SVNDRY Particulars Concerning BISHOPS Humbly offered to the consideration of this Honourable PALIAMENT C P ICH DIEN Printed for the Author and are to be sold by William Nowell Bookseller in Norwich 1661. Against Bishops holding their Office Jure Divino from God FIrst Christ hath forbidden his Apostles and in them all Ministers and Bishops to exercise jurisdiction as is proved in my book of Defence of the Kings Supremacy and as you may read in Mat. 20.25 26. and 1. Pet. 5.2 3. 2. If a Bishop exercise jurisdiction as he doth in his Consistory then he usurpeth the Magistrates authority which is contrary to the will of God as is proved in my book of the Kings Supremacy 3. Whilst a Bishop take upon him the Office of jurisdiction in his Consistory and summoneth and censureth any Magistrate he makes himself a Pope or an Antichrist for he exalts himself above the Magistrate 2. Thes 2.4 who is called God Psa 82.6 which is a brand of Antichrist 4. It is against our publike Oath and Covenant to maintain Bishops and will Bishops be so wicked as to force us to be forsworn by compelling us to subjection unto them and their jurisdiction 5 Bishops cannot prove by the Scripture that Christ hath left them any jurisdiction and for them to prove it by humane Records to have been very ancient 1500. years as they say this is no Divine authority or no better then Apocriphal Scripture which are not admitted to prove any point of Divinity or no better then an Ordinance of Men for a tradition received from our Fathers the Church or fifteen hundred yeares of which were the Churches of the Pope for many hundred yeares now Christ reproves the Scribes and Pharisees for walking after the tradition of the Fathers or Elders Mark 7.2 3 4 7 8. and St. Paul warnes us to beware of the traditions of Men which are not after Christ Col. 2.8 and such are the traditions of Bishops for they can plead no authority from Christ but from Men. And further what Scripture have they for Archbishops Deanes Chapters Presbends c. It is not meet to have so many and so great Offices and Officers in the Church which were never appointed by Christ 6. If a Bishop take upon him the Office of Ruling he must renounce his office of Preaching as shall be proved by and by 7. If a Bishop shall exercise jurisdiction he shall hold two Offices which are inconsistent the one destroying the other as shall be proved by and by in my next point 8. Being the Magistrate punisheth all crimes both in Laiety and Clergy it is meerly superfluous for a Bishop to exercise jurisdiction as shall be proved by and by 9. Being the Magistrate punisheth all crimes with a full and sufficient punishment it is unjust for a Bishop to punish also as shall be proved by and by 10. A Bishop will be a Magistrate in and of the Church and exercise jurisdiction and yet hath but one kinde of punishment as that of Excommunication for all sins greater and lesser but one Last for every foot which is too great for some and too little for others as shall be proved 11 If a Bishop exercises jurisdiction he will be exceedingly partiall and unjust punishing two or three sins letting all other go scotfree c. 12 A Bishop exercsiing jurisdiction doth usurp the Office of the Magistrate as is proved in my book of the Kings Perogative and he doth devest and rob the King of his Supremacy as is proved in the same book 13. Men say Bishops have a Commission from the King But how can this be for they own not the Kings Authority having an higher Commission from God If their jurisdiction be Jus Divinum of God then it is not jus Humanum of the King Now Bishops do not own jus Humanum if then their office be not of the King how can he give a Commission to that thing wherein he hath no right a man cannot give an house or land unless he first have a right himselfe in them Against Bishops holding their Office jure Humano from the King and if they relinquish their jus Divinum and derive their Authority from the King then quere if it be not more safe to put jurisdiction into the hands of the Magistrate then of the Bishops for this FIrst if the King would give the Office of jurisdiction unto a Bishop yet he may not take and exercise it because Christ hath forbidden it Mat. 20 25. and 1 Pet. 5 3. And further in my book for the Kings Supremacy I have proved by many arguments that jurisdiction belongs to the Magistrate but none to a Bishop or Minister wherefore it is Lawfull in a Magistrate but sinfull in a Bishop to use jurisdiction 2 If a Bishop would derive his Authority from the King yet it is against our publick Oath and Covenant to maintain Bishops and will Bishops be so wicked as to force us to be forsworne by compelling us unto subjection unto them and to their jurisdiction What a dreadfull account shall Bishops have to make to God who for lucre gaine and honour will force many thousands to live in the sin of perjury all their lives long Is it not better then for the King and Parliament to put all jurisdiction into the hands of the Magistrate whom we can cheerfully and with a quiet conscience obey then into the hands of a Bishop whom we cannot obey with a good conscience 3 If a Bishop take upon him the Office of jurisdiction from the K. then he makes himself a Pope or Antichrist for by summoning censuring any Magistrate in his Consistory he exalts himself above one that is called God 2 Thes 2 4. Ps 8 26. Now it is better to make the King a Ruler over the Church and the Magistrate under him then to make the Bishop a Pope 4 If a Bishop take upon him the Office of jurisdiction from the King then he must disclaime and renounce his former Title and Office of jus Divinum and also his right to St Peters Keies with all other Scriptures alleaged to prove their Divine right to a Bishoprick and must be content with an humane right from the King To hold their Commission from God and the King both as to say it is of God and by the King this cannot be for 1. To hold their Commission from God it is false Divinity as is proved in my book of the Kings Supremacy and further I say Bishops cannot prove by the Scripture that their Office of jurisdiction is of God as shall appear by by 2 It is against the Honor of the King by denying his Supremacy as is proved in my book 3 If they hold a Commission from God the K. both then the Kings Commission must be the inferiour Commission for their Commission from God is higher then their Commission which they have from the King now it cannot stand with the Honour of the King and his
jurisdiction of one Messenger or Preacher over an other but only a super excellency of gifts and utterance as that he was the best or chiefe Preacher or speaker like as Paul was called the chief speaker Act. 14.12 4. They plead Heb. 13.17 Obey those that have the over sight of you Answ There is a Magistraticall obedience and a Ministerial obedience Now this latter may be understood of obedience to the Faith Rom. 6.17 Rom. 10 16. Rom. 15.18 Heb. 3. 18 19. But it may not be understood of Magistracial obedience for if so the Clergy may hang and draw whip and brand men 5 They plead the postscript in 2. Tim. 4. Where it is said Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus and that in Tit. 3. Where it is said Titus was Bishop of Creet But these postscripts come too late to do Bishops any good for they are no Canonicall Scripture but foisted into our Bibles of late I have by me an old Bible printed a 120 years ago and there is not any word of these two postscripts beside the learneder Papists deny them and say somethings in postscripts are false Why then should learned Protestant Bishops own them 6 When Bishops are beaten out of play by the Scriptures they flie to Antiquities that Popish plea and plead the the Records of the Church that there hath been Bishops in the Church 1500 years Answ 1 It seemes by what they say that they find no such record for above 100 year after Christ when the Church was more pure 2 Of this 1500 years wherof they boast many hundred years were Popish 3 Why do Bishops alleage the Records of the Church long since Christ would they have us pin our faith on humane Histories and make them equal to Scripture and do not they know that a Church may erre and that the Churches since Christ have erred 4 The Histories of the Church anciently will amount to no more then a tradition from our Fathers and Elders now Christ reproved the Scribes and Pharisees for walking after the tradition of the Fathers and Elders Mark 7.2 3 4 7 8. St Paul warnes us to beware of the tradition of men which are not after Christ Col. 2 8. Now what are Bishops but traditions of men and the Fathers and Elders for many hundred years before us which traditions are not after Chrst for Bishops can shew no authority from Christ but from our forefathers The Record for the Church 1500 years are no better then Apocripha Scriptures which are not admitted of to prove any point of Divinity But suppose there were such Scripture to prove a Lording Bishop that may exercise jurisdiction what Scripture have Bishops to prove an Archbishop a Deane a Chanceler the rest of them these orders must needs be from the Pope as hatching or nursing them for there is no Scripture for them God is not their Father but the Pope or some other thing is their Mother so far of my twelft point 13 This my 13. point shall be of gaine of lawfull gaine If the King and Parliament would put all authority and jurisdiction into the hands of the Magistrate and take all jurisdiction from the Bishop the State may save their three or four thousand pounds a year which now is wastfully spent on Bishops as is proved in my last point and so it shall be again in four or five particulars The which mony may better be added to the Crown lands or a part of it yearly to such Ministers as have little livings and a part to such Cities and Towns that are over burdened with multitudes of many miserably poor beyond the abilities of the richer sort to relieve who give four pence a week where need is of eighteen pence But it will be said this is Sacriledge and to rob the Church Answ To rob the Church say you 1. Though it be robbing in a private man to take yet it is not in a Parliament who may dispose of all men goods 2. A Parliament may without robbery or Sacriledge take a part of a Bishops living and of a Ministers tythe as well as of the Laieties mony for publike use as in the case of war Again I hope 20 Bish are not the Church but the least number of the Chu for there are many thousands of Clergy men too being members of the Chur. and must go for a part of the Church and for the greatest part too Now if the Parliament shall take away Bishops livings they shall take but from 26 men to bestow on hundreds of poor Clergy men or on many thousands of the poor Laiety God will have mercy rather then sacrifice Mat. 12.7 God would rarher have the poor Clergy and the Laiety provided for then rich Bishops whose Office is superfluous and their great livings evilly bestowed If men would unpartially look into these they might find it so For as their Office as Ministers they do not say Service in their Cathedrals but others read for them as for preaching in their Cathedrall it is and still may be so if the State please by a Combination of Ministers as for their office of Ruling the Chanceler in his Consistory doth it for the Bishop and it may as well and better be done by the Magistrate for point of heresie 10. or 12. Ministers can judge as well as a Bishop so their office being superfluous to allow them 2000 or 3000 yearly is wasted for other men do their work for them me thinks therfore other men should have their great livings divided among them but it is in the power of a Parliament to amend all this But it will be said if you take away Bishops livings you discountenance learning and discourage young Students in the University Answer 1. None shall be discouraged but such as gape for a Bishoprick and as for such Students they are unfit to be Bishops for St Paul saith a Bishop must not be covetuous nor given to filthy lucre 1 Tim. 3.3 and such are they that study for learning to obtain honour and gain by a Bishopick If such men do not make use of their Bishoprick when they have it to get honour and riches by it they must faile of the end of their studies 2. Bishops have been down in England neer 20 years and yet learning flourisheth in the Universities 3. In Scotland Holland and other Countries where there are no Bishops yet learning flourisheth It is the love of God and learning that makes a profitable preacher not the love of honour and lucre by a Bishoprick 14 In this my 14. point I shall propound four or five things more to be considered of 1. For matter of jurisdiction the Bishops Chanceler who is a Lay-man may exercise this Authority in his Consistory as he doth assisted with two or three Ministers and then there shall be no need of a Bishop and why may not the Chanceler exercie this authority under the King and for the King as well as under the Bishop and for a Bishop
But if you desire to hold this authority in the line of the Clergy still then why may not every minister in his parish do it who will do it without reward from the State or why not by a Combination of 10. or 12. Ministers ruling over 10. or 20. Towns But I judge it best to have this authority in the hands of the Magistrate for he is in offiee exercising jurisdiction already So if you take away a needlesse Bishop the State may save three or four thousand pounds yearly for better use 2. The Metropolitan or Archbishop with other inferiour Bishops do consecrate or make a new Bishop But why may not the King consecrate and make a new Bishop if it be necessary to have Bishops as well as the Metropolitan For 1. sure I am the King being the fountain of all jurisdiction in our Kingdom he hath more right to confer his authority and jurisdiction to a new Bishop then a Metropolitan hath doth not the King create and make the Lord chief-Justice and other Judges and High-Sheriffs who exercise jurisdiction 2. Moses did consecrat Aron and his sons Ex. 29 1 c. Now if Moses did consecrat the High-Priest may not our King consecrat an inferiour Bishop 3. Our Bishops consecration is a strange thing to me for our Archbishops being dead before these times where is there a Metropolitan to create a new Bishop 3. When a Bishop was made minister he was ordained not to rule but to preach therfore when he is ordained a Bishop it is to rule not to preach unlesse he be twice ordained to preach which is absurd now to consecrat or ordaine a Minister 〈◊〉 in State or Church what warrant is there for Archbishop 〈◊〉 do it doubtlesly Christ forbad it Mat. 20.25 26. They say that Ordination and jurisdiction are two parts of a Bishops office and conferreth these two upon a Bishop at his consecration now the Archbishop have no right unto jurisdiction in himself how can he then give it to another can a man give what he hath not The first news that I ever heard of an Archbishop of a Deane and a Chanceler it came from the Popedom This monster was nursed of old in Rome and thence translated into the Church of England an Archbishop draws into the Church a multitude of inferiour officers under him every one having a yearly living as much as would maintain an able Minister and all wastfully spent for things might be better ordered as to dispose of their livings for the poor Laiety and to the poor Clergy to mend their livings I see not but that we may have Abbots and Cardinals as well as Archbishops and a Pope over all take in one of that Hierarchie and take in all reject one and reject all and every one 4 It is said that State and Church have flourished for many hundred years under and with the government of Bishops answ As for the State it flourished as well when we were Papists as since 2 The Act in Charles the first and 17 yeare of his raign complains of Bishops then for intermedling with secular jurisdiction which occasoned great mischiefe in State and Church and therefore disinabled Bishops to set in Parlament As for the Church it hath flourished many hundred year but it were with Popery till a 100. years agone and since it hath flourisht with Popish ceremonies and with Bishops persecutions for Crosse and Surplice for not observing them very many godly and constant preachers of honest life and conversation have been silenced and their livings taken away 5. I have before confuted Bishops authority to be jure Divino and also to be jure humano But then their is an occasion which I have not wrot of For Bishops perhaps will say we claim not jurisdiction from God or from the King but the exercise of it and we have the Kings commission to exercise our jurisdiction answ 1. In Mat. 20. â—5 26. and 1. Pet. 5.2 3. Christ forbad his Apostles to exercise authority 2 If your Commission be from the King then he may give the like Commission to a Lay man as to a Magistrate for the King is not bound to give Commission only to the Clergy 3. The office of preaching and ruling as before I have proved are inconsistent the one destroying the other and therfore a Bishop must not take or seek for a Commission to rule or exercise authority These things you have seen proved against Bishops jurisdiction 1. That Christ forbad it 2. It is an usurpation of the Magistrates office 3. He makes himselfe a Pope 4. It is against our Covenant 5. It cannot be proved by the Scripture 6. If he rules he cannot preach 7. His ruling is superfluous unjust and partiall 8 St Paul warns us to beware the traditions of men which are not after Christ Col. 2.8 Such are Archbishops Deanes Commissaries Chancelers c. 9. Bishops do not own the Kings authority in matters Ecclesiasticall 10. They rob the King of his supremacy These things you have seen proved against that other office of Bishops namely preaching 1. If a Bishop exercise jurisdiction he must lay aside his ordination to preach and his office of preaching 2. It is superfluous for a Bishop to preach as a Bishop as hath been proved Then how can a Bishop desire 2. or 3 thousands a year for his pains taken in the Church cannot this mony be better imployed By Theophilus Brabourn humbly submitting to the wisdom of this Honourable Parliament