all the Members thereof how much more Vniversall practise This the Adversaries of Episcopall-government whether they be of the Classicall or Congregationall way turn off with a light finger as if it had no weight in it or as if the Apostle had said nothing in alledging the Customes of the Church Scripture is the onely thing they will be tryed by We refuse not to meet them there but let them consider that they come against the Established authority of their own Nationall Church against the custome and practise not onely of that but of all the Churches of God and there are bound to bring plain and expresse Scripture to demonstrate that Episcopacy or such a superiority over other inferiour Pastors or meere Presbyters is directly unlawfull for else the Custome and Practise of the Churches by the Apostles rule must be observed so long as in force i. e. till due Authority change them supposing they are changeable and that it is in the power of the present Church to change them It were well the Adversaries of the Episcopall Function would yeild more Authority to Universall Practise or Tradition of the Churches of God at least in their respect to some points they will acknowledge themselves bound to maintaine As first That Scripture is the Word of God I do not ask upon what grounds they finally believe this themselves but how they would maintaine it against Heathen or Jew and perswade them to it but upon the witnesse of universall Tradition which speaks to the conviction of all men upon the ground of common Sense or Reason as abovesaid 2. or Secondly That the observation of the Lords day comes from the Apostles How would they convince such a one as Mr. Trask was by the places of Scripture mentioning the Apostles meeting upon the first day of the week or that place which names the Lords day Rev. 1. which might be on Easter day the annuall Lords day He according to the doctrine of these men slighting the Witnesse of Universall Tradition or Practise found nothing in Scripture expresse but the Commandement for the Seventh day or Jewish Sabbath so obstinately held for that till he was reclaimed by the labour and travail of our learned Bishops and made to see how the continued and undeniable practise of the whole Church did clearely shew those passages in Scripture were intimations of this practise then beginning and that their observing of the Seventh day or Jewish Sabbath for they observed that too as occasion served was but in complyance with the Jewes for a time while the Temple stood In like manner the Universall practice of the Church the best interpreter of Scripture where there is not any place of it so plaine as to take away all gainsaying tells us those passages we shew in Scripture for this Government contain so many intimations and sometimes exercises of that Episcopall power which should continue in the Church after the Apostles and assures us those other instances brought by the Adversaries against that Function cannot inferre any other way of Government And therefore we had good cause to say above Episcopall Government was conformable to Gods Word which is our second consideration §. XIV Episcopall government conformable to the word Secondly then take we a briefe survey of the Grounds on both sides which yet I cannot in reason enter upon without asking leave to suppose it possible which never was seen in any particular that Universall Tradition or Practise can be contrary unto Scripture but yeilding that as possible to the Adversaries it is cleare they are bound as abovesaid to demonstrate this Practise or Government is against Scripture and that their way is peremptorily there prescribed How impossible it is for them to do this appeares at first sight by their severall judgements upon the passages of Scripture concerning Church-government Some of them look upon these passages and think they see a Classicall or Presbyterian others of them look upon them and are as strongly perswaded they see a Congregationall or Independent way Where 's the clear Evidence then which they pretend against Episcopall Government To examine their chiefe Instances briefly and plainly for the satisfaction of ordinary Capacities make the triall of those that are alledged for the Classicall way because that pretends to more regularity and to a better foundation than the other Their Instances are from the mention made in Scripture of Presbytery and Presbyters or Elders and the name of Bishop applyed to them We read 1 Tim. 4. 14. the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery But what evidence is there in this to demonstrate that the power of ordination was put into the hands of meer Presbyters For first it is a question whether this laying on of hands was for ordination here or for some other purpose Secondly when that is granted it is a question whether the word Presbytery here implies the office to which Timothy was ordained or the Persons ordaining him for both interpretations are admitted Thirdly admit the Persons ordaining are meant yet never can it be proved they were meer Presbyters for besides that the word Presbytery or Eldership included the Apostles and all the chief Rulers of the Church 1 Pet. 5. 1. who am also an Elder and John Ep. 2. v. 1. Ep. 3. v. 1. the Elder St. Paul saith expresly he laid hands on Timothy 2 Tim. 1. 6. Neither can they in all Scripture give one instance of Imposition of hands for Ordination permitted to meere Presbyters alone So for the places alledged by them mentioning Bishops and Deacons onely as the Ministers of the Church Phil. 1. 1. or calling them first Elders and then presently Bishops Tit. 1. 5. 8. Acts 20. 17. 28. If we say that in these and the like places those first Elders set in the Churches newly planted were Bishops properly or that the Elders or Bishops there mentioned were of both sorts some Bishops properly some inferiour Presbyters the Adversaries could disprove neither part evidently or if in the third place we should grant them what they aime at that these were onely Presbyters it would be nothing to the purpose unlesse they could directly shew the power of Ordination and Government over those Churches fully committed to them For supposing those Elders to be such Presbyters the name Bishop might be appliable to any of them in as much as he had over-sight of any flock which Name was appropriated after to the more Generall Pastor who had oversight of the Presbyters and particular Flocks or Congregations within such Precincts And what marvail is it if the distinction of these two sorts of Elders or Bishops did not nay could not appeare so clearly in the beginning of the new planted Churches and whilst the Apostles were on earth governing the Churches as it did after the Churches were enlarged and the Apostles gone off Then clearly appeared who succeeded them and how far in that ordinary power which was to continue
for preserving that one body which is the Church Eph. 4. 4. 13. 16. II. As for Catholick or Vniversal Practice or Tradition which stands in the consent of all the Churches in all Nations and Ages since the Apostles as Sectaries wave it altogether as wholly contrary to their Novelty so Papists pretend it onely reducing it into the testimony of their present Church and cannot truly give Catholick Tradition for any point of their faith and worship wherein they differ from us But the Church of England in the midst between both denying onely the Romish Tradition which brings not down any part of their Faith or Worship through all Ages from the Apostles admits of the true Catholick Tradition or Practice and yields due Authority to it the force of it resting upon common sense and reason which is in every man and which he must forsake that denies the Witnes of such Tradition it being not possible that all the Christian Churches which began in and about the Apostolical Times and so succeeded through all Nations and Ages should be either deceived in what they unanimously witnessed or agree all of them to deceive those that followed them Whereas the testimony of the Romish Church being but part of the Catholick and possibly over-ruled with some prevailing Faction cannot convince upon any such common notion of humane reason but must first prove it selfe to be the onely Church and infallible And seeing it is forced to seek such proofe by witnesse of Scripture they plainly run in a Circle from the testimony of their Church to the receiving or proving of Scripture to be the Word of God and back again from the Witnesse of Scripture to prove their Church But Catholick or Vniversal Tradition brings down Scripture to the Conviction of Heathens or Jews that will but use their common sense and reason that discovery which Scripture makes of it selfe by light from the innate qualities and internal Arguments relucent in it comes after and appeares to them onely that having entertained it upon the former Witnes of Catholicke Tradition are versed in it So by this Witnes of Catholick Practice in observing the Lords day Easter day Episcopal Government throughout the Church from the Apostles time we are assured that such passages of Scripture as concern any of these doe shew the Beginnings of the said Practices and the Church of England as it received at first and ever since observed the fore-mentioned particulars so it commands in generall due respect and adhaesion to that sense of Scripture which comes down by such universall consent III. Whereas the condition of the Church according to severall respects admits the distinction of Visible and Invisible the Romanists beare themselves too much upon the one extreme and the Sectaries upon the Other the first will have such a visible flourishing condition of it as is inconsistent with that state which the Church of Christ has and may fall into and prejudiciall as by them pretended to all just Reformation and profession of Truth which more neerly concerns the life and soul of the Church and the more invisible perfection of the members thereof And therefore they please themselves with the outward garb and face of their Church and will have it tryed by the conspicuous Eminency of it as Tr. 1 c. 12. rather than by truth and purity of doctrine Sectaries on the other extreme bear themselves too much upon the Invisible condition of the Church which stands in those inward qualifications of true faith and sanctification requisite to make a true and lively member of Christs mystical Body so that in the pursuit thereof and in pretence of gathering Churches consisting of such members onely they dissipate the visible Church of Christ and dissolve the Government he has setled in it But every true English Protestant acknowledges the Church of Christ is a visible society of Believers or of Professors of the Christian Faith of whom some are effectually called true and lively members but that is invisible others not yet advanced beyond the externall calling or profession a society I say of such Professors under such a Regiment or Government left by Christ and his Apostles and left to this purpose to keep all in unity and to advance those that are admitted in the visible Church to the meanes of Salvation unto a reall and effectuall participation of Grace and Union with Christ as lively Members of his body Eph. c. 4. 11 12 13. 16. And therefore all Christians are bound to yeeld obedience to the lawfull Pastors and Governors of that Visible Church whereof they are Members All this we professe in that Article of our Creed touching the Church for albeit that invisible condition of true Faith and Sanctity be the highest concernment and qualification of a Member of Christs Church and the attaining to that condition be the hope and aime of every good Christian in the Visible Church and therefore the chiefest thing in the profession of that Article viz. a Communion of such true Believers Saints and Members of Christ yet because the administrations of the visible Church tend necessarily unto that end and he that cuts himself off from the communion of the visible Church bereaves himself necessarily of the means to be advanced to that invisible condition therefore he that professeth this Article sayes he believes Christ alwayes has his visible Church which may be found in which such Meanes and Administrations may be had and that he yields obedience to the Pastors and Governors set in it to that end and purpose IV. As the Romanists pretend to an infallible assistance of Gods Spirit bound to St. Peters Chair so have Sectaries their confidence of the speciall guidance of the same Spirit And if we set the vanity of the one against the other we may find as much semblance of Reason from those places of Scripture which Sectaries alledge for every true Believer so inspired and directed as from those places the Romanists alledge for the Papal Infallibility of which Tr. 1. c. 27. Both these pretences are the very bane of the Unity of the Church Romish Infallibility rendring that Church incorrigible and setting it beyond all bounds of accord with other Christians that desiring Reformation will not be satisfied or put off with that pretended priviledge and the pretence of Sectaries rendring Pastors and Teachers in the Church uselesse or at least weakning the obedience due to them puts it into the power of every one that will fancy himselfe a true Believer and guided by such assistance to be a Reformer and to break the Church in pieces In the Church of England no such pretence either of Infallibility in the Governours or of Private Judgment in any against their Governours but such Authority of Governours and Pastors lawfully constituted as is beyond Appeal save to a Generall Council sitting and competent to determine and define in all Causes and to stop the mouth of the gainsayer and bind
things are considerable in Liturgy Matter and Frame XVIII Lawfulnes and fulness of our Liturgy as to the matter For the Matter or things prayed for or spoken there we are assured they cannot shew any one particular to be contrary to sound doctrine or unfitting for Christian men to begg of God and to speake in the serving and Glorifying of him All suitable to the ends and purposes of the publick Assemblies and reason of publick Worship which will appeare if we consider the Frame which implies two things the Order in which it runs and the set Forms in which every thing is expressed As to the Order in which it is framed what could be more to the purpose of holy meetings and Assemblies Where Christians come together First to confesse their sins in the presence of God then to heare the promise of the Gospell to their comfort accordingly after some short exhortation Confession is made and then a generall Absolution pronounced to all that are truly penitent Again Christians come together to prayse God therefore Psalmes are read before and Hymnes used after each Chapter still concluding the Psalmes and Hymnes with the Doxology or giving Glory to the whole Trinity Father Son and Holy Ghost Furthermore They meet to shew themselves Christians and that they Worship God in Christ Not only by concluding all their Prayers in his name but also by expresse profession of the Christian Faith according to the Apostles and Nicene Creed to the actuall renouncing of Heresie against the Person of our Saviour Christ Christians also meet to give thanks for blessings they received and to beg what they need accordingly there are severall prayers and Supplications for the necessities of the Congregation with Intercessions for others So the Apostle enjoyns 1 Tim. 2. 1. Lastly They come together to hear and receive instruction for which the Word is both read and preached besides a continuall repeating of the ten Commandements with a suitable deprecation subjoyned to every Commandement What can be more full useful and comfortable The way of Worship which they that are gone from us use as it is defective in many of these as Absolution Hymnes profession of Faith repeating the Commandements of God so what they have of Confession Petition or Thanksgiving is reduced or shuffled up into one continuall Prayer which admit it be not defective in those three yet does it not in so convenient a way as the Church of Engl. does in distinct severall concise Formes For so it is more intelligible to ordinary capacities because delivering every part Confession Petition Thansgiving more distinctly also it is more for the holding up intention of the spirit which is more dulled with one long continued Prayer wherein those parts are confused than if it were broken into so many several Colects or Prayers I have heard ordinary people acknowledge it and shew themselves sensible of it complaining not onely of the defect of that Service for they observe they heare not the Lords Prayer Creed Ten Commandements as formerly but also of the confusednesse of such continued Prayer which they could not go along with were not edified by it whereas before they understood still what they were about and by reason of the short expressions of the Churches Prayers and the Responses the people were sometimes to make they remembred many things And much they have to answer for it who through â—… know not what pretence of the Spirit or spirituall gifts but indeed through self-conceit or some fleshly respects have drawn the people from that way of Worship which was more to Gods glory and their comfort and edification §. XIX Set Forms of publick Prayer But all those parts of publique Worship or Liturgy which I have instanced to shew the fulnesse of that which is used in this Church rre delivered in set Formes That they are afraid of lest they worship God with the inventions of Man But by this reason they should be afraid to pray their own way lest they worship God with their own invention or to pray with their approved Ministers lest they worship God with their inventions for the Form or Expression of a Prayer whether Set or Extemporary Conception is equally of mans Invention and if so surely it is better to worship God upon a Set premeditate and deliberate Invention than upon an extemporary one The truth is it is not for man to invent that which is of the Substance of Worship viz. the work act or Duty directed upon such a due Object for that is of Gods prescribing as Prayer but Authority may invent something for the better managing of the work in publique or for the more convenient performance of the Worship i. e. of the Act or Duty prescribed by God The Apostle bids it be done in order decently and to edification 1 Cor. 11. ult. That set Formers may be so we are assured by those which the Church alwayes had the Jewish Church had as see Numb. 6. 23. and elsewhere John Baptist taught his Disciples a Form of Prayer and so did our Saviour teach his Luke 11 1 2. The Practise of the whole Church has approved the use of Set Forms in publique and so does the judgement and practise of Reformed Churches abroad Nay but they will not be satisfied unlesse we shew it to be the practise of the Church in the Apostles time which they do not finde in Scripture Nay but they must according to the Rule above set not expect the Church should shew example in Scripture for every thing she Orders but they stand bound to shew it is against Gods Word if they will not yeild obedience that they may have that warrant against Authority We must obey God rather then Man And though we know not whether or what Forms they used in those first Times for all things they did are not recorded yet is it no marvel if they did not as then use Set Formes considering the condition of the Church small and unsetled by reason of Persecution or the quality of the Persons ministring in it few and of extraordinary perfections and gifts for the most part Whatever judgment these men have of Prayer in set Forms or low conceit of them that use them See we how Reason evinces the lawfulnesse and expediency of them in publique and therein commends the prudence of the Church in appointing them 1. As the matter or things prayed for and the intention of the spirit or affection with which they are prayed for is of the substance of Prayer so the utterance or words are but externall to it and therefore Prayer without words is Prayer truly Now let the matter of our Prayer be according to Gods will and the Spirit and affection suitable thereunto and accompanying our Petitions it is indifferent whether the expression be in our own words or borrowed whether in Forms before composed or upon the present conceived Let a man prepare his heart afore-hand suitable to the Forms and generall
pretending only to private or selfe-reformation Such was the Schism of former Separatists whilest this Church stood free from violence They went their way and it remained where it was This incurrs the guilt aforesaid of high disobedience and breach of Charity but not in so high a degree as that which followes A Schism that not only divides from the Communion but also offers violence to the destruction of the Church pulls down what was not only persons and Governours to set themselves in their places but also the form and government it selfe to set up their own in stead of it This is higher and farther than ever any of the Ancient Schismatikes went which changed not the form of Government alwayes used in the Church and this will be considerable in the violence of our modern Schism But before we charge them according to the premises let us clear the Case as it stands between the Church of England and that of Rome charging us with Schisme upon the Reformation §. IV. Our Defence against the Church of Rome Our Defence in generall comes to this as it was touched Tr. 1. c. 4. 5 6. This Church had Cause for such Reformation and Authority for the doing it sufficient both For when such Errors prevail in a Church and come to such generall practice it is high time by due Reformation to cast them out and when they are in Authority be convinced and doe it then is the Reformation just and lawfull First there was sufficient Cause by reason of Error and corruption in belief and Worship such as we could not continue in without gross dissembling and wrong to our consciences and Gods honour The truth and evidence of this stands upon the examination of those doctrines touching Faith and Worship wherewith the English Church was generally tainted according to the Romish infection The tryall whereof was in part made Tr. 1. c. 30. to shew that the points wherein they and we differ cannot be as they would impose upon the world Catholick doctrines i. e. the beliefe and practice of the Church in all ages since the Apostles or as S. Jude ver. 3. calls it the faith once delivered But farther to the end that they which cannot examine all the Romish doctrines whether they be Catholick or professed in all Ages may briefly and more neer at hand see so far into that Church as to perceive it is not such a Church that they who have means to know better can safely or conscionably communicate with We will make a brief tryall or estimate of a Church by the Faith Worship Sacraments professed practiced administred therein for these the Romanists will not deny to belong immediately to the constitution of the Church and therefore fit to give us direction for holding or not holding Communion As for example If we finde any Church or Congregation of Men calling themselves Christians deny directly and peremptorily any Article of the Creed or Belief into which all Christians are baptized as professed Arrians and Socinians doe it is evident their Error is immediately against the foundation they doe not deserve the name of Christian Churches We doe not so charge the Church of Rome But albeit she holds the Foundation yet finde we her superstructures in no less matters than of Faith and Worship to be such as the Foundation will not safely bear nor any good Christian coming to the knowledge of them conscionably endure For when any Church propounds any thing as matter of Faith Worship without manifesting the truth thereof to mens consciences by clear consequence from those prime Fundamentals into which they are baptized or from Scripture it selfe it is intolerable For this Rule is just and reasonable Whatever the Church propounds so to be believed and practiced it stands bound so to manifest the same else it sets it selfe in Gods stead taking an immediate dominion over mens faith and consciences but in all other things which the Church propounds and enjoynes as matters of Order Ceremony discipline for the more significant profession of that Faith or the more decent performance of that Worship every Member of the Church is to obey or to bring as expresse warrant from Gods word against the particular he refuses to doe as the command is expresse which binds him to obey those that are over him in the Lord Were this Rule well held to there would have been more peace in the Church It was necessary for peaceable subjection Tr. 2. c. 1. will be useful below against those that causelesly divide from this Church And as to the present Case we did not quarrell at the Church of Rome for matters of Rite Order or the like but of Faith and Worship The superadded Articles being so farre from a manifestation by clear consequence as above said that they proved clearly inconsistent with the Word and the worship then in an unknown tongue against the Apostle plainly 1. Cor. 14. against the reason of a reasonable serving of God beside that Worship which was given to Images against the express words of the second commandment Lastly examine a Church by the Sacraments in it administred Those two which confessedly are of Christs appointment Where we finde the Cup denyed to the Cummunicants we see a direct breach of Institution a defrauding the People of God of that part of the Sacrament which affords and makes them partakers of Christs blood-shed also where we finde a daily propitiatory Sacrifice established we plainly see a depravation of the Sacrament and a derogation to the One oblation upon the Cross Thus to say nothing of Primitive Antiquity it is cleer to every one that sees any thing there is just Cause of Reformation where such Errors and Corruptions have prevailed and of ceasing to communicate at least as to those Errors and Practises with that Church which will not being admonished reform them so that if the Question be put to any man whether he will be of the English Church as it was corrupted together with the Romish or as it was after reformed it amounts to this Whether he would be a sick and diseased man or whole and healthfull Whether keep company with persons infected or with those that are cleare and sound The choice is easie to a man in his wits §. V. Iust and sufficient Authority for publick Reformation But to cast those Errors and Corruptions out of a Church by publick Reformation is required Sufficient Authority That also was not here wanting both the Civill and the Ecclesiasticall Both these were seen in the Ancient lawful Synods gathered and held for the same purpose of Reformation And therefore every Nationall Church having within it self the whole subordination of Ecclesiasticall Power or Government the Permission and Authority of the Supreme Civill Power concurring may reform it self i. e. make a publick nationall Reformation The Antient Council of Arles in France the severall Councils of Carthage in Africa of Toledo in Spaine did so and that not
Romanists alledging that the present Sects of these dayes may plead against the Church of England from which they have divided what the Church of England can against the Roman for as it was above premised the case betweene English and Romish Church is as between two Nationall Churches having full authority for publick Reformation but the case between the English Church and those that have divided from it is between a Nationall Church and the members of it by which appears they could have no sufficient Authority for publick Reformation without and against the Authority in being to pull down and set up as they have done and it will appear they could have no just Cause for so much as a Separation from the Communion of this Church §. IX Grounds laid for convincing them of Schism Now for making good the charge of Schisme against them we will premise some undeniable Truths which speak the Authority of Church-governours the obedience due thereunto the condition of Schism and the danger and guilt of it I. That the Church of Christ is a Society or Company under a Regiment Discipline Government and the Members constituting that Society are either Persons taught guided governed or Persons teaching guiding governing and this in order to preserve all in Unity and to advance every Member of this visible Society to an effectuall and reall participation of Grace and Union with Christ the Head and therefore and upon no lesse account is obedience due unto them Eph. 4. 11 12 13 16. and Heb. 13. 17. and he that will not hear the Church be as a Heathen and Publican Mat. 16. II. That every Nationall Church has power as to determine in matters of Faith according to Gods word so to determine in things indifferent Rites Ceremonies matters of order as in prudence it sees most fit for the better and more convenient performance of Gods worship or administration of Discipline and Government This is plain by the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. 26 40. The Rule above delivered speaks to this purpose That the Church propounding or determining matters of Faith or of the substance of Worship ought to manifest it out of Gods Word cannot doe it besides the same as the 20 Act of our Church hath it and we may expect such manifestation or proof before we yeild the absolute assent of belief unto any thing so propounded But in the Churches determination of things in themselves indifferent and enjoyning the observation of Rites and Ceremonies it is enough that the particular be not against Gods Word and he that will not yeild obedience to it is bound to shew it plainly contrary to the Word or else stands guilty of disobeying the known precepts of the Word which command obedience to Authority I will not be enough to say The Governours of the Church did not hold to their Rule for this Rite or Ceremony is not to edification is not decent it might be better otherwise For this is to set a mans owne judgement against that of the Church in matters of prudence a spice of that pride and self conceit which is the Mother of all disobedience Schism and though a private judgement might truly say some things might be better done in and about Gods Worship or Service yet unlesse such a one can say as truly those things are unlawfull to be done and that by direct warrant from Gods Word he ought not to disobey III. When the Apostle used an argument from Custome against certaine disorders We have no such Custome nor the Churches of God 1 Cor. 11. 16. he plainly shews what force the Customes of a Church so they be not against Gods Word have to binde the Members of that Church as from Introducing any New Custome without Authority so to observe such Customes as the Church hath and he that will not is reckoned by the Apostle there among the Contentious or disturbers of the peace of the Church for against such he urges that Much more are we to take notice of the strength of Universall Tradition the Custome and Practice of the whole Church in all Ages for of this we shall have occasion below against the Contentious IV. In the same Epistle for it is mainly spent upon this Argument he commends Charity as a Remedy against that Pride which upon conceit of Knowledge or Spiritual gifts cap. 12. pufft them up and made them swell one against another and despise one another the ready way to Division and breaking all asunder This Charity not that which does workes of mercy or relieves the poor as we see by ver. 3. cap. 13. but which bindes together the body of the Church Edifying it selfe in Love as Eph. 4. 16. Charity in opposition to Schism this I say he commends and by severall properties discribes It vanteth not is not puffed up ver. 4. not against Equals much lesse in setting our private judgement against our Governors It thinketh no evill ver. 5. It receives satisfaction easily from Equals interprets their Words and Actions to the best much more the commands and doings of our Governours Charity seeks not her owne endureth all things ver. 5 7. suffers much rather than come to open difference and contention with Equals so will peaceable Charity suffer much ere it come to a division from the Church much lesse will it seek that which is anothers that especially which belongs to the Governours their power meanes preferments Thus Schism takes beginning from Pride and self-conceit goes on by uncharitablenesse to enormous excesse of disobedience and injustice and renders all Knowledge Faith and other good workes for want of this Charity unprofitable nothing worth as the Apostle in that Chapter often tells us V. The Apostle when he set Titus over the Churches of Crete directs him in the use of his power as to this point of dealing with the Contentious Tit. 3. 10 11. A man that is an Heretick reject being self-condemned Every Schismatick is this Heretick for so the word Heresie and Heretick signifies and according to the use of it then implyed one that obstinately stood out against the Church or that lead any Sect after the strictest Sect or Heresie of the Pharisees Act 26. 5. after that which they call Heresie Act. 24. 14. a Factious company divided from the Church so they called or accounted of Christians and Gal. 5. 20. we have it reckoned among the workes of the Flesh Debates Contentions Heresie So here Heretick that leads a Faction a Sect or that wilfully followes or abets it A Man therefore that is a Heretick contentious disobedient to the Order and Authority of the Church reject for he is self-condemned having both passed the Sentence upon himself by professing against or dividing from the Church and also done execution like that of the Churches censure and excommunication upon himselfe by actuall separation or going out of the Church A fearfull condition Now the application of the Premises to the convincing
in the Church For our Saviour left his Apostles with full power extraordinary and ordinary for the planting and propagating his Church through the World The ordinary power they were to leave unto others after them for continuing of his Church to the Worlds end viz the power of Reconciliation in the Ministry of the Word Sacraments the power of ordaining and sending others and the power of jurisdicton and government How and into what hands they communicated these severall powers That 's the question Some of the Ancients apprehend it thus That they committed the whole power to those first Elders they placed in every City where the Church was planted so that those first Elders were properly Bishops having power to ordain other Ministers and Labourers as the encrease or extent of the Church required Other Fathers or ancient Writers seem to apprehend those first Elders to be meer Presbyters to whom the whole power was not committed but that afterwards upon the encrease of the Church other speciall Men were intrusted with it to ordain others as need required and as Generall Pastors to rule and over-see the whole Church with all the particular Congregations and Presbyters or inferiour Pastors belonging to it Either way is sufficient for establishing the Episcopall power and government and the Adversaries thereof as they cannot disprove it if we say those first Elders were Bishops properly so neither will they gain any thing if we grant them in courtesy thus much that the first Elders were meer Presbyters For see briefly what they can say against the first or draw from the second Against the first they usually say 1. If those Bishops at Philippi were so properly then were there more than one Bishop in one City or Church Answ This indeed was absurd and inconvenient and never suffered in the Church inlarged and established but in the Church Nascent or beginning it might be very reasonable by way of provision for the future enlargement establishment of that Church So we find 12. Apostles left in the Church of Jerusalem by our Saviour in order to their propagating and governing the Church through the whole World And so in some great Cities where and from which the Gospel might suddenly spread it self the Apostles might provisionally leave more than One Elder vested with power for the supply of the Church enlarged Secondly If the Elders or Bishops mentioned in those places were Bishops properly vested with such power then would the Apostle also have remembred the other sort of Elders between them and Deacons Answ But what if there were not yet in that Church Elders or Presbyters of the second sort For no Church at first was full Or if there were such in that Church why might he not salute both sorts under that general name Bishop Thirdly But then the Apostle did not distinctly set down the Office of the one or the other for having set down the office of a Bishop he presently goes to the Deacon 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. 5. Answ It was not the Apostles purpose in those places distinctly to set down the Office of Elders nor of Deacons but the general qualification of the Persons to be admitted to those Offices We may ask of them Where has the Apostle distinctly set down or described the Office of a Lady-Elder They are fain to force it out of one word Ruling 1 Tim. 4. 17. which belongs to the Preaching Elders as they well acknowledge In the places above mentioned the Apostle gives as I said qualifications fitting the Persons of both sorts of Elders that then were or should be in the Church for the duties there hinted teaching ruling do belong to both sorts of Elders but with Subordination of the one to the other And if they will have the word rule 1 Tim. 4. 17. insinuate a distinct Office of Elders from the preaching Elders without any intimation of such an Office anywhere else in Scripture why might not we say with more reason that the same word in the forementioned place 1 Tim. 3. 5. belongs to Bishops of both sorts according to their order and station to rule or take care of the Church of God Especially seeing we shew elsewhere in the same Epistle such a Prelacy or supereminent power of rule given to Timothy distinctly from other Elders as Lay hands suddenly on no man Rebuke not an Elder receive no accusation against an Elder c. cap. 5. v. 19. 22. Like speciall power given to Titus as we see in that Epistle besides all the acts of ordinary power exercised by the Apostles and not communicated in general to Presbyters And so the exhortation of the Apostle Acts 20. 28. might generally fit both sorts of Elders or Bishops supposing those of the inferiour rank present there that they should all of them feed the Flock according to their several stations and in that subordination of Rule which was in the Church But if we grant them that those Elders or Bishops in the above cited places were not Bishops properly but ordinary presbyters What can they draw from thence advantagious either to the Classicall or Congregational pretension when as there is no instance in all Scripture of the Power vested in a Classis or consistory of Presbyters or in every particular Congregation but on the contrary where ever there is mention of the exercising of the power for ordination by laying on hands or for Jurisdiction in rebuking or receiving accusation against an Elder in rejecting Heretiks or the like we find it always done by the Apostles or speciall men appointed thereunto as Timothy Titus Nor is it to any purpose to reply as they doe These were extraordinary men Apostles or Evangelists and so exercised that power as such For albeit in the office of Apostle and Evangelist there was something extraordinary and supposing Timothy Titus may passe under the Title of Evangelists yet the power of ordination and Jurisdiction was ordinary and to continue in the Church and to be communicated unto others as was most convenient What help therefore can the Adversaries have in the Apostles and Evangelists being extraordinary persons unlesse they can shew the power did ordinarily belong to and was exercised by the company of Presbyters or else demonstrate it was left in their hands by expresse and peremptory order from the Apostles So that here they would be non-suited laying their plea only by Scripture against Universall Tradition and practice of the Church for the Scripture story goes not downe to the departure of the Apostles Now after they were gone off it clearly appeared by the practice of the whole Church in what hands the chief power and Government was left viz. not to Presbyters in common but in speciall hands according to the instances and examples of the exercising that power in the Apostles Time The Ancient Records also which continue the Church story from that Time give us the succession of Bishops from the Apostles in the more eminent
Churches as Jerusalem Antioch Rome Ephesus Corinth and this practice and succession setled before St. John the Apostle dyed All which as it clearly shewes those severall Angels of the severall Churches to whom our Saviour by Saint John did write could be no other then such Bishops having chief care of and rule in those Churches therfore more chargeable with the Corruptions prevailing in them So doth it clearly convince that plea of the Adversaries which amounts to a charging the first Bishops with Usurpation and invasion upon the right of Presbyters or particular Congregations to be a conceit altogether unreasonable for it is beyond all Imagination that Saint John would have suffered such an invasion or that those first Bishops who conversed with the Apostles and were their disciples should make such an invasion and immediately subvert the Apostolicall order pretended for the Presbyterian Consistory Or that those first Bishops being holy men and many of them Martyrs for still we finde the heathen Persecutors sought chiefly after the Bishop of the Church that the chief Pastor being smitten the flock might be more easily scattered should be so ambitious and unjust or lastly that the Presbyters then should be so tame as not once to complain of the wrong done them or to transmit their Protestation against it to Posterity To conclude this Tryal by Scripture It comes to this issue The Adversaries were bound to shew direct Authority of Scripture against Episcopal Government it being in possession established by the continued Authority of this Nationall Church and which is more by the perpetuall practice of the Catholick Church against this it was expected they should bring some places of Scripture forbidding that power of Ordination and Jurisdiction to be committed to speciall hands such as Bishops properly taken or commending it to the Consistory of Presbyters or some instances at least of that power exercised by such a company Whereas all they can evince out of Scripture is that there were Presbyters strictly so taken and of the inferiour rank which being granted them we shew there was a Prelacy still over such Presbyters still there were special men that had an inspection and rule over them and when the Apostles went off the practise of the Church shewes the power was left in the hands of special men called Bishops properly So that the Government of the Church by Bishops appears as was said above conformable not onely to the Universal practise of the Church after the Apostles time but also to the Word of God i.e. to the practise and patterns we have there 1. of our Saviour appointing twelve Apostles and besides and under them seventy Disciples of a lower rank 2. of Apostolical practise by which we find the power exercised by special Elders viz. the Apostles themselves or other choice men appointed thereunto by them whereas all Elders had power of the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments 3. of the several Angels of the several Churches to whom the Epistles were directed Rev. c. 2. 3. which is the last instance in holy Writ to this purpose §. XV Episcopacy most agreeable to the reason of Church-government Lastly The Government of the Church by Bishops was said above to be most agreeable to the reason of Church-government for preserving Unity and excluding Schism This is very obvious in the writings of the Fathers St. Cyprian had much to do with the Novatian Schismaticks of his time which caused him to write many Epistles upon that occasion and a Book intituled De Vnitate Ecclesiae wherein he shewes the Unity of the Church as to the preventing of Schisme stands much upon this that there be one Bishop in one Church St. Hierom whom they of the Presbyterian perswasion take for their best friend because he strives to advance the Order of Presbyters as much as he can yet as he denies the power of Ordination belongs to Presbyters so he acknowledges that Bishops were appointed over Presbyters to keep out Faction and Schism that the people should not say as they did at Corinth I am of Paul I of Apollos I of this Teacher I of that And for his saying of Presbyters that they did anciently communi consilio with joint advice rule the Churches is not to be understood exclusivè to the Bishop for such a time was never known in the Church but joyntly with him as his Council so were the Presbyteri Civitatis to the Bishop and their advice was more used and there was more cause for it before the many Canons and decrees of Councils gave rule in most particulars what the Bishop should do as it was by that time S. Jerom wrote and whatever he saith for the advancing of the order of Presbyters it is but to set them above all Deacons even those that immediately attended on the Bishop and it seems carried themselves too high it is not to equal them to Bishops whose Prelacy St. Jerome acknowledged and thought it very necessary for this purpose of keeping out Schism which the Parity of Presbyters would expose it to And I would appeale to the reason of any of that perswasion whether it were not more convenient and necessary for keeping all in order to have one aged grave learned and experienced in the way of the Church to be the standing Moderator of the Classis or company of Presbyters than to change their Moderator year by year and leave the place open to every young unexperienc'd Presbyter that can make a faction to advance him unto it I have heard this inconvenience complained on by some of the new erected Classes whereas a Bishop being such a Moderator as is fixed and above all competition is more enabled to keep all ordinary Presbyters in their station and within their bounds And then again I would demand whether the Apostles who complained of Divisions as in the Church of Corinth and of false Teachers there and elswhere were not careful to provide the most reasonable Expedient in government against them It cannot be denyed and upon this score and to this very end of preserving Schism it cannot be thought otherwise but that the Apostles gave beginning to this Government throughout the Church 1. Notwithstanding those of the Classicall perswasion bear themselves much upon Mr. Blondels Collections whose pains might have been better implyed to the use of the Church upon some other Argument For in this it is impossible to drive out of Antiquity though ransaked over again any more to the purpose of the Presbyterian claim than has been already acknowledged and the weakness of it discovered viz. That it seems to be the judgement of some Fathers that the name Bishop was at first common to all Elders and that those Bishops mentioned Phil. 1. 1. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. were Presbyters or Elders of the second rank But what advantage is this to the cause they would establish without proving also that the power of Ordination and Government which we appropriate to