declared in a Letter he wrote to St. John's Colledge where he had been Fellow in behalf of a Kinsman of his Mr. Low for whom he desired a Fellowship that he was an adversary to his Kinsman if he refused it His words are these But if this young man be averse to that posture of Bowing himself towards the Lords Table he shall have me much his Elder altogether his Enemy And although our Church in her Canons doth but commend this and leaves the practice of it perfectly indifferent yet nothing of this nature claims a greater Antiquity For Clemens Alexandrinus tells us That by the Christians Prayers were made towards the East And Tertullian sayes That the Heathens suspected the Christians worshipped the Sun and that their suspicion arose because Christians prayed towards the East And St. Augustin who lived at the end of the 4 th Century is very express in this custom and withall gives this reason of it When saith he we stand to Prayer we are turned to the East whence the Sun ariseth not as if that was God's proper place and that he hath deserted the other parts of the World who is every-where present not by extension of places but Majesty of power but that our mind might be admonished to convert it self to the more excellent nature that is to the Lord. And in that discourse which goes under the name of Justin Martyr though not so antient as St. Justin yet as old as Theodoret if we believe Rivet we are told That this custom speaking before of Praying towards the East the Church received from the holy Apostles For the Church received the place where to Pray from whom they received the command to Pray And a few lines before he tells us That â—o Pray to the East doth not contradict either the Prophets or Apostles As if he should argue We have no command in the Scripture to the contrary this hath been the custom and practice of the Church of which we have no beginning therefore 't is Apostolical But whether this custom be from the Apostles or no this we are sure on Bodily adoration is that we owe to God and if that be his due and our duty certainly the custom of the Church is of more than sufficient authority to determine to what place that Act of Worship is most decent to be directed unto I must not omit another Information I haâ—â— of this good Bishop before I come to speak of this Work I now publish and that is He was in his younger dayes nay when he came to be a Bishop earnest in those Controversies which commonly go under Calvin's name insomuch that when he was Bishop of Lichfield he set upon to Answer Arminius and morâ— particularly that Tract of his Intituled Examen Praedestinationis Perkinsianae and after a moneths consideration anâ— making several Observations on thaâ— Discourse he laid it aside saying thesâ— words If thou wilt not be Answered lie thee there And after that he greâ— very moderate if he did not incline tâ— the contrary opinion though he did not love to discourse of that Subject or to hear Ministers in their Pulpits to meddle with that which is most proper for the Scholes Now though this Controversie about the time of the Synod of Dort was by many good men looked on under a severe character yet now we find the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas incline much to it As in the French Church Amiraldus and Mr. Daillee who hath a particular tract de Gratia Universali do sufficiently assure us and for the Dutch Churches the Remonstrant party is so much increased in power that they possess most of the great places both in Church and State But some men are strangely mistaken when they would father the Calvinian Doctrin on the Church of England in her Articles who hath most wisely left it undetermined knowing that both learned and good men may differ in these Sublime Points and that the Churches peace ought not to he disturbed with such unnecessary determinations 'T is true I have read that in the Parliament of 1 Caroli Mr. Pym moved in the House of Commons That Arminianisme might be condemned by a Vote of that House as if the Infallibility pretended to attend St. Peter's Chair at Rome was removed to the Speaker's at Westminster But yet I find not that grave Assembly did any thing in it As for those Articles composed at Lambeth by Archbishop Whitgift and those Assistants he called to him they were so far from being received as a Doctrin of our Church that if we believe a very diligent Historian Queen Elizabeth totally disliked them and the manner of making of them and had like to have questioned the Archbishop about them And when by Dr. John Reynolds at the Conference at Hampton Court they were desired to be inserted into the Articles of the Church of England the motion was rejected by King James who told them That the quietest determinations of such Questions were fit for the University and not to stuff our Articles with all Theological conclusions But this by the way I have before told you how great service this worthy Prelate did in his Controversies against the Papists This was not all the work that lay on his shoulders for he no sooner came to the Office of a Bishop but he met with another sort of Adversary who began then to question the Authority of the Church in her ordaining decent Ceremonies in her service And when he found that a private Conference with these sort of men did little prevail he then published his Defence of the Three Innocent Ceremonies a discourse so solid that it must satisfie any person that is governed by reason and not by phansie and affection But as these men began then to undermine the Out-works as I may so call them of Episcopal Jurisdiction so this great man lived to see the whole Hierarchy by them destroyed voted down Root and Branch and that as Popish and Antichristian to the amazement of all Mankind the Wonder of the Reformed Church and the publique Triumph of the Roman Conclave And were it not that those years so late past were perfectly a time of Paradoxes what wise man could imagine that they and their Order should be counted Popish who were the greatest opposers of it who had writ so many unanswerable Volumns against it and who had by divers of their Martyrdom in Queen Mary's days asserted the Reformed Catholick Doctrine against the Corruptions and Novelties of the Roman Church This was the occasion which put this Learned Bishop to write this ensuing Tract which when he had first done he communicated it to the Most Reverend Father in God James Usher Lord Archbishop of Armagh and it did so satisfie that Learned Primate that he put it forth with some Discourses of his own without our Bishops Name or Knowledge though in the Codicel annexed to our Bishops Will
goes under the Name of St. Ambrose and was as he confesseth an Author of the middle of the fifth Century and it was this Because saith he the following Presbyters began to be found unworthy to govern the reason of Succession was changâ—◠〈◊〉 by the care of a Council that 〈◊〉 â—rder of Succession but Deâ—eâ—◠〈◊〉 â—â—ld create a Bishop thereunto elected by the judgment of many Priests This Authority may be good to prove that the Church upon good reason altered the Method of succession but tends nothing to prove that those who succeeded by Age were not Bishops But here I would ask any impartial Reader whether from this place he hath colour of Reason to imagin D. Blondells Proposition Was it possible that all the world could in a moment alter the Government established by the Apostles and that without the contradiction or repining of any in the Church to the Contrary Was it possible for a Council to do this and no footsteps remain of this decree Nay were all those Holy Martyrs the Apostles Successors unto whose mission God gave daily Testimony by the wonderful miracles they did seduced by a lying Spirit to impose upon all Christians a Yoke as some call Antichristian Certainly he who will allow such an Extravagant Fancy hath a Faith to believe Impossibilities I might say a great deal more upon this subject but that was to forestal the ensuing Discourse which will more abundantly satisfie any Intelligent Reader But our Episcopal Government hath another sort of Enemies than those we have hitherto mentioned which are divers in the Church of Rome who designing to draw all divine Right to the Papal Chair will allow nothing to Bishops but as derived from that And therefore if you will look into that excellent History of the Council of Trent when the Spanish Bishops pressed the determination of the Divine Right of Episcopacy the Italian Bishops opposed it and were so cautions in it as if the whole Papal Fabrick was to fall by that assertion Nay we are told that the Legates had this in command from the Colledg of Cardinals inviolably to observe that Episcopacy should not be determined of Divine right And therefore he who looks into the Canons of the Council of Trent that treat of Episcopacy shall find them penned in such ambiguous Phrases that all the Divinity allowed that Order may be interpreted not to be so originally but derivatively as proceeding from their great Divine Right the Papal Chair And upon this dispute the Infallible Pope in Letters sent to his Legats in that Council tells them that the Opinion by which the Institution of Bishops was said to be of divine Right was false and erroneous because the alone power of Order was from Christ. And Jacobus Lanez the General of the Jesuits Order tells us that Bishops are of divine Ordination not Right This in that Council And in the Decretals collected by Gregory the 9th we find this Decree We call Deacon-ship and Presbyter-ship sacred Orders For those alone the Primitive Church is read to have had And it were very easie to find out Testimonies in abundance to this purpose were not these cited more than enough which I have collected out of the Council of Trent which is the Rule by which the Church of Rome is guided And though it may be objected that divers Learned Papists are of another Opinion Yet it is evident the Interest of the Papacy runs that way for certainly no interest could be carried on with greater subtlety and dexterity than the Papal was in that Council and this we see was one thing principally to be taken care of From this we may gather how fond â— thing it is in some zealous men amongâ—â— us who call the Order of Bishops Popish and Antichristian since the Papists as well as Presbyterians conspirâ— against this Order and the Parity â— Presbyters and Bishops is perfect Popery But besides these two Adversaries which seem to be so diametrically opposite in themselves and yet both conspire against the Divine Right of Episcopacy as in many other points might were it proper be made appear Wâ— have a third sort of a much later datâ— than the younger of these and that is sort of pleasant men who tell us Theâ— are for Church Government but theâ— believe that neither Christ nor his Apostles left any at all but with a dependence on the Civill Magistrates will that whatever Government was established in the Apostles time 't was only setled for the present condition of thâ— Church and not upon any lasting Reâ—son but that the Magistrate may if 〈◊〉 think fit institute a new Ecclesiasticâ— Government And this Opinion haâ— been so advanced by a learned man that he saith the Magistrate is the only Judg of what Religion his Subjects must be on that he is the only infallible Judg of Controversie and Scripture and that he that is a Subject to the Great Turk and follows the Religion of Mahomet and dies for that Faith is as much nay more a Martyr than the Primitive Christians were in the first ten Persecutions And it is to me no wonder at all that this Opinion hath after it many Followers For besides that this increaseth the Civil Magistrates Jurisdiction Dominion is a thing all mankind contend for and so cannot much offend the best Supreme Governour since 't is an errour of a good meaning to teach Subjects obedience Yet it carries along with it this advantage that it enables the Embracers of it to swim with every stream and so finds them a Religious Expedient to consult their secular interest and Advantage let the world turn upside down But certainly this Opinion as it savours much of Atheism so it hath in it little of Reason and nothing of Religion For to suppose that Christ Jesus the Supreme Head of the Church should take upon him humane nature and purchase to himself â— Church with no less a price than the blood of God and that after this great work done he should take no further carâ— of her but leave her to the direction of the changeable inclination of every humane Fansy to the Extravagancy of every ambitious humour If this be nâ—â— a fond and an unreasonable opinion know not what may merit that name But this to me seems abundantly satisfactory and to it I have not yet hearâ— the least colour of an Answer And thaâ— is since it doth most evidently appeaâ—â— from all Antiquity the consent of aâ— antient writers and the confession 〈◊〉 all that have searched into it that thâ— Apostles setled in all Churches one anâ— the same Government For thougâ— men dispute what Government was setled and every party fansie 't is theirs yâ—â— all agree there was but one how thâ—â— could one Ecclesiastical Order conforâ— and agree with the Various Forms 〈◊〉 Temporal Policies The World had theâ— Monarchies absolute mixed Aristâ—cracies Oligarchies Democracies aâ— they as different as we can imagine aâ—â—
yet the Apostles who were guided by an Infallible Spirit setled Episcopacy in them all There was not in a Monarchy Episcopacy and in a Republick Presbytery but one and the same in both And this is matter of Fact and hath greater Authority to attest it than any humane story of that Antiquity which all mankind admits for Truth And for to affirm that though this be true this Government is alterable if the Magistrate judg it not so conducing to Piety as another he sets up What is it but to say that God did not foresee what contingencies would fall out in succeeding Ages and that the Apostles did not know what would advance true Religion and Piety in succeeding Ages so well as Magistrates that follow who are easily blinded and deceived when it conduceth to their Temporal Interest But if we must fansy nothing to have a lasting Reason but what we judg to have so I doubt this Atheistical Age will quickly lay aside all Institutions of Christ by judging them as some openly do of all Religion not to be of a lasting necessity Besides he that shall affirm that nothing can be a Medium to bind the Consciences of men as of Divine right unalterably but what is founded on Divine Testimony in some sense speaks true but if this be included in the assertion that this must be obvious to every capacity that is obliged to obey this divine Right 't is false For upon that account the Scripture it self should not bind those who have not understanding enough to know how they are admitted as such For to say the Scripture is the word of God because my Conscience which in plain English is nothing but my Opinion tells me so is no better an Argument than every Turc hath for his Alcoran But if there is a necessity to prove the Scripture to be Divine viz. the Reception of these books by the Catholick Church then he who hath not sense nor Learning enough to find out the truth of this must either admit the Scripture of divine Authority when the reason why it is so is not obvious to his understanding or else all illiterate people are not obliged to believe the truth of its Doctrine and obey it Now let us apply this to Church-Government If the same Authority which tells us these books are Canonical Scripture tells us withall that the very Apostles the Penmen of the New Testament did settle such a Government and if we find the following Age practiced it allow it to be dubious in Scripture which certainly it is not yet is not there as sufficient assurance that that Government was settled by the Apostles and so in some sense of Divine Right and so unalterable as we have to admit for Scripture the Revelation or any other book that ever was questioned Now for to affirm that Antiquity is not a sufficient ground for our assent unless we have a full assurance that the succeeding Ages did not vary from what the Apostles delivered or that they could not mistake in the delivery What is it but to say we must have greater Authority for matter of Fact than what a fact can have and doth not this Opinion destroy the Authority of Scripture totally For if the Churches delivery of such books as the writings of the Apostles be not sufficient for a rational man to ground his assent that these books were their writings and so Divine unless we have assurance that she could not mistake in the delivery of those books we must either believe the Church incapable of Errour in the delivery of Scripture or else we have no assurance to ground our Assent Now to believe a Church incapable of Errour savours little of Reason and to believe her only incapable in the delivery of Scripture savours much of Partiality But if we must understand the Church for by Church here I mean the Governours of it to be a wise sober body of pious and rational men and so by consequence that they would receive no books as the writings of inspired men but such of whose Authentickness they had rational Grounds as perhaps the very authentique Letters under the Apostles own hands which Tertullian mentions or some other good Authority And if this be sufficient reason to gain our assent Why is not the same Reason as sufficient for the Apostolical Government as for the Apostolical writings I confess 't is beyond my reach But if the Apostolical practice be sufficiently attested then to affirm 't is not enough to bind continually unless it be known to be God's mind it should do so is either to say the Apostles knew not the mind of God or else would not reveal it For certainly we have much more reason to say their practice binds unalterably than any one can have to say it doth not For we have much more reason to demand of these men some mind of God why we should change Apostolical Practice than they have of us why we constantly practice what the inspired Apostles did Neither do I understand how an Argument from Apostolical practice must suppose a different State of things than what they were when the Apostles established Governours over Churches For why should not we imagine the Apostles did constitute what they practiced And certainly he must be as infallible as the Pope pretends too that is sure any Exposition of Scripture that contradicts or concurs not with Apostolical practice is true if there can be any rational Exposition of those Scriptures which concurs with that practice And he who shall not believe there are such Expositions and though not infallible yet sober and I dare say much surer than any to the contrary must condemn all the Antient Fathers of the Church as ignorant and irrational men and believe some new fancies of men of Yesterday and the dotings of some idle Haereticks of greater Authority than those great lights of the Catholick Church And now to argue from some few practices in the Apostles times which were laid aside such as the Holy kiss c. that therefore any Constitution may is just such an Argument that if a circumstance a Ceremony may be changed the whole Substance may too unless a man will affirm there is no more need of a standing succession of Church-Governours than there is of the most minute practice in those daies But here I expect it should be said What necessity is there of a Succession of Ministers A ministry is necessary but to think that every Minister must as some in derision say draw his Pedegree from the Apostles that is a narrow principle and fit only for Bigots to believe and such as are easily deceived with the Great names of Antiquity and Catholique Tradition I confess I was sorry when I considered this Opinion to find that the French Ministers when they maintained their vocation to be lawful unto which Cardinal Perron made his Reply lay this down for their first Argument That if there was no other
writing against that grand Antiepiscopal Presbyter Aerius told him That the Superiority of Bishops above Presbyters was founded in the word of God An Author under the name of Ambrose speaking distinctly of Bishops saith That they held the person of Christ and therefore our behaviour before them ought to be as before the Vicars of the Lord. And again That the Bishop is ordained by the Lord the light of the Church Another under the name of Augustine as hath been said judged it a matter that none could be ignorant of That Bishops were instituted by Christ who instituted Bishops when he ordained the Apostles whose Successors the Bâ—shops are Hierome thus far agreeth with him to wit That Bishops in the Catholick Church supply the place of the Apostles And what else meant that which hath been before alleadged out of the Canon of six hundred Fathers in the general Council of Calcedon which judgeth The Depression of a Bishop down to the degree of a Presbyter to be in it self Sacriledg But do any Protestant Divines of remote Churches consent to any Divine Right SECT III. That two eminent Protestant Divines grant this Supposition which is the ground of the said Truth THis grant and concession is freely yielded unto us by Beza who speaking of Episcopacy saith If it did proceed from the Apostles then certainly I should not doubt to attribute it wholly as all other Apostolical Ordinances to divine disposition Another who is also a professed Advocate for the Presbyterians granteth as freely as the former That if Episcopacy be from the Apostles then doubtless it is of Divine Right But that Episcopacy had its Apostolical institution hath been sufficiently ratified unto us through this whole Discourse both from Testimonies of Antiquity from general Consent of Protestants of Reformed Churches and above all from the clear Evidence of the Scriptures themselves the Repetition whereof would be superfluous the rather because these our foresaid Opposites will ease us of that labour for Mr. Beza himself confesseth That it is a Custome not to be reprehended of setting one of the Presbyters over the rest which was used saith he from Mark the Evangelist in the Church of Alexandria So he Now then whether we say with Hierome That this Episcopacy was in Mark because the first Bishop or in Anianus who was constituted by Mark as Eutychus relateth or with Beza that it was from Mark as a thing irreprehensible It must needs be judged to be from the Ordinance of the Apostles and consequently Divine We have yet somewhat more SECT IV. That Episcopal Prelacy hath been directly acknowledged by Protestants of remote Churches to be of Divine Right 1 LUther proves this directly and Categorically saying That every City ought to have its proper Bishop by Divine Right grounding his Argument upon Titus 2.5 Who was commanded to ordain Elders in every City which Elders saith he were Bishops as Hierome witnesseth and the subsequent Text doth manifest Yea and St. Augustine describing a Bishop concurreth with them saying It was a City as if he should have said it was not a mere Presbyter but a Bishop which is here spoken of because Bishops were over Cities Thus far Luther his Tractate being a Resolution his Sentence the Conclusion and his words plainly distinguishing Bishop from mere Presbyter and alleadging from Scripture a divine Right of Episcopal Function as clearly as either our Opposites can dislike or we desire Accordingly Bucer a man of great Learning and Piety saith That these three Orders of Ministers in the Church Bishops Presbyters and Deacons were for institution from the Holy Ghost and for Continuance perpetual even from the Beginning The learned Professor in the Palatinate Scultetus hath Professedly and Positively concluded Episcopacy to be of Divine Right by as he saith efficacious Reasons clear Examples and excellent Authorities And he hath been as good as his word as in divers foregoing Sections hath been made manifest upon which Subject likewise a most learned Belgick Doctor wrote a whole book urging therein very many Arguments both from Scripture and Antiquity and assoiling the Objections to the contrary Aegidius Hunnius Divinity Professor in the University of Marpurg speaking of Episcopacy in the Apostles times saith That Paul did ordain Titus General Superintendent that is Archbishop of all the Cretian Churches and thereupon concludeth That the Order and Degree of Episcopacy is a thing not lately invented but received in the Church even from the very times of the Apostles Wherein he is seconded by Hemingius a very Learned Divine whose Observation upon Titus 1. v. 5. is That to the end that Anarchy might be avoided and all things done Decently and in Order the Apostle would have some one to ordain Ministers to dispose all things in the Church and to take care lest Haeresie should arise The worthily renowned Doctor Gerard speaks no less than the former proving Episcopacy as distinct from Presbytery to be of Divine Right not only in respect of the Original as proceeding from the diversity of Gifts but also in regard of the End The avoiding of Dissension and Schism in the Church Yea and even the Church of Geneva it self will afford us a Testimony or two from the pen of the Mirrour of Learning Mr. Isaac Causabon who tells us That three Orders of Ministers in the Church Bishops Presbyters and Deacons are founded upon the Testimony of plain Scriptures And again That Bishops are the Vicegerents of the Apostles Thus these learned Protestants Nothing now remaineth but that nam finis coronat opus we have as the Seal of this Truth the Approbation of Christ himself SECT V. That Episcopal Prelacy had the Approbation of Christ himself after his Ascension into Heaven NEver did nor could any deny but that every of the Angels of the seven Churches of Asia had the Approbation of Christ himself after his Ascension into Heaven that Book wherein they are mentioned being called the Revelation of Jesus Christ as the Author delivered by an Angel to John as unto Christs Scribe commanding him to write the seven Epistles and to direct them to the Angels of the seven Churches two of which Angels Christ commendâ—th in the same Epistles for the good discharge of their Function And is not Commendation Testimonial enough and an Argument of his Approbation The other five Bishops being more or less Delinquents are reprehended for Neglect of their Cure And is not Reproof of the Neglect of Duty in the Officers a Justification and Approbation of their Offices Finally as those which are faithful in their Offices are continued so they that were obnoxious are threatned To be removed except they did repent So that here is no Displacing of any for a first Offence nor yet an Eradicating the whole Order for the particular Abuses of some For he that calleth for Repentance and Amendment of
't is owned by him for his But afterwards when the Covenant was hotly pressed and a compliance to forein Reformed Churches pretended our Bishop renewed his former Discourse made several additions to it and where he found it necessary took occasion to answer both Salmasius and Blondel and so it swelled to the Volume it now is This was by his Lordship committed to my charge either to publish or not as I thought fit And truly I had once determined still to have kept it by me hoping that the wonderful Restauration both of our King and Church would have made all Disourses of this Nature unnecessary but since it hath pleased Almighty God to suffer these Troublers of Israel still to continue amongst us their disturbances and separations I thought it a duâ—â— I owed to the Memory of this Blessed Bishop to publish this Discourse which I did not doubt but might do God and his Church some service But before I would attempt so great a Work I communicated both my Design and Book to the Most Reverend Father in God Gilbert Lord Archbishop of Canterbury who was pleased not only to approve the Work but command the speedy publishing of it This immediately put me upon the Examination of the several Quotations I found in it having most of the Authors by me fearing that either through the mistake of his Lordships hand which was not very easie to be read or the negligence of the Transcribers some Errours might creep in the places cited and I dare assure the Reader that for all the Works which I have by me and I want but few they are exactly true The Method used in this Discourse is a way our Bishop had been very successful against the Papists and I hope may prove so against our Adversaries of another kind which is the Testimony of Reformed Divines in the Churches beyond the Seas to our Episcopal Government which they do not only commend but admire and wish for Nay divers ef them expound those very Texts of Scripture which are urged for Bishops as we do so that if our Dissenters will believe any sort of men but themselves they must be convinced with this kind of Argument It seems to me I confess extreamly strange that in these last and worst times some men should so applaud themselves and their own phansies as to condemn what went before them even in the most pure Primitive Church I find not in all my little reading any that set himself against that Sacred Order till Aerius who lived about the middle of the fourth Century And Epiphanius says who gives us the most ample Relation of him this his Errour arose out of Emulation that Eustathius was preferred to a Bishoprick before him who most of all desired it And truly I could wish secular Interest such as want of a Bishoprick Applause with a Party self-justification in former mistakes and an unwillingness to let the world know they were formerly deceived did not with-hold many amongst us from doing that which I doubt not they are more than sufficiently convinced they ought to do And I do heartily wish since Conscience is the thing pretended that they gave some assurance 't was Conscience and not Interest prevailed with them by their peaceable Passive Obedience to our Laws and not to fill our streets with their unreasonable complaints against our Government and Governours and still to seduce a sort of empty people of great Faith and little Sense who are in the right only because they are sure they are in the right And although 1600 years possession is more than a sufficient lawful Title for any to plead A thing so unquestionable that no man hath yet produced any sufficient Authority to the contrary Yet there are two learned Pens Salmasius and Blondel who have attempted rather to shew their Wits and Reading than their Reason in this Controvesie The first of these when he undertook the task wrote not under his own Name as if it was what he was commanded to write a thing frequent to the Professors of Leyden than what he himself either believed or would perswade others to do And in all his Discourse he is in that violent heat that he hardly gives Dionysius Petavius that learned Jesuite any other Name than Inepte Fatue He answers the Greek Fathers who affirm that in the Apostles time a Bishop was superiour to a Presbyter that it is a ly and upon no other account but because he expounds the Apostles words after a different manner than what Antiquity did And in any Controversie that concerns the Church he continues this temper For to the Learned Doctor Hammond who calmly defended the Churches Power of the Keys against some of his Objections he gives no other Title but Nebulo in Anglia shewing neither respect to the Learning nor to the quality of the Doctor who as he confessed was Chaplain to his late Majesty And yet this great Magisterial man with the same confidence as he denied the Divine Right of Episcopacy so he doth the Authority of the 2d Epistle of St. Peter affirming the first only for genuine and truly I wonder not much at it for certainly he who shakes the Authority of the Tradition of the universal Church takes away the only Argument to prove any Book to be Canonical when any Sect or Heresie shall question it But I the more willingly pass this over since in his own Name in his Defensio Regia he seems to alter his Opinion For D. Blondel He who shall look into his Discourse will find it to be a great Collection of Various Readings and if Fame be true collected at first to be the Materials of a Discourse he intended for Episcopacy But the misfortune of our Church turned his weapon another way But after all he only affirms that Bishops and Presbyters were equal in degree till the 136. of Christ which if you consider is a very small time after the Apostles For St. John died as both Eusebius and St. Hierome tells us in the 102. of Christ so then according to him their was but 34 years distance But to me truly he proves not that For he who will consider the Epistle before his Book will find all he affirms is that in that short time the Senior Presbyter in the Colledge was their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their Praesident and that when he died the next in Age succeeded him What then I pray doth this make to his purpose If he had given us any Testimony that though this Office fell to him by his Age he immediately entred upon it without any Consecration by the Imposition of Episcopal hands he had done something but of this not one word He only tells us this course was altered over the whole world velut Conspiratione factâ as if done by a Conspiracy And what was this Alteration This he tells us out of Hilary's Comments on St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians which commonly
not from Christ as the Apostles only were and therefore if by the Laws of Men he was prohibited Preaching he ought to obey and never did Preach till Mr. Knightly his Patron procured him a Licence from Archbishop Abbot Where by Ordinance of Parliament the Common Prayer Book was laid aside he never forsook the use of it but read always as much as his very old Age would suffer him When he was desired to Baptize a Child after the Mode of those Times without the Common-Prayer-Book he refused but administred both Sacraments according to that Order the Cross only excepted which practice made some imagine 't was the only thing he scrupled And when by Accident a great Commander in the Parliaments Army who formerly had been his Auditor came with Forces that way he asked Mr. Dod why he did not Pray and Preach up the Parliament He Replied He Preached Jesus Christ which was the work of a Minister And after that asked that Commander Who he fought for He answered For the King and Parliament The good old man replied But what if the King be in a fight and you should kill him The Commander replied He must take his fortune Mr. Dod returned 'T is a strange fighting for the King to kill him and this answer did so trouble and concern this good man that after this discourse ended he mentioned it with great horror to some of his Relations A little before Naseby fight King Charles of blessed memory sent the late Earl of Lyndsey to Mr. Dod to know his Opinion of the War His Lordship found him ill however he sate up and dictated his sense of it But the Earl was on a sudden by reason of the Fight hurried away that whether the King had the paper or no I cannot learn but the Original or a Copy of it was by some zealous men suppressed And their lived near him a Justice of Peace in those ill times who though he pretended to much Piety had little honesty as appeared at his death that was thought the man who suppressed it And when by some of Mr. Dod's Relations he was asked about it he made this answer That in his old Age he began to dote I have done my utmost to retrive it and am not yet out of hopes to do it which if I can compass the World shall see this man was none of those who disliked the Liturgy despised our Ecclesiastical Government none of those who gathered Proselytes by broaching Opinions contrary to the Established Laws none of those who Preached in Corners and so applaud themselves and their fancies that they fill our streets with their unreasonable Argumentations none of those who study to deceive because either they have deceived or been deceived themselves I have now done I only desire the Reader to lay aside all interest and partiality and as an indifferent and unconcern'd person to read this Discourse I here offer thee And since all Truth is great and will prevail I cannot but hope this truth will have a good success If the constant practice of the Primitive Church if the Authority of all the great Reformers in the Protestant Church if the universal consent of Antient holy Fathers if the concurrent Testimony of Modern Divines if the confessions of so many great Divines in our late ill times the blood of Archbishop Laud or the Martyrdom of our late blessed Sovereign have any Rhetorique at all let these compel thee to forsake these Separations and to return to the bosome of that Church whose Orders are Apostolical whose Ceremonies are Primitive and whose Doctrin is most Orthodox Hen. Yelverton From my house at Easton Manduit in Northamptonshire this 12 of March 1668 â— Episcopacy Asserted CAP. I. SECT I. That the Church of Geneva hath both justified and praised our Episcopal Government in England and prayed for the prosperous continuance thereof FRom the Church of Geneva we have that Pole-starr thereof Mr. Calvin himself peremptorily asserting the Right of Episcopal Government in what Church soever That professeth the truth of Doctrine and denieth dependence on the Roman Antichrist And the Case so standing he denounceth them Anathema and accursed who shall not reverently obey such Episcopal Hierarchy so Mr. Calvin which is the more remarkable because the Tractate wherein these words are is written professedly concerning the Reformation of Churches and therefore so much more appliable to the impugners of our English Church none more professedly maintaining the same Religion and somewhat more Reformed than it was in the dayes of Calvin Yea and even in her last Canons opposite to Papists and Popery as ever Again his Approbation of our English Episcopal Government then in being was expressed sufficiently in dignifying Archbishop Cranmer Even for his Archi-episcopal care which he had saith he not only of England but also of the whole World Meaning by endeavouring to his power to propagate the truth of Christ's Gospel every where In which sense of Publick Universal care good Bishops were antiently called Bishops of the Catholick Church Yea and in a more vehement and emphatical expression he exhorteth him with others the Governors of the Church To labour to discharge their Function as that which is enjoined them of God who will exact of them a due account thereof Our second witness Mr. Beza testifieth That the Church of England after the Reformation was supported by the Authority of Archbishops and Bishops excellent Pastors of the Church wishing furthermore blessing upon their Function that it might be perpetual to this Nation And in another place Judging them worthy of punishment that should not willingly obey their Authority So he Next both Mr. Beza and Sadeel jointly inveigh against those As impudent slanderers who should report them to have detracted any thing from the dignity of Episcopacy in this Church What shall we say to that mirrour of Learning Mr. Isaac Causabon who having taken due survey of our Episcopal Government in England doubted not to publish to the World That no Church in the World doth come nearer to the form of the Primitive Church than it doth so far saith he that they that envied her happiness are notwithstanding constrained to extol it judging furthermore That what either belongeth to the Doctrine of Salvation or to the decency of a Church is found in her as well as in any other Church upon Earth And in a Brotherly and Christian close concludeth saying Praised and magnified be God therefore Even as he did at the sight of the Consecration of Bishops in Paul's Church with this pathetical ejaculation Good God saith he how great was my joy do thou Lord Jesus preserve this Church and restore such to their wits who do deride these things So he After these Doctor Diodati now a famous Preacher in Geneva at his being in England did not a little joy to observe our Episcopal Government who if he had been an Adversary thereunto would not
whom we begin Lutheâ— himself indeed will be found to iâ— veigh against Bishops yet not in general against all but such only 〈◊〉 were Tyrannous and unworthy as hâ— saith of the holy name of Bishop Otherwise not only he but all thâ— Churches of the Lutherans have in the publique Augustine Confession speaking of Bishops testified that They often protested their earnest desire to preserve the Ecclesiastical Polity and Degrees then in being in the Church even in their highest Authority which they acknowledge to be of great use for avoiding of Schisms in the Church To this purpose Melancthon by the perswasion of Luther as Camerarius writeth in his life as much for Episcopacy as any burst out into this pathetical Expression I speak my mind freely saith he I would to God yea I would to God I were able to restore the Government of Bishops for I see what a Church we are like to have the Ecclesiastical Polity being dissolved I foresee the Tyranny will be more intolerable than ever it was before So he citing Bucers like judgment of the Necessity of Episcopâ—â— Government To the end that refractory and dissolute persons may â—â— removed out of the Church The Illustrious Prince Hainault one persecuted for Religion and afterwards enâ—bled with the calling of Preacher of tâ—â— Gospel professeth in the name of thâ— Lutheran Churches saying With what willingness and joy of heart wouâ—â— we reverence obey and yield Bishop their Jurisdiction and Ordination which thing we have alwayes contestâ— for as did also Luther himself both iâ— Words Writing and Preaching So he We may add out of the Daniâ—â— Church that learned Hemingius confessing The Episcopal Order to bâ— most profitable both for Governing thâ— Church and for preservation of sound Doctrine The other Classis of Protestant Authors are at hand to deliver their own Judgments also Calvin in the first place delivereth the Original Reason of Episcopacy to be as he saith Left by Equality as it usually cometh to pass Schismes should arise in the Church So he With such a Parenthesis as telleth tales namely That Dissention accompanieth Parity But that which is spoken in a farr lowder tone is this his Confession I confess saith he that as the manner of men is new a days the Order of Ministers cannot continue except one be over the rest So he From whom we expect much more hereafter In the interim Beza granteth That because by Experience the Presbyterial Government was found insufficient to keep under Ambitious Pastors and vain and Fanatical Auditors One was constituted over the rest to govern them which thing saith he neither can nor ought to be reprehended Especially seeing that in thâ— Church of Alexandria this Custom was observed even from the dayes of Matâ— the Evangelist And again Gâ—â— forbid that I should reprehend this Order as rashly or proudly brought into thâ— Church whereof there was great usâ— when good and holy Bishops governed the Church So he Zanchie is of reverend esteem amongst our Adversaries yet he confesseth Thâ— Episcopacy was ordained out of Piety to best ends for the Edification of the Elect and was so received by the consent of Christian Churches Who thâ—â— am I saith he that I should disalloâ— that which the whole Church of Chriâ—â— hath approved To comprise much in a little we have heard of the Protestation made in the Augustane Confession in the behalf of Episcopacy and the Necessity of it and it is testified by Conradus Vorstius that the Protestant Divines in Conference at Bosnack subscribed to it per omnia except that dubious Article concerning the Eucharist Amongst whom he reckons Calvin Beza Zanchie Viretus and Melancthon We may not pass by Bogarmannus Moderator in the Synod of Dort who hath been rendred unto us by a credible person That upon the mention of Episcopacy by some of our English Divines the want of which had in all probability caused those dissentions in the Netherlands He made this Answer before them all as the mouth of the rest Alas but we are not so happy which none that duly considers either the Person that spake it or yet the Place where it was uttered can conceive to be a Complement but rather a Conscionable acknowledgment of a clear Truth Neither is this the first or the last time that this Truth hath been asserted by Divines of remote Churches though perhaps never so solemnly and publickly as here For before this Saravia hath published his Judgement in Print wherein heâ— esteems it A part of the happiness of our English Church that she hath conserved in her the Order of Bishops And since that Synod the learned Professor of Divinity in Geneva Videlius speaking of good Bishops and such as are instructed by the Holy Ghost To such saith he as Ignatius speaketh We willingly obey and say they are Necessarily to be obeyed Nothing now remaineth but that one whom our Opposites have proclaimed for their chiefest Advocate Walo Masselinus alias Salmatius may give the upshot in this very point That 〈◊〉 Bishop saith he was set over Presbyters in the same Church to take away Schisms none can deny to have been instituted to a good end and that with best Reasons We need not repeat how the Church of Geneva did not dote so much upon their own Form of Church Government as to think it worthy to be an Example for other Churches to copy out We are not ignorant of the flourishing pretense which our Opposites make to others to be enamoured of their Helen the Presbyterial Government as if it were most commonly used in all Churches abroad therefore have we been constrained to advertise as followeth SECT VI. That the Episcopal Government is farr more practised among Protestants of remote Churches than is the Presbyterial THe words of Zanchie are punctual That Episcopi that is Bishops and Superintendentes are words of the same sense and signification and therefore where there is an agreement in the thing we ought not to make any alteration or strife about Words And for Practice he saith That in some Reformed Churches both the Name and Function of Archbishops and Bishops were retained in others the Office was retained changing only the Title of Archbishops and Bishops into Superintendents and general Superintendents And where neither Name nor Office did remain as formerly yet even there almost all Authority was managed by some Chief Pastors So he Mr. Dureus a Learned Divine and in one sort Apostolical by his great Travail and endeavours for reconciling of Lutherans and other Protestant Churches and also some others published to to the World a multitude of Protestant Churches governed by Prelates under the name of Bishops farr exceeding the number of the Presbyterial which seemed a matter so unquestionable to a Jesuit that he presumed to affirme of all Protestant Churches excepting Anabaptists That they admitted three
after the Prophesie above-mentioned addeth concerning the Apostles as followeth They saith he having a perfect foreknowledge constituted the aforesaid persons and left 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a description of Officers and Ministers in their course that so after that they themselves should fall asleep other Godly men might succeed and exercise their Function Which what it meaneth the forenamed worthy and judicious Publisher of this Epistle of Clement hath delivered in his Commentary thereupon observing from Clement his word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Description that it is no other then the Census in Tertullian by which it appears saith the worthy Publisher to have been a Custom in the Apostolical Churches to write a Roll for this word he holds not unfit of the Order of Bishops in their Successions to bring them from their Originals as Tertullian speaketh Polycarpus was from John the Apostle in the Church of Smyrna and Clemens in the Church of Rome from Peter and others speaking often of this Clement whom the Apostles constituted Bishops from whom others might deduce their traductions and off-springs So this singularly learned Gentleman Therefore by occasion of this Objection Bishops have gained the Patronage of Clemens then whose writings to use the Smectymnians our Opposites own Encomium There is no piece of Antiquity of more esteem May it therefore please our Reader to observe with us the unluckiness of our Opposites who have objected against Episcopacy no Testimony of any antient Father who hath not in effect plainly discovered their ignorance or else their wilful boldness as of men that in fighting do wound themselves with their own Weapons We are now to inquire into the Judgment of Antiquity which is of two Classes of Fathers some more immediate unto the Apostles and some more remote We begin with the latter SECT VI. The justification of Episcopal Prelacy by the Universal practice of the Church Christian in times approaching towards Primitive Antiquity First By condemning Aerius the only famous Adversary against Episcopal Prelacy in those times 1 EPiphanius and Augustine declare the Schismatical behaviour of this Aerius which was because Eustathius was elected Bishop and he himself received the repulse therefore he set abroach new Doctrines and amongst others as Augustine relateth That there ought to be no difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter Which word Ought is that which is derogatory to the Judgment of the two foresaid Fathers and of the then Church Catholick The two learned men Walo and Blondellus being as it were the late professed Advocates for Presbyters may give them satisfaction in this point by their confessions The one acknowledging Hierome to have taught that men should not adhere unto Aerius because of the use of Episcopal Govornment for avoiding of Schisme The other more generally That Hierome and other Antients were most against the Sacrilegious and Schismatical practice of Aerius So he Another learned Divine at this day censuring the Schisme made in the Church because of Episcopacy to be Sacrilegious as some other Protestants have done by their approbation of Episcopacy to whom may be joyned in a greater speciality two other lights of God's Church Mr. Beza in the first place plainly discovering the said Opinion of Aerius If there be any saith he as I think there be none who altogether reject Episcopal Order God forbid that any of sound brain should ever assent to their furies So he professing furthermore his acknowledged observance and reverence to all Bishops Reformed Accordingly Mr. Moulin roundly attesteth himself To have detested the Opinion of Aerius So he And so peradventure would our Opposites have said if they had not falne into these dayes of contradiction who whether they look East West North or South to any Climate Christian cannot find in the Church Catholick any other famous Presbyter who for the space of Fifteen Hundred years held an unlawfulness of Episcopal Government This is not all SECT VII That in the time of the foresaid Fathers the whole Church of Christ held the Derogation from Episcopal Prelacy to be Sacrilegious WE call that the Judgment of the whole Church of Christ which is the Decree and Determination of a General and Unquestionable Council representing the whole Church Christian such was the Council of Calcedon concluding by a Canon That to depress a Bishop down to the degree of a Presbyter it is Sacriledge So they But what say our Antiprelatical Opposites We may not conceal it This say they was but a Stirrop for Antichrist to mount into the Pontifical Saddle Wittily we see but yet scurrilously withal we do not desire to contend with them at this Weapon but give our indifferent Reader to understand that this was a Council for Antiquity one of the four General Councils for number of Fathers above six hundred for Universality of Approbation Representative of all Christendom for belief of the Doctrine thereof in our Church Authorized by Act of Parliament touching at least the Doctrine of Faith and for Opposition to Romish Popedom decreeing on equality of Priviledges of the Bishops of Constantinople and the Bishops of Rome upon this especial ground that the then Primacy of the Romish Pope over others was but an Humane Ordination which was indeed to pull both Stirrop and Saddle from under Antichrist so that at that time he could not mount up Somewhat would be heard of the Ages succeeding after the time aforesaid SECT VIII That the immediate Succession of Bishops from the days of the Apostles is liberally Confirmed unto us by Learned Protestant Divines albeit sufficiently Presbyterial IT was laid down as a Rule Infallible by Augustine in the days of Primitive Antiquity That whatsoever the Universal Church held and was not instituted by Councils but always retained that was most rightly believed to proceed from no other than Apostolical Authority This Pâ—â—â—e as it was often repeated so was it never contradicted by any Judicious Author yea it is plainly asserted by as Learned a Doctor as any their Presbyterian Church hath afforded of later times If no instance saith Scultetus can be given between the days of the Apostles and the times succeeding of a nâ—â— Episcopal Government then must Episcopacy be thought to have proceedeâ— from the Apostles So he Accordingly Calvin in another case against them that deny the Baptism of Infants saith That Irenaeus and Origen being tâ— write against the Prodigâ—ous Errors of Anabaptistical Revelations refuteâ— them very easily from the testimonies of those who being then alive had been Disciples of the Apostles and had iâ— memory what had been delivered bâ— them So he Applying the same to his purpose as we also do to ours SECT IX That there was an immediate Succession of Bishops from the Apostles times proved first because no time can be assigned wherein it was not in use COncerning the immediate Succession of Bishops from the dayâ—
of the Apostles it is confessedly acknowledged before by that worthy and Learned Scultetus But we shall not think we have fully satisfied the Reader until we shew sufficient proof That the Episcopal degree was furthermore actually exercised even in the days of the Apostles If therefore our Opposites be willing to consult with Bucer he will tell them That the Fathers before Hierome did clearly affirm That in the days of the Apostles in all the chief Churches one was chosen and placed over the rest of the Presbyters to have and exercise a charge of Souls and Episcopal Function over them in chief as James is described by Luke Acts 15. to have been Bishop of Hierusalem and the like Ordinance was perpetually observed in other Chuâ—ches So he And if we ask their most exact Searcher into Antiquity Scultetus he will testifie no less concerning this James Brother of our Lord for which he alledgeth not fewer or meaner Authors then 1. Clemens Alexandrinus Eusebius Chrysostome Ambrose Epiphanius yea and Hierome himself besides the joynt consent of the Fathers in a Council But that which makes all questionless is the personal Line of Successors set down by Epiphanius from James in the same Sea of Hierusalem by Simeon Judas Matthias c. unto Hilarion who was Bishop in Epiphanius his own time Alexandria was another Episcopal Seat whereof Beza hath taken especial notice as also Calvin doth Jâ—st lib. 4. cap. 4. v. 2. from the testimony of Hierome concerning Mark the Evangelist That even from his time there wâ—s one of the Presbyters by them elected as an Army doth their General who was placed in an higher degree and was termed Bishop This is further confirmed unto us by Eutychius an Author lately translated and published by Mr. Selden the Ornament of our Nation for Exotick Learning who saith expressly That Mark constituted Anianus Patriarch of Alexandria And the said Learned Publisher in his Commentaries thereupon hath deduced the immediate Succession of Bishops from Anianus for almost 300. years wherein according to exact Chronology he hath recounted eighteen Bishops and telleth us moreover That this Author Eutychius himself was Patriarch of Alexandria albeit he lived not till almost 1000 years after Antioch was a third and therein Ignatius will stand for an example irrefragable of whom Antiquity hath thus largely testified namely Eusebius That he was after Peter the second Bishop of Antioch Theodoret That he received the Grace of Episcopacy by the right hand of Peter And before him accordingly Athanasius That after the Apostles he became Bishop of Antioch and Martyr of Christ. We conclude with the Encornium of Chrysostome g Ignatius was familiarly conversant with the Apostles and enjoyed Spiritual Graces flowing from them and received his Dignity from the Racred Hands of the Blessed Apostles So he The like hath been antiently witnessed concerning the Church of Rome and though the course of personal Succession therein and especially about the beginning seem to be somewhat perplexed yet is there nothing more sure in Ecclesiastical History than that there was an immediate personal Succession in that Church from the Apostles times and the doubtfulness of the course is assoyled from Vedelius a most exquisite Professor at Geneva in that kind who speaketh unto us in the Margent and this Truth was so clear in antient times that Irenaeus was able to recount those that had been instituted Bishops in the Churches by the Apostles and their Successors even until his own time as one that had his reckoning at his fingers ends saying But because it would be very long in so small a Volumn to recount the Succession of all Churches I shall instance in the Church of Rome Wherein he setteth down an exact Succession of twelve Bishops the last whereof Elutherius by name was then alive when he wrote this Book Mr. Blundel the French Divine was not ignorant of the series and lines of Succession of those whom he calleth Praepositos Episcopos even of the same times Those Ecclesiastical Testimonies being so manifold so pertinent so perspicuous and so freely confessed we doubt not but that ingenuous Readers will prefer Antiquity before Novelty Universality before Paucity Solemnity of profession before Obscurity and this fully testified Apostolical practical Succession before the refactoriness of any whomsoever the rather because they in the space of 400 years after the Apostles have not had any famous and absolute Patron of a Presbyterial parity in Ecclesiastical Government excepting that one Swallow Aerius whom the Church Christian then rejected as a man Schismatical branding him with the note of Ambition as the cause of his Opposition to Episcopacy even for that he standing in competition for a Bishoprick did miss thereof as hath been shewed And now left the humor of some in hearing of Popes of Rome to have been Bishops should boggle and startle at it to make the Episcopal dignity no better than Popish according to that which is now held Popedome we add and it is but a footstep out of the way the next Section SECT X. That the whole Church Christian did profess and practise the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy IT cannot but be a matter of wonder to any man of judgment to see such an averseness in our Opposites as not only to object the Testimonies of these Fathers who have given their common acknowledgement of the lawfulness of Episcopal Prelacy but much more that they cannot discern that they by instancing in some few Fathers in contradiction to Episcopacy do thereby grant their assent for it in the rest and that all the rest indeed do accord thereunto is as clear as a beam of the Sun long before that time whereof their pretended Patron St. Hierome is a plentiful witness who testifieth of the more Primitive times before him telling our Opposites plainly and roundly That it was decreed through the whole Christian World That one of the Presbyters should be set over the rest to whom the whole care of the Church should appertain So he Of many who gave their lives for the profession of the Faith of Christ among whom as Captains of the innumerable Host of Martyrs of Christ were many Bishops in the dayes of Heathenish persecutions of whom it is recorded by Antiquity and confessed by one of our Opposites That above all other Christians enquiry was made for Bishops Bishops were rather apprehended than others Bishops were afflicted with tortures and as leaders to all others constantly indured whatsoever was laid upon them It had been good therefore our Opposites had made conscience of their sayings before they had burst out into so contumelious detractions and had followed the example of the French Divine Mr. Moulin I am not so hard faced saith he against the Lights of the Primitive Church Ignatius Polycarp c. Bishops as to think them
Usurpers of an unlawful Function Reverend Antiquity shall prevail more with me than any mans Novel Institution The like was that Mr. Beza his Absit saying God forbid that I should reprehend that Order as rashly introduced c. As also Zanchy his Quis Ego Who am I that I should reprehend that which the whole Church hath approved to be for the best ends So he Whereof there hath been a full Section And that the deduction of Episcopacy cannot be called properly Popish will be proved hereafter CAP. III. After these our Evidences from Primitive Antiquity according to our precedent Method we are to contemplate of the Coelestial Sphear the Word of God it self The Right of Episcopacy discussed by the Word of God IN this Discussion we are to use both our hands the one of Defence in Answering Objections and as it were bearing off Assaults made against the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy The other is the Confirmation thereof by such Arguments which may be held convincent SECT I. Against the first Objection from the Identity of Names as they call it of Bishops and Presbyters in Scripture OUr Opposites endeavour to perswade us that there ought to be No dâ—stinction of Degree between Bishop and Presbyter because of the Identity of denomination in Scripture which is say they of no small consequence And this they offer to prove from as they say The Supreme Wisdom of God the imposer of Names who could not mistake the proper end of the imposition of Names And for a further inforcement they add That the Texts brought to prove the Identity of Names prove also as intrinsically the Identity of Offices So they Which consequence was taught them by their great Dictator Walo Messalinus Who would have it impossible that Bishops and Presbyters should really differ in Function seeing that their Titles are communicable in Scripture So he One would think it had not been possible for any of judgment to have concluded thus who had but once observed the Texts of Scripture which present themselves often unto any conversant therein as the places in the New Testament themselves The Testimonies of Fathers together with the consent of some Protestant Divines will evidence unto us First Scriptures wherein we find Matthias Peter John and Paul all by excellency of Function Apostles yet Maâ—thias entituled to a Bishoprick Act. 1.20 Peter styling himself Co-presbyter 1 Pet. 5.1 John terming himself a Presbyter twice 2 Joh. 1. and 3 Joh. 1. And Paul descending a degree lower to name himself thrice a Deacon Col. 1.23 25. 2 Cor. 3.6 Yea reciprocally those that were but Assistants of the Apostles had the name of Apostles attributed unto them As Barnabas Act. 14.14 Andronicus and Junias Rom. 16.7 Titus and others Graece 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 8. In all which communicableness of names of Bishop Presbyter Sympresbyter and Deacon attributed to the Apostles themselves and of the Title of Apostle given to some of inferior ranke our Opposites we dare say will not presume to conclude any necessity of Indistinction of Offices either between the Disciples of the Apostles and the Apostles themselves or between Presbyters and Deacons and the same Apostles Therefore to draw nearer to our mark we add more particularly SECT II. That the former Objection is rejected by the choycest and most acceptable Divines which our Opposites themselves can name WE besides the current Testimonies of Fathers to be alleadged in the following Section seek to satisfie our Opposites by the Confession of three such Protestant Divines whose very Names and that deservedly are of great Authority with them 1. Calvin upon that very objected Text Tit. 1.5 For this cause left I thee at Creet c. From hence we learn saith he that there was not then any equality among the Ministers of the Church but that one was placed over the rest in Authority and Counsel 2. Beza successor to Calvin expressly confesseth That the Presbyters even then in the Apostles times had a President over them while the Appellation of Bishop and Presbyter was communicable Accordingly hereunto is the judgment of Dr. Reynolds telling us That in the Apostles times the Presbyters did choose one amongst them to be President c. Whom afterward saith he in the Primitive Church the Fathers called Bishops So that in the judgment of these exquisite judicious Divines the Office or Function of a Bishop was distinct from that of Presbyters notwithstanding the Identical communicableness of Titles or Names SECT III. The second Objection out of Scripture in that place Phil. 1.1 With the Bishops and Deacons c. is repugnant to the general Expositions of Antient Fathers IT useth to be objected That seeing as the Fathers held there should be no more than one Bishop in any one City How then cometh it to pass that the Apostle mentioneth Bishops in the Plural and immediately subjoyneth Deacons without insinuation of Presbyters Either we must suppose that there were no Presbyters at all in that City or else that by Bishops here Presbyters are to be understood The Testimonies of Antiquity have untwined this thred long since telling us That for as much as the words Bishop and Presbyter were then Communicable notwithstanding the difference of their Degrees and Functions therefore by the word Bishops in this place are to be understood Presbyters So Chrysostom Occumendus Theophylact Theodoret. This last for further illustration thereof sheweth That St. Paul did in this Epistle attribute likewise this Title of Apostle to Epaphroditus though he was distinctly a Bishop Our Opposites we know are in all these Questions most addicted to Hierome Who notwithstanding upon the same reason with the rest of the Fathers inferreth the same Conclusion saying Here by Bishops we understand Presbyters because there could not then have been two Bishops in one City But if Epaphroditus was Bishop of Philippi as Theodoret both here and elsewhere assureth us he was why will some say was not this Epistle inscribed unto him as well as to the Presbyters and Deacons Theophylact gives the answer Because saith he at this time the Philippians had sent Epaphroditus to carry such things to the Apostle as he had need of So he Which Answer of his hath sufficient ground upon Phil. 2.25 and 4.18 To which we refer our Reader SECT IV. The third Objection is against the appropriation of the word Bishop unto one which Appellation is shewn to be most justifiable BOth Houses of Parliament have been advised concerning Presbyterial Ordination that the Names of Bishop and Presbyter have been communicable to Presbyters Therefore the appropriation of the word Bishop to one hath been say they by corrupt Custom Both which we take to have been so unadvisedly spoken concerning Appropriation as if they had meant to cross the judicious Confessions of the three Worthies Mr. Calvin Mr. Beza and Dr. Reynolds who have expressly testified and
delivered the contrary But yet our Opposites have given as it were defiance not only to the manifold and manifest Testimonies both of Antiquity together with the most famous Protestant Divines who have already justified the distinction of Episcopacâ— as superior to Presbytery here by them called a Corruption as instituted for the Best But also against the Universal Church Christian which held and continued the same Appropriation for Fourteen Hundred years compleat This is not all for the time and reason of the same alteration will justifie it to the full The time is thus acknowledged by the foresaid Dr. Reynolds The Presbyters saith he in the Apostles times chose one among them to be President c. And this is he whom afterwards in the Primitive Church the Fathers called Bishop So he The reason is plain for if the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying a Superintendent or President was by the Fathers of the Primitive Churches appropriated to him that had indeed the Presidentship over Presbyters How then should this be called a Corruption and not rather a just Congruity and Consideration namely that the Title Superintendent should be gâ—ven to the Person and Function which is indeed Superintendent Accordingly Vedelius an exquisite searcher into Antiquities hath testified That this different Appropriation of the Word Bishop to one was common in the dayes of Ignatius who was so antient us to be a Disciple of the Apostles themselves for saith he this distinction of Bishop and Presbyter was used in the Church very early in the Apostles times presently after it began to be said I am of Paul I of Apollo I of Cephas So he With whom agreeth the learned Professor of Divinity in the University of Hiedelburgh Scaltetus who from the words of Hierome shewing the occasion Why one of the Presbyters was set over the rest as Bishop was because of Schism among the People some saying they were of Paul some of Apollos some of Cephas From hence saith he I collect That Bishops were instituted in the Apostles times because that then it was said among the People I am of Paul c. As saith he besides others of St. Paul ' s Epistles the former to the Corinthians doth undoubtedly assure us And that the end of this Institution was Ut Schismatum semina tollerentur To take away the seeds of Schisme are the express words of Hierome so that if either the seasons of the Primitive times be had in consideration or the wisdom of the Church Universal or the reason now given of attributing the word of Superiority to any superiour degree of Dignity one would think they may very well perswade that this objection out of Hierome ought to have been put to silence before it had been published We are not ignorant how urgent many of our Opposites have been to prove from Antiquity That the Primitive Fathers sometimes gave the Title of Presbyters unto Bishops as did Irenaeus to the Predecessors of Victor Bishop of Rome and have concluded thereupon an equality of Functions This is a thrice wandring from the sense of those Fathers who were Predecessors to Victor First By not considering that a Bishop by calling Bishops Presbyters might understand it either properly as Seniors unto him because Predecessors before him or if in consideration of their inferiour degree by way of accommodation to the joynt Functions of Bishops and Presbyters Secondly By concealing from their Reader that although they have but a few examples of the name Presbyter applyed to Bishops yet of calling Presbyters expressly Bishops not one the reason is plain by that which goeth under the name of Ambrose because according to the proper signification of names every Bishop is a Presbyter but not every Presbyter a Bishop Lastly Those stand confuted by the universally confessed preeminence of Victor and other his Predecessors Bishops of Rome over Presbyters in those Primitive times as also of the Episcopacy and Superiority of Irenaeus over the Presbyters under him SECT V. The last Objection 3 John 9. THat Objection which one hath made is usual with others viz. St. John reprehended Diotrephes for his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to desire a Superiority over his Brethren Presbyters therefore there was not any degree of Superiority over them in those dayes We say that the consequent of this Argument is very lavish and loose because St. John doth not except against 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or degree of Superiority but against the Usurpation of Superiour degree that was and his insolent abuse thereof in contemning his Brethren and peremptorily casting them out of the Church for it is incredible that any one Presbyter could create and assume the degree of a Superintendent or Bishop that had no being at all Ergo say we The degree of Prelacy was in being before it could be ambitiously affected CAP. IV. Our Propositions grounded upon the Word of God Our first Evidence out of the Epistles of St. Paul SECT I. That the Presbyterial Order was alwayes substitute to an higher Government as first to the Jurisdiction Apostolical HOw Commandatory the Apostolical Authority was is best discernable by the Apostles Mandates unto the Churches upon several occasions as to the Thessalonians We command the Brethren And again As we commanded you Next by word of Censuring If any obey not our Word c. The same Apostle commanded the Ephesians to assemble themselves before him at Miletus But most especially was he occasioned to express his Jurisdiction Apostolical over the Corinthians regulating and silencing Women in the Congregation touching the ordering of Wives So ordain I saith he in all Churches and also concerning other matters saying The rest will I set in order when I come Thus by his commanding and as effectually by his censuring in shaking of his Rod of Excommunication over them saying Shall I come unto you with a Rod Peter likewise did not conceal the Apostolical Authority in general over the dispersed Members of the Churches of Pontus Asia Cappadocia Galatia and Bithynia when he put them in minde of as he saith The Commandements given by us the Apostles of our Saviour We should have been larger in this proof if we could think that any of our Opposites were of a contrary judgment or had not known that their own Author Walo had by his ingenious confession given them a Supersedeas in this point For the Apostles saith he as long as they lived governed the Church with great Authority and could more easily continue them in their duties lest that any divisions might burst out upon the occasions aforesaid to the destruction of unity in the Churches sâ—ch as was reprehended by St. Paul in the Church of Corinth So he Wherefore to the confutation of Walo himself I do necessarily inferr That there being at all times the same if not more possibilities of Schisms and Rents in the Church than could
be in the Apostles times there cannot but be the like if not a greater necessity of a Superintendency over Presbyterial parity the rather if we duly consider our next Proposition SECT II. That divers of the Apostolical Disciples were even in their times both in Dignity and Authority Superintendents over Presbyters HEre again our Opposites authentick Author Walo after much discussion of this point is ready to teach them being inforced thereunto by Scripture That those who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Assistants unto them in founding the Churches ordaining of Ministers in every City and watering the Church which they had instructed These he confesseth were so in Superiority above Presbyters as that the Apostles themselves did not forbear to term them Apostles and so predominant in Authority as Although absent from the Churches yet to instruct them by their Epistles and wheresoever any Schism arose either in Clergy or People still to rebuke them even as if they had been of their own Flock Upon these premisses thus granted we are sufficiently warranted to conclude not only that the Presbytery were continually under subjection both to the Apostolical Government but likewise to other eminent Disciples of the Apostles The same Author sticketh not to give a List of such Prelates and Superintendents as Mark Clement Titus Timothy Epaphroditus and saith he many others This being so pregnant a truth how is it that our Opposites should pretend an Eccesiastical Presbyterial Government no way Subordinate That which is objected by them is most vain and frivolous whereunto we occur as now followeth SECT III. That the aforesaid Apostolical Disciples were as Bishops over the Presbyters Among whom were Timothy and Titus by evidence from Scripture THE Texts of Scripture for proof of their Superiority and Authority are so plain that they need no Commentary And our witnesses are so impartial as not to admit of any exception For in the Text we read of an Apostolical Ordinance to Timothy and Titus respectively To set in order the things that were wanting To inhibit Heterodox Preachers To receive accusations against criminous Elders To excommunicate Hereticks To Ordain Elders yet so As to lay hands on no man suddainly Each of these and the like Apostolical Injunctions do fully express an Episcopal Function and Authority in both of these respectively over Presbyters and the whole Churches under them And though this hath been stuck at by divers of our Opposites lest that hereby Timothy and Titus might appear to be Bishops distinct from Presbyters yet now at last their chief and greatest Advocate for Presbyterial Government confesseth the Authority which these held and exercised over Presbyters yet so that Bishops as he thinks shall take no advantage thereby if they who are Pleaders may also be admitted as our Judges We proceed citing the same witness Walo Messalinus confessing That Timothy and Titus had almost equal Authority with the Apostles of Christ by whom they were ordained to govern whole Churches as Directors and Judges Of which sort besides Timothy and Tituâ— he there sets down Mark Clemens Epapâ—roditus and all those who were Assistants and fellow Labourers with the Apostles whereof we have spoken already Thus by the premises it sufficiently appeareth that there was a double Superintendency over Presbyters yet we enquire furthermore concerning Timothy and Titus whether or no they were at this time whereof we now speak distinctly Bishops In discussing whereof we shall according to our usual method first remove their Objections which are against their Episcopacy that done we shall make good the contrary by due proofs SECT IV. That Timothy and Titus were properly and distinctly Bishops notwithstanding their Title of Evangelists as is confessed by Protestant Divines of remote Churches BUt here their Walo will needs interpose seeking by an Objection as with a Spunge to wipe out all opinion of Episcopacy either in Timothy or Titus because forsooth Called Evangelists who had no peculiar Residence in any Church but general in all Churches whereas they who are by the Apostle called Bishops had a singular charge of the Church wherein they were and there were they to reside and remain for the governing thereof So he And from him our home Opposites chanting and rechanting and making it their undersong to say again and again That Timothy and Titus were Evangelists so as not to be held that which we call Bishop and they name this Assertion The hinge of the Controversie But this Objection say we hath often been taken off the hinge and laid flat on the floor by divers solid and satisfactory Answers We say not of Bishops or their Chaplains but of other Protestant Divines even of Presbyterial Churches cited here in the Margent First The Theological Professor of Hiedelberg answers That when these Epistles weâ—e written to Timothy and Titus they were exercised not as Evangelists in assisting the Apostles in the collecting of Churches but as Bishops in governing them which had been collected as saith he the general Praecepis given to them do prove which could not refer to the Temporary power of Evangelists but to them and their Successors as Bishops From whence we conclude what that learned Doctor doth there declare That the name Evangelist did belong unto them in the large sense as it signifieth a Preacher of the Gospel Tolossanus agreeth in the same answer namely that Timothy and Titus who had been Companions with Paul in his travails was afterward made Bishop of Crete Dr. Gerard answereth by way of distinction That the word Evangelist 2 Tim. 4.5 is not there specially taken for a particular degree in the Church but generally as signifying a Preacher of the Gospel and so including that Order which Timothy now had being a Bishop of Ephesus for now he did no more accompany Paul So he citing Luther also for the like interpretation of that Text. And though he doth acknowledge that both Timothy and Titus had formerly been Evangelists agreeable to the special and proper signification of the word and according hath set down their several travails from place to place yet after those travails were ended which was before these Epistles were written he concludeth both of them to have been Bishops out of several Texts of Scripture Timothy of Ephesus and Titus of Creet 6 Zwinglius likewise is downright against the Objectors proving by the example of Timothy out of the 2 Timoth. 4.5 That the Office of Evangelist and Bishop was hâ—re one and the same However our Opposites it may be will allow to Bishops the same liberty of going out of their Dioces which Calvin doth to Presbyters out of their Parishes who are otherwise bound to be Resident in their Charge Concerning whom he saith That they are not strictly tied to their Glebe or Charge but that they may be helpful unto other Churches upon necessary occasions The same admirable Divine will furthermore
instruct us in the particular Instance which we have in hand who although he held it uncertain whether Timothy be here called an Evangelist in the general notion of Preaching the Gospel or for some peculiar Function yet doth he grant that an Evangelist is a middle degree between Apostle and Pastor and upon those words of St. Paul to Timothy Do thy diligence to come speedily unto me he Commenteth telling us That St. Paul called Timothy from the Church over which he was Governour for the space of almost a whole year This is a pregnant testimony to teach us That Timothy had both the Government over Presbyters in the Church of Ephesus and also that it was his peculiar Charge whence except upon great and weighty Cause he was not to depart which is as much as we contend for Before we conclude this Point we make bold to intreat our Opposites to satisfie us in one particular namely seeing that Philip being one of the seaven Deacons is found Preaching the Word in Samaria Act. 8.5 and yet afterwards is called Philip the Evangelist one of the seven viz. Deacons Act. 21.8 Our Quaere hereupon is Why Timothy and Titus might not as well be called Evangelist for Preaching the Word of God being Bishops as Philip was for the same cause named an Evangelist being but a Deacon It may be our Opposites would wish to be satisfied by Reverend Zanchy upon these points whom yet they will find to be chief Opposite to themselves And albeit he will have the Apostles by their Vocation to have been as it were Itinerants for their time For the founding and erecting of Churches Yet he granteth That Churches being once erected the same Apostles set a Pastor or Bishop over them And what he meaneth hereby he sheweth when more distinctly he confesseth That at first indeed Presbyters were ordained in the Churches and after them Bishops as Hierome affirmeth even in the Apostles times So he Where by the judgment of Zanchy First Bishops were ordained by the Apostles as a degree contradistinct from Presbyters Secondly That the Bishops so ordained although they had been Evangelists and fellow Labourers with the Apostles yet when Churches were once erected some of them were placed Residentiaries in the said Churches And lastly That although Presbyters had their Institution void of subjection to Episcopal Authority at the first as Deacons likewise had theirs yet because of the insufficiency of Presbyterial Government the Episcopal was erected as more perfect even in the dayes of the Apostles The next Obstruction is to be removed SECT V. That Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus notwithstanding that objected Scripture Act. 20. THere is one Objection for we may not dissemble which the Smectymnians press thrice as being inexpugnable and thereupon call it Lethalis Arundo as that which must strike all opposition quite dead In summe thus Timothy was with Paul at the meeting of Miletum Act. 20.4 Therefore say they if Timothy had been Bishop of Ephesus Paul would there and then have given him a charge of feeding the Flock and not the Elders So they As though Timothy before this had not been sufficiently instructed in this duty both by his long and constant attendance on St. Paul and also by his former Epistle unto him which was written and received before this time as some have probably conjectured or as though Timothy should need a particular Admonition to discharge that duty which was respectively common to him with the rest of the Bishops and Presbyters there assembled For though the Smectymnians tell us It is a poor evasion to say that they who were there assembled were not all of Ephesus but were callâ—d also from other parts because say they these Elders were all of one Church made by good Bishops over one Flock and therefore may with most probability be affirmed to be the Elders of the Church of Ephesus Yet we must tell them that Dr. Reynolds whom they and we admire for his exquisite learning speaking of the same meeting at Miletâ—m Act. 20.17 saith notwithstanding all these objected circumstances That though the Church of Ephesus had sundry Pastors and Elders to guide it yet amongst those sundry was there one Chief c. The same whom afterwards the Fathers in the Primitive Church called Bishop So he But yet though he or all Protestants should fail us there is a Father Irenaeus by name who was so antient as to be acquainted with the Apostles of the Apostles themselves and him we can produce distinguishing the persons here met at Miletum into Bishops and Presbyters and affirming That they came not only from Ephesus but also from other Cities near adjoyning to it Which makes the Smectimnians Arundo but a bruised Reed Thus have we fully as we hope satisfied the contrary Objections We proceed now to our proof SECT VI. That Timothy and Titus were both of them properly Bishops by the judgment of Antiquity THe greatest Opposite that we can name even Walo Messalinus the very Atlas of Presbyterial Government will spare us the labour of citing the Greek Fathers or Scholiasts for confirmation of this point who confesseth That most of their Commentaries upon Titus record him to have been Bishop of Crete alleadging by name Chrysostom Theophylact Oâ—cumenius Theodoret and others whose Testimonies we shall not need to repeat only we shall add which may serve for a transition to Timothy the testimony of that antient Ecclesiastical Historian Eusebius who speaking of S. Pauls fellow Labourers reckons Timothy amongst them Whom saith he History recordeth to be the first Bishop of Ephesus adding with the same breath and so was Titus Bishop of Crete Thus this famous Author concerning the Episcopacy of Timothy also To whom we may adjoyn as concurring in the same Judgment Epiphanius Chysostomus Theophylact Oecumenius Gregory Ambrose Primasius yea and Hierome himself who hath positively affirmed That Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus and Titus of Crete But the Smectymnians hearing of a Cloud of Witnesses averring Timothy and Titus to have lived and and died Bishops answer That this Cloud will soon blow over and the greatest blast that they give is That the Fathers who were of this judgment borrowed their Testimonies from Eusebius Assuredly this will seem but a poor evasion to any judicious Reader who shall but observe that the Testimonies of these Fathers are in their Commentaries and Collections out of Texts themselves But the best is other Protestant Divines will appear to be more ingenuous SECT VII That Protestant Divines of very great esteem have acknowledged Timothy and Titus to have been properly Bishops WE begin with Luther who amongst other Resolutions setteth down this for one That Episcopacy is of Divine Right which he groundeth upon St. Paul's appointing Titus to Ordain Elders in every City which Elders saith he were Bishops as Hierome and the subsequent Texts do
our selves much but may be contented with the Testimonies of our Opposites choice Advocate and against Bishops as vehement an Adversary as could be Yet he in his Commentaries upon the Verses concerning the foresaid Bishops instiled Angels in the two first Chapters of the Apocalypse from Point to Point sheweth notwithstanding how those Bishops in these Churches were reprehended by Christ for not executing Spiritual Discipline upon certain as well Clergy as People A second for too much Indulgence to the Wicked A third for suffering the Woman Jezabel and such as had been seduced by her and not handling her according to her Deserts Doctor Fulke saith as much in effect A fourth For forbearing to use Discipline against a Balaamatical Seducer Mr. Perkins likewise fetcheth his ground of Excommunication from the foresaid Texts concerning the Angel of the Church of Pergamus whom he was inclined to think was a Prelate over Presbyters as Marlorate also but even now told us That the same Angel was therefore reprehended by Christ because being President there he did not put in practice his Authority of Correction which he had over Clergy and People Let us now proceed to a Rule of Proportion to try how our Opposites Comparison can stand between an Apocalyptical Prelate and either Speaker in Parliament or Proloquutor in an Assembly or as any other for Time or Place together with some other circumstances allotted by Ordinance of Parliament But tell us have any of these Authority to take an Accusation of any Criminal Offence which haply may be committed or of controlling any one Vote be it never so exorbitant much less any Corrective Power of any one Member of the House Nor doth this differ from the Confession of Mr. Calvin first in his Collection out of the Epistle of St. Paul to Titus viz. That at that time one was set over the rest of Presbyters to govern them both in Authority and Counsel in Authority Why I confess saith he as the Conditions of Men are now a days no Order can be kept amongst Ministers except one be over the rest And how often have they acknowledged the Prelacy of one over the rest of the Clergy to be a Presidency And so their thrice Learned Advocate will resolve them saying They dream not of any Presidency void of Authority seeing that every Child knoweth that there cannot be any Presidency without Authority SECT XXV That Episcopal Government exercised in the Primitive Church was Authoritative WE dare and do protest That hereby we plead not for an irregular Prelacy No for according to the State of the Church even at this time Bishops themselves are under Canons and are as liable to Censures as others if they shall transgress Besides the Obedience enjoyned upon Presbyters hath ever been constituted by their own Consents either express or implicit and accordingly ratified by Parliaments But we are to inquire into the Judgment of Antiquity that we may the better continue in their Footsteps The most Antient Father Ignatius in those Epistles which are allowed for genuine by the most exact and industrious Authors Vedelius Scultetus and Rivetus is most frequent in this Argument for submission of Presbyters to their Bishops giving them always a Negative Voice and allowing nothing to be done without them As did also Clemens both of them being Disciples of the Apostles Cyprian not long after a Martyr of Christ professed to do nothing without the Consent of his Clergy yet held it necessary for the Church that all Acts should be managed by Bishops Tertullian though himself a Presbyter denied that Presbyters we speak of the Exercise had the right so much as of Baptizing without the Consent of the Bishop Origen a Presbyter likewise thinketh That his Accompt to God will be less than if he had been a Bishop because saith he the Bishop possessing the chief place in the Church is accomptable to God for the whole Church Ambrose noteth such a Man be he Presbyter or Lay to be a strayer from the Truth who doth not obey his Bishop We pass by Epiphanius Chrysostome and other eminent Fathers to Hierome whose Patronage our Opposites pretend to have yet in this Particular he is as much against them as any The Safety of the Church saith he doth depend upon the Dignity of the Bishop so that unless an extraordinary and eminent Power be given unto him there will be as many Schisms in the Church as Ministers And again which we wish the Presbyterial Advocates duely to mark he saith not only that Bishops are a Law unto themselves but unto Presbyters also Hitherto of the Jurisdiction it self The next Point concerneth the Continuance of it in the Person of the Bishop SECT XXVI That the personal continuance of Episcopacy was during life against the most novel Figments to the contrary FIrst The Angels or Supreme Ministers in the Revelation to whom the Epistles according to the Scriptures were written seeing that they were always chargeable to inform the Presbyters with the Contents therefore they must be supposed to be in Office before they could discharge any such Function Because Timothy Titus and all the other Apostles continued their functions until their bodily dissolution Secondly In the narrative parts of every of the said Epistles Christ giveth every of the Prelates to know That he knew their works and that he had them in estimation according to their works namely works done long before insomuch that he chargeth one To do his former works c. 2. v. 3. and commendeth another because His last works were better than his former c. 3. v. 19. Noting as well the works of his Function as of his Conversation and therefore was far from the conceipt of a Deambulatory Hebdomatical or peradventure Ephemeral Office either of the foresaid Speaker Proloquutor or Moderato Who by reason of their not continuance in their Office could not be capable of their Charge either of doing their former work nor commended for his better after work in his said Office Thirdly Besides some were questioned for not executing their Offices against the Heretical Nicolaitans and Idolatrous Balaamites and Jesabel as well out of the Convocation of Presbyters as with their consent when they were met Which proveth that in the interim between Convents and not Convents the Prelates office was permanent Whereas the Deambulatory Actors use to have their Quietus est and to forgo their Imployments for want of Continuance more or less Fourthly If we look forwards to the time to come Christ is found threatning the Prelates that were obnoxious One to be removed if he did not repent c. 2. v. 3. And denouncing against another To come against him if he should not repent and do his former works c. 2. v. 14. But useth this to be the process of Deambulatory Officers if they have offended grievously in one Parliament and Convocation to
elect them again upon an expected Repentance Lastly to one of these Prelates Christ made a royal Promise saying Be thou faithful unto death and I will give thee a Crown of life c. 2. v. 9. Wherein is as well implied Faithfulness in his Function as Constancy in his Christian profession especially this being written unto him even as he was President over others Which is a Faithfulness which the Spirit of God frequently mentioneth commending it in Tychicus Eph. 2.21 and in Timothy 2 Cor. 4. v. 1.2 Now let us proâ—eed to shew you the Novelty SECT XXVII That the Novelty of this Opinion of a Deambulatory Prelacy evinceth the Falsity thereof HIstory hath delivered unto us the Successions of all the four Celebrious Churches Hierusalem Alexandria Antioch and Rome as also from the Asian Churches in the Revelation An Instance in one will give light to all the rest As for example The Church of Alexandria wherein succeeded next to Mark the Evangelist Anianus An. Christ. 51. Sedit An. 22. After him Abilius An. 77. Sedit An. 13. Then Cerdon Sedit An. 10. and Justus An. 12. Finally there is not any Monuments more directly manifesting the continuance of the Succession of Emperours and Kings in their Royal Thrones than there hath been for the Residence of Bishops successively in their Episcopal Seats and Functions even to their dying day Sure we are therefore that Antiquity would have exploded that conceit which Tertullian abhorred to think That one should be a Bishop to day and none to morrow The general Council of Calcedon also judging the Depression of a Bishop down to the degree of a Presbyter to be no better than Sacriledg SECT XXVIII That the Foundation of the Deambulatory Opinion was altogether groundless A Belgick Doctor noted this Opinion as void Of any warrant from the word of God or example of Ecclesiastical History or yet probable reason Whereof a Zealot for the Presbyterians hath confessed namely That the Succession of one after another in the primitive times was after the Predecessor had slept in the Lord. The result of all these premisses discovering the sensless Novelty of this Opinion sheweth that it serveth for nothing better than the betraying of a lost Cause CHAP. V. Our last Consideration is whether this Apostolical Right of Episcopacy in some sense be called Divine ALthough the proof of the Right thereof to be according to the Word of God be demonstration enough of a Divine Right Yet will it not be amiss to know how far either the Judgment of Antiquity or the Consent of learned Protestant Divines have extended their Suffrages for acknowledgment thereof But yet first we are to satisfie our Opposites Objections in censuring this to be properly Popish SECT I. That the Doctrine of the Divine Right of Episcopacy is repugnant unto Popedome and Papal Usurpation NOthing hath been more common in the mouths of many adversly affected than first hearing of the Divine Right of Episcopacy not without some horrour of mind to impute Popery unto it but yet not without ignorance of the Popes Usurpation herein which is here discovered in the Margin by the earned Professor of Divinity in Geneva grappling with the greatest Champion of the Pope even that Romish Goliah Bellarmine who in his defence of Papal Right saith That the Pope of Rome is immediately from Christ and all other Bishops from him pretending this to be patronized by Antiquity citing that most antient Father Ignatius for his Opinion but he was confuted by our judicious Author Vedelius even out of the express words of Ignatius himself teaching That as Presbyters are immediately subject to Bishops so are likewise Bishops to Christ. So doth he also from Tertullian who recounteth the like Succession in the Church of Smyrna where the first Bishop was ordained by the Apostle St. John which he doth from St. Peter in the Church of Rome But sooner may the Roman Pope unbishop himself than presume to justifie from Antiquity that other Bishops in respect of their first Original are immediately derived from him as by the manifold testimonies of the Antients alleadged expresly already hath appeared and will furthermore become more undeniable when Antiquity it self shall be heard to speak by and by in the interim we may behold the Spanish Divines standing for the Divine Right of Episcopacy as being from Christ himself and therefore denied to be present in the Council of Trent except it should be so decided The Italian Bishops contrarily withstood this in the behalf of the Pope that it might be known to be derived not immediately from Christ but mediately by the Pope himself Can any doubt what the Pope would determine in this Case He in his letters prohibited that Episcopacy should be held to be absolutely from Divine Right This being the Case who can justly attribute Popery to them who in defending a Divine Right yet renounce and abhor the derivation thereof which is from the Pope SECT II. The Judgment of Antiquity concerning the Divine Right WE begin with the most antient Ignatius and for the vindication of the credit of this our Foreman It is testified by Vedelius the Genevan Professor concerning Ignatius his Epistles alleadging withal the like testimonies of Scultetus and Rivetus That seven of them are properly his and so genuine herein as that they take no exceptions in this Case Which he furthermore proveth out of Eusebius Ruffinus and Hierome and we shall not wander out of these seven And though all these be full of Sentences abundantly asserting the Divine Right of Episcopacy yet we shall content our selves with these few wherein he exhorteth The Presbyters to obey the Bishops as the Vicars of Christ And he telleth both Presbyters and People That he that contemneth his Bishop is Atheistical and Prophane and doth set at nought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Ordinance of Christ and the like as is more fully testified in the Margin Cyprian is our next Witness who tells us That the constituting of Bishops over the Church with Authority to govern all Acts therein is done by Divine Law So he With many other expressions to the same effect for which again I refer you to the Margin We pass to Origen our next Witness who saith of the publick Governours of the Churches of Christ That they are in a very eminent place because the Lord hath set them over his Family And again which we alleadg as making against Romish Popedome That Bishops have as much interest in that saying of our Saviour Whatsoever thou bindest on Earth shall be bound in Heaven c. as St Peter himself Gregory Bishop of Nazianzum telleth his Flock of that City That the Law of Christ had made them subject to his Episcopal Power and Jurisdiction Athanasius That whosoever he be that contemns the Function of a Bishop contemneth Christ who ordained that Office Epiphanius
Life in the Ministers intendeth a further execution of their Ministration and Discharge of their Function in these Angels which was a Prelatical Superintendency or Episcopacy as hath been testified not only by Protestant Divines of the Reformed Churches fourteen in number but also so generally that Doctor Scultetus Divinity Professor of Heidelburgh concerning this Approbation of Christ saith That all the most learned Interpreters have by Angels understood Bishops nor can they do otherwise without violence to the Text. So he All Glory be to God through Jesus Christ the Bishop of our Souls the Author and Finisher of our Faith Amen FINIS THE CONTENTS CHAP. I. SECT I. That the Church of Geneva hath both justified and praised our Episcopal Government in England and prayed for the prosperous continuance thereof Page 1 SECT II. That the Church of Geneva disclaimed the Opinion of thinking that their Churches Government should be a Pattern for other Churches p. 6. SECT III. That also other Protestant Divines of Reformed Churches have observed the Worthiness of the Episcopal Government in England p. 7. SECT IV. That the Episcopal Government in the Church of Christ is for Necessary Use the best according to the judgment of Primitive Antiquity p. 11 SECT V. The Protestant Divines of remote Churches have generally acknowledged Episcopal Government to be for Necessary Use the best p. 14 SECT VI. That the Episcopal Government is far more practised among Protestants of Remote Churches than is the Presbyterial p. 22 CHAP. II. SECT I. The second General Part of this full Satisfaction is concerning the Right of Episcopacy which is to accord to the Word of God which is the second reserved Condition in the Common Covenant p. 24 SECT II. First That no Antient Father hath been justly objected as gainsaying the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy no not Hierome p. 26 SECT III. That Augustine objected against the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy is directly for it p. 31 SECT IV. Thirdly Gregory Nazianzen a Primitive Father who is verbally objected against Episcopacy doth really contradict the Objectors p. 34 SECT V. That Clemens one of the most Antient of Fathers objected proveth to be a Counterwitness against the Objectors p. 37 SECT VI. The justification of Episcopal Prelacy by the Universal Practice of the Church Christian in times approaching towards Primitive Antiquity First By condemning Aerius the only famous Adversary against Episcopal Prelacy in those times p. 42 SECT VII That in the time of the foresaid Fathers the whole Church of Christ held the Derogation from Episcopal Prelacy to be Sacrilegious p. 45 SECT VIII That the immediate Succession of Bishops from the daies of the Apostles is liberally confirmed unto us by Learned Protestant Divines albeit sufficiently Presbyterial p. 47 SECT IX That there was an immediate Succession of Bishops from the Apostles times proved first because no time can be assigned wherein it was not in use p. 48 SECT X. That the whole Church Christian did profess and practise the Apostolical Right of Episcopacy p. 55 CHAP. III. After these our Evidences from Primitive Antiquity according to our precedent Method we are to contemplate of the Coelestial Sphear the Word of God it self p. 59 The Right of Episcopacy discussed by the Word of God ib. SECT I. Against the first Objection from the Identity of Names as they call it of Bishops and Presbyters in Scripture p. 60 SECT II. That the former Objection is rejected by the choicest and most acceptable Divines which our Opposites themselves can name p. 62 SECT III. The second Objection out of Scripture in that place Phil. 1.1 With the Bishops and Deacons c. is repugnant to the general Expositions of Antient Fathers p. 64 SECT IV. The third Objection is against the Appropriation of the word Bishop unto one which Appellation is shewn to be most justifiable p. 67 SECT V. The last Objection 3 John 9. p. 72 CHAP. IV. Our Prepositions grounded upon the Word of God Our first Evidence out of the Epistles of St. Paul p. 73 SECT I. That the Presbyterial Order was alwaies substitute to an higher Government as first to the Jurisdiction Apostolical ib. SECT II. That divers of the Apostolical Disciples were even in their times both in Dignity and Authority Superintendents over Presbyters p. 76 SECT III. That the aforesaid Apostolical Disciples were as Bishops over the Presbyters Among whom were Timothy and Titus by Evidence from Scripture p. 78 SECT IV. That Timothy and Titus were properly and distinctly Bishops notwithstanding their Title of Evangelists as is confessed by Protestant Divines of remote Churches p. 81 SECT V. That Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus notwithstanding that objected Scripture Act. 20 p. 88 SECT VI. That Timothy and Titus were both of them properly Bishops by the judgment of Antiquity p. 91 SECT VII That Protestant Divines of very great esteem have acknowledged Timothy and Titus to have been properly Bishops p. 94 SECT VIII The Second Evidence from Scripture for proof of Episcopal Prelacy is out of Christs Epistles To the Angels of the seven Churches of Asia To the Angel of the Church of Ephesus write c. Chap. 2.1 p. 97 SECT IX That the first Exposition of our Opposites by Angel understanding the whole Church is flatly repugnant to the Context p. 98 SECT X. That the second Exposition is in interpreting the word Angel to signifie the Order of Presbyters in the Church The state of which Question is set down by our Opposites p. 100 SECT XI That the Objections made for this Exposition are confuted by their own best approved Protestant Authors p. 101 SECT XII Their second Reason confuted by their own alleadged Author p. 103 SECT XIII Their third Argument likewise confuted by their own Chiefest Author p. 106 SECT IVX. Their fourth Argument confuted by the same their own much applauded Author p. 108 SECT XV. The fifth Objection as a body in a Consumption languisheth in it self p. 111 SECT XVI Their last Argument standeth confuted by their own selves p. 112 SECT XVII Our Arguments to prove that the word Angel in the aforesaid Epistles of Christ signifyeth an individual person as a Prelate over Presbyters p. 114 SECT XVIII Arguments in special collected from the Texts p. 116 SECT XIX The second kind of Arguments taken out of the Doctrinal Testimonies of Antiquity p. 119 SECT XX. That Historical Evidence from Antiquity demonstrateth what Bishops some of these Angels personally were by their proper names and from them some of their Successors p. 121 SECT XXI A Torrent of Protestant Divines of the Reformed Churches consenting to the same Exposition of an Individual Person having Prelacy over Presbyters under the name of Angels p. 128 SECT XXII The second of our English Protestant Divines in the Opinion of our Opposites as competent Witnesses as any p. 131 SECT XXIII Of two notable Subterfuges of our Opposites What they are p. 132 SECT XXIV Against the Opposites Exception to Episcopal