litle after If you would be further taught that a generall Councill is neither the Vniversall Church nor representeth the Vniversall Church c we can send you to a merchant of the same stampe that your selves are of where you shall see as much as I say debated commended with no small braverie Pigh hierarch lib 6. cap 5. 4. I graunt this man in an other place is “ Perp. gov pag. 370. 371. 372. contrarie to this But that is no newes in him For I know nothing almost which is controverted but if hee affirme it in one place he denyeth it in another As touching the Scriptures which he produceth for his warrant they are the same which D. Downame also “ Def. 2.4 meÌ„tioneth are often alleadged by many men at random For God knoweth they come nothing neare to the purpose The textes are Math. 18.17 Act. 15.22 Both which indeed are to be taken properly and literally and not improperly and figuratively as they in an idle imagination do think Their imagination I say heerein is idle because they have no reason for them in the world requiring that this word Ecclesia heere should be figurative Which is ground “ D. Down Def. â— 33 enough for vs and assurance also that it ought heere to be vnderstood as proper Besides those two Doctors are both learned in the Greeke toung Let them shew that this word was ever vsed by any good Author living in the Apostles times or before for a Confistorie of Governors only or els they ought to acknowledge they speake idly and vntruly If no such place can be shewed as I am very sure there can not shal we thinke the Apostles spake and wrote Greeke in such a phrase as none in all the world ever spake either before or in their dayes What absurditie and vnconscionable presumptioÌ„ were it so to thinke I know they and others do alleage som Greek Fathers that do take the word Ecclesia sometime for the Governours only But those Fathers lived 300. yeres after the time of writing the New Testament and later Now the Aposties framed not their laÌ„guage to the maner of speaking so longe after their owne age Many and great alterations were come in by that time by reason whereof their speach began much to alter also And we following them must needes Equivocat Some pointes therein I noted “ Reaâ— for â—ef pag. 4â— 64. â—5 herefore but our adversaties will not remember nor consider that The effect of al that I say is this Eusâ—bius beodoret Epiphanius Chrysostome and such other of those times are not our Apostles nor maisters of our faith nor equall interpreters of the true Apostles chiefâ—y in the matter of Church governement There was to much iniquitie to much anomie entered then and increased still afterward till Antichrist him selfe stood vp which was anon after â—n such case therfore let vs retire our selves as we are commaunded to the plaine and vnpartiall and syncere evidence of Christs Law and Testimonie if any speake not according this word it is because there is no light in them Sure the vniversad sense and meaning of this Greeke word Ecclesia in all pure and vncorrupt times is to signifie the whole Assemblie even the people evermore togeather wâ—th their Guides vnles their state were such that they had no Guides as at some instant happily the case might be But alwayes it signifyed the people and those asseÌ„bling together in one place Which also is the proper signification of the Latin word Concio and nothing els Concio is the iust expositioÌ„ of Ecclesia It were madnes therefore to go from the native proper sense of the Apostles wordes without cause And if the Humane Politike reasons where with Doct. Bilson “ Perp. gov pa. 370. 372. 374. 376. flourisheth were warrant for vs without Christs worde to erect such a spirituall governement as is in absolut Synods over Christendome besides that then Mens Traditions and politike inâ—entions may be receaved as spiritual instruments in the worke of the salvation of our soules which impietie I thought all good Christians had long since abhorred moreover a plaine direct way is opened for a Vniversall Papacie and for a Vniversall consistorie of Cardinalls to be placed over all Christes people I say the Humane reasons alleadged do inforce this as well yea much better then that each Christian Nation should be ordinarily left to them selves and not bee ruled Spiritually by some one generall ordinarie Superior by whom all in al Countries may be reduced to vnitie This might easily bee adorned with moe flowers of Rhetoâ—â—ke then hee there doth or can set vpon his matter Againe over besides this there is an other plaine Logical coÌ„sequence which will induce a Pope if any Representative Church bee acknowledged to be of Divine institution in the New Testament For if any Representative Church bee in the New Testament of Divine institution then such a Provinciall Representative Church is Nay then a Vniversal representative Church is of Divine institution in the New Testament ArepreseÌ„tâ—tâ—ve Church By a representative Church I meane the Guides one or moe having power to exercise Spiritual governemÌ„et without any consent of the people Which also is a Church figuratively viz. by a Syneedoche And this all men agree vnto Againe if a Vniversall representative Church be of Divine institution in the new Testament then a Vniversall church represented or such a proper Church whereof the figurative is a figure and a representation is of Divine institution also in the New Testament This sequence is of “ Relativa fuut simul Arâ—stoâ— infallible truth Some have thought the figurative Vniversall Church viz. the Vniversall Synod may represent not one Vniversall proper Church but a nomber of particular independent Churches But this is vntrue impossible as any shall see that wel considereth it As for our present adversaries they do acknowledge maintaine the effect of this Sequence at least they say it in plaine termes D. Bilson teacheth that Christ hath “ Perp. gov pa. 372. 377 one Church in generall which is a whole having all particular Churches partes to be ruled by the whole and that this one whole or generall Church is the body of Christ. Doct. Downame expreslie saith †Def. 3.4 the whole Church is but one body Thus in plaine termes they acknowledge and teach as I said One proper Church Vniversall vnder outward governement What meaning they have heerein God knoweth Now from hence I reason further If one Vniversall proper Church subiect to out ward governement bee of Divine institution in the New Testament then a Vniversall ordinarie Pastor is of Divine institution in the New Testament This consequence though in truth it be vndenyable and inevitable yet they in wordes deny it with vehemence without sense reason D. Downame saith Defenc. 1.17 and 3.4.6 He is Antichrist that assumeth to him selfe the governement of the Vniversal Church
he meaneth that it may bee so called but not truly Which is but double dealing For presently after he saith †Pag. 17. He separateth the true Kingdome of Christ from the externall Order and Discipline of the Church which some in these dayes more zealous then wise do not separate So he calleth the faithful worshippers of Christ But is it such wisedome I pray to seperat froÌ„ Christ this his Divine honor and glorie and to give it to others Nay this is accursed wisedome Then a Ministerie supposed to be setled by the Apostles in the Primitive Church he denyeth to bee any part of Christes Kingdome Hath hee any reason for it Yea a straÌ„ge one Saith he Christes kingdom is proper to his person As though the power and authoritie to institute setle such an ordinance might not be proper to Christes person and yet the execution thereof committed to his Officers and Deputies And nevertheles all is Christes still Christ hath a Kingdome Commissive It is the Kings authoritie which the Deputie of IrelaÌ„d executeth And may it not be Christes power and governement which his Ministers and Deputies on earth do execute Yea certainly Which this D. acknowledged before saying it may bee called the kingdome of heaven and of Christ. Yet hee doth further strive against the truth in this cause making the Minister the Maister of a familie and the Magistrate to be Gods ordinance alike Which surely never any sound Divine would say If we looke but to Moses law the falsitie heereof is soone seene Every Ministerie in the Iewes Church must have expresse and particular institution from God but naturall reason Humane contractes were sufficient to institute both the other And is not the case so with vs now also vnder the Gospell Yeas truly Wherefore these in deed are nowe Gods ordinances but not alike He concludeth that the Ministers may not arrogat any part of Christes honor and power as incident to their calling or function They may take to them the execution of that which to ordaine is only Christs right That power of his which hee hath in his word committed to them and as the D. speaketh trusted them with they may take to them viz. the Keyes and Mysteries of the kingdome of heaven Which they arrogate not but it is their right to take vse the same as Christ himselfe hath specially appointed From this dissolut opinion aforesaid and so derogatorie to the holy Offices of Christ it floweth that this D. teacheth “ Pag. 339. 348. the peoples interest in Church-governement standeth only vpon the groundes of reason and nature and is derived from the rules of Christian equitie and societie And that this is both lawfull and †Pag. 334. much to be commended And yet also that “ Pag. 349. the people may willingly forsake and worthily loose the right which they had Nay more hee holdeth the Apostolike and †Pag. 299. 300. Divine forme of Church-governement by sole governing Bishops as hee maintaineth Timotihe and Titus and the Angell of Ephesus c. to have ben may give place on occasion to those forenamed grounds of reason and nature “ Pag. 348. 334. humane governement Thus he by denying the peoples consent to be †Pag. 368. essentiall in the choice of their Pastors doth indeed make nothing essentiall to them For that which is Essentiall must evermore be had to the true being of any thing it can never be altered nor absent from it as before “ Pag. 8â— I have also noted These our adversaries say our assertions are raw and vndigested fancies but what raw and vndigested yea irreligious assertions they doe holde and maintaine it maketh me afraid even to thinke of it It shall not bee amisse to observe somewhat contrarie to their opinions out of some both of the Ancient and the late writers Cyprian noteth this in generall as an odious error in the haeretike Novatian though he aime at an other point in particular But in generall this which they holde Cyprian maketh noe lesse then haereticall in him His words are “ Cypr Epist 4.2 Ille post Dei traditionem humanam conatur Ecclesiam facere This man letting go Gods ordinance indeavorâ—th to make a Humane Church Againe touching the order and forme of the Church and administration thereof hee in another place flyeth only to Christ and his word for authoritie saith “ Epist 1.8 Quisquis alibi collegerit spargit Adulterum est impium est SacrileguÌ„ est quodâ—unque humano furoâ—e instituitur vt dispositio divina violetur Procul ab huiusmodi hominum contagione discedite Whosoever gathereth elswhere he scattereth It is adulterous it is impious it is sacrilegious whatsoever is instituted by mens madnes that Gods order should be violated Depart far away from the infectioÌ„ of such meÌ„ And a litle after Nemo vos frat res errare â Domi. viâ faciat Nemo vos Christianos ab EvaÌ„gelio Christi rapiat Brethren let no man cause you to erre from the Lords way Let no man pull you Christians from Christes Gospell Of the church coÌ„stitution and order againe hee saith †De Vnitat Eccles. Verbis Christi insistere quaecunque docuit feat discere facere debemus Crederese in Christum quomodo dicit qui non facere quod Christus facere praecepit Wee ought to insist in Christes wordes whatsoever he taught did we must learne and do How can one say hee beleeveth in Christ who doth not that which Christ commandeth Thus in the order constitution and governement of Christes Church this holy man of God layeth a necessity on vs to cleave alwayes to that which is in Christes Testament not to Humane reason nor to Civill disposition at any time Which our adversaries do “ Perp. gov pag. 339. Def. 2.73 teach and maintaine to be lawfull Augustine also of the visible Churches constitution beside that †Pag. 138.139 above cited in him elswhere writeth thus “ August contra Crescon Gram. 1.33 Ecclesiam sine vlla ambiguitate sancta Scriptura demonstrat †Ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam â— De Vnit. Eccles. cap. 3. ibi discutiamus causam nostram Nâ—lo humanis documentis sed divinis oraculis sanctaÌ„ Ecclesiam demonstrari The holy Scripture demonstrateth the Church without any doubt There let vs seeke the Church there let vs try our cause I cannot abide that the holy Church should be shewed by mens doctrines but by the Divine Oracles And in that sense Ierome calleth Christs Visible Church as it is vnder outward governement “ Hieron dâ— 7. Ordin Eccles Fabrica Deâ— a Frame which God him selfe hath builâ— Thus these Ancientes With whom heerein the godly learned of late do consent also Zuinglius said enough “ Pag. 101.102.104 before Calvin to Cardinall Sadolet saith †Calvin ad Sad. Non te adeo pracisè vrgebo vt revocem ad illam
otherwise heere as indeed it is Beside I remeÌ„ber not above “ 1 Cor. 12.28 which is not ofteâ— one such place as he signifyeth and yet there it is in the plural nomber 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 powers not in the singular Betweene which place and ours in hand there is apparantly very great difference Againe he saith To deliver vnto Sathan is more then to Excommunicate It is not Yea him selfe held so likewise †Against the Semina part 3. pag. 58. heeretofore He which is excommunicat and as a Heathen is out of Christes Kingdom And being out of Christes Kingdome he is in the power of Satan Therefore it is all one Neither is it true that many are secluded from the company of the godly for a time that are not yeelded to Satan or that many were delivered to Sathan by the Church assembled togeather as this was don heere without Excommunication Or that Ananias and Elymas were delivered to Satan Which him selfe “ Against the Seminar part 3. pag. 53 54. once contradicted He toucheth heere many thinges beside to no purpose viz. This Sinner was delivered to Satan that it might bring him to repentance Why and that is the proper end of Excommunication Againe the end of this action was the destruction of the flesh which in Excommunication hath no sense except it bee Metaphoricall It is not so This destruction of the flesh viz. the lustes of the flesh hath great sense in Excommunication And it seemeth rather a Metonymicall phrase then a Metaphoricall as he nameth it He addeth Excommunication indangereth the Spirit and toucheth not the flesh Nay it is intended to save the Spirit that is the Regenerat man by repentance So the Spirit is †1. Cor. 5.5 heere vnderstoode Also Excommunication toucheth the flesh for it serveth to huÌ„ble and mortifie the lustes of the flesh or the vnregenerat man Hee saith this is dome not by Excommunication but by repentance Strangely spoken I say it is done by both For these are Subordinat not opposit As well hee might say the lustes of the flesh are not destroyed by Gods worde but by repentance The truth of both is alike Here also the one of it selfe is no consequent to the other For many are preached vnto that never repent aswellas Excommunicated that never repent And yet who knoweth not that God hath ordained that repentance should follow froÌ„ both as it doth indeed in many Who would not wonder to see such dallying in such a man in a cause so serious The like is also where hee saith Excommunication is before and after in other wordes expressed Yea and this is not against our sense of Delivering to Sathan but much for it Seeing all the CircuÌ„stances coherence of the text heere both before and after speake only of Excommunication and the phrase it selfe to deliver to Satan is so fit and agreeable to expresse the same even according to Christes description of it “ Mat. 18.17 Let him be to thee as a Heathen that is without the Church Christs Kingdome vnder the power and rule of Satan in like state and coÌ„dition as the very infidelles and vnbeleevers are This therefore is much for vs. But saith he †Pag. 100. This is no such new founde or vaine exposition Chrysostome Ierome Ambrose Theodoret Occumenius Theophilact c. embrace it Wonderfull This opinion and these very testimonies hee cited “ Against the Semin part 3. pag 54.56 heeretofore as beeing the Papistes Then he * Pag â—5 resisted refuted the samâ— at large by †Ambr. in 1 Cor. 5. Ambrose “ August in queâ—t vet nov Test 49. Austin and †Ierom ad Hiliod ad Râ—par Ierome insinuating that this “ Ierom. in 1. Cor. 5. Ierome which now he grouÌ„deth on which then the Papistes alleaged was a couÌ„terfait or suspected at least Is this fidelitie is this vpright dealing For advaÌ„tage to ioyne with the Antichristian Enemies yea against him selfe to allow of the self same witnes which him selfe then branded with infamie opposing Chrysostome to Chrysostome Ierome to Ierome Ambrose there to Ambrose heere and which passeth interpreting the same wordes of Theodoret contrarie heere to that hee did “ Pag. 59. there What mutabilitie is this But to the point I answer This his sense out of Chrysostome c. heere can not be true viz. that this delivering to Satan was to be tormented corporally by Satan For then the whole Church of Corinth had this miraculous power given theÌ„ at Pauls appointement They were then the visible instrumentall doers of this Apostolike Miracle in Pauls behalfe Also then the Apostles had power and did vse to strike men whom they never saw nor spake with beeing far from them in other countries All which how absurd they are who seeth not Againe this Sinners “ 2. Cor. 2. restoring was without Miracle his casting out therefore was so likewise Neither can it be thought that “ 1. Tim. 8.20 Paul corporally tormented †Pag. 103. Hymenaus and Alexander He only excommunicated them and yet not he alone but with the Churches concurrence and consent whereof they were For so was his practise in other actions of Church-governement as we see In “ Pag. 226. another place hee readeth 2. Thess 3.14 not as it should be He readeth If any obey not our saying note him by a letter It should be †Bez. in Thes 3 1â— If any obey not our saying in the Epistle note him That is Excommunicat him withdraw your selves from him as it is in vers 6. This he requireth the whole Church of the Thessalonians to do not to signifie such a one to Paul that he might do it The word is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signify to me but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 set a marke on him viz. of ExcoÌ„munication For it can beare no other sense Now touching Calling to the Ministerie “ Chap. 7. pag. 66. he laboureth to take from vs quite First Act. 1. about Mathias election to be an Apostle It is true as he saith An Apostle might not be chosen by meÌ„ Yet heere Gods will was that men should and they did go about this Election and proceeded in it and managed the same so far as possibly men might That is men performed many waightie and remarkable partes therein not that there was any simple necessitie for men to concurre heerein but only it pleased God it should be so for an example to posteritie to follow to practise all that was ordinarie in the same D. Bilson excepteth it is not expressed that the Church intermedled in the choice of Mathias Which is not true For first all this action was performed “ Act. 1.15 vers 23. in the middest of the Church Secondly †vers 24. they appointed two and * vers 26. they prayed and they cast lotts and hee was accounted by common consent as it
14. That the people most of all have power to chose worthy Ministers and to refuse their vnworthy ones After which he sheweth that the other churches els-where professing the Gospell refusing Poperie did likewise They who had a calling from the church of Râ—me renounced it resting on that which they have according to the rule of the Gospell 14. Iunius Also Iunius saith †Ecclesiastie 3.1 Simplicissimam quidem probatissimamque Eligendi Vocandi viam illam esse constat ex Scripturae Sacrae testimonijs quam Apostoli in Ecclesijs tenuerunt olim prisca Ecclesia aliquamdiu eos imitata observavit Eligebat tota Ecclesia id est corpus ex Presbyterio populo seu plebe constitutum equis communihus suffragijs Haec iusta electionis ratio It is manifest that that way of chosing and calling Ministers is most simple and most approoved by the testimonies of holy Scripture which the Apostles in old time did keepe in the Churches and the ancient Church sometime imitating them did observe The whole Church did chose that is the Body consisting of the Eldership and people or common sort by equal common voyces This is the iust manner of Chosing Ministers Afterward hee saith This the old Church did observe very long doneo res coeperunt vt fit humanitus in peius ruere atque retrò sublapsa referri Vntill as through mens corruption it comes to passs things began to grow worse and to runne to ruine And after that corruptioÌ„ in the Church government was come in Yet saith he id semper obtinuit vt Ecclesia actioni toti interesset camque prasentiâ suâ haberet raetam That alwayes was in force that the Church was present at the whole action and ratifyed it with their presence But neither this in England is seene anie where neither will bee allowed Also Iunius saith Where the Church at any time doth no more but ratifie matters by their presence only the Guidâ—t ought to certifie the Church that if they can them selves take care for do their owne affaires non fore penâ—â—â—â—lâ—um Episcoporum Seniorumve coetum vt 〈◊〉 siâ—i cum damno Ecclesia iniuriae ignominâ arroget It shall not be in the power of any asâ—eÌ„bly of Bishops or Elders to arrogat so much to them selves with the Churches dammage iniurie and shame Where hee professeth that this is the Church â—s daÌ„mage iniurie shame if being vnderstaÌ„ding Christians they be only present at the chosing and ordayning of their Ministers if they do not also them selves chose or at least freely expresly coÌ„sent to the chosing and ordayning of them After noting the tyrannie which was in this behalfe vnder the Pope he saith Iam de populo queÌ„ Christus redemit suo sanguine Ecclesiam sibi ex eo compararet verbum nullum Now of the people there was not one word whom Christ redeemed with his bloud that they might be his Church And he addeth Hinc illa barbaries hinc colluvies selelerum omnium hinc illa fraudum nundinationuÌ„ sentina exundavit Hence came that barbarous ignorance in those times that heape of all sinnes that sinke of deceit and selling of the soules of men TheÌ„ speaking of some Churches Magistrates who have worthily freed themselves from the Pope yet hee leaveth this foule blot vpon them Ius illud Eccesiasticum institutionis ordimationis restitut non curant Ecclesijs They care not to restore to the Churches this right of theirs viz of making ordaining of Minister Finally he answeceth some obiections At nescit populus dixerit quispiam Doceatur sciet At nescit vti Imo nesciet vnquam Siture suo non vtatur vnquam At factiosus est plerumque in diversas partes studiaque scinditur Revocetur adpaceÌ„ monitis salutaribus compescatur authoritate verbt virorumque bonorum officijs vt conciliatis compositis animis faciant quod sui turis est But some will say The people is ignorant of their duty and right heerein Let them be taught and they wil vnderstand it But they know not how to vse this their right They will not know it ever if they vse it never But they are factious often and are divided into partes Let them be reduced to Peace by wholesome counsaill and let them be ruled by the authority of the word and the indeavours of good men that their mindes being ordered they may do that which is their right to do 15. Piscator About ExcoÌ„municatioÌ„ Piscator saith “ Observ ex â— cap. 1. Cor. Excommunication ought to bee don by the Church or by the Presbyterie iudging in the name of the Church Where all meÌ„ may see his meaning to bee this viz. that the Presbyterie may excoÌ„municat howbeit alwayes with the Churches free consent For so he signifieth by these wordes iudging in the name of the Church It can not be that hee should meane that they may Excommunicate by their owne power and right onely or whether the Church will or no. After the same maner also I doubt not som others do speake concerning the making king of Ministers Whose sense and meaning is to be taken altogeather to that purpose likewise In the Churches â—amâ— that is Executing the Churches â—uthoritie and power and doing that which they do with their free conâ—ent and approbation 16. Chemniciâ—â— Chemnicius a man most famous of â—are learning among the followers of Luther in the matter of the reall presence yet in our cause hee saith thus “ Exam. part pag. 226. 227. 228. Non sine consensu Ecclesiae Paulus Barâ—abas invitis obtruserunt Presbyteros Paul and Barnabas did not thrust Ministers on the Church being vnwilling or without their â—onsent And Exempla Aposiolica bistoria â—â—are oftendunt c. The examples of the Apostles storie do cleerely shew that Election or Vocation did belong to the whole church And Haec est Apostolicae primitiva veteâ—â— Eccesia sententia de legitima Electione Vocatione Ministrorum c. This is the iudgement and way of the Apostolike primitive and ancient Church concerning the lawful Election and Calling of Ministers which iudgement and way hath place in those Churches which are coÌ„stituted according to Gods word And he addeth In our Churches it is so meaning in those that follow Luther 17. Whitakeâ— Neither can I forget that among â—ur owne Country-men D. Whitaker â—eacheth thus “ De Coneâ—â— pag. 44. Quod omnes attingit ab â—â—â—â—bus approbari debet That which toucheth all Chap. 4. ought to be approved of all Meaning that nothing should bee obtruded vpon any people in Ecclesiasticall and Spirituall regiment no not by Synods except the people consent to it And this consent of the people hitherto avouched verily many other worthy Divines both among vs abroad do maintaine likewise But I forbeare to nominate any mo Knowing that to whom any thing will be enough
people of every Church alwayes ought to have by Christes and the Apostles ordinaÌ„ce as “ Pag. 19. chap. 3.4.5 before we have seene Nay to come nearer No proper and perfect Diocesan Church or larger ever did or doth admit the peoples free consent in their ordinarie governement Vniversally and alwayes it is so indeed it can not be otherwise For where each ordinarie Congregation hath their free consent in their ordinarie governement there certainly each Congregation is an intire and independent Body politike Spirituall and is indued with power in it selfe immediatly vnder Christ And so every of them are true proper Churches So that these Congregations admit not where they are any proper Diocesan Church or larger neither doth the proper Diocesan Church or larger admit intire and independent ordinary CoÌ„gregations Which as I said have their free consent in their ordinary governement They are indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as “ Reas. for 〈◊〉 form pag. 23.25 cannot stand together possibly And therfore it is likewise that which heretofore †Ibid pag. 8â— I have affirmed and so do still in the Newe Testament there is not any Diocesan Church or larger to be found Which point though I have in my Declaration proved it by this and 6. other reasons yet I will heere draw it into this Syllogisme againe No Church holding the peoples free consent in their ordinary governement with iust and decent order is Diocesan or larger Every Visible Church in the New Testament holdeth the peoples free consent in their ordinary governement with iust and decent order Therfore No Visible Church in the New Testament is Diocesan or larger The first proposition is manifest of it selfe and I have shewed it more “ Pag. 84 8â— 86. c. fully before The Assumption or 2. proposition is at large proved confirmed in those places which are noted in the margin before viz. pag. 19. and are mentioned againe particularly pag. 76. To which purpose also the whole 3.4 5. chap. do helpe Where I am to adde moreover that this Conclusion is true not only in the New Testament but also in the ages following a long while after That is no such Diocesan churches were fouÌ„d till 420. yeres after Christ yea til 680. and more were past Which I shewed before in the end of the fift Chap. as also I touched it in my Declaration pag. 24.25 But let it be remembred that heere I speake precisely of proper Diocesan Churches and larger There is therefore necessarily a distinction to be made of Diocesan Churches There are proper Diocesan Churches and larger there are improper The proper Diocesan Church and larger is where the people have no power freely to consent in the affaires of their ordinarie Church governement The improper Diocesan Church and larger is where although there be a kinde of Diocesan or larger Consociation of many ordinarie CoÌ„gregations in Spirituall governement vnder one generall Presidencie or Superioritie yet the ordinarie Congregations have their free consent at least they have nothing by their Spirituall Governors imposed on them against their wills Which kinde of Dioces church being duly ordered wee do not gainsay There are hereof also two kinds The one is “ Act. 15.2.3.6.7 Apostolicall viz. where many ordinarie Congregations consociating togeather in their spirituall governement have a Diocesan or larger Synod or Presbyterie over them for their better direction Such the forraigne reformed Churches at this day do enioy The other kinde is where many ordinary Congregations so consociating togeather have one person a constant President during life over them whom men after the Apostles called a Diocesan Bishop some a Metropolitan and such like other names Albeit of these there were without question divers kindes and sortes some exercising greater power and authoritie some lesse that is the ancienter had lesse the later for the most part alwayes had their power greater and greater Ad â—vagr in Tit. 1. For of these Ierome saith most truly both that their Matoritie over the Presbyters of Congregations was by Humane ordinaÌ„ce and also that it came in grew greater paâ—latim by litle and litle that is by degrees Albeit I say therefore that these Diocesan Bishops were of divers kindes sortes yet the first of them neither were in the Apostles times neither were they immediatly after the Apostles Contrariwise D. Downame affirmeth that Marke the Evangelist ordained in Alexandria a Diocesan church coÌ„sisting of many ordinarie Congregations Which he thinketh to prove by some words of “ Euseb 2.15 Eusebius who saith Marke first †D. Downâ— Def. 2.124 constituted churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Alexandria it selfe as he falsly translateth it I say this he falsly translateth as “ 3.137 3.25.16 Doct. Dovâ— also did before him wherevpon the whole grouÌ„d of their error doth rest Def pag. 17 â—â— Which their falsificatioÌ„ I shall by Gods helpe shew plainly out of Eusebius him self even in this very place The preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not heere signifie in a place as they vntruly imagine but it signifyeth to a place and so it ought to be translated In Latin we should say ad Alexandriaâ— ipsam or vsque ad that is to Alexandria or vnto Alexandria it selfe This is Eusebius true meaning For he would shew that Marke was the first that constituted Churches in the country of Egypt and withall that hee did so even vnto the chiefe City thereof viz. Alexandria And this is all that hee meaneth heere Twice in this very place besides Eusebius vseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this same construction and sense Both immediatly before the wordes in question and immediatly after Before thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Egypt or vnto Egypt After thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Rome or vnto Rome not in Rome nor in Egypt Wherefore so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifyeth likewise in this place which we have in hand seing it runneth in one coÌ„text together with the former and is all one manner of phrase Besides Eusebius straight after alleaging Philo concerning this same people whom Marke converted saith that he spake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Churches about in the Countrey and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about Alexandria not in Alexandria Last of all Eusebius vttereth this as he doth the next foregoing clause likewise with this terme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they say or some report By which and the like termes he vseth to relate vncertain and apocryphall things yea sometimes fabulous and vntrue For Eusebius is not precise in setting down all his matters chiefly those which he hath only vpon rumour and report And where hee seemeth to require credit in deed hee is not sparing to name his authors as Egesippus Clemens Dionysius and such other Wherefore divers wayes D. Downames presumptuous assertion and which he doth so boast of that Marke instituted many Churches in AlexaÌ„dria waÌ„teth
obey in all doubtes of conscience and questions of faith will easily make a great shew that he is the common Father and that all Princes ought to bee his Sonnes and that their States are appointed of God through Christ for the said Churches inheritance And therefore that they may bee brought vnder this Churches Holy Fathers obedience “ By what meanes soever vijs modis if the saide Church and her friendes can any way effect it Yea so far they may indeavour the advancement and inlargement of this Church into the possessions which Christ hath left to his Vicar if he can get them that in procuring the same they may ordine ad Deum lawfully destroy all obstinate resisters hinderers thereof But most of all where any States or Princes have ben formerly of that Church In such case they thinke by a double right they may iustly and ought necessarily seeke their conversion or confusion But all honest and truly religious Christians do heerein plainly see the pride of Antichrist Wherefore I will vnfolde this packe of spirituall and temporal mischiefes no farther Only I would to God that Governours and people also did marke the true Origen and fountaine of all this as they feele the harme that cometh of it Last of all from the due consideratioÌ„ of the forerehearsed points which have ben heere plainly and truly laid open it followeth and it is manifest that many among vs who would seeme to see somewhat in the knowledge of the Gospell do very fondly and improvidently say that our controversies in the Church of England are but for trifles and thinges indifferent and about Circumstances only not for any Substantial matters They who have any sense of their owne good or feare of future falling away of brethren can not but perceave the vanitie yea in deed the plaine follie and vntruth of such sayings First P. Martyr saith “ P. Mart. epist ad Domin Polon Wee must confesse the Church governement to bee not the least part of Christian religion and that the Gospell seemeth to be neglected by them who put away from them so excellent a part thereof Maister Cartwright affirmeth that it is †T. C. 1. pag 48. 2 247 of the Substance of the Gospell and that “ T. C. 1.26 2.570 the kinde of governement is a matter necessary to salvation and of faith And so Calvin saith as before I noted †Calv epist ad Sadoleâ— In illa Ecclesia formâ quam Apostoli constituerunt vnicum habemus verae Ecclesia exemplar a quo si quis vel minimum deslectit aberrat In that Forme of the Church which the Apostles seâ— downe we have the only patterne of a true Church from which if any bend aside never so little he erreth And thus in another place hee saith “ Instit 4.1.1 Externa subsidia Deuâ— quoque addidit quo infirmitatâ— nostra coÌ„suleret God hath also added Outward meanes and helpes whereby he may provide for our infirmitie Shewing that eveÌ„ touching Outward means our infirmitie is not holpen but by such only as God ordaineth for vs. See the Divine beginning institution of Christes Visible Church And that it is the worke of God to institute the Outward meanes in the exercise of religion the principall whereof is the Forme of the Visible Church and Governement Men can not institute this neither ought any to attempt so much for that is to intrude in Gods office Agreeable heerevnto is that which I have written in my “ Declarat pag. 38. c. Declaration where I shew that vnder the Gospell the forme of Christes Visible Church the kinde of governement and Calling of the Ministerie are matters of substance in religion fundamentall And more fully in a proper place for this point viz. in my Exposition of the second Commandement A true and plaine Exposition of the â— Com. Where I make it manifest that Mens institutions in these matters are a direct breach and violation of Gods sacred Lawe and Divine Commandement to vs even of the â—cond Commandement in the Decalogue and withall that Christes ordinances heerein are in deed partes of Gods true worship matters of doctrine matters of faith matters of substance in religion and ordinarily necessarie to salvation For these Outward Meanes where they are right true that is of Divine institution “ Before pag. 155. they are the instrumentall worke is and causes of inward grace and life to our soules and those that are of men are contrary Nothing in religion more important no thing more waighty then the Controversies now in England For by the true Outward Meanes as by ordinary Instrumentes God coÌ„veyeth to vs his grace giveth vs faith and bringeth vs to salvation God saveth vs not without meanes nor ordinarily without these meanes before named nor with or by these meanes being of Mens institution and invention and tradition His owne ordinances only hee sanctifyeth and blesseth Hee promiseth a blessing only to them to Mens devices though they seeme never so plausible or probable in the reason of men yet he giveth nothing hee promiseth nothing we can bee assured of nothing by them vnles it be of Gods anger Which indeed we may be sure of These then are no small matters I am sure nor Circumstances in religion but matters of substance as I said and such as wee ought first to know and vnderstand in our Christian professioÌ„ before we can reape firme assurance to our soules Without our vnderstanding the truth and falshood of these Outward meanes our whole faith and religion may soone bee shaken overturned specially in these distracted times Yea the manifold ill Consequentes before noted do all hange vpon the vniustifyable form and nature of Christs Visib Church the Ministerie and their Calling Which are the special matters of controversie now in England And particularly the Church of Romes advantage against vs I have somewhat opened “ Pag. 156.157 c. before viz. because the sacred right of Christes faithfull people touching their free consent in Church governement is denyed But in this I have ben to long The waightines of this matter touching the lawfull right making of Ministers and the perill of erring therein hath drawen mee to say so much In regard of all which wee may seâ— also the great cause which they had who published the Offer of Conference disputation The Offer of ConfereÌ„ce why it was published not long since Whereby they desired a iust and equall tryall which hitherto they could never have of these thinges which do so certainly touch the safetie of our soules Chiefly considering how violently they have ben overborne afflicted and despised in this cause as also they still are Moreover by this before delivered their affirmation is shewed evidently to bee true which the Doctor so ignorantly “ Def. 1 3â— skorneth where they say that †Considerâ—tion 6. some of the
in a good sense â—ay becalled a Parish one ordinarie assembly as I have said The true Grammar sense and proper meaning of the worde Ecclesia in those times doth proove it What Divinitiâ— shall we expect from these Doctors whâ— will pervert Grammar Which ouâ— Doctor is not ignorant of but his error heerein is wilfull All sound †See my Declarat pag. 18 32. Autors of the Greek toung according to whom the Apostles do speak do shew that Ecclesia in the times then and alwayes before signifyed one ordinarie Congregation only and not many His fift error heere is that the New Testament noteth some Churches not defining whether an intire church or but a part And he citeth Act. 9.31 and 15. 3.4.41 and 18.22 Rom. 16.16.23.1 Cor. 4.17 and 6.4 and 11.16 and 14.33 with a great many other But all these are likewise by him grosly abused For in all these places the Scripture speaketh intirely properly not by a figure whereof there is no cause appearing in the text Only in Act. 15.4 the Church signifieth a part namely the People because the text expresly distinguisheth it heere froÌ„ their Guids who were a part also Thus in all the whole Writings of the Apostles there is not one word which sheweth a Diocesan Church to have ben then Wherefore in this point hee is quite overthrowen The D. perverteth his text on which his Sermon Defense resteth yea his very text Apoc. â— 20 which was the whole foundation of his Sermon and Defence is found to bee vtterly perverted and abused togeather with the other places So that all which be buildeth vpon it followeth in his writing after is nothing but cavillation And namely that against my selfe in his pag. 6. where hee saith I have first strongly conceited that there is no true Visible Church but a Parish then have haled the places of scripture where Ecclesia is mentioned to the confirmation of my conceit Let him not abuse people as hee doth by the Equivocation of the word Parish For I meane not that the Apostolike Churches were Parishes as we cal a Parish now in England that is limited within a certaine circuit of grounde Though a Church may be so limited yet it is not necessarie neither was it so then But then every Church was such a Parish as I noted a little “ Pag. 201. Declar. pag. 18.19 Reas. for ref pa. 5.29 before And so it is very true Then why saith hee that I have first conceited that there is no true Visible Church but a Parish He might have seene it conceited before me by those noble and sacred instrumentes †Before pag. 103.104 32. c. And after pag. 214.215 Zuinglius Luther the rest of our Attestators But malice drave him against me as it hath driven him against me in other slanders likewise Wherefore rather he might have said that in this not I If in this the Scripture be haled Zuinglius hath don it c. but they have haled the Scripture from whom I have learned it But I hope those worthies knew the meaning of the Greek Ecclesia better then our Doctor though hee be conceited enough of his owne learning and they maintained it prosperouslie against stronger adversaties then hee â—is or ever will bee But in deed hee ought to blush to charge mee in this case with haling the Sciptures Him selfe haler of Scripture when him selfe is thus found to hale them and pervert them most vnconscionably as before is shewed He is often vpon this “ Def. 2.104.65 that the Church of Cenchreae Rom. 16.1 was a Membrall Church to the Church of Corinth and subiect to it But I have †Declarat pag. 30. els-where shewed this his presumptioÌ„ in taking the Apostles words figuratively here also without cause As if the Apostle called but a part of a Church by the name of a Church there being no reason in the text why he should heere speak Synecdochically Nay to take the Apostle so is coÌ„trarie even to his owne rule I will presse him with his owne wordes I would know of him what reason hee hath to forsake the grammaticall sense “ Def. 1. pag. 33. And where the Holy Ghost speaketh properly how dares be to expound him figuratively Heere I could leave of this point concerning his proofes from the New Testament for Diocesan Churches But that hee †Chap. â— resumeth Rev. 1.20 which was his text and laboureth to make shew of some reason therein First hee saith “ Pag. 42.43.44 those 7. Churches contayned the Cities and Countryes adioyning This is his Minor Which is not only contrarie to the propertie of the word Ecclesia before noted but also coÌ„trary to the expresse text beside which saith this Ephesian Church was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Ephesus Rev. 2.1 not without nor contayning that large Country Territorie adioying as he saith it did then The like the text saith of the Church in Smyrna and of the Church in Pergamus and so of all the rest Signifying expresly that every of these Churches was contayned at least when they met within their Cities His shifting heereabout pag. 105 is nothing And that of â—â—keniÌ„g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to it is as little For Act. 24.12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in the City and did not extend it selfe to the CouÌ„try adioyning viz. to the Civill Province of each of them This reason therfore of his is very vntrue Yet he would fortifie it further “ Pag. 43.56 assuming againe that Our Saviour writing to all the Churches of Asia nuÌ„breth but seaven If hee wrote to all then it may seeme that these 7. were generall Churches contayning in and vnder them many other inferior Congregations For it is not like but in Asia properly so called which was the Roman Province and †Cicer. Orat pro L. Flacco contayned Phrygia Mysia Caria Lydia there were moe ordinarie Christian Congregations then only 7. at that time Nay it is plainly false our Saviour heere writ not to all the Churches of Asia The text beside mentioneth “ Act. 20.7 Troas †Colos 4.13 Colossâ— Hierapolis which were questionles within these â—â—undes Magnesia Trallis in all likeâ—â—hood were now also Mentioned in Ignatius Epist and were no â—embers now of any of those seaven 〈◊〉 the Revelation And it is more then â—â—kely that many other besides these â—â—â—ere named were also Indeed Christ â—â—ould that all within Asia yea out â—f Asia too should exemplarily take â—dmonition by this which he writeth â—etsonally directly to these seaven â—one which is all that he meaneth in â—hose wordes “ Rev. 2 1â— Let him that hath an eare â—eare what the Spirit saith to the Churches â—ut this is nothing to proove that all â—hese other Churches were MeÌ„bers subâ—ect to those seaven Yet two reasons â—â—ore “ Chap. 4. he hath One is
this †Pag. 65. The Apoâ—les appointed Ministers to whole Cities and Countryes adioyning to labor so far as they â—ere able the conversion of all True What â—hen Therefore they appointed them â—o stande Ministers still to whole Ciâ—ies and Countryes adioyning I deny â—his consequence It is a plaine fallacie â—b eo quod est secundum quâ—d Fallaciâ— ad simpliciter 〈◊〉 pray Sir when Logike fayleth you play not the Sophister The Apostles appointed Ministers to convert what they could in great Cities and Countries adioyning yea and in the whole “ Math. 13.33 world but not to stand Ministers Pastors to all them when they should be converted But only according tâ— the order and forme of a Church seâ— downe in the New Testament Which representeth to vs each Ordinarie Congregation as an entire Church Wherefore they might not remayne as Pastors to all when all were converted because so Ordinarie Pastors after the time of the New Testament should become substantially contrary to the ordinary Pastors constituted in the New Testament It i Ì„s blasphemie to avouch that the Apostles intended the Churches forme should be substantially coÌ„trary to that which is in the New Testament Which certainly was never the Apostles intent it is no lesse then blasphemie for any that will persist in saying the Apostles intended so You will aske how are Pastors so large and so generall contrary substantially to Pastors of but one ordinarie Congregation I answer they are substantially coÌ„trary in that these may and do admit the Christian peoples free consent in Church governement the other can not these caÌ„ personally administer to their whole flocke they possibly can not but by Substitutes and Curates as wee call them For there the proper Pastors them selves are of necessitie must be grand Pluralistes and NoÌ„residents Which plainly are substantiall differences in Pastors Besides that the one can execute a whole and intire Pastorall Office the other can not c. as “ Declarat Pag. 12.13.14 15 16. â— els-where I have more fully declared His 2. reason is this †Def. 2.69 In the Apostles times the Churches were not divided into Parishes â—or Presbyters assigned to their several Cures Therefore then a Church was not a Paâ—ish I answere Heere againe hee doth nothing but Equivocat Let him vnderstand a Parish in that sense as before have defined it Pa. 204.205 and so I affirme that by the very Apostles the Churches were divided into severall Parishes That is â—ach Church was it selfe a distinct Paâ—ish and severally divided from all oâ—her Also the Presbyters then were assigned to their severall cures viz. to these Parishes or Churches But if hee â—ake a Parish as it is a Congregation liâ—ited within a certaine circuit of â—round and as a Dioces is subdivided â—nto many of them as they are now so â—ve speake not of them Yet commonly â—r altogeather †Pag. 77. hee doth so speake of â—hem Wherefore heere every man may â—â—e his vanitie Hee doth fly the true â—uestion and shufleth in things that â—e never intended Then his grosse vnâ—ruth vnschollerlike assertion ought 〈◊〉 bee marked where he saith “ Pag 75. The â—ord Ecclesia is of a larger extent then to sigâ—â—fy only one assembly I appeale to all auâ—entike Greeke Authors Thucidides Deâ—osthenes Plato Aristotle Isocrates c. Out â—f whom plentifull allegations may be brought all of them shewing that this word Ecclesia did evermore signifie only one assembly and never a dispersed multitude holding many ordinary set meetings in far remote places as Diocesan and larger Churches do Now according to these and other Greekes living in the Apostles dayes doe the Apostles speake And this I have heeretofore often “ Reas. for ref pag 64. Declarat pag 31. 32. above pa. 110. propounded and affirmed as a principall ground and cause of our dissent from the Church state in England And the ground is certain it can not be with reason spoken against The D. heere †Pag. 14. 15. putteth in to the contrary the vse of the word Ecclesia in Eusebius who vseth it to signify sometimes a Diocesan and Provinciall Church Hee doth so sometimes I deny it not And so after him the Fathers do vse the word likewise as Epiphanius Theodoret Chrysostome and the Councilles and Historie writers c. All this we know well But what have wee to doe with these Authors so late and so partiall as these all were touching the exposition of the Greeke word Ecclesia The time that Eusebius wrote in When Eusebius wrote was about 340. yeares of Christ or little lesse All the rest wrote after him At which time or before viz. presently vnder Constantine the outward forme of the Church did so alter and change from that vnder the Apostles even in substantiall points of Church politie or in such points as did come neere to the substance of it that it appeared outwardly to be allmost not the same And as the state of the Church altered so the Fathers and Councills which were then much affecting that state did alter the old vse of â—he words pertaining to these matters As they practised so likewise they spake and wrote And so have most men followed after them Wherby at the last Antichrist was vndoubtedly advanced But our noble “ Our Attestators before mentioned specially pag. 104. after pag. 214. forefathers of late having discovered this mysterie of iniquitie have found out also the corruption depravation even of this word Ecclesia which hath ben extended larger and farther then Apostolically it was The which abuse of this very word doubtles was a pregnant reason and meanes among other to extend the Church and Governement thereof to that Vniversalitie which it came to and is still vehemently chalenged by the Catholiks Wherefore great cause have we ad originem reverti to go backe even vp to the first originall and beginning as Cyprian well adviseth vs. For so saith he cessat error humanus thus and not otherwise error which hath begun from men will cease Wherefore wee must refuse Eusebius Epiphanius Theodoret and all either in or after their times for iudges or interpreters of matters or words specially touching Church-governement The forme whereof inclined toward alteration yea somewhat before them as wee may perceave in “ Can 6. Nic. Concilâ— through Humane ambition and desyre of greatnes which is incident even to the godliest best men But vnder Constantin and after it degenerated much more Wherfore in “ See before pa. 125. 127. conscience to God and to his blessed word we must leave all men when they so palpably differ from the Scripture as in this cause they doe cleave only and vnseparably to the plaine and †Math 22.29 Ioh. 5.39.40 Isa 8.20 proper writing of Christs Testament Hee “ In his chap. 5. indeavoureth to make voide some of our reasons against Diocesan Churches vnder
voice-giving which was then ordinary in Pastors calling Timothie I say came not to Ephesus by the peoples election nor Titus to Creet Paul only authorised them to that Ministrie Therfore their calling or sending thither was also extraordinary And Tâ—mothie attained giftes by extraordinary meanes viz by the Apostles miraculous laying on of hands though the D. deny it Then he addeth 3. other errors 1. The power of ordination and iurisdiction was wholy in Timothie and 〈◊〉 Titus Our Attestators “ Above pa. 23 26 36 38.4â— disprove thâ—â— 2. The function may bee the very sam where one person governeth the church wholy and alone where thâ— people do necessarily coÌ„cur with him Though his wordes bee not these yet his sense is cleerly so And all the next page hee beateth vpon the same Fearfully affirming that the difference “ Pag. 102. seemeth not to bee so essentiall Though he hold so yet see howe hee faltereth 3. Where he addeth the title or calling to a Church seemeth to be variable Which are all grosse vntruths coâ—uted in my †Pag 12 at 34 35. 38 c Declarat the 3. runneth amoÌ„g those evill opinions heere “ Pag. 133.134 before censured That which he addeth as it were a proofe for him the Iewes Church governors came to their places †Pag 103. by succession and lineall discent but in the Churches of Christ by free electioÌ„ is absolutly against â—imselfe For neither of these titles or coming to the Church-governement had bene lawfull by any meanes but because God so ordayned And it being so ordained by God in his word it was theÌ„ absolutly vnchangeable by men as in the Lawe so likewise vnder the Gospel which is the Law of Christ Where he saith the Apostles committed not the power of ordination and iurisdiction to all Ministers I answer they did as I have “ Declarar pag 25. elswhere shewed Their committing it to †Pag 104. Timothie c. denyeth it not to the other Presbyters in the several Churches neither doth the Angells power in the RevelatioÌ„ 2. exclude the ioint power of his fellow presbyters with him nor yet the peoples free concurrence with them all His last reason is If while the Apostles lived it was behoofull to substitute Bishops in the Churches then much more after their decease But the former is evident Therfore the later also This I wholy grant we mislike not Bishops In the end he falleth to the authoritie of those bastard “ Pag. 105. subscriptions namely of the epistles to Tim. and Titus Touching the which I referre him to Mr. Cudworth in his Supplement to Mr. Perkins on the * At the end of chap. 6. Galatians Where he shall finde them to be of no “ Pag. 106. greater antiquitie nor better credit then such counterfait drosse may be The †Pag. 107. testimonies of the Fathers which follow “ Pag. 244.259 have ben sufficiently answered Nowe I will gather briefly our Proofes that Timoth. or Titus were not proper Bishops Proofes that Timothie c. was no Bishop They are 8. in nomber First the H. Ghost made †Ephe. 4.11 Evangelists and Bishops or Pastors distinct persons Therefore the Apostles could not make them one And consequently Timothie and Titus being Evangelists as is known neither were nor could be made proper Bishops Sec An EvaÌ„gelist had an Office “ Ibid. superior extraordinarie temporarie and vnlimited a Bishop was inferior ordinarie perpetuall and limited to one Church Now these qualities are incoÌ„patible they can neither bee togeather nor successively in one person Therefore Timothie and Titus Evangelistes neither were nor could bee proper Bishops at any time Thirdly After Timothie had bene at Ephesus hee was an Evangelist 2. Tim. 4.5 For Paul chargeth him so to bee and cary himselfe Neither is there cause nor reason why Paul here should speake improperly and generally Therfore he spake properly “ See pag. 240. he was still a proper Evangelist and consequently not a proper Bishop And so likewise Titus Fourt Timothies Ministie at Ephesus extended to other distinct and intire Churches viz. to Smyrna to Sardis to Pergamus to Colossi to Hierapolis to Laodicea c. and not to the Church in Ephesus only But the Bishop of Ephesus ministrie was limited and appropriated to the Church in Ephesus only as also of Smyrna to Smyrna of Sardis to Sardis c. As the Angells in Rev. 2. do shew Therefore Timothie was not properly the Bishop of Ephesus And then neither Titus of Crete Fift Timothie was thesame no other at Ephesus then hee was at Philippi and Corinth at Athens and Thessalonica in Phrygia Galatia Mysia Troas But in these bee was no proper Bishop of any place Therefore neither was hee a proper Bishop at Ephesus So likewise * Declarat Pag. 29.30.6 Titus in Crete Sixt proper Bishops in those dayes were not called without the coâ—â—ent and voyces of their Church as before “ Pag. 164.251 hath bene shewed But Titus came to Crete and Timothie into Asia only by the Apostle Pauls sending vtterly without the peoples calling to whom they ministred in all those Churches Therefore Titus in Crete Timothie in Ephesus were no Bishops SeaveÌ„th If Titus were a proper Bishop in Crete then many distinct and intire Churches were not committed to him but only one But to Titus in Crete many distinct intire Churches were committed and not one only Therefore Titus in Crete was no proper Bishop The Assumption is plaine because hee had many “ Tit. 1.5 Cities in his charge And every City had a distinct and intire Church for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 †Act. 14.23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In every City in every Church do signifie all one thing And Eusebius “ Euse 4.22 maketh them so likewise But every proper Bishop is limited and appropriated to one Church only The D. saith assigned But that word is to loose Indeed a Bishop is limited appropriated as it were confined to one Church D. Bilson saith †Perpet gov pag 227. 232. affixed Therefore Titus was no Bishop nor Timothie neither Lastly Whatsoever reason maketh Titus Timothie Provinciall Bishops in Crete and in Asia the same serveth to make Paul or Peter Vniversall Bishops and to have Vniversal Bishops their Successors at Rome But no reason is sufficient to make Paul or Peter Vniversall ordinary Bishops of Rome nor that they should have Vniversall Bishops their Successors Therefore no reason sufficient to make Titus in Crete or Timothie at Ephesus Provinciall Bishops And so much of Timothie and Titus that they were indeed no proper Bishops which point yet Doct. Bilson “ See before pag. 241. confesseth to be their only holde After this let vs now shew how D. Downame grosly †Def. 2 14â— abuseth Calvin and Beza affiâ—ming that they ioyne with the Bishops
est qui ignoret Calvin saith In this place Mat. 18.17 “ Calvin Instit 4.11.1 Ius Iudaici Synedrij transfertur ad Christi â—egem And †Instit. 4.12.7 Illa est legitima in ExcoÌ„muâ—cando homine progressio si non soli Seniores â—orsum id faciant sed consciâ approbante â—cclesiâ c. * 4.1.15 Totius Ecclesia hac cognitio est Clavium potestatem Dominus fidelium soâ—etati contulit “ 4.1.22 And hee calleth Excommunication †11.2 Fidelium judicium the â—xcommunicat saith he is “ Ibidem 12.4 Fidelium â—uffragijs damnatus Thus must these â—ther worthy men of God be vnderâ—tood and not to contradict themselves Beza also of the Calling of Ministers â—aith “ Bez. CoÌ„fess 7 1â— Per quod ostium sunt ingress Quis â—os vocavit c. Vbi electio Presbyterij Vbi â—opuli suffragia By what dore entred they Who called them Where was the Election of â—he Elders Where was the peoples voice-giving By this shewing that hee helde the peoples free consent to be necessary also in the making of Ministers FINIS Math. 6.10 Thy will bee doâ— A Table of the chief matters contained in this Treatise A. HOw a true Church may bee Accidentally Pag. 306. The Angell of Ephesus a President during life pag. 237. The name Angell or Apostle given in Scripture to Ministers also Dominus in Latin c. proveth not that they may be called Lords iâ— English pag. 121. 123. c. All Apostolike Ordinances are Divine vnchangeable by men pa. 139. 142. The practise of Antiquitie for many ages with vs. pag. 53. c. Asia properly taken how large pag. 206. Comfortable Assurance where pag. 77. 154. 155. 159. Our Attestators were no Brownistes Anabaptists Schismatiks Fantastical Fanaticall doaters pag. 249. 279. 306. B. Belgike Liturgie and Synod with vs. pa. 50. Beza consenteth with vs fully in effect pag. 22. c. 49. 50. 322. Beza abused pag. 13. 22. 270. c. 322. Beza fayleth pa. 237. D. Billons chief matters in his Perp. gov answered pag. 99. 107. 108. 110. 112. 116. 120. 121. 132. 143. c. 146. 148. 239. c. 250. 261. 276. c. D. Bilsons Contradistions pa. 70. 71. 73. 107. 144. 146. 150. 225. 281. 283. 286. 288. 289. 290. 293. 302. 303. 305. We deny not Bishops simply pag. 14. 264. Seaven divers sortes of Bishops pa. 274. Bishops next after the Apostles differed from ours in substaÌ„ce of their Calling p. 98. 99. 128. A Bishop to a Parish pag. 32. 104. 213. c. Bohemian Confession for vs. pag. 48. Bucer for vs. pag. 33. Bullinger for vs. pag. 37. C. Calvin fully with vs. p. 25. c. 149. 193. 214. 269. 323. Calvin much abused p. 13. 267. c. 322. 323. Calling of Ministers must be by the Congregation or els we shall go to wracke pag. 159. 160. 161. 167. Calling of Ministers essentially by the Congregation pag. 246. 247. 78. 79. 80. 81. 164. 166. 168. The truth is not so fruitfully defended where Christs Visible Church Calling to the Ministerie is not well cleared pa. 158. 167. Circumstances in Church government changeable by men pag. 280. 247. Chemnicius for vs. pag. 47. 178. The Church-controversie in England for uâ— trifles pa. 193. 195. 269. 320. A Visible Church what See Ecclesia The dignitie and power of each Visible Church pag 164. 165. Christes Visible Churches Divine constitution pa. 74. 75. 142. c. 147. 102. 104. 154. Christes Visible Churches forme vnchangeable by men pag. 134. 135. 139. 142. 147. 149. 150. 153. 281. A true Visible Church essentially somtime with out Guides pag. 164. 165. 278. 298. 300. Why some strive to change the proper sense of the word Church Ecclesia in Mat. 18.17 pa. 216. Protestantes may iustifie their Church Calling to the Ministery soundly if they will pag. 262. 264. 266. 267. What God hath given to the Congregation men can not take away pag. 76. 77. The Offer of Conference not without necessarie cause and reason pag. 196. 250. The true cause and reason why we Conforme not pag. 137. Two maine pointes of our whole Controversie pag. 10. 303. But the chiefe of all is about the peoples free consent in Church govern pag. 10. 16. 17. Cornelius B. of Rome prooveth no Diocesan Church nor Bishop pag. 233. 234. Cyprian teacheth the peoples consent to bee juris Divini pag. 57. 59. D. Danaeus strongly with vs. pag. 41. 42. A Definition of Christes true Visible Church pag. 318. A Definition of a Diocesan Chuch pag. 200. A Diocesan Church proper improper p. 88. One kinde of improper Diocesan Church is Apostolicall pag. 89. The best sort of Diocesan Bishops not Apostolike pa. 15. 89. 90. Yet not simply evill pag. 16. 89 97. Nor yet expedient now ibid. All our question is against the proper Diocesan Church pag. 15. 88. 97. 98. 131. 225. Substantiall differences between a Church and Ministerie of one Congregation and of a Diocesse pag. 208. 128. 129. A Diocesan church but in a shadow till Constantines time p. 126. 226. c. 231. c. 253 No proper Diocesan Church can bee where the people freely consent pag. 84. 85. c. 88. Apropre Diocesan Church is new pag. 226. A proper Diocesan Church induceth the Pope pag. 157. 179. The Papistes shame Diocesans about their church constitution and calling to the Ministerie pag. 161. 167. 169. 171. 172. 183. 150. Diocesan Bb. are pluralitie men and Nonresidents pag. 131. 185. Diocesan Bd. Metropolitans in Office Archbishops Patriarkes in substance are all one pag. 273. Yea a Vniversall Bishop also pag. 181. 184. 186. 189. 191. In a proper Diocesan Church a true church may be but accidentally pag. 306. 87. Dionysius the first titular Diocesan Bishop in the West pag. 92. 93. Diplodophilus one holding two wayes to heaven pag. 104. 125. 151. 153. D. Dove turneth Eusebius falsly for his advantage 3 times pag. 226. 227. 90. D. Downames Defence answered pa. 11. c. 98. 199. c. 221. c. 245. c. D. Downame maketh Apostles and Evangelistes inferiour in iurisdiction to Bishops pag. 241. 260. 251. D. Downames levitie pag. 14. 74. 83. 313 D. Downames vaine boast pag. 217. D. Down abuseth Scripture p. 201. 202. 203. E. Ecclesia a Church Visible is only one Ordinarie CoÌ„gregatioÌ„ pa. 102. 103. 104. 108. 110. 201 202. 203. 205. 209. 213. 214. 322. 323. The question of Elders or Presbyters wholy impertinent pag. 11. 12. 62. Our adversaries still Equivocat or contradict them selves pag. 14. 15. 98. 99. Their Equivocation pag. 120. 121. 148. 204. 209. 240. Evaristus Titles were but precincts or quarters in one Congregation not Parishes pa. 93. Eusebius of no persit credtt 91. 92. 229. And yet in many things for vs. F. Fabulous and bastard writings cited by Doct. Downame pag. 257. Raw and vndigested Fancies pag. 147. Fathers after 300. yeares of Christ no fit iudges of
propositions which they offer to maintayne are such as if they were not true wee can not iustly separat froÌ„ the Church of Rome nor stand out against it Those some Proposittions which they meane are namely the fourth eight set down in that Offer Which affirme that a Church is but one Ordinary CoÌ„gregation and that the people ought to have their free consent in the spirituall governement thereof Vnto which may be added the 5.6.7 and 10. as being all of one nature by cleere and certain consequence The soundnes and firme truth of all the which hath ben sufficiently prooved and declared heeretofore and might by such a right ChristiaÌ„ tryal as there they desire bee brought to further light Wherefore D. Downames absurd reproches against that treatise calling it most senselesly “ Def 1.382 4.81 an Vnchristian and vnmodest Offer and the Positions therein Schismatical novelties do declare with what gall of bitternes his heart over-floweth against the truth against his brethren as “ Def. 2.48 hee dissemblingly calleth vs and also against those noble Pillars of the Gospell before alleaged our Attestators who are heerein his vtter adversaries whatsoever he pretendeth to the coÌ„trary He as a cocke on his owne dunghill may crowâ— what he list But if the Offer had ben or might bee accepted in such equall order as is there tendered he would be made to eate his wordes I doubt not and all the infamie of Schisme Noveltie would fall vpon his owne head Without which acceptanc elet the Doct. know that his tedious and Sophisticall writing all other such like will be held by wise men to bee vaine boasting and no better coÌ„quest then of such Champions as draw their weapons strike fight and take on at adversaries whose handes they will bee sure them selves have firste tyed fast Yea whom they will bee sure to have in their power to imprison and persecute if any presume to move against them Neither will they indure to bee shewed the imminent danger from the common enimy till all come about their heads And so much touching the important CoÌ„sequences of our present Assertion CHAP. 8. An answer to divers chiefe Obiections of the adversaries of this cause noting also brieflie their immodest not Christianlike reproches against this Evangelicall doctrine FIRST we will consider heere D. Downames second booke of his Defence D. Downames Defence 2. Booke answereâ—â— affirming and maintaining that there were proper DiocesaÌ„ Churches vnder the Apostles Which being true the people then certainly had not a free consent in Church-governement A cleare reason whereof I shewed before pag. 85. And I willingly acknowledge it still Yea and likewise that neither now they ought to have That vnder the Apostles the Churches were properly Diocesan the D. affirmeth in the title of this second book of his Defense and doth his best to maintaine it in the whole processe thereof afterward Where indeed I coÌ„mend him above al others that ever wrote in this cause against vs D Downames commendatiors namely for that hee doth more fitly and rightly set downe the point of the controversy which hath so long troubled Christian people in England Chap. 8. then any other before him hath don Which “ Whether proper Diocesan Churches were vnder the Apostles point only if it were Christianly and plainly decided would bring great contentment and a ioyful Vnitie I am perswaded to many thousandes But the proofes of his assertion heere do all faile him Nay they are strangely abused and perverted by him specially his Scriptures And heerein he is little to bee commended Let vs examine therefore his Scriptures and then the rest Yet by the way wee will Define a proper Diocesan Church The Definition of a Diocesan Church before wee begin with him A Diocesan Church is a Societiâ— of professed Christians whose spirituall governement is practised without the peoples sieâ— consent and whose Pastor hath a pluralitie of ordinarâ—e Congregations in his charge Such a Church we deny to have ben vnder the Apostles and I pray the Reader to have recourse to those seaven Reasons of mine which I have “ Declarat pag. 20.21 c. elswhere set downe to proove this my denyall and to disprove his assertion Now what doeth the Doctor bring to proove his opinion Expect not good Reader that I should follow him in his vaine flourishes and needles amplificatioÌ„s repetitions invectives other passages more fit for ostentation to satisfy his inteÌ„perate humor then for profit My desire is so as I may with perspicuitie in the cause to vse brevitie and if not to deâ—iver multa paucis yet to take heed not to deliver pauca multis as hee doth Wherefore I will pick out that which 〈◊〉 see materiall in him the rest I will â—et passe In his first Chapter pag. 4. he â—etteth downe a most confused distriâ—ution of the divers senses of the Greeke word Ecclesia D. Down Defen 2.4 in the New Testament which we vsually translate 〈◊〉 Church Wherein hee committeth 5. errors pertinent to our question First from this in Mat. 18.17 Act. 15.22 hee â—ould make a Synod or Consistone which have answered before pa. 108. c. Seâ—ondly a Nationall Church of the Iewes Act. 7.38 Which likewise I have anâ—wered in Reas. for Reform pag. 5. in the margin Thirdly Christian Nationall Churches in the nober plurall as he speaâ—eth namely in Rom. 16.4 1. Cor. 16.1 â—9 2. Cor. 8.1 Gal. 1.2.22 Which places â—e abuseth perverteth most rudely and desperatly The wordes do exâ—resly signifie nothing but a nomâ—er of Ordinarie Congregations Such wee meane by Parishes â—ath of them assembling in one â—lace or at most contayning “ See my Declarat pa 10. and 18.19 28.29.31.32 no mo ordinary assemblies then one and he without yea contrary to the expresse â—etter fancieth to him selfe a Nationall Church from no ground nor shew of ground in these places Fourthly he bringeth Act. 5.11 and 8.1 and 11.12 and 12.1.5 and 13.1 and 14.23 20.17.28 1. Cor. 1.2 2. Cor. 8.23 2. Thes 1.1 1. Tim. 5.16 Iam. 5.14 Apoc. 1.4.11.20 and 2.1 c. to prove a Church of a Citie and Country adioyning Where his error is like to the former What should I say to this man Not one of all these signifyeth a Church of a City and Country adioyning if he meane it to be extended or intended to mo ordinarie Congregations then only one Which is his meaning It is true the Churches of these Cities heere specifyed viz. of Ierusalem Antioch Ephesus Corinth Thessalonica c. might have meÌ„bers then which dwelt scatteringly and some a good way of from the place of their ordinarie maine meeting and such also as did assemble often in divers vncertain companies as in times of trouble there is reason it often commeth to passe but yet in those primitive times they all in each Church then made no mo but “ Which