Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
power_n bishop_n jurisdiction_n ordination_n 4,138 5 10.4414 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
B01998 Certaine papers, which passed betwixt his Majestie of Great Britaine, in the time of his being with the Scottish army in New-Castle. And Mr. Alexander Henderson concerning the change of church government. Anno Dom. 1646. Charles I, King of England, 1600-1649.; Henderson, Alexander, 1583?-1646. 1649 (1649) Wing C2154; Wing C2154; ESTC R171161 26,474 64

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

other the like which have moved some to apply this saying to the Church of England Multi ad perfectionem pervenirent nisijam se pervenisse crederent 4. In my Answer to the first of your Majesties many Arguments I brought a Breviate of some Reasons to prove that a Bishop and Presbyter are one and the same in Scripture from which by necessary consequence I did inferre the negative Therefore no difference in Scripture between a Bishop and a Presbyter the one name signifying Industriam Curae Pastoralis the other Sapientiae Maturitatem saith Beda And whereas your Majesty averres that Presbyterian Government was never practised before Calvin's time your Majesty knowes the common objection of the Papists against the Reformed Churches where was your Church your Reformation your Doctrine before Luther's time One part of the common Answer is that it was from the beginning and is to be found in Scripture The same I affirme of Presbyterian-Government And for proving of this the Assembly of Divines at Westminster have made manifest that the Primitive Christian Church at Ierusalem was governed by a Presbytery while they shew 1. That the Church of Ierusalem consisted of more Congregations then one from the multitude of Believers from the many Apostles and other Preachers in that Church and from the diversity of Languages among the Believers 2. That all those Congregations were under one Presbyteriall Government because they were for Government one Church Acts 11.22 26. And because that Church was governed by Elders Acts 11.30 which were Elders of that Church did meet together for Acts of Government And the Apostles themselves in that meeting Acts 15. acted not as Apostles but as Elders stating the Question debating it in the ordinary way of disputation and having by search of Scripture found the will of God they conclude It seemed good too the Holy Ghost and us which in the judgement of the learned may be spoken by any Assembly upon like evidence of Scripture The like Presbyterian Government had place in the Churches of Corinth Ephesus Thessalonica c. in the times of the Apostles and after them for many yeares when one of the Presbytery was made Episcopus Praeses even then Communi Presbyterorum Consilio Ecclesiae gubernabantur saith Ierome Episcopos magis consuetudine quam Dispositionis Divinae veritate Presbyteris esse majores in Commune debere Ecclesiam regere 5. Farre be it from me to think such a thought as that your Majesty did intend any Fallacy in your other maine Argument from Antiquity As we are to distinguish between Intentio Operantis Conditio Operis so may we in this case consider the difference between Intentio Argumentantis Conditio Argumenti And where your Majesty argues that if your Opinion be not admitted we will be forced to give place to the Interpretation of private Spirits which is contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostle Peter and will prove to be of dangerous consequence I humbly offer to be considered by Your Majesty what some of chief note among the Papists themselves have taught us That the Interpretation of Scriptures and the Spirits whence they proceed may be called private in a threefold sense 1. Ratione Personae if the Interpreter be of a private condition 2. Ratione Modi Medii when Persons although not private use not the publique meanes which are necessary for finding out the Truth but follow their owne fancies 3. Ratione finis when the Interpretation is not proposed as Authenticall to bind others but is intended onely for our owne private satisfaction The first is not to be despised the second is to be exploded and is condemned by the Apostle Peter the third ought not to be censured But that Interpretation which is Authenticall and of supreme Authority which every mans conscience is bound to yeild unto is of an higher nature And although the Generall Councell should resolve it the Consent of the Fathers should be had unto it yet there must alwaies be place left to the judgment of Discretion as Davenant late Bishop of Salisbury beside divers others hath learnedly made appeare in his Book De Iudice Controversiarum where also the Power of Kings in matter of Religion is solidly and unpartially determined Two words onely I adde one is that notwithstanding all that is pretended from Antiquity a Bishop having sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction will never be found in Prime Antiquity The other is that many of the Fathers did unwittingly bring forth that Antichrist which was conceived in the times of the Apostles therefore are incompetent Judges in the Question of Hierarchy And upon the other part the Lights of the Christian Church at and since the beginning of the Reformation have discovered many secrets concerning the Antichrist and his Hierarchy which were not knowne to former Ages And diverse of the learned in the Roman Church have not feared to pronounce That whosoever denies the true literall sense of many Texts of Scripture to have been found out in this last Age is unthankfull to God who hath so plentifully powred forth his Spirit upon the Children of this Generation ungratefull towards those men who with so great paines so happy successe so much benefit to Gods Church have travailed therein This might be instanced in many places of Scripture I joyne together Diotrephes and the Mystery of Iniquity the one as an old example of Church-ambition which was also too palpable in the Apostles themselves And the other as a cover of Ambition afterwards discovered which two brought forth the great Mystery of the Papacy at last 6. Although your Maj sty be not made a Judge of the Reformed Churches yet you so farre censure them and their actions as without Bishops in your judgment they cannot have a lawfull Ministery nor a due Administration of the Sacraments Against which dangerous destructive Opinion I did alledge what I supposed your Majesty would not have denied 1. That Presbyters without a Bishop may Ordaine other Presbyters 2. That Bapatisme administred by such a Presbyter is another thing than Baptisme administred by a private Person or by a Midwife Of the first your Majesty calls for proofe I told you before that in Scripture it is manifest 1. Tim. 4.14 Neglect not the Gift that is in Thee which was given Thee by the Prophesie with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery so it is in the English Translation And the word Presbytery so often as it is used in the New Testament alwaies signifies the Persons and not the Office And although the Offices of Bishop and Presbyter were distinct yet doth not the Presbyter derive his power of Order from the Bishop The Evangelists were inferior to the Apostles yet had they their power not from the Apostles but from Christ The same I affirme of the 70. Disciples who had their power immediately from Christ no lesse then the Apostles had theirs It may upon
minor will never be made good in the behalfe of a Diocaesan Bishop having sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction there being a multitude of Fathers who maintaine that Bishop and Persbyter are of one and the same Order I shall humbly offer some few Considerations about the major because it hath been an inlet to many dangerous Errors and hath proved a mighty hinderance and obstruction to Reformation of Religion 1. First I desire it may be considered that whiles some make two Rules for defining Controversies the word of God and antiquity which they will have to be received with equall veneration or as the Papists call them Canonicall Authority and Catholicall Tradition and others make Scripture to be the onely Rule and Antiquity the authentick Interpreter the latter of the two seemes to me to be the greater errour because the first setteth up a ●arrallel in the same degree with Scripture but this would create a Superior in a higher degree above Scripture For the interpretation of the Fathers shall be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and accounted the very Cause and Reason for which we conceive and believe such a place of Scripture to have such a sence and thus Men shall have Dominion over our Faith against 2 Cor. 1.24 Our faith shall stand in the wisedome of man and not in the power of God 1 Cor. 2.5 and Scripture shall be of private interpretation For the Prophesie came not of old by the will of man 2 Pet. 1.20 22. Nisi homini Deus placuerit Deus non erit Homo jam Deo propitius esse debebit saith Tertullian 2. That Scripture cannot be Authentically interpreted but by Scripture is manifest from Scripture The Levites gave the sense of the Law by no other means but by Scripture it self Neh. 8.8 Our Saviour for example to us gave the true sense of Scripture against the depravations of Satan by comparing Scripture with Scripture and not by alleaging and Testimonies out of the Rabbins Mat. 4. And the Apostles in their Epistles used no other help but the diligent comparing of Propheticall writings like as the Apostle Peter will have us to compare the clearer light of the Apostles with the more obscure light of the Prophets 2 Pet. 1.19 And when we betake our selves to the Fathers we have need to take heed that with the Papists we accuse not the Scriptures of obscurity or imperfection 3. The Fathers themselves as they are cited by Protestant Writers hold this Conclusion that Scripture is not to be interpreted but by Scripture it selfe To this purpose amongst many other Testimonies they bring the saying of Tertullian Surge veritas ipsa Scripturas tuas interpretare quam Consuetudo non novit nam si noscet non esset if it knew Scripture it would be ashamed of it selfe and cease to be any more 4. The some Errors have been received and continued for a long time in the Church The Error of Free will beginning at Justin Martyr continued till the time of Reformation although it was rejected by Augustine as the Divine Right of Episcopacy was opposed by others The Error about the Vision of God That the Souls of the Saints departed see not the face of God till the Judgement of the Great Day was held by universall Consent the same may be said of the error of the Millenaryes and which more nearly toucheth upon the present Question the Ancients erred grosly about the Antichrist and Mystery of Iniquity which did begin to worke in the dayes of the Apostles Many other Instances might be brought to prove the universall practise of the Church as were not warranted by the Apostles as in the Rites of Baptisme and Prayer and the forming up and drawing together of the Articles of that Creed that is called Symbolum Apostolicum the observation of many Feasts and Fasts both Aniversary and Weekly 5. That it is not a matter so incredible or impossible as some would have it appeare to be for the Primitive Church to have made a sudden defection from the Apostolicall purity The people of Israel in the short time of Moses his absence on the Mount turned aside quickly and fell into horrible Idolatry Exod. 32. Soone after the death of Iosuah and the Elders that had seen the great works which the Lord had done for Israel there arose another Generation after them which did evill in the sight of the Lord Iudg. 2. 7. Soone after the bulding of the Temple and setling of Religion by David and Salomon the worship of God was defiled with Idolatry when Rehoboam had established the Kingdome he forsook the Law of the Lord and all Israel with him 2 Chron. 12.1 And the Apostle sayes too the Galatians Gal. 1.6 I marvell that you are so soone removed unto another Gospel why then shall we thinke it strange that in the matter of Discipline there should be a sudden defection especially it being begun in the time of the Apostles I know it is a common Opinion but I believe there be no strong reasons for it that the Church which was nearest the times of the Apostles was the most pure and perfect Church 6. That it is impossible to come to the knowledge of the universall Consent and Practice of the Primitive Church for many of the Fathers wrote nothing at all many of their writings are perished it may be that both of these have dissented from the rest many of the Writings which we have under their names are supposititius counterfeit especially about Episcopacy which was the foundation of Papall Primacy The Rule of Augustine afore mentioned doth too much favour Traditions and is not to be admitted without cautions and exceptions Many the like Considerations may be added but these may be sufficient to prove that the unanimous Consent of the Fathers and the universall practice of the Primitive Church is no sure ground of Authenticall interpretation of Scripture I remember of a grave Divine in Scotland much honoured by K. Iames of happy memory who did often professe that he did learne more of one Page of Iohn Calvin then of a whole Treatise of Augustine not can there be any good reason many there be against it why the Ancients should be so farre preferred to the Moderne Doctors of the Reformed Churches and the one in a manner Deified and the other vilified It is but a poor Reason that some give Fama miratrix sen●oris aevi and is abundantly answered by the Apologist for Divine Providence If your Majesty be still unsatisfied concerning the Rule I know not to what purpose I should proceed or trouble your Majesty any more Newcastle Iuly 2. 1646. For Mr. Alex Henderson Iuly 3. 1646. His MAIESTIES fourth Paper TO shew a better way for clearing of the Scripture I Shall very willingly follow the method you have begun in your third Paper but I doe not conceive that My last Paper multiplies more Controversies than My first gave occasion for having been so far from
better reason be averred that the Bishops have their power from the Pope than that Presbyters have their power from the Prelats It is true Ierome saith Quid facit exceptâ ordinatione Episcopus quod non facit Presbyter but in the same place he proves from Scripture that Episcopus Presbyter are one and the same and therefore when he appropriates Ordination to the Bishop he speaketh of the degenerated custome of his time 2. Concerning Baptisme a private Persō may performe the externall Action Rites both of it and of the Eucharist yet is neither of the two a Sacrament or hath any efficacy unlesse it be done by him that is lawfully called there unto or by a Person made publique clothed with Authority by Ordination This Errour in the matter of Baptisme is begot by another Errour of the Absolute Necessity of Baptisme 7. To that which hath been said concerning your Majesties Oath I shall adde nothing not being willing to enter upon the Question of the subordination of the Church to the Civill power whether to King or Parliament or both or to either of them in their owne place Such an Headship as the Kings of England have claimed and such a supremacy as the Houses of Parliament crave with Appeales from the supreme Ecclesiasticall Iudicature to them as set over the Church in the same line of Subordination I doe utterly disclaime upon such Reasons as give my selfe satisfaction although no man shall be more willing to submit to Civill Powers each one in their owne place and more unwilling to make any trouble then my selfe Onely concerning the application of the Generalls of an Oath to the particular case now in hand under favour I conceive not how the Clergy of the Church of England is or ought to be principally intended in your Oath For although they were esteemed to be the Representative Church yet even that is for the benefit of the Church Collective Salus Populi being Suprema Lex and to be principally intended Your Majesty knowes it was so in the Church of Scotland where the like alteration was made And if nothing of this kind can be done with the consent of the Clergy what Reformation can be expected in France or Spaine or Rome it selfe It is not to be expected that the Pope or Prelate will consent to their owne ruine 8. I will not presume upon any secret knowledge of the Opinions held by the King your Majesties Father of famous Memory they being much better knowne to your Majesty I did onely produce what was profest by him before the world And although Prayers and Teares be the Armes of the Church yet it is neither acceptable to God nor conducible for Kings Princes to force the Church to put on these Armes Nor could I ever heare a reason why a necessary Defensive Warre against unjust Violence is unlawfull although it be joyned with offence and invasion which is intended for Defence but so that Armes are layed downe when the Offensive War ceaseth by which it doth appeare that the War on the other side was in the nature thereof Defensive 9. Concerning the forcing of Conscience which I pretermitted in my other Paper I am forced now but without forcing of Conscience to speake of Our Conscience may be said to be forced either by our selves or by others By our selves 1. when we stop the eare of our Conscience and will not hearken or give place to information resolving obstinately Nesi persuaseris persuadebis which is no lesse then a resisting of the Holy Ghost the hardning of our hearts 2. Or when we stop the mouth and suppresse the clamours of our Conscience resolving rather to suffer the worme to gnaw the fire to burne inwardly them to make profession of that we are convinced to be Truth 3. Or when we seare our Conscience as with an hot Iron that it becometh senslesse which is the punishment of the former unto which is opposed the truly Tender Conscience such as Iosiah had 2 Kings 22.19 Againe 1. Our Conscience is said to be forced by others when they obtrude upon us what is in it selfe evill and unlawfull which if we admit against our owne Conscience we sinne two waies one is by doing that which is in it selfe evill and unlawfull the other is by doing it against a dictate of Conscience which is a contempt of God whose Vicegerent it is 2 Or when others urge us to doe that which is in it selfe good or may lawfully be done but through errour of Conscience we judge it to be evill and unlawfull in this case if we doe not that which is prest upon us we sinne because the thing is good and lawfull And if we doe it we sinne because we doe against our Conscience Which in this case bindeth but obligeth not And yet there is a way to escape out of this labyrinth it being repugnant to the equity of the will of God to lay a Necessity of sinning upon any man The onely way is to lay aside such a Conscience it being a part of the Old man Which we are commanded to put off otherwise we being sufficiently informed and yet cleaving to our old errour we rather doe violence to our Conscience our selves then suffer violence from others The Application for Answering the Quaere I leave to your Majesty Newcastle June 17. 1646. For Mr. Alex Henderson In Reply to his second Paper Iune 22. 1646. His MAIESTIES third Paper 1. I It were arrogance besides losse of time in Me to vie preambles with you For it is the truth I seek and neither praise nor victory wherefore I shall only insist upon those things which are meerly necessary to my owne satisfaction in order to which I desired the assistance of some Divines whereupon I will insist no further save onely to wish that you may not as I have knowne many Men doe loose time by being mistaken in the way to save it wherein I have onely sought to disburden My selfe but to lay no blame upon you and so I leave it 2. Nor will I say more of the second then this that I am glad you have so well approved of what I have said concerning My Education and Reason but then remember that another Mans will is at least as weake a ground to build My Faith upon as My former Education 3. In this there are two points First concerning the Reforming power then anent the English Reformation For the first I confesse you now speake clearly which before you did but darkly mention wherein I shall mainly differ with you untill you shall shew Me better reasons yet thus farre I will goe along with you that when a Generall Councell cannot be had severall Kingdomes may reforme themselves which is learnedly and fully proved by the late Arch-Bishop of Canterbury in his disputation against Fisher but that the inferior Magistrates or People take it which way you will have this power I utterly deny For which by your
Davenant he is none of those to whom I have appealed or will submit unto but for the exception you take to Fathers I take it to be a begging of the Question as likewise those great discoveries of secrets not knowne to former Ages I shall call new invented fancies untill particularly you shall prove the contrary and for your Roman Authors it is no great wonder for them to seek shifts whereby to maintain Novelties as well as the Puritans As for Church-ambition it doth not at all terminate in seeking to be Pope for I take it to be no point of humility to endeavour to be independent of Kings it being possible that Papacy in a multitude may be as dangerous as in one 6. As I am no Iudge over the Reformed Churches so neither doe I censure them for many things may be avowable upon necessity which otherwaies are unlawfull but know once for all that I esteeme nothing the better because it is done by such a particular Church though it were by the Church of England which I avow most to reverence but I esteem that Church most which comes nearest to the purity of the primitive Doctrine and Discipline as I believe this doth Now concerning Ordination I bad you prove that Presbyters with out a Bishop might lawfully ordaine which yet I conceive you have not done For 2 Tim. 1.6 it is evident that Saint Paul was at Timothies ordination And albeit that all the seventy had their power immediately from Christ yet it is as evident that our Saviour made a clear distinction between the twelve Apostles and the rest of the Disciples which is set down by three of the Evangelists whereof Saint Marke calls it an ordination Mark ● 15 and S. Luke sayes And of them he chose Twelve c. Luke 6.13 onely S. Matthew doth but barely enumerate them by their names of distinction Mat. 10.1 I suppose out of modesty himselfe being one and the other two being none are more particular For the administration of Baptism giving but not granting what you say it makes more for me then you but I will not engage upon new Questions not necessary for My purpose 7. For My Oath you doe well not to enter upon those Questions you mention and you had done as well to have omitted your instance but out of discretion I desire you to collect your Answer out of the last Section and for yur Argument though the intention of My Oath be for the good of the Church collective therefore can I be dispensed withall by others than the representative Body certainly no more than the People can dispence with Me for any Oaths I took in their favours without the two Houses of Parliament as for future reformations I will onely tell you that incommodum non solvit Argumentum 8. For the King my Fathers opinion if it were not to spend time as I believe needlesly I could prove by living and written testimonies all and more then I have said of Him for His perswasion in these points which I now maintaine and for your defensive Warre as I doe acknowledge it a great sinne for any King to oppresse the Church so I hold it absolutely unlawful for Subjects upon any pretence whatsoever to make Warre though defensive against their lawfull Soveraigne against which no lesse proofs will make Me yeild but Gods words and let Me tell you that upon such points as these instances as well as comparisons are odious 9. Lastly you mistake the Quaere in my first Paper to which this pretends to answer for my Question was not concerning force of Arguments for I never doubted the lawfulnesse of it but force of Armes to which I conceive it saies little or nothing unlesse after My example you refer Me to the former Section that which it doth is meerly the asking of the Question after a fine discourse of the several wayes of perswading rather than forcing of conscience take notice that there is none of these Sections but I could have enlarged to many more lines some to whole pages yet I chose to be thus brief knowing you will understand more by a word than others by along discourse trusting likewise to your ingenuity that reason epitomized will weigh as much with you as if it were at large C. R. Iune 22. 1646. For His Majestie Concerning the Authority of the Fathers and practise of the Church Iuly 2. 1646. Mr. Alex Henderson's third Paper HAving in my former Papers pressed the steps of your Majesties Propositions and finding by your Majesties last Paper Controversies to be multiplied I believe beyond your Majesties intentions in the beginning As concerning the Reforming Power The Reformation of the Church of England The difference betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter The warrants of Presbyterian Government The Authority of Interpreting Scripture The taking and keeping of Puplique Oathes The forcing of Conscience and many other inferior and subordinate Questions which are Branches of those maine Controversies All which in a satisfactory manner to determine in few words I leave to more presuming Spirits who either see no knots of Difficulties or can find a way rather to cut them assunder than to unloose them yet wil I not use any Tergiversation nor doe I decline to offer my humble Opinion with the Reasons thereof in there owne time concerning each of them which in obedience to your Majesties command I have begun to doe already Onely Sir by your Majesties favourable permission for the greater expedition and that the present velitations may be brought to some issue I am bold to entreat that the Method may be a little altered and I may have leave now to begin at a Principle and that which should have been inter Precognita I meane the Rule by which we are to proceed to determine the present Controversie of Church policy without which we will be led into a labyrinth and want a thred to wind us out againe In your Majesties first Paper the universall custome of the Primitive Church is conceived to be the Rule In the second Paper Section the 5. The practise of the Primitive Church and the universall consent of the Fathers is made a convincing Argument when the Interpretation of Scripture is doubtfull In your third Paper Sect. 5. the practice of the Primitive Church and the universall consent of the Fathers is made Judge and I known that nothing is more ordinary in this Question then to alleage Antiquity perpetuall Succession universall consent of the Fathers and the universall practise of the Primitive Church according to the Rule of Augustine Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec à Consilio institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi Authoritate Apostolicâ traditum rectissime creditur There is in this Argument at the first view so much appearance of Reason that it may much worke upon a modest mind yet being well examined and rightly weighed it will be found to be of no great weight for besides that the
my younger yeares at the university Like as I did apprehend that it was not your Majesties purpose to have the Question disputed by Divines on both sides which I would never to the wronging of the cause have undertaken alone and which seldome or never hath proved an effectuall way for finding of truth or moving the minds of Men to relinquish their former Tenents Dum res transit à judicio in affectum witnesse the Polemicks between the Papists and us and among our selves about the matter now in hand these many yeares past 2. Sir When I consider your Majesties education under the hands of such a Father the length of time wherein your Majesty hath been setled in your principles of Church-Government the Arguments which have continually in private and publique especially of late at Oxford filled your Majesties eares for the Divine right thereof your Coronation Oath and divers State-reasons which your Majesty doth not mention I doe not wonder nor thinke it any strange thing that your Majesty hath not at first given place to a contrary impression I remember that the famous Ioannes Picus Mirandula proveth by irrefragable Reason which no rationall man will contradict That no man hath so much power over his owne understanding as to make himselfe believe what he will or to thinke that to be true which his reason telleth him is false much lesse is it possible for any man to have his reason commanded by the will or at the pleasure of another 2. It is a true saying of the Schoolemen Voluntas imperat intellectui quoad exercitium non quoad specificationem Mine owne will or the will of another may command me to thinke upon a matter but no will or command can constraine me to determine otherwise then my reason teacheth me Yet Sir I hope your Majesty will acknowledge for your Paper professeth no lesse that according to the saying of Ambrose Non est pudor ad meliora transire It is neither sinne nor shame to change to the better Symmachus in one of his Epistles I think to the Emperour Theodosius Valentinian alledgeth al those motives from education from prescription of time from worldly prosperity and the flourishing condition of the Roman Empire and from the Lawes of the Land to perswade them to constancy in the ancient Pagan profession of the Romans against the imbracing of the Christian Faith The like reasons were used by the Iewes for Moses against Christ and may be used both for Popery and for the Papacy it selfe against the reformation of Religion and Church-Government and therefore can have no more strength against a Change now than they had in former times 3. But your Majesty may perhaps say That this is petitio principii and nothing else but the begging of the Question and I confesse it were so if there can be no Reasons brought for a Reformation or Change your Majesty reverencis the Reformation of the Church of England as being done legally and orderly and by those who had the Reforming Power and I doe not deny but it were to be wisht that Religion where there is need were alwaies Reformed in that manner and by such power and that it were not committed to the Prelats who have greatest need to be reformed themselves nor left to the multitude whom God stirreth up when Princes are negligent Thus did Iacob reforme his owne Family Moses destroyed the golden Calfe the good Kings of Iudah reformed the Church in their time but that such Reformation hath been perfect I cannot admit Asa tooke away Idolatry but his Reformation was not perfect for Iehosaphat removed the high Places yet was not his Reformation perfect for it was Hezekiah that brake the brasen Serpent Iosiah destroyed the Idol-Temples who therefore beareth this Elogie That like unto him there was no King before him It is too well knowne that the Reformation of K. Hen 8. was most imperfect in the Essentials of Doctrine Worship and Government And although it proceeded by some degrees afterward yet the Governmēt was never reformed the head was changed Dominus non Dominium and the whole limbs of the Antichristian Hierarchy retained upon what snares and temptations of Avarice and Ambition the great Enchanters of the Clergy I need not expresse It was a hard saying of Romanorum Malleus Grosted of Lincolne That Reformation was not to be expected nisi in ore gladii cruentandi yet this I may say that the Laodicean lukewarmnesse of reformation here hath been matter of continued complaints to many of the Godly in this Kingdom occasion of more schisme and separation then ever was heard of in any other Church and of unspeakable grief sorrow to other Churches which God did blesse with greater purity of reformation The glory of this great worke we hope is reserved for your Majesty that to your comfort and everlasting fame the praise of godly Iosiah may be made yours which yet will be no dispraise to your royall Father or Edward 6. or any other religious Princes before you none of them having so faire an opportunity as is now by the supreme providence put into your Royall hands My soule trembleth to thinke and foresee what may be the event if this opportunity be neglected I will neither use the words of Mordecay Esth 4.14 nor what Savanarola told another Charles because I hope better things from your Majesty 4. To the Argument brought by your Majesty which I believe none of your Doctors had they been all about you could more briefly and yet so fully and strongly have expressed That nothing was retained in this Church but according as it was deduced from the Apostles in the constant universall practise of the Primitive Church and that it was of such consequence as by the alteration of it We should deprive our selves of the lawfulnesse of Priesthood I thinke your Majesty meanes a lawfull Ministry and then how the Sacraments can be administred is easie to judge I humbly offer these considerations First what was not in the times of the Apostles cannot be deduced from them We say in Scotland It cannot be brought But that is not there Ben but not to insist now on a Liturgie and things of that kind there was no such Hierarchy no such difference betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter in the times of the Apostles and therefore it cannot thence be deduced for I conceive it to be as cleare as if it were written with a sun-beame that Presbyter and Bishop are to the Apostles one and the same thing no majority no inequality or difference of office power or degree betwixt the one and the other but a meere identity in all 2. That the Apostles intending to set downe the Offices and Officers of the Church and speaking so often of them and of their gifts and duties and that not upon occasion but of set purpose doe neither expresse nor imply any such Pastor or Bishop as hath power over other Pastors although it be true