multitude Now for as much as this is gain-said by our Hierarchists as a ridiculous evasion I will therefore confirme it against their contradiction and endeavour to make it evident that under one many may be many are meant This is the language and usuall stile of the holy Ghost 1. In visionall speeches Daniel in the narration and interpretation of the Kings dreame faith to Nebuchadnezzar f Dan. 2.38 Thou art this head of gold after thee shall arise another Kingdome inferiour unto thee The speech is directed to Nebuchadnezzar in his own person yet under one many are meant for not he alone but all the Kings precedent and succeeding in that Monarchie are the head of gold as Interpreters doe unanimously consent It is said in the verse following After thee shall another Kingdome arise yet all that have any insight in history both sacred and profane doe know that the Persian Monarchie which is the Kingdome there spoken of did not arise immediately upon the death of Nebuchadnezzar the Great to whom this dreame and interpretation of it is made knowne but upon the death of Belshazzar his Grand-childe So that under the Person of one many of the same order and degree are here necessarily to be understood The Lord represents to g Chap. 1.18 19 20 21. If any desire more instances of this kinde for the confirmation of this I refer him to the reply to Dr Downhams defence part 1. l. 3. c. â— sect 7. Zechariah in a vision soure hornes which did scatter Judah and Jerusalem and foure Carpenters which were sent to fray them away and to repaire Jerusalem Will any sober man hence conclude the Persons which scattered Judah were individually foure no more nor no lesse and the Repairers of Jerusalem just foure and no more yet this inference will hold as well as that which our Prelates make from this vision in the Revelation Christ holdeth in his hand seven starres which seven starres are the Angels of the Churches therefore the Angels of the Churches are just seven and no more They may with as much colour of reason and truth extort another conclusion also thus Christ holdeth in his hand seven starres of the first magnitude and none but them which seven starres are the Angels by a fixed superioritie Therefore Christ hath care of the direction and protection of none but the Bishops which are the starres of the first magnitude the Angels by a fixed superiority Take one instance more When the Apostle speakes of that grand Apostate Antichrist he speakes of him in the singular number h â— Thes 2.3 That man of sinne the sonne of perdition now albeit the i Bell tib 3. de Rom. Pent. â— 2. K. Secudus locus Graeci contrabunt significationem ad unam tem certam ut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hominem in coÌ„muni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hominem singularem fignificet Et sanè mirum est nullum adversariorum qui tamen jact ant linguarum peritiam hoc animadvertisse Romish Cardinall doe from the article prefixed when he is stâ—â—ed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that maen of sinne the sonne of perdition that wicked one plead for a restriction to one individuall person and wonder at it that none of the adversaries doe take notice of it notwithstanding all their skill in the tongues of which they so much boast yet how ridiculous a conceit this is you all know Our Polemicall Divines have sufficiently discovered the falshood and vanitie of this assertioÌ„ of which I may truly say as our learned Fulk doth in his reply to the Rhemists who trod in the steps of their fellow Jesuite fore-mentioned k in 2 Thes 2. ver 3. annot â— This is so false that young children which have scarce tasted of the Greek tongue are able to disprove it by infinite Examples 2. In other places of Scripture where the speech is directed unto one yet under that one others of the same order and societie are meant Our Saviour Christ said to Peter l Matth. 16.19 I will give unto thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven though at Rome under the Popes nose in a conclave of Cardinals the limitation of this to Peters person as Christs Vicar would be readily embraced yet you all know Reverend and Beloved how repugnant this is to Scripture in which regard he would be hooted at as having a Pope in his belly that should in any Reformed Church confine the power of the Keyes to Peters person Yea m de rep eccles lib. 1. cap. 7. n. 3. Antonius de Dominis will tell us that it would be a monstrous thing indeed to deny that our Lord did there direct his speech to Peter and promise him the Keyes which he did after wards infallibly conferre on him But it would be monstri majoris simile more monstrous by farre so to limit this promise and the execution thereof unto Peter as that it should imply an exclusion of the rest of the Apostles Hence divers of the Fathers have observed that there under the Person of One to wit Peter to whom the speech is primarily directed is an united multitude the Church to be understood Thus Austin sundry times speaks n Tract 50. in Evang. Iohan. Iudas malus Corpus malorum significat quomodo Petrus corpus bonorum corpus ecclesiae imò corpus ecclesiae sed in bonis nam si in Petro non esset sacramentum Ecclesiae non â—i diceret Dominus Tibi dabo claves regni â—oelorum Wicked Judas signifieth the body of the wicked as Peter the body of the good the body of the Church which consisteth of the good otherwise the Lord would not say to himâ— I will give unto thee the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven And elsewhere o Tract 124. in idem Evang. Ecclesiae Petrus Apostolus propâ—er Apostolatus sui primatum gerebat figurata generalitate personam Quad enim ad ipsum propriè pertinet natura unus homo erat gratia unus Christianus abundantiore gratia ur us idemq primus Apostolus sed quando et dietum Tibi dabo claves regni coelorum universam significabat ecclesiam Peter in respect of himself was properly by nature one man by grace one Christian by a more abundant grace one and the same a chief Apostle But when it was said to him I will give unto thee the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven he did signifie the whole Church c. So he more testimonies might be produced but these are sufficient he that desireth to see this truth confirmed by more suffrages of the ancients may consult p Loc. cit n. 4. seq Spalatensis and receive abundant satisfaction As then in the fore-mentioned speech of our Saviour under one a collected body of Apostles and Beleevers is understood so here by one Angel is meant the united body of Angels and what is spoken unto one is to be understood as spoken to all of them as by
ergò boc fixum hoc argumentum ab Angetis qui Episcopos denotant nibit facere ad prâ—bandum Episcopos tum suisse in urbibus singulos Wal. Mess dissert 1. de presb epise c. 4. p 184. Salmasius in whom the Reader if he please may see this last quotation at large drawes this conclusion Let this therefore be an undoubted truth that this argument from the Angels makes nothing to prove that there was but one Bishop in a Church or citie Thus much of the third argument I proceed to another 4. By the Angel in this place is not to be understood a Bishop in Order Office and power of Jurisdiction distinguished from and superiour to a Presbyter for there was no such distinction or superiority settled in the Church of Christ before nor in St Johns time nor immediately after the Apostles dayes The truth of this negative assertion I shall endeavour to confirme by these ensuing arguments First in the Word of God we finde no such difference or imparity in Order and Power between a Bishop and a Presbyter as is pretended by our Prelates In prosecuting of which undertaken taske I will as briefly as I may consider what is delivered by a late Patron of Episcopacy who tels us that g Episc by div right p. 91. This imparity of Government and Episcopall Jurisdiction was founded by Christ erected by his Apostles both by their practise and recommendation In the proofe of which position when he had spent sundry pages he concludes with a great deale of assurance that he hath carried all down before him saying h Pag. 127. I am for my part so confident of the Divine Institution of the Majoritie of Bishops above Presbyters that I dare boldly say there are weighty points of faith which have not so strong evidence in holy Scriptures We heare him speaking with so much confidence as if he had not only taken the Oath in the late Canons but sworne unto or at leastwise in heart and by his pen subscribed to the i Si quis dixerit in Ecclesia catholica inon esse Hierar biam divina ordinatione institutam quae constat ex Episcopis Ministris Anathema sit Seis 7. Can. 6. Anathematisme of the Tridentine Conventicle in which this Hierarchie of Bishops and Presbyters is said to be of Divine institution and an Anathema denounced against those that shall question or deny it Yet notwithstanding the confidence of those Bishops and Fryars at Trent and of our English Hierarchists how farre this was from being embraced as an article of faith Friar Peter will informe us k Historie of the Counc of Trent lib. 8. pag. 743. The sixt Anathematisme saith he was much noted in Germany in which an article of faith was made of Hierarchie which word and signification thereof is alien not to say contrary to the Scriptures and though it was somewhat anciently invented yet the Authour is not known and in case he were yet is he an hyperbolicall writer not imitated in the use of that word nor of others of his invention by any of the ancients and following the stile of Christ our Lord and of the holy Apostles and Primitive Church it ought to be named not Hierarchie but Hierodiaconia or Hierodantia I will therfore because the Bishop whom I intend to chase runs this way follow him and 1. Consider whether our Saviour Christ laid any foundation for this Episcopall Jurisdiction 2. Look to the practice of the Apostles in which they say this fabricke and frame of Church government was erected 3. View their writings whether in them there is any such distinction of Order and Power between a Bishop and a Presbyter 1. As for that foundation which our Prelatists say was laid by Christ placing his Apostles above his other Disciples the Twelve above the Seventie it hath beene sufficiently discovered by sundry Divines in which regard I shall have cause to say the lesse to be sandy and weak altogether unable to bear the weight of that fabricke which is by them hereupon erected yea some of their owne friends and sticklers in the cause have confessed it or at leastwise yeelded that which doth overthrow it For 1. m Agnoscit Saravia Septuaginta discipulos Evang listarum dignitate eminuisse ac proinde Ordinariis Episcopis vocationis gradu aâ—tecelluisse Gers Bucer p. 515. ex Sar. de Min. Ev. grad cap. 4. Saravia a professed patron of Episcopacy and Antagonist to Beza whom our Prelates looke on as their back-friend doth acknowledge that the Seventie Disciples were Evangelists and in that respect by the degree of their calling superior to Ordinary Bishops How then is there I pray you any foundation for the imparitie between a Bishop and a Presbyter laid by Christ in this fact of his choosing Twelve Apostles and Seventie Disciples when these Seventie whom the Presbyters are said to succeed were superior to Bishops themselves 2. n Peracto hoc primo munere post quam reversi sunt gaudentes non legimus eos amplius a Christo missos in Ministerium verbimeq novam ill is suisse replicaraÌ„ coÌ„missionem c. de rep Eccl. lib. â— c. 3. n. 4. Quam confirmationem quedqÌ„ mandatum generalem missionem quia à Christo factam 72. discipulis non invenio neâ—â—possum affirmare in ipsis suisse directe proximè immediate institutum ordinem presbyteralem c Id. â—b num 4. Spalatensis hath observed that these Seventie Disciples were not instituted by our Saviour for the perpetuall government of the Church but onely that they had a temporarie Commission p Luke 10. to goe before him into every City and place whither he himselfe would come which was not renewed to them after their returne with joy because the devils were made subject unto them as the Commission given to the Apostles at first with a limitation q Match 10. Go not into the way of the Gentiles neither enter into the Cities of the Samaritanes but goe rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel was after his resurrection repeated and enlarged r Match 28. Go teach all nations In which regard saith he I cannot affirme that in them the 70. Disciples was the Order of Presbyters instituted directly and immediately Christs election of the Seventie Disciples affords you see by the confession of the Archbishop of Spalato himself no sure footing for the subjection of Presbyters to Bishops though he would fain claime an institution of Bishops in the Commission given to the Apostles But thirdly the Å¿ Enchir. Christ relig in Conc. Col. p. 169. de sacr ord edit Parisâ—an 1558. Non est tamen putanâ—um Episcopos alium in Ecclesia ordinem à Presbyteris constituisse Nâ—m in primitiva Ecclesia iidem erant Presbyteri Episcopi quod Apostolorum Petri Pauli epistolae divâ—â— quoque Hierony nus ac caeteri serè omnes veteres ecclesiassici scriptores aâ—estantur
Canons of Coleine speak home to the point and in plaine termes deny the consequence of this or that hereupon we should imagine that Bishops are a distinct Order from Presbyters Albeit say they Christ did institute twelve Apostles in whose place the Bishops are and afterwards chose seventie Disciples whose place in the Church the Presbyters do hold Yet we must not thinke that Bishops did constitute in the Church an order different from Presbyters For in the Primitive Church Bishops and Presbyters were the same which the Epistles of the Apostles Peter and Paul St Hierome also and almost all other ancient Ecclesiastic all writers doe testifie In which regard our learned Junius spake a truth and no more but the truth when he told Bellarmine * Quam patres Episcopos Apostolis Presbyteros 7â— Discipulis succedere affirmaverunt nunquam dâ—xerunt ex institute Christi succedere Quia nunquam instituâ—t Christus ut Aposto is secundum gradum in Ecclesia succedâ—â— etur quae res si fuisset sam Apostolatus surctio ordinaria dicenda suisset Hoc autem verirati rationi adversatur Omnes Dei servi in dectrina Apost olerum successerunt in gradum corum ne mineâ—â— adoptavit Deus Sed 70. Discipulorum vocatio fuit extraordinaria postea in ordinariam â—raducti sunt ut Episcopi Presbyteri essent in t is ecclesiis quibus sunt attributi Quomode ergo inquio dixetunt Dos illos succedere â—empe â—umana ac non divina institutione analogica ratione quadam non autem propria imitatione communi quadam non fingulari necessita e ecclesiae Succedere igitur ex simili non â—utem pari hos iâ—â—is dixere Patres qu a gradus in Ecâ—lesiae non pares sed similes non pleuè sed quodommedo â—bservari putabant alii posse â—â—ii oportere Siqua autem similitudo est tantum secuâ—dum quid remotissima tamen fimâ—â—uco est si verè vera si imaginarie imaginaria Haec verò secundum quid remota est imaginaria simitiâ—â—do ex qua siqui absolute concludunt al solutè falluntâ—â—un controv 5 lib. 1. cap. 14 not 15. When the Fathers said the Bishops succeed the Apostles and the Presbyters succeed the Seventie Disciples they never said they did succeede one the other by Christs Institution but by humane no Divine Ordinance They said they did succeede them because some thought there might be the like degrees after a sort though not fully the like be observed in the Church Yet this likenesse is but in some respect a remote and imaginary fimilitude from which saith he if any doe inferre an absolute conclusion that it is so that it ought to be so they doe absolutely deceive themselves and others This is the summe of Junius more large and satisfactory answere By all which hath been said the Reader may easily discerne on how uncertain grounds the faith of the Hierarchie is built Of much more which might be spoken in this subject I will adde onely one thing Our Saviours act incorporating the Apostles into one collegrate body as we may stile them investing all and each of them with equall power conferring a Superioritie or Primacy to none of them above his fellowes doth plainly evince that he laid a foundation for and gave a plat-forme of an Aristocraticall not Monarchick Governement in the Church The Monarchie he hath reserved to himselfe as his peculiar Prerogative but those to whom he gave a fixed superiority as our Hierarchists speake and commission during terme of life were all conjoyned in an Aristocracy If any desire a reason why our Saviour Christ was pleased in his Apostles to settle an Aristocraticall Government and lay downe this as a standing plat-forme for them and their successours to follow the Archbishop of Spalato shall informe him in whom we have a full and satisfactory reason t Derep. Eccl. lib. 1. c. 12. n. 3. Albeit saith he it is true that in humane Common-wealths a Monarchie but especially that which is tempered by lawes is best yet in the Church Christ did not think it fit that way should be given to a Monarchie though never so well tempered amengst those that are his Ministers this he judged to be worst of all in the Church Observe I pray you his reason for it carrieth a great deale of weight with it u Salvator ipse satis praevidit quam perniciosa foret in Ecclesiae haec Monarchia quam sacilè in tyrannidem illa posset erumpere ideoq ut tyrannis haec vitaretur usus est fimilitudine servorum c. Sciebat enim Monarchiam banc Ecclesiasticam surtim introductam ad tyrannidem apertum tandem transitum facturam Id. ibid. num 4. Our Saviour himselfe did well fore-see how dangerous it would prove in the Church that if once a Monarchie did creepe in by stealth it would open a manifest way to tyrannie to which it would degenerate So Antonius de Dominis well known to be a learned and great Patron of Episcopacie As this reason given by him serveth to overthrow the Papall Monarchie over the whole Church so it doth effectually conclude against an Archiepiscopall over a Provinciall an Episcopall Soveraignty over a Diocesan Church For indeed there are not many steps betweene a Pope and a Prelate Stapleton the Jesuite if the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have rightly quoted him hath confessed it * Qui gravid a est ex Archiepiscopo facise parere potest Papam Stapleton an easio matter for an Archibishop impregnated with an ambitious domineering spirit to bring forth a Pope and the practises of our later Prelates have made it evident to all the world that a Diocesan Monarch may quickly become a tyrannicall petti-Pope In a word suppose it should be granted that the thrones promised by our Matt. 19.28 Saviour are thrones Apostolicall and that thereby is meant that power of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction which Christ communicated to them his Extraordinarie Delegates and Embassadours which yet is very questionable x Chemnit har Ev. c 132. I ansen conc Ev. c. 100. Cajet Par. divers Divines carrying it another way yea y L. cit cap. 11â— = â—3 Spalatensis affirmes the quite contraty that Christ there speakes not a word of the throne in the Church yet what is all this to an Episcopal throne or to the advancing of a Prelate above the rest of the Presbyters What affinity is there between an Apostolicall and Episcopall throne between an Aristocraticall Government which Christ founded in his Apostles and a Monarchicall Soveraignty which Prelates have usurped We reade indeed in Scripture of z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Rev. 13. a throne which the Dragon did give to the beast on whose head are names of blasphemie but we reade not any where of an Apostolicall throne derived to a Bishop True it is as the Patron of Episcopacie hath told us that in the ancients there is mention of 〈◊〉
right trade of your apologie to pretend the Church and meane the Pope And so you make the Church but a cloak-bag to carry the Popes titles after him Our Cathedralists pretend the Church but meane the Bishops and themselves and so the Church is made but a cloak-bag to carry the Diocesans titles of honour after him But why I pray you may not a particular private congregation be stiled the pillar and ground of truth There is no Orthodoxe Divine can be ignorant that the Church is said to be the pillar of truth Non ratione architect onica sed sorensi not as the notion of a pillar is taken by Architects in building for that which doth uphold and beare up the roofe or loft that lyeth on it as if the Church did give supportance and stabilitie to the truth but as a pillar in the market-place to which the Kings Proclamation is fastned that all his subjects may take notice of it Hath Christ fastned his truth to a Cathedrall only that there it is to be found and no where else The sad experience of that ignorance superstition and profaneness which reigne in places neerest unto them hath verified the Proverbe The neerer the Church the further from God Lyra though a popish Fryar and one that lived in times of much blindnesse yet saw so much light that he could say h Lyra in Matt. c. 16. The Church consists not in men of dignity and power either Ecclesiasticall or Secular for many Princes and Popes with other inferiour persons have revolted from the faith wherefore the Church consists in those persons in whom is the true knowledge and confession of the faith I would we had not too much cause to confesse the same of many of our Church-men Prelates and their adherents the Cathedrall Diocesan crew with others but albeit there hath been an apostasie in them yet blessed be the Lord for it we may truly say of the Church of England at this day what once a i Dr Potter in his answer to Charitie mistaken Cathedralist spake in favour of the Church of Rome The errours have been the errours of the domineering faction in the Court of England not the errours of the Church of England I hope they will give us leave to speake as favourably of our mother the Church of England as they of theirs the Church of Rome which is with them a true Church I will shut up all that I shall say concerning Timothy and Titus and the pretended Episcopall power committed unto them the same as our Hierarchists say with what they exercise with the observation of a Friar yet an k Historie of the Counc of Trent lib. 4. pag. 332. Historian of good esteeme It is denyed in words that Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction is dominion as is the secular yet one knoweth not how to put a difference between them But St Paul did when he wrote to Timothy and repeated it to Titus that a Bishop should not be greedy of gaine nor a striker Now on the contrary they make men pay for processes and imprison the parties as is done in the secular Courts In the next place according to promise I come to view the writings of the Apostles and to enquire whether in them there be any such Superiority and Distinction in Order and in Office between a Bishop and a Presbyter as is pretended by our Prelatists If in this Scripture may be judge it is as cleare as the Sunne in my apprehension that a Bishop and a Presbyter are one and the same in Order and in Office For when the Apostle doth set downe the sacred orders we find no other but these Bishops and Deacons that which is by the Hierarchists made a middle order between both to wit of Presbyters is not at all expressed in distinction from the former which doth evidently prove that the distinction between a Bishop and a Presbyter is but an institution of man not of God nor hath it foundation in the Word of God Consider the Inscription of St Pauls Epistle to the Philippians it is directed to l Phil. 1. â— All the Saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons When Paul directeth Timothy how he should carry himself in the Church of God that is saith a late m Bishop Hall pag. 108.109 Patron of Episcopacie how he must carry himselfe as a Diocesan in such a Church where there would be need of all varietie of Church-Officers we have no other Orders set downe then the fore-mentioned n 1 Tim. 3. Bishops and Deacons together with the qualifications of the one and the other I demand then of our Diocesans now how comes it to passe that the order of Presbyters is left out If Presbyters were a distinct order from Bishops and inferiour to them in place and power would the Apostle have omitted them as unnecessary and superfluous in such a Church as the Diocesse of Ephesus yea of Asia rather for of that extent is the Church there mentioned by the Apostle said to be by our fore-mentioned Bishop Come we from Timothy to Titus and view the Epistle directed unto him o Tit. 1.5 He is left by the same Apostle at Creete that he should set in order the things that are wanting and ordain Elders in every city Of what ranke and order these Presbyters or Elders were the verses immediately following will informe us The qualifications of those which should be admitted to this order and be made Presbyters follow If any be blamelesse Vers 6. the husband of one wife having faithfull children not accused of riot or unruly Why must a Presbyter be such an one Vers 7. the next verse gives the reason For a Bishop must be blamelesse as the steward of God not selfe-willed c. Therefore must a Presbyter be blamelesse because he is Gods steward a Bishop an Overseer as the Greeke word properly imports and so it is rendred by our late Translators Act. 20. set over the House of God In a word if the Apostles had in their dayes instituted any such distinct order of Bishops above Presbyters then surely either in their last and valedictory speeches to those Presbyters whom they ordained and Churches which they planted or in their Epistles sent unto them we should have some expressions tending to this purpose some charge or other given either to the Bishop how he should carry himselfe towards the Presbyters under his power and Jurisdiction or to the Presbyters how they should behave themselves toward the Bishop set over them But we finde not the least intimation of any such thing nor of one Bishop set over many flocks and congregations but rather of more Bishops then one which had the oversight of a flock The command given to the Hebrewes is this p Heb. 13.17 Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your soules as they that must give an account
Church of Smyrna when St John wrote this his Revelation Yet all this makes nothing against what I have delivered as I conceive under favour and with submission to men of greater reading and better judgement For 1. Sundry passages in that Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarpe are as r Margin annot in epist Ignat. ad Polyc. Vedelius hath observed supposititious thrust into them by some one or other out of the pretended Constitutions of Clemens lib. 2. cap. 26. 2. Albeit Ignatius doth in that Epistle salute Polycarpe the Bishop and the Presbyterie yet it doth necessarily follow that he was a Bishop in order distinguished from the Presbytery if he were a Presbyter President of the Presbytery it is a sufficient reason why in this falutation of Ignatius he should be named in the first place and the Presbyterie after him It appeares by Ignatius elswhere that the Presbyters were Counsellors unto and Coassessors with the Bishop in the Presbyterie for so he doth expresly call them Å¿ In epistâ— ad Troll. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What is the Presbyterie saith he but a sacred Assembly the Counsellours and Coassessours of the Bishop In the Romane common-wealth though all the Patricii or Noblemen were Counsellours of State and Senatours yet there were two chosen out from among the rest who had for honours sake the denomination of Consuls appropriated unto them yet this title of honour did not advance them to a Place or Dignitie of a different Order from or Superiour to the rest of the Patricii they were all Counsellours but these two the Presidents of the Counsell and from this their Orrice they had their name of honour Consules à consulendo How weak a ground the restriction of the name Bishop unto him that is a President of the Presbyterie to prove his distinction in order from thence hath been shewed before out of * Dissert de presb episc pag. 232. Salmafius who hath made it evident that by the same reason a Counsellour and Senatour The Councell and the Senate should constitute different Orders and Offices yea all that the Primate of Armagh whom for his Pietie and Learning I shall ever honour doth in plain termes plead for at leastwise seemes unto me to plead for and doth undertake to prove is only this that he to whom the title of Bishop which was as is confessed by Dr Reynolds whom he alleadgeth at first common to all the Presbyters by whose common counsell and advice all Church affaires were ordered is restrained by the Fathers was a President of the Presbyterie which may easily be granted without any great advantage to the Hierarchists or prejudice to the Presbyterians But if by reason of Presidentship it shall be inferred that the Bishop was in Order and in Office distinct from and superior to the Presbyters I shall for my part be ready to assent unto those which say so on the same conditions that that Old Archbishop of r Faâ—etur Armachanus diversam sententiamâ— esse magis amicum Doctoribus ecclesiae cui paratum se profitetur morem gerere node eâ— divinis differentia ostendatur oraculis mich de Pal. in 4. dist 24. disp 2. Num episc fit ordo Armagh profered to subscribe to the opinion of the Prelates and Doctors who were well-pleased with their assertions that did say there was by divine institution a difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter So that the difference may be manifested out of the divine Oracles and what is affirmed be proved by them 3. True it is that Irenaeus doth indeed set forth Polycarpe under that name Bishop of the Church of Smyrna yea and withall doth say that he was constituted Bishop of that Church by the Apostles yet doth it not follow that he was a Bishop in Order superiour to a Presbyter which I shall prove two wayes 1. By the writings of the Apostles which best of all informe us what orders of Church Officers they did institute a Bishop and Presbyter are one in Order and Office Of this I have spoken before and therefore will but mention it onely I will adde the judgement of that fore-mentioned old and learned Archbishop of Armagh in this point who considering the passages of the Apostle in his Epistle to Timothie wherein there is mention of no other Orders but Bishops and Deacons delivereth it as a u Constant quod inter orcinem Episcopalem inter ordinem Diaconatue non est orao medius quoâ—iam si quis esset non dubium quia iste Doctor maximus qui suum evangelium recepit à Christo ut ipse scrihit ad Gal. 1. suum discctum discipulum Timotheum de illo ordâ—ne instruxisset ei regulas dedisset ficut de superiori inferiori reâ—utas dedit Rich. Armach lib. â—1 quaest Armen cap 5. fol. 84. manifest and unquestionable truth that there is no middle order between them for if there were out of all doubt that great Doctor who received his Gospel from Jesus Christ would have instructed Timothy therein and prescribed rules concerning that as he did concerning the order above and below it 2. Out of Irenaeus himselfe who * Haec dogmata tibi qui ante nos fuerunt prisbyteri qui Apostolorum discipuli â—xtiterunt non tradiderunt Possum coram deo testificarâ— beatum ilum Apost olicum Presbyterum si tale quid audissâ—t reclamatum Iraen in epistâ—ad Plorin Cent. Magd. ent 2. cap. 10. col 134 135. elsewhere cals both Polycarpe himself and other bishops of Asia Disciples of the Apostles Apostolicall Presbyters Under the same notion doth he mention Anicetus Pius Hyginus Telesphorus who are by others called Bishops of Rome giving them no other title then this a In Epist ad victor The Presbyters that were before you Whosoever shall peruse sundry passages in x Iren. lib. 3. adv haer cap. 3. compared with ca. 2. ejud lib. and li. 4. cap. 43. compared with cap 44. 45. Irenaeus will clearly see that in him the Succession of Bishops is all one with the succession of Presbyters I will mention but one and referre the Reader to the rest in the margent if he thinke fit to conâ—ult the authour himselfe y Iren. lib. 4. cap. 43. We must obey saith he those Presbyters which are in the Church those which have a succession from the Apostles as we have shewed Who together with the succession of the Bishoprick or Episcopacie have received the gift of truth according to the good pleasure of the Father The places are so cleare the words so plaine and evident that from thence Spalatensis did rightly inferre z De rep Eccl. l. 2. c. 3. n. 44. In all Presbyters Irenaeus doth both acknowledge and confound one and the same order of Episcopacie though afterwards seeking to avoide the pregnant testimonies which overthrow his position and the position of other Hierarchists he gives this childish and slender answer or rather silly
is the watch-tower of the vine-dresser not the top of honour for him that is proud If whilest I retain my Bishoprick I scatter the flock of Christ how is the dammage of the flock the honour of the Shepheard With what face shall we in the world to come hope for the honour promised by Christ if our honour in this world doth hinder Christian unity Thus farre the African Bishops Sed Cynthius aurem I returne unto and proceede in the proving of our Proposition laid downe before 3. In Christian Churches which were of Apostolicall foundation and others after them we finde two Bishops in a Church or Citie both in and after the Apostles dayes not one advanced before the other Which being duly considered we may invert that argument which is used by our Hierarchists for the maintainance of their Episcopall Monarchie You know who hath laid down this amongst his Postulata g Episc by div right part 1. §. 12. p. 50. We may not entertain so irreverent an opinion of the Saints and Fathers of the Primitive Church that they who were the immediate successours of the Apostles would or durst set up a forme of government different from that which was fore-designed unto them Let this be granted the position may easily be retorted on their own heads thus If the Apostles had instituted one Bishop onely in a Church and placed him in superiority of power and order above the Presbyters can we think that the Saints and Fathers of the primitive Churches or the Churches themselves would have so soon swerved from the rule and practise of their first founders and have set up or admitted two Bishops where the Apostles had ordained but one The truth of this assertion touching the plurality of Bishops in a Church may be easily proved by varietie of examples h Dissert de gub Eccles p. 302 303. Gersom Bucerus hath proved it by no lesse then ten examples out of Scriptures and others out of Ecclesiasticall history I will onely mention some few Narcissus and Alexander both Bishops of Hierusalem not by succession one after the other but both at the same time as is proved out of i Eccl. hist li. 6. ca. 9. 10. Eusebius Ignatius and Evodias both Bishops of Antioch at the same time the one ordained by Peter the other by Paul as the fore-mentioned * Gers Buc. p. 439. forraine Divine hath proved by the confession of Clemens Constit l. 7. c. 46. and Baronius tom 1. ad an 45. At Rome Linus and Cletus or Anacletus were Coepiscopi Fellow-Bishops in Peters dayes and afterwards as Platina l In vita Sancti Petri. hath acknowledged and before him Ruffinus in praefar ad lib. Recognit as m Pan. tom 2. l. 13. c. 4. Chamier hath observed out of him and the n Cent 1 part 2. c. 10. in Lino Centurists of Magdenburge after them both Liberius after his returne from exile was conjoyned with Felix in the Episcopall See at Rome by the decree of the Synod of Syrmium as I have learned from o Cat. test ver l. 4. col 255. Illyricus and Gonlartius out of p Lib. 4. c. 14. Sozomen which Synod was held no lesse then fiftie six yeeres after the Councell of Nice which first made a Canonicall constitution to the contrary prohibiting that there should be two Bishops in one citie as q Lib. 1. c. 6. Ruffinus hath set down that Canon yea later then this Austin was made Bishop of Hippo in the dayes of Valerius and joyned with him as his Colleague in the Episcopall honour and Function albeit Austin was very unwilling yet the x Dum id fieri solere ab omnibus suaderetur atque id ignare transmatinis Africanis Ecclesiae exemplis probaretur compulsus atqueâ—â—â—ctas succubuit Epi scapatus curam majoris loci ordinationem suscepit Posslid in vita Aug. c. 8. Quod quidem quia tanta ejus obaritate tantoque populi studio dominum id velle credidt nonnullis jam exemplis praecedentibus quibus mibi omnis excusatioiâ—laudehatur vehemeâ—ter timuiexcusare Aug. ep 34 â—d Pausin Primate of Numidia Megatius Calamensis and Valerius together with all the rest Bishops that were present perswaded him thereunto and by varietie of examples in the African and transmarine Churches proved it to be a thing so usuall that Austin was left without all excuse and yeelded to undertake coepiscopatus sarcinam as he cals it the burthen of Coepiscopacie with Valerius for the prohibition by the Nicene canon was not yet come to the knowledge of Valerius nor to the cares of Austin as he doth Å¿ Ep. 110. Quod cone liio Nieeno prohibitum saisse nesciebam nec ipse sciebat else where professe This is a truth so clear and which hath such varietie of instances for the confirmation of it that the * Neq fuit tanta valigie priscu illis Episcopis lâ—cum sibi interdum ascicere aliquem ex suarum Ecclesiarum Presbyteris qui ipse tum furisdictione ordine u uque pleno Episcopalis propriae porestatis tum etiam nomine in eadem Ecclesia simul esset diceretur Episcopus de rep Eccl l 2. c 9. n. 14. Archbishop of Spalato doth confesse The ancient holy Bishops made no scruple of making one of their Presbyters their companiâ—n who both in Jurisdiction and Order and full use of power properly Episcopall should be their Colleague and Fellow-bishop in the same Church Yea t Idem est juris in parte quod in toto in parvis quod in magnis sed in eodem episcopatu possunt simut esse duo episcopi Caus 7. q. 1. c. Non est autem C Peristi C. Quia vero Ergo consimiliter propter necessitatem vel utilitatem possent esse snnut plures summi Pontifices dial part 3. tract 1. lib. 2. c. 25. sol 202. Occham proving out of the Canon Law it selfe that there may be two Bishops in a Bishoprick or Diocesse doth thence inferre that by the same reason there may be also two Popes u Fideles propter necessitatem vel utilitatem sufficienter moventem constituendo plures Pontifices non facerent conditionem Ecclesiae deterivem sed meliorarent cam cap. 26. sol 203. ad septimum as the government of one and the same Church by more Bishops then one conduceth to the benefit thereof so the regiment of the Church Catholike by many Popes a Loc. cit cap. 15. paulo ante finem This he maintaines might be done in both without any rent or division in the Church without the breach of that unity which the Apostle doth require for among all those things which he reckons up as grounds of union and motives to the conservation of it b Ephes 4. One faith one Baptisme c. Vnum Apostolicum minimè ponit saith he the Apostle makes no mention of one Apostolicall either Pope or
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Bishops throne a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orat. 7. Gregorie Nazianzen indeed so stiles his Episcopall dignity to which he was advanced but withall he saith he could not well tell whether he should call it a tyrannicall throne or hierarchicall in his next Oration he cals it in plaine termes b Orat. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a tyrannicall preheminence and sets down both there in prose and afterwards in c Carm. de vita suâ— oper Graecol tom 2. p. 24. seq edit Par san 1630 Carm. de div vitae genâ—ad pseudoepisc verse the bloudy contentions and divisions which the ambition of Bishops affecting this Episcopall throne caused both in Church and State I would the same were not verified in our dayes and that we had not cause with him to complain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Alas for our great sorrowes and occasions of griefe Thus much for the foundation of Episcopall Jurisdiction pretended to be laid by Christ himself We are in the next place to enquire whether it hath in the practise of the Apostles and their recommendation any more solid and firme erection The onely instance of this that is produced is the charge of the Apostle in his Epistles to Timothy and Titus wherein in my understanding saith our fore-mentioned d Page 105. Patron of Episcopacie the Apostle speakes so home to the point that if he were now to give direction to an English Bishop how to demeane himselfe in his place he could not speake more fully to the execution of his sacred Office In which assertion we may seâ— what is one speciall ground of this great confidence Those acts and offices which have beene by degrees limited to the. Bishops as distinguished from Presbyters and granted by the Custome of the Church those are singled out as if then by the Apostle limited and restrained to the Bishop Amidst all that is here spoken out of these Epistles we have not the least mention of those qualifications which St Paul requirech in a Bishop It is not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not the work of a Bishop but the dignitie and feigned Soveraignty for which they now contend and fight however they would faine beare the world in hand that Episcopacie is a sacred Order of Divine and Apostolicall institution so that we may truly apply that to ours which sometimes Martin Duther first and Marlorat after said concerning Popish Prelates e Perinde sunt qui statum episcopalem statum jactitant perséctionis quum interim nthil agant quam Satrap as pompa agere equitare bellos caballos nisi quod interdum templa consecrant aras Marl in 2 Pet. 2.18 ex Luth. Like unto them that speake great swelling words of vanitie are they which boast that Episcopacie is a state of Perfection when in the meane time the onely thing they aime at is to be equall to Peeres in pompe to ride on stately horses only now and then their Lordships doe consecrate a Temple or an Altar For if we should looke for the same conditions and qualifications in many of ours which St Paul commands to bee in those Bishops there mentioned by him we shall finde that we are f Hujusmedi conditiones siquu exactè consideret conferat cum nostrae aetatis episcopis videbitur in novo orbe in peregrina aliqua ecclesia quae Christum Apostolos penitus ignoraverit ve sari Salm. in Tit. 1. disp 1. ad 4 â—â—â— dub in a new world as Salmeron the Jesuite once spake and in a strange Church that never heard of Christ and his Apostles This by the way From all that is culled out of these Epistles the argument by which they must prove Episcopacie to have been erected by the Apostle laboureth with an usuall fallacie a shamefull begging of the question For first of all Timothy and Titus have been sufficiently un-bishopped not onely by him who hath written a particular treatise in that name but by all that have waded into this controversie Domestick and Forraigne Divines against English and Romish Hierarchists neither hath there been any sacriledge committed by those which have unbishopped them but they have been restored to the Dignitie of Evangelists from which the Prelates have sacrilegiously degraded them that so they might on the ruines of the fore-mentioned Evangelists honour build up their Episcopall Soveraignty I might be large in proving this that Timothy and Titus were Evangelists but the work is already sufficiently done by others Onely I will least our Hierarchists should say that this is the assertion of none but their opposites put them in minde what g Video Timetheum proculdubio Episcopum generalem i. e. Apostolum nulli certae sedi adbuc alligatum ab ipso Paulo vocari suum adjutorem de rep Eccl. l. 2. ca. 3. n 60. Antonius de Dominis hath observed concerning Timothie long after the first Epistle written to him even when the Apostle wrote his Epistle to the Romans which was about the time of his last journey to Hierusalem as is cleare by paralleling those two places of Scripture Rom. 15.25 Act. 24.17 18. to wit that he was out of doubt a generall Bishop i. e. an Apostle as yet confined to no certain seat So that if Spalatensis speake truth his Episcopacie of Ephesus is gone for he was not yet saith he confined to any certain See And as hee was not then when Paul wrote that Epistle to the Romans so neither was he when the same Apostle wrote his second Epistle to Timothie himselfe Consider the charge which the Apostle there gives him h 2 Tim. 4.5 Doe the worke of an Evangelist make full proofe of thy Ministery He doth not say Doe the worke of a Bishop then had our Prelatists some colour for their assertions but of an Evangelist now it is well knowne that the Apostle setteth the i Ephes 4. Evangelists as Persons whose calling was extraordinarie above the standing and ordinary governours of the Church Pastors and Teachers Those are by the Apostle there stiled Evangelists who did Evangelizare sine Cathedra as k in Eph 4. Ambrose speakes Preach the Gospel up and downe not being confined to Residence on any one peculiar charge We have St Paul professing that on him did lye the l 2 Cor. 11.27 Care of all the Churches and oft expressing his desire in his own person to come to them to confirme and strengthen their faith which when he could not do he sent these two not to mention any more sometimes to one Church sometimes to another but being now imprisoned at Rome and having once answered before Nero already knowing that he m Ac. â—0 should never see their faces any more as he said to those Elders of Ephesus that n â— Tim. 4.6 the time of his departure was at hand as he speakes to Timothy he puts him in minde of that Office
accusation is to acquaint the Church with the crime and to bring the offender into judgement openly to reprove which not onely superiours but equals also yea and inferiours may doe The Knights of Rome did not only judge the people but the Senatours and Noble-men also if they were delinquents Certainly Timothy had no such Consistory or Court as was afterwards attributed to the Bishops What this authority was may be understood from that which followeth Them that sin rebuke before all which equals also may doe Thus of old the Bishops if a Bishop or Presbyter were accused did referre the matter to the Ecclesiasticall Senate or Synod and did condemne him if he were found worthy i. e. they did suspend excommunicate or remove him according to the nature of his offence Thus that Divinitie Professour of Cambridge in his dayes And that this was the manner of proceeding in administration of Church censures appeares by our Saviours precept concerning other Offenders though private persons z Matth. 18. Dic Ecclesiae Tell the Church and the sentence of Excommunication pronounced and executed on the incestuous person at Corinth It was not the act of a Bishop alone or of his Officiall or Chancellour these are Apocryphall names and offices unknowne for some Centuries of yeares in the Church of Christ but it was a 2 Cor. 2.6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Punishment inflicted by many 2. I may adde the answer of Gonlartius unto Pamelius objecting this place of the Apostle to Timothy for the proofe of Episcopall Preeminence over Presbyters b Annot. in Cypr. Epist 65. An accusation is two wayes received either privately or in the Ecclesiasticall assembly which doth judge of those crimes This though it be taken as spoken to Timothy alone yet implieth as he there shewes onely a preheminence of Order in Timothy not of power and authority Which he thus makes good if a Bishop were accused the Presbyters did receive the accusation and judge of it as he proves out of Cyprian who c Epist 65. old 3 Ep. 9. writes to Epictetus and the people of Assura commanding them not to admit to the Episcopacie againe Eortunatianus who sometimes was their Bishop but had denyed the faith of Christ Other Bishops saith Gonlartius are not called together nor is there any appeale to the Bishop of Rome but the Assuritan Church in a convenient order judgeth their own Bishop In the Presbyterie one of the Presbyters or Ministers of the Church did fit for orders-sake onely untill those degrees did arise of which we have elsewhere spoken Therefore to receive an accusation against one is not only a note of preheminence but of order also and that preheminence doth not confirme those degrees which afterwards introduced tyranny into the Church but manifesteth an eutaxie in the house of God This shall suffice to be spoken touching that branch of Episcopall Jurisdiction I come to another and that concernes the Commission given to Timothy concerning the Doctrine of the Teachers d Episc by di◠right p. 106. Timothy is charged to charge the Preachers of Ephesus that they teach no other doctrine that they doe not give heed to Fables and Genealogies and e Pag. 116. Titus is commanded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to stop the mouths of those false teachers who broach doctrines they ought not for filthy lucres sake and to passe sharp censures upon them what can doe this but Episcopall authority saith the Bishop Pag. 107. I may truly say saith he that both St Paul and Timothy his Disciple doe as truly Lord it here in their Episcopall power as those Bishops which they the Scots have abdicated I will not here Camerinam movere rake into the sinke of the Lordly tyrannicall exorbitancies of our later Prelates they stinke bad enough already I will not cause the Reader to stop his nose at those putrid steemes which would arise if that puddle were stirred Onely I would desire the Reader by the way to consider that St Paul hath professedly disclaimed all Lording it over the consciences of the Corinthians f 2 Cor. 1.14 Not that we have dominion over your faith saith he but are helpers of your joy for by faith ye stand g In locum Cajetan hath well observed that this is here added by the Apostle to exclude a calumnie which might have been cast on him because the words of Paul which he spake immediately before viz. to spare you might seeme to imply some dominion he presently subjoynes this Not that we have dominion over your faith which words are fitly and fully paraphrased by Beza thus h Ineund locum Not as if I might doe any thing amongst you in matter of Religion What I pleased by my power in binding and loosing of your consciences but I am the Minister of God to comfort you and to cheere your hearts we are helpers of your joy wherein he doth secretly oppose the joy and peace of Conscience Where of he makes God the authour but himselfe and his colleagues the Ministers unto that tyrannicall terrour which is caused by those who carry themselves as if they were Lords over the consciences of both Ministers and people We doe not say that either Timothy or Titus were meere Presbyters and so compeeres or Equals to the Presbyters of Ephesus or Crete nor were they Bishops such as you fancy them and in that superiority of degree above them but Evangelists of an higher Orbe then either Bishops for which you plead or Presbyters Looke on them in that degree wherein they were and they might on better grounds with more authority charge false teachers that they should not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 teach any other doctrine then what the Apostles had taught for unto that the i Gal. ◠8 ◠Apostle himselfe doth limit it doubling his Anathema on the heads of them whosoever they were that should doe it then any ordinary Bishop whatsoever if there had been then any such distinct from Presbyters The case is cleare concerning them both they had been the Apostles companions in his travailes had been fully instructed in the doctrine which he preached and in respect of their familiar conversing with him they could avouch what truth he had delivered That of Paul to Timothy the pretended Bishop of Ephesus is clear for him k 2 Tim. 3.10 Thou hast fully knowne my doctrine manner of life l Ib. ver 14. Continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of knowing of whom thou hast learned them As for Titus touching whom Bishop m Pag. 117. Hall is pleased to tell us there is no colour to say he was an Evangelist not to insist on the frequent use which the Apostle made of him in sending him from one Church to another consider what false teachers they are whose mouths the Apostle would have in an especiall manner to be stopped they are n Tit. 1.10 those of the
He doth not say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Be obedient to the Bishop that is over you but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the plurall number them that have the rule over you for they watch for your soules it is too great a burthen for one to be intrusted with the over-sight and give an account for the soules in many congregations The counsell of St Paul to the Thessalonians runs thus q 1 Thes 5.12 We beseech you brethren to know them which labour among you and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are over you in the Lord. However in the writings of the Fathers as the r Orig. of Episc pag. 5. Archbishop of Armagh hath observed which were somewhat neere the Apostles dayes the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the same with the word here used by the Apostle is limited unto one whom other of the Fathers doe peculiarly terme a Bishop in what respect you shall heare more anon yet it is cleare by this plaâ—â— of the Apostle that they confined not that Title unto one nor did they set up one under that title or notion Superiour to the rest of the Presbyters who laboured also in the word and doctrine In which regard Å¿ Amâ—â—t in â—oc Beza spake a truth and no more but a truth when he observed from this and other places that the Church was governed a Pastoribus in communi by the Paestors in common or by the common consent and counsell of the Pastours the degree of Episcopacie bâ—ing not as yet invented or found out by the Apostles or Apostolike men Let us proceed St Peter commandeth the Presbyters to t 1 Pet. 5.1 2. feed the flock of God which is amongst them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taking the oversight of them or being and performing the office of Bishops amongst them not by constraint but willingly not for filthy lucre but of a ready mind From which and other places it is clear that in Scripture phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so farre from signifying an Order distinct from or superiour to a Presbyter that it imports no other thing then the Office of a Presbyter a truth which u Dissert 1. de presb episc cap 6. Salmasius hath proved at large against Petavius the Jesuite Yea the * Ibid. cap. 3. pag. 172. same learned Critick hath observed that there is as much colour of reason to say that a Senatour and Counsellour were distinct Offices and Orders as to say that a Bishop and a Presbyter are different in Office and in Order For as the Senate and the Counsell did not constitute different bodies but one and the same assembly was understood by both denominations so the particular members of that body were sometimes called Senatours sometimes Counsellours Idem est saith he de Presbyterio Episcopio The Presbyterie and the Episcopium were but one and the same body and convention of Bishops and Presbyters The light of Scripture is so evident and convincing unto all those which doe not shut their eyes against it being prepossessed with other fancies that from thence to omit other testimonies of the Fathers with sundry Divines of note both Protestant and Popish m Dist 60. cap. Null ex urb Papa Sacros or lines dicimus diaconatum Presbyteratum Hos quidem sotos ecclesia primitiva habusse dicitur Gratian and x Sent. lib. 4. dist 24. tit 1. Excellentèr canones duos tantum sacros ordines appellari censent diaconatus scil presbyteraâ—us quia hos solos Ecclesia primitiva legetur habuisse de bissolis praeceptum Apostolihabemus Peter Lumbard have confessed that the Scripture mentioneth no other sacred Orders then of Presbyters and Deacons the primitive Church is said to have these onely and we have the precept of the Apostle concerning these alone As Gratian in his text of the Canon Law so y Dicunt quidem quod in ecclesia prima primitiva coÌ„mune crat officium episcoporum sacerdotum no mina crant communia dist 95. cap. Olim officium crat commune sed in secunda primitiva caeperunt distingui nomiua Presbyter et Episcopus erant prorsus synonyma etiam administratio coÌ„munis erat quia communi consitio sacerdotum regebantur ecclesiae In schismatis ergoremedium ut bicdicitur fact a est praelatio ut unus praeessâ—t quoad quaedam sacramenta quae modò appropriantur episcopis Gloss ikn dist 95. cap. Legimus verb. Postea Johannes Semeca in his Glosse thereon tels us In the first Primitive Church Bishops and Presbyters or Priests were all one both in name and office the names and offices began to be distinguished in the second primitive Church when for a remedy of schisme one was advanced in the Church which was before governed by the common consent of Presbyters in respect of name and administration and some sacraments which are now appropriated to the Bishops Thus Semeca If any shall desire to know of what extent this first primitive Church is none can better informe him then learned Dr USSHER once Divinity Professor at Dublin now Archbishop of Armagh z De succ statu Eccles cap. 1. pag. 19. who having observed out of Hegesippus that during the age of the Apostles the Church continued 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a pure and undefiled Virgin addes in matters of Religion we are not ashamed to appeale to this first Primitive Church for so it hath pleased some to distinguish saith he referring us in the margin to this fore-mentioned Glosse of Semeca And truly as in articles of faith and points of Doctrine against all Romanists with other pretenders of antiquity so in matters of Discipline and this particular point of controversie concerning the Parity or rather Identity of Bishops and Presbyters against all Hierarchists whatsoever we are neither afraid nor ashamed to appeale to this first Primitive Church the Church in the Apostles dayes Before I part with Gratian and the Canon Law I shall adde this out of it we finde there another Originall of this Imparity and distinction in Order between a Bishop and a Presbyter a Horum discretio à Gentilibus maximè introducta est qui suos Flamines alios simpliciter Flamines alios Archiflamines alios Protostamines appellabant Grant decr par 1. dist 21. Vide plura distinct 80. Can. in Illis The difference that now is between an Archbishop a Bishop and a Presbyter was introduced saith Gratian into the Church from the imitation of the Heathenish Hierarchie who so marshalled their Priests that some were Archiflamines some Protoflamines some Flamines The same is acknowledged for the substance of it by the b Vt Rom. veteres olim majores minores Pontifices inter hos unum summum qui omnes sacris praecrant habebant it a nos in Christianismo easdem denominationes servamus Archiepiscopi dicti sunt tanquam primores Episcopi c. Desacr Ord. p.
Pastorum collegto judicium adimeretur Sed hoc tantum jubet Apostotus ut omnibus electionibus praesit tanquam moderator electos oratâ—one jejunio impositione manuum consecrareâ— uâ— habes Act. 6. 13 14. Ob id enim Titum priùs à se ordinatum Episcopum reliquit ut alios ipse constitueret sicut dâ—â—itur Consul aut Dictator Consutes alios creasse quia Comitia de eis eligendis babuerunt Salm. in Tit. 1 disp 1. Paul did not in that place permit Titus alone to set Ministers over the Churches for this were to invest him with a Kingly power and by this meanes the right of Election should be taken away from the Churches and the judgement should be taken away from the Colledge of Pastors But the Apostle doth only command him this that he should be President at all elections as a Moderator that he should by prayer fasting and Imposition of hands consecrate those that were chosen as the Apostles themselves did Act. 6.13 14. For this cause did he leave Titus ordained a Bishop formerly that he should ordain others as the Consul or Dictator is said to create Consuls because they held the Comitia the Assemblies for the election and creation of them This being a truth so cleare confirmed as you see by testimonies on all hands I wonder with what face it is spoken against i Episc by div right pa. 120. and another passage out of Hicrome Tanquam imperator in exercitu as the Generall in the Army brought in obtorto collo quite against the haire For Hierome k In Epist ad Evagr. in that place speaks not concerning the power which the Bishop had over the Presbyters but concerning the manner of his prelation to wit by the free election of the Presbyters of Alexandria who did choose one out of their own company whom they placed in an higher degree and called Bishop This forme of prelation by election he doth there illustrate by two examples 1. l Quomodo si exercitus imperatorem sactat aut Diacone eligant de se quem industrium noverint Arcbidiaconum vocent ibid. Of souldiers in an army making choise of a Generall and Commander in chiefe over them but the Father doth not say the Bishop carried himselfe as a Generall in an army or had power given him answerable to the power of a Generall Nay on the contrary he tels the Bishops in plain termes they m Sicut ergo Presbyteri sciunt se ex ecclesiae consuetudine ei qui sibi praepositus suerit subjectos esse ita Episâ—opi noverâ—â—â— so magis consuetudine quam dispositionis Dominiâ—ae veritate Presbyâ—eâ—u esse majores in communi debere Ecclesiam regere in Epist ad Titum ca. 1. ought to governe the Church by the common counsell of the Presbyters above whom they are by the custome of the Church advanced 2. He instanceth in the fact of Deacons making choise of one whom they know to be industrious and set him to be Arch-deacon over them This latter passage is cunningly omitted the former misalleadged and fraudulently perverted because the one cuts the comb of Episcopall Dominion the other as it is wrested seemeth at first sight to uphold or favour it Indeed the execution of Martiall Law hath well pleased them which are now turned Martialists It is too well known how they have hang'd up Ministers ad placitum at their pleasure by their suspensions excommunications deprivations n Conc. Hisp 2. act 6. ap cent Magdâ—cent 7. cap 9. by a tyrannicall power not canonicall authority as was complained of old against some Prelates in the second Councell of Hispalis But ab initio non fuit sic from the beginning it was not so The Colledge of Presbyters granted unto the Bishop the chiefest seat in their publike meetings and gave honour to him as to their Senior and he was commanded to carry himself towards them as toward his Colleagues by the o Episcopus in quolibet loco sedens stare Presterum non patiatur Conc Carth. 4. can 34. Episcopus in ecclesia consessu presbuterorum sublimior sedeat Intra domum verò collegam se Presbyterorum cognoscat can 35. ap Grat dist 95. Canons of the fourth Councell of Carthage unto which Canons registred by Gratian this Summarie or title is prefixed p Episcopus non dominum sed Collegam se presbyâ—erorum cognoseat Let the Bishop know that he is not a Lord over but Colleague of the Presbyters In this regard in the same Canonist the q Episcopi se sacerdotes esse noverint non dominos bonorent clericos quasi clericos ut it sis à clericis quasi episcopis honos eseratur Grat. dist 95. ca. Esâ—o subjectus ex Hier. ad Nepot epist 2. Bishops are commanded to honour their Clergy as Clergy-men that so the Clergy may reciprocally honour them as their Bishops And the forementioned r Hoc est contra supercilium Episcoporum qui subdiros appellant siâ—ios cum debeant cos appel lare fratres Caus 8. q. 1. cap. Quid autem vol sociâ—s caus 10 q. 3. cap. Cavendum Gloss in verb. quasi clerices Glossator Semeca hath observed that this doth sharply reprove the pride of those Bishops who account them their subjects and underlings whom they ought to reckon of and call their brethren and companions Last of all when the Bishop began to be distinguished in name from the Presbyters and the forementioned Presidentship and Priority was granted him yet was he not thereby advanced to an order distinct from and superior to the order of Presbyters but only to an higher degree in that Order This is cleare by this that at the first distinction of a Bishop from the Presbyters there was no new consecration or ordination of the Bishop Antonius de Dominis a man Prelaticall enough doth confesse induced thereunto by the cleare testimonie of Ambrose Å¿ De rep eccl lib. 3. cap. 3. n. 2. at the beginning whensoever a Bishop dyed and the Episcopall throne was vacant there was not so much as an election of him that was to succeed much lesse any new ordination but the eldest Presbyter came prosently in the roome of the deceased Bishop The words of Ambrose are expresse for it t Primi pretbyteri Episcopi appellabautur ut recedente co sequent ei succederet in 4 ca. ad Eph. The first Presbyters were called Bishops so as that when he to wit the first or eldest Presbyter departed the next did succeed him Thus it was at first the reason why this order was changed that Episcopacie should be conferred by Election not by Succession is there given by the same Father * Quia caperunt sequentes Presbyteri indigul inveniri ad primatus tenendes immatata est ratio prospiciente Concilie ut non ordo sed meritum crearet Episcopum multerum Sacerdotum judlcio constitutum ne indigum temerâ— usurparer esset