Selected quad for the lemma: order_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
order_n apostle_n church_n zion_n 13 3 9.0041 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A49800 Politica sacra & civilis, or, A model of civil and ecclesiastical government wherein, besides the positive doctrine concerning state and church in general, are debated the principal controversies of the times concerning the constitution of the state and Church of England, tending to righteousness, truth, and peace / by George Lawson ... Lawson, George, d. 1678. 1689 (1689) Wing L711; ESTC R6996 214,893 484

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

ye the Holy Ghost whosoever sins ye remit they are remitted c. Where 1. Many by the Holy Ghost understand spiritual power or power of and from the Spirit 2 This power is not a power of Ordination or Jurisdiction in foro exteriori but a power of Remission and Retention of sins in foro interiori poenitentiali as the Schoolmen and Casuists speak 3. They remit and retain sins by the Word and Sacraments Therefore in the ordination of Presbyters both in the Pontifical of Rome and our Ordination-book these words are used and after them are added with some ceremony this passage Be thou a faithful dispenser of the Word of God and his holy Sacraments And again the Bible delivered into the hands of the party ordained Take thou authority to preach the Word of God and to administer the Holy Sacraments 4. This is the power of the Keys promised Matthew 16.19 which place he himself understands of Conversion by the Word 5. This is the essential power of a Presbyter as a Presbyter section 6 In the third place as neither the context antecedent nor consequent help him so neither do the words themselves For except the similitude and agreement between his Fathers Mission and his be Universal and adequate or some ways specifically determined unto this particular imparity of the twelve and seventy and also of Bishops and Presbyters his Exposition can never be made good That it is not Universal is evident and that by his own Confession who tells us that the Father sent Christ to redeem but Christ never sent the Apostles to do any such thing As and So are notes of similitude indeed and therefore his Fathers Mission of him and his Mission of the Apostles must agree in something And so they do 1. He was sent so were they 2. He received the Spirit so did they 3. He was sent to preach and do miracles so were they 4. His Mission was extraordinary so was theirs Sicut est nota similitudinis and as a Lapide saith may signifie similitudinem Officii principii finis miraculorum amoris yet none of these can serve his turn Therefore saith Grotius and that truly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aliquam non omnimodam similitudinem significat Gerrard upon the same words as used by our Saviour Joh. 17.18 multiplies the analogy and makes these two missions agree in fifteen particulars yet he never thought of this Christ as he observes was sent 1. To redeem 2. To preach the Gospel so they were sent not to redeem but to preach and did succeed him not in his sacerdotal but prophetical Office by the Word and Sacraments to apply the Redemption not as Priests to expiate sins Seeing therefore the analogy is not universal nor any ways by the Context antecedent or consequent or the Text it self determined to this particular but to another as is apparent therefore his Exposition is frivolous his Supposition false and the Text no ground of an Hierarchical Episcopacy Yet he proceeds to prove this imparity from examples 1. Of Peter and John sent to Samaria that by imposition of hands as of Bishops they whom Philip had converted as a meer Presbyter might receive the Holy Ghost 2. From Barnabas sent as a Bishop as he takes for granted to Antioch to confirm the believing Jews converted by the dispersed Saints in that Faith they had received But will it follow that Peter and John and Barnabas were Bishops invested with the power of ordination and jurisdiction because they were sent by the Church of Jerusalem not to ordain or make Canons or censure but by imposition of hands and prayer give the Holy Ghost and confirm the new Converts of Samaria and Antioch how irrational and absurd is this 3. He instanceth in Timothy left by Paul at Ephesus and Titus left by him at Creet to ordain Elders and order other matters of those Churches not fully constituted and perfected for Doctrine Worship and Discipline But let it be granted that they had power of Ordination and Jurisdiction yet 1. It will not follow from hence that because they had it therefore Presbyters had it not Nor 2. That they had it without Presbyters where Presbyters might be had Nor 3. That they had it as Bishops which is the very thing to be proved 4. The plain truth is that they had it in those places and for that time as commissioned and trusted by the Apostle to do many things in that Church according to the Canons sent them by the Apostles which they had no power to make themselves Dr. Andrews taking all Apostolical power to be divine affirms Episcopacy to be a distinct order and of divine institution and grounds himself upon the testimony of Irenaeus Tertullian Eusebius Hierome Ambrose Chrysostome Epiphanius and Theodoret who all write that Ignatius Polycarpus Timothy Titus and others were made Bishops and of a distinct Order above Presbyters by the Apostles themselves Yet 1. If he mean by Apostolical whatsoever is done by the Apostles then many things Apostolical are not Divine much less of Divine Institution and Obligation For many things were done by them in matters of the Church by a meer ordinary power 2. The testimony of all these Fathers is but humane and according to his own rule cannot be believed but with an humane and fallible Faith Et quod fide divina non credendum fide divina non agendum 3. If he meant that those had power of Ordination and Jurisdiction as Bishops he contradicts himself affirming that this power of the Keyes was given immediately by Christ not to Peter not to the Apostles but to the Church and the Church had it to the Church it was ratified the Church doth exercise it and transfer it upon one or more qui ejus post vel exercendae vel denunciandae facultatem habeant Tortura Torti p. 42. So that none can have it but as delegates of the Church not as Bishops or Officers section 4 The last instance from Scriptures is in the Angels of the seven Churches of Asia and he affirms these were Bishops But 1. So they might be and yet only Presbyters 2. Suppose they were more then Presbyters and super-intendents at least it doth not follow they were Hierarchical Bishops For if they were it must appear from some divine Record or else how can I certainly believe it 3. Let them be Hierarchical Prelates yet it must be made evident by what warrant and institution they became such The institution must be grounded either upon the practise or precepts of Christ or his Apostles yet all these grounds have been formerly examined But 4. Doth any man think that these Letters and Messages were sent only to seven Persons who were Bishops It s evident and clear as the Sun they were directed to the whole Churches to the Ministers which are called by the name of Angels and to the people For the whole Church of Ephesus of Smyrna and of the rest is
man was made 3. When Nations who knew not Christ should come unto him These I say were not fulfilled in the Apostles times 4. Many of the Primitive Christians after their conversion continued for a certain time without any set-form of external Government or perfect Rules of New-Testament-worship except to Word and Prayer were setled Hence those words of the Apostle The rest will I set in order when I come 4. Even within the compass of that time which the Scripture-History reacheth there was a great inequality in the Apostolical Churches for the number of the persons which was far greater in one Church than in another and in the same Church fewer at the plantation and far more numerous afterward For the Kingdom of God was like leaven which did spread and diffuse it self and to a grain of Mustard-seed which did grow mightily 5. After many of these became formal Polities they encreased so much that without divisions and subdivisions they could not be well ordered so as that every part should be subjected to the whole This Ecclesiastical History testifies 6. Seeing 1. That the inequality of the first Churches planted by the Apostles was so great in the former respects 2. That some of them were incompleat not fully formed not grown up to their full stature 3. That most of them did mightily encrease and enlarge afterwards 4. That the Prophesies of the glorious Enlargement of the Church began but to be fulfilled in the times of the Apostles therefore those first Churches as in the Apostles times could be no obligatory examples to us for matter of extent except with admission of some great latitude From all this it follows that the Rules whereby this Controversie must be decided must be the generals of decency and order so far as they may prove most efficaciously conducent unto the preservation and edification of the Body Yet we must have a special care to observe the Institution and the Examples agreeable thereunto And that Church which is ordered according to these Rules and most effectually tends unto these ends is the best and most approved of Christ. He doth not respect and value Churches as they are Congregational Presbyterian or Episcopal nor as of more narrow and larger compass nor as of less or greater number but as so ordered as to discover false Brethren reject Hereticks purge out the old Leaven cast out scandalous persons free from the Doctrine of Nicolaitans and Jezabel and keep themselves in Unity and Purity And surely as our Christian Profession is disgraced so is God highly displeased because we so miserably distract God's people and urge upon them such accidentals with so great importunity though they be neither essential nor necessary to good Government section 10 I might instance 1. In the Church of Israel which no doubt was National from the times of Moses till the Raign of Jeroboam all which time it continued entire in one body adequate to the State and was never divided into independent Congregations This example is not to be slighted as it is by some For this Church was modeled enlarged and confined by God himself neither was it in this particular any Type or Shadow of something to come which upon the coming of Christ and the Revelation of the Gospel was to vanish And this at least will prove that a National Church under one supream Judicatory is not unlawful in it self 2. I might add that it 's no where prohibited in the New Testament 3. That it 's agreeable to the Rules of Decency and Order 4. That it 's not contrary to the Institution 5. If the State be Christian it may have much help and many advantages from the State especially when the divisions of Church and State are the same But 6. If a Congregational Church may be lawful then a National may be so too And the reason of the consequence is because a National may be as easily and as well nay more easily and better governed than a single Congregation much more than thousands of independent Congregations in one and the same State. That the multitude of Christians in one Nation associating and uniting in one body and subjecting it self to one supreme Judicatory may be better ordered than many independent Congregations in the same Nation is evident For 1. they may be far more firmly united and far more free from Schisms and Separations 2. Order which is the life of Government may far more easily be established and observed 3. It will be far stronger to preserve it self from all opposition both within and without 4. It will be furnished with far more excellent persons endued with excellent qualities for to make Officers and Representatives 5. It will be of far more Authority 6. It will be far more able to reform and reduce into order the greater Multitudes and whole Congregations and the greatest persons 7. It will be far more able to receive Appeals to make Canons give Advice hear and determine the most difficult Causes and to execute their highest Judgments One reason of all this is because so many Gifts of the Spirit may be united in one To clear this more fully we may consider a difference 1. Between a single Congregation independent and a national Community under one and the same power of the Keys 2. Between a multitude of these independent Congregations supposing all the Christians of a Nation made up their several Polities and all the Congregations of a Nation united severally for Worship and some acts of Discipline yet all subject to one supreme Judicatory Ecclesiastical For the first difference it 's two-fold 1. In the number of persons 2. In the distance of place in respect of the parts and members of these Bodies both which if they be too great are thought to be impediments of Government As for the number of persons 1. They must not be too many as they ought not to be too few 2. They are far more for number in a National than in a Congregational Church 3. As for this great multitude of a Nation if not too vast reason and the same confirmed by experience will tell us that by distinction and a wise division with a co-ordination of parts equal and a subordination of the less to the greater and all the several parts unto the whole a multitude though of millions may be united into one organical Body and governed as one Man. And by the way we may take notice of a mistake in Mr. Hooker of New England who thinks that a Church or Community of Christians cannot be an organical Body till Officers be made whereas the making of Officers is an act of Administration and presupposeth the Constitution whereby it 's properly and formally organical before any act of Administration But to return that whereby so many are made one is order which unites Heaven and Earth and all things therein in one Body much more a petty multitude of Christians of one Nation This is apparent in all
sanctified person is a Priest to offer spiritual Sacrifice to God. Yet this doth not make any such person a Minister and publick Officer of Christ who must sequester himself from worldly business more than other men to tend his Calling to which he is consecrated and solemnly devoted With this distinction agrees that of the Clergy and Laity Whence the name Clerus the Clergy for the Ministry should have its original is uncertain The people of Israel sanctified and consecrated unto God were call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lot or Inheritance of God and the Priests and Ministers were the eminent party of this Lot and people For the people as distinct from the Pastours are called the Clergy Lot or Heritage of God 1 Pet. 5.3 in which it cannot be proper to the Ministers It 's true that the first Officer made by the Church after that Christ was glorified was made by Lot For the Lot that is Cleros fell upon Matthias Acts 1.26 From whence some think the system of Presbyters and Deacons were called the Clergy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signify one made and an Officer by Lot. As for Laity we find often in the Old Testament the people as distinct from the Priests and Levites called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Laity The Apostle and seventy Disciples were distinguished from the rest of the Disciples and Believers The Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastours and Teachers were different orders from the rest of the Church The twenty four Elders which signifie the Priests and Levites divided into orders by Lot were distinct from the four Beasts that is the main body of the Church but these are days of confusion and disorder Every one will be a Prophet and a Teacher either presuming upon their gifts yet scorning to engage themselves for the service of Christ in the poor and much despised Ministery or pretending blasphemously to the Spirit which God never gave them There is another distinction of Subjects in Nobiles Plebaeos Some are Noble some of a lower Form and Rank Nobilis is any Gentleman well descended Yet there is a difference inter Nobilem Generosum for though Omnis Generosus sit Nobilis yet Omnis nobilis non est Generosus because Generosus is not only one well born but also one vertuous In this respect the word of a Gentleman is more than the word of a Nobleman nay than the word of a King yet Nobility with us is taken more strictly and is given to none under a Baron and Peer of the Kingdom which hath right of suffrage in Parliament as one of the House of Lords The ancient Nobility of England is much diminished and decayed and many of their Estates alienated and the late Barons created by Patent do much obscure them and if these as Barons have their suffrage in the House of Lords by vertue of their Honour and not their Vertue and Wisdom I do not see how the Parliament should be Wittena Gemott the Meeting of Wise Men. It were wisdom by some strict Law to limit Jus Nobilitandi unto Vertue and Wisdom For Honours should be conferred rarely and upon merit and worth for they have great priviledges which should not be made so common and prostituted to the Lust and Ambition of every one that can pay for them The subjects of lower Rank if Freeholders have also their priviledges and one principal is a power to Elect the Knights of the County to represent in Parliaments There be other accidental differences of less moment which I pass by section 14 After these distinctions follows a division of the whole body of the Subjects into parts and this is necessary especially in respect of the Administration For without an orderly division the subjects cannot be well governed Israel was divided into Tribes Tribes into Families Families into Housholds Housholds into Persons Thus they were divided and according to this order Achan was discovered Josh. 7.16 17 18. and they had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heads of their Tribes and their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heads of their Hundreds as Masius upon the place observes The Romans were also divided in Tribus Tribus in Curias and after these we read of Centurias and Decurias We read that Alfred divided England into Counties Counties into Hundreds the Hundreds into Allotments In some Counties we find Ridings and Wapentakes yet Sir Henry Spelman under the word Hundreds understands by Wapentake an Hundred which in the Welsh is called Cantreda where he adds that the Counties were divided into Tithings Rapes and Laths and Hundreds were divided into Tithings and Friberges Upon this division made it 's said that Justice was administred with that ease exactness and severity that any man's goods might at any time be secure in any place Yea they might hang golden Bracelets in the High-way-side and in open view and none durst meddle with them To this head belongs the numbring the people by pole enrowling their Names and Estates without which Taxations cannot be justly imposed The end of this distribution was to reduce the people into a certain order according to which the equal parts were to co-ordinate one with another as Counties with Counties Hundreds with Hundreds so that one had no Jurisdiction over another The unequal were less or greater and were subordinate the less to the greater which had Jurisdiction over the less and all the parts were subject to the whole This was necessary for Judicial proceedings that Actions in Law might proceed according to the subordination of Courts For anciently with us Actions did commence in the Courts held by the Lords of the Mannors if the cause were too high or could not there be determined or Justice had Appeal was made to the Hundred Court from thence to the County Court from thence to the King's Court. In the word Comitatus Sir Henry Spelman observes this was the ancient Order and thinks it an abuse and great disorder that in our days every petty Business and Cause is brought into the King's Court at Westminster What the Division of this Nation was under the Romans is not so well known except we may conjecture of it by the ancient Division of the Provinces and the Cathedral Seas and Diocesses which much differ from these of latter times Cambden finds some divisions of England in the time of the Romans yet they are not clear and certain Under the Saxons he finds several divisisions 1. Some according to certain proportions of Lands 2. He makes the Heptarchy an argument that it was divided into seven parts At length he concludes his political Division with that of Counties which he as Sir Henry Spelman ascribes to the King Alfred But I have read that it was thus divided before his time and this is more probable because the Myrrour informs us of Counties and of Counties before there were any Saxon Kings Vt subditi section 15 distinguuntur sic distincti dividuntur educantur
which should be united Some desire to propagate their own Opinions though false unprofitable blasphemous and their design is to draw Disciples after them These prevail the more because they find the minds of many so ready to receive any impression For some have itching ears and every new and strange opinion doth affect and much take with them Few are well grounded in the principles of Christian saving truth so as to have a distinct methodical knowledge of them with an upright humble heart disposed to practise what they know for a distinct knowledge of Fundamentals with a sincere desire and intention to practise and live accordingly are excellent means to avoid Errors for such God will guide in his truth some aim at an higher perfection than this life can reach and boasting of their high attainments insolently censure others or look upon them with scorn and contempt as far below them Some design to make Men Scepticks in all matters of Religion that then their minds being like Matter ready to receive any form they may more easily imprint upon them what they please yet in the issue many of them prove Atheists and enemies to all Religion The grand Politicians and chief Agents who do least appear animate the Design take all advantages watch all opportunities single out the fittest persons and make men even of contrary Judgments and of a temper quite different from themselves instrumental and efficient to their own Ruine yet I hope that God in the end will not only discover but disappoint them All these bandy together and do conspire to destroy the Protestant English interest and it 's a sad thing that Orthodox Christians take little notice of these things but fearfully wrangle about matters of less moment to the great prejudice of the necessaries and substantials of Religion section 5 All this is come upon us for our neglect and abuse of a long continued Peace and the light of the Gospel shining so gloriously amongst us We are guilty but God is just and also merciful and wonderfully wise For he is trying of us to purge away the Tin and dross and he expects that we should search more accurately pray more fervently and more humbly depend upon him whose wisdom is such as that he can and will bring light out of darkness good out of evil and a far more excellent Order out of our confusions The prayers of the upright for this end are made and heard in heaven already and what we desire in due time shall be effected For he will comfort Sion he will comfort all her waste places and he will make her Wilderness like Eden and her Desart like the Garden of the Lord. This indeed is a work to which man contributes little hinders much retards long that Gods hand and Wisdom may the more appear and that he may have the glory In the mean time Christ takes care of the universal Church and the parts thereof converting some confirming others and directing all true believers to eternal Glory and though a storm be raised and the same very terrible yet it 's nothing but we may be confident when we consider the skill and miraculous power of our Heavenly Pilot. section 6 My intention is not to instruct the learned who are more fit to be my Masters yet to these endued with far more excellent gifts I would give occasion and also make a motion to exercise their improved parts and learning in this Subject and do this poor distracted Church of ours a part of the universal some far more glorious service God may make me though very unworthy an instrument of his Wisdom to inform the ignorant and remove their Errors and correct their mistakes It may also through God's Blessing contribute something unto Peace by uniting well affected minds I am enemy to no man yet professedly bent against errors and that not only in others but also in my self if once I know them I am not pre-engaged to any Party but a servant unto truth and devoted unto Peace I wish I may not be prejudicate or partial or precipitate as many do who contend to maintain a Party or a Faction but do not care to search out the truth these do not close up but open the breaches amongst us and make them wider and leave others unsatisfied Our differences be so many and so great that we seem to be uncapable of any Peace yet God can do wonders and we may trust in him who in his time will give us Peace if not on Earth yet certainly in Heaven the place of our Eternal Rest. CHAP. II. Of Government in general and of a Community Civil CHurch-Government presupposeth the Rules of Government in general therefore he that will know the latter must understand the former For he that is ignorant of Government must needs be ignorant of Church-Government and this is the very case of many in our days and this is one cause of many differences amongst us at this time to give some light in this particular I will say something of Government in General the Government of God whereby he more immediately orders man to his final and immortal estate I have according to my poor ability declared in my Theopolitica or Divine Politicks therefore I will confine my discourse to the Government of man by man or rather the Government of God by men set over men For God communicates some measure of his Power to mortal men and such as are entrusted with it become his Vicegerents and bear his name according to that of the Psalmist I have said ye are Gods Psal. 82.6 My design in this Treatise is not to deliver an exact Systeme of Politicks yet I will make use of those rules I find in political writers of better rank but with a reservation of a liberty to my self to vary from them as I shall see just cause To pass by the distinction of Government Monastical and Oeconomical I will pitch upon that which is Political The subject whereof is a Community and Society larger than that of a Family and may be sufficient to receive the form of a Common-wealth section 2 To this end we must observe what Politica which some call the rule of Government of a Politie is 2. What a Politie or Common-wealth 3. What the parts of Politica be Politica or Politicks is the act of well ordering a Common-wealth A Common-wealth is the order of Superiority and Subjection in a Community for the Publick Good. Of Politicks there be two parts the constitution administation of a Common-wealth These Rules are the foundation of the following Discourse and inform us that Politica is an act that is a rule of Divine Wisdom to direct some operations of the Creature for so I understand it here 2. That the Object of this rule is a Common-wealth 3. That the proper act is to direct how to order a Common-wealth aright so that it may attain its proper end 4. That the subject
had already sworn could have found as many reasons against it as against the Covenant especially if it had been new as the Covenant was Many wise men at the first did scruple it and some suffered death for refusal Amongst the rest Sir Thomas Moor a learned and a very prudent man could not digest it and though he might have an high conceit of the Papal Supremacy yet that might not be the only reason of his refusal but this because he knew the Crown had no Ecclesiastical power properly so called Though this was not thought to be the true but only the pretended cause of his death For in his Vtopia he seems to dislike the Indisputable Prerogative which was a Noli me tangere and to touch it so roughly as he did might cost dear as it did Yet I have taken the Oath of Supremacy in that sense as our Divines did understand it and I was and am willing to give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's section 4 That which hath been said in this point in brief is this That though the Civil Powers have a right to order matters of Religion in respect of the outward part and so far as the Sword may reach it according to Divine Law yet they have no power of the Keys which Christ committed to the Church For if we consider all the power exercised in matter of Religion by David Solomon and the pious Kings of Judah by the Christian Emperours and Princes by the Kings of France and England it was but civil Neither is the power of our Parliaments any other For though they make Acts concerning the publick Doctrine and Discipline yet these are but civil They are not Representatives of the Church but of the State whether the Convocation was an essential part of the Parliament or a full representative of the Church I will not here debate I find some great Lawyers which deny both And if their denial be true then England had no general Representative of the Church in latter times As for Erastians and such as do give all Ecclesiastical power of Discipline to the State and deny all power to the Ministers but that of dispensing Word and Sacraments it 's plain they never understood the state of the Question and though a Minister as a Minister have no power but that of Word and Sacraments yet from thence it will not follow that the Church hath not a power spiritual distinct from that of the State in matters of Religion CHAP. XI Whether Episcopacy be the primary subject of the Power of the Keys section 1 THE Prelate presumes that the power of the Keys is his and he thinks his title very good and so good that though he could not prove the institution yet prescription will bear him out For he hath had possession for a long time and Universality and Antiquity seem to favour him very much Yet I hope his title may be examined and if upon examination it prove good he hath no cause to be offended except with this that I of all others should meddle with it But before any thing can be said to purpose we must first know the nature and institution of a Bishop which is the subject of the Question Secondly Put the Reader in mind that the Question is not in this place whether a Bishop be an Officer of the Church either by some special or some general Divine Precept but whether he be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the primary subject of the power of the Keys For he may be an Officer and yet no such subject Concerning a Bishop the subject of the Question two things are worthy our consideration 1. What he is 2. How instituted at the first The Definition and Institution seem rather to belong unto the second part of Ecclesiastical Politicks where I shall entreat of Ecclesiastical Officers and the constitution of them Yet I will here say something of both in order to the Question though I be the briefer afterward section 2 What a Bishop is may be difficult to know except we do distinguish before we do define For we find several sorts of Bishops in the Church Christian. There is a Primitive a Prelatical or Hierarchical and an English Bishop distinct and different in some things from both the former for whom I reserve a place in the end of this Chapter The Primitive Bishop is twofold 1. A Presbyter 2. A President or Superintendent 1. A Presbyter in the New Testament is a Bishop For the Elders of Ephesus were made by the Holy Ghost Bishops or Superintendents over God's flock Acts 20.28 And the qualification of a Bishop 1 Tim. 3.1 2 3 c. is the qualification of an Elder Tit. 1.5 6 7 c. For whatsoever some of late have said to the contrary yet Presbyter and Bishop were only two different words signifying the same Officer And this is confessed by divers of the Ancients who tell us that the word Bishop was appropriated to one who was more than a Presbyter in after-times 2. A Bishop signified one that was above a Presbyter in some respects as a Moderatour of a Classis or President of a Synod But such a Presbyter might be only pro tempore for the time of the Session and after the Assembly dissolved he might return to be a bare Presbyter again For to be a Moderatour or President was no constant place The word in this sense we find seldom used if at all 2. A President was a kind of Superintendent with a care and inspection not only over the people but the Presbyters too within a certain precinct and this was a constant place and the party called a Bishop and by Ambrose and Austine with divers others called primus Presbyterorum and these were such as had no power but with the Presbytery joyntly and that without a negative voice And the Presbytery might be a Representative not only of the Presbyters strictly taken but of the people too For we may read in Cyprian and other Authours that these Bishops in more weighty matters of publick concernment did nothing without the counsel and consent not only of the Presbyters but the people This I call a primitive Bishop not only because he is ancient but also because the place or office is agreeable to the rules of Reason of Government and the general Rules of the Apostles concerning Order Decency Edification There is also an Hierarchical Bishop who may be only a Bishop or an Archbishop and Metropolitan or a Patriarch and these challenge the power of Ordination and Jurisdiction and in Jurisdiction include and engross the power of making Canons This kind of Episcopacy is ancient as the former This last Bishop is he upon whom Spalatensis and many others do fix and though they grant that he should do nothing without the Counsel of the Presbytery yet they give him full power without the Presbytery which they joyn with him only for advice The English Bishop is in