inequality without any Rule over his brethren Ours claime an eminent Superiority and a power of Ordination and Iurisdiction unknowne to the Primitive times That this which hee supposeth hee heares us say is Scripture Truth we have shewed already c. that there was a parity between Presbyters and Bishops and that eminent superioritie and power of Ordination and Iurisdiction which our Bishops claime was unknowne to Scripture and are now prepared by Gods assistance to prove it was unknowne to primitive times But how doth this Remonstrant meete with this Reply ALAS ALAS HOVV GOOD PEOPLE may be abused by misinformation It seemes the man Judged this Reply so poore as in his thoughts it was more worthy of his pitty then of his paines to answer or rather knew there was more in this Reply then hee knew how to answer and therefore waves it with his Rethoricke And this we rather thinke because hee knowes but little in Antiquity that knowes not that there is so vast a difference betweene our Bishops and those that were not onely in the Apostles dayes whom wee have proved to be undistinguished from Presbyters But those Bishops that were in the Church 400 yeares after when there began to bee some discrimination that Episcopacy may well be likened to the Shippe Argo that was so often repaired as there was nothing left of the First Materialls yet stil it challenged the first Name Which difference we spread before your Honours in three particulars first in point of Election to their office secondly in point of Execution of their office thirdly in point of state-Imployment First having discovered already upon what occasion this priority began to have existence in the Church and from whom it first received its being not from God but from Consent and Custome of the Churches according to Ambrose Ierom Augustine c. Wee come now to Declare what was the manner of Election unto this Prioritie in these times and to shew first how therein these Bishops did differ from ours for all their Elections were ordered by the privity consent and approbation of the people where the Bishops was to serve Were there no other Authours to make this good Cyprian alone would doe it among other places let his 68. Epistle witnesse where he saith plebs Maxime habet potestatem c. The people specially have power either of chusing worthy Priests or rejecting the unworthy for this is derived from Divine Authority that the Priests should bee chosen in the presence of the people before all their eyes and approved as fit and worthy by their publike vote and Testimony This hee proves by the Testimonie of Sacred writ both Old and New Where wee observe first that the speciall power of Judging of the worthinesse or unworthinesse of a man for the Prelacy was in the breast of the People Secondly the speciall power of choosing or rejecting to his place according as they Judged him worthy or unworthy resided in the People Plebs maximé Habet potestatem c. Thirdly that this power did descend upon the People De Divina Authoritate Nor was this the Judgement of one Sole man but of an Affrican Synod consulted by the Spanish Churches in point of Election as the inscription of the Epistle shewes The Obtrusion of a Bishop upon the Church of Alexandria without the Presence desire and vote of the Clergie or People is Condemned by Athanasius not onely as a breach of Canon but as a Transgression of Apostolicall prescript and that it did compell or necessitate the heathen to blaspheme Nor did onely Christian Bishops but Christian Princes acknowledge the Right and power of Election of Bishops to be in the People so that admired Constantine the great Promover and Patron of the peace of the Christian Church writing to the Church of Nicomedia against Eusebius and Theognius tells them the ready way to lay asleepe the Tumults that did then disturbe the Church about the Election of a Bishop was si modo Episcopum fidelem integrum nacti fuerint quod quidem in praesentia in vestrâ situm est potestate quodque etiam dudùm penes vestrum Iudicium fuerat nisi Eusebius de quo dixi pravo eorum qui cum juverunt Consilio hâc praeceps ruisset rectum Eligendi Ordinem impudenter conturbasset Gelas in Act. Concil Nicen. part 3. if they would get a faithfull and upright Bishop which saith he is in your power presently to doe and was long agoe if Eusebius with the ayd of his faction had not rushed in upon you and impudently disturbed the right Order of Election That which this sacred Emperour calls the right order of Election what is it but the Election by the people in whose power he saith it then was and long had beene to choose a Bishop and by whose power the next Bishop was chosen So the same Author tells us that after Eusebius and Theognius were cast out of their severall seats for Arianisme by the Councell of Nice others were appointed in their roomes by the Clergy and people of each Diocesse To this Election in Nicomedia wee could if it were needfull in so cleare a Truth adde many the like Presidents of popular Elections which for brevities sake we passe over Not questioning but that which hath beene spoken is sufficient to informe the intelligent Reader that our Bishops and the Bishops of former times are Tvvo in point of Election SECT VIII A Second thing wherein we have undertaken to shew that our Bishops and the Bishops of former times are Tvvo is in the Execution of their Office and here there are three things wherein he that will not wilfully shut his eyes against all light may see a Latitude of difference betweene ours and former Bishops First in that Sole Iurisdiction which our Bishops assume to themselves Secondly in the Delegation they make of the power of exercising this Iurisdiction unto others Thirdly in the way of the exercise of that power For the first of these Their sole Iurisdiction That our Bishops assume this to themselves it is knowne and felt and that this Sole Iurisdiction was a stranger a Monster to former times wee shall now prove and make cleare that the power of Ordination Admonition Excommunication Absolution was not in the hands of any sole man First for Ordination Cyprian in his exile writing to his Charge certifies them that Aurelius was ordained by him and his Colleagues who were present with him who were these Colleagues but his Presbyters as he himselfe expounds it writing to Lucius in his owne name and the name of his Clergie and people Ego Collegae fraternitas omnis c. I and my Colleagues and my whole people send these Letters to you c. So that it is cleare in Cyprians time Presbyters had a hand in Ordination and Bishops did not Ordaine alone Firmilianus saith of them that rule in the Church Quod baptizandi MANVM
in their Polemicks yet in their Practicks a power that Timothy and Titus and those angels never did Thirdly Whereas this remonstrant saith If there can be better evidence under Heaven for any matter of fact let Episcopacy be for ever abandoned out of Gods Church We beseech you remember how weake we have discovered his Evidence to be and then the Inference upon all these we humbly leave to your Honours Wisedome and Iustice. SECT XIIII HAving thus considered the validity of those arguments whereby this remonstrant would suffult Episcopacy we descend now to inquire what satisfaction he gives to those objections which himselfe frames as the maine if not the sole arguments that Episcopacy is asfaultable by and they are two First that pleading the Divine right of Episcopacy is to the prejudice of Soveraignty Secondly that it casts a dangerous imputation upon all those reformed Churches that want this Government To the first the prejudice of Soveraignty he answers there is a compatiblenesse in this case of Gods Act and the Kings it is God that makes the Bishop the King that gives the Bishopricke But we have proved already that God never made a Bishop as he stands in his Superioritie over all other Presbyters he never had Gods Fiat and if they disclaime the influence of soveraignty unto their creation to a priority and assert that the King doth not make them Bishops they must have no being at all Sure we are the Lawes of the Land proclaime that not onely Bishopricks but Bishops and all the Iurisdiction they have is from the King whereas the Remonstrant acknowledgeth no more but the bare place and exercise to be from Regall donation which cannot bee affirmed without apparent prejudice of that Soveraigntie which the Lawes of the Land have invested our Princes with And for his unworthy comparison of Kings in order to Bishops and Patrons in order to their Clerkes when he shall prove that the patron gives ministeriall power to his Clerke as the Kâ—nâ— according to our Laws gives Episcopall power to the Bishop â— it may be of some conducement to his cause but till then we leave the unfitnesse of this comparison and the unthankfulnesse of those men to the indulgence of their Soveraigne to their deserved recompence His learned answer to such men as borrowing Saint Ieroms phrase speake Saint Pauls truth is in summe this That he knâ—wâ—s not how to prescribe to mens thoughts but for all his Rhetoricke they will thinke what they list but if they will grant him the question they shall soone be at an end of the quarrell which one answer if Satisfactory would silence all controversies to as good purpose as he did Bellarmine who said Bellarmine saith it is thus and I say it is not and where is Bellarmine now To the second objection that Episcopacie thus asserted casts an imputation upon all the reformed Churches that want that Government hee saith that the objection is intended to raise envie against them who if they may be beleeved love and honour those sister Churches and blesse God for them But doe they not plucke all this envie upon themselves who in their Conferences Writings Pulpits Vniversities Disputes High Commission Declamations have disclaimed them us no Churches that have disclaimed the Prelats and have honoured the most glorious Lights of those Reformed Churches Calvin Beza and others with no better titles than of Rascalls Blasphemers c. But the pith of his answer after a few good words is this that no such consequent can be drawne from their opinion for their Ius divinum pleads only for a Iustifiablenesse of this holy calling Not for an absolute necessity of it warranting it where it is and requiring it where it may be had but not fixing upon the Church that wants it the defect of any thing of the Essence of a Church but only of the glory and perfection of it neither is it their sin but their misery And is it so doth not this Ius divinum argue a Necessitie but onely a Iustifiablenesse of this calling nor is the want of it a want of any thing of Essence but onely of perfection wee had thought that page the twentieth where this Remonstrant strives to fetch the pedegree of Episcopacie from no lesse than Apostolicall and in that right Divine institution he had reckoned it among those things which the Apostles ordained for the succeeding administration of the Church in essentiall matters but here it seemes he is willing to retract what there fell from him there it was to his advantage to say this government was a thing essentiall to the Church and here it is no lesse advantage to say it is not essentiall But if it be not Essentiall then what is the reason that when a Priest who hath received orders at Rome turnes to us they urge not him to receive ordination among us againe but when some of our brethren who flying in Queene 〈◊〉 dayes had received Imposition of hands in the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas returned againe in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth they were urged to receive Imposition of hands againe from our Bishops and some did receive it If those Churches that want Bishops want nothing essentiall to a Church then what Essentiall want was there in the ordination of those Ministers that received Imposition of hands in those Churches that might deserve a Re-ordination more than if they had first received their ordination at Rome And what is the reason that Bishop Mountague so confidently affirmes that Ordination by Episcopall hands is so necessary as that thâ— Church is no true Church without it and the Ministery no true Ministery and ordinarily no salvation to be obtained without it And if this Remonstrant should leave Bishop Mountague to answer for himselfe yet notwithstanding he stands bound to give us satisfaction to these two questions which arise from his owne Booke First whether that Office which by divine right hath the sole power of Ordaining and Ruling all other Officers in the Church as he saith Episcopacy hath belong not to the being but onely to the glory and perfection of a Church Secondly there being in this mans thoughts the same Ius divinum for Bishops that there is for Pastors and Elders whether if those Reformed Churches wanted Pastors and Elders too they should want nothing of the Essence of a Church but of the perfection and glory of it But this Remonstrant seemes to know so much of the minde of those Churches that if they might have their option they would most gladly embrace Episcopall Government as littlâ— differing from their owne Moderatorship save onely in the perpetuitie of it and the new Invention as hee odiously calls it of Lay Elders But no question those learned Worthies that were entrusted by the Churches to compile their confessions did comprise their Iudgements better than the Composer of this Remonstrance And to his presumption wee oppose their Confession Wee will begin with
sixth verse he gives a delineation of the persons that are capable of such Ordination and in the seventh the Reason why the person to be ordained must be so qualified for a Bishop c. Now if the Bishop and Elder be not here the same but names of distinct office and order the Apostles reason rendred in the seventh verse of his direction in the fift and sixt verses is with reverence be it spoken inconsequentiall and his demand unjust If a Chancellor in one of the Vniversities should give Order to his Vice-chancellour to admit none to the decree of Batchelour in Arts but such as were able to preach or keepe a Divinity Act For Batchelours in Divinity must be so what reason or equity were in this So if Paul leaving Titus as his Locum teneus as it were in Creet for a season should give order to him not to admit any to be an Elder but one thus and thus qualified because a Bishop must be so Had a Bishop been an Order or Calling distinct from or superiour to a Presbyter and not the same this had been no more rationall or equall then the former therfore under the name of Bishop in the seventh verse the Apostle intends the Elder mentioned in the fift verse Consonant to this is the Language of the same blessed Apostle Acts 20. verse 17.18 where such as in 17 verse he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders in the 28. he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in ordinary English Bishops though our Translation there we know not for what reason reads it Overseers not so rendring the word in any other Text. And though this Remonstrant undertakes to shew a cleare and received distinction of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons as three distinct subordinate Callings in Gods Church with an evident specification of the duty charge belonging to each of them or els let this claimed Hierarchy be for ever hooted out of the Church Yet let us tell him that we never find in Scripture these 3 Orders Bishops Presbyters Deacons mentioned together but onely Bishops Deacons as Phil. 1. and 1 Tim. Nor do we finde in Scripture any Ordination to the office of a Bishop differing froÌ„ the Ordination of an Elder Nor do we finde in Scripture the specification of any Duty charged upon a Bishop that Elders are secluded from Nor any qualification required in a Bishop that is not requisite in every Presbyter some of which if not all would be found were they not the same But if this Remonstrant thinke to helpe himselfe by taking Sanctuary in Antiquity though we would gladly â—est in Scripture the Sanctuary of the Lord yet we will follow him thither and there shew him that Hierome from the Scriptures proves more then once Presbyters and Bishops to be the same And Chrysostome in Philip. 1. Homil. 2. with his admirer Theophilact in Philip. 1. affirmes that while the Apostles lived the Names of Bishops and Presbyters were not distinguished and not only while the Apostles lived but in after ages Doth not Irenaeus use the name of Bishops and Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a promiscuous sence Are not Anicetus Pius Hyginus Telesphorus Sixtus whom the Papists call Bishops and the popes predecessors termed by Eusebius presbyters Nor was it strange in the primitive times to heare Bishops called presbyters when Presbyters writing to their Bishops have called him Frater So Cyprian Epist. 26. in the beginning is stiled by his Presbyters Deacons and confessors nor was that holy Martyr offended with that title nor they condemned of insolency that used it But what should we burthen your patience with more testimonies when the evidence of this truth hath shined with so strong a beame that even our Adversaries have stooped to it and confessed that their Names were the same in the Apostles time But yet say they the Offices were distinct Now here wee would gladly know what these men make the distinct Office of a Bishop Is it to edifie the Church by word and Sacrament is it to ordaine others to that worke is it to rule to governe by admonition and other censures if any of these if all these make up the proper worke of a Bishop we can prove from Scripture that all these belong unto the Presbytery which is no more then was granted by a Councell For the first Edifying of the Church by word and Sacraments though we feare they will some of them at least scarce owne this as their proper worke for some have beene citeâ— into the High Commission for saying it belongs to them yet Sir we are sure Scripture makes it a part a chiefe of the Episcopall office for so in the 1 Pet 5.2 they are said to doe the worke of a Bishop when they doe feede the flocke of God And this is such a worke as we hope their Lordships will give the poore Presbyters leave to share with them in or if not we will tell them that the Apostle Peter in that forecited place and the Apostle Paul Acts. 20. binds this worke upon our hands and Woe unto us if we preach not the Gospell But this branch of Episcopall and Presbyteriall office we passe with brevity because in this there lies not so much controversie as in the next which they doe more wholly Impropriate to themselves the power of Ordination Which power that it was in former times in the hands of Presbyters appeares 1 Tim. 4.14 Neglect not the gift which was given thee by Prophesie and by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery The gift here spoken of is the Ministeriall gift the exercise whereof the Apostle exhorts Timothy not to neglect which saith he he had received not by the laying on of the hands of one single man whether Apostle or Bishop or Presbyter But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Presbytery that is the whole company of Presbyters for in that sense onely wee â—inde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taken in Scripture as in Luke 22. vers 66. Act. 22. vers 5. which the Christian Church called the Ecclesiasticall Senate as Ierom in Isay 3. Nos habemus in Ecclesia Senatum nostrum Coetum Presbyterorum an Apostolicall Senate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ignatius Epis. ad Magnes and some times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Ancyr Can. 18. And though the Apostle in his second Epistle to Tim. 1.6 makes mention of the laying on of his hands yet to maintaine the Harmony of Scripture it must not be denied but there was imposition of hands by the Presbytery as well as by himselfe so it was a joynt act So that in this there is no more difference then in the former And if there be no difference betweene Presbyters in feeding or ordaining let us see if there be any in the third part of their office of Ruling which though our Bishops assume wholy to themselves yet we shall discover that it hath beene
committed to and exercised by Presbyteriall hands For who are they of whom the Scripture speakes Heb. 13.17 Obey them that have the Rule over you for they watch for your soules as they that must give an account c. Here all such as watch over the soules of Gods people are intituled to rule over them So that unlesse Bishops will say that they only watch over the soules of Gods people and are only to give an account for them they cannot challenge to themselves the sole rule over them And if the Bishops can give us good security that they will acquit us from giving up our account to God for the soules of his people we will quit our plea and resigne to them the sole rule over them So againe in the 1 Thessa. 5.12 Know them which labour amongst you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you In which words are contained these truthes First that in one Church for the Thessalonians were but one Church 1 Ca. there was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â— but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not one chiefe Bishop or President but the Presidency was in many Secondly that this presidency was of such as laboured in the word and Doctrine Thirdly that the Censures of the Church were managed not by one but by them all in Communi Them that admonish you Fourthly that there was among them a Parity for the Apostles bids know them in an Indifferency not discriminating one from another yea such was the rule that Elders had that S. Peter thought it needfull to make an exhortation to them to use their power with Moderation not Lording it over Gods Heritage 1 Pet. 5.3 By this time we have sufficiently proved from Scripture that Bishops and Presbyters are the same in name in Office in Edifying the Church in power of Ordination and Iurisdiction we summe up all that hath beene spoken in one argument They which have the same Name the same Ordination to their Office the same qualification for their Office the same worke to feede the flock of God to ordaine pastors and Elders to Rule and Governe they are one and the same Office but such are Bishops and presbyters Ergo. SECT VI. BUt the dint of all this Scripture the Remonstrant would elude by obtruding upon his reader a commentary as he calls it of the Apostles own practise which hee would force to contradict their own rules to which he superadds the unquestioÌ„able glosse of the cleare practise of their immediate successors in this administration For the Apostles practise we have already discovered it from the Apostles own writings and for his Glosse he superadds if it corrupts not the Text we shall admit it but if it doe we must answer with Tertullian Id verum quodcunque primum id adulterum quod posterius whatsoever is first is true but that which is latter is adulterous In the examination of this Glosse to avoyd needlesse Controversie First wee take for granted by both sides that the first and best Antiquitie used the names of Bishops and Presbyters promiscuously Secondly that in processe of time some one was honoured with the name of Bishop and the rest were called Presbyters or Cleri Thirdly that this was not Nomen inane but there was some kinde of Imparitie betweene him and the rest of the Presbyters Yet in this we differ that they say this Impropriation of name and Imparity of place is of Divine Right and Apostolicall Institution we affirme both to be occasionall and of humane Invention and undertake to shew out of Antiquitie both the occasion upon which and the Persons by whom this Imparity was brought into the Church On our parts stands Ierome and Ambrose and others whom we doubt not but our Remonstrant wil grant a place among his Glossators Saint Ierome tells us in 1 Tit. Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus antequam Diaboli instinctu studia in Religione â—ierent diceretur in populis ego sum Pauli ego Apollo ego Cephae Communi Presbyterorum Consilio ecclesiae gubernabantur Postquam verò unusquisque eos quos baptizaverat suos putabat esse non Christi in toto Orbe decretum est ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur caeteris ad quem omnis Ecclesiae Cura pertineret schismatum semina â—olicrentur Putat aliquts non Scripturarum sed nostram esse sentâ—ntiam Episcopum Presbyterum unum esse aliud aetatis aliud esse nomen officii relâ—gat Apostoli ad Philippenses verba dicentis Paulus Timotheus servi Iesis Christi qui sunt Philippis cum Episcopis Diaconis c. Philippi una est urbs Macedoniae certè in unâ Civitate non poterant plures esse ut nuncupantur Episcopi c. sicut ergo Presbyteri sciant se ex Ecclesiae consuetudine ei qui sibi praepositus fuerit esse subjectos Ita Episcopi noverint se magis consuetudine quam dispositionis Dominicae veritate Presbyteris esse majores in Communi debere Ecclesiam regere A Presbyter and a Bishop is the same and before there were through the Devils instinct divisions in Religion and the people began to say I am of Paul and I of Apollo and I of Cephas The Churches were governed by the Common Counsell of the Presbyters But after that each man began to account those whom hee had baptized his owne and not Christs it was decreed thorow the whole world that one of the Presbyters should be set over the rest to whom the Care of all the Church should belong that the seeds of schisme might be taken away Thinkes any that this is my opinion and not the opinion of the Scripture that a Bishop and an Elder is the same let him reade the words of the Apostle to the Philippians saying Paul and Timothy the servants of Jesus Christ to them that are at Philippi with the Bishops Deacons Philippi is one City of Macedonia and certainly in one Citie there could not be many Bishops as they are now called c. and after the allegations of many other Scriptures he concludes thus as the Elders therefore may know that they are to be subject to him that is set over them by the Custome of the Church so let the Bishops know that it is more from custome then from any true dispensation from the Lord that they are above the Presbyters and that they ought to rule the Church in common In which words of Ierome these five things present themselves to the Readers view First that Bishops and Presbyters are originally the same Idem ergo est Presbyter qui Episcopus Secondly that that Imparitie that was in his time betweene Bishops and Elders was grounded upon Ecclesiasticall Custome and not upon divine Institution Episcopi noverint c. Thirdly that this was not his private judgement but the judgement of Scripture Putat aliquis c. Fourthly that before this Prioritie was upon this occasion started
but this is but a blind wherewith the Bishop would Dorre his Reader for wee challenge any man to produce the names of any Clergie-man that was Vicar to Ambrose or Chancellour to Augustine or any other of the Bishops of these times so that herein our Bishops and theirs are TWO SECT XI A Third branch wherein the difference betweene our Bishops and the Bishops of former times inpoint of Exercising their Jurisdiction is visible is the way or manner of exercising that power For brevities sake we will onely instance in their proceedings in Causes Criminall where let them tell us whether any good Antiquity can yeeld them one President for THEIR OATH EX OFFICIO which hath been to their COURTS as Purgatory fire to the Popes Kitchin they have forgotten that old Maxime in the Civill Law Nemo tenetur prodere seipsum which as it is grounded upon naturall equity so it is confirmed by a Law enacted by Dioclesian and Maximilian Nimis grave est quod petitis c. It is too grievous that the adverse part should be required to the exhibition of such things as should create trouble to themselves Vnderstand therefore that you ought to bring proofes of your intentions and not to extort them from your adversaries against themselves Shall the Lamp of Nature in the night of Ethnicisme enable Heathen Princes yea Persecutors to see and enact thus much and shall not the glorious Sunne of the Gospell convince these of their iniquities in transgressing this Law that call themselves the Fathers of the Church If neither the light of Nature nor Gospell light can yet the Custome of the Church to which they so oft appeale may both convince them of this iniquitie and discover to all the world the contrarietie of their proceedings to the proceedings of former times in this particular For of Old both the Plaintiffe and Defendant were brought face to face before the parties in whose power it was to judge which way of proceeding Athanasius affirmes to be according to Scripture the Law of God And because those that condemned Macarius did not thus proceed he condemnes their Sentence as malicious and unjust Of old no Sentence passed against any man but upon the Testimony of other witnesses besides the Accusers after Complaint exhibited the first thing they applyed themselves to was to consider the person and qualitâ—e of the Accuser Concilâ— prim Constant. Can. 6 Then they heard the Witnesses who were two at least Can. Apost Can. 75. And these witnesses must be such as might not be imagined to be partiall nor to beare enmity nor malice against the party accused Ambros. Epist. 64. so Gratian Caus. 3. quae 5. cap. Quod suspecti Of old None might be party witnesse and Iudge which Gratian proves at large Caus. 4. qu 4. cap. Nullus unquam praesumat accusator simul esse Iudex testis We grant indeed the Canon Law permits in some cases Tryall without witnesses Si crimen ita publicum est ut meritò debeat appellari notorium If the crime be so publique that it may deservedly be called Notorious Which Law further determines what is notorious saâ—ing Offensam illam nos intelligimus manifestam quae vel per confessionem vel probationem legitime nota fuerit aut evidentiâ Rei quae nulla possit tergiversatione celari We count that offence manifest which either by confession or by lawfull proofe comes to be knowne or by evidence of fact so as it can be hid by no tergiversations So that all was done in former times with mature deliberation upon examination and evidence produced and proved by such witnesses as against whom the dâ—fendant could lay in no just exception And not as now an accusation whispered against a man he knowes not by whom to which he must take his Oath to answer before he knowes what his accusation is Which Oath if he takes without further witnesse he is censured upon the witnesâ—e of his owne Oath If he takes it not he is sent presently to prison there to lie without Bayle or Mainprize till the insupportable miseries of his long durance compel him to take an Oath against Nature Scripture Conscience and the just Defence of his owne innocencie That our Bishops therefore and former Bishops are Two in the point of executing their Judicatory power we need spend no more time to prove But come to the third thing in which the difference betweene ours and former Bishops is to be evidenced SECT XII ANd that is State Imployment or attendance upon Civill and Secular affaires c. which both Christ and Saint Paul prohibits which prohibition reacheth every Bishop to speake in Chrysostomes words as well as Timothy to whom it is directed Nullus ergo Episcopatu praeditus haec audire detrectet sed agere ea omnia detrectet Let no man that is a Bishop refuse to heare what the Apostle saith but to doe what the Apostle forbids We deny not but that Bishops were in the Primitive times often incumbred with secular businesse but these were put upon them sometimes by Emperours who sought the ruine of the Church as Iulian of whom Niceph lib. 10. cap. 13. doth report that in Clerum coaptatos Senatorum munere ministerio perversè fungi jussit Sometimes the gracious disposition of Princes towards Christian Religion made them thus to honour Bishops thinking thereby to advance Religion as Constantine the Great enacted that such as were to be tryed before Civill Magisâ—rates might have leave to appeale ad Iudicium Episcoporum atque eorum sententiani ratam esse tanquam ab ipso Imperatore prolatam And this the Historian reckoneth as one argument of his reverend respect to Religion Sometimes the excellency of their singular parts cast Civill dignities upon them Tiberius granted a Questors dignitie unto a Bishop for his eloquence Chrysostome for his notable stoutnesse and freedome of speech was sent as the fittest man to Gainas with the Emperours command Sometimes the people observing the Bishops to be much honoured by the Emperour would sollicite them to present their grievances to the Emperour And sometimes the aspiring humour of the Bishops raised them to such places as appeares by Cyrill who was the first Bishop in Alexandria who had civill dignities conferred upon him as Socrates relates it from whom Civill authority did descend upon succeeding Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of whom Nicephorus therefore recorded Episcopatum majoricum fastu prophanorum Magistratuum more quam praedecessores ejus Episcopi ingressus est unde adeo initium sumptum est in Ecclesia Alexandrina ut Episcopietiam profana negotia curarent He entred upon his Episcopacie with more pomp then his predecessors with a pomp conformable to the Heathen Magistrates Both these Historians relate the sad consequence that followed upon this that Orestes the Roman Governour seeing his power much weakned by the Bishops interposing in secular affaires
hated the Bishop and this as the Historian calls it his usurped power This president of the Alexandrian Bishop the Bishop of Rome did soone follow Et Romanus Episcopatus non aliter quam Alexandrinus quasi EXTRA SACERDOTII FINES egressus ad secularem principatum erat jam delapsus The Bishop of Rome as well as the Bishop of Alexandria breaking the limits of the Priestly function did degenerate into a secular Principalitie which purchased no lesse envie to him then that to the other And though these two Bishops went at first abreast in this point yet in a short time the Roman had outstripped the Alexandrian in that power till the Church degenerating more and more that Roman Priest advanced his power not onely above all the Bishops but all the Monarchs in the Christian Orbe Yet notwithstanding he that shall look into the Ancients shall finde first that the best of them held that they were not to be molested with the handling of worldly affaires Cyprian Epist. 66.1 Singuli divino Sacerdotio honorati non nisi altari sacrificiis deservire precibus atque orationibus vacare debent Molestiis secularibus non sunt obligandi qui divinis rebus spiritualibus occupantur Secondly that they complained of them as of heavy burthens Aug. calles it Angaria yea Austin himselfe in his 81. Epistle Complaines that worldly businesse hindered his praying and so pressed him that vix respirare potuit and Gregory the great non sine dolore in secularibus versabatur praefat in Dial. Thirdly Cyprian construed it as one great cause of persecutions raised against the Church de lapsis Sect. 4. Fourthly it was much cryed downe as unlawfull by the holy Fathers many Canons forbidding it and that under paine of being removed from their places Can. Apost Can. 6. Can. 81. hee that did presume to administer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Roman command or Administration of Military affaires or civill place as Zonaras there he should be deposed Can. Apo. Can. 83. hiring of ground medling with worldly affaires is to be laid asid by them Otherwise they are threatned to be liable to Ecclesiasticall censures Conc. Cal. Cano. 3. Conc. Carth. Can. 16. We will ad this for a conclusion in this point it is observed by Athanasius Sulpitius Severus and other Ecclesiasticall Historians that the Arians were very expedite in worldly affaires which experience they gained by their constant following and attendance upon the Emperours Court and what troubles they occasioned to the Church thereby is notoriously knowne to any that have seene the Histories of their times And in this our Bishops have approved themselves more like to the Arian Bishops then the purer Bishops of purer times but how ever cleare it is that our Bishops and the Bishops of former times are Two Two in election to their office Two in the discharge of their office Two in their Ordination Iurisdiction processes Censures Administrations and the difference betweene our Bishops and those of former times is greater then between the great Bishop of Rome and them SECT XIII BUt it seemes our Remonstrant soared above those times even as high as the Apostles dayes for so hee saith If our Bishops challenge any other spirituall power then was by Apostolike Authority delegated to and required of Timothy and Titus and the Angels of the seven Asian Churches let them be DISCLAIMED as VSVRPERS And the truth is so they deserve to be if they do but challenge the same power that the Apostle did delegate to Timothy and Titus for Timothy and Titus were Evangelists and so moved in a Sphere above Bishops or Presbyters For Timothy it is cleare from the letter of the Text 2 Tim. 4.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Doe the worke of an Evangelist if Timothy had beene but a Presbyter or Bishop Paul had here put him upon imployment Vltra Sphara Activitatis And to any man that will but understand and consider what the Office of an Evangelist was and wherein it differed from the Office of a Presbyter or Bishop it will bee manifest that Timothy and Titus were Evangelists and no Bishops for the title of Evangelist is taken but two wayes either for such as wrote the Gospell and so wee doe not affirme Timothy and Titus to bee Evangelists or else for such as taught the Gospell and those were of two sorts either such as had ordinary places and ordinary gifts or such whose places and gifts were extraordinary and such Evangelists were Timothy and Titus and not Bishops as will appeare if wee consider what was the Difference betweene the Evangelists and Bishopsâ— Bishops or Presbyters were tyed to the particular care and tuiâ—ion of that flock over which God had made them Overseers Acts 20.28 But Evangelists were not tyed to reside in one particular place but did attend upon the Apostles by whose appoyntment they were sent from place to place as the necessity of the Churches did require As appeares first in Timothy â— whom S. Paul besought to abide at Ephesus 1 Tim. 1.3 which had been a needlesse importunity if Timothy had had the Episcopall that is the Pastorall charge of Ephesus committed to him by the Apostles for then hee might have laid as dreadfull a Charge upon him to abide at Ephesus as he doth to Preach the Gospell But so far was Paul from setling Timothy in Cathedrâ in Ephesus that he rather continually sends him up and downe upon all Church services for we â—inde Acts. 17.14 That when Paul fled from the tumults of Berea to Athens he left Silas and Timothy behinde him who afterwards comming to Paul to Athens Paul sends Timothy from Athens to Thessalonica to confirme the Thessalonians in the faith as appeares 1 Thes. 3.1.2 from whence returning to Paul to Athens againe the Apostle Paul before hee left Athens and went to Corinth sent him Silas into Macedonia who returned to him againe to Corinth Act. 18.5 afterwards they travelled to Ephesus from whence we read Paul sent Timothy and Erastus into Macedonia Act. 19 22. whither Paul went after them from whence they divers other Brethren journied into Asia Acts 20.4 All which Brethren Paul calles as it is probable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the messengers of the Churches 2 Cor. 8.23 And being thus accompanied with Timothy and the rest of the Brethren he comes to Miletum and calls the Elders of the Church of Ephesus thither to him of which Church had Timothy beene Bishop the Apostle in stead of giving the Elders a charge to feede the flock of Christ would have given that charge to Timothy and not to them And secondly the Apostle would not so have forgotten himselfe as to call the Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before their Bishops face Thirdly It is to be conceived the Apostles would have given them some directions how to carry themselves towards their Bishop but not a word of this though Timothy were then in
Pauls presence and in the presence of the Elders The cleare evidence of which text demonstrates that Paul did not leave Timothy at this time as Bishop of Ephesus But it is rather evident that hee tooke him along with him in his journey to Hiâ—rusalem and so to Rome for wee finde that those Epistles Paul wrote while hee was a prisoner beare either in their inscription or some other passage of them the name of Timothy as Pauls companion viz. The Epistle to the Philippians Colossians Hebreâ—es Philemon which Epistles he wrote in bonds as the contexture which those two learned professors the one at Heydelberge the other at Saulmur make of Saint Pauls Epistles doth declare So that it appeares that Timothy was no Bishop but a Minister an Evangelist a fellow labourer of the Apostles 1 Thess. 3.1 an Apostle a Messenger of the Church 2. Cor. 8.3 a Minister of God 1 Thess. 3.2 these titles the Holy Ghost gives him but never the title of a Bishop The like we find in Scripture concerning Titus whom Paul as it is conceived by learned men did first assume into the fellowship of his Labours in the place of Iohn and made him his companion in his journey through Antioch to Herusalem so we find Gal. 2.1 from thence returning to Antioch againe from thence hee passed through Syria and Cilicia confirming the Churches from Cilicia he passed to Creet where having Preached the Gospell and planted Churches he left Titus there for a while to set in order things that remaine Yet it was but for a while he left him there for in his Epistle which he wrote to him not many yeares after hee injoynes him to come to him to Nicopolis where he did intend to winter but changing that purpose sends for him to Ephesus where it seemes his Hyemall station was and from thence sends him before him to Corinth to enquire the state of the Corinthians His returne from thence Paul expects at Troas and because comming thither he found not his expectation there he was so grieved in his spirit 2 Cor. 2.12 that hee passed presently from thenâ—e into Macedonia where Titus met him and in the midst of his afflictions joyed his spirits with the glad tydings of the powerfull and gracious effects his first Epistle had among the Corinthians 2 Cor. 7 5 6 7. Paul having there collected the Liberalities of the Saints sends Titus againe to the Corinthians to prepare them for the same service of Ministring to the necessities of the Saints 2 Cor. 8.6 And makes him with some others the Conveyers of that second Epistle to the Corinthians All these journeyes to and fro did Titus make at the designement of the Apostle even after hee was left in Creet Nor doe we finde that after his first removall from Creet he did ever returne thither Wee reade indeed 2 Tim. 4.10 hee was with Paul at Rome and from thence returned not to Creet but into Dalmatia All which doth more then probably shew it never was the Intendment of the Apostle to six Titus in Creet as a Bishop but onely to leave him there for a season for the good of that Church and to call him from thence and send him abroad to other Churches for their good as their necessities might require Now who that will acknowledge a Distinction betweene the Offices of Bishops and Evangelists and knowes wherein that Distinction lyes will not upon these premisses conclude that Timothy and Titus were Evangelists and NOT Bishops I but some of the Fathers have called Timothy and Titus Bishops We grant it true and it is as true that some of the Fathers have called them Archbishops and Patriarks yet it doth not follow they were so Wee adde secondly that when the Fathers did call them so it was not in a proper but in an improper sense which we expresse in the words of our Learned Orthodox Raynolds You may learne by the Fathers themselves saith hee that when they tearmed any Apostle a Bishop of thiâ— or that City as namely Saint Peter of Antioch or Rome they meant it in a generall sort and signification because they did attend that Church for a time and supply that roome in preaching the Gospell which Bishops did after but as the name of Bishop is commonly taken for the Overseer of a particular Church and Pastor of a severall flocke so Peter was not Bishop of any one place therefore not of Rome And this is true by Analogy of all extraordinary Bishops and the same may be said of Timothy and Titus that he saith of Peter But were it true that Timothy and Titus were Bishops will this remonstrant undertake that all his party shall stand to his Conditions If our Bishops challenge any other power then was by Apostolique Authority delegated to and required of Timothy and Titus and the Angells of the seaven Asian Churches let them be disclaimed as usurpers Will our Bishops indeed stand to this then actum est Did ever Apostolique authority delegate power to Timothy or Titus to ordaine alone to governe alone and doe not our Bishops challenge that power Did ever Apostolique authority delegate power to Timothy and Titus to rebuke an Elder no but to entreate him as a Father and doe not our Bishops challenge to themselvesâ— and permit to their Chancellours Commissaries and Officialls power not only to rebuke an Elder but to rayle upon an Elder to reproach him with the most opprobrious tearmes of foole knave jack-sauce c. which our paper blushes to present to your Honours view Did ever Apostolique authority delegate to Timothy and Titus power to receave an accusation against an Elder but before two or three witnesses and doe not our Bishops challenge power to proceed Ex officio and make Elders their owne Accusers Did ever Apostolique authority delegate power to Timothy or Titus to reject any after twice admonition but an Heretick and doe not our Bishops challenge power to reject and eject the most sound and orthodox of our Ministers for refusing the use of a Ceremony as if Non-conformity were Heresie So that either our Bishops must disclaime this remonstrance or else themselves must be disclaimed as usurpers But if Timothy and Titus were no Bishops or had not this power it may bee the Angells of the seven Asian Churches had and our Remonstrant is so subtile as to twist these two together that if one fayle the other may hold To which we answer first that Angell in those Epistles is put Collectively not Individually as appeares by the Epistle to Thyatira cap. 2. vers 24. where wee reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But I say unto you in the plurall number not unto thee in the singular and unto the rest in Thyatira c. Here is a plaine distinction betweene the members of that Church By you is signified those to whom hee spake under the name of the Angell By
prayers but such as were approved of in a Synode which was not determined till the yeare 416. Conc. Milev 2. Can. 12. And had there been any Liturgies of Times of the first and most venerable antiquity producible the great admirers of them and inquirers after them would have presented them to the world ere this we know that Bishop Andrews in his zeale for Liturgies pursued the inquiry after the Iewish Liturgie so far that he thought he had found it and one there was which he sent to Cambridge to be translated but there it was soone discovered to have beene made long after the Iewes ceased to be the Church of God and so himselfe supprest it that it never saw the light under a translation We wonder therefore what this Remonstrant meant to affirme so confidently that part of the forme of prayer which was composed by our blessed Saviour was borrowed from the formes of prayer formerly used by Gods people An opinion we never met before indeed we have read that the Rabbines since the daies of our Saviour have borrowed some expressions from that Prayer and from other Evangelicall passages But we never read till now that the Lord Christ the wisdome of the Father borrowed from the wisdome of the Rabbines expressions to use in Prayer And as much we wonder by what Revelation or Tradition Scripture being silent in the thing he knew that Peter and Iohn when they went up to the Temple to pray their Prayer was not of a sudden and extemporary conception but of a Regular prescription Sure we are some as well read in Iewish antiquity as this Remonstrant shewes himselfe to be have told us that the houre of Prayer was the time when the Priest burnt Incense and the people were at their private prayers without as appeares Luke 1.9 where we reade that while Zachary the Priest went in to offer Incense all the people stood with out praying in the time of the Oblation Which Prayers were so far from being Prescript Formes or Liturgies that they were not vocall but mentall Prayers as Master Meade tels us in his exposition upon the eighth of the Revelations And what ever Peter and Iohn did this we know that when the Publican and the Pharisee went up to the Temple to pray as the Apostles did at the houre of prayer their prayer was not of Regular prescription but of a present Conception But if this Remonstrant be in the right concerning the Iewish Liturgies then the Evangelicall Church might better have improved her peace and happinesse then in composing Models of Invocation and Thanksgiving when there is one extant and ready to be produced that was constantly used by Gods people ever since Moses daies and put over to the times of the Gospel and confirmed by Apostolicall practise or else great is our losse who are so unhappily deprived of the best improvement the Church made of her peace and happinesse in the first 300. yeares for rejecting those Liturgies that are confest by the Learned to bee Spurious We challenge this Remonstrant to produce any one Liturgie that was the issue of those times And blessed Constantine was herein as unhappy as we who needed not have composed formes of prayer for his Guard to use upon the Lords day but might and would have taken them out of former Liturgies if there had been any And can ye with patience think that any ingenuous Christian should be so transported as upon such weak and unproved premises to build such a Confident conclusion as this Remonstrant doth and in that Conclusion forget the state of the controversie sliding from the question of a prescribed and imposed Liturgie to an arbitrary book of prayer In his Rhetoricall Encomium of conceived prayer wee shall more willingly bear a part with him then they whose cause he pleads for had that been in their hearts which is in this book to hate to be guilty of powring water upon the Spirit and gladly to adde oyle rather so many learned able Conscientious Preachers had not been molested and suspended for letting the constant flames of their fixed conceptions mount up from the altar of their zealous heart unto the throne of grace nor had there been so many advantages watched from some stops and seeming solecismes in some mens prayers to blaspheme the spirit of prayer which though now confest to be so far from being offensive that they are as pleasing Musick in the eares of the Almighty yet time hath been when they have â—ounded as meere Battologies nay no better then meere Blasphemies in the â—ares of some Bishops And if this conceived prayer be not to be opposed in another by any man that hath found the true operation of this grace in himselfe with that spirit then are those possest that have not only thus raged with their tongues against this way of prayer but by sealing up the mouthes of Ministers for praying thus in publike and imposing penances upon private Christians for praying thus in their Families and compelling them to abiure this practise have endeavoured with raging violence to banish this divine ordinance from our Churches and dwellings and profest in open Court it was fitter for Amsterdam than for our Churches But howsoever this applause of conceived prayer may seeme to be Cordiall yet he makes it but a vantage ground to lift up publike formes of sacred Church Liturgie as hee calls it the higher that they may have the greater honour that by the power of your authority they be reinforced which worke there would have beene no need to call your Honors to had not Episcopall zeale broke forth into such flames of indignation against conceived prayers that we have more just cause to implore the propitious aide of the same Authority to reestablish the Liberty of this then they to re-inforce the necessity of that Yet there are two specious Arguments which this Remonstrant brings to perswade this desired re-inforcement the Originall and Confirmation of our Liturgie For the first he tels your Honours it was selected out of ancient Models not ROMAN but CHRISTIAN contrived by the holy Martyrs and Confessors of the blessed reformation of Religion where we beseech your Honours to consider how we may trust these men who sometimes speaking and writing of the ROMAN Church proclaime it a true Church of CHRIST and yet here ROMAN and CHRISTIAN stand in opposition sometimes they tell men their Liturgie is wholly taken out of the Romane Missall only with some little alteration and here they would perswade your Honours there is nothing Romane in it But it is wholly selected out of pure Ancient Models as the Quintessence of them all Whereas alas the originall of it is published to the world in that Proclamation of Edward the sixt And though here they please to stile the Composers of it holy Martyrs and contrivers of the blessed Reformation yet there are of the Tribe for whom
not what this Arrogancy might attempt to fasten upon your Honors should the bowels of your compassion bee enlarged to weigh in the Ballance of your wisdomes the multitude of Humble petitions presented to you from severall parts of this Kingdome that hath long groaned under the Iron aâ—d Insupportable yoake of this Episcopall Government which yet we doubt not but your Honours will please to take into your prudent and pious consideration Especially knowing it is their continuall practise to loade with the odious names of Faction all that justly complain of their unjust oppression In his addresse to his defence of Episcopacy he makes an unhappy confession that he is confounded in himselfe Your Honours may in this beleeve him for hee that reades this Remonstrance may easily observe so many falsities and contradictions though presented to publike view with a face of confident boldnesse as could not fall from the Pen of any but selfe-confounded man which though we doubt not but your Honours have descryed yet because they are hid from an errant and unobserving eye under the Embroyderies of a silken Language wee Humbly crave your Honours leave to put them one by one upon the file that the world may see what credit is to be given to the bold assertions of this confident Remonstrant First in his second page he dubs his Book the faithfull messenger of all the peaceable and right affected sons of the Church of England which words besides that unchristian Theta which as we already observed they set upon all that are not of his party carry in the bowels of them a notorious falsity and contradiction to the phrase of the booke for how could this booke be the messenger of all his owne party in England when it is not to be imagined that all could know of the comming forth of this booke before it was published and how can that booke crave admittance in all their names that speakes in the singular number and as in the person of one man almost the whole booke thorow But it may besome will say this is but a small slippe well be it so but in the seventh page hee layes it on in foure lines asserting these foure things First that Episcopall Government that very same Episcopall Government which some he saith seekes to wound that is Government by Diocesan Bishops derives it selfe from the Apostles times which though we shall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more fully confute anon yet we cannot here but ranke it among his notorious for how could there be such Government of a Diocesse by a Bishop derived from the Apostles times when in the Apostles times there were no Bishops distinct from Pâ—esbyters as we shall shew and if there had beene Bishops yet they were no Diocesans for it was a hundred yeares after Christ or as most agree 260. before Parishes were distinguished and there must be a distinction of Parishes before there could be an union of them into Diocesses Secondly it is by the joynt confession of all reformed Divines granted that this sacred Government is derived from the Apostles What all reformed Divines was Calvin Beza Iunius c. of that minde Are the reformed Churches of France Scotland Netherlands of that Iudgement we shall shew anon that there is no more Truth in this Assertion then if he had said with Anaxagoras snow is black or with Copernicus the Earth moves and the heavens stand still Thirdly he saith this Government hath continued without any interruption What doth he meane at Rome for we reade in some places of the world this Government was never known for many yeares together as in Scotland â— we reade that in Ancient times the Scots were instructed in the Christian faith by Priests and Monkes and were without Bishops 290. yeares yea to come to England we would desire to know of this Remonstrant whether God had a Church in England in Q. Mariâ—s daies or no and if so who were then the Bishops of this Church for some there must be if it be true that this man saith this Government hath continued without any interruption unto this day and Bishops then we know not where to finde but in the â—ine of Popish succession Fourthly he saith it hath thus continued without the contradiction of any one Congregation in the Christian world It seemes he hath forgotten what their own darling Heylin hath written of the people of Biscay in Spaine that they admit of no Bishops to come among them for when Ferdinand the Catholike came in progresse accompanied among others with the Bishop of Pampelone the people rose up in Armes drove back the Bishop and gathering up all the dust which they thought he had trode on flung it into the Sea Which story had it been recorded only by him would have been of lighter Credit But we reade the same in the Spanish Chronicle who saith more then the Doctor for he tels us that the People threw that dust that the Bishop or his Mule had trode on into the Sea with Curses and Imprecations which certainly saith he was not done without some Mysterie those people not being voide of Religion but superstitiously devout as the rest of the Spaniards are so that they is one Congregation in the Christian world in which this Government hath met with contradiction And are not the French Scottish and Belgicke Churches worthy to be counted Christian Congregations and who knows not that amongst these this Government hath met not only with verball but reall contradiction Yet he cannot leave his But within two pages is at it again and tels us of an unquestionable clearnesse wherein it hath been from the Apostles derived to us how unquestionable when the many volumes written about it witnesse to the world and to his conscience it hath been as much questioned as any point almost in our Religion And that assertion of his that tels us that the people of God had a forme of prayer as ancient as Moses which was constantly practised to the Apostles dayes and by the Apostles c. though we have shewed how bold and false this assertion is yet we mention it here as deserving to be put into the Catalogue And that he may not seeme Contra Mentem ire but to be of the same minde still p. 18. he saith Episcopall Government hath continued in this Island ever since the first plantation of the Gospell without contradiction Had he taken a lesse space of time and said but since the resuscitation of the Gospel we can prove it to him and shall that since the reformation Episcopacy hath been more contradicted then ever the Papacy was before the extirpation of it Yet still the man runs on thinking to get credit to his untruthes by their multiplications for pag. 21. hee saith Certainly except all Histories all Authors faile us nothing can be more certain then this truth Oâ— Durum Nothing more certain what is it not more certain
that there is a God is it not more certain that Christ is God and man is it not more certaine that Christ is the onely Saviour of the world Nothing more certaine must this then be an Article of our Creede the corner stone of our Religion must this be of necessity to Salvation Nothing more certaine O that men should not onely forget themselves but God also And in their zeale for their owne Honour utter words bordering upon Blasphemy Indignation will not suffer us to prosecute these falsities of his any further wee will leave this displeasing service onely retorting the words of this Remonstrant upon himselfe Surely could he looke with our eyes or any eyes that were not partiall he would see cause to bee throughly ashamed of these his grosse injurious miscarriages and should be forced to confesse that never good cause if cause be good had more reason to complaine of a sinfull prosecution SECT IV. VVE will now come with your Honours patience to weigh whether there be any more strength in his arguments then there is truth in his assertionâ— His Plea for Episcopacy consists of two parts In the â—irst he brings arguments for the supporting of it In the second he undertakes to answer the objections that may be made against it His first argument for it is couched in these words Were this Ordinance merely humane or Ecclesiasticall if there could no more be said for it but that it is exceeding Ancient of more then 15 hundred yeeres c. The strength of which argument lies in this that they have beene in peaceable possession of this government fifteene hundred yeares and upwards and in this Island ever since the Gospell without contradiction In which words he speakes two things which deserve just censure First that the Hierarchicall Government hath continued for fifteene hundred yeares therefore should not now be altered which may well be called as Hierome in another Case ArgumentuÌ„ Galeatum an argument calculated for the Meridian of Episcopacy and may indifferently serve for all Religions in the world For thus the Iewes might have pleaded against Christ the Antiquity of more then so many hundred years and thus the Heathens did plead against the Christian Religion which Iustin Martyr in his Apology answers And by this Argument the Pope sits as fast rivetted in his chayre at Rome as ours in theirs whose plea for Antiquity runs parallell with theirs It is a good observation of Cyprian that Christ said Ego sum via veritas vita not Ego sum consuetudo and that Consuetudo sine veritate est vetustas erroris Christ is Truth and not Custome and Custome without Truth is a mouldy errour and as Sir Francis Bacon saith Antiquity without Truth is a Cypher without a Figure Yet had this Remonstrant been as well versed in Antiquity as he would beare the world in hand he hath hee might have found Learned Ancients affirming there was a Time when the Church was not governed by Bishops but by Presbyters And when by Bishops he might further have seene more affinity betweene our Bishops and the Pope of Rome then betweene the Primitive Bishops and them And that as King Iames of famous memory said of the Religion of England that it differed no more from Rome than Rome did from what it was at first may as truly be said of Bishops that we differ no more from them then they doe from what Bishops were when first they were raised unto this eminency which difference we shall shew in our ensuing Discourse to be so great that as he said of Rome he did Romam in Roma quaerere he sought Rome in Rome so we Episcopatum in Episcopatu may go seek for a Bishop among all our Bishops And whereas in his application of this Argument to the Bishops of this Nation he saith It hath continued in this Island ever since the first plantation of the Gospel without contradiction which is his Second in this Argument How false this is we have declared already and we all know and himselfe cannot but know that there is no one thing since the reformation that hath met with so much Contradiction as Episcopacy hath done witness the severall Bookes written in the Reignes of our severall Princes and the many Petitions exhibited to our severall Parliaments and the many speeches made therein against Episcopall Government many of which are yet extant As for that supply of Accessory strength which he begs to this Argument from the light of nature and the rules of iust policy which saith he teacheth us not easily to give way to the change of those things which long use and many Lawes have firmly established as Necessary and Beneficiall it is evident that those things which to former Ages have seemed Necessary and Beneficiall may to succeeding Generations prove not Necessary but Noxious not Beneficiall but Burthensome And then the same light of nature and the same iust policy that did at the first command the establishment of them may and will perswade their abolishment if not either our Parliaments must never Repeale any of their former Acts which yet they have justly and wisely done or else in so doing must run Counter to the light of nature and the Rules of iust policy which to think were an impiety to be punished by the Iudge SECT V. THe Second Argument for the defence of Episcopall government is from the Pedigree of this holy Calling which he derives from no lesse than an Apostolicall and in that right divine institution and assayes to prove it from the practice of the Apostles and as he saith the cleare practice of their Successors continued in Christs Church to this very day and to this Argument he so much confides that he concludes it with this Triumphant Epiphonema What scruple can remain in any ingenuous heart And determines if any continue yet unsatisfied it is in despight of reason and all evidence of History and because he wilfully shuts his eyes with a purpose not to see the light Bona verba By your favour Sir we will tell you notwithstanding the supposed strength of your argumentation there is one scruple yet remaining and if you would know upon what ground it is this because we finde in Scripture which by your own Confession is Originall Authority that Bishops and Presbyters were Originally the same though afterwards they came to be distinguished and in processe of time Episcopacy did swallow up all the honor and power of the Presbytery as Pharaohs lean Kine did the fat Their Identity is discernable first from the same names given unto both secondly from the same office designed unto both in Scripture As for the names are not the same names given unto both in sacred Writ Let the fifth sixth and seventh verses of the first Chapter to Titus testifie in the fifth verse the Apostle shews that he left Titus in Creet to ordaine Elders in every City in the
sentence of Saint Ambrose because saith hee Hoc Iudicium Nostrum cum fratribus consacerdotibus participatum processerit Nor was there any kinde of censures that the Bishops did administer alone Admonitions were given by the Elders Augustine tells us the Elders did admonish such as were offenders to the same purpose speakes Origen contra Celsum Lib. 3. So excommunication though that being the dreadfullest thunder of the Church and as Tertullian calls it summum praejudicium futuri Iudicij the great fore-runner of the Judgement of God was never vibrated but by the hand of those that laboured in the Word and Doctrine yet was no one man in the Church invested with this power more then another Therefore saith Hierom Presbytero si peccavero licet me tradere satanae in interitum carnis If I sinne a Presbyter not a Bishop onely may deliver me to Satan to the destruction c. where the Reader may please to take notice that Saint Hierom speakes not of one particular Presbyter but of the Order of Presbyters The same S. Hierom saith againe Sunt quos Ecclesia reprehendit quos interdum abijcit in quos nonnunquam Episcoporum Clericorum censura desaevit There be some whom the Church reprooves and some which shee casts out against whom the censures of Bishops and Presbyters sharply proceed where we see the Censures whereby wicked men were cast out of the Church were not the sole hands of the Bishops but likewise in the hands of Presbyters Syricius Bishop of Rome signifies to the Church of Mâ—llaine that Iovinianus Auxentius c. were cast out of the Church for ever and he sets downe how they did it Omnium Nostrum tam Presbyterorum quam Diaconorum quam totius etiam clerisciscitata fuit sententia There was a concurrence of all Presbyters Deacons and the whole Clergie in that sentence of Excommunication The truth herein may be further evidencâ—d by this because the whole Clergie as well as the Bishops imposed hands uâ—on such as repâ—nting were aâ—solved Nec ad communicationem saith Cyprâ—an venire quis possit nisi prius ab Episcopo Clero Manus illi fuerit imposita No man that hath beene excommunicated might returne to Church-Communion before hands had been laid upon him by the Bishop and Clergie Also writing to his Clergie concerning lapsed Christians he tells them Exomologe si facta manu eis a vobis in poenitentiam impositâ c. that after confession and the laying on their hands they might be commended unto God so when certaine returning from their heresie were to be received into the Church at Rome in the time of Cornelius they came before the Presbyterie and therefore confessed their sinnes and so were admitted But though the sentence of Excommunication was managed oneâ—y by the hand of those that laboured in the Word and Doctrine yet we will not conceale from you that neither Excommunication nor absolution did passe wâ—thout the knowledge and approbation of the body of the Church to which the Deliquent did belong So we have learned out of Tertullian that their censures were ordered in their publike assemblies and good reason because the people were to forbeare communion with such 2 Thes. 3.6 14 15. and publick Censures of the Church were inflicted not onely for the Emendation of delinquents but for the admonition of others and therefore ought to be administred in publick that others might feare 1 Tim. 5.20 Origen speaking of the Duty and Power of the Church in cutting off a scandalous Person though a Presbyter making the case his owne he saith thus In uno consensu Ecclâ—sia universa conspirans excidat me dextram suam projiciat a se He would have the consent of the whole Church in that Act. And when the lapsed Christians were received againe into the Church the Peoples consent was required therein else why should Cyprian say Vix plebi persuadeo imò extorqueo ut tales patiantur admitti I can scarce perswade the people to suffer such to be admitted and in another Epistle written to his people in his Banishment he promiseth to examine all things they being present and judging Examinabuntur singula praesentibus judicantibus vobis But of this power of the People wee shall have a further occasion to speak afterwards when we come to discourse of Governing Elders Onely may it please your Honours from hence to take notice how unjustly our Bishops have invaded this right and power of Presbyters and people in Church censures and devesting both of it have girt it wholly upon themselves and how herein they and the Bishops of former times are TWO SECT X. ANd as our Bishops and the Bishops of former times are TWO in point of Sole Iurisdiction so also in the Delegation of this power of Iurisdiction unto others to their Chancellours Commissaries Officers c. Was ever such a thing as this heard of in the best primitive Times that men that never received Imposition of hands should not onely be received into assistance but be wholly intrusted with the power of Spirituall Iurisdiction Even then when it is to be exercised over such persons as have had hands laid upon them We may observe in Cyprian whilst persecution separated him from his Church when questions did arise among his people he doth not send them to his Chancellour or Commissarie No he was so farre from suâ—stituting any man much lesse a lay man to determine or give Judgement in such cases that hee would not assume that power wholly to himselfe but suspends his Judgement till the hand of God should restore him to his Church againe that with the advice and Counsell of the Presbyters he might give sentence as may appeare to any that shall peruse his Epistles Sure if God had ever led his Church to such a way of deputation it would have been in such a case of Necessity as this was or had any footsteps of such a course as this beene visible by this holy Martyr in the goings of former ages hee needed not have deferred the determination of the question about the receiving of some penitent lapsed ones into the bosome of the Church againe till his returne and the returne of his Clergie as he doth We will instance in his 28 Epistle wherein giving direction for the excommunicating of such as would rashly communicate with lapsed Christians he gives this charge not to his Chancellor or Commissarie or any other man upon whom he had devolved his power and set him as his Deputie or Vicar generall in his absence but ad clerum to the whole Presbyterie This Truth is so cleare that Bishop Downam the great Adâ—ocate of Episcopacie confesseth that in Ambrose his time a good while after which was about 400 yeers til the Presbyters were in a manner wholly neglected the Bishops had no Ordinaries Vicars Chancellors or Commissaries that were not Clergie-men
Subscriptions there would be no more Subscription to Ceremonies in the Churches of England But some will say that there is one objection out of Scripture yet unanswered and that is from the inequality that was betweene the twelve Apostles and the seventy Disciples To which we answer First that it cannot bee proved that the twelve Apostles had any superiority over the seventy either of Ordination or Jurisdiction Or that there was any subordination of the seventy unto the twelve But suppose it were yet we answer Secondly that a superiority and inferiority betweene Officers of different kindes will not prove that there should be a superiority and inferiority betweene Officers of the same kinde No man will deny but that in Christs time there were Apostles Evangelists Prophets Pastors and teachers and that the apostles were superior to Evangelists and Pastors But it cannot bee proved that one apostle had any superiority over another apostle or one Evangelist over another And why then should one Presbyter be over another Hence it followeth that though we should grant a superiority betweene the twelve and the seventy yet this will not prove the question in hand Because the question is concerning Officers of the same kinde and the instance is of Officers of different kinds amongst whom no man will deny but there may be a superiority and inferiority as there is amongst us between Presbyters and Deacons And now let your Honours judge considering the premisses how farre this Episcopall government is from any Divine right or Apostolicall institution And how true that speech of Hierome is that a bishop as it is a superior Order to a Presbyter is an Humane praesumption not a divine Ordinance But though Scripture failes them yet the indulgence and Munificence of Religious Princes may support them and to this the Remonstrant makes his next recourse yet so as he acknowledgeth here Ingagements to Princes onely for their accessory dignities titles and Maintenance not at all for their stations and functions wherein yet the author plainely acknowledgeth a difference betweene our Bishops and the Bishops of old by such accessions For our parts we are so farre from envying the gracious Munificence of pious Princes in collating honourable maintenance upon the Ministers of Christ that we beleeve that even by Gods owne Ordinance double Honour is due unto them And that by how much the Ministery of the Gospell is more honourable then that of the Law by so much the more ought all that embrace the Gospell to bee carefull to provide that the Ministers of the Gospell might not onely live but maintaine Hospitalitie according to the Rule of the Gospell And that worthy Gentleman spake as an Oracle that said That scandalous Maintenance is a great cause of a scandalous Ministery Yet wee are not ignorant that when the Ministery came to have Agros domos locationes vehicula equos latifundia as Chrysost. Hom. 86. in Matth. That then Religio peperit divitias filia devoravit Matrem religion brought forth riches and the Daughter devoured the Mother and then there was a voyce of Angels heard from Heaven Hodie venenum in Ecclesiam Christi cecidit this Day is poyson shed into the Church of Christ. And then it was that Ierome complained Christi Ecclesia postquam ad Christianos principes venit potentiâ quidem divitiis major sed virtutibus minor facta est Then also was that Conjunction found true That when they had woodden Chalices they had golden Priests but when their Chalices were golden their Priests were wooden And though we doe not thinke there is any such incompossibility but that large Revenues may be happily managed with an humble sociablenesse yet it is very rare to finde History tells us that the superfluous revenues of the Bishops not onely made them neglect their Ministery but further ushered in their stately and pompous attendance which did so elevate their Spirits that they insulted over their brethren both Clergy and People and gave occasion to others to hate and abhorre the Christian Faith Which Eusebius sets forth fully in the pride of Paulus Samosatenus who notwithstanding the meannesse and obscurity of his birth afterwards grew to that height of Insolâ—ncâ— and pride in all his carriage especially in that numerous traine that attended him in the streetes and in his stately throne raised after the manner of Kings and Princes that Fides nostra inviâ—â—ia odiâ— propter fostum superbiâ—m cordis illius facta fuerit obnexia the Christian faith was exposed to envy and hatred through his pride And as their ambition fed with the largenesse of their revenewes discovered it selfe in great attendance stately dwellings and all Lordly pompe so Hierom complaines of their pride in their stately seates qui velut in aliqua sublimi specula constituti vix dignantur vidâ—re mortales alloqui conservos suos who sitting aloft as it were in a watch tower will scarce deigne to looke upon poore mortalis or speake to their fellow servants Here we might bee large in multiplying severall testimonies against the pride of Ecclesiasticall persons that the largenesse of their revenues raysed them to but we will conclude with that grave complaint of Sulpitius Severus Ille qui ante pedibus aut asello ire consueverat spumante equo superbus invebitur parvá prius ac vili cellula contentus habitare erigit celsa Laquearia construit multa conclaviu sculpit postes pingit armaria vestem respuit gressiorem indumentum molle desiderat c. Which because the practise of our times hath already turned into English wee spare the labour to translate Onely suffer us being now to give a Vale to our remonstrants arguments to recollect some few things First whereas this remonstâ—ant saith If we doe not shew out of the true genuine writings of those holy men that lived in the Apostles dayes a cleare and received distinction of Bishopsâ— Presbyters and Deacons as three distinct subordinate callings with an evident specification of the duty belonging to each of them Let this claimed Hierarchie be for ever rooted out of the Church We beseech you let it be rememred how we have proved out of the genuine and undeniable writings of the Apostles themselves that these are not three distinct callings Bishops are Presbyters being with them all one Name and Office and that the distinction of Bishops and Presbyters was not of Divine Institution but Humane and that these Bishops in their first Institution did not differ so much from Presbyters as our present Bishops differ from them Secondly Whereas this remonstant saith If our Bishops challenge any other power then was by Apostolike authority delegated to and required of Timothy and Titus and the Angells of the Asian Churches Let them bee disclaimed as usurpers Wee desire it may be remembred how wee have proved first that Timothy and Titus and the Angels were no Diocesan bishops and secondly that our bishops challenge if not
to be thunder-stricken at this Question and cals the very Question a new Divinity where he deales like such as holding great revenues by unjust Titles will not suffer their Titles to be called in Question For it is apparent Ac si solaribus radiis descriptum esset to use Tertullians phrase that the word Church is an Equivocall word and hath as many severall acceptions as letters and that Dolus latet in universalibus And that by the Church of England first by some of these men is meant onely the Bishops or rather the two Archbishops or more properly the Archbishop of Canterbury Just as the Iesuited Papists resolve the Church and all the glorious Titles of it into the Pope so do these into the Archbishop or at fullest they understand it of the Bishops and their party met in Convocation as the more ingenuous of the Papists make the Pope and his Cardinals to be their Church thus excluding all the Christian people and Presbyters of the Kingdome as not worthy to be reckoned in the number of the Church And which is more strange this Author in his Simplicitie as he truly saith never heard nor thought of any more Churches of England then one and what then shal become of his Diocesan Churches and Diocesan Bishops And what shall wee think of England when it was an Heptarchy had it not then seven Churches when seven Kings Or if the Bounds of a Kingdome must constitute the Limits and Bounds of a Church why are not England Scotland and Ireland all one Church when they are happily united under one gracious Monarch into one Kingdome Wee reade in Scripture of the Churches of Iudea and the Churches of Galatia and why not the Churches of England not that we denie the Consociation or Combination of Churches into a Provinciall or Nationall Synod for the right ordering of them But that there should be no Church in England but a Nationall Church this is that which this Author in his simplicity affirmes of which the very rehearsall is a refutation SECT XVIII THere are yet two things with which this Remonstrance shuts up it selfe which must not be past without our Obeliskes First he scoffes at the Antiprelaticall Church and the Antiprelaticall Divisions â— for our parts we acknowledge no Antiprelaticall Church But there are a company of men in the Kingdome of no meane ranke or quality for Piety Nobility Learning that stand up to beare witnesse against the Hierarchie as it now stands their usurpations over Gods Church and Ministers their cruell using of Gods people by their tyrannicall Governement this we acknowledge and if hee call these the Antiprelaticall Church we doubt not but your Honours wil consider that there are many Thousands in this Kingdome and those pious and worthy persons that thus doe and upon most just cause It was a speech of Erasinus of Luther Vt quisque vir est optimus ita illius Scriptis minimè offendi The better any man was the lesse offence he tooke at Luthers writings but we may say the contrary of the Prelates Vt quisque vir est optimus ita illorum factis magis offendi The better any man is the more he is offended at their dealings And all that can be objected against this party will be like that in Tertullian Bonus vir Cajus Sejus sed malus tantum quia Antiprelaticus But he upbraides us with our Divisions and Subdivisions and so doe the Papists upbraid the Protestants with their Lutheranisme Calvinisme and Zuinglianisme And this is that the Heathens objected to the Christians their Fractures were so many they knew not which Religion to chuse if they should turn Christians And can it be expected that the Church in any age should be free froÌ„ divisions when the times of the Apostles were not free and the Apostle tells us it must needs be that there be divisions in Greg. Naz. dayes there were 600 Errours in the Church doe these any wayes derogate from the truth and worth of Christian Religion But as for the Divisions of the Antiprelaticall party so odiously exaggerated by this Remonstrant Let us assure your Honours they have beene much fomented by the Prelates whose practâ—se hath beene according to that rule of Machiavill Divide Impera and they have made these divisions and afterwards complained of that which their Tyranny and Policie hath made It is no wonder considering the pathes our Prelates have trod that there are Divisions in the Nation The wonder is our Divisions are no more no greater and wee doubt not but if they were of that gracious spirit and so intirely affected to the peace of the Church as Greg. Naz. was they would say as he did in the tumults of the people Mitte nos in mare non erit tempestas rather then they would hinder that sweet Conâ—ordance and conspiration of minde unto a Governement that shall be every way agreeable to the rule of Gods word and proâ—itable for the edification and flourishing of the Church A second thing wee cannot but take notice of is the pains this Author takes to advance his Prelaticall Church and forgetting what he had said in the beginning that their party was so numerous it could not be summed tells us now these severall thousands are punctually calculated But we doubt not but your Honours will consider that there may be mulâ—i homines pauci viri And that there are more against them then for them And whereas they pretend that they differ from us onely in a Ceremony or an Organ pipe which however is no contemptible difference yet it will appeare that our differences are in point of a superiour Alloy Though this Remonstrant braves it in his multiplyed Quere's What are the bounds of this Church what the distinction of the professours and Religion what grounds of faith what new Creed doe they hold different from their Neighbours what Scriptures what Baptisme what meanes of Salvation other then the rest yet if hee pleased hee might have silenced his owne Queres but if hee will needs put us to the answer wee will resolve them one by one First if he ask what are the bounds of this Church we answer him out of the sixt of their late founded Canons where we find the limits of this Prelaticall Church extend as farre as from the high and lofty Promontory of Archbishops to the Terra incognita of an c. If what Distinction of professors and Religion we answer their worshipping towards the East and bowing towards the Altar prostrating themselves in their approaches into Churches placing all Religion in outward formalities are visible differences of these professours and their Religion If what new Creed they have or what grounds of Faith differing from their Neighbours we answer Episcopacy by divine right is the first Article of their Creed Absolute and blinde obedience to all the commandements of the Church that is the Bishop and his Emissaries election upon faith
foreseene the influence of works into Iustification falling from grace c. If what Scripture we answer the Apocrypha and unwritten Traditions If what Baptisme a Baptisme of absolute Necessity unto salvation and yet insufficient unto salvation as not sealing grace to the taking away of sinne after Baptisme If what Eucharist an Eucharist that must be administred upon an Altar or a Table set Altar-wise rayled in an Eucharist in which there is such a presence of Christ though Modum nesciunt as makes the place of its Administration the throne of God the place of the Residence of the Almighty and impresseth such a holinesse upon it as makes it not onely capable but worthy of Adoration If what Christ a Christ who hath given the same power of absolution to a Priest that himselfe hath If what Heaven a heaven that hath a broad way leading thither and is receptive of Drunkards Swearers Adulterers c. such a heaven as we may say of it as the the Indians said of the heaven of the Spaniards Unto that heaven which some of the Prelaticall Church living and dying in their scandalous sinnes and hatefull enormities goe to let our soules never enter If what meanes of salvation we answer confession of sinnes to a Priest as the most absolute undoubted necessary infallible meanes of Salvation Farre be it from us to say with this Remonstrant we do fully agree in all these and all other Doctrinall and practicall points of Religion and preach one and the same saving truths Nay we must rather say as that holy Martyr did We thank God we are none of you Nor doe we because of this dissension feare the censure of uncharitablenesse from any but uncharitable men But it is no unusuall thing with the Prelats and their party to charge such as protest against their corrupt opinions and wayes with uncharitablenesse and Schisme as the Papists do the Protestants and as the Protestants doe justly recriminate and charge that Schisme upon the Papists which they object to us So may we upon the Prelats And if Austin may be Judge the Prelats are more Schismaticks then we Quicunque saith he invident bonis ut quaerant occasiones excludendieos aut degradandi vel crimina sua sic defondâ—re parati sunt si objecta vel prodita fuerint ut etiam conventiculorum congregationes vel Ecclesiae perturbationes cogitent excitare jam schismatici sunt Whosoever envie those that are good and seeke occasions to exclude and degrade them and are so ready to defend their faults that rather then they will leave them they will devise how to raise up troubles in the Church and drive men into Conventicles and corners they are the Schismaticks And that all the world may take notice what just cause wee have to complaine of Episcopacie as it now stands wee humbly crave leave to propound these Quaeries Quaeries about Episcopacie VVHether it be tolerable in a Christian Church that Lord Bishops should be held to be Iure Divino And yet the Lords day by the same men to be but Iure Humano And that the same persons should cry up Altars in stead of Communion Tables and Priests in stead of Ministers and yet not Iudaize when they will not suffer the Lords day to be called the Sabbath day for feare of Iudaizing Whereas the word Sabbath is a generall word signifying a day of rest which is common as well to the Christian Sabbath as to the Jewish Sabbath and was also used by the Ancients Russinus in Psal. 47. Origen Hom. 23. in Num. Gregory Nazian Whether that assertion No Bishop No King and no Ceremonie no Bishop be not very prejudiciall to Kingly Authoritie For it seemes to imply that the Civill power depends upon the Spirituall and is supported by Ceremonies and Bishops Whether seeing it hath beene proved that Bishops as they are now asserted are a meere humane Ordinance it may not by the same Authoritie be abrogated by which it was first established especially considering the long experience of the hurt they have done to Church and State Whether the advancing of Episcopacie into Ius Divinum doth not make it a thing simply unlawfull to submit to that Government Because that many consciencious men that have hitherto conformed to Ceremonies and Episcopacie have done it upon this ground as supposing that Authoritie did not make them matters of worship but of Order and Decencie c. And thus they satisfied their consciences in answering those Texts Colos. 2.20 21 22. Math. 15.9 But now since Episcopacy comes to be challenged as a Divine Ordinance how shall wee be responsable to those Texts And is it not as it is now asserted become an Idoll and like the Brazen Serpent to be ground to powder Whether there be any difference in the point of Episcopacie between Ius Divinum and Ius Apostolicum Because we finde some claiming their standing by Ius Divinum others by Ius Apostolicum But wee conceive that Ius Apostolicum properly taken is all one with Ius Divinum For Ius Apostolicum is such a Ius which is founded upon the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles written by them so as to be a perpetuall Rule for the succeeding Administration of the Church as this Author saith pag. 20. And this Ius is Ius Divinum as well as Apostolicum But if by Ius Apostolicum they meane improperly as some doe such things which are not recorded in the writings of the Apostles but introduced the Apostles being living they cannot be rightly said to be jure Apostolico nor such things which the Apostles did intend the Churches should be bound unto Neither is Episcopacie as it imports a superioritie of power over a Presbyter no not in this sense jure Apostolico as hath beene already proved and might further be manifested by divers Testimonies if need did require We will only instance in Cassander a man famous for his immoderate moderation in controverted Points of Religion who in his Consultat Articul 14. hath this saying An Episcopatus inter ordines Ecclesiasticos ponendus sit inter Theologos Canonistas non convenit Convenit autem inter omnes in Apostolorum aetate Presbyterum Episcopum nullum discrimen fuisse c. Whether the distinction of Beza betweene Episcopus Divinus Humanus Diabolicus be not worthy your Honours consideration By the Divine Bishop he meanes the Bishop as he is taken in Scripture which is one and the same with a Presbyter By the humane Bishop he meanes the Bishop chosen by the Presbyters to be President over them and to rule with them by fixed Lawes and Canons By the Diabolicall Bishop he meanes a Bishop with sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction Lording it over Gods heritage and governing by his owne will and authority Which puts us in minde of the Painter that Limmed two pictures to the same proportion and figure The one hee reserved in secret the other he exposed to common view And as the phansie
of beholders led them to censure any line or proportion as not done to the life he mends it after direction If any fault bee found with the eye hand foot c. he corrects it till at last the addition of every mans fancie had defaced the first figure and made that which was the Picture of a man swell into a monster Then bringing forth this and his other Picture which hee had reserved he presented both to the people and they abhorring the former and applauding the latter he cryed Hunc populus fecit This the deformed one the People made This lovely one I made As the Painter of his Painting so in Bezaes sence it may be said of Bishops God at first instituted Bishops such as are all one with presbyters and such are amiable honourable in all the Churches of God But when men would bee adding to Gods institution what power preheminence Iurisdiction Lordlynes their phansie suggested unto them this divine Bishop lost his Originali beauty and became to be Humanus And in conclusion by these and other additions swelling into a Pâ—pe Diabolicus Whether the Ancient Fathers when they call Peter Marke Iames Timothy and Titus Bishops did not speak according to the Language of the times wherein they lived rather then according to the true acception of the word Bishop and whether it bee not true which is here said in this Booke that they are called Bishops of Alexandria Ephesus Hierusalem c. in a very improper sense because they abode at those places a longer time then at other places For sure it is if Christ made Peter and Iames Apostles which are Bishops over the whole world and the Apostles made Marke Timothy and Titus Evangelists c. It seemes to us that it wonld have beene a great sinne in them to limit themselves to one particular Diocesse and to leave that calling in which Christ had placed them Whether Presbyters in Scripture are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that it is an office required at their hands to rule and to governe as hath beene proved in this Booke The Bishops can without sinne arrogate the exercise of this power to themselves alone And why may they not with the same lawfulnesse impropriate to themselves alone the Key of Doctrine which yet notwithstanding all would condemne as wel as the Key of Discipline seeing that the whole power of the Keyes is given to Presbyters in Scâ—ipture as well as to Bishops as appears Mat. 16.19 where the power of the Keyes is promised to Peter in the name of the rest of the Apostles and their successors and given to all the Apostles and their successors Mat. 18.19 Iohn 20.23 And that Presbyters succeed the Apostles appeares not onely Mat. 28.20 but also Acts 20 28. where the Apostle ready to leave the Church of Ephesus commends the care of ruling and feeding it to the Elders of that Church To this Irenaeus witnesseth lib. 4. cap. 43.44 This Bishop Iewell against Harding Artic. 4. sect 5.6 saith that all Pastors have equall power of binding and loosing with Peeter Whether since that Bishops assume to themselves power temporall to be Barons and to sit in Parliament as Judges and in Court of Star-Chamber High Commission and other Courts of Justice and also power spirituall over Ministers and People to ordaine silence suspend deprive excommunicate c. their spirituall power be not as dangerous though both bee dangerous and as much to be opposed as their temporall 1. Because the spiritual is over our consciences the temporall but over our purses 2. Because the spirituall have more influence into Gods Ordinances to defile them then the temporall 3. Because spirituall Judgements and evills are greater then other 4. because the Pope was Anticstrist before he did assume any temporall power 5. Because the Spirituall is more inward and lesse discerned and therefore it concernes all those that have Spirituall eyes and desire to worship God in spirit and truth to consider and and endeavour to abrogate their Spirituall usurpations as well as their Temporall Whether Acrius bee justly branded by Epiphanius and Austin for a Hereticke as some report for affirming Bishops and presbyters to be of an equall power Wee say as some report for the truth is he is charged with heresie meerely and onely because he was an a Arian As for his opinion of the parity of a presbyter with a Bishop this indeede is called by Austin proprium dogma Aerii the proper opinion of Aerius And by Epiphanius it is called Dogma furiosum stolidum a mad and foolish opinion but not an heresie neither by the one nor the other But let us suppose as is commonly thought that he was accounted an Heretike for this opinion yet notwithstanding that this was but the private opinion of Epiphanius and borrowed out of him by Austin an opinion not to be allowed appeares First because the same Authors condemne Aërius as much for reprehending and censuring the mentioning of the dead in the publique prayers and the performing of good works for the benefit of the dead And also for the reprehending statu jejunia and the keeping of the week before Easter as a solemne Fast which if worthy of condemnation would bring in most of the reformed Churches into the censure of Heresie Secondly because not onely Saint Hierome but Anstin himselfe Sedulius Primasius Chrysostome Theodoret Oecumenius Theophilact were of the same opinion with Aërius as Michael Medina observes in the Councell of Trent and hath written Lib. 1. de sacr hom Origine and yet none of these deserving the name of Fools much lesse to be branded for Hereticks Thirdly because no Counsell did ever condemne this for Heresie but on the contrary Concilium Aquisgranens sub Ludovico Pio Imp. 1. anno 816. hath approved it for true Divinitie out of the Scripture That Bishops Presbyters are equall bringing the same texts that Aerius doth and which Epiphanius indeed undertakes to answer but how slightly let any indifferent Reader judge Whether the great Apostacie of the Church of Rome hath not been in swarving from the Discipline of Christ as well as from the doctrine For so it seems by that text 2. Thess. 2.4 And also Revel 18.7 and divers others And if so then it much concernes all those that desire the purity of the Church to consider how neere the discipline of the Church of England borders upon Antichrist least while they indeavour to keepe out Antichrist from entring by the doore of doctrine they should suffer him secretly to creep in by the doore of discipline especially considering what is heere said in this Booke That by their owne confession the discipline of the Church of England is the same with the Church of Rome Whether Episcopacy be not made a place of Dignity rather then Duty and desired onely for the great revenues of the place And whether if the largenesse
of their revenues were taken away Bishops would not decline the great burthen and charge of soules necessarily annexed to their places as much as the ancient Bishops did who hid themselves that they might not be made Bishops and cut off their eares rather then they would bee made Bishops wheras now Bishops cut off the eares of those that speak against their Bishopricks How it comes to passe that in England there is such increase of Popery superstâ—tion Arminianisme and profanenesse more then in other reformed Churches Doth not the root of these disorders proceed from the Bishops anâ— their adherents being forced to hold correspondence with Rome to uphold their greatnesse and their Courts and Canons wherein they symbolize with Rome And whether it bee not to be feared that they will rather consent to the bringing in of Popery for the upholding of their dignities then part with their dignities for the upholding of Religion Why should England that is one of the chiefest Kingdomes in Europe that seperates from Antichrist maintaine and defend a discipline different from all other reformed Churches which stand in the like Separation And whether the continuance in this discipline will not at last bring us to communion with Rome from which wee are separated and to separation from the other reformed Churches unto which wee are united Whether it bee fit that the name Bishop which in Scripture is common to the Presbyters with the Bishops and not onely in in Scripture but also in Antiquitie for some hundreds of yeeres should still bee appropriated to Bishops and ingrossed by them and not rather to bee made common to all Presbyters and the rather because First we finde by wofull experience that the great Equivocation that lyeth in the name Bishop hath beene and is at this day a great prop pillar to uphold Lordly Prelacy for this is the great Goliah the master-peece and indeed the onely argument with which they thinke to silence all opposers To wit the antiquity of Episcopacie that it hath continued in the Church of Christ for 1500 yeeres c which argument is cited by this Remonstrant ad nauseam usque usque Now it is evident that this argument is a Paralogisme depending upon the Equivocation of the name Bishop For Bishops in the Apostles time were the same with Presbyters in name and office and so for a good while after And when afterwards they came to bee distinguished The Bishops of the primitive times differed as much from ours now as Rome ancient from Rome at this day as hath beene sufficiently declared in this Booke And the best way to confute this argument is by bringing in a Community of the Name Bishop to a Presbyter as well as to a Bishop Secondly because wee finde that the late Innovators which have so much disturbed the peace purity of our Church did first begin with the alteration of words and by changing the word Table into the word Altar and the word Minister into the word Priest and the word Sacrament into the word Sacrifice have endevoured to bring in the Popish Masse And the Apostle exhorts us 2 Tim. 1.13 To hold fast the forme of sound words and 1 Tim 6.20 to avoid the prophane novelties of words Upon which text we will onely mention what the Rhemists have commented which wee conceive to be worthy consideration Nam instruunt nos non solum docentes sed etiam errantes The Church of God hath alwayes been as diligent to resist novelties of words as her adversaries are busie to invent them for which cause shee will not have us communicate with them nor follow their fashions and phrase newly invented though in the nature of the words sometimes there bee no harme Let us keepe our forefathers words and wee shall easily keepe our old and true faith that wee had of the first Christians let them say Amendment Abstinence the Lords Supper the Communion Table Elders Ministers Superintendent Congregation so be it praise yee the Lord Morning Prayer Evening Prayer and the rest as they will Let us avoide those novelties of words according to the Apostles prescript and keepe the ole termes Penance Fast Priests Church Bishop Masse Matâ—in Evensong the B. Sacrament Altar Oblation Host Sacrifice Halleluja Amen Lent Palme-Sunday Christmasse and the words will bring us to the faith of our first Apostles and condemne these new Apostates new faith and phrase Whether having proved that God never set such a government in his Church as our Episcopall Government is wee may lawfully any longer be subject unto it bee present at their Courts obey their injunctions and especially bee instruments in publishing and executing their Excommunications and Absolutions And thus we have given as wee hope a sufficient answer and as briefe as the matter would permit to The Remonstrant With whom though we agree not in opinion touching Episcopacie and Liturgie yet we fully consent with him to pray unto Almighty God Who is great in power and infinite in wisdome to powre downe upon the whole Honourabe Assembly the Spirit of wisdome and understanding the spirit of Councell and might the spirit of knowledge and of the feare of the Lord. That you may be able to discerne betwixt things that differ separate betweene the precious and the vile purely purge away our drosse and take away all our tinne root out every plant that is not of our heavenly Fathers planting That so you may raise up the foundations of many generations and be called The Repairers of breaches and Restorers of paths to dwell in Even so Amen FINIS A POSTSCRIPT THough we might have added much light and beauty to our Discourse by inserting variety of Histories upon severall occasions given us in the Remonstrance the answer whereof wee have undertaken especially where it speaks of the bounty and gracious Munificence of Religious Princes toward the Bishops yet unwilling to break the thread of our discourse and its connexion with the Remonstrance by so large a digression as the whole series of History producible to our purpose would extend unto Wee have chosen rather to subjoyne by way of appendix an historicall Narration of those bitter fruits Pride Rebellion Treason Vnthankefulnes c. which have issued from Episcopacy while it hath stood under the continued influences of Soveraigne goodnesse Which Narration would fill a volume but we wil bound our selves unto the Stories of this Kingdome and that revolution of time which hath passed over us since the erection of the Sea of Canterbury And because in most things the beginning is observed to be a presage of that which followes let their Founder Austin the Monk come first to be considered Whom wee may justly account to have beene such to the English as the Arrian Bishops were of old to the Goths and the Jesuits now among the Indians who of Pagans have made but Arrians and Papists His ignorance in the Gospell which he preached is seene in his idle