perpetu govern pa. 299.300 in effect obiected that Timothy and Titus were properly Diocesan ruling Bishops Yea such as wee call Lord Bishops that is vsing * pag 232. sole authoritie and had charge of mo particular Churches then one Which is to be in deed a Diocesan Bishop But they and their Offices are founde in the “ 1 Tim. 3. and 5. Tit. 1.5 Tit. 3. Scripture viz. To ordeine Pastors in divers Churches and to censure them c. I answere the very Apostles did not * Act. 14.23 1.15 23. c. 6.3 5 6. 1 Ti. 4.14 w Act. 16.2 make Ministers nor Censure by their sole and single Authoritie but evermore in the presence and with some liking of that particular Church whom it concerned Therefore much lesse did Timothie or Titus such matters solely and singly who were lower then Apostles And therefore they were no Lord Ministers certainelie Further it is vntrue they were no proper Bishops at all neither Diocesan nor any other For all proper Bishoppes were “ D. Bilson pag. 227. 232. affixed to certaine places and certaine charges where they were to serve and * Act. 20.38 1 Pet â— 2. Theodoret. â—n Ephe. 4. attend in purpose continually But Timothie and Titus were never affixed to one certaine charge For they like the Apostles intended not a constant continuance in a place but after a time of their aboade in one Nation translated both their presence and their labours into another Countrie Being Comites Apostolorum CoÌ„panions or Assistants to the Apostles “ See Bez. Annotat. in Acts 19. de Mini. grad cap. 5. indued doubtles with the extraordinarie gift of divers tongues and therefore did goe being coÌ„monlie sent or called by the Apostles hither hither to the end that they might perfect such Churches as the Apostles had planted but not throughlie furnished And this is evident by the text First Timothie was chosen and ordayned at * Act. 16. Lystra went into Phrygia Galatia Mysia Troas being at Philippi was sent to “ 1 Cor. 4.17 Corinth from * 1 Thes 3.1.2 6. Athens went to Thessalonica from § Act. 19.22 Ephesus went to Macedonia after he was left at “ 1 Tim 1.3 Ephesus againe to order redresse things there And yet * 2 Tim. 4.9.1 thence he was sent for away and departed A litle before Paules death he was at “ Phil. 1 1. Rome from * Phil. 2.19 23. thence to goe to the Philippians Wherefore Timothie was no ordinarie proper Bishop of any sort nor affixed to anie certaine place but a verie Evangelist as also the * 2 Tim. 4.5 Scripture calleth him that is an vnlimited extraordinarie and teÌ„porarie function in the Churches The like was Titus Paule chose him for his coÌ„panion helper and had him * Gal. 2.2 with him to Ierusalem Also he sent him to § 2 Cor. 8 17. Corinth Hee left him in “ Tit. 1.5 Crete a while but sends for him theÌ„ce * Tit. 3.12 away anon after to Nicopolis A litle before Pauls death he was with him at “ 2 Tim. 4.10 Rome from thence he went into Dalmatia Both these therefore were verie Evangelistes and no maner of ordinarie Bishops Neither in deede were there anie Diocesan Bishops or Diocesan Churches that can be found in all the New Testament Then they will obiect that some things are Indifferent in Ecclesiasticall actions and doubtles so are certaine Circumstances c. It is not necessarie that these should bee warranted particularly in the Scripture I answer The Papists do hold their Ecclesiasticall Traditions or Rites to be meerelie indifferent in their nature and to be necessarie onelie as the Church commaundeth them This is manifest by D. Stapleton saying * Stapletâ— Promtuar Catholic part Quadragesimal pag. 99. Omnes vident in corum Rituum Ecclesiasticorum vsu nullam necessitatem poni sed liberè assumi vel non assumi modò absit contemptus qui non in Ceremoniam sed in Ecclesiae prepositos qui cam instituerunt imò in Christum cadit dicente ad illos Christo Qui vos spernit me spernit Also by the Rhemes Testament saying “ Rhem. Tâ— stame Annotat in Math. 15 1â— Neither flesh nor fish of it selfe doth defile but the breach of the Churches precept defileth Likewise writeth Bellarmine in his discourse of their Church-Ceremonies But yet notwithstanding every good Christian knoweth well that their Traditions are plainly superstitious and vnlawfull How then shall not ours also be the like What are ours better then theirs Further though Circumstances be indifferent and may be chaunged by men yet Formes of Churches are not so nor the Church Ministeries nor Ceremonies nor in a word any Traditions Ecclesiasticall whereof our former Reason wholy intreateth We denie not then but that in Ecclesiasticall actions the meere CircumstaÌ„ces are in some sort indifferent that is not necessarie to be determined by Scripture But these truely are not to be called Ecclesiasticall Traditions Wherefore we must know that there is a great difference betweene Traditions Circumstances Besides Gods Ordinances specified in Scripture there are 2. other kindes of lawfull thinges in the administration of Church matters 1. Naturall Necessities 2. Proper and meere Circumstances Naturall Necessities are Persons Times Places c. what things only are in different CircuÌ„stances Proper meere Circumstances which onely are indifferent in Church actions are Accidentall things wherof there is no necessitie but either may or may not be vsed They are of 2. sortes either Civill or Occasionall The Civill Circumstances are such as though they be vsed in Church actions To this do belonge all thinges of Comlinesse and DeceÌ„cy yet even there they import only and meerely a Civill vse Which we shall easilie discerne thus viz. when the same things in the same maner are vsed also in actions meerely Civill at other times and places Such were Christes “ John 13. with 1. Tim. 5.10 Washing the Disciples feet the “ Rom. 16.16 Love feasts * Iud. 12. Kissings in the Church meetings of old The maner at this day of the French Preaching covered To come to the Church in this or that decent and comely common apparell A commodious distinct House for Gods Service c. Occasionall Circumstances are such particulars as some special occasion requireth and moveth vs vnto namely when the Generall things are either vsuall in Civill custome or by Gods owne ordinance in Nature or in the Word written As such or such Places Times Persons Things Namelie to come together in Synagogues or Temples To vse Pues or Pulpits c. To Pray Kneeling or Prostrate To eate and drinke at the L. Table leaning or sitting c. In the “ Mat. 26. 1 Cor. 11.23 Evening or at * Acts 20.7 Midnight To Baptize in “ Acts 16.15 Rivers Also the Apostles vsing of
alone though now he be a L. Bishop himselfe hath most fully and substantially confuted Against the Iesuits and Seminaries obiecting thus The word is * Math. 20.25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they Over-rule their Subiects with iniusticÄ™ and violence You shall not do so He replyeth “ D. Bils against the Apol. of the Seminar part 2. pag. 174. print Lond. 1586. So your new Translation over-ruleth the word Howbeit Christ in that place doth not traduce the Power of Princes as vniust and outragious but distinguisheth the calling of his Apostles from the maner of regiment which God hath allowed the Magistrat Christ saith not Princes be tyrants you shall deale more curteously then they do but he saith Princes be Lords and rulers over their people by Gods ordinance you shall not be so Againe the word which S. Luke hath is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without any composition They be Lords Masters and S. Paul confesseth of himselfe and other Apostles Not that we be Lords or Masters of your faith Ye the compound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is with power force to rule men whether they will or no not with wrong and iniury to oppresse them And therefore the conclusion is inevitable that Princes may lawfully compell and punish their Subiects which Bishops may not “ Pag. 175. All Pastors and Bishops are straitly charged not to medle with the sword * Pag. 182. To compell Heretikes and Schismatikes neither is it possible sor the Preacher if he would nor lawfull if he could he lacketh both meanes and leave to constraine them Bishops be flatly forbidden to raigne and must not meddle with the materiall sword †Pag. 227. Commanding and forcing our Savior forbiddeeh to all his Disciples Where the full effect of all his discourse is this All Civill iâ—risdiction and power of the sword to commaund compell and punish by losse of life limme or libertie is secluded from the Ministers function and reserved to the Magistrates * Luk. 22.24.25 Christ precisely forbad his Apostles to beare rule and exercise authoritie over their brethren not vniust and tyrannicall rule but all compulsive power And where the thing is not lawfull the signe is not lawfull c. To like purpose also he writeth in his booke of the Perpetual Governement of Christes Church * Pag. 137.142 where he saith †Many giftes may conioyne in one man many offices cannot “ Pag. 52. The Ministers shall not have any such rule or dominion as the great States have * Pag. 55. The thing so much prohibited by Christ his Apostles is that Preachers Pastors should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 behave or thinke themselves to bee Lords and Maisters over their brethren And “ Pag. 56. To increase the love of the sheepe toward their Sheepheards Christ would not have his Apostles to be feared as Maisters but to be honored as Fathers and consequently Pastors not to force but to feede not to chase but to lead the flocke committed to their charge neither roughly to intreat them as servants but gently to perswade them as coheires of the same kingdome Heere are Testimonies of this man for vs most full most cleare and above all exception Reason 6. IF in the Lawes estimation the calling of Ministers with vs is given by those who in Gods word have no power to give it Vsurpation then this is contrarie to Gods word and necessarie to be reformed But in the Lawes estimation the calling of Ministers with vs is given by those who in Gods worde have no power to give it Namely it is given by a Diocesan ruling Bishop who is no where found as before I shewed in al the New Testament So that he can not therein have anie power or authoritie to give Ministers their calling nor yet to take it from them Againe by the rule of Gods word that particular Church whiche is to have the Minister ought to be present and to shew a liking and consent in their Ministers calling Whiche proveth that no Bishop hath any power or authoritie in Gods word to give anie Minister his calling or to take it from him in absence of that Church to whom the Minister belongeth yea and as the practise now is vtterly without their liking Therefore this that is the giving of the Ministers calling with vs by such as now do give it and in such maner is contrary to Gods word and ought of necessitie to be reformed Where I say by the rule of Gods worde The Churches right that Church which is to have the Minister ought to bee present and to shew a liking and consent in their Ministers Calling this is evident by many testimonies and reasons First because in the Apostles time the Church had a consent in Excommunication as it appeareth to the Corinthians where the Apostle saith * 1 Cor. 5.4.5 I have determined already when yee are gathered together and my spirit in the name of our L. Iesus Christ that such a one by the power of our L. Iesus Christ be delivered to Satan And * vers 13. Put away from among your selves that wicked man Which agreeth with Christes owne ordinance and precept where he saith “ Mat. 18.17 Tell the Church If he heare not the Church let him be vnto thee as an Heathen and a Publicane Now if the Church was to Excommunicate surelie the Church also was to elect her Ministers For these are the 2. maine partes of the holy Governement Ecclesiasticall both which must belong to the Church equallie alike Further it is apparant by the Apostles practise First the calling of Matthias to the Apostleship was permitted so farre as was possible to the Churches Election For they * Act. 1.23 c. appointed two whereof one should be and was divinely chosen This questionles was done not of necessitie for that Calling which was then to be given but only for an example in Ecclesiasticall Elections which the Churches after should and did imitate Besides howsoever the very Election of Matthias was by Divine lot yet it was all done in the Churches presence with the actuall concurrence of their prayers and free consentes instantly Now these acts of the Church as they may so therefore they ought to be perpetual in every Election of whatsoever Minister seeing even for that end the Apostles caused nowe the Church thus to do It is a slight answer and vntrue to say “ Parpet govern pag. 69. Examples are no preceptes For the same answerer elswhere confesseth that * Per. gov pag. 373. the Apostles taught the Church by their Example But if he had not confessed it yet the trueth of this generall point is in it selfe most certain Wherefore was the Booke of the Apostles Actes els written But that their Acts in the Churches should be Rules and patterns for vs to do likewise All Divines vse the Argument drawen from an act of Christ or his
were each of them primitiuely no more but a Parish only that is but one ordinary constant Congregation only As wehre he nameth the Church of Ierusalem a Euse lib. 3.11 the Parish of Ierusalem of Ephesus the Parish of b Lib. 3.28 Ephesus and so of c Lib. 3.13.18 lib. 4.1.4.5.19 Alexandria of d Lib. 3.32 Hierapolis of e Lib. 4.22 Corinth of f Lib 4.25 Sardis of g Lib. 5.5 Lyons divers Churches the h Lib. 4.22 6. Parishes of Crete He no where mentioneth many Churches nor Parishes vnder one Bishop in any Citie till Iulianus time in Alexandria as before we observed By Epiphanius testimonie also our Assertion is maintained Who saith Primitiuely * Epiph coÌ„tr Haâ—â—â—â— 73. in a small CoÌ„gregation a Bishop was ordayned alone without other Presbyters assisting him And in som places only Presbyters and Deacons without a Bishop In other places that is in great populous CongregatioÌ„s where they had meete men to be chosen there they chose in each of them a Bishop with other assistant Presbyters By which it appeareth consequently that every-where a Bishop then was but of one particular Congregation only whether greater or simaller The second part is proved The particular Congregations had their owne goverment Ecclefiasticall Ignat. ad Philad NEither let any imagine that these particular Congregations then wanted their owne Ecclesiasticall government among themselves only It is most evident that they had it exercised it only within themselues ordinarily Which is plaine by that of Ignatius writing to one of them thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is meet for you as being the Church of God to chose by common coÌ„sent your Bishop And to an other particular Church thus * Ad Smyrna 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Church which is with you at Smyrna there is not any thing aboue the Bishop He meaneth the Bishop or Pastor of the particular Congregation is of greatest authoritie and aboue any other there whomsoever So that they in that Congregation had all governement simply and solely among themselves He speaketh heere of governing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Spiritually not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Civilly For thus the Magistrate is Supreme both in and over each Church and whatsoever Church matters as Mai. Beza religiously and dutifully * Theod. Bez. de Excom Presbyt speaketh we †Pag. 57. before observed Yea verily thus the Magistrat is supreme whether he care for the Church or care not Hence therfore we conclude that these particular Churches had the ordinary Ecclesiasticall government of themselves among themselves TertulliaÌ„ also in the place before cited sheweth so much speaking of each particular ordinarie Congregation in his dayes Ibidem est censura divina Iudicatur magno cum pondere vt apud certos de Dei conspectu Apol. â— 39 President probati quique Seniores There are divine Censures They iudge with great waight and advisednes as being sure that God seeth them The approved Elders are the chiefe or do governe these Censures Therfore all particular ordinary Congregations inioyed their owne spirituall governement then in those times There is no suspicion of any restraint or abridging of them therin till Dionysius the 13. Bishop of Alexandria Anno 260. at the soonest The third part is proved No Maioritie of rule but only Prioritie of order in a primitive Bishop BEsides the testimonies before alleaged Ambrose in plain wordes telleth vs this that primitively * Ambro in Eph. 4. 1 Tim. 3. A Bishop was no more but primus Presbyter the foremost in order among the other Ministers of the word in the Synods or where there were other in the same Congregation with him Therefore the Bishop then differed not in Maioritie of rule from any other Pastor And therefore then there was no Diocesan Church vsing governement nor Diocesan Bishop ruling other Pastors and Churches Much lesse was there any Diocesan Lord Bishop then Ierome doth likewise Where he saith * Ierom. ad Evagr. in Tit. 1. A Bishop and an Elder or common Pastor by Divine institution and ordinance are all one And Maioritie among them came in by the custome of the Church and Humane disposition He meaneth Maioritie of Ruling because he sheweth heere that formerly all did rule “ in coÌ„muniâ— or communi Presbyterorum consiliâ— in common Wherefore by his iudgement there was not at the first any Maioritie of rule in a Bishop over Pastors Much lesse were there any Diocesan L. Bishops ruling by their sole authoritie in those times Som Prioritie in order we doubt not was alwayes First Parishionall and then Diocesan som good while after as before is shewed Yea the Parishionall prioritie of order was we deny not constant yea even among Pastors who had otherwise all one Office intirely I say this was where there were divers Ministers of the word in one particular Congregation As we doubt not there were in som places Now for this matter viz. Bishops Maioritie in governement above Presbyters and also concerning Ieromes opinion thereof it is not amisse to observe what D. Bilson also hath taught and avouched In his * Against the Semina part 2. pag. 318. First Booke he sayeth It was not by the institution of Christ nor his Apostles but long after by the consent of the Churches the Custom of the tymes and the will of Princes Where also he sheweth that this was Ieromes iudgement likewise Howsoever since I can not tell how nor why D. Bilson †Perpeâ— gov pag. 236.237.238 changed much his minde heerein and yet with no more discrepance from himselfe then from the trueth and from almost all learned men beside both ancient and later Further this reason prooveth the present whole Assertion If the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsed religiously for a Church Visible with order and governement do and ought to keepe in all good Authors a iust proportion answerable to the Civill and Originall vse thereof then it must needs be in proper signification a particular CoÌ„gregation only For Originally and Civilly in all Greeke Authors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth one particular Assembly in one place only as an Assembly of the people at Athens in Ephesus in Corinth c being com togeather in their publike iudgement-place Which is evident by the writinges of Plato Demosthenes Isocrates Xenophon c. Yea in the * Acte 19. â—2 39.40 Actes of the Apostles we do finde it likewise so vsed But the Apostles and other Ecclesiasticall writers for 200. yeares after Christ vsing this worde for a Visible Church with order and governement do speak properly and so ought to keepe a iust proportion in it answerable to the Civill and originall vse thereof This sentence is vndoubtedly true and vndenyable If any think he can shew to the coâ—â—â—rie let it be shewed Therefore the Apostles and other Ecclesiasticall Writers for 200.
more a Church then any other though som may be greater som smaller som richer som poorer Yet as Churches they are all equally Churches and one hath as much Ecclesiasticall or spirituall right power authoritie as any other Even so is it with their Pastors being compared I saye togeather as Pastors among themselves Againe as the Apostles were all equall Apostles so surely the Pastors ought to be who are in deed their right proper Successors Pari consortio prediti honoris potestatis As Cyprian * cypr. de vnit Eccles saith The Apostles were indued with equall honor power Therfore the Pastors their Successors ought to be so likewise To which purpose also is that in the same place following “ Ibid. Episcopaius vnus est cuius à singulis in solidum pars tenetur There is but one kinde or nature of the Bishoplie or Pastoral office whereof everie one participateth in whole And in another place * Cypr. in CoÌ„cil Caâ—thag Nemo nostrum Episcopum Episcoporum se facit None of vs maketh him self a Bishop of Bishops or over Bishops Signifying that it was not lawfull for them so to be neither likewise a Pastor over Pastors And to what purpose els is that of Ierome to Evagrius where speaking of Bishops or Pastors saith he “ Icrom ad Evagr. Eiusdem sunt meriti eiusdem Sacerdotij They are all of one and the same preeminence of one and the same Office These sentences are verie memorable tending to allow ordinarie equalitie in all Offices which are of one and the same kinde or nature Howsoever yet a declination from the right and perfect Pastorall office began to come in in the dayes of these men also to get allowance even of the most famous Doctors specially about Ieromes dayes Whereby it is manifest how a paritie of Pastors ought to be held and yet notwithstanding how a paritie of all Ministers ought not to be in any Church But some wil say this is not enough For this nevertheles will be the cause of strife discord in the Churches We answer The cleane contrarie is true Your humane disparitie in the Ecclesiasticall Ministeries both is and ever * Nazianz. in orat post redi hath ben the true cause of discord But our Divine disparitie that which we hold and allow is the true cause of peace and vnitie For where in what place can discord be In every Church we acknowledg a Superior and in everie meeting out of many Churches a Superior likewise Now no other place can be imagined where discord and strife Ecclesiasticall can arise If therefore Superioritie and disparitie will cause peace wee through Gods goodnes and blessing shall both have and keepe peace every where If anie other Superioritie bee required and namely Yours which crosseth yea cutteth of Gods owne ordinance in the Pastoral office we deny that it can ever procure peace And this our present experience doth shew in all the forraigne Reformed Churches compared with ous They all inioying this ordinance of God have most admirable vnitie We only wanting this notwithstanding many sundrie worldly advantages yet do remaine still now these 50. yeeres almost in wofull dissentions desolations and dissipations Neither can the Lordly Prelacie neither will they remedy it If heerein yet men will not be satissied but will hold it still to be speciall wisedom to take away from som Pastors the power of spirituall governement and to give it to som few We answer againe with the holy Ghost It behooveth vs not it is high presumption * 2 Cor. 4.6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be wise aboue much rather contrary to that which is written Reason 5. THOSE Elders or Pastors as they couÌ„t themselves stand directlie contrarie to Gods word Lord-Ministers who do rule their fellow-Elders or Pastors and specially manie whole Churches with a Lordly Ecclesiasticall power or sole authoritie also who do rule them Civilly with outward force and compulsive power and who receave Civil Titles and Stiles answering to the worldly honor due to high Magistrates in the world But our Diocesan Bishops in England are such Elders or Pastors and do thus rule and stand by their publike Office or Offices which they hold Therefore our Diocesan Bishops in England even by their publike Office or Offices which they hold stand directly contrary to Gods word The Proposition whereof only there can be doubt is proved by many plaine places of Gods word Christ earnestly forbad his Apostles this whole matter and in them much more all other Ministers their inferiors in these words * Mat. 20.25 Ye know that the Rulers of the Nations haue dominion over them and the Great men exercise authoritie over them But it shall not be so among you But who soever will be great among you let him be your servant Luke hath the same thus “ Luke 22.25 The Kings of the Nations haue dominion or rule as Lords over them and they who exercise authoritie over them are called Gratious Lords But ye shall not be so And Peter an Elder as he calleth himselfe chargeth all Elders that they be not * 1 Pet. 5.8 as Lords over Gods heritage but examples to the flocke And Paul renounceth it for his part saying “ 2 Cor. 1.24 Not that we haue dominion â—ver your faith but are helpers of your ioy Heere it is a silly evasion which som vse or rather a delusion of these manifest Scriptures to say Christ heere forbiddeth his Apostles to expect Civill power authoritie by vertue of their Ecclesiasticall Ministerie or it is heere denyed that Civil power is necessarily annexed to the Ecclesiasticall function And besides this that nothing els iâ— heere denyed by our Savior to his Apostles and Ministers I say this is a vaine shift The Apostles manifestly desired this outward preeminence no other way but by CoÌ„mission from Christ whom they hoped should haue ben a great Prince in the world This * Math. 20.21 Marc. 10. â—7 they simply desired and this Christ simply denied both to them and in them to all true Ministers of Christ for ever Besides Luke also addeth the Magnificent Titles of worldy authoritie and these to be likewise denyed them Which indeed necessarily followeth Finally both Mathew Luke do principally speake of the forbidding of Civill rule to Ministers yet their words are so generall that we must needs grant that Christ there forbiddeth his Ministers simply generally al Lordly rule or domination or sole authoritie whatsoever And therefore Ecclesiasticall domination or sole authoritie in Church matters also Even as it is manifest that Peter and Paul do without controversy in the places before rehearsed It is no better shift to say that Christ heere forbad nothing but Tyrannicall over-ruling of the brethren Or only the ambitious desire of Lordly rule sole power and civill authoritie but not the things themselues But all this D. Bilson
in Scotland is “ To the Reader the only true forme of Gods worship which we vnderstand as spoken in this respect that they professe to renounce all humane Traditions therein For these thinges have those evill Beastes maliciously reproched his Maiestie as if this were worthy of no better name then a Puritan opinion In deed for this only opinion thus they have and do still revile vs. But we commit the iudgement heereof to the Lord. Wherefore finallie let vs observe heere in regard of the premisses that godly wise and necessarie counsell of Peter Martyr a man of worthy memory Saith he * Martyr Epist ad Dom. Polo Consulo praeterea vt Disciplinam quanto ocyùs fieri poterit in vestras Ecclesias omninò invehatis c. I counsaill you moreover that as soone as possible may be you bring in the Discipline wholy into your Churches For if it be not receaved at the beginning when men are whot in love with the Gospell it will not be easily lett in afterward when som coldnes shall creepe in as vsually it commeth to passe And how vainely men labour without it England described very many Churches may be an example vnto you which from the foundations of their restoring when they would not vndergo so healthfull a yoke they could never after in their life and maners be brought into order by any rule Whence it is with grief I speake it that all thinges almost have little firmenes and do threaten ruine on every side Therefore it is a grievous dammage and a certayne destruction of the Churches if the sinew of discipline be wanting vnto them Neither may they be said truly and soundly to have and professe the Gospell which either want the Discipline or despise it or have no desire of it Surely seeing it is delivered vs with so great diligence in the Gospells and Apostles Epistles we must confesse it to be not the least part of Christian Religion Whereby it commeth to passe that the Gospell seemeth to be neglected by them who do put away from theÌ„ so excellent a part thereof c. Thus say these learned men Howbeit yet our Adversaries do will accuse vs that we are Schismatikes and Seditious in refusing the Diocesan Bishops authoritie and rule Ecclesiasticall which is publikely receaved But we answer It is no sedition nor disloyaltie at all it is no misbehaviour against the King dutifully to endevour that those partes of Christes Gospell which yet are wanting should be entertayned among vs that Christes true Visible Churches should be acknowledged and regarded as by Gods word they ought to be that in theÌ„ Christs owne spirituall ordinances and none other should be established Nay it were disloyaltie against the King and his estate to endevour otherwise Againe touching Schisme 1. We affirme with the Canonistes Non separatio sed causa facit Schismaticum Not separation but the cause maketh a Schismatike Wherefore it behoveth all wise men to see where the cause is 2. Then we affirme proove that our adversaries themselves do cause or make the Schisme which in deed is amongst vs. For the Apostle saith They make Schismes who teach any thing Ecclesiastical * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 16.17 beside the doctrine which the Apostles left vs they ought to be avoyded Now our Adversaries do teach and vrge all their forenoted Traditions most evidently besides the Apostles doctrine and ordinances Yea verily contrary vnto them as before we have shewed Whereby it is manifest who are in deed the Schismaticks and to be refused To which purpose also Cyprian witnesseth saying “ Cypr. de Lapsiâ— Non Ecclesiae iungitur qui ab Evangelio separatur He that differeth from the Gospell ioyneth not to the Church but schismeth from it And Augustin †Aug. coÌ„â— Peril 2.25 Vtrum Schismatici nos sumus an vos nec ego nec tu sed Christus interrogetur vt indicet Ecclesiam suam Lege ergo Evangelium respondet tibi c. Whether we or you be Schismatickes aske not me nor your selves but aske Christ that be may shew his owne Church Read the Gospell therefore and it answereth thee c. Againe * De Vnitâ— Eccle cap. 3 Ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam ibi discutiamus causam nostram Nolo humanis documentis sed divinis oraculis sanctam Ecclesiam demonstrari “ Contr. Crescon Gram. 1.33 Ecclesiam sine vlla ambiguitate sancta scriptura demonstrat There in the New Testament let vs seeke the Church There let vs examine our cause I cannot abide that the holy Church should be shewed by mens doctrines but by the Divine Oracles The holy Scriptures do demonstrat the Church without any doubt * Chrysost operis imperfect Hom â—3 Ecclesia cognâ—scitur tantummodò per Scripturas Onely by the Scriptures is the Church knowen And another saith †Basil de confes sid Manifesta â—st 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à Fide Superbiae crimen aut reprobare quid exijs quae sâ—ripta sunt aut aliquid superinducere ex non scriptis It is a manifest falling away from the faith a sinne of pride either to refuse any thing of that which is written or to bring in any thing besides that which is written Againe Cyprian saith * Cypr. epi. 2.3 No other thing ought to be don of vs then that which our Lord for vs hath don before vs. “ Epist 1.7 Whosoever gathereth from any other ground he scattereth It is adulterous it is impious it is sacrilegious whatsoever it be which mad men do institute violating thereby the Divine or dinance And againe †Ad Pomp. Vnde est ista Traditio Whence commeth this Tradion speaking namely of an outward Ecclesiasticall custom Whether is it from the Lords authoritie in the Gospells or from the Apostles preceptes and Epistles Where his meaning in brief is that every such that is Ecclesiasticall Vnwritten Tradition whatsoever ought to be vtterly reiected These Reasons I had Christian Reader which long since perswaded me in this cause Wherfore I was moved in conscience to communicate them to Gods people now in this seasonable and necessary time Considering that these things are farre from matters indifferent or arbitrarie but are in deed very greatly importing the common salvation Besides we have ben often vehemently provoked therevnto And the present opportunitie exacteth it at our handes as all men do vnderstand To God only wise be praise through Iesus Christ for ever Rom. 16.27 Via vna cor vnum AN EXHORTATION To all the godly learned and faithfull Pastors of the severall Churches in England HENRY IACOB Minister of Gods word wisheth grace and peace to be multiplied in CHRIST IESVS BRETHREN my hearts desire prayer to God for the People of England is that they may be saved And this you know well can not be attained ordinarily with comfortable firme assurance in Gods Promises vnto vs but by