yet the Apostles who were guided by an Infallible Spirit setled Episcopacy in them all There was not in a Monarchy Episcopacy and in a Republick Presbytery but one and the same in both And this is matter of Fact and hath greater Authority to attest it than any humane story of that Antiquity which all mankind admits for Truth And for to affirm that though this be true this Government is alterable if the Magistrate judg it not so conducing to Piety as another he sets up What is it but to say that God did not foresee what contingencies would fall out in succeeding Ages and that the Apostles did not know what would advance true Religion and Piety in succeeding Ages so well as Magistrates that follow who are easily blinded and deceived when it conduceth to their Temporal Interest But if we must fansy nothing to have a lasting Reason but what we judg to have so I doubt this Atheistical Age will quickly lay aside all Institutions of Christ by judging them as some openly do of all Religion not to be of a lasting necessity Besides he that shall affirm that nothing can be a Medium to bind the Consciences of men as of Divine right unalterably but what is founded on Divine Testimony in some sense speaks true but if this be included in the assertion that this must be obvious to every capacity that is obliged to obey this divine Right 't is false For upon that account the Scripture it self should not bind those who have not understanding enough to know how they are admitted as such For to say the Scripture is the word of God because my Conscience which in plain English is nothing but my Opinion tells me so is no better an Argument than every Turc hath for his Alcoran But if there is a necessity to prove the Scripture to be Divine viz. the Reception of these books by the Catholick Church then he who hath not sense nor Learning enough to find out the truth of this must either admit the Scripture of divine Authority when the reason why it is so is not obvious to his understanding or else all illiterate people are not obliged to believe the truth of its Doctrine and obey it Now let us apply this to Church-Government If the same Authority which tells us these books are Canonical Scripture tells us withall that the very Apostles the Penmen of the New Testament did settle such a Government and if we find the following Age practiced it allow it to be dubious in Scripture which certainly it is not yet is not there as sufficient assurance that that Government was settled by the Apostles and so in some sense of Divine Right and so unalterable as we have to admit for Scripture the Revelation or any other book that ever was questioned Now for to affirm that Antiquity is not a sufficient ground for our assent unless we have a full assurance that the succeeding Ages did not vary from what the Apostles delivered or that they could not mistake in the delivery What is it but to say we must have greater Authority for matter of Fact than what a fact can have and doth not this Opinion destroy the Authority of Scripture totally For if the Churches delivery of such books as the writings of the Apostles be not sufficient for a rational man to ground his assent that these books were their writings and so Divine unless we have assurance that she could not mistake in the delivery of those books we must either believe the Church incapable of Errour in the delivery of Scripture or else we have no assurance to ground our Assent Now to believe a Church incapable of Errour savours little of Reason and to believe her only incapable in the delivery of Scripture savours much of Partiality But if we must understand the Church for by Church here I mean the Governours of it to be a wise sober body of pious and rational men and so by consequence that they would receive no books as the writings of inspired men but such of whose Authentickness they had rational Grounds as perhaps the very authentique Letters under the Apostles own hands which Tertullian mentions or some other good Authority And if this be sufficient reason to gain our assent Why is not the same Reason as sufficient for the Apostolical Government as for the Apostolical writings I confess 't is beyond my reach But if the Apostolical practice be sufficiently attested then to affirm 't is not enough to bind continually unless it be known to be God's mind it should do so is either to say the Apostles knew not the mind of God or else would not reveal it For certainly we have much more reason to say their practice binds unalterably than any one can have to say it doth not For we have much more reason to demand of these men some mind of God why we should change Apostolical Practice than they have of us why we constantly practice what the inspired Apostles did Neither do I understand how an Argument from Apostolical practice must suppose a different State of things than what they were when the Apostles established Governours over Churches For why should not we imagine the Apostles did constitute what they practiced And certainly he must be as infallible as the Pope pretends too that is sure any Exposition of Scripture that contradicts or concurs not with Apostolical practice is true if there can be any rational Exposition of those Scriptures which concurs with that practice And he who shall not believe there are such Expositions and though not infallible yet sober and I dare say much surer than any to the contrary must condemn all the Antient Fathers of the Church as ignorant and irrational men and believe some new fancies of men of Yesterday and the dotings of some idle Haereticks of greater Authority than those great lights of the Catholick Church And now to argue from some few practices in the Apostles times which were laid aside such as the Holy kiss c. that therefore any Constitution may is just such an Argument that if a circumstance a Ceremony may be changed the whole Substance may too unless a man will affirm there is no more need of a standing succession of Church-Governours than there is of the most minute practice in those daies But here I expect it should be said What necessity is there of a Succession of Ministers A ministry is necessary but to think that every Minister must as some in derision say draw his Pedegree from the Apostles that is a narrow principle and fit only for Bigots to believe and such as are easily deceived with the Great names of Antiquity and Catholique Tradition I confess I was sorry when I considered this Opinion to find that the French Ministers when they maintained their vocation to be lawful unto which Cardinal Perron made his Reply lay this down for their first Argument That if there was no other
declared in a Letter he wrote to St. John's Colledge where he had been Fellow in behalf of a Kinsman of his Mr. Low for whom he desired a Fellowship that he was an adversary to his Kinsman if he refused it His words are these But if this young man be averse to that posture of Bowing himself towards the Lords Table he shall have me much his Elder altogether his Enemy And although our Church in her Canons doth but commend this and leaves the practice of it perfectly indifferent yet nothing of this nature claims a greater Antiquity For Clemens Alexandrinus tells us That by the Christians Prayers were made towards the East And Tertullian sayes That the Heathens suspected the Christians worshipped the Sun and that their suspicion arose because Christians prayed towards the East And St. Augustin who lived at the end of the 4 th Century is very express in this custom and withall gives this reason of it When saith he we stand to Prayer we are turned to the East whence the Sun ariseth not as if that was God's proper place and that he hath deserted the other parts of the World who is every-where present not by extension of places but Majesty of power but that our mind might be admonished to convert it self to the more excellent nature that is to the Lord. And in that discourse which goes under the name of Justin Martyr though not so antient as St. Justin yet as old as Theodoret if we believe Rivet we are told That this custom speaking before of Praying towards the East the Church received from the holy Apostles For the Church received the place where to Pray from whom they received the command to Pray And a few lines before he tells us That â—o Pray to the East doth not contradict either the Prophets or Apostles As if he should argue We have no command in the Scripture to the contrary this hath been the custom and practice of the Church of which we have no beginning therefore 't is Apostolical But whether this custom be from the Apostles or no this we are sure on Bodily adoration is that we owe to God and if that be his due and our duty certainly the custom of the Church is of more than sufficient authority to determine to what place that Act of Worship is most decent to be directed unto I must not omit another Information I haâ—â— of this good Bishop before I come to speak of this Work I now publish and that is He was in his younger dayes nay when he came to be a Bishop earnest in those Controversies which commonly go under Calvin's name insomuch that when he was Bishop of Lichfield he set upon to Answer Arminius and morâ— particularly that Tract of his Intituled Examen Praedestinationis Perkinsianae and after a moneths consideration anâ— making several Observations on thaâ— Discourse he laid it aside saying thesâ— words If thou wilt not be Answered lie thee there And after that he greâ— very moderate if he did not incline tâ— the contrary opinion though he did not love to discourse of that Subject or to hear Ministers in their Pulpits to meddle with that which is most proper for the Scholes Now though this Controversie about the time of the Synod of Dort was by many good men looked on under a severe character yet now we find the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas incline much to it As in the French Church Amiraldus and Mr. Daillee who hath a particular tract de Gratia Universali do sufficiently assure us and for the Dutch Churches the Remonstrant party is so much increased in power that they possess most of the great places both in Church and State But some men are strangely mistaken when they would father the Calvinian Doctrin on the Church of England in her Articles who hath most wisely left it undetermined knowing that both learned and good men may differ in these Sublime Points and that the Churches peace ought not to he disturbed with such unnecessary determinations 'T is true I have read that in the Parliament of 1 Caroli Mr. Pym moved in the House of Commons That Arminianisme might be condemned by a Vote of that House as if the Infallibility pretended to attend St. Peter's Chair at Rome was removed to the Speaker's at Westminster But yet I find not that grave Assembly did any thing in it As for those Articles composed at Lambeth by Archbishop Whitgift and those Assistants he called to him they were so far from being received as a Doctrin of our Church that if we believe a very diligent Historian Queen Elizabeth totally disliked them and the manner of making of them and had like to have questioned the Archbishop about them And when by Dr. John Reynolds at the Conference at Hampton Court they were desired to be inserted into the Articles of the Church of England the motion was rejected by King James who told them That the quietest determinations of such Questions were fit for the University and not to stuff our Articles with all Theological conclusions But this by the way I have before told you how great service this worthy Prelate did in his Controversies against the Papists This was not all the work that lay on his shoulders for he no sooner came to the Office of a Bishop but he met with another sort of Adversary who began then to question the Authority of the Church in her ordaining decent Ceremonies in her service And when he found that a private Conference with these sort of men did little prevail he then published his Defence of the Three Innocent Ceremonies a discourse so solid that it must satisfie any person that is governed by reason and not by phansie and affection But as these men began then to undermine the Out-works as I may so call them of Episcopal Jurisdiction so this great man lived to see the whole Hierarchy by them destroyed voted down Root and Branch and that as Popish and Antichristian to the amazement of all Mankind the Wonder of the Reformed Church and the publique Triumph of the Roman Conclave And were it not that those years so late past were perfectly a time of Paradoxes what wise man could imagine that they and their Order should be counted Popish who were the greatest opposers of it who had writ so many unanswerable Volumns against it and who had by divers of their Martyrdom in Queen Mary's days asserted the Reformed Catholick Doctrine against the Corruptions and Novelties of the Roman Church This was the occasion which put this Learned Bishop to write this ensuing Tract which when he had first done he communicated it to the Most Reverend Father in God James Usher Lord Archbishop of Armagh and it did so satisfie that Learned Primate that he put it forth with some Discourses of his own without our Bishops Name or Knowledge though in the Codicel annexed to our Bishops Will
't is owned by him for his But afterwards when the Covenant was hotly pressed and a compliance to forein Reformed Churches pretended our Bishop renewed his former Discourse made several additions to it and where he found it necessary took occasion to answer both Salmasius and Blondel and so it swelled to the Volume it now is This was by his Lordship committed to my charge either to publish or not as I thought fit And truly I had once determined still to have kept it by me hoping that the wonderful Restauration both of our King and Church would have made all Disourses of this Nature unnecessary but since it hath pleased Almighty God to suffer these Troublers of Israel still to continue amongst us their disturbances and separations I thought it a duâ—â— I owed to the Memory of this Blessed Bishop to publish this Discourse which I did not doubt but might do God and his Church some service But before I would attempt so great a Work I communicated both my Design and Book to the Most Reverend Father in God Gilbert Lord Archbishop of Canterbury who was pleased not only to approve the Work but command the speedy publishing of it This immediately put me upon the Examination of the several Quotations I found in it having most of the Authors by me fearing that either through the mistake of his Lordships hand which was not very easie to be read or the negligence of the Transcribers some Errours might creep in the places cited and I dare assure the Reader that for all the Works which I have by me and I want but few they are exactly true The Method used in this Discourse is a way our Bishop had been very successful against the Papists and I hope may prove so against our Adversaries of another kind which is the Testimony of Reformed Divines in the Churches beyond the Seas to our Episcopal Government which they do not only commend but admire and wish for Nay divers ef them expound those very Texts of Scripture which are urged for Bishops as we do so that if our Dissenters will believe any sort of men but themselves they must be convinced with this kind of Argument It seems to me I confess extreamly strange that in these last and worst times some men should so applaud themselves and their own phansies as to condemn what went before them even in the most pure Primitive Church I find not in all my little reading any that set himself against that Sacred Order till Aerius who lived about the middle of the fourth Century And Epiphanius says who gives us the most ample Relation of him this his Errour arose out of Emulation that Eustathius was preferred to a Bishoprick before him who most of all desired it And truly I could wish secular Interest such as want of a Bishoprick Applause with a Party self-justification in former mistakes and an unwillingness to let the world know they were formerly deceived did not with-hold many amongst us from doing that which I doubt not they are more than sufficiently convinced they ought to do And I do heartily wish since Conscience is the thing pretended that they gave some assurance 't was Conscience and not Interest prevailed with them by their peaceable Passive Obedience to our Laws and not to fill our streets with their unreasonable complaints against our Government and Governours and still to seduce a sort of empty people of great Faith and little Sense who are in the right only because they are sure they are in the right And although 1600 years possession is more than a sufficient lawful Title for any to plead A thing so unquestionable that no man hath yet produced any sufficient Authority to the contrary Yet there are two learned Pens Salmasius and Blondel who have attempted rather to shew their Wits and Reading than their Reason in this Controvesie The first of these when he undertook the task wrote not under his own Name as if it was what he was commanded to write a thing frequent to the Professors of Leyden than what he himself either believed or would perswade others to do And in all his Discourse he is in that violent heat that he hardly gives Dionysius Petavius that learned Jesuite any other Name than Inepte Fatue He answers the Greek Fathers who affirm that in the Apostles time a Bishop was superiour to a Presbyter that it is a ly and upon no other account but because he expounds the Apostles words after a different manner than what Antiquity did And in any Controversie that concerns the Church he continues this temper For to the Learned Doctor Hammond who calmly defended the Churches Power of the Keys against some of his Objections he gives no other Title but Nebulo in Anglia shewing neither respect to the Learning nor to the quality of the Doctor who as he confessed was Chaplain to his late Majesty And yet this great Magisterial man with the same confidence as he denied the Divine Right of Episcopacy so he doth the Authority of the 2d Epistle of St. Peter affirming the first only for genuine and truly I wonder not much at it for certainly he who shakes the Authority of the Tradition of the universal Church takes away the only Argument to prove any Book to be Canonical when any Sect or Heresie shall question it But I the more willingly pass this over since in his own Name in his Defensio Regia he seems to alter his Opinion For D. Blondel He who shall look into his Discourse will find it to be a great Collection of Various Readings and if Fame be true collected at first to be the Materials of a Discourse he intended for Episcopacy But the misfortune of our Church turned his weapon another way But after all he only affirms that Bishops and Presbyters were equal in degree till the 136. of Christ which if you consider is a very small time after the Apostles For St. John died as both Eusebius and St. Hierome tells us in the 102. of Christ so then according to him their was but 34 years distance But to me truly he proves not that For he who will consider the Epistle before his Book will find all he affirms is that in that short time the Senior Presbyter in the Colledge was their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their Praesident and that when he died the next in Age succeeded him What then I pray doth this make to his purpose If he had given us any Testimony that though this Office fell to him by his Age he immediately entred upon it without any Consecration by the Imposition of Episcopal hands he had done something but of this not one word He only tells us this course was altered over the whole world velut Conspiratione factâ as if done by a Conspiracy And what was this Alteration This he tells us out of Hilary's Comments on St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians which commonly
degrees of Ministers to wit Bishops Presbyters and Deacons That which we wish may be principally observed by these Premisses is That so many so eminently Learned and Judicious Divines and among them such as are thought to have practised the Presbyterial Discipline would not so plainly and universally have acknowledged the Necessary Use of Episcopal Prelacy except before all Presbyterial parity they had judged it the Best but yet we are to soar higher accounting that most truly the Best which hath the Best Right CAP. II. SECT I. The second general part of this full satisfaction is concerning the Right of Episcopacy which is to accord to the Word of God which is the second reserved Condition in the Common Covenant THere are but two principal wayes to understand every Accordance to the Word of God One from Primitive Antiquity especially that which bordereth immediately upon the Apostolical Age the Other by the light and evidence of Scripture it self And for our just enquiry into both we shall take along with us the Consent and acknowledgment of such Protestant Divines to whom our Opposites cannot justly impute partiality in the behalf of Bishops Antiquity speaketh unto us both by its profession and practice sometimes professing it to be so far according to the Word of God as it is Apostolical sometimes in an higher tone and accent to attribute unto it a Divine Right Touching the Apostolical Right our Opposites will not seem to be so far forlorn of Antient Patronage but that they will object four Authors against this which Objections we are to remove in the first place as rubs in our way that our Readers passage may become more even and easie unto him SECT II. First That no Antient Father hath been justly objected as gainsaying the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy no not Hierome THe Smectymnians have informed both the Honourable Houses of Parliament that The best Charter pleaded for Episcopacy is Ecclesiastical Constitution and the testimony of Hierome Which is the main Fort which they and other out Opposites rest upon The Original of Episcopal Prelacy saith he is rather from the Custom of the Church than of the Lords disposing Whence these Disputants conclude that he held it to be Meerly Ecclesiastical and the rather because this his Commentary is upon a Text of Scripture Two kind of Answers are appliable to this Objection One in respect of Hieromes person the Other in regard of his manifold Confessions to the contrary First Hierome by nature an angry man had been not a little provoked by John Bishop of Hierusalem and thereupon as a learned Doctor even of the Presbyterian Church saith Did probably vent this sentence in an humane passion Especially as another saith Holding it an indignity to see his Order contemned And that such passions were sometimes incident to this Father our next Section will further manifest But we are rather willing to rest upon the more manifest resolution of Hierome himself Secondly Therefore we come to the Construction of his words which we cannot unfold better than according to the interpretation of the above-mentioned Scultetus namely That Hierome denying Episcopacy to be of Divine disposition meant that it was not immediately ordained by Christ himself in the time of his Residence here upon earth And by affirming it to be of the Custome of the Church of Christ understood this in the dayes of the Apostles And that this is the proper and genuine interpretation of these words we appeal from if so it was passionate Hierome to Hierome dispassionate from whom we have manifold acknowledgments of the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy saying That all Bishops are the Successors of the Apostles and do now supply their places He also terms the Episcopal power of Excommunication the Apostolical Rod and correspondently he calls Damasus a Bishop his Shepheard and himself a Presbyter his Sheep Thirdly He resembleth Bishops and Presbyters in the New Testament to Aaron and his Sons in the Old calling it an Apostolical Tradition And Lastly He recounteth from Antiquity James our Lords Brother Bishop of Hierusalem Mark Bishop of Alexandria Timothy of Ephesus Titus of Crete whom the Apostles left their Successors in place of their Government So St. Hierome in as full a distinction of Bishops over Presbyters as any Prelate can do at this day Wherefore it will not we presume fall into the imagination of any discreet Reader to think that so many Apostolical Relations had unto Bishops by Hierome must needs confirm unto us his opinion of an Apostolical Institution especially those last now mentioned out of his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers which Erasmus calls A learned work and worthy of such an Author If we should yield unto our Opposites to choose them an Author out of all Protestant Divines whom they would make Umpire and Determinator between us and them in this very Case we are perswaded that Beza must be he and him shall not we refuse who directly proveth even out of Hierome That the custom of â—of choosing one among the Presbyters who should be over the rest was observed from the time of Mark thâ— Evangelist Nay and further thâ— same Theodore Beza doth quit the main Objection of Hieromes denying Prelacy to have been of Divine disposition saying roundly The Hierome is not to be thought to havâ— dated so much as to dream that noâ— of the Presbyters was placed as Preâ—â—dent â—ver the rest when he said that at the first the Church was gâ—verned by the Common Council 〈◊〉 Presbyters This is as much as an Prelatically minded man could either say or wish to be said SECT III. That Augustine objected against the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy is directly for it AUgustine a Father whose memory hath been Venerable throughout the whole Christian World is objected to have written thus to Hierome Although according to the titles of Honour usual in the Church Episcopacy be greater than Presbytery yet is Augustine inferiour to Hierome in many things Hence the Smectymnians If Augustine had known that the Majority of Bishops above Presbyters had been of Divine or Apostolical institution c. he would have said as much So they Which is much more than they themselves ought to have said for two Reasons First Because St. Hierome as they there confess had taken distaste at Augustine and thereupon written two sharp Epistles to him in both which he doth but yet Ironically extelâ— him as a great man because he was In Pontificali culmine Constitutus So they Whereby they do in a manner proclaim Hieromes peevishness every Ironie proceeding from some Splenetical tumor for although Hierome was otherwise a Saint-like man yâ—â— in respect of Moderation he was famâ— inferior to Augustine who here by his mild answer in the objected Epistle endeavoured to allay the heat of Hieromes passion with the cool breath of Christian condescension saying Augustine is in many
Usurpers of an unlawful Function Reverend Antiquity shall prevail more with me than any mans Novel Institution The like was that Mr. Beza his Absit saying God forbid that I should reprehend that Order as rashly introduced c. As also Zanchy his Quis Ego Who am I that I should reprehend that which the whole Church hath approved to be for the best ends So he Whereof there hath been a full Section And that the deduction of Episcopacy cannot be called properly Popish will be proved hereafter CAP. III. After these our Evidences from Primitive Antiquity according to our precedent Method we are to contemplate of the Coelestial Sphear the Word of God it self The Right of Episcopacy discussed by the Word of God IN this Discussion we are to use both our hands the one of Defence in Answering Objections and as it were bearing off Assaults made against the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy The other is the Confirmation thereof by such Arguments which may be held convincent SECT I. Against the first Objection from the Identity of Names as they call it of Bishops and Presbyters in Scripture OUr Opposites endeavour to perswade us that there ought to be No dâ—stinction of Degree between Bishop and Presbyter because of the Identity of denomination in Scripture which is say they of no small consequence And this they offer to prove from as they say The Supreme Wisdom of God the imposer of Names who could not mistake the proper end of the imposition of Names And for a further inforcement they add That the Texts brought to prove the Identity of Names prove also as intrinsically the Identity of Offices So they Which consequence was taught them by their great Dictator Walo Messalinus Who would have it impossible that Bishops and Presbyters should really differ in Function seeing that their Titles are communicable in Scripture So he One would think it had not been possible for any of judgment to have concluded thus who had but once observed the Texts of Scripture which present themselves often unto any conversant therein as the places in the New Testament themselves The Testimonies of Fathers together with the consent of some Protestant Divines will evidence unto us First Scriptures wherein we find Matthias Peter John and Paul all by excellency of Function Apostles yet Maâ—thias entituled to a Bishoprick Act. 1.20 Peter styling himself Co-presbyter 1 Pet. 5.1 John terming himself a Presbyter twice 2 Joh. 1. and 3 Joh. 1. And Paul descending a degree lower to name himself thrice a Deacon Col. 1.23 25. 2 Cor. 3.6 Yea reciprocally those that were but Assistants of the Apostles had the name of Apostles attributed unto them As Barnabas Act. 14.14 Andronicus and Junias Rom. 16.7 Titus and others Graece 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 8. In all which communicableness of names of Bishop Presbyter Sympresbyter and Deacon attributed to the Apostles themselves and of the Title of Apostle given to some of inferior ranke our Opposites we dare say will not presume to conclude any necessity of Indistinction of Offices either between the Disciples of the Apostles and the Apostles themselves or between Presbyters and Deacons and the same Apostles Therefore to draw nearer to our mark we add more particularly SECT II. That the former Objection is rejected by the choycest and most acceptable Divines which our Opposites themselves can name WE besides the current Testimonies of Fathers to be alleadged in the following Section seek to satisfie our Opposites by the Confession of three such Protestant Divines whose very Names and that deservedly are of great Authority with them 1. Calvin upon that very objected Text Tit. 1.5 For this cause left I thee at Creet c. From hence we learn saith he that there was not then any equality among the Ministers of the Church but that one was placed over the rest in Authority and Counsel 2. Beza successor to Calvin expressly confesseth That the Presbyters even then in the Apostles times had a President over them while the Appellation of Bishop and Presbyter was communicable Accordingly hereunto is the judgment of Dr. Reynolds telling us That in the Apostles times the Presbyters did choose one amongst them to be President c. Whom afterward saith he in the Primitive Church the Fathers called Bishops So that in the judgment of these exquisite judicious Divines the Office or Function of a Bishop was distinct from that of Presbyters notwithstanding the Identical communicableness of Titles or Names SECT III. The second Objection out of Scripture in that place Phil. 1.1 With the Bishops and Deacons c. is repugnant to the general Expositions of Antient Fathers IT useth to be objected That seeing as the Fathers held there should be no more than one Bishop in any one City How then cometh it to pass that the Apostle mentioneth Bishops in the Plural and immediately subjoyneth Deacons without insinuation of Presbyters Either we must suppose that there were no Presbyters at all in that City or else that by Bishops here Presbyters are to be understood The Testimonies of Antiquity have untwined this thred long since telling us That for as much as the words Bishop and Presbyter were then Communicable notwithstanding the difference of their Degrees and Functions therefore by the word Bishops in this place are to be understood Presbyters So Chrysostom Occumendus Theophylact Theodoret. This last for further illustration thereof sheweth That St. Paul did in this Epistle attribute likewise this Title of Apostle to Epaphroditus though he was distinctly a Bishop Our Opposites we know are in all these Questions most addicted to Hierome Who notwithstanding upon the same reason with the rest of the Fathers inferreth the same Conclusion saying Here by Bishops we understand Presbyters because there could not then have been two Bishops in one City But if Epaphroditus was Bishop of Philippi as Theodoret both here and elsewhere assureth us he was why will some say was not this Epistle inscribed unto him as well as to the Presbyters and Deacons Theophylact gives the answer Because saith he at this time the Philippians had sent Epaphroditus to carry such things to the Apostle as he had need of So he Which Answer of his hath sufficient ground upon Phil. 2.25 and 4.18 To which we refer our Reader SECT IV. The third Objection is against the appropriation of the word Bishop unto one which Appellation is shewn to be most justifiable BOth Houses of Parliament have been advised concerning Presbyterial Ordination that the Names of Bishop and Presbyter have been communicable to Presbyters Therefore the appropriation of the word Bishop to one hath been say they by corrupt Custom Both which we take to have been so unadvisedly spoken concerning Appropriation as if they had meant to cross the judicious Confessions of the three Worthies Mr. Calvin Mr. Beza and Dr. Reynolds who have expressly testified and
writing against that grand Antiepiscopal Presbyter Aerius told him That the Superiority of Bishops above Presbyters was founded in the word of God An Author under the name of Ambrose speaking distinctly of Bishops saith That they held the person of Christ and therefore our behaviour before them ought to be as before the Vicars of the Lord. And again That the Bishop is ordained by the Lord the light of the Church Another under the name of Augustine as hath been said judged it a matter that none could be ignorant of That Bishops were instituted by Christ who instituted Bishops when he ordained the Apostles whose Successors the Bâ—shops are Hierome thus far agreeth with him to wit That Bishops in the Catholick Church supply the place of the Apostles And what else meant that which hath been before alleadged out of the Canon of six hundred Fathers in the general Council of Calcedon which judgeth The Depression of a Bishop down to the degree of a Presbyter to be in it self Sacriledg But do any Protestant Divines of remote Churches consent to any Divine Right SECT III. That two eminent Protestant Divines grant this Supposition which is the ground of the said Truth THis grant and concession is freely yielded unto us by Beza who speaking of Episcopacy saith If it did proceed from the Apostles then certainly I should not doubt to attribute it wholly as all other Apostolical Ordinances to divine disposition Another who is also a professed Advocate for the Presbyterians granteth as freely as the former That if Episcopacy be from the Apostles then doubtless it is of Divine Right But that Episcopacy had its Apostolical institution hath been sufficiently ratified unto us through this whole Discourse both from Testimonies of Antiquity from general Consent of Protestants of Reformed Churches and above all from the clear Evidence of the Scriptures themselves the Repetition whereof would be superfluous the rather because these our foresaid Opposites will ease us of that labour for Mr. Beza himself confesseth That it is a Custome not to be reprehended of setting one of the Presbyters over the rest which was used saith he from Mark the Evangelist in the Church of Alexandria So he Now then whether we say with Hierome That this Episcopacy was in Mark because the first Bishop or in Anianus who was constituted by Mark as Eutychus relateth or with Beza that it was from Mark as a thing irreprehensible It must needs be judged to be from the Ordinance of the Apostles and consequently Divine We have yet somewhat more SECT IV. That Episcopal Prelacy hath been directly acknowledged by Protestants of remote Churches to be of Divine Right 1 LUther proves this directly and Categorically saying That every City ought to have its proper Bishop by Divine Right grounding his Argument upon Titus 2.5 Who was commanded to ordain Elders in every City which Elders saith he were Bishops as Hierome witnesseth and the subsequent Text doth manifest Yea and St. Augustine describing a Bishop concurreth with them saying It was a City as if he should have said it was not a mere Presbyter but a Bishop which is here spoken of because Bishops were over Cities Thus far Luther his Tractate being a Resolution his Sentence the Conclusion and his words plainly distinguishing Bishop from mere Presbyter and alleadging from Scripture a divine Right of Episcopal Function as clearly as either our Opposites can dislike or we desire Accordingly Bucer a man of great Learning and Piety saith That these three Orders of Ministers in the Church Bishops Presbyters and Deacons were for institution from the Holy Ghost and for Continuance perpetual even from the Beginning The learned Professor in the Palatinate Scultetus hath Professedly and Positively concluded Episcopacy to be of Divine Right by as he saith efficacious Reasons clear Examples and excellent Authorities And he hath been as good as his word as in divers foregoing Sections hath been made manifest upon which Subject likewise a most learned Belgick Doctor wrote a whole book urging therein very many Arguments both from Scripture and Antiquity and assoiling the Objections to the contrary Aegidius Hunnius Divinity Professor in the University of Marpurg speaking of Episcopacy in the Apostles times saith That Paul did ordain Titus General Superintendent that is Archbishop of all the Cretian Churches and thereupon concludeth That the Order and Degree of Episcopacy is a thing not lately invented but received in the Church even from the very times of the Apostles Wherein he is seconded by Hemingius a very Learned Divine whose Observation upon Titus 1. v. 5. is That to the end that Anarchy might be avoided and all things done Decently and in Order the Apostle would have some one to ordain Ministers to dispose all things in the Church and to take care lest Haeresie should arise The worthily renowned Doctor Gerard speaks no less than the former proving Episcopacy as distinct from Presbytery to be of Divine Right not only in respect of the Original as proceeding from the diversity of Gifts but also in regard of the End The avoiding of Dissension and Schism in the Church Yea and even the Church of Geneva it self will afford us a Testimony or two from the pen of the Mirrour of Learning Mr. Isaac Causabon who tells us That three Orders of Ministers in the Church Bishops Presbyters and Deacons are founded upon the Testimony of plain Scriptures And again That Bishops are the Vicegerents of the Apostles Thus these learned Protestants Nothing now remaineth but that nam finis coronat opus we have as the Seal of this Truth the Approbation of Christ himself SECT V. That Episcopal Prelacy had the Approbation of Christ himself after his Ascension into Heaven NEver did nor could any deny but that every of the Angels of the seven Churches of Asia had the Approbation of Christ himself after his Ascension into Heaven that Book wherein they are mentioned being called the Revelation of Jesus Christ as the Author delivered by an Angel to John as unto Christs Scribe commanding him to write the seven Epistles and to direct them to the Angels of the seven Churches two of which Angels Christ commendâ—th in the same Epistles for the good discharge of their Function And is not Commendation Testimonial enough and an Argument of his Approbation The other five Bishops being more or less Delinquents are reprehended for Neglect of their Cure And is not Reproof of the Neglect of Duty in the Officers a Justification and Approbation of their Offices Finally as those which are faithful in their Offices are continued so they that were obnoxious are threatned To be removed except they did repent So that here is no Displacing of any for a first Offence nor yet an Eradicating the whole Order for the particular Abuses of some For he that calleth for Repentance and Amendment of
Life in the Ministers intendeth a further execution of their Ministration and Discharge of their Function in these Angels which was a Prelatical Superintendency or Episcopacy as hath been testified not only by Protestant Divines of the Reformed Churches fourteen in number but also so generally that Doctor Scultetus Divinity Professor of Heidelburgh concerning this Approbation of Christ saith That all the most learned Interpreters have by Angels understood Bishops nor can they do otherwise without violence to the Text. So he All Glory be to God through Jesus Christ the Bishop of our Souls the Author and Finisher of our Faith Amen FINIS THE CONTENTS CHAP. I. SECT I. That the Church of Geneva hath both justified and praised our Episcopal Government in England and prayed for the prosperous continuance thereof Page 1 SECT II. That the Church of Geneva disclaimed the Opinion of thinking that their Churches Government should be a Pattern for other Churches p. 6. SECT III. That also other Protestant Divines of Reformed Churches have observed the Worthiness of the Episcopal Government in England p. 7. SECT IV. That the Episcopal Government in the Church of Christ is for Necessary Use the best according to the judgment of Primitive Antiquity p. 11 SECT V. The Protestant Divines of remote Churches have generally acknowledged Episcopal Government to be for Necessary Use the best p. 14 SECT VI. That the Episcopal Government is far more practised among Protestants of Remote Churches than is the Presbyterial p. 22 CHAP. II. SECT I. The second General Part of this full Satisfaction is concerning the Right of Episcopacy which is to accord to the Word of God which is the second reserved Condition in the Common Covenant p. 24 SECT II. First That no Antient Father hath been justly objected as gainsaying the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy no not Hierome p. 26 SECT III. That Augustine objected against the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy is directly for it p. 31 SECT IV. Thirdly Gregory Nazianzen a Primitive Father who is verbally objected against Episcopacy doth really contradict the Objectors p. 34 SECT V. That Clemens one of the most Antient of Fathers objected proveth to be a Counterwitness against the Objectors p. 37 SECT VI. The justification of Episcopal Prelacy by the Universal Practice of the Church Christian in times approaching towards Primitive Antiquity First By condemning Aerius the only famous Adversary against Episcopal Prelacy in those times p. 42 SECT VII That in the time of the foresaid Fathers the whole Church of Christ held the Derogation from Episcopal Prelacy to be Sacrilegious p. 45 SECT VIII That the immediate Succession of Bishops from the daies of the Apostles is liberally confirmed unto us by Learned Protestant Divines albeit sufficiently Presbyterial p. 47 SECT IX That there was an immediate Succession of Bishops from the Apostles times proved first because no time can be assigned wherein it was not in use p. 48 SECT X. That the whole Church Christian did profess and practise the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy p. 55 CHAP. III. After these our Evidences from Primitive Antiquity according to our precedent Method we are to contemplate of the Coelestial Sphear the Word of God it self p. 59 The Right of Episcopacy discussed by the Word of God ib. SECT I. Against the first Objection from the Identity of Names as they call it of Bishops and Presbyters in Scripture p. 60 SECT II. That the former Objection is rejected by the choicest and most acceptable Divines which our Opposites themselves can name p. 62 SECT III. The second Objection out of Scripture in that place Phil. 1.1 With the Bishops and Deacons c. is repugnant to the general Expositions of Antient Fathers p. 64 SECT IV. The third Objection is against the Appropriation of the word Bishop unto one which Appellation is shewn to be most justifiable p. 67 SECT V. The last Objection 3 John 9. p. 72 CHAP. IV. Our Prepositions grounded upon the Word of God Our first Evidence out of the Epistles of St. Paul p. 73 SECT I. That the Presbyterial Order was alwaies substitute to an higher Government as first to the Jurisdiction Apostolical ib. SECT II. That divers of the Apostolical Disciples were even in their times both in Dignity and Authority Superintendents over Presbyters p. 76 SECT III. That the aforesaid Apostolical Disciples were as Bishops over the Presbyters Among whom were Timothy and Titus by Evidence from Scripture p. 78 SECT IV. That Timothy and Titus were properly and distinctly Bishops notwithstanding their Title of Evangelists as is confessed by Protestant Divines of remote Churches p. 81 SECT V. That Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus notwithstanding that objected Scripture Act. 20 p. 88 SECT VI. That Timothy and Titus were both of them properly Bishops by the judgment of Antiquity p. 91 SECT VII That Protestant Divines of very great esteem have acknowledged Timothy and Titus to have been properly Bishops p. 94 SECT VIII The Second Evidence from Scripture for proof of Episcopal Prelacy is out of Christs Epistles To the Angels of the seven Churches of Asia To the Angel of the Church of Ephesus write c. Chap. 2.1 p. 97 SECT IX That the first Exposition of our Opposites by Angel understanding the whole Church is flatly repugnant to the Context p. 98 SECT X. That the second Exposition is in interpreting the word Angel to signifie the Order of Presbyters in the Church The state of which Question is set down by our Opposites p. 100 SECT XI That the Objections made for this Exposition are confuted by their own best approved Protestant Authors p. 101 SECT XII Their second Reason confuted by their own alleadged Author p. 103 SECT XIII Their third Argument likewise confuted by their own Chiefest Author p. 106 SECT IVX. Their fourth Argument confuted by the same their own much applauded Author p. 108 SECT XV. The fifth Objection as a body in a Consumption languisheth in it self p. 111 SECT XVI Their last Argument standeth confuted by their own selves p. 112 SECT XVII Our Arguments to prove that the word Angel in the aforesaid Epistles of Christ signifyeth an individual person as a Prelate over Presbyters p. 114 SECT XVIII Arguments in special collected from the Texts p. 116 SECT XIX The second kind of Arguments taken out of the Doctrinal Testimonies of Antiquity p. 119 SECT XX. That Historical Evidence from Antiquity demonstrateth what Bishops some of these Angels personally were by their proper names and from them some of their Successors p. 121 SECT XXI A Torrent of Protestant Divines of the Reformed Churches consenting to the same Exposition of an Individual Person having Prelacy over Presbyters under the name of Angels p. 128 SECT XXII The second of our English Protestant Divines in the Opinion of our Opposites as competent Witnesses as any p. 131 SECT XXIII Of two notable Subterfuges of our Opposites What they are p. 132 SECT XXIV Against the Opposites Exception to Episcopal