this be according to the 55 Canon then all the Bishops were of this mind Also papists do sing their Mass so in our Cathedral Churches Bishops do sing cant and chant their Service 9. The Pope was horribly superstitious so were these Bishops for both of them had their Cross in baptism the Surplice hood and tippet Copes high Altars Waxe Candles Rails before the high Altar bowings towards the high Altar Saints dayes standing up at the Creed with others like Bishops said these Ceremonies were innocent and decent things but they have been defiled with superstition as I read in their Canons and are things defiled now innocent and are popish ceremonies decent things in a Protestant Church Thus it appears that the Pope and those Bishops were much alike and neerly allyed and that I have done them no wrong by saying they were popish For I read not in Scripture of Arch-Bishops Lord-Bishops Deans Chancellours c. nor of a Crosse in the ayre on an Infants fore head nor of Surplices Hood and Tippet nor Copes Wax-candles Rails c. These never were plants of Gods setting but of the Popes I cannot therefore bow to this golden Image which the Pope hath set up The Popish Mass doth crawl full of these Ceremonies and so doth our Bishops Divine Service in Cathedrall Churches the which is one cause why many people do so loath the Service-book for where the Service-book comes in there comes in these Romish ceremonies and we have a superstitious Clergy as ready and nimble to bid them welcome as may be These Bishops therefore being so like the Pope in cruel persecution of godly Ministers in superstitious ceremonies and in superstitious Orders of Archbishops Deans and Chancellours c. and being such loyterers in Gods Vineyard and hiding their talent of light in a close Lanthorn those at the beginning of the long Parl. did us a good office to remove them quite and I wish the King had been in presence to have confirmed it and annexed their Lands to the Crown Lands where they would have done good but now they do none but to maintain a Colledg of lazy persons but that which hindred our happiness was an over high carriage then with the King for which we have ever since smarted full sore Quest 13. Is there no meanes to pacifie and allay the animosity between Bishops and Episcoparians Independents and the Scottish Disciplinarians that so we may have peace in the Church I answ Yes there is one means and but one that I know of which is that the King would take his own sword into his own hands and manage in by his Magistrates who are capable of it as I have abundantly proved and discharge Bishops Presbyterians Independents and Scottish Disciplinarians of their Lordly power This Kingly sword is the bone of contention among them all untill it be removed I never look to see peace in the church but if once removed I hope to see these persons for highly contesting feed and play together like Lambs and love like Christians A word or two of false Translations I Do find by reading of learned Expositors on the Bible that many words and Texts concerning the blessed Trinity are falsely translated I hold it my duty no longer to conceal it but to make it known that it may come to the knowledge of the King and Parl. who I hope will take it into consideration and in due time see that it be amended And for a taste I will give you some of the Texts and shall be ready to shew many more 1. See Eccl. 12.1 Remember thy Creators so it is plurally in the Hebr. Text as if there were more then one Creator of the World And St. Paul said God created all things by Jesus Christ Ephes 3.9 But it is falsely translated Creator singularly as if there were but one 2. See Psal 149.2 Let Israel rejoyce in his makers so it is plurally in the Hebr. Text as if there were two or three makers of the world And St. Paul said God made the world by his sonne Heb. 1.1 2. But it is falsly translated Maker or Him that made as if there were but one 3. See Gen 1.2 The spirit of the Gods moved on the waters so it is plurally in the Hebrew as if there were two or 3 Gods But it is falsly translated God singularly as if there were but one God 4. See Ephes 2.12 And ye were without Gods in the world so it is in the Greek Text plurally as if there were more then one God in the Trinity But it is falsly translated God singularly as if there were but one God in the Trinity 5. See Gen. 20.13 When the Gods they caused me to wander so it is in the Heb. Text plurally both noun and verb are plural as if there were two or three Gods in the Trinity Genes 3.22 The man is become like one of us but it is falsly translated singularly both in the noun and verb as God caused me as if there were but one God in the Trinity 6. See Gen. 35.7 The Gods they appeared unto him So it is plurally in the Hebr. Text both the noun and verb are plurall as if there were two or three Gods as God the Father God the Son and God the holy Ghost But it is falsly translated both in in the noun and verb singularly as God appeared as if there were but one God in the Trinity The Church saith there is but one God Now Translators unfaithfully to maintain the Doctrine of the Church translate falsly to draw Scripture to the Church but like honest men they should translate word for word number for number to draw the Church to the Scriptures FINIS A Postscript further proving that Bishops usurp the Kings Authority and devest him of his Supremacy THe King is the Fountain of all Authority and Jurisdiction and whosoever exercises Jurisdiction in this Kingdome wtthout authority from the King they usurp the Kings authority and make voyd his supremacy and this Bishops do For 1. There are two essentiall parts of a Bishops office as they hold Ordination and Jurisdiction Now they lay as much claim to the power of Jurisdiction as to Ordination and receive them both from the same hand and Donor As the one therefore is from God not from the King so is the other even both from one and the same Donor but neither of them from the King 2. a Bishop is created by his Metropolitan and other Bishops who by Imposition of their hands do confer upon him as from God the office of jurisdiction as they say now this Office is not derived from the King nor can be for the King doth not lay hands on the Bishop created 3. Bishops claim their authority and jurisdiction in the Church from Peters Keys Mat. 16.19 but not from the King for Peters Keys were not delivered to Kings or lay persons but to the Clergy 4. All this Bishops confest in their writings concerning this similitude
A DEFENCE OF THE Kings Authority AND SUPREMACY In the Church Church-Discipline And that He is Supream Head and Governour over all persons in all Causes Ecclesiastical Against these Disciplinarians the Pope and his Clergy the Bishops and Episcoparians the Scottish and English PRESBYTERIANS with the INDEPENDENTS Who have for a long time usurped the power of Kings and authority of Magistrates contrary to the will of GOD and the Honour of KINGS The second Edition much enlarged By THEOPHILVS BRABOVRNE Give unto Caesar the things that are Caesars LONDON Printed for the Author and are to be sold by William Nowell Book-seller in Norwich 1660. A DEFENCE Of The KINGS SVPREMACIE In the Church and Church-discipline Against these Disciplinarians the Pope English Bishops Scottish and English Presbyterians and Independents who have for a long time usurped the authority of the King and his Magistrates MY ensuing Discourse shall be to maintain the Kings Supremacy in causes Ecclesiastical and the authority of all Magistrates under him and to confute the authority of Bishops and other Ministers in Church-matters Now because I will not dispute on Generals I will by and by come to a particular namely to the censure and punishment of Excommunication the which is all the authority that Bishops and Ministers do claim and I shall try whether it belongs to the office of our Christian Magistrates or to the Bishop and his Chancellour or to the Minister and his Lay-Elders Now if it can be made appear as I believe it will that the censure of Excommunication belongs to the Magistrate and not to the Bishop then Bishops have lost all their authority even the richest flower in their Garland By the way note that as the inferiour Ministers rule with their Lay-Elders so doth the Bishop with his Chancellour who is no Minister but a Lay man and thus you see that all Disciplinarians have their Lay-Elders Now my endeavour shall be to give unto Caesar our King the things that are Caesars and to his subordinate Magistrates the things that are theirs and to give unto Bishops and Ministers the things that belong to them as to be Preachers not Rulers like Magistrates I have 2 or 3 things more to premise before I come to my task 1. Near twenty years agone I took the Nationall Oath and Covenant to be true and faithfull to the King and his Posterity the which I have been ever since so far as in my power was sorrowing to see so many illegall and treacherous practises beyond my power to amend I then also did swear to do my endeavour for the extirpation of Prelacy that is of Archbishops Bishops and Chancellors c. In pursuance whereof I writ this little Treatise holding my self bound in conscience to keep my Oath But it will be said the Parliament when they required this Oath was then illegall the King being absent I answer Hence it follows that my Oath was illegall and binds not in the Common Law but yet it binds in point of Divinity For an Oath taken by force and feare binds as in the case of the Oath taken to the King of Babel Ezek. 17.12 c. And an Oath taken by fraud binds as in the case of the Gibeonites and no man on earth can absolve from such an Oath Josh 9.3 4.18 19. with 2 Sam. 21.1 2.6 wherefore I dare not be a perjured person Jeremiah said Because of Oaths the Land mourns Jer. 23.10 God plagued the Israelites in Davids time for the perjury of Saul before him 2 Sam. 21.1 c. We have sins enough in this Land to answer to God for and shall we add wilfull perjury to them to provoke the Lord to wrath God forbid Now I humbly beseech our honourable Parliament to order things so as those who have taken this Oath which cannot be recall'd may not be enforced by Law to be forsworn by any of their endeavours to establish or countenance our new Bishops 2. Many say as King James did no Bishop no King but King James was no Prophet he spake as he thought and desired But had he lived to our dayes and seen what we have seen he might have changed his proverb If I may be so bold to speak my sense it had been good for King Charles his Son if he had cast off Bishops twenty years before his death For as I suppose they were one great cause of his untimely end For he had armed his Bishops with too much of his Authority the which some of them abused to pride calling them Jack Gentlemen Most of them abusing his authority for the ushering in of Popish Ceremonies spending their zeale to maintain trifles not beseeming learned and grave Doctors as an ayeriall Cross and white Surplice an Hood and Tippet whereby they became ridiculous to the people And then they abused his authority to cruelty and persecution for those trifles How many hundreds of painfull and godly Ministers of a good life and conversation did they silence for non-observance of these and unmercifully deprived them of their livings and livelihood so as they were enforced to live upon Almes So great was their persecution in those dayes as they drove many hundreds of the Kings Subjects out of the Kingdome to plant themselves in a Wilderness And how great was their tyranny in the High Commission Court at London and their Chancellours Courts in the Country persons of years know too well and all this for trifles whereby they became odious to the people then and to those that sate at the beginning of this long Parliament after who rooted them quite up For these were eye-witnesses and sensible of the pride ambition and cruell persecutions of the Bishops whereof many in our dayes being but young men are totally ignorant and therefore think to gather grapes of these thorns and Figs of these thistles But a wolf will be a wolf still though you crop his eares and cut his tayle the same is true of a Fox Now in process of time when unhappily the King and Parliament fell at odds many thousands of the people took in with the Parliament some help them with money others with their persons and swords but would not take in with the King for feare of Popery and for feare they should be still under the tyranny of cruell Bishops the which to conscientious men was more intollerable than monethly Taxes or illegall Monopolies of old Thus the King lost the hearts of his Subjects because they saw themselves in a desperate case For it was grown into a proverb no Bishop no King 3. Many who have read my former book of this subject say that I am an Erastine but they are such as know not the opinion of Erastus I have seen his book which was anciently a dispute between reverend Beza and him about Excommunication Now Erastus held it to be no Ordinance of Christ but a figment of mans brain but I differ from him and hold it to be an Ordinance of Christ I
Court to examine them and to examine witnesses against them and then if guilty to judge and censure them to punishment all these are acts of Magistraticall authority and we daily see Magistrates exercising this authority Now for Bishops to use these severall acts in their Consistorie it is an usurpation of the Magistrates office and authority and therefore this authority belongs not to a Bishop or a Minister nor to the Pope and without these precedent acts of authority there can be no Excommunication 3. Christ hath forbidden the Pope the Bishop of a Diocess and the Minister of a Parish to exercise Lordly authority in the Church for he said The Lords of the Gentiles exercise dominion and they that are great exercise authority But it shall not be so among you Mat. 20.25 Christ forbad his Apostles to Lord it and St. Peter to like purpose said That Ministers must not be so much as or like unto Lords over Gods heritage 1 Pet. 5.3 Now for a Bishop to punish with the Rod of Excommunication it is a Lordly authority for punishment is Lordly and for a Bishop in his Consistory to examine one and witnesses against him and then to judge and condemn him to punishment this is Lordly authority wherefore the censure of Excommunication belongs not to a Bishop I shall prosecute this point further by sundry absurdities which depend upon it as 1. If Excommunication be proper to a Bishop or a Minister why doth the Bishops Chancellour meddle in it for he is a Lay-man and why do the Ministers Elders meddle in it for these are Lay-men 2. If the Bishop will punish some sins by Excommunication as Adultery then he must punish all sins with Excommunication for if he doth not he is partiall and unjust The Bishop hath but one salve for every sore but one last for every foot which is Excommunication for greater and lesser sins wherefore he must inflict this one punishment upon every sinner and then he must excommunicate every thief every traytor and every murtherer before they are hanged and there are a multitude of trespasses by the Common Law the which are sins also Now all these the Bishop must summon into his Consistory for to undergo his spirituall punishment 3. The Magistrate punisheth in his Court the adulterer drunkard swearer c. Now the Bishop and his Chancellour may not punish these in his Consistory again with Excommunication for if they do they commit injustice For after the Magistrate hath inflicted a full punishment then for a Bishop to bring the matter about again for another punishment this is to punish twice for one fault a double punishment for a single sin It is a torment intollerable and apt to make men run mad to be trounced from the Magistrates Court unto the Bishops Consistory for one crime to be twice examined in severall Courts to have witnesses twice brought against them to be twice censured and condemned and to suffer two sorts of punishments and all for one fault which hath been sufficiently punisht before by the Magistrate this is intollerable To avoid this mischief either let the Magistrate do all acts of authority and justice without the Bishop or let the Bishop and his Chancellor do all acts of authority and justice in things Civill and Ecclesiasticall without the Magistrate For to have two such Magistrates a corporall and a spirituall or a Civill and an Ecclesiasticall is as if we had two Suns in the Firmament or two Kings in England the Pope was the author of it 4. If Excommunication be exercised by a Bishop then he makes himself an Antichrist or Pope For in his Consistory he sits as a Judge over a Magistrate if he be scandalous examines him and witnesses against him censures and condemns him Now the marke of Antichrist is to exalt himselfe above all that is called God 2 Thes 2.4 And the Magistrate is called God Psal 82.6 If therefore a Bishop doth passe sentence upon a Magistrate he makes himself Antichrist Quest 8. Is excommunication a spirituall punishment belonging to Bishops I take this to be a popish device and invented by the Pope For when he encroached upon the authority of Kings that he might with the more colour obtain leave from them to reigne over the souls of the people leaving the bodies and fleshly carkasses for Kings to Reign over then he stifled them with this Dose that Excommunication is no corporall but a spiritual punishment and sutable to his spirituall Clergy and this hath been the dose and plea of our Bishops ever since But why the Clergy should engross this spirituality as proper to them I see no reason For a Magistrate is an Ecclesiasticall person and a spirituall man as well as a Bishop for he is a spiritual man that worships God in spirit and truth and who minds spiritual things and live after the guidance and motions of the spirit John 4.23 Rom. 8.1 5. Rom. 7.6 Now we have as many Magistrates such spirituall men as Bishops and therefore Magistrates are as fit to exercise the spirituall discipline of Excommunication as a Bishop this I thus prove 1. If a Bishops Chancelleour who is a Lay-man or the Lay-Elders of Ministers may meddle in spirituall Excommunication then a Magistrate may do so too though you call him a Lay-man 2. That Excommunication if it be a spirituall punishment yet it is in the power of the Magistrate it is cleer Ezra 10.3 7 8. where the Princes and Elders did by a Proclamation threaten the people with Excommunication or separation from the congregation if they came not to take the Covenant 3. King Solomon put off Abiathar the Priest from his spirituall office of Priesthood which degradation was a spirituall punishment 1 King 2.27 as his office was a spirituall blessing 4. If Excommunication be a spirituall punishment yet it belongs not to a Bishop because it is a Lordly power forbidden by Christ to Ministers Mat. 20.25 1 Pet. 5.3 5. If a Bishop useth this spiritual punishment of Excommunication he makes himself an Antichrist and a Pope as I lately proved Quest 9. Can you prove that the censure and punishment of Excommunication belongs to the Magistrate I answer yes But first give me leave to shew what and how the Magistrate is to act in this his office when he hath summoned into his Court the Adulterer Swearer Drunkard c. and hath examined him and witnesses against him and hath convicted him as guilty of punishment then he is to passe sentence on him publiquely in Court to suffer such punishment as is sutable to his sinne and if the Magistrate judgeth Excommunication to be more sutable then any other punishment then he is to denounce the sentence thereof upon the offender And this done then he is to send his command to the Bishop or Minister of the parish to deny him the Sacrament I doubt not but the Magistrate may command the Bishop or Minister For Moses commanded Aaron
Hezekiah and Josiah commanded the Priests and Levites and so I come to prove the point 1. The censure and punishment of Excommunication must either belong to the Bishop or Minister or to the Magistrate But it belongs not to the Bishop or Minister as I have abundantly proved before Therefore it belongs to the Magistrate 2. The Princes and Elders in Ezra's time commanded the people to come to Jerusalem to take the Covenant and threatned those that refused with excommunication or separation from the Congregation or Church Ezra 10.3.7 8. whereby you see that excommunication was in the power of the Magistrate 3. King Solomon degraded Abiather the Priest from his spirituall office which was a spirituall punishment 1 King 2.27 Now if Kings and Magistrates will imitate Solomon then they must excommunicate scandalous persons Solomon put off the Priest from medling in holy things so should Magistrates cut off scandalous sinners from the communion of Saints at the Lords Table and from medling with these holy things 4. If the Magistrate may command spirituall duties then he may inflict spirituall punishment for neglect of them as in Excommunication He that may command a duty hath power to punish the neglect of it or else he hath no power to command to command without a coercive power to compell is but an image or scare-crow But the Magistrate may command spiritual duties 1 Chron. 16.7 2 Chron. 35.15 2 Chr. 29.1 4 5. 2 Kings 23.4 And therefore the Magistrate may inflict the spirituall punishment of Excommunication 5. Excommunication is a punishment and so called by all men and so it is called in Scripture 2 Cor. 2.6 and a punishment is a revenge Now to punish and revenge is proper to the Magistrate for he is the Minister of God to punish and to take vengeance on him that doth evill Rom. 13.4 Wherefore the censure of Excom upon the scandalous sinner belongs to the office of the Magistrate 6. The severall acts of authority used in Excom belongs to Magistraticall power as to summon into Court and to examine witnesses against one and to examine the person complained on And without these precedent acts there can be no Excom Now to whom belongeth these acts to him belongeth the censure of Excom that is to the Magistrate By these particulars it appears that by the Word of God the Bishop in his Consistory doth usurp the Magistrates office Quest 10. Do Bishops devest the King of his supremacy I answer yes and thus I prove it 1. It is clear by the Word of God as hath been proved that Bishops do usurp the Magistrates authority and office Now he that usurps the Magistrates authority he usurps the Kings authority for the Magistrates authority is the Kings and he that usurps the Kings authority in causes Ecclesiasticall he denies and devests the King of his supremacy in causes Ecclesiasticall For if you deny him authority you devest him of and deny his superiority and supremacy in authority If a Master gives his servant five pounds to dispose of by his order and the servant be robbed of it by the way not onely the servant is robbed but his Master also and then his money being lost he can exercise neither authority nor superiority over it So it is if a Bishop takes from the Magistrate the Kings authority with it he takes the Kings superiority and supremacy in Ecclesiasticals But Bishops will say they had the Kings Commission for it and the King gave them this authority But say I Christ forbad them to take it Mat. 20.25 and 1 Pet. 5.3 Secondly they say the King gave it them and so doth a true man give his purse to a Thief but it is out of fear So these Kings afore-time gave their authority to Bishops but they got this gift by fraud For the Pope perswaded Kings that the Key of Discipline and Jurisdiction was a Legacy left by Christ first to Saint Peter and so to his successors Mat. 16.19 which is false and more then can be proved Besides Christ forbad the Pope and Bishops to exercise Lordly authority Mat. 20.25 1 Pet. 5.3 Now as the Pope so did those Bishops falsly plead that Legacy and so got it by fraud and subtlety wherefore as I conceive the gift of those Kings and their Commissions was a nullity Cromwell of late got off the Kings head by force and thus Bishops got away those Kings regall authority in the Church by fraud and subtilty Would it not grieve a man to see his friend cheated of his money at Dice And how can it but be grievous to a loyall Subject to see his Kings just and Royall prerogative wrested out of his hands by the wit of Bishops In King Henrie the 8. the Bishops of England took an Oath to the Pope whereupon the Lord Cromwell then informed the King of it saying that he was but half King and his subjects but half-subjects to him As I conceive that the King was King but over the bodies and Bishops were Kings over the souls of the people so they fell into a premunire which cost them 100000. pounds The Bishops in those dayes could not by flattery and subtlety perswade the King and his Council that St. Peters keyes did hang on the Popes girdle or on the girdle of English Bishops he would not be so cheated of his supremacy for they got it by fraud 2. The Pope holds his office Jure Divino so did those Bishops and so do our Bishops for all these plead for Peters keys and such like Scriptures Now though our Bishops take a commission from the King and say he is supreme yet they hold a higher commission namely from God and Christ and the Scriptures How then can the King be supreme in causes Ecclesiastical for Bishops have a commission higher then the commission which they have from the King And how can he be next under Christ when the Bishops have gotten the higher Commission The King may be supreme over the State but Bishops are next to Christ and supreme over the Church and in causes Ecclesiasticall for they say they have an immediate commission from Christ If so their commission from the King must be an inferiour commission 3. If a Bishop hath this Lordly authority to Excommunicate then if he makes conscience of his office he must do justice to and upon all men rich and poor noble and ignoble even to the K. as well as to the pesant God is no respecter of persons a Bishop must not be partiall Now if a King be subject to a Bishops Court and the Bishops there sits as Lord and Judge over him where is the Kings supremacy in Ecclesiasticals Notwithstanding Bishops consciences and doing of justice I know they dare not summon the King into their Consistory Yet I know and they know too that by their principles and the power of Peters keyes which hang at their girdle as they make the world believe they are bound to make no scruple
of any man noble or ignoble The Scottish Discipline is odious to Episcoparians for excommunicating their King but in my opinion the Scots are the more honest men for they act according to their principles but Bishops halt of one leg and are blind of one eye when they look upon a King and yet the Scots and our Bishops do fetch their authority both from the same Scriptures If therefore they may excommunicate the King by their principles where is the Kings supremacy 4. There is a secret designe of Bishops for supremacy for they write and say Church and State Now though common people regard not which end goes forward yet Bishops do for they do not onely write so and speak so but will have others to speak so too my self being with a Bishop long since I said State and Church but the Bishop corrected me saying you must say Church and State So Bishops will have priority and superiority over the State and if so then they aym at the Kings supremacy for he is a States-man and the chief of the State there can be no supremacy where there is not priority superiority However the Bishops do act openly for the Kings supremacy yet underhand they aime at the old Popish supremacy why else do they keep on foot that popish language of Church and State The Bishops also use to name the Clergy and Laiety giving the priority and superiority to the Clergy and Bishops but where then is the Kings priority superiority and supremacy Also they use to say Lords spirituall and Lords temporall Quest 11. Are Ministers capable of a Bishopricke or the office of a Bishop I answer negatively and my reasons are these 1. As is before proved Christ hath forbidden Ministers to use Lordly authority in the Church Mat. 20.25 1 Pet. 5.3 and therefore Ministers are not capable of a Bishoprick 2. If a Minister takes upon him the office of a Bishop he makes himself a Pope or an Antichrist who exalts himself above all that is called God 2 Thes 2.4 Who is the Magistrate Psal 82.6 For in his Consistory he sits as Judge over both Magistrate and people 3. The office of a Bishop by ruling is contrary to the office of a preaching Minister as I thus prove Christ sent his Apostles to preach Mat. 20.1 2 7. but not to rule St. Paul charged Timothie not to rule but to preach and be instant in season and out of season 2 Tim. 4.2 And St. Paul said Woe unto me if I preach not the Gospel 1 Cor. 9.16 And Ministers had their Ordination not to rule but to preach But Lordly Bishops are no Preachers no sooner Bishops but their heads are so full of Proclamations with ruling as they lay aside preaching Queen Eliz. when she went to make a Bishop said I am now going to stop a Preachers mouth I can speak my knowledge of them for sixty years that they preach not above once a yeare sometimes twice sometimes not once Bishops have ever been Ministers but never Preachers they have been the Drink â— in the â—ive the 〈◊〉 in Gods Vineyard those that have hidden their Talent in the earth or in a dark 〈…〉 did not such Bishops well deserve 2000. or 3000. pounds a year surely the State in those times knew not what to do with their money As for those that sate at the beginning of the long parliament though I cannot call them legall the King being absent yet I look upon them as an Assembly of the wise men of our Kingdome and those judged it good for the Church to root our Bishops Archbishops Deans Chancellours c. and these wise men were eye-witnesses and ear-witnesses and had too long an experience of Bishops miscarriages the which our young dayes cannot afford us They saw with their eyes how the heart of Religion was in a Consumption and how Religion was like a garden over grown with the nettle and weeds of humane inventions and Bishops or rather the Popes inventions untill Ceremony had well nigh eat up substance all was for an outward form and fashion as to bow towards the East and then to turn West To go up to the high Altar and then come down again to the Deske to be clad in white and in the Pulpit to be clad in black as if God were pleased with such toyes but I shall tell you of many more of these Ceremonies before I have done One thing more I believe provoked these wise men which was the Bishops cruell persecution silencing and depriving of livelihood very many godly and painfull Ministers men of a blameless life and conversation and all for non observance of popish Ceremonies and another thing was that they drove hence many of the Kings Subjects to plant in New-England Quest 12. Are Bishops allied or a kin to the Pope or are they Popish I have often said that Bishops Ceremonies are Popish and now I shall prove it by shewing their affinity to the Pope 1. The Pope of Rome is a Clergy-man a Bishop and a Lord-Bishop and so were our English Bishops 2. The Pope hath these many Orders of Archbishops Bishops Deans Commissaries Chancellors Arch-deacons Prebends and the rest of them so have our Bishops as like to the Pope as may be 3. The Pope reigns over many Nations and our Bishops over hundreds of Towns and Parishes and the Arch-bishop by reason of a larger circuit is yet nearer the Pope 4. The Pope challengeth the Lordly power of Excommunication and so do our Bishops 5. The Pope exalts himself above all that is called God that is the Magistrate and so did our Bishops in their Consistory 6. Pope is a Minister but no preacher so were our Bishops Non-preachers As soon might you draw a Bear to the stake as a Bishop into a pulpit and if at once in a year then they came trapped with their popish vestments Bishops had high Altars in their Chappels and wax Candles thereon unlighted a fit Embleme of a Bishop without light in a pulpit They would be these Angels Rev. 1.20 but they were not the Angels of light for they gave no more light than their wax candles unlesse on Christmas day in the forenoon 7. The Pope was a cruell persecuter of godly protestants so were these Bishops of many godly painfull Ministers men of an honest life and conversation these they silenced from preaching The dog in the manger would eat no hay nor suffer the horse to eate and they unmercifully deprived them of their Livings and livelihood so as the Minister his wife and children were enforced to live upon Almes-deeds 8. Bishop Wren whilst Bishop in Norwich forbad the Ministers in his Diocess to make any prayer in the pulpit and nothing but an exhortation to prayer according to the 55. Canon as pray we for the King or let us pray for the sick c. but the Minister was not suffered to put up one petition to God for the King or for the sicke If