Lords flocke for whom hee shed his blood AND NEVER THEIR LABOVR CARE AND DILIGENCE HEREIN untill they had done all that lyeth in them according to their bounden duety to bring all such as were or should be committed to their charge unto that agreement of faith and knowledge of God and to that ripenes and perfectnes of age in Christ which none of them hath yet done that there should be no place left among them neither of errour in Religion or for viciousnes of life and that for the same cause they should and would forsake and sett aside as much as in them lyeth all worldly cares and studies and give themselves WHOLLY to this thing and draw all their cares and studies this way and to this end and that they should and would preach and be faithfull dispensers of Gods Word in their Congregations which charge being layd upon them by the Bishop at their ordination in the name of Christ by the whole Church and State of England and the Booke of Ordination confirmed by three severall Acts of Parliament the 8 Canon and their owne subscriptions to it and they particularly promising in a most solemne maner to performe it to the â—ttermost of their power How any Bishop can by Law suspend them from preaching as long as they continue Ministers and are not actually degraded or deprived of their livings for some just or lawfull cause warranted by an expresse Act of Parliament or how any godly Minister in point of Law or Conscience can give over his preaching or Ministry upon any unjust suspenâ—ion inhibition excommunication or commaund of any Bishop Visitor or Ordinary who cannot countermaund this charge or Booke of Ordination ratified by 3 Acts of Parliaments I cannot conjecture Finally That if Ministers will thus suffer every Bishop at his pleasure without any speciall Commission from his Maiesty vnder the great Seale of England or any just cause in point of Law upon every humor fancy or new minted Article of his owne which by the Statute of 25. H. 8. c. 19. and the 13. Canons resolution yea and his Maiesties too in his Declaration before the 39. Articles hee hath no power to make to suspend excommunicate and put them downe from preaching then it will be in the Bishops power to suppresse and alter Religion at their pleasure without his Maiesties or a Parliaments assent and so all shall hang vpon their wills who have no power at all either by the Lawes of God or the Realme to institute any new rites Ceremonies Articles Canons or Injunctions or to alter or innovate any thing in Religion much lesse to suspend or silence Ministers Wherefore in case our Prelates presently revoke not these their anti-christian illegall suspenâ—ions inhibitions injunctions or other Censures to hinder Ministers from preaching I hope every Godly Minister who hath any care either of his owne soule liberty people any love at all to God or Religion any zeale or courage for the truth or desire of the good either of Church or State taking these considerations into his thoughts and finding the Bishops Jurisdiction and proceedings to have no lawfull warrant either from the Lawes of God or man will readily protest both against their usurped authority and proceedings as meere nullities and vanities and proceed to preach pray and doe his duetie as the Apostles and Martyrs did of old without any feare or discouragement that so Gods judgements Plagues and punishments which the Prelates late practises with the Ministers silence and cowardize and all our sinnes have drawen downe upon us may be asswaged and remooved and wee may ever retaine the Ordinances and Word of God among vs in purity power sincerity and plenty both to our present and future happines I shall close all with this Syllogisme That calling authoritie and jurisdiction which obliterates persecutes suppresseth oppugneth the very Law Gospell and word of God with the frequent powerfull preaching preachers and professors thereof is doubtles not of divine right or institution but Anti-christian and Diabolicall 1. Thess 2. 14. 15. 16. Rom. 2. 13. 10. Iohn 8. 39. to 48. 1. Tim. 3. 1. to 7. Tit. 1. 5. to 10. But this doth the calling authority and jurisdiction of Lord Archbishops and Bishops as the premises and all stories witnes especially our Booke of Martyrs Therefore it is doubtles not of divine right or institution but Anti-christian and Diabolicall If the Minor be not sufficiently evidenced by the Premises by the silencing of many Ministers suppressing of so many Lectures throughout the Realme give me leave to instance but in two fresh examples more The first in Doctor Peirce Bishop of Bath and Wels who in his Visitation in the midst of August last expresly prohibited all Ministers in his Diocesse to preach on the Lords day afternoone threatning some Ministers to suspend them both from their office Benefice if they durst presume to preach any more on the Lords day afternoone without alleadging any Law or Canon which there is none or any danger of bringing or spreading the plague which there is not feared but onely out of his malice to preaching and to deprive poore people of the sprituall food of their soules to affront the Staâ—utes of 5. and 6. E. 6. c. 1. 3. and 1. Eli. c. 2. which require OFTEN PREACHING AND HEARING of the Gospell upon every Sunday and Holy day and prescribe preaching twice a day as well as much as Common-prayer coupling them together in the same words to oppugne the Homily of the right use of the Church p. 3. 4. 5. which prescribes and enforceth the dayly and continuall preaching of Gods word and specially on the Sabbath-dayes from our Saviours and his Apostles owne Precepts and Examples to make all Ministers perjured who at the time of their Ordination make a solemne promise and covenant before God diligently and painefully to instruct their people never to give over preaching c. as the Booke of Ordination and the Church and State of England both in and by it injoyne them and to spite S. Paulâ— himselse who as by the space of three yeares together hee ceased not to warne every one Night and Day therefore hee preached Evenings as well as mornings publikely from howse to howse Acts. 20. 20. 31. So hee chargeth Timothy and in him all Ministers To preach the word instantly in season out of season that is on Lords dayes and weekedayes Morning and Evening yea and at Midnight to if need be in times of prosperity and adversity of health and pestilence when preaching is most seasonable to raise men from their sinnes 2. Tim. 4. 2. which Apostle were hee in this Bishops and some other of his Brethrens Diocesse they would schoole him roundly for such good doctrine and stop his mouth to prevent the great mischeife of often preaching yea 〈◊〉 our Saviour Christ himselfe and his Apostles were now among our Prelates and should preach DAYLY in our temples as they
exempt from Archiepiscopall Episcopall Iurisdiction is united and annexed as a royall prerogative to the Kings Imperiall Crowne and to be executed by none but by Patent under him And that all your Citations processe Excommunications Probates of Wils Commissions of Administration c. ought to be made onely in his Majesties name and sealed with his seale as they were in King Henry the 8. and King Edwards dayes witnesse the Bishops Registers Proces and Probates of wils in their two raignes and now are in your High-Commission that so both the Courts and processe migth be knowen to be his Majesties by leaving his Image stile and superscription ingraven on them and to be derived unto you not by any divine right but by his Princely grace alone who hath as absolute an Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction as any of his royall progenitors enjoyed both by the Lawes of God and of the Realme So they will inforce your Lordships to acknowledge unlesse you will renounce your Alegiance to your most gracious Soveraigne whose meere grace hath advanced you to what you now are that all your Episcopall Iurisdiction whereby you are distinguished from or elevated above any ordinary Presbyters and Ministers is not from any divine Charter or Commission from Christ but onely in by from and under his Majesty and so not Jure Divino as you have thus frequently craked and boasted to the world so as you must either now forthwith renounce your Bishoprikes according to your Protestations or else be guilty of breach of promise unlesse you can proove you enjoy them onely by a divine right and yet onely in by from and under his Majesty which is a contradiction If your Lords to maintaine your divine pretended Episcopall Iurisdiction shall flie to Doctor John Pocklington for ayd who by one of your Domesticke Chaplaines approbation hath verily published in print That you by Gods mercy to our Church are able lineally to set downe your Succession in your Episcopall dignity from S. Peters Chaire at Rome to S. Gregory and from him from our first Archbishop S. Augustine though we had many Archbishops before his comming our English Apostle so the Papists would have him stiled though Bishop lewel Fox and others renounce him downeward to his Giver that now sits in his chaire Primate and Metropolitane of all England I shall then desire your Lordships and this Doctor to proove First that S. Peter was a Bishop by divine Institution Secondly that he was Bishop of Rome of which this Doctor is so impatient that he breakes out unto these passionate words well worthy your Episcopall Censure Whereby their vanity may appeare that upon idle ghesses against all antiquity makes fooles beleeve that S. Peter w as never at Rome mking the Succession of Bishops and truth of the Latine Churches as questionable as the Centurists orders Thirdly Wheter Peter was sole Bishop of Rome or rather Paul also Bishop as well as hee at the same time and that by divine institution whence it will follow that there ought to be how Bishops of Rome and so of Canterbury at the same time not one alone as two severall persons at least to constitute one Bishop Fourthly Whether it will follow from Peters being Bishop of Rome Iure Divino that the Arch-bishops of Canterbury and Yorke most necessarily be Archbishops Iure divino Fifthly Whether if this Doctrine be true this Proposition can be denied that your Lordships being lineally descended from the Church and Popes of Rome are both the true and genuine sonnes and members of these two ghostly Parents If you deny this inference then you must renounce this divine Title to your Prelacies if you subscribe unto it as I presume you dare not then all his Majesties loyall subjects who have in their oath of allegiance and supremacy renounced all forraigne Iurisdiction with the Bishops and Church of Rome abandoned by severall Acts of Parliament must renounce both you and this your Episcopall Iurisdiction to thus claimed which since you can no wayes substantially proove to be Iure Divino I hope you will now lay downe your Bishopriches according to provise or else be thoughâ—never worthy faith or credit more in future time Neither may the seeming strangnes of the thing it selfe deterre you from it this being no new thing for Bishops to resigne and give over their Bishoprikes For not to mention that famous Gregory Nazianzen that great Patriarke of Constantinople or p Hiâ—rax Iohn of Antioch with sundry others in the primitive Church who either out of conscience or for quietnes sake voluntarily renounced or repudiated their Bishoprikes betaking themselves to a more retired private life wherein they might serve God better Nor yet to recite the History of Ammonius who when the Cleargy and people elected him for their Bishop and urged him to take a Bishopricke upon him fled away secretly and cut off his right eare that the deformity of his body might be a Canonicall impediment to his election and being yet deemed meet to be a Bishop by Timothius the Patriarke though his Nose and eares had beene both cut off by reason of his learning and vertues and the people drawning him against his will to accept that office hee replyed that hee would likewise cut off his tounge to which pleased them unlesse they would specdily let him goe Nor yet to remember Euagrius the Philosopher who when he was constrained to accept a Bishopricke by Theophilus Alexandrinus renounced his Ministery rather then hee would accept it such a dangerous and ill office did hee then repute it and many good men else who as Nicephorus records refused aunciently to accept thereof though nothing so dangerous and pernicious an office then as now Or Nicephorus Blemmides who being elected Patriarch of Constantinople absolutely refused to accept it upon any termes Or Werinbaldus unanimously elected Bishop of Spier who could by no meanes be induced to embrace it Or Theophilâ—us Archdeacon of Adaina who being chosen Bishop of that See refused to receive it and being forced both by the Ministers and people to take it against his will relinquished it shortly after though in an idle manner I find it recorded of Arsenius Germanus Paulus Cyprius Iosephus Becus Gregorius Cyprius Athanasius Iohn Ioannes Glicis Antonius Studites Cosmas and Theodosius all Patriarkes of Constantinople as likewise of Gildenutus Bishop of Malden Vlfranius Bishop of Shetne Arnulphus Bishop of Mets Addo-Bishop of Lyons Victerbus Bishop of Ratisbon Herigerus Bishop of Meniz Michael Bishop of Ephesus Adelberus Bishop of Wirtenburg Michael Opites Patriarch of Athens Desiderius Bishop of Flaunders Bruno the third Bishop of Colen Vlrious the second Bishop of Constance Walther Bishop of Augusta Gerhardus Bishof Herbipolis Vlricus Bishop of Rhesia Brincingus Bishop of Hildeshem Conrade the second Bishop of Lubecke Adam Bishop of Morini in Flaunders Christianus the second Bishop of
by the Canons of 1571. and 1603. to sett in order and provide such bookes ornaments and necessaries as are wanting in Parish Churches and see them well repaired Ergo Churchwardens are Bishops For Titus was here left to sett in order the things that were wanting AS PAVL HAD APPOINTED HIM and no other wise Tit. 1. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. hee did all by his direction and authority not his owne There is nothing therefore in this of ordering things that were wanting in the Church of Creete which savours of Episcopall Iurisdiction And I may better argue hence Titus did nothing at all in Creet but by Paules speciall appointment and Cōmission Ergo hee was no Bishop or if a Bishop Ergo Bishops should order nothing in their Bishoprikes nor keepe any visitations but by speciall direction Commission from the Apostles King or State authorizing them Then the Objectors conclude Ergo hee was a Bishop and Bishops Archbishops yea Archdeacons too without any speciall commission from the Apostles King and State may make and institute what orders constitutions Articles and Ceremonies they please as now they doe in their illegall Courts and visitations kept in their owne names without any Patent from the King Obj. 3. If any object in the third place That Titus was lest to ordaine Elders in every Citty in Creete Tit. 1. 5. Ergo hee was a Bishop because none have power to ordaine Elders but Bishops since none ordained Elders in Creete but Titus who was a Bishop Answ 3. I answer first that this is as bad a consequence as the former and a meere circular argumentation For first they will needs proove Titus a Bishop because hee ordained Elders and none but Bishops can ordaine Elders and then next they proove that none but Bishops can ordaine because Titus foresooth was a Bishop and hee onely did ordaine Elders in Creete A meere Circle and Petitio Principij yet this is the Logicke of our great Rabbi Prelates Secondly I answer that this proposition whereon they ground themselves and their Prelacy that none have any right Ture divino to ordaine Elders or Ministers but Bishops and that quatenus Bishops too which they must adde or else their argument is unsound is a notorious falsehood and meere sandy foundation For first not to remember how Moses a Civill Magistrate consecrated Aaron and his sonnes by Gods owne appointement Levit. 8. 5. to 32. Exod. 29. 9. 35. First The Apostles themselves were ordained Apostles and consecrated Ministers by Christ himselfe Matth. 28. 19. 20. Marke 16. 15. 16. Iohn 20. 22. 23. 24. Acts. 1. 4. 5. Rom. 1. 5. 2. Cor. 3. 6. To whom the power of ordination principally appertaines Ephes 4. 11. 12. 1. Cor. 12. 28. Acts. 20. 28. 1. Pet. 1. 4. Secondly The Apostles and Euangelists ordained Elders in every Church Acts. 14. 23. c. 19. 1. 6. 7. c. 7. 6. yet they were properly no Bishops as all learned men acknowledge Thirdly The Disciples inferior to the Apostles and Euangelists as the objectors teach ordained Ministers and Elders too though they were no such Bishops as the objectors mean Acts. 14. 1. 2. 3. c. 9. 10. to 22. Fourthly Presbyters and ordinary Ministers ordainea Elders and Ministers yea Timothy himselfe was made a Minister by the imposition of the handes of the Presbytery 1. Tim. 4. 14. Thus did they in the primitive Church this doe they still in our owne Church as the booke of ordination it selfe confirmed by two Acts of Parliament the 35. Canon and experience witnesse this doe they in all the reformed Churches now which should have no lawfull Ministers and so no true Church if the power of ordination were Jure divino appropriated onely to Bishops and not common with them unto other Ministers Fiftly Patriarkes Metropolitanes Archbishops and Chorall Bishops neither of which are properly Bishops in the objectors sence ordaine Ministers If then all these have ordained Elders and Ministers though no Bishops by sufficient divine Authority as the objectors cannot deny of the 4. first and dare not contradict it in the last then it is most false that the power of ordination Jure divino belongs onely to Bishops as Bishops in the objectors sence for then none of those 5. being not properly such Bishops could lawfully have ordained Ministers or Presbyters as they did and doe Thirdly There is no one syllable in the Scripture to proove that the power of ordination belongs onely to Bishops quatenus Bishops neither is there any one example to warrant it We read of Apostles Euangelists Disciples Presbyters that layd hands on others to ordaine them Ministers but of Bishops I mean distinct from Presbyters we read not a word to this purpose how then can this be true that the power of ordination belongs onely to Bishops quatenus Bishops Jure divino Fourthly We read not a word to this purpose in Scripture of any Bishops distinct from or superior in order degree and dignity to Presbyters if therefore such Bishops themselves be not Jure divino the power of ordination cannot belong to them Jure divino the rather because we read of no man whom the Scripture cals a Bishop ordaining Ministers Admit there were such Bishops Jure divino yet that the power of ordination belongs to them Jure Divino quatenus such Bishops is most false but onely quatenus they are Ministers For it appertained to the Apostles to the Euangelists to Disciples and Presbyters Iure divino though no such Bishops and the objectors will acknowledge that it belongs to Popes Patriarkes Metropolitans and Archbishops though they neither were nor are properly such Bishops and are no divine but meere humane institutions therefore it must appertaine unto them onely as they are Ministers in which respect they all accord and are not differenced one from another not quatenus Bishops for then the Apostles Euangelists Disciples Presbyters Popes Patriarkes Metropolitanes and Arch-bishops being not properly such Bishops could not lawfully ordaine The power therefore of ordination belonging to the Apostles Euangelists Disciples Presbyters and others as well as to Bishops not to Bishops onely or to them as Bishops but as Ministers it being a meere Ministeriall act inferior to preaching administring the Sacrament and baptizing as all acknowledge it can be no good evidence to proove Titus a Bishop Now because this power of ordination which our Prelates would Monopolize unto themselves is the maine pillar whereon they now suspend their Episcopall Jurisdiction over ther Ministers I shall produce some humane authorities to proove the right the power of ordination and imposition of hands to be by Gods Law common to Presbyters as well as to Bishops I shall beginne with Councells The 4. Councell of Carthage Can. 3. about the yeare of our Lord 418. prescribes this forme of ordination of Ministers When a Minister is ordained the Bishop blessing him and holding his hand upon his head all the Presbyters or Ministers likewise that
prooved by Scripture reason and Authors of all sorts that none which read these passages of his can ever hereafter call this into question more Having runne thus long abroade I now in the last place returne to our owne Church and writers The Booke of ordination of Ministers ratified by two severall Acts of Parliament namely 3. Ed. 6. c. 12. and 8. Eliz. c. 1. and subscribed to by all our Prelates and Ministers by vertue of the 36. Canon as containing nothing in it contrary to the word of God expresly orders that when Ministers are ordained ALL THE MINISTERS PRESENT AT THE ORDINATION SHALL LAY THEIR HANDS TOGETHER WITH THE BISHOP ON THOSE THAT ARE TO BE ORDAINED And the 35. Can. made in Convocation by the Bishops and Clergy An. 1603. prescribes that the Bishop before hee admit any person to holy Orders shall diligently examine him in the presence of those Ministers that shall ASSIST HIM AT THE IMPOSITION OF HANDS And if the said Bishop have any lawfull impediment hee shall cause the sayd Ministers carefully to examine every such person so to be ordered Provided that they who shall assist the Bishop in examining AND LAYING ON OF HANDS shall be of his Cathedrall Church if they may be conveniently had or other sufficient preachers of the same Diocesse to the number of three at the least And according to this Booke of Ordination and Canon when ever any Ministers are ordained all the Ministers there present joyne with and assist the Bishop in layng on of hands on every one that is ordained So that both by the established Doctrine and practise of the Church of England the power of laying on hands and right of ordination is common to every of our Ministers as well as to our Bishops who as they cannot ordaine or lay hands on any without the Bishop so the Bishop can ordaine or lay hands on no Ministers without them so that the power and right of ordination rests equally in them both With what face or shadowe then of truth our Prelates now can or dare to Monopolize this priviledge to themselves alone against this Booke of Ordination their owne Canons subscriptions yea their owne and their Predecessors common practise to the contrary which perchance their overgreat imployments in temporall businesses secular state affaires have caused them wholly to forgett at least not to consider let the indifferent judge But to passe from them to some of our learned writers Alcuvinus De Divinis Officiis c. 37. writes that Bishops Presbyters and Deacons were anciently and in his time too elected by the Clergy and people and that they were present at their Ordination and consenting to it That the Bishops consecration in his dayes used in the Church of Rome wherein two Bishops held the Gospell or New Testament over the head of the Bishop consecrated and a third uttered the blessing after which the other Bishops present layde their hands on his head was but a Novelty not found in the old or new Testament nor in the Roman tradition And then heâ— prooves out of Hieroms Epistle to Evagrius and his Commentary on the first to Titus that the ancient consecration of Bishops was nothing else but their election and inthronization by the Elders who chose out one of their company for a Bishop and placed him in a higher seat then the rest and called him a Bishop without further Ceremony just as an Army makes a Generall or as if the Deacons should choose one from among them and call him an Archdeacon having no other consecration but such as the other Deacons had being advaunced above others onely by the Election of his fellow-brethren without other solemnity By which it is plaine that in the primitive Church Presbyters did not onely ordaine Presbyters and Deacons before there were any Bishops elected and instituted but likewise that after Bishops were instituted they ordained and consecrated Bishops as well as Elders and Deacons and that the sole ordination and consecration of Bishops in the Primitive and purest times was nothing but the Presbyters bare election and inthronization of them without more solemnity So that the other Rites and Ceremonies now used are but Novelties Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury on the 1. Tim. 4. 14. expounds these words with the laying on of hands of the Presbytery in this maner Hee cals that the laying on of hands which was made in his ordination which imposition of hands was in the Presbytery because that by this imposition of hands hee received an Eldership that is a Bishopricke For a Bishop is oftentimes called a Presbyter by the Apostle and a Presbyter a Bishop which in his Commentary on the third Chapter on Phil. 1. 1. Tit. 1. 5. 7. hee prooves to be but one and the same in the Apostles time and in the Primitive Church So that by his resolution the imposition of hands and power of ordaining Elders and Bishops belongs to Presbyters as well as to Bishops Our English Apostle John Wickliffe and his Coaetanean Richard Fitzralphe otherwise called Richardus Armachanus Arch-bishop and Primate of Ardmagh in Ireland if we beleeve either their owne writings or Thomas Walden who recites their opinions arguments and takes a great deale of paines though in vaine to refute them affirmed and taught First that in the defect of Bishops any one that was but a meere Preist was sufficient to administer any Sacrament or Sacramentals whatsoever either found in Scripture or added since Secondly That one who was but a meere Preist might ordaine another and that hee who was ordained onely by a simple Preist ought not to doubt of his Presbytership or to be ordained againe so as hee rightly performed his clericall office because the ordination comes from God who supplies all defects Thirdly That meere Preists may ordaine Preists Deacons and Bishops too even as the inferior Preists among the Jewes did ordaine and consecrate the High Preist as Bishops consecrate Archbishops and the Cardinals the Pope Fourthly That the power of order is equall and the same in Bishops and Preists and that by their very ordination they have power given them by Christ to administer all Sacraments alike therefore to conferre orders and confirme children which is the lesse as well as to baptise administer the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and preach the Gospell which is the greater Fiftly That Christ sitting in heaven hath given the power of consecrating and ordaining Preists and Deacons of Confirmation and all other things which Bishops now challenge to themselves to just Presbyters and that these things were but of late times even above 300. yeares after Christ reserved and appropriated to Bishops onely by their owne Canons and Constitutions to increase their Caesarian Pompe and pride And Waldensis himselfe who undertakes to refute these propositions saith expresly That no man hitherto â—ath denied that God in an urgent case of necessity gave the power of ordination to any one that is
without due examination or making Ministers without a title as many now doe for which the Canons prescribe they shall be suspended from giving Orders for two yeares space are inferior in order and degree to Bishops who may execute this power and ordaine and so one Bishop shall be superior in order and degree to another Bishop which none ever yet affirmed yea all our Bishops being prohibited and disabled by their owne Canons to ordaine Ministers or Deacons at any time but onely at the 4. solemne times appointed and that in the presence of the Deane Archdeaâ—on or two Prebends at the least or of 4. other grave Persons being Masters of Art at least and allowed for publike Preachers it will hereupon follow that Bishops onely at these 4. times of the yeare are greater in dignity and degree then Ministers because they may then ordaine but not at other seasons when they have no power or authority to conferre orders upon any being restrained by the Canon All which being layd together discovers the weakennes the absurdity of this our Prelates Theory on which they build both their owne Titus his hierarchy which now fall quite to ruine with this their sandy foundation which I have here 〈◊〉 ever dissipated subverted if I mistake not Obj. 5. If any finally object that the Fathers stile Titus the first Bishop of Crete and Timothy of Ephesus therefore they were Diocaesan Bishops and superior in Jurisdiction and degree to other Ministers and so by consequence are other Diocaesan Bishops as well as they Answ 1. I answer First that neither S. Paul nor S. Luke who lived in their times and knew them farre better then any Fathers or writers since ever so much as once terme or stile them Bishops much lesse the first or sole Diocaesan Bishops of Crete or Ephesus which no doubt they would have done had they beene in truth Diocaesan Bishops there and the name the office of a Bishop so honorable and sublime above that of Ministers even Iure Divino as our Prelates and their flatterers now pretend Their testimonies therefore who stile them onely Ministers or Euangelists never Bishops is to be preferred before all Fathers and writers who stile them Bishops being neither acquainted with their persons or functions nor living in their age Secondly No Father ever stiles them or either of them a Diocaesan or sole Bishop of Crete or Ephesus the thing which ought to be prooved but Bishops onely as they stiled other Ministers the name the office of Bishops and Presbyters being but one and the same and promiscuously used in the Apostles times all Presbyters being then called Bishops and all Bishops Presbyters as is evident by Acts. 14. 23. c. 20. 17. 28. Phil. 1. 1. 1. Pet. 5. 1. 2. 3. Tit. 1. 5. 7. 1. Tim. 3. 1. 2. 3. 2. Iohn 1. 3. Iohn 1. Philemon 9. with all ancient all moderne Commentators on these texts Whence the Translators of our last authorized English Bible affixe these Contents to Titus 1. 6. to 10. which treates of the quality of Bishops How they that are to be chosen MINISTERS ought to be qualified And the Booke of ordination of Ministers confirmed by two severall Acts of Parliament prescribes the 1. Tim. c. 3. Acts 20. and Titus 〈◊〉 to be read both at the ordination of Ministers and Consecration of Bishops and so intimates yea interpretes that Bishops and Ministers in the Scriptures language are both one in name and office and were so reputed in the Primitive Church Thirdly The Fathers use the word Elders and Bishops promiscuously calling Elders Bishops and Bishops Elders Hence Papias the Auditor of S. John and companion of Polycarpus writes thus in the Preface of his bookes It shall not seeme grievous untome if that I compile in writing and commit to memory the things which I learned of the Elders If any came in place which was a follower of the Apostles forthwith demaunded the words of the Elders what Andrew what Peter what Philip what Thomas or Iames or John or Mathew or any other of the Lords Disciples what Ariston and the Elder John Disciples of the Lord had sayd Here hee stiles not onely Bishops but even Apostles Elders Polycarpus his companion and Coaetanian writes thus in his Epistle to the Philippians Be ye subject to Presbyters and Deacons as to God let the Presbyters be simple and mercifull in all things Now those whom hee here stiles Presbyâ—ers S. Paul expresly termes Bishops Philip. 1. 1. Justine Martyr in his second Apology used neither the name Bishop nor Elder but termes the Minister onely Hee who is sett over the Brithren Hee who holds the first place in reference to the Deacon who held the second place not to any Elders of an inferior order to him And least any one should dreame that Iustine Martyr here speakes of a Bishop Tertullian who lived neere about that time or within few yeares in his Apology writes thus Praesident nobis probati quique Seniores c. Approoved Elders not Bishops are sett over us having obtained this honor not with any price but by a good testimony Whence it is evident that in his age every Christian Congregation had divers Elders not one Diocaesan Bishop over it to feede and rule it according to the practise of the Apostles times Acts. 14. 23. c. 20. 17. 28 c. 21. 18. Philip. 1. 1. 1. Tim. 5. 17. Tit. 1. 5. Iames 5. 14. 1. Pet. 5. 1. 2. Hence learned Apollinarius cals the Bishops and Elders of the Church of Ancyra in Galatia Presbyters And Clemens Alexandrinus relating the Story of the young man delivered by S. Iohn to a Bishop to traine up in the feare of God twice together cals him interchaingably both a Bishop and an Elder as Meridith Hamner a Bishop Englisheth it So Ireneus one of the ancientest of all the Fathers stiles Polycarpus Bishop of Smyrna That holy and Apostolike Elder yea hee termes the Bishops of Rome themselves Elders They saith hee that were Elders before Soter of the Church which now thou governest I meane Anacletus Pius Hyginus Thelesphorus and Xystus neither did so observe it themselves neither left they any such commaundement unto posterity And the same Father Adversus Haereses l. 3. c. 2. l. 4. c. 43. 44. oftentimes stiles Bishops Elders and Elders Bishops making Presbyters equall to Bishops in all respects and Successors to the Apostles as well as much as they So Dionysius Alexandrinus in his Epistle to Xystus Bishop of Rome about the yeare of Christ 240. writes thus There was a certaine Brother reputed to be of our Church and Faith very aged priusquam ego etiam creatus Episcopus and created a BISHOP before I was and as I thinke before blessed Heraclas was made a Bishop Where hee expresly termes this party who was but a Minister or Presbyter onely in that Church A BISHOP and saith hee was created a
〈…〉 4. 3. 16. 1. Sam. 10. 1. c. 26 6. 11. Ps 92. 10. 1. Kings 1. 39. c. 19. 15. 16. * Bishop Iewell Reply to Harding Article 4. Divis 5. 6. 18. Richaâ—dus Armachanuâ— De Quaest Armenorum l. 11. c. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. ‡ Contr. haer l. 3. haer 75. ‡ Anselmuâ— Haymo Rabanus Primasius Calvin Deering and David Dickson on this text * Heb. 4. 14. 15. c 8. 1. c. 9. 11. c. 10. 21. ‡ Heb. 13. 20. 1. Pet. 5. 4. * Ephes 4. 10. 11. 1. Cor. 12. 28. Math. 9. 37. 38. ‡ Acts. 1. 25 26. Gal. 2. 8. 9 11. 14 1. Cor. 12. 28. 29. 2. Cor. 11. 5 * Canon 33. 35. An. 1603. ‡ Canon 31. ‡ 1. Tim. 4. 6. 2. Tim. 4. 5. 1. Thes 3. 2. * 3. Ed. 6. c. 12. 8. Eliz. c. 1. * Eusebius Eccles Hist l. 3. c. 39. p. 55. ‡ Bibliotheca Patrum Tom. 1. p. 96. * Apolog. c. 39. Tom. 1. p. 692. 693. 694. * Eusebius Eccles Hist l. 5. c. 16. ‡ Eusebius Eccles Hist l. 5. c. 23. * Eusebius Eccles Hist l. 5. c. 20. o Ibid. e. 26. * Eusebius Eccles Hist l. 7. c. 8. p See his life before his workes * Aretius Theolog Problemata Locus 62. De Officiis Eccl. Sex 9. p. 184. 186 Chenmitius Examen Concilij Tridentini pars 2. De Sacramento Ordinis c. 4. p. 223. 224. ‡ Iliad 1. 10 * De Vita Constantini l. 4. c. 24. * So is the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used by Basil Epist 52. not to ride in visitation like a Lordly Prelate but to consider of the miserable state of the Church to be carefull for it as Bishop Iewell witnesseth in his Defence of the Apology of the Church of England part 2. c. 3. Divis 5. p. 107. ‡ Enarratio in Psal 126. Tom. 8. pars 2. p. 726. 727. * Let our great Prelates marke this well * De Civitate Dei l. 19. c. 19. Tom. pars 2. p. 516. †Note this * fol. 116. Act. 20. * See Fulke and Cartwright Ibid. m. ‡ Bishop Iewel Defence of the Apology part 2. c. 3. Divis 5. p. 107. * Marsilius Patavinus Defens Pacis pars 2. c. 15. 16. Richardus Armachanus Resp ad Quaest Armenorum l. 11. c. 1. to 8. Fox Acts and Monum p. 1009. 1116. 1465. * Bishop Iewell Defence of the Apol. part 2. c. 3. Divis 7. part 111. Thomas Beacon his Catechism Vol. 1. f. 499. 500. Chrysost Opus Imperf in Matth. Hom. 3. 43. Ambros de Dign Sacerd c. 4. ‡ August De Civ Dei l. 19. c. 19. Hier. Ambr. Sedul Primas Haymo Rab. Maur. Chrysostom Theodoret. Theophylact. Oecumenius Anselmus Beda in 1. Tim. 3. 1. 2. Bernard De Consid ad Eugen. 2. 3. * Math. 10. 1. to 16. Marke 6. 7. to 12. Luke 9. 1. to 6. compared with Luke 10. 1. to 21. ‡ Clemens Epist apud Surium Tom. 1. p. 141. and others who have since followed this forgery of his * L. 3. c. 4. Eccl. Hist. ‡ See Mercator Atlas Minor p. 812. * Math. 7. 26. 27. ‡ The Instit of a Christian man Ch. os Orders and Thomas Beacons Catech. f. 499. 500 * See the Fastbookes then printed ‡ Ioel. 2. 14 to 20. 4. 2. 1. to 28. Isay 22. 12. 13. 14. 2 Chron. 6. to 24. to 40. c. 7. 13. 14. 15 Zeph. 2. 1. 2. 3. Ionah 3. 5 to 10. Ezech. 9. 4. Mal. 3. 16. 17. Ezra 9. 10. †See Bishop Wrens Injunctions for Norwich and his Visition Artiles and yet this Can. bindes them not strictly to any forme as the Words Or to this Effect declare f Ier. 7. 16. c. 11. 14. c. 14. 11. c. 29. 7. c. 37 3. 4. c. 42. 2. 4. 20. Ioel. 2. 17. * Isay 22. 12. 13. g Ps 119. 21. Iudg. 5. 23. Mal. 2. 2. c. 3. 9. 1. Cor. 16. 22. h Luke 18. to 3. Rev. 6. 9. 10. Psal 28. 4. 5. ‡ 1. Sam. 4. 18. * Fox Acts Monuments London 1610. p. 502. ‡ Platina Onuphrius Bale Stella Volateranus Celestin 5 Bonifac. 8. * Georgius Pontan Bohemiae piae l. 3. p. 36. Godwin Catalog of Bps. p. 212. 216 460. 564. 585. Mathew Westminst An. 932. p. 361. Newbrigens l. 1. c. 14. ‡ De Sacram. l. 3. c. 1. l. 5. c. 1. e Tract 9. 16. 20. 21. 25. 27. 29. 35. 37. in Ioan. f Hom. 5. 6. 8. 9. 10. 13. 28. in Genes g Catech. Orat. 7. 14. Catech. Mystag 14. h Socr. Eccl. Hist. l. 7. c. 2. i Fox Acts. Monum p. 1366. k Fox Acts Monuments p. 15. 59. See p. 1115. 1153. 1457. 1579. 1696. ‡ See his Visitation Articles and injunctions for Norwich †Before the 39. Articles of the Dissolution of the last Parliament p. 20. 21. 22. 42. 43. * Magna Charta c. 29 25. Hen. 8. c. 19. 21. 27 H. 8. c. 15. 37. H. 8. c. 17. 1. Ed. 6. c. 2. 1. Eliz c. 12 5. Eliz. c. 1. 12. Eliz. c. 13. 8. Eliz. c. 1. o Inconformity therefore it notâ— the thing the Bishops ayme at but the suppression of the Gosple p 1. Cor. 9. 16. q Isay 56. 7. Ier. 7. 11. Math. 21. 13. Marke 11. 17. Luke 19. 46. See Dr. Boyes Postill on the first Sunday after the Epiphany p. 132 and on the 10. Sunday after Trinity p. 446. 447. ‡ To wit for affirming That his Majesty and the Lords of the Councell would be heartily glad if all those that went over to New-England were drowned in the bottom of the Sea A most trayterly seditious speech as of his Majesty the State delighted in the destruction of his faithfull subjects whom hee is bound by Oath and duty to protect and preserve p Of the right use of the Church of the time and place of prayer q Dr. Boyes Postill on the 10. Sunday after Trinity p. 448. r Hom. of the repairing keeping cleane of Churches p. 80 of the time place of prayer p. 131. s Hom. of the right use of the Church of repairing Churches of the time place of prayer * Hom. 1. 2. 3. 5. 10. 29. in Gen. Hom. 5. in Math. †Defence of the Apology part 5. c. 3. Divis 4. p. 449. 450 * O Blasphemy b See Doctor Iames his Treatise of the corruption of the Scriptures c. by the Prelates of Rome part 2. 3. 4. c See the Homilies of the Right use of the Church of the time and place of prayer of keeping cleane of Churches d Ier. 23. 13 14. 15. * Gen. 18. 19. See 2. Chron. 36. 15. 16. 17. * Fasciculus Temporum 1144. Cent. Magd. 12. Col 1407. stella a Antiq. Eccl. Brit. p. 13. Godw. p. 53. * Fox Acts Monuments p. 364. b Alberti Argentinensis Chron. An. 1348. p. 147. * Georgius Pont. Bohemiae piae l. 3. p. 34. * Behold Constantiensis ad Herman Appendix An. 1085. p. 357. * Thomas