the proceedings of the Prelats against himself and their dealings tovvards others of their brethren the theame of vvhich booke he the Defendent desireth the honorable Courtâ— to take a briefe relation of at this time that they may the better be informed of the falsitie of the information And first for the principall theame and matter of the booke it is the State of the questions in his Flagello Pontificis for vvhich he suffered vvith the summe of the Arguments he produced for the confirmation of the trueth The questioâ—s arising betvveen the Babylonian and the defendent concerning the autoritie of the Pope were these The first whether Christ did constitute Peter sole Monarch of the Catholick Church The second vvhether the Pope of Rome if hee bee a Bishop as hee is a Bishop hath Autoritie jurisdiction over Kings Emperors Thirdlie vvhether Popish Bishops be true Bishops or no and of the discussing of these questios the defendent saith his adversarie vvas the sole cause In the handling of the which the Defendenâ— fâ—rther affirmeth that he used all the caution that vvas possible as he supposed for man to use prefacing in his booke that being to dispute about the Autority of the Bishop of Rome he desired candidly to be understood of all menâ— for while he disputed of Episcopall autoritie he medled nor contended not against such Bishops as ackovvledge their autoritie jurisdiction from Kings and Emperors into vvhose hands the government of States Kingdomesâ— and Commonvvealths is by God committed For if the Popes themselves vvould acknovvledge their immense and unlimited autoritie from Kings and Emperors he the defendent there said if they commanded nothing contrarie to the vvill and Word of God that he for his part out of the reverence duty â— loyaltie to his Prince vvould obey it The Words in the Original are these Verum de Episcoporum autoritate locutus à bonis bene intelligi cupio Non enim litis litem moveo quatenus ab Imperatoribus Regibus Principibus Terre quorum interest salutem civium tueri potestatem â—us Imperium in socios totumque Dei gregem adepti sunt Nam si Romani Episcopi immâ—nsam illam nullis limitibus circumscriptam autoritatem indulgentia Principum acceptam ferrent voluntati Episcopali nihil voluntati divinae inimicum jubenti obtemperandum putem ob reverentiam Principi si volenti debitam c. So that the defendent having thus playnlie set downe his minde before knowing that all the jurisdiction that the Bishops in England now exercise over others is â—rom the King he thought himself not onely secure from danger but expected favâ—ur at least from the Bishops their helping hand especially when the opposing the Popes Autority in England is a thing that the King and State have ever so well allowed of And that this honorable Court may yet be fâ—rther informed of the speciall cause for which the Prelats are so displeased with the defendent it was for the truely and narrowlie disputing and discussing of the second question to wit whether the Pope of Rome if he be a Bishop as he is a Bishop have Autoritie jurisdiction not onelie over his fellow brethâ—en but over Kings and Emperors which the Defendent there denyed for many warrantable Arguments The summe of which he desireth here to relate unto this honorable Court for his just and necessarie defence justification For by the veâ—ie light of nature and unanswerable reason it is evident and manifest that where there is an equalitie and pariâ—ie amongst men there the one doth not exceed the other in power or Dominion Paris enim in Parem non esse imperium inter Naturae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est Novv Divine constitution hath made Bishops and Presbyters or Elders a like and equall vvhich that it might the better appeare the Defendent propounded there tvvo things to be proved The first vvas That Bishops and Presbyters vvere by the Word of God one and the same Secondlie That Presbyters had equall Autoritie of Governmentâ— Ordination Excommunication vvith Bishops vvherein onely consists their preeminency Autoritie above their brethren vvhich things being proved it vvill necessarilie follovv That the Pope of Rome as he is Bishop doth no vvay exceed other Bishops and Presbyters they being in all things a like and equall unto him much lesse hath any Autoritie and povver over Kings and Emperours And for the proofe of the first position the vvords Presbyter Bishop do sufficientlie evince iâ— vvhich in holy Scripture though diverse in sound signifie one and the same thing as not to cite the vvords themselves vvhich would be large The Apostle Paul to Titus in the first chapter doth sufficientlie shew vvhere the words Bishop Presbyter are confounded And likevvise in the first Epistle of Peter and the fift Chapter there Presbyter and Bishop signifie one and the same thing And the Epistlâ— to the Philippians the first Chapter and the â—irst verse doâ—h apparentlie demonstrate itâ— and diverse other places might be produced dilucidating the same thing But the 20â— of the Acts puts all out of controversie where Presbyter and Bishop signifie one the same thingâ— for officeâ— honour and function so that the identity of their officeâ— is signifyed by those tvvo expressions Neither is there a confusion of their names with a difference still of their functions administrations as some vvould cavill for in these places vvhere Presbyters are called Bishops the disputation is not about the title but about the office signified and specified by the title For vvhen S. Paul exhorts the Presbyters to have an eye to their duty charge he useth this reason that the Holy Ghost had made them Bishopsâ— And the trueth of â—his is so evident that the Rhemists themselves as learned men as any Bishops in England and as able to mayntayne an error are forced ingenâ—ouslie to confesse it saying in expresse vvords in their Noâ—es upon the 28. vers of that Chapter That in the Apostles times there vvas no difference betvveen Presbyter and Bishopâ— so that for the first position it is not onely by the Word of God clearlie evident but by the very confession of the adversaries of the trueth granted as a thing without controversy Novv for proofe of the second position that Presbyters as vvell as the Bishop of Rome have the povver and right of Government Ordination and Excommunication by vvhich in these times Bishops onely exceed Presbyters the defendent vvill here brieflie demonstrat it referring those of this honorable Court that have a desire to search into the full trueth of it to his booke And for proofe that the Government vvas committed unto them and that they exercised the same it is most perspicuous out of the first of Timothie 5. vvhere the Apostle sayth The Presbyters that rule vvell are vvorthie of double honour especially those that labour in Word and Doctrine By this testimonie it is evident that they
there at the Barr as a Delinquent for mayntayning the Religion established by publick Autority the honour of the King and the glory of his Majestie and that one Chouny a Sussex man a laick as vvell as himselfe should vvrite a Booke and set it forth by publicke autoritie mayntayning the Church of Rome to be a true Church and never to have had so much in her as the suspition of error in fundamentall poynts and that this booke should be dedicated to the Prelate of Canterbury patrionized by him vvhich Bookâ— the Defâ—ndent both read and exhibited in Court by vvhich notwithstandig the King himselfe and all his Subiects were made Schismaticks and hereticks to the infinit dishonour of God our Gratioâ—s King and King Iames of blessed memorie and our most holie profession and religion This as the defendent told the Lord of Dorset struck an amazement in him especially vvhen the author of it must be favoured and coâ—ntenanced by Canterburie and for the defending of the honour and dignitie of our Church and the honour of the King the Defendent should stand as an evill doer Novv vvhen the defendent vvas come thus farre and vvas then approaching more closely unto them all intending more fullie in the pleading of his cause to have set forth their unjust dealing they tolde him that he rayled and imperiouslie commanded him to hold his peace vvhich vvas the reason of his Apologeticus ad Praesules Anglicanos vvhere he tooke libertie to vvrite that and publish it to the vievv of all the vvorld vvhich he vvould have then spoke But after that they had silenced him they then fell a thundering against him everie one as he pleased all of them joyning in this one onely excepted that they censured him onely for his Booke and in their censure they unanimously agreed that the Defendent should pay the costs of suite a thousand pounds unto the King for a fine be debarred of his practice that his booke should be burnt and that the Defendent should lye in prison till recantation and in the meane time be delivered unto Satan And thus did the Sublime Court deale with the Defendent for doing his duty But here the Defendent craveth favour againe of the honorable Court that he may briefly letting the puny Iudges and their nonsenâ—e dye in silence say something of the Prelats haranges because they onely were the men that found themselves aggreeved aâ— his writing to say the trueth all the other are Officiers under them and are the Prelats hangbyes he meanes the Doctors to doe what they would have theÌ„ as hourely experience teacheâ—h all men And so much the more earnestly he desireth this liberty because it will make much for the demoÌ„stration of the justice of his accusation against the Prelats both in respect of the dishonor they have don unto God by it the dishonour of the King their Master King Iames of precious memory and the wrong done to himself in particular Now the first that entred this combat was Francis White Bishop of Ely who in the first place most blasphemously and with many contumelyes reproached the holy Scriptures making nothing of their divine Autority as all the standers by can witnes for he reviling the Defendent sayd That he had nothing in his booke but Scripture which was as he tearmed it the refuge of all Hereticks and Schismaticks openly averring withall That the Scripâ—ures could not be knowne to be the Word of God but by the Fathers and Saint Augustin would not have beleeved the Scriptures to be the Word of God had not the Church told him so Further he sayd That the Scripture could not be knowne distinguished from â—he Apocrypha but by the Faâ—hers nor the meaning of the Scripture found out but by the Fathers that all the Faâ—hers from all Antiquity which is most false as the defendent in a speciall booke hath sufficiently shewed made and proved a vast difference between Bishops and Presbyters and that there was ever a greater excellency and Autority in the Bishop then in Presbyters And this with an unanâ—mous coÌ„sent they all agreed in till a base fellow Calvin for so he tearmed that ever to be honoured Divine rose up in an obscure corner of the World viâ—lated and overtrew all order Autority in the Church and would allso have demolished the Autority of the Magistrates And then turning his speech to the Defendent unhumanly he called him Base fellow Brasen faced Fellow Base Dunce and sayd in the face of the Court That if he could not mayntayne his Episcopall Autority to be Iure Divino he would fling away his Rotchet And so concluding with those that had gone before him in his censure he sat downe in a very great fuâ—y and passion Afâ—er him came forth the Bishop of Yorke and in that numerous Assembly proclaymes That Iesus Christ made him a Bishop and the holy Ghost consecrated him and that he had not his Autority from the King for Bishops were before Kings and that Bishops held the Crownes of Kings upon their heads and so peremptorily averring that the Defendent ought to be knockt downe with club-Law for his ignorance assenting with the rest in their Censure he fell a sleep In the third place the Bishop of London advanced forwards speaking very loud and temerarious words against the Holy Scriptures saying That he had thought to have found some great Matters in the Defendents booke seeing him so confident and so peremptory but diligently reading of it he met with nothing in it but Scripture which as he sayd was the refuge of all Schismeticks Hereticks so according with his predecessors in their opinion and censure he concluded his part of speech But last of all came forth the Prelat of Canterbury who with a frontlesse boldnes avouched his Episcopall Autority preeminency over his breâ—hren to be onely from God very much blaming Calvin for his faâ—tious Spirit saying That their Ecclesiasticall Autority the power they exercised was from Christ Iesus and produced Timothy and Titus to proveâ— the same assertion and that Bishops were before Christian Kings and they held the Crownes of Kings upon their heads For no Bishop no King those that would have no Bishops sought to overthrow all Government in his censure he jumped in all things with the rest saving in the Fine which as he sayd hee thought too little and therefore ought of meere conscience as he told the other Iudges hee fined the Defendent a Thousand pounds more But he had one thing more to speake as he sayd concerning the Châ—rch of Rome and about that he resolved publickly there to declare himself in regard the Defendent had cast Chounyes book unto him in open Court and of the Synagogue of Rome he spake verie honorably affirming That shee was a true Church and that shee did not erre in fundamentall poynts and all this hee spake in that publick Sessions All which the Defendent hath
the Statuts at the Barr they notwitstanding affirmed that they had not their Autority and jurisdiction from the King but that Iesus Christ made them Bishops and bestowed their Autority upon them and that they were jure Divino and that they were before Christian Kings held the Crovvnes of Kings upon their heads for no Bishop no King and all this in a publick Court of judicature and in a most crouded assembly So that it seemeth the King is beholding to them and not they to his Majest And if this bee not to invade the Prerogative and to be enimyes of it and to be ungratefull unto his Highnes the Defendent knovveth not what it is to bee enimies of the prerogative The Lavves say it and therefore if the Defendent hath erred the Lavves have brought him into this error Neither did the Prelats ovvne Words at the Bart onely declare their disloyalty to the King and their independency on him but this very information vvhich comes from the Prelats in the name of the Attorney Generall sufficiently demonstrates it For in it the Defendent is accused as guilty of a great crime for vvriting against the Hierarchy and preferâ—ing a Presbyterian paâ—ity before the Sacred Orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons What the Defendent hath Writ the occasion of it concerning the Presbyâ—eâ—y the honorable Court hath been informed in part and vvithall if so vvriting be libelloâ—s and the Defendent have erred in it the Holy Scripture is also libellous which vvere impiety to thinke and hath been the cause of it from vvhich he varied nothing at all in that discourse further the Defendent resolveth to live and die in that error concerning the parity of Ministers and Presbyters vvhich he is ready to prove and make good against all the host of Prelats Doctors Proctors Commissaries Officials and Surrogats this day living But the thing that the Defendent desireth the honorable Court to take notice of is the contumacy of the Prelats for they call their Hierarchy and the Orders of their Bishops Priests and Deacons Sacâ—ed which if it bee graunted and so bee indeed then the Prelats are from God and not from the King of whom they have no depence For speaking of the King wee say His sacred Majestie because God himselfe hath appointed Him over us for by mee saith GOD Kings raigne and all Authority is from God and Kings are called Gods so that Kings are sacred Persons But that Hierarchy should be sacred and that there should be a holy Principality of Pastors and Ministers the prime and forman of which should have the Keyes of Heaven Earth and Hell and that hee should dispose of Kingdomes and Empires and make the greatest Potentates and Rulers his Subjects and Vassals and should have his domineering servants under him in all Common-wealths and Princes Courts to pry into their royall proceedings to their revenues riches and treasuries to know their powers their allyes and confederates and be Counsellors of their most secret admission should have an autority and jurisdiction independent over their Subjects and Lawes and Canons of their owne making to rule by and by them to persecute and undoe them at pleasure in the number of which are Cardinals Patriarchs Prime-mates Metropolitans Archâ—Bishops Bishops Deanes and innumerable such like vermin a member of which monstrous body our Hyrarchy is the Defendent saith this is not knowne in Sacred Writ nor never came from God but rather from the Pope and the Devill Diabolus cacavitillos Yea the Word of God is absolutely against it And that our Arch-Bishops Prime-mates and Metropolitans are members of that body let not onely our Martyrs writings and speeches Henry Stubbridge his exhortatory Epistle but even Masons Booke be looked into concerning the Succession of Bishops and it will be â—ound That hee derives their pedigree from Rome and so doth Pâ—cklington in his Booke Sunday no Sabbath wherein hee saithâ— That our Prelats are lineally descended from Saint Peters Chaire at Rome they being therefore a branch of that Synagogue and standing by the same autority the Pope pretends to stand which is as they all chalâ—â—nge jure divino they are enemies to the King and â—â—vaders of his prerogative and so they are justly gâ—ilty of all those crimes they accuse the Pope of and as great enemies of God as hee is all which the Defendent hath sufficiently proved in his Apoâ—ogy For they challenge their Autoritie jure divino and say That Iesus Chrâ—â—t made them Bishops and the holy Ghost consecrated them and that they weâ—e before Kings and held the Crownes of Kings upon their heads and the Pope sayes no more They call also their Hierarchy Sacred the Pope doth no more and for the erecting of this sacred Hierarchie Emperors Kings must be thrust down and made vassals of and all Kingdomes that are under their jurisdiction made slaves to it and all those stinking slavelings that depend upon it as the whole Christian world by woefull experieÌ„ce daily findeth But this same tearme of Sacred Hierarchie and sacred orders of Prelats ought here a little to be discussed That which is sacred is from God But the Hierarchie is not from God Ergo it is not sacred For the minor it is evidentâ— That vvhich God hath peremptorily forbid to his Ministers and Servants and is an enemie to that is not of God and by his institution but hee hath forbid Lordâ—y dominion to all the Ministers of the Gospell saying The Princes of the Gentiles beare rule over them but it shall not be so among you you shall not Lord it over your Brethren Ergo thâ— Hierarchie is not of God but of the Devill that is the cause of all disorder and ignorance For God forbad his Apostles and in them all Ministers to be Lords over one an other and set his owne example before them of service and commanded them to immitate him and to bee humble and meeke and told them plainly That the office of Principalitie and Dominion belonged unto Kings and Princes and that their imployments consisted in their obedience to Kings in praying for them that they might live in all godly peace under them and that they should diligentâ—y feed the flock of Iesus Christ committed to their charge in season and out of season as they love him and will answere it at his last appearingâ— and this was all the businesse that Christs Ministers Servants vvere to be taken up in they were not to be intangled with the things and affaires of this life nor to bee incombred with worldly matters they have speciall commands and presidents to the contrary and their charge and dutie assigned unto them from which station they must not goe which is onely to feed the flocke with all care and diligence vvith the sincere milke of the Word to preach unto them day and night and to goe before them in godly and holy example and to neglect thâ—s and to be taken up vvith domination and
the said Iohn Bastvvickâ— by the advice confedeâ—acyâ— combination abetment helpe and assistance of the sayd Henry Burton and Mr. Prin c. hath unlavvfully contrived framed and vvriâ— vvithout licence printed divers epistles prefaces additions other passages annexed and inserted thereunto and all vvritten by him the sayd Iohn Bastvvick or by his advice and approbation in vvhich book he hath causlesly boldly enveighed against the Oath ex officio other the antient formes and proceedings of the sayd High Commission Court c. against the Hierarchy of the Church preferring a Presbyterian parity before the sacred and setled Orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons and in the sayd book hath falsly and scandalously defamed the vvitnesses produced against him falsly allso and maliciously taxed the High Commission Court it self and the Iudges therein in generall and some of them particularly personally vvith cruelty injustice vvith vvant of vvisdome temperance and that they are persvvaders of his Mast. though in vaine to bloudâ—hed and are upholders of idolatry superstition prophanesse and therein farther most malicioâ—sly falsly affirmeth That the Archbishop the Lord Treasurer and the Bishop of Ely three of the most vvorthy and learned Prelats of the Kingdome that they are disgracers and contemnets of the holy Scriptures and falsly traduceth them for Traytors and invaders of his Mast. prerogative And in the sayd booke are contayned divers other unlavvfull scandalous libellous passages vvhich beeing many and of various natures is annexed unto the information as a part thereof to vvhich he referreth himselfe To all vvhich large accusation the Defendent for ansvver saith That vvhereas these things of so foule nature consequence are layd upon him Mr. Burton and Mr. Prin That the informers begin their accusation with a calumny As for the defendents ovvne partscular he affirmeth and that truely That for reverend and learned Mr. Henry Burton and Mr. Prin he hath never knovvne them othervvise then to be loyall Subjects unto his Mast. and such as in all peaceable vvayes and honest endeavours have sought vvished earnestly laboured for the promotion of the true Christian faith and religion and such no other maner of men he the defendent hath ever knovvne them and such he verily believeth they are and therefore as they feare God honour the King he is and hath been and ever vvill be by the grace of God an a better vvith them and if that in so doing and practising it be counted either faction confederation or combination he vvill live and dye in it But notvvithstanding of the resolution and purpose of the defendent he further for satisfaction to the information sayth that hovvsoever the forenamed Master Burton and Mr. Prin and himself have been of long acqueyntance yet their familiarâ—â—y hath been ever very little they having not by the 4. or 5. yeares together neither seen nor heard one of an other and for these three yeares last past the defendent sayth that he hath not seen the face of Mr. Prin nor been ever vvith Mr. Burton above tvvice or thrice as he remembreth much lesse bene privy or acquaynted the one vvhat the others either proceedings or intentions vvere and therefore for ever doth disaâ—owâ— any help counsell advice in the making or publishing of any thing that ever he hath done but vvhatsoever he hath vvrit it vvas accomplished before that they knevv of it And for the other men specifyed in the information the defendent knovves them notâ— neither by face nor name and this he is ready to depose And so much may suffice in generall to have spoke of this matter But novv more especially vvhereas he the defendent is accused of long continuance to have envyed maligned his Mast. happy governmenâ— and the good discipline of the Churchâ— Hee the defendent protesteth in the presence of Godâ— and before the vvorld that it is a most false accusation and that there is never a Subject in his Mast. dominions a more honourer of the government of his Imperiall Mast. one that desireth more the good discipline of the Church and is able to produce the testimonies of all the places he haâ—h lived in in this Kingdome both from Magistrats Ministers for the honesty and integriâ—y of his life and conversation and that in all respects he hath so demeaned himself as that he hath not onely been free from viceâ— faction schisme but from the suspition of all vvhich testimonies he hath ready to shevv to this honorable Court the vvhich he exhibited to â—he High Commission Court at that time they studyed most to defame him all this both towne and contrey can testify as also of the infatigable diligence in his particular calling How that he neglected no opportunity to doe the indigentesâ— men good how that being unwearyed in his imployments he wenâ— through the heat of Summer the cold of Winter rose earlie went to bed late exposing himself at all times to any danger whatsoever of plague and pestilence and all to doe the meanest of the Kings Subjects good never taking penny of poore nor never of servant never suffering the most neglected creature of nature to perish for want of care or looking to but made them all an object of his pity and of his art giving them out of his poore competency both for their food Physick neither can any man say that ever he asked the richest a farthing for any paynes he tooke day or night for their preservation or that he ever murmured at the smallest content thy gave him if the Prelâ—â—s had let him follow his calling this defendent had continued in this diligent course of life till the day of his death Buâ— they picking a quarrell with him for writing in defence of the Kings prerogative Royall against the Popeâ— sayingâ— that while hee writ against the Pope he meant them put him upon sâ—ch imployments as he indeed thinks will be very little pleasing to the Prelats allâ—hough he is most cenfident that in them he hath and shall doe the King and Church good service and so he knoweth it will appeare when he is dead and gone But because this bookâ— is now layd unto the Defendents charge as tending to thâ— mayntenance and upholding of schisme and division iâ— his Mast. Church of England opposition against thâ— laudable Orders and Ceâ—emonyes of the sayd Churchâ— howsoever there be no such thing in the sayd Flagâ—llâ— yeâ— this Defendent desireth to give a reason unto this honorable Court for the writing publishing not onely oâ— that booke but of all other his writings since And first concerning the booke for which he was censured He saith that he was provoked thereunto by a Popish Iesuiticall Doctor of Physick who continually dared him into the field of Dispute and set downe his owne theames about which he wâ—â—ld contend which were concerning the Popes Supremacy and the sacrifice of the Masse And it
had rule and government in their hands And that they had povver also of ordination and imposition of hands it is likevvise apparent out of the first Epistle of Paul to Timothy the first Chapter For the Apostle speaking to Timothy sayth Doe not neglect the gift that is in thee vvhich is given thee for prophesy by the imposition of the hands of the Presbyterie Here allso the Presbyters had the right of imposition of hands And that they had the povver of Excommunication and Absolution it is likevvise manifest from the 5. of the 1. of the Corinthians and the 2. Chapter of the 2. Epistle vvhere the Apostle gives them the povver of casting the incestrous person out and upon his repentance receiving of him in againe By all vvhich Autorities of sacred vvrit it is sufficiently cleare and evident That the Presbyters had the Autoritie and povver of government and rule in the Church vvith the facultie also and abilitie of ordination excommunication and all this by Divine institution and expresse vvords of holy Scripture hovvsoever this right and their due vvas through the fraud and deceit of the Bishop of Rome and Romish Bishops aftervvards taken avvay from the Presbyters Wherefore the Defendent concludedâ— That if there were any difference betweene Presbyters and the Bishop of Rome which hee denyed that then the Presbyters in dignitie and honour exceeded and that greatly the Bishop of Rome Romish Bishops for all these Privileges of governement ordâ—nation and excommunication are in formall vvords given unto the Presbyters and no vvhere granted unto the Bishops And for farther illustration and proofe of this the Defendent with many other Arguments proved That Presbyters were better men then the Bishop of Rome if there were any difference The summe of which hee desireâ—h this Honorable Court to take notice of â—hat they may more ponderously waâ—gh the businesse in hand and see the vanitie of the information And for the Arguments in briefe they are these They who are most obedient to the Preceptsâ— Commands and Prohibitions of Christ and doe most diligently obey the Apostles admonitions they are and so ought to bee esteemed more worthy and excellent then such as regard neither of both But the Presbyters are more obedient to the Commands of Christ and doe more diligently obey the Apostles admonitions then the Romish Bishops Therefore they are more worthy excellent For the major no man can deny that knovves loyall and obedient Subiects to their Prince and his Officiers just commands are to bee preferred before Rebels and them that regard neither of both Novv Christ and his Apostles have commanded That all Ministers should feed the Flock of Christ deligently in preaching of the vvord administration of the Sacraments and that they should not be Lords over his inheritance Both which precepts and prohibitions the Presbyters do more exactly observe then Romish Bishops for they neither preach themselves nor will let others and are Lords over Christs inheritance which the Lord Iesus and his Apostles have peâ—emptorily forbid Ergo the Presbiters are more worthie then Romish Bishops Againe That name which is and hath ever bene a name and title of Dignitie and Honour is to bee preferred before that which is a name of paine labour and sollicitude But the name of Presbyter or Senior is hath beene ever a name of Honour and dignitie and a title of mightie Emperors and Princes and the name of Bishop is a name and title of labour and travell Ergo the title and name of Presbyter is to be preferred before that of the Romish Bishops For the major none that are truly noble and learned can deny And for the minor to omit many other places it vvil evidently appeare to any that vvill looke upon the â—irst Epistle to Tim. and the 5. There the Apostle sayth The Presbyters that rule well are vvorthy of double honour So that it is apparent enough That honour and dignity is contayned in that name vvhich deserveth both reward reverenceâ— respect And in the same Epistle the Apostle sayth Rebuke not a Presbyter but honour him as a Fatherâ— and speaking of Bishops he sayth He that desireth the Office of a Bishop desireth a good worke Hee sayth indeed a good vvorke but a work notwithstandig full of care watchfullnes toyle and labour From all which it is ratifyed That the name and title of Presbyter is a name full of dignity honour and splendour and the title of Bishop a compellation or name full of labour anhelation solicitude and therefore to be preferred before the title of Bishop being farre more excellent Againe That name which whensoever it is ioyned with the name of Bishop hath alwayes the first place and precedencie that name is most excellâ—nt But the name of Presbyter when it is ioyned with the title of Bishop hath ever the precedencie Ergo it is to be preferred before it For the major the adversaries cannot deny it For they conclude and establish the precedency and preminency of Peter before the oâ—her Apostles because he is often first named And for the minor the vvord of God declares it illustriously as may be seene in the 20. of the Acts and the first of Titus and the fifâ—h chapter of the first of Peter In all vvhich places the names of Presbyâ—er and Bishop being ioyned together Presbyter is ever first named To all this Peter calls himselfe a Presbiter The same doth Saint Iohn as if all Ecclesiasticall dignity vvere placed in that name But there are many arguments yet remayning to prove the dignitie of Presbyters to bee above that of Bishops if there be any difference betvveen them For They to whom in the most difficult controversies of the Church and greatest dissentions the Primitive Christians had ever recourse and who the spirit of God did in a special maner assist and who made Decrees by which the Church of God to this day is to be regulated and governed and who the Apostles themselves made their sociats and companions in both Generall and Provinciall Counsels and the which had the next place unto the Apostles in their Assemblies they are more worthy and to be had in greater honour and veneration then the other Ministers of the Church which are neither by name nor place knowne in those holy meetings But the Presbyters are such and Therefore the Presbyters are more worthy and excellent then Bishops As for the major the adversaries cannot doubt of that vvhich bestovv dignity and honour upon their Bishops according to the place and degree they had in the first Councels And for the minor none can doubt of it vvho hath read the 15 of the Actsâ— and the twentyeth chapter of the same book But they that desire to be satisfied concerning this argument at large the Defendent desireth vvould read any of his booksâ— Lastly That the dignity of the Presbyters may yet appeare above â—he title of Bishops it is thus evident Those to whom the Keyes
beene forced to recite because it makes very much for the justification of what hee writ in his Apology and that hee had good ground greatly to blame the Prelates aswell for these as for many other of their proceedings as afterwards this honorable Court shall well perceive And now that the Defendent may come to the things that he is charged with in the Information as to have accused the Bishops of in his Apology which by the informers is termed a Libell though it contayneth nothing but a true Narration of the passages of the High-Commission Court which he never spake nor writ against but onely against the abuses of the Iudges in it who have turned that Court which was of purpose appoynted by the State for the suppressing of Heresyâ— Popery and viceâ— to the beating downe of the Religion established by Autority and the promotion and advancement of superstition and the molestation and undoing of the Kings faithfullest Subjects and the deare servants of God as daylie experience teacheth us and the whole Kingdome can witnes In the writing of which booke he the Defendent thinketh himself so far from being a delinquent as he conceiveth he hath done good service to King Church and State having in it vindicated and mayntayned regall Autoritie against the tyranny of the Pope discovered also the Prelats lawlesse usurpations with their ungratitude to the King and cruelties againâ—â— their brethten mayntayned the hoâ—our likewise of the Lawes of the Land and the dignity of sacred Writ both which they slight and make nothing of and by innâ—merable testimonyes of learned men proved the assertion for which he is thus traduced and envyed to be neither novell nor hereticall but according to both the Divine Scriptures and all Antient trueth the vetustest Bishops and by the whole clergy of England in King Henry the eights dayâ—s as all the learned and ingenuous do well perceive and know both at home and abroad So that if â—he Informers with the Prelats will make this Booke a libell then let them make holy Scripture the Lawes of the Kingdome and all the antient recordâ— of learned Bishops libells also for the Defendent in â—hat haâ—h sayd nothing concerning the Preâ—bytery which is not agreeable to them all And for â—he matters in specâ—all he is charged wiâ—h in the information Viz. That he hath causlesly enveighed against the oath ex officio and other antient formes of proceedings in that Court and against the sacred Hierarchy orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons preferring a Presbyteâ—ian parity before it And â—â—at he hath falsly and scandalously defamed the witnesses produced against him falsly maliciously taxed the High Commission Court it self and the Iudges therein in generall and some of them particularly and peâ—sonally with cruelâ—y and injustice with want of wisdome and temperance and that they are perswaders of his Majest to bloudshed and are upholders of idolatry superstition Popery and Prophanesse and further most maliciously and falsly affirmeth that Canterbury London and Ely are disgracers and contemners of holy Scriptures and falsly traduceth them and the rest of the Bishops for traytors and invaders of his Majest Prerogative and that in the sayd booke there are contayned diverse other unlawfull and scandalous passages against the established government and seâ—led discipline of the Church of England the Bishops and Clergy and their proceedings which being many and of various naâ—ure is delivered into his Majestâ— Court of Starchamber To all which things that he is here charged with the Defendent will answer with what breviâ—yâ— and the best Method he can doubteth nothing but whatsoever he hath writ in his Apology against the Prelats their proceeding shall be made evidently appeare to this Court to be most true And to begin with the things layd to his charge in the last place that hee accuseth the Bishops to be disgracers and contemners of holy Scripture to be invaders of his Majest prerogative upholders of idolatry Poperie superstition and prophanesse All which is most true for so they are as he hath sufficientlie proved against them in that booke and doth here also add that they have greatly dishonoured the King their Master and King Iames his Father of perpetuall memoryâ— all which he will briefly declare and demonstrat to this noble Court And that they are contemners disgracers of holy Scripture what can be more manifest when they say that the Scriptures are the refuge of all Schismaticks and Hereticks as much as if they should say â—he good Lawes and Statuts of a Kingdome and the Kings Edicts and Proclamations are the cause of all disorder and wickednes withall what is it to be contemners and disgracers of the holy Scriptures if this be not to say That they can neither be knowen to bee the Word of God nor distinguished from the Apocrypha and Prophane Authors nor be understood and the meaning of them attayned unto for their obscurity but by the Fathers If this be not to contemne sacred writ then all Orâ—hodox writers both in ours all reformed Churches and King Iames himself have accused the Church of Rome most falsly whom they prove blasphemous against God and disgracers of the Holy Scriptures for the same assertions as all their learned wriâ—ings witnes wiâ—h innumerable Arguments in them for proofe of the same The Defendent desireth to know what it is to prophane and contemne holy Scripture of thâ—s be not to slight and vilyâ—â— the autority of it and to proferre humane authority before it which the Bishops did blasphemously saying that they couâ—d not be knowne to be the Word of God without the help of the Fathers when every page and leafe of those sacred monuments breath a divine Spirit and they are called the lively oracles Act. 7. vers 38. as if the Scripture had lost his ancient luster â—ife and Divinity by its antiquity were inferior to alâ— other things boâ—h Naturall and Artificiall When notwiâ—h standing there is such a Maiesty and Splendor in the Scripture as it dazleth the eyes of all those that looke into it with hiâ— transcendent and heavenly clarity and brightnes the eyes of whose minds the God of this world hath not blinded yea vnder the very law whâ—n there was a vayle before the eyes of men so that they could not so clearly see into them as now Christians may yet then such dignity and excellency was discerned in them that at the first reading of them men cryed out the voice of God and not of man tore their garments for very anguish and feare of the threats in them and never were so ungratious and impious to say How shall wee know these books to be the Word of God For the holy Scriptures had ever such an innate and Domesticall light beauty goodnes in them and caryed such testimony and witnes within themsâ—lves ever able to declare themselves Divine and holyâ— to be the very word of the everliving God that they needed