and infirme Bishops who cannot labour in the word and doctrine Answ. 1. The Apostle speaketh of Presbyters not of Prelates 2. To rule well importeth as great labour as preaching and somewhat more as I shewed before so that they who cannot labour in preaching cannot labour in ruling neither 3. They who have eviscerate and spent themselves in the work of the Ministry who have been as long as they could stand upon their feet valiant Champions for the truth against the enemies thereof who have served their time according to the will of God without the staine of Heresie Schisme Apostasie or unfaithfulnesse when they become old and infirme they ought not to be the lesse honoured as the impious verdict of this Prelate would have it but so much the more honour ought to be given to their hoare head found in the way of righteousnesse Another Glosse is given by the same King namely that the Apostle would have Ministers not onely to live well but to feed also by the word and doctrine Answ. 1. The rising of the Apostles words doth not concern duties but persons as wee have said before 2. To live well is not to rule well unlesse wee will make all who live godly to rule well 3. Thirdly this glosse doth stil leave a double honor to Ministers that live well though they do not preach We see now our opposites have been trying all windes to fetch upon us but here we leave them betwixt winde and wave â—or this our last argument carrieth us away with full saile CHAP. VIII The testimony of Ambrose for ruling Elders vindicated IF wee looke backe beyond the times of declining unto the first and purest times of the Church wee shall finde ruling Elders to be no new fangled device at Geneva but that the primitive government and policy of the Church hath beene in them restored There is one place of Ambrose which cleereth it sufficiently He writing on 1 Tim. 5.1 Rebuke not an Elder saith Vnde Synagoga c. Wherefore both the Iewish Synagogue and after the Church had Senior or Elders without whose counsell nothing was done in the Church which by what negligence it grew out of use I know not except perhaps by the sloth or rather by the pride of the teachers whiâ—es they alone will seeme to be something This sentence is also cited in Glossa ordinar And it sheweth plainely that as the Jewish so the Christian Church had some Elders who though they were not Teachers of the Word yet had a part of the government of the Church upon their shoulders But that this came into desuetude partly through the sloth of the teachers and Ministers of the Word whiles they were not carefull to preserve the ordinances of God and the right way of governing the Church and partly through their pride whilst they would doe all by themselves and have no consorts Vtinam modo nostra redirent In mores tempora priscos But let us heare a triple divination which the non-friends of ruling Elders give forth upon this testimony First Bishop Hall telleth us that it is not Ambrose but a counterfeit who wrote that Commentary upon the Epistles and for this he alledgeth our owne Parker against us The truth is Bellaâ—mine and Scultingius taught him this answer The place of Parker he citeth noâ— in the Margine but I believe the place he meaneth of is de polit Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 13. where he holdeth indeed that the author of these Commentaries was not Ambrose Bishop of Millaine but sheweth withall that he nothing doubteth of the Catholike authority of the Commentaries themselves Hoc vero c. This saith he may befall the best Author whosoever he be that some may ascribe his workes to another But that hee lived before the Councell of Nice this addeth weight to his testimony of the Seniors These Commentaries are commonly cited by our Divines as Ambrose's I finde them in Erasmus his edition both at Collen 1532. and at Paris 1551. acknowledged to bee the genuine workes of Ambrose only the Prefaces before the Epistles are called in question They are also acknowledged in the edition of Costerius at Basile 1555. Sixtuâ— Senensis ascribeth them to Ambrose in like manner The edition of Collen 1616. hath an observation prefixed which repudiateth many of his workes and these Commentaries among the rest Yet the last edition at Paris 1632. hath expunged that observation which they had not done if they had approved the same Howsoever that same observation maketh those Commentaries to bee as old as 372. or 373. Perkins in his preparative before his demonstration of the probleme calleth in question the Commentary upon the Hebrewes but no more Rivet sheweth that these who reject them doe neither give good reasons for their opinion neither yet doe agree among themselves Bellarmine ascribing them to Hilarius Diaconus Maldonat to Remigius Lugdunensis the Censors of Lovaine to the Author of the questions of the old and new Testament I beleeve that Cooke in his Censura Scriptorum veterum hath touched the true cause why these Commentaries are so much called in question which is the perfidiousnesse of Papists who when they finde any thing therein which they imagine to bee for their advantage then they cry Saint Ambrose saith thus but when they finde any thing therein which maketh against them then they say as Hall doth It is not Ambrose but a counterseit I must confesse that Hall is wiser in disclaiming the same then his fellowes in acknowledging them yet because he found that the Testimony may bee of force though not Ambrose's and beside had no proofe for this alledgeance he durst not trust to it but thought upon another answer To proceed then to their next conjecture Bilson Sutcliffe and Doctor Field tell us that Ambrose meant of Bishops who excluded other Clergy men from their consultations and that by the name of Teachers hee might fitly understand the Bishops seeing none but they have power to preach in their owne right others but onely by permission from them This is a most desperate shift for a bad cause For first there is no warrant neither from Scripture nor Antiquity to distinguish Bishops from other Ministers of the Word by the name of Teachers Secondly as for that reason alledged that none but Bishops have power to preach in their owne right it is contrary to that which Field himselfe saith in the very next Chapter where he holdeth that Presbyters are equall with Bishops in the power of order and that they may preach and minister the Sacraments by vertue of their order as well as Bishops Thirdly neither did the advising of Bishops with Presbyters cease in Ambrose his time For as Field himself noteth out of the fourth Councell of Carthage which was holden shortly after Ambrose his writing hereof all sentences of Bishops were declared to bee void which were not confirmed by the presence of their Clergy Let us also
Senatum nostrum coetum Presbyterorum cum ergo inter caetera etiam senes â—udea perdiderit quomodo poterit habere concilium quod proprie Seniorum est And what sense shall we give to these words unlesse we say it is imported that both the Jewish and the Christian Church had such an Eldership as we plead for Else why did both hee and Basil make such a parallell betwixt the Jewish and the Christian Church in the point of Elders Surely if we understand by the Elders of the Christian Church whereof they speake the Ministers of the Word alone wee must also understand by the Elders of the Jewish Church whereof they speake the Priests which no man will imagine Eusebius in his History citeth Dionysiuâ— Alexandrinus relating his disputes with the Chiliasts after this manner When I was at Arsenoiâ—a where thou knowest this doctrine first sprung c. I called together the Elders and Teachers inhabiting those villages there being present also as many of the brethren as were willing to come and I exâ—orted them publikely to the search of this doctrine c. By the Teachers here are meant the Pastors or Ministers of the Word who are most frequently called by the Fathers Teachers or Doctors neither can it bee supposed that there were any Teachers besides the Pastors in these rurall villages which notwithstanding we see had beside their Pastors or Teachers Elders also Augustine writeth his 137. Epistle to those of his owne Church at Hippon whom he designeth thus Dilectissimis â—ratribus clero senioribus universae plebi Ecclesiae Hipponenâ—is cui servio in dilectione Christs To my welbeloved brethren the Clergy the Elders and the whole people of the Church at Hippon whom I serve in the love of Christ. Hee putteth Elders or Seniors in the middle betwixt the Clergy and the people as distinct from both and yet somewhat participant of both Isidorus Hispalensis speaking of the prudence and discretion which Pastors should observe in teaching of the Word giveth them this advise among others Prius docâ—ndi sunt Seniores plebis ut per â—os infra posâ—tifacilius doceantur The Elders of the people are to bee first taught that by them such as are placed under them may be taught the more easily Origen speaking of the tryall of such as were to bee admitted members of the Church saith Nonnulli praepositi sunt c. There are some Rulers appointed who may enquire concerning the conversation and manners of these thâ—t are admitted that they may debarre from the Congregation such as commit filthinesse In the acts of the 5. Councell of Toledo according to the late editions we read that Cinthila whom others call Chintillanus came into that Councell cum optimatibus Senioribus palatii sui But Lorinus hath found in some ancient copy Cum optimatibus Senioribus populi sui with the Nobles and the Elders of his people I would know who were these Elders of the people distinguished from the Nobles These things may suffice from antiquity to give some evidence that the office of ruling Elders is not Calvins new fangled devise at Geneva as our adversaries are pleased to call it but for further confirmation of this point Voetius disp 2. de Senio and before him Iustellus in annot notis in cod Can. Eccles. Afric Can. 100. hath observed sundry other pregnant testimonies from antiquity for ruling Elders especially out of these notable records Gesta puâ—gationis Caeciliani Faelicis to be seen in the Anna's of Baronius An. 103. and in Albaspinaeus his edition of Optatus These testimonies I have here set downe in the Margine From which passages it is apparant that in the dayes of Ambrose these Seniors were neither in all places nor altogether growne out of use but that both in the Easterne and Westerne Churches manifest footsteps of the same remained neither is his testimony before alledged repugnant hereunto for we may understand his meaning to be either that in some places or that in some sort they were growne out of use because peradventure the Teachers beganne to doe somethings without their counsell and advice which in former times was not so Bilson answereth two waies to the testimony from the 137. Epist. of August and belike hee would have answered in the same manner to these other testimonies he saith we may understand by these Seniors either the better part of the Clergy or the Senators Rulers of the City That they were neither Bishops nor preaching Presbyters nor Deacons it is manifest for they are distinguished from all these In act purgat Cacil Fal. and they are called by Isiâ—ore and Pâ—rpurius Seniores plebis Besides it were strange if August Bishop of Hippo writing to his Clergy should distinguish either the Deacons from the Presbyters by the name of the Clergy which was common to both or some preaching Presbyters from other preaching Presbyters by the name of Seniors On the other part that they were not Magistrates of Cities it is no lesse plaine for they are called Seniores Ecclesiae and Ecclesiastici viri they instructed the people and had place in judging of causes Ecclesiasticall But elsewhere Bilson taketh upon him to prove that those of the Clergie who were by their proper name called Presbyters were also called Seniores as those who came neerest to the Bishop in degree wisedome and age And this he proveth by a testimony of Ambrose Viduarum ac virginum domos nisi â—isitandi gratia Iuniores ad re non est opus hoc cum Senioribus hoc est cum Episcopo vel sigravior est causa cum Presbyteris Answ. 1. Here the Seniors are the Bishop which is neither good sense nor any thing to his purpose 2. Hee hath left out a word without which the sentence cannot be understood and that is vel Ambrose saith Hoc est vel â—um Episcopo c. and so the words may suffer a threefold sense for either Seniores is here a name of age or of office If it bee a name of age as may bee presumed by the opposition thereof to Iuniores then the meaning of Ambrose is that young men should not goe into the houses of virgins or widowes except it bee with some men of age and these to bee the Bishop or the Presbyters If â—t be a name of office theâ— may wee either understand that by the Presbyters he meaneth ruling Elders and by the Bishop the Pastor of any particular Church for if Whitaker be not deceived Pastâ—rs have the name of Bishops not onely in Sâ—â—â—pruâ—e but in the ancient Church also Or that hee comprehendeth under the order of Elders not onely the Preaching Presbyters but the Bishop also who was chiefe among them By the first sense Bilson doth gaine nothing by the other two hee hath worse then nothing for any of them destroyeth his chiefe grounds CHAP. X. The consent of Protestant Writers and
matters the matters of law and judgement which are called the Lords matters because the Lord was the author of their civill lawes what a crazie device is this did not matters of peace and warre come under the civill lawes which God had delivered to the Jewes as well as any matter of judgement betwixt man and man and what can bee more plaine then that the Lords matters or things pertaining to God when they are differenced from other matters are ever understood to bee matters spirituall and Ecclesiasticall Quapropter wherefore saith Iunius the Readers are to be warned whosoever they bee that consult the histories of ancient times that where they read the name Synedâ—tum they wisely observe whether the civill Assembly or the Ecclesiastical be meant of because that name was confused and indistinct after the times of Antiochus But notwithstanding that in these latter times all good order had much degenerate and growne to confusion yet it seemeth to me that even in the dayes of our Saviour Christ the Civill and Ecclesiasticall courts remained distinct let me say my opinion with all mens leave and under correction of the more learned that night that our Lord was betrayed he was led to the Hall of Cajaphas where there was holden an Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim which asked Jesus of his Disciples and of his doctrine received witnesse against him and pronounced him guilty of blasphemy Mat. 27.57 Mark 14.53.55 Ioh. 18.19 Nothing I finde in this Councell why we should think it civill for as touching the smiting and buffeting of Christ Mat. 26.67 Luk 22.63 some think it was by the servants of the high Priests and Elders after that they themselves had gone home left the Councell howsoever it was done tumultuously not judicially and tumults may fall forth in any Judicatory whether civill or Ecclesiastical As for the sentence which they gave Mat. 26.66 He is guilty of death it proveth not that this was a civill Court for just so if an incestuous person should bee convict before an Assembly of our Church the Moderator might ask the Assembly what thinke ye and they might well answer He is guilty of death away with him to the Magistrate Shortly then the matter debated in this nocturnall Councell was meerly Ecclesiasticall and the accusation of sedition and making himselfe a King were not spoken of till he was brought before Pâ—â—at But there was another Sanedrim convocat in the morning Mat 27 1. Mark 15.1 Luk 22 66. and this seemes to have been not Ecclesiasticall but Civill 1. because they meddle not with the triall of his doctrine nor any examination of witnesses thereanent only they desire to heare out of his own mouth that which hee had confessed in the other Councell viz. that he was the Christ the Son of God whereupon they take counsell how they might deliver him to Pilate which was the end of their meeting 2. Mâ—â—k saith They bound him and carried him awâ—y to Pilate 3. The Ecclesiasticall Councell had already done that which they thought pertained to them for what should they have convened again Some say that aâ—l the high Priests Scribes and Elders were not present at that nocturnall councell and that therefore they convened more fully in the morning But that the nocturnall Councell was fully convened it is manifest from Mat. 26.59 Mark 14.53.55 4. This last Councell led Jesus away to Pilâ—te and went themselves with him to accuse him before Pilate of sedition and of making himselfe a King Luk. 23.1.2 Mat. 27.12 5. They complain that the power of capitall punishment was taken from them by the Romans importing that otherwise they might have put him to death by their law Ioh. 18.31 Now D. Fields last reason is For that all Fathers or Councels mentioning Elders place them betwixt Bishops and Deacons and make them to be Clergy men and that in the Acts where the Apostles are said to have constitute Elders in every Church Pastors are meant is strongly confirmed from Act. 20.17.28 where the Elders of the Church of Ephesus are commanded to feed the flocke of Christ over which they were appointed over-seers whence it followeth inevitably that they were Pastors We answer 1. Ambrose speaketh of Elders which were not Pastors 2. Beza Gualther expound the place Act. 14.23 where the Apostles are said to have ordained Elders through every Church of ruling as well as preaching Elders 3. As for that which he alledgeth from Act. 20. Beza Iunius and the Professors of Leyden hold that the names of Bishops and Pastors are common both to ruling and preaching Elders and that the Scripture giveth these names to both howsoever in Ecclesiastical use for distinctioÌ„s cause they are appropriate to teaching Elders Surely the ruling Elder both overseeth the flocke and feedeth the same both by discipline and by private admonition and for these respects may bee truly called both Bishop and Pastor 4. How small reason hee hath to boast of the Fathers we have already made it to appeare 5. It is a begging of the question to reason from the appropriation of the name of Elders to the Pastors CHAP. XII The extravagancies of Whitgift and Saravia in the matter of ruling Elders THese two Disputers doe not as D. Field altogether oppose the government of ruling Elders but with certain restrictions about which notwithstanding they differ betwixt themselves â—hitgift alloweth of ruling Elders under a Tyrant but not under a Christian Magistrate but â—ayeth they cannot be under an Infidell Magistrate Me thinkes J see here Sampsons Foxes with their tailes knit together and a firebrand betwixt them yet their heads looking sundry waâ—es To begin with Whitgift he saith in one place I know that in the primitive church they had in every church seniors to whom the Government of the Congregation was committed but that was before there was any Christian Prince or Magistrate c. In another place My reason why it the Church may not bee governed under a Christian Magistrate is it may under a Tyrant is this God hath given the chiefe authority in the government of the Church to the Christian Magistrate which could not bee so if your Seigniory might aswell retaine their authority under a Christian Prince and in the time of peace is under a Tyrant and in the time of persecution for tell me I pray you what authority Ecclesiasticall remaineth to the civill Magistrate where this Seigniory is established Hee who pleaseth may find this opâ—â—ion largely consuted by Beza de Presbyterio contra Erasmum and by I. B. A. C. polit civil Eccles. Jn the meane while I answer First T. C. had made a sufficient Reply hereunto which Whitgift here in his defence should have confuted but hath not viz. That if the Seniors under a Tyrant had medled with any Office of a Magistrate then there had beene some cause why a godly Magistrate being in the Church the Office of a Senior or at least so much as