also of Deacons a Even a Bishop is called a Deacon wherupon S. Paul writing to Timothy said to him though a Bishop Fullfill thy Deaconry From thence you may gather that the Names of Bishop and Deacon are taken for the same Nay the very Apostles themselves call themselves sometimes Presbyters sometimes Deacons and so their whole Office a Deaconry and yet is not Deacon or Presbyter the same that Apostle Why therfore did you not add that too that it might appear that the other suffered as much as Bishops and that in the begining not only the names of Bishops but of other Orders also were taken in like manner promiscuously wheras the Things the Offices themselves were distinct 2. Wheras then in those very places where the Fathers speak so That then they communicated in Names they presently apply a remedy and give this item that the Things themselves are otherwise And instantly add Afterward the proper name was given to each of Bishop to a Bishop of Presbyter to a Presbyter By the rule of speech then who would urge the common name when the proper had taken place For no body would now call a King a Tyrant or a Souldier Latronem as of old they were wont a Robber neither sure would they call a Presbyter a Bishop as when S. Hierom wrote had he called himself Bishop and S. Augustine Presbyter you know he would have been laughed at for his pains 3. Add further that in those very places wherin the Fathers speak so before they speak they are forced {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} to object by way of exception concerning the use of names and to premise some what that should put the thing out of question S. Chrysostom What meaneth this were there then more Bishops of one the same city by no means No not then when S. Paul wrote Theodoret It could not be that many Bishops should be Pastors of one City S. Hierom There could not be many Bishops in one City S. Ambrose God appointed several Bishops over several Citys So that they do cleerly shew the Offices were then distinct when they make the inference touching the name I collect then how ere it was for the names at first Be it they then neglected the Propriety of speech yet that even then there was but one Bishop but one Pastor in one City And this holdeth among us even at this day but doth it so among you Thus if you had prefacd touching the Thing it self and had afterward inferr'd touching the names though to what end is it to make any stir about the name when we are agreed on the thing that they were a little while taken one for another and had not spoken so loosly concerning the promiscuous use of the names his Majestie would not I beleeve have set his dash of dislike upon that passage The next is touching the Order Where I pray consider whether they be to be called One and the same Order whose Offices are not one and the same But that they are not the same Offices even they who less favour the Episcopal Order do confess in that they ever except Ordination Again whether they be to be called One and the same Order wherin there is not One and the same but a new and distinct Imposition of hands For that in all Antiquity there was Imposition of hands upon Bishops no man I think will deny And whether the Antient Church were of this opinion let Isidore be the witness who b in plain words calls it the Order of Bishoprick To the Schole indeed if you referr it they do not agree among themselves Your Altisiodorensis our Major and others are for the distinction of the Order But they who are most against it though they will not grant it a Sacrament of Orders the whole force wherof they bound within the Eucharist yet an Order they grant since an Order is nothing else but a Power to a special Act as namely to Ordain which is competible to Bishops only For what a thing were this if that from whence Ordination and so all other Orders proceed should it self not be an Order For we pass not for the Church of Rome or the Pontifical If they please themselves with the name of Consecration let them enjoy it Even the Church of Rome it self did anciently speak otherwise For instance The Church of Rome saith Tertullian c gives out that Clement was ordained by S. Peter Otherwise also the Fathers even they whom you allege even S. Hierom d who affirms that S. Iames the brother of our Lord was presently after the Passion of our Saviour ordained Bishop And of Timothy e Timothy had the gift of Prophecy together with his Ordination to Episcopacy S. Ambrose f For unlawfull it was and might not be that the Inferior should ordain the superior to wit a Presbyter a Bishop S. Chrysostom g For Presbyters could not have ordained the Bishop For the Latin word Ordination is agreable to the Greek {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and is often rendred by it nor is any word more frequent where mention is of making Bishops then that of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Theodoret h Titus was ordained by S. Paul Bishop of Creet But you say an Order is one thing a Degree another Yet you know that in Holy Scriptures these words are taken one for another no less then those of Bishop and Presbyter where the Deaconry is called {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} a Degree i which notwithstanding you will not I know deny to be an Order You know also that it is so among the Fathers among whom you may often read that a Deacon or Presbyter may {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} fall from his Degree and be degraded no less then a Bishop Indeed every Order is a Degree but not every Degree an Order But both are in Episcopacy though in one respect an Order in another a Degree A Degree as it hath a superiority even without any power an Order as it hath a power to a special act For were it a Degree only it had been enough to have used the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the superlative which denotes a Degree superior to that of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Presbyter the Comparative neither would there have been need to fetch in a new word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} a Bishop meerly to design a Degree For as touching Archbishops t is quite another reason They are not indued with a power to any special act For even they if they were not Bishops before receive their Ordination from Bishops And as they are Archbishops they are not necessary to the Ordination of Bishops for by the Fourth Canon of the Council of Nice Three Bishops together have power to ordain a Bishop But we very well know that the Apostles and the Seventy two Disciples were
Of Episcopacy THREE EPISTLES OF PETER MOULIN Doctor and Professor of Divinity Answered By the Right Reverend Father in God Lancelot Andrews Late Lord Bishop of Winchester Translated for the benefit of the Publike S. Clemens in Epist. ad Corinth 1. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Our Apostles understood by our Lord Iesus Christ that there would be contention about the name of Episcopacy Printed in the Yeer 1647. To the most Reverend Prelate the Lord Bishop of Winchester Peter Moulin wisheth all health and happiness THat Honorable man your Predecessor was taken hence not without great damage both to the Church and Common-wealth The King lost a most wise Counseller and the Church a faithfull Pastor but I a Patron and a friend who though he was most carefull and desirous of my good yet oblig'd me more by his Virtues then his benefits I have his Letters by me which he wrote to me when he was sick and his recovery was almost desperate the very sight wherof doth exceedingly afflict me But yet my grief was not a little eas'd when I heard that you succeeded in his room whose learning I long since admir'd and of whose good affection I had great experience when I was with you Indeed his most judicious Majestie did not stick long upon his choice You were even then design'd his Successor in the judgment of all who knew the wisdome of the King May it I beseech God prove happy and fortunate to your self to the Church and Kingdom May He grant you with increase of Honor increase of Virtue and a fresh and lively old age That his most Gracious Majestie may long enjoy you for his Counseller and the Church daily reap more and more fruits of your industry and vigilance I wrote a Book touching the Calling of Pastors wherin some passages greiv'd the soul of your most wise King as if they were averse to the Office of Episcopacy But indeed on the other side our Countrymen complain not a little that I vndertook the cause of Bishops and condemnd Aerius who in a matter anciently and universally receivd durst oppose himself against the Practise of the Catholik Church And they take it in ill part that I said that it was generally receivd in the Church even from the first successors of the Apostles that among the Presbyters of a City some one should have the preeminence and be call'd the Bishop But though there be many things in my Book which the King set a dash of his dislike upon which as all things els he observed wisely and with an incredible sharpness of wit yet Three things there are which specially offend Him The First is that I said that the Names of Bishop and Presbyter are promiscuously taken in the New Testament for one and the same The Second that I affirm'd that there is but one and the same Order of Presbyter and Bishop The Third and that the greatest is that I think the {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the Priority or Superiority of Bishops not to be of Divine Right nor a point of Faith but to be a thing wherein the Primitive Church vsed her liberty and prudence when she judged the Preeminence of One to be fitter for the mantaining of Order and conserving of Peace and that Vnity may well be kept whole and intire between Churches though they differ upon that point I confess these things were wrote by me which lest they be drawn to a wrong sense or be taken in the worser part take I pray breifly my meaning in them I said indeed that the Names of Bishop and Presbyter were taken for all one in the New Testament But I thought not that the Dignity of the Bishop was less'ned thereby since I spake only of the Name not of the Office only and I have beside clear places of Scripture the consent not only of Hierom the Presbyter but also of the most famous Bishops of the Ancient Church Chrysostom Ambrose Theodoret who took it not as a wrong to them or that any thing was abated of their honor if it were beleeved that the Names of Bishop and Presbyter were at first used in the same sense That the Order indeed of Bishop and Presbyter was one and the same that I said For so did the Ancient Church ever think and the Church of Rome thinks so to this day although there be in that Church an incredible difference betwixt the pomp of the Bishops and the meaness of the Priests Thence it is that in the Roman Pontifical there is set down the Consecration of Bishops but not the Ordination of them Indeed Order is one thing a Degree another for men of one and the same Order may differ in Degree and Dignity even as among Bishops the Degree of Archbishops is the more eminent Howbeit that this Episcopal Degree and Prerogative is by Ecclesiastical not by Divine Right I confess it was said by me For beside that to speak otherwise then I thought had not been the part of an vpright honest man you according to your wonted goodness will easily judg that a French man living vnder the Polity of the French Church could not speak otherwise but he must incur the censure of our Synods and vnder the danger {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} of degrading be forced to a recantation For to think that our Churches do err in points of Faith and in that which is of Divine Right were questionles to brand them with the note of Heresy and to shake the conscience of many weak ones Truly I came very vnwillingly to the writing of this Book but our Church requiring it and lately enforcing me for to stop the insolency of our Adversaries who in this point insult over vs out of all temper and speak of vs as of so many doltish mushrums newly sprung out of the earth and as of a company of base fellows who by force and tumult had got the Pulpit But howsoever I think I have kept such a temper that in defending our own I have not struck at your government nor by immoderate affection to a part have inclined more then was meet to either side Nor did I ever mention the Bishops of England with out due honor These things I thought fit to write to you Great Sir by whom I chiefly desire my papers may be approved I had sent my Book to you before now but that I was told by divers you vnderstood not French Now I send it because since you enjoy a more frequent and neerer presence of His Majestie I doubt not but He may have some speech with you about it and use you as an umpire in the cause And I shal most willingly stand to your iudgment well knowing that the most learned are ever the most can did and hoping that you wil not lauce too deep whatever may be salved with a fair interpretation So think of me as of a man with whom the Authority of Antiquity shal be
ever in great esteem and who shall think my self sufficiently arm'd against al opposite judgments if you shal not vtterly disapprove what I have writ God preserve you Great Prelate Farewell Paris Nones of Sept. 1618. Your Honors most devoted Peter Moulin The Bishops Answer I Had wrote these in the begining of March and was about to send them presently when lo the indisposition of the King in point of health made me lay them by and hindred my sending of them This sickness contracted first by grief for the death of his most dear Consort our most Gracious Queen and the neglect of all care of his body upon that greif ended at last in a diseas a diseas indeed so intricat and doubtfull that the Physitians themselves were at a stand what the event would be Wherby I forgat that I wrote and so omitted to send to you For all I had to do was to fall to my prayers with many moe who were sore perplexed as then in jeopardy for a most Gracious King But God lookd upon us and restord Him to us in Him us to our selves And now being returnd to my self I return to you what I confess I have bin too long indebted to you in so that as a bad debtor I was fain to be calld vpon by Monsieur Beaulieu in your name You will accept of this my too just excuse kindly as you are wont and promise your self from me what good offices one friend can do another Now concerning your Book You write that some passages therin greivd the Kings Soul And no wonder For his soul is tender and very sensible of any thing in that kind that bites or stings For out of His Piety to God He makes it not the least of His cares to tender the Peace and Order of His Church here And therfore in His great wisdom He presently discernd whether these Three points tended I. The name of Bishop is not distinct from that of Presbyter II. The Order is not distinct that is not the Thing it self III. And so the whole matter is not any thing of Divine Right What could they who lately made all the stirrs among us mutter more possibly Then that 1. the Name is taken confusedly that 2. the Thing is not distinct 3. Finally that it is a Human invention being setled by man may be unsetled and so stands or falls at the pleasure of the Commonwealth These Dictats are too well known to the King He hath been long usd to them They have long since on all hands been rounded in His ears He knows that there are still among us such as will from your writings presently take a new occasion perhaps not to pluck up this Order of ours that for so many ages hath taken root but surely to defame and calumniat it And this so much the rather because at one and the same time not by agreement I beleeve but yet as though vpon a compact lo one Bucer a fellow not hurt nor medled with by any in a very unseasonable time set forth a Book in Latin as it were of the same argument What King that studies the Peace not only of His own Church but which He desireth and would purchase at a dear rate even of the whole Christian world would not these things trouble Wherfore if the King set a dash of dislike upon those passages take it not ill I dare say He had rather set many asterisks of commendation then one dash of dislike specially upon what is your This surely is the Kings mind and is as it ought to be the mind and sense of vs all Wherin I appeal to your own equity You were for manteining of Your Churches Government and the repressing of your adversaries insolency should you not do it you should incurr the censure of your Synod and be forced either to recant or fear to be degraded In this We pardon you and demand the like pardon from you that it may be lawfull for us also to defend our Government as becometh upright honest men For we likewise have froward adversaries and there are consciences too among us which we may not suffer to be shaken or undermind as though they liv'd under another form of Church Government then was from the begining even from the very times of the Apostles And we are ready if need be and occasion shall serve to make this good to the whole Church How I wish therfore that you had not so much as touchd upon our Church Government For who put you upon it You might have turnd your weapons against those enemys you speak of and never have jerkt at vs There 's no such complication of ours with yours but that you might easily have pass'd by ours with silence And A faithfull silence hath its sure reward Or if you were so set upon it that you must needs be intermedling with Ours how I wish you had first imparted your mind to the King and whilst the coast was cleer had seasonably taken His advice in that you had to say of His affairs for Ours He accounts His You your self know and indeed who knows not since He hath wrote so much so admirably that as He is most able in respect of his other endowments of Wit and Learning so also in respect of his acuteness and solidity of judgment he is equal to the best or rather goes before them No man living hath in our Churches affairs a clearer insight a readier dispatch then he He himself in any point but specially in what concerns his own Church could have answerd you best and have set you the bounds so far to go but not beyond Wherfore if hereafter you shall go about any thing in the like kind pray remember this my advice which proceeds from a very good will to you I knowing that the King is well affected to you that he hath deserved well of you nor will you deny it and I hope will for the future deserve better Concerning those Three points if you demand as you do what I think I shall give you here this ingenuous answer That the Names of Bishop and Presbyter are taken promiscuously in Holy Scriptures that at first there was not so great force in the Words I shal easily grant you Nor did his Majestie regard so much what you said as to what purpose as what others would catch from thence who both in other parts here among us too are not rightly affected to this our order that these things were spoke to this purpose as if the Names being promiscuous the Things themselves were so also For to what end is it of what concernment to speak of Words taken confusedly when the Things are distinct No man lightly carps at the Name but he that wisheth not very well to the Thing also 1. And yet nothing here hath befallen Bishops which hath not befallen those other Orders also For in those very places in those very Authors whom you name it is said in like manner
after the example of the Seventy Two nor Bishops but after their own pattern This Order therfore hath the strength and sinews therof not only from the Apostles but even from our Saviour himself Would you have me fetch it yet higher even out of the Old Testament and there from the Divine Law it self S. Hierom doth And that we may know that the Apostolical traditions were taken out of the Old Testament what Aaron and his Sons and the Levites were in the Temple that do Bishops Presbyters and Deacons challeng to themselves in the Church S. Ambrose doth in both those places 1. Corinth 12. and Ephes. 4. speaking of the Iews Whose tradition saith he hath passed over to us I omitt Aaron lest you should reject him as a Type of Christ Over his Sons the Priests was there not in their several families {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} i. e. a Prelate or as is said †elswhere {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} i. e. a Bishop Over the Gersonites Num. 3. 24. Over the Kohathites vers. 30. Over the Merarites verse 35. Was not Eleazar there even while his Father was alive {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} as if you would say Prelate of Prelates verse 32. Who is elsewhere called {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} as if you would say Archbishop There are therefore in the Law {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} i. e. Prelats or Bishops Priests and Levites In the Gospel The Apostles the Seventy Two and those Seven Acts VI In the Apostles practise which was taken from those Two the Law and Gospel Bishops Presbyters Deacons But do not do not think that this was by Apostolical Right alone if there be in the Gospel if in the Law any Divine Right this Government is not without example in both it is founded on both Either then there is no Divine Right in the form of Church Government and then wellfare Amsterdam where so many humane prudences as there are so many forms of Government shall be set up Or if there be any Divine Right it is in Those Three it is for us And now to your skirmishes of lighter consideration That I know what useth to be answered by the Vulgar concerning Timothy and Titus Add this too that I know that many things are ill answered by the Vulgar But what is answered by the Vulgar that they were Evangelists Who affirms this either the Vulgar or they that out of some mans novel device have spread these doubtfull speeches among the Vulgar For none of the Antients ever spake so no History can witness it But History doth witness that Timothy and Titus were Bishops Epiphanius Chrysostom Ambrose Hierom Theodoret say it That they were Evangelists no man ever said wrote or dream'd before our Age This Vulgar answer is a Vulgar forgery Therfore whether Evangelists were superior or inferior to Bishops it 's nothing to us since these by no means were Evangelists Who saith so S. Chrysostom But I am to mind you that he corrects what he had spoken with some diffidence there concerning Evangelists For that nothing can be collected out of that place Ephes. 4. concerning the Priority of any But we may fetch it from another Epistle 1. Corinth 12. 28. where we have {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} first second third But Evangelists appear not there Besides that they whom you with the Vulgar would have to be counted Evangelists Timothy and Titus are from thence placed among the Pastors {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} intrusted with the care of their several Provinces and in general of all but not among Evangelists Aquila and Priscilla are to him Evangelists that I cannot but wonder what you meant to mention that place For from that place of S. Paul 2. Timoth. 4. 5. if you will hear S. Chrysostom you shall assoon make Timothy but a Deacon from the fulfilling {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} of the Deaconship as an Evangelist from the work of an Evangelist Do not you therfore make such a disjunction either Bishop or Evangelist Evangelists they were never reputed by any but some I know not who two or three days ago whom any upstart device pleaseth better then reverend Antiquity Do we give credit to Antiquity They were Bishops they had Bishops their successors their heirs both in Superiority and Power You demand then Whether your Churches sin against the Divine Right I did not say it this only I said that your Churches wanted somewhat that is of Divine Right wanted but not by your fault but by the iniquity of the times For that your France had not your Kings so propitious at the reforming of your Church as our England had in the interim when God shall vouchsafe you better times even this which now you want will by his grace be supplyed But in the mean while the Name of Bishop which we find so frequent in the Scriptures ought not to have been abolish'd by you Though to what purpose is it to abolish the Name and to retein the Thing For even you retein the Thing without the Title and they Two whom you named while they lived what were they but Bishops in Deed though not in Name seing as he in the Poet saith excellently there is scarce any man that would wish {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} To be a Tyrant and not to tyrannize That Aerius was put in the black book of Hereticks and worthily whosoever shall beleeve Epiphanius Philastrius or S. Augustine must needs confess And you that condemn Aerius upon what consideration do you condemn him What because he oppos'd himself to the consent of the Catholike Church He that is of the same opinion doth not he also oppose himself and is to be condemn'd upon the same consideration But if there be any error so it be not with obstinacy of mind though he think as Aerius did his cause will be far from what the cause of Aerius was Do not you therfore betake yourself to those tragical expressions of damning to the pit of Hell of giving sentence of damnation against your Church as against her that treads under foot the Divine Right Ther 's no necessity of that Weigh only calmly what is spoken To vote that a thing were so is not to devote if it be not A wish is no sentence of damnation To want somewhat that is of Divine Right is not to tread under foot the Divine Right Let but obstinacy and perversness be wanting it will be no heresy And if it be heresy being about a point of Discipline it will not be among those which S. Peter calls {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} damnable heresies But far be it from me that I should drive you to any streits For neither would I have you hold your peace being so provoked by the Iesuit Nay but write by al means write but yet when you write so mantein your own