be it is superabundantly recompenced with far greater blessings when wee practise Christes ordinance And truly this must be so Such a Bishop to such a Church must be if the Do. opinion be true that Christ hath in the New Testamēt appointed a Vniversall Church Visible being but one Body subiect to governement as above we have seene Hee addeth These reasons may suffice Yea truly they suffice to make 10000. Papists but they wil never reclaime one Vnto this wee may adde that the very Natures of a Diocesan or Provinciall Church and of a Vniversall have no essentiall difference in them The very Forme and Order of administring thē differeth not in any substantiall point Only a Church limited to one ordinary Cōgregation differeth essentially from a Vniversall Church as also from a Diocesan and Provinciall as “ Declar. pag. 11. 12. 13. I have shewed elswhere Whence it is that where the Church is Diocesan or Provinciall as it is now in England there is an easie passage to the Vniversall and sooner they may be combined into one then where the Churches are limited each to one ordinarie Congregation the people inioying their free consent in Church-governement Nay there are many stronge seeming reasons inducing men of reason to yeelde that the Diocesan and Provinciall Formes of Churches not only may easily but also ought necessarily to bee combined to come into one Vnivers Church For whatsoever is or can bee brought by Doctor Downame or any other to maintayne Diocesan and Provinciall Churches the same is much more pregnant for a Vniversall And what warrant alloweth them to rule over the particular Congregations that same requireth them to be ruled also by a Vniversall Church If Diocesans and Provincialistes go about to produce Scripture for their origen institution they do it so weakly so vntowardly and so vnlikely that any man seeing considering it without partialitie would bee ashamed But heere the Catholikes step in boldly foorth-with they name sundrie places in the New Testament for their Vniversall Church Visible Eph. 4.4 12. 16. Math. 16.18 1 Cor. 12.28 Rev 20.9 Gal. 4.26 And in the Creed I beleeve the Catholike Church Which indeed have more shew for it then anie places have for Diocesan or Provinciall Churches independent as ours be in England Againe if Vnitie concorde and peace-making be a reason for Diocesan and Provincial churches it is much better for a Vniversal Church For it is true a Vniversall Church may cause in Christendom a kind of Vnitie peace but Diocesan Provincial Churches can never For among these there may bee easily so many opinions as there bee Provinces Their Bishops beeing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heads by them selves Where the D. saith †The Church was freer from Schismes before the Papacie Def. 3.66.67 then vnder it It is most vntrue and it bewrayeth in him much ignorance though he disdaine to have that once imagined in him The case being thus what resistance can be made to the subtill and mightie perswasions of Iesuites and Popish Priestes vrging tender soules consciences vpon these advātages Chiefly when they shall shew them withall that our great learned Divines Doctors confesse that Christ hath ordayned in the New Testament that his true Visible Church should be one Body subiect to governement A strange oversight in our Defenders against Poperie granting a Vniversall Church Visible in the N. Testam and that a Vniversall Church Visible is Christes ordinance now vnder the Gospell Seeing it is plaine that a Vniversall Church Visible at this day in all the world there is none but the Romane And the Roman Church in deed is a Vniversall Visible Church intending to have and having members in every Nation vnder heaven Yea it hath seemed to have bene such for these thousand yeares past but the Catholikes avouch it to have ben ever since Christ And why may not that bee likely if a Vniversall Visible Church bee Christes Ordinance Certainly Christes Visible Ministerial Church must continue “ Math. 28.20 alwayes from the time of his Ascētion vnto the Worlds end And some-where extant it must be But this hath not ben any where since in all Christendome except at Rome Whence it will follow if those our Doctors sayings be true that the Roman Church hath ben and is Christs Vniversall Church Visible It is fond to obiect as some doe that No particular Church can be Vniversall because they are opposit And so neither can the Roman Church seeing it is particular bee Vniversall I saye this is fond For a Vniversal Church Visible must have some particular Visible Church to bee their Head As from King David till Christ the Vniversall Church had the particular Church at Ierusalem for their Head So the Roman◠Church may be the Head of the Vniversall Church visible now if Christ have ordayned any such which those our D.D. seeme to grant and in that respect it may bee well called a Vniversal Church though it selfe bee but particular Thus the Catholikes will have strong advantage still vpon the Provincials And they will presse that we ought rather to imbrace the Vniversall Church then any Diocesan or Provinciall independent as ours in England is Nay they will shewe that if we will be saved simply we must be professed members of Christes Vniversal Church Visible seeing Chirst hath ordayned it And this absolutly can not be mo then only one in the world And in this case we must suspect our opinions in religion which differ from the doctrine of Christes only true Church we must thinke it at least probable that the doctrine of the said Church is the very minde of Christ though otherwise wee might make question of somewhat therein And such doubtes must be decided tryed within the saide Church not without it So that first we must provide that our selves be in the communion of the said Church And this after the former reckoning will proove as I have shewed to bee the Roman Church And so Doctor Downame and the rest have spun a faire threed Which fearfull inconvenience and mischiefe followeth by denying this true Christian Assertion viz. that Christes true Visible Church vnder the Gospel is only one Ordinary Congregation as also this that the peoples free consent in the Church governement ought to bee alwayes admitted To grant a Vniversall Church Visible vnder the Gospel is the groūd of all mischief Where may be added an other vnspeakeable and intolerable mischiefe which cometh by this magnifying of a Vniversal Visible Church against the Kings Maiesties Soveraigntie and against al other Civil Magistrates free governement A Vniversall Visible Church is the very ground and reason that so many do give their lives against the oth of allegeance to our King as now there do and as it may be feared many mo will For the Vniversal Pastor or Bishop of the said Vniversal Visible Church whom the members are bound to heare 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
and whose faith wee follow therein whom I put first namely for their singular perspicuitie and resolutnes in it Then I will rehearse the practise of the most ancient times after the Apostles After that I will remember our very adversaries consent with vs heerein sometimes Then I will shew some certaine firme consequences whiche follow from this ground necessarily also some true great inconveniences in reâ—ecting this doctrine Moreover I will answer some of the adversaries chiefest obiections noting also briefly their immodest and vnchristian reproches against this Evangelicall truth And finally adding a brief advertisement touching this cause we will commit the whole coÌ„sideration thereof to the vpright hearted and discreet Christian Reader CHAP. III. The testimonies of many particular late Writers of blessed memorie making for vs in this matter BEGINNING therefore with the New Writers I iudge it meet and convenient to alleage in the formost place the resolut determination of Maister Beza Beza because he of al others is thought by some vnadvised persons to be most against vs in this point Now hee disputing this question at large in his Epist 8â— setteth downe this conclusion Populo invito nihil obtrudatur Let nothing be imposed on the people or Congregation agâ—aâ—t their willes Then the which verily we desire no more this is all in substance that we seek in our assertion Againe vnles it bee so the Church-governement either is a Monarchie or a verie Oligarchie But Maister Beza expresly condemneth both these and the later namely on Math. ca. 18.17 Wherefore howsoever Maister Beza interpreteth some things otherwise then we do vseth some times other phrases then we perhaps do thinke so fit or so frequently to be vsed yet touching this point in question hee agreeth wholy with vs in substance and in effect For let this which he in these wordes setteth downe be yeelded vnto vs theÌ„ wee are satisfyed for the substance of Church-governemeÌ„t To which purpose Maister Beza saith also in Confes 5.35 The Apostles intended in the Churches which they planted that no Pastor should bee obtruded on a flocke against their willes Yet moreover I pray the Reader to note that even hee also strongly maintayneth this right of the people in the affayres of their soules many tymes in more free and large termes As where he saith “ Confes 5.34 I finde no where in any Christian Church built vp that any is promoted either to the Ministerie of the word or Deaconship or Eldership any other way then by a publike and free election And †Sect 35. I repeat againe that which I said before It was never receaved in Christian Churches established that any should be admitted to an Ecclesiastscall function but being freely and lawfully chosen of that Church which it concerneth Againe “ ibid. Pastors are not to be chosen without the consent of the whole Church Also * ibid. They whosoever they are bring Tyrannie into the Church if they call any man to a publike function at their owne will the consent of the multitude being neglected Againe “ ibid. Presbyters were chosen by the voyces at least by the allowance of the whole assembly Vpon the Act. 14.23 he saith See Oecumen in hunc loc Also Badei Commentar The force of this word Chirotonein is to be noted that wee way know Paul and Barnabas did nothing by their private will neither exercised any tyrannie in the Church He meaneth that they here made Ministers by the peoples voyces or free consent not otherwise And vpon 1. Time 5.22 All the authoritiâ— of making Ministers was not in Timothie alone but election being made by the consent of the whole Church then the President of the assemblie did consecrate him by laying on of handes And on 2. Cor. 2.8 By the publike consent of the Church declare that you embrace that penitent sinner againe as a brother even as by the publike iudgement of the Church he was cast out In all the which it is easie to see Maister Bezaes minde and resolution in this question to bee cleerely with vs. As for that which D. Downame “ Defens 4. pag. 81. obiecteth out of him where he calleth one Morellius †Deâ—grad Ministr 6.23 Fanaticall because he pleaded in like maner for the popular governement The D. abuseth Beza and vs all Morellius pleaded for the popular governement in far vnlike maner He sought in Churches perfectly established to bring all things in particular and ordinarily to the peoples hearing examining iudging and voice-giving But neither Beza nor we intend so Wee acknowledge that the ordinarie sway of all Ecclesiasticall authoritie ought to bee in the true Bishop or Pastour of the church and we affirme that right wel so it may bee although never anie thing be imposed on the Church by him against their willes Which thing D. Downame him selfe also acknowledgeth may be and “ Def. 4. p. 21 was heeretofore in a state of the Church * Rather about 420. about 400. yeres after Christ which hee seemeth to allow of Saving that he cunningly falsifyeth the wordes of the Councill which there he mentioneth to wit in saying the assent or connivence of the people where the Councill saith “ Concil Carth. 4. Can. 22. the assent and connivence But to proceed By this before alleaged all men may see Maist Bezaes iudgement in this cause to be as I said cleerely with vs. And so much concerning him In the second place we will consider Maister Calvin 2. Calvin a Pastor and Guide of the Church of Geneva before Mai. Beza Hee also every where in all his writings is a most earnest patron of this point which heere we professe I will note certain of his sentences to this purpose Saith he “ Instit 4.5.15 Est haec ex verbo Dei legitima Ministri vocatio vhi ex populi consensu approbatione creant qui visi suerint idonei Preesse autem Electioni debent alij Pastores nequid per levitatem vel per malae studia vet per tumultum à multitudine peccetur This is the lawfull calling of a Minister by the word of God where they which seeme fit are created by the consent and approbation of the people Indeed other Pastors ought to moderate and order the Election least the multitude should offend through lightues or ill affection or tumult And a litle before Videmus ipsum Paulum ex populi suffragijs Episcopos creare solitum We see that Paul him selfe was wont to create Bishops by the voyce giving of the people Againe Falluntur qui putant vel Timotheum Ephesi vei Titum in Creta regnum exercuisse vt suo vterque arbiâ—rio omnia disponeret Praefuerunt enim tantum vt bonis salutaribus consilijs populâ— praeirent non vt soli exclusis alijs onnibus agerent quod placereÌ„t They are deceaved who thinke either that Timothie at Ephesus or Titus in Crete did
the whole Church This ought to go before that iudgement And Non absque consensu Ecclesiae quispiam excommunicari potest lus hoc ad Ecclesiam pertinet neque ab illâ eripi potest Witthout the consent of the Church not any one can bee excommunicated This right belongeth to the Church neither ought it to bee taken away from it And the consent of the people is still to be observed in Excommunication both that tyrannie may be avoyded that it may be done with greatâ—er fruit and gravitie The same worthy man greatly coÌ„mendeth the pietie of a Bishop at Troie in France who about the yeare 1561. left his Popish state and did betake him to a flocke of Christians there Epict. â—â— and taught them the word of God purely But quia ei gravis scrupulus â—iectus est de suâ vocatione quod in ed Ecclesis ac populi Elestionem seu Censirmationem uâ— is habuerit ideò c. Beâ—ause he had a great scruple in his conscience about his Calâ—aâ—g seeing hee had not therein the Elâ—ction or Confirmation of the Church and people Therefore hee sent for the Elders of the reformed Church and desired theÌ„ that they would consider godly and wisely whether they would chose confirme and haâ—e hâ—n for their Bishop Which if they thought good to do hee would doe his indeavour that as hee began so hee would go on as hee was able by teaching and exhorting to edifiâ—â— and increase the Church committed to him But if they thought him not fit for so great an Offâ—â—â— they should speake it freely and openly hee was â—eadie to give place c. And hee desired that they would speedily deâ—berate with the Church about the matter Which when it was done hee was acknowledged â—aâ— reâ—eaved of all with one consent as a true Bishop Wherefore his authoritie and pâ—â—iâ— doth much profit the Church of Chriâ—t God bee praised who governeth and gâ—ideth the kingdome of his Sonne in this manner O where shall wee see such Bishops in these dayes 8. Musculus Musculus also speaketh and reasoneth cleerely with vs heerein Hee saith †Com. plac Of Min. Elect. There is no doubt but the Apostles keâ—t that maner of ordayning viz. after the church had chosen And After fasting and praying which was wont to be done in the Congregation of the faithful They ordayned Elders which were first chosen of the faithfull And this forme of Electing and ordayning Elders and Bishops the Apostle commended vnto his fellow workman Titus and Timothie saying “ Tiâ— 1 5. For this cause I left thee in Crete c. For who would beleeve that he ordained that Titus should do otherwise then both hee and the rest of the Apostles were accustomed to do Therefore both by example and ordinace of the Apostle in the primitive church Elders Pastors Bishops and Deacons were in the Ecclesiasticall Meetings chosen of the people by lifting vp of handes Also hee saith The Forme of Election vsed in the Apostles times is conformable to the libertie and priviledge of the Church whereof Cyprian made mention and that forme of choise whereby men began to be thrust vpon the people of Christ beeing not chosen of it doth agree to a Church which is not free but subiect to bondage And this forme of electioÌ„ by the peoples choise he calleth the Old the Fittest the Divine the Apostolicall and lawfull election the other to come from the corrupt state of the Church and Religion 9. Bullinger Bullinger assirmeth thus “ Decaâ— 5.4 The Lord from the beginning gave authoritio to the Church to chose and ordayne fit Ministers And Those which thinke that the Bishop Archbishop have power to make Ministers vse these places of the Scripture * Tit. 1. Therefore I left thee at Crete that thou mightest appoint Elcers Towne by Towne And againe “ 1. Tim. 5. Take heed that thou lay not thy handes rashly on anie But we answer that the Apostles did not vse any tyranny in the Churches nor themselves alone to have don these thinges which pertayned either to Election or Ordination other men in the Church shut out For the Apostles and Elders did create Bishops and Elders in the Church but communicating their counsaill with the Churches yea and with the consent and approving of the people Yea of Ministers that governe anic Church without or against their consent thus he saith “ In 1. Coâ— 5.4 Vâ—bem prodere diâ—untur Legati qui diversum ab eo quod ab vrbe prescriptum est agunt Those embassadors are said to betray the Citie who do any thing divers from that which is prescribed them by the Citie 10. Gualter Gualter likewise is as plaine as can be Saith hee of the calling of Ministers †Hoâ—â—il in Act 13.1 Divinitùs vocatos esse censebimus quâ—scunque Dei spiritus donis necessarijs instruxerit legitiâ—â—s Ecclesiae suffragijs elegerit Aliquas enim in hac causa partes Ecclesiae mandatas esse hiâ— locus perspicuè tradit Ecclesiae calculum spiritus requirit We wil esteeme them to have a calling from God whomsoever Gods spirit hath â—â—abled with necessarie giftes and hath chosen by the Churches lawful giviâ—g of voyces For this place plainly sheweâ—h that in this cause there are some partes committed to the Church The Spirit requireth the Churches iudgâ—ment Afterward he saith “ In Act. 14. â—â— Foedá tyranâ—ide Ecclesiarum slatus opprimitur The state of the Churches is oppressed by filthy tyrannie where at this day the Churches have not this libertie to give their free consent at least For heere he respecteth that right and iust order according to the rule of the Gospell which before he had described †In Act. 1. â—â— Ministrorum verbi Ecclesiae Electiones atque ordinationes non occultè intra privatos parietes à paucis hominiâ—us sed publicè ab Ecclesia in totius Ecclesiae conspectu fieri debent Neque noâ— movet quod Paulus alibi vni Tito vel Timâ—theo ius potestatem Episcopoâ— eligendi tribuere videtur Non enim illos privata authâ—ritate quiâ—quam agere voluit sed pro antistâ—tum â—fficio iubet curare vt Ministri digni idones legittimè crdinentur Nec verisimile est illis plus concessum fu isse quà m Apostolis ipsis qui inconsulta Ecclesia nihil in hac causa vnquam statuerunt Nam paulo post Diaconos coram Ecclesia publicè eligunt Paulus oum Barnabá collectis viritim suffiagijs Presbyâ—eres per Ecclesias singulas ordinavisse leguntur Act. 6. 3.4 The Elections and ordinations of the Ministers of the word and of the Church ought not to bee made secretly within privat walls by a few men but publikly by the Church and in the face of the whole Church Neither doth it moove vs that Paul inan other place seemeth to give right power of chofing Bishops to Titus aloâ—e
these are enough CHAP. IIII. The publike consent of many late yet excellent Churches heerein with vs. NEvertheles yet I will not spare to adde heerevnto also certain publike voyces of most famous Churches The CoÌ„sestion of the Bohemian Churches hath these words “ Bohemie Confess cap. 〈◊〉 AnimaruÌ„ Curatoribus singulis Ecclesiasticis CoÌ„munitatibus sive parvae sint sive magna Claves concreditae sunt concessae Sic Dominus dixit Ecclesiâ—s Amen dico vobis quacunque ligaveritis in teria erunt ligata in coelo quaecunque solveritis in terra erunt soluta in coelo Et mox Nam vbi duo aut tres congregati fuerint in nomine meo ibi in medio eorum sum The Keyes that is Ecclesiastical governement are given in trust and graunted to the Pastors and to every Ecclesiasticall Communaltie that is ordinarie Congregation whether they bee smal or great So the Lord said to the Churches Verily I say vnto you Whatsoever you binde in earth shal be bound in heaven and whatsoever you loose in earth shalbâ— loosed in heaven And by and by For where two or three shal be gathered togeather in my name there am I in the middest of them The Helvetian Confession saith Helvet confess .. prior Artic 17. Quae cùm vera Dei Electio sit Ecclesiae suffragio Sacerdotis manuum impositione rectè comprobatur Which when it is Gods true ElectioÌ„ it is rightly approoved by the Churches voyce-giving and the laying on of handes of the Minister The Genevian Liturgie setteth downe expreslie Genev. the peoples consent to be necessarie both in their Calling of Ministers and Excommunication of impenitent offenders Beza also witnesseth the same vse in the Elections at Geneva and likewise in other places where there are free Churches Saith he “ Bez. de grad Minist cap 11. Presbyters heere are chosen not without the knowledge and consent of the people So every where in other free Churches according to the condition of the place the like choice is made Elswhere also he saith of the same thus †Annotat in Act. â—4 2â— Habemus nos Dei beneficâ—o certas nostrae vocationis notas legitimo ab Ecclesijs nostris vita doctrinae testimonio ernati ab yÌ„sdemelects ac demurn etiaâ— in nostro ministerio confirmats Cus Domiaâ—â— vt spero eâ—ectis tum furibus tum mercenarijs benedicet Wee have by Gods goodnesâ— certain notes of our Calling having good testimoâ—e from our Churches both for our life and doctrine and being by them Chosen and Confirmed also in our Ministerie Which I hope the Lord will blesse when hee will caâ—â— out both theeves and hirelings According to this order out of question the Savoyan Churches Savey and the French also generally are constituted French Which the French Liturgie doth likewise prove The Churches of Scotland before the late wofull breaking off from their former consent did approove the same publike Order of the Churches of France and Geneva aforesaid Scottish Also the publike Order set forth in the Low countreis consenteth herewith Belgiâ— The Synod of Middelburgh Anno 15â—1 decreeth thus of the Chosing of Ministers “ Artiâ— Electio sit penes Ecclesiam fiat per suffiagium in templo publicè Let the Election of the Ministers bee in the power of the Church and let it be done by voyces publikely in the Temple Afterward they determine thus Nulla Ecclesia nullus Minister Nullus Senior nulluâ— Diaconus vllum â—abeat primatum super alterum No Church no Minister no Elder no Deacon may have any kinde of primacie above other Chap 4. The Synod of Tilleburgh in Nasovia Anno 1582 Nasson receaveth these Points for them selves also as Zepperus sheweth in the end of his Politia Ecclesiastica There is a publike Order publâ—â—ed in Middelburgh Anno 1602. agreeing withall the former which touching the Chosing of Ministers saith thus The partie as chosen with the free consent of the Ministers Elders and the whole Congregation to be ordayned is to frame his Sermon c. Touching Deposing of them thus By the like authoritie as he was elected he is to be Deposed Touching Excommunication thus It is ordayned that nothing be attempted in that behalfe without the determination of the whole Congregation Wherevnto the Churches vnder the Palsgrave do agree Palatin in whose publike Catechisme thus we read “ In the end of part â— The Church by the commandement of Christ his Apostles vsing the Keyes ought tâ—o drive the wicked from this Supper till they shall repent and change their maners Which Vrsinus the approved interpreter therof doth shew to be with the peoples free consent as “ pag. 41. before out of Vrsmus wee observed Finally Other churches this same is allowed by those Churches also which follow Luther according to Chemnicius testimonie of them “ pag. 47. before alleaged Chap. 5. where at least he signifieth that many of them do allow it Which many other churches besides do also whoÌ„ here I name not Hitherto I have truly and plainly declared as touching these later times who they are who have ben our Maister Teachers in this matter of the Church constitution governement viz. that it ought to bee alwayes with the peoples free consent Verily now it appeareth I hope that we neede not bee ashamed either of these noble lights of Religion or of this doctrine which manifestly wee have learned and receaved from such worthies CHAP. V. The Testimonies and practise of the best Antiquitie after the New Testament heerein likewise with vs. HOwbeit furthermore that it may not bee thought noveltie or vnbeseeming Christian Religion although no honest maÌ„ will once think so of any thing which such a vniforme coÌ„sent of so renowned late Christians doth iustifie yet I iudge it very coÌ„ venient to produce also some testimonies of the most ancient times of Christianitie after the Apostles downe-ward even while anie soundnes of the Gospell did openly shew it selfe in the world I say such testimonies I purpose heeâ—e to shew of famous Christians as have ben alwayes continually after the Apostles by which the practise of the peoples free consent in their Church governement is approoved yea in peace as well as in persecution till the tyrannie of Antichrist would beare it no longer in any publike state And this God willing I shall performe in this maner To begin therefore we will first observe the Church of Ierusalems practise in this point immediatly after the decease of the Apostle Iames that dyed there as Eusebius recordeth Saith â—ee Annâ— circôter 70. “ Euseb 3.10 After Iames was dead it is reported that the Apostles Disciples out of all places neare about Ierusalem came togeather into one and tooke counsaill togeather who might bee iudged worthy to suâ—ceed in Iames his plaâ—e Therefore all with one consent did thinke Simeon the sonne of Cleophas
is before noted Whence it is that Doct. Downame heere saith truly the succession of their owne Clergie fayling and the helpe of others wanting the right is devolved to the whole body of the Church If the Doctor will reply say that this power and right is not essentially in the whole Congregation alwayes nor at all times but sometimes only that is in the case of necessitie aforesaid I answer then the D. folly and want of true reason will be manifest to all men For what soever is essentiall to any thing at sometime is essentiall to the same alwayes and evermore That which is essentiall once is essentiall still So that if the Congregations power right to consent in making of Ministers in Censures be essentiall at sometime as he acknowledgeth it is then certainly it is essentiall therein at all times and evermore The truth heereof can never be denyed And hence it is that Luther saieth If Titus would not Luth. de Ministr Eccles instit propâ— finem the Congregation might ordaine Ministers to them selves And of Excommunication Zuinglius saith “ Artic. 31. Non quod solus Episcopus hac facere debeat quisque hoc â—â—â—est si Episcopus fuerit negligens Any man may do this if the Bishop be negligent Hee meaneth any Man appointed by the Church may do it In which respect also that senteÌ„ce of Epiphanius that †Epiph. haereâ—â— 75. Biâ—â—ops can beget Fathers to the Church but Presbyters can not is to be refused as vntrue and erroneous For before wee have seene that only the CoÌ„gregation doth beget Fathers that is maketh Ministers essentially the Bishop doth it but instrumentally and Ministerially And so a Presbyter may do it as well as he whom they name a Bishop yea any other also may do it as Luther and Zuinglius before affirme when the Church imployeth them to that vsâ— Our two Doctors before cited even aâ— the Papistes also do hold strongly with those wordes of “ â—aereâ— 75. Epephanius to the great preiudice of the Gospel But their bare opinions names are nothing to our cleere and certain reason for the contrarie before set downe Neither are the bare opinions and naked names of any other men whosoever any better worth Seventhly 〈◊〉 last of all hence it foloweth so that it can not bee denyed that seeing thâ— whole CoÌ„gregation doth always give the Calling of ordinary Ministers essentially therfore the whole Congregation ought alwayes of necessitie tâ— give their free consent to their Minister at least so farre foorth that nonâ— bee imposed on them whether they will or no. The like also is to bee saiâ— of their power in iurisdiction And these pointes wee must imagine that they are acknowledged and held by D. Downame or surely that hee ought to acknowledge them all seeing by force of true reason they al do follow from those his wordes which he affirmeth holdeth as before I have declared Now this is all that wee professe touching the pleoples right tâ— Church government For we deniâ— not but in the ordinarie peaceable and right state of the Church when al things are caried well the chief diâ—ection sway of the whole government belongeth to the Bishop or Paâ—tor the people beeing on their part â—o hearken to their Teacher to folâ—ow their Guide obediently dutieâ—ully D. Down Deâ—â— 1.41 Their power to iudge and to provide otherwise for themselves being wheÌ„ they see their Guides to faile Which seeing it is his minde also set downe in his owne words before reâ—earsed I have truly affirmed that â—ouching our present cause even this Doctor agreeth with vs sometime in â—ull effect by good consequence of â—eason from his expresse wordes Though at other times he do as some report Cicero said to Salust “ Orat. 〈◊〉 Cicer. 〈◊〉 Salust Aliud stans â—â—â—â—d sedens de repub sentis Of the common â—ealth thou thinkest one thing standing another sitting Of Christes Visible Church and the governement thereof verily our Doctor doth likewise CHAPTER VII Chap. 7. Consequences of greatest importance following vpon the peoples free coÌ„sent in their Church governement inconveniences in Religion not sufferable following from the contrary AFter the forerehearsed Witnesses for this Doctrine we wil now shewe certain cleere and necessarie Consequences which follow from the same also some true and great Inconveniences to faith and godly life and to Civill authoritie such as are not to be tolerated which yet cannot be avoyded where men professing to be Christians imbrace not this point Of all fortes I wil heere observe eight great and waightie Consequentes heerevpon First this being receaved as the Ordinance of Christ and the practise of the Apostles 1. CoÌ„sequent that the Church governement ought to be alwayes with the peoples free consent it followeth that every Church is only “ As is also shewed in the Declaration pag. 12. 13. 14. 35. one ordinarie Congregation and not any proper Diocesan or Provinciall Church or larger Vnderstanding alwayes the peoples free consent to be orderly conveniently taken and practised so as Christ intendeth that †1. Cor. 14.40 every thing should bee done in his Church For where the peoples free consent is orderly and conveniently practised alwayes in the Church governement there the Body of the Church can not be so large as a Diocese much lesse as a Province or Nation and least of all so large as a Vniversall Church Seeing all this people can not possibly by any meanes give their free consent in the ordinarie Church-governement neither can any person take it of all them iustly orderly and conveniently This to say the truth is not possible For in such a state when onely some maine partes of the Church governement are exercised it will bee alwayes with much defect and also with great disturbance and tumult oftentimes I say where it is extended so largely so wide with concurrence of such multitudes of people This is true first in very reason and withall often experience hath shewed it in former times vnder most Christian carefull Princes after the Nicen Councill as at Alexandria at Antioch at Rome at Constantinople and in infinite places mo a great part whereof the “ Euseâ— Socrat. Zozomeâ— Theodoret. Evagrius Stories doe record In which Church actions though done with to inconvenient libertie of the people yet the greatest part of the people whoÌ„ the effect of those businesses reached vnto were absent and so wanted their right those which were present were full of confusion and tumult neither could it be otherwise But God is the God of equitie of order and of peace Wherefore this disorder can nor be fit for Gods Church And so neither can a Diocesan circuit Râ—as for reform p. 26.27 or larger in which this disorder wil arise necessarilie if all that people togeather have their free consent in their Church-governement Which the whole
many good reasons which heere I passe over But what is this to approve the governement of a proper Diocesan Church or larger of which all our question is where the peoples free consent is wholy and altogeather denyed them such as I know not cleerly either at this day to be or to have ben any where but vnder the Papacie and now in England Certainly against this that is the proper Diocesan Church and governement all our controversie at this day is intended Which also I have noted in my Declaration pag. 21. 22. So that the Diocesan Church which I absolutly speake against in “ In Reas. for reform Exposition of the a Com. The Divine beginning institution of Christes Visible Church c. other places is to bee vnderstood of this proper Dioc. Church so likewise questionles it is meant in the Offer of disputation and in the Petition for toleration also Now no proofe can be made from the law fulnes or toleration of the improper Piocesan Church for the lawfulnes or tolerablenes of the proper Dioces Church Because they differ formally essentially as elswhere “ Declarat pag. 12. 13. 34. 35. I have shewed These can not by any meanes sustifye the one the other In which respect D. Downames foule abusing of Christian people in his Defence by his perpetuall Equivocating and bringing in infinit matters which are nothing to the intent of our questioÌ„ is to be marked and confidered of all men For he taking in hand to proove our Diocesan or rather Provinciall Churches in England and our Bishops who do all things in Ecclesiasticall governement without any free consent of the severall Congregations to be for the substance of their calling and condition Apostolicall hee pleadeth only in generall for Diocesan Churches or larger and for Bishops in generall His proofes such as they be are only for the improper Diocesan Churches and larger and for their Bishops As if simply we did deny them Or as if our Diocesan Churches and Bishops in England were such What intollerable doubling and deceaving of Gods people is this What altering the question What Equivocating as bad as Iesuiticall This is all that he doth in his second booke of the said Defence where the proper place is for this point and where is the very foundation of all his writing beside Yea indeed he doth nothing els throughont his whole Defence Wherefore even this which heere is spoken is enough for a iust confutation of his saide whole Defence The very like dealing Doctor Bilson vseth also in his Perpetuall governement chapt 12.13.14 where he dealeth about Bishops and Dioceses out of the Fathers Chiefly in pag. 260. where he setteth downe 4. Ranks of Bishops which I deny not were in those foure Chiefe Churches there named viz. Ierusalem Antioch Rome Alexandria But the truth is touching his purpose these are so many Catalogues of Equivocations and changings of the question For neither were those Bishops all of one kinde and power neither were any of them of that kinde and power as ours now in England are For whose allowance and approbation they are notwithstanding by him heere produced and mightily vrged But hitherto I have digressed speaking of the divers kindes of Diocesan Churches and Bishops and of their originall likewise of the deceit of the Defenders of our Church state in England by Equivocating so palpably by changing the question The maine point heere in this place is Seeing the Church governement vnder the Gospel ought to be alwaies with the peoples free consent which before wee have sufficiently shewed therefore every true Church vnder the Gospell is only one ordinarie Congregation And consequently no proper Diocesan Church or larger is lawfull A second Consequent also is heere hence to be considered To wit This being admitted that the Church governement ought to be alwayes with the peoples free consent it followeth that such Synods or Presbyteries can not be approoved which rule imperiously over the CoÌ„gregations and impose on them whether they will or no their actes Canons vnder some spirituall penaltie as Excommunication Suspension Deprivation Degradation from the Ministerie c. To which purpose many excellent men also do speake expresly Zuinglius of all other is heerein peremptorie Saith he speaking to such Synodes “ Zuignl Artic 8. Explanat Quod Ecclesia sitis representativa libenter eredimus vera enim non estis c. Wee willingly believe that you are a representative Church for a true Church you are not But I pray you shew vs whence you fetch this name Who hath given this name Who hath given you power to meet and conspire togeather Who hath given you power to make Canons and Decrees differing from Gods word Who hath suffered you to impose these thinges on mens shoulders Who hath perswaded you to grieve mens consciences c. And a little before he saith Deistâ representativâ— Ecclefiâ in Scripturis Sanctis nihil invenis Ex hominum commentis fingere quisquis potest quidlibet Nos Scriptura netimur sacra contraquam nec tis quidquam tentabis si Christianus es Of this represeÌ„tative church I finde nothing in the holy Scriptures Our of mans devises any may faigne what they list Wee rest in the holy Scripture against which thou maist not attempt any thing if thou be a Christian And they that impose their Decrees without the peoples consent saith he tviolento imperio ius Ecclesia invadunt Ad Valent. Comp. They invade vpoÌ„ the Churches right by violent command And such are “ Artic. 64. nomine tenus Episcopi revera tyranni in name Bishops but indeed tyrants As †Pag. 31. before also is observed No lesse sharpe hee is likewise heerein els-where saying “ Epichirisis de Canon Missae Est particularis Ecclisia ea cut praceptum est vt morbidum membrum resecer Math. 18 qualis est ea Corinthi ad qua scribit Paulus aliae quarum se curam geâ—ere predicat in quibus se parâ— modo daceâ—e asseres inquiens Sollicitudo omnium Ecclesiarum Siâ—â—â— in omnibus Eeclesijs doceâ— Superest vs concursantium Eispeopor um ne dicam conspirantium Ecclesia non sit alia quam cut Propheta Malignantium nomen dedit Quod enim vlera verum est a malo est Verax autem est solus Deus omnis homo mendax Quiequitigetur à Deo est equum verum bonum est quiequid al 's homine profectum iniquum mendax malum est Hac horum Ecclesia a Deo non est a malo igitur est Siquis vberiora desideret Conclusionum nostrarum farraginem legat It is a particular Church which is commaunded to cut off the infected member Math. 18. Such as that is of Corinth to which Paul writeth and others of which he saith hes had care and in which he affirmeth that he taught alike saying The care of all Churches is I teach in all Churches It remayneth
Ecclesiae forniam quam Apostols constituerunt in quà tamen vnicum habemus verae Ecclesiae exemplar à quo si quis vel minimùm deflectit abâ—rat I will not presse you so precisely as to call you backe to that forme of the Church which the Apostles set In which forme notwithstanding we have the only patterne of a true Church From which if any decline never so little he erreth He meaneth be would take it well at the Cardinalls handes if he could reduce him to the forme of the Church which “ Instit 4.4 the Fathers vsed suppose about 200. till 300. yeares after Christ after for some while Howbeit he absolutly affirmeth that in the forme which the Apostles set in the Scriptures the only patteâ—ne of a true Church is to be had And that if any decline never so little from it hee erreth Which is all one with that where hee saith Extern◠†Instit 4.1.1 subsidia quoque Deus addidit quò infirmitati nostrae consuleret The Outward helpes and Meanes God hath added also to the end that he might provide for our weaknes If God have added them appointed them for vs what arrogancie shall it be for men to alter them And chieflie the forme of the Visible Church Like to these P. Martyr saith “ P. Mart. in Rom. 3.21 Forma reipublica quandoque variatur quod attinet ad Ecclesiam non mutat formam The Forme of a Civill state sometime is changed but as touching the Church it changeth not her forme All this is very contrary to our forenamed adversaries Nay which is to our great shame the very Papistes in this generall point are nearer to the kingdome of God then such vnworthy Protestantes are For they religiously and most strictly do holde this that †Sander Vifib Monatch â— 6 Christ only is the Teacher and Instituter of the forme of his Visible Church and that no men may ever change it from that same which is set downe in Christes Testament In the particular indeed they erre in setting vp vnder the Gospell a Vniversall church exercising governemeÌ„t which is not Christes spouse but the Queene of pride Nevertheles in the generall they holde cleerely the truth as I have shewed whereby they put many of vs to shame who beare a name of professing the Gospell And so much of the Consequentes which highly touch the Honor and Office of Christ and the Dignitie of his New Testament There are also Consequentes from our adversaries opinion which greatly touch our selves First whosoever of the Protestantes do refuse our foresaid Vniforme OpinioÌ„ of the peoples consent must of necessitie holde two distinct formes of Christes Visible Church Two wayes to heaven and two distinct formes of Church-governement to bee lawfull that is both that where the people are absolutly excluded that where they are admitted The one ordinary and best as they say the other extraordinarie and only in case of necessitie as before hath ben shewed Now to hold two distinct opposit formes of the Visible Church Church-governement is directly all one as to holde two wayes to heaven distinct and opposite in them selves Which is very scandalous in religion and that which can not stande with truth For the Visible Church and Church-governement is plainly the way to heaven and the Outward meanes which must bring vs thither or els ordinarilie we can not come there That is Ordinarily faith repentance sanctification and at last glorification in heaven cometh only by the Ministerie of Gods word and none can lawfully administer but being sent now in these dayes by the Visible Church according to their authoritie in this case given them of Christ Thus the only Outward meanes and way to heaven is Christes Visible Church and the exerciâ—ing of her authoritie in such forme and maner as Christ her Lorde hath appointed her Which is only one way it can not bee two wayes There is only one forme ordained of Christ And so only one is true one lawfull which soever it bee “ As before also I noted pag. 78. Two wayes cannot be D. Dewname answereth that there be other wayes which he alloweth which are †Def. 3.108 4.99 by necessitie and necessitie hath no law Nay him selfe is lawles Gods servants at no time are freed from Gods Law As well in necessitie as in pleÌ„tie in adversitie no lesse then in prosperitie they are so tyed to the rule of his word which is alwayes one that they professe it alwayes vnlawfull for them to take vp any invention of their owne vpon anie pretence Indeed in Humane affaires sometime Necessitie doth excuse vs ftoÌ„ following mans law And so the proverbe is verifyed Necessitie hath no law But in Gods matters and in the affaires of the Church which are causes touching our soules no necessitie nor prosperitie can free vs as I said from Gods law and ordinance appointed for vs. So far at least that we may never take vp any invention of men which in Gods Service is evermore the way of “ See my ExpositioÌ„ of the 2. Commandement error and not of truth As for Do. Dwname I remember the time when hee was stout and resolut for Vnica Methodus in Philosophie But the world is so changed with him since that in Divinitie hee is now a professed Diplodophilus one that thinketh there are two wayes to heaven Dioplodophilus two wayes and formes of administring Christes Visible Church of Calling the Ministerie of exercising holy Censures Which matters as before I shewed are the ordinarie way to heaven for every soule the Outward instrumentall Meanes sanctified of Christ to save his people by Now he professeth two formes of administring them essentially distinct and opposit the one to the other and yet both to be lawfull Which indeed is evidence enough that hee is in error For the way of truth is only one as before hath ben noted but errour is manifold Wherefore among the Protestantes seeing only wee holde a Vniforme constant opinion in this matter of Christes Visible Church which is for the peoples consent in the Ordinarie Governement it is certain that wee only have the truth and our adversaries are in error And heere withall this followeth from our opinion that we only have comfortable assurance to our consciences Comfortable assurance on Christs Ordinances not in Mens which the adversaries can not soundly have We hold only vpon the institution of Christ practise of his Apostles Of which wee have reason to be confident and wherein we may well have assurance For when wee builde the forme and frame whole administration of Christes Visible Church vpon the Rocke mentioned in the Gospell Math. 16.18 that is vpon Christ and his worde alone who can make vs to doubt but that God will crowne his owne worke and blesse his owne Ordinance and sanctify his owne way Certainly we ought with all cheerfulnes to expect and to
conceave assurance to our soules of Gods gracious favor and everlasting goodnes if wee stande in that way which plainly is Christes Gal. 6.16 As many as walke according to this rule peace shal be vpon them mercy and vpon the Israel of God But contrariwise our adversaries allowing of two wayes in the Churches spirituall governement and administratiō the one Apostolike the other Humane both good as they say both changeable by men but neither of them any certain Ordinance or Cōmandement of Christ Againe when they make many “ Those which follow the doctrine of our Attestators before alleged thousand several Churches in the world to vse no other Calling of their Ministers but such as is of Mens institutiō and from naturall reason do they in this give assurance to mens consciences Nay it can not be At the least men standing in such state will often doubt and make question whether the spirituall blessings and graces of God in Christ bee promised or may bee instrumentally wrought in them by such a Ministerie no otherwise authorised and called then so For as it is most certain that God saveth no man Ordinarily but by Outward meanes that these Outward meanes are ordinarilie Christes Visible Church the Ordayning of Ministers and the administring of Gods Word Sacramentes and Censures therein so it is most vncertain and much to bee doubted whether God will acknowledge anie of these Outward meanes and instrumentes to be his or will give his ordinarie blessing vnto them working saith repētance sanctificatiō hereafter his heavēly glorie in vs by thē vnles the saide Outward meanes and instrumentes be simply of that forme and nature and bee exercised by the power and authoritie of such persons only as he himself hath specially ordayned and sanctifyed in his word to that purpose This doubt I say at least As also to stand vnder a Nōresidēt may breed this doubt will and must needes arise from the opinion of our adversaries And it can not but weaken the faith of many if in the end it do not wholy subvert it Which indeed may come to passe from this originall divers and sundry wayes But our vniforme cōstitution of the Church and administration thereof cutteth of all occasion of such doubting and leaveth our consciences safely resting on Christ alone And so much for this Seaventhly where this is held viz. that the peoples free consent ought to be alwayes in the Church governement there necessarily the Visible Catholike Church of Rome is ruined quite overthrowen and destroyed Yea this assertion of ours being made good her spirituall tyrannie vsurpation is easily demonstrated And there is no man who seeth not this But contrariwise many see not and many will not see till they feele that which yet is as certain and as sure a Consequence in true reason viz. that where the peoples consent in the Church governement is condemned and hated Advantage to the Pope by a Diocesan Church there the Church of Rome will get advātage and in time advancement againe notwithstanding that Civill Magistrates for a season doe what they can to resist the same I know many will at the first thinke this a Paradox yet verily it wil prove true For the Church of Rome not only in reason but by cleere rules of Divinitie and Religion must needes get ground of vs if we willingly give away this invincible Bullwarke and Fortresse against thē I meane Christes Visible Churches true and proper Nature and that both intensive Christes Visible Churches Nature Intensive which is the power of Spirituall governement receaved from Christ her Author and Founder wherein the Peoples free consent is comprehended as before I have often rehearsed Extensive and also the Extensive quantitie and Outward Body of the said Church which in the Gospell never reacheth to many Ordinarie Congregations nor to any Set circuit of ground at all as a Diocesan Church doth but to one ordinarie Congregation only as I haue “ Declarat pag. 18. elswhere plainly declared This is the true and proper Nature of Christes Visible Church in the New Testamēt And I would all men did cōsider this viz. that the effectuall defence of our faith against Poperie is must be the alleadging and pressing against them this Nature and proper Constitution of Christes saide Visible Church Without which we shall labor against them al in vaine and which our forefathers Zuinglius Luther and the rest wisely holding and maintayning as †Chapt. 3. 4. and pag. 102. 103. 104. above we have seene have easily mightily from thence by the sword of the Spirit whiche is the word of God put them to flight and quelled them And so may we do still but no otherwise In which regard it greeveth me often times when I see many of our Defenders of the truth against the Papistes being otherwise learned and godly yet dealing in this matter very vncircumspectly and I may say praeposterously Who make no great reckoning to stande with the Papistes vpon the proper Nature of Christes Visible Church A great cause why cur controversies com not to an and. or if they medle with it they do not strictly holde to that Nature forme thereof which is left vs in the N. Testament being plainly another and distinct from that of the Iewes vnder the Law This verily our men against that Adversarie do consider too little and they prosecute it lesse They treat more of Christes Invisible or Militant then of the Ministeriall Church So leaving the question in deed and labouring in things which touch not the point Whereby it cometh to passe that they resist thē not with that fruit as they might For wee must know that ordinarily the Church Ministeriall is the Meanes and instrument of true faith If the Meanes and procuring cause which is most sensible to vs be not first well cleered and mens consciences therein satisfyed and the same demonstrated plainly to bee of Divine institution the doctrine of faith besides will bee but vncertain If any say Our Forefathers overcame the Papistes by the word of God cutting downe their other foule errors Obiection viz. Purgatorie Free-will Auricular confession Reall presence Images Praying to Saints Iustification by workes c. They overcame them not by affirming that the people ought to have alwayes their free cōsent in Church governement And so may wee also overcome them still I answere Men are much deceaved that do thus thinke Answ Our Forefathers as I said by this verie assertion that the people ought to have their said free consent did vtterly overthrow the Papistes and without this they could not possibly have so done For vnles this assertion had ben true neither could the first Protestant Pastors bee truly authorised and called neither could any of the Protestants at first lawfully have forsaken the Roman Church whereof they all stood members And then I pray how could they have overcome them Nay it had
strangers voice they will flee from Ioh. 10.27.3 But they can not thus discerne and try vnles they may reiect their Teachers being false and erroneous And if they may reiect they may chose Yet alwayes as I said in the best maner they can Some heere obiect and say The people in deed have power and right but they have not meanes thus to do wheÌ„ they want Ministers I answer if they have power froÌ„ whom have they it It wil be said from God If the people have power from God then they have meanes also Otherwise God giveth power in vaine But that is absurd c false that God giveth any power in vaine or such as can not be acted If God intend an end as he doth in giving all power then sure hee intendeth Meanes also to effect the said end And so a Church wanting Ministers but having power from GOD hath Meanes also to make Ministers and so likewise to do everie other Ecclesiasticall action They are not vtterly altogeather destitute of iust and lawfull meanes to performe any such action for their owne vse in the feare of God That is the best meanes they have is sufficient wheÌ„ they have not such as they would and should have otherwise So then this was the answer which the said Tilenus gave to that FreÌ„ch Lord. But in deed this is not only Tilenus answer in this matter for it hath ben the coÌ„mon defence of all sound Protestantes alwayes when they be opposed touching their Ministerie Which the common consent of all our Attestators before cited See our very Adversaries beeren Above pa. 73. 74. c. and many other maketh manifest If any have given other answeres yet only this hath ben the firme sure anchre to trust to Other answeres are all to weake vncertain this only is cleere and constant Though “ Perpe gov Pag. 335. D. Bilson do vniustly deny it A most certain deduction of this power and right of the people from Christes ordinance in the Gospell I have plainly shewed before in the sixt Chapter Also the benefit and fruit of this defence we see in all Churches abroad namely it is evident in those of France Against which the learnedst of the Papistes have nothing soundly to reply So that the Churches there flourish and increase mightily blessed bee God Who but for this answer would certainly both then when Tilenus so did write before and since have ben much troubled and staggered and no lesse then shamed As many are now with vs in England who do shunne and despise this answer Whereby I see that to lay against the Papistes their other errors before we have cleered the lawfulnes of our Ministerie is in deed vnseasonable and little availeable For if we be shamed in the eyes of vnderstanding people or have not certainly what to hold stand to when we be vrged to make good the Calling and lawfulnes of our Ministerie Papistes will easily with distinctions and subtile answeres make a faire shew in reconciling other matters betweene vs in controversie to Gods worde though I graunt they be grosse When we are shamed in so maine a point as the Calling of our Ministers is in no other matter afterward we shall neither can we have good successe But our adversaries of the Protestantes in Englande what say they to this How defend they the Calling of our Ministers against the Papistes D. Bilson denyeth vehemently that “ Perpet gov pag. 335. 368. the peoples consent is essentiall in the making of any Ministers I desire him then to tell vs what is essentiall in it There is no question but somewhat is The very question is Who have power essentially to make Ministers Then what is it which is essentiall in making a Minister If the peoples consent be not surely I know not what els they will assigne to be And yet as I said somewhat must be Wherefore I conceave the peoples consent may be said to be essentiall by Gods word in the making of a Minister vnder the Gospell because no other thing els can be assigned by Protestants as Essentiall therein The common answer in a maner of all men is that in England our Diocesan and Provincial Bishops do give our Ministers their Calling and Office Heere I demande is this Essentiall in the Calling of our Ministers or is it not I thinke few advisedly will saye it is Essentiall For whatsoever is Essentiall any where the same is essentiall every where as “ Pag. 81. before I have observed And so they must deny the true Essence of Ministerie in the forraigne reformed Churches where they have no such Bishops at all where at first they had no Minister at all Therefore they will not say I thinke I know they can not that the Ordination by Bishops is Essentiall to Christes Ministerie vnder the Gospell Yet againe if they say not so they answer the Papist nothing they satisfie not the question So that what they will resolve on in this point Surely no man can well tell Wherefore heere the craftie Priestes and Iesuites among vs will perswade vehemently their disciples that they have got the victorie Seeing wee can not affirme whence our Ministerie is essentially derived given vs. In the end I doubt not the coÌ„mon defence will be this that our said Bishops by their sole authoritie and power do essentially give the Calling of all our Ministerie And that from Archb. Cranmer Ridley our first Protestant Bishops they have stil so done Let what inconvenience soever follow thereof Be it then so Yet even they likewise must have it given to them They viz. those our first Bishops must have it derived vnto them froÌ„ others From whom had they their authoritie and power Briefly it will bee answered they had it given them from the Bishop and Church of Rome And that in deed is the truth the Pope is he who made Archb. Cranmer and Ridley c. such Bishops They had no other Ordination since And from them all the rest of our Ministers have had their Ordination to this day And so the effect of all is that our whole Ministerie in England successively and derivatively cometh from the Pope See the Supplication for Toleration pa. â— Doct. Downame Doct. Bilson and all that maintaine the Church state in England will thus answer But O miserable defence wofull vnto vs. Which in deed though it be false yet it is such as the Papâ—sâ—es desire and do triumph in It is false two wayes First whatsoever the Church of Rome did give to Archbi Cranmer c. that wholy they tooke away againe namely when he fel from them For then they both deposed him and excommunicated him So that they left him no whit of that power function so much as lay in them which they had given him But questionles if they could give it they could take it away Wherefore so soone as hee was ours being thus
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
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
Assembly See how lively hee painteth out and taxeth also our Church state in England though primarily he intendeth the Papists And remember that to every of these Churches he alloweth a Bishop as “ Pag. 104. before I have noted So that the D. might have spared his proud boast that “ Pag. 7. All the Disciplinarians in the world are not able to shew that there were or ought to have ben after the division of Parishes any more then one Bishop for a whole Diocese Neither should he have called vs for this our assertion †Pag. 14. New foolish Disciplinarians His worship doubtles is wise when all these our Attestators and abbettors bee fooles Also that “ Pag. 21. his great challenge to his adversary is thus answered Now to proceed he saith it is not probable that Ierusalems Church in the Acts “ Pag. 89. did ordinarily meet in one place I answere yet it is certain they had not then many ordinary set and constant companies meeting togeather Which is the point we stand on will he never see it Further he saith †Pag. 90. The Apostles were never intended to be members all or any of them of one Parish Which is not so they were truly Members of every Church or Parish occasionally that is where when they were present though consâ—antly and necessarily they were not of any one Againe he saith The meetings Act. 6.1 15.22 26 were not Parishionall bur Synodicall They were Parishionall Indeed the later was both I take it Where the Apostles and Elders met first Synodically a part to debate the controversy but Parishionally or with the whole Church when they decreed and set down their resolutioÌ„ Before he said these meetings of the Church were “ Pag. 8 9. Panegyrical meetings Panegyricall not ordinary Which again is not true Such meetings are out of many Cities and Countries but heere the Church of Ierusalem only assembled and in the 15 of the Acts 2. or 3. out of Antioch Againe those are when sundry ordinary set assemblies doe meet in one but these all were of one Church as I said having in it not many ordinary set assemblies Lastly heere matters were haÌ„dled which pertaine to a Church to performe ordinarily so oft as occasion is Therefore they are not to be called extraordinary much lesse were they like the meetings at Pauls Crosse or at the Spittle as he saith least of all were they Panegyricall His obiection from Act. 21.20 of the many 10000. believing Iewes I have answered †Declarat pag. 30. 31 els-where The rest is of no moment In his 6. Chapter he setteth against som other of our reasons viz. touching the Churches of Corinth Ephesus Antioch vnder the Apostles Of all of them he saith “ Def. 2.103 Though it should be granted that each of these Churches in the Apostles time did ordinarily assemble togeather in one place yet would it not follow that therfore each of them was but a Parish much lesse that all Churches should be but Parishes and that every Parish should have a Bishop Verily all this doth follow neither hath hee with any true reason denyed it but all reason is for it as †Pa 208. 213 before I have shewed Then beginning with the Church of Corinth “ Pag. 104. hee dealeth deceitfully leaving out our principall proofe viz. 1. Cor. 14.23 The whole church came togeather in one Which can not bee such as might be written to the Church of England as he saith most vntruly Of this I have said more “ Declarat pag. 26. 27. elswhere To Act. 20.28 of the Church of Ephesus hee saith it needs not signifie only the Congregation of a Parish Yet the wordes are Attend or †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cleave close vnto all the flocke and the Apostle nameth it also “ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Congregation Which being taken for a Visible Companie is ever more with authentike Grecians an ordinary CongregatioÌ„ only as I have oft observed So that properly and truly it can not be as he would have it either the Vniversall or a Nationall or Provinciall or Diocesan Church Neither can the Pastors of such cleave close to all such sâ—ockes nor possibly be present to the whole But they must be NoÌ„residents which questioÌ„les these Ephesin Pastors were not as hath ben said Wherefore this place still is a good argument for vs. And so is that touching Antioch also where Act. 14.27 Paul and Barnabas gathered the Church togeather into one particular assembly as the text importeth It is vntrue and against the letter of the text to say as he doth some of the chiefe perhaps not many perhaps not any beside the Clergie Theâ—e perhapses are miserable and desperat shiftes And what forbiddeth Husbandes Wives Servants and children of ripe yeares and vnderstanding to have ben there Hitherto he hath laboured to shew that the Churches mentioned in the New TestameÌ„t were not each of them only one ordinary Congregation but that they were Diocesan Churches Which how vnsufficiently hee hath done every childe may perceave By the way hee obtrudeth a foolish conceit on vs as if by “ Def. 2. pag. 102.104 these aforesaid places of the N. Testament wee intended to prove that the Churches still remained till 200. yeares of Christ such as we hold they were at the first But let him take that collection to himselfe it is none of our meaning Yet where he maketh so much a doe about the space of 200. yeares that we should say for so long time there was no Diocesan Church The truth therof is very perspicuous and certain let the D. know that I can easily maintaine it For the space of 200. yeares after Christ there was no Diocesan Church Therefore let vs see what he hath against it Where first I will note what a cavill he hath against vs for abridging and restraining the primitive Church to 200. yeares only To which I answer in respect of taking the Primitive Church as a pattern for vs to follow so we restraine it yet shorter even to the Apostles times onely yea to the times of writing the N. Testament yea to the N. Testament it selfe only And we affirme if any doe follow any authoritie beside they doe profanely irreligiously adulterously no better So that in this our D. D. Bilson likewise where beeing without all proofes in Christs Testament they heap vp Fathers vpon Fathers and most eagerly cry out that we holde against “ Def. 2.128.142 Def. 4. c. Perp. gov 25â— 259. c. the Vniversall perpetuall practise of the Church of Christ if they could make som shew hereof yet I say seeing they have not nor caÌ„ bring one sound proofe for themselves in Christs Testament therefore they vse heere but a carnall reason and contrary to the honour of God They †Ier. 17 5â— make flesh their arme and put not
of England in maintayning Diocesan and Provinciall Churches Calvin and Beza abused and that therein they are against vs. First though Calvin doe note in this Chapt. the Churches state “ Institut 4.4.1 before the Papacie yet he saith not neither was it before Papalitie began Againe your governement may bee not withstanding from the Papâ—sts as indeed it is though this Church state there noted by Calvin were before the Papacie Chap. 4. For your governement is by him described in his †Chap. 5. next Chapter where hee saith “ Sect. I am in eligendo totum illud ius populi sublatum est Ad solos Canonicos integra potestas translata est Ills in quem volunt conferunt Episcopatum eum mox in conspestu plebis producunt non examinanduÌ„ sed adoraÌ„dum Now all the right of the people to chose thâ—ir Pastor was taken away The whole power was transferred to the Chanons or Prebendaries only They bestow the Bishoprike on whom they will him they bring forth before the people not to be tryed but to be worshipped of them And though hee saith this was “ In the title of chap. 5. tyrannide Papatus by the tyrannie of the Papacie yet every one seeth it to be the same kinde that is vsed in EnglaÌ„d which differeth substantially from the ancient forme of Church governement yea from that by him noted in his 4. Chapter which is not it that you exercise labour to maintaine So any may see from whom in deed you have receaved your governement Secondly he saith those before had almost nothing dissonant from Gods word Where he graunteth they had somewhat And therefore hee would not that this Church governement should be * See before pag. 149. our patterne though hee held it not wholy intolerable What meaneth the vaine Doctor to say wee “ Pag. 146. our selves do extend our assertioÌ„ to two hundred yeares We do not extend our patterne so farre Indeed we say a proper Diocesan Church was not before that time But we take our patterne of a Church only from the New Testam as wee ought Against which fundamentall point of ChristiaÌ„ religion see how profanely and yet absurdly hee reasoneth Aswell they may alleage that no whole Countrey ought to be converted because none was in the Apostles times as to deny a whole Countrey to be a Church Should weâ— not vse that forme of a Church which the Apost vsedâ— because it was not so in the Apostles times Never did I heare a more senseles speach and yet it savoureth all of impietie Every visible Church may containe no mo ordinary Congregations then the New Testament sheweth that a Church coÌ„tayned then which was but one and yet a whole Country may be converted to the faith and being converted may be reduced into many Churches in nomber according to the forme †Galat. 1 â— 21. and â— Cor. 8.1 1 Cor. 16.19 extaÌ„t in Christs TestameÌ„t And God forbid wee should professe to doe otherwise As for Calvin beside that above noted in him “ Pag. 149. speaking of the Order set down in Scripturs he saith the same is it †Instit 4. â— â— quo EcclesiaÌ„ suam gubernari voluit Dominus wherewith the Lord would have his Church to bee governed alwayes Againe “ Sect. â— Ecclesiae disitpationem vel ruinam potiùs exitium molitur quisquis ordinem hunc de quo disputamus HOC GENVS regiminis vel abolere studet vel quasi minus necessarium elevat He seeketh the ruine and destruction of the Church whosoever indeavoureth to abolish this order and THIS KIND of governement whereof wee treate or maketh light of it as lesse necessarie speaking as I said of that same kinde of ordinary governement which is fouÌ„d in the New Testament Which being Calvins minde can we thinke that hee would like of the Doctors mutabilitie No nor of his calling him and Beza “ Defen 2. pag. 140. Authors of Discipline and him the first or chiefe founder of it Beside is not this Doct. a cunning dissembler who can say of Calvin that his memorie with me is blessed and yet curseâ—h and revileth his Discipline as he calleth it Thirdly is it truth must we abide it that Calvin agreeth with the Do. against Lay Elders as he calleth them And his Refuter reproving him for that speach he mocketh saying What shall become of me now He saith he will salve it But how Forsooth he confesseth Calvin is against him both touching the Scripture and also the practise of the first Churches How salveth he the matter then Calvin saith that afterward Every City had a College of Elders all which were Teachers What then Can not Calvin thinke that this might somewhat differ from the Scripture and that this was thus about and after the Nicen Councell hitherward and yet in the first age of the Church after the Apostles there were som such lay Elders Is it not possible that Calvin may thus meane but that hee must needes agree in this matter with the D. and grosly contradict himselfe Thus forsooth our D. will needes have it in wordes commending Calvin Beza for the learned Disciplinarians but indeed making them what he can to seeme fooles Fourthly neither Calvin nor Beza “ Pag. 14â— 144. agreeth with them nor materially differeth from vs about a Diocesan Church as hee almost every where repeateth that they doe and is still beating vpoÌ„ it But falsly For first Calvin maketh not even then the City Country to be but one body He saith †Instit 4.4 2. velut Corpus as it were a Body Hee meaneth not that it was a persit Body but that there was some resemblance of one Body because of the consociation of all vnder one Bishop Yet indeed hee maketh each Parish then a Body substantially Saying “ Sect. 1â— Cum Parochijs novi Presbyters destinabantur tunc loci multitudinem nominatim consentire oportuit When newe Presbyters were appointed to Parishes then the multitude of the place must namely consent This power made them a Body indeed and to the Diocese they belonged but as it were to a Body or as having som resemblance of a body Which yet consisted in deed of many distinct bodyes someway independent This is the Diocesan Church which Calvin and Beza also speake of and is constituted at Geneva and in France and in the Lowcountries c. But this is not the †See before pag. 88. 89. proper Diocesan Church which is in England There is a substantiall difference betweene this improper and vnperfit Diocesan Body and that which is proper and persit Now then how do Calvin and Beza agree with the Bishops of Englande touching a Diocesan Church as he so ofte vaunteth and boasteth that they do Or how do they dissent from vs Wee see they do not The Doct. doth but slander them Neither “ Def. 2.147 doth Beza
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
Luther Bucer P. Martyr Viret Calvin Beza Danaeus Vrsinees Gualter c. And not the later only but the elder Christians also For all these we have seene do consent with vs in our profession And it is a slander that in Geneva or any where els the reformed Churches do substantially differ from our iudgement As may be seene through out the 3. 4. Chapters before If any thing dissonaÌ„t from those testim may now be found in some of these Churches which I will not deny then it cometh to passe with theÌ„ as with goodly and faire Houses A Similitude which being inhabited by men will neede sweeping very oft If they bee not swept cleaned they will soone become foule And so truly it may be in some of the Churches before named Which can be no preiudice to vs who seeing transgression creepe in do wish all men and even them also ad originem reverti Cyprian cont Epist StephaÌ„ De Vnit. Eccles. to returne to the originall and first Plantation both of them selves in particular and specially of all Churches at the first In the which only there is safetie As for this intemperat Doctors rayling wordes in calling this our doctrine “ Def. 1.41 4.80.99 Brownisticall Anabaptisticall †Def. 3.142 4.81 fanaticall fantasticall dotage phrensie c. We will beare it knowing as Cyprian said of some such in his dayes “ Cyprian Epist 4.2 Non possunt laudare nos qui recedunt à nobis We must looke for hatefull and â—â—â—lent wordes from them that fall from vs. Yet in the meane whyle let him know also that in this he reprocheth not so much vs as those pillars of the truth and lights of the Gospell before named zuinglius Luther Bucer Martyr Viret Calvin and the rest of whom we have directly receaved this doctrine and profession These are our Maisters heerein as in the beginning I said Our Do. obiecteth often that these are partiall that this is their owne cause And that as well we might cite “ Def. 4.30 Mai. Cartwright and Mai. Travers as some of these Yea hee will have Ierome also to be †Def. 4.137 partiall Yet we frankly acknowledge Ierome to be theirs touching the lawfulnes of Dioces Ierome not ours simply Bishops Although he and many other of the Fathers beside are with vs in this that Diocesan Bishops are not Apostolicall but Humane And this verily they teach far from partialitie Partiall they may be for the said Prelacie not against it And the truth is they were notoriously partiall for it it was indeed their owne cause Who are partiall They may be partial are wont so to be counted who are likely to get by their opinion some temporall commoditie not they who loose by it Now the Fathers Cui bono CassianuÌ„ erotema specially vnder Constantine after by approoving Diocesan Prelacie got great honor power and rule among the people and wealth and pleasure what they desired Which by opposing against it they should have lost WheÌ„ce certainly it is that D. Downame might as well cite B. Whitgift B. Bancroft and B. Bilson for his authors as some of those ancientes viz. as wel as B. Eusebius B. Epiphanius B. Theodoret B. Damasus B. Leo B. Chrysostom c. Who questionles in this point were very partiall And no les if not more may be thought of some of those Diocesan L. Bishops who began our Church reformation in England They by proceeding no further did get much temporall commoditie which by setting the Church state neerer to the forme Apostolike they must needes have lost And so they though otherwise as likewise those Ancientes were good and godly Fathers yet they were meÌ„ and might easily be partiall in this Good and godly Fathers yeâ— Men. Which and more wee may thinke of many of our Diocesan Lord Bishops since Most of all of D. Downame himselfe who besides these temporall hopes beeing a Diocesan L. Bishops fonne had neede of much grace I coÌ„fesse to cause him to degenerat But I pray then hath he done wisely to obiect as hee doth every foot against those singular instrumentes and very effectuall reformers our Attestators others like them that they were partiall and that this was their owne cause Indeed they were partiall that is they tooke part throughly with the sinceritie of the Gospell and stood against all Papall and Pontificall over-ruling of Gods people spiritually so should this Doct. and others do well if they were partiall likewise But partiall otherwise they neither were nor could be viz. they did not get but lost by this their proceeding great worldly honor much power and rule among the people large wealth daintie pleasure and ease which ours now do abound with as all the world seeth Whereby the worlde seeth likewise which side may rather plead partialitie to be in those whom they take to be their adversaries In many places D. Downame signifyeth that the godly late defenders of the Gospell do mislike only “ Def. 4.151.157.158.161 popish tyrannizing Bishops not orthodoxall Bishops as he presumeth ours to bee But let him know that those are Orthodoxall who imitate the Apostles and the patterne of the Church left vs in the New Testament And they are tyrannizing not Orthodoxe †viz. in this nor truly believing who imitate the popish though otherwise they be not papists Cicero said well to Antonie †Cicer. Philippic 2. Miror te Antoni quorum fasta imitere corum exitus non perhorrescere I wonder Antonie said hee that thou fearest not their iudgement whose deedes thou imitatest Now how wee imitate the very forme of the Popish Church-government all the world seeth and the Gospell rueth What meaneth the racke and the wracke of many consciences viz. the Oath ex officio What the Bishops depriving and imposing of Ministers without Imitation of Popish Church-governement yea contrarie to the Congregation What meane also such Excommunications What their imprisoning of Christians and punishing their purses with fees fines c. Are these the partes of Orthodoxe Bishops Are these things approved of those godly Writers Nothing lesse Likewise his vaine and frivolous seeking to avoid the Waldenses Wickliffe Hus Zuinglius Luther Oecolampadius Bucer Martyr Calvin c. our Tindal Fr. and Ioh. Lamberts Bradsord Bale c. is of no worth Some of theÌ„ signifie that they disalow not Diocesan Bishops simply Well no more do I as I have shewed “ Pag. 15.16.73.89.97 before Yet heereby appeareth no allowance of ours in England Our old English translators of the New Testament some other Writers since doe expresse the word Church by Congregation But saith our Doctor heere by they meane the †Def. 2.106.107.108 Vnivesall Church Which answer is vntrue and absurd That is where they speake of a Visible Ministe Church of which only our question is Speaking of this that they
the Apostles Which he doth very poorely 1. He sheweth that the Church of Ierusalem †Pag 84. exceeded the proportion of one particular assembly ordinarily meeting in one place I grant it and have granted it “ Reas. for ret pag. 19. 65. 66. heeretofore But he can not shew that this Church nowe had in it mo ordinary set and constant assemblyes then one Which is the point Hee addeth †Def. 2. p. 87 It was never intended to be one Parish among many but to be a Mother Church when by Gods blessing it should beget others to be severed from it in particular assemblies yet to remaine subordinate and subiect to it as children to the Mother The very same was affirmed by “ Pag 7. him before of all the Primitive Churches But all this is fall â—t was intended by the Apostles that Ierusalems Church should bee one Parish among many others and indeed to be as a Mother Church in reverence and reputation yet as a common Sister with the rest in power iurisdiction They also intended both in Ierusalem and in every other City that the Bishop and his presbyterie should bee set over no more but one particular Congregation and that as more Congregations should be constituted Every Congâ—â—gation 〈◊〉 to be an intâ—â— Church every Church buâ— a Congregation every one should have a Bishop also a Presbyterie if it might be All this I say the Apostles intended both in Ierusalem and every where els in the world And first this my reasons “ Pag. 208. Decâ—â—â— pa. 12 13. 14 15 c. before rehearsed do soundly proove Also Ignat. epistles do plainly shew that the practise was so then every where yea in the Country as wel as in the Cities wheresoever there were any Churches then Ignatius words are these †Ignat. Ad Trall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Without these there is no Church no meeting togeather of the Saints no holy assembly This is Vniversally spoken So againe “ Ad Phila. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To every Church for so it may well be translated there is one Bishop with a coÌ„pany of Persbyters Deacons Where Ignat. meaning is that every wher it ought at least so to be In which Calvin likewise consenteth Saying * Calv. Instit 4.1.9 Vnaquaeque nomen authoritatem Ecclesiae iure obtinet Every one of the Congregations which were dispersed “ And 8.15 Oppidatim Vicatim in the Country townes and Villages obtaineth by right the name and authoritie of a Church Again “ Instit 4.3.6 Quod orbi Vniver so prestiterunt Apostoli id gregi suo debet Pastor vnusquisque That which the Apostles were to the whole world the same ought every Pastor be to his owne Flocke Zuinglius also before hin is heerein of all other the most cleere and resolute I touched many of his places †Pag. 102. 103. 104. before But heere I think it fit to lay forth his words more fully First to shew that every Church ought to be but one ordinary Congregation and that in the N. Testament it was so hee saith “ Zuingl ad Valentin Compar Vox Ecclesiae proprie exposita non aliud quà m cetum vel populi CoÌ„gregationem totum plebis collegium significat Vndè singulas paraecias Ecclesiae vocabulo not are licet cum per hoc cetus coÌ„gregati in vnuÌ„ populi multitudo intelligatur The word Church what it is The word Church properly expounded signifyeth no other thing then an assembly or meeting togeather of the people and the whole gathering togeather of the people Whence by the word Church wee may note and signifie every particular Parish Seeing by this word is vnderstood the multitude of an assembly of the people meeting togeather in one place Of the Church of Corinth vnder the Apostles he saith †Ad Valent Compar Non equidem negare poteris Paulum hoc loco communem totius populi fidelis Ecclesiam intelligere qui in vnum collectus Scripturae sensus ab alijs expositos attentus percipit Populus ergo fidelis Christianorum oninium Ecclesia Doctores suos dijudicat de illoruÌ„ doctrina sana ne sit vel impia pronuÌ„ciare solet Truly thou canst not deny that Paul vnderstandeth in this place the common assemby of the whole faitful people which being gathered together in one place attentively heareth the senses of the Scripture expounded by others wherefore the people and faithfull assembly of all the Christians iudgeth of their Teachers is wont to pronounce of their Doctrine whether it be found or wicked Likewise elswhere hee saith that the Corinthian Church †In Pastoâ— erat Paraecia was a Parish And again likewise The Ephesin Church theÌ„ was “ Above pag. 103. Concio a particular assembly And questioÌ„les as he thought of these so likewise he thought of IerusaleÌ„s Church yea of every true visible Church indefinitly Of which he saith “ Artic. 8 Explanat Capitur Ecclesia pro peculiaribus Congregationibus qui ad auditionem verbi ad Communionem Sacramentorum commodè in aliquem vnum locum conveniunt Graeci parikiaâ— voc 〈◊〉 De huiusmodi Ecclesiâ Christus loquitur Math. 18 Sic Paulus 1. Cor. 1. 14. The Church is taken for the particular Congregations which to the hearing of the word and reâ—eaving the Sacraments do come togeather commodiously into one place The Grecians call them Parishes Of such Christ speaketh Math. 18 17. Paul 1. Cor. 1. 14. And that every of these Churches and Parishes should have the “ See before pag. 30. 31. power of governement iudging of causes among themselves that wee must follow herein only the Scriptur he sheweth a little before that it is his meaning Where expressing what Church he speaketh of and also the very cause why there is such strife among men about the Church he saith A multis iam seculis ad nostra vsque tempora quae sit Ecclesia certamen fuit ortum nimirum ex regnanai cupiditate Nam hoc sibi quidam arrogarunt vt se dicerent esse Ecclesiam vt omnia corum manu administrarentur Omissis autem hominum commentis quibus quidam hâc in re nituntur ex Scripturis sacris mente spiritus de Ecclesiâ scribemus Quod Graeci Ecclesiam Hebraei Kahal vocant Latini Concionem There hath ben controversie of old even to our times what the Church is which riseth indeed from a greedines to rule For this some men doe arrogat to theÌ„selves that they say theÌ„selves are the Church to the end that all things may bee done by their hand But we letting go mens devises whereon in this cause some doe rest we will write of the Church out of the holy Scripturs and minde of the spirit That which the Greeks cal a Church the Hebrues call a Congregation the Latineâ— an