids him do the worke of an Euangelist what then that rather intimates that he was none for he doth not say do thine own worke but the worke of an Evangelist when I tell my friend that I must desire him to do the office of a Soliciter or a Secretary for me I do herein intimate that he is neither but so for the time employed why is it not so here And what I beseech you is the worke of an Evangelist but to preach the Evangell or good tydings of peace So as St. Paul herein gives no other charge to his Timothy then in 2. Tim. 4.2 Preach the Word be instant in season and out of season And this you say and urge to be the worke of a Bishop too well therefore may Timothy notwithstanding this charge be no other then a Bishop what need these words to be contradistinguished St. Paul sayes of himselfe Whereto I am appoynted a Preacher and an Apostle and a teacher of the Gentiles what shall we say St. Paul was an Apostle he was not a Preacher or not a Doctor but an Apostle You distinguish of Evangelists the word is taken either for the writers of the Gospell or for the teachers of it and why then was not St. Paul an Evangelist who professed to be a teacher of the Gospell unto the Gentiles These teaching Evangelists you dreame to be of two sorts the one those that had ordinary places and gifts the other extraordinary but tell me sirs for my learning where do you finde those ordinary-placed and ordinary-gifted Evangelists unlesse you mean to comprse all Preachers under this name and then a Bishop may be an Evangelist also so as the difference of a Bishop and an Evangelist vanisheth The truth is these ordinary Evangelists are a new fiction their true imployment was to be sent by the Apostles from place to place for the preaching of the Gospell without a setled residence upon any one charge upon this advantage you raise a slight argument that St. Paul besought Timothy to abide at Ephesus 1. Tim. 1.3 which had been a needlesse importunity if he had the Episcopall charge of Ephesus for then he must have necessarily resided there whereas you recite severall proofes and occasions of his absence which will appear to be of little force if a man doe duly consider the state of those times the necessity wherof in that first plantation of the Gospell made even the most sixed Sars planetary calling them frequently from the places of their abode to those services which were of most use for the successe of that great worke yet so as that either after their errands fully-done or upon all opportune intermissions they returned to their own Chaire The story therefore of those journal computations might well have been spared Your argument from Pauls calling the Elders of Ephesus to Miletus how ever you lean upon it it will prove but a Reed Your selves confesse I know not upon what certaine ground that Timothy was at the meeting Acts 20. with St. Paul Had he been Bishop there the Apostle you say in stead of giving the Elders a charge to feede the flocke of Christ would have given that charge to Timothy and not to them Besides the Apostle would not have so forgotten himselfe as to call the Elders Bishops before the Bishops face and would have given them some directions how to carry themselves to their Bishops In all which brethren you goe upon wrong ground wil ye grant that these assembled persons were Presbyters and not Bishops under some Bishop though not under Timothy otherwise why doe you argue from the want of directions to them as inferiours but if they were indeed Bishops and not mere Presbyters as the word it selfe imports your argument is lost For then the charge is equally given to Timothy and all the rest and it was no forgetfulnesse to call them as they were you are straight ready to reply how unpossible it is according to us there should be many Bishops in one City and here were many Presbyters from Ephesus but let me mind you that though these Presbyters were sent for from Ephesus yet they were not said to be all of Ephesus Thither they were called to meet St. Paul in all likelihood from divers parts which he seemes to imply when he saith Ye all amongst whom I have gone preaching the Kingdome of God intimating the super-intendents of severall places so as notwithstanding these urged probabilities Timothy might have beene both before this time and at that present Bishop of Ephesus after which if Paul tooke him along with him to Hierusalem this is no derogation to his Episcopacy And if Timothy were yet after this prisoner with St. Paul at Rome as you argue from Hebr. 13.23 this is no derogation from his Episcopacy at Ephesus but to cut the sinewes of all this strong proofe of your computation it is more than probable that whereas the whole history of the Acts ends with Pauls first beeing at Rome that Apostle survived divers years and passed many travells and did many great matters for the plantation and setling of churches whereof we can looke for no account from Scripture save by some glances in his following Epistles into which time these occurrents concerning Timothy and Titus his ordination did fall as may be justly proved out of the Chronologicall table of the experienced Jacob Cappellus compared with Baronius Now then the Reader may take his choyse whether he will believe all antiquity that have medled with this subject affirming Timothy to have been bishop of Ephesus or whether he wil believe a new hatched contradiction of yesterday raised out of imaginary probabilities Shortly it is far enough from appearing that Timothy was no Bishop but a Minister an Evangelist a fellow-labourer of the Apostles an Apostle a Messenger of the Church it rather appeares that he was al these in divers sences and upon severall occasions The like yea say of Titus whom you are pleased to create an Evangelist not being able to shew that ever God made him so save in that generall sence that might well stand with Episcopacy you tel us a story of his perigrination in the attendance of Paul wherein you shall not expect any contradiction