all your victories You may perchance blame my needless pains in answering so many frivolous Arguments and you may wonder too who they be who have framed such simple Objections but you will cease to wonder at this last when you consider that in these later times the man hath been accounted without zeal or to want wit that hath not something to say against Bishops whom to vilifie and slander hath passed for an evidence of holinesse and if you blame me in the former I contesse I had rather answer too much thereby if I could to satisfie you in all then to leave you unresolved in any thing though it be not material nor worth the answering Argum. 21 Which this last Argument I know you will not hold to be because it rests upon an Ordinance of the two Houses and therefore I have kept it as the Reserve and strength of the whole host of Arguments for the last Now the Ordinance thus speaketh For the abolishing of Archbishops and Bishops and providing for the payment of the just and necessary debts of the Kingdome into which the same hath been drawn by a War mainly promoted by and in favour of the said Archbishops and Bishops and other their adherents and dependents Be it Ordained that all their Lands be sold c. Resp In which Ordinance the ends wherefore these Lands must be sold are two 1. For the abolishing of Episcopacy a Government which whether it be by Divine Right besides what hath been wrote by divers godly reverend and learned men I desire you to heare from a Treatise in defence of Paedobaptisme which Mr Charles Herle President of the Assembly of Divines at Westminster by authority granted him by the two Houses of Parliament hath licenced and which is accordingly printed and published 1645. where it thus speaks Pag. 7. Christ Mat. 28. gives a charge to the Apostles which hath special reference to matters of Discipline for the right Ordering and Government of the Churches And it is evident saith he by some passages in the New Testament that some things were delivered to the Churches and particularly to the Ministers thereof which were not then committed to writing but were delivered from hand to hand called therefore Traditions And these Ordinances saith he 1 Cor. 11.2 2 Thes 2.15 2 Tim. 2.2 set up and practised by the appointment of the Apostles are equivalent in authority to what Christ himselfe hath immediately ordained Hence therefore is that 1 Cor. 14.37 and hereupon saith he the custome of the Church which is established must stand for a Law to quiet the conscience of him that is willing to be satisfied as is proved 1 Cor. 11.16 What may appear to have been ordained by the Apostles Pag 8. and used by the Churches even from the dayes of the Apostles why should it not be acknowledged to be the commandement of Christ But you will say saith he how may it appear to have been the custome of the Churches ordained by the Apostles to which himself answers It is worth our observation that the pattern and precedent from whence most if not all the customes in the Churches were taken was the custome of Israel in the Old Testament And this saith he may be one special reason why the providence of God did not take so much care for the writing of every custome and ordinance for the Government of the Church in the New Testament because the precedent from whence they were taken being at hand if any alteration did creep in it might easily be amended by reducing it to the pattern Yea who saith he can tell whether the wisdome of God did not hereby provide to uphold the credit of the Church of Israel against the frowardnesse of some to disesteeme it And that the Institutions saith he of God by Moses for the Church of Israel were the pattern for the Apostolical Traditions which were appointed for the Discipline and Order to be observed it will appear by divers particulars 1. Pag. 9. In the Old Testament there was one day of seven set apart for holy rest in imitation whereof the Apostles saith he by direction of our blessed Saviour consecrated the first day of the week called the Lords day 2. Israel had Synagogues besides their Temple and in the Apostles times saith he there were places set apart called Churches 3. The directions saith he for Censures were received from Israel and that not onely by the appointment of the Apostle 1 Cor. 5. Tit. 3. but of Christ Mat. 18.15 4. The liberty saith he which women take to come to the Table of the Lord must be acknowledged a Tradition of the Apostles taken from the pattern of the Passeover 5. The custome of the Apostles to baptize the whole housholds of them that beleeved whence saith he should they have it but from the pattern in the Old Testament 6. The maintenance of Ministere saith he Saint Paul affirmes to be ordained of the Lord 1 Cor. 9.13 14. in conformity to the Ordinance of the Old Testament 7. So for Persons Israel had those who were set apart to the service of the Altar and Temple and accordingly saith he the Apostles ordained in several Churches Elders And whether saith he the Subordination of some in the Ministry were not likewise an Apostolical Institution appointed by Christ and this also fetched from the pattern of Moses I dispute not He saith he disputes not for what needs it any dispute confidering what he had proved before and what he allegeth from Saint Hierom the Father thus speaks That we may know Ep. 85. ad Evag. that the Traditions of the Apostles were taken from the Old Testament appears by this that what Aaron the Priests and Levites were in the Jewish Temple the same Bishops Presbyters and Deacons doe rightly challenge in the Christian Church And that there was a Superiority and Subordination among the Priests in the Old Testament is so well known to all that it needs no dispute The Author having laid down these grounds concludes in these words viz. Why this Rule should hold in so many particulars and onely faile in this point I leave for them to give a reason who know what difference is betwixt reason and absurdity especially since it is plain by the testimony of the Antients who lived in the next Ages after the Apostles that this was a custome established by the Apostles The Author answering an Argument Pag. 11 drawn from Heb. 3.26 saith The office of Moses was to settle the Common-wealth and National Church of Israel by particular Lawes and Ordinances where as the office of Christ was the reconciliation betwixt God and man and the Redemption of mankind and therefore Christ loft it to his Apostles and their successors in several ages to provide for the welfare and good of the Church in the New Testament and thereupon concludes all thus What was instituted in the Old Testament and is not repealed in the New nor
and by the divine acceptation of God in Christ which is sufficient in this case Argum. 11 But why then had not the Apostles or their immediate successors such lands as well as these Bishops Resp The answer is plaine and easie the reason why the Apostles had not such lands was not because the Apostles or that God would not have accepted them for sure that God that accepted of the feeding and cloathing them would not have denied them a perpetual certain maintenance nor was it because the Christians to their abilities Act. 4. Gal. 1.15 would not have given them lands as it may appeare by that story in the Acts and by that of Saint Paul I bear you record that you would have plucked out your eyes to have given them to me But one reason Saint Chrysostoâ—e gives that in the first planting of the Gospel the Jewes or Gentiles might perchance have supposed that the Apostles had preached rather for the gaine of their wealth then for the salvation of their soules and who knowes but that Saint Paul to that end spake that sentence 2 Cor. 12.14 I seeke not yours but you But because the Fathers of the Primitive Church are not heard in these times I desire you to heare Saint Paul who for himselfe and the other Apostles gives a more full answer hereunto 1 Cor. 9.11 Ver. 12. when he thus speaks If we have sewen unto you spiritual â—â—â—â—gs is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things And then If others be partakers of this power over you are not we rather Neverthelesse we have not used this power but suffer all things lest we should hinder the Gospel of Christ In which words the Apostle evidently sheweth that the reaping or maintenance out of their carnal things should be according to that which was sowed viz. spiritual things and what proportion of carnal things can compensate for things spiritual let the spiritual and not the carnal man judge Now the full Answer to this Objection which S. Chrysestome might happily collect out of this Text is this though we the Apostles have power to require all this as due not of Almes but morally as the seventh Verse of that Chapter shewes it yet we use it not lest we should hinder the Gospel of Christ thereby And yet a second reason that the Apostles had not lands for their maintenance lay in the time wherein the Apostles lived who at that time had not onely no continuing city or certaine place of abode but wandred about Heb. 11.37 being afflicted and tormented Againe the Romans the chief lords of all were so far from letting them enjoy any lands at that time that they hardly afforded them the aire wherein to breath and live distinguish therefore of times for it holds both in Church and State aliter in constitutâ vivitur aliter in constituendâ At first planting of either Church or State there is neither the same Privilege nor the same wealth but each grow by Gods blessing in time And what is here spoken of the maintenance may in part hold for the Government of the Church that is that when Saint Paul wrote from whom the most is gathered both for the Presbyterian and Independent the Church was not then divided into Parishes and Provinces no nor into publikely known Congregations and therefore it being under bloudy Persecution it could not have the face of a visible Church Whereupon though then the Apostle and Apostolical men ordained by him exercised Episcopal authority yet it could not nor indeed ought it to have been in that height of visible power as no doubt Saint Paul himself would and those Apostolical men did use it so soon as God had added greater numbers to the Church and given them favour with the Civil Magistrate the Apostle both for that and all succeeding times leaving this one general Rule 1 Cor. 14.40 Let all things be done decently and in order And can any indifferent man hold it just and reasonable that when all other men grow in state and wealth the Church-men alone should decrease and be abused What if I should urge to any Gentleman or others Your Predecessors two or three hundred years since had not such estates therefore neither should you but be content with that which your Forefathers enjoyed would you hold this Argument to be of force I doe not in your cases and I pray be you as just to us But that I be not too tedious and irksome in this arguing let me make an indifferent motion which may well serve for this Objection be you now Christians as they were in the times of the Apostles and the Bishops will be very well content with such maintenance as the Apostles had in the times of those Christians for then the Christians sold their lands and goods and laid the price thereof at the Apostles feet which if you hold unfit now to be done as I doe then I pray conceive it as unreasonable to reduce them now to the indigency of the Apostles when all the land besides God be praised enjoyes plenty which the two Houses have found both in City and Countrey Argum. 12 But other Reformed Churches have not such Lands and why this in England rather then they Resp Neither have they perchance Bels or Chancels c. what then Must these downe in England therefore 2. Perchance they had lands but as they complaine they are taken away by Church-robbers 3. The time and state wherein they live haply will not so well bear it But 4. would not those Churches accept of Lands if time the State and Benefactors would afford it And is thine eye evil in Scotland because God is good to us in England The Commons in Germany and France live like Boors and Peasants and the Nobles in Russia and Turkie like slaves and vassals Hold you this a good Argument therefore it should be no otherwise in England We are no more bound in England to live without Lands because other Churches have none then other Churches are bound to live upon lands because we have them every Church or State are in these cases to be governed and live by their owne Laws and Customes 1 Cor. 11.16 and hitherto God be praised We have no such Custome no nor all the Churches of God Argum. 13 Some have argued that the Lands given to Bishops in England are held per Baroniam which Baronies with their Votes in Parliament being taken away by an Act the lands are or may likewise be taken away Resp That they may likewise be taken away as their Votes were in Parliament or that by power they can be taken away is not my dispute but whether they may justly and lawfully be taken and sold and then to your Argument though it be out of my sphere so far as it is a title in Law I submit this Answer First if that learned Antiquary and diligent searcher of Historie and Records Gâ—â—ssar ad
is incompatible with the state of the Church in the New that is understood to be continued and commanded to the practice of the Christian Church Now that an Hierarchy or Superiority and Subordination of the Priests was instituted in the Old Testament I think is denied by none that understands the Government of that Church and that this kind of Government is repealed in the New Testament appears not for the words of Christ forbid onely an Heathenish Tyranny and not a Christianly Superiority or an over-lording and not an orderly ruling Luke 22.25 26 1 Pet. 5.3 2. When in that place our Saviour explicitely forbids such Dominion or Lordship as the Kings and Gentiles exercised not ones mentioning alluding to or touching that Government instituted and practised in the Old Testament me thinkes it stands to reason that this kind of Government by Superior and Inferior is rather confirmed then weakened by our Saviours prohibition for had be intended the abolition of such a Government is it not probable being now as it were upon the theme that be would in some glance at least have strook at that Superiority and Subordination among the Jewes Especially when you consider what before was spoken that the Apostles and their Successors did and were to order the Discipline and Government of the Christian Church by the pattern of the Jewish and whether the like kind of Hierarchy was or is likely to be incompatible for the Christian Church which was instituted for the Jewish Church we may judge by the first and after continued practice of the Christian Church from the Apostles and succeeding times And here I shall cite whom you may as well credit as you are willing to heare Mr Calvin Instit 4.4 who confesseth in the Primitive Christian times they chose one called a Bishop who was as Consul in Rome and the Consuls in Rome were above the Senators in place and power And Mr Beza and Mr Moulin come neerer to us and truth who confesse that either in or very neer after the Apostles times Bishops ruled in the Christian Church where they deny not Bishops to have been in the Apostles times onely they will not lest they should offend or lose by the truth say what they did generally read and I am perswaded did beleeve that Bishops were in the Apostles times yet in the other they are plain and peremptory saying Bishops were soon after the Apostles and could they have proved it they would as readily and as plainly have said the Bishops were not in the Apostles times but soon after but by an artificial blinding or hood-winking the truth they chose rather to expresse it as they doe Whereas Bucer Professor of Divinity in Cambridge in K. Edward the Sixth's time speaks as plainly as truly saying From the first Ordination and perpetual Institution of Christian Churches by the Apostles it seemed good to the Holy Ghost to have in them Bishops and in the Book of Consecration of Bishops made and set forth in the fifth and sixth of K. Edward the Sixth and confirmed by Parliament 8 Eliz. 1. it is thus said It is evident to all men reading the Scriptures and ancient Authors that from the Apostles times there have been these Orders of Ministers in the Church of Christ viz. Bishops Presbyters and Deacons And if it were as evident that the Apostles either instituted or commended a Presbyterian Government and not Episcopal may it not be as a wonder and astonishment that so soon as ever the Apostles were deceased or the most of them the whole Christian Church dispersed through the whole world would suddenly conspire and convene to change that Government instituted or commended by the Apostles into Episcopacy And that Episcopacie and not Presbyterie was the Government generally I may say universally used in the Christian Churches from the times of the Apostles besides the authorities above mentioned I appeale to all the best Histories Moreover it cannot be denied but that this Government came into this Kingdom with the first planting of the Gospel here which was almost 1500. years agoe and hath been ever since established by our best Lawes but hath been confessed by the best learned of the Assembly not to be repugnant to Gods Word and by the most learned and strict Presbyterians Calvin Beza Monlin acknowledged to be either in or soon after the Apostles times and by the full consent of the best Historians proved to be instituted if not by Christ yet by his holy Apostles and by and from them spread over all the Christian world and yet to the end this holy Government may be abolished this detestable sin of Sacrilege must be committed The end and the means we see meet but then well weigh and consider that if it be damnation to him that doth ill to a good end as the Apostle testifieth then what damnation shall attend them who to such an end as the abolishing so holy or divine a Government as Episcopacy shall wilfully commit so detestable a sin as Sacrilege But the second end perchance is better which is as professed to pay necessary debts a good end I confesse I would it were practised by all yea or in this case But would not the Excise and Compositions have discharged that debt had the money been rightly imployed as it was pretended I pray remember that Charles Martell of France under pretence of pay for the Holy War seised on the Church Revenues and though he promised restitution yet was proclaimed by the best Historians to be a notorious and a damnable Sacrilegist But how ever the ends meet perchance there is some great cause that moved or provoked the two Houses to this selling yes and the cause is expressed for this late War was promoted by the Archbishops and Bishops and in favour of them or their adherents and dependents I confesse it seems strange to me that their Lands should be sold for what was done in favour of them who know not by whom this favour is done neither are their favourers once impeached for the favourable act for suppose one doe an evill act in favour of or for Mr Speakers sake who never desired nor acknowledged the favour shall Mr Speakers lands be sold away for this And yet more strange it is that their lands should be sold because the War was in favour of their adherents and dependents But it is said that the Bishops promoted this War and yet not said who nor when nor how but may not that more truly be said which I would not add were it not visible and apparently known to all that some one at the least of the Bishops have stood with and by the two Houses in this War For hath there been wanting one who hath sought and received dangerous wounds as it is reported and proclaimed and that in the War for the two Houses against the King For which he hath not only by suit obtained a pardon for his former disservice so called but bath