not much better then that we have noted of the Minorite Friar For the saying of Hierome That it is not a Church that hath not Sacerdotem we that are Presbyters may as well conceive that he meaneth a Presbyter as he a Bishop that he meaneth a Bishop and Hierome a Presbyter as wee are if he were alive would as wee verily beleeve give sentence on our side For First it cannot bee denied that though there bee more dignity in a Bishop the is more necessity of a Presbyter that is of one to officiate in preaching the Word and administration of the Sacraments whereof there is continuall use then of a Bishop to ordaine if none could doe it but a Bishop which is required but sometimes and though a Bishop performe the same acts yet hee doth them not as a Bishop but as a Presbyter Secondly if Hierome meant that there is no Church without an ordaining Bishop and that is his opinion as his Lordship expounds him it is his errour an uncharitable errour which casteth not particular Christians onely but many Orthodox Churches out of the communion of Saints and consequently out of the state of salvation whereas if some Bishops had been as remote non-residents from their Bishoprickes as the Pope from Rome when he resided at Avinion in France or had medled no more with the Churches under their charges then the Italian Priests did when they had Benefices in England and knew onely the names of them and received tythes from them but did nothing for them or in them yet there might for all that bee true Churches and salvation in them well enough For of what use is such a Bishop or such a Priest either to the being of a Church or the well being or salvation of a Christian Thirdly if his words were true in that sense wherein his Lordship taketh them it would be necessary there should be as many Bishops as Churches and so that Bishops should be rather Parochiall then Diocesan Fourthly if the place in Hierome be unpartially perused it will not make much for the necessity of Bishops for Hierome in his Dialogue against the Luciferians whence the quotation is taken speaketh of one x Hilarius cum Diaconus de Ecclesia recesserit cum homo mortuus sit cum homine pariter interiit secta quia post se nullum clericum potuit ordinare Hieron advers Luciferian Dialog tom 2. fol. 49. col 2. Hilarius a schismaticall Deacon who dyed in the schism and his sect with him because being but a Deacon hee could not ordaine a Clerke to succeed him upon this saith Hierome y Ecclesia autem non est quae non habet Sacerdotem Ibid. It is not a Church which hath not a Priest The word is Sacerdotem which seemeth to bee of the same sense with the word Clericum a little before and that is there meant of him who is next above a Deacon and he is a Presbyter not a Bishop whose office in administration of the Sacraments is there particularly noted which belongeth to a Presbyter ut sic as he is a Presbyter not to a Bishop as he is a Bishop Object But hee speaketh of ordaining and that in Hieromes judgement was proper to a Bishop Answ 1. Hierome knew well enough that of old though it were otherwise in his time Bishops alone did not ordaine Church Ministers but the Presbytery with them 1 Timoth. 4.14 if not without them for many hold that at that time there were no Prelaticall Bishops above their brethren even to this day there is a shadow of that sociable power in ordination of Ministers of the Church of England retained in practice by the imposition of the hands of Presbyters with the Bishop and required by constitution in the 35. Canon of the yeare 1603. And some learned Papists are of opinion though it come too neere the truth to be common among them that Bishops may delegate their power both of z Episcopum in sua provincia posse committere simplici sacerdoti quod conferat sacramentum Confirmationis Martin Ledesma prima 4 ti qu. 13. a. 11. Confirmation and of * Episcopos posse delegare potestatem sacerdoti ordinandi sacerdotes aequè ac Papam Novariens tract 1. part 2.13 apud Fran. à Sancta Clara Apolog. Episcop pag. 249. Ordination to Presbyters or Priests Secondly though where there were Bishops anciently and usually ordination was not conferred without them yet where there were none without them it might be lawfully and effectually done as we shall note in another place and therefore no such necessity either of them or of ordination by them as is pretended And though the over-high exaltation of Prelates hath depressed Presbyters so farre below the right and power of their order that it is made in some mens conceipts a strange thing and a kind of presumption in any case to take upon them the ordination of Ministers yet Hierome surely was not of their mind when hee gave them the honour which some Episcopall parasites appropriate to Bishops to bee accounted the successours of the holy Apostles as he doth in the first of all his Epistles which is written to Heliodorus Thirdly from Hieromes words in this place wee may rather collect that a Presbyter as well as a Bishop may ordaine since hee denieth that faculty but to a Deacon then that by the word Priest a Bishop must bee meant and ordination peculiarly derived from him Fourthly howsoever where hee saith that it is not a Church that hath not a Priest hee is in reason to be understood not of one that hath power to make a Priest but of a Priest already made for such a one a particular Church cannot want but of a Bishop unto it there is no such need Fifthly if Hierome in this place being zealous against schisme spoke somewhat too freely in favour of Bishops which yet is doubtfull though more probable that he spoke on the Presbyters side then of the Bishops It is certaine that in other places which wee shall observe afterward hee expresseth himselfe farre from such fondnesse of affection to Bishops as his Lordship deduceth out of his words So much for the Testimonies of Hierome wherein wee crave his Lordships patience and pardon for our boldnesse since his explication and application thereof for the necessity of Bishops to the being of a Church and so by consequence to salvation hath put a necessitie upon us seriously to examine what hee said and meant Object There be some who to assert a necessity of Discipline say that Discipline comprehendeth a preaching Ministry and that 's necessary to salvation Answ 1. There is neerer affinity betwixt Preaching and Doctrine then betwixt Preaching and Discipline which is exercised more in matter of a Quid prodesset disciplinam habere in conversatione scientiam in praedicatione nisi ad sit bonitas in intentione Sermo ad pastores in Synodo congregatis Inter opera Bernardi col 1730.
Franciscus à Sancta Clara Provinciall of the minorite Friars who holdeth h Ubi nulli praeesse solent Episcopi deesse debent Presbyteri hos si domas quam miserenda quaeso horrenda sunt quae necessariò subsequentur nam ubi nulli sunt Presbyteri nulla erunt Sacramenta nisi fortè Matrimonium Baptismus Franc. à Sancta Clara Apolog. Episcop pag. 151. That where Bishops doe not rule there are no Presbyters where no Presbyters no Sacraments Hee excepteth according to the tenet of his Church Matrimony and Baptisme the former as a Sacrament the later as a Sacrament and more then that in the Popish opinion as necessary to salvation and hee so farre enforceth this necessity as to say i Episcoporum necessitatem inficiari nihil aliud est quà m Dominicae pasâ—ionis irritationem subintroducere nostrumque redemptionis piaculum evacuare Ibid. pag. 152. That to deny the necessity of Episcopacy is nothing else but to bring in the irritation of the passion of our Lord and to evacuate the vertue of his redemption which is in effect as Doctor du Moulin wrote to Bishop Andrewes k Hoc asserere nihil aliud esset quà m omnes nostras Ecclesias addicere Tartaro Pet. du Moulin cpist 2. Episc Wintonien pag. 173. opusc to damne the Reformed Churches of France and other Countries to the pit of Hell which being brought in as a consequence of the Bishops Tenet of the Authority of Bishops that reverend Prelate very wisely and religiously shunneth saying l Caecus sit qui non videat stantes sine ea Ecclesias ferreus sit qui salutem iis neget Episc Winton Resp ad epist 2. Pet. du Moulin pag. 176. opusc Hee wants his sight that seeth not Churches standing without that Discipline and hath an iron heart that consenteth not that they may bee saved and therefore our late learned Soveraign King James lest he should be mistaken in some of his speeches of some of those who had no good conceipt of the Discipline of the English Church when his monitory Preface wherein hee toucheth most upon such matters was published in Latine that hee might not bee thought to condemne the Churches whose Discipline is different from ours he expresly professed m Puritanorum nomine Ecclesias apud exteros reformatas earumveregimen non designari mihi est decretissimum rebus alienis me non immiscere sed illas reformatae Religionis libertati permittere sic ad fin Praefat. monitor in 8o. printed Lond. 1609. That by that hee had said therein hee intended neither reproach nor reproofe to the Reformed Churches or to their forme of Government but left them free to their Christian liberty And when the Bishop of Landaffe asserted the Ecclesiasticall Imparity of the Church of England at the Synod of Dort hee did not seeke to obtrude it as necessary to salvation but used this caution in the conclusion of his speech n Haec non ad harum Ecclesiarum offensionem sed ad nostrae Anglicanae defensionem The joynt attestation that the Discipline of the Church of England was not impeached at the Synod at Dort pag. 17. This I say said hee not to give offence to these Churches scil those whose Clergy assembled at that Synod but for the defence of our Church the Church of England And the Church of England surely at that time was farre from the conceipt of the Franciscan Friar fore-mentioned when hee and other learned Divines were sent to that Synod the most generall Synod of the Reformed side that hath been held since the reformation of Religion to assist with their consultations and to confirme with their suffrages and subscriptions the Decrees of that Synod wherein among many Presbyters there was but one Bishop and hee not President of that Assembly And when hee who hath pleaded for Episcopacy not onely as a pinnacle of honour but as a pillar of support to the Church wrote thus against the Brownists I o So Bishop Hall in his Apology against the Brownists sect 19. p. 588. reverence from my soule so doth our Church their deare Sister those worthy forraine Churches which have chosen and followed those formes of outward government that are every way fittest for their owne condition It is enough for you to censure them I touch nothing common to them with you which wee alledge not against the government of Bishops In a meet and moderate imparity as the same p Bishop Hall his prop of Church government added to his Irrefrag prop. pag. 6. Authour stateth their preheminence but onely against the necessity of their superiority to salvation which is the point wee have now in hand Whereto agreeth that of Epiphanius who conceived more necessity of a Deacon to a Bishop then of a Bishop to a Church saying q Ubi non est inventus quis dignus Episcopatu permansit locus sine Episcopo verùm sine Diacono impossibile est esse Episcopum Epiphan haeres 75. l. 3. tom 1. pag. 215. That where there was not a man of sufficient worth to bee a Bishop the place might be without one but it is impossible said hee that a Bishop should bee without a Deacon And the fifth Canon of the second Councell of Carthage decreeth r Placuit ut Dioceses quae nunquam Episcopos acceperunt non habeant quae aliquando habuerunt habeant Concil Carth. 2. Can. 5. That those places which never had Bishops shall have none at all and those that had them should have them still which they would not have done if they had conceived Episcopacy to be of necessity to salvation or of necessity to the being of a Church Quest But is there any cause to conceive that any of the late Synod imagined a necessity of Bishops either to save a Chrisian or to constitute a Church Answ Wee take not upon us confidently to impute that opinion to any nor can wee acquit the chiefest of them from such a conceipt for the Å¿ Archb. Laud in his relat of his conference with Fisher pag. 176. marg Archbish in his reply to A.C. having brought in a sentence out of Saint Hierome which is this t Ubi non est sacerdos non est Ecclesia Hieron advers Lucifer where there is no Priest there is no Church he taketh the word Sacerdos for one who hath the power of ordaining which in Hieromes owne judgement is no meere Priest but a Bishop only and thence concludeth so even with him no Bishop no Church which he so approveth as if some who professe more good will to Bishops then Hierome u See Doubt 16 pag. 80. and in the conference at Hampton Court pag. 34. are these words Hierome no friend to Bishops by reason of a quarrell betwixt the Bishop of Hierusalem and him elsewhere doth should say somewhat more or the same that he did with more confidence which to us seemeth little lesse and
the title page of his booke doth testifie setteth this Note upon that Article Touching this Article the greatest matter saith l Mast Rogers on the 35. Article of Relig. pag. 193. he is not Whether these Homilies meant and mentioned doe containe Doctrine both godly wholsome and necessary but whether Homilies or any Apocrypha writings at all may bee read in the open Church and before the Congregation Whereof in reason there needs no more refutation then the reading of the Article and the severall Titles and Contents of the Homilies annexed to it And though we like it well enough that his Testimony is sometimes excepted against as m By the Archbishop of Cant. in his answer to A. C. p. 47 48. proceeding from a private man yet since his glosse upon that authenticke Text hath commonly passed in the name and without the note of dislike of Authority it induceth us to doubt what Doctrine in those Bookes may be said to bee established in our Church and wee are the more unsettled in our conceipt thereof because wee see the Homily of the perill of Idolatry so little heeded and so much liberty of late taken to controll it with new Pictures in Churches that if the Homily were read in some of them it might be doubted by such as consider no more then what is presented to their senses whether there were not one Religion for the eares another for the eyes or whether the Lay-mens bookes or the Clergy mens were published with greater priviledge which hath been an occasion of Papists bragging n Charity maintained see Master Chil. Preface in answer to it p. 12. That our Churches begin to looke with a new face and their walls to speak a new language the face out-facing and the language contradicting the Doctrine of the Homilies We doe not meane hereby to charge those with Idolatry who have made it their care and have been at great cost to adde the beauty of henour in the walls and windowes of Gods house to the beauty of holinesse in the Communion of Saints who resort unto it and performe their solemn devotions in it wee doubt not but they are too wise to worship the worke of the pensill or any worke of mans hand yet wee beseech their wisedome to consider that the world groweth old and with age according to the Proverb becomes childish and children delight more to looke upon Babies then on the letters of their bookes or to learne their lessons and so that which by them was meant but for adorning the illiterate with the mutilation of a letter may turne to adoring and what was intended but to be a memorandum of History may be turned by some and taken by others as a memoriall of the mystery of Iniquity whereby the subtle may draw the simple from spirituall piety to sensuall superstition which was the evill effect feared by those grave and godly Divines who composed the Homily and for which cause they so zealously contested against all Images in Churches They had read no doubt with due regard the saying of St. o Malè vos parietum amor cepit malè Ecclesiam Dei in tectis aedificiisque veneramini Anne ambiguum est in his Antichristum esse sessurum Hilarius contra Auxent pag. 216. 217. Hilary against Auxentius Your love is fondly set upon faire walls you doe ill to make your respect of the Church by the outward splendour or statelinesse of structure know you not that Antichrist will set his Throne in such as these But this is his Quaere none of ours we goe on We had thought it had been the established Doctrine of the Church of England in the Homily of the time and place of prayer that it is a necessary and perpetuall duty by the fourth Commandement to celebrate one day in seven with religious observances but wee find that Doctrine publickly gain-said by divers and the Doctrine of the Popish Schoolemen as publickly maintained against it in divers Treatises in print And for the Articles of Religion themselves wherein chiefly wee conceive the Doctrine of our Church to be contained and by Authority both Civill and Ecclesiasticall to be established they are much impeached in the power and vigour of their stability by leaving such liberty for the points of free will predestination and possibility of keeping Gods Commandements as before hath been noted which by the 10.15 and 17. Articles are resolved against the opinions of the Papists and much more are they wronged by him who hath written a p Fran. à San. Clara his book called Deus natura gratia printed Lugdun 1634. Booke and therein hath laboured with much subtlety and diligence so to mince them by manifold distinctions and to wrench them from their proper to a Popish construction as if the Convocation that concluded them had had no mind or meaning to contradict the Councell of Trent and that now our 39. Articles were patient yea ambitious of some sense wherein they may seeme Catholick i. in their sense Popish as a late q See Master Chil. his Preface in answer to the Author of Charity maintained pag. 12. Papist with great boasting hath upbraided unto us So in the book called Charity maintained By expounding and applying of these Articles in a new way hath Franc. à Sanct. Clara troden out a new tracke though with many intricate turnings and windings in which men of equivocall consciences may send their faith to Rome while their affections keep close to their Interests in England and hath taught them to play fast and loose as to their Orthodox and Protestant sense so that as r Plutarch in the life of Alexander p. 110 Aristotle said to Alexander concerning his Physicks they were published and not published their words being read and their meanings not rought the Articles might be said to be established and not established established as a sacred Text but not established by meanes of an ambiguous Comment turning the Interpretation like a nose of waxe as easily to the left hand as to the right And how farre this cunning stratagem hath prevailed with some we cannot tell but as in charity we hope well of those of whom wee know no ill so in godly discretion wee dare not bee so confident in our good opinion as to sweare what we but thinke and wish to be true But though we cannot make faith upon Oath how farre our Doctrine is established as in opposition to Popery wee doe not deny but that our reverend Fathers and Brethren of the Synod might intend hereby more firmly to establish that Doctrine which is most repugnant to such opinions as they beleeved to bee properly Popish and the rather because wee have been credibly informed that the Oath was first proposed and so passed in the house of Convocation as an abjuration of Popery onely But a second time tendred as in a second edition it was augmented but as we conceive not amended when the Discipline or Government
expunge his name out of the Catalogue of u One onely branded Hereticke i. Aerius in so many hundred yeares opposed Episcopall government Bishop Hall of Episcopacy part 1. p. 66. Heretickes but to enroll it in the Register of Orthodox Doctors And for the Tridentine Decree it is the lesse to be regarded because wee may say as Bishop Jewel doth of x As for the words of Leo his own authority in his own cause cannot be great Bish Jewel defence Apol. part 2. c. 3. pag. 101. Leo The words of the Bishops of that Councell are of no great weight because they make a Decree in their owne cause But Chrysostome and Augustine were Bishops though Hierome was none and yet they spake of Bishops and Presbyters so equally as hath beene said and if untruly indiscreetly also because both against the truth and themselves We may say the same of Bishop Jewel whose judgement is plaine against the opinion of Divine Right by his exposition of Saint Augustine fore-alledged Besides y Panormitanus in quaestionibus suis ex mala interpretatione Hier. negat hanc Divino Jure inter Episcopos Presbyteros distinctionem Franc. à Sancta Clara Apol. Episc pag. 64. Panormitan and z Fulv. Pacian de probationib l. 2. c. 28. fol 96. Pacianus very famous men in their faculties the one for a Canonist the other for a Civilian and divers more to say nothing of the a Chamier tom 2. l. 10. c. 6. pag. 350. learned men of the Reformed Churches in forraine parts will not admit of any preheminence of a Bishop above a Presbyter by Divine Right All which wee alledge not to contest with the reverend Prelates in point of Authority but to shew that if an acknowledgement of Episcopall preheminence as of Divine Right bee required in this Canon and by that wee have shewed wee have cause to suppose it it is too problematicall an opinion for such confidence as should accompany an Oath Of Archbishops Of Archbishops though their Authority be greater yet as touching the Tenure by Divine Right our beliefe is lesser for they that hold Bishops to bee superiours to Presbyters by Divine Right as the Apostles were superiours to the 72. Disciples doe not for the most part unlesse they be Papists allow of Archbishops in that sacred Episcopacy and even he who was an Archbishop himselfe and highly advanced in print the Episcopall degree hath out of Ignatius observed and thereby affronted the Papall usurpation that the twelve were all b Abundè probavi Christum suam Ecclesiam Apostolis omnibus aequè commendâsse eosque ad hoc necessariâ potestare aequè omnes adornâsse confentit Ignat. episi ad Philadelph dum ad Apostolos veluti ad Presbyterium Ecclesiae Collegium recurri postulat Collegium verò Aristocraticum nemo ignorat Spalat de Repub Eccles lib. 1. c. 12. pag. 137. The Archbish that now is saith the like of the Aristocraticall Government and equality of the Apostles and quoteth Bellarm. de Ro. Po. l. 1. c. 9. to the same purpose making account his words are a confession of the truth against his owne side So in relat of his conference pag. 168 200 202 380. See Bishop Hall of Episcopacy part 2. pag. 13. equall as an Aristocraticall Colledge no Prince or Monarch ruling over the rest as the Romanists pretend and assume in the name of St. Peter wherein Saint c Jam illud considera quà m Petrus agit omnia ex communi Discipulorum sententia nihil authoritate suâ nihil cum Imperio Chrysost bom 3. in Act. Apost cap. 1. tom 3. col 459. Chrysostome is directly opposite unto them observing how Saint Peter in an assembly of the Disciples doth all by their common consent nothing by his owne authority nothing in a lofty or a Lordly manner For that Authority which they take up as Saint Peters right his Master and ours thought too much for him or any one man else fore-seeing as the Archbish of Spalato noted d Spalat de Repub. Eccles l. 1. c. 12. p. 138. That a Monarchy in a Church-man would bee apt to breake out into a tyrannie over the Church And for the tenure of Archiepiscopall authority wee may beleeve Bishop e Bish Jewels defence of his Apolog part 2. c. 3. divis 5. pag. 110. Jewel where hee saith in answer to Master Harding that though Primates or Archbishops had authority over the inferiour Bishops yet they had it but by agreement and custome neither by Christ nor by Peter nor Paul nor by any right of Gods Word Object If it be objected as by some it hath been that though the Apostles had no Archbishops among themselves who had a priority of Order and a majority of Rule above the rest of that fundamentall Function yet in respect of other Bishops constituted by them they were all Archbishops to those that were under them It may be answered Answ 1. That the right of Episcopacy hath not been so well cleared by Scripture that it should bee taken for an undoubted ground whereon to erect an Archiepiscopall power for there is so much difficulty and dispute about that as makes it to us uncapable of the assurance of an Oath Secondly our Protestant Divines when the Papists plead for Peters Episcopall or Archiepiscopall supremacy at Rome to maintaine the usurpations of the Pope upon all other Churches answered that as we conceive according to the truth that to bee a Bishop or Archbishop and an Apostle imports a repugnancy for both Bishops and Archbishops were confined to a certaine compasse for their Authority but the Apostles were of an unlimited liberty and power both for planting and governing Churches all over the world wherein they had every one of them such an equall and universall interest that f Non erat ea facta divisio scil inter Apostolos ut alter ab alterius abstineret Apostolatu Baron Annal. tom 1. an 51. 27. col 424. no Apostle had any part of the world to himselfe wherein the rest had not an Apostolicall and Pastorall right as well as he which is not nor can be so in Episcopall or Archiepiscopall callings Object If the opinion of g Estius comment in 1 Tim. 5.19 col 809. Estius be interposed viz. That Archiepiscopacy was founded when Timothy was made Bishop of Ephesus the Metropolis of Asia wherein he had h Bish Hall reckons 36. Bishopricks under Ephes part 2. p. 24.43 See Will. Synops papis controv 5. in append ad quaest 3. p. 273. many Bishops under his Jurisdiction that to say nothing of what is said of the unbishoping of Timothy and Titus in a particular booke of that title being brought in without proofe will bee as readily k Didoclau Altare Damascen pag. 175. denied by some as it is easily affirmed by any and if we should say that untill Pope Zepherinus in the third Century named himselfe an l Cent. 3. c. 10.
col 275. Archbishop or untill the reigne of Constantine as a very learned m Archiepiscopi Patriarchae in usum abierunt quorum ante Constantini tempora altum silentium Dan. Chamier de oecumen pontif lib. 10. cap. 6. tom 2. pag. 353.20 Writer hath observed there is no mention of an Archbishop it will not bee easie perhaps for any by legitimate Testimony to bring in an instance to disprove the observation in the Easterne Church and for the Westerne it came later thither as the Sun-setting cometh after the Sun-rising And Filasacus a Divine of Paris saith n Filasac de sacr ep Anth. ch 19. sect 1. Concil Matisc 1. Can. 4. It is not used in these parts untill the first Matiscon Councell scil anno 587. Which may bee to us the more probable because we have had experience in our owne time of a o Doct. Saravia saith the Assemblies of the Presbyterians are no Synods but Conventicles because he readeth not of any Synod without an Archbishop Sarav de Triplic ep q. 3. p. 90. principall point of now-Archiepiscopall Government the Presidentship of a Provinciall Synod without an Archbishop So was it in the yeare 1603. when the Bishop of London was President of the Synod then assembled Archbish p Archb. Whitgifl in his reply to Master Cartwr p. 310 313 427 432. Whitgift against Master Cartwright endeavoureth to maintaine That the office of an Archbishop was in use in the Apostles time and by their q Can. 33. or 34. as some accompt p. 470. Archb. Whitgi appointment in an Apostolicall Canon and that r Ibid. pag. 400. Titus was an Archbishop over Crete and ſ Pag. 470. Dionysius Areopagita the Scholar of S. Paul Archbishop of Athens But his proofes as some of us upon examination have found them are too low and too flat for the height and compasse of the Arch of his Asseveration especially as applyed to the state and authority of Archbishops in the Church of England the prelation particularly opposed by Master Cartwright who conceiving both the authority and title of an Archbishop by Scripture to belong peculiarly to Christ and not finding the name t The title Archbishop is proper to Christ as appeareth by Saint Peter where he calleth him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is an Archshepheard or Archbishop for Bishop and Shepheard are all one Ibid. p. 300. Archbishop there taketh up the title Archshepheard 1 Pet. 5.4 as equivalent to it The greatest Antiquity and best Authority that wee find for that title is that which u Archb. Whitgifts reply to Mast Cartwr pag. 323. ex Mr. Fox Martyrol tom 1. p. 146. Archbishop Whitgift citeth out of Master Fox viz. That in the time of Eleutherius an 180. there were in Britaine 28. head Priests which in the time of Paganisme they called Flamines and three Archpriests among them which were called Archiflamines as Judges over the rest these 28. Flamines upon the conversion of the Britains were turned to 28. Bishops and the three Archiflamines to three Archbishops which if it be true yet it is far below that which is alledged for the calling of Archbishops and yet more ancient then honourable for the conformity to Pagan preheminence Nor will it serve to say as Pope x Eugen. 4. Epist ad Episcop Cantuarien ait Cardinalium nomen non fuisse in principio nascentis Eccles expressum munus tamen officium à B. Petro ejus successoribus evidenter crat institutum Fran. Long. annot in 2. Concil Rom. pag. 201. Eugenius the fourth said of the name Cardinall that though it were not expresly mentioned in the beginning of the Christian Church yet the office was instituted by Saint Peter and his successours For not to insist upon the name Cardinall of which the saying of the Pope is an unprobable fiction superiority among Bishops is to be reduced rather to a secular then to a sacred Originall For our Archbishop of Canterbury that now is saith y Archb. Laud in his relat of his confer pag. 176. It was insinuated if not ordered that honours of the Church should follow honours of the State as appeareth by the Canons of the Councell of z Concil Chalced Can. 9. Act. 16. Chalcedon and Antioch It was thought fit therefore though as Saint a Cypr. de simplic Praelat Episcopatus unus est Cyprian speaks there bee one Episcopacy the calling of a Bishop bee one and the same that yet among Bishops there should be a certaine subor dination and subjection the Empire therefore being cast into severall divisions which they then called Diocesses every Diocesse contained severall Provinces every Province severall Bishops the chiefe of a Diocesse in that large sense was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and sometimes a Patriarch the chiefe of the Province a Metropolitan next the Bishops in their severall Diocesses as we now use the word Among these there was effectuall subjection grounded upon Canon and positive Law in their severall Quarters all the difference there was but Honorary not Authoritative So farre he where though he name the title Bishop Patriarch and Metropolitan hee doth not mention the title Archbishop And though hee grant that b Archb. Laud ubi supra pag. 168. the Church of Rome hath had and hath yet a more powerfull principality then any other Church yet he saith shee hath not that power from Christ The Romane Patriarch by Ecclesiasticall constitutions saith hee might perhaps have a primacy of order but for principality of power they were all equall as the Apostles were before them and hee might have said so much as well of Bishops as of Patriarchs for except for Ecclesiasticall Constitutions and positive Lawes they are not subordinate one to another neither the authority nor title then of Metropolitan or Archbishop is taken to bee so ancient or warrantable by the Word of God as that of the Bishops in the judgement of such as are the dearest friends to Prelaticall dignity Yet as wee deny not but that an inequality betwixt Bishops and Presbyters is as c Inaequalitatem inter Episcopum Presbyterum esse vetustissimam vicinam Apostolorum temporibus ultrò fatemur Fr. Chamier de oecumen pontif l. 10. c. 6. tom 2. p. 85.3 col 2. Chamier confesseth most ancient and very neere the Apostles times so wee yeeld it as probable that Archbishops are very ancient also and as certaine that there have been and are very many as worthy to be Archbishops as others to be Bishops and that there have been of that elevation men of as eminent desert for learning and devotion both in ancient and later times as any that have lived in the same Ages with them but in regard of more doubt of their Authenticke tenure then of that of Bishops though that also bee very much doubted of wee have the lesse heart to sweare to Archiepiscopall preheminence Object If it bee said that