all People we knoâ— Dissenters in this Diocess do most need sucâ— help the weakest of them being often accoâ—ed with Questions more proper for studied Dâ—vines than poor Countrey-People and if thâ— Answers of these poor People do not relish â—â— shall have it published that the Dissenters here are a most ignorant People insulted over and exposed to Contempt Therefore we thought it necessary in our Circumstances because of our Love to the Truth and to the Weakest â—â— these who adhere to it to afford what Heâ—â— we could Acknowledging that this presâ—â— Undertaking might have been performed â—â— greater Advantage by some abler Pen which iâ— hoped will yet be done but whatever weaknes appear in this little Tractat shall not be imputable to many but to some of those to whom the Authors Admonition was Directed and therebâ— concerned to exoner their Conscience by making it appear that neither trifling Scruplâ— Peevishness nor perverse Obstinacy but meer â—y that our Consciences cannot be stretched to â—he Latitude that others take in the VVorship of GOD hath procured the following Resoâ—ution to the Authors Query If it be displeasing to him it 's that which we could not prevent but himself might have prevented it by permitting us to Live in Peace without such Queries For he could not but foresee our Answer would be conformed to our own Principles and Practice though we have no Pleasure in provocking him or any other being desirous to live Quiet and Peaceable in the Land giving thanks to GOD the Author of all Good and to his Majesties Clemency under whose happy Government we enjoy Protection and to whom we owe most entire Acknowledgements of Gratitude which we are desirous to testifie on all Occasions and at this present are confident that when many are found Guilty of these execrable Conspiracies to take away his Precious Life there shall not one of our Principles be stained with Disloyalty but all in a cheerfull readiness for his Majesties Preservation and Service There is one thing more that the Reader is desired to Notice that notwithstanding the Exceptions hereafter mentioned stand in the Way of our Communion with the Establisht Church yet we doubt not but many of that Communioâ— are Godly Persons and are known to be of suâ— a Christian-Conversation that we could free partake with them in Gospel-Ordinances pâ—viding we could obtain it without danger of Siâ—ning nor do we take it on us to Judge theâ— for following their own Judgement only â— cannot see with their Eyes nor they with ouâ— but must wait untill GOD reveal it to them wâ— are otherwise minded Perswading our Selâ— that the Sober and Judicious of another Persâ—sion whom we Love and Honour in the LORâ— will not Condemn but rather approve of oâ— Ingenuity in allowing Men to know the weigâ— of these Reasons that binds Us up from tâ— Communion which otherwise we would Coâ— for the Churches Peace This ingenuous Apology is neither for Ostentation nor Irritation but a necessary Vindication of our Practice unto which we are pressed IN laying open Our Exceptions we shall begin with that which is the Root of all these Eclesiastick-Impositious whereby our Consciences are Burdened and our Selves â—hrust out from Communion with You in the â—ublick Worship of GOD Our Ministers and â—heir Ministry is Rejected if they Subscribe not â—o this Article Cannon 36. viz. That the Book of Common Prayer and of Ordering of Bishops Priests â—nd Deacons containeth nothing in it contrary to the â—ord of GOD and that it may Lawfully so be used â—nd that he Himself will use the Form in the said Book â—rescribed in publick Prayer and Administration â—f the Sacraments and none other Here is a plain and full Extrusion of all Miniâ—ers who are not for Bishops over Presbyters for â—he Canon mentioneth only such Bishops or will â—se any other Form in Prayer than the Service â—ook to this Form of Service the People must â—lso subject for no other Church-Communion is allowed them but where these are Consented uâ— to But this our Consciences being Directed bâ— the Word of GOD cannot Comply with coâ—plaining of it as a most heavy Imposition And this Jurisdiction of Bishops over Presbyters is the Ground of our first Exception and thâ— because the Office of a Bishop having Authoriâ— over other Ministers of the Gospel is not founâ— in the Scriptures and therefore wanteth Diviâ— Institution And if such a Bishops Commission â— not found there then We are not obliged to suâ—ject to him as an Officer in the House of GOD Such therefore as will stand on no lower Grounâ— for Prelacy in the Church than Scriptural-Authâ—rity are obliged to make it appear And We dâ—sire no more but direct us to any Scriptures whâ— this Commission is granted if this could be doâ— ye would not only save us a Labour of proving Negative but should also find us as comformabâ— in Point of Subjection as any of your own Coâ—munion but after frequent and according â— our Measure serious reading the Book of GOD We could never yet observe a Bishop set ovâ— Presbyters but We frequently find that a Bishoâ— Presbyter are one office as hereafter shal appeaâ— Reason 1. If Christ had instituted the Offiâ— of a Prelate or Bishop over Presbyters then tâ— said Office would be mentioned in some of theâ— Scriptures which designedly giveth an accountâ— all Church-Officers in the Gospel-Church But in none of these Scriptures is there any mention of a Prelate or Bishop over Presbyters Therefore Christ hath not instituted the said Office For the first Proposition that if there were Institution for such an Officer he would be mentioned in these Scriptures is evident because the Apostle setteth himself to shew what Offices Christ had set in his Church both Extraordinary and Ordinary And who dare say that the Apostle failed in the Enumeration being inspired by the Holy Ghost and how can it be imagined that so eminent a Church-Officer making so great a Figure in the Church could be omitted was it not of great Importance for the Church of GOD in all succeeding Generations to know if there was One appointed to have Authority over many other Ministers without whose placet they should â—either have Power to Ordain other Ministers â—or Govern their Flocks If Christ had instituted such an Officer would he not have given some â—ntimation of Him That other Ministers might â—ave known it was their Duty conscientiously to Obey Him But we have no where any such Intiâ—ation from Christ or any of his Apostles but the contrary as shall appear And that a Bishop over Presbyters is invisible â—y any of these Scriptures where Church-Officers are purposely enumerated the Reader shall havâ— them in ready and full view 1 Cor. 12. 28. And GOD hath set some in thâ— Church first Apostles secondary Prophets thirdly Teachers after that Miracles then Gifts of Healinâ— Helps Governments Diversities of Tongues Rom. 12. 6. Having then Gifts differing accordinâ— to the Grace
that is given to us whither Prophecy let â— Prophecy according to the proportion of Faith or Minâ—stry let us wait on our Ministry or he that Teacheâ— on Teaching or he that Exhorteth on Exhortation â— that Giveth let him do it with Simplicity he that Ruâ—eth with Diligence he that sheweth Mercy with Cheeâ—fulness Ephes 4. 11. And he gave some Apostles anâ— some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pâ—stors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints fâ— the Work of the Ministry for the Edifieing of the Bâ—dy of Christ As for any other Scriptures alledged to favour thâ— Episcopal Cause they shall be considered in theiâ— due place But these Scriptures now mentioneâ— are the places that all Church-Officers do ordinarily betake themselves unto who are willing tâ— have their Commission and Title tryed by thâ— Word of GOD because by them we are particulaâ—ly instructed Who they are whom GOD hath sâ— in his Church and in what order as first secondâ—rily c. now let the Reader demonstrate a Bishoâ— over Presbyters by any of these Scriptures and â—e shall not want reverence let him appear and â—ell us plainly where he fixeth his claim for he will â—ot for Truth and Modesties sake challenge all â—hese Offices and Gifts to be his and some of them â—eing now out of his reach and ceased as Miâ—acles Gifts of Healing and Diversities of Tongues â—t's agreed that all these may be laid aside from â—his Debate as Extraordinary Some of the Offiâ—es mentioned are too low for a Bishop being the â—owest Set of Church Officers as Deacons under â—he Denomination of Helps giving with Simplicity â—nd Cheerfulness neither will these be concerned â—n this Debate We shall come then to the Highest and First in â—he Roll the Apostles being set down first and Biâ—hops now the First and Highest in the Church â—ere some of them fix their Claim as Successors â—o the Apostles and plead it with all earnestness â—ut no successe for lack of Arguments and the â—eight of Arguments against it and that VVe be â—ot amused with big and ambiguous Words not â—nderstood We crave that Justice of those who â—aintain this Apostolick succession to let us know â—hat they understand by it if it be that Prelats â—â— the Gospel-Church have succeded to the intire â—ffice of Apostles or 2d if they have fucceded unâ—o the Doctrine of the Apostles or 3d. unto such â—ospel-Administrations performed by the Apostles as were necessary to continue in the Gospâ— Church as Preaching administration of Sacrameâ— Discipline c. or 4th if by Apostolick Succâ—sion they understand Apostolick Institution Tâ— is such as have Commission from Christs Apostlâ— to Feed his Flock If the first of these be affirmed that Bishops â—ver Presbyters succeed to the Apostles intire Offâ— Then First we have many moe Apostles than eâ— Christ did Institute for all Diocesan Bishops mâ— be Apostles 2. Then they have all immediat Commissiâ— from Christ as all the Apostles had For we mâ— see that when one Apostle was wanting the Detâ—mination who should fill his Room the immeâ—at Decision thereof was left to GOD by Lots â— Acts 1. When Mathias was appointed to take pâ— of the Apostleship from which Judas fell by Traâ—gression This manner of Election our Bishops wâ— not pretend 3. If Bishops Succeed to the very Office aâ— Commission of Apostles then they are infallible Doctrine and may write Canonick Scriptuâ— which their modesty will not challenge 4. If Bishops succeed the Apostles Office thâ— shall all lose their Diocesses for the Apostles â— no Diocess but the wide World they had no liâ—ted Bounds but the Bishop is restricted by Lâ— limited Bounds for as Diocesan his Power extenâ—eth no further then the circumscribed Diocess â—hereof he is Bishop Secondly If it be said that Apostolick Successiâ— is by succeeding to their Doctrine then all Gosâ—el-Ministers have the same claim for they also reach the same Doctrine feeding the Flock with â—e same sincere Milk of the Word So that eâ—ery faithfull Gospel-Pastor preaching sound Doâ—rine neither Corrupting Diminishing nor Adâ—ing to the Word of GOD may put in his Claim â—r this Kind of Succession And that with greatâ— confidence than such as make Additions of doâ—rinal significative Ceremonies of their own Inâ—ention For the third manner of Succession to these Goâ—el-Administrations which were to continue in the â—urch tho' performed by the Apostles Consider â— First That all Gospel-Ministers partake equalâ— of that manner of Succession As they are Paâ—rs entrusted by Christ with the feeding of his â—ock Let the Maintainers of imparity among â—ospel-Ministers shew a Difference or what Miâ—sterial Acts are reserved to some and denied to â—hers 2. These Gospel-Administrations now to be â—erformed by the ordinary Pastors of the Church â—ke not their Original Authority from the Apoâ—olick Office but from Christs Commission and Precepts to the Pastors of his Church to perfoâ— these Ministerial Acts the Pastor being a distiâ— Officer in the House of GOD dependeth not â— the Apostolick Office nor is there any need for â— Because the Pastor hath his Commission distiâ— from the Office of an Apostle though the mattâ— of their Administrations in some things coincidâ— yet that maketh not the two distinct Offices coiâ—cide the Pastors Office being entire by it self the Gospel Charter Fourthly If by Apostolick Succession be meaâ— only Apostolick Institution that is that these aâ— the Apostles Successors whom the Apostles dâ— Institute and Appoint to be the Pastors of tâ— Church This manner of Succession we acknoâ—ledge to be most firm and therefore whosoevâ— can instruct their Office in the Church to be Apostolick Institution have the true Right aâ— Title and therefore shall now most willingly joâ— Issues for its Trial knowing that Bishops ovâ— Presbyters were never instituted by the Apostlâ— as shall hereafter appear Object Some Bishops can draw the line of â—piscopal Succession from the Apostles days unâ— this day Answ A line of Episcopal Succession that is the Succession of Diocesan Bishops for its Bishoâ— of that new Cut Model who are concern'd this Debate such a Line of Succession can no Mâ— draw from the Apostles Times The Reason is obâ—ious because there were no Diocesses and thereâ—ore no Diocesan Bishops long after the Apostles â—imes For the first three Centuries the Church was under Heathnish Persecutors incapable of aâ—y Diocess for a Bishop and therefore Euseb commonly calleth the Bishop a Bishop of a Parish the Church knew not what a Diocess was before Conâ—tantin appeared and then began to follow the Mode of the Civil Government 2. Tho' a Line of Succession could be drawn from the Apostles Times that is of Scriptural Bishops having no greater Charge then they could personally oversee Yet as this maketh nothing for Diocesan-Bishops so it proveth nothing of Apostolick Succession because a Succession from the Apostles Times can never prove a Succession to the Apostolick Office the one cannot infer the other Object Some Apostles came
unwarrantable â—pectations of Christs Disciples hoping he wâ— erect a Temporal Kingdom and thereby Plâ— of Trust and Honour might fall to their shaâ— â—is Attendants Yet their Master gave them no round to expect such Worldly Honour shewing â—hem that His Kingdom was not of this World and â—hat they might expect to be Hated Despised and â—ersecuted for his Names Sake And therefore â—he Instructions given them by these Scriptures â—oncerning Superiority relateth to the lowly â—tate they were in and might expect for the future â—s his Servants And not to a State of Worldly Granâ—ur which He did not promise them nor did they â—fterwards Possess but as it was grasped without â—is Commission And this is manifestly confirmâ—d by our Saviours following Words verse 27. but â— am among you as he that serveth in which Words â—y his own Example as one that serveth among â—hem he rebuketh Dominion and Superiority over â—ne another This Example immediatly followâ—g the Prohibition of one of them to be Greater â—an another is most remarkable that tho' himâ—elf had absolute Dominion over them as their â—ORD yet to have this engraven upon the hearts â—f all his Servants in his Gospel-Kingdom that â—one of them should usurp Authority over anoâ—er he condescendeth upon this over coming Exâ—mple of serving as a perswasive against their Deâ—ate who should be Greatest 6. This Superiority being prohibited among â—e Apostles who were all of one Order The same â—uperiority is thereby forbidden all Ministers of the Gospel who are by Divine Institution of oâ— and the same Order And therefore Scriptural-Bâ—shops Presbyters being of one the same Oâ—der and under equal Commission by Divine Insâ—tution are under the same Prohibition of Superâ—ority over one another For it were ignorant Iâ—pudence to say that the Apostles might not usuâ— Authority over one another but Bishops or Pâ—stors may do it By these Scriptures then we have our greâ— Law-Givers Determination and Verdict passed â— that unhappy Plea of Greatness among Churcâ— Men which should end the Dispute being a moâ— solide Argument against Prelacy in the Gospeâ— Church and no reason to pass from it on that uâ— just Pretence as if nothing were forbidden bâ— love of Greatness the which Opinion contradicâ—eth the very words of the Text. A third Reason why we cannot approve of a Bâ—shops Jurisdiction and Superiority over othâ— Gospel-Pastors is because by the Gospel-Chartâ— all Gospel-Ministers have parity of Ministeriaâ— Power committed to them and therefore none them have a Right to Jurisdiction over anothâ— besides many other Scriptures this our Assertiâ— shall be proved by Acts 20. 17 28. by this Scâ—pture these things are clear First That these who are called Presbyters Elders verse 17. are called Overseers or Bishoâ— verse 28. Take heed therefore unto your selves and to all the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made â—ou Overseers to feed the Church of GOD which He hath purchased with his own Blood It hath pleased GOD to make this Truth so plain that Bishops and Presbyters are one that it hath stopt the mouths of the greatest Gain-sayers Papists and all who are not Antiscripturists being convinced by its undenyable Evidence it must â—hen be Presumption to excogitate a Difference â—etween those whom the Holy Ghost hath â—ade one and so great a Difference that some of them shall be subordinate to the Jurisdiction of â—nother this is to be Wise above what is written â—nd who should be obliged in the Matters of God â—o subject to that Wisdom that cometh not from â—bove 2. By this Scripture it 's evident that the Comâ—ission given is to feed the Flock that is to Lead Guide and Govern the Flock with Pastoral Powâ—r for without this Pastoral Authority they could â—ot Discharge the Trust committed to them the â—astors part being not only to take care that the â—lock have good wholsom Food But to keep â—em in Order to preserve them from Straying â— bring again that which was driven away and to â—eek that which was Lost For if the Flock be not â—ttended defended from Injuries and so ordered â— to be kept from Straying they are as if they had no Shepherd which we may see at length â—zek 34. from verse 2 d. to verse 7th the People thâ— are as if they had no Pastor if their Pastor have â— Power to Govern them or neglect his Officeâ— GOD will require his Flock at the Pastor's hanâ— and yet he is not capable of giving an account if â— be deprived of Power to Govern them We maâ— see this farther confirmed By that which is wriâ—ten to the Hebrews Cap. 13. and verse 17. the Mâ—nisters who Watch for the Souls of the People aâ— allowed Ministerial Ruling over them and thâ— People obliged to submit because these who watâ— for their Souls must give an Account If it be said that none Watch for the Souls â— the People but a Bishop over a vast number â— Parishes then these People are forced into Misâ—ry it being impossible for one Man to Watch â—ver all their Souls Again if it be said that other Ministers undeâ— him Watch for the Souls of the People then thesâ— Ministers who Watch have by the Scripture Power to Rule as these who must give an Account anâ— to deprive them of that Power which Christ haâ— committed to them can be no less then Sacrâ—ledge Will a Bishop assuming the sole Power â— Government to himself say in earnest that he wiâ— stand up for all the Ministers that are under hiâ— and take their Accounts off their Hands and Aâ—swer to GOD for them all will he indeed taâ— such a Burden upon him Or if he would what Minister dares trust him with it For if the Men â—e Ministers of the Gospel themselves they shall â—ever be clear before GOD by anothers underâ—king for them because themselves were Personâ—lly entrusted with the feeding and therefore the â—overning of the Flock For Thirdly By the above-mentioned Scripture we â—nd all Gospel-Pastors equally interressed in the Commission no imparity of Ministerial Power â—or any colour for it in the Text Bishops and â—res byters being not only under one Name but â—nder one and the same Commission Who then â—ath Authority to make some of them subordinat â— another Who are made equal by Divine Instiâ—tion if Men would be concluded by plain Scriâ—ture this should put an End to the whole Disâ—ute Fourthly We are the more obliged to take this â—ext as the Revelation of GOD's Will for the paâ—ty of Gospel-Ministers that none of them â—ould have Superiority over another because the â—ne when these words were spoken was an opâ—rtune Season to have discovered imparity if the â—oly Ghost had allowed it Because first the Aâ—stle did call these Ministers together to give â—em Directions as Ministers of the Gospel 2. â—e was now to take Leave of them so as to see their â—ces no more And it was of great Importance for the Church of GOD in future Ages to know if
â—eing he was to Ordain Elders in the plural numâ—er in every City and by the Scripture these Elâ—ers are Bishops then mo Bishops then one was â— be in every City which is contrare to the Episâ—opal Constitution 4. If it be said that Titus â—as Archbishop or Metropolitan Answ This â—cketh nothing but Proof which no where can â—e had For the primitive Gospel-Church knew â—o such thing as either a Diocesan Bishop Archâ—ishop or Metropolitan long after the Death of â—imothy and Titus there being no certain Rule â—or modeling of Diocesses until the Reign of Conâ—antine the Great at which time the Church did â—ollow the Civil Government as to Diocesses this â—ishop Stilling-fleet maketh out in his Irenic page â—76 377. 5. There is nothing to be found in â—e Scriptures to countenance this Assertion that â—itus was Archbishop of Crete all that can be said is â—at he was sent to Crete upon a piece of special serâ—ice for the Church which made him no more Biâ—op there then when he staid some time in other â—laces Aquinas run into the same Mistake as â—o Dalmatia for because Titus went to Dalmatia â—herefore he calls him the Bishop of Dalmatia 6. â—f it be said that the least that Bishops can Gain from Titus being left to Ordain Elders is that â—shops have sole Power of Ordination seing Tâ— alone ordained Answ This is but to begâ— Question for we deny that Titus was a Bishâ— let that first be proved And 2. That he ordaâ—ed as a Bishop And 3. That he ordained aloâ— For his ordaining of Elders makes him no Bishoâ— no more then the Apostle Pauls ordaining maâ— him a Bishop they ordained as Extraordinaâ— Officers in the Church making way for Bishoâ— or Pastors and though Titus was invested wiâ— extraordinary Power above any Bishop or Pastoâ— yet that it self will not prove that he ordained sâ— paratim without Presbyters Because he was Ordain Elders in the same manner that was the â—stablished Way of the Church in conjunction wiâ— Presbyters as the Apostle Paul did lay his hanâ— on Timothy conjunctim with the Presbytry thâ— is joyntly with a Presbytry Object 2. The Epistles to the seven Church of Asia are directed to the Bishops of these Chuâ—ches because each of them is directed to one siâ—gle Person called the Angel of the Church Answ That these Epistles are directed to tâ— Bishops of these Churches in the Scripture seâ— we easily acknowledge but then no advantaâ— to the Episcopal Cause is gained For if these Aâ—gels be Bishops and Bishops the same with Prâ—byters then ye are just where you were not liâ— â—d one step higher than a preaching Presbyter or â—ospel-Pastor 2. Whereas the Angel is spoken unto in the sinâ—lar number you have no advantage by this either â—r you shall find one and the same Angel spoken â— in the plural number As to the Angel of the â—hurch of Smyrna Rev. 2. 10 The Devil shal cast â—me of you into Prison the Speech is directed unâ— the Angel yet the plural number is used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to â—ew that it 's not one single Person only that is deâ—ted by the Name of Angel so also to the Angel â—f the Church of Thyatira but unto you I say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—ere the Angel is expresly spoken unto in the pluâ—l number So that any Argument from the â—ame Angel utterly faileth you For though an â—gel be named in the singular number yet that by â—e Name Angel is understood a collective Body â— Ministers is evident otherwise let any Man â—nder a Reason why the Angel is spoken to in the â—ural number as mo than one And hereby we â—ve solid ground to think that the Angel is spoâ—n to in the plural number purposly to obviat or â—rrect the Misapprehensions of any who would â—ink that a Bishop over Presbyters is understood â— the Word Angel Object 3 But the Government of the Church â— Bishops having Authority Jurisdiction over â—esbyters is so Antient that we cannot judge it â— any lower Derivation then from the Apostles albeit we have it not by express Scripture Answ 1. If you have such a Government the Church by due consequence from any Scriptuâ— of the New Testament We are ready to yeâ— Subjection albeit ye cannot Prove it by exprâ— Scriptures ye shall not be so hard put to it â— for you only to Affirm and Assert it Apostoliâ— without any Proof cannot convince Mens Judgâ—ments and satisfie their Conscience in a matter so great Importance Your selves being Judge if you have Proof for it make it appear Bishâ— Laud and some other Bishops with him said oâ— publickly if Prelacy were not the Apostolick Gâ—vernment they would forth with throw away thâ— Rotchets But they kept them as long as thâ— could and the Proof went no further upon whiâ— Mr. Pryne did challenge them for breach of Pâ—mise VVhy do ye not stop all our Mouths â—proving your Assertion and so satisfie a great Bâ—dy of Protestants at Home and Abroad Who giâ— Reasons from Scripture contrare to your Asserâ—on And to say it must be Apostolick because its Antiquity is little less then to say we will haâ— it from them whither they will or not their Dâ—ctrine and Practice refuse and yet it must be â—torted from them 2. We have made it appear already that the â—postles did prescribe another Form of Governmenâ— be managed by the Ministers of the Gospel in â— â—ty of Ministerial Power and how to impose uâ—on our own Reason and Belief that by some inâ—isible Prescription they have contradicted all â—is were hard measure should we or can we â—ject what they have Recorded by Inspiration of â—e Holy Ghost and betake our selves to some fanâ—ed Tradition Could this be a safe Way for our â—onsciences Or could we Answer to GOD for â— Your selves being Judges 3. If the Antiquity of Prelacy be at last its only â—ea and strongest Defence Cyprian will soon Anâ—er for us that Antiquity without Verity is but mouldy â—rror and as Sir Francis Bacon termed it a Cypher â—ithout a Figure 2. If this Plea should hold Good then there â— a Door opened for the most Antient Errors â—herewith the Church was infested even in the Aâ—ostles times and such as soon after endangered â—e renting of her Bowels 3. And however Antient Prelacy be found yet may and doth suffice us that it hath no Institution â— the Gospel-Church by Christ or his Apostles â—nd therefore can claim no better than Humane Appointment for which Appointment no Commisâ—n was granted to the Church Object All that is Alledged by you against Eâ—iscopacy is but your own late Sentiments For â—e Antient Fathers who understood the State of â—e Primitive Church better than you do generally bear Testimony that Bishops have been in all Agâ— of the Gospel-Church Answ We are of the same mind with Augâ—stin who being urged with the Authority of â—prian answered That what he spoke according to â— Scriptures he would
to be Bishops of Cities and from thence an Episcopal Line of Succession is drawn not only from their Times but from their Persons Answ That Apostles were Bishops of any Ciâ—y or Diocess is false because they were not limited to any certain place as all Diocesan Bishops are and therefore it implyes a Contradiction that they were limited and not limited But if any shall say it will make no Contradiction to be limited in one Respect and unlimited in another Râ—spect that is the Apostles Charge might be limâ—ted as they were Bishops but unlimited as theâ— were Apostles Answ This Distinction leaveâ— the Difficulty untouched and is but a begging â— the Question to suppose they had any limiteâ— Charge as Bishops which can never be proveâ— by Scripture Reason or Antiquity For 2. No Man had Power to restrict their Chargâ— whom Christ had left free 3. As no other Men had Power to alter or makâ— narrower Limits to the Apostolick Charge so neâ—ther had they Power themselves to alter theiâ— own Commission by being bound as Pastors â— Bishops of a particular Charge For thereby theâ— should be disabled to discharge the general Coâ—mission of Preaching and Planting Churchâ— through the World 4. This were a degrading of the Apostolicâ— Office to reduce it to the Office of a Bishop or Pâ—stor therefore ignominious to the Apostles bâ—sides the confounding of these two most distinâ— Offices of Apostle and Pastor by all which it is aâ— parent that a Bishop over Presbyters hath no claiâ— to that Office by Succession to Apostles and tâ— maxime holdeth sure Apostolo in quantum est Apâ—stolus non succeditur All the rest of the Sacred Roll of Church-Oâ—ficers shall be easily dispatched For Prophets who are twice enrolled next to the Apostles will sustain no Debate whether Propheâ—ying be taken more strictly for predicting things â—o come or more largely for opening the Mysteâ—ies of Religion or expounding the Scriptures For in the first sence Bishops are so Modest as not â—o claim it Though some had that extraordinaâ—y Gift in the Apostles times In the second sence â—t importeth no Authority over other Ministers and therefore can do them no service The next are Evangelists but nothing can deâ—cend from that Office for the Office of Bishops because it 's agreed on all Hands that Evangeâ—ists were the Apostles Adjuvants travelling from â—lace to place on Gospel-Service without any fixâ—d residence either in Parish or Diocess and thereâ—ore no claim is made to that for it would deprive â—hem of a fixed Diocess As for Teachers since teaching of it self implyâ—th no Authority over other Teachers it can yeild â—o Argument for Episcopal Authority whither â—y these Teachers be understood such Doctors of â—ivinity as are set a-part for instructing and preâ—aring others for the Ministerial Calling or for â—xplaining of Scriptures neither of them can â—rove Authority over others of the same Office â—d therefore is not pleaded As for Pastors we acknowledge these to be the â—dinary established Ministers of the Gospel unto whom the Charge of Feeding the Flock is coâ—mitted and these in Scripture are called Bishoâ— or Presbyters all of them by the Gospel-Chartâ— under one Commission for equal Authority and Power in the Church as hereafter GOD willing shaâ— plainly appear As for Governments and these who Rule whâ— come in among the last of the Roll they are dâ—stinct Officers in the Church being neithâ— Teachers nor Pastors but such as Rule as is â—vident 1 Tim. 5. 17. where they are said to â— worthy of double Honour specially such as Lâ—bour in Word and Doctrine here are Elders tâ— Rule who do not teach and therefore Bishops caâ— not make this Officer their Claim because a Bâ—shop must be apt to teach and if he only Rule anâ— do not Teach Some will be sure to call him Ruling-Elder which he is not fond of As for Ministring and Exhorting they are tâ— low for a Bishops Character and therefore nâ— pleaded By all this Pains taken in searching for a Bâ—shop Superior to Presbyters the candide Readâ— will perceive that we do not willfully blind foâ— our selves but are willing to search the Scripturâ— and be determined by them but in all these Scâ—ptures where Church-Officers are particularly â— numerated there is no such Church-Officer to â—ound as Bishop over other Ministers of the Gâ—pel either in express Words or by any true Consequence from them and therefore we cannot â—ubject to the said office as an Institution of Christ A second Reason shall be taken from the Words â—f our Saviour Luke 2â— 24. And there was also a â—trife among them which of them should be accounted â—e Greatest and He said unto them the Kings of the Gentils exercise Lordship over them and they that exâ—cise Authority upon them are called Benefactors but â—e shall not be so but he that is Greatest among you let â—m be as the Younger and he that is Chief as he that â—oth Serve The paralel place is Matth. 20. 25. and by â—ese Scriptures Christ Dischargeth Prelacy aâ—ong his Servants or that one of them should be â—reater than another Therefore We cannot conâ—orm to it For clearing of this that Christ hath â—rohibited one of his Ministers to be Greater than â—other Consider first that the Apostles tho' generally â—odly Men yet by reason of remaining Corrupâ—on did too much affect Preheminence which â—ised Heat and Strife among them a Disease not â—sily câ—red 2 Christ perceiving this proud Debate rebukâ—h it by shewing it shall not be with them as with â—reat Men of this World in their exercise of â—ordship and Authority for none of them shall be â—reatest or Chief 3. It cannot be said without Violence to tâ—â— Text that Christ doth only reprove the affectiâ— of Greatness tho' that be reproved yet it is nâ— all that is reproved for Superiority it self or oâ— of them to be Greater than another is discharge Christ's Words are it shall not be so the Thing self is forbidden besides the Love of it he shâ— not be Greatest whither he Love it or not Thâ— maketh it evident to be a meer perverting of tâ— Text contrary to our Saviours express Wordâ— when Men say that nothing is here discharged bâ— the Love of Greatness for Christ doth not say tâ— Kings of the Gentiles Love to exercise Authoritâ— but it shall not be so among you but they do eâ—ercise Authority and it shall not be so among yoâ— 4. Nor can it be said that only Tyrannical Dâ—mination is forbidden by these Scriptures becaâ—â— the word here is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth laâ—full Authority and commonly taken in that seâ— so Matth. 8. 9. I am a Man under Authority the same word so also it 's made use of to signiâ— Christs own Power John 17. 2. Thou hast given Hâ— Power over all Flesh so that the same Authorâ— that is lawfull among others yet shall not be uâ—ped by any of his Servants over one another 5. Whatever might be the
willingly accept but when he spâ— without them with his good leave he would dissent â— well knew that the best of sinfull Men were Fâ—lible and no Man to be followed further then â— was a follower of Christ 2. When it 's said that the Fathers do generalâ— assert Episcopacy was in the Church it will nâ— thence follow that they asserted it should be the Church it 's one thing to affirm that in thâ— and the other place there were Bishops over Preâ—byters but another thing to affirm there was Dâ—vine Institution for such Prelacy there 's vast diffâ—rence between the two and where this is not aâ—verted the Testimonies of the Fathers are bâ— wrested and perverted as if they all approved Prelacy because they make mention of Bishop For 3. We shall find the choise of the Fathers â—claring that from the beginning it was not so aâ— that the Difference between Bishop and Presbâ—ter came in to the Church by Custom but by â— Divine Appointment That the Church in â— primitive times after the Apostles was governâ— and should be governed by the common Couâ— â—f Presbyters and therefore we are willing they â—pear and speak for themselves knowing they and up for us more than for you Palycarp Epist ad Philip. perswadeth the Peoâ—e to Obey their Presbyters as Christ We are not â—ncerned in his manner of Expression if it appear â—yperbolick this being sufficient to us that his â—xhortation is to obey Presbyters in the Lord but â—t Bishops over Presbyters Ignatius Epist ad Trallens requireth the People subject to the Presbytry calling it Gods Court. Ireneus lib. 4. cap. 44. it becometh you to be Oâ—diâ—nt to Presbyters who have their succession from the â—postles And in his Epistle to Victor called Bishop of â—ome he hath these Words The Presbyters of Rome whom you have succeeded This Epistle and this â—ententence in it is quoted by Euseb lib. 5. cap. 23. â—hereby it 's evident that all the Bishops of Rome the second Century were but Presbyters in Ireâ—us his Judgement Tertull. Apolog. cap. 30. calleth Presbyters preâ—ents of the Churches Praesident probati quique Senioâ— Theophylact. in Philip. 1. affirms that whiles the â—postles lived the Names of Bishops and Presbyters â—ere not distinguished Chrysostom commenting on the same Scripture â—clareth himself to be of the same mind Jerom is more plain then pleasant insisting length in the Probation of his known Assertiâ— that Bishops over Presbyters are not by Diviâ— Institution for which he quoteth many Texts aâ— Commenting on the first cap. to Titus saith a Prâ—byter is the same with a Bishop and before that Faâ—ons did arise in Religion by the instinct of the Devil â— Churches were governed by the common Council of Prâ—byters It 's strange that this Discourse of Jeroâ— escaped an index expurgatorius confidering hâ— Bellarmin and others fret when ever it 's mentioâ—ed it 's so plain and full against the Divine Rigâ— of Prelacy That some of them spare not to saâ— the Good Old Father erred But he goeth onâ— his Epistle to Euagr. and saith let Bishops know thâ— it 's rather by Custom then by the Lords Appointmâ— that Bishops are above Presbyters Ambrose on Eph. 4. saith that Bishops were set â—bove Presbyters by a Council But giveth no accouâ— of the time and place of that Council Howevâ— that same which he saith sufficeth because suppâ—sing it were enacted by a Council then the preâ—tion was but by Humane Authority August Epist 19. confesseth that it was but by present Custom of the Church that Bishops were greâ—er than Presbyters Gregor Naz. orat 28. wisheth the utter Abolâ—on of Prelacy calling it a Tyrannical Government Theodoret. commenting on Phil. 1. saith tâ— these Bishops mentioned in the Text were Presbyters Oecumenius commenting on the same text deâ—lareth himself of the same mind Chrysostom commenting on Hebrews saith â—at Heb. 13. 17. made always his Soul to tremble â—hen he thought on it and Homil. 34. page 602. falâ—th a wondring if a Bishop can be saved any of them â—peciallie whoâ—are greedy of so great a Charge Hom. â— page 627. he calleth them miserable Wretches who â—esire it for saith he thou must give an account of all â—hom thou Rulest these are the words of Chrysoâ—om Basil de Spir. Sancto saith that by Ambition to overnall all Church Government came to nothing Many mo ' might be added but we suppose ye â—ill think these too many speaking at this Rate It should also be observed that Bishops of old â—mmonly had no greater Charge then they could â—ersonally oversee So Euseb lib. 10. cap. 4. saith expresly that a Bishop â—d no greater Charge then he could take personal notice their Souls And lib. 6. cap. 29. saith that an 236. the faithfull in Rome did meet together in one place chuse another Bishop in Place of Anterus Cyprian lib. 2. epist 5. When a Bishop was to Chosen the whole Body of the People were called toâ—her that he might be Elected before all their eyes and the suffrage of the whole Fraternity Here are two â—ings to be Noted that the Body of the People Elected their own Bishop next that the People whom the Bishop was to take Charge could meâ— together in one place One Bishop had common â— but one Altar or Communion Table so that oâ— Bishop now after the New Model taketh a greaâ—er Charge than would have well served twenâ— yea fourty in former times Primat Vsher in his Relig. of Irish saith that Pâ—trick Planted in Ireland 365. Churches and as mâ—ny Bishops and that afterward in Malachias tiâ— the Bishops were more multiplied Let that numbâ— be compared with the present number of Bishoâ— in Ireland And then let the Reader Judge wâ— hath the greatest regard to Antiquity or who tâ— Bishops are that are most capable to Dischargeâ— Pastoral-Duty to the Flock whether few aboâ— twenty in a Nation or many hundreds And if â— will not regard the account given by Mr. Clerks and others though convincingly demonstratâ— that many Bishops lived so near to one anotheâ— and their Sees so contiguous that their Charâ— could not exceed the Bounds of an ordinary Parisâ— and that many of them were Bishops of Villagâ— yet ye will take notice of your Friend Mr. Fulâ— who saith that Bishops of Old were set too thick for â— to grow Lydda Jamina and Joppa being Episcopâ— Towns and all of them within 3 or 4 Miles of othâ— For Bishops had then their Sees in Poor Contemptiâ— Villages And that none may think he speaketh random Sozom. confirmeth the same that Villages â—ad their Bishops lib. 7. cap. 19. Object But the Church upon mature Delibeâ—ation found it expedient to invest some with â—ower and Authority over many others for preâ—enting or healing of Divisions and keeping all in Unity and good Order Answ The most knowing and moderat of the â—piscopal Perswasion take Sanctuary here and â—resume no higher alledging the Church was â—onstrained to it for compescing turbulent Huâ—ors and
his Liturgy which evâ— Papists though most fond of Forms are ashaâ—ed of therefore Bellarm. de Jacobi Liturgia paâ— 146. and 150. confesseth it spurious 2d Reason as there were no Liturgies in the â—postles times for Divine Service so the Churâ— wanted a fixed Liturgy for the space of 600 yeaâ— Dr. Burnet in his History of the Reformatioâ— maketh it appear that Liturgies were not so muâ— as the matter of Publick Consultation for â—â— years after Christ And that the first Liturgy tâ— was Imposed was Composed by Gregory an 60â— Others also more antient Confirm the same â— Socrat. who lived in the fifth Century lib. 5. cap. â—1 page 698. saith that generally in any place aâ—ong all sorts of Worshippers there cannot two be found â—greeing to use the same Prayers Sure then there was â—o Liturgy obliging them to agree in a Set-Form â—amous Bishop Vsher affirmeth yet more Relig. of â—e Irish cap. 4. page 31. that the Roman Vse was â—ought in to this Nation but 500 Years before his own â—me by the Popes Legats Gillibertus Malachias â—d Christianus whereby as Mr. Clarkson observes â—at the Roman Liturgy was not admitted here â—efore the 12th Century so that imposed Liturâ—es are but a Novelty in the Church And to this â—ree the Testimonies of antient Fathers making manifest that the Churches publick Prayers â—ere not read out of a Book Justin Martyr Aâ—ol 2. page 139. saith their Prayers and Thanksâ—vings were according to their Ability and very â—ean Abilities would serve to read Prayers if â—ere had been any such extant But Tertull. Apolog. 39. maketh it yet more plain who saith â— Pray without a Monitor because we Pray from â— Heart These Testimonies make it abundantly appear â—at the first imposed Liturgy was no Elder but â—ntemporary with the Popes Establishment and â—t received in this Nation several hundreds of â—ars afterward and that this Liturgy was first â—posed when a Pope was Imposed as an Universal Head to the Church doth conciliate no great â—neration for that Composure it 's also notouâ— known that the Liturgy unto which we are reqâ—red to Conform was taken out of that Roman â—turgy and though many Things were left out our Liturgy which were in the Roman yet tâ— Argument made use of for gaining of Papists â— the Communion of the Protestant Church by Prâ—clamation in the Reign of Edward the 6th â— that they should hear their own Service in English whâ— formerly they heard in Latin 3d. Reason as neither Christ nor his Apostâ— did form any Liturgy for Divine Service so nâ—ther He nor any of his Apostles did ever give Coâ—mission to other Men for Composing such a Foâ— of Divine Service which should oblige othâ— to Use it whereby it 's manifest that such a Foâ— of Service wanteth Divine Institution and theâ—fore we cannot Consent to it as any Ordinanceâ— GOD. 4th Reason because Mens Composing and Iâ—posing a Form of Worship without Divine Inâ—tution or Commission casteth an injurious Imâ—tation upon those to whom the Care of the Châ—ches was committed as if the Church had not beâ— sufficiently provided for the Service of GOD â— all that Christs Apostles had prescribed But tâ— Men were constrained to devise some new and bâ—ter Way than what we have by Scripture Direâ—â—n this is such a Reflection as we cannot be guilâ—y of if any shall say the Composers of the Liturgy no doubt had Direction from GOD before â—hey attempted such a Work Answ Let this Direction or Appointment appear and We shall Conform to it or if any shall say that the Exterâ—als of Worship and the manner of Church-Administrations are left to the Discretion of Church-Officers and so they may Compose a Model of Service as they think most expedient for the Churâ—hes Good Answ There is great Difference between a Model directing the external Order of â—hat Worship which GOD himself hath Appoinâ—ed as to common Circumstances for Time and Place and how one part shall Succeed another â—nd such a Model wherein is contained Worship â—o be offered to GOD which he hath not prescribâ—d Church-Officers may safely do the first but â—ave no Power for the second The Worship of GOD is not such a trivial matter but that Christ â—r his Apostles in his Name would have given Directions for what was necessary will Liturgists â—ndeed claim to more Authority and Wisdom for Gospel-Administrations than CHRISTS Apostles â—ho never imposed but left us free of such Bonds 5th Reason The imposing of a Form of Divine â—ervice composed by one or a few derogateth â—om the esteem due to other Ministers of the Gosâ—el both of your own Perswasion and others and is a real Reflection against your Selves as if in â— Age there were Men so qualified for the Scrviâ— of GOD no Men assisted by the Spirit of GOâ— for Gospel-Administrations as if no Ministers haâ— the Blessing and Benefit of Christs being with hâ— Servants to the end of the World no Ministeâ— partaking of these Gifts that Christ received fâ— Men But only a few Composers of Liturgy thâ— all others must take both Matter and Form â— Divine Service from them and so to serve GOâ— with that which cost them nothing and yet thâ— Composers but Men not so much as pretendinâ— to Divine Inspiration or any Commission froâ— Christ for the said Composure by what Argâ—ment can a Minister of Christ convince his owâ— Conscience that it is his Masters Will to be serveâ— in that manner And if he please not his Mastâ— what Comfort can he have in the Service Anâ— how can he know it wil be pleasing to him excepâ— one way or other he had revealed it 6th Reason The obliging of Christians â— serve GOD by an imposed Liturgy is a Lording â—ver the Heritage of GOD Which is expresly foâ—bidden And that it is a Lording over GODS Hâ—ritage is evident because it 's imposed as one of thâ— principal Terms of Communion with the Church sâ— that such as will not Conform to it shall be Exclâ—ded the Churches Communion this is to take Dominion over Mens Faith and Consciences Fâ— â—f a Mans Conscience will not permit him to make â—hat his Worship to GOD which is only devised â—y Men Yet he must either Comply renitente â—onscientia against his Light or shall be no Memâ—er of the Church Next it's a Lording over the Heritage of GOD â—ecause it depriveth us of our Christian Liberty â—hich we must stand fast in after Christ hath made â—s free We are not to be entangled again in a â—oke of Bondage But to be obliged to serve â—OD by a Form he hath no where commanded a very Bondage depriving us of our Liberty to â—erve our LORD as himself hath Appointed for â—e plead for no Lawless Liberty only in the â—ure Matters of GOD his Worship and our Conâ—iences we desire to be Subject to GODS own â—ppoiniments and not to the Ordinances and Comâ—andments of Men. 7th Reason A peremptory imposed Liturgy â—epriveth us of the Benefit